English 2.28MB - Center for International Forestry Research

Biodiversity and Local Perceptions 

on the Edge of a Conservation Area, 

Khe Tran Village, Vietnam 

Manuel Boissière • Imam Basuki • Piia Koponen 

Meilinda Wan • Douglas Sheil

National Library of Indonesia Cataloging-in-Publication Data 

Boissière, Manuel 

Biodiversity and local perceptions on the edge of a conservation area, Khe 

Tran village, Vietnam/ by Manuel Boissière, Imam Basuki, Piia Koponen, 

Meilinda Wan, Douglas Sheil. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International 

Forestry Research (CIFOR), 2006. 

ISBN 979-24-4642-7 

106p. 

CABI thesaurus: 1. nature reserve 2. nature conservation 

3. landscape 4. biodiversity 5. assessment 6. community involvement 

7. Vietnam I. Title 

© 2006 by CIFOR 

All rights reserved. 

Printed by Inti Prima Karya, Jakarta 

Revised edition, June 2006 

Design and layout by Catur Wahyu and Gideon Suharyanto 

Photos by Manuel Boissière and Imam Basuki 

Maps by Mohammad Agus Salim 

Cover photos, from left to right: 

- A villager prepares the soil for peanut plantation in a former rice field, Khe Tran 

- A young woman carries Acacia seedling ready to be planted 

- Villagers discuss the future of Phong Dien Nature Reserve 

- The different land types in Khe Tran: bare land, village with home gardens, rice fields, and 

protected mountain areas 

Published by 

Center for International Forestry Research 

Jl. CIFOR, Situ Gede, Sindang Barang 

Bogor Barat 16680, Indonesia 

Tel.: +62 (251) 622622; Fax: +62 (251) 622100 

E-mail: cifor@cgiar.org 

Web site: http://www.cifor.cgiar.org

Contents 

Acronyms and terms vii 

Acknowledgements ix 

1. Research context and objectives 1 

2. Methods 3 

Village activities 3 

Field activities 4 

3. Achievements 8 

4. Conservation context in Khe Tran 10 

4.1. Previous conservation activities 10 

4.2. Government programs that affected Khe Tran village 12 

Summary 14 

5. Site description 15 

5.1. Research site 15 

5.2. People from Khe Tran 17 

5.3. Land use and natural resources 23 

Summary 28 

6. Local perceptions of the different land types and resources 29 

6.1. Local land uses 29 

6.2. Land type importance 31 

6.3. Forest importance 32 

6.4. Forest importance in the past, present and future 34 

6.5. Importance according to source of products 36 

6.6. Most important products from the forest 37 

6.7. Threats to local forests and biodiversity 41 

6.8. People’s hopes for the future of their forest and life 42 

Summary 45 

iii

iv | Contents 

7. Characterization of land types 46 

7.1. Sampling of land types 46 

7.2. Specimen collection and identification 48 

7.3. Plant biodiversity 51 

7.4. Forest structure 53 

7.5. Species vulnerability 55 

Summary 58 

8. Ethno-botanical knowledge 59 

8.1. Plant uses 59 

8.2. Species with multiple uses 61 

8.3. Uses of trees 62 

8.4. Uses of non-trees 62 

8.5. Forest as resource of useful plants 64 

8.6. Nonsubstitutable species 65 

8.7. Remarks on potential uses of species 66 

Summary 66 

9. Local perspectives on conservation 67 

Summary 70 

10. Conclusion and recommendations 71 

10.1. Conclusion 71 

10.2. Recommendations 75 

Bibliography 77 

Annexes 79 

1. LUVI (mean value) of important plant species by different use 

categories (result based on scoring exercise of four groups of informant) 79 

2. LUVI (mean value) of important animal species by different use 

categories based on scoring exercise of four groups of informant 83 

3. The botanical names, families and local name of specimens collected 

within and outside the plots by their use categories 84

Tables and figures 

Tables 

Biodiversity and Local Perceptions | v 

1. Composition of MLA research team in Khe Tran village 3 

2. Important events affecting the local livelihoods 21 

3. Income range by source of products and settlement area 22 

4. Identified land types in Khe Tran 24 

5. Regrouped land types in Khe Tran 25 

6. Important forest plants and their local uses 30 

7. Main categories of use of plant and animal resources 30 

8. Local importance of land types by use category (all groups) 33 

9. Forest importance by use categories (all groups) 33 

10. Forest importance over time according to different use categories 

(all groups) 35 

11. Importance (%) of source of product by gender 37 

12. Most important forest plants and animals in Khe Tran (all groups) 39 

13. Most important forest plants by categories of use (all groups) 40 

14. Most important forest animals by categories of use (all groups) 40 

15. Locally important plant species by use category and IUCN list 

of threatened trees 41 

16. Villagers’ perception on threats to forest and biodiversity (19 respondents) 42 

17. Villagers’ perception about forest loss (19 respondents) 43 

18. Villagers’ ideas on threats to human life (19 respondents) 43 

19. Summary of specimen collection and identification of plant species 

from 11 sample sites 50 

20. Plant richness in Khe Tran 53 

21. Main tree species based on basal area and density listed with their 

uses in Khe Tran 54 

22. Richness (total number of species recorded per plot) of life forms 

of non-tree species in all land types in Khe Tran 55 

23. Threatened species in Khe Tran based on vegetation inventories 

and PDM exercises 57 

24. Summary of specimen collection and identification of plant species 

from 11 sample sites 59 

25. Mean number of species and number of useful species recorded 

in each land type 60 

26. Distribution of all useful plant species per plot and by use category 61 

27. Plant species with at least four uses 62 

28. Distribution of tree species considered useful per plot and per use category 63 

29. Distribution of non-tree species considered useful per plot and per use 

category 64 

30. Villager’s perceptions on conservation and Phong Dien Nature Reserve 69

vi | Contents 

Figures 

1. Scoring exercise (PDM) with Khe Tran men group 5 

2. Working on sample plot 6 

3. Location of Khe Tran village in the buffer zone of Phong Dien 

Nature Reserve 16 

4. Situation of Khe Tran village 18 

5. Livestock and Acacia plantations are important in Khe Tran 20 

6. A woman from the lower part of the village harvests rubber 

from her plantation 22 

7. Considerable areas of bare land are used in Khe Tran for new 

Acacia plantation 25 

8. Biodiversity and resource distribution map of Khe Tran 27 

9. Land type by importance (all groups) 31 

10. Importance of forest types (all groups) 32 

11. Forest importance over time (all groups) 35 

12. Source of product importance (all groups) 37 

13. Importance of forest resources by use categories (all groups) 38 

14. Recent flood on a bridge between Phong My and Khe Tran 44 

15. Field sampling of land types in Khe Tran (total sample size 11 plots) 47 

16. Distribution of sample plots in the research area 49 

17. Accumulation of non-tree species with the increasing random 

order of subplots (each 20 m 2 ) for various land types in Khe Tran 50 

18. Relative dominance in primary and secondary forest plots in Khe Tran 

based on basal area 52 

19. Forest structural characteristics in Khe Tran. Left panel: basal area and 

density; right panel: tree height, stem diameter and furcation index 56 

20. All plant species considered useful by the Khe Tran villagers shown 

in use categories 63 

21. Total number of all useful plant species per category in primary, 

secondary and plantation forests 65

Acronyms and terms 

asl above sea level 

CBEE Community-Based Environmental Education 

CIFOR Center for International Forestry Research 

CIRAD Centre de coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique 

pour le Développement 

dbh diameter at breast height 

DPC District Peoples Committee 

ETHZ Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich (Federal Institute of 

Technology in Zürich) 

ETSP Extension and Training Support Project 

FIPI Forestry Inventory and Planning Institute 

FPD Forest Protection Department 

GoV Government of Vietnam 

HUAF Hue University of Agriculture and Forestry 

IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural 

Resources 

Land type component of landscape that is covered by natural coverage or used 

for human activities 

Land use component of landscape that is used for human activities 

Landscape holistic and spatially explicit concept that is much more than the 

sum of its components e.g. terrain, soil, land type and use 

Lowlands village area on the lower reaches of O Lau river 

vii

viii | Acronyms and terms 

LUVI Local User Value Index 

MLA Multidisciplinary Landscape Assessment 

NTFP Non-Timber Forest Product 

PDM Pebble Distribution Method 

PDNR Phong Dien Nature Reserve 

PPC Province Peoples Committee 

SDC Swiss Development Cooperation 

SFE State Forest Enterprises 

TBI-V Tropenbos International-Vietnam 

Uplands village area on the upper reaches of O Lau river 

USD US Dollar 

Village group of households included in a commune (subdistrict level) but 

not recognised as a legal entity in Vietnam 

VND Vietnamese Dong (USD 1 approximately equals to VND 15,700) 

WWF World Wildlife Fund

Acknowledgements 

We would like to express our profound gratitude to individuals and institutions for 

their assistance in the course of undertaking this research. We wish to thank the 

representatives of the Government of Vietnam, the Provincial Peoples Committee 

(PPC) of Thua Thien Hue province, Peoples Committee of Phong Dien district 

and Phong My commune for their interest in our work. 

Our appreciations are addressed to Tran Huu Nghi, Jinke van Dam, Tu 

Anh, Nguyen Thi Quynh Thu, from Tropenbos International Vietnam, for their 

cooperation and for their assistance in organising our surveys. 

We were lucky to collaborate with all the MLA participants: Le Hien (Hue 

University of Agriculture and Forestry), Ha Thi Mung (Tay Nguyen University), 

Vu Van Can, Nguyen Van Luc (FIPI), Nguyen Quy Hanh and Tran Thi Anh 

Anh (Department of Foreign Affairs of Thua Thien Hue province), and Ho Thi 

Bich Hanh (Hue College of Economics) for their hard work and interest for the 

project. 

We would like to thank Patrick Rossier (ETSP-Helvetas), Eero Helenius 

(Thua Thien Hue Rural Development Programme), and Chris Dickinson (Green 

Corridor Project-WWF), for their useful suggestions. 

We wish to thank Ueli Mauderli (SDC), Jean Pierre Sorg (ETHZ), for their 

useful comments and suggestions during their survey in Khe Tran, Jean-Laurent 

Pfund and Allison Ford (CIFOR) for their valuable comments during the redaction 

of the report, Michel Arbonnier (CIRAD) for the revision of the plant list, Henning 

Pape-Santos, our copy-editor, and Wil de Jong, the coordinator of the project for 

his support. 

Last but not the least, we would like to thank the villagers from Khe Tran, Son 

Qua and Thanh Tan for their cooperation during our different surveys, for their 

patience and for all the information they provided to us. 

ix

. Research context and objectives 

Vietnam has been reforming its forest management in favour of household and 

local organization (Barney 2005). The government increasingly gives local people 

the right to manage the forests. Unfortunately, in this changing environment, 

recognition of local people’s rights is still limited and local knowledge and 

perspectives are rarely taken into account by the state institutions implementing 

land titling and decentralization. The challenge is to better inform each stakeholder 

on the perspectives of people living in and near the forest on the natural resources 

and landscapes. Furthermore, clarification of the local capacity to manage forests 

is necessary for better informed decision making. 

Stakeholder and biodiversity at the local level is a three-year collaboration 

between the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) and the Swiss 

Development Cooperation (SDC). Tropenbos International-Vietnam (TBI-V) 

has been a very helpful collaborator for coordinating the project activities. The 

project goal is to contribute to the enhancement of the livelihoods of local forest 

dependent communities and sustainable forest management. The project aims to 

strengthen local capacity to plan and implement locally relevant forest landscape 

management as a mechanism to achieve those goals. It focuses on situations where 

decentralization has given local government more authority and responsibility for 

forests. The project fosters better engagement by local decision-makers that takes 

into consideration the needs and preferences of local people, especially the poor 

communities. 

Multidisciplinary landscape assessment, or MLA, is a set of methods developed 

by CIFOR scientists to determine ‘what is important to local communities, in 

terms of landscape, environmental services, and resources’. The approach is 

rooted in social (anthropology, ethnobotany and socio-economics) as well as 

natural sciences (botany, ecology, geography and pedology); was tested and used 

in different countries (Bolivia, Cameroon, Gabon, Indonesia, Mozambique and 

Philippines). The methods are fully detailed in four languages: English, French, 

Indonesia and Spanish (Sheil et al. 2003; http://www.cifor.cgiar.org/mla/).

| Research context and objectives 

MLA helps the project by providing information on the way local people 

articulate and document their knowledge of land and natural resources uses. Local 

knowledge is considered crucial information for the management of forest. 

Finally, in this report we aim to provide information on the way the local 

community in Khe Tran (Phong My commune, Phong Dien district, Thua Thien 

Hue province) perceives and manages its environment, and we discuss the options 

it has to participate in future nature reserve management.

. Methods 

The multidisciplinary approach of MLA gathers information on land use in village 

and field, and studies local perceptions on forest landscapes and resources as well 

as local priorities in terms of land management and which land types, resources 

and activities are important to local people. The MLA team, working in both 

village and field, was composed by scientists from different disciplines (Table 1). 

Table 1. Composition of MLA research team in Khe Tran village 

Team member Responsibility/research aspect Contact 

Manuel Boissière Team coordinator/ethnobotany m.boissiere@cgiar.org 

Ha Thi Mung Socio-economy mungbmt@yahoo.com 

Imam Basuki Socio-economy i.basuki@cgiar.org 

Le Hien Socio-economy Hienle2001@yahoo.com 

Meilinda Wan Socio-economy m.wan@cgiar.org 

Douglas Sheil Ecology d.sheil@cgiar.org 

Piia Koponen Ecology p.koponen@cgiar.org 

Nguyen Van Luc Botany vanluc_qh@yahoo.com.vn 

Vu Van Can Botany Tel. 04-861-6946 

Ho Thi Bich Hanh Translator hanhdhkt@gmail.com 

Nguyen Quy Hanh Translator Quyhanh2000@yahoo.com 

Tran Thu Anh Anh Translator hianhanh@yahoo.com 

Village activities 

Consisting of one or two researchers assisted by a translator, the village team was 

responsible for all socio-economic data collection. The team used questionnaire 

and data sheets to interview most households and key informants and to record

| Methods 

the results of community meetings and focus group discussions. Information was 

gathered from each household head on socio-economic aspects (demography, 

sources of income and livelihoods) and some other cultural aspects (history of 

the village, social organization, stories and myths, religion). The questionnaire 

and data sheets also provided basic information on local views by gender, threats 

against biodiversity and forests, perspectives on natural resource management and 

conservation, and land tenure. 

Participatory mapping exercises began during the very first days of the survey 

with two women and men groups of villagers using two basic maps, assisted by 

two research members to explain the objectives of the exercise. They facilitated 

the process through discussion with villagers about which resources and land 

types to add to the basic maps. These maps were then put together to build a single 

map representing the perception of the overall community. During all our onsite 

activities, the map was available to any villager for adding features and making 

corrections. In the case of Khe Tran, we worked a second time with a group of key 

informants to increase the precision of the map, and two young villagers drew the 

map again with their own symbols. 

Village activities involved: 

(a) community meetings to introduce the team and its activities to the village 

members, to cover basic information on land and forest types available, 

location of each type (through participatory resources mapping) and categories 

of use that people identify for each of these landscapes and resources; 

(b) personal and small groups interviews to learn about village and land use 

history, resource management, level of education, main sources of income, 

livelihoods and land utilization system; 

(c) focus group discussion on natural resource location, land type identification 

by category of uses, people’s perception of forests, sources of products 

for household consumption and important species for different groups of 

informants using the scoring exercise known as ‘pebble distribution method’, 

or PDM. PDM was used to quantify the relative importance of land types, 

forest products and species to local people by distributing 100 pebbles or 

beans among illustrated cards representing land types, use categories or 

species (Figure 1). In the following tables and figures with information from 

PDM, the 100% value refers to the total number of pebbles. The pebbles were 

distributed by the informants among the cards according to their importance. 

Field activities 

The field team consisted of four researchers assisted by one translator, two local 

informants and a field assistant. This team was responsible for botany, ethnobotany 

and site history data collection. It gathered information through direct 

observations, measurements and interviews in each sample plot using structured 

datasheets.

Figure 1. Scoring exercise (PDM) with Khe Tran men group 

Biodiversity and Local Perceptions | 

Activities in the field were decided on and set up in accordance with 

information collected in the village. The field team collected data from sample 

plots (Figure 2). The team chose plot locations after the different land types had 

been identified by the villagers. Sampling of land types took into account the main 

categories of the land types and sites where the most important resources could 

be found. Village informants accompanying the field team provided details on 

history and land use of each site, as well as the uses and names of the main forest 

products that were traditionally collected there. Although the sampling effort was 

distributed across most of the land types, forest habitats were given emphasis 

since they cover the largest area and generally house more species per sample 

than other land types. Most of the land types were sampled with one (rice field, 

primary forest) or two plots, in total 11 plots were surveyed with 110 subplots. 

For each plot a general site description with tree and non-tree data and detailed 

ethno-ecological information was composed and plot position was recorded with 

GPS. Plots consisted of 40 m transects subdivided into 10 consecutive 5 m wide 

subunits, where the presence of all herbs, climbers with any part over 1.5 m long 

and other smaller plants was recorded. Trees with a diameter at breast height (dbh) 

of 10 cm or more were censused and their height and diameter measured using the 

same base-transect but variable area subunits (Sheil et al. 2003). 

Collaboration between village team and field team was crucial to the collection of 

relevant information, but collaboration with villagers was also important to link 

the data collected by direct measurements with those coming from discussions,

| Methods 

Figure 2. Working on sample plot 

interviews and questionnaires. Preparation of the final reference list of plants with 

their corresponding local-language names took considerable time because of the 

mixture of Vietnamese language and Pahy language used by the local people. 

Some specimens identified to one species had several local names (e.g. Ageratum 

conyzoides) and other specimens with one local name belonged to different species 

(e.g. Fibraurea tinctoria and Bowringia sp.). A. conyzoides was given two local 

names (Cá hỡi and Sắc par abon) by different informants at different sites along 

with different uses. (Being bad for soil, Cá hỡi has few uses, while Sắc par abon 

was mentioned as potential fertilizer for sweet potato, although another informant 

said that it is actually not used by villagers). Catimbium brevigulatum, which was 

recorded in seven plots, had four different local names (A kai, A xây cỡ, Betre, 

Papan). Although informants were reliable and persistent in their ways of naming 

species, both gender and different experiences caused variation and the mixture of 

different languages (mainly Pahy and Vietnamese) was sometimes confusing for 

the researchers. The ethno-botanical survey was conducted simultaneously in the 

field, where we had in total 12 informants, normally two or more at the same time 

with both genders represented. This was important to ensure the broad sampling 

of knowledge about uses and sites. As an example, genus Bowringia, which was 

present in four plots in two land types (secondary forest and primary forest), had 

no use according to five informants, whereas two informants said it was used as 

firewood and its roots could be sold.


From each plot plant specimens for further herbarium identification were 

collected. The entire specimen collection has been left with botanist Vu Van Can in 

Hanoi. All specimens were conserved in alcohol before drying and identification. 

Some specimens were identified in the field, others later in Hanoi. Genus and 

species names follow the nomenclature used in Iconographia Cormophytorum 

Sinicorum (Chinese Academy of Science, Institute of Plant Research 1972– 

1976), Cây cỏ Việt Nam (Pham Hoang Ho 1993), Vietnam Forest Trees (Forest 

Inventory and Planning Institute 1996), Yunnan Kexue Chubanshe (Yunnan Shumu 

Tuzhi 1990) and the International Plant Names Index database (http://www.ipni. 

org/); and family names in The plant-book: a portable dictionary of the vascular 

plants (Mabberley 1997) and the International Plant Names Index database 

except Leguminosae sensu lato, which follows the subfamily categorization of 

Mimosaceae, Fabaceae sensu stricto and Caesalpiniaceae. 

The study in Khe Tran covered two periods, from 15 May to 9 June 2005 and 

from 2 to 15 October 2005. The first period was reserved mainly for data collection 

on the importance of local land types, while during the second period we focused 

more on quality control and biodiversity and conservation aspects according to 

local people. During both periods, commune officers joined the research team to 

make sure that we were safe. Even if their presence was not directly useful to our 

research, it was an opportunity for researchers to socialize with local authorities 

and discuss local perspectives on biodiversity and land types.

. Achievements 

During the project, our objectives were to 

(a) test and adapt the MLA method as an appropriate mechanism for 

integrating local perceptions and views in decision making and planning. 

The method was successfully tested in the rural context of Khe Tran, and even 

if the MLA was originally designed for assessments of local perceptions and 

priorities of forest dependant societies in a tropical context, we have shown 

here that the method can be adapted to situations where local communities 

rely less on the forest products than they used to; 

(b) provide baseline data that can be used for the biodiversity conservation 

of the planned Phong Dien Nature Reserve. We have a considerable data 

base from our different surveys in Khe Tran, with an amount of important 

information on local priorities and perceptions, on the richness of the vegetation 

in the village’s vicinity, on the uses of forest and non-forest products by the 

local people as well as on the economic, social and demographic data of the 

village. Seven hundred and fifty-four specimens of plants were recorded, 

consisting of 439 species from 108 families, for which we registered 824 

uses. All these data, including socio-economic data will be valuable for the 

successful management of the planned nature reserve, providing information 

on the biodiversity in the buffer and core zones, and on the different uses and 

valuation of species and of natural resources by the local people; 

(c) provide an overview of the importance of landscape and local species 

to the people of Khe Tran and collect information on their livelihoods 

and perspectives on Phong Dien Nature Reserve. Through community 

meetings, participatory mapping and scoring exercises, the landscape of the 

research area has been studied. Findings reflect the local point of view and


relative importance of each category of use. Direct field observations using 

systematic sampling supported the recorded local views of the importance of 

different species, land types and spatial design of the landscape; 

(d) discuss the opportunities and constraints faced by conservation 

institutions in the future nature reserve regarding land allocation and 

forest rehabilitation schemes. Dialogue with local informants occurred 

during the survey, in focus group discussion, interviews and more informal 

discussions, to understand the local priorities and perspectives facing the 

future nature reserve planning. A workshop with local people was held at the 

end of the survey to discuss the implications of conservation according to 

the local point of view, the options for local people in the frame of the future 

nature reserve, the role they would like to play and the threats to biodiversity 

they identified; and 

(e) facilitate greater involvement of local people and other stakeholders in 

decision making and planning at the local level. Based on survey results, 

workshops will be held at the provincial, communal and village levels to share 

our information and experience with all interested partners, stakeholders and 

decision makers, and discussions will be held to look for options to involve 

local communities in reserve management. Before these workshops another 

part of the project, called Future Scenario, was implemented as a follow-up 

of our activity in Khe Tran (Evans 2006). Future Scenario helped the local 

community in Khe Tran to build strategies for their future based on local 

knowledge and preliminary MLA results. A presentation of the local people’s 

future scenario was made to the local authorities (commune officers). 

Before we analyse the survey results, it is necessary to better understand the 

context of conservation in the Phong Dien area and who the villagers of Khe Tran 

are.

4.1. Previous conservation activities 

Government of Vietnam (GoV) policies have affected the forest-related activities 

of Khe Tran village. Prior to 1992, the upland forest, one of the last remaining 

patches of lowland evergreen forest including and adjacent to Khe Tran, was 

considered a ‘productive forest’ and managed by logging companies under the 

Department of Forestry at the province level. Then in 1992 this site, ‘dominated by 

a ridge of low mountains, which extends south-east from the Annamite mountains 

and forms the border between Quang Tri and Thua Thien Hue provinces’, was 

recognised for its ‘important role in protecting downstream water supplies and 

reducing flooding in the lowlands of Thua Thien Hue province’ and designated as 

a ‘watershed protection forest’, a status it still has (Le Trong Trai et al. 2001). 

In 1998, international bird conservation groups focused attention on the site 

after rediscovery of Edward’s Pheasant (Lophura edwardsi) in these hills, a fowl 

thought extinct. Today the site is part of a government forest strategy to create a 

system of 2 million ha of special use forest (national parks, nature reserves and 

historical sites) throughout the country and it is listed as one of the sites destined 

to become a nature reserve (41,548 ha) in 2010 (Barney 2005). 

Local forests around Khe Tran are one of the key biodiversity areas of the 

province, since many rare and endangered species of plants and animals can be 

found there. Le Trong Trai et al. (2001) report that significant numbers of endemic 

and nonendemic plants, mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians and butterflies are 

found in Phong Dien forests including Khe Tran. Endangered tiger, Panthera 

tigris, was confirmed to be present in this area. Muoc, who belongs to the Pahy 

ethnic group from Khe Tran, reported that in March 1998 he observed a tiger of 

approximately 100 kg at 200 meters from his village. He also reported that in May 

1998 a tiger preyed on one of his buffalo in the Moi valley (16°27’N 107°15’E). 

He further noticed that, judging by the footprints, two adults and one cub were 

present. Villagers also reported during our survey the regular presence of some 

of the globally threatened green peafowl (Pavo muticus), although these reports 

0 

. Conservation context in Khe Tran


remain unconfirmed. Some of these key biodiversity species are closely related to 

the livelihood of the local people. Our study analyses this kind of knowledge. 

First among the threats to forest biodiversity identified by BirdLife 

International and the Forest Inventory and Planning Institute (FIPI) is hunting, 

because of the value and rarity of the game, followed by firewood and other nontimber 

forest product (NTFP) collection, timber cutting, forest fires (including 

human-made as part of scrap metal collection) and clearance of forest land for 

agriculture (Le Trong Trai et al. 2001). But the threats are usually specific to each 

site, and detailed information is needed for each location, as we did in Khe Tran. 

In June and July 2001, the nature reserve project team including the project 

leader and two local people, in collaboration with the Phong Dien Forest Protection 

Department (FPD), conducted hunting surveys in Khe Tran and other parts of the 

future Phong Dien Nature Reserve (PDNR). International Nature Conservation 

made this investigation in the frame of a project named ‘Understanding the 

impacts of Hunting on Edwards’s Pheasant Lophura edwardsi at PDNR, Vietnam: 

Towards a Strategy for Managing Hunting Activities’. Interviews were conducted 

with villagers, village leader, hunters/trappers (hereinafter called hunters) and 

wildlife traders. Villagers also helped to cross-check information obtained in the 

field. During the initial meetings with hunters in the future core zone, the team 

was accompanied by a local guide. The guide helped to introduce the survey 

and emphasized its scientific nature. This helped the socialization of the team’s 

activities and to gain local support and trust (see the report in http://www.rufford. 

org/rsg/Projects/reports/Tran_Quang_Ngoc_Aug_2001.doc). 

The Protection Area and Development review, in collaboration with the World 

Wildlife Fund (WWF), BirdLife International and FPD undertook another field 

study in Khe Tran and other specific sites of Thua Thien Hue province in late 2001 

and early 2002. The objective was to examine the actual and potential economic 

contribution of the protected areas to different economic sectors in the province 

and to define important policy and planning issues related to maintaining and 

enhancing the development benefits from the protected areas. This information 

helped policy-makers and planners to understand how their actions could 

influence protected area management, local livelihoods and associated economic 

development in the areas. A number of case studies also investigated specific 

connections between protected areas and economic sectors (see http://www. 

mekong-protected-areas.org/vietnam/docs/vietnam-field.pdf). 

A project on Community Participation for Conservation Success developed by 

WWF, Xuan Mai Forestry University and FPD used Khe Tran as one of the training 

sites in buffer zones. It was designed to increase the effectiveness of conservation 

programs in Vietnam by promoting community participation through communitybased 

environmental education (CBEE). The project, started in 2003, aimed to 

increase the immediate and long-term capacity of government to incorporate 

CBEE training into mainstream training institutions. It also contributed directly to 

conservation actions in two priority sites in the Central Annamite, by integrating 

CBEE activities into the implementation of protected area conservation projects 

(Matarasso and Do Thi Thanh Huyen 2005).

| Conservation context in Khe Tran 

4.2. Government programs that affected Khe Tran village 

Swidden cultivation was a major activity for local livelihoods until 1992–1993, 

when most of the households were resettled as part of the government’s fixed 

cultivation program. Called ‘327 Program’ (1992–1997), it was the first effort 

of the GoV to develop industrial plantations and to decentralize control over and 

reallocate benefit-sharing of forest resources in Vietnam (Barney 2005), in line 

with the ‘Doi Moi’ economic reform (which, with six major economic changes, 

helped Vietnam come out of the economic crisis in 1986). Since then most of the 

Khe Tran people have concentrated more on their new agriculture and plantation 

land and decreased their activity in the natural forests. In this community, there 

was little land suitable for wet rice cultivation, and villagers began to cultivate 

crops such as maize and peanuts, and to diversify crop production with rubber and 

Acacia plantations supported by the national 327 Program. 

In 2003, according to Artemiev (2003), new guidelines were formed on State 

Forest Enterprises (SFE) by various government institutions (see Prime Minister 

Decision 187/1999/QĐ-TTg from September 1999 and Political Bureau Resolution 

28-NQ/TW of 16 June 2003 on the arrangement, renovation and development of 

State Farm and Forest Enterprises), which reformed its status to 

1. business SFE (forestry related business), which earns profits as its main 

performance objective and receives no subsidies to cover its operating cost; 

2. Protection Forest Management Board (forest protection activities), which 

combines earned profits and subsidies only for cost recovery; 

3. other business form (transportation, construction, wood processing, 

extension services, etc.), which is similar to business SFE in its objective; 

and 

4. public utility State Owned Enterprises. 

For more than one decade forestry activities have been implemented under a 

series of national forest development programs, most recently the ‘661 Program’ 

and its predecessor, the 327 Program. In Phong Dien district, the 661 Program 

is managed by Phong Dien Forest Enterprise and the management board of Bo 

River Watershed Protection Forest (Le Trong Trai et al. 2001). The main forestry 

activities focused on ‘afforesting’ bare lands and degraded areas, and establishing 

forest plantations. In Khe Tran village, households were paid VND 700,000 to 

VND 1 million per hectare for planting trees on land allocated for plantations 

(Acacia spp.). They were then paid a further VND 450,000 for the first year and 

VND 250,000 for each of the next two years under the terms of the forest protection 

contract (for comparison, the average annually per capita income in Khe Tran is 

VND 1,944,167). They were not allowed to cut the trees but, in places with older 

trees, were allowed to collect fallen branches for firewood. In A Luoi district, for 

example, households were paid VND 400 per tree for planting cinnamon trees, 

which equals VND 4 million/ha (high planting density of Cinnamomum cassia is 

10,000 trees/ha; Le Thanh Chien 1996).


Further, Le Trong Trai et al. (2001) described that payments from these national 

forestry programs have provided benefits to villagers in the short term, and Acacia 

spp. and pine plantations established under these programs are growing reasonably 

well. However, villagers brought attention to a number of problems they had to 

face in response to the needs of the national forestry programs. For example, 

villagers from Khe Tran and Ha Long pointed out that they faced considerable 

difficulties after their individual agreement (temporary Land Use Certificate) 

on plantation with the Forest Enterprise expired, and they were left without any 

further incentive. This kind of agreement does not provide any official recognition 

of the local people’s rights to the land, and they only have the right to use the 

land, temporarily, for the time of the agreement. These same villagers expressed 

a preference for natural forest management approaches that deliver sustainable 

and regular benefits and allow them to manage existing forest land (including 

regenerating forest and ‘bare’ lands) in a more sustainable manner. 

In Phong Dien district, the main species for plantation establishment are 

Acacia auriculiformis, Acacia mangium and Pinus kesiya, selected by project 

managers of the national forestry programs. The total area under forest plantation 

is substantial: according to Phong Dien Forest Enterprise, 30,366 ha of plantations 

have now been established in the three communes of Phong Dien district near the 

buffer zone, with support from the 327 and 661 programs. Most plantations have 

been established on flat lands and lower slopes, for accessibility and financial 

reasons. 

Rubber trees were also established under the 327 Program in Khe Tran. 

Unfortunately, according to Le Trong Trai et al. (2001), this plantation was 

established on the river banks, the village’s best lands available for agriculture 

crops. Because the trees already produce latex, villagers are left without any better 

option for other agriculture. In our survey we observed that beyond the rubber 

plantation and the plain area in the lower part of the village, land is composed of 

reddish, stony and hard soil surface. 

Le Trong Trai et al. (2001) argued that with an abundance of heavily degraded 

land available for rehabilitation, forest management and other land uses, there is 

considerable potential for cash earning activities in the buffer zone (for example 

through economic crop plantations). This activity would also reduce the overall 

pressure on the forest resources in the nature reserve. They also suggested that 

current arrangements for forest development and management in the bare lands 

are costly, create social tensions and seem to be unsustainable in the long run. 

On the other hand some of the Acacia plantations have been established in areas 

that are not optimal from environmental or economical perspectives. This practice 

may lead to increasing conflicts, especially as land pressure for crops continues 

to increase. Consideration might, therefore, be given to allocating a greater 

proportion of existing forest lands for community management.

| Conservation context in Khe Tran 

Summary 

Khe Tran village has been through different land use policies. Its forests were 

first considered productive forests, then watershed protection forests, and 

it is planned to be part of Phong Dien Nature Reserve in 2010, because of 

its important biodiversity and the presence of rare and endangered species. 

However, forests in the village’s surroundings have been deeply disturbed, 

because of war, logging activities and agricultural practices. Many projects 

linked to the preparation of the nature reserve have taken place in Khe Tran. 

Banning local people from many extractive activities in the planned reserve, 

the government has proposed to develop other activities to provide incomes 

to all households. In this context, rubber and Acacia plantation programs were 

implemented with government support. Even if these programs are supposed 

to provide cash income to the local people, some villagers worry about their 

future rights on the plantations and expect to get rights to manage the natural 

forests and the bare land in a sustainable way. Lack of land for agriculture may 

become a problem for food security and may leave many villagers with few 

alternatives to the exploitation of the natural forest.

. Site description 

5.1. Research site 

Khe Tran (Phong My commune, Phong Dien district, Thua Thien Hue province) is 

situated near the limits of the future Phong Dien Nature Reserve (PDNR) (Figure 

3). The village covers an area of about 200 ha and its average elevation is 160 m 

asl. Located to the north-west of Hue city, it can be reached by car in 1.5 hours 

from the provincial capital. During the rainy season flooding regularly isolates the 

village for several days. Khe Tran is bordered by the Phong Dien Nature Reserve 

on the west and south, and by Hoà Bac village on the east. 

The village is in the buffer zone of PDNR, an area of forest and converted 

lands. The reserve and the village area are dominated by low mountains, which 

extend south-east from the Annamite Mountains and form the border between 

Quang Tri and Thua Thien Hue provinces. The highest points within the nature 

reserve are Coc Ton Bhai (1,408 m), Ca Cut (1,405 m), Ko Va La Dut (1,409 m), 

Coc Muen (1,298 m) and Co Pung (1,615 m). 

Very little natural forest remains in the village vicinity, and plantations cover 

an increasing portion of the abundant bare lands. Village houses are scattered on 

both sides of a small trail, 1 km from the main road running between Phong My 

and Hoà Bac. One characteristic of the village is the isolation of the houses from 

each other, and it takes approximately 30 minutes to walk from one end to the 

other of this village of 20 households. Home gardens commonly consisting of 

pepper and jackfruit are surrounding most of the houses. 

This place was chosen for our project as the reference site for the MLA 

activities for several reasons: 

1. There is a strong presence of a minority group, the Pahy, in the village, 

mixed with some Kinh (the majority ethnic group in Vietnam) and Khome 

(an alternate name for one of the Khmer language groups in Vietnam; see 

Gordon 2005). There are 53 ethnic minorities in Vietnam (12.7% of the 

population in 1979 census) and some of them have problematic relationships 

with the main ethnic group, represented by the central government (Yukio

| Site description 

Sources: 

- Le Trong Trai et al. 2001 

- SRTM 90m Digital 

Elevation Data, The 

NASA Shuttle Radar 

Topographic Mission 

- World Administrative 

Boundaries, UNEP World 

Conservation Monitoring 

Centre, 1994 

Figure 3. Location of Khe Tran village in the buffer zone of Phong Dien Nature Reserve


2001). Generally the main conflicts occur in the Central Highlands (conflicts 

over land allocation to Kinh people, problems of traditional land management 

and of shifting cultivation), and ethnic minority groups often are not well 

perceived by the Kinh. Nevertheless, the GoV has recently made efforts to 

recognize the situation and vulnerability of minority groups and has developed 

a policy of integration of these groups into the more global economic life, 

through development and infrastructures programs (ADB 2005). We found it 

relevant to work with a local community belonging to a minority group that 

was already mixed with the main Kinh group. The fact that this community 

has been forbidden to practice its traditional shifting cultivation activities, 

and encouraged to follow the more sedentary mode of agriculture, was one 

more reason for us to study its perception and priorities for natural resource 

management, and how it manages its relationships with other village groups 

and government authorities at commune, district and provincial levels. 

2. A second important reason was the presence of a future nature reserve in the 

village’s vicinity. This reserve, decided on after the discovery of Edward’s 

Pheasant in the mountains of Phong Dien district, is planned for 2010 (BirdLife 

International et al. 2001) and has great potential for local communities’ 

involvement, although at this time people from Khe Tran and other villages at 

the limit of the reserve are forbidden to pursue any extractives activity inside 

the future core zone. Yet our survey could provide valuable information on the 

way local people envisage their possible participation in reserve management 

and for negotiations among all stakeholders. 

3. Last, most of the projects in Phong Dien district focus on mines and 

infrastructure, while few seek to gain experiences in land use planning 

(some projects have developed activities in community forestry, but mainly 

plantation forests). Results from our activities can be used for comparison 

with similar projects undertaken in other districts of Thua Thien Hue, or even 

other provinces of Vietnam. 

5.2. People from Khe Tran 

5.2.1. History of the people from Khe Tran 

Prior to 1967, Khe Tran village was situated around the upstream portion of the O 

Lau and My Chanh rivers (see Figure 4). The villagers practiced shifting cultivation 

in this hilly area. They were displaced by war to A Luoi district and even Laos PDR. 

In 1971, the GoV informed them that their homeland was safe and that they could 

re-occupy it. The village leader and a few other villagers returned to Tam Gianh, 

a place situated 2 km from the actual settlement, upstream on O Lau river, and the 

remaining refugees followed soon after. The displaced Khe Tran villagers settled 

there for five years, before moving on to Khe Cat village, where they remained 

until 1978. Finally, they re-occupied their former homeland, the upstream part of 

O Lau river. In 1992, encouraged by the government to settle closer to the main 

road, some villagers moved to Khe Tran lowlands (the lower part of O Lau river


Sources: 

- Department of 

Planning and 

Investment, TT-Hue 

province, 2005 

- Landsat Satellite 

Imagery Path 125 

Row 049, The Global 

Land Cover Facility, 

2001 

- SRTM 90m Digital 

Elevation Data, The 

NASA Shuttle Radar 

Topographic Mission 


Boundaries, UNEP 

World Conservation 

Monitoring Centre, 

1994 

Figure 4. Situation of Khe Tran village


in the lower part of the village), thus moving away from the lands traditionally 

occupied by the Pahy. Most of these villagers were of mixed ethnic origins. This 

is how the village became divided into two parts, as mentioned before, on the 

upper and lower reaches of the O Lau river; with support from the government the 

villagers living in the lowlands developed agricultural crops (including rice) and 

rubber plantations. 

5.2.2. Population and ethnicity 

One hundred twenty-four villagers, divided into 20 households, live in Khe Tran. 

People 15 to 60 years old represent 71% of the population, the remainder being 

composed of children (21%) and seniors (8%). Most villagers are farmers and 

only a few have other occupations such as police, teacher or tailor. 

As mentioned before, most of the villagers belong to the Pahy ethnic group, 

one of the many minority groups found in Vietnam; 23 people are Kinh, which is 

the majority ethnic group in Thua Thien Hue province and in Vietnam generally 

(Vu Hoai Minh and Warfvinge 2002). There is a single representative of the 

Khome ethnic group. Originally only Pahy people inhabited Khe Tran and the 

surrounding areas, but with time other ethnic groups have settled in the region 

through intermarriages. Pahy and Kinh people live together in both the upland and 

lowland village parts. 

Interactions between government and minorities like the Pahy are sometimes 

strained, especially in respect to land and natural resources rights of usage. Working 

with the Pahy of Khe Tran allowed us to study the situation of a minority group for 

which the process of integration and transformation is practically achieved, and 

our observations may be of value as a basis for comparison with other groups in 

Central Vietnam. 

5.2.3. Education 

Only eight villagers have not received an education. The villagers who have 

received the most years of education are young people (under 30 years old), most 

of whom have finished elementary school. A very few have gone to high school. 

The sole elementary school is located in a nearby village on the way to the 

commune (Phong My). The primary (middle) school is at the commune (5 km 

from the village), and secondary (high) schools are located in Phong Dien district. 

There was an elementary school in the village, but it closed for lack of students. 

Most of villagers hope for better education, infrastructure and institutions. 

They think that education can help them to increase their welfare by providing 

their children with useful knowledge and skills. 

5.2.4. Livelihood 

Villagers of Khe Tran work most of the time in their rice fields, in their home 

gardens (mostly growing pepper and jackfruit) and in rubber and Acacia plantations

0 | Site description 

as a result of the government resettlement program. Despite these new sources 

of income, people still occasionally gather forest products (e.g. honey, rattan) 

and war wreckage from the nature reserve. Some villagers still depend on nature 

reserve forests, but an increasing number of people depend on more permanent 

agriculture and plantation for their livelihoods and for cash earning. Villagers in 

the lowlands principally depend for their livelihoods on cultivation of seasonal 

crops, plantations, livestock and home gardens, whereas those in the uplands are 

relying on plantations and livestock (Figure 5). 

Figure 5. Livestock and Acacia plantations are important in Khe Tran 

Some important events have affected the livelihoods of the villagers. Until 

recently, the inhabitants of Phong Dien districts, including Khe Tran village, had 

to cope with problems of flooding, drought and forest fire. For example, floods 

caused widespread damage to crops and infrastructure in 1983 and 1999. During 

the 1999 floods, houses, crops and even lives were lost in Khe Tran. Widespread 

fires and drought were also reported in the district in 1985, and another drought 

occurred in 1990. We recorded these events which started from 1992, when some 

villagers started to settle in the lower part of the village (Table 2). 

5.2.5. Source of income 

There is a big difference between the two parts of the village in terms of household 

income (Table 3). According to the household survey, people from the lower part 

have a higher annual income (average of VND 13.7 million) than those from the

Table 2. Important events affecting the local livelihoods 


Year Disasters/important events Causes 

1992 Settlement in Khe Tran village Following government plans 

1993 Forest assigned to villagers Because previous forest management by 

the government failed to prevent forest 

destruction, forests were assigned to local 

people (reforestation program). This helped 

the local people to use the bare lands, which 

are still officially included in the forest 

category 

1999 Flood Natural disaster which damaged/destroyed 

some houses 

2003 Access to electricity Government program 

2004 Access to water for irrigation 

(self-running water system) 

Government program for poverty alleviation 

upper area (VND 9.6 million). The average household contains six members, with 

an income of VND 1.6 million to VND 2.3 million per capita. These values are 

much lower than the general per capita income in Vietnam of USD 553, or VND 

8.7 million in 2004 (http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/4130.htm). We found that 

some households’ income was below the poverty line of VND 1.04 million per 

capita (Vietnam General Statistical Office at http://www.unescap.org/Stat/meet/ 

povstat/pov7_vnm.pdf#search=’poverty%20line%20in%20vietnam’). 

Rubber (Figure 6) and Acacia plantation, livestock, home gardens and 

retirement subsidies are the main source of income for the lower area, while Acacia 

plantations and war subsidies (compensation) represent the main source for the 

upper part. People from the upper part have little cash income from livestock, 

rattan, home gardens and the collection of war wreckage. 

Some of the villagers were in the army during the war against the USA, and 

they still receive compensation from the government. Two villagers have opened 

small shops that sell drinks and foods. The owners lay in supplies at the market of 

Phong My commune. Some villagers work in Phong Dien as teachers and police 

officers, and one is a tailor in Ho Chi Minh City. 

Villagers living in the upper part are near the natural forest and use it when 

they experience food shortages. Food security is critical in the upper part as they 

do not cultivate rice and for cash income depend on Acacia plantation. Efforts to 

intensify livestock and home garden production may help to improve their income 

and to secure food availability. Maltsoglou and Rapsomanikis (2005) reported that 

livestock plays an important role in household income in rural areas of Vietnam. 

Acacia plantation is a potential source of substantial income for households 

nowadays and may become even more important in the future. Demand for local 

Acacia production is significant and absorbs all harvested products in Khe Tran. 

Demand from pulp and chipboard factories located near Thua Thien Hue and the 

GoV program to expand the plantation area (Barney 2005) bode well for forest 

plantation as a means to increase local income. Plantation may also provide fodder 

for livestock.


Table 3. Income range by source of products and settlement area 

Source of income 

Household income (VND millions) 

Lower area Upper area 

Monthly Annually Monthly Annually 

Rubber plantation 0.27–0.67 3.20–8.00 0.00 0.00 

Acacia plantation 0.58 7.00 0.10–0.25 1.20–3.00 

Livestock 0.25 3.00 0.10–0.29 1.20–3.50 

Home garden 0.58 7.00 0.25 3.00 

Pension 0.61 7.30 0.60 7.20 

Agriculture n.a. n.a. 0.10 1.20 

Rattan 0.05 0.60 n.a. n.a. 

War wreckage 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.20 

Store 0.00 0.00 0.05–0.58 0.60–7.00 

Others 0.17 2.00 0.03–0.15 0.30–1.80 

Average 1.14 13.70 0.80 9.63 

Range 0.35–2.08 4.2–25 0.33–1.67 4–20 

n.a. means respondents gave no information in regard to the small amount of income obtained from 

corresponding source 

Figure 6. A woman from the lower part of the village harvests rubber from her 

plantation


Another opportunity to increase and diversify income is to utilize the river for 

fish production. O Lau river, near the village, is approximately 20 m wide and in 

some parts has natural pools that offer potential for fish farming. Fisheries have 

been introduced and are popular in other areas of Phong Dien and A Luoi districts 

(Le Trong Trai et al. 2001) and may also prove useful in this village, even if there 

are great concerns in case of flood and about dioxin contamination of the river. 

5.2.6. Access and interaction with outsiders 

Access to the commune is good, with a 4 m–wide path linking the village to the 

main road of the commune. Villagers use bicycles and motorbikes to go to the 

commune. During the rainy season, however, sections of the path are sometimes 

cut by floods, especially in the lower parts. The village road becomes muddy and 

slippery. A bridge connects the lower and upper parts of the village, and a bigger 

bridge is under construction with assistance from the Thua Thien Hue Rural 

Development Project (Appraisal Mission 2004). 

Outsiders interacting with villagers are traders who buy agricultural products 

(peanut, pepper, rubber, cassava) or sell meat and clothes. Sometimes villagers 

meet outsiders who collect eaglewood, war wreckage or rattan, but there is little 

interaction. The coffee shops in the upper part of the village are the place where 

villagers frequently chat with outsiders. 

Villagers reported that many extension workers from government and 

nongovernment institutions have held training courses in the village since the 

program of land allocation and reforestation started in the early 1990s. They 

think that these extension efforts have been very useful and hope to have more 

workshops especially on technical and management aspects of livestock, plantation 

and agriculture. 

5.3. Land use and natural resources 

In the village’s vicinity the planned nature reserve and its buffer zone consist of 

patches of degraded forest, grassland, Acacia and rubber plantations, and areas 

reserved for agriculture. Two main rivers can be found near the village, the O Lau 

and My Chanh rivers. 

During our first observations and community meetings, we identified the 

main surrounding land types, e.g. alluvial plain with settlements, pepper gardens, 

rubber plantations, rice fields and other dry-land agriculture, hilly areas with 

secondary forests, Acacia plantations, settlements, pepper gardens and grasslands. 

We recorded about 20 different land types identified by the villagers around Khe 

Tran (Table 4). The land type identification reflects the official perception and 

classification of land tenure (e.g. land reserved for settlement, land for peanut 

farming), along with some features less relevant to our activities (e.g. waterfall, 

small road, bridge). 

We tried, therefore, to classify the local perception, rather than the official 

one, and the land types were regrouped into six main types, namely bare hills,


Table 4. Identified land types in Khe Tran 

Land types (Pahy) Description 

Cutect vườn Land for garden 

Cutect màu Land for agriculture 

Cutect a tong Land for peanut farming 

Cutect along Land for forest plantation 

Cutect vá Land for cemetery 

Cutect cho tro Land for rice farming 

Cutect tiêu Land for pepper farming 

Cutect cao su Land for rubber farming 

Cutect âm bút Land for natural forest 

Cutect cỏ Land for grass/bare land 

Đa pưh Pahy Pahy/O Lau river 

Đá so tù moi Tu moi tributary 

Cutect ta xu Land for houses 

Ân yên cooh 935 Mountain peak of 935 

A chuh Rana Rana waterfall 

Chooh Rana Sandy area of Rana riverside 

Mỏ zeeng Gold mine 

Along papứt Big tree forest 

Along cacet Small tree forest 

Câm foong fứt Bridge 

dry land for agriculture, forests, home garden, rice field and rivers. The forests 

classification was further divided into plantation, small tree and big tree forests 

(see Table 5). 

O Lau river is an important part of the landscape near the village. It traverses 

the entire village territory, close to the settlements. The second big river, My 

Chanh river in the northern part of Khe Tran, is rarely used by the local people. 

Forests within and around the village are categorized into three types as 

mentioned above. Plantation forests in our survey include Acacia and rubber. 

The oldest (8 years) rubber plantation of the village is situated near the main 

road, and covers about 10 ha, including some patches of new plantations. The 

Acacia plantation begins in the middle of the village and reaches to the upper part, 

covering about 160 ha. Small tree forest represents the dominant types of forest 

around the village, mainly inside the Phong Dien Nature Reserve, and consists 

of young Myrtaceae and Rubiaceae forests. Big tree forest (or primary forest) is 

distant from the village, situated at more than one day’s walk, inside the reserve 

area. 

Bare lands (Figure 7) were caused historically by war, fires, grazing and 

shifting cultivation (Le Trong Trai et al. 2001). This land type, dominated by 

shrubs and grasses, is the target of reforestation efforts by the government. Acacia 

plantations are developed on these bare hills. 

The rest of the village’s landscape is divided into settlements, home 

gardens (pepper and fruits), bare hills, rivers and roads. If land for plantation is 

geographically specialized (Acacia in the upper part and rubber in the lower part), 

home gardens can be found near the houses in both parts of the village.

Table 5. Regrouped land types in Khe Tran 


Land types (English/Pahy) Description 

Home garden/Cutect vườn Mostly pepper with jackfruits and pineapples; 

around houses 

Land for agriculture /Cutect màu Peanut and cassava; lower part of Khe Tran 

Rice field/Cutect cho tro Dry rice field 

Bare land/Cutect cỏ North of the village; shrub and grass on hills and 

riverbanks 

River/Đa pưh South and north of the village (O Lau and My 

Chanh rivers) 

Forest plantation/Cutect along Rubber and Acacia 

Small tree forest/Along ca cut Young regrowth around village 

Big tree forest/Along papứt West of the village (far from the village) 

Figure 7. Considerable areas of bare land are used in Khe Tran for new Acacia 

plantation 

Khe Tran landscape mainly reflects the efforts of the central government to 

manage the local community resettlement and to apply agricultural and forestry 

programs through land allocation schemes. This mosaic landscape dominates 

the village area near the settlements. They are situated on alluvial plains, which 

represent the best land. 

The GoV has pursued a land use policy that has greatly influenced the 

development of Khe Tran. With the objective of creating a natural reserve at Phong


Dien, the government has encouraged villagers to abandon traditional agriculture 

and other activities in the mountains for permanent agriculture in the rich lowland 

soils. The government is omnipresent in the activities of villagers through the 

Provincial People’s Council, which frequently intervenes at the local level. The 

people’s council of the Phong My commune is involved in all decision-making 

concerning daily village management, nominates the village chief and decides the 

attribution of government-financed development projects. 

Our informers said that they did no longer hunt in the forest because there is 

little game and hunting is banned by the government. This said, when shown a 

map, they can tell where to find the different wild animals, which shows that they 

have only recently given up hunting or that some clandestine hunting (mostly by 

snares as firearms are illegal) still occurs. 

An old cemetery is situated in the middle of an Acacia plantation, and the 

remains of abandoned villages can be found around the small tree forest in the 

village area. These land features represent important historical and cultural sites 

for the villagers. 

5.3.1. Distribution of resource and land types (participatory 

resource mapping) 

As mentioned previously (see Methods, Chapter 2), community meetings were 

used to map the main resources and land types identified by villagers. These 

participatory mappings are a preliminary condition to arrive at a common 

understanding of the local perceptions of the different land types and activities in 

the target area. 

During the participatory mapping exercise, we provided a basic map showing 

the main rivers and tributaries, roads and village location. Local representatives 

added the spatial distribution of many land types and resources, e.g. forests, 

Acacia and rubber plantation, agricultural land, settlements and home gardens, 

old village, specific locations for hunting and other specific resources such as war 

wreckage, rattan, bear, pheasants, etc. The final result of this map can be seen in 

Figure 8. 

Villagers showed good knowledge of the resources near their settlement, 

including resources from home gardens, agriculture land, plantation forests, 

small tree forests, bare hills and rivers. Most of the villagers seem to have limited 

knowledge of the resources situated farther from the village, e.g. in the big tree 

forest. 

Even if the map was not meant to be used for official or legal purposes, 

villagers considered it a good tool for communication with the outsiders on local 

land types and resources. The map was used during a workshop with villagers on 

biodiversity conservation issues in Khe Tran during the last days of our survey 

(see local perceptions in Chapter 6). The field team also used the map for the 

selection of relevant sites for measuring plots in the various land types identified 

by villagers and collecting information on local knowledge of forest products and 

sites history.


Figure 8. Biodiversity and resource distribution map of Khe Tran


The process of compiling the map showed us that, even if the landscape 

around Khe Tran is severely disturbed, mainly made up of secondary forests, 

plantations, grassland and bare lands, villagers recognize a large number of wild 

resources not far from the village, including some extremely rare animals (tigers, 

bear). According to informants, these animals were observed at some time during 

the last 5–6 years. 

Therefore, even if the knowledge of resources and land type locations is 

important, it is concentrated mainly in the village’s vicinity. We will return to this 

map during our discussion on traditional knowledge in the following chapter. 

Summary 

The village is characterized by the presence of a strong minority group, the 

Pahy, mixed with the majority group in Vietnam, the Kinh, and with the Khome. 

The population of Khe Tran moved during the war against the USA, some to 

A Luoi district, close to the Laotian border, and some into Laos. At the end 

of the war, they were authorized to resettle in their village, and in 1992 the 

government encouraged the villagers to settle near the main road and helped 

them to develop more sedentary cultivation of rice fields and industrial crops 

plantations of Acacia and rubber. 

Only few people among the 20 households have received no education. 

Most villagers spend a large amount of time in their gardens, rice fields and 

plantations. The village is divided in two areas, the upper part, where villagers 

have smaller incomes and depend on home gardens and Acacia plantations for 

their livelihoods; and the lower part, with a higher mean income, depending 

on more diversified crops cultivation, including Acacia and rubber plantations, 

home gardens and peanut, cassava and rice fields. The 20 households are 

scattered and it takes about 30 minutes to walk from one end of the village to 

the other. 

Villagers distinguish a large number of land types, some corresponding 

with the official nomenclature. Of the eight main land types, forests account 

for three. In addition to big tree forests and small tree forests, villagers include 

plantations among the forest landscape. This classification may relate to the 

official ‘forest status’ of the bare land used for plantation. Plantation forests are 

part of a large land allocation and forest rehabilitation plan promoted by the 

local government to provide more income from ‘stable’ and sedentary activities 

and to keep the villagers out of more forest-dependant activities (shifting 

cultivation, timber collection, NTFP collection), especially in the Phong Dien 

Nature Reserve. Nevertheless, participatory mapping of the natural resources 

of the village shows that knowledge of forest products, wildlife and other 

natural resources is still important among the villagers, even if this knowledge 

tends to be limited to the close vicinity of the village. We did not collect 

much information on areas situated farther from the village, in the core zone 

of the Nature Reserve. Villagers also have a strong sense of ownership when 

discussing land tenure in the village, repartition of plantation responsibilities 

and expectation in the future.

. Local perceptions of the different 

land types and resources 

Perceptions of natural resources differ between local people, such as the Pahy, and 

outsiders such as the government, traders, researchers or development agencies. 

Decision makers need information on local perspectives to plan and manage 

the natural resources in a more sustainable way. We present here the villagers’ 

perceptions of their surrounding natural (e.g. forest, river) and other (forest 

plantation, home garden, etc.) land types and the village’s biodiversity. 

We captured local perceptions of the surrounding landscape and biodiversity 

using scoring exercises (PDM), focus group discussions and interviews (as 

described in Methods, Chapter 2). Some of the results were qualitative concerning 

the description of the perceptions, others were quantitative to compare the 

perceptions of different groups of villagers, but always accompanied by 

explanations on the values given by informants. 

Villagers use numerous natural resources in their daily activities. These 

resources (plants and animals) can be found in the various landscape units identified 

by the local people. Natural resources are used for food, medicine, construction, 

basketry, firewood, cash earning, etc. The following results show how and why 

these resources are meaningful for local people in Khe Tran. 

6.1. Local land uses 

As discussed earlier, there are six main land types around Khe Tran (Table 5, page 

25). Bare land, river, big tree forest and small tree forest represent the natural land 

types, while garden, forest plantation, rice field and dry land for agriculture are 

the direct consequence of villagers’ activities, sometimes with support from the 

local government. During the community meetings, villagers named some areas 

allocated by the government for agriculture and plantations in a highly formal 

way, e.g. ‘allocated land for rubber plantation’, or, in Pahy, ‘cutect cao su, in 

contrast with more basic land type, e.g. ‘small tree forest’ (along papút).

0 | Local perceptions of the different land types and resources 

According to the villagers biodiversity is important for their livelihoods. 

Table 6 shows some important products that local people still gather exclusively 

from the natural forest. Hundreds of other products (plant and animal) are still 

collected during their daily activities in the surrounding landscape. In Section 6.6, 

we discuss in more detail the most important products from forest. 

More complete, although not exhaustive, lists are also available in Annexes 

1 and 2, which show the important knowledge of local people on biodiversity and 

the large range of uses they have for many forest products. During discussions, 

informants agreed to categorize the main uses of these products into 14 big 

categories (Table 7) adapted from the MLA method to the local context. 

Table 6. Important forest plants and their local uses 

Product names (Pahy or Vietnamese/scientific) Uses 

A ro/Licuala spinosa Conical hat 

Ấp lăng/— Roof 

Cây re/Calamus walkeri Furniture 

Chùn quét/— Broom 

Long huện/Tarrietia javanica Cattle cage 

Tu vien/Melocalamus compactiflorus Rope 

Tân ning/— Honey 

Ùi a dúm/— Firewood 

Table 7. Main categories of use of plant and animal resources 

Categories of use Description 

Basketry Rope made from leaves, rattan or bark for weaving or tying 

Firewood Wood for fire 

Fodder Used for feeding cattle, pigs 

Food Primary and secondary foods, famine food 

Heavy construction Material for permanent construction (houses and bridges) 

Hunting function Poisons, bait, gums, catapult made of plant/animal parts 

used to catch animal 

Hunting place Indirect use of plant as hunting location, usually fruits 

appreciated by game 

Light construction Poles and cuttings for cattle cage, fences, furniture 

Marketable items Plant/animal parts and processed products that are sold for 

cash 

Medicine Medicinal and health related 

Ornamental/traditional/ritual Plant/animal parts used in ceremony, dress, decoration, 

house ornaments 

Recreation Area or forest products used for entertainment needs 

The future Plant/animal invested and will be important in the future 

Tools Plant/animal parts used for tools in agriculture, housing; 

includes rice pounders, ploughs, tool handles, etc.

Importance value (%) 


6.2. Land type importance 

The results from the scoring exercise with men and women groups show that 

villagers consider forest the most important land type (40% and 35%; Figure 9). 

Both natural and plantation forests are important to villagers because they provide 

many products for the local livelihoods such as latex, timber, rattan, firewood, 

honey, medicinal plants, bamboo, food, etc. Natural forests also have the role of 

protection of the village against floods and erosion. Villagers consider gardens the 

second most important land type, especially for those who live on the upper part 

of the village, because gardens provide fodder, bamboo for fences for cattle and 

fruits for cash income. They consider rice fields the least important because they 

belong to only those who live in the lower part of the village and because rice is a 

recently cultivated crop here that can be substituted by cassava or peanut. People 

who do not have rice fields buy rice from the local market at Phong My commune, 

not far from the village. 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

Forest 

Garden 

River 

Dry land for agriculture 

Land types 

Figure 9. Land type by importance (all groups) 

Bare hill 

Rice field 

The high importance villagers place on forest is explained by the products sold 

and by the contribution to the local livelihoods that forest can provide. Forest will 

support the villagers’ livelihoods in the future too (Table 8, page 33). Rice fields 

provide only few uses such as food for humans and cattle. Cattle are often let free 

in the rice fields once the harvest is completed. 

Men 

Women


| Local perceptions of the different land types and resources 

Gardens and forests are important for the future because they can provide 

consequent income. Bare land comes in third position for its use in the future 

because it will provide lands for new forest plantations. Forest dominates all but 

four of the use categories (Table 8). Bare lands are the most important land types 

for fodder, and gardens for food. Gardens and the riverside are equally important 

as hunting places, and they represent the places where villagers spend a large 

amount of their time. The main game hunted is small birds in the vicinity of the 

village. River is important for recreation because villagers regularly go to swim 

and wash in the nearby river, and children go there to play. 

6.3. Forest importance 

Villagers divide forest land type into three categories, namely big tree forest 

(primary forest), small tree forest (young, secondary regrowth) and plantation 

forest. Men and women have different points of view concerning the importance 

of these forest types. Men consider plantation the most important forest type (49%; 

Figure 10), because they reckon that in the future plantations will provide them 

with more regular cash income. Big tree forest comes in second place (43%), 

although villagers said they gather more products there than in the other forest 

types. One reason for the lower importance given is the difficult accessibility of 

these forests. 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

Plantation forest Big tree forest Small tree forest 

Forest types 

Figure 10. Importance of forest types (all groups) 

Men 

Women 

Women consider the big tree forest the most important type (50%). They 

explain that big tree forest provides many valuable products to them. Uses of these 

products includes food, medicine, heavy construction, tools, basketry, ornaments 

and marketable items (Table 9). Women also often go to the forest to collect leaves 

to make conical hats.

Table 8. Local importance of land types by use category (all groups) 

The future 

Recreation 

Ornament 

Medicines 

Marketable items 

Light 

construction 

Hunting place 

Hunting function 

Heavy 

construction 

Fodder 

Firewood 

Basketry 

Land type Overall 

Bare land 9.00 0.00 28.25 40.25 5.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 19.25 3.25 12.75 3.00 0.00 14.75 6.75 

Dry land for agriculture 14.00 0.00 0.00 25.00 21.25 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.00 16.00 3.75 0.00 0.00 9.00 3.75 

Forest 37.50 70.00 50.25 7.00 19.50 68.75 50.67 12.67 54.50 48.75 52.75 74.50 8.50 37.00 67.25 

Garden 23.00 28.75 18.50 11.50 24.00 31.25 49.33 39.33 22.50 26.25 14.75 15.00 30.00 22.75 21.00 

Rice field 5.25 0.00 0.00 1.50 8.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.50 0.00 

River 11.25 1.25 8.00 14.75 22.00 0.00 0.00 39.00 3.75 5.75 16.00 7.50 61.50 12.00 1.25 

Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 

Tools 

Food 

Biodiversity and Local Perceptions | 33 

Table 9. Forest importance by use categories (all groups) 

The future 

Recreation 

Ornament 

Medicines 

Marketable 

items 

Light 

construction 

Hunting place 

Hunting 

function 

Heavy 

construction 

Fodder 

Firewood 

Basketry 

Overall 

Forest type 

Big tree forest 46.25 63.25 11.25 23.00 64.50 59.50 46.50 20.00 38.25 45.50 53.50 79.00 0.00 41.25 52.00 

Small trees forest 19.25 21.75 40.00 62.50 20.25 13.50 33.50 45.00 41.00 27.00 26.25 21.00 0.00 13.50 36.50 

Plantation forest 34.50 15.00 48.75 14.50 15.25 27.00 20.00 35.00 20.75 27.50 20.25 0.00 100.00 45.25 11.50 

Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 

Tools 

Food


Men do not consider the small tree forests important. They are mostly used 

for fodder extraction and for hunting. We will see in the section on ethno-botanical 

knowledge, Chapter 8, that a large number of herbaceous plants are recognized 

for their use as fodder. Usually, villagers find food for their cattle in the grasslands 

near the village, rather than in the forest, but this result shows that their knowledge 

is focused on this kind of activity and that their perception has followed their 

progressive settling process. In these forest areas, they also gather small materials 

for tools and cattle fences. On the contrary, women consider this forest type the 

second most important. According to them, because small tree forests are closer 

to the village, it is easier for them to collect grass for cattle, tool materials and 

firewood. The results show that resource accessibility and the differing activities 

by gender play an important role in the difference of perception by the villagers. 

The results of group discussions show that plantation forests have not brought 

optimal benefits yet, as plantations are still recent, but in the near future they will 

become the most profitable source of income. This point seems to relate to the 

fact that plantations are the key element of the government policy for the settling 

process. Government officials emphasize that plantations bring more income and 

a better livelihood to local people than shifting cultivation, and for that reason 

villagers should stay close to the main road and reduce their activities in the forest. 

But local perception shows a different perspective on the importance of natural 

and planted forests to local livelihoods. 

In the context of nature reserve management, the Khe Tran community needs 

alternative sources of income to replace the loss of products previously provided 

by the forest (marketable items, construction materials, tools, etc.). There should 

be an agreement on the possibility of access to the forest during hard times 

(drought or flood). Perception of forests should be considered in its dynamic 

aspects, however, and the importance of forests to local people may change with 

time. 

6.4. Forest importance in the past, present and future 

The notion of forest importance across different time scales was difficult to explain 

during group discussions. Groups had to compare the importance of forest (both 

natural and plantation) among three time periods (present, 30 years ago and the 

next 20 years) based on the different categories of uses, but to avoid confusion the 

category ‘for the future’ was not used. 

The result shows that forest of 30 years ago was more important for villagers 

than that of today (Figure 11). According to local informants, in the past they 

were more dependent on forest products for food, heavy construction, firewood, 

basketry, hunting and recreation. Today agriculture (home gardens and plantations) 

has replaced many previous activities in the forest. 

Villagers consider the forest of the future more important than the forest 

at present. All groups think that it will provide more fodder, more products for 

ornament and more marketable resources such as latex and timber (Table 10). 

Each household should have a bigger plantation that is a more important source of

Present 

23% 

Next 20 years 

34% 

Figure 11. Forest importance over time (all groups) 


30 years ago 

43% 

Table 10. Forest importance over time according to different use categories (all 

groups) 

Category of use 30 years ago Present Next 20 years Total 

Total importance 44.0 22.5 33.5 100.0 

Basketry 43.5 37.0 19.5 100.0 

Firewood 47.8 32.0 20.3 100.0 

Fodder 17.3 36.3 46.5 100.0 

Food 43.5 28.3 28.3 100.0 

Heavy construction 40.0 29.0 31.0 100.0 

Hunting function 75.0 19.3 5.7 100.0 

Hunting place 70.0 20.7 9.3 100.0 

Light construction 33.0 39.5 27.5 100.0 

Marketable items 22.0 31.5 46.5 100.0 

Medicine 32.5 33.0 34.5 100.0 

Ornamental/traditional/ritual 8.5 32.0 59.5 100.0 

Recreation 58.0 0.0 42.0 100.0 

Tools 36.5 37.8 25.8 100.0 

income. The forest of the future will also protect the water source and will prevent 

the village from floods and erosion. Moreover, forest will be a safety net in case 

of hard times. 

Looking at the results in more detail, we find that for most use categories the 

forest of the past was the most important, except for fodder, light construction, 

marketable items, medicine, ornamental and tools. The presence of a protected 

area, affording limited access to forest resources, partly explains why the forest 

of the present is the least important one. Another reason is the diversification of 

subsistence activities, which makes local people rely less on forest products than


they used to. The growing importance of marketable items in the future comes from 

the expectation of more Acacia and rubber plantations. Villagers also expect to 

have more cattle in the future and will rely more on forest resources for feeding it. 

Justification for the increasing importance of medicinal and ornamental functions 

of the forest in the future is key to a better understanding of the local perception of 

the village’s development. The future is supposed to bring wealth, education and 

time. Education will sharpen the local knowledge on medicinal plants and wealth 

will provide more time to look for ornamental plants in the forest. Villagers told 

about the possibility of developing an ornamental plants business and were aware 

of the good possibilities for cash earning, but they are not yet fully using them. 

These results also suggest that villagers’ dependency on and perception of 

natural forest importance have been affected by the application of GoV programs 

such as the Phong Dien Nature Reserve management and forest rehabilitation. 

Reserve management has stopped people from looking for forest products. The 

consequence is that natural forest has become less important to villagers. Plantation 

forest, being part of the rehabilitation program and a relatively new activity in Khe 

Tran, has an increasing importance and is replacing natural forests in that function. 

Villagers expect to be granted permanent land use certificates (the ‘red book’) for 

these planted areas, a way, according to them, to secure their rights. 

The source of products is also important to understand the local dependency 

on domestic or wild products. 

6.5. Importance according to source of products 

Villagers use a large number of plants and animals in their daily lives. To better 

understand the importance of the different products we categorize them into three 

sources: wild, cultivated/farmed and purchased. 

Villagers perceive domesticated products as the most important source 

for both plant and animal products (Figure 12). The villagers cultivate plants 

(pepper, peanut, cassava, rice, jackfruit, bamboo) as well as grow animals (cattle, 

chickens, pigs). They use these products mainly for domestic use and for cash 

earning. Although the villagers still depend on wild products, they focus more on 

maintaining their farming and plantation systems. Wild products from the natural 

forest (mostly plants) are still collected, but, as villagers are not allowed to hunt 

animals or cut trees in the natural forest of the conservation area, they usually 

collect wild animals from places close to the village but outside the nature reserve, 

e.g. gardens, bare lands and forest plantations. 

Both men and women groups agree that cultivated plants and farmed animals 

are the most important sources of products for consumption (Table 11). They 

explain that these are their most valuable and accessible sources for food and 

cash. The importance local people give to wild products may be influenced by the 

fact that free wild resources are limited and often inaccessible because of the ban 

on extractive activities in the future reserve.


50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 


Domesticated Wild Purchased 

Source of product 

Figure 12. Source of product importance (all groups) 

Table 11. Importance (%) of source of product by gender 

Gender 

Wild plants Wild animals 

forest 

non 

forest forest 

Cultivated/ 

farmed Purchased 

non 

forest plant animal plant animal 

Plant 

Animal 

All 

Total 

Women 8.00 7.00 4.00 6.50 25.00 19.00 17.00 13.50 100.00 

Men 13.00 6.50 6.50 5.50 26.00 18.00 13.50 11.00 100.00 

Mean 10.50 6.75 5.25 6.00 25.50 18.50 15.25 12.25 100.00 

6.6. Most important products from the forest 

Forest is the most important land type according to the local people partly 

because of the products it supplies. Here we show how the forest (both natural 

and plantation) provides people with products and which are the most important 

plants and animals. 

Figure 13 shows that forests are considered most important in providing for 

a better future (20%) and for food (11%), marketable items (11%), fodder (10%), 

heavy construction (10%) and tools (10%). These values were calculated from a 

general consideration of the uses of forest types, the first step during the scoring 

exercises, when groups of villagers estimate the overall importance of forest 

resources.


Fodder 

Figure 13. Importance of forest resources by use categories (all groups) 

A second activity was to assess the importance of the 10 main species for each 

category of use. Informants listed and scored the most important plant and animal 

species they gather from the forest. A list was made for each of the categories of 

use except hunting place, recreation and the future. Villagers decided not to include 

these latter categories because no specific plant or animal from the forest was used 

for them. The result shows that local people consider forest important for the 

future, but cannot name any specific plant or animal to support this assumption. 

This emphasizes the fact that specific knowledge on forest has decreased. Local 

people still recognize the various roles of forest in general, but have difficulty to 

provide information on more specific resources. 

The scores of the important species from the forest were analysed, and the 

top 10 most important plants and animals were identified using a tool called LUVI 

(Local User Value Index; Sheil et al. 2003), which represents the sum of all a 

species values. A summary of the results is shown in Table 12. 

The importance of plants seems correlated to their usefulness (number of use 

categories). Bamboo (Pheo), the most important plant in Khe Tran, is used for


Table 12. Most important forest plants and animals in Khe Tran (all groups) 

Plant Animal 

Pahy Latin/English LUVI Pahy/English LUVI 

Pheo Poaceae/bamboo 24.22 A binh/rat 7.81 

Ki re Calamus walkeri /rattan 20.49 Chon den/— 3.67 

Tràm Acacia auriculiformis/Acacia 19.21 A cuot/frog 3.55 

Pe Musaceae/banana 12.87 A at na/— 2.35 

A xop Wendlandia glabrata/tree 12.28 Khuou/bird 1.87 

A ro Licuala spinosa/Licuala palm 11.96 A ut/— 1.75 

Huen Tarrietia javanica/tree 11.06 Truoi/chicken 1.63 

Pa lar Cleistanthus aff. myrianthus/tree 10.41 Chim Cuong/peacock 1.22 

Tu vien Melocalamus compactiflorus/ 

scrambling bamboo 

9.82 Hon/— 1.21 

Lim Afzelia xylocarpa/Macka wood 9.03 Pi reo/— 1.15 

food (bamboo shoots), in construction and as fodder (Table 13). It can also be sold 

to the chopstick industry and provide villagers with cash income. This valuable 

plant is available in nearby forests, especially on the riverside, where people grow 

it near their settlement. 

Another important resource, rattan is used for making ropes and baskets, 

but it is also sold to the furniture industry. Villagers still regularly go into the 

forest to look for rattan, which is then transported to the village by river. The FPD 

tolerates this activity even near conservation areas, as it provides income to local 

people without disturbing the natural forest too much. Acacia is valued for its 

economic importance, and banana for food (and sometimes as commodity sold 

among villagers). 

Macka wood (Lim) was the tenth most important plant. The wood from this 

tree has two specific uses: heavy construction and tools. Many other plants, such 

as Pheo, Huen, A xop, and Tràm, have the same uses, but Lim is one of the best. 

It seems that the importance of plants, especially plants from natural forest, for 

heavy construction is decreasing because people are not allowed to cut trees in 

the nature reserve. Some villagers explained that they had planted forest trees in 

their yard to satisfy some of their log needs, as otherwise they would have to buy 

expensive planks and posts for the construction of their houses. 

No plant is used for the three categories of hunting place, recreation and the 

future, but several of the top 10 plants can share the same uses, such as for tools 

or marketable items. No plant has just one use, and Lim is the only one to have 

just two uses. 

A type of rat, A binh is considered the most important animal from the forest. 

It is important for food, as it is easy to catch. We were able to find only the Pahy 

names for most of the animals, as we could not observe them directly. Animals 

have only four different uses, according to the villagers: the main one is for food, 

then ornaments, medicine and cash earning (Table 14).

0 | Local perceptions of the different land types and resources 

Table 13. Most important forest plants by categories of use (all groups) 

Basketry 

Pahy 

name Scientific name 

Pheo Poaceae 

Ki re Calamus walkeri 

Tràm Acacia auriculiformis 

Pe Musaceae 

A xop Wendlandia glabrata 

A ro Licuala spinosa 

Huen Tarrietia javanica 

Pa lar Cleistanthus aff. myrianthus 

Tu vien Melocalamus compactiflorus 

Lim Afzelia xylocarpa 

Table 14. Most important forest animals by categories of use (all groups) 

Animal (Pahy) Basketry 

A binh 

Chon den 

A cuot 

A at na 

Khuou 

A ut 

Truoi 

Chim cuong 

Hon 

Pi reo 

Firewood 

Fodder 

Food 

Heavy construction 

Firewood 

Fodder 


Food 


People have valuable knowledge on local biodiversity of natural resources 

found near the village and those that can be linked to activities important for 

their livelihoods (e.g. knowledge on plants used as fodder is important in all the 

land types). The species recognised and assessed cover both rare and abundant 

Hunting place 

Light construction 


Hunting place 




Medicines 

Ornament 

Medicines 

Ornament 

Recreation 

Recreation 

The future 

The future 

Tools 

Tools


resources, as well as cheap and expensive products. For example, Macka wood 

(Lim) is a useful plant for tools and construction materials in Khe Tran but it is 

also listed in the World Conservation Union’s (IUCN) World List of Threatened 

Trees, and is more generally known as a valuable commercial timber (Table 15). 

Local knowledge can be used to better understand conservation priorities for 

plants and animals. We learned that local people can provide much information on 

species’ abundance, distribution and other biodiversity parameters. It would also 

be useful to involve local people more closely in the biodiversity management of 

the future nature reserve. Their familiarity with the area and their perception of the 

forest would be a valuable contribution to the conservation of the area. 

Table 15. Locally important plant species by use category and IUCN list of threatened 

trees 

Pahy 

name 

Scientific name Local uses IUCN Red List category 

Lim Afzelia xylocarpa Tools, construction material Endangered 

Sao Hopea odorata Marketable items Vulnerable 

Prao Parashorea stellata Construction material Critically endangered 

A ngo Pinus latteri Marketable items Near threatened/almost 

vulnerable 

6.7. Threats to local forests and biodiversity 

People in Khe Tran have a long history of living near forests and managing them 

for their livelihoods. They have accumulated experiences and knowledge on local 

forests and biodiversity conditions. It is important to understand and acknowledge 

this wisdom when planning future management activities appropriate for the 

reserve. 

When asked about threats to the local forest and biodiversity, informants gave 

various answers. The diversity of results indicates that the nature of recognized 

threats is highly related to the informant’s location (lower or upper part of the 

village) and to individual experience. 

Timber felling was the main threat identified by villagers (17 of 19 

respondents; Table 16). The GoV declared logging forbidden in 2000, following 

the establishment of an investment plan for Phong Dien Nature Reserve. Even 

if the reserve status is not yet official (it will be in 2010), the government is 

already taking action to protect the forests of the future conservation area. 

Villagers consider that logging may destroy the forest, and it is a sensitive issue 

because, while the villagers are banned from logging, they have no right to stop 

outsiders from collecting timber in the area. Villagers have no rights with respect 

to forest management, and they would like this situation to change (see following 

section). 

Forest fire is considered a threat because fire is often used for war wreckage 

and honey collection or caused by careless cigarette smoking and (in the past) 

clearing land for agriculture. To collect scrap metal in grasslands people use metal


Table 16. Villagers’ perception on threats to forest and biodiversity (19 respondents) 

Threat to forests and biodiversity 

Number of respondents 

perceiving threat 

Logging 17 

Forest fire 8 

Slash-and-burn agriculture 6 

War wreckage collection 6 

Hunting 4 

Extraction of forest products 3 

Firewood collection 1 

detectors and because it is difficult to use them on this kind of land, they clear the 

grass with fire. When this is done during the dry season, the danger is high for the 

fire to expand out of control. 

People think that hunting activities can harm the forest’s wildlife. Although 

hunting is forbidden, villagers often meet poachers in the forest looking for 

endangered species (bear, tiger). The collection of firewood and other NTFPs is 

considered less harmful to the forest habitats. 

People’s knowledge and perception of the threats to forest and biodiversity 

are similar to those reported by Le Trong Trai et al. (2001), even if we found 

that the ranks attributed to those threats are quite different. For example, the Le 

Trong Trai et al. (2001) affirm that Khe Tran people perceive NTFP collection 

and timber cutting as the most pernicious ongoing threat to the forest, but our 

survey shows local people rank logging and forest fire as the most serious threats. 

To some extent, the discourses of local people may be influenced by the official 

vision and discourse on threats. Villagers try to follow the communal, district and 

provincial rules as much as possible and this effort may influence their perception 

of land management. We think that this behaviour helps villagers to emphasize the 

struggle for their rights over the lands around Khe Tran. 

These factors, according to villagers, in addition to the ‘open access’ to the 

forest for outsiders (because of limited FPD personnel to control access) have 

increased the threat to local biodiversity. Local people’s involvement in the 

management of the reserve could be a way to reduce some of the threats. During 

one of the meetings some villagers expressed their interest to become more directly 

involved in the management of the surrounding natural forest and they hoped that 

it might bring them some benefits, e.g. employment and even some timber for 

their daily needs. If they were to become part of the nature reserve management, 

it could help achieve a win-win situation. 

6.8. People’s hopes for the future of their forest and life 

Villagers gave many answers to our questions on the future of their forest and life 

during personal interviews. Their aspirations are presented in Tables 17 and 18 . 

The main answer given by villagers asked what they would do if the forest 

degraded or disappeared is to reforest the area. They think they will always


Table 17. Villagers’ perception about forest loss (19 respondents) 

What to do after forest is lost 

Number of respondents choosing 

measure 

Reforestation 8 

Expand agricultural land 3 

Expand forest plantation 3 

Improve livestock 2 

Nothing but sadness and regret 2 

Prepare to face flood and storm 2 

Expand home garden 1 

Table 18. Villagers’ ideas on threats to human life (19 respondents) 

Threats to human life 

Number of respondents perceiving 

threat 

Disease 14 

Natural hazard 11 

Poverty 11 

Lack of knowledge 3 

Lack of transport infrastructure 2 

Land mines 2 

Pests of agricultural plants 2 

Lack of communication facilities 1 

Unemployment 1 

War 1 

need forest to protect them from floods and storms. They believe that the effect 

of natural disasters is often increased by the absence of forest on the hills. The 

idea to reforest the area reflects villagers’ familiarity with forest rehabilitation. 

The government project of Acacia plantation is well accepted in Khe Tran and 

successfully implemented in the main bare land areas. 

Some of the villagers think they would develop more agricultural and farming 

activities, forest plantations on cleared forest land, expecting more income 

from these activities. A few of them said they would just be sad because of the 

floods in case of forest loss. Other villagers considered the option of preparing 

ample livestock and cash reserves to face the hazards. Local people generally 

believe natural forests can protect them from natural hazards, and this opinion is 

emphasized by those who have experienced disasters during the past. 

Villagers identified many threats to human life, but the main factors were 

disease, poverty/hunger and natural hazards (flood, storm and drought, Figure 14). 

The lack of knowledge on cultivation and plantation techniques is also considered 

a threat, because it would cause failures in harvest and provoke starvation (Table 

18). 

Local people explain that they would work harder to face these threats 

and would ask for help from the government, which shows their high reliance 

on government support and guidance. They expect their children to have better


Figure 14. Recent flood on a bridge between Phong My and Khe Tran 

education opportunities and to receive training on cultivation techniques and land 

management. They also expect to earn more money, build stronger houses, yield 

more agricultural products, and plant more trees to prevent hunger and diseases. 

It seems that people will use any possible way to prevent and overcome those 

threats. Plantation, agriculture and livestock are considered important activities 

to be intensified.


Summary 

The natural resources from the various land types in Khe Tran provide important 

products for local livelihoods. Forest, including natural forest and plantations, 

is the most important land type for all the villagers because of all the products 

that can be collected from it. Rice fields are the least important land type, as 

very few are being cultivated because of the inappropriate soil. An important 

category of use is fodder, mainly found on bare lands. 

Perception on forests types differ by informant gender and according to 

the accessibility of the resource and the different activities. Plantation is the 

most important category for men, because of its economic benefits. Among 

women big tree forest ranks first, because of the diversity of NTFP they collect 

from it. Because of its relatively recent development, villagers do not consider 

plantation an optimal activity from which to get full benefits. Plantation is the 

alternative to forest extractive activities proposed by the government, but it 

should not be the only one, as the profitability of plantation products depends 

on fluctuating market condition. 

The importance of forest on different time scales is changing for local 

people. Forest in the present is the least important category, because of the 

depletion of resources, the government ban on all natural resource collection in 

the forest, and the actual alternative activities. Forest of the past is considered 

the most important one for all the activities that were carried out there. Forest of 

the future is more important than that of the present time because of the belief 

that plantation forest will bring more income. 

Domesticated resources are considered more important than wild and 

purchased resources. Dependency on forest resources has been affected by the 

government policy on the PDNR. 

When asked what is most important in general, among all use categories, 

local people consider the forest resources of the future most important, followed 

by food and marketable item. Local expectations on what forest could provide 

in the future is therefore high. But at the same time, when asked concretely 

about the uses of the 10 main species, the future is no longer mentioned. This 

shows that the specific knowledge on forest has decreased. Local people still 

recognize the different roles of the forest in general, but have difficulty to 

provide information on specific resources. Knowledge is still important for 

areas near the village, and the familiarity with the area and local perceptions on 

forest land types would be a valuable contribution for conservation agencies. 

The main threat to forests identified by villagers is logging, followed by 

forest fires. Most of them agreed to reforest an area after natural forest loss 

so as to protect them from natural hazards. Even if local discourses may, 

sometimes, follow the official one, this opinion shows awareness of the risks of 

unsustainable activities for both the forest and local livelihoods.

. Characterization of land types 

Our objective in Chapters 7 and 8 is to report the results from the field team 

activities, which were based on information provided by the village team. These 

two types of activities, even though separated, were the result of tight collaboration 

between all the team members. 

7.1. Sampling of land types 

Small amounts of repetition of particular land types within the 11 plots (Figure 

15) restrict the possibilities for statistical analysis and broader generalization 

but nevertheless the sample serves the purpose of better understanding the 

valuation and perceptions of landscape based on quantitative data, e.g. species 

identification. We will make some generalizations throughout the text, such as 

reporting densities and basal areas per hectare, but we ask the reader to be aware 

of limitations to broad quantitative characterizations of landscapes and their land 

type comparisons. 

The first plot was established in a 12-year-old rubber plantation, which was 

created just one year after the resettlement of Khe Tran village. This area does 

not suffer frequent flooding and it has experienced only minimum disturbance, 

the most severe impacts being caused by strong winds. Although cattle grazing 

is officially disallowed, some was evident during the fieldwork. Hunting is also 

not allowed, and for other activities permission from owners (10 households) is 

needed. 

The Acacia plantation was eight years old, which is already the harvesting 

age in plantations of many similarly fast growing species. When the forest was 

young, the government prohibited the cutting of trees or branches, along with 

cattle grazing. Any digging was also forbidden. Nevertheless everyone has 

free access to the graveyard inside the plantation, which is to be honoured by 

refraining from hunting in its proximity. In 1983 and 1999, when most of the

Garden (pepper and 

jackfruit garden) 

18% 

Shrub land 

(bare hill) 

18% 

Rice field 

9% 


Plantation forest 

(rubber, Acacia) 

18% 

Primary forest 

(big tree forest) 

9% 

Secondary forest 

(small tree forest) 

28% 

Figure 15. Field sampling of land types in Khe Tran (total sample size 11 plots) 

village area was prone to flooding, this area was affected as well. Plantations have 

also experienced forest fires, especially in 1983. 

Most of the secondary forests of the area have experienced disturbance rather 

recently. One plot (Plot 3) was established in forest that had experienced many 

fires in the period between 1980 and 1995, and in 1983 a big storm had caused 

many trees to fall. Earlier this area had also been used for shifting cultivation, 

and the forest was evaluated to be young, not more than 10 years old. The second 

secondary forest plot (Plot 9) was in older forest (40 years old) with clearly less 

disturbance, although it bore some marks of illegal logging. A third plot (Plot 11) 

was established at a site that had seen some fires in 1983, but the age of the forest 

was relatively high (40 years) and it was mainly used as a source of firewood and 

scrap metal. 

Two plots were established in gardens with more than 10 years of cultivation 

history after having been natural forests—one a pepper garden and the other a 

jackfruit garden with riparian bamboo patches. Both areas had flooded in 1983 

and the riparian area had burned. The jackfruit garden had been a small bamboo 

plantation from 1986 to 1995, and before that it was a mixed banana, pineapple and 

cassava garden. Cassava and pineapple were still cultivated next to the jackfruit 

garden, which was presently not intensively managed and thus in close to natural 

condition with the main trees being jackfruits. In the pepper garden there had been 

cassava and sweet potato cultivation between 1996 and 2002 and natural forest 

before that. The rice field was a young fallow between the first harvests at the time 

of the survey. This area has also been cultivated with peanuts.

| Characterization of land types 

The edge of old growth primary forest is not easily reached by walking from 

the Khe Tran village. Some of the oldest patches of forest lie close to the mountain 

tops or on steep slopes reached only after more than one hour’s climb and walk. 

The only plot in mature secondary forest closest to the condition of primary forest 

was established in 60-to-70-year-old stands visited regularly, but not often, by 

villagers. Men and women come to this site to collect rattan, honey and metal. The 

forest was afforded protected status by the provincial government in 1983, and the 

earlier regular hunting for bear, ‘helmeted’ hornbills, elephants and porcupines 

was thus forbidden along with timber production activities. 

Shrub lands (or bare hills) are a rather heterogeneous land type category with 

areas that have a history of having been under sugar cane cultivation (Plot 2) but 

are now fallows waiting to be converted to production area. Villagers describe 

those barren areas without any clear function for villagers as being degraded or 

barren because of the impact of chemicals during the war time (Plot 8). 

7.2. Specimen collection and identification 

A total of 754 plant specimens were collected from 11 plots (Figure 16). In addition 

to systematic plot sampling of trees and non-trees, the most abundant seedling, 

sapling, shrub and monocot species were also recorded and sampled separately. In 

the text all the categories of ‘abundant’ species refer to this separate census, if not 

otherwise stated. Table 19 shows the division of specimens in trees, non-trees and 

abundant species. In total 108 families comprising 260 genera and 439 species 

were recorded (Annex 3 provides the botanical names, families and local name 

of specimens collected within and outside the plots). The number of unidentified 

taxa remains high due to the technical difficulties in sampling as well as the high 

vascular plant richness of the area. 

The sampling was not exhaustive, and was not supposed to be so, as one 

of the main objectives of using MLA was to test the relevance of such a tool in 

the Vietnamese context. Nevertheless the sampling using 11 plots in total was 

considered rigorous and adequate for non-tree representativeness, since the curves 

of cumulating numbers of non-tree vascular plant species laid against cumulating 

numbers of random subplots are levelling out for most land types (Figure 17). 

There was surprisingly diverse under storey in the plantation forests and thus they 

could have been sampled with an additional plot. For trees this short inventory time 

did not enable as good sampling as for non-trees, but nevertheless the collected 

data can be used as a basis for recommendations and considerations of further 

inventories of the forests. For trees the accumulation curves show in most of the 

land types no levelling down, pointing to the need for more plots, which were 

unfeasible considering the time constraints.


Sources: 

- Department of Planning and 

Investment, TT-Hue province, 

2005 

- Landsat Satellite Imagery Path 

125 Row 049, The Global 

Land Cover Facility, 2001 

- Project Location GPS Point, 

Center for International 

Forestry Research, 2005 

- SRTM 90m Digital Elevation 

Data, The NASA Shuttle 

Radar Topographic Mission 


Boundaries, UNEP World 

Conservation Monitoring 

Centre, 1994 

Figure 16. Distribution of sample plots in the research area

0 | Characterization of land types 

Table 19. Summary of specimen collection and identification of plant species from 11 

sample sites 

Family Genus Species 

Tree 39 

Identified = 34 

Unidentified = 5 

Non-tree 80 



Abundant* 28 



All plants 108 



65 



172 



50 



260 



98 

Completely identified = 71 

Identified up to genus = 18 


292 




62 




439 




Total 

records 

*Abundant refers to the seedling, sapling, shrub and monocot species separately recorded in the field 

as the most abundant ones based on expert opinion. 

Cumulating number of non - tree species 

120 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 




Rice field 

Shrub land 

Garden 

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 

Subplots 

Figure 17. Accumulation of non-tree species with the increasing random order of 

subplots (each 20 m 2 ) for land types in Khe Tran 

268 

413 

73 

754


7.3. Plant biodiversity 

Tree species (dbh ≥10 cm) among 39 families and non-tree species among 80 

families were inventoried. The most common families among non-trees were 

Cyperaceae and Poaceae, both of which were present in 10 of the 11 plots. The 

most common families among trees and non-trees combined were Rubiaceae and 

Euphorbiaceae (each found in 9 plots) and Fabaceae (8). Among trees the most 

common families were Euphorbiaceae and Moraceae (5) followed by Lauraceae, 

Myrtaceae and Rubiaceae (4). 

Twenty-eight percent of identified families and 84% of all plant species 

were singletons, present in only one plot, which indicates the high diversity of 

vegetation and large differences among land types. This view is also supported by 

the data from non-tree species alone, in which case 68 of the total of 292 species 

(identified and unidentified lumped together) were present in only one subplot 

(out of 110 subplots), 38 in two subplots and 258 species (88%) were present 

in only one land type. Only a few true generalists were recorded in many land 

types. The most common and abundant non-trees were the herbs Centella asiatica 

(Apiaceae), present in 34 subplots and four land types, Catimbium breviligulatum 

(Zingiberaceae) in 33 subplots in four land types, and Curculigo cf. capitulata 

(Hypoxidaceae) in 10 subplots and four land types. The next most common ones 

were Hypolytrum nemorum (Cyperaceae) (23, 4), Schizostachyum cf. gracile 

(Poaceae) (23, 2), Paspalum conjugatum (Poaceae) (21, 3) and Cleome viscosa 

(Capparaceae) (19, 1). Nevertheless only a few species were shared between 

different land types. 

Secondary forests stand mainly on steep slopes and consist of diverse 

tree species (from 20 to 30 tree species per plot, tree richness index from 0.81 

to 0.91), often with fairly open canopy and dense understorey. Basal area in 

secondary forests varied from 11 to 17 m 2 ha -1 . Relative dominance of a species 

is commonly expressed as percentage of the total basal area. Based on this index 

one more dominating tree species in secondary forests was identified (Figure 18). 

Barringtonia macrostachya (Lecythidaceae) was recorded in all secondary forest 

plots with its relative dominance always being close to 35%. Its relative abundance 

(percentage of the total number of individuals per plot) varied from 15% to 43%. 

Other species with relative large basal areas were Cinnamomum cf. burmannii 

(Lauraceae) (21% present in one plot) and Aporosa tetrapleura (Euphorbiaceae) 

(relative dominance from 2% to 8% in three plots, present in both secondary and 

primary forest). In secondary forests 55 tree species (132 individuals) out of the 

total of 70 species were present with a single individual, indicating high overall 

diversity of the forests and the need for larger sample size for trees if more rigorous 

information on them is needed. 

Planted and managed forests are very common and promoted by the 

government, thus many bare hills have recently been converted into mixed fast 

wood plantations of Acacia mangium, Acacia auriculiformis and Acacia siamensis 

(Plot 5) or rubber (Hevea brasiliensis) plantations (Plot 1). Since for example A. 

mangium reaches harvest age in a mere 6 to 8 years after planting, the landscape 

has changed fast. Planting Acacia has also been supported by its catalyzing effect

Relative basal area 


0 

0.1 

0.2 

0.3 

0.4 

0.5 

0.6 

0.7 

0.8 

0.9 

1 

Species 

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 

Secondary forest (Plot 11) 




Figure 18. Relative dominance in primary and secondary forest plots in Khe Tran 

based on basal area 

on the growth of natural forest tree species. Many of the fast wood plantations 

close to the village were not intensively managed and the plot located in Acacia 

plantation shows that the diversity of non-tree species in the understorey was 

relatively high (on average 32 species per plot), even comparable to secondary 

forests (from 27 to 51) (Table 20). 

The primary forests (which could also be considered to be old secondary 

forests) of the area are relatively inaccessible because of the distance and their 

rarity due to the disturbance history. The most abundant species in the primary 

forest were Adinandra cf. hainanensis (Theaceae), Aporosa tetrapleura and 

A. dioica, all with 7% of the total number of individuals in the plot of primary 

forest. 

The most abundant seedlings in the understorey of Acacia plantation were 

not Acacia but species from the genera Ficus (Moraceae) and Eurya (Theaceae) 

and saplings of Maesa balansae (Myrsinaceae). The only primary forest plot had 

relatively open canopy and thus an almost as diverse understorey as secondary 

forests or bare hills (shrub lands) with abundant seedlings from Myrtaceae and 

saplings from Lauraceae and Polygalaceae. In the understorey of rubber plantations 

the most abundant tree seedling was Mallotus paniculatus (Euphorbiaceae), sapling 

Maesa balansae with the most abundant shrub Melastoma sp.1 (Melastomataceae). 

None of the recorded most abundant seedlings or saplings were present as main 

tree species in respective land use type. Most of the main tree species have 

specified use value for local people, and Table 21 shows different land types with 

the main tree species and their importance to local livelihoods. The main uses for 

tree products are for construction, firewood and food, which can be considered 

major forest services.

Table 20. Plant richness in Khe Tran 

Land type Plot Tree 

richness* 

Number 

of tree 

individuals 

recorded 


Number 

of tree 

species 

Mean 

number 

of tree 

species 

Number 

of nontree 

species 

Mean 

number 

of nontree 

species 

Garden 

4 

6 

0.25 

0.00 

16 

12 

2 

1 

2 

46 

27 

37 

Plantation 


1 

5 

0.00 

0.30 

40 

40 

1 

3 

2 

25 

39 

33 

Primary 


7 0.91 40 29 29 33 33 

Rice field 10 n.a. 0 0 0 31 31 

Secondary 


3 

9 

11 

0.87 

0.92 

0.81 

40 

40 

40 

25 

30 

20 

25 

36 

51 

36 

41 

Shrub 

land 

2 

8 

n.a. 

n.a. 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

30 

24 

27 

*Tree richness = log sp/log count 

10 10 

n.a. means not applicable 

7.4. Forest structure 

Richness of life forms of non-tree species varied substantially among land types. 

Epiphytes were present in only one secondary forest plot. Herbs, with 190 species, 

were the richest non-tree life form category in all land types, especially in more 

open and managed areas such as dry rice fields and gardens. Lianas, climbers and 

ferns were also present in all of the land types, except rice fields (Table 22). 

Secondary forests had the highest canopy, highest dbh and second lowest 

furcation index, as illustrated in Figure 19 on the right. Mean height of the 

secondary forest varied from 10 to 17 m with a maximum of two canopy layers, 

which indicates the lack of high primary forest species. Mean height of the primary 

forest was 14 m, which is in line with other survey results from this area (e.g. Le 

Trong Trai et al. 2001). Canopy height in plantation forest varied between 14 and 

16 m and in gardens from 6 to 10 m. 

Furcation index indicates the plant height where apical dominance is no 

longer a property of a single defined stem. It was recorded on a continuous scale 

from 0 to 110% (the latter being a tree trunk without clear dominant stem). Some 

structural features of trees may be linked to their disturbance history and MLA 

experiences from, for example, Papua and Kalimantan show that apical dominance 

is generally low in primary rainforests with closed canopy. An increase of value 

may reflect the rate of disturbance in the forests (trees resprout after breakage) and 

history of utilization of trees. As presented in Figure 19, on the right, furcation 

index values in Khe Tran varied from 30 to 63. The highest value was recorded 

in rubber plantation and the lowest ones in the most distant secondary forest plots 

and Acacia plantation without intensive management.


Table 21. Main tree species based on basal area and density listed with their uses in 

Khe Tran 

Land 

type 

Garden (pepper and 

jackfruit garden) 


Primary (big tree) forest 

Secondary (small tree) 


Main tree species Uses Basal area 

(m 2 ha -1 ) 

Artocarpus 

heterophyllus 

Food (fruit), heavy and light 

construction (timber for house 

and cattle barn), firewood 

cf. Moraceae Food (fruit), heavy 

construction (timber for 

house), support stalk for 

growing of pepper 

Unknown species Tree used as a support stalk for 

growing of pepper 

Acacia auriculiformis Heavy construction (timber 

for house), marketable item 

(timber for pulp), firewood 

Acacia mangium Heavy construction (timber 

for house), marketable item 

(timber for pulp), firewood 

Density 

(tree ha -1 ) 

2.3 100 

0.6 73 

2.5 233 

5.8 429 

1.3 67 

Hevea brasiliensis Marketable item (latex) 11.0 398 

Adinandra cf. 

hainanensis 

Firewood 1.0 53 

Aporosa tetrapleura Heavy construction (timber 

for house), firewood, light 

construction (timber for cattle 

barn) 

0.8 51 

cf. Osmanthus sp.1 Firewood 1.8 40 

Syzygium cf. 

cochinchinensis 

Heavy construction (timber for 

house) 

1.2 28 

Vitex trifolia Firewood 0.5 45 

Aporosa tetrapleura Firewood, light construction 

(timber for cattle barn) 

Barringtonia 

macrostachya 

Cinnamomum cf. 

burmannii 

7.1 42 

Food, firewood 5.3 123 

Firewood 3.7 19 

Fagaceae Firewood 3.2 43 

Trees with dbh ≥ 10 cm are clearly smaller and growing less densely in gardens 

compared to other land types with trees. Density is very similar in plantations and 

secondary forests, but the latter has clearly higher basal areas per hectare.


Table 22. Richness (total number of species recorded per plot) of life forms of non-tree 

species in all land types in Khe Tran 

Land type Plot number 

Garden 


Herbs 

Lianas (woody 

climbers) 

Climbers (nonwoody 

lianas) 

Palms 

Pandanus 

Ferns 

4 38 4 2 2 

6 10 8 5 1 3 

1 21 1 3 

5 14 13 6 6 

Primary forest 7 12 10 5 1 3 2 

Rice field 10 31 


Shrub land 

3 15 12 2 3 4 

9 7 14 3 7 2 2 

11 13 17 3 8 2 5 2 1 

2 16 2 3 7 2 

8 20 2 2 

All plots 190 77 27 20 5 36 6 1 

7.5. Species vulnerability 

Ten plant species with threatened status were recorded in the field and/or in PDM 

exercises. These threatened species and their status are shown in Table 23. Species 

with undefined status are omitted. Data is based on checklist of WCMC (1994) 

and IUCN (2006). None of the red-listed plant species recorded at Phong Dien and 

Dakrong Nature Reserves and reported by BirdLife (Le Trong Trai et al. 2001) 

were found in the sample plots. 

For most of these threatened species villagers named uses, and four of the 

species, Hopea odorata, Parashorea stellata, Afzelia xylocarpa and Pinus latteri, 

were valued as very important ones. Those were found only outside the sampling 

plots. Most of the threatened species recorded in the field were found in secondary 

forests and no threatened species were found from intermediate or cultivated land 

types. 

All of the threatened species were considered to have substitute sources for 

their particular use. Calamus tonkinensis, which is used for making furniture and 

building roofs, is also listed as threatened. The biggest threats to Parashorea 

stellata are habitat degradation and wood clear cutting, the latter being also 

conducted by Khe Tran villagers. According to IUCN (2006), Amesiodendron 

chinense is a dominant component of some forest localities and has been observed 

to regenerate well, although population reductions have occurred. It was considered 

Climbing ferns 

Epiphytes

Individuals ha -1 


1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

Density 

Basal 

area 

Garden 

Plantation 

Primary 

Secondary 

20 

18 

16 

14 

12 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 

m 2 ha -1 

Proportion of max value 

1 

0.8 

0.6 

0.4 

0.2 

0 

Avg. dbh (cm) Max. dbh (cm) 

Avg. height (m) Max. height (m) 

Avg. furcation 

Figure 19. Forest structural characteristics in Khe Tran. Left panel: basal area and 

density; right panel: tree height, stem diameter and furcation index 

a marketable item in the village. Apart from threatened status, Gnetum montanum 

(present in secondary forest, in one plot), which is one of the CITES-listed species 

for Vietnam, listed in Annex 3, was not valued as useful species since it was 

mentioned many times without uses and only once as a source of children food. 

Garden 



Secondary forest


Table 23. Threatened species in Khe Tran based on vegetation inventories and PDM 

exercises 

Species Family Uses Status 1 Land use type 

Calamus dioicus Arecaceae Basketry R Secondary forest 

Calamus salicifolius Arecaceae None R Secondary forest 

Calamus tonkinensis Arecaceae Heavy and light 

construction 

R Secondary forest 

Epiprinus balansae Euphorbiaceae Firewood R Secondary forest 

Hopea odorata Dipterocarpaceae Marketable item VU* 2 

Parashorea stellata Dipterocarpaceae Heavy 

construction 

CR* 

Afzelia xylocarpa Mimosaceae Marketable item EN* 2 

Pinus latteri Pinaceae Marketable item R, LR/ 

NT* 

Amesiodendron 

chinense 

Sapindaceae Heavy 

construction, 

firewood 

Camellia cf. fleuryi Theaceae Firewood, heavy 

construction 

2 

2 

LR/NT* Primary forest, 

secondary forest 

R, VU* Primary forest 

1 Status according to WCMC (1994) without asterisk, according to IUCN (2006) with asterisk. R: rare; 

VU: vulnerable; CR: critically endangered; EN: endangered; LR/ NT: near threatened. 

2 Recorded in PDM exercise as locally important species, but not observed in the field plots.


Summary 

The flora of Khe Tran exhibits high species richness, and although our sampling 

was not exhaustive, it is sufficiently rigorous to address the value and relative 

richness of remaining natural forests as well as other land types. It also shows 

that the potentially monotonous land types, such as plantations or rice fields, are 

still very high in non-tree diversity in Khe Tran, which enables and maintains 

their multiuse function. 

According to this survey, the people of Khe Tran represent no imminent 

threat for recorded endangered species. We recommend that information on 

threatened species be given to villagers to raise the awareness of conservation 

needs and that the specific uses of especially threatened species be discussed 

in order to give people the option to choose other species for these uses. It 

seems likely that the range of threats from cutting of construction material 

and collection of firewood and material for basketry may have contributed to 

the status of plant species in the past, but the impact at present is difficult to 

assess. Direct impact on forest cover or composition as a whole is impossible to 

quantify based on our sampling. Therefore further research on sustainability of 

NTFP collection is required. Most of the natural vegetation is disturbed forest 

or shrub lands and the impacts of floods and fires continue to influence forest 

cover and structure. The most substantive influence on remaining forests may 

be the way of planning and measure of recognising the outside effect on land 

types. During the fieldwork we saw many people coming from elsewhere to 

collect NTFPs and some marks of illegal logging conducted by people from 

outside the area.

. Ethno-botanical knowledge 

8.1. Plant uses 

We categorized all the uses of plants recorded in the field according to the 

categories used in the PDM exercise (Table 7, Chapter 6). In addition a category 

of ‘miscellaneous’ was created for 15 species that were outside the most common 

use categories. In the miscellaneous group we find: fertilizer, support stalk for 

growth of pepper, fabric dye, shampoo, charcoal to blacken teeth, incense and 

furniture polish. Similarly to the results from the PDM exercises, no plant was 

recorded for the future and hunting place categories. 

The result of herbarium identification shows that 71% species gathered are 

useful species from 81 families and 164 genus (Table 24). Annex 3 provides local 

uses information of collected plants with their botanical names, families and local 

names. 

Table 24. Summary of specimen collection and identification of plant species from 11 

sample sites 

Total 

collected 

plants 

Total useful 

plants 

Family Genus Species 

108 



81 



260 



202 



439 


Identified up to sp. = 117 


312 


Identified up to sp. = 72 


Trees are very useful for the Khe Tran people (Table 25). From the total of 98 

tree species recorded in the 11 plots, 94 have at least one use. All trees recorded

0 | Ethno-botanical knowledge 

(dbh ≥10 cm) in the garden and plantation forest are considered useful, which 

reflects the fact that these forests are relatively intensively managed and mainly 

useful species are left to grow there. No tree was found in the rice fields and shrub 

lands, as they are usually cut at the seedling stage. 

Table 25. Mean number of species and number of useful species recorded in each 

land type 

Land type 

-------------- Tree -------------- ----------- Non-tree ----------- 

Mean 

number 

of 

species 

Mean 

number 

of useful 

species 

Percent 

useful 

Mean 

number 

of 

species 

Mean 

number 

of useful 

species 

Percent 

useful 

All plots (n = 11) 98* 94* 96 292* 175* 60 

Garden (n = 2) 2 2 100 37 27 73 

Plantation forest (n = 2) 2 2 100 33 21 62 

Primary forest (n = 1) 29 27 93 33 11 33 

Rice field (n = 1) 0 0 0 31 24 77 

Secondary forest (n = 3) 25 22 87 41 15 37 

Shrub land (n = 2) 0 0 0 27 17 61 

*Total number of species from all plots 

At the time of the fieldwork the rice field was dry, a young fallow during a 

short period before the rainy season returned with the new planting. It had the 

highest percentage of useful non-tree species (77%, 24 species) of all land types, 

while primary forest had the lowest (33%, 11 species). 

For all non-trees, the percentage of useful species is higher in cultivated areas 

(rice field, garden and plantation forest) than in other places, including the natural 

forest. This reflects the distance and accessibility of the different areas for the 

local people. Since villagers visit the cultivated areas more often than they go to 

the natural forest, they are more familiar with the plants near the settlement. In 

comparison with the PDM exercise for the source of products, cultivated plants 

have more value than wild plants (Figure 12, Chapter 6). 

The use categories with the largest total number of recorded useful species are 

firewood, fodder and food. Firewood is gathered mainly from the natural forest, 

while fodder is found mainly in gardens and rice fields (after harvest). Food comes 

mainly from the garden. Therefore even if forests are important in most of the 

categories of uses, land types near the village, such as gardens, plantations and 

rice fields, are the most important for the main categories (Table 26).


Table 26. Distribution of all useful plant species per plot and by use category 

Basketry/rope 

Firewood 

Fodder 

Food 


number 

Plot 

Land type 

Garden 

4 

6 1 

1 

6 

24 

9 

8 

11 

2 

1 2 2 

1 

3 

5 

5 

5 

2 1 

38 

25 

32 


1 

5 1 

4 

13 

12 

12 

5 

8 

1 

3 

1 

2 

3 

4 

6 

4 

1 

1 

1 

1 1 

25 

35 

30 

Primary forest 7 3 23 1 5 15 1 4 1 4 2 1 2 39 39 

Rice field 10 19 5 2 2 1 24 24 

3 19 5 8 11 3 11 2 2 4 4 3 50 

Secondary forest 9 4 29 2 5 11 1 2 1 4 3 2 49 46 

11 3 24 8 3 1 1 1 3 1 2 39 

Shrub land 

2 

8 

7 

5 

11 

11 

5 

3 

1 

1 1 

1 

1 

2 

2 

1 

1 1 1 

1 22 

22 

22 

All plots 12 117 89 57 44 5 21 16 29 15 18 2 11 318 

8.2. Species with multiple uses 

Some species have multiple uses (Table 27), as is apparent in the following 

examples. The most multipurpose species is Gigantochloa sp. (giant bamboo), 

which is used for basketry, firewood, food (from the shoot), fodder (leaf), fence 

for cattle facility, marketable item (chopstick) and tools. Giant bamboo was only 

present near the jackfruit garden, but grows abundantly in the whole area, not far 

from the settlements. Imperata cylindrica (Cogon grass) is used for spice (from the 

roots), medicine (root), thatching (leaf) and fodder (leaf). Macaranga trichocarpa, 

a pioneer species, indicates disturbance in forests and is commonly used by local 

people. It was not very abundant (one individual in each secondary forest plot), 

although rather common in secondary forest. Drink made from its leaves is 

believed to improve and maintain health and its wood is used for firewood. In the 

past this species was also used to make beds. Artocarpus heterophyllus (jackfruit) 

is used for firewood, heavy and light construction and food (fruits). 



Marketable item 

Medicine 

Ornamental/ritual 

Miscellaneous 

Recreation 

Tools 

Total number of species 

Mean number of species

| Ethno-botanical knowledge 

Table 27. Plant species with at least four uses 

Basketry/rope 

Botanical name Family Local name 

Gigantochloa sp. Poaceae Abung 

Artocarpus heterophyllus Moraceae Pa nây 

Calamus sp.1 Arecaceae Ki re 

Imperata cylindrica Poaceae A séc/Cá tranh 

Schizostachyum cf. gracile Poaceae A tang/Ilatuvia 

Unknown sp. 4 Myrtaceae Clem 

Unknown sp. 22 Unknown A cê lem 

Firewood 

Fodder 

Food 




Medicine 

Tools 

8.3. Uses of trees 

For the local people trees in primary and secondary forest are useful for firewood, 

food, heavy and light construction, medicine, tools and miscellaneous uses (such as 

dye, shampoo, woody plant species taken from its original habitat and transplanted 

in the gardens to grow pepper on it; see Table 28). Trees in plantation forest are 

used mainly to obtain cash income from the latex from Hevea brasiliensis, the 

timber from Acacia auriculiformis, A. mangium and the pulp from A. siamensis. 

Villagers also use them for house construction and firewood. 

From the garden, trees such as Artocarpus heterophyllus and unknown sp. 

30 and 31, are used as resource for firewood, food (fruit), timber for heavy and 

light construction, and as support stalk for pepper. Barringtonia macrostachya, 

which is the main tree in secondary forests, is used for firewood and its fruits were 

important sources of food during the war. 

8.4. Uses of non-trees 

Based on the PDM exercise result, domesticated animals are more important 

resources than wild and purchased ones. Fortunately Khe Tran has plenty of 

different species of plants (89 species) that can be used as fodder (Figure 20). They 

only use non-tree species for that purpose. Even if primary and secondary forests 

provide virtually many plant species that could be used as fodder, villagers do not 

need to go that far to get this kind of product because many varieties are available 

in the rice fields, gardens, plantations and shrub land, which are more accessible. 

Rice field has the highest number of plants used for fodder (19 species, see Table 

29), but only after harvest.


Table 28. Distribution of tree species considered useful per plot and per use 

category 

Land type Plot number 

Total number of 

tree species 

Firewood 

Food 

Heavy 

construction 

Light 

construction 

Garden 

4 

6 

2 

1 1 

1 

1 

1 

1 1 

2 


1 

5 

1 

3 3 3 

1 

3 

Primary forest 7 29 23 1 13 3 1 1 1 

Rice field 10 0 

3 25 17 2 8 5 2 2 

Secondary forest 9 30 23 1 9 2 

11 20 18 1 2 

Use category 

Shrub land 

Recreation 


Tools 

Basketry/rope 



Miscellaneous 


Medicine 


Food 

Fodder 

Firewood 

2 0 

8 0 

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 

Number of species 


Medicine 

Miscellaneous 

Tree species 

Tools 

Non-tree species 

Abundant species* 

Figure 20. All plant species considered useful by the Khe Tran villagers shown in use 

categories 

*Including the seedling, sapling, monocot or shrub of the tree and non-tree species


For food and medicine they use, respectively, 39 and 22 non-tree species 

(Figure 20). Centella asiatica (Rau ma/Pahy), a major wild vegetable, is used for 

food and medicine, as well as sold in the market. 

Table 29. Distribution of non-tree species considered useful per plot and per use 

category 

Basketry/rope 

Firewood 

Fodder 

Food 


number 

Plot 

Land type 

Garden 

4 

6 1 1 

24 

8 

7 

7 

1 

1 1 

1 

3 

5 

5 

3 

2 1 

46 

27 

Plantation 1 12 4 1 1 1 5 1 25 


5 1 12 5 1 3 1 1 1 39 

Primary forest 7 3 1 3 2 1 1 1 3 2 1 33 

Rice field 10 19 5 2 2 1 31 

Secondary 


3 

9 

11 

4 

3 

1 

5 

2 

4 

3 

7 

3 

2 

1 

1 

1 

1 

3 

1 

2 

1 

1 

2 

3 

4 

1 

3 

1 

2 

2 

36 

51 

36 

Shrub land 

2 

8 

1 11 

11 

4 

2 2 

1 

1 1 1 

1 30 

24 

8.5. Forest as resource of useful plants 

The most important useful species recorded from the forest are used for firewood 

(101 species), followed by species for heavy construction (41 species) and food 

(35 species), as shown in Figure 21. The local people use not only wood species 

for firewood but also bamboo (Gigantocloa sp. 1, Schizostachyum cf. gracile and 

Stixis scandens). 

Secondary forest has more species (18) used for the food category than 

plantation and primary forests (13 and 5 species, respectively), all plant forms 

considered. The species from primary forest are Artocarpus styracifolius 

(Moraceae), Linociera cf. ramiflora (Oleaceae), Zingiber sp. 2 (Zingiberaceae), 

Schizostachyum cf. gracile (Poaceae) and Tetracera sarmentosa ssp. asiatica 

(Dilleniaceae). 

There are several plants from the forest, especially from plantation and 

secondary forests, appreciated by children for food: Catimbium breviligulatum 

(young stem), Dracaena sp. (shoot), Gnetum cf. montanum (fruit), Fibraurea 

recisa (fruit), Linociera cf. ramiflora (flower), Melastoma sp. 2 (fruit), Physalis 

angulata (fruit), Psychotria sp. 2 (fruit), Randia spinosa (fruit), Rubus sp. 2 (fruit) 

and Stixis suaveolens (fruit). 




Medicine 


Miscellaneous 

Recreation 

Tools 

Total number of species

Use categories 

Recreation 


Tools 

Miscellaneous 

Basketry/rope 



Medicine 


Fodder 

Food 


Firewood 


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 

Number of species 

Figure 21. Total number of all useful plant species per category in primary, secondary 

and plantation forests 

8.6. Nonsubstitutable species 

Hevea brasiliensis, Imperata cylindrica, Centella asiatica and Gomphia serrata 

are the only plants that have functions or uses for which there were no known 

substitutes according to the villagers. Rubber is used for its latex, the following 

two as medicine and the last one to blacken the teeth (with its stem, which is 

turned into charcoal). 

From the uses of plants and land types, we can admit that the livelihoods of 

villagers are no longer totally dependent on forests. We can observe a diversity 

of sources of income and materials, some of them still found in the natural forest. 

The multiple uses of land types show that people know their area still very well 

(see participatory map of resources, Figure 8 in page 27). During our survey some 

people said they were considering different options for use types concerning, for 

example, medicinal plants, but they expected more education and training to that 

end. They also considered the possibility of finding and using more ornamental 

plants. ‘Life is easier nowadays, and one can start to think more about the additional 

recreational or aesthetic things like ornamental plants’, said one villager.


8.7. Remarks on potential uses of species 

Saccharum spontaneum (Poaceae), which in Khe Tran is used for fodder, is a 

valuable medicinal plant in India (Oudhia 2004). There may be some potential in 

scoping further possibilities for this usage. 

Caryota urens (Arecaceae) is recorded as food only in the past and the stems 

of Caryota monostachya are used to build floors, while Le Van Lan, Ziegler and 

Grever (2002) mentions that leaves of the Caryota sp. are used for building roofs 

and sheds, and their stalks for fences. He also lists that Ageratum conyzoides 

(Asteraceae) is medicinal plant against cold (Le Van Lan, Ziegler and Grever 

2002). 

More ethno-botanical and socio-economic studies are necessary to collect 

data on potentially economically viable plants that could be developed in the area, 

considering market demand and network, and the sustainability of resources. 

Summary 

The villagers use a large range of species for their livelihoods, not only from the 

natural forests, but on the contrary, mainly from the cultivated areas. The reason 

is that their main activities are near the village, and primary forests are of difficult 

and restricted access. The plant with the most numerous uses, bamboo, can be 

found everywhere near the habitations. Rice fields, Acacia and rubber plantations 

and home gardens are places where villagers can find a lot of useful plants, mainly 

for fodder, medicine and food. Very few species (only four) are not substitutable 

for the usage villagers have of it, and local people are no longer relying as much 

on forest products for their livelihoods as they once did, since their subsistence 

activities have recently diversified, even if some forest products are still used.

. Local perspectives on conservation 

From the previous sections of this report it is apparent that biodiversity is high 

in the Khe Tran area and that natural resources still play an important role in 

local people’s livelihoods. During our survey we observed that villagers gather 

these products from wild and domesticated sources and sometime even purchase 

them. Even if domesticated sources are perceived as the most important product 

sources, many products from the natural forest are still collected for several uses. 

In all, 134 plant and 29 animal species are considered important species of the 

forest (see Site description, Chapter 5). 

Considering the presence of a conservation area close to the village, local 

people’s relations to their natural environment, and the ban on extractive activities 

in the reserve, we organized a small workshop with the villagers to better 

understand their perceptions concerning forest and biodiversity conservation as 

well as their perspectives and priorities concerning Phong Dien Nature Reserve 

development. The villagers were divided into two groups, according to the part 

of the village in which they live (lower and upper part of the village). The groups 

had more or less similar perspectives on the meaning of conservation (Table 30). 

Villagers from the lower part defined conservation as forest protection, which bans 

any activities that disturb it, such as hunting, logging, making fire or gold mining. 

They considered conservation more along its management perspectives, whereby 

all villagers should share responsibilities, with a task force available to solve 

urgent forest problems. Clear demarcation between conservation and production 

forests should be available, with a concrete management strategy at all levels. 

The upper village group also perceived conservation as forest protection, but they 

considered it according to their willingness to protect it and as an opportunity for 

employment. 

Apart from the local definition of conservation, we asked both groups how they 

would imagine their life and activities in Khe Tran if there were no conservation 

area. Both groups agreed that, without a conservation area, they would have free

| Local perspectives on conservation 

access to the forest. The lower village group thought that they would also have 

free access to new places to settle and for their cattle, but that their lives would be 

more difficult, because they would be more dependent on forest resources (unless 

a governmental program gave them incentive to move away from extractive 

activities) and more vulnerable to natural hazards. The upper village group thought 

that they would have a hard time and poor life conditions; they would be obliged 

to move more often to open new gardens, and this option was linked, according to 

the local point of view, to the traditional use of shifting cultivation. Conservation 

is synonymous with more sedentary agricultural practices for the villagers. 

For both groups the presence of the conservation area implied a better future, 

with more infrastructure facilities, domesticated products (plants and animals), 

better relationships among villagers and more employment opportunities. 

These answers, even if conditioned and influenced by the position and 

vulnerability of the local people towards government policy, shows that 

conservation, according to their perception, means change, progress, education, 

new activities and the loss of the main traditional activities. Once again these 

answers have to be considered in their political and social context, taking into 

account the tendency of villagers to give a soothing discourse to outsiders (here, the 

scientists). But it affords perspectives on the way local people consider their future 

living at the edge of a conservation area, their opportunities and expectations. 

Local people hope that, with the formation of Phong Dien Nature Reserve, 

they will acquire the right to participate in its management and they even expect 

to have a key role in coordination with the government staff in charge of reserve 

protection. 

Villagers have a positive perception of conservation of forest and biodiversity, 

even if they worry about their right to collect natural resources in the future. Their 

interest in participating in reserve management depends on their expectation of 

financial compensation if they, for example, take part in the task force in charge 

of the control of the reserve. It is also a way to emphasize their land rights and 

to push the government to recognize these rights. They consider that a negotiated 

participation in reserve management will allow them to collect some forest 

resources, including timber, NTFPs and even the valuable eaglewood.


Table 30. Villager’s perceptions on conservation and Phong Dien Nature Reserve 

Perception Lower part villagers Upper part villagers 

Definition of 

conservation 

Life with 

conservation 

Life without 

conservation 

Role to play 

in future 

management 

of Phong 

Dien Natural 

Reserve area 

• Forest area is protected; all hunting 

of precious animals, logging, 

setting of forest fires, gold mining 

and trapping is banned 

• Conservation area must be 

considered as the work of all 

people, with a task force that can 

solve urgent cases 

• There must be a definite 

demarcation between conservation 

area and production/planted forest 

• In order to have good conservation 

efforts, a concrete plan/program/ 

project/organization is required at 

all levels 

• Will stabilize their life 

• Forbidden from entrance to forest 

and clearing for cultivation. More 

focus on planting forest; better 

income from production forest 

harvesting 

• Will establish cattle facilities 

• Gain better awareness of forest and 

literacy standard 

• Better infrastructure 

• Close relationships among local 

people 

• Free access to forest, clearance to 

search for metals, for cultivation, 

logging and trapping (hunting) 

• Free migration (movement to other 

locations) 

• Free grazing of cattle 

• Low awareness of natural disasters 

• Local life is dependent on forest 

• Have the right to manage/protect 

the reserve and receive a subsidy 

• In general, management should rest 

in the cooperation of staff in charge 

and local people, with a permanent 

task force 

• Local people may collect NTFPs 

• Forest and natural resources 

are protected 

• Hunting, setting fires, 

logging, etc. is prohibited 

• Conservation is very 

important and it is the job of 

both state and local people 

• Local people will have 

employment from 

conservation area activities 

• Conservation brings 

brighter future and offers 

employment 

• Focus on planting and 

tending forest, animal 

husbandry 

• More state projects; better 

infrastructure (roads, etc.) 

• Free access to forest, e.g. 

cattle grazing, hunting and 

clearing for cultivation 

• Life is hard and poor 

• People had to move to 

different places several 

times annually 

• More efforts on planting 

forest for younger 

generations 

• Every person has to protect 

the forest (including its 

animals) 

• Local people want to be 

staff that look after the 

conservation area 

• Hope to establish a 

conservation organization in 

Khe Tran and make Phong 

Dien Reserve an area of rich 

biodiversity and beauty

0 | Local perspectives on conservation 

These results show that the local people want to be part of the conservation 

process and not just be considered an external threat that should be banned from 

any extractive activity. Recognition of their rights, negotiation on the possibility 

to collect forest products and emphasis on local people’s responsibility for their 

own land should be considered important elements of a successful conservation 

effort in Khe Tran. 

Summary 

Even if sometimes they are following the ‘official’ position on biodiversity 

conservation and its definition, villagers explained that they would like to be 

part of the process, for various reasons: to get access to resources, to enhance 

their rights to the land, to get payment for the activities they would perform 

for the FPD. By doing so, local people expect to be able to negotiate with the 

government the sustainable use of a number of resources, mainly NTFPs, but 

some logging and game hunting too. They want to collaborate with conservation 

institutions and to preserve the forest for the future and as a safety net, since 

they do not strongly rely on forest resource anymore.

0. Conclusion and recommendations 

In conclusion to the MLA activities implemented during this SDC-funded project, 

‘Stakeholders and biodiversity at the local level’, we discuss the relevance of the 

method, summarize the main results of our surveys in the context of the different 

objectives of the project and provide recommendations in the Khe Tran village 

context. 

10.1. Conclusion 

10.1.1. Relevance of MLA in a Vietnamese context 

If the overall project sought to strengthen local capacity to plan and implement 

locally relevant and viable forest landscape management, two objectives were 

particularly relevant to our MLA activities: 

• to develop appropriate mechanisms for integrating local perceptions and 

views in decision making and planning; and 

• to facilitate greater involvement of local people and other stakeholders in 

decision making and planning at the local level. 

We proposed, by our activities, to test a set of tools, the MLA, designed to 

study local perception of landscapes and natural resources in the local context, a 

small village in rural Central Vietnam. 

We are now able to confirm that the MLA tool was relevant to this kind of 

study and provided valuable information on the local management of natural 

resources. It was adapted to the Khe Tran context, where forest has been disturbed 

and no longer plays the role it used to play in local livelihoods. Plot sampling, 

because it records both tree and non-tree specimens, can be used in various 

environments: forests, plantations or even rice fields. The socio-economic data 

and the information about local perception gained through scoring exercises and

| Conclusion and recommendations 

participatory mapping are also relevant to a context where local people have 

shifted from forest-oriented activities to more sedentary agriculture. They show 

the evolution and transformation of the local people’s priorities and knowledge 

on natural resources. The set of methods used during our survey provided a large 

set of data and results on Khe Tran villagers and their perspectives and options 

concerning the management of the future Phong Dien Nature Reserve. 

An important database is available containing the data we collected through 11 

plot samplings and 20 household surveys undertaken in Khe Tran on ethnobotany, 

forest landscapes characterization, local importance of natural resources and all 

socio-economic data necessary to the project achievement. This database helps us 

to provide an overview of the forest condition and on how forests still influence 

the local livelihood of the Pahy. 

Soil analysis, which could not be implemented in the frame of our activities 

for logistical reasons, may provide relevant information on land suitability for the 

different land use options proposed by the government to the local people. 

The MLA survey and the participatory development of future scenarios have 

also helped to facilitate discussions with local villagers about their options in the 

context of living at the edge of a nature reserve. The results of these discussions 

provide an informed case study and can help the government to make betterinformed 

decisions on Khe Tran–specific land and forest management. A June 

2006 workshop in Thua Thien Hue will give us the opportunity to share this 

information with provincial and local institutions. During the workshop we will 

report the project results at the provincial and local levels. We will present the 

results to government agencies, nongovernmental organizations and villagers, and 

we will collect feedback on the way these results, and more generally the MLA set 

of tools, can be used by each participant in the frame of their own activities and 

projects in Vietnam. 

Based on previous presentation and on interactions with various stakeholders 

during project implementation, it is clear that the method has already raised 

interest. 

• District and commune officers consider MLA a valuable source of information 

on socio-economy, land use and local point of view on land management. 

• Educational institutions such as the Hue University of Agriculture and Forestry 

have expressed interest to integrate the method into their curriculum. 

• Conservation institutions such as the FPD consider MLA a valuable source 

of information for future forest land allocation, natural resource management 

and forest conservation. 

• The international nongovernmental organizations Helvetas, SNV (Netherland 

Development Organization), TBI and WWF consider it an interesting way to 

gather information on local perceptions and priorities in the context of their 

own projects. Some partners have argued that a systematic implementation 

might be difficult in Vietnam because the land use planning and land allocation 

processes are already following specific procedures and because some parts 

of MLA may be considered time consuming and dependent on specialized 

expertise. Nevertheless they have expressed interest to compare the results


collected by this method with their own information on community forestry, 

community-based natural resource management and land allocation. 

• The Vietnamese participants in the surveys have also expressed great interest 

in and enthusiasm for the set of methods, the important information it generates 

and the strong relationship with local people it helps to build. Some of the 

participants working in government institutions such as FIPI, Department of 

Foreign Affairs, HUAF (Hue University of Agriculture and Forestry) and Tay 

Nguyen University have expressed the desire to use the methods in their own 

projects in other places in the province and in the rest of Vietnam, as they find 

that MLA provides relevant data on local priorities related to land allocation 

in the country. 

More generally, in Vietnam, the government increasingly gives local people 

the right to manage the forests, even if recognition of local people’s rights is still 

limited, as is the consideration of local knowledge and perspectives in that rapidly 

changing context. The government still makes decisions on land use planning 

following a relatively rigid top-down approach. In this context, MLA provides a 

relevant set of tools that can be selectively utilized in situations where stakeholders 

and especially decision makers want to become better informed on the perspectives 

of the local people on the important issues of forest land management, reforestation 

and allocation. 

The results of our survey were also used as a basis for follow-up activities 

in Khe Tran, in the frame of the Future Scenario part of this SDC project (Evans, 

2006). The information provided by MLA activities and the good relationship 

we built with the villagers were important contributions to the success of Future 

Scenario activities. 

10.1.2. Main results of our surveys 

The status of forest in Khe Tran has changed within the last 13 years from productive 

forest to watershed protection forest, which is planned to become part of Phong 

Dien Nature Reserve in 2010 because of its high biodiversity. The war, logging 

activities and agricultural practices have deeply disturbed the forest landscape. In 

the frame of the future reserve, local people have been banned from most of the 

extractive activity in the natural forest. The government has proposed to develop 

other activities to provide income to each household. In this context, rubber and 

Acacia plantation programs are supposed to provide cash income to villagers. 

The village is characterized by the presence of a strong minority group, the 

Pahy, mixed with other groups. The villagers moved away during the war, and 

they were authorized to resettle in their village only after the conflict ended. They 

routinely spend a large amount of time in their gardens, rice fields and plantations. 

The village is divided into two areas, the upper part, where villagers have lower 

incomes and depend on home gardens and Acacia plantations for their livelihoods, 

and the lower part, with a higher mean income and depending on more diversified 

crop cultivation, including rubber and rice.


Among the eight main land covers, forests are divided into three categories: 

big tree forests, small tree forests and plantations. The fact that villagers include 

plantations in the forest category seems related to the official forest status 

of plantation lands. Species richness is high in Khe Tran and even potentially 

monotonous land cover types such as plantations or rice fields still have high nontree 

diversity, which enables and maintains their multiuse function. Villagers still 

use a wide range of species for their livelihoods, partly from the natural forests 

but, under present conditions, mainly from the cultivated areas. 

Participatory mapping also showed that knowledge on forest products, 

wildlife and other natural resources is still important for villagers, even if this 

knowledge tends to be limited in diversity of resources and in area covered. Apart 

from this ethno-botanical knowledge, we found that villagers also have a strong 

sense of ownership when they discuss land tenure in the village, repartition of 

plantation responsibilities and expectations for the future. Local people represent 

no imminent threat to the recorded endangered species. The direct impact of human 

activities on forest cover at present cannot be quantified based on our sampling. 

Forest, including natural forest and plantations, is the most important 

landscape element for all the villagers for all the products that can be collected 

from it. Perceptions of forest types vary by gender and according to accessibility 

and activities performed. For men, plantation is the most important category 

because of the economic benefits, while for women it is natural forest because of 

the diversity of NTFPs encountered. 

With respect to different time frames, forest in the present (including 

plantations) is the least important, because of the actual resources depletion, the 

government ban on all natural resource collection in the forest and the actual 

alternative activities. Forest of the past is considered more important, because of 

all the activities that were possible then. Domesticated resources are considered 

more important than any other category, wild or purchased. The government 

policy on the PDNR has affected dependency on forest resources. 

Even if the knowledge on natural resources is still important considering 

the new management activities, we observe that the knowledge on forest is 

progressively decreasing. Local people still recognize the different roles of the 

forest in general, but have difficulty to provide information on specific resources. 

A big contribution to conservation could be realized by integrating the local 

point of view into it and by preserving the local knowledge. The main threat 

identified by villagers is logging, followed by forest fires. This ranking shows 

that there is awareness of the risks for the forest, but also for local livelihoods, of 

engaging in unsustainable activities. 

The villagers explained that they would like to be part of the conservation 

process, for various reasons: to get access to the resources, to enhance their rights 

to the land, to get payment for the activities they would perform for the FPD. They 

expect also to be able to negotiate the use of some of the resources, mainly NTFPs, 

but logging as well. They want to collaborate with conservation institutions, not 

only for the reasons mentioned above, but also to keep the forest as a safety net 

for the future.


10.2. Recommendations 

The following recommendations are based on the results of our survey, and are 

taking into account the different objectives of the project. More specifically, these 

recommendations concern potential follow-up in Khe Tran and the possibility 

of more closely involving the local population in conservation management and 

other land use planning. Government and other development agencies may use 

them to analyse the role of local stakeholders in forest management. 

10.2.1. Community forestry and forest management 

• Community forestry should be considered an interesting option for involving 

local people in reserve management by involving them in more sustainable 

activities. 

• More, and longer-term, targeted studies of the different categories of land 

cover would help to gain more comprehensive information on the forest 

conditions in and near Khe Tran and on the local knowledge and priorities 

concerning forest conservation and management. This would necessitate 

closer involvement in the daily life of the Pahy, the possibility to stay for 

longer periods in the villages and authorization to travel to less accessible 

forests located farther from the village in the core zone of the reserve. 

10.2.2. Land tenure 

• Land tenure remains a sensitive issue, even if initiatives are undertaken by 

the government to recognize the rights of local communities on their land. 

Especially concerning plantations, land tenure should be secured so that the 

local community does not have to rely only on limited contracts to exploit 

these lands. 

10.2.3. Conservation 

• Involvement in management. Local people should be more directly involved 

in conservation area management. At the moment, they only have to follow 

the rules designed by government and conservation agencies, and they are not 

allowed to perform any extractive activity in forest proximate to or within the 

nature reserve. Local people represent a human resource that can be useful 

for the reserve (in the fight against poachers and illegal loggers, for example). 

The local interest clearly was direct participation in reserve administration 

activities, through jobs. 

• Involvement in negotiations. We recommend that information on threatened 

species be given to villagers to raise the awareness of conservation needs. The 

specific uses of especially threatened species should be discussed in order to 

give people the option of choosing other species for these uses. 

• Zonation in the reserve. Traditionally a part of the reserve has belonged to the 

local community, and villagers should not be kept away from their territory


but be part of the decisions concerning its sustainable management. Local 

people should be given more rights to collect and use forest products, through 

a negotiation process. Viewing the local people as part of the solution for 

conserving Phong Dien Nature Reserve is not yet an option for the government 

but they could help keep poachers away from the reserve. There should be an 

agreement on the possibility to access the forest, even that inside the nature 

reserve, during hard times (drought or flood) to collect some important forest 

products. 

10.2.4. Economic incentives 

• The danger of the new economic and subsistence activities (plantations, rice 

farming) is that they keep people away from more-traditional activities. Even 

if the Pahy society is changing, preserving its traditional roots and its bases 

should be an important condition in any attempt of integration into other 

economic systems. 

• Decisions should be made on the diversification of agricultural practices 

(aquaculture, etc.). The profitability of plantations depends on market 

fluctuation and they should not be taken as the sole alternative to shifting 

cultivation and extractive activities in the forest. 

• The current new economic activities (especially plantations) are unsecured. 

Since most of the land around the village has been converted, few options are 

left to villagers in case of an economic crisis. 

10.2.5. Cultural identity and local knowledge 

• The political process of integration of the Pahy minority group into the 

lowland way of life carries the danger of loss of cultural identity. Even if the 

integration of other ethnic groups into Pahy society is a slow process, these 

communities bring with them new behaviours, new activities and relationships 

with the local government. 

• Emphasis should be placed on tapping the existing (remaining) local 

knowledge of the village community. More studies should be implemented to 

collect information on local skills, and the traditional knowledge should be 

sustained. 

• Further research on the sustainability of NTFP collection is necessary, as an 

option for sustainable use of forest resources. Most of the natural vegetation 

in Khe Tran is disturbed forest or shrub lands, and the impacts of floods and 

fires continue to influence forest cover and structure.

Bibliography 

Appraisal Mission. 2004. Thua Thien Hue rural development programme II: 

programme framework document. Post Appraisal Revision. (http://global. 

finland.fi/english/procurement/ThuaThienHue/pd_viet_tthII.pdf) 

Artemiev, Igor. 2003. State forestry enterprise reform in Vietnam: unlocking the 

potential for commercial wood growing. Technical note. Rural Development 

and Natural Resources East Asia and Pacific Region. 

Asian Development Bank (ADB). 2005. Ethnic minority development plan for 

Central region water resources project. ADB VIE 30292. (http://www.adb. 

org/Documents/IndigenousPeoples/VIE/EMDP-CRWR.pdf) 

Barney, Keith. 2005. Central plans and global exports: Tracking Vietnam’s Forestry 

Commodity Chains and Export Links to China. Forest Trend. (http://www. 

forest-trends.org/documents/publications/Vietnam%20Final%20Report%20 

7-1-05.pdf) 

Evans, Kristen. 2006. Evaluating and Adapting Future Scenarios in Forest- 

Dependent Communities in Hue Province, Vietnam. 

Le Thanh Chien. 1996. Trial planting of Cinnamomum cassia for high essential oil 

productivity from the leaves. Forest Science Institute of Vietnam, Hanoi. 

Forest Inventory and Planning Institute (FIPI). 1996. Vietnam Forest Trees. 

Agricultural Publishing House, Hanoi. 

Gordon, Raymond G., Jr. (ed.) 2005. Ethnologue: Languages of the world, 15th 

edition. SIL International, Dallas, TX, USA. (http://www.ethnologue.com/) 

Chinese Academy of Science, Institute of Plant Research. 1972-1976. Iconographia 

Cormophytorum Sinicorum. Volume 1 – 5. Since Press. Beijing. (Zhongguo 

Gaodeng Zhiwu Tujian, Kexue Chubanshe:1-5 Beijing) 

IUCN. 2006. IUCN red list of threatened species. http://www.iucnredlist.org/


Le Van Lan, S. Ziegler, and T. Grever. 2002. Utilization of forest products and 

environmental services in Bach Ma National Park, Vietnam. http://www. 

mekong-protected-areas.org/vietnam/docs/bach_ma_forest_products.pdf 

Mabberley, D.J. 1997. The plant-book: a portable dictionary of the vascular plants. 

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. 

Maltsoglou, Irini and George Rapsomanikis. 2005. The contribution of livestock 

to household income in Vietnam: a household typology based analysis. PPLPI 

Working Paper No. 21. FAO. (http://www.fao.org/ag/AGAinfo/projects/en/ 

pplpi/docarc/wp21.pdf) 

Matarasso, Michael and Do Thi Thanh Huyen. 2005. Community participation for 

conservation success: promoting effective conservation of Vietnam’s natural 

heritage through community-based environmental education. Final Progress 

Report. WWF Indochina Environmental Education Unit, Vietnam. 

Oudhia, Pankaj. 2004. Kans (Saccharum spontaneum L.). http://www.hort.purdue. 

edu/newcrop/CropFactSheets/kans.html 

Pham Hoang Ho. 1993. Cây cỏ Việt Nam. Volume 1-6. Montreal. 

Sheil, Douglas, Rajindra Puri, Imam Basuki, Miriam van Heist, Meilinda Wan, 

Nining Liswanti, Rukmiyati, Mustofa A. Sardjono, Ismayadi Samsoedin, Kade 

Sidiyasa, Chrisandini, Edi Permana, Eddy M. Angi, Franz Gatzweiler, Brook 

Johnson, Akhmad Wijaya. 2003. Exploring biological diversity, environment 

and local people’s perspectives in forest landscapes, 2nd revised and updated 

edition. Center for International for Forestry Research, Ministry of Forestry 

and International Tropical Timber Organization, Bogor, Indonesia. 

Le Trong Trai, Tran Hieu Minh, Tran Quang Ngoc, Tran Quoc Dung and Ross 

Hughes. 2001. An investment plan for the establishment of Phong Dien 

Nature Reserve, Thua Thien Hue Province, Vietnam. BirdLife International 

Vietnam Program and the Forest Inventory and Planning Institute, Hanoi, 

Vietnam. 

Vu Hoai Minh and Hans Warfvinge. 2002. Issues in management of natural forests 

by households and local communities of three provinces in Viet Nam: Hoa 

Binh, Nghe An, and Thua Thien Hue. Asia Forest Network; Working Paper 

Series vol 5, California. 47p. 

WCMC. 1994. Biodiversity profile of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam. 

Appendix 5: threatened plant species. (http://www.wcmc.org.uk/infoserv/ 

countryp/vietnam/app5.html) 

Yukio, Ikemoto. 2001. Poverty alleviation policies and ethnic minority people 

in Vietnam. Conference Justice and Poverty: Examining Sen’s Capability 

Approach, Cambridge, 5–7 June 2001. (http://www.st-edmunds.cam.ac.uk/ 

vhi/sen/papers/ikemoto.pdf ) 

Yunnan Shumu Tuzhi, 1990. Yunnan Kexue Chubanshe, Kunming.

Annexes 

Annex 1. LUVI (mean value) of important plant species by different use categories (result based on scoring exercise of four groups of 

informant) 

Plant name Category of use 

No. 

Marketable 

Scientific/English Family Pahy Firewood Fodder Food 

Tools 

items 

1 Allium sp. Alliaceae Toi - - 0.10 - - 

2 Colocasia sp. Araceae Pong - 0.16 0.75 - - 

3 Colocasia sp. Araceae Tu ven - 0.56 - - - 

4 Colocasia sp. Araceae Tu ven thuc - 0.56 - - - 

5 Schefflera octophylla Araliaceae A ruom 0.09 - - - - 

6 Calamus walkeri Arecaceae Ki re - - 0.99 1.96 - 

7 Caryota urens Arecaceae A tút - - 0.14 - - 

8 Licuala spinosa Arecaceae A ro 0.27 - - 1.78 1.47 

9 Livistona saribus Arecaceae Ta lo - - 0.30 - - 

10 Ormosia balansae Arecaceae Ràng - - - - 0.42 

11 Rhapis laoensis Arecaceae à ché r - - 0.68 - - 

12 Canarium pimela Burseraceae Clam 0.20 - - - - 

13 Cratoxylum pruniflorum Clusiaceae Leng ngeng 0.64 - - - - 

14 Garcinia merguensis Clusiaceae Chaon - - 0.12 - - 

15 * Convolvulaceae La bai - 0.17 - - - 

16 Hopea odorata Dipterocarpaceae Sao - - - 0.25 - 

17 Aporosa sp. Euphorbiaceae Mộc 0.11 - - 0.08 - 

18 Baccaurea annamensis Euphorbiaceae Dau ne - - 0.08 - - 

19 Hevea brasiliensis Euphorbiaceae Cu su/Cao su 0.27 - - 1.68 - 

20 * Euphorbiaceae A leo 0.28 - - - -

Annex 1. Continued 

0 | Annexes 


No. 

Marketable 


Tools 

items 

21 Cleistanthus aff. hirsutulus Euphorbiaceae Palar - - - - 2.09 

22 Afzelia xylocarpa Fabaceae Lim - 0.21 - - 0.14 

23 Lithocarpus sp. Fagaceae A re 0.60 - - - 1.27 

24 * Gesneriaceae Tai nai - - 0.06 - - 

25 Litsea sp. Lauraceae Boi loi - - - 0.22 0.72 

26 Barringtonia macrostachya Lecythidaceae Tâm lang - - 0.14 - - 

27 Angiopteris sp. Marattiaceae Ti lai - - 0.07 - - 

28 Melastoma sp. Melastomataceae Car cho 0.27 - - - - 

29 Khaya senegalensis Meliaceae Xa cu - - - 0.30 - 

30 Acacia auriculiformis Mimosaceae Tràm 1.22 - - 2.53 0.21 

31 Acacia mangium Mimosaceae Keo - - - 1.16 - 

32 Ficus racemosa Moraceae Tut nat - 0.14 - - - 

33 Banana Musaceae Pe - 0.89 2.16 0.17 - 

34 Horsfieldia amygdalina Myristicaceae Cha hàm 0.05 - - - - 

35 Artocarpus heterophylla Myrtaceae Panay - - 0.44 - 0.31 

36 Baeckea frutescens Myrtaceae Sen - - - 1.03 - 

37 Eucalyptus sp. Myrtaceae Bach dan 0.27 - - - - 

38 Rhodomyrtus tomentosa Myrtaceae Clem 0.45 - - - 0.23 

39 Pinus latteri Pinaceae A ngo - - - 0.49 - 

40 Bamboo Poaceae Mang - - - 0.44 - 

41 Bamboo Poaceae Tang nu - - - - 0.14 

42 Bamboo Poaceae Pheo 0.27 0.13 1.91 0.37 0.49 

43 Digitaria petelotii Poaceae Samalu - 0.15 - - -




No. 

Marketable 


Tools 

items 

44 Grass Poaceae Sắc - 1.94 - - - 

45 Imperata sp. Poaceae Sắc blang - 0.60 - - - 

46 Melocalamus sp.1 Poaceae A tang 0.27 - - 0.59 - 

47 Melocalamus sp.2 Poaceae Tu vien - - - - 2.19 

48 Thysanolaena sp. Poaceae Chul - 2.12 - 0.39 - 

49 * Poaceae Sắc ila - 0.44 - - - 

50 Mussaenda sp. Rubiaceae Piêng pang - 0.14 - - - 

51 Wendlandia glabrata Rubiaceae A xop - - - - 2.32 

52 Commersonia bartramia Sterculiaceae A pong 0.47 - - - 1.28 

53 Tarrietia javanica Sterculiaceae Huen - - - 0.69 1.15 

54 Mushroom * Tria - - 1.09 0.10 - 

55 Vegetable * Co cho 0.11 - 0.23 - - 

56 * * A lo 0.11 - - - - 

57 * * A pang - - - - 0.47 

58 * * A roc - 0.24 - 0.21 

59 * * Bong bot 0.20 - - - - 

60 * * Cac cho 0.04 - - - - 

61 * * Chel 0.11 - - - - 

62 * * Choan 0.28 - - - - 

63 * * Chua - - 0.07 - - 

64 * * Chun - - - 0.11 - 

65 * * Co chat - 0.34 - - - 

66 * * Co chinh - 0.26 - - -


| Annexes 


No. 

Marketable 


Tools 

items 

67 * * Co ron - - 0.26 - - 

68 * * Crol 0.32 - - - - 

69 * * Cron - - 0.24 - - 

70 * * Cu - - - - 0.21 

71 * * Dong 0.14 0.24 - - 

72 * * Leng nganh 0.27 - - - - 

73 * * Pa ro ne - - - 0.15 - 

74 * * Ran xel 0.07 - - - - 

75 * * Ta rang - - - - 0.53 

76 * * Tan ao 0.22 - - - - 

77 * * Tu luon - - - 0.17 - 

78 * * Tu phi 0.56 - - - - 

79 * * Tu Va - - 0.38 - - 

80 * * Tung ao 0.17 - - - - 

81 * * Va 0.14 - - - - 

- means that the species is not used for the corresponding category 

* means that the species is unidentified because of no specimen/sample was found in the research site.


Annex 2. LUVI (mean value) of important animal species by different use categories 

based on scoring exercise of four groups of informant 

Animal name Category of use 

No. 

Pahy English Food 

Marketable 

item 

Medicine Tools 

1 A at na * 0.59 - - - 

2 A binh Rat 1.95 - - - 

3 A che Bird 0.02 - - - 

4 A cuot Frog 0.89 - - - 

5 A ut * - - 0.44 - 

6 Can chong * - - 0.24 - 

7 Chim chao mao Bird - 0.14 - 0.03 

8 Chim chich choe Bird - - 0.03 

9 Chim cuong Peacock - 0.21 - 0.10 

10 Chim sao Bird - 0.20 - 0.04 

11 Chon den * 0.92 - - - 

12 Co chong * - - 0.17 - 

13 Cu lui * 0.14 - - - 

14 Cu xanh Snake 0.02 - 0.12 - 

15 Cuong * - - - 0.27 

16 Dong * - - - 0.08 

17 Hon * - - 0.30 - 

18 K chu * - 0.09 - 0.05 

19 Khep * - - 0.03 - 

20 Khuou Bird - 0.27 - 0.25 

21 Kien * 0.06 - - - 

22 Kiep * 0.08 - - - 

23 Pi reo * - - - 0.29 

24 Quai * 0.04 - - - 

25 quai * - - 0.24 - 

26 Tac ke * - - 0.16 - 

27 Truoi Chicken 0.41 - - - 

28 Truon prieng * 0.15 - - - 

29 Vet * - - - 0.07 

- means that the species is not used for the corresponding category

Annex 3. The botanical names, families and local name of specimens collected within and outside the plots by their use categories 

| Annexes 

No use 

Tools 

Recreation 


Miscellaneous*** 

Medicine 





Local name* 

Land 

Botanical name Family 

(Pahy/Vietnamese) 

type** 

Dicotyledones 

Adiantum diaphanum Adiantaceae - 2 

Adiantum sp.1 Adiantaceae - 2 

Adiantum sp.2 Adiantaceae - 2 

Adiantum sp.3 Adiantaceae Ta ranh canh 3 

Anogramma microphylla Adiantaceae Sắc a trom can chong 4 

Alternanthera sessilis Amaranthaceae Sắc chiêú 5 

Alternanthera sp.1 Amaranthaceae Sắc cằn cờ leng 6 

Centella asiatica Apiaceae Rau má/Sắc a tăng/Sắc i cha 3 4 5 6 

Melodinus cf. annamensis Apocynaceae A mư a tang 2 

Melodinus cf. myrtifolius Apocynaceae A mư cê ló 2 

Melodinus locii Apocynaceae A mư cê ló 2 

Wrightia dubia Apocynaceae Choh/Còi ke 2 

Hoya sp.1 Asclepiadaceae A mư bỏ tê ró 2 

Streptocaulon sp.1 Asclepiadaceae A mu pu xá 3 6 

Ageratum conyzoides Asteraceae Cá hỡi/Sắc par abon 3 4 

Crassocephalum crepidioides Asteraceae Rau nghđo/Sắc a ngươn 3 6 

Eupatorium sp.1 Asteraceae Tôm bro bon 6 

Gnaphalium polycaulon Asteraceae - 5 

Basketry/rope 

Food 

Fodder 

Firewood 

Lactuca sp.1 Asteraceae Sắc a pi 6


No use 

Tools 

Recreation 



Medicine 





Local name* 

Land 



type** 

Lactuca sp.2 Asteraceae Sắc tía 6 

Spilanthes cf. iabadicensis Asteraceae Sắc răm bon 6 

Vernonia patula Asteraceae Sắc a chể 6 

Begonia cf. porteri Begoniaceae Cu to a rop 2 

Canarium pimela Burseraceae Clam 2 

Dacryodes cf. breviracemosa Burseraceae A long chua lòy/A long khét 2 

Garuga sp.1 Burseraceae A long cì ăi 2 

Garuga sp.2 Burseraceae A long chuá 2 

Bauhinia cf. lorantha Caesalpiniaceae A mư cu tiên 2 

Bauhinia cf. penicilliloba Caesalpiniaceae A mư cu tiên/A mư tà riêng 1 2 

Peltophorum dasyrrhachis Caesalpiniaceae Tulvom 2 

Cleome viscosa Capparaceae Cơn côc mẵn 5 6 

Basketry/rope 

Food 

Fodder 

Firewood 


Stixis scandens Capparaceae Nôm bê lốc 4 

Stixis suaveolens Capparaceae Cần cò lốt 3 

Calophyllum cf. balansae Clusiaceae A long cồn 2 

Cratoxylum maingayi Clusiaceae A long oi/A long râu gia/Rìng rìng 2 6 

Cratoxylum sp.1 Clusiaceae A long ran sia 3 

Hypericum japonicum Clusiaceae Sắc a da pang nang 4 

Quisqualis indica Combretaceae A long chà chế 3 

Ipomoea batatas Convolvulaceae A rau cu lang 6 

Ipomoea purpurea Convolvulaceae A mu ran gion/Sắc rần dòn 6


| Annexes 

No use 

Tools 

Recreation 



Medicine 





Local name* 

Land 



type** 

Dillenia turbinata Dilleniaceae Ripo 1 2 

A mư cah hát/A mư lân hát/A mư lang 

Tetracera sarmentosa spp. asiatica Dilleniaceae 

1 2 

hat 

Aceratium sp.1 Elaeocarpaceae Sắc a nả 6 

Basketry/rope 

Food 

Fodder 

Firewood 

Elaeocarpus cf. nitidus Elaeocarpaceae - 2 

Itea macrophylla Escalloniaceae Cỏ cha 2 

Aporosa dioica Euphorbiaceae A long mom/Mom along sên 1 4 

Aporosa microstachya Euphorbiaceae Mộc 4 

Aporosa tetrapleura Euphorbiaceae A long mom pu xá/A long môt/Mom 1 2 

Cleistanthus cf. hirsutulus Euphorbiaceae Pa lar 2 

Cleistanthus sp.1 Euphorbiaceae A long ti 2 

Croton potabilis Euphorbiaceae A long lán liếc 2 

Epiprinus balansae Euphorbiaceae A long pa cha 2 

Euphorbia sp.1 Euphorbiaceae - 5 

Glochidion cf. jussieuanum Euphorbiaceae A long vu ve 3 

Hevea brasiliensis Euphorbiaceae Caosu 3 

Macaranga trichocarpa Euphorbiaceae A long cà pai 2 

Mallotus floribundus Euphorbiaceae Lanh lep 1 

Mallotus hookerianus Euphorbiaceae A long tò ràng a rây 2 

Mallotus paniculatus Euphorbiaceae Alỏe/A long a ló 3 

Phyllanthus amarus Euphorbiaceae Chã ợị 3


No use 

Tools 

Recreation 



Medicine 





Local name* 

Land 



type** 

Phyllanthus sp.1 Euphorbiaceae Sắc pa co 6 

Abrus mollis Fabaceae A mư ân rá 2 

Arachis hypogaea Fabaceae Aton lon 5 

Bowringia callicarpa Fabaceae A beo/A mư nghê 1 2 

Bowringia sp.1 Fabaceae - 2 

Dalbergia polyadelpha Fabaceae A vét 2 

Dalbergia sp.1 Fabaceae A long pộ ru 3 

Derris sp.1 Fabaceae A mư a óc 6 

Desmodium trifolium Fabaceae - 4 

Millettia sp.1 Fabaceae A chuông 6 

Ormosia semicastrata var. 

Fabaceae Ràng cóc 2 

litchiifolia 

Lithocarpus ailaoensis Fagaceae A re 2 

Basketry/rope 

Food 

Fodder 

Firewood 


Lithocarpus hemisphericus Fagaceae A long lim 2 

Lithocarpus sp.1 Fagaceae A long vang 2 

Lithocarpus sp.2 Fagaceae A long cu vï 2 

Quercus cf. sp.1 Fagaceae A long a rở 2 

Homalium cf. hainanense Flacourtiaceae A long cê lâm 2 

Boea rufescens Gesneriaceae - 2 

Chirita cf. minutihamata Gesneriaceae - 2 

Dicranopteris linearis Gleicheniaceae Rang rang 3


| Annexes 

No use 

Local name* 

Land 



type** 

Dicranopteris sp.1 Gleicheniaceae Taranh 3 

Gomphandra sp.1 Icacinaceae Càm măng a đe 2 

Gonocaryum lobbianum Icacinaceae - 2 

Iodes ovalis var. vitiginea Icacinaceae A mư bay bươn/Pi a pang 1 3 

Irvingia malayana Irvingiaceae A long chê 2 

Ixonanthes cf. reticulata Ixonanthaceae A long mât 2 

Leucas zeylanica Lamiaceae Sắc thúi/Sắc tă ong 5 

Beilschmiedia sp.1 Lauraceae Mân 2 

Cinnamomum cf. burmannii Lauraceae A long cha chế 2 

Cinnamomum cf. mairei Lauraceae A long tân bu 2 

Cryptocarya cf. metcalfiana Lauraceae - 1 

cf. Litsea sp.1 Lauraceae - 2 

Litsea cubeba Lauraceae A long cê lã 2 

Litsea verticillata Lauraceae - 1 

Machilus odoratissima Lauraceae Bêi lêi 2 

Phoebe cuneata Lauraceae A long trèng treng 2 

Barringtonia macrostachya Lecythidaceae Tâm lang 2 

Strychnos cf. ovata Loganiaceae A mư lá vang/Amư tât cây/A mư tói 1 2 

Urena lobata Malvaceae A long ta con a a/Sắc ki đon 4 6 

Acinodendron sp.1 Melastomataceae A long a riêp 2 

Basketry/rope 

Tools 

Recreation 



Medicine 





Food 

Fodder 

Firewood 

Blastus cf. eglandulosus Melastomataceae A long ka cho 2


No use 

Tools 

Recreation 



Medicine 





Food 

Fodder 

Firewood 


Local name* 

Land 



type** 

Blastus eglandulosus Melastomataceae A long ka cho 2 

Melastoma sp.1 Melastomataceae Crâr cho 3 

Melastoma sp.2 Melastomataceae A long ca ro cho 3 

Melastoma sp.3 Melastomataceae A long ca ro cho 4 

cf. Memecylon sp.1 Melastomataceae A long trẽn trẽn 2 

Memecylon cf. fruticosum Melastomataceae A long apăng 2 

Memecylon ligustrinum Melastomataceae Cê lâm 2 

Dysoxylum cf. binectariferum Meliaceae A long capo 1 

Amư/Dây a mư/Piro pang kon/ Sắc cì 

Diploclisia glaucescens Menispermaceae 

3 4 6 

pỡng 

Fibraurea recisa Menispermaceae A mư nghê/Sắc rần sàng 2 3 

Fibraurea cf. recisa Menispermaceae - 1 

Fibraurea tinctoria Menispermaceae A beo 2 

Acacia auriculiformis Mimosaceae A long tràm 3 

Acacia mangium Mimosaceae A long keo 3 4 

Acacia siamensis Mimosaceae A long muồng 3 

Acacia sp.1 Mimosaceae A mư tà riêng 2 

Archidendron chevalieri Mimosaceae Ea lìt 2 

Mimosa pudica Mimosaceae Sắc a chiết 6 

Mimosa sp.2 Mimosaceae Sắc a xông 6 

Mollugo pentaphylla Molluginaceae Sắc a cho 5 6 

Basketry/rope


0 | Annexes 

No use 

Tools 

Recreation 



Medicine 





Local name* 

Land 



type** 

Artocarpus heterophyllus Moraceae A long pa nây 6 

Artocarpus melinoxylus Moraceae A put 2 

Artocarpus cf. melinoxylus Moraceae A long a pứt 2 

Artocarpus styracifolius Moraceae Chæi 1 

Ficus sagittata Moraceae A mư cusóc 2 

Ficus sp.1 Moraceae A long tốt tốt 3 

Ficus sp.2 Moraceae A mư sôc 2 

Ficus vasculosa Moraceae A long ca đom/Già díp 1 2 

Taxotrophis sp.1 Moraceae Tỏri 2 

Horsfieldia amygdalina Myristicaceae Cha hàm 2 

Horsfieldia sp.1 Myristicaceae A long cha hàm 2 

Ardisia quinquegona var. latifolia Myrsinaceae - 1 

Basketry/rope 

Food 

Fodder 

Firewood 

Maesa balansae Myrsinaceae Dong don 3 

Maesa perlarius Myrsinaceae A long 4 

Acmena cf. acuminatissima Myrtaceae A long choang 2 

Decaspermum parviflorum Myrtaceae A long bùng bôc 2 

Rhodomyrtus sp.1 Myrtaceae A long cê lem 6 

Syzygium cf. bonii Myrtaceae - 1 

Syzygium cf. bracteatum Myrtaceae A long a sâu 2 

Syzygium cf. cochinchinensis Myrtaceae A long ca doan/Cê lâm 1 2 

Syzygium cf. lineatum Myrtaceae A long tu kiêng 2


No use 

Tools 

Recreation 



Medicine 





Local name* 

Land 



type** 

Syzygium rubicundum Myrtaceae A long trám 1 

Syzygium sp.1 Myrtaceae - 1 

Syzygium sp.2 Myrtaceae - 1 

Syzygium sp.4 Myrtaceae Cê lâm cù so 1 

Syzygium sp.5 Myrtaceae A long a păng 2 

Basketry/rope 

Food 

Fodder 

Firewood 

Syzygium sp.6 Myrtaceae A long a páng 2 

Syzygium sp.7 Myrtaceae A long tần coi tì rá 2 


Syzygium sp.8 Myrtaceae A long a tiởng 2 

Syzygium vestitum Myrtaceae Trâm tổ kiến 2 

Gomphia serrata Ochnaceae Tờ nu 2 

Linociera cf. ramiflora Oleaceae A long chot a vot 1 

Linociera thorelii Oleaceae A long ta rê con ke/Trai 3 4 

Myxopyrum nervosum Oleaceae A mư a pư ăng 1 2 

cf. Osmanthus sp.1 Oleaceae Chàm hàm 1 

Ludwigia prostrata Onagraceae Sắc tiêu 6 

Microdesmis caseariaefolia Pandaceae A long tù nu tù mò/Tờ nu tờ mo 2 

Adenia heterophylla Passifloraceae A mư cu tiên 3 

Piper cf. brevicaule Piperaceae - 1 

Piper nigrum Piperaceae Tiêu tho 6 

Piper sp.1 Piperaceae - 1 

Piper sp.2 Piperaceae A ai ki nen 1


| Annexes 

No use 

Local name* 

Land 



type** 

Piper sp.3 Piperaceae Là bả âm bút/Tiêu tho 2 6 

Piper sp.4 Piperaceae Sắc alít 6 

Xanthophyllum cf. flavescens Polygalaceae A long to răng a rây 1 2 

Xanthophyllum cf. hainanense Polygalaceae A long a so 2 

Rubus sp.1 Rosaceae Sắc a lau 6 

Rubus sp.2 Rosaceae A long po ro su/Parosu 3 6 

Gardenia sootepensis Rubiaceae A long ca ao 1 2 

Gardenia sp.1 Rubiaceae A long ka ao 2 

Hedyotis capitellata var. mollis Rubiaceae A mư a tói 3 

Hedyotis diffusa Rubiaceae Sắc pi nhe 6 

Hedyotis hedyotides Rubiaceae Pi a pàng cù téc 2 

Hedyotis cf. hispida Rubiaceae - 2 

Hedyotis cf. leptoneura Rubiaceae Sắc a dó 6 

Hedyotis cf. microcephala Rubiaceae Tà rinh 3 

Hedyotis multiglomerata Rubiaceae Rau mè 3 

Hedyotis multiglomerulata Rubiaceae Sắc lá tre 5 

Hedyotis cf. pilulifera Rubiaceae Sắc ản truôi 1 3 

Hedyotis cf. symplociformis Rubiaceae Sắc tê rá i a chá 4 

Hedyotis sp.1 Rubiaceae Cây mè/Sắc mè 5 6 

Ixora sp.1 Rubiaceae Pin ra vốt 2 

Basketry/rope 

Tools 

Recreation 



Medicine 





Food 

Fodder 

Firewood


No use 

Tools 

Recreation 



Medicine 





Food 

Fodder 

Firewood 


Local name* 

Land 



type** 

Lasianthus cyanocarpus var. 

Rubiaceae - 2 

asperulatus 

Lasianthus sp.2 Rubiaceae - 1 

Morinda cf. parvifolia Rubiaceae A mư a dó/A mư bo tê ro 2 3 

Morinda cf. umbellata Rubiaceae Dây a mư 4 

Morinda sp.1 Rubiaceae A mư pa lai 2 

Mussaenda aptera Rubiaceae A mư pa ro pang/Pia rơ pang 2 3 

Mussaenda cf. aptera Rubiaceae A mư a lá/Pia pàng âm bút 2 

Mussaenda sp.1 Rubiaceae Pi a rỏ pang 3 

Neolamarckia cf. adamba Rubiaceae A long ka ao 2 

Neonauclea cf. purpurea Rubiaceae Mắt boái 2 

Paederia scandens Rubiaceae Sắc co lo/Sắc la vang/Tar bo tro 6 

Psychotria serpens Rubiaceae Sắc bul 2 

Psychotria sp.1 Rubiaceae Còike 2 

Psychotria sp.2 Rubiaceae Along piararốt 3 

Randia spinosa Rubiaceae Along a xông a tói 3 

Acronychia pedunculata Rutaceae A long atốt/Cơm rưîu 2 

Euodia calophylla Rutaceae A long a lô 2 

A long cfsốc lâm pá/A long par cha/A 

Maclurodendron sp.1 Rutaceae 

2 

long răng sê 

Amesiodendron chinense Sapindaceae Tà ràng 1 2 

Basketry/rope


| Annexes 

No use 

Local name* 

Land 



type** 

Nephelium lappaceum Sapindaceae A long cê rôl 2 

Planchonella cf. annamensis Sapotaceae - 2 

Lindernia anagallis Scrophulariaceae Pi a rò pang 4 6 

Lindernia oblonga Scrophulariaceae - 3 5 

Lindernia pusilla Scrophulariaceae Sắc a púa/Sắc cu so 4 6 

Scoparia sp.1 Scrophulariaceae Sắc răng cưa 5 

Torenia benthamiana Scrophulariaceae Sắc a quang 4 

Torenia glabra Scrophulariaceae - 3 

Physalis angulata Solanaceae Cê leng 3 

Physalis sp.1 Solanaceae Sắc cê leng cê long 5 

Solanum cf. americanum Solanaceae Sắc rau bay 4 6 

Heritiera augustata Sterculiaceae Mang 2 

Heritiera macrophylla Sterculiaceae A long mang 2 

Melochia corchorifolia Sterculiaceae Sắc báy/Sắc lăn lép/Sắc tờ con 5 6 

Adinandra cf. hainanensis Theaceae - 1 

Camellia cf. fleuryi Theaceae A tung 1 

Camellia cf. nitidissima Theaceae A long a tung 2 

Camellia sinensis Theaceae A long tre 3 

Camellia sp.0 Theaceae Rau ròn 1 

Camellia sp.1 Theaceae - 1 

Basketry/rope 

Tools 

Recreation 



Medicine 





Food 

Fodder 

Firewood 

Camellia sp.2 Theaceae Lân lép 1


No use 

Tools 

Recreation 



Medicine 





Food 

Fodder 

Firewood 


Local name* 

Land 



type** 

Eurya cf. acuminata var. euprista Theaceae A tích/Cần nổ 2 

Eurya cf. nitida Theaceae A long chên 3 

Eurya cf. trichocarpa Theaceae A tich 1 

Eurya sp.1 Theaceae A têch 1 

Eurya sp.2 Theaceae Mâl 1 

Linostoma decandrum Thymelaeaceae A tiêng 2 

Gironniera cuspidata Ulmaceae A xấc 2 

Gironniera subaequalis Ulmaceae A long a sất 2 

Gironniera yunnanensis Ulmaceae A long a sấc 2 

Clerodendrum cyrtophyllum Verbenaceae A long a lau 3 

Premna sp.1 Verbenaceae Piarò pang 6 

Premna sp.2 Verbenaceae Piarò pang 6 

Vitex cf. pierreana Verbenaceae Ti 2 

Vitex trifolia Verbenaceae A long ti hê 1 

Rinorea cf. anguifera Violaceae A long a sâc 2 

Tetrastigma cf. tonkinense Vitaceae - 2 

Tetrastigma sp.1 Vitaceae - 2 

Ferns 

Allantodia metteniana var. faurieri Athyriaceae Cằn 2 

Diplazium crassiusculum Athyriaceae - 2 

Blechnum orientale Blechnaceae Sắc côn căn 3 

Basketry/rope


| Annexes 

No use 

Local name* 

Land 



type** 

Blechnum sp.1 Blechnaceae Con 6 

Aspidistra cf. minutiflora Convallariaceae Sắc ta cao 2 

Disporum trabeculatum Convallariaceae - 2 

Ophiopogon japonicus Convallariaceae Sắc a bon/Sắc ta riết 3 4 6 

Ophiopogon reptans Convallariaceae - 2 

Ophiopogon sp.1 Convallariaceae Sắc soi tần cào 2 

Lindsaea ensifolia Dennstaedtiaceae Sắc ta renh co 2 

Pteris cf. venusta Pteridaceae Tờ cây 2 

Pteris multifida Pteridaceae Sắc con can 4 

Pteris sp.1 Pteridaceae Bong bong 2 

Pteris sp.2 Pteridaceae - 2 

Pteris sp.3 Pteridaceae Taron 3 

Pteris sp.4 Pteridaceae - 1 

Lygodium conforme Schizaeaceae Sắc pang tuoi/sắc cong chao 2 4 

Lygodium digitatum Schizaeaceae Sắc cổng chào 2 

Lygodium cf. digitatum Schizaeaceae Ta ranh 2 

Lygodium flexuosum Schizaeaceae Bong bong 3 

Lygodium microphyllum Schizaeaceae Sắc co 4 

Lygodium sp.1 Schizaeaceae Sắc cê ten nhon 6 



Basketry/rope 

Tools 

Recreation 



Medicine 





Food 

Fodder 

Firewood


No use 

Tools 

Recreation 



Medicine 





Food 

Fodder 

Firewood 


Local name* 

Land 



type** 

Lygodium sp.4 Schizaeaceae Sắc tà rang 6 

Lygodium sp.5 Schizaeaceae Ta rò nhon 3 

Ferns allies 

Lycopodium cernuum Lycopodiaceae Hoa ợĩ 3 

Selaginella cf. picta Selaginellaceae - 2 

Gymnospermae 

Gnetum cf. montanum Gnetaceae A mư cê lãt 2 

Monocotyledones 

Colocasia esculenta Araceae Uìlang 6 

Pothos sp.1 Araceae Amư căncrô 2 

Pothos sp.2 Araceae - 2 

Raphidophora sp.1 Araceae - 2 




Raphidophora sp.5 Araceae Ati kahép 2 

Calamus cf. dioicus Arecaceae Ki re tăng 2 

Calamus cf. salicifolius Arecaceae - 2 

Calamus sp.1 Arecaceae Ki re 2 

Calamus sp.2 Arecaceae Saphun 2 

Calamus sp.3 Arecaceae A tói 2 

Basketry/rope


| Annexes 

No use 

Tools 

Recreation 



Medicine 





Local name* 

Land 



type** 

Calamus sp.5 Arecaceae A tút 2 

Calamus sp.6 Arecaceae Lết 2 

Calamus sp.7 Arecaceae A zay 2 

Calamus tonkinensis Arecaceae Kì re đá 2 

Calamus walkeri Arecaceae Kì re 1 

Caryota monostachya Arecaceae A tút 2 

Caryota urens Arecaceae A tút 2 

Korthalsia sp.1 Arecaceae Ki a sa phun 2 

Licuala sp.1 Arecaceae A ro 2 

Licuala spinosa Arecaceae A ro 2 

Licuala cf. spinosa Arecaceae A chê rê 6 

Pinanga duperreana Arecaceae Ki re tăng 2 

Pinanga sp.1 Arecaceae Ântôm apoang 2 

Plectocomia elongata Arecaceae Adur 2 

cf. Plectocomia sp.4 Arecaceae Adur 2 

Basketry/rope 

Food 

Fodder 

Firewood 

Commelina cf. diffusa Commelinaceae Sắc pờ lông a tót 6 

Commelina sp.2 Commelinaceae Sắc nem 6 

Tradescantia zebrina Commelinaceae Co riu 3 

Bulbostylis barbata var. pulchella Cyperaceae Sắc a bơn 6 

Cyperus diffusus Cyperaceae - 3 

Cyperus haspan Cyperaceae Sắc a môn/Sắc ta riởng 4


No use 

Tools 

Recreation 



Medicine 





Food 

Fodder 

Firewood 


Local name* 

Land 



type** 

Cyperus iria Cyperaceae - 5 

Cyperus cf. nutans Cyperaceae Sắc cha chéc 4 

Cyperus cf. thorelii Cyperaceae - 3 

Fimbristylis argentea Cyperaceae Sắc bông 4 

Fimbristylis cf. argentea Cyperaceae Sắc pa rươi 6 

Fimbristylis gracilenta Cyperaceae Sắc tra vuỡi a chiên 4 

Fimbristylis miliacea Cyperaceae - 5 

Fimbristylis cf. miliacea Cyperaceae Sắc tiá 6 

Fimbristylis cf. parvilenta Cyperaceae Sắc nu 5 

A set/Sắc a pê rưng/Sắc cha chéc/Sắc 

Hypolytrum nemorum Cyperaceae 

1 2 3 6 

cha chiết/Chua/Pi nhieh 

Hypolytrum nemorum var. 

Cyperaceae - 1 

proliferum 

Rhynchospora chinensis Cyperaceae - 5 

Rhynchospora rugosa Cyperaceae Sắc tarvangl 6 

Scleria cf. levis Cyperaceae Sắc dai 3 

Dioscorea cf. laurifolia Dioscoreaceae A mư cu tróc 2 3 

Dioscorea sp.1 Dioscoreaceae A mư ta la 1 2 

Dracaena sp.1 Dracaenaceae A long lĩ vằng/Sắc lá vằng 2 

Flagellaria indica Flagellariaceae Sắc a tên 1 6 

Curculigo cf. annamitica Hypoxidaceae A đòm đo 2 

Basketry/rope


00 | Annexes 

No use 

Tools 

Recreation 



Medicine 





Local name* 

Land 



type** 

Curculigo cf. capitulata Hypoxidaceae A đom đo/Nom ca lai/Sắc a đom đo 1 2 3 4 

Stachyphrynium sp.1 Marantaceae A nen 1 2 

Bulbophyllum cf. pectinatum Orchidaceae A long cù chỏ 2 

Mischobulbum sp.1 Orchidaceae Sắc pa par 2 

Pandanus cf. gressittii Pandanaceae Chứa a sông/Roso/Sắc cha chiết 2 

Pandanus sp.1 Pandanaceae A ro 1 

Pandanus sp.2 Pandanaceae A tút 1 

Pandanus sp.3 Pandanaceae A long sâm 1 

Dianella ensifolia Phormiaceae Sắc a chung 6 

Basketry/rope 

Food 

Fodder 

Firewood 

Cynodon dactylon Poaceae Bắt rờ kên 6 

Dactyloctenium aegyptium Poaceae Sắc chin 5 

Digitaria heterantha Poaceae Sắc voi 4 

Digitaria petelotii Poaceae Samalu 3 

Digitaria violascens Poaceae Sắc chỉn 5 

Echinochloa colonum Poaceae Sắc tói 6 

Eleusine indica Poaceae Sắc pa pát 5 6 

Eragrostis unioloides Poaceae Sắc a bon/Sắc chi 4 

Eragrostis zeylanica Poaceae A tép 6 

Eriachne chinensis Poaceae Co chi 3 

Gigantochloa sp.1 Poaceae A bung 6 

Hemarthria sp.1 Poaceae - 5


No use 



Medicine 





Local name* 

Land 



type** 

Imperata cylindrica Poaceae A séc/Cá tranh 3 4 

Oplismenus cf. compositus Poaceae A luông tây/Sắc trá a chá/Sắc pa lông 3 4 

Oplismenus sp.1 Poaceae Sắc ông 6 

Oplismenus sp.2 Poaceae Tarò nhon 3 

Basketry/rope 

Tools 

Recreation 

Food 

Fodder 

Firewood 

Oryza sativa Poaceae A cả 5 

Panicum cf. atrosanguineum Poaceae - 5 

Panicum brevifolium Poaceae - 3 

Panicum cf. psilopodium Poaceae Sắc tre 4 


Panicum repens Poaceae Sắc pò lông a tót 6 

Panicum cf. trichoides Poaceae Sắc âm bút 2 

Panicum sp.1 Poaceae Sắc lép 3 

Paspalum conjugatum Poaceae Luôn tây/Sắc lóng/Sắc cê ri a cha 4 5 6 

Paspalum cf. distichum Poaceae Sắc bắt 6 

Paspalum orbiculare Poaceae Sắc nem 4 

Pennisetum sp.1 Poaceae - 3 

Saccharum arundinaceum Poaceae A séc 3 

Saccharum sp.1 Poaceae Sắc a reng 3 

Saccharum spontaneum Poaceae A séc/À séc/Sắc pờ lăng 3 4 6 

Sacciolepis indica Poaceae Sắc a mư/Sắc a luông con hê 4 6 

Schizostachyum cf. gracile Poaceae A tang/Ilatuvia 1 2 

Schizostachyum hainanense Poaceae A tàng 2


0 | Annexes 

No use 

Tools 

Recreation 



Medicine 





Local name* 

Land 



type** 

Setaria palmifolia Poaceae Sắc tê rá a chá/Sắc a luỡng 3 4 

Thysanolaena latifolia Poaceae A tèng 4 

Thysanolaena maxima Poaceae A ròng/A tăng 2 3 

Smilax cf. aspericaulis Smilacaceae A mư trăn trót 2 

Smilax bauhinioides Smilacaceae Sắc gai 3 

Smilax corbularia Smilacaceae A mư tà rá 2 

Smilax cf. corbularia Smilacaceae A mư răng đơn 1 2 

Smilax cf. ferox Smilacaceae - 3 

Dây a mư/Sắc a xông/Sắc a pâc/Sắc pa 

Smilax glabra Smilacaceae 

3 4 6 

ruoi/Sắc po mê po 

Smilax cf. lanceaefolia Smilacaceae - 2 

Smilax megacarpa Smilacaceae A mư trung guân 2 

Smilax megalantha Smilacaceae Coi toria 3 

Smilax cf. megalantha Smilacaceae - 1 

Smilax cf. ocreata Smilacaceae Mùng mơ 4 

Smilax perfoliata Smilacaceae Phong phô 3 

Smilax cf. petelotii Smilacaceae A mư trăn trót 2 

Smilax cf. pottingeri Smilacaceae - 2 

Smilax sp.1 Smilacaceae - 1 

Smilax sp.3 Smilacaceae A mư trung guân 2 

Alpinia chinensis Zingiberaceae A kai 2 

Basketry/rope 

Food 

Fodder 

Firewood


No use 

Tools 

Recreation 



Medicine 





Food 

Fodder 

Firewood 


Local name* 

Land 



type** 

Alpinia cf. phuthoensis Zingiberaceae A đòm đo/A kai 2 

Catimbium breviligulatum Zingiberaceae A kai/A xây cỡ/Betre/Papan 1 2 3 4 

Catimbium cf. breviligulatum Zingiberaceae A kai/A sai sen 6 

Zingiber sp.1 Zingiberaceae A sai am but 2 

Zingiber sp.2 Zingiberaceae Pa par 1 

Indeterminated Dicotyledones 

unknown63 sp.63 Amaranthaceae Sắc bông gà 5 

unknown46 sp.46 Asteraceae Sắc ang von 4 

unknown23 sp.23 cf. Euphorbiaceae A lẻo 4 

unknown42 sp.42 Fabaceae Lim xủt 1 

unknown59 sp.59 Fagaceae Along are 2 

unknown38 sp.38 Gesneriaceae - 1 

unknown19 sp.19 Lauraceae Dây a mư 4 

unknown44 sp.44 Lauraceae Boi loi 1 

unknown21 sp.21 Melastomataceae Cành chò 4 

unknown29 sp.29 Melastomataceae Tôm cờ cho 6 

unknown26 sp.26 Menispermaceae - 2 

unknown31 sp.31 cf. Moraceae Tôm pa nây 6 

unknown04 sp.04 Myrtaceae Clem 3 

Basketry/rope 

unknown36 sp.36 Rubiaceae A long chôt a vot 6 

unknown20 sp.20 Rutaceae A song 4


0 | Annexes 

No use 

Tools 

Recreation 



Medicine 





Local name* 

Land 



type** 

Indeterminated Monocotyledones 

unknown35 sp.35 Commelinaceae Sắc eó 5 

unknown50 sp.50 Commelinaceae Sắc éo 5 

unknown51 sp.51 Commelinaceae Sắc trai 5 

unknown52 sp.52 Commelinaceae Sắc eó 5 

unknown57 sp.57 Commelinaceae Sắc a lík 4 

unknown58 sp.58 Commelinaceae Sắc pa par 4 

unknown18 sp.18 Cyperaceae Sắc lau 4 

unknown24 sp.24 Cyperaceae A séc 2 

unknown25 sp.25 Cyperaceae - 2 

unknown47 sp.47 Cyperaceae Sắc a séc 4 

unknown49 sp.49 Cyperaceae Sắc ka kiet 2 

unknown55 sp.55 Cyperaceae Sắc a séc 2 

unknown61 sp.61 Cyperaceae Sắc cú 5 

Basketry/rope 

Food 

Fodder 

Firewood 

unknown02 sp.02 cf. Cyperaceae Co let 3 

unknown03 sp.03 Poaceae Co chi 3 

unknown11 sp.11 Poaceae Sắc tre 4 

unknown12 sp.12 Poaceae - 4 

unknown14 sp.14 Poaceae Sắc tre 4 

unknown27 sp.27 Poaceae A sa ma lu 6 

unknown33 sp.33 Poaceae Sắc tói 6


No use 

Tools 

Recreation 



Medicine 





Food 

Fodder 

Firewood 


Local name* 

Land 



type** 

unknown13 sp.13 Zingiberaceae Pa pan 4 

unknown48 sp.48 Zingiberaceae A kai 2 

Indeterminated plants 

unknown01 sp.01 Unknown01 Cr chuònco 3 

unknown05 sp.05 Unknown05 - 4 

unknown06 sp.06 Unknown06 Ta ran 4 

unknown07 sp.07 Unknown07 Cỏ lác 4 

unknown08 sp.08 Unknown08 Van tuế 4 





unknown17 sp.17 Unknown17 Bỡng lau 4 

unknown22 sp.22 Unknown22 A cê lem 4 

unknown30 sp.30 Unknown30 Tôm cằn côm 6 

unknown32 sp.32 Unknown32 Cân cán 3 

unknown34 sp.34 Unknown34 A long co ro cho 6 


unknown39 sp.39 Unknown39 Car chual ko 1 


unknown41 sp.41 Unknown41 A lô 1 

Basketry/rope


0 | Annexes 

No use 

Tools 

Recreation 



Medicine 





Local name* 

Land 



type** 

unknown43 sp.43 Unknown43 Aruom 1 

unknown45 sp.45 Unknown45 Mâl 1 

unknown53 sp.53 Unknown53 A mư lân hát 2 


unknown56 sp.56 Unknown56 A long pu lốt 2 

unknown60 sp.60 Unknown60 Sắc 6 

Basketry/rope 

Food 

Fodder 

Firewood 

*Further research is needed to improve the accuracy of the local names 

**Land types: 1=primary forest, 2=secondary forest, 3=plantation forest, 4=shrub land, 5=rice field, 6=garden 

***Miscellaneous: fertilizer, support stalk for growth of pepper, fabric dye, shampoo, charcoal to blacken teeth, incense and furniture polish

The Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) is a leading international forestry research 

organization established in 1993 in response to global concerns about the social, environmental, and economic 

consequences of forest loss and degradation. CIFOR is dedicated to developing policies and technologies 

for sustainable use and management of forests, and for enhancing the well-being of people in developing 

countries who rely on tropical forests for their livelihoods. CIFOR is one of the 15 Future Harvest centres of the 

Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR). With headquarters in Bogor, Indonesia, 

CIFOR has regional offices in Brazil, Burkina Faso, Cameroon and Zimbabwe, and it works in over 30 other 

countries around the world. 

Donors 

The Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) receives its major funding from governments, 

international development organizations, private foundations and regional organizations. In 2005, CIFOR 

received financial support from Australia, Asian Development Bank (ADB), Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, 

Centre de coopération internationale en recherche agronomique pour le développement (CIRAD), Cordaid, 

Conservation International Foundation (CIF), European Commission, Finland, Food and Agriculture Organization 

of the United Nations (FAO), Ford Foundation, France, German Agency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ), German 

Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ), Indonesia, International Development 

Research Centre (IDRC), International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), International Tropical Timber 

Organization (ITTO), Israel, Italy, The World Conservation Union (IUCN), Japan, Korea, Netherlands, Norway, 

Netherlands Development Organization, Overseas Development Institute (ODI), Peruvian Secretariat for 

International Cooperation (RSCI), Philippines, Spain, Sweden, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences 

(SLU), Switzerland, Swiss Agency for the Environment, Forests and Landscape, The Overbrook Foundation, 

The Nature Conservancy (TNC), Tropical Forest Foundation, Tropenbos International, United States, United 

Kingdom, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), World Bank, World Resources Institute (WRI) and 

World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF).

Decisions on land use in Vietnam are often only based on biophysical and economical 

assessments, with little consideration for the local people’s opinions or perspectives. This can 

lead to conflicts over natural resources management, unsustainable land use and decisions 

that are unfair to local people. In the landscape surrounding Khe Tran, a village in Central 

Vietnam lives a Pahy minority group. The driving force in this area has been different land 

use policies, resulting mainly from a government ‘top down’ approach, and the consequent 

changes in local forest status. 

The major activities for local livelihoods have shifted from swidden agriculture and high 

dependency on natural forests, to more sedentary activities. Khe Tran is now situated in the 

buffer zone of a planned nature reserve and the government has encouraged the villagers 

to plant economic crops in the bare hills around the village. The people’s dependence on 

forest resources has significantly decreased, and most of the local knowledge about natural 

forests may soon be lost. The main land covers around the village are now Acacia and rubber 

plantations, bare lands, and lands for agriculture. 

Local knowledge and perspectives are rarely taken into account by state institutions 

when implementing land allocation projects or making decisions on natural resource 

management and land use at the landscape level. There is opportunity to better inform 

development agencies and involve local level stakeholders so that more sustainable 

decisions can be made. This book reports on what Khe Tran villagers find important in 

terms of environmental services and resources in their landscape. Our approach integrates 

multidisciplinary activities - through human and natural sciences- and explains the relative 

importance of landscape components, products and species for local people. It aims to 

better articulate local people’s priorities for the future, their hopes and values as well as 

their relationship with the conservation area. 

VIETNAM

English 2.28MB - Center for International Forestry Research

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?