670 first draft PNKB community 2013 en

Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from the Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park Region Peter Bille Larsen and Nguyen Manh Ha 1st draft report December, 2012 for GIZ, Quang Binh Nature Conservation and Sustainable Management of Natural Resources in the Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park Region, Quang Binh Province Quang Binh Provincial People’s Committee Table of Contents Abbreviations ii Preface 1 Introduction and specific mandate 1.1 Methodology 1.2 Background on social dynamics and PNKB with a specific focus on ethnic minorities 1.3 On-going processes to address local community concerns in PNKB 2 Information sharing, consultationand consent 2.1 Evolving forms of participation 2.2 Assessing emerging forms of participation and consultation 6 Tenure& rights 10 3.1 Broadening notions of tenure 10 3.2 Unresolved protected area legacy issues 11 3.3 New issues emerging in the context of the IUCN-recommended expansion area 12 3.4 Unresolved forest and agricultural tenure in the bufferzone 12 3.5 Recognizing and working with rather than against customary tenure 14 3.6 Growing outside pressures and “land grabbing” 15 Livelihoods, costs and benefit-sharing 17 4.1 Moving beyond livelihoods as a threat towards recognition 17 4.2 Underreporting or inadequate representation of forest dependency 18 4.3 Equitable cost and benefit-sharing framework lacking 20 4.4 A rights-based approach to livelihoods and benefit-sharing 22 4.5 The importance of equitable benefit-sharing and preferential arrangements in tourism 22 Participation in decision-making and management 5.1 Assessing park expansion process 5.2 Growing focus on sustainable use in management, yet lack of equity focus 5.3 Recognizing the limitations of expanding the normal protection system 5.4 Strengthening community forest protection contract approaches 5.5 Putting PNKB regulations on co-management into equitable practice 24 24 26 27 28 29 Culture 6.1 Culture and living heritage: the missing link 6.2 Culture, ethnicitiy and tourism 6.3 From recognition of culture to the integration of culture in management 6.4 Transboundary conservation and socio-cultural dynamics 33 33 34 35 37 Capacity and structures in place to strengthen governance of forest people relations 39 Conclusions 41 Key findings 42 Recommendations 45 Annex: possible co-management structure Ke Bang co-management council and Tân Thuong Trach co-management council References the 47 i Abbreviations BZ BZDP CBD CBFM CDP CEM CTA DOLISA EUR FGD FLA GIZ HH IUCN KfW MARD MOLISA NGO NTFP ODA PNKB PPC PPMU SFE TA TOR UBND UNESCO VBARD VBSP VDP VFA VND VWU Buffer Zone Buffer Zone Development Master Plan Convention on Biodiversity Conservation Community-Based Forest Management Commune Development Plan Committee for Ethnic Minorities Chief Technical Adviser Department of Labour, Invalids and Social Affairs Euro Focus Group Discussion Forest Land Allocation Gesells a t r nternationale usa enarbeit hectare(s) Household International Union for the Conservation of Nature reditanstalt r iederau bau Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development Ministry of Labour, Invalids and Social Affairs Non-Governmental Organisation Non-Timber Forest Product Official Development Assistance Phong Nha – Ke Bang National Park Provin ial People’s Co ittee Provincial Project Management Unit State Forest Enterprise Technical Assistance Terms of Reference People’ Co ettee United Nations Educational, Social and Cultural Organisation Vietnam Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development Vietnam Bank for Social Policies Village Development Plan Vietna Far ers’ Asso iation Vietnam Dong Vietna o en’s Union Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 ii Preface T is report as been supported and inan ed under t e “Nature Conservation and Sustainable anage ent o Natural esour es in t e P ong N a- e ang National Par egion” in uang in Provin e t roug inan ial logisti al and te ni al support o t e Gesells a t r internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) The consultant team made up of Peter Bille Larsen and Nguyen Manh Ha would particularly like to thank Jens Kallabinski, Pham Thi Lien Hoa and Nguyen Duy Luong for the opportunity to conduct this rapid appraisal.We are grateful for the good support and nice company offered by the project team members Mr Tuân, Mr Duc and Mr Vân, who took actively part in the fieldwork We would also like to thank the Phong Nha Ke Bang National Park colleagues, KfW staff, provincial authorities and other friends for their active support Finally, the project team would like to thank the hamlets, who kindly shared their precious time with us in order for us to conduct our interviews, learn about their everyday struggles and hopefully shed light on challenges and possible ways forward With a very intense, but short field schedule, rapid data collection tools were employed, yet there is no pretension here to be exhaustive on the admittedly wide range of topics and issues covered Still, the analysis seeks to identify a number of critical areas of work, for the protected area management board, provincial authorities and the KfW and GIZ partners Throughout the report key findings are listed alongside recommendations for action Given the increasing attention to the social performance of World Heritage sites, it is our hope that findings can assist Vietnamese authorities in identifying effective and equitable solutions to the challenges in the area For a province and a people that have fought so long to rebuild their homes, striving to protect their heritage and secure local benefits are admirable aspirations We have been honoured to be able to work with Quang Binh province and its partners on this important topic Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 1 Introduction and specific mandate This brief report seeks to provide a snapshot of the relationships, issues and concerns between Phong Nha Ke Bang National Park and World Heritage site and the surrounding communities with a specific focus on ethnic minorities Specific objectives for the consultant team included: “1 To provide an independent and credible analysis of the current status of relevant aspects of indigenous peoples1 and the Phong Nha – Ke Bang National Park and its surroundings To provide an analysis on lessons to be learned and recommendations for improvements (emphasis on social safeguard policies for all investments/interventions in the region) To provide recommendations aiming at good governance for forest and people for this region (PNKB NP and Hin Namno plus the surrounding areas).” Where previous studies have focused on bufferzone development, ethnic minorities and poverty more broadly(Gebert and Trang 2011), this study aimed to shed light on a number of specific “people and par s” issues experienced by selected ethnic minority communities living within and around the national park and the world heritage site.The PNKB area is a national hotspot of cultural diversity This poses distinct issues and challenges for protected area and World Heritage site management processes, which this study begins to address It was specifically expected that the consultancy would involve a preliminary assessment and analysis of the following elements: a Information sharing and consultation b Tenure c Decision-making and management d Livelihoods and benefits e Culture 1.1 Methodology The review combines a desk review of key documents and background literature provided with field assessments in selected villages in and around the park Given time constraints, a rapid assessment and open-ended qualitative assessment approach was preferred in order to, within the very short time-span, identify key elements, which could nevertheless contribute to on-going planning and implementation processes Several recent documents have put particular emphasis on collecting quantitative data on demography, poverty statistics and it was deemed important to undertake a less data-intensive, yet open-ended qualitative approach to answer the questions at stake Initial plans included two periods of fieldwork, which were later reduced to one brief preparatory visit along with a second data-gatheringfield-visit from December to December in selected hamlets in the communes of Tân Trach (Ban 39/ Arem/ Ma Coong people), Thuong Hoa (Ban On, Ruc/ Sach people) and Dân Hoa (Ban Cha Lo/ May people) ereas “indigenous peoples” is not syste ati ally applied by Vietna ese aut orities t e commonly appearing term of ethnic minorities is used synonymously throughout this report Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 ore Name of Village no household Population Ethnicity Arem, Arem village, Tân Trạch 74 265 Ma Coong 63 259 Ruc, Sách On Village T ượng Trạch commune 42 191 Ruc, Sách Yên Hợp village T ượng Trạch commune 66 268 Ruc, Sách Mò O- Ồ Ồ village T ượng Trạch commune Cha Lo Village, Dân Hóa commune 24 92 Khùa, Sách In addition, a brief visit was made to commune officials in Thuong Trach and brief talks were held with villagers in Yên Hop and Mo O Ồ O hamlets of Thuong Hoa As the hamlets concerned all are within so-called border areas, this created particular permit requirements and registration steps at all levels when conducting fieldwork The final border permit was received late morning of the first day, and local authorities and border police kindly provided support and presence during the fieldwork process Initial plans to have hamlet participatory consultations were “reduced” to informal information sharing dinners given the particular fieldwork conditions and the preparation challenges Finally, the initial ToR involved the preparation of a provincial stakeholder meeting, which in the end was cancelled during the field trip Instead, a feedback session was held with the protected area management board In summary, what was initially planned more as a participatory appraisal, in the end took form of a rapid appraisal The team was made up of an environmental anthropologist alongside a protected area specialist both with experience in the area While the initial hope was to have an anthropological study undertaken, time did not allow for ethnography (requiring several months of fieldwork) However, we have sought to bring in open-ended approaches to data gathering 1.2 Background on social dynamics and PNKB with a specific focus on ethnic minorities Phong Nha–Ke Bang National Park (PNKB) covers an area of125,498 hectares (if the extension is included) and a buffer zone of 225,000 with both high population figures and levels of cultural diversity A series of recent efforts including overall bufferzone development plans as well as village-specific participatory processes point to the growing attention to social dynamics not least in the context of KfW and GIZ support Ethnic minority communities make up roughly one fifth of the bufferzone communes, yet this figure is much higher if only hamlets bordering the PNKB are listed It needs to be noted that many of the bordering ethnic minority communities have among the highest poverty rates, not only in the province, but the country as a whole Provincial data demonstrates that poverty rates are closely correlated with ethnic minority presence By end of the 2007, Thuong Trach, Dan Hoa and Trong Hoa communes, for example, had poverty rates above 90 %, even having increased in some of these communes (Ilumtics 2008: : 19-20) With such poverty rates and lack of food security, even minor changes can have dramatic impacts, as is illustrated by some of field material presented here In fact, poverty and ethnicity correlations are even stronger the further one approaches to park highlighting a series of questions relating to the ethnicity, conservation and poverty interface Thus whereas poverty levels in Thuong Hoa commune were roughly around 50 % in 2007, the figures for the Ruc ethnic minority hamlets within the commune neighboring the Ke Bang park extension in the commune were almost double as high This has made it difficult to achieve the objectives of hunger and poverty reduction (UBND Quảng Bình 2006) despite significant investments over the years Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 It is increasingly clear for authorities that poverty reduction are not being achieved involving complex linkages to resource degradation and fragile livelihoods, but also recognizing the potential negative impacts of current forest management policies World Heritage site recognition in PNKB has been a major milestone in terms of generating both public policy attention and wider awareness about the specific challenges in the area The PNKB strategic plans put a strong emphasis on reflecting the highest international standards on protected area conservation and World Heritage Site management Within the last few years, UNESCO and the World Heritage Committee have increasingly alongside advisory bodies such as IUCN and ICOMOS started addressing how State parties have integrated community and rights concerns in their World Heritage nominations and management practices The issues addressed here largely reflect the kinds of topics and policy objectives becoming international World Heritage standards The report should in other words be seen as a management contribution allowing for a better understanding of community participation in the World Heritage site dynamics as well the identification of relevant management responses T e initial proje t agree ent o t e / G parti ularly e p asizes t at “t e project will pay parti ular attention to t e equal parti ipation o wo en and et ni inorities” This offers a genuine opportunity to support Vietnamese authorities in this respect 1.3 On-going processes to address local community concerns in PNKB The PNKB area is undergoing a series of rapid project developments, park extension, tourism development and management planning processes, which in one way or another, involve or affecta wide range of community participation issues Many park staff members have over the years worked closely with villagers and local leaders through meetings, environmental education and protection contract managementas well as some pilot efforts involving community-based mapping, participatory development planning and non-timber forest products Despite such experiences, there have been few attempts to systematically analyze the advances made and constraints met The report seeks to make a small contribution in this respect The team also invited the park management to share their experience, and upon request by the management board also sent a set of written questions to explore the subject matter in more detail Two PNKB project staff formed part of the data gathering process in the field At the final meeting, where preliminary findings were discussed, exchanges were held with staff representatives and we have sought to integrate findings in the analysis below This being said, further work can be done by the park management to undertake a self-evaluation exercise about the issues raised in the report A series of on-going community-related processes are closely linked to international processes Management decisions are not merely aimed at satisfying provincial or national requirements, but equally to reflect global standards, the most evident case being the World Heritage process This also concerns the recent emphasis on social issues.Within recent years, both CBD and UNESCO processes have put increasing emphasis on rights-based approaches, equitable benefit-sharing and participation in protected areas and Throughout the 40 year history of the convention, work in the World Heritage context on community and rights issues have gradually taken on more importance and received explicit attention, not least through the adoption of the fift “C” to “en an e t e role o o unities in t e i ple entation o t e orld Heritage Convention” ( HC 2007 in C rist ur New ealand) T e World Heritage Convention framework increasingly alongside wider conservation policy seeks to contribute to wider sustainable development objectives and diverse management approaches Site renomination to acknowledge cultural values and criteria has, for example, taken place in some cases Given that the park expansion has been driven by IUCN evaluations as well as being a KfW donor requirement, it is equally important to take into account international policy development in relation to community rights, participation and benefit-sharing when assessing Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 current dynamics The study therefore also seeks to provide a point of reflection upon current dynamics using the main categories currently employed by UNESCO and the advisory bodies:      Information sharing, consultation and consent Tenure & rights Participation in decision-making and management Livelihoods, costs and benefit-sharing Culture Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 Information sharing, consultation and consent This section particularly explores the use of information, consultation and consent procedures in on-going PNKB processes Whereas a recent study specifically explores the use of Free Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) in REDD-related processes (J Kallabinski, personal communication), the focus is here particularly on protected area-related processes as seen from below 2.1 Evolving forms of participation In overall terms, there has been a growing emphasis on consultation as evidenced by having some level of community consultations upon drafting the management and strategic planning, protected area expansion plans as well as bottom-up driven development priority setting (VDP 2011) Whereas community relations were previously driven by a top-down “environ ental edu ation” approa there is now more emphasis on sharing information and participation Evolving forms of participation in PNKB Several planning documents indicate the use of consultation and participation of local representatives in the planning of the bufferzone, sustainable tourism and management plans (PPC Quang Binh 2012a: : 6) In the Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT) exer ise underta en by irdli e it is noted t at “ onsultation pro esses ave been arried out with local communities, including indigenous ethnic minority groups (such as Arem, Ruc/ Chut) in villages of in villages of Tan Trach, Thuong Hoa and Hoa Son co unes” (Birdlife 2012) This indicates particular attention being paid to the need for particular consultation needs and rights of what the Birdlife report labels as “indigenous et ni inorities” w i in prin iple would indicate interest in reflecting best national and international protected area practice, indeed stressing t e i portan e o onsultation Next steps suggested in lude t at “opinions and suggestions by indigenous local communities are taken into account and incorporated in t e Par ’s anage ent plan” as well as “Spe ial attention s ould be paid to lo al o unities’ suggestions/requests on landuse planning and bene it and responsibility s aring in natural resour e use.” (ibid:13-14) Yet t e sa e report also underlines ow “during t e Park establishment planning process and Investment plan making process, local communities ave a little involve ent in t e pro ess” Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 2.2 Assessing emerging forms of participation and consultation Given the history of top-down driven protected area processes in the area (Larsen 2008), it is important to assess newly evolving efforts in terms of their relevance, effectiveness and actual outcomes What appears is a varied landscape of consultation and participation practices to a large extent determined by the specific activity framework, and sometimes even the specific competencies of a consultant hired for a specific assignment Key finding Consultation practices are mainly activity-based and dependent on consultant, not under a common policy framework and systematic practice What appeared in our field consultations was, in effect, either overall confusion about the boundaries and location of the PNKB area as such or village leaders vaguely remembering having participated in some kind of meeting or exercise linked to the park and the World Heritage site Whether dealing with park-specific or World Heritage site-specific consultation processes, forms and level of consultation have been very rudimentary Villagers did not recall any specific consultation on World Heritage site nomination In most cases where villagers remembered meetings (notably in connection with the park extension and the strategic park plan), they could no longer remember what exactly had been discussed, nor whether or what the outcomes were of the consultations held While some leaders had a slightly clearer sense of the focus of what they had participated in or had been consulted about, they were not able to show actual results, moreover, there were no documented meeting minutes, agreements available locallyon any consultation meeting which had been conducted The core conclusion here is the lack of systematic predictable participation and consultation approaches for local people to incrementally build up a better understanding of protected area and World Heritage processes and engage more actively Participation spectrum In the spectrum of consultation possibilities, main emphasis has been on sharing information once decision have been taken alongside process specific consultations e.g linked to a given project process For village leaders living within the park (such as Tân Trach), people would generally remember having meetings, yet not being able to show or inform about meeting Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 7 Capacity and structures in place to strengthen governance of forest people relations We have been asked to analyze and provide recommendations in relation to forest and governance relationships This obviously covers a wide array of issues from tenure to participation as discussed above in findings and recommendations, but we also here wish to address a series of capacity issues of a more structural nature A major obstacle remains the common perception of livelihoods as a threat, rather than an integral part ofthe PNKB reality Linked to this, the management systems and approaches have not been geared to such and other social equity concerns There are no systems and safeguard mechanisms in place to ensure equitable cost and benefit-sharing There are no regularized mechanisms for participation, consultation and consent, nor are there effective comanagement structures and mechanisms in place to effectively put regulations into practice There are, for example, no regular budgetary allocations for community engagement and outreach, most activities being project activity specific Management responsibilities, staff resources and operational budgets, while having grown considerably, remain concentrated in the protected area management board and both human and financial resources to address the bundle of social equity issues raised here are inadequate While there are professionals with competencies and considerable experience in engaging with local communities within specific units, actual use and levels of activity are highly projectdependent Funding has either come through government resources such as as the previous 661 programme funding for information and education or ODA funding for socio-economic assessments or the recent German funding for participatory green development planning Conversely, local communities have very limited organizational capacity, resources and skills to take actively part in world heritage management and secure effective representation of their voice and concerns While there is a huge potential to build up decentralized co-management council given the particular social, geographical and cultural conditions, such efforts would need a structural boost in terms of specific competencies, regular budget resources and capacity building to effectively generate conservation results Till date, most implementation efforts, including under ODA funded activities, have mainly involved the PNKB management board and its specialized units It would be critical in the next few years to gradually empower co-management and community-based organizations to take on and implement conservationrelated activities In this respect, it could also be explored to have an elected body of hamlet representatives to represent community concerns in major decision-making processes at the World Heritage site level Such a body could, if properly prepared and resourced, help guide the management board on critical decisions related community participation and benefit matters At the management board level, while there are several staff members with key competencies in this respect, there is not a specific team of people with direct community relations, nor is there a clear-cut co-management structure and well-established mechanisms for consultation, information sharing or conflict resolution As follow-up to this report will be considered, such a cross-cutting unit would play a key role in facilitating the different kinds of activities put forward here such as policy development and implementation, co-management and benefitsharing agreements etc Such a unit would ensure the necessary expertise to effectively respond to the kind of global good practices expected from World Heritage sites Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 39 Key finding While there is an overall bufferzone development programme in place, there is not a crosscutting community relations unit and programme in place to systematically address and ensure systematic high quality delivery on participation, benefit-sharing, co-management, rights and a PNKB social safeguards policy Recommendation Quang Binh PPC and the PNKB Management Board is recommended to urgently allocate and hire a team of specialized social science staff in a cross-cutting community relations unit with a dedicated regular budget for 2014 and onwards to facilitate implementation of the Action Plan It should be would be of a cross-cutting nature and have more of a facilitatory role than necessarily have its own portfolio of activities One could e.g imagine collaborative efforts with the science unit on research and monitoring, tourism unit on developing benefit-sharing agreements, or with the management unit in relation to co-management councils Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 40 Conclusions This report seeks to generate knowledge blocks and debate about a series of community participation and benefit topics in the Phong Nha Ke Bang World Heritage area In specific, it presents a series of findings in relation to questions of participation, tenure, benefit-sharing, management and culture While this rapid assessment in no way can replace a more in-depth study and day-to-day monitoring of such complex matters, we trust the findings are more than adequate to generate action Social concerns, including ethnic minority perspectives, have received increased attention within the last 15 years,yet have not been mainstreamed in major planning processes in a systematic and coherent way As a result, actual performance in relation to certain social dimensions as culture, livelihoods and rights is not yet satisfactory compared to emerging standards and best practice in protected area and World Heritage policy The good news is that Vietnamese and Quang Binh provincial authorities are in a strong position to rapidly take action and follow-up on the findings and recommendations presented in this report There is wide recognition about the kinds of challenges at stake and the need for concerted action Many stakeholders, including staff members of the park, recognizing the lack o a o pre ensive approa on ir t at „business a usual“ now t at PN is on t e orld Heritage list is no longer an option There is, indeed, a strong commitment from the Quang Binh PPC that local communities should be the first to benefit equitably and take part in the World Heritage site management The challenge now is turning such aspirations into reality „joining t e di erent dots“ listed in t is report t is in ot er words not enoug to i prove approaches incrementally with small alternative livelihoods initiatives, local participation in selected meetings or participatory development plans A multi-pronged and systematic approa „pulling toget er“ t e different elements put forward here would be necessary One needs only talk to a few PNKB villagers to learn about the urgency of socially responsive conservation action For some, particularly the most vulnerable and impoverished, living within or in the immediate vicinity of the park, the social situation is truely alarming and getting worse Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 41 Decisions dramatically affecting their livelihoods are being taken without their consent Whereas local communities are the first to pay the costs of intensified conservation e.g by losing old fallows, they are currently the last to reap benefits from PNKB World Heritage recognition and tourism It is a scary fact, yet not surprising, that ethnic minority communities living at the heart of PNKB are among the poorest in the province, and the country as a whole Furthermore, age-old cultural relationships with the land, landscapes and a highly significant cultural diversity is increasingly recognized, yet without supportive regulations and protective mechanisms in place More is needed to make PNKB an example living heritage, and not merely a show-case of million year old geological values and cave tourism, where indigenous inhabitants are left impoverished There is now growing recognition of such challenges and the opportunities present Customary livelihoods can be recognized and there is knowledge and expertise in place to create sustainable conditions There is a good opportunity and techniques available to document customary lands and cultural landscapes, as there are clear-cut possibilities to reconsider agricultural and forest land allocation processes to effectively reflect customary holdings There is equally a considerable potential to craft equitable co-management agreements with local communities and put in place effective conservation plans Villagers can be empowered to engage more effectively in tourism, protection and monitoring activities granted that adequate regulatory, financial and human conditions are in place Addressing the kinds of social dynamics listed in this report is therefore not a possible luxury, but at the heart of demonstrating that PNKB is not merely valuable for UNESCO, tourists and conservation professionals, but a rightful home and source of sustainable livelihoods and living heritage While the comprehensive approach advocated here may seem challenging for some, Vietnamese authorities, and not least the PPC Quang Binh and the PNKB Management Board, have the capabilities and organizational experience to effectively turn such a bundle of recommendations into real change whether in terms of more socially responsive regulations for the park and the bufferzone or effective and equitable co-management mechanisms The question we believe is in that sense making sure that provincial authorities and the wider population are adequately informed about the needs, challenges and action opportunities at stake allowing them to rapidly take remedial action A comprehensive Action Plan is now not only needed to ensure the PNKB World Heritage sites reflects international good practice, but even more importantly that it reflects the spirit and strength of Quang Binh having rebuilt the province over the last three decades The earlier this is developed the higher the chance that activities can play a genuine transversal role across the different the project activities which all in one way or another have social dimensions Recommendation PPC Quang Binh and the PNKB Management Board is urgently recommended to hold an extra-ordinary stakeholder action planning meeting on community participation and benefits in PNKB World Heritage Stakeholders should receive report findings in advance for their consideration The continued KfW and GIZ presence also offers a golden opportunity to support the province financially as well as technically to design and implement such an Action Plan Such concerted action would not only respond to critical social needs making use of a closing window of opportunity, but equally be a sign to the international community about the Vietnamese commitment to PNKB as a living and socially equitable World Heritage space Key findings Consultation practices are mainly activity-based and dependent on consultant, not under a common policy framework and systematic practice Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 42 Appoaches to participation in PNKB are mainly based on data-gathering and information sharing upon decision, rather than applying informed consent procedures and active involvement in decision-making Information levels and consultation processes are on the increase, yet till now have been inadequate to secure effective and equitable participation and informed consent in key planning processes including the park expansion Furthermore, basic information sharing is yet to be systematically organized across different levels alongside clear-cut mechanisms and processes for community claims and independent conflict resolution measures The lack of systematic participation and consultation mechanisms is leading to a deficit of knowledge about the customary forest use practices and wider community perspectives and is yet to involve differentiated consultation and consent practices reflecting distinct positions and rights conditions There is an urgent need to address protected area legacy issues such as resettlement and the neglect of customary tenure in a more transparent fashion 12 While overlaps between the PNKB expansion area and agricultural areas have mostly been addressed, a wider set of customary tenure rights over some shifting cultivation areas, older fallows and wider forest-related tenure rights remain to be fully understood and addressed in terms of current expansion plans 12 Implementation of agricultural and forest land allocation processes in the core and bufferzone reveal substantial gaps and implementation challenges There is a need for additional land use assessment and planning processes in the bufferzone to fully address customary agricultural and forest use as integral components including where such lands and resources overlap with State Forestry Entreprises, the National Park or Watershed Protection Forest 14 Current forest and land allocation processes are often limited to pre-defined limits, and are yet to fully build on and reflect customary tenure relationships, which form a critical ingredient in culturally sensitive and equitable bufferzone development and conservation planning 14 There is no systematic understanding of customary use areas of key neighbouring ethnic minority groups, yet a clear need and opportunity to recognize and formalize customary tenure of the ethnic minorities living within and around the PNKB including the forest lands under SFEs and watershed management forest 15 There is growing pressure on land and resources, and urgent need for a bufferzone policy prioritizing community tenure security and blocking further settlements and access to land resources 16 Despite the overall emphasis on sustainable livelihoods, there is a dominant management logic against (customary) livelihoods, hindering more effective and equitable engagement with livelihood rights among the most needy and further provoking poverty 18 Traditional forest use and dependence is continuously under-reported and misunderstood in discriminatory terms in terms of consequences for biodiversity loss as well as systematic neglect as a development priority 19 The overall policy stance remains prohibitive and restrictive in terms of customary livelihoods with some exception in terms of NTFPs and recent fallow lands Yet, forest resources as old fallows, hunting and trapping grounds remain the backbone of community livelihood strategies in some hamlets, yet are under severe pressure and should receive investments and protection attention rather than being fought There is a need to take a far more pro-active planning perspective on managing for rather than against sustainable livelihoods 20 Protected area processes are far from achieving equitable cost and benefit-sharing in PNKB There is a need for systematic implementation of equitable benefit-sharing including Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 43 management, tourism, employment and revenue as well as far more explicit attention to both subsistence and commercially-oriented forest use 21 Massive tourism development in PNKB is yet to equitably benefit local communities, despite repeated plans, underlining the urgent need for specific policy mechanisms for equitable benefit-sharing to be put in place 23 There is an overall social deficit of including local perspectives, equity concerns and knowledge about local conservation priorities for core protected area processes in terms of setting management objectives, zonation and wider management planning Forest anage ent logi s are ainly based on en or e ent “against” liveli oods rat er t an management of sustainable livelihoods for conservation 24 National park expansion responding to IUCN-UNESCO World Heritage-site related recommendations and zoning models not yet adequately reflect customary use areas and practices, although technical studies partly recognize their importance and the need for specific management approaches that build on customary 26 For the Ke Bang expansion area, whereas current emphasis is on extension demarcation and expansion of protection enforcement, there is huge need and opportunity to revisit management design and zonation to better reflect and accommodate customary use both in terms of customary shifting cultivation, use and rights 26 Existing “ orest guard only” prote tion approa es are inadequate and in pra ti e o ten rely on “in or al” e anis s o o unity involve ent and ooperation wit ot er agen ies in their daily work Such de facto co-management generally remains informal, without formal agreements and adequate conditions, which need to be strengthened 27 Community protection efforts through protection contracts and wider protection efforts show promising potential, yet still implemented at a scale too small, and with limited extension support which needs to be beefed in terms of geographical coverage, relevant organizational dimensions and socio-economic incentives 29 While regulations clearly stipulate a series of institutional co-management requirements, investments and management planning directed to community-based and co-management approaches to special use forest management and protection have been inadequate To fully exploit the potential of existing co-management requirements and opportunities for collaborative conservation, there is an urgent need to devolve institutional responsibilities and channel core funding for protected area management in areas where relevant The model proposed here involves creating co-management councils (see annex) 32 There is a growing recognition of cultural dimensions, yet an urgent need to put in place culture as a cross-cutting priority 33 While there is growing recognition of PNKB as cultural heritage space, approaches are yet to fully recognize and nurture PNKB as a living heritage space There is an urgent need to re-consider PNKB as a combined natural and cultural heritage site 34 Without immediate efforts to secure community control, management and benefits of village and eco-tourism within their customary areas, there is a high risk that communities will not benefit from tourism development in their customary areas 35 there is an urgent need to consider the importance of cultural diversity and its protection as a common transboundary conservation objective between PNKB and Hin Namno 37 While there is an overall bufferzone development programme in place, there is not a crosscutting community relations unit and programme in place to systematically address and ensure systematic high quality delivery on participation, benefit-sharing, co-management, rights and a PNKB social safeguards policy 40 Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 44 Recommendations The World Heritage site and the management board should urgently adopt and implement participation, consultation and consent measures as a cross-cutting policy reflecting the distinct rights and concerns of communities These measures should in accordance with provincial priorities, reflect the highest UNESCO, IUCN and CBD standards including the use of Free Prior Informed Consent where relevant It is recommended that a process to document and address protected area legacy issues such as resettlement, livelihood loss and the neglect of customary tenure rights is put in place by the management board with support from the project 12 The Project is highly recommended to urgently put in place with technical support by the GIZ a process to identify and map out customary tenure rights within and in the immediate surroundings of the PNKB National Park and the expansion areas 12 The PNKB project and German partners are recommended to urgently conduct a detailed review process of current agricultural and forest land allocation processes allowing for a rapid identification of needs and opportunities to adapt and expand allocations to better reflect customary livelihoods needs and rights 14 The project and the German partners are recommended to urgently put in place a process to document customary tenure rights in order to allow for the effective integration in agricultural and forest-land allocation processes 15 Provincial authorities are recommended to put in place a safe-guard policy in the bufferzone to protect indigenous community tenure security and prevent future outside settlements and resource access in the area 16 Provincial authorities should urgently put in place a pro-poor policy to recognize and support customary livelihoods clearly distinguishing such forest use and practices from forest use by outsiders 18 Provincial authorities are recommended to urgently put in place a comprehensive policy for equitable cost and benefit-sharing 22 Provincial authorities are encouraged to urgently reform benefit-sharing mechanisms to allow for local communities to benefit more equitable alongside specific community-based control and management mechanisms for village-based tourism Pilot status from the DoNC to implement such efforts should urgently be requested given the presence of technical support from GIZ at both national and provincial level 23 Provincial authorities are recommended to urgently to revisit management plans and zonation approaches for the expansion area to reflect customary use rights and comanagement potential (see annex) Allocated funds could be directed to allow for participatory mapping of customary use areas, zonation and sub-zone conservation management planning with a triple community-based structures in the surrounding communes (Thuong Hoa, Hoa Son, Dan Hoa) 26 Provincial authorities are recommended to rapidly scale-up and strengthen co-management approaches as indicated in the current legislations in a step-by-step approach starting with the Ke Bang expansion area and Tan / Thuong Trach combining conservation planning, agreement building the devolution of management responsibilities and adequate financing (see annex) 28 Provincial authorities and the PNKB management board are recommended to scale-up and integrate hamlet protection contracts as an integral part of regular management budgets through a bundle of co-management approaches 29 Provincial authorities, supported technically by German advisory services, are recommended to fast-track the strengthening of co-management mechanisms by starting with the Ke Bang expansion area as well as the Tan/ Thuong Trach area as an integral dimension of the regular management mechanism and core budget 32 Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 45 Provincial authorities are recommended to rapidly seek support from UNESCO in securing the integration of cultural values, landscapes and criteria in the renomination process 34 Provincial authorities and the PNKB management board are recommended to immediately put in place a policy to ensure community control over tourism access, management, guidance operations and benefits regarding eco-tourism, village tourism and other activities touching upon customary lands, caves and waters of ethnic communities This should be combined with a capacity building approach allowing communities to effectively manage and organize tourism to their areas 35 Provincial authorities are recommended to put in place a living cultural diversity protection plan together with the ethnic communities themselves, CEMA and the World Heritage Centre as an integral dimension of the PNKB World Heritage Site 37 Provincial authorities to include community-based collaboration and cultural heritage as two priority issues in future transboundary heritage deliberations with Khamouane and Laos 38 Quang Binh PPC and the PNKB Management Board is recommended to urgently allocate and hire a team of specialized social science staff in a cross-cutting community relations unit with a dedicated regular budget for 2014 and onwards to facilitate implementation of the Action Plan.40 PPC Quang Binh and the PNKB Management Board is urgently recommended to hold an extra-ordinary stakeholder action planning meeting on community participation and benefits in PNKB World Heritage Stakeholders should receive report findings in advance for their consideration GIZ 42 Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 46 Annex 1: Possible co-management structure Ke Bang co-management council and the Tân Thuong Trach co-management council Co-management, while being a legal requirement as well as a logical option has till date only been explored to a limited extent in the PNKB area In part, protected area officials have lacked concrete points of anchorage, despite the considerable legal obligations and opportunities A number of critical international experiences are worthwhile to take under consideration for the design of area and people-based co-management as well as a legal framework increasingly harnessed to facilitate effective co-management This cannot be spelt out here in full detail, but will need to be considered from a locally grounded and tailored perspective For one, co-management should build on geographically, socially, administratively and ecologically logical units This builds on the simple fact that places are already tied historically, ulturally as well as t roug usto ary use to people a ing t e “obvious” interlo utors to engage in co-management building We have here suggested two constellations of representatives and connections to pilot this effort The first would involve engaging hamlets leaders bordering the park and the bufferzone in Tân and Thuong Trach in an area-based co-management council building on their customary use areas in the Southern parts of the park and relevant forest areas in the bufferzone The second would involve engaging relevant hamlet leaders in Thuong Hoa, Hoa Son and Dan Hoa in a co-management council for the protected area extension area again reflecting customary use areas.Currently there is no formal consultation process and body of community representatives e.g reviewing strategic management plans, operational plans and the effectiveness of management measures The councils would seek to fill this gap In both cases, a step-by-step process to identify customary use areas, community conservation priorities and protection capabilities will form critical building blocks in creating logical management units It is evident that management in parts of the PNKB extension for example, require careful attention to the relatively few points of access largely reflecting ageold transportation routes and Thus where the current contract protection system is based on small areas defined numerically, the co-management councils would involve putting in place large-scale conservation plans reflecting customary use areas, tenure rights and conservation capabilities Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 47 The proposed management example here notably for the Ke Bang extension is merely an example to illustrate the kinds of models available to concretize co-management in a more effective and equitable manner It offers a more locally relevant management model through t e “ oi dong” oun il creation, while beefing up conservation incentives through much stronger allocations for community management, conservation planning, community-based tourism management and monitoring It is particularly recommended to sub-contract the council to be responsible through performance based regular budget allocations reflecting actual size and conservation responsibilities Rather than the current model of isolated forest protection stations and forest protection contracts, what is proposed here is rather a fullyfledged devolved management council with a bundle of management responsibilities in charge of both forest protection stations and local protection efforts Linking incentives, decision-making and responsibilities In practice, we suggest as a first step to prioritize working on co-management models for: The Ke Bang extension area (Ke Bang Co-management council) The Southern part of the park (Tân/ Thuong Trach co-management council) Decision-making would take place through the co-management council constituted e.g by elected members of the hamlets neighbouring the park and specific conservation areas covered by the council A dedicated budget would allow for the council to meet regularly and specifically engage in conservation planning and direct management of the specific conservation area Contrary to the small areas dedicated to specific hamlets under current protection contracts, the councils would cover much larger areas, receive dedicated conservation and enforcement budgets from the Quang Binh PPC as part of annual planning under wider supervision of the PNKB management board Councils would not be limited to implementation of protection contracts, but be granted wider management responsibilities The constitution of these councils cannot be defined from above, but will require a clear negotiation process around specific areas, responsibilities and what might constitute effective measures and structures In particular, this report has stressed the identification of customary use areas as a logical starting point to allow for the building of co-management areas, which make sense socially and culturally Whereas the current approach to village-planning and regulations follows after the decision-making about the protected area has taken place, comanagement to be effective and equitable would here involve conservation planningto take place before the final big picture decisions Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 48 The PNKB management board will play a critical monitoring and enforcement role to ensure that allocated budget and management budgets of the council are used effectively and efficiently Boundaries and zones rarely make sense While the over idea of managing Ke Bang as a larger ecological landscape and biodiversity zone makes sense, there is a need to revisit the management zones It has been shown elsewhere in the world how zones reflecting cultural boundaries, traditional use zones, make locally more sense than zones and maps only identifiable on the map and using general criteria In this sense, a far more local level zonation and management planning process is proposed to be worked out around customary use areas Area-based conservation and development council approach Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 49 Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 50 Annex 2: Fieldwork Schedule 28/11 – 10/12/2012 Date Thursday Friday, 29/11 30/11 (2 days) Saturday Tuesday, 01-04/12 (4 days) Activity Work with Tan Trach CPC, Thuong Trach CPC and Con Roang Border Police Station on the working trip of the Consultant Team from 3/12 to 5/12 at the locality Implemented by Mr Van and Mr Tuan (staff of PCU in PNKB NP) Work with Dan Hoa CPC and 02 Border Police Stations of Cha Lo and Ra Mai on the working trip of the Consultant Team from 6-7/12 at the locality; and Work with Thuong Hoa CPC and Ca Xeeng Border Police Station on the working trip of the Consultant Team from 7-8/12 at the locality Monday, 08:30-10:00 3/12 Work with GIZ on the working trip, preparation on logistics, supporting budget and on consultancy meeting on 10/12 10:00-11:30 Depart to Phong Nha 13:30-15:00 Work with PNKB NP Management Board on the working trip and on consultancy meeting on 10/12 15:00-19:00 Depart to and stay overnight in Tan Trach commune Tuesday, 08:00-17:00 4/12 Carry out study contents and interview households in Arem village 17:00-19:00 Group discussion 19:00-21:00 Have dinner with village community Wednesday, 08:00-09:00 5/12 Brief discussion with Thuong Trach CPC on study contents 09:00-15:00 Depart to Dan Hoa commune 15:00-17:00 Brief discussion with Dan Hoa CPC on study contents and working schedule for the next day Stay overnight in Quy Dat town Thursday, 08:00-17:00 6/12 Carry out study contents and interview households in Cha Lo Village, Dan Hoa CPC 17:00-19:00 Group discussion Mr Van and Mr Tuan (actual time depends on arrangement of PNKB NP Manangement Board) Peter Larsen, Nguyen Manh Ha, staffs of PNKB NP, Project staffs (stay overnight in Tan Trach) Peter Larsen, Nguyen Manh Ha, staffs of PNKB NP, Project staffs Peter Larsen, Nguyen Manh Ha, staffs of PNKB NP, Project staffs 19:00-21:00 Have dinner with village community Stay overnight in Quy Dat town Friday, 7/12 08:00-17:00 Carry out study contents and interview households in Peter Larsen, Nguyen Manh Ha, staffs of Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 Date Saturday, 8/12 Sunday, 9/12 Monday, 10/12 Activity On village, Thuong Hoa commune 17:00-19:00 Group discussion 19:00-21:00 Have dinner with village community Stay overnight in Quy Dat town 08:00-12:00 Continue to interview households in On village, Thuong Hoa commune on the study contents 12:00-17:00 Depart to Phong Nha Stay overnight in Phong Nha-Ke Bang Write report Prepare for the consultancy meeting on 10/12 08:00-12:00 Synthesize information and data 14:00-17:00 Quick report on the outcomes of the working trip and collect comments and feedbacks from PNKB NP and from the project on the report PNKB NP: Centre for Scientific Research and Wildlife rescue: Mr Dinh - Vice Director, Mr Dai - Vice Director, r Tri and r Vin r ien … PCU in PNKB NP: Mr Van and Mr Tuan 19:00 Depart to Hanoi Implemented by PNKB NP, Project staffs Peter Larsen, Nguyen Manh Ha, staffs of PNKB NP, Project staffs Peter Larsen, Nguyen Manh Ha, staffs of PNKB NP Peter Larsen, Nguyen Manh Ha, Project staffs: Dr Jens Kallabinski, Ms Hoa GIZ staff & Mr Luong Consultant for GIZ Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 References Birdlife (2012), 'Conservation needs assessment for the Phong Nha Ke Bang National Park, Quang Binh province, Vietnam: the final ', (Hanoi, July 2012: A report for the nature conservation and sustainable natural resource management in Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park Region Project, Quang Binh province) FIPI (2012), 'CONSERVATION-ORIENTED SOCIO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN FOR THE BUFFERZONE OF PHONG NHA KE BANG NATIONAL PARK TO 2020, VISIONING TO 2030', (Ha Noi: PPC uang in Proje t “Nature onservation and sustainable management of natural resources in Phong Nha Ke Bang national par region uang in Vietna ” G – Technical Assisstance Component) Gebert, Rita and Trang, Hieu Tuong (2011), 'Report of the Study on Gender, Poverty and Ethnicity in Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park Buffer Zone Communes, Quang Binh Vietnam', (Dong Hoi: Quang Binh PPC and GIZ) Ilumtics (2008), 'Socio-economic baseline study', (Dong Hoi: Commissioned by VietnameseGerman Technical Cooperation Project, Nature Conservation and Sustainable Management of Natural Resources in the Phong Nha Ke Bang National Park Region, Quang Binh Province - Vietnam) Larsen, Peter Bille (2008), 'Linking livelihoods and protected area conservation in Vietnam: Phong Nha Kẻ Bàng World Heritage, Local Futures?', in Marc Galvin and Tobias Haller (eds.), People, protected areas and global change: participatory conservation in Latin America, Africa, Asia and Europe (Bern: NCCR North-South, Swiss Centre of Competence in Research North-South, University of Bern) Larsen, Peter Bille and Trần, Chí Trung (2008), 'Wildlife trade policy and social dynamics in Vietnam : with a focus on trade in Aquilaria and Freshwater Turtles ', “Enhancing National Capacities to Assess Wildlife Trade Policies in Support of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora” (Geneva: UNEP, CITES Secretariat , UNCTAD and IHEID) Nguyen et al, Quoc Dung (2012), 'Luan chung khoa hoc mo rong Vuon Quoc Gia Phong Nha Ke Bang', (Dong Hoi: UBND Tinh Quang Binh) PPC Quang Binh (2012a), 'Strategic Management Plan 2013 to 2025 Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park Region -World Heritage Site, October 2012', (Dong Hoi: PPC Quang Binh and the Nature Conservation and Sustainable Management of Natural Resources in the Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park Region Project) - (2012b), 'Operation management plan 2013 to 2018 Phong Nha Ke Bang', (Dong Hoi: PPc Quang Binh and the Nature Conservation and Sustainable Management of Natural Resources in the Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park Region Project) UBND Quảng Bình (2006), 'Về việ ban àn C ương trìn p át triển kinh tế - xã hội vùng đồng bào dân tộc thiểu số tỉnh Quảng ìn giai đoạn 2006 - 2010' (27/2006/ ĐUBND) - (2007), 'Ban hành Quy chế quản lý Vườn Quốc gia Phong Nha - Kẻ Bàng', (18/2007/ ĐUBND) VDP (2011), 'Green VDP: participatory and conservation-oriented village development planning process', (Dong Hoi: GIZ and others) Rapid appraisal of community participation and benefit-sharing in biodiversity conservation and on relevant lessons to be learned from Phong Nha Ke Bang, Peter Bille Larsen & Nguyen Manh Ha, 2012 ... Methodology 1.2 Background on social dynamics and PNKB with a specific focus on ethnic minorities 1.3 On-going processes to address local community concerns in PNKB 2 Information sharing, consultationand... support Vietnamese authorities in this respect 1.3 On-going processes to address local community concerns in PNKB The PNKB area is undergoing a series of rapid project developments, park extension,... of community consultations upon drafting the management and strategic planning, protected area expansion plans as well as bottom-up driven development priority setting (VDP 2011) Whereas community