Socioeconomic and environmental trade-offs for multifunctional landscapes: rice-fish Bac Kan Elisabeth Simelton In collaboration with: Dam Viet Bac, Ngo The An, Nguyen Thi Hoa Email: [email protected]Funding: FORMAS Sweden Technical workshop on Methods and Experiences in Climate Change Research and Assessments in Fisheries and Aquaculture Hanoi Sep 6, 2013
17
Embed
Socioeconomic and environmental trade-offs for multifunctional landscapes: rice-fish Bac Kan
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Socioeconomic and environmental trade-offs for multifunctional landscapes: rice-fish Bac Kan
Elisabeth SimeltonIn collaboration with: Dam Viet Bac, Ngo The An, Nguyen Thi Hoa
• Mono-rice (MR) and rice-fish (RF)• Food self-sufficient (FSS) – non self-
sufficient (NSS)30 km
40 km
ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS
SOC
IO-E
CO
NO
MIC
BEN
EFIT
S
Low High
Low
Hig
h
PES (Decree 99-2010)
National Food Security Policy
PAM (Reforestation programmes 327)
1980s- 1990s
Viet Nam: 3 policies influencing multi-functional land use & food security
Source: HH Survey I
Ecosystem Services Rating
Ecosystem ServicesFarmers rate
MR RF
Provisioning
Food provision 5 6
Economic value 5 6
Fuel provision 0.5 1
Clean water 0 2
Regulating
Shade 0 1.5
Natural pest control 0 3.5
Resilience to extreme weather events 1 0
Supporting
Enhance soil fertility 0.5 2
Soil water content 0 1
Prevent soil erosion 1 1
Biodiversity 0.5 2
Cultural Landscape beauty 0.5 1.5
Source: Focus group discussions 2013 (mixed gender, mixed RF/MR farmers)
Household types
n=285Rice Fish (RF-)Cá ruộng
Mono-rice (MR-) Lúa không
Tot
Food Self-Sufficient (-FSS) 53 160 213
Food Non-Self Sufficient (-NSS) 11 61 72
Total 64 221
Source: HH Survey II
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
RF - NSS MR - NSS MR - FSS RF - FSS
he
ctar
e
Rice Area Upland Crop
Intercrop Tree-Based
Forest Plant Forest Natural
Farm contexts
• Food sufficiency is possible despite smaller total areas
• Non-self sufficient HHs have large shares natural forest (no economic value), smaller forest plantation areas implications for participation in PES?
• Food self-sufficiency is associated with land use, not total area
Non-self sufficient -- Self sufficient
Rice-fish
Mono rice
Source: HH Survey II (n=285)
Paddy field characteristics
• Food self-sufficiency associated with paddy area, irrigated share (2 crops/year) - not total farm area
• Mono-rice households have cash crop instead of fish
• RF-NSS least irrigation, mechanisation, cash crop of all
RF - NSS
MR -…0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
he
ctar
e
RF - NSS MR - NSSMR - FSS RF - FSS
Source: HH Survey II
ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS
SOC
IO-E
CO
NO
MIC
BEN
EFIT
S
Low High
Low
Hig
h
PES (Decree 99-2010)
National Food Security Policy 2010
PAM (Reforestation programmes 327)
1980s- 1990s
Bac Kan: 3 policies influencing household land use & food security
Source: HH Survey I n=23
Ecosystem Services Rating
Ecosystem ServicesFarmers rate PES
MR RFDecree
99Poten-
tial
Provisioning
Food provision 5 6
Economic value 5 6
Fuel provision 0.5 1
Clean water 0 2 X +++
Regulating
Shade 0 1.5
Natural pest control 0 3.5 +++
Resilience to extreme weather events 1 0
Supporting
Enhance soil fertility 0.5 2 +
Soil water content 0 1
Prevent soil erosion 1 1 X ++
Biodiversity 0.5 2 X +
Cultural Landscape beauty 0.5 1.5 X +
Source: Focus group discussions 2013 (mixed gender, mixed RF/MR farmers)
ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS
SOC
IO-E
CO
NO
MIC
BEN
EFIT
S
Low High
Low
Hig
h
PES (Decree 99-2010)
National Food Security Policy
PAM (Reforestation programmes 327)
1980s- 1990s
Recommendations for land use & food security policy
Source: HH Survey I n=23
Rice-fish: 3 knowledge gaps
• Adaptation: Reducing exposure to extreme events– Flood risk (storm) – Cold spell – alternatives to tilapia?
• Food security: consequences of national rice food security targets on integrated systems– Hybrid rice More intensive agriculture less rice fish
• Environmental Services: Linking PES to all land uses– Mitigation: Nitrogen leaching? Methane emission? – Clean water: Agriculture water pollutants – Soil erosion: paddy fields are sedimentation traps– Ecotourism
Lessons learned: 3 adoption principlesmultifunctional farming system
• Additional component(s) add value, do not interfere with current land uses on the farm or land use policies
• Economic and environmental risks and benefits are well known and rational to the farmer
• Flexibility. The new system generates annual outputs and enables multiple possible outcomes
Conclusions
• Rice fish is an important component of food self sufficient households– Provides food (quantity & quality) – Generates income
• Rice-fish has socio-economic and biophysical synergies– Diversifies income and land use – Negotiable within (most) current land use policies– Potential PES for all land uses