Final report on sep 2014

FINAL REPORT
WWF VIETNAM CSO CAPACITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT –VPA/FLEGT
JULY 2014Page 1
WWF VIETNAM
D13, Làng Quốc tế Thăng Long
Cầu Giấy, Hà Nội, Việt Nam
SEP 2014
REPORT
CAPACITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR
EFFECTIVE CSO PARTICIPATION IN
VIETNAM’S VPA PROCESS
FINAL REPORT

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 2
CONTENTS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................................................4
1.1. THE VPA/FLEGTY NEGOTIATION PROCESS .........................................................................................................4
1.2. INVOLVEMENT OF VIETNAMESE NGOS.................................................................................................................5
1.3. PROJECT “COMMON ACCESS TO THE VPA PROCESS IN LAOS AND VIETNAM”.............................................5
2. THE ASSESSMENT..........................................................................................................................................................6
2.1. OBJECTIVES OF THE ASSESSMENT......................................................................................................................6
2.2. SCOPE OF THE ASSESSMENT ...............................................................................................................................6
2.3. APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY .........................................................................................................................6
2.4. LIMITATIONS OF THE ASSESSMENT .....................................................................................................................8
3. VIETNAMESE CSO’S MISIONS IN THE VPA/FLEGT PROCESS ..................................................................................9
3.1. PARTICIPATION OF VIETNAMESE CSOS IN VPA/FLEGTY...................................................................................9
3.2. PRIORITISED FUNCTIONS AND MANDATES OF CSOS IN VPA/FLEGT PROCESS .........................................10
4. CHALLENGES FACED BY KEY NATIONAL ACTORS OF VPA/FLEGTY PROCESS ................................................12
4.1. KEY NATIONAL ACTORS OF VPA/FLEGT PROCESS..........................................................................................12
4.2. MAJOR CHALLENGES ...........................................................................................................................................13
5. TYPES OF CAPACITY REQUIRED FOR CSO EFFECTIVE CONTRIBUTION TO VPA/FLEGT PROCESS ...............14
6. GENERAL OBSERVATION............................................................................................................................................17
6.1. ABOUT THE ADAPTED CSO CAPACITY ASSESSMENT TOOL ..........................................................................17
6.2. OVERAL EVALUATION...........................................................................................................................................18
7. VPA/FLEGT SPECIFIC CAPACITY................................................................................................................................19
7.1. EXPERIENCE, HUMAN RESOURCE AND EXPERTISE........................................................................................19
7.2. COMMITMENT TO VPA/FLECT..............................................................................................................................22
7.3. TOOLS AND SKILLS ...............................................................................................................................................23
7.4. EXTERNAL RELATIONS AND NETWORKING FOR VPA/FLEGT INTERVENTIONS...........................................23
7.5. COMMUNICATION, AWARENESS RAISING, EDUCATION..................................................................................24
7.6. POLICY ADVOCACY...............................................................................................................................................24
7.7. GENDER, POVERTY AND INCLUSION .................................................................................................................26
8. OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES IN VPA/FLEGT CAPACITY BUILDING FOR CSO........................................27
9. GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR DESIGNING THE CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM ...................................................29
9.1. TARGET GROUPS OF THE CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM ...........................................................................29
9.2. GUIDING PRINCIPLES ...........................................................................................................................................29
10. PRIORITISED CAPACITY ..............................................................................................................................................31
10.1. PRIORITISED INFORMATION AND KNOWLEDGE.............................................................................................31
10.2. REQUIRED TOOLS AND SKILLS.........................................................................................................................32
10.3. CAPACITY BUILDING NEEDS OF VNGO-FLEGT NETWORK............................................................................33
11. MODE OF TRAINING......................................................................................................................................................34
12. CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM ................................................................................................................................34
12.1. ESTABLISH A CAPACITY BUILDING TASKFORCE:...........................................................................................34
12.2. CAPACITY BUILDING NEEDS .............................................................................................................................34
13. M&E SYSTEM FOR VPA/FLEGT CAPACITY BUILDING .............................................................................................38
14. MEASURING THE RESULTS OF WWF’S CAPACITY BUILDING SUPPORT .............................................................39
15. MEASURING THE IMPROVEMENT OF ORGANISATIONAL CAPACITY....................................................................39

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 3
LIST OF ABREVIATIONS
CED Center for Education and Development
CORENARM Consultative and Research Center on Natural Resource Management Hue city
CRD Centre for Rural Development in Central Vietnam
CSOs Civil Society Organisations
DFID The Department for International Development – UK
FLEGT The EU Forest Law Enforcement Governance and Trade
GoV Government of Vietnam
MARD Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
PanNature Center for People and Nature Reconciliation
SMEs Small and Medium Enterprises
SFMI Institute for Sustainable Forest Management and Forest Certification
SRD Centre for Sustainable Rural Development
TLAS Timber Legality Assurance System
VNGO-FLEGT Network Network of Vietnamese NGOs participating in VPA/FLEGT process
VNFOREST Vietnam Forestry Administration
VPAs Voluntary Partnership Agreements
WWF World Wide Fund for Nature
LIST OF BOXES, FIGURES AND TABLES
Diagram 1: Approach and steps of the assignment .......................................................................................................7
Diagram 2: Order of priority of CSO’s functions and tasks by stages of VPA process ................................................11
Diagram 3: Knowledge, information and issue areas related to VPA/FLEGT..............................................................15
Diagram 4: Strengths and limitations of SFMI in implementing VPA/FLEGT interventions .........................................21
Diagram 5: Channels of Communication, Awareness Raising, Education and Advocacy...........................................25
Diagram 6: Quick SWOT analysis of CSOs’ capacity in implementing VPA/FLEGT...................................................27
Diagram 7: M&E – comparison the expected and actual achievements......................................................................38
Figure 1: External relation capacity of target CSOs.....................................................................................................24
Figure 2: Self-evaluation scores for Gender, Poverty, Inclusion and M&E, Reporting.................................................26
Table 1: Methods applied in the assignment..................................................................................................................8
Table 2: Average scores of the CSOs participating in the assessment........................................................................18
Table 3: Primary target groups and thematic working areas of CSOs under assessment...........................................20
Table 4: Experts in the CSOs.......................................................................................................................................22
Table 5: Priorities target groups of WWF’s capacity building program.........................................................................30
Table 6: Information and knowledge on VPA/FLEGT prioritised by target CSOs ........................................................32
Table 7: Tools and skills prioritised by target CSOs.....................................................................................................33
Table 8: Summary of CSOs’ capacity building needs ..................................................................................................37

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 4
PART 1: INTRODUCTION
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. BACKGROUND
1.1. THE VPA/FLEGTY NEGOTIATION PROCESS
The VPA/FLEGT negotiation between Vietnam and the EU has accelerated to reach the deadline of
October 2014 when the two sides expect to sign the agreement and implement it.
There are 3 key elements in a
VPA agreement: 1) Defining
product scope and legality, e.g
defining the laws and regulations
to be enforced for the purpose of
the agreement; 2) The Timber
Legality Assurance System
(TLAS) (timber tracking,
government legality controls, and
systems to verify the legality of the
timber); and 3) Independent audits
of the whole system to ensure
credibility of the export licenses.
These elements are reflected and
detailed in a set of 11 Annexes attached to the agreement as binding commitments of EU and the timber
exporting country (Box 2). Negotiation delegations of Vietnam and the EU are now working on Annex 1,
2, 3 and 4.
When coming into force, the
VPA/FLEGT process would affect
the assurance of legality of many
stages of the timber supply chain
which are managed by different
ministries and agencies and
involve up over 3,500 Vietnamese
medium and small enterprises
(SMEs) as well as millions of
forestry households and farmers.
The Government of Vietnam will
need to establish and operate an
effective and reliable FLEGT
verifying, licensing and monitoring
system that meets the
requirements of EU on the one
hand and not to create remarkable
burden as well as remarkable
additional costs to enterprises on
the other hand.
The Government involved ministries and agencies, enterprises and timber producing households are
under great pressure of preparation for implementing VPA/FLEGT.
VPA/FLEGT
The EU Forest Law Enforcement Governance and Trade (FLEGT) is the
European Union’s response to the global problem of illegal logging and the
trade in timber products.
VPAs are Voluntary Partnership Agreements - the legally binding bilateral
trade agreements that set out the commitments and action that the EU and
timber exporting countries will take to tackle illegal logging.
The VPAs requires active participations of all rights- and stakeholders,
especially NGOs and non-state actors, for greater environmental and social
justice, with a focus on forests and forest people’s rights.
Box 1: What is VPA/FLEGT?
Main Annexes
• Annex 1: Product scope (which timber products are covered by the
agreement)
• Annex 2: Legality definition (the set of laws whose enforcement will
be monitored prior to awarding a FLEGT license)
• Annex 3 Description of the Timber Legal Assurance System (TLAS)
• Annex 4 Conditions for the import of timber products into the EU
from the FLEGT partner country
• Annex 5 FLEGT License (demand, delivery, validity and other
conditions)
• Annex 6 Terms of reference for the Independent Auditor of the
system
• Annex 7 TLAS Assessment Criteria (criteria to determine the
functioning of the system)
• Annex 8 Implementation Schedule
• Annex 9 Accompanying Measures (list of measures needed to
ensure a good implementation of the agreement)
Other:
• Annex 10 Information (list of documents that will be placed on the
public domain)
• Annex 11 Functions of the EU-FLEGT country Joint Implementation
Committee
Box 2: Annexes of the VPA/FLEGT Agreement

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 5
1.2. INVOLVEMENT OF VIETNAMESE NGOs
VPA/FLEGT is new for all national rights-holders and stakeholders. In term of contents, the agreement is
comprehensive and the issues it covers would range from the right for land use to business liscence and
import-export regulations. In terms of negotiation and implementation process, the VPA encourages and
requires active participation of all rights-holders and stakeholders, which are not limited in the
government sector and forestry industry. The VPA Agreement gives special attention to non-state actors,
including CSOs, and the marginalised groups, rural communities, indigenous peoples who have their
livelihood dependent on forest and forest resources. It creates favourable conditions for these groups to
express their views and contribute to the process of FLEGT policy-making, implementation and
monitoring. Improving transparency/accountability of forest management and trade of forest productions
is another important aim and demand of the VPA. FLEGT process must be well monitored, audited
independently, reported and give the public greater access to information.
For the Government, the task of negotiation itself is already complicated, needless to mention the review
and revision of laws and policies after the agreement is signed and ratified. The forestry enterprises and
the timber-producing households have little information and knowledge of the process. Key players in
Vietnam are not ready. They need support from those who have information, knowledge and experience
on VPA/FLEGT.
Generally speaking, Vietnamese CSOs have a number of striking advantages when participating in
VPA/FLEGT process. Firstly, CSOs are familiar with principles which are keys to VPA/FLEGT process:
conveying voice of the marginalised to policy makers, participation, education and awareness raising,
transparency/accountability, social monitoring and supervision, policy advocacy etc. Secondly, some
CSOs are members of several national, regional and international networks, from which they can obtain
information, share knowledge and experience and mobilise expertise. The EU’s demand of CSOs
participation in VPA/FLEGT process would be great opportunities for CSOs to apply these advantages.
However, it is observed that Vietnamese CSOs themselves have not been well prepared to join the VPA
process. Most of the CSOs show little or no interest and commitments to VPA process, partly because of
their inadequate knowledge and experience on the issue. Those who are currently involved in the
VPA/FLEGT are also in the process of “learning by doing” themselves and their contributions to the
negotiation process remains limitted: sharing publications developed by international NGOs such as EFI,
FERN; conducting a few surveys and studies on possible impacts of VPA/FLEGT on the forest
communities and enterprises, providing comments to the drafts of VPA Annexes … These contributions
are made through the efforts of individual NGOs as well as collective effort of the VNGO-FLEGT network,
which was established in 2012, two years after the VPA negotiation between Vietnam and the EU started.
It is increasingly clear that in order to make effective contributions to VPA/FLEGT process, Vietnamese
CSOs need to strengthen their own capacity, e.g. improve their knowledge, skills, tools and
organisational arrangements, to fulfill their mandates and meet expectation of key actors. Otherwise, they
would miss the train and lose the one opportunity of being involved in the VPA/FLEGT policy making and
implementation process.
1.3. PROJECT “COMMON ACCESS TO THE VPA PROCESS IN LAOS AND VIETNAM”
In order to boost the effective process of negotiation, signing and implementation of VPAs, WWF-Greater
Mekong has developed the project “Common Access to the VPA Process in Laos and Vietnam”. The
project - co-funded by the EU as primary donor and Sida as secondary donor through its civil society
support project managed by WWF-Greater Mekong - will be implemented over four years from 2014 to
2018 with the aims of supporting capacity building and awareness raising for more informed and inclusive
participation in the VPA processes in Vietnam and Laos.
The specific objective of the project is that the VPAs in Laos and Vietnam explicitly and adequately
account for the needs and interests of civil society, forest-dependent communities and forest sector

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 6
companies, and that the VPAs distinctively address trans-boundary issues in timber trade, including
impacts on forest services and the needs of these target groups.
As a response to the training needs of key stakeholders of the VPA process, the project will provide
technical and capacity building support to several target groups. Notable ones include civil society
organisations (CSOs), forest-dependent communities in 7 key provinces in Vietnam, private sector actors,
especially small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), and government agencies involved in the VPA
process.
2. THE ASSESSMENT
2.1. OBJECTIVES OF THE ASSESSMENT
As the first step towards strengthening the target groups’ capacity to participate more effectively in all
phases of the VPA process, the project will undertake a participatory capacity needs assessment, starting
with the assessment of VNGOs’ capacity building needs. The objective of the assessment is to identify
areas of strength and areas of weakness within selected Vietnamese CSOs engaged in the
VPA/FLEGT process to: a) enable the development of tailored capacity building activities for enhancing
participation in the national VPA process; b) establish a baseline for monitoring the impact of capacity
building efforts supported by WWF on the target CSOs.
2.2. SCOPE OF THE ASSESSMENT
• Time: July 2014 – August 2014
• Target groups: The assessment is conducted for 6 selected CSOs engaged in Vietnam’s
FLEGT/VPA process. Selection criteria include:
o the selected organisations operate at both central and provincial levels, and within the
project location;
o the selected organisations have already involved in VPA/FLEGT process; and
o has shown commitment to VPA/FLEGT process.
They are the Center for People and Nature Reconciliation (PanNature), Centre for
Sustainable Rural Development (SRD), Center for Education and Development (CED),
Institute for Sustainable Forest Management and Forest Certification (SFMI) in Hanoi and
Centre for Rural Development in Central Vietnam (CRD), Consultative and Research Center
on Natural Resource Management (CORENARM) in Hue city.
2.3. APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY
1.1.1. APPROACH AND STEPS OF THE ASSESSMENT
The assessment itself is conducted through a process of “guided self-assessment”, where a consultant
works with one or more CSO manager(s) and staff in charge of VPA-FLEGT to complete the tool in a
participatory manner.
The assessment is conducted in 5 steps, focusing on three main levels: 1) capacity of the CSO under
assessment in supporting the VPA/FLEGT process in relation to its missions and mandates; 2) individual
capacity building needs with focus on the needs of staff who are assigning to VPA/FLEGT activities; and
3) Needs for technical support of the VNGO-FLEGT network (Diagram 1).

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 7
1.1.2. METHODOLOGY
• Assessment tools:
The CSO Capacity Assessment Tool developed under the WWF-UK/DFID Programme
Agreement (PPA) will form the basis of the assessment. This is the most recent iteration of a
capacity monitoring tool that has been in use by PPA teams for several years. Besides
providing a snapshot of the existing capacity of an organisation, it is also detailed enough to
identify areas of weakness and areas of strength in both the organisation’s internal structure
and its external activities. However, to be applicable to the local context, the tool was modified
to ensure the reflection of particular capacity requirements of FLEGT/VPA participation in
Vietnam. The adapted version of the tool is being made available to the target CSOs for their
pre-study before the assessment.
Diagram 1: Approach and steps of the assignment
Individual questionnaire is developed to explore the specific training needs of individual
staff, who are assigned with VPA/FLEGT related activities. This questionnaire compensates
the limitation of the CSO Capacity Assessment Tool, which focuses on the capacity at
organisational level.
In-depth interview questions is used to explore further the strengths, weaknesses and
opportunities of CSOs under assessment in capacity building for effective participation in
VPA/FLEGT process (as WWF project is not the only capacity building project in the field of
VPA/FLEGT). They are also used for consulting the CSOs experience and suggestions on the
design of WWF future capacity building plan.
Objectives of
CSO when
supporting
VPA/FLEGT
process
Objectives of
VNGO-FLEGT
network
Mandates of
VNGOs/CSOs
Identification of
MUST-HAVE
CAPACITY:
Knowledge
Skills
Tools
Organisational
arrangements
Elements of
VPA/FLEGT
Principles of
VPA/FLEGT
Expectation of key
players on support
of VNGOs
Development
of the
assessment
tools:
Adapted CSO
Capacity
Assessment
Tool; Individual
questionnaires;
In-depth
interview
questions
Information -
data
collection:
Current
status/capacity
of VNGOs
Analysis:
Compare the
current
capacity and
the expected
capacity
Identification of capacity gaps and
capacity building needs:
Organisational level: Arrangements,
human resources, tools
Individual level: Knowledge, skills
Network level: Joint efforts, networking
34
5
1 2

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 8
• Methods applied:
# Tasks Methods applied
1
Identification of prioritised tasks and MUST-HAVE
CAPACITY (Knowledge, Skills, Tools,
Organisational capacity)
Consultation meeting – group discussion
In-depth interviews
Desk study - Literature review
3 Development of assessment tools
Desk work
Consultation with program officers in charge of WWF and
selected CSOs.
3 Information/Data collection
Desk study - Literature review
Guided discussion for self-assessment (organisational
capacity)
Individual questionnaire
In-depth interviews
4
Identification of capacity gaps and capacity
building needs
Desk work
5 Planning for capacity building program
Desk work
Consultation meeting
Table 1: Methods applied in the assignment
2.4. LIMITATIONS OF THE ASSESSMENT
• The term Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) in Vietnam can be larger than that in other
countries. Civil society in Vietnam has a dynamic character and CSOs may range from NGOs
to government-organised NGOs or state-sponsored mass organisations such as the Youth
Union and Women’s Union. This assessment, however, aims at the NGOs that are not funded
by the Government, though by law most of them are registered under a government-organised
and -funded organisation – the Vietnam Union of Science and Technology Associations
(national or provincial levels). The reason is that in order to play active roles in the
VPA/FLEGT process, CSOs must have a certain level of background, experience and
expertise, which Vietnamese mass and propaganda organisations fail to meet.
• The assessment is conducted on a comparatively small number of CSOs and the
representation of such a small sample size may be criticised. One of the reasons comes from
the limitation of time and budget. However, one would agree that the number of CSOs who
are actively participating in VPA/FLEGT process at this moment remains small.
• The application of the adjusted WWF-UK/DFID’s CSO Capacity Assessment Tool requires
longer internal discussion as part of the self-evaluation process. The time limitation of this
assignment, however, does not allow such discussion and therefore constraint the amount of
information obtained. This shortage, fortunately, is compensated by the existing OCA reports
that have previously been developed by the CSOs under assessment.
• The assessment team does not have opportunity to work and conduct consultation with the
communities, timber producing households and forestry enterprises. Instead, the team
consolidates opinions of these groups from reports provided by the CSOs under assessment
and the VNGO-FLEGT network.

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 9
PART 2: CAPACITY REQUIRED FOR EFFECTIVE
CONTRIBUTION IN VPA/FLEGT PROCESS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. VIETNAMESE CSO’s MISIONS IN THE VPA/FLEGT PROCESS
3.1. PARTICIPATION OF VIETNAMESE CSOs IN VPA/FLEGTY
The world is suffering from the negative impacts of climate change and it is now clear that deforestation
and forest degradation contribute greatly to such impacts. Effective forest governance is now referred to
as one of the measures to reduce and response to the impacts of climate change. When it comes to the
term “governance”, the tasks of forest management and protection are no longer the government’s
exclusive right and obligation. Rather, “it requires the inclusion and active participation of different actors
in various modes of governance, including those of civil society” (Bui Hai Thiem, 2011)
1
.
VPA/FLEGT is a great challenge, but also opportunity for CSOs and NGOs to play an increasingly active
and influencing roles in forest governance in general and in control of illegal logging in particular. The
VPA requires measures to increase participation of rights-holders and non-state stakeholders, including
CSOs, local communities, indigenous peoples, and the timber industry
Vietnamese CSOs have participated quite actively in the governance of forest and forest resources for
many years and their roles have gradually been recognised by the local communities, then the
government at central and local levels. Since the Vietnam-EU VPA/FLEGT negotiation process started in
2010, a handful number of Vietnamese NGOs have joined the process. A VNGO-FLEGT network was
established in the begin of 2012 to support the negotiation process by providing comments to draft of
annexes on timber legal definition (LD) and timber legality assurance system (TLAS). Some CSOs have
conducted community consultation activities to collect opinions of affected groups and convey them to the
policy makers (e.g. the Vietnamese Negotiation Taskforce, the Vietnam Forestry Administration
(VNFOREST) and the EU Commission in Vietnam). A number of awareness raising communication
activities have been organised.
VNGO-FLEGT NETWORK
VNGO-FLEGT network was initiated in December 2011 with the objective: “participate and make effective contribution to the
VPA/FLEGT negotiation process between the GoV and EU, through that contribute to the implementation of Vietnam’s forest
management and protection plan, promote policies that allow forest communities to access, utilise, managge and develop
the forests in a fair and sustainable way”.
By July 2014, the network has 41 member CSOs stationed in 3 regions of Vietnam. These CSOs have years of experience
in forestry, agriculture, rural development, community development, environment protection and natural resource
management. The Steering Committee of the network include 4 CSOs namely: SRD, PanNature, ForWet and CRD. SRD is
coordinating organisation for the network.
The network has designed and implemented a number of VPA/FLEGT supporting activities:
• Project “Promoting the participation of communities and CSOs in the VPA/FLEGT negotiation and implementation
process”. The project is funded by DFID through FERN.
• Participate in the consultation process on the definition of legal timber and TLAS of Vietnam.
• Share experience with CSOs/NGOs in countries implementing VPA/FLEGT;
• Participate in the dialogues with the EU and EC on FLEGT;
• Participate in training workshops in the UK, Indonesia, Malaysia;
• Conduct awareness raising communication activities, update and share FLEGT information relularly with the
1
Bui Hai Thiem, 2011. Civil society and environmental policy in Vietnam: A new source of governance? Vietnam Update
2011, ANU, Canberra.

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 10
network members by emails and websites (www.logging-off.info; www.vngo-cc.vn; www.srd.org.vn;
www.nature.org.vn; www.thiennhien.net);
• Organise capacity building activities for CSOs focusing on VPA/FLEGT roadmap, REDD and forest governance;
• Organise community consultation activities about legal timber in 35 villages of 14 communes in 6 districts and 6
provinces (Yên Bái, Bắc Kạn, Thanh Hóa, Thừa Thiên Huế, Lâm Đồng và Bà Rịa-Vũng Tàu);
• In cooperation with Forest Trend and Mandala, conduct the Livelihood impact asessment of the VPA;
• Organise seminars, workshops with concerned ministries, agencies and the EU
• Design and start implementing 3 VPA/FLEGT capacity building project for the network members.
Box 3: VNGO-FLEGT Network: Objectives, members and activities
2
As of the time of assessment, VNGO-FLEGT network and its most active members continue to provide
support to the negotiation process on the one hand and start preparing for guiding rightsholders and
stakeholders in implementing the Agreement once it is signed and ratified by the EU and the Government
of Vietnam.
3.2. PRIORITISED FUNCTIONS AND MANDATES OF CSOS IN VPA/FLEGT PROCESS
Despite the differences in their visions, missions and development objectives, CSOs share common
legally regulated functions, mandates and rights
3
, through which they make effective contribution to forest
governance and VPA/FLEGT processes. A brainstorming session and discussion with representatives of
core members of the VNGO-FLEGT identified the following key functions and tasks:
• Representation: The main focus of Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) in the VPA process is
to increase transparency and accountability in the forestry sector as well as ensuring that the
rights of local communities are well respected and recognised in the VPAs. To do so, a focus
on legal reforms which takes into account existing customary, statutory and international law is
often required. It is thus clear that local communities’ stakes and rights are at the heart of
CSO’s advocacy in the VPA process and thus these stakeholders or rights holders must be
effectively represented4
. CSOs must represent the communities, especially those whose
livelihood is dependent on forest and forest resources, and timber producing households. The
representation takes place: i) During VPA negotiation; and ii) In VPA implementation. It is also
important that a feedback mechanism between communities and CSOs is established and
operated.
Since by law CSOs are not legal representatives of communities or small-scaled timber
producing households, the representation can be done through:
o Collect and consolidate evidence through consultation, studies, survey and
researches as inputs for policy counter-arguments, advocacy, education, capacity
building and designing appropriate interventions.
o Sharing and disseminating information, education and awareness raising on
VPA/FLEGT, environment protection, forest governance etc … with the policy makers,
communities, timber producing actors, forestry enterprises (including timber producers,
processing and trading ones) and with the large public.
• Social counter-argument5
on Laws, policies, programmes and plans related to environment
protection, natural resource management, forest governance, FLEGT …
2
Presentation at the workshop of VNGO-FLEGT Network in Hanoi on 20 Aug 2014.
3
Such as Decree 45/2010/ND-CP dated 21 April 2010; Decree 88/2003/ND-CP dated 30 July 2003
4
Claudine Léger. 2014. Community representation and participation in the VPA process. FERN. Belgium.
5
The term “social counter-argument” can also be used alternatively as “social criticism”. In this report, we choose to use the
former term since it can be more tollerent by all actors, especially the government/policy making actors.

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 11
• Policy advocacy, advisory support and recommendations to the policy makers/policy
making agencies and those who are affected by the VPA/FLEGT policies.
As there are up to ten ministries and agencies will need to review and revise their policies to
meet with VPA/FLEGT requirements, the advisory role of CSOs will applied not only to the
leading ministry (MARD) and its agency in charge (Vietnam Administration of Forestry) but
also to the National Assembly and other state organisations involved. Policy areas are not
limited within the forestry policies but extend to the fields of socio-economic development,
poverty reduction etc …
• Monitoring and supervising the implementation of Laws, policies and regulations on
VPA/FLEGT, environment protection, forest governance
• Provide technical support and capacity building to the actors of forestry industry, focusing
on timber producers and forestry SMEs.
• Promoting and strengthening the quality of participation of CSOs in VPA/FLEGT
process. This includes the sharing of information, knowledge, experience among CSOs;
strengthened VPA/FLEGT
network, partnerships; and capacity building for CSOs themselves.
• Continue to provide supports to the communities, especially forest communities, in
sustainable livelihood, climate change adaptation and mitigation etc.
It is underlined that the order of priority of these functions and tasks are changeable according to stages
of the VPA process, e.g. the negotiation period, the transitional period and the implementation period:
Diagram 2: Order of priority of CSO’s functions and tasks by stages of VPA process
6
6
The EU and Vietnamese Government expect to have the Agreement signed in October 2014. The current situation shows
that such deadline is hard to meet.
IMPLEMENTATION PERIOD
1. Monitoring and supervision
2. Consultation, collect and
consolidate evidence
3. Representation
4. Social counter-argument
5. Policy advocacy & advisory
support
6. Education and awareness
raising
7. Strengthening the quality of
participation of CSOs
8. Capacity building
9. Direct supports to communities
2010
Negotia
-tion
started
2011
Studies
conduc-
ted
2012
VNGO-
FLEGT
2013 2014
Participation in the
VPA/FLEGT
negotiation process
Oct
2014
VPA
signed
Beyond
Transitio-
nal period
2015
Implementation
period
NEGOTIATION PERIOD
3. Representation
support
raising
6. Capacity building (for
communities, timber producing
households and SMEs)
8. Direct supports to communities
TRANSITIONAL PERIOD
1. Capacity building
raising
3. Representation
support
8. Monitoring and supervision
9. Direct supports to
communities

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 12
It is noticed that the functions of 1) Consultation, collect and consolidate evidence; 2) Social counter-
argument; 3) Representation; 4) Policy advocacy & advisory support; and 5) Education and awareness
raising are always high in the list of priority. Changes are observed in the movement of Capacity building
and Monitoring when they are moving to the top of the list in the transitional period and implementation
period respectively.
It is also observed that the list of priority of the Vietnam Administration of Forestry is not much different
from that of the CSOs. It means that evidence from the fields and recommendations of CSOs are
welcome and appreciated by the state management agency in charge of VPA/FLEGT. This agency is
actually more concerned of when the information is given, how it is given and by what mean. We’ll
discuss this in the coming parts of this report.
The list of prioritised functions and tasks of CSOs in VPA/FLEGT process by each and every stages of
the process (Diagram 2) forms the foundation for the design of capacity building plan and design of
training contents.
4. CHALLENGES FACED BY KEY NATIONAL ACTORS OF VPA/FLEGTY PROCESS
4.1. KEY NATIONAL ACTORS OF VPA/FLEGT PROCESS
National key actors of VPA/FLEGT process include:
• Government actors:
o The policy makers and authorities at national and local levels. In the center of the policy
making circle is MARD and its concerned agencies such as the Vietnam Forest
Administration and the Forest Protection Administration. However, as its was discussed
earlier, sectors involved in this VPA process would go up to a dozen and CSOs will have
to choose which ones they wish to work with.
o Association of timber industry - VIFORES
• Timber producing actors:
o Timber producing households (local farmer) with and without land-use certificates (red
books)
o Forest owners – private and state-owned companies
• Timber processing actors: small-scaled sawmills and SMEs – timber manufacturers.
• Timber traders: – private and state-owned companies
• Forest communities and households how have their livelihood strongly dependent on forest
resources. These normally include the indigenous/ethnic minority people, the poor and
marginalised.
VIFORES and forestry enterprises expects that the value of exported timber and timber products from
Vietnam to the EU market would reach the level of USD 1 billion per year when VPA/FLEGT is ratified
7
.
The road to success, however, is not flat and easy and key national actors of VPA/FLEGT in Vietnam are
facing underlying challenges. Without addressing these challenges in a proper way, social impacts on a
number of groups would be severe.
The identification of these challenges is another foundation for the signing CSOs’ interventions and
capacity building program for CSOs accordingly.
7
Vietnam Economic News. VPA/FLEGT ngotiation: speeding-up stage. 23
rd
April 2014.

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 13
4.2. MAJOR CHALLENGES8
Lack of VPA/FLEGT specific information and knowledge:
This problem is faced by all stakeholders of VPA/FLEGT process, ranging from the government agencies
to SMEs and small-scaled timber producing and processing households, not mentioning the poor forest
communities who have tiny or no access to such information.
It is noticed that Vietnam has been implementing a number of forest governance and timber management
practices, which are close to VPA/FLEGT. Typical examples may include REDD+, CITES, FSC Forest
Certification etc. However, these practices, including different types of existing certificates, cannot be
used for VPA/FLEGT alternatively. While most of the existing mechanisms and voluntary systems are
based on current understanding of best practices for sustainable forest management worldwide and not
strictly legally-binding, VPA/FLEGT requires far higher level of timber legality compliance. Consequently,
laws and regulations must be revised to meet such requirements. The involvement of the Government is
therefore central to the implementation of VPA/FLEGT. In other words, not all existing knowledge and
experience are applicable in this VPA process. New set of knowledge, information, experience, best
practice will need to be consolidated and disseminated.
The range of new information and knowledge is wide. For the policy-making agencies, especially MARD
and the Vietnam Forestry Administration and the negotiation taskforces, who are in-experienced in
participatory policy impact assessment, evidence of impacts of new policies on different
stakeholders is on the top of their priority list. In addition, policy reviews and recommendations to
policy revisions are also important (which policy/regulations must be revised and how, who will lead the
revision of which policies …).
For SMEs, priority is given to VPA/FLEGT trading requirements (domestically and cross-border),
procedures and taxation. For the small-scaled timber producing and processing households and the
forest communities, it would be a challenge to list out what they wish to know about VPA/FLEGT due to
their limited background of the issue. “How do I make my timber legal” may be the most important
question that they want to ask.
The large public may also need to know the basic information of VPA/FLEGT. To the end, the public is
entitled for monitoring the implementation of policies, including those related to forest governance and
VPA/FLEGT.
Lack of legal evidence:
The problem is normally faced by small-scaled timber producing and processing households. These
households are in serious lack of awareness of legality and knowledge on legal requirements of
doing business with timber, timber products and forest resources. Considering the business as
traditional family business, they have not been enthusiastic in getting business licenses and
registrations. In other cases, complicated procedures and corruption discourage them to get proper
legal evidence of their ownership of land, timber and other kinds of production materials.
What this groups of stakeholders required is clear guidance in getting legal evidence for their
business. It is expected that CSOs may provide support in this area.
Alternative livelihood:
Once the VPA/FLEGT agreement comes into force, land use changes and lack of capital would force the
economically-disadvantaged timber producers to sell their lands to private companies, who are capable of
8
Information used in this part of the report is consolidated from i) the existing reports of the VNGO-FLEGT network,
especially the Livelihood Impact Assessment of the VPA; and ii) indepth interviews with representatives of CSOs under
assessment, notably CED, SRD and CORENARM.

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 14
fulfilling all VPA requirements. Similarly, small scaled sawmills, due to their insufficient capacity for land
management and utilisation, would find the additional costs generated by new administrative procedures
unaffordable. In both cases, a certain proportion of forest-dependent households will need to seek for
alternative livelihood.
In order to sustain their livelihood and incomes from forestland, forest communities must be equipped
with land management and utilisation skills. In addition, forest communities may also need a
mechanism to ensure the equality in sharing forest resources.
5. TYPES OF CAPACITY REQUIRED FOR CSO EFFECTIVE CONTRIBUTION TO
VPA/FLEGT PROCESS
As it was described in Diagram 1, the identification of capacity required for CSOs to participate effectively
in VPA/FLEGT process is brainstormed and discussed by representatives of the 6 CSOs participating in
this assessment on the bases of: i) Prioritised functions and tasks of CSOs in VPA/FLEGT process; ii)
Challenges that key national actors of VPA/FLEGT are facing and their needs for support; iii) Objectives
of the VNGO-FLEGT network; and iv) Requirements of VPA agreement. The discussion on specific
needs of individual CSO also takes into account the mission, vision, mandate and development
objectives of the CSO under assessment.
Capacity, in this report, is understood as Information and Knowledge, Tools, Skills and Organisational /
Institutional Arrangement. The list of required capacity – e.g. the capacity that a CSO must have for
effective contribution of CSO in VPA/FLEGT process - is consolidated from discussion with CSOs and
presented bellow.
Knowledge and information needed
VPA/FLEGT is by no mean a stand-alone issue. It is inter-connected with many other issues and
knowledge, ranging from forest governance to livelihood and social security as well as legitimate rights
such as participation, equality etc. In order to understand well VPA/FLEGT and identify what a CSO can
do in this process, managers and staff of CSOs needs to have under standing on these issues.
Diagram 3 lists out and categorises these sets of knowledge, information and issue areas into 3 groups:
• The “transitional zone” which includes issues related to VPA/FLEGT
• The “buffer zone” which includes issues directly linked to VPA/FLEGT; and
• The “core zone” which includes the core issues of VPA/FLEGT
This classification will later be used to: i) explore the priority of information of CSOs and their staff in
charge of VPA/FLEGT; and ii) to assess the experience of CSOs in the field of VPA/FLEGT, e.g. the CSO
working only on the “transitional zone” would have less experience with VPA/FLEGT than the one who
has been working in the “buffer zone” or “core zone” for several years.
It is important to know that CSO staffs do not need to be experts in VPA/FLEGT. However, they must
have adequate background knowledge on VPA/FLEGT in order to participate in discussions on the issue
and to mobilise and manage external experts when required.
Tools and Skills
Representatives of 6 CSOs list out 11 different types of tools and 12 types of skills and those they would
need to manage VPA/FLEGT activities.
The lists are presented in Box 4 and Box 5. These are the consolidated lists. Priorities of individual
CSOs are discussed later.

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 15
Diagram 3: Knowledge, information and issue areas related to VPA/FLEGT
Topics/Issues related
to
VPA/FLEGT
Topics/Isues
Directly linked to
VPA/FLEGT
Core issues of
VPA/FLEGT
“Transitional
zone”
“Buffer
zone”
“Core
zone”
1. Basic VPA/FLEGT mechanisms
2. Conditions for the import of timber
products into the EU from the FLEGT
partner country
3. Laws, regulations, policies of Vietnam
related to the definition of legal timber
4. Laws, regulations, policies of Vietnam
related to TLAS
5. [Potential] social, economic and
environmental impacts of VPA/FLEGT on
different groups of rightsholders and
stakeholders
6. Specific regulations on certifying legal
timber
7. Regulations on transporting, trading,
export – importing timber
8. Regulations on taxation, fee on timber
and timber products
9. Regulations on timber confiscation
10. FLEGT License (demand, delivery,
validity and other conditions)
11. Basic international practice and
principles/regulations on exploitation,
trade, transportation of timber and timber
products; Lacey …
12. Monitoring mechanism (3
rd
party
monotoring, community monitoring,
auditing system)
• Policies on forestry
management and
development
• Legal rights of
stakeholders in land-
use, access to forests,
exploitation of timber
and forest products
• Links between FLEGT
and the conservation of
natural resources,
biodiversity, CITES …
• Links between FLEGT
and sustainable forest
management
• Participatory forest
governance
• Rights and benefits of
forest rightsholders and
stakeholders
• Value chains of timber
and forest products
• Timber-efficiency
production/pocessing
models
• Models of timber
production
management
• Similar/Other
• Climate change
adaptation
• Sustainable livelihood for
forest communities
• Agriculture and forestry
production models for
forest communities
• Gender, ethnic
minorities, poverty in
forest governence and
sustainable development
• Similar/Other

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 16
TOOLS
1. VPA/FLEGT Communication Strategy & Plan 2. Q&A on VPA/FLEGT
3. Policy advocacy strategy of the organisation in general
and for VPA/FLEGT in particular
4. VPA/FLEGT Monitoring Manual for CSOs and
Communities
5. Toolkit for VPA/FLEGT implementation 6. Participatory decision making mechanism for
VPA/FLEGT
7. Toolkit for VPA/FLEGT implementation specifically
designed for SMEs
8. Guidance for partnership and network development for
VPA/FLEGT
9. M&E manual for VPA/FLEGT (to measure the results of
VPA/FLEGT interventions carried out by the CSO)
10. Independent evaluation reports on good practice of
VPA/FLEGT
11. Guidance/Manual for Gender mainstreaming in forest
management and VPA/FLEGT
Box 4: List of tools needed for the management of VPA/FLEGT activities
SKILLS
1. Research skills (for CSO staff to conduct researches on VPA/FLEGT by themselves)
2. Methods and skill for identifying research issues, developing TOR and management/coordination of research activities
(by independent consultants/experts).
3. Skills for M&E and data analysis
4. Skills for consolidating research results/findings into policy brief on VPA/FLEGT
5. Methods and skill for developing, collecting information and analysing sets of M&E indicators for evaluating the results
of VPA/FLEGT interventions
6. Skills for coordinating VPA?FLEGT activities within CSO and in the VNGO-FLEGT
7. Consultation skills to consult rightsholders and stakeholders on issues related to VPA-FLEGT
8. Skills for gender analysis and gender mainstreaming in VPA/FLEGT, forest governance and natural resource
management
9. VPA/FLEGT budgeting
10. Monitoring skills, including skills for organising monitoring activities for VPA/FLEGT
11. Skills for identifying problems/gaps and writing project proposal to mobilise resources for the implementation of
VPA/FLEGT interventions
12. Negotiation and lobbying skills – applied for policy making bodies
Box 5: List of tools needed for the management of VPA/FLEGT activities

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 17
PART 3: CURRENT CAPACITY OF CSOs PARTICIPATING
IN THE ASSESSMENT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. GENERAL OBSERVATION
6.1. ABOUT THE ADAPTED CSO CAPACITY ASSESSMENT TOOL
The original WWF-UK/DFID Programme Agreement (PPA) CSO Capacity Assessment Tool
The WWF-UK/DFID Programme Agreement (PPA) CSO Capacity Assessment Tool is applied
compulsorily in this assessment. At the foundation of the tool is a set of pillars that are common
characteristics of successful CSOs. There are 7 key pillars and 30 assessment criteria in this tool (Box
6).
1. Vision, Strategy and Management 4. Engagement, Inclusion and Impact
• Vision, Mission and Purpose • Community Engagement
• Organisational Strategy • Beneficiary Consultation
• Strategic Review • Gender, Poverty and Inclusion
• Leadership development • Beneficiary Impact
• Governance and Management
• Conflict resolution
2. Financial Planning 5. Programme Planning and Sustainability
• Financial Planning and Accountability Programme Planning
• Financial Budgeting Programme Implementation
• Financial Sustainability Programme Resources
Programme Sustainability
3. External Relations 6. Advocacy Strategy
• CSO Networks and Links • Advocacy Strategy Development
• Donor Relations • Advocacy and Constituency Building
• External Communications • Private Sector Engagement
• Funding Proposals/Proposal Writing • Engagement with Local Government
• Engagement with National Government
7. Monitoring, Evaluating and Reflecting
• Monitoring and Evaluation
• Learning from Practice
• Expertise and Good Practice
• Reporting
Box 6: Pillars and assessment criteria of the CSO Capacity Assessment Tool
The adapted CSO Capacity Assessment Tool
The tool was adapted by adding from minimum 3 to maximum 6 assessment questions under each and
every assessment criteria. Of these questions, the first 2 to 4 questions (#67% of the total number of
questions under each criteria) are normally about the capacity of the CSO in relation with its vision,
mission and development objectives. The rest (#33% of the questions) focuses on the organisation’s
performance in the field related to VPA/FLEGT.
Scores (weakest = 1 and strongest = 5) is given to each of the assessment questions. The assessment
score for a criteria is the average score of the assessment questions. This scoring system allows the

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 18
assessment of the general
capacity of a CSO in its
traditional working areas and at
the same time measuring the
CSO’s performance and
experience in areas related
VPA/FLEGT, which can be
new to the CSO. The argument
is that a CSO may be very
strong in its traditional but is
not necessarily strong in
implementing VPA/FLEGT
activities.
Furthermore, it is expected that the adapted tools can also measure the level of commitment of a CSO
when participating in VPA/FLEGT process: how does the organisation prepare for VPA/FLEGT? How
many staffs are assigned for this new area of intervention? How much resource – time, budget, human
resource – is made ready for VPA/FLEGT assignments …
6.2. OVERAL EVALUATION
Six CSOs selected for the assessment are generally speaking strong, even probably among the strongest
in the community of CSOs working in their similar areas. All are highly active in VNGO-FLEGT network. In
a sense, the selection is bias since it does not include the “average” and the “weak” CSOs. However,
from the point of view that target groups of WWF’s capacity building program should focus on those who
already have background on and committed to VPA/FLEGT rather than those who join the movement
only because it is in fashion, this selection is acceptable.
Table 2 bellow summarises the average self-evaluation scores of the CSOs participating in the
assessment. Since the scores are self-given, they do not imply that the CSO with higher score is stronger
than the one with lower score. They only reflect the perception of CSOs about where they are in the
course of their own organisational development and in relation to the requirements of VPA/FLEGT
activities.
Capacity areas SRD PanNature CED SFMI CORENARM CRD
1: Embryonic; 2: Developing; 3: Moderately developed; 4: Well-developed; 5: Exemplary
1. Vision, Strategy and Management 4.0 3.0 3.8 2.8 2.5 2.8
2. Financial Planning 4.2 3.3 3.4 3.3 2.6 3.4
3. External Relations 3.8 2.8 4.1 2.0 2.7 3.2
4. Engagement, Inclusion and Impact 3.6 2.8 3.4 2.1 3.3 3.2
5. Programme Planning and
Sustainability
3.7 3.3 4.4 3.0 2.7 3.3
6. Advocacy Strategy 3.1 2.9 4.1 1.5 2.4 2.8
7. Monitoring, Evaluating and
Reflecting
3.5 3.5 4.2 2.7 2.5 3.1
TOTAL AVERAGE 3.7 3.09 3.9 2.5 2.67 3.11
Table 2: Average scores of the CSOs participating in the assessment
The overall scores suggest that the CSOs under assessment have already been comparatively strong in
their organisational management and development. Support to organisational capacity development may
Criteria Assessment questions
Question
score
Criteria
score
Expertise
and
Good
Practice
Question 1: Expertise and Good Practice
in traditional working area
Score for Q1
Q1 + Q2 +
Q3 + Q4
________
4
in traditional working area
Score for Q1
in areas related to VPA/FLEGT (buffer
zone)
Score for Q1
in VPA/FLEGT activities (core zone)
Score for Q1

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 19
be needed but not much and not high in the priority list. Instead, priority is given to VPA/FLEGT specific
knowledge, tools and skills. We will discuss this in the coming part of the report.
7. VPA/FLEGT SPECIFIC CAPACITY
7.1. EXPERIENCE, HUMAN RESOURCE AND EXPERTISE
Experience of the target CSOs
The six CSOs have profound experiences in the areas they are working on and these experiences are
essential for VPA/FLEGT concepts, which are participation, right-based, equality, pro-poor and support to
the marginalised and forest communities, representation, education and awareness raising, support to
livelihood, technical support to forest management and governance …
Most of the CSOs have 8 -9 years of experience working with the target groups and areas, which are
closely related to VPA/FLEGT – mostly in the “buffer zone”.
The most common target groups of these CSOs are: i) rural and forest communities; ii) other CSOs.
Among the six, SRD seems to work more closely with the communities, PanNature with policy making
bodies at the national and provincial levels, CORENARM and CRD with local government – policy
implementing bodies at local level. Target groups of CED and SFMI are a little bit more specific. CED has
solid experience working with SMEs and SFMI with forest management agencies and forest owners
(Table 3). It is underlined that few CSOs have good connections and working experience with timber
SMEs.
With regards to the thematic interventions, all CSOs are experienced in providing capacity building and
technical support to their respective target groups in the forms of training, consultation, providing
guidance and management tools so that the target groups can put policies into practice.
However, each CSO has their own strengths and limitations in the experience of working with target
groups. While SRD has established very strong links with the poor communities by providing hands-on-
the-field support through sustainable rural livelihood projects, PanNature tends to focus more on policy
analysis, policy counter-argument/advocacy and environment education/awareness raising.
# CSOs
Year of
establishment
Year starting
VPA/FLEGT
Type of CSO Primary target groups Themes
1 SRD
2006
2012
NGO
Community
development
Communities
Local government
Other CSOs
Community development &
sustainable livelihood
Agriculture and rural
development
Climate change adaptation
in agriculture
2 PanNature
2006
2010
NGO
Community
development
Policy advocacy
Capacity building
Communities
State management agencies
in the fields of agriculture,
forestry, environment
protection, natural resource
management
Other CSOs
Sustainable management
and protection of natural
resources
Agriculture and forestry
policies
Community development
and sustainable livelihood

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 20
# CSOs
Year of
establishment
Year starting
VPA/FLEGT
Type of CSO Primary target groups Themes
3 CED
2011
2014
NGO
Education and
training; Capacity
building
Forestry industry
SMEs
Mass organisations
Education solutions for
socio-economic issues
4 SFMI
2006
2012
NGO
Research and
consultancy
Capacity building
Forest owners/management
boards
Government policy making
bodies
Mass organisations
resources
policies
5 CORENARM
2005
2010
NGO
Research and
consultancy
Capacity building
Communities
Local governments
CSOs and mass
organisations
resources
policies
6 CRD
…..
2010
Research center
Communities
Local governments
CSOs and mass
organisations
Forestry policies
resources
Table 3: Primary target groups and thematic working areas of CSOs under assessment
Also dealing with policies and capacity building but CRD and CORENARM channel their effort to local
government and local communities in the form of consultation and advisory services. Their direct
connection with the communities is remarkably weaker than that of SRD and PanNature. The
“representation function”
9
of CRD and CORENARM is therefore limited.
In another instance, SFMI is regarded to as having strong expertise in FLEGT-related fields such as
forest management, forestry institution and policy, forest certification, markets of forest products and
forestry technology. The organisation is now cooperating with an international consulting organisation –
NepCon – to develop a toolkit of VPA/FLEGT and training materials on implementing VPA/FLEGT for
SMEs. However, when it comes to the task of VPA/FLEGT policy advocacy, SFMI has little choice but
channels its knowledge through the VNGO-FLEGT network instead of approaching the policy-making
bodies directly.
The observations listed above suggest that:
• Each CSO can be strong in only one or several aspects of VPA/FLEGT process. For effective
contribution to the VPA/FLEGT process, CSOs should not act alone. The networking capacity
and skills are therefore of vital importance in the future capacity building program of WWF.
9
As mentioned earlier, CSOs are not legal representatives of either communities nor enterprises. The term “representation
function” in this case means “connecting and bridging communities, SMEs with concerned government agencies” and
“conveying messeges, opinion, expectation of these groups to responsible government agencies”

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 21
Diagram 4: Strengths and limitations of SFMI in implementing VPA/FLEGT interventions
NEPCon SFMI
National experts;
Studies & researches;
Training, national
experience
-----------------------------
• Sustainable management
of forest and natural
resources
• Forestry institution,
policies
• Forest certification
• Forest products: Markets,
processing and trade
• Forestry technology
Int’l Expert & int’l
experience; Good
practice
----------------------------
VPA/FLEGT
Legal Source; Traceability
Forest certification & forestry
products
Verification of legal sources
Forest governance,
Natural resource
management
Timber Legality Project in Vietnam
• Awareness
raising for SMEs
on VPA/FLEGTY
• Identify legal
risks
• Develop toolkits
to reduce legal
risks
Training experts
Vietnamese
Professional
Association
CSOs
Select
ed
SMEs
Pilot at 20-25 SMEs
300-500 SMEs, timber producing
and processing households
To
2017
After
2017
Technically sustainable?
Sustainability of human resources?
Financially sustainable?
Institutionally sustainable?
VNGO-
FLEGT
network
VN
Foresty
Admin.
Policy advocacy
Advisory service (policy) for
GoV agencies
Develop tools;
Capacity building

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 22
• As all CSOs in the assessment are experienced in providing capacity building support to their
respective target groups, they can act as TOT trainers in the capacity building program of WWF.
• As there are several VPA/FLEGT project being implemented and most of them have capacity
building components, it is suggested that WWF keep cooperating with the project implementers
to exchange expertise and save resources.
Expertise of the target CSOs
Key areas of expertise of the six CSOs are listed in Table 3 (in the column named “Themes”). The list
includes themes related to VPA/FLEGT, basically in the categories of “transitional zone” and “buffer
zone”. The situation suggests that CSOs do not have many in-house VPA/FLEGT specific expertise,
which is explainable since VPA/FLEGT is new to every one. However, experience and expertise of the
CSOs in the areas related to VPA/FLEGT are their great advantage to approach the process and provide
support to rightsholders and stakeholders of the process.
# CSOs
Experts (general)
Including program
officers if they act as
experts
VPA/FLEGT Experts
10 Staff assigned with
VPA/FLEGT activities
CSO leaders in
charge of VPA
In house
Out-sourced
Part time
In house
Out-sourced
Part time
Full time Part time
1 SRD 15 2 0 1 4 1 1
2 PanNature 8 1 0 4 0 1
3 CED 7 17 1 4 2 0 2
4 SFMI 18 26 1 3 1 0 1
5 CORENARM 8 20 1 1 1 1 2
6 CRD 15 40 1 1 2 0 1
Table 4: Experts in the CSOs
7.2. COMMITMENT TO VPA/FLECT
Commitment of the CSO community
It was recalled that shortly after the negotiation process started, FERN approached Vietnamese NGOs to
make introduction and invite VNGOs to participate in the process and exercise the representation
function, conveying voice from the field to the negotiation table. VNGOs working in the fields of forestry,
natural resource conservation and community development were encouraged to establish a network to
take advantage of the unified action and voices. Only 4 VNGOs showed interests. These include
CERDA, CSDM, PanNature and SRD. Two (PanNature and SRD) of the four remain in the network today
and act as the core members and coordinators of the network.
As of today, the number of 31 CSOs participating in the VNGO-FLEGT network, to a certain extent,
reflects the low level of interest and commitment of CSO community to the issue. Reasons may
include:
• The issue of VPA/FLEGT is not only new but also complicated enough to discourage the CSOs
with little knowledge and expertise in areas related to VPA/FLEGT.
10
We understand that “VPA/FLEGT experts” are the experts or program managers/officers with good experience and
expertise in the fields related to VPA/FLEGT.

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 23
• Many Vietnamese CSOs are small and do not have human and financial resources to “invest” in
this new area.
• Inefficient level of awareness: many CSOs have not been aware of the importance of the issue.
• Limited sources of funding
As CSOs would play very important roles in the VPA process as the representatives of affected
communities, as the monitor of the implementation process and as technical-support service providers, it
is important to include in the WWF’s capacity building program a component on awareness raising
targeting CSO community in Vietnam.
Commitment of 6 target CSOs
The 6 CSOs under this assessment, on the other hand, are highly committed to VPA/FLEGT.
Commitments of these CSOs are reflected in:
• Of the six CSOs, three are members of the VNGO-FLEGT Operating Committee (SRD,
PanNature, CRD). The other 3 are active members of the network.
• Most of the CSOs are running VPA/FLEGT projects and/or VPA/FLEGT activities: SFMI with
Timber Legality Project in Vietnam (in cooperation with NepCon); CRD with Supporting
participation of national civil society organisations and private sector federations/ entities in
FLEGT VPA related activities; SRD with the FLEGT project funded by FERN and Forest Trend;
and PanNature with WWF Vietnam under the 4-year project on Common Access to VPA Process
in Vietnam and Lao.
• The CSOs have invested resources, including human resources and financial resource, to the
preparation/design and implementation of VPA/FLEGT interventions (Table 4).
7.3. TOOLS AND SKILLS
As being experienced in management and organisational development, the six target CSOs have
developed and applied most of the key tools required for the management, operation and development of
their organisation. However, it was discussed and agreed that in order to participate effectively in the
VPA/FLEGT process, a number of VPA-specific tools will need to be further revised and/or newly
developed. Skills must be improved and strengthened accordingly.
The prioritisation of these skills and tools by each CSO is presented in Session 10 – Prioritised
Capacity.
7.4. EXTERNAL RELATIONS AND NETWORKING FOR VPA/FLEGT INTERVENTIONS
The external relation capacity of a CSO is reflected in the following criteria: i) Networks and Links; ii)
Donor relations; iii) External communication; iii) Community engagement; and iv) Beneficiary consultation.
Self-evaluation scores of these criteria are presented in Figure 1.
It is noticed that the capacity of the target CSOs varied from criteria to criteria. CRD is comparatively
strong in all criteria. This organisation is especially more advanced in networking and community
engagement. The “research CSO” such as CRD and SFMI find themselves less advantaged in
community engagement. Similar level of self-assessment is applied to PanNature, may be because this
CSO tends to work more with policy-making bodies.
While all target CSOs appear to be strong in community consultation, which is an advantage for their
participation in VPA/FLEGT process, external communication may be an issue to be considered when
up to 3 out of 6 target CSOs find themselves in effective. Observation also shows that international
cooperation, e.g. cooperation with international and regional CSO networks and with donor communities
who are interested in and promoting VPA/FLEGT process is weak in a number of CSOs. The current
situation is that one or several CSOs keep exclusive contacts with the international partners, then
mobilising resources and sub-contract other CSOs to implement VPA/FLEGT activities.

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 24
This will be one of the focus of WWF’s intervention in the future.
7.5. COMMUNICATION, AWARENESS RAISING, EDUCATION
As it was mentioned earlier, the target CSOs are all recognising the importance of communication,
awareness raising, education and policy advocacy. Target audience of these CSOs, however, are
different and this affect their approaches and strategies of delivering messages.
It is observed that SRD, PanNature and CED are comparatively more experienced in communication,
awareness raising and education for those who would be affected by VPA/FLEGT process; SFMI,
CORENARM, CRD in technical solutions and PanNature, SRD in advocacy.
Figure 1: External relation capacity of target CSOs
7.6. POLICY ADVOCACY
Policy advocacy is an important task that takes place throughout the whole process, including 3 stages of
negotiation, preparation and implementation of VPA/FLEGT.
Suppose the major targets of CSOs in the VPA/FLEGT process are policy making bodies, e.g. MARD, Vietnam
Forestry Administration, VPA/FLEGT Negotiation Taskforces and concerned ministries, then advocacy can be
made: i) directly from an CSO or VNGO/FLEGT network as representatives of their “clients” to the targets; and ii)
through influencing rightsholders and stakeholders such as the Vietnam Timber and Forest Products Association
(VietFores) and national law enforces. Another powerful channel of advocacy is the EU/Negotiation Delegation, who
would accept information and recommendation directly from the VNGO-FLEGT network or from the European
NGOs (
Diagram 5).
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
SRD
PanNature
CED
SFMI
CORENARM
CRD
CSO Networks and Links Donor Relations
External Communications Community Engagement
Beneficiary Consultation

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 25
To utilise such channels to deliver messages, effective VPA/FLEGT advocacy would require a number of
qualification:
• Sufficient and adequate knowledge of VPA/FLEGT and issues related to VPA/FLEGT: This
requirement is of utmost important since one cannot persuade the policy makers without having
equal or better knowledge and understanding of the advocacy issues than the policy makers.
While many of the staff assigned for VPA/FLEGT have been working on issues related to
VPA/FLEGT for years, there are still representatives of CSOs participating in VNGO-FLEGT
network meetings and meetings with policy makers without sufficient knowledge of forestry and
forestry industry.
Diagram 5: Channels of Communication, Awareness Raising, Education and Advocacy
National Policy
Makers
MARD
Vietnam Forestry
Administration
VNGO-
FLEGT
CSO CSO
CSO CSO
CSO
CSO
EU
The Negotation
Delegation
EU INGOs
LoggingOff
Community Rights
Network (CRN)
Vifores and Timber
Companies
Timber
producing/processing
households
Communities
Local Policy Enforcers
Communication
Awareness
raising
Education
Advocacy
Advocacy
Sharing information
Advocacy
Advocacy

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 26
• Consultation, research and research management skills to collect, analyse and consolidate
information from rightsholders and stakeholders: Many of the CSOs have profound experience
working with communities and small timber producing and processing households. Few,
however, have sufficient experience working with the SMEs, and even fewer have experience
working with both SMEs and policy makers.
• If timber SMEs are identified as one of the advocacy channels and education target group - and
they should be – then working with SMEs would become a qualification that need to be
strenghthened. CSOs remains weak in this fields.
• Policy brief and negotiation skills to present the messages from rightsholders and stakeholders to
target audience/policy makers in an appropriate way and at the right time. In the negotiation
process, the Vietnam Forestry Administration is asking for more precise and timely
information from CSOs.
In addition, it is suggested that “softer” engagement strategy should be applied: “policy counter-
argument” and sharing information instead of “policy criticism”. Coming in to hard and fast would
easily cause reverse effects.
• Strengthened networking within the VNGO-FLEGT network so that all network members must
agree upon an issue the issues they want to advocate before “selling” it to the policy makers.
Further improvement in the VNGO-FLEGT network is required.
• Networking with European CSOs and international, regional networks of CSOs working on
VPA/FLEGT. More members of VNGO-FLEGT network should established direct connections
with these European CSOs to exchange information, experience and to deliver messages to
them, and through them to the EU and the GoV. At this moment, the connection with international
and regional networks is made through representative(s) of VNGO-FLEGT network.
It is observed that the skills listed above are not unfamiliar to the CSO managers and staff. However,
using these skills in combination with VPA/FLEGT issues and target audience may required further study
and practice.

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 27
7.7. GENDER, POVERTY AND INCLUSION
Figure 2: Self-evaluation scores for Gender, Poverty, Inclusion and M&E, Reporting
Gender, Poverty and Inclusion scores high with SRD and CED and quite modest with the rest of the
target CSOs. Further discussion show that it is the aspect of gender that pulls down the overall score for
this assessment criteria (Figure 2). Most of the six target CSOs find it confused when trying to make
analysis to identify effective gender interventions for VPA/FLEGT.
It can be reasoning that once these 6 CSOs have problems with gender mainstreaming in VPA/FLEGT,
so would other CSOs in the VNGO-FLEGT network.
Poverty and Inclusion can be considered as strengths of these organisation.
7.1. MONITORING, EVALUATION AND REPORTING
Once committed to VPA/FLEGT, it is expected that CSOs established and integrated a sub-system of
M&E for VPA/FLEGT interventions in their existing overall M&E system. This part of the M&E system
allows a CSO to evaluate the effectiveness of its interventions in connection with the VPA/FLEGT
requirements and with the development objectives of the CSO. The recorded information can also be
used for the purposes of planning, education and advocacy.
Some of the six target CSOs, namely SRD, PanNature, CED, have already established M&E system for
their respective organisations. Organisational M&E system of CRD, CORENARM and SFMI remains
embryonic and developing. None, however, have integrated the VPA/FLEGT indicators into their M&E
system. This can be considered as an issue that needs further attention and improvement.
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
SRD
PanNature
CED
SFMI
CORENARM
CRD
GENDER,POVERTY, M&E, REPORTING
Gender,Poverty, Inclusion Monitoring, Evaluating and Reflecting

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 28
8. OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES IN VPA/FLEGT CAPACITY BUILDING FOR
CSO
A quick SWOT analysis of the current status of CSOs’ capacity in implementing VPA/FLEGT (Diagram 6)
shows that:
• As participation of the civil society is a requirement of VPA/FLEGT process, CSOs are standing
before a great opportunity to be involved in all stages of the Agreement, ranging from negotiation
process to the implementation and monitoring stages. In order to take advantage of this
opportunity, CSOs must prepare themselves first to meet with the demands of the process.
Diagram 6: Quick SWOT analysis of CSOs’ capacity in implementing VPA/FLEGT
• Each of the target CSOs have profound experience in a number of areas related to VPA/FLEGT
and this gives them a good start to implement VPA/FLEGT activities. It is advisable that CSOs
must cooperate to support each other in this process since experience and expertise of a single
CSO do not fully cover the requirements of VPA/FLEGT process. The cooperation includes
sharing of information, knowledge, tools developed and contacts with international CSOs and
donor communities. In this process, a CSO can play the role of trainer in one area and learner in
other areas.
• International support is available and CSOs can take advantage of such support to strengthen
their capacity and to deliver support to other organisations through consultation, education and
advocacy process.
• Although CSOs have already developed and practice most of the organisational management
tools required for the development of their organisations, there are shortages of VPA/FLEGT
specific tools. Few have developed or documented and integrated VPA/FLEGT issues into their
existing management and operation tools.
• Target CSOs show high level of commitment in implementing VPA/FLEGT interventions.
However, the wider CSO community remains ignorant. It is important to raise awareness of these
CSOs for reaching wider range of rightsholders and stakeholders.
S
TRENGTHS
W
EAKNESSES
O
PPORTUNITIES
T
HREATS
•  Experienced and
knowledgeable in forestry
and fields related to VPA/
FLEGT
•  Experienced in working with
the stakeholders.
•  Organizational development
tools available
•  Ability of mobilizing national
experts
•  Inadequate VPA/FLEGT
specific knowledge and
experience
•  Insufficient ability in
applying the existing tools
and skills specifically in VPA/
FLEGT process.
•  Lack of tools specifically
designed for VPA/FLEGT
•  Inexperienced in working
with timber SMEs
•  The inclusion mechanism of VPA
requires participation of CSOs
•  Government is aware of the
contribution of CSO in the VPA
process
•  VNGO-FLEGT Network
•  International and regional
networks
•  Technical and financial support
from donor-funded projects
•  Commitment of CSOs
•  Ignorance of policy making
agencies
•  Too few CSOs show
commitments in VPA/FLEGT
•  Access to information for
independent monitoring
Nega%ve'
Internal''
factors'
External'
factors'
Posi%ve'

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 29
PART 4: PROPOSED PLAN FOR VPA/FLEGT CAPACITY
BUILDING FOR VIETNAMESE CSOs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR DESIGNING THE CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM
9.1. TARGET GROUPS OF THE CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM
WWF needs to identify and priorities target groups of its technical support in capacity building for
VPA/FLEGT capacity building interventions targeting CSOs according to its available resources, including
time and budget available. Criteria for prioritisation may include:
• The current level of commitment to VPA/FLEGT
• Background experience, knowledge and skills in areas related to VPA/FLEGT
• Potential future roles in VPA/FLEGT process
Core members of the VNGO-FLEGT network are on the top of the priority list. These will be the TOT
trainers and/or keynote speakers in WWF training in the future. The list may include the six target CSOs
of this assessment, Wetland in the south and a small number of selected and qualified CSOs. This

FINAL REPORT
JULY 2014Page 30
group required advanced knowledge, tools, skills and international experience in implementing
VPA/FLEGT.
The second group in the priority list includes the active members of the VNGO-FLEGT network. These
organisations are currently making contribution to a number of the network’s activities, including
consultation with communities and local governments.
Other members of the VPA/FLEGT occupy the 3
rd
place in the priority list. They are participating in some
activities of the network. These organisation may make more active contribution to the consultation
process and sharing information on VPA/FLEGT among their clients.
The training and capacity building program of WWF may reach out to the CSOs working in areas related
to VPA/FLEGT, e.g. natural resources conservation, environment protection with the objective of raising
awareness of these organisations and equipped them with basic knowledge on VPA/FLEGT.
See Table 5 for more information.
9.2. GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Cross learning and sharing experience: It is advisable that experience and expertise of CSOs in the
VNGO-FLEGT network is mobilised. Outside national and international experts will be mobilised, but only
when it is needed. Experts from the Vietnam Administration of Forestry can be mobilised as keynote
speakers and/or trainers at the training activities.
Learning by doing: WWF may consider assigning/inviting a group of qualified CSOs to develop a
number of tools and materials needed for VPA/FLEGT process with technical support from expert(s)
recruited by WWF or its implementing partner PanNature. The assignments can range from updating
management tools of selected CSOs (M&E system, communication strategies …) to meet with new
requirements of VPA/FLEGT process to developing new tools, materials, curriculums that can be used by
other CSOs.
In this case, WWF and/or PanNature are responsible for designing the assignment, developing the TOR,
supervising the implementation process and quality control.

Final report on sep 2014

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (16)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Final report on sep 2014

Similar to Final report on sep 2014 (20)

More from Minh Vu

More from Minh Vu (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Final report on sep 2014