index

ASIA (cont)

Malaysia

Each prawn produced represents a teardrop

The shrimp industry in Malaysia has developed rapidly since the early 1980s after the so-called successes experienced in neighbouring Thailand, Indonesia and Philippines. Malaysia, however, is not one of the major producers of cultured marine prawn in the world, as the area under marine prawn culture is about 5,100 hectares (2,627 hectares in 1995). Despite this, the government of Malaysia is very proud to claim that the country's average production (metric tonnes per hectare) is the third highest in the world, after Taiwan and Thailand. And plans for intensification and expansion have been drawn up.

Based on the Food Production Action Plan (Fisheries Sector) that was formulated by the Fisheries Department, forecasted production of marine prawn (White Prawn, Penaeus penicillatus and Tiger Prawn, Penaeus monodon) in the year 2010 will be 129,100 metric tonnes. This amounts to a jump in production by about 13 times from the 1998 level of 9,835 metric tonnes.

In the early 1990's, the government identified 110,000 hectares of mangrove forest suitable for tiger prawn rearing and allocated RM15.38million for aquaculture development in the Sixth Malaysia Plan. State governments and related agencies were quick to alienate very valuable mangrove and peat swamp forests for this ecologically destructive activity and had even acquired very productive paddy lands for this purpose. Little thought had been spared for the impact of such destruction would have on the environment and the communities who depend on mangroves for their livelihood.

The major environmental impacts resulting from shrimp farming have been mangrove loss, water pollution and fisheries decline in coastal waters.

Mangroves form only about 3% (some 650,000ha) of the total land area in Malaysia. Most of the ponds opened during the 1980's and early 1990's involved the clearcutting of mangroves. Local fisherfolk are severely concerned about the increased loss of mangroves as this has led to decrease in wild stocks and extinction of several commercial fish species in some places. The Penang Inshore Fishermen Welfare Association states that its survey revealed that 34 species of fish have become extinct and another 50 or more are becoming rare in the waters off Penang.

The destruction of coastal mangroves has also brought about coastal erosion. The coastal villages are susceptible to critical erosion, battered by strong waves and storms. Their life and property is at stake as the raging sea is slowly swallowing the coast. Some ponds have been abandoned due to the erosion, acid sulphate soil conditions and occasional mass mortality of prawns due to disease outbreaks. The culturists do not make any effort to rehabilitate the degraded mangroves and again the coastal communities are victims of such development.

Although prawn farming is still a small industry in Malaysia, the social impacts have already become evident. Among the most worrying are the loss of livelihood and income of small coastal fisherfolk due to mangrove loss and fish decline, negative changes in agricultural practices, and human rights violations.

The most controversial shrimp project in Malaysia is in Kerpan (Kedah). Samak Aquaculture was approved as a joint venture company in 1993, and 60% is owned by a Saudi firm named Saudi Ben Ladin, 10% by the Kedah State Government and 30% by a company set up to represent the interest of the landowners and farmers. Government support for commercial aquaculture has helped companies like Samak immensely. However, the most reprehensible aspect of the whole project is that land already owned by local farmers was expropriated by the State in order to serve corporate interests.

Initially the State government and Samak began to woo farmers and landowners in Kerpan to sell, lease their land or join in the venture. Some of the landowners agreed to join the project but most of the bigger landowners and farmers, totaling 800, refused. Thus, the State invoked the Land Acquisition Act to take over the 1,000 acres of paddy land. The Act allows the State to acquire any privately owned lands if it deems that the development projects started there will be economically beneficial to the country.

The State offered a compensation between RM18,000 and RM24,000 (Ringgit Malay 3.8 = US$1) per acre, but the landowners refused to accept the menial compensation. In January 1995, about 100 farmers gathered at the entrance of the project site to stop excavators from moving into the site. Farmers held vigil in makeshift tents. In the next few days, police battalions gathered at the project site. A week later, heavy machinery moved into the project site. Rice farmers watched helplessly as bulldozers and heavy machinery began to tear up their paddy during harvest season.

Farmers, both men and women couldn't bear to watch and lay down on the road to prevent vehicles from moving in. The police arrested 33 of the protestors, comprising of 10 women and 23 men. The women were released after three days whilst the men spent seven days in jail. One of those detained lamented that "The tragic of the day is that we are the victims and we were arrested for defending our rights."

The village was still mired in land disputes after seven years, the ponds have been dug, but disease outbreaks, legal wrangles, management problems and conflict over land have meant that in the seven years of existence, the operation has lost millions of dollars and had yet to export any prawns. Meanwhile, the farmers of Kerpan have been living in economic uncertainty for the past seven years and with impending poverty and loss of their self-provisioning lands, they find it difficult to make ends meet. As a farmer in Kerpan states, "Each prawn produced here represents a teardrop that belongs to one of us. That's how much we have suffered." (By: Meenakshi Raman, WRM Bulletin Nº 51, October 2001).

Penang's mangroves and biodiversity conservation

The Penang Inshore Fishermen Welfare Association (PIFWA) has recently held a workshop on the importance of mangroves. Fisherfolk had there the opportunity to highlight what they already knew: that mangrove forest is an inherent part of their livelihood since it is closely related to fish catch. Without mangroves there will be no fish in the sea since they play a vital role as intermediaries between marine and terrestrial ecosystems.

This rich ecosystem is home to several aquatic species - all kinds of fish, snails, cockles, shrimps and crabs -, reptiles like snake and monitor lizards, migratory and local birds, insects and mammals such as monkeys, wild boars and otters. There, the tide allows the formation of mudflats where trees grow, with a complex system of roots that shoot out of the mud and become a haven for many aquatic species which find there shelter to breed and feed their offspring.

But mangroves serve other functions: their strong roots hold firmly the soil and protect inland from soil erosion, storm and flooding. Also mangrove wood can be used for construction, to build jetties, houses, fences and pole markers. It can be used for fuel and even the process of burning it to turn it into charcoal is beneficial: the smoke is channelled into a funnel where condensation turns it back into water. This water has many useful properties, one of them is medicinal for cough and skin disease. Even the bark of the tree has a certain quality that strengthens clothes and nets if put to boil in water, something that fisherfolk take profit of. With proper technology, the bark serves also as anti-rust and protective paint for boats and jetties.

As a source of food, mangrove fruits are edible and mangrove leaves are a good food for goats and sheep, while the honey from bees which have built their hives in a mangrove forest is said to be more potent because such bees tend to be bigger and wilder. Roots are appropriate to make handles, axes and knives.

However, all these qualities of such a complex and prodigal ecosystem are being destroyed. In the island of Penang, there remain only 900 hectares of mangroves, only half of them considered forest reserve. Destruction since 1966 amounts to 130 hectares of mangroves per year. Unfortunately, this process is happening worldwide, and is related to shrimp farming carried out by big corporations.

In Balik Pulau, Penang, what used to be an exuberant stretch of mangrove forest has been invaded with hundreds of hectares of shrimp ponds in Kuala Sungai Pinang and Pulau Betong. The same happens in Sungai Chenaam and Batu Kawan, in Seberang Perai Selatan. Inshore fisherfolk from Batun Kawan remember that not long ago they did not need to fish deep into the sea because they found in the mangrove forest the catch for the day and more. Now the place is covered with roads and buildings, and the Jejawi River is polluted since aquaculture requires a high use of chemical inputs. Fisherfolk reported that areas where mangrove forests have been felled, register a gradual decline in fish catch over the years.

When a mangrove is destroyed, gone is with it the whole living system which it contains and irretrievably lost are the long term and long reach benefits it yields. Business for profit (for just a few) irresponsibly plunders local peoples' resources and destroys biodiversity ... the same biodiversity that the Malaysian government has committed itself to protect. If international agreements are to make any sense, then the government should support the fisherfolk - eager to conserve biological diversity - against the shrimp farming industry - only eager to make profits. Will it? (WRM Bulletin Nº 56, March 2002).

  top

Philippines

Shrimp farming and mangrove decline

In the 1980s, shrimp farming became an industry when commercial availability of new technology from Taiwan, along with attractive export prices, led to the Shrimp Fever that swept the country and the rest of Asia. Filipino farmers shifted from milkfish (Chanos chanos) to shrimp, as well as intensified their culture systems from traditional and extensive to higher stocking densities.

Rising domestic prices and consumptio1n of shrimp, moreover, encouraged many sugarcane planters in Negros Occidental to convert to the monoculture of black tiger prawn (Penaeus monodon), setting up expensive aquaculture facilities and boosting Philippine shrimp production in the process. An increase in foreign aid for aquaculture development, coupled with reforms in Philippines' investments policies initiated under the Aquino administration in the late 80s, provided further support to the nascent shrimp industry resulting in an impressive and steady rise in production until the mid-90s.

However, the widespread outbreak of luminous bacteria in the Western Visayas - largely the result of poor farming and environmental practices - led to a spectacular collapse in shrimp production, particularly in Negros Occidental. By 1996, it was estimated that only one of ten shrimp farms in this province - once the center of intensive shrimp culture in the country - was operating.

J. H. Primavera, in "Development and Conservation of Philippine Mangroves: Institutional Issues" (1998), discussed the "intertwined histories of Philippine mangroves and aquaculture ponds", singling out the decline of mangrove ecosystems and the loss in goods and services derived from same resources, as one of the major impacts of shrimp farming.

She likewise pointed out the correlation between fish production and shrimp and mangrove areas: over the years, as mangrove areas declined, so did production from fish caught nearshore; in contrast, brackishwater pond area increased, as did the aquaculture sector's contribution to total Philippine fish production.

Moreover, "national policy encouraging brackishwater pond culture has been premised on the belief that mangroves and other wetlands are wastelands", Primavera added.

The Bureau of Fisheries and Aquaculture Resources (BFAR) - the lead agency tasked to ensure the protection and management of inland and marine resources - insists that its new thrust, the Aquaculture for Rural Development (ARD) program, departs sharply from the old paradigm that focused too much on technology and production.

However, despite its claims of being "mass-based with emphasis on simple environment-friendly technology" and geared towards solving "the perennial problem of poverty in the countryside", it appears that the ARD is still the same dog given a new collar: it aims to increase aquaculture production through such schemes as the establishment of mariculture parks, and "conversion of wastelands", such as "sand dune areas, lahar lands, sunken/flooded areas, mountainous areas, (and) marshlands/swamplands" into more "productive aquaculture areas".

With its history of favoring big business over small fisherfolk, combined with weak and vague national fisheries policies that obfuscate rather than enlighten, BFAR is inexorably paving the way for a repeat of the social and environmental mistakes of the Blue Revolution in the 70s, when some 200,000 hectares of mangroves were converted to fishponds - all in the name of so-called 'development' and 'progress'. (By: Gilbert Sepulveda, WRM Bulletin Nº 51, October 2001).

  top

Sri Lanka

Local fisherfolk protect the mangroves

Mangroves are wetlands rich in biodiversity that are suffering a severe depredation worldwide. In Sri Lanka mangroves are associated with 22 brackish water bodies, locally known as lagoons. Even if mangroves area in that country is limited to 12,000 hectares, it is of much value since it includes very rare species and types of plant associations in different climatological zones. Fishing in these lagoons is the livelihood for over 120,000 coastal people.

Over the past decade many of the lagoons and estuaries in Sri Lanka have been subjected to rapid destruction of its mangrove vegetation for commercial aquaculture. This powerful industrial group is composed by big politicians, top level bureaucrats and businessmen, who have shown their lack of interest in mangrove conservation.

As a consequence of this unsustainable activity lagoons are silted, estuaries are eroded and mangrove ecosystems are deteriorated. In Puttlam District, for example, where the most extensive and rare mangrove species occur, more than 3,000 hectares of mangrove lands were converted to industrial shrimp farms under the government's patronage. Where the commercial shrimp farms are nowdays located, 28,000 lagoon fishers were engaged in fishing till 1994. After the construction of commercial shrimp farms two thirds of them lost their job and were obliged to migrate to the city in order to earn their living. Before the widespread of shrimp farming, the average fish catch per unit effort was 4 kg and by 1997, this had declined to 1.5 kg.

Commercial shrimp has also polluted groundwaters, what has directly affected drinking water, creating further problems for the fisher folk. At the village vicinity they do not have drinking water now and most of the women walk 5 to 6 km daily looking for fresh water. Due to lack of drinking water most of the children at the school age do not attend school; the reason is that in the morning they do not have water in the house and therefore their primary task is looking for water for their house consumption. All the lagoon periphery is blocked by the shrimp farmers who have constructed fences and maintain security personnel, what means that local fishers have even lost their right to access to the traditional source of their food.

Local communities of fishers have reacted organizing themselves to face this problem. The Small Fishers Federation was formed with the aim of mobilizing fishing communities and other associated people to conserve the lagoons and mangroves ecosystem, through appropriate education programmes and practical conservation strategies.

The primary task of the newly created group was to put the conflict on the table of negotiations. A participatory organizational mechanism was established, where more than 4,000 fishers actively participate in decision making on the conservation of mangroves, negotiate with shrimp farmers to monitor mangrove destruction activities and work for the improvement of fish habitats in the lagoons.

The following step was to create an organization that supports lagoon conservation and management committees where the fisher folk leaders from different lagoon fisher folk groups and government officials can dialogue to solve the conflict that affect their lives in such a hard way.

A so called Mangrove Conservation and Demonstration Centre was set up to carry out an education programme on mangroves and fish habitats. The Centre is visited daily by school children, university students and other interested people; publications in three official languages used in Sri Lanka are issued, and seminars and workshops are conducted in order to promote mangrove protection as the most effective and equitative way to conserve nature and maintain local people livelihoods.

Regarding practical conservation strategies, more than 100 hectares of degraded land has been reconverted to mangrove forest. To face the loss of jobs resulting from the decline of fishing and the lack of access to the lagoons, the Small Fishers Federation is working to introduce alternative income generation activities focusing their efforts with fisher folk, women and youth. More than 623 jobs have been already created by promoting animal husbandry and other appropriate income generation sectors. (WRM Bulletin Nº 20, February 2001).

  top

Thailand

Uncertain future for the world Nº 1 exporter?

Thailand has been the world's No. 1 producer and exporter of farmed shrimp for a number of years, with the shrimp boom starting in the early 1980's. The country's total shrimp output reached 300,000 tonnes last year, higher than the annual average of 200,000 to 250,000 tonnes, thanks to a supply shortage in the world market. Despite this, during 2001, shrimp farmer and exporter associations have asked the government to speedily implement a national policy encouraging shrimp farming to prepare for tougher export competition from neighbouring countries. India and Bangladesh together produce 60,000 to 80,000 tonnes; Indonesia 60,000 to 80,000 tonnes; Vietnam 50,000 to 70,000 tonnes; the Philippines 30,000 tonnes; and Malaysia 10,000 tonnes. According to shrimp exporters, due to government support and new policies, these countries now had greater potential to increase capacity and Thailand could be pushed out of the export market if a national policy to boost the sector was not developed.

The shrimp exporters are clearly vocal about the need to further support the shrimp industry, but they are mute concerning the tremendous environmental and social impacts of the industry. According to the Thai National Economic and Social Development Board, about 253,000ha of the country's 380,000ha of mangrove forests have been destroyed by shrimp farms. In several coastal provinces, many of these farms were located close to paddy fields, which have been impacted by saltwater contamination. The livelihood of farmers and fishermen communities close to shrimp farming areas have been very badly affected. Due to self-pollution, virus attacks and land degradation, many ponds along the coast have been abandoned and the industry has moved on to other areas, leaving behind large tracts of wasteland.

One of the targeted areas in recent years has been the inland rice bowl of the country in the central plains. This move generated heated opposition by rice farmers, NGOs and academics to the point that the government instituted a ban on inland farming of black tiger prawns two years ago. Due to the insatiable nature of the shrimp industry, the ban came under heavy attack during the year 2001 and there were strong rumours that the ban would soon be lifted. But due to pressure from civil society groups and academics, and advice from a sub-committee, the National Environment Board eventually decided to let the ban stand and urged promotion of environmentally-friendly and sustainable shrimp cultivation. Latest news report that inland prawn farmers in rice growing provinces would switch to a less profitable but more environmentally-friendly freshwater prawn known as koong kam kram (a freshwater prawn). Meanwhile, a policy prohibiting the cutting of mangroves and promoting the rehabilitation and reforestation of abandoned ponds has yet to be developed.

Local people have had a difficult time to voice opposition to the expansion of shrimp farming, as the police, the army and the justice system generally stand in support of those with money and political connections. In this state of affairs, the shrimp investors feel free to do what they like, sometimes going far beyond what is acceptable. In January 2001, Mr Jurin Rachapol, 49, a conservationist and advocate of community forestry in Phuket was assassinated while harvesting nuts on his farm. His family and friends believe that Jurin's activism against shrimp farming and
destructive fishing gear was the reason he was gunned down. Even the Bangkok Post published strong articles on this subject casting the conflict as one of conservation and wise use and management against, in the words of newspaper, "over-exploitation of natural resources" and "greed" of shrimp farmers.

The end of 2001, however, is not bringing good news to the shrimp industry. With forty-eight per cent of Thailand's shrimp exports going to the US, the industry will have to try new markets given the decline in US shrimp imports after the September 11 attacks. Latest news also report that Thai prawn farmers warned of contamination derived from improper cultivation that have resulted in products laced with anti-biotic substances that may be banned in European countries. (By: Maurizio Farhan Ferrari, WRM Bulletin Nº 51, October 2001).

  top

Vietnam

Shrimps, mangroves and the World Bank (I)

Governments in Southeast Asia have promoted shrimp farming as a means to earning foreign exchange. The beneficiaries of this expansion are private companies such as the Thai agribusiness company, Charoen Pokphand. In Thailand, the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, Charoen Pokphand and the Thai government worked together to set the scene for expanding the shrimp industry. Companies setting up shrimp farming operations in Thailand were offered generous subsidies including tax breaks, tariff-free imports, tax holidays and export credits.

During the 1990s, Charoen Pokphand expanded its operations to Vietnam. In 1993 Charoen Pokphand exported shrimp from Vietnam worth US$ 96 million - about 40 per cent of Vietnam's shrimp sales that year. Charoen Pokphand also operates shrimp-feed plants in Vietnam.

In the last 40 years, the area of mangrove forest in Vietnam has shrunk dramatically. For example, in the province of Ca Mau at the southernmost tip of Vietnam, an area of 60,000 hectares of mangrove forest was lost between 1983 and 1992. Causes include defoliation during the American war, logging, expansion of rice farming as a consequence of government agricultural policies, and influx of people, especially in Ca Mau province. In the last decade, government-promoted shrimp farming has increasingly become a major cause of mangrove loss. The role of mangrove forests in providing thatching for roofs, firewood, charcoal, medicinal plants and honey, as well as mangrove's role in protecting the coastline, has been lost in many places.

Shrimp farming tends to be a short term activity. Many farmers moving into shrimp farming without sufficient technical skill or money for the necessary infrastructure have found the land is useless after as little as three years. Shrimp farming is also at risk from disease. In 1994-95, a virus wiped out almost the entire shrimp harvest in Vietnam.

Although in Vietnam most shrimp farming is extensive, the Ministry of Planning and Investment has recommended intensifying production. Intensive shrimp farming uses antibiotics and chemical additives to increase production. Eventually the shrimp ponds and surrounding water systems are so poisoned that the land can only be abandoned.

Two years ago, a project funded by the World Bank and Dannida (the Danish government aid agency) started in mangrove areas of four provinces in the Mekong Delta. Titled the Coastal Wetlands Protection and Development project, the six-year project will involve a 470 kilometre-long stretch of coastline.

One of the studies produced for the project notes, "many occupants appear to be well aware of the need for reforestation as illustrated by individual and voluntary tree planting activities which can be observed at various locations." Yet, under the project, more than two thousand families are to be evicted so that mangrove trees can be planted. The people to be moved are not only shrimp farmers but include farmers, forestry workers, salt producers, tailors, mechanics, handicraft producers, shopkeepers, fishers, and labourers.

Many of these people were encouraged to move to the area by local authorities, to grow shrimp or as forestry workers. The Bank's Resettlement Action Plan argues that the project will improve villagers' livelihoods through "community development support, including social infrastructure and services (health, household water supply and primary education)."

Rather than examining the role of government policy in promoting shrimp farming, Ronald Zweig, the World Bank task manager for the project, puts the blame for mangrove loss on villagers. Zweig says, "The rural poor in the project area have had few income-generating opportunities other than exploiting coastal forest resources to the point where the benefits from them have seriously eroded."

Of course, the US$ 31.8 million World Bank loan for the project will have to be repaid. To do this the Vietnamese government will require foreign exchange. To raise this the government will promote the export of cash crops - such as shrimp. In February 2001, Vietnam's aquaculture industry announced a five-year plan, a key aim of which is to increase the area of shrimp farming in the country from 226,000 hectares to 330,000 hectares. Deputy Minister for Fisheries, Nguyen Viet Thang, promised governmental financial assistance for shrimp farms of over 100 hectares.

The loss of Vietnam's mangrove forests is a complex issue. To blame the farmers who are clearing mangroves whilst ignoring government policy and an expanding aquaculture industry is to blame the victims. In the context of ever increasing shrimp exports, simply moving villagers and planting mangrove trees is unlikely to solve the problem. (By: Chris Lang, WRM Bulletin Nº 51, October 2001).

Vietnam: Shrimps, Mangroves and the World Bank (II)

Christopher Gibbs of the World Bank office in Hanoi, requested that WRM publish his response to article on Vietnam in WRM Bulletin 51. Mr Gibbs' letter is reproduced in full below, followed by Chris Lang's reply.

"November 16, 2001.

Dear WRM,

In WRM Bulletin #51, you published an article Vietnam: Shrimps, Mangroves and the World Bank by Chris Lang. This article was written and published without consulting the World Bank and, disappointingly, is inaccurate and makes a number of wrong assertions. In the interests of accuracy and your readers I would request that you publish on your website this response.

1. The World Bank's position on aquaculture in Vietnam

The World Bank's position throughout its dialog with the Government of Vietnam on aquaculture has been and continues to be consistent and clear, and is summarized in its 1998 rural development strategy report for Vietnam: Advancing Rural Development, which states:

"Without more careful site assessment and better practices, investments in aquaculture will be excessively risky. Shrimp, crab, prawn and fish farming, although risky can be highly profitable, and Vietnam has a high potential for aquaculture if solutions can be found for persistent disease and pollution problems. Further promotion of aquaculture must be preceded by enhanced knowledge of land use zoning and aquaculture practices. Otherwise, mangrove forests, wetlands and estuarine areas will be put at further risk, and poor households practicing intensive aquaculture will continue to gamble on risky investments."

2. The Vietnam Coastal Wetlands Protection and Development Project (CWPDP)

CWPDP is specifically designed to counteract mangrove destruction along 470 km of coastline in southern Vietnam. However, in the project area, it is the very poorest people who live among the mangroves and make a living by cutting them for firewood and charcoal who pose the threat to mangroves, the stability of the shoreline and the breeding grounds of fish. At the edge of the sea, poverty is the primary cause of coastal mangrove degradation and the project is responding directly to the development needs of the poor and environmental damage they do. CWPDP responds by supporting both mangrove replanting and providing - inland, but close to the original settlements - new economic activities for the poor. That is why some resettlement is necessary.

3. Resettlement

Resettlement is always best avoided and difficult to do well. For these reasons, the World Bank has its safeguard policy on resettlement (Operational Policy 4.30) and why resettlement in CWPDP has been carefully planned and is well supported. The only people being resettled in CWPDP (some 2,150 people, not more than 2,000 families as mentioned in Chris Lang's article) are those from the government-defined full protection zone (FPZ), a narrow strip dedicated to mangroves at the very edge of the sea.

Those being resettled are the people who have depended on cutting mangroves for a livelihood. Others, in the FPZ who depend on fishing, or live in areas where land is accumulating or are farming sandy soils, may stay. The households being resettled are among Vietnam's very poorest people who subsist by exploiting mangroves, and that is why they are being helped to start a new life where there are alternative economic opportunities to cutting mangroves.

Resettlement is always tricky, but CWPDP offers substantial support to those being resettled - land-for-land compensation, housing, transport, subsistence, training, vocational training - plus substantial support to the receiving communities. More than US$15.9 million is allocated for resettlement of FPZ occupants, including $8.5 million in credit through the Vietnam Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development, US$1.63 million for improved facilities in the receiving communities and an additional $672,000 for ethnic minorities. This is a carefully planned and generously financed program that we expect to work well.

4. World Bank support for aquaculture in Vietnam

The World Bank does not support brackish-water shrimp aquaculture in Vietnam. However, the World Bank does support the extension of rice-fish and rice-freshwater shrimp farming in some areas of the Mekong Delta to help mitigate the impacts of flood control in seasonally flooded areas. But freshwater prawn farming is less susceptible to the diseases of brackish water shrimp farming and can help to control insect pests of rice and lower the use of pesticides which has reached hazardous levels in many rice growing areas.

Thank you.

Christopher Gibbs,
Rural Sector Coordinator,
The World Bank Office in Hanoi,
Vietnam"

Chris Lang's reply:

"Christopher Gibbs' response to my article, disappointingly, is inaccurate and makes a number of wrong assertions. Gibbs states: 'This article was written and published without consulting the World Bank'. On 23 October 2001, I wrote to John Carstensen at the Danish Environmental Assistance Programme in Hanoi (which is also supporting the project), asking a series of questions about the Coastal Wetlands Protection and Development Project. I copied the e-mail to Ronald Zweig, the World Bank task manager for the project. Carstensen replied saying that the Bank should reply to my questions. I still haven't received a reply from Zweig.

In fact, I first contacted the World Bank in Hanoi about this project in June 1995 when I spoke to Choeng-Hoy Chung, who was then the World Bank representative in Vietnam. On 12 September 1995, I wrote to him with several questions about the project. Two months later I sent him and others at the Bank a copy of a report I'd written, 'The World Bank in Vietnam', which included a critique of the Bank's mangrove project. I never received a reply either to my letter or to the report.

According to Gibbs, the Bank's position on aquaculture is 'consistent and clear'. Yet, the statement that Gibbs quotes simply recommends sorting out the disease and pollution associated with shrimp farming and learning a bit about land use zoning and aquaculture practices. Then, Vietnam's 'high potential for aquaculture' can be realised, 'further promotion of aquaculture' can continue and presumably Charoen Pokphand can get on with selling shrimps to Europe.

Gibbs' letter makes no mention of companies such as Charoen Pokphand, who are the ultimate beneficiaries of the destruction of mangroves for the expansion of industrial shrimp farming.

In a similar vein to Ronald Zweig's comment quoted in my article, Gibbs puts the blame for mangrove loss on poor villagers. He says, 'in the project area, it is the very poorest people who live among the mangroves and make a living by cutting them for firewood and charcoal who pose the threat to mangroves'. Here, Gibbs is contradicting his own organisation's studies of the project area. The Bank's Resettlement Action Plan states: 'The degradation of the mangrove forests can not solely be attributed to the families living in the FPZ [full protection zone]. Greatest harm to the forests has been caused by defoliation, indiscriminate cutting of timber by Forest Enterprises, illegal cutting by itinerant gangs from outside the region and, more recently, deforestation to enable the GOV [government of Vietnam] promoted shrimp production.'

Gibbs and Zweig are not alone at the World Bank in blaming villagers for forest destruction. Before Choeng-Hoy Chung moved to Hanoi he was based at the World Bank in Bangkok. In an interview in 1994 with journalist Nantiya Tangwisutijit, he explained that a successful forest management programme required three things: 'First you need the daab, the sword, second you need the khanom, what westerners call a carrot, and third you need the long thot, the stick.'

The figure of 'more than two thousand families' to be evicted comes from the World Bank's project information document and the Resettlement Action Plan available on the World Bank web-site. One of my questions in my 23 October e-mail to John Carstensen specifically asks how many people were to be resettled. The occupations of people to be resettled listed in my article came from the Resettlement Action Plan.

Gibbs points out that, 'The World Bank does not support brackish-water shrimp aquaculture in Vietnam.' My article does not say that the Bank directly supports shrimp farming in Vietnam. However, each time the World Bank lends money to Vietnam, the country's debt increases. The government has little choice other than to promote cash crops such as shrimps to earn the foreign exchange needed to repay its debts. The World Bank is part of the problem, not part of the solution." (WRM Bulletin Nº 52, November 2001).

  top

next page