Community forest management and protection in quang nam province, viet nam

COMMUNITY FOREST MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION IN QUANG NAM PROVINCE, VIET NAM Huynh Van Thuong, Ha Thi Minh Thu & Barney Long WWF MOSAIC Project Management Of Strategic Areas for Integrated Conservation Abstract The indigenous communities of the mountainous regions of Quang Nam province have high levels of vulnerability due to their isolation, lack of productive assets, lack of basic social services, high dependence on natural resources and a lack of defences against external factors The WWF MOSAIC project is working to address these issues in terms of sustainable natural resource management A series of activities are under implementation and development that aim to address each of the key conditions required for effective community based natural resource management These include forest land allocation to community groups, the development of community forest management and protection regulations and ‘Village Protection Teams’ A pilot initiative was established in Tabhing commune in 2003 and the methods employed are explained Through the training of local government agencies, this approach has now been replicated in 16 additional communes throughout the province’s uplands Successes and constraints of the pilot site and the replication sites are outlined as are recommendations for strengthening of the process and further actions that are required to convert decreased vulnerability into poverty alleviation results Introduction Quang Nam is a central province of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam located between 14o57’22’’ - 16o04’28’’ north and 107o13’35’’ - 108o42’06’’ east Quang Nam covers 10,405.14km2 (Department of Land Administration, 2000) and is divided into 17 districts and two towns Twelve of these 17 districts have natural forest cover The population at the end of 2002 was 1,427,117 at an average density of 137 people per km2 and a population growth rate of over 2% (Anon, 2002) Human demography correlates to the province’s topography, with highest human densities along the coast, decreasing to the west as hills turn to mountains and forest cover increases Quang Nam is a poor province with a GDP at current prices of 5,242,401 million Dong Of this total, 30.17% comes from the agriculture and forestry sector, 17.36% from manufacturing and 11.65% from retail (Anon, 2002) Provincial policy is to reduce the agriculture sector’s proportion of its equity to 21% and 13% in 2010 and 2015 respectively On the contrary, it hopes to increase the proportion of the industrial and construction sectors along with other service sectors from 61.7% in 2002 to 87% in 2015, with the intention to convert Quang Nam into an industrial province by 2015 In 2001, Quang Nam had 428,850 poor people, based on data from the 135 programme, 2001 UBDTMN, T.5/2001 presented in Nguyen Lam Thanh (2003) This equates to approximately 30% of the population of Quang Nam living below the official poverty line Six districts are classed as mountainous, four districts as mid-land and seven districts and the two towns as lowland Eight ethnic groups are found in Quang Nam although others are present in small numbers The Kinh majority inhabit the low and mid-lands, although are distributed throughout the province with the other groups being focused on the mountainous districts The second largest ethnic group is the Ka Tu followed by the Xo Dang, who are closely related to the Ca Dong; the M’Nong; the Gie-Trieng who are closely related to the Ta-Rieng and finally the Co (adapted from Nguyen Lam Thanh, 2003) The Comprehensive Poverty Reduction and Growth Strategy of Vietnam focuses on economic growth as the primary focus for poverty alleviation Stated economic goals include a doubling of GDP between the years 2000 and 2010 Additionally, it aims to reduce the overall vulnerability of the poor through improved local level governance A recent macro-economic study of Quang Nam found that agriculture development in the mountainous areas of Quang Nam would have little impact on poverty alleviation targets or a decrease in vulnerability of the poor in the province due to a lack of suitable land for intensive agriculture (Le Van Hung and Tu Van Khanh, 2005) Instead, the authors suggest that sustainable use of forest resources may represent the best option for the majority of upland communities to alleviate poverty A study of the economic value of forest resources in four communes in the mountainous Tay Giang district indicated that natural resources are worth $213 per year after costs to the average household (Dang Thuy Nga and Schuyt, K 2005) In contrast, agriculture was worth $278 after costs Natural resources therefore contribute 43.4% of the average household’s annual economic gain Moreover natural resources play a critical role in many aspects of rural community’s lives such as constriction and handicraft production Table Economic value of natural resource harvest per year Timber NTFP Aquaculture Total (VND) Per household Gross value/y Cost/y 108,400 11,151 2,743,077 534,823 31,399 3,386,300 42,550 Total (USD) 215.68 Adapted from Dang Thuy Nga & Schuyt, K (2005) 2.71 The official definition of a ‘poor household’ in Vietnam is when income does not exceed 80,000VND per month (US $5.1) for mountainous areas This works out at only US $61.1 per year Natural resource harvest provides three and a half times this amount and is therefore a critical component of rural livelihoods in Quang Nam province and should not be ignored in any poverty alleviation strategy Despite this high dependence on natural resources and government policies to reduce poverty, rural communities are increasing vulnerable as these resources are being over exploited This over exploitation is led predominantly by ‘outsiders’; non-local people, usually Kinh people from the lowland areas of Quang Nam and other provinces There is currently little attention paid to community needs in regards to natural resource management by the legislature or local administrative bodies in Vietnam Rural communities currently have no legal tenure over the land and so have no user rights or protection rights, making sustainable harvest for community needs impossible Moreover, this is leading to the erosion of biodiversity values and so the choice of communities in resource use (Vermeulen, 2004) The decline of traditional institutional arrangements and the breakdown of the community’s collective stake in natural resources management has often led to degradation of natural resources (Jodha, 2002) This is exactly what has occurred in Quang Nam where road development has opened up previously remote, culturally distinct communities to outside economic forces As forest is currently ‘open access’ in Vietnam, the influx of outsiders collecting natural resources has led to a more survivalist approach by households often described to the authors as ‘we need to harvest the resources before others do’ Culturally these communities still view the forest as belonging to their ‘clan’ which roughly corresponds to the current commune administrative unit in many areas Our work was developed around this cultural belief in the hope that it will provide it strength and a framework for bolstering traditional forest management systems It is accepted that environmental degradation hurts the poor (Markandya, 2001) In the long-term, an over-exploited natural resource base will lead to decreased community options in poverty alleviation, although in the short to medium term this is not so clear A long-term view must be taken however, that provides a win-win situation which is both pro-poverty alleviation and pro-environment As such, we focus our work on ensuring the sustainability of natural resource harvest for the long-term, whilst understanding that in the short-term some concessions must be made; the prevention of a decrease in biodiversity is a fundamental principle of the approach In this paper we present the results from our work to date on the development of a multitier system that is institutionalised within the provincial government system to promote sustainability The pilot site for the work is Tabhing commune where we have worked for three years The Tabhing community is 98.6 percent Ka Tu with only a few lowland Kinh people moving in as road 14D was recently developed so opening up economic opportunities The forest of the commune is both in the buffer and core zone of Song Thanh Nature Reserve Local threats to livelihoods and bio-diversity include legal and illegal artisanal gold mining and NTFP harvest for commercial trade by ‘outsiders’ and illegal hunting and logging Methods The focus of work has been on the relationship between the rural communities’ ability to co-operate in the management of common resources and the state of those resources In dealing with this relationship the key questions are (a) under what conditions are communities going to effectively manage natural capital and (b) what can governments to facilitate the process of co-operation (Markandya, 2001)? An initial ten point list of components for community-based natural resource management was developed to address this relationship (Hardcastle, 2002 after McKean, 2000) These have recently been expanded to a 16 point list of requirements for successful community-based natural resource management through a project monitoring and review process Based on these requirements, a series of seven actions have been identified Detailed methods for the first three of these have been developed and are described in this manuscript Three of the remaining four steps have their methods in development and finally require linking to mainstream development action through the facilitation of commune development plans Steps towards legal and sustainable community-based natural resource management: Forest land allocation Village forest management agreement Village Protection Team establishment Participatory assessment of natural resource abundance Legal community harvest mechanisms Annual monitoring through participatory assessment of natural resource abundance Village and commune development plans Forest land allocation The first step in ensuring sustainable harvest of natural resources was to ensure forest becomes ‘closed access’ so that communities have ownership of resources and the legal rights over natural capital are transferred to the community This is being done through forest land allocation which provides the forest user with a 99 year land tenure agreement with the Government of Vietnam Prior to the 2004 Land Law the terms ‘village’ and ‘community’ were not legal units The Quang Nam Department of Natural Resources and Environment, therefore designed a method for forest land allocation to ‘groups of households’ The WWF MOSAIC project supported this idea and its associated programme and helped the Department of Natural Resources and Environment to design a strong method that could be implemented in any commune in the province and result in an appropriate allocation of land based on the local situation, cultural beliefs and traditional management systems One constraint faced, however, was that the province would fund the forest land allocation programme, but the finances for this programme were limited A method therefore had to be designed that could be implemented within the timeframe and budget of the provincial programme Forest land allocation is implemented by the district Department of Natural Resources and Environment This was expanded through the establishment of District Allocation Teams which included a range of district level authorities including the Department for Ethnic Minorities and the Farmer’s and Women’s Unions Each department has clear roles and responsibilities outlined in a provincial level document on the method for forest land allocation (DoNRE, in prep) The ownership of resources is an essential component of sustainable harvest, and if resources are correctly allocated to the appropriate community unit of management, it could lead to effective poverty alleviation as part of sustainable development and use of natural capital As such, the key issue of the forest land allocation process is to match the correct forest area to the correct community unit of management to ensure consensus and cohesion in natural resource management If conducted effectively, this process could lead to the institutionalisation of traditional forest management regimes and the protection of cultural values of forest areas This was achieved through a consultation process involving Participatory Rural Appraisal techniques Community consultation was conducted through focus group meetings with the participants voted for by the whole village Focus groups consisted of a minimum of tem people of which a minimum of 40 percent were women Consultations included: • The production of a seasonal calendar • An institutional analysis of current natural resource management systems • An analysis of cooperation and conflicts between institutions • A situation analysis of current natural resource use • Production of sketch maps, and subsequent field ground-truthing, of current land use and proposed land allocation options These steps enabled the matching of land allocation options to the local situation and ensured community consensus on proposed outputs Once options were designed, they were presented back to the community and agreement was reached on the identification, location and management of allocation plots These could then be turned into digital maps that complimented community sketch maps so that allocation contracts could be provided using both GIS maps and local nomenclature Village forest management agreement Critical to successful implementation of sustainable community-based natural resource harvest is that the whole community understand and accept the aims, objectives and implementation mechanism Moreover, clear stakeholder equality, community support for the implementation framework, consensus on user group identity, clear rights, roles and responsibilities, explicit use rights and use rules and conflict resolution mechanisms all require a legislative framework These have been largely combined into a single document, although some are also included within land allocation contracts and other district level policy documents The forest management agreements have been developed out of existing village level policy options which focus on the maintenance of village traditions These Huong Uoc or Quy Uocs were adapted within the legal framework to focus on natural resource management These are written by the village, signed by the commune and endorsed by the District People’s Committee These agreements are developed by the whole village, being facilitated by commune rangers of the Forest Protection Department A template agreement was formulated based on experience from nine villages in the pilot commune of Tabhing This template provides a framework for rangers to facilitate a community consultation process that ensures key components of the agreement have standard wording, whilst local issues can be discussed and legislation based on community consensus The agreement includes numerous articles, the first of which states which stakeholders it applies to The whole village is charged with implementing the agreement with support from the Commune People’s Committee and the commune ranger of the Forest Protection Department Anyone who enters the village forest however is held under the agreement and must act within the regulations set out in the document It is the responsibility of the entire village to identify and report violations to the village management board, Commune People’s Committee, ‘Village Protection Team’ or commune ranger For the agreement to work it requires an implementation framework This is outlined in the regulation and varies according to the local situation In general, the village management board is responsible for community adherence to the regulation and the establishment and management of a village Forest Protection Fund A ‘Village Protection Team’ is established under this agreement, which is comprised of four to five villagers who are in charge of monitoring and enforcing the forest management agreement Rewards and compensation for different stakeholders in the implementation of these agreements are outlined Community agreed harvest regulations on timber, non-timber forest products, hunting and fishing are provided These include what products can be harvested, where and when Regulations have a strong focus on the protection of resources through over exploitation by people from outside the community It is the belief among all communities in Quang Nam that it is the intense pressure by outsiders that has led to recent precipitous declines in natural resource abundance Punishments for violations are explicitly outlined separately for villagers and outsiders, with higher punishment levels provided to outsiders Punishments are not always financial, but can be expressed in terms of community service or donation of livestock to the village fund depending on what the community perception of the violation is Environmental protection is also expressed in an article to ensure water supplies are kept free of natural and chemical contaminates and that water is not diverted to the detriment of the whole community Enforcement of management agreements, protection and monitoring of natural resources The largest threat to the depletion of a community’s natural capital in Quang Nam is over exploitation by people from outside the commune In order to reduce the vulnerability to loss of resources Village Protection Teams were formed Moreover these teams act as the internal policing mechanism for the forest management agreement The objectives of the establishment of Village Protection Teams are: • To decrease community vulnerability to poverty through empowerment • To provide an internal policing mechanism for community-based natural resource management • To protect the community’s natural resources from outsider harvest • To monitor community-based natural resource harvest mechanisms • To improve forest protection through increased enforcement effort These teams are formed through community vote and can be changed at any time if the community don’t feel they are representing their interests sufficiently The village management board is responsible for convening meetings to change team membership if requested by any community member Village Protection Teams are managed by the Commune People’s Committee, cooperate with commune police and army and are technically advised and trained by the commune ranger from the district Forest Protection Department VPTs are formed via a district level instruction drafted by the Commune People’s Committee This instruction outlines the responsibilities of VPT members as well as their rights and benefits The instruction also states the responsibilities of the Commune People’s Committee and the commune ranger VPTs are expected to conduct a minimum of two days forest patrol per month and are compensated for this with a stipend of 100,000VND (US $6.4) per month This payment is made from the village forest protection fund which is replenished from fines through the forest management agreement and the sale of confiscated items The project provides an initial three months salary to this fund to enable the sustainable financing mechanism to establish itself All the above methods have been implemented by district level government staff to ensure the processes are institutionalised and are maintained after the life of the project This requires a large and sustained capacity building effort for a range of departmental staff Results Forest land allocation Forest land allocation has occurred in three communes, each with different socioeconomic profiles (table 2) This permitted comparison of the appropriateness of the developed method to be assessed for varying socio-economic situations Table Socio-economic profile of three pilot land allocation communes Land area (ha) Ethnicity (%) Population Poverty (% Households) Total Forest Kinh Ka Tu Ca Dong Muong Xo Dang Co M’Nong Total Density (km2-) Poor Medium Rich Tabhing 22,800 20,873 1.59 98.41 23.71 10.40 39.94 49.04 11.02 Commune Ba 9,000 5,940 54.07 45.93 4,497 49.97 24.90 57.12 17.98 Tra Giac 15,010 5,825 1.33 96.53 0.53 0.53 0.27 0.53 2,024 13.48 46.57 46.77 6.66 The method developed for forest land allocation (DoNRE, in prep) produced different allocation scenarios for the three communes (tables 3-5) In Tabhing the traditional Ka Tu systems of forest land management still exist, but are weaker than the government system of villages With sedentary villages along a road being upgraded as part of the East-West Development Corridor, the village was the strongest unit of management, although village boundaries were not clear and consensus was required to be reached prior to allocation on exactly where these boundaries are Ba commune is bisected by a long-established road and relatively close to the major city of Danang Previous land management regimes implemented by a State Forest Enterprise for protection, reforestation, enrichment and restoration were strong and so were supported through forest land allocation programme To date, only four of 13 villages have been allocated land in Ba commune In the remaining nine villages an State Agricultural Enterprise currently manages the land and conflict over land use rights between the enterprise and the commune and district authorities currently prevent the completion of data analysis and stakeholder consultation Tra Giac commune is remote and comprised of six ethnic groups, but the majority (96.3%) of the population are Ca Dong To date, only one wholly Ca Dong village (Hai) has been allocated forest land Forest land of other villages is currently managed by a State Forest Enterprise and will be allocated later this year as part of the State Forest enterprise reform process Forest land in Hai village has been allocated to nine groups of households This is due to traditional management systems under which these groups of households have always managed land Each group of households is led by a dominant household and are based on geographical proximity not family connections Table Forest land allocation in Tabhing commune Village Pa Ting Ca Dang Pa La Pa Xua Pa Rong Za Ra va Pa Va Pa Toi Vinh Total Forest land allocated to Forest land not yet allocated or managed by different community stakeholders Forest land Forest land Total Household or Commune Song Thanh Total with forest without individual People’s Nature Reserve forest Committee 576.0 97.0 673.0 135.0 701.0 836.0 915.0 147.0 1,062.0 150.0 354.0 504.0 589.0 78.0 667.0 156.0 100.0 256.0 360.0 6.0 366.0 217.0 1,900.0 2,117.0 87.0 45.0 132.0 131.0 3,806.0 3,937.0 290.7 950.0 1,240.7 287.3 1,900.0 2,187.3 33.0 109.0 142.0 80.0 80.0 1,523.0 795.0 2,318.0 255.0 1,461 2,639.0 4,355.0 4373.7 2,227.0 6,600.7 1411.3 1,461 11,400.0 14,272.3 Table Forest land allocation in Ba commune Village Forest land allocated to community Forest land with forest Eo Village Group of Mr Cu Group of Mr Duoi Group of Mr Oi Group of Mr Buc Sub-total Phu Bao village Group of Mr Sanh Group of Mr Ninh Group of Mr Be Sub-total Doc Kien village Group of Mr In Group of Mr Ven Group of Mr Voi Group of Mr Uoi Group of Mr Ngoc Sub-total Ban Mai village Group of Mr Viet Other organizations Total 127.0 78.5 105.1 173.8 484.4 68.0 129.2 117.0 314.2 195.2 93.5 34.5 35.0 83.4 441.6 Forest land without forest Total Household or individual 127.0 78.5 105.1 173.8 484.4 11.7 7.0 5.0 11.0 34.7 68.0 129.2 117.0 314.2 10.9 12.1 20.0 43.0 237.0 93.5 96.5 174.0 83.4 684.4 20.6 13.6 30.0 17.4 20.5 102.1 67.7 15 41.8 62.0 139.0 242.8 67.7 1,307.9 Forest land not yet allocated or managed by different stakeholders 242.8 1,550.7 194.8 Other organizations Total 11.7 7.0 5.0 11.0 34.7 10.9 12.1 20.0 43.0 20.6 13.6 30.0 17.4 20.5 102.1 4,194.6 4,194.6 15.0 4,194.6 4,389.4 Table Forest land allocation in Tra Giac commune Land management unit Group of households No Group of households No and Group of households No Group of households No Group of households No Group of households No Group of households No Group of households No No of Households in group 10 10 10 15 23 40 20 20 148 Forest land allocated to Forest land not yet allocated Community and managed by the commune Forest land Forest land with forest without forest Household 170.00 478.00 600.00 30.00 81.90 40.05 70.90 100.00 414.18 50.00 400.00 800.00 70.00 30.00 450.00 150.00 1,742.02 390.90 1,694.13 3,592.02 Village forest management agreement The development of village forest management agreements has created good feeling between the community and commune ranger and acted as a useful awareness tool for both All stakeholders agree that the Quy Uoc is a strong legal document and the framework prepared covers all required aspects of natural resource management that the document should The process has been conducted in 105 villages across 17 communes (figure 1), with all documents receiving district level approval Whilst development of the documents appears to have gone well, their implementation has been weak to date Reasons put forward by various stakeholders for this weak implementation are: • Lack of distribution of the documents resulting in few community members remembering the content, • Lack of commune-level political will to implement the recommendations despite district and province level support, • Corruption and apathy, • Lack of support from commune and district Forest Protection Department rangers Figure Communes where management agreements and Village Protection Teams have been established Enforcement of management agreements, protection and monitoring of natural resources ‘Village Protection Teams’ were formed in each village This name was used to amplify the message that the teams were to protect village resources and not act as supplementary forest rangers Each team consists of 4-5 people who are voted for by a community forum Teams are managed by, and cooperate with, commune authorities so as to provide them more power Initially they were more separate from the authorities, but the teams felt they required additional support so this was adapted Support, training and monitoring is supposed to come from the commune ranger Teams are provided with uniform and basic field equipment such as a torch, boots, hammock and raincoat The pilot teams formed in Tabhing commune in September 2003 were financially supported by the project for 12 months, during which time their implementation was adapted and a sustainable financing mechanism was developed The funding mechanism involves a commune Forest Protection Fund that is kept liquid through Quy Uoc fines, administrative fines and the sale of confiscated items This system was based on a functioning example of the Ca Dy adjacent commune 18 months into the trial, the nine teams in Tabhing are producing mixed results Anecdotal evidence and local opinion strongly suggest that forest crime has dramatically reduced in the commune due to the presence of the teams (see table 6) However, it is clear that some teams are working much better than others Support from the commune is sporadic and the capacity of the commune ranger is too low to adequately support the teams As such, the sustainable financing mechanism is still not fully operational and a comprehensive monitoring system is taking a long time to be implemented Table Results of 18 months of VPT operations in Tabhing commune Patrols by VPTs only Number of patrols Number of man days on patrol Number of days on patrol Number of camps destroyed Number of people ‘arrested’ Confiscations 122 715 358 19 65 3.675 m3 timber 22 saws buffalo Patrols by VPTs and Song Thanh rangers 11 195 40 15.82m3 timber buffalo Conclusions One aim of the WWF MOSAIC is to develop a model for sustainable community-based natural resource management that can be implemented by communities cooperating with local authorities Some major steps have been taken towards this aim, but many more obstacles remain A strong method for forest land allocation has been developed that takes into account local situations and forest management regimes This will form the underlying building block of secure land tenure on which sustainable harvest mechanisms can be implemented No conflicts with allocation plots have yet been voiced, although legal allocation has not yet been possible due to current lack of forest type classification which is required under Decree 178/2001/QDD-TTg dated 12/11/2001 before the legal ‘Red Book’ certificate can be provided This represents a hurdle in the development of legal harvest regulations that requires further work Allocation plots have yet to be marked on the ground which is likely to be a major implementation constraint in terms of finances at least These constraints aside, simply the process of going through the action of deciding on the area has empowered communities to protect and manage their resources and all have expressed appreciation for the process Forest management agreements were always seen as a first step in the development of more compressive harvest regulations and management The documents are legally strong and provide a framework for community management and protection of natural capital according to their traditional systems and cultural beliefs Implementation of these documents is currently weak and requires a combination of awareness building and training of communities and authorities on their power and use in natural capital management and protection Community protection measures have been successful in reducing forest crime by people from outside the commune Implementation issues remain and need addressing through capacity development of identified key stakeholders During preparatory needs assessments, protection of natural capital was the highest priority among all communities interviewed There is very strong community support for these groups and so with targeted strengthening of the system it is believed this will become a powerful tool for community-based natural resource management in Quang Nam Possibly the strongest point the development process is that all components have been institutionalised within local or provincial government systems This brings sustainability and longevity to the approach and is ensuring community needs and wishes are integrated into government work at many levels Through the co-development of methods with provincial level departmental staff, their piloting and their subsequent adaptation, the understanding and awareness of the impact of natural resource use on poverty alleviation has been raised significantly at the provincial level However, the implementation of methods through the district and commune levels throughout the province makes the task of capacity building, and especially awareness raising, an immense prospect With the beginnings of a strong and appropriate framework in place the next steps will include the refinement of methods and intensive capacity building for all stakeholders, further work on sustainable financing and the implementation of legal harvest regimes It is hoped that these can all be tied together through the formulation of commune development plans The need to tie community based natural resource management to development plans stems from the need to: • decrease community vulnerability to poverty through the provision of a community voice in land use and development planning, • decrease poverty through sustainable and focused development of agriculture and forest land • prioritise sustainable development interventions at the local scale A suite of monitoring indicators embedded within a simple adaptive management system to monitor natural resources and the effect of their sustainable use on poverty alleviation targets needs to, and will be, developed This will ensure the processes being developed will contribute to the provincial poverty alleviation and biodiversity conservation goals set out in provincial strategies References Anonymous 2002 Quang Nam Statistical Yearbook 2002 Quang Nam Statistical Publishing House Hanoi, Vietnam Dang Thuy Nga & Schuyt, K 2005 Economic benefits of the A’Vuong watershed in Vietnam to indigenous Ka Tu people WWF Vietnam Programme, Tam Ky, Vietnam Department of Land Administration 2000 Quang Nam Land Census [In Vetnamese] Printing House of Quang Nam Newspaper, Tam Ky, Vietnam Department of Natural Resources and Environment Forest land allocation procedure for the mountainous districts of Quang Nam province including post allocation requirements for forest management In prep Hardcastle, J.E 2002 Opportunities for indigenous community management of forest resources in the central Troung Son Uplands, Quang Nam WWF Vietnam Programme, Tam Ky, Vietnam Jodha, N.S 2002 Natural resource management and poverty alleviation in mountain areas: approaches and efforts Conference paper series: International conference on natural assets PERI and CSE Le Van Hung & Tu Van Khanh, 2005 Agricultural Development Policies in Quang Nam Province, Vietnam; Strategic Vulnerabilities Assessment Case Study WWF MPO Office, Washington, USA Markandya, A 2001 Poverty and alleviation and sustainable development; implications for the management of natural capital Workshop proceedings: Poverty and sustainable development The International Institute for Sustainable Development McKean M A 2000 Common Property: What is it? What is it good for? What makes it work? In People and Forests: Communities, Institutions, and Governance eds Gibson C.C., McKean M.A., & Ostrom E Massachussets Institute of Technology, Boston Nguyen Lam Thanh 2003 Socio-economic Issues in the Central Truong Son Landscape Central Truong Son Initiative Report No WWF Indochina Hanoi, Vietnam Vermeulen, S 2004 Biodiversity planning: why and how should local opinions matter Gatekeeper Series: 115 iied Acknowledgements The work presented in this paper represents a collaborative effort between many people and departments The staff of the provincial Forest Protection Department, especially Diep Thanh Phong, Thai Truyen, Dang Dinh Nguyen and Thu Van Khanh have been instrumental in method development and implementation support Similarly the staff of the Department of Natural Resources and Environment, especially Duong Chi Cong, Vo Nhu Toan and Bui Van Ba The staff of Song Thanh Nature Reserve assisted in the piloting of methods in Tabhing commune and have added enthusiasm to the replication of the approach; Le Nho Nam, Tran Van Thu, Ngo Dinh Khoi and Ngo Hoang Hai Son The work of three people was critical in method development and much of this paper is based on their invaluable inputs: James Hardcastle, Nguyen Quoc Dung and Nguyen Huu Tho The people of Tabhing deserve special mention for their patience during repetitive consultations and slow implementation; we hope the hard work is worth it This work was made possible by the generous support from USAID, WWF-US, the Ford Foundation, Swiss-Re and the John, D and Catherine, T MacArthur Foundation; for this we are very grateful  ... 2000 Quang Nam Land Census [In Vetnamese] Printing House of Quang Nam Newspaper, Tam Ky, Vietnam Department of Natural Resources and Environment Forest land allocation procedure for the mountainous... currently weak and requires a combination of awareness building and training of communities and authorities on their power and use in natural capital management and protection Community protection. .. Households in group 10 10 10 15 23 40 20 20 148 Forest land allocated to Forest land not yet allocated Community and managed by the commune Forest land Forest land with forest without forest Household