This document summarizes key findings from research on payment for environmental services programs for mangrove forests in Vietnam. It discusses options for how to collect payments, such as through docking fees from tourist ships or fishing licenses, and how to distribute payments, including providing cash or in-kind benefits. The best approaches depend on factors like the size of the payment, social motivations, leadership capacity, and monitoring costs and benefits. Combining cash and in-kind payments can maximize impacts. Payments should be tailored to local needs and preferences to ensure environmental services are maintained over time as conditions change.

1. Financial mechanism of Payment for
Mangrove environmental services
Ho Chi Minh, 9 November 2020
Pham Thu Thuy

2. Outline
1. How to collect
payment ?
2. How to distribute
payment ?
3. How to monitor ?
4. Principles and key
recommendations

3. • Literature review
• Interviews and HH surveys
• Cases studied: both PES AND PES-LIKED,
different scales + management regimes,
different ecoregions, and state and non-state
programs/projects
Provinces Total key informants interviewed
Thai Binh 292
Thanh Hoa 287
Quang Ninh 288
Da Nang 6
Hai Phong 224
Quang Nam 4
Ben Tre 14
Tra Vinh 25
Ca Mau 10
TOTAL 1,150
Methods

4. How to collect payment ?- Depends
on what to be paid…
Lý do chi trả cho việc
bảo vệ rừng ngập mặn
Tàu du
lịch
Tàu
cá
Vẻ đẹp cảnh quan 37.5 77.45
Bảo vệ môi trường,
làm sạch nước
12.5 20.59
Bảo vệ đê điều và sản
xuất nông nghiệp
50 63.73
Cung cấp củi và thức
ăn
0 26.47
Tăng thêm thu nhập
cho người dân làm
nghề cá
37.5 63.73
Cho thế hệ tương lai 12.5 81.37
Bảo vệ tuần thuyền
khỏi gió bão
12.5 10.78

5. How to collect payment ?...
Depends on who pays ?

6. Who pay and how to pay ?
Fishermen + tourist
ships: Docking fee and
through port
management board
Fishermen and Tourists:
Fishing license through
Department of
Aquaculture
Tourist: Entrance fee,
diving fee, environmental
fees by Border police
Private sector: Trust
Fund
Organic Shrimp Certification
and Carbon Financing
Hợp đồng trực tiếp

7. Who pay and how to pay ?
https://www.land-links.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/USAID_LAND_TENURE_TGCC_MANGROVE_PAYMENT_VIETNAM.pdf

8. Payment distribution
Advantages Disadvantages
In cash • Greater flexibility in the use of
resources
• Less prone to be seen as
paternalism
• Reinvestment to other land uses
• Raise participation in communal
tasks
• Reduce social motivations in case of
collective action made on the basic of
social norm
• Depends on financial management
skills
• Investment in certain type of land
uses creates pressure to forest
In kind (e.g.
in schools
and clinics
(Mikoko
Pamoja
project;
training for
Ca Mau
local
people)
• More likely to lead to long-lasting
benefits and predicable welfare
improvement
• Potential to benefit the whole
community
• Depends on decision-making process

9. Payment distribution

10. Payment distribution
HAI PHONG

11. Factors for relevant BDS selection
 Size of payment
 Social motivation complement with existing financial
incentives
 History of collective actions
 Leadership, financial capacity and accountability of local
management
 Discourse on equity and local preferences on frequency and
types of payment (e.g. 50% advance payments, followed by
30% then 20% upon satisfactory completion (Mikoko Pamoja
project) and agreement on payment criteria
 Costs and benefits in delivering PES
 M&E system- payment criteria (E.g. environment or
economic outcomes such as in Ca Mau ? M&E to enforce
both providers and sellers to comply with the rules

12. https://www.planvivo.org/Handlers/Download.ashx?IDMF=3faf7087-dec2-41ca-8a67-42a98e21c59d
Payment criteria

13. Key messages
 How to pay- Bundling multiple ES and is driven by political
economy and political will, trade-off and cross sectoral
collaboration, complex multilevel governance
 Combination of both in cash and in kind could leverage the
impacts of PFES
 Fixed schedule tailored to the need of local people enhance
commitment in delivering ES
 Ratio of payment needs to ensure the ES is actually delivered
 A mixture of payment ensure benefits reach to different
groups and reduce the risks of inequity
 No one size fits all recipes and need to be locally adapted
 Local preferences and perceptions changes overtime - BDS
has to be adapted overtime

14. We acknowledge the support from:
the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad), the Australian
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), the European Union (EU), the
UK Government, USAID, the International Climate Initiative (IKI) of the German
Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and
Nuclear Safety (BMUB) and the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and
Agroforestry (CRP-FTA) with financial support from the CGIAR Fund.
& all research partners and individuals
that have contributed to the GCS research
Thanks