Rethinking Livelihoods, Forest Governance and Socioecological Systems: The State of REDD+ in Vietnam

The Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) programme is offering developing countries financial incentives by creating financial values for the carbon stored in forests. The main aim of this initiative is to combat climate change, deforestation and forest degradation. It also includes forest conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks. However, in a decade in which community forest management initiatives are rising, the REDD+ programme could reverse this process in putting forest governance on national level again. This could have severe consequences for local forestdependent communities. Many local forest communities are indigenous peoples. They have often created complex forest management systems, which are deeply intertwined with their social, cultural and religious lives. Many of those systems have already been changed or altered by the state or other conservation agencies, but communitybased forest management (CBFM) and benefit sharing mechanisms (BSM) seemed to have revised indigenous forest management systems. Vietnam has implemented various REDD+ programmes, including that of the United Nations (UNREDD), the World Bank and various nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Besides that, the country is home to many forestdependent indigenous peoples. Since the late 1980s, forest governance has been devolving in Vietnam, and local governments, communities and local households have more involvement and rights in the forest management of the country. BSM and CBFM have been introduced, and communities and local households were entitled to financial and inkind rewards for forest conservation. The question which arises is in what way will REDD+ be implemented in the forestgovernance arrangements of Vietnam, as well as the socioecological systems of the affected communities. Therefore, the central question of this study is: In what way does REDD+ integrate into the local forest governance context, and what will be its outcomes on livelihoods and socio II ecological systems?

Rethinking Livelihoods, Forest Governance and Socio-ecological Systems: The State of REDD+ in

Vietnam

BAYRAK, Mucahid Mustafa

A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

in Geography and Resource Management

The Chinese University of Hong Kong

July 2015

All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript

and there are missing pages, these will be noted Also, if material had to be removed,

a note will indicate the deletion.

All rights reserved.

This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code

Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC.

789 East Eisenhower Parkway

P.O Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346

ProQuest 10037080 Published by ProQuest LLC (2016) Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.

ProQuest Number: 10037080

Thesis Assessment Committee

Professor FUNG Tung (Chair) Professor Lawal Mohammed MARAFA (Thesis Supervisor) Professor NG Sai Leung (Thesis Co-supervisor) Professor XU Yuan (Committee Member) Professor LIU Jinlong (External Examiner)

Abstract of the thesis entitled:

Rethinking Livelihoods, Forest Governance and Socio-ecological Systems: The State of REDD+ in Vietnam

Submitted by Bayrak, Mucahid Mustafa

for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Geography and Resource Management

at The Chinese University of Hong Kong in July 2015

The Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) programme is offering developing countries financial incentives by creating financial values for the carbon stored in forests The main aim of this initiative is to combat climate change, deforestation and forest degradation It also includes forest conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks However, in a decade in which community forest management initiatives are rising, the REDD+ programme could reverse this process in putting forest governance

on national level again This could have severe consequences for local forest-dependent communities Many local forest communities are indigenous peoples They have often created complex forest management systems, which are deeply intertwined with their social, cultural and religious lives Many of those systems have already been changed or altered by the state or other conservation agencies, but community-based forest management (CBFM) and benefit sharing mechanisms (BSM) seemed to have revised indigenous forest management systems

Vietnam has implemented various REDD+ programmes, including that of the United Nations (UN-REDD), the World Bank and various non-governmental organizations (NGOs) Besides that, the country is home to many forest-dependent indigenous peoples Since the late 1980s, forest governance has been devolving in Vietnam, and local governments, communities and local households have more involvement and rights in the forest management of the country BSM and CBFM have been introduced, and communities and local households were entitled to financial and in-kind rewards for forest conservation The question which arises is in what way will REDD+ be implemented in the forest-governance arrangements of Vietnam, as well as the socio-ecological systems of the affected communities Therefore, the central question of this study is: In what way does REDD+ integrate into the local forest governance context, and what will be its outcomes on livelihoods and socio-

ecological systems?

This research will focus on four communes in Vietnam: Huong Hiep, Thuong Nhat, Hieu and Bao Thuan Huong Hiep has pre-REDD+ and pre-BSM arrangements, Thuong Nhat has BSM arrangements, Hieu is involved in a REDD+ programme of a NGO, and Bao Thuan is involved in the UN-REDD programme First, Huong Hiep and Thuong Nhat commune are analyzed to explore the potential livelihood impacts of REDD+ Then, Hieu and Bao Thuan are analyzed to explore the integration of REDD+ in the socio-ecological systems of the affected communities Finally, the last part of this thesis will deal with the role of CBFM in REDD+ and BSM Could CBFM mitigate the negative impacts of REDD+ and BSM?

通 過 減 少 砍 伐 森 林 和 減 緩 森 林 退 化 而 降 低 溫 室 氣 體 排 放 的 專 案 （ 簡 稱 為REDD+），將森林碳匯轉換為了財政價值，極大激勵了發展中國家的發展。這個項目主要是為了應對氣候變化、森林砍伐以及森林退化而提出。它同時也包括森林保護、森林可持續管理以及增強森林碳儲藏等方面的內容。然而，近

制重新提升到國家層面。這可能會嚴重影響當地一些依賴森林發展的社區。許多當地的森林社區住著土著居民。他們經常創建複雜的森林管理系統，並與他們的社會文化及宗教生活交織在一起。許多管理系統已經被政府或者其他保護

管制背景中，它將對生計和社會生態系統造成什麼樣的效果？

Thuan。Huong Hiep 社區沒有 REDD+和 BSM 方式，Thuong Nhat 有 BSM 方式，Hieu 參與了一個 NGO 的 REDD+專案，Bao Thuan 參與了一個聯合國的 REDD

REDD+專案與本地社會生態系統的整合；最後，論文分析了 REDD+項目中CBFM 和 BSM 分別發揮的作用，以及 CBFM 是否能減少 REDD+和 BSM 方式帶來的負面效應。

PUBLISHED PAPERS DURING PHD STUDY

Refereed Journals

1) Bayrak, M.M., Tran, T.N and L.M Marafa 2014 Creating Social Safeguards for

REDD+: Lessons Learned from Benefit Sharing Mechanisms in Vietnam Land 3(3),

1037-1058

2) Bayrak, M.M., Tran, T.N and P Burgers 2013 Restructuring space in the name of

development: the socio-cultural impact of the Forest Land Allocation Program on

the indigenous Co Tu people in Central Vietnam Journal of Political Ecology 20, 37-52

Refereed Book Chapters

3) Bayrak, M.M and L.M Marafa 2015 The Role of and for Sacred Forests and

Traditional Livelihoods in REDD+: Two Case Studies in Vietnam's Central

Highlands In: M Cairns (ed.) Shifting Cultivation Policy: Trying to Get it Right

Oxon and New York: Earthscan, Routledge (forthcoming)

4) Bayrak, M.M., Tran, T.N and P Burgers 2015 Formal and Indigenous Forest

Management Systems in Central Vietnam: Implications and Challenges for REDD+

In: M Cairns (ed.) Shifting Cultivation and Environmental Change: Indigenous

People, Agriculture and Forest Conservation Oxon and New York: Earthscan,

Routledge, pp.319-334

5) Tran, T.N and M.M Bayrak 2014 Integrating REDD+ and customary forest

management in Vietnam In: Broekhoven, G and Wit, M (eds.) Linking FLEGT

and REDD+ to Improve Forest Governance Wageningen, the Netherlands:

European Tropical Forest Research Network and Tropenbos International, pp 109

- 117

6) Bayrak, M.M., Ha, V.T and L M Marafa 2013 Making REDD+ Local in Vietnam

– The Dynamics and Challenges of a Pre-REDD+ Commune in Quang Tri,

Vietnam In: Marios, S., Chris, G., Le, T.T., and Nguyen, V.T (eds.) Sustainable

Built Environment: For Now and the Future Hanoi: Construction Publishing

House, pp 597 – 604

Policy Briefs

7) Liem, D.T., Bayrak, M.M and V.D Tran 2015 FPIC-Based Community

Consultation in Developing REDD+ Projects: Lessons Learnt from Kon Tum

Province and Other Sites Fauna & Flora International REDD+ Policy Brief #002,

January 2015

8) Liem, D.T and M.M Bayrak 2015 Lessons Learned From Forestland Allocation

and Land Tenure Arrangements Fauna & Flora International REDD+ Policy Brief

#001, January 2015

Conference Proceedings

9) Bayrak, M.M and L M Marafa 2014 Changing the indigenous landscape of the Co

Tu people in Vietnam Proceedings of the International Conference on

“Transforming Societies: Contestations and Convergences in Asia and the Pacific”,

Chiang Mai University and the Asia Pacific Sociological Association, Thailand

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This thesis has been supported by the Worldwide Universities Network (WUN) Research Development Fund (Titled: Adopting REDD+ for Conservation, Sustainable Community Livelihood and Climate Change Mitigation), Zhongjian Dongfang Gao's

Scholarship for Resource Management Study, and Lion Dr Francis K Pan Scholarship This thesis has been institutionally supported by the Department of Geography and Resource Management of the Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK), CUHK Graduate School, Hue University of Agriculture and Forestry (HUAF), Hue University (Hue Uni.), and North-Central Vietnam Forestry Science and Production Center (NCFSPC) I have also worked on my thesis at the School of Geosciences of the University of Sydney as Visiting Scholar, which was sponsored by the CUHK Global Scholarship Programme All opinions expressed in this thesis are mine and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the individuals and organizations mentioned here, and any errors that remain are my sole responsibility

I would like to offer my sincere gratitude to everyone who helped me in writing this thesis Without the support of you all, I would have never been able to write this thesis I am grateful to all, and this thesis is an ode to everyone who has supported me for the last four years First of all, my sincere thanks go to Prof Lawal M Marafa He was not only my academic supervisor, but also mentor, friend, and life coach I have disturbed him so many times with my questions, but he was always there and always helpful He introduced me to his wonderful family He also took the time to travel with

me to Vietnam for a research visit I couldn’t have wished for a better supervisor than Prof Marafa Thank you Professor Lawal Marafa

My sincere thanks also go to my co-supervisor Prof Ng Sai Leung, my committee chair Prof Fung Tung and committee member Prof Xu Yuan, Head of Department Prof Shen Jianfa, Head of the Graduate programme Prof Xu Jiang, Prof David Chen, Prof K.C Chau, Prof Leung Yee, Prof Edward Yiu, and all the members

of the Department of Geography and Resource Management, my family for the last four years Sincere thanks also to Prof Liu Jinlong (Renmin Uni.) and Prof Mervyn R Peart (HKU) for examining my long thesis

My special thanks are also reserved for my wonderful colleagues I am very sad

to leave you guys, but I thank you for the friendship, collegiality, and support during

happy and sad times Thank you so much He Sanwei for all of your support Thank you Guo Meiyu, Zhang Hankui, Wang Lei, Song Chunqiao, Zhang Wenting, Nathan Tseng, Lin Lu, Liu Lu, Frankie Fan, Mandy Leung Ka Man, Li Jianfeng, Ifeanyi Nduka, Cui Yuanzheng, Sally Duan, Lin Lijie, Sunil KC, Pan Jian, Yang Minxing, Xu Jiaxing, Xue Jie, Liu Ye, Wu Dan, Si Fung Hoi, Danica Chan, Chen Yanyan, Cai Jixuan, Johnny Lau, Johnson Chan, Hyley Chiu, Augusta Lui, Cheung Ka Ling, Wendy Cao, Calvin Lam, Wang Juan, and all of my other wonderful colleagues Special thanks to Michelle Law Man Suet and Leung Chiu Yin for writing my thesis title in Chinese

In Vietnam I received great support from Dr Tran Nam Tu, who worked hard for getting me all the permits, offering his valuable advice on my thesis, and his friendship Thank you very much Mr Tu Special thanks also go to Prof Nguyen Quang Linh (Hue Uni.), Prof Le Van An (HUAF), Prof Huynh Van Chuong (HUAF), Prof

Le Duc Ngoan (HUAF), Prof Duong Viet Tinh (HUAF), Dr Ho Thanh Ha (HUAF),

Dr Pham Huu Ty (HUAF), Director Le Xuan Tien (NCFSPC), Ha Van Thien (NCFSPC), Le Xuan Toan (NCFSPC), Pham Huu Minh (HUAF), Ngo Van Dung (HUAF), and all the staff of HUAF, Hue Uni and NCFSPC Thank you Tran Huu Nghi (Tropenbos International), Thanh Liem Dang (FFI International), Tore Langhelle (UNDP), Soojin Kim (FAO), Inoguchi Akiko (FAO), Dr To Xuan Phuc (Forest Trends; ANU), Hoang Dai Quang (Forestry Officer), Nguyen Truong Thi (CRD), and very special thanks to Phan Thi Kim Tu, for transcribing so many documents for me

In Australia, I would like to thank my host-supervisor Dr Jeffrey Neilson (Sydney Uni.), Prof Philip Hirsch (Sydney Uni.), Dr Thushara Dibley (Sydney Uni.), and my colleagues at Sydney Uni: Danny Marks, Tim Frewer, Sopheak Chann, Lada Phadungkiati, Soimart Rung, Chetan Choithani, Zoe Wang, Maria Elena Indelicato, Abbas Miri and many others

In the Netherlands, many thanks go to my former supervisor Dr Paul Burgers (Wageningen Uni.), Prof Gery Nijenhuis (Utrecht Uni), and Prof Annelies Zoomers (Utrecht Uni.)

Also, thank you Miles Kenny-Lazar (Clark Uni.), Jeroen van Bekhoven (National Taiwan Uni.), Prof Chusak Wittayapak (Chiang Mai Uni.), Prof Steffanie Scott (Waterloo Uni.), Prof Jenny Cameron (Newcastle Uni.), Leon Hauser (VAST, Hanoi), Alistair Monument (FSC), Dr Saroja Dorairajoo (NUS), Prof Bill Goggins (CUHK), Alex Hochner, Oskar Kulik, Choukri Abourida, Dr Ozan Dogan, Serdar Aydin

(CUHK), Dr Malcolm Cairns, Prof Kim Doo-Chul (Okayama Uni.), Prof Rupert Hodder (HITSZ), and Martijn Hendrikx (CityUni HK)

This thesis is also dedicated to the local communities of Bao Thuan, Hieu, Thuong Nhat, and Huong Hiep, local government officials, and all of my other interviewees I only had positive experiences My student-helpers from HUAF were also wonderful Thank you Phan Trung Thong, Hoang Kim Tay, Nguyen Ba Luong, Tran Thi Hong Suong, Phan Thanh Bang, and Hoang Phan Bich Ngoc You guys did an awesome job!

Final thanks go to my parents, Ibrahim and Ayse Bayrak, my brothers Ridvan, Rayyaan and Naim Bayrak, my sisters Munise and Birgul Bayrak, and all other family members for their unconditional love and support Special thanks to my lovely nephew Yunus (1.5 years old) and our little princess Enise (just born) Uncle Mucahid loves the two of you the most (our little secret)

May God bless you all, and thank you all from the bottom of my heart I am forever grateful, also to the ones I failed to mention here

TABLE OF CONTENT

1.1.1 Global climate change and human responses 2 1.1.2 Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation 3 1.1.3 Changing narratives in forest governance 4

1.1.5 Forests, indigenous peoples, and REDD+ in Vietnam 6

2.2 Concepts of space and the relevance of geography 15

2.3.3 Physical capital 24

2.3.7 Vulnerability and opportunity context 32

2.4.1 Governing the common-property resources 36

2.5 Socio-ecological systems and climate change mitigation 46

2.5.2 Adaptive governance and local communities 52

3.4.2 Forestland and carbon tenure and rights 77

3.5.1 Loss of traditional knowledge and practices 81

4.3.2 Forest governance and administration in Vietnam 100

4.4.2 Asia-Pacific Community Carbon Pools

5.3 Sites for study, selection requirements and time frame 125

5.4.1 Qualitative methods (Q1) 128

5.5.1 Indicators I: Livelihood impacts of

5.5.2 Indicators II: REDD+ and

5.5.3 Indicators III: Community-Based Forest Management,

Chapter 6: Livelihoods and benefit sharing mechanisms 137

6.2 Research context and benefit sharing mechanisms 139

6.3 Livelihood activities, strategies and financial capital 150

6.4.4 Customary and formal forest classifications 164

6.5.2 Social capital 169

6.7.2 Livelihood impacts and drivers of BSM 186

7.5.1 Resource system, units and physical capital characteristics 210

7.5.3 Changes in the forests and resource units 217 7.5.4 Customary and formal forest management 218

7.6.1 Governance overview 221

7.6.3 Property rights, rulemaking, sanctioning

7.7.1 Harvesting levels, information sharing

7.7.4 Key differences in REDD+ implementation

Chapter 8: Communities, smallholders and

8.4.2 Heterogeneous communities, CBFM, and REDD+ 267

Chapter 9: Discussion and conclusion 269

9.2.1 Mixed livelihood impacts of BSM and CBFM 272 9.2.2 Diminishing roles for customary institutions

9.2.3 A typology of forest-dependent households in Vietnam 274 9.3 How did REDD+ shape socio-ecological systems? 276

9.3.1 REDD+ and the coffee smallholders of Bao Thuan 278

9.4.1 Communities and the mitigating effects of CFM 282 9.4.2 Contextual factors for the success or failure of CBFM,

Appendix B: Topic lists for interviews and observation 289

LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES, BOXES AND PLATES

Figures

Figure 1.1: Increase in average global temperature (1850-2020) 3

Figure 1.3: Locations of the research communes in Vietnam 11

Figure 2.5: General principles and requirements of adaptive governance 55 Figure 2.6: First-tier components of the SES Framework 59

Figure 4.2: Poverty distribution in Vietnam on provincial level 97 Figure 4.3: The governance structure of the UN-REDD programme Phase II

117 Figure 4.4: Concise history of forest governance and livelihoods in Vietnam 119

Figure 5.2: Comparing and analyzing the four selected communes 125 Figure 6.1: Location and land cover of Huong Hiep Commune 143 Figure 6.2: Location and land cover of Thuong Nhat Commune 144 Figure 6.3: On-Farm, Off-Farm, and Non-Farm Livelihood Activities (%) 149 Figure 6.4: Livelihood changes in the communities in the last 20 years (%) 155

Figure 6.6: Participatory mapping in Thuong Nhat 159 Figure 6.7: Access to the natural forest in the past as opposed today (%) 162 Figure 6.8: Customary and formal forest classifications (%) 164 Figure 6.9: Land cover and land-use classifications in Huong Hiep 166

Figure 6.10: Activities done/allowed in the ghost forest (%) 171

Figure 6.11: Venn-Diagram on community forestry and BSM in Thuong Nhat (I = very

Figure 6.12: Major natural hazards in Thuong Nhat 180

Figure 7.1: Location and land cover of Hieu Commune 192

Figure 7.2: Location and land cover of Bao Thuan Commune 196

Figure 7.3: On-Farm, Off-Farm, and Non-Farm Livelihood Activities (%) 204

Figure 7.4: Yearly Income (VND) form Livelihood Activities 205

Figure 7.5: Livelihood changes in the last 20 years 209

Figure 7.6: Forest categories, mean estimated sizes (ha), and amount of households

Figure 7.7: Benefits derived from the natural forests as opposed to ten years ago

216 Figure 7.8: Forest governance and administration in the research sites 222

Figure 7.9: Forest use and information sharing after REDD+ 232

Figure 8.5: Livelihoods and participation in forest monitoring 255

Figure 8.7: Wood-based Commodity and Woodchip Export in Vietnam 261

Figure 8.8: Rubber area (ha) and production (Ton) in Vietnam 262

Figure 8.9: Rubber area (ha) by smallholding and state companies 262

Figure 9.1: Adapted conceptual framework of REDD+ implementation 286

Tables

Table 2.2: Enhancing resilience and sustainability in indigenous and forest management

57 Table 2.3: Second-tier attributes of the SES framework 60

Table 2.4: Similarities between the SES framework and the framework on

Table 2.5: Conceptualizing space in the forests, livelihoods and governance debate

63 Table 3.1: REDD+ and forest-dependent communities 87

Table 4.2: Forest classifications in Vietnam in 2012 102 Table 4.3: Forest management area per user group in Vietnam in 2012 104 Table 4.4: Formal forest administration of Vietnam 105

Table 4.6: Productions of space by the main stakeholders in Vietnam 120

Table 5.3: Sequencing Methods (in chronological order) 132

Table 6.1: Main Characteristics of the Study Sites 139

Table 6.4: Monthly income (VND) for the research communities 151 Table 6.5: Monthly income (VND) and shifting cultivation 152 Table 6.6: Livelihood activities and its annual benefits 153 Table 6.7: Reasons for not conducting livelihood activities 156 Table 6.8: Differences between the community forest and BMNP 160 Table 6.9: Land tenure in Huong Hiep and Thuong Nhat 161 Table 6.10: Who taught you about the following livelihood activities? (% of households)

167

Table 6.11: Ranking of institutions in the village (1= most important, 4 = least

Table 6.13: Households’ statements on BSM in Thuong Nhat (%) 176

Table 6.14: Problems in the communes now, before BSM and 20 years ago (%)

178 Table 6.15: Occurrence and financial damage of natural hazards in both communes in

Table 6.16: How much land (m2) was affected by extreme weather/hazards in the past

Table 6.17: Applied sustainable livelihoods framework 184

Table 6.18: Drivers of success and failure for BSM and REDD+ 187

Table 7.1: Main Characteristics of the Study Sites 190

Table 7.2: Research villages and forest management arrangements in Hieu 193

Table 7.5: Monthly income (VND) for the research communities 205

Table 7.6: Reasons for not conducting livelihood activities 206

Table 7.9: Changes in resource systems and units in the past 20 years 215

Table 7.10: Use of different types of in last 20 years (%) 219

Table 7.11: Most important stakeholders in the village 223

Table 7.12: Households’ statements on property rights 224

Table 7.13: Households’ statements on rulemaking 225

Table 7.14: Households’ statements on sanctioning 227

Table 7.15: Households’ statements on monitoring 228

Table 7.16: Who taught you about the livelihood activities? 229

Table 7.17: Households’ statements on social and cultural capital 230

Table 7.18: Households’ statements on dependence and technology 231

Table 7.19: Households’ statements on deliberation processes 233

Table 7.21: Households’ statements on social and ecological performance 237

Table 8.2: Differences in farm and off-farm livelihoods among (non-)swiddeners

257 Table 8.3: Socio-economic characteristics of land-workers 265

Table 9.1: Proposed SES-framework adapted to BSM/REDD+ context 276

Boxes

Box 7.1: The Climate, Community and Biodiversity Standard (CCB) and the Verified

Plates

Plate 1: Thuong Nhat commune, Thua Thien-Hue province 1

Plate 2: Integrated livelihoods in Hieu commune, Kon Tum province 13

Plate 3: REDD+ sign/propaganda in Bao Thuan commune, Lam Dong province

66 Plate 4: Benefit Sharing instructions in Thuong Nhat commune, Thua Thien-Hue

Plate 5: PRA methods in Huong Hiep commune, Quang Tri province 121

Plate 6: A ‘stakeholder’ in forest management in Hieu commune, Kon Tum province

137 Plate 7: Coffee smallholder in Bao Thuan commune, Lam Dong province 188

Plate 8: A lady carrying firewood in Hieu commune, Kon Tun province 245 Plate 9: Natural and plantation forests in Hieu commune, Kon Tun province 269

ABBREVIATIONS AND CURRENCY

5MHRP - Five Million Hectare Reforestation Project

ADB –Asian Development Bank

AIPP - Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact

BDS - Benefit Distribution System

BMNP – Bach Ma National Park

BMNP MB – Bach Ma National Park Management Board

BSM – Benefit Sharing Mechanism

CBD - Convention on Biological Diversity

CBFM - Community-based Forest Management

CCB - Climate, Community and Biodiversity Standard

CCP –Asia-Pacific Community Carbon Pools and REDD+ Programme

CDM – Clean Development Mechanism

CEMA - Committee for Ethnic Minority and Mountainous Area Affairs

CES - Commoditized Environmental Services

CFMB – Community-based Forest Management Board

CIA – Central Intelligence Agency

CIFOR - World Agroforestry Center

CIP –Co-implementing Partner

CIRUM - Culture Identity and Resource Use Management

CIS - Co-Investment in (landscape) Stewardship

CITES - Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora COP - Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC

COS - Compensating for Opportunities Skipped

CPC – Commune People’s Committee

CPR – Common Property/Pool Resource

CSO - Civil Society Organizations

D&D – Deforestation and Degradation

DPC – District People’s Committee

EB - Executive Board

EG –Executive Group

EKC – Environmental Kuznets Curve

ES – Environmental Services

EXO – Unexploded ordinances

FAO - Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

FCPF - Forest Carbon Partnership Facility

FFI - Fauna and Flora International

FLA - Forest-Land Allocation Programme

FLEGT - Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade

FLITCH - Forests for Livelihood Improvement in The Central Highlands FMB – Forest Management Board

FPD – Forest Protection Department

FPDF - Forest Protection and Development Fund

FPIC – Free Prior and Informed Consent

FPU – Forest Protection Unit

FRL - Forest Reference Level

GDP - Gross Domestic Product

GHG – Greenhouse Gas

GIZ - Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit

GPS- Global Positioning System

HEDO - Highland Education Development Organisation

HRW – Human Rights Watch

ICDP - Integrated Conservation and Development Project

IGES - Institute for Global Environmental Strategies

IK – Indigenous Knowledge

ILO – International Labour Organisation

IMB –Independent Monitoring Board

IPCC – Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

IUCN - Union for the Conservation of Nature

JCG –Joint Coordinating Group

JICA - Japan International Cooperation Agency

MARD – Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development

MB - Management Board

MEA - Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

MONRE - Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment

MPTF - Multi-Partner Trust Fund

MRV - Measurement, Reporting, and Verification

NASA - National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NFMS - National Forest Monitoring System

NGO – Non-Governmental Organization

NIA –National Implementation Agency

NPD –National Programme Director

NRAP - National REDD+ Action Programme

NRIS - National REDD+ Information System

NTFP – Non-Timber Forest Product

NTFP-EP – Non-Timber Forest Products-Exchange Programme for South and Southeast Asia ODA - Overseas Development Assistance

PC - People’s Committee

PDD - Project Design Document

PES – Payment for Environmental Services

PFES – Payment for Forest Environmental Services

PG – Patrolling group

PMU - Programme Management Unit

PPC – Provincial People’s Committee

RCFEE - Research Centre for Forest Ecology and Environment

RECOFT - The Center for People and Forests

REDD+ - Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation programme REL - Reference Emission Level

R-PIN - Readiness Plan Idea Note

SES – Socio-Ecological Systems

SFE – State Forest Enterprise

SNV - the Netherlands Development Organization

STWG - Sub-technical working group

UNDP - United Nations Development Programme

UNEP – United Nations Environmental Programme

UNFCCC – United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

UNHCR - United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

UN-REDD - United Nations Collaborative Programme on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries

VAC - Vuon, Ao, and Chuong

VAP - Voluntary Partnership Agreements

VCS - Verified Carbon Standard

VOV – The Voice of Vietnam

VRO - Vietnam REDD+ Office

WCED - World Commission on Environment and Development

As of July 22nd 2015, HKD$1 = 2814.81 Vietnam Dong (VND); USD$1 = 21817.00 VND

Plate 1: Thuong Nhat commune, Thua Thien-Hue province

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

“Forests are gold; if we know to protect and develop them well, they will be very precious”

- Ho Chi Minh, founder of The Socialist Republic of Vietnam (in: McElwee 2006)

1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

1.1.1 Global climate change and human responses

Forests provide food and regulate the air, climate and water Forests protect us against external shocks and natural disasters, and contain cultural and spiritual values for many people and communities Forests not only contribute to our own well-being but

to all living species on Earth (MEA 2005a)

As a response to the devastating state of forests and the natural environment in the 1980s, Our Common Future (WCED 1987) was one of the first influential documents which coined the term sustainable development Sustainable development, according to the World Commission on Environment and Development (1987), needs

to ensure that “it meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations

to meet their own needs” Our Common Future was followed up by a series of major

United Nations conferences which shaped the paradigms and narratives on sustainable development, poverty alleviation, and nature conservation of the 20th Century The Rio

de Janeiro summit on Environment and Development established Agenda 21 which linked rural poverty with deforestation and forest degradation in a downward spiral Ten years later, the Johannesburg summit perceived globalization as an important cause of global and regional inequalities, and environmental degradation Even though it is generally acknowledged that poverty and environmental degradation are linked and interconnected, the ways how they are related remains contested among scholars and

policy makers (Burgers 2004; Sunderlin et al 2005)

The consequences of globalization on natural resources were becoming gradually clearer, when research on global climate change progressed Global climate change, as depicted in Figure 1.1, is expected to cause an increase in weather anomalies, natural hazards, crop failure, water shortage, heath-related mortality, food shortage and malnutrition (IPCC WG1 2013) Global climate change is caused by human-released greenhouse gases (GHG), which include water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and chlorofluorocarbons (NASA NA) The United Nations Framework

Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) established, during Conferences of the Parties (COPs), various treaties and agreements, such as the Kyoto Protocol, the Bali Road Map, and the Cancun Agreements, to reduce global GHG-emissions and combat climate change Developed countries (Annex 1 countries) committed themselves to significantly reduce GHG emissions in the next decades The general thought was that global climate change was primarily caused by Annex-1 countries Therefore, developing countries (non-Annex) would have to commit to fewer responsibilities than their developed counterparts (Burgers 2004)

Figure 1.1: Increase in average global temperature (1850-2020)

Source: IPCC WG1 2013

1.1.2 Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation

One of the outcomes of the COPs is the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation programme (REDD+) REDD+ is a global programme, which was initiated in 2007, that recognizes the significance of forests in reversing and mitigating global climate change (UN-REDD 2013) Forests, and especially tropical forests, are huge carbon sinks Singh (2008) estimated that deforestation contributed to one-fifth of global carbon-dioxide emissions REDD+ therefore aims to reduce global carbon-dioxide emissions through sustainable management of forest, carbon stock enhancement, and conservation The basic premise

of REDD+ is straightforward: Annex-1 countries will pay non-Annex countries for conserving their forests through carbon credits (UN-REDD 2013)

Currently, the two main multilateral readiness platforms for REDD+ are the United Nations Collaborative Programme on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries (UN-REDD) and the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) of the World Bank Furthermore, various international and non-governmental organizations, as well as governments and private actors are involved

in REDD+ readiness activities and pilot projects

1.1.3 Changing narratives in forest governance

REDD+ is part of the changing trends in the global forest governance Current trends in forest governance show three processes: 1) decentralization of forest management; 2) logging concessions in publicly owned commercially valuable forests; and 3) timber certifications (Agrawal et al 2008) The way how REDD+ shapes current forest governance processes remains a matter of debate (Phelps et al 2010) Simultaneous to REDD+ implementations, new forms of forest management and governance have emerged, including: community-based forest management, benefit sharing in forest protection, payment for environmental services, and devolution of forest tenure and rights (Agrawal et al 2011) These new arrangements question Hardin (1968)’s thesis on the tragedy of the commons Namely, these arrangements prove that institutions and rule-making do matter in sustainably managing the commons, and that the tragedy of the commons is not necessarily inevitable (Ostrom 1990)

REDD+, however, proves a new challenge to the world’s forests Are external agencies on a global level able to implement forest governance mechanism at local scales? Can REDD+ be appropriately ‘localized’? What are the implications of global conservation initiatives on local communities? Is it desirable that the UNFCCC is able

to influence local peoples’ relationship with their surrounding forests? Can we put a price tag on trees, and what is the impact of the ‘commodification’ of nature on people and environment (Lang 2011)?

1.1.4 Changing theoretical approaches

Scientific approaches on forest management and commons changed concomitantly with changing forest management and governance approaches The first

approach used in this study is the sustainable livelihoods approach (Chamber and Conway 1991), which became popularized in the 1990s The sustainable livelihoods approach acknowledges that development is a complex and dynamic process influenced

by both internal and external factors (Chambers and Conway 1991; Scoones 1998; Zoomers 2008) This approach gradually transformed from perceiving people to have access to different types of capital (financial, human, natural, physical, social, and cultural) to the ‘capabilities’ of people to have access or lay claim to these six types of capital (Sen 1985)

The second approach used in this study is the commons theory, which was commenced by Hardin’s (1968) famous study on “The tragedy of the commons” and followed up by Ostrom’s (1990) response with “Governing the commons” Various key principles were identified which should ensure sustainable forest and natural resource management, including setting boundaries, rules and sanctioning process, monitoring, and so on (Agrawal 2001)

Around the same time the theory on the commons was being developed, the resilience and adaptive capacity approach became a dominant paradigm in natural resources management, which is the third approach used in this study Resilience theory perceives the natural environment to be inseparable from the social environment, and changes and processes within socio-ecological systems are non-linear, uncertain, and encompass interplays of gradual and rapid changes across different temporal and spatial scales (Levin 1989; Adger 2004; Folke et al 2006; Folke 2006)

Both from resilience and commons theory, the socio-ecological systems framework was developed (Ostrom 2007; 2009) This framework is a powerful analytical tool to unravel and understand focal actions situations between ecosystems, institutions, resource units, and relevant actors Also incorporating resilience and commons theory principles, scholars on traditional ecological knowledge increasingly drew more and more similarities between traditional and indigenous natural resource management, and adaptive and the resilient systems (Posey 1985; Wiersum 1997; Berkes 2008) Their main argument was that indigenous forest management systems contained much ecological and managerial wisdom, and scientific sound knowledge, which far exceeded biological knowledge on fauna and flora species alone (Wiersum 1997) Especially with coping with changing environments and climate change, there have been various examples of adaptive and resilient indigenous management systems (Berkes 2008) Like its ‘formal’ adaptive and resilience counterparts, it incorporated a holistic approach towards

managing ecosystems The ecosystem, as it was argued, did not only contain ecological values, but also social, cultural and spiritual values, kept up by numerous indigenous and local communities in all corners of the world (Wiersum 1997; Berkes 2008)

This study aims to incorporate aforementioned theories and approaches to shed light on the way how forest governance processes are shaped by, and are shaping externalities such as REDD+ It takes a multi-scalar approach which incorporates micro (sustainable livelihoods), meso (forest governance and devolution), and macro (socio-ecological systems) perspectives on forest governance processes, conservation initiatives, and sustainable livelihood development

1.1.5 Forests, indigenous peoples, and REDD+ in Vietnam

Until recently, indigenous and other local communities were rarely considered

in academic, policy and public discourses on climate change, although they are most vulnerable to global climate change Indigenous peoples often reside in economically and politically marginal areas, and fragile ecosystems (Salick and Byg 2007) Involving indigenous peoples in the climate change and REDD+ discourse is not only an ethical and moral obligation1, but any conservation initiative will be deemed to be unsustainable

on the longer term without their effective involvement (Agrawal et al 2008) Through utilizing the ecological, social and cultural aspects of their customary management systems, local and indigenous communities have the ability to achieve meaningful participation and empowerment in development projects and programmes on climate change mitigation, such as REDD+

For this reason, Vietnam was chosen as the research site of this study First of all, Vietnam consists of more than 50 ethnic groups, of whom many are indigenous to the region and dependent on natural resources (Salemink 2003) Second, current forest governance trends (Agrawal et al 2008) are also found in Vietnam, including devolution

of forest management, forestland allocation to households and communities, community-based forest management, benefit sharing mechanism, payment for environmental services, and REDD+ Even though REDD+ is not implemented at the national scale in Vietnam yet, the Nation hosts UN-REDD and FCPF readiness activities and various other REDD+ projects Lastly, Vietnam is expected to be amongst the countries that are most affected by global climate change in Asia With a

1 As decided by the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention (1989), United Nations Declaration on the

pre-dominantly rural society, Vietnam faces and already experiences severe climate change caused perturbations, stresses, and shocks, such as floods, droughts, and natural hazards (ISPONRE 2009) It should therefore not come as a surprise that Vietnam is one of the pioneering countries of REDD+ and UN-REDD, destined to combat the negative consequences of global climate change on the country and its people

1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT

Global climate change, changing approaches in forest governance, and the complex and interdependent relationship between rural livelihoods and forest degradation, provide significant challenges to REDD+ implementation The extent to which REDD+ could influence aforementioned also remains a matter of debate Furthermore, what does it mean, from a local household’s point of view, to engage in REDD+, community-based forest management, and benefit sharing mechanism? This thesis aims to theoretically contribute to this debate Therefore the central question or problem statement of this thesis reads as:

In what way does REDD+ integrate into the local forest governance context, and what will be its outcomes on livelihoods and socio-ecological systems?

This research targets four communes2 with indigenous communities in the Central Highlands of Vietnam: Huong Hiep, Thuong Nhat, Hieu and Bao Thuan The communes are positively and negatively affected by benefit sharing mechanisms, payment for environmental services and REDD+ in various degrees However, all four communes consist of indigenous peoples who are dependent on natural resources and agriculture

The sub-questions used to answer the central question read as:

I What are the livelihood impacts of Benefit Sharing Mechanisms (BSM) on the research communes and what are the lessons learned for REDD+?

II In what way is REDD+ implemented in the socio-ecological systems (SES) of the research communes?

2 Communes are administrative units on sub-district level in Vietnam Communes consist of several

III What roles do community-based forest management (CBFM) and communities play

in BSM/REDD+, and in what way does CBFM align with the programmes’ respective objectives?

Figure 1.2: Conceptual framework of the study

1.3 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND GOAL OF THE STUDY

This thesis concerns the interactions between REDD+, BSM and CBFM with livelihoods, forest governance, and socio-ecological systems These interactions are depicted in Figure 1.2, which is the conceptual framework of this study

Sub-question I of this thesis primarily concerns the micro-level, as depicted in Figure 1.2 REDD+ is not fully implemented in any commune yet It is therefore important to analyze livelihood impacts of other incentive-based natural conservation initiatives, such as BSM, and to identify its underlying drivers and factors for success or failure Sub-question II deals with the macro-level, and aims at understanding the interactions and dynamics between the forest governance processes, resource management systems and units, and the actors involved in REDD+ communes Finally, Sub-question III deals with the meso-level The main focal points of this sub-question are REDD+ and non-REDD+ communes, their governance structures, and the

different types of households within a community participating in BSM or REDD+, such as swiddeners, smallholders and land workers

The main goal of this thesis is to understand how forest governance, rural livelihoods, and conservation initiatives in Vietnam are interrelated within the REDD+ context How do externalities, such as REDD+, integrate in the local context, impact the livelihoods of the communities involved, and interact with forest governance and socio-ecological systems?

1.4 JUSTIFICATION AND RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

1.4.1 Scientific

While research on REDD+ is topical, this study aims to contribute to scholarly work on forest governance, livelihood strategies, and incentive-based conservation initiatives in several ways Therefore, the following research objectives have been formulated:

 To create a deeper understanding of forest governance processes using REDD+ as

1.4.2 Societal

REDD+ will most probably impact the lives of many forest-dependent local and indigenous communities Among those communities, there are rising concerns that REDD+ will negatively impact their livelihoods and well-being (Lang 2011) Therefore this study’s societal relevance is threefold: first, to engage as many stakeholders in the study as possible (including: local households, institutions, national and international experts, and scholars); second, to provide specific solutions to local pitfalls and concerns and finally, to serve as a main point of reference of potential impacts of REDD+ and forest governance in Vietnam As a point of reference, this thesis provides policy makers and scholars an overview of latest forest governance and REDD+ trends

in Vietnam, and tangible tools to implement REDD+ or BSM programmes Being mainly financed by the Worldwide Universities Network Research Development Fund, the results of this study will be further disseminated to policy makers, scholars, and other stakeholders in REDD+

1.4.3 Geographic

As stated earlier, Vietnam fulfilled all the requirements for this study: it is a REDD+ country; it has devolution of forest governance; it has forest-dependent indigenous communities participating in formal and customary forest management systems; it is vulnerable to climate change; and it implements incentive-based conservation initiatives The communes in this research consist of pre-BSM/REDD+ (Huong Hiep), BSM (Thuong Nhat; also see Plate 1), UN-REDD (Bao Thuan), and NGO-based REDD+ (Hieu) communes (see Figure 1.3) This allows two types of studies to be conducted: ex-ante and ex-post, and a comparison study between two types of REDD+ projects, one initiated by UNFCCC and one by a NGO (Fauna Flora International) The communes were selected according to four criteria: 1) it needs to be primarily inhabited by indigenous forest-dependent communities; 2) it needs to be involved in BSM, CBFM or REDD+; 3) it needs to be accessible for research; and 4) it needs to have forestland allocated to either households and/or the community The villages within each commune, with an exception of Kala Tonggu village in Bao Thuan, were selected randomly

Figure 1.3: Locations of the research communes in Vietnam

1.5 OUTLINE STUDY

This thesis is structured as follows Chapter 1 is the Introduction Chapter 2 is the theoretical chapter in which different approaches and theories on forest governance and conservation are discussed This discussion is structured along micro, meso, and macro scale levels Particular attention will be paid to Lefebvre’s (1991) production of space theory, which is used to distinguish and comprehend various approaches and paradigms on nature conservation and communities Chapter 3 is a literature review on the (possible) impacts of REDD+ This chapter is divided into institutional, livelihood, socio-cultural, and environmental impacts of REDD+ Chapter 4 is a discussion on the forest governance context in Vietnam and it reviews REDD+ trends in Vietnam Chapter 5 divides the literature and policy based chapters from the empirical based chapters, and deals with the methodology and operationalization of this thesis The main focal point of Chapter 6 is the livelihood impact of BSM and community-based forest management on two pre-REDD+ communes This chapter presents lessons