&/7*30/.&/5documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/879611468311116866/pdf/345420rev0VN... · National consultants were Vu Van Dung, Nguyen Van San, Nguyen Huu Dung, Vu Thu Hanh, Vu Xuan

��

� � � � � � ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

34542

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

ii

The Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (MoNRE), the World Bank, and the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) contributed to the preparation of this Monitor, the fourth in the series. Its production has been a participatory and consultative exercise involving national agencies, academia, civil society, donors and NGOs. WWF-Vietnam, in collaboration with partners and national experts, was mobilized to consolidate much of the data from a variety of sources. Technical group and roundtable meetings with national and international specialists were organized to provide comments, inputs, and guidance at various draft stages. In late June 2005, a national consultation workshop was held with the participation of ministries and central government agencies, research institutions, NGOs, national park staff, and donor agencies. Oral and written comments were received from the Ministries of Agriculture and Rural Development, Fisheries, Foreign Affairs, Finance, Planning and Investment, and many conservation researchers and managers in Vietnam. MoNRE was involved in the Monitor preparations through the following VEPA staff: Tran Hong Ha, Phung Van Vui , Duong Thi To, Le Thanh Binh, Hoang Duong Tung, To Kim Oanh and Le Hoang Anh. MoNRE established an expert review panel to provide comments on the final draft. The panel consisted of Nguyen Ngoc Sinh, Vo Quy, Dang Huy Huynh, Duong Hong Dat, Nguyen Ba Thu, Nguyen Xuan Ly, Tran Hong Ha, Hoang Van Thang, and Do Quang Tung. Sida contributions were made through Rolf Samuelsson and Do Thi Huyen from the Embassy of Sweden in Hanoi, and Maria Berlekom from SwedBio. The World Bank Task Team consisted of Tran Thi Thanh Phuong (Team Leader), Phillip Brylski, Tony Whitten, John Morton, Lars Lund, Dan Biller, Ron Zweig, and Bryony Morgan. The document was peer reviewed by Kathy MacKinnon and Susan Shen. Le Thanh Huong Giang provided logistic support. Bruno Bonansea and Jeffrey Lecksell were responsible for map design. Advice and contributions were received from Magda Lovei, Rob Swinkels, Nina Bhatt, and Keiko Sato of the World Bank. The WWF team included Richard McNally, Pham Hong Nguyen, Barney Long, Tran Minh Hien, Keith Symington, Do Thi Thanh Huyen, Chris Dickinson, Mai Ky Vinh, Fergus MacDonald, Tran Chinh Khuong, Roland Eve, Christian Anderson, Le Cong Uan, and Ashleigh Lezard. WWF provided the photos (unless noted otherwise). National consultants were Vu Van Dung, Nguyen Van San, Nguyen Huu Dung, Vu Thu Hanh, Vu Xuan Nguyet Hong, Nguyen The Chinh, Vu Trung Tang, Nguyen Tat Canh, Pham Binh Quyen, Vu Huu Tuynh, Tran Thi Hoa, and Le Minh Tue. Important inputs were provided by Jeremy Carew-Reid of ICEM, Andrew Tordoff and Jonathan Eames of BirdLife International, Mark Infield of Fauna and Flora International, Bernard O'Callagan of IUCN, and Julie Thomson of TRAFFIC. Special appreciation and thanks are due for the support and encouragement given by Mr. Mai Ai Truc, Minister, and Mr. Pham Khoi Nguyen, Vice Minister of MoNRE; Mr. Klaus Rohland, Country Director of the World Bank in Vietnam; Ms. Teresa Serra, Sector Director of the Environment and Social Development Sector Unit of the World Bank East Asia and Pacific Region; and Ms. Anna Lindstedt, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Sweden to Vietnam. The views expressed in the Vietnam Environment Monitor are entirely those of the authors and should not be cited without prior permission. They do not necessarily reflect the views of the World Bank Group, its Executive Directors, or the countries they represent. The material contained herein has been obtained from sources believed reliable, but it is not necessarily complete and cannot be guaranteed.

FOREWORD

iii

Vietnam is one of the most biologically diverse countries in the world. Biodiversity plays an essential role in sustaining many of Vietnam’s economic sectors, such as forestry, fisheries, agriculture, tourism and industry. It provides stability and resilience to the economy. It also creates opportunities for increased productivity, new areas of enterprise and income generation. Biodiversity is also the foundation for the livelihoods and well-being of some of the poorest, most isolated and most vulnerable communities in the country. It is engrained in the nation’s spiritual and cultural traditions - its maintenance is critical to conserving the distinctive and extraordinary social fabric which makes Vietnam what it is. Vietnam’s rapid economic growth has brought dramatic reductions in poverty and improvements in the material standard of living for most of its people. With development has also come expansion of urban areas, rapid land use changes, growing exploitation of natural resources, and intense pressures on the environment. The pace and scale of change is increasing. If not managed well, there are signs that consequent losses of biodiversity could impose constraints on the country’s future growth and compromise its natural and cultural heritage. The Government of Vietnam, international donors and conservation organizations have recognized the importance of conserving biodiversity. They have been working in collaboration throughout the country to implement strong policies and programs to help local government, communities and the private sector safeguard the natural systems on which they depend. Much progress has been made but there is more work to be done involving the many who stand to benefit from good management of biodiversity values. The Vietnam Environmental Monitors (VEM) are annual reports chronicling trends, challenges and priorities that the country faces in environmental management. This year’s report is the fourth in the series and takes a close look at conservation of the country’s most unique and fragile environmental resource, its biodiversity. As in previous issues, which focused on environmental conditions generally (2002), water (2003), and solid waste (2004), this Monitor provides a frank assessment of biodiversity status and trends, highlights key issues, and identifies experiences and lessons which can guide decision makers in setting priorities for future action to improve the management of Vietnam’s ecosystems, species and genetic resources. The Monitor promotes biodiversity conservation as an essential aspect of Vietnam’s pursuit of sustainable development. While it attempts to show that biodiversity is found and needs to be conserved in all systems -- including those heavily influenced by people, such as agricultural landscapes -- the main emphasis of this Monitor is on biodiversity in natural ecosystems. In addition, coverage of reptiles, amphibians and microbiological species and of genetic diversity was constrained by the availability of studies and data. The report is a joint effort by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MoNRE), the World Bank, and the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida). It is intended for a broad audience, including policy makers and managers, researchers, and the Vietnamese public, as well as donors, investors, and international researchers. It is hoped that the document will serve as a tool for decision makers and for raising widespread public awareness and that it will contribute to implementing the National 10-year Socio-Economic Strategy 2001-2010, and addressing some of the key environmental problems confronting the country.

Pham Khoi Nguyen Vice Minister Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment

Klaus Rohland Country Director for Vietnam World Bank

Maria Teresa Serra Sector Director Environment and Social Development Sector Unit East Asia and Pacific Region World Bank

Anna Lindstedt Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Sweden to Vietnam

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

iv

5MHRP Five Million Hectare Reforestation Programme

ASEAN Association of South-East Asian BAP Biodiversity Action Plan BP British Petroleum CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CITES Convention on International Trade in

Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora

CPC Commune People's Committee CPRGS Comprehensive Poverty Reduction and

Growth Strategy CRES Centre of Resources and Environmental

Studies Danida Danish International Development

Agency DARD Department of Agriculture and Rural

Development DEP Department of Aquatic Resources

Exploitation and Protection DOE Department of Environment DoNRE Department of Natural Resource and

Environment DPC District People's Committee ECO ECO Institute of Ecological Ecology EIA Environmental Impact Assessment FAO Food and Agriculture Organization FFI Fauna and Flora International FIPI Forest Inventory and Planning Institute FPD Forest Protection Department GDP Gross Domestic Product GEF Global Environment Facility GSPC Global Strategy for Plant Conservation GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Technische

Zusammenarbeit IBA Important Bird Area ICEM International Centre for Environmental

Management ICDP Integrated Conservation and

Development IEBR Institute of Ecology and Biological

Resources INGO International Nongovernmental

Organization IUCN International Union for the

Conservation of Nature MAB Man and the Biosphere Programme MARD Ministry of Agriculture and Rural

Development

MCI Ministry of Culture and Information MEA Multilateral Environment Agreement MoET Ministry of Education and Training MoFi Ministry of Fisheries MoNRE Ministry of Natural Resources and

Environment MPA Marine Protect Area MPI Ministry of Planning and Investment NGO Nongovernmental organization NP National Park NTFPs Non timber Forest Products ODA Overseas Development Assistance PA Protected Area PES Payment for Environmental Services PPC Provincial People's Committee Ramsar Ramsar Convention RNE Royal Netherlands Embassy SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment SFE State Forest Enterprise Sida Swedish International Cooperation

Development Agency SNV Netherlands Development Organisation SPAM Strengthening Protected Area

Management in Vietnam SUF Special Use Forests UNCCD UN Convention on Combating

Desertification UNDP United Nations Development

Programme UNFCCC UN Framework Convention on Climate

Change VCF Vietnam Conservation Fund VEPA Vietnam Environment Protection

Agency VIFEP Vietnam Institute of Fisheries

Economics and Planning VNAT Vietnam National Administration of

Tourism WB World Bank WWF World Wide Fund for Nature

Notes: 1. All tons are metric tons. 2. Unless otherwise noted, all dollars are U.S. dollars. 3. Exchange rate $1 = VND15,800

TABLE OF CONTENTS

v

Foreword...............................................................................................................................................iii Abbreviations and Acronyms .............................................................................................................iv Table of Contents ..................................................................................................................................v Biodiversity Management Scorecard ...............................................................................................viii Summary...............................................................................................................................................ix CHAPTER 1: BIODIVERSITY IN VIETNAM 1.1 What is Vietnam’s Biodiversity? .....................................................................................................2

1.2 Diversity of ecosystems ..................................................................................................................3

Terrestrial ecosystems ...............................................................................................................4 Wetland ecosystems ...................................................................................................................9 Marine ecosystems .....................................................................................................................9

1.3 Species and Genetic Diversity .......................................................................................................10 1.4 Economic and Social Values of Biodiversity ................................................................................13

Agriculture ...............................................................................................................................13 Fisheries ....................................................................................................................................................15 Forestry....................................................................................................................................16 Cultural values.........................................................................................................................17

1.5 Biodiversity and Poverty Reduction ..............................................................................................18 CHAPTER 2: BIODIVERSITY TRENDS AND THREATS 2.1 Ecosystem Trends ..........................................................................................................................22

Forest ecosystems ....................................................................................................................22 Coastal and marine ecosystems ...............................................................................................24 Freshwater wetlands................................................................................................................25

2.2 Species and Genetic Diversity Trends ...........................................................................................26 2.3 Threats to Biodiversity...................................................................................................................28

Wildlife Trade ..........................................................................................................................28 Destructive Fisheries Practices ...............................................................................................30 Illegal Logging.........................................................................................................................30 Infrastructure Development .....................................................................................................30 Agricultural Encroachment .....................................................................................................31 Invasive Alien Species..............................................................................................................31 Forest Fires..............................................................................................................................32

CHAPTER 3: POLICY, INSTITUTIONAL, AND MANAGEMENT RESPONSES 3.1 National Policy and Institutional Framework for Biodiversity Conservation................................34

Biodiversity Action Plans.........................................................................................................34 Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) ....................................................................34 Institutional framework............................................................................................................35 Decentralization.......................................................................................................................35 Nongovernmental and research organizations ........................................................................35

TABLE OF CONTENTS

vi

3.2 The National System of Protected Areas .......................................................................................37 An expanding national PA system............................................................................................37 Protected areas staffing ...........................................................................................................40 Communities living within protected areas .............................................................................42

3.3 Conservation Outside Protected Areas ..........................................................................................43

Buffer zones..............................................................................................................................43 Landscape planning and management.....................................................................................44 Mainstreaming biodiversity in economic sectors.....................................................................45

3.4 Financing for Biodiversity Conservation.......................................................................................50

Government and donor funding ...............................................................................................50 Private sector funding..............................................................................................................52 Payments for ecosystem services (PES)...................................................................................55

3.5 Community Involvement in Biodiversity Conservation ................................................................55

Communities as natural resource managers ...........................................................................55 Community involvement in Ecotourism ...................................................................................56

CHAPTER 4: CHALLENGES AND DIRECTIONS FOR INNOVATION 4.1 Improve the protected area network and its management effectiveness........................................58 4.2 Strengthen the rights and capacity of communities to manage natural resources .........................59 4.3 Improve the integration of biodiversity protection measures into economic development ...........59 4.4 Control illegal wildlife trade..........................................................................................................60 4.5 Increase, diversify, and efficiently manage financing for conservation ........................................61 Annexes I Indicators relevant to the 2010 CBD strategy target......................................................................63 II Biodiversity regions in Vietnam....................................................................................................66 III Vietnam's terrestrial ecoregions.....................................................................................................67 IV Major MEAs to which Vietnam is a party .....................................................................................70 V Key institutions responsible for biodiversity conservation and sustainable use ............................71 VI Major ongoing and pipeline biodiversity conservation projects in Vietnam.................................72 VII Vietnam at a glance .......................................................................................................................77

Figures 1.1 Area of forest types in Vietnam.......................................................................................................4 2.1 Change in composition of natural forests, 1990-2004 ...................................................................22 2.2 Changes in mangrove forest area in Vietnam, 1943-2000.............................................................24 2.3 Trends in overall production (wild fisheries and aquaculture) and fisheries catch per unit effort

in Vietnam .....................................................................................................................................26 2.4 Maximum counts of wintering black-faced spoonbills at Xuan Thuy Ramsar Site ......................26 2.5 Cumulative pressure on protected areas in the Greater Annamites Ecoregion..............................28 3.1 Key central-level institutions with responsibilities for biodiversity conservation.........................36 3.2 Increase in number of decreed SUFs, 1962-2004..........................................................................37 3.3 Staffing in seven Vietnamese protected areas ...............................................................................40 3.4 Trends in investment in biodiversity conservation, 1996-2004.....................................................50 3.5 Government funding for protected areas in developed and developing countries.........................53

TABLE OF CONTENTS

vii

Maps 1.1 Biodiversity regions in Vietnam study area.....................................................................................5 1.2 Terrestrial ecoregions in Vietnam mainland and neighboring countries .........................................6 1.3 Density of mammals and amphibian species in Vietnam, Lao PDR, and Cambodia ......................7 1.4 Areas of highest biodiversity in Vietnam mainland ........................................................................8 1.5 Economic benefits of conservation in Thua Thien Hue Province .................................................14 1.6 Poverty and protected areas in Vietnam mainland ........................................................................20 2.1 Forest cover change in Vietnam mainland between 1983 and 2004..............................................23 3.1 Protected areas system in Vietnam study area...............................................................................38 3.2 Central Truong Son Conservation Landscape ...............................................................................46

Boxes 1.1 Recent mammal discoveries ........................................................................................................11 1.2 Vietnam’s slipper orchids ............................................................................................................12 1.3 Bamboos of Vietnam ...................................................................................................................16 1.4 Karst Landscapes-Vietnam’s natural and cultural heritage .........................................................17 1.5 Spirit forests and biodiversity conservation.................................................................................18 1.6 Enhancing the poverty reduction focus of Vietnam forest sector strategies................................19 2.1 Trends in freshwater fisheries......................................................................................................25 2.2 Species impacted by the wildlife trade ........................................................................................29 2.3 Innovative provincial transboundary initiative against wildlife trade .........................................29 2.4 Impacts of the invasion of Mimosa pigra in the Tram Chim National Park................................31 3.1 The Vietnam Conservation Fund (VCF) .....................................................................................39 3.2 Vietnam Flora Conservation Project............................................................................................41 3.3 Biodiversity Training in Cuc Phuong Training Centre................................................................41 3.4 Biodiversity outside protected areas: experience from important bird areas...............................43 3.5 Enabling factors for ICDPs in Vietnam.......................................................................................44 3.6 A landscape approach to conservation planning..........................................................................45 3.7 Five Million Hectare Reforestation Programme..........................................................................48 3.8 Forest sector development project ...............................................................................................49 3.9 SUCCESS Alliance Vietnam: Mainstreaming diversity and biodiversity in cocoa-growing systems.........................................................................................................................................49 3.10 Private sector investment in Marine Protected Area (MPA) management..................................52 3.11 Lessons learned in community-based conservation from Vietnam’s first MPA .........................55 3.12 Community orchid production in Phuong Nha Ke Bang National Park......................................56 3.13 Ecotourism in Pu Luong-Cuc Phuong Limestone Landscape .....................................................56

Tables 1.1 Known species richness of selected taxonomic groups in Vietnam .............................................10 1.2 Goods and Services from Protected Areas in Thua Thien Hue Province .....................................13 2.1 Forest cover in Vietnam, 1995-2004 ............................................................................................22 2.2 Number of nationally and globally threatened species in Vietnam ..............................................26 2.3 Population estimates for selected globally threatened species in Vietnam to illustrate the extreme rarity of some species......................................................................................................27 2.4 Reduction of area and loss of indigenous races of some major domestic plans, 1970-98............27 2.5 Relative importance of threats to biodiversity ..............................................................................28 2.6 Potential impacts of roads and dams on biodiversity....................................................................30 3.1 Planned and gazetted Special Use Forests ....................................................................................37 3.2 Proportion of populations of selected threatened species within SUFs ........................................37 3.3 Mean revenue by source for 66 provincially managed SUFs, 2000-02........................................51

BIODIVERSITY MANAGEMENT SCORECARD

viii

This simple scorecard provides a snapshot of Vietnam’s progress in meeting the two Millennium Development Goal 7 indicators related to biodiversity. A number of more specific indicators fill out the picture concerning protected areas. This is a partial treatment of Vietnam’s conservation monitoring needs. In 2002, the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity and the World Summit on Sustainable Development agreed to achieve by 2010 a significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss at the global, regional and national level as a contribution to poverty alleviation and to the benefit of all life on earth. 1 The Parties also adopted seven “focal areas” to facilitate the assessment of progress toward the 2010 target and agreed that each country should develop its own set of indicators for this purpose. As the synthesis of trends in Chapter 2 shows, Vietnam uses a range of measures to keep track of biodiversity. Greater attention is needed to set in place a complete monitoring framework based on the CBD focal areas. Annex 1 summarizes a guide to proposed biodiversity indicators relevant to the 2010 target prepared by the CBD Secretariat. This is an initial step for Vietnam to adopt its own framework as part of the annual national State of Environment Report and in meeting its international obligations under the Convention.2

Millennium Development Goal 7

Indicators Baseline 2005 Trend

Forest cover (% of total land area) 28.3 (1995) 37.3 32% increase

Protected area coverage (i.e., Special Use Forest coverage as a % of total land area)

4.1 (1999) 5.5 34% increase

Contributing indicators relating to protected areas

Related international agreement Indicators Baseline 2005 Trend

CBD/COP-7 Decision on Protected Areas

No. of SUFs 80 (1995) 126 58% increase

CBD/COP-7 Decision on Protected Areas

No. of established MPAs 0 (1995) 1 increase

Ramsar Convention No. of Ramsar Sites 1 (1995) 2 100% increase

World Heritage Convention No. of natural World Heritage Sites

1 (1995) 2 increase

Man and the Biosphere Program No. of MAB Reserves 0 (1995) 4 increase

ASEAN Declaration on Heritage Parks

No. of ASEAN Heritage Parks

0 (1995) 4 increase

1 Decision VI/26 concerning the Strategic Plan for the Convention on Biological Diversity 2 CBD Executive Secretary, 2003, Proposed biodiversity indicators relevant to the 2010 target, Note by the Executive Secretary, Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice, Ninth meeting Montreal, 10-14 November 2003, Items 5.3 and 7.2 of the provisional agenda., UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/9/INF/26 29 October 2003

SUMMARY

ix

Vietnam is one the most biologically diverse countries in the world and is recognized as a high priority for global conservation. Its natural ecosystems include a rich variety of productive and beautiful forest types, marshes, rivers, and coral reefs, which together support nearly 10 percent of the global total of mammal and bird species. Many species are unique to Vietnam or found in very few other places in the world, making the country the best—in some cases the only—opportunity in the world for their conservation. Forest cover, including both natural forest and plantations, is 37 percent of the total land area of the country. About 18 percent of that total is plantations. Only 7 percent of remaining forest is “primary” forest, and nearly 70 percent is poor quality secondary forest. Vietnam’s wetlands include many types of rivers, ponds, swamps, wet forests, and reed beds. There are 39 documented wetland types, including mangroves and other inter-tidal forests, brackish lagoons, seagrass beds, and coral reefs, all of which have high species richness and productivity. The marine environment covers 20 distinctive ecosystem types; many are regionally unique in their oceanographic properties. These support more than 11,000 species. About 1,100 square kilometers of coral reefs are widely distributed from the north to the south, with the largest area and highest biodiversity found in the center and south of the country. Vietnam’s coral reefs support nearly 400 species of reef-building corals, which compares with the most diverse systems worldwide. Vietnam is within one of the eight Vavilov “Centers of Origin” for domesticated plants, and has a high variety of both domesticated animals and crop plants. For example, Vietnam has dozens of races of the 14 major livestock and poultry species. Domestic plants are very diverse; over 700 plant species are grown for food, medicine, and construction In recent decades, scientists have discovered many previously unknown species in Vietnam, including some new to science. The list includes five new mammal species and three new bird species to be described in mainland Southeast Asia in 30 years. Also during this period, large numbers of new species of reptiles, amphibians, fishes, and invertebrates were described, including six new species of crabs. In the 10-year period to 2002, 13 new genera, 222 new species, and 30 new subspecies of plants were described in Vietnam. Vietnam’s natural systems, species, and genetic material are an intrinsic part of the country’s economy and culture. This biodiversity makes a major contribution to many development sectors such as forestry, fisheries, agriculture, health, industry, and tourism. The aesthetic attractions and charismatic wildlife of natural areas bring considerable economic benefits to the country and local people through the expanding nature-based tourism industry. Vietnam’s natural systems provide important environmental services such as soil and watershed protection with benefits for soil fertility, river navigation, irrigation, and hydropower. They also contribute to global and local climate regulation. The coastal forests and coral reefs are important in coastal protection and as breeding grounds for many economically important species. In short, Vietnam cannot afford to let its biodiversity degrade. Ecological systems and the biodiversity contained within them provide much of the basic needs of the rural poor—from foodstuffs to fuelwood, medicines, and potable water. In addition, they provide insurance against natural disasters, to which the poor are particularly vulnerable. Some 25 million Vietnamese depend on forest systems and an estimated 8 million depend on fisheries as their primary source of household income. An additional 12 million get part of their income or subsistence from fisheries. Recognizing and understanding the value of biodiversity for poor people can help provide livelihood opportunities, improved nutrition, health, and water supply. Over 85 percent of protected areas in Vietnam are located in areas of high poverty. Forest management and biodiversity conservation therefore affect and are affected by poverty reduction initiatives.

SUMMARY

x

Biodiversity trends and threats Forest cover is increasing. The government has set a target of 43 percent forest cover in the country by 2010. Yet natural forests are increasingly fragmented and degraded. Over two-thirds of Vietnam’s natural forests are considered poor or regenerating. Forest loss and degradation are major reasons for desertification and land impoverishment, creating a wide range of negative impacts and challenges such as more serious flooding and drought. Rapid conversion of wetlands continues; remaining areas are under intensive use and development pressure. Mangrove forests appear to have stabilized in some local areas, but wide-scale coral reef degradation continues. Nearly 700 species are threatened with extinction nationally, while over 300 species are threatened with global extinction. Forty-nine of Vietnam's globally threatened species are classified as “critically endangered,” meaning they face a high risk of extinction in the wild in the immediate future. Fisheries resources are declining, especially in inland and nearshore ecosystems. If current trends continue, it is likely that the first decades of the 21st Century will witness a wave of species extinctions unprecedented in Vietnam’s history. As the country’s economy has expanded and the population grown, Vietnam has experienced worsening habitat loss, habitat fragmentation, pollution, and the increasing incursion of invasive alien species. Threats are compounded by the lack of clear institutional arrangements for biodiversity conservation, capacity and commitment in implementation of good policies, and a lack of ownership of the natural resource base by local communities. Wildlife consumption in Vietnam is unsustainable. Poaching is one of the most significant threats to protected areas and is considered among the greatest threats to biodiversity in Southeast Asia. In 2002, the trade in wildlife within and from Vietnam amounted to approximately 3,050 tons and was worth over $66 million. Other threats include destructive fishing techniques, such as the use of dynamite, poison, and electric fishing, which are effecting over 80 percent of Vietnam's coral reefs. Illegal logging continues in areas where effective forest protection has not taken hold. Between 0.5 and 2 million m3 of timber is extracted illegally each year from all forest categories, including special-use forests. The rate of extraction exceeds sustainable levels by 70 percent. The unintended effects of infrastructure development on natural systems are leading to biodiversity loss and beginning to have very significant negative impacts on the productivity of key economic sectors and on the economy overall. Encroachment by fixed cultivation and shifting agriculture has led to loss of forest ecosystems. Freshwater wetlands, such as seasonally inundated grasslands, also have been threatened by conversion to rice agriculture. Vietnam has experienced the introduction of a number of invasive species. The increase in global trade, travel, and transport of goods across borders—as well as growing development of infrastructure such as roads—has facilitated the spread of invasive alien species. Although to date natural terrestrial ecosystems do not appear to be seriously affected in freshwater and agricultural systems, the impacts of invasive species have been much more dramatic, with substantial economic costs. About 6 million hectares of Vietnam's forests are considered to be vulnerable to fire. Between 1992 and 2002, forest losses due to fire averaged 6,000 hectares annually. In the three years to 2005, MARD reports that authorities uncovered 134,000 cases of crime related to the prevention and control of forest fire rules.

SUMMARY

xi

Policy, institutional and management responses

The Government of Vietnam and its partners are responding to these urgent conservation needs. Efforts by the government, international donors, and conservation organizations have been substantial and have resulted in several key achievements. Vietnam has established a solid framework of laws and institutions. Starting in the late 1980s, Vietnam committed to establishing the necessary laws to protect its biodiversity. In 1995, a national Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) was adopted to guide and focus the nation’s conservation effort. A new BAP, covering the period 2006-2015 with a vision to 2020, is being developed by MoNRE and will be issued in 2006. A law on biodiversity is in the early stages of preparation. Other detailed plans for biodiversity conservation include the Management Strategy for a Protected Area System in Vietnam to 2010, which was adopted by government in 2003; the Action Plan for Wetlands Conservation and Sustainable Development (2004–10); and the draft Marine Protected Areas Action Plan, which is expected to be adopted early in 2006. Regulations to support implementation of these plans are being prepared by MARD, MoFi ,and MoNRE.

Responsibility for many aspects of biodiversity conservation is strongly decentralized to the provincial and levels of local government, which presents a number of opportunities for better management. Decentralization also presents a number of obstacles to effective biodiversity conservation. Critical responsibilities and authorities are often devolved to agencies that do not have the capacity, skills, and detailed administrative arrangements to take the new roles on board. Implementation has been a slow process, while institutional capacities and enabling regulations and procedures have steadily been put in place. Significant barriers remain in the institutional framework, which suffers from poor inter-agency coordination and overlapping and unclear mandates. During the past decade, Vietnam’s protected areas system has expanded rapidly with the establishment of a network of 126 special-use forests (SUFs), including national parks, nature reserves, and landscape conservation areas. While coastal and marine ecosystems are represented in a number of SUFs, comprehensive planning for a national MPA system began only a few years ago. Vietnam’s first marine protected area, at Nha Trang Bay, was approved for establishment in 2001. A national system of 17 MPAs is being proposed, and includes a site within the Halong Bay World Heritage Site. Protection of freshwater wetlands remains in the planning stages. The management of these areas is improving, but they are facing constraints, including a lack of consistent support from local authorities and limited funding. The number of staff and their qualifications are not adequate to meet the demands of PA management. Both the government and NGOs have recognized the need for further conservation training. Around 80 percent of SUFs have communities living within them, although this is not permitted under the 2004 Forest Development and Protection Law. The situation with MPAs and wetland conservation areas will differ. Under the Fisheries Law and the draft MPA regulations, the concept of multiple use and community zones associated with protected areas has been introduced. Overall, government policies relating to communities and protected areas are evolving. Protected-area designation applies to only 7 percent of the country. Natural areas beyond their borders are also critical to the long-term conservation of biodiversity. The role of buffer zones in preventing and lessening encroachment on protected areas has been recognized in government regulations since the late 1980s, but they do not have clearly defined boundaries or management objectives and regimes. More protected areas are being planned and managed at the landscape or bioregional scales. This is a reflection of the ecosystem approach advocated by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), to which Vietnam is a party. This approach extends the conservation reach well beyond strictly protected core zones. In several regions of the country, landscape planning is under way to encourage conservation of contiguous habitat linking protected areas.

SUMMARY

xii

Although there continues to be a lack of acknowledgment of biodiversity values within the plans and strategies of other sectors, there are a growing number of examples—in agriculture, fisheries, and forestry—in which biodiversity issues are being integrated. The forest sector, in particular, has led in bringing conservation and sustainable use into policies, legislation, and national programs. Examples include the Forest Protection and Development Law (1991 and 2004), the Land Law (1993 and 2003), the policy on closing natural forests, and the Forest Land Allocation (FLA) programs, which have been conducted since the 1993 Land Law revision. The operational focus for implementing these policies has been the Five Million Hectare Reforestation Program (5MHRP), also known as the 661 Program, as well as a series of initiatives, including National Agenda 21, the Law on Environmental Protection (1993) and its amendment now under consideration by the National Assembly, the National Environmental Protection Strategy until 2010 and Vision toward 2020, Politburo Resolution 41-NQ/TW on environmental protection, and the Prime Minister’s Decision 34/2005/QĐ-TTg promulgating Government´s action plan to implement the Resolution 41-NQ/TW. Together, these provide direction for incorporating environmental issues across governmental plans and programs, including emphasis on the use of environmental assessment early in development planning. National and international investment in Vietnam’s conservation projects has been growing; $261 million was spent between 1996 and 2004. Total investment in biodiversity conservation in 2005 could reach $51.8 million, which is 10 times higher than total investment a decade earlier. While ODA still accounts for most expenditure on biodiversity, the government share has increased from 26 percent in 1996 to 40 percent in 2004. Even so, average annual spending for biodiversity accounts for only 0.4 percent of total expenditure from the state budget, for 2 percent of total ODA to the environment sector, and only 0.3 percent of total ODA to Vietnam. Despite a growing commitment to the principle of corporate environmental and social responsibility by private firms globally and some encouraging pilot activities, the private sector is not fully engaged in biodiversity conservation in Vietnam. Both ODA and government investment in biodiversity conservation has been skewed toward particular ecosystems, sites, and approaches. More than 66 percent of the government's total expenditure on biodiversity has been for capital investment projects that were not necessarily priorities for conservation. Payment for environmental services represents one innovative source of conservation financing with high potential for application in Vietnam. New policy developments such as the Law on Forest Protection and Development (2004) and the planned biodiversity law could provide a foundation for ecosystem service payments and a user pays approach to those who benefit commercially from biodiversity. The role of communities in biodiversity conservation is growing. With a large number of poor communities dependent upon natural resources in the country, especially in the remote mountainous areas and protected areas, the relationship between biodiversity and communities is crucial to both poverty alleviation and conservation. Progress on this front has been incremental. Community-based projects and public awareness are growing, but the systematic approach necessary for truly broad impact is lacking.

Challenges and directions for innovation Improve the protected area network and its management effectiveness. The protected area system is a cornerstone of Vietnam’s biodiversity conservation program. The priorities are to expand the protected area network to include poorly represented habitats such as lowland evergreen forests, rivers, coastal wetlands, and marine areas. A review of the protected areas system is needed to define a comprehensive, adequate, and representative (CAR) system of protected areas for all terrestrial and

SUMMARY

xiii

marine bioregions, and to identify adjustments and additions required. Management planning is critical to improving the PA system so that scarce financial resources are focused on conservation needs. Legal provisions and procedures are also required for (a) boundary demarcation and zoning, (b) working with communities living within and around PAs, (c) establishing clearly defined buffer zones, and (d) allowing management boards clear autonomy to raise and use revenues. Strengthen the rights and capacity of communities to manage natural resources. In marine and wetland conservation areas and in certain categories of forest, the evolving legal framework foreshadows multiple use zones and collaborative management arrangements. The mechanisms for natural resources management and sustainable use by communities need to be developed. Extension services and protected areas staff need to develop greater capacity to allow new roles to be taken on in community outreach and support. Special arrangements are needed to manage uses of protected areas, including structures and governance procedures to involve communities and to allow traditional and subsistence uses of PA resources within the context of agreed plans, zones, and monitoring. The main challenge for PA staff and communities is to determine the levels of use that natural systems can sustain without harming biodiversity. Improve the integration of biodiversity protection measures into economic development. Infrastructure developments and expanding exploitation of natural resources are having major impacts on biodiversity at the site and landscape levels. Three priority strategies are needed: (1) regional biodiversity planning to set conservation frameworks for development both within and outside protected areas; (2) a much more rigorous application of EIA procedures to ensure that conservation standards and guidelines are followed, and areas which must be kept in their natural state are not harmed; and (3) “user pays” policies for commercial exploitation of biodiversity and ecosystem benefits. Improve enforcement, especially regarding illegal wildlife trade. Vietnam is one of Asia’s major international markets in endangered plant and animal species, both as a supplier of species caught within Vietnam and as a transit point for trade between regional neighbors. For Vietnam to meet its international legal obligations, it needs to fully implement the various action plans covering enforcement, public disclosure, and awareness. This will require increased powers for the Forest Protection Department in law enforcement, improved coordination between local authorities and enforcement agencies, and increased understanding and knowledge of the laws and capacity to enforce them. Increase, diversify, and effectively manage the financing available for conservation. Investment in biodiversity conservation has emphasized a relatively small number of areas and the financing of buildings and roads in protected areas. To reverse the current trend of biodiversity loss, there will need to be (1) an increase in the total amount of conservation investment by government, and (2) a more strategic targeting of funds to meet conservation needs. Another priority is to assess and develop the opportunities for the poor to benefit from the provision of ecological services, in particular ecotourism, watershed protection, and carbon sequestration, and to empower protected areas staff to raise revenues and thereby develop sustainable conservation financing. Underlying all these challenges is the need to build the capacity, skills, and budgets of protected area managers. Strong protected area authorities are essential to the innovation and flexibility required if protected area systems are to survive and remain the principle form of special tenure for biodiversity conservation. Protected area managers must be given the authority, confidence, and resources to build working relationships with development sectors and local communities, allowing them to take their skills and knowledge into the productive sectors around the protected areas. A strong impetus for innovation and progress in managing protected areas will come from Vietnam’s working relationships with neighbouring countries and with the international community.

SUMMARY

xiv

Species extinction and, to a large extent, habitat loss are irreversible. Decisions taken today will affect future generations. Wisdom and conviction are needed to ensure that Vietnam’s remarkable natural assets are managed to ensure that the benefits and advances of the steep development path that Vietnam is on do not come at the cost of permanent damage to the global commons.

CMYK CMYK

Chapter 1

Biodiversity in Vietnam

Chapter 1

Biodiversity in Vietnam

CHAPTER 1: BIODIVERSITY IN VIETNAM

2

Biological diversity’ means the variability among living organisms from all sources including, terrestrial, marine, and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species (genetic diversity), between species, and of ecosystems. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD, 1992) 1.1 What is Vietnam’s Biodiversity?

Vietnam’s biological diversity is the variety of all life forms in the country—the different plants, animals, and microorganisms, the genes they contain, and the ecosystems of which they form a part. It is not static, but constantly changing. It is increased by genetic change and evolutionary processes and reduced by processes such as habitat degradation and loss, population decline, and extinction. It covers the terrestrial, marine, and other aquatic environments and their interrelatedness. The biodiversity of the country is found in its:

• genetic diversity—the variety of genetic information contained in all of the individual plants, animals, and microorganisms. Genetic diversity occurs within and between the populations of organisms that comprise individual species, as well as among species.

• species diversity—the variety of species.

• ecosystem diversity–the variety of habitats, biotic communities, and ecological processes.

In 1992, the World Conservation Monitoring Centre evaluated Vietnam as one of the 16 most biologically diverse countries in the world.3 For particular taxonomic groups, Vietnam is one of the most important countries in the world in terms of conservation. For example, it is ranked fourth in the world for primates, being home to five of the twenty-five most endangered species in this order.4

3 WCMC. 1992. Development of a national biodiversity index. A discussion paper prepared by the World Conservation Monitoring Centre. Cambridge, UK: WCMC (unpublished). 4 CI, MMBF, IUCN/SSC and IPS. 2002. The world's top 25 most endangered primates. Washington DC: Conservation International, Margot Marsh Biodiversity Foundation, IUCN/SSC Primate Specialist Group, and International Primatological Society.

Vietnam is recognized as a center of species endemism, containing all or part of five endemic bird areas defined by BirdLife International,5 and having three of the Global 200 Ecoregions defined by WWF6 and six Centers of Plant Diversity defined by IUCN.7 The entire country is included within Conservation International’s Indo-Burma hotspot,8 one of the earth's richest and most threatened biological regions.

5 Stattersfield, A. J. and others. 1998. Endemic Bird Areas of the world: priorities for biodiversity conservation. Cambridge, UK: BirdLife International. 6 Olson, D. M. and others. 2000. The Global 200: a representation approach to conserving the Earth's distinctive ecoregions. Washington, D.C.: WWF-US Conservation Science Program. 7 Davis, S. D., V. H. Heywood, and A.C.Hamilton, eds. 1995. Centres of plant diversity: a guide and strategy for their conservation. Volume 2: Asia, Australasia and the Pacific. Cambridge, U.K.: IUCN Publications Unit. 8 Mittermeier Russel A., Robles Gil, P., and others, eds. 2004. Hotspots revisited: Earth's biologically richest and most endangered terrestrial ecoregions. Monterrey: CEMEX; Washington D.C.: Conservation International; and Mexico: Agrupación Sierra Madre.


3

For Vietnam, biological diversity is much more than wildlife and their habitats protected in nature conservation reserves. It is also the life-support systems essential for development and social well-being. It includes animals, plants, and micro-organisms used directly or indirectly for food and agriculture (including crops, livestock, forests, and fisheries). It comprises the diversity of genetic resources (including sub-species, varieties, and breeds) and species used for fiber, fuel, and pharmaceuticals. It also includes the diversity of species that are not harvested directly, but support production (for example, soil micro-organisms, predators, and pollinators), as well as those in the wider environment that live in and support agroecosystems (agricultural, pastoral, forest, and aquatic). An environment rich in biological diversity offers the necessary array of options for sustainable economic activity, for nurturing human welfare, and for adapting to change. Benefits to Vietnam arising from biological diversity are not restricted to the continued harvest of resources. They include the provision and maintenance of a wide array of ecological services. Such services include the maintenance of hydrological cycles (groundwater recharge, watershed protection, and buffering against extreme events), climate regulation, soil production and fertility, protection from erosion, nutrient storage and cycling, and pollutant breakdown and absorption. They are fundamental to the quality of life and the economy, but they are often undervalued in economic terms. A benefit of biodiversity conservation is avoidance of the rising costs incurred through degradation of ecological systems resulting in lost production and ongoing nutrient losses. The aesthetic and cultural values of Vietnam’s natural ecosystems and landscapes also contribute to the emotional and spiritual well-being of an increasingly urbanized population. Both active and passive recreational benefits of ecosystems are highly valued by an increasing number of people, and form the basis of a growing nature-based tourism industry.

1.2 Diversity of ecosystems

Vietnam extends more than 1,650 km from north to south, with an altitude that varies from sea level to a maximum of 3,143 m in the Hoang Lien Mountains. Three quarters of the country is hilly or mountainous, and the lowland areas are fed by two major river systems: the Red River in the north and the Mekong River in the south. This geography results in high variation in climate, soils, and topography, and thus a wide large variety of ecosystems, each with its own distinct flora and fauna. Within Vietnam, the distribution of biodiversity across the country is uneven. The varied pattern of biodiversity across the country can be illustrated a number of ways, depending on the number of factors taken into account. The definition of biodiversity or eco-regions is a useful way of describing areas of land or water containing a characteristic set of natural communities that share a majority of their species, dynamics, and environmental conditions. Map 1.1 identifies ten distinct terrestrial and nine coastal/marine biodiversity regions adjusted to follow provincial boundaries. The distinguishing characteristics of the regions are summarized in Annex II.9 This variation is also reflected in Map 1.2 showing forest or terrestrial ecoregions in Vietnam. Many ecoregions are shared with neighboring countries. The biodiversity

9 In 1999, the Ministry of Planning and Investment and UNDP brought together a team of Vietnamese experts to define a set of terrestrial and marine biodivesrity regions as part of a study of aid to the environment and to assist the government and its international partners in setting priorities for conservation action. MPI and UNDP. 1999. Aid to the environment sector in Vietnam. Hanoi: UNDP.


4

characteristics of the 14 ecoregions are described in Annex III. The variation in habitat types is also illustrated in Map 1.3, which shows the importance of the central highlands for amphibians, as well as the importance of the northwest for mammals. The ways to depict Vietnam’s natural systems and biodiversity are evolving as more reliable information becomes available and better monitoring programs are put in place. It is important for Vietnam to formally adopt some form of biodiversity regions to assist in planning, setting investment priorities, and for better integrating biodiversity values with socioeconomic development. Similarly, the methods for identifying the areas of highest biodiversity importance in Vietnam are improving and becoming more comprehensive as detailed information improves. A recent analysis commissioned by the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund for the Indochina region overlaid data on species and habitats to identify “key biodiversity areas” and “conservation corridors” linking them.10 Key biodiversity areas support globally threatened species. In Vietnam, only 65 percent of these areas are wholly or partially within gazetted protected areas (Map 1.4). Conservation corridors are defined for the conservation of landscape species and for maintaining ecological and evolutionary processes. Terrestrial ecosystems – forests are most diverse from mountains to the sea Natural terrestrial ecosystems in Vietnam include evergreen forests (lowland and mountain), semi-evergreen forests, deciduous forests, and forests on limestone, coastal sand dunes, and beaches. Beside these, through a long history of land use, there are a variety of human-generated ecosystems, such as different agricultural landscapes and urban areas. Among natural terrestrial ecosystems, forests cover the largest area and support the highest levels of biodiversity. 10 Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund. 2005. Ecosystem Profile, Indo-Burma Biodiversity Hotspot, Indochina Region. Final Draft Submitted to the CEPF Working Group by Birdlife International

The most recent official figures (using a new methodology for measurement) show forest cover in Vietnam, including both natural forest and plantations, to be 12.3 million ha, which is over 37 percent of the total land area of the country (Figure 1.1). Plantations account for about 18 percent of the total.11 Only 7 percent of remaining forests are considered “primary” forests, and nearly 70 percent of remaining forests are considered to be poor quality secondary forests. Figure 1.1 Area of forest types in Vietnam

mangrove forest68,035 ha

(1%)

mixed forest 682,642 ha

(6%)

bamboo forest 799,130 ha

(6%)

plantations 2,218,570 ha

(18%)limestone forest

611,657 ha(5%)

timber forest 7,926,825 ha

(64%)

Source: FPD-MARD (2004).

11 According to the official forestry statistics of MARD, 2004


5

Map 1.1


6

Map 1.2

7

CH

APT

ER

1: B

IOD

IVE

RSI

TY

IN V

IET

NA

M 7

Map

1.3

Base

d on

pre

limin

ary

data

pro

vide

d by

IUCN

-The

Wor

ld C

onse

rvat

ion

Uni

on.


8

Map 1.4


8

Map 1.4


8

Map 1.4


9

Wetland ecosystems – a land of rivers, lakes and ponds Vietnam has a dense river network, including 2,360 rivers with a length over 10 km. Eight rivers have large basins with catchments of more than 10,000 km². This river network includes many international rivers that originate in other countries. About two-thirds of Vietnam’s water resources originate outside the country, making Vietnam susceptible to water resources decisions made in upstream countries. Vietnam’s wetlands12 include many types of rivers, ponds, swamps, wet forests, and reed beds. There are 39 documented wetland types in Vietnam, including 30 natural wetlands and nine artificial wetlands.13 The Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment has identified 68 wetland sites of national importance. Vietnam’s rivers support a variety of ecosystem types each with a different fauna and flora: mountain torrents, hill streams, rapids, rivers within caves, and slow-moving large rivers. Threatened freshwater wetlands of high biodiversity importance are the small remaining areas of peat swamp and grassy swamps of the Mekong delta, almost all of which have been converted to agricultural land.

12 The Ramsar Convention defines wetlands as areas of marsh, fen, peatland, or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including areas of marine water the depth of which at low tide does not exceed six meteers. Wetland types are dependent on Ramsar categories. 13 FREC/FIPI,. 1999. Development of Basis for Planning Wetland Protected Areas of Vietnam. Hanoi

With over 3,260 km of tropical coastline and more than 3,000 islands, it is not surprising that Vietnam has very diverse and rich coastal ecosystems. These include mangroves and other inter-tidal forests, brackish lagoons, seagrass beds, and coral reefs, all of which have high species richness and productivity. Marine ecosystems – feeding the nation Vietnam has an exclusive marine economic zone of about 1 million km2, which covers 20 distinctive ecosystem types; many are regionally unique in their oceanographic properties. These support more than 11,000 species, including nearly 2,500 marine fish species (130 of which are of high economic value), 225 shrimp species, over 500 phytoplankton species, nearly 700 zooplankton species, nearly 100 species of mangrove plants, 15 species of seagrass, and over 6,000 benthic invertebrates. In addition, marine ecosystems are important for 5 species of turtles, 15 snakes, 25 mammals, and 43 seabirds.14 As more surveys are undertaken, the total number of marine species in Vietnam is steadily increasing. Approximately 1,122 square kilometers of coral reefs are widely distributed from the north to the south. The largest area and highest biodiversity is found in the center and south. Studies of Vietnam’s coral reefs have recorded nearly 400 species of reef building corals. The waters of Nha Trang Bay, Ninh Thuan, and the Con Dao archipelago contain more than 300 species each. This demonstrates the richness of coral species diversity in Vietnam’s waters. Ninety percent of hard coral species in the Indo-Pacific have been found in Vietnamese waters. The soft coral species Alcyonaria is the most diverse in Western Pacific-Indian areas. With the number of known coral species, Vietnam’s coral community can be compared with the most diverse areas around the world.15

14 Nguyen Chu Hoi. 2001. Present status and management mechanism of Marine Protected Areas in Vietnam. Marine Science and Technology Magazine 1; and Research Institute for Marine Fisheries. 2005. Proceedings of National Workshop on Fishery exploitation, processing and logistic service. Hai Phong: Agriculture Publishing House. 15 Vo Sy Tuan. 2005. National action plan for coral reef management in Vietnam to 2015. Paper presented to the Sixth Meeting of the Regional Working Group for the Coral Reef Sub-component of the UNEP/GEF Project entitled Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand, Masinloc, Philippines, August 22–25, 2005.


10

1.3 Species and Genetic Diversity Vietnam’s diverse array of ecosystems is made up of a similar richness of species—11,458 species of fauna, 21,017 species of flora, and about 3,000 species of micro-organisms have been recognized. Many of them contain useful genetic material (Table 1.1). A center of origin for domesticated plants Vietnam is located in one of the world’s eight Vavilov “Centers of Origin” for domesticated plants, and has a high variety of domesticated animals and crop plants. For example, Vietnam has dozens of races of the 14 major livestock and poultry species.16 Domestic plants are very diverse because of the intensive use and management of plants throughout history in the various agricultural landscapes. There are over 700 plant species (belonging to 79 families) grown for food, medicine, and construction.17 Vietnam is richly endowed with plant genetic resources. It is particularly strong when it comes to rice and taro resources, for which Vietnam is a center of origin. This unique genetic reservoir provides the foundation for further development and improvement of rice and root crops worldwide. The genetic resources of rice are the best known and most significant of all domestic crops in Vietnam. The application of new molecular techniques has shown that Vietnam’s rice plants have special characteristics and are among the most diverse in the world. Certain landraces of the fragrant Japonica rice are particularly important for breeding purposes.18 Rice landraces in Vietnam possess a relatively high level of genetic diversity. Besides high levels of variation, landraces tend to be genetically different from the commercial varieties. This indicates the importance of their conservation as valuable resources for future commercial variety development.

16 Le Thi Thuy, Nguyen Van Vang, 2003. Scientific Report, The second national conference on basic research on biology, agriculture, and medicine. Hue 25-26 July 2003. Hanoi Science and Technique Publishing House 17 Nguyen Dang Khoi, 2000 Results of Agriculture Genetic Resources Conservation. Agriculture Publishing House, Hanoi. 18 Luu Ngoc Trinh and Dao The Tuan (1996) and Luu Ngoc Trinh (1999) in Vietnam Environment and Life. National Politics Publishing House. Hanoi, 2004).

Traditional agricultural practices have assisted in the maintenance of native races. During the long history or rice cultivation, local people in Vietnam have accumulated a rich and indigenous knowledge of the use and management of rice resources. Different varieties of rice are grown for different purposes and under different maintenance regimes. Similarly, farmers have maintained various taro varieties based on their preferred traits and use. Table 1.1 Known species richness of selected taxonomic groups in Vietnam.

Species group

No. of species

known from Vietnam

No. of species

described globally

(approx.)

Percent of global species

found in Vietnam

Terrestrial plants

c. 13,766 220,000 6.3

Insects 7,750* 750,000 1.0 - freshwater

species 670

- marine species

2,500

Fishes 3,170 30,000 10.6 Reptiles 286 6,300 4.5 Amphibians 162 4,184 3.8 Birds 840 9,040 9.3 Mammals 310 4,000 7.7

Source: Dang Huy Huynh, 200519 * Almost certainly an underestimate.

New species continue to be discovered In recent decades, scientists have greatly expanded knowledge of Vietnam’s biodiversity, adding many new species to the list, including some new to science, including five new species of mammals (Box 1.1), and three new bird species to be described in mainland South-East Asia for 30 years.20 Also during this period, large numbers of new species of reptiles, amphibians, fishes and invertebrates were described, including six

19

Dang Huy Huynh, 2005. Present Status and Management Situation of Biodiversity in Vietnam. Paper presented at Vietnam Environmental and Socio-economic Issues Conference, Hanoi, April 2005 (Unpublished) 20 Black-crowned barwing Actinodura sodangorum, golden-winged laughingthrush Garrulax ngoclinhensis, and chestnut-eared laughingthrush G. konkakinhensis


11

Box 1.1 Recent mammal discoveries Saola Pseudoryx nghetinhensis The only species in its genus, Saola is restricted to the wettest parts of the Annamite mountains. Its distribution extends from Nghe An province to Quang Nam provinces, and includes neighbouring areas of Laos. Although little detailed information is available about its population, it is believed to be small and declining.

Large-antlered Muntjac Muntiacus vuquangensis One of a number of new muntjac species discovered in the mountains of South-East Asia during the last decade, The Large-antlered Muntjac is found throughout the Annamite mountains of Vietnam and Laos, and also occurs in a small part of Cambodia.

Annamite Muntjac Muntiacus truongsonensis Restricted to the montane forest of the Annamites mountains, the exact distribution of this species is unclear. It is very similar to other small, dark muntjacs found in South-East Asia, whose taxonomy remains unclear (Photo provided by Pu Mat National Park)

Grey-shanked Douc Pygathrix cinerea Restricted to just five provinces in central Vietnam, the global population is of Grey-shanked Douc is thought to total only around 600 individuals. Consequently, the species is considered one of the top 25 most endangered primates in the world.

Annamite Striped Rabbit Nesolagus timminsi The Annamite Striped Rabbit is found throughout the Greater Annamite Mountains of Vietnam and Laos. The only other species in its genus is restricted to montane forests on Sumatra.


12

new species of crabs.21 One of the areas where scientists can look for new species with the greatest success is in Vietnam’s extensive limestone ecosystems (on the surface, in the soil, and in wet or dry caves). These karst landscapes are difficult to access and not well studied. They include many isolated and relatively self-contained ecosystems. Even neighboring hills can support different species. In recent years, many new plants have been found in Vietnam. During the period 1993 to 2002, 13 new genera, 222 new species, and 30 new subspecies of plants were described. Also, an additional two families, 19 genera, and over 70 species found elsewhere were added to the native flora of the country. The rate of discoveries was particularly high among the orchids—three new genera and 62 new species were described, and four genera and 34 species were recorded for the first time in Vietnam (Box 1.2). In addition, one genus and three species of conifers were described as new, and two genera and 12 species were added to the Vietnamese list of plants.22

21 Basic Research issues on life science. Paper presented at the second National Conference on Basic Research on Biology, Agriculture, and Medicine., Hue, July 25-26, 2003. Hanoi Science and Technique Publishing House. 22 Jacinto Regalado and others. 2003. New taxa of vascular plants to science and/or additional for Vietnam flora (1993-2002). Paper presented to the second National Conference on Basic Research on Biology, Agriculture, and Medicine., Hue July 25-26. Hanoi Science and Technique Publishing House.

Box 1.2 Vietnam’s slipper orchids Nowhere is the diversity of slipper orchids greater than in Vietnam, where 18 species of Paphiopedilum plus a handful of natural hybrids can be found. Five of these species appear to be found only in Vietnam. These showy orchids are in great demand; collectors brave climbing steep limestone cliffs in remote areas to tear them off the rocks where they grow. Collecting has had devastating impacts. One species is already extinct in the wild, one is critically endangered, and 15 are endangered (most approaching the critical level).

Paphiopedilum hangianum is a Vietnam endemic found only in an area of 25 km2 in northern Tuyen Quang Province. Although locally abundant before 1999, the global population was almost obliterated in 2000–01 when local people collected hundreds of thousands of plants in response to demand by orchid dealers and traders, and most were illegally exported. As there were relatively large natural populations and incredibly wide commercial collecting, the price slumped and the plant could be found in spring 2001 in Hanoi flower markets for just 10,000 VND. After 2 years, all known populations of this species were extirpated through collection, and it is now very close to extinction in the wild. Source: Leonid Averyanov, Phillip Cribb, Phan Ke Loc, and Nguyen Tien Hiep. 2003. Slipper Orchids of Vietnam: With an Introduction to the Flora of Vietnam.


13

1.4 Economic, social, and cultural values of biodiversity In terms of their economic value, natural systems can be broadly placed in the following categories: (a) direct extractive value (for example, as food, fiber, and medicine); (b) direct non-extractive value (recreational); (c) indirect value (climate regulation, watershed protection, soil quality); and (d) non-use values (aesthetic, spiritual and cultural). Map 1.5 and Table 1.2 provide a breakdown of some economic values associated with biodiversity in Thua Thien Hue Province. The products and services of protected areas and other important biodiversity areas in that province provide local, provincial, national, and global economic benefits. In 2003, the agricultural sector represented a significant portion of GDP—roughly 21 percent—with both traditional crops and new hybrids helping to increase food production. Forestry accounted for roughly 1.1 percent of GDP, while the fisheries sector represented 4 percent of GDP.23 Agriculture – biodiversity brings stability and resilience to agriculture Biodiversity is the foundation of Vietnamese agriculture. The northern mountains, the northern midlands, and the northwest mountains of Vietnam are especially rich in biodiversity of native landraces and their wild relatives for important crop groups such as rice, taro, tea, litchi-longan, citrus, and ride bean.

23 Government Statistical Office. This figure does not take into account the indirect benefits of the forest; their inclusion would make the figure much higher.

Table 1.2 Goods and Services from Protected Areas in Thua Thien Hue Province

Economic values Biodiversity areas providing the economic benefits

Direct Use Values Timber products Production forests Non-timber forest products

Phong Dien and watershed protection areas

Tourism

All PAs in province have potential to contribute to tourism

Bach Ma National Park has a growing tourism service function

Education and research All PAs have potential to provide important education and research services

Bach Ma NP has research and training facility

Indirect use Values Nursery function - coastal inshore fishery and aquaculture

Tam Giang and Cau Hai Lagoons

Hydrological services Prevention of sedimentation

Bach Ma and Ha Truoi Reservoir

Prevention of landslides —for example, Cau Hai near Highway 1 and railroad

SUR and protection forests

Water quality maintenance, clean water supply, brewery, fish processing

Huong River

Water bottling Phong Dien and Bo River Water supply to Cau Lai and other towns

Hydropower and irrigation Bach Ma and Ha Truoi Reservoir Flood protection Protection Forests and Huong

River Phong Dien and Bo and O Lau River

Dry-season flow and maintenance of lagoon saline levels

Bach Ma and Truoi Reservoir Bo, O Lau and Huong Rivers and Tam Giang

Ground water supply Bach Ma and wells Protection Forests and wells Phong Dien and wells

Coastal protection Tam Giang Lagoon Carbon sequestration Bach Ma, Phong Dien, Watershed

Protection Forest Existence Values Protection of tiger and other species of international importance

Phong Dien and Bach Ma

Religious and cultural significance

Bach Ma, Phong Dien

Source: ICEM. 2003. Field Studies: Economic benefits of protected areas. Lower Mekong River Region Protected Areas and Development Review. Indooroopilly, Queensland, Australia.


14

Bach Ma National Park

Map 1.5

Source: Field Study: Vietnam, Thua Thien Hue Province. The PAD Partnership – 2003


15

Biodiversity is interrelated; these links bring significant additional benefits to agriculture. For example, forest ecosystems provide many benefits for agriculture, including water-source protection, which helps maintain a steady supply of surface and groundwater during dry weather shortages and reduces wet season flooding and soil erosion. Forests also provide a windbreak function; support crop pollination; provide habitat for predators to consume crop pests, and help maintain a local climate (microclimate) that produces a moister atmosphere in dry weather. But these services are often not recognized until forests decline and, as a consequence, agricultural production declines. For example, in 2005, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimated that soil erosion on Vietnam’s sloping lands amounted to about 2 billion tons/year. The associated costs—loss of productivity, dredging, water treatment, and flooding—are considerable and rising. Fisheries - biodiversity sustains the fisheries sector The fisheries sector is dependent on biodiversity for its productivity in direct and indirect ways. Fisheries biodiversity provides the main source of protein for Vietnam’s population. An estimated 8 million people in Vietnam depend on fisheries as the primary source of household income, an additional 12 million get part of their income or subsistence from fisheries. The coral reef and mangrove ecosystems are a great national asset. In a natural state their value is based on:

The habitat they provide for living marine resources, which are part of the catch of inshore fisheries

Biological resources (such as fish, crabs, molluscs, firewood, construction timber, medicines), which are harvested directly from these ecosystems

The protection they provide for coastlines and coastal settlements from storm seas

Their capacity to absorb and treat pollution and to trap sediment

The stability and resilience that coastal biodiversity resources bring to local economies.

Vietnamese have long been engaged in forms of aquaculture that require only small interventions in the natural environment and rely on local species. Most of these involve simple farming techniques in the sea and are known as “mariculture.” In recent years, pond aquaculture using brackish water has become popular. It can produce high yields of the shrimp that fetch good prices on the overseas market. The economic and social contributions of capture fisheries and of low-intervention aquaculture are often ignored when the economic case for pond aquaculture is presented. Yet, even the pond aquaculture industry is dependent on the ecosystems and ecological processes that mediate water and nutrient quantity and quality. Habitat and ecosystem conservation plays an important role in sustaining the fisheries sector. By maintaining fisheries habitats and surrounding natural systems and sustainably managing the exploitation of the resource, the economic value of the sectors and its long-term viability is improved.

Vinh Hy Bay in central coast


16

Forestry – forest ecosystems bring undervalued benefits to many sectors The value of forests products such as timber, rattans, fruits, nuts, or medicinal plants is self-evident and recognized by local communities and by national and international markets. For example, Vietnam has up to 300 species of bamboo, most of major significance to local economies (Box 1.3). According to MARD’s Agriculture, Forest Products Processing, and Salt Department (2004), in 2001–03 harvested forest products amounted to an estimated 3 million m3 of timber, 500,000 tons of bamboo, and 20,000 tons of other non-timber forest products (e.g., resins, rattan, shellac, star anise, pine oil and resins, cinnamon, and medicinal plants). The export value of forest products was estimated at $567 million in 2003 and $1 billion in 2004. Currently, an estimated 25 million people live in or near forest areas and derive about 20 percent of their household income from non-timber forest products. It is comparatively easy to quantify the economic worth of these goods and identify those who are interested in paying for them. The value of ecological services such as the provision of clean water, stable hill slopes, nature conservation, or genetic resources such as tree seed for forest plantations is often less obvious and much more difficult to quantify. It is also difficult to identify the people or communities who are the beneficiaries of the supply of these from particular forests. Many, in fact, would be unaware of their usage. For those reasons, forestry’s contribution to the national economy is undervalued. The official estimate of 1 percent of GDP does not account for forestry’s contributions to industrial production, firewood (which contributes 7 percent of national energy needs), or to a range of environmental goods and services, such as carbon sequestration or ecotourism. Also, those figures do not include the contribution of timber extracted “illegally,” which could amount to over 50 percent of national roundwood supply.24

24 MARD. 2005. National Report to the Fifth Session of the United Nations Forum on Forests, Vietnam, January 2005

Protecting forested ecosystems provides many indirect values to other development sectors by, for example, (a) providing an economic “safety net” for poor communities living in and around protected areas; (b) providing flood protection for downstream areas and water for drinking and irrigation; (c) protecting the watersheds of hydropower dams and providing industry with clean water and reliable power; (d) conserving important native agro-biodiversity and providing shelter for regenerating fish populations; and (e) helping to conserve the country's genetic, species, and landscape diversity for future generations (Table 1.2).25

Box 1.3 Bamboos of Vietnam Bamboo is probably the most important non-timber forest product (NTFP) in Vietnam. It is commonly used in daily life, providing bamboo shoots for food, materials for art works, floorboards for export, and fiber for paper mills. Bamboo has contributed considerably to economic development and employment, and played an important role in poverty reduction and hunger eradication in Vietnam. Just 15 years ago, Vietnam was thought to have 102 bamboo species belonging to 19 genera. However, in 2003, botanists from the Forestry Science Institute of Vietnam and the Forest Inventory and Planning Institute, in collaboration with Chinese bamboo taxonomists, discovered 23 new bamboo species, and recorded six genera and 21 species of bamboo in Vietnam for the first time. These and other discoveries have raised the total number of bamboo species known from Vietnam to nearly 150. If a systematic nationwide survey were to be carried out, the total number of Vietnamese bamboo species could be as high as 250 to 300.

Source: Vu Van Dung. 2004. Vietnam Environment and Life.

25 ICEM. 2003. Vietnam national report on protected areas and development. Indooroopilly: Review of Protected Areas and Development in the Lower Mekong River Region.


17

Cultural values – rich and diverse culture and biodiversity go hand in hand The relationship between people, landscape, and nature informs and pervades cultural values at their deepest levels. Many of these values have been carried through history and transported from rural or wild environments to urban and modern society. Of particular importance for conservation in Vietnam is the need to understand how nature and society engage with each other, how that relationship shapes traditions and behavior, and how it can be a powerful force in the use and maintenance of biodiversity. In parts of north and central Vietnam, limestone karst mountains are common and are recognized as important elements of Vietnam's natural and cultural heritage. These mountains and the very specific physical landscape they create are a good example of how nature and culture are linked through the construction of a cultural landscape over thousands of years that is intimately connected through beliefs and practices to natural systems (Box 1.4). Many ethnic communities in Vietnam have traditional religious and customary associations with forests and other natural systems and species that continue to promote biodiversity conservation. Although greatly diminished in area over the past 40 years, “spirit” forests still play an important role in the lives of Thai ethnic communities in Son La Province, for example, and are a focus of local education and conservation efforts (Box 1.5). Part of the motivation for wildlife consumption stems from traditional Vietnamese medicine, in which the humours of the body—such as heat or dampness—must be balanced for good health and can be balanced through the consumption of different plants and animals. A solution to the unsustainable exploitation of wildlife must entail an analysis of the culture and values at the heart of the problem. The behavior is driven by culture, not nutrition or scientific understanding of personal health and well-being. Traditional and modern manifestations of power and authority within society also play a part. Understanding the behavior of

wildlife consumption in cultural terms is a key requirement for influencing it and bringing it within sustainable limits.

Box 1.4 Karst landscapes – Vietnam’s natural and cultural heritage Karst landscapes— the characteristic, steep hills of limestone regions—are well-represented in Vietnamese myths and stories. Perhaps the best known are the The Betel and the Areca Tree and The Land of Bliss. In the latter, the hero is required to struggle through the karst landscape to reach the heaven he is seeking. The landscapes also feature strongly in the paintings and poetry of Vietnam. Representations of idealized karst landscapes abound in ancient and modern Vietnamese paintings, almost to the point of being a stereotype. Through direct association, the karst mountains and its plants and animals are linked to Buddhism and Confucianism and the most fundamental cultural understandings of many Vietnamese people. Many of the most famous temples and pagodas are located high in the mountains. The Perfumed Pagoda is reached by a boat journey through a stunning karst landscape, followed by a gruelling climb up a mountain: each year this temple is visited by hundreds of thousands of pilgrims each year. Vietnamese cosmology requires a balance of yin and yang, which are symbolized by mountains and water. Many homes and offices in Vietnam have fragments of karst limestone with water forming the basis of shrines.

Ha Long Bay – a UNESCO World Heritage site


18

1.5 Biodiversity and Poverty Reduction Biodiversity and livelihoods of the poor are intertwined Ecological systems and the biodiversity contained with them provide much of the basic needs of the rural poor, ranging from foodstuffs to fuelwood, medicines, and potable water. In addition, they provide a host of ecological services, such as reducing vulnerability natural disasters. Recognizing and understanding the value for poor people of biodiversity can help provide livelihood opportunities, improved nutrition, better health, better water supply, and less impact from natural disasters. The most important sites for biodiversity in Vietnam tend to be areas with the lowest level of human impact such as the largest remaining natural forest blocks (Map 1.6). Many of the most important biodiversity areas are restricted to remote mountainous regions inhabited by ethnic peoples, who are among the poorest and most vulnerable in Vietnam. Over 85 percent of protected areas in Vietnam are located in areas of “medium” and “high” poverty.26 Remoteness, which has been good for conservation, is correlated with poverty, creating an uncertain tension between poverty reduction and biodiversity conservation objectives. Yet, remote areas, rich in natural resources, are also the refuge of some of the poorest and most powerless people. Lack of economic alternatives along with strong ties to traditions and cultural and religious beliefs make ethnic communities heavily dependent on natural systems. Forest management and biodiversity conservation therefore affects and is affected by poverty reduction initiatives (Box 1.6). There are various methods of forest resource use that can potentially assist in poverty alleviation. Some favor the maintenance of forest cover and quality; in other cases, the relationship is less clear. Timber and non-timber forest products can be good resources for pro-poor earning and a “safety net” if 26 ICEM. 2003. Regional Report on Protected Areas and Development. Review of Protected Areas and Development in the Lower Mekong River Region, Indooroopilly, Queensland, Australia.

well-managed with institutional and technical support. Benefits from environmental services provided by forests, employment opportunities in the industrial forestry sector, and other indirect benefits such as livelihood improvement and government poverty-reducing investment in forest communities can also play an important role in poverty alleviation. In part, the strategy needs to help poor communities better secure subsistence uses for basic livelihoods and capture existing market opportunities. Equally important, the strategy must develop effective transfer payment schemes for ecosystem services that recognize in financial terms the contributions of poor communities to the conservation of biodiversity.

Box 1.5 Spirit forests and biodiversity conservation A study of Thai ethnic communities in Son La Province showed they traditionally recognize two kinds of spirit forest. The first is worship forest, where people practice religious ceremonies. Once extensive, today this type of forest is heavily degraded, with the common size less than 1,000 m2 per commune. However, spirit forests still play spiritual and cultural roles and are important in environmental education for the younger generation in mountainous areas. The second is gosh or graveyard forest. Each village has about 5 ha of gosh forest, which are well-protected and respected by all local people. There are about 12,000 ha of gosh forest in Son La Province, which is protected by local people and through both traditional Thai law and new village regulations. If appropriately managed, spirit forests can continue to significantly contribute to conserving biodiversity values. The forestry and land administration sectors should address this issue in their policy formulation. Source: Hoàng Viet Anh and others. 2003. Link between spirit forest and biodiversity conservation. Case study at Son La Province, Research Center for Forest Ecology and Environment Forest Science Institute of Vietnam, Project funded by TREELINK - APAFRI


19

Paying the poor to maintain ecosystem services One avenue offering further income opportunities for the poor in buffer zones is payments for conservation work. The most obvious is for individuals and/or communities to receive payments for protecting watersheds by planting trees. In Vietnam, this is being done through Program 327 (1992), Program 556 (1995), and through the 5MHRPs fund 661. The government has tried to encourage the poorest to get involved in such schemes. The schemes currently cover about 1.6 million hectares and involve 270,000 households.27 They have had mixed results as a vehicle for alleviating poverty.28 With a large population in coastal areas dependent upon the fisheries and other coastal and marine biodiversity, the long-term negative effects of ineffective coastal and marine management are likely to have detrimental impacts on poor user groups. For example, coastal wetlands have experienced widespread loss of mangroves. This has reduced fish populations; removed a source of fuel and building timber; and reduced flood and storm protection for coastal dwellers. Continued poverty will result in further pressures on marine resources and increased user conflicts.

27 MARD. 2001. Five Million Hectare Reforestation Program Partnership. Synthesis Report, Hanoi, Vietnam, MARD – International Cooperation Department 28 Sundelin, W..D. and Huynh Thu Ba. 2005. Poverty alleviation and forests in Vietnam. CIFOR, Indonesia

Box 1.6 Enhancing the poverty reduction focus of Vietnam forest sector strategies Vietnam has experienced some difficulties in engaging communities in poverty alleviation activities. These relate to how national laws are implemented in the locality; the vested interests of local actors; division of responsibilities between local government departments; lack of adequate finance to support policy reforms; and cultural differences and interpretation of activities. Approaches with success in poverty reduction include:

• More equitable benefit sharing to enable co-management of forest resources

• Greater control of forest resources to be passed to local communities

• More transparency in the forest land allocation process

• Effective implementation of regulations relating to benefit sharing

• incentives for forest protection and management with adequate enforcement measures

• Capacity building and research to identify how best forest areas could be managed for multiple benefits

• Resolving the institutional barriers for trade in forest products that adversely affect small-scale forest producers.

Four main strategies need to be developed to improve the livelihoods of the poorest through forest management: (1) developing high-value native species plantations; (2) training of peoples from mountainous areas in forest management; (3) developing the role of forest-based small industries, such as handicrafts; and (3) developing the role of payments for environmental services to enable additional revenue streams to rural communities. Source: World Bank . 2005. Shanks, E.and S. O'Reilly. Enhancing the Poverty Reduction Focus of Forest Sector Strategies. Hanoi, World Bank


20

Map 1.6

IN MAINLAND

CMYK CMYK

Chapter 2

BiodiversityTrends and Threats

Chapter 2


CMYK CMYK

CHAPTER 2: BIODIVERSITY TRENDS AND THREATS

22

2.1 Ecosystem Trends Forest ecosystems- Forest cover is increasing but quality is diminishing A century or so ago, Vietnam was richly endowed with high-quality forest, covering virtually the whole country. By 1943, forest cover had been reduced to only 14.3 million (M) ha, or 43 percent of the national land territory. From then on, forest area decreased very rapidly, especially during the war and during the 1976–85 period. The government estimated that by 1990 forest cover had declined to 10.88 million ha or 28.2 percent. Since 1993, major national programs (327, 556, and 661) promoting afforestation, reforestation, and improved forest management have turned around these negative trends. According to official statistics, in 2004 forest cover had increased to 12.3 million ha, or 37.3 percent of national land area (Table 2.1 and Map 2.1).29 The 5MHRP or 661 Program aims to reestablish 43 percent forest cover in the country by 2010. Nonetheless, it is generally acknowledged that the quality of natural forests continues to be more fragmented and degraded. Over two-thirds of Vietnam’s natural forests are considered poor or regenerating, while rich and closed-canopy forest constitute only 3.4 percent (in 2000) and 4.6 percent (in 2004) of the total (Figure 2.1). Lowland forests supporting their full natural biodiversity have been almost entirely lost. The chances of full generation are rapidly decreasing with the isolation of the rich natural forest patches. In 2005, the government’s delegation to the Fifth Session of the United Nations Forum on Forests reported that, besides forest loss, thousands of hectares of forests are degraded every year: “Forest loss and degradation are major reasons for desertification and land impoverishment, creating a wide range of negative impacts and challenges for economic development, the society, and its environment, such as causing more serious flooding and drought, creating difficulties in 29 MARD Official statistics: Over half of this increase was due to an increase in the area of plantation forest, which has limited biodiversity value. The changes in methods used for calculating forest cover would also lead to an increase in measured cover.

forest product supply, reducing arable land, and finally worsening rural poverty and unemployment.”30 Table 2.1 Forest cover in Vietnam, 1995–2004

Year 1995 1999 2004* Forest cover (percent)

28.2 33.1 37.3

Total forest area (million ha)

9.3 10.9 12.3

Natural forest (million ha)

8.2 9.4 10.1

Plantations (million ha)

1.1 1.5 2.2

Source: MARD. 2001, 2005. Report on Result of Overall National Forest Inventory. Central Inventory Directive Board. Hanoi, January 2001; and Decision No. 1116/QD/BNN-KL dated 18/5/2005 of the Minister of MARD on gazettement of forest area and unused land nationwide in 2004. • See footnote 29 below

Figure 2.1 Changes in Composition of Natural Forests, 1990-2004

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

1990 2000 2004

Poor/open/regeneratingforests - Classes IIIa1,IIa, IIb

Medium quality/partially-closed forest - ClassIIIa2

Rich/closed forest -Class IIIa3, IVA

rea

(mill

ion

hect

ares

)

Source: FIPI/ MARD, 2005

30 MARD. 2005. National Report to the Fifth Session of the United Nations Forum on Forests. Vietnam, January 2005

923


22

2.1 Ecosystem Trends

Forest ecosystems- Forest cover is increasing but quality is diminishing A century or so ago, Vietnam was richly endowed with high-quality forest, covering virtually the whole country. By 1943, forest cover had been reduced to only 14.3 million (M) ha, or 43 percent of the national land territory. From then on, forest area decreased very rapidly, especially during the war and during the 1976–85 period. The government estimated that by 1990 forest cover had declined to 10.88 million ha or 28.2 percent. Since 1993, major national programs (327, 556, and 661) promoting afforestation, reforestation, and improved forest management have turned around these negative trends. According to official statistics, in 2004 forest cover had increased to 12.3 million ha, or 37.3 percent of national land area (Table 2.1 and Map 2.1).29

The 5MHRP or 661 Program aims to reestablish 43 percent forest cover in the country by 2010.

Nonetheless, it is generally acknowledged that the quality of natural forests continues to be more fragmented and degraded. Over two-thirds of Vietnam’s natural forests are considered poor or regenerating, while rich and closed-canopy forest constitute only 3.4 percent (in 2000) and 4.6 percent (in 2004) of the total (Figure 2.1). Lowland forests supporting their full natural biodiversity have been almost entirely lost. The chances of full generation are rapidly decreasing with the isolation of the rich natural forest patches.

In 2005, the government’s delegation to the Fifth Session of the United Nations Forum on Forests reported that, besides forest loss, thousands of hectares of forests are degraded every year: “Forest loss and degradation are major reasons for desertification and land impoverishment, creating a wide range of negative impacts and challenges for economic development, the society, and its environment, such as causing more serious flooding and drought, creating difficulties in 29 MARD Official statistics: Over half of this increase was due to an increase in the area of plantation forest, which has limited biodiversity value. The changes in methods used for calculating forest cover would also lead to an increase in measured cover.

forest product supply, reducing arable land, and finally worsening rural poverty and unemployment.”30

Table 2.1 Forest cover in Vietnam, 1995–2004 Year 1995 1999 2004* Forest cover (percent)

28.2 33.1 37.3


9.3 10.9 12.3


8.2 9.4 10.1


1.1 1.5 2.2

Source: MARD. 2001, 2005. Report on Result of Overall National Forest Inventory. Central Inventory Directive Board. Hanoi, January 2001; and Decision No. 1116/QD/BNN-KL dated 18/5/2005 of the Minister of MARD on gazettement of forest area and unused land nationwide in 2004. � See footnote 29 below


0

2

4

6

8

10

12

1990 2000 2004




rea

(mill

ion

hect

ares

)



CH

APT

ER

2: B

IOD

IVE

RSI

TY

TR

EN

DS

AN

D T

HR

EA

TS 23

Map

2.1

CH

APT

ER

2: B

IOD

IVE

RSI

TY

TR

EN

DS

AN

D T

HR

EA

TS 23

Map

2.1


22

2.1 Ecosystem Trends

Forest ecosystems- Forest cover is increasing but quality is diminishing A century or so ago, Vietnam was richly endowed with high-quality forest, covering virtually the whole country. By 1943, forest cover had been reduced to only 14.3 million (M) ha, or 43 percent of the national land territory. From then on, forest area decreased very rapidly, especially during the war and during the 1976–85 period. The government estimated that by 1990 forest cover had declined to 10.88 million ha or 28.2 percent. Since 1993, major national programs (327, 556, and 661) promoting afforestation, reforestation, and improved forest management have turned around these negative trends. According to official statistics, in 2004 forest cover had increased to 12.3 million ha, or 37.3 percent of national land area (Table 2.1 and Map 2.1).29

The 5MHRP or 661 Program aims to reestablish 43 percent forest cover in the country by 2010.

Nonetheless, it is generally acknowledged that the quality of natural forests continues to be more fragmented and degraded. Over two-thirds of Vietnam’s natural forests are considered poor or regenerating, while rich and closed-canopy forest constitute only 3.4 percent (in 2000) and 4.6 percent (in 2004) of the total (Figure 2.1). Lowland forests supporting their full natural biodiversity have been almost entirely lost. The chances of full generation are rapidly decreasing with the isolation of the rich natural forest patches.

In 2005, the government’s delegation to the Fifth Session of the United Nations Forum on Forests reported that, besides forest loss, thousands of hectares of forests are degraded every year: “Forest loss and degradation are major reasons for desertification and land impoverishment, creating a wide range of negative impacts and challenges for economic development, the society, and its environment, such as causing more serious flooding and drought, creating difficulties in 29 MARD Official statistics: Over half of this increase was due to an increase in the area of plantation forest, which has limited biodiversity value. The changes in methods used for calculating forest cover would also lead to an increase in measured cover.

forest product supply, reducing arable land, and finally worsening rural poverty and unemployment.”30

Table 2.1 Forest cover in Vietnam, 1995–2004 Year 1995 1999 2004* Forest cover (percent)

28.2 33.1 37.3


9.3 10.9 12.3


8.2 9.4 10.1


1.1 1.5 2.2

Source: MARD. 2001, 2005. Report on Result of Overall National Forest Inventory. Central Inventory Directive Board. Hanoi, January 2001; and Decision No. 1116/QD/BNN-KL dated 18/5/2005 of the Minister of MARD on gazettement of forest area and unused land nationwide in 2004. � See footnote 29 below


0

2

4

6

8

10

12

1990 2000 2004




rea

(mill

ion

hect

ares

)




24

Coastal and marine ecosystems – Mangroves stabilise but corals and fisheries continue to decline Mangroves are central to the sustainability of many of Vietnam’s fisheries through the provision of habitat to coastal and marine fish and crustaceans. Yet Vietnam’s mangrove forests have been significantly degraded; between 1943 and 1999, the national area of mangrove forests declined from 409,000 to about 155,000ha or by 62 percent. The main causes included wartime damage and more recently through the massive expansion of shrimp aquaculture (Figure 2.2). 31 Between 1991 and 2001, the total area of coastal and marine aquaculture in Vietnam almost doubled.32 The rate of mangrove forest loss to production activities in the period 1985–2000 is estimated to have been about 15,000 ha/year.33 There have been some notable efforts to replant mangroves. For example, Can Gio Biosphere Reserve, located in the coastal district southeast of Ho Chi Minh City, has become one of the most extensive sites of rehabilitated mangroves in the world. It covers 75,740 hectares and is dominated by mangroves, including both salt water and brackish water species, with more than 200 species of fauna and 52 species of flora. The ongoing World Bank-funded Coastal Wetlands project is protecting and developing mangrove forests in the four Mekong Delta provinces of Ca Mau, Bac Lieu, Soc Trang, and Tra Vinh. Mangrove clearing is now being more strictly controlled. In September 2005, the pattern of damage to sea dykes in many provinces brought by Typhoon Damrey (known also in Vietnam as Storm No. 7) confirmed the protective role of mangroves that Vietnamese scientists have long been bringing to public attention. The last comprehensive national inventory of mangroves was carried out in 1999, but a range of site-specific data suggest that the combined controls and replanting programs in all regions appears to have slowed the decline over the past few years. 31 MARD. 2004. International Support Group Monthly Briefing Issue No. 13 (August). 32 MOFi. 2001. Master plan for fisheries sector 2000-2010. Hanoi: Ministry of Fisheries. 33 Vo Sy Tuan. 2005. Proceedings of National Workshop on Fishery exploitation, processing and logistic service. Agriculture Publishing House.

Figure 2.2 Changes in mangrove forest area in Vietnam from 1943–99

408500

290000252000

156608

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

Are

a(h

a)

1943 1962 1982 1999

Year

Source: Overview of Vietnam mangrove forest, Prevention Environment Degradation in East Sea and Thailand Gulf Project, Mangrove Forest Contract, 2005.

Mangrove in Xuan Thuy National Park (a Ramsar site)


25

More than 200 coral sites have been surveyed along the Vietnam coast over the last 10 years. In general, these surveys have shown that average coral cover is poor. Based on the scale of English and others(1997),34 only 1 percent of coral reefs are in good condition (>75 percent coral cover), while more than 30 percent of coral reefs are in bad condition (<25 percent coral cover). Coral reefs with average and better coverage are about 41 percent and 26 percent, respectively. The specific survey data for each coral reef indicates that the average cover ranges from 25 to 50 percent. Those coral reefs located offshore or far from human settlements may remain in relatively good condition. The coverage of live corals on the reefs at some major distribution areas of Vietnam waters has been decreasing over time. The coral coverage has declined to 30 percent in some areas. The general trend is toward wide-scale coral reef degradation.35 Seagrass beds and other marine habitats are similarly declining, threatening the livelihoods of communities that depend on them. As a result of the decline of coral reefs and overharvesting, the diversity and volume of economically important and ornamental animals also have decreased; example include lobster Panulirus spp., sea cucumber Holothuria scabra, trumpet shell Hemafusus colosseus, abalone Haliotes spp., shell fish Chalamys spp., squid Loligo spp., and giant clam Tridacna maxima.36 Fisheries resources are declining, affecting especially inland and nearshore aquatic ecosystems and threatening certain species. Evidence of this decline is apparent in marine fisheries. Compared to 1990, it now takes a fisherman twice as much effort to catch a ton of fish (Figure 2.3). Similarly, studies on four northern rivers indicate that people now have to go further to catch fish than 10 to 20 years ago. Their daily catch is declining, and the fish they

34 English, S., C. Wilkinson, and V. Baker. 1997. Survey Manual for Tropical MarineResources. Townsville, Australia: Australian Institute of Marine Science. 35 Vo Sy Tuan, 2005. National action plan for coral reef management in Vietnam to 2015. Report presented to the Sixth Meeting of the Regional Working Group for the Coral Reef Sub-component of the UNEP/GEF Project: Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand Masinloc, Philippines, August 22–25. UNEP: GEF South China Sea Project. 36 Vo Sy Tuan. 2002. Coral Component – Prevention of Environment Degradation in East Sea and Thailand Gulf Project.

catch are getting smaller (Box 2.1).37 Freshwater wetlands – Rapid conversion continues Riverine ecosystems suffer from industrial and domestic pollution, dredging, damming, destructive fishing practices, and the clearance of fringing habitats. For example, in the 19th Century, the Mekong Delta was a mosaic of wetlands and forests spanning over 3.9 million ha. Today, the region has been converted to rice farming, shrimp ponds, and other human uses with natural freshwater wetlands reduced to a few isolated fragments that are unsuitable for agriculture, mainly in areas of acid sulphate soils.38 These remaining wetlands are under intense human pressure, and some will be lost if present trends continue.39

Box 2.1 Trends in freshwater fisheries In the past, freshwater capture fisheries were important for the economy in many regions. During the 1970s, there were more than 70 fishing cooperatives with annual production of several thousand tons. However, overexploitation led to a collapse in the resource and the end of operations for most cooperatives. Inland (river, lake, dam, and rice field) fisheries remain important for rural dwellers in many inland areas. The main data source for inland fishery resources are the GSO statistics, which suggest a peak of 244,000 tons in 2001 declining to 209,000 tons in 2003. This is probably due to upstream environmental disturbance and drought. Vietnam’s rivers are generally quite productive. The Mekong River, for example, provides more than 30,000 tons of fish annually, landed by around 48,000 fishers in 250 communes (MoFi Master Plan). However, the Red River Delta in the north, which was once highly productive, is now almost devoid of fish due to extensive flood control and the closure of floodplain fish breeding and nursery areas.

37 Based on RRA surveys along four major northern rivers (Lo, Da, Sesan and Dong Nai). 38 Buckton, S. T., and R.J. Safford. 2004. The avifauna of the Vietnamese Mekong Delta. Bird Conservation International 14: 279-322. 39 BirdLife International and IEBR. 1999. Wetlands in the balance: a strategy for balance and harmony in wetland resource management in the Mekong Delta. Hanoi: BirdLife International and the Institute of Ecology and Biological Resources.


26

2.2 Species and Genetic Diversity Trends

As Vietnam's natural habitats decline in extent and condition, the species they support become increasingly threatened. Nearly 700 species are threatened with extinction nationally,40, 41 while over 300 species are threatened with global extinction (Table 2.2).42 Forty-nine of Vietnam's globally threatened species are classified as critically endangered, meaning that they face a high risk of extinction in the wild in the immediate future.

Since 1900, several of Vietnam’s mammals, birds, and reptiles have become nationally extinct, including the hairy rhinoceros Dicerorhinus sumatrensis, sika Cervus nippon, wild water buffalo Bubalus arnee, Indian skimmer Rynchops albicollis, white-crowned hornbill Aceros comatus, and mangrove terrapin Batagur baska. The kouprey Bos sauveli, an ancestor of the domestic cow, has not been sighted in Vietnam for more than 20 years, although small numbers may persist in remote areas. Some species are being pulled back from the brink of extinction. There have been focused conservation initiatives to help reverse the trends in species loss. Some conservation interventions appear to have been successful at stemming the decline of species at particular sites. In 1995, a protected area was established at Xuan Thuy in the Red River Delta, Vietnam’s first Ramsar site (a wetland of international importance). As hunting has been brought under control, the wintering population of black-faced spoonbill Platalea minor at the site has stabilized at around 60 individuals (Figure 2.4).

Painted stork Mycteria leucocephala 40 Anon. 1992. Vietnam Red Data Book, volume 1: animals. Hanoi: Scientific Publishing House. 41 Anon. 1996. Vietnam Red Data Book, volume 2: plants. Hanoi: Scientific Publishing House. 42 IUCN. 2004. 2004 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Downloaded from http://www.redlist.org on May 5, 2005.

Table 2.2 Number of nationally and globally threatened species in Vietnam

Taxonomic group Species in Vietnam

Nat. threatened*

Globally threatened†

Mammals 310 78 46 Birds 840 83 41 Reptiles 286 43 27 Amphibians 162 11 15 Fish 3,170 72 27 Invertebrates 72 NE Plants 14,000 309 148 Fungi 7 NE Algae 9 NE Total 684 304

* In categories Endangered, Vulnerable, Rare and Threatened, following Red Data Book of Vietnam. (1992, 1996, 2000). † In categories Critically Endangered, Endangered and Vulnerable, following IUCN (2004). NE = not evaluated. Figure 2.3 Trends in overall production (wild marine fisheries and aquaculture) and fisheries catch per unit effort in Vietnam

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Year

00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91

Gross Output Marine-Capture AquacultureCatch Per Unit of Effort (CPUE) - tons/HP/year

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Gro

ss o

ut p

ut (’

000

tons

)

CPUE

(ton

s/H

P/ye

ar)

Source: MOFI. Master Plan for the Fisheries Sector 2000–10 Figure 2.4 Maximum counts of wintering black-faced spoonbills at Xuan Thuy Ramsar Site

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Winter

Max

imum

cou

nt

93-'94

94-'95

95-'96

96-'97

97-'98

98-'99

99-'00

00-'01

01-'02

02-'03

03-'04

04-'05

Source: BirdLife International Vietnam Program


27

Other interventions for globally threatened species are meeting with less success. Despite intensive conservation efforts, the population of lesser one-horned rhinoceros at Cat Tien National Park has shown no signs of breeding since its rediscovery in 1989. To ensure that future efforts are more effective, it is important that lessons are learned from species conservation efforts to date. Trends suggest a wave of extinctions in this century Although Vietnam appears to have retained most of its species into the 21st century, some of these persist only as small, fragmented populations of doubtful long-term viability (Table 2.3). Three of Vietnam's four endemic primates have populations of under 500 individuals,43 while the population of lesser one-horned rhinoceros Rhinoceros sondaicus—one of only two remaining in the world—numbers merely six or seven individuals.44 If current trends continue, it is likely that the first decades of the 21st century will witness a wave of species extinctions unprecedented in Vietnam’s history, with environmental and economic implications. Native varieties are being pushed out by new ones The introduction of new high productivity agricultural varieties, especially hybrids, has caused a reduction in the planted area and genetic diversity of indigenous varieties (Table 2.4). More than 80 percent of native crop varieties have been lost through various forms of modernization. Some animal breeds are believed to be disappearing at the rate of about 10 percent per year. As a replacement for former native varieties, farmers are now offered a limited range of high-yield varieties developed by plant breeding companies and biotechnology corporations. Such losses are significant because indigenous varieties often have higher genetic diversity than introduced varieties, an important factor in the stability and resistance of crops to pests and diseases, and in the development of new and improved varieties.

43 Nadler, T., F. Momberg, Nguyen Xuan Dang, and N. Lormee. 2003. Vietnam primate conservation status review 2002. Part 2: leaf monkeys.. 44 Polet, G. and others. 1999. The Javan Rhinos, Rhinoceros sondaicus annamiticus, of Cat Tien National Park, Vietnam: current status and management implications. Pachyderm 27: 34-48.

Table 2.3 Population estimates for selected globally threatened species in Vietnam to illustrate the extreme rarity of some species

Species Global threat status Population

Delacour's leaf monkey Trachypithecus delacouri* CR <500

Cat Ba leaf monkey T. poliocephalus ssp. poliocephalus*

CR <100

Tonkin Snub-nosed monkey Rhinopithecus avunculus* CR <500

Western black crested gibbon Hylobates concorlor EN c.100

Lesser one-horned rhinoceros Rhinoceros sondaicus CR <10

Asian elephant Elephas maximus EN <100 Rufous-necked hornbill Aceros nipalensis VU <100

Giant ibis Thaumatibis gigantea CR <10 White-shouldered ibis Pseudibis davisoni CR <10

Black-faced spoonbill Platalea minor EN <100

Taiwania Taiwania cryptomerioides VU c.100

Source: Birdlife International Vietnam Programme. * Endemic to Vietnam Table 2.4 Reduction of area and loss of indigenous races of some major domestic plants 1970-1998

Plant

Reduction of Area (%)

Loss of Indigenous races ( %)

Rice 50 80 Maize, bean 75 50 Plant for bulbs 75 20 Tea, fiber plants 20 90 Fruit trees 50 70

Sources: CRES and IEBR (1998); Vietnam Forestry Research Institute (1998). Project VIE/G35. Biodiversity Conservation in Agriculture (2001-2005). Project Document.

One-horned Rhino in Cat Tien National Park


28

2.3 Threats to Biodiversity Communities in Vietnam have a long tradition of natural resource use. They depend on natural habitats as a source of food, fuel, and building materials. Traditional forms of natural resource exploitation can be sustainable when practiced by human populations living at low densities to meet their subsistence needs. But recent decades have been characterized by unprecedented economic, social, and demographic changes. Rural populations and urban populations have increased, and consumption patterns among urban dwellers have changed. As a result of these changes, overexploitation of natural resources and inadequate development planning has had significant impacts on biodiversity. For example, a rapid analysis of 19 protected areas in the Greater Annamites Ecoregion conducted in 2004 revealed that, of twelve types of pressures on biodiversity over the last five years, the most serious have been poaching, overexploitation of NTFPs, logging, agriculture, grazing, and infrastructure development (Table 2.5 and Figure 2.5).45 Wildlife Trade – emptying Vietnam’s ecosystems Poaching to supply domestic and international markets is a major threat to protected areas and is considered among the greatest threats to biodiversity in Southeast Asia. Wildlife consumption in Vietnam is unsustainable and directly threatens many species with local or global extinction. Wildlife is traded as food, traditional medicine, trophies, decorations, pets, religious objects, and zoo exhibits. If the demand for a species is high enough, it is traded. With economic growth and the subsequent rise in disposable income, demand for these natural resources is higher than ever. In 2002, the trade in wildlife within and from Vietnam amounted to 45 WWF and FPD. 2004. Management effectiveness assessment of protected areas in the Greater Truong Son Ecoregion using WWF's RAPPAM Methodology. Hanoi: WWF and the Forest Protection Department. The impacts are scored by points accumulated from carrying out the Rapid Assessment and Prioritization of Protected Area Management Methodology (RAPPAM).

approximately 3,050 tons and was worth over $66 million.46 Commonly traded wildlife species include wild pigs, sambar deer, pangolins, bears, primates, civets, freshwater turtles, monitor lizards, and snakes (Box 2.2). Wild birds are captured for sale as pets. Table 2.5 Relative importance of threats to biodiversity

Threats to Biodiversity

Historical impact

Future Threat

Infrastructure development

■■ ■■■■

Extraction of natural resources Wildlife consumption and trade

■■■■ ■■■■

Fisheries exploitation ■■■ ■■■ Logging ■■■ ■■ Agricultural expansion

■■■ ■■■

Invasive alien species

■■ ■■

Pollution ■ ■■ Other less known or dependent Population pressure ■■ ■■ Consumption level ■ ■■ Global climate change ■ ■■

Source: WB staff assessment Figure 2.5 Cumulative pressure on protected areas in the Greater Annamites Ecoregion

Source: WWF and FPD (2004)

46 Nguyen Van Song. 2003. Wildlife Trading in Viet Nam: Why it flourishes. Economy and Environment Programme for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA). Additional information provided by TRAFFIC.


29

Cooked tortoises In 2004, in response to the scale of the legal and illegal trade in wild species in Vietnam, the deputy prime minister approved a National Action Plan to Strengthen Control of Trade in Wild Fauna and Flora to 2010—the only country in Asia, and quite possibly the world, to have such an action plan.47 Achieving the overall objective to enhance the effectiveness of wildlife trade controls will not be easy, as government agencies have limited capacity to rigorously enforce wildlife protection legislation. In addition, incentives for rural people to hunt are often high, particularly where there are few economic alternatives. As a result, hunting continues unchecked in many areas, only abating when wildlife populations crash. The populations of many species targeted by the wildlife trade have already been reduced so much that traders are forced to source wildlife from outside the country. Most pangolins and freshwater turtles recently found in trade in Vietnam, for example, have been in shipments from Malaysia and Indonesia. The wildlife trade is fueled largely by the demand for food and traditional medicines in China. Vietnam provides a source of animals and plants and functions as an important trade route for wildlife taken from neighboring countries, including Indonesia. Additionally, with rising consumption and disposable income in Vietnam, there is a growing internal demand, largely in urban areas, for wildlife meat. In Pumat National Park, the wildlife trade involved 75 percent of buffer-zone households during the 1990s. Restaurant owners around Tam Dao National Park can make $1,000 to $1,500 annually from selling accidental by-catch of marine turtles and seabirds.

47MARD. 2004. National Action Plan to Strengthen Control of Trade in Wild Fauna and Flora to 2010. Hanoi: Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development.

Box 2.2 Species impacted by the wildlife trade The species most impacted by wildlife trade have been tigers, bears, rhinos, primates, orchids, and reptiles. Freshwater turtles and tortoises, in particular, support a $1 million per year trade with China. Thirty-one species of Asian turtles, including 15 from Vietnam, are now listed under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). Additionally, Aquilaria crassna, a source of agarwood, an aromatic product used in perfume manufacture and traditional medicine, and Ngoc Linh Ginseng Panax vietnamensis, which is used to produce a tonic, are threatened with extinction in Vietnam as a result of overexploitation. Both species are now being artificially propagated in Vietnam. The trade in live reef fishes is also a significant sector of the market, but few data on the volume of the harvest are available, either for aquarium fish or of live reef fish for the China market. The main species targeted include groupers, snappers and lobster, either wild caught, or wild caught and grown in cages. The main production areas include the northern and central regions (Khanh Hoa and Phu Yen). In the north, the main collection and trade areas are located in Quang Ninh and Hai Phong. In Quang Ninh Province, four areas—Coto Island, Thuong Mai Island, Ha Mai Island and Halong City—are deeply involved in the trade. In Hai Phong Province, Cat Ba Island and Bach Long Vi, both proposed marine protected areas, are the major collection centers. Most reef fish are exported live, often unofficially through transfer to Chinese vessels at sea, at Co To Island, Cat Ba port and other locations. Sources: (1) TRAFFIC (2) Ministry of Fisheries and World Bank (2004) Vietnam Fisheries and Aquaculture Sector Study, Draft Final Report, December 1, 2004

Box 2.3 Innovative provincial transboundary initiative against wildlife trade At the World Conservation Congress in November 2004, the governments of Lao PDR and Vietnam, facilitated by the World Bank, announced the agreement of the Cooperative Action Plan between Ha Tinh/Quang Binh (Vietnam) and Bolikhamxay/Khammouane (Lao PDR) to control illegal transboundary hunting, trading, and transporting of wild fauna and flora for the period 2005–10. This is the first time a cooperative joint action plan to control the transboundary wildlife trade at the field level has been signed. It represents an important contribution to the protection of natural resources and biodiversity of Lao PDR and Vietnam. The plan also recognized the importance of socioeconomic development, and will aim to improve the living conditions of people in border areas. This action plan stands as a guiding document for managers at the grass-roots level, strengthening cooperation on actions necessary to combat the transboundary wildlife trade, promoting natural resource management and biodiversity conservation in this area, and contributing to sustainable development for local people. Simultaneously, it helps relevant agencies of the provinces and central governments of both countries, as well as international organizations, to identify conservation targets and priority areas for program/project development.


30

wildlife meat to tourists. In 2004, the density of all traded butterflies was reduced by 55–58 percent in collection sites compared to remote forest sites. 48

Live loris in cage for trade Destructive Fisheries Practices – bad habits and short-term thinking Destructive fishing practices are reducing diversity in habitats and species. In 2002, 14 percent of the country's fishing fleet were long-line fishing vessels, which are linked to Fishing techniques, such as the use of dynamite, poison, and electric fishing, are widespread and are cited as a high or medium threat to over 80 percent of Vietnam's coral reefs.49 Illegal Logging – continues in all types of forest and proving hard to control During the 1990s, government controls on timber harvesting reduced the timber quota from 1.5 million to 0.35 million m3 per year.50 Yet, demand for wood products is rising and is not fully met by production from forest plantations. Illegal logging continues in areas where effective forest protection has not taken hold. Between 0.5 and 2 million m3 of timber is extracted illegally each year from all forest categories, including protected areas or “special-use forests.”51 Logging may be exceeding sustainable levels by 70 percent.52

48 WB, 2005. Going, Going…Gone: The illegal wildlife trade in East Asia 49 Burke, L., Selig, E. and Spalding, M. eds. (2002) Reefs at risk in Southeast Asia. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute. 50 FPD. 2002. A proposed management strategy for a protected area system in Vietnam. Hanoi: Strengthening Protected Area Management in Vietnam Project. 51 World Bank. 2002. Vietnam Environment Monitor. Hanoi: The World Bank. 52 Vietnam National Report to UN Forum on Forests (UNFF) 5

Infrastructure Development – unwanted side-effects of development The essential elements of Vietnam’s economic development have not always been planned and implemented with adequate concern for the immediate and long-term consequences on environmental quality and biodiversity. The unwanted effects of development on natural systems are beginning to have very significant negative impacts on the productivity of key economic sectors and on the overall economy. Vietnam’s roads have doubled in length since 1990; an additional investment of VND 246 billion in roads is planned between 2002 and 2010.53 To help meet the rising demand for electricity, a doubling of hydropower capacity is planned by 2010.54 These development plans pose a challenge for biodiversity conservation. If not well-planned, they can have large impacts on habitats and migration routes, as well as increasing pressure on natural resources in previously inaccessible areas (Table 2.6). Most of these potential impacts can be moderated—and some avoided altogether—through careful planning, project design, and siting to avoid critical habitats.

Table 2.6 Potential impacts of Roads and Dams on biodiversity

Roads

• Habitat fragmentation and loss

• Interference with migration routes

• Improved access to remote areas leading to increased extraction of natural resources

• Increased pressure on natural resources from in-migration and workers

Dams

• Changes in river flows impacting fisheries

• Interference with aquatic and terrestrial migration routes

• Direct habitat loss

• Improved access to remote areas, causing increased hunting/logging

• Increased pressure on natural resources from in-migration and workers

53 Length of roads from infrastructure strategy Investment projections from MOT: Submission to Prime Minister, December 2002; 54 EVN. 2000-2010 Master Plan.


31

Road construction in Central Truong Son Agricultural Encroachment – forests and wetlands under siege In Vietnam, the area of agricultural land has increased from 6.7 million ha in 1990 to 9.4 million ha in 2002. This expansion is occurring without considering biodiversity impacts. It is driven by global market demand for products such as sugar, tea, coffee, and cashew nuts. Encroachment by fixed cultivation and shifting agriculture has led to loss in forest ecosystems in the northern provinces and expansion of cash crops in the Central Highlands and southeastern agro-ecological zones. Freshwater wetlands, such as seasonally inundated grasslands, have also been threatened by conversion to rice agriculture. Invasive Alien Species – a growing threat to terrestrial and aquatic systems Invasive alien species (IAS) are degrading biodiversity and agricultural systems around the globe, leading to species extinctions and effects on human health. The increase in global trade, travel, and transport of goods across borders, as well as growing development of infrastructure such as roads, has facilitated the spread of invasive alien species. Vietnam has experienced the introduction (both deliberate and accidental) of a number of invasive species. Although natural terrestrial ecosystems in Vietnam do not appear to be seriously affected to date, small numbers of invasive species are significant threats to biodiversity at particular sites, such as Marsh Mimosa Mimosa pigra at Cat Tien and Tram Chim National Parks (Box 2.4).

In freshwater and agricultural systems, the impacts of invasive species have been much more dramatic, with substantial economic costs. For example, Golden Apple Snail Pomacea canaliculata, a native South American species introduced into Southeast Asia in the 1980s as a source of snail meat, has become established as one of the most serious rice pests in Vietnam, causing millions of dollars worth of lost rice production each year. The problem of invasive alien species is global in scope and requires international cooperation in response. Vietnam will be one of five countries worldwide to receive assistance through the Global Invasive Species Program, which aims to establish a node of expertise to coordinate regional efforts, build national capacity, conduct public awareness campaigns, and improve access to information and technical support.

Box 2.4 Impacts of the invasion of Mimosa pigra in Tram Chim National Park Mimosa, a leguminous thorny shrub, probably first entered Vietnam before 1960, but it did not start to become a pest until the mid-1980s. In the core zone of Tram Chim National Park. Mimosa now occupies well over 2000 ha, more than one-quarter of the total area. The invasion of Mimosa into the core zone of Tram Chim is considered the most significant threat to the park’s biodiversity because it replaces the grassland vegetation which is habitat for the endangered Eastern Sarus crane Grus antigone sharpie—the Park’s flagship species—as well as the critically endangered Bengal florican (Houbaropsis bengalensis). The control of invasive plants is not yet a legal responsibility of the management boards, so little has been done to control its spread to date. Mimosa is harvested by the poorer local people for use as fuelwood; a few people come into the park to cut the plant. However, this contributes little to the control of Mimosa, and may even facilitate its spread. Source: Tram Triet. 2005. “Impacts of the invasion of Mimosa pigra on the livelihood of people living around Tram Chim National Park, Dong Thap Province, Vietnam.” In: McGarry, C.M Shackleton, S. Fourie, and C.F. Fabricus, eds. A rapid assessment of the effects of invasive species on human livelihoods, especially of the rural poor. Grahamstown, South Africa: Rhodes University.


32

Forest Fires – most intentionally lit In 2002, a series of devastating fires destroyed large areas of Melaleuca forest at U Minh Thuong National Park in the Mekong Delta, focusing the attention of the government and the general public alike on the issue of forest fires. Forest fires originate from a number of sources, including fires set to clear land in shifting cultivation cycles, fires set by hunters to flush wildlife or alter understory structure, and accidental fires started by honey collectors, construction workers or other people living and working in forest areas. About 6 million ha of Vietnam's forests are considered to be vulnerable to fire. Between 1992 and 2002, an average of 6,000 ha of forest was lost to fires annually.55 In the three years to 2005, MARD reports that authorities uncovered 134,000 cases of crime related to the prevention and control of forest fire rules. Forest fires are particularly prevalent in the Mekong Delta, Central Highlands, and the southeastern and northwestern agro-ecological zones—largely because of the pronounced dry season in these areas.

55 FPD. 2002. ibid.

On the Da Lat plateau, forest fires are promoting a transition from montane evergreen forest to fire-climax coniferous forest dominated by Pinus kesiya. As most of the endemic and globally threatened species found on the Da Lat plateau are restricted to montane evergreen forest, this transition is reducing the biodiversity value of the area.56

56 Eames, J. C. and Nguyen Cu. 1994. A management feasibility study of Thuong Da Nhim and Chu Yang Sin Nature Reserves on the Da Lat plateau, Vietnam. Hanoi: WWF Vietnam Programme and the Forest Inventory and Planning Institute.

CMYK CMYK

Chapter 2


Chapter 2


CMYK CMYK

Chapter 3

Polic y, Institutional, and Management

Responses

Chapter 3

Polic y, Institutional, and Management

Responses

CHAPTER 3: POLICY, INSTITUTIONAL AND MANAGEMENT RESPONSES

34

3.1 National Policy and Institutional Framework for Biodiversity Conservation Substantial achievements in a short time Vietnam's first biodiversity conservation regulations were formulated in the 1960s, providing for the establishment of the country's first protected area and protection of certain rare species.57 That early initiative led to the establishment of the national terrestrial protected areas system in 1986.58 It was not until the 1990s that rapid institutional and legal reform took hold, with the adoption in 1991 of the National Plan for Environment and Sustainable Development 1991–2000,59 which catalyzed the introduction of a series of laws related to biodiversity conservation and sustainable use, including the following:

• 1991 Law on Forest Development and Protection (amended in 2004);

• 1993 Land Law (amended in 1998 and 2003);

• 1993 Law on Environmental Protection; • 2003 Law on Fisheries; • 2004 Law on Forest Protection and

Development; • Law on Environmental Protection

(expected to be approved in 2005); and the • Law on Biodiversity (planned to be

promulgated by 2007).

The need to integrate the principles of sustainable development, including biodiversity conservation, into the policies and programs of all sectors is recognized in national policy documents at the highest level. Examples include the Comprehensive Poverty Reduction and Growth Strategy (CPRGS) for 2001–10 and its successor, the Socioeconomic Development Plan (SEDP) for 2006–10; the National Agenda 21 (2002), or “Orientation strategy for advancing toward sustainable development,” as it is known; and the 5-year plans of MoNRE, MARD, and MoFi. In 2001, the government adopted the National Strategy for Environment Protection 2001–2010 with

57 Government of SRV/GEF. 1994. Biodiversity action plan for Vietnam. Hanoi: Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam and the Global Environment Facility. 58 Decision No. 194/CT of the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, dated 9 August 1986. 59 State Committee for Sciences. 1991. Vietnam National Plan for Environment and Sustainable Development. Hanoi: State Committee for Sciences, UNDP, SIDA, UNEP, and IUCN.

vision toward 2020. Biodiversity Action Plans – plans leading to enabling regulations In 1995, the Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) laid out a plan of action for conservation and sustainable use of the country’s biodiversity. Over the last 10 years, the policy framework has been used to guide investment in biodiversity conservation and the establishment of 98 legal documents related to biodiversity. It has helped to engage a growing number of stakeholders in conservation activities. Weaknesses in BAP implementation have included ineffective enforcement, overlapping and unclear institutional responsibilities, insufficient integration of economic development, and low investment in biodiversity conservation. A new BAP (through 2015) and Vision toward 2020 is being developed by MoNRE and will be issued in early 2006, which will provide an opportunity for these concerns to be addressed. Also, a law on biodiversity is in the early stages of preparation. Other detailed plans for biodiversity conservation include the Management Strategy for a Protected Area System in Vietnam to 2010 adopted by the government in 2003; the Action Plan for Wetlands Conservation and Sustainable Development, 2004–10, approved by MoNRE in 2004; and the draft Marine Protected Areas Action Plan, which is expected to be adopted early in 2006. Regulations to support implementation of these plans are being prepared in MARD, MoFi, and MoNRE.

Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) – Vietnam taking international obligations seriously These policy frameworks and laws are progressively putting into place the domestic arrangements for meeting Vietnam’s international obligations. Vietnam is party to 28 MEAs, several relating specifically to the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity (Annex IV). In addition, Vietnam participates in a number of other global and regional mechanisms that promote international cooperation in this field, such as the Man and the Biosphere (MAB) Programme, the ASEAN Centre for


35

Biodiversity, and the Mekong River Commission. There are a number of key agreements to which it is not a signatory, including the Convention on Migratory Species. Vietnam’s progress toward meeting its international commitments differs among the MEAs. While Vietnam is delivering under the Convention on Biological Diversity, its implementation of the Ramsar Convention has been slow, and it is in the process of bringing its national legislation in line with CITES. Institutional framework – major structural reforms in the past decade At the central level, responsibility for biodiversity conservation is divided among several ministries, including MARD, MoNRE, the Ministry of Fisheries (MoFi), and the Ministry of Planning and Investment (MPI) (Figure 3.1 and Annex V). Various academic and technical institutions play important supporting roles with regard to research, monitoring, technical advice, or training. At the provincial and city level, a local line department represents each of the central line ministries. The relevant Provincial People’s Committee (PPC) coordinates the local operation of these line departments. The police, customs, and judiciary also have vital roles regarding the enforcement of conservation legislation. Implementation of relevant legislation is frequently constrained by unclear and overlapping institutional jurisdictions, weak interagency cooperation, and capacity limitations among government institutions charged with conserving the country's biodiversity. The government’s Management Strategy for a Protected Areas System to 2010 requires the establishment of a focal national protected area authority, an important goal for achieving a consistent and integrated national system. Decentralization – shifting decision making to local government Responsibility for many aspects of biodiversity conservation is strongly decentralized to the provincial and other levels of local government. Decentralization presents a number of opportunities for biodiversity conservation. It enables PPCs to pilot innovative approaches to biodiversity

conservation that go beyond a strict interpretation of national regulations, such as community co management of protected areas. Similarly, PPCs are well-placed to facilitate coordination among local line departments with responsibility for natural resource management. Yet, decentralization also presents a number of obstacles to effective biodiversity conservation. Critical responsibilities and authorities are often devolved to agencies that do not have the capacity, skills, and detailed administrative arrangements to take the new roles on board. Also, central line ministries themselves often lack the capacity to support and promote consistent regulations and management approaches. Nongovernmental and research organizations – the legal basis for local NGOs remains uncertain A range of national nongovernmental and research organizations contribute to conservation in Vietnam. These are legally constituted, have the capacity to support conservation activities, are able to raise funds, and support their activities by undertaking consultancies with government agencies and international NGOs. They include the Institute of Ecological Economy (Eco Eco), the Environment and Sustainable Development Institute (VESDI), Centre for Education and Communication of Environment (CEACE), Centre for Natural Resources and Environmental Studies (CRES), the Centre for Biodiversity Conservation (CBC), and The Vietnam National Parks and Protected Areas Association (VNPPA) Universities play a critical role in conservation. In Vietnam, they are the primary repositories of technical knowledge, and their scientists feature prominently in NGOs and in ongoing survey and inventory work around the country. Government research bodies such as the Forestry Institute for Planning and Investment (FIPI), the Institute of Ecology and Biological Resources (IEBR), Ho Chi Minh Institute of Tropical Biology under the National Academy of Science and Technology, the Institute of Anthropology (IA), and the Research Institute of Geology and Mineral Resources (RIGMR) play similar roles to those of universities.


36

Figure 3.1 Key central-level institutions with responsibilities for biodiversity conservation

MoNRE MARD

VEPA

CBD

Ramsar

FPD

CITES

7 NPs (*)

(*) Under MARD control (**) Awaiting Prime Minister’s decision MoNRE: Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment VEPA: Vietnam Environmental Protection Agency CBD: Convention on Biological Diversity Focal Point Ramsar: Ramsar Convention Focal Point Cartagena: Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety GEF: Global Environment Facility Focal Point DOE: Department of Environment MARD: Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development FPD: Forest Protection Department CITES: Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora DOF: Department of Forestry UNCCD: UN Convention on Combating Desertification Focal Point ICD: Department of International Cooperation

UNFCCC: UN Framework Convention on Climate Change Focal Point FIPI: Forest Inventory and Planning Institute NP: National Park MoFi: Ministry of Fisheries NADAREP: National Directorate of Aquatic Resources Exploitation and Protection VIFEP: Vietnam Institute of Fisheries Economics and Planning DEP: Department of Aquatic Resources Exploitation and Protection MOET: Ministry of Education and Training NUNIs: National Universities VSTI: Vietnam Science and Technology Institute IEBR: Institute of Ecology and Biological Resources VASI: Vietnam Agricultural Science Institute PGRC: Plant Genetic Resources Centre

Cat Tien National Park


37

3.2 The National System of Protected Areas An expanding national PA system Over the past 40 years, the national system of protected areas has increased in size dramatically (Figure 3.2) (Map 3.1). It includes 126 approved special-use forests (SUFs), comprising 28 national parks, 59 nature reserves, and 39 landscape-protected areas, with a total area of 2,541,675 ha (Table 3.1).60 Not all of the sites are under conservation management on the ground. Nevertheless, the number of SUFs with established management boards is increasing and has more than doubled over the last decade, from 50 in 1995 to 106 in 2004.61

Vietnam’s SUF system contains a number of gaps with regard to the coverage of species and habitats. Wetland habitats, notably lowland rivers and coastal wetlands, are under-represented within the current system, as are lowland evergreen forests. Vietnam’s SUFs tend to be concentrated at higher elevations or in limestone karst regions—marginal areas for most alternative land uses. In addition, for some species the coverage is inadequate. At least nine globally threatened animal species have less than 50 percent of their Vietnamese populations within established SUFs (Table 3.2). While coastal and marine ecosystems are represented in a number of SUFs, comprehensive planning for a national MPA system began only a few years ago. In 2001, Nha Trang Bay was confirmed as Vietnam's first marine protected area (MPA). A national system of 17 MPAs is being proposed, including the Halong Bay World Heritage Site. Protection of freshwater wetlands remains in the planning stages. The country has recognized several internationally important wetlands as Ramsar sites (two designated and several under consideration)62 and as UNESCO Biosphere Reserves (four sites).63 A list of 68 nationally important wetlands has also been created. However, the establishment of a national system 60 As of October 2005, there were 128 SUFs approved by the authorized agencies such as government and PPCs. 61 BirdLife International, 2004. Sourcebook of existing and proposed protected areas in Vietnam. Hanoi, Vietnam: BirdLife International, February 2001. 62 MOSTE/NEA. 2001. Wetland sites with biodiversity and environment values in Vietnam. Hanoi: Ministry of Science, Technology and the Environment and the National Environment Agency. The sites designated were Xuan Thuy National Park on the Red River Delta. 63 Includes Can Gio, Xuan Thuy-Tien Hai, Cat Tien, and Cat Ba.

of wetland conservation areas is still under discussion. Vietnam has a number of national parks and nature reserves that support important wetland habitats, such as Tram Chim, U Minh Thuong, and Mui Ca Mau National Parks, and the Kien Luong and Lung Ngoc Hoang Nature Reserves. Figure 3.2 Increase in number of decreed SUFs 1962-2004

2004

2003

1998

1995

1992

1989

1986

1983

1980

1977

1974

1971

1968

1965

1962

Table 3.1 Planned and gazetted Special Use Forests

Type of SUF Number Area (ha) National park 28 957,330 Nature reserve 48 1,283,209 Species/habitat protected area 11 85,849 Landscape protected area 39 215,287 Total 126 2,541,675

Source: BirdLife International, 2005. Sourcebook of existing and proposed protected areas in Vietnam. Table 3.2 Proportion of populations of selected threatened species within SUFs

Species

Estimate of coverage of Vietnamese population within established SUFs† (%)

*Grey-shanked douc Pygathrix cinerea

<50

Western black crested gibbon Nomascus concolor

<10

*Saola Pseudoryx nghetinhensis <50 *Vietnamese pheasant Lophura hatinhensis

<50

Green peafowl Pavo muticus <50 Rufous-necked hornbill Aceros nipalensis

<50

Sarus crane Grus antigone <50 *Golden-winged Laughingthrush Garrulax ngoclinhensis

<50

*Annam leaf turtle Mauremys annamensis

0

* Endemic or near-endemic to Vietnam † SUFs with an established management board


38

Map 3.1


39

Mechanisms for conflict resolutions needed There is great variation among SUFs with regard to management effectiveness. An assessment of 19 SUFs in the Truong Son ecoregion conducted by the Forest Protection Department and WWF concluded that protected areas that have been established the longest have the highest management effectiveness. Those protected areas have been supported with international funding, and have had the attention of central and local governments. They include Phong Nha-Ke Bang, Yok Don, Cuc Phuong, and Nui Chua National Parks. The strength of support for the conservation objectives among local authorities seems to be a critical factor governing management effectiveness. In contrast, Phong Dien, and Song Thanh Nature Reserves and Bu Gia Map National Park, which were more recently established and have received little support, had lower scores for effectiveness. Throughout the system, weaknesses were found regarding land-use conflicts (land tenure or use rights) and the adequacy of resources, both in terms of staff and finances, to conduct critical law enforcement activities. Management of visitors was found to be particularly low.64 Under the Vietnam Conservation Fund (Box 3.1), there are plans to initiate a detailed monitoring program for SUF management effectiveness using a tracking tool developed by the World Bank and WWF.65 This should enable key limitations to management effectiveness to be identified, and help target available funding toward addressing them.

64 WWF and FPD. 2004. Management effectiveness assessment of protected areas in the Greater Truong Son Ecoregion using WWF's RAPPAM Methodology. Hanoi: WWF and the Forest Protection Department. 65 Stolton, S., M. Hockings, and N. Dudley. 2003. Reporting progress at protected area sites: a simple site-level tracking tool developed for the World Bank and WWF. Bristol and Toowoomba: World Bank/WWF Alliance for Forest Conservation and Sustainable Use.

Box 3.1 The Vietnam Conservation Fund (VCF) The majority of Vietnam’s protected areas suffer from weak financing, and in particular struggle to meet operational costs. A significant on-going initiative with regard to conservation financing in Vietnam is the VCF, which was launched in 2005. This financing mechanism is a pilot for conservation of internationally important biodiversity in the special-use forests nationwide. The VCF will provide small-grant support to the management boards of priority SUFs on a competitive basis. Grants will be targeted toward operational conservation management activities, such as hunting/wildlife trade control, conservation awareness raising, engagement of local communities in conservation management, and ecological monitoring. Currently, the VCF donors include the GEF, Netherlands, and Trust Fund for Forests (TFF), with other donors considering providing resources. The VCF Management Committee's mandate is to implement and disburse funding from the VCF, and to develop it into a long-term mechanism for protected area financing in Vietnam. Initially, the VCF will be a sinking fund focused solely on SUFs. In the future, it may be possible to convert it into an endowment fund or another type of trust fund or expand its remit to include other forest management or protected area categories. It may also be possible to replenish the VCF from innovative sources, such as tourism receipts or environmental service payments. In this way, the VCF could broaden and enhance the sustainability of the funding base for conservation in Vietnam. The challenge will be to effectively integrate the VCF into the overall government financing system.

Butterfly in Cat Tien National Park


40

Protected areas staffing – more trained conservation specialists are needed The number of staff and their qualifications are not adequate to meet the demands of PA management. MARD has a staffing norm of one post for each 1,000 hectares, but it is not closely followed. Staff members are not allocated according to the biodiversity importance of a protected area or levels of conservation need (Figure 3.3). Training in conservation has increased, and training opportunities for related disciplines are available (Box 3.2). Younger scientists are not moving forward to replace the cadre of existing taxonomists, creating a critical gap in skills for conservation. A more systematic national approach to the training of conservation experts is clearly needed.

Illegal animal trap removal

Figure 3.3 Staffing in seven Vietnamese protected areas Number of staff per area of protected area

Staff qualifications

Source: SPAM project (WWF&FPD-MARD), Technical report No. 6. Hanoi 2002

Douc langur


41

Both the government in the Forestry Development Strategy and NGOs have recognized the need for further conservation training. There is one forestry university, three secondary forest schools, and six vocational forestry technical schools under MARD, located in various ecological zones. These institutions have helped to provide training in forestry, and a number of graduates have gone on to work in protected areas. Additionally, donors and international NGOs have increasingly been focusing on capacity building programs for protected areas managers, including developing skills such as project design and management, ecology and wildlife management, inventory and monitoring, law enforcement, communications, tourism management, GIS technique, database development and application, and internet use (Box 3.3).

Training in conservation planning

Ecotourism in Cat Tien National park

Box 3.2 Vietnam Flora Conservation Project A four-year project funded by the Missouri Botanical Garden in cooperation with Vietnam’s IEBR used the “pyramid” approach in training botanical experts in Vietnam. At the lowest level, 50 to 100 researchers and conservationists nationwide were provided with information and knowledge on research projects, training, and conservation of floral biodiversity. At level two in the middle of pyramid, 40 conservation staff members of nature reserves and national parks were trained in the field. At level three at the top of pyramid, 20 to 24 young botanists and students were intensively trained in botany in the field, particularly on how to manage dry plant specimens. This project was successful and is a good example of the development of specialist training in Vietnam. Source: IEBR, Handouts of the training course on Botanical Research and Conservation in Nui Chua National Park, April 2004

Box 3.3 Biodiversity Training in Cuc Phuong Training Center In 1994, a training center was established in Cuc Phuong National Park in Ninh Binh Province in the north of Vietnam. In the first four years of operation, 363 people were trained in biodiversity conservation through 15 cost-effective, high-quality courses conducted by both international and national experts. With similar activities of two other training centers in Bach Ma National Park (in central Vietnam) and Cat Tien National Park (in south Vietnam), the project has helped to train some 1,200 government forestry staff in biodiversity conservation, especially for Vietnam's protected areas system. The Cuc Phuong Center continues to be used for a variety of training activities.


42

Communities living within protected areas – around 80 percent of PAs have communities living within them Under the Forest Development and Protection Law 2004, communities are not permitted to live or settle in core zones of biodiversity importance within protected areas. This has been a consistent government policy since the SUF network was established. From the point of view of the government, resettlement from protected areas is necessary for conserving biodiversity and providing more effectively for the socioeconomic needs of the communities. People are not forced to leave, and the Forest Law provides that if the conditions are not in place for resettlement, the Management Board must sign a forest protection contract with households and individuals so they are less dependent on natural resources. The situation with MPAs and wetland conservation areas will differ. Under the Fisheries Law and the draft MPA regulations, the concept of multiple use and community zones associated with protected areas has been introduced. The 2003 Government Decree on Wetlands promotes activities to “harvest economic, cultural and social potentials” from wetlands at a rate that maintains ecosystem functions. When households have been moved, both the central and local governments have supported them through a range of compensation, education, and technical support programs in addition to housing and land. Resettlement has not always met with success. A great deal can be learned from experience in ensuring that, having made the move, households consider themselves better off. Overall, government policies relating to communities and protected areas are evolving. To make optimal decisions that favor biodiversity and natural resource dependent communities, a thorough understanding of the interactions between ecological and human systems is needed, including the value of traditional and cultural practices.

The response needs to include effective management tools and policies to ensure respect for forest-dependent communities and their rights and to promote biological integrity and conservation.

Damaged coral

Wood collection in Central Annamites


43

3.3 Conservation Outside Protected Areas Protected areas are the cornerstones of conservation efforts in Vietnam, but only 7 percent of the country is under this form of management tenure. Natural areas beyond their borders are also critical to the long-term conservation of biodiversity and sustainable development. Internationally important sites for biodiversity remain in the landscapes linking protected areas (Box 3.4). The management of these wider landscapes for biodiversity conservation is generally overlooked, although supported by some laws and a variety of innovative projects. These initiatives have focused on three areas: management of buffer zones, landscape planning, and mainstreaming conservation in production sectors. Buffer zones – beginning to receive attention as a management tool Buffer zones—the areas next to boundaries of protected areas—are important from a management perspective as some of the severest threats to biodiversity arise from exploitation of resources by people living nearby. The role of buffer zones in preventing and lessening encroachment on protected areas has been recognized in government regulations since the late 1980s and, most recently, in 2001 through the Prime Minister’s Decision 08/2001/QD-TTg relating to forest management. Yet the buffer zones of most nature reserves and national parks do not have clearly defined boundaries or management objectives and regimes.66 Developing alternative livelihoods outside protected areas is often promoted as a means of reducing local dependence on forest resources while reducing poverty through “integrated conservation and development projects” (ICDPs). A review of ICDPs in Vietnam concluded that the performance of these projects has generally been poor.67 The reasons included inappropriate approaches for addressing the major causes of biodiversity 66 Gilmour, D.A. and Nguyen Van San. 1999. Buffer zone management in Vietnam. Hanoi: IUCN. 67 Sage, N. and Nguyen Cu. 2001. A discussion paper on analysis of constraints and enabling factors of ICDPs in Vietnam. Hanoi: ICDP Working Group (CARE, SNV and WWF) and Proceedings of Integrated Conservation and Development Projects Lessons Learned Workshop, supported by SNV, WWF, IUCN and UNDP. Hanoi, June 12–13, 2000.

loss, and insufficient involvement of the local communities. The ICDP review highlighted eight enabling factors necessary for integrating conservation and development in Vietnam, which continue to be relevant (Box 3.5). In connection with the Clean Development Mechanism under the Kyoto Protocol, there are a growing number of new initiatives looking into the possibility of establishing community-based reforestation projects to provide carbon credits or support pro-poor and community-based tourism. This type of business is not yet well-developed in Vietnam, but it offers real potential.

Box 3.4 Biodiversity outside protected areas: experience from Important Bird Areas

Important Bird Areas (IBAs) are internationally important sites for the conservation of birds and other biodiversity, identified according to objective, scientific criteria. To date, a total of 63 IBAs have been identified in Vietnam, covering a total area of 1.7 million ha, equivalent to 5 percent of the total land area of the country. Of these 63 IBAs, 29 are wholly or partly included within decreed protected areas, while the remaining 34 are not officially protected. Source: BirdLife International.


44

Landscape planning and management – a commitment to landscape planning is growing Vietnam has adopted conservation landscapes as one of the categories for its terrestrial protected areas system. That reflects a significant adaptive change that has occurred in many countries to view protected areas as key components in regional land-use planning, representing a gradation of conservation and sustainable use functions, to meet multiple conservation and development objectives. More often, protected areas are being planned and managed at the landscape or bioregional scales reflecting the ecosystem approach, as advocated by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), to which Vietnam is a party. This approach extends the conservation reach well beyond strictly protected core zones. As a result, PAs are being networked into larger systems through ecologically friendly landscapes, including transnational ecosystems, as opposed to managing them as individual sites that were cut off from their surrounding socioeconomic and ecological contexts. The use of a range of management categories in designing PA systems has helped greatly in their integration with the broader regional landscape and in mitigating people-PA conflicts.68

Delacour’s langur (Photo source: Frankfurt Zoological Society) 68 ICEM. 2003. Lessons learned from global experience. Review of Protected Areas and Development in the Lower Mekong River Region. Indooroopilly, Queensland, Australia.

Box 3.5 Enabling Factors for ICDPs in Vietnam 1. Good cooperation—building trust over time Consultation and co-ordination with the existing park staff, the district and provincial authorities and senior members of committees, such as the PPC, are vital ingredients for success. 2. Strong/direct conservation-development linkages It is important that any development-related activities are directly linked to the goal of protecting natural resources. There are examples in Vietnam of “forest protection contracts” where the project will provide continued support for development-related priorities to the community only in return for good conservation activities on their part. 3. Alternative income schemes target resource users It is important not only to develop alternative income generating schemes but to ensure such schemes are designed so as to target and involve the participation of those groups who have traditionally been using resources from the national park. 4. Start small and scale up Small ICDPs [less than $150,000] tend to be more careful with expenditures and therefore more effective overall. Moreover, smaller scale ICDPs tend to rely more on local institutional structures, such as local government and traditional community groups; 5. Community collaboration Natural areas cannot be effectively managed unless communities have a stake in the decision-making process for use and management of those resources. The people most dependent on natural resources are often the ones most knowledgeable about their effective management. 6. Reform of State Forest Enterprises State forest enterprises tend to be located within buffer zones. SFE reform offers an opportunity for such land to be transferred to households to alleviate population pressures within and surrounding the protected area. In addition, SFE staff can be trained in improved natural management practices. 7. Raise community awareness and assist government As with all ICDPs, there is a need for conservation education for the local resource users and the provision of training for local government staff, in particular the Forest Protection Department. The WWF MOSIAC project and SNV for Hue project have put an emphasis on awareness raising and training. 8. Influencing landscape- level threats The major threats to biodiversity in buffer zones often stem from outside pressures such as illegal wildlife and timber trades, migration, large infrastructure development, illegal mining and industrial cash crop expansion. Rural communities may often become increasingly marginalized and pushed further into areas such as national parks.


45

Protected landscapes can reinforce more strictly protected areas by surrounding them and linking them with landscapes managed for conservation and sustainable use. Many protected areas in Vietnam are less than 100 km2 in area. Full representation of natural systems and conservation of all species cannot be obtained through the protected area network alone. For example, tiger densities in tropical rainforest where prey density is medium to low are 1.1 to 2.2 per 100 km2.69 A landscape approach is needed to conserve both wild biodiversity and agricultural biodiversity, and to conserve human history alongside nature. They can support and reward stewardship of natural resources, sustain rural economies, and help communities resist pressures from outside that could undermine their way of life. Landscape planning has been undertaken in several regions of Vietnam to encourage conservation of contiguous habitat linking protected areas. The landscape projects include the Central Truong Son (Annamites) Biodiversity Conservation Initiative (Map 3.2), provincial-level planning in Quang Nam, and the Green Corridor Project in Thua Thien Hue Province (Box 3.6). Vietnam is participating in a ten-year Greater Mekong Core Environment Program by the Asian Development Bank, including the definition and management of biodiversity corridors linking protected areas. With positive lessons from those demonstrations and the current draft Biodiversity Action Plan for Vietnam until 2015 and Vision toward 2020 promoting the preparation of regional and provincial biodiversity action plans, the landscape approach is likely to become more widely applied. Mainstreaming biodiversity in economic sectors – sectors beginning to see biodiversity conservation as a development strategy While production sectors and infrastructure development can pose a threat to biodiversity,

69 Rabinowitz, A. 1993. Estimating the Indochinese tiger Panthera tigris corbetti population in Thailand. Biological Conservation 65: 213-217.

with careful planning and design these activities can avoid impacts and contribute to biodiversity conservation. Although there continues to be a lack of acknowledgment of biodiversity values within the plans and strategies of other sectors, there are a growing number of examples—in agriculture, fisheries, and forestry—in which biodiversity issues are being integrated.

Box 3.6 A landscape approach to conservation planning Several of Vietnam’s more innovative projects focus on how to integrate conservation priorities into wider land management practices and planning to create a dynamic landscape that protects globally important biodiversity while being economically productive. The Central Truong Son (Annamites) Action Plan Vietnam’s first landscape-scale conservation plan targets the temperate/tropical transition forest of the Central Truong Son, a landscape stretching from central Vietnam to southern Laos. This plan has been adopted by the Government of Vietnam, and contains 69 priority actions based on detailed biological and socioeconomic assessments. The activities range from supporting the implementation of the Prime Minister’s Circular 12 concerning conservation of forests and environmental protection associated with the Ho Chi Minh Highway to supporting local communities that use the forest resources to support their livelihoods (Map 3.2). The Green Corridor GEF Project: meeting global conservation targets in a productive landscape The Green Corridor is an area of forest situated between Phong Dien Nature Reserve and Bach Ma National Park in Thua Thien Hue Province. It comprises over 130,000 ha of medium- and low-altitude forest. The forest protects part of the catchment of the Huong River system, providing environmental services for fisheries and flood prevention. The Green Corridors Project intends to work with a productive SFE to encourage sustainable, conservation-oriented timber harvesting. In addition, it works with local stakeholders to provide economic incentives for managing natural forest and conserving the province’s rich natural heritage.


46

Map 3.2


47

The forest sector, in particular, has led in bringing conservation and sustainable use into policies, laws, and national programs. Policies includes the Forest Protection and Development Law (1991 and 2004), the Land Law (1993 and 2003), the Policy on “Closing Natural Forests,” and the Forest Land Allocation (FLA) programs, which have been conducted since the Land Law revision of 1993. The operational focus for implementing those policies has been the Five Million Hectare Reforestation Programme (5MHRP), also known as the 661 Programme (Box 3.7). The 5MHRP is estimated to cost about US$2.5 billion over 12 years. The general direction of Vietnam's forest policy is to expand the area of forest cover, while protecting existing forests to enhance the contribution of the forest sector to biodiversity conservation, provision of environmental services, poverty alleviation, and national economic development. Although the 5MHRP has gone a significant way toward meeting these commendable objectives, there remains a concern that its targets are unrealistic, particularly the overarching target of restoring forest cover to 43 percent of the national land area. There is insufficient suitable land available for reforestation activities because much of the bare land in Vietnam is either unsuitable for plantation forestry or located far from wood processing centers. A related problem is that the financial incentives available under the 5MHRP, coupled with a drive to meet reforestation targets, have led to afforestation of natural non-forest habitats, and establishment of plantations in areas where natural forest could have been restored through natural regeneration. The National Environmental Protection Strategy until 2010 and vision toward 2020 has taken into account the need for applying economic instruments for environmental management, and for harmonizing economic development and environmental protection. The National Agenda 21 provides further direction and strategies for the incorporation of environmental issues across governmental plans and programs, including its emphasis on the use of environmental assessment early in development planning. EIA provide a means of incorporating information on potential biodiversity impacts of projects

into project siting, design, and mitigation and compensation programs. Currently, the process is commonly undertaken too late to significantly influence the decision-making process. Also, technical capacity and gaps in information have discouraged the incorporation of biodiversity issues into EIAs in ways that help shape development.

The Government’s commitment to improve biodiversity conservation and support environmental protection more generally are reflected in recently issued legal documents. These include Politburo Resolution 41-NQ/TW on environmental protection in the country industrialization and modernization (November 15, 2004) and its implementing decision (Prime Minister’s Decision 34/2005-QD/TTg, February 22, 2005) which. These actions show strong commitment to strengthen conservation and sustainable development of biodiversity by incorporating conservation into development activities, as reflected in the following commitments70:

Improved awareness and actions, reforms in leadership, guidance, coordination, in implementing environmental protection;

Comprehensive assessment of natural resources and biodiversity; sustainable and efficient use of natural resources, biodiversity conservation, recovery of ecosystems, safeguarding wild animals and threatened species, prevention of impacts of invasive species and genetic change; strict protection of natural forests, especially primary forests, upstream forests, mangrove, national parks, and nature reserves. Building of new roads in natural forests should be limited. Hunting of protected birds and animals, and use of destructive fishing should be forbidden.

Development of environmental protection decrees for preparation, appraisal, approval and implementation of strategies, plans,

70

Orientations and actions extracted from Resolution 41-NQ/TW (November 15, 2004) and Decision 34/2005-QD/TTg (February 22, 2005).


48

programs, and projects. Incorporating environmental protection in annual socio-economic development plans and national development projects. Assessment of environmental impacts of strategies, planning, development programs and projects.

The Amendment to the Law on Environmental Protection, development of the National Action Plan on biodiversity conservation 2006-2010, and the proposed law on biodiversity, regulations on environmental protection taxes and the review and adjustment of legal documents in associated sectors, supplement of environmental protection task; and

Incorporating environmental protection investment into socio-economic development programs.

At present, there is no legislation requiring strategic environmental assessment (SEA), although it is provided for in the Amendment to the Law on Environmental Protection that is now under consideration by the National Assembly and expected to be approved by the end of 2005.

Box 3.7 Five Million Hectare Reforestation Program (known as the 661 Program) The Five Million Hectare Reforestation Program 5MHRP), implemented by Decision 661, is the government’s main forestry program for the period 1998–2010. It is intended to contribute to achieving the CPRGS. The 5MHRP aims to reforest Vietnam and to address issues of rural poverty and national socioeconomic development. Its objectives are: Establishing and restoring 2 M ha of protection forests and 3 M ha of production forests to increase forest cover to 43 percent by 2010 to ensure environmental protection requirements

Ensuring the forest products supply for development (every year 15 M m3 of timber and 20 M steres of fuelwood), thereby reducing the pressure on natural forests

Supporting poverty alleviation, hunger eradication, and development of rural mountainous areas by creating forestry-related employment for 2 M people and increasing the income of people living in forest areas in association with development of industries processing forest products.

Bach Ma National Park


49

On average, business investment in environmental issues is estimated to be less than 2 percent of the total for business development.71 However, there are some encouraging initiatives in the forestry and agriculture sectors designed to enhance the contribution of smallholders to biodiversity conservation while improving livelihoods (Boxes 3.8 and 3.9).

Box 3.9 SUCCESS Alliance Vietnam: Mainstreaming Diversification and Biodiversity in Cocoa Growing Systems The SUCCESS Alliance is assisting Vietnam to promote best practices to encourage the economic, social, and ecological sustainability of the cocoa subsector; including diversification of on-farm income and maintaining biodiversity in the on-farm agroecosystem. Primarily smallholders grow cocoa; diversified systems offer varied sources of income to the smallholder, reducing the farmers’ overexposure to price and production risks. The Alliance is promoting mixed cropping and the evaluation and incorporation of a wide range of seasonal and perennial economic crops and timber species into the cocoa cropping system. The SUCCESS Alliance has trained over 17,000 farmers on potential cocoa crop pests and diseases and beneficial insects and organisms that work to protect farmers’ crops and promote soil health.

71 Miehlbrandt, A. and InvestConsult Group. 2002. Business Development Services in Viet Nam. A Study to Assess the Market for BDS.

Box 3.8 Forest Sector Development Project The Forest Sector Development Project—supported by a World Bank loan, the GEF, and Trust Fund For Forests (TFF)—supports to promote the sustainable management of plantation forests, the conservation of biodiversity, and the contribution of forestry to rural poverty reduction and global environmental protection in Vietnam. The project contains the following main components: (a) institutional development—strengthening forest management and biodiversity conservation; (b) smallholder plantation forests— based on different cropping systems for fast-growing plantations, mixed forestry-agriculture crops, fruit trees, and small-scale tree growing by rural communities; and (c) special-use forests—conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity resources that will be financed through the Vietnam Conservation Fund (Box 3.1).


50

3.4 Financing for Biodiversity Conservation In Vietnam, there are two main sources of investment in biodiversity conservation and sustainable development: the government budget and international donors. A number of private sector businesses are also investing in biodiversity conservation in the country, but their contributions are less significant. Government and donor funding - Increasing financial commitment to biodiversity conservation The trend in government and international donor investment in biodiversity conservation has been one of steady increase (Figure 3.4). Precise data on overall investment in biodiversity conservation and sustainable use are not available because there is no centralized source of information, and because it is often difficult to distinguish investments in biodiversity conservation from investments in other related objectives, such as environmental protection, poverty reduction, and agricultural extension. Nevertheless, over the period 1996–2004, total investment in biodiversity conservation is estimated at $259 million, of which the state budget contributed $81.6 million (31.5 percent) and international donors contributed $177 million (68.5 percent). Total investment in biodiversity conservation in 2005 could reach $51.8 million, which is 10 times higher than total investment a decade earlier.72 Consistent with the overall picture of increasing investment in environmental protection, government investment in biodiversity conservation is rising steadily, both in the aggregate and as a proportion of overall investment. While ODA projects (Annex VI) still account for most expenditure on biodiversity, the government share has increased from 26 to 40 percent of total investment between 1996 and 2004. The government has committed to allocate 1 percent of the total state budget to environmental protection from 2006 onwards, a percentage to be adjusted in

72 Vu Xuan Nguyet Hong. 2005. Expenditure for biodiversity conservation in Vietnam. Unpublished report.

accordance with economic growth.73 Even so, average annual spending for biodiversity accounts for only 0.4 percent of total expenditure from the state budget. The newly established VCF might provide a vehicle for tapping more resources for biodiversity conservation (Box 3.1).

Figure 3.4 Trends in investment in biodiversity conservation in Vietnam 1996-2004

-

10,000,000

20,000,000

30,000,000

40,000,000

50,000,000

60,000,000

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

USD

Domestic state budget (US$)

ODA (US$)

Sources: UNDP (1999), VEPA and UNDP (2004); MPI (2003)

73 Decision No. 34/2005/QD-TTg


51

Special target national programs have contributed to conservation funding Government institutions responsible for biodiversity conservation receive two regular sources of government funding: (1) investment funds for infrastructure, equipment, and activities; and (2) recurrent funds for staff salaries, fuel, and other operating expenses. In addition, a number of national programs make funding available for activities that either have direct conservation benefits (such as forest protection) or make indirect contributions to conservation objectives (such as alternative livelihood activities for forest-dependent communities). The key national programs in this regard are the 5MHP (Box 3.7), and the Programme for Socioeconomic Development in Communes Facing Extreme Difficulties, also known as the 135 Programme. An analysis of sources of revenue of 66 provincially managed special-use forests (SUF), conducted during the design phase for the Vietnam Conservation Fund (VCF), reveal that government programs (principally 5MHP) were the single largest source of funding for SUFs followed by government investment and recurrent budgets (Table 3.3). More than 66 percent of the government's total expenditure on biodiversity has been for capital investment projects. In the five years to 2003, donors invested $53.5 million in biodiversity conservation, accounting for 2 percent of total ODA to the environment sector and only 0.3 percent of total ODA to Vietnam.74 Around 65 percent was provided by multilateral agencies, 30 percent by bilateral agencies, and 5 percent from NGOs. Fees and charges are a growth area for conservation funding Collection of tourist fees and charges by SUF management boards amounts to less than 1 percent of the total revenues (Table 3.3).75 SUF management boards are constrained in their ability to generate revenue from other innovative sources, such as payments for

74 VEPA and UNDP. 2003. Compendium of environmental projects in Viet Nam 2003. Hanoi: Vietnam Environmental Protection Agency and UNDP 75 Following Article 16 of Prime Ministerial Decree No. 10/2002/TTg, on Financial Management for Revenue-generating Economic Public-Service Units.

ecosystem services. While there is considerable variation among SUFs with regard to regimes of collection, remittance, and use of locally generated revenue, in general, SUF management boards only retain a portion of the revenue they generate locally. Innovations through regulations for SUF, MPA, and wetlands management now being developed by MARD, MoFi, and MoNRE are likely to improve the arrangements for using fees and charges as a consistent revenue stream for protected areas (Box 3.10) Table 3.3 Average revenue by source for 66 provincially managed SUFs, 2000–02

Revenue source VND million Percentage

Government investment budget

10,152 21

Government recurrent budget

10,724 22

661 Programme 17,977 37

135 Programme 783 2

Other national programs 837 2

Loans, private investment and international projects

7,320 15

Entrance and tourism fees 304 <1

Fines for illegal activities 46 <1

Others 29 <1

Total 48,172 100

Source: Unpublished data collated during VCF preparation phase.


52

Private sector funding - Private sector investment remains limited In many countries, the private sector is a major supporter of biodiversity conservation initiatives. Over the last decade, there has been a rapid growth in the number of foreign companies and domestic private enterprises operating in Vietnam. Yet, despite a growing commitment to the principle of corporate environmental and social responsibility by private firms globally, the private sector is not engaged in biodiversity conservation in Vietnam. There are some examples of involvement by the private sector that give directions for the future. For example, between 1996 and 2002, BP and Statoil funded the Cuc Phuong Conservation Project, an integrated program of conservation activities implemented by Fauna & Flora International. This project initiated a conservation awareness program for local communities and visitors to the park, which has been sustained since the completion of the project, and now serves as a model for similar initiatives elsewhere in Vietnam. In 2003, a sustainable development and biodiversity conservation project was initiated in the Ha Tien Plain, Kien Giang Province, with the objective of developing and then demonstrating the benefits of multiuse land management. This project is a joint initiative among Ho Chi Minh City National University, Can Tho University, the International Crane Foundation, the International Finance Corporation, and Holcim Vietnam, a private company that operates a cement factory at the site. By investing in the project, Holcim hopes to offset some of the negative impacts its operations are having on biodiversity. Other international corporations have funded conservation projects in Vietnam; together, they provide useful models for increasing private sector involvement. Investment in biodiversity conservation has not been strategic Investment in biodiversity conservation in Vietnam has been skewed toward particular ecosystems, sites, and approaches. Investments in protected area management, in particular, have been heavily skewed toward a small number of sites. Government funding for SUFs is targeted toward the seven national parks directly managed by MARD. These

seven national parks receive, on average, about $1,200 per km2 per year of government funding. This is comparable to the level received by protected areas in Canada and Sweden. The large number of provincially managed SUFs, however, receive less than $200 per km2 per year of government funding.76

Box 3.10 Private sector investment in Marine Protected Area (MPA) management Financial constraints currently limit Vietnam’s ability to protect its coastal and marine biodiversity. The private sector is viewed as a potential source of cofinancing for MPAs. The long-term aim of the proposed MPA network is to create an environment that encourages non-governmental sectors, including the private sector, to actively participate in the management of MPAs in a manner that supports biodiversity conservation and protection. Regulations being drafted by MoFI will open the way to the development and implementation of: (1) Guidelines, standards, and/or regulations regarding the types of private sector activities allowed in MPAs (2) Policies regarding resource rents to be paid by private companies under cofinancing arrangements (3) Institutional arrangements for transferring resource rents from larger, more popular MPAs to smaller, less well-financed MPAs. Private sector investment and financing mechanisms in the MPA Network has been piloted at Nha Trang Bay MPA, with comprehensive plans under way for Con Dao National Park.

76 IUCN. 2002. Financing study phase II: synthesis report: needs and opportunities for the establishment of sustainable financing mechanisms for Ba Be National Park and Na Hang Nature Reserve. Hanoi: PARC Project.


53

This trend has been reinforced by international donors, who have targeted most of their investment on site-based conservation focusing on one or a few sites. Often there has been a mismatch between the scale of these investments and the absorptive capacity of the sites in question, while other sites of equal or higher biodiversity value lack funding for even the most basic conservation management activities. Recognizing that conservation investments need to be better targeted, more effective and more sustainable, the government and international donors are moving toward more strategic approaches. In particular, there is increasing emphasis on putting in place an enabling environment for successful biodiversity conservation through policy reform and institutional strengthening.

Figure 3.5 Government funding for protected areas in developed and developing countries

Source: IUCN (2002) Financing study phase II: synthesis report: needs and opportunities for the establishment of sustainable financing mechanisms for Ba Be National Park and Na Hang Nature Reserve. Hanoi: PARC Project.


54

Payments for ecosystem services (PES) Payments for environmental services (PES) represent one innovative source of conservation financing with high potential for application in Vietnam. A precedent for introducing PES has been set by the Tri An hydropower project, which has signed a legal agreement to provide financial support for forest protection activities in the upstream Tri An Nature Reserve. Similarly, a proposal is currently pending approval by the government to invest a small percentage of the natural resource tax revenues from the Hoa Binh hydropower project into catchment protection. This would provide an estimated VND2 billion77 per year for forest protection activities in Son La and Hoa Binh provinces.78 There is interest from government and international donors to explore further the potential of PES. Several multilateral donor agencies are considering sector-wide investments in hydropower development in Vietnam. Such investments provide opportunities for establishing revenue streams that support upstream forest protection. A number of services stand out as fields for piloting PES approaches in Vietnam: 1. Carbon sequestration and storage; for

example, an electricity company paying farmers in the tropics for planting and maintaining additional trees

2. Biodiversity protection; for example, conservation donors paying local people for setting aside or naturally restoring areas to create a biological corridor

3. Watershed protection; for example, downstream water users paying upstream farmers for adopting land uses that limit deforestation, soil erosion, and flooding risks

4. Landscape beauty, for example, a tourism operator paying a local community not to hunt in a forest being used for tourists’ wildlife viewing.79

77 Equivalent to $125,000. 78 ICEM. 2003. Vietnam national report on protected areas and development. Indooroopilly: Review of Protected Areas and Development in the Lower Mekong River Region. 79 Sven Wonder. 2005. Payments for Ecosystem Services – Some nuts and bolts. CIFOR Occasional Paper No. 42.

New policy developments such as the Law on Forest Protection and Development (2004) and the planned biodiversity law could provide a foundation for ecosystem service payments and a user pays approach to those who benefit commercially from biodiversity. For example, Article 33 of the Forest Law on forest prices asserts that the government shall prescribe principles and methods for determination of prices of forests of all kinds, based on which PPC shall set specific prices of forests in their localities. These prices include assorted taxes, charges, and fees related to forest goods and services.

View of the Ma River on the southern border of Pu Luong Nature Reserve

Po-mu tree Fokienia hodginsii in Vu Quang National Park


55

3.5 Community Involvement in Biodiversity Conservation Communities as natural resource managers Local people in Vietnam have been managing forests for centuries.80 The traditional practices of ethnic groups are valuable for forest land management and for biodiversity conservation. The Law on Forest Protection and Development (2004) makes specific provision for community involvement in the management of protection and production forests. The important change has been to recognize that village communities can be allocated forest blocks for communal management outside protected areas. Natural forests are included in these allocations, and there is great potential for community involvement in their conservation and sustainable use. The government recognizes that considerable work will be needed to develop adequate guidelines, operational procedures, training programs, and extension services to support rural communities to effectively manage these forests. This issue is particularly difficult and challenging, yet urgent, as the most heavily forested areas remaining in Vietnam are remote, mountainous areas. The local population belongs primarily to ethnic minority groups who are disadvantaged in terms of education, access to infrastructure, and other aspects of development, and thus suffer the highest and most persistent rates of poverty in the country.81 With new laws supporting the rights of communities to manage forests, their role is likely to grow. A range of community-based initiatives has been piloted by governmental and nongovernmental organizations, for example in Nha Trang Bay MPA (Box 3.10), Phong Nha Ke Bang National Park (Box 3.11), and wildlife management clubs in Pu Luong. The public at large can play a key role in biodiversity conservation, especially in helping to control wildlife trade and implementation of key legal and regulatory mandates. To help increase awareness,

80 The Community Forestry Working Group conference papers and case studies can be accessed through the MekongInfo Web site: www.mekonginfo.org 81 MARD. 2005. National Report to the Fifth Session of the United Nations Forum on Forests, Vietnam, January 2005.

organizations—including government bodies, NGOs, and educational groups—are implementing various public awareness programs. Activities range from development of field guides, training courses, campaigns, films, and exhibitions, to interpretation using puppet shows. Activities are conducted at national and local levels with the main area of focus being cities, national parks, and other protected areas. Additionally, working with Vietnamese scientists and international NGOs, the World Bank has been able to support the production of affordable Vietnamese-language field guides for a range of animal and plant groups—namely mammals, birds, turtles and tortoises, orchid genera, and slipper orchids.

Box 3.11 Lessons learned in community-based conservation from Vietnam’s first MPA The Nha Trang Bay MPA covers 160 km2, and includes Hon Mun Island as well as eight other islands. The majority of the resident population of 5,300 people rely on fishing and related coastal activities as their primary livelihoods. The bay is also a major tourist destination in Southeast Asia. During the last century, the bay's coral reef fish have become increasingly scarce and the waters polluted by runoff. In 2001, in response to these impacts, Nha Trang Bay was declared the first Marine Protected Area (MPA) in Vietnam. An important focus of activities has been the development of a collaborative approach to management. Village advisory committees have been established in each village in Nha Trang Bay. Regular meetings provide the opportunity to discuss approaches to management. In cases where access to fishing grounds has been compromised, initiatives to assist families to generate additional income have included training in aquaculture, handicraft activities, and the provision of small investment loans to over 60 families. A “conservation fee” has been introduced for each visitor to the Nha Trang Bay MPA. In addition to providing ongoing funds for the operation of the MPA, a minimum of 10 percent of these funds will be re-allocated back to local villagers living within the MPA for community development activities. Some key lessons learned from the process of establishment of the Nha Trang Bay MPA include the need for a comprehensive education and awareness strategy to ensure local participants are able to play a role in the management of these important areas. In addition, local residents need to have a role in the planning and implementation of surveys to monitor protection and restoration of degraded habitats.


56

Community involvement in Ecotourism In Vietnam, tourism is growing rapidly and has the potential to support conservation objectives while contributing to local livelihoods, especially in cases where the natural environment is the main attraction. Protected areas are a major existing and potential tourist attraction, such as Van Long, Cuc Phuong, Cat Ba, Cat Tien, Con Dao, Hon Mun, and Bach Ma. There are a number of ongoing community-based tourism initiatives in Vietnam; for example, in Hon Mun (Box 3.10) and Pu Luong (Box 3.12).

Training local communities in Chu Mom Ray National Park

Nui Chua National Park – a tourism destination to the only arid ecosystem in Vietnam

Box 3.12 Community orchid production in Phong Nha Ke Bang National Park Research in communities around Phong Nha Ke Bang National Park has demonstrated that high levels of poverty continue to fuel illegal logging, NTFP collection, and hunting, including hunting of endangered endemic primates. No formal mechanisms exist to allow communities to participate in or benefit from park management. However, the park authorities are collaborating with a USFAD-funded project to promote orchid production in communities around the park, which contains rare and potentially valuable orchids. Fauna and Flora International and Counterpart International are working to introduce the sterile seed technique of orchid propagation. Seed pods collected in the national park can be used to create hundreds or even thousands of orchid plants. The project creates the potential for farmers to derive benefit from the existence of orchids in the park, creating a direct link between the park and local livelihoods.

Box 3.13 Ecotourism in Pu Luong – Cuc Phuong Limestone Landscape In the Pu Luong–Cuc Phuong Limestone Landscape, there are potentially significant economic benefits that appropriate tourism could bring to the communities and support for the area’s conservation. Community groups in isolated villages have been offered support to establish small-scale infrastructure for tourists. This includes building simple toilets, basic washing facilities, and training householders in the core skills necessary to look after visitors to their villages. Simultaneously, the project has promoted the area to tour agents and agencies. By helping to establish the basic requirements for tourism, the project has strengthened the capacity of communities to negotiate a better deal with the tour agencies. The community now has an equity stake to bring to the bargaining table in addition to its beautiful landscape and its biodiversity.

CMYK CMYK

C hapter 4

C hallenges and D irec tions for Innovation

C hapter 4

C hallenges and D irec tions for Innovation

CHAPTER 4: CHALLENGES AND DIRECTIONS FOR INNOVATION

58

By global standards, the biodiversity of Vietnam is exceptionally rich. Its products and ecosystem services are critical to national and local economic development and in the fight against poverty. While those development contributions are not well understood or valued, over the past decade Vietnam has taken significant strides to safeguard its natural systems, species, and genetic resources. Most notable has been the establishment of a protected areas system now covering more then 7 percent of national land area and the introduction of a comprehensive framework of plans, laws, and institutions at national and local levels for environmental protection. Staff and units for environmental, forest, and fisheries protection are now in place at the center, within the 64 provincial governments, and down to district and even communal level in some regions. At the grass-roots level, government and internationally supported conservation initiatives have shown promise, including programs for sustainable agroforestry systems and a growing number of community natural resource management projects. Yet, the overriding commitment to decentralization has devolved responsibilities to local administrations often lacking capacity and resources to shoulder them. Frequently, this has increased biodiversity losses and reduced funding for protected areas as scarce investment budgets are oriented to meet short-term local economic agendas. Nationally, poverty has dropped from 58 percent in 1993 to about 25 percent in recent years, but pockets of persistent poverty remain. These communities are the most directly dependent on healthy natural systems and biodiversity. Most areas of remaining biodiversity wealth coincide with the more isolated regions of high poverty and are critically important in supporting subsistence activities. Degradation of land outside protected areas combined with laws preventing exploitation within them can together affect the most vulnerable poor communities. Clearly, the forces causing the degradation need to be addressed as a priority. Illegal uses of biodiversity, driven by increasingly affluent urban-based commercial and consumer interests, often leave the poor worse off. Good progress has been made in setting up the institutional systems for biodiversity conservation. Remaining

challenges relate to getting the systems to work effectively. The key priorities for action include:

Improve the protected area network and its management effectiveness

Strengthen the rights and capacity of communities to manage natural resources

Improve the integration of biodiversity protection measures into economic development

Control illegal wildlife trade Increase, diversify, and manage efficiently financing for conservation.

4.1. Improve the protected area network and its management effectiveness The protected area system is a cornerstone of Vietnam’s biodiversity conservation program. The network has significant gaps and there are serious weaknesses in the effectiveness of management. Underlying the problem is the insufficient authority given to protected area staff as the principle managers of those areas. The priorities are to expand the protected area network to include poorly represented habitats such as lowland evergreen forests, rivers, coastal wetlands, and marine areas. A review of the protected areas system is needed to define a comprehensive, adequate and representative (CAR) system of protected areas for all terrestrial and marine bioregions and identify adjustments and additions required, including the possibility of removing already occupied and/or heavily degraded sites from the protected area network. A systems review would augment the existing efforts by MARD, MoFi, and MoNRE to review lists of existing and proposed SUFs, MPAs, and wetland conservation areas for government endorsement. Critical to improving the management of an expanded and consolidated protected areas system is a process of management planning so that scarce financial resources are focused on conservation needs. Legal provisions and procedures are also needed for (a) boundary demarcation and zoning, (b) working with communities living within and around PAs, (c) establishing clearly defined buffer zones, and (d) allowing management boards clear autonomy to raise and use revenues and


59

therefore have the opportunity for sustainable financing. The government’s Management Strategy for a Protected Areas System to 2010 envisages a focal national protected area authority. This is an important goal for achieving a consistent and integrated national system. As a transitional measure, the status and authority of conservation divisions within MARD, MoFi, and MoNRE should be strengthened and the options explored for bringing together management planning, enforcement, and technical support functions for protected areas under one roof within each ministry. The national systems review should facilitate a dialogue among the three main conservation sectors so that the integration process can move forward with a rationalization of PA categories, approaches to zoning, and other management issues of common concern. 4.2 Strengthen the rights and capacity of communities to manage natural resources Since 1994, Vietnam has taken steps to decentralize forest management and allocate forest and forest land to households, individuals, and organizations for long-term use. That process, and the access of communities to forests, has been given greater impetus through the Land Law (2003) and Law on Forest Protection and Development (2004). The Forest Law enables social and community-based forestry for large areas of protection forest in the uplands and encourages new management systems that combine protection with production. Progress is also being made on establishing legal rights for communities to sustainably use resources within special-use forests and other protected areas. Under a draft revised Decision 08/2001/QD-TTg on SUF management, those uses will be limited to collection of deadwood in landscape conservation areas and to the gathering of NTFPs in the administration zones of national parks and natures reserves. In marine and wetland conservation areas, the evolving legal framework foreshadows multiple-use zones and collaborative management arrangements. Now the priorities are to continue improving the legal basis for natural resources

management and sustainable use by communities and to provide assistance for its implementation. Capacity needs to be built within extension services and protected areas staff to take on new roles in community outreach and support. Special arrangements are needed to manage uses of protected areas, including structures and governance procedures to involve communities and to allow traditional and subsistence uses of PA resources within the context of agreed plans, zones, and monitoring. The main challenge for PA staff and communities is to determine the levels of use that natural systems can sustain without harming biodiversity. Long-term training, demonstration, and financial assistance programs will be required to carry out this kind of sustainability analysis. 4.3 Improve the integration of biodiversity protection measures into economic development The National Agenda 21 Strategy, Resolution 41-NQ/TW, Decision 34/2005-QĐ/TTg, and the National Environmental Protection Strategy until 2010 and Vision toward 2020 have promoted a variety of approaches to integrating environmental factors and sustainability into sector development at national and local levels. Approaches include support to community-based action, a greater role for the private sector and “green productivity” schemes, an emphasis on integration and inter-agency cooperation, and strengthening the use of integrating processes and tools. Pilot projects show that there are ways of implementing development projects that can lead to economic, social, and environmental gains. One challenge recognized in Agenda 21 is making the good experiences and practices systematic. The tools and methods for promoting conservation and sustainable use need to be more widely promoted and applied. Among the basket of integrating tools and approaches promoted through the National Agenda 21 and the Biodiversity Action Plan, three need to be given special attention as ways of helping to build the many best practice lessons accumulating at the local level into the development system:


60

(1) regional biodiversity planning to set conservation frameworks for development; (2) a much more rigorous application of EIA procedures to ensure that conservation standards, guidelines, and best practices are followed, and areas that must be kept in their natural state are not harmed; and (3) adoption of user pays policies for commercial exploitation of biodiversity and ecosystem benefits to reflect the economic values of biodiversity. Protecting biodiversity requires maintaining habitats and corridors that connect them. Achieving this will require regional or landscape-level planning, best approached at two levels: (1) undertaking regional ecosystem planning to identify key conservation landscapes; and (2) working with provincial authorities to develop and implement shared regional plans. MoNRE has tested approaches to preparing plans for biodiversity regions. MARD has adopted a biodiversity conservation plan for the Central Truong Son.82 Other projects have piloted approaches to conservation planning for a province and for landscapes within a province. MoNRE has supported some provinces in preparing biodiversity action plans, and others are interested in doing so. It is critical for the proposed biodiversity law to be submitted to the government in 2008 to draw from these experiences in defining a system for the preparation of conservation plans for biodiversity regions and provinces. Sector and provincial socioeconomic development planning should proceed against this backdrop of standards, safeguards, and guidelines relating to areas of conservation value. The second priority is to improve EIA as a decision-making tool by ensuring it is done at an early enough stage to influence decision making and to improve the contractual and legal arrangements for their implementation. Project-level EIAs provide useful environmental inputs to the investment planning and decision-making process, but they are not sufficient alone. Environmental assessment tools should be expanded to include programmatic

82 MARD Decision 06/2004/QD-BNN on issuing the Central Truong Son Biodiversity Conservation Initiative 2004–20

assessments, such as strategic environmental assessments for Public investment plans, for sectoral master plans, and for regional development plans. The need for developing and piloting these environmental tools will be particularly important for addressing environmental impacts of sectoral development, such as energy and roads, and for development in ecologically sensitive regions. Finally, all critical biodiversity areas need to have their values expressed in economic terms, which can be communicated in annual and long-term budget submissions and reflected in development plans. Valuations need to be part of PA management planning. Each sector should be made aware of the development benefits they do or might receive from PAs. Those benefits and their maintenance should be recognized in sector plans and budgets. As a start, the user-pays principle applied to commercial beneficiaries of biodiversity would need to be embraced in new legislative initiatives such as the Biodiversity Law. 4.4 Control illegal wildlife trade Vietnam plays an important role in Southeast Asia's trade in wild species, both as a supplier of species originating from Vietnam and as a transit point for trade between regional neighbors. One of Vietnam’s most serious conservation problems is how to reduce the illegal trade in wildlife and meet its obligations under the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild fauna and Flora. The activities that are needed to address this problem have been proposed in action plans by several line ministries, but their implementation is only beginning. As proposed in Vietnam’s national action plan on wildlife trade, addressing this issue will require a comprehensive national approach to enforcement complemented by public disclosure and awareness programs. It will also require intensive international cooperation, multilateral and bilateral agreements and joint management programs focusing on problem geographic areas (Box


61

2.2). On the enforcement side, the priorities are to improve the laws on wildlife protection and trade and the institutional arrangements for implementing them. This will require increased powers for the FPD in law enforcement, improved coordination between local authorities and enforcement agencies, increased understanding and knowledge of the laws, and capacity to enforce them. On the public awareness side, the priority is to develop campaigns that change public opinion and behavior in ways that curb the demand for wildlife. This will be key to reducing the appeal and ultimately the profitability of the illegal trade. Farming of wildlife species to respond to the demand for medicinal, food, and other purposes is being considered alongside appropriate technologies and advanced monitoring and control measures. A national policy on the farming of wildlife species is needed.

Products from animals 4.5 Increase, diversify, and efficiently manage financing for conservation There have been significant investments in biodiversity conservation and sustainable use by the government and international donors. However, overall such financing appears to be decreasing relative to overall investment levels in socioeconomic development. This is at a time when conserving Vietnam’s biodiversity will require increasing financial commitments for a range of programs and a continuing commitment to sustain these programs in the medium and long term. Another factor is the need to reorient the existing flows of government investment to directly meet

conservation priorities—rather than predominantly infrastructure to facilitate access and tourism development. As Vietnam develops and ODA declines, the government will need to progressively shoulder a greater proportion of the needed investment in conservation. That is already the trend, but the total investment levels are a small fraction of what is required to set in place the management capacities and skills for biodiversity management. The highest priority is to address the problem of shortfalls in financing for protected areas under provincial management, which is 95 percent of the national PA system. Conservation management requires a long-term budgetary commitment. A special national target program that dedicates 10 years of funding for PAs would provide for that long-term perspective, improve management effectiveness based on conservation needs, and allow for better business and investment planning at the local level. A special national program would help close the conservation funding gap in a transitional period during the decentralization process, while provinces acquired the capacity—in terms of surplus budget and skills—to commit to their PA systems. One option to be considered as a component of a special national PA program is the creation of a biodiversity conservation fund or the expansion and modification of an existing fund such as the government’s national environment fund managed by MoNRE. Such a fund could be fed by taxes on hydropower development, tourism, and other beneficiary sectors under the user-pays scheme. Another priority is to assess and develop the opportunities for the poor to benefit from the provision of ecological services, in particular ecotourism, watershed protection, and carbon sequestration. Reforms are needed to allow fees to be collected for the services conservation provides, including an enabling policy to collect fees from hydropower developments and empowering protected areas to collect fees and manage the revenues for conservation purposes. These and other methods for strengthening


62

the role and contribution of the private sector in conservation need to be introduced. Increasingly, private enterprise needs to recognize that good biodiversity management is good for business. A strong impetus for innovation and progress in managing protected areas will require strengthening of Vietnam’s working relationships with neighbouring countries and with the international community. Emphasis on active engagement with ASEAN working groups and the technical networks associated with various international agreements is especially important, particularly on the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the Ramsar Convention, CITES, and the World Heritage Convention (WHC). The evolving arrangements for addressing environmental concerns shared by countries of the Greater Mekong Region will require increasing attention and commitment by Vietnam.

Underlying all these new directions is the need to build the capacity, skills, and budgets of PA managers. Strong PA authorities are essential to the innovation and flexibility required if PA systems are to survive and remain the principle form of special tenure for biodiversity conservation. PA managers must be given the authority, confidence, and resources to build working relationships with development sectors and local communities. In future, the importance of protected areas will be measured in terms of their contribution to national and local economies. They will come under particularly sharp appraisal for their contributions to poverty alleviation. Also, they will be assessed against the priorities that have been adopted for governance reform, such as decentralization, transparency, and accountability.

ANNEXES

63

Annex I. Indicators relevant to the 2010 CBD strategy target In 2002, the Parties to the CBD adopted a Strategic Plan for the Convention on Biological Diversity, committing them to achieve by 2010 a significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss at the global, regional and national level as a contribution to poverty alleviation and to the benefit of all life on earth. 83 This target was subsequently endorsed by the World Summit on Sustainable Development. The Parties also adopted a framework to facilitate the assessment of progress toward the 2010 target, including seven “focal areas” with indicators. The focal areas are: 1. Reducing the rate of loss of the components of biodiversity, including (a) biomes, habitats, and

ecosystems; (b) species and populations; and (c) genetic diversity 2. Promoting sustainable use of biodiversity 3. Addressing the major threats to biodiversity, including those arising from invasive alien species,

climate change, pollution, and habitat change 4. Maintaining ecosystem integrity, and the provision of goods and services provided by biodiversity

in ecosystems, in support of human well-being 5. Protecting traditional knowledge, innovations, and practices 6. Ensuring the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising out of the use of genetic resources 7. Mobilizing financial and technical resources for implementing the Strategic Plan. Parties were invited to establish their own set of indicators within this framework. Vietnam needs to define a simple set of indicators to keep track of its contribution to meeting the 2010 target. The following matrix is summarized from the CBD Secretariat paper to the Parties as a guide to defining their own indicators.84 2010 target Generic

indictor Specific indicators Meaning Relation to

MDGs Significant reduction to the loss of biodiversity

Size per ecosystem type

- Forest area by type - Area of dry and sub-humid lands by type - Inland waters area - Agricultural area by type - Coastal area by type - Built-up area

How much remains per ecosystem type (no conversion into other type).

Eradicate hunger and poverty of people that depend on these ecosystems

Ecosystems protected

Percentage and size of ecological region protected

According to IUCN categories

1. Significant reduction of the loss of ecosystems

Trends in ecosystem structure

Trends in:

Forest -canopy cover -age -dead-living wood ratio -primary, secondary, plantation

Marine communities -vital coral reef area -sea grass area -mangrove area -intertidal area -salt marsh area

Agriculture -% (semi)natural area -other

Inland waters -floodplain area

These variables of ecosystem structures can be used as proximate for species trends in case insufficient data on species trends is available

83 CBD Conference of Parties Decision VI/26 concerning the Strategic Plan for the Convention on Biological Diversity. 84 CBD Executive Secretary. 2003. Proposed biodiversity indicators relevant to the 2010 target, Note by the Executive Secretary. Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice, Ninth meeting Montreal, November 10–14, 2003. Items 5.3 and 7.2 of the provisional agenda., UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/9/INF/26 29 October 2003.

ANNEXES

64

Trends in species abundance

Trends in:

Mammal species -large carnivores -large herbivores -other

Bird species Reptile species Amphibian species Fish species

Plant species - Herbaceous species - tree species - wild relatives Butterfly species - other species

Show homogeneity process within ecosystem types at species level. Show decline (gain) in quality of ecosystem type Show loss (gain) of productivity of ecosystems Species abundance can be expressed in e total numbers, population density, distribution, biomass, breeding pairs, etc.

In case of species or communities of direct or indirect economic importance, the indicators relate to MGD on hunger and poverty

2. Significant reduction of species loss

Red List Red List: - vascular plants - mammals - birds - reptiles - amphibians - fishes - butterflies - other groups

Number of threatened and extinct species by group and their threat status

Number of livestock breeds

Number of: -cattle breeds - goat breeds - pig breeds - sheep breeds - other species

Which genetic resources are threatened, being the basis of human food production

3. Significant reduction of the loss of genes

Number of crop varieties

Number of: - rice varieties - corn varieties - potato varieties - other

Threats to biodiversity Loss area per ecosystem type

Converted area of: - Forest - Grassland - Tundra - Inland waters - Desert and semi-desert - Ice - Agricultural area

How much of the natural ecosystem is lost? This is the reverse of the state indicator on extent of area

4. Control threats from habitat loss, fragmentation

Fragmentation Road density

Local impact by roads, industry, mines, and urban area

5. Control threats from exploitation

Exploitation

Harvested species in tons/year: - tree species - fish species - game species - cetaceans - others

Direct impact on the abundance of species

Climate change

Mean temperature Mean precipitation

Changing conditions for ecosystems and species

6. Reduce pressures from climate change, pollution

Acidification and eutrophication

Nitrogen and Sulfur deposition in equivalents/km2 Nitrogen loads in rivers

Eutrophication and acidification by air pollution related to critical loads Conversion of natural ecosystems and intensified agricultural production often result in increasing riverine nitrogen fluxes and damage to aquatic and marine systems

Maintain and share benefits/services from biodiversity

ANNEXES

65

7. Maintain capacity of ecosystems to deliver goods

Harvesting of species Income

Amount harvested: - tree species - fish species - game species - cetaceans - extensive cattle gazing Income from tourism

Harvest expressed in: - tons/year (as indicator 5) - US$ - number of people depending on these natural resources - contribution to Gross Domestic Product - US$ - number of people depending on the sector - contribution to GDP

Eradicate hunger and poverty

8. Maintain capacity of ecosystems to deliver services

Climate regulation Soil stability Flood/drought control

Carbon sequestration Pg C/yr. ecosystem type (Pentagram of C per year) Total suspended solids in main rivers River flow characteristics major rivers (hydrograph)

Especially for forest, but other ecosystems contribute too Relation with vegetation cover and land use River flow characteristics will become more extreme (flooding and droughts) due to loss of water holding capacity of the catchments area as a result of conversion of natural ecosystems in agriculture and built-up area, deforestation and unsustainable soil management practices

Ensure environmental sustainability Eradicate hunger and poverty Eradicate hunger and poverty

Two relevant indicators under Millennium Development Goal 7—(1) Proportion of land area covered by forest, and (2) Ratio of area protected to maintain biological diversity to surface area—are accommodated within this CBD framework.

ANNEXES

66

Annex II. Biodiversity regions in Vietnam Terrestrial biodiversity Regions 1. Northeast. The region has many ecosystems ranging from limestone mountains to low hills and a narrow

coastal plain. It includes many picturesque sites of important heritage value: the Ha Long Bay area, Cat Ba Island, and the Ba Ba Lake area. The fauna and flora of the region are very rich, with a number of rare endemic species such as musk deer (Moschus caobanghensil) and snub-nose monkey (Trachypithecus avunculus). Forest cover was once around 50 percent but has been seriously depleted due to shifting agriculture and illegal logging.

2. Hoang Lien Son Range. Vienam’s most important mountain range with the country’s highest peak, Phansipan. This region has diverse biological resources, particularly medicinal plants of value.

3. Red River Delta. One of the two largest river deltas in Vietnam. The region possesses a typical wetland ecosystem, including Xuan Thuy, the first Ramsar site of Vietnam.

4. Northwest. Although not extensive, the forests of this region represent well-defined ecosystems at different altitudes. Biodiversity per unit area may be low, but there are about 38 rare animal species and several important plant species such as ginseng and Fokienia hodginsii.

5. North Central (Bac Trung Bo). A typical feature of the region is the long but narrow band between the Truong Son Range and the sea. Rich forest still covers a long strip of the Truong Son Range, near the Lao border. The varied relief explains the rich biodiversity of the region with a number of endemic and endangered species, such as the blue pheasant with white tail (Lophura hatinhensis) and the Hatinh monkey (Trachypithecus francoisi hatinhensis). Over the past five years, two new mammal species, saola (Pseudoryx nghetinhensis) and the large muntjiac (Megamunticus vuquangensis), have been discovered in this region.

6. Central (Trung Trung Bo). The region has transitional features between the limestone mountains of the North and “earth” mountains of the South. This creates an area with unusual biodiversity characteristics including endemic species and the Truong Son muntjiac, a newly discovered mammal species.

7. South Central (Nam Trung Bo). This region has coastal characteristics, and is not of high biodiversity value.

8. Tay Nguyen Plateau. This region lies at the Indochinese junction between Vietnam, Lao, and Cambodia. The region has great biodiversity wealth, including many large mammals such as elephants, tigers, panthers, wild buffalo, and kouprey. The region is also home to rare plant species; for example, ginseng, Ngoc Linh, and the Dipterocarpaceae.

9. Nam Bo Plain. It is a transitional region between the high plateau of Tay Nguyen and the plain of Nam Bo. There are many rare tree species in this region. However, its biological resources have been depleted due to the development of hydroelectric dams and of rubber and cacao plantations.

10. Mekong Delta. This is the largest river delta in the country. The region possesses a diversity of mangrove and paper bark wetland ecosystems that provide habitat for the eastern sarus crane (Grus antigone).

Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Regions Less is known about marine systems, so only basic information is provided on distinguishing characteristics. 1. Mong Cai to Do Son: The dominant dynamic is tidal; the seashore is estuarine and the sediment is mud. 2. Do Son to Lach Truong River Mouth. Riverine flows; the seashore is a deltaic river mouth and the

sediment is sand-mud. 3. Lach Truong River Mouth to Mui Ron Cape. Riverine flows and wave action; the seashore is sandy

plain and the sediment is sand. 4. Mui Ron Cape to Hai Van Cape. Seashore currents and waves; the seashore consists of sand dunes and

behind these formations are lagoons. 5. Hai Van Cape to Dai Lanh Cape. The land-sea interaction is relatively balanced. The seashore consists of

capes, small deltas, small lagoons, and bays. The land area is affected by subtropical climatic influences. 6. Dai Lanh Cape to Vung Tau Cape. The land-sea interaction is relatively balanced. The seashore consists

of capes, small deltas, small lagoons, and bays. 7. Vung Tau Cape to Ca Mau Cape. River flows. The seashore is a delta with mangrove forests. The

sediment is sand and mud. 8. From Ca Mau Cape to Ha Tien (West Nam Bo). Southwesterly waves. The seashore is a delta with

mangrove forests and the sediment is sand and mud. 9. Parasells and Spratlys Archipelago. Almost all islands are coralline.

1167

67

Ann

ex II

I. V

ietn

am’s

terr

estr

ial e

core

gion

s Th

e te

rres

trial

eco

regi

ons s

how

n in

Map

1.1

are

des

crib

ed in

det

ail i

n Er

ic W

ikra

man

ayak

e an

d ot

hers

(200

2), T

erre

stri

al E

core

gion

s of t

he In

do-P

acifi

c, A

C

onse

rvat

ion

Asse

ssm

ent.

Thi

s tab

le is

a su

mm

ary

desc

riptio

n of

the

14 fo

rest

eco

syst

ems o

f Vie

tnam

.

Nam

e of

E

cosy

stem

s L

ocat

ion

and

gene

ral d

escr

iptio

n B

iodi

vers

ity fe

atur

es

Car

dam

om

Mou

ntai

ns R

ain

Fore

sts

The

ecos

yste

m r

epre

sent

s th

e or

igin

al e

xten

t of

the

wet

eve

rgre

en

fore

sts

that

cov

er t

he C

arda

mom

and

Ele

phan

t m

ount

ains

in

sout

hwes

t Cam

bodi

a. T

he D

ao P

hu Q

uoc

Isla

nd, w

hich

bel

ongs

to

Vie

tnam

just

off

the

sout

hern

coa

st o

f Cam

bodi

a is

als

o in

clud

ed in

th

is e

cosy

stem

.

The

ecos

yste

m is

one

of

the

few

eco

syst

ems

in I

ndoc

hina

with

in

tact

rai

n fo

rest

s th

at s

till

have

pot

entia

l fo

r la

ndsc

ape-

leve

l co

nser

vatio

n ac

tions

. N

atur

al d

istu

rban

ce r

egim

es a

nd l

arge

pr

edat

or-p

rey

inte

ract

ions

stil

l occ

ur. M

uch

of th

e ec

osys

tem

’s

biot

a pr

obab

ly re

mai

ns in

tact

.

Cen

tral

Indo

chin

a D

ry

Fore

st

This

eco

syst

em c

over

s m

ore

area

in m

ainl

and

Sout

heas

t Asi

a th

an

any

othe

r fo

rest

typ

e. I

t ex

tend

s w

idel

y in

to T

haila

nd,

from

dry

lo

wer

sl

opes

in

no

rther

n Th

aila

nd

and

the

foot

hills

of

th

e Te

nass

erim

Ran

ge t

o up

land

s ar

ound

the

Cha

o Ph

raya

Bas

in a

nd

then

acr

oss

the

Kho

rat P

late

au. A

sm

all a

rea

of C

entra

l Ind

ochi

na

dry

fore

st

ecos

yste

m

reac

hes

into

V

ietn

am

with

in

the

uppe

r w

ater

shed

s of t

he S

e Sa

n an

d Sr

epok

rive

rs.

The

ecos

yste

m’s

167

mam

mal

spe

cies

inc

lude

an

impr

essi

ve

asse

mbl

age

of th

reat

ened

larg

e ve

rtebr

ates

suc

h as

the

criti

cally

en

dang

ered

kou

prey

and

Eld

’s d

eer,

the

enda

nger

ed ti

ger,

Asi

an

Elep

hant

, gau

r, ba

nten

g, w

ild b

uffa

lo, s

erow

, and

oth

er s

peci

es

such

as

the

pile

ated

gib

bon,

lea

f m

onke

y, w

ild d

og,

Mal

ayan

su

n be

ar, c

loud

ed le

opar

d, a

nd c

omm

on le

opar

d.

Indo

chin

aM

angr

ove

The

exte

nt o

f m

angr

oves

in c

oast

al a

reas

of

Thai

land

, Cam

bodi

a,

and

Vie

tnam

wer

e on

ce h

igh,

but

muc

h of

thi

s ar

ea h

as b

een

dest

roye

d. E

xten

sive

man

grov

e fo

rest

s oc

cur

arou

nd P

atta

ya i

n Th

aila

nd a

nd in

the

area

of V

eal R

enh

and

Kom

pong

Som

Bay

s in

C

ambo

dia.

In

Vie

tnam

, the

larg

est a

rea

of r

emai

ning

man

grov

e is

ar

ound

Ca

mau

Poi

nt a

t the

sou

ther

n tip

of

Vie

tnam

, with

sm

alle

r ar

eas

in th

e M

ekon

g D

elta

regi

on, i

n so

uth-

cent

ral V

ietn

am a

roun

d C

am R

anh

Bay

, and

in n

orth

ern

Vie

tnam

in

the

Red

Riv

er D

elta

ar

ea.

Ther

e ar

e no

end

emic

mam

mal

s in

the

eco

syst

em,

but

man

y sp

ecie

s ar

e kn

own

to u

se m

angr

oves

, inc

ludi

ng th

e tig

er, t

apir,

an

d si

aman

g.

Num

erou

s w

ater

bi

rds

use

the

rem

aini

ng

man

grov

es,

and

man

y ar

e en

dang

ered

, su

ch a

s th

e le

sser

ad

juta

nt,

Stor

m’s

sto

rk,

whi

te w

inge

d w

ood

duck

, an

d sp

ot-

bille

d pe

lican

.

Lua

ng P

raba

ng

Mon

tane

Rai

n Fo

rest

This

eco

syst

em c

ompr

ises

are

as l

arge

ly a

bove

800

m i

n no

rth-

cent

ral L

aos.

The

regi

on g

rade

s to

the

north

ver

y gr

adua

lly in

to th

e N

orth

ern

Indo

chin

a Su

btro

pica

l For

ests

eco

syst

em a

nd to

the

east

in

to th

e N

orth

ern

Ann

amite

Rai

n Fo

rest

eco

syst

em.

The

ecos

yste

m l

acks

kno

wn

ende

mic

mam

mal

s or

bird

s, bu

t th

at m

ay b

e be

caus

e of

its

inac

cess

ibili

ty a

nd la

ck o

f bio

logi

cal

surv

eys.

How

ever

, th

e ec

osys

tem

har

bors

sev

eral

thr

eate

ned

and

enda

nger

ed

mam

mal

s of

co

nser

vatio

n si

gnifi

canc

e,

incl

udin

g Fr

anco

is’s

lea

f m

onke

y, s

ilver

ed l

eaf

mon

key,

dou

c la

ngur

, tig

er, A

sian

ele

phan

t, w

ild d

og, H

imal

ayan

bla

ck b

ear,

sun

bear

, clo

uded

leop

ard,

com

mon

leop

ard,

tham

in, a

nd g

aur.

ANNEXES

66

Annex II. Biodiversity regions in Vietnam

Terrestrial biodiversity Regions

1. Northeast. The region has many ecosystems ranging from limestone mountains to low hills and a narrow coastal plain. It includes many picturesque sites of important heritage value: the Ha Long Bay area, Cat Ba Island, and the Ba Ba Lake area. The fauna and flora of the region are very rich, with a number of rare endemic species such as musk deer (Moschus caobanghensil) and snub-nose monkey (Trachypithecus avunculus). Forest cover was once around 50 percent but has been seriously depleted due to shifting agriculture and illegal logging.










Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Regions

Less is known about marine systems, so only basic information is provided on distinguishing characteristics.

1. Mong Cai to Do Son: The dominant dynamic is tidal; the seashore is estuarine and the sediment is mud. 2. Do Son to Lach Truong River Mouth. Riverine flows; the seashore is a deltaic river mouth and the








ANNEXES

66























1268

AN

NE

XE

S

68

Nam

e of

E

cosy

stem

s L

ocat

ion

and

gene

ral d

escr

iptio

n B

iodi

vers

ity fe

atur

es

Nor

ther

nA

nnam

ite R

ain

Fore

st

This

eco

syst

em l

ies

larg

ely

in L

aos,

but

with

a s

igni

fican

t ar

ea

acro

ss t

he c

rest

of

the

Ann

amite

s R

ange

in

Vie

tnam

. G

eolo

gica

l su

bstra

tes

are

varie

d ov

er t

his

ecos

yste

m,

but

ther

e ar

e no

tabl

e la

rge

area

s of l

imes

tone

kar

st to

pogr

aphy

.

The

treas

ure

trove

of

biod

iver

sity

is

still

div

ulgi

ng i

ts t

rue

riche

s. Ea

ch n

ew s

urve

y tu

rns

up n

ew s

peci

es o

f m

amm

als,

bird

s, fis

hes,

rept

iles,

butte

rflie

s, an

d pl

ants

. O

f th

e 13

4 m

amm

als

now

kno

wn

from

the

eco

syst

em,

thre

e ar

e ne

ar-

ende

mic

spe

cies

and

four

are

end

emic

. Mor

e th

an h

alf o

f the

se

are

rece

ntly

des

crib

ed sp

ecie

s.

Nor

ther

nIn

doch

ina

Subt

ropi

cal

Fore

st

This

lar

ge e

cosy

stem

ext

ends

acr

oss

the

high

land

s of

nor

ther

n M

yanm

ar, L

aos,

and

Vie

tnam

and

als

o in

clud

es m

ost o

f so

uthe

rn

Yun

nan

Prov

ince

. A

com

plex

net

wor

k of

hill

s an

d riv

er v

alle

ys

exte

nds

sout

h of

the

Yun

nan

Plat

eau

into

nor

ther

n In

doch

ina

to

incl

ude

the

mid

dle

catc

hmen

ts o

f the

Red

and

Mek

ong

river

s.

Mor

e th

an 1

83 m

amm

al s

peci

es k

now

n fr

om th

is e

cosy

stem

, of

whi

ch f

our

are

ende

mic

and

fiv

e ar

e ne

ar-e

ndem

ic.

Seve

ral

othe

r spe

cies

are

thre

aten

ed, i

nclu

ding

the

criti

cally

end

ange

red

Tonk

in sn

ub-n

osed

mon

key

and

the

tiger

. The

bird

faun

a he

re is

ve

ry ri

ch, w

ith 7

07 sp

ecie

s. N

orth

ern

Vie

tnam

Low

land

Rai

n Fo

rest

This

eco

syst

em e

xten

ds f

rom

the

fre

shw

ater

sw

amp

fore

st o

f th

e R

ed R

iver

val

ley

sout

h al

ong

the

north

east

ern

coas

t of V

ietn

am, t

o th

e re

gion

sou

th o

f Tam

Ky.

Geo

logi

cal f

orm

atio

ns a

re v

arie

d, b

ut

ther

e ar

e ex

tens

ive

limes

tone

subs

trate

s.

Mos

t of

this

eco

syst

em’s

bio

dive

rsity

has

bee

n lo

st b

ecau

se o

f th

e ex

tens

ive

habi

tat l

oss.

Nev

erth

eles

s, it

still

har

bors

sev

eral

m

amm

als

and

bird

s of

con

serv

atio

n si

gnifi

canc

e, in

clud

ing

the

Ow

ston

e’s

band

ed c

ivet

, w

hite

che

eked

gib

bon,

red

-sha

nked

do

uc la

ngur

, and

Fra

ncoi

s’s

leaf

mon

key.

The

re a

re m

ore

than

30

0 bi

rd

spec

ies

in

this

ec

osys

tem

, in

clud

ing

thre

e ne

ar-

ende

mic

and

one

end

emic

spec

ies.

Red

Riv

er F

resh

W

ater

Sw

amp

Fore

st

This

eco

syst

em c

ompr

ises

the

fres

hwat

er s

wam

p fo

rest

s al

ong

the

low

er R

ed R

iver

in N

orth

ern

Vie

tnam

Fr

eshw

ater

sw

amps

sup

port

a w

ide

varie

ty o

f pl

ant

spec

ies,

man

y lim

ited

to t

his

spec

ializ

ed h

abita

t, an

d th

ey s

uppo

rt a

grea

t div

ersi

ty o

f fre

sh w

ater

fish

, bird

s, an

d m

amm

als.

Ther

e ar

e no

end

emic

bird

s or m

amm

als i

n th

is e

cosy

stem

. So

uth

Chi

na –

Vie

tnam

Subt

ropi

cal

Eve

rgre

en F

ores

t

This

larg

e ec

osys

tem

ext

ends

from

nor

ther

n V

ietn

am in

to

sout

heas

tern

Chi

na, i

nclu

ding

Hai

nan

Isla

nd. O

nly

the

Vie

tnam

ese

porti

on o

f thi

s eco

syst

em is

con

side

red

here

The

area

of

the

ecos

yste

m th

at e

xten

ds in

to n

orth

ern

Vie

tnam

co

ntai

ns

four

-nea

r en

dem

ic

mam

mal

s, an

in

dica

tor

of

the

biod

iver

sity

and

end

emis

m le

vels

that

can

be

expe

cted

from

this

ec

osys

tem

. So

uth-

east

ern

Indo

chin

a D

ry

Eve

rgre

een

Fore

st

This

eco

syst

em o

ccur

s in

a b

road

ban

d ac

ross

nor

ther

n an

d ce

ntra

l Th

aila

nd in

to L

aos,

Cam

bodi

a, a

nd V

ietn

am. D

ry e

verg

reen

fore

st

is

mor

e ap

prop

riate

ly

calle

d se

mi-e

verg

reen

fo

rest

be

caus

e a

sign

ifica

nt p

ropo

rtion

of

cano

py tr

ee s

peci

es a

re d

ecid

uous

at t

he

heig

ht o

f the

dry

' sea

son.

The

ecos

yste

m

is gl

obal

ly

outst

andi

ng

for

spec

ies

richn

ess,

espe

cial

ly

for

the

larg

e ve

rtebr

ate

asse

mbl

age

and

asso

ciat

ed

ecol

ogic

al p

roce

sses

. Th

e kn

own

mam

mal

fau

na o

f 16

0 sp

ecie

s in

clud

es ti

ger,

Asia

n el

epha

nt, d

ouc

lang

ur, y

ello

w-c

heek

ed g

ibbo

n,

pile

ated

gib

bon,

wild

dog

, M

alay

an s

un b

ear,

clou

ded

leop

ard,

co

mm

on le

opar

d, g

aur,

bant

eng,

Jav

an r

hino

cero

s, El

d's d

eer,

and

sout

hern

sero

w. M

any

of th

ese s

peci

es ar

e thr

eate

ned.

ANNEXES

66























1369

69

Nam

e of

E

cosy

stem

s L

ocat

ion

and

gene

ral d

escr

iptio

n B

iodi

vers

ity fe

atur

es

Sout

hern

Ann

amite

Mon

tane

Rai

n Fo

rest

This

eco

syst

em e

xten

ds a

long

the

gre

ater

Ann

amite

s R

ange

fro

m

cent

ral

Vie

tnam

sou

th t

o th

e B

olov

ans

Plat

eau

of L

aos

and

the

Cen

tral

Hig

hlan

ds o

f V

ietn

am.

It in

clud

es a

bro

ad t

opog

raph

ic

rang

e fr

om

low

land

s w

ith

wet

ev

ergr

een

fore

sts

to

mon

tane

ha

bita

ts w

ith e

verg

reen

har

dwoo

d an

d co

nife

r for

ests

.

Of

the

122

mam

mal

spe

cies

kno

wn

from

the

ecos

yste

m, t

hree

ar

e ne

ar-e

ndem

ic sp

ecie

s, an

d tw

o ar

e en

dem

ic.

Som

e of

the

thre

aten

ed s

peci

es in

this

ass

embl

age

incl

ude

tiger

, A

sian

ele

phan

t, do

uc la

ngur

, gau

r, ba

nten

g, E

ld's

deer

, ser

ow,

clou

ded

leop

ard,

pyg

my

loris

, pi

g-ta

iled

mac

aque

, w

ild d

og,

Mal

ayan

sun

bea

r, an

d sm

ooth

-coa

ted

otte

r. M

ore

than

410

bird

sp

ecie

s ar

e kn

own

from

thi

s ec

osys

tem

. Fiv

e of

the

se s

peci

es

are

near

end

emic

, and

five

are

end

emic

. So

uthe

rnV

ietn

amL

owla

nd D

ry

Fore

st

The

sem

i-arid

coa

stal

are

as o

f so

uthe

rn V

ietn

am a

re th

e m

ost a

rid

in V

ietn

am b

ecau

se o

f the

rain

sha

dow

eff

ect o

f the

pla

teau

of t

he

sout

hern

Ann

amite

Ran

ge, w

hich

res

trict

the

flow

of

hum

id a

ir in

th

e ea

rly m

onso

on se

ason

.

Ther

e ar

e se

vera

l la

rge

mam

mal

s of

con

serv

atio

n si

gnifi

canc

e in

th

is

ecos

yste

m,

incl

udin

g th

e en

dang

ered

do

uc

lang

ur,

yello

w-c

heek

ed g

ibbo

n, a

nd p

ileat

ed g

ibbo

n an

d po

tent

ially

the

tiger

.T

onle

Sap

Fr

eshw

ater

Sw

amp

Fore

st

The

swam

p sh

rubl

ands

and

for

est

of t

he T

onle

Sap

Fre

shw

ater

Sw

amp

Fore

sts

ecos

yste

m i

nclu

de t

wo

fore

st a

ssoc

iatio

ns o

f th

e ex

tens

ive

flood

plai

n ar

ea o

f To

nle

Sap,

a s

hort

tree

shru

blan

d co

verin

g th

e m

ajor

ity o

f th

e ar

ea a

nd a

stu

nted

sw

amp

fore

st

arou

nd th

e la

ke it

self.

Sim

ilar s

wam

p fo

rest

s ar

e al

so p

rese

nt a

long

flo

odpl

ains

of t

he M

ekon

g ex

tend

ing

into

Vie

tnam

.

Mam

mal

s of

con

serv

atio

n si

gnifi

canc

e in

clud

e th

e en

dang

ered

pi

leat

ed g

ibbo

n, ti

ger

and

seve

ral t

hrea

tene

d sp

ecie

s, in

clud

ing

wild

dog

, su

n be

ar,

clou

ded

leop

ard,

com

mon

leo

pard

, an

d ba

nten

g. A

lthou

gh u

nsui

tabl

e fo

r ag

ricul

ture

, ar

eas

that

hav

e be

en d

egra

ded

to r

eed

beds

non

ethe

less

are

impo

rtant

site

s fo

r w

ater

fow

ls,

prov

idin

g fe

edin

g gr

ound

s fo

r th

e ea

ster

n sa

rus

cran

e, w

hite

-sho

ulde

red

ibis

, and

nea

r-en

dem

ic g

iant

ibis

. T

onle

Sap

–M

ekon

g Pe

at

Swam

p Fo

rest

The

Tonl

e Sa

p-M

ekon

g Pe

at S

wam

p Fo

rest

s ec

osys

tem

ext

ends

ov

er

area

s pe

rman

ently

in

unda

ted

with

sh

allo

w

fres

hwat

er,

alth

ough

the

regi

on a

s m

appe

d in

clud

es m

osai

cs o

f sw

amp

fore

st

and

herb

aceo

us w

etla

nd in

terp

osed

with

upl

and

area

s of

dry

fore

st.

How

ever

, ca

re m

ust

be g

iven

in

sepa

ratin

g pe

rman

ently

flo

oded

sw

amp

fore

sts

of s

outh

east

Asi

a fr

om s

easo

nal s

wam

p fo

rest

s th

at

char

acte

rize

exte

nsiv

e ar

eas o

f the

Ton

le S

ap B

asin

, the

floo

dpla

ins

of m

ajor

Cam

bodi

an r

iver

s, an

d th

e M

ekon

g D

elta

reg

ion

in

Vie

tnam

.

Mam

mal

sp

ecie

s of

co

nser

vatio

n si

gnifi

canc

e in

clud

e th

e po

ssib

ly e

xtin

ct w

ild w

ater

buf

falo

, Eld

's de

er, I

ndoc

hine

se h

og

deer

, an

d ba

nten

g. T

he r

eed

beds

are

im

porta

nt s

ites

for

wat

erfo

wl,

and

the

habi

tats

pro

vide

fee

ding

gro

unds

for

the

ea

ster

n sa

rus

cran

e, th

e ne

ar-e

ndem

ic g

iant

ibis

, and

the

whi

te-

shou

lder

ed ib

is.

ANNEXES

66























ANNEXES

66























ANNEXES

70

Annex IV. Major MEAs to which Vietnam is a party

Multilateral Environmental Agreement Date ratified Lead agency World Heritage Convention 19/10/1987 Vietnam UNESCO

Committee* Convention on Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar Convention)

21/01/1989 Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MoNRE)

Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Fauna and Flora (CITES)

20/01/1994 Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD)

Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 16/11/1994 Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MoNRE)

Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety 21/01/2004 Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MoNRE)

UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and (the Kyoto Protocol on the Clean Development Mechanism)

16/11/1994 (25/09/2002)

Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MoNRE)

UN Convention on Combating Desertification (UNCCD)

25/08/1998 Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD)

* Inter-ministerial committee Source: VEPA/MoNRE

ANNEXES

71

Annex V. Key institutions responsible for biodiversity conservation and sustainable use The Ministry of Planning and Investment (MPI), together with the Ministry of Finance (MoF), is responsible for setting funding levels and negotiating budget allocations with line ministries and the provinces. MPI has overall planning responsibility for environmental projects, through its Department of Science, Education and Environment. MPI is also responsible for coordinating ODA for biodiversity conservation. The Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MoNRE) has overall responsibility for environmental protection. It is the CBD Focal Point and the Ramsar Focal Point for Vietnam. The Department of Environment within MoNRE is responsible for formulating legal documents, strategies, and policies on biodiversity conservation and wetlands. The Vietnam Environmental Protection Agency (VEPA) within MoNRE is responsible for coordination and implementation of the CBD and the Ramsar Convention nationwide. The Department of EIA and Appraisal has the management function in EIA and appraisal, and provides advices on natural resources. The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD) has overall responsibility for activities relating to agriculture, forestry and rural development. Within MARD, the Forest Protection Department (FPD) has responsibility for managing the national SUF system, as well as for wildlife protection within other forest management categories. The FPD of MARD is also the CITES management authority for Vietnam, and the manager of the Vietnam Conservation Fund. Also within MARD, the Department of Forestry is responsible for overseeing the implementation of the 5 Million Hectare Reforestation Programme and is the focal point for implementation of UNCCD. The Ministry of Fisheries (MoFi) is responsible for management of all aquatic resources in marine, coastal, and freshwater ecosystems. MoFi is responsible for formulation and enforcement of fisheries management regulations, and has overall management responsibility for development

and management of a national system of marine protected areas. The National Directorate of Aquatic Resources Exploitation and Protection (NADAREP) is responsible for checking and monitoring the conservation of fishery varieties, genetic resource, and biodiversity; protecting inland water and marine protected areas and natural habitats of fishery species. The Ministry of Culture and Information (MCI) shares management responsibility for cultural and historical sites (a category of SUF) with MARD. MCI is responsible for conserving the historical or cultural features at these sites, while MARD is responsible for protecting their forests. The Vietnam National Administration of Tourism (VNAT) is responsible for developing the tourism strategy for the country, and promoting tourism to national parks and World Heritage Sites. The Vietnam Sciences and Technology Institute (VSTI) contains a number of research institutes, which provide technical advice to line ministries on a range of environmental issues. With particular relevance to biodiversity conservation and sustainable use is the Institute of Ecology and Biological Resources (IEBR), which is engaged in a variety of applied biodiversity research. Ministry of Education and Training (MoET) provides training on botany, zoology, biology, ecology, and nature conservation, and participates in research on related topics. Provincial (and City) People's Committees (PPCs) are responsible for coordinating the biodiversity conservation activities of various line departments at the provincial (and city) level. PPCs have management responsibility for most SUFs and MPAs. PPCs also have an important role in ensuring that biodiversity is integrated into sectoral plans and programs at the local level. Source: 2003. Vietnam National Report on Protected Area and Development.

1472

AN

NE

XE

S

72

Ann

ex V

I. M

ajor

ong

oing

and

pip

elin

e bi

odiv

ersi

ty c

onse

rvat

ion

proj

ects

in V

ietn

am

Titl

e Pe

riod

T

otal

cos

t (U

S$)

Don

or(s

) E

xecu

ting

agen

cy/ie

s Im

plem

entin

gag

ency

/ies

Goa

l/Obj

ectiv

es

On-

goin

g pr

ojec

ts

Ngo

c Li

nh-X

e Sa

p B

iodi

vers

ity C

orrid

or

Con

serv

atio

n Pr

ojec

t

2006

–16

3,23

0,00

0A

DB

M

oNR

E,

MA

RD

, MPI

rele

vant

DO

NR

Es,

DA

RD

s and

FP

Ds

To m

aint

ain

the

ecol

ogic

al i

nteg

rity

of t

he C

entra

l A

nnam

ites

land

scap

e th

roug

h im

prov

ed m

anag

emen

t of

cor

e ar

eas

for

biod

iver

sity

con

serv

atio

n an

d w

ater

shed

pro

tect

ion

and

the

sust

aina

ble

deve

lopm

ent

of

land

scap

e lin

kage

s th

roug

h th

e cr

eatio

n of

go

vern

men

t-com

mun

ity

co-m

anag

emen

t m

echa

nism

s. Ta

m D

ao N

atio

nal

Park

and

Buf

fer Z

one

Man

agem

ent P

roje

ct

2004

–08

1,78

8,00

0B

MZ

GTZ

, MA

RD

To

con

tribu

te t

o th

e co

nser

vatio

n of

the

nat

ural

res

ourc

es o

f Ta

m

Dao

N

atio

nal

Park

an

d th

e im

prov

emen

t of

liv

ing

cond

ition

s of t

he lo

cal p

opul

atio

n.

Fore

st P

rote

ctio

n an

d W

ater

shed

Man

agem

ent i

n N

ghe

An

Prov

ince

Pro

ject

2003

–05

2,00

0,00

0D

anid

a FP

D

Ngh

e A

n PP

CTo

ac

hiev

e su

stai

nabl

e liv

elih

oods

, na

tura

l re

sour

ce

and

wat

ersh

ed m

anag

emen

t, an

d in

crea

se e

nviro

nmen

tal

awar

enes

s th

roug

h pa

rtici

pato

ry

land

-use

pl

anni

ng

and

man

agem

ent

plan

ning

for P

u H

uong

Nat

ure

Res

erve

. B

iodi

vers

ity

Con

serv

atio

n in

the

Nor

th T

ruon

g So

n M

ount

ain

Ran

ge,

Vie

tnam

, Pro

ject

2002

–05

2,14

6,66

7D

anid

a H

a Ti

nh P

PCH

UST

A

To g

ain

a de

taile

d un

ders

tand

ing

of th

e H

uong

Son

For

ests

, and

de

velo

p lo

cally

acc

epta

ble

stra

tegi

es a

imed

at

cons

ervi

ng t

he

high

bio

dive

rsity

fore

st li

nkin

g Pu

Mat

and

Vu

Qua

ng N

atio

nal

Park

s. To

ach

ieve

sus

tain

able

liv

elih

oods

, nat

ural

res

ourc

e an

d w

ater

shed

man

agem

ent,

and

rais

e en

viro

nmen

tal a

war

enes

s.

Supp

ort t

o th

e M

arin

e Pr

otec

ted

Are

as

Net

wor

k in

Vie

tnam

Pr

ojec

t

2003

–06

2,20

6,12

8D

anid

a M

oFi,

Qua

ng

Nam

PPC

Q

uang

Nam

D

ON

RE

To s

uppo

rt se

lect

ed m

arin

e pr

otec

ted

area

s in

Qua

ng N

am

Prov

ince

, an

d de

velo

p ap

prop

riate

pol

icie

s an

d m

anag

emen

t pr

oced

ures

.

Com

mun

ity-b

ased

C

onse

rvat

ion

of th

e H

oang

Lie

n So

n M

ount

ain

Ecos

yste

m

Proj

ect

2002

–05

1,21

9,83

4EU

FF

I FF

I To

mai

ntai

n th

e cu

ltura

l an

d bi

olog

ical

div

ersi

ty o

f th

e H

oang

Li

en S

on M

ount

ains

with

in th

e fr

amew

ork

of a

col

labo

rativ

ely

man

aged

“M

an a

nd t

he B

iosp

here

Res

erve

,” c

ombi

ning

the

ex

istin

g re

serv

es w

ith p

ropo

sed

rese

rves

to p

rote

ct th

e fo

rest

of

the

entir

e m

ount

ain

rang

e.

ANNEXES

66























1573

AN

NE

XE

S 73

Titl

e Pe

riod

T

otal

cos

t (U

S$)

Don

or(s

) E

xecu

ting

agen

cy/ie

s Im

plem

entin

gag

ency

/ies

Goa

l/Obj

ectiv

es

Cha

ract

eriz

atio

n an

d V

alor

izat

ion

of th

e B

iodi

vers

ity o

f D

omes

tic a

nd W

ild

Ani

mal

s Pro

ject

2004

–07

6,82

7,42

8M

AE

NIA

H,

NC

NST

,C

IRA

D,

INR

A

To

m

oder

nize

V

ietn

am’s

na

tura

l sc

ienc

e la

bora

torie

s an

d su

ppor

t pos

tgra

duat

e pr

ogra

ms

(mas

ters

, doc

tora

tes)

in o

rder

to

supp

ort

biod

iver

sity

dat

a co

llect

ion,

res

earc

h, a

nd u

ltim

atel

y bi

odiv

ersi

ty c

onse

rvat

ion.

Sust

aina

ble

Util

izat

ion

of N

on-

timbe

r For

est

Prod

ucts

Pro

ject

(P

hase

II)

2002

–07

6,20

7,00

0N

ethe

rland

s G

over

nmen

tIU

CN

FS

IV

To a

chie

ve b

iodi

vers

ity a

nd f

ores

t co

nser

vatio

n th

roug

h th

e pr

omot

ion

of e

colo

gica

lly s

usta

inab

le a

nd e

cono

mic

ally

via

ble

use

of n

on-ti

mbe

r for

est p

rodu

cts.

Prog

ram

me

for

Res

earc

h an

d D

evel

opm

ent i

n Su

ppor

t of

Con

serv

atio

n an

d W

ise

Util

izat

ion

of

Trop

ical

For

est

2002

–05

1,75

7,00

0N

ethe

rland

s G

over

nmen

tTr

open

bos

Inte

rnat

iona

lFI

PI

To c

ontri

bute

to

the

deve

lopm

ent

of p

olic

ies,

tech

niqu

es,

and

met

hods

for

con

serv

atio

n an

d w

ise

utili

zatio

n of

trop

ical

for

est

reso

urce

s an

d in

stitu

tiona

l cap

acity

and

coo

pera

tion,

with

in th

e fr

amew

ork

of t

he F

ores

t Se

ctor

Sup

port

Prog

ram

me

and

the

5MH

RP.

GEF

Sm

all G

rant

s Pr

ogra

mm

e20

03–0

6 1,

079,

376

UN

DP/

GEF

loca

l NG

Os/

C

BO

slo

cal N

GO

s/

CB

Os

To

prov

ide

smal

l gr

ants

fo

r pr

ojec

ts,

with

th

e ai

m

of

dem

onst

ratin

g co

mm

unity

-leve

l stra

tegi

es a

nd te

chno

logi

es th

at

coul

d re

duce

thre

ats

to th

e gl

obal

env

ironm

ent i

f rep

licat

ed o

ver

time.

In si

tu C

onse

rvat

ion

of N

ativ

e La

ndra

ces

and

thei

r Wild

R

elat

ives

in V

ietn

am

Proj

ect

2002

–05

3,90

3,43

0U

ND

P/

GEF

MA

RD

IA

G

To

cons

erve

gl

obal

ly

sign

ifica

nt

agro

biod

iver

sity

of

si

x im

porta

nt c

rop

grou

ps i

n th

ree

eco-

geog

raph

ical

are

as:

the

north

ern

mou

ntai

ns,

the

north

ern

mid

land

s, an

d th

e no

rthw

est

mou

ntai

ns.

Mek

ong

Riv

er B

asin

W

etla

nd B

iodi

vers

ity

Con

serv

atio

n an

d Su

stai

nabl

e U

se

Prog

ram

me

2002

–06

31,5

50,0

00*

UN

DP/

GEF

, N

ethe

rland

sG

over

nmen

t

IUC

N, M

RC

UN

DP

To e

stab

lish

a m

ultis

ecto

ral

plan

ning

pro

cess

ope

ratio

nal

at

natio

nal a

nd re

gion

al le

vels

; to

stre

ngth

en th

e po

licy

fram

ewor

k an

d m

acro

econ

omic

en

viro

nmen

t su

ppor

tive

of

wet

land

bi

odiv

ersi

ty

cons

erva

tion

and

sust

aina

ble

use;

to

pr

ovid

e ad

equa

te i

nfor

mat

ion

to s

uppo

rt so

und

wet

land

pol

icy

and

plan

ning

; to

im

prov

e ca

paci

ty t

o co

nser

ve a

nd s

usta

inab

ly

man

age

wet

land

s in

the

Low

er M

ekon

g B

asin

.

ANNEXES

66























ANNEXES

66























1674

AN

NE

XE

S

74

Titl

e Pe

riod

T

otal

cos

t (U

S$)

Don

or(s

) E

xecu

ting

agen

cy/ie

s Im

plem

entin

gag

ency

/ies

Goa

l/Obj

ectiv

es

Mak

ing

the

Link

: The

C

onne

ctio

n an

d Su

stai

nabl

eM

anag

emen

t of K

on

Ka

Kin

h an

d K

on C

ha

Ran

g N

atur

e R

eser

ves

2004

–07

2,98

9,00

0G

EF

Gia

Lai

Pe

ople

'sC

omm

ittee

UN

DP

To d

eliv

er t

he l

ong-

term

con

serv

atio

n of

the

uni

que

biol

ogic

al

attri

bute

s of

the

Cen

tral

Ann

amite

s Pr

iorit

y La

ndsc

ape.

It

is

esse

ntia

l tha

t KK

K a

nd K

CR

NR

s an

d th

e in

terv

enin

g SF

Es b

e m

anag

ed i

n a

way

tha

t is

con

sist

ent

with

the

mai

nten

ance

of

thei

r in

tegr

ity a

s a

sing

le b

iolo

gica

l un

it. T

he p

urpo

se o

f th

e pr

ojec

t is

, th

eref

ore,

to

esta

blis

h a

foun

datio

n of

sup

port

and

man

agem

ent

to

mai

ntai

n th

e bi

olog

ical

in

tegr

ity

and

conn

ectiv

ity o

f KK

K a

nd K

CR

NR

s. C

oast

al a

nd M

arin

e B

iodi

vers

ity

Con

serv

atio

n an

d Su

stai

nabl

e U

se in

the

Con

Dao

Isla

nds

Reg

ion

Proj

ect

2003

–06

1,87

3,20

0U

ND

P/G

EFU

ND

P B

a R

ia-V

ung

Tau

PPC

To

im

prov

e m

anag

emen

t of

glo

bally

sig

nific

ant

coas

tal

and

mar

ine

biod

iver

sity

in

the

Con

Dao

Isl

ands

reg

ion

thro

ugh

incr

ease

d pa

rtici

patio

n of

loca

l res

iden

ts in

the

man

agem

ent o

f na

tura

l re

sour

ces,

prom

otio

n of

ec

onom

ic

deve

lopm

ent

stra

tegi

es c

ompa

tible

with

coa

stal

and

mar

ine

biod

iver

sity

, and

st

reng

then

ing

of t

he i

nstit

utio

nal,

polic

y, a

nd l

egal

fra

mew

ork

for c

oast

al a

nd m

arin

e bi

odiv

ersi

ty p

rote

ctio

n.

Rur

al D

evel

opm

ent i

n th

e B

uffe

r Zon

e of

Ph

ong

Nha

Nat

iona

l Pa

rk P

roje

ct

2003

–06

2,00

0,00

0U

SDoA

U

SDA

C

PI, F

FI

To p

rote

ct P

hong

Nha

Nat

iona

l Par

k th

roug

h de

velo

pmen

t of t

he

rura

l are

a in

its b

uffe

r zon

e.

Vie

tnam

C

onse

rvat

ion

Fund

C

ompo

nent

of t

he

Fore

st S

ecto

r D

evel

opm

ent P

roje

ct

2005

–11

15,0

00,0

00W

orld

Ban

k,

Net

herla

nds

Gov

ernm

ent,

GEF

, EU

MA

RD

FP

D

To p

rom

ote

SUF

cons

erva

tion

by (

a) e

stab

lishi

ng,

on a

pilo

t ba

sis,

a ne

w fi

nanc

ing

mec

hani

sm th

at w

ill p

rovi

de s

mal

l gra

nts

to

initi

ate

and

impr

ove

man

agem

ent

of

up

to

50

SUFs

su

ppor

ting

biod

iver

sity

of

in

tern

atio

nal

impo

rtanc

e,

on

a co

mpe

titiv

e ba

sis;

and

(b)

mob

ilizi

ng i

nter

natio

nal

and

loca

l te

chni

cal

assi

stan

ce t

o bu

ild t

he c

apac

ity o

f SU

F m

anag

emen

t bo

ards

and

loc

al c

omm

uniti

es t

o pl

an a

nd i

mpl

emen

t pr

iorit

y co

nser

vatio

n ac

tiviti

es.

ANNEXES

66























1775

AN

NE

XE

S 75

Titl

e Pe

riod

T

otal

cos

t (U

S$)

Don

or(s

) E

xecu

ting

agen

cy/ie

s Im

plem

entin

gag

ency

/ies

Goa

l/Obj

ectiv

es

Cuc

Phu

ong-

Pu

Luon

g Li

mes

tone

B

iodi

vers

ity

Con

serv

atio

n Pr

ojec

t

2002

–06

1,30

6,00

0W

orld

B

ank/

GEF

,A

ECI,

BM

Z

FFI,

DED

, FU

ND

ESO

FFI,

FPD

, D

ED,

FUN

DES

O

To m

aint

ain

the

cont

inuo

us f

ores

t ra

nge

betw

een

Cuc

Phu

ong

Nat

iona

l Pa

rk a

nd P

u Lu

ong

Nat

ure

Res

erve

, an

d pr

otec

t fo

rest

ed li

mes

tone

out

crop

s; to

con

serv

e th

e bi

odiv

ersi

ty o

f Pu

Lu

ong

Nat

ure

Res

erve

by

im

plem

entin

g co

mm

unity

-bas

ed

natu

ral

reso

urce

s m

anag

emen

t in

sel

ecte

d co

mm

unes

; an

d to

re

duce

pov

erty

and

con

tribu

te t

o so

cioe

cono

mic

dev

elop

men

t co

mpa

tible

with

for

est

cons

erva

tion

in s

elec

ted

buff

er z

one

com

mun

es o

f Pu

Luon

g N

atur

e R

eser

ve.

Hon

Mun

Mar

ine

Prot

ecte

d A

rea

Pilo

t Pr

ojec

t

2001

–05

2,17

3,00

0W

orld

B

ank/

GEF

IUC

N, W

orld

B

ank

MoF

i, K

hanh

H

oa P

PC,

IUC

N

To i

mpr

ove

the

capa

city

of

the

loca

l po

pula

tion

and

othe

r st

akeh

olde

rs to

pro

mot

e su

stai

nabl

e us

e of

nat

ural

res

ourc

es; t

o en

able

loc

al i

slan

d co

mm

uniti

es t

o im

prov

e th

eir

livel

ihoo

ds

and,

in

partn

ersh

ip w

ith o

ther

sta

keho

lder

s, ef

fect

ivel

y pr

otec

t an

d m

anag

e th

e m

arin

e bi

odiv

ersi

ty o

f Hon

Mun

as

a m

odel

for

colla

bora

tive

MPA

man

agem

ent i

n V

ietn

am.

Gre

en C

orrid

or:

Mee

ting

Glo

bal

Con

serv

atio

n Ta

rget

s in

a P

rodu

ctiv

e La

ndsc

ape

Proj

ect

2004

–08

2,00

0,00

0W

orld

B

ank/

GEF

Wor

ld B

ank

WW

F To

as

sist

th

e G

over

nmen

t of

V

ietn

am

in

prot

ectio

n of

bi

odiv

ersi

ty in

the

last

con

tiguo

us s

tretc

h of

fore

sts

in V

ietn

am,

and

deve

lop

an u

mbr

ella

pro

gram

to

brin

g ex

istin

g pr

otec

ted

area

s and

surr

ound

ing

fore

sted

regi

ons u

nder

one

coh

esiv

e fo

rest

m

anag

emen

t and

dev

elop

men

t pla

n.

Inte

grat

ing

Wat

ersh

ed

Man

agem

ent a

nd

Bio

dive

rsity

at C

hu

Yan

g Si

n N

atio

nal

Park

Pro

ject

2005

–09

1,76

9,00

0W

orld

B

ank/

GEF

Wor

ld B

ank

Bird

Life

, Dak

La

k PP

C

To

cons

erve

th

e bi

odiv

ersi

ty

attri

bute

s of

C

hu

Yan

g Si

n N

atio

nal

Park

in

the

long

ter

m,

with

in a

wid

er f

ram

ewor

k of

in

tegr

ated

wat

ersh

ed a

nd b

iodi

vers

ity m

anag

emen

t.

Fore

st P

rote

ctio

n an

d R

ural

Dev

elop

men

t Pr

ojec

t

1997

–200

5 32

,300

,000

Wor

ld B

ank,

N

ethe

rland

sG

over

nmen

t

Wor

ld B

ank

MA

RD

, re

leva

nt P

PCs

To a

ssis

t th

e go

vern

men

t to

pro

tect

and

man

age

effe

ctiv

ely

natu

ral f

ores

ts w

ith h

igh

biod

iver

sity

and

redu

ce d

epen

denc

e on

fo

rest

s fo

r su

bsis

tenc

e an

d ca

sh i

ncom

e by

im

prov

ing

the

livel

ihoo

d st

atus

of

resi

dent

s in

the

buf

fer

zone

s of

Cat

Tie

n N

atio

nal P

ark

and

Chu

Mom

Ray

Nat

ure

Res

erve

.

ANNEXES

66























ANNEXES

66























1876

AN

NE

XE

S

76

Titl

e Pe

riod

T

otal

cos

t (U

S$)

Don

or(s

) E

xecu

ting

agen

cy/ie

s Im

plem

entin

gag

ency

/ies

Goa

l/Obj

ectiv

es

Pipe

line

proj

ects

Cat

Ba

Isla

nd

Com

mun

ity F

ores

t M

anag

emen

t Mod

el

for E

nviro

nmen

tal

Prot

ectio

n an

d Su

stai

nabl

e Fo

rest

U

se: E

stab

lishm

ent o

f Fo

rest

Uni

ons

TBA

10

,249

,132

AFA

P A

FAP,

ZC

SPA

FAP,

ZC

SP

To

redu

ce

impe

ndin

g fo

rest

re

duct

ion

adja

cent

to

th

e in

tern

atio

nally

im

porta

nt C

at B

a N

atio

nal

Park

and

mak

e a

sign

ifica

nt c

ontri

butio

n to

the

prot

ectio

n of

the

natio

nal p

ark

and

biod

iver

sity

con

serv

atio

n on

the

isl

and.

To

supp

ort

an e

xist

ing

prog

ram

me

prot

ectin

g th

e 50

re

mai

ning

in

divi

dual

s of

th

e cr

itica

lly e

ndan

gere

d C

at B

a Le

af M

onke

y.

Pres

ervi

ng th

e La

rge

Wild

Cat

tle in

Ea

So

Nat

ure

Res

erve

Pr

ojec

t

TBA

3,

342,

254

FFEM

A

FD,

MoN

RE,

Dak

La

k PP

C

NIA

H, E

a So

N

atur

e R

eser

veTo

pre

serv

e th

e bi

odiv

ersi

ty o

f Gre

at W

ild B

ovid

ea in

Vie

tnam

an

d ap

ply

sust

aina

ble

man

agem

ent p

rinci

ples

in m

anag

ing

Ea S

o N

atur

e R

eser

ve.

Nat

iona

l Wet

land

s Su

ppor

t Pro

gram

me

2006

–08

3,41

3,71

4N

ethe

rland

s G

over

nmen

tM

oNR

E M

oNR

E To

ass

ist

the

gove

rnm

ent

impl

emen

t th

e N

atio

nal

Wet

land

C

onse

rvat

ion

and

Sust

aina

ble

Use

Pro

gram

me.

M

akin

g th

e Li

nk:

Con

nect

ion

and

Sust

aina

ble

Man

agem

ent o

f Kon

K

a K

inh

and

Kon

Cha

R

ang

Nat

ure

Res

erve

s Pr

ojec

t

2005

–10

1,40

0,00

0U

ND

P/G

EFU

ND

P G

ia L

ai P

PC

To p

rote

ct a

nd m

aint

ain

ecol

ogic

al c

onne

ctiv

ity b

etw

een

Kon

K

a K

inh

and

Kon

Cha

Ran

g N

atur

e R

eser

ves,

as a

con

tribu

tion

to m

aint

enan

ce o

f th

e gl

obal

bio

dive

rsity

val

ues

of th

e C

entra

l A

nnam

ites.

Sour

ces:

VEP

A a

nd U

ND

P. 2

003.

Com

pend

ium

of e

nviro

nmen

tal p

roje

cts i

n V

iet N

am 2

003.

Han

oi: V

ietn

am E

nviro

nmen

tal P

rote

ctio

n A

genc

y an

d U

ND

P.

Tord

off,

A. W

., Tr

an Q

uoc

Bao

, Ngu

yen

Duc

Tu,

and

Le

Man

h H

ung,

eds

. 200

4. S

ourc

eboo

k of

exi

stin

g an

d pr

opos

ed p

rote

cted

are

as in

Vie

tnam

. Sec

ond

editi

on. H

anoi

: Bird

Life

Inte

rnat

iona

l in

Indo

chin

a an

d th

e M

inis

try o

f Agr

icul

ture

and

Rur

al D

evel

opm

ent.

Wor

ld B

ank.

200

4. C

rouc

hing

tige

r, hi

dden

lang

ur: W

orld

Ban

k su

ppor

t to

biod

iver

sity

con

serv

atio

n in

Eas

t Asi

a an

d th

e Pa

cific

. Was

hing

ton,

DC

: The

Wor

ld B

ank.

N

otes

: † =

pro

ject

s with

a to

tal b

udge

t > $

1,00

0,00

0; *

= re

gion

al p

roje

ct: b

udge

t inc

lude

s act

iviti

es in

cou

ntrie

s oth

er th

an V

ietn

am.

ANNEXES

66























ANNEXES

77

Annex VII. Vietnam at a glance

ENVIRONMENT/GEOGRAPHY ECONOMY/SOCIETY Natural disaster Total loss: 2,209 billion VND (2004) Flood (above Level 3 and all flashfloods) Number of occurrences: 15 (2004) Typhoon Number of occurrences: 4 (2004) Drought Number of occurrences: 5 times lasting for 7 months (2004) Forest fire Number of occurrences: 995 (2004) Area of loss: 4,233 ha (2004) Environment-international agreements: Party to: Biodiversity, Climate Change, CITES, RAMSAR, Basel, Ozone Layer Protection, MARPOL, Law of the Sea, Desertification, POPs conventions, Kyoto Protocol, and Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. Economy GDP: $44.6 billion (2004) GDP growth rate: 7.7 % (2004) GDP-composition by sector (2004): Agriculture: 21.8% Industry: 40.1% Service: 38.2% Inflation rate of consumer price index: 9.5% (2004) Unemployment rate of labor force working in urban areas: 5.8% (2003) Exports of goods and services/GDP: 66.4% (2004) Industrial production growth rate: 16% (2004 at 1994 price) Agricultural production growth rate: 4.2% (2004 at 1994 price) Agricultural products: rice, rubber, corn, sugarcane, coconuts, soybeans, coffee, cashews, and aquatic products. Exports: total value $26.5 billion (fob, 2004) Imports: total value $31.9 billion (fob, 2004) Gross Domestic Investment/GDP: 35.6%(2004) Gross national saving/GDP: 32.2% (2004)

Geography Area: approximately 332,000 km2 Land boundaries:

Total: 4,510 km Border countries: China (1,306 km), Cambodia (1,137 km) , Laos (2,067 km)

Coastline: 3,260 km Maritime claims:

Continental shelf: 200 m or edge of continental shelf Exclusive economic zone: 200 nm Territorial sea: 12 nm

Climate Tropical in south; tropical monsoon in north with hot, rainy season (mid-May to mid-September) and warm dry season (mid-October to mid-March) Terrain: Mekong River Delta in the south (area approx. 59,000 km2); the Red River Delta in the north (area approx. 17,000 km2); and mountains in the central and west. Elevation extreme: Lowest point: 0 m at sea level Highest point: Phan xi phang 3,000 m Mineral resources: Oil, natural gas, coal, iron, zinc, bauxite Environment Forest: 12.3 million ha (2004) Forest cover: 37.3% Protected areas Protected areas: National Parks (957,330 ha); Natural protected areas (1,369,058 ha); Landscape proctected areas (215,287 ha) Number of protected areas: 27 National Parks, 60 Nature Reserves, 39 Landscape Protected Areas Surface Water quality Good: Northwest, Central Highland Moderate: North Central Coast, South Central Coast, Northeast Region Poor: Northeast of Mekong, Mekong River Delta, Red River Delta Groundwater quality Good: Northwest, Central Highland Moderate: Northeast, North Central Coast, South Central Coast Poor: Red River Delta, Northeast of Mekong, Mekong River Delta Solid and hazardous waste (in 2004) Municipal waste: 12,800,000 tons Industrial hazardous waste: 128,400 tons Industrial non-hazardous waste: 2,510,000 tons Hazardous healthcare waste: 21,000 tons

Society Population: 82.2 million (2004) Population growth rate: 1.2% (2004) Labor force: 41.6 million (2004) Birth rate: 19.0 births/1,000 population Death rate: 5.8/1,000 population (2002) Infant mortality: 26 deaths/1,000 population (2002) Access to safe water (percentage of population): 56 (2002) Access to sanitation latrines (percent of population): 44 (2002) Life expectancy at birth: 69 years (2002) Literacy (percentage of population of age 15+): 94 National Capital: Hanoi Administrative divisions: 64 provinces Independence: 1945

ANNEXES

78

��

� � � � � � ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Documents

&/7*30/.&/5documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/879611468311116866/pdf/345420rev0VN... · National consultants were Vu Van Dung, Nguyen Van San, Nguyen Huu Dung, Vu Thu Hanh, Vu Xuan