Presented by Pham Thu Thuy, CIFOR, on 10 November 2020 at "International workshop: Enhancing wetland management and sustainable development"

1. Sustainable financing mechanisms for
mangrove and wetland protection
Pham Thu Thuy

2. 1. Methods
2. Global overviews
3. National lessons learnt
4. Future schemes
5. Recommendations
Outline

3. • Literature review
• Interviews and HH surveys
• Cases studied: both PES AND PES-LIKED,
different scales + management regimes,
different ecoregions, and state and non-state
programs/projects
Provinces Total key informants interviewed
Thai Binh 292
Thanh Hoa 287
Quang Ninh 288
Da Nang 6
Hai Phong 224
Quang Nam 4
Ben Tre 14
Tra Vinh 25
Ca Mau 10
TOTAL 1,150
Methods

4. Global overviews
o Tourism, recreation as well as storm
protection are the most common ES
that have been monetized.
o cultural services such as aesthetic and
artistic values have been hardly valued
so far, indicating the necessity for
further research regarding these
services
o A/R CDM : 18 registered globally,
none is on mangrove

5. Global financing mechanisms and instruments
1. EMISSION TRADING
SCHEMES
2. ECOLOGICALTAX 3. GREEN BONDS, STOCKS
AND SECURITIES
4. ZERO DEFORESATION 5. VOLUNTARYAND
COMPLIANCE CARBON
MARKET
6. PAYMENT FOR
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
(PES) AND REDD+

6. GLOBAL vs. NATIONAL PFES schemes for
mangrove
22.7
77.3
45.5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Landscape beauty carbon sequestration aquaculture
%
VIETNAM GLOBAL

7. National and sub-national level funding
sources
Source: Pham et al. 2019.Funding the protection and development of mangrove forests at sub-national level: Lessons from
Ben Tre, Tra Vinh and Ca Mau provinces, Vietnam. Available at: https://www.cifor.org/library/7234/

8. Incentives and disincentives
• INCENTIVES:
o Payment for labour day…but low, no significant between control
and intervention sites, only for planting not maintenance
o Training as side benefit but become the main incentives
o Providing seeds and fertilizer… but not locally adapted and based
on local needs, overlook appropriate site selection and right
species
o Payment for end products but… late or event no payment; no
significant between control and intervention sites
o Innovative from village-self formed group: reward for reporting
violations
o Better access and higher price for certified products… but market
margin is low
• DISINCENTIVES:
o Prohibit access and use of local people to convert mangrove and
access to mangrove forests with administrative fines….but weak
law enforcement
o High investment costs
• Both do not fully address and tackle drivers of D&D and do not take
into account and build on social motivation

9. M&E, additionality and permanence
• Unclear M&E indicators and
framework
• Primary economic indicators driven
(E.g. kg of prawns, and are not
based on environmental indicators
• Ineffective law enforcement
• external stressors(fire, pollution,
sea level rise, ocean acidification)
can potentially impinge on key PES
parameters
o (1) threaten ecosystem service
provision, additionality and
permanence,
o (2) add challenges to the
identification of PES providers and
beneficiaries, and
o (3) add complexity and costs to PES
mechanism design.

10. Mangrove governance
• Overlapping and unclear mandates,
responsibilities amongst government
agencies.
• Information gaps and access to
information on non-state programs on
mangrove protection and development
• New form of governance and local
resistance
• Insecured tenure and elite capture
• Conflicts between local and migrants
• Willingness and political commitment
varies
• Imbalance power between local people
vs. companies, people vs. State in
setting up and implementing PES
contracts

11. Potential ES and ES buyers

12. Willingness to pay
• LOW due to: (i) not directly managing the
mangroves; (ii) low level of payment and
only a small group benefit the schemes; (iii)
limited area available and feasible for
mangrove reforestation schemes; (iv)
uncertain and unclear legal framework; (v)
unstable income
• HIGH, if:
• Better law enforcement
• Secured land tenure
• Equitable benefit sharing mechanism
• Transparent, accountable M&E
• Inclusive decision making
• Appropriate incentives and
disincentives
• Who benefit more should pay more
• Clear mechanism
• Stable annual incomes
• The boat sizes
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
301,000- 500,000
100,000- 300,000
<100,000

13. RECOMMENDATIONS
PAYMENT
• Think out of the box
• International funding is limited - domestic
funding plays a key role
• Secure enabling conditions (e.g. institutional
setting, M&E, safeguards) to attract funding
DISTRIBUTION
• Focuses on incentives protecting existing
mangrove as well as reforestation
• Shifting from paying labor day for reforestation
activities to addressing the drivers
• Combine in-kind and in-cash payment,
incentives and disincentives

14. cifor.org
blog.cifor.org
ForestsTreesAgroforestry.org
THANK YOU