Landscape/Geology: Chu Mom Ray National Park (CMR NP) is located within 08 communes and 1 town in 2 districts of Sa Thay and Ngoc Hoi in Kon Tum province, Vietnam. The Park has a diverse and rich forest ecosystem with 05 main types of forest vegetations representing the Sa Thay ecological sub-region.
Flora and Fauna: The CMR NP is home to many rare and endemic species listed in the Red Book of Vietnam and IUCN Red List that need to be prioritized for protection and conservation (192 plants and 112 animals are rare and endemic species). With a high value of biodiversity, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) recognized the park as an ASEAN Heritage Park in 2003.
Major impacts and challenges: Currently, Chu Mom Ray National Park is still facing the risk of deforestation and forest degradation, and biodiversity loss due to impacts from socio-economic activities of local communities.
Executive Summary
The ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity (ACB) addresses the biodiversity challenges across Southeast Asia by working on regional strategies towards the implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). The ASEAN Heritage Parks[1] (AHP) Programme is one of the flagship programmes of ASEAN to promote biodiversity conservation and improve the livelihood of AHP communities by developing and enhancing the capacity of AHP managers and multiple other stakeholders involved, including the communities that depend on the forest and other natural resources.
The Small Grants Programme (SGP), with assistance of German Financial Cooperation (KfW) supports efforts to protect biological diversity in AHPs, while simultaneously assisting livelihood development in and around select AHPs. Since 2017, in the second phase (SGP II), this financial cooperation extends its support to participating AHPs in Vietnam.
In Viet Nam, Chu Mom Ray (CMRNP) National Park, and three (3) other AHPs, Ba Be National Park (BBNP), Hoang Lien National Park (HLNP), and Kon Ka Kinh National Park (KKKNP) have been selected for implementation of the SGP II.
The overall programme objective is the protection of biological diversity and the sustainable management of natural ecosystems in the ASEAN region and to contribute to the improvement of livelihoods of the local population. The SGP II aims to:
- Improve biodiversity protection in line with the interest of local population directly dependent on selected AHPs and adjacent areas;
- Improve the livelihood of local communities directly dependent on selected AHPs or adjacent areas;
- Improve capacity and coordination for biodiversity conservation of AHP system in Viet Nam, including monitoring and evaluation system;
- Strengthen the role of ACB in promoting biodiversity protection among the ASEAN Member States (AMS).
The SGP supports a co-management approach for government-managed protected area landscapes and adjacent areas through multi-level co-management as means to link the protected area officials with the local stakeholders. It highlights eight thematic fields of protected area management: i) General Park management, ii) Wildlife research and monitoring, iii) Law enforcement, iv) Habitat and species management, v) Community outreach and conservation awareness, vi) Community development, vii) Ecotourism, and viii) Sector policy development; introduces the concept of establishing protected area working groups; and linking the core zone and the buffer zone agendas, comprising key landscape stakeholders.
This 5-Year AHP Participatory Small Grants Action Plan (PSGAP) provides a strategic framework for implementing SGP II and clear guidance to the development of small grant supported projects. It also serves as a reference for projects planning of relevant stakeholders. The PSGAP adopts a participatory planning approach that will actively engage all stakeholders to ensure the involvement and acceptance of all stakeholders to the small grants action plan.
The PSGAP aligns with the AHP’s national Sustainable Forest Management Plan (SFMP) and annual local Social-Economic plans that are developed by local authorities.
The PSGAP is implemented by Contracted Service Providers (SP) of the respective participating AHPs with the support of international Consultants.
The PSGAP is required to conform with the appropriate KfW Sustainability Guidelines[2] for implementing international projects through a supporting Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF). The SGP II Environment Social Due Diligence (ESDD) identified overall project risk rating as Category B (moderate risk) under the KfW Sustainability Guidelines. Given the anticipated contextual risk, and the risk associated with grant selection and specific activities, the ESMF details the generic procedures of addressing these risks as well as the implementation of ESMF monitoring in SGP II.
Based on the rapid assessment findings of law enforcement and practice in the 4 AHPs, and discussion with KfW, the PMU and ACB decided to exclude most of the law enforcement activities.
The ESMF and the PSGAP both outline stakeholder engagement at site-level, ensuring that there is inclusive stakeholder engagement, in particular gender and ethnic minority, in the grant projects, and allows for stakeholders’ ability to provide feedback and/or grievance, which are policy requirements in the KfW Sustainability Guideline. SG packages rated low risk will require a minimum Environmental and Social Code of Practice (ESCOP). Those packages rated moderate risk will require a site-specific Environmental Social Management Plan (ESMP).
The PSGAP aligns its SGP packages for investment with the findings of the ESMF. Selected grant projects shall not foresee having more than moderate risks. In addition, Grantees, SPs and relevant authorities shall be capacitated in addressing the associated risks of environmental and social impacts of the anticipated activities.
Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) is an instrument to assert indigenous peoples’ rights/ethnic groups/local communities (communities) in development activities in their territories. FPIC builds on the process of meaningful consultation and is established through good faith negotiation. Grant supported projects in SGP II which involved ethnic minorities are required to adopt this engagement approach prior to project implementation.
The primary beneficiaries of the programme are the local communities and Community-Based Organizations (CBOs) in AHPs and adjacent areas with strong vested interests (short to medium term income generation opportunity and longer-term natural resource sustainability) in the project interventions offered. Other groups such as ethnic minority groups, women, youth, and other the vulnerable communities are actively encouraged to participate in project planning and implementation.
Other core partners / beneficiaries that will be institutionally strengthened within the scope of the SGP are professionals and executives of the environment, forestry, water, energy, and other relevant sector authorities at the national level; the nature conservation administrations; the management of AHPs; as well as universities and NGOs. Local government field staff (agriculture/forestry technicians) engaged in community-based resource management shall be capacitated to provide the required extension support. In addition, village leaders, key farmers, local businesses and cooperatives, CSOs and NGOs are also seen as target group for capacity building.
Chu Mom Ray National Park (CMRNP) is located in the West of Kon Tum province in Central Highlands, approximately 30 km from Kon Tum city. The Park and its buffer zone are in the administrative area of two districts: Sa Thay, consisting of five communes and one town, and Ngoc Hoi, consisting of three communes. The national park has a total area of 56,257.2 ha and is divided into three subdivisions (zones): a strictly protected subdivision, an ecological restoration subdivision, and an administrative service and tourism subdivision.
CMRNP was established in 2002 due to its high biodiversity value, including an internationally recognised Important Bird Area and was recognised as an ASEAN Heritage Park in 2003.
CMRNP is characterised by medium and low mountains (500m – 1,700m), low hills and valleys. It shares an international boundary with Cambodia. There are five types of forest habitat: mid-mountain tropical evergreen forest, lowland evergreen forests, semi-evergreen broad-leaved tropical seasonal rain forest in lowland areas, bamboo and mixed bamboo-timber forests, and grassland and grassland with mixed shrubs and scattered trees.
The flora of Chu Mom Ray National Park is typically characterized as the flora in southern Truong Son mountain range (Annamite mountain range). In the park, 1,895 terrestrial vascular plants belonging to 184 plant families are recorded with 33 endemic species recorded, some of which have narrow ecological enveloped (e.g., Wrightia kontumensis Ly and Polygala tonkinensis Chodat) largely due to the diversity of habitats in the park.
In the park, 192 plant species are categorized as endangered species[3] with high economic and conservation value. Several species are considered critical in their conservation status (e.g., Decussocarpus fleuryi and Dipterocarpus grandifloras).
There are 1,001 animal species, belonging to six different Classes, are recorded with particularly high carnivore diversity (23 carnivore species belonging to 6 families, of which 17 are considered to be rare species).
CMRNP is an Important Bird Area[4] due to its high diversity of bird resources in terms of order, family and species composition, compared with the bird resources of the whole country, with 290 bird species belonging to 57 families and 17 orders.
There are 45 species of reptiles and amphibians, 123 species of fish and 416 species of insects. It is reasonable to conclude that these latter groups have been underrepresented in studies of the park and further research is likely to provide important data on the park’s global importance and will need to be prioritised in terms of conservation management.
CMRNP faces numerous challenges due to climate change, anthropogenic pressures, insufficient resources for management and historical events which all place significant pressure on the park. Agriculture landscape and potential tourism developments, places increasing pressures on the natural values of the AHP, in some instances with developments that are not integral to the aims and objectives of the AHP programme and the conservation of globally significant biodiversity per se. The core zone is made up of areas that have been largely protected by their aspect until recently, however, even these areas are now under pressure from land use demand.
CMRNP is a very recently designated protected area. As such, there are existing challenges and inconsistencies in the designation, SFMP and local communities ranging from areas designated as special use forest but in reality, degraded bare ground to a lack of clarity over the designated boundaries.
In common with the other three targeted AHPs, the policy and planning framework, which provides the rationale for the trade-offs between ecosystem resilience and economic development, leans towards investment in economic development, often at the expense of biodiversity conservation and the ability of the ecosystem to continue to provide the goods and services which underpin life processes as well as altering the scenic values of an unspoiled landscape and traditional agro-ecological landscapes.
Kon Tum province is important in economic cooperation and development with provinces on the East-West economic corridor. Economic growth is high (16-17% between 2016-2020) with the industry and construction sector and services sector expected to grow more than forestry and agriculture with correspondingly high rates of urbanisation.
However, additional restrictions on economic activities and topography also place many of the buffer zone communities at a disadvantage in economic terms as well as access to basic services, often resulting in a high dependency on forest resources, higher levels of poverty and food insecurity.
The diverse ethnic make-up of the buffer zone communes creates different challenges and opportunities in relation to forest management due to their different tenure, cultural approaches to farming and common pool resources management and gender equality.
The AHP is relatively small in ecosystem terms resulting in genetic isolation, greater “edge effects”, higher risk of species extinction and increased vulnerability to stochastic and catastrophic events. The lack of continuity and connectivity as well as the altitudinal aspect of the AHP makes it highly vulnerable and will likely experience high rates of habitat fragmentation, degradation and species extinction in the near future, processes which will be exacerbated by climate change given that there are limits to vertical migration as a means to adaption.
Tourism development offers a number of opportunities to improve socio-economic conditions of buffer zone communes. However, this requires a strategic vision which incorporates the aspirations of local communities, the need to attract external investment and the resilience of the ecosystem to buffer and absorb these pressures without loss of natural values and functions. This strategic vision still needs to be strengthened, integrating the AHP into the local socio-economic development with guidelines based on the socio-ecosystems ability to maintain its key components and functions. Thus, there is a need to develop a framework for tourism and eco-tourism development which acknowledges the necessary limitations to maintain the natural values as opposed to investment-led development objectives. Tourism, in the form of eco-tourism offers opportunities for sustainable local socio-economic development. Uncontrolled and mass-market tourism poses a significant threat to these globally important resources due to the small size, topography and lack of connectivity with other areas.
All these issues taken together reflect the need to use the small grant facility, effectively a financial tool; to support the growth – institutional, agency, community and private sector capacities, material resources and tools, technology, know-how, relationships and social capital – of a larger planning and management framework that provides the space and rationale for these trade-offs in order to make the system, core and buffer zones taken together, resilient. From the perspective of the ACB SGP, “resilience can be defined as the capacity of a system to undergo disturbance while maintaining both its existing functions and controls and its capacity for future change”[5], moreover; “resilience is determined not only by a system’s ability to buffer or absorb shocks, but also by its capacity for learning and self-organisation to adapt to change”[6].
The proposed small grant packages are therefore tailored, within the overall envelope of the grant, to support the stakeholders in this process. There is a focus on building technical capacities in areas such as biodiversity data and information management, GIS, monitoring with drones because these are some of the tools necessary to support decision-making and planning. Besides, there is also an emphasis on the processes which build social capital, the networks and relationships, which are a prerequisite for collaborative planning. In addition, the SG packages also stress the needs on awareness raising, especially as it relates to the alarming and urgent risks posed by climate change, along with the need to make collective decisions to avoid, mitigate and adapt to the inevitable impacts of global warming.
Finally, there is an emphasis on poverty alleviation and gender equality. Gender equality will be mainstreamed in all of the SGP activities as a core objective of the AHP programme, recognising not just the universality of gender equality, but also that; women play an important role in the management of biodiversity and in rural circumstances women often have a high dependency on biodiversity and other natural resources for their livelihood security and its sustainable management is of real and practical concern to them.
To this end the SG packages selected reflect this emphasis on capacity building, awareness raising and process alongside the agreed 60:40 split[7] in favour of livelihood investment. Table below provides an overview of the grant prioritization in different thematic areas.
[1] AHPs are defined within the ASEAN context as “protected areas of high conservation importance, preserving in total a complete spectrum of representative ecosystems of the ASEAN region”. The establishment of the AHPs intends to present the uniqueness, diversity, outstanding values, and the importance of the conservation areas. This effort is one of the important strategies to tackle the challenges on the environmental degradation in the ASEAN region, as well as part of ACB’s contribution in the region.
[2] https://www.kfw-entwicklungsbank.de/PDF/Download-Center/PDF-Dokumente-Richtlinien/Nachhaltigkeitsrichtlinie_EN.pdf
[3] 20 species in the IUCN Red List (2020): 7 endangered (EN), 7 vulnerable (VU) and 6 of low concern (LC) species. 48 species recorded in the Vietnam Red Book (2007): 14 endangered (EN), 34 vulnerable (VU) species. 26 species mentioned in Decree No. 06/2019 (ND 06) of Vietnamese Government: 2 species are banned from exploitation and use for commercial purposes (IA) and 24 species are restricted from exploitation and use for commercial purposes (IIA).
[4] http://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/mom-ray-iba-vietnam/details
[5] Gunderson, L.H. (2000). Ecological resilience – in theory and application. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 31, 425-439.
[7] Packages addressing eco-tourism are essentially addressing socio-economic/livelihood needs.
[6] Gunderson, L.H. and Holling, C.S. Eds. (2002). Panarchy: Understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Washington, DC. Island Press.
| HIGH PRIORITY (B) | ||||
| B-2 / Species recovery plan | B-3/ Value chain approach for NTFP, local agricultural and traditional products | B-4/ Capacity building and training of AHP staff on ecotourism management and participatory threat reduction | ||
| B-1/ Capacity building for financial planning of AHP | B-5/ Training to promote and develop local products, traditional handicraft and techniques | |||
| B-6/ Ecotourism and Biodiversity Day: a collaborative approach for awareness programme and promotion of local products | ||||
| General Park Management | Wildlife research and biodiversity monitoring | Community Outreach and Conservation Awareness | Community Development | Sustainable ecotourism development |
| HIGHEST PRIORITY (A) | ||||
| A-1/ Capacity building of AHP management in grant proposal identification, writing and management | A-4/ Capacity building for AHP’s staffs on GIS capabilities and data management | A-6/ Training in outreach and community relations for AHP staffs | A-10/ Capacity building of commune cooperatives | A-14/ Upgrading CMRNP ecotourism development plan |
| A-2/ Participatory Threat Reduction Assessment | A-5/ Monitoring the efficacy of regeneration interventions | A-7/ Awareness training on importance of conserving of natural values and its benefits | A-11/ Identification and commercialization of NTFPs | A-15/ Participatory workshop(s) on ecotourism management |
| A-3/ English language skills training for AHP staffs | A-8/ Awareness training of local administration | A-12 / Small-scale (village and individual) composting | A-16/ Establishing visitor info panel and upgrading of small-scale tourism facilities | |
| A-9/ Awareness of climate change | A-13 / Micro-support to community developments | A-17/ Info-package nature and biodiversity tourism | ||
| A-18/ Capacity building of minorities (esp. women) in commercialization of rural and nature-based tourism using social media tools and tourism hospitality skills | ||||
| A-19/ Language skills training [in tourism aspect] for AHP staffs and tour guides | ||||
| A-20/ Development of Chu Mom Ray ecotourism website | ||||
| General Park Management | Wildlife research and biodiversity monitoring | Community Outreach and Conservation Awareness | Community Development | Sustainable ecotourism development |
| ACB | ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity |
| ADB | Asian Development Bank |
| AHP | ASEAN Heritage Park |
| ASTS | Administrative Service and Tourism Subdivision |
| ASEAN | Association of South East Asian Nations |
| ERS | Ecological Restoration Subdivision |
| BZ | Buffer Zone |
| CBCE | Center of Biodiversity Conservation and Ecotourism |
| CBD | Convention on Biological Diversity |
| CBO | Community-Based Organization |
| CMR | Chu Mom Ray |
| CMRNP | Chu Mom Ray National Park |
| CPC | Commune People’s Committee |
| RPS | Strictly Protected Subdivision |
| CSO | Community-Based Organization |
| CSO | Civil Society Organizations |
| DARD | Department of Agriculture and Rural Development |
| DCST | Department of Culture, Sports and Tourism |
| DONRE | Department of Natural Resources and Environment |
| DPC | District People’s Committee |
| ĐT | Provincial road |
| ESDD | Environment Social Due Diligence |
| ESCOP | Environmental and Social Code of Practice |
| ESMF | Environmental and Social Management Framework |
| FES | Forest Environmental Service |
| FFPF | Forest Fire Prevention and Fighting |
| FPD | Forest Protection Department |
| FPIC | Free, Prior, and Informed Consent |
| GIS | Geographic Information System |
| GPS | Global Positioning System |
| GRDP | Gross Regional Domestic Product |
| IER | Institute for Environment and Resources |
| IPLC | Indigenous people and Local communities |
| IUCN | International Union for Conservation of Nature |
| KfW | German Financial Cooperation KfW |
| MARD | Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development |
| MCST | Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism |
| METT | Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool |
| M&E | Monitoring & Evaluation |
| MONRE | Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment |
| MoU | Memorandum of Understanding |
| ND-CP | Decree of the Government |
| NGO | Non-Government Organization |
| NP | National Park |
| NTFP | Non-Timber Forest Product |
| NRDP | New Rural Development Program |
| OCOP | One Commune One Product Program |
| ODA | Official Development Assistance |
| PCEMA | Provincial Committee for Ethnic Minority Affairs |
| PFES | Payment for Forest Environmental Services |
| PMU | Project Management Unit |
| PPC | Provincial People’s Committee |
| PR | Public Relation |
| PSGAP | Participatory Small Grant Action Plan |
| QD-TTg | Decision of Prime Minister |
| QD-UBND | Decision of Provincial People’s Committee |
| SGP | Small Grants Programme |
| SGP II | Small Grants Programme Phase II |
| SFMP | Sustainable Forest Management Plan |
| SMART | Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool |
| SP | Service Provider |
| UBND | People’s Committee |
| VND | Vietnamese Dong |