Forest-Based poverty alleviation in North-Eastern Vietnam

Forest-Based Poverty Alleviation

in North-Eastern Vietnam

This thesis is presented for the degree of

Doctor or Philosophy

Student’s name

Giang Huu Nguyen

Edith Cowan University

School of Science

Year: 2019

Forest-Based Poverty Alleviation

in North-Eastern Vietnam

Giang Huu Nguyen

Submitted in fulfilment for the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy,

Edith Cowan University (October, 2019)

i

i) Declaration

I certify that this thesis does not, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

(i) incorporate without acknowledgement any material previously

submitted for a degree or diploma in any institution of higher

education;

(ii) contain any material previously published or written by another

person except where due reference is made in the text; or

(iii) contain any defamatory material.

(iv) I also grant permission for the Library at Edith Cowan University to

make duplicate copies of my thesis asrequired.

Giang Huu Nguyen

Date

10th March 2019

Statement of Authority of access

This thesis may be made available for loan and limited copying in accordance with the

Copyright Act 1968.

ii

ii) Abstract

The relationship between poverty and forest in developing countries like Vietnam is important

because the poor rely on forest resources and poverty is often seen as a major cause of

environmental degradation. The overall aim of the thesis is to examine the way national policy has

influenced household livelihood strategies for poor people in situations where access to forests is

important to supplement income, and to examine the role of forest management in this process.

To deal with the aim, we compared six villages in two provinces (Bac Kan and Thai Nguyen; three

villages in each province) where conditions such as national policy, forest areas, forest type

categories, socio-economic conditions, lifestyle, ethnicity, culture and livelihood strategies were

similar. Only location and form of forest management, were different. Three instruments (village

survey, annual household survey, and quarterly household survey), modelled and adapted on the

Poverty Environment Network (PEN) prototype household questionnaires, were used in 184

households. In addition, 57 people working directly in forest-related fields from different level of

government (province, district, commune, village, National Park, Natural Reserve) were invited to

participate in in-depth interviews, and 60 villagers living in the six villages were involved in group

discussions.

The mechanism used for the decentralization of forest management known as forest land

allocation (FLA) was examined by considering the experiences of administrators and users from

the village to the province level and benchmarking them against Ostrom’s eight design principles.

Areas were identified where policy and practice can be improved, including clarifying the rights

between forest owners (communities, households, and individuals) and three forest-use

categories (special-use forests, production forests and protection forests).

Forest management practices differed between the two provinces: sponsored Forest Protection

Groups (FPGs) existed in Bac Kan, while forest protection by households’ responsibility was used

in Thai Nguyen. FPGs can be shown to play a role in reducing the amount of forest products being

collected and curtailing illegal activities. Collective action in the form of FPG activities in Bac Kan

include internal elements (forest patrols, village/FPG meetings, leader capacity building,

cooperation, trust and honesty between villagers, and household characteristics) and external

elements (the technical and funding support from international projects, and village recognition

from a government agency administering a National Park). Together these elements can be held

responsible for improved forest condition.

iii

For both provinces, about 15.2% of total household income was derived from forests, a consistent

and significant contribution to livelihoods. Principal Component Analysis of quarterly household

income revealed seasonal increases mainly based on crop (maize, rice, root) and forest protection

for Bac Kan, and seasonal increases for particular forest products (firewood, timber/poles) and

crop (maize, rice) for Thai Nguyen. Poor people in both provinces have less diverse income

sources.

By using poverty indices with and without forest income, and comparing with and without PES

income between the two provinces, we can demonstrate that the poverty rate would double if

different forms of forest income were to be excluded. Incentives in the PES scheme, encouraging

forest dwellers to become involved in forest management, and voluntary payment schemes for

tourism services can be shown to add a stable and sustainable financial source that contributes to

better forest protection and improved income for people who directly rely on forests.

Overall, we built a novel forest-based poverty alleviation framework to apply wherever forest

types, socio-economic conditions, livelihoods, culture, and livelihood strategies, are similar. By

using this framework, policymakers can develop appropriate plans/policies to target forest

management and poverty alleviation.

iv

iii) Acknowledgements

First and foremost my lovely family, my wife and three beautiful princesses, have encouraged me

to undertake this Ph.D. My wife, also my colleague, has accompanied me on this project journey,

as well as other rural development projects in Vietnam. I hope I can give you as much support as

you have given me, when time comes for you to do your PhD. Our children Mai, Moon, and Mary

Lou have always been my inspiration for my research. In the most stressful times, they have

always been the motivation for me to go on. So, this thesis is for all of you.

I also would like to express my special thanks to my principal supervisor, Professor Pierre Horwitz

from the School of Science, for his kindness, constant support and advice throughout the course

of the research program. During times of difficulty in both life and research, he was always there,

giving me valuable advice. The research presented significant challenges in data collection, data

processing, data analysis, and writing, and the debates we had to find a common direction for the

research project; to have come this far must be some measure of success. Professor Pierre

Horwitz, you are not only a great supervisor, but a second father. Again, I would like to thank you

especially.

I would like to thank two other supervisory committee members for my thesis, Assoc. Prof. Dr.

Tran Quoc Hung (Faculty of Forestry, Thai Nguyen University of Agriculture and Forestry, Vietnam)

who helped me to organize field work in Vietnam, while Dr. Aiden Fisher (School of Science, ECU)

advised me in data analysis and gave me feedback for Chapters 4 and 5.

I would like to thank: the enumerators (Miss. Ma Thi Ngan, Mr. Nong Van Tu, Mr. Nong Van Su,

and Mr. Nguyen Van Duong) for helping me collect field data; the leaders of Province People’s

Committee of Thai Nguyen and Bac Kan province who agreed to allow me to carry out this

research; and all interviewees, village heads, 104 households in Thai Nguyen, and 80 households

in Bac Kan who agreed to participate directly in the study. Without these contributions the thesis

would not have been possible.

In addition, I would like to take this opportunity to show my greatest appreciation to an academic

writing consultant, Dr. Helen Renwick, a helpful proof-reader for her help in editing Chapters 3, 4,

and 5 of my thesis. I also would like to show my greatest appreciation to Dr Saiyidi Mat Roni,

lecturer in accounting at School of Business and Law, ECU, for his comments and advice on my

income chapter (Chapter 5).

Finally, I wish to express a deep sense of gratitude and love to my friends and parents for their

mental support and help, and their encouragement for me to complete this study and thesis.

v

Table of Contents

i) Declaration............................................................................................................................ i

ii) Abstract............................................................................................................................... ii

iii) Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................iv

Table of Contents................................................................................................................................v

List of Tables.......................................................................................................................................ix

List of Figures ......................................................................................................................................x

List of Acronyms.................................................................................................................................xi

Chapter 1: General introduction............................................................................................... 1

1.1. Poverty and Natural Resources in Developing Countries ........................................................... 1

1.2. Forestry and poverty alleviation ................................................................................................. 3

1.3. Sustainable rural livelihood (SL).................................................................................................. 5

1.4. Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) and Policies.................................................................. 8

1.5. Total economic forest value (TEV) ............................................................................................ 10

1.6. Aim ............................................................................................................................................ 14

1.7. Thesis structure......................................................................................................................... 15

Chapter 2: Methodology.........................................................................................................16

2.1. Research context....................................................................................................................... 16

2.2. Research design......................................................................................................................... 21

2.3. Data collection........................................................................................................................... 22

2.3.1. Secondary data collection.................................................................................................. 22

2.3.2. Primary data collection ...................................................................................................... 23

2.3.2.1. In-depth interviews..................................................................................................... 23

2.3.2.2. Questionnaires............................................................................................................ 23

2.3.2.3. Participatory observation and photos......................................................................... 25

2.4. Database management and statistical method ........................................................................ 29

2.5. Ethics......................................................................................................................................... 31

Chapter 3: Forest management decentralization in NE, Vietnam: theory, policy, and practice...32

Abstract............................................................................................................................................ 32

3.1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 32

3.2. Methods.................................................................................................................................... 36

3.2.1. Research design.................................................................................................................. 36

3.2.2. Data collection and analysis............................................................................................... 37

vi

3.3. Results and Discussions............................................................................................................. 39

3.3.1 Main policy context related to FLA in Vietnam................................................................... 39

3.3.2 FLA since the two provinces separated............................................................................... 42

3.3.3. Common understandings of inadequacies and problems ................................................. 47

3.3.3.1. Penalties...................................................................................................................... 47

3.3.3.2. Rights........................................................................................................................... 50

3.2.4. Conclusion.......................................................................................................................... 56

Chapter 4: The influence of Forest Protection Groups on the collection of forest products in

public forest in North-Eastern Vietnam ...................................................................................58

Abstract............................................................................................................................................ 58

4.1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 59

4.2. Methods.................................................................................................................................... 61

4.2.1. Research design.................................................................................................................. 61

4.2.2. Data collection ................................................................................................................... 62

4.2.3. Data analysis....................................................................................................................... 64

4.3. Results and Discussions............................................................................................................. 67

4.3.1 Form of forest protection.................................................................................................... 67

4.3.2 Baseline characteristics....................................................................................................... 71

4.3.3. Household use of forests ................................................................................................... 79

4.3.4. Social capital and community capacity .............................................................................. 88

4.4. Conclusion and recommendations............................................................................................ 91

Chapter 5: Rural subsistence incomes in forested region, NE Vietnam......................................94

Abstract............................................................................................................................................ 94

5.1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 95

5.2. Methods.................................................................................................................................... 97

5.2.1. Research design.................................................................................................................. 97

5.2.2. Data collection ................................................................................................................... 98

5.2.3. Data analysis..................................................................................................................... 100

5.3. Results and discussions........................................................................................................... 101

5.3.1. Household socioeconomic characteristics....................................................................... 101

5.3.2. Income characteristics of the sample population............................................................ 103

5.3.2.1. Annual income .......................................................................................................... 103

5.3.2.2. Annual household income by wealth group ............................................................. 106

5.3.2.3. Household income by quarter................................................................................... 109

vii

5.3.2.4. The influence of income sources to total quarterly household income ................... 113

5.4. Conclusions and recommendations........................................................................................ 121

Chapter 6: Payment for Forest Environmental Services in NE Vietnam: a case study in Bac Kan

province...............................................................................................................................122

Abstract.......................................................................................................................................... 122

6.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 122

6.2. Research context and data analysis........................................................................................ 123

6.2.1. Research design............................................................................................................ 123

6.2.2. Data collection and analysis......................................................................................... 124

6.3. Results..................................................................................................................................... 125

6.3.1. PES context in Bac Kan ..................................................................................................... 125

6.3.2. The steps to conduct PES in Bac Kan................................................................................ 130

6.4. Discussion................................................................................................................................ 132

6.5. Conclusions ............................................................................................................................. 138

Chapter 7: Summary and linkages: Decentralization, forest management, household income,

and poverty alleviation.........................................................................................................140

7.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 140

7.2. Decentralization, forest management, and household income ............................................. 143

7.3. Forest-based poverty alleviation............................................................................................. 148

7.4. Data validity and reliability, limitations, alternative explanations and further research ....... 160

7.4.1. Data reliability and validity............................................................................................... 161

7.4.1.1 Literature review........................................................................................................ 161

7.4.1.2. Field enumerator recruitment and training, and piloting the study......................... 162

7.4.1.3. Data collection .......................................................................................................... 163

7.4.1.4. Data analysis.............................................................................................................. 166

7.4.2. Limitations, alternative explanations, and further research ........................................... 166

7.4.2.1. Considerations of limitations in study design ........................................................... 166

7.4.2.2. Considerations of limitations in collection of data ................................................... 169

References ...........................................................................................................................172

Appendices ..........................................................................................................................205

Appendix 1: Number of people were involved in this project................................................... 205

Appendix 2: Ethical Documents................................................................................................. 206

Appendix 3: Questionnaires and checklist for the fieldwork..................................................... 223

1. Village Survey ..................................................................................................................... 223

2. Annual Household Survey .................................................................................................. 232

viii

3. Quarterly household surveys (Q1-Q4) ............................................................................... 245

4. Attrition (drop out) and temporary absence survey (ATA)................................................ 250

5. Checklist for in-depth interview......................................................................................... 252

ix

List of Tables

Table 1-1: Types of forest values and valuation techniques............................................................ 11

Table 2-1: Forest area being managed by households in the research areas by village. ................ 20

Table 2-2: Number of households surveyed in the survey areas. ................................................... 25

Table 2-3: Other rural appraisal tools used for primary data selection........................................... 26

Table 2-4: Content, time and responsibility of the survey questionnaire ....................................... 28

Table 2-5: Phases of thematic analysis............................................................................................ 30

Table 3-1: The main policies related to land allocation................................................................... 40

Table 3-2: The process of FLA in Thai Nguyen province from 2007 to August 2017 . ..................... 43

Table 3-3: The process of FLA in Bac Kan province from 2009 to August 2017. ............................. 46

Table 3-4: Comparison of the right to possess, the right to use, and the right to dispose. ............ 51

Table 3-5: Comparison of land use rights between agricultural land and forest land .................... 54

Table 3-6: Common understandings of inadequacies and problems in FLA. .................................. 57

Table 4-1: Correlation matrix and correlation tests for eleven independent variables ................. 77

Table 4-2: Household baseline characteristics by province ............................................................ 78

Table 4-3: The number of households collecting forest products................................................... 80

Table 4-4: Differences between provinces in terms of the time spent collecting resources . ........ 82

Table 4-5: Testing whether any household characteristics significantly influenced the collection 87

Table 5-1: Household socioeconomic characteristics against three wealth groups...................... 102

Table 5-2: OLS regression results of log total income onto social-economic factors.................... 105

Table 5-3: OLS regression results of log forest income onto social-economic factors.................. 105

Table 5-4: OLS regression results of log forest income onto other sources income ..................... 106

Table 5-5: Annual household income sources by three wealth groups......................................... 108

Table 5-6: Forest income sources by three wealth groups in Bac Kan and Thai Nguyen. ............. 109

Table 5-7: Correlation and contribution ........................................................................................ 115

Table 6-1: K-factors applied in Bac Kan ......................................................................................... 127

Table 6-2: Summary of forest environmental services ................................................................. 129

Table 6-3: The process to conduct PES in Bac Kan ........................................................................ 131

Table 7.1: Comparison private forest area. ................................................................................... 147

Table 7-2: Forest income divided by three forest use categories ................................................. 149

Table 7-3: Forest income distribution in three household wealth groups. ................................... 150

Table 7-4: Foster-Greer-Thorbecke (FGT) poverty indices. ........................................................... 152

Table 7-5: Test-retest reliability in all six villages .......................................................................... 165

x

List of Figures

Figure 1-1: General linkages between the SL, SFM, and forest value.............................................. 14

Figure 2-1: Provinces and regions of Vietnam................................................................................. 17

Figure 2-2: Than Sa-Phuong Hoang Natural Reserve and three villages located............................. 18

Figure 2-3: Ba Be National Park and three villages located ............................................................. 18

Figure 2-4: Mixed method approach used in this study .................................................................. 22

Figure 4-1: Thirteen reasons why householders decided to join an FPG in Bac Kan....................... 69

Figure 4-2: Thirteen reasons why householders decided to join a contract in Thai Nguyen. ......... 71

Figure 4-3: Boxplots of the baseline characteristics of the six villages by each variable................. 73

Figure 4-4: Multidimensional scaling (MDS) plot the for six villages .............................................. 75

Figure 4-5: MDS plot for 184 households. ....................................................................................... 76

Figure 4-6: Box plots for the amount of forest products being collected by households. .............. 81

Figure 4-7: Comparison of elements of social capital and community capacity . ........................... 90

Figure 4-8: Model working in forest management in Bac Kan province......................................... 93

Figure 5-1: Box plots for six income sources.................................................................................. 104

Figure 5-2: Total quarterly household income in Bac Kan and Thai Nguyen................................. 111

Figure 5-3: Quarterly forest income. ............................................................................................. 112

Figure 5-4: PCA for households ..................................................................................................... 117

Figure 5-5: Seasonal calendar for main crop species and forest products collected .................... 120

Figure 6-1: PES cash flow in Vietnam and Bac Kan . ...................................................................... 130

Figure 6-2: Electricity retail price and ration of PES price from 2008-2015 .................................. 138

Figure 7-1: Lorenz curve and the Gini index .................................................................................. 154

Figure 7-2: Lorenz curve and the Gini index. ................................................................................. 156

Figure 7-3: Forest-based poverty alleviation framework .............................................................. 159

xi

List of Acronyms

3PAD Pro-Poor Partnership for Agroforestry Development project

ARFL Application for Recognition of Forest Land

CPCs Commune People's Committees

DPCs District People's Committees

EVN Vietnam Electricity

FLA Forest Land Allocation

FLASC Forest Land Allocation Steering Commission

FLAWG Forest Land Allocation Working Group

FPGs Forest protection groups

LCs Land Certificates

MARD Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development

MONRE Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment

NE North-Eastern (Vietnam)

NGO Non-Government Organization

NRM Natural resource management

NTFPs Non-timber forest products

PPC Province People's Committee

SFEs State-owned Forest Enterprises

SL Sustainable livelihood

VND Vietnamese Dong (national currency of Vietnam)

1

Chapter 1: General introduction

1.1. Poverty and Natural Resources in Developing Countries

Poverty eradication is still the biggest challenge facing humanity (The World Bank (2017). Of the

seventeen Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs, also referred to as Agenda 2030) adopted by

193 countries of the United Nations in 2015, the first, and arguably the most important goal, was

"end poverty in all its forms everywhere" by 2030. Although the global poverty rate has halved

between 1990 and 2015, from 1.9 billion to 836 million, many people are still facing critical

shortages of basic needs (UNDP, 2018). Currently, around 800 million people are living below US$

1.25 per day, and every country in the world seeks to reduce its poverty rate.

Poverty can be defined as a lack of physical or material well-being, low educational attainment,

lower health care, and vulnerability with a lack of basic human rights and a lack of voice in societal

affairs (World Bank, 2001). Vulnerability refers to exposure to the possibility of shocks to which

the poor cannot respond, or cannot afford ways to deal with the consequences (Sen, 1999).

Poverty alleviation, therefore, establishes activities that reduce these shortcomings of life

(Sunderlin & Huynh, 2005), and reduces the likelihood that the marginally poor slip into poverty.

Under these circumstances, any additional sources of income become very important for

households (FAO, 2003).

Forest products are important sources of income. Three-quarters of the poor in developing

countries are living in rural areas (FAO, 2018; The World Bank, 2007), and forest products are

collected by poor people who rely, to varying degrees, on the direct benefits of the forest

(Hogarth, Belcher, Campbell, & Stacey, 2013). Indeed, an estimated 90 percent of world’s poorest

people rely on forests (Cohen, 2009), and approximately 350 million people living in, or around,

forests depend on them “to a high degree” (IFAD, 2013). Moreover, around two billion people,

accounting for one-third of the world’s population, use forest products, including firewood,

charcoal, traditional medicines, and other non-timber forest products (NTFPs) (Agrawal et al.,

2013). In addition, the empirical evidence also suggests that the livelihoods of the poor are more

dependent on natural resources than non-poor people living in the same area/village, as has

been observed in West Bengal India (Beck & Madan, 2000), Zimbabwe (Cavendish, 2000), South

Africa (S. Shackleton, Campbell, Lotz-Sisitka, & Shackleton, 2008), and for 51 case studies from 17

countries (Vedeld, Angelsen, Bojö, Sjaastad, & Kobugabe Berg, 2007). The crucial role of forest

resources for human lives and livelihoods has been recognized in many studies worldwide (Adam

2

& Eltayeb, 2016; Mark. Appiah et al., 2009; Coulibaly-Lingani, Tigabu, Savadogo, Odén, &

Ouadbad, 2009; Das, 2010; M. Fisher, 2004; Giliba, Lupala, Mafuru, Kayombo, & Mwendwa, 2010;

Reddy & Chakravarty, 1999).

Since the poor often drawing heavily on forest resources, poverty is seen as a major cause of

environmental degradation (Arnold, Powell, Shanley, & Sunderland, 2011), especially in areas

where the poor rely on forests to source food, as well as other necessities, to ensure their

livelihoods, resulting in an over-exploitation of forests. Abuse over an extended period leads to

degradation of natural resources and environmental degradation (Ribot, Lund, & Treue, 2010). A

vicious cycle of poverty occurs when resources are exhausted leading to unstable livelihoods of

rural people (WCED, 1987). To get out of this cycle, the World Bank (2001) argues that increasing

all five types of capital of the household,human, natural, financial, social, and physical, will help

them withstand exposure to risks and shocks. Decisions on livelihood strategies will also depend

on a household’s five capitals (Adams, 2012). Since the livelihoods of the poor are more

dependent on natural resources than other wealth groups, and they are the most vulnerable

group when natural resources are degraded, forest-based poverty alleviation must deal with the

links between: a) forms of livelihood such as agriculture, livestock, or other production activities

(Adam & Eltayeb, 2016), b) natural resource management, and c) development and poverty

reduction programs (Arnold et al., 2011).

The relationship between poverty rate and forest resources available in developing countries is

crucial (Broegaard et al., 2017; D. R. Lee, Neves, Wiebe, Lipper, & Zurek, 2009), with most relevant

studies demonstrating that the poorest people were living in or around forest areas (Pattanayak,

Sills, & Kramer, 2004; Walelign, 2013) where income from forest resources is very important. For

instance, the need for subsistence for around three-quarters of the poor are highly reliant on

forest resources (Barbier, 2010). Generally, an average share of forest income in total household

income ranges from 15-39% and this rate can fluctuate within-country (Meilby et al., 2014), for

example the income contribution is 27% in Tigray, Northern Ethiopia (Babulo et al., 2009)

compared to 34% in Bale Highlands, Southern Ethiopia (Tesfaye, Roos, Campbell, & Bohlin, 2010).

Strikingly, in some parts of the world, the share of forest income in total household income can be

extremely high, such as 53% from activities carried out in the domestic forest in Cameroon

(Lescuyer, 2013), and up to 74% for the lower income households in Bangladesh (Mohammad

Abdullah, Stacey, Garnett, & Myers, 2016). Accordingly, there has been an increase in research

examining both the potential of afforestation for poverty alleviation (Adhikari, Falco, & Lovett,

2004; J. A. Fisher et al., 2014; J. A. Fisher et al., 2013; Illukpitiya & Yanagida, 2008; Scherr, White,

& Kaimowitz, 2002; Schmidt, Berry, & Gordon, 1999; C. M. Shackleton, Shackleton, Buiten, & Bird,