Co management of the mangrove forest in giao thien commune, giao thuy district, nam đinh province

MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT VIETNAM FORESTRY UNIVERSITY STUDENT THESIS Title CO-MANAGEMENT OF THE MANGROVE FOREST IN GIAO THIEN COMMUNE, GIAO THUY DISTRICT, NAM DINH PROVINCE Major: Natural Resources Management Code: D850101 Faculty: Forest Resources and Environmental Management Student: Dao Thi Dieu Linh Student ID: 1153101972 Class: K56 Natural Resources Management Course: 2011 - 2015 Advanced Education Program Developed in collaboration with Colorado State University, USA Supervisor: Dr Do Anh Tuan Ha Noi, March /2016 ACKNOWLEGEMENT In the study process in course (2011-2015), with the sanction of the faculty Forest Resources and Environmental Management and Vietnam Forestry University, I have researched Student thesis During the research, I always get support and assistance of the teachers, friends and family Through here, I want to express my sincere gratitude for Forest Resources and Environmental Management Faculty and all teachers of Vietnam Forestry University helped me finish this thesis Especially, Dr Do Anh Tuan has supervised and reoriented to me in study I also thank to the staffs in Xuan Thuy national park, Giao Thien Commune people‟s Committee and local communities in Giao Thien commune have create favorable conditions in the survey to complete the study Finally, I thank to my family, my friends and my classmates have helped and encouraged me to implement this study Although having many efforts, but I have had many lacking of knowledge, time and communication as well as reality so the study could not be avoided the shortcomings I expect to get the opinions and suggestion from teachers and guys for my study is more complete TABLE OF CONTENT ABSTRACT CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION 1.1 The concept of Co-management 1.2 Researching about Co-management in Vietnam 1.3 Co-management in XuanThuy national park CHAPTER 2: OBJECTIVES AND METHODS 2.1.Objective of the study 2.1.1 General objectives 2.1.2 Specific objectives 2.2 Method of the study 2.2.1.Method of choosing the study sites 2.2.2 Method of data collection 2.2.3 Method of choosing group to interview 2.2.4 Method of data processing and writing report 10 CHAPTER 3: OVERVIEW OF THE SITUATION OF NATURAL CONDITION, ECONOMIC- SOCIAL IN XUAN THUY NATIONAL PARK, GIAO THUY DISTRICT, NAM DINH PROVINCE 11 3.1 Overview of XuanThuy national park 11 3.1.1 Geographical location 11 3.1.2 Topographic 11 3.1.3 Climate and hydrological 12 3.1.4 The history of XuanThuy national park 13 3.1.5 Organizational structure 13 3.1.6 Biodiversity in XuanThuy national park 14 3.2 Socio – economic situation of GiaoThien commune, GiaoThuy district, Nam Dinh province 14 3.3 The form of Co-management in GiaoThien commune 15 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 16 4.1.Scientific basis and practicality of Co-management in XuanThuy national park 16 4.1.1.The rationale 16 4.1.2.Scientific basis and practicality of Co-management 17 4.2 The current status of Co-management mangrove forest in GiaoThien commune, GiaoThuy district, Nam Dinh province 19 4.2.1 The analysis of stakeholders to Co-management 19 4.2.2 The role of stakeholders 23 4.2.3 Analysis the conflicts and cooperation of stakeholders 25 4.3 The current status of household‟s participation in Co-management 28 4.3.1 The importance of forest with local people 28 4.3.2 The general information of household‟s participation in Co-management 30 4.3.3 Status of implementation Co-management in location 31 4.3.4 The effects of Co-management in GiaoThien commune 33 4.4 The status of Non- Co-management households 35 Table 4.5.The general information of Non-Co-management households 35 4.6.The general comment of Co-management in GiaoThien commune 37 4.6.1 The advantages of Co-management 37 4.6.2 The disadvantages of Co-management 37 CHAPTER 5: SOLUTIONS FOR IMPROVE THE EFFECTS OF CO-MANAGEMENT MANGROVE FOREST IN GIAO THIEN COMMUNE-GIAO THUY DISTRICT-NAM DINH COMMUNE 39 5.1 Solution to improve the effects of Co-management in GiaoThien commune 39 5.1.1 Solution of organization and management 39 5.1.2 Solution of economic 39 5.1.3 Solution of social 39 5.1.4 Solution of communication and education 39 5.2.Recommendations 40 CONCLUSION 42 REFERRENCES…………………………………………………………………………… 43 APPENDIX………………………………………………………………………………… 44 CONTENT OF TABLES Table 2.1.The distribution of surveyed households Table 4.1.Synthesis and analysis the concerns and role of stakeholders 19 Table 4.2.The general information of household‟s participation in Co-management 30 Table 4.3.Status of implementation Co-management in GiaoThien commune 31 Table 4.4.The assessment of local people about the plans of Co-management in location 32 Table 4.5.The average output of main fisheries 35 Table 4.5.The general information of Non-Co-management households 35 Table 4.7.The knowledge and the ability to participate in Co-management of Non-Comanagement households 36 CONTENT OF FIGURES Figure 4.1.The stakeholders participate in Co-management in location 22 Figure 4.2.Indicators reflect the insurance exploitation fisheries in Co-management area 25 Figure 4.2.Indicators reflects the insurance exploitation and objectives between Comanagement households and local staffs and management board 26 Figure 4.2.The relationship of the main stakeholders 28 Figure 4.3.The importance of forest 29 Figure 4.4.The status of forest resources in before and after Co-management 33 Figure 4.5.The status of household‟s income in GiaoThien commune after participation Comanagement 34 ABSTRACT In the last decades of 20th century, we developed Special Use Forest ( 2,16 million ha) to represent the regions and tropical climates from North to South, the aim is protecting biodiversity, ecosystem and just it is expected to recover the animals and plants in danger of extinction However, in reality, this type of forest management is main target of management boards, operated in the administrative units with income; lacking of coordination of the stakeholders, especially in communities effectiveness so is low, forest is interceded illegally In many locations, instead of taking part in Co- management to protect forest, people opposed with the protection and management force of government The wetland in mouth of river and coast in Xuan Thuy national park has established from the sediment accretion process of Red River and Eastern Sea According to initial statistics, Xuan Thuy national park is growing area of many aquatic animals so the quantity of aquatic animals is very high In many years, the fishermen in this area used the power grids to exploit the fisheries, degraded the fishery resources and exterminated the small larvae and eggs of the aquatic animals in area So, in the recent years, a lot of seabirds have migrated to Xuan Thuy national park, it resulted in reducing about the species but the quantity of individuals significantly reduced The establishment of national park changed the large the amount of people living in buffer zone The buffer zone includes five commune with total population with 45 000 people, is very high biodiversity, the fishery resources have been exploited for many years GiaoThien commune – GiaoThuy district is buffer zone which has rich natural resources of national park In fishing production season, there are many people working in forest, the over exploitation and made the resources and forest decrease rapidly While forest protection unit of national park have function the protection and management forest in Forestry so the protection natural resources in general in Vietnam is very difficult and complex So, the question gives out: How to improve the internal resources of community, promote the potential availability and attract the community to take part in the activities of Co-management forest because the purpose in sustaining development in location? This is problem is not only for the managers but also for people in the buffer zone Therefore, basing on practices and theories, with the knowledge learned from teachers to answer these questions, I will study: Co- management of the mangrove forest in XuanThuy national park, GiaoThien commune, GiaoThuy district, Nam Dinh province CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION 1.1 The concept of Co-management When economic is developing leading to the depletion of natural resources and forest resources The problem for each country is researching to find out the management solution using natural resources in a sustainable way In recent years, many authors gave out the series of management solution including the cooperation of stakeholder This is an important problem for the success of management resources, in there; the most interest is solving the benefit of local people who have suitable forests for general objective of country The term „Co-management‟ is used to describe the distribution, the formal arrangement or informal arrangement between the governments, the private sector or population strata relating to management natural resources The prevalence of this management mode increased significantly over twenty years; this can be found many examples in developing countries where the poverty status and the degradation of natural resources leading to the social and that country to Co-management According to Rao and Geister (1990), Co-management is sharing the decision between people using local resources and the manager of the policy using the protected area The partners need to focus on the general concern is nature conservation to become voluntary allies Co-management also has been taken care and researched by two scientists Andrew W Ingle and authors (1999) The authors said that Co-management regarded as the arrangements are negotiated by the stakeholder, basing on established rights and interests or recognized by government and accepted by most of user forest resources That process has been done in sharing the decision and control using resources Co-management of the mangrove forest is searching the cooperation, while the stakeholders have sharing agreement the function of management, rights and obligations on a territory or resource area under protection status This concept addressed by Borrini- Feyerabend think that forest resources are being at medium level With the management of local staff, forest resources are better and better These mean local people have aware of protection forest Besides the activities of exploitation the resources, people are reforestation to create environment of fisheries and making biodiversity 4.3.4.2 The impacts of Co-management to the development of socio-economic in location Figure 4.5.The status of household’s income in Giao Thien commune after participation Co-management (Sources: The result of PRA in 2015) According the results of PRA, in total 50 households, there are 33 households who have increasing income (66%) and 17 households have not changed in their income after participation Co-management Forest is managed better and plays an important role in development economic Forest has become more value, so people have higher income When taking part in Co-management, people have responsible in exploitation and protection the fishery resources 34 Table 4.5.The average output of main fisheries Fisheries Production (kg/day) Minimum (kg/day) Maximum (kg/day) Shrimp 6.34 11 Geoduck 9.6 0.3 50 Krill 10 10 Sea crabs 10 15 (Sources: The result of PRA in 2015) According the results of study, Co-management products are maintained fisheries; 100% of households said that the main products from forest are fisheries, besides, when trees are died, they can use it as the fuel The fisheries which they are catching are variety, geoduck is most of all, and the maximum is 50kg per day Sea crabs are also main fishery of households with the maximum is about 15 kg/day 4.4 The status of Non- Co-management households Table 4.5.The general information of Non-Co-management households No Number of Objects households Rate (%) Households Good 22 55 economic Medium 18 45 Near poor Sources of Agriculture 42 income Fisheries 15 Other 43 Occupation Education level Gender Farm worker 23 57.5 Civil servant 40 Worker 11 27.5 Secondary education 15 37.5 Higher education 25 62.5 Male 30 75 Female 10 25 35 According the above table, households don‟t participate in Co-management who have suitable economic and their life is heavily dependent on agriculture, forestry and fisheries Besides the incomes are from agriculture, they have other sources as wages, side-job In 40 households, there are 23 households who are working in the fields, households are civil servants and 11 households are the workers in factories and skilled worker About education level, Non-Co-management households are mostly graduated high school and have higher education This rate is 62,5% There are 37,5% of households who have secondary education level Mostly of households are male (75%) and female is accounted 25% Table 4.7.The knowledge and the ability to participate in Co-management of Non-Comanagement households No Number of Objects households Rate (%) Know about Co- Yes 30 75 management No 10 25 Why don‟t participate? Without human 14 35 Have other jobs 19 40.5 Not be chosen 10 Not see the benefits 7.5 Do you participate in Yes 12 30 future? No 28 70 resources (Sources: The result of PRA in 2015) According the results of the interview, there are 30 households who are known about Comanagement because they participated in meetings of village and commune 10 households don‟t know about information of Co-management because they are migrating and work at the factories so they haven‟t access to sources of information in Co-management The income of most households doesn‟t depend on agricultural production so the reasons of households have the higher paying job and more stable Some other reasons are as they don‟t 36 transfer of forest and without human resources to participate in Co-management Besides, there are few people who don‟t know about Co-management so they don‟t see the benefits from Comanagement leading to not participation in Co-management In total of 40 households, there are 12 households who said that they would participate in Co-management in future and 28 households wouldn‟t participate because they have suitable jobs and high income 4.6.The general comment of Co-management in Giao Thien commune 4.6.1 The advantages of Co-management - Area and the quality of forest: Forest is managed better, the density is more trees These create environment for the growth and development of fisheries and forest also the shelter of many birds creating biodiversity - Soil erosion and salinization are reduced - Forest resources are increasing and have the variety of fisheries The exploitation and catching fisheries are adjusted and forest are maintained the value genetic - Local community: When participating in Co-management, the income of local people is increasing so they can response the demand of daily This helps the relationship between local people and local staff become closely and local people were contributed their opinions 4.6.2 The disadvantages of Co-management - Co-management is caused of the conflicts of Co-management households and Non-Comanagement households - Co-management is new concept so local people so local people are not ready to understand and believe and it is responded by many people - The communication and dissemination in Co-management are reduced - Patrol is weak because commune patrol has few people and no support from local authorities 37 - Most of local people participating in Co-management don‟t get the support from government and local authorities so local people just catch the natural fisheries that not farming more leading to forest resources will be exhausted in future - There are some Non-Co-management households exploiting in area of Co-management So, the aim of Co-management in Giao Thien commune and other communes is completed and achieved high efficiency, it needs to the close cooperation between stakeholders and the coordination between levels 38 CHAPTER 5: SOLUTIONS FOR IMPROVE THE EFFECTS OF CO-MANAGEMENT MANGROVE FOREST IN GIAO THIEN COMMUNE-GIAO THUY DISTRICT-NAM DINH COMMUNE 5.1 Solution to improve the effects of Co-management in Giao Thien commune 5.1.1 Solution of organization and management The solutions continue to maintain and promote the patrol, implement the transfer of land and forests to local people and unions It needs to establish more the self- management team to the patrol activities and are frequently carried out and help management better Having managing mechanism is more effective with the area of Co-management, prohibited the hunting the birds This makes forest become various and can be a great attraction 5.1.2 Solution of economic The solution supports the capital to poor households and households have plans to grow more fisheries It must increase the wages of the self-management team and have more many patrol tools or pay for wages in time 5.1.3 Solution of social The communication of education has the objective for improving aware of economic and ecology forest, encourage local people participating in protection forest and development forest resources It builds the community organizations relating to management and development forest It also builds the system of management and development forest from commune level to households The staffs have ability who are guaranteed by the supervising organizations 5.1.4 Solution of communication and education The communication of education are one of the important activities in Co-management, it help local people and local staff in communication to improve the aware of conservation nature and biodiversity Some activities are solutions to develop communication and education - Training the knowledge, skills and transactions to local staffs and people 39 - Building the plans, communication and education program have participation of local people - Organizing regular meetings to impart Co-management and answering the questions of local people - Improving the awareness of local people about the importance role of forest and resources, the role of Co-management with government and local authorities 5.2 Recommendations ● Management board - Having plans to implement Co-management more specific and authenticity - Combine with local authorities to complete the communication and dissemination information of Co-management and through practical activities to convince local people participating in Co-management - Regularly patrol, observe and appreciate the status of forest management and having the solution for better management - Deploy Co-management for local people - Mobilize the support capitals from government and foreign countries ● Local authorities - Combine with staffs of national park implemented good at communication and dissemination Co-management - Take care of socio-economic of local people especially people taking part in Comanagement to assess life‟s local people can be improved when taking part in Co-management -To promote advocacy on Co-management and the benefits when managing better ● Local communities - Strictly implement the regulations, principles in commitment when taking part in Comanagement 40 - Exploitation forest resources must combine with protection forest and using the right instruments - Control forest and detect the environmental pollution to report to management board and local staff -The government needs to complete Legal Framework of Co-management, taking care and supporting the factors to develop forestry, agricultural and fisheries 41 CONCLUSION From practices and the survey process, I can see Co-management mangrove forest in Giao Thien commune have high feasibility and be correcting for socio-economic of location Forest is managed better by local communities and all levels of government, the component of trees become more variety, forest resources are restored, salinization in land is reduced, soil erosion and landslip drop compared with before Co-management Local people don‟t exploit and catch fisheries with exploitation tools contrary to regulations, this show the number of fisheries becoming variety and abundant The awareness of local people is higher in protection forest and the incomes meet the demand of life Local people stick together and have little conflict When participating in Co-management, the right of local people is guaranteed, but besides, households need to implement their role to complete the plans The plans of national park and local authorities will deploy Co-management with large scale and this show the determination of staffs of national park, local authorities to protection forest and forest resources Although the concept of Co-management was first introduced in Vietnam in1997 and it also the new concept to local people but it was gotten the support of local authorities and local people realized the approach with information of local people From Co-management in Giao Thien commune, the relationship between local people and local authorities become closely and stakeholders have done well their responsibility Besides the advantages of Co-management, there are some disadvantages in implementation; because Co-management is new so it hasn‟t attracted many participation households Economic of local people have many challenges, the market of fisheries is reduced Management capacity of local staff and management board are not good, patrols are less, and the illegal exploitation of fisheries is still going on There are many households who don‟t participate in Co-management but they are catching fisheries in area of mangrove forest leading to disunity of local people, the support policies are not specific 42 REFERENCES Andrew Ingles, Arne Musch and Helle Qwist – Hoffman.1999 The participatory Process for supporting Collaborative Management of Natural resources: An overview: FAO, Rome Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development.2002 The legal documents of forestry: National Political Publisher Nguyen Ba Ngai 2004 The rights and duties of communities‟ management: Report of study, National Task Force for Community Forestry Report of Communal People‟s Committee Giao Thien.2014 The application of Co-management in Coastal resources management Centre for Marine life Conservation and Community Development.2013 The project: Sustainable use of mangrove forest resources bring benefits to poorer women through the pilot mechanism of Co-management the fisheries resources and mangrove forest in the core area of Xuan Thuy National park.2012 Tran Ngoc Lan 1999 The buffer zone of the nature reserve and the national park sustainable development: Agriculture publisher Vo Mai Anh and Research team.2013 Co-management of Special Use forests: The pilot study in the North upland: Agricultural publisher Vu Huy Phuc.2009 The survey and the assessment of the current status development household livelihood in five communes of the buffer zone of Xuan Thuy national park 10 Xuan Thuy National Park The survey and the assessment of the exploitation in the area of mangrove forest in Xuan Thuy national park 43 APPENDIX 44 QUESTONNAIRE FOR LOCAL PEOPLE WHO PARTICIPATE IN COMANAGEMENT I General information Name of interviewees: Address: Gender: □ Male □ Female Age: Ethnic: Education level Occupation: Classification of households: □ Rich □ Medium □ Near poor □ Poor The income of households: Total income of household: Sources of income million VND/year The amount of products Value (VND) Agriculture Fisheries Other II The participation in Co-management 10 Before participation in Co-management, you know about Co-management of forest? □ Yes □ No 11 When did you participate in Co-management? 12 Why you participate in Co-management? □ Have more incomes □ Protect forest □ Follow in other households □ Other 13 The role of stakeholders in Co-management: □ Management board □ Local people □ Local authority □ Unions □ other opinion 14 Are you disseminated about interests and obligation when participation in Co-management? □ Yes 45 □ No 15 In your opinion, Co-management is suitable? □ Yes □ No If the answer is no, please give the reason □ They can‟t manage □ It‟s not suitable for local people □ It‟s not fair □ Other reasons 16 What„s your opinion of Co-management? III The development and using of Co-management mangrove forest 17 Are your family given the support from Co-management? □ Yes □ No If yes, what is specific? 18 What products your family derived from Co-management forest? Name of products Production (kg) Value (VND/kg) 19 How is the change of total income after Co-management? □ Increase □ don‟t know □ Decrease □ No comment □ No change 20 Has your family deployed for aquaculture in forest area? □ Yes □ No If yes how much income? 21 Besides aquaculture, does your family exploit the other products in forest area? □ Yes □ No If yes, what are these products? 23 Before and After Co-management, how is the status of forest resources? IV The situation of management and protection forest 24 Do stakeholders create the plans to Co-management? 46 □ Yes □ No If No, why? 25 The objective of that plans is suitable with the demand of local people? □ Yes □ No 26 In your opinion, how is the role of management board? □ Good □ Normally □ Not good 27 The assessment of local people in the implementation of Co-management: Local staffs National staffs 28 In your opinion, How to improve Co-management? 47 Participants QUESTONNAIRE FOR LOCAL PEOPLE WHO DON’T PARTICIPATE IN COMANAGEMENT I General information Name of interviewees: Address: Gender: □ Male □ Female Age: Ethnic: Education level Occupation: Classification of households: □ Rich □ Medium □ Near poor □ Poor The income of households: Total income of household: Sources of income million VND/year The amount of products Agriculture Fisheries Other 10 Do you know about Co-management project? □ Yes □ No 11 What are the reasons you don‟t take in Co-management? 12.Will you take part in Co-management in the future? □ Yes □ No 13 In your opinion, how to improve the Co-management? 48 Value (VND)