The goal to eradicate poverty through the sustainable use of natural resources has been one of the driving forces behind the development of integrated natural resources management (Campbell and Hagmann 2003,1; CGIAR 2003,3). Yet, integrated natural resources management is still in its infancy and the call to eradicate poverty has somewhat been redeemed by the call for methodological development and to justify this new research approach (Campbell and Hagmann 2003,18; Probst and Hagmann 2003,12). Although this course of action taken in the integrated natural resources management literature is certainly necessary, it is vitally important not to repeat the mistake to focus solely on research development and neglect impact, i.e. poverty eradication. There is a great risk that integrated natural resources management research focuses too much on methodological and theoretical issues to become recognized in the scientific world instead of producing relevant results in the real world. This risk is reflected in Cornwall and Brock’s (2005,iii) stance who contend, that the use of ‘buzzwords’ “(…) in development policy may offer little hope of the world free of poverty (…)”. The justification of its relevancy to solve today’s problems in sustainable resource management comes from successful examples that mirror poverty reduction, stable ecosystems and/or confident and creative resource users experimenting with alternative livelihood strategies only to name a few.

In a meta-evaluation of the CGIAR by Garrity (2003,6) he admits that natural resources management research within the CGIAR has made significant contributions in training scientists from national agricultural research systems (NARS) and developing NARS institutional capacity. However, he notices that resource-oriented centers may be doing more and better work in integrated natural resources management. He further accentuates that although natural resources management research has attracted increasing interests and resources over the past decade, the CGIAR has not focused on the topics and functions where it can make tangible contributions such as sustainable agricultural productivity increases, improving livelihoods and reducing the vulnerability of the poor. And while Voss (2003,5) still focuses on the challenge how to bring reductionists and system thinkers together, he also admits that impacts of integrated natural resources management on income and poverty are rarely documented. In congruence with the meta-evaluation impact assessment of integrated natural resources management is becoming increasingly prioritized a reasonable demand of donors (Garrity 2003,6; Voss 2003,5).

However research on natural resource systems and its management is highly complex and places high demands on the quality of applied research methods. Furthermore the complexity does not reveal itself right from the start but becomes evident during the research process. To be scientific meaningful a high degree of conceptual preparation is necessary. The ongoing debates about interdisciplinarity versus monodisciplinarity and qualitative versus quantitative research approaches reflect these issues and are widely dispersed in the literature (cf. Strauss and Corbin 1996; Glaser 1992; Greene 1997; Mayring 2001; Burzan 2004; Creswell 1994; Bitsch 2000). The same discussions but on a less aggregated level exist in the integrated natural resources management literature (cf. Probst and Hagmann 2003). Thereby integrated natural resources management provides the concept for the wider research framework and participatory action research represents the method of inquiry. Participatory action research is a well-established and credible research approach. The relevant action research literature is rather old but has lost no relevance compared to modern times and offers concepts, examples and discussions that allow the reader to take action (cf. Rapoport 1970; Susman and Evered 1978; Calder, Phillips and Tybout 1981; Brown and Tandon 1983). However as mentioned before the high degree of complexity places a high demand on participatory action research, which has also never been applied in a coastal fishery environment. Understanding complexity in action-oriented integrated natural resources management means to explore the system from the perspective of fishermen (cf. Hagmann et al. 2002). Thereby the conceptual elements offered by integrated natural resources management such as the constructivist paradigm, adaptive management, the sustainable livelihoods framework, and integration as central concept provide useful guidelines for the pursued method of action research learning cycles.

Checkland (1981,288) characterizes natural resource systems, “in which objectives are hard to define, decision-taking is uncertain, measures of performance are at best qualitative and human behaviour is irrational”. Therefore selecting indicators for impact assessment is not simple. Campbell et al. (2000) propose an approach based on the sustainable livelihood framework and its five types of capital assets: physical, financial, social, natural, and human. For each capital asset a number of principles is proposed, e.g. natural capital: (1) options for future use are maintained and (2) yield and quality of natural resources is maintained or improved. For each of the principles indicators will need to be selected. Meaningful indicator sets will have to be quite large given the complexity of the natural resource system. However, many outcomes may not be covered by the monitoring system because they are not expected (Pachico et al. 1999, cited in Campbell et al. 2000). Campbell et al. (2000) advocate an approach to impact assessment that is part of a learning process integrated into the integrated natural resources management learning cycle. This implies the need for constant iteration between research practice and research evaluation, the use of many qualitative indicators, simulation modeling to address uncertainty and numerous external influences on integrated natural resources management systems, and bounding the system through developing a conceptual framework (Campbell et al. 2000). The authors point out that most of these activities have already been carried out in the course of doing the research. To answer the question which indicators can be combined to give an integrative assessment of the performance of an integrated natural resources management system, various tools are suggested: (1) a simple additive index, (2) the use of radar diagrams and (3) multivariate techniques (Campbell et al. 2000).

In their 10 years of practical experience in integrated natural resources management in Zimbabwe Hagmann et al. (2000,18) emphasize a shift from conventional understanding of ‘impact’ to performance, quality and strategy monitoring and assessment. As performance indicator they highlight empathy, confidence, self-esteem, creativity, values, and social energy that create adaptive capacity. And this “(…) capacity to learn and reflect and re-adapt the strategy and action is the process impact to be achieved” (Hagmann et al. 2000,18). But how did Hagmann et al. reach this assertion? During a mid-term evaluation the reviewers came to the conclusion that fortunately Hagmann and his colleagues had not followed what they had set out to do (Hagmann et al. 2000,17). Instead they had done a successful and innovative job by responding to unforeseen opportunities and thus had generated substantial impact (Hagmann et al. 2000,17). In the same evaluation, the reviewers recognized, that the human and emotional capital of farmers was the strongest factor in finding solutions to their problems (Hagmann et al. 2000,17). Thereby good process documentation not only helped external project evaluators by making decisions transparent but was central for Hagmann’s team own learning as well as for demonstrating the quality of process impact (Hagmann et al. 2000,17).

Similar to the experience of Hagmann et al. (2000,17) the most evident impact in this study was in the human asset base. Although not fully comparable since the study only marked the beginning of a possible development project, I ascribe the awareness building among participants to the integrated natural resources management learning cycle. The mediation and facilitation processes and especially the repetition of the ‘learning cycle’, i.e. the sharing of research findings with participants lead to deep self-reflection among participants. Consequently in the beginning of the field research resource-users had no or little opinion about the degradation of resources their livelihoods depend on. Later in the research process local people not only took a stand but also were developing ideas and debating with others how to manage the coastal resources in a more sustainable way. Reflecting on their daily lives encouraged people to stop and think and the set of ideas ranging from biological-technical to institutional-organizational demonstrated their willingness and ingenuity to change things.

The following chapter is concerned with implementation challenges of integrated natural resource management research. In general I had the impression that integrated natural resources management is widely accepted. Yet, my intention to include other scientists in the research process was characterized by experiencing how mono-disciplinary scholarship is. This had strong implications, since I had to cover the entire bandwidth of the agro-ecosystem Nha Phu Lagoon and its socio-economic environment myself. Hence, a team approach to integrated natural resources management is essential. This work was only possible through collaboration with strong research partners, which expertise could be tapped regarding fisheries management through the WorldFish Center on Penang, Malaysia, aquaculture, through the Research Institute for Aquaculture No. 3 in Nha Trang, Vietnam, and through the University of Fisheries also in Nha Trang, Vietnam, which specialized in the socio-political aspects of the coastal fishery sector and participatory methodologies used in a coastal fishery environment.

After moving quickly into the field to explore the system from within and before developing preconceived ideas, hypotheses and develop bias, I was quickly confronted with the day-to-day problems of fishermen and other community members. Sticking to what I had read about integrated natural resources management, process facilitation and mediation I encountered several organizational problems associated with this research approach and procedure. Mobilizing rural communities in critical self-reflection and developing options to engage in natural resource management is not exactly along the lines of a Communist country like Vietnam. Some village leaders demanded special permissions and those villages had to be avoided until I had acquired all of the relevant documents for my work.

After a long explorative research phase learning more about the multiple stakeholders, system levels, institutional and organizational issues, the next step was to feed back this information to the communities, policy makers and government officials. This was no easy step. Not only because of the unexpected outcome and reactions I was going to encounter but also because of the locations this was going to take place. My preference was to organize workshops and to invite representatives from each of the interest groups mentioned before. However due to financial, personal and temporal limitations I arranged group meetings and visited government officials personally.

Yet, the biggest challenge in the implementation of integrated natural resources management on site was drawing the lines between research and client orientation, the demarcation between personal and public interests, i.e. delivering relevant research results versus impact and process results at local level.

Denzin and Lincoln (1998,3) describe the qualitative researcher and the multiple methodologies of qualitative research as bricoleur respectively as bricolage, i.e. a “professional do-it-yourself person” (Lévi-Strauss 1966,17) that produces a construction by using whatever comes to hand or as Weinstein and Weinstein (1991,161) put it, “a pieced-together, close-knit set of practices that provide solutions to a problem in a concrete situation, …and is an [emergent] construction”. Applying what has been said, this means that the researcher involved needs to be adept at performing a large number of diverse tasks ranging from participant data inquiry to mediation and facilitation, to self-reflection and knowledge about the multiple paradigms (cf. Denzin and Lincoln 1998,4). This approach adds complexity to the research design and demands a great deal from the researcher, as he or she usually is less familiar with either qualitative or quantitative paradigms (Creswell 1994,178).

The attitude, motivation and ability of the researcher to focus on the social environment of the resource system seem vital to achieve both relevant research results and local impact. Thereby it is not only core competencies like facilitation as Hagmann et al. (2000,20) stress or the types of participation as described by Probst and Hagmann (2003,6) to steer the integrated natural resources management process. First and foremost I see the attitude of the researcher as the most compelling factor for successful learning and participation within the integrated natural resources management research process. Especially from a natural science perspective associated with fishery management Rapoport’s (1970,499) statement directed towards social scientists that see “(…) clients with a problem to be solved” has not lost much of its relevance today. During many lectures and discussions I recognized that the attitudes of most scientists and students would not allow them to abandon linear research and one-way thinking as suggested by Bationo, Lompo and Koala (1998,33). Although this general shortcoming is met by integrated natural resources management, the scientists attitude and way of thinking is much more crucial to focus on the underlying reasons for adoption and non-adoption of technologies and innovations.

The motivation of the scientist is another factor in establishing a participatory learning cycle in the research project. An honest interest in the natural resource system is not enough but must encompass the resource users and their lives. Only open interest will convince participants to establish relationships with the researcher and engage in a learning cycle together. In this context Hagmann et al. (2000,20) talk of researchers that engage themselves emotionally in the research process to fully understand the dimensions and be able to contribute effectively. Thereby the motivation of the researcher might need to be transferred to some of the participants to initiate the process.

Last but not least the ability of the researcher to engage in such a research process is not to be underestimated. First of all there is the ability to engage in a research process with no clear beginning and end; without any research hypotheses and objectives; and a constantly changing research setting. The latter means adapting to a constantly broadening natural resource system with unfolding facets that need to be addressed spontaneously and in an iterative manner. This demands a lot of improvisation talent from the researcher to bring uncertain processes to a successful ending. Second of all there is the ability to separate the ideals of research from the methodology of research and not to fall into the “idealist trap” as described by Swepson (1998,1-2). Rapoport (1970, 507-509) calls this a goal dilemma and tries to answer the question how an action researcher can deliver scientifically accepted research results and provide something to the client system without getting over-involved or evoke a defensive reaction. This question reflects very well a situation I experienced many times during my field study, i.e. not to get lost in the whole and assimilate with the studied fishermen and their situation but to focus on the research process, the applied methodologies and the desired outputs. This point cannot be emphasized enough, because integrated natural resources management research goes beyond participatory methods, and on one hand the scientist might find himself identifying with the day to day problems of the researched but on the other hand he might lose track of his research and fail to achieve his research objectives. Needless to add that any other researcher might experience the opposite extreme namely the “rejection phenomenon” of research clients (cf. Rapoport 1970, 509). That means the researcher might live up to scientific standards but fails to grasp the client system he is studying since the clients themselves reject him.

Conflicts and negotiation define the processes of the integrated natural resources management learning cycle. Many times the topics raised during group discussions evoked issues that lead to heated debates among fishermen. Sometimes these were unexpected, other times I would provoke them through rendering reality or by asking critical questions. My experience was that these debates were always fruitful and often yielded information of previously unknown instances. On the other hand these situations sometimes required careful negotiation in order to restore calm and achieve good results, i.e. awareness building among participants and new insights. This process is also a direct answer to one of the shortcomings, namely conducting objective research without getting involved, influencing the system and thus being ineffective in explaining real life (cf. Lal et al. 2001,2). Quite to the contrary influencing the resource system from within and having a stake in the coastal community myself allowed me to see reality through the eyes of the fishermen, an approach that resembles what Hagmann et al. (2000,11) describe in much detail by “(…) exploring these systems from the perspective of farmers (…)” in a “pro-active process” and who state, that “it was the key success factor in the identification of the most effective intervention points”. In addition the interdisciplinarity immanent in integrated natural resources management addresses various dimensions and scales of the complex multi-stakeholder resource system. The latter also addresses the shortcomings mentioned by Conway (2003,3) and Van Keer et al. (1998,12), that is to say, neglecting the wide diversity of ecosystems and the socioeconomic environment.

The research design followed an explorative approach without prior formulated hypotheses or theories. Research goals and objectives were formulated to act as a research framework with the specification that they will be followed flexibly in response to research collaboration, local factors, and the ongoing research process. Although Campbell and Hagmann (2003,4) endeavor to use “clear research hypotheses”, I believe that such preconceived ideas introduce bias and hamper “decisions must be made, owned and internalized by NR managers and other stakeholders”, as Campbell and Hagmann stress earlier (2003,2). Therefore I had chosen a nearly ideal scientific inquiry, i.e. observation and recording of facts without hypothesis or postulates other than those necessary to envision the research process. This process highlighted that a qualitative study is consistent with a qualitative paradigm, that Creswell (1994,1) defines “as an inquiry process of understanding a social or human problem, based on building a complex, holistic picture, formed with words, reporting detailed views of informants, and conducted in a natural setting”. By contrast the inquiry process of a quantitative study is theory-driven, i.e. based on testing a theory through statistical analysis of empirical findings (cf. Creswell 1994,2). Creswell (1994,7) continues that the research design of qualitative studies emerges from the research process with informants identifying the categories. The design of a qualitative study begins with the selection of a paradigm and the associated theories and methods, the focus of the study remains the central concept being described (Creswell 1994,1). Creswell (1994,2) suggests the use of a clear and easily understood language compared to commonly used complex and academic language to frame a sentence that describes the research focus.

Choosing the right methods was therefore the next step to identify the natural resource system and its resource users. This study was carried out following an adaptive research framework. That means that qualitative and quantitative methods were applied according to the respective situation at hand. With little theoretical background on the combination of qualitative and quantitative methods I set out to answer the immediate questions of the subject matter. Engaging deeper in the possible forms of data analysis, did I discover that empirical findings and the use of qualitative analysis software would add to the transparency and replicability of findings and to the generalization and credibility of the study (cf. Mayring 2001). In this respect engaging in social science and philosophy of science literature proved the most fruitful occupation.

Initially one of the research objectives was to operationalize the applied methods applicable in a coastal fishery environment. Today I have abolished this objective. Recapitulating my belief mentioned earlier I feel confident that operationalizing selected methods is neither a core competency necessary for the success of integrated natural resources management nor a sensible utilization of time. Furthermore the selection of appropriate methods for any particular research setting should serve the respective situation at hand making the best of scarce resources such as finances, personnel, material, and time. In addition the selected methods will most likely be adapted to personal preferences and the prevailing circumstances. And last but not least several sourcebooks are readily available that offer a variety of choices of appropriate methods (cf. IIRR 1998). Most of these sourcebooks are even specialized in community-based coastal resource management like in the present sourcebook.

One of the most prolific methods to gain deeper understanding was participatory action research. Although more a research approach itself it proved vital to apply the selected methods and to encourage participatory learning. Applying integrated natural resources management is very process- and result-oriented, i.e. the integrated natural resources management scientist becomes an actor himself and experiences how different stakeholder groups perceive their living and how after each ‘learning cycle’ new problems reveal themselves. Letting stakeholders participate in the research design not only opens the doors to people but leads to result-oriented research and a wide acceptance of the researcher and his work. When visiting fishermen for the first time for example and explaining the research ‘vision’ participants were skeptical and discussions yielded scattered information. During follow-up visits participants experienced one’s determination, so that the collected information could be verified and ‘real’ problems detected. One possible explanation is that not only people are taken seriously and listened to, but that for the first time in their lives they engage in a research process, that firstly puts livelihoods in the center, secondly not only asks participants for their opinions but thirdly seeks to establish a dialogue between the stakeholders (the scientist being a stakeholder himself, acts as a mediator between the different and often conflicting stakeholder groups). Thus the role of the integrated natural resources management researcher is identical to an action researcher in developing a learning environment and helping communities to adopt more sustainable resource management strategies (cf. Allen 2001). The concept of ‘learning by doing’ recognizes that people learn through the active discussion of their experiences with other people accounting for both the researcher and the researched (cf. Allen 2001). The advantage of action research is that it provides a framework for this process of learning and makes it visible. By being deliberate and intentional about this process learning can be maximized (Allen 2001).

Comparing the numbers of the actual marine catch and the total allowable catch one can see that overexploitation takes place in the nearshore fisheries and that offshore species are underexploited. Several independent authors support this such as Edwards et al. (2004,18), Ruangsivakul and Siriraksophon (2002,5), Tri (2002,4), and Hoi (2003,8) as well as Vietnam’s Ministry of Fisheries (RIMP 2005a) itself.

Latest figures show that during the period from 1986 until 2004 the total engine capacity increased by 8.78 times from 537 503 hp in 1986 to 4 721 701 hp in 2004. However, during the same time the total marine catch only increased by 3.02 times from 570 481 tons in 1986 to 1 724 200 tons in 2004. (Ruangsivakul and Siriraksophon 2002,4; RIMP 2005a) This means that the catch per unit of effort (CPUE – tons/hp/year) has declined from 1.06 tons/hp in 1986 to 0.37 tons/hp in 2004 and thus signals overexploitation and possible overcapacity. A study by the Ministry of Fisheries from 1984 to 1994 confirms this downward trend of marine fish resources in stock, production and size of captured fish, particularly for demersal fish stocks, which decreased by over 30 percent (Hoi 2003,8). This negative trend is also reflected in the fishery of Nha Phu Lagoon. Recapitulating findings from the questionnaire catches had declined by 55 percent in recent years. Looking at possible forms of overfishing it is likely that several forms exist and overlap each other. Growth overfishing is most likely the case in a multi-species fishery like that of Nha Phu Lagoon where mesh sizes of dragnets often only reach 10 mm and small fish (juveniles) account for 75 percent of the catch (cf. 58:17; 58:19). Considering the fish size in fish landings it could be apparent that recruitment overfishing has set in already and is one reason for declining catches. Certainly Malthusian overfishing occurs since many fishermen have no alternative jobs and accordingly cause high incidences of destructive and illegal fishing practices.

It is acknowledged that the enforcement of fishing regulations and restrictions in Vietnam is weak or not existing (NORAD 2002,14). The FAO (2005) notices that gear size and type restrictions are seldom enforced due to budgetary constraints and although fishing licenses are required, many fishermen appear to ignore them. In Nha Phu Lagoon the situation is similar. Quantitative and qualitative findings acknowledge a high prevalence of illegal fishing practices and problems in the enforcement of current fishery legislation.

Analog to the limitations of global fishery management i.e. fishery management has generally failed to protect resources from being overexploited in Nha Phu Lagoon (Grainger 1999,23). And according to authors who attribute this failure to the institutions in fishery management the situation presents itself in Nha Phu Lagoon (Grainger 1999,23; Froese and Pauly 2003,252). Although Vietnams Ministry of Fisheries has launched several initiatives to develop offshore fishing in order to reduce the pressure on nearshore coastal resources, i.e. target programs and the provision of soft loans with low interest rates for the purchase of bigger boats, unforeseen circumstances prevent fishermen in Nha Phu Lagoon to invest in offshore fishing (cf. Edwards et al. 2004,18). One reason is reflected in a coding category that deals with the difficulties of boat sales. Many fishermen reported that there used to be a government program that bought medium sized fishing vessels to accelerate the reorganization of the fishery sector. However, the program has stopped and now fishermen have difficulties to sell off their fishing vessels to invest in a bigger boat for offshore fishing or change their job (65:24; 65:25; 70:2). Since dragnet fishing is illegal in Vietnam’s coastal waters of less than 25 meters of depth, there is no market and no potential buyers for medium sized motorized boats, because these size boats are mainly suitable for dragnet fishing but not in offshore conditions (65:23; 70:2; 65:17). However, this is only one possible solution to the general problem of overfishing in coastal waters and does not address the underlying causes. The complexity of the resource system Nha Phu Lagoon adds to the shortcomings of global fishery management.

Identifying government organizations in the fishery sector proved somewhat difficult, since party organs of the Communist Party such as the People’s Committees and the People’s Councils are responsible for the implementation of national fishery law. Yet unlike officials from the Provincial Department of Fisheries officials from the People’s Committees were aloof. Thus the attempt to detect the responsibilities of the actors was clouded and information obscure. In addition, responsibilities were not always clear, neither to the government officials nor to the village leaders themselves. Unfortunately the five levels of governance in Vietnam, of which only four are recognized by the state, do not add clarity (13:11; 76:6). For this reason there is some discontent among fishermen over the authorities (cf. 56:15; 76:6). The ineffectiveness of government institutions is also reflected in the failure to keep up with new developments, e.g. the spontaneous development of the deep-water trap net (19:10).

Another failure is the hitherto exclusive focus on the expansion of fishery production and at the same time neglecting the development of local, regional and national fishery marketing opportunities. Although new market opportunities have emerged, they exclusively target export markets. For example, product markets for green mussels, a locally consumed product, are only poorly developed, as green mussels are no export commodity (cf. 35:13; 35:14). Informal market structures and high transaction costs for fishery products lead to economic dependence on intermediaries and middlemen, since fishermen are prevented market access. Informal markets also inhibit effective controls of product hygiene as witnessed under Kai Bridge in Nha Trang (Figure x). Product hygiene is not only a concern of public health but also of effective utilization of fishery resources, since up to 50-60 percent of high value fish on some offshore trawlers becomes waste because of poor storage (Edwards, Tuan and Allan 2004,23).

Analogue to the market sector the financial sector is subdivided into a formal and an informal sector. And like the market sector the same middlemen and intermediaries who provide credit to the poorer households dominate the informal financial sector. Although this is not necessarily bad, it does pose some restrictions for the economic development of poorer households. The term ‘poorer households’ is not exactly correct, as these households are not directly poor but instead usually lack legal land rights and capital resources both prerequisites to obtain formal bank credits (cf. 67:6; 68:1). In addition banks are not interested in financing small-scale fishing operations but rather agriculture, aquaculture or other forms of self-employment. As a last resort fishermen depend on middlemen with no perspective to improve their livelihoods. A discussion in Ngoc Diem also yielded little outlook. The subject of the discussion was the successful practice of community saving groups in Dac Lac Province (personal communication, Mr. Phuong, RIA 3). These saving groups had been established in fishing communities around reservoirs and handed out small credits to members. However, fishermen in Ngoc Diem doubted that this practice could be successful in their village and failed to choose even one person in the village whom they would trust as cashier.

The various forms of decision-making processes are visualized in the Venn diagrams in the previous chapter. Most noticeable are the strong differences between the three villages and the organization of circles. These circles represent the relationship structures of stakeholders and thus the channels of decision-making. The Venn diagrams also reveal that those organizations responsible for fishery management, e.g. the Fisheries Resources Protection Department (i) received a rather low ranking by Tan Dao and Ha Lien because it has only limited influence on the local coastal fishery sector, (ii) has no direct connection to the fishermen households, and (iii) is situated at great distance. This arrangement is a sign for the exclusion of fishermen from the decision-making processes concerning fishery management and vital information for future attempts to integrate stakeholders and internalize decisions from resource users. The differences between the three villages emphasize that in order to introduce sustainable management of natural resources, the forums to address the resource users need to be adaptive to the respective village situation.

Several trends have been identified in Nha Phu Lagoon of which the decline of coastal fishery resources is the most noteworthy and perhaps interlinked with some of the other trends identified. Rising populations and lack of alternative jobs is forcing more people to enter the fishery sector. Simultaneously these inexperienced fishermen choose fishing methods that require no specific knowledge, e.g. illegal fishing techniques such as trawling or electric fishing. Hence the pressure on coastal fishery resources increases. Several examples of resource depletion in Nha Phu Lagoon highlight the ‘human’ effect on coastal fishery resources. Environmental degradation further accelerates the pressure on the coastal ecosystem of Nha Phu Lagoon. The destruction of mangroves to develop shrimp ponds is self-evident. Less noticeable is the increasing environmental pollution caused by sewage, industrial wastewater, surface run-off from agricultural land, shrimp pond effluent, and nutrients and chemicals from lobster culture. Unfortunately results from a study by the Institute of Oceanography in Nha Trang on water quality in Nha Phu Lagoon could not be incorporated, as it was not completed at the time.

Several lessons can be drawn from the example of Ha Lien Village and the formation of a community self-help organization. Although there have been reports on local TV about the success story of Ha Lien Village, no horizontal scaling was detected, i.e. villages in close proximity with similar large numbers of electric fishermen, social conflicts, and disagreement react differently. In most villages this means that no action is taken, even though similar to Ha Lien Village, individual actors are very aware of the negative effects of their unsustainable action. But only the shared understanding of the situation and thus further increasing awareness encouraged ‘community action’ generally known as collective action. In addition this increased awareness combined with knowledge about the cause and effect of the degradation of resources or like in the case study, of social tension leads to a willingness to change and to innovative ideas. In integrated coastal fisheries management Silvestre (1996,11) recalls “problems must first be perceived and diagnosed as one before solutions to them may be prescribed”. In an analysis on forest management of 18 sites in Nepal, Varughese (1998) points out the ability of resource users to organize themselves and use their what Béné (2003,968) calls “institutional richness”, to establish arrangements governing resource use and to enforce these arrangements (cf. Ostrom 1998,17). Those communities that had formed self-help organizations experienced similar or improving forest conditions and can be compared to the constant or presumably slightly increasing coastal fishery resources surrounding Ha Lien Village (Varughese 1998). Interestingly no correlation between the variation in population growth rates and the variation of forest condition in the studied locations was detected (Varughese 1998; Ostrom 1998,17). The recognition of mediating effects of local institutional arrangements on the dynamics of resources and resource-users has important implications for those who seek to engage in participatory approaches to natural resources management (Varughese 1998).

Illegal fishing and its perception by users and government officials play a key role in the degradation of coastal fishery resources in Nha Phu Lagoon. Thereby it is important to note that the common explanations of fishery depletion mentioned by fishermen are outspoken. That means fishermen are very aware of their actions and social effects. For instance, in problem ranking electric fishermen and dragnet fishermen regularly gave high rankings to electric fishing and dragnet fishing identifying them as reasons for declining catches. Similarly respondents associated the increasing population as one of the reasons for declining catches and gave it a high ranking. Qualitative methods yielded the same results. These findings are very different from Johnson’s (2001,967) experience in a fishing community in Southern Thailand. In a household survey the studied community did not associate fisheries depletion with the number of boats in the village. Instead a much more common explanation for the depleted fishery was the push nets and trawlers which were outside the village community. Quite contrary to the fishery community studied by Johnson (2001,967) the local fishery in Nha Phu Lagoon does challenge existing practices in the sense of conserving the local fishery.

On the other hand government officials from the Marine Border Police, the Fisheries Resources Protection Department, the Fisheries Department, and People’s Committees share the perception that only poor fishing households practice illegal fishing. Although this perception might be true for a few of the electric fishermen, none of the interviewed electric fishermen confirmed this assertion. However, government officials refer to dragnet fishermen which is an even greater oxymoron since dragnet fishermen use medium sized motorized boats worth 50 million VND versus gill net and electric fishermen who use small, unmotorized boats worth 500 000 VND to 800 000 VND, i.e. roughly one hundredth (70:8; 75:12). These findings are similar to Silva’s (2006,37) analysis of the linkage between poverty and the use of destructive fishing gear in Tanzania. Her study revealed no direct link between income poverty and the use of destructive fishing gear. And just like dragnet fishermen who fish illegally in Nha Phu Lagoon have access to credit, Silva (2006,27) validates that access to credit increases the probability of using destructive gear.

Thus the discrepancy in the perception of illegal fishing by fishermen and government officials is one reason for the failure to enforce existing regulations.

Electric fishing is said to cause great damage to eggs and larvae of marine fish and invertebrates floating in the water body. For better understanding of electric fishing the impressed voltage that stuns the fish and invertebrates is dependent on the size of the organism. In other words the bigger the fish the bigger the voltage drop and hence the impact (Knösche 1995,16). Latest studies on the effects of electric fishing reveal that small invertebrates showed no higher mortality (Rümmler, Schreckenbach and Pfeifer 1998,90). The negative effect on fish eggs is also questionable since electric fishing is commonly used to capture broodstock for restocking efforts (Ochl et al. 1998,308). The alleged negative effect of electric fishing on the coastal fishing grounds in Nha Phu Lagoon is most likely a result of the efficiency, its widespread use and the fact that electric fishing areas and breeding grounds are congruent. In any case electric fishing is an illegal activity and banned nationwide.

During the field study I had the possibility to experience the development of the newly introduced deep-water trap in Nha Phu Lagoon. Although the traps are quite obvious and the use of small mesh netting violates the current regulation on minimum net size, authorities did not intervene despite the growing numbers of traps. When I finally left the study site, a government notification had been passed that informed about the dismantling of deep-water traps though until then no action had been taken. Instead an interesting phenomenon occurred in Tan Thuy that affected the numbers of deep-water traps in the area. First of all quite a few people had misjudged the high maintenance costs which led to a decline of deep-water traps (53:7; 52:13). Yet, a more striking reason for the decline of deep-water traps was that crab fishermen were experiencing increasing crab catches and thus making more money than in the past, since those fishermen operating deep-water traps had abandoned crab fishing (53:9). For exemplification, about 100 fishermen catch 400 to 500 kilograms of mud crabs a day in Tan Thuy, whereas four to 10 kilograms are caught per person (52:7). A possible explanation could be that crab stock exploitation is at equilibrium and that the amount of crabs caught is equally distributed among the number of fishermen fishing the area.

Another effect of the deep-water trap was that although many people perceived this new fishing technique as a threat to fishery resources, others noticed that the deep-water trap was not responsible for declining catches but only in the way of fishing boats (54:23). As a result its construction was said to prevent trawling through blocking the boat passageways (32:21). Yet further investigation proved this assertion wrong, since the water in the deep-water trap area was not deep enough for trawling in the first place (3:11; 78:2). On the other hand fishermen using cast nets were said to catch a lot of fish that take cover and live close to the wooden-pole construction of the trap (53:10). Personal observation showed that nearby structures for green mussel culture were actually attracting a lot of fish and provided cover in the monotone tidal zone of the lagoon. In this sense the deep-water trap structure was perhaps fulfilling the same function.

Apart from fishing aquaculture certainly has a major impact on livelihoods Nha Phu Lagoon and its ecosystem. The propagation of shrimp aquaculture in Nha Phu Lagoon is the most evident aquacultural activity and shrimp ponds cover vast areas. The promotion of shrimp farming is seen as a panacea to rural development of coastal communities in Vietnam and substantial effort of the Research Institute for Aquaculture No. 3, the Institute for Oceanography, the University of Fisheries, and the Fisheries Promotion Centre in Nha Trang is directed towards shrimp aquaculture (cf. EJF 2003,5,16). In 2003 Vietnam’s Ministry of Fisheries reported that 574 953 ha were used for shrimp culture (FAO/MOFI 2005a). The profits within reach are without doubt appealing to many households to engage in shrimp aquaculture however responsible officials often downplay the associated high risks. For example, in Tuan Le Village, Khanh Hoa, 70 to 80 percent of shrimp harvests failed in 2001 (EJF 2003,17). The resulting widespread indebtness of rural households in Tam Ich, Tan Te, Ha Lien, and Le Cam highlights the socioeconomic disparity of shrimp farming. The Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF 2003,16) has reported on the social and economic impacts of shrimp aquaculture in Vietnam and confirms what has been said above with the following citation:

“In many coastal areas the spread of shrimp farming, resulting from clear government support, has resulted in a major upheaval in social structure. The subsequent failure of the shrimp harvest to reach initial profit levels has caused high levels of indebtedness, shifts in livelihood structure and an increased reliance on open access resources.’’

An often-neglected effect of shrimp farming is the irrecoverable conversion of rice fields into shrimp ponds. Alone in Ca Mau Province in the Mekong Delta 120 000 ha of paddy was converted to shrimp ponds in 2001 (EJF 2003,19). In addition saltwater seeps through shrimp pond dikes and causes salinization in neighboring rice fields. The Department of Fisheries in Ca Mau reported that most of the dikes of the 200 000 ha of acid-free rice fields have been damaged and that intruding seawater is threatening rice and sugarcane crops and fruit trees (EJF 2003,20).

The degradation of mangroves through the conversion of mangrove areas into shrimp ponds has several effects on the ecosystem of Nha Phu Lagoon. Up until now Vietnam has lost more than 80 percent (220 000 ha) of its original mangrove forests (EJF 2003,11). The most striking effect is the loss of breeding and feeding grounds for coastal fishery resources. A second and often mentioned problem is the increasing siltation of the lagoon as mangroves are absent that could hold back some of the sediments. The loss of mangroves has globally been recognized to reduce biodiversity, fish catches, cause coastal erosion, acidification, loss of nutrients, and loss of forestry products (EJF 2003,11). In Malaysia fishermen reported declining incomes to 1/6 of its former level within two to three years of large-scale mangrove deforestation (EJF 2003,11). Some of the fishermen in Nha Phu Lagoon know about the benefits of mangroves and several replanting efforts on the banks of shrimp ponds could be observed. However, these replanting efforts are most likely not just the cause of deliberate fishermen but to a larger extent caused by government replanting efforts and economic support. Mangrove rehabilitation is said to improve biodiversity which is particular important for the rural poor (EJF 2003,33). The return of juvenile shrimp and crabs families can improve their livelihoods through the collection and sale of juvenile crabs (EJF 2003,33).

Other environmental impacts of shrimp aquaculture are the dispersion of chemicals, diseases and nutrients into the coastal waters of the lagoon. The Environmental Justice Foundation report (2003,15) describes in great detail the release of effluent by shrimp farms into the natural environment and its effects on coastal ecosystems and human health including chemical inputs (disinfectants, antibiotics, fertilizers, pesticides, hormones) and waste (uneaten food, faeces, ammonia, phosphorous and carbon dioxide). Analogue to statements from fishermen that shrimp pond effluent was killing fish and in one case cultured grouper, the International Marine Life Alliance documented the death of 6 000 lobsters cultured off the coast in Xuan Tu, Khanh Hoa, in 2001 and reported that lobster culturists hold the shrimp farmers responsible through their untreated wastewater (Hue, Wade and Vinh 2002,3). The effects of frequent over-use or misuse of chemicals, bad pond design and inadequate feeding regimes are twofold. One is its negative impact on coastal resources and human health and the other is its negative impact on the shrimp production process itself.

Many shrimp culturists in Nha Phu Lagoon reported that post-larvae quality was low and that shrimp hatcheries were responsible for this forcing broodstock to spawn early. By this shrimp farmers most likely refer to the practice of raising seven or eight broods per broodstock (EJF 2003,24). According to recent estimates only 10 percent of broodstock in the central region meet quality standards thus post-larvae tends to be of very poor quality with high mortality rates and increased susceptibility to disease (EJF 2003,24). Another reason that might add to the poor quality of broodstock is, that according to own observation and information from fishermen broodstock were caught as by-catch during trawling. Depending on the time of capture during the trawl and on the position in the cod-end broodstock were still alive or dead after the dragnet was hauled in.

Shrimp aquaculture as currently practiced in Vietnam is largely unsustainable (EJF 2003,1). In Nha Phu Lagoon declining productivity has already led to an unintended shift from intensive to extensive production systems or conversion of shrimp ponds for other uses such as polyculture of shrimp and crabs.

The Environmental Justice Foundation (2003,38) recommends lobster aquaculture as an alternative livelihood strategy and as an alternative to export dominated shrimp production. However, lobster culture is no panacea and is associated with risks and negative impacts on its socioeconomic and natural environment itself. Lobster culture is very well export-oriented and high investment costs and long cultivating periods combined with disease susceptibility make it a risk prone undertaking. Similar to post-larvae quality problems in shrimp culture juvenile lobsters are often of poor quality with high mortality rates. The cause is said to be the use of too strong light associated with lift net fishing at night, although regulations exist that stipulate the wattage of technical equipment. Catching juvenile lobsters with drilled coral is therefore a solution to poor quality but one needs to consider the negative environmental impact of extracting coral from Nha Phu Lagoon. In 2000 the International Marinelife Alliance (IMA) conducted an extended field survey in Van Hung Municipality, Khanh Hoa Province, including a study of lobster culture in Van Phong Bay. Hue, Wade and Vinh (2002,2) reported that lobster culturists pour sand into their cages to clean them amounting to 6 000 m³ of sand each month and that feeding is irregular and often excessive. Estimates show that between 60 to 70 tons of chemicals are used in lobster culture in Khanh Hoa Province per year (Hue, Wade and Vinh 2002,2). Contrary to Hue, Wade and Vinh’s (2002,3) observation of a decline of lobster larvae in the wild, lobster larvae in Nha Phu Lagoon is abundant and reported to be on the increase.

The negative impacts of agriculture through agricultural runoff on coastal ecosystem seems to be low on the agenda in Vietnam, since the issue was only voiced once during the entire field study by an elderly dragnet fisherman in Luong Son (66:2; 66:3). Beman, Arrigo and Matson (2005,211,213) demonstrate that nitrogen-deficient areas of tropical and subtropical oceans are acutely vulnerable to nitrogen pollution caused by agricultural runoff, which strongly influences marine ecosystem processes causing large phytoplankton blooms within days of fertilization and irrigation of agricultural fields. In conjunction with projected increasing levels of nitrogen fertilizer applied in developing regions, Beman, Arrigo and Matson (2005,211) highlight the present and future vulnerability of these ecosystems to agricultural runoff.

During the preparation of Venn diagrams, group discussions and interviews participants expressed their “visions” how to improve their livelihoods, prevent poverty increase and develop the fishery in Nha Phu Lagoon. The subsequent list gives a review of new management forms and ideas:

• Develop aquaculture suited to the local environment (93:2)

• Allocation of land suitable for lobster culture (18:21)

• Compulsory shrimp pond effluent treatment (18:18)

• Mangrove replanting (18:19; 54:16)

• Construct artificial reefs (95:2)

• Develop agriculture, in particular animal husbandry (93:1)

• Develop offshore fishing (18:20; 41:10; 47:11; 65:11)

• Government scheme to buy up small to medium sized dragnet boats (65:19; 70:9; 66:5)

• Construction of a harbor in Vinh Luong Municipality (23:11)

• Provision of knowledge, credit and assistance to help people to exit the fishery sector and change to another job (75:18; 75:19)

• Provide alternative jobs (65:20; 57:5)

The development of aquaculture is generally seen as an option to diversify livelihoods and provide alternative incomes. Lobster culture is among the most favored production systems next to Babylon snail culture (65:12; 65:25; 47:12). As mentioned in the previous chapter the associated risk in lobster culture and the high initial investment capital do not predestine lobster culture to be an adequate and well-suited production system. Moreover, lobster culture in Nha Phu Lagoon has developed somewhat unregulated and suitable areas for lobster culture are already occupied preventing boat passage (cf. 24:13). Furthermore, the only area left for the possible development of lobster culture is congruent with one of the “best” coral reefs in the lagoon and the only other available area was taken away to develop a tourist resort (65:25; 18:21). Since most lobster are only cultured during a short season the diversification of production through the introduction of new species suited for cage culture could be an option to better utilize existing structures.

Polyculture of shrimp and crabs seems to be a practical livelihood strategy that utilizes shrimp ponds and requires relatively low-inputs. Remarkably, few officials were aware to what extent polyculture was already practiced in Ninh Hoa District. Although some research on polyculture of shrimp and crabs is practiced at the Research Institute for Aquaculture No. 3, extension offered by the Fishery Promotion Centre in Nha Trang focuses mainly on shrimp and lobster culture (94:4). This disparity between the actual pursued livelihood strategies and public guidelines needs to be addressed if development efforts are to be effective. Obviously blood cockle is not suitable to Tan Te since villagers turned down a training course offer (94:6). On the other hand the Fishery Promotion Centre had great success with a training course in Tan Dao highlighting the suitability of green mussels to that particular area (94:2). The bottom line is the development and promulgation of highly diversified low input aquaculture adapted to the respective agro-ecosystem and its socioeconomic environment. As demonstrated above this environment widely varies from village to village and every village has adapted their own strategy to the prevailing circumstances. This implies that suitable aquaculture that serves rural communities needs to be developed locally, if costly and time-consuming adjustment is to be avoided. This also implies that in order to learn about the respective agro-ecosystem and its socioeconomic environment, local communities need to be incorporated into the research and development process of new aquacultural systems.

Intensive shrimp culture is still carried out on a large scale despite growing problems associated with disease and loss of entire harvests. One of the main reasons is certainly poor pond design, i.e. the discharge of effluent and recruitment of water into and from the same canal (cf. EJF 2003,26). The long-term solution to this problem is the conversion of some of the shrimp ponds and the creation of second supply channels. The idea to establish a Shrimp Farmer Group to solve this problem is discussed in the next chapter. However a few participants demand treatment ponds as stipulated in regulations that make sure that effluent is treated prior to discharge. As most farmers have little land available it is understandable that they do not favor converting valuable shrimp pond area to treatment ponds. The Environmental Justice Foundation (2003,27,38) encourages harvesting shrimp only once a year, since the second shrimp harvest is often very risky. Accordingly water treatment could be carried out in the shrimp pond itself without the construction of new settlement and treatment ponds.

Several fishermen were promoting replanting of mangroves in order to restore coastal fishery resources. From the replanting efforts observed about half gave the impression to be successful and the other half had failed. Fishermen and pond owners could neither detect any direct causes nor any success factors for the failure or success of replanting efforts. Experience from Oxfam mangrove replanting projects in Vietnam offers some explanations. Monoculture plantation encourages pest attacks and causes the loss of 40 percent of planted mangroves (EJF 2003,33). Mangrove diversity will increase survival and there are more than 30 mangrove species available (EJF 2003,35). High planting densities (0.3-0.7 m intervals) are also problematic reducing sunlight, causing reduced leaf decomposition rates, and also inhibiting root development and thus making the mangroves susceptible to wind and waves (EJF 2003,33).

The construction of artificial reefs is a similar attempt to restore the coastal ecosystem and fishery resources. In addition to habitat enhancement for marine life artificial reefs provide obstacles to boats and nets and may be used to augment enforcement of trawling in Nha Phu Lagoon (cf. 15:8; 32:11).

In contrast to aquaculture agriculture receives only little official support. Especially animal husbandry is barely represented in the villages although quite a few respondents expressed their interest to engage in animal husbandry of cows and goats (93:1). Thus small-scale animal husbandry could possibly contribute a large share to household incomes in villages with access to land that is not yet utilized as rice paddy, shrimp pond or orchard like in Le Cam.

Next to aquaculture offshore fishing development is also high on the agenda of fishermen, although only in those villages that pursue illegal dragnet fishing already and who represent the higher income households in Nha Phu Lagoon. Although promoting offshore fishing is sought to reduce pressure on inshore fisheries, it must be noticed that the total catch in 2002 exceeded the total allowable catch (RIMP 2005a). Nevertheless the Research Institute for Marine Fisheries in Hai Phong recommends management measures to reduce the number of inshore fishing boats and to adjust the number of offshore boats (RIMP 2005a). The underlying assumption is that offshore fishery resources are considered underexploited (Nguyen Chu Hoi 2003,8). However, the offshore fishery resources do not meet the demand of the Vietnamese fishing fleet. The total allowable catch of nearshore coastal resources is estimated at 580 000 tons hence the total allowable catch of offshore fishery resources amounts to 820 000 tons (Ruangsivakul and Siriraksophon 2002,5). Latest figures show that in 2003 the total catch in offshore capture fisheries was 845 215 tons (FAO/MOFI 2005b). The implication is that the total allowable catch of offshore fishery resources has already been exceeded in 2003. This interior conflict of the Vietnamese fishery sector is becoming more and more evident and in the meanwhile is recognized by government agencies and policy makers (Nguyen Chu Hoi 2003,8; RIMP 2005a).

The suggestion from fishermen to establish a government scheme to buy up small to medium-sized dragnet boats to enable fishermen to invest in bigger boats suitable for offshore fishing is based on a former existing scheme that had been discontinued. However the overcapitalization of the fishing sector through direct and indirect subsidies and its negative effects on the sustainable management of fishery resources has been described in Chapter 3.1. The resulting overcapacity of fishing fleets and the subsequent effort to reduce capacity has been demonstrated on global scale. Therefore the proposed government scheme is problematic in the sense of creating a fishing fleet that is unfitted to the local fishery resource capacity.

The recommendation from villagers to construct a fishing harbor to protect boats during stormy weather and support loading and unloading of boats is appropriate to improve the livelihood of the local coastal communities and to develop the fishery sector (23:11). The infrastructure facilities to handle fishery products are generally poor and bigger boats are loaded and unloaded by hand using small boats (cf. Nguyen Chu Hoi 2003,8). This practice is time-consuming and costly (23:11). Therefore the construction of a harbor eases logistics, allows better hygiene and thus improves product quality. Consequently household incomes are improved and the fishery sector strengthened.

Several respondents mentioned creating alternative jobs outside the fishery sector through the provision of knowledge, credit and assistance as a possible solution to create new household incomes. The side effect to socioeconomic development is the reduction of fishing pressure. Silva (2006,9) analyzed the effects of alternative income generating activities as an integral component of MPA management strategies to reduce fishing pressure and address poverty concerns in Tanzania. She concludes that alternative income generating activities reduce the probability that households use destructive fishing gear but have no significant effect on household consumption levels (Silva 2006,38,1). However, Ireland (2004, cited in Silva 2006,9) points out that several factors influence the decisions of coastal communities in the Western Indian Ocean to engage in alternative livelihood strategies and that profitability is not the only factor. Other important factors include the attitude towards risk, access to assets, vulnerability, and institutional influences (Ireland 2004, cited in Silva 2006,10). Bearing in mind that fishing households in Nha Phu Lagoon are exposed to high risks in shrimp and lobster aquaculture, vulnerable to the changing ecosystem and declining catches as well as violating existing institutions by pursuing illegal fishing activities, alternative income generating activities are important to reduce pressure on coastal resources.

A group discussion with women in Le Cam yielded ‘birth control’ as means to improve livelihoods and reduce the pressure on coastal resources (27:5; 27:6; 27:7). Although young women in Le Cam were said to use contraceptive coils today after they had one or two kids, the only training course on birth control by the Municipal People’s Committee lies 10 years back (27:5). Astonishingly women of different age were openly discussing birth control measures like contraceptive coils and sterilization. Yet it seemed that this topic was neither on the agenda of government officials nor of respective husbands and that women were left alone with these decisions. Hence birth control is an essential element in the long-term sustainable management of coastal fisheries.

Next to management forms and ideas to manage coastal resources more effectively in the future, stakeholders of the fishery sector in Nha Phu Lagoon envisioned organizational and institutional considerations for implementation. Suggestions for successful enforcement of fishery regulations include:

• Stop dragnet fishing (95:3)

• Strict enforcement of electric fishing and confiscation of gear (75:20)

• Station a patrol boat in Nha Phu Lagoon (20:28)

• Empower the Marine Border Patrol to administer sanctions (76:5; 77:4).

• Establish a public Shrimp Farmer Group (78:15)

The strict enforcement of illegal fishing activities such as trawling and electric fishing was one of the most frequently mentioned issues during the entire field study. Its importance is highlighted by the concrete recommendations listed above. In general lax enforcement and the prospect to increase utility is seen as encouragement to engage in illegal fishing activities (56:2; 56:12; 62:6; 65:13; 71:4; 71:7; 71:9; 79:2; 81:8; 95:9). The failure to enforce the trawling ban is directly linked to the disparity of perceptions between fishermen and government officials and has been described in chapter 5.3.3. In the case of electric fishing recommendations suggest outlawing the possession of electric fishing equipment. Silva (2006,37) demonstrates that a policy that confiscates illegal fishing gear is just as important as the enforcement of existing regulations banning the use of the illegal fishing gear. Households that own destructive fishing gear, which also happens to be illegal, are virtually certain to use such gear (Silva 2006,37). Therefore confiscation of illegal fishing gear such as electric fishing equipment and dragnets is very much applicable to Nha Phu Lagoon. These gear types are not only conspicuous but also easy to distinguish from others. In particular electric fishermen from inland communities can be dissuaded from purchasing destructive fishing gear before using it. The same applies for dragnets used in nearshore fishing and thus illegal that are openly manufactured and sold in Vinh Luong Municipality, although they are assigned to a specific use. Manufacturers and users know very well that these dragnets are illegitimate and rigorous confiscation is likely to influence household choice of fishing gear. Silva (2006,37) suggests a gear exchange program to facilitate the exchange of destructive fishing gear for more environmentally sustainable fishing gear. In combination with strict enforcement of existing regulations this could be an incentive for fishing households pursuing trawling to change to more sustainable fishing practices.

To realize strict enforcement fishermen suggest to permanently station a patrol boat in Nha Phu Lagoon. Besides deterrence this would overcome the practice of fishermen to avoid controls from the Fisheries Resource Protection Department through communicating the location of the patrol boat thus giving the fishermen enough time to cease illegal fishing activities.

The different administrative structures, i.e. the Department of Fisheries, Fisheries Resources Protection Department, and the Marine Border Patrol 368 prevent effective action (76:6). As a result fishermen plead for a reorganization of the organizations responsible for fisheries management. The Marine Border Patrol 368 is stationed in Nha Phu Lagoon already and uses their own patrol boat. Their main field of responsibility is the control of boat traffic and merchandise trade. However the Marine Border Patrol 368 regularly accompanies the Fisheries Resources Protection Department on their patrols. Furthermore the Marine Border Patrol 368 is familiar with the resource system Nha Phu Lagoon, its structures, fishermen and boat owners. Thus the recommendation from fishermen to empower the Marine Border Patrol 368 to administer sanctions, i.e. invoke warnings, issue fines, and confiscate fishing gear without being dependent on the Department of Fisheries or the Fisheries Resources Protection Department is likely to encourage enforcement of existing regulations. In addition village and municipality leaders have no incentive to enforce strictly, because enforcement would affect the lives of community members and make some people’s lives even poorer whereby these would not vote for the representatives a second time (76:6). The second village leader from Ha Lien highlights this issue stating: “If you want to stop illegal fishing, you need to involve xa leader, thon leader and all agree at the same time” (78:18).

According to the experience gathered with the self-formed Fisheries Resources Protection Group in Ha Lien Village residents suggest forming a Shrimp Farmer Group similar to the Farmer’s Union with the obligation that everybody who joins has to follow good rules of practice (78:15). An example for such good practice could be the idea from a group of fishermen in Tan Thanh to establish compulsory shrimp pond effluent treatment (18:17). A shrimp farmer near Tan Thuy adds that small treatment ponds could be a solution, if everybody were forced to use them (22:6). Similar attempts are successfully practiced in Vietnam and are initiated and attended by the University of Fisheries, Nha Trang. Crucial to its success is the highly participative approach including methods such as history time line, Venn diagram, gender analysis, and group discussion to improve local understanding and build awareness (personal communication, Ms. Hoa, University of Fisheries). Therefore the link to improve organization thus improving livelihoods and the environment is a feasible approach.

Apparently the taxation of shrimp ponds is inadequate, as nobody could be identified paying taxes. However adequate taxation of shrimp ponds and the diligent collection of taxes may prevent uncontrolled shrimp farm development and encourage only those to engage in shrimp farming who hold the necessary skills, knowledge and financial resources to successfully culture shrimp.