FOREST GOVERNANCE - Việt Nam Forestry · Forest governance monitoring in Viet Nam Forest...

FOREST GOVERNANCE

Vol. 32 - 33, January 2012

Forest governance monitoring in Viet Nam

Forest governance and forest governancemonitoring - Some international views

Law enforcement contributes toenhance forest governance

Participation innatural resource governance

Transparency in forest governancein terms of information sharing

Forest governance and the interrelationbetween FLEGT and REDD+

Forest resource investigation and monitoringand forest governance monitoring in Viet Nam

Legal documents on forestry issuedbetween 1 July 2011 and 31 December 2011

2

4

8

10

13

15

18

20

20Major upcoming FSSP&TFF activitiesin the first half of 2012

INSIDEPageArticle

FOREST GOVERNANCE

02

Arend Jan van Bodegom,Wageningen UR,

Centre for Development Innovation,Wageningen, The Netherlands

is ageneral term for describingthe way in which people and

organizations rule and regulateforests. Important aspects include:

(1) a coherent set of laws andregulations, both within the forestsector and in other sectors thatinfluence forest management;

(2) the coherent implemen-tation of these laws; this includesmulti-annual and annual plans,budget allocation;

(3) the decision making pro-cesses about rules, laws andregulations;

(4) clear mandates of, andarrangements between differentstakeholders (various units andlevels of the government, NGO,community organisations, businesssector, etc.); and

(5) staff capable of executingthe tasks that have been assigned tothem.The term Forest Governance alsoemerged in response to a changingvision of the roles and responsibilities of the government towardsother stakeholders: from the 'old'style of governance the government is steering to a new situationin which several actors are co-steering. In this vision thegovernment does not bear soleresponsibility for the governancesituation, but every actor is meantto play a role and assume specificresponsibilities. Important aspect isthe recognition that differents takeholders may embracedifferent values, interests andworld views .

isfollowing a different approach: it isnormative and it is about quality.Important principles often mentioned in relation to 'GoodGovernance' include: participation

(stakeholder engagement), fair-ness, accountability, transparency,efficiency, and effectiveness. Theyare supposed to be universallyapplicable. However, there isalways debate on what principleshave to be included and whatexactly is meant by them. Differentstakeholders may have differentperspect ives , interes ts andinterpretations of what good forestgovernance means to them and howit should be operationalized.A joint initiative between UN-REDD/Chatham House and theWorld Bank is underway toformulate indicators for (Good)Forest Governance, applying thesix earlier mentioned principles.The resulting indicators aregrouped into three pillars: (1)policy, legal, institutional andregulatory frameworks, (2)decision-making processes ; and(3) implementation, enforcementand compliance (see figure 1). Thisleads to the following categoriesunder each of the pillars.

- Forest related policies andlaws

- Legal framework to supportand protect land tenure, ownershipand use rights

- Concordance of broaderdevelopment policies with forestpolicies

- Institutional frameworks- F i n a n c i a l i n c e n t i v e s ,

economic instruments and benefitsharing

- Stakeholder participation- T r a n s p a r e n c y a n d

accountability- Stakeholder capacity and

action

- Administration of forestresources

- Forest law enforcement- Administration of land tenure

and property rights- Cooperation and coordination- Measures to address corrup-

tionWhy should we enhance forestgovernance? The promotion offorest governance can bring aboutmany or fruits. Goodforest governance makes it possibleto optimize the production of goodsand services from the forest (seeFigure 2). Important fruits of forestgovernance may include profitfrom new opportunities created byREDD+ and FLEGT. These maygenerate additional forest revenuesthrough penetration to internationaltimber markets (in the case ofFLEGT) or international paymentsfor forest carbon capture, storageand avoided emissions (in the caseof REDD+). For these processesdurable results at a national levellike 'legally produced timber' and'decreased deforestation' will beimportant selling points andrequirements.Promoting forest governance maybe good, but why should oneengage in monitoring governance?Would it not be better to only spendfunds on the actual improvement ofgovernance? To these questionsseveral answers are possible:

Monitoring helps to check whetherpolicies are on the right track, byproviding crucial information overtime on status and progress aboutgoals, objectives, strategies andoutcomes. Governance monitoringcan help to clarify and improve theroles and performance of variousstakeholders in the sector and thusimprove coordination and diminishoverlap in actions. Monitoring canhelp answer vital questions like:does the governance in the sectoradvance in the direction that wasoriginally envisaged? Monitoringalso helps where changes need to be

Forest governance

Good Forest Governance

-

benefits

-

-

1

2

Pillar 1: Policy, legal institutionaland regulatory frameworks

Pillar 2: Planning and decision-making processes

Pillar 3: Implementation, enforce-ment and compliance

- Strategic management:

1

2

See Van Bodegom, A.J., D. Klaver, F van Schoubroeck and O. van der Valk, 2008. FLEGT beyond T: exploring the meaning of'Governance' concepts for the FLEGT process. Wageningen UR, The Netherlands

Capistrano, D., 2010. Forest Governance Indicator Development: Early Lessons and Proposed Indicators for Country Assessments.FAO, 34 pp.

http://www.cdi.wur.nl/UK/resources/Publications/

Vol.32 - 33, 1/2012FSSP Newsletter

FOREST GOVERNANCEAND FOREST GOVERNANCE MONITORINGSOME INTERNATIONALVIEWS

03

made to meet new demands/priorities, new weaknesses/vulnerabilities need to be address-ed, and emerging new strengthscould be built on.

Monitoring helpsto improve operations. It providesinformation needed for coordinating human, financial andphysical resources committed todifferent programmes and projects,and for improving coordination.

Monitoring provides a basis fordemonstrating to taxpayers,beneficiaries and partners thatexpenditure, actions and results areas agreed or could reasonably beexpected in the situation. Thistransparency helps to buildlegitimacy, or the “social license tooperate”, which in turn reducesinvestment risks. Reduced riskimproves the investment climate.For international processes (e.g.REDD+ and FLEGT) monitoringof forest governance is a tool forcreating evidence that forestgovernance is indeed improvingtowards an acceptable level.

A governancemonitoring system helps to buildtrust between stakeholders in thesector and improves the image ofthe sector. It can also demonstratethat the forest sector is important inthe country and contributes to itssustainable development.The six principles of ForestGovernance are also applicable toforest governance .Below we list the six principles andexamples of their effectiveapplication in forest governancemonitoring :

: this principleimplies transparency about dataThere is a need to be as open aspossible about disclosure of data.However, a balance is necessary, asit is unproductive to disclose alldetailed data, but aggregated datashould be disclosed as much aspossible. Transparency also meansa well - organised communication

- Operational management/Implementation:

-

- Reputation and credibility:

- M o n i t o r i n g i m p r o v e svisibility to other departmentswithin government and othereconomic sectors:

1. Transparency.

monitoring

3

Figure 1: Pillars and Principles of Forest Governance.

Figure 2: The Roots and fruits of forest governance

(adapted from: World Bank, 2009)3Partially based on the national forest programme principles and on Saunders & Reeve. 2010

. Chatham HouseMonitoring Governance for Implementation

of REDD+


04

towards stakeholders about theprocess of strengthening forestgovernance monitoring to stake-holders from the start.

implies thatthere should be credibility of themonitoring process and data.Monitoring is only of use if the dataquality is adequate. There needs tobe a mechanism for quality controland quality assurance of the datathat is collected and reported andfor adapting data collection andanalysis methods. Big steps are notto be expected overnight; it isimportant to take a realistic viewon the situation of 'here and today'and what would be attainable goalsand pathways in a process ofgradual improvements. Capacitybuilding at all levels will beneeded, and may need to be built,for all stakeholders engaged in thedesign and implementation ofsystems.

: the monitoringshould fit within goals set by thecountry. Aspects include: (a)Country leadership and nationalownership, (b) Consistency withnational policies, strategies.

partnership andinclusive multi-actor participation

are key for success, as areinvolvement of all relevantstakeholders, decentralisation andempowerment, coordination andconflict-resolution. The monitor-ing system should be developedand implemented jointly by majorstakeholders and take intoconsideration various relevantgeographic and administrativelevels in the country. Multi-stakeholder participation in theidentification of indicators as wellas in the design and implement-ation of the tools and institutionalarrangements will result in morecredible and useful informationand thus promote trust betweenstakeholders.

implies the importanceto secure meaningful participationof disadvantaged stakeholders inthe country: remote and resourcedependent communities, un-organized actors, and women maylack the possibilities and oppor-tunities to effectively participate inthe forest governance monitoringprocess. It may also be important toinvolve groups that at first sight donot see the importance of forestmonitoring for them, for examplethe private sector.

implies the need tobuild on existing data sets, datacollection routines, IT infras-tructure and organisationalframeworks as much as possible. Italso implies the need to prioritizethe aspects/issues on whichmonitoring should concentrate inthe beginning. There is also a needto use as much as possible existingdata. Data needs at domestic andinternational levels should beharmonised and collected andreported ideally through a co-ordinated national and inter-national institutional architecturewith appropr ia te overs ightmechanisms involving verificationat both national and internationallevel. Lastly, the forest monitoringsystem must be implementable andcost effect ive. I t must becompatible with the country'slonger term institutional andorganizational capacities andresources for forest relatedmonitoring.So forest governance monitoringfaces many challenges, but it is alsoa very promising possibility toenhance the sustainable use offorests for the benefit of thecountry and all its inhabitants.

2.Accountability

3. Effectiveness

4. Participation:

5. Fairness

Efficiency

Dr. Lê Khắc Côi

1. BACKGROUNDDue to the increasing recognition oft h e i m p o r t a n c e o f f o r e s tgovernance quality on progresstowards sus ta ina lbe fores tmanagement (SFM), Forest LawEnforcement, Governance andTrade (FLEGT) and the reductionof deforestation and forestdegradation (REDD+), increasing-ly many efforts are taken to monitorand report forest governance andgovernance quality. Severalinitiatives and different method-ologies exist for monitoring andreporting forest governance,including those related to ForestLaw Enforcement and Governance(FLEG), reporting based on SFMcriteria and indicators and oninternational agreements, as well asthose of the World Bank. Recently,the REDD negotiations under theUN Framework Convention on

Climate Change have agreed onsafeguards, initiative of EU FLEGTVPA (voluntary partnershipagreement), and timber supplyc h a i n p o l i c y o f d i f f e r e n tgovernments that relate to forestgovernance, further increasing theneed for monitoring. However,perhaps most importantly, forestgovernance monitoring systems atthe country level need to meetnational monitoring needs in orderto be relevant. This means thatmonitoring of forest governanceshould be most of all useful to betterfulfill national and local prioritiesfor forest management. Any forestgovernance monitoring that shouldbe established by countries needs tobe feasible, cost-effective, reliable(verif iable) , al low rel iablemeasurement of change over time,and fulfill international reportingrequirements.2 .FOREST GOVERNANCEMONITORING IN VIET NAM

MAIN FINDINGS

Relation between forest gover-nance and forest/SFM is describedin figure 1. Forest governance, bynature, is to make influence in orderto achieve expected results on (i)extent of forest resources; (ii) forestbiological diversity; (iii) foresthealth and vitality, (iv) productivefunctions of forest resources; (v)protective functions of forestresources, (vi) socio-economicfunctions of forest resourcesthrough action programs and legal,policy and institutional arrange-ments (vii).Forest governance monitoring isone of the components of forest-related monitoring system includ-ing (i) forest bio-physical monitor-ing, (ii) forest socio-economicmonitoring, and (iii) forestgovernance monitoring.

2.1. Forest governance monitor-ing and sustainable forestmanagement

FOREST GOVERNANCE MONITORING IN VIET NAM


05

2.2. International initiative onforest governance monitoring

2.3. Forest governance monitor-ing cycle

As stated in the previous article byMr Bodegom, a joint initiativebetween UNREDD/ChathamHouse and the World Bank isunderway to formulate togetherwi th in te rna t iona l exper t sindicators for (Good) ForestGovernance. The resul t ingindicators are grouped into threep i l l a r s : (1 ) po l i cy, l ega l ,institutional and regulatory frame-works, (2) decision-makingprocesses; and (3) implementation,enforcement and compliance. Ineach of these pillars the followingprinciples have to be applied:transparency, accountability, effect-iveness, participation, fairness andefficiency. We will take the threepillars and six principles as astarting point for discussions onwhat (good) forest governance in acountry could mean.

Figure 2 roughly describes forestgovernance monitoring cycle, fromthree-pillar-relationship point ofview, including planning anddecision making process (step 4)producing policy, legal, institu-tional and regulatory framework(step 3). Implementation of policy,legal, institutional and regulatoryframework in practice (step 6)brings results and impact of forestgovernance (step 1) leading tosustainably managed forest andforestry (step 2).Besides of that demand fromsustainable forest management andsustainable development of forestrygenerates needs for new or revisionof current policy, legal, institutionaland regulatory framework. In factthe demand generates inputs forplanning and decision makingprocess (step 4). Apart from thatmonitoring implementation of thepolicy, legal, institutional andregulatory framework (step 5) canbring two kinds of results. If theresult is good then current policy,legal, institutional and regulatoryframework can continue. If theresult is bad which means that theimplementation of the policy, legal,institutional and regulatory

1:Figure Relation between FGM and SFM

FGM:FBM:FSEM:SFM:

Forest Governance monitoringForest bio-physical monitoringForest socio-economic monitoring

Sustainable Forest Management


Figure 2: Forest governance monitoring cycle

06

framework creates bad or negativeimpacts, then the framework mustbe revised or a new one needs to beissued, which generates inputs forstep 4 of the process.

Figure 3 reflects result of FGMassessment, by interviewedstakeholders, and by 6 principles.According to that principle“Transparency” is rated at 56%(56/100 mark) which is the lowest,from lowest to highest, then followby “Accountability” and “Part-icipation” both at 60% (60/100mark), “Fair/Equity” and “Effec-tiveness” at 63% (63/100 mark),and finally and highest is“Efficiency” at 67% (67/100 mark).Data on the figure 3 advise us that ifViet Nam wants to improve itsFGM the prioritized focus shouldbe more on

andthan other

principles.The Table 1 is the overall

assessment by scoring whole FGMand each pillar, by interviewedstakeholders, and by the 6principles. The data clearly showthat the first attention in streng-thening FGM should be paid to

,, and

3. FOREST GOVERNANCEMONITORING IN VIET NAMNEXT STEPSIn case, Viet Nam would like tostrengthen FGM systematically,what will be mention below can be areference.Figure 4 presents a generic designoverview for FGM. The overviewdistinguishes between a number ofbuilding blocks that need to beaddressed in the process ofpreparing for design, actual design,and sustaining the designed FGM.

establishing shared understanding of what isinvolved in forest governance andits monitoring. In a kind of matrix,under each pillar and principlespecific forest governance issues

can be identified.

establishing a sharedunderstanding of the key reasonsfor engaging in FGM. Such anunderstanding needs to beconsistent with national policies,strategies document and fit withinthe country's sustainable develop-ment strategies, inter-sectoralapproaches. It would be consistentwith the country's legal frame-works, recognition and respect forcustomary and traditional rightsand secure land tenure arrange-ments.

establishing sharedunderstanding of what informationis needed to answer forestgovernance performance questions,taking into consideration the needto prioritize amongst the manyinformation needs.

esta-blishing shared understanding ofthe ways in which necessaryinformation will be gathered fromwhich sources of information; useof primary and secondary data;clarification of IT part of themethods and methodologies(storage, retrieval etc.).

establishingclear processes for turning data intoinformation and the way in which itwill flow to/be accessed byintended audiences.

establishing sharedunderstanding of who will beexpected to do what to makefunctional forest governancemonitoring happen;

establishing a shared understandingof what will be required in terms ofcapacities and conditions to sustainefforts.

establishing forestgovernance monitoring in existingorganizational and institutionalarrangements.

2.4. Assessment of forestgovernance monitoring in VietNam

(i) “Transparency”,(ii) “Accountability” (iii)“Participation”

(i)“Transparency” (ii) “Account-ability” (iii) “Participation”.

1. Creating a forest governancereference framework -

2. Agreeing on a defined purpose& vision

3. Making information needsexplicit -

4. Selecting methods & methodo-logies for data collection

5. Creating an outline of theorganization (flow) & intendeduse of information

6. Agreeing on roles & respon-sibilities

7. Activating a plan for putting inplace operational capacities &conditions for functional FGM

8. Providing an institutionalembedding -


Table 1: Overall assessment by 6 principles

Figure 3: Forest Governance Monitoring - Assessed y 6 Principles

07Vol.32 - 33, 1/2012

FSSP Newsletter

Figure 4: A framework for forest governance monitoring design

08

Nguyễn Hữu Dũng,Director of Forest Protection

Department, Administrationof Forestry, MARD

Law enforcement is anintentional activity processto ensure that the provisions

of the law come into life. Lawenforcement is a fundamentalcondit ion to ensure forestgovernance. Therefore, in order tohave good forest governancesystem, it is necessary to focus oncapacity building for effective andefficient law enforcement.

The basis for forest law enforcementin Viet Nam is a system for legaldocuments relating to forestprotection and development,including some key legislations asfollows:

- Land Law;- Forest Protect ion and

Development Law;- Some articiles related to

forestry in the Criminal Code;- The Decree No. 99/2009/ND-

CP dated 2nd November 2009 onhandling administrative violationsin forest management, protectionand forest product management;

- Other relevant supportinglegislations.Basically, the forestry legislationframework in Viet Nam is quiteadequate to address the issuesoccurred in the process of forestmanagement, protection and forestproduct management. However, thelegal framework is still overlapped,inconsistent, asynchronous, includ-ing some infeasible provisions.These has lessened the efficiencyand effectiveness of law enforce-ment.

According to local statistics, in thelast 5 years (2007-2011) a numberof 180,115 cases violating theregulations on forest protection anddevelopment have been detectednationwide. Annual average is36,023 cases (Figure 1), mainly aret r a d i n g t r a n s a c t i o n s a n dtransportation of forest products(52%), followed by acts of

deforestation (13%), illegallylogging (8%), other behaviors( 1 8 % ) , v i o l a t i o n s a g a i n s tregulations on fire prevention andforest fires, violations of protectionand management of wildlife andforest product processing account-ing less (Figure 2). This suggeststhat in the future to promote site-based forest protection activities, inorder to timely detect cases ofviolations of deforestation, illegallyforest product harvesting; streng-then inspection and control of theforest product processing facilities,activities related to wildlife (breed-ing, transportation, trading, usage

...), together with further improve-ment of the legal basis in the field ofmanagement and protection ofwildlife.Most of the above violations havebeen handled by local forest rangersaccording to legislation provisionson handling of administrativeviolations of forest management,forest protection and forest productmanagement. Practical settlementsof administrative violations showssome issues: sanctions are some-what not appropriate, not strongenough for deterrent purpose; manyprovisions are unclear or inadequateso that violators can take advantage1. Basis for law enforcement

2. Status of violations against legalregulations and handling actions

LAW ENFORCEMENT CONTRIBUTES TO ENHANCE FOREST GOVERNANCE

Figure 1. Number of cases of violation of forest protection andmanagement, forest product management, 2007 - 2011

Figure 2. Percentage of violation cases of regulations on forestprotection, management, forest product management


09

by misusing them or creating fakedocuments, etc ....Some violations with criminalindications have been transferred byforest rangers to competentauthorities to address in accordancewith legal regulations. However, therate of the violations in forestprotection and management regula-tions prosecuted, handled by law isvery low. The objective reason forsuch situation is the complexity ofthe violations cases in the forestrysector. Additionally, this alsoillustrates the limitations in thesystematic comprehensiveness andconsistency of some legal provi-sions related to forestry sector andrequires an improved capacity forlaw enforcement agencies as well astheir collaboration in fulfilling theirtasks.

Forest protection is the responsi-bility of all agencies, organizations,households, individuals. Amongthem, forest rangers are the full-timeState forces to protect forests, assistMinister of Agriculture and Ruraldevelopment and Chairpersons ofPeople's Committee at all levels tocarry out their State administrationresponsibilities over forest protec-tion, ensure the compliance withlegal regulations on forest protec-tion and development.Besides ensuring the law enforce-ment, forest rangers also carry outother tasks related to forest govern-ance (formulate legislation; develop

master plan and plan on forestprotection and management;disseminate to local people, ect). Asa result, strengthening andenhancing capacity for forestrangers will contribute considerablyto improved forest governance.Currently, there are nearly 11,000forest rangers nationwide, over 40%of which are appointed to work atcommune levels (commune forestrangers) to execute the Stateadministration responsibilities overforest. However, the number is notadequate to meet the demand offorest protection and development.As a result, the Prime Minister hasagreed in principle to supplement3,000 full-time forest rangers until2015. Together with increasing thenumber, strengthening theirbehaviors, professional capacityshould be also emphasized.In order to ensure legal compliance,forest rangers have closelycooperated with polices and armyforces in accordance with theCircular No. 44/2002/TTLT/BNNPTNT-BCA-BQP dated 13Dec 2002 on guid ing thecollaboration between forestrangers, police, army forces in forestprotection; directions by PrimeMinister, Minister of Agricultureand Rural development, Ministry ofPublic Security, Ministry ofNational Defense as well as in thelight of other inter-agencycollaboration regulations.

a) Law enforcement contributes topromote forest governance. A goodforest governance system shalldepend on an efficient and effectivelaw enforcement system. Therefore,enhancing capacity for lawenforcement agencies is an urgentrequirement to ensure forestprotection, contributing to realizethe objective of forest governancewhich is sustainable forestmanagement. Besides that, wellimplementing the elements of aforest governance, including legalframework, transparency, stake-holders' participation, etc aslofacilitate the law enforcement.b) Enhancing forestry-related lawenforcement capacity should focuson the following points:

- Further review, finalize thelegal system to increase thesystematic comprehensiveness,coherence and consistency amongthe legal provisions; avoid over-lapping and conflicts; supplementnew provisions to be appropriatewith the practical situation follow-ing the direction of administrativereform.

- Enhance capacity for forestrylaw enforcement agencies, particu-larly forest rangers and polices at alllevels by increasing number of staff,organizing more training courses onprofessional skills, strengtheninginfrastructure facilities, professionalequipment, etc.c) Forest rangers are the key forcefor forest protection and ensures thelaw enforcement in terms of forestprotection, management and forestproduct management. Besides this,forest rangers are also assigned withmany other tasks which are directlyrelated to forest governance. As aresult, it is urgent to strengthenforest rangers to establish aneffective forest governance systemin Viet Nam.d) The last time has witnessed aclose cooperation among forestrangers, police and army forces inforest protection and forestry lawenforcement. In the future, it isnecessary to further promote theachieved results, supplementspecific regulations, mechanisms toincrease the active role andresponsibility of each agency.

3. Forestry law enforcementagencies

4. Conclusions and recommen-dations


Dr. Nguyễn Quang Tân, RECOFTC1

In the context of natural resource

governance, participation means

the effective involvement in mak-

ing and implementing decisions

either directly or via a legal

representative.

Participation of different sectors in

formulating and implementing the

polices on natural resource

management is supported by

international legal framework and

legally - recognized by a number of

countries. In Viet Nam, stakeholder

participation, particularly of local

people, is clearly stipulated in the

Grassroots Democratic Ordinance

(came into effect since 1 July

2007), which regulates the specific

issues for which local people shall

be informed, discussed with for

making decisions, consulted with

and jointly monitoring.

In general, there has been an

improved awareness of the benefits

brought by the participation.

Countries in the world started

realizing that participation is not a

threat, as a result, they has started

open ing the door fo r the

participatory processes.

By encouraging stakeholders from

different sectors to involve in

making decisions and implement-

ing the activities related to natural

resource management , the

following can be expected:

- Various knowledge, points of

view, skills and resources are more

effectively used in the decision

making and implementing process.

- Decisions as well as their

enforcement shall be more

effective, more practical and more

sustainable.

- Everyone jointly shares and

reinforces their points of view,

awareness of issues, resources and

opportunities for better choices.

- Everyone shares and widens

their knowledge and sharpens their

skills.

More importantly, natural resource

governance shall be more efficient

and effective, contributing to

ensure the social equity when

participation, transparency, legal

compliance and accountability are

in place. When the participation-

based outcomes are recognized,

this shall create driving - forces for

relevant stakeholders to increase

their investments in terms of time

and resources to work together and

learn how to facilitate the

participatory process.

Limited participation does not

always mean the lack of willing-

ness from a part of Government

officials and stakeholders. The

barriers to the participation often

are:

- Benefits brought by power and

influence in case of non-participa-

tion.

- Limited institutional capacity

to facilitate the participatory

process.

- Lack of a mechanism to

facilitate the participation.

- Lack of transparency and

openness. This means information

and information flows are not

adequate.

- “Theoretical representation”

means in many cases, the

representatives for relevant stake-

holders don't share the consultation

outcomes to other people in their

groups.

- Difficulties in terms of logistic

arrangement in organizing consul-

1. Overview

2.Participation-based expect-ations

3. Barriers to and challenges ofparticipation

st

Barriers

10

1According to the training material on natural resource governance published by IUCN, RECOFTC and SNV (Patti Moore,Xuemei Zhang, and Ronnakorn Triraganon (2011) IUCN, RECOFTC,SNV, Bangkok, Thailand. xii + 278 pages) and experience from the Forest Governance Learning Group (FGLG)coordinated by RECOFTC.

Natural Resource Governance Trainers' Manual

Local people involve in removing teredos to protect mangrovesSource: www.tinthanhhoa.vn

PARTICIPATION IN

NATURAL RESOURCE GOVERNANCE


tations with rural people or in

identifying reliable representatives

from communities.

- Restrained capacity at the local

level to involve in making and

implementing decisions. Natural

resources-based benefit sharing

mechanism can drive them to more

actively participate in.

- Lack of transparency or

information can considerably

reduce the local communities'

participation in the decision


Meanwhile participation can bring

a number of benefits to the society

in general and for some particular

stakeholders, some challenges

should be overcome to get more

effective participation:

- Participation is not an

obviously familiar concept in many

cultures.

- Some Governments are not

favour of participation, particularly

in case the participation can impact

their power.

- Some participatory processes

require a cer ta in level of

investment in terms of time,

resources and finance.

- Participatory processes require

an effective facilitation.

- An effective participation

requires a commitment in terms of

time and it also takes time to

provide obvious outcomes.

- Relevant stakeholders need to

come to compromises to avoid

conflicts and ensure an effective

participation in the decision


- An effective participation

requires clear objectives.

Participation can be in many

formalities and at different levels

which are similar to the steps of a

ladder. It is not important to know

exactly the term of each step, but it

is crucial to distinguish the

difference among such steps as

each step requires a specific

method.

Decisions are just made by a

limited number of stakeholders.

Other sectors don't participate in

making the decisions but are just

informed about what happened or

will be happening.

Relevant stake

holders participate by answering

questions provided by others who

are decision makers. The relevant

stakeholders have no opportunities

to influence the decision making

process and the decision makers

don't share their own answers to the

questions.

Decision makers

consult with relevant stakeholders

and take their knowledge and

concerns into consideration. The

decision makers define issues and

solutions but they can also amend

them in accordance with the

reactions/feedbacks from the

relevant stakeholders. The process-

es do not recognize any decision-

making rights to the consulted

stakeholders and the decision

makers are not supposed to follow

the opinions of the consulted

stakeholders.

Stakeholders participate by creat-

ing groups or unofficial institutions

to meet with the objectives set by

the decision makers. Such par-

ticipation is not targeted at the

planning phase but after important

decisions have been made. Such

unofficial institutions sometimes

are dependent on external initiators

but can become independent.

Stakeholders

jointly analyse the issues to come to

actions by establishing new groups

or strengthen the existing groups.

Stakeholders control the decisions,

which motivates them to maintain

the institutions and processes.

Stakeholder participate by taking

an active and independent role with

decision makers to change

legislations, institutions and/or

processes. Decision makers and

other people can act as a catalyst or

facilitator.

The Forest Protect ion and

Development Law passed in the

December 2004 remarks the ever-

f i r s t l ega l r ecogn i t i on o f

community-based forest in Viet

Nam. However, it is still not clear

how such a legal recognition can

attract local participation in forest

protection and management. The

last part of the article summaries

some findings from the Forest

Governance Learning Group

(FGLG) in Viet Nam in perspective

of the article.

FGLG project collected infor-

mation on community-based

Challenges

4. Participatory hierarchy

Step 1: Non-participation:

Step 2: Participating by provid-ing information: -

Step 3: Consultation-basedparticipation:

Step 4: Practical participation:

Step 5: Interactions:

Step 6: Self-mobilization:

5. People's participation inc o m m u n i t y - b a s e d f o r e s tmanagement in Viet Nam

11

Factors influencing participa-tionIn reality, we are unable and notrequired to get to the highest stepof participation. An appropriateparticipation step in eachspecific circumstance dependson the following factors:

- Participatory objectives.- Participatory timeframe.- Mechanisms supporting

participatory processes are inplace or not.

- A legal environment andlegislation supporting participa-tion in place or not.

- An institutional environ-ment supporting participation inplace or not.

- Adequate human and finan-cial resources for participation inplace or not.


12

forestry enforcement in 25 locali-

ties through a number of study tours

from January to November 2008.

Up to 24 of the 25 communities

were allocated forests with land use

right certificates or forest alloca-

tion decisions through pilot

programs or projects. In the

remaining village, rights of local

people over forests have not been

recognized legally (land use right

certificates are still absent) and

local people managed forests by

their traditional regulations.

A field-based finding shows that

the interaction between having

legal rights and their actual

participation in effective forest

management is still not clear. Out

of the 24 communities being

re conized legal rights over forests,

only 9 communities actively

participated in forest protection

(preventing illegal harvesting,

encroachment and conversion of

land use purpose). In seven other

communities, parcipation in

managing the allocated forests was

just at the medium level while in the

eight remaining ones local people

hardly involved in forest manage

ment since being allocated with

forests. In the first group, local

people formulated their forest

protection regulations at village

level and followed the regulations

to protect forests. In the second

group, local people also formulated

their forest protection regulations,

but the enforcement was not good

enough. Illegal logging still

occur ed in some cases. Forest

management by the third group was

quite weak. These are the villages

being allocated with forests but

failing to develop appropriate

institutions to protect ,

resulting in deforestation and forest

deterioration

In the village without legal rights

over forests, people has jointly

protected forest resources from

generations to generations.

However, in 2006, a part of forest

area managed by local people were

acquired and allocated to a sand-

collecting company. The company

compensated local people for the

trees and assets attached to the

acquired land. However, the

amount was just equal to a small

porportion of the total compen-

sation in case local people got use

right certificate over such land

area.

The aforementioned findings show

that authorizing legal rights over

forests does not automatically

involve local people in forest

protection and management in an

effective manner. Meanwhile the

lack of legal rights over forests can

hinder local participation in forest

protection, the findings from such

villages also indicate that other

factors such as an equal and pro-

poor benefit-sharing mechanism,

status of allocated forests (rich-

poor-medium), importance of

forests to life and (other) liveli-

hoods of the localities as well as

other resources of the communities

also play an important role. This

means besides allocating forests to

local people, it is necessary to

enhance their capacity and provide

other supporting institutions.

Furthermore, allocated forests

should be economically beneficial

to local people.

g

-

r

those

since allocation.

RECOFTC The Center for People and Forests is a not-for-profit international organization with its

headquarters in Bangkok, Thailand. It specializes in capacity building for community forestry i.e. supporting

local people to gain rights over forest resources and manage them. RECOFTC engages in strategic networks

and effective partnerships with governments, nongovernment organizations, civil society, the private sector,

local people, and research and educational institutes throughout the Asia-Pacific region and beyond. With 25

years of international experience and a rights-based approach to capacity building involving research and

analysis, demonstration sites, and training products RECOFTC delivers innovative solutions for people and

forests

In recent years, the organization has opened country offices in Viet Nam, Cambodia, and Indonesia, with its

headquarters in Thailand. The Center's work focuses on the four thematic areas of people, forests and climate

change; conflict management over natural resources; livelihood and access to markets for forest dependent

communities; and building capacities for community forestry at all levels.

-

.


13

Tapio Leppanen,Chief Technical Adviser,

FORMIS Project (Developmentof Management Information System

for Forestry Sector in VietNam)

Information is an essential parto f g o v e r n a n c e a n dmanagement. It cuts across the

different elements that constitutean operating system in anyorganisation including forestrya g e n c i e s a n d c o m p a n i e s :leadership, strategy, processes,human resources, results andenvironmental and social impacts.Each of the elements requiresinformation related to the regula-tions that govern the organisation,the operating environment, and theperformance of the organisation.Atthe same time organisations havelegal obligation to provide thecitizens information that may affecttheir lives. In forestry suchobligations are related to forinstance forest certification, carbontrade, and the regulations upon thelegality of the origin of timber:Lacey Act in the USA and EU-FLEGT in Europe (Forest LawEnforcement, Governance andTrade).

With regards to the legal context inViet Nam, the Law on ForestProtection and Development, fromDecember 3, 2004, contains article32 that provides for the publishingof annual forest statistics 'foreststatistical work shall be conductedannually and publicized in the firstquarter of the subsequent year'.

This article studies transparencyand information sharing in forestrywith focus on information manage-ment. Once the necessary policyand regulations, that enableinformation sharing, are in placethere is still a long way to go inorder to make information sharableand actually transfer data from oneplace to another. Transparencymeans that the stakeholders areable to access meaningful and fact-

based information that will help inmaking decisions on the futurecourse of action.

The first obstacle in sharing forestinformation in Viet Nam is itsfragmented nature. Information isnot comparable across organisa-tions, administrative areas andtimeand thus it is difficult to getmeaningful, aggregated informa-tion for directing and steering theforest sector in accordance to thestrategic goals. Districts, provincesand government agencies areapplying different indicators whencollecting information and whenreporting on forestry resources and-activities. This makes it difficult toaggregate information at nationallevel, compare the forestryperformance in different provincesand capture the trend of develop-ment over a longer period of time.This situation can be corrected byagreeing on standards with regardsto the definitions, concepts,terminology and indicators relatedto forest resources, forestryactivities and incidents. Informa-tion standards are the foundation ofinformation sharing.

Transparency requires the capabi-lity to combine data and informa-tion from different governmentagencies and other sources. Forinstance in Viet Nam we regularlyneed to combine cadastral datafrom Ministry of Natural Resour-ces and Environment (MONRE)with the forest resource data fromMinistry of Agriculture and RuralDevelopment (MARD). At locallevel Sub-FPD (Forest ProtectionDepartment) and Sub-DOF(Department of Forestry), and therespective district level organisa-tion, collect and store informationon forest resources, for instance,Sub-DoF is responsible formonitoring the establishment ofplantations while Sub-FPD isresponsible in monitoring changesin forest cover, including thechanges caused by establishing

new plantations. Both organisa-tions would benefit from sharingdata.

Exchanging information betweenagencies requires that the organisa-tions agree on a sharing mechanismand on their respective roles inmanaging the informat ion:collecting, storing, updating anddistributing data. Currently in VietNam we have a situation where thesame data is collected and stored bydifferent organisations resulting intwo or more sets of figures for thesame thing. In such situation theuser cannot determine, which datais correct and reliable. Our aimshould be an information sharingmechanism that clarifies the rolesin managing forest information.For instance, the forest cadastralboundary data can be maintainedby one entity, MONRE, and sharedwith other agencies that need dataon forest ownership boundaries.

Agreeing on data- and informationsharing mechanism is not enough toactually share and transfer data in asecure manner. Informationmanagement today is based oncomputerised systems. Data isstored in servers and shared throughnetworks and internet. Currently inViet Nam electronic data on forestsis stored in individual personalcomputers and transferred primarilyby memory sticks and other portablemedia. This situation is far fromideal and raises concerns oversecuri ty and rel iabi l i ty ofinformation. In Viet Nam there areseveral major organisations thatcollect, store, and maintain forestdata and distribute information onforests. This kind of situation callsfor an IT architecture that canprovide the necessary means fori n f o r m a t i o n s e c u r i t y a n dinformation transfer to the entirecluster of organisations assumingthat data is stored in separatephysical locations and using varioushardware and soft-ware solutions.FORMIS project is currently

TRANSPARENCY IN FOREST GOVERNANCEIN TERMS OF INFORMATION SHARING


14

building such an informationsystem, which is based on cloudcomputing architecture.

Transparency in forest governancerequires also that the forest ownersand other stakeholders and users areable to access the system to obtaininformation and also to updateinformation by entering data into thesystem. For instance forest ownercould be able to submit theobligatory notifications related toforestry activities and incidents byentering the data directly into thesystem. The idea of eGovernment isbased on the citizens being able totake use of government servicesover a computerised system. It canbe assumed that the eGovernmentservices could reach remote areaseasier and with fewer costs than theconventional way of physically

travelling to the nearest office. Inthis way computer based servicescan directly contribute to povertyalleviation and to the involvement ofethnic minorities that often inhabitthe forested parts of the country.

Transparency in forest governancerefers to the possibility of citizens toobtain information on forestresources and forestry activities inthe vicinity of their households andvillages. However, it does not meanthat all the forest related informationmust be public. In fact individualforest owners and households wouldprobably be reluctant to providedata for the computerised systemunless the confidentiality ofinformation pertaining to theirindividual situation is guaranteed.This situation requires a regulationthat would ensure security of

information and would provide theforest owners the right to approvesharing of information related totheir individual forest asset.

Good forest governance depends onthe reliability and accuracy ofinformation. Conventional paperbased reporting systems are hard tocontrol and validate because theinformation is not auditable. In otherwords it is not possible to trace howthe data has been entered, modifieda n d a g g r e g a t e d f r o m o n eadministrative level to the next.Computerised reporting systemsprovide technological means fortracking data entry and the updatingof information. Furthermore dataaggregation and analysis are visiblein computer applications andanalysis tools. Thus moderntechnologies will provide costeffective means to control thereliability of data for instance inconnection to carbon trade and incontrol of the legality of the origin oftimber. Chain-of-custody systemsand timber tracking systems areessentially information systems.

Finally with regards to thetransparency of forest informationthere is a wide realisation around theworld that information is an assetthat can generate businessopportunities, employment andthereby also tax income to thegovernment. As a result certainbasic 'information infrastructure',collected by government agencies,is provided and shared free ofcharge to be used by a multitude oforganisations. Such informationincludes also information on thelocation and status of forests.

Forest status map field check, PhuLoc District, ThuaThien Hue,June 2011. FORMIS has carried out forest status mapping in connectionto developing a forest resource database system

FORMIS (Development of Management Information System for Forestry Sector) is developing a modernforestry sector information system to provide accurate information for decision making at all levels. FORMISPlatform addresses issues related to integration of existing resources and new systems, while FORMIS Portalprovides a single access point to the resources. The focus is currently on development of Forest ResourceDatabase System and Reporting System, while other new applications can be integrated into the platform. Theproject also provides IT infrastructure and builds capacity for use and maintenance of the system. FORMISproject is piloting the system in three target provinces (Thanh Hoa, Thua Thien Hue and Quang Ninh).FORMIS is implemented by the Vietnam Administration of Forestry (VNFOREST) under the Ministry ofAgriculture and rural Development (MARD). The project is financed by the Government of Finland, the TrustFund for Forests (TFF) and the Government of Vietnam. Niras Finland Oy (www.niras.com) as a leadconsultant, in collaboration with GFA and Green Field consulting, provides technical assistance for theProject.


15

Christophe Van Orshoven,

Tim Dawson, Iola Leal,

Alessandro Trevisan and

Melissa Othman,

European Forest Institute

In recent decades, mounting

pressure to combat pervasive

consequences of illegal

logging and deforestation has

initiated sectoral change and

intensified concern for improving

gover-nance of the world's forests.

Increasing awareness of the

importance of land-use change,

and particularly deforestation, to

climate change, offers a fresh

opportunity to address the drivers

of forest destruction. This article

introduce show forest-related

processes such as REDD+ and

FLEGT can, if properly designed,

s u p p o r t i m p r o v e d f o r e s t

governance.

As part of the worldwide push to

address illegal logging and its

negative consequences, the

European Commission (EC)

enacted the Forest Law Enforce-

ment, Governance and Trade

(FLEGT) Action Plan in 2003,

setting out a range of measures to

tackle illegal logging and promote

stronger forest governance. The

Action Plan recognises the role of

both timber consumer and

producing countries to address

sectoral problems whose major

underlying causes include govern-

ance failures and defines a set of

actions to tackle them. Voluntary

Partnership Agreements (VPAs)

are one of the instruments

proposed in the Plan as a means for

the European Union (EU) and its

trade partners to jointly address

governance weaknesses that

undermine the management of

forests and the legal production,

transformation and trade in timber.

VPAs are negotiated between a

timber exporting country (the

FLEGT partner country) and the

EC and, once operational, would

ensure that timber destined for the

EU market is produced in

accordance with the existing

legislation of the FLEGT partner

country.

Formal VPA negotiations with

Viet Nam started in May 2010, and

should concludeby the end of

2012. To date work has concen-

trated on deciding which laws and

regulations will be checked to

ensure legal compliance before a

FLEGT license can be issued, with

more detailed design of other

elements such as wood tracking

and verification procedures now

commencing. A National Consul-

tation workshop was held in 2011

to promote broad stakeholder

participation amongst NGOs,

government agencies and the

private sector. Thus far mostly

g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c i e s a n d

enterprises are providing inputs.

Both Viet Nam and EU recognise

the importance to conduct open

and continuous broad stakeholder

consultation during the year ahead

and are working to support other

stakeholder participation.

Increased understanding of the

impacts of forest loss to climate

change, led the United Nation

Framework Convent ion on

Climate Change (UNFCCC) to

launch negotiations on ”Reducing

Emissions from Deforestation and

Forest Degradation in developing

countries” (REDD+) in 2005.

R E D D + a i m s t o p r o v i d e

incentives to forest owners in

tropical countries for maintaining

forests, thereby reducing the

carbon emissions that would

otherwise arise. It is widely

understood that for any REDD+

s t r a t e g y t o w o r k , f o r e s t

governance will have to improve.

By tackling wider governance

issues linked to natural resources

and land use, it is hoped that a

successful REDD+ mechan-ism

will not only deliver signi-ficant

c l imate change mi t iga t ion

benefits, but will also contribute to

poverty reduction, improved

livelihoods, protection of bio-

diversity, food security, and better

governance in the sector and

beyond.

Preparations for REDD+ are

FLEGT

REDD+

FOREST GOVERNANCE ANDTHE INTERRELATION BETWEEN

FLEGT AND REDD+

FOREST GOVERNANCE ANDTHE INTERRELATION BETWEEN

FLEGT AND REDD+


16

advancing in Viet Nam, in

particular through site-based pilot

projects, work on how carbon and

non-carbon benefits will be

monitoredreportedand verified

(MRV), and development of a

National REDD+ Programme.

Realisation of REDD+ benefits on

a national scale will however

require the development and

implementation of a comprehen-

sive REDD+ strategy integrated

within broader development and

land-use strategies expanding the

future governance challenges.

Arange of tropical forest countries

are now engaging in REDD+ and

FLEGT VPA processes. When

designing a REDD+ strategy or a

system to ensure the legality of

forest products (the basis for a

VPA), people involved face

common challenges: unclear legal

and regulatory frameworks -

particularly regarding land use

and access to resources, difficulty

in engag ing some fores t -

dependent stakeholders, poorly

developed information systems

and trans-parency mechanisms,

corrupt ion , and weak law

enforcement and judicial systems.

To maximise opportunities at

national level to tackle these

challenges, it is important to draw

synergies between existing policy

processes - making them mutually

supportive. For example, the

FLEGT process can support other

national forest processes through

clarifying the legal framework of

the sector, improving law

enforcement, and providing new

mechanisms for transparency,

accountability and control. Exper-

ience from the FLEGT process in

ensuring effective stakeholder

participation could further be used

in REDD+ as a basis for

strengthening multi-stakeholder

engagement. In turn, the REDD+

process is providing increased

momentum to support forest

sector reform, access to finance

and increased political attention

on forests. Its international

dimension and broader scope

provides stakeholders with the

possibility to address aspects of

forest gover-nance that fall

outside the scope of VPAs.

Reflecting on areas of overlap in

design and implemen-tation of

sectoral processes, such as

REDD+ and FLEGT, could

increase their effectiveness to

bring about forest governance

reforms.

While processes a imed at

improving the forest governance

reform, such as REDD+ and

FLEGT, offer opportunities for

synergies and coordination, it is

also important to be aware of

differences. FLEGT is a bilateral

negotiation process focusing

mainly on the forestry sector; and

although its bilateral nature and

restricted focus makes it easy to

come up with stricter commit-

ments, addressing governance

issues that extend beyond the

forest sector is more difficult. The

mul t i l a t e r a l d imens ion of

REDD+, involving a complex

range of stakeholders at local,

national and international levels,

makes it harder to reach strict

consensual commitments; but the

fact that it requires strong

coordination with a number of

other economic sectors (such as

the agriculture and mining

sectors) allows other areas, which

processes such as FLEGT cannot

reach, to be tackled. In addition,

while the FLEGT framework is

relatively clear and predictable for

stakeholders to engage with and

mainly driven by timber trade,

REDD+ still involves a substantial

degree of uncertainty as multi-

lateral negotiations are still

ongoing and institutional and

policy preparations at country

level are developing. Forest

carbon and ecosystem services are

also relatively new concepts for

many stakeholders.

In order to provide substantial

technical and analytical support to

tropical forest countries involved

in FLEGT and/or REDD+, the EU

REDD Facility and EU - FLEGT

Facility, both hosted and managed

by the European Forest Institute

(EFI), have been established with

EC and Member State support.

The EU - FLEGT Facility,

established in 2007, supports the

EU, Member States and partner

countries in implementing the EU

FLEGT Action Plan. The EU

REDD Facility, created in 2010,

suppor ts governments and

stakeholders in the development

and implementation of their

Joining forces to promote forest

sector reform

An EU response


17

REDD+ policies, with a

s p e c i f i c f o c u s o n t h e

interaction with FLEGT. Both

Facilities mainly conduct

activities in Africa, Asia, and

Central & SouthAmerica.

The FLEGT/VPA negotiation

process is proving to be a

powerful tool to enhance

stakeholder participation and

thus works to strengthen forest

governance. Also multilateral

REDD+ negotiat ions have

refocused political attention and

thinking around forests. Multi-

s takeholder, part icipa-tory

processes are fundamental to

good forest sector governance and are a

prerequisite for the credibility of the

V PA a n d s u c c e s s f u l R E D D +

implemen-tation - and the development

a n d i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f n e w

institutional structures and legal

systems that will be necessary to

demonstrate that the worlds forest still

have a bright future.

Conclusion

Exploring forest governance challenges in relation to REDD+ and FLEGTShared underlying causes of forest loss:

Defining steps to address governance challenges:

*

*

*

There is broad recognition that improving governance is key

to successful REDD+ implementation. There is also global recognition that poor governance is an

underlying cause of illegal logging.

The FLEGT VPA process provides the

opportunity to clarify the legal framework underpinning forest management and a strong foundation

for improving law enforcement. The process offers a powerful tool for governments and stakeholders

to increase dialogue, awareness and transparency of the forest sector's legal framework. Equally,

REDD+ will have to be based on a strong legal framework. For effective REDD+ development and

implementation it is a pre-condition to ensure similar buy-in from the different forest sector

stakeholders.

* Key components of a FLEGT VPA, such as a

system to ensure the legality of the timber, independent audit, publication of documents or the

increased role for stakeholder oversight are tools that help strengthen transparency, clarity and

accountability in forest sector institutions and policies. REDD+ preparatory work includes detailed

analysis on institutional and legal reform, including tenure and design of a benefit distribution system

that meets expectations of the international community in terms of transparency, accountability and

equity of performance based payments.

Asound MRV system is a necessary component of any compliance based processes.

To date, the REDD+ process has focused extensively on the design and development of systems to

measure and verify carbon. The process has recently also started to focus on the design of systems to

control non-carbon benefits such as biodiversity, respect of rights of indigenous peoples and local

communities, and compliance with relevant national and international obligations. In addition to a

system to verify legal compliance, each FLEGT/ VPA will include a mechanism to oversee and make

the necessary decisions related to implementation, monitoring of impacts and problem solving, in

order to provide a platform for the wider public to turn to for dialogue and information.

Preparing for the implementation of REDD+ and

FLEGT processes will require, at least in the short to medium term, significant efforts to increase the

capacity of institutions, systems and civil society. Coordination between all national initiatives in the

forest sector can help maximise efficiency and avoid duplication of efforts.

Building the legal framework to ensure law enforcement:

Tackling lack of transparency and accountability.

Designing and implementing robust and effective mechanisms for monitoring, reporting and

verifying (MRV):

Promoting harmonised policy implementation:


18

MA. Hồ Mạnh TườngNFA Project National Coordinator

Forest Inventory and PlanningInstitute is the leadingagency in forest resource

assessment and monitoring in VietNam. For over 20 years, theGovernment has paid adequateattention to assessment andmonitoring of forest resources.Since 1990, the Government hasapproved the implementation ofNational Forest Inventory,Monitoring and AssessmentProgram (NFIMAP). The overallobjective of the program is toco l l ec t and prov ide da t a ,information and development offorest resources through periodswhich will serve as the basis ofdecision making at all levels inforestry and socio-economic deve-lopment. With above objective, asystem of Permanent sampling plotsystem with more than 2,000primary plots has been establishedon national forest areas based on8x8 km square grids. TheGovernment has approved toimplement the program in the cycleof every 5-year . So far, 4 Cycleswere conducted: 1991-1995; 1996-2000; 2001-2005 and 2006-2010.The program has been carried outthrough field survey on system ofprimary plots and national forestmapping based on interpretation ofsatellite images. The plots arelocated in tracts of one kilometresquare. The sub-plots (measure-ment plots) were installed in twoperpendicular strips of 25 m x 20mstarting in the centre of the tract forcollecting physical variables andparameters of the stand.

The using of satellite images andaerial photographs in forestmapping has been early applied bythe Forest Inventory and PlanningInstitute. In the NFIMAP, mappingmethods has increasingly beenimproved and modernized. InCycle I (1991-1995) forest was

mapped based on field delineatingmethod. In Cycle II (1996-200)Forest by visualinterpretation hard copies of spot 4and Landsat TM images. In CycleIII (2001 -2005), forest

by digital classification ofLandsat7-ETM+ images withoutgroundtruthing and in Cycle IVforest by visualinterpreting Spot 5 imagesresolution 2.5 x 2.5 m withgroundtruthing

Data and information on socio-economic development, forestproduction activities in the fieldwere collected, and simultaneouslythe data collection of forestresources on permanent sampleplots. These data together withother jobs such as assessing thedynamic of forest animals, forestinsects, and non-timber forestproducts will allow performing theassessment of forest resourcedevelopment comprehensively andtaking into account the interactionof socio-economic factors andforest governance and manage-ment.

However, there are no existingspecific researches, surveys toassess the rationality, scientificallyand economically, of location andnumber of these sample plots. Onthe other hand, scattered trees havenot been evaluated and monitoredin the program.

The national forest inventoryassessment and monitoring in VietNam will potentially become areliable information source on aseries of full benefits (in terms ofgoods and services) of all forest treeand scattered tree types and fordecision making process at nationallevel. This can be achieved if forestresource monitoring is modern-ized, in terms of concept,technology and objective, as wellas knowledge scope and quality areimproved and broadened in order toidentify the needs of information

users. It will even become asuccessful example to introduce toregional countries. In addition tomentioned biological and socio-economic variables, the programshould focus on monitoring thechanging of land use system(including REDD monitoring), treeresources beyond forests andimproving capacity for projectimplementing agency the ForestInventory and Planning Institute.

Within framework of FAO/FinlandForestry Cooperation Programme,Government of Finland has fundedfor implementing the project

aiming at improving definition andobjectives of forest assessment andmonitoring program as well asinformation quality, in whichfocusing on evaluating thechanging of land use system,reducing emissions from deforest-ation and forest degradation(REDD+) and providing infor-mation for greenhouse gas (GHG)report. The objectives of the projectare also to enhance capacity andintroduce the application ofadvanced technology for agenciescarrying out forest inventory.

NFA project will be closelyconnected with Development ofManagement Information Systemfor Forestry Sector (FORMIS)project and national forestinventory project (2011 2015).NFA project will also be imple-mented in close relation with forestinventory, initiatives related toforest governance monitoring; theUnited Nations FrameworkConvention on Climate Change(UNFCCC); IntergovernmentalPanel on Climate Change (IPCC);Forests for Livelihood Improve-ment in the Central Highlands(FLITCH) project; United Nationscollaborative programme on reduc-ing emissions from deforestationand forest degradation in develop-

was mapped

wasmapped

was mapped-

.

Support to national assessment andlong-term monitoring of forest andtree resources in Viet Nam (NFA)

FOREST RESOURCE INVESTIGATION AND MONITORINGAND FOREST GOVERNANCE MONITORING IN VIET NAMFOREST RESOURCE INVESTIGATION AND MONITORINGAND FOREST GOVERNANCE MONITORING IN VIET NAM


19

ing countries (UN-REDD); ForestCarbon Partnership Facility(FCPF); bilateral donors, non-governmental organizations, …

Forest governance is one offundamentals of sustainable forestmanagement , including relevantareas such as law, policy andregulation issuance; plan develop-ment and implementation; moni-toring to improve system of laws,policies and regulations. Theincreasingly widespread recog-nition of forest governance qualitytowards sustainable forest manage-ment and REDD has stronglypromoted monitoring and report-ing forest governance and itsquality. At present, there areinitiatives and methods of forestgovernance monitoring andreporting, including methods ofstrengthening forest law enforce-ment and governance (FLEG);report based on criteria andindicators of sustainable forestmanagement; and initiatives,methods of World Bank. Recently,

discussions on REDD within theUnited Nations FrameworkConvention on Climate Changewith agreements relating to thecontrol of forest governance haveincreased the need for monitoring.However, the most important thingfor the system of forest governancemonitoring at national level is tomeet the country's monitoring needappropriately. This means thatforest governance monitoring mustbe useful for priority implement-ation in forest management atnational and provincial level.Forest governance monitoring,which is established by countries,has to be feasible, effective, areliable measure of time changes,and meet reporting requirements ofinternational community.

To achieve this goal, the Govern-ment of Viet Nam has requestedFAO to support technical activitiesand methodology for integratingforest governance monitoring toforest resources assessment andmonitoring system in Viet Nam.

Accordingly, FAO will supportViet Nam through consultationservices provided by national andinternational consultants. Theconsultants will coordinate withViet Nam Government and rele-vant agencies to describe currentstatus of forest governancemonitoring and propose severalimmediate steps to improve forestgovernance monitoring. On 12 - 13January, 2012, under the chair-manship of Viet Nam Adminis-tration of Forestry, Representativeo f FA O / F i n l a n d F o r e s t r yCooperation Programme, FAORepresentative in Viet Nam, NFAProject organized the workshop on“Forest Governance Monitoring inViet Nam”. At the workshop,principles, definition and status onforest governance and forestgovernance monitoring wereintroduced and discussed. Inaddition, roadmap and next steps topromote forest governancemonitoring were also proposed anddiscussed.

Forest governance monitoringactivities will be implementedwithin the framework of nationalforest assessment and monitoring(NFA) project with support fromFAO/Finland. In the meantime,they are also based on efforts andachieved results from Forest SectorInformation and MonitoringSystem (FOMIS) and FORMISProject, which is funded byGovernments of the Netherlands,Finland and Switzerland throughthe Trust Fund for Forests (TFF).Therefore, it needs to focus on fieldlevel, on the basis of existingsystem and regulations, and closelycoordinate with other initiatives,including FLEGT and REDD+.

© FSSP© FSSP

Chief Editor: , Deputy Director General, Administration of Forestry, MARD

Director of FSSP Coordination Office

Editor: - Communications Officer, FSSP Coordination Office

Publication permit No.

3 floor, A8 Building, No. 10 Nguyen Cong Hoan str., Hanoi, Viet Nam /Tel: 84-4-37629412; Fax: 84-4-37711431

Email: / Website:

Mr. Nguyễn Bá Ngãi

Ms.Nguyễn Bích Hằng

107-2012/CXB/27/08-02/H

Comments are welcome at FSSP Coordination Office:

Đ

rd

[email protected] www.vietnamforestry.org.vn


20

1. Decision No. 30/2011/Q UBND, dated 29 September, 2011, issued by People's Committee of Ha Tinh

Province regulating standing tree bidding in timber harvesting in Ha Tinh Province;

2. Circular No. 69/2011/TT-BNNPTNT, dated 21 October, 2011, issued by MARD guiding the

implementation of some issues of the regulations on investment management of sivilculture construction

projects attached wi 0 of the Prime Minister;

3. Circular No. 70/2011/TT-BNNPTNT, dated 24 October, 2011, issued by MARD on amending,

supplementing the Circular No. 35/2011/TT-BNNPTNT, dated 20 May, 2011 on guiding the

implementation of timber and non-timber forest product harvesting and salvaging; the Circular No.

87/2009/TT-BNNPTNT, dated 31 December, 2009 issued by MARD on guiding natural timber harvesting

design;

4. Circular No. 78/2011/TT-BNNPTNT, dated 11 November, 2011, issued by MARD on implementin

, dated 24 December, 2010 of the Government on organization and

management of special-used forest system;

5. Circular No. 80/2011/TT-BNNPTNT, dated 23 November, 2011, issued by MARD on guiding methods of

identification of payment for forest environmental services.

Đ-

th the Decision No. 73/2010/QĐ-TTg dated 16 November, 201

g the

Decree No. 117/2010/NĐ-CP

LEGAL DOCUMENTS ON FORESTRY ISSUEDBETWEEN 1 JULY 2011 AND 31 DECEMBER 2011

1. FSSPactivities:

2. TFFactivities:

- FSSPCO Trust fundAudit 2011;

- Develop FDI database in forest sector;

- Develop proposal for the next phase of NFPFacility;

- Develop proposal for FSSPin the period of 2013 - 2015;

- Organize FSSPSteering Committee meeting # 3;

- Organize FSSPPolicyAdvisory Board meeting quarter 1 and 2;

- Set up a database of the results of the projects and researches in the forest sector;

- Prepare FSSPThematic Newsletter, Volume 34-35.

- PrepareAnnual Progress Report 2011 for MARD and donors;

- TFFAudit 2011;

- Organize BOD # 14;

- Coordinate with projects to revise budget plan for the second half of 2012;

- Organize training workshops for TFF projects;

- Recruit consultant and coordinate with him/her to finalize Community Forest Project Phase 2 and State

Forest Enterprise Project;

- Support Forest Protection Department to develop project proposal “Developing a pilot policy con benefit

sharing mechanism for households, individuals, communities who are contracted to manage forest protection”

and submit to MARD and donors for approval;

- Support Forest Utilization Department to develop project proposal “Developing policies on sustainable

forest management and promoting forest certification in Viet Nam” and submit to MARD and donors for

approval;

- Develop Commune Development Fund Manual;

- Fulfill roadmap to merge TFF to VNFF and submit to VNFOREST Leaders for approval;

- Support VNFF to develop Operational Handbooks;

- Meet with WB and Management Board for Forestry Projects to sign new grant agreement for FSDPProject;

- Meet with project evaluation mission team periodically.

MAJOR UPCOMING FSSP&TFF ACTIVITIESIN THE FIRST HALF OF 2012:


FOREST GOVERNANCE - Việt Nam Forestry · Forest governance monitoring in Viet Nam Forest...

Documents

Transcript of FOREST GOVERNANCE - Việt Nam Forestry · Forest governance monitoring in Viet Nam Forest...