Research proposal


Published on

Published in: Business, Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Research proposal

  2. 2. Outline <ul><li>Key terms </li></ul><ul><li>Issues to be addressed </li></ul><ul><li>Importance of these issues </li></ul><ul><li>Research methods </li></ul><ul><li>Time for various stages of research </li></ul><ul><li>Ethical clearances required </li></ul><ul><li>Identification of issues of intellectual ownership </li></ul><ul><li>Identification of the source of other required fund </li></ul>
  3. 3. Key terms <ul><li>Pro-poor : issues beyond economic growth . It often does not reach the poorest unless governance issues are resolved </li></ul><ul><li>PES : a new market-based approach to conservation that aims to change incentives for land use to maintain or restore natural ecosystems. Payment can be in kind or in cash </li></ul><ul><li>-> Pro-poor PES : so far no concrete definition </li></ul><ul><li>Definition of pro-poor PES in this study: </li></ul><ul><li>“ all action that involves, empowers, supports the poor to payment for environmental service mechanism”. </li></ul>
  4. 4. Aims <ul><li>To contribute to an enhanced understanding of the feasibility and challenges for pro-poor PES in Vietnam </li></ul><ul><li>To provide recommendations for its future improvement </li></ul><ul><li>4 objectives and 11 research questions </li></ul>
  5. 5. Issues to be addressed <ul><li>Objective 1 : To evaluate and assess to what extent the poor have been targeted in current PES policies, program and projects in Vietnam </li></ul><ul><li>What are the lessons learnt and pitfalls of PES policies, programs and projects in Vietnam? </li></ul><ul><li>To what extent have poverty reduction goals and the poor been taken into account in current policies and in program and project planning, design, implementation and monitoring? </li></ul><ul><li>What are the constraints limiting local authorities and other local organizations from involving the poor in PES? </li></ul>
  6. 6. Issues to be addressed <ul><li>Objective 2 : To understand the role of intermediates in PES and pro-poor PES establishment, implementation and monitoring </li></ul><ul><li>4) What are the key functions for intermediaries (development NGOs, conservation NGOs, different government agencies) in getting PES established and reducing transactions costs? </li></ul><ul><li>5) To what extent can local organizations (e.g. farmer associations) act as ES sellers? </li></ul><ul><li>6) What are the main differences in the capacities and power of the different stakeholders groups in negotiating PES and can the power and ability of poor ES providers be enhanced ? </li></ul>
  7. 7. Issues to be addressed <ul><li>Objective 3 : To identify opportunities for, and constraints to, involving the poor in a potential PES scheme </li></ul><ul><li>7) What are the opportunity costs faced by potential poor ES providers and what level of PES would be required to make them better off, after deducting opportunity and transaction costs? </li></ul><ul><li>8) What are the organizational and institutional constraints to the poor becoming ES providers? </li></ul><ul><li>9) To what degree could a potential PES scheme reduce poverty? </li></ul>
  8. 8. Issues to be addressed <ul><li>Objective 4 : To recommend enabling conditions for PES and pro-poor PES policy so that they can be more effective </li></ul><ul><li>10) What is the appropriate policy framework for facilitating PES and pro- poor PES? </li></ul><ul><li>11) What are the potential incentives and sanction systems that could be designed in order to minimize monitoring costs and improve conditionality? </li></ul>
  9. 9. PhD Well, Pro-poor PES is till a good food. I’ll learn how to jump ! Hey, look at this PhD trap! It could be Permanent Health Damage!
  10. 10. The importance of these issues <ul><li>INTERNATIONAL CONTRIBUTIONS </li></ul><ul><li>Give an answer as to whether PES can have an impact on poverty reduction </li></ul><ul><li>Contribute to current knowledge on specific conditions that PES and pro-PES can and cannot work in SEA </li></ul><ul><li>Useful for not only future PES work design but also its implementation and monitoring </li></ul>
  11. 11. The importance of these issues <ul><li>NATIONAL CONTRIBUTION : </li></ul><ul><li>Provide information on PES and pro-poor PES globally and nationally </li></ul><ul><li>Justifying changes in PES policies in the future using the global and national lessons learnt </li></ul><ul><li>Demonstrate how poverty can be integrated into PES policy </li></ul>
  12. 12. Research methods <ul><li>Qualitative approach </li></ul><ul><li>Action research framework </li></ul><ul><li>Participatory approaches: focus group discussion, in-depth interview, observations, seminars, mini-workshops and national workshops </li></ul><ul><li>Case study approach: 4 learning sites + 1 action site </li></ul>
  13. 13. Research methods
  14. 14. Site selection criteria <ul><li>Learning sites : </li></ul><ul><li>High poverty rates </li></ul><ul><li>The availability of previous and ongoing PES-like projects from which lessons learnt can be drawn </li></ul><ul><li>The availability of project publications and reports; </li></ul><ul><li>The willingness of project leaders and staff to be involved in the study </li></ul><ul><li>Active participation and engagement of central government, local authorities and key community members </li></ul>
  15. 15. Site selection criteria <ul><li>Action site selection: </li></ul><ul><li>High poverty rates </li></ul><ul><li>Governmental priority for environmental protection and poverty reduction </li></ul><ul><li>Large population living in and around area that has environmental services </li></ul><ul><li>A well-defined demand for environmental services so that PES can be feasible </li></ul><ul><li>Previous efforts in environmental protection and poverty reduction have not been successful and local people are willing to pilot a new pro-poor PES approach. </li></ul><ul><li>High potential for replication and influencing policy </li></ul>
  16. 16. Analytical framework
  17. 17. Research timeframe <ul><li>2008: </li></ul><ul><li>April – June: Darwin </li></ul><ul><li>July – December: Field work in Vietnam </li></ul><ul><li>2009 </li></ul><ul><li>January – May: Data analysis and stakeholders workshop in Vietnam </li></ul><ul><li>June – August: Darwin </li></ul><ul><li>September – December: Additional data collection in Vietnam </li></ul><ul><li>2010 </li></ul><ul><li>January- May: Data analysis + stakeholders workshops in Vietnam </li></ul><ul><li>June- August: Draft all chapters in Darwin </li></ul><ul><li>September to December: Finalise all chapters </li></ul><ul><li>2011: </li></ul><ul><li>January to February: Format and edit whole thesis </li></ul><ul><li>March: Submit </li></ul>
  18. 18. Ethics clearance <ul><li>A Human Ethics clearance following the Australian National Statement on Ethical </li></ul><ul><li>Conduct in Research Involving Humans (1999) will be submitted on 23rd June. </li></ul>
  19. 19. Intellectual ownership <ul><li>The collected data, its results as well as analysis will belong to: </li></ul><ul><li>The PhD </li></ul><ul><li>Charles Darwin University, </li></ul><ul><li>Center of International Forestry Research (CIFOR) and </li></ul><ul><li>World Agroforestry Center (ICRAF) </li></ul>
  20. 20. Identification of the source of other required funds Sponsors Covered activities IPRS scholarship program Living allowances, health insurance in Australia SER Relevant research work activities CIFOR Traveling between Australia - Vietnam and field work activities ICRAF Administrations and field works
  21. 21. THANK YOU!!!!! [email_address]