The politics of numbers and additionality governing the national Payment for Forest Environmental Services scheme in Vietnam: A case study from Son La province

Abstract

Payments for forest environmental services (PFES) is a major breakthrough policy in the Vietnamese forestry sector because it contributes 25% of the total investments in the forestry sector and serves as the first market-based instrument employed to protect forests. However, there is little empirical evidence of its effectiveness. Is the policy meeting the core objectives of improving forest cover and forest quality and is it also achieving its claims of supporting local livelihoods? This paper analyses the environmental, social, and economic impacts of PFES in Son La province, the longest standing implementation of a PFES scheme in Vietnam. Our study uses a sampling method that incorporates pre-matching and a before-after-control-intervention approach. Data was collected from government statistics, remote sensing analysis, focus group discussions involving 236 people, surveys with a total of 240 households, and key informant interviews with 45 people. Our findings show that additionality of PFES in Son La is controversial and depends on who collects the data and what data is used to evaluate the impacts of PFES. Data collection is also politicized to serve central, provincial and district government interests. Evidence shows that PFES has provided little additional income to individual villagers to protect forests in Son La. However, total PFES revenue paid to communities generates significant income for village communities. Moreover, not all villagers can receive continuous payments from PFES, meaning that PFES has not become a stable source of income, rendering the permanence of PFES limited. Improving monitoring and evaluation policies coupled with transparent, inclusive, independent mechanisms are essential to providing a more accurate reflection of impacts from PFES in Vietnam.

Effect of payment for forest ecosystem services on forest conservation practices in Vietnam

“…Vietnam has been at the forefront of executing payment for forest services (PFES) in Asia. The PFES program in Vietnam is designed with multifaceted objectives: i) safeguarding forests, ii) enhancing livelihoods and alleviating poverty, and iii) promoting equitable income distribution (Loft et al, 2017;Thuy, Chau, et al, 2020). Over a decade of implementation has seen PFES compensating for three categories of forest ecosystem services: i) services that protect the soil and mitigate soil erosion and sedimentation, ii) services that regulate water, and iii) services that preserve natural landscapes and maintain the biodiversity of forest ecosystems for tourism and recreational purposes.…”

Evaluation of land cover changes and secondary ecological succession of typical agroforestry landscapes in Phu Yen Province

“…Accordingly, there has been financial support for people and village communities in forest management and afforestation such as support for zoning and regeneration of natural forests and support for afforestation and development of nontimber forest products. This is a very active and timely policy of Phu Yen Province as well as most of the forested provinces in Vietnam, effective in sustainable forestry development and protection and restoration of natural forests (Thuy et al, 2020). In addition, the efforts of forest rangers, along with many strict policies on staff management, including the consolidation of the Sub-Department of Forestry of Vietnam the focal point on forest management, have made the management and protection of forests clearer, more unified, and more effective than before (Phu Yen Provincial People's Committee, 2016).…”

“…For example, in Vietnam, payment for forest environmental services has not yet become a stable source of income for the local people. Forest environmental services are limited (Thuy et al, 2020). Therefore, the assessment of land cover changes and the succession of agroforestry landscapes serve as a basis for policymaking and solutions and models for local agroforestry management.…”

Participation of Local People in the Payment for Forest Environmental Services Program: A Case Study in Central Vietnam

“…The main ethnic group there is Pa ko, and their main source of income comes from labor, acacia plantations, and husbandry. Previous research compared several villages and suggested PFES should be implemented thoroughly and depending on the characteristics of the local communities [30,31]. Therefore, we focused on one village with the expectation that village Y had considerable experience in PFES among its residents.…”