University - Community engagement and collaborative governance for sustainable development: Learning from and with VietNam

LPRV generated learning about participatory methods, institutional strengthening, social system dynamics, collaborative governance, capacity building and university- community en[r]

(1)

AND COLLABORATIVE GOVERNANCE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: LEARNING FROM AND WITH VIETNAM

Peter Boothroyd*

1 Introduction

Much o f the external assistance provided to Vietnam over the last half-century has oeen grounded in the global North’s paternalistic perspective that the role of international agencies is to guide “developing” countries in the global South This perspective, which underlay the establishment o f the World Bank at Bretton Woods in 944, continued to inform “international development” programming of multilateral agencies and individual OECD countries even as their preferred strategies shifted over the decades from promoting economic growth with trickle- dowi, to meeting basic needs, and then to advocating supporting sustainability, go-oc governance, and social inclusion

Today, however, the validity o f the perspective that “North knows best” is begiining to be challenged - on the one hand by economic stresses and worsening ineqiality in Japan, North America, and Europe, and by the success o f development initiitives in the South ranging from social forestry to participatory budgeting Slovly, we are coming to understand that sustainable development should be conceived as a long-term process o f countries learning from each other, and with

each other through jointly conducted action-research

(2)

V lfT NAM HQC - KY Yfcu HQl THAO QU6c Tt LAN THlT TU*

The project, Local Poverty Reduction in Vietnam; Building capacity fo r project planning and policy assessment (LPRV), illustrates well the potential for a

development project to contribute to international mutual learning and co-operative knowledge generation at the same time as it serves substantive development goals o f host and donor countries

In this paper, I first describe LPRV's background, context, partners, goal, strategy, organizational structure, and results in Vietnam (Complete information on LPRV is available through its website http://www.chs.ubc.ca/lprv/overviewF.html which includes the Final Report (2004) and the NCSSH LPRV Steering Committee’s final assessment (2003) The latter presents the NCSSH perspective succinctly, yet comprehensively and with instructive examples.) After describing LPRV, I discuss the lessons it provided to us at UBC about university-community engagement and collaborative governance, how we applied them to capacity building for collaborative governance in Brazil and university-community engagement generally, and how we disseminated the lessons through publications

In preparing this paper, I have drawn on my observations and experience as an active participant in LPRV and in other international development activities of UBC

Thanks are due to the many people from and with whom I learned during LPRV: they contributed significantly to my thinking Thanks are due also to C1DA and the partner institutions that made this learning possible Comments from LPRV participants or observers are welcomed especially if they include corrections to this paper or alternative interpretations o f the history it presents

2 Local Poverty Reduction in Vietnam (LPRV) 2.1 Background

LPRV was built on a strong partnership that had been developed between Vietnam’s National Center for Social Sciences and Humanities (now the Vietnam Academy o f Social Sciences) and the University o f British Columbia in the early 1990s Thanks to doi moi, Vietnam's momentous overarching policy o f social and economic renovation meta-policy direction that had been initiated in 1986, Vietnam was open to such a partnership, and Canada was open to financially supporting it

(3)

ecoromic, and linguistic constraints Sample course syllabi and core readings were prefared in four topic areas: rural development, urban housing, household economy antd social policy These activities were supplemented by English-language and librarian training

The research project involved joint Vietnamese-Canadian teams investigating the social impacts of Vietnam's evolving policies in the above-listed four topic area>, and assessing the implications for Vietnam's future development The outputs were published in an IDRC monograph entitled Socioeconomic Renovation in Met Nam: The Origin, Evolution, and Impact o f Doi Moi (Boothroyd and Nam

200)).

2.2 Context

LPRV was created in response to Vietnam’s need for poverty reduction efforts that could address local conditions by building local capacity, and to the enhanced oppjrtunities for experimentation, participation, and international co-operation that w en enabled by the spirit o f doi moi.

2.3 Partners

LPRV expanded the early 1990s UBC-NCSSH partnership to include in Vienam the Universities o f Thai Nguyen, o f Vinh, o f Hue, and o f Dalat, and the Ho ChiMinh City College o f Social Sciences, and in Canada, Université Laval, and the Woild University Service o f Canada (WUSC) The project was co-chaired by NCSSH President Prof Dr Nguyen Duy Quy and UBC Professor Terry McGee; it was co-directed by Professor Pham Xuan Nam and myself Others, too numerous to rame here, played strong leadership roles (NCSSH was renamed as VASS in 2004, just after LPRV finished.)

2.4 Goal and Strategy

The LPRV goal was to "build self-sustaining capacity in the [Vietnamese] partier institutions to develop and teach low-cost, participatory policy assessment and project planning methods that are effective in generating appropriate solutions to ocalized poverty, and suited to Vietnamese cultures and administrative conditions."

(4)

VI$T NAM HQC - KY YÉU H<)I THÀO QUÔC TÉ LAN THÙ* TU*

participatory methods in ensuring that women, ethnic minorities, and the poorest of the poor are meaningfully included in planning local projects and that policy makers are well informed about local conditions; v) to disseminate the results in curricular guides and texts

The pilot projects (related to small scale irrigation, livestock raising, crop propagation, domestic hygiene, micro-credit, eco-tourism, etc.) were to be implemented primarily with local resources and through local authorities They were not to be off-the-shelf suggestions from outsiders but instead grounded in local aspirations, conditions, opportunities, knowledge and skills

LPRV thus fell within what might be called the social development (as opposed to growth-with-trickle-down) approach to poverty reduction: it sought to enhance the capacity of community leaders, local officials and academics to work with the poor in identifying locally specific causes o f poverty, considering options for solutions, and making action decisions or policy recommendations that are effective and fair It tried to build social capital as it expanded knowledge and skills

LPRV’s focus on participatory planning meant that it paid close attention to gender analysis and equality, and to working respectfully with minority peoples It also meant that it needed to mirror in its own program management the participatory ethos it promoted in workshops and explored in the field For example, from the beginning, it was agreed that its annual all-partner Steering Committee meetings would include at least one woman and one man from each of the partner institutions

2.5 Structure

LPRV was structured as an equal partnership among institutions—there was equality in goal setting, strategic planning, adaptive management, and budget control The idea was to create a "knowledge network" rather than the more usual North-to-South project which purports to "train-the-trainers." From the beginning, each institutional partner had considerable financial and programmatic autonomy within overall guidelines established annually by the Steering Committee

The degree o f autonomy was perhaps unusually high for an international aid project, and was not seen as positive by all active participants; some of them had well-founded concerns about accountability, effectiveness, and follow-through problems inherent in the network approach (See Scott and Chuyen 2003 )

(5)

flexibility and creativity plus mutual learning and responsibility The network approach also reflected the participation ideals that the program was dedicated to, and provided opportunities for learning from practice about participatory planning participation’s difficulties (e.g not enough time in large groups for all to talk), barriers (e.g women’s traditional roles), solutions (e.g small groups) and benefits (e.g better plans, more commitment to them)

2.6 Evolution o f Strategy and Structure

While the core o f the strategy and structure - learning by doing, and networking - was maintained throughout LPRV's five years, there was some evolution in the project programmatically and structurally as a result o f its adaptive management by the Steering Committee

Programmatically, the initial idea that Canadians would deliver “training” courses in Vietnam was soon changed to organizing workshops and study tours where Vietnamese could learn from each other and Southeast Asian neighbours, and to having Canadians assist Vietnamese scholars as they developed course outlines, curricular materials, and teaching formats The initial idea that Canadian “interns” (university students or recent graduates) would help CPRs in circumscribed areas such as English-language training was soon changed to seeing Canadian interns as cO'leamers with the CPRs in diverse action-research activities, and intern sponsorship was extended beyond WUSC to other Canadian agencies

Structurally, a Coordinating CPR (CCPR) was established in NCSSH to strengthen the network's cohesion

2.7 Results in Vietnam

By the end o f the project, LPRV had produced results (“outcomes,” in Results Based Management language) at three levels

1 The tangible results were that poverty was reduced in a handful of communes thanks to faculty and students from the five partner universities acting

on three fronts: a) disseminating appropriate technologies (and related skills) that had been scientifically or locally discovered (e.g., those related to latrines, or to pepper trees); b) creating or reviving local institutions (e.g a cattle-raising co-op, a water-management association, a lending circle); c) strengthening social capital (e.g by legitimating local co-operative and aesthetic traditions, by facilitating participatory project planning) on which local poverty reduction efforts depend

(6)

VIÊT NAM HQC - KŸ YÉU HQl THÀO QUÔC TÉ LAN THÙ* TlT

objectives (as the international development schemes Logical Framework Analysis and Results Based Management are often interpreted as prescribing), the results emerged from open-ended engagement by universities with local governments and community members Such engagement at its best (as was discussed at many LPRV meetings) fostered dialogue (open yet respectful communication), creativity (through fresh observation and brainstorming), and analytical rigour (through multi criteria assessment o f project and policy ideas)

2 Though the tangible results were gratifying, qualitatively they were not novel and quantitatively they were very modest Thus, a more significant level o f LPRV results lay in the social learning it generated-learning, through acticn- research by people in various roles (officials, community leaders, and academics, as well as students on their way to being those) who participated in LPRV and who then disseminated their new knowledge through word-of-mouth, workshops, and publications

LPRV generated learning about participatory methods, institutional strengthening, social system dynamics, collaborative governance, capacity building and university- community engagement Some o f the specific areas o f learning that were enriched by LPRV related to: a) planning tools (e.g gender analysis, participatory rural assessment) which the Canadians were responsible for introducing to Vietnam through training workshops in the early stage o f the program; b) the value for poverty reduction work o f traditional ecological and other local knowledge, indigenous mutual aid norms, and informal institutions; c) the gendered nature o f poverty; d) the danger, on the one hand, that the poorest o f the poor may be overlooked in commune-level projects, but the opportunity on the other hand, for organizing projects in ways that connect households across a range o f incomes; e) benefits o f tripartite processes that link universities with local governments and communities in collaborative problem solving; and f) learning itself

(7)

As NCSSH wrote in its final report:

The most crucial gain from the LPRV program is shown in the improvement o f p>verty reduction capacity, which means improved capacity for the poor to relie'e themselves from poverty [T]hey have shifted from passively waiting for ecommic assistance from the State and other organizations to actively exploring effective solutions to escape poverty; and from considering themselves project impbmenters to becoming project designers This is the most important basis for then to get out of poverty in a sustainable manner

Thanks to [LPRV induced and other] changes in terms o f awareness and appnaches, the poor, instead of being distrusted [by government staff] and passvely carrying out the tasks assigned, are encouraged to participate and make deci ions in planning and implementing poverty reduction projects, and bring into

full >lay their capacity to find solutions to escape poverty (NCSSH LPRV Steering Committee, 2003:4-5)

3 LPRV results at a third level potentially offer the greatest leverage in reducing poverty over the long term These results related to the strengthening of

univrsity capacities. LPRV strengthened the capacity o f the Vietnamese partners to cmtribute to development through innovative perspectives (e.g., commitment to ong<ing mutual learning), processes (e.g problem-based pedagogy, action-research, and collaborative engagement), materials (e.g curricular guides and Vietnamese and English language texts on such topics as gender and development, poverty- redu;tion work with ethnic minorities, urban poverty, participatory project plaming, policy assessment, and commune profiling), and structures (e.g., the CPFs) More important than the Vietnamese universities’ starting to teach gender anal'sis or participatory rural appraisal, or initiating poverty-oriented action- resetrch projects, was their commitments to continuously and creatively develop their capacities to so

(8)

VIÇT NAM HQC - KŸ U H<)I THÀO QC TÉ LAN THỴT T lỵ

the Centre for Environmental and Rural Development at Vinh (Ramachandran aid Scott 2009), and the Department o f Social Work and Community Development at Dalat Some created ad hoc structures to continue their work: an example is the team o f VASS and Thai Nguyen scholars that was formed to address trafficking in women in northern Vietnam

The impact o f LPRV on the Canadian partner institutions has been much more modest Structurally, no new units or programs were created at UBC nor, to my knowledge, at Laval However, as elaborated in the next section o f this paper, LPRV did have an impact on the perspectives o f the Canadian faculty and interns who participated, and on various development processes we subsequently led I say this on the basis o f references to LPRV in formal and informal meetings, and on the basis o f self-reflection

3 Lessons learned at from and irith Vietnam through LPVR

While I am unsure o f LPRV's after-project impact on Vietnam (partly because other UBC responsibilities have prevented me from maintaining close contact with the principals at most LPRV partner institutions), I am confident in declaring that LPRV has continued to have significant learning value for some o f us at UBC, and that it has therefore continued to influence the nature of our international development work

For me personally, the LPRV experience provided two overarching sets of lessons: lessons about the ways community engagement can strengthen universities as centres o f learning; and lessons about the potential o f collaborative governance to contribute to sustainable development Together, these lessons have enriched my understanding o f what participatory development (as opposed to technocratic development) ideally means, and o f the roles universities can play in leading long term social learning and initiating collaborative problem-solving

3.1 University-Community Engagement

LPRV’s community engagement lessons relate to the role that universities can play in promoting action-research as a strategy for building capacity to promote sustainable development, and to possibilities for strengthening performance in that role through international partnering The university, we learned, can be a social learning leader

Action-Research as a Capacity Building Strategy

(9)

reduction in the short term while building the capacity o f communities, governments and universities to contribute over the long term

We were aware of action-research thanks to the writing o f social change theorists ranging from John Dewey to Mao Tse Tung, and o f professional practice theorists ranging from feminists to natural resource managers, plus our own experiences in development work In my own case, these experiences had included working with urban neighbourhoods and aboriginal communities in Canada, and on a CIDA-funded UBC project to build participatory planning in rural Thailand with Thammasat University These experiences had showed me first hand that academics have much to learn from others, and in a vague sense that action-research could be productive; however, until LPRV I was not aware o f its potential for helping universities strengthen their capacity to build the capacity o f others

LPRV's action-research generated knowledge about the value o f action- research itself, and the diverse forms it can take Most interestingly for me, it revealed the potential for universities to contribute directly to meeting society’s immediate and long-term development goals while concomitantly serving the academic missions o f education and research The likelihood o f this potential being met, LPRV showed, is increased when commitment to action-research as one of a university’s priorities comes from the top, support is provided for professors and students to engage with complex development problems, units are established for this purpose, inter-disciplinarity is embraced, collaboration with government and communities is fostered, and mutual-learning networks o f like-minded institutions are established domestically and internationally with other higher education institutions

At the same time, LPRV showed the difficulties that academics face when they undertake action research, especially participatory action research These difficulties include the large amount of time required for consultation, the lack of full control over research questions, methods, and schedules, and the tension in determining authorship o f written products when many people-not just academics but also community members and government officials-have played significant roles in designing and conducting the action-research activities

In te rn a tio n a l P a rtn e rin g

(10)

VIÇT NAM HQC - KŸ U HQl THÀO QC TÉ LAN THỴT TlT

generation o f new know ledge- new knowledge about development, social learning, institution-building, and capacity-building It confirmed that development can be enhanced by framing projects in a spirit of mutual learning rather than North-to- South knowledge transfer ("training the trainers"), that structuring international programs as participatory institutional partnerships presents benefits and difficulties parallel to those associated with participatory planning at the community level

An implication, UBC suggested to CIDA, is that donor countries could perhaps increase their impact on international development by becoming less preoccupied with intensive but time-limited projects and paying more attention to supporting lasting partnerships

3.2 Collaborative Governance

Our LPRV experience helped me, and I believe others at UBC, to see collaborative governance as an essential component o f participatory development for sustainability, and to see possibilities for universities not only researching and helping communities bilaterally but also initiating and participating in multi-lateral problem-solving

By governance, I mean the processes by which a social system o f any size steers itself These processes, to continue the cybernetic metaphor o f steering, include determining destinations and courses to take (development goals and strategies), navigating (monitoring progress, threats and opportunities), and piloting (adaptively managing so as to change course, and even destinations, as necessary) To put it more succinctly, governance is the ongoing process o f societal planning, decision-making, and evaluation

(11)

However, soon after LPRV began, the Vietnamese university partners went beyond the originally envisaged roles of interpreting and facilitating communities; they progressed to initiating multilateral meetings and relationships where officials (from Peoples’ Committees, provincial departments, etc.) could analyze, plan, and assess development activities jointly with both community members and academics Such initiations became termed in LPRV "getting to D," where D represents the overlap among academic (A), governmental (B), and community (C) spheres of interest, expertise, action and authority The idea o f “getting to D” was helpful to all LPRV partners as the project’s final reports (NCSSH LPRV Steering Committee 2003 and LPRV 2004) make clear For UBCers, the idea has continued to be helpful

3.3 Impact ofLPRV on UBC’s Continuing International Capacity Building What w'e at UBC learned from and with our Vietnamese colleagues about university-community engagement and collaborative governance was helpful as we shaped our approach to CIDA-funded capacity building projects in Brazil One of those projects was concurrent with LPRV Its aim was to make watershed management in Santo Andre, a mid-sized industrial city in the suburbs of Sao Paulo, more participatory and effective in meeting the potentially competing objectives of sustainability (protecting water quality by preventing informal settlement) and social justice (serving the needs o f existing settlers) The project is described in its website: http://www.chs.ubc.ca/brazil/

A second UBC project in Brazil started three years after LPRV had finished This project, which was co-led by Brazil’s Ministry o f Cities ran until 2010 It aimed to enhance collaborative governance of metropolitan areas in Brazil by participatorily building regional consciousness and facilitating the formation of inter-municipal structures ("new public consortia") for managing social programs and maintaining ecological sustainability Website: http://www.chs.ubc.ca/con sortia/index.html

(12)

V lfT NAM HQC - KY YfcU HQl THAO QU6C TE LAN THlT TU

Building on the learning generated by LPRV, UBC’s projects in Brazil further enriched our understanding o f what international capacity building by universities can and should entail In turn, this understanding led to UBC organizing two colloquia on this topic: i) the International Forum on Universities and Participatory Development held at UBC in 2008 to promote university-community engagement in international development projects; ii) a component o f UNESCO-APEID’s 2009 conference in Bangkok on the theme o f Reinventing Higher Education: Toward Participatory and Sustainable Development.

3.4 Disseminating L PR V ’s Lessons

The lessons learned at UBC from LPRV have been explicated and disseminated through various publications and presentations For example:

• 2000 Mid-term in LPRV’s work, a paper (Boothroyd 2000) to the

International Conference on Vietnam in the 20fh Century in Hanoi discussed what we were learning about the opportunities and constraints universities face in doing poverty reduction work, particularly through the social development approach, and particularly in the context o f Vietnam at the time

• 2001 An article (Goldstone, 2001) in a publication o f the Association of Universities and Colleges o f Canada introduced the project’s approach to academics across Canada

• 2003 UBC’s Dr Leonora Angeles who had played a major role in LPRV, prepared with me a Special Edition o f the Canadian Journal o f Development Studies. Our introductory article (Angeles and Boothroyd 2003) identified many of the LPRV lessons listed above, and compared them to those from other development work by ourselves and by other contributors to the journal We suggested, inter alia, that universities:

o learn through international development experience about thorny issues related to local knowledge, collaboration, empowerment, participation, and diversity

o accept community-based participatory action research (PAR) as a legitimate academic endeavour;

o rethink with funding agencies the relationship between research and action in development work

(13)

Eduction Organization (SEAMEO) and UNESCO We were able to relay the lessins Vietnamese and Canadians had learned together from LPRV about the power o f systematically incorporating learning-by-doing into university-based devilopment projects

It is hard to know if our 2004 presentation had any impact on those in the audi;nce, but just the fact that we had been invited indicated that the organizers of the evert thought the LPRV experience was worth publicizing (The SEAMEO Executive Director had participated in LPRV's final conference some months before.)

• 2004b A paper on lessons UBC had learned from LPRV and other comnunity engagement initiatives was presented at a 2004 UNESCO colloquium in Pari The paper (Boothroyd and Fryer 2004) had been prepared with Dr Margo Frye who had just founded, with senior UBC support, the UBC Learning Exchange to atvance social inclusion in Vancouver's challenging Downtown Eastside At that time UBC was beginning to formally embrace global citizenship on the one hand and ocal community engagement on the other

LPRV, we noted, is

instructive o f what can be achieved when universities apply themselves to development, and o f opportunities and constraints universities face when they take on adevelopment role Universities could contribute more to development if they wen to commit themselves to: 1) engagement with complex development probems; 2) mutual learning (south-north, intra-university, university-community); 3) elab o ratio n (with government at all levels, communities, NGOs, international development agencies); 4) and institutionalization (of mutual learning, engagement, and collaboration in various teaching and research programs, e.g., through problem- basei learning and participatory action-research)

• 2006 Information on LPRV, and the lessons it offered to universities globally, was included in a compendium published by the Global University Netvork for Innovation Some of the lessons, presented in the form o f reconmendations to others, were:

o Build robust project-learning loops into the project-design; i.e., take an adajtive management approach to project implementation

o Focus on producing high-leverage institutional change that can produce on- goirg capacity-building

(14)

itself)-VIÇT NAM HQC - KŸ U H<)I THÀO QC TÉ LAN THỴT TU*

o Adopt a collaborative, mutual learning approach to international development o Be prepared for a significant drop-off in activity after the hard-money for the project ends

(Boothroyd and Van Anh 2006)

• 2008 LPRV was featured in UBC’s International Forum on Universities and Participatory Development through presentations by VASS representatives Dr Trinh Duy Luan and Ms Dang Anh Phuong, as well as through the participatory action-planning sessions led by UBCers Dr Robert Woollard and Mr Vince Verlaan whose association with Hue University in LPRV had been instrumental in conceptualizing “getting to D.”

• 2012 The relationship between collaborative governance and university- community engagement that had been initially sketched in my mind through participation in LPRV, and then elaborated through UBC’s projects in Brazil, was the focus o f my presentation to the University-Community Engagement Conference 2012 hosted in Chiang Mai by Thammasat and Universiti Sains Malaysia

4 Conclution

The direction o f learning that international development agencies institutions and their agents (consulting firms, professional associations, NGOs, universities) tend to focus on is knowledge transfer from "developed" countries to "developing" countries, from the global North to the global South LPRV, however, is an example o f a development activity that did not just benefit the host country; it also benefited an international partner from a donor country It illustrates the potential for international mutual learning and co-operative knowledge generation I suspect there are many other such examples, but to my knowledge there has been no systematic attempt to discover and analyze them

While North-to-South knowledge transfer can be valuable, it need not, as LPRV showed, crowd out transfers in other directions: South <—> South, and South >North In fact, much of the knowledge, such as Participatory Rural Appraisal tools, that Canadians introduced to Vietnamese through LPRV had actually originated in the South In development work, knowledge flows in all directions

Multi-directional knowledge flows are often referred to as "mutual learning" by development practitioners who recognize that we all have much to learn from

(15)

spirit o f mutual learning includes joint discovery LPRV indicated that joint discovery can be accomplished through collaboration in action-research (leaming- by-doing) at several levels - from immediate problem-solving, to advancing social learning, to institution building

For some o f us at UBC, the rippling effects o f LPRV have been powerful and long-lasting We feel lucky to have had the opportunity to learn from and with Vietnamese colleagues, many of whom are now good friends

Perhaps one day, Canada and other OECD countries will welcome development advice from Vietnam and other countries in the global South Toward that end, I propose that conferences on Vietnam studies be seen not only as venues for comparing notes on what has happened and may happen within Vietnam, but also as opportunities to consider the contributions that Vietnam makes, often in collaboration with other countries, to international learning about development processes

Works referenced

1 Angeles, Leonora and Peter Boothroyd 2003 "Canadian Universities and International Development: Learning from Experience." In: Peter Boothroyd and Leonora Angeles Canadian Journal o f Development Studies Special Issue on Canadian Universities and International Development: A Critical Look. XXIV (pdf available from peter.boothroyd@ubc.ca)

2 Boothroyd, Peter and Pham Xuan Nam (eds.) 2000 Socioeconomic Renovation in Viet Nam: The Origin, Evolution, and Impact o f Doi Mol Ottawa and Singapore: International Development Research Centre and Institute of Southeast Asian Studies 175 pp http://books.google.ca/books?id=XAjWruFJT3MC&pg=PA 178&lpg=PA 178& dq=boothroyd+and+pham+xuan+nam&source=bl&ots=ri9vn9pVQF&sig=3Kjn2Nasx6 4wl-zW5HLY_q9knfug&hl=en#v=onepage&q=boothroyd%20and%20pham%20xuan %20nam&f=false

3 Boothroyd, Peter 2000 “Doi Moi, Poverty Reduction, and the Role of the Academy.” Presentation to International Conference on Vietnam in the 20th Century, 19-21 Sept 2000, Hanoi pp http://www.chs.ubc.ca/lprv/PDF/lprv0600.pdf (Vietnamese: "Đổi mới, giảm nghèo vai trò Viện Hàn lâm." In: Việt Nam kỷ XX, Nhà xuất bàn Chính trị Quốc gia, Hà Nội, 2001, tr 285-310)

(16)

VIÇT NAM HQC - KŸ YÉU HOl THÀO QUÔC TÊ LAN THÙ* TU*

tion/en/ files/36308/11002584003Col loquium_-_December_04_-_Boothroyd_and_ Fryer.doc/Colloquium%2B-%2BDecember%2B04%2B-%2BBoothroyd%2Band% 2BFryer.doc

5 Boothroyd, Peter and Tran Thi Van Anh 2004 "Enhancing Education and Reduciig Poverty through Engagement, Collaboration and Mutual Learning.” Presentation to

SEAMEO-UNESCO Education Congress and Expo: Adapting to Changing Times end' Needs. 27-29 May 2004, Bangkok (powerpoint available fnm peter.boothroyd@ubc.ca)

6 Boothroyd, Peter and Tran Thi Van Anh 2006 “Localized Poverty Reduction in Vietnam: Building Capacity for Policy Assessment and Project Planning.” Higkr Education in the World 2006. Barcelona: Global University Network for Innovation 57-59

7 Goldstone, Jennifer 2001 "A Multi-level approach to Poverty Reduction in Vietnar."

UniWorld-UniMonde. Oct 2001 Ottawa: Association of Universities and Collegesjf Canada 1-2 http://www.aucc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/uniworld-unimonde-ot-2001.pdf

8 LPRV 2004 Localized Poverty Reduction in Vietnam: Building Capacity for Pol:y Assessment and Project Planning 1998-2003 Final Report to Canadian International Development Agency Hanoi and Vancouver: National Centre for Social Sciences ad Humanities of Vietnam, and The University of British Columbia, Centre for Humn Settlements, Vancouver 130 pp http://www.chs.ubc.ca/lprv/OutputPDF/LPRV.Finl Report, pdf http://www.chs.ubc.ca/lprv/OutputPDF/APPENDIX Quy.pdf

9 http://www.chs.ubc.ca/lprv/OutputPDF/APPENDIX2_Saumier.pdf

10 NCSSH (National Center for Social Sciences and Humanities of Vietnam) LPIV Steering Committee 2003 “LPRV’s Experiences, Achievements and Sustainabilit ” 14pp http://www.chs.ubc.ca/lprv/OutputPDF/APPENDIXl_Quy.pdf

11 Ramachandran, Leela and Steffanie Scott 2009 “Single-Player Universities in ne South: The Role of University Actors in Development in Vietnam's North Cental Coast Region.” Regional Studies 43:5:693-706 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00343407 01874115

12 Scott, Steffanie and Truong Thi Kim Chuyen 2003 "Learning Networks and Methds for