You are on page 1of 103

Forest Development and

the Planting of Native


Trees in Three
Mountainous Northern
Provinces

Dang Kim Son


Nguyen Ngoc Que
Phan Sy Hieu
Truong Huu Chi

INFORMATICS CENTRE FOR AGRICULTURAL


AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT IN VIETNAM
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
NO. 2 Ngoc Ha Street, Ba Dinh District, Ha Noi,
Vietnam - 2004

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION
6
CHAPTER 1. REVIEW OF FOREST DEVELOPMENT IN VIETNAM
FROM 1989 – 2001 7
1. Role of Forestry in Vietnam’s Economy
7
2. Changes in Area and Structure of Forests
9
3. Forest Development Programs
10
4. Legal Framework for Smallholder Forestry Practice
12
4.1 Forest Ownership
12
4.2 Forest Land Allocation and Renting
13
4.3 Rights of Households Planting Forests
15
5. Native Trees in Vietnam
18
5.1 Situation of Native Tree Plantations
18
5.2 Distribution of Native Trees in Vietnam
19
6. Characteristics of Surveyed Provinces
20
6.1 Forestry in Mountainous Northern Region
20
6.2 Forestry in Lao Cai
21
6.3 Forestry in Hoa Binh
22
6.4 Forestry in Phu Tho
23
6. Summary
24
CHAPTER 2. SURVEY METHODOLOGY
27
1. Sampling Method
27
2. Response Rate
27

2
3. Data Analysis Method
28
CHAPTER 3. CHARACTERISTICS OF RESPONDENTS
29
1. Characteristics of Interviewees
29
2. Income Sources of Households Interviewed
31
3. The Poverty and Hunger Situation
32
4. Summary
32
CHAPTER 4. FOREST OWNERSHIP AND TREE DISTRIBUTION
34
1. Types of Forest Managed by Households
34
2. Land Use Certificates
35
3. Land Area per Household
37
4. Distribution of Trees in Natural Forest
40
5. Distribution of Trees in Plantation Forest and Forest Gardens
43
5.1 Planting of Exotic Trees
43
5.2 Planting of Native Trees
44
6. Mixed Plantation of Trees and Agroforestry Production
50
7. Summary
54
CHAPTER 5. TREE PLANTATION INPUT
58
1. Support from Projects for Forest Plantations
58
2. Application of Fertilizers on Trees
59
3. Seedling Supply
61
4. Thinning and Trimming
63
5. Access to Technical and Market Information
64
6. Summary
64
CHAPTER 6. PLANTATION RESULTS AND FOREST HARVESTS
68
1. Growth Rate of Timber Trees in Planting Forests
68
2. Products from Plantation Forest Thinning
69
3. Household Firewood Consumption
70
4. Harvest and Usage of Timber from Plantation Forest
71
5. Harvest from Natural Forest
74
6. Summary
76
CHAPTER 7. HOUSEHOLDS’ FOREST PLANTATION PLAN
78
1. Households Having Tree Planting Intention
78
2. Trees to be Planted
79

3
3. Forestry Planting Impediments
81
4. Reasons of Forest Plantation
84
5. Encouraging Effects of Government Support
84
6. Summary
85
CHAPTER 8. CONCLUSION
88
1. Forestry Development in Vietnam
88
2. Results of Survey in Lao Cai, Phu Tho and Hoa Binh
89

4
List of Tables
Table 0.2-1 Forest Classification, Vietnam, 1995 9
Table 0.2-2 Changes in Forest Area (M ha) 9
Table 1.5-1 Area of Some Important Native Trees in 1999 2
Table 1.6-1 Forest Area in the Mountainous Northern Provinces 20
Table 0.2-3 Survey Sample 20
Table 0.1-4 Sample Structure by Gender 28
Table 0.1-5 Interviewees Who Are Household (HH) Heads 29
Table 0.1-6 Forest Plantation Decision Maker 29
Table 3.1-4 Relationship of Respondent to Household Head 39
Table 3.1-5 Respondents’ Age 30
Table 3.1-6 Ethnicity of Interviewees 03
Table 3.2-1 Propostions of Respondents with Non-farm Earnings, by Province 30
Table 3.2-2 Non-farm Earning Sources 31
Table 3.3-1 Self-assessed Indicators of Household Welfare 31
Table 4.1-1 Forest Types Managed by Households, by Province 32
Table 4.1-2 Time Length of Natural Forest Management (years) 34
Table 4.1-3 Time Length of Plantation Forest Management (years) 34
Table 4.2-1 Agricultural Land Sources 35
Table 4.2-2 Source of Forest Land 36
Table 4.3-1 Area of Agricultural Land per Household 37
Table 4.3-2 Area of Forest Land per Household 38
Table 4.4-1 Area of Trees in Natural Forest (m2) 94
Table 4.4-2 Height Distribution of Tree Species in Natural Forest (%) 40
Table 4.4-3 Diameter Distribution of Tree Species in Natural Forest 41
Table 4.5-1 Households Planting Trees, by Tree Type 42
Table 4.5-2 Households Planting Exotic Trees 43
Table 4.5-3 Planting Year of Exotic Trees 43
Table 4.5-4 Reasons for Growing Exotic Tree Species 4
Table 4.5-5 Households Growing Native Trees 4
Table 4.5-6 Households Growing Native Species, by Species 45
Table 4.5-7 Year of Plantation Establishment 54
Table 4.5-8 Number of Trees at Time of Planting 46
Table 4.5-9 Number of Trees per Household at Time of Survey 47
Table 4.5-10 Importance of Factors for the Selection of Native Trees to Grow 47
Table 4.6-1 Proportion of Households Growing Trees in Mix 59
Table 4.6-2 Proportion of Different Tree Mixes Grown on Forest Land 50
Table 4.6-3 Proportion of Plant Mixes in ACOTR Land 51
Table 4.6-4 Proportion of Mixed Trees Grown on Fruit Land 52
Table 4.6-5 Number of HHs Mixplanting On Industrial Land 52
Table 4.6-6 Households Planting Under Trees 52
Table 4.6-7 Proportion of Households Planting Under Trees, Lao Cai (%) 53
Table 4.6-8 Proportion of Households Planting Under Trees, Phu Tho (%) 35
Table 4.6-9 Proportion of Households Planting Under Trees, Hoa Binh (%) 53
Table 5.1-1. Proportion of HH Participating in Projects (%) 54
Table 5.1-2. Proportion of HH Participating in Different Projects 58
Table 5.1-3. Households Receiving Support from Projects 8
Table 5.2-1 Households Applying Fertilizer on Timber Trees
5
Table 5.1-2 Proportion of HH Using Fertilizer out of HH Growing Trees (%)
Table 5.2-3 Quantity of Fertizers Applied to Each Tree (kg)
Table 5.3-1 Seedling Sources
Table 5.3-2 Sources of Seedlings, by Province
Table 5.3-3 Method of Seedling Production
Table 5.4-1 Proportion of Households Thinning and Trimming
Table 5.4-2 Average Statistics on Thinning
Table 5.5-1 Communication via Telephone
Table 5.5-2 Most Important Information Source
Table 5.5-3 Second Most Important Information Source
Table 5.5-4 Outside Support Needs
Table 6.1-1 HH Assessment of Best Growing Trees
Table 6.1-2 Opinion on Tree Growth Rate (%)
Table 6.2-1 Timber Gained from Thinning
Table 6.2-2 Usage of Thinning and Trimming Products
Table 6.3-1 Quantity of Firewood Used per HH (m3)
Table 6.4-2 Proportion of HH Exploiting Timber for Different Purposes
Table 6.4-3 Proportion of Households Selling Timbers
Table 6.4-4 Quantity of Timber Sold, m3
Table 6.4-5 Price of Timber Sold, m3 (000 vnd)
Table 6.4-6 Price of Timber Sold per Tree (000 vnd)
Table 6.4-7 Proportion of HH Selling Timbers in Different Ways
Table 6.5-3 Households Harvesting Products from Natural Forest
Table 6.5-4 HH Harvesting Products from Natural Forest, by Product
Table 6.5-5 Usage of Natural Forest Products
Table 7.1-1 No of HH Intending to Plant More Trees
Table 7.1-2 Methods of Timber Tree Plantation
Table 7.1-3 Area Still Available for Expansion of Timber Tree Plantations
Table 7.1-4 Reasons For Buying/Renting More Land
Table 7.1-5 Land Area HH Intend to Buy/Rent (m2)
Table 7.2-1 Popularity of Trees in HHs’ Plantation Plans
Table 7.2-2 Average Area Intended for the Plantation of Different Trees (m2)
Table 7.2-3 Households’ Knowledge on Density of Trees They Intend to Grow
Table 7.2-4 Intended Density (trees per ha)
Table 7.3-1 Obstacles in Forest Plantation
Table 7.4-1 Factors of Importance in Timber Tree Plantations
Table 7.5-1 Levels of Encouragement for Different Measures

6
Introduction
Over the past fifty years, Vietnam’s forests have been heavily depleted. The rapid
reduction in forest area has resulted in many adverse environmental impacts such as
soil erosion, landslides, water resource reduction, increased flooding and an
increased risk of extinction of many plant and animal species. On a national scale,
the government has implemented Forest Development Program 327 to increase the
forest cover area, and is in the process of implementing the Five Million Hectare
(5MH) Reforestation Program. However, until now most of newly planted forest has
been monoculture, planted mostly with acacia, eucalypt and pine species, aiming
solely at increasing the area planted (ICD, 2001). The long-term economic interests
of farmers have not been given enough attention.

The Australian Center of International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) has provided a


fund of about $AUD 940 000 to the University of Queensland (UQ) and the Forest
Research Center (FRC) of Phu Ninh, Vietnam to conduct the Mixed Species
Plantations of High-value Trees for Timber Production and Enhanced Community
Services in Vietnam and Australia project. The objective of the project is to help
farmers grow a mix of high-value native species and multi-species plantations to
provide timber, fruits, gums, resin and traditional medicines while restoring the
biodiversity and enhancing environmental protection (Lamb, 2003).

To provide background information on the practice of forest plantation at the


household level for the project, the FRC and UQ have collaborated with the
Informatics Centre for Agricultural and Rural Development (ICARD) to conduct a
socio-economic survey of smallholder forestry practices and attitudes in three
mountainous provinces in northern Vietnam. Specific objectives of the study include:

1. Review literature on farm forestry in the north-west of Vietnam.

2. Carrying out surveys in three provinces in the North that are representative of
smallholder forestry practice.

3. Analysis of survey data and reports.

In the implementation process, the ICARD research group received strong support
from UQ experts in questionnaire design and detailed comments by both UQ and
FRC experts for the report draft. The research has been conducted over four months
from August to December, 2003.

The report is composed of eight chapters. Chapter 1 reviews the development of


forests in Vietnam since 1943, changes in forest management policies with a focus
on forest allocated to smallholders and the planting of native trees. Chapter 2 details
the methodologies used to survey and analyze field data. Chapter 3 describes the
characteristics of respondents. Chapter 4 describes the types of forest managed by
households and distribution of trees within them. Chapter 5 describes the allocation
of inputs to tree planting. Chapter 6 describes the planting results and harvest from
forests. Chapter 7 describes households’ planting plans, impediments and motivation
effects of various government interventions. Report conclusions are presented in
Chapter 8.
7
Chapter 1
Review of forest development in
Vietnam in 1989 – 2001

1. Role of Forestry in Vietnam Economy

During the “doimoi" process from 1989 to 2001, Vietnam achieved remarkable
progress. The economy grew rapidly with an average GDP growth of 7.1% per year.
Agriculture changed considerably, with the focus changing from self sufficiency to an
export orientation. Exports of some products including coffee, rice, pepper, and
cashews have grown to become globally signifgant. With the industrialization and
modernization process, industry has grown at an average rate of 10.5% per year, 2.5
times as rapidly as agriculture at (3.9% per year). The share of agriculture has
dramatically decreased, from 33% of the total GDP in 1989 to 23.6 % in 2001.

Figure 1.1-1 Growth of industry and agriculture and


the share of labour in agriculture, Vietnam, 1990 -
2001

Rural Labor
Growth (%) Force Share (%)
16 84

80
12

76
8
72

4
68

0 64
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001

Industrial growth rate Agricultural growth rate


Rural labourforce share (%)
Source: GSO (2002)

In spite of its declining, agriculture remains an important area with its high proportion
of the GDP (over 20%) and of the total labor force (70%). The agricultural sector is
also important regarding the income imbalance between urban and rural residents
with 90% of the poor residing in rural areas.
Within the agricultural sector, the development of forestry is still at the primary stage
but the potential for quick initial development is there. The share of forestry in the
8
total agricultural product remained steadily low during the 1990s at about 4% (Figure
1.1-2)1.
Figure 1.1-2 Structure of Gross Agriculture Value

Share (%)
100% Fishing
Services Forestry
80%
Livestock
60%

40%
Cropping
20%

0%
86

88

90

92

94

96

98
19

19
19

19

19

19

19
Source: General Statistical Office (2000a), Table 34, p.77.

The natural forests have not been adequately protected and exploited in an efficient
manner while the proportion of planted forest remains small and farmers are not
interested in investing in forestry. Major difficulties that constrain investment in
plantation forestry include:
• Government policies do not encourage establishment of plantations, major
impediments being
 high tax rate
 short term of land tenure
 difficulties obtaining loans due to the collateral requirements and the shortage
of long-term loan finance
 lack of investment in the infrastructure for planting forest
 low investment in research
• The nature of forest production discourages plantation establishment, because
forestry has:
 long payback period
 high logging and transportation costs due to lack of roading infrastructure
• Deficiencies in markets for forest products :
 Unstable market caused by monopsonistic wood processing companies and
unplanned harvesting of plantation forest
 Low stumpage price received by tree growers
 Government support to the processing industry does not assist farmers due to
the monopsonistic nature of the processing industry.

1
It is true that this figure underestimates the contribution of forestry to the economy
because a large proportion of the natural forest products (timber, animals, other rare and
precious forest products) has been illegally harvested and smuggled, which is not
included in official statistics. However, large diameter logs from natural forest which is
the most important source of income source in the forestry sector, only have 36% of its
total sale quantity illegally traded (as estimated by Ogle et al. 1999c and Castren 1999 in
Salmi (1999, p.51)).
9
Because forestry is an industry not yet developed and involving many poor people,
government assistance to the industry has the potential to spur growth and help to
reduce the poverty and hunger rate remarkably. It could also decrease the social
pressure in big cities and improve the environment (providing environmental services
including preserving water resources, protecting the land and carbon sequestration),
which will considerably benefit society.

2. Changes in area and structure of forest


In Vietnam, forests are classified into three main kinds – namely production forest,
protection forest and special use forest – based on the purpose of land use.
Production forest serves to produce timber. Protection forest plays an important role
in protecting sloping land, watersheds and water resources. Special use forest
receives great protection to maintain biodiversity, protect wildlife, conserve nature
and restore the natural ecology. Out of the total forest area, production forest
accounts for the greatest proportion of land (53%), protection forest accounts for 38%
and special use forest accounts for 10% (Table 1.2-1). Most special use forests are
national gardens (Nguyen, 2001).

Table 0.2-7. Forest Classification, Vietnam, 1995


Land Category Forested Unforested* Forestry Land
M ha % M ha % M ha %
Special use Forest 0.9 10 0.3 3 1.2 6
Protection Forest 3.5 38 4.5 46 8 42
Production Forest 4.9 53 5 51 9.9 52
Total 9.3 100 9.8 100 19.1 100
Forest Land Structure 9.3 49% 9.8 51% 19.1 100%
*
Unforested land includes hills/mountains without forest.
Source: Nguyen (2001).

Over the last five decades, the forest area in Vietnam has declined sharply due to: (i)
forest damage by wars, (ii) over-exploitation to develop the economy after war, (iii)
shifting cultivation and (iv) lack of effective management for natural forest, leading to
the excessive illegal logging.
Table 0.2-8. Changes of Forest Area (M ha)
Year Natural Forest Planted Forest Total Area Cover ratea
(M ha) (M ha) (M ha) (%)
1943 14.00 0.00 14.00 43.00
1976 11.08 0.09 11.17 33.80
1980 10.49 0.42 10.61 32.10
1985 9.31 0.58 9.89 30.00
1990 8.43 0.75 9.18 27.80
1995 8.25 1.05 9.30 28.20
2002 9.87 1.92 11.78 36.00

a. The cover rate is calculated by dividing the total forest area out of the total natural land
area.
Source: Nguyen (2001) and FID (2002)
10
In 1943, the national level of forest cover was about 43%, approximately 14 M ha. In
1976, the forest area was still 11.2 million hectares, the forest cover rate reduced to
33.8%. Up to 1990, the remaining forest area was only about 9.2 M ha with the cover
rate at 27.8%. Averaged over 25 years (1976 - 1990), the natural forest area has
reduced by 80,000 ha per year. A significant reduction of forest coverage in the
Northern moutainous, Central Highland and South East regions over the period from
1943 to 1982 is illustrated in the map below.

The decrease in forest resources has: reduced the capacity of land to retain water,
leading to greater peak and trough in water flows; increased flooding, landslides,
erosion and landslips; reduced forest biodiversity pushing precious plants and
animals to the edge of extinction (MPI, 1999).
Since 1989, the government has launched investment projects and changed policies
in order to bring about forest recovery. Major projects include Program 327 and the
Five Million Hectare forest project. As a result, the decrease in natural forest area has
slowed and the rate of plantation establishment has started to increase.

3. Forest Development Programs


Aware of the importantance of forests and forest management, from the beginning of
the 1990s the government has implemented large scale programs to reduce timber
logging in natural forests, increased the newly planted area and rejuvinated the
depleted forest. These include Program 327 (or Greening Bare Land and Hills
Program, implemented in 1992-1998) and the 5MH Program (commenced in 1998
and ending in 2010).

11
Program 327 objectives initially focused on replanting forests in damaged areas,
protecting the remaining natural forest, improving fruit and industrial tree areas,
constructing infrastructure and encouraging farmers to settle and farm in fixed
locations. During the implementation process, the objectives were changed to focus
on plantation establishment and protection of the protection and special use forests.
The program was funded with 2789 billion VND (equivalent to $US 206 million, based
on recent exchange rates) from the State Budget and implemented via 412 state
forest farms (SFF). These SFFs set up projects and directly implemented them or
contracted with farmers and cooperatives to implement them (Nguyen, 2001).
Although the program helped plant 1.4 M ha of unforested land, this plantation was
inefficient and unsustainable (planted trees had a low survival rate/slow growth). The
objective of forest protection was not achieved. Illegal logging and continued shifting
cultivation lead to a reduction in the area and quality of production and protection
natural forests. According to ICD (2001, p7), there are many reasons for the lack of
success of Program 327:
• Program 327 did not pay attention to market research regarding the forest
products it produced and hence there was no regime ensuring wood products be
sold at sufficiently high prices.
• Farmers’ short-term food needs in mountainous areas were not anticipated. The
rotation cycle of trees is too long for many farmers to consider, and many harvest
early to meet their short-term food demand. In addition, some did not adequately
care for the forest, even releasing cattle into newly planted areas, which reduced
the tree survival rate. In some regions, planted forest was replaced by industrial
crops like coffee, tea and fruits.
• There was a lack of participation from local people in designing the objectives of
the program. Therefore, the objectives were set up using a top-down approach
and were not suitable to local conditions, which had to be continuously changed
in the implementation process.
• The legal environment was not stable so farmers lost trust in investing their
resources in forest. Although the rights of households growing forests were
established with the implementation of the Forest Protection and Development
Law in 1991, trouble remains with the classification of forest types2.
• The process of allocating land-use rights to farmers was slow, especially in
mountainous and remote areas.
• Insufficient funding and late disbursement resulted in low quality seed and nursery
stock.

In order to solve the problems of program 327 and increase forest coverage, in
1998 the Vietnamese government started the 5MH program (2 M ha of protection

2
The establishment of natural reserve or protection forest may dispossess farmers of the
trees or crops they have grown in the previously abandoned land or forest allocated to
them from collapsed state forest farm without compensation. This is illustrated by the
establishment of Ke Go Natural Reserve in 1996 (IUCN, 2004) and Ba Be Natural Reserve
(Zingerli, 2004). Households in these regions planted forest without receiving allowance
for planting and according to the recent regulations (Decision No.08/2001/QĐ-TTG,
detailed later on) they have the ownership of trees they grew. However, they were not
compensated or paid allowance.
12
forest and 3 M ha of production forest). The program is funded with $US 974
million from the State Budget to achieve three main targets:
• Increase forest coverage to 43%, conserve the environment for Vietnamese
communities and preserve biodiversity.
• Meet domestic timber and firewood demands, supply materials for industrial
production such as the paper industry and wood board, and gradually produce a
surplus for export taking forestry to an important position in the economy, enabling
basic changes in economic and social situations in mountainous regions.
• Creating about 2 M full-time jobs, increasing incomes of people living in nearby
forest regions, stabilizing politics, society and national defense security, especially
in highland and border regions (Nguyen Van Tiem, 1998, pp. 91-92).
Although there have been some improvements as a result of Program 327, such
as increased participation of farmers, acceleration of land-use right certificate
issuance to farmers and increased investment capital, some shortcomings still
remain. These shortcomings include a limited capacity in land messurement
leading to insecure land property rights, tree species used are limited to exotic
varieties3, a lack of technical research leading to the failure of mixed-planting
(fast-growing exotic trees suppressed slow-growing native trees, ICD (2001,
p.31)), and low quality extension services. There was also a lack of development
plans for forest (which land, what area and where to plant forest); and a lack of
thorough research into future timber demand to identify if the amount of timber
which will be produced can be consumed. The short-term and long-term benefits
to forest growers therefore have not been ensured.
The forest area will be maintained and increased if planting brings sustainable
and sufficiently large economic benefits relative to other agricultural activities.
Then forest will be preserved while the expenditure required for forest protection
is reduced. Thus, researching solutions for improving the economic benefit of
planting is really necessary.

4. Legal Framework for Smallholder Forestry


Practice
Along with forest development programs, a series of new policies relating to forestry
has been implemented to encourage the involvement of households in forestry.
These include the Forest Protection and Development Law issued in 1991, Policies
on allocating and renting forestry land to organizations and households (Decree
163/1999/NĐ-CP issued on 16/11/1993), and Policies on contracting to protect and
regenerate forest (Decree 202/TTg issued on 02/5/1994), and Rulings on timber and
non-timber forest product exploitation (Decision 02/1999/QĐ-BNN issued on
05/1/1999).

4.1 Forest ownership


According to the Forest Development and Protection Law, no individual has the
ownership of any forest. Forests, whether natural or planted using state funds,
belong to the state even if allocated to some organizations or individuals for
management.

3
Main species planted are pine, eucalyptus and acacia (ICD, 2001 p31).
13
Organizations or individuals planting with their own capital only own plant products in
the assigned forests. The other entity besides the state that has forest ownership is
the village community. Public ownership of forest by village communities that live
within the forest area has been recognized by state law. When they move to other
places, the government will make compensation and appropriate forest ownership
(Decree No.17, issued on 17 January, 1992).
Until 2001, SOEs managed the largest forest areas (34% of total) followed by
households (18%). To this date, a significant proportion of forest has yet to be
allocated (27%) (Figure 1.3).

Figure 1.3. Proportion of Forest Managed by Different


Stakeholders
Unassigned
forest State owned
27% enterprise
34%

Army force
2%
Households and Board of
Joint-venture Board of special
individuals protection forest
enterprises used forest
18% 9%
0% 10%

Source: Central Forestry Inventory Steering Committee, 2001, Table 03A,


page 17

4.2 Forest land allocation and renting


The government controls special use and protection forests by assigning them to
Special Use Forest Management Boards (usually the National Garden Management
Board, the Nature Preservation Area Management Board or the Environmental -
Historical - Cultural Area Management Board, depending on the characteristics of the
forest) and the Protection Forest Management Board for protection forests with an
area of more than 5000 ha (only forest with less than 5000 ha are assigned to other
organizations, households or individuals to manage, protect and develop) (Decision
08/2001).
Some special use forests may have households living within them, if the government
has not been able to settle the inhabitants in other places. Special Forest
Management Boards may contract with these households and allocate them forest
land so that they can undertake agricultural, forestry or fishery activities. The boards
may also contract with these households to protect and plant the forest if ecological
recovery is needed. Similarly, Protection Forest Management Boards may contract
with organisations and individuals to protect, plant and nurture protection forests.
Protection forests and special use forests may also be rented out, but this rarely
takes place. For protection forest, it must be forest at the beginning of the watershed
in less vulnerable regions. For special use, it must be forest for ecological tourism. In
these forests, rental is not restricted to Vietnamese. Foreign organizations and
individuals are also allowed to rent them (Decision 02 QD-BNN 5/1/1999).
14
Production forests are usually allocated to state forestry farms and households to
produce wood. The chairman of the People’s Committee at a district level is the
decision maker when allocating production forest to households to use as forest
gardens or agroforestry production. Foreign organizations, individuals or Vietnamese
living overseas can rent production forest land to develop forests and to carry out
business in the forest, but need the approval from the Chairman of the Ministerial
Committee (now the Prime Minister).
The process of forest land allocation started long ago but proceeds very slowly.
Decision 184 issued in 1982 allocated most forest land to cooperatives and working
groups. Some households also received forest land with a forest book indicating
entitlement to use the land. However, property rights were not well defined (no land
measurement and boundary demarcation was done) and farmers did not have
enough incentives to improve land management. Only 10-20% of households
succeeded in maintaining the forests, the rest left the forest cleared for shifting
cultivation (Nguyen and Lehtonen, 1996).
In 1992, forest land allocation started over. Land allocation is often the first step in
Forest Development Programs (Program 327, 5MH) being implemented4. According
to ICD (2001, p.26) the budget for land measurement is low (25000 vnd/ha as in the
ADB Forestry Sector Project and the KFW Reforestation Project), which leads to
demarcation not actually being carried out on the ground in many places. Areas with
unclear boundaries run the risks of land confiscation on the basis of non-performance
and land ownership disputes.
Forest land use rights are less secure than agricultural land use rights. According to
the Forest Development and Protection Law, land use rights may be cancelled if the
allocated area is not managed according to the law, i.e protection, nurturing and
planting activities are not carried out according to approved plans without sound
reasons; forest or forest land is used for purposes different from the ones specified
for each kind of forest (production, special use or protection forest), or the Forest
Development and Protection Law is seriously violated5; the state or the society need
the forest or forest land for important matters or urgent needs of war or natural
calamities. Compared to land use rights in general, forest land is subject to more
constraints and there are more reasons to confisticate land, which leads to unstable
forest land use rights6.

4.3 Rights of households planting forests

4
Usually, households submit an application form to the head of hamlet indicating the
piece of forest land they want, their financial and labour capacity. The head of the hamlet
consider whether the land is still free and whether the household capacity is strong
enough to invest in the land to submit the application to the chairman of the commune
who will pass it to the Forest Inspection Station and the Land Department of the
Commune. These two departments will assess the capacity of the household and design
the land use plan, which is called the green book. The green book is passed and certified
at all level to the Provincial level. After 2-3 years if all requirements in the green book are
fulfilled, the green book is changed to red book (IUCN, 2004).
5
The definition of serious violations is not available in the Forest Development and
Protection Law.
6

15
4.3.1 Protection Forest
Decision No.08/2001/QĐ-TTG by the Prime Minister specifies the rights and
obligations of households involved with protection forests.
Households signing an assignment contract to undertake forest protection,
rehabilitation and new plantation establisment with state investment funds will
receive:
- Allowance for forest protection, rehabilitating and regenerating forest, and new
planting of forest based on result assessments. The allowance for protecting 1 ha
of natural forest is 50,000 vnd/year.
- The right to harvest dried wood and forest by-products under the cover of forest.
- Thinning products (thinning rate must not exceed 20% and after thinning, forest
coverage must be over 60%), products that do not affect forest coverage (e.g.
flowers, fruit and sap) and agro-forestry by-products under forest coverage if the
household is assigned to rehabilitate and regenerate forest in addition to planting
new forest.
- Bamboo exploitation at a rate not exceeding 30% and bamboo shoot collection if
the bamboo forest satisfies protection requirements (land cover rate of more than
80%)
Exploitation procedures include:
- The Protection Forest Management Board establishes a logging plan based on
Clause 1, Article 17, Decision 08/2001/QD - TTG.
- The Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Development approves the
plan and submits it to the provincial People’s Committee for approval.
If households rehabilitate or newly plant forest with their own capital, they will have
100% of agriculture and forestry products (including timber) when the forest reaches
the harvestable criteria. Each year, households can harvest a maximum of 10% of
the area provided that they conduct rehalibitation or replant next crop, and continue
to manage and protect the forest. No tax payments have been specified for
protection forest managed by households. Procedures for the issue of a harvest
license include:
• For the harvest of trees to meet households’ wood and furniture timber demands:
Households submit the application to the Protection Forest Management Board.
The board will consider the issuing a harvest license.
• For the harvest of trees for sale :
- Households submit an application with the pre-approval of the Protection
Forest Management Board to the Provincial Department of Agricultural and
Rural Development.
- If approved, the household sets up a harvest plan.
- The Provincial Department of Agricultural and Rural Development approves
the plan and submits it to the Provincial People’s Committee for approval.

4.3.2 Production Forest


16
a. Natural Forest
The government assigns or rents out some natural production forests to households,
individuals and cooperatives. The forest owner can conduct business such as set up
a forest garden, forest camp, or forest farm (Decision No.08/2001/QĐ-TTG). The
owner’s rights are as follows:
- Provided with loan at favorable interest rate, technical service, forest extension
service and support for processing and selling products.
- Being supported in constructing infrastructure for production including roading for
transportation, fire prevention and extinguishing system, forest pest and insect
management and constructing a nursery garden
- Allowed to use up to 20% of assigned or rented land without forest for agriculture
and fishery production.
- Allowed to harvest timber and forestry products and have 100% of income after
returning borrowed capital and interest payments (if interest is charged), paying
tax expenses and setting aside sufficient capital for forest regeneration. Tree
species falling in Group 1A must not be harvested (stated in Decision No.18
issued on 17th, January, 1992) and forest products must not be harvested if they
are from Group 1 species (stated in Decision No.18 issued on 17th, January,
1992). Also, there must be an exploitation plan approved by the Provincial
Department of Agricultural and Rural Development, which must comply with log
harvest quotas and the annual exploitation plan issued by MARD.
- Receive compensation for investment works conducted by owners if the
government takes land back.

To have above rights, the owners have to fulfill the following responsibilities:
- Have to comply with all regulations, laws and technical guidelines in managing
land, forest land and carrying on bussiness with forest.
- The usage of forestry land must comply with the purpose specified for the forest.
- Have to pay natural resource tax ranging from 0-45% depending on individual
forest products7. This tax is exempt if the natural forest is regenerated by
nurturing (Decision 661/TTg on 29/7/1998). People in the remote regions can be
considered to be exempt from natural tax (Circular 69/TC on 27/11/1991).
- Have to pay export tax if the product is exported8
- Value added tax for products used domestically (10% for timber, bamboo shoot,
and products processed from timber except for tools for teaching, study, research,
experiments and children toys which have a tax of 5%, and 5% for other forestry
products, products made from bamboo, jute, sedge).

7
Tax ranges from 15-45% for timber, 5% for firewood, 10% for bamboo; 25% for Aquilaria
crassna Pierre, morinda officinalis ; 10% for Illicium verum Hook. f , cinnamon, Amomum
echinosphaera K. ; 5% for medicine materials; 20% for birds, wild animals that are
allowed to harvest (Natural Resource Tax Law issued on 30/3/1998 and changed on 28/4/
1998 quoted in NTFP (2004, p19)).
8
Export tax for timber from natural forest is 20% (Decision 1124/1997/QĐ - TTg on
25/12/1997)
17
- Income tax of 28% for individuals/ enterprises doing trade with forest products.
High income individuals and households9 that plant and/or nurture forest also
have to pay income tax but have tax preference. Tax preference is also given to
enterprises conducting the same activities. This preference includes being exempt
from income tax for 2-4 years from the period when income was genterated and
paying only 50% of the tax level for the next 3-9 years. The reference level of tax
for the first 10 years is 20% and after that it is 28% (Decision 164/2003/N§-CP on

22 /12 / 2003).
- Report annually to the government on the state of resources in the forest area
allocated. Carry out forest resource inspections every five years to evaluate the
effectiveness of forest management and to make a plan for the next period.

b. Plantation Forest
According to Forest Development and Protection Law, households allocated with
natural forest that is plantation must construct a planting plan based on the
forestry planning of the region. The forest planting plan must include a fishery -
forestry - agriculture production combination and measures for soil protection, and
soil fertility improvement.
Households using their own capital or capital borrowed with favourable terms to plant
production forest are relatively free in forest harvesting. They are allowed to:
- Decide the time for harvesting the planted forest and non-wood products.
- Exploit, transport and sell products from trees that are not available or rarely
available in natural forests like eucalypt spp., Acacia auriculaeformis, hybrid
acacia, Styrax tonkinensis, Manglietia glauca, melaleuca, rhizophoraceae, jack
fruit, mango, longan and casuarina spp.
- Regarding trees from natural forest not on the banned list (1A group) stipulated in
Decree 18/HĐBT issued on 17th, January, 1992 by the Ministerial Committee
(now the Prime Minister) including Chukrasia tabularis, canarium, Cinnamomum
illicioides. and Fagaceae, the forest owner has only to inform the Provincial Forest
Inspection Department before harvesting for a commercial purpose. Alternatively,
they must inform the Communal People’s Committee when exploiting for family
usage to certify that the timber harvested was originally planted forest, garden
forest or scattered planted trees.
For households that planted forest with capital granted by projects, forest harvest
must comply with the specific regulations of each project.
When harvest timber from plantation forest, farmers have to pay taxes:
- land tax of 4% of product value
- export tax if product is exported (15%-20% for timber, 5% for wood chips, 0% for
processed products according to Decision 1124/1997/QĐ - TTg on 25/12/1997)
- Value added tax for products used domestically (10% for timber, bamboo shoot,
and products processed from timber except for tools for teaching, study, research,

9
Individuals or households have a total product values of over 90 million VND/year and
income of over 36 million VND/year (Circular 96/1999/TT-BTC on 12/8/1999)

18
experiment and children toys which have a tax of 5%; 5% for other forestry
products, products made from bamboo, jute, sedge).
- Income tax of 28% for individuals/ enterprises doing trade with forest products.
High income individuals and households10 that plant and/or nurture forest also
have to pay income tax but have a tax preference. Tax preference is also given to
enterprises that conducting the same activities. This preference includes being
exempt from income tax for 2-4 years from the period when income was
genterated and paying only 50% of the tax level for the next 3-9 years. The
reference level of tax for the first 10 years is 20% and after that it is 28%
(Decision 164/2003/N§-CP on 22 /12 / 2003).
- Households using their own capital are free to carry out thinning while those using
capital from the state budget and favorable capital must follow specific regulations
including:
- The cut rate is not more than 50%.
- Trees for cutting must be slow-growing, curved, damaged by insects or
shootless.
Further, the owners have to set up a thinning plan including details on: the thinning
area; tree age, height and diameter; number of trees retained; total timber volume of
the intended thinning area; cutting intensity; number of trees harvested and retained;
volume harvested and retained. That plan will be submitted to the Provincial
Department of Agricultural and Rural Development to obtain a thinning certificate.

5. Native Trees in Vietnam


5.1 Situation of native tree plantation
Large forest planting projects that have been implemented (Project 327, 5 Million
Hectare Reforestation, PAM), have mostly used exotic trees like eucalyptus, acacia
and pines which grow fast and are more suited to bad soil. However, these
monocultures may suffer from disease and damage by insects11. Planting native
species and appropriate mixed planting between exotic and native trees will reduce
these risks and also maintain and improve soil fertility. Growing native trees also
helps protect their genes and enrich the biodiversity of the forest. Though in the 5MH
Program’s documents these benefits are recognized, plantings of native trees was
limited due to a shortage of native tree seedlings (ICD, 2001).
During the last decades, mixed plantation occurred mostly by chance, not supported
by any program or project and therefore the benefits are limited. There is also a lack
of research identifying the characteristics of trees intended for mixed planting and
clarifying when mixed planting is beneficial.
Native gene resources are being seriously degraded due to forest over-exploitation
and shifting cultivation that destroys the living environment. The need to recover
forests by planting more native trees has become urgent. However, planting and
developing native trees have the following difficulties:
10
Individuals or households have a total product values of over 90 million VND/year and
income of over 36 million VND/year (Circular 96/1999/TT-BTC on 12/8/1999)
11
Epidemics of caterpillar attacked pines in 2003 on a large scale in Kontum, Thanh Hoa,
Ng he An illustrated this very well (VnExpress, 2003). 4000 ha of pine in Nghe An was
damaged.
19
In terms of knowledge: Most native trees are wild and have long life cycles, which
have not been fully researched. There is a lack of research into biological
characteristics such as demands for soil, climate, sunlight, relationships with the
surrounding community, and the capacity to regenerate. Current research is limited to
small-scale experiments in specific locations.
In terms of profitability: Growers want to plant native trees on a large scale, but
because a 50-year lifecycle for trees is too long, they prefer to invest in fast-growing
trees (5 to 7 years) for a quick harvest.
In terms of technology: It is not easy to plant native trees on barren land and
denuded hills. Investment in native-tree research and the research results available
are still limited and do not satisfy the demands of producers.
In terms of social-economy: Regions where there is a demand for planting and
recovering forests with native trees are usually remote and people face many
difficulties in their lives, e.g. lack of investment capital, poor access to new
technology, and unclear land planning. Moreover, deficiencies in the market for forest
products drive down forest product prices and prevent people from planting native
trees.

5.2 Distribution of native trees in Vietnam


Native tree species have been planted in various areas in Vietnam. Widely planted
species include Illicium verum Hook. f in Lang Son, cinnamon in Yen Bai, Thanh Hoa,
Quang Nam, Quang Ngai; Erythroloeum fordii in Thanh Hoa, Hoa Binh, Vinh Phuc
and Cau Hai (in Phu Tho). Styrax tonkinensis and Manglietia glauca are the main
trees planted in the Central and North Eastern regions, supplying materials for the
paper industry. Pinus merkusii from the Northern midlands and Central region can
live on arid and laterite land; Verciania montana Lour in the Northern mountainous
and the Central North region; Anisoptera costata, Dipterocarpus, Hopea odorata in
the South; trees producing lac (Protium serratum, Dalbergia hupeana) in the North
West. Demdrocalanrus membranaceus is easy to plant and is a good tree for hunger
elimination and poverty reduction, planted not only in Thanh Hoa but also in Hoa
Binh, Phu Tho province.
Besides these, some trees have been planted to test their viability in different regions
and climates. Afzelia xylocarpa, Toona surei, Litsea glutinosa in Central Highland;
Aquilaria crassna Pierre, Tarietia Javanica, Sinosideroxylon Wightianum in the
Central region; Toona surenii, Paulownia fortunei, Machilus bonii H. Lee-lauraceae,
Castanea mollissima, Castanopsis boisii in the North East; Docynia indica in the
North West; Chukrasia tabularis in Son La, Hoa Binh and Nghe An; bamboo species
for bamboo and shoot, Calamus are scatteredly planted in many places.

Table 1.5-1. Area of some main native trees in 1999


Species Area (ha) Location
Dipterocarpaceae 26 924 Whole country
Pure-bred 16 064 Whole country
Dipterocarpaceae
Hybrid Dipterocarpaceae 10 860 Whole country
Hopea odorata 9651.3 South East
Pinus merkusii 218 056 South East
20
Melaleuca 114 837 South East
Styrax tonkinensis 64 734 Whole country
Manglietia glauca 50 023 Whole country
Cinnamomum cassia 27 270 Whole country
Illicium verum Hook 18 085 Whole country
Cassia 10 163 Whole country
Chukrasia 9 044 Whole country
Verciania montana Lour 9 146 Whole country
Erythroloeum fordii 309 Whole country
Canarium 645 Whole country

6. Characteristics of surveyed provinces


6.1 Forestry in Northern Mountainous Region
The northern mountainous region has a sloping topography and a warm sub-humid
subtropical climate. It has a forest cover rate slightly higher than the national average
(38.6% compared to 36%) with a total forest area of about 4 M ha, of which 81% is
natural forest (Table 1.6-1).
The region is divided into two sub-regions, North West and North East. The North
West has three provinces, of which Hoa Binh has the highest forest cover rate
(41.7%) and also the highest rate of planted forest (21.6%). Although Hoa Binh has
the smallest area of forested land, it has the largest area of planted forest in the
North West. The North East has 12 provinces, of which Tuyen Quang has the highest
forest cover rate (56.3%), followed by Bac Can (51.7%). In terms of planted forest
area, Vinh Phuc has the highest rate (65%), followed by Phu Tho and Bac Giang
(51.7%).

Table 1.6-1: Forest Area in the Northern Mountainous Provinces


Provinces Forestry Natural Planted Forest
Land (ha) Forest (ha) Forest (ha)Cover rate
(%)
National 19,134,669 9,865,019 1,919,568 35.8
Northern 7,620,614 3,199,904 750,276 38.6
Mountainous
North West 2,709,205 1,157,357 81,807 34.8
21
Lai Châu 1,484,762 546,974 17,323 33.4
Sơn La 898,434 458,208 22,450 34.2
Hoa Binh 326,008 152,175 42,035 41.7
North East 4,911,409 2,042,548 668,470 40.6
Tuyên Quang 448,563 259,356 71,104 56.3
Hà Giang 603,684 262,957 35,603 37.9
Cao Bằng 555,169 276,570 18,739 44.1
Lao Cai 543,958 236,912 51,910 35.8
Lạng Sơn 698,233 185,302 85,977 32.7
Yên Bái 568,196 180,430 90,281 39.3
Bắc Kạn 434,841 224,114 23,682 51.7
Quảng Ninh 428,551 164,249 77,453 39.9
Bắc Giang 186,483 71,544 76,829 38.8
Thái Nguyên 206,500 102,158 44,435 41.2
Phu Tho 203,572 69,547 74,710 41.0
Vĩnh Phúc 33,658 9,410 17,746 20.1
Source: Forest Inspection Department, MARD (2002).

To date, there has not been any forest inventory to estimate the area of forest planted
with native trees in the region. However, according to the assessment of forestry
experts, Hoa Binh, Lao Cai and Phu Tho are the three provinces with the highest rate
of planted native trees.

6.2 Forestry in Lao Cai


Lao Cai is a mountainous province bordering China, with a shared border of 203.5
km. It has an area of 804 400 ha, eight districts, two towns (Lao Cai and Cam Duong)
and 180 communes, of which 120 belong to type I area12 (area with special
difficulties).
The landscape is dissected by ridges and mountains. Areas with steep slopes
exceeding 25o occupy 84% of the land area and the elevation ranges from 80 m to
3,143 m at the summit of Fan Si Pan, the highest mountain in Viet Nam. The
mountainous terrain and associated rain shadow effects help to create a highly
diverse natural environment.
Lao Cai had a population of 600 000 people in 1998, with a population density
ranging from 50 to 200 people/km2. This population consists of 33 ethnic groups. The
ethnic groups of Kinh, Tay, Thai, Lao and Giay predominate in the midland areas,
while Hmong, Dao, Nung, Phu La and several smaller ethnic groups tend to live at
the higher elevations. The largest ethnic groups are the Kinh (approximately 35%),
Hmong (20%), Dao (15%) and Tay (10%). Literacy levels vary greatly between ethnic
groups: Kinh 95%, Tay 80%, Dao 30% and Hmong 8%.
Lao Cai’s economy is dominated by agriculture with a subsistence basis. Over 88%
of the adult labour force are involved in agriculture. In the midland areas, where there
are greater market opportunities, farmers practice mixed farming systems including

12
Vietnam is classified into 3 areas based on which the government can give more
privilege to disadvantaged students. Area I includes the high, remote districts,
communes, towns, and islands; area II include midlands and plains provinces, suburbs of
cities; area III includes districts of cities.
22
wetland rice and rain-fed hill crops, and intensive home-garden and forest-garden
production systems combining livestock, horticulture, forestry and fisheries in some
places. In upland areas farmers are more reliant on rain-fed agriculture.
Maize is the main staple crop in these areas, but there is also a wide range of other
staples including cassava, hill rice, potatoes etc.
Lao Cai has 237 thousand ha of natural forest and 52 thousand ha of plantation
forest, which gives the province a forest cover rate of 35.8%. It also has 425 153 ha
of barren land and denuded hills, of which 303 664 ha may be afforested. 50% of the
total barren land and denuded hill area is covered by grass, located at the height of
700 m, and is to be targeted for protection forest plantations.
Some forestry projects implemented in Lao Cai include Project 327, Project 661 and
some projects funded by foreign donors. The funds provided by Project 661 were
minimal (2.5 mil. VND/ha), making it difficult to plant forest since in Lao Cai, most of
the barren land and denuded hills are located in remote areas. A fund of 3.5 - 4
mil.vnd/ha would be needed if forest is to be planted properly.
Project MRDP (Mountain Rural Development Program) funded by the Swedish
Government has supplied 1,285 million VND to 324 villages, hamlets at 21
communes in 5 districts (Sa Pa, Bao Thang, Muong Khuong, Bac Ha, Si Ma Cai) to
afforest barren land and denuded hills with 7,176.000 seedlings. The project was
implemented over 4 years (1997-2000). If forest density is calculated as 2,500
trees/ha, 2,870 ha will be planted.
For forest plantation credit support, only national investment support funds are
available in Lao Cai. These funds are provided for industrial input forest plantation
(paper, artificial board) with an interest rate of 5.4%/year over a period of 8-10 years
without compounded interest. Both the original loan and interest are paid once after
carrying out forest exploitation. Loans are provided on the basis of individual projects
approved by competent agencies. However, only 3 forest enterprises, Van Ban, Bao
Thang, Bao Yen are eligible to ask for soft loans from the fund. Farmer's households
can’t get loans directly from the national investment support fund. They are invested
by forest enterprises under joint ventures, cooperations or contracts.
Organizations, households and individuals can get loans from other credit
organizations with commercial interest rates for production development. Farmers
can also apply for loans of up to 10 million VND from the Agricultural Bank without
any collateral.
Other policies involving forestry production are no different from policies at a national
level. People exploiting forest products from natural forest have to pay a natural
resource tax (0-45%). People planting production forest are obliged to pay land use
tax equivalent to 4% of their products’ value (Vu, 2001).

6.3 Forestry in Hoa Binh


Hoa Binh is a mountainous province, located 76 km North West of Hanoi. It has a
good system of sealed roads and riverways linking up with other provinces like Phu
Tho, Ha Tay, Ha Nam and Ninh Binh. The province has 10 districts and towns: Da
Bac, Mai La, Tan Lai, Lac Son, Kim Boi, Ky Son, Lac Thuy, Yen Thuy, Ky Son and
Hoa Binh municipality with 214 communes and towns.

23
The population of Hoa Binh totals 770 000 with 57% at working age. The province
has 7 ethnic groups: Muong, Kinh, Thai, Dao, Tay, H'mong, Hoa, of which Muong
accounts for 60% and Kinh accounts for 30%.
Hoa Binh has rich mineral resources such as granite, coal, gold, and iron. Several
factories of medium scale have been constructed, including 3 cement factories (with
a capacity of 88 thousand ton each), a tunnel brick factory (20 million units), a cane
sugar mill (700 T/cane/day), a mineral water plant, a construction material plant, an
agro-forestry product processing plant and has attracted 4 enterprises with foreign
investment funds involved in agro-forestry products processing, fine art handicrafts
and electronic assemblage. The province also has many scenic places, cultural and
historic remnants, old pagodas such as Kim Boi mineral spring, Tien Lac Thuy
pagoda, and the Da river dam, which make good tourism centers (Ha Cong Dong,
2003).
As for agriculture, the province has developed areas specialising in industrial crops
and fruit trees such as tea, sugar cane, peanuts, soy bean, oranges, mandarins, and
pineapples.
The area of natural forest in Hoa Binh at present is 152 thousand ha and the area of
plantation forest is 42 thousand ha. However, natural forest has been heavily
depleted, with no timber trees that are large enough for ethnic minority people to
build houses on stilts. Forest is now dominated with small trees and bamboos.
Farmers are now attracted to forest non-timber products, selling firewood and
bamboo shoots. This is an important source of income for Hmong people living near
national road No 12. Since 1992, Hoa Binh has constructed factories that process
forest timber into chopsticks to be exported to Japan (Donovan, et al. 1997:31).
Hoa Binh has been involved with most of the projects funded by the state such as
Project 661, Project 747 supporting Da catchment people and Project 472. It has also
been supported by other projects funded by foreign donors.

6.4 Forestry in Phu Tho


Phu Tho is a mountainous province, bordering Tuyen Quang and Vinh Phuc in the
East, Son La in the West, Ha Tay in the South and Yen Bai in the North. The center of
the province is located in Viet Tri City, 90 km from Hanoi via national road No 2. Phu
Tho has 10 districts and towns, including Viet Tri City, Phu Tho Town, Phong Châu,
Đoan Hùng, Thanh Ba, Hạ Hòa, Sông Thao, Yên Lập, Thanh Sơn and Tam Thanh
districts.
The province has an area of 3465 km², 89% of which is midlands or mountainous;
11% is plains. The current population is 1 295 000 with more than 20 ethnic groups
and a population density of 373 people/km2.
Processing industries, production of agro-forestry and food are the province’s strong
sectors.
In forestry, Phu Tho has 203.6 thousand ha of forestry land, with 69.6 thousand ha of
natural forest, 74.7 thousand ha of plantation forest and the rest is bare land. There
are 109 600 households engaged in the agriculture and forestry sector, of which 31
100 households were allocated forest land with an average of 3.19 ha per household.
Large forestry projects implemented in the province include Project 327, Project 661
and Project 264.

24
Unlike other provinces, Phu Tho did not assign tasks from Project 327 (previously)
and Project 661 (currently) project owners to state forest enterprises because it
wants forest enterprises to concentrate on business production. It has neither
established protection forest management boards as regulated at decision Nr.08 nor
allocated natural forest or forest land planned for protection forest plantations to state
forest enterprises. The 9 SFEs only have 36 362 ha of forest they established from
barren land and denuded hills previously. This area is planted with paper material
trees.
Thanks to land allocation for forest garden establishment, forestry farms have
developed well in Phu Tho. At present, there are about 2 059 farms with sized from 1
ha upward, and a total area of 9 340 ha. Districts that have many forestry farms are
Doan Hung (601), Thanh Son (423).
Apart from forestry farm production, households, individuals and communities are
also contracted to protect, regenerate and plant forest managed by the Special-use
Forest Management Board, the management board of project 661 and state forest
enterprises. Longterm and stable contracts (for 50 years) as regulated by Decree
Nr.01/CP have not been applied in this province.
For credit support, national support fund is also the only source of credit support for
forest growers. State forest enterprises and forest farms are entitled to get loan from
the fund. Loan period is from 8 to 10 years without calculating compound interest; the
principal and interest expense are paid up when timber is harvested. The interest
rates vary in different periods and is not compounded. From 1990 to 1995, the
interest rate is 30 - 50% of commercial interest rate (around 3,5-5%/year) (Decision
Nr. 264). From 1996 to present, the interest rate is changing within the following
years:
+ 1996 - 1997: 0.81%/month (= 9,7%/year).
+ 1998 - 1999: 7%/year.
+ 2000 - 2001: 5.4%/year, not as similar as the level applied previously under
decision 264: 4.5%/year.
In practice, people are reluctant to ask loan to invest in forest plantation because of
high interest rate, complex procedures and the current low price of wood material.
Phu Tho forest growers have to pay the same tax as in Lao Cai.

6. Summary
Over the reform process, the agricultural sector plays an important role in the
economy. The development of agriculture contributes not only to the economy growth
but also help to reduce the heat of the economy for smooth development, specifically
it helps to slow down the widening of the income gap, reduce the poverty rate, the
unemployment rate in the rural area, and reduce the migration flow from rural area to
urban area and therefore, reduce the pressure of social problems caused by idle
labour in cities.

25
In the agriculture sector, forestry is still very primary, has not been paid attention for
development. The share of forestry in total product value of agriculture sector
remained low over the whole sector. The potential of the forestry development is
therefore still large. Moreover, most of forestry production locates in remote areas
where infrastructure and market access are seriously lacking compared to other
agricultural production fields and therefore forestry is concentrated with poor
population. Should forestry be appropriately developed, the development of forestry
will help reduce poor and hunger rate remarkably, decreasing the social pressure in
big cities as well as improving the environment (water resource preserving, land
protection, air refreshing...), which will considerably benefit the society.
Up to now, forests have been planted mostly in the framework of projects invested by
the state. There have been 2 big projects implemented over large scale with the
objectives of increasing the cover rate of forest. Trees planted are mainly imported
species that are easy to plant and have high survival rate. Program 327 implemented
over 6 years (1992-1998) with the total investment capital of 2 978 billion VND has
help to increase the area of planted forest by 1.4 million ha. Following Program 327,
the government invested 13,650 billion VND in Program 5 million ha reforestation to
plant 2 million ha of protection forest and 3 M ha of production forest. This program is
still beeing implemented.
Although the two programs help increase the area of planted forest dramatically, this
occurs with high cost and not sustainable. The serious problem of the two programs
is that the government did not pay attention to ensure the long-term benefits of the
forest growers. Forest growers cannot get ownership of forest land while the rent
period only last 50 years, which prohibits them from growing long life cycle trees,
especially native species. The main objectives of the two programs focus too much
on increasing covering rate of forest but do not pay attention to measures ensuring
that forest products are sold at reasonable price to encourage farmers to plant forest
with their own capital and protect the existing forest area carefully. Even worse, the
plantation of forest with one or two tree species that have the same life cycle at large
scale has resulted in oversupply of timber in many areas, which drives down the
timber price and make forest plantation less attractive to the farmers. Future forest
projects need to pay more attention to forest product market study, the diversification
of trees planted with appropriate plan.
In addition, the government needs to change some policies to provide incentives for
farmers, such as support for forestry products instead of the current high tax,
increase infrastructure investment, increase reseach investment for forest plantation,
and provide capital to forest growers with favorable conditions and low interest rate.
The plantation of native trees and mixture of native trees and other trees has
occurred mostly by chance. There have not been large scale programs, project for
native trees. Some native trees that are widely planted include Illicium verum Hook. f
in Lang Son, Cinnamon in Yen Bai, Thanh Hoa, Quang Nam, Quang Ngai;
Erythroloeum fordii in Thanh Hoa, Hoa Binh, Vinh Phuc, Cau Hai (Phu Tho); Styrax
tonkinensis and Manglietia glauca are the main trees of Centre region and North
Eastern region supplying materials of paper industry. Pinus merkusii in Northern
midland and Central region can live on arid and Laterite land; Verciania montana
Lour in Northern Mountainous region and the Central North region; Anisoptera
costata, Dipterocarpus, Hopea odorata in the South; trees producing lac (Protium
serratum, Dalbergia hupeana) in the North West. Demdrocalanrus membranaceus is
easy to plant and is the tree for hunger elimination and poverty reduction to not only
people in Thanh Hoa but also in Hoa Binh, Phu Tho province.
26
Besides, some trees are planted for test in different kind of land and climate like
Afzelia xylocarpa, Toona surei, Litsea glutinosa in Central Highland; Aquilaria
crassna Pierre, Tarietia Javanica, Sinosideroxylon Wightianum in the Centre region;
Toona surenii, Paulownia fortunei, Machilus bonii H. Lee-lauraceae, Castanea
mollissima, Castanopsis boisii in the North East; Docynia indica in the North West;
Chukrasia tabularis in Son La, Hoa Binh and Nghe An; bamboo species for bamboo
and shoot, Calamus are scatteredly planted in many places.
Native gene resource is being seriously degraded due to forest exploitation, shifting
cultivation that living environment destroying. Recovering forest by planting more
native trees becomes urgent. However, planting and developing native trees has
some difficulties. Firstly, most of native trees are wild ones having long life cycle,
which has not been carefully and fully researched, especially there is a lack in
research in biology characteristics such as demand for soil, climate, sun light,
relationship with the surrounding community, capacity to regenerate. Current
researches are limited to small - scaled experiments in specific locations and have
not been checked at large scale. Secondly, the long life cycle of native trees (50
years or more) also reduce the profitability and growers often want to invest in trees
with shorter life cycle (5-7 years) for quick harvest and recovering their capital.
Thirdly, It is not so easy to plant native trees on stunted and barren land and hills.
Investment to native tree research and research results available are still limited and
do not satisfy the demand from the production process. Fourthly, regions that
demand for planting and recovering forest with native trees are usually remote ones
where people face so many difficulties in their lives, lack of investment capital, hard
to access to new technology, and land planning is not clear. Apart from that, lack of
market for forest products is the major factor preventing people from planting native
trees. Mixed plantation of native trees and others also face many difficulties due to
the lack of research on the interaction of trees when mix-planting.

27
Chapter 2
Survey Methodology
1. Sampling Method
Based on the objectives of the ACIAR project, staff of the ACIAR project designed a
draft of questionaire for the survey and a guideline on how the sample is selected. It
was decided that the FRC would provide advice on locations selected for the survey.
The survey was to be carried out in four provinces, for each one, one district would
be selected and households in five communes of that district will be selected by the
probability proportional to size (PPS) sampling method. The total sample size was
decided to include at least 200 farmers from 200 households. These farmers would
be personally interviewed. It was also specified at the beginning that at least one
district to be selected was to be relatively remote and distant from the pulpmill and
Bai Bang.

After receiving the contract, the ICARD research group reviewed the literature and
held meetings with forestry experts, including experts from the FRC, who specialized
in policy, technical and economic areas to make the questionaire more detailed and
adjust it to capture practical issues from the field. A meeting was held between the
ICARD research group and ACIAR project staff to get approval for the final draft of
the questionaire and survey site selection. It was agreed that 3 provinces were to be
chosen for survey, including Lao Cai, Hoa Binh and Phu Tho and 70 households to
be surveyed in each province. The questionaire was then tested in one district in Hoa
Binh and adjusted to make the final version. Interviewers were selected at the
beginning of the process and got involved in the discussion on the objectives of the
survey and the contents of the questionaire provided by ACIAR project staff. They
were involved in the whole process from questionaire review to field test and
contributed to questionaire adjustment.
For each province, the group worked with the Provincial Department of Agricultural
and Rural Development to select the district and worked with the extension worker to
select communes where the growing of native tree species by households is most
common. Then, communal extension workers were contacted to obtain lists of
households growing forest trees and select households to interview in a random
manner. The communal extension workers also helped the research group to make
appointments with households for interviews.

2. Response Rate
Due to the nature of the districts chosen in each provinces, the number of communes
chosen was lower than the required number (Table 2.2-1). Due to the raining weather
in the survey week in Phu Tho, the low turning-up number of households was low
and the survey team had to increase the sample size in Hoa Binh to compensate. As
a result, the sample is a bit biased towards Hoa Binh province.

28
Table 0.2-9. Survey Sample
Province District Commune Number of Percentage
households (%)
Lao Cai Bảo Phố Lu 74 35.24
Thắng Phong Hải
Sơn Hà
Phu Tho Thanh Tân Phú 54 25.71
Sơn Thu Cúc
Hoa Binh Mai Mai Hịch 82 39.05
Châu Vạn Mai
Phúc Sạn

After all revision, the final questionaire’s contents include:


• Questions on the situation of agriculture, forestry and fishery production and non-
farm activities of households.
• Questions on the situation of natural forest management by households
• Questions on the situation of forest plantation for plantation forests by
households, focusing on distribution of tree species, silviculture methods and
inputs, benefits households gain from those forest.
• Questions on opinions of forest growers about growing native trees.

3. Data Analysis Method


After the survey, details from questionaires were entered into a Microsoft Access
Database and Stata 7.0 was used to analyze the database. The database was
analysed with the aim of describing fully and accurately description the current
situation of forest development and native tree plantation in the mountainous
provinces in Vietnam.

29
Chapter 3
Characteristics of Respondents
1. Characteristics of Interviewees +

Most of the interviewees were male (82% of the sample), especially in Phu Tho which
had 100% of respondents to be male (Table 3.1-1)

Table 0.1-10. Sample structure by gender

Gender Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole sample


Number % Number % Number % Number %
Male 65 87.84% 54 100.00% 54 65.85% 173 82.38%
Female 9 12.16% 0 0.00% 28 34.15% 37 17.62%
Total 74 100% 54 100% 82 100% 210 100%

Most of husbands were also the household head (83% of interviewees, Table 3.1-2).
This is not by chance but due to the customs of the rural areas in Vietnam where
husbands are usually the head of the household, taking care of meetings and
participating in training courses. The wife is only the head of household in some
special cases like the husband is sick or the family belongs to the minority ethnic
group (for example Ede people in Central Highland) where the wife is always the
head of household.

Table 0.1-11. Interviewees who are household heads

Household head Number of households Percentage (%)


Male 175 83.33
Female 35 16.67
Total 210 100.00

For interviewed households, 83% had forest plantation decisions made by the
husband alone (Table 3.1-3). There were some households where the decision was
made from the discussion between husband and wife but not many (10%). The
number of households where the wife alone made the decision on forest plantation
was even smaller (7%).

30
Table 0.1-12. Forest Plantation Decision Maker

Decision Makera Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole sample
HH No 53 44 75 172
Husband
% 72.6 83.02 91.46 82.69
HH No 10 0 5 15
Wife
% 13.7 0 6.1 7.21
Both Husband HH No 10 9 2 21
and Wife % 13.7 16.98 2.44 10.1
HH No 73 53 82 208
Total
% 100 100 100 100
a. The sample includes two households that did not grow trees and did not know who would actually
make the decision.

For interviewees who were not the household head, most of them were the wife of
the head (85.7%), and few were the husband or children of the head (Table 3.1-4).

Table 3.1-4. Relationship of respondent to household head


Relationship with the head HH No Percentage (%)
Wife 30 85.71
Husband 1 2.86
Children 4 11.43
Total 35 100

Most of interviewees were of working age with 80% under the age of 48. (Table 3.1-
5). The youngest was 19 years while the oldest 73 years.

Table 3.1-5. Respondents’s Age

Statistics Youngest 1st 2nd 3rd Quintile 4th Greatest


Age Quintile Quintile Quintile Age
Age 19 34 40 43 48 73

There were many ethnicities involved in the sample, including Kinh, Muong, Dao,
Thai, Tay. As indicated in Table 3.1-6, Kinh, Muong and Thai accounted for the
highest proportion and nearly equaled to each other, at about 30%. Kinh was the
majority in Lao Cai (69%) while Muong was the majority in Phu Tho (89%) and Thai
was the majority in Hoa Binh (74%).

31
Table 3.1-6. Ethnicity of Interviewees

Ethnic Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole


sample
HH No 51 6 3 60
Kinh
% 68.92 11.11 3.66 28.57
Muong HH No 1 48 18 67
% 1.35 88.89 21.95 31.9
Dao HH No 20 20
% 27.03 9.52
Thai HH No 61 61
% 74.39 29.05
Tay HH No 2 2
% 2.7 0.95
HH No 74 54 82 210
Total
% 100 100 100 100

2. Income Sources of Households Interviewed


Most of the households depended totally on farming activities for their living. Only
about one third of the households had any non-farm income. Lao Cai and Phu Tho
had the highest proportions of households which had non-farm earnings (40.5% and
44.4%, respectively). That proportion in Hoa Binh was very low, 18% (Table 3.2-1).
These percentages include households that receive pensions. The proportion of
households that actually had off-farm activities (working for other household, for
enterprises, or conducting a small business) was low, and accounts for only 17.6% of
the sample. This may be contrasted with the proportion of farmers who have off-farm
activities combined with on-farm activities in the rural area national-wide, of 33.9%
(VLSS, as reported in JBIC 2002, p.17).

Table 3.2-1. Propostions of respondents with Non-farm Earnings, by province

Non-farm Activities and Earnings Lao Phu Hoa Whole


Cai Tho Binh sample
Having non-farm earnings No. 30 24 15 69
% 40.54 44.44 18.29 32.86
Having non-farm activities No. 22 6 9 37
(excluding pensions*) % 29.72 11.11 10.97 17.61
Total number of households No. 74 54 82 210
*
There are several kinds of pension including retirement pension, disabled veteran pension, pension
for people contributed to revolution.
Of the households having non-farm earnings, the ones that had pensions were quite
many, (46.38%, Table 3.2-2). Households having members working for other
households; working for enterprises or engaged in small business accounted for
similar proportions, about 16-20%. Pensions are common non-farm earnings in Phu
Tho and Hoa Binh. In Hoa Binh, working for other households is the most common
source of non-farm earnings while in Lao Cai, the four sources of non-farm earnings
are equally common.
32
Table 3.2-2. Non-farm Earning Sources

Non-farm earning source Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole
sample
Working for other HH No 8 1 5 14
households % 26.67 4.17 33.33 20.29
HH No 7 3 2 12
Working for enterprises
% 23.33 12.5 13.33 17.39
HH No 7 2 2 11
Doing small business
% 23.33 8.33 13.33 15.94
HH No 8 18 6 32
Pensions
% 26.67 75 40 46.38
HH No 30 24 15 69
Total
% 100 100 100 100

3. The Poverty and Hunger situation


Two poverty lines are usually used to assess the poverty and hunger situation of
households, namely the food poverty line and general poverty line. The food poverty
line is based on the essential level of dietary metabolisable energy (in Kcal) each
person needs for a day and is used by most of developing countries and the World
Health Organisation (WHO, 2001a, p2; WHO, 2001b, p6). In contrast, the general
poverty line is calculated based on the cost of food and non-food items needed to
satisfy basic demand of a person. The general poverty line is used by the World Bank
and Vietnamese government in the Comprehensive Poverty Reduction and Growth
Strategy (CPRGS).
With the purpose of emphasizing the food poverty nature of households, the research
group decided to ask questions on whether the households have sufficient food to
meet their daily needs. The questions are not detailed enough to calculate the level
of energy intake (Kcal/day), but help to roughly compare the food poverty rate of the
region with the national rate. According to the self-evaluation of interviewees on food
poverty state, the proportion of households having not enough food or having just
enough food is 24.28%, above the national rate of 15% in 1998 (MPI, 2003 p.7). Very
few households are well-off (13.8%). Most of households have enough food and just
some spare income (62%) (Table 3.3-1).

Table 3.3-1. Self-assessed indicators of Household Welfare

Welfare (self-assessment) Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole


sample
Very poor 0 0 0 0
No. 3 0 1 4
Hunger
% 4.05 0 1.22 1.9

33
Have enough food but no No. 14 9 24 47
spare income % 18.92 16.67 29.27 22.38
Have enough food and some No. 44 34 52 130
spare income % 59.46 62.96 63.41 61.9
No. 13 11 5 29
Well off
% 17.57 20.37 6.1 13.81
No. 74 54 82 210
Total
% 100 100 100 100

4. Summary
The sample reflects the typical living style of Vietnam rural areas where husbands
are usually the head of the household, taking care of meeting, participating training
and are the ones who make important decisions for the family. Here, most of
respondents were male, the head of the households and the one who made
decisions on forest planting. For interviewees who were not the head of the
households, they were mostly the wife of the head of households. Most of
interviewees were in the working age and so they were the ones who directly
involved in forest management and planting.
The sample involved many ethnicities, including Kinh, Muong, Dao, Thai, Tay. Kinh is
the majority in Lao Cai while Muong is the majority in Phu Tho and Thai is the
majority in Hoa Binh.
The number of households that depend totally on farming activities is large. Only one
third of of households have non-farm incomes and only 17.6% of the households
have off-farm activities. This number is low compared with the national average of
33.9% of households in rural areas having off-farm activities.
The hunger rate in the sample is also high compared with the national rate (24.3%
compared with 15%). The proportion of households that are well-off is low (13.8%).
Still, households that have enough food and some spared income account for the
majority.

34
Chapter 4
Forest Ownership and Tree
Distribution

1. Types of forest managed by households


More than half of the households surveyed had only plantation forest (52%). Others
had mostly both planted and natural forests (43%) and some had only natural forest
(4.3%). Most of households in Lao Cai and Phu Tho have only plantation forest (88%
and 50%, respectively) while most of households in Hoa Binh have both plantation
forest and natural forest.

Table 4.1-1 Forest Types Managed by Households, by Province


Type of Forest Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole
sample
Having only Natural No. 0 5 4 9
Forest % 0 9.26 4.88 4.29
Having only Plantation No 65 27 17 109
Forest % 87.84 50 20.73 51.9
Having both Natural No 9 21 61 91
and Plantation Forest % 12.16 38.89 74.39 43.33
Have no forest No 0 1 0 1
% 0 1.85 0 0.48
Total No. 74 54 82 210
% 100 100 100 100

On average, a household had managed natural forest for 8.35 years. The average
management period is longer in Phu Tho (11.23 years) compared to Lao Cai and Hoa
Binh, for which the average periods are 7.37 years and 7.26 years, respectively
(Table 4.1-2).

Table 4.1-2. Time length of natural forest management (years)

Province Household Average Standard Earliest Latest


no. period deviation start start
Lao Cai 8 7.37 3.89 1990 1999
Phu Tho 26 11.23 10.08 1960 2003
Hoa Binh 67 7.26 4.70 1977 2002
Whole sample 101 8.35 6.61 1960 2003

For plantation forest, on average, a household had managed for 8 years. Lao Cai has
the longest average management period (9 years) compared to Phu Tho (7 years)
and Hoa Binh (6 years) (Table 4.1-3).

35
Table 4.1-3. Time length of plantation forest management (years)

Province Number of Average Standard Earliest Latest


households period deviation start start
Lao Cai 74 9 5 1976 2002
Phu Tho 47 7 2 1985 2000
Hoa Binh 79 6 4 1981 2002
Whole sample 200 8 4 1976 2002

2. Land use certificates


Most of paddy land, residential land and fruit tree land have been issued with red
book 13(about 95%, Table 4.2-1). Few households having land from clearing or land
allocated by the state but have not yet been issued with the red book. For annual
crop other than rice (ACOTR) land, pond land and industrial cropping land, the
number of households issued with a red book is lower, less than 80%.
The number of households borrow land from others to grow ACOTR and industrial
crops is low (less than 3%). For ACOTR, some households have ACOTR land from
clearing (13.26%), from land allocated but has not been issued with red book
(10.04%), community forest land (2.15%) and SFF-assigned (State Forestry Farm)
land (0.72%). For industrial crop, there are some households growing in clearing land
(12.7%), land allocated but has yet been issued with red book (7.94%) and SFF-
assigned land (1.59%).
For forest land, the process of red-book issuance is not completed yet (Table 4.2-2).
For production forest, 77% of the households with planting forest have been issued
with red books and 82% of households with natural forest got red books. Most of
households that have not got red books are the ones that were allocated with land
but have not been issued with red books (11.2% for planting forest and 9.1% for
natural forest). For protection forest, the number of households having red book is
lower, 67% for planting forest and 49.5% for natural forest. However, the process of
red book allocation is slower for planting forest than natural forest in this case.
Households that were allocated with planting protection forest but have not been
issued with red books account for 22% of households having planting protection
forest, while that number for natural protection forest is half (11.3%). A significant
number of households having natural protection forest have not been issued with red
book because the forest land they have is the land assigned by SFF (11.3%), or
community forest land (14.4%) or land obtained from clearing (10.3%).

13
Red books have important influence on land use. They certify that farmers have right to use land for 30 years
if the land is agricultural land and 50 years if it is forestry land. Farmers can use red books as collateral for loans
in banks.
36
Table 4.2-1. Agricultural Land Sources

Paddy land Residential ACOTR Pond land Industrial Fruit tree


land land cropping land
Land source land
No No
No. % No. % No. % . % . % No. %
Issued with red book 95.9 98.5 94.2 88.4
Land 71 5 70 9 66 9 23 6 11 84.62 95 100
Rented from others Land
Communal Land 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SFF-assigned Land
Lao Cai Allocated but has not
been issued with red
book land 1 1.35 0 0 1 1.43 0 0 0 0 0 0
Community forest
land 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Clearing land 2 2.7 1 1.41 2 2.86 3 11.54 1 7.69 0 0
Borrowed land 0 0 0 0 1 1.43 0 0 1 7.69 0 0
Issued with red book 93.4 83.0 73.0 74.0
Land 57 4 44 2 46 2 20 7 24 77.42 37 86.05
Rented from others Land
Communal Land
SFF-assigned Land 0 0 0 0 2 3.17 1 3.7 1 3.23 1 2.33
Phu Tho Allocated but has not
been issued with red 15.0 20.6 18.5
book land 0 0 8 9 13 3 5 2 5 16.13 5 11.63
Community forest
land 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Clearing land 4 6.56 1 1.89 2 3.17 1 3.7 1 3.23 0 0
Borrowed land
Issued with red book 97.5
Land 83 100 80 6 93 63.7 6 60 92 92.93
Rented from others
Land 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Communal Land 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SFF-assigned Land 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hoa
Allocated but has not
Binh
been issued with red
book land 0 0 1 1.22 14 9.59 0 0 2 2.02
Community forest
land 0 0 0 0 6 4.11 0 0 3 3.03
Clearing land 0 0 1 1.22 33 22.6 4 40 2 2.02
Borrowed land 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Issued with red book 96.7 19 94.1 20 73.4 77.7 22
Land 211 9 4 7 5 8 49 8 35 79.55 4 94.51
Rented from others
Land 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Communal Land 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SFF-assigned Land 0 0 0 0 2 0.72 1 1.59 1 2.27 1 0.42
Whole Allocated but has not
sample been issued with red 10.0
book land 1 0.46 9 4.37 28 4 5 7.94 5 11.36 7 2.95
Community forest
land 0 0 0 0 6 2.15 0 0 0 0 3 1.27
13.2
Clearing land
6 2.75 3 1.46 37 6 8 12.7 2 4.55 2 0.84
Borrowed land 0 0 0 0 1 0.36 0 0 1 2.27 0 0
37
Table 4.2-2 Source of Forest Land

Protection Protection Special Production Production


Natural Planting use Natural Planting
Land source Forest Forest Planting Forest Forest
Forest
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Red book Land 2 66.67 1 100 6 100 61 88.41 406 94.86
Rented Land
Communal Land 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4.35 3 0.7
SFF-assigned Land
Lao Allocated but not
Cai issued with red book
yet 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 5.8 6 1.4
Community forest land 1 33.33 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.23
Clearing land 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1.45 10 2.34
Borrowed land 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0.47
Red book Land 19 79.17 15 78.95 3 60 26 76.47
Rented from others
Land
Communal Land
SFF-assigned Land 3 12.5 1 5.26 1 20 5 14.71
Phu
Allocated but not
Tho
issued with red book
yet 0 0 2 10.53 1 20 1 2.94
Community forest land 1 4.17 0 0 0 0 0 0
Clearing land 1 4.17 1 5.26 0 0 2 5.88
Borrowed land
Red book Land 27 38.57 42 63.64 1 100 2 15.38
Rented from others
Land 1 1.43 1 1.52 0 0 0 0
Communal Land 2 2.86 0 0 0 0 1 7.69
SFF-assigned Land 8 11.43 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hoa
Allocated but not
Binh
issued with red book
yet 11 15.71 17 25.76 0 0 8 61.54
Community forest land 12 17.14 0 0 0 0 0 0
Clearing land 9 12.86 4 6.06 0 0 2 15.38
Borrowed land 0 0 2 3.03 0 0 0 0
Red book Land 48 49.48 58 67.44 1 100 9 81.82 89 76.72
Rented from others
Land 1 1.03 1 1.16 0 0 0 0 0 0
Communal Land 2 2.06 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 3.45
SFF-assigned Land 11 11.34 1 1.16 0 0 1 9.09 5 4.31
Whole
Allocated but not
sample
issued with red book
yet 11 11.34 19 22.09 0 0 1 9.09 13 11.21
Community forest land 14 14.43 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Clearing land 10 10.31 5 5.81 0 0 0 0 5 4.31
Borrowed land 0 0 2 2.33 0 0 0 0 0 0

38
3. Land Area per Household
Almost all households have paddy land (95%), many have ACOTR land (69%) and
fruit tree land (66%). The number of households that have industrial cropping land is,
however, very low (20%) (Table 4.3-1).
The average area of annual crop land (paddy and other annual crops including corn,
vegetable, peanut) per household is small, about 0.5 ha, equivalent to the average
land area per household of the Red River Delta. Most of this is the land for ACOTR,
about 70%. The average industrial cropping land per household is about that of the
annual crop other than rice land area per household. The average fruit cropping land
area per household is about the area of paddy land area.
Lao Cai has the highest proportion of households having fruit tree land (76%) and the
average area of fruit tree land per household is 2-3 times as large as that of Phu Tho
and Hoa Binh. Phu Tho has the lowest rate of fruit tree growing (46%) but the
average area of fruit tree per household in Phu Tho is larger than in Hoa Binh (873
m2 compared with 669 m2).
Industrial crop plantation in Phu Tho is common, accounting for 54% of the
interviewed households, but relatively rare in Lao Cai (16%) and very rare in Hoa
Binh (0% of interviewed households). However, the average area of industrial crop
per household in Phu Tho is smaller than in Lao Cai (0.2 ha compared with 0.6 ha).
Some households in Lao Cai have up to 2.5 ha of industrial crop while the maximum
area a household in Phu Tho has is 1 ha.

Table 4.3-1. Area of Agricultural Land per Household

Land Type HH No Percentage Average Standard Min Max


Province
(%) Area (m2) Deviation
Paddy Land 73 99 1,488 1,209 300 9,000
Residential Land 73 99 389 487 38 3,000
ACOTR Land 42 57 3,813 5,873 100 32,000
Lao Cai
Pond Land 27 36 1,053 1,507 108 8,000
Industrial Crop Land 12 16 5,988 6,856 360 25,000
Fruit tree Land 56 76 1,825 2,545 100 12,500
Paddy Land 54 100 1,904 1,259 396 9,564
Residential Land 53 98 366 293 40 2,160
ACOTR Land 38 70 959 461 50 2,160
Phu Tho
Pond Land 27 50 556 730 50 3,600
Industrial Crop Land 29 54 2,139 2,055 200 10,000
Fruit tree Land 25 46 873 583 70 2,000
Paddy Land 82 100 1,137 1,105 300 10,000
Residential Land 82 100 221 162 35 1,000
Hoa ACOTR Land 64 78 5,040 6,327 500 29,490
Binh Pond Land 10 12 178 151 30 500
Industrial Crop Land 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fruit tree Land 58 71 669 1,140 70 7,000

39
Paddy Land 209 100 1,458 1,216 300 10,000
Residential Land 208 99 317 347 35 3,000
Whole ACOTR Land 144 69 3,605 5,512 50 32,000
sample Pond Land 65 31 695 1,120 30 8,000
Industrial Crop Land 41 20 3,266 4,362 200 25,000
Fruit tree Land 139 66 1,172 1,863 70 12,500

According to a more detailed classification for forest (production forest, protection


forest and special use forest; natural forest and planting forest), production planting
forest is most common among the types managed by households (accounting for
57% of interviewed households), followed by protection natural forest and protection
planting forest (44% and 41%, respectively). Almost no household manage special
use forest and very few have production natural forest (5%) (Table 4.3-2).
The average area of production planting forest per household is 2.4 ha with large
difference between households (the standard deviation is 3.1 ha). The average area
of production natural forest per household is smaller (2.05 ha) and the different
between households is also smaller than for the production planting forest (on
average, 2 ha). The average area of protection natural area per household is
relatively large (4.3 ha) and the difference between households is also large (on
average, 7.1 ha). The largest area is 62 ha while the smallest area is 0.1 ha. The
average area of protection planting forest per household is smaller than the above
types, only about 1.7 ha. The difference between households is large, averaging 2.07
ha. Household with the largest area has 16.7 ha while household with the smallest
area has 0.07 ha (Table 4.3-2).

Table 4.3-2 Area of Forest Land per Household

Provinc Forest Type HH Percen Average Standard Min Max


e No t (%) Area (m2) Deviation
Protection Natural 3 4 35,333 577 35,000 36,000
Protection Planting 1 1 12,000 12,000 12,000
Lao Cai
Production Natural 6 8 22,383 15,875 300 40,000
Production Planting 73 99 28,796 37,427 1,080 300,000
Protection Natural 24 44 89,125 124,647 10,000 622,000
Protection Planting 19 35 26,301 36,375 720 167,000
Phu Tho
Production Natural 4 7 17,715 28,549 360 60,000
Production Planting 33 61 20,066 17,386 1,080 80,000
Protection Natural 66 79 26,039 21,159 1000 100,000
Protection Planting 66 80 14,616 12,769 1,080 60,000
Hoa
Special use Planting 1 1 30,000 30,000 30,000
Binh
Production Natural 0 0
Production Planting 13 16 6,623 5,310 1,000 20,000
Protection Natural 92 44 42,648 70,905 1,000 622,000
Protection Planting 86 41 17,167 20,710 720 167,000
Whole
Special use Planting 1 0 30,000 0 30,000 30,000
sample
Production Natural 10 5 20,516 20,433 300 60,000
Production Planting 119 57 23,953 31,486 1,000 300,000

40
Distribution of forest types is province-characterised. Most of households in Lao Cai
have production planting forest while the number of households having other forest
types is very small (lower than 10%). In Hoa Binh, households mostly have protection
forest (the number having protection natural forest and protection planting forest
accounts for 80%) while very few households have production forest. In Phu Tho,
both production and protection forests are common, but the number of households
having production forests is larger (61% compared to about 40%) (Table 4.3-2).

4. Distribution of Trees in Natural Forest


There are more than 30 species of native trees in natural forests managed by
households. The names of these trees are listed in Table 4.4-1. According to Table
4.4-1, Bambusoidae is most popular (account for 15% of the total natural forest
area), followed by Dracontumelum duperranum (8.4%), Styrax tonkinensis (8.2%)
and Canarium album (7.9%). Other species like Chukrasia tabularis, Fagaceae,
Parashorea chinensis, Oak, Anogeissus Acuminata account for 4-6% each.
Natural forest in Hoa Binh has the largest range of tree species, of which Canarium
album, Fagaceae spp. are most common, accounting for 12.5% and 10.4% of the
total area, respectively. Anogeissus Acuminata, Bambusoidae spp., Styrax
tonkinensis, Dracontumelum duperranum, Milleta ichthyotona, account for 6-8%.
In Phu Tho, natural forest has mainly Bambusoidae spp. (21%), Dracontumelum
duperranum (11%) and Chukrasia tabularis (9%), Parashorea chinensis(9%), Styrax
tonkinensis (9%). Other trees with the share from 4-6% include Oak, Manglietia
glauca, Vatica fleuryana, Phoi bo14.
Natural forest in Lao Cai is less diversified. Main species include Bambusoidae and
Styrax tonkinensis (30% each). Other species including Canarium album, Manglietia
glauca, Phoebe Cuneata account for 10% each.

Table 4.4-1 Area of Trees in Natural Forest (m2)15

Tree species Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole sample
% Area % Area % Area % Area
Bambusoidae 36.82 125,300 21.38 1,400,500 7.73 568,000 14.75 2,093,800
Dracontumelum 10.87 712,000 6.63 487,000 8.44 1,199,000
duperranum
Styrax tonkinensis 29.09 99,000 8.49 556,000 6.94 510,000 8.2 1,165,000
Canarium album 10.29 35,000 2.62 171,360 12.49 917,700 7.92 1,124,060
Chukrasia tabularis 9.68 634,000 3.83 281,700 6.45 915,700
Fagaceae 10.38 762,700 5.37 762,700
Parashorea chinensis 9.65 632,000 0.68 50,000 4.8 682,000
Oak 6.07 397,500 3.51 258,000 4.62 655,500
Anogeissus Acuminata 8.78 645,300 4.54 645,300

14
This is the Vietnamese name of the tree. The name means “Cow Lungs”. The author tried to find English
name but could not.
15
The area of each tree is calculated by adding the area of these trees across households
( ∑ percentage of each tree * Natural forest area ).
Householdi
These numbers are only estimated
numbers that help to evaluate the popularity of each tree with the assumption that the
density of plantation is the same between households and between the types of trees.
41
Milleta ichthyotona 6.29 461,900 3.25 461,900
Ormosia Balansae Drake 1.83 120,000 4.06 298,000 2.94 418,000
Manglietia glauca 11.75 40,000 4.03 263,860 0.98 72,000 2.65 375,860
Vatica fleuryana 4.89 320,000 2.25 320,000
Phoi bo 4.84 317,000 2.23 317,000
Phoebe Cuneata 10.58 36,000 0.92 60,000 2.94 216,000 2.2 312,000
Sapotaceae 4.13 303,700 2.14 303,700
Burretiodendron hsienmu 3.48 255,700 1.8 255,700
Verciania montana Lour 1.37 90,000 1.36 100,000 1.34 190,000
Toona surei 0.23 15,000 2.18 160,000 1.23 175,000
Michelia mediocris 0.92 60,000 1.36 100,000 1.13 160,000
Anogeissus Acuminata 2.05 150,400 1.06 150,400
Cinnamomum illicioides 0.92 60,000 1.05 77,000 0.96 137,000
Livistona saribus 1.69 110,860 0.78 110,860
Peltophorum tonkinense 1.36 100,000 0.7 100,000
Milleta ichthyotona 0.84 61,600 0.43 61,600
Engelhardta 1.47 5,000 0.38 25,000 0.21 30,000
Garcinia Fagraeoides 0.41 30,000 0.21 30,000
Cinnamon 0.34 25,000 0.18 25,000
Dendrocalamus 0.28 20,700 0.15 20,700
menpranace
Markhamia stipulate 0.15 10,000 0.07 10,000
Other trees 9.07 594,000 5.92 435,200 7.25 1,029,200
Total 100 340,300 100 6,549,080 100 7,347,600 100 14,200,000

Most of the trees have the height of 5-10 m, except for Parashorea chinensis with
67% having the height of above 20m and Anogeissus Acuminata with 53% having
the height of 10 – 15m. About ¾ of the Bambusoidae is 5-10m high and ¼ is 10-15m
height. For other trees like Dracontumelum duperranum, Styrax tonkinensis,
Canarium, 10-15m high is most common, accounting for about 30%. The proportion
of trees at 15-20 m is also high, 25%, except for Styrax tonkinensis, the proportion is
8% (Table 4.4-2).

Table 4.4-2. Height Distribution of Tree Species in Natural Forest (%)

Species Height
5-10m 10-15m 15-20m >20m
Bambusoidae spp. 73.37 23.84 2.33 0.47
Dracontumelum 36.67 27.83 24.39 11.11
duperranum
Styrax tonkinensis 51.35 32.69 8.46 7.50
Canarium album 35.00 32.49 25.14 7.37
Chukrasia tabularis 74.67 9.33 14.67 1.33
Fagaceae spp. 45.11 21.50 20.71 12.68
Parashorea chinensis 16.67 8.33 8.33 66.67
Oak 45.00 15.71 30.71 8.57
Anogeissus Acuminata 16.38 53.45 18.79 11.38
Milleta ichthyotona 29.17 30.28 32.22 8.33
Ormosia Balansae 49.17 31.67 12.50 6.67
Drake
Manglietia glauca 58.33 20.83 20.00 0.83
42
Vatica fleuryana 76.67 20.00 3.33 0.00
Phoi bo 66.67 16.67 16.67 0.00
Phoebe Cuneata 46.82 21.82 16.36 15.00
Sapotaceae 33.50 33.50 31.00 2.00
Burretiodendron 33.18 49.55 13.64 3.64
hsienmu
Verciania montana 80.00 10.00 10.00 0.00
Lour surei
Toona 70.00 30.00 0.00 0.00
Michelia mediocris 38.57 20.00 30.00 11.43
Anogeissus Acuminata 27.14 60.71 12.14 0.00
Cinnamomum illicioides 92.00 8.00 0.00 0.00
A.Chev.
Livistona saribus 42.00 54.00 2.00 2.00
Peltophorum 32.50 52.50 15.00 0.00
tonkinense
Milleta ichthyotona 12.00 54.00 28.00 6.00
Engelhardta 63.33 26.67 3.33 6.67
Garcinia Fagraeoides 0.00 100.00 0.00 0.00
A.Chev.
Cinnamon 50.00 45.00 5.00 0.00
Dendrocalamus 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
menpranacestipulate
Markhamia 50.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
Others 90.91 0.00 4.55 4.55

Diameters depend on the kind of trees (Table 4.4-3). Most of the Bambusoidae has
the diameter of 5-10 cm. The shares of different diameter categories are pretty close
to each other for Dracontumelum duperranum, Styrax tonkinensis, Melaleuca,
Chukrasia tabularis, Oak, Anogeissus Acuminata (about 20-30%). Most of Fagaceae
has the diameter of above 30cm (40%) and Parashorea chinensis has the diameter
of 20-30 cm (76%).

Table 4.4-3. Diameter Distribution of Tree Species in Natural Forest

Tree Species Diameter of Standing Trees


5-10 cm 10-15 cm 15-20 cm 20-30 cm >30 cm
Bambusoidae 81.51 10.35 6.05 2.09 0.00
Dracontumelum 11.94 18.06 26.67 18.89 24.44
duperranum
Styrax tonkinensis 23.08 22.23 20.77 20.00 13.92
Canarium album 9.95 11.33 29.74 33.85 15.13
Chukrasia tabularis 20.00 11.67 29.67 33.33 5.33
Fagaceae 6.71 12.32 18.57 22.86 39.54
Parashorea chinensis 0.00 5.00 13.33 76.67 5.00
Oak 22.86 10.00 17.50 26.79 22.86
Anogeissus Acuminata 10.00 10.34 18.97 26.21 34.48
Milleta ichthyotona 5.83 17.22 24.17 31.11 21.67
Ormosia Balansae Drake 33.33 0.00 25.00 16.67 25.00
Manglietia glauca 30.77 25.38 12.31 22.31 9.23
Vatica fleuryana 53.33 16.67 16.67 13.33 0.00
Phoi bo 33.33 16.67 16.67 13.33 20.00
43
Phoebe Cuneata 11.82 20.00 14.55 43.18 10.45
Sapotaceae 2.00 15.00 35.00 14.50 33.50
Burretiodendron hsienmu 2.27 11.82 31.82 17.27 36.82
Verciania montana Lour 33.33 23.33 13.33 6.67 23.33
Toona surei 31.36 27.73 9.09 31.82 0.00
Michelia mediocris 28.57 3.57 9.29 31.43 27.14
Anogeissus Acuminata 15.00 12.86 27.86 12.14 32.14
Cinnamomum illicioides 22.00 18.00 22.00 38.00 0.00
A.Chev.
Livistona saribus 0.00 2.00 26.00 50.00 22.00
Peltophorum tonkinense 3.75 17.50 23.75 32.50 22.50
Milleta ichthyotona 13.00 12.00 8.00 25.00 42.00
Engelhardta 23.33 43.33 6.67 26.67 0.00
Garcinia Fagraeoides 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
A.Chev.
Cinnamon 35.00 15.00 10.00 15.00 25.00
Dendrocalamus 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
menpranace
Markhamia stipulate 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 0.00
Others 73.64 5.91 5.00 1.36 14.09

5. Distribution of Trees in Plantation Forest and


Forest Garden
5.1 Planting of Exortic Trees
In planting forest and garden land, timber trees and multi-purpose trees planting to
supply timber is very common in the sample. 98% of households grow trees in their
land, 96% grow timber trees and 96% grow multi-purpose trees that supply timber
(Table 4.5-1).
Table 4.5-1. Households planting trees, by tree type

Planting or not Planting tree Planting timber Planting multi-


tree purpose tree
No % No % No %
Yes 206 98.1 202 96.19 202 96.19
No 4 1.9 8 3.81 8 3.81
Total 210 100 210 100 210 100
Of the timber trees grown, there are some exotic species supplied by projects such
as PAM. However, households that grow these trees are not many, accounting for
only 20% of the whole sample. Phu Tho has the highest rate of exotic species
plantation (46.3% of total number of households) while Lao Cai almost has none
(Table 4.5-2).

Table 4.5-2. Households Planting exotic trees

44
Planting Imported Trees Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole sample
No of planting 1 25 16 42
% of Sample 1.35 46.3 19.51 20
% in total No of HH planting 2.38 59.52 38.1 100
native trees

Exotic tree species grown are Acacia and Eucalyptus, where Acacia is much more
common (19% of the number of interviewed households, compared to 2% for
Eucalyptus) (Table 4.5-3). Most of exotic trees were grown in 1996-1997. Acacia was
first grown in 1993 and Eucalyptus was first grown in 1994. At the time of growing,
each household on average has about 1300 Acacia trees and about 2200 Eucalyptus
trees. The largest number of trees per household reaches 6400 trees for each tree
species. However, until now, the average number of tree per household is only 810
trees for Acacia and 1450 trees for Eucalyptus.

Table 4.5-3. Planting Year of Exotic Trees

Variable Species
Acacia Eucalyptus
Household % Whole sample 19 2
planting No of HH planting 40 4
Plantation Year Mean 1997 1996
Min 1993 1994
Max 2002 1998
Number of Mean 1329 2225
trees/household S.D. 1456 2810
Min 40 300
Max 6400 6400
Number of Mean 810 1450
remained trees S.D. 985 2269
Min 0 0
Max 3200 4800

Households grow exotic trees for different reasons (Table 4.5-4). Most of households
growing Eucalyptus because of its high growth rate while a majority of people
growing Acacia because of the support they are provided by projects (Project 661,
Project 327).

Table 4.5-4. Reasons for growing exotic tree species

Reasons Fraction of number growing


this species (%)
Eucalyptus Acacia
High Growth Rate 50 10
Suitable to Land and Climate 25 15
High quality timber 0 2.5
High resistance to disease and 25 12.5
45
insects
Easy to sell products 25 2.5
Need little care 25 2.5
High survival rate 0 2.5
Support other species 0 5
661 program 0 32.5
327 program 0 25
747 program 0 10
472 program 0 2.5
Growing in cooperation with SFF 0 5
Projects funded by foreign donor 0 17.5

5.2 Planting of Native trees


While the proportion of households growing exotic species is low, most of households
grow native species (95% of the sample). The province that has the lowest proportion
of households growing native species also reaches 90% (Phu Tho province) (Table
4.5-5).

Table 4.5-5. Households Growing Native Trees

Native Tree Plantation Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole
sample
No of HH 74 48 78 200
% 100 88.89 95.12 95.24
Whole sample 74 54 82 210
(%) 100 100 100 100

More than 14 native species are grown in planting forest and forest garden of
households interviewed (Table 4.5-6). The most common species include Manglietia
glauca, Dendrocalamus menpranace, Chukrasia tabularis, Cinnamon and Styrax
tonkinensis with the respective percentage of households growing to be 45%, 40%,
31%, 24% and 22%. In Lao Cai, Manglietia glauca, Cinnamon and Styrax
tonkinensis are the most popular species with the growing rate of 81%, 61% and
36%. In Phu Tho, Manglietia glauca, Styrax tonkinensis and Canarium album are the
most popular species with the growing rate of 63%, 35% and 31%. In Hoa Binh, most
of households grow Dendrocalamus menpranace (93%) and Chukrasia tabularis
(73%).

Table 4.5-6. Households Growing Native Species by Species

Tree Species Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole


sample
No % No % No % No %
Styrax tonkinensis 27 36 19 35 0 0 46 22
Manglietia glauca 60 81 34 63 1 1 95 45
Dendrocalamus menpranace 1 1 7 13 76 93 84 40
Canarium album 2 3 17 31 3 4 22 10
Chukrasia tabularis 5 7 0 0 60 73 65 31
46
Cinnamon 45 61 4 7 1 1 50 24
Dracontumelum duperranum 0 0 4 7 0 0 4 2
Peltophorum tonkinense 0 0 10 19 0 0 10 5
Phoebe Cuneata 2 3 0 0 0 0 2 1
Parashorea chinensis 0 0 4 7 0 0 4 2
Bambusoidae 2 3 11 20 0 0 13 6
Toona surei 0 0 8 15 2 2 10 5
Verciania montana Lour 6 8 4 7 0 0 10 5
Cassia rotundifolia 0 0 5 9 0 0 5 2
Other 1 1 9 17 1 1 11 5
Interviewed HH 74 54 82 210

Native trees are grown scatterly in different years. The first ones were grown in 1960
and the majority were grown in the 1990s (Table 4.5-7). Popular native trees like
Styrax tonkinensis, Manglietia glauca, Dendrocalamus menpranace, Chukrasia
tabularis and Cinnamon were grown first in the 1980s and the majority was grown in
1995 – 2002. These trees are still grown in the recent years (Table 4.5-7).

Table 4.5-7. Year of Plantation Establishment

Species Planting Year Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole sample
Min 1986 1992 1986
Styrax Max 2003 2000 2003
tonkinensis
Mean 1996 1996 1996
Min 1985 1980 1991 1980
Manglietia Max 2003 2001 1991 2003
glauca
Mean 1996 1996 1991 1996
Min 1997 1995 1987 1987
Dendrocalamus Max 1997 2000 2002 2002
menpranace
Mean 1997 1997 1997 1997
Min 1998 1992 1995 1992
Canarium album Max 1999 2000 2001 2001
Mean 1999 1997 1998 1999
Min 1998 1991 1991
Chukrasia Max 2002 2002 2002
tabularis
Mean 2001 1999 2001
Min 1983 1990 2002 1983
Cinnamon Max 2003 1998 2002 2003
Mean 1995 1995 2002 2002
Min 1996 1996
Dracontumelum Max 1996 1996
duperranum
Mean 1996 1996
Min 1995 1995
Peltophorum Max 2000 2000
tonkinense
Mean 1998 1998
Min 1990 1990
Phoebe Cuneata Max 1999 1999
Mean 1995 1995
Min 2001 2001
Parashorea Max 2002 2002
chinensis
Mean 2002 2002
47
Min 1999 1980 1980
Bambusoidae Max 1999 2000 2000
Mean 1999 1994 1999
Min 1995 1997 1995
Toona surei Max 2000 2001 2001
Mean 1998 1999 1999
Min 1993 1994 1993
Verciania Max 1998 1997 1998
montana Lour
Mean 1997 1996 1997
Min 1996 1996
Cassia Max 2001 2001
rotundifolia
Mean 1998 1998
Min 1996 1960 1998 1960
Other Max 1996 2001 1998 2001
Mean 1996 1993 1998 1998

Among popular species, Manglietia glauca, Styrax tonkinensis and Cinnamon are
often grown in large quantity, on average 2000 – 3000 trees/household (Table 4.5-8).
Some households grow up to 10000 trees. However, the difference among
households is very large, about 3000 trees on average. Species such as
Dendrocalamus menpranace, Chukrasia tabularis and Canarium album are grown in
a smaller number, on average 300 – 500 trees/household. Some households grew up
to some thousands of trees and the average difference among households is about
500 – 1000 trees.

Table 4.5-8. Number of Trees at Time of Planting

Species Min Max Mean Standard Deviation


Styrax tonkinensis 40 10000 2340 2706
Manglietia glauca 20 12000 1999 2363
Dendrocalamus menpranace 15 3000 342 498
Canarium album 20 4000 560 970
Chukrasia tabularis 30 8000 421 990
Cinnamon 50 15000 3372 3345
Dracontumelum duperranum 20 300 173 142
Peltophorum tonkinense 100 2000 720 704
Phoebe Cuneata 100 100 100
Parashorea chinensis 100 1000 350 436
Bambusoidae 2 400 105 135
Toona surei 50 1200 322 308
Verciania montana Lour 150 10000 2378 3117
Cassia rotundifolia 100 1200 537 464
Others 1 2000 337 548

Compared with the growing time, the average number of trees per household for
common species (Manglietia glauca, Dendrocalamus menpranace, Canarium album,
Chukrasia tabularis) remained at the survey time is not much different, except for
Styrax tonkinensis with the number reduced to 1545 trees/household (a reduction of
40%) (Table 4.5-9).

48
Table 4.5-9. Number of Trees per Household at Time of Survey

Species Min Max Mean Standard Deviation


Styrax tonkinensis 0 10000 1545 1955
Manglietia glauca 0 30000 1882 3484
Dendrocalamus menpranace 0 3000 367 478
Canarium album 10 2000 273 476
Chukrasia tabularis 10 8000 380 991
Cinnamon 40 12000 3203 3172
Dracontumelum duperranum 12 300 108 130
Peltophorum tonkinense 70 1200 468 456
Phoebe Cuneata 70 70 70
Parashorea chinensis 100 1000 350 436
Bambusoidae 15 1000 215 281
Toona surei 50 1200 261 323
Verciania montana Lour 50 10000 2315 3105
Cassia rotundifolia 80 1000 327 344
Others 1 800 247 256

Many different factors influence the selection of native trees to grow, but the common
factors mentioned most by the households are trees’growth rate, suitability to land
and climate and support of projects. For Manglietia glauca, the tree that is grown
most, suitability to land and climate and high growth rate are the main reasons its
planting. For Styrax tonkinensis, high growth rate, suitability to land and climate and
products are easy to sell are the main reasons. For Dendrocalamus menpranace,
Chukrasia tabularis, Canarium album and Peltophorum tonkinense, most of
households growing them because they are supported by projects (Project 661, 327,
747), and because the trees are suitable to land and climate, and high growth rate
(Table 4.5-10).

49
Table 4.5-10. Importance of Factors for the Selection of Native Trees to Grow
(% of HH stated that these factors make them select the tree out of the number of households that grow that tree)

Factors Styrax Manglietia Dendrocalamus Canarium Chukrasia Cinnamon Dracontumelum Peltophorum Parashorea Bambusoidae Toona Verciania Cassia Other tree
tonkinensis glauca menpranace album tabularis duperranum tonkinense chinensis surei montana rotundifolia
Lour
Grow fast 51 32 10 27 14 4 0 10 75 15 18 30 0 25
Suit land 27 35 3 32 2 21 0 60 50 38 36 30 67 17
High value 20 19 0 5 6 37 25 0 0 15 18 0 0 0
timber
High quality 8 5 1 0 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 17
timber
Disease 8 10 1 14 0 2 0 20 0 0 0 0 50 17
resistant
Easy to sell 27 17 3 23 3 19 0 0 0 15 18 0 0 8
Little care 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 0 0 0 17 0
High 4 3 1 5 0 0 25 0 25 0 9 30 17 8
survival rate
Support 4 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 9 0 0 0
other
plants/tree
Many grow 18 11 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 17
Diversified 0 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
products
Project 661 0 2 47 18 65 0 0 10 0 8 9 0 17 0
Project327 2 6 2 23 0 4 50 40 0 0 0 10 0 8
Project 747 0 1 24 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Project 472 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Coop with 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SFF
Foreign 0 4 13 0 22 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Projects
Total 49 102 105 22 65 57 4 10 4 13 11 10 6 12
number of
HH grow
6. Mixed plantation of trees and agro-forestry
production
Table 4.6-1 shows the proportion of households growing trees in mix in forest land.
According to Table 4.6-1, more than a half of households grows trees in a mix. Hoa
Binh has the highest ratio of households with mixed planting (nearly 70%), followed
by Phu Tho (53.7%) and Lao Cai (37.8%).

Table 4.6-1. Proportion of households growing trees in mix

Mix-planting Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole


sample
HH No 28 29 57 114
Yes
% 37.84 53.7 69.51 54.29
HH No 46 25 25 96
No
% 62.16 46.3 30.49 45.71
HH No 74 54 82 210
Total
% 100 100 100 100

Mixed planting types are also different among provinces (Table 4.6-2). Only Styrax
tonkinensis - Manglietia glauca mix is grown in all the 3 provinces. Styrax tonkinensis
- Manglietia glauca -(Cinnamon/Verciania montana Lour/Acacia) mix; Chukrasia
tabularis – Canarium mix and Manglietia glauca - Cinnamon mix are grown in 2
provinces. Other mixes are only grown in one province. In Hoa Binh, Chukrasia
tabularis-Dendrocalamus menpranace mix is most popular, accounting for 67% of the
households who grow trees in mix, followed by Acacia-Chukrasia tabularis-
Dendrocalamus menpranace mix (25%). In Phu Tho, Acacia-Manglietia glauca
-Cassia rotundifolia mix is most popular (16% of the households growing trees in
mix), followed by Styrax tonkinensis -Manglietia glauca -(Cinnamon/Verciania
montana Lour/Acacia) mix (13%); Acacia-Peltophorum tonkinense -Canarium mix
(13%) and Manglietia glauca -Dracontumelum duperranum -Canarium-Verciania
montana Lour mix (13%). In Lao Cai, Styrax tonkinensis -Manglietia glauca mix is
most popular (35%), followed by Styrax tonkinensis - Manglietia glauca -
(Cinnamon/Verciania montana Lour/Acacia) mix (19%), Cinnamon-Cassava mix
(19%) and Manglietia glauca - Cinnamon mix (16%).
Table 4.6-2. Proportion of different tree mixes grown in forest land

Tree mix Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Whole


Binh sample
% No % No % No % No
Styrax tonkinensis Manglietia glauca 35 11 6 2 2 1 11.38 14
Styrax tonkinensis Acacia 6 2 1.63 2
Dendrocalamus menpranace Manglietia
glauca
Styrax tonkinensis Manglietia glauca and 19 6 13 4 8.13 10
(Cinnamon or Verciania montana Lour or
Acacia)
Acacia Peltophorum tonkinense 13 4 3.25 4
Canarium
Acacia Fagaceae 3 1 0.81 1
Acacia Peltophorum tonkinense 6 2 1.63 2
Manglietia glauca Canarium
Acacia Chukrasia tabularis 25 15 12.2 15
Dendrocalamus menpranace
Acacia Manglietia glauca Cassia 16 5 4.07 5
rotundifolia
Chukrasia tabularis Dendrocalamus 67 41 33.33 41
menpranace
Chukrasia tabularis Dendrocalamus 5 3 2.44 3
menpranace Toona surei
Chukrasia tabularis Canarium 3 1 2 1 1.63 2
Dendrocalamus menpranace Manglietia 6 2 1.63 2
glauca Cinnamon Dracontumelum
duperranum Canarium
Manglietia glauca Cinnamon 16 5 3 1 4.88 6
Manglietia glauca Dracontumelum 13 4 3.25 4
duperranum Canarium Verciania
montana Lour
Manglietia glauca Indosasa hispida 3 1 0.81 1
Meclure; Toona surei
Manglietia glauca Toona surei 6 2 1.63 2
Cinnamon Cassava 19 6 4.88 6
Chukrasia tabularis Manglietia glauca 3 1 0.81 1
Canarium
Chukrasia tabularis Cinnamon 3 1 0.81 1
Styrax tonkinensis, Indosasa hispida 3 1 0.81 1
Meclure;
Total 100 31 100 31 100 61 100 123

In ACOTR land, Corn-Sugar Cane-Cassava is the most popular mix (accounting for
45.5% of the households growing annual crops in mix) (Table 4.6-3). This mix is
especially popular in Hoa Binh (83%) and Lao Cai (50%). Besides, there is Bean-
Peanut-Corn mix that is grown in Phu Tho and Lao Cai and is most popular Phu Tho
(37.5%) and the second popular in Lao Cai (12.5%), after Corn-Sugar Cane-Cassava
mix.

52
Table 4.6-3. Proportion of plant mixes in ACOTR land

Plant Mix Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole sample
% No % No % No % No
Green Bean Corn 25 2 17 1 13.6 3
Bean Peanut 12.5 1 37.5 3 18.2 4
Corn
Sophora japonica 12.5 1 4.6 1
L. Corn Cassava
Potato Vegetable 12.5 1 4.6 1
Corn Mia 50 4 12.5 1 83 5 45.5 10
Cassava
Tea Cassava 12.5 1 4.6 1
Sophora japonica 12.5 1 4.6 1
L. Na
Bean Vegetable 12.5 1 4.6 1
Cassava Litchi
Total 100 8 100 8 100 6 100 22

For fruit land, mixed planting is similar among provinces (Table 4.6-4). Logan-Litchi
mix is the most popular (accounting for 45.5% of the total number of households
growing fruit trees), grown in all 3 provinces. This is the mix that is the most popular
in Hoa Binh (33% of households growing fruit trees in mix) and in Lao Cai (61%) and
is the second most popular mix in Phu Tho (22%). The second most popular fruit tree
mix in the whole sample is Custard apple – Longan – Litchi (15.2%). This mix is the
most popular in Phu Tho (33%) and the second most popular in Hoa Binh (17%).

Table 4.6-4. Proportion of mixed trees grown in fruit land

Tree Mix Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole sample
% No % No % No % No
Orange Manglietia glauca Man 11 1 17 1 6.06 2
Mandarin
Custard-Apple, Longan, Litchi 6 1 33 3 17 1 15.15 5
Longan- Manglietia glauca 17 3 17 1 12.12 4
Longan Corn Cassava Litchi 6 1 22 2 9.09 3
Mango
Longan Litchi 61 11 22 2 33 2 45.45 15
Litchi Mango 11 1 3.03 1
Banana Longan Mango 11 2 17 1 9.09 3
Total 100 18 100 9 100 6 100 33

In industrial cropping land, very few households grow trees in mix (Table 4.6-5).
There are some in Phu Tho and only one in Lao Cai. Tree mixes grown are Tea-
Cassava, Tea-Cassia-Cassava and Tea-Cassia.

53
Table 4.6-5. Number of HHs mixplanting in industrial land

Plant Mix Lao Cai Phu Tho


Tea Cassia rotundifolia 0 1
Tea Cassia rotundifolia Cassava 0 1
Tea Cassava 1 4
Total 1 6

Table 4.6-6 describes the picture of plantation under trees. According to this table,
households that underplant only account for 29% of the sample. The rate is highest
in Hoa Binh (37.7%) and lowest in Phu Tho (12%).

Table 4.6-6. Households plant under trees

Underplanting Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole sample


No 25 7 40 72
Yes
% 29.76 12.07 37.74 29.03
No 59 51 66 176
No
% 70.24 87.93 62.26 70.97
No 84 58 106 248
Total
% 100 100 100 100

In Lao Cai, cassava is the most common crop that is underplanted and usually
planted under Manglietia glauca and Cinnamon (11% of households growing
Manglietia glauca and 12% of households growing Cinnamon) (Table 4.6-7). Some
households grow Corn and Lemon grass under Manglietia glauca. Other plants that
are underplanted are pine apple, potatoes, soy bean, ginger, usually under fruit trees.

Table 4.6-7. Proportion of households planting under trees in Lao Cai (%)

Plants grown under trees Trees


Manglietia Cinnamon Multipurpose trees
glauca (Litchi, Custard-Apple,
Longan)
Pine apple 4
Cassava 11 12 2
Potatoe 2
Corn 2
Soy bean 4
Ginger 2
Lemon grass 2
Total number of HH growing trees 66 52 51

54
In Phu Tho, cassava is usually grown under trees like Cassia rotundifolia (17% of
households growing Cassia rotundifolia in Phu Tho), Peltophorum tonkinense (10%),
Styrax tonkinensis (5%), Acacia (4%) and Manglietia glauca (3%) (Table 4.6-8).
However, cassava is not planted under fruit trees but tea is planted instead (10% of
households growing fruit trees).

Table 4.6-8 Proportion of households planting under trees in Phu Tho (%)

Plants grown Styrax Manglietia Peltophorum Acacia Cassia Multipurpose


under trees tonkinensis glauca tonkinense rotundifolia trees (Litchi,
Longan)
Cassava 5 3 10 4 17
Tea 10
Total number 19 35 10 25 6 21
of HH
growing trees

In Hoa Binh, Cassava is also the most popular plant that are underplanted, followed
by Corn and Soy bean (Table 4.6-9). Of the households growing Chukrasia tabularis,
15% plants Cassava and 12% plants Corn underneath. Cassava and Corn are also
planted under Acacia (each accounts for 14% of households growing Acacia). These
plants are also planted under Dendrocalamus menpranace but not so common (7.8%
of households growing Dendrocalamus menpranace).

Table 4.6-9 Proportion of households planting under trees in Hoa Binh (%)

Plants grown under trees Dendrocalamu Chukrasia Acacia


s menpranace tabularis
Cassava 7.9 15 14
Corn 7.9 12 14
Soy bean 7.9 3
Total number of HH growing trees 76 60 14

7. Summary

In the sample, households often have planting forest rather than natural forest. This
may be due to the selection method that oriented towards choosing the households
that plant native trees. Households that have only planting forest account for the
majority of the sample (52%), followed by households having both planting and
natural forests (43%). Households that have only natural forest account for a small
proportion (4.3%).
The forest management experience of households is relatively short compared to the
tree life cycle. On average, households have the 8.35 years of experience in
managing natural forest and 8 years in managing planting forest.

55
The process of land use certificate issuance, which help secure the right of farmers
for their investment into their forest, is not completed yet. 23% of households having
planting forest and 18% of households having natural forest have not been issued
with red books. The number of households that were allocated forest by the state but
have not got red book remains at about 10% of households for each kind of forests.
Very few households have forest land from clearing land.
Even for agricultural land, land use certificate issuance is not completed either. Most
of land that has not been issued with red books fall in the categories of land
allocated, waiting for red books and clearing land. It is also mostly the land to grow
ACOTR.
Almost all households have agricultural activities. 99.5% of households have paddy
land, 69% have ACOTR land and 66% have fruit tree land. Households that have
industrial cropping land are few (20%).
The average area of annual crop land (paddy and other annual crops like corn,
vegetable, peanut…) per household is small, about 0.5 ha, 70% of which is the land
for crops other than rice. The average industrial cropping land per household is about
that of the annual crop other than rice land area per household. The average fruit
cropping land area/household is about the area of paddy land area.
The average area per household for production plantation forest is 2.4 ha, for
production natural forest it is 2.05 ha, for protection natural forest it is 4.3 ha and for
protection plantation forest it is 1.7 ha. The difference between households tends to
be large.
Distribution of forest types is province-characterised. Households in Lao Cai often
have production plantation forest while those in Hoa Binh often have protection forest
(both natural and plantation) and those in Phu Tho have both production and
protection forests.
Natural forests have a good variety of timber trees. There are more than 30 species
of native trees, of which Bambusoidae is most popular (account for 15% of the total
natural forest area), followed by Dracontumelum duperranum (8.4%), Styrax
tonkinensis (8.2%), Canarium album (7.9%). Chukrasia tabularis, Fagaceae,
Parashorea chinensis, Oak, Anogeissus Acuminata account for 4-6% each.
Natural forest in Hoa Binh has the largest range of tree species, of which Canarium
album, Fagaceae are most common, accounting for 12.5% and 10.4% of the total
area, respectively. Anogeissus Acuminata, Bambusoidae, Styrax tonkinensis,
Dracontumelum duperranum, Milleta ichthyotona, account for 6-8%.
In Phu Tho, natural forest has mainly Bambusoidae (21%), Dracontumelum
duperranum (11%) and Chukrasia tabularis, Parashorea chinensis, Styrax
tonkinensis accounting for about 9% each. Other trees with the share from 4-6%
include Oak, Manglietia glauca, Vatica fleuryana, Phoi bo.
Natural forest in Lao Cai is less diversified. Main species include Bambusoidae and
Styrax tonkinensis (30% each). Other species including Canarium album, Manglietia
glauca, Phoebe Cuneata account for 10% each.

56
Trees in natural forests are not very high. Most of the trees has the height of 5-10 m,
except for Parashorea chinensis with 67% having the height of above 20m and
Anogeissus Acuminata with 53% having the height of 10 – 15m. About ¾ of the
Bambusoidae is 5-10m high and ¼ is 10-15m height. For other trees like
Dracontumelum duperranum, Styrax tonkinensis, Canarium, 10-15m high is most
common, accounting for about 30%. Tthe proportion of trees at 15-20 m is also high,
25%, except for Styrax tonkinensis, the proportion is 8%.
Most of the Bambusoidae has the diameter of 5-10 cm. The shares of different
diameter categories are prety close to each other for Dracontumelum duperranum,
Styrax tonkinensis, Melaleuca, Chukrasia tabularis, Oak,
Anogeissus Acuminataabout (20-30%). Most of Fagaceae has the diameter of above
30cm (40%) and Parashorea chinensis has the diameter of 20-30 cm (76%).
For plantation forest and garden forest, plantation of timber trees and multi-purpose
trees that supply timber is very common. 98% of households grow trees in their land,
96% grow timber trees and 96% grow multi-purpose tree that supply timber.
Households growing exotic trees account for only 20% of the whole sample. Phu Tho
has the highest rate of exotic species plantation while Lao Cai almost has none. The
number of exotic species is limited to two, Acacia and Eucalyptus, where Acacia is
much more common (19% of the interviewed households, compared to 2%). Most of
households growing Eucalyptus because of the high growth rate while a majority of
people growing Acacia because of the support provided by projects (Project 661,
Project 327).
Exotic trees were mostly grown in 1996-97. Acacia was first grown in 1993 and
Eucalyptus was first grown in 1994. At the time of growing, on average, each
household grew about 1300 acacia tree and about 2200 eucalyptus tree. The
maximum number of tree grown by one household was 6400 trees for each kind.
However, the current average number of trees per household is only 810 for Acacia
and 1450 for Eucalyptus.
The number of households growing native species dominates the sample (95%). The
province that has the lowest proportion of households growing native species also
reaches 90% (Phu Tho province).
More than 14 native species are planted by households interviewed. The most
common species include Manglietia glauca, Dendrocalamus menpranace, Chukrasia
tabularis, Cinnamon and Styrax tonkinensis with the percentage of household
growing to be 45%, 40%, 31%, 24% and 22% respectively. In Lao Cai, Manglietia
glauca, Cinnamon and Styrax tonkinensis are the most popular species with the
growing rate of 81%, 61% and 36%. In Phu Tho, Manglietia glauca, Styrax
tonkinensis and Canarium album are the most popular species with the growing rate
of 63%, 35% and 31%. In Hoa Binh, most of households grow Dendrocalamus
menpranace (93%) and Chukrasia tabularis (73%).
Native trees are grown scatterly in different years with the first ones grown in 1960
and the majority grown in the 1990s. Popular native trees like Styrax tonkinensis,
Manglietia glauca, Dendrocalamus menpranace, Chukrasia tabularis and Cinnamon
were grown first in the 80s and the majority was grown in 1995 – 2002. These trees
are still grown in the recent years.

57
Among popular species, Manglietia glauca, Styrax tonkinensis and Cinnamon are
often grown with large quantity, on average 2000 – 3000 trees/household. Some
households grow up to 10000 trees. The difference between households is very
large, about 3000 trees. Species such as Dendrocalamus menpranace, Chukrasia
tabularis, Canarium album are grown with smaller number, on average 300 – 500
trees/household. Some households grow up to some thousands of trees and the
difference between households is about 500 – 1000 trees.
Compared to the time of growing, the average number of trees per household for
common species (Manglietia glauca, Dendrocalamus menpranace, Canarium album,
Chukrasia tabularis) remained at the survey time is not much different, except for
Styrax tonkinensis which has the quantity reduced to 1545 tree/household (40%).
For households growing native trees, the factors that have largest impact on their
tree selection include growth rate, suitability to land and climate and support from
forestry projects. For Manglietia glauca, the tree that is grown most, suitability to land
and climate and high growth rate are the main reasons why it is chosen for
plantation. For Styrax tonkinensis, high growth rate, suitability to land and climate
and products are easy to sell are the main reasons. For Dendrocalamus
menpranace, Chukrasia tabularis, Canarium album, Peltophorum tonkinense, most of
households growing them because they are supported by projects (Project 661, 327,
747), and because the trees are suitable to land and climate, and high growth rate
Mixed planting of timber trees is not really popular and varied between provinces.
The ratio of households growing trees in a mix is just above a half. Hoa Binh has the
highest ratio of households with mixed planting (nearly 70%), followed by Phu Tho
(53.7%) and Lao Cai (37.8%).
Mixed planting types are also different among provinces. Only Styrax tonkinensis -
Manglietia glauca mix is grown in all the 3 provinces. Besides, Styrax tonkinensis -
Manglietia glauca -(Cinnamon/Verciania montana Lour/Acacia) mix and Chukrasia
tabularis – Canarium mix and Manglietia glauca - Cinnamon mix are grown in 2
provinces, other mixes are only grown in one province. In Hoa Binh, Chukrasia
tabularis-Dendrocalamus menpranace mix is most popular, accounting for 67% of the
households who grow trees in mix, followed by Acacia-Chukrasia tabularis-
Dendrocalamus menpranace mix (25%). In Phu Tho, Acacia-Manglietia glauca
-Cassia rotundifolia mix is most popular (16% of the households growing trees in
mix), followed by Styrax tonkinensis -Manglietia glauca -(Cinnamon/Verciania
montana Lour/Acacia) mix (13%); Acacia-Peltophorum tonkinense -Canarium mix
(13%) and Manglietia glauca -Dracontumelum duperranum -Canarium-Verciania
montana Lour mix (13%). In Lao Cai, Styrax tonkinensis -Manglietia glauca mix is
most popular (35%), followed by Styrax tonkinensis - Manglietia glauca -
(Cinnamon/Verciania montana Lour/Acacia) mix (19%), Cinnamon-Cassava mix
(19%) and Manglietia glauca - Cinnamon mix (16%).
In ACOTR land, Corn-Sugar Cane-Cassava is the most popular mix (accounting for
45.5% of the households growing annual crops in mix). This mix is especially popular
in Hoa Binh (83%) and Lao Cai (50%). Besides, there is Bean-Peanut-Corn mix that
is grown in Phu Tho and Lao Cai and is most popular Phu Tho (37.5%) and the
second popular in Lao Cai (12.5%), after Corn-Sugar Cane-Cassava mix.

58
For fruit land, mixed planting is similar among provinces. Longan-Litchi mix is the
most popular (accounting for 45.5% of the total number of households growing fruit
trees), grown in all 3 provinces. This is the mix that is the most popular in Hoa Binh
(33% of households growing fruit trees in mix) and in Lao Cai (61%) and is the
second most popular mix in Phu Tho (22%). The second most popular fruit tree mix
in the whole sample is Custard apple – Longan – Litchi (15.2%). This mix is the most
popular in Phu Tho (33%) and the second most popular in Hoa Binh (17%).
In industrial cropping land, very few households grow trees in mix. There are some in
Phu Tho and only one in Lao Cai. Tree mixes grown are Tea-Cassava, Tea-Cassia-
Cassava and Tea-Cassia.
Underplanting is not so popular either. Households that underplant only account for
29% of the sample. The rate is highest in Hoa Binh (37.7%) and lowest in Phu Tho
(12%).
In Lao Cai, cassava is the most common crop that is underplanted and usually
planted under Manglietia glauca and Cinnamon (11% of households grow Manglietia
glauca and 12% of households grow Cinnamon). Some households grow Corn and
Lemon grass under Manglietia glauca. Other plants that are underplanted are pine
apple, potatoes, soy bean, and ginger, usually under fruit trees.
In Phu Tho, cassava is usually grown under trees like Cassia rotundifolia (17% of
households growing Cassia rotundifolia in Phu Tho), Peltophorum tonkinense (10%),
Styrax tonkinensis (5%), Acacia (4%) and Manglietia glauca (3%). However, cassava
is not planted under fruit trees but tea is planted instead (10% of households growing
fruit trees).

59
Chapter 5
Inputs for Tree Plantation

1. Support from Projects for Forest Plantation


Project support depends on each province. On average, 57% of the households were
supported by projects (Table 5.1-1). Hoa Binh has the highest proportion of
households participating projects (95%), followed by Phu Tho (65%) and Lao Cai
(9%) (Table 5.1-1).

Table 5.1-1. Proportion of HH participate projects (%)

Participating Projects Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole


sample
No 7 35 78 120
% 9 65 95 57
No interviewed 74 54 82 210

Of the projects, Project 661 reached the largest number of households (52% of HH
participating projects), followed by projects funded by foreign organizations (24%),
Project 327 (20%) and Project 747 (18%) (Table 4.6-2). In Lao Cai, projects funded
by foreign organizations are most popular (57%), followed by Project 327 (29%). In
Phu Tho, Project 327 is most popular (63%), then Project 661 (34%). Project 661 and
327 are also most popular in Hoa Binh, accounting for 63% and 32%, respectively,
followed by Project 747 and Project 472 (27% and 14%, respectively).

Table 5.1-2. Proportions of HH participating different projects*

Project Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole


sample
No % No % No % No %
Project 661 1 14 12 34 49 63 62 52
Project 327 2 29 22 63 0 0 24 20
Project funded by donor 4 57 0 0 25 32 29 24
Project 264 0 0 2 6 0 0 2 2
Project 747 0 0 0 0 21 27 21 18
Project 472 0 0 0 0 11 14 11 9
Total number of HH 7 35 78 120
participating projects
*
as % of total number of households participating projects

Most of households participating projects were supported with seedlings and


technical services (Table 5.1-3). The ratios of households provided with fertilizers are
relatively low (the highest are 46% by Project 327 and 18% by Project 661).

60
However, the ratios of households receiving financial support are high (more than
70% for Projects 661, 747, 472 and 58% for Project 327).

Table 5.1-3. Households Receiving Supports from Projects

Projects Support Types Total


Seedlings Technical Fertilizer Financial Participated
Project 661 HH No 62 60 11 48 62
% 100 96.77 17.74 77.42 100
Project 327 HH No 24 21 11 14 24
% 100 87.5 45.83 58.33 100
Foreign HH No 29 27 4 8 29
projects % 100 93.1 13.79 27.59 100
Project 264 HH No 2 2 0 2 2
% 100 100 0 100 100
Project 747 HH No 21 21 1 16 21
% 100 100 4.76 76.19 100
Project 472 HH No 11 11 1 8 11
% 100 100 9.09 72.73 100
Total HH No 149 142 28 96 149
% 100 95.3 18.79 64.43 100

2. Application of fertilizers on trees


Forest growers usually do not apply fertilizers for trees (Table 5.2-1). For common
trees like Manglietia glauca, Styrax tonkinensis, Dendrocalamus menpranace, less
than 25% of the households applied fertilizers. For less common trees, the proportion
of household applied fertilizers is higher, for example, the rate is 41% for Canarium
album, 50% for Peltophorum tonkinense …For multi-purpose trees, households
applied fertilizers account for 23%.

Table 5.2-1 Households applying fertilizer on timber trees

Trees Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Total


% No % No % No % No
apply growing apply growing apply growing apply growing
Styrax tonkinensis 3 27 5 19 0 4 46
Manglietia glauca 15 60 41 34 0 1 25 95
Dendrocalamus 0 1 57 7 8 76 10 84
menpranace
Canarium album 50 2 47 17 0 3 41 22
Canarium nigrum 0 100 1 0 1 50 2
Chukrasia tabularis 20 5 5 60 8 65
Cinnamon 15 45 25 4 0 1 14 57
Dracontumelum 25 4 25 4
duperranum
Peltophorum 50 10 50 10
tonkinense
Parashorea 50 4 50 4

61
chinensis
Fagaceae 100 1 100 1
Cassia rotundifolia 17 6 17 6
Garcinia 0 1 100 1
Fagraeoides A.Chev.
Acacia 0 1 48 25 0 14 30 40
Multi-purpose tree in 49 51 5 21 8 64 23 136
general

Table 5.2-2 describes the proportions of households applying each kind of fertilizers
to each kind of tree out of the number of households that grow that tree. Among the
types of fertilizers used, biofertilizer is the most popular, followed by chemical
fertilizer. Manual is the fertilizer households can produce and do not have to buy but
rarely used for timber trees.

Table 5.1-2. Proportion of HH using fertilizer out of HH growing trees (%)

Tree Chemical Manual Biofertilizer No


Fertilizer Fertilizer (%) growing
(%) (%)
Styrax tonkinensis 2 0 2 46
Manglietia glauca 12 3 11 95
Dendrocalamus menpranace 3 4 2 84
Canarium album 14 9 18 22
Canarium nigrum 0 0 50 2
Chukrasia tabularis 3 3 0 65
Cinnamon 7 0 7 57
Dracontumelum duperranum 0 0 25 4
Peltophorum tonkinense 20 10 30 10
Parashorea chinensis 50 0 0 4
Fagaceae 100 0 0 1
Erythroloeum fordii 100 0 0 2
Cassia rotundifolia 17 0 0 6
Garcinia Fagraeoides A.Chev. 0 100 0 1
Acacia 10 5 15 40
Timber tree in general 18 15 1 136

Little fertilizer is applied for trees (Table 5.2-3). The quantities of fertilizers an average
household have applied from the time of planting up to the interviewing time are 0.3-3
kg/tree for biofertilizer, 0.03 – 6 kg/tree for chemical fertilizer and 0.1-25 kg/tree for
manual fertilizer, depending on each kind of trees.

Table 5.2-3. Quantity of fertizers applied for 1 tree (kg)

62
Tree Chemical Manual Biofertilizer
Fertilizer Fertilizer
Styrax tonkinensis 6.00 1.00
Manglietia glauca 1.70 25.03 0.54
Dendrocalamus menpranace 2.67 7.75 3.00
Canarium album 2.04 5.00 0.56
Canarium nigrum 0 0 1.00
Chukrasia tabularis 1.01 12.50
Cinnamon 0.17 0 0.33
Dracontumelum duperranum 0 0 1.00
Peltophorum tonkinense 3.05 20.00 0.57
Parashorea chinensis 0.03 0 0
Fagaceae 0.10 0 0
Erythroloeum fordii 3.01 0 0
Cassia rotundifolia 6.00 0 0
Garcinia Fagraeoides 0 10.00 0
A.Chev.
Acacia 1.80 2.55 0.53
Litchi 3.45 20.38 0
Mango 0 20.00 0
Persimmon 0 0.10 0.40
Longan 3.92 19.82 0

3. Seedlings Supply
According to the pre-survey, seedlings used to grow trees are from different sources:
s
elf-making, commercial sources and provided by projects. Projects are the main
source, supplying 46% of the seedlings. Self-making accounts for 29% and
commercial sources account for 25% (Table 5.3-1).
Most of households growing Dendrocalamus menpranace, Canarium, Chukrasia
tabularis, Dracontumelum duperranum, Acacia were supplied with seedlings by
projects. The ratio of households supplied with seedlings out of the total number
growing these trees are 71%, 74%, 82%, 67% and 87%, respectively. For
Dendrocalamus menpranace, Project 747 (Song Da Watershed Protection Project) is
the main project that supplies seedings in Hoa Binh.
Other popular trees like Manglietia glauca, Styrax tonkinensis, Cinnamon have high
rates of sell-making for seedlings (42%, 62% and 43%, respectively). Trees that have
the high rate of buying seedlings include Manglietia glauca (36%) and Cinnamon
(47%).

63
Table 5.3-1. Seedling Sources

Trees Self-made Bought Provided Frequency of households


by having different seedling
Projects sources16
Styrax tonkinensis 62 32 6 50
Manglietia glauca 42.11 35.96 21.93 114
Dendrocalamus 11.21 17.76 71.03 107
menpranace
Canarium album 21.05 5.26 73.68 19
Canarium nigrum 0 0 100 2
Chukrasia tabularis 5.48 12.33 82.19 73
Cinnamon 42.65 47.06 10.29 68
Dracontumelum 33.33 0 66.67 3
duperranum
Peltophorum tonkinense 0 0 100 8
Parashorea chinensis 0 25 75 4
Fagaceae 0 0 100 1
Bambusoidae 85.71 0 14.29 7
Toona surei 80 10 10 10
Eucalyptus 0 0 100 1
Acacia 3.13 9.38 87.5 32
Litchi 0 100 0 1
Longan 40 60 0 5
Verciania montana Lour 44.44 55.56 0 9
Oak 100 0 0 1
Erythroloeum fordii 0 0 100 3
Cassia rotundifolia 0 0 100 3
Chet 0 0 100 1
Whole sample 28.93 25.29 45.79 522

Seedling supply source is province-characterized (Table 5.3-2). Most of seedlings in


Hoa Binh and Phu Tho were supplied by projects or programs (77% and 58%,
respectively) but in Lao Cai, seedlings were mostly bought (49%) and self-made
(43%).

Table 5.3-2. Source of Seedlings by Provinces

Seedlings Source Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole


sample
Self-made 43.01 33.57 9.39 28.63
Buying 49.74 8.39 13.26 25.53
Provided by Projects 7.25 58.04 77.35 45.84
Total of Frequency that 193 143 181 517
households have seedlings
from different sources

Seedlings were produced by seed germination or branch transplantation. How


seedlings are produced depends on each kind of tree. Most of timber trees, including
16
This is not the same as the number of households growing trees. For example, a
household growing Styrax tonkinensis may have some seedlings provided by projects and
some bought from outside.

64
commonly planted trees such as Manglietia glauca, Styrax tonkinensis, Cinnamon,
Acacia have seedlings created by seed-germination, except for Dendrocalamus
menpranace which has most of seedlings created from branch transplatation (Table
5.3-3).

Table 5.3-3. Method of seedlings production

Tree Seed Branch Frequency of


germination Transplantation households
having seedlings
created by
different
methods.
Styrax tonkinensis 97.73 2.27 44
Manglietia glauca 96.81 3.19 94
Dendrocalamus menpranace 5.33 94.67 75
Canarium album 86.67 13.33 15
Canarium nigrum 50 50 2
Chukrasia tabularis 100 0 61
Cinnamon 95.92 4.08 49
Dracontumelum duperranum 66.67 33.33 3
Peltophorum tonkinense 100 0 6
Parashorea chinensis 75 25 4
Fagaceae 100 0 1
Bambusoidae 60 40 5
Toona surei 100 0 8
Eucalyptus 100 0 1
Acacia 72.22 27.78 18
Litchi 0 100 1
Longan 40 60 5
Verciania montana Lour 100 0 7
Oak 100 0 1
Erythroloeum fordii 100 0 2
Cassia rotundifolia 100 0 2
Total 76.98 23.02 404

4. Thinning and trimming


Thinning often has important impacts on tree growth. By reducing the number of
stunted trees and it provides more nutrients, water and sunlight to better grown trees,
which helps them to grow faster. Thinning rates are described in Table 5.4-1 for each
kind of tree, where Manglietia glauca has the highest rate of thinning (61.8% of
households growing Manglietia glauca), followed by Cinnamon (56.14%), Oak (50%),
Styrax tonkinensis (47%), Dendrocalamus menpranace 40%.

Table 5.4-1. Proportion of households did thinning and trimming

65
Tree Thinning (%) Trimming (%) No of HH plant
Styrax tonkinensis 46.94 31 46
Manglietia glauca 61.76 48 95
Dendrocalamus 40 23 84
menpranace
Canarium album 9.09 9 22
Chukrasia tabularis 3.08 3 65
Cinnamon 56.14 40 57
Peltophorum tonkinense 20 20 10
Bambusoidae 7.69 8 13
Verciania montana Lour 30 10 10
Cassia rotundifolia 33.33 33 6
Toona surei 18.18 9 11
Acacia 25 23 40

Similar to thinning, trimming also helps to increase the growth rate of trees by cutting
down unnecessary branches. In Table 5.4-1, the order of trees according to the rate
of trimming is similar to that of thinning.
The age of thinning varies between trees (Table 5.4-2). The tree that has youngest
thinning age is Verciania montana Lour (2.5 years old) and the one that has oldest
thinning age is oak (6 years old). Common trees like Styrax tonkinensis, Manglietia
glauca, Dendrocalamus menpranace, Cinnamon are usually thined at the age of 3-5
years old. The remained densities also vary between types of trees, from 400 trees to
1650 trees/ha.

Table 5.4-2. Average Statistics on thinning

Tree Thinning Remaining density


age (trees/ha)
Styrax tonkinensis 3.5 1635.6
Manglietia glauca 4.7 1381.2
Dendrocalamus menpranace 2.9 535.1
Canarium album 1000.0
Chukrasia tabularis 1100.0
Cinnamon 5.4 1648.4
Peltophorum tonkinense 1000.0
Bambusoidae
Toona surei 4.0 400.0
Acacia 3.6 633.3
Persimmon
Verciania montana Lour 2.5 800.0
Oak 6.0 4000.0
Cassia rotundifolia 4.0 650.0

5. Access to Technical and Market Information


Communication means at the household level are very primary. Most of households
do not have telephone (98.97%), not mention internet. The number of households
near telephone service is not many either, only accounts for 25.5% (Table 5.5-1).

66
Table 5.5-1. Communication through Telephone

Telephone access Yes (%) No (%)


Having a telephone 1.03 98.97
Near telephone service 25.51 74.49

Households use information from 5 main sources, including information from


extension workers; radio, television; personal relationship; private business agents
and other source. In the survey, we ask the question on which information source is
most important for each of the 6 types of information (Table 5.5-2) and which one is
the second most important for these types of information (Table 5.5-3).

Table 5.5-2. Most Important Information Source*

Information Type Extention Radio, Personal Private Other No


Workers TV Relations Business Source Informatio
Agents n Avalable
Information on forestry 16.58 30.05 19.69 30.57 2.07 2
product prices and domestic
markets
Information on input prices 18.97 23.08 20 33.33 3.08 1.54
and markets
Information on technics of 64.21 7.89 22.11 0 4.74 1.05
growing and caring trees
Information on policies 23.31 47.85 14.72 2.45 5.52 6.13
supporting product sales
Information on polices 18.75 51.88 13.13 3.75 6.25 6.25
supporting input prices
Information on polices on 27.1 48.39 12.9 1.94 4.52 5.16
credit supply for forest
growers.
In General 28.5 33.52 17.42 12.97 4.26 3.31
*
% households evaluating

For the most important sources of information, the survey provides some interesting
results. For information on forestry products prices and market, most of households
use information from private business agents (30.57%) and radio-TV (30.05%).
However, there are a number of households using information from people they know
(19.69%) and from extension workers (16.58%). For information on input prices and
markets, information from private business agents is used most (33%). The
proportions of households using information from radio-TV or people they know or
extension workers are similar, about 20%. For information on technics of trowing and
caring trees, most of households rely on extension workers (64%) or learn from
people they know (22%). For information on policies (policies supporting product
sales, polices supporting input prices, polices on credit supply for forest growers),
radio-TV is the main source used by about 50% of the households. Extension
workers are also a popular source, used by about 20% of households, while the
proportion using personal relationship is only above 10%. For information necessary

67
for forest growing in general, radio-TV is the source used most by farmers (33.5%),
followed by extension workers (28.5%), personal relationship (17.4%) and private
business agents (12.97%).
The survey also reveals that there is a small proportion of households do not receive
information they need for forest plantation from any sources at all. The proportion for
information on output prices and market is 2%, for information on input prices and
market is 1.54%, for information on technics of growing and caring trees is 1.05%.
For information on policies, the proportions that do not have information are higher.
6.13% of households do not have information on policies supporting product sales,
6.25% do not have information on policies supporting input prices and 5.16% do not
have information on credit policies for forest growers.

Table 5.5-3. Second Most Important Information Sources*

Information Type Extention Radio, Personal Private Other No


Workers TV Relation Busines Source Information
s s Agents Avalable
Information on forestry 10.78 9.8 60.78 16.67 1.96 0
product prices and domestic
markets
Information on input prices 11.83 11.83 52.69 21.51 1.08 1.08
and markets
Information on technics of 20.45 18.18 61.36 0 0 0
growing and caring trees
Information on policies 24.59 18.03 55.74 0 1.64 0
supporting product sales
Information on polices 28.33 18.33 50 1.67 1.67 0
supporting input prices
Information on polices on 25.81 16.13 53.23 0 3.23 1.61
credit supply for forest
growers.
In General 18.88 14.81 56.22 8.15 1.5 0.43
*
% households evaluating

When asked about the most important information sources, most of households
considered personal relationship is source they would turn to if they do not have
information from the other sources (Table 5.5-2). For all type of information, the
proportions of farmers considered personal relationship to be the second most
important source exceed 50% (Table 5.5-3).
The current situation of information supply is such, but the quality of information
supplied is not very good. Most of households interviewed still need more information
on technics of tree plantation and market information for tree plantation (92.8% and
91.8%, Table 5.5-4). This may be the most difficult point for forest growers at present,
lacking infomration on good markets for forestry products and information on how to
plant forest effectively. The number of households encounter difficulties on capital is
lower than for difficulties on information. According to Table 5.5-4, more than half of
households (56.4%) is self-sufficient in capital.

68
Table 5.5-4. Needs for Outside Supports

Supports Support Demand


Yes No
More information on technics on tree plantation 92.86 7.14
More market information for tree plantation 91.84 8.16
Need more capital to grow forest 43.59 56.41

6. Summary
Not many households were supported by projects (57%). Hoa Binh has the highest
proportion of households participating projects (95%), followed by Phu Tho (65%)
and Lao Cai (9%). Project 661 reached the largest number of households (52% of
HH participating projects), followed by projects funded by foreign organizations
(24%), Project 327 (20%) and Project 747 (18%). In Lao Cai, projects funded by
foreign organizations are most popular (57%), followed by Project 327 (29%). In Phu
Tho, Project 327 is most popular (63%), then Project 661 (34%). Project 661 and 327
are also most popular in Hoa Binh, accounting for 63% and 32%, respectively,
followed by Project 747 and Project 472 (27% and 14%, respectively).
Most of households participating projects were supported with seedlings and
technical services. The ratios of households provided with fertilizers are relatively low
(the highest are 46% by Project 327 and 18% by Project 661). However, the
proportion of households receiving financial support are high (more than 70% for
Projects 661, 747, 472 and 58% for Project 327).
Trees planted are usually not fertilized. For common trees like Manglietia glauca,
Styrax tonkinensis, Dendrocalamus menpranace, less than 25% of the households
applied fertilizers. For less common trees, the proportion of household applied
fertilizers is higher, for example, the rate is 41% for Canarium album, 50% for
Peltophorum tonkinense …For multi-purpose trees, households applying fertilizers
account for 23%.
Among the types of fertilizers used, biofertilizer is the most popular, followed by
chemical fertilizer. Manual is the fertilizer households can produce and do not have to
buy but is rarely used for timber trees. It seems farmers just apply the fertilizers they
are provided free of charge for timber trees and do not buy extra fertilizers or use the
fertilizers they have for timber trees.
The quantity of fertilizer used for each tree is also very little. The quantities of
fertilizers an average household have applied from the time of planting up to the
interviewing time are 0.3-3 kg/tree for biofertilizer, 0.03 – 6 kg/tree for chemical
fertilizer and 0.1-25 kg/tree for manual fertilizer, depending on each kind of trees. It
seems trees are often just fertilized at the time they are grown.
Seedlings are obtained from various sources, including self-making, commercial
sources and forestry projects. Projects are the main source, supplying 46% of the
seedlings. Self-making accounts for 29% and commercial sources account for 25%.
Most of households growing Dendrocalamus menpranace, Canarium, Chukrasia
tabularis, Dracontumelum duperranum, Acacia were supplied with seedlings by
projects. The ratio of households supplied with seedlings out of the total number

69
growing these trees are 71%, 74%, 82%, 67% and 87%, respectively. For
Dendrocalamus menpranace, Project 747 (Song Da Watershed Protection Project) is
the main project that supplies seedings in Hoa Binh.
Other popular trees like Manglietia glauca, Styrax tonkinensis, Cinnamon have high
rates of sell-making for seedlings (42%, 62% and 43%, respectively). Trees that have
the high rate of buying seedlings are Manglietia glauca (36%) and Cinnamon (47%).
Seedling supply source is province-characterized. Most of seedlings in Hoa Binh and
Phu Tho were supplied by projects or programs (77% and 58%, respectively) but in
Lao Cai, seedlings were mostly bought (49%) and self-made (43%).
Seed germination or branch transplantation are the two ways of making seedlings.
How seedlings are produced depends on each kind of tree. Most of timber trees,
including commonly planted trees such as Manglietia glauca, Styrax tonkinensis,
Cinnamon, Acacia have seedlings created by seed-germination, except for
Dendrocalamus menpranace which has most of seedlings created from branch
transplatation.
Thinning forest is not so commonly done. For most of trees, trimming is even less
commonly done. Manglietia glauca has the highest rate of thinning (61.8% of
households growing Manglietia glauca), followed by Cinnamon (56.14%), Oak (50%),
Styrax tonkinensis (47%), Dendrocalamus menpranace 40%.
The age of thinning varies between trees. The tree that has youngest thinning age is
Verciania montana Lour (2.5 years old) and the one that has oldest thinning age is
sồi (6 years old). Common trees like Styrax tonkinensis, Manglietia glauca,
Dendrocalamus menpranace, Cinnamon are usually thined at the age of 3-5 years
old. The remained densities also vary between types of trees, from 400 trees to 1650
trees/ha.
Farmers also lack information that supports tree plantation. Communication means at
the household level are very primary. Most of households do not have telephone
(98.97%), not mention internet. The number of households near telephone service is
not many either, only accounts for 25.5% (Table ). Communicating with farmers is
therefore not easy.
Households use information from 5 main sources, including information from
extension workers; radio, television; personal relationship; private business agents
and other source. Radio – television is the most important information source for
information on prices, domestic market situation, and policies including forestry
product sales support, input subsidy and credit support for forestry growers. Private
bussiness agents are the most important information source for output prices, input
prices and domestic market situation. Extension workers are the most important
source for technical aspects of plantation and necessary care of trees. Personal
relationship is assessed to be the second most important information source for all
kind of information, i.e the source that farmers turn to when they cannot have the
information they need from the previous sources.
At present, many househods lack information seriously. Most of households
interviewed still need more information on techniques of tree plantation and market
information for tree plantation (92.8% and 91.8%). The number of households
encounter difficulties on capital is lower than for difficulties on information. More than
half of households (56.4%) are self-sufficient in capital. However, lacking capital is
still a very large obstacle for 31% of households growing forest. Many households

70
lacking capital do not want to borrow because of high interest rate. 22% of the
households interviewed stated that the current interest rate is the substantial obstacle
for tree plantation and 22% said that it is a relatively large obstacle.

71
Chapter 6
Plantation Results and Forest
Harvest

1. Growth rate of timber trees in planting forest


As shown in Table 4.5-10 before, high growth rate and suitable to land and climate
are the two important factors for the selection of common native trees such as Styrax
tonkinensis, Manglietia glauca, Canarium album.
Table 6.1-1 provides more details on farmers’ assessment of the suitability of trees to
land and climate and the growth rate of timber trees. This assessment is detailed to
each province, which is necessary because of the differences in climate and land
conditions. In Hoa Binh, Dendrocalamus menpranace is the tree that has the highest
growth rate and is almost the only tree that receives good assessment from farmers.
Manglietia glauca is rated by 55% of the households to be the best grown tree in Lao
Cai, followed by Cinnamon and Styrax tonkinensis with the rates of 20% and 19%,
respectively. In Phu Tho, Acacia is rated to be the best grown tree by the majority of
farmers (38% of the total number of household growing timber tree in Phu Tho),
followed by Manglietia glauca (23%) and Styrax tonkinensis (21%). In the whole
sample, Dendrocalamus menpranace, Manglietia glauca, Styrax tonkinensis,
Cinnamon and Acacia are the best grown trees.

Table 6.1-1. Proportion of HH Assessed Trees to be Best Growing

Species Province Whole


Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh sample
Styrax tonkinensis 19 21 0 12
Manglietia glauca 55 23 0 26
Dendrocalamus 1 2 94 38
menpranace
Canarium album 0 2 0 1
Chukrasia tabularis 0 0 1 1
Cinnamon 20 0 0 8
Parashorea chinensis 0 2 0 1
Bambusoidae 0 6 0 2
Toona surei 0 6 0 2
Livistona saribus 0 2 0 1
Acacia 0 38 3 10
Verciania montana Lour 3 0 0 1
Erythroloeum fordii 0 2 0 1
Total Number of HH 73 50 79 202
growing timber trees

72
With the current growing rate of timber trees, only 19% of households are not
satisfied (Table 6.1-2). Phu Tho has the highest proportion unsatisfied (29%),
followed by Lao Cai (24%). Only 8% of households in Hoa Binh are not satisfied.

Table 6.1-2. Opinion on Tree Growth Rate (%)

Opinion Province Whole


Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh sample
Satisfied 76 71 92 81
Unsatisfied 24 29 8 19

Of the unsatisfied households, most of them claimed that the slow growth of trees is due to
the lack of fertilizers (53%), diseases (39%), lack of care (39%) and lack of technical support
(39%) (Table 6.1-3). In Phu Tho where the unsatisfied proportion is highest, lack of fertilizers
is the main reason causing slow growth of trees, while in Lao Cai, it is due to the lack of
technical support.

Table 6.1-3. Percentage of HH encountering different problems*

Problem Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole


sample
Tree Diseases 33 21 100 39
Rats and Insects 11 43 33 26
Trees unsuitable to land 17 43 0 24
Lack of Fertilizer 39 57 83 53
No thinning 17 29 33 24
Lack of Care 22 43 83 39
Lack of technical support 50 36 17 39
Unfavorable climate 11 14 0 11
Total of unsatisfied HH 18 14 6 38
*
out of the total number of unsatisfied household

2. Products from plantation forest thinning


The quantity of timber products gained from thinning is highest in Styrax tonkinensis
(574 m3/ha), followed by Manglietia glauca (150 m3/ha) and Cinnamon (57.5m3/ha)
(Table 6.2-1).

Table 6.2-1. Timber gained from thinning

Tree Thinning Remaining density Gained


age (trees/ha) timber (m3)
Styrax tonkinensis 3.5 1635.6 574.5
Manglietia glauca 4.7 1381.2 150.0
Dendrocalamus 2.9 535.1 1.6
menpranace

73
Canarium album 1000.0 2.0
Chukrasia tabularis 1100.0
Cinnamon 5.4 1648.4 57.5
Peltophorum tonkinense 1000.0
Bambusoidae 1.0
Toona surei 4.0 400.0 5.0
Acacia 3.6 633.3 2.4
Persimmon 0.0
Verciania montana Lour 2.5 800.0 5.5
Oak 6.0 4000.0
Cassia rotundifolia 4.0 650.0 5.0

Products gained from thinning and trimming are used for manual production, selling,
firewood and other family usage. Table 6.2-2 shows that most of the products are
used as firewood (66% of the households thinning Styrax tonkinensis, 59% of
households thinnign Manglietia glauca, 52% of household thinning Dendrocalamus
menpranace). Selling is the second most popular usage, accounting for 26.3% of
households thinning Styrax tonkinensis and 23% for Manglietia glauca, 25% for
Dendrocalamus menpranace, 38% for cinnamon. Few households used thinning
products for manual production and other family usage.

Table 6.2-2. Usage of Thinning and Trimming Products*

Tree Used for Sell Firewood Other Total No of


Manual Usage HH thinned
and trimmed
Styrax tonkinensis 2.63 26.32 65.79 5.26 27
Manglietia glauca 7.48 23.36 58.88 10.28 70
Dendrocalamus 13.24 25 51.47 10.29 43
menpranace
Canarium album 0 0 100 0 3
Chukrasia tabularis 50 0 50 0 3
Cinnamon 5 38.33 46.67 10 32
Peltophorum tonkinense 25 25 50 0 2
Bambusoidae 0 0 100 0 1
Toona surei 0 0 100 0 3
Acacia 16.67 16.67 55.56 11.11 11
Manilkara acras 0 0 100 0 1
Verciania montana Lour 0 0 100 0 3
Oak 50 50 0 0 1
Cassia rotundifolia 33.33 33.33 33.33 0 2
Total 9.24 25.8 56.05 8.92 314
*
Assessed as % of households who do thinning and trimming

74
3. Household firewood consumption
In rural area, firewood is a very popular kind of fuel. Forest growers can obtain
firewood regularly by collecting dead branch, trees or tree trimming, thinning and
save the cost of fuel. The values of firewood to households varied between
provinces, depending on the climate of the province, the substitutes (electricity, by-
products of agriculture like rice straw, biogas…) and depending on the fuel demand
from processing activities, for example drying tea in Phu Tho. According to the
survey, there are 71% of households using firewood as fuel (Table 6.3-1). Lao Cai
has the highest rate (88%) and Hoa Binh has the lowest rate (60%). Phu Tho has the
highest average demand for firewood, about 15.6 m3/household in the summer and
17.8 m3/household in the winter while Hoa Binh has the lowest average demand for
firewood, 6.5m3/household in the summer and 7.5 m3 in the winter. Lao Cai has the
demand for firewood/household similar to Phu Tho.

Table 6.3-1. Quantity of firewood used by HH (m3)

Province Summer Winter


% of HH Average Standard No of HH Average Standard No of
use quantity Deviation use quantity Deviation HH use
firewood firewood firewood
Lao Cai 88 12.8 14.2 65 16 20.4 65
Phu Tho 67 15.6 19.2 34 17.8 23.7 36
Hoa Binh 60 6.5 4 49 7.5 4.9 49
Whole 71 11.4 13.7 148 13.7 18.4 150
sample

4. Harvest and usage of timber from plantation


forest
Apart from firewood, households usually exploit timber to build houses, to sell or to
make furniture for family usage. Table 6.4-2 shows the proportions of households
using timber for these different purposes out of the total number of households
exploiting trees for timber. Exploiting timber for selling is the most popular for most of
the trees (100% for households exploiting Dendrocalamus menpranace, 88% for
Styrax tonkinensis, 71% for Manglietia glauca and 79% for Cinnamon). Exploiting
timber for house building is less popular and very few households exploit timber for
furniture making.

Table 6.4-2. Proportion of Households exploiting timber for different purpose*


Tree Constructing Sell Making No of HH
house (%) (%) furniture (%) exploited
timber
Styrax tonkinensis 41 88 6 17
Manglietia glauca 42 71 21 24
Dendrocalamus 19 100 0 27
menpranace

75
Canarium album 50 50 0 2
Cinnamon 43 79 14 14
Dracontumelum 100 100 0 1
duperranum
Burretiodendron hsienmu 100 0 0 1
Bambusoidae 50 100 50 2
Toona surei 0 100 0 3
Livistona saribus 100 100 100 1
Acacia 60 60 0 5
Verciania montana Lour 0 100 0 1
Oak 0 100 0 1
Garcinia Fagraeoides 100 0 0 1
A.Chev.
Whole sample 28 61 5.5 72
* As % of No of HH exploited timber

Selling is the most common purpose for exploiting timber in the above 3 purposes but
according to Table 6.4-3, the number of households exploited timber for selling is
small compared to the number of households growing timber trees, only account for
31.9%. Lao Cai has the highest rate of household exploiting timber for sell (39.2%),
followed by Hoa Binh (29.3%) and Phu Tho (26%). Among common trees,
Dendrocalamus menpranace is most often exploited for selling (accounting for
54.76% of the households growing Dendrocalamus menpranace), followed by Styrax
tonkinensis (32.6%), Cinnamon (26%), Manglietia glauca (22%).

Table 6.4-3. Proportion of Households Selling Timbers

Tree Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole sample


HH HH HH sell HH HH HH HH sell HH
sell plant (%) plant sell plant (%) plant
(%) (%)
Styrax tonkinensis 30.00 30 31.58 19 0 32.61 46
Manglietia glauca 24.24 66 14.29 35 0.00 1 22.11 95
Dendrocalamus 0.00 1 14.29 7 46.39 97 54.76 84
menpranace
Canarium album 0.00 2 11.76 17 0.00 3 9.09 22
Cinnamon 28.85 52 0.00 4 0.00 1 26.32 57
Bambusoidae 0.00 2 27.27 11 0 23.08 13
Vatica fleuryana 0 100.00 1 0 100.00 1
Toona surei 0 22.22 9 50.00 2 27.27 11
Verciania montana 16.67 6 0.00 4 0 10.00 10
Lour
Oak 0 100.00 2 0 100.00 2
Acacia 0.00 1 12.00 25 0.00 14 7.50 40
Timber trees in 39.19 74 25.93 54 29.27 82 31.9 210
general
*
out of the number planted trees

76
Timber is sold by m3 or trees, but mostly by m3, except for Dendrocalamus menpranace
(Table 6.4-4). Most of households sell to collectors within the district, very few sell to
collectors outside district or processing company. Styrax tonkinensis and Manglietia glauca
have the highest average quantity of timber sold per household (48.2 m3 for Styrax
tonkinensis sold within the district, 10m3 for Styrax tonkinensis sold to processing company
and 39.18 m3 for Manglietia glauca sold within the district, 5 m3 for Manglietia glauca sold
outside the district).

Table 6.4-4 Quantity of timber sold as m3

Average Quantity per Maximum Quantity Minimum Quantity


Trees Household
Sold Sold Sold to Sold Sold Sold to Sold Sold Sold to
within outside Processor within outside Processor within outside Processor
District district District district District district
Styrax 48.16 10 240 10 2 10
tonkinensis
Manglietia 39.18 5 200 5 2 5
glauca
Canarium 3 3 3
album
Cinnamon 20 50 5
Toona 2 2 2
surei
Acacia 4 5 3

The selling prices for one kind of tree varies strongly between households (Table 6.4-
5). This may be due to the size of timber sold that was not taken into account in the
survey. The purpose of putting Table 6.4-5 and 6.4-6 here is not to compare the
prices but to provide some notions of prices that farmers might get.

Table 6.4-5. Prices of timber sold by m3 (000 vnd)

Tree Selling 2000 2001 2002 2003


Destinatio Mean Max Min Mean Max Min Mean Max Min Mean Max Min
n
Styrax Within 370 370 37 212.5 340 70
tonkinensi district 0
s Processor 400 400 40
0
Manglietia Within 350 600 50 233.5 600 45 200 200 200
glauca district 7
Outside 800 800 80
district 0
Canarium Outside 320 320 32
album district 0
Cinnamon Within 50 50 50 97.5 150 45 52.25 60 45
district
Toona Within 250 250 25
surei district 0

77
Acacia Within 205 330 80
district

Table 6.4-6. Price of timber sold by tree (000 vnd)

Tree Selling 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002


Destination Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Max Min
Styrax Within 4 24.8 65 4
tonkinensis district
Within 8 44 90 12
Manglietia district
glauca To 15 15 13.5 15 12
Consumer
Within 4 5 4 6 4.6 4.4 5 5 5
district
Dendrocalamu Outside 5.8 5 4.8 7 4
s menpranace district
To 2 2 2
Consumer
Within 1 6 6 6
Cinnamon
district
Outside 4 4
Bambusoidae
district
Vatica Outside 4 4 4
fleuryana district
Outside 70 100 40
Toona surei
district
Within 20 20 20
Acacia
district
Verciania Within 4
montana Lour district
Within 20 20 20 20
district
Oak
To 25
Consumer

Of the households selling timber, just above half of households (54.5%) take care of
harvest and deliver timber to the buyer, the others selling standing trees (Table 6.4-
7).

Table 6.4-7. Proportion of Households selling timbers by different ways

Ways of Selling No of HH Percentage (%)


Deliver to the Buyer 36 54.55
Sell Standing Trees 30 45.45
Total 66 100

78
5. Harvest from Natural Forest
Most of households having natural forest have harvested products from their forest
(71%). However, these households concentrate in Hoa Binh and Phu Tho (account
for 81% and 63% of the households having natural forest in each provinces). Few
households have harvested products from natural forest in Lao Cai (22%) (Table 6.5-
3).

Table 6.5-3 Households Harvested Products from Natural Forest

State Province Whole


Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh sample
Having Harvested Products % 22.22 62.96 80.88 71.15
No 2 17 55 74
Having not Harvested Products % 77.78 37.04 19.12 28.85
No 7 10 13 30
HH having natural forest 12.16 50.00 82.93 49.52
(% of sample)
(No of HH having Natural Forest) 9 27 68 104
Total No of HH in Sample 74 54 82 210

Products harvested from the natural forest are varied. The main products include
timber, firewood, calamus thread, grains of Amomum echinosphaera K.,
Neohouzeaua dulloa A. Camus, bamboo shoot, other grain and leaves of Livistona
saribus, of which firewood, timber and Neohouzeaua dulloa A. Camus are the most
common (account for 79.73%, 59.5% and 56.76% of the number of households
having products from natural forest, respectively). Two provinces with the highest
ratio of household having products from natural forest are Hoa Binh and Phu Tho.
Firewood, timber and Neohouzeaua dulloa A. Camus are also the most common
products in these two provinces (Table 6.5-4).

Table 6.5-4. Households Harvested Products from Natural Forest by Products

Product Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole sample


% No. % No. % No. % No.
Firewood 50 1 52.94 9 89.09 49 79.73 59
Timber 50 1 41.18 7 65.45 36 59.46 44
calamus thread 0 0 0 0 25.45 14 18.92 14
Amomum 0 0 0 0 29.09 16 21.62 16
echinosphaera
Grain
Neohouzeaua 100 2 52.94 9 56.36 31 56.76 42
dulloa A. Camus
Bamboo shoot 50 1 41.18 7 36.36 20 37.84 28
Other grains 50 1 11.76 2 10.91 6 12.16 9
Livistona saribus 0 0 35.29 6 0 0 8.11 6
Leaves

79
Common products (firewood, timber and Neohouzeaua dulloa A. Camus) are mostly
used at home (90%, 90% and 60% of the households harvested the corresponding
product) (Table 6.5-5). Products that have high rate of selling include Amomum
echinosphaera K. grains, other grains and leaves of Livistona saribus (83%, 67% and
56% of the number of households harvesting the corresponding product). Amomum
echinosphaera K. grains and other grains are mostly sold in Hoa Binh while leaves of
Livistona saribus are mainly sold in Phu Tho.

Table 6.5-5. Usage of Natural Forest Products

Products Selling Used by Households


Lao Phu Hoa Whole Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Whole
Cai Tho Binh sample Binh sample
% No % No % No % No % No % No % No % No
Firewood 0 1 2 8 4 1 6 10 1 82 9 9 47 90 57
8 0 0 2
Timber 5 1 0 10 4 1 5 50 1 10 7 9 35 90 43
0 0 0 0
calamus thread 27 4 2 4 7 11 73 11
7 3
Amomum 83 15 8 15 1 3 17 3
echinosphaera 3 7
Grain
Neohouzeaua 6 2 3 3 40 17 4 22 34 1 67 6 6 26 60 33
dulloa A. 6 3 0 0
Camus
Bamboo shoot 1 0 37 11 3 12 1 10 8 6 19 70 28
0 0 3
Other grains 0 10 6 6 6 1 10 2 33 3
0 7 0
Livistona 5 5 5 5 44 4 44 4
saribus Leaves 6 6

6. Summary
Different provinces have different trees that are suitable to their climate and land
conditions. In Hoa Binh, Dendrocalamus menpranace is the tree that has the highest
growth rate and is almost the only tree that receives good assessment from farmers.
Manglietia glauca is rated by 55% of the households to be the best grown tree in Lao
Cai, followed by Cinnamon and Styrax tonkinensis with the rates of 20% and 19%,
respectively. In Phu Tho, Acacia is rated to be the best grown tree by the majority of
farmers (38% of the total number of household growing timber tree in Phu Tho),
followed by Manglietia glauca (23%) and Styrax tonkinensis (21%). In the whole
sample, Dendrocalamus menpranace, Manglietia glauca, Styrax tonkinensis,
Cinnamon and Acacia are the best grown trees.
Most of households are satisfied with the current growing rate of timber trees (81%).
Of the households unsatisfied, most of them claimed that the slow growth of trees is
due to the lack of fertilizers (53%), diseases (39%), lack of care (39%) and lack of
technical support (39%).

80
Trees planted provide timber in thinning time and harvest. The quantity of timber
products gained from thinning is highest in Styrax tonkinensis (574 m3/ha), followed
by Manglietia glauca (150 m3/ha) and Cinnamon (57.5m3/ha).
Products gained from thinning and trimming are used for manual production, selling,
firewood and other family usage. Most of the products are used as firewood (66% of
the households thinning Styrax tonkinensis, 59% of households thinning Manglietia
glauca, 52% of household thinning Dendrocalamus menpranace). Selling is the
second most popular usage, accounting for 26.3% of households thinning Styrax
tonkinensis and 23% for Manglietia glauca, 25% for Dendrocalamus menpranace,
38% for cinnamon. Few housholds used thinning products for manual production and
other family usage.
Firewood is often the main source of fuel for farmers. Forest growers can obtain
firewood regularly by collecting dead branch, trees or tree trimming, thinning and
save the cost of fuel. 71% of households use firewood as fuel. Lao Cai has the
highest rate (88%) and Hoa Binh has the lowest rate (60%). Phu Tho has the highest
average demand for firewood, about 15.6 m3/household in the summer and 17.8
m3/household in the winter while Hoa Binh has the lowest average demand for
firewood, 6.5m3/household in the summer and 7.5 m3 in the winter. Lao Cai has the
demand for firewood similar to Phu Tho.
Apart from firewood, households usually exploit timber to build houses, to sell or to
make furniture for family usage. Exploiting timber for selling is the most popular for
most of the trees (100% for households exploiting Dendrocalamus menpranace, 88%
for Styrax tonkinensis, 71% for Manglietia glauca and 79% for Cinnamon). Exploiting
timber for house building is less popular and very few households exploit timber for
furniture making.
However, the number of households exploited timber for selling is small compared to
the number of households growing timber trees, only account for 31.9%. Lao Cai has
the highest rate of household exploiting timber for sell (39.2%), followed by Hoa Binh
(29.3%) and Phu Tho (26%). Among common trees, Dendrocalamus menpranace is
most often exploited for selling (accounting for 54.76% of the households growing
Dendrocalamus menpranace), followed by Styrax tonkinensis (32.6%), Cinnamon
(26%), Manglietia glauca (22%).
Timber is sold by m3 or trees, but mostly by m3, except for Dendrocalamus
menpranace. Most of households sell to collectors within the district, very few sell to
collectors outside district or processing company. Just above half of households
(54.5%) take care of harvest and deliver timber to the buyer, the others selling
standing trees.
Among the kinds of trees households exploit for selling, Styrax tonkinensis,
Manglietia glauca provide the highest average quantity of timber (48.2m3 for Styrax
tonkinensis sold within the district, 10m3 for Styrax tonkinensis sold to processing
companies; 39.18 m3 for Manglietia glauca sold within the distric, 5 m3 for Manglietia
glauca sold outside district). The selling prices for one kind of tree vary strongly
between households. This may be due to the size of timber sold that was not taken
into account in the survey.

81
Most of households that have natural forest have harvested products from their forest
(71%). However, these households concentrate in Hoa Binh and Phu Tho (account
for 81% and 63% of the households having natural forest in each provinces). Few
households have harvested products from natural forest in Lao Cai (22%).
Products harvested from the natural forest are varied. The main products include
timber, firewood, calamus thread, grains of Amomum echinosphaera K.,
Neohouzeaua dulloa A. Camus, bamboo shoot, other grain and leaves of Livistona
saribus, of which firewood, timber and Neohouzeaua dulloa A. Camus are the most
common (account for 79.73%, 59.5% and 56.76% of the number of households
having products from natural forest, respectively). Two provinces with the highest
ratio of household having products from natural forest are Hoa Binh and Phu Tho.
Firewood, timber and Neohouzeaua dulloa A. Camus are also the most common
products in these two provinces.
Common products (firewood, timber and Neohouzeaua dulloa A. Camus) are mostly
used at home (90%, 90% and 60% of the households harvested the corresponding
product). Products that have high rate of selling include Amomum echinosphaera K.
grains, other grains and leaves of Livistona saribus (83%, 67% and 56% of the
number of households harvesting the corresponding product). Amomum
echinosphaera K. grains and other grains are mostly sold in Hoa Binh while leaves of
Livistona saribus are mainly sold in Phu Tho.

82
Chapter 7
Households’ Forest Plantation Plan

1. Households Having Tree Planting Intention


A majority of households planting forest intends to plant more trees (Table 7.1-1). Lao
Cai has the highest rate (73%) and Hoa Binh has the lowest rate (40.24%).

Table 7.1-1. No of HH intending to plant more trees

Planting more trees Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole sample
Yes No of HH 54 31 33 117
% 72.97 57.41 40.24 55.71
No No of HH 20 23 49 93
% 27.03 42.59 59.76 44.29
Total No of HH 74 54 82 210
% 100 100 100 100

Most of households that wants to plant more trees actually intend to expand their
forest area (74%). The rest intend to plant more trees in their current forest (Table
7.1-2).

Table 7.1-2. Ways of timber tree plantation

Ways of tree plantation Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoà Binh Whole sample
Plant more tree in the No of HH 19 9 3 31
current forest % 35.19 29.03 9.09 26.27
Explanding forest No of HH 35 22 30 87
area % 64.81 70.97 90.91 73.73
Total No of HH 54 31 33 118
% 100 100 100 100

The area that households are able to expand for forest plantation is relatively large
compared to the area of their current planted forest which is 2.4 ha (Table 7.1-3). In
Hoa Binh, an average household is able to expand by 0.66 ha while in Lao Cai and
Phu Tho, the expandable areas are 1.3 ha and 1.47 ha, respectively.

83
Table 7.1-3. Area of land still available for expansion of timber tree plantation

Province Average Standard Min (m2) Max (m2)


Area (m2) Deviation (m2)
Lao Cai 14771 12122 0 50000
Phu Tho 13018 8123 400 30000
Hoa Binh 6623 6385 300 20000

For the 21 households intend to expand forest area by buying or renting land, 71.4%
intend to buy/rent land because they do not have any land left, the rest buy/rent land
because the area of their land remained for forest plantation is less than the area
they would like to expand (Table 7.1-4).

Table 7.1-4. Reasons for buying/renting more land

Reasons for buying/renting Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole
more land sample
There’s no land left No of HH 11 3 1 15
% 78.57 75 33.33 71.43
There’s still land but want to No of HH 3 1 2 6
expand larger % 21.43 25 66.67 28.57
Total No of HH 14 4 3 21
% 100 100 100 100

The areas of land an average household would like to buy/rent differ between Hoa
Binh and the other two provinces (Table 7.1-5). On average, a household in Hoa Binh
intend to buy/rent an extra of 0.4 ha while in Lao Cai and Phu Tho, the area is about
2.3 ha.

Table 7.1-5. Land Area HH Intend to Buy/Rent (m2)

Province No of Average Area Standard Min Max


HH Deviation
Lao Cai 14 22928 18792 1000 60000
Phu Tho 4 23750 17969 10000 50000
Hoa Binh 3 4000 5196 1000 10000

84
2. Trees to be Planted
Table 7.2-1 shows the percentage each tree accounts for in the total number of times
that households select timber trees for their forest plantation plan. Manglietia glauca
is the most popular tree (account for 25.7%), followed by Cinnamon (18.4%),
Dendrocalamus menpranace (14.11%), Acacia (12.8%), Chukrasia tabularis (10.4%),
Styrax tonkinensis (8.6%). Dendrocalamus menpranace and Chukrasia tabularis are
popular in Hoa Binh, accounting for 45% and 30.6% respectively, while Manglietia
glauca and Cinnamon are popular in Lao Cai, accounting for 46% and 38.4%
respectively. In Phu Tho, Acacia and Manglietia glauca are the most popular,
accounting for 38.9% and 16.7%.

Table 7.2-1. Popularity of trees in HHs’ plantation plan*

Trees Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole


sample
Manglietia glauca 46.15 16.67 0 25.77
Cinnamon 38.46 0 0 18.4
Dendrocalamus 0 2.78 44.9 14.11
menpranace
Acacia 1.28 38.89 12.24 12.88
Chukrasia tabularis 2.56 0 30.61 10.43
Styrax tonkinensis 6.41 25 0 8.59
Canarium album 1.28 5.56 2.04 2.45
Toona surei 0 0 6.12 1.84
Canarium nigrum 1.28 0 2.04 1.23
Dracontumelum 0 2.78 0 0.61
duperranum
Cinnamomum 1.28 0 0 0.61
illicioides A.Chev.
Parashorea chinensis 0 2.78 0 0.61
Eucalyptus 0 0 2.04 0.61
Litchi 0 2.78 0 0.61
Markhamia stipulate 1.28 0 0 0.61
Magnolia Dandyi 0 2.78 0 0.61
Gagnep
Percentage total 100 100 100 100
Total No of selections 78 36 49 163
*
ranked by the percentage of total selection count

The area that households intend to grow for each kind of trees is under 1.5 ha (Table
7.2-2). For popular trees like Manglietia glauca, Cinnamon, Dendrocalamus
menpranace the average intended area are 0.93 ha, 1.22 ha, 0.34 ha respectively.
Households in Hoa Binh usually intend to expand tree area to a lesser extent than
the other provinces. On average, the intended area for a kind of tree in Hoa Binh is
only about 1/3 of that in the other provinces.

85
Table 7.2-2. Average Area Intended for the Plantation of each trees (m2)

Trees Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole


sample
Manglietia glauca 10186 4117 9319
Cinnamon 12284 12284
Dendrocalamus menpranace 4000 2623 3404
Acacia 2800 15800 7000 12950
Chukrasia tabularis 3250 2827 2876
Styrax tonkinensis 8200 12882 11210
Canarium album 2000 2000 8000 3500
Toona surei 4000 4000
Canarium nigrum 5000 20000 12500
Dracontumelum duperranum 2000 2000
Cinnamomum illicioides 7200 7200
A.Chev.
Parashorea chinensis 10000 10000
Eucalyptus 10000 10000
Litchi 5000 5000
Markhamia stipulate 1500 1500
Magnolia Dandyi Gagnep 15000 15000
Trees in general 10271 11162 3856 8638

For the trees households intending to grow, most of households have not yet know
what density they should grow (51.13%) (Table 7.2-3). The proportion of households
that definitely need technical information on how to grow these trees is higher in Phu
Tho (60%) and Hoa Binh (59%). The proportion in Lao Cai is only 39.2%.

Table 7.2-3. Households’ Knowledge on Density of Trees They Intend to Grow

Knowledge on Growing Density Lao Cai Phu Tho Hoa Binh Whole
for trees intended to grow sample
No of HH 63 26 41 130
Have some idea count17
% 61.76 40 41.41 48.87
No of HH 39 39 58 136
Have no idea count
% 38.24 60 58.59 51.13
No of HH 102 65 99 266
Total count
% 100 100 100 100

17
A household may grow more than 1 tree and this number is sum(household*treek)

86
For households that have some ideas on the density of trees they intend to grow, the
average density for 1 ha is shown in Table 7.2-4. However, the large standard
deviation shows that each households have different ideas on the growing density for
each kind of trees and therefore, maybe most of them need proper training or advice
on how they should grow the trees they plan to. Besides density, these households
probably need other technical information (the ones that are more complicated than
density, which was not asked in the survey).

Table 7.2-4. Intended Density (trees per ha)

Trees Average Standard Min Max


Density Deviation
Styrax tonkinensis 2311 1112 1300 5000
Manglietia glauca 3189 1340 1600 7000
Dendrocalamus 275 194 100 1000
menpranace
Canarium album 1275 967 500 2500
Canarium nigrum 550 71 500 600
Chukrasia tabularis 562 377 100 1660
Cinnamon 3498 1815 1600 10000
Dracontumelum 500 500 500
duperranum
Cinnamomum illicioides 1600 1600 1600
A.Chev.
Toona surei 400 400 400
Acacia 1840 974 200 4000
Markhamia stipulate 625 625 625

3. Forestry Planting Impediments


Above parts have mentioned some information on the difficulties farmers have in
planting forest. To explore in more details, the research group asked about the 25
possible obstacles that households may encounter. These obstacles include
difficulties in credits, difficulties caused by output prices and product markets,
difficulties in infrastructure (road, machinery), in technical aspects (knowledge,
seedlings, plant growth cycle), difficulties in current institutional mechnanism (policies
on land ownership, exploitation control) and risks. Obstacles are ranked at 5 levels:
1. Not an obstacle; 2. Slight obstacle; 3. Moderate obstacle; 4. Relative obstacle; 5.
Very large obstacle. There are 205 households answere these Cinnamonstions,
accounting for 97.6% of the sample. Some difficulties were added on by about ¼ of
the number of households interviewed, including difficulties in selling products, low
quality seedlings and low quality technical guides.
Some of difficulties that become very large obstacles for large proportions of
households include lack of credits (31.22%), lack of land (30.73%), risk of forest fire
(28.78%), high interest rate (21.95%), lack of information on the appropriate species
for farmers’ land and for the market (21.35%), lack of technical guides (18.54%).

87
Lack of land, high interest rates, lack of technical guides and lack of information on
the appropriate species for farmers’ land and for the market are also relative
obstacles for large proportions of households (26.34%, 22.44%, 39.02% and 23.96%,
respectively).
Apart from that, uncertainty about future timber prices; current timber price is low;
lack of necessary machinery and equipment; poor road access are also relative
obstacles for many households (29.76%, 29.76%, 23.9% and 20.49%, respectively).
For most of households, long growth cycle of trees; unsuitable land; unsuitable trees;
labour for planting and maintenance; do not want ot remove land from existing
profitable use; future difficulties in land use changes; risk of disease and insect; risk
of storm; risk of stealing; difficulties in obtaining permission for harvest or transport of
timber; risk of changes in regulations that prevent future harvest are not obstacle or
just slight obstacles for most of farmers.
Some difficulties that are relatively large obstacles for large proportions of
households but are also not obstacles for other large proportions include lack of
necessary machinery and equipment; risk of forest fire.

88
Table 7.3-1. Obstacles in forest plantation

Possible obstacle to tree Not an Slight Moderate Relative Very HH


planting obstacle obstacle obstacle Obstacle large No
obstable
Lack of land 19.51 8.78 14.63 26.34 30.73 205
Lack of capital 8.78 14.15 26.34 19.51 31.22 205
High interest rate on borrowed 11.22 19.51 24.88 22.44 21.95 205
money
Low current prices for timber 13.17 17.56 25.37 29.76 14.15 205
Long growth cycle 26.83 18.05 36.1 16.1 2.93 205
Land is unsuitable 25.37 24.39 30.73 12.68 6.83 205
Trees do not establish well 27.94 22.06 32.35 10.78 6.86 204
here
Poor road access for 20 23.41 23.41 20.49 12.68 205
marketing timber
Lack of expert advice on how to 16.59 12.2 13.66 39.02 18.54 205
grow trees
Lack of necessary machinery 33.66 18.54 15.12 23.9 8.78 205
and equipment
Lack of labour 21.95 29.27 22.44 19.02 7.32 205
Do not want to remove land 27.32 44.88 11.71 11.22 4.88 205
from existing profitable use
Future difficulties in land 28.29 42.93 13.17 10.24 5.37 205
use changes
Risk of fire damage to trees 20.49 33.66 5.85 11.22 28.78 205
Risk of pest or disease 24.88 36.1 10.24 13.66 15.12 205
damage to trees
Risk of storm or cyclone 26.83 35.61 7.32 15.12 15.12 205
damage
Risk of theft of timber or other 32.2 37.07 7.32 11.71 11.71 205
forest products
Difficulty in obtaining 31.71 36.59 5.85 16.59 9.27 205
permission for harvest or
transport of timber
Risk that regulations may be 31.22 32.68 8.29 10.73 17.07 205
introduced which will prevent
future harvest
There is a lack of information 20.49 26.34 25.37 18.54 9.27 205
about likely financial returns
Uncertainty about future 22.93 17.07 23.41 29.76 6.83 205
timber prices
Lack of information on 23.44 16.15 15.1 23.96 21.35 192
appropriate species for my
site and for future markets
Difficult to sell 34.78 11.59 15.94 15.94 21.74 69
Low quality seedlings 33.93 12.5 16.07 16.07 21.43 56
Low quality technical training 33.33 14.04 17.54 14.04 21.05 57
In general 23.81 25.29 18.06 18.62 14.22 4678

89
4. Reasons of Forest Plantation
Table 7.4-1 evaluates the importance of different factors for the timber tree plantation
decision. For forest growing farmers, timber sale, making property for their heirs and
protect the environment are the most important factors considered in the forest
plantation decision. Support from government, non-timber sale are also important
factors but for a smaller number of people. Apart from that, supplying timber for
family usage, providing firewood, creating short-term incomes also affect the forest
plantation decision, but at a lesser extent. Providing non-timber products for family
usage, creating cover for crops, firewood sale almost have no impact on the decision.

Table 7.4-1. Importance of Factors for Timber Tree Plantation

N Not Slightly Moderately Quite Very


o Reason for tree planting important important important important important
a.
1. To obtain income from 0.69 6.21 7.59 34.48 51.03
timber sales
2. To provide timber for family 12.77 14.89 29.08 34.04 9.22
use
3. To obtain income from 35.17 24.83 13.1 16.55 10.34
selling fuelwood
4. To provide fuelwood for 8.28 15.86 21.38 42.76 11.72
household use
5. To receive government 15.6 19.86 18.44 20.57 25.53
support
6. As a legacy for children or 4.83 7.59 20 28.28 39.31
grandchildren
7. To obtain income from sale 25.52 17.93 18.62 14.48 23.45
of non-wood products
8. To obtain non-wood forest 34.48 35.17 12.41 13.1 4.83
products for household use
9. To provide shade for crops 40.69 9.66 10.34 31.03 8.28
10 To create short-term 15.86 8.97 33.1 26.9 15.17
.11 income
For environmental 6.34 15.49 23.94 24.65 29.58
. purposess (e.g. land
protection, wildlife habitat)

5. Encouraging effects of government supports


The research group presented 11 different forest plantation encouraging measures to
survey the effectiveness of each of them. These measures were created based on
the difficulties presented in above parts. Encouragement is ranked according to 5
level: 1. No incentive; 2. Very little Incentive; 3. Moderate Incentive; 4. Strong
Incentive; 5. Very Strong Incentive.
The survey results show that all measures have high encouraging values for most of
households growing native trees. Measures that have high proportions of households

90
assessed to provide strong incentive and very strong incentive are Better information
available about how to grow trees (70%); Higher market prices for timber (67%);
Availability of high-value tree species (63%); Secure harvest rights (62%); These are
also measures that have highest proportions of households evaluate to be the ones
providing very strong incentive.

Table 7.5-1. Levels of Encouragement for Different Measures*

Strong and Very Strong Incentive


No Encouraging Measures Rating

Very little incentive/

Moderate incentive

Strong Incentive

Very Strong Incentiveều


No Incentive

1. Better information available 3.98 6.47 18.91 37.31 33.33 70.64


about how to grow trees
2. Continuous support on 6.73 9.13 39.9 25.96 18.27 44.23
management to maximise
timber quality and yield
3. Higher market prices for timber 12.02 5.29 15.38 41.35 25.96 67.31
4. Higher prices for non-timber 12.02 5.29 25.96 37.02 19.71 56.73
forest products
5. Availability of fast growing trees 2.43 6.8 42.72 34.47 13.59 48.06
6. Availability of high-value tree 2.4 7.21 27.4 48.56 14.42 62.98
species
7. Provision of free seedlings 0.49 3.88 35.92 29.13 30.58 59.71
8. Seedlings of preferred species 0.48 5.77 37.5 34.62 21.63 56.25
made available for purchase at
reasonable prices
9. Secure harvest rights (i.e. 0.48 8.7 28.5 33.33 28.99 62.32
guaranteed right to cut trees
down)
10. Tree planting grants paid 4.78 22.49 24.4 40.19 8.13 48.32
directly to farmers
11. Sharing costs and profits 6.73 15.87 32.69 24.52 20.19 44.71
cooperation program with
Government/Foreign donors/
private company
*
% of households rating

91
6. Summary
More than half of households planting forest intend to plant more trees. Lao Cai has
the highest rate (73%) and Hoa Binh has the lowest rate (40.24%). Most of these
households actually intend to expand their forest area (74%). The rest intend to plant
more trees in their current forest.
For households intend to expand their forest area, 76% can expand without having to
buy or rent land.
The area that households are able to expand for forest plantation is relatively large
compared to the area of their current planted forest which is 2.4 ha. In Hoa Binh, an
average household is able to expand by 0.66 ha while in Lao Cai and Phu Tho, the
expandable areas are 1.3 ha and 1.47 ha, respectively.
For the other 24% of households intend to expand forest area, 71.4% intend to
buy/rent land because they do not have any land left, the rest buy/rent land because
the area of their land remained for forest plantation is less than the area they would
like to expand.
The areas of land an average household would like to buy/rent differ between Hoa
Binh and the other two provinces. On average, a household in Hoa Binh intend to
buy/rent an extra of 0.4 ha while in Lao Cai and Phu Tho, the area is about 2.3 ha.
In the households’ plan of tree plantation, Manglietia glauca is the most popular tree
(account for 25.7%), followed by Cinnamon (18.4%), Dendrocalamus menpranace
(14.11%), Acacia (12.8%), Chukrasia tabularis (10.4%), Styrax tonkinensis (8.6%).
Dendrocalamus menpranace and Chukrasia tabularis are popular in Hoa Binh,
accounting for 45% and 30.6% respectivly, while Manglietia glauca and Cinnamon
are popular in Lao Cai, accounting for 46% and 38.4% respectively. In Phu Tho,
Acacia and Manglietia glauca are the most popular, accounting for 38.9% and 16.7%.
The area that households intend to grow for each kind of trees is under 1.5 ha. For
popular trees like Manglietia glauca, Cinnamon, Dendrocalamus menpranace the
average intended area are 0.93 ha, 1.22 ha, 0.34 ha respectively. Households in Hoa
Binh usually intend to expand tree area to a lesser extent than the other provinces.
On average, the intended area for a kind of tree in Hoa Binh is only about 1/3 of that
in the other provinces.
For the trees households intending to grow, most of households have not yet know
what density they should grow (51.13%). The proportion of households that definitely
need technical information on how to grow these trees is higher in Phu Tho (60%)
and Hoa Binh (59%). The proportion in Lao Cai is only 39.2%. For households that
have some ideas on the density of trees they intend to grow, each of them have
different ideas on the growing density for each kind of trees and therefore, proper
training or advice on how the trees should be grown is beneficial for them. Besides
density, these households probably need other technical information (the ones that
are more complicated than density, which was not asked in the survey). For the
plantation of timber trees to be efficient in the coming years, households need more
strong support from forestry extension.
Besides, other difficulties that are large obstacles for farmers in forest plantation are
lack of credits (31.22%), lack of land (30.73%), risk of forest fire (28.78%), high
interest rate (21.95%), lack of information on the appropriate species for farmers’
land and for the market (21.35%), lack of technical guides (18.54%).

92
Uncertainty about future timber prices; current timber price is low; lack of necessary
machinery and equipment; poor road access are also relative obstacles for many
households (29.76%, 29.76%, 23.9% and 20.49%, respectively).
For forest growing farmers, timber sale, making property for their heirs and protect
the environment are the most important factors considered in the forest plantation
decision. Support from government, non-timber sale are also important factors but for
a smaller number of people. Apart from that, supplying timber for family usage,
providing firewood, creating short-term incomes also affect the forest plantation
decision, but at a lesser extent. Providing non-timber products for family usage,
creating cover for crops, firewood sale almost have no impact on the decision.
With such difficulties farmers encounter in forest plantation and motivations farmers
have in planting forest, the question is which government support can be most
valuable and most encouraging to farmers to invest into forest. Measures that have
high proportions of households assessed to provide strong incentive and very strong
incentive are Better information available about how to grow trees (70%); Higher
market prices for timber (67%); Availability of high-value tree species (63%); Secure
harvest rights (62%); These are also measures that have highest proportions of
households evaluate to be the ones providing very strong incentive.

93
Chapter 8
Conclusion

1. Forestry Development in Vietnam


Agriculture plays an important role in the Vietnamese economy and is also a sector
where poverty concentrates. The development of agriculture contributes not only to
economic growth but also helps to slow the widening of the income gap, reduce the
poverty and unemployment rate in the rural area, and reduce migration from rural
area to urban area and therefore, reduce the pressure of social problems caused by
idle labour in cities.
In the agriculture sector, forestry is still in its infancy, and has not been paid attention
for development. The potential for forestry development is therefore still substantial.
Most of forestry production is located in remote areas where forestry infrastructure
and market access are seriously lacking compared to other agricultural production
fields and therefore forestry is concentrated in low-income communities. Forestry
development therefore will bring about substantial contributions to economic growth
and poverty reduction.
Within the forestry sub-sector, plantations and woodlots have been established
mostly in the framework of projects invested by the state. Two national projects
implemented at a large scale are Project 327 and the Five Million Hectare
reforestation Project. Trees planted are mainly imported species that are easy to
plant and have high survival rates but have high risk of disease epidemics.
Projects have focused on increasing planted forest area quickly, but have not paid
attention to the mechanism that ensures long-term benefits to forest growers. Forest
growers do not have the ownership of forest land, the land allocation process and
land use certificate issuance process proceed slowly and the land demarcation is
unclear, which prevents them from growing long-rotation species, and especially
native species.
Forestry projects have not paid attention to what prices farmers will receive from
selling timber and forest products. Large-scale planting of one or two tree species
that have the same rotation length has resulted in oversupply of timber in many
areas, which drives down the timber price and makes plantation forestry less
attractive to the farmers. Future forest projects need to pay more attention at the
planning stage to forest product markets and the diversification of species planted.
Native gene resources are being seriously degraded due to logging of natural forest,
and to shifting cultivation that damages natural ecosystems. Restoring forests by
planting more native trees has become urgent. The planting of native trees is also
essential, to maintain the supply of high quality timber in the future when natural
forests have been depleted. Native trees can also protect soil and the environment
better than exotics, but up to now the planting of native trees and mixtures of native
and exotic species has occurred mostly by chance. There have not been any large
scale programs or projects for native trees, and hence plantations of native species
are small and scattered.

94
Planting and establishing stands of native trees has many difficulties. Most native
species have long rotations, which not only makes technical research difficult but also
reduce the profitability of the plantation business. Native trees have require relatively
favourable sites, unlike imported species that can be easily grown on barren land and
hills with low soil fertility. Regions where the need for planting and recovering forests
with native trees is greatest are usually remote ones where people face so many
difficulties in their lives, lack investment capital, are unable to access new technology,
and face uncertain land planning regulations. Mixed plantations of native trees and
others also face many difficulties due to the lack of research on the interaction of
trees when planted in mixtures.

2. Results of Survey in Lao Cai, Phu Tho and Hoa Binh


The survey was conducted with 210 households in three northern provinces, namely
Lao Cai, Phu Tho and Hoa Binh, with an aim of gaining an overall picture on the
current situation of native tree by households. The survey has revealed some typical
features of rural households in Vietnam, namely most of husbands are household
heads, participating interviews or meetings and are the decision makers on forest
planting. Most of survey respondents were found to be at working age, with 80%
under the age of 48 years.
Ethnicities of households in these midland and mountainous provinces are strongly
diversified. They include Kinh, Mường, Dao, Thái and Tày people, with Kinh, Muong
and Thai accounting for the highest proportions and nearly equal to each other, about
30%. Kinh was found to be the majority in Lao Cai, Muong in Phu Tho and Thai in
Hoa Binh.
Among households having forest, more households have plantation forest rather
than natural forest. More than a half of households have had only planted forest and
nearly a half had both planted and natural forests. Very few households had only
natural forest.
Households are not very experienced in managing forest for both natural and
planting forest. On average, a household starts to manage natural forest in 1994 and
planted forest in 1995.
These households depend very much on farming activities. Compared to the national
average, fewer households have off-farm jobs, more households live under or on
food poverty line and fewer households are well-off.
Self-sufficient agriculture seems to dominate, with most of households produce
paddy, more than half growing fruit trees and few households growing industrial
crops.
Agricultural land right is reasonably secure with most of households issued with red
book. Some households have ACOTR land and industrial cropping land from
clearing, but the proportion is only about 13%. Households having been assigned (by
the state) with land but have not been issued with red book account for only 10%.
Very few households growing agricultural crops in community forest land, land
distributed by the State Forest Farm or borrowed land.

95
For forest land, production planted forest is the most common among the types
managed by households, followed by protection natural forest and protection planting
forest. Almost no households manage special use forest and very few have
production natural forest.
Forest land allocation seems not really equitable with the allocated areas differ
substantially among households. The average area of forest per household is not
lare, 2.4 ha for production planted forest , 4.3 ha for protection natural forest and 1.7
ha for the protection planted forest.
The types of forest allocated to households vary among provinces, characterising the
topography of each province. Most of Lao Cai households have production planted
forest, Hoa Binh households have protection forest and Phu Tho households have
both production and protection forests.
For the natural forests households have, a good variety of timber trees exists with
more than 30 native trees species. Bambusoidae is most popular, then
Dracontumelum duperranum, Styrax tonkinensis and Canarium album. There are
also Chukrasia tabularis, Fagaceae, Parashorea chinensis, Oak,
Anogeissus Acuminata but only few households have them.
The range of tree species in natural forest in Hoa Binh is largest with Canarium
album, Fagaceae are the most common species. Natural forest in Phu Tho has
mainly Bambusoidae, Dracontumelum duperranum, Chukrasia tabularis, Parashorea
chinensis, Styrax tonkinensis. There are fewer kinds of trees in natural forest in Lao
Cai. Main species are Bambusoidae, Styrax tonkinensis, Canarium album,
Manglietia glauca and Phoebe Cuneata.
However, these natural forests seem to have mostly young trees. The diameter and
height of timber trees are not very large. Anyway, most of households benefit from
having natural forest somehow by harvesting timber and non-timber products. These
households concentrate in Hoa Binh and Phu Tho where natural forest is assigned to
households for management.
Products from natural forest, however, do not provide incomes to many households.
Firewood, timber and Neohouzeaua dulloa A. Camus are the most common products
and mostly harvested for domestic use. Other less common product like Amomum
echinosphaera K. grains, other grains and leaves of Livistona saribus are usually
sold. Amomum echinosphaera K. grains and other grains are mostly sold in Hoa Binh
and leaves of Livistona saribus are mainly sold in Phu Tho.
Most of surveyed households plant timber trees and multi-purpose trees. However,
not many households growing exotic trees. The number of exotic species grown is
limited to Acacia and Eucalyptus. Acacia accounts for the majority. Eucalyptus is
grown mostly because of its high growth rate while Acacia is grown mostly because
of the support provided by projects implemented.
Most of exotic species were grown in 1996-97. Acacia was first grown in 1993 and
Eucalyptus was first grown in 1994. At the time of planting, on average, each
household planted about 1300 acacia trees and about 2200 eucalyptus trees, some
households planted up to 6400 trees for each kind. At present, the number of trees
left averages 810/household for Acacia and 1450/household for Eucalyptus.

96
In contrast with exotic species, most of households surveyed grow native species.
More than 14 native species are grown in planting forest and garden of these
households. The most common species include Manglietia glauca, Dendrocalamus
menpranace, Chukrasia tabularis, Cinnamon, Styrax tonkinensis. In Lao Cai,
Manglietia glauca, Cinnamon and Styrax tonkinensis are the most popular species. In
Phu Tho, Manglietia glauca, the most popular species are Styrax tonkinensis and
Canarium album while in Hoa Binh, most of households grow Dendrocalamus
menpranace (93%) and Chukrasia tabularis (73%).
Native trees are grown scatterly in different years with the first ones grown in 1960
and the majority grown in the 90s. For more popular native trees like Styrax
tonkinensis, Manglietia glauca, Dendrocalamus menpranace, Chukrasia tabularis
and Cinnamon, they were first grown in the 80s and grown by more households in
1995 – 2002. These trees are still grown in the recent years.
Among popular species, Manglietia glauca, Styrax tonkinensis and Cinnamon are
often grown with large quantity, on average 2000 – 3000 trees/household. However,
this differs very much among households (the average difference between 2
households is 3000 trees). Species like Dendrocalamus menpranace, Chukrasia
tabularis, Canarium album are grown in a smaller number, on average, 300 – 500
trees/household with the average difference between households to be about 500 –
1000 trees. Compared with the planting time, the average number of trees per
household for common species (Manglietia glauca, Dendrocalamus menpranace,
Canarium album, Chukrasia tabularis) remained at the survey time is not much
different, except for Styrax tonkinensis which has the quantity reduced to 1545
tree/household (40%).
For households growing native trees, the factors that have largest impact on their
tree selection include growth rate, suitability to land and climate and support of
project. For Manglietia glauca, the most popular native tree, suitability to land and
climate and high growth rate are the main reasons for its wide acceptance. For
Styrax tonkinensis, besides high growth rate, suitability to land and climate and the
marketability of its products are also the determining factors. For other trees including
Dendrocalamus menpranace, Chukrasia tabularis, Canarium album and
Peltophorum tonkinense, besides their high growth rate and their suitability to land
and climate, support from projects plays an important role.
Mixed planting in planting forest is not yet widespread and varies among provinces.
The ratio of households growing trees in a mix is just above a half, most popular in
Hoa Binh, then Phu Tho and Lao Cai.

97
Mixed planting types are also different among provinces. Only Styrax tonkinensis -
Manglietia glauca mix is grown in all the 3 provinces. Styrax tonkinensis - Manglietia
glauca -(Cinnamon/Verciania montana Lour/Acacia) mix, Chukrasia tabularis –
Canarium mix and Manglietia glauca - Cinnamon mix are grown in 2 provinces, other
mixes are only grown in one province. In Hoa Binh, Chukrasia tabularis-
Dendrocalamus menpranace mix is most popular, then Acacia-Chukrasia tabularis-
Dendrocalamus menpranace mix. In Phu Tho, Acacia-Manglietia glauca -Cassia
rotundifolia mix is most popular, followed by Styrax tonkinensis -Manglietia glauca -
(Cinnamon/Verciania montana Lour/Acacia) mix, Acacia-Peltophorum tonkinense
-Canarium mix and Manglietia glauca -Dracontumelum duperranum -Canarium-
Verciania montana Lour mix. In Lao Cai, Styrax tonkinensis -Manglietia glauca mix is
most popular, followed by Styrax tonkinensis - Manglietia glauca -
(Cinnamon/Verciania montana Lour/Acacia) mix, Cinnamon-Cassava mix and
Manglietia glauca - Cinnamon mix.
Mix-planting in fruit tree land is more similar among provinces. Longan-Litchi mix is
most popular, followed by Custard apple – Longan – Litchi
For industrial trees, very few households grow trees in mix. Some tree mixes grown
are Tea-Cassava, Tea-Cassia-Cassava and Tea-Cassia.
Planting agricultural crops under tree branches is not popular either, only practised
by one third of the households. Cassava is the most common crop under-planted,
then corn, soybean. Tea is also planted under trees, but only fruit trees.

Although project support is one of the reason impacting the forest plantation decision
of households, only about half of the households were supported by projects. There
are three main types of projects supporting forest planting. Project 661 reaches the
largest number of households, then projects funded by foreign donors and NGOs and
Project 327.
Most of households participating projects were supported with seedlings and
technical services. Also, a large number of households receive financial support from
projects and some households received fertilizers to plant trees.
The seedlings provided by projects is an important source, accounting for nearly half
of the seedlings quantity used by households. The other half is homemade or bought
from commercial sources. Home-made seedlings are popular for Manglietia glauca,
Styrax tonkinensis, Cinnamon. Seedlings are commonly bought for Cinnamon,
Manglietia glauca and provided by projects for other trees.
Sources of seedlings supply differ among provinces. Most of seedlings in Hoa Binh
and Phu Tho were supplied by projects but in Lao Cai, seedlings were mostly bought
and self-made.
For most of the planted trees, seedlings are created from seeds, except for
Dendrocalamus menpranace, they are created by branch transplantation.

98
Most of households do not put much effort in raising timber trees. Few households
apply fertilizers to timber trees. For households applying fertilizers, Biofertilizer is
most popular, followed by chemical fertilizer. Manual is the fertilizer households can
produce and do not have to pay but rarely used for timber trees. Usually, farmers just
apply the fertilizers they are provided free of charge for timber trees and do not buy
extra fertilizers or use the fertilizers they have for timber trees. Households that do
thinning for plantation forest are not many, about a half. Households who do trimming
are even less.
Besides, households lack technical knowledge on tree planting and need strong
support from forestry extension. They also lack market information on tree planting.
Information equipments households currently have are primary and therefore
providing information to households is not easy. Households use information from 5
main sources, including information from extension workers; radio, television;
personal relationship; private business agents and other source. Radio – television is
the most important information source for information on prices, domestic market
situation, and policies including forestry product sales support, input subsidy and
credit support for forestry growers. Private bussiness agents are the most important
information source for output prices, input prices and domestic market situation.
Extension workers are the most important source for technical aspects on plantation
and necessary care of trees. Personal relationship is assessed to be the second
most important information source for all kind of information, i.e the source that
farmers turn to when they cannot have the information they need from the previous
sources.
Lack of capital is also a substantial obstacle for a large number of households (31%).
Many households do not borrow money to grow trees due to high interest rate. 22%
of the households interviewed stated that the current interest rate is the substantial
obstacle for tree plantation and 22% said that it is a relatively large obstacle.
Despite low level and low quality of inputs, most of farmers were satisfied with the
growth rate of trees. For some unsatisfied farmers, lack of fertilizers, diseases, lack
of care and lack of technical support were the main factors that caused the slow
growth.
Trees planted provide timber in thinning time and harvest. Products gained from
thinning and trimming are mostly used as firewood. Only about ¼ of households sell
them and very few use them for manual production and other family usage. Firewood
is widely used as fuel in these provinces in large quantity in Phu Tho, Lao Cai and in
smaller quantity in Hoa Binh.
With newly planted forest, not all households have harvested timber for any
purposes. 70% have harvested to build houses, selling and make furniture for family
usage. Exploiting timber for selling is the most popular for most of the trees. Some
household exploit timber for house building and very few households exploit timber
for furniture making. However, to the time of survey, only 1/3 of households growing
timber trees actually exploit timber to sell. Dendrocalamus menpranace, Styrax
tonkinensis, Cinnamon and Manglietia glauca appear to be most commercial.

99
Timber is sold by m3 or trees, but mostly by m3, except for Dendrocalamus
menpranace. Most of households sell to collectors within the district, very few sell to
collectors outside district or processing company. Just above half of households take
care of harvest and deliver timber to the buyer, the others selling standing trees. The
selling prices for one kind of tree vary strongly between households. This may be due
to the size of timber sold that was not taken into account in the survey and also
indicates that households sell timber trees at various ages.
The satisfaction with tree planting activity is further reflected by farmers’ future plan.
Farmers grow trees not soly for money, although timber sale was stated to be the
most important factor. Farmers also grow forest to make property for their heirs and
protect the environment. Support from government, non-timber sale are also
important factors but for a smaller number of farmers. Apart from that, supplying
timber for family usage, providing firewood, creating short-term incomes also affect
the forest planting decision, but at a lesser extent. Providing non-timber products for
family usage, creating cover for crops, firewood sale almost have no impact on the
decision.
More than a half of households intended to plant more trees, with the highest rate in
Lao Cai and the lowest rate in Hoa Binh. Most these households plan to expand their
forest area (74%). The rest intend to plant more trees in their current forest.
For households intend to expand their forest area, about ¼ plans to buy or rent more
land to plant forest, others will plant forest trees in their unused land. The area they
plan to buy is as large as the area of plantation forest an average household
currently has.
In the households’ tree plantation plan, Manglietia glauca will be grown most,
followed by Cinnamon, Dendrocalamus menpranace, Acacia, Chukrasia tabularis,
Styrax tonkinensis. Dendrocalamus menpranace and Chukrasia tabularis are popular
in Hoa Binh while Manglietia glauca and Cinnamon are popular in Lao Cai. Acacia
and Manglietia glauca are popular in Phu Tho.
However, as farmers forsaw, many obstacles exist that hinder farmers planting forest.
These include lack of capital, lack of land, low timber price, unpredictable future
timber price, lack of technical support, lack of information on the kind of trees suitable
to land and climate and information on market situation, bad road system, forest fire
risk.
The government and outside organizations may play an important role in
encouraging the forestry sector to develop. They can help by providing farmers with
technical information to help farmers growing forest better, find solution to stimulate
timber prices (restructure the market, find export market, provide good forcast…),
supply of seedlings for high valued trees and the guarantee on the right of growers to
exploit forest they plant. These supports are also the ones that have the highest
values to farmers.

100
References
Central Forest Inventory Conduct Committee (2001), Statistical data for forest in
1999, Agricultural Publishing House, Hanoi.

Central Forest Inventory Department, Inventory Forest Data, Vietnam, 1999, 2001.

CIEM (Centre Institute of Economic Management) (1999), Vietnam Economy in 1998,


Education Publishing House, Hanoi.

CIEM, 1999. Vietnam Economy in 1998, Education Publishing House.

Dang Kim Son, (2002), Policies Analysis Matrix for Plantation Forest in Mountainous
Region in Vietnam, Agricultural Publishing House, Hanoi.

FID (Forest Inspection Department, MARD), 2002. Statistics on Forest and Forestry
Land Area.
Available on Web page:
http://www.kiemlam.org.vn/VN/DBR/Nam2002/SLDBR2002.htm
Geneva, Switzerland. Available at web page: http://www.who.int/health-systems-
performance/technical_consultations/fairfincont_report.pdf.

GSO (General Statistic Organization) (2000), Economic – Social Statistic Figures of


Vietnam from 1975 to 2000, Statistic Publishing House, Hanoi.

GSO (General Statistic Organization) (2003), Statistical Year Book, Statistic


Publishing House, Hanoi.

Hà Công Dộng, 2003. Introduction on Hoa Binh Province. Website:


http://www.hoabinh.gov.vn/gioithieu.htm
http://vinhbacviet.tripod.com/new_page_1.htm

ICARD (2002), Estimate economic result of forest growing household at Dai Tu


District, Thai Nguyen Province, Hanoi.

ICARD (2003), Background Paper for Forestry, 2003, Hanoi.

ICARD (Information Centre for Agricultural and Rural Development) (2001), Building
policies analysis matrix for plantation forest in mountainous region in Vietnam,
Hanoi.

ICD, MARD, 2001. Synthesis Report – Five Million Hectare Reforestation Program
Partnership.

IUCN, 2004. Research on Land Use Right in Ke Go and Ba Be. Available on


Webpage:
http://www.mekonginfo.org/mrc_en/contact.nsf/0/abb6ecc3f00d510e8025686a0
0805dad/$file/section6_1_vn.htm

101
JBIC, 2002. Sector Study for Agriculture and Rural Development Sector in the
Socialist Republic of Viet Nam. Website:
http://www.isgmard.org.vn/Information%20Service/Report/General/JBIC%20Stu
dy%20Strategy%20to%20ARD-e.pdf.

Lamb, 2003. UQ plant boffins help regenerate Vietnam’s forests. Website:


http://www.uq.edu.au/news/index.phtml?article=3651

MARD (Ministry of Agricultural and Rural Development) and ICD (NAME IN FULL)
(2001), Synthesis Report – Five Million Hectare Reforestation Program
Partnership, Hanoi.

MARD and FAO (1999), Proceeding of National Forestry Forum, Agricultural


Publishing House, Hanoi.

MARD and JICA (Ministry of Agricultural and Rural Development and Japan
International Cooperation Agency) (1998), Forest lord and profit of forest lord in
the forest growing business, Agricultural Publishing House, Hanoi.

Ministry of Forestry (1995), Vietnam Forestry, Agriculture Publishing House, Hanoi.

MOLISA, 1998. Circular No 12/1998/TT/BL§-BL§TBXH issued on 16 October, 1998


on Treatments for People Contracted by Communal Authority for Forest
Protection in Dry Season Months.

MPI, 1999. A Study on Aid to the Environment Sector in Viet Nam. Available on Web
page: http://www.undp.org.vn/undp/docs/1999/envaid/

MRDP and FIPI (Mountainous Rural Development Program and Forest Investigation
Planning Institute) (1999), Survey and estimate result report of the forest and
vegetation cover development on 20 villages of MRDP area, 1989 – 1999,
Hanoi.

Nguyen, V.V. and Lehtonen, P., 1996. Review of Land Allocation in Cho Don District,
Bac Thai Province. Available on Web page:
http://www.mekonginfo.org/mrc_en/doclib.nsf/0/EA8CCF7511A77DEF472568E
E0036ABDA/$FILE/FULLTEXT.html

Nguyen, X. N., 2001. Experience and Future Directions of Forestry Funding in


Vietnam. International workshop of experts on financing sustainable forest
management (CIFOR). Oslo, Norway, 22 – 25 January 2001. Available at:
www.cifor.cgiar.org/fsfm/Papers/26Nguyen.pdf

NTFP, 2004. Review and Analysis of policies related to non-timber forest products in
Vietnam. Available at:
http://www.mekonginfo.org/mrc_en/contact.nsf/0/abb6ecc3f00d510e8025686a0
0805dad/$file/section3_7_vn.htm

102
Salmi, J., Nguyen, X. N. and Le, Q.T, 1999. Study on Financing Strategy for
Sustainable Forest Management in Vietnam. Program on Forest by MARD and
UNDP. Draft for comments

Vnexpress, 2003. Epidemics of caterpillar restarted in Nghe An. Available at web


page: http://vnexpress.net/Vietnam/Xa-hoi/2003/12/3B9CE8D8/

Vu, H.T., 2001. Analysis and Assessment of the Implementation of Forest


Management Policy and Institution at 5 Provinces under the Vietnam Sweden
Mountainous Rural Development Program. Website:
http://www.mekonginfo.org/mrc_en/doclib.nsf/0/20E4D2ABA2BF06FD47256CB
0003176DF/$FILE/FULLTEXT.html#III. LAO CAI PROVINCE

WHO, 2001a. Report on WHO Technical Consultation on Fairness Of Financial


Contribution. Evidence and Information For Policy World Health Organization

WHO, 2001b. Urban and Semi-Urban Food and Nutrition Action Plan, Elements For
Community Action To Promote Social Cohesion And Reduce Inequalities
Through Local Production For Local Consumption. European Health Target.
Available at web page: http://www.euro.who.int/nutrition/Publications/
Foodsecurity/20011123_1

World Bank (2000), Vietnam Attacking Poverty, Hanoi.

Zingerli, C., 2004. Changing The Rules Of The Game: Forest Management In The
Mountain District Of Ba Be, Vietnam. Available on Webpage:
http://www.etfrn.org/etfrn/newsletter/news38/nl38_oip_3_5.htm

103

You might also like