1
The Tam Giang Lagoon, one of the biggest in Asia, is located in Thua Tien Hue province, Vietnam. Natural resource degradation and threats to sustainable livelihoods in this ecosystem result in complex problems in management. The project, established in 1994, was aimed at improving intellectual capacity and interdisciplinary skills for researchers in the Hue region to address the above problems. During the first twoyear phase, the research activities were to learn about the systems and management mechanism by using participatory research in an interdisciplinary fashion. First, efforts were made to involve resource users in the research activities and raise their awareness about resource problems and conflicts in management. The project collected data to serve as the basis from which to establish community-based management of biological resources in the lagoon. This paper is to present a new application in approaching participatory research, the most critical issues/problems identified, and challenges for expanding the community-based research for biological resource management. 1. Background The Tam Giang lagoon, one of the biggest in Asia, is located in Thua Thien Hue province, Vietnam. Its area is about 22,000 ha with a length of 70 km along the coast. About 300,000 inhabitants have settled around the lagoon in a total 236 villages from 31 communes and earn their livelihood by directly or indirectly exploiting natural resources in and around the lagoon. The project was established in 1994 by a group of Canadian and Vietnamese researchers from Hue University of Science (HUS), Hue University of Agriculture and Forestry (HUAF), Dept. of Fisheries of Thua Thien-Hue Province (DoF), Provincial Department of Science, Technology and Environment, Nha Trang Oceanography Institute, Southeast Asian Research Institute and Hai Phong Institute of Oceanography. The project outline was developed and approved by IDRC and CIDA under the VISED program in 1995. The project started in July 1995 with a PRA training course and exercise in Phu Tan commune. In October, 1995 three interdisciplinary research teams were formed and separated to conduct research in the three research sites selected. The institutions directly involved in carrying out the project are: HUAF, HUS and DoF. Among a total of 19 researchers (HUAF: 7, HUS: 9 and DoF: 3), there are 4 PhDs, 5 Masters and 11 Bachelors or engineers belonging to the following disciplines: Biology (5), Agronomy (2), Rural development studies (1), Animal production (2), Sociology and Ethnography (3), Fisheries (4), Agricultural Economics (1) and Environmental Chemistry (1). The project is managed by a Management Committee of 6 members. The chairman and the coordinator are both from HUAF. The Management Committee makes final decision on all activities, monitors the budget and holds monthly meetings. 2. Specific Research Objectives 2.1 To identify the structure and social organisation of representative communities whose members are active fishers and farmers, including social and gender role of fisher groups. 2.2 To identify the groups harvesting resources, species harvested , sites and technologies used, and the amount of harvest by gear, season and location. 2.3 To estimate stock and understand crucial ecological parameters of important species in the lagoon, including distribution, migration, spawning, nursery habitats and growth. 2.4 To identify local resources management and production, decision-making at the community level, including fishers’ selection of gear and allocation and enforcement of use rights to fishing grounds as well as the role of village leaders, commune People’s Committee and formal and informal regulations and policies. 2.5 To identify the share of aquatic production destined for household consumption and use, household-based processing, direct local marketing, export and the significance of aquatic products to people’s livelihoods. 2.6 To understand why previous settlement attempts for sampan people have been unsuccessful and to involve these sampan people in determining preferences for livelihood alternatives. 2.7 To improve farms incomes and productivity of poor soils especially for selected villages whose households engage in both farming and fishing. 2.8 To identify the socio-economic and environmental impacts of aquaculture development in the lagoon including an analysis of conflicts between aquaculture and other economic activities (e.g.: agriculture, tourism, fishing, transport, etc.) 2.9 To initiate research to develop methods of sustainable aquaculture production, addressing technological, organisational and regulatory issues. 3. Training Activities PRA Training was organised at HUAF and Phu Tan commune for 28 participants consisting of 19 project members, 3 members of the Upland resources management project, 4 from Bach Ma National Park and 2 from JIVC. The training course provided the researchers with new methodologies to conduct research and to improve local people’s participation into the research activities. In December 1995, 2 project members attended a 2-week training course on ‘Coastal and marine resources management’ organised by SEAMEO/BIOTROP at University of Can Tho. 2 project members attended ” Festival Workshop on Community-based Coastal Resources Management” (CBCRM) held by the University of Philippines in Dilliman. 1 project member attended a Workshop on “Mangrove Management in Asia” held in Ho Chi Minh City. Other trainings were organised by the researchers at three research site. These training sessions were on data collection for local research collaborators and the fishers and farmers who participated in the research activities. 4. Process followed in conducting research PRA was applied at the selected sites at the beginning of the research period. The community groups, facilitated by the research team, identified their problems. However, the level of local participation in planning each research topic varied. Participation was weak for those research topics focussed on basic studies, e.g. aquatic resources assessment, social issues, effects and impact of development strategies. However, participation was higher for those research topics or activities which were oriented towards interventions, e.g. banning of electric fishing, improving land productivity using appropriate cropping patterns; finding alternative income for women. Different community groups were involved in the research. Though the groups are not distinct and members can belong to more than one group, the list is as follows: • Government officials at district, commune and village levels • Fishers: Fixed gear and mobile gear fishers • Farmers • Farmers-fishers • Women • Aquaculturists • Sampan people (who live in boats) The support of local government officials was enhanced by fitting the research activities to local socioeconomic development. Establishing a good rapport with local leaders (by soliciting external support to solve some critical problems and needs of the community) produced advantages to improve participation. Other groups’ participation were enhanced by involving them in appropriate research activities. The farmers were involved in the improvement of agricultural productivity. The fishers participated in research into fishery resources, freshwater macrophytes, aquaculture and aquatic resource protection. Briefly, the process followed in conducting research is as follows: 4.1 Local people, facilitated by researchers, identified their problems, assessed local potentials regarding natural and human resources, proposed research topics and the groups to be involved. 4.2 Researchers with local participants planned the specific research topics. The local people made decisions on selection of participating households, overall content and implementation procedure to be followed. The researchers facilitated the work by providing various options for the participants, thus building their awareness and in developing their insight into every alternative. In fact, the level of the researchers’ influence on local people’s decision-making varied from topic to topic and also from site to site. 4.3 Implementation of research activities was mainly done by fishers and farmers. It included the following: • Training and instruction on research design, data collection and recording, and evaluation were provided to the participants regarding specific activities. • Materials and tools that were not locally available for data collection and recording were provided to the participants. • Supervision of data collection was the responsibility of the researchers, field staff and/or local research collaborators. • Materials and resources necessary for implementing research activities in combination with livelihood activities were made available to the households. In some cases, money and gifts were given for extra time that the households took to collect and record the data. 4.4 Continuous evaluation and improvement in the implementation of research. In most of the research activities, continuous evaluation was done by the researchers. The evaluations identified difficulties encountered and positive results. Proposed improvements and changes to contents and procedures were discussed and agreed to with the participants and then put into effect. A lot of improvements were made in research content, type of data collected, and the process in order to adapt the research to local people’s knowledge and skills. To improve the reliability of data, other appropriate participants were involved. 4.5 Final evaluation was done by the local people and the researchers. Level of the participation from local people in results evaluation was different depending on specific research topics.
