TDA-IME Project Final Report June, 2013 small plots of mangrove forest, or forest protection contracts, has been tried as an alternative. The effectiveness of these approaches was analyzed by Joffre and Luu (2007) and Pham (2011). They concluded that individual household-based forest protection contracts did not result in more effective protection and management of mangrove forests. In fact, the opposite was the case, because the amount paid per year and hectare was not enough to actively engage people in forest protection activities. Instead, it encouraged them to generate their own income by cutting the forest for fuel wood rather than protecting it. The experience in Viet Nam with forest protection contracts clearly shows that mangrove protection and management, which relies on individual ownership of small plots of forest, does not work in a situation where a highly dynamic coast is protected by only a narrow belt of mangroves (as in figure 3). In such a situation, forest protection obligations are more important than rights to forest management (Sikor and Nguyen, 2011). Approaches which focus on mangrove protection do not address the needs of those who depend on natural resource collection from mangrove forests for their livelihood. One way to avoid the problems associated with a mangrove forest protection by the conventional forest authorities, or through individual ownership/responsibility for small forest plots as in Viet Nam, is to directly involve those people whose livelihoods depend on the use of natural resources from the protective mangrove forest belt. If these people can develop ownership and ensure sustainable use of resources, then effective protection can follow. This goal can be achieved through co-management, an approach that has already proved successful for the management of natural resources worldwide (for a comprehensive overview of co-management see Borrini-Feyerabend et al., 2004, 2007). Co-management The main principles of co-management are summarized below. Two case studies describing examples of mangrove co-management in Soc Trang Province in the Mekong Delta, Viet Nam and in Koh Kong Province in Cambodia are provided in Annexes 2 and 3, respectively. Co-management, or shared governance (see text box below and Table 13 below on the use of these terms), is a type of management/governance in which decision-making power, responsibility and accountability are shared between governmental agencies and other stakeholders, in particular the indigenous peoples and local communities who depend on the natural resources culturally and/or for their livelihoods (Borrini-Feyerabend, 2011). International conservation polices and agreements developed over the last 15 years not only talk about participation, culture and equity, they also deal with governance. In contrast to Management, which is about what to do, Governance is about who decides what to do. Therefore, the term shared governance should be used when talking about co-management to avoid a one-sided focus on what to do and to include the important element of who decides what to do. In this report, the term comanagement is used with the clear understanding that it includes shared governance (Borrini- Feyerabend, 2011). Four main governance types can be identified in relation to who holds management authority and responsibility and is held accountable for the crucial decisions regarding the designated area and natural resources at stake: (1) the government (and its agencies at various levels); (2) various actors together; (3) the owners of the concerned land and natural resources; and (4) the concerned indigenous peoples and local communities (Table 13) (Dudley, 2008; Borrini-Feyerabend, 2010). 73
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis of Indochina Mangrove Ecosystems
To see the actual publication please follow the link above