i Dissertation Nguyen Tan Dat Sustainable livelihood strategy for shrimp farmers in Mekong Delta under the climate change context. A case study in Tra Vinh province, Vietnam First supervisor: Prof. Dr. Björn Vollan Second supervisor: Prof. Dr. Michael Kirk Date of submission: 15 September 2020 Place: Marburg Working Group for Sustainable Use of Natural Resources School of Business and Economics Philipps- University of Marburg ii Declaration Full name: Nguyen Tan Dat Birthday: 15.07.1982 Place birth: Tra Vinh, Vietnam I declare that this thesis is my own account of my research and contains as its main content work that has not previously been submitted for any tertiary education institution. Marburg, 15.09.2020 iii Acknowledgements First and foremost, I would like to express my great gratitude and appreciation to Professor Dr. Björn Vollan who accepted me after one hopeless year in finding supervisor, he gave me a big opportunity to pursue my dream. In deep my heart to thank and respect him, a principal supervisor, for his excellent supervision and encouragement during this doctoral research. Likewise, I am deeply indebted to Professor Dr. Michael Kirk, my second supervisor, for his guidance. I am grateful to, my colleagues, Matthias Mayer, Ivo Steimanis, Lukas Kampenhuber, Macro Nilgen and Maximilian Burger, for their willingness to share their experience, as well as their valuable comments and suggestions on the papers. Especially, I am grateful to Matthias for his translation the summary into German with all kindness. I am also very grateful to my friend, Chung N.V for his invaluable advices when I was in stressful status during this doctoral research. My sincere thanks to the Marburg International Doctorate (MID) program for giving me the financial support to my fieldwork in Vietnam for three months. Acknowledgement is also given to the main financial support provided by the International Cooperation Department, Ministry of Education and Training of Vietnam (VIED) for during my study in Germany. My great appreciation is given to the school of Economics and Law, Tra Vinh University for their valuable support and encouragement during my doctoral study. My sincere thanks are extended to local authorities in Tra Vinh province, especially those in Duyen Hai and Cau Ngang districts for their valuable comments, support and nice cooperation during my survey. I would like to thank assistants and all interviewees who used their time for my questionnaire with the honest answers in the ten villages of both Duyen Hai and Cau Ngang districts. I would like to express all of my heart-feeling gratefulness to my parents and my parents-in-law who always encouraged me with such love and support my wife taking care two daughters. Finally, from the depth of my heart, I would like to give a very special thank you to my wife Duong Hien Ngoc Lan, my two daughters Nguyen Duong Ngoc Han and Nguyen Duong Phuc An. They always supported me and encouraged me with their best wishes. My wife was always there cheering me up and stood by me through the good and bad time during my research journey. Thank you. iv v Zusammenfassung der Dissertation Innerhalb der letzten Jahre hat die Brackwassergarnelen-Zuchtindustrie große Gewinne erwirtschaftet. Tatsächlich entwickelt sich die Industrie seit 1980 stetig weiter (EASRD, 2006; MARD, 2015). Sie wurde vom Norden bis zum Süden Vietnams kultiviert, insbesondere im Mekong-Delta, wo sie im Jahr 2014 91% (699,725 Hektar) der Garnelenzuchtfläche ausmachte, mit einer durchschnittlichen Wachstumsrate von 3.12% pro Jahr von 2010 bis 2014 (MARD, 2015). Im Jahr 2018 machte die Garnelenproduktion im Mekong-Delta etwa 83% der gesamten nationalen Garnelenproduktion aus und besaß eine durchschnittlichen Wachstumsrate von 8.85% pro Jahr von 2010 bis 2018 (GSO, 2020). Die Provinz Tra Vinh ist eine von zwölf Provinzen im Mekong-Delta. Mit einer 65 km langen Küstenlinie und einem dichten System von Flüssen und Kanälen, eignet sie sich besonders gut für die Zucht von Brackwassergarnelen. Nach Angaben des Ministeriums für natürliche Ressourcen und Umwelt der Provinz Tra Vinh existieren 110 Kanäle der Stufe 1 mit einer Gesamtlänge von 467 km; 690 Kanäle der Stufe 2 mit einer Gesamtlänge von 2.110 km und 8,800 Kanäle der Stufe 3 mit einer Länge von 6,620 km. Die Behörden aus Tra Vinh bezeichnen die Garnelenzuchtindustrie als eine bedeutende Wirtschaftstrategie für die Region. Bis 2019 dehnte sich die Garnelenzucht in der Provinz Tra Vinh auf 33,378 Hektar aus und erreichte 67,768 Tonnen Garnelenproduktion mit einer durchschnittlichen Wachstumsrate von 21.5% pro Jahr von 2010 bis 2019 (Aquaculture Department of Tra Vinh). Darüber hinaus hat die Provinz Tra Vinh, durch den Beschluss 784/QD- UBND “Entwicklung der Garnelenzuchtindustrie bis 2025” vom 27. April 2018, verfügt die Garnelenproduktion auf Grundlage der jeweiligen natürlichen Gegebenheiten zu Entwickeln. Währenddessen solle die Entwicklung und Anwendung von intensiven und halbintensiven Produktionsmethoden und Technologien in der Landwirtschaft vorangetrieben werden. Die Anwendung dieser Methoden soll dazu dienen die Nutzung von Chemikalien und Antibiotika in der Landwirtschaft zu unterbinden und ein Öko-Umweltzertifikat zu erhalten, welches den Anforderungen der Exportmärkte entspricht. vi Die Garnellenindustrie sieht sich jedoch ernsthaft mit Umweltproblemen konfrontiert. Laut MARD (2015) lag der Verschmutzungsgrad der Flüsse über dem 2.5- bis 3-fachen des zulässigen Standards. Das kurzfristige Gewinnstreben der Bauern in der Garnelenzucht, geht auf Kosten der Umwelt. Sie beachten nicht die Folgen des Missbrauches von nicht überwachten oder verbotenen Chemikalien und Medikamenten in der Garnelenzucht. Dies geschieht trotz vorhandener Umweltschutzgesetze. In Tra Vinh gibt es besonders viele kleine Farmen, die häufig ihr komplettes Land für Garnelenteiche verwenden, ohne jedoch Schmutzwasserbecken anzulegen, die die Chemikalien und Abfälle abfangen könnten. Abwässer werden daher häufig direkt in die Flüsse und Kanäle geleitet, was die Wasserverschmutzung zusätzlich erhöht. Wird das verschmutzte Wasser für neue Kulturen verwendet, ohne dieses davor zu reingingen, besteht ein hohes Risiko für den Ausbruch von Krankheiten in den Garnellenkulturen. Laut Angaben der Abteilung Aquakultur der Provinz Tra Vinh, hat die Garnelenzuchtindustrie durch den Klimawandel innerhalb der letzten Jahre erhebliche Schäden und Verluste erlitten. Im Jahr 2019 meldeten über 6,200 Garnellenzüchter Schäden durch Trockenheit, Temperaturschwankungen, und den Ausbruch von Krankheiten erlitten zu haben. Insgesamt waren 2,121 Hektar, 19% der gesamten von Kleinbetrieben bewirtschafteten Fläche, betroffen (Abteilung Aquakultur der Provinz Tra Vinh). Von 1970 bis 2007 stieg die Durchschnittstemperatur um 0.6° Celsius, und die durchschnittlichen Niederschläge nahmen um 94 mm pro Jahr zu (MARD, 2015). Bis 2100 werden unter dem A2- Szenario eines Anstiegs des Meeresspiegels um 1 Meter (SLR) 85% des Gebietes des Mekong-Deltas (12,376 km²) versinken. Insbesondere in der Provinz Tra Vinh werden bis zu 45.7% der Fläche an Naturland verloren gehen, und das Küstenland für die Aquakulturzucht wird vollständig verschwinden (Carew-Reid, Jeremy, 2007). Gleichzeitig wird mit dem Meeresspiegelanstieg auch die Durchschnittstemperatur auf schätzungsweise 30°C ansteigen, was bis 2100 fast alle Wirtschaftsbereiche, insbesondere aber die Garnelenzucht, betreffen wird (MORE, 2008). Nach dem Szenario A2 des IPCC werden die Niederschläge in diesem Gebiet bis 2050 und bis 2100 um etwa 3% bzw. 7% zunehmen, so dass die Provinz Tra Vinh in Zukunft voraussichtlich mehr Niederschläge erleiden wird. Die gilt insbesondere für die Küstengebieten, die am besten für die Garnelenzucht geeignet ist (JICA, 2013). vii Um trotz dieser schlechten Aussichten, den bereits existierenden Klima Unsicherheiten, sowie den vorhanden Wasserverschmutzungsproblemen einen Gewinn erzielen zu können, werden immer mehr Chemikalien und Medikamente in der Garnelenzucht eingesetzt. Diese zunehmende Verwendung von Medikamenten und Chemikalien ist nicht nur für die Umwelt und das natürliche Ökosystem schädlich, sondern kann auch aufgrund der in den Garnelen vorhanden Rückständen der Produktion die Gesundheit der Konsumenten beeinträchtigen. Aufgrund dieser Probleme haben einige internationale Abnehmer das Vertrauen in die vietnamesische Aquakultur verloren. Laut MARD wurden in den letzten Jahren einige Garnelen Exportprodukte aufgrund von Antibiotikarückständen und Bedenken der Ernährungssicherheit von internationalen Abnehmern abgelehnt. Daher fällt es den vietnamesischen Garnelen schwer, auf neue ausländische Märkte vorzudringen, und sie werden von den traditionellen Märkten streng beobachtet. Zum Beispiel müssen derzeit 100% der Garnelensendungen aus Vietnam vom japanischen Zoll kontrolliert werden, anstatt der bisher üblichen 30%; auch Korea warnte davor, Nitofuran Rückstände in Garnelenprodukten aus Vietnam gefunden zu haben (VASEP, 2020). Das Ministerium für Landwirtschaft und ländliche Entwicklung (MARD) führte daher 2011 den Vietnam Good Aquaculture Practice (VietGAP)-Standard ein, um nachhaltige Produktionsmethoden der Aquakulturindustrie zu fördern. Die VietGAP ist der Leitfaden für die Aquakulturpraxis und umfasst fünf grundlegende Kriterien: sichere Lebensmittel, sichere Gesundheit der Garnelen, eine sichere Umwelt, soziale Verantwortung und Informationen zur Rückverfolgung. Kernstück der VietGAP ist der Kriterienkatalog für ökologische und umweltbezogene Anforderungen an den Prozess der Garnelenzucht. Dieser verfolgt das Ziel, die regulierenden Funktionen der Natur zu maximieren, indem Umweltbedingungen geschaffen werden, die die nachhaltige Entwicklung der Garnelenzucht begünstigen, wobei die natürlichen Ressourcen so weit wie möglich geschont werden sollen. Gegenwärtig ist die Regierung zutiefst beunruhigt und ermutigt die Bauern, den VietGAP-Standard in der Garnelenzucht anzuwenden. Das MARD ging davon aus, dass VietGAP bis 2020 von 80 Prozent der Garnelenzüchter angewendet werden würde. Die derzeitige Zahl der zertifizierten Betriebe ist jedoch mit insgesamt nur 128 Garnelenfarmen unbedeutend (vietgap.tongcucthuysan.gov.vn). In der Provinz Tra Vinh gibt es nur einen Garnelenzüchter, der ein VietGAP-Zertifikat erhält. viii Die Garnelenzucht ist die wichtigste Lebensgrundlage für mehr als 44,000 Haushalte in der Provinz Tra Vinh (Aquakulturabteilung von Tra Vinh), deren Existenz durch den Klimawandel und der von der Garnelenzucht verursachte Verschmutzung der Wasserressourcen bedroht ist. Ziel der Dissertation ist es, den aktuellen Stand der Lebensgrundlagen der Garnelenzüchter zu bewerten, die die ökologische Nachhaltigkeit in der Garnelenzucht beeinflussen, und den Livelihood Vulnerability Index (LVI) gegenüber dem Klimawandel zu analysieren. Ein weiteres Ziel der Dissertation ist es herauszufinden, unter welchen Umständen Garnelenzüchter die Voraussetzungen des VietGap Zertifikates in ihrem Betrieb umsetzen würden. Die Dissertation besteht aus drei Studien, deren Beitrag zum aktuellen Stand der Wissenschaft werden im Folgenden kurz zusammengefasst. In Kapitel 2 werden die Daten aus der Provinz Tra Vinh von 300 Haushalten, die in der Garnelenzucht tätig sind, durch Fragebogeninterviews und Transect Walks gesammelt. Die Studie basiert auf dem Sustainable Livelihood Framework des DFID, welcher 5 Typen umfasst: Humankapital; Naturkapital; physisches Kapital; Sozialkapital und Finanzkapital, um den aktuellen Stand der Lebensgrundlagen der Garnelenzüchter zu analysieren. Die Studie zeigt auf, dass die derzeitige Existenzgrundlage und das Niveau der ökologischen Nachhaltigkeit von extensiven, intensiven und halbintensiven Landwirtschaftssystemen in der Rangfolge aufsteigend bewertet wurden. Drei Lebensgrundlagen, das menschliche, das natürliche und das finanzielle Kapital stehen in einer positiven Beziehung zur ökologischen Nachhaltigkeit in der Garnelenzucht. Insbesondere die intensive Grundwassernutzung und die oftmals nicht vorhandene Abwasserreinigung in der Garnelenzucht war für die Garnelenzucht im Hinblick auf die Umweltverträglichkeit nicht nachhaltig. In Kapitel 3 misst die Studie den Livelihood Vulnerability Index (LVI) der Garnelenzüchter gegenüber dem Klimawandel, indem sie drei Garnelenzuchtsysteme in der Provinz Tra Vinh, Vietnam, miteinander vergleicht. Die Analyse basiert auf dem Rahmenwerk des IPCC zur Bewertung der Anfälligkeit der drei Dimensionen Ausbeutung, Empfindlichkeit und Anpassungsfähigkeit. Im Rahmen des Sustainable Livelihood Framework (SLF) von Chambers and Conway (1992) wurden insgesamt 42 Indikatoren für die Dimensionen vorgeschlagen, die den Kapitalien des Lebensunterhalts entsprechen (menschliches, physisches, natürliches, soziales und finanzielles Kapital). Insgesamt wurden 300 Haushalte ix befragt. Davon betrieben 195 intensive, 62 halbintensive und 43 extensive Produktion. Im Allgemeinen deuten die Ergebnisse darauf hin, dass die Garnelenzüchter auf einer mittleren Ebene anfällig waren. Die Extensiv Haltung war unter den drei Methoden der Garnelenzucht, die am stärksten durch den Klimawandel gefährdete. Insbesondere die intensive Landwirtschaft war in Bezug auf Naturkapital, Sozialkapital und Finanzkapital sehr anfällig für den Klimawandel, während die umfangreiche Landwirtschaft am anfälligsten für Sach- und Humankapital war. Obwohl die intensive Garnelenzucht in der Regel angemessener in Anlagen und Ausrüstung investiert wird, war sie aufgrund der hohen Besatzdichte anfälliger für den Klimawandel als die semi-intensive. Kapitel 4 verwendet die Methode der kontingenten Bewertung, um herauszufinden, welche Faktoren die Entscheidung der Landwirte beeinflussen, der VietGAP-Zertifizierung zu folgen (WTADecision) und wie viel Subventionswert sie bereit sind zu akzeptieren (WTASubsidy), um den VietGAP-Standard zu verfolgen. Die Ergebnisse zeigten, dass WTADecision positiv mit Bildungsniveau der Landwirte, der Wahrnehmung der Umwelt und der Einstellung gegenüber dem VietGAP- Zertifikat korrelieren, während dieselben Faktoren negative mit der von den Farmern erwartete Auswirkung einer WTASubsidy korreliert sind. Das Jahreseinkommen hatte auch einen leichten Einfluss auf die Bereitschaft der Landwirte, einen Subventionswert zu akzeptieren. Die Ergebnisse der Studie legen nahe, dass die Behörde die Subvention in der ersten Phase des Programms erhöhen sollten, um die Landwirte zur Teilnahme zu bewegen. In der der Folge sollte dann gezielt das Umweltbewusstsein der Garnelenzüchter gestärkt werden, um die langfristigen Vorteile des VietGAP-Zertifikats hervorzuheben, um noch mehr Garnelenzüchter zur Teilnahme zu bewegen. Diese Forschung leistet Beiträge zur nachhaltigen Existenzstrategie von Garnelenzüchtern im Kontext des Klimawandels. - Aufstellung der Kriterien für die ökologische Nachhaltigkeit der Garnelenzucht - Herausfinden der Beziehung zwischen den Vermögenswerten zum Lebensunterhalt und der ökologischen Nachhaltigkeit der Garnelenzucht. - Zusammenstellung der Indikatoren für drei Dimensionen der Bewertung der Verwundbarkeit gegenüber dem Klimawandel auf der Grundlage der fünf Lebensgrundlagen. x - Herausfinden des Unterschieds zwischen den drei Garnelenzuchtsystemen in Bezug auf die Verwundbarkeit des Lebensunterhalts gegenüber dem Klimawandel. xi Table of contents Declaration ............................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgements ................................................................................................ iii Zusammenfassung der Dissertation ...................................................................... v Table of contents .................................................................................................... xi List of tables.......................................................................................................... xiv List of figures ......................................................................................................... xv Abbreviation ......................................................................................................... xvi Chapter 1: Introduction ......................................................................................... 1 1.1 The Mekong river system ............................................................................. 1 1.2 The Mekong Delta ......................................................................................... 1 1.3 Tra Vinh province ......................................................................................... 1 1.4 Climate change context ................................................................................. 2 1.5 Aquaculture overview ................................................................................... 3 1.6 Research questions ........................................................................................ 6 1.7 The findings of this thesis ............................................................................. 6 1.8 Conclusion of thesis ...................................................................................... 8 References .............................................................................................................. 10 Chapter 2: Analyse how livelihood assets affect the environmental sustainability of shrimp farming: A case study in Tra Vinh province, Vietnam. ................................................................................................................. 13 Abstract .............................................................................................................. 13 2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 13 2.2 Methodology ................................................................................................ 16 2.2.1 Literature reviews .................................................................................. 16 2.2.2 Study area ............................................................................................... 17 2.2.3 Household survey ................................................................................... 17 2.2.4 Analyzing current status of livelihood assets of shrimp farmers ........... 17 2.2.5 Analysing the effect of livelihood assets on the environmental sustainability of shrimp farming ..................................................................... 18 xii 2.3 Results and discussion ................................................................................ 19 2.3.1 Current status of livelihood assets of shrimp farmers ............................ 19 2.3.2 The effect of livelihood assets on the environmental sustainability of shrimp farming ................................................................................................ 31 2.4. Conclusion .................................................................................................. 39 References .............................................................................................................. 43 Appendix 2.A. Indicators of Livelihood assets. .............................................. 47 Appendix 2.B Regression do-files .................................................................... 53 Chapter 3: Analysing the livelihood vulnerability of shrimp farmers to climate change: A case study in Tra Vinh province, Vietnam .......................... 57 Abstract .............................................................................................................. 57 3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 57 3.2 Literature Review and Methodology ........................................................ 59 3.2.1 Literature review .................................................................................... 59 3.2.2 Study area ............................................................................................... 63 3.2.3 Climate patterns and scenarios in Tra Vinh province ............................ 65 3.2.4 Household survey ................................................................................... 70 3.2.5 Study methodology ................................................................................ 70 3.3. Results and Discussion ............................................................................... 74 3.3.1 Human capital ........................................................................................ 74 3.3.2 Natural capital ........................................................................................ 77 3.3.3 Physical capital ...................................................................................... 82 3.3.4 Social capital .......................................................................................... 84 3.3.5 Financial capital ..................................................................................... 85 3.3.6 Overall indices ....................................................................................... 87 3.4 Conclusions and recommendations ........................................................... 89 References .............................................................................................................. 91 Appendix 3.A: Indicators of vulnerability to climate change basing on five forms of livelihood capital. ............................................................................... 97 Appendix 3.B. Value of Indicators for three dimensions of each capital and LVI-IPCC ........................................................................................................ 116 Appendix 3.C. Statistic data of Shrimp farming from the Aquaculture Department of Tra Vinh province over last 6 years. ................................... 118 xiii Appendix 3.D Example of calculating the LVI-IPCC for the Human capital of the intensive shrimp farming. .................................................................... 119 Chapter 4: Evaluating WTA (willingness to accept) a subsidy for getting a VietGAP certificate in shrimp farming: A case study in Tra Vinh province, Vietnam. ............................................................................................................... 121 Abstract ............................................................................................................ 121 4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................... 121 4.2 Literature and methodology .................................................................... 125 4.2.1 Literature .............................................................................................. 125 4.2.2 Methodology ........................................................................................ 130 4.2.3 Survey design ....................................................................................... 130 4.2.4 Estimation methods .............................................................................. 132 4.3 Results ........................................................................................................ 133 4.3.1 Statistical description of farmers’ characteristics ................................ 133 4.3.2 Farmers’ environmental perceptions .................................................... 134 4.3.3 Farmers’ attitudes towards VietGAP standard .................................... 135 4.3.4 Descriptive WTADecision and WTASubsidy .............................................. 137 4.3.5 Estimating results and discussion ........................................................ 138 4.4 Extended discussion .................................................................................. 141 4.4.1 Drawbacks of applying the VietGAP standard .................................... 141 4.4.2 Status quo of exporting shrimp ............................................................ 141 4.5 Conclusion ................................................................................................. 145 References ............................................................................................................ 147 Appendix 4.A. Stata do-files ........................................................................... 150 Appendix 4.B. Questionnaires ....................................................................... 153 xiv List of tables Table 2.1. Standard environment required for shrimp cultivation .......................... 14 Table 2.2. Area and productivity of shrimp industry in Tra Vinh province ........... 16 Table 2.3. Statistic values of indicators of human capital ...................................... 20 Table 2.4. Statistic values of indicators of natural capital ...................................... 22 Table 2.5. Statistic values of indicators of physical capital .................................... 25 Table 2.6. Statistic values of indicators of social capital ........................................ 27 Table 2.7. Statistic values of indicators of financial capital ................................... 29 Table 2.8. The list of criteria for environmental sustainability of shrimp farming in Tra Vinh province ................................................................................................... 31 Table 2.9. Training courses in the last five years ................................................... 34 Table 2.10. Statistic values of the dependent variable ............................................ 36 Table 2.11. The result of estimating five capitals affected the environmental sustainability of shrimp farming ............................................................................. 36 Table 3.1. Comparison of three shrimp farming systems in Vietnam. ................... 60 Table 3.2. Climate change scenarios according to the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) for Tra Vinh Province. ..................................................................... 67 Table 3.3. Climate change scenarios based on the IPCC’s Third and Fourth Assessment Reports for Tra Vinh Province. ........................................................... 68 Table 3.4. The degree of impact of climate change on shrimp production. ........... 69 Table 3.5. Indicators of vulnerability to climate change based on five forms of livelihood capital. .................................................................................................... 72 Table 3.6. Shrimp farmers’ perception of related climate events in the past and the future. ...................................................................................................................... 81 Table 4.1. Quality of discharge water permitted by the VietGAP standard ......... 123 Table 4.2. Descriptive statistics ............................................................................ 135 Table 4.3. Result of regression WTADecision and WTASubsidy for VietGAP ........... 138 Table 4.4. Three main shrimp import markets and total shrimp exports .............. 142 xv List of figures Figure 2.1 Current status of five livelihood assets of shrimp farmers classified by shrimp farming method in Tra Vinh province. ....................................................... 30 Figure 2.2 Illustration of groundwater extraction ................................................... 35 Figure 3.1. Components of the vulnerability of a system to climate change. ......... 61 Figure 3.2. The impact of adaptive capacity on the vulnerability of a system. ...... 62 Figure 3.3. Map of Tra Vinh Province. ................................................................... 65 Figure 3.4. Recorded climate patterns in Tra Vinh Province in 2013. ................... 66 Figure 3.5. Exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity of human capital in different shrimp farming systems. .......................................................................... 75 Figure 3.6. Exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity of natural capital in different shrimp farming systems. .......................................................................... 77 Figure 3.7. Exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity of physical capital in different shrimp farming systems. .......................................................................... 83 Figure 3.8. Exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity of social capital in different shrimp farming systems. .......................................................................... 84 Figure 3.9. Exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity of financial capital in different shrimp farming systems ........................................................................... 86 Figure 3.10. Summary of the vulnerability assessment process. ............................ 88 Figure 4.1 The process of getting the VietGAP certificate for shrimp farming. .. 129 Figure 4.2 Number of shrimp shipments rejected by three main importers from 2012 to 2019. ........................................................................................................ 142 Figure 4.3 Forecasted demand for shrimp in United States. ................................. 143 Figure 4.4 Forecasted demand for shrimp in Europe. ........................................... 144 Figure 4.5 Forecasted demand for shrimp in Japan. ............................................. 144 xvi Abbreviation ASC Aquaculture Stewardship Council BOD Biochemical Oxygen Demand DFID Department for International Development DO Dissolved Oxygen FAO Food and Agriculture Organization GAA Global Aquaculture Alliance GlobalGAP Global Good Aquaculture Practice GSO General Statistic Organization IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency LVI Livelihood Vulnerability Index MARD Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development MONRE Minister of Natural Resource and Environment MOFI Minister of Fishery SLR Sea level rise VASEP Vietnam Association of Seafood Exporters and Producers VietGAP Vietnam Good Aquaculture Practice WB World Bank WTA Willingness to accept 1 Chapter 1: Introduction 1.1 The Mekong river system The system originated in China and flows through five countries: Myanmar, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam. It is ranked eighth in the world in terms of discharge at about 15,000m3 /s, twelfth in terms of longest rivers in the world (4,500 km) and twenty-first in terms of largest areas in the world (795,000 km2) (MRC- Mekong River Commission). When the Mekong River reaches Vietnam, it divides into two branches, one called Song Tien (Tien River) and the other Song Hau (Bassac River). And then each of these divides again into six rivers and three rivers, respectively. This is why it is called Song Cuu Long (meaning “nine rivers” or “nine dragons”) by the Vietnamese. In Vietnam, the Mekong Delta is not only named after a bowl of rice but is also the biggest area for aquaculture cultivation with the most aquatic productivity, especially when it comes to shrimp farming. 1.2 The Mekong Delta The Mekong Delta is located in south Vietnam between 8030’N-10040’N latitude to 104026’E-106040’E longitude. It includes eight coastal provinces: Tien Giang, Ben Tre, Tra Vinh, Soc Trang, Bac Lieu, Ca Mau, Kien Giang, Long An, and the inland provinces of Hau Giang, Vinh Long, An Giang and Dong Thap. There is also the province-level municipality of Can Tho. The total natural area is 4,046,400 ha, with 80.3% of its area used for agriculture and aquaculture. The brackish shrimp industry is developing especially rapidly in the eight coastal provinces with 780 km of coastline and 22 main estuaries covering 600 to 800 ha of tiding areas (GSO, 2019). In 2014, total shrimp farms took up 699,725 ha and accounted for 91% of national shrimp-farming land. The industry produced 661,074 tons of shrimp (2014), which is equivalent to 80.61% of the total national production, which is 1.5 times higher compared to 2010 (MARD, 2015). 1.3 Tra Vinh province Tra Vinh province is located in the northwest Mekong Delta, Vietnam. It lies between 9031’46” N-1004’5” N latitude and 105057’16” E -106036’04” E longitude, belonging to the 12 provinces of the Mekong Delta. It has quite plain topography and an elevation above sea level of approximately one meter. It also has a 65km 2 coastline. The annual average temperature ranges from 260C to 27.60C. The annual average of precipitation is about 1,520 mm, the humidity 84%, and annual total hours of sunshine reaches 2,556 hours. Tra Vinh lies between two main river branches, the Co Chien River and Hau River, both of which originate from the Mekong River. Inland, it has a dense network of rivers and canals cover the province. Along with nine natural rivers and 12 tributaries, there are many artificial canals serving agriculture and aquaculture activities. There is a total area of 2,341 km2, a population of 1,009,168 (as of 2019) and a density of 443 people per km2 (GSO, 2019). The advantage of a dense network of rivers and canals is that it is favourable to the shrimp-farming industry developing throughout the province. There are four shrimp-farming districts, and Duyen Hai and Cau Ngang are the two most prominent of the four shrimp-farming regions in Tra Vinh province (Hiep et al., 2016). In 2018, both districts accounted for 93.32% of the shrimp-farming area and 89% of productivity in the province (Aquaculture Department of Tra Vinh province). They are coastal districts suitable for brackish shrimp farming, but they are also susceptible to sea-level rise, storms and drought (791/QD-UBND, dated 7 April 2016). 1.4 Climate change context Climate change is manifested mostly through phenomena such as increasing temperature and sea-level rise, which is considered a huge challenge for the human race worldwide. It has explicit and implicit impacts on a wide range of areas in our life: economics, environment, society and health. No country is beyond the impact of climate change, and no country can fight it alone. Climate change demands that all countries around the globe come together to alleviate the negative impacts of climate change. According to Maplecroft (2010) and IFAD (2011), Vietnam was ranked 13th in the world in terms of vulnerability to climate change. Importantly, Vietnam is considered one of five Asian countries in danger of being seriously affected by sea-level rise (SLR) and rising temperatures. In the last five decades, Vietnam’s annual average temperature increased by 0.7°C, and the sea level rose 20 cm. The ‘El Nino’ and ‘La Nina’ phenomena affected Vietnam more seriously than ever (MONRE, 2008), and average precipitation rose more 94 mm per year (MARD, 2015). 3 By 2100, under the A2 scenario of one-meter sea-level rise (SLR), approximately 10% of the population will be affected directly with a loss of 10% of GDP (WB, 2007). It will lead to be inundated 85% of the Mekong Delta area (12,376 sq. km). Tra Vinh province in particular will lose up to 45.7% of its natural land area and coastline for aquaculture farming (Carew-Reid & Jeremy, 2007). Accompanying SLR, the average temperature was estimated to increase by 3°C, which will affect almost all economic sectors in general and shrimp farming in particular by the year 2100 (MONRE, 2008). According to scenario A2 of IPCC, the rainfall in this area will increase by about 3% and 7% by 2050 and 2100, respectively. Thus, it is predicted that Tra Vinh province will be hit with more excessive rainfall in the future, especially in coastal areas that are considered most suitable for shrimp farming (JICA, 2013). Considering the unpredictability and severity of climate change, aquaculture production was experiencing substantial difficulties caused by rising temperatures, sea-level rise, freshwater surface scarcity, contaminated water resources and disease outbreaks. In terms of climate patterns, the trend of long droughts in the dry season and heavy precipitation in the rainy season will be increasingly apparent in the future (IPCC, 2007; MARD, 2015). 1.5 Aquaculture overview Coastal areas serve as home to more than 2.4 billion people and 40% of the world population (Ocean Conference, United Nations, New York, 5-9 June 2017). In Vietnam 51.7% of the population, equivalent to 40 million or more people, were living on natural resources along 2,600 km coastlines from north to south (EASRD, 2006; IFAD, 2011). Aquaculture cultivation plays an important role in improving the livelihoods of millions of farmers along coastlines in Southeast Asia (IPCC, 2001). The shrimp industry in Vietnam started in the 1980s when it was an undeveloped and low-tech industry that depended on wild shrimp seed for stocking and made occasional use of homemade feed. Shrimp farming traditionally used primitive extensive systems with low yield. But by the 1990s, with more investment in technologies like aeration systems, formulated foods, advanced aquatic chemicals and development of artificial hatcheries, the semi-intensive and intensive farming systems began to expand quickly. 4 From 1990, aquaculture cultivation became an important livelihood for farmers and was an accurate measure for economic prosperity in general. In the last five years, shrimp production accounted for an average of 43.9% of total national aquaculture production and earned 3.376 billion USD annually from exports (Table 4.1). The shrimp industry in particular has become a principal sector that contributes to economic development in the Mekong Delta (Ha et al., 2013; Anh et al., 2010). The Vietnamese government has paid special attention to aquaculture activities, shrimp farming in particular, which accounted for 79.54% of total aquaculture production from 2010 to 2018 (GSO, 2019). Tra Vinh province is one of eight provinces with a shrimp industry in the Mekong Delta. The province has an average production growth rate of 24% per year, and annual shrimp production accounts for approximately 41,000 tons or 7.35% of total shrimp production in the Mekong Delta over five years (GSO, 2019). Therefore, the shrimp industry is considered instrumental in the reduction of poverty and creation of employment opportunities (Ha et al., 2013). According to MARD (2015), an average of 2-3 labours per ha are dependent on the intensity of shrimp farming. By 2020, Vietnam had 1.2 million labours participating in this sector, and that number is predicted to reach 1.3 million labours in 2030. Although aquaculture production has been successful in recent years in the Mekong Delta, this mode of production faces several risks and challenges, especially from diseases, environmental pollution, rejected export shipments and climate change factors. In fact, almost all the rivers and canals around shrimp-farming areas are polluted; they were reported that the pollution was two to three times over the permitted level (MARD, 2015). There are many causes of this pollution, but aquaculture is known to be the most prominent. Because of high profits coming from the shrimp industry, the farmers are shortsighted in their environmental responsibilities. To solve the problem of water resource pollution in farming, farmers usually choose such short-term measures as using more chemicals and drugs in shrimp farming (Kim et al., 2020). Moreover, small-scale farms are popular in Tra Vinh province, and they utilise almost all their land for shrimp ponds but do not have reservation ponds. Hence, discharged wastewater directly emptied into rivers or canals is a major cause of polluted water resources. And a vicious cycle becomes evident when farmers use that water for new crops: this is a big risk for disease outbreaks. According to the Aquaculture Department of Tra Vinh province, the 5 shrimp-farming industry has suffered significant damage and losses in recent years. In 2019, there were 6,238 intensive and semi-intensive shrimp farming households damaged, with 2,121ha damaged due to drought, fluctuation of temperature and epidemic disease. This accounted for 19% of the total shrimp-farming area. In recent years, extreme weather patterns in temperature and precipitation have occurred in the Mekong Delta. For instance, the rise in temperature has both advantages and disadvantages. The shrimp’s metabolism increases when the water temperature rises, which could promote the shrimp’s digestion and enhance the shrimp growth rate. On the other hand, a process of organic decomposition also increases along with high water temperature, leading to low dissolved oxygen (DO) which is one of the main causes of shrimp dying off en masse (Kam et al., 2012). Regarding salinity intrusion, Nguyen et al. (2020) concluded that Tra Vinh is the most vulnerable place among all the provinces in the Mekong Delta. Both temperature rise and seawater intrusion stimulate groundwater for compensating for evaporation and balancing the degree of salinity in ponds. While rainfall reduces the degree of salinity in ponds, causing stress to shrimp. Furthermore, to struggle against the negative effects of climate change leads to use of more chemicals or antibiotics to treat diseases, and the consequence of abusing those substances is an increase in rejected shipments in exporting activity which accounted for 80% of shrimp production in Vietnam (MARD, 2015). While there are more opportunities to serve major export markets like the EU, America and Japan, these markets require high-quality shrimp products. Hence, in 2011 the Ministry of Agricultural and Rural Development (MARD) promulgated the Vietnam Good Aquaculture Practice (VietGAP) standard to address how the aquatic industry could develop sustainably. The VietGAP is the guide for aquaculture practice in Vietnam, comprising five fundamental criteria: safe food, safe shrimp, safe environment, social responsibility and traceability. However, the current number of certified farms is insignificant, with only 128 shrimp farms in total (vietgap.tongcucthuysan.gov.vn). In particular, there is only one shrimp farmer getting a VietGAP certificate in Tra Vinh province. Therefore, to develop the shrimp industry in Tra Vinh province, this study approaches the sustainable livelihood strategy for shrimp farmers adapting to climate change. First, based on the Sustainable Livelihood Framework (DFID, 1999) suitable indicators must be chosen for livelihood capitals to calculate the value of 6 shrimp farmers’ livelihood assets. And composed the criteria to measure the environmental sustainability of shrimp farming (env_sus). Afterwards, there should be analysis of how the livelihood capitals affect the env_sus. Second, the vulnerability assessment method was applied to analyse the Livelihood Vulnerable Index of three shrimp farming systems to find solutions for alleviating the vulnerability of shrimp farming. Third, the willingness to accept a subsidy for getting a VietGAP certificate in shrimp farming is considered. That assesses the extent of shrimp farmers’ contributions to a sustainable environment. 1.6 Research questions Considering the climate change context and shrimp-farming problems mentioned above, this study will attempt to answer the following questions: What are the shrimp farmers’ livelihood assets? How do the livelihood assets affect the environmental sustainability of shrimp farming? How are shrimp farmers’ livelihoods vulnerable to climate change? Are shrimp farmers willing to change over from traditional shrimp farming to eco-environmental practices (VietGAP standard)? And how much a minimum subsidy would they be willing to accept to get a VietGAP certificate? 1.7 The findings of this thesis Based on the research questions above, the research has found the following. First, the study showed that shrimp farmers in Tra Vinh province had moderate livelihood asset values. Issues of financial capital were a big problem for shrimp- farming households. A majority of farmers found it difficult to access financial credit to invest in farming due to their small-scale operation and the low value of pledged land. In terms of natural capital, some risks were exposed. Prevailing use of groundwater in shrimp farming with no reservation pond could not meet the conditions of sustainable shrimp farming. The 19 criteria chosen to measure the environmental sustainability of shrimp farming, and in general all farming systems achieved an over mean level of environmental sustainability. This study found that human, natural and financial capitals have a positive effect on the environmental sustainability. In specifically, environmental sustainability had a positive relationship with shrimp farmers who had more experience in shrimp farming and 7 who have reservation ponds, access to financial credit, or a high annual income. While farm size had a negative effect on the environmental sustainability. Secondly, the study assessed the Livelihood Vulnerability Index under the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (LVI-IPCC) of shrimp-farming households through several indicators based on five livelihood assets in the context of climate change. The study results reported that extensive shrimp-farming households’ livelihoods were the most vulnerable to climate change. This is because extensive shrimp farmers had high sensitivity but low adaptive capacity to climate change in almost livelihood capitals, especially with human and physical capitals. In addition, these families are located in the coastal areas with ponds damaged due to sea-level rise and tidal waves. While intensive shrimp farmers were the second vulnerable to climate change. However, in terms of natural, financial, and social capitals, this farming system was the highest vulnerability (Fig.3.10). Especially, it was highly sensitive to polluted water resources, and exposed problems such as disease outbreaks, using groundwater in farming due to irregular climate patterns such as drought, fluctuated temperature between night and day. Furthermore, intensive shrimp farmers found it difficult to access credits from banks and relatives due to the frequency of lost crops. Be similar to the intensive farming system in terms of technology production, but with lower density stock, the semi- intensive shrimp farming was the least vulnerable to climate change. Thirdly, the VietGAP certificate is valuable not only for its positive economic aspects but also is an indication that farmers are taking responsibility for long-term environmental preservation. And this certificate is also required for the sustainability of shrimp farming. The farmers would contribute to creating a positive image of Vietnam’s shrimp products under the VietGAP standard. When their shrimp products are accepted into the wider world, this helps the Vietnamese economy become integrated with other international economies. One could conclude that the VietGAP standard is not beneficial to shrimp farmers in the short term in the sense that it will not increase productivity, their bottom-line profits, or make their shrimp disease free. In the long term, however, their commitment to sustainable development in terms of environmental preservation will create a good image and reputation, and the VietGAP certification has a good international reputation but with a lower certification cost compared to other international certifications (ASC, GlobalGAP, etc.). Application of VietGAP standard would help reduce the risk of 8 rejected shrimp shipments and could help gain access to potential import markets. The study used the contingent valuation method (CVM) to analyse the factors affecting shrimp farmers’ decisions (WTADecision) whether to accept a subsidy for the VietGAP certificate, and a minimum subsidy value that farmers are willing to accept (WTASubsidy) or a subsidy for pursuing VietGAP certificate. It found that WTADecision considered farmers’ education levels, environmental perceptions and attitudes toward the VietGAP certificate. These factors had negative effects on WTASubsidy. Also, the farmers’ annual income also slightly influenced farmers’ willingness to accept a subsidy value. The findings of the paper are not only relevant to Tra Vinh province but also to all provinces engaged in shrimp farming or aquaculture in general. 1.8 Conclusion of thesis This thesis brought a perspective of the shrimp industry in the Mekong Delta in general and in Tra Vinh province in particular under a climate change context. The study employed the sustainable livelihood framework to analyse the current status of shrimp farmers’ livelihood assets as well as evaluating the effects of those on the environmental sustainability of shrimp farming. Several studies in the literature have been published concerning the vulnerability assessment in aquaculture sectors. However, no study has used the quantitative method to measure the degree of vulnerability to climate change. This study makes an important contribution to quantifying the livelihood vulnerability of shrimp farmers to climate change by composing a list of appropriate indicators based on three dimensions (exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity). Shrimp farming in Tra Vinh is divided into three systems: extensive, semi- intensive and intensive. The main differences of those systems are the intensity of stock and integrated technologies. This study found that the semi-intensive farmer had the highest-valued livelihood assets and was the least vulnerable to climate change. The extensive shrimp farming system was the polar opposite of the semi- intensive system. Likewise, the degree of environmental sustainability of each farming system was ranked in order from the highest to the lowest for semi- intensive, intensive and extensive systems, respectively. The results imply that in a climate change context, shrimp farming needs to invest more in facilities and 9 equipment to adapt to changes in climate patterns. The semi-intensive and intensive farming systems are more suitable for adaptation to climate change than the extensive system. Therefore, extensive farming should gradually revert to semi- intensive or intensive methods to reduce vulnerability to climate change. However, the higher-intensity farming would be more at risk of adverse environmental effects if there is a low environmental perception. Encouraging shrimp farmers to obtain eco-environment certificates like VietGAP is the best option for sustainable shrimp farming in the future. Based on the results of the thesis, I can judge this study’s limitations and give some recommendations for future studies. First, the study has just referred to the environmental sustainability of shrimp farming, but the sustainable development of an agricultural entity should include economic, social and environmental aspects (Valenti et al., 2011; Chowdhury et al., 2015), thereby future studies could elaborate on these overlooked dimensions. Secondly, regarding the livelihood vulnerability assessment, this study found it difficult to approach the secondary data of Tra Vinh’s climate change patterns, so the study could not analyse the direct relationship between climatic factors (temperature, precipitation, sea-level rise) and shrimp farmers’ livelihood. It would be better if future research could collect those data to get the whole picture of the climate change vulnerability assessment. Thirdly, the study was limited to factors affecting the willingness to accept a subsidy for getting a VietGAP certificate. Due to the shortage of farmers who experienced the VietGAP standard of farming in the research sites, the study could not collect data related to the efficiency of this model to compare it with non- VietGAP farming. Thus, it may be difficult for respondents to decide on adoption of the incentive program. In the future, studies should compare productivity of VietGAP and non-VietGAP farming systems to emphasise the important role of sustainability in shrimp farming. In conclusion, through analysis of livelihood assets of shrimp farmers, this thesis evaluated the current status of livelihood assets, the vulnerability of this livelihood and the factors affecting the willingness to accept a subsidy to pursue a VietGAP certificate which plays an important role in achieving the sustainable livelihood strategy for shrimp farming. 10 References Anh P.T., Carolien Kroeze, Simon R. Bush, Arthur P.J. Mol, 2010. Water pollution by intensive brackish shrimp farming in south-east Vietnam: Causes and options for control. Agricultural water management 97, page 872-822. Ashley C. and Diana Carney, 1999. Sustainable Livelihoods: Lessons from early experience. Department for International Development, London, UK. Carew-Reid, Jeremy, 2007. Rapid Assessment of the Extent and Impact of Sea Level Rise in Viet Nam, Climate Change Discussion Paper 1, ICEM – International Centre for Environmental Management, Brisbane, Australia. Chambers, R., Conway, G., 1992. Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: Practical Concepts for the 21st Century. Institute of Development Studies, London, UK. Chowdhury M.A., Yahya Khairun, Ganesh P. Shivakoti, 2015. Indicator-based sustainability assessment of shrimp farming: a case for extensive culture methods in South- western coastal Bangladesh. Int. J. Sustainable Development, Vol. 18, No. 4 Decision No 791/QD-UBND, dated 7th April, 2016. Plan for adaptation to natural disaster in Tra Vinh province from 2016 to 2020. (No online available, just hard copy in Vietnamese). DFID, 1999. Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets. Department for International Development, London, UK. EARSD, 2006. Guidelines for Environmental Management of Aquaculture Investments in Vietnam. Institute of Fisheries Management. Research Institute for Aquaculture Number 1. Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific. Can Tho University. World Wide Fund for Nature. GSO- General Statistics Office of Vietnam. www.gso.gov.vn Ha, T. T. P., Dijk, H. V., Bosma, R., & Sinh, L. X., 2013. Livelihood Capabilities and Pathways of Shrimp Farmers in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam. Aquaculture Economics & Management, 17(1), 1-30. Hiep T.Q, BOSMA H. Roel, TRAN T.P. Ha, LIGTENBERG Arend, VAN P.D. Tri, BREGT Arnold, 2016. Aquaculture and Forestry Activities in Duyen Hai district, Tra Vinh Province, Vietnam. ALEGAMS project, WUR - Netherlands, CTU - Vietnam, IUCN- Vietnam. 11 IFAD-International Fund for Agricultural Development, 2011. Vietnam Environmental and Climate Change Assessment. https://www.ifad.org/documents/38714170/39150184/Comprehensive+environment+a nd+climate+change+assessment+in+Viet+Nam.pdf/e3053f97-6560-45f6-a72d- 01f6cc75b20d IPCC, 2007, Working Group III contribution to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Fourth Assessment Report Climate Change 2007: Mitigation of Climate Change, WMO and UNEP. IPCC, 2001. Climate change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Intergovernmental panel on climate change, 2001. IFAD report. Jim Smyle, Roshan Cooke, 2011. Vietnam Environmental and Climate Change Assessment, JICA, 2013. The project for climate change adaptation for sustainable agriculture and Rural Development in the coastal Mekong Delta in Vietnam. Final report 2013. Japan International cooperation agency (Jica), SanYu Consultants Inc., Japan, NewJec Inco., Japan. Kam S.P, M-C. Badjeck, L. Teh, L. Teh and N. Tran, 2012. Autonomous adaptation to climate change by shrimp and catfish farmers in Vietnam’s Mekong River delta. Kim Anh Thi Nguyen, Tram Anh Thi Nguyen, Curtis Jolly, and Brice Merlin Nguelifack, 2020. Economic Efficiency of Extensive and Intensive Shrimp Production under Conditions of Disease and Natural Disaster Risks in Khanh Hoa and Tra Vinh Provinces, Vietnam. Sustainability, 12(5), 2140; doi:10.3390/su12052140 Maplecroft, 2010. Big economies of the future - Bangladesh, India, Philippines, Vietnam and Pakistan - most at risk from climate change. Climate Change Vulnerability Index (CCVI). 21/10/2010 http://maplecroft.com/about/news/ccvi.html. MARD- Ministry of Agriculture and Development Rural, 2015. General report of the planning for brackish shrimp farming in Mekong Delta by 2020 and vision toward 2030. (in Vietnamese) MONRE- the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, 2008. National target program of climate change adaptation. Nguyen K.A, Liou Y.A, Tran H.P, Hoang P.P, Nguyen N.H, 2020. Soil salinity assessment by using near-infrared channel and Vegetation Soil Salinity Index derived from Landsat 8 OLI data: a case study in the Tra Vinh Province, Mekong Delta, Vietnam. Prog Earth Planet Sci 7, (1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40645-019-0311-0 Scoones Ian, 1998. 'Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: A Framework for Analysis'. IDS Working Paper 72. 12 VALENTI, W.C.; KIMPARA, J.M.; PRETO, B.L. 2011. Measuring Aquaculture Sustainability. World Aquaculture, 42(3):26-30. WB-World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4136, February 2007. The Impact of Sea Level Rise on Developing Countries: A Comparative Analysis http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/156401468136816684/pdf/wps4136.pdf 13 Chapter 2: Analyse how livelihood assets affect the environmental sustainability of shrimp farming: A case study in Tra Vinh province, Vietnam. Abstract This study is based on the DFID’s Sustainable Livelihood Framework, which lists five types of capital to analyze the current status of shrimp farmers’ livelihood assets: human capital, natural capital, physical capital, social capital, and financial capital. The data was collected from 300 shrimp-farmer households in 2019 in Tra Vinh province through questionnaire interviews and transect walks. The purpose of the study is to estimate the effects of five forms of livelihood capital and 17 indicators on the environmental sustainability of shrimp farming which is measured by 19 criteria. The study revealed that three forms of livelihood capital and five indicators have statistical significance affecting the environmental sustainability of shrimp farming in Tra Vinh. It was found that using groundwater in shrimp farming was not environmentally sustainable. Conversely, having reservation ponds had a positive impact on environmental sustainability. 2.1 Introduction The shrimp industry is facing with a serious environmental problem. According to MARD (2015), the degree of pollution in rivers was 2.5 to 3 times the permitted standard (Table 2.1). And 80% of surveyed shrimp farmers recognised the problem. Because of the high profits in the shrimp industry, shrimp farmers can be short sighted when it comes to environmental responsibility. They were ignoring the effects of certain prohibited chemicals sometimes used in shrimp farming, in spite of well-known regulations and environmental protection laws. Moreover, small- scale farms are popular in Tra Vinh province, as they utilise land for shrimp ponds, but they do not have reservation ponds. Hence, wastewater gets directed to rivers or canals, which leads to polluted water resources. And a vicious cycle occurs when farmers use that polluted water for new crops: it is a big risk for disease outbreaks. According to the Aquaculture Department of Tra Vinh province, the shrimp farming industry has suffered significant damage and loss in recent years. In 2019, there were 14 6,238 shrimp farming households damaged with 2,121ha of shrimp farming losses due to drought, fluctuation of temperature, and epidemic disease. These losses accounted for 19% of total shrimp farming area excluding extensive production. Table 2.1. Standard environment required for shrimp cultivation Parameter Unit Optimal range Black tiger shrimp White leg shrimp pH degree of water ------- 7.5-8.5 7-9 Temperature Celsius 28-33 18-33 Salinity ‰ 15-25 5-35 Transparency m 0.4-0.5 0.2-0.5 H2S mg/l <0.02 <0.05 NH3 mg/l <0.1 <0.3 DO (dissolved oxygen) mg/l >=3.5 >=4.0 Source: MOFI, 2006; Anh et al., 2010; Tra Vinh Department of Science and Technology. Obviously, environment plays a crucial role in aquaculture in general, and it seriously affects the shrimp industry. Shrimp are highly sensitive to adverse environmental changes such as quality of water, degree of salinity, the temperature of water, and pH degree (Kongkeo & Phillips, 2001). In shrimp farming, water resources are considered a “common pool,” which is used free of charge. Hence, the quality of the water resource is dependent on the farmer’s behavior or environmental perception when it comes to resource management. In fact, aquaculture cultivation was faced with increasingly severe instances of polluted surface water due to directly discharge without proper treatment. However, in order to continue their work, the majority of farmers used groundwater to supplement shrimp ponds during the crop. In other words, the farmers transfer the common resource to private resource. Overexploitation of groundwater sooner or later leads to subsidence issues, which exacerbate flooding and seawater intrusion inevitably. There were approximately two million wells extracting 2.8 million m3/day of groundwater in Mekong Delta, in which Tra Vinh accounted for 88,833 wells and exploited 224,773 m3/day (Bui et al., 2017). Groundwater exploitation is the main cause of subsidence in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam. Its average rate of subsidence was about 1.1 cm annually over the 15 past 25 years, and this trend is likely to increase in the near future (Minderhoud et al., 2017). In Vietnam, the brackish shrimp farming industry has brought large profits for farmers in recent years. In fact, this industry has been developing since 1980 (EASRD, 2006; MARD, 2015). It was cultivated across the north and south of Vietnam, especially in the Mekong Delta, where it accounted for 91% (699,725 hectares) of national shrimp farming land in 2014, with an average growth rate of 3.12% per year from 2010 to 2014 (MARD, 2015). In 2018 shrimp productivity in the Mekong Delta accounted for nearly 83% of the total national shrimp production, with an average growth rate of 8.85% per year from 2010 to 2018 (GSO, 2020). In particularly, Tra Vinh province is one of 12 provinces in Mekong Delta suitable for brackish shrimp cultivating with a 65km coastal line and a dense system of rivers and canals. According to Department of Natural Resources and Environment of Tra Vinh province, there are 110 canals at level 1 with a total length of 467 km; 690 canals at level 2 with a total length of 2,110 km; 8,800 canals at level 3 with a length of 6,620 km. Tra Vinh authority considers the shrimp industry to be a vital economic asset. By 2019 Tra Vinh province’s shrimp farming land expanded to 33,378 hectares and achieved 67,768 tons of shrimp production with an average growth rate of 21.5% per year from 2010 to 2019 (Aquaculture Department of Tra Vinh; Table 2.2). However, in 2016 the total area of shrimp farming decreased dramatically compared with the previous year due to the El Niño weather systems that prevailed from 2015 to 2016. In addition, Decision 784/QD-UBND of Tra Vinh province dated 27 April 2018 ‘Developing shrimp farming industry to 2025’, has planned to develop shrimp production based on each natural condition area. Whereas the intensive and semi-intensive methods should continually develop and apply new technology in farming without abusing chemicals and antibiotics, going forward it will be mandatory to acquire a certificate showing that farmers are meeting the exporting market requirements. And the extensive shrimp farming industry should combine its resources to preserve the existing mangrove forests and to help balance the ecosystem. 16 Table 2.2. Area and productivity of shrimp industry in Tra Vinh province Year 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Area 24,832 27,801 23,692 30,707 32,600 33,378 Output 37,033 34,926 37,862 43,043 52,823 67,768 Source: Department of Aquaculture of Tra Vinh province. All the above problems mentioned pose challenges to sustainable shrimp farming in terms of environment. Therefore, this study would like to compare the current status of livelihood assets of three shrimp farming systems and find out how livelihood assets affect the environmental sustainability of shrimp farming in Tra Vinh province. 2.2 Methodology 2.2.1 Literature reviews There are several definitions of sustainability that depend on the perspective of each author or institution. But there is some general agreement on particular points. In general, sustainability concerns three important pillars: economic, environmental, and social development (Valenti et al., 2011; Chowdhury et al., 2015). And to achieve sustainability, first the human race must alleviate poverty and ensure food security without exhausting our natural resources (DFID’s Sustainable Livelihoods Approach and its Framework). For example, sustainable development utilizes all present resources without compromising future generations’ livelihoods (Barbier, 2016). Therefore, in this study, the environmental sustainability of shrimp farming implies that the shrimp industry has to strike a balance between extracting natural resources and preserving them for their posterity. However, to measure sustainability, both qualitative and quantitative methods were employed by some authors when it came to finding suitable indicators. Chowdhury et al. (2015) looked at water quality, soil quality, and biodiversity loss to measure sustainability by the quantitative method. And sustainability combines with other economic and social institutional dimensions to gauge what constitutes sustainable shrimp farming. While Valenti et al. (2011) suggested a quantitative method to measure environmental sustainability in aquaculture with three indicators—natural resources, efficiency of natural resource use, and generated waste. The qualitative method is based on the list of improved environmental criteria for sustainable shrimp 17 aquaculture to assess the impacts of shrimp farming on the environment (Noennback, 2002). Both methods worked perfectly for their respective purposes. However, they still did not present the final value of the environmental sustainability of aquaculture cultivation. This study is also based on the environmental sustainability criteria of those authors and experts’ opinions to establish the list of criteria for the environmental sustainability of shrimp farming (Table 2.8). And the final value of environmental sustainability was normalised on an individual basis. 2.2.2 Study area Tra Vinh province is located in the northwest Mekong Delta, Vietnam, between 9031’46’’N-1004’5’’N latitude and 105057’16’’E -106036’04” E longitude, belonging to 12 provinces of the Mekong Delta. It has quite plain geographical features and an elevation above sea level of approximately 1 meter. It also has a 65km coastline. The annual average temperature is from 260C to 27.60C, and the annual average precipitation is about 1,520 mm. The average humidity annually is 84%, and annual total hours of sunshine reaches 2,556 hours. Tra Vinh lies between the Co Chien and Hau rivers, which flow from the Mekong River. Inland, there is a dense network of rivers and canals across the province, comprising nine natural rivers and 12 related tributaries, as well as an immense number of artificial canals serving agriculture and aquaculture. It has a total area of 2,341 km2, a population of about 1,009,168 in 2019, and a density of 443 people per km2 (GSO, 2019). 2.2.3 Household survey The survey conducted interviewed 300 households in total. The household was selected randomly by each member of the team who was assigned to concentrate on a certain number of households for each village. This survey was repeated for each village until the process was complete. Our interviewing team had two members, and each member had to complete four surveys per day. The study started at the beginning of December 2018 and finished at the end of January 2019. There were 320 samples in total, after omitting uncompleted samples or illogically answered samples, there were 300 total samples for this study. 2.2.4 Analyzing current status of livelihood assets of shrimp farmers The study analyses the current status of livelihood assets affecting strategies of sustainable shrimp farming. The livelihood assets based on the DFID’s Sustainable Livelihood Approach and its framework which has five types: human capital; natural 18 capital; physical capital; social capital and financial capital. Based on the conception of livelihood assets, the experts’ discussion, characteristics of local shrimp farming, and actual fieldwork, 17 indicators were found for five livelihood assets to measure the value of each type of livelihood capital (Appendix 2.A). Because each of the original value of indicators was calculated in different units or scales, they first would be normalized on the rating scale from 0 to 1 as the equation (1) if an indicator has a positive relationship with its type of livelihood capital (Hahn et al., 2009; Vincent, 2004; Antwi-Agyei et al., 2012; Urothody et al., 2010), otherwise using equation (2) for a negative relationship with its type of capital (Rajiv Pandey et al., 2017). Iij = (Xij – min Xij)/ (max Xij - minXij) (1) Iij = (Max Xij – Xij)/ (max Xij - minXij) (2) Where Xij is original value of indicator jth of the livelihood capital ith. The ith is human capital, natural capital, physical capital, social capital and financial capital. Iij is the normalised average value of indicator jth and the livelihood capital ith. min Xij is the minimum value of indicator jth and the livelihood capital ith. max Xij is the maximum value of indicator jth and the livelihood capital ith. Then, value of each livelihood capital (Ci) is the average of all indicators of types of capital. Ci = "#$% % &'( (3) Value of Ci from 0 to 1. Equation (3) showed that the weight of each indicator is equal, which means every indicator in each capital has an equal degree of importance and influence. This approach has been employed in studies such as Eakin et al. (2008), Sulliva et al. (2002). 2.2.5 Analysing the effect of livelihood assets on the environmental sustainability of shrimp farming The study estimates the impact of livelihood assets and the indicators on the environmental sustainability of shrimp farming. This study uses linear regression for analysis as follows: Yi = a +bkXki + µi 19 Yi is the environmental sustainability of shrimp farming that is measured by the list of criteria (Table 2.8). Yi is calculated by the number of “yes” answers dividing the total number of criteria, so its value is from 0 to 1. According to Roennback (2002), defining the regional and global criteria for environmental sustainability in shrimp aquaculture, and expert opinions, 19 criteria related to environmental sustainability of shrimp farming were selected as the following Table 2.8 shows. Xki represents explanatory variables: they are the five types of capital (human capital, natural capital, physical capital, social capital, and financial capital) for the first regression and second regression with 17 indicators. They are calculated in the above equations and mentioned in Appendix 2.A. 2.3 Results and discussion 2.3.1 Current status of livelihood assets of shrimp farmers The survey conducted interviewing 300 households in total and divided into three sample groups: intensive (195 samples), semi-intensive (62 samples) and extensive production (43 samples). Human capital The age range of the shrimp farmer households surveyed in this study ranged from 24 to 66 years, whereas 56.67% were over 46 years old and 43.33% were under 45 years old. Therefore, average years of experience (H3) in shrimp farming was seven years, and only 10% of shrimp farmers had more than 10 years’ experience. Looking at the 30-year history of the Vietnamese shrimp industry, the average years of experience of Tra Vinh shrimp farmers are quite modest. However, it is assumed that seven years is enough time to learn how important the role of the environment in shrimp farming is. In terms of shrimp-farming experience, the extensive- producing farmers were ranked the highest among the three methods of practice (Table 2.3). Extensive shrimp farming is the primary method of shrimp practice in this industry, which was inaugurated in 1980, while the other methods developed later (EARSD, 2006). According to survey data, households were literate, with 23.33% having high school degrees, 43.33% secondary school degrees, and 33.33% with primary school degree. And the average family education level (H2) is nine years of schooling. Here, the intensive households were the most prominent because most 20 were younger and wealthier, and their children had more educational opportunities. The extensive households had the lowest family education levels because their low incomes do not allow for many adequate educational opportunities. The average household size was approximately four people, but 96% of families have non-labours with an average of two people per household being children or/and elderly; and 48.3% of families have semi-labour. Almost all members of shrimp- farmer families are involved in farming activities, but they do not take account of wages due to the prevailing social norms in Tra Vinh. As a result, average household labour capacity (H1) was quite low at around two members per household who could work. It means that most households were burdened with one out of two dependent members. There was no significant difference among the three methods of shrimp production. Overall, the three indicators made human capital value lower than the medium value for all kinds of shrimp farming (Fig. 2.1). The intensive shrimp farmers’ human capital in Tra Vinh was slightly higher than the others; this could be considered an advantage, as they are able to understand concepts of environmental responsibility. Semi-intensive and extensive were the opposite. Therefore, the higher-valued human assets would contribute to more environmental sustainability in shrimp farming. Table 2.3. Statistic values of indicators of human capital Indicator scale Unit Intensive Semi- intensive Extensive Household labour capacity (H1) Min 1 labour 0.301 0.352 0.384 Max 5 labours Average 2 labours Household education level (H2) Min 5 years 0.418 0.298 0.288 Max 13 years Average 9 years Household experience in shrimp farming (H3) Min 0 year 0.359 0.348 0.373 Max 20 years Average 7 years No 40% Normalised value of human capital 0.359 0.332 0.348 21 Natural capital The natural capital of shrimp farmers comprises four indicators: quality of water resource (N1), distance to water resource (N2), reservation pond (N3), and farm size per capita (N4). The study recorded 19% of shrimp farmers reporting that the water is slightly polluted, but highly polluted water was reported by 37.3% of farmers (Table 2.4). Water pollution has several causes, and this study reveals that aquaculture activity was cited by 63% of shrimp farmers as the main cause of water pollution. In recent years, scientists and authorities have been concerned about this issue because polluted water is one of the main causes of disease in shrimp. Effluents from shrimp ponds contain suspended soils, nutrients, residual chemicals, and pathogenic microorganisms. This problem is more severe in intensive rather than extensive shrimp farming. According to Anh et al. (2010), fertilizer and food waste discharged into surrounding surface water may reach 1 to 1.5 tons per ha in each crop for intensive shrimp farming. And due to the high cost for treating outlet water after harvesting or disposing of diseased shrimp ponds, there were some farmers discharging the polluted water directly into rivers or canals, which leads to diseases spreading to adjacent areas. The treatment cost of discharge water is between 4 to 5 million VND for 5,000m2 pond size (Anh et al., 2010). In turn, the farmers pay high costs for treating water in ponds or treating disease in shrimp at an average of 14% to 15% of total production costs in intensive and semi-intensive farming (Sinh, 2005), or they may even experience crop losses and fall into debt. Because water pollution which carries a variety of pathogens or diseases resulting from polluted water discharged from shrimp ponds. It is presumed that all shrimp farmers should obey the rule of having their water treated before discharging it, avoiding the vicious cycle of disease spreading, pollution and sustaining the shrimp farming. The survey revealed that the semi-intensive shrimp farmers believed the quality of river water to be at the highest value (0.694), while the intensive farmers recorded the lowest values for quality of river water. The extensive farmers were as optimistic about their water quality as the semi-intensive farmers. 22 Table 2.4. Statistic values of indicators of natural capital Indicator Scale Percent Intensive Semi- intensive Extensive Quality of river water resource (N1) Definitely unpolluted 0% 0.537 0.694 0.636 Low pollution 19% Generally polluted 40.33% Very polluted 37.33% Very highly polluted 3.33% Distance to water resource (N2) Under 30m 78% 0.867 0.910 0.912 From 30m to 50m 19% Over 50m 3% Reservation pond (N3) Yes 60% 0.651 0.823 0.000 No 40% Farm size (N4) <= 0.5 ha 59% 0.015 0.149 0.315 from 0.51ha to 2.0ha 13% > 2.0 ha 28% Normalised value of natural capital 0.518 0.644 0.466 Several drivers led to environmental pollution. Shrimp production is the main cause of polluted water and is itself a vicious cycle. The shrimp industry has rapidly expanded in recent years in both productivity and area covered (Table 2.2). Moreover, the majority of shrimp farmers work at a small-scale volume-wise: the survey data recorded that 59% of shrimp-farmer households own a farm (N4) less than 0.5ha in size, while households owning from 0.5 to 2ha of farmland accounted for 13%. This circumstance makes it difficult to control solid waste and wastewater in shrimp farming. It is beyond the local authority’s ability to control all contravention in the term environment. Although there were several laws related to environmental protection promulgated in order to develop the shrimp industry into an environmentally sustainable business, the implication of the laws is weak. Under the Decision 784/QD-UBND of Tra Vinh province dated 27 April 2018, ‘Developing shrimp farming industry to 2025’ refers to improving environmental management systems with intensive and super-intensive shrimp production. The law 23 mandates that a household owning a farm from 0.5 to 10ha in size has to sign an environmental declaration, and households with over 10 ha of farm size must report environmental effects periodically. In addition, the Circular No. 27/2015/TT- BTNMT dated 29 May 2015 requires all shrimp farmers to properly treat outlet water, and sediment and sludge must have reservation ponds equivalent to 10% to 15% of the pond size. Those legal actions were put forth in the hope that they would be steps forward in contributing to sustainable shrimp farming. However, there is a significant drawback in treating waste from shrimp production. In terms of technology, there are some feasible measures to eliminate effluents in ponds; that is, circulation water farming using beneficial algae and probiotics to deal with organic waste. But the cost burden for those measures becomes a significant obstacle for small-scale farmers, even if they act sustainably with respect to the environment and ecology. Another problem is that shrimp farmers are often not properly educated about the disseminated diseases and environmental risks. They are mainly concerned about their shrimp ponds and do not pay adequate attention to the water resources in rivers or canals that are more and more susceptible to untreated discharge water. In fact, when their neighbors were discharging polluted water into rivers or canals, these farmers were inclined to do the same. It seems that there is no benefit conflict in using the common pool. As mentioned previously, shrimp farming is quite environmentally sensitive, especially in terms of water resources. Those farmers who do not reserve quality water for water exchange during the shrimp crops would be at risk of contracting disease from a common pool. Hence, the reservation pond (N3) plays a vital role in shrimp farming. Besides its function of storing water, it is also used to treat discharge water from shrimp ponds after harvesting crops. The data shows that 60% of shrimp farmers had reservation ponds; those without reservation ponds accounted for 40% of the total (Table 2.4). Specifically, those are numbers for intensive shrimp farming with 65% and semi-intensive shrimp farming with 82.3% have reservation ponds. Extensive shrimp farming does not need reservation ponds due to its particular characteristic. A majority of intensive and semi-intensive farmers who have no reservation pond would either accept the risk of polluted water when water is exchanged during crop or they might decide to use groundwater. And they have no options for treating discharge water, which is recognised as the main driver of polluted water in rivers and canals around shrimp farming areas. Although extensive 24 shrimp farmers use less food and fewer chemicals compared to the other categories, extensive farming is still more or less harmful to the environment because of the dramatic loss of mangrove forest area in recent years. The extensive shrimp farming is located mainly in the Duyen Hai district where the mangrove forest area has declined from 12,797ha in 2001 (Thu et al., 2007) to 4,083ha in 2010, with the annual rate of reduction of mangrove forest being 6.8% (Hiep et al., 2016). Moreover, the adverse effects from the climate change context caused a shortage of brackish water in the dry season and higher salinity in water in the shrimp-farming areas. Hence, the reservation pond is required for all methods of practice. Almost all shrimp farmers’ ponds were relatively close to a water resource (N2) with 78% of them within 30 meters of a water resource, the average distance being about 28 meters (Table 2.4). Because shrimp farms are developing along rivers or canals, they are conveniently located near inlet and outlet water. According to the Department of Natural Resources and Environment of Tra Vinh province, there are 110 canals at level 1 with a total length of 467 km; 690 canals at level 2 with a total length of 2,110 km; 8,800 canals at level 3 with the length of 6,620 km. In general, shrimp farmers in Tra Vinh province have good access to water resources owing to the dense networks of rivers and canals. This indicator was favourable to all shrimp farming methods which are shown in Table 2.4 with relatively high values. Overall, the current status of the natural capital of shrimp farmers in Tra Vinh was just at a medium level due to the four indicators mentioned above (Fig.2.1), in which the lowest value goes to extensive farming and the highest value to semi- intensive farming (Table 2.4). Physical capital In this study, I chose two indicators: the quality of the house (P1) and the household assets (P2) as physical capital. Referring to the quality of the house, 80% to 90% of all shrimp farmers were living in cement-and-brick houses. General data recorded 89% of shrimp-farming families living in level 4 houses made from cement and brick with corrugated iron roofs (Table 2.5) in general. This kind of house can last up to 30 years (Joint circular No. 07- LB/TT dated 30 September 1991). Just 11% of these families lived in a cottage-style house made from bamboo or mangrove wood with nipa palm leaf. Under caution from the Vietnam Disaster Management Authority, the level 4 houses could withstand winds up to grade 7 (on the Beaufort scale) in case of tropical low pressure and could be damaged in a typhoon. Because 25 the Mekong Delta is located in the lower frequency typhoon area in general, and Tra Vinh province was affected only slightly by two typhoons (Category No.5- Linda storm in 1997 and Durian in 2006). However, shrimp-farming families could be at risk in extreme weather contexts. One hundred percent of shrimp-farming households have three essential assets: televisions, cellphones, and motorbikes. Most of them also have a refrigerator for storing fresh foods (Table 2.5). But no one has a boat because almost all the families have access to roads, which is a more convenient and quicker way to travel than using small boats. The list of household furniture was chosen based on the living conditions of the farmers. Those items were essential assets that would help them lead more comfortable lives. As a result of the survey, 32.7% of families had five out of ten assets on the list. Three percent of families had a maximum of eight assets and 11% of families had a minimum of three assets. Overall, the value of this indicator (P2) was lower than the medium level, from 0.365 to 0.439 for semi- intensive, extensive, and intensive respectively. Overall, two indicators mentioned previously contributed to the normalised value of physical capital higher than the average level, ranked in order by semi- intensive, extensive, and intensive households (Fig. 2.1). Table 2.5. Statistic values of indicators of physical capital Indicator Scale Percent Intensive Semi- intensive Extensive Quality of house (P1) cottage 11% 0.903 0.839 0.884 cement and brick (level 4) 89% Household assets (P2) television 100% 0.439 0.365 0.409 entertainment media 42.33% cell phone 100% motorbike 100% small boat 0% car 0.33% air conditioner 15.67% washing machine 49% refrigerator 95.67% internet access 6.67% Normalised value of physical capital 0.671 0.602 0.647 26 Social capital Social capital refers to all benefits from relationships, community networks, and access to necessary information for livelihood strategy (DFID, 1999). For shrimp farmers, social capital was measured through neighbor relationship (S1), the degree of frequency of accessing information (S2), distance to the nearest relatives (S3), and taking part in community activities (S4). The normalised value of the neighbor relationship (S1) was over 0.6 for all shrimp-farming methods. The shrimp farmers almost reported that they have a very good and good relationship with their neighbors with 37.3% and 35.6% respectively. The remainder have an acceptable relationship with each other, and the lower medium accounted for a small percentage (Table 2.6). With good relationships, the farmers would benefit from neighbors’ willingness to help, sharing their experiences or benefitting from their support in some cases. Although you would not get any material support, you would feel good that someone else advocates or stands behind you. Based on the traditional culture of Vietnam, the relationship between neighbors is always friendly. In fact, approximately all of the shrimp farmers are ready to help and share experiences with their neighbors. The relationship with relatives (S3) also plays an important role in shrimp farming. Because relatives (parents, siblings, cousins) could lend a hand in difficult situations in terms of finances and encouragement. Therefore, living close to relatives is an advantage. And the survey revealed that shrimp families living within a radius of 10km was 36%. The average distance to their nearest relatives was 28km, and those living further than the average distance only accounted for 21% of the total. Hence, the normalised value of distance to the nearest relatives was pretty high, from 0.914 for the all shrimp farming households (Table 2.6). Getting news on a daily basis (S2) also plays a vital role in shrimp farming such as keeping up with weather news, season crop incentives, fluctuation of shrimp prices, and so on. Without that information, it is easy to make bad decisions. The study recorded that almost all shrimp farmers had access to information through television. Twenty-three percent of households were updated with news every day, and more than 30% got the news regularly; farmers who rarely or never got updated news was a tiny percentage (Table 2.6). The scheme of shrimp crop was informed by local authorities in order to assure that every farmer begins a new crop at the same time. This action helps control disease spread because it is also based on the 27 climate conditions suitable for shrimp farming. The intensive and semi-intensive farmers are especially concerned with this issue strictly because of the high density of shrimp stocking and high sensitivity to weather changes. In contrast, the extensive farmer paid less attention to obtaining that information because of its particular characteristics, such as low density and year-round stocking. Therefore, the normalised value of this indicator was the highest for intensive shrimp farming and the lowest for the extensive farming (Table 2.6). A majority of shrimp farmers did not take part in community activities (92%) which comprise festivals and sport clubs. Hence, the normalised value of taking part in community activities was very low for all the farming methods. Despite those activities prevailing in each local area, only children and people who do not work take part in them. Shrimp farmers are busy with their shrimp ponds, although they have occasional meetings and share experiences, building a close relationship with the community. The farmers need a practical activity such as a shrimp farmer club where they can meet weekly or monthly to discuss technical problems related to shrimp farming. Nearly 60% of surveyed shrimp farmers agreed to establish a shrimp farmer club. With the advantage of living close to relatives, having a good relationship with neighbors and frequently access information but rarely attend local community activities: as a result, the value of social capital was highest for intensive farming and lowest for extensive farming (Fig. 2.1). Table 2.6. Statistic values of indicators of social capital Indicator Scale Percent Intensive Semi- intensive Extensive Neighbor relationship (S1) Very good 37.33% 0.721 0.608 0.643 Good 35.67% Medium 22.67% Lower medium 4.33% Very bad 0% Degree of frequency of access to information (S2) Every day 23.33% 0.756 0.577 0.238 Regularly 30.67% Sometime 31.67% Rarely 9.33% Never 5% 28 Distance to nearest relatives (S3) Within 10km 36% 0.920 0.914 0.945 Within 20km 57% Within 30km 79% Over 30km 21% Taking part in community activity (S4) Yes 8% 0.041 0.145 0.233 No 92% Normalised value of social capital 0.610 0.561 0.515 Financial capital Financial capital encompasses all kinds of tangible property which can be liquidated into cash. Those financial resources are allocated for investment with an aim to achieve livelihood objectives (DFID, 1999). For shrimp farming, financial resources play a very important role that determines whether a farmer can continue farming in case of crop losses or investments needed to adapt to severe climate change conditions. In this study, financial capital refers to having access to bank loans (F1), credit from relatives (F2), having a savings account (F3), and annual income from shrimp farming per capita (F4). The recorded data shows that 72% of shrimp farmers could not access bank loans (Table 2.7). Most of the households that had an area of less than 2ha (Table 2.4) were those of intensive and semi-intensive shrimp farmers who needed more money to invest in facilities and equipment for cultivating. However, they found it difficult to access credit from the banks due to the low value of their farmland. And as a result of the normalised value, the bank’s offerings of credit were dramatically low for extensive farming. In terms of credit for shrimp farming, besides bank credit, the study recorded that 10% of households were borrowing money from their relatives. An advantage of this approach is that it is based on prestige or trust rather than the value of mortgage property. However, intensive shrimp farming did not take full advantage of this credit, while 18.6% and 16% of the extensive and semi-intensive farmers, respectively, could access credit from relatives. By contrast, more than 70% of intensive and semi-intensive households had a savings account, while approximately 50% of the extensive households had one. Holding a savings account would be considered a safety net in adverse financial situations whether these scenarios involve reinvesting in shrimp farming, an ill family member, or school fees for 29 children. Although the annual income from shrimp farming per capita was under 25 million VND and accounted for 51.3% of shrimp farmers, a large proportion of shrimp-farmer households saved large amounts of money for financially trying situations. Consequently, the normalised value of the savings account indicator was relatively high for the three shrimp farming methods. The survey reported that the annual income of individuals was approximately 35 million VND. There were only 15.3% of households with an annual income per capita of over 50 million VND (Table 2.7). The annual income was calculated from shrimp-farming earnings after deducting all costs for the shrimp crops and not yet considering the household’s expenditures. The study uses income per capita as an effective indicator to measure the financial capital because the productivity from shrimp farming varies between intensive, semi-intensive, and extensive farming. Although the shrimp productivity per hectare of extensive farming is the lowest, its farm size is largest among three shrimp farming methods. The average farm size was 5.7 ha for extensive farming, 2.6ha for semi-intensive farming, and just 0.3ha for intensive farming. Thus, the average annual income per capita for extensive farming, semi-intensive farming, and intensive farming was 41.7 million, 56.7 million, and 26 million VND, respectively. The normalised value of this indicator was lowest for intensive farming, which was approximately equal to half of the two other values. In general, the normalised value of the financial capital of shrimp farmers in Tra Vinh province was very low (Table 2.7). They found it difficult to secure credit from both banks and relatives. Intensive farming is considered a high-profit farming model but with a high risk of spreading disease. Hence, its annual income per capita was lower than the other forms. Table 2.7. Statistic values of indicators of financial capital Indicator Scale Percent Intensive Semi- intensive Extensive Access to bank loans (F1) Access to bank loan 28% 0.292 0.339 0.140 No access 72% Borrowing money from relatives (F2) Yes 10% 0.097 0.161 0.186 No 90% Having a savings account (F3) Yes 72% 0.749 0.726 0.488 No 28% 30 Annual income from shrimp farming per capita (F4) under 25 million VND 51.30% 0.108 0.265 0.188 from 25 to 50 million VND 33.40% from 50 to 200 million VND 15.30% Normalised value of financial capital 0.312 0.373 0.268 As analysed above, Fig. 2.1 shows that shrimp farmers’ livelihood assets were lower than the mean value in terms of financial and human capitals. The three remaining capitals were just higher than the mean value but under a good point (0.7). The overall values of livelihood assets were ranked in order from the highest to the lowest for semi-intensive, intensive, and extensive farmers, respectively. Semi-intensive farmers had more financial and natural capital than the farmers of other systems. In contrast, the intensive farmers had the highest values for social and physical capital. And the extensive farmers’ livelihood assets were the lowest of all, except for their physical capital. Figure 2.1 Current status of five livelihood assets of shrimp farmers classified by shrimp farming method in Tra Vinh province. 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 Hum