FGM Workshop Background Paper - REDD - VietNam

Forest Governance
Monitoring in Viet Nam
Background Paper
( Final)
Dr. Le Khac Coi
December, , 2011

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
LIST OF TABLES 4
LIST OF FIGURES 5
LIST OF BOXES 6
ACRONYMS AND ABBRIVIATIONS 7
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 8
Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION 9
1.1. Background and context 9
1.2. Method of preparation of the background paper for the workshop 10
Chapter 2: RATIONALE FOR STRENTHENING FGM IN VIETNAM 12
2.1. What is Forest Governance? 12
2.2. Why strengthen forest governance? 16
2.3. Why monitor forest governance? 18
2.4. Principles of effective forest governance monitoring 20
Transparency: 20
Accountability: 21
Effectiveness: 21
Participation : 21
Fairness 22
Efficiency: 22
Chapter 3: FOREST GOVERNANCE MONITORING IN VIETNAM –
MAIN FINDINGS 25
3.1. Vietnam policy, legal, institutional and regulatory framework:
introduction 25
3.2. Sustainable Forest Management and Development 27
3.2.1. Forestry land and 3 types of forest 28
3.2.2. Forest and forest land rental and allocation 29
3.2.3. State forest enterprise restructuring 31
3.2.4. Timber harvesting from natural forests 34
3.2.5. Forest conversion into rubber plantation and other purposes 34
3.2.6. Beneficiary policy 35
3.3. Program of Forest protection and conservation, PES and Forest
Finance 37
3.3.1. Forest Protection 38
3.3.2. Handling of violations related to forest 39
3.3.3. Forest fire prevention and fire fighting 41
3.3.4. Protection forests and special-use forests 42
3.3.5. Forest environmental services 43
3.3.6. Forestry finance 44
3.4. Program “Forest Products Processing and Trade” 46
3.5. Planning and decision-making processes 47
3.5.1. Forest governance cycle 47
3.5.2. Planning and decision making process 48
3.5.3. Planning and decision making at provincial and local level 49
3.6. Implementation, enforcement and compliance 51
2

3.6.1. Implementation, enforcement and compliance at national level 51
3.6.2. Finance at provincial and local level 52
3.6.3. Forest land management and allocation at provincial and local
level 54
3.6.4. Coherence and cooperation at local and provincial level 56
3.6.5. Staff capacities at provincial and district level 57
3.7. Main initiatives relevant to FGM in Vietnam 58
3.7. 1. FLEGT and VPA 58
3.7.2. REDD+ 59
Chapter 4: FGM ASSESSED BY 3 PILLARS AND 6 PRINCIPLES –
MAIN FINDINGS
61
Chapter 5: STRENGTHENING FOREST GOVERNANCE MONITORING
IN VIETNAM 66
5.1. FGM is new for Vietnam 66
5.2. Current indicator systems for Vietnam forest sector 66
5.2.1. Indicators of the General Statistics Office (GSO) 66
5.2.2. Indicator system of MARD 66
5.2.3. Indicator system to monitor implementation of Vietnam Forestry
Development Strategy 2006-2010 of VNFOREST, MARD 67
5.3. Strengthening FGM in Vietnam – a set of proposed indicators 71
5.4. Next steps proposed for strengthening FGM in Vietnam 87
Chapter 6: CONCLUSION 89
LITERATURE 92
ANNEX 01: LIST OF PEOPLE RECEIVED FGM FAO FRAMEWORK
WITH 13 COMPONENTS AND 77 SUB-COMPONENTS 93
ANNEX 02: LIST OF PEOPLE DIRECTLY INTERVIEWED 95
ANNEX 03: LIST OF THE INTERVIEWEES AND ORGANIZATIONS AT
PROVINCIAL LEVEL 96
3

LIST OF TABBLES
PAGE
Table 01: Overall assessment by 6 principles 65
Table 02: 18 indicators of MARD for the forest sector 66
Table 03: List of 72 forest-sector indicators (FOMIS) 68
Table 04: Indicators proposed for strengthening FGM in Viet Nam 73
4

LIST OF FIGURES
PAGE
Figure 01: Relationship between forest governance and forest/SFM 14
Figure 02: Pillars and Principles of Forest Governance. 15
Figure 03: The roots and fruits of forest governance (adapted from:
World Bank, 2009) 17
Figure 04: Relationship between forest governance and Viet Nam
forestry development strategy and emerging issues. 26
Figure 05: Forest governance cycle 47
Figure 06: Forest Governance Monitoring – Assessed by Score Rating 62
Figure 07: Forest Governance Monitoring – Assessed by the 6
Principles 62
Figure 08: Pillar 1 “Policy, legal, institutional and regulatory framework” –
Assessed by 6 principles 63
Figure 09: Pillar 2 “Planning and decision making process” – Assessed
by 6 principles 64
Figure 10: Pillar 3 “Implementation, enforcement and compliance” –
Assessed by 6 principles 64
Figure 11: A framework for forest governance monitoring design 87
5

LIST OF BOXES
PAGE
Box 01: Objectives of Viet Nam Forestry Development Strategy 2006-
2020: 11
Box 02: COFO about forest governance 12
Box 03: Sustainable development definition 15
Box 04: Seven key components of sustainable forest management
(SFM): 16
Box 05: Safeguards for REDD+ 18
Box 06: The Power of Measuring Results 18
Box 07: REDD+ and forest monitoring 20
Box 08: Key success factors for improving and sustaining FGM 24
Box 09: Tasks of Program “Sustainable Forest Management and
Development” 27
Box 10: Main legal regulations on forest and forest land 28
Box 11: Forest and forest land rental and allocation 31 December 2009 29
Box 12: Results of state forest enterprise restructuring 31
Box 13: Status of timber harvesting from natural forest 34
Box 14: Forest conversion into rubber plantation 34
Box 15: Tasks of Program of Forest protection and conservation, PES 37
Box 16: Forest protection system 38
Box 17: Violations related to forest 39
Box 18: Status on forest fire 41
Box 19: Protection and special-use forest 42
Box 20: Status of forest environmental service 43
Box 21: Status of forestry finance 44
Box 22: Tasks of Program “Forest Products Processing and Trade” 46
Box 23: Status of legal regulation for timber processing and trade 46
Box 24: Status of FLEFT and VPA in Viet Nam 58
Box 25: Status of REDD in Viet Nam 59
Box 26: Score rating 61
6

ACRONYMS AND ABBRIVIATIONS
COFO Committee on Forestry
CoIST Centre of Information Technology and Statistics
Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural
DARD Development
DoF Department of Forestry
DoFD Department of Forest Development
DoFU Department of Forest Utilization
DoPF Department of Provincial Finance
DoST Department of Science & Technology
EU European Union
FAO Food and Agricultural Organization
FBM Forest bio-physical monitoring
FFPD Provincial fund for forest protection and development
FG Forest governance
FGM Forest governance monitoring
FIPI Forest Inventory & Planning Institute
FIS District Forest Inspection Section
FLEG Forest law enforcement and governance
FLEGT Forest law enforcement, governance and trade
FM Forest monitoring
FPD Forest protection department
FRA Forest resources assessment
FSC Forest Stewardship Council
FSEM Forest socio-economic monitoring
HRD Human Resource Department
JEM Joint expert meeting
MARD Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
NC National Customs
NFMA National forest monitoring assessment
NGO Non-governmental organization
NTFP Non-timber forest product
PDoF Provincial Department of Finance
PEFC Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification
PFPD Provincial FPD
PPC Provincial People Committee
QPPL Legal regulation
Reduction of emission from forest degradation and
REDD deforestation
SFM Sustainable forest management
SOM Senior officer meeting
TWG Technical working group
UNREDD
VFDS Vietnam Forestry Development Strategy 2006-2020
VNFOREST Vietnam Forest Administration
VPA Voluntary Participation Agreement
7

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This document on forest governance monitoring in Vietnam has benefitted from the
contributions and insights of several organizations and persons which is gratefully
acknowledged by the authors.
First of all, special high appreciation is to Tran Huu Nghi, Arend Jan van Bodegom,
and Savenije Herman, because the background paper could not be completed
without their valuable contributions.
My sincere thanks goes to Dr. Nguyen Ba Ngai, Nguyen Huu Dung, Cao Chi Cong,
Nguyen Tuong Van, Dr. Nguyen Nghia Bien, Doan Diem, Nguyen Ton Quyen,
Huynh Thach, Vu Long, To Dinh Mai, Pham Minh Thoa, Dr. Pham Xuan Phuong,
and Dr. To Xuan Phuc for their patience in answering demanding and complex
questions from the national consultant.
Many thanks also to Vu Thanh Nam, Le Cong Uan, Dr. Ho Van Cu, Tran Le Huy, To
Manh Tien, and Huynh Thach for their patient assessment of Viet Nam FGM against
the FAO FGM framework consisting of 13 components and 77 sub-components.
I am extremely grateful to Lauri Vesa; Rametsteiner, Ewald; Akiko Inoguchi;
Leppanen, Mikko; Cheney, Emelyne; Ho Manh Tuong; Dr. Nguyen Phu Hung; and
Tore Langhelle.
I gratefully acknowledge numerous other colleagues who provided valuable inputs to
the development of this document, especially Stephanie Lackey for English language
edit for the document.
8

1.1 Background and context
Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION
Due to the increasing recognition of the importance of forest governance quality on
progress towards SFM, FLEGT and the reduction of deforestation and forest
degradation (REDD+), increasingly many efforts are taken to monitor and report
forest governance and governance quality. Several initiatives and different
methodologies exist for monitoring and reporting forest governance, including those
related to Forest Law Enforcement and Governance (FLEG), reporting based on
SFM criteria and indicators and on international agreements, as well as those of the
World Bank. Recently, the REDD negotiations under the UN Framework Convention
on Climate Change have agreed on safeguards, initiative of EU FLEGT VPA, and
timber supply chain policy of different governments that relate to forest governance,
further increasing the need for monitoring. However, perhaps most importantly,
forest governance monitoring systems at the country level need to meet national
monitoring needs in order to be relevant. This means that monitoring of forest
governance should be most of all useful to better fulfill national and local priorities for
forest management. Any forest governance monitoring that is established by
countries needs to be feasible, cost-effective, reliable (verifiable), allow reliable
measurement of change over time, and fulfill international reporting requirements.
To meet these goals, Government of Vietnam (MARD) has requested the assistance
of FAO to help integrate forest governance monitoring into national-forest related
monitoring systems. The work on forest governance monitoring is undertaken in the
context of the FAO/Finland 1 work on a National Forest Assessment (NFA) system.
To this end, FAO is providing support through the services of a national consultant
and international technical consultants.
As a first step, from June to October 2011, the national consultant carried out a
scoping study in collaboration with and with inputs from several organizations of the
Vietnamese Government and other stakeholders. The aim of the study – that has
been based on review of relevant documentation and stakeholder interviews - was to
inventory and assess the present status of FGM and propose steps to develop a
preliminary proposal for strengthening FG monitoring. The results of the study are
laid down in the present draft report. The report will serve as the background
document for the multi-stakeholder consultation workshop on 5-7 December 2011,
where the results, key issues and main questions and proposals of the report will be
evaluated as a basis to provide concrete, practical recommendations for next steps
to take.
The background paper consists of 6 chapters:
• Background;
• Rationale for strengthening forest governance monitoring in Viet Nam;
• Forest governance monitoring in Viet Nam – Maim findings;
1 FAO Finland Forestry Programme: “Strengthening Forest Resources Management and Enhancing its
Contribution to Sustainable Development, Land use and Livelihoods”
9

• Forest governance monitoring in Viet Nam assessed by 3 pillars and 6
principles;
• Strengthening forest governance monitoring in Viet Nam;
• Conclusion.
1.2. Method of preparation of the background paper for the workshop
Forest governance is a broad concept and a complex issue to monitor. Moreover in
the Vietnamese context – like in many other countries- the term forest governance is
relatively new term that is not readily understood by everybody as to what it means,
what it entails, and in which it differs from (or relates to) forest monitoring (see
chapter 2). Moreover emerging international frameworks like one mentioned in the
program on forests (PROFOR) Food and Agricultural Organization of United nations Rome, 2011 that is
elaborated into 3 pillars, 6 principles, 13 components and 77 sub-components, - if
untailored - appear to be too generic and too difficult for their immediate application
in the context of countries like Vietnam; this proofed to be particularly so at the level
of components and sub components. 2
In the context of Viet Nam the Viet Nam Forestry Development Strategy 2006-2020
is the main policy programme for forest (see Box 01). In other words, – and in line
with the opinion of the persons interviewed - the governance to implement the 5
programs of the strategy and their targets should be the focus and starting point of
forest governance monitoring.
Because of explanations above the documentation analysis and interviews, were
conducted in the context of the following two relations:
• Firstly, the relation between FGM on one side and implementation of the 5
programs of Vietnam Forestry Development Strategy 2006-2020 and their
targets, on the other side. In current circumstances this, perhaps, is an
appropriate way to get the background paper for the workshop, because by
this way the paper can bring what the workshop participants are familiar with,
interested in and confident to join discussions.
• Secondly, FGM is assessed through documentation analysis and interviews in
the context of the FAO FGM framework, but only of the 3 pillars and 6
principles and not 13 components and 77 sub-components.
Recently, Vietnam achieved some very important results in forest sector, especially
in increase of forest cover, forest products export and poverty reduction in
mountainous areas. The way in which forest governance is taking place in Vietnam,
no doubt, has provided considerable contributions to those achievements, also
2 This is illustrated by the experience of the national consultant at the earlier stages of this study. Initially, the
national consultant tried to use 13 components and 77 sub-components of the FAO/PROFOR framework, to
assess FGM in Vietnam. The consultant sent the framework to 46 people (including 32 from domestic
organizations and 14 from international organizations) requesting them to assess FGM in Vietnam accordingly to
13 components and 77 sub-components of the framework. Opinion of majority of the requested was that it is too
difficult to assess FGM in Vietnam by using the 13 components and 77 sub-components of the framework. And
the consultant is in the similar view. In fact, it is too difficult to classify what is being done in Vietnam, in terms of
FGM, into 13 components and 77 sub-components of the “FAO framework for assessing and monitoring forest
governance”. Until time when the consultant started writing the background paper, only 6 assessments in the
mentioned way were received. As explained by the respondents the main reason of the difficulties is the
components and sub-components of the FAO framework are still general.
10

providing valuable experiences for the development of forest governance and its
monitoring. This report will focus on finding the issues to be addressed - not for
criticism but rather for opportunities - to advance the forest governance towards
sustainably managed forests and sustainable development of Vietnam forestry. The
documentation analysis and the discussions with the key organizations and persons
in this field during preparation of this report therefore were conducted following this
way.
Due to the complexities of “forest governance monitoring” and time and resources
constraints, , the background paper must be seen as “work in progress” and as a
growth document to improve on step by step. It surely contains certain shortcomings
for which the authors expect to get and appreciate every input from colleagues to
address them.
Box 01: Objectives of Viet Nam Forestry Development Strategy 2006-2020:
a) To sustainably establish, manage, protect, develop and use 16.24 million ha
of land planned for forestry;
b) To increase the ratio of forested land with forest up to 42 – 43% by the year
2010 and 47% by 2020;
c) To ensure a wider participation from various economic sectors and
social organizations in forest development, and to increase their
contributions to socioeconomic development, environmental protection,
biodiversity conservation and environmental services supply, in order to reduce
poverty and improve the livelihoods of rural mountainous people, and to
contribute to national defense and security.
11

Chapter 2: RATIONALE FOR STRENTHENING FGM
2.1. What is Forest Governance?
IN VIETNAM
Box 02: COFO about forest governance
“It is now broadly understood that good governance in the forest sector is vital
for achieving sustainable forest management. Furthermore, realizing the full
potential of forests to contribute to reducing poverty can only be achieved if the
forest sector is governed in such a way that it ensures poor people’s access to
and benefits from forest resources. However, forest governance means different
things to different people and there is no internationally agreed definition.
Originally, the term was understood as being almost synonymous with
government or the way the government was ruling. With changing vision of the
role and responsibilities of governments, a broader vision of governance has
evolved, which takes into consideration the new roles of civil society and the
private sector. It involves multiple actors and multiple levels (local, national and
international) and acknowledges that different stakeholders have different views,
values and interests. Improving forest governance to move forward towards
sustainable forest management therefore is a complex endeavor involving the
active participation of a range of stakeholders, not just forestry administrations.”
COFO/2010/6.2
Forest governance is a generic term for describing the way in which people and
organizations rule and regulate forests. This relates to how they allocate and secure
access to, rights over and benefits from forests, including the planning, monitoring
and control of their use, management and conservation. Important aspects include a
coherent set of laws and regulations, both within the forest sector and in other
sectors that influence forest management;
1. the coherent implementation of these laws;
2. the decision making processes about rules, laws and regulations
3. clear mandates of, and arrangements between different stakeholders (various
units and levels of the government, NGO, community organizations business
sector, etc.), and
4. staff capable of executing the tasks that have been assigned to them.
Relation between forest governance and forest/SFM is described in figure 01. Forest
governance, by nature, is to make influence in order to achieve expected results on
(i) extent of forest resources; (ii) forest biological diversity; (iii) forest health and
vitality, (iv) production functions of forest resources; (v) protective functions of forest
resources, (vi) socio-economic functions of forest resources through action programs
and legal, policy and institutional arrangements (vii).
Forest governance monitoring is one of the components of forest-related monitoring
system including (i) forest bio-physical monitoring, (ii) forest socio-economic
monitoring, and (iii) forest governance monitoring.
12

The term Forest Governance also emerged in response to a changing vision of the
roles and responsibilities of the government vis-à-vis other stakeholders: from the
‘old’ style of governance – the government is steering – to a new situation (or
conceptual understanding) in which several actors are co-steering. In this vision the
government does not bear sole responsibility for the governance situation, but every
actor is meant to play a role and assume specific responsibilities. Important aspects
of this new situation are its multi-actor, multi-level (national, international, and local)
and multi-meaning nature, recognizing that different stakeholders may embrace
different values, interests and world views. The term Forest governance is to a large
extent non-normative. See also the COFO description of forest governance in box 1.
The concept of forest governance is being used by many institutions, each
emphasizing certain aspects. But in general there is broad agreement on what forest
governance relates to 3 .
Good Forest Governance is following a different approach: it is normative and it is
about quality. Important principles often mentioned in relation to ‘Good Governance’
include: participation (stakeholder engagement), fairness, decency, accountability,
transparency, efficiency, equity and sustainability 4 . They are supposed to be
universally applicable, as they are based on the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights. However, there is always debate on what principles have to be included and
what exactly is meant by them. The interpretation of such principles is value-laden
and debatable. Different stakeholders may have different perspectives, interests and
interpretations of what good forest governance means to them and how it should be
operationalized. It is also possible that stakeholders may agree that a certain
concrete issue is part of forest governance, but they may disagree about the
question under which principle the issue should be categorized.
3 For an extensive discussion on forest governance, good governance and good enough governance see Van
Bodegom, A.J., D. Klaver, F van Schoubroeck and O. van der Valk, 2008. FLEGT beyond T: exploring the
meaning of ‘Governance’concepts for the FLEGT process. Wageningen UR, The Netherlands
http://www.cdi.wur.nl/UK/resources/Publications/
4 ODI, 2006. Governance, development and aid effectiveness: a quick guide to complex relationships. Briefing
paper March 2006. 4pp.
13

FOREST
GOVERNANCE
Vietnam Forestry
Development Strategy 2006-
2020 (5 programs)
FSEM
FBM
FGM
FOREST/SFM
(1) Extent of forest resources
(2) Biological diversity
(3) Forest health and vitality
(4) Productive functions of forest
resources
(5) Protective functions of forest
resources
(6) Socio-economic functions
(7) Legal, policy and institutional
framework
FGM: Forest Governance monitoring
FBM: Forest bio-physical monitoring
FSEM: Forest socio-economic monitoring
SFM: Sustainable Forest Management
Figure 01: Relationship between forest governance and forest/SFM
A joint initiative between UNREDD/Chatham House and the World Bank is underway
to formulate together with international experts indicators for (Good) Forest
Governance. The resulting indicators are grouped into three pillars: (1) policy, legal,
institutional and regulatory frameworks, (2) decision-making processes; and (3)
implementation, enforcement and compliance. 5
5 Capistrano, D., 2010. Forest Governance Indicator Development: Early Lessons and Proposed Indicators for Country
Assessments. FAO, 34 pp.
14

In each of these pillars the following principles have to be applied: transparency,
accountability, effectiveness, participation, fairness and efficiency. See figure 02. We
will take the three pillars and six principles as a starting point for discussions on what
(good) forest governance in a country could mean.
Box 03: Sustainable development definition
"Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs".
World Commission on the Environment and Development.
FOREST GOVERNANCE
Transparency
Accountability
Effectiveness
Participation
Fairness/Equity
Efficiency
Policy, legal, institutional
and regulatory framework
Planning & decision making
process
Implementation, Enforcement
and compliance
Figure 02: Pillars and Principles of Forest Governance.
Box 04: Seven key components of sustainable forest management (SFM):
1) Extent of forest resources;
2) Biological diversity;
3) Forest health and vitality;
4) Productive functions of forest resources;
5) Protective functions of forest resources;
15

6) Socio-economic functions;
7) Legal, policy and institutional framework.
United Nations Forum on Forestry (UNFF)
2.2. Why strengthen forest governance?
Before ourselves asking the question: why monitor forest governance, we need to
ask ourselves: why enhance forest governance? We may approach this question
from two angles: a) assessing the costs of bad governance and b) assessing the
benefits of good governance.
Inadequate forest governance has often contributed to the following interrelated
costs 6 :
• Environmental impacts resulting in deforestation, forest degradation and
biodiversity loss and loss of environmental services such as clean water and
carbon sequestration;
• Economic impacts caused by poor governance and corruption which distort
forest economies. This may lead to unfair competition between legal and
illegal forest practices and it may lead to loss of revenues for the state and
other stakeholders. Areas with poor governance will pose risks that
discourage investors (so lack of trust). Also, the forest sector may get a bad
reputation, which affects the investment climate.
• Poverty reduction and social impacts caused by poor governance that harms
forest-dependent communities. Livelihoods of indigenous people and the rural
poor may be threatened through unclear and insecure land tenure and other
property rights, lack of adherence to rule of law, and excessive discretionary
authority.
6 See: World Bank, 2009. Roots for Good Forest Outcomes: An Analytical Framework for Governance reform.
Report No. 49572-GLB. 47 pp.
16

Figure 03: The Roots and fruits of forest governance (adapted from: World Bank,
2009)
In most countries the situation in and around forests is rapidly changing and has
become increasingly dynamic and complex. An increasing number of – often
competing – claims and uses is exerted on the country’s forests by a growing range
of actors, each with their specific needs, interests and powers. So there is a need to
tackle this complex situation.
The promotion of forest governance can bring about many benefits or fruits. Good
forest governance makes it possible to optimize the production of goods and
services from the forest. See figure 03.
Important fruits of forest governance may include profit from new opportunities
created by internationally driven processes. These may generate additional forest
revenues through penetration to international timber markets (in the case of FLEGT)
or international payments for forest carbon capture, storage and avoided emissions
(in the case of REDD+). For these processes durable results at a national level like
17

‘legally produced timber’ and ‘decreased deforestation’ will be important selling
points and requirements. Such results can only be realized and ensured in the longer
term if an adequate forest governance system is in place. In the case of REDD+ the
in 2010 formulated ‘safeguards’ (see box 05) can be considered governance
aspects.
Box 05: Safeguards for REDD+
When undertaking REDD+ activities, the following safeguards should be
promoted and supported:
“(a) Actions complement or are consistent with the objectives of national forest
programmes and relevant international conventions and agreements;
(b) Transparent and effective national forest governance structures, taking into
account national legislation and sovereignty;
(c) Respect for the knowledge and rights of indigenous peoples and members of
local communities, by taking into account relevant international obligations,
national circumstances and laws, and noting that the United Nations General
Assembly has adopted the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples;
(d) The full and effective participation of relevant stakeholders, in particular,
indigenous peoples and local communities, in actions referred to in paragraphs
70 and 72 of this decision;
(e) Actions are consistent with the conservation of natural forests and biological
diversity, ensuring that actions referred to in paragraph 70 of this decision are
not used for the conversion of natural forests, but are instead used to incentivize
the protection and conservation of natural forests and their ecosystem services,
and to enhance other social and environmental benefits;
(f) Actions to address the risks of reversals;
(g) Actions to reduce displacement of emissions. “
Source: Annex I from draft decision -/CP.16, LCA, Cancun 2010
2.3. Why monitor forest governance?
Box 06: The Power of Measuring Results
• If you do not measure results, you cannot tell success from failure
• If you cannot see success, you cannot reward it
• If you cannot reward success, you are probably rewarding failure
• If you cannot see success, you cannot learn from it
• If you cannot recognize failure, you cannot correct it
• If you can demonstrate results, you can win public support
(Source: Kusek & Rist, 2004 7 )
Promoting forest governance may be good, but why should one engage in
monitoring such governance? Would it not be better to spend funds in a more useful
7 Kusek, J., and Rist, R., 2004, 'Ten Steps to a Results-based Monitoring and Evaluation System', World Bank,
Washington, D.C. 268 pp. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/23/27/35281194.pdf
18

way, for example on the actual improvement of governance directly? To these
questions several answers are possible, which are basically an elaboration of box 3:
Monitoring improves performance of the forest sector:
Strategic management: Monitoring helps to check whether policies are on the
right track, by providing crucial information over time on status and progress to
inform the definition and adjustment of shared goals, objectives, strategies and
outcomes that are important to the stakeholders. Monitoring supports a
development agenda that is working towards greater accountability of the
governance system. Governance monitoring can help to clarify and improve the
roles and performance of various stakeholders in the sector and the relations
between them. Up to date information can create an overview, needed
particularly in a situation characterized by increasing complexity. Monitoring can
help answer vital questions like: does the governance in the sector advance in
the direction that was originally envisaged? Monitoring also helps with adaptive
management in situations where changes need to be made to meet new
demands/priorities, new weaknesses/vulnerabilities need to be addressed, and
emerging new strengths could be built on.
Operational management/Implementation: Monitoring helps to improve
operations. It provides information needed for co-ordinating human, financial and
physical resources committed to different programmes and projects across and
within organizations and sectors, for improving coordination, collaboration and
performance in the forest sector, and for targeting particular geographic and/or
programmatic areas to enhance effectiveness of investments.
Monitoring improves reputation and credibility towards the general public,
investors and the international community: Monitoring provides a basis for
demonstrating to taxpayers, beneficiaries and partners that expenditure, actions
and results are as agreed or could reasonably be expected in the situation. This
transparency helps to build legitimacy, or the “social license to operate”, which in
turn reduces investment risks. Reduced risk improves the investment climate. For
international processes (e.g. REDD+ and FLEGT) monitoring of forest
governance is a tool for creating evidence that forest governance is indeed
improving at an acceptable level. The rationale here is that (a) better forest
governance is needed to effectively decrease deforestation (see figure 1 on ‘roots
and fruits’); (b) reduction of deforestation cannot be pursued at all social costs,
hence certain safeguards are needed (see box 2). In the REDD+ process
governance monitoring is therefore a requirement (see box 4).
Monitoring improves visibility to other departments within government and
other economic sectors: A governance monitoring system helps to build trust
between stakeholders in the sector and improve the image of the sector towards
the outside world. But it can also demonstrate that the forest sector is important
in the country and contributes to sustainable development of the country.
19

Box 07: REDD+ and forest monitoring
Paragraph 71 from draft decision -/CP.16, LCA, Cancun 2010:
71. Requests developing country Parties aiming to undertake activities …., in the
context of the provision of adequate and predictable support, including financial
resources and technical and technological support to developing country Parties,
in accordance with national circumstances and respective capabilities, to
develop the following elements:
(a) A national strategy or action plan;
(b) A national forest reference emission level and/or forest reference level or, if
appropriate, as an interim measure, sub-national forest reference emission
levels and/or forest reference levels, in accordance with national circumstances,
and with provisions contained in decision 4/CP.15, and with any further
elaboration of those provisions adopted by the Conference of the Parties;
(c) A robust and transparent national forest monitoring system for the monitoring
and reporting of the activities referred to in paragraph 70 above, with, if
appropriate, sub-national monitoring and reporting as an interim measure, in
accordance with national circumstances, and with the provisions contained in
decision 4/CP.15, and with any further elaboration of those provisions agreed by
the Conference of the Parties;
(d) A system for providing information on how the safeguards referred to in
annex I to this decision are being addressed and respected throughout the
implementation of the activities referred to in paragraph 70, while respecting
sovereignty.
2.4. Principles of effective forest governance monitoring
The principles of Forest Governance (see figure 02) are: transparency, accountability,
effectiveness, participation, fairness and efficiency. These principles are also
applicable to forest governance monitoring. Below we list the six principles and
examples of their effective application in forest governance monitoring 8 :
1. Transparency:
a. Transparency about data. There is a need to be as open as possible
about disclosure of data. However, a balance is necessary, as it is
unproductive to disclose all detailed data, but aggregated data should
be disclosed as much as possible.
b. Communication and transparency. In order to secure coordination
within forest agency and across sectors it is important to clearly
communicate the process of strengthening forest governance
monitoring to stakeholders from the start so that they understand what
it involves. It is also very important to disseminate the results of the
monitoring in a transparent way so that the users help build a demand
for the service. If the results from monitoring aren’t used, then even the
best designed system will—and indeed should—die from neglect.
2. Accountability:
8 Partially based on the national forest programme principles and on Saunders & Reeve. 2010 Monitoring
Governance for Implementation of REDD+. Chatham House
20

a. Credibility of the monitoring process and data quality is key. Monitoring
is only of use if the data quality is adequate. There needs to be a
mechanism for quality control and quality assurance of the data that is
collected and reported and for continually adapting data collection and
analysis methods.
b. Iterative learning, incremental improvement and adaptive management.
Just like in the nfp process, the monitoring system is meant to provide
a basis for learning that allows for sharing the realities experienced
along the way; and for using the lessons learned for fine-tuning and
adapting the process. The monitoring system is meant to be a self-help
tool for the government and other stakeholders in a country to improve
accountability, to promote sectoral learning and adaptive management,
and to promote better strategic and operational management and
capacity building in the sector. Adjustment in forest governance is -
like governance reform itself - essentially an institutional change
management process in which big steps are not to be expected
overnight; it is important to take a realistic view on the situation of
‘here and today’ and what would be attainable goals and pathways in a
process of gradual improvements within a given time frame.
c. Capacity building at all levels. Capacity will be needed, and may need
to be built, for all stakeholders engaged in the design and
implementation of systems. To engender ownership, trust and
accountability, these efforts to monitor forest governance should be
developed in partnership with local institutions, respecting national
circumstances.
3. Effectiveness: the monitoring should fit within goals set by the country.
Aspects include:
a. Country leadership and national ownership: A national driven
process ownership and firm commitment and a strong political and
societal will to manage forests sustainably and to monitor forest
governance.
b. Consistency with national policies, strategies/NFP document:
Integration with the country’s sustainable development strategies, intersectoral
approaches, consistency with the country’s legal frameworks,
recognition and respect for customary and traditional rights and secure
land tenure arrangements.
4. Participation: partnership and inclusive multi-actor participation are key for
success, as are involvement of all relevant stakeholders, decentralisation and
empowerment, coordination and conflict-resolution.
a. The monitoring system should be developed and implemented jointly
by major stakeholders and take into consideration various relevant
geographic and administrative levels in the country, also recognizing
the differences in influence, means, roles and mandates of the different
stakeholders.
b. Multi-stakeholder participation in the identification of indicators as well
as in the design and implementation of the tools and institutional
21

arrangements for monitoring, reporting and verification will result in
more credible and useful information and more accountable
institutions. It will also help to build trust between stakeholders and
break down barriers between historically antagonistic parties.
5. Fairness: Fairness implies the degree to which rules apply equally to
everyone in society. It is also about who is part of the negotiation and who is
left out.
a. Meaningful participation of disadvantaged stakeholders in the
country: remote and resource dependent communities, unorganized
actors, and women may lack the possibilities and opportunities (power
and recognition, time, funds, and distance) to effectively participate in
the forest governance monitoring process.
b. Meaningful participation of groups that at first sight do not see
the importance of forest monitoring for them. The private sector
may not be interested in participating because they do not see any use
in it. However such stakeholders do matter and it is critical that they are
encouraged or enabled to participate effectively in and benefit from the
process.
6. Efficiency: this principle has several very important aspects:
a. Building on existing data sets, data collection routines, IT
infrastructure and organisational frameworks as much as possible.
Building on existing monitoring, including data collection/reporting
commitments (e.g. FLEGT VPA impact monitoring, NFMA, FRA
reporting and domestic collection of social statistics), and institutions
will increase transparency and reliability of data while at the same time
as reducing costs.
b. Don’t do it all at once, but prioritize and incentivize progress.
Forest governance encompasses many aspects.
i. Prioritize. By paying attention to all of them, the data collection
and monitoring grid may become unmanageable, due to
expense and limited capacities for data collection and analysis;
moreover it may take away the motivation of those engaged, as
the dimensions of the tasks are beyond their capacities and
means, urging the need for prioritizing what is really needed. A
key issue for success is the extent to which key stakeholders
can agree on what is “good enough” 9 , within the circumstances,
with a strategy for building capacity and monitoring reach,
moving forward over time.
9
‘Good Enough’ is related here to Good Enough Governance, a concept which brings the discussion of ‘good governance’
from the realms of idealism - and sometimes the imposition of values - back to on-the-ground realities: what can be done from
‘here and now’; an analysis should be made of the existing situation and a set common objectives and priorities identified and
agreed by national stakeholders, because it will not be possible to achieve everything at once and in a way that different
stakeholders would ideally want it to be. We need to emphasize that the “here and now” mentioned above, is dynamic. ‘Good
enough’ today should not be considered good enough 10 years from now. There needs to be a discussion on how to incentivize
progress in a sensible sequence, because ‘good enough’ is never an excuse for not pushing forward. See also:
Grindle, M.S., 2004. Good Enough Governance: poverty reduction and reform in developing countries. Governance: an
institutional journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, Vol. 17, No. 4, October 2004 (p. 525-548), and: Grindle, M.S.
2005. Good enough governance revisited. A report for DFID with reference to the Governance Target Strategy Paper, 2001.
Harvard University, USA. 27 pp.
22

ii. Use as much as possible existing data. An example is private
certification. There are already several certification schemes
(e.g. FSC, PEFC) for assessing and monitoring
sustainable/legal forest management, focusing on the forest
management unit, but forest governance encompasses the
relation with other economic sectors: dealing with competing
claims on natural resources through land use planning
legislation etc. Such aspects are largely unaddressed in market
based certification schemes.
c. Consistency and complementarity in national and international
systems. Data needs at domestic and international levels should
harmonised and collected and reported ideally through a coordinated
national and international institutional architecture with appropriate
oversight mechanisms involving verification at both national and
international level. Similarly, it is important to be multi-level (this
initiative has a field level evidence collection focus), multi-sector, and
multi actor (private/public) appropriately involved in FGM.
d. Sustainability and cost of governance monitoring. The forest
monitoring system must be feasible, implementable and cost effective.
It must be compatible with the country’s longer term institutional and
organizational capacities and resources for forest related monitoring. If
the process of gathering, assessing, and reporting of information is too
costly there is a high risk that the system will collapse. In particular, this
risk may occur in the case of external financing once donors have gone
or funding cycles ended. Responsibilities and tasks within the
monitoring system must be agreed and properly institutionalized
among the different stakeholders to ensure continuity of the system
and delivery of results.
Box 08: Key success factors for improving and sustaining FGM
Established demand and a sense of urgency. Major stakeholders, in
23

particular the government and parliament, in the country need to be convinced of
the urgency, relevance/value added and benefits of developing and/or improving
monitoring or forest governance.
Ownership, commitment, and championship. From the outset, the major
national stakeholders in the forest sector should express co-responsibility and
active support for the process, which requires that they are able to participate in
guiding and benefiting from the process. Ownership and commitment is
particularly important in the case of funding of the process by international
donors, hence to avoid the risk and impression that it is becoming a donor driven
action rather than a process designed to meet nationally identified needs.
Existence of national champions to advance FGM is indispensable, both in state
agencies and other stakeholders in the sector. Champions are persons who
constantly and energetically promote the cause of FGM.
Credibility of leadership. The organisation that leads the process must be
considered as open, trustworthy, and effective to guide and facilitate the process
of monitoring. Stakeholders are likely to forgive gaps or errors in data as long as
they believe that the organisations that are in charge of the forest governance
monitoring are doing the utmost to give a fair picture of the situation, while
striving for improvement and allowing outside oversight.
Chapter 3: FOREST GOVERNANCE MONITORING IN
VIETNAM – MAIN FINDINGS
3.1. Vietnam policy, legal, institutional and regulatory framework: introduction
24

As mentioned above, forest governance, in this background paper, is analyzed in
relation with Vietnam National Forestry Development Strategy 2006-2020,
particularly its three key programs including
• sustainable forest management and development program,
• program on forest protection, biodiversity conservation and environmental
services development,
• forest products processing and trade program and
• newly emerging issues, not yet included in the strategy: FLEGT and REDD.
However, FLEGT and REDD, in spites of the fact that they have different stating
point and approach, both of them aim to sustainably managed forest. See figure
04.
Since 2003 Vietnam central governmental agencies have issued 165 legal
documents related to forest policy and institution: Resolution: 01 document (The
Communist Party Political Bureau); Law: 5 documents; Decree: 39 documents;
Decision, directions by Prime Minister: 20 documents; Circular, Decision, Direction
by ministries: 105 documents. However, some documents only mention forest policy
and institution at one or some articles, or even at some expressions. Only about 140
out of 165 documents issued since 2003 are legally valid.
This legal system has made their way into society, creating a legal base and
mobilizing resources into forest protection and development, which contributes to
continuous increase of forest cover, a stable socio-economic development, poverty
reduction and improvement of people’s living in the highland and mountainous areas.
However, as mentioned above, this report will focus rather more on finding
opportunities of improvements in FGM.
Vietnamese system of key legal regulations for forest governance consists of Land
Law 2003; Forest Protection and Development Law 2004; decisions, circulars
dealing with different areas of or related with forest and forestry. Generally those
legal regulations form a system covering all aspects of forest governance that need
to be addressed, including:
• Forestry land and 3 types of forest;
• Forest and forest land rental and allocation;
• State forest enterprise restructuring;
• Timber harvesting from natural forests;
• Conversion of natural forest into rubber plantation and other purposes;
• Beneficiary policy;
• Forest Protection;
• Handling of violations related to forest;
• Forest fire prevention and firefighting;
• Protection forests and special-use forests;
• Forest environment services ;
• Forestry finance;
• Forest Products Processing and Trade.
25

FOREST
GOVERNANCE
REDD
FLEGT
NATIONAL FORESTRY
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
2006-2020
(1) Sustainable forest
management and development
program
(2) Forest protection,
biodiversity conservation and
environmental services
development
(3) Forest products processing
and trade program
(4) Research, Education,
Training and Forestry Extension
(RETE)
(5) Renovation of the forest
sector institutions, policy,
planning and monitoring
Figure 04: Relation between forest governance and Vietnam forestry development
strategy and emerging issues.
What is monitored/ measured already?
•
What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Number of forest-related legal regulations newly issued.
• Number of forest-related legal regulations withdrawn (out of effectiveness).
3.2. Sustainable Forest Management and Development
Box 09: Tasks of Program “Sustainable Forest Management and
26

Development”
• Establish the national permanent forest estate for three forest
types, mapping and boundary demarcation in field, manage
sustainably and effectively all stable production forest areas,
including 3.63 million ha of natural forests and 4.15 million ha of
plantation forests (including industrial raw material plantations, NTFP
and other plantation forests).
• All forests and forest lands are to be allocated, or leased, to forest
management entities before 2010.
• Establish and implement plans of forest management and capacity
building for forest owners, such as: forestry companies, cooperatives,
communities, and foreign fund- invested enterprises, etc.
• Stabilize wood production from natural forests, plantation forests and
scattered planted trees with timber production targets of 9.7 million
m 3 / year by 2010 and 20 - 24 million m 3 / year by 2020 (including 10
million m 3 large timber) and develop NTFPs to meet major demands
for domestic consumption and export.
• Provide small timber for pulp processing: 3.4 million m 3 /year by 2010,
and 8.3 million m 3 /year by 2020. Improve the productivity and quality
of plantation forests, with an average annual increment of
15 m 3 /ha based on the implementation of forest tree seed strategy
during period 2006-2020.
• Enrich 0.5 million ha of poor degraded forests contributing to
increase the quality of natural forests.
• Afforest 1.0 million ha of new forests by the year 2010 (of which, 0.75
million ha of production forest and 0.25 million ha of special-use
forest) and 1.5 million ha for the next phase, and harvested forest will
be replanted after logging operations at the rate of 0.3 million
ha/year.
• Annually plant 200 million scattered trees, equivalent to 100,000 ha
of plantation forests, to serve local demands of wood and fuel-wood
for home consumption.
• Undertake forest inventory periodically; consolidate and update
database of forest resources and related socio-economic aspects.
• 100% of production enterprises will develop, implement, monitor and
evaluate the forest management proposals (plans).
• At least 30% of production forest areas are to be issued with
certification on sustainable forest management by 2020.
• Invest in equipment to modernize forest management work.
3.2.1. Forestry land and 3 types of forest
Box 10: Main legal regulations on forest and forest land
Land Law 1993 and Land Law 2003; Law on Forest Protection and Development
1991 and Law on Forest Protection and Development 2004; Directive
38/2005/CT-TTg dated 25/12/2005 by Prime Minister on Three-type-forest
Classification; Decision 1828/QĐ-BNN-TCLN dated 11/8/2011 of MARD on
national forest status year 2010.
27

ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED:
1. Land Law 2003 replaced the term “Forest land” by a new term which is “land
of special-use forest, land of protection forest and land of production forest”
(point c, d, đ section 1, article 13). Forest Protection and Development Law
2004 did the same and only mentions three types of forests which are
“special-use forest”, “protection forest” and “production forest”. Since those
laws became effective the term “forest land”, including land with forest on it
and bare land identified for forestry, no longer exists. Forest land, from a legal
point of view now only consists of land of special-use forest, land of protection
forest and land of production forest. Thus following this term only the land with
forest on it is forest land and bare land, even on mountains, is no longer forest
land. This legal provision leads to the fact that the forest sector is not clear
where to get land for the target of 16.24 million ha as decided by Decision
17/2007-TTg dated 05 February 2007 by Prime Minister for implementation of
Vietnam Forestry Development Strategy 2006-2020.
2. Planning for 3 forest types has been done only as master plan, not clearly
marked on maps and in the field therefore often can be changed by other
sectors’ planning.
3. Many communes with forests have not been approved with their planning and
detailed land use plan, so these plans have been pending and overlapped.
What is being monitored already?
• Existing forests on lands (special-use forest land, protection forest land,
production forest land).
What needs to be monitored in the future?
• Total national land, defined for management of the Forest Sector, with clear
boundaries in the field.
• Total national land area, with forest, defined for management of the Forest
Sector with clear boundaries.
• Total area of production forest.
• Area of production forest with clearly defined boundaries in the field.
• Area of production forest with clear demarcation in the field.
• Area of protection forest.
• Area of protection forest with clearly defined boundaries in the field.
• Area of protection forest with clear demarcation in the field.
• Area of special-use forest.
• Area of special-use forest with clearly defined boundaries in the field.
• Area of special-use forest with clear demarcation in the field.
3.2.2. Forest and forest land rental and allocation
Box 11: Forest and forest land rental and allocation 31 December 2009
According to FPD report, on 31 December 2009 total forest area of 13,258,843
ha was allocated by the state to forest mangers as follows: (1) forest
28

management boards 4,318,492 ha (33%), state enterprises 2,044,252 ha (15%),
households 3,287,070 ha (25%), people committees 2,422,485 ha (18%), other
organizations 659,935 ha (5%), military forces 243,689 ha (2%), communities
191.383 ha (1%), other economical organizations 91,537 ha (1%).
ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED:
• Available legal documents do not explain clearly legal terms such as “forest
allocation”, “forest allocation by contract”, “forest rental”, which results in
inadequate perceptions and implementation of forest policies, particularly
between forest allocation and forest allocation for rental.
• Lack of specific regulations on classification for which kind of special-use
forests, protection forests, production forests can be allocated for rental,
which results in the fact that most of land allocated to local people is bare land
or poor natural forests. Medium and rich natural forests remain managed by
state companies.
• Legal content on natural forest use and beneficiary rights have not been
transparently explained and regulated in legal documents, particularly the
relation between the government - as natural forest owner and forest
managers - as bodies authorized by the government to use the forests
through allocation and forest rental.
• Forest Protection and Development Law 2004 (Article 29, 30) defines that
forest allocated to local communities by the Government is for common
benefits of the communities regardless of forest types as special-use,
protection or production forests. However, the Land Law does not define land
allocation to local communities; Decree No. 181/2004/NĐ-CP on guidelines to
perform Land Law at Article 72 stimulating that only protection forests would
be distributed to local communities.
• According to the Land Law, forest enterprises are entitle to receive forest
rental or allocation with land use charge, but no legal document is available to
define specific price of forest rental charge.
• Slow allocation of land and forests. By 2009, only about 70% of forest land
has been distributed to different managers. The area allocation to communes’
People’ Committees reaches more than 2.4 million ha (accounting for 18% of
the total national forest area in use), without clear responsibilities.
• Land allocation and forest allocation do not link together closely (there is no
close collaboration between Agriculture and Rural Development Sector and
Natural Resources and Envrionemnt Sector).
• Forests allocated to households and communities are mainly with low
standing-tree stock with small and scattered area and bad transportation
conditions. Therefore, they are not accurate to run a good business.
• Fee of masurement, recording, and issuing land use certificate (Red Book) is
high while government budget allocated to this item is limited.
• The unclear demarcation in the field has created more difficulties to
management leading to difficulties in dealing with illegal forest land use
transformation, which results in overlapped land allocation and conflicts
among forest owners.
29

• There is no connection between land allocation and forest allocation (area is
identified but there is no data about forest status, standing stock, etc, thus
there is no basis for beneficiary calculation.
• Land disputes and encroachments in some areas occurred because of
different reasons. They have not been solved.
• Civil Law in 2005 (Basic Law) does not recognize village communities (called
community) as a legal entity. Therefore, they do not have rights like other
forest owners to transform, transfer, rent, mortgage, act as a gurantee with
their allocated forest land. Legal status of village communities should be
clearly identified for forest resource management.
• It is unclearly perceived that forest is a property, so forest allocation and forest
rental policies are treated as natural forest protection policies rather than
property protection and defined only for two criteria: forest area and cover.
• What are the rights of forest enterprises when they work with forest rental or
allocated forest with rental charge or fee payment (especially natural forest
land).
What is being monitored already?
• Allocation of land and forests
What needs to be monitored in the future?
• Number of Forest Management Boards having forest allocated, but without
land use certificate.
• Number of Forest Management Boards clearly knows in-the-field defined
boundaries of the forest under their management.
• Number of Forest Management Boards made in-the-field demarcation for the
forest under their management.
• Total area of land, forest allocated to households.
• Area of land, forest allocated to households having clearly defined boundaries
in the field.
• Area of forest allocated to households but without land-use certificate.
• Number of land-related conflicts between households and organizations.
• Number of land-related conflicts between households and organizations
solved.
• Number of land-related conflicts between households and other households.
• Number of land-related conflicts between households and other households
solved.
3.2.3. State forest enterprise restructuring
Box 12: Results of state forest enterprise restructuring
• The number of SFEs decreased from 355 (2005) down to: only 157 SFEs
converted into Forest Companies (FCs), 68 SFEs converted into Forest
Management Boards and 28 Forest Management Committee newly
established due to splitting of protection forests from SFEs, and 14 SFEs
dissolved.
• Total area under management of 157 FCs) is more than 2 million ha
(2005: 4.08 million ha).
• Total area managed by forest management boards (converted from SFEs
30

and newly established) : more than 4 million ha.
ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED:
• Rights, duties, and responsibilities of FCs for forest management as forest
enterprises have not been clearly identified in legal documents, particularly,
the policy on natural forest with production function allocated to FCs.
According to the current law, natural forests with production function are
important production materials of the company, but they are not accepted as
FCs’ asset. FCs therefore manage the allocated forests as natural resources
not as asset.
• According to Forest Protection and Development Law, for FCs the
Government executes the land and forest land allocation or forest rental with
rental charge paid by FCs, but there is no specific provisions to address that.
Currently, the Government has performed the land allocation without land
and forest use/rental charge for many FCs. Some provinces implement forest
rental, but FCs can not afford the payment for the rental charge due to lack of
budget.
• Decree No. 200 also does not have any provision facilitating FCs to get longterm
loans for plantation cycle, essential for FCs to run their operation, even
FCs operating in remote areas.
• According to Forest Protection and Development Law (Article 64), though FCs
have paid forest use and rental charge from their own budget (no government
budget), they only are allowed to profit from the value added to the forests,
but there is no transparent and clear regulation how to identify the value
added and how to benefit from it.
• SFEs that do not have harvestable plantation and mainly have poor natural
forests were converted into FCs, do not afford to manage and protect this
forest area and can generate profits.
• Land withdrawn from SFEs for allocation to other bodies has not been
implemented well. In some localities, numerous area of forest land has been
withdrawn from FCs but failed to be allocated to other bodies. Commune
People Committes therefore temporarily manage this area, but they are not
forest owners and have no capacity for management and protection, which
results in “ownerless” circumstances for the forest land.
• Almost all FCs have not completed their forest and forest land management
plans or have plans available but fail to apply as a “legal” instrument for land
and forest management.
• In some provinces, FCs do not have self-control right for their own financial
issues during their natural forest business because in the provincial policy,
profits from standing tree auction is collected by Provincial Financial
Department and reallocated a part to FCs as forest management unit
operating under provincial budget.
• FCs had to hand over good-quality and close-to-communities lands for
agricultural purposes, so they had to move to more remote region and do their
business with poor-quality land left, poor infrastructure, long production cycle
with lots of risks which results in higher costs, particularly transportation and
lower efficiency.
31

• When SFEs established by establishment decisions, in which allocated land
for management was only identified in the map, not in the field. And in
practice, many organizations and companies do not know exactly the
boundary and demarcation of their forest area.
• Many FCs operate their business without land-use right certificate (Red Book)
because they do not have enough money for making land measurement and
land documentation, even though the Decree No. 200 defines the local budget
is responsible to cover this cost for FCs but no payment is from local budget
for them in reality.
• Currently, FCs lack of capital for their business and forest development, but
they find difficult to get loans. According to Decree No. 200, FCs manage
allocated poor natural forests in the enrichment and rehabilitation stage which
has not reached the harvesting stage (FCs located in remote areas with
mainly ethnic groups) are supported by the Government for management and
protection cost as protection forests. But in practice, they do not receive any
support.
• Decree No. 200 defines “FCs are supported by the Government in
development and application of advanced technology into their production,
processing, particularly high-productivity trees; establishing multiplication
facilities to provide seedlings; advanced technical hand-over and developing
agro-forestry extension services and providing marketing information to local
people”, but factually, no considerable support in technology and capacity
building activities are available.
• Some FCs manage allocated protection forests, but without proper investment
as defined to protection forests.
• No proper financial and crediting policies are available to natural forest
management (budget for poor natural forest protection, enrichment and
development).
• No policy on forest rental charge. Forest value is not identified yet thus there
is no basis for dealing with forest, during its management, as an asset.
• In many cases the conversion from SFE to FC is just change of name, the
management and all other aspects of doing business remain unchanged. So
FC cannot operate in line with the Enterprise Law 60/2005/QH11, dated 29
November 2005.
• Almost FCs are in lack of financial resources, but they cannot use natural
forest under their management as guarantee to get loan from bank because
the natural forest is not an asset having concrete financial value.
What is monitored/ measured already?
• Number of SFE and FCs.
What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Number of forest companies having allocated forest but with land-use
certificate.
• Number of forest companies having land and forest with clearly defined
boundaries in the field.
• Number of forest companies having land and forest with clear demarcation in
the field.
• Total forest area allocated to forest companies.
32

• Total land area allocated to forest companies (with land-use certificate).
• Total land area and forest area allocated to forest companies having clear
demarcation in the field.
• Number of forest companies doing business according to Company Law
2005.
• Number of forest companies financially independent in line with the Company
Law 2005.
• Number of forest companies trained in sustainable forest management.
• Number of companies having forest management plan.
• Number of forest companies received fund supporting enrichment of poor
forest.
• Number of forest companies received support in application of new
technology.
• Number of forest companies providing forestry extension and market
information for local communities.
• Number of forest companies managing protection received investment as
defined by policy for protection forest.
• Number of forest companies received long-term preferential credit appropriate
to timber-production cycle.
• Number of provinces having forest value defined when the forest is allocated
to forest companies.
• Number of provinces having forest rental price defined when rent the forest to
forest companies.
• Number of provinces having forest rental price defined when rent the forest to
forest companies.
• Number of companies defined forest value when the forest is allocated to
them.
• Number of forest companies having forest-added-value calculation defined.
• Number of forest companies paid forest rental charge.
3.2.4. Timber harvesting from natural forests
Box 13: Status of timber harvesting from natural forest
Implementing the Plan “To promote afforestation in bare land toward closing
‘gates’ of natural forest" started in 1996:
• From 1997 timber harvesting is suspended in all protection forests and a
considerable part of natural forests with production function.
• The number of provinces and companies busy with timber harvesting has
been decreased remarkably.
• Volume of timber harvested from natural forests decreased from 1 million
m 3 (2000) to around 0.2 million m 3 in 2009.
ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED:
Today some shortcomings of the timber-harvesting-limit policy, revealed clearly:
• Timber-harvesting-limit and/or logging ban policy makes presence of forest
managers in the natural forest much less which results in a situation that the
33

forest is like without real “ownership”, which at the end makes more chance
for illegal logging in practice.
• Timber-harvesting-limit and/or logging ban policy minimizes or eliminates
revenue from forest which substantially affects the basis of from-forest-benefit
policy and makes it ineffective,
• No resources for forest managers and government to re-invest in natural
• Moreover, harvesting ban also means forest is without sylvicultural activities
because timber harvesting itself is a necessary sylvicultural measure to
manage forest.
What is monitored/ measured already?
• Volume of timber harvested from natural forests by quota.
What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Number of forest companies are in condition accurate for implementation of
sustainable timber harvesting.
• Number of forest companies allowed to do timber harvesting in line with
timber production of their allocated forest.
3.2.5. Forest conversion into rubber plantation and other purposes
Box 14: Forest conversion into rubber plantation
Conversion of poor natural forest, with low timber production, to rubber
plantation is allowed by government from late 2006. The conversion of this kind
of forest aims to generate more jobs and income for local poor people lacking
production land.
ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED:
• The criteria for identifying the conversion forest are not clear.
• Some good natural forest was converted to rubber plantation.
What is monitored/ measured already?
• Area of natural forest converted to rubber plantation and other purposes.
What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Area of natural forest converted to rubber plantation.
• Total number of projects to convert natural forest to rubber plantation.
• Number of projects to convert natural forest to rubber plantation appraised by
relevant authority from forest sector.
• Number of projects to convert natural forest to rubber plantation rejected by
relevant authority from forest sector after appraisal.
• Total area of forest converted to hydro-power plants.
• Number of hydro-power plant projects requesting conversion of natural forest.
• Number of hydro-power plant projects appraised by relevant authority from
forest sector.
• Number of hydro-power plant projects rejected by relevant authority from
forest sector after appraisal.
34

• Area of natural forest lost due to mining activities.
• Number of mining projects requesting conversion of forest.
• Number of mining projects appraised by relevant authority from forest sector.
• Number of mining projects rejected by relevant authority from forest sector
after appraisal.
3.2.6. Beneficiary policy
ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED:
• The term “benefit” is not consistent among different currently effective
documentations.
• There are no clear criteria for identifying forest major and minor products. For
instance: the major product of resin-pine forest is resin, the major product of
cinnamon forest is tree bark, while Decision 178 stipulates timber annual
allowed cut only, (point 5 article 14).
• The beneficiary policy is practically efficient where harvesting and selling
harvested products are in place. For forest without timber standing stock and
non-timber products for harvesting, and forest land with poor-quality-soil for
agricultural activities, and forest in remote area, forest in limestone mountains,
forest close to borders, protection forest along sea coasts, forest with CITES
species, etc the beneficiary policy is not feasible.
• Benefit for households contracted for special forest protection is much lower
than ones contracted for protection and production forest.
Benefit is based on the forest added production, in practice, is not feasible because
the timber standing stock of forest at the time of allocation and annual additional
timber standing stock (annual growth) are not identified. Therefore there is no clear
basis for-households benefit identification.
What is monitored/ measured already?
• Area of forest allocated to households.
• Payment for households for provided forest protection service.
What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Number of provinces having forest value defined when the forest is allocated
to households.
• Number of provinces having forest rental price defined when rent the forest to
households.
• Number of provinces defined forest value when the forest is allocated to
households.
• Number of provinces defined real income from forest (including pay for forest
protection and others from forest), per ha of forest allocated to households.
• Number of provinces defined total real income from forest (including pay for
forest protection and others from forest) and its ratio to total income of local
households.
35

3.3. Program of Forest protection and conservation, PES and Forest Finance
Box 15: Tasks of Program of Forest protection and conservation, PES
a) Forest protection (protection, special-use and production)
• Protect effectively 16.24 million ha of forest and forest land area.
• One hundred percent of documents regulating forest protection are
disseminated to forest owners and local people.
• The State will continue to allocate 1.5 million ha special-use and
protection forests under protection contracts by 2010.
• Reduce by 80% the cases violating the forest protection and
development law.
• 100% of forest owners, villages, and communes having forests will
arrange their forest protection forces and 100% forest rangers at
communes and forest protection forces will be trained to improve
capacity.
• Invest to infrastructure, equipment, operational costs for
protection, forest fire prevention and control, and pest and disease
control.
b) Management of protection and special-use forest systems
36

• Develop and consolidate the protection forest system (watershed,
coastal and urban environment) with a total area of about 5.68
million ha and special-use forest system with a total area not
exceeding 2.16 million ha.
• 100% of protection and special forest areas will have their
management owners (state agencies, private owners or communities)
and availability of planning, medium- and long-term forest protection
and development plan. 0,25 million ha of new protection and specialuse
forests will be planted by 2010.
• Continue to pilot and scale-up community-based forest management
modality and other modalities (community management, shareholding
company, cooperative, joint venture, joint business, etc.)
c) Environmental services
• Study on the valuation of the forest environmental services, such
as water source protection, erosion control, sedimentation
prevention, CO2-sequestration, ecotourism, etc.; develop
mechanisms for payment of environmental services during the
period 2006-2010.
• The Forest Protection and Development Fund will be established and
implemented by 2007.
3.3.1. Forest Protection
Box16: Forest protection system
Forest protection system from commune level up to national level established.
Forest ranger system at all levels (about 11,000 people) including: Forest
Protection Department under VNFOREST, 63 provincial FPD at provincial level,
490 district Forest Inspection Section (FIS) at district level and 735 ranger posts.
4,289 rangers are in service in 4,816 communes out of 5,985 communes with
forests. 88 FIS of special-use forests established (out of 164 management
boards). They succeed to prevent illegal logging on a large scale and some
forest protection and development models have been established. 42,000
groups of local forest protection have been set up.
ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED:
• Lack of financial mechanism to permit close and regular collaboration
between forest ranger forces and other legal execution agencies; lack of
active involvement by local authorites and people in forest protection as well
37

as a lack of connection and integration between poverty and rural
development programmes at the one hand and forest protection activities in
the area at the other hand.
• Legal status of forest rangers is weak, so they cannot perform in an effective
way.
• Forest rangers have a hard job with limited capacity and supportive tools as
well as low income and an allowance of 100,000vnd/ month only, no housing
and transportation support to perform their work.
• Lack of synchronous and sustainable support policies to protect natural
forests. Almost all financial support comes from Program 661, but only for an
area of 1.5-2 million ha out of 8 million ha of protection and special-use
forests, furthermore Program 661 ended end of 2010. This is a big challenge
because without further support, this area will be put in a risk of faster
deforestation.
• No proper policy available to involve local communities in forest protection
because forests are not their property and they do not receive any profits from
the forests (in case of poor and immature forests) or too little (if they are
contracted for protection and special-use forest protection). Beside of that
there is no policy facilitating sustainable livelihoods for people depending on
forests.
What is monitored/ measured already?
• Number of local forest rangers.
• Number of communes having local forest rangers.
• Area of forest under financial support of the program 661.
What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Number of local forest rangers.
• Number of communes having local forest rangers.
• Number of plans of forest protection authorities, forest companies, forest
management boards to cooperate with local authorities and communities in
forest protection agreed and signed.
• Number of violations of Forest Protection and Development Law that are not
treated due to legal position of forest protection officers (forest rangers) is
limited.
• Number of forest patrol units having forest regular patrol plans.
• Number of patrols conducted.
• Number of villages having common forest protection agreement.
• Number of communes having forest officer.
• Number of communes having forest protection team.
3.3.2. Handling of violations related to forest
Box 17: Violations related to forest
• According to the data of the Forest Protection Department in 2009,
Government has found 40,929 cases of violations of the Law on Forest
Protection and Development; has handled 34,370 cases, including
34,046 cases for administrative sanctions and 324 cases for criminal
38

sanctions with 210 defendants. However, the number of cases brought to
trial is very low (47 cases with 52 defendants).
• Material evidences and means confiscated timber includes 25,598.9 m3
round wood (1,779.5 m3 precious wood), lumber 26,316.9 m3 (3,998.1
m3 rare wood); wildlife 12,930 individuals (with 723 individual rare) with a
volume close to 38 tons and seized several transportation vehicles of
illegal forest products.
• The total amount collected in 213 billion VND - up 3% compared with
2008 (penalties 62.5 billion VND; sale seized exhibits 149.3 billion VND,
tax arrears 0.159 billion VND; other revenue 1.09 billion VND), put to
state budget over 186 billion VND.
ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED:
• In recent years, the situation of the violation of the Law on forest protection
and development is extremely complex, especially against people on duty
also are widespread in many regions rich in forests.
• Land conflicts land disputes between local people and business bodies
(companies and others) in several regions.
• Illegal deforestation is concentrated particularly in forests which (by the
classification) changed from protection function to production forests, and in
the forests under projects of transferring from SFE to local management.
• Illegal logging, illegal timber transport and illegal forest products processing
take place throughout in many areas where the natural forests exist,
especially in areas which are having convenient condition for transportation by
road and river, and in areas with many small-scale wood processing facilities
in and near forest.
• The level of punishment for violations to the legal documents is too soft, so it
has no deterrent effect to offenders, leading to their contempt of law,
challenging the public authorities. The 2009 Amended Criminal Law only
provided for forest deforestation criminal is the highest for 15 years and fines
up to 100 million VND.
• The handling of forest law violations was not strict, doesn’t punish strictly the
instigators.
• If the offender does not abide, they will be enforced to implement decisions on
administrative sanctions under Article 45 of Decree 99/2009/ND-CP. In many
cases when the decision is taken for administrative punishment (for example
encroachment, illegal exploitation of forests, deforestation for cropping, using
a hunting rifle ...), the fines cannot be collected , so rates of fine collection are
usually lower. The cause is that the offenders have low-income,, they belong
to families of poor, ethnic minorities, so the decisions to implement
administrative sanctions (by fine) is not implemented. The consequence is
that the effectiveness of the enforcement decision is lost. Another type of
punishment would be imprisonment.
• Law enforcement was to some extent carried out at the local level, but it still
could not meet the real demands. When a document and/or policy was
released, DARD made an announcement and sent it together with guiding
papers or technical guidelines (if any) to its belonging organizations. However,
few policy-updating meetings were held for relevant staff members, thus
39

district and commune staff members had few chances to get informed about
these policies and papers. As a consequence, staff at district levels (District
Department of Natural Resources and Environment, District Department of
Agriculture and Rural Development), and staff at commune levels (vicechairman/chairwoman
in charge of agriculture and forestry field) had limited
information about forest-relating policies. This constraint was due to the fact
that there was not a sufficient number of staff carrying out forestry activities at
DPC. More over, DPC is merely in charge of state management, and not
assigning forestry activities. At the district level, the Forest Protection Section
was responsible for carrying out the law on forest protection, while forest
companies conducted forest trade activities, and forest protection and
management boards took the roles of forest protection and management.
• At provincial and local level, the following information was gathered.
Implementation of forest policies faced a number of challenges because there
were several constraints in the current law system. For instance, if a staff
member of a forest company discovered illegal logging during his forest
patrol, the only action he could take was to inform the forest protection and
security forces in the area. However, the forest protection and security forces
could not always make themselves available when needed. Due to limited
budget availability, many forest companies could not involve relevant
organizations/parties in fighting against violating cases. This problem also
happened at the commune level because the CPC did not have a budget for
these types of activities. Consequently, both forest protection enforcement
and the development law created limited impacts at the commune and
community levels.
What is monitored/ measured already?
• Number of forest-destroy cases.
• Area of destroyed forest.
• Volume/value of seized timber.
• Number of illegal timber transportation cases.
• Volume/value of illegal-transported timber seized.
What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Number of cases against people on duty.
• Number of forest-destroy cases.
• Area of destroyed forest.
• Volume/value of seized timber.
• Value of illegal-logging means seized.
• Number of illegal timber transportation cases.
• Volume/value of illegal-transported timber seized.
• Value ofillegal-timber-transporting means seized.
• Number of criminal-violation cases.
• Number of contriver-found violations.
• Number of violation punishments that violators do not follow.
3.3.3. Forest fire prevention and fire fighting
40

Box 18: Status on forest fire
• From 2005 to 2009, there has been 3,102 forest fire cases with the
damaged of 11,752 hectares, 2,350 hectares on average damage per
year. Forest area is damaged by fire continuously decreased over the
years and forest fire is controlled actively. Compared with 2005, the area
of damage in 2009 only 34.8%.
• Fired forests are mainly planted forests with tree species like Pine,
Melaleuca, Eucalyptus, Acacia;
• Direct causes of forest fires during the last years are: burning vegetation
for cropping, burning to clean fields for agricultural activities account for
63.7%, using fire for hunting, collecting honey, collecting materials count
for 13.6%, careless use of fire in the forest 6%, and 7.7% of other
causes, and particularly in recently burning forest on purpose (burning
due to conflict, revenge and on purpose) 9%.
ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED:
• Decree 09/2006/NĐ-CP dated 16/1/2006 specifies that forest managers who
do not benefit from the state budget have to cover expenses for forest fire
prevention and fire fighting from their own budget. This is a big problem for
forest owners who are households, communities and also the state
enterprises and the management boards of protection forests and special-use
forests. Therefore when the fire occurs, district forest inspection sections and
forest owners face difficulties because there is no accurate budget for
firefighting.
• Budget to support fire prevention and fire fighting at commune level also is
very limited. It depends on the budget of local authorities which is very limited,
too.
What is monitored/ measured already?
• Number of forest fire cases.
• Area of forest lost by fire.
• Direct causes of fire.
What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Number of organizations having fire-prevention and fire-fighting plans, and
resources to implement those plans.
• Number of agreement of forest range units; forest companies; forest
management boards to cooperate with local authorities and communities in
fire-prevention and fire-fighting, signed.
• Number of communes having budget, plan, means and forces for fire
prevention and fire fighting.
3.3.4. Protection forests and special-use forests
Box 19: Protection and special-use forest
According to the FPD report monitoring changes of forest resources, to
41

31/12/2009 the country has 2 million ha of special use forests (of which 1.92
million ha of natural forests and 0.08 million ha planted forest) and 4.83 million
hectares of protection forest (of which 4.24 million ha of natural forests and 0.59
million hectares of planted forest). There are 164 special-use forest management
boards, including 30 national parks, 58 nature-conservation areas, 11 speciesconservation
areas, 45 landscape-conservation areas and 20 scientific
research, experiment areas. Most provinces have the management boards of
protection forests, of which the new management are formed after reviewing
three types of forest following the Directive 38/2005/CT-TTg dated 12/05/2005 of
the Prime Minister.
ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED:
• Management boards, in average, have very limited staff capacity (around 7-10
people), funded from the budget of Program 661, therefore they face many
difficulties in managing protection and special-use forests;
• Payment for forest protection service is too low (initially 50,000 vnd/ha/year,
then increased up to 100,000 vnd/ha/year.
What is monitored/ measured already?
• Area of protection and special-use forest.
• Number of forest management boards.
• Pay for provided forest-protection service.
What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Number of forest management boards having forest management plan
(protection and special-use forest).
• Number of forest management boards having forest-patrol plan (protection
and special-use forest).
• Number of patrols conducted vs planned.
• Average of actual income of a staff of forest management boards.
• Number of forest management boards that do not get fund for forest
management on time.
3.3.5. Forest environmental services
Box 20 : Status of forest environmental service
• After nearly 2 years, two provinces Lâm Đồng and Sơn La following
decision No 380/2008/Decision No-TTg on April 10 th 2008 of Government
Prime Minister, the two provinces have screened and updated the
allocated area, contracting to family households, individuals,
organizations, enterprises. Up to February 2010 of implementation there
are 7 hydraulic power plants and clean drinking water supply committed
to pay for 2009 with the total of 234, 4 billion VND and 300 million VND
from tourist units in Lâm Đồng;
• The Government issued Decree No 99/2010/Decree No-CP on
September 24 th 2010 on policy of paying forest environment services
(PES);
ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED:
42

• The implementing progress is slow (up to February 2010): in Lâm Đồng just
paying 20, 23% of the pilot area and in Sơn La just with 9/156 communes of
12, 9% of the pilot area. Reason is that the forest status and forest boundary
have not been defined. Besides, catchment’s area and fields are not clear on
maps There is lack of budget to screen forest;
• Confusion in the establishment Forest Protection and Development Fund
(FPDF) in the localities;
• Regulation of “K” factor is difficult when forest quality is not grasped;
• Collaboration with ministries and the pilot localities is not close enough,
especially pilot budget arrangement for the provinces.
What is monitored/ measured already?
• Information from box 20 and the information in the first bullit above
What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Number of provinces having clearly defined principles, calculation method and
procedure for paying for forest environmental service.
• Number of organizations, households who are entitle to get payment for forest
environmental service provided, but payment has not been made.
• Number of provinces having clearly defined area providing forest
environmental services.
• Number of provinces having clearly defined forest status with “K” – pay
coefficient.
• Number of provinces having clearly defined in-the-field forest boundaries of
organizations and households providing forest environmental service.
3.3.6. Forestry finance
Box 21: Status of forestry finance
• Decision 147/2007/ QĐ-TTg dated 10/9/2007 issued by the prime
minister for production forest development.
• Circular 02/2008/TTLT-BKH-NN-TC dated 23/6/2008 jointly issued by
MPI, MARD, and MOF on guidelines for implementation of Decision
147/2007/ QĐ-TTg dated 10/9/2007
• Decree 05/2008/NĐ-CP dated 14/1/2008 issued by the government on
establishment, management and use of fund for forest protection and
development.
• Decision 114/2008/QĐ-BNN dated 28/11/2008 issued by MARD on
establishment of fund for forest protection and development.
• Law on natural resources tax 2009.
ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED:
43

Decision 147/2007/ QĐ-TTg dated 10/9/2007
• Article 12 of Decision No 147 is about funding for local budgets Funds are
collected from e.g.: (a) standing tree selling, (b) forest resources tax, (c)
money collected from punishments for violations of laws on forest protection
and development, (d) environment protection fee, (e) fee from hydraulic
power plants to make local budget for production forest development. This
article is not feasible, because:
o Collection from hydraulic power plants is only paid for protecting
watershed forest,
o Standing tree selling money and resource tax collection is not sufficient
(small) to manage and protect the trees and the forest,
o Environment protection fee must be approved by the Government, and
o Money collection of from administrative punishment is mainly put to
local-government budget for other-than-forest purpose and the rest
only can cover some cost of forest protection activities done by the
forest rangers and collaboration with the other forest protection bodies.
• Decision No 147 stipulates total investment for implementation of the decision
is 40,000 billion VND, in which contribution from all economic sectors is
31,000 billion VND, contribution from central government budget is 8,000
billion VND and contribution from local government budget is 1,000 billion
VND. However, in reality contribution for implementation of this decision from
the central government budget hardly reaches amount of 1,000 billion
VND/year.
• For credit policy: Only Vietnam Forest Product Corporation (VINAFOR) and
Vietnam Paper Products Corporation (VINAPACO) can access the
concessionary loans. For other enterprises, family households and individuals
who are planting production forest, so far, the access to this kind of credit is
impossible.
What is monitored/ measured already?
• Budget information under second bullit.
What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Number of provinces collecting standing-tree fee.
• Amount of money that forest sector receive from national budget.
• Amount of money that forest sector receive from provincial budget.
• Number of households having access to preferential credit for forestry
activities.
Vietnam fund for forest protection and development
• Vietnam Fund for Forest Protection and Development (VN FFPD) is still is not
operating, as there is no financial resources: it is stipulated that the state
budget supports the fund 100 billion VND as soon as it is established, but so
far it is not sufficient in spites of the fact that 2 years gone after the fund
establishment;
• There is no mechanism to mobilize willingly contribution of international
organizations; organizations, individuals in country and outside the country;
44

• The provincial fund for forest protection and development (FFPD) is not
established there is no guidance from MARD how to get resources for the
fund. Many provincial DARDs have submitted proposals to PPCs requesting
for establishment of the fund, but so far almost is still unsolved.
What is monitored/ measured already?
• Amount of money invested in forestry.
What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Size of the National Forest Protection and Development Fund.
• Number of organizations, individuals providing contributions to the National
Forest Protection and Development Fund.
• Amount that organizations and individuals contributed to the National Forest
Protection and Development Fund.
• Number of provinces established provincial forest protection and development
fund and set up the fund management system.
Law on natural resources tax 2009:
• Tax rate of timber class I and II is higher than all metal mineral and non metal
ones, coal, and natural gas, and from 4 to 7 times higher than tax rate of
natural sea products. Timber is a natural renewable resource, therefore
charge it at a tax rate higher than that of non renewable resources is not
accurate/fair.
• Too high tax rate promotes illegal logging, especially illegal logging of highvalue
timber from natural forest.
What is monitored/ measured already?
What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Total amount of natural-resource tax paid by forest companies.
• Total amount of natural-resource tax paid by households.
3.4. Program “Forest Products Processing and Trade”
Box 22: Tasks of Program “Forest Products Processing and Trade”
a) Reorganize the wood and NTFP processing industries in order to match
the production capability with the sustainable raw material supply sources.
b) Strengthen the production capacity of forest product processing industry to meet
the basic demands for domestic consumption and for export, which are:
• Total capacity of sawn timber: 6 million m3/year
• Particle board: 320,000 m3 of products/year
• MDF board: 220,000 m3 of products/year
• Value of exported wood products: 7.0 billion USD (3.5 million m3 of
products)
• NTFPs for export: 0.8 billion USD
c) By 2020, NTFPs will become one of the main production commodities,
45

accounting for more than 20% of the total value of forestry production, the
average exported NTFP value will increase 15-20%, attracting 1.5 million
laborers and incomes from NTFPs will comprise 15-20% of the rural household
economy.
Box 23: Status of legal regulation for timber processing and trade
Timber processing and timber trade is governed by Circular 35/2011/TT-
BNNPTNT, dated 20 May 2011, of MARD on timber and NTFP harvesting;
Decision 44/2006/QĐ dated 01 June 2006, of MARD, on managing and using
for-harvesting- timber-mark hammer and forest protection hammer; Decision
59/2005/QĐ-BNN dated 10 October 2005 of MARD, on timber and forest
products control.
ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED:
• Control system for timber supply chain ensuring timber legality in line with
FLEGT and Lacey Act requirement.
• There is lacking of an official and comprehensive study on domestic timber
consumption and its market.
What is monitored/ measured already?
• Annual export value of timber products.
• Annual import value of imported timber material.
What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Total number of wood processing companies.
• Number of wood processing companies having timber product exporting
business.
• Number of companies importing timber to Vietnam.
• Volume of from-natural-forest imported timber.
• Volume of from-plantation-forest imported timber.
• Volume of from-domestic-plantation processed into timber products for export.
• Volume of exported wood chip.
• Total volume and value of exported timber products.
3.5. Planning and decision-making processes
46

3.5.1. Forest governance cycle
Sustainably
FOREST
managed forest
GOVERNANCE
& forestry
1 2
Implementation,
Enforcement
and compliance
6
Policy, legal,
institutional
and regulatory
framework 3
Good
Forest
governance
monitoring
5
Bad
Planning &
decision
making process
4
Figure 05: Forest governance cycle
Figure 05 roughly describes forest governance cycle, from three-pillar-relationship
point of view, including planning and decision making process (step 4) producing
policy, legal, institutional and regulatory framework (step 3). Implementation of
policy, legal, institutional and regulatory framework in practice (step 6) brings results
and impact of forest governance (step 1) leading to sustainably managed forest and
forestry (step 2). Besides of that demand from sustainable forest management and
sustainable development of forestry generates needs for new or revision of current
policy, legal, institutional and regulatory framework. In fact the demand generates
inputs for planning and decision making process (step 4). Apart from that monitoring
implementation of the policy, legal, institutional and regulatory framework (step 5)
can bring two kinds of results. If the result is good then current policy, legal,
institutional and regulatory framework can continue. If the result is bad which means
that the implementation of the policy, legal, institutional and regulatory framework
creates bad or negative impacts, then the framework must be revised or a new one
needs to be issued, which generates inputs for step 4 of the process.
3.5.2. Planning and decision making process at national level
47

The planning and decision making process is defined in Law number 17/2008/QH12,
dated 03/06/2008 and consists of steps as follows:
• Needs assessment: Occurrence of needs (new or revision) on policy, legal,
institutional and regulatory framework can be identified by forest governance
practice (found by local people/organizations, found by researchers, found by
working visits, etc).
• Description of need and its rationale: Organization who found the need should
clearly describe the need and its rationale to have new or revised policy, legal,
institutional arrangements.
• Need approved and put into plan: After proven, need will approved and put
into plan to develop new or revise current policy, legal, institutional and
regulatory framework of relevant institutions, organizations (ministries,
government, etc). The plans are reviewed at operational meeting of those
institutions, organizations.
• Development of policy, legal, institutional and regulatory framework and
consultation with stakeholders: Unit who is assigned to develop or revise
policy, legal, institutional and regulatory framework has to develop and get
consultation from stakeholders.
• Monitoring implementation of the plan: Plan to develop or revise policy, legal,
institutional and regulatory framework is reviewed at every operational
meeting of the concerned institutions, organizations. The assigned units must
report progress and result of their works at the meetings.
• Issuance of new or revised policy, legal, institutional and regulatory framework
: After the regulation is developed or revised, it must go through consultation
process with stakeholders, before official issuance by authorized bodies.
It is very clear that (i) quality of finding, describing, identifying the need of new or
revised policy, legal, institutional and regulatory framework, and (ii) quality of
consultation of stakeholders are crucial for getting good policy, legal, institutional and
regulatory framework for forest governance.
Other institutional and regulatory arrangements follow procedure similar to one
mentioned above.
FSSP and the planning and decision making process for policy, legal, institutional
and regulatory framework
FSSP has created many fora, where Government of Viet Nam and international and
domestic partners could exchange information on scientific technology,
management, institutions and policies relating to forestry at national, regional and
global scale. Through information sharing and policy dialogue fora, FSSP has
definitely made remarkable contributions on important issues of the forest sector of
Viet Nam, such as in development of Forest Protection and Development Law 2004,
development and implementation of National Forestry Strategy 2001 – 2010, and
Viet Nam Forestry Development Strategy 2006 – 2020, and other legal documents of
the sector.
What is monitored/ measured already?
•
48

What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Number of needs assessments executed before new policy.
• Number of initiatives on policy, legal, institutional and regulatory framework to-
MARD proposed by FSSP.
• Number of initiatives on policy, legal, institutional and regulatory framework to-
MARD proposed by FSSP considered by MARD.
• Number of initiatives on policy, legal, institutional and regulatory framework to-
MARD proposed by Forestry Regional Network, FSSP.
• Number of initiatives on policy, legal, institutional and regulatory framework to-
MARD proposed by Forestry Regional Network, FSSP considered by MARD.
• Number of initiatives on policy, legal, institutional and regulatory framework to-
MARD proposed by organizations, individuals (including civil society).
• Number of initiatives on policy, legal, institutional and regulatory framework to-
MARD proposed by organizations, individuals (including civil society),
considered by MARD.
• Number of monitoring implementation reports.
• Number of reports on consultations after issuance of new or revised policy,
legal, institutional and regulatory framework.
3.5.3. Planning and decision making at provincial and local level
The inventory for forest for management and protection is generally prepared by
provincial agencies, while the preparation of both a short and medium-term plan is
assigned to authorized organizations at district and commune levels based on the
provincial master plan.
Forest land planning and use specification were clearly indicated in the Land Law
2003, Decree 181/NĐ-CP, and Circular 30 issued by the Ministry of Natural
Resources and Environment (MONRE).
ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED:
• The development of an inventory for forest protection and management
mainly depended on professional organizations and statistics data, rarely
involving local people and organizations at district and commune levels. As a
consequence, the feasibility of a forest plan was limited. Concerning the
decision making of how to record the annual volume of logged timber and
changing of land-use purposes, national and provincial agencies are the ones
who formulate and make every decision with little consultation from district
and commune-level organizations.
• The cooperation among in-charge agencies in the vertical axis (from
provincial to district and commune levels) and among ones in horizontal axis
(between professional departments at the same level as provincial and
district) is not always good. This was proved when a large area of forest land
in the Central Highlands was changed into rubber plantations, which was not
indicated in the forest sector’s plan for the 2006-2010 period. The interviews
with the leaders of the provincial forest sector (during the review meeting of
the Central Highlands forestry network on 9 September 2011) indicated that
the decision to change the natural poor forests into rubber plantations was
made in haste, and thus did not receive support from the grass root level.
49

There was even some feedback that went against the decision, especially
those residing in the forest sector. The statistics show that in 2007, the PPC
of Gia Lai province allocated more than 73,000 ha of forest to forest
enterprises in order to convert this forested land to rubber plantations. From
2007 to 2011, Kon Tum and Dak Lak provinces allocated 47,000 ha and
35,000 ha of forested land to forest enterprises to convert the plots into rubber
plantations. Most of these rubber plantations were managed by state
companies or corporations, not by local people.
• Furthermore, there was a lack of transparency in every stage of decisionmaking
process. A specific decision may be well received by one professional
discipline (rubber production), while it failed to get support from the other field
(forestry sector). The report on rubber plantation development by 2010,
created by the Gia Lai People’s Council, pointed out several constraints of this
policy. “Changing natural poor forests into rubber plantations in Gia Lai
province was not a careful decision, which lacked of comprehensive field
research, which resulted in the circumstance that not much land was allocated
for planting rubber compared to its land potentials” (from Baogialai.com.vn).
• The provincial and district policies and regulations on forest and forest land
use were mainly based on ones from the national level. Most of documents
released by provincial agencies were guiding papers which clarified national
policies, not their own initiatives or policies. There was not much ownership or
initiative at the provincial and district levels because they were not
empowered in the decision-making process, even if those decisions were
directly related to their local needs. This indicates that participatory
approaches were rarely used at the local level.
• When asked to point out some constraints of national policies and regulations,
most interviewees could not indicate them distinctly. In general, there were no
serious mistakes in the forestry sector’s policies and regulations (in terms of
clarity of words, and general orientation). However, discussions on the
implementation of policies brought about a number of various, different ideas.
In short, the research team found out that there was a big gap in policy
implementation compared to what was stated by the policy itself. This gap
was due to the low feasibility and effectiveness of the policies because once
the state policies were made without adequate consultation from relevant
stakeholders and local people, they could not create a substantial effect.
What is monitored/ measured already?
• Number of ha converted from forest to rubber plantations.
• Number of the state companies and the private companies involved in the
rubber plantation.
• Total amount of investment to rubber plantation and potential number of job
created by planting rubber according to the reports from companies.
• The process of rubber planting after clearing forest/vegetation in comparison
with the plan.
What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Who are the owners of rubber plantations.
• How many local and poor households allocated land for rubber plantation.
• How many jobs are created by this program.
50

• Impacts of conversion from forest to rubber plantation on biodiversity loss,
and vulnerable group especially ethnic minorities and the poor.
3.6. Implementation, enforcement and compliance
3.6.1. Implementation, enforcement and compliance at national level
Normally the issued legal regulation contains a provision on its implementation
where specifies who is mandatory to implement it and when. After that, depending
on the issued legal regulation itself, a written guideline in form of anther legal
regulation (e.g. circular) or administrative letter will guide how to implement the
issued legal regulation. And in many cases, trainings on the issued legal regulation
implementation are taken place.
The implementation of the issued legal regulation is also reported in operation
meetings to aim (i) for right implementation of the regulation and find opportunities
for improvement of its implementation or gaps that need to be addressed by its
possible revision or even by possible issuing new regulation like described in the
FGM cycle (figure 05).
What is monitored/ measured already?
• Number of forest-related legal regulations newly issued.
• Number of forest-related legal regulations withdrawn (out of effectiveness).
What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Number of feedbacks on implementation of legal regulations from Forestry
Regional Network, FSSP to MARD.
• Number of feedbacks on implementation of legal regulations from Forestry
Regional Network, FSSP to MARD, considered by MARD.
• Number of feedbacks on implementation of legal regulations from
organizations, individuals (including civil society) to MARD.
• Number of feedbacks on implementation of legal regulations from
organizations, individuals (including civil society) to MARD, considered by
MARD.
3.6.2. Finance at provincial and local level
Normally the issued legal regulation contains a provision on its implementation
where specifies who is mandatory to implement it and when. After that, depending
on the issued legal regulation itself, a written guideline in form of anther legal
regulation (e.g. circular) or administrative letter will guide how to implement the
issued legal regulation. And in many cases, trainings on the issued legal regulation
implementation are taken place.
The implementation of the issued legal regulation is also reported in operation
meetings to aim (i) for right implementation of the regulation and find opportunities
for improvement of its implementation or gaps that need to be addressed by its
possible revision or even by possible issuing new regulation like described in the
FGM cycle (figure 05).
51

At the provincial level, the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development
(DARD), together with Forest Protection Sub-Department and Forestry Sub-
Department, which belong directly to DARD, are key agencies in charge of state
management of forest activities. Though placed under the management of technical
and professional aspects from MARD, most of the forestry activities at provincial,
district and commune levels are coordinated by the policies enforced by the
provincial people’s committee (PPC).
ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED:
• The annual publication of exploited timber, as well as projects pertaining to
afforestation and forest development, which use the provincial budget, have
shown that although most of forest policies are carried out at provincial and
district levels, there is usually a lack of staff members to perform the assigned
tasks. The number of permanent staff members is based upon the decisions
made by the provincial Department of Home Affairs and the PPC.
• Another interesting finding is that DARD cannot be active in recruiting staff to
carry out the required assignments. Concerning the preparation of provincial
forest production and development plan, DARD is often assumed to be the
agency in charge of plan development, which in turn would be submitted to
the PPC. However, due to technical requirements, the final decision actually
depends greatly on the provincial Department of Finance. The cooperation
between these organizations is not always good, which can create difficulties.
The forestry sector is often less active than it would like to be, especially
under the implementation of its sector plan, due to the dependency on budget.
• This difficulty happens even when the income generated from forest, which in
principle would be used for forest protection and care, cannot be accessed by
the forest sector. This amount of money often goes to the State of Treasure
first, then is allocated through the provincial Department of Finance, based on
its annual budget plan. This creates unnecessary paper work, time-consuming
procedures and roots of bad practices.
• The stagnation in budget allocation causes a delay in planting forests,
resulting in the slow progress of forest development, and bad quality of
plantations. However, those reports failed to explain the reasons for the delay,
which organizations are now blamed for, and consequences in terms of profit
losses and what should be done to fix the problem.
What is monitored/ measured already?
• Number of staff members at local and provincial level.
• Procedures for budgeting and budget flows based on the regulation of
Ministry of Finance or the PPC at provincial level.
• Annual forest plantation and forest protection area plan based on the existing
forested area and land available for plantation.
• Annual report of forest production, forest protection area including the number
of forest law violation cases.
• Annual forest production turnover including domestic production and exporting
forest products.
52

What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Income generated from forest sector of domestic and exporting forest
products.
• Budget allocation and actually transferred funds to the forestry sector based
on the real demand from grass root level, such as the number of forest area
must be protected, the available barred land for forest plantation.
• Number of staff really function well and appropriate with their educated
background and assessment of their performance based on the results of
assigned tasks as well as the feedback from their counterparts at all level.
This measure the accountability of the civil servants downward the local
population and upward to the policy level.
• Training needs assessment should be conducted by the third party in the link
with real demand of forestry sector and the long term education strategy of
forest university and colleges. This assessment also reflects how many
percent of educated student got proper job with their background, and the
number of new staff appointed proper position in the forestry organizations.
• The cost-benefit analysis for the forest production and forest protection if the
budget allocating to the forestry sector delayed.
• Policy analysis for the current mechanism of budgeting process and budget
follows inside and outside forestry sector in order to point out which steps
should be skipped so as to save time and reduce transaction cost.
3.6.3. Forest land management and allocation at provincial and local level
For the field of forest and forest land management, Decision 245/QĐ, enforced by
the Prime Minister in 1998, stated that at the provincial level, “the
chairman/chairwoman of PPC is responsible for reporting to the Prime Minister on
forest and forestry land use, protection and development in the province. DARD is
assigned to assist PPC in carrying out the state management of forest and forest
land. The provincial Department of Forest Protection (FPD) is responsible for
inspecting and monitoring the implementation of laws regarding forest protection and
development within the provincial area. In particular situations, the FPD is
encouraged to cooperate with army and public security forces in the province to
establish a forest patrol, arrest forest violators, and fight against forest fire. The
provincial Department of Land Administration is assigned to help PPC carry out the
state management of forest land” (extracted from Decision 245).
At the provincial level, the PPC is responsible for forest land allocation (FLA) and
issuance of land use right certificates for institutes and organizations, and the district
people’s committee is associated with assignments for individuals, households and
community groups. The Department of Natural Resources and Environment is the
advisory agency in charge of paper work for FLA process.
The Decision 245/QD on the state management of forest and forestry land, which
should be carried out by commune people’s committee (CPC) indicates that:
The chairman/chairwoman of commune people’s committee is responsible for
reporting to the chairman/chairwoman of the district people’s committee about forest
protection and management, and forest land use within the area of its commune.
a) Management of forest and forested land occur within a commune’s area, in
terms of the list of forest owners, forest area and borders, forest land
allocation (FLA) papers, forest protection contracts, rehabilitation and
53

afforestation activities among organizations, households and individuals in the
commune.
b) There will be instructions given to villages and communities in order to
prepare and carry out the rules on forest protection and management; and
planting forests for use which should be in line with current regulations.
c) Based on the district’s inventory and plan, the CPC is in charge of making
plans and checking inventory for forest protection and development, forest
land use; preparing the FLA options, which should be first sent to the
commune people’s council for their comments, and then submitted to DPC;
and carrying out FLA process among organizations, households, and
individuals according to the instructions of DPC, while setting the landmarks in
the field among forest owners.
d) Keeping records of forest and forested land change in order to write reports
for the authorized organizations; regularly inspecting forests and forested land
use by organizations, households and individuals in the commune.
e) Cooperating with forest rangers, public security and army forces, and
communities to protect forests in the commune, efficiently preventing any
action that many lead to destroying forests.
f) Making awareness campaigns on forest fire control, and involving relevant
organizations and security forces to assist forest owners to fight against forest
fires in the commune.
g) Distributing fines to any violations against forest protection and management
policies based upon legalized rights and responsibilities.
h) Solving any disputes about forest and forested land within the commune area.
(Extracted from Decision 245/QĐ-TTg)
Issues that need attention:
• The field trips in two provinces showed that the majority of field inventory and
measurement and a part of FLA paper work were carried out by forestry
organizations (Forest Companies, provincial Forest Inventory and Planning
Institutes). Another fact found in the areas visited by researchers was that the
management of forest and forest land allocation was not given adequate
attention by the authorized organizations. This management task is not even
considered as an official and regular assignment. Instead, it is only performed
if there is an evaluation and inspection mission.
• Most forest companies in the Central Highlands have not been given land use
right certification for the land areas that they have been cultivating and
managing since their date of establishment. One of many reasons for this is
that those companies could not afford the fees of issuance of a land use right
certificate. This obstacle made those companies fail to access bank loans for
their production development. This difficulty has existed for a long time, right
from the date when the Decision on reforming state forest enterprises came
into effect (Decision 187/QĐ-TTg 1999, and later revised one 200/NĐ-CP
2004).
• The management of forest and forest land at the district level, by the time the
research group carried out this study, was based on Decision 245/QĐ-TTg,
also enforced by the Prime Minister in 1998, on decentralization within forest
management. In reality, there has been no document/paper instructing the
responsibilities and rights of forest activities. As a consequence, a couple of
organizations at district level were not consulted during the process of project
54

design and development relating to changing land use purposes, including
forest land. It can be understood that though districts and communes are
greatly associated with forest management within their area, they did not play
a role in the decision making process. They did not have a budget for carrying
out activities and lacked staff to carry out assignments. In general, Decision
245 failed to bring its effect and significance of decentralization of forest
management into life. However, it has been ten years since the the Decision
was issued, and no official evaluation has been made to figure out the effect
of this Decision.
• In order to carry out all the above-mentioned assignments (ranging from” a” to
“h”), there must be enough permanent staff members at CPC. However, most
of those assignments were not implemented at the communal level. The
reason being that only forested communes where a “ forest team’’ was set
up were able to perform the tasks. The team members included a vicechairman/chairwoman
of CPC, who often took the position of team leader,
head of commune public security force, and some other members from army
groups. Still, the team leader was often the only person to receive a monthly
allowance of around VND 80,000. Though the CPC had to carry out the state
management of forests in its area, they did not receive salary, and could not
make decisions if any problems arose. For instance, if the commune forest
team established a forest patrol and discovered a case of illegal logging, they
would confiscate the tools and illegal timber, and bring them all to CPC’s
venue. However, all the illegal timber would be sold by another authorized
district agency (District Section of Forest Protection and District Department of
Finance). The profit gained from selling the illegal timber was out of the
control of the CPC and the CPD was left to pay the forest patrol fees and
collect the illegally logged timber. This left the CPC unmotivated to protect the
forests because they did not make any profit.
What is monitored/ measured already?
• Number hectares of forest and land allocated to the state forest companies,
local people and communities and its existing land use.
• The roles and responsibilities for forest management at all levels province,
district and commune indicated in Decision 245/TTg.
• The volumes of timber logged yearly based on the demand of the province
which approved by People Council Committee and MARD at central level.
• The total area of new plantation made from government funding sources
(normally from state forest companies for production forest, and state budget
for protection forest), and the number of tress planted scatter of the year.
• Number hectares of deforestation and forest fire around the year in the
province.
What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Information on amounts obtained by selling illegally logged timber.
• The effectiveness of forest and land used by state forest companies.
• Number of state forest companies got land certificate (red book), and how
many of them can mortgaged it for loan from the bank.
• Information from assessment of allocated forestland to the local people and
communities.
• The area of new plantation made by the private sector and individuals.
55

• Analysis and impact assessment of forestland allocation policy and the
performance at province, district and commune level to explore how the
policies, regulations functioning on the ground.
• Information of feedback from district, and commune level about the
implementation of Decision 245/TTg in term of forest management
decentralization process.
3.6.4. Coherence and cooperation at local and provincial level
The cooperation among relevant organizations in carrying out state policies within
the vertical axis was relatively good, as indicated by most of the interviewees and
discussion groups. Nevertheless, the cooperation among agencies in the horizontal
axis still faced a great deal of challenges. For instance, there were a lot of
differences in the forest resources and land data recorded by DARD and provincial
Department of Natural Resources and Environment (DONRE). When asked about
the differences, these two agencies gave reasonable explanations based on their
own viewpoints.
What is monitored/ measured already?
• The guidelines, and policy direction mentioned generally about cooperation,
collaboration among government organizations, departments during carrying
out the policies.
• Number of committees mixed members from different department to regulate
certain projects and programs for forest development.
What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Transparent of policy development process including budgeting and cost
benefit analysis for all forest management and development project with
cleared tasks and responsibility of each actors involved.
• Number of time that head of different department have meeting to deal with
crucial issues happening in the province, and district levels.
• The information/data jointly published by two or more government agencies.
• Frequency of the regular meetings, and the ad hoc meeting held among the
departments at province level.
3.6.5. Staff capacities at provincial and district level
Concerning the capacity of local forestry organizations, results from interviews and
group discussions indicated that provincial agencies/organizations were well trained
and capable of completing their tasks. Each professional discipline was managed by
given organizations and agencies. Provincial staff members often received good
training based on the human resource development strategy of forest sector.
Issue that needs attention:
• At the district and commune levels, staff members were not qualified enough.
Moreover, there were not sufficient numbers of staff working for the forest
sector. This was because of a budget shortage and preparations for
permanent staff members. Another reason was that many people assumed
that the forest sector was not a productive field.
56

What is monitored/ measured already?
• Number of staff working for forestry sector at province, district and commune
level and their education level (technician, engineer, and post-graduation).
• Number of training courses provided to the local staff yearly.
• Number of staff got refreshing courses for their professional.
What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Capacity building efforts at district and commune level.
• Percent of new staff appointed proper to their background in forestry sector.
• Training need assessment at district and commune levels.
• Amount of time that staff at district and commune level really involved in
forestry activities rather than the other tasks.
• Information about local educated students come back home to work in
forestry sector and the seasons.
• Job competition and the opportunity for staff working in forestry sector based
on the statistic information in the past (it should be available in the personnel
section of the district).
3.7. Main initiatives relevant to FGM in Vietnam
3.7. 1. FLEGT and VPA
FLEGT and VPA is relevant to FGM because it is towards transparent and cleanfrom-illegal-timber
supply chain which involve participation of stakeholders from
private sector in timber processing, timber trading (domestic and imported) industry
and forest mangers harvesting timber that joins the timber supply chain. But this
initiative, as mentioned in previous chapter, is in an early stage.
Box 24: Status of FLEGT and VPA in Vietnam
• Vietnam established organizations relevant to VPA negotiation, including
Steering Committee, Negotiation Mission/Technical Working Group,
FLEGT and Lacy Act Standing Office, working groups.
• Completed three important researches, providing input information for the
VPA negotiation and other related activities, including (i) Domestic and
imported timber flows in Vietnam, (ii) Timber legality definition, and (iii)
Stakeholders analysis in Vietnam.
ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED:
• Complete VPA negotiation and sign VPA by end of 2012.
• Establish and run the timber legality assurance system (TLAS).
What is monitored/ measured already?
•
What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
57

• Number of organizations/individuals trained in FLEGT, VPA, EU Timber
Regulation 995/2010 and Lacey Act.
• Number of organizations/individuals consulted during VPA negotiation/VPA
implementation.
• Number of initiatives/suggestions/requests from organizations/individuals
contributed to VPA negotiation/VPA implementation.
• Number of companies having COC certificate.
• Number of companies having FSC FM certificate.
• Total forest area FSC FM certified.
• Number of organizations/individuals competent to provide consultancy in
timber supply according to COC requirement.
• Number of organizations/individuals competent enough to provide
consultancy in forest management according to FSC FM requirement.
• Number of organizations/individuals trained in TLAS.
• Number of organizations/individuals competent enough to verify timber supply
chain according to TLAS requirement.
• Number of organizations competent enough to do FLEGT licensing for timber
products exported to EU.
• Number of organizations competent enough to conduct independent
monitoring for TLAS.
• Volume of legal/controlled/certified timber imported into Vietnam.
• Number of shipments need to be licensed for export to EU market.
• Number of companies competent enough to get “operator-based licenses” for
their timber products exported to EU market.
• Volume/value of timber products exported to each of 27 countries of EU.
3.7.2. REDD+
REDD+ is relevant to FGM because it is towards sustainably managed forest in
country and also to purpose of preventing leakage. But this initiative, as mentioned in
previous chapter, is also in very early stage.
Box 25: Status of REDD in Vietnam
Established:
• National Steering Committee for REDD;
• REDD Standing Office;
• National REDD+ Network;
• Sub-technical working groups (STWG):
o STWG on REDD governance (STWG-Governance);
o STWG on measurement, reporting and verification (STWG-MRV);
o STWG on finance and benefit distribution system (STWG-BDS)
o STWG on local implementation of REDD (STWG-LI).
ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED
• National REDD program
• REDD governance;
• Forest data, forest inventory, data management;
58

• Monitoring, reporting, verification;
• Finance and benefit distribution;
• Implementation of REDD at district and community level.
What is monitored/ measured already?
•
What needs to monitored/measured in the future?
• Number of forest companies/forest management boards competent enough
(meeting all conditions) to join REDD+.
• Total forest area meeting all conditions to join REDD+.
• Number of communities competent enough (meeting all conditions) to join
REDD+.
• Number of forest companies, forest management boards having forest area
with defined c-stock.
• Total area of forest having defined c-stock.
• Number of communities having established system for from-REDD+ benefit
distribution (BDS).
• Number of provinces having established system for measuring, reporting and
verification (MRV).
• Number of forest companies, forest management boards participate in carbon
voluntary market.
• Total C-stock of Vietnam forest.
• Total amount of money received from REDD+.
59

Chapter 4: FGM ASSESSED BY 3 PILLARS AND 6
PRINCIPLES – MAIN FINDINGS
During interviews, after discussion about the current status and issues of FGM,
interviewees were requested to assess Vietnam FGM by using the 3 pillars and the 6
principles of the FAO framework and by giving score rating to each principle in each
pillar. See box 26.
Box 26: Score rating
0 = If there is no sign that FGM considers the principle. Score 0 is 0% when
transferred to 100% mark scale.
1 = If there is sign that a minor part of the principle is considered by FGM.
Score 1 is 33% when transferred to 100% mark scale.
2 = If there is sign that a major part of the principle is considered by FGM.
Score 2 is 66% when transferred to 100% mark scale.
3 = If there is sign that the principle is fully considered by FGM. Score 3 is
100% when transferred to 100% mark scale.
Because the principles are not indicators having measurement unit the assessment
of the interviewees is their perception. However, on one side, the interviewees are
experts in their FG and FGM-related working area and, on the other side, their
judgment was done after a long discussion with the consultant and on top of that
they had to explain their own score rate by giving their own evidences and
arguments. The evidence and arguments sourced from their own practice, their
working experiences, as well as their expectations how a good FG and FGM in
Vietnam should be.
For instance, about the principle “Effectiveness”, person rated it with score 3 argued
that FG and FGM is under a national driven process ownership and firm commitment
and a strong political and societal will to manage forests sustainably and to monitor
forest governance with evidence that FG and FGM considerably contributed to
increase of the forest cover from 27.2 % in 1990 up to 39.1% in 2009 and millions of
households in mountainous areas received land and thanks to that they got rid of
poverty. But the “Effectiveness” is rated by another interview with score 1 with other
arguments that FG and FGM is without integration with the country’s sustainable
development strategies, inter-sectoral approaches, and evidences of weak
effectiveness is problematic conversion of natural forest to rubber plantation and
60

other non-forest purposes, and responsibilities and beneficiary policy for people
managing allocated is not clear enough.
In terms of gathering all possible information on FG and FGM in Vietnam, both
people mentioned here provided the consultant with a very good help in getting
multi-vision and multi-experience based information. Therefore with the score rating
for 3 pillars and 6 principles, the consultant at least achieved two purposes: (i) know
how overall FGM in Vietnam is seen by the deeply- in-FGM-involved people, and (ii)
all arguments and evidences of the interviewees to back their own score rating are
really good ideas and suggestions for how a good FGM in Vietnam should be.
Figure 06 describes result of the score rating mentioned above. Following that 27%
of the interviewees rated FGM in Vietnam with score 1, while another 62% consider
that the FGM is entitle with the score 2, and only 11% of them given the FGM the
score 3.
Figure 06: Forest Governance Monitoring – Assessed by Score Rating
Figure 07 reflects result of FGM assessment (as mentioned above) by 6 principles.
According to that principle “Transparency” is rated at 56% (56/100 mark) which is the
lowest, from lowest to highest, then follow by “Accountability” and “Participation” both
at 60% (60/100 mark), “Fair/Equity” and “Effectiveness” at 63% (63/100 mark), and
finally and highest is “Efficiency” at 67% (67/100 mark).
61

Figure 07: Forest Governance Monitoring – Assessed y 6 Principles
Data on the figure 07 advise us that if Vietnam wants to improve its FGM the
prioritized focus should be more on “Transparency”, (ii) “Accountability” and
“Participation” than other principles.
Figure 08 is scoring result of the pillar 1 “Policy, legal, institutional and regulatory
framework”. The data on the figure shows that 3 principles including “Transparency”,
“Accountability” and “Participation” have the lowest mark 63% (63/100 mark), then
“Efficiency” 67% (67/100 mark) and finally “Fair/Equity” and (Effectiveness” both at
70% (70/100 mark).
Data of pillar 1 assessment once again advise that if Vietnam wants to improve its
FGM the prioritized focus should be more on “Transparency”, (ii) “Accountability”
and “Participation” than other principles.
62

Figure 08: Pillar 1 “Policy, legal, institutional and regulatory framework” – Assessed
by 6 principles
Figure 09 describes scoring result of the pillar 2 “Planning and decision making
process” which shows that “Transparency” gets 52% (52/100 mark), “Accountability”
scored at 59% (59/100 mark), are the lowest ones. All three “Effectiveness”,
“Participation”, “Fair/Equity” reached 63% (63/100 mark). And the highest one is
“Efficiency” 67% 67/100 mark).
Data of pillar 2 assessment once again tell us if Vietnam wants to improve its FGM
the prioritized focus should be more on “Transparency”, (ii) “Accountability” than
other principles.
63

Figure 09: Pillar 2 “Planning and decision making process” – Assessed by 6
principles
In the Figure 10 we can see “Transparency” scored at 52% (51/100 mark) which is
very lowest and very low. This means that if Vietnam wants to improve its FGM the
first priority focus should be “Transparency”.
Figure 10: Pillar 3 “Implementation, enforcement and compliance” – Assessed by 6
principles
The Table 01 is overall assessment by scoring whole FGM and each pillar by the 6
principles. The data clearly show that the first attention in strengthening FGM should
be paid to (i) “Transparency”, (ii) “Accountability”, and (iii) “Participation”.
64

Table 01: Overall assessment by 6 principles
PRINCIPLE FGM PILLAR 1 PILLAR 2 PILLAR 3 AVERAGE
Transparency 56% 63% 52% 52% 56%
Accountability 60% 63% 59% 59% 60%
Effectiveness 63% 70% 63% 56% 63%
Participation 60% 63% 63% 56% 60%
Fair/Equity 63% 70% 63% 56% 63%
Efficiency 67% 67% 67% 67% 67%
65

Chapter 5: STRENGTHENING FOREST GOVERNANCE
MONITORING IN VIETNAM
5.1. FGM is new for Vietnam
The term of forest governance has not been officially used in the legal documents of
the forestry sector, at least at the provincial, district and commune levels. The targets
in forest monitoring and evaluation, which have been used by the forest sector,
mainly focus on technical aspects such as forest cover, area of plantation forests,
and volume of logged timber. Meanwhile, there is still a lack of targets relating to the
transparency in policy making, the extent of involvement in forest activities, or
gender equity in forest land allocation. There are no specific policies and regulations
for forest governance monitoring, nor implementation instruction at the local level.
The results from the interviews conducted in Dak Lak and Thua Thien Hue provinces
indicated that the annual report from the forest sectors contains a great deal of
information on forest governance, nevertheless the information is general and lack
specific targets, foundation and a performance guide.
5.2. Current indicator systems for Vietnam forest sector
Current indicator systems for Vietnam forest sector are structured as a pyramid. At
national level, indicators are the highest synthetic mode. From national level down to
sectoral, provincial, and local level those indicators split off to detailed indicators.
5.2.1. Indicators of the General Statistics Office (GSO)
The GSO indicator system is formed in line with the Decision 305/2005/QDTTg,
dated 24 November 2005 of the Prime Minister. This system consists of 24 groups of
indicators. Forest sector indicators belong to group number 9 (agricultural and
fishery indicators according to Vietnam classification) which includes 17 indicators,
namely from 0901 to 0917. But there are only 3 indicators for the forest sector which
are: Production value of forestry-0901, area of newly planted forest-0912, and
volume of harvested timber-0913.
5.2.2. Indicator system of MARD
MARD indicator system is formed according to Decision 71/2006/QD-BNN of MARD
dated 14 September 2006, containing 19 groups with 231 indicators including 18
indicators for the forest sector, classified in group 3. See table 02.
Table 02: 18 indicators of MARD for the forest sector
No
Indicator Name
Time
period of
reporting
Organization
leading in &
reporting
Information
source
A B D E F
66

45
Current status of
forest land
Year FPD PFPD
46 Area of current forest
Year/5
years
FPD/FIPI
PFPD/FIPI
48 Forest cover Year FPD PFPD
49 Area of lost forest Month FPD PFPD
50
Forest
force
protection
Year FPD PFPD
51
Ratio of special-use
forest conserved
Year FPD PFPD
52
List of rare and
endanged of forest
plants and animals
Year FPD PFPD
53
Timber
stock
standing
5 years DoF FIPI
54
Area of newly planted
forest
Month
DoF
PDoF,
DARD
55
Area of planted forest
after harvesting
Month
DoF
PDoF,
DARD
56
Area of forest under
enrichment
Month
DoF
PDoF,
DARD
57
Area of forest under
enrichment became
forest
Month
DoF
PDoF,
DARD
58
Number of scattered
planted trees
Quarter
DoF
PDoF,
DARD
59
Area of forest under
protection
Month
DoF
PDoF,
DARD
60
Volume of harvested
and forest products
harvested
6 months DoF
PDoF,
DARD
67

61
Area of clear-cut
plantation
Year
DoF
PDoF,
DARD
62
Volume, industrial
value of timber and
other forest products
processing
6 months DoF
PDoF,
DARD
63
Investment
sylvicultural works
in
Year
DoF
PDoF,
DARD
5.2.3. Indicator system to monitor implementation of Vietnam Forestry
Development Strategy 2006-2010 of VNFOREST, MARD (see table 03)
Table 03: List of 72 forest-sector indicators (FOMIS)
No CODE INDICATOR
1. OVERALL OBJECTIVE AND IMPACTS INDICATORS
1 1.1 Existing forest areas FPD
2 1.2 Forest cover FPD
3 1.3
Gross domestic product (GDP) contributions from the forest
sector
GSO
4 1.4 Poverty rate of forested areas GSO
2. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE INDICATORS
2.1 Economic objectives and outcome indicators
5 2.1.1 Gross forest output value GSO
6 2.1.2 The structure of forest output value GSO
7 2.1.3 Timber volume FIPI
8 2.1.4
Investment in forestry at current and constant price by
ownership
Future
9 2.1.5 Profit from planting 1 ha of forest Future
2.2 Social objectives and outcome indicators
10 2.2.1 Number of poor communes under Program 135 CoITS
11 2.2.2 Area of allocated and leased forestland MoNRE
12 2.2.3 Average monthly income per capita GSO
13 2.2.4
Number of annual jobs in forestry (created by the Program 661
and wood processing sector)
2.3 Environmental objectives and outcome indicators
DoFD
14 2.3.1
No. of forest fauna and flora species that are rare of endangered
(threatened with extinction)
FPD
15 2.3.2 Rate of forest cover by elevation and slope FIPI
16 2.3.3
Rate of crown cover and number of forest layers in protection
forest
Future
17 2.3.4 Area of forestland threatened by desertification Future
3. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
68

3.1 Sustainable forest management and development program
18 3.1.1 Area of land planned as forest land to 2010 MoNRE
19 3.1.2 Area of land for natural regeneration DoFD
20 3.1.3 Land planned for new forest plantation MoNRE
21 3.1.4 Area of production forests DoFD
22 3.1.5 Area of annual newly planted forests DoFD
23 3.1.6 Area of annual forests re-planted after harvesting DoFD
24 3.1.7 Area of land for natural regeneration that has become forest DoFD
25 3.1.8 Number of scattered trees planted each year DoFD
26 3.1.9 Area of certified production forests DoFD
27 3.1.10 Non-timber forest products (NTFPs) DoFD
28 3.1.11
Area of forest that has approved plan for forest protection and
development
Future
3.2 Forest protection, biodiversity conservation and environmental services development
program
29 3.2.1 Area of protection forests FPD
30 3.2.2 Area of special-use forests FPD
31 3.2.3 Area of forests under forest protection contracts FPD
32 3.2.4 No. of forest rangers working at commune level FPD
33 3.2.5 Area of damaged forests FPD
34 3.2.6 No. of Forest Protection and Development Law violation cases FPD
35 3.2.7 No. of villages having forest protection conventions FPD
36 3.2.8 Total values of environmental services of forests (collected) Future
3.3 Forest products processing and trade program
37 3.3.1 Harvested timber volume DoFU
38 3.3.2 Volume of harvested NTFPs DoFU
39 3.3.3 Volume of harvested fuel wood GSO
40 3.3.4 Gross output values of wood processing industry GSO
41 3.3.5 Export value of forestry sector GSO
42 3.3.6 Value of imported wood and wood materials GSO
43 3.3.7 Productivity of main forest products from the processing industry GSO
44 3.3.8
Areas (and gross outputs) of agroforestry production in the
forestland
Future
45 3.3.9 Gross outputs of wood and NTFP of craft villages Future
46 3.3.10 Price index for main forest products Future
47 3.3.11 Total value of retail sale of forest products Future
3.4 Research, education, training, and forestry extension program
48 3.4.1 No. of people working in forest science and technology DoST
49 3.4.2 No. of seed species to be certified DoFD
69

No. of scientific research results post-tested and transferred or
50 3.4.3 applied into production
DoST
51 3.4.4 No. of agro-forestry extension staff CoIST
52 3.4.5
No. of forestry students (in vocational, technician, high schools
and universities)
HRD
53 3.4.6 No. of government staff working in forestry sector are re-trained Future
54 3.4.7
55 3.4.8
No. of on-farm farmers to assess and benefit from in forestry
and agriculture activities
No. of farmers participated in voluntary forestry extension
groups
3.5 Renovation of the forestry sector institutions, policies, planning and monitoring
program
56 3.5.1
No. of laborers in forestry-related economic and administrative
agencies
Future
Future
CoIST
57 3.5.2 Number of forest product processing enterprises GSO
FSSPCO
58 3.5.3
Number of SFEs converted to forestry companies/ enterprises
(Decree 200) and management area
59 3.5.4 Value of fixed assets of forestry production enterprises GSO
60 3.5.5 Number of households working in forestry GSO
61 3.5.6 No. of forest farms, laborers and management area GSO
62 3.5.7 Revenue of forest farms GSO
63 3.5.8
No. of cooperatives participating in forest
management/protection and forest areas managed
Future
64 3.5.9
No. of village communities participating in forest management/
protection and managed forest areas
4. INPUT INDICATORS
4.1 Financial investment
Future
65 4.1.1 Total basic construction investment capital for the forestry sector CoIST
FSSPCO
66 4.1.2 No. of ODA projects in forestry sector (signed, implemented)
67 4.1.3
Total value of FDI projects in forestry sector (signed,
implemented)
FSSPCO
68 4.1.4 Investment in forest science and technology DoST
69 4.1.5 Outputs values for silvicultural investment DoFD
4.2 Human resource development
70 4.2.1 Expenditures on forest extension CoIST
71 4.2.2 No. of people in working age in rural areas GSO
70

72 4.2.3 Expenditure on forest training, education HRD
5.3. Strengthening FGM in Vietnam – a set of proposed indicators
Based on results of the analysis of related documentation and interviews, issues to
be addressed and monitoring needs the strengthening FGM in Vietnam may
consider indicators suggested, by the consultant, listed in table 04. The proposed
indicators are in line with area of the Vietnam Forestry Development Strategy 2006-
2020 and issues that need to be addressed and monitoring needs, as summarized in
the chapter 3 of this report, to get better implementation of the strategy.
Criteria for proposal of the indicators are as:
1. Strengthening FGM is to improve quality of FG for implementation of
programs of Vietnam Forestry Development Strategy 2006-2020;
2. Strengthening FGM should be appropriate to forestry sector administration
system, in terms of sectoral, multi-sectoral and geographical aspects;
3. Strengthening FGM should not require to much additional resources;
4. Strengthening FGM should be appropriate to FAO framework so that FGM in
Vietnam can be, to certain extent, similar with global FGM.
Total number of proposed indicators is 150, including 16 areas as bellows:
• General indicators;
• Forestry land and 3 types of forest;
• Forest and forest land rental and allocation;
• State forest enterprise restructuring;
• Timber harvesting from natural forests;
• Conversion of natural forest into rubber plantation and other purposes;
• Beneficiary policy;
• Forest Protection;
• Handling of violations related to forest;
• Forest fire prevention and fire fighting;
• Protection forests and special-use forests;
• Forest environment services ;
• Forestry finance;
• Forest Products Processing and Trade.
• FLEGT và VPA;
• REDD.are
71

In the table 04, indicator number is in the column A. Area of the FGM concern is in
the column B. Indicator name is in the column C. Indicator measurement unit is in
the column D. The column E is about availability of the indicators information as
follows: “Y” means the information is available, “N” means the indicator information is
not available, and “P” means the indicator information is partially available. The
column F is about organization leading for information collection and reporting for
indicators. The column G is about reporting period which, at national level, is one
year. However, at lower levels, is can be shorter according to different kinds of
organizations and their monitoring needs. The column H is about “code” of indicators
within FAO forest governance monitoring framework.
The set of proposed indicators do not require establishment of a new agency,
because all indicators can be integrated into roles and tasks of the current
organizations. Furthermore most of indicators having “count” as measuring unit
therefore the proposed system do nor require much additional resources. Major part
of information needed for the proposed indicators can be provided if organizations
have a standard documentation system for their day-to-day operations.
In terms of method and methodology of collection and treatment, FORMIS and NFA
projects can support the FGM through their action plan and pilot case studies.
72

Table 04: Indicators proposed for strengthening FGM in Vietnam
No AREA OF FGM SUGGESTED INDICATOR UNIT INFORMA
TION
AVAILABIL
ITY (Y/N/P)
ORGANIZ
ATION IN
CHARGE
REPORT
ING
PERIOD
REFERE
NCE TO
FAO
FRAME
WORK
A B C D E F G H
1 General Number of forest-related legal regulations Count Y VNFORE 1 year
indicators newly issued.
ST
2 Number of forest-related legal regulations Count Y TCLN 1 year
withdrawn (out of effectiveness).
3 Number of initiatives on policy, legal,
institutional and regulatory framework to-
MARD proposed by FSSP.
Count P FSSP
Office
1 year 0204
4 Number of initiatives on policy, legal,
institutional and regulatory framework to-
MARD proposed by FSSP considered by
MARD.
5 Number of initiatives on policy, legal,
institutional and regulatory framework to-
MARD proposed by Forestry Regional
Network, FSSP.
6 Number of initiatives on policy, legal,
institutional and regulatory framework to-
MARD proposed by Forestry Regional
Network, FSSP considered by MARD.
7 Number of feedbacks on implementation
of legal regulations from Forestry
Regional Network, FSSP to MARD.
8
Number of feedbacks on implementation
of legal regulations from Forestry
Count P FSSP
Office
Count P FSSP
Office
Count P FSSP
Office
Count P FSSP
Office
Count P FSSP
Office
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
73

Regional Network, FSSP to MARD,
considered by MARD.
9 Number of initiatives on policy, legal,
institutional and regulatory framework to-
MARD proposed by organizations,
individuals (including civil society).
10 Number of initiatives on policy, legal,
institutional and regulatory framework to-
MARD proposed by organizations,
individuals (including civil society),
considered by MARD.
11 Number of feedbacks on implementation
of legal regulations from organizations,
individuals (including civil society) to
MARD.
12 Number of feedbacks on implementation
of legal regulations from organizations,
individuals (including civil society) to
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
MARD, considered by MARD.
13 P1A)* Total national land, defined for
ha N VNFORE 1 year
Forestry land management of the Forest Sector, with
ST
and 3 types clear boundaries in the field.
14 of forest Total national land area, with forest, ha N MoNRE, 1 year
defined for management of the Forest
DARD
Sector with clear boundaries in the field.
15 Total area of production forest ha Y VNFORE 1 year
ST
16 Area of production forest with clearly ha N VNFORE 1 year
defined boundaries in the field.
ST
17 Area of production forest with clear
ha N VNFORE 1 year
demarcation in the field.
ST
18
Area of protection forest. ha Y VNFORE 1 year
74

ST
19 Area of protection forest with clearly
defined boundaries in the field.
ha N VNFORE
ST
20 Area of protection forest with clear
ha N VNFORE
demarcation in the field.
ST
21 Area of special-use forest. ha Y VNFORE
ST
22 Area of special-use forest with clearly ha N VNFORE
defined boundaries in the field.
ST
23 Area of special-use forest with clear ha N VNFORE
demarcation in the field.
ST
24 P1B) Forest Number of Forest Management Boards Count N VNFORE
and forest having forest allocated, but without land
ST
land rental use certificate.
25 and
Number of Forest Management Boards Count N VNFORE
allocation clearly knows in-the-field defined
ST
boundaries of the forest under their
management.
26
Number of Forest Management Boards Count N VNFORE
made in-the-field demarcation for the
ST
forest under their management.
27 Total area of land, forest allocated to
households.
28 Area of land, forest allocated to
households having clearly defined
boundaries in the field.
29 Area of forest allocated to households but
without land-use certificate.
30 Number of land-related conflicts between
households and organizations.
ha N MoNRE/
VNFORE
ST
ha N MoNRE/
VNFORE
ST
ha N MoNRE
VNFORE
ST
Count N MoNRE
VNFORE
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
75

31 Number of land-related conflicts between
households and organizations solved.
32 Number of land-related conflicts between
households and other households.
33 Number of land-related conflicts between
households and other households solved.
34 P1C) State
forest
enterprise
Number of forest companies having
allocated forest but without land-use
certificate.
35 restructuring Number of forest companies having
allocated forest but with land-use
certificate.
36 Number of forest companies having land
and forest with clearly defined boundaries
in the field.
37 Number of forest companies having land
and forest with clear demarcation in the
field.
38 Total forest area allocated to forest
companies.
39
Total land area allocated to forest
companies (with land-use certificate).
40 Total land area and forest area allocated
to forest companies having clear
demarcation in the field.
41 Number of forest companies doing
business according to Company Law
2005.
ST
Count N MoNRE
VNFORE
ST
Count N MoNRE
VNFORE
ST
Count N MoNRE
VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
ha Y VNFORE
ST
ha N VNFORE
ST
ha N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
76

42 Number of forest companies financially
independent in line with the Company
Law 2005.
43 Number of forest companies trained in
sustainable forest management.
44 Number of companies having forest
management plan.
45 Number of forest companies received
fund supporting enrichment of poor forest.
46 Number of forest companies received
support in application of new technology.
47 Number of forest companies providing
forestry extension and market information
for local communities.
48 Number of forest companies managing
protection received investment as defined
by policy for protection forest.
49 Number of forest companies received
long-term preferential credit appropriate
to timber-production cycle.
50 Number of provinces having forest value
defined when the forest is allocated to
forest companies.
51 Number of provinces having forest rental
price defined when rent the forest to
forest companies.
52 Number of companies defined forest
value when the forest is allocated to
them.
53 Number of forest companies having
forest-added-value calculation defined.
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
77

54 Number of forest companies paid forest Count N VNFORE 1 year
rental charge.
ST
55 P1D) Timber Number of forest companies are in Count N VNFORE 1 year
56
harvesting
from natural
forests
condition accurate for implementation of
sustainable timber harvesting.
Number of forest companies allowed to Count N
ST
VNFORE 1 year
do timber harvesting in line with timber
production of their allocated forest.
ST
57 P1E)
Area of natural forest converted to rubber ha Y VNFORE 1 year
58
Conversion
of natural
plantation.
Total number of projects to convert Count N
ST
VNFORE 1 year
59
forest into
rubber
natural forest to rubber plantation.
Number of projects to convert natural Count N
ST
VNFORE 1 year
60
plantation
and other
purposes
forest to rubber plantation appraised by
relevant authority from forest sector.
Number of projects to convert natural Count N
ST
VNFORE 1 year
forest to rubber plantation rejected by
relevant authority from forest sector after
appraisal.
ST
61 Total area of forest converted to hydropower
ha Y VNFORE 1 year
plants.
ST
62 Number of hydro-power plant projects Count N VNFORE 1 year
requesting conversion of natural forest.
ST
63 Number of hydro-power plant projects Count N VNFORE 1 year
appraised by relevant authority from
forest sector.
ST
64 Number of hydro-power plant projects Count N VNFORE 1 year
rejected by relevant authority from forest
sector after appraisal.
ST
65 Area of natural forest lost due to mining ha Y VNFORE 1 year
activities.
ST
66
Number of mining projects requesting Count N VNFORE 1 year
78

conversion of forest.
ST
67 Number of mining projects appraised by
relevant authority from forest sector.
Count N VNFORE
ST
68 Number of mining projects rejected by Count N VNFORE
relevant authority from forest sector after
ST
appraisal.
69 P1F)
Number of provinces having forest value Count N VNFORE
Beneficiary defined when the forest is allocated to
ST
policy households.
70 Number of provinces having forest rental Count N VNFORE
price defined when rent the forest to
ST
households.
71 Number of provinces defined forest value Count N VNFORE
when the forest is allocated to
ST
households.
72
Number of provinces defined real income Count N VNFORE
from forest (including pay for forest
ST
protection and others from forest), per ha
of forest allocated to households.
73 Number of provinces defined total real Count N VNFORE
income from forest (including pay for
ST
forest protection and others from forest)
and its ratio to total income of local
households.
74 P2A) Forest Number of local forest rangers. Count Y VNFORE
Protection
ST
75 Number of communes having local forest Count Y VNFORE
rangers.
ST
76
Number of plans of forest protection Count N VNFORE
authorities, forest companies, forest
ST
management boards to cooperate with
local authorities and communities in
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
79

forest protection agreed and signed.
77 Number of violations of Forest Protection
and Development Law that are not
treated due to legal position of forest
protection officers (forest rangers) is
limited.
78 Number of forest patrol units having
forest regular patrol plans.
Count N VNFORE
ST
1 year
Count N VNFORE 1 year
ST
79 Number of patrols conducted. Count N TCLN 1 year
80 Number of villages having common forest Count Y VNFORE 1 year
protection agreement.
ST
81 Number of communes having forest Count N VNFORE 1 year
officer.
ST
82 Number of communes having forest Count N VNFORE 1 year
protection team.
ST
83 P2B)
Number of cases against people on duty. Count N VNFORE 1 year
84
Handling of
violations Number of forest-destroy cases. Count Y
ST
VNFORE 1 year
85
related to
forest Area of destroyed forest. ha Y
ST
VNFORE 1 year
ST
86 Volume/value of seized timber. m 3 /vnd Y VNFORE 1 year
ST
87 Value of illegal-logging means seized. vnd N VNFORE 1 year
ST
88 Number of illegal timber transportation Count Y VNFORE 1 year
cases.
ST
89 Volume/value of illegal-transported timber
Y VNFORE 1 year
seized.
ST
90
Value ofillegal-timber-transporting means
seized.
vnd N VNFORE
ST
1 year
80

91 Number of criminal-violation cases. Count Y VNFORE
ST
92 Number of contriver-found violations. Count N VNFORE
ST
93 Number of violation punishments that Count N VNFORE
violators do not follow.
ST
94 P2C) Forest Number of organizations having fireprevention
Count N VNFORE
fire
and fire-fighting plans, and
ST
prevention resources to implement those plans.
95 and fire Number of agreement of forest range Count N VNFORE
fighting units; forest companies; forest
ST
management boards to cooperate with
local authorities and communities in fireprevention
and fire-fighting, signed.
96
Number of communes having budget, Count N VNFORE
plan, means and forces for fire prevention
ST
and fire fighting.
97 P2D)
Number of forest management boards Count N VNFORE
Protection having forest management plan
ST
forests and (protection and special-use forest).
98 special-use Number of forest management boards Count N VNFORE
forests having forest-patrol plan (protection and
ST
special-use forest).
99 Number of patrols conducted vs planned. Count N VNFORE
ST
100 Average of actual income of a staff of
N VNFORE
forest management boards.
ST
101
Number of forest management boards
that do not get fund for forest
vnd per
capita
per
year
Count N VNFORE
ST
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
81

management on time.
102 P2E) Forest
environment
services
Number of provinces having clearly
defined principles, calculation method
and procedure for paying for forest
environmental service.
103 Number of organizations, households
who are entitle to get payment for forest
environmental service provided, but
payment has not been made.
104 Number of provinces having clearly
defined area providing forest
environmental services.
105 Number of provinces having clearly
defined forest status with “K” – pay
coefficient.
106
Number of provinces having clearly
defined in-the-field forest boundaries of
organizations and households providing
forest environmental service.
107 P2F) Forestry Number of provinces collecting standingtree
finance
fee.
108 Amount of money that forest sector
receive from national budget.
109 Amount of money that forest sector
receive from provincial budget.
110 Number of households having access to
preferential credit for forestry activities.
111 Size of the National Forest Protection and
Development Fund.
112
Number of organizations, individuals
providing contributions to the National
Forest Protection and Development Fund.
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count Y VNFORE
ST
vnd Y VNFORE
ST
Y VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
vnd N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
82

113 Amount that organizations and individuals
contributed to the National Forest
Protection and Development Fund.
114 Number of provinces established
provincial forest protection and
development fund and set up the fund
management system.
115 Total amount of natural-resource tax paid
by forest companies.
116 Total amount of natural-resource tax paid
by households.
117 P3) Forest Total number of wood processing
companies.
Products
118 Number of wood processing companies
Processing having timber product exporting business.
119
and Trade
Number of companies importing timber to
Vietnam.
120 Volume of from-natural-forest imported
timber.
121 Volume of from-plantation-forest imported
timber.
122 Volume of from-domestic-plantation
processed into timber products for export.
vnd per
year
N
VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
vnd per
year
1 year
1 year
N DoPF 1 year
DoPF
1 year
Count N MARD 1 year
Count N MARD 1 year
Count N MARD 1 year
m 3 N MARD 1 year
m 3 N MARD 1 year
m 3 N MARD 1 year
123 Volume of exported wood chip. Ton N MARD 1 year
124
Total volume and value of exported m 3 /usd N/Y MARD 1 year
timber products.
125 FLEGT and Number of organizations/individuals Count Y FLEGT & 1 year
VPA
trained in FLEGT, VPA, EU Timber
Lacey
Regulation 995/2010 and Lacey Act.
Act Office
126
Number of organizations/individuals Count Y FLEGT & 1 year
consulted during VPA negotiation/VPA
Lacey
implementation.
Act Office
83

127 Number of Count N FLEGT & 1 year
initiatives/suggestions/requests from
Lacey
organizations/individuals contributed to
Act Office
VPA negotiation/VPA implementation.
128 Number of companies having COC Count Y MARD 1 year
certificate.
129 Number of companies having FSC FM Count Y VNFORE 1 year
certificate.
ST
130 Total forest area FSC FM certified. Count Y VNFORE 1 year
ST
131 Number of organizations/individuals Count N VNFORE 1 year
competent to provide consultancy in
ST
timber supply according to COC
requirement.
132 Number of organizations/individuals
competent enough to provide consultancy
in forest management according to FSC
FM requirement.
133 Number of organizations/individuals
trained in TLAS.
134 Number of organizations/individuals
competent enough to verify timber supply
chain according to TLAS requirement.
135 Number of organizations competent
enough to do FLEGT licensing for timber
products exported to EU.
136 Number of organizations competent
enough to conduct independent
monitoring for TLAS.
Count N VNFORE
ST
Count N VNFORE
ST
m 3 N VNFORE
ST
m 3 N VNFORE
ST
m 3 N VNFORE
ST
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
137 Volume of legal/controlled/certified timber m 3 N NC 1 year
imported into Vietnam.
138 Number of shipments need to be licensed Count N FLEGT & 1 year
84

for export to EU market.
139 Number of companies competent enough
to get “operator-based licenses” for their
timber products exported to EU market.
140 Volume/value of timber products exported
to each of 27 countries of EU.
141 REDD Number of forest companies/forest
management boards competent enough
(meeting all conditions) to join REDD+.
Lacey
Act Office
Count N FLEGT & 1 year
Lacey
Act Office
m 3 /usd N/Y TCHQ 1 year
Count N REDD
Office
1 year
142 Total forest area meeting all conditions to
join REDD+.
143 Number of communities competent
enough (meeting all conditions) to join
REDD+.
144 Number of forest companies, forest
management boards having forest area
with defined c-stock.
145 Total area of forest having defined c-
stock.
146 Number of communities having
established system for from-REDD+
benefit distribution (BDS).
147 Number of provinces having established
system for measuring, reporting and
verification (MRV).
148
Number of forest companies, forest
management boards participate in carbon
voluntary market.
ha N REDD
Office
Count N REDD
Office
Count N REDD
Office
ha N REDD
Office
Count N REDD
Office
Count N REDD
Office
Count N REDD
Office
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
85

149 Total C-stock of Vietnam forest. Ton N REDD
Office
150 Total amount of money received from vnd N REDD
REDD+.
Office
1 year
1 year
Note:
*: Within abbreviation P1A, P1 stands for program 1 of Vietnam Forestry Development Strategy 2006-2020 (VFSD), A means part
“A” of the program 1. Whole P1A means area of FGM concern under part A, Program 1, VFDS. P2, P3 have similar meanings.
Number in the H column is indicator code having 4 digits. The first two digits represent pillar of FAO FGM framework. The two rest
digits represent principle of FAO FGM framework. Following that the pillars have their code as: the pillar 1 “Policy, legal,
institutional and regulatory framework”: 01; the pillar 2 “Planning and decision making process”: 02; the pillar 3 “Implementation,
strengthening and compliance”: 03. Similarly the principles have their code as: “Transparency”: 01, “Accountability”:02,
“Effectiveness”:03, “Participation”): 04, “Fair/Equity”:05, “Efficiency”:06. In the table 04: indicator number 3 “Number of initiatives on
policy, legal, institutional and regulatory framework to-MARD proposed by FSSP” has code 0204 which means that the indicator
number 3 belongs to the pillar 2 (planning and decision making) and principle 4 (participation) of FAO FGM framework. This code
number may be put into the “H” column, by the international FGM consultant , after the workshop in order to a certain link of those
indicators with the FAO FGM concept.
86

5.4. Next steps proposed for strengthening FGM in Vietnam
In case, Vietnam would like to strengthen FGM systematically, what will be mention
below can be a reference.
Figure 11: A framework for forest governance monitoring design
Figure 11 presents a generic design overview for forest governance monitoring. The
overview distinguishes between a number of building blocks that need to be
addressed in the process of preparing for design, actual design, and sustaining the
designed forest governance monitoring.
1. Creating a forest governance reference framework – establishing shared
understanding of what is involved in forest governance and its monitoring. As a
starting point for such a reference framework figure 1 from the previous chapter can
be used. It is composed of three “pillars” (i.e. in a way the structural elements for
Forest Governance to function) and “principles” (the quality of how well Forest
87

Governance functions,. In a kind of matrix, under each pillar and principle specific
forest governance issues can be identified.
2. Agreeing on a defined purpose & vision – establishing a shared understanding of
the key reasons for engaging in forest governance monitoring. Such an
understanding needs to be consistent with national policies, strategies/NFP
document and fit within the country’s sustainable development strategies, intersectoral
approaches. It would be consistent with the country’s legal frameworks,
recognition and respect for customary and traditional rights and secure land tenure
arrangements.
3. Making information needs explicit – establishing shared understanding of what
information is needed to answer forest governance performance questions, taking
into consideration the need to prioritize amongst the many information needs.
4. Selecting methods & methodologies for data collection – establishing shared
understanding of the ways in which needed information will be gathered from which
sources of information; use of primary and secondary data; clarification of IT part of
the methods and methodologies (storage, retrieval etc.).
5. Creating an outline of the organization (flow) & intended use of information –
establishing clear processes for turning data into information and the way in which it
will flow to/be accessed by intended audiences.
6. Agreeing on roles & responsibilities – establishing shared understanding of who
will be expected to do what to make functional forest governance monitoring happen;
7. Activating a plan for putting in place operational capacities & conditions for
functional forest governance monitoring – establishing a shared understanding of
what will be required in terms of capacities and conditions to sustain efforts.
8. Providing an Institutional embedding – establishing forest governance monitoring
in existing organizational and institutional arrangements.
The background paper partially touched the points 1, 2, 3 of the framework in figure
11. So very first step of the process for strengthening FGM in Vietnam can start with
discussing the background paper then take relevant actions to complete steps 1, 2, 3
and all the rest steps.
88

Chapter 6: CONCLUSION
Due to the increasing recognition of the importance of forest governance quality on
progress towards SFM, FLEGT and the reduction of deforestation and forest
degradation (REDD+), increasingly many efforts are taken to monitor and report
forest governance and governance quality. Recently, the REDD negotiations under
the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change have agreed on safeguards,
initiative of EU FLEGT VPA, and timber supply chain policy of different governments
that relate to forest governance, further increasing the need for monitoring. However,
perhaps most importantly, forest governance monitoring systems at the country level
need to meet national monitoring needs in order to be relevant. This means that
monitoring of forest governance should be most of all useful to better fulfill national
and local priorities for forest management. Any forest governance monitoring that
should be established by countries needs to be feasible, cost-effective, reliable
(verifiable), allow reliable measurement of change over time, and fulfill international
reporting requirements.
To meet these goals, Government of Vietnam (MARD) has requested the assistance
of FAO to help integrate forest governance monitoring into national-forest related
monitoring systems. To this end, FAO is providing support through the services of a
national consultant and international technical consultants.
Initially, the national consultant tried to use 13 components and 77 sub-components
of the “FAO framework for assessing and monitoring forest governance”, to assess
FGM in Vietnam. The consultant sent the framework to 43 people (including 29 from
domestic organizations and 14 from international organizations) requesting them to
assess FGM in Vietnam accordingly to 13 components and 77 sub-components of
the framework. Opinion of majority of the requested is too difficult to assess FGM in
Vietnam by using the 13 components and 77 sub-components of the framework. And
the consultant is in the similar view. In fact, it is too difficult to classify what is being
done in Vietnam, in terms of FGM, into 13 components and 77 sub-components of
the “FAO framework for assessing and monitoring forest governance”. Until time
when the consultant starts writing the background paper, only 6 assessments in the
mentioned way were received. As explained by the requested the main reason of the
difficulties is the components and sub-components of the FAO framework are still
general. Besides of that a common understanding about forest governance in
Vietnam is governance to implement Vietnam Forestry Development Strategy 2006-
2020. In another words, it is governance to implement the 5 programs of the strategy
and their targets. This fact is a self explanation that: (i) FAO vision on assessment of
FGM based on FG with the 13 components and 77 subcomponents is rather quite far
from Vietnam circumstances on assessment of FGM based on FG towards
implementation of the Forestry Development Strategy 2006-2020; (ii) The first step
to shorten the gap, perhaps, is both sides (FAO & Vietnam) to work out indicators of
assessment of FGM (because any monitoring can be effective if is based on clearly
identified indicators); and based on that (iii) a base for comparison of those
indicators to select indicators appropriate for Vietnam and also for FAO, to apply for
FGM in Vietnam.
Because of explanations above, this background paper is written based on analysis
of related documentation and interviews of selected government officers in forest
89

sector at central level and local level; different experts; some key NGOs; and
representatives of private sector in Vietnam, about issues of assessment of FGM in
Vietnam. The documentation analysis and interviews, mainly, were conducted in the
context of the two relations:
• Firstly, the relation between FGM on one side and implementation of the 5
programs of Vietnam Forestry Development Strategy 2006-2020 and their
targets, on the other side. In current circumstances this, perhaps, is an
appropriate way to get the background paper for the workshop, because by
this way the paper can bring what the workshop participants are familiar with,
interested in and confident to join discussions.
• Secondly, FGM is assessed through documentation analysis and interviews in
the context of the FAO FGM framework, but only of the 3 pillars and 6
principles and not 13 components and 77 sub-components.
Recently, Vietnam achieved some very important results in forest sector, especially
in increase of forest cover, forest products export and poverty reduction in
mountainous areas. Forest governance in Vietnam, no doubt, provided considerable
contributions to those achievements. However, this report will rather focus on finding
issues, not for criticism but for opportunities to improve the forest governance
towards sustainably managed forests and sustainable development of Vietnam
forestry. The documentation analysis and the discussions with the key organizations
and persons in this field during preparation of this report therefore were conducted
following this way.
The background paper tried to provide (i) an overall picture of FGM in Vietnam, and
f(ii) propose a set og indicators for strengthening FGM in Vietnam based on criteria:
• Strengthening FGM is to improve quality of FG for implementation of
programs of Vietnam Forestry Development Strategy 2006-2020;
• Strengthening FGM should be appropriate to forestry sector administration
system, in terms of sectoral, multi-sectoral and geographical aspects;
• Strengthening FGM should not require to much additional resources;
• Strengthening FGM should be appropriate to FAO framework so that FGM in
Vietnam can be, to certain extent, similar with global FGM.
Total number of proposed indicators is 150, including 16 areas as bellows:
• General indicators (12);
• Forestry land and 3 types of forest (11);
• Forest and forest land rental and allocation (10);
• State forest enterprise restructuring (21);
• Timber harvesting from natural forests (2);
• Conversion of natural forest into rubber plantation and other purposes (12);
• Beneficiary policy (5);
90

• Forest Protection (9);
• Handling of violations related to forest (11);
• Forest fire prevention and fire fighting (3);
• Protection forests and special-use forests (5);
• Forest environment services (5);
• Forestry finance (10);
• Forest Products Processing and Trade (8).
• FLEGT và VPA (16);
• REDD (10).
Each from the set of the proposed indicators has its own reference code to the 3
pillars and the 6 principle of FAO FGM framework which is a effort to get the first
basis for getting a certain resemblance of Vietnam FGM with FAO FGM framework.
Due to time and resources constraints, and “forest governance monitoring” is a
complex issue, the background paper surely contains certain shortcomings which we
expect to get and appreciate every input to address them.
LITERATURE
1. Vietnam Forestry Development Strategy 2006-2020
91

2. Vietnam Forestry Development Strategy 2006-202 - 2010 progress report
3. The Vietnam province governance and public administration performance index
PAPI 2010
4. World Bank, 2009. Roots for Good Forest Outcomes: An Analytical Framework for
Governance reform. Report No. 49572-GLB. 47 pp.
5. Partially based on the national forest programme principles and on Saunders &
Reeve. 2010 Monitoring Governance for Implementation of REDD+. Chatham House
6. Capistrano, D., 2010. Forest Governance Indicator Development: Early Lessons
and Proposed Indicators for Country Assessments. FAO, 34 pp.
7. Grindle, M.S., 2004. Good Enough Governance: poverty reduction and reform in
developing countries. Governance: an institutional journal of Policy, Administration,
and Institutions, Vol. 17, No. 4, October 2004 (p. 525-548),
8. Grindle, M.S. 2005. Good enough governance revisited. A report for DFID with
reference to the Governance Target Strategy Paper, 2001. Harvard University, USA.
27 pp.
9. James Mayers | Stephen Bass | Duncan Macqueen | 2002 : The Pyramid
A DIAGNOSTIC AND PLANNING TOOL FOR GOOD FOREST GOVERNANCE
10. JOANGO Hutan, September 2006: Forest governance in Malaysia
An NGO perspective
11. Krister Andersson and Ashwin Ravikumar, University of Colorado at Boulder, July
15, 2010 : Monitoring Forest Governance: A Field-Based Approach from Tanzania
12. Kusek, J., and Rist, R., 2004, 'Ten Steps to a Results-based Monitoring and
Evaluation System', World Bank, Washington, D.C. 268 pp
13. Nigel Dudley, Nguyen Cu and Vuong Tien Manh: A Monitoring and Evaluation
System for Forest Landscape Restoration in the Central Truong Son Landscape,
Vietnam
14. Nguyen Hang, Wulf Killmann, Xuan Phuong Pham and Eveline Trines: Viet Nam
National REDD+ Program: Background document UN-REDD PROGRAMME Version
3 February, 2011
15. ODI, 2006. Governance, development and aid effectiveness: a quick guide to
complex relationships. Briefing paper March 2006. 4pp.
16. Pham Xuan Phuong, Doan Diem, le Khac Coi: Assessment on forest policy
formulation and execution phase 2006-2010 and proposal for forest policy
amendment, revision phase 2011-2015.
17. Simon Counsell: Forest Governace in Africa. 2009
18. Tim Holland and Doan Diem: Scoping Study of Forest Governance Indicators in
Vietnam
19. Van Bodegom, A.J., D. Klaver, F van Schoubroeck and O. van der Valk, 2008.
FLEGT beyond T: exploring the meaning of ‘Governance’concepts for the FLEGT
process. Wageningen UR, The Netherlands
ANNEX 01: LIST OF PEOPLE RECEIVED FGM FAO FRAMEWORK WITH 13
COMPONENTS AND 77 SUB-COMPONENTS
92

No Name Position Position
1 Dr. Nguyễn Bá Ngãi Vice director VNFOREST
2 Nguyễn Tường Vân Vice director
Department of Science;
Technology and International
Cooperation, VNFOREST
3 Nguyễn Hữu Dũng
4
Dr. Nguyễn Nghĩa
Biên
Director
Planning and Finance
Department, VNFOREST
5 Cao Chí Công Director
Department of Forest Utilization,
VNFOREST
6 Vũ Thành nam Seniot officer
Management Board for Forestry
Enterprises
7 Đàm Ngọc Năm Vice director
Department of Agricultural
Products Processing and Trading
and Salt Production, MARD
8 Trần Hữu Thành Senior officer
Department of Agricultural
Products Processing and Trading
and Salt Production, MARD
9 Phạm Minh Thoa Director
Department of Science;
Technology and International
Cooperation, VNFOREST
10
Dr. Phạm Mạnh
Cường
Director
REDD Standing Office,
VNFOREST
11 Dr. Đinh Đức Thuận Director Forestry Projects, MARD
12 Tô Mạnh Tiến Director
Provincial Department of
Forestry LN, DARD Lào Cai
13 Phạm Trọng Minh Vice general director Vietnam Forestry Corporation
14
Dr. Nguyễn Phú
Hùng Vice director FIPI, VNFOREST
15 Hồ Mạnh Tường NFA Project, FIPI, VNFOREST
16
Dr. Nguyễn Văn
Tuấn Vice director Vietnam Forestry University
Forestry Business & Management
17
Dr. Nguyễn Quang
Hà
Faculty, Vietnam Forestry
University
18 Dr. Lê Minh Chính
Dr. Phạm Xuân
19 Phương
Faculty Head
Senior lecturer in forestry
economics
Freelance consultant
20 Tô Đình Mai Director
21 Đoàn Diễm Freelance consultant
22 Vũ Long Freelance consultant
23 Nguyễn Tuấn Phú Freelance consultant
General Secretary, Vice
24 Nguyễn Tôn Quyền
Chairman
25 Huỳnh Thạch Senior officer
26 Chu Đình Quang Freelance consultant
27 Lê Duy Phương Freelance consultant
28 Trần Lê Huy General Secretary
Vietnam Forestry University
Former vice director of Legal and
Institutional Framework, MARD
Centre for Environment and
Community Development
Vice chairman of Forestry
Science & Technology
Association
Former director of Forestry
Economics Institute
Former director of Agriculture
Department, Vietnam government
Office (expert in FPES)
Vietnam Forest Products
Association (VIFORES)
Vietnam Forest Products
Association (VIFORES)
Former coordinator to Vietnam-
Germany Forestry Program
Bình Định Forest Product
Association
93

29 Nguyễn Chiến Thắng Chairman
Handicraft & Wood Processing
Association (HAWA)
30 Huỳnh Văn Hạnh Vice-chairman
Handicraft & Wood Processing
Association (HAWA)
31 Trần Quốc Mạnh Vice-chairman
Handicraft & Wood Processing
Association (HAWA)
32 Nguyễn Văn Vy General Secretary
Handicraft & Wood Processing
Association (HAWA)
33 Akiko Inoguchi Officer FAO
34 Dr. Juergen Hess Director MNR Program, GIZ
35 Tô Thị Thu Hương Component Manager FP, GIZ
36 Tapio Leppänen CTA FORMIS
37 Lê Công Uẩn GFTN VN Coordinator WWF, GFTN
38 Dr. Hồ Văn Cử
Vietnam Country
Representative TFT
39 Dr. Tô Xuân Phúc
Vietnam Country
Representative Forest trends
40 Trần Hữu Nghị
Vietnam Country
Representative Tropenbos International
41
Dr. Nguyễn Quang
Tân
Vietnam Country
Representative RECOFTC
42 Goetz Eberhard Advisor to HAWA HAWA/CIM
43 Heiko Woerner CTA GFA
44 Lutz Lehmann CIM advisor to Kontum Kon Tum
45 Tim Dowson FLEGT VPA Advisor EC Hanoi
46 Lauri Vesa CTA NFA Project
Note:
People who filled 77 sub-components of the FAO FGM framework
ANNEX 02: LIST OF PEOPLE DIRECTLY INTERVIEWED
No Name Position Position
94

1
Dr. Nguyễn Bá
Ngãi Vice director VNFOREST
2
Nguyễn Tường
Vân
Vice director
Department of Science;
Technology and
International Cooperation,
VNFOREST
3
Nguyễn Hữu
Dũng
4
Dr. Nguyễn
Nghĩa Biên
Director
Planning and Finance
Department, VNFOREST
5 Cao Chí Công Director
Department of Forest
Utilization, VNFOREST
6 Phạm Minh Thoa Director
Department of Science;
Technology and
International Cooperation,
VNFOREST
7
Dr. Phạm Xuân
Phương
Freelance consultant
Former vice director of
Legal and Institutional
Framework, MARD
8 Tô Đình Mai Director
Centre for Environment and
Community Development
9 Đoàn Diễm Freelance consultant
Vice chairman of Forestry
Science & Technology
Association
Former director of Forestry
10 Vũ Long Freelance consultant
Nguyễn Tôn General Secretary, Vice
11 Quyền
Chairman
12 Huỳnh Thạch Senior officer
Dr. Tô Xuân
Vietnam Country
13 Phúc
Representative
Economics Institute
Vietnam Forest Products
Association (VIFORES)
Vietnam Forest Products
Association (VIFORES)
Forest trends
ANNEX 03: List of the interviewees and the organizations at provincial level
95

No. Name, position of
Position and Organization
interviewees
1 Mr. Y Manh Adrong, Vice Chairman of District People Committee
2 Mr. Huynh Duc Luan Director of Ea Hleo State Forest Company
3 Mr. Le Cong Hung Vice director of Ea Hleo SFC
4 Mr. Nguyen Ngoc Vice head of Technical Section of Ea Hleo SFC
Hung
5 Mr. Phung Chi Hai Head of Technical Section of Ea Hleo SFC
6 Mr. Ho Duy Tan Chairman of Ea Sol Commune People Committee
7 Mr. Nguyen Van Xuan Deputy Director of Dak Lak province DARD
8 Mr. Nguyen Quoc
Hung
Vice Director of Forest Sub-Department of Dak Lak
province
9 Mr. Le Van Minh Deputy Director of Lam Dong Province DARD
10 Mr. Nguyen Trong Director of Thua Thien Hue Department of Forestry
11 Mr. Nguyen Vu Linh Vice Director of Bach Ma National Park, Thua
Thien Hue
12 Mr. Nguyen Huu Dai Director of Phong Dien Forest Company, Thua
Thien Hue
13 Mr. Le Van Tam Director of Forest Protection Unit, Nam Dong
district, Thue Thien Hue province
14 Mr. Truong Xang Vice Director of Forest Protection Unit, Nam Dong
district
96