Master Thesis

In the study program “Environmental Management”

Assessing the Provisioning Ecosystem Service Food Rice and its Linkages to Human Well-Being in Hai Duong and

Vinh Phuc Province of Vietnam

Presented by

Clemens Kühn

May, 2014

1st examiner: PD Dr. Benjamin Burkhard

2nd examiner: Prof. Dr. Felix Müller

Institute for Natural Resource Conservation

Faculty of Agricultural and Nutritional Sciences Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel

I

Abstract

Since the rapid economic development in many regions of Asia leads to urbanization and land

use change, rice farmers are coping with multiple difficulties and chances. Regarding the

predicted population growth in most Asian countries, an increase in rice production will be

needed in order to sustain food security. Climate change and sustainability issues will pose

major challenges to future crop increases. Those factors make a better understanding of the

rice production system with its numerous interactions a vital task for future development. As

rice farmers play an important role in the cultivation of rice, it is necessary to investigate their

human well-being and how it is linked to the provisioning ecosystem service food rice. The

concept of ecosystem services promises to provide better management options to decision

makers, but its linkages to human well-being are still not sufficiently understood.

Therefore, this study developed an indicator set for the assessment of the provisioning

ecosystem service food rice and human well-being of rice farmers. The adapted indicator

framework was applied in two study regions in the provinces of Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc in

the Red River Delta of Vietnam. The measurement of trends in human well-being and the

provisioning ecosystem service food rice was done by conducting a survey among rice farmers

in the two regions and analyzing statistical data gained from the General Statistics Office of

Vietnam. That indicator assessment allowed the establishment of conceptual linkages between

the provisioning ecosystem service food rice and different dimensions of human well-being.

Keywords: agriculture, ecosystem services, Hai Duong, human well-being, indicator, linkages,

provisioning ecosystem service food rice, rice farmer, rice production, Vietnam, Vinh Phuc.

II

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank PD Dr. habil. Benjamin Burkhard for the supportive supervision of the

thesis and the numerous constructive comments he gave, which helped a lot in finishing this

work. Moreover, he was a great help for applying to the funding of the PROMOS program.

My gratitude goes to Prof. Dr. Felix Müller for reviewing the thesis and all the inspiring lectures

he gave during the master course.

Special thanks go to all the LEGATO project partners who contributed to this work with their

advice, especially Dr. Vera Tekken who helped in developing the questionnaire. I am grateful

for Prof. Dr. Yuzuru Isoda’s advice on conducting surveys. My thanks go to Anika Marxen for

providing her rice yield data. Moreover, I would like to thank the members of IPAM (formerly

CEPSTA) that facilitated the fieldwork for the thesis by providing logistics and establishing

contacts to the farmers, especially Dr. Đào Thanh Trường who was my local supervisor and

Nguyễn Thị Quỳnh Anh who helped a lot with all the survey organization.

The fieldtrip to Vietnam was only possible because of the funding provided by the PROMOS

program of the German Academic Exchange Service.

My great appreciation goes to the help of my colleague and partner Lê Thùy Dương who

translated all the surveys and helped me overcome all the difficulties encountered during the

thesis work.

I thank Lê Đông Phương and Trần Lệ Hương for being so welcoming and making my stay in

Hanoi such a great time. Additionally, I express my gratitude to Mrs. Hồng for hosting us in her

house and Mr. Quảng for patiently driving us to the interview locations in Vinh Phuc.

Thanks a lot to my parents, my sister and my grandma for all their support and inspiration.

III

Dedication

This thesis is dedicated to my family members

Martha Wüstemann, Ludwig Kühn and Waltraud Klocke

who passed away recently.

IV

Table of Contents

Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... I

Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................... II

Dedication .................................................................................................................................... III

Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................... IV

List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................... VII

List of Figures ............................................................................................................................. VIII

List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. IX

1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1

Rice Agriculture ............................................................................................................. 1 1.1

1.1.1 Importance of Rice to Humanity ........................................................................... 1

1.1.2 Food Security ......................................................................................................... 2

1.1.3 Rice Agriculture in Vietnam................................................................................... 4

Ecosystem Services ....................................................................................................... 6 1.2

1.2.1 Latest Developments in Ecosystem Service Concepts .......................................... 8

1.2.2 Provisioning Ecosystem Service Food Rice .......................................................... 10

Human Well-Being ...................................................................................................... 12 1.3

1.3.1 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Concept of Human Well-Being .................. 12

1.3.2 Quality of Life ...................................................................................................... 12

1.3.3 OECD How’s Life? ................................................................................................ 15

Linkages of Ecosystem Services and Human Well-Being ............................................ 16 1.4

1.4.1 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) ......................................................... 16

1.4.2 Linkages between Marine Ecosystem Services and Human Well-Being (Busch et

al. 2011) ............................................................................................................... 18

1.4.3 Indicators in Ecology ........................................................................................... 18

1.4.4 Indicators for Ecosystem Services ....................................................................... 19

1.4.5 Indicators for Human Well-Being ........................................................................ 20

Research Rationale ...................................................................................................... 21 1.5

2. Methods .............................................................................................................................. 22

LEGATO Project ........................................................................................................... 22 2.1

2.1.1 Purpose of the LEGATO Project........................................................................... 22

2.1.2 Position of this Thesis inside LEGATO ................................................................. 23

Research Regions ........................................................................................................ 23 2.2

V

2.2.1 Hai Duong (VN_1) ................................................................................................ 24

2.2.2 Vinh Phuc (VN_2) ................................................................................................ 26

Indicator Selection ...................................................................................................... 27 2.3

2.3.1 Indicators for the Provisioning Ecosystem Service Food Rice ............................. 27

2.3.2 Indicators for Human Well-Being ........................................................................ 29

Questionnaire .............................................................................................................. 32 2.4

Survey .......................................................................................................................... 32 2.5

Data Analysis ............................................................................................................... 34 2.6

2.6.1 Data Collection .................................................................................................... 34

2.6.2 Analysis of Statistical Data .................................................................................. 34

3. Results ................................................................................................................................. 35

Trends of Human Well-Being Indicators ..................................................................... 35 3.1

3.1.1 Average Annual Income of Farmers ................................................................... 35

3.1.2 Savings Rate of Average Annual Income ............................................................. 36

3.1.3 Share of Average Annual Income from Rice ....................................................... 37

3.1.4 Employment Rate ................................................................................................ 38

3.1.5 Share of Employees Working in Rice Production ................................................ 39

3.1.6 Population Structure According to Age Groups .................................................. 39

3.1.7 Ratio of Women and Men Working in Rice Production ...................................... 40

3.1.8 Net Migration per 1000 Inhabitants ................................................................... 40

3.1.9 Education ............................................................................................................ 42

3.1.10 Nutrition .............................................................................................................. 42

3.1.11 Number of Doctors per 1000 Inhabitants ........................................................... 43

3.1.12 Number of Hospital Beds per 1000 Inhabitants .................................................. 43

3.1.13 Personal Satisfaction and Happiness .................................................................. 44

3.1.14 Average Working Time during the Busy Period .................................................. 45

3.1.15 Average Working Time during other Periods ...................................................... 46

3.1.16 Time Spent for Leisure and Personal Care .......................................................... 46

3.1.17 Satisfaction with the Quality of Air ..................................................................... 46

3.1.18 Satisfaction with the Quality of Water ................................................................ 47

Trends of Provisioning Ecosystem Service Food Rice Indicators ................................ 49 3.2

3.2.1 Yield of Paddy ...................................................................................................... 49

3.2.2 Number of Harvests ............................................................................................ 51

3.2.3 Fertilizer Use ....................................................................................................... 51

3.2.4 Machinery Use and Labor Input .......................................................................... 52

VI

3.2.5 Export and Import of Rice from the Region ........................................................ 53

Summary of Identified Trends of Indicators ............................................................... 54 3.3

Adaptation of the Indicator Set................................................................................... 56 3.4

3.4.1 Provisioning Ecosystem Service Food Rice Indicators ......................................... 56

3.4.1 Human Well-Being Indicators ............................................................................. 56

Linkages Between the Provisioning Ecosystem Service Food Rice and Human Well-3.5

Being ............................................................................................................................ 59

3.5.1 Income ................................................................................................................. 60

3.5.2 Employment ........................................................................................................ 60

3.5.3 Demography ........................................................................................................ 60

3.5.4 Nutrition .............................................................................................................. 61

3.5.5 Health Infrastructure ........................................................................................... 61

3.5.6 Personal Well-Being ............................................................................................ 61

3.5.7 Work and Life Balance ......................................................................................... 61

3.5.8 Environmental Quality ........................................................................................ 62

4. Discussion ............................................................................................................................ 63

Data Reliability ............................................................................................................ 63 4.1

4.1.1 Limitations of the Survey Conduction ................................................................. 63

4.1.2 Future Development ........................................................................................... 64

4.1.3 Availability of Statistical Data .............................................................................. 65

Development Trends of Provisioning Ecosystem Service Food Rice and Human Well-4.2

Being in the Study Regions .......................................................................................... 65

4.2.1 Provisioning Ecosystem Service Food Rice .......................................................... 65

4.2.2 Human Well-Being ............................................................................................. 66

Conceptualization of Linkages between the Provisioning Ecosystem Service Food Rice 4.3

and Dimensions of Human Well-Being ....................................................................... 68

5. Conclusions ......................................................................................................................... 71

References................................................................................................................................... 73

Appendices ..................................................................................................................................... i

Appendix A ................................................................................................................................. i

Appendix B – English Version of the Questionnaire ..................................................................ii

Appendix C - Vietnamese Version of the Questionnaire .......................................................... ix

Declaration ................................................................................................................................. xvii

VII

List of Abbreviations

BMBF Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung – German Federal Ministry of

Education and Research

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GSO General Statistics Office of Vietnam

IPAM Institute of Policy and Management, formerly CEPSTA (Center for Policy

Studies and Analysis)

LEGATO Land-use intensity and Ecological EnGineering – Assessment Tools for risks and

Opportunities in irrigated rice based production systems

MA Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

pp percentage points

PROMOS Programm zur Steigerung der Mobilität von deutschen Studierenden –

Program for increasing the mobility of German students

SD Standard Deviation

VND Vietnamese Dong

yr. year

VIII

List of Figures

Figure 1: Dependence on rice for human nutrition around the world ......................................... 2

Figure 2: Global rice production increases needed to meet demand until 2035 ......................... 3

Figure 3: Conceptual cascade of ecosystem services from processes to benefits. ...................... 8

Figure 4: Conceptual framework linking ecosystem integrity, ecosystem services and human

well-being as supply and demand sides in human–environmental systems .............. 10

Figure 5: Conceptual framework on the assessment of ecosystem services of lowland rice

ecosystems .................................................................................................................. 11

Figure 6: Quality of Life as the interaction of human needs and the subjective perception of

their fulfillment ............................................................................................................ 14

Figure 7: The OECD human well-being conceptual framework .................................................. 16

Figure 8: Conceptual linkages between ecosystem services and human well-being ................. 17

Figure 9: Location of the 4 LEGATO research regions in Vietnam .............................................. 24

Figure 10: The districts of the province of Hai Duong and the location of VN_1. ...................... 25

Figure 11: The districts of the province of Vinh Phuc and the location of VN_2 ........................ 27

Figure 12: Conducting the survey in a newly-built commune house, VN_1 Hai Duong ............. 33

Figure 13: Meeting rice farmers in VN_2 Vinh Phuc ................................................................... 34

Figure 14: Monthly income per capita in the provinces of Vinh Phuc and Hai Duong ............... 36

Figure 15: Rate of Employment of people from 15 years of age and above in relation to the

whole population in the provinces of Vinh Phuc and Hai Duong ................................ 39

Figure 16: Total population, rural population and urban population in the provinces of Vinh

Phuc and Hai Duong .................................................................................................... 40

Figure 17: In-migration, out-migration and net migration rates of the province of Hai Duong. 41

Figure 18: In-migration, out-migration and net migration rates of the province of Vinh Phuc . 41

Figure 19: Number of doctors per 1000 inhabitants .................................................................. 43

Figure 20: Total number of hospital beds in government establishments per 1000 inhabitants

in the provinces of Vinh Phuc and Hai Duong ............................................................. 44

Figure 21: Average yield of paddy per season in the provinces of Vinh Phuc and Hai Duong ... 50

Figure 22: Conceptual linkages found between the provisioning ecosystem service food rice

and human well-being of rice farmers ........................................................................ 59

Figure 23: Conceptual model of linkages between the provisioning ecosystem service food rice

and dimensions of human well-being of rice farmers in Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc ... 68

Figure 24: Alternative terms to the ecosystem service terminology ............................................ i

IX

List of Tables

Table 1: Definitions of ecosystem services and their sources commonly cited in the literature . 7

Table 2: Ecosystem service delivery concept including capacity, pressures, demand and flow .. 8

Table 3: Proposed indicators for the provisioning ecosystem service food rice and parameters

for their quantification. ............................................................................................... 28

Table 4: Proposed indicator set for human well-being of rice farmers in the research regions.31

Table 5: Trends of average annual income of rice farmers from 2002 to 2012 in ..................... 35

Table 6: Savings rate of average annual income of rice farmers in the two research regions ... 37

Table 7: Share of average annual income from rice stated by the interviewed farmers ........... 37

Table 8: Additional sources of income of rice farmers, apart from rice cultivation, in the

research regions of Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc ............................................................ 38

Table 9: Rice farmers' self-supply of rice for their families in months per year ......................... 42

Table 10: Personal satisfaction and happiness of rice farmers in the research regions of Hai

Duong and Vinh Phuc. ............................................................................................... 45

Table 11: Average working time of rice farmers during the busy period for rice cultivation in

hours per day ............................................................................................................ 45

Table 12: Average working time of rice farmers during the other (non-busy) periods of the year

for rice cultivation in hours per day .......................................................................... 46

Table 13: Time rice farmers spend for leisure and personal care (free time) in hours per day . 46

Table 14: Satisfaction of rice farmers with the quality of air ..................................................... 47

Table 15: Sources of air pollution mentioned by interviewed farmers, several sources per

farmer were possible ................................................................................................ 47

Table 16: Satisfaction of rice farmers with the quality of natural waters .................................. 48

Table 17: Satisfaction of rice farmers with the quality of household water .............................. 48

Table 18: Sources of water pollution mentioned by interviewed farmers, several sources per

farmer were possible ................................................................................................ 49

Table 19: Yield of paddy in tons/ha/season calculated from data reported by rice farmers in

the research regions of Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc ................................................... 49

Table 20: Fertilizer use of organic fertilizer, nitrogen (N), phosphorous (P), potassium (K) and

NPK fertilizers in kg per hectare per season in the research region of Hai Duong ... 51

Table 21: Fertilizer use of organic fertilizer, nitrogen (N), phosphorous (P), potassium (K) and

NPK fertilizers in kg per hectare per season in the research region of Vinh Phuc ... 52

Table 22: Machinery use in percentage of work, for soiling, harvesting, threshing and husking

of rice in the research regions of Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc .................................... 53

X

Table 23: Main trends of provisioning ecosystem service food rice indicators; including only

indicators that were applicable in Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc. .................................. 54

Table 24: Main trends of human well-being indicators; including only indicators that were

applicable in Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc. ................................................................... 55

Table 25: Adapted indicator set for the provisioning ecosystem service food rice as it was

applied in the study regions. ..................................................................................... 57

Table 26: Adapted indicator set for human well-being as it was applied in the study regions. 58

1

1. Introduction

Rice (Oryza sativa) provides one quarter of all food energy taken up by humans on the globe.

Thus its importance for human nutrition cannot be underestimated. Actually, rice has fed more

people over a longer time than has any other crop (GRiSP 2013).

Since research has been a major factor in more than doubling world rice production over the

past 50 years (GRiSP 2013), this work is trying to offer a small contribution in understanding

and managing the complexities of the socio-ecological rice production system.

As the world is facing a number of changing developments and problems connected to rice

cultivation, this background will be explained in detail in the first subchapter. Following this,

the concepts of ecosystem services and human well-being will be introduced and linked to

each other in separate subchapters. The developed framework for applying the two concepts

in rice research in South East Asia will be laid out in the fifth subchapter of the introduction.

Rice Agriculture 1.1

The first section of this subchapter will give an overview of the important role that rice is

having in feeding the world today. Then a number of current topics related to food security

issues will be explained in the second section. The last part will introduce the situation of rice

agriculture in Vietnam, as Vietnam is one of the leading countries in rice production and the

field work for this study has been conducted there.

1.1.1 Importance of Rice to Humanity

Rice is produced in a wide range of locations and under a variety of climatic conditions, from

the wettest areas in the world to the driest deserts. It is produced along Myanmar’s Arakan

Coast, where the growing season records an average of more than 5’100 mm of rainfall, and at

Al Hasa Oasis in Saudi Arabia, where annual rainfall is less than 100 mm (Mahonty et al. 2012).

Thousands of varieties are farmed on 144 million farms around the world, most of them

smaller than one hectare (GRiSP 2013). According to the FAO (2004) rice is the major staple

food for 17 countries in Asia and the Pacific, eight countries in Africa, seven countries in Latin

America and the Caribbean, and one in the Near East. Although rice is cultivated in 114

countries around the world, 90 % of rice is produced in Asia, with world production totaling

696 million tons in 2010 (GRiSP 2013). Looking at the importance for human nutrition it can be

2

seen that the contribution of rice to overall calorie intake is remarkably high in parts of East

Asia and South Asia, but especially in South East Asia (Figure 1). There, rice supplies more than

50 % of the human food energy uptake in many countries. Although the area dominated by

rice looks rather small on the world map, it is the region with the highest population densities

in the world. Therefore, the issues connected to rice production affect a major part of the

human population and have a direct influence on global food security, which will be discussed

in the next section.

1.1.2 Food Security

A major factor influencing the availability of rice for human food consumption is the

development of demand for rice and its supply. Those two factors are dependent on

population dynamics, consumption patterns, availability of resources for production and

innovation processes along the rice life cycle (Pandey et al. 2010). If demand for rice develops

as predicted in the Rice Almanac (GRiSP 2013), 116 million tons of milled rice will need to be

produced additionally to the output of 2010 by the year 2035 (Figure 2). In Asia, which accounts

for 87 % of global rice consumption, total rice demand continues to rise despite declining per

capita consumption in many high- and middle-income countries, which is caused by continued

population growth in the region (GRiSP 2013).

Figure 1: Dependence on rice for human nutrition around the world (from Dawe et al. 2010).

3

Mohanty et al. (2012, p. 6) present an overview of the effects of climate change on rice

agriculture:

“High temperatures coinciding with critical developmental stages

Floods causing complete or partial submergence

Salinity, which is often associated with sea-water inundation

Drought spells that are highly deleterious to rain-fed systems”

Mohanty et al. (2012) also state that, although rice is known to be sensitive to those abiotic

stresses, the negative effects on productivity could be balanced by the development of

resistant rice varieties. However, Mohanty et al. (2012) admit that a likely combination of

several climate change related stress factors would be very challenging for rice breeders.

Poverty in combination with urbanization is another challenge in current and future rice

production. Since Asia is rapidly urbanizing, more people will shift from being net rice

producers to net rice consumers. Also, the total number of urban poor people is expected to

increase. A major challenge will be not only to produce more rice, but to keep its price

affordable to improve food security of poor people. As low rice prices reduce the income of

farmers, the dilemma could be solved by reducing the production costs in order to increase

profits, or by implementing government support schemes for rice farmers (GRiSP 2013).

Connected to the ongoing urbanization is the emerging lack of labor for rice farming. Thus, an

increase in mechanization will probably take place, which is likely to be accompanied by a

restructuring of farms toward bigger sizes (GRiSP 2013).

Figure 2: Global rice production increases needed to meet demand until 2035 (from GRiSP, 2013).

4

The list of factors influencing food security is not complete, but gives an idea about the most

striking developments.

1.1.3 Rice Agriculture in Vietnam

In Vietnam, the main rice growing regions are the Mekong Delta in the South and the Red River

Delta in the North, with additional production in the northeastern and north-central coast.

Moreover, there is some rice cultivation with very low yields in the mountain areas. An

overview of the situation of rice farming in Vietnam is given in the Rice Almanac (GRiSP 2013).

The population of Vietnam reached 87 million in 2010, of which 70 % live in rural areas and are

mostly concentrated in the two rice growing deltas. Although the economic importance of

agriculture was sinking from 25 % of GDP in 2000 to almost 21 % of GDP in 2010, still more

than half of the country’s total labor force is engaged in agriculture (GRiSP 2013).

Nowadays Vietnam is the 5th largest rice producing country (USDA 2014), due to an increase of

paddy production from 25 million tons in 1995 to almost 40 million tons in 2010 (GRiSP 2013).

The main factors enabling such fast development were an extension of the irrigated

proportion of rice fields, more intensive use of fertilizers, the growth of higher yielding

varieties and an expansion of the rice cultivation area (GRiSP 2013). Those developments were

similar to the so-called “Green Revolution” which took place earlier in other Asian rice

producing countries.

Today Vietnam is one of the biggest exporters of rice that saw a growth of rice exports from

4,7 million tons in 2008 to 7,7 million tons in 2012, but exports fell down to 6,7 million tons in

2013 (VFA 2014).

The downside of the growing harvests was an incredible rise in fertilizer and pesticide use in

the last two decades, which was mostly caused by misunderstanding of pest management

(Heong et al. 2008) and heavy marketing efforts by the pesticide producing companies

(Normile 2013). As a result, not only harmful insects were killed, but also beneficial ones, and

additionally bird and amphibian populations were decimated (Parsons et al. 2010, Normile

2013). According to Normile (2013), the trend of rising pesticide use has been reversed at least

in the Mekong River Delta.

5

The Rice Almanac (GRiSP 2013, p. 128) gives a list of constraints to rice production in Vietnam:

“Shrinkage in rice area for rice cultivation due to land conversion to commercial lands,

which will result in a decrease in total rice production.

Inadequate credit facilities, which limit farmers’ input use due to insufficient capital.

Limited access to inputs.

Inadequate water during summer-autumn seasons.

Soil degradation brought about by a long-term high cropping intensity, which could

deplete soil fertility.

High inflation rate (about 11%), which increases input costs.

Small landholdings, which restrict farmers’ ability to produce rice for export.”

However, a review of rice related news of Vietnam showed a much more fundamental

problem to rice farming in Vietnam. Rice farmers in the country are facing increasing

difficulties to make a living from rice cultivation (Economist 2014). The costs of fuel, fertilizers

and pesticides are rising, whereas the rice prices are extremely low, because of excessive

supplies and low export demand. One year’s costs for inputs could even eat up all harvest

profits. Therefore, many rice farmers in Vietnam are not motivated to grow rice anymore

(Oryza 2014). Resulting from this, many farmers abandon their fields and look for livelihoods in

better-paid jobs in the cities, some convert their paddies to more profitable vegetable farms,

or others transform them (often illegally) to shrimp farms. In 2013, around 6’882 hectares of

fields have been left uncultivated (Diplomat 2013).

The Vietnamese Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development is aware of the problem and

announced a plan to shift 200’000 hectares from rice cultivation to more profitable crops.

Instead of rice, maize could be grown, which is needed to support the rising demand for meat

in Vietnam and is currently imported. Additionally, a restructuring of the whole agriculture

could take place, so that high quality and specialty rice would be grown on fertile land, while

other crops could be produced on currently ineffective rice fields (VietnamNet 2013). It was

also proposed to increase field size and farm area in order to reduce costs and increase profits

in rice farming (MARD 2013). Although those problems are mainly caused by long term trends,

the situation of rice farmers worsened even more in 2013 after the fieldwork for this work was

carried out. A massive decline of the international rice price occurred due to the huge sell-out

of record rice stockpiles of the Thai government, additional exports by India and Pakistan, and

efforts in the Philippines and Indonesia to reduce imports by increasing domestic rice

production (Economist 2014, Bloomberg 2014, Financial Times 2014).

6

Ecosystem Services 1.2

The concept of ecosystem services is one way to analyze and understand the complex

interactions that occur in human-environmental systems such as rice agriculture. Employing

that concept is intended to support the development of policies and instruments that

integrate social, economic and ecological perspectives. Seppelt et al. (2011, p. 630)

summarized that: “In recent years, this concept has become the paradigm of ecosystem

management.”

The ecosystem services concept gained wide popularity with the Millennium Ecosystem

Assessment that defined them as “the benefits people obtain from ecosystems” (MA 2005,

p. 27). As shown in Fisher et al. (2009), the number of publications referring to the term

ecosystem services increased dramatically afterwards. However, the diverse use of different

definitions and concepts has been a hurdle to the wider application of ecosystem services in

decision making processes (Villamagna et al. 2013).

A list of commonly used definitions of ecosystem services that was adapted from Nahlik et al.

(2012) can be found in Table 1. The diversity of concepts arises from the fact that the term

ecosystem service is used by economists, ecologists, geographers, spatial planners and social

scientists as well as researchers of other associated fields of study. It should be considered that

there is a fundamental difference between the definition of ecosystem services as the benefits

themselves (e.g. MA 2005) and the definition of ecosystem services as the components of

nature that yield human well-being or benefits (e.g. Boyd and Banzhaf 2007).

In the year 2012 Burkhard et al. gave an interesting contribution to the definition debate

around ecosystem services by stating that: “Ecosystem services (ES) are the contributions of

ecosystem structure and function – in combination with other inputs – to human well-being”

(Burkhard et al. 2012a, p. 2). Here, the role of “other [anthropogenic] inputs” in the ecosystem

services concept is recognized.

7

Table 1: Definitions of ecosystem services and their sources commonly cited in the literature (adapted from Nahlik et al. 2012).

Definition of ecosystem services Citation

…“the benefits human populations derive, directly or indirectly, from ecosystem functions.”

Costanza et al. 1997

…“the conditions and processes through which natural ecosystems, and the species that make them up, sustain and fulfill human life.”

Daily 1997

…“the capacity of natural processes and components to provide goods and services that satisfy human needs, directly or indirectly.”

de Groot et al. 2002

…“the set of ecosystem functions that is useful to humans.” Kremen 2005

…“the benefits people obtain from ecosystems.” MA 2005

…“components of nature, directly enjoyed, consumed, or used to yield human well-being.”

Boyd and Banzhaf 2007

…“the aspects of ecosystems utilized (actively or passively) to produce human well-being.”

Fisher et al. 2009

…“a range of goods and services generated by ecosystems that are important for human well-being.”

Nelson et al. 2009

…“benefits that humans recognize as obtained from ecosystems that support, directly or indirectly, their survival and quality of life.”

Harrington et al. 2010

…“a collective term for the goods and services produced by ecosystems that benefit humankind.”

Jenkins et al. 2010

Despite the ongoing dispute over definitions, ecosystem services are most commonly

categorized into provisioning ecosystem services, regulating ecosystem services and cultural

ecosystem services. The following definitions can be found in Kandziora et al. (2013):

“Regulating ecosystem services are the benefits people obtain due to the regulation

of natural processes such as water purification and erosion control. These are the less

tangible benefits people gain from ecosystems when abiotic and biotic factors are

controlled and/or modified (Haines-Young and Potschin, 2010a; Fu et al., 2011; Dale

and Polasky, 2007; Nedkov and Burkhard, 2012) and consequently they are not widely

acknowledged by humans.” (Kandziora et al. 2013, p. 58)

“Provisioning ecosystem services include all tangible products from ecosystems that

humans make use of for nutrition, (economic) processing and energy use. These

products can be traded and consumed or used directly (Haines-Young and Potschin,

2010b) and divided into the main subcategories of food, materials and energy (cp. de

Groot et al., 2010a; Haines-Young and Potschin, 2010b).” (Kandziora et al. 2013, p. 59)

“Cultural ecosystem services refer to the intangible benefits people receive from

ecosystems in form of non-material spiritual, religious, inspirational and educational

experience.” (Kandziora et al. 2013, p. 61)

8

1.2.1 Latest Developments in Ecosystem Service Concepts

The following section will give an overview of the latest developments regarding the concepts

of ecosystem services that stand in relation to this work. First, the framework developed by

Villamagna et al. (2013) will be considered to distinguish between the different components of

ecosystem service delivery. They take the ecosystem service capacity as a starting point, i.e.

the ecosystems potential to deliver services (Table 2). This capacity is influenced by ecological

pressures which also influence the ecosystem service flow. Ecosystem service demand has

been defined as the amount of a service desired by society. The ecosystem service flow is the

actual production or use of the service. Throughout the literature, a wide array of terms has

been used for those categories, e.g. currently consumed or used ecosystem services are called

demand in Burkhard et al. (2012). To avoid further confusion, the alternative terms can be

found in Appendix A. The concept of the ecosystem service delivery components is helpful in

understanding the factors influencing the actual flow of ecosystem services from nature to

society.

What is missing in the concept of Villamagna et al. (2013) is the need of human inputs or

capital in order to actually enable the flow of ecosystem services that result in benefits. In

order to comprehend the ecological background of the ecosystem service concept, it can be

beneficial to consider the “ecosystem service cascade” (Haines-Young and Potschin 2010a)

(Figure 3). The structures and processes of ecosystems generate ecosystem functions that

provide ecosystem services. In combination with human input(s) ecosystem services can result

in human benefits (Lamarque et al. 2011).

Figure 3: Conceptual cascade of ecosystem services from processes to benefits (adapted from Haines-Young and Potschin 2010a and de Groot et al. 2010b) and example of fodder production in mountain grasslands. (from Lamarque et al. 2011).

9

Table 2: Ecosystem service delivery concept including capacity, pressures, demand and flow (from Villamagna et al. 2013, p. 116).

Components of ES delivery Ecosystem service categories

Provisioning Regulating Cultural

Ecosystem service capacity: an ecosystem's potential to deliver services based on biophysical and social properties and functions (a)

Biophysical capacity; feature-based (e.g. modeled water supply)

Biophysical capacity; process-based (e.g. modeled carbon sequestration)

Biophysical and social capacity; feature- and process-based (e.g. potential to provide experience)

Ecological pressures: anthropogenic and natural stressors that affect capacity or flow of benefits; often attributed to overuse or feedback from land management decision to enhance other service capacities (b)

Events that reduce stock and/or regenerative capacity (e.g. overharvest; water impoundments)

Environmental disturbances that increase the amount of ecological work required to meet societal demands (e.g. pollution, impervious surfaces)

Events that reduce stock, regenerative, or assimilative capacity of a system; commonly related to overuse (e.g. soil compaction, erosion)

Ecosystem service demand: the amount of a service required or desired by society (c)

Amount of service desired per unit space and time multiplied by the number of potential users (rival service) (e.g. liters of water per person)

Amount of regulation needed to meet pre-determined condition (e.g. % nitrogen reduction; Total Maximum Daily Load [TMDL])

Desired total use (if rival service) or individual use (if non-rival) (e.g. total visitor-days from year prior; individual visitation rates)

Ecosystem service flow: the actual production or use of the service; incorporates biophysical and beneficiary components (d)

Quantity harvested, consumed, or used; number of people served; number of industries served

Ecological work = ecological pressures minus environmental quality (same units) (e.g. nitrogen inputs-minus in-stream load)

Amount of service used measured in units of time and/or space (e.g. total visitor-days from current year; individual visitation rates)

(a) Chan et al. (2006, 2012), Egoh et al. (2008), Daily et al. (2009), van Oudenhoven et al. (2012). (b) Beier et al. (2008), Rounsevell et al. (2010), van Oudenhoven et al. (2012). (c) McDonald (2009) and Nedkov and Burkhard (2012). (d) Beier et al. (2008), Layke (2009), de Groot et al. (2010b), van Oudenhoven et al. (2012).

10

Burkhard et al. (2012b) developed a conceptual framework linking ecosystem integrity,

ecosystem services and human well-being (Figure 4). Supply of ecosystem services is defined as

“the capacity of a particular area to provide a specific bundle of ecosystem goods and services

within a given time period. Here, capacity refers to the generation of the actually used set of

natural resources and services” (Burkhard et al. 2012b, p. 18). The term demand for ecosystem

services is defined as “the sum of all ecosystem goods and services currently consumed or used

in a particular area over a given time period” (Burkhard et al. 2012b, p. 18).

1.2.2 Provisioning Ecosystem Service Food Rice

Despite the widespread use of the ecosystem service terminology and the increasing number

of concepts (Subchapter 1.2 and Section 1.2.1), only a very small number of publications

relating to the provisioning ecosystem service food rice could be found. Natuhara (2013)

analyzed the ecosystem services of rice paddies in Japan, but only focused on the non-food

ecosystem services they provide. Berg et al. (2012) mention that future production systems

should not be optimized to only provide a single ecosystem service, such as rice, but designed

to deliver a variety of interlinked ecosystem services, or ‘bundles’ of services, such as rice, fish,

pest control, and nutrient recycling.

The only publication that was closely related to this thesis’ topic of the provisioning ecosystem

service food rice was Floresca et al. (2009). Floresca et al. (2009) confirmed that very little

research has been done on how rice farms have affected the ecological dynamics of the

tropical ecosystems. Therefore, a good understanding of the contributions of rice fields, as

ecosystems, to the wider range of ecosystem services is needed. One of the aims was to

measure the grain yield provisioning service of a lowland rice agro-ecosystem in the

Philippines. Floresca et al. (2009) reported that the assessment of the ecosystem services

should consider the change in levels of inputs, outputs and variations in season and cultural

Figure 4: Conceptual framework linking ecosystem integrity, ecosystem services and human well-being as supply and demand sides in human–environmental systems (from Burkhard et al. 2012).

11

practices. The estimation of grain yield was based on data obtained from personal interviews

of rice farmers estimating the total harvest of threshed rice. Additionally, the natural and man-

made inputs used by the rice farmers to produce the rice yield were recorded. The practices

and inputs used by farmers were reported, but the provisioning ecosystem service food rice

was only represented by the rice yield itself without calculating the proportion of man-made

inputs. The conceptual framework for the assessment of ecosystem services of lowland rice

applied by Floresca et al. (2009) can be seen in Figure 5.

It can be seen in Figure 5 that the provisioning ecosystem service food rice is directly influenced

by the kinds and levels of inputs. Since one aim of this work is to assess the provisioning

ecosystem service food rice, inputs will also play an important role in the investigation. The

fertilizer inputs, machinery use and labor inputs are important factors in the two study regions

and will be incorporated into the indicator set development.

Figure 5: Conceptual framework on the assessment of ecosystem services of lowland rice ecosystems (from Floresca et al. 2009).

12

Human Well-Being 1.3

Human well-being is an ambiguous concept that has no generally accepted definition, leading

to numerous and often competing interpretations (Summers et al. 2012). Therefore, an

overview of the three most relevant concepts of human well-being will be given in the

following sections, also introducing the main dimensions of well-being included in the different

concepts.

1.3.1 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Concept of Human Well-Being

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA 2005) has been providing a conceptual framework

to determine the effects of ecosystem changes on human well-being. Here, human well-being

is defined as: “the opposite end of a continuum from poverty, which has been defined as a

‘pronounced deprivation in well-being’” (MA 2005, p. 27). According to the Millennium

Ecosystem Assessment the constituents of human well-being: “as experienced and perceived

by people, are situation-dependent, reflecting local geography, culture, and ecological

circumstances” (MA 2005, p. 27). Multiple dimensions of human well-being are given in the

publication, such as basic material for a good life, freedom of choice and action, health, good

social relations, and security.

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment concept of human well-being is significant for the

approach of this study, since it has been defining human well-being dimensions that can be

directly linked to ecosystem services. However, it lacks an explanation of the process creating

human well-being, rather giving an arbitrary set of constituents of well-being. The study

focused on the ecosystem service side much more than on human well-being and an

operational guideline for assessing human well-being was more or less omitted.

1.3.2 Quality of Life

The Quality of Life concept provides an alternative understanding of human well-being, which

will be introduced in this section.

Sung-Bok (2005) was reviewing different approaches to the concept of Quality of Life in order

to construct an index for its measurement. Sung-Bok (2005) states that the basic needs

approach to Quality of Life focuses on the fulfillment of basic human needs in order to lead a

minimally decent life. In this approach goods and services such as food, health services and

water enable the satisfaction of the basic needs in order to improve the Quality of Life (Sung-

Bok 2005). The second approach analyzed by Sung-Bok (2005) is the capability approach to

13

Quality of Life. That approach tries to enhance the human capabilities to have a rich (social) life

in order to increase the Quality of Life. According to Sung-Bok (2005) the human development

approach to Quality of Life combines elements of both the basic needs and the capability

approach. The human development approach points to the importance of human well-being in

development (of nations) and regards human beings as the major economic resource. That

approach led to the creation of the Human Development Index (Sung-Bok 2005).

Diverse concepts of Quality of Life were integrated by Costanza et al. (2007) into an approach

that would combine opportunities, human needs and subjective well-being. Costanza et al.

(2007) fused objective and subjective approaches to Quality of Life in order to formulate an

integrative definition of Quality of Life:

“Quality of Life is the extent to which objective human needs are fulfilled in relation to

personal or group perceptions of subjective well-being” (Costanza et al. 2007, p. 269) (Figure 6).

Costanza et al. (2007, p. 269) further explain the definition of Quality of Life in the following

way: “Human needs are basic needs for subsistence, reproduction, security, affection, etc.

SWB is assessed by individuals' or groups' responses to questions about happiness, life

satisfaction, utility, or welfare. The relation between specific human needs and perceived

satisfaction with each of them can be affected by mental capacity, cultural context,

information, education, temperament, and the like, often in quite complex ways. Moreover,

the relation between the fulfillment of human needs and overall subjective well-being is

affected by the (time-varying) weights individuals, groups, and cultures give to fulfilling each of

the human needs relative to the others.”

Thus, Quality of Life is determined by the objective satisfaction of human needs on the one

hand, and the subjective perception of personal well-being on the other hand. Furthermore,

the opportunities for increasing the Quality of Life by meeting the human needs are provided

by four forms of capital, social capital, human capital, built capital and natural capital

(Costanza et al. 2007).

14

Stiglitz et al. (2009) reviewed concepts of Quality of Life in the report by the commission on

the measurement of economic performance and social progress. Three different approaches

to Quality of Life focusing on subjective well-being, capabilities, and fair allocations were

found. From those approaches Stiglitz et al. (2009) derived a concept of Quality of Life that

considers subjective measures of Quality of Life and objective features shaping the Quality of

Life. To capture the subjective part of Quality of Life they recommend measuring “cognitive

evaluations, positive affects and negative affects” (Stiglitz et al. 2009, p. 43). The subjective

measures of Quality of Life provide information on the level of each person. Regarding the

objective features of Quality of Life, Stiglitz et al. (2009) point out, that the choice depends on

the purpose of each study. Moreover, Stiglitz et al. (2009) report that the following objective

features are shared across countries and have been applied in diverse studies of Quality of

Life: health, education, personal activities, political voice and governance, social connections,

environmental conditions, personal insecurity, economic insecurity. The Quality of Life concept

presented by Stiglitz et al. (2009) was one of the major influences on the OECD (2011) human

well-being framework which will be presented in the next section.

Figure 6: Quality of Life as the interaction of human needs and the subjective perception of their fulfillment, as mediated by the opportunities available to meet the needs (from Costanza et al. 2007).

15

1.3.3 OECD How’s Life?

The OECD concept of human well-being has been developed with the objective to provide

better measures of well-being in order to inform public policy (OECD 2011). The conceptual

framework was published in the OECD How’s Life? (2011) report and updated statistical data

was given in the How’s Life? report of 2013 (OECD 2013).

According to the OECD (2011, p. 18), “Defining well-being is challenging because it requires

looking at many aspects of people’s lives, as well as understanding their relative importance.

Although there is no single definition of well-being, most experts and ordinary people around

the world would agree that it requires meeting various human needs, some of which are

essential (e.g. being in good health), as well as the ability to pursue one’s goals, to thrive and

feel satisfied with their life.”

The OECD (2011) How’s Life approach focuses on households and individuals, as opposed to

aggregate conditions for the economy. It emphasizes on well-being outcomes, rather than on

well-being drivers that are measured by input or output indicators. Furthermore, the OECD

(2011) considers the distribution of well-being across individuals and takes into account both

objective and subjective aspects of well-being.

Three pillars of human well-being were identified by the OECD (2011): material living

conditions, quality of life and sustainability of well-being over time (Figure 7). Under the pillars

of material living conditions and quality of life, 11 dimensions of well-being are considered,

whereas the measurement of sustainability requires looking at the development over time of

the different stocks of capital (Figure 7). For each of the dimensions of human well-being, the

OECD also gives a justification why they actually matter for well-being.

All in all, the OECD How’s Life is providing the theory behind as well as a framework for the

practical application of their human well-being concept. The OECD (2011) also gives a set of

indicators that can be used to measure human well-being. Since the OECD countries are

characterized by an advanced stage of development, the well-being concept may need some

minor adaptations to the conditions of Vietnam that is less developed yet.

16

Linkages of Ecosystem Services and Human Well-Being 1.4

The linkage between ecosystem services and human well-being is an integral part of the

ecosystem services concept as it was introduced in Subchapter 1.2. However, the actual nature

of linkages between ecosystem services and human well-being is complex and poorly

understood (Abunge et al. 2013). Although the interactions of ecosystems providing services

and humans gaining benefits and well-being from them are of such complexity, different

studies tried to identify linkages of ecosystem services and human well-being (Suneetha et al.

2011, Smith et al. 2013, Ringold et al. 2014). The following sections will give an overview of the

most relevant concepts for this investigation (MA 2005, Busch et al. 2011). As most of the few

research efforts investigating the nature of the linkages did so by applying indicator systems,

there will also be a section presenting indicators in ecology and their use in ecosystem services

and human well-being measurement.

1.4.1 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005)

With the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA 2005), the importance of ecosystem services

as drivers of human well-being has been established (Summers et al. 2012). The MA was based

Figure 7: The OECD human well-being conceptual framework (from OECD 2013).

17

on a conceptual framework that linked the three categories of ecosystem services

(provisioning, regulating and cultural services) to four constituents of human well-being (Figure

8). The constituents are security, basic material for good life, health, and good social relations.

The fifth constituent of well-being, freedoms of choice and action, was not directly linked to

any specific ecosystem service, since it is influenced by and has an influence on all other

dimensions of human well-being. In the MA, the strength of the linkage between ecosystem

services and constituents of well-being was also indicated. It was noted that the strength of

the linkages was dependent on the ecosystems and regions considered. Moreover, the MA

recognized that human well-being is influenced by other factors than ecosystem services,

including environmental, economic, social, technological, and cultural factors. Changes in

human well-being again have effects on ecosystem services (MA 2005), but that relation was

not explained in further detail.

The authors of the MA unfortunately just described the linkage of ecosystem services to

certain human well-being dimensions, but did not give a more detailed explanation of the

processes behind those links. Neither did the authors outline any framework for measuring the

interrelations between these two key components of the human environmental system.

Figure 8: Conceptual linkages between ecosystem services and human well-being (from MA 2005).

18

1.4.2 Linkages between Marine Ecosystem Services and Human Well-Being (Busch et

al. 2011)

A conceptual case study linking marine ecosystem services to human well-being was carried

out by Busch et al. (2011). Busch et al. (2011) pointed out, that in order to examine the

relationship between ecosystem services and human well-being, two key issues need to be

considered. First, a context-dependent definition for the constituent dimensions of human

wellbeing needs to be provided. Secondly, relationships need to be established between the

dimensions of human well-being and the benefits that ecosystem services provide.

After analyzing the research area (the German North Sea Coast), Busch et al. (2011) defined a

set of twelve human well-being dimensions that are relevant and have a potential relation to

specific ecosystem services. Since the case study dealt with offshore wind farming, a list of

potentially impacted marine ecosystem services was developed. The assessment of the linkage

between the ecosystem services and the dimensions of human well-being was carried out with

the help of indicators representing both. Specifics of indicators and their selection will be

discussed in the following Section 1.4.3. The next step was a qualitative analysis of the

strength of the linkages. Busch et al. (2011) could show that the methodology of the study

allows a verification of the effects of ecosystem services changes on different dimensions of

human well-being.

That case study is conceptualizing a clearly defined method to specify the detailed connections

of ecosystem services to dimensions of human well-being.

1.4.3 Indicators in Ecology

Indicators help to understand complicated matters and can therefore be used as

communication instruments that reduce the complexity of human–environmental systems

(Kandziora et al. 2013). Heink and Kowarik (2010) gave a comprehensive analysis of the

definition of indicators in the fields of ecology and environmental planning. Heink and Kowarik

(2010) use the indicator term as a synonym for “indicans”, which means a measure or

component from which conclusions on the phenomenon of interest (the indicandum) can be

derived. Indication stands for the reflection of an indicandum by an indicator (Heink and

Kowarik 2010).

19

The broad definition of indicators developed by Heink and Kowarik (2010, p. 590) is:

“An indicator in ecology and environmental planning is a component or a measure of

environmentally relevant phenomena used to depict or evaluate environmental conditions or

changes or to set environmental goals. Environmentally relevant phenomena are pressures,

states, and responses as defined by the OECD (2003).”

Kandziora et al. (2013, p. 54) use the following indicator definition (following Wiggering and

Müller 2004):

“Indicators are variables which provide aggregated information on certain phenomena.

Indicators are selected on the base of specific management purposes, with an integrating,

synoptical value, which (in the optimal case) shows the difference between existing states and

aspired target situations. Indicators are also comprehended as depictions of qualities,

quantities, states or interactions that are not directly accessible.”

Good indicator sets should provide scientific correctness and practical applicability (Kandziora

et al. 2013).

1.4.4 Indicators for Ecosystem Services

After clarifying the definition of indicators in ecology, this section will introduce the specific

use of indicators in the ecosystem service context. Ecosystem service indicators are critical for

knowing whether or not the observed ecosystem services are being maintained and used in a

sustainable manner. Thus, the indicators are enabling policy makers to identify the policies

and other interventions needed to better manage the ecosystem services. As a result,

ecosystem service indicators are of increasing interest and importance (UNEP-WCMC 2011).

The Convention on Biological Diversity carried out a project that reviewed the use of

ecosystem service indicators over the past 20 years, in order to address the issues and

challenges of developing ecosystem service indicators (UNEP-WCMC 2011). It was found out

that despite the growing demand for assessing ecosystem services, the development of

practical indicators is often delayed by a lack of information and data, resulting in few available

indicators. The provisioning ecosystem services category was characterized by the most

common and well-developed indicators. In the provisioning ecosystem services category, the

provisioning ecosystem service food was represented by the highest number of indicators,

most of those addressing capture fisheries, crop and livestock production, and wild foods

(UNEP-WCMC 2011).

20

Kandziora et al. (2013) were proposing three potential indicators for the provisioning

ecosystem service crops: harvested crops, net primary production and yield. As this study aims

at indicating the provisioning ecosystem service food rice, a specific indicator set for this

service will be designed in Section 2.3.1.

1.4.5 Indicators for Human Well-Being

“Well-being is multidimensional, and so very hard to measure. All available measures have

problems, both conceptual (are they measuring the right thing, in the right way?) and practical

(how do we actually implement them?)”, MA 2005, p. 54.

Even though these problems related to the measurement of human well-being exist, there is a

multitude of human well-being indicators. A comprehensive review of the literature on human

well-being indicators resulted in 799 indicators that were categorized in 157 different domains

of human well-being (Smith et al. 2013). Since the number of available measurements of well-

being is that high, this section will focus on the OECD report “How’s Life? Measuring Well-

being” (OECD 2011), which condensed the matter into a well-defined concept.

According to the OECD (2011), measuring human well-being requires choosing indicators that

suitably capture the dimensions of well-being regarded in the report. OECD (2011) put a great

effort into choosing available indicators that are conceptually sound as well as relevant to

measure well-being across the population from the perspective of informing policy. There is a

differentiation between headline indicators that fulfill the requirements for an ideal indicator

set and secondary indicators which cover more specific aspects of the well-being dimensions,

but are more limited in country coverage and robustness.

The selection process of the human well-being indicators of the OECD has been well-

documented in the report. The OECD (2011) selected their human well-being indicators

according to the following criteria: they should capture well-being achievements at the

individual or household level; measure well-being outcomes; allow disaggregation, so as to

assess the well-being of different population groups; and gauge the joint distributions of

achievements.

Moreover, the indicators have been chosen to fulfill a long list of statistical requirements,

which can be found in the OECD (2011, p. 22). These criteria are defining the ideal human well-

being indicator set. In practice, finding indicators that meet all the requirements is challenging

and will remain so for the near future (OECD 2011). That is why the presented indicator set of

21

the OECD is flexible to be changed and will be improved in the future, if better data sources

are available.

Research Rationale 1.5

After seeing the dynamic developments in rice production and their influence on global food

security (Subchapter 1.1), it is obvious that a detailed understanding of the complex

interactions in human-environmental rice production systems is urgently needed. The

ecosystem service concept (Subchapter 1.2) provides a framework that can connect

researchers, farmers and government representatives to enable a more sustainable

management of rice ecosystems. Although human well-being (Subchapter 1.3) is a vital part of

the definition of ecosystem services, the linkage between the two concepts is not sufficiently

developed (Subchapter 1.4). Since that link has often been neglected in existing ecosystem

service research, this work aims to clarify it further. This study focuses on the provisioning

ecosystem service food rice and its diverse linkages to human well-being in order to reduce the

complexity of the rice production system by concentrating on one service only. The human

well-being investigations will aim at rice farmers in the research regions, as they are expected

to benefit directly from the provisioning ecosystem service food rice. In order to fulfill the

objectives of the study, the investigation aims to answer the three following research

questions in the frame of the LEGATO project (Subchapter 2.1):

What is the ideal indicator set to indicate human well-being and the provisioning

ecosystem service food rice in the study regions?

What are the main trends and patterns of human well-being and the provisioning

ecosystem service food rice?

Which are the linkages between the provisioning ecosystem service food rice and the

different dimensions of human well-being?

22

2. Methods

The methods chapter will provide an introduction of the LEGATO project, followed by an

overview of the two research regions of the study. Afterwards, the methods applied for

indicator selection, questionnaire development and survey conduction will be described.

Finally, the tools used for the data analysis will be addressed.

LEGATO Project 2.1

This master thesis was carried out in the framework and with the support of the LEGATO

project. LEGATO1 stands for “Land-use intensity and Ecological EnGineering – Assessment

Tools for risks and Opportunities in irrigated rice based production systems”. The project is

conducted by multiple partner institutions in Europe and Southeast Asia investigating seven

research regions in Vietnam and the Philippines (Settele et al. 2013). Funding of the

international project is provided by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research

(BMBF) under the funding measure “Sustainable Land Management”, Module A: “Interaction

between land management, climate change and ecosystem services”. The following section

will give an overview of the objectives of LEGATO and specify the role of this work inside the

project.

2.1.1 Purpose of the LEGATO Project

In consideration of the various risks arising from multiple aspects of global change, LEGATO

aims to support the sustainable development of irrigated rice agriculture. The emerging

discipline of ecological engineering will be used as a frame to develop and test generally

applicable principles for enhancing ecosystem functions and services. The researchers will

study numerous connections of ecosystem functions and services to each other and especially

their relation to land use intensity in the cropping areas in Vietnam and the Philippines. Their

aim is to comprehend interactions between rice fields and the surrounding landscapes.

Moreover, LEGATO is developing methods for monetary and non-monetary valuation of

ecosystem services. The findings will be integrated into the elaboration of an indicator

framework for enabling the assessment of risks and opportunities in rice production under

diverse aspects of global and regional change (LEGATO 2011).

1 http://www.legato-project.net/

23

2.1.2 Position of this Thesis inside LEGATO

This work was carried out under the LEGATO work package number 4.2 Indicators. The overall

objectives of this work package are the following (LEGATO 2011):

Identification of suitable indicator sets in order to characterize the state of the

environment and related socio-economic and cultural factors;

Quantification of the indicators based on the results of other work packages; and

Integration of LEGATO results into an interdisciplinary indicator framework system.

More specifically, the thesis at hand applies to the characterization of socio-economic land use

consequences and cultural factors. This thesis investigates the connection between the

provisioning ecosystem service food rice and human well-being of the rice farmers. In addition

to testing appropriate indicators for the mentioned fields of interest, the work also meets the

aim of carrying out cross-site comparisons, since it was conducted in the two research regions

of Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc (LEGATO 2011).

Research Regions 2.2

The LEGATO project chose seven research regions in the Philippines and Vietnam to enable

comparisons of rice cropping systems along similar biophysical gradients from mountains to

lowlands in both countries. Each research region defines an area of 15 km x 15 km inside the

province it is named after. The chosen set of regions covers different degrees of land use

intensity, structural diversity and cultural identity (LEGATO 2012).

This master thesis is analyzing the situation in the two LEGATO research regions located in the

Red River Delta in northern Vietnam, Hai Duong (VN_1) and Vinh Phuc (VN_2). As my colleague

Lê Thùy Dương carried out a parallel investigation in the two complimentary research regions,

Lao Cai (VN_3) and Tien Giang (VN_4), all four LEGATO regions in Vietnam have been covered

by our joint research effort (Figure 9).

24

2.2.1 Hai Duong (VN_1)

The province of Hai Duong, which is named after its capital city, is located in the Red River

Delta about halfway between Hanoi and Hai Phong. Hai Duong covers a land surface area of

1’656 km² that is mostly very flat with an average elevation of 3 m to 4 m and slightly sloping

down from Northwest to Southeast. Only about 11 % of the area is formed by low mountain

ranges in the Northeast of the province. The flat lands have fertile soils that are used for

intensive staple food production, mainly rice and short-term industrial crops, but are also

converted into numerous industrial complexes. On the low mountain ranges, there is tourism

development, forestry, fruit crop and industrial crop cultivation (VTPA 2011). The tropical

monsoon climate of Hai Duong is characterized by four distinct seasons with an annual average

precipitation of 1’500 to 1’700 mm and an annual temperature average of 23 °C (HDDPI 2013).

On the administrative level, the province is divided into one city (Hai Duong), one town (Chi

Linh) and ten districts (Figure 10). The total population is 1.7 million, the population density is

1’029 persons per square kilometer and the percentage of rural inhabitants is 84 %. The data

of 2012 shows that Hai Duong’s economy is dominated by industry and construction which are

Figure 9: Location of the 4 LEGATO research regions in Vietnam: Hai Duong (VN_1); Vinh Phuc (VN_2); Lao Cai (VN_3); Tien Giang (VN_4). Based on LEGATO (2013) and the map of www.bing.com.

25

accounting for 52 % of GDP, followed by the service sector with 33 % of GDP and agriculture,

forestry and fishery representing 15 % of GDP (HDDPI 2013).

Figure 10: The districts of the province of Hai Duong and the location of VN_1. (from HDG 2014).

26

2.2.2 Vinh Phuc (VN_2)

The province of Vinh Phuc is located in the Northwest of Hanoi with its southern border being

the Red River. The northern frontier is formed by the Tam Dao mountain range, which hosts

the highest peak of the province with 1’592 m elevation above sea level. Therefore, the

landscape of Vinh Phuc is characterized by three different zones: the plains of the Red River

Delta, the hilly inland region and the medium mountain ranges. The plains are mostly used for

intensive agriculture based on rice and industry development. In the hilly inland, there are

mostly forest plantations, fruit trees and short-term industrial crops like beans and peanuts.

Tea plantations can also be found there. Moreover, there is the Dai Lai Lake reservoir

supplying 2’700 ha of cultivated land with irrigation water and being a tourist attraction in

itself. The medium range mountains, which are home to many lakes, are mainly used for

tourism and forestry (VPGP 2012).

Forests cover 22 % of the land surface, of which around one third is natural forest and two

thirds are classified as plantations. 6’978 ha of the natural forests are protected by the Dam

Dao national park, where 1’436 plant species and 1’141 animal species have been identified

(VPGP 2012). The total area covered by the national park is 36’883 ha, as it includes two

neighboring provinces of Vinh Phuc (VNP 2009).

The climate of Vinh Phuc is tropical monsoon climate with four distinct seasons. An average

temperature of 24 °C and an average rainfall between 1’400 and 1’600 mm is indicated on the

province government portal (VPGP 2012). It should be noted that, due to the diverse

topography, the temperature and precipitation can differ rather much between the regions

(VPGP 2012).

Vinh Phuc province underwent an administrative reform in 2012 resulting in a new surface

area of 1’236 km², a population of 1’020’600 and a population density of 825 persons per km²

(GSO 2012). Now the province is divided into one city (Vinh Yen), one town (Phuc Yen) and

seven districts (Figure 11). According to government statistics, the GDP grew on average 17 %

per year from 1998 to 2010. This rapid economic growth was accompanied by an urbanization

trend with the urban population increasing from 13 % in 2001 to 23 % in 2011. The industry

and service sectors combined accounted for 85 % of GDP, whereas the agricultural sector

resulted in 15 % of GDP in 2011 (VPGP 2012).

27

Indicator Selection 2.3

The indicator selection has been an integral part of the study and the LEGATO project. There

was no established set of indicators readily available in the published literature for the specific

purpose of the investigation. Therefore, an applicable indicator set had to be developed that

was covering the provisioning ecosystem service food rice and the different dimensions of

human well-being.

2.3.1 Indicators for the Provisioning Ecosystem Service Food Rice

Indicators for the provisioning ecosystem service food rice were selected in such way that a

comparison between the different sites would be possible. As in different areas of rice

production the degree of mechanization, the climatic conditions and thus the number of

possible harvests per year, as well as the chemical input can differ, indicators needed to be

found that would enable a meaningful indication of the ecosystem service part of the rice

harvest.

Figure 11: The districts of the province of Vinh Phuc and the location of VN_2 (from VPG 2014).

28

The yield of paddy, which is the harvested amount of paddy per hectare and season,

represents the baseline of our provisioning ecosystem service food rice indication. Paddy

refers to the threshed, but unmilled stage of rice and is a widespread measure of rice harvests

in the literature. This indicator was chosen, because of its universal use in rice statistics which

allows for literature comparisons and the fact that rice farmers normally refer to paddy if they

indicate the amount of their rice harvest. Additionally to the yield of paddy, indicators for the

diverse human inputs to the agricultural rice field ecosystem were selected, which can be

found in (Table 3).

An alternative approach of measuring the rice yield was chosen by the LEGATO project

members who are investigating the biomass production on the LEGATO sites. They are directly

taking samples from the rice fields and measure them after oven drying. That methodology

allows an estimation of the rice yield standing on the field before harvest.

It should also be noted that the concept of ecosystem services not only requires the accurate

analysis of the ecosystem of the region considered, but that it also facilitates the assessment

of ecosystem services supply and demand flows between different locations (Subchapter 1.2).

To include this relatively new trend of ecosystem services research in this concept, the

examination of rice export and import to the investigation area as a measure of supply and

demand flows of the provisioning ecosystem service food rice is proposed.

Table 3: Proposed indicators for the provisioning ecosystem service food rice and parameters for their quantification.

Indicator Parameter Unit

Yield of paddy tons/ha/season

Number of harvests 1 to 3 per year

Fertilizer use kg of fertilizer per ton of rice output

Machinery use hours of work per ton of rice output

Labor input hours of work per ton of rice output

Export of rice from the region tons/yr.

Import of rice to the region tons/yr.

29

2.3.2 Indicators for Human Well-Being

As explained in detail in Subchapter 1.3, there is no commonly agreed definition of well-being

and no generally accepted constellation of dimensions of human well-being yet. That is why an

agreement on the definition of human well-being dimensions for the study had to be reached.

The dimensions were chosen with the purpose of representing human well-being in its

complexity and covering the relevant aspects of the matter in the study regions. Based on the

study of Busch et al. (2011), the three major dimensions of economic well-being, social well-

being and personal well-being were established (Table 4). Additionally, the two dimensions of

health and environmental quality were adapted from the OECD “How’s Life?” report (OECD

2011).

Before developing the indicators for human well-being, the target group and the scale of the

study needed to be defined. According to the main research objectives defined in Subchapter

1.5, a possible linkage between the provisioning ecosystem service food rice and the

dimensions of human well-being should be investigated. Therefore, it was appropriate to

document such correlation in the group of people that were directly supplied with and

profited from the provisioning ecosystem service food rice, i.e. the rice farmers. The study was

designed to reveal potentially existing trends in the development of human well-being of the

farmers directly involved in the production of rice in the research regions. In order to detect

such trends, a time scale of 20 years was established, with three points in time that were to be

examined: the present, ten years in the past and ten years in the future. That definition of the

target group and time scale was followed by the selection of categories for each of the

dimensions of human well-being. As no study of such specific setting was published before in

this region, this study defined the categories in order to comply with the socio-economic

conditions of the research regions in Vietnam (Table 4).

The selection of human well-being indicators was done considering the following criteria:

Indicators needed to represent the chosen dimensions and categories of human well-being as

accurately as possible. Human well-being indicators had to be applicable and significant under

the circumstances of the rice agricultural system of Vietnam. Moreover, the indicators were

chosen in regard of the anticipated availability of statistical data sources. Furthermore, the

variety of available indicators had to be limited to a feasible number that would allow for a

timely completion of the investigation under the conditions of the research project. The

proposed indicator set was developed for later testing in the research regions. Being aware of

the need for further adaptations, the set was not regarded as the final one, but as a

30

momentarily optimal version. The adaptation of the proposed indicator set for human well-

being of rice farmers will be introduced in Subchapter 3.4.2.

31

Table 4: Proposed indicator set for human well-being of rice farmers in the research regions.

2 1 = not satisfied, 2 = satisfied, 3 = very satisfied

No Dimension Category Definition (adapted from Busch et al. 2011 and from OECD 2011)

Indicator Parameter Unit Data Sources

1

Economic well-being

Income

Disposable income; that is, the income available to individuals for meeting their respective needs. The material basis available to each individual for participating in social life.

Average annual income of farmers VND

Farmer survey, statistical data

2 Savings rate of average annual income %

3 Share of average annual income from rice %

4

Employment

Diversity and security of available agricultural jobs within the region, linked to the overall regional employment/unemployment ratio.

Employment rate %

Statistical data 5 Share of employees working in rice production %

6

Social well-being

Demography Dynamic changes of population numbers and overall social composition.

Population structure according to age groups % Statistical data 7 Ratio of women/men working in rice production -

8 Net migration per 1000 inhabitants persons/year 9

Education

Assess to formal education for the rice farmers and their children in the region.

Farmers finished secondary school %

Farmer survey 10 Farmers finished high school %

11 Farmers' children visiting high school %

12

Health

Nutrition Availability and quality of locally produced rice and rice products.

Share of locally produced rice supply in the region % Official sources

13

Infrastructure

Access to health infrastructure and the overall status of health infrastructure within the case study area.

Number of doctors per 1000 inhabitants -

Statistical data 14 Number of hospital beds per 1000 inhabitants -

15

Personal well-being

Personal well-being

Subjective determinants of quality of life.

Personal satisfaction and happiness scale from 1-10

Farmer survey 16 Work and life balance

The ability to combine work, family commitments and personal life.

Average working time during busy period hours/day

17 Average working time during other periods hours/day

18 Time spent for leisure and personal care hours/day

19 Environmental quality

Environmental quality

The health of the physical environment, focusing on pollution aspects.

Satisfaction with the quality of air scale from 1-32

Farmer survey 20 Satisfaction with the quality of water scale from 1-32

32

Questionnaire 2.4

After the indicators of the different dimensions of human well-being and the provisioning

ecosystem service food rice had been compiled, a questionnaire for an oral survey amongst

rice farmers in the research regions was developed. The questionnaire was designed following

the guidelines of the Colorado State University for survey research (Barribeau et al. 2012).

Before the main part of the questionnaire started, there was a cover letter including an

introduction of the topic and an explanation of the research interests. A structure of the

questionnaire was developed that would allow for the farmers to be comfortable with and

interested in taking part in the survey. First, the topic of environmental quality was addressed,

followed by rice provisioning, economic well-being and finally personal well-being.

Questions for the survey were derived from the indicator sets for the provisioning ecosystem

service food rice (Table 3) and human well-being (Table 4). Here, closed-ended questions made

up the main part in order to enable a quantitative analysis leading to a calculation of the

indicators afterwards. Some open-ended questions were included giving space for the

collection of useful background information about the research regions. The technique of

rating scales in combination with inverted funneling questions was chosen for most efficient

data gathering (Barribeau et al. 2012). In general, the questions were asked for the past,

present and future time with ten years intervals.

When the first draft of the questionnaire had been developed in English, it was send to

LEGATO researchers for their comments. After the feedback was analyzed and integrated, the

revised questionnaire was translated to Vietnamese with the support of a local expert in

Hanoi. This prototype questionnaire was pre-tested in April 2013 on a field excursion of

LEGATO researchers to the region of Sapa in the Lao Cai province (LEGATO region VN_3) as

recommended in the IRRI rice knowledge bank (IRRI 2009). The improved final questionnaire

was used for all following surveys in the research regions. Appendix B contains the English

version of the final questionnaire and the Vietnamese translation can be found in Appendix C.

Survey 2.5

According to Barribeau et al. (2012) surveys are one of the most common kinds of quantitative,

social science research. The researcher typically selects a sample of respondents from a basic

population and distributes a standardized questionnaire to them. The questionnaire can be

provided as a written document that is completed by the person being surveyed, in an online

form, a face-to-face interview, or a telephone interview (Barribeau et al. 2012).

33

The survey was aimed at a defined target population of people between 30 and 70 years of

age that had been living in the research region for at least ten years. Rice farming should have

been their main occupation at least since 2002. Each survey participant should represent a

different family.

In this study, personal interviews were conducted with 30 different farmers at four sites of

each research region. The sample size of 30 (ideally randomly sampled) rice farmers per region

was a compromise between the need of a large sampling size permitting a statistical analysis

of the results later on and the necessity to keep the number of respondents reasonable low

under the given limits of time and labor of the interviewer. Random sampling of rice farmers

should have been applied in order to allow generalization to the basic population of rice

farmers in the research region and perform statistical analysis (Kelley 2003).

The surveys were held in Vietnamese language by Ms Lê Thùy Dương who translated them to

English afterwards. From 20th to 21st of April and 8th to 9th of May 2013, interviews took place

in the research region of VN_1 in Hai Duong (Figure 12). Participants of the survey came from

diverse villages in the Tuan Hung commune in the Kim Thanh district and the Quoc Tuan

commune in the Nam Sach district. In the research region VN_2 in Vinh Phuc, the interviews

were carried out from 18th to 19th of April and on 19th of June 2013 (Figure 13). The participating

farmers came from several villages in the Ngoc Thanh commune in the Phuc Yen district. After

the completion of the each survey session the farmers and the contact person were given

monetary payment in compensation for their loss of working time.

Figure 12: Conducting the survey in a newly-built commune house, VN_1 Hai Duong on 09.05.2013 (photo taken by Lê Thùy Dương).

34

Data Analysis 2.6

2.6.1 Data Collection

Apart from conducting the survey in the research areas, statistical data was collected in order

to calculate the indicators. The National Library of Vietnam was consulted for assess to the

statistical yearbooks of Vietnam. Unfortunately, the yearbooks focus only on statistical data of

the whole country and do not give specific results for the provinces. Local authorities in the

research regions were asked for available data. Moreover, the statistical yearbooks of Vinh

Phuc from 2002 until 2012 could only be found on the website of the province government

(IPA 2014). Hai Duong published data on a government website on statistical data (Cục Thống

Kê Hải Dương 2014). Both sources are provided in Vietnamese language, with English subtitles

only inside the data sheets. Most of the required data could be found at the Statistical Office

of Vietnam, which also provides an English version of most of the provided data (GSO 2014). As

the Statistical Office of Vietnam is coordinating the data collection in Vietnam and also

publishes the statistical yearbooks, this source was taken as the basis for the indicator

calculations.

2.6.2 Analysis of Statistical Data

The data obtained from the survey was put into a Microsoft Excel 2010 file. The mean and the

standard deviation of each indicator was calculated for the past (2002) and the present (2012)

using the functions of Microsoft Excel 2010. For deriving the indicator change from past to

present, the data change of each family was calculated (present value – past value) and then

the mean and standard deviation were computed from that. Statistical data was examined

using the data analysis tool of Microsoft Excel 2010. Additionally, graphs were designed with

Microsoft Excel 2010 for better illustration of the results.

Figure 13: Meeting rice farmers in VN_2 Vinh Phuc on 19.06.2013 (photos taken by Lê Thùy Dương).

35

3. Results

The results chapter will cover the outcome of the farmers’ survey and the statistical data

analysis which was carried out in the course of this investigation. First the trends of human

well-being indicators will be outlined, followed by the trends of provisioning ecosystem service

food rice indicators. After a summary of the indicator trends, there will be a description of the

findings related to the linkage between the provisioning ecosystem service food rice and the

human well-being of rice farmers in the two research regions of Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc.

Trends of Human Well-Being Indicators 3.1

This subchapter will provide the main findings related to each indicator of the developed

human well-being indicator set (Table 4).

3.1.1 Average Annual Income of Farmers

The average annual income of farmers is an indicator that turned out to be rather difficult to

measure. Many of the interviewed farmers could not remember their income of ten years ago

exactly. In addition, the farmers in several survey locations were uncomfortable with

mentioning their income. Other groups of rice farmers however were very open about the

topic and gave some numbers for their present and past income. The answers depended very

much on the group dynamics and interview location. If the interviewees gathered in the house

of a farmer and there was no official present, they were more open to give information of their

income.

What yielded much better results was the question for the farmers’ income trend instead of

the absolute income. The rice farmers in Hai Duong had a mean increase to 3,45 times the

income of the past with a standard deviation (SD) of 1,45 (Table 5). In Vinh Phuc the rice

farmers could increase their income to 2,37 times the income of 2002 with a standard

deviation of 1,0.

Table 5: Trends of average annual income of rice farmers from 2002 to 2012 in the two research regions (Survey data).

Income of 2012 in relation to 2002 SD

Hai Duong 3,45 times higher 1,45

Vinh Phuc 2,37 times higher 1,00

36

Statistical data relating to the income of farmers could not be found, but the monthly income

per capita of the whole population was available for the two provinces (Figure 14). Here, it can

be seen that the monthly income per capita was rising fast in both provinces at a similar level.

In Hai Duong the income per capita in 2012 was 6,79 times the income of 2002. The income

per capita of Vinh Phuc was increasing 7,04 times during the same time period, but always

stayed below the income per capita in the province of Hai Duong. A comparison of the survey

results with the statistical data shows that the income of rice farmers was rising slower than

the income of the whole population in both provinces. The gap between farmers’ income

increase and general population income gains was more pronounced in Vinh Phuc, where rice

farmers indicated income level raises of about one third the statistical income increase per

capita. In Hai Duong the farmers’ income increased about half the magnitude of the per capita

income gain.

3.1.2 Savings Rate of Average Annual Income

The survey results show that the savings rate of average annual income of rice farmers was

increasing in both study regions (Table 6). In Hai Duong the increase was higher than in Vinh

Phuc, but the savings rate remained on a low level in both investigation areas. Presently only

14 out of 30 farmers in Hai Duong could save money from their income, whereas in Vinh Phuc

only 10 out of 30 farmers indicated savings. This difference between the majority of farmers

who could not save any income and some farmers who had higher savings resulted in the

relatively high standard deviations given in Table 6.

2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012

Vinh Phuc 265,0 403,9 540,0 872,0 1231,7 1866,8

Hai Duong 301,4 451,2 609,0 924,9 1306,4 2047,0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Unit: 1000 VND

Figure 14: Monthly income per capita in the provinces of Vinh Phuc and Hai Duong (Data source: GSO 2014)

37

Table 6: Savings rate of average annual income of rice farmers in the two research regions (Survey data).

Savings rate

change3 SD

Savings rate

past SD

Savings rate

present SD

Hai Duong

9 pp4 14 pp 3 % 7 pp 12 % 16 pp

Vinh Phuc

3 pp 9 pp 4% 10 pp 6 % 12 pp

3.1.3 Share of Average Annual Income from Rice

The importance of rice as a source of income for the rice farmers was decreasing ten

percentage points in Hai Duong (Table 7). Farmers in Vinh Phuc only indicated a minor decrease

of three percentage points less income from rice. In Hai Duong two farmers of 30 were only

producing rice for their own family and derived no income from rice production. However, in

Vinh Phuc 8 of 30 interviewed farmers produced rice only for self-supply. Additional sources of

income, apart from rice cultivation, were listed by the survey participants and can be found in

Table 8.

Table 7: Share of average annual income from rice stated by the interviewed farmers (Survey data).

Income from rice

change SD

Income from rice past

SD Income from rice

present SD

Hai Duong

-10 pp 17 pp 29 % 22 pp 19 % 16 pp

Vinh Phuc

-3 pp 7 pp 22 % 16 pp 19 % 15 pp

3 positive numbers indicate an increase, negative values show a decreasing trend

4 pp stands for percentage points

38

Table 8: Additional sources of income of rice farmers, apart from rice cultivation, in the research regions of Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc; several sources of income per farmer were possible (Survey data).

Hai Duong Vinh Phuc

Source of Income Number of farmers Source of Income Number of farmers

hired work 14 animal farming 18

animal farming 10 hired work 6

vegetables 8 vegetables 5

other agricultural products

2 other agricultural products

2

Fruits 2

3.1.4 Employment Rate

Unfortunately, only the employment rate of people of 15 years or above in percentage of the

whole population could be found. There was no data on the employment rate in relation to the

people being able to work.

The rate of employment data of the General Statistics Office of Vietnam showed a general

rising trend over the last years in the provinces of Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc (Figure 15). Data

was only available from the year 2005 to 2012. Details of the development of employment

rates differed between the two provinces. Hai Duong started with a higher employment rate of

59,8 % in 2005, having a decrease in the two following years and then a steady increase for

four years, reaching 62,7 % in 2012. Vinh Phuc had an employment rate of 55,8 % in 2005 and

showed a steady increase until 2012, with only a minor decrease of 0,5 percentage points in

2011. The employment rate of Vinh Phuc was close behind the one of Hai Duong in 2012 with

61,2 % in comparison to 62,7 %.

39

Figure 15: Rate of Employment of people from 15 years of age and above in relation to the whole population in the provinces of Vinh Phuc and Hai Duong (Data source: GSO 2014).

3.1.5 Share of Employees Working in Rice Production

There was no data available for the share of employees working in rice production. The share

of employees working in agriculture could not be found related to the provinces, but only

describing the whole region of the Red River Delta. Considering the province level, there was

only data on the share of employees working in agriculture, forestry and fishery combined.

That was considered too unspecific for the purpose of the study. Therefore, this indicator

could not be applied in the investigation.

3.1.6 Population Structure According to Age Groups

It was not possible to find population structure data showing the different age groups of the

population of the research provinces. However, there are statistics of the development of rural

population and urban population of the provinces of Vietnam. As those data could also be

helpful for the purpose of the study, they were adopted as alternative indicators.

What is obvious in Figure 16 is an abrupt decrease of the total and rural populations of Vinh

Phuc in 2008. That was caused by an administrative reform which transferred the Me Linh

district from the Vinh Phuc province to Hanoi. Thus, Vinh Phuc lost 187’255 people and

4’165 ha of land surface (VPGP 2012). Apart from that, it can be seen that the rural population

in Vinh Phuc was stable from 2002 to 2012. The urban population on the other hand grew fast

from 124’600 in 2002 to 235’600 in 2012, which also resulted in a rising trend of the total

population of the province. Hai Duong, which has a bigger population than Vinh Phuc, showed

similar development patterns. A small urban population was growing fast, whereas the big

2005 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Vinh Phuc 55,8 58,1 58,3 59,6 59,5 59,0 61,2

Hai Duong 59,8 57,3 56,9 58,9 60,1 61,7 62,7

52

54

56

58

60

62

64

Pe

rce

nta

ge

40

rural population was decreasing and the total population of the province was growing slowly

(Figure 16).

3.1.7 Ratio of Women and Men Working in Rice Production

There was no data available for calculating the indicator of the ratio of women and men

working in rice production.

3.1.8 Net Migration per 1000 Inhabitants

Statistical data of the migration rates could be found for the years 2005 to 2012 (GSO 2014).

The province of Vinh Phuc experienced a negative net migration over the whole period of time,

with fluctuating numbers between -1,1 and -5,7. Only the year 2011 was characterized by an

exceptionally low net migration of -11,7 persons per 1000 inhabitants (Figure 18). Apart from

the permanently negative net migration, it can be seen that out-migration was increasing until

2011 and then suddenly decreasing dramatically from 16 to 4 persons per 1000 inhabitants.

This resulted in an inversed pattern of net migration, as in-migration stayed rather constant on

a low level.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

20

11

20

12

Po

pu

lati

on

in 1

00

0

Vinh Phuc

Total Urban Rural

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

20

11

20

12

Po

pu

lati

on

in 1

00

0

Hai Duong

Total Urban Rural

Figure 16: Total population, rural population and urban population in the provinces of Vinh Phuc and Hai Duong (Data source: GSO 2014).

41

Hai Duong showed a fluctuation of the net migration rate between -4,3 and 2,3 persons per

1000 inhabitants (Figure 17). The trends that could be seen here were a raise of in-migration,

which was accompanied by a sinking out-migration. Therefore, the net migration of the

province of Hai Duong was increasing from -4 persons per 1000 inhabitants in 2005 to 2,3 in

2011 and 0,8 in 2012. Only the data from 2005 to 2012 was collectable and the data of the

year 2006 was missing in the database of GSO. Although the development of the migration

rates is not continuous, the general trends are visible (Figure 17). Due to the data limit of seven

years, not the whole investigation time of this work could be covered.

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

2005 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

pe

rso

ns

pe

r 1

00

0 in

hab

itan

ts

in-migration

out-migration

net migration

Figure 17: In-migration, out-migration and net migration rates of the province of Hai Duong (Data source: GSO 2014).

-15

-12

-9

-6

-3

0

3

6

9

12

15

18

2005 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

pe

rso

ns

pe

r 1

00

0 in

hab

itan

ts

in-migration

out-migration

net migration

Figure 18: In-migration, out-migration and net migration rates of the province of Vinh Phuc (Data source: GSO 2014).

42

3.1.9 Education

None of the three education indicators was yielding data that could be used in our analysis.

The interviewed farmers felt shy about the lack of education and were not willing to give

detailed information about the education of their families. Therefore, the education status was

not asked after the testing phase of the survey. Unfortunately, there was also no statistical

data related to the education of farmers. Thus, the three following indicators are considered

impracticable under the conditions of the two research regions:

percentage of farmers finished secondary school

percentage of farmers finished high school

percentage of farmers’ children visiting high school

3.1.10 Nutrition

No data could be found revealing the rice trade inside Vietnam. There are only statistics of the

rice yield of the provinces which will be covered in section 3.2.1. Therefore, the proposed

indicator share of locally produced rice supply in the region could not be applied to the two

study regions.

Instead, the indicator self-supply of rice was created to indicate the availability of locally

produced rice. During the survey the rice farmers were asked to state the months per year that

they could supply their own families with self-produced rice from their fields. That indicator

was especially useful in the province of Lao Cai which was covered by the work of my colleague

Lê Thùy Dương. The two research regions of Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc, that are investigated

here, had an equal result for all the interviewed farmers (Table 9). The farmers replied that

they were supplying their families for 12 months per year with their own-grown rice without

any exception and had also been doing that for the past ten years.

Table 9: Rice farmers' self-supply of rice for their families in months per year (Survey data).

Self-supply change SD Self-supply past SD Self-supply present SD

Hai Duong 0 0 12 0 12 0

Vinh Phuc 0 0 12 0 12 0

An additional factor reflecting the farmers’ valuation of the quality of rice for their own

nutrition is the cultivation of traditional rice varieties. The survey results found out that 50 %

of farmers in Hai Duong grow traditional rice varieties. The number in Vinh Phuc was slightly

43

higher with 53,3 % of farmers cultivating traditional varieties in addition to the high yielding

ones.

3.1.11 Number of Doctors per 1000 Inhabitants

The number of doctors per 1000 inhabitants indicator revealed a rising trend for both Vinh

Phuc and Hai Duong (Figure 19). Vinh Phuc started with 0,31 doctors per 1000 people in 2002

and could more than double the figure to 0,70 doctors in 2012. This indicates a rapid

development of the health infrastructure of the province. In Hai Duong the number of doctors

per 1000 inhabitants was 0,40 in the year 2002 and increased moderately and continuously

over the following ten years to 0,54 doctors per 1000 people in 2012. As can be seen in Figure

19 the faster development in Vinh Phuc allowed the province to overtake Hai Duong in this

indicator in 2008.

3.1.12 Number of Hospital Beds per 1000 Inhabitants

For the indicator number of hospital beds per 1000 inhabitants a variety of data was available,

as there are different categories of health care establishments that provide beds to their

patients. The decision was made to include all beds of government health care facilities in this

indicator, which are hospitals, regional polyclinics, sanatoriums, rehabilitation hospitals and

medical service units in commune precincts, excluding private establishments. Covering all the

different kinds of “hospitals” allows for a better representation of the health infrastructure of

the considered provinces.

0,0

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0,7

0,8

Do

cto

rs p

er

10

00

inh

abit

ants

Vinh Phuc

Hai Duong

Figure 19: Number of doctors per 1000 inhabitants in the provinces of Vinh Phuc and Hai Duong (Data source: GSO 2014).

44

Looking at the data for Hai Duong, it can be seen that there was a moderate increase from 2,1

hospital beds per 1000 inhabitants in 2002 up to 2,9 hospital beds in 2011, followed by a minor

decrease to 2,7 beds per 1000 people in 2012 (Figure 20). That dip in the last year can be

explained with the population growth in the province (Section 3.1.6). The number of hospital

beds per 1000 inhabitants indicates a steady development of the health infrastructure in Hai

Duong province.

Vinh Phuc had less hospital beds per 1000 inhabitants than Hai Duong in 2002, increased the

number rapidly until 2010 and stayed at a constant level for the two following years (Figure 20).

The number of beds per 1000 capita more than doubled from 1,6 to 3,8 over the ten years

period of the investigation. Therefore, Vinh Phuc surpassed Hai Duong regarding this indicator

in the year 2009.

3.1.13 Personal Satisfaction and Happiness

Asking the rice farmers for their personal satisfaction and happiness was very successful in

both study regions, as every farmer was open about the topic and willing to indicate their

personal well-being. The happiness was assessed on a scale from 1, which stands for

completely unsatisfied or unhappy, to 10, which means completely satisfied and happy.

Interestingly, the results for the present were very similar in both research regions with the

farmers of Hai Duong grading their happiness 6,6 and the farmers of Vinh Phuc replying 6,7 on

average. A difference between the regions could only be seen, when the farmers were stating

their past happiness (Table 10). The interviewees of Hai Duong saw their personal well-being

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

3,0

3,5

4,0

4,5

ho

spit

al b

ed

s p

er

10

00

inh

abit

ants

Vinh Phuc

Hai Duong

Figure 20: Total number of hospital beds in government establishments per 1000 inhabitants in the provinces of Vinh Phuc and Hai Duong (Data source: GSO 2014).

45

ten years ago at 3,7 and thus had a mean increase of 2,9 points to the present. In Vinh Phuc

the past score was closer to the present result with 5,0 points and a positive change of 1,7

points to the present. For the future the rice farmers expected a positive trend in both regions,

namely a score of 7,8 in Hai Duong and 8,1 in Vinh Phuc.

Table 10: Personal satisfaction and happiness of rice farmers on a scale from 1 (low) to 10 (high) in the research regions of Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc (Survey data).

Happiness

change SD

Happiness past

SD Happiness

present SD

Happiness future

SD

Hai Duong

2,9 1,8 3,7 1,8 6,6 1,9 7,8 2,2

Vinh Phuc

1,7 1,5 5,0 1,6 6,7 1,2 8,1 1,3

3.1.14 Average Working Time during the Busy Period

The indicator of average working time during the busy period in hours per day captures the

work intensive times of the rice production during soiling, seeding, harvesting and processing

of the harvest. Here, the results were constant over the study period and also very similar

between the two regions (Table 11). In Hai Duong only one of 30 farmers changed the working

time during the busy period, from 11 hours a day in the past to 10 hours per day in the

present. All the other 29 farmers worked exactly the same time in the present as they did ten

years ago, which was between 7 and 12 hours per day with a mean value of 9,3 hours in the

present.

There was also just one farmer in Vinh Phuc who changed the working time during the busy

period, from 10 hours per day in the past to 6 hours per day in the present. The results of all

farmers ranged from 6 to 12 hours per day, yielding a present mean of 9,0 hours. Thus, the

mean working time during the busy period was 0,3 hours less in Vinh Phuc than in Hai Duong

in the past (2002) as well as the present (2012).

Table 11: Average working time of rice farmers during the busy period for rice cultivation in hours per day (Survey data).

Working time busy period

change SD

Working time busy period past

SD Working time busy

period present SD

Hai Duong

-0,03 0,18 9,4 1,2 9,3 1,1

Vinh Phuc

-0,13 0,73 9,1 1,5 9,0 1,6

46

3.1.15 Average Working Time during other Periods

Average working time during other periods expresses the work that farmers spend for rice

cultivation in the periods of the year that are not included in the indicator average working

time during the busy period (Section 3.1.14). The results were exactly the same for the present

and past in both Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc (Table 12). Rice farmers in Hai Duong spend 2,1

hours per day on average for rice cultivation during the non-busy periods, whereas the

interviewed farmers of Vinh Phuc only spend 1,5 hours per day for rice farming during the

same periods.

Table 12: Average working time of rice farmers during the other (non-busy) periods of the year for rice cultivation in hours per day (Survey data).

Working time other period

change SD

Working time other period

past SD

Working time other period

present SD

Hai Duong

0,0 0,0 2,1 1,0 2,1 1,0

Vinh Phuc

0,0 0,0 1,5 0,6 1,5 0,6

3.1.16 Time Spent for Leisure and Personal Care

The sample of rice farmers in Vinh Phuc showed almost exactly the same result for the time

spent for leisure and personal care as did the interviewed farmers in Hai Duong (Table 13). In

both research regions the free time increased 1,4 hours per day over the last ten years and

reached 3,0 hours per day in Hai Duong, respectively 3,1 hours in Vinh Phuc.

Table 13: Time rice farmers spend for leisure and personal care (free time) in hours per day (Survey data).

Free time change SD Free time past SD Free time present SD

Hai Duong 1,4 1,4 1,6 1,4 3,0 0,7

Vinh Phuc 1,4 1,4 1,7 1,2 3,1 1,4

3.1.17 Satisfaction with the Quality of Air

The rice farmers taking part in the survey were asked to assess their satisfaction with the

quality of air using the categories 1 (not satisfied), 2 (satisfied) or 3 (very satisfied). Different

trends could be seen in the results of the two research areas (Table 14). The satisfaction with

the air quality of Hai Duong was decreasing a full category from 2,2 in the year 2002 to 1,1 in

2012. That means the farmers were “satisfied” with the air quality in the past, but saw a

47

decrease of the quality of air over the last ten years to “not satisfactory” in the present. Vinh

Phuc however showed a stable trend of high satisfaction with the air quality with a mean of

2,7 in the past and 2,6 in the present, which stands for “very satisfactory” quality of air.

Table 14: Satisfaction of rice farmers with the quality of air , 1 = not satisfied, 2 = satisfied, 3 = very satisfied (Survey data).

Air quality change SD Air quality past SD Air quality present SD

Hai Duong -1,0 0,6 2,2 0,5 1,1 0,3

Vinh Phuc -0,1 0,5 2,7 0,5 2,6 0,5

Apart from assessing the satisfaction with the quality of air, the farmers were also asked to

point out sources of air pollution. In Hai Duong the unsatisfactory air quality was mostly

connected to industrial pollution (16 farmers) and waste incineration (8 farmers), followed by

stink from animal farms (5 farmers) (Table 15). Only two respondents in Vinh Phuc mentioned

three air pollution sources.

Table 15: Sources of air pollution mentioned by interviewed farmers, several sources per farmer were possible (Survey data).

Hai Duong Vinh Phuc

Pollution source Number of farmers Pollution source Number of farmers

Industry 16 Deforestation 2

Waste incineration 8 Traffic 1

Animal farms 5 Pesticides 1

Private emissions 3

Incense stick production 3

Canalization 2

Traffic 1

Straw burning 1

3.1.18 Satisfaction with the Quality of Water

The satisfaction of farmers with the quality of water was quantified for the two indicators

satisfaction with the quality of natural waters and satisfaction with the quality of household

water. Here, the same scale as for satisfaction with the quality of air was used (Section 3.1.17).

In Hai Duong the satisfaction with the quality of natural waters decreased 1,1 categories, while

in Vinh Phuc the satisfaction with natural water quality sank 0,5 (Table 16).

48

Table 16: Satisfaction of rice farmers with the quality of natural waters, 1 = not satisfied, 2 = satisfied, 3 = very satisfied (Survey data).

Natural water

quality change SD

Natural water

quality past SD

Natural water

quality present SD

Hai

Duong -1,1 0,4 2,1 0,4 1,0 0,0

Vinh

Phuc -0,5 0,5 2,0 0,6 1,5 0,5

Farmers’ satisfaction with their household water quality was declining only in Hai Duong (-0,5)

and stayed on the same level in Vinh Phuc over the ten years examination period (Table 17). In

both research areas the farmers were more satisfied with their household water quality than

they were with the quality of natural waters.

Table 17: Satisfaction of rice farmers with the quality of household water, 1 = not satisfied, 2 = satisfied, 3 = very satisfied (Survey data).

Household

water quality

change

SD

Household

water quality

past

SD Household water

quality present SD

Hai

Duong -0,5 0,5 2,2 0,4 1,7 0,5

Vinh

Phuc 0,0 0,8 1,9 0,6 1,9 0,5

Additionally to the satisfaction with water quality, the rice farmers named sources of water

pollution that occurred in the research regions. Hai Duong had most farmers pointing out

waste water from private households, industry or waste water in general, followed by animal

farming as a source of water pollution (Table 18). In Vinh Phuc private waste water was

regarded as the main course of concern (7 farmers), animal farming (4 farmers) and pesticides

(4 farmers) ranked second.

49

Table 18: Sources of water pollution mentioned by interviewed farmers, several sources per farmer were possible (Survey data).

Hai Duong Vinh Phuc

Source of pollution Number of farmers Source of pollution Number of farmers

private waste water 6 private waste water 7

animal farming 5 animal farming 4

industry waste water 5 pesticides 4

general waste water 5 loss of natural river 2

pesticides 2 garbage 1

loss of natural rivers 2 aquaculture 1

aquaculture 2

incense stick production 1

garbage 1

Trends of Provisioning Ecosystem Service Food Rice Indicators 3.2

Main results of each indicator of the proposed provisioning ecosystem service food rice

indicator set (Table 3) will be outlined in this subchapter.

3.2.1 Yield of Paddy

The indicator yield of paddy, which was calculated in tons per hectare per season, showed an

increasing trend in both research regions in the farmer survey as well as the statistical data of

the provinces. Yield data presented here refers to the average yield of paddy per season.

Looking at the survey data, it can be seen that the interviewed rice farmers in Hai Duong

stated an average yield increase of 1,5 tons per hectare from 3,9 tons per hectare in 2002 to

5,4 tons per hectare in 2012 (Table 19). The yield of paddy increase in Vinh Phuc was slower

with 0,6 tons per hectare during the same time period. Here, the rice farmers indicated a yield

of 4,2 tons per hectare for 2002 and 4,7 tons per hectare for 2012.

Table 19: Yield of paddy in tons/ha/season calculated from data reported by rice farmers in the research regions of Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc (Survey data).

Yield change SD Yield past SD Yield present SD

Hai Duong 1,5 0,9 3,9 0,8 5,4 0,8

Vinh Phuc 0,6 0,6 4,2 0,7 4,7 0,6

50

Statistical data of the General Statistics Office of Vietnam displayed a slight raise in the yield of

paddy in the province of Hai Duong (Figure 21). The average yield per season increased from

5,79 tons per hectare in 2002 to 6,19 tons per hectare in 2012. Hence, the yield gain was 0,4

tons per hectare, which is considerably lower than the increase calculated from the survey

data. Vinh Phuc went through a yield expansion of 1,0 ton per hectare from 2002 to 2011 and

experienced a decline during the last year of the investigation. Resulting from that the yield

increase in the ten years of analysis was 0,6 tons per hectare.

Comparing the two different data sources, it can be seen that the statistical yield of paddy per

season is higher in both provinces than the survey results. Moreover, the rising trend in Vinh

Phuc is faster than in Hai Duong looking at the statistics, though regarding the survey data the

opposite holds true.

An alternative approach of measuring the rice yield was taken by Anika Marxen of the LEGATO

project, who kindly provided her preliminary data. Marxen calculated the yield of rice grains

with hulls after measuring oven-dried hill samples taken in the LEGATO fields of the research

regions. The mean value for the yield of rice grains with hulls in Hai Duong was 4,2 tons per

hectare in 2012. Vinh Phuc LEGATO fields showed a mean yield of rice grains with hulls of 2,9

tons per hectare. Those data confirmed that the rice yield in Hai Duong was higher than in Vinh

Phuc in 2012, although the total values differed from the statistical data and the survey results

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Vinh Phuc 4,67 4,82 5,00 5,05 4,68 4,58 5,21 5,35 5,30 5,67 5,05

Hai Duong 5,79 5,85 5,88 5,81 5,89 5,77 5,97 6,09 5,94 6,17 6,19

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

yie

ld in

to

ns/

ha

Figure 21: Average yield of paddy per season in the provinces of Vinh Phuc and Hai Duong (Data source: GSO 2014).

51

due to the divergent methodology. Unfortunately, the data covered only one year, so that no

trend could be seen.

3.2.2 Number of Harvests

The number of rice harvests stayed constant at two seasons per year in Vinh Phuc and Hai

Duong over the ten year investigation period according to all interviewed farmers.

3.2.3 Fertilizer Use

Quantifying the indicator fertilizer use in the research regions proved more complex than

anticipated. The rice farmers of each region applied diverse kinds of fertilizers on their fields

using different combinations of organic fertilizer, nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), potassium (K)

and NPK fertilizers. Since the effects of diverse fertilizers and their various combinations were

hardly comparable to each other, this practice posed a major obstacle at indicating the

fertilizer use in its proposed design of kg fertilizer used per output of rice. Because of that, the

fertilizer use was recorded separately for each of the five fertilizers that were applied in the

two study regions. The indicators were assessed in kg of fertilizer use per hectare per season.

In the survey results a decreasing trend of the same magnitude could be seen for the use of

organic fertilizer in both Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc (Table 20 and Table 21), although the average

amount of organic fertilizer use in Vinh Phuc was much higher. Contrastingly, the use of all four

inorganic fertilizers (N, P, K and NPK) was rising in both study areas. Their increases were more

pronounced in Hai Duong, where the use of N, P and K fertilizers was higher than in Vinh Phuc

in the past and the present. Although the increase of NPK fertilizer use was faster in Hai Duong,

the use of NPK fertilizer stayed higher in Vinh Phuc than in Hai Duong.

Table 20: Fertilizer use of organic fertilizer, nitrogen (N), phosphorous (P), potassium (K) and NPK fertilizers in kg per hectare per season in the research region of Hai Duong (Survey data).

Use

Fertilizer

Change SD Past SD Present SD

Organic -4983,2 3888,0 6616,5 3829,6 1633,3 3384,4

N 82,1 106,1 179,1 196,8 261,2 179,7

P 36,4 234,5 164,8 215,8 201,2 341,0

K 68,7 71,9 95,1 103,3 163,8 104,4

NPK 148,7 106,1 69,6 136,5 218,3 203,4

52

Table 21: Fertilizer use of organic fertilizer, nitrogen (N), phosphorous (P), potassium (K) and NPK fertilizers in kg per hectare per season in the research region of Vinh Phuc (Survey data).

Use

Fertilizer

Change SD Past SD Present SD

Organic -4991,6 6376,5 13470,1 6845,0 8478,5 3986,7

N 39,7 48,8 101,5 51,5 141,2 30,9

P 13,6 47,4 31,8 101,4 45,4 147,8

K 36,7 38,8 110,4 58,1 147,1 42,5

NPK 60,9 48,8 314,6 177,4 375,6 199,3

3.2.4 Machinery Use and Labor Input

The original idea to quantify the machinery use and labor input in hours of work per ton of rice

output could not be realized in the course of this investigation. During the testing phase of the

survey it was found out that the interviewed rice farmers were not able to quantify the hours

of machinery use and their labor input. Alternatively it was possible to determine the

machinery use in percentage of work for certain stages of rice cultivation and processing.

Specifically, the machinery use for soiling, harvesting, threshing and husking was identified; the

results can be seen in (Table 22). The farmers of both regions reported major increases of

machinery use in soiling and comparatively small rises in machinery use for harvesting.

Threshing and husking was completely done by machines in the past and present in both

research regions.

53

Table 22: Machinery use in percentage of work, for soiling, harvesting, threshing and husking of rice in the research regions of Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc (Survey data).

Hai Duong Vinh Phuc

Machinery use SD in pp Machinery use SD in pp

Soiling change 52 pp 53 50 pp 50

past 40 % 43 7 % 25

present 92 % 27 57 % 45

Harvesting change 12 pp 30 3 pp 18

past 3 % 18 0 % 0

present 16 % 33 3 % 18

Threshing change 0 pp 0 0 pp 0

past 100 % 0 100 % 0

present 100 % 0 100 % 0

Husking change 0 pp 0 0 pp 0

past 100 % 0 100 % 0

present 100 % 0 100 % 0

3.2.5 Export and Import of Rice from the Region

No statistical data regarding the rice trade between provinces or regions of Vietnam could be

found. Therefore, the two indicators export of rice from the region and import of rice to the

region could not be applied in the two study region.

54

Summary of Identified Trends of Indicators 3.3

After examining the main trends of each indicator in the Subchapters 3.1 and 3.2, this

subchapter will summarize the results of the indicator trend analysis. Since the proposed

indicator sets for human well-being and provisioning ecosystem service food rice needed to be

adapted in the course of the research study (Subchapter 3.4), only the finally applied indicators

are presented here. The main trends of the provisioning ecosystem service food rice indicators

can be found in Table 23. Moreover, main trends of the human well-being indicators for the

two study regions are given in Table 24.

Table 23: Main trends of provisioning ecosystem service food rice indicators; including only indicators that were applicable in Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc.

Indicator Hai Duong Vinh Phuc

Yield of paddy

Number of harvests

Use of organic fertilizer

Use of nitrogen (N) fertilizer

Use of phosphorus (P) fertilizer

Use of potassium (K) fertilizer

Use of NPK fertilizer

Machinery use for soiling

Machinery use for harvesting

Machinery use for threshing

Machinery use for husking

55

Table 24: Main trends of human well-being indicators; including only indicators that were applicable in Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc.

Category Indicator Hai Duong Vinh Phuc

Income

Average annual income of farmers

Savings rate of average annual income

Share of average annual income from rice

Employment Employment rate

Demography

Rural population

Urban population

Net migration per 1000 inhabitants

Nutrition Self-supply of rice

Health infrastructure

Number of doctors per 1000 inhabitants

Number of hospital beds per 1000 inhabitants

Personal well-being Personal satisfaction and happiness

Work and life balance

Average working time during busy period

Average working time during other periods

Time spent for leisure and personal care

Environmental quality

Satisfaction with the quality of air

Satisfaction with the quality of natural waters

Satisfaction with the quality of household water

56

Adaptation of the Indicator Set 3.4

During the practical indicator assessment in the research regions several indicators proved to

be not applicable under the given conditions or there was not sufficient data available for their

calculation. Some cases allowed the development of alternative indicators, whereas others

could not be replaced sufficiently. The adaptations that were made to the indicator set will be

outlined in the following sections.

3.4.1 Provisioning Ecosystem Service Food Rice Indicators

Of the proposed indicator set for the provisioning ecosystem service food rice (Table 3) the

indicators yield of paddy and number of harvests could be applied as intended. Regrettably,

machinery use, fertilizer use and labor input turned out to be too complex to measure those

inputs per ton of rice output. The export of rice from the region and import of rice to the region

were not quantifiable due to a lack of statistical data. Further details related to each indicator

can be found in Subchapter 3.2. However, the indicator fertilizer use could be adapted by

splitting it into the five different indicators use of organic fertilizer, use of nitrogen (N) fertilizer,

use of phosphorus (P) fertilizer, use of potassium (K) fertilizer and use of NPK fertilizer (Table

25). Similar adaptations were made to the indicator machinery use, which was divided into the

four indicators machinery use for soiling, machinery use for harvesting, machinery use for

threshing and machinery use for husking.

3.4.1 Human Well-Being Indicators

Most of the proposed human well-being indicators (Table 4) could be applied to Vinh Phuc and

Hai Duong. What proved to be difficult to indicate was the average annual income of farmers,

even so, the trend of the indicator could still be determined by analyzing the survey data

(Section 3.1.1). The indicator share of employees working in rice production was not applicable

in the study areas due to a lack of statistical data. The same was true for the indicators

population structure according to age groups and ratio of women/men working in rice

production. Fortunately, the demographic development could be indicated by the two

alternative indicators rural population and urban population (Table 26).

However, for the three education indicators farmers finished secondary school, farmers

finished high school and farmers' children visiting high school no replacement could be found

and the category education had to be discarded from the indicator set. There was no data

available for the indicator share of locally produced rice supply in the region, which was then

57

replaced by self-supply of rice. The indicator self-supply of rice measures the number of

months per year that the rice farmers could supply their own families with self-grown rice.

The environmental quality indicator satisfaction with the quality of water was divided into the

two separate indicators satisfaction with the quality of natural waters and satisfaction with the

quality of household water. That allowed a more specific indication of the environmental

quality dimension of human well-being.

Table 25: Adapted indicator set for the provisioning ecosystem service food rice as it was applied in the study regions.

Indicator Parameter Unit Data Sources

Yield of paddy tons/ha/season Farmer survey, statistical data

Number of harvests 1 to 3 per year Farmer survey

Use of organic fertilizer kg/ha/season Farmer survey

Use of nitrogen (N) fertilizer kg/ha/season Farmer survey

Use of phosphorus (P) fertilizer kg/ha/season Farmer survey

Use of potassium (K) fertilizer kg/ha/season Farmer survey

Use of NPK fertilizer kg/ha/season Farmer survey

Machinery use for soiling % Farmer survey

Machinery use for harvesting % Farmer survey

Machinery use for threshing % Farmer survey

Machinery use for husking % Farmer survey

58

Table 26: Adapted indicator set for human well-being as it was applied in the study regions.

5 1 = not satisfied, 2 = satisfied, 3 = very satisfied

No Dimension Category Definition (adapted from Busch et al. 2011 and OECD 2011)

Indicator Parameter unit Data sources

1

Economic well-being

Income

Disposable income; that is, the income available to individuals for meeting their respective needs. The material basis available to each individual for participating in social life.

Average annual income of farmers VND

Farmer survey, statistical data

2 Savings rate of average annual income %

3 Share of average annual income from rice %

4 Employment

Diversity and security of available jobs within the region.

Employment rate % Statistical data

5 Social well-being Demography

Dynamic changes of population numbers and overall social composition.

Rural population inhabitants Statistical data 6 Urban population inhabitants

7 Net migration per 1000 inhabitants persons/year

8

Health

Nutrition Availability and quality of locally produced rice and rice products.

Self-supply of rice months/year Farmer survey

9

Infrastructure

Access to health infrastructure and the overall status of health infrastructure within the case study area.

Number of doctors per 1000 inhabitants -

Statistical data 10 Number of hospital beds per 1000 inhabitants -

11

Personal well-being

Personal well-being

Subjective determinants of quality of life.

Personal satisfaction and happiness scale from 1-10

Farmer survey 12 Work and life balance

The ability to combine work, family commitments and personal life.

Average working time during busy period hours/day

13 Average working time during other periods hours/day

14 Time spent for leisure and personal care hours/day

15 Environmental quality

Environmental quality

The health of the physical environment, focusing on pollution aspects.

Satisfaction with the quality of air scale from 1-35

Farmer survey 16 Satisfaction with the quality of natural waters scale from 1-35

17 Satisfaction with the quality of household water scale from 1-35

59

Provisioning

Ecosystem Service

Food Rice

Income

Employment

Demography

Nutrition

Health Infrastructure

Personal Well-Being

Work and Life Balance

Environmental Quality

Direct linkage

Indirect linkage

Economic well-being

Social well-being

Health

Personal well-being

Environmental quality

Linkages Between the Provisioning Ecosystem Service Food Rice and 3.5

Human Well-Being

After analyzing the indicator trends of the provisioning ecosystem service food rice

(Subchapter 3.1) and the human well-being (Subchapter 3.2), the question needed to be

addressed, if both were linked to each other. The qualitative indicator trend analysis

(Subchapter 0) in combination with the insights gained from the farmers’ comments and

discussions during the survey helped establishing conceptual links between the provisioning

ecosystem service food rice and five human well-being categories. Two other human well-

being categories were indirectly linked to the provisioning ecosystem service food rice and one

of the categories showed no linkage. In the following sections the conceptual linkages for each

of the human well-being categories will be explained.

Figure 22: Conceptual linkages found between the provisioning ecosystem service food rice and human well-being of rice farmers; categories of human well-being are given in the center, dimensions of human well-being appear on the right side (based on indicator analysis and farmers’ comments). Design by Lê and Kühn.

60

3.5.1 Income

During the ten years study period an increase of the yield of paddy occurred, which was

accompanied by rising average annual income of farmers in both research regions. Apart from

the increasing income of rice farmers, there was also a rising trend of the savings rate of

average annual income in Hai Duong and a stable trend of the same indicator in Vinh Phuc.

Therefore, the income growth can be seen as “real” and was not only caused by inflation. Since

the share of annual income from rice indicator was sinking in Hai Duong and stable in Vinh

Phuc, not all of the rising income could be attributed to the higher yield. Moreover, 21 farmers

of each region mentioned additional sources of income apart from rice. Nonetheless, 22 of 30

interviewed farmers in Vinh Phuc derived income from rice cultivation and 28 of 30 farmers

did so in Hai Duong. During the discussions accompanying the survey conduction, the farmers

confirmed that their income was also rising because of the higher rice yield, but part of the

income raise was caused by other income sources and higher money transfers from other

family members. Therefore, the income of rice farmers was linked to the provisioning

ecosystem service food rice. The higher income allowed farmers in the study regions to raise

their machinery use and fertilizer input, which contributed to the yield increases.

3.5.2 Employment

The employment rate in the two study regions was expanding from 2002 to 2012, but could

not be directly linked to the increase of the yield of paddy. The farmers and contact persons

reported that the rising employment was caused by the growing industry in both Vinh Phuc

and Hai Duong. Farmers explained that the rising machinery use allowed them to produce rice

with less hired labor input. Unfortunately, no statistics about the share of employees working

in rice production were available. Even so, the farmers and officials pointed out that the share

of employment in agriculture was decreasing, while the yield of paddy increased. Thus, a

conceptual link between the provisioning ecosystem service food rice and employment in the

agricultural sector could be drawn, which is a negative effect of rice productivity on

employment.

3.5.3 Demography

Looking at the demographic indicators, it could be seen that the urban population of both

provinces was rising, while the rural population was sinking in Hai Duong and stayed on the

same level in Vinh Phuc. This trend of urbanization was fostered by the mechanization of the

rice agriculture. The higher yields of paddy that were produced with lower numbers of workers

61

enabled more people to leave the agricultural sector and search for jobs in the urban areas.

Accordingly, the provisioning ecosystem service food rice could be linked to the demography

category of the social well-being dimension.

3.5.4 Nutrition

The nutrition category of human well-being is directly linked to the provisioning ecosystem

service food rice, as the farmers covered hundred percent of their rice supply from their own

fields in the present as well as the past. Therefore a major part of the rice farmers’ nutrition is

supplied by the provisioning ecosystem service food rice.

3.5.5 Health Infrastructure

Regarding the ten years investigation period there was a rising trend of both the number of

doctors per 1000 inhabitants and the number of hospital beds per 1000 inhabitants. Even

though the yield of paddy indicator showed a growing trend at the same time, no linkage

between the health infrastructure category of human well-being and the provisioning

ecosystem service food rice could be established. Local officials in Vinh Phuc attributed the

advancements in health infrastructure to the good government policies of the last decade.

3.5.6 Personal Well-Being

The personal well-being indicator personal satisfaction and happiness displayed an increase

from 2002 to 2012, but according to the farmers, this was mostly linked to their average

annual income gains. Consequently, the provisioning ecosystem service food rice is only

indirectly linked to the personal well-being through the mutual linkage to the income of the

farmers. In addition, survey participants also mentioned a connection between their health

status and their personal satisfaction and happiness.

3.5.7 Work and Life Balance

Three indicators were applied to represent the work and life balance category of human well-

being. The average working time during busy period and the average working time during

other periods remained steady in Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc during the investigated period. Rice

farmers in the two regions confirmed that because of the growing use of machinery, fewer

workers are required for rice production. Nonetheless, there was no change of the working

time in rice cultivation of the farmers themselves. Hence, the expansion of the time spent for

leisure and personal care was not directly linked to the provisioning ecosystem service food

rice. Farmers saw a connection between their additional free time and their income raise.

62

Higher income allowed them to reduce their working time in side jobs and therefore gave

them more time for leisure and personal care. Following that, the provisioning ecosystem

service food rice is indirectly linked to the work and life balance of rice farmers through the

linkage to income.

3.5.8 Environmental Quality

In Hai Duong the three indicators of environmental quality were sinking. Those are satisfaction

with quality of air, satisfaction with quality of natural waters and satisfaction with the quality

of household water. Vinh Phuc only showed a decrease in the satisfaction with natural waters,

whereas the other two indicators remained constant. This decrease of the environmental

quality is partly linked to the higher use of inorganic fertilizers and pesticides. Most farmers

specified industry and private waste water as courses of pollution, but ten percent of the

survey participants also mentioned pesticides as a course of pollution. In the interviews,

concerns about the negative influence of environmental pollution on their health and rice

production were raised by many farmers, especially in Hai Duong. This illustrates that the

provisioning ecosystem service food rice is not only influencing the environmental quality, but

on the other hand is also affected by it.

63

4. Discussion

The results chapter has shown the trends of the applied indicator framework in the two study

regions of Vinh Phuc and Hai Duong which were based on data collected in rice farmer surveys

and statistical data. However, during the data collection there have been factors influencing

the reliability of the gathered information, which will be discussed in this chapter. Following

will be a discussion of the development trends of the study regions. Finally, the

conceptualization of the linkages between the provisioning ecosystem service food rice and

dimensions of human well-being will be addressed.

Data Reliability 4.1

4.1.1 Limitations of the Survey Conduction

When considering the results of the survey, it needs to be taken into account that some minor

difficulties were encountered in the survey conduction. First of all, the interviews were carried

out in Vietnamese language by Ms. Lê Thùy Dương who is familiar with the topic as she

operated an assessment which is similar to this study in the LEGATO regions of Lao Cai and

Tien Giang. As she is not a professional interpreter herself, it was rather challenging for her to

take notes of the responses and simultaneously translate the general issues. Hence, it was

often fairly difficult to immediately understand the situation properly. There may also have

been some information loss during the immediate translation process, but the collected data

was translated after the fieldtrip in order to avoid translation inaccuracies in the results.

Another matter that may have caused some bias in the study results was the selection process

of the farmers who took part in the survey. The very helpful LEGATO project colleagues from

the Institute of Policy and Management (IPAM) in Hanoi supported this study by organizing the

interviews. Unfortunately, due to the given conditions in the research regions, the farmers

could not be selected randomly, but were invited by local contact persons of IPAM. Since the

contact persons could only invite farmers that they knew, many of the interviewees turned out

to be friends, colleagues or neighbors of them. This sampling process of the survey farmers

may limit the representativeness of the study results. To overcome those limitations, diverse

groups of farmers were interviewed in different villages with alternative contact persons.

In addition, the situation during the interviews might have influenced the outcome, as all

farmers of one location were invited at the same time to the interview place. On each

interview day several farmers gathered, either in the house of the contact person or in a

64

commune building. The interviews were still done individually, but as the whole group of

participants was in one room, the others also discussed the questions or helped the

interviewee to answer the interviewer. Thus, an influence on the data by the group talks could

not be avoided.

During the interview dates in April, also interviews from other LEGATO project colleagues took

place in parallel, which helped save resources and deepened the cooperation among project

partners. Regrettably, the parallel interviews also put some time pressure on the interviewer,

since they were often finished faster, so that the organizers were waiting to exchange the

interviewees. That situation sometimes led to a fast and less thorough explanation of the

questions asked, which might have affected the survey results.

The data given by the rice farmers was sometimes contradicting itself, which was normally

clarified by additional explanations of the questions by the interviewer. In some cases, the

respondents were not sufficiently informed about the data concerning their rice farms and

gave rather vague answers or could not reply the questions at all. That was a reason why

several indicators needed to be adapted to the situation of the farmers in the study regions

(Subchapter 3.4).

Finally, the results of the survey may be influenced by the practice of paying all survey

participants and contact persons money for their cooperation. Consequently, some rice

farmers were not taking the survey seriously and showed a rather low interest in replying

honestly, but seemed eager to finish fast in order to receive the payment. Other rice farmers

however were reluctant to accept the payment for their contribution.

4.1.2 Future Development

When the study was developed, the intention was to ask the rice farmers participating in the

survey to anticipate the future development of their situations in ten years. Thus, the results

would ideally not only indicate the past and present state of the socio-ecologic rice agriculture

system, but additionally show the expected future scenario. Unfortunately, during the testing

phase of the survey, the asked farmers were unable to state their expectations, as the number

of insecurities about the future was too high. Moreover, it was suggested by the farmers that

the multitude of different factors influencing the future would make such prediction of each

indicator impossible. Therefore, the future point of time for each question was not asked

during the survey anymore.

65

4.1.3 Availability of Statistical Data

The availability or lack of statistical data was influencing the choice of indicators and resulted

in necessary adaptations to the indicator set (Subchapter 3.4). Some data was only referring to

the whole country of Vietnam or large regions such as the Red River Delta and was hence not

applicable for this study. Additionally, only the statistical data which was published in English

could be utilized for the indicator analysis. That was limiting the precision of the assessment,

as much data in Vietnam is published only in Vietnamese language. Therefore, the outlined

trends of indicators in the Subchapters 3.1 and 3.2 could be refined in more details given the

ability to include Vietnamese data sources. It occurred that datasets only started in the year

2005 or only included every second year of the research period (2002 to 2012). In spite of

those gaps, the respective datasets were included in the indicator trend analysis in order to

assess a maximum number of indicators. This was done with the aim of ensuring a more

holistic representation of the provisioning ecosystem service food rice and the categories of

human well-being. Accepting the reduced accuracy of some indicators’ database enabled an

examination of the linkages between human well-being and the provisioning ecosystem

service food rice on a conceptual level.

Development Trends of Provisioning Ecosystem Service Food Rice and 4.2

Human Well-Being in the Study Regions

The following sections will contrast the developments in the two study regions of Hai Duong

and Vinh Phuc.

4.2.1 Provisioning Ecosystem Service Food Rice

The yield of paddy indicator followed an increasing trend in both Vinh Phuc and Hai Duong

over the ten years investigation period. This finding was in alignment with the reported yield of

paddy increases in Vietnam (GRiSP 2013).

Farmers in Hai Duong indicated a higher yield increase than in Vinh Phuc, which could be

associated to the diverging input of fertilizers. The application of organic fertilizer decreased by

the same amount in both research regions. However, the use of inorganic fertilizers (N,P,K and

NPK) revealed a faster growth in Hai Duong. The use of machinery for soiling and harvesting

was rising faster in Hai Duong than in Vinh Phuc, which was affecting the number of needed

workers, but did not reduce the working hours of the rice farmers. A publication by Alizadeh

and Allameh (2013) found no significant difference in harvesting losses between manual and

mechanical rice harvesting. Therefore, it can be assumed that the faster rise in input of

66

inorganic fertilizers in Hai Duong, and not the higher degree of mechanization, was the main

reason for the higher yield of paddy growth rate. Soong (2006) also confirmed that the rapid

yield increases in the Red River Delta were associated to the massive input of fertilizers.

4.2.2 Human Well-Being

Regarding the economic well-being dimension of rice farmers, four indicators related to the

income and employment categories could be applied in the study regions. Rice farmers in Hai

Duong mentioned substantially higher income gains than those in Vinh Phuc and additionally

reduced the share of their income derived from rice cultivation which was almost stable in

Vinh Phuc. Such decline of the share of rice farmers’ income derived from rice was also seen in

the Philippines (PhilRice 2010). Moreover, the savings rate in Hai Duong was rising when it

stayed constant in Vinh Phuc. Those findings can be explained by the different economic

development of the two regions during the investigation period. In Hai Duong industrial plants

were constructed in the research area and therefore more farmers gained income from hired

work (Table 8, Section 3.1.1). The situation of the study region in Vinh Phuc was different, as

there industrial sites were at least ten kilometers away from the area. Thus, the farmers in

Vinh Phuc focused their efforts on agricultural activities to create additional income (Table 8,

Section 3.1.1).

Parallel to the economic well-being increase there was a shift in social well-being in both

provinces due to urbanization and migration. Similar trends of rising percentage of the urban

population and migration from rural to urban areas in Vietnam were already discussed by Cu

(2000). In Hai Duong a reversal of the net migration trend from negative to positive was found

which may be attributed to the more advanced stage of economic development. Vinh Phuc

however had a negative net migration during the whole study period, which reflected the

trend of people from rural areas searching for better job opportunities in urban and more

developed regions in Vietnam (Cu 2000).

The fact that the health infrastructure was growing faster in Vinh Phuc than in Hai Duong

could be explained by the higher province budget revenue. Vinh Phuc reported a total revenue

of 13’356 billion VND in 2013 (PCVP 2014), whereas the province of Hai Duong registered only

6’425 billion VND of revenue in 2013 (PCHD 2014).

Personal well-being was rising faster in Hai Duong than in Vinh Phuc, which was explained by

the higher income gains of the rice farmers that also allowed them to have more free time.

The use of the personal satisfaction and happiness indicator on a scale from 1 to 10 was

67

adapted from the OECD How’s Life? (2011) and yielded remarkably good feedback from the

rice farmers during the survey conduction.

In relation to environmental quality in the research region of Hai Duong, the ongoing

industrialization was the most pressing issue to the survey participants. Many rice farmers

expressed their concerns about the growing environmental pollution that was held responsible

for rising health problems in their families and communities. The farmers reported increasing

cancer rates in combination with declining life expectancy. They could also specify certain

factories and waste incineration plants that caused most of the pollution in the area.

Regarding this background it was no surprise that the satisfaction with the environmental

quality was sinking in Hai Duong. In Vinh Phuc however, there was mostly concern about the

negative influence of wastewater on the quality of natural waters in the area. This could be

explained by the different location of the two research areas. The survey in Hai Duong was

conducted in villages surrounded by industrial sites, while the project region in Vinh Phuc was

located in an area with higher distance to industrial plants.

68

Conceptualization of Linkages between the Provisioning Ecosystem 4.3

Service Food Rice and Dimensions of Human Well-Being

After having discussed the development trends of the different components of the

provisioning ecosystem service food rice and dimensions of human well-being, the question

remains how the involved linkages can be formed into a concept that enables a better

understanding of the socio-ecological rice production system. Based on the results outlined in

Chapter 3 and especially the interactions described in Subchapter 3.5, a conceptual model of

the linkages between the analyzed components of the system was designed. In Figure 23 it can

be seen that the rice field ecosystem supplies the provisioning ecosystem service food rice that

is directly influencing environmental quality, economic well-being, social well-being and health

of the rice farmers. Personal well-being of the rice farmers was much dependent on their

economic well-being with additional influence from their health. On the other hand, economic

well-being also had effects on the provisioning ecosystem service food rice and the

environmental quality was seen as affecting the rice field ecosystem.

Dimensions of Human Well-being

Rice Field

Ecosystem

Provisioning

Ecosystem Service

Food Rice

Environmental

Quality

Economic

Well-being

Social

Well-being

Personal

Well-being

Health

Figure 23: Conceptual model of linkages between the provisioning ecosystem service food rice and dimensions of human well-being of rice farmers in Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc (Design by Lê and Kühn).

69

The conceptual framework for linking specific ecosystem services to dimensions of human

well-being with the help of case study specific indicators was developed by Busch et al. (2011).

Although the case study of Busch et al. (2011) was located at the German North Sea Coast and

related to the effects of off-shore wind farming, the results of this work demonstrate that the

approach of Busch et al. (2011) can also be applied in other contexts. Here, it was shown that

the assessment of indicators can reveal linkages of a specific (provisioning) ecosystem service

(food rice) to certain dimensions of human well-being. Even though the data availability and

survey results posed limits to the quantification of linkages, conceptual linkages could be

identified. The interactions depicted in Figure 23 should be considered the preliminary outcome

of a pilot study testing the possibility of applying the framework of Busch et al. (2011) in the

context of rice agriculture in Vietnam. Thus, the linkages drawn here (Figure 23) are based on a

qualitative indicator assessment and need further investigation on a quantitative level.

It is hard to compare the found linkages of the provisioning ecosystem service food rice and

dimensions of human well-being to other references, since no known attempt to link the two

concepts in rice agriculture was conducted so far. In other contexts ecosystem services have

been connected to human well-being concepts, but none was focusing on the effects of a

provisioning ecosystem service on specific dimensions of human well-being. For example,

Duraiappah et al. (2014) developed a multi-scale conceptual framework on nature, the

productive base of societies and human well-being also including the ecosystem services

concept, but they did not disintegrate human well-being into separate dimensions. Pinto et al.

(2014) were linking biodiversity indicators, ecosystem functioning, provision of services and

human well-being in estuarine systems in Portugal. Pinto et al. (2014) also did not consider

different dimensions of human well-being, but took the condition of the bivalve population in

the area as an indicator to estimate the link between biodiversity and human well-being. Smith

et al. (2013) were relating ecosystem services to domains of human well-being, but only

focused on the selection of domains of human well-being. The Millennium Ecosystem

Assessment (MA 2005) also linked ecosystem services to dimensions of human well-being, but

did not apply indicators to show the trends of human well-being.

Even though they did not apply the concept of ecosystem services, other publications relate

rice output to diverse aspects of human well-being. Referring to publication examples all the

linkages included in the conceptual model (Figure 23) can be reconstructed. Benjamin and

Brandt (2002) confirmed that the economic well-being (income) of rice farmers in Vietnam is

influenced by the rice output in combination with rice market prices and costs of inputs such

as fertilizers. Adesina (1996) pointed out that the economic well-being (non-farm income) is a

70

factor influencing fertilizer use by rice farmers. Africa Rice (2013) suggested that the

development of the rice agricultural sector could raise the social well-being of millions of poor

people. The contribution of rice to human nutrition can for example be found in Juliano (1993).

That nutrition is seen as a part of health is in alignment with the Eurobarometer Well-Being

Aggregate Report (TNS Qual+ 2011), that categorizes health and nutrition as a dimension of

human well-being. The report (TNS Qual+ 2011, p.38) explains that: “The influence of

nutritional intake on well-being includes having something to eat, eating quality food, what

you eat, and the relationship between food and money”.

Moreover, Lamers et al. (2011) proved the influence of rice production on the environmental

quality examining the pollution by pesticides applied on rice fields in Northern Vietnam. The

influence of the environmental quality on rice field ecosystems in Vietnam was described by

Huynh and Mitsuyasu (2013) using the example of the impacts of industrial water pollution on

rice cultivation.

Oguz et al. (2013) were investigating the issue of what matters most to personal well-being

and found a strong linkage to health. The direct linkage of subjective well-being to economic

well-being was supported by Sacks et al. (2010) and Wu and Li (2013).

Of course there are many more possible interactions to other components of the system and

factors influencing the linkages between the provisioning ecosystem service food rice and

dimensions of human well-being than those included in the conceptual model (Figure 23). It

has to be considered, that the model only reflects the situation of the rice farmers in Vinh Phuc

and Hai Duong as it could be analyzed from the survey results and the available statistical data.

Further investigations would allow the development of a more detailed model.

71

5. Conclusions

This study was aimed at finding an indicator set that could be applied in Vinh Phuc and Hai

Duong in order to assess the provisioning ecosystem service food rice and dimensions of

human well-being of rice farmers. During the field investigations, adaptations needed to be

made to the beforehand proposed indicator sets. Nonetheless, all the defined categories of

human well-being, except education, could be assessed by an indicator analysis. The indicator

set which was applied here, could still be developed further in future research efforts in the

study regions. In spite of its preliminary status, it proved to be applicable under the given

conditions using a survey among rice farmers and collection of governmental statistical data as

sources of information. The method of conducting a survey among rice farmers of the two

research regions involved some minor difficulties, but could still be recommended as a

valuable data source. Especially helpful was the fact that much background knowledge of the

areas could be gained in the survey, which was not available in the published English literature.

One of the main trends that were found in Hai Duong and Vinh Phuc was a raise of the

provisioning ecosystem service food rice in combination with an intensification of inorganic

fertilizer input over the ten year study period. In addition, economic well-being, health and

personal well-being increased in the study regions, whereas a shift of social well-being was

related to ongoing urbanization and migration. The environmental quality was deteriorating

fast in Hai Duong and started to decline in Vinh Phuc.

Conceptual linkages could be established based on the indicator trends and background

information supplied by the farmers during the survey. The provisioning ecosystem service

food rice was directly linked to economic well-being, social well-being, health and

environmental quality. The human well-being dimension of personal well-being was only

indirectly linked to the provisioning ecosystem service food rice through the economic well-

being and health of the rice farmers.

Unfortunately, the future development of the indicators could not be predicted by the survey

participants. Therefore, it is recommended to conduct interviews with governmental

representatives or scientific experts of the provinces in order to clarify possible future

scenarios of the development of the regions.

Nevertheless, this study could make a contribution to the development and testing of

indicators for the provisioning ecosystem service food rice and human well-being of rice

72

farmers as a part of the indicator assessment of the LEGATO project. Thus, a small step could

be taken in uncovering the linkages between ecosystem services and human well-being. Many

pieces of the big puzzle of the LEGATO project still need to be found, but hopefully the

information gathered here can be beneficial to some of the numerous partners and help them

find ways to enhance the sustainability of rice farming in Vietnam and the Philippines.

73

References

Abunge C., S. Coulthard, T. M. Daw. 2013. Connecting Marine Ecosystem Services to Human Well-being: Insights from Participatory Well-being Assessment in Kenya. Ambio 42: 1010–1021.

Adesina A. A. 1996. Factors affecting the adoption of fertilizers by rice farmers in Côte d’Ivoire. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 46: 29-39.

Africa Rice. 2013. 3rd Africa Rice Congress, Rationale. Africa Rice Center, Contonou, Benin. http://www.africarice.org/arc2013/rationale.asp; assessed on 07.05.2014.

Alizadeh M. R. and A. Allameh. Evaluating rice losses in various harvesting practices. International Research Journal of Applied and Basic Sciences 4 (4): 894-901.

Barribeau P., B. Butler, J. Corney, M. Doney, J. Gault, J. Gordon, R. Fetzer, A. Klein, C. Ackerson Rogers, I. F. Stein, C. Steiner, H. Urschel, T. Waggoner and M. Palmquist. (1994 - 2012). Survey Research. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University. Available at http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/guide.cfm?guideid=68.

Beier C. M., T. M. Patterson, F. S. Chapin. 2008. Ecosystem services and emergent vulnerability in managed ecosystems, a geospatial decision-support tool. Ecosystems 11: 923–938.

Benjamin D. and L. Brandt. 2002. Agriculture and Income Distribution in Rural Vietnam under Economic Reforms: A Tale of Two Regions. The William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan Business School. William Davidson Working Paper Number 519.

Bloomberg 2014. Rice Rout Seen Extending as Thai Sales Quicken: Southeast Asia. February 19th 2014, Bloomberg, New York City. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-18/rice-rout-seen-extending-as-thai-sales-quicken-southeast-asia.html; assessed on 26.03.2014.

Boyd J. and S. Banzhaf. 2007. What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecological Economics 63: 616-626.

Burkhard B., R. S. de Groot, R. Costanza, R. Seppelt, S. E. Jørgensen, M. Potschin. 2012a. Solutions for sustaining natural capital and ecosystem services. Ecological Indicators 21: 1–6.

Burkhard B., F. Kroll, S. Nedkov, F. Müller. 2012b. Mapping ecosystem service supply, demand and budgets. Ecological Indicators 21: 17–29.

Busch M., K. Gee , B. Burkhard , M. Lange and N. Stelljes. 2011. Conceptualizing the link between marine ecosystem services and human well-being: the case of offshore wind farming. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management: iFirst, 1–14.

Chan K., M. R. Shaw, D. R. Cameron, E. C. Underwood, G. C. Daily. 2006. Conservation planning for ecosystem services. PLoS Biology 4: 2138–2152.

Chan K., T. Satterfield, J. Goldstein. 2012. Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values. Ecological Economics 74, 8–18.

Costanza R. and H. E. Daly. 1992. Natural capital and sustainable development. Conservation Biology 6: 37–46.

74

Costanza R., R. d'Arge, R. de Groot, S. Farber, M. Grasso, B. Hannon, K. Limburg, S. Naeem, R. V. O'Neill, J. Paruelo, R. G. Raskin, P. Sutton, M. van den Belt. 1997. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387: 253–260.

Costanza R., B. Fisher, S. Ali, C. Beer, L. Bond, R. Boumans, N. L. Danigelis, J. Dickinson, C. Elliott, J. Farley, D. Elliott Gayerg, L. MacDonald Glenn, T. Hudspeth, D. Mahoney, L. McCahill, B. McIntosh, B. Reed, S. A. Turab Rizvi, D. M. Rizzo, T. Simpatico, R. Snapp. 2007. Quality of life: An approach integrating opportunities, human needs, and subjective well-being. Ecological Economics 61: 267-276.

Cu C. L. 2000. Rural to urban migration in Vietnam. Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization (IDE-JETRO), Chiba, Japan.

Cục Thống Kê Hải Dương 2014. Hai Duong office of statistical data. http://www.thongkehd.gov.vn/view1.aspx?lID=1&nID=376.

Daily G. C. 1997. Nature's Services: Societal Dependence On Natural Ecosystems. Island Press, Washington D.C., USA, p. 392.

Daily G. C., S. Polasky, J. Goldstein, P. M. Kareiva, H. A. Mooney, L. Pejchar, T. H. Ricketts, J. Salzman, R. Shallenberger. 2009. Ecosystem services in decision making: time to deliver. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 7: 21–28.

Dale V. H. and S. Polasky. 2007. Measures of the effects of agricultural practices on ecosystem services. Ecological Economics 6 (4): 286–296.

Dawe D., S. Pandey, A. Nelson. 2010. Emerging trends and spatial patterns of rice production. In: S. Pandey, D. Byerlee, D. Dawe, A. Dobermann, S. Mohanty, S. Rozelle, B. Hardy, editors. Rice in the global economy: strategic research and policy issues for food security. Los Baños (Philippines): International Rice Research Institute.

de Groot R. S., M. A. Wilson, R. M. J. Boumans. 2002. A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecological Economics 41: 393–408.

de Groot R. S., B. Fisher, M. Christie, J. Aronson, L. Braat, R. Haines-Young, J. Gowdy, E. Maltby, A. Neuville, S. Polasky, R. Portela, I. Ring. 2010a. Integrating the ecological and economic dimensions in biodiversity and ecosystem service valuation. Chapter 1. In: Pushpam, Kumar (Eds.), The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB): Ecological and Economic Foundations. Earthscan, London, pp. 4–9.

de Groot R. S., R. Alkemade, L. Braat, L. Hein, L. Willemen. 2010b. Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecological Complexity 7 (3): 260–272.

Diplomat 2014. Vietnamese Rice Farmers Abandon Their Fields, December 29th 2013, The Diplomat, Tokyo. http://thediplomat.com/2013/12/vietnamese-rice-farmers-abandon-their-fields; assessed on 26.03.2014.

Duraiappah A. K., S. Tanyi Asah, E. Ss Brondizio, N. Kosoy, P. J. O’Farrell, A.-H. Prieur-Richard, S. M. Subramanian, K. Takeuchi. 2014. Managing the mismatches to provide ecosystem services for human well-being: a conceptual framework for understanding the New Commons. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 7: 94–100.

Economist 2014. Rice farming in Vietnam, against the grain, Vietnam’s farmers are growing a crop that no longer pays its way. January 18th 2014, The Economist, Hanoi and Chau Doc.

75

http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21594338-vietnams-farmers-are-growing-crop-no-longer-pays-its-way-against-grain; assessed on 26.03.2014.

Egoh B., B. Reyers, M. Rouget, D. M. Richardson, D. C. Le Maitre, A. S. van Jaarsveld. 2008. Mapping ecosystem services for planning and management. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 127: 135–140.

FAO 2004. International Year of Rice 2004, fact sheet on Rice and Human Nutrition. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.

Financial Times 2014. Thailand rushes to sell rice stockpile to appease farmers. February 13th 2014, The Financial Times, London. http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/0055c5e6-94a2-11e3-af71-00144feab7de.html; assessed on 26.03.2014.

Fisher B., R. K. Turner, P. Morling. 2009. Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecological Economics 68: 643-653.

Floresca J. P., A. J. Alcantara, C. B. Lamug, C. L. Rapera and C. B. Adalla. 2009. Assessment of Ecosystem Services of Lowland Rice Agroecosystems in Echague, Isabela, Philippines. Journal of Environmental Science and Management 12(1): 25-41.

Fu B., Y. Liu, Y. Lu, H. Chansheng, Y. Zeng, W. Bingfang. 2011. Assessing the soil erosion control service of ecosystems change in the Loess Plateau of China. Ecological Complexity 8: 284–293.

GSO 2012. General Statistics Office of Vietnam. http://www.gso.gov.vn/default.aspx?tabid=387&idmid=3&ItemID=14632; assessed on 31.03.2014.

GSO 2014. General Statistics Office of Vietnam. http://www.gso.gov.vn/default_en.aspx?tabid=491.

GRiSP (Global Rice Science Partnership). 2013. Rice almanac, 4th edition. Los Baños (Philippines): International Rice Research Institute. ISBN: 978-971-22-0300-8.

Haines-Young R. H. and M. P. Potschin. 2010a. The links between biodiversity, ecosystem services and human well-being. In: Raffaelli, D., Frid, C. (Eds.), Ecosystem Ecology: A New Synthesis. BES Ecological Reviews Series, CUP, Cambridge, pp. 110–139.

Haines-Young R. and M. Potschin. 2010b. Proposal for a common international classification of ecosystem goods and services (CICES) for integrated environmental and economic accounting. Background document. Report to the EEA, 21. March 2010.

Harrington R., C. Anton, T. Dawson, F. de Bello, C. Feld, J. Haslett, T. Kluvánkova-Oravská, A. Kontogianni, S. Lavorel, G. Luck, M. Rounsevell, M. Samways, J. Settele, M. Skourtos, J. Spangenberg, M. Vandewalle, M. Zobel, P. Harrison. 2010. Ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation: concepts and a glossary. Biodiversity and Conservation 19: 2773–2790.

HDDPI 2013. Hai Duong Department of Planning and Investment, overview of the province. http://skhdt.haiduong.gov.vn/En/Aboutus/Pages/OverviewofHaiDuongvince.aspx; assessed on 25.03.2014.

HDG 2014. Hai Duong Government website. http://haiduong.gov.vn/chinhquyen/pages/default.aspx; assessed on 03.04.2014.

76

Heink U., I. Kowarik. 2010. What are indicators? On the definition of indicators in ecology and environmental planning. Ecological Indicators 10: 584–593.

Heong K. L., M. M. Escalada, N. H. Huan, V. H. Ky Ba, P. V. Quynh, L. V. Thiet, H. V. Chien. 2008. Entertainment– education and rice pest management: A radio soap opera in Vietnam. Crop Protection 27: 1392– 1397.

Huynh V. K. and Mitsuyasu Y. 2013. Impact of Industrial Water Pollution on Rice Production in Vietnam. In: International Perspectives on Water Quality Management and Pollutant Control. Edited by N. W. T. Quinn, ISBN 978-953-51-0999-0.

IPA 2014. Links to the statistical yearbooks of Vinh Phuc 2002 to 2012. Investment Promotion Agency of Vinh Phuc. http://www.ipavinhphuc.vn/nien-giam-thong-ke-tinh-vinh-phuc.

IRRI 2009. The rice knowledge bank, International Rice Research Institute, Los Banos, Philippines. http://www.knowledgebank.irri.org/ipm/introduction-to-research-and-extension/understanding-farmers/farmer-surveys/how-to-conduct-a-survey.html; assessed on 03.04.2013.

Jenkins W. A., B. C. Murray, R. A. Kramer, S. P. Faulkner. 2010. Valuing ecosystem services from wetlands restoration in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley. Ecological Economics 69: 1051–1061.

Juliano B. O. 1993. Rice in human nutrition. FAO Food and Nutrition Series No. 26.

Kandziora M., B. Burkhard, F. Müller. 2013. Interactions of ecosystem properties, ecosystem integrity and ecosystem service indicators—A theoretical matrix exercise. Ecological Indicators 28: 54–78.

Kelley K., B. Clark, V. Brown and J. Sitzia. 2003. Good practice in the conduct and reporting of survey research. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, Volume 15, Number 3: 261-266.

Kremen C. 2005. Managing ecosystem services: what do we need to know about their ecology? Ecology Letters 8: 468–479.

Lamarque P., F. Quetier, S. Lavorel. 2011. The diversity of the ecosystem services concept and its implications for their assessment and management. C. R. Biologies 334: 441–449.

Lamers M., M. Anyusheva, L. Nguyen, V. V. Nguyen, T. Streck. 2011. Pesticide Pollution in Surface- and Groundwater by Paddy Rice Cultivation: A Case Study from Northern Vietnam. Clean – Soil, Air, Water 39 (4): 356–361.

Layke C. 2009. Measuring Nature’s Benefits: A Preliminary Roadmap for Improving Ecosystem Service Indicators. World Resources Institute Working Paper. 36 pp.

LEGATO 2011. Description of Work, Contract Version 16th May 2011.

LEGATO 2012. Progress Report 2012.

LEGATO 2013. Annual Report for 2013.

MA 2005. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Global Assessment Reports, Volume 1: Current State and Trends. Island Press, Washington, DC.

MARD 2013. Radical strategies are required for rice production, consumption and export. April 8th 2013, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Hanoi.

77

http://www.agroviet.gov.vn/en/Pages/news_detail.aspx?NewsId=965&Page=1; assessed on 26.03.2014.

McDonald R. I. 2009. Ecosystem service demand and supply along the urban-to-rural gradient. Journal of Conservation Planning 5: 1–14.

Mohanty S., R. Wassmann, A. Nelson, P. Moya, and S.V.K. Jagadish. 2013. Rice and climate change: significance for food security and vulnerability. IRRI Discussion Paper Series No. 49. Los Baños (Philippines): International Rice Research Institute.

Nahlik A. M., M. E. Kentulaa, M. S. Fennessy, D. H. Landers. 2012. Where is the consensus? A proposed foundation for moving ecosystem service concepts into practice. Ecological Economics 77: 27–35.

Natuhara Y. 2013. Ecosystem services by paddy fields as substitutes of natural wetlands in Japan. Ecological Engineering 56: 97– 106.

Nedkov S. and B. Burkhard. 2012. Flood regulating ecosystem services – mapping supply and demand, in the Etropole municipality, Bulgaria. Ecological Indicators 21: 67–79.

Nelson E., G. Mendoza, J. Regetz, S. Polasky, H. Tallis, D. R. Cameron, K. M. A. Chan, G. C. Daily, J. Goldstein, P. M. Kareiva, E. Lonsdorf, R. Naidoo, T. H. Ricketts, M. R. Shaw. 2009. Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 7: 4–11.

Normile D. 2013. Vietnam Turns Back A ‘Tsunami of Pesticides’. Science Vol. 341 no. 6147 pp. 737-738.

OECD 2003. Core Environmental Indicators. Development Measurement and Use. OECD Publishing, 37 pp.

OECD 2011. How’s Life?: Measuring well-being, OECD Publishing. ISBN 978-92-64-12116-4.

OECD 2013. How’s Life?: Measuring well-being, OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264201392-en

Oryza 2014. Vietnam Agricultural Officers Call for Rice Farming Reforms to Control Prices. 21st March 2014, Oryza Global Rice Quotes, San Francisco. http://oryza.com/news/rice-news/vietnam-agricultural-officers-call-rice-farming-reforms-control-prices; assessed on 26.03.2014.

Pandey S., D. Byerlee, D. Dawe, A. Dobermann, S. Mohanty, S. Rozelle, and B. Hardy, editors. 2010. Rice in the global economy: strategic research and policy issues for food security. Los Baños (Philippines): International Rice Research Institute.

Parsons K. C., P. Mineau, R. B. Renfrew. 2010. Effects of Pesticide use in Rice Fields on Birds. Waterbirds 33 (sp1): 193-218.

PCHD 2014. Peoples Committee Hai Duong province. Report on the implementation of the 2013 budget estimates and proposed 2014 budget of Hai Duong province. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&uact=8&sqi=2&ved=0CFMQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.haiduong.gov.vn%2FChinhQuyen%2Fhethongvanbanpq%2FDocuments%2FBC195_2013.doc&ei=3adsU6HDPIiVPKr5gYgF&usg=AFQjCNFT3CbzT2UTOVFMMpIyQLsFCPzeeA&sig2=Hqdcz9kqYNZr02kQmEF-Og; assessed on 07.05.2014.

78

PCVP 2014. Peoples Council Vinh Phuc. Resolution on state budget estimates 2013 of Vinh Phuc. http://thuvienphapluat.vn/archive/Nghi-quyet-so-68-NQ-HDND-du-toan-ngan-sach-nha-nuoc-tinh-Vinh-Phuc-nam-2013-vb183277.aspx?attempt=2; assessed on 07.05.2014.

PhilRice 2010. Is the Household Income of Rice Farmers Getting Better Over Time? Managing Editor: AMJ E. Eligio. Rice Science for Decision-Makers (Issue 1).

Putnam R. D. 1995. Tuning in, tuning out — the strange disappearance of social capital in America. Political Science and Politics 28: 664–683.

Ringold P. L., J. Boyd, D. Landers, and M. Weber. 2013. What data should we collect? A framework for identifying indicators of ecosystem contributions to human well-being. Front Ecol Environ 11(2): 98–105.

Rounsevell M. D. A., T. P. Dawson, P. A. Harrison. 2010. A conceptual framework to assess the effects of environmental change on ecosystem services. Biodiversity and Conservation 19: 2823–2842.

Sacks D. W., B. Stevenson, J. Wolfers. 2010. Subjective Well-Being, Income, Economic Development and Growth. NBER Working Paper No. 16441. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, USA.

Seppelt R., C. F. Dormann, F. V. Eppink, S. Lautenbach and S. Schmidt. 2011. A quantitative review of ecosystem service studies: approaches, shortcomings and the road ahead. Journal of Applied Ecology 48: 630–636.

Settele J., I. Kühn, S. Klotz, G. Arida, E. Bergmeier, B. Burkhard, J. V. Bustamante, Dao T. T., M. Escalada, C. Görg, V. Grescho, Ho V. C., K. L. Heong, N. Hirneisen, S. Hotes, R. Jahn, T. Klotzbücher, G. Marion, L. Marquez, A. Marxen, R. Moritz, F. Müller, Nguyen V. S., J. Ott, L. Penev, B. Rodriguez‐Labajos, M. Schädler, S. Scheu, R. Seppelt, P. Stoev, T. Tscharntke, V. Tekken, K. Thonicke, D. Vetterlein, S. Vidal, S. Villareal, W. W. Weisser, C. Westphal, M. Wiemers, J. H. Spangenberg. 2013. Kulturlandschaftsforschung in Südostasien – das LEGATO‐Projekt. Berichte. Geographie und Landeskunde 87(3): 315‐323. Selbstverlag Deutsche Akademie für Landeskunde e.V., Leipzig.

Smith L. M., J. L. Case, H. M. Smith, L. C. Harwell, J. K. Summers. 2013. Relating ecosystem services to domains of human well-being: Foundation for a U.S. index. Ecological Indicators 28: 79–90.

Soong J. 2006. Soil fertility and changes in fertilizer use for intensive rice cultivation in the Red River Delta and Mekong Delta of Vietnam. Independent Study Project (ISP) Collection. Paper 340.

Stiglitz J. E., A. Sen, J.-P. Fitoussi. 2009. Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress. http://www.stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr/documents/rapport_anglais.pdf; assessed on 12.05.2014.

Summers J. K., L. M. Smith, J. L. Case and R. A. Linthurst. 2012. A Review of the Elements of Human Well-Being with an Emphasis on the Contribution of Ecosystem Services. AMBIO, 41: 327–340.

Suneetha M. S., J. S. Rahajoe, K. Shoyama, X. Lu, S. Thapa, A. K. Braimoh. 2011. An indicator-based integrated assessment of ecosystem change and human-well-being: Selected case studies from Indonesia, China and Japan. Ecological Economics 70: 2124–2136.

79

Sung-Bok P. 2005. Concept of the Quality of Life and Indexing. International Review of Public Administration 9 (2): 77-87.

TNS Qual+. 2011. Well-being Aggregate report. Eurobarometer Qualitative Studies. Available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/quali/wellbeing_final_en.pdf; assessed on 07. 05.2014.

UNEP-WCMC 2011. Developing ecosystem service indicators: Experiences and lessons learned from sub-global assessments and other initiatives. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montréal, Canada. Technical Series No. 58, 118 pages.

USDA 2014. United States Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service. World Agricultural Production, Circular Series, May 2014, 27 pp.

van Oudenhoven A., K. Petz, R. Alkemade, L. Hein, R. de Groot. 2012. Framework for systematic indicator selection to assess effects of land management on ecosystem services. Ecological Indicators 21: 110–122.

VFA 2014. Vietnam Food Association, yearly export statistics for rice. http://www.vietfood.org.vn/en/default.aspx?c=108; assessed on 10.03.2014

VietnamNet 2013. Vietnam considers cutting rice farming area down. August 20th 2013, VietNamNet Online Newspaper, Hanoi. http://english.vietnamnet.vn/fms/business/82250/vietnam-considers-cutting-rice-farming-area-down.html; assessed on 26.03.2014.

Villamagna A. M., P. L. Angermeier, E. M. Bennett. 2013. Capacity, pressure, demand, and flow: A conceptual framework for analyzing ecosystem service provision and delivery. Ecological Complexity 15: 114–121.

VNP 2009. Vietnam National Parks, Tam Dao National Park. http://www.vietnamnationalparks.org/vietnam-national-parks/north-eastern-area/tam-dao-national-park.html; assessed on 31.03.2014.

VPG 2014. Vinh Phuc Government website. http://www.vinhphuc.gov.vn/ct/cms/thongtingioithieu/Lists/DieuKienTuNhien/View_Detail.aspx?ItemID=41; assessed on 03.04.2014.

VPGP 2012. Vinh Phuc Government Portal. http://english.vinhphuc.gov.vn/Pages/Default.aspx.

VTPA 2011. Vietnam Trade Promotion Agency, Overview of Hai Duong Province. http://www.vietrade.gov.vn/en/index.php?option=com_content&id=1909:overview-of-hai-duong-province&Itemid=251; assessed on 25.03.2014.

Wiggering H. and F. Müller (Editors). 2004. Umweltziele und Indikatoren. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg/New York, p. 670.

Wu X. and J. Li. 2013. Income growth, income inequality and subjective well-being: evidence from China. Population Studies Center Research Report 13-796. Population Studies Center, University of Michigan.

i

Appendices

Appendix A

Figure 24: Alternative terms to the ecosystem service terminology (from Villamagna et al. 2013).

ii

Appendix B – English Version of the Questionnaire

Survey for Rice Farmers

Date, time:

Location:

Interviewer:

Interviewee:

Age:

Gender:

Number of persons in the household:

Member Age Occupation

iii

Notes to interviewee:

Dear Interviewee,

We are conducting a research about human well-being and its correlation to the

provisioning ecosystem service food rice. In order to carry out the research, we

developed the questionnaire to gather your personal experiences and opinions. Thank

you for your participation. I believe your input will be valuable to this research and in

helping grow all of our professional practice. All of your answer will be kept

confidential and only be used for scientific purposes.

We are interested in seeing the development of the rice output and human well-being.

That is why we will ask you questions about the past, the present and your view about

the future. The time step is about 10 years.

Our survey consists of 4 topics which concern: environmental quality, rice provisioning,

economic well-being and personal well-being.

iv

A- Environmental quality

1. How satisfied are you with the overall air quality?

Not satisfied Satisfied Very satisfied

Past

Present

Note:

2. How satisfied are you with the water quality of natural waters in the area (rivers, lakes,

ponds?

Not satisfied Satisfied Very satisfied

Past

Present

Note:

3. Where do you get your household water from?

- For eating

Well (drilled)

Well (dug) From the pipe of water company

Rain water

Past

Present

- For hygiene purposes

Well (drilled)

Well (dug) From the pipe of water company

Rain water

Past

Present

4. How do you assess the quality of the household water?

Not satisfied Satisfied Very satisfied

Past

Present

v

B- Rice provisioning

1. Do you have any kinds of machines that you use for rice production?

Tractors Harrows Combined harvesters

Mill Others

Past

Present

2. How much of your work in the fields do you do with machines?

a. Soiling

Percentage

Past

Present

b. Harvesting

Percentage

Past

Present

c. Threshing

Percentage

Past

Present

d. Husking

Percentage

Past

Present

3. How much fertilizer do you use on your fields?

Organic Phosphorous (P) Nitrogen (N) Potassium (K) NPK

Past

Present

4. How much rice did you harvest in the respective year?

Past

Present

Harvesting area for past and present

Number of seed bags (only in Lao Cai)

vi

5. Do you produce traditional aromatic rice varieties for your own consumption?

6. During busy period, do you have enough labor or do you hire additional workers?

Enough No, I have to hire additional workers

Past

Present

7. How many months of the year do you have enough rice for your family?

Months

Past

Present

C- Economic well-being

1. Please indicate your average income of the respective year. If you do not want to give

the accurate number, please indicate the development.

VND

Past

Present

Comparison of present income to the past

%

Present income in comparison to the

past

2. How much of the income mentioned came from rice? (%)

Percentage

Past

Present

Future

3. How much money could you save from the income you mentioned in question 1?

Percentage

Past

Present

vii

D- Personal well-being

1. How would you score your personal satisfaction and happiness?

(1=not satisfied; 10=completely satisfied)

- Past:

- Present:

- Future:

2. If it is possible, what do you want to improve in your current life?

3. How many hours do you work per day in the busy period?

Hours/day

Past

Present

4. How many hours do you work for the rice production per day in other times of the

year?

Hours/day

Past

Present

5. Do you have other jobs beside being rice farmer? If yes, please indicate.

6. How much free time do you have left per week when you don’t have to work in any

context? For your personal activities like resting, meeting with relatives, friends or

neighbors; watching TV; having a walk, playing sports, reading newspapers…

Hours/week

Past

Present

viii

7. How are you satisfied with the amount of free time you have?

Not satisfied Satisfied Very satisfied

Past

Present

8. Could you imagine your life in 10 years? How will it be like?

Thank you for your time and your answers.

ix

Appendix C - Vietnamese Version of the Questionnaire

PHIẾU KHẢO SÁT

Ngày, tháng:

Địa điểm:

Người phỏng vấn:

Người được phỏng vấn:

Tuổi: Giới tính: Nam/ Nữ

Thông tin thành viên trong hộ gia đình

Thành viên trong gia đình Độ tuổi Trình độ học vấn Nghề nghiệp

x

Kính thưa ông bà,

Chúng tôi đang thực hiện đề tài nghiên cứu về mối liên quan giữa điều kiện cuộc sống và dịch

vụ liên quan đến hệ sinh thái mà cụ thể ở đây là cung cấp lúa gạo. Trong quá trình nghiên cứu,

chúng tôi cần thực hiện một khảo sát nhỏ để thu thấp ý kiến và kinh nghiệm của ông bà. Chúng

tôi xin cảm ơn sự giúp đỡ và hợp tác của ông bà. Chúng tôi tin rằng những thông tin mà ông bà

cung cấp là tư liệu hữu ích cho đề tài nghiên cứu. Mọi câu trả lời của ông bà đều được bảo

mật.

Chúng tôi muốn tìm hiểu sự tăng trưởng của sản lượng lúa gạo với điều kiện sống của con

người. Do vậy, mỗi câu hỏi sẽ được đề cập theo 3 mốc thời gian: quá khứ, hiện tại và tương lai.

Mỗi mốc thời gian này cách nhau khoảng 10 năm.

Các câu hỏi của chúng tôi được gói gọn trong 4 chủ đề: chất lượng môi trường, sản xuất lúa

gạo, điều kiện kinh tế và điều kiện cá nhân.

xi

A- Chất lượng môi trường

1. Mức độ hài lòng của ông bà về độ trong lành của không khí?

Không hài lòng Hài lòng Rất hài lòng

Quá khứ

Hiện tại

Ghi chú:

2. Mức độ hài lòng của ông bà về chất lượng nguồn nước tự nhiên trong vùng (sông,

hồ, ao)?

Không hài lòng Hài lòng Rất hài lòng

Quá khứ

Hiện tại

Ghi chú:

3. Nước dùng cho sinh hoạt của gia đình được lấy chủ yếu từ nguồn nào?

- Ăn uống

Giếng đào Giếng khoan Đường nước của nhà máy

Nước mưa Nước từ nguồn tự

nhiên

Quá khứ

Hiện tại

- Vệ sinh

Bể ngầm Giếng khoan Đường nước của nhà máy

Nước mưa Nguồn nước tự nhiên

Quá khứ

Hiện tại

xii

4. Ông bà đánh giá thế nào về chất lượng nước dùng trong sinh hoạt?

Không hài lòng Hài lòng Rất hài lòng

Quá khứ

Hiện tại

B- Sản xuất lúa gạo

1. Ông bà có sử dụng bất kỳ loại máy móc nào trong quá trình sản xuất lúa gạo

không?

Trâu Máy cày bừa

Máy tuốt Máy gặt đập

Máy xay xát

Máy khác (ghi rõ)

Quá khứ

Hiện tại

2. Ước tính khoảng bao nhiêu phần công việc trong quá trình sản xuất lúa gạo được

thực hiện bằng máy móc?

- Cày, bừa

%

Quá khứ

Hiện tại

- Gặt

%

Quá khứ

Hiện tại

- Đập

%

Quá khứ

Hiện tại

xiii

- Xay, xát

%

Quá khứ

Hiện tại

3. Trung bình một vụ lúa, ông bà sử dụng bao nhiêu phân bón cho ruộng lúa của

mình?

Hữu cơ Lân Đạm/Ure Kali Tổng hợp

Quá khứ

Hiện tại

4. Năng suất gạo ông bà thu được là bao nhiêu?

- Quá khứ

- Hiện tại

- Diện tích

- Số bao lúa sử dụng

5. Ông bà có trồng loại gạo truyền thống nhưng sản lượng thấp để phục vụ cho nhu

cầu của gia đình không?

6. Trong ngày mùa, ông bà có đủ nhân công không hay phải thuê thêm người?

%

Quá khứ

Hiện tại

7. Bao nhiêu tháng trong năm ông bà có đủ gạo từ ruộng của gia đình để sử dụng

trong việc ăn uống hàng ngày?

%

Quá khứ

Hiện tại

xiv

C- Đời sống kinh tế

1. Ông bà có thể cho biết thu nhập bình quân một năm (tính bằng tiền mặt) của hộ

gia đình (bao gồm tất cả các khoản thu nhập)?

VND

Quá khứ

Hiện tại

So sánh thu nhập hiện tại với quá khứ

%

Thu nhập hiện tại bằng bao nhiêu

phần của quá khứ

2. Trong tổng thu nhập ông bà đề cập ở câu hỏi 1, bao nhiêu phần trăm là từ lúa gạo?

%

Quá khứ

Hiện tại

3. Trong tổng thu nhập ông bà đề cập ở câu hỏi 1, bao nhiêu phần trăm ông bà có thể

để dành?

%

Quá khứ

Hiện tại

D- Đời sống cá nhân

1. Ông bà có hài lòng với cuộc sống (về vật chất và tinh thần) của mình không?

(1=hoàn toàn không hài lòng, 10= rất hài lòng)

Quá khứ

Hiện tại

Tương lai

xv

2. Nếu có thể thì ông bà muốn thay đổi điều gì trong cuộc sống hiện tại của mình?

3. Trong ngày mùa, ông bà phải làm việc bao nhiêu tiếng/ngày

Số giờ

Quá khứ

Hiện tại

4. Ngoài ngày mùa, ông bà phải làm việc bao nhiêu tiếng/ngày?

Số giờ

Quá khứ

Hiện tại

5. Ngoài làm ruộng ra, ông bà còn có công việc khác không? Nếu có, xin ghi rõ.

6. Ngoài giờ làm việc, ông bà có khoảng bao nhiêu thời gian nhàn rỗi để làm các việc khác

như nghỉ ngơi, thăm hỏi họ hàng, làng xóm, xem ti vi, đi dạo, chơi thể thao…trong một

ngày?

Số giờ

Quá khứ

Hiện tại

7. Ông bà có hài lòng với lượng thời gian rỗi không?

Không hài lòng Hài lòng Rất hài lòng

Quá khứ

Hiện tại

xvi

8. Ông bà hình dung về cuộc sống và tình hình sản xuất lúa gạo của gia đình trong 10 năm

tới như thế nào?

Xin cảm ơn vì sự hợp tác của ông bà!

xvii

Declaration

Herewith, I declare that this thesis has been completed independently and unaided and that

no other sources than the ones stated here have been used.

The submitted printed version of this work is identical with the one electronically saved and

submitted on CD.

Furthermore, I declare that this work has never been submitted at any other time and

anywhere else as a final thesis.

__________________ ______________________________

Date Signature