Community-based mangrove management in Giao An commune, Giao Thuy - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Community-based mangrove management in Giao An commune, Giao Thuy district, Nam Dinh province, Viet Nam Presenter : Vo Thi Thu Supervisor : Prof. Misa Masuda

Contents 1. Introduction to Community-based forest management 2. Objectives of the study 3. Research site 4. Methods 5. Tentative results 6. Future work

Community-based Forest Management (CBFM) Arnold (1992) defined CBFM as “an umbrella term denoting a wide range of activities which link rural people with forest and trees, and the products and benefits to be derived from them” The Regional Community Forestry Training Center for Asia and Pacific (RECOFTC) defined CBFM as a forest management method which involves the governance and local community in managing forest resource for commercial and non-commercial purpose. Pomeroy (1992):CBFM strives to make maximum use of local knowledge and expertise in developing management and strategies. Agrawal and Gibson (1999) showed that communities to be successful and sustainable alternatives to state and private management of resources. Soontornwong (2006) proved contribution of CBFM in livelihood improvement in community mangrove management in Thailand

Country Initation Level Salient features of the program period achieved Philippines Originally Moderate CBFM was taken as a component of the in 1957, comprehensive coastal management comprising all but on coastal resources national scale in 1990 Thailand 1980s High Achievements of grass-root communities have made the state agencies to modify the legislation and support initiatives accordingly as well as allocate financial assistance for them India 1990s Moderate Protective duties and usufructs are shared by both commune and state-run forestry development South 1990s Low CBFM, in its true sense, was implemented in the Africa post- apartheid period. Status of implementation of CBFM in different countries Source: Datta, D., etc (2012), Status of implement CBFM in different countries , Journal of Environmental Management 107, 84-95.

Historical changes in forest management bodies in Viet Nam Changes in forest area 13.39 15 12.09 11.7 Millions (ha) 9.31 10 5 0 1976 1995 2003 2010 Year  Land Law 2003 Forest Forest land  Forest management by allocation policy the state Protection Law 2004 Individual 70% of forests households belonged to the Communities as became legal State Forest legal owners of owners of forests Enterprises (SFEs) forests

Current forest ownership  State actors: 66%  Forest Management 10% Board (FMBs)  People’s committee 33% FMBs People's committee  State enterprises 26% State Enterprise  Army units Households  Households: 26% Others  Communities: 2% 16% 15% Total: 13.39 millions ha  Private actors: 1%  Others: 5% Percentage to the total forest area by forest management bodies (MARD, 2010) Forests currently controlled by people’s committee will be allocated to communities.

Historical changes in forest management bodies in Viet Nam Changes in forest area 13.39 15 12.09 11.7 Millions (ha) 9.31 10 5 0 1976 1995 2003 2010 Year 2013  Land Law 2003 Forest Forest land 40 CBFMs in  Forest management by allocation policy production the state Protection Law forests 2004 70% of forests Individual belonged to the households Communities as 2 CBFMs in State Forest became legal legal owners of protection Enterprises owners of forests forests forests (SFEs) CBFM: community-based forest management

Objectives and methods OBJECTIVES METHODS  Focus on one of the two  Evaluate applicability of CBFMs in protection CBFM to protection forests. forests, particularly to  Bach Ma National Park mangrove forests.  Xuan Thuy National Park  Clarify characteristics of  Secondary data collection livelihoods in mangrove at MoNRE, National Park, forests. GA commune  Compare the policy and  Household survey at a practices. commune selected from  Compare perceptions of those surrounding the stakeholders. mangrove forest.

Research site: Xuan Thuy National Park (XTNP)  Area: 15,100 ha Core zone: 7,100 ha Buffer zone: 8,000 ha Mangrove forest: GA commune 3,200 ha  Largest mangrove distribution is in Giao An commune  CBFM has been introduced to GA commune since 2010 Map of Xuan Thuy Nation Park (XTNP, 2008)

Structure of CBFM in Giao An commune  Xuan Thuy National Park  GA commune Community Forest Management Board (5 members) GA commune: Members Patrol group (52HHs) 126 HHs in (5 members) research village 72 HHs were randomly selected, of which 38 HHs belonged to CBFM

Rights and Obligation of members in CBFM Rights Obligation - Conduct plan and rules of mangrove - Freely collectors: Do not use collecting management and resources ultilization equipments which can cause harm to (time of harvesting, amount … ) mangrove and ecosystem - Collect resources within mangrove - Shrimp pond owners: do not expand forest sustainably shrimp pond illegally, do not cut down mangrove in shrimp pond, contribute money to support for patrol group activities - Patrol group can make record of rule - Patrol group: go on patrol to protect violating and reports to local authority mangrove forest, organize meeting every or national park month and reports to the community forest management board - Members of management board and patrol group can receive supporting money. Members of CBFM do not have pay for the annual renting area

Livelihoods in mangrove environment Dang

Choi : watching hut in clam, fish and oyster farms Inside of a choi Free collectors of shells.

Result Utilization of the land could gain larger income. Shirmp farming 4,878 Shrimp farming is more Clam farming 3,512 forest destructive than the others. Oyster farming 2,732 Profits derived from Aquatic resource trading 2,220 aquatic resources can be Dang, Day, Lo 2,107 categorized to: Direct ones ( dang , day , lo , Work outside village 1,756 and free collection), and Indirect ones (trading Choi protecting 1,463 and labor) Freely collecting 1,317 Others 1,024 Livestock 585 USD Rice planting 488 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 Average annual net income by major source of income (June 2012 – May 2013)

Result Function of mangrove : 12.5  72 HHs ( 100% ): Protect Very important 20.8 Important from storm Significant  58 HHs ( 80.5% ): Protect 66.7 and improve livelihoods  34 ( 47.2% ): HHs Provide habitats for Awareness of local people about mangrove migratory birds  14 HHs ( 19.4% ): Others Number of HHs Percentage(%) Very important 48 66.7 Important 15 20.8 Significant 9 12.5 Donnot know 0 0 Total 72 100

Result Catch mature aquatic 100% Catch died aquatic 30.50% Catch small-sized aquatic 84.70% Catch female aquatic with egg 100% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Awareness of local people on aquatic resources protection Number of HHs Percentage (%) Catch female aquatic with egg 72 100 Catch small-sized aquatic 61 84.7 Catch died aquatic 22 30.5 Catch mature aquatic 72 100

Future works LITERATURE SURVEY HOUSEHOLD SURVEY  Analysis of the policies  Analysis of the and regulations related to: dependency on the  CBFM mangrove forest  Shirmp farming  Comparison of awareness  Original design of the among the stakeholders CBFM in XTNP that have different interests in mangrove ecosystem protection Compare between policies and practices in CBFM in XTNP Applicability to other mangrove forests and other forest types