The rapid growth of the pangasius aquaculture industry has raised a number of environmental and social concerns. Excess waste can pollute the water and negatively affect plant and animal habitat. Feeding trash-fish to pangasius can cause unsustainable harvesting and water pollution. On the other hand, the inappropriate use of veterinary medicines and chemicals can have unintended consequences for the environment and human health, such as antibiotic resistance and unsafe products.
Sustainably produced aquacultural product is increasingly becoming the standard to get access to important market channels, such as supermarkets. The environmental aspects of pangasius, particularly in production, are receiving more and more attention. Certification and eco-labelling have become more and more indispensable for accessing international markets.
The SPSP is a Public-Private Partnership programme involving GIZ, IDH (Dutch Sustainable Trade Initiative), ANOVA Seafood company and WWF (development of standards for sustainable aquaculture), cooperating with the provincial People’s Committees to support farmers gaining access to global market. The programme was initiated in July, 2010 in Mekong Delta and has been implemented in some provinces such as Dong Thap, Tien Giang, Tra Vinh. The program’s objective is that “Farmers, processor and feed producers operating along the Pangasius supply chain in selected provinces of the Vietnamese Mekong Delta comply with internationally accepted and accredited certification schemes for sustainable production and sell certified Pangasius to European buyers.”
SPSP program is approved by Tra Vinh PPC since 2011 and has been implemented through the GIZ PARA project. The project aims to convince and raise awareness of farmers about Global G.A.P and ASC standards, which approach aspects such as environmental protection, animal health, product quality, safety, worker welfare and social responsibility etc... in order to get certification for exporting to EU.
The certification is a “Visa” for small-scale production to the international market. However, certification is not cheap for Vietnamese farmers. Producing pangasius to meet the ASC standards means an investment of 50 million VND for each ha of pond, while prices of ASC qualified pangasius are often 0.2-0.3 USD per kg higher than the normal level. Therefore, group certification can help reduce certification cost in comparison with the individual certification cost. Moreover, share technical support within group can also enhances productivity and product quality.
What the project has done here are raising awareness and willingness to obtain certification, developing understanding for the standard criteria, selecting cooperating small holders, developing individual upgrading plans for each farmer according to the results of the GAP-analysis (GAP analysis against the requirements of the certification standards), implementing individual/group upgrading plans including record keeping, and developing a value chain by identifying possible actors and set up an internal control system (ICS) for group certification (on-going). From experiences of the Tra Vinh project, big gaps are the record keeping and management. On the other hand, information on premium price is important for small scale farmers and this information should be given to the farmers from the beginning.
Shrimp-mangrove farming model - A win-win solution
 |
| Shrimp farming in Tra Vinh |
“In Vietnam, mangrove forests work like natural sea dykes and offer a front-line against storm surges. Their wide and knotty root systems protect against floods, salt water and erosion. They also regulate the local climate and water levels. But mangrove trees are being cut down at a rapid rate in the country. It's estimated that about half of Vietnam’s mangrove forests have been lost in the last decades. In recent years, the mangroves have fallen victim to shrimp farmers. Fueled by a global demand for shrimps, Vietnam, like many other countries in the region, has seen a boom in lucrative shrimp farming. It's estimated that land use for aquaculture has jumped ten-fold in the coastal regions of the Mekong in the past 15 years. The boom has brought lots of money and jobs to the region. But it's also had fatal consequences. Plant and animal life are losing their natural habitat, the ground is becoming more saline and in some places infertile, where antibiotics and chemicals from the shrimp processing plants have contaminated the ground water” (
Samson, 2010).
That was the same with the situation in Tra Vinh. One of the main causes of mangrove deforestation in Tra Vinh province is intensive shrimp farming. Though industrial shrimp farming can bring high economic benefits at the beginning, they contain high environmental risk in the long-term. Moreover, if pests or diseases happen, there is high risk of losing all.
A model with mangrove conservation and organic shrimp farming at the same time has been emerged, reconciling shrimps and mangroves conflict. With this extensive shrimp farming, the area rates of mangroves and shrimp are approximately 60% and 40% respectively. Given these rates, mangroves can be maintained while the respective (farm) ecosystems are healthier, the shrimp quality is better, and farmers have lower input costs.
Basically no chemicals, no feed, with pond renovation and only feeding when shrimps at seedlings stage, these natural shrimps need less input while they are more resistant. The farmers have less risk compared to intensive shrimp farming, while organic shrimps get higher price in the market than industrial shrimps. Moreover, along with shrimp, farmers can also harvest fish, crab… Therefore, farmers can earn more money while consumers can eat healthier, organic shrimps. Profits can then return back for mangrove forestry (PES - Payment for Ecosystem Services).
Since 2009, GIZ PARA project supported 3 households pilot in shrimp-mangrove model with activities such as training for DARD staff, forming a group of shrimp-mangrove model, training on management, technical skills as well as setting-up beneficial market linkages.
 |
Low investment, stable income,
with shrimp-mangrove model farmers can earn money sustainably and environment is protected. |
We visited a household with shrimp-mangrove model in Hiep Thanh commune, Duyen Hai district, Tra Vinh. [*It should be noted that the mangrove here is of production type and shrimp-mangrove model applied behind the dyke. Because for Soc Trang, with mangrove in front of the dyke as protection forest type, it does not work that way].
His harvest is sold at local markets with a premium price due to large size and high quality of his shrimp. The price he gets per kg of products sold is on the average 9 USD higher than the price for conventionally farmed shrimp.
According to the farmer, this extensive shrimp farming requires much lower investment in terms of inputs, time and labour than intensive shrimp farming. Though yields and profits are low, shrimp-mangrove farming carries no risk of crop loss.
However, there is a challenge as his farm shares water channels with surrounding intensive shrimp farms and waste water from these farms has negative effects on his shrimp ponds. All of the farmers here even joining the project, they apply both 2 types of intensive farming and shrimp-mangrove as back-up for each other.
Market-oriented Socio-Economic Development Planning (moSEDP) in Tra Vinh
Problem of conventional planning is that more often, the planning was made by district officials and it does not reflect the reality and the real need of the people in the communes. Market-oriented Socio-Economic Development Planning (moSEDP) is a bottom-up answer to conventional Development Planning with 3 main characteristics different: participation and empowerment, especially of the poor and landless people (1), market-orientation (2) and climate proofing (3).
Since 2008, the DPI of Tra Vinh has been developing the Market-oriented Socio-Economic Development Planning (moSEDP), a participatory version of SEDP. In 2010-2011, pilots of moSEDP have been conducted in IMMP/PARA communes. In 2012, it was replicated in the whole province.
Grass root participation and empowerment
The participation of citizens was integrated into the planning process, ensuring that the investments will correspond to the needs of the grass root. The bottom-up process from Village to Commune to District levels gives citizens a voice.
-Each village has at least 2 meetings with grass root people to do planning.
-People participating into planning meetings (max 25 per meeting): -men-women (as much balanced as possible), Khmer, poor (esp. the landless poor), private sector available in the village.
-Planning facilitators are local officials who have been trained in SEDP and facilitation skills to maximize people’s participation.
-Grass root people decide the investment through normally into three pillars: infrastructure construction, technical training including market linkage effort, women saving credit groups and other collective groups establishment and operation.
-After the final list of the most prioritized activities for the commune is identified, commune planning team discuss about the possible climate proofing solutions.
Market-orientation - Value Chain Approach
On the other hand, fostering income generation activities to improve people's livelihood is the heart of a SEDP. While the conventional SEDP process foresees no explicit involvement of the private sector in the planning process, the DPI Tra Vinh has based moSEDP on the value chain approach, thereby oriented moSEDP towards the demands of the commodity market and business opportunities.
[A value chain in agriculture can be described as a set of actors and activities that bring a basic agricultural product from production to final consumption, where at each stage value is added to the product. A value chain can involve input provision, production, processing, packaging, storage, transport and distribution].
After intensively raising awareness among partners and targets groups on the value chain approach, the project entered into value chain promotion through the local decentralized market-oriented planning process.
During the planning process, communities identify their economic development activities and earmark the commodity which should be developed through value chain upgrading. With involvement of the private sector, the selection includes a brief analysis of the value chain potential.
Promoting value chains seem to be the most promising approach to reduce the poverty rate. Well operating value chains foster economic growth as a necessary precondition for incomes to rise. In pro-poor value chains, it should be assured that the additional income generated actually benefits the poor, who are mostly represented in the primary producer group. PARA/IMPP initially identified 3 value chains for wider support that are rice, peanut and beef. For these three commodities province-wide value chain analyses were conducted and subsequent action plans developed. Project support concentrated on strengthening producer groups, improving techniques of primary production, and establishing business and market linkages.
From the experience gained so far, the following important aspects should be considered when working with value chains:
- Any value chain needs a “driver”and the project should not be a part of the value chain actors, but facilitating support services only.
- The pro-poor orientation has to be reflected regularly, especially in the view of the poor’s disadvantages of living in remote areas and potential marginalization with regard to access to services.
- A thorough value chain analysis with identification and quantification of each type of actor is crucial. Actors and service providers for the value chain should be clearly distinguished.
Promoting Development of Collective Economy
Promoting individual farmer/producer working in collective group can help them participate better into commodity market as they can earn following benefits:
- Lower production costs since they can buy cheaper inputs at larger quantity
- Easier sales and better business deal since they can sell larger quantity collectively at increased quality homogeneity and have increased power of negotiation
- Higher possibility to enter longer term of business deal and relationship.
The above benefits eventually increase income of group members and hence reduce poverty. At the same time, larger scale of operation likely demands more business supportive service and labor which create more income generating activities for the poor, especially the landless ones.
IMPP and PARA project have been supporting Tra Vinh Cooperative Alliance, DARD and district and commune authorities in creating good environment and facility for collective economy development. Tra Vinh is one of the first provinces in Vietnam having full data inventory of all the collective groups and cooperatives in the province. The 5 year development strategy and action plan is in final stage of development. Enhancement coordination among governmental and civil institutions for better services and facilitation to CE development is especially addressed in the strategy and action plan.
Learning form Tra Vinh experiences showed that two most important success factors of the collective groups are benefits for the members (1) and strong leadership and devotion of the chief of the groups (2). Moreover, support on group management, production techniques and market linkages are the 3 main pillars of support all the groups need.
Climate Proofing Tool - A systematic and long-term approach
The GIZ PARA project in Tra Vinh developed a "Climate Proofing Tool" in 2010. This tool is a means to prioritize development measures along value chains which are suitable for adaptation to and mitigation of climate change effects. From 2012, the Tra Vinh DPI, with assistance from the PARA project, integrated climate proofing into the planning process.
[To "climate proof" a development plan could e.g mean to propose the formation of water-user groups and training of farmers on water-saving irrigation, climate-smart cultivation techniques, or to plan a trial on salt-resistant crop varieties].
 |
Three main steps in the Climate Proofing Tool
(GIZ Climate Proofing Tool was adapted by the PARA project for local development planning, so that the identified adaptation measures could be integrated into the provincial moSEDP). |
Lessons learned:
- Local level adaptation requires locally appropriate practices. Even simple agriculture and aquaculture practices can bring long-lasting positive adaptation effects.
- It is essential for the effectiveness of Climate Proofing efforts to further improve the integration of Cliamte Proofing into moSEDP.
- It is also important to strengthen the knowledge base and capacity of moSEDP facilitators in a systematic way in order to enable them to apply Climate Proofing during the moSEDP process.
Impacts of the renovated, demand-based moSEDP
For citizens, income of people increased from 20% to 50% due to better public investment (bridges, roads, etc.) addressing difficulties of value chain actors, that leads to enhance business transaction; improved technical training; empowerment tremendously improved, people including women, ethnic and the poor set priority for public investment and services; high social benefits, better access to health centers and schools, village security is improved as the police have quicker access to the villages; additional job opportunities contribute to the reduction of “social evils”.
At admin level, attitude of officials towards people have changed extremely. Now they know much better what people need, and there is more accountability in relationship between people and local officials. Local authority (PPC, DPI, DoF) regard bottom-up processes as a necessity for sustainable planning. Central government is now reforming SEDP nation wide and incorporating the experiences from Tra Vinh into their reform process.
For private sector, recognition of local authority and people about private sector’s role in socio-economic development and poverty reduction (private sector does not only make money for their own benefit) has been improved; more dialogue between local authority and private sector.
Lessons learned:
- Generating ownership of local authority (DPI) from the start ensures higher probability and earlier institutionalization of the reform (including financing from public finance).
- Generating capacity for planning facilitators on both using planning templates and facilitation skills as well as putting the effective technical backstopping from higher admin levels in place are the key to producing quality plan.
- Raising enough capacity for village chiefs is the most crucial but also challenging.
- Local authorities’ accountability towards grass root people especially private sector regarding implementing what agreed in the approved SEDP is crucial to nurturing people’s and private sector’s participation.
- Announcement of budget ceiling on public investment at the village and communes can help to avoid “planning from nowhere”.
- Compromising all priorities from all the villages is a very challenging job of commune planning team.
- Integration of climate proofing tool into planning exercise only works after certain awareness and capacity on the tool built at the commune level.
References
Presentations and documents at the CCCEP Cluster meeting in Tra Vinh, January 16-17, 2013
Africare, Oxfam, WWF, 2010 - More Rice for People, More Water for the Planet - System of Rice Intensification
