Document(s) 8 of 24

Abstract

Indications of overexploitation and degradation of the rich natural resource base in the Tam Giang lagoon in Vietnam led to a long-term participatory research project to jointly investigate problems and potential responses. Local farmers, fishers and government officials joined the research team in a series of collaborative learning and testing interventions over a period of several years. This initiative generated a new understanding of the conflicts and degradation in the lagoon as they relate to changes in tenure and production systems.

The participatory research led to a pilot implementation of a new model for participatory planning and resource co-management in the lagoon. This not only helped resolve conflicts and ensure a more equitable access to the resources, but also improved the prospects for better governance of lagoon resources in the future. Key to this achievement was a common understanding of the community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) approach developed among the stakeholders through the research project.

The essential elements included the full engagement of local stakeholders (with emphasis upon marginalized groups), the recognition of customary access rights, and changes to the processes of local planning and resource governance, and to the organization and roles of the key stakeholders. The research team also adopted a new role as facilitators of learning, capacity-building and, more importantly, negotiation and consensus-building among the stakeholders.

New locally organized user groups along with leaders of local government played a central role in empowering the community, providing legal support and organizing the implementation of joint plans. The officers of provincial and district government departments adopted a new role, providing technical assistance instead of giving direct instructions. Fishers and farmers participated in lagoon planning based on their improved understanding of problems, benefits and responsibilities, which grew from their ongoing involvement in the research.

This chapter describes how participatory research led to innovations in natural resource planning and local governance in the Tam Giang lagoon.

Introduction

Application of a participatory approach to NRM in Vietnam attracted the attention of the government and others primarily because of the failure of conventional top-down measures. Improvements to livelihoods and resource sustainability in a variety of cases in Vietnam and elsewhere in Asia provide an indication of the effectiveness and applicability of participatory approaches (Ferrer, La Cruz and Newkirk, 2001). The participatory approach also provided researchers with a new way of thinking about research. It evolved into far more than the mere analysis of scientific data and technology. Instead, participatory research emphasized people and not things (Brzeski and Newkirk, 2002).

Participatory research has been carried out in the Tam Giang lagoon, Thua Thien Hue province, Vietnam since 1995 by an interdisciplinary research team supported by the IDRC and the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA).¹ The support provided by the project helped the research team carry out fieldwork with several different communities, to understand the lagoon context and how global and national changes affected people's livelihoods. The application of participatory research was a response to the ineffectiveness of the conventional 'top-down' approaches of technical intervention in resolving problems in complex systems like the Tam Giang lagoon.

As a result of this research, the team and local people identified the fundamental problem as a lack of management control over lagoon exploitation. However, the tools, processes and strategies to deal with such a situation were neither available nor clear. The general opinion of key stakeholders was that any management approach would be ineffective. But this view was based on the failure of the prevailing mechanisms for local planning. These mechanisms were mainly imposed from higher levels of government without the involvement of local stakeholders, and without an understanding of the context and problems. This case demonstrates how research led to new mechanisms for participatory local planning in the Tam Giang lagoon.

Everybody acknowledges how important the lagoon is. However, no one actually manages and takes responsibility for what happens there. All the different organizations (Communes, Districts, and Departments...) want to have rights, but that is all.

N.L. Hien, Director of Fisheries Department, Thua Thien Hue province

The lagoon context and recent changes

The Tam Giang lagoon is considered very important to the development of Thua Thien Hue province in general, and to alleviating poverty around the lagoon in particular. Of approximately 300,000 people living on and around the lagoon, many are poor and involved in fishing and aquaculture, or various agricultural activities along the shores. A living standards survey carried out in 1998 showed that the incidence of poverty in these communities varied between 55 and 70 per cent (Socialist Republic of Vietnam, 1999).² Approximately 100,000 people depend for their primary livelihoods on fishing and aquaculture, and many others depend on these as a secondary source of income. There are also an estimated 1,500 households living on boats in the lagoon (Vietnam, Department of Fisheries of Thua Thien Hue Province, 2003). These households are extremely poor and heavily dependent on aquatic resources for food and income, and their livelihoods are threatened by various factors, including a declining fish catch and difficulties in gaining access to fishing grounds (discussed further below).

The human and ecological significance of the lagoon extends beyond those people immediately involved in fishing and aquaculture. The lagoon is an important nursery area for inshore and offshore fish species, and thus indirectly supports the livelihoods of people living along the coastal area in the central part of Vietnam. The lagoons of Thua Thien Hue province, their ecological condition, and their capacity to support human development, are threatened by various activities (fishing, aquaculture, agriculture, tourism, transport, and industry development). However, few people in charge of lagoon management properly understand the context of its exploitation.

The 'Doi Moi' reforms, which mandated Vietnam's transition to a market-oriented economy, wrought significant improvements in poverty alleviation and resource management during the 1990s (Socialist Republic of Vietnam, 2003). However, socio-economic disparities also increased (Vietnam Development Report, 2004). One such policy reform that started in 1989 was the allocation of land to individuals. The land laws (1993) recognized legal private rights to the use of land, which had previously belonged exclusively to state enterprises and formal collective organizations such as agricultural cooperatives.

Although the central government still maintains legal ownership, it has issued certificates of long-term land-use rights, which were formalized and presented in the Red Book, or title, to certain legally defined individuals. (The Red Book is the local term for a certificate of title which passes with the land in transactions.) The Red Book, which indicates the purpose(s) of land use, defines the types of land to be allocated (e.g. agricultural lands) and those to be kept under state control (e.g. lagoon and fishery resources). However, recent patterns of lagoon exploitation have rendered existing guidelines on resource use largely irrelevant.

In recent years aquaculture has expanded rapidly (Brzeski and Newkirk, 2002). Fishers who had traditional access rights to specific areas of the lagoon, such as the fish-trap corral owners (see Box 4.1), have enclosed them with nets. In collusion with commune government representatives, they have been able to secure exclusive rights for aquaculture. Net enclosures and ponds have proliferated in the middle and south of the lagoon, while shrimp ponds and fish pens have rapidly expanded in the northern part. The number of households participating in aquaculture and the number of aquaculture facilities such as fish culture pens per household has also increased rapidly. This wave of lagoon privatization has reduced open-access lagoon areas and widened the disparity between those who have enclosed the lagoon and thus have easy access to lagoon resources, and those who have been excluded from their traditional fishing grounds. Small-scale, mobile fishers have become increasingly marginalized as resources have come under more direct control by the wealthier users or user groups in the community.

Figure 4.1 Map of Tam Giang lagoon

While small fishers have always had to compete with wealthier members of the village who own larger fishing gear, recent competition for lagoon resources has reached a scope and intensity never seen in the past. This is because of the sheer number of current users and the many ways in which they are now making claims on the lagoon resources.

The degradation of lagoon resources as a result of this indiscriminate and unplanned exploitation has resulted in declining average fish catches. The total annual fish catch from the river and the lagoon in the province decreased slightly from 3,099 tons in 2000 to 3,088 tons in 2003 (Statistics Office of Thua Thien Hue Province, 2003). However, information supplied by villagers showed that their individual fish catch for all major types of fishing in the north and middle of the lagoon (except clam collection) decreased by 23–45 per cent from 2000 to 2003. Despite the evidence of increased fishing effort and pressure, small-scale private aquaculture continues to be encouraged by the government because of the high value of export products such as shrimp, crab and certain fish species.

Figure 4.2 Illustration of dense net enclosures in the lagoon (drawn by Ariel Lucerna)

The local government has expressed concern about these trends, but as with most problems, it has chosen to defer the solution to higher levels of government. Meanwhile, the latter has traditionally approached the management of coastal resources by promoting productivity-enhancing technology and capitalization of the fishing industry. Central authorities generally respond to local problems by implementing regulations at the district level without consultation or participation of the resource users, and without regard for the potential impact on the ecosystem. On rare occasions, external consultants and experts may be asked to propose solutions. There had never been an alternative approach to governance that involved the affected communities in a meaningful way.

Participatory research and outcomes

When the research project began in 1995, researchers were just starting to experiment with participatory methods. IDRC provided training on PRA, community-based coastal resource management (CBCRM) and gender sensitivity, among other tools and methods. PRA techniques were employed to get local people involved in assessing current use patterns in the lagoon, and in identifying problems and solutions. At this stage, the project focused mainly on the development of livelihood strategies.

The middle lagoon (Tan Duong village, Thuan An)

In the middle lagoon, the rapid and widespread expansion of net enclosures by fixed-gear fishers led to the marginalization of mobile-gear fishers, already the most disadvantaged group in the community. Hence, the participatory research exercise in this site was initiated to explore options for resolving this conflict. The researchers worked separately with the two groups of users, and then facilitated the establishment of a committee of local fishers, officials and researchers to oversee arrangements in the community. The committee organized the participatory mapping of current net enclosures, as well as the design of waterways on the basis of existing navigation lanes. The representatives also agreed upon the size (length/width) of the waterways after discussion and consultation with the local authority. However, new issues arose in the development of regulations governing the management of the widened waterways. Conflicts became even more heated when the net-enclosure owners refused mobile-gear fishers access to the waterways.

Without consulting the researchers, the commune government acted unilaterally, using police forces, to open the waterways using specific authority provided by a decision of the district government. This decision and enforcement borrowed selectively from the new community plan to open up the waterways at Xa Bac. For example, the community map of the waterway system was adopted. However, the commune government did not adopt any of the procedures for conflict resolution and livelihood provision, intended to increase the fishing area for mobile-gear fishers. After the waterways were opened, the commune formed the respective net-enclosure owners into groups and assigned them particular waterways to manage. There was no support given to mobile-gear fishers in accessing the opened waterways.

The old conflicts grew worse and violence erupted. The mobile-gear fishers had assumed that they would be given access in accordance with the participatory planning agreements, but the local government's unilateral directives meant they were kept out of the waterways by the net-enclosure owners. The latter argued that the opened waterway area was part of their own net enclosures and that the local government had made them responsible for managing the waterways. Therefore, they also had rights to the waterways as well as to the net-enclosure area. Finally, the two groups of users could not even meet to discuss or negotiate because of all the conflicts. The most urgent issue became how to strengthen the fishers' common values and restart negotiations.

Though the waterway conflicts in Tan Duong grew worse, the waterway plan emerged as one of the early examples of local co-management efforts, contributing to the reforms in the fishery law of 2003. The problems in Tan Duong highlighted the problems of the private allocation of the lagoon's surface area and these issues were publicized nationally. The lessons from this experience were also helpful in the later Quang Thai efforts (see next section). It should be noted that the conditions in Tan Duong were more complex than elsewhere in the lagoon. Tan Duong was near the opening to the sea. It was more productive and, therefore, the intensity of exploitation was very high. As well, it was closer to the city and more sensitive to market pressures. PAR was much more challenging in this situation. Moreover, with completion of the research in 2000, the local government tried to intervene without sufficient support from researchers and only aggravated the conflict.

Figure 4.3 Map of aquaculture system and waterway in the Phu Tan area
Source: Phap, 2002.

The northern lagoon (Trung Lang village, Quang Thai)

Trung Lang village in Quang Thai commune is a mixed farming and fishing community that is isolated from market and administrative centres. The commune includes traditional boat-dwelling households which have decided to settle on the land in the past 20 years. This particular village was among the poorest in the commune. The research team became involved with Trung Lang village through the early promotion of peanut crop production in the village. The success in farm diversification built trust in and credibility of the research team among community members and in local government. This helped address the more conflictual issues related to the management of the lagoon (Brzeski and Newkirk, 2000).

In the early stages of the research effort, the most critical issue in the northern part of the lagoon was the prevalence of electric fishing and failure to enforce an existing ban of it. The fishers used high-voltage electricity to shock entire schools of fish so that they could be easily harvested, but at the same time, they destroyed other aquatic organisms. A self-management committee was established at the village level to organize the villagers to patrol the lagoon. A mechanism for collaboration with local government security forces was also developed. The community ban had been enforced effectively to begin with, but broke down under threats of violence. In one incident, electric fishers from outside the community destroyed fish corrals and threatened the villagers who tried to enforce the ban. This pilot effort brought out important lessons for the local stakeholders about the need for collective action to prevent destructive fishing, and the importance of formal collaboration with local government.

Participatory research in Trung Lang specifically targeted livelihood improvements for the poorest after 1998. The team introduced poor mobile-gear fishers to techniques of raising fish in cages in the lagoon (cage aquaculture), and initially subsidized the capital cost of cages as a strategy for improving their incomes. As a result, fish cages owned by mobile-gear fishers began to proliferate near the shore, and larger fish pens multiplied in the deeper lagoon area. However, as the number of pens increased, conflicts arose because they competed for choice locations.

In 2003, the research team re-engaged after a hiatus of two years in the field research, to update stakeholders on the current situation in the lagoon and problems which could only be resolved through local planning. However, the local government seemed blind to both the conflicts among resource users and the negative environmental impact. This was probably because the prevailing national and local policy was to promote aquaculture with its high returns as being essential to the country's economic development. The growing harvest from fish pens persuaded the government of their efficacy as a pro-poor strategy, and there was little attention to the warning signs of lagoon over-exploitation. Officials assumed that the northern Tam Giang lagoon still had plenty of potential in terms of unutilized lagoon surface area, when compared with the more congested central portion.

Figure 4.4 Trends of expansion of fish-pen culture in the northern lagoon

An important finding related to aquaculture expansion was that a freshwater macrophyte (locally named rong), used as feed for fish-pen culture in the northern lagoon system, was being overharvested. The local people wanted to know the potential amount which could be harvested without damaging the lagoon ecosystem. Rong has a close connection with a key aquatic habitat for certain stages in the life cycle of valuable fish species. By providing evidence of this ecosystem link, the research team convinced the commune government that the expansion of fish-pen culture should be limited.

It was more difficult to build awareness of the decline of fishery resources in the lagoon, because summary statistics (which include commercial aquaculture) showed increases in aggregate production, so provincial government officials assumed there was no problem. The research team built its analysis on the villagers' local knowledge and adjusted data to reflect fishing effort, rather than aggregate landings, to illustrate how the fishery resources were deteriorating (see Table 4.1 above). Focus group discussions, however, suggested that the price of most species increased faster than the decline of the catch.

We don't have to go to market to sell fish or shrimp. The middlemen buy at the boat with prices that are higher today than yesterday.

Fisherwoman in Ha Cong village.

Fishers also explained that the decrease of fish catch was 'the reality of every household. It was due to electric fishing and motorized drag nets catching all kinds of fish of all sizes.' They acknowledged that they themselves used more effective fishing gear and spent more time fishing, too.

Government planning structure and fisheries policy reform

Vietnamese government structure is unified and hierarchical, including national, provincial, district and commune representatives and policy-making bodies. The district is the seat of formal public administration closest to the local level. District offices deliver public services and programming. They combine the responsibilities of several line agencies at the provincial and national levels. District offices are directly accountable to provincial departments, which receive technical and administrative guidance from central ministries and report back to the central government. So, for example, in Figure 4.5 we can see that the Ministry of Fisheries develops the overall national policy and provides regulatory guidelines to the provincial DoF.

Table 4.1 Changes in fish catch per fishing effort unit and income from fishing, 2000–3

Figure 4.5 Government planning system in Vietnam

It is at the national level that planning requirements for the fisheries sector are determined. The content of fisheries sector plans is prepared by the ministry based on data from provincial agencies. At the provincial level, detailed plans are prepared on the basis of the national policy framework and planning guidelines from the ministry. The plans are approved by the provincial government and then distributed to the district so as to guide implementation. The process is led from above and includes sectoral plans from a wide range of ministries (including Fisheries, Agriculture and Rural Development, Transport, Trade and Tourism, Resources and Environment, among others.) The plans are implemented by district government staff, with the involvement of commune (local) government officers acting under the technical guidance of one of these line agencies. While there are obvious interactions between the sectoral plans when they are implemented on the ground, there is no mechanism to integrate them.

As part of the process of learning for policy reform, the earlier research project experiences in Tan Duong had been widely published and discussed among other research teams and with the Ministry of Fisheries, along with other donor-funded pilot projects. Reforms introduced in the fisheries law (2003)³ were the government's way of acknowledging that the strategy of allocating resource tenure to households, which worked well in boosting the productivity of agricultural land, was not as effective in the fishery sector.

Instead, the government recognized the need for co-management approaches through which government authorities could work together with locally defined user groups to manage fishery resources. This policy change was implemented by the provincial government in Thua Thien Hue and was designed to develop user groups among local fishers (see next section).

Participatory planning for lagoon use in Quang Thai

Participatory planning for lagoon use was undertaken in Quang Thai two years after the pilot experience of opening the Xa Bac waterways in Tan Duong. The new planning process involved the steps as outlined in Figure 4.6.

In practice, these steps were not separate but integrated. Neither were they strictly sequential, but sometimes took place parallel to each other. Lagoon planning was initiated quite early and developed alongside the learning and awareness-building. Some implementation began while the planning was still in progress. At different levels (commune, village, and user groups), there were different emphases on learning, planning and action. The planning and action should be seen as an integrated process in which the learning was initiated first, followed by the planning. Initial actions were taken to provide a base for learning, further planning, and adaptation. The following sections describe more details of each step.

Participatory learning and awareness-building of lagoon context

Building awareness of the context of lagoon resources exploitation was combined with the application of PRA tools and participatory research processes. Semi-structured interviews were conducted for data collection and to develop a database to facilitate learning and awareness-building. As well, a series of focus group discussions was conducted. Local participants who were involved in the focus groups included core villagers,⁴ village leaders and officials from state-sponsored people's organizations, such as the Farmers' Union and Women's Union. Local government (commune) officials were also involved in focus groups. Meetings and discussions were organized for officials and for the core villagers, both separately and together. The outcomes of the learning activities were a common understanding of the context of lagoon exploitation and the need for planning.

The research team supported participatory environmental education. They analysed the community communication network through a training workshop, which addressed the necessity and importance of two-way communication, and the development of information channels and participatory messages. The workshop participants themselves developed a programme for environmental education on lagoon resource problem-solving. Afterwards, the commune officers who were in charge of culture and communication led its implementation. Activities included broadcasting, meetings and seminars. The outcomes were important in sensitizing the community members and preparing them for the next steps in the planning process.

Figure 4.6 Participatory planning process for Quang Thai lagoon

Involving local governments and developing community partnerships

The biggest challenge to the research team in preparing for the participatory planning exercise was to involve local government officials, because they were accustomed only to following central instructions. Therefore, adopting a new and participatory process required considerable learning effort.

The problems with the involvement of local government in participatory planning were twofold: without knowledge and skills, it was much easier to proceed in a conventional way; and there were no formal requirements or incentives to apply participatory planning instead of familiar methods.

The team played a crucial role in overcoming these barriers, using several strategies to accomplish change. The researchers prepared scientific evidence and technical data about resource degradation in order to justify local, participatory planning. Officials from the district and provincial departments of fisheries were informally engaged in cooperation on field activities, analysis and community meetings with the research team to build their confidence and familiarity with the issues. Special workshops were organized and targeted at local government officials in different agencies, to promote a shared understanding of lagoon resource management. Finally, the researchers played an important role in negotiating and facilitating discussions among the various different government agencies involved in the planning process.

The outcomes of these efforts to engage local government were very important in terms of learning for change. They not only made it possible for fisheries departments in the districts and provinces to get involved in planning, but also encouraged government officials to adopt new roles. For example, the team succeeded in getting officials to support community arrangements for opening the navigation space in Quang Thai rather than using the police to enforce a different district regulation. Officials were also persuaded to consider customary and current use rights in reorganizing the allocation of the lagoon area to fish corrals instead of imposing a bidding mechanism provided for in district policy.⁵

The research team was able to overcome the scepticism and suspicion of local government, and encouraged officials to undertake a completely new planning process in part because of the evidence and expertise the team had acquired in several years of prior research on lagoon exploitation and resource conflicts. Another reason was the strong relationships of trust and collaboration they had developed with the involved communities through participatory research. This experience built facilitation and communication skills in the research team, which were essential to the successful introduction of this new participatory governance process.

The involvement of research and government organizations with local village fishers and other resource users proved important in developing new local organizations. For instance, in responding to the fisheries policy reforms, the provincial government was forced to rethink its traditional strategy of allocating areas in the lagoon to individual households. Instead, they had to consider how areas could be allocated to groups of fishers. The problem was that local co-management groups were required to be legally established entities.

There are already a number of mass organizations, which involve most local residents in any village, such as the Farmers' Union, the Women's Union and the National Fatherland Front. These are sanctioned by the national government; however, they do not have the appropriate legal standing to receive resource title under the land law (1993). In a pilot activity, which was approved by the provincial DoF and the district government, a local Fishing Coalition was formally established and constituted as a legal entity capable of holding resource rights. Its members were the villagers who exploit aquatic resources in the lagoon. This new user organization developed a formal constitution addressing membership and procedures, and subsequently played a major role in planning lagoon resource use. An open registration process included all the fishing and aquaculture households, both fixed-gear and mobile-gear, the very poor and the better-off. Membership was defined at the household level, with representation normally by the head of the household, so the organization as constituted by local people themselves is dominated by men.

Another challenge for the research team was ensuring the meaningful participation of women and very poor households in the planning process. In the lagoon communities, women and men are both active in fishing and aquaculture. However, women are more involved in processing and selling products, as well as domestic and farming work (livestock) for additional income. Women from better-off households typically practise both fishing and aquaculture. They also have more opportunities to join in community activities since they have more financial security and spare time.

In the planning discussions, women were not very active and decision-making was dominated by men. The women from very poor households, some of whom practise only mobile-gear fishing, were even more difficult to reach. Men are assumed to represent the different interests in their households, in accordance with traditional practice, power relations in the family and social norms. While the research team has been successful from the outset at engaging even very poor households in the planning process to secure their access to lagoon resources, they also recognize that additional education and awareness-building are still needed to strengthen the representation of women's interests in the process. These activities are being developed as the new local planning procedure evolves.

Consensus on planning criteria

Planning for the allocation of the lagoon surface and access rights started with a stakeholders' meeting and workshop, which involved the participation of core villagers, the Fishing Coalition, the village leadership, the commune government, and representatives of district and provincial departments in charge of lagoon management. With the facilitation of the research team, participants reached consensus on the main problems to be addressed, the purpose and overall strategy, and the criteria for planning. The agreed purpose of resource planning was to reorganize fish-pen culture and fish-corral practices to provide space necessary for waterflows and navigation, as well as a base for improved administration (including registration, licensing and taxation) and more effective enforcement of the ban on destructive fishing. Specifically, the participatory planning aimed to involve the villagers as resource users in the following planning activities:

• determining the fish-pen culture zones and locating them in the local lagoon;
  
  
• defining the intended (maximum) number of fish corrals and locating the whereabouts of the fish corrals;
  
  
• locating and defining the lagoon space for the navigation lanes and waterway systems;
  
  
• community organizing to form appropriate fish-pen culture and fish-corral groups to facilitate community-based management; and
  
  
• developing local regulations for resource management based on input from user groups, the village and commune, and in accordance with provincial and district regulations on resource protection.

Three main priority considerations and criteria for planning were also discussed and agreed upon among different stakeholders:

• maintaining access to the lagoon for all current resource users within the local territory;
  
  
• respecting customary rights regarding fishing places; and
  
  
• sharing any dislocations required for the re-arrangement of lagoon areas.

Participants also agreed to take into account requirements for navigation and resource protection as defined in district and provincial regulations. Feedback from the community led to the consensus that it was difficult (or impractical) to enforce all these regulations fully. However, certain planning measures could be taken to reinforce their intent so as to satisfy the responsible agencies while these regulations were gradually replaced or updated.

Participatory planning and actions at the village level

The research team facilitated development of the plan, using PRA tools such as mapping, Venn diagrams and focus groups to involve the community in learning, generating ideas, proposing strategies and designing plans for lagoon use. The plan was developed in several stages, starting with a preliminary design at the village level and then detailed plans for fish-pen and fish-corral activities. These designs were drawn up jointly by the fish-pen owners and fish-corral owners, the researchers, commune officers and Fishing Coalition representatives. The separate draft plans for fish-pen culture and fish-corral practice were integrated and presented to a meeting of the whole village for review and feedback.

After a consensus among villagers was obtained, actions were taken to strengthen the resource user organizations. Villagers were registered based on the current locations, zones developed for pen culture and rows defined for fish corrals. This led to the formation of resource user groups. Lagoon demarcation was organized by the Fishing Coalition together with representatives from local, district and provincial government agencies. The local government and provincial departments provided technical and legal support through officials who witnessed the field activities. User groups constructed sites and demarcation posts in the lagoon. Meanwhile, the project team contributed consulting services and construction materials for the demarcation posts.

Through participatory planning and action, villagers accomplished several useful results.

• They specified what the number of fish corrals, pens and future limits should be. The community reduced the number of rows of corrals and increased the number of pens and pen zones. The participants defined these in a way that would not increase conflict with the current fish corrals but which would, instead, maximize production, taking account of the lagoon environment, such as depth and currents.
  
  
• They defined both the types and number of resource user groups. This was aimed at promoting cooperation among the resource users. All current owners could join in the corral groups and each group would correspond to one row of corrals. However, no new fish corrals or users would be permitted. Meanwhile, all current owners of fish pens could join the pen groups, each corresponding to one pen zone. Newcomers were eligible to join the new zones to be designated.
  
  
• They located and designed navigation lanes and waterway systems.
  
  
• They defined pen-culture zones, fish-corral rows and waterway systems (using concrete markers in lagoon).
  
  
• They mapped all pen-culture zones, fish-corral rows and waterway systems for monitoring.
  
  
• They dismantled and removed pen zones and fish corrals in designated navigation areas.

Participatory planning and actions among the resource user groups

All households that practised fish-corral and fish-pen culture were registered with their respective user groups. This guaranteed them access to the lagoon, provided collective protection of their gear and resolution of pollution issues, and brought external and government support, such as extension services.

Figure 4.7 Map of planned lagoon use

Figure 4.8 Demarcating the pen zones, fish-corral rows and navigation space in Quang Thai lagoon

About 90 per cent of the total 150 households of the village participated in the user groups. The size of each fish-corral group varied from 7 to 15 households, while members of pen groups varied from 17 to 35. There was no specific user group for mobile-gear fishers. However, most of these households participated in the fish-pen culture groups because they practised both mobile-gear fishing and pen culture.

Actions at the resource user group level were led by group leaders who were elected by the respective user groups. They started by designating the location of gears in their allocated zone. For example, the proposed number of rows of pens, the direction of the rows and the space between them were all intended to optimize water current flows, protection and management practices. Places in the pen zone were allocated to group members randomly after the number of pens had been registered. Pens of group members in the allocated zones were then moved and rearranged, and the new locations mapped. In addition, other group regulations and agreements on gear establishment and management were developed. Additional measures for group management and cooperation were still being formulated as this chapter was being written.

Consolidation, monitoring and follow-up

The Fishing Coalition facilitated and reviewed group arrangements, the allocation of locations and places, and the development of regulations. It also coordinated among groups to schedule the moving of pens. Decision-making on user fees and mode of collection, budget management and capital development was remanded to the user groups. The Fishing Coalition has recently developed measures including charging higher fees for people who set up pens outside the designated zones. As long as pen culture is still allowed to expand, newcomers need to be organized in new zones yet to be designated.

Systems for local planning, enforcement, monitoring and reporting are being developed. A continuing role of the research team is to provide technical support and facilitation for a participatory monitoring mechanism with the people of Quang Thai. Its other important roles are identifying means and processes to strengthen local roles in planning processes both at the district level (scaling vertically 'up' in the government hierarchy) and in neighbouring communes (scaling horizontally 'out'). Some preliminary steps have already been taken.

The team is now preparing for planning in Quang Loi, the commune next to Quang Thai. It is also exploring with officers of Quang Dien district and the provincial DoF how to conduct the vertical scaling-up process.

The emerging model for participatory local planning

The new participatory planning process in Quang Thai was not predefined either by government officials or by the research team, but emerged from interaction among resource users and other concerned stakeholders. The process is still evolving as all stakeholders continue to learn from experience and make adaptations. As the research project continues, the research team will reinforce this process of iterative action, learning, planning and adaptation. Figure 4.9 presents the most important features of the emerging local planning process.

Innovative elements of participatory planning

Participatory planning in Quang Thai emphasized the importance and urgency of NRM at the local level. It also succeeded in resolving some of the problems and conflicts that it was supposed to address. This was a dramatic change from the previous planning mechanism. The process tested concurrent planning and implementation, built on local knowledge, organized resource users, assigned responsibility and management authority to user groups and created new roles for users and all levels of government. The planning sustained the livelihoods of resource users because it recognized access based on customary rights, and because community members themselves took action to regulate exploitation and reduce the pressure on lagoon resources.

In terms of problem-solving, conflicts among the fish-pen owners competing for a good location were resolved successfully, though those of newcomers still need to be addressed. All households moved their pen(s) to newly allocated places even without external financial support. It thus became unnecessary to compete with each other. Most users were able to participate in negotiations to come up with collective actions. For instance, when a few households were asked to relocate their fish corrals from the navigation zone, all the group members decided to move theirs in an expression of solidarity with the affected families.

Figure 4.9 The emerging model for participatory local planning for NRM

The planning process also improved the capacity of community leaders to involve people in resource management and community actions. An example was the users' voluntary contribution of time, labour and materials to mark off the exploitation zones, public navigation routes and waterways.

Another positive impact was the support that the process lent to management and governance. It provided the basis for defining new roles and management functions of the stakeholders in further planning efforts. As (co-)managers, the user organizations identify problems, plan solutions and monitor results. Resource user groups carry out collective actions. Commune officials initiate and lead local resource planning. The provincial and district officials provide technical advisers and facilitators to help local people resolve their own conflicts. The researchers design the process, which in turn facilitates learning, planning and negotiations between other stakeholders.

Lessons learned

Key elements of participatory planning

Our experience with the successful introduction and establishment of a new participatory planning process for resource co-management in the lagoon incorporates five strategic elements.

1. The key point is a shared understanding among the stakeholders of the context, problems and planning approach. This came from learning and sharing together in the previous participatory research applications. This common understanding not only assured the participation of the stakeholders, but also facilitated their effective contribution to carrying out the whole planning process.
   
   
2. The active and meaningful participation of fishers and farmers is crucial, because they bring their knowledge and experience to the planning process, and because their opinions are respected and valued. They have the most important role in decision-making, but in return are expected to take responsibility for the implementation of the plan. This is not to be misunderstood as the token consultation of local people in a plan essentially developed by bureaucrats.
   
   
3. Strengthening a new community organization, the Fishing Coalition, was very important in order to build the capacity of community actors who would undertake the central roles in organizing and planning resource management. The support of commune government officials, who were able to take leadership of the overall process, was also very important in empowering the community and providing legitimacy to community actors.
   
   
4. Participation of the line agencies at various local levels (provincial and district departments of fisheries) was important in providing functional and technical support.
   
   
5. The overall facilitating role of the research team was essential to carrying out participatory planning as an innovative process. They were vital to the learning process, capacity building, technical analysis and, most importantly, negotiations among the community groups and stakeholders

The effectiveness of participatory research

The long-term participatory research project was a crucial prerequisite to the planning innovations for several reasons. First, it helped all the stakeholders to understand the context and livelihoods of people, instead of seeing problems in simplistic terms and making assumptions about their causes and solutions. This enabled all parties to recognize the source of the problems and to develop effective strategies for solving them. PAR approaches helped the research team to develop new skills, which proved invaluable in developing co-management solutions. Participatory research also respected the people's knowledge and practices; therefore, it invited local people into the learning process with the researchers. Together, researchers and local people were able to generate ideas to learn and change, and to convince governments at different levels that their recommendations would be practical.

PAR was also an effective tool for developing local partnerships, good relations and trust with the communities. Sometimes problems were not addressed successfully. However, the support formthe development of local livelihood strategies and the involvement of communities in learning enhanced the credibility of the research team and of the solutions adopted.

The team applied PAR for problem-solving. This made the approach adaptive and responsive to the rapid changes in lagoon exploitation. For example, PAR dealt with the new expansion of pen culture. The approach not only provided effective tools for the research team but also for government officials in learning about the context, analysing the situation and designing interventions. The tools were also helpful as a means to facilitate negotiation, dialogue and to share learning among the local stakeholders. This enhanced the involvement of the local government in locally driven initiatives of planning for NRM.

The effectiveness of participatory planning

In Quang Thai, the new participatory planning process was effective in reducing conflicts and improving both equity and environmental quality. This was a different result from the earlier experience in Tan Duong. With less severe conflicts and with the benefit of earlier lessons, the research team was able to adapt participatory research and facilitate successfully a new local planning process. Local government recognized the importance of the actual process involved as opposed to only acknowledging the final planning document with its approval stamped by senior government. Moreover, the participating stakeholders were willing to try new roles, rather than remain stuck in conventional practice. For example, officials from the local government office and line agencies went to the lagoon to witness the demarcation of allocated zones and provide legal recognition, instead of just approving a plan document in their offices.

The planning process was based on local knowledge and meaningful participation in problem-solving, which addressed not only the conservation and ecological issues of the lagoon resource base, but also the economic issues of local livelihoods. Most of the solutions and strategies came from the suggestions of local people themselves. This greatly strengthened local commitment and participation in plan implementation.

The plan recognized customary rights and current (informal) resource use rights in the lagoon, so it did not threaten any groups of resource users. This commitment to resource users greatly increased their buy-in to the planning process, reduced the fear that one group would benefit at the expense of others and lessened the risk of long-term over-exploitation by non-participating users.

The role of the research team in ongoing support for the planning process was crucial. The team introduced the concepts and practices of participatory decisions and adaptive learning, and emphasized to all stakeholders the value of scientific evidence to help achieve equity and sustainability, through several years of engagement in participatory research work. The team's skills in communication and facilitation were essential to gain the support of local government, and to build trust and foster dialogue between stakeholders. The research team maintained its engagement throughout the process of background preparation, planning and implementation, in order to ensure continuity and address technical issues, negotiate conflicts and prevent miscommunications, even as more and more of the leadership for planning and management was being taken by local user groups together with the commune.

The research team did not predetermine the introduction of the participatory planning. This outcome emerged as the dynamics of resource use changed in the lagoon, as all stakeholders came to share a common understanding of the problems, and as they gained experience with new aquaculture technologies and tenure options. The local government and resource users took advantage of the opportunities afforded by the reform of national fisheries legislation to develop an effective participatory planning response.

Everybody had to learn a lot along the way, but learning takes time. Effective preparation for engaging different groups in participatory planning involves time-consuming step-by-step processes, with frequent setbacks and false starts. These steps are crucial to allow the research team, local officials and resource users to understand the context and reach shared expectations for planning. With experience, they can be improved to some extent, but the emergence of effective local participatory planning processes will never be a smooth or rapid process.

Conclusions

When it is undertaken with attention and rigour, PAR provides an effective tool for researchers to involve the community in the learning process about NRM problems and solutions. It facilitates the identification of problems and emphasizes the most effective interventions. Participatory research helps build awareness and trust, and this leads to the sensitization and involvement of the community, government and other stakeholders in local planning for natural resource co-management.

Participatory research made it possible for the research team, the local government and other stakeholders to modify their positions on issues of conflict through dialogue and negotiation. This was key to reaching a common understanding over time of the new processes, roles and actions for lagoon resource management.

The new participatory planning model in Quang Thai not only resolved conflicts and responded to resource degradation but also helped stakeholders to make the changes in processes, organization, representation and roles required to move towards better governance and CBCRM.

Acknowledgements

The research project was conducted with the financial and technical support of the IDRC and CIDA and with special acknowledgment to Stephen Tyler and Gary F. Newkirk for their efforts to initiate and guide the project. Acknowledgement is also extended to the reviewers, editors and experts from the 2004 CBNRM writeshop in Tagaytay, Philippines, for their substantive comments, technical guidance, and support in preparing this paper. A number of institutions and individuals have been involved in the implementation of this planning effort: Hue University of Agriculture and Forestry; Hue University of Sciences; Fisheries Department of Thua Thien Hue province; Department of Agriculture and Rural Development of Quang Dien district; and the Commune Government of Quang Thai. The lead author's background is described elsewhere. Co-authors Chat, Hanh, Tinh, Thanh and Suong are all affiliated with Hue University of Agriculture and Forestry; co-authors Than and Phap with Hue University of Sciences. The research team would like to thank all those people who have been involved and who have contributed to this project: government technical staff, faculty members, researchers from participating institutions, local officials and particularly the villagers – the women, men, fishers and farmers from Quang Thai.

Document(s) 8 of 24