This presentation was delivered by Anastasia Yang to the Vietnam Forest Protection and Development Fund in Hanoi, 11th November. Topics discussed include arguments for researching multilevel governance, site selection, and an overview of the global study itself.

1. Multi-level governance and decision-
making on forests and PFES in Vietnam
Anastasia Yang, Vu Tan Phuong, Tien Nguyen Dinh, et al.

2. Why research multilevel
governance?
Village Village Village
commune
Village
Commune
District
Province
National
International e.g. donors
Horizontal
Vertical
Key
actors:
Vietnamese
government
State
companies
Forest
protection and
development
fund (FPDF)
Rubber
plantation
companies
Hydro power
companies
Village actors
Non-
government
Organizations
(NGO)
Government
organizations
e.g. JICA

3. Research questions
* Based on key informants interviews
1. How do multilevel actors and their decisions relate to land use change on the
ground?
2. How has decentralization influenced land use change and local peoples livelihoods?
3. What can existing benefit sharing mechanisms teach us about procedural and
outcome legitimacy in land use decisions?
Site selection

4. Global study :
lessons on MLG and land use decisions
Power Equity
Technical
Political
rights
Study overview:
• 54 research cases of land use change in 5 countries.
• Exploring the case driven stories at ach of these sites
• Assess the legitimacy of decision making and outcomes
Findings:

5. Multi-level governance and
decision-making on forests and
PFES in Vietnam

6. A Legal study…..
Distribution of powers and
responsibilities affecting forest,
land use, and REDD+ across levels
and sectors in Vietnam
- Key regulations on PFES are outlined based
on Decree No. 99

7. Province Dien Bien Nghe An
District Muong Cha Dien Bien Con Cuong Tuong Duong
Commune Hua Ngai Muong
Muon
Muong
Pon
Muong Nha Chi Khe Luc Da Thach Giam Yen Na
Sites PFES REDD+
pilot
project
Rubber
plantation
Community
based
forestry
management
Hydropower
plant (HPP)
developmen
t
Afforestation
business
(smaller
enterprise –
private
company)
afforestation
government
program - 147
program
Hydropower
plant (HPP)
development
Research Case study sites
Increasing emissions
Decreasing emissions

8. Study sites & methods
Table 1. Number of interviewees at each government level
Study province Province District Commune/local Total interviewees
Dien Bien 7 9 33 52
Nghe An 9 11 30 48
Total 16 20 63 100
IntervieweesVietnamese
government
State
companies
Forest protection
and development
fund (FPDF)
Rubber
plantation
companies
Hydro power
companies
Village actors
Non-
government
Organizations
(NGO)
Government
organizations
e.g. JICA
 Provincial government
 District government
 Commune government
….And across ministries
(smallholders,
villager heads, mass
organizations)

9. Forest ownership in Vietnam 2013
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
3,500,000
4,000,000
4,500,000
1) Forest
management
boards
2) State
owned forest
companies
3) Other
economic
organizations
4) Arm force
units
5) Households 6)
Communities
7) Others 8) Communal
people's
committee
TotalHaallocatedforestin2013
Natural Forest Planted forest
data source: MARD, 2014

10. Policy, people and land use change
Forest land
allocation (FLA)
Forest &
livelihood
outcomes
Benefit sharing
mechanism
(BSM) e.g. PFES

11. Regional research: Provincial PFES,
payments & FLA
Dien Bien
403.4 billion VND paid
393,340 ha
116.2 billion VND (29 %)
Delayed due to FLA
Nghe An
94.84 billion VND
562,743 ha (2013),
273,982 ha in 2014
16.14 billion VND (17 %)
Delayed due to FLA, HH not
received payments
Payment collected
from users
Number of eligible
forest hectares (ha)
Benefits received
Dien Bien FPDF 2014; Nghe An people committee, 2014
. MLG synthesis report
Payment distributed
Province

12. PFES Findings: Dien Bien province
Hua Ngai
+ village decide forest regulations
+ good awareness of forest protection
Muong Muon
+ “Before 2013, there was no boundary among villages…... Under
implementation of PFES, there are clear boundaries and [villagers]
cannot come to cultivate in land of other villages” (villager 34b).
Muong Pon
+ the Dien Bien PPC decided to re-implement activities on FLA
alongside attempts to implement PFES
Muong Nha
- PFES has not implemented yet due to small amount paid for watershed
of Ma River.

13. PFES Findings: Nghe An province
Chi Khe
- the Hydro power plant is not yet in operation so eligible
households have not received compensation
Yen Na
- individual household forest boundaries are not yet identified the
Fund has just paid for forest owner organization, and group.
 “If let’s say, who protect better will get higher payment, I don’t
think it would be good, because when we was allocated forest
land, there was different in term of conditions of each land plot.
Land allocation is not up to our decision” (#41)
Luc Da
- coordination among PFES with other projects / governmental
program is weak and resulted in a poor understanding at the local
level (#44).

14. Multi-level governance and
decision-making on forests and
PFES in Vietnam
Power Equity
Resources
Coordination
rights
lack finances, human resources & capacity to meet greater demands of
decentralization
Lack of coordination amongst policy and programs
FLA highly variable –more complicated second time round
Forest classification implicates rights, access and benefits

15. Recommendations
Provisions of adequate resources / training at
commune/ district government level
Legitimate FLA and forest classification are
important steps to a more legitimate PFES
Benefits need to meet livelihoods needs

16. Thank you!
http://www.cifor.org/redd-benefit-sharing/
With co-financing from:
The CIFOR REDD+ Benefit Sharing project is supported by:

17. Publications
Trung, L.Q et al. (2015) The distribution of powers and responsibilities affecting forest, land use, and REDD+ across levels and sectors in Vietnam,
occasional Paper, CIFOR http://www.cifor.org/publications/pdf_files/OccPapers/OP-137.pdf
Yang et al. (forthcoming) Analyzing multilevel governance in Vietnam: lessons for REDD+ through land use change and benefit sharing in the provinces
of Nghe An and Dien Bien, occasional Paper, CIFOR
Myers et al (2015) Benefit sharing in context. CIFOR InfoBrief
118. https://www.google.com/search?q=benefit+sharing+in+context&oq=benefit+sharing+in+context&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i60.3778j0j7&sourceid=c
hrome&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8
Ravikumar et al (2015) Multilevel governance challenges in transitioning towards a national approach for REDD+: evidence from 23 subnational REDD+
initiatives. International Journal of the Commons 9(2) http://www.cifor.org/library/5703/multilevel-governance-challenges-in-transitioning-towards-a-
national-approach-for-redd-evidence-from-23-subnational-redd-initiatives/
Ravikumar et al (2015) Project Guide and Methods Training Manual. CIFOR
(https://www.google.com/search?q=ravikumar+project+guide&oq=ravikumar+project+guide&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i59.3352j0j4&sourceid=chrome&
es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8) - Futher details on research methods
And more…..
Project website: http://www.cifor.org/redd-benefit-sharing/
Contact a.yang@cigar.org