The causes and results of Forest degradation: actors analysis, the case of Vietnam

Pham Van Dung, SPERI

May 2012

Overview Vietnam forestland management

• Before Independence (1945): not strong state management in mountainous areas, where traditional land and forest ownership prevailed

• 1950s-1985: Collectivisation, land, forest converted to state forest enterprises and cooperatives

• Since 1986: Decollectivisation, more involve local people and different economic sectors in forest protection and development – Land Law 1993: land user’s rights to lease, exchange, inherit, mortgage, and transfer land-use titles

– Decree 02/CP in 1994 on allocation of forestland to local organizations, households and individuals

– Decree 01/CP in 1995 on contracting of land for agriculture, forestry, and aquaculture purposes

– Land Law 2003 recognizing the legal status of communities as land user, also promoting commercialization of forestland

– Forest Protection and Development Law 2004 recognizing legal status of common property

– Decree 200/2004/ND-CP on reorganization, renewal and development of State-owned forestry enterprises

– Joint-Circular 07/ 2011/TTLT-BNNPTNT-BTNMT guiding forest allocation and lease in association with forestland allocation and lease

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

1943 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2009

Vietnam forest cover %

Source: http://lesscentr.ru/en/en/presentations/nguyen.pdf

Forest area 1976-2009

Source: Nguyen Quang Tan and Thomas Sikor, 2011

Vietnam Forestland by stakeholders in (2010)

Management boards 33%

State forest enterprises 15%

Other economic agents 1%

Armed forces 2%

Households 26%

Communities 2%

Other organizations

5%

People's committee 16%

Source: Decision 1828/QD-BNN-TCLN dated 11 Aug 2011

Map of Que Phong district and Hanh Dich commune

Case of Que Phong district, Nghe An province

Case of Que Phong district, Nghe An province (1)

• A poor mountainous district, west of Nghe An province

• 13,540 household, 64,521 persons (2010)

• Natural area: 189,543 ha

• Forest area: 158,506 ha (83.6%)

• Ethnic groups: Thai, Kinh,

Mong, Kho Mu, Tho, Tay,

Chut, each keep traditional culture and close link to forests

Nine-room temple festival

<= Traditional water pumps

Case of Que Phong district, Nghe An province (2)

• Before 1945: Forestland belonged to Chaudin (local land owners), keep strong local traditions with sacred forests

• 1950s-1980s: collectivisation, forestland controlled by cooperatives and State forest enterprises

Traditional Sangkhan ceremony and

A sacred forest area in Hanh Dich commune =>

Case of Que Phong district, Nghe An province (3)

• Late 1990s: state forest enterprise offered contracts of forest protection to villagers

• 2002: Land allocation (3,360 ha) to 360 households and 16 local mass organizations in Hanh Dich commune, supported by TEW (Towards Ethnic Women)

Ceremony for granting land certificates

<= A village landscape

Case of Que Phong district, Nghe An province (4)

• 2003: Herbalist group set up in Hanh Dich commune

• 2007: Hanh Dich communal authority informally allocated herbal forests to herbalist group

• 2011-: lobby for forestland title to community of Pom Om village, Hanh Dich commune as a pilot model

Herbal forest marked on a rock

Sharing herbal knowledge between different ethnic groups =>

Forest share in Que Phong district (2010)

Actor analysis (1)

Actor Interests Function Action

Households • Available land for cultivation • Have forest for daily use

• Inter-generation sustainable use of land and forest

• Produce agricultural products • Collect non-timber products

Communities • Keep biodiversity to ensure local livelihoods • Have adequate forestland space to practice traditional culture

• Keep community spirits • Balance interests of households and the whole community

• Solve conflicts according to customary laws • Solve problems between community and outsiders

Actor analysis (2)

Actor Interests Function Action

Local authorities

• Forestland is well planned and managed • Effective forestland use for socio-economic development for tax revenues

• Balancing interests of different actors

• Land allocation • Manage cadastral profiles • Tax collection

Forest protection boards

• Income from forest services

• Protection of watershed forests

• Plantation, keep forest cover • Offer contracts of forest protection to local people

National parks

• Income from forest services

• Protection of bio-diversity of special-use forests

• Supervise and keep forest resources • Offer contracts of forest protection to local people

Actor analysis (3)

Actor Interests Function Action

State enterprises

• Profits • Forestry economics • Some assigned social-political responsiblities

• Forest extraction • Timber processing • Plantation

Private companies

• Profits

• Increase products • Advertise to promote market

• Exploit resources to provide products, services • Influence decision makers to favor their interests

Problems

• Existence of large area managed by SFEs, forest protection boards, national parks

• Illegal wood exploitation due to lack of actual forest owners, or actual open access

• Increase of landless and local poor’s shortage of land

• Land disputes due to unclear demarcation

• Not yet flexible application of the term ‘community’ – formally defined as ‘residential community at village level’, so it is difficult to allocate forestland to communities

• Land allocation procedures (e.g. inventory of forest volume) make it impossible to poor communities to access forestland title

Questions

• Questions to the transfer/reallocate forestland under management of communal people’s committee

• Who should be the most suitable forestland users after reallocation? – Competition between wealthy companies and local people

– Profit vs local livelihoods

– Mono-plantation vs biodiversity

• Who should be beneficiaries of forest environmental services (e.g. REDD++)

Recommendations

• Sharing experiences from pilot models of community forest

• Find possible replication of the pilot models

• Better participation of local people/ community in all steps of forestland allocation, planning & management

• Wider acceptance of local people’s knowledge and results in forest inventory

• Community representatives, NGOs help the public to keep in mind the priority to local livelihoods

References

• SPERI (2008), Study on ‘indigenous knowledge of water using for wet rice cultivation of Thai ethnic group in Na Sai village, Hanh Dich commune, Que Phong district, Nghe An province’.

• SPERI (2009), Yearly narrative report on Network for Traditional Herbal Medicine, http://www.speri.org/upload/images/PART%203.%20speri.yearly%20report.jul07-jun08.pdf

• SPERI (2011), Research on ‘Role of Customary Law in Ethnic Minority Community Development’ (unpublished).

• Tan, Nguyen Quang and Thomas Sikor (2011) Forest Land Allocation: An Overview of Policy Framework and Outcomes in ‘Realizing Forest Rights in Vietnam: Addressing Issues in Community Forest Management’, RECOFTC, Bangkok

• http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/economies/Asia-and-the-Pacific/Vietnam.html

• http://lesscentr.ru/en/en/presentations/nguyen.pdf

• http://quephong.nghean.vn/quephong/default/explorer/folder/56?folder_id=56

• http://vi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qu%E1%BA%BF_Phong

Thank you!