21903 GIZ PNKB process report CS EN

Report on Livelihood Selection and Planning Process Nature Conservation and Sustainable Management of Natural Resources in PNKB Region Project Christian Schoen cs@mesopartner.com Ta

Draft Report 1 February 2014

Report

on Livelihood Selection and Planning Process

Published by

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH Nature Conservation and Sustainable Management of the Natural Resources in the Phong Nha – Ke Bang National Park Region

Address 09 Quang Trung Street Dong Hoi City

Quang Binh Province Viet Nam

Report on Livelihood Selection and

Planning Process

Nature Conservation and Sustainable Management of Natural Resources in PNKB Region Project

Christian Schoen ( cs@mesopartner.com )

Table of Contents

Table of Contents 3

Executive Summary 4

List of Abbreviations 6

1 Background and Objectives 7

1.1 Background 7

1.2 Rationale and Objectives 9

2 Brief description of Moderation Process 11

2.1 Livelihood Selection Process 11

2.2 Pre-Selection and Final Selection Criteria 13

3 Results of Moderation Process 16

3.1 Shortlisted Livelihood Models 16

3.2 Prioritized Livelihood Models 18

3.3 Action Plans 20

3.4 Economic Actor Map 20

4 Conclusions and Recommendations 22

Annex 1: Agenda of Livelihood Selection and Planning Workshop 24

Annex 2: Livelihood Selection Questionnaire 25

Annex 3: Participants at Livelihood Selection Workshop 26

Annex 4: Key Features of Pre-selected Livelihood Models 28

Annex 5: Proposed Operational Plans for Developing Livelihood Models 30

Annex 6: Selected Photos 37

Executive Summary

This consultancy mission conducted in February 2014 responded to the request from the Project “Nature Conservation and Sustainable Management of Natural Resources in the Phong Nha-Ke Bang (PNKB) National Park Region” (in brief: PNKB Region Project) operated

by GIZ and KfW to moderate the selection process of livelihood models for the buffer zone of PNKB National Park in a structured way, drawing on previous value chain development (VCD) and local economic development (LED) experiences in Vietnam

The assignment aimed at supporting the project to identify and choose alternative livelihood models that meet critical economic, social and biodiversity standards and to plan initial support measures The project’s promotion of alternative livelihood models for poor communities will ultimately contribute to reducing the pressure on the national park and its buffer zone

Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park, a UNESCO World Heritage site, has a global significance for biodiversity, including various endemic species and extensive karsts landscape with magnificent cave systems However, natural resources of the PNKB are under pressures by the current choice of livelihoods of local communities in the buffer-zone

In previous phases, the project has initially set up necessary structural conditions for a better biodiversity management in the core zone, while considering a conservation-oriented economic development in the buffer zone The current and final phase of this eight year project aims at further improving the living conditions in the buffer zone combined with biodiversity conservation objectives The project is now putting more focus on biodiversity-friendly products and on supporting the poorest group of the communities, especially women and ethnic groups The selection of promising and biodiversity-friendly livelihood activities for suitable target groups is necessary and crucial in this phase.Subsequently, a sustainable and market-oriented approach of supporting local households in developing selected livelihood options is essential for achieving the project’s objectives

With above-mentioned objectives, the project was cooperating with the Department of

Agriculture and Rural Development to conduct a “Selection and Planning Workshop for biodiversity-friendly livelihood development in the Buffer zone of Phong Nha Ke Bang National Park” on 20 February 2014 in Dong Hoi The workshop and its preparatory activities

helped narrowing down a long list of potential livelihood alternatives (17) to a small selected number of models (4-6) that can be supported with the project’s means and capacities The moderation team agreed to use two sets of selection criteria A first set of five criteria was applied for pre-selecting a long list of 10 livelihood models, a second set of 11 criteria for the participatory prioritization exercise at the public workshop (divided into 5 economic criteria,

4 social criteria and 2 environmental criteria)

The Selection and Planning Workshop comprised of two parts: (1) selection of potential biodiversity-friendly livelihood products/service and (2) upon the result of the product/service selection, a collective planning session in order to pave the way for

implementation of these products at the communities The Workshop resulted in the selection of chicken farming as highest scoring livelihood model across all sets of criteria It is followed by tourist souvenirs made of bamboo/rattan and bee-keeping / honey production, both showing almost equal results With some distance, mushroom cultivation qualifies as forth livelihood activity Although PNKB Regional Project is tasked to develop four livelihood models only, the project is considering selecting the fifth and sixth ranking activity as well: sweet potato cultivation and agro-forestry models

Structured action plans had been discussed and drafted in the second part of the Selection and Planning Workshop for the six most prioritized livelihood models As time was tight during action planning in the afternoon hours of the workshop, different plans show different quality Apart from the plan on developing tourist souvenirs made from bamboo and rattan, all other plans look like early drafts that need a profound revision

Part of the assignment was also a moderated internal mapping exercise of economic actors

in the project area The map was first drafted by the GIZ and KfW project teams and representatives of DARD at provincial level in Quang Binh and later critically reviewed by the participants in the Livelihood Selection and Planning Workshop

The international consultant gives the following recommendations for next steps:

 The considerations of the project to start supporting more than the necessary four models are sensible given that support measures can fail for various reasons Sweet potato cultivation and agro-forestry models rank five and six with almost the same scores For both, support should be discussed and explored as well, provided the necessary resources are available

 Having a larger number of livelihood models selected for support (more than 4) provides the opportunity to experiment with different models in different districts, as the three districts and 13 communes in the buffer zone show different features

 For some livelihood models, particularly bee keeping/honey production and tourist souvenir production, private sector involvement is crucial in terms of providing both capital and expertise, which needs to be considered when revising the action plans and starting implementation

 To enable a wide outreach of project activities to a large number of people living and working in the buffer zone, subcontracting of local villagers on a large scale is a preferable and already well proven scheme

 The value chain development perspective is proposed to be applied in the development of products that are defined and selected for livelihood interventions due to its rigorous market orientation and its proven positive impact on poverty alleviation

 The economic actor map drafted by the project and reviewed in the stakeholder workshop provides a snap-shot of the current local economic system consisting of actors and their interrelations It should be used by the project beyond the livelihood selection process and updated regularly in order to reflect changing realities

List of Abbreviations

BMZ Bundesministerium für Wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung

(Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development) CBT Community-based Tourism

DARD Department of Agriculture and Rural Development

GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit

KfW Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau

LED Local Economic Development

PACA Participatory Appraisal of Competitive Advantage

PNKB Phong Nha - Ke Bang

PPR Project Progress Report

TC Technical Cooperation

TRC Tourism Resource Consultants

VCD Value Chain Development

1 Background and Objectives

1.1 Background

Project Background

This consultancy mission responded to the request from the Project “Nature Conservation and Sustainable Management of Natural Resources in the Phong Nha-Ke Bang (PNKB) National Park Region” (in brief: PNKB Region Project) to moderate the selection process of livelihood models for the buffer zone of PNKB National Park in a systematic way, drawing on previous value chain development (VCD) and local economic development (LED) experience

in Vietnam

The PNKB Region Project is a Vietnamese-German Development Cooperation, initiated by the Vietnamese Government in cooperation with the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) The Project is implemented by the People’s Committee of Quang Binh province with the support of the two German Development organizations: the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) and the

KfW Development Bank The project’s overall goal is “Contribution to the conservation of the Northern Annamite Region, its biodiversity and ecological services in close relation with a sustainable socio-economic development” and the specific goal is “Reduction of the pressure

on the Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park and amelioration of the legal income of the target groups living the park region” The project duration is 8 years, starting from October 2007

until the end of September 2015 (in 3 phases) for the technical cooperation component (GIZ) and from August 2008 to September 2016 for the financial cooperation (KfW)

The phase II of the Technical Cooperation (TC) Phong Nha-Ke Bang Region Project ended on 30th September 2013 During the previous phases, the project has achieved almost all agreed objectives and was recommended to continue for another phase which has been mutually agreed by the PPC Quang Binh and the GIZ Mid-term Review Mission (PPR)

Meanwhile, the financial cooperation (KfW) is currently in phase II, supporting the NP management, and enhancing law enforcement and livelihood investments in the buffer zone

in order to contribute to World Natural Heritage Conservation

The project has initially set up necessary structural conditions for a better biodiversity management in the core zone (Park Management Plan) with considering a conservation oriented economic development in the buffer zone (Tourism Development Plan, Buffer Zone Development Plan) Furthermore, the participatory socio-economic development plans at village and commune levels and land-use plans which have been developed in 13 buffer zone communes have contributed to a positive development of income of local communities More than 1,000 households were allocated forest land and nearly 800 households were supported in developing agricultural production (bamboo-shoot growing, chicken raising, vegetable growing, sweet potatoes growing, sow-pig raising) and tourism development The aim of this support was to contribute to an increase of local people’s income based on

agricultural production and related services, instead of depending on the exploitation of forest resources

The current and final phase aims at further improving the living conditions in the buffer zone combined with biodiversity conservation objectives In addition, the provincial government will be further empowered to monitor the impact of socio-economic development in the buffer zone on biodiversity Compared to previous phases, the project is putting more focus

on biodiversity-friendly products and on supporting the poorest groups of the communities, especially women and ethnic groups Based on its capacity, experience and complete operation system, the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD) and its line agencies at all levels are identified as main partner for jointly implementing these activities

With the objective of the phase is “Approaches and learning experiences for integrated nature conservation in the Phong Nha-Ke Bang region are used for local management and national policy-making”, it is expected that the results, approaches and experiences of the

project of the final phase will be documented and integrated into the current government system of livelihood development for local households in the buffer zone and other regions Livelihood development in buffer zone requires typical measures of linking biodiversity conservation of core zone of PNKB NP The selection of potential and biodiversity-friendly livelihood activities for suitable target groups is necessary and crucial in this phase Thereafter, a sustainable and market-oriented approach of supporting local households in developing selected livelihood options is essential for achieving the project’s objectives

Socio-economic Background

Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park has its global significance for biodiversity, including many endemic species, extensive karsts landscape with magnificent cave systems However, natural resources of the PNKB are under pressures by the current choice of livelihoods of local communities in the buffer-zone With an approximate area of 225,000 ha within 13 communes of Quang Binh, the buffer zone is inhabited by about 65,000 inhabitants, including different tribes of the two ethnic groups Bru-Van Kieu and Chut Seen as the highest poverty rate in the province, a majority of inhabitants in the buffer zone is poor with little job opportunities and their main livelihoods depend on natural resources of the PNKB National Park (NP) for centuries Agricultural area accounts for only about 2% of the total area of the NP, while inhabitants’ lives in the buffer zone are mainly based on agriculture Biodiversity of the PNKB National Park is under threat by over-exploitation while other alternative livelihoods development measures for local people are still limited Moreover, though the tourism industry is growing rapidly at the national park, the majority of locals in the buffer zone are not benefiting from tourism activities It is crucial to support the residents in approaching alternative income resources and new development opportunities

to reserve important biodiversity values of the national park In addition, it is necessary to get supportive efforts in connection between reserve objectives in core zone of PNKB NP and development demand of buffer-zone based communities Due to this, pressure on natural resource of the NP is reduced and sustainable livelihoods of inhabitants are improved This issue was focused and mentioned in the Decree 117, Decision 24 by the Government

Currently, there is a number of income generating products and activities that are supported

by different projects/programmes for local people which are assumed to have high potential for further development and for which market linkages can be established It is important to draw on local knowledge and appraisal by involving relevant stakeholders in the process of selecting the most potential products and services to be promoted with the support of the project in the coming time

Figure 1: Phong Nha – Ke Bang Region Map

Source: TRC (2010) Sustainable Tourism Development Plan , 2010 to 2020, Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park Region , September 2010

1.2 Rationale and Objectives

Ensuring a sustainable livelihood is the main concern of communities in the buffer zone and,

at the same time, a precondition for the conservation of the PNKB NP The natural resources

in the buffer zone consist for more than 80% of forest land, whereas the agricultural land is very limited Consequently, the lack of cultivable land for paddy production in the buffer zone leaves local communities to generate their main income from the forests This causes big challenges for local people’s life and puts pressure on natural capital and biodiversity in the forests There are three potential ways to ease this pressure on natural resources in the park: raising awareness among local communities, enforcing laws and regulations that restrict the exploitation of forests and their products and promoting alternative livelihood models for local communities In order to have sufficient impact, all three pathways need to

be followed simultaneously (see Figure 2 below)

Supporting the development of livelihood models among local communities through the promotion of local products in the buffer zone by the project, jointly with the support of

other projects/programmes in the same area, is expected to professionalize production and market access of those products

During the final phase of the project life, a systematic and participatory selection and development of suitable livelihood alternatives is a continuation and intensification of previous project work on developing income generating products for the area The participation of relevant stakeholders from the support structures and local beneficiaries from the communes in selecting local products for support is crucial

Figure 2: Logic of Livelihood Support in Buffer Zone

The project has assigned an experienced international consultant who supported the project team to consolidate available inputs and moderate a participatory selection and planning process to come up with a product selection to be promoted in the coming years Furthermore, an actor mapping to define roles and involvement of key stakeholders in the whole process was another requirement of this mission The assignment aimed at supporting the project by applying selected elements of the pro-poor PACA1 methodology to identify and choose alternative livelihood models that meet critical economic, social and biodiversity standards and plan initial support measures The project’s promotion of alternative livelihood models for poor communities will ultimately contribute to reducing the pressure on the park and its buffer zone

1

PACA (Participatory Appraisal of Competitive Advantage) is a rapid analysis methodology of local economies, sub-sectors or value chains The methodology is aiming at identifying economic potentials and challenges and creating motivation among local actors to take an active role in LED initiatives A pro-poor variety of PACA has been developed and field-tested by GIZ and Mesopartner in Vietnam between 2009 and 2012 in Thanh Hoa and Dak Nong provinces (see http://www.mesopartner.com/themes/unleashing-the-economic-potential-of- the-poor/ )

2 Brief description of Moderation Process

2.1 Livelihood Selection Process

The assignment and the livelihood selection process consisted of the following six steps:

1 Reviewing currently available project reports and livelihood models prior to the project mission;

2 Developing concept and structure of a one-day Livelihood Selection and Planning Workshop by drawing on value chain and LED concepts, including the PACA methodology;

3 Moderating an internal preparatory workshop with project staff and key counterparts

to come up with a short list of potential products and services and agree on a short list of selection criteria;

4 Moderating a stakeholder mapping exercise with project staff and key counterparts;

5 Prepare and present inputs at the Livelihood Selection and Planning Workshop with

up to 50 stakeholders and moderating the products selection and planning process;

6 Document the workshop proceedings and results in a comprehensive report following the assignment

Part of the preparatory activities was a moderated internal mapping exercise of economic

actors in the project area (step 4) that took place on 18 February 2014 Mapping is a useful

technique to understand the structure of actors involved in a local economy By using the mapping technique ‘mapping on the floor’ (or in this case, on a large table), the team discussed and mapped the key economic actors and their main activities in the buffer zone

of PNKB national park The results are the economic actor map of PNKB displaying key economic actors and their relationship among each other in the local economy (see Figure 7 below) In the course of this exercise, it was the first time that a systematic actor map of the buffer zone had been prepared in a participatory way The map was first drafted by the GIZ and KfW project teams and representatives of DARD at provincial level in Quang Binh and later critically reviewed by the participants in the Livelihood Selection and Planning Workshop The map was, however, also used to identify participants for the Selection and Planning Workshop and will be later used for various other project purposes

Steps 3 and 5 in above sequence constitute the core selection process, which is visualized in

Figure 3 below The process helps to narrow down a long list of potential livelihood alternatives (17) to a small selected number of models (4-6) that can be supported with the project’s means and capacities

Figure 3: Livelihood Selection Process

The whole process was hugely participatory, as the in the pre-selection different project colleagues and representatives of the counterpart were eliminating the seven most unsuitable models In the main selection workshop, ultimately 4 to 6 most suitable alternatives were chosen by a representative group of 50+ participants from government at different administrative levels, private sector and farmers (see list of participants in Annex 3) Upon the results of the product/service selection, a planning session had been carried out in the second part of the workshop in order to pave the way for implementation

During the internal pre-selection workshop on 17 February 2014 GIZ and KfW project colleagues and DARD representatives proposed potential livelihood models for the 3 districts and 13 communes in the buffer zone as well as a long list of criteria that need to be considered when selecting suitable models Next, the resulting 17 models were assessed along five criteria2 (for pre-selection criteria see section 2.2) To end up with 10 livelihood models to be taken to the following Selection Workshop, the seven lowest ranking models were discarded The results of the pre-selection exercise are shown in the table on page 15 below

The Selection and Planning Workshop on 20 February 2014 had been divided into two parts (see Annex 1 for the detailed agenda):

 Part 1 (Selection): Selection of potential biodiversity-friendly livelihood products/service;

 Part 2 (Planning): Upon the result of the product/service selection, a planning session was jointly carried out with the involvement of workshop participants in order to

pave the way for implementation of these products at the communities

2

A model could fully comply with a criterion (Yes = 1), could somewhat comply (Somewhat = 2) or could not comply (No = 0)

At the start of the part 1 of the workshop, the international consultant and the GIZ livelihood component manager explained the questionnaire for livelihood selection (selected models, selection criteria) and the task of the participants how to fill it in During the explanation each group of participants had received a questionnaire and, in addition, the questionnaire was projected by the LCD beamer onto a screen visible for the participants For each question, the participants were asked to select three models they believe to comply in the best way with the given criteria (for list of criteria see section 2.2 below) Participants were requested to list them in order of priority, the one with the highest potential first (see questionnaire in Annex 2) During 30 minutes working group discussions (5-6 participants per group), participants had the opportunity to add three additional models that were not part of the original list of 10 livelihood alternatives, before making their group selections Each group appointed one group representative who briefly presented the key outputs of the group discussion In parallel to these short presentations, the international consultant processed the questionnaires during the short feedback presentations of each group, calculated the overall results in MS Excel and presented the results at the end of the first part of the workshop

For the second part of the workshop, the participants convened in livelihood-specific working groups Each group was composed of a mix of participants that had knowledge and experience to discuss one of the six prioritized livelihood models, providing answers to the following questions:

 What are necessary measures for initial support of selected livelihood models?

 What of these measures are realistic and feasible?

 What measure can be started soon?

As an additional activity in part 2 of the Selection and Planning Workshop, the participants reviewed the actor map (as drafted on 18 February), commented on it and suggested some improvements in terms of missing actors and their interrelations

2.2 Pre-Selection and Final Selection Criteria

In order to come up with sensible results, it was essential that the team brainstormed and agreed on a mix of economic, social and ecological criteria that are suitable for this specific situation and purpose Previously used sets of criteria3 were presented as examples, discussed within the team, modified and adjusted to be most suitable for this specific exercise The team agreed to use two sets of criteria as presented below The first set of 5 criteria was used for the pre-selection of livelihood models, the second set of 11 criteria for the public workshop (divided in 5 economic criteria, 4 social criteria and 2 environmental criteria) The only criterion that appears in both lists is biodiversity-friendliness due to its outstanding significance in the project context A more detailed explanation of the 11

criteria used for the selection process by workshop participants is presented in Box 1

Pre-selection Criteria (internal workshop)

1 Innovativeness (new in the area)

2 Significance and potential for up-scaling

3

See Making Markets Work Better for the Poor (M4P) (2007) and the Pro-Poor PACA Manual Version 1.3, Schoen (2012)

3 Availability of Skills /Capacities at community level

4 Competitive advantage (over other locations)

7 Opportunities for Women

8 Compliance with cultural traditions

9 Compliance with government strategies

Environmental Criteria

10 Biodiversity-friendliness

11 Reduction of pressure on PNKB NP

In phase II, the PNKB regional project had supported a few short-term livelihood activities, such as chicken farming (for eggs and meat), bamboo cultivation, vegetable farming, grass planting for fodder purposes and sweet potato farming The previous support of livelihood alternatives, however, was considered to not be a relevant reason to continue promotion measures for the same products or sub-sectors Hence, no respective criterion, such as

‘continuation of previous support’ has been considered in the pre-selection or final selection phase

The pre-selected livelihood models together with the selected set of selection criteria were then used to prepare the selection questionnaire for the Selection and Planning Workshop (see Annex 2) The team also needed to make a decision whether to weight the criteria due

to importance Using non-weighted criteria means assuming that all criteria are being equally important Certainly, there was the option to put a stronger weight on all social criteria and/or on the environmental criteria A weighting could alter the final results significantly However the team decided to not weight the criteria and made this transparent

to the local community at the workshop

Box 1: Description of Selection Criteria

1 Market Demand: Sufficient number of consumers/final users available who are willing and

can afford to buy the product, which indicated by growth trends in recent years and/or apparently unmet market demand

2 Market Access: Local producers are able to enter the market by overcoming geographical,

organisational and power structure related hindrances

3 Potential for Value Addition: Local producers could add value to the primary or

intermediate product they are producing so far (vertical integration in a value chain)

4 Sustainability: Local producers will likely continue producing a certain product even after

the project support and other support had ended due to economic benefits

5 Capacity of Supporting Services: Agricultural extension centers and other support

structures are able to give advice and other support to local producers with regard to a certain product

6 Labour Intensity: Local production requires are relatively large number of workforce, thus

creating income for more people

7 Opportunities for Women: Women can be involved in the production process, thus

creating income opportunities for them

8 Compliance with cultural traditions: The nature, usage options and production process of

a product is not conflicting with value or traditions of local producers, particularly ethnic minorities

9 Compliance with government strategies: A product or sub-sector is in line with the

strategic economic orientation of government at different administrative levels (province, district, commune, village)

10 Biodiversity-friendliness: A livelihood activity contributes to maintaining the natural

biodiversity in and around the Park or does at least not change natural species,

compositions and habitats

11 Reduction of pressure on PNKB NP: There are more incentives to generate incomes from

legal sources in environments outside the Park

3 Results of Moderation Process

3.1 Shortlisted Livelihood Models

The ten below listed livelihood models have been pre-selected during internal discussions by achieving six or more scores All ten models are described in more detail in Annex 4 with regard to their advantages and disadvantages, previous project experience and communes suitable for implementation Tourist souvenir products made from bamboo/rattan is the clear winner of the pre-selection (10 scores), as for this livelihood activity all criteria are fully met according to the assessment of project staff and the counterpart In fact, the model souvenir products made from bamboo/rattan is rather a value chain that consists of different livelihood activities, including bamboo cultivation, bamboo and rattan harvesting and basic processing, manufacturing souvenirs and selling to tourists visiting PNKB NP as well as exporting

The total list of pre-selected models reads as follows:

A Tourist souvenir products made from bamboo/rattan

B Bee-keeping and honey production

C Bamboo shoot cultivation

D Grass cultivation (for cattle forage)

E Sweet potato cultivation

F Chicken raising

G Agro-forestry models (e.g forest gardens, integrated farming)

H Herbal medicine cultivation (e.g bastard cardamom)

I Mushroom cultivation

J Clean vegetable cultivation

Seven other models (with five or less scores) did not qualify (see table on the next page and assessment table in the photo section of Annex 6) This includes community-based tourism (CBT), which is innovative and shows competitive advantage, but can only be operated in a small number of communes and thus has hardly up-scaling potential Local communities also lack skills and capacity to provide CBT services

Pig raising could be significant with regard to up-scaling potential, and local farmers have plentiful experience However, the downside of this activity is a lack of innovativeness, competitive advantage and, most importantly, biodiversity-friendliness Support of legally farming and selling pigs could obscure the illegal collection and selling of wild pigs taken from protected forests

Draft Report 17 February 2014

Trong Hoa, Thuong Hoa, Xuan Trach, Phuc Trach, Trong Hoa, Truong Son, Thuong Trach

Son Trach, Xuan Trach, Phuc Trach, Tan Trach, Thuong Trach, Trong Hoa, Dan Hoa, Truong Son

Son Trach, Xuan Trach, Phuc Trach, Tan Trach, Thuong Trach, Trong Hoa, Dan Hoa, Truong Son

Xuan Trach, Phuc Trach, Son Trach, Hung Trach

Son Trach, Xuan Trach, Phuc Trach, Trong Hoa, Thuong Hoa, Hoa Son

Phuc Trach, Son Trach, Xuan Trach

Xuan Trach, Son Trach, Trung Hoa, Thuong Hoa, Truong Son

Dan Hoa, Trong Hoa, Tan Trach, Thuong Trach, Truong Son

Son Trach, Xuan Trach, Phuc Trach, Hung Trach

Draft Report 18 February 2014

Fish-farming in Quang Binh province is not innovative and does not have any competitive advantage over other locations Concerning the other three pre-selection criteria it is rather neutral, leading to an overall score of only three points

Banana plantation is positive with respect to up-scaling potential and available capacities, but it is not innovative, it lacks competitive advantage and is biodiversity-friendly in a limited way only Pepper cultivation scores in a very similar way like banana production, but its significance for development outreach is even lower

Upland rice farming has the lowest scores of all livelihood models in the pre-selection process It is not innovative, misses competitive advantages and up-scaling potential and is even biodiversity-unfriendly (due to the need for cultivable land and resulting slash and burn practices of farmers) It only scores positively in terms of farmers having sufficient experience and skills

Finally, dot production for broom making is neutral in terms of sustaining biodiversity, but it also misses innovativeness and competitiveness Capacities and development significance would be given, though

3.2 Prioritized Livelihood Models

The Figures 4 to 6 show the results of the participatory livelihood model selection exercise at the Selection and Planning Workshop in Dong Hoi on 20 February 2014 Figure 4 presents the overall average assessment results across all criteria, whereas Figures 5 and 6 focus on the results generating from economic criteria assessment or social/environmental assessment only

Figure 4: Average Assessment of Livelihood Models (across all criteria)

The clearly highest scoring livelihood model across all sets of criteria is chicken farming In total terms, it is followed by tourist souvenirs made of bamboo/rattan and bee-keeping / honey production, both showing almost equal results With some distance, mushroom cultivation qualifies as forth livelihood activity that calls for project support

Although PNKB Regional Project is tasked to develop four livelihood models only, the project

is considering selecting the fifth and sixth ranking activity as well: Sweet potato cultivation and Agro-forestry models The reason is that having one or two substitute models available might be very valuable in case one or two primarily selected models fail In conclusion, the team finally decided to go for full support of the livelihood models chicken raising, tourist souvenirs made from bamboo/rattan, bee-keeping and mushroom cultivation and give some attention to support sweet potato cultivation and agro-forestry models in addition

Figure 5: Average Economic Criteria Assessment of Livelihood Models

In purely economic terms (see Figure 5 above), chicken raising is again the clear winner Runners-up are also bee-keeping and tourist souvenirs, but in reverse order compared to the overall results Sweet potato plantation ranks fourth (fifth in the total average) Mushroom cultivation, on the fourth rank in the overall results, only reaches rank six Agro-forestry models seem economically less promising than the overall results (sixth rank) might suggest Only in the economic criteria assessment one of the additionally proposed livelihood activities made it among the top ten, namely cut flower production on rank eight

Looking only at the assessment outcome of social and environmental criteria, chicken raising tops the table again (see Figure 6 below) However, the distance to the second placed bamboo/rattan souvenir value chain is much smaller than in the general average assessment Also here, bee-keeping and honey production follows on third rank After sweet potato production, with almost equal scores agro-forestry models and mushroom cultivation rank fifth and sixth Only when focusing on social/environmental factors and excluding economic and business aspects, clean vegetable and herbal medicine production manage to achieve relatively good results (sixth and seventh rank)

By the way, chicken raising and bee-keeping are the two activities best complying with the two environmental criteria only Both received six nominations for environmental compliance