living with floods: residential clusters and cykes in the mekong delta, vietnam by jane chun,...
DESCRIPTION
DISCLAIMER: The views expressed in this paper are the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), or its Board of Governors, or the governments they represent. ADB does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this paper and accepts no responsibility for any consequence of their use. The countries listed in this paper do not imply any view on ADB's part as to sovereignty or independent status or necessarily conform to ADB's terminology.TRANSCRIPT
Living with FloodsResidential clusters and dykes in the
Mekong Delta, Vietnam
Jane Chun
Refugee Studies Centre
University of Oxford
DISCLAIMER: The views expressed in this paper are the views of the authors and do
not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), or
its Board of Governors, or the governments they represent. ADB does not guarantee
the accuracy of the data included in this paper and accepts no responsibility for any
consequence of their use. The countries listed in this paper do not imply any view on
ADB's part as to sovereignty or independent status or necessarily conform to ADB's
terminology.
Framing the study: aims
investigate the capacity of current legal and normative frameworks – principally at the national level - to protect the rights of people vulnerable to environmental displacement
strengthening and enhancing national-level
different configurations of governance and
government
Framing the study: case studies
Global south focus
environmental displacement most severe
Kenya, Ghana, Bangladesh, Vietnam
representative sample of ‘environmentally-stressed’
countries
changing environmental conditions
internal and regional migratory impacts (Kenya and Ghana)
scenarios of slow onset change - rising sea levels (Vietnam and
Bangladesh) and desertification (Kenya and Ghana)
legal and normative rights protection apparatus
Framing the study: data collection & methods
Data Documents: legal and normative instruments; policy reports and
documents on environmental issues; local research publications; web
searches
Interviews: government policy makers; international and UN agencies;
NGOs, civil society and human rights organisations
Country reports country overview
recent and current migratory patterns, processes, policies
legal/normative protection and rights-based instruments related to
migration
initiatives to enhance norms and instruments; ‘compliance’ with 1998
Guiding Principles; capacity to address environmental displacement
obstacles to implementation
‘protection gaps’
Context: Vietnam
vulnerable to SLR and saline water
intrusion
1m SLR: inundate 9.3% of total land
surface
Mekong Delta would lose 37.8% of its land
6th highest proportion of population living
in LECZ
disaster-prone: annual average of 6-10
typhoons and tropical depressions
Source: Evers, H-D., Benedikter, S.,
Strategic Group Formation in the
Mekong Delta – The Development of
a Modern Hydraulic Society, Center
for Development Research (ZEF),
University of Bonn, February 2009.
Migration policies and rights regimes: Vietnam
Migration histories and politics shape the migration policies
and rights regimes for the environmentally displaced
history of state-managed internal migration
1976-1995: ~4.57 million people resettled (mostly short distances)
1994-1999: 2,105,000 people resettled
1999 census: 4.5 million migrants (spontaneous and resettled)
2009 census: 6.6 million migrants (excluding <6 months prior, seasonal
and unregistered)
household registration system – ho khau
regulate population mobility
residents and non-residents do not have same access to basic services
(health care, education, home ownership)
4 categories: KT1-4
‘Living with Floods’: Residential Clusters Programs
Policy to mitigate negative effects of annual floods
predecessors 1996-2001:
residential clusters
in An Giang province, 16,887 households were resettled in
residential clusters and dykes
loan program for poor farmers to raise housing
foundations
in An Giang province, 97,085 households received loans
(USD 316 each), but only 5-10% repayment rate
loans used for other purposes – making purchases and
paying off other debts
Living with Floods: Residential clusters and dykes
Residential cluster Residential dyke
‘Living with Floods’: Residential Clusters Programs
recognizes that while floods are essential to livelihoods and
economic development, flood risks should be mitigated
new policies and programs to relocate resource-poor
households living in flood-prone areas into new residential
clusters / dykes within Mekong Delta (since 2001)
Prime Minister’s decision on the ‘socio-economic development
of the Mekong Delta region in the 2001-2005 period’ (2001)
from 2001-2007, 1,043 residential clusters /dykes were built
containing 73,111 houses to accommodate 200,000
households.
plans to build 178 more clusters to house 57,257 households
by 2013
within provincial boundaries
Residential clusters/dykes: Preferential households
Removal of Canal Houses to Secure Environmental Sanitation
of An Giang province from 2006-2010
Five year interest free loan to purchase housing plot and
house frame. Repayment from Y6 to the end of Y10
Preferential households:
1. Households subject to preferential policy, poor households fleeing from
floods and bank erosion (with poverty certification).
2. Households that own land or houses in locations marked for residential
cluster / dyke construction, and as a result must vacate the premise for
site clearance.
3. Households subject to preferential hardship policy (without poverty
certification), without housing foundations for overcoming floods and
having only temporary accommodation.
4. Households of above target group but on the poverty line.
Residential clusters/dykes: Administrative process
1. Household lodges application.
2. Village self-management board deliberates.
3. Commune residential cluster / dyke Steering Committee
deliberates.
4. District residential cluster / dyke Steering Committee
deliberates.
5. District People’s Committee issues decision and signs
hand-over minutes of housing foundations and houses.
6. Household signs contract for buying foundation and house
on credit with a bank.
Residential clusters/dykes: Procedural issues
discrepancies in designation of who is poor or not poor
lack of community participation and low awareness among
community members
posting of drawings in local People’s Committee offices increased
input from community, particularly where there are community
members who knowledgeable on construction
difficult to gather people in one place at same time when they are
scattered and living in areas that are hard to access
Sources: Adam Fforde 2003, AusAID 2004, Dun 2009, Pham 2007
Results: Cons
loan-centered structure of program may push already poor
households deeper into poverty
lack of basic infrastructure such as schools, health care, or water
and sewage treatment facilities
dissolution of social assets / networks
removed from former livelihoods, competition with residents
makes securing job difficult and lowers wages
additional expenditures with per-urban lifestyle
unable to breed livestock or plant home garden
lack of ability to make repayments
Results: Pros
All surveyed households believed new houses were more sturdy and
comfortable because:
1. No need for evacuation during flooding season
2. No threat of house collapsing or children drowning in the
clusters / dykes
3. No concerns about diseases whereas before, they were in
constant contact with dirty (flood) water
4. Opportunities to enjoy urban living conditions such as clean
water, electricity, cultural exchange, markets, etc.
National Strategy for Natural Disaster Prevention,
Response and Mitigation to 2020
Vietnam’s national policy framework for DM
address sudden onset extreme climate events and minimize their
impact on sustainable development
leading agencies: Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
(MARD) and the Central Committee for Flood and Storm Control
(CCFSC)
importance of community participation, mitigating loss of life and
household assets, and ‘living with floods’ strategy
includes relocation plan for 150,000 households; decrease
poverty rates in relocated areas by 15%
relocation plan not yet underway; central funding not yet available
Recommendations
To ensure sustainability and improvement in quality of life in
residential clusters/dykes, urban planning should be improved
taking into account housing and community infrastructure.
Participation of communities throughout process through
community meetings in accessible locations with clear visual
materials and explanations of conditions, with fair representation
of different groups. Consultation with both resettled and host
communities.
Develop clear criteria for assessment of resettlement process,
and continually monitor. This will also shed light on needs and
arising issues.
Increase funding to local mass organizations to assist at grass-
roots level.
Strengthen coordination with other programs, taking into
consideration the broader development context of MD.
Increase funding at central and local levels.