<%BANNER%>

Role of Social Capital in Natural Resource Conservation

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0021195/00001

Material Information

Title: Role of Social Capital in Natural Resource Conservation A Case Study of Cat Tien National Park in Vietnam
Physical Description: 1 online resource (158 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Nguyen, Thuy
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2007

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: attitude, benefit, capital, cat, cohesion, conservation, familarity, integration, interaction, national, natural, park, participation, resource, social, support, tenure, tien, trust, vietnam
Interdisciplinary Ecology -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Interdisciplinary Ecology thesis, Ph.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: The Cat Tien National Park (CTNP) is one of the last remaining lowland jungles in Vietnam, which possesses unique biodiversity including the last surviving population of the Vietnamese Javan Rhinoceros (Rhinoceros sondaicus annamiticus). People inhabiting in and around the CTNP belong to diverse ethnic groups with different histories, administrative systems, and land use strategies. One of the World Bank's projects entitled 'Forest Protection and Rural Development Project (FPRDP)' is being implemented in the buffer zone of CTNP with a dual objective of sustaining the CTNP and improving the livelihoods of local inhabitants. However, conservation and management of CTNP, a typical public or collective good, is not a trivial task. Drawing from the literature on public goods and collective action, this study explores the role of social capital on households' conservation attitude and participation in conservation programs. More specifically, this study explores the relationships among households? socio-demographic variables, social capital, conservation attitude, and participation in the FPRDP for those inhabiting in and around the bufferzone of the CTNP. Data from 270 households representing nine villages were collected, using a structured questionnaire and a face-to-face interview method, to achieve the study objective. A three level stratified random sampling approach was followed to account for spatial and ethnic diversity of households living around the park. Factor analysis was employed to identify eight social capital components and four conservation attitude components and the identified components were used to construct social capital and conservation attitude indices. Multivariate regression techniques were used to determine the effect of social capital and other socio-demographic variables on household attitudes toward conservation of CTNP. Logistic regression models were used to determine the effect of social capital, demographic variables, and conservation attitude on household?s participation in the FPRDP. Results suggest that education, social cohesion, familiarity, and social integration have positive and significant impacts on households perceived benefit of conservation. Households that scored high on voluntary cooperation and social integration variables tend to perceive less direct use benefits from the park. Households with higher social commitment and community support indices feel more secure about forestland ownership. Results also show that land tenure security can improve participation in conservation activities. Important implications of this study include (1) a policy or program to increase social capital in general with emphasis on efforts to enhance social networks among households in and around CTNP; and (2) government should create a land tenure regime that better encourages households to participate in conservation activities.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Thuy Nguyen.
Thesis: Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 2007.
Local: Adviser: Alavalapati, Janaki R.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2007
System ID: UFE0021195:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0021195/00001

Material Information

Title: Role of Social Capital in Natural Resource Conservation A Case Study of Cat Tien National Park in Vietnam
Physical Description: 1 online resource (158 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Nguyen, Thuy
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2007

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: attitude, benefit, capital, cat, cohesion, conservation, familarity, integration, interaction, national, natural, park, participation, resource, social, support, tenure, tien, trust, vietnam
Interdisciplinary Ecology -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Interdisciplinary Ecology thesis, Ph.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: The Cat Tien National Park (CTNP) is one of the last remaining lowland jungles in Vietnam, which possesses unique biodiversity including the last surviving population of the Vietnamese Javan Rhinoceros (Rhinoceros sondaicus annamiticus). People inhabiting in and around the CTNP belong to diverse ethnic groups with different histories, administrative systems, and land use strategies. One of the World Bank's projects entitled 'Forest Protection and Rural Development Project (FPRDP)' is being implemented in the buffer zone of CTNP with a dual objective of sustaining the CTNP and improving the livelihoods of local inhabitants. However, conservation and management of CTNP, a typical public or collective good, is not a trivial task. Drawing from the literature on public goods and collective action, this study explores the role of social capital on households' conservation attitude and participation in conservation programs. More specifically, this study explores the relationships among households? socio-demographic variables, social capital, conservation attitude, and participation in the FPRDP for those inhabiting in and around the bufferzone of the CTNP. Data from 270 households representing nine villages were collected, using a structured questionnaire and a face-to-face interview method, to achieve the study objective. A three level stratified random sampling approach was followed to account for spatial and ethnic diversity of households living around the park. Factor analysis was employed to identify eight social capital components and four conservation attitude components and the identified components were used to construct social capital and conservation attitude indices. Multivariate regression techniques were used to determine the effect of social capital and other socio-demographic variables on household attitudes toward conservation of CTNP. Logistic regression models were used to determine the effect of social capital, demographic variables, and conservation attitude on household?s participation in the FPRDP. Results suggest that education, social cohesion, familiarity, and social integration have positive and significant impacts on households perceived benefit of conservation. Households that scored high on voluntary cooperation and social integration variables tend to perceive less direct use benefits from the park. Households with higher social commitment and community support indices feel more secure about forestland ownership. Results also show that land tenure security can improve participation in conservation activities. Important implications of this study include (1) a policy or program to increase social capital in general with emphasis on efforts to enhance social networks among households in and around CTNP; and (2) government should create a land tenure regime that better encourages households to participate in conservation activities.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Thuy Nguyen.
Thesis: Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 2007.
Local: Adviser: Alavalapati, Janaki R.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2007
System ID: UFE0021195:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E20101113_AAAASA INGEST_TIME 2010-11-14T03:51:59Z PACKAGE UFE0021195_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES
FILE SIZE 25788 DFID F20101113_AAEKQL ORIGIN DEPOSITOR PATH nguyen_t_Page_135.pro GLOBAL false PRESERVATION BIT MESSAGE_DIGEST ALGORITHM MD5
b8d866c7dab539df8ca42c1a147b518d
SHA-1
4d61b1798d184ec9e7e3038a8d45e188b571c981
115958 F20101113_AAEKPW nguyen_t_Page_013.jp2
66ec96b8e93e2feb1b5ac91e1f0c541a
af5bd09ad563f9cb156b45963b873fff98c82db5
110459 F20101113_AAEKRA nguyen_t_Page_125.jp2
5f2cf40d043d15c78a453f3ee3fed3c1
6f3f5ea2817a3df8d954bba79d96a5c088a5f90f
2018 F20101113_AAEKQM nguyen_t_Page_018.txt
e03c41dfc2ec8a81059b7acd507cafc4
3fc4d03b8ed2b141e75dc851ca6499c39fb5bf92
16241 F20101113_AAEKPX nguyen_t_Page_077.QC.jpg
f13fd432889834c884eed4ad3d36654b
1256f72c137fb259127484fdcdff34ed87e04721
82691 F20101113_AAEKRB nguyen_t_Page_041.jpg
b1e4016c05dc945fce71a379b6cada36
e7b85cd4c614a67d8ce6791e97cb8cb5e745d302
22040 F20101113_AAEKQN nguyen_t_Page_021.QC.jpg
977bb67c2340ed83840d3ceb8255e486
a016b439d92b0a6f1f698abee1661107364f950c
2100 F20101113_AAEKPY nguyen_t_Page_130.txt
789e868fd6f3467d9822a13bfc47189c
ac1af4830a6b52c0c38593da3c30cffc59e9453b
12018 F20101113_AAEKRC nguyen_t_Page_037.pro
05d8fdb26fcfca50bed324e8138c583a
58c2e5044c97141e9300922e60f39a8e45b28cd9
66227 F20101113_AAEKQO nguyen_t_Page_066.jpg
d35a27eeefaa83f17d81e095422c8d4a
a1a5f51e25300a938967107da3266ab557cd09a8
48044 F20101113_AAEKPZ nguyen_t_Page_060.pro
c8c969d6206c3e142b96e637452f017d
49fc82d3aaa0d241d6a2141f9f522c0dc4ab85fa
17335 F20101113_AAEKRD nguyen_t_Page_147.pro
f0b2b7ff74296789901dc54a4d0cba52
c02020c3b895e268683452d2f4627109704417a0
6654 F20101113_AAEKQP nguyen_t_Page_059thm.jpg
72b373cbc9a33b89dd0101e28fb8146d
b05ad0e87bdd26d38b9396ec0d497747e374acd6
4125 F20101113_AAEKRE nguyen_t_Page_143thm.jpg
c637146ffd02fcb77b9a53dd1db38830
f1c43305796a9ea03a4291659800a071c35cd086
1053954 F20101113_AAEKRF nguyen_t_Page_091.tif
3489cc8dd029193e4e300daa2c42b1b6
ff53cd9dcdb3cd5fbbc80194959ccdb71ef0a1ff
12137 F20101113_AAEKQQ nguyen_t_Page_010.QC.jpg
a61efd1033b53154068dccf21b5d4edd
72d9ffaa961650c60f6372d3b6e6f375f834ba21
38407 F20101113_AAEKRG nguyen_t_Page_012.pro
b3a77c6451b672b460d977a330e55f20
e7fde22b88ce8ada2e727585c82159b7829a3b30
23456 F20101113_AAEKQR nguyen_t_Page_118.QC.jpg
b4cc2fea1fbe6882353f697ba61555ae
462e6d7bb001d0a00ff8ff7b1fe890819d49ac48
2149 F20101113_AAEKRH nguyen_t_Page_112.txt
488da67dfd5470ca84e89efd87f6c6a1
c3ee4302a2f667af684c72743fc2d964da7ddc0d
50261 F20101113_AAEKQS nguyen_t_Page_139.pro
88df5c361357fe45e7e32a0836a39db0
636c534157ffaa2fecf0399973f13dcb0b98d32d
F20101113_AAEKRI nguyen_t_Page_135.tif
f0fc3f01399783fa3eb36497a49ce355
b235a15a728578bffef6f52d7a4b5d9fab678680
1095 F20101113_AAEKQT nguyen_t_Page_079.txt
b42baf2be10aa1c9715c6f1d586b0823
8884371a60b6c7bafc0db03901ef8c6ffd48f3d9
3276 F20101113_AAEKRJ nguyen_t_Page_005.txt
a0ed65a5cd805f73f30a455eb2b84721
c16a3c082108e3805a53bb028213d101e1127706
63669 F20101113_AAEKQU nguyen_t_Page_110.jpg
d13360b1ec089ef588b1905288cf43b6
518b9c5cc542efa59b505bd7e3cfd1e81ce636ff
6648 F20101113_AAEKRK nguyen_t_Page_118thm.jpg
a1577ef1d5e5fb41f9869fbd1a75b9b5
7716fb68abb5541c68781af1eacd1765e6daebae
61991 F20101113_AAEKQV nguyen_t_Page_008.pro
b24e12db1145671bcd7bdcaf64a94faf
bd2304f87df5070165474d43550a9470f8f66361
72145 F20101113_AAEKRL nguyen_t_Page_077.jp2
144bd4961c5acd6d6e2482b08bb08119
718acbe00de62d2bd562a7d2e845b9805a1b0671
F20101113_AAEKQW nguyen_t_Page_106.tif
7479d881242b1938e18703898fa9fc63
667f330218607bcb9b1c18cce38f2cca9eca8cc9
52283 F20101113_AAEKRM nguyen_t_Page_096.pro
71307418e249e38829bbc01531ccabb3
6dfd91aaf22640819648282154804e5657ddd2ba
43003 F20101113_AAEKQX nguyen_t_Page_020.jpg
f3de6cc0adbcf2630f809bd5324d9fb5
34bd081d49da3490b5e574ebfc2b3c0b72a45803
23851 F20101113_AAEKSA nguyen_t_Page_071.QC.jpg
da5f9e1622c6d25a22ca571fe64761ca
a564cd2b62f0987ad802b4670c416d4ed0b4a506
1008103 F20101113_AAEKRN nguyen_t_Page_082.jp2
71a1ce438499a2bfa7c169e8ce51e782
e0cafed6b5fe611ff2e2beb42bd55c7d379b461f
80718 F20101113_AAEKQY nguyen_t_Page_107.jpg
8ae4b62dcb47ec3399715be529a7ec80
555ba174218c576f6d4239e487c991ff461c6c09
23939 F20101113_AAEKSB nguyen_t_Page_138.QC.jpg
4d9f2aa77488fbb72611a3bad5026803
e9a96a1346b7142b294d774206e95924f3d8d111
1296 F20101113_AAEKRO nguyen_t_Page_144.txt
668a953aae16ac369b6f2f901dbc3b5b
6c2644671a5d80e80d21d59fc00925c90db17741
49850 F20101113_AAEKQZ nguyen_t_Page_072.pro
986e260a4ea63611f91e284b6ae29291
c4bbfd3fa09466621c775cf43c8bb8503e39d9cf
100133 F20101113_AAEKSC nguyen_t_Page_151.jpg
0395c4025902846faff43cbe80f6abd3
6dc4ae6d9e05dabe6a2fc2ce7bf2d52b98f94553
F20101113_AAEKRP nguyen_t_Page_118.tif
4bfce709867de568d0103fad9d290dac
0b6409c2b0a64b250cafedf232d5bc07c31816d4
F20101113_AAEKSD nguyen_t_Page_083.tif
d162fab950e121de8a99334b1c88c268
89f5b5620e04831c9f702050ef124afc53e1a3f0
12516 F20101113_AAEKRQ nguyen_t_Page_140.QC.jpg
116271ba67c260a20884522089474041
967cdfbef98b2c9569eed3c92feb06da3ce5f777
2961 F20101113_AAEKSE nguyen_t_Page_003.QC.jpg
bbf686dcc723330dea0fa0bd77eea0ea
172f392dd590a64a821e71b5c2614e5eadbc9878
72010 F20101113_AAEKSF nguyen_t_Page_078.jpg
0422535793fab0454ce3df84adccbdbd
3162596b6052c80db342fd4a50247ddbcefd9ea7
22956 F20101113_AAEKRR nguyen_t_Page_037.jpg
05154a135a2ac5498eec4f70314e50ab
ecdb9c9776211b9cf33871acb2d886001d98c4b6
59731 F20101113_AAEKSG nguyen_t_Page_152.pro
1d6bfdc0d6d2a5425a7e9bdff1a18c9f
ec19d99fece40dbce2bda13261e4294c6326da66
2047 F20101113_AAEKRS nguyen_t_Page_103.txt
eb367b884d5ae327c7ea04899a7221a3
d249c681ac56de141523af9e98f738a59e84a189
23905 F20101113_AAEKSH nguyen_t_Page_056.QC.jpg
b01b76dc9d758ca4be9dc322334c1f23
2eab7a9dc5878d70c3eff489e82c486f876741c9
17958 F20101113_AAEKRT nguyen_t_Page_134.QC.jpg
bdb89b24410ef357ce5191bc6ab72e62
92b8f68591ef337aabd96006f792a5d71fa05976
37698 F20101113_AAEKSI nguyen_t_Page_134.pro
e2ed29dc9ab55cc0a39794f5b3d424f0
604bd31e844bfc7ee00c2b5a867d0d38f78a617f
F20101113_AAEKRU nguyen_t_Page_101.tif
19349bcfa5e11258ada5fd911e33bc21
d8e06f8d491a2257101d0b5c5dca0952afe09061
1110 F20101113_AAEKSJ nguyen_t_Page_148.txt
310491cb4234ce48372741bf4d28dafd
d97fee187ad29510cd6f5f713057eabd549a785c
2127 F20101113_AAEKRV nguyen_t_Page_058.txt
930e0264cd0f9aa2f26c2f9f8809f89e
6f364bdf6793e58b4d160740bd623f7c6338a48e
50048 F20101113_AAEKSK nguyen_t_Page_086.pro
eb9566f6e25086c4dcff739113e070b6
0c2567567b8e6617827be5c7c2e8fa20dc32a3e1
49782 F20101113_AAEKRW nguyen_t_Page_093.pro
e864bfbe4e2ef46fc5cccbda5f02b32b
4801f78514ff0254790c05c0c50506761d95a42d
51960 F20101113_AAEKSL nguyen_t_Page_125.pro
872d373526d75ae143f99b19ad1919be
5b27876a7775ee1cd023b52fa9036a491891c5b8
74922 F20101113_AAEKRX nguyen_t_Page_038.jpg
c153429c59483e10cf8567a47157cf1f
34e484bb13edd3c2ae805b7a2e36aba48dc60404
1964 F20101113_AAEKTA nguyen_t_Page_050.txt
eb7797cb1708af2cd4893c64483fe23f
fbe708152ca0fb9753a30eb8438f0d30a0678830
37119 F20101113_AAEKSM nguyen_t_Page_127.pro
0c5523d715350036d70b0076d3b02c52
a053d5bccbc753d10b873497f4fef08d82eb1092
1086 F20101113_AAEKRY nguyen_t_Page_157.txt
033a26006c488ab17c9c0faa7c5115a6
55a1e881399899f3f382ffb2cfd2cc13c5934dcb
72231 F20101113_AAEKTB nguyen_t_Page_049.jpg
806850ed4d45e3f4dd1d0e309d98731a
b77f4bd969d518b4bde0bf4b3582d229c250b3af
5277 F20101113_AAEKSN nguyen_t_Page_012thm.jpg
599a230de88d888233158dff4405acb6
26da268086703be92909e130f0202056de39fc9f
12988 F20101113_AAEKRZ nguyen_t_Page_133.QC.jpg
0dcf1ef3db075ca138119d4c1858d5e3
ccf851da446a853bb8596a5e3f4fb44a30e07ca8
114792 F20101113_AAEKTC nguyen_t_Page_112.jp2
69a23014d0ec5796c79cc2e608d03185
1027b94d3854996e3ad374b09ad3ea301e53c202
26364 F20101113_AAEKSO nguyen_t_Page_130.QC.jpg
b59c72008c92349935768ad177ef4782
7ba99e722a722f3a87d8255148a72448dec52329
25271604 F20101113_AAEKTD nguyen_t_Page_039.tif
84ba405759ac0f27bd5d1804de4b3b14
d30dad91ec9a0452f6023d35a69141f49d1c447f
17499 F20101113_AAEKSP nguyen_t_Page_127.QC.jpg
f458bcac02f503b05e864cd097c265c1
b1a3acf7829a979167eb50d1899680927f58dd70
120080 F20101113_AAEKTE nguyen_t_Page_015.jp2
603fd0341eed3e1a9a095af8ab41e61c
7fe787e51b11ba2a3a1e3a30595cacdebf2c3123
69637 F20101113_AAEKSQ nguyen_t_Page_054.jpg
98a111caade23fd0e8c39caafb7fa3d8
83191d8c0eeb94d3b9accdf49b903a221e98cc60
56242 F20101113_AAEKTF nguyen_t_Page_081.jpg
0355b48519ec5e470441227a001a8339
feabb7b93b186983d4ccb0a4a2c4e59872c87527
71931 F20101113_AAEKSR nguyen_t_Page_068.jpg
720dd382a5630b9156ab4ca70ef0b02a
9f4382cbe1506c14a199e6e81c02c13784bc30ad
24963 F20101113_AAEKTG nguyen_t_Page_101.QC.jpg
fa0474ad100d626a3e9088412c0b46ad
fdace3a1e32ebbd9232ffacfb312dd3fa8ed45c9
21703 F20101113_AAEKTH nguyen_t_Page_076.QC.jpg
148d9d20e90a266fe55e8629b02a9615
ee7654b2386b875d616496ec6d1b7971c5d3e2f1
6932 F20101113_AAEKSS nguyen_t_Page_106thm.jpg
a8a0f951e9717035ad37057e695598da
2fc98051463d0e08cb141939136f46c21cf779df
F20101113_AAEKTI nguyen_t_Page_001.tif
dc9c84adeea12291e835696e2eb341dc
01e20914d5e8a6553f1392a52f7e03ee151d508e
2143 F20101113_AAEKST nguyen_t_Page_042.txt
12c6220129be0b01453311192f8b02d0
a5d4ad836c31aa2d1239aac4848ffac25f6761d0
107984 F20101113_AAEKTJ nguyen_t_Page_006.jpg
a1b801b54307bf67b03ee3be0b09cbdd
13be984d955d6b99edf5ab33d2ba465cc57177ff
2022 F20101113_AAEKSU nguyen_t_Page_052.txt
686140c099ad32de92432df3fcdb6869
8b5f9e424cdd7db5deb3d5dfe655ed19eb957628
2134 F20101113_AAEKTK nguyen_t_Page_124.txt
f41f6b21b1aa0494502d682a8d5afc85
986e4f0ff7be12aa9049056fbb736529eb5e4cac
7048 F20101113_AAEKSV nguyen_t_Page_150thm.jpg
53ee67720347d4bc4add13cc53a897bc
8a70d0c9b135e3f5f3f311013e1a34990c9b6bff
6517 F20101113_AAEKTL nguyen_t_Page_125thm.jpg
cca0466d10c4fab3dfcaceec7d74e5f8
0ac54ff7c9270dfe5213c0c5ef4aab8ab3017fa0
4036 F20101113_AAEKSW nguyen_t_Page_144thm.jpg
5d10fc25f5401b04ad38cae5452b65a8
6235fb77dadf8853677f3e8c31143fca921258fc
51838 F20101113_AAEKUA nguyen_t_Page_145.jp2
4efd0ac2f1a08e9feed50d154550e0fe
b786a6dae8195110c968ec8e4a5852715eaf15de
120613 F20101113_AAEKTM nguyen_t_Page_031.jp2
238af62482a9809adf22a0a511ffdebf
577cfb5fe63969cab9cefebc8b2f10588249e249
64496 F20101113_AAEKSX nguyen_t_Page_156.pro
d82a448d25a48d4a61ffb1d9b04dc9a8
1eeac747383a427877ad9e1e97f18eb756ce7b10
105689 F20101113_AAEKUB nguyen_t_Page_129.jp2
e4523cf94d6ca08a5cee785941a277d4
577df3ad47109e77f6d72b8ea24b33501ba04f33
53774 F20101113_AAEKTN nguyen_t_Page_053.pro
a9d394a2b106974a0ce2bd86c15b7b00
1f794f8e336248ebad69c6053fac354ae7d56252
1677 F20101113_AAEKSY nguyen_t_Page_070.txt
6b8dfdc1d396e1a1b404d013da07ba7e
6a0c5f85c8b05b59033ca6c60c7e2c67a2191415
4196 F20101113_AAEKUC nguyen_t_Page_149thm.jpg
b9f9f5464476658029ad13ec2bc5350f
20bd333e6555c9b01feb0db5308ee0c4c0825951
2088 F20101113_AAEKTO nguyen_t_Page_125.txt
8ecb3b480172697b659caeb4f9d01dc2
96824f33ef30a7613a3d42dcb80a7d3902ebde3c
6663 F20101113_AAEKSZ nguyen_t_Page_094thm.jpg
28f8e792731174c51c93970be89fde4e
7d416b15511fa2a710e5e80707cc3fd61f9eb75c
29596 F20101113_AAEKUD nguyen_t_Page_081.pro
2a2a4ca5c0e3e2e91d8d64d557d186d0
4283501d6a0bc8a327b412101f3ef7996bdbd873
F20101113_AAEKTP nguyen_t_Page_143.tif
c71e716e3e4a5f56cf1f53ac9bf83896
19909db4ddfac15f2426329a13a38b11cbdc7225
236091 F20101113_AAEKUE UFE0021195_00001.xml FULL
f6f8d0bce4f5922ef89871551aeab852
823ef77bb49ca23de694409f2ea5a7717444e71e
F20101113_AAEKTQ nguyen_t_Page_111.tif
64fa5d5dc605d1e71e8548efbb0aca45
7e2d121a50a1b9e1464b35d5afbcaad9e3b38410
1508 F20101113_AAEKTR nguyen_t_Page_092.txt
042bb57dfafdf27f79701f27822cbb4e
b573f4f062e8c1d8702598e9266d065c152e45a8
F20101113_AAELAA nguyen_t_Page_082.tif
c526bfabd6b3c92241050f778e060c94
70e26bf6b58a484136df3c60d45df6e12276bcee
76592 F20101113_AAEKTS nguyen_t_Page_064.jpg
480a0e7d17380ed818ce882a3e8daffa
a7302600b7e588d798c3395dcbdad90780ce8e4a
F20101113_AAELAB nguyen_t_Page_090.tif
d190b04959dfa117326a65ac0dc6be53
a13a9ffbb78962ff9c0cd5bc368281c0291a4254
24301 F20101113_AAEKUH nguyen_t_Page_001.jpg
39f724c72a695139bef9d9767af365e0
625dde64bdaf39bd508f1324192b281285c6ab81
F20101113_AAELAC nguyen_t_Page_097.tif
dd3e516871e3713db90d11e200416788
3f3a50f762f3bcee5c6079d53617da3a8e3ac666
9456 F20101113_AAEKUI nguyen_t_Page_003.jpg
f95aa478a59b39da5dbd625d1e93e568
cec82597df1abe522eda8000dc5fcd1c23f416b1
974 F20101113_AAEKTT nguyen_t_Page_010.txt
9e4d96b6f6341fe83d87341b1d603842
f777642ab49aa94d1b75310f58809cea04036e5f
F20101113_AAELAD nguyen_t_Page_104.tif
0f94ed015646ed8f983fb5b154773105
6afc2bf3667985aff81d41c43efbd6061e30adfc
29523 F20101113_AAEKTU nguyen_t_Page_156.QC.jpg
90868e0f250a352a191f5d32e01ad6de
259d1f7e2bedc0df9d179e9c3292f0c7a7f6a5c2
15410 F20101113_AAEKUJ nguyen_t_Page_009.jpg
aa501e4083904ec9983b79624b74127e
b51cc39cb75e79c2c7c37284d650aeff87e3a210
F20101113_AAELAE nguyen_t_Page_105.tif
edd53040a934b76ec31e6f68e76784c3
f4de72d937dc9b5a52d2dfa29886bc62dce13d1d
24977 F20101113_AAEKTV nguyen_t_Page_013.QC.jpg
997cb9c143bda6777b35fbf051cc937e
8347b84a98d02ce350b24a7830e4f29e19ac4265
40782 F20101113_AAEKUK nguyen_t_Page_010.jpg
00aad00b08d6d63fb8acf6a9b5674a9e
6154faf1c123a7b787c17d66f9007c512c5dbfad
F20101113_AAELAF nguyen_t_Page_107.tif
027d9c2cd7315c6e1c9ce8f2d4290990
ccdb54197e8c8dcfec1c6dc7d409d99979c3953e
74774 F20101113_AAEKTW nguyen_t_Page_114.jpg
49e3eba6efcfa7a5f9533011aec81e26
9a7bdc35d6b8c6612cf84afcf3bcf492e609763d
76474 F20101113_AAEKUL nguyen_t_Page_014.jpg
2f512f0b605473f3741d3226933c8d8a
92e055990fcd9a049823b6403f1e3af0efd59538
F20101113_AAELAG nguyen_t_Page_108.tif
2ab162492b04c0e3a80748e6580e405f
e81cd597ec18af10ab111bc5b8b0aded223793ea
115530 F20101113_AAEKTX nguyen_t_Page_043.jp2
2d99cfb8680af8422acaca767514996d
895339d5550b5e9dd20cef04764432e806160505
75350 F20101113_AAEKVA nguyen_t_Page_059.jpg
79e91e26aa817fc06218af39afb35fae
d1c45697ae376f563dc261af419fe8166129174b
78493 F20101113_AAEKUM nguyen_t_Page_015.jpg
fe871f4fd2c510f7f69d0be4bfb9f13c
f0024218dacdc9720819331c98783428290be89c
F20101113_AAELAH nguyen_t_Page_110.tif
776d0b00f70e4d4e85e44a0b775ca7a4
5030387bc0a16d6ded6e0f92ef526be98b6322a4
F20101113_AAEKTY nguyen_t_Page_015.tif
03ec18b34e30f20a4b69e39490be72cc
a65ad4bbc944a0fe83dae8b57eba4008f6eca76c
69165 F20101113_AAEKVB nguyen_t_Page_060.jpg
828698eed95c803e98f8a7fbeb785901
477885bf41b127da88b0e0e5f52cab2f5ec28101
70999 F20101113_AAEKUN nguyen_t_Page_018.jpg
b05bec404446a2c7005ecc324f3b2eb9
98f561c6bd1924fe9f48dd43d9c058d99c9756d2
F20101113_AAELAI nguyen_t_Page_112.tif
622a4ffd01d00b735aaa9ba74d65a749
58ffdcc14365dcf6858db689a851a7637a7f61f9
6888 F20101113_AAEKTZ nguyen_t_Page_080thm.jpg
6ecdfb59bae5e559653772dafd2447c1
81a154fbd7506404dc31af4e1135d0407174af33
51883 F20101113_AAEKVC nguyen_t_Page_063.jpg
f886dcd2ecd3bbbf0c2a3bd95942e94f
fbf4391979c6632d11c5f4c4fa0a9b123b815ae4
36198 F20101113_AAEKUO nguyen_t_Page_024.jpg
c03cab2ea0df6f699fa3575e37dedef6
3afafeac662eee4fa4284294ffde40391f0e72a7
F20101113_AAELAJ nguyen_t_Page_114.tif
a8c0f6d92f24220c6837b58dac73bd50
0bd083b4004aeb902b96ff4c3236572380ad35c6
72506 F20101113_AAEKVD nguyen_t_Page_069.jpg
5f735edc2a72fc6759630d985d08163c
ed714f71df3c8464dbf75bc05fa5ec809c12ee45
77761 F20101113_AAEKUP nguyen_t_Page_025.jpg
7c8d34cd4165f0676b480916beafe202
320f4ef440a2c2a1f7786603de4d99e62e63ac4a
F20101113_AAELAK nguyen_t_Page_115.tif
42ce681c15a3f7f2029e73f0ef0dab10
2d0bef56d25372d54638accb293289a8cd000f16
59081 F20101113_AAEKVE nguyen_t_Page_070.jpg
cdcc9f2fede9cca64ff87e94ac8fc197
23ac6259c1f5b071f02c064b321c959494ba96ee
72047 F20101113_AAEKUQ nguyen_t_Page_028.jpg
19a447ac557bd764811029cb01d391ae
c85f02cb27f278ec98c27076a9f879fac35ad64f
F20101113_AAELAL nguyen_t_Page_121.tif
d413457974cfb91323c10bcb225ddf9b
2db9c7f89eb52ca6479d0f4ca129e34dc3cb1d57
71144 F20101113_AAEKVF nguyen_t_Page_071.jpg
347911d33017a978ef4cafada4f914d8
0872481b9c7700b6a8f6076922711eee82a3fbcb
79877 F20101113_AAEKUR nguyen_t_Page_033.jpg
bfa1274110de123baa4af736cd9ecebd
220992355ec2de8f71201eb307106ec01435805d
F20101113_AAELBA nguyen_t_Page_151.tif
e216f369499ebb8e6979e7e250728575
0e1c18b137f921a8f10bff6ce2d1a1725cd8521c
F20101113_AAELAM nguyen_t_Page_123.tif
fe8003603e338c7086d3b7815a2b8d2c
8d316b6250bd4577ca0488fff88077ee28cf5fbd
68883 F20101113_AAEKVG nguyen_t_Page_075.jpg
c9d46c40c5ef6664fc46757a48c51948
192a77e77d6b7d0b914ad2dccfeb66972e739ec1
87237 F20101113_AAEKUS nguyen_t_Page_039.jpg
77a258ee23ced6828e4dda5deec2fa78
a81c1db86523499c97e3ff1a4d29d8a843ad9699
F20101113_AAELBB nguyen_t_Page_153.tif
412e48f6e0576d9a05420b2b3744ab9f
8eec5a66232f80aa3d37c21ffffbfc08bcc3983a
F20101113_AAELAN nguyen_t_Page_124.tif
4921a879b4cc9930805392f908ae3847
074d3d695c738ae7d7ab40a8e5e0db0d09a7eead
66154 F20101113_AAEKVH nguyen_t_Page_076.jpg
9e51f5af04767a62b4cc549e579cfe0a
8c0148d2fbebb1b8b89585f0f06b277cf8d1cba9
77573 F20101113_AAEKUT nguyen_t_Page_043.jpg
93bdb9ce083bf0b767e8a81421e87c0c
41b70e0e0b415ea2f8774a507ddb45a5c54a3803
F20101113_AAELBC nguyen_t_Page_154.tif
c137f3f62038d6acf730e0f9bfde935d
624de62c8547048cab373617363ea13a7dde1d8a
F20101113_AAELAO nguyen_t_Page_125.tif
4e1a33305d46e5074ca5b643ae792121
7d8223cccdded527f55336e50be94f2eac27fb4c
74508 F20101113_AAEKVI nguyen_t_Page_082.jpg
4902347c6747259da6cca07d4bb5959d
83df2e6c29f31fee34570a66791d2f79fe1b135a
8918 F20101113_AAELBD nguyen_t_Page_001.pro
824d7bea9816c48f19bb9acb42c0c8d4
541ddee8aab44a2d5ef13eab41fea13e5eecf1fc
F20101113_AAELAP nguyen_t_Page_130.tif
90d0af98e472d44e56c56ad6a4e706e8
8694fec2e8c1748da103472ee6787b7d4a1d952c
76468 F20101113_AAEKVJ nguyen_t_Page_085.jpg
36a2585ba859c48fb4ed4248311c70c9
3784b760aca3e2202c3751bbb06c1aedf9b22624
67219 F20101113_AAEKUU nguyen_t_Page_044.jpg
a5919de90bb56ed263a51e1cf99a846d
65f5023a3c435b578c6db7748e1c9d1d96e7e74d
622 F20101113_AAELBE nguyen_t_Page_003.pro
c5865655c14ca2beb9ca60ecef60a8b8
cb20653fad6080a593c1dd6616012e1cc3c07fe9
F20101113_AAELAQ nguyen_t_Page_131.tif
fbc88c550442c7d6e70c10c95b971fa0
713d1ed81482a7c544dcb3e74e36692b5f6d8338
71195 F20101113_AAEKVK nguyen_t_Page_086.jpg
b24868441255202b5ad6fa04a8400602
3510e290ad914c86f4b27136185e03486a26f559
72158 F20101113_AAEKUV nguyen_t_Page_045.jpg
5a04311658cb6eb717725e8458139984
f88ae0b13ed360469d3eee1f963c38df80c58a67
74398 F20101113_AAELBF nguyen_t_Page_005.pro
f84e2638ff7207cdd6d9928fb2568afa
9e8498b2fd7ed22ad93a874618349857edb59b13
F20101113_AAELAR nguyen_t_Page_132.tif
7170dbc2e57db2c9848f24934aa588cf
50dd08c3837e56c88b49f01b7ec5890ca00747bf
65463 F20101113_AAEKVL nguyen_t_Page_089.jpg
56f857712c5910ff41426486dd4555df
d85d470d296610988ddaa20e1bdacac005b64fd2
73659 F20101113_AAEKUW nguyen_t_Page_052.jpg
243b2372a8445f86e448d227be20b6b1
21aea2b66bf49864d6c909e266baadf7e2b0461a
70431 F20101113_AAELBG nguyen_t_Page_007.pro
f5fffe204d8cbc5b50843fe22e54b90a
45dd43aa4ac07eb0ce0ed339a409e8fe0fe6bf60
F20101113_AAELAS nguyen_t_Page_133.tif
b5b659faf900a1b06ab5f2f27c10ad0c
2f239452fca9aff93a6fdcebc99e6aff7d5b313b
76352 F20101113_AAEKWA nguyen_t_Page_123.jpg
391bda1fcfe9d869a2eaaafa6f52aa05
e7f20c5cd2932b89eec87c371eb901bf844e209f
48599 F20101113_AAEKVM nguyen_t_Page_090.jpg
ba115ab25b5cf0f13c9a251b77e8f024
8651a69fe8e2803b001a5a1e87206f92699f1919
78616 F20101113_AAEKUX nguyen_t_Page_053.jpg
a65954a672aba825e9511e7ae04669b2
53bcf66ad610b294a843d3d52780994ce4dd3532
24088 F20101113_AAELBH nguyen_t_Page_010.pro
fe22c2eb80c66c011df3e9891cd3e30d
b70a8456c72b5951ccba22acb53516c32c19d7b7
F20101113_AAELAT nguyen_t_Page_134.tif
320ebec01b23a7b5904b0ce9b8e03382
df7468a5eb774efa6c0c7f637f6e944e81a5c7a1
77466 F20101113_AAEKWB nguyen_t_Page_124.jpg
ba71295296f45009c0afb4ff817089ea
eb61f5dba37144e40d1968bf8209315c540deda9
56406 F20101113_AAEKVN nguyen_t_Page_091.jpg
8f2378c27225471f0a5773c60f207a01
9c285c99a966d7db2f7e2f000cc31973005b6eaa
77658 F20101113_AAEKUY nguyen_t_Page_055.jpg
93bc192df2017ae8dee6ab72507a5f7c
322179a9c96eebde8cf14177ac49343e05cc30a0
52944 F20101113_AAELBI nguyen_t_Page_013.pro
b466f2b355ba2bc9abeea51afcc56a46
291683b96c9be189255f226e24a4d10f345cb3b0
F20101113_AAELAU nguyen_t_Page_137.tif
1700cff5872a910e7fdff12e42afe278
7ba14e77bab046e51317fe3217f03266d9ff51b4
72591 F20101113_AAEKWC nguyen_t_Page_125.jpg
4a010157575f1396ef5e093ac4dadb65
40ef6632e247d0e89c03ec46b55ea69b744fc52a
54919 F20101113_AAEKVO nguyen_t_Page_092.jpg
867c1291cc7c791c78fb146996a385a5
eff1e89796374156d2436b731c71656b6d6f0f1a
75163 F20101113_AAEKUZ nguyen_t_Page_057.jpg
7c8802c5472573dbfada0968db0de63d
5134d42e8138352e08d0027d4a4184edc9a6eb07
53201 F20101113_AAELBJ nguyen_t_Page_014.pro
23cf955879c7289b7efcf7325cdc37b6
e50349460153e1a1b081c183e552d68bdc0da08c
F20101113_AAELAV nguyen_t_Page_139.tif
b6e03e60888d32da274ddb9df6f07245
46d4d854bc5a4d7e7b464f69071bc2f53fb72ab4
59327 F20101113_AAEKWD nguyen_t_Page_127.jpg
584dc9b7d0204e14eae3814331cefa1a
c935c1a2439ca795553b35382b3bd1704b63b4ca
76937 F20101113_AAEKVP nguyen_t_Page_094.jpg
bd1298d09c3f3a271af3259705ca5d62
5abf46a8ec865200fe7f7d59e17c4af5cf132258
26970 F20101113_AAELBK nguyen_t_Page_020.pro
896b3c57331cd1ce8db56ab18b26eada
dc0cef6951270a82cded1799f497ca43f6648f7c
F20101113_AAELAW nguyen_t_Page_140.tif
92439fae4072ca7eaa37f07502c1adf0
dc7ab2397eb2d96439a7c8b327cd11132e92c2e9
55835 F20101113_AAEKWE nguyen_t_Page_128.jpg
9a1c7a0bd74ebf2e95fd115c4a041821
e829fcf7f16cb968f9c93ea2c7f2ac5735856d79
76383 F20101113_AAEKVQ nguyen_t_Page_095.jpg
3405b30518c8e3e9094c46a3eea10532
92c53ee05fcf35972bc2290c6973f0af507719fd
53333 F20101113_AAELCA nguyen_t_Page_059.pro
46f5497c7a6c853815803be2244c75c8
c0a228440244bbb1a40f0b3680e45ab8bd628301
56062 F20101113_AAELBL nguyen_t_Page_022.pro
827f343f54aaa4e44386e72c199aec89
4d632abfd92e47dc2125e02f65269dea732ca857
F20101113_AAELAX nguyen_t_Page_144.tif
6fa41669c0b8512abefb104a22242f9a
97279e19e2e2a95a45f9376dda51b3d968846183
86810 F20101113_AAEKWF nguyen_t_Page_129.jpg
d1e34d158612e581d06a913caa9e2867
80dd7b61061f8148dbd8fbc3c3c33e61e27672ec
71619 F20101113_AAEKVR nguyen_t_Page_096.jpg
242ae920444ed7f681cfce31a39a280c
6c9055b9885906f88f61d761f3238e7814730719
13447 F20101113_AAELBM nguyen_t_Page_024.pro
c18474eae3e29ee15a4342b234d1d78a
07c248e1a54149fd10b473c0fb3d8fe89f962c3b
F20101113_AAELAY nguyen_t_Page_147.tif
5098368988d0c552f97f53ad911c60b5
31f959d80c88eea5b79ab3df5f7eade31e1fd99c
73202 F20101113_AAEKWG nguyen_t_Page_131.jpg
b29f3e5fda74a6c9b97bd245c71b9510
fbf78db84e455014e010700903cd29b218cdda2e
77578 F20101113_AAEKVS nguyen_t_Page_101.jpg
b72ed6a95e0e56eb3423f511ce24b18d
9bd0e13b86bb0aad126e60639f2b631bedf10508
48444 F20101113_AAELCB nguyen_t_Page_061.pro
95d1f35b23048a7041d3ad2fe32ef4fb
41dbad7069db31e50d5fa6e0a6d7c85bf9f1a189
56604 F20101113_AAELBN nguyen_t_Page_029.pro
5b049804084ef68e68aa54b9d31198e2
732b74dc098d7a8431b22771a4f031f3dd78fae0
F20101113_AAELAZ nguyen_t_Page_149.tif
c4b989c75da8606e05cf466d5d6b5d30
942a6e66f94d9a1ab57dd6bdbfa0f7f3dd4a2ea5
33815 F20101113_AAEKWH nguyen_t_Page_142.jpg
9b514840980787a0927ffeac00114222
16a45850fb11ab8e5b9f398d45b32f4b42a67928
63699 F20101113_AAEKVT nguyen_t_Page_109.jpg
17cb2881816698ab98655aa25c5cb058
007c3b166ab7cda1b5307834cbe9fa21792d92b7
50620 F20101113_AAELCC nguyen_t_Page_071.pro
bafc0157fe617c09900e8d7a61369b0f
a081340509840641f5c57fe66e98de75ef49255d
53077 F20101113_AAELBO nguyen_t_Page_030.pro
a31db111f19a425332bcf6831eddbdce
ca9f6ca4cf740400104a90bc80ec165682f9b6fe
38558 F20101113_AAEKWI nguyen_t_Page_143.jpg
7d1fd5d71f9febef4d5c475fbe41d119
25b55fd2ab440bb3acc5f5bf6bb4cd381b855253
64125 F20101113_AAEKVU nguyen_t_Page_111.jpg
839f5e5a1ac42bcc4a85ce9b285a3dc9
65a8bd6e63588418c888b7cc3a50259827fe3028
45907 F20101113_AAELCD nguyen_t_Page_076.pro
26857ed757faa5a2236e30c9e661a416
644c53f487901b1972cfa65fdaff48692820f203
56810 F20101113_AAELBP nguyen_t_Page_033.pro
1f8a1341ae2ccac025596491c1994f4d
06ff141851e18e95010f19629f529101246834d1
6967 F20101113_AAEJTH nguyen_t_Page_046thm.jpg
ca1609f74183436d89c60535ba6f36f7
e9ccfe5ff4dd116d2508c0272526a5f2afaddf36
45810 F20101113_AAEKWJ nguyen_t_Page_146.jpg
4c854a6539b98a4600e8c7364d053966
f4dd7f0c42a9b89e7ff72bc25b9e5823ef9dbad1
22753 F20101113_AAELCE nguyen_t_Page_079.pro
caf883f7e7b89d4ad0f4bbc3aba227a7
d77717190cce0d4ba65d7a8633d5edfbee393847
57121 F20101113_AAELBQ nguyen_t_Page_034.pro
8faee53314d7642961fa206e9d13a223
d1883c7b18897229b3ccdcafdb7b4feaae0d040e
F20101113_AAEJTI nguyen_t_Page_085.tif
87d811750d557b4e56bca90c6c75fbef
28d32a2b2fa044ee4517bd90c2482dd3253e8bac
39885 F20101113_AAEKWK nguyen_t_Page_149.jpg
3d4d739d24b1fde95cdd582eaf079241
02a42d768bdde5ea9a0a4bbf91bd656586a742b8
60745 F20101113_AAEKVV nguyen_t_Page_113.jpg
4466b8ee7f761bacbf813bf17c0fbff1
ee55b4033ce06c4063aded176a05a6363f231063
42793 F20101113_AAELCF nguyen_t_Page_082.pro
63737345715cbdd0b9a6193810d5d4b8
c3d01bf2c7782e4e1e4cc2ae545a67a5c1f747c0
52587 F20101113_AAELBR nguyen_t_Page_035.pro
f9579ec8f4ef297ef637630a10ea88ba
e53202f64d4b112ffd526f9f6303563609c55bc5
117733 F20101113_AAEJTJ nguyen_t_Page_085.jp2
f2f74b213a0eea8ec2ec0fa38dd21fc8
d6bcd39694bab29f728d3ee6ff199c283ec60848
109175 F20101113_AAEKWL nguyen_t_Page_153.jpg
b0837395141ebfc7c69f7d6d39f1d4fa
d81468aa6c68f8f101d63190410a081899d16618
71903 F20101113_AAEKVW nguyen_t_Page_116.jpg
29b887be8cfb33e36c77686ab840f47a
accca08cb301e8c965c9c8a5dda12c5ca2fadd41
65766 F20101113_AAELCG nguyen_t_Page_087.pro
4b7a788f697f3accc9de97a55a8c30dd
fd5292363c2e5a18abe839d2f13a4bdbb4a4b9b3
48974 F20101113_AAELBS nguyen_t_Page_045.pro
9b17ad988f191622ecb121c78b70935a
45b775604725857387bef68192fa697be5794e19
3086 F20101113_AAEJTK nguyen_t_Page_002.QC.jpg
15be8ec3b2bfd11da9672a3c4c527d1a
f341bbef999cdfa827534bc8bb43d58c24d7614a
85464 F20101113_AAEKWM nguyen_t_Page_155.jpg
c9bc77f1880592a7a47f4178a40b39c5
7d6f624e217fa302b47ceda4032c845cb142f7a0
77937 F20101113_AAEKVX nguyen_t_Page_117.jpg
eb8cbe406e6867472851cf62bf5e8440
7b385f39d4570d4fb68e527e70300847d35c37cc
111047 F20101113_AAEKXA nguyen_t_Page_052.jp2
727e1434d5286fed24125eabd3e46714
7c319c268f69def56e6d2b1fbcc9b907e861bf23
81674 F20101113_AAELCH nguyen_t_Page_088.pro
cf39351c43d99d4b49c3c701f1d791fc
f8361e28b64bc2a90bb7024007197ac07a608d3d
50557 F20101113_AAELBT nguyen_t_Page_049.pro
807c16a1cda5796f7fd0c54f94e2d71c
b337b2e1c333359cb9833db0c8dc089e1957b6a0
57197 F20101113_AAEJTL nguyen_t_Page_023.pro
78cf5a66c8e642fc0d9d0361756ae7c8
bf3d85a63c8bda8639d3da2dfded5d3eb53fbad5
26624 F20101113_AAEKWN nguyen_t_Page_001.jp2
3f071d4b13b296d9e57a32001c4388db
19f006547bb74badd6451af5455f58a4841db8ed
73438 F20101113_AAEKVY nguyen_t_Page_118.jpg
7d7b6aa414622417ecc7abe940c65463
21e905d1c1175ec4cdbdb5b5568a5d4a38c59bcf
105508 F20101113_AAEKXB nguyen_t_Page_061.jp2
de990eab50da1d8439432ab7979387a5
2e67cd028fccb453d965fc2eddc6f60458e07918
45916 F20101113_AAELCI nguyen_t_Page_089.pro
4d06a5ea26a3b1fbff8115e40c511a42
c532dcc56e4cd2770b4369beca03e23739b59e8d
49634 F20101113_AAELBU nguyen_t_Page_050.pro
6f2c05680f2bc934d22fedd4e6c89dca
37dd60de82c637d397f5bd8f67a4f20525cdc6c1
48164 F20101113_AAEJTM nguyen_t_Page_158.jpg
5a05d9071a8f98fd2cf534d017b3f8a8
d45ae7183be3296d2d5fbc7786df55e7add790b7
1051972 F20101113_AAEKWO nguyen_t_Page_006.jp2
3a085156f0018b4f5c47395e98ec11b4
51b85af2de921609045fabd23ca91cb5babf7fdb
77707 F20101113_AAEKVZ nguyen_t_Page_120.jpg
f8aea1465f857656a56a86455171b2b1
91d4d4375575397d0816978565d7684c8a98f112
2238 F20101113_AAEJUA nguyen_t_Page_073.txt
bb0882d84a6975947f31a1622cb59841
0fa64cb4cbb928437a1b85a7c362759752312024
115144 F20101113_AAEKXC nguyen_t_Page_064.jp2
8b716d846c791759fd2460baef072a85
666b70473707c39c0865044fbb2c00b5318290e8
46140 F20101113_AAELCJ nguyen_t_Page_090.pro
3b0ecc19657c907f6a5ea1915606968f
83a5b128419a8008d0d5ebc651102611e7c293fd
51408 F20101113_AAELBV nguyen_t_Page_051.pro
738609d14f17fa06974045e5f0dac1ff
5eacae5298ac43e8627ba0b5208449fdebbdf371
53580 F20101113_AAEJTN nguyen_t_Page_047.pro
688b2b4594d054dc3eb6f8e5082880aa
e8908ed99f67cd91511373906334e0dbae899f73
117716 F20101113_AAEKWP nguyen_t_Page_022.jp2
46088b4f60234848ade7c5d1262ab27d
3e9491e86bfb6305d926bbae11a6ea0beeddfb55
54396 F20101113_AAEJUB nguyen_t_Page_025.pro
d1ebb5d5b7b51b79483c0b5417968023
5e6d82c8b0c037d9c89bb798f4026528f0b0dc84
115678 F20101113_AAEKXD nguyen_t_Page_067.jp2
7556b2deff70248eba16122829497446
3de90e9bd06b0eeb70cf0e8778809a568c84d614
59605 F20101113_AAELCK nguyen_t_Page_091.pro
13f7fe06ea5cb8600d95fc845f0c571a
79fee3c1f691062195050571843f558567c66d3a
51079 F20101113_AAELBW nguyen_t_Page_052.pro
3936e4ecf52cd01b19c0046d0f83a34e
6f40bd2b5e3e79694ae4322e65f4212576de7aad
90056 F20101113_AAEJTO nguyen_t_Page_132.jpg
c8bdc8a4c7bd98a50e7eb7ef9c1f64d7
55f1c69db901bf157c6342c16c16ec0eb4d78e9c
1051971 F20101113_AAEKWQ nguyen_t_Page_024.jp2
0cb8364ef070e4969b7b88b59fd02800
31efc34d86417b586ed29945e0bb0ceadda4b49d
121998 F20101113_AAEJUC nguyen_t_Page_107.jp2
983e1b123b8752e334687ac3a9e856f3
851ddd33668c01bce93f9d2a4539731a843af945
110906 F20101113_AAEKXE nguyen_t_Page_068.jp2
6c148d17d2cf42557cb933559f83fa90
fb36e09792cbcf077ea1b6a21fa4e06487fe9d1b
19300 F20101113_AAELDA nguyen_t_Page_143.pro
b38cf87887dbfa0500956d382f8a506e
db3d590b429bdc1a0670def263cabace3f540d71
33774 F20101113_AAELCL nguyen_t_Page_092.pro
d2752fd3b1e1d651e984e4d094ff1736
00f325a68ac4bf9dba48bafd0bac27f74cff5d1c
54191 F20101113_AAELBX nguyen_t_Page_055.pro
26ac4d795bd0b50cc8909e2fb038d88c
40045c759c9dc94461d0c9e3ffbddd482411a960
2297 F20101113_AAEJTP nguyen_t_Page_001thm.jpg
189c86ef5e2152971decc9d97ead0357
9f4f666f0415663155454c05b10691965d091994
116772 F20101113_AAEKWR nguyen_t_Page_025.jp2
12e308e4656d44a6108a052286b496cc
599b6244d2091ce625bb3114b0d8414356b85757
F20101113_AAEJUD nguyen_t_Page_095.tif
0d6136f984c48410d50c5229f954ba0e
26b220d43e7095fb8be86247d4f21a2320ebff71
109926 F20101113_AAEKXF nguyen_t_Page_069.jp2
934f86849e49681766607816b3aae14b
a1dc7d3848442ae04e1ec461d8e2e30dba0799bf
18847 F20101113_AAELDB nguyen_t_Page_144.pro
ee99c1eedafe617991c8c54f5cb8fc0b
fc95b8acaf0eb987d5257d64525adccf5d489c36
56109 F20101113_AAELCM nguyen_t_Page_100.pro
88ab34dd240afcbe97819d1f06d7abd5
a7e1778703ef7bb332350cb62548c4dd6fc2b0a8
51288 F20101113_AAELBY nguyen_t_Page_057.pro
12354e70c07d82225d069028dc05e82b
5b16780a26fb7a9567334060adb248562d1ab247
3893 F20101113_AAEJTQ nguyen_t_Page_126thm.jpg
28338ad145545f91fe06ac862b79a7d1
5e17c8358afa6acf9b471af3a9487538b1cca64f
120907 F20101113_AAEKWS nguyen_t_Page_027.jp2
3c21b37657cc3fe041e3422e53038117
d6c4f99f03f78ea07d2575cb355e258e9c2d18bc
F20101113_AAEJUE nguyen_t_Page_045.tif
6560a5cd6b1297a324fc5fda737f69d1
3b057015ab541893b931221f0180b26ecc4a6f65
91811 F20101113_AAEKXG nguyen_t_Page_070.jp2
62f6dd2e2b844b05d147b09c8f5c017a
9ce01d414467c8c93a0654ab3bb082e82516bd4f
53933 F20101113_AAELCN nguyen_t_Page_101.pro
5365c0cfb96e30d794bd7ee3213265cf
6f21764f7b24c184a0968dd1fc10bb0bb0fb7c3a
53421 F20101113_AAELBZ nguyen_t_Page_058.pro
062d4e92939bbc11c92a9e8bac4ffe12
b7c7f035b96fca652e0531e65683f194fb8ffdf2
42211 F20101113_AAEJTR nguyen_t_Page_143.jp2
e7c91dc229f3adfe492f3a034746490f
293d6dd863d44e4c50955c06a3a2b813379aae40
120983 F20101113_AAEKWT nguyen_t_Page_029.jp2
8d5988c6a0387b23c707e6f01b7fcc50
55d9830bda61d7ee2b887d2b2e5b3dee3baf469b
83965 F20101113_AAEJUF nguyen_t_Page_139.jpg
5862131fb9b10416e04838ebddbdf57e
bcf20e7f3abb4ca8e97e18244954c69a5348f508
117506 F20101113_AAEKXH nguyen_t_Page_074.jp2
a261ee8236c6320208b54858b14da944
772fcc2ca3b8a07856c779492ac199d8654e5acd
66586 F20101113_AAELDC nguyen_t_Page_153.pro
b89f479bb3198ee7ec1ef773c5fa434a
f6473e441b59138f6984b6def218b968c3521ef9
50579 F20101113_AAELCO nguyen_t_Page_104.pro
454273cd430c0f16c0dc2811c47e54da
7dabaffe4a8c506bbed190842421d44847330801
2137 F20101113_AAEJTS nguyen_t_Page_038.txt
423391b285fa7e8e8f2ab0a2c5342146
5d1e663939a64c67f649aced6445c8dd187c08e4
114662 F20101113_AAEKWU nguyen_t_Page_032.jp2
784f18e156e55bf52a1a3969db5a3102
f75fa78506ce72a7f6284940d4ed840995539956
79039 F20101113_AAEKAA nguyen_t_Page_031.jpg
9037cf7b31e7be3e5093c435b9fc08cf
3b7f988af98fb629247c302071a63c34de151efe
76396 F20101113_AAEJUG nguyen_t_Page_121.jpg
6f8e73e065cd4da73557fade9d61b56f
20f2777ecd5995e6a166f83a394d399a6d3bebe4
104844 F20101113_AAEKXI nguyen_t_Page_075.jp2
c34d651a2ebb9fa1862cc2e2cc28d40c
af1a21dd5ab95586f67b49e31b590e014d815fb6
59399 F20101113_AAELDD nguyen_t_Page_155.pro
db9602d0100475e0d774a5f4fb91e3aa
3aaed9c3e036c10e89878d1b5af0cc0a2af0fc86
58212 F20101113_AAELCP nguyen_t_Page_107.pro
23fdbce3ed3d8e709744395432f00b9c
f5633b6ad87022ee29f89625047dc36604cb0f30
2590 F20101113_AAEJTT nguyen_t_Page_156.txt
86d1379ecbee717ee810610b6cc9ba25
96e998decc2d94f27f3c736d57a9d24c6531736f
121692 F20101113_AAEKWV nguyen_t_Page_033.jp2
94f883dcab7b2bb90191bffa0b3eae82
280401a9107ecaf1ea95780d2ee39b1316e274e0
6488 F20101113_AAEKAB nguyen_t_Page_018thm.jpg
17a986eecb2a73cb49bef6fcda55cac7
cf9cab9d107970710331f1d4b6c210d0c3fc901b
1028547 F20101113_AAEJUH nguyen_t_Page_010.jp2
2ef9d19fb44da16719bde59c7ba8744e
b4f72e2d35750cfcf6b18638215f702c604e87b6
109511 F20101113_AAEKXJ nguyen_t_Page_078.jp2
87496f4ea9c6f3c8084a80e4723954c3
6032b46f8bfc9e25ad6ddae1028630fe8b4f7f88
26584 F20101113_AAELDE nguyen_t_Page_157.pro
4dae985e64421ac4fd909fc2bfcce3bd
6d00f2f85d26bff1d87316ab7fa09fcb61656630
49967 F20101113_AAELCQ nguyen_t_Page_116.pro
99ce47416132d9fcb367114319f4b51d
25b30f183eeaebe32562213134a27d5db4d37868
61083 F20101113_AAEKAC nguyen_t_Page_020.jp2
8153223de3121d45ae2e2a1c048df147
be2d66109514b5fad4d3dd1a29d3a187d79f86e7
79384 F20101113_AAEJUI nguyen_t_Page_092.jp2
afb2d5d5661475a8ad1d04f50f79f355
a47fd4626ecba61e49ab5f90b0bde86542ffe25c
110197 F20101113_AAEKXK nguyen_t_Page_083.jp2
353f664487c5cb021b84b40793e794e5
2f0ea3dca0def68507e8fc8d269bd0ef740cb8c7
29753 F20101113_AAELDF nguyen_t_Page_158.pro
d40e99d17eb2248d09810a07d17d1c60
f5f7ae8fd2be30fe8ffa5d4dc8d851881e460aff
55363 F20101113_AAELCR nguyen_t_Page_117.pro
aed1ae9bbf5ae13a16532b1d7e4cb084
0ec5c8552a0721c382c342f81497a5d56d06ab8f
117693 F20101113_AAEJTU nguyen_t_Page_122.jp2
08dbd9120e4f4610fafc072d59efb358
3e5f5cff5039fe905e10946390b678ab3c21e59e
124591 F20101113_AAEKWW nguyen_t_Page_036.jp2
0ad2fbdc00915caa5b0c7c48914fb604
00c892ff1cbfbb2798e4246b8262601f82b630d1
6753 F20101113_AAEKAD nguyen_t_Page_022thm.jpg
a84fe00b47caebb701fa6db8882a0db5
f846ee189477e785e22e4011393738d8bfcc5348
95820 F20101113_AAEJUJ nguyen_t_Page_152.jpg
98e8e0c445d96c136317b4b7d3310c8d
a757eae7dac15e2402bf8fcaa511c20665a6e419
116641 F20101113_AAEKXL nguyen_t_Page_088.jp2
a0dc8b0147fc6bf59e793a092b9124e8
9208f0f2d1c17acb5c54558d33465a615e6f4e00
488 F20101113_AAELDG nguyen_t_Page_001.txt
413a847ed3c7bdd406ffd1c0d733e6cf
b9553e038fa18f519fc194060081cafc70f44da8
52411 F20101113_AAELCS nguyen_t_Page_119.pro
7c92d9ef78c85b38a4e1d49284f76d31
f3c3de038c3a2449feeaf144c12dd5c4872df601
116221 F20101113_AAEKYA nguyen_t_Page_123.jp2
52fd38c5419f7482ee0ec9a18b169498
257f4ce1d4225f1661ed20628c273e50260efd6f
75120 F20101113_AAEJTV nguyen_t_Page_040.jpg
835904fec3eae9a3cbbbcdcf87286db2
6916f86f57d4ae2d0aa14e05f33675ac8d95e003
28633 F20101113_AAEKWX nguyen_t_Page_037.jp2
677dd5ee4380b9e2e57fc82b2531968f
246c5b89e8f4c726ee51dbcd7547cf3d6164cbdd
F20101113_AAEKAE nguyen_t_Page_081.tif
612f039876aeed9fde5b7e14b407f8ca
b8fd0704167008cec6ecebb0ea0791fcf59f92fe
88 F20101113_AAEJUK nguyen_t_Page_002.txt
f8d731eb3ed9254132be7e6cd13b03cc
8b9987498b01ec065161775ccad0b3ae59363e63
99337 F20101113_AAEKXM nguyen_t_Page_089.jp2
afd4a420b0592b84b4a12ec7e5b4b182
cc62b9b224c768da917b6b191f255e09839b7c3f
4042 F20101113_AAELDH nguyen_t_Page_006.txt
d8033389aa3fa2b6ce742264259e86cf
1ead63e447e9b82f99084288914178b597cf8d12
54119 F20101113_AAELCT nguyen_t_Page_121.pro
6f20008d634dde2ff6da5eae6bb6b0c6
b6861125bb11011597889927d2ed0931f50bd736
58799 F20101113_AAEKYB nguyen_t_Page_126.jp2
f580f10ee7bd2c81cbae68aa9b778cd8
36ff631b563aa20a6793a1a91e54271543ba378f
90325 F20101113_AAEKXN nguyen_t_Page_091.jp2
219b9990e2afdb383fb9d32a0fcdc015
e8fb3525f012abe7936192cd27e72c8b0e72c65c
1051941 F20101113_AAEKWY nguyen_t_Page_039.jp2
b5ce20b8e99f5b9fe598c29598ff3fc8
897da8ea5e1030d56c6bac2f337c90bdaf4c5659
2178 F20101113_AAEKAF nguyen_t_Page_136.txt
1af9132b42fb46a29e834d69a7dc9543
c34d9327743d44efbc088eaa1dfc7d57b9c3747a
69192 F20101113_AAEJUL nguyen_t_Page_019.jpg
1e5ad8bec9fda8aee1f6c9f213ab554b
f314e418a45411aaa65b23bcf1ca4940d401d0b0
80375 F20101113_AAEJTW nguyen_t_Page_017.jpg
128c72883d5ffb0a06387b3ec0c0c9d4
be94c43e5d47532111597873b17dc2df4335ae89
223 F20101113_AAELDI nguyen_t_Page_009.txt
d24069d3bf67b97b4b5c6229c70ea3c5
963239b0430b9176fe9372f5bee7dd1c4ea65972
55261 F20101113_AAELCU nguyen_t_Page_122.pro
b7715ac62ee99bd2decf339702dc76f7
7d4454c2b29e6ea5ca1f8bbb1ad4afa59b45e341
81920 F20101113_AAEKYC nguyen_t_Page_127.jp2
a6c9b0968f3b12061b2d4f1c77bc1040
66f4b070a1b932f38bbf0b123c3e3b3c5eccc8ad
116364 F20101113_AAEKXO nguyen_t_Page_094.jp2
86f226e44828d079937684366ac782b5
56e356df56362ff5adb72ddf62a1d79ae897dcdf
114901 F20101113_AAEKWZ nguyen_t_Page_047.jp2
051f0be54153742a244b0ec9cef45ccc
3602e4f8a134ced5f00ef0daa4bd5fe0a72ffca2
114217 F20101113_AAEKAG nguyen_t_Page_114.jp2
027c0f0fb62251e2426c4eb80b58ec05
1ff3f9d8c00bfb64de3e28f268f31fbd5782f678
6843 F20101113_AAEJVA nguyen_t_Page_064thm.jpg
b26033e7874fbad920f08ebadf4224a3
1baef13a9cd19fd1aa2474fc90677b72036b5b79
78139 F20101113_AAEJUM nguyen_t_Page_097.jpg
02a5754bca2d46bede326d5680381667
ac31400fd439dfa3cd7a129808709692059481cd
81298 F20101113_AAEJTX nguyen_t_Page_131.jp2
e29950f768e9c8073d290b3a34161612
decac78078079e9381d0ebe8c5d5c7fe4820e4f3
2160 F20101113_AAELDJ nguyen_t_Page_013.txt
3b0cfd6dfac3ca55d63087b2245ec951
344c04caa760f8da950cd78c557b7de85fffb56b
27513 F20101113_AAELCV nguyen_t_Page_128.pro
5bd0fe9cce600f1d058ab50ecc0e66e1
00b6a98c6269ed591d34427ed32e8b15483d3c61
109140 F20101113_AAEKYD nguyen_t_Page_132.jp2
0bb819cdbb4dc28b9e796cb10136cfa5
4767c07920e42a01c1c6118d0920f1521ce0d5ed
116000 F20101113_AAEKXP nguyen_t_Page_095.jp2
284a40f30d13fd9884782657936ce5ed
3ecbfb8df929877713671372329f6014a59f7c47
2235 F20101113_AAEKAH nguyen_t_Page_034.txt
802b0a1c40611a6c6b7f5fc935bab9a8
dfaf137e06084f109b996c20980fb56b736b3eae
77579 F20101113_AAEJVB nguyen_t_Page_080.jpg
2b93b7487df1b4d4af8ce73dd3588eba
366a4be2861e1b3843e4e3f69bfeb93d316f9dea
26378 F20101113_AAEJUN nguyen_t_Page_129.QC.jpg
c055f445ecb216a3b02cc74d2a18b15e
3345049c3e7c1df854db7bf88df2c78fa9ed90f8
47811 F20101113_AAEJTY nguyen_t_Page_054.pro
7f51dee76e79a4c7a83e809b7cea1d00
e1c33f71b53e942d7b6f51880ba3555255942927
2089 F20101113_AAELDK nguyen_t_Page_014.txt
be93d482cb83844f706b7b9fcaf04c0c
418e6a0e8c949a4ea58e1887fececa24ba0c3857
44054 F20101113_AAELCW nguyen_t_Page_129.pro
e0b56883e4e036b73183108f168a3e0f
4a27fb40725fb176a3324f361875a3fd0d8c754c
64547 F20101113_AAEKYE nguyen_t_Page_135.jp2
e5170d573e3ad2f6d2454791411d4e86
9333e08fa68e9c06c19dfd3157ad1c6b12e373a6
107108 F20101113_AAEKXQ nguyen_t_Page_096.jp2
12459ebd01dae07609c551c5cea4d069
b7ef46ce7f55a0a7596d30f56b46b2777dad50ff
7035 F20101113_AAEKAI nguyen_t_Page_032thm.jpg
ba18de7aee103ec93eee3e8010783724
ae02a12ec4773556efa062bc04086d08fc70d467
108255 F20101113_AAEJVC nguyen_t_Page_050.jp2
3015fbbed3452c78a00fca447d9cc2eb
19afed23420a20f5b096f0ed1773ade1454ed863
98678 F20101113_AAEJUO nguyen_t_Page_062.jp2
97fe816aad3bb199b58d0ca89fd4d0d1
f3b24a5642139d57bbe950d366fec61cde9119e0
2170 F20101113_AAEJTZ nguyen_t_Page_040.txt
718b2a88c631f126cada8a9f14c40755
905ab9c6c4c5c6c08e4cc2a69c7e641bcd023c7b
2030 F20101113_AAELEA nguyen_t_Page_057.txt
6b34b96bf674884d1aac4897969a2336
7320cf9984a92f4e9045fb3276ebbfaaeb430994
2213 F20101113_AAELDL nguyen_t_Page_017.txt
3d10a6f80474dd66f8bfc3773a6980fc
8aef9d4388c43b63ec2a2cb901a4c0752faaa293
50336 F20101113_AAELCX nguyen_t_Page_132.pro
092b9228c03a76dab981f2da2faf0019
46eaac38ab11d91c17f43f921d90d5bb7646fa5b
80686 F20101113_AAEKYF nguyen_t_Page_138.jp2
d4a1727c6cfb3f9358bc2cdec3dc3268
7d3edb66b8a6b45b8f257d5084202a2c8ebea643
123096 F20101113_AAEKXR nguyen_t_Page_098.jp2
45cb6a0cdfb7be2b8f96dde8373f05bf
ed4c73c1a9156d90ab96aca78c95f6ff25d46673
4787 F20101113_AAEKAJ nguyen_t_Page_128thm.jpg
3c76f9290d0062d209666dbc2f344685
e168ea554a6be9df345a3daeb082713276f5c278
87326 F20101113_AAEJVD nguyen_t_Page_005.jpg
8f9cf4525a8f9399f842c16dcb1e7c92
2945d87b5af89ea2f7de222b23cbf1f6e31a6f11
16868 F20101113_AAEJUP nguyen_t_Page_128.QC.jpg
248c24e9a2b12f2999274d8551d87b55
f5e294bb9a5403aa57c846a795dbce5c45b177d8
1943 F20101113_AAELEB nguyen_t_Page_062.txt
b42bebef94d734853acc4a8bc8ee4b3a
6d58d4d480e33c7ec35ece7bbc15d1b4a485ed2f
2234 F20101113_AAELDM nguyen_t_Page_023.txt
de611b7ccea3bb38b047e1c541762f03
9efb1bae651be43c66cf05354389c2d64efad64d
54388 F20101113_AAELCY nguyen_t_Page_137.pro
ac1d4005c4b5e5ee2f4f918dd31d1fc4
3dff2c9eebbdeac9d81a309dc2ed5f3801ab8c5b
108006 F20101113_AAEKYG nguyen_t_Page_139.jp2
7028deeae5e21ed3106263b8638d5b37
8c0b219ab8ab78ea970d09f962e6dbf5b2f52921
115039 F20101113_AAEKXS nguyen_t_Page_099.jp2
15e353abd98010947f238eec797072ec
e21362e00c33b4567e55035613557d5be9803cc4
F20101113_AAEKAK nguyen_t_Page_089.tif
cef62b142dc49693da7d583301a63f21
fdc12e6b09ed24fa47a277f6b3f2a74e7e27dde4
116183 F20101113_AAEJVE nguyen_t_Page_100.jp2
da1e220b5e911ee3651a72db8098b74a
73cd464d75b52751bd754cb826769a4a235e2d2e
105695 F20101113_AAEJUQ nguyen_t_Page_130.jp2
00164f4d4718df1a3419937535912f61
634497e11bad01faf30f74195c3a39a5f63a7065
1978 F20101113_AAELEC nguyen_t_Page_068.txt
cbfae8c65e08c29d6262f078bbfe19b5
7570840a6bd4cb3fa6801de5a2ff03eaf3501357
686 F20101113_AAELDN nguyen_t_Page_024.txt
0d5db55fc6a902edb05673945f8f1a1b
67afb4eb18f37163970cd51e4f25c6fa8258e722
22505 F20101113_AAELCZ nguyen_t_Page_141.pro
afb0ff5630b0b97f8a6d076bdce2bf41
76c4c479300997a0bf7abff5e181215466d7bb77
36601 F20101113_AAEKYH nguyen_t_Page_142.jp2
38f286f275c614494019323b27f63287
6941fa002e1a64d56d1cbc0e7255b508a6bbe578
108594 F20101113_AAEKXT nguyen_t_Page_104.jp2
639bc8d8f097302291d3c4fd0cb2aa45
53ad98581a53594d718eda0c43a3132541b93aeb
6533 F20101113_AAEKAL nguyen_t_Page_011thm.jpg
147d95f0a4bb2ef5418da8d6c2be77bd
e39ce61cce76a2275782cf561be0c2c762f4d85d
F20101113_AAEJVF nguyen_t_Page_102.tif
492d289d328aa56b7cffb04b3f1b0b13
e79fb48dcceda19ca7b8bc72aa7a714fa99bde92
18947 F20101113_AAEJUR nguyen_t_Page_087.QC.jpg
38a0db74153e9c7de5dfdef67ba2b233
dd8ffca24f8a2768ed2c55ec3ab9b09c03c301ae
34490 F20101113_AAEKBA nguyen_t_Page_147.jpg
c4da77e2fb438a6725cc0d8c7e6d7a40
c6415ac585b925a6bd87984763662a507f0e05e6
2140 F20101113_AAELDO nguyen_t_Page_025.txt
fc713105451ae9221b7b98d883e3c7c2
6e4afc738fc8e01dafbd4e53860fdbb16df1e3fd
40174 F20101113_AAEKYI nguyen_t_Page_144.jp2
d96083b007fc35a35ef268ae010d5bd6
3c8d2f85c5e05635a257e2c0da55473a127d21e4
100240 F20101113_AAEKXU nguyen_t_Page_105.jp2
9fee8e27777425e0b8d8526e3299d619
fed34c3e275338eee34e733b80b1e42fb36613e0
1051984 F20101113_AAEKAM nguyen_t_Page_007.jp2
21403f94b35e6925149aa3e0d1561b22
727262643ceb5a1690c50185342cfb277640c598
121230 F20101113_AAEJVG nguyen_t_Page_017.jp2
971ebe00a50170b3e613ef036f71cb87
8ef5c880cdaaf7b20f515cd756680db11d63071b
16706 F20101113_AAEJUS nguyen_t_Page_063.QC.jpg
a421c777220ebb615398f30618a24a4f
58a0534a49c0769957f5f9424b6627c9863fa385
2043 F20101113_AAELED nguyen_t_Page_071.txt
977c159c6991495d4db26a707596008f
fa0e9ab3f9f7f06e4db6ecd77ce6718996d5128c
2253 F20101113_AAELDP nguyen_t_Page_027.txt
b010898a4a064eec4ae4d275007c9d7f
45113e469b1f5dc266051f8ac5de25753b0c5062
35411 F20101113_AAEKYJ nguyen_t_Page_148.jp2
a860a27ad93418edb45e3df9347cc182
8d0ff360002c7a396d27ec4fdf14fd91a158a681
109344 F20101113_AAEKXV nguyen_t_Page_108.jp2
64754d335d106d1ad1fb45ee567fd015
12ccdb649ab1176b44d12fa68198b4b6b644fbe3
115947 F20101113_AAEKAN nguyen_t_Page_124.jp2
ed34ee787035ac6d54a33b477540a617
b47248bf88b3d16e9d7184bb5497e7577f1cf7b0
116126 F20101113_AAEJVH nguyen_t_Page_040.jp2
9270461fa55e1166e15b49aa282fd193
b3b675d9d3a0afd67c7507c0c0db831af9ed955d
75284 F20101113_AAEJUT nguyen_t_Page_047.jpg
fe0d0a4836e3e2eac892a3fa338b1396
dfe4ba54db743adbf3c4fdfd822e4080c69fa03c
52005 F20101113_AAEKBB nguyen_t_Page_146.jp2
0ad8cb795fc86a18eab2e864ad5d768d
ee555d32bc0a3afd74e885bee346e197f2caff2f
2021 F20101113_AAELEE nguyen_t_Page_072.txt
ef5937b07957565a1a16287b696b7401
21425a9322bcf8d4daab4328f0e4a9dc0a7edd3b
2091 F20101113_AAELDQ nguyen_t_Page_030.txt
fccf1e36bf1877f077832fdcefef3a33
6a8d44e684c14d3a555a30292d70b0f07c87ee6a
1051980 F20101113_AAEKYK nguyen_t_Page_151.jp2
f593c8a55bc5cccaae8555da8aa21eac
9184b847a608678056bb5cd50c2a3e1eca651924
94460 F20101113_AAEKXW nguyen_t_Page_110.jp2
184ab7a07b2b9eca96d2a2449a743741
1ce0b4db00f6a1a938dbe493c5217562b11fdaa1
55337 F20101113_AAEKAO nguyen_t_Page_039.pro
1b7e99cfddea621a8548d20529480d27
a4a2256aae6d98d35ed65532469749f1c9c7e9a9
24896 F20101113_AAEJVI nguyen_t_Page_022.QC.jpg
775a8f1958fcaec2a5114c2aed7dc7f8
e16fb399b552cd9b1a4c0aab76afa37bd5d33324
23984 F20101113_AAEJUU nguyen_t_Page_083.QC.jpg
07b977fb6976c8fafab8fe1449c9508a
97fa9993b0871ce1cbf2d44d3f9e55fc2f7688bb
126227 F20101113_AAEKBC nguyen_t_Page_150.jp2
45525a8d20ab1b854ef619e0ed7dd1c8
aff506b6716e2bd2ea1c43dbaf6d8eac1e0be515
2139 F20101113_AAELEF nguyen_t_Page_074.txt
481b86bedeb605a24313365c5e4b9cce
bcc1aa8d1b15d50c417e4e299456d58dcca8b11f
2214 F20101113_AAELDR nguyen_t_Page_031.txt
f609a149734a1043095b2f41f11b7b2d
2eda30aab7bef761aea74b4432031efe8b12e59d
131919 F20101113_AAEKYL nguyen_t_Page_155.jp2
52d793f71cd9106d2208fd89f36815b7
2312a168b142080340ac6db91ca401ecc62dfc65
104949 F20101113_AAEKAP nguyen_t_Page_060.jp2
ecb9b17fbca37739af21356081db48d6
71497f3e470227a013a0ba779a6f2131f13aebfc
6983 F20101113_AAEJVJ nguyen_t_Page_097thm.jpg
6d0f49e483ea86ca120fb21da527fab6
4d925844ef9e03de6334b1998157796e9cd75cfb
6853 F20101113_AAEKBD nguyen_t_Page_054thm.jpg
566227409c880281171fc63a7ab52c9e
a9bd404b3c77ce87fe64242158a11f3c05b1daa4
2083 F20101113_AAELEG nguyen_t_Page_080.txt
70f001cf41d8dd7ad216cd2669ebb29e
55cbb3fd23b1dc64b5f2c12b69348df81961e0bc
2252 F20101113_AAELDS nguyen_t_Page_041.txt
70f2e60876717ffb73ce9ecdd4ca5cff
6deb891abb1e3056300b93f44844fcd411214b53
F20101113_AAEKZA nguyen_t_Page_032.tif
6d24eed56d220a3f5063d0f48d44cf95
d0ac8295e5effdedd0e3e3a928220cb82083178f
1051958 F20101113_AAEKYM nguyen_t_Page_156.jp2
94fd466e72e7a50756c0b84f9148ee37
0c54cc629da85aac5994c022fd7e449fc66384cb
20198 F20101113_AAEKXX nguyen_t_Page_115.jp2
3bd9727ee8d4240d04181453eec510e6
b6cf342180ead1430130e733a9463fa36ab5e19b
7197 F20101113_AAEKAQ nguyen_t_Page_029thm.jpg
777280692cb84ee9937c2359df0c6bb4
085878729df7fa00c4907a895e78c9c32329b186
23785 F20101113_AAEJVK nguyen_t_Page_004.QC.jpg
ea860eaebf161de9af4deaee21b5725e
b4928fe493e7110f5691da3ad4150a611b668d8c
F20101113_AAEJUV nguyen_t_Page_148.tif
6bbb32d4d1fe06d49fb82c8e21ed05cf
c13654c63e1d9bf3581f792810f66fbc10c71ddd
1850 F20101113_AAEKBE nguyen_t_Page_134.txt
f57a7700f7a6de769549d713630fc17c
64c3e4d6adc13bbb276ba1748ed333cbf3699178
2233 F20101113_AAELEH nguyen_t_Page_085.txt
bdbcfa5fd0de4c31805a8c91ac74fcfc
0ba40c4ceb13bf86572a770cd71b30286c896d0e
F20101113_AAELDT nguyen_t_Page_043.txt
e12083c79fecd28c6a7bf79e16a461e1
3438e182da0309fa20129e61f1a2c0831375355e
F20101113_AAEKZB nguyen_t_Page_033.tif
fc722b58bd5693158d009d8eeee702e7
b39158f68a0ff59554cc1d922260345621ed410a
66988 F20101113_AAEKYN nguyen_t_Page_158.jp2
18345e80f73fb4de5b52a7ffdc1b2704
06147c81384e11b9b10f09ed7c3d6e75743f257e
118694 F20101113_AAEKXY nguyen_t_Page_117.jp2
5f2dca4e5a8065b1ca25a834d1f37393
d005623034094e77f9e31fc45d8378ede207f596
F20101113_AAEKAR nguyen_t_Page_098.tif
4678348505f6e88bbd2bc623ff081eb2
195dea58145956a784e2e26f50dbdfa91ed15a49
66390 F20101113_AAEJVL nguyen_t_Page_062.jpg
29168c79cd5f12e55526264523873939
f84bb16d4ffa5cbb465f99b87a10f0e1e6a092d4
32005 F20101113_AAEJUW nguyen_t_Page_077.pro
3cf377d6567d2aa5eb49a19a9735222f
dd2a906a7be03b355c06135d46212adcb603daa3
23103 F20101113_AAEKBF nguyen_t_Page_005.QC.jpg
56b81bff0d069a00fe67c675d8ba796f
91aed3022ab4ae033371559cfc2cfa466bdb4d0b
3001 F20101113_AAELEI nguyen_t_Page_087.txt
3e7c95ce91f06b6ebfda2aeeaa468a5d
ee39654a376ca7424cacf724c08fb322135fd958
1007 F20101113_AAELDU nguyen_t_Page_044.txt
c0148c2b1125519af51c86ecc7524d89
f6e3d52306586d658cb9e724d16ca7fbe99967aa
F20101113_AAEKZC nguyen_t_Page_035.tif
a5d6eb82861cd25bdc3abf449bb4e219
76737bd216681ecb901d513dc3cdb694f3bc42e1
F20101113_AAEKYO nguyen_t_Page_002.tif
81d7d87b2eed17c8db35aeb6f69572b1
968e703b5c6f9e0c262226bee15aafea50c83fd6
110621 F20101113_AAEKXZ nguyen_t_Page_118.jp2
e3bd9e44148acea263e9cb05b8a854bd
8094515f50ad3bc881ea3532a10f98c403fca6a2
2325 F20101113_AAEKAS nguyen_t_Page_150.txt
66db6ec34e5acfe8b5af4b7b983bf35b
08ea089cafe1c36e1d268d6348148ee8562f9ca4
24076 F20101113_AAEJVM nguyen_t_Page_119.QC.jpg
48b12c99893d505ebb74d473be5203d5
d041089443feb0eadf35048c22af7373aa874ce6
53649 F20101113_AAEJUX nguyen_t_Page_064.pro
738b98c86cb75497eea286ef8ef4737f
6d75bbd722c96f8567d32bd0c139d00b89e6c959
79084 F20101113_AAEKBG nguyen_t_Page_102.jpg
5dfee5a0147cc01f6070ad8edebcb198
c12feccbaa0e372b2eb2e84280c6e6090518c334
117373 F20101113_AAEJWA nguyen_t_Page_014.jp2
b2fd8022929a6890c31096f711aa9386
6722e25a397d6d828ced9f8f37d2ca8384299e63
1849 F20101113_AAELEJ nguyen_t_Page_089.txt
64071c211c3c25f2aa48113cca765e7b
1c878bdfa7f99317ddd82580c4c4846826b20fba
2141 F20101113_AAELDV nguyen_t_Page_046.txt
05ad62c2d6ccc291241e0c2ef3fc1585
e52c07fd00661f615ab0bd3683ea39efa83365af
F20101113_AAEKZD nguyen_t_Page_036.tif
7843238ea118cd21d0dc1886336770ce
e85a54cdbc349fe224867e3c2c68ee09cd55450f
F20101113_AAEKYP nguyen_t_Page_003.tif
b09265a319cb660e8da153cd7da3da6f
9ee9c4e0d8c26a1771b1fa223eae5c6650f2972b
49874 F20101113_AAEKAT nguyen_t_Page_056.pro
fad00fca6f32983d4d3482a25629d9ab
30ecf08e69c09cd94a8a3da9595cb2951aa9c081
3994 F20101113_AAEJVN nguyen_t_Page_133thm.jpg
16604f7bac5329e3af2571d19960e7d1
9f105ed387a8b1e7af7af9eec2368ae742ca97ba
23398 F20101113_AAEJUY nguyen_t_Page_068.QC.jpg
d8d8e722ad63750e2e1ecdc53689d2ef
8d07d0608814506b364b77898d6721dabf767bd7
47797 F20101113_AAEKBH nguyen_t_Page_075.pro
6b5845c6bf110b753942400aa3d32958
2a335b8e1f435f807236ef5c3e40d26321017c26
50079 F20101113_AAEJWB nguyen_t_Page_069.pro
3412f28a41c86a9c41035ca446964882
187508b58bb31956538cc2cd92b84650f4337a98
2329 F20101113_AAELEK nguyen_t_Page_090.txt
7a6ada067953fada8cc72577ee859821
4a49bbf8a73edfeed07918c735724e3bc43e8138
2152 F20101113_AAELDW nguyen_t_Page_053.txt
2a14644e7b1f0f3426d2c8b91c0afafc
2a08e55a88ddb6443c4bdfc7fb9bffac797addfb
F20101113_AAEKZE nguyen_t_Page_038.tif
f204bc384ea35bd519e711e18e7770f7
651e88a045007fe7f8340f0f82a44ff62865084f
F20101113_AAEKYQ nguyen_t_Page_007.tif
56793353e8748b45ba4f1ca6850c9241
71f49ccc1e845f2d8756c51ddc12fba4222ee7cf
112657 F20101113_AAEJVO nguyen_t_Page_119.jp2
07bbbf00ce474dc6b18538d5c7403308
8362596b79ee9cb3fb338f50581ac37a8d866671
1899 F20101113_AAEJUZ nguyen_t_Page_021.txt
2a7bba9132e43f29f9d4f98b4f057bc9
917016db98f8319957bf915a5490c6a28ef83ba8
76627 F20101113_AAEKBI nguyen_t_Page_074.jpg
2e3e110fe0b57042d0568e006992b859
034ed90d03d66de090e99dd45b968ca108d945cd
7064 F20101113_AAEJWC nguyen_t_Page_027thm.jpg
609a238ac8f6d131df737f648e8fa46f
1482cfb58d8ffe46509a3d65db55316da5407c06
2305 F20101113_AAEKAU nguyen_t_Page_036.txt
d10f40e3c98df2a64c47342cfa1a41e5
f6caa2fe0d9cfd87e4afd3c0a3248ace08bc29b5
2123 F20101113_AAELFA nguyen_t_Page_137.txt
2599ab185eab8ba6c77df04ee30d1f06
16022fc55259adccea2e762d95395f3db41e76ae
2388 F20101113_AAELEL nguyen_t_Page_094.txt
e46c8d3c0e0b07a9e92c416ab94de113
8becee30e86015dca379110b347e962f7e3fccc1
1906 F20101113_AAELDX nguyen_t_Page_054.txt
da15baf38568b487d7c11ab3a951e4a7
a780b60dc33f5a0e29eb639e78723190ff9b9726
F20101113_AAEKZF nguyen_t_Page_040.tif
d073b9ab57d60e642db9b8e2a58af3e6
766b11295b0d52f2764e71571507b495c5f2db5a
F20101113_AAEKYR nguyen_t_Page_010.tif
dfb62b8ed38bf433d12faddd940c73c2
b20fda6fceb51fcf09f11e70f5f42efdebf19216
12508 F20101113_AAEJVP nguyen_t_Page_079.QC.jpg
14275203ab191725261dce6ee2410146
7b63fc3ba435a13477ee5af2c91c64ae506dbffd
25412 F20101113_AAEKBJ nguyen_t_Page_016.QC.jpg
60d1b8c69c6f9285b9a2b34505d03719
743dc5ccd201a1aedb1d084806b5a76921191a6b
F20101113_AAEJWD nguyen_t_Page_086.tif
6a90711f76281b3e7d45b7484d69609b
27c038a82a1ce30ddb34194bed5e348aadcedcf1
54195 F20101113_AAEKAV nguyen_t_Page_046.pro
437174d983efa143a9a75d9b5e8f1277
93d557b02a248b593aa35ef9ba3a03d2eec9f679
1318 F20101113_AAELFB nguyen_t_Page_138.txt
f80cf69fc0970b194081895955f9b005
7ac782c19d7c72b8e869a394a47bd2491b84c07b
2365 F20101113_AAELEM nguyen_t_Page_097.txt
ce3d90f9d610eb401a9cf9a888636d25
a865eaf5af4c2b6866e32b2f88266efbdf6e984e
2148 F20101113_AAELDY nguyen_t_Page_055.txt
d396ba231886cba2e4f282643c8f8e52
3594e226e6ff1b22a7354b6e6aad49d40fbf1d4d
F20101113_AAEKZG nguyen_t_Page_041.tif
622501ef530bf3dcb876e5824f30a5eb
b8e36acdd8466842f2e7ecee9ae80d8a9797c9c3
F20101113_AAEKYS nguyen_t_Page_013.tif
08f8f7a057984dab97c8b18d7ce4e7d7
194e6c6e76d6e54c61caf4072a236f8cf62572d6
49125 F20101113_AAEJVQ nguyen_t_Page_004.pro
dd8cb0b59db6d857216054ed76639164
739ad4f29a627e14881319631fd99014c733e2a2
2014131 F20101113_AAEKBK nguyen_t.pdf
601149023e50301f3a1fcd09cf7bcdd4
4ed0a88092e86aa752a7b02b32f9ef86d8713986
1901 F20101113_AAEJWE nguyen_t_Page_060.txt
c421d24ad94185dbcb0a238e1062d0de
51b805fe42ecc6af24fdc1919a7ebf60ab9cbda1
42098 F20101113_AAEKAW nguyen_t_Page_133.jp2
24b0beabc44fea593984c9391176d133
05eaf02690f56b499830729e83ac3b1ab2549aab
572 F20101113_AAELFC nguyen_t_Page_140.txt
3bde2305cd0d22848e620ce10ecdf367
3a8b502d60f3bfed38dec06c761568fe32286f12
2161 F20101113_AAELEN nguyen_t_Page_099.txt
a795e40296a29a8f7569c9e0242ed38c
c31d99c7790f3ced085abd4e0f84ed343d22b3f4
1976 F20101113_AAELDZ nguyen_t_Page_056.txt
b5170bba512d775558905a39819cea96
3eca76ea33152a08aca3f4e587e8a9c501fa0486
F20101113_AAEKZH nguyen_t_Page_043.tif
ebb12b1745b7c77aa31c10c7277cd8bf
73a0fd17442bc364c5dedd7cb01918ef6630b444
F20101113_AAEKYT nguyen_t_Page_014.tif
fe21cad8457c662627fece36759a85fc
1a37fed81b49d5404fda2bdc20f8e578d92063cc
15583 F20101113_AAEJVR nguyen_t_Page_148.pro
8e4e724c58ae15939a38635a1c511324
0fe7a20637ceebed8c3635c8e346ba60561dd96c
1051979 F20101113_AAEKCA nguyen_t_Page_152.jp2
36bb0b16acf03b014c00fecbe9039726
819fb7f89a6dbeea689224850bbd9e90301471f6
F20101113_AAEKBL nguyen_t_Page_100.tif
e169d323208300fd2fca0012cedc9ff7
30182c01daf12d41f3e1a3c77ebbcd4ee3294b1e
54689 F20101113_AAEJWF nguyen_t_Page_026.pro
b751865267b691ed58ade13038d45f4d
5308f360b2fbd37cc7f2d104f556dfed28884b96
54600 F20101113_AAEKAX nguyen_t_Page_112.pro
ab7301d1b1c1cf9833a9360f92818303
14db329e54b93ec1b09962e682411900ab7b8d45
1197 F20101113_AAELFD nguyen_t_Page_142.txt
9b43ea0eb4bdda6c1aca503a8077c6db
52e4b00dff1272594069e339b025ff1e3b6164eb
2117 F20101113_AAELEO nguyen_t_Page_101.txt
c309473d41d874139f3922965b86e2af
df9043a96e809705af9976b764f982a26c38a011
F20101113_AAEKZI nguyen_t_Page_046.tif
f19a5f5aade687221f24a27a6a6e1ba2
9f92da4cb793e04e53e380f6899e4f356105b83a
F20101113_AAEKYU nguyen_t_Page_019.tif
7b01192b426d93c7c2bf684c9c5b07d5
596991dd9f068236fd4af88fa813c1df53c52e49
77981 F20101113_AAEJVS nguyen_t_Page_042.jpg
82346991a9028b7fa9c2056851ee677c
d56c69bc0fa24a7cde596121e066908895857c76
92684 F20101113_AAEKCB nguyen_t_Page_136.jpg
7fc994514a8e04b413cba388b600338c
61562bd4b7d01ffbc8dba2794e3dace89dd3f071
53287 F20101113_AAEKBM nguyen_t_Page_032.pro
a9eaf4f499e821090040dff2cb4adcbd
4d8e77285b1513ea843921049e88e6d467e096c2
23987 F20101113_AAEJWG nguyen_t_Page_069.QC.jpg
d69bf2a79b7fec3fbfa7e7d9042035f8
e6fe985c056f5efb1a2503c9a7eba586d233e66c
49153 F20101113_AAEKAY nguyen_t_Page_105.pro
ab87a05234fd345c93fddc43b473c8f9
f825a9f0e3b44e5f0b838ec474707c729ffabc69
2096 F20101113_AAELEP nguyen_t_Page_106.txt
9f14ae346d3428afd2b70595dd0ecc24
12e79719624d03962e0cfcb9c7d2cb2d84260e6d
F20101113_AAEKZJ nguyen_t_Page_047.tif
644e5b404cb989f66ac4b89df5085011
977aefdbb89bfd93b9a5d0850c4bb5bae6939c11
F20101113_AAEKYV nguyen_t_Page_026.tif
5c56cdcfa62ed5953e66882d0d87a9a9
aeda1233031b2f82759983b9fc58540627453523
1894 F20101113_AAEJVT nguyen_t_Page_076.txt
e9d3102cf4f9cf2e87bfd519d8bfc815
8c9454745b71aa139255e142ccd92fbff3834d3d
56206 F20101113_AAEKBN nguyen_t_Page_120.pro
aeb8695df95500fa54042429fbc81b9d
26c0999924551a98a918df16e06661507179c2da
1357 F20101113_AAEJWH nguyen_t_Page_135.txt
ad9c5d26f6ad96577130b0e8e5c08e90
722919fc943947fb8eb3992d8bd8997cbdba484e
50587 F20101113_AAEKAZ nguyen_t_Page_078.pro
9f41b40a65843a184dc47f4f76f555fd
db12a2a33eb9cd98fe49dcfee2d60e756605c95a
2747 F20101113_AAELFE nguyen_t_Page_154.txt
26230ad6903893f0640dbd336ba8aeb4
3384f12d8a15f18bb7226978fe0bb1a32c551383
2282 F20101113_AAELEQ nguyen_t_Page_107.txt
8ca4ad26f805d2cb1b1429d856be5d36
31963043c74aa4888c4307fbf1725992ba205742
F20101113_AAEKZK nguyen_t_Page_048.tif
aff0d605a4edf3400d7fac9774a58617
336371cb8738420f1bf09947e3906eb6e2210772
F20101113_AAEKYW nguyen_t_Page_027.tif
8e32c2465c212c2a23a871145efde4c8
af18d4eaec969d72fc499bac1b4ab85b3245e63e
25345 F20101113_AAEJVU nguyen_t_Page_043.QC.jpg
c06b91e3fe56af6024290767c59aab29
4740edc073f31b554058367a0850b33ebf90074e
F20101113_AAEKCC nguyen_t_Page_025.tif
bb193759bde468231c8abdfee5c32a0b
18e02d830a545d1c1a690f3399c91e216a722bd3
13693 F20101113_AAEKBO nguyen_t_Page_126.QC.jpg
f805575fb23076addc1ced524160bcaf
6684eaf9a6debef9c6a384b61ae7f6c0c5fb4b14
F20101113_AAEJWI nguyen_t_Page_020.tif
3c924f897f72eac111466f55a14a048a
8e5faf76f421a71fea57e18b455e2f0cf33010ec
1218 F20101113_AAELFF nguyen_t_Page_158.txt
4b9f08b37324224e210a475b5ab44c4e
cfad2d85c36f12bb833940fa880a7d514e338b75
1730 F20101113_AAELER nguyen_t_Page_110.txt
a0c30ac753e17298ec880f76d11800bf
3fa7c260204b7ee5516f598c6aa75b3323e22765
F20101113_AAEKZL nguyen_t_Page_051.tif
2f81e2cd252cc6e3a59a727c0aea4ed0
c553659a4e35129a753cc98c3107d5353946be16
F20101113_AAEKYX nguyen_t_Page_029.tif
19a9e3802fe2c13da79f063a6fced782
216b203d355564ccc90045c89809ecbb1625b42b
113260 F20101113_AAEJVV nguyen_t_Page_023.jp2
ee3b9114dc8849ba894a98713d0f4177
2424b29e09e3ec89007855031fe1151d84e9aadb
49011 F20101113_AAEKCD nguyen_t_Page_109.pro
92456810ed5dae9ca752088c79d7fc42
50fc08567e4dc34894db467e4f636358ebebbabf
6759 F20101113_AAEKBP nguyen_t_Page_099thm.jpg
7c9e8249151c4c062d061eabbe1abc92
c831dfaf3a29843c38fe7737d394ee07768704a7
116562 F20101113_AAEJWJ nguyen_t_Page_048.jp2
ff7c7c5e25e09e171923a620743e9316
bbe15d702aff31a7d2b1a5512783ec6566761ea4
7531 F20101113_AAELFG nguyen_t_Page_001.QC.jpg
ceaa9336fa642a28d216f020841fc116
be581f8d5dfc29bc86f86753a9417dd160195429
314 F20101113_AAELES nguyen_t_Page_115.txt
6c5dbf0d2b8a9a374772b01374080455
7429e0fe8388e1f7243afc4dfa6a63ae3c61d40e
F20101113_AAEKZM nguyen_t_Page_052.tif
cbe2c11c89d95bc306ddd879f20fd721
671083027c8e23aba7e411631b7ad6809fc22b94
108035 F20101113_AAEKCE nguyen_t_Page_049.jp2
0b1b5ee6cf5a3dd0d43c002f3814386b
578a7260b32d6df850b6abcc6eb28577424c44b2
73662 F20101113_AAEKBQ nguyen_t_Page_106.jpg
1270765bf441e67ee93931a94b9bfef0
626681168fe1a751446581a1037549fe88375c80
1942 F20101113_AAEJWK nguyen_t_Page_045.txt
eba9997823840a5b0f8b3c24420a6453
b3cc792794a521c4594c05456f697e3d48c770ab
1397 F20101113_AAELFH nguyen_t_Page_002thm.jpg
477f913818216a2e5dd947c31b108730
7adca4532dc915367448a38ca7b7f4aac752bcbd
2177 F20101113_AAELET nguyen_t_Page_117.txt
d60693cb86eb62a8f0ceb5b79b75ee96
500d5a223ea41157b2523a5064b05b738e3b4516
F20101113_AAEKZN nguyen_t_Page_057.tif
af4dbba95cccd108f50297fbb7ab3f4c
39508a36251b229c9ea3639d2890c80f6add7bc7
F20101113_AAEKYY nguyen_t_Page_030.tif
ab29f57e341b980282aed3d9a1f49450
d5f5975bf19af1261492af4bbcd7aa2aaf18b54e
F20101113_AAEJVW nguyen_t_Page_006.tif
7bd7cbf060cdcfc3d8e8705c3d3a7a94
081ce475a6f27fea99938d4b75c971bab806709f
35878 F20101113_AAEKCF nguyen_t_Page_144.jpg
65c0a739c522b9f8bcb79154dc775e85
6c57086870afb1525a4723c7ad95a6466053fdee
119849 F20101113_AAEKBR nguyen_t_Page_102.jp2
378eb130cf3af8eb2903dae5bd14b11e
a46a4cae1c7856fdd9dfb5a54b7758d669aa6896
F20101113_AAEJWL nguyen_t_Page_156.tif
9bdb7d1a0b8b200a1253644a77ddd9d4
5e0e0f74c478a901d9e40b0d9cd4279347829234
6421 F20101113_AAELFI nguyen_t_Page_004thm.jpg
df5ad85f417b18d6c28fc4287ac8ce1f
f8134b54d6bd1b54bed64abcf36c94c6f8a36cd7
2000 F20101113_AAELEU nguyen_t_Page_118.txt
3dcc392a8a3178ed02fa31870c7388d7
628de1bfe78272adbc332c7f5229783d09188552
F20101113_AAEKZO nguyen_t_Page_058.tif
de034958b74b8f23a7bf6121522dd45f
83e9a607fa4cf7116a753c1ed6bc871e27f6ae2d
F20101113_AAEKYZ nguyen_t_Page_031.tif
e77ccd605169b27c282da90d85d175d4
79377ff475fb9b9f68682a3739bce868067be9fc
72347 F20101113_AAEJVX nguyen_t_Page_050.jpg
0c4eb297ffaa92bf96891b440afd336c
30b06dc0034d0c72e655e45e5886b3d6e1facc7f
F20101113_AAEKCG nguyen_t_Page_145.tif
37fa0a703e470500f2a0400a0ef78e97
341e0663f544ca4813ae108f2038b79fce9d3102
2144 F20101113_AAEJXA nguyen_t_Page_096.txt
5284a82e0547741a3e3ab8ab33eae230
74c4f5072884f0a4c3bce69420b7746fef594d7d
1468 F20101113_AAEKBS nguyen_t_Page_131.txt
863a732b50b91bc5b57a7f8589a2f276
ae2b4d63df205b08d578792513d245cff525e3ed
107483 F20101113_AAEJWM nguyen_t_Page_086.jp2
6522a3e0fbae199c817786823fb94daa
0c0c4bb7b1ad75b7f8a6e557a854fc7025140f89
5770 F20101113_AAELFJ nguyen_t_Page_005thm.jpg
3857a592613175851e5487ba2a25597a
0ee0bf84900e5614880184335179c2e409c5ca23
2208 F20101113_AAELEV nguyen_t_Page_120.txt
bad1d88ca23a16382b5730aa452638a3
d79f464df9423ce2f152a2f253d7cd3da37cd4b1
F20101113_AAEKZP nguyen_t_Page_062.tif
e446f081b6d896e348b727a20b8439f2
42340fb287bc9431fd4c855031258277c4ccd89d
2001 F20101113_AAEJVY nguyen_t_Page_086.txt
dd8c6e9a381fc017afba4b2f1e70409e
73421873fb3db4f6d35a1b042d6e978d119ecd5a
63462 F20101113_AAEKCH nguyen_t_Page_151.pro
04aa9f7e8495e6086947f070b0aa69b6
30391f19e75b2b258f3ea809067df8a8de9537b2
56236 F20101113_AAEJXB nguyen_t_Page_085.pro
6d82b352f9b4f44c9af9c285b7e5523a
91612b174e470f10f1b4be62d163ca2972866a26
24362 F20101113_AAEKBT nguyen_t_Page_100.QC.jpg
b8870bd80e498d5d7770ca4e9df80b35
5fcdc3d9754365b0186404a344a4fe060faaa7ce
94428 F20101113_AAEJWN nguyen_t_Page_087.jp2
e3080e844119fc4172a9694b17b14082
9b22c49d42899bde2c469a1214d228297fffcb8f
20816 F20101113_AAELFK nguyen_t_Page_007.QC.jpg
450f44978545ac26b7f63018f21a1332
34ec0d57c08ca7568ced62d1f7d63f76a237811f
2179 F20101113_AAELEW nguyen_t_Page_122.txt
02de545257cdf57b422a465c236c6b7b
f453265f850e2d4127aec6aa84b0d6098517cca0
F20101113_AAEKZQ nguyen_t_Page_063.tif
9c3361dcdc9ace10db90bbb9639ac043
5ad32ef78bb5c5ea3d182c3c2f6da202faf7d5b0
107709 F20101113_AAEJVZ nguyen_t_Page_045.jp2
826779691b02720a1fe577dd83c12bd5
91bb754c1ccefbea057ae8d0a2d4a85fd253e8ce
20712 F20101113_AAEKCI nguyen_t_Page_110.QC.jpg
0df8b17082be86e14d0d6fb30778c583
1d2ba05e9a7050d00867fee540967ed7a98266e0
116769 F20101113_AAEJXC nguyen_t_Page_055.jp2
3a982af246c67effe26aaa5e7449fad9
100876920cce2484fc2177c13820c775280bd642
25265604 F20101113_AAEKBU nguyen_t_Page_024.tif
b0c202f29dcdad9c3ededc5feb3a003d
988bb8c97d3ebd019422a204a8f3d545b82d2ff6
F20101113_AAEJWO nguyen_t_Page_056.tif
b532ed858004e172e3340eacce0f0021
70ed04f5c4e19308317312901c92b09bd03ff0d5
26311 F20101113_AAELGA nguyen_t_Page_027.QC.jpg
163379aab8ce529a067f4084f9e4795a
5e095d54c6d7619a853f5dd48f86ac2db9a24555
6719 F20101113_AAELFL nguyen_t_Page_008thm.jpg
088520d5546d36a3195f1fc8a883f778
7bc49b585d26384b6f00e935ae6c988a101f49c1
2133 F20101113_AAELEX nguyen_t_Page_123.txt
7f3841ff58a6343cb4d824805ea29064
c71423b418e0d1b47dc1ea0c04251c2bf11588a2
F20101113_AAEKZR nguyen_t_Page_064.tif
f38254693f881465a17c5fb5615d5251
ad65493130d8b536be96402e99ba82a362b3dad2
6852 F20101113_AAEKCJ nguyen_t_Page_095thm.jpg
9a9de69a1a847eee4f3138adbd679aaf
807334bc2987d12cec26e6b946e387c2d07bbe7e
7244 F20101113_AAEJXD nguyen_t_Page_036thm.jpg
5c352ef107c71e16e39588aaed3de397
b41e24882cc71708d51679044bb7da53d29ab4d6
73821 F20101113_AAEKBV nguyen_t_Page_119.jpg
268e7faa441969f8cc3216175bc59b42
d913cb7b21df32ac4af2e5e530ba2a80548557bc
4904 F20101113_AAEJWP nguyen_t_Page_063thm.jpg
f6a23804ff31f49d040bcffeff333532
182c0b233b9b589526c61357bb66660aa53f2352
24313 F20101113_AAELGB nguyen_t_Page_028.QC.jpg
5ac36173e718185ec417c969562715a5
946b9637fd70abeeb3d96669f2eb1bbc443d0728
22762 F20101113_AAELFM nguyen_t_Page_011.QC.jpg
b0876fcb72d7450f6da28bfcdae2993c
b16381f5a0d6eb49d297c73d5d91102ad9ed00aa
1951 F20101113_AAELEY nguyen_t_Page_129.txt
5fee14915a01c28a60697d60ada82a97
c2f578d9e9cc687f43c6c1a388c1a2c11260730e
F20101113_AAEKZS nguyen_t_Page_067.tif
11bd8599c7264f25820e95d0f093aa73
4f1b0b28964c4fa62615ad4ba7e50d9b04006ac5
6662 F20101113_AAEKCK nguyen_t_Page_108thm.jpg
0f2851cb4f96c6cdfe31998b04d6d1d2
57085cad7aacd8998ca4739ef384be7010a80f0d
6490 F20101113_AAEJXE nguyen_t_Page_069thm.jpg
118602a8c4d13f87d1e9431c6d59e4cb
9837471b2341843c98baaa421314e934e479a944
107220 F20101113_AAEKBW nguyen_t_Page_011.jp2
7db71c3843a04a5fddcbb78845ab7753
0c70a031b170ac89e4e5b901f528083b98f469f3
101465 F20101113_AAEJWQ nguyen_t_Page_156.jpg
d9e4b1fd9987fa66e5ef62452e09ed92
30e3bfcec379c7849c49899dceae8f26197c2c5c
6823 F20101113_AAELGC nguyen_t_Page_028thm.jpg
9ff115801003d2f318e664b77bed87af
4d0944d85ac4e11fe7b9e5419dd05c1646e65a1f
6891 F20101113_AAELFN nguyen_t_Page_013thm.jpg
63eb4363e4290be75f00ffa666375d31
d6f2bb9fed7308f66bcb4dcd758f1c1c09426721
716 F20101113_AAELEZ nguyen_t_Page_133.txt
cb5b3086d9bccd0538398a92119b2068
8c6291854c6e469911e356663bfd3b0c5e13182e
F20101113_AAEKZT nguyen_t_Page_069.tif
1f8240a26aad1dc45b45015359b3dcd7
b8285a0278ad1e10c2aee3ca3190bfc3328a0a94
6316 F20101113_AAEKCL nguyen_t_Page_060thm.jpg
3dd7c2f8b94fcc79481f3c9c8baa34e4
bd8320d5601c69dd2b7055f207d086cd96b21675
7570 F20101113_AAEJXF nguyen_t_Page_039thm.jpg
80d3c69a10ea90f3ab6719f5bf8bdef1
f9eb81d82b8e9b3834f9df662cfe5095337e2e18
F20101113_AAEKBX nguyen_t_Page_136.tif
6375400b255a1d129022b7805fbb17d4
f4121c1dd32403f74622f4d5e735d21c0e01683d
F20101113_AAEJWR nguyen_t_Page_129.tif
98fcdc861356c9e858328a9f0f9b8d88
426f89fa59b07b5d6c56d8181729c7709476784a
F20101113_AAEKDA nguyen_t_Page_073.tif
5c27185fcb883385c8bb20419cdaadde
3d7b20945b46d9c927f894a1527f950d294ca95f
26302 F20101113_AAELGD nguyen_t_Page_029.QC.jpg
fb508a64f2982728305f02301fafc530
e052994feb4c935383e7af68934448d559465db5
6837 F20101113_AAELFO nguyen_t_Page_014thm.jpg
b83384a23447ff1716bcad7790063e6b
f26bcd02c84b313bcb6bad21dd7d63b69848cbd8
F20101113_AAEKZU nguyen_t_Page_070.tif
d525fe6ad3b073eff17516dabdb70556
015e4be688f01f206cd8a0c8cdea49050b035377
268120 F20101113_AAEKCM nguyen_t_Page_009.jp2
8dd2089bcae1119f343429ae827de509
59de7a79cf48b658145351aed7f66918a9c70c8b
112829 F20101113_AAEJXG nguyen_t_Page_028.jp2
80ed21d4a417c31db15d2e552036075e
099deda49333d13e64d7bbd64bdd450f4d2e8290
1667 F20101113_AAEKBY nguyen_t_Page_145.txt
5b6214c613c5cc678b4399e54d4bd892
e0bc53fce85ad07a7e39760cba50dbd16b8a3b93
88572 F20101113_AAEJWS nguyen_t_Page_130.jpg
d052c3501c31524425f970e10e89d6d8
2430320dcb9c8d6df9c700a299b13844f4f86215
6747 F20101113_AAEKDB nguyen_t_Page_072thm.jpg
f22863f558b9e2d68c9e2351714068e2
6e479a75b761e426335f548d94839302f7b34a5a
24800 F20101113_AAELGE nguyen_t_Page_030.QC.jpg
4900e2e1b9e274a6c2b7fb8b3def838e
4fefef465e61bd1c54cbd080dade0e10b2a0b394
6943 F20101113_AAELFP nguyen_t_Page_015thm.jpg
f19470b0da11efb719a5f5cfe008aa4a
3f8b961e50d15f15d59599083b78e997c65c6c13
F20101113_AAEKZV nguyen_t_Page_071.tif
8c1b41eec33f0aa404b645b4b633dea5
aea45482de2ae4287b593599e70a6c0427b617ab
71799 F20101113_AAEKCN nguyen_t_Page_056.jpg
a623eceb11c5ebadecadcffd18dfc3aa
682bf3ec827b3048997c8317b72bf525cdf8ecc2
14313 F20101113_AAEJXH nguyen_t_Page_146.QC.jpg
507f1e2d66f91a464df47a3dabf0f86b
3aed4d0f0efe0c4a033014144b59986cbe18442b
72611 F20101113_AAEKBZ nguyen_t_Page_021.jpg
e022ea7b8d0aef8fc2fd2a119e9de00a
3cbb942a7abf25d588cfd1bca87e000ba16bba7b
2409 F20101113_AAEJWT nguyen_t_Page_155.txt
f5d636d002a685e9748f686c97c2df5d
b3c51fb2caaea89d91cfab70a15d93464060b2a7
2447 F20101113_AAEKDC nguyen_t_Page_037thm.jpg
7c64aaf4cdebeca7f9b8bf8c09bc5bc0
19d65d619a545ee40ccca7e3e1e9cb6c32c9d49e
22796 F20101113_AAELFQ nguyen_t_Page_018.QC.jpg
924a0997ad2596237fcd0f1127b1b9b6
879faca89f16136dcaf0d32fbebe2288c3a75225
F20101113_AAEKZW nguyen_t_Page_072.tif
ea51ce57767371feeb2f93e81df42a6a
3a288c25aabb92d9e283c7d25b25f72d4dfda28b
F20101113_AAEKCO nguyen_t_Page_023.tif
ce72d51df109d42c7595640716df0530
04f645e03c808f3674a98e1ba4376830d2b98547
52037 F20101113_AAEJXI nguyen_t_Page_038.pro
23ad550c5535462f5c26b500693abb96
b5a84655b4d7f566316a513e65ccc1e36bc4c9f6
39361 F20101113_AAEJWU nguyen_t_Page_141.jpg
8c79958c9b2260f0b053c3b2887a72e6
8cfd58e24603efd0c5a8a326261ed2b5a6cb2b0b
25822 F20101113_AAELGF nguyen_t_Page_031.QC.jpg
a798f3d4b07be29095f35a2d17e99e3f
df5fb5f4e69412199081827c51248913d42ccb40
13911 F20101113_AAELFR nguyen_t_Page_020.QC.jpg
56cd51bc51674d4235c38489003dc2cc
f0f6f0b51e7f1d8463bde41377c4a7fd2ba56ecd
F20101113_AAEKZX nguyen_t_Page_075.tif
f539a043ef6668d71ad5c4e5e9ffdf93
8ad0be6c274045b80e7e98de8c77df6605c50577
116127 F20101113_AAEKCP nguyen_t_Page_121.jp2
0ce2bdd8248b96803a95f4ee4b9fa5ae
d658d1c93708a7015f853927e73471e2040406cf
48746 F20101113_AAEJXJ nguyen_t_Page_111.pro
aa0da552504f08d2e3eff52ff8326229
d1066e0b2ceaaa401d195bc99ab2df82265d90de
82514 F20101113_AAEJWV nguyen_t_Page_036.jpg
07e2ee021c6004173693a9243e81b873
f24b235cc5bce1ef613eead5dddf95bebc231846
111457 F20101113_AAEKDD nguyen_t_Page_051.jp2
38a5b26fb697daf07475d6fa43df0910
089a5104f85054aea98fb9ed36db05708d3f18d0
6913 F20101113_AAELGG nguyen_t_Page_034thm.jpg
bb9b6121cd2d504bea1eb19cf325220d
9494e18161d1b826847057368ca3345d14f23d4b
3945 F20101113_AAELFS nguyen_t_Page_020thm.jpg
32220f1d0a294a359cb3071eaf1e3c3a
476f59a27a1b048f90e129bd9f7c1467516d6bc3
F20101113_AAEKZY nguyen_t_Page_078.tif
3c0210220c779cfa6f4d7447aca4c300
01bdab23495e7307f13f3e97172e1012ae006094
24280 F20101113_AAEKCQ nguyen_t_Page_044.pro
b3a61ce1d2c396aedc90141b95c54ed1
e95d0d5d5e954c6c231a22d62d9414ee6b714345
F20101113_AAEJXK nguyen_t_Page_095.txt
a97b54742e8b1babf3289d7ce92b245f
08371a7f84c4341a41a02214e318e1d42323de4f
25734 F20101113_AAEJWW nguyen_t_Page_117.QC.jpg
b0575fd2c46bfd0379896687f6431677
02a7cf61ae343b39f6681daaac4311fb4d674a07
6014 F20101113_AAEKDE nguyen_t_Page_111thm.jpg
b04edc895bd0e2a794b2ff2f502f2872
05a1ecf798d272b8aea0a5afa4d5a3787761c507
24621 F20101113_AAELGH nguyen_t_Page_035.QC.jpg
80c7e2f45abaecdb8ec875d9eb434173
8e22091177aa0422327195b7c06a3eedabbfe7f1
F20101113_AAELFT nguyen_t_Page_021thm.jpg
3b53ac950e475dafd1a10a243e3c5ff9
38603a3b4a06581449a11efda7997c289069edd4
20267 F20101113_AAEKCR nguyen_t_Page_103.QC.jpg
4071aacd452b0b7322fb200bd0a6e8eb
81d186060013966ca73012b013d618e3fb0ba0ab
72574 F20101113_AAEJXL nguyen_t_Page_104.jpg
42fc836e576d95f3c206dfcb5767f379
06a0b05ba208665c6257ccfee9cb16087d666f77
23948 F20101113_AAEKDF nguyen_t_Page_057.QC.jpg
47474e733655d999bd2dc5f72c3c48c9
f14f828712c01b613143959fecc812d1540fc57c
6768 F20101113_AAELGI nguyen_t_Page_035thm.jpg
8432e00e8dc3da5f9736b69fd9967fbb
c517e2ce18bd2ea81fde48ac20002ab76edd858a
23409 F20101113_AAELFU nguyen_t_Page_023.QC.jpg
70722d9fb28390ecad1f27274502e749
59172ac5a9ce00897e6965eb2e9870f729be58a9
F20101113_AAEKZZ nguyen_t_Page_079.tif
c68f5c91a58f25f2bc0e9c0b3ac738a1
2afb121f665df84665cf776871177e5761dec1d9
53229 F20101113_AAEJYA nguyen_t_Page_114.pro
2c1c8d667faa33aa148b874ed9d40271
e866b9b21b94152d0ed77f12013af0064fbd3439
62760 F20101113_AAEKCS nguyen_t_Page_103.jpg
5f892ac967b5a11a9ddb285c927059b8
ff32202cf5a1218cfb9e592d338189adc5d01f4b
104501 F20101113_AAEJXM nguyen_t_Page_054.jp2
3599959ab10bf35ae92be3238cc4cd0b
230551e9a52dd73618a9d74418c7d8efd31eeeae
2288 F20101113_AAEJWX nguyen_t_Page_082.txt
4927506793872e0ea5662666e9b69a8e
50df5c9f4a6c237c2824281997969bfb3e03341f
F20101113_AAEKDG nguyen_t_Page_128.tif
a4c34525aeaf441a02ba9606e63d5d2c
24f5c30b8a25ea68faadf5060da77bb11e5addd3
27058 F20101113_AAELGJ nguyen_t_Page_036.QC.jpg
26851708ababdeecd52e302d96ef901d
57f0c6ff3698483b81141d0f077b8747a40e5ac5
11333 F20101113_AAELFV nguyen_t_Page_024.QC.jpg
6086d409ddc3d7c9982a4961fa864294
4cf0584df0d8e9bd258407abf8240ff12799bf0f
81675 F20101113_AAEJYB nguyen_t_Page_150.jpg
cd20e32d6f6d664d4a39eb88d4a26966
a5946a832f67fdc482b0ad43786d4075abfbd141
2037 F20101113_AAEKCT nguyen_t_Page_108.txt
0f3339a02567d0b5ccea350b3d436e88
37d58ff522c25b6a0c7998afef03780b2cdb4f74
112615 F20101113_AAEJXN nguyen_t_Page_059.jp2
9ea834f80db338c99acb14022f82f5e1
30cba28d24c31eacea1e2a1243429a1a2c88e75a
24276 F20101113_AAEJWY nguyen_t_Page_125.QC.jpg
fa95a263d6b3a99838950f009c53db72
19cd4029d8cb8ec886f94b718339f29728dfda4f
51513 F20101113_AAEKDH nguyen_t_Page_108.pro
b88f9afe703ed92c2d141235a6d7f32e
8fb4383d707c6c741c97e0ac1d9a60d9616c7c63
24645 F20101113_AAELGK nguyen_t_Page_038.QC.jpg
47f6ff7f4c5322c12023f0cb85473a4e
7bbe5f56a88cf7979ee5efdca4e3f94ff64dee07
25156 F20101113_AAELFW nguyen_t_Page_025.QC.jpg
4fdf15a5b0f60bb8bbcff3963052895e
51e8215b33ed4f22060dd0864f89ce33950a2f7a
80031 F20101113_AAEJYC nguyen_t_Page_027.jpg
08f637339f468e84030035cc99238e86
5f9e175797c4527bdece8179bb910b8308671762
2206 F20101113_AAEKCU nguyen_t_Page_022.txt
ee57059738ce9d9d98686dbaeefbc695
f44f387692ccca2b63540e63c44fa9b816126801
6757 F20101113_AAEJXO nguyen_t_Page_122thm.jpg
d15c22fe6f3cc25a1d566413cce68961
bc26fa76cf198bc7a25667101cf6d9c781323b82
25135 F20101113_AAEJWZ nguyen_t_Page_008.QC.jpg
95671fea0ed38099904a66ec3bb0d9f4
d4f4e51244b0b68989cf8bc110beabec69e9ff0f
25483 F20101113_AAEKDI nguyen_t_Page_080.QC.jpg
cbfc54d13268d5f3301a200366381163
281c82a7f1ce984d95bd6a0b12aee43b9abfd21b
6680 F20101113_AAELHA nguyen_t_Page_058thm.jpg
396c45be677340b3dae103fb2128fa6f
a2695093b541e9593aaf306f6a752e072a0fe5eb
27350 F20101113_AAELGL nguyen_t_Page_039.QC.jpg
6547d9a7a9f9c5a3ef209d4c499c3e29
164564a3b137d172d7d1c4f94b32b4600964176b
6822 F20101113_AAELFX nguyen_t_Page_025thm.jpg
74cd3f161aa2ce528d3ffd414a85122e
23aba99a2e3eb03d44336eebed2f196caf54275c
F20101113_AAEJYD nguyen_t_Page_044.tif
2114e10d138882e1bf0470dfcffcb251
073eae31cb908004b54c05fa0389334265413682
108382 F20101113_AAEKCV nguyen_t_Page_116.jp2
295006370c0cf928f9e4234622ec3022
a03694c15db6986d67d110ce95a9b8b64eccbcf9
6930 F20101113_AAEJXP nguyen_t_Page_112thm.jpg
d278dd989645ac5d92bcace802a5f189
8ca8d81b053e21ad4b304cb804fa6b589c5e207f
75994 F20101113_AAEKDJ nguyen_t_Page_112.jpg
dd7f47388a0a2554a9bd84e174d2e304
4489bb1cf297969a941bdd130599ebcd88606f9b
24872 F20101113_AAELHB nguyen_t_Page_059.QC.jpg
95d4c3fb16e58321fcf3e31d08f31858
1e441c124d4c4c48bdd13074f405b47c0c83cb81
6905 F20101113_AAELGM nguyen_t_Page_040thm.jpg
45fb6a084912a206298b2f3fe7c8374b
cb9ae5cfef273ea264b3b5f6bdfd76784f844519
25212 F20101113_AAELFY nguyen_t_Page_026.QC.jpg
daae3b6182be1fe1af391f46f7f034c2
1335dac7019c86047c48e9991c24173aca91029f
F20101113_AAEJYE nguyen_t_Page_049.txt
9edfaa3a3d53ee7cba425bbd485eb8af
9e31f34326f473192d75797f0442123166d8492e
2115 F20101113_AAEKCW nguyen_t_Page_011.txt
0b160f85ace9183a8178c371c07d0425
623a0db76230548468da710d5d01522472081d1b
6374 F20101113_AAEJXQ nguyen_t_Page_131thm.jpg
67670f1dac12952f94bd72fc84355298
c9b86311def8f4e4424cf1d77bc7695bcfc9d250
122076 F20101113_AAEKDK nguyen_t_Page_034.jp2
8d93300b137fdee8fa0c7990932d8fa6
f41e373a5e9b81d3943f2670761db5cda2327dcf
22809 F20101113_AAELHC nguyen_t_Page_061.QC.jpg
11ac13085209d7f56f1797d4db30881d
e24e9cfc362a5b188befe4c8df6523c6cdef9abe
25993 F20101113_AAELGN nguyen_t_Page_041.QC.jpg
b9be0354e00a61d004b8af13b7f611fb
a6214dbe2b3c6d767d8e8444961308a28b571e9b
6717 F20101113_AAELFZ nguyen_t_Page_026thm.jpg
9f5222d43d72f7bafbc8df4e9c243cc6
6569b2f538575efcd4fdd6073674ed52ef86b175
F20101113_AAEJYF nguyen_t_Page_146.txt
74b60dd1305f78aa0f862e6c67fd32e4
013c7466eaa4b7780873bea25dfe217d59b496bc
53489 F20101113_AAEKCX nguyen_t_Page_043.pro
08f68a681be1c3a205b42094460b6b96
732ad7ff6253c1f4ece8f0c173e2d6e091c49519
F20101113_AAEJXR nguyen_t_Page_017.tif
5093a87f8fb8e8ba97740727baf2fa70
eb43597af9daa49831fe7591fb597291e28c934b
56947 F20101113_AAEKEA nguyen_t_Page_150.pro
00cc470acb7123adb8ab3671e6f3911d
f47e98bb9b3f0fffe250b7f8013a9556b623703c
22163 F20101113_AAEKDL nguyen_t_Page_066.QC.jpg
8126462975f48f6a6b55e5d27c8f097a
512ca6c064a01ce3df89ccd0cbf803da0924888e
6030 F20101113_AAELHD nguyen_t_Page_065thm.jpg
6a79071ba3ca0a85a46c58f94dd7062d
0649c0586e675e4816f71ad5172c6727f14db8d2
6934 F20101113_AAELGO nguyen_t_Page_041thm.jpg
0af019a429fc539ff409754117410f3b
e74b6edce1ec79bb2b4c3a0cb46b82fe79160cd7
55067 F20101113_AAEJYG nguyen_t_Page_016.pro
99903d3d07caf4e08dfa3b313237375f
537c156dacc640ed2254ef7133d534fd6ed83c5f
2119 F20101113_AAEKCY nguyen_t_Page_048.txt
f22cf0dbafd01a1faf9cb764aa11eb4d
8ddac4fe4de1937b1df21a380ab2f3d3694f58bd
6233 F20101113_AAEJXS nguyen_t_Page_115.QC.jpg
e12ecdb56b4f9ddd66638b82a095f613
974e8f35af946dd6bbf6d3ca3597c84dc8295b90
37548 F20101113_AAEKEB nguyen_t_Page_140.jpg
225be645d51324a3fd1234e34e4b9f6d
120cf08bc7730c76228ea18d91917c262f084f81
56383 F20101113_AAEKDM nguyen_t_Page_102.pro
f1bf5e3946df0419bc3c4cda69c855e3
814eafac23cd52d217e65ffe7ebada01418de51a
6875 F20101113_AAELHE nguyen_t_Page_067thm.jpg
7837aa851bb1a1d4fae73f193bc011db
8b85ab41622f6148cdb4fa1415ce9f5d389acd36
7017 F20101113_AAELGP nguyen_t_Page_043thm.jpg
8e410296dd48f1edf4a9cc37baa59fd4
62ef2e5e816d7b0354f83315f1931788fa102341
2072 F20101113_AAEJYH nguyen_t_Page_035.txt
2e51b5dfcdc4464a17830aea22541fcc
af99764333a0eacf51be4f4ebccbdaa7d58c1a3c
F20101113_AAEKCZ nguyen_t_Page_009.tif
f80b494e75904b335dab8a8233aae6b7
063541bf979ed2c4582827378520ab00433e394c
F20101113_AAEJXT nguyen_t_Page_155.tif
ba2189623329de3c7094a82f66106a4d
737ca73c0a97377024e0571597f65f6f32a4e48a
2683 F20101113_AAEKEC nguyen_t_Page_153.txt
ebff63a15036f85d7c18d2e8cad7f19c
64560df4802181fa985ec74ba4b08f30d2bf12a0
48037 F20101113_AAEKDN nguyen_t_Page_019.pro
9fd7a5ddfc1dde080421a908c1da96ad
9e6e33a3088d981b2fbce977a15ecb3b47882503
6685 F20101113_AAELHF nguyen_t_Page_068thm.jpg
dcb4f7043a93a7f8aaec5058b54415f1
6419896c5306e474c32e6b1418628b8e153905b2
23212 F20101113_AAELGQ nguyen_t_Page_045.QC.jpg
5d8d0a6f48df0ae2291f48b9fe0bda6f
2f23d314aa2ee5e7839da20292b4d9d242868027
72798 F20101113_AAEJYI nguyen_t_Page_138.jpg
0bcc49dee5e1f734ce7e374d8241f8c0
56ce12d0d23e43eb7b4649d7a49fa55e68620d67
2361 F20101113_AAEJXU nguyen_t_Page_132.txt
89c9554928379624a088887d050c754e
39b9cb24e6e79d78530672a4daa5886b355ac3eb
23791 F20101113_AAEKED nguyen_t_Page_116.QC.jpg
27d0c56349c67079917a30b42cd6c1a6
c1b588c0da4bb14ff22013c6840990c2c1ab45a2
882 F20101113_AAEKDO nguyen_t_Page_002.pro
cb6a2c5f0305aa827183b8b7c2879ea6
984cf5a62a3c160e2a351ba11092a8e2eaa23882
7141 F20101113_AAELGR nguyen_t_Page_047thm.jpg
71a75ea82b8810621e5611307ff09b6b
beeb67f309df3b3e4bd1374c00bc9d6c3d421f21
1081 F20101113_AAEJYJ nguyen_t_Page_126.txt
882c4852d4e638c26e8879e0821eab80
59c6bb92fbd60765026f203cae7f8959a30f00e6
25307 F20101113_AAEJXV nguyen_t_Page_040.QC.jpg
f6a3e83a5aacdc1a91dcf7362cb1d080
93ddcc6e30065c4008e32533ca25d35fa5ec523d
F20101113_AAEKDP nguyen_t_Page_142.tif
92f4214fe3f0c19ae4fd10f7e562034e
2fa21cfd0d2b45e1fbc4b2c155e59f2fa8f508c5
19998 F20101113_AAELHG nguyen_t_Page_070.QC.jpg
e253419dbd8e4d2e5196a4a4be637353
fc0fffed99c7c49d06c21667c164a7f9ff8e9f57
25423 F20101113_AAELGS nguyen_t_Page_048.QC.jpg
f945f029f2ad1970978cfd80cd241b34
0d830bbdf47cbeeb0ddf0d36c8b79ca100b60cdb
20633 F20101113_AAEJYK nguyen_t_Page_044.QC.jpg
8d964820bf9ba921f6c4dcaa34407720
f355f9f4fa3a64486434f7434c791bd858ee2268
2225 F20101113_AAEJXW nguyen_t_Page_111.txt
a05a87e37c9f00455c64e81ea8a1263e
f44aec305a379ba9555b3ad15f5777164bcf66ca
1305 F20101113_AAEKEE nguyen_t_Page_003thm.jpg
da32310022f06ba198495b415705ec8a
f42f09c7a32fc582c2d125aa2195384862626f2f
72890 F20101113_AAEKDQ nguyen_t_Page_011.jpg
d2f296afdae71e3dc204d461bdbb1962
7c95053ea3279e754db97872587f455c47a70a69
5639 F20101113_AAELHH nguyen_t_Page_070thm.jpg
a3851301754d9a46fdfd9677792195a5
a79ba64cc99aa0d557611530743da415d27da5c6
23253 F20101113_AAELGT nguyen_t_Page_049.QC.jpg
d04758cd1a19517a0929521952aa07cb
cfa9c80de3974e6bcc32806775fb6010812475fa
57610 F20101113_AAEJYL nguyen_t_Page_041.pro
25e0be85c1048d544c2c204f9cfa21aa
c8533d9de4487ef4cb6e673525c6cf3f4db57f6f
1783 F20101113_AAEJXX nguyen_t_Page_127.txt
3226dbabe0977b98f7ed0177abfe371e
760e9c627f60c3f5728ec93878d01799e188f8b0
52225 F20101113_AAEKEF nguyen_t_Page_106.pro
de4d74b65faa363929f2380526207471
4daeed93c4497f3659c948638782000e42d15140
118955 F20101113_AAEKDR nguyen_t_Page_120.jp2
f5848322d827dc39f58b0be1d1b6c68a
913180bcd968908da96fd98f4c6d04e8e836c229
22968 F20101113_AAELHI nguyen_t_Page_072.QC.jpg
f027ca5b7e654c1de9517495af5b71bc
a380fc064faf842a3911458760a76ef87979add3
6763 F20101113_AAELGU nguyen_t_Page_049thm.jpg
a8b6798ccd655189eb2d471b3ee53671
acb00500fa139c76a358677648cea8decfa31a3d
F20101113_AAEJYM nguyen_t_Page_158.tif
68d9241a2e1edb47362682945bbde8ff
0d935280b4e51a011a9d9c88f4e6f4951a558e4b
25884 F20101113_AAEKEG nguyen_t_Page_015.QC.jpg
305415454a506261f74af9bfe2b161a2
3b0d33490865474648ecc026a42af702027f6762
73353 F20101113_AAEJZA nguyen_t_Page_093.jpg
7413ef790831b167b4feb31cb112e884
48ecb06774c5e11f9329cf525cace12fbf290e29
76841 F20101113_AAEKDS nguyen_t_Page_013.jpg
010ca909c66ab204a5328c6607392453
b36c5507032e136c66ac00a89545cc7c979ea634
6885 F20101113_AAELHJ nguyen_t_Page_073thm.jpg
7b79d002313848d06619ce114a4139cf
f021bf1bb525522a1986b750610f03c9886ceb96
24722 F20101113_AAELGV nguyen_t_Page_051.QC.jpg
fa9bd480be626b2c79f215b5870c65dd
329cd821c2233d8912db0efb8fec25f2c0b93f98
49741 F20101113_AAEJYN nguyen_t_Page_136.pro
413505737b49a4a748aaa00c54b09020
d5ac51b84e827346167d8d2c334a9771041ec0dc
4364 F20101113_AAEJXY nguyen_t_Page_079thm.jpg
be16865dfe6be6bb0d56137715e8fc4b
51ab38cd51d893567543bd73ca22248fd76fa8da
6762 F20101113_AAEKEH nguyen_t_Page_048thm.jpg
40e43aac33216f23429d91bf405af88d
4267d548c3a3e9ec05334b20e764f8831bcdd732
F20101113_AAEJZB nguyen_t_Page_119.tif
d870b9e5ede29453e48795baadce27a4
4c3ca13c96ef9de827303e414a8e5e487d5af253
108949 F20101113_AAEKDT nguyen_t_Page_072.jp2
4e9549fe3f1cc10468132dc5612c2599
7e6a22c1ed282e74b1c5180f4a2ac870d70ac8de
25143 F20101113_AAELHK nguyen_t_Page_074.QC.jpg
b81362f97d2db038b9c900cf6f3909ee
5ddba76894e82fa22f972861992b80c5e05cf17a
6705 F20101113_AAELGW nguyen_t_Page_051thm.jpg
491ce6c464c6773221bc532f1c6f17f4
66457e5c40161fa7a580fb48941d0dd1b664ac6f
23424 F20101113_AAEJYO nguyen_t_Page_086.QC.jpg
336c390da054a1bee44da9ed90668ab1
7963164af562ed880c2c5ac022ccc167861091df
F20101113_AAEJXZ nguyen_t_Page_141.tif
0f5b290b4f80b56554701d15592698d2
04e3ed86cb6d816a47cd65377d88fabb78cbd707
F20101113_AAEKEI nguyen_t_Page_049.tif
b2f11d6fb1e1eade19f8114fc4c1cdc9
3aa8070f8b42e03147020f2bb31852678b0b11b8
93720 F20101113_AAEJZC nguyen_t_Page_103.jp2
d098f515391e071df1da0c4ce4f20444
741f0acdcddbbd10fc2eda9fa82de6af68319959
6556 F20101113_AAEKDU nguyen_t_Page_030thm.jpg
382fd7c424fe471e457281afa8e74477
ed4400b6794f6cd98726ed50b22ba9a39cde5e78
5026 F20101113_AAELIA nguyen_t_Page_092thm.jpg
8bbb3f2fc8a590f3f4b315abe9bdb848
8c2c896221a2fade724db1dda69bf619ebe15449
6329 F20101113_AAELHL nguyen_t_Page_075thm.jpg
fe2581f9c596a667cb2c89adec97fc12
361a63f672d93656ec185ccb055c53ddf45a155a
24803 F20101113_AAELGX nguyen_t_Page_052.QC.jpg
29ab3560c1eb73a0aa5ec881e794aebb
906e0f27b20c93228b9234da4615d4e83ad72142
1969 F20101113_AAEJYP nguyen_t_Page_075.txt
9f25bea493889496e0efa4c6aaad955d
6c76614fab86658798fe2612d339015af477ea72
F20101113_AAEKEJ nguyen_t_Page_146.tif
e340c7e18d26f7ada6ee29f9f4e84a84
f02cb804c3f62e93951a6428d5e650aeec61cf3e
2573 F20101113_AAEJZD nguyen_t_Page_151.txt
524f9fabf1543895a4d42dd5d14ce8fc
8532ecc34f325f9c3f0d41831a813614405bab6b
77449 F20101113_AAEKDV nguyen_t_Page_048.jpg
906d24007f1b7c043a53f5d640ad8053
3f4cc4e9eda220ea89f6d12b41de4ad798af7ab4
24025 F20101113_AAELIB nguyen_t_Page_093.QC.jpg
1879405d241f86e946b3d508d9290c35
c584703ac57322500790ceb4c568c35d8f6cba3e
6274 F20101113_AAELHM nguyen_t_Page_076thm.jpg
e16ed5e3d6a72ec3209e5dd24508dca6
979e3a9514d2eefc454be00062a16dd0e62bb4df
25349 F20101113_AAELGY nguyen_t_Page_053.QC.jpg
c23e227be34074dd699503e236953bce
4874f4b839016b44abdb3e21cf964417f1ff6bf9
F20101113_AAEJYQ nguyen_t_Page_021.tif
9c61b182f3311378b6164277f04eb66c
542451770951c89bbf6b13f77790779a0d88f668
5549 F20101113_AAEKEK nguyen_t_Page_113thm.jpg
b85ad42f3ea00714d8a8b5bd2d223360
c0d1cc033690f1d3a2e4860cb6f065a04976972f
9910 F20101113_AAEJZE nguyen_t_Page_002.jpg
5403ec82207f0da80f0795ef665f06ca
fdeb736158c6e772447c4c3ea54c27b21bb95d61
25304 F20101113_AAEKDW nguyen_t_Page_121.QC.jpg
b77bee8f55ec6b71f61cc54bc108464c
e31db6bc2cd76cf41e755ec3c095bee6c2db4a17
24897 F20101113_AAELIC nguyen_t_Page_094.QC.jpg
20edab0cc3ce0e13f5e3a6c0371762ab
bfc1ab01aaa60f337aed84ef87e8074cdff83ccf
4815 F20101113_AAELHN nguyen_t_Page_077thm.jpg
0932c8739e8df1f7dd373c25404e55f8
bef33c56652d22824f3cc9a2c0d3d490718d8abe
7138 F20101113_AAELGZ nguyen_t_Page_055thm.jpg
a02419b8362906e7f3ecc553da031eaf
a11e1d7d259decb708bbc9548836de69ab7f77cb
35061 F20101113_AAEJYR nguyen_t_Page_084.pro
a3b3c12fcae427fe98e96228e51f62b0
a075196e9d943ffcd67727c8723c3029bc314e68
F20101113_AAEKFA nguyen_t_Page_127.tif
e13db52c7ce61d48c463edbc43a35ac2
f6bafd74d0614f7d89f6e28e67479927cf02c3b6
F20101113_AAEKEL nguyen_t_Page_037.tif
b8e6ac9d385e00934a3568df92b66470
6d68e11b6c8a0ea3e40e70e6edb0112af0ed5a66
F20101113_AAEJZF nguyen_t_Page_080.tif
07999996a98c30206a2ff252efbffaa4
4fbe95059ce7e78db2bcef6e7a6599b851e24068
F20101113_AAEKDX nguyen_t_Page_094.tif
da390a67e6ef22666c1bb28cb6454145
82d1dffc8da4fda348d227424fa0cd20dd0f4c20
24550 F20101113_AAELID nguyen_t_Page_095.QC.jpg
e1875f514aae510320b05d68a270f25d
9dfc614773115fa49692a3f08b1d544bc7d482cc
23135 F20101113_AAELHO nguyen_t_Page_078.QC.jpg
9b4307c59623825a1fbdc31dd9a686ce
6f863461dde65c8c20b7013d1fd49b67a97636f2
F20101113_AAEJYS nguyen_t_Page_060.tif
51c29ba7e58bd6638882394cbdfd0155
f63ea3f868490e2e80aafa2941c1263a4d4c0dac
4883 F20101113_AAEKFB nguyen_t_Page_127thm.jpg
f9d638218511c7735a26b377f51c9ffc
f0d7b1dc81d2d77649737b237395ae454078d292
2008 F20101113_AAEKEM nguyen_t_Page_069.txt
a9bf9f33e68ec57d60524354f387dee8
3aecf5c8e98e7461fad8cccae5db66dc2aa8460c
6638 F20101113_AAEJZG nguyen_t_Page_104thm.jpg
6ca5bf0f1fbf5bbc90004951df839287
4c377b6193f2e71073e709c739ce827e1143a940
2462 F20101113_AAEKDY nguyen_t_Page_098.txt
4ec94d9613b043772e8996b58eb4fa35
6c5376040098efea60a7ba546d8270f303ca353a
23175 F20101113_AAELIE nguyen_t_Page_096.QC.jpg
c81dbc486aee4dcb4632ded9367eff85
8d94841cfb1341db86af369383e9b0337e73a437
6578 F20101113_AAELHP nguyen_t_Page_078thm.jpg
9c8c4563e87411e5b5f143872d4a35cb
905054d7f4917491ee15ce5ef174cbb8216223ae
28333 F20101113_AAEJYT nguyen_t_Page_146.pro
d14603747edb0ef3586fc3fc2db20983
32979a3219d25b5fa60623a1ae7c11fead53acec
2107 F20101113_AAEKFC nguyen_t_Page_047.txt
2a15e7a518c8c6b1b327ca450c5d21ac
26b92c56c22f76372ef5631194c1c32de4d8fe7c
105422 F20101113_AAEKEN nguyen_t_Page_004.jp2
2804f8d1d1b6f88a526c3cddb5d7d440
6afecb95dac9d63a5d7db7d6a31c5542f1714561
18607 F20101113_AAEJZH nguyen_t_Page_113.QC.jpg
5d37e14e6d9353d9e46ed601b3690393
dffea76063e31c69c0208e08d093f71d4a1c2d75
F20101113_AAEKDZ nguyen_t_Page_122.tif
f3d31fa983bd7b788ee954e06fe9d12e
1b3ef9f1721f757e44658d188bef21a192da7e89
6350 F20101113_AAELIF nguyen_t_Page_096thm.jpg
f70d8b237971f483892a306b183a62d9
ded3ea251187f5f809feb97a969e4f807b09b3ac
23542 F20101113_AAELHQ nguyen_t_Page_082.QC.jpg
6f7e06850c6e17d5e7e681e13af3ef62
9266cb70c042713ce276231c17fbf7146e55b2e1
1963 F20101113_AAEKFD nguyen_t_Page_061.txt
88a81bdd19c15a681877305cbcdd4381
c4f6207508f95e4f6814296eb63d3eaa1686ddc4
107859 F20101113_AAEKEO nguyen_t_Page_018.jp2
a5620f6ae3a9cfb01a933c9251b0c696
df3a4f0c4b0899832191c66b7aba973bbddfa5b2
6526 F20101113_AAEJZI nguyen_t_Page_050thm.jpg
9b4b840bcd13317a990effb393e222c0
4ab29b57fc518f57c8b0c9cbf82cba8813fed2af
123016 F20101113_AAEJYU nguyen_t_Page_041.jp2
e40338e85d7be7acefe318e1a5f48ca7
bb647c178c387a8e3511bd26fedf0aac18048eca
6548 F20101113_AAELIG nguyen_t_Page_100thm.jpg
3f4f5d810c1922aedc95f43d262bb26c
44c20b113ef8f378176f27b885bc39cde98fe5db
6716 F20101113_AAELHR nguyen_t_Page_082thm.jpg
0eeab505e030cde21fea8ae8a7977f43
aa2a8a84e72e4ae9b964fae1ab601aa15b7091d7
45924 F20101113_AAEKFE nguyen_t_Page_062.pro
1fcab873e755687f96b6fc4b013e1361
4398a52dad6dd061fa6579ec3224ed015cd71294
53811 F20101113_AAEKEP nguyen_t_Page_135.jpg
5c094bdd83b71b8aee5a1e5ae8e3b58d
ab4f44d780672fb2f4123da1ea0c8b5fb8aab7f7
118980 F20101113_AAEJZJ nguyen_t_Page_016.jp2
8c812e9f08b26d5a11581cf7e0967ad1
3571e9cd49f588f352e187674416ca6f624786c2
F20101113_AAEJYV nguyen_t_Page_109.tif
04332f5fcd8b760d4ff691a35cf5cde4
0e38e924d62d703e2d9315512591e016e8913d22
6826 F20101113_AAELHS nguyen_t_Page_083thm.jpg
bb9f611ae324e6a168596aa01da1db43
9f91896a4299a34bc32cd7ca67a3fc2a3f49972f
61561 F20101113_AAEKEQ nguyen_t_Page_134.jpg
2cdd3342c928b39acbf2baebec5fcb0c
ff37bfa8c019209067ffe57b0ea8d1df882ee837
2044 F20101113_AAEJZK nguyen_t_Page_019.txt
660b215bfe62bcd732e93078dcb17c68
94fbf42e0eae9797f624e92c1ce822348f3534d5
6703 F20101113_AAEJYW nguyen_t_Page_093thm.jpg
ad4b66e6eab1d38a2fed2dba899d75f3
bca35c72a23b8400643599bc7e2d076561f4f378
6848 F20101113_AAELIH nguyen_t_Page_101thm.jpg
c5954b5293ede6be432d0556a6948530
187bbeb471df25c869dd787c7a8d936655d509f0
6938 F20101113_AAELHT nguyen_t_Page_085thm.jpg
761e99afc88c12b129649df2a82fa1e5
54624941d2a31e577dbbfae357770bda99ffd9e9
1403 F20101113_AAEKFF nguyen_t_Page_084.txt
f0dc0ce07cfb00ddc106a2540cc0568f
974fa369a09f0b56d0059859572414a60158f121
115999 F20101113_AAEKER nguyen_t_Page_026.jp2
dde6648c927bbcad3f855ff04a147bea
ce8d13ff558bba786d0a72e105097c740e979a6f
57437 F20101113_AAEJZL nguyen_t_Page_027.pro
242828b2bf0ff855f6e4774093554e12
0f8495d90c7d08b2f58eab95232c99e1735ceea6
F20101113_AAEJYX nguyen_t_Page_042.tif
39bfdde09a15e116ba8654143eadfb2b
b61e979aa2da12cf9c5f8f7ca1141d5a3152bad0
25765 F20101113_AAELII nguyen_t_Page_102.QC.jpg
814af5cb506545dab90279cbe969ca65
9e80657070ee1ef67afbff16380b4da688c0562a
22149 F20101113_AAELHU nguyen_t_Page_088.QC.jpg
c9ef873a84d5ec778a848c7bfbb353ef
949d7241c3d63e8b3130cff898add9dd909cf7ea
96047 F20101113_AAEKFG nguyen_t_Page_111.jp2
eae7e75460299a6021a44acef6ff40d2
1a31c43fe116a7f5c2e745f1370b549e4e5c0a44
25863 F20101113_AAEKES nguyen_t_Page_046.QC.jpg
7a14c3f86bc54f016c2ca1ee91edbdb5
2117c5637bfa728d86aeb6d7d6433ee9277e0e4c
1528 F20101113_AAEJZM nguyen_t_Page_012.txt
f0a788f3c7617a6839f6d071a3e8317b
89594dfee39c0d78a69d045726263a510a40b21c
F20101113_AAEJYY nguyen_t_Page_113.tif
f1db6d00fe1d3fb83eb6eeb44ab0e8a9
e0dd43a5e6fcd93e522e538bfc6de638d0dc44f2
7077 F20101113_AAELIJ nguyen_t_Page_102thm.jpg
5dd958b49f32eec3ad582672afc1ea58
c71558b51b5b741ac74e99bc18425c8a9c6d990c
6027 F20101113_AAELHV nguyen_t_Page_088thm.jpg
7482b8f4137e7d78826e53b06bce199b
8013a01a02c26e12e6d22f0868c31f030d081919
2846 F20101113_AAEKFH nguyen_t_Page_091.txt
cdfbaeef15b857440ac33bca79038c81
9185a04c31cd982aafb1f249072f1ac78eb11470
6849 F20101113_AAEKET nguyen_t_Page_139thm.jpg
f9e3c46b4f7a3e6bebcb4989c90587a6
1eae3ab4123abf464a736b420f0f3a8d405bd6b1
737919 F20101113_AAEJZN nguyen_t_Page_081.jp2
9e272dd840fabd0e7c8068d58decf48a
d5e26565d711168f2a170ad90a263f3bd224beeb
5684 F20101113_AAELIK nguyen_t_Page_103thm.jpg
674b302c2f83e6fc90fbce5fe78c6bf2
433fbe405f1c32ce071cf926d0fefece3fedaae1
21467 F20101113_AAELHW nguyen_t_Page_089.QC.jpg
89041451689dfcbea04713fff9e8226d
bdc270769733170090581f67add88278ab7acb75
45510 F20101113_AAEKFI nguyen_t_Page_157.jpg
6756f64448322a3f224db419e6e87601
45a77522d89dbb04126a5dfa2bffbef99d6b60d0
45324 F20101113_AAEKEU nguyen_t_Page_113.pro
e6e8e15f5cb6855a2fd9bb91825ac4e3
d7996a6d7193e14523d7f8bed65d9895a4a46d5a
6695 F20101113_AAEJZO nguyen_t_Page_114thm.jpg
dd434725dc710c0f7451e363514135de
e9f882f7e46d6276dbc6ca25501d2f0a9858e424
F20101113_AAEJYZ nguyen_t_Page_053.tif
f5df251e0ddb190cdc803bc00197f619
8a78b7c4bd91a2a0ee2b8c2b8aa16c2554658cb5
28592 F20101113_AAELJA nguyen_t_Page_136.QC.jpg
49b94ee81246b0d0d85c6ffc957e6f1a
3515bb62ace64e654cfd6855f66c60cf12364e1e
21409 F20101113_AAELIL nguyen_t_Page_105.QC.jpg
3a419a86e53b1499c06ed61ee165f00f
385b68b59a6e8ec405d2dfe1d197018c8571ca39
6037 F20101113_AAELHX nguyen_t_Page_089thm.jpg
bb892dc5e3b3549a0bf8f6f080986450
195da5dab3d660f9c8b6160434ab953eeea2178f
61652 F20101113_AAEKFJ nguyen_t_Page_087.jpg
d88b02175d1b99d210a32873c1eb2fd7
155ffe236c33d5b6189802dce2d1e2a17259998b
2341 F20101113_AAEKEV nguyen_t_Page_100.txt
3e0e43d248ca672bba6ef1f5fad026c5
2aaab0f86ec678bf9cbdcca51ea17eae8dbd1af1
F20101113_AAEJZP nguyen_t_Page_066.txt
4da0fe53f856d1e08035c2b05f53306d
efac62715861b0b6435f7bc44c2124b63cefa6a6
7368 F20101113_AAELJB nguyen_t_Page_136thm.jpg
148e25b7681369989c102104af5869f4
e6150218be4b95ea622bf7d9f843f3378bfe86e7
5925 F20101113_AAELIM nguyen_t_Page_105thm.jpg
26bbc9226105ab0b3c6b40f8698ffb34
8356e876053a594a28806fdb242c65ffe2076d51
4353 F20101113_AAELHY nguyen_t_Page_090thm.jpg
5937815d72639ecbba5458ca359faf63
475a288bae5e9efdbdb09ea4de793c78ee81b612
74673 F20101113_AAEKFK nguyen_t_Page_099.jpg
dec316281e8ffa6985b50b44bd95477a
a91f48d7da73c929bc97553f2d6b6470f1897005
25439 F20101113_AAEKEW nguyen_t_Page_145.pro
02b859eba311d7a6b34b53a7d1a359c9
87ae39d26abe1fab70b017743087ed65f65341d5
87303 F20101113_AAEJZQ nguyen_t_Page_134.jp2
3f2e8802d40e64f4d2747631c4587474
e93a1df5fd15015fce591a50f997f2c37b81823b
28074 F20101113_AAELJC nguyen_t_Page_137.QC.jpg
156a94bca61077fce56309b0f24ad7fc
129f445e6d2dc6aaf54d7c08c36e27d00ce2de6c
24359 F20101113_AAELIN nguyen_t_Page_106.QC.jpg
7ac55a96e2822677103aeb751314c85e
dc3078c7fb0bae2834b8007925bd37ad2a347da0
5506 F20101113_AAELHZ nguyen_t_Page_091thm.jpg
1ad1341473f32693b2f88a652ea84fab
f0db128eeed1d2060d2457cd72301f3c16bc17c3
42116 F20101113_AAEKFL nguyen_t_Page_065.pro
1c8487eb04cf822f195f2898b2299e94
14ea0a7efb4c2c0e6c616211fdd5ab19e500ead5
24214 F20101113_AAEKEX nguyen_t_Page_104.QC.jpg
f678c3b3bd18184d7f77eb2dce56875d
c0717c0cf3775db85d58b92102f9ba207b96eaaa
19085 F20101113_AAEJZR nguyen_t_Page_149.pro
71490c335b202c4707ebd28761c18e5f
af49971be57f0ff3ffadb3fe6d8bdae541420ea3
6997 F20101113_AAEKGA nguyen_t_Page_042thm.jpg
54a8bfa8ce1a002872fb9e939c53c884
fc267fcc9b8c2e9a98d6e76ecc9af3023fea2b0b
6959 F20101113_AAELJD nguyen_t_Page_137thm.jpg
4dd2411c73a0d81a7930c4e2abdfaf74
cb51db1f1129a21a4d511dd655760ebad8cf8fce
7073 F20101113_AAELIO nguyen_t_Page_107thm.jpg
fd2a23bbb524e70887263e1a124d389d
8610cce4e968e56ee73f278bd83852f209a94996
103597 F20101113_AAEKFM nguyen_t_Page_019.jp2
672fbf00bc10ce411564e57c1b042579
12aa5712512494e950dc6e99fe3f7bbc1062a30a
F20101113_AAEKEY nguyen_t_Page_016.tif
81cd7d5a835381304b3216db295eec86
d99da3a2aa63ead9c98daee2a2197415a326a8af
F20101113_AAEJZS nguyen_t_Page_008.tif
c10dd35e5959a855db756b592f4eb72b
c9590bfacc8443294f29120d27d723015410b932
24700 F20101113_AAEKGB nguyen_t_Page_085.QC.jpg
f49251eb5e53da74fa35c3b622bccd0c
5b01ceb1c246128940c13d76904e3210cd9c3680
13783 F20101113_AAELJE nguyen_t_Page_141.QC.jpg
5c217f2ba330c5cf9deef1b345f87411
efe38f74b70d278370bbdf90a9712ea33dfc0bb6
19478 F20101113_AAELIP nguyen_t_Page_111.QC.jpg
cca6b2c8c8beb34dc762c1589987e7dd
cd275a8b82b166c75bbea7386b8aa6d3f348193d
2166 F20101113_AAEKFN nguyen_t_Page_065.txt
b7bf454b6c506786e8035c118ab6b7c8
76e12f9f14f4c3f400aa48ef48a4eabf56709e26
76709 F20101113_AAEKEZ nguyen_t_Page_022.jpg
09a67d2bbc6713126d3d6231445abb77
87a91cd20a0f4398071b34909afc33e664827ea0
F20101113_AAEJZT nguyen_t_Page_039.txt
741ffaa012377e7588a0d8e6f0ddc0db
adbc3a25bb1637a2a2b6f13899c82c922e33fb03
F20101113_AAEKGC nguyen_t_Page_008.jp2
69390f4073540ad5f247017225d25aeb
43c941f11607448dee4e72b720d3b9a8f829539b
4497 F20101113_AAELJF nguyen_t_Page_141thm.jpg
380e808dd48f5ca634c4d5458748673e
d4c192606c4a41d1333973dfda263880354d04d9
6949 F20101113_AAELIQ nguyen_t_Page_117thm.jpg
045861b6500eb68b074f6185cc65a3cd
f38b9baf4e7019adce1fbb34e6cb5ea3aa694d7f
7081 F20101113_AAEKFO nguyen_t_Page_154thm.jpg
9fcd2f9c39fac84f9fa0d872fac0d991
eb113c3d9048d1fe8b36559e5cafcd8e10ac16ea
54641 F20101113_AAEJZU nguyen_t_Page_040.pro
595efa52c8559272fafb08c086210c93
23b1c9f379a896a0bf326eaecf7026994ea2aeda
78919 F20101113_AAEKGD nguyen_t_Page_029.jpg
26e3c177eb8df530f15ab357d64e82e2
699cb9f52cc0cd6f604ed454aa17cf31d028e5f6
3602 F20101113_AAELJG nguyen_t_Page_142thm.jpg
71d94f70de4bf53a2bc2252ae25c484e
af63f163da3925249a9f9b93e24684e210e51779
6582 F20101113_AAELIR nguyen_t_Page_119thm.jpg
9c4f46378dac3084f244ed1bd260467b
14d4c6063ecc38a78ac63ea92394da5c3c776ba8
26143 F20101113_AAEKFP nguyen_t_Page_033.QC.jpg
1028bcc239b78e77f86bce4ca9e1bcc4
09ba1a685173f3721990c6c4d65f53b9747faeca
115196 F20101113_AAEJZV nguyen_t_Page_101.jp2
067a8ca0a0d0d8bfb80bd0dfa476f7c5
4a4a32227ae751298da882d7e4dbafb10983d7c8
78946 F20101113_AAEKGE nguyen_t_Page_100.jpg
b9803b12c72e3076a3405ce89b2e2a7c
727f7335126b579d9ebed23979e55771d0fd4ccb
12919 F20101113_AAELJH nguyen_t_Page_143.QC.jpg
303ae9e2e81b463f7da293134f322037
4f6096beeedfb84c3f5c37d8dba89466e502a748
7012 F20101113_AAELIS nguyen_t_Page_120thm.jpg
45948510783e7bdd853bdfc3aa18d352
f7a6809d276f11ea51334475e971c5e36640a9a6
6393 F20101113_AAEKFQ nguyen_t_Page_061thm.jpg
e572529cb960290e2b2d53aeebf5a71b
8c5016f16c0d9a3b1be5aaf8afe92bdfacb3acda
2339 F20101113_AAEJZW nguyen_t_Page_113.txt
dde9612edcb3296e10facbbd599688c2
0fb5092bdf6e0d0a7e55a6afbe2af12c391450d1
33208 F20101113_AAEKGF nguyen_t_Page_131.pro
66208468779180be8572ec1dda30b30a
8201f7bb3227aaea9b5c5ab2952021cef084defd
6740 F20101113_AAELIT nguyen_t_Page_121thm.jpg
557e617f2023e6c5cab55cc564ffa822
83b0b4b45a579fc71d53ea8d0b5d311b5482c12e
F20101113_AAEJZX nguyen_t_Page_059.tif
310df0d0a9c83df2108a005c463d7c78
cf1151087c1f7427f312b80ec586fd1179747a29
41593 F20101113_AAEKFR nguyen_t_Page_145.jpg
86ac667c024dcd948ef40d01fcda3c0b
b482d74ba9fb9a299306410fe17d3f3296b9b01c
12206 F20101113_AAELJI nguyen_t_Page_144.QC.jpg
1af4bb215d1e019c6ce43689f7aa81b7
2123aecac3a0a1f4b7f5c8fb0cbf2334d0177203
25476 F20101113_AAELIU nguyen_t_Page_122.QC.jpg
3991183e9bd8d90375fedf6ef4c048fb
27efe105dd1c5f0f790466395db1a5caee3087a3
61219 F20101113_AAEJZY nguyen_t_Page_157.jp2
5299c1306cc06d6ef0446139a0435690
f6358082d387cc84d3130914d34068224ac7d4a3
6535 F20101113_AAEKGG nguyen_t_Page_006thm.jpg
ab4d8ebbebeef873e7c0592adca421cc
13cef718e972a304eb1e7aec13b21a23b82d245e
1545 F20101113_AAEKFS nguyen_t_Page_081.txt
cc806b15d921f8c3bed7693dc33832fd
718ba9ce4444c9efd8fd3fcf80e5b46f17847a9f
14331 F20101113_AAELJJ nguyen_t_Page_145.QC.jpg
f599afd108ce9fb86976b4284e4dbcf1
256aab6b19637ae20be4a920142556b7f7afd2ee
25532 F20101113_AAELIV nguyen_t_Page_124.QC.jpg
3e6b74f78f2fb399f5eb77e181f381ee
70be25a3cbb9053d31f5a26c6e0ce10fa62a3ff0
F20101113_AAEJZZ nguyen_t_Page_054.tif
1f9009cd724752cf133fc6d0348ca542
9cff3ebbc1d05864857ff53d3e9f87eec7fbdb19
7091 F20101113_AAEKGH nguyen_t_Page_132thm.jpg
2b319f38884cd41bbc9e986922faff45
27e0614ca349b3917e89c53b79d2d1e49c703644
24931 F20101113_AAEKFT nguyen_t_Page_114.QC.jpg
bfc907a611490617ed99138f37d91cc4
f930a534173b7f24a890fe2fe9b666d9bdd915c4
4646 F20101113_AAELJK nguyen_t_Page_145thm.jpg
eca0b61563aa3291bfe64dfc91695873
dc0102ed791b46d7b302a9a1e852eeedcd7f7627
7198 F20101113_AAELIW nguyen_t_Page_129thm.jpg
f6d50175a93109942504f0b449271268
799e5905084f31cfbc6837af595011090e439308
122002 F20101113_AAEKGI nguyen_t_Page_137.jp2
d1bc198b777ffcba0cf46d9935998286
7b06b488d8931a06686a0cbfb4c5c7c58a2eaa63
24739 F20101113_AAEKFU nguyen_t_Page_112.QC.jpg
251d1a33eedf96143e845cc69b9bfadf
526e654f427943905c98a080da453f0275f97842
4632 F20101113_AAELJL nguyen_t_Page_146thm.jpg
d473353705064c9d049ae92a49dee840
b547fb864817ff7d6ec5bcbf8444d7ce865ba2ad
5151 F20101113_AAELIX nguyen_t_Page_134thm.jpg
e5b7308e731f41cc7f37b484c62ad463
62c598af25046c3e6bc9f3b1588173ad5831cbb9
F20101113_AAEKGJ nguyen_t_Page_126.tif
128ce16af9454ac54f2c0e24b2ef7a72
bd2b20d9477d68d79f2d7714c34e63a7d37e98bb
5226 F20101113_AAEKFV nguyen_t_Page_007thm.jpg
7672f17263160162bf536538ab8c8173
ee7188e2d631e388ef55a1e5858ed1d7a0ffcb52
11315 F20101113_AAELJM nguyen_t_Page_147.QC.jpg
5ef919f4baa833e422665da5580d1380
45a8fe044af4a9ff3e773f4c9b8e99a500042223
16577 F20101113_AAELIY nguyen_t_Page_135.QC.jpg
0b9e0ecb6b734a23a6f203ec58d153ae
d97e070c84e71374099ed7dd69d55804a470cfbe
23879 F20101113_AAEKGK nguyen_t_Page_108.QC.jpg
0cfd223a59014076bfed4d8224428c7e
b8b51c82d23c8ef35956fbfa75882219e84972f0
F20101113_AAEKFW nguyen_t_Page_065.tif
f3afb408da57348f33887113238230a1
0110725666c67636f84a751f77f5e9680fe30611
3728 F20101113_AAELJN nguyen_t_Page_148thm.jpg
e11a1d1296e13ce6ab641c87ace508b4
2073252cd857f352cc03f3af0e2a2bae38531991
4733 F20101113_AAELIZ nguyen_t_Page_135thm.jpg
f5f9ec0db079f51181eade9ee2d1054d
6bf5254c8b8a35a08defed81680cdb539f031cc3
2237 F20101113_AAEKHA nguyen_t_Page_109.txt
7bf4b2cfda8477b5b4fa6684df1119af
42a85b5ce4b30dd83cbc79b1db629dcc46f7ffce
70078 F20101113_AAEKGL nguyen_t_Page_090.jp2
10934fccefa25fc6a879041c4354251a
ff9a4148251b16328fa6a205d659319e40c9c7b4
41064 F20101113_AAEKFX nguyen_t_Page_070.pro
025e3442a43349fc298c9a8907aa0e00
05969b6460cd5e414575cecd3a4b5c2f50c82673
F20101113_AAELJO nguyen_t_Page_149.QC.jpg
4a6d13e61f897176106d96b60365bff5
627836fcb25b9d72e205326f2945827c251b5aa9
6847 F20101113_AAEKHB nguyen_t_Page_038thm.jpg
52cd2e56e75e37eef42d6a3d5e7895b6
51a35ffff5c96e6a784767de17657c3479830d3c
2028 F20101113_AAEKGM nguyen_t_Page_051.txt
6e4e11586d236d72a962918cf2e4e824
f25388e2582eba59f8d96ffaa493eb563b01d0a2
116790 F20101113_AAEKFY nguyen_t_Page_053.jp2
05ed6db5218d0879ba2ece9493b42a4e
655c81b7ef19b3ea3cd37c31641afeccebc456e6
7660 F20101113_AAELJP nguyen_t_Page_151thm.jpg
9ca588a223b3267fdd4c6d98cd7f45f3
c0cf222e7d64b33f273f9dca0e478d9c11525f4e
63258 F20101113_AAEKHC nguyen_t_Page_063.jp2
7ab546dd39de22e784aa2a6c40ec492f
4d7b4952b5dafc7acbcc6e43e383a5faa0958ff3
F20101113_AAEKGN nguyen_t_Page_116.tif
50c5286b4b5e034f9e4dbfe8d4d408fe
3f935adcb6193adb1cdec9d1e7c3dd54c936c073
F20101113_AAEKFZ nguyen_t_Page_096.tif
c37f60a3255d77f38208026e6530da1f
9e1c3ebcc1bed479c9150e9ca93bfaacd910cb19
27295 F20101113_AAELJQ nguyen_t_Page_152.QC.jpg
dde9a2b6f4a018a2ff74d04f7d71c7fe
4d72b2ee6779811b3afe94ecb121c6badd6f3aca
15243 F20101113_AAEKHD nguyen_t_Page_090.QC.jpg
8bdd02cca392a19bb96d74250cd71240
2e84b99180d03cbc2c6e50a85ae2a480cc4d284e
56365 F20101113_AAEKGO nguyen_t_Page_017.pro
dfc9455b88dfb1c7bdf681b178380c09
87127f54d8a98d550168dff96e7031e12898e266
29960 F20101113_AAELJR nguyen_t_Page_153.QC.jpg
b1793ba232272023060a7eab26e4f6e4
f87b7e7b97dbee06b4ef6a360a464825d18efe38
67558 F20101113_AAEKHE nguyen_t_Page_128.jp2
6b394ebe2c1d2f00336993e25fea209e
78cb7266f8578e00fc82727801e348d5f86a8307
1325 F20101113_AAEKGP nguyen_t_Page_077.txt
7e8676d109641758791216882d08ddd8
022c8c771aad4b3bc9cf95790fd8a4a756e2d466
7587 F20101113_AAELJS nguyen_t_Page_153thm.jpg
861565fdd368e7b95e941966ff6be2e2
90e122718793f55e79fac58e723cec59b49c86c6
3671 F20101113_AAEKHF nguyen_t_Page_157thm.jpg
b41265dd48ffa3c95b3576b36338c4bc
be1c6c8118679714b477e81f0824edff9e787be9
25378 F20101113_AAEKGQ nguyen_t_Page_073.QC.jpg
e08a2c43c4b0a4a932b3baabcb2dad78
2ae0e19d6d484538d810371a73629605c9c8a181
25213 F20101113_AAELJT nguyen_t_Page_155.QC.jpg
4c3f52e7cba8a44b9f7f47b964d62886
d9cd9aa2bd77dc8f5c7ce4027d6f843923386acf
39303 F20101113_AAEKHG nguyen_t_Page_140.jp2
3002bceae75a30799f4065caad0bbaac
1dff279c13ef711596c35eba634512f1e02e76c1
58798 F20101113_AAEKGR nguyen_t_Page_036.pro
2b610624ccbb21ad5e126d4600fe51b0
fc2710e88037cf1d8bc70982e292867cb558b866
7151 F20101113_AAELJU nguyen_t_Page_155thm.jpg
fff1033f56819384a902cae8775f4bad
4458cb3e409e356de730ee384b9b4dec91863c44
5945 F20101113_AAEKGS nguyen_t_Page_044thm.jpg
41e4d45fa955a9c80d32473673bea333
20b3686d2f5d39c558c8093a0112a1223d0ed3c0
7738 F20101113_AAELJV nguyen_t_Page_156thm.jpg
9d00ff1c4eec0b249c1445ad5c316b2c
977e8a95d6efacee41638b69e5ca436e20f35b6b
24419 F20101113_AAEKHH nguyen_t_Page_067.QC.jpg
ba2694cfbf87396b395683429f614898
37550e1a54d67fcfa82b8a4edfef1f5a3cce67a1
3906 F20101113_AAEKGT nguyen_t_Page_147thm.jpg
fd21983316446cec8686923675aff164
9c06a699307980a1f14f7c6bd3a3ec7b19cb2834
13193 F20101113_AAELJW nguyen_t_Page_157.QC.jpg
192b273a05c380f8fd963703eba8d017
72fe62b7d9c210b40d192fe7f74d2b997327fa86
55877 F20101113_AAEKHI nguyen_t_Page_095.pro
020af324bb7034c4201346ca4a7c173e
19cc4c2e8a68f013af91036dd08afcd3fd838a49
86717 F20101113_AAEKGU nguyen_t_Page_113.jp2
6ba641e1a73709d79d005ca97bb2df1f
f49be45c30e2642c7dbab591ec982c5cd17ec456
15678 F20101113_AAELJX nguyen_t_Page_158.QC.jpg
4409c85edc83e1e880c711f96dd5e724
6d98a44986de1e10d09c28286faf1d6db4fd786c
F20101113_AAEKHJ nguyen_t_Page_061.tif
c8e872ad2a780abb6cbe5c37057a1a35
a99a672f11cd06e65d99b0c7d9f032dba466b85a
111542 F20101113_AAEKGV nguyen_t_Page_038.jp2
243673a7906a9338a766b9564b91c901
744a65dda45fc99232e80370949d297750ba1ac7
4492 F20101113_AAELJY nguyen_t_Page_158thm.jpg
9961730276dee45897d0e95aeeff5141
a654b5768b77a9d5f55f7f99cf21b9e41ca30afb
F20101113_AAEKHK nguyen_t_Page_087.tif
435c447ccc952386ad7f509aa5e27930
9dd9e30b5220ca52ad67461c6f4b42e460d5840d
41821 F20101113_AAEKGW nguyen_t_Page_126.jpg
797655782e73fe564f121db60b4b1551
5f74e28109880af9839f0d4dd2430a7c4fa7ad58
182328 F20101113_AAELJZ UFE0021195_00001.mets
8fa5d4a86e383053e7d8d09f373a5b88
05b02d0574f91052584434bb1c08d00eae83fdb7
18107 F20101113_AAEKHL nguyen_t_Page_142.pro
a1e59d6193529e4a5b0f709ef45a3800
346869fd7e26f2b106eeab6c76a275fc3c5ced9f
111695 F20101113_AAEKGX nguyen_t_Page_106.jp2
7c8fb6238e4d810fe2677ecb17eec003
00e5c83de9e22d605b32922539b04dca9933918c
6773 F20101113_AAEKIA nguyen_t_Page_057thm.jpg
9bd164f5a795fe792c5e7e91576563c7
deaaf77a48a955096abb4c40ce22cdf5713c0a96
26812 F20101113_AAEKHM nguyen_t_Page_132.QC.jpg
390a03dd89246bee10a882c6d61da7ff
ee0ef1ba831ba85e861cf2602f4d8aab4ca7006c
F20101113_AAEKGY nguyen_t_Page_153.jp2
4f9f95c6ec497f5f79b5d56391820773
4fdd1438878179292192ea2f1b19bca2bdb78cdb
54183 F20101113_AAEKIB nguyen_t_Page_124.pro
b51d2753cc8786627965d0ca6ec03ffc
6be97174f5a08035fd41f9faddc4fb277cd53692
25619 F20101113_AAEKHN nguyen_t_Page_064.QC.jpg
82c51f9a5ebe9949eefd95f971f1852f
1e470887764ca8898336da1601b842675d602be5
F20101113_AAEKGZ nguyen_t_Page_066.tif
602287bea9c6582f7bbf2eeafa83520a
7d27141f30577b66b27e62b5436c37a16bc16a51
93138 F20101113_AAEKIC nguyen_t_Page_065.jp2
d8b7cf9e4e1b04b5a9289ba11a10bcee
3921c16a710000714e412ce8e256da635672c94a
1981 F20101113_AAEKHO nguyen_t_Page_004.txt
b3458871920b5688759d3152fb51a8fc
9a2878aa230d9a8eb6f5b59da1775cdb304dd24b
85893 F20101113_AAEKID nguyen_t_Page_012.jp2
fa971dc3582b50327b2a0cfb3b7a8d9a
bd41308951c4e0e4bc19d93df43f3be2c2b8867f
100715 F20101113_AAEKHP nguyen_t_Page_066.jp2
14f86fec1e229548c0c2aa9fc98e4dc5
c93f5a24de18ddf6902f966491ade764b0abd926
77456 F20101113_AAEKIE nguyen_t_Page_122.jpg
a3086a5717be21de9cc54b93a0f294f5
11ea2dfd3696e68092ef7e7aa30b9911bf8d996c
23187 F20101113_AAEKHQ nguyen_t_Page_054.QC.jpg
a7b6696552a0e0431621ee078167a2bd
e0f5bd7caf25ef9fe43cd770b4f68a0477cf7ecd
F20101113_AAEKIF nguyen_t_Page_103.tif
67817f56c60c7b3994598ebe3e73b5a3
9202d7e221dac04d5b2cf8ccccc649780740fe22
2098 F20101113_AAEKHR nguyen_t_Page_116.txt
78739fe0cc4f72d188d2ebfc28f63fdb
2d46a2f068a885001ce4878b1eb4513e0aad71eb
6530 F20101113_AAEKIG nguyen_t_Page_071thm.jpg
2dd865d1a0747c23cc881f2c2ad5a53d
4004785c1d5f18b988e4f459871ff0cd962a852e
24564 F20101113_AAEKHS nguyen_t_Page_097.QC.jpg
33c375c0dcc61a2add0add4ed7ae0ac7
f2a15b1899959f72e1f8b80983b96be200b597d4
75112 F20101113_AAEKIH nguyen_t_Page_067.jpg
2f6fe0891041510cc67a898d51215ff0
704aaf174556f7f9502f0a01e54564f9e3a15f5e
79918 F20101113_AAEKHT nguyen_t_Page_098.jpg
2a67e027f88be50b1da166256a72e254
b091ea0953ccc055b6818ff553eb48b11b49ec9e
F20101113_AAEKHU nguyen_t_Page_084.tif
e0aac43a344feb6d64b6326166011af2
f55745d846ef1ec4be27221754322b75afac3431
2986 F20101113_AAEKII nguyen_t_Page_007.txt
2f1d157e34035e450cf6a92db0af0f77
e21616578785fed1f0d28922dd31ef2b74c938f6
78172 F20101113_AAEKHV nguyen_t_Page_073.jpg
76ad87ce7385fc096790e238201e947a
e1b4dfa0c702dbcf09b89e27e3d8690c3ce3f8d1
117167 F20101113_AAEKIJ nguyen_t_Page_080.jp2
957f736cd884acb7533ea7e9adaf3228
a5f0717f16f3337070c8dfba36d77b9ffa1b150d
66351 F20101113_AAEKHW nguyen_t_Page_105.jpg
662f1936beff9a29728995843d875680
eda7c39b8e66647c6a89ba0893cb821ab9f1de60
81054 F20101113_AAEKIK nguyen_t_Page_007.jpg
164e9b60a7d731c88bd31b77919d1731
020922786848febd5b634a48fdfc45e064a245ce
F20101113_AAEKHX nguyen_t_Page_076.tif
c86e5fc6c45acad0ddfcfdce1d4eed77
12dac195abc273be14ed7df458ad1c690775d0c3
F20101113_AAEKJA nguyen_t_Page_092.tif
7e5b72da898c58b3ddc96b104891c48c
bf0afc7dee871bb5b44fd880e0c498b47d1a3129
2155 F20101113_AAEKIL nguyen_t_Page_139.txt
753fb037ba183c3339b61fe0c81e5ca8
94f4f4cc3c474ae753aa30a21dc3cef7f6c75fb7
77337 F20101113_AAEKHY nguyen_t_Page_016.jpg
242d4cb3cf69a348294093ff6083f9d6
69ed1472cec99829224216805c7039e74e520ce3
6686 F20101113_AAEKJB nguyen_t_Page_098thm.jpg
cec3591aec546d798d8a37b0d8d39e0f
fc09fb8ec54bdfde8b55c7339ad2348aa56bace8
F20101113_AAEKIM nguyen_t_Page_022.tif
676c15f8b634c110594007da54c5b8fe
e580e32cfeb8cd82263ff32415cb403b783603af
F20101113_AAEKHZ nguyen_t_Page_083.txt
23db65b7c1e05ee3feb1f3d477c458bc
d537dff1d3724e9dcb05a345007ab930722b28d1
478 F20101113_AAEKJC nguyen_t_Page_037.txt
350c11dc9449a2ed6b1ffd347f3ef497
0a45e337ddbbe58354be78c6ea17b5198e25cc4e
114127 F20101113_AAEKIN nguyen_t_Page_058.jp2
c6967927a54db9392c5f358e6a4b4fb0
471eaf6bb84af0941a7302f7906a5a3d6550c3eb
57034 F20101113_AAEKJD nguyen_t_Page_012.jpg
9f12ab701cbc05cdbf86dcdf42ca9d31
2c5f5f21dbf0a1f0e6c3c731d8202b9ab27e4478
5525 F20101113_AAEKIO nguyen_t_Page_009.pro
34bdd09a6c9870bfa91b81785b9632e2
a3299a444bcb62446289b6514432003b3e1170ad
45599 F20101113_AAEKJE nguyen_t_Page_066.pro
8dd060c29f3f02c91491ad6a957232e3
99bf728ae241f1949d20b8de5bda5af377d44976
115100 F20101113_AAEKIP nguyen_t_Page_030.jp2
eea5a31c95244178925692c1716d3f70
99028717da9d9cdffdb2ae592320e6e7e44a8cc0
22751 F20101113_AAEKJF nguyen_t_Page_075.QC.jpg
db9683d7483750c42b3f335137c4e718
11d49a68c22c87167447c33be35b4d8f81f632d1
71223 F20101113_AAEKIQ nguyen_t_Page_072.jpg
f17c932c887f5440de1bd2faaf734f74
ff6f9a0634396a099f4dbcdbbe0e81cee90aa33d
26196 F20101113_AAEKJG nguyen_t_Page_034.QC.jpg
3f80c6b06654ea828b9dbe13990f4426
8fdb6f5f38f07ab46c9159b3a4191e0b7021926f
2222 F20101113_AAEKIR nguyen_t_Page_033.txt
c5813d1e4074f88ad662fd81e2033927
662a3e2a8f76338a15d808367d0c6bd8520f076c
32645 F20101113_AAEKJH nguyen_t_Page_138.pro
04eead7a5cd3a2a953312730082dd0ef
b6e5be0b51f2b776f805af37fc1ed348b9db0f35
45743 F20101113_AAEKIS nguyen_t_Page_103.pro
7583ec33b32a070af8c6203015366891
0d795e3d96aee59966acab7e9f8713df03538252
16173 F20101113_AAEKJI nguyen_t_Page_133.pro
6b262b52df8592f3dc55382c72d3b192
7d9e855c4af8c43007320318b8bc56c90807a3bb
33091 F20101113_AAEKIT nguyen_t_Page_148.jpg
85cabf611ea58dc624aa83689a065ab4
bb115fdaf5ad91cfd05c2dfbfb6717d326340ddc
17314 F20101113_AAEKIU nguyen_t_Page_084.QC.jpg
70e80c0f1714b472a29092d8b84fd5f4
0f80232ca358125ee8b490e5a893c6d826166027
48867 F20101113_AAEKJJ nguyen_t_Page_011.pro
23e0e348b15bf316d1f5061ff35afbae
55d7e30fa63a2963c94d4df1edc93087232da3e6
83314 F20101113_AAEKIV nguyen_t_Page_008.jpg
d3b53d6c036619d65a09c8e3ef2447b7
dc96fba4c1eb75e0ee467484c6d914f7cab06139
52162 F20101113_AAEKJK nguyen_t_Page_084.jpg
e34ded91a3a825954fa4ba9557249425
6525cd47a53a574908234052028c1e70ad7b8437
6918 F20101113_AAEKIW nguyen_t_Page_033thm.jpg
af853dbbf7d9db0c3783ca922268ea76
2447b8813d12f9295d467c4dd505325399b4d885
13422 F20101113_AAEKKA nguyen_t_Page_140.pro
af63afa43ae005052205edd0fe30b2c1
f62a5a7271a517f3e2993180dd5fcb083773f3b8
118094 F20101113_AAEKJL nguyen_t_Page_046.jp2
e0f6dde0c0856c63387852fccafc1deb
8c06a1e45bb5599733111508ef39f841a91683dd
56335 F20101113_AAEKIX nguyen_t_Page_031.pro
37eb15dccf5ea481637a8f5e80d03348
7eeb6a614fab8eb2319020fb8d1d0abb00f85d20
F20101113_AAEKKB nguyen_t_Page_011.tif
93c3b79f399147d00641f25ac0a0f2a2
3acf5421cc63108c091ab270c30fc2b3e9f1b430
5659 F20101113_AAEKJM nguyen_t_Page_002.jp2
42f4e7b23778b8b9d0046742ad545716
0e55168a2875f1ba5d2bd8ca7e14f5ac5078069b
2118 F20101113_AAEKIY nguyen_t_Page_032.txt
2cca7a433a0dfc11ff09b1bf82b441b6
3faa2b56ec9ad2d043641cf8d409b627ebace5a5
F20101113_AAEKKC nguyen_t_Page_077.tif
8a4e71f209550773546a776b356267dd
4d9a3f5e2fa72d3c42ed593da160865e0ed54498
1974 F20101113_AAEKJN nguyen_t_Page_093.txt
be5912281481d4e6ca24237d36f9a37f
f3af8252cf5fa9d7c00a768ea5832bb22d0e6686
23494 F20101113_AAEKIZ nguyen_t_Page_131.QC.jpg
28cde275b7bc98f08058cf118915aa97
8cada6198bb60412ac5776c28df221049e570e32
7356 F20101113_AAEKKD nguyen_t_Page_152thm.jpg
51816b9ad5b6f18de5ed6dc0377b48e2
dffe5192f0ee1f38ca76fa7737b68bc550c1dc42
2454 F20101113_AAEKJO nguyen_t_Page_008.txt
1441711d7eb69a97c087dfce03cfc665
032aba2dfd82beaed9e1ce6653a6de5e43dd0a1e
25862 F20101113_AAEKKE nguyen_t_Page_047.QC.jpg
8b8e8b51fea84e2925562b83aef11d8d
3f52496c6f7266bf96110a949b552a797c9872e7
91695 F20101113_AAEKJP nguyen_t_Page_154.jpg
4fb0d18535387762d8ff873d5b9395b0
56ea15a78525f4090ab500782647c1eeef89486a
98779 F20101113_AAEKKF nguyen_t_Page_076.jp2
e08c7703913644df414eecdce62ca4a9
16d343767116eb011201c8568153ba1463a7e16d
73414 F20101113_AAEKJQ nguyen_t_Page_083.jpg
40d6eff53aaef0a22c78f198c4bbb5e9
d2bcbcfdd7c4aae53ed9fb7c578eac876046a499
31320 F20101113_AAEKKG nguyen_t_Page_063.pro
9c909da9abf31775cbee09b4e38a67ec
27c57ef8eab7e302fd699806defcf18763e43913
95033 F20101113_AAEKJR nguyen_t_Page_137.jpg
19313e3bf8f64c19662ff1a851f80a7b
e68596b8f867f8684ee55948ad073bcdede839b8
73787 F20101113_AAEKKH nguyen_t_Page_035.jpg
daadae532fe95a52d3e8829a9a73df8b
717f534a5a4d03808207b336aea16a10f3fbb1d6
109418 F20101113_AAEKJS nguyen_t_Page_057.jp2
dccfe6569391ca39128eb321245cb2e0
24207bd668a5cd17c42c28c5d26d15b31c592b2d
F20101113_AAEKKI nguyen_t_Page_050.tif
4b3cef0da279416a3809cd5380895ec5
919cabf5013c7eadf980e14cecedd3bc6b9f03c3
1887 F20101113_AAEKJT nguyen_t_Page_009thm.jpg
468d6ad3bf473cfe1cd018f0945b2133
5e621dec982ceb322a586d00c9111356969f7b75
5146 F20101113_AAEKKJ nguyen_t_Page_087thm.jpg
1e4772ab8b66af5bb175d2cad0d79206
28f802608390ca28046fe261c878743c197c30a0
25694 F20101113_AAEKJU nguyen_t_Page_055.QC.jpg
b359b752e43a1b7aa3390d6ed1d85209
a3eb3d3ca0c5f084692dfc7019fc5b3c32aad57e
145987 F20101113_AAEKJV nguyen_t_Page_154.jp2
4c3ec28e2e1c0343309b456b85469e8b
c0651781279ba941533a756bd53d4a820a65c599
1051916 F20101113_AAEKKK nguyen_t_Page_044.jp2
b14490b4dac2db3c831a7ebd5cfbed56
dd583cc74f6d6a3baf0eee2eabd8a0eafdc2ac87
54644 F20101113_AAEKJW nguyen_t_Page_042.pro
ad0de234ecbbdfd70aad6baff7bad430
62bf1897c6b56544cd3f2f3fdb2ca0e990a4dbc3
28067 F20101113_AAEKKL nguyen_t_Page_151.QC.jpg
8cef97cf77816ab8c422770757aa0fd9
512caa5bc3511c5a27435f209440fae6ff47512a
56545 F20101113_AAEKJX nguyen_t_Page_079.jp2
96d68cd2a4511c777ae845112e0a068c
50421514de71f660db1a605118c8be6f458239f1
47773 F20101113_AAEKLA nguyen_t_Page_141.jp2
083885815e5142a62e837b52d2c5db45
841d55bdb52b7aa036eee32d698470be4e3bff19
116918 F20101113_AAEKKM nguyen_t_Page_042.jp2
6958c3664e5ab669589a92bab124af6e
185659c74ffc9ef87fe07cd4023b6d07cb99c0eb
17223 F20101113_AAEKJY nguyen_t_Page_092.QC.jpg
a2eb09ada059f071d331e88e1b69a249
4cdebc50b285bc9cc75c44de8bfa3c854fc585a2
75184 F20101113_AAEKLB nguyen_t_Page_030.jpg
d7361a43a9e326a7ecb77271c18066c1
d343046b2a2f597e16ff6dd9f4f807a7aa899cc4
19687 F20101113_AAEKKN nguyen_t_Page_109.QC.jpg
9c6aa9f0dbae0b789387d57a424e8e5e
1c75310c61566b9ecac47d08354d07036ddbddb0
2226 F20101113_AAEKJZ nguyen_t_Page_029.txt
b27ee5e64599d1ccfabd43c2436c584d
78d11751b581cdca8598c5fb82efbb890df86143
3875 F20101113_AAEKLC nguyen_t_Page_024thm.jpg
1361b375b25fd2ddee911fc9a5d6fb0e
f875b31a253f48b1af829246b385c6629fcbe6ca
53833 F20101113_AAEKLD nguyen_t_Page_099.pro
7e805a3023660a841f41d0c683b71aa9
cc5081650a5d82d453c9bc34764de93066cc667b
10535 F20101113_AAEKKO nguyen_t_Page_148.QC.jpg
933d08fb703d924dbf96b689a2c92b63
43637797b7c68957668144aa600202379797f732
24876 F20101113_AAEKLE nguyen_t_Page_058.QC.jpg
0fcadcfe8784841ca9f1460c5e322b36
25bd00f4b3a675ab5eecd0ab4635c6b08591c59e
6651 F20101113_AAEKKP nguyen_t_Page_116thm.jpg
460ca3d64e637700b77be33b1529ea2c
884bee22212063a9489832f04b3d9518e1a01e20
38295 F20101113_AAEKLF nguyen_t_Page_147.jp2
07eaea6010b923d0a66e3853cbd94fa2
66f668a3cc65a39cb2b3eb28f82c831f52a2a6bd
73677 F20101113_AAEKKQ nguyen_t_Page_051.jpg
735bbc83737239270d731c9e422e6559
44feb70b8b6c5fdea950986ee7254b590afaf95f
1376 F20101113_AAEKLG nguyen_t_Page_063.txt
327ad5105ef739b23a081fbe70d464b5
3d93c900578f7f12987a71ba4ed96996d2a39fa5
4426 F20101113_AAEKKR nguyen_t_Page_003.jp2
26c9cd99843bf6b7b84387cca28d9533
9ab6e3a2c3698d1ad084d4debeef342bb1852d0c
4242 F20101113_AAEKLH nguyen_t_Page_088.txt
4a4e9429f48f5f10201b708def24af49
3e4437f9503d7a5edf37f1c0ac2bc8747357ae3d
18225 F20101113_AAEKKS nguyen_t_Page_081.QC.jpg
4bf251fca39ab2a57f4e857980f00684
afc787993a474893fe42a32d7ef6447b81d291cd
27017 F20101113_AAEKLI nguyen_t_Page_139.QC.jpg
6fd64c0bf4b7140317653d5ea62fef02
1366cdd013d383dad4a1b5dd6bab7594b94b071e
110636 F20101113_AAEKKT nguyen_t_Page_071.jp2
e9b95dd94aee71eabdade84739e2f8cf
98d28cf47e5f3ffa6a07bf89cbcc4bf73c7ac233
60700 F20101113_AAEKLJ nguyen_t_Page_098.pro
9e1279dfae85ac1bad81af901a2de683
61616d0fb6f016b894c4161bde536d8403edd164
2202 F20101113_AAEKKU nguyen_t_Page_016.txt
d8dae3f93cd79d6fdea9f2f84d5484e6
72a37aa6d2faa2ecff30c8cfca8439bc7735be28
6792 F20101113_AAEKLK nguyen_t_Page_074thm.jpg
bef2360abf6b38a9565f53c4138f1ccd
37bb8e55b66750d29c371713f21ce72970566afc
110297 F20101113_AAEKKV nguyen_t_Page_093.jp2
8f136945f0fd6edbe7210b3b961505c8
ce7547cb7a9907ed941a5d16fea2b04b89a0f03d
50692 F20101113_AAEKKW nguyen_t_Page_118.pro
85688bc4d36fbe3a08cbbe52bbe66089
49bd83d73ad7361e8551894abc4d2c69e98173cf
22958 F20101113_AAEKMA nguyen_t_Page_060.QC.jpg
25ae735349282a231a83f2d8e6c1c19d
d22bbffb446239856093f7ff940c33a07ba6dfb9
67942 F20101113_AAEKLL nguyen_t_Page_154.pro
3be489e009b9fef9164b65a67ac67688
f366b628592fdf3c877072c0dec54630ce3147d6
6859 F20101113_AAEKKX nguyen_t_Page_130thm.jpg
df9d58f73fb7bc6adb1c5380f4528cfa
b12e3ed78dd277ef2144012c0eac799429d089ec
69268 F20101113_AAEKMB nguyen_t_Page_061.jpg
d70dc6030c999894b327209edbb7cc04
fd74b64f08aaf46979f701da68c731afecf1e106
113914 F20101113_AAEKLM nguyen_t_Page_035.jp2
c681d977609c9ce36df4cc2f04640fe5
6a72ef1bfb637c5a7fb7b268dce97faada0b7188
5829 F20101113_AAEKKY nguyen_t_Page_110thm.jpg
1b3d87257a807735a1bd25844584766a
21e53bc05fc0dfa2a08868aa577122eb38518a47
23703 F20101113_AAEKMC nguyen_t_Page_099.QC.jpg
0e5af6772fa847f17be87e045d1f8917
48e0f024b0690a79098048f30af1c7cbcbab7667
F20101113_AAEKLN nguyen_t_Page_115thm.jpg
e50ffd3b09f927b231b3345ec9d779ab
b75421907bdfdbbbc337e724c1625b526988ad3d
1051986 F20101113_AAEKKZ nguyen_t_Page_005.jp2
5221272a98ad25611c09c3e2b519735b
7f3874de1dc59cec6e76c89a27f22e68ce8451ab
1358 F20101113_AAEKMD nguyen_t_Page_143.txt
327a3dd65a4ac5e029b443f2a2d0112b
e670950f6a119beeec9efdcc3db7e7b5be080e79
2400 F20101113_AAEKLO nguyen_t_Page_152.txt
d369f787850d71ea50e9a01a14021b96
8a106d2989dcbcc815771adef0578398ab40ec1c
38480 F20101113_AAEKME nguyen_t_Page_079.jpg
3f929fd1e7ab606921489626bef12c42
e1444e0c18977d19bb4a1b56f69bc53e1d237940
11302 F20101113_AAEKLP nguyen_t_Page_142.QC.jpg
ba2753f26211f5a8e591de66b31d2a09
0617f061d3866bffe795949442c4473cc3864334
75623 F20101113_AAEKMF nguyen_t_Page_058.jpg
15b2c9b9d911d9355702dabdf5e76fea
77d25dadf05788c15f528d04dddd091bce93caf3
F20101113_AAEKLQ nguyen_t_Page_028.tif
991fbfd70a2341a6b9e023d3961e2657
0ac90ee05e0932eceb613f456e2f960d91fb4833
F20101113_AAEKMG nguyen_t_Page_005.tif
e75ea5fb0f56cb2ae7c18d2e5fbefcd4
2b4a19205b72598b4c1eeee9249403611d30fa6e
25008 F20101113_AAEKLR nguyen_t_Page_123.QC.jpg
5d08fd8df27a3503f08a4b786b9e14c2
dae60359ba2cbbf583985c27dd4252a79a7dd4a8
2065 F20101113_AAEKMH nguyen_t_Page_028.txt
69c6b7f5e4f4011e72264f66a93bff58
f8150e5e39578432d108bddd2649c7df4cf78022
24974 F20101113_AAEKLS nguyen_t_Page_032.QC.jpg
5891ccdebb3296406b3f4a01c2053cdb
a098c7de341520a04dc532e46830fe1c6104afc6
53226 F20101113_AAEKMI nguyen_t_Page_067.pro
a81a578b810f503428b0403fb8f30b79
1c24849db50ad3e86196373cd2a6b3189092f0ec
25067 F20101113_AAEKLT nguyen_t_Page_014.QC.jpg
90848f03da80e2ebbd9a9ddc273522f0
faa4c5dd8b0b79d1997d21376b91d2d45c4f78e5
18843 F20101113_AAEKMJ nguyen_t_Page_091.QC.jpg
fd5055e66709cb5adff8d43f14897c93
cd86079f8356eba5f453d8ed3994fbfcff930759
2182 F20101113_AAEKLU nguyen_t_Page_064.txt
d1bae5ce71268cc8b1b7636d6414f5df
6f76730f700148b57eba0292fb1781da2882a36c
981499 F20101113_AAEKMK nguyen_t_Page_021.jp2
de71746148dc8343ccc5112be6c1f9cb
a2f42eb0380a29283f7e4a84cf71f1a4ef5d33e6
F20101113_AAEKLV nguyen_t_Page_093.tif
5082b82b8288fc986ecdee6641d360b4
6266d29c932691b979eec69be6f10ff96330bd09
117148 F20101113_AAEKML nguyen_t_Page_136.jp2
2155023aac845c5c904f2089394c1b82
a53d410625e5497eaf346fd07fd4dea8435ca9bb
24689 F20101113_AAEKLW nguyen_t_Page_098.QC.jpg
e38d21c9697f4bfa8ebb1e1729b0ec2a
e32ad5f0519a408c2424bf5df6401265debf4753
57413 F20101113_AAEKLX nguyen_t_Page_097.pro
6a658381ae17912d21c81103f30c6b3e
254da577907b1048191b5407d6724f0c6bee8c4f
21782 F20101113_AAEKNA nguyen_t_Page_062.QC.jpg
1e2863504db57032bbb550397fd83d70
9eb7311731e4190105745fdcd6b1a5921f14b972
4996 F20101113_AAEKMM nguyen_t_Page_084thm.jpg
a07248dc709580d2191543eca78550f3
2a6c0068c2e3215a0e7f60ddf961f2e6a591150b
25668 F20101113_AAEKLY nguyen_t_Page_107.QC.jpg
a3077e550b4e8cb1e290a9eaed244a75
e21ef5ace3d07b4a531afaebb91e9536df7fea89
50625 F20101113_AAEKNB nguyen_t_Page_083.pro
1d2ce7551a120700c1fd2a99f8dbc677
d64a731d397bb0024a665c6b417fe9f84e6b35da
2169 F20101113_AAEKMN nguyen_t_Page_067.txt
056fb378c75888dbfc8901b747617f20
ff6ef2e01d3e7288ca7182eff833eb94bc746acf
73853 F20101113_AAEKLZ nguyen_t_Page_032.jpg
533693590cb913843108febc5159fbea
3ebd8abfc86ecbb510feed1cce1fba526a628352
25400 F20101113_AAEKNC nguyen_t_Page_042.QC.jpg
d46a47dadc5f13181ca1a952cc03b159
79f7ea3000cb3f2c3651a95580b69a4ba49454f3
F20101113_AAEKMO nguyen_t_Page_055.tif
5ef40fd6b42b29977e02ee29825ed13f
ad7435ef887d4c1df9c9e3aec2d46766d7fa88f8
6075 F20101113_AAEKND nguyen_t_Page_019thm.jpg
947579d138cbc1f05d42694db120b527
db9f9e05e385364d7a6fc82fa5dc2f009387b325
17802 F20101113_AAEKMP nguyen_t_Page_115.jpg
c7d32a37eb56932993cccd070bb70f18
d149d1d89b69b8d224e55ca5b5fb97df024e107c
72777 F20101113_AAEKNE nguyen_t_Page_108.jpg
2daa76f37ceb97ca901953ccd6af0fcd
5b3b4afba03ff4650283aaca757fa5e5a9a7e76d
27582 F20101113_AAEKMQ nguyen_t_Page_006.QC.jpg
8187d8350e8bf3d75af26f0a7d563ef7
5922ee220dcda8aed4bdd3f803ca9475fef0176c
19026 F20101113_AAEKNF nguyen_t_Page_012.QC.jpg
7d7a1ec401fb43ec352862c27c70a566
5063a5bc3cf5f4285c203d9c1c7e7fb0932d2e26
25535 F20101113_AAEKMR nguyen_t_Page_120.QC.jpg
436c7cb05e54dc5e673174637c200b3d
790f56961ccdc432ab8a7ab2d0cdc2fcc3321992
20872 F20101113_AAEKNG nguyen_t_Page_065.QC.jpg
cbfea9c54bf8e5d42ac741c15af8882c
1a82c26c0571b7ac694a1939b56714741d52f3ee
78095 F20101113_AAEKMS nguyen_t_Page_084.jp2
3533e8d461b56097befc6d0040b2e896
526640fe69353b6eb1441b7a4313698cf0ccb446
F20101113_AAEKNH nguyen_t_Page_020.txt
e8efb368bc2c434ba5eb4fa2ef0ee409
19d14519bc9f410ffa625625452eae60f40f3ba9
54039 F20101113_AAEKMT nguyen_t_Page_074.pro
b6132e1066ec9996f4a929ce2b34cc72
78befbfd741166d2921bc0fe032372869bcb10ce
F20101113_AAEKNI nguyen_t_Page_018.tif
e6bde5d52d0fc89f339aad2756bb251f
607351cf21df877bc1962185b39a5417e9142285
F20101113_AAEKMU nguyen_t_Page_152.tif
6e3e5be73155114953dcae387f257d97
806dc7d6cafc738a79931667a47b222c6ea9b57c
2212 F20101113_AAEKNJ nguyen_t_Page_102.txt
69467a87f7e55a6f957992076aaf4b36
260d3c664aa7d970d4e0d59079b4a501e71760ff
F20101113_AAEKMV nguyen_t_Page_068.tif
9744fc8f546321266f0b5c822339774f
f0a375b5c43bcd0f48dd9d22ade23a6f0d23cb40
1483 F20101113_AAEKNK nguyen_t_Page_141.txt
27b3cecb8af67a29f12ce83554a6e93b
0f842f082df066a31e8ba6c2bb1bc22511a7c2c5
3364 F20101113_AAEKMW nguyen_t_Page_010thm.jpg
1e4298adb349a26c7a5532157a4f1de3
69891d4120c6d96f55db94595f6ca71962575449
73811 F20101113_AAEKNL nguyen_t_Page_023.jpg
236a8baaf8446674b863092a26b28357
e1d7df278bc4b279fbc097900707998cc23e6fa9
6906 F20101113_AAEKMX nguyen_t_Page_031thm.jpg
ed28e430ed8473ae5b13ee17b64d00f4
cfe4088cd096657b23b622f6b75954d3e7d4ff9b
F20101113_AAEKOA nguyen_t_Page_088.tif
48a97a0018c207cd77dd9768fbf45010
5ea1c7f393c7d703a883238a6d1e15d3b89604c8
F20101113_AAEKNM nguyen_t_Page_012.tif
2b7127da0eca0203d9132e331086653b
77ca55923149f38b19a2a21269c5d0b287220cbd
1433 F20101113_AAEKMY nguyen_t_Page_128.txt
7618f5f711eb06000082f58a2e79fa25
e4c4fbb01d5a02456b0d0ed88929ec071ca277d7
6188 F20101113_AAEKOB nguyen_t_Page_062thm.jpg
1f1107e04b62c3b5c2c521d708ccdcd5
f2a75650dacf5f4fcc2c0a8a0af8c5e3774d2d04
6742 F20101113_AAEKMZ nguyen_t_Page_123thm.jpg
6ad49039c67b81b42fcaf05a845f1cbc
7916ef2d6425ca3c129a1e278699cb3bf4c0cab0
119321 F20101113_AAEKOC nguyen_t_Page_073.jp2
06ded98d3fcdd5eb1092458690d33537
6a0cce6b1993146a311819aa851c70e277f55a0f
80 F20101113_AAEKNN nguyen_t_Page_003.txt
dc77786b5c1717680485a503fcd825e0
a72f5bf28ffda001d0ca8e46418fa440af4a57c9
73972 F20101113_AAEKOD nguyen_t_Page_088.jpg
522fd0afb547c4775caf56f99da6c71e
bf13d6e757865c025adb751cd7ffa05b3ad92954
43504 F20101113_AAEKNO nguyen_t_Page_021.pro
5aa2eac935d1b03a7f0bee6e439b1eac
3cf22f66fbdf313e23e9cafb1d470d6e148379d7
6395 F20101113_AAEKOE nguyen_t_Page_066thm.jpg
7d7bd6fc8e77c02f537709dad4061614
1fb1f6a7afa8901cb788542e7f3807134a7227b2
6507 F20101113_AAEKNP nguyen_t_Page_086thm.jpg
053f45b18a7f25182b7ce81b245fe381
187b797af5017b6d78ccf5153a056a2835f42e92
52854 F20101113_AAEKOF nguyen_t_Page_080.pro
b7c6b3b69156105e57b36d4c228cdd7b
0207bfb3ace99a0b311f283677a762c8d91caf93
41916 F20101113_AAEKNQ nguyen_t_Page_149.jp2
152115fe87c4ab67dde3816778dad7c9
02925ff9df856cb202b024d4392beba958560f5c
F20101113_AAEKOG nguyen_t_Page_138.tif
c5936e2b07f1f0faf994c64f5d730049
dfabd1b317909a308a305203857aee479ec43710
66067 F20101113_AAEKNR nguyen_t_Page_065.jpg
2c3a6edac6db8420c1619669059f4026
ddb92ca16143586e998ec262ef83ab309e9b3f2e
F20101113_AAEKOH nguyen_t_Page_074.tif
37c1df5b506bd62a31e2e4d51abf704e
ff1f4b9ad439c9aa462eea43ef99e78f990c2462
93447 F20101113_AAEKNS nguyen_t_Page_006.pro
2905a42b2245649d3c56c8c5c2edc6e0
a9f85efe49b655f57509cab41d46a9285d64b192
F20101113_AAEKOI nguyen_t_Page_121.txt
d24da6101f367471294a125426eff312
14ab3ec228f9c83918f802379b31995d51c172ea
F20101113_AAEKNT nguyen_t_Page_023thm.jpg
5c4e671f681a838557ad051a38400d78
ade4b9ad920939f18216bdf3a8f787ff288b8b60
1997 F20101113_AAEKOJ nguyen_t_Page_104.txt
106ad25ab4949023cbf1fdad80e77ebe
9c585886830cd1488bd1f121b6d6c91c070a04ca
57193 F20101113_AAEKNU nguyen_t_Page_094.pro
643bc458faf2ccb5f77b908165509581
53ee8b5edd7d89c0fd8e32f418d92b682bf75e4a
5629 F20101113_AAEKOK nguyen_t_Page_081thm.jpg
73302133f73d6a12cde47ae94752b647
2d22935c4121f34d3656afe46c6f6075bae9195d
F20101113_AAEKNV nguyen_t_Page_117.tif
259b8ef0a6e1eed8a7dc56da72eeb927
bdeeac16a67370a059c8211e45f6f37cd559490f
F20101113_AAEKOL nguyen_t_Page_150.tif
bde137d247acd060e767623d8390e14c
bbd12d6a52da917916bb2629f7693fa097fa28f0
2145 F20101113_AAEKNW nguyen_t_Page_114.txt
6600eafeb72591e8302df888bdd2302e
6488f84f40f3c4c6bfb2cf09ab8cd32ea967b6af
2153 F20101113_AAEKPA nguyen_t_Page_105.txt
8fd9f1113952630e7567253e88c1cffa
c42392f091726b08deee3c7231ef6bae3248a6f0
F20101113_AAEKOM nguyen_t_Page_034.jpg
5d142cd51fb32c100670a8e081aa099e
49b48893a34ef0833a1de1bbdc524de8dfa97ef4
3962 F20101113_AAEKNX nguyen_t_Page_140thm.jpg
b7b8c5cbd14275224848d715d6992911
73cd9f69cf3e77b7f0c4887b4d178c41a22d3780
72058 F20101113_AAEKPB nguyen_t_Page_004.jpg
d26f985cea440e7c9ff16db4d77fdc1f
27f6d70adc5b845b73b4c6c5224ca0d0e8e0213b
40755 F20101113_AAEKON nguyen_t_Page_133.jpg
b63ef2138872b2697b24d0a8503115ee
150f34994884746873752ca20933c7526d5e046e
52094 F20101113_AAEKNY nguyen_t_Page_028.pro
f06eb6ad79cc875d5a5a9555ba70ba38
c978a21a85d6497a6d832607047979d715c0e411
F20101113_AAEKPC nguyen_t_Page_004.tif
abd068565da8d4d441af1ae76b1821de
a9482976b2b79ddfb5a1edc0ed71455ce20773d0
78759 F20101113_AAEKNZ nguyen_t_Page_046.jpg
ed82a2e7bbc133b34b2c8971611fe8bc
d81d454e19263a1aa381f0c71f483fb06517548e
F20101113_AAEKPD nguyen_t_Page_157.tif
390f2b7605cd1392ae343831e4a1e7a8
8e9e4f8fc4bb4d02d9bef66d32c806ee6d748d0b
55946 F20101113_AAEKOO nguyen_t_Page_073.pro
313bf292f98b1a3a286c9828d32e4481
63e5cae76c18c5a48d64cd655c40f6c79a9d3ef7
6907 F20101113_AAEKPE nguyen_t_Page_016thm.jpg
ff1eb7bca09484df4833ec714177b3d5
7de234b12bfe5219aaff536e476dce8122d6e199
107384 F20101113_AAEKOP nguyen_t_Page_056.jp2
6d5b578ba112a3e9b51ecf94a0eda1d1
5c0fa1157286a2b9207ff72a72ac05c6a24c5b2b
2188 F20101113_AAEKPF nguyen_t_Page_015.txt
468fa247550b6531bb4f3670bb058e62
d584f5330a79b79ddda9c269ef2ce73c553eefce
6957 F20101113_AAEKOQ nguyen_t_Page_124thm.jpg
a5c23a59d069e4c39cf2ba246be8946c
4367bb0be74c242da661d0b764681782d0a51072
1183 F20101113_AAEKPG nguyen_t_Page_147.txt
31e46f9ef4388a0f0291daee12db7db5
3843e5215d90084b881833146a78d002ee88e8d0
43370 F20101113_AAEKOR nguyen_t_Page_110.pro
46326b262c1dada5e60194c3d30910e4
f7996d15a86306e2cd5b161b373dfab26bbb7cc2
49147 F20101113_AAEKPH nguyen_t_Page_077.jpg
3b94055931ff877ba5d75610a7105950
cdd4fad74f2ac1fde60c83dc971200c9ca75e36e
6674 F20101113_AAEKOS nguyen_t_Page_138thm.jpg
0ddd2bebfb81e3c9d8940f3b00f633b9
e3f1571e1a69b0c5f65177b37dd3a955790e26de
26298 F20101113_AAEKPI nguyen_t_Page_017.QC.jpg
f9b4fd3e0dbcb0c56fbb9aa878f615fd
173acec821f09fd5cdc5fe993cb25803c1bb1726
7600 F20101113_AAEKOT nguyen_t_Page_037.QC.jpg
0380135a075a6475ba2cbfad29f267ae
3f6205e4d161f7d6ee21ac365ba5711490441f1f
54314 F20101113_AAEKPJ nguyen_t_Page_123.pro
d29d144068d47acfa66e5a5de55e35a9
50915fdacafe2164738b196e57d70b9427e8ff16
95754 F20101113_AAEKOU nguyen_t_Page_109.jp2
fd4c12fc1bd4737a18c6e7b97854c8a9
2a9f3910f9977a92c0b35794c18b7199f1ea6e42
25184 F20101113_AAEKPK nguyen_t_Page_150.QC.jpg
58c8a34d40136328fccbd7ba4bc84cd6
3a20005a91f8907050a7e3c1ad49162a7e08e024
22834 F20101113_AAEKOV nguyen_t_Page_019.QC.jpg
58ed1f4046cfe12a37168d32c6f260f9
2363150a9b15311be664b9dfea11d1df0007b974
48643 F20101113_AAEKPL nguyen_t_Page_130.pro
9de34e8e774e8bded22caa6f42495b57
78beea60d476c5127e06a0879e5c12d8a014e819
76517 F20101113_AAEKOW nguyen_t_Page_026.jpg
9c0c85d0acc913a23091a215c408692c
3a63a3325883e2f37c8e1233b7d611c7576019d5
4974 F20101113_AAEKOX nguyen_t_Page_009.QC.jpg
163e953cd88be0bef9ade047d4c78026
bd234cc2bb363d2ae4d4156a7433479a1e13679c
F20101113_AAEKQA nguyen_t_Page_026.txt
80ebce5575626ed5971995111dd2830d
d1825a8925fad0a2095976227f2bd436bf9d8998
F20101113_AAEKPM nguyen_t_Page_045thm.jpg
40270f118bc2d7a2700d9fc1d5e82e69
2e728ea5e2ce564289c8a7f7a360b8e7852d3278
F20101113_AAEKOY nguyen_t_Page_078.txt
cc14b9dcf5d2439e5d3aa2c8e1e90b82
8791c6626ba8a6813b5388a73d8e09c4224212ad
7879 F20101113_AAEKQB nguyen_t_Page_115.pro
9cf13fa8cd363c2c8b2b4308757d0bd6
0b9de20d34a1f28a1f8fb78e00836008236f5196
6968 F20101113_AAEKPN nguyen_t_Page_017thm.jpg
7e021f64d0e1c42853b4d851d35494f6
b56a438817807958968b94b21a868b07915f7276
F20101113_AAEKOZ nguyen_t_Page_034.tif
c1db6851b6041f16ddeb6f5e87b5aed4
87f0edf5a38b300444ceb16c7399d72d33b5db2e
6911 F20101113_AAEKQC nguyen_t_Page_053thm.jpg
7a232de5a287ed2655404c93380e865f
a28128045d391d87364c544af7626f200e045ca2
23361 F20101113_AAEKPO nguyen_t_Page_050.QC.jpg
cd974d81ab8277b7017ef4874b5a5e00
75d7c24ec0232aed0aa5658cefa0ad8ed369e508
F20101113_AAEKQD nguyen_t_Page_099.tif
c2b6fe47134643ffc40dc5380bdd97a2
128acd48ccbd6d087dcd984988b31ded9dcf8be6
49320 F20101113_AAEKQE nguyen_t_Page_068.pro
0165f4f5e0a9dba806843cc5f1c67368
7dd9169608b108b136b2062616921cd3fd5971f9
26780 F20101113_AAEKPP nguyen_t_Page_154.QC.jpg
063ea673e3c492a7e78872b15533fd29
d3809f8337c0c243ee81ed4f45a75c701face3e5
6883 F20101113_AAEKQF nguyen_t_Page_052thm.jpg
efe9218165608499ac8c2409a81b9f56
c81375d903f3aa05db3838bd8a1af3ff47dd42d3
6807 F20101113_AAEKPQ nguyen_t_Page_056thm.jpg
b47f91a52790cee2eaf127916faf7761
8eae86329155d062057a7f0f5b648374298b8a3a
49715 F20101113_AAEKQG nguyen_t_Page_018.pro
60cc9b7a7c2b3938be91396c8c7972c2
beda407df755fbf79751ef1bf971534b8143899d
55754 F20101113_AAEKPR nguyen_t_Page_015.pro
1fd1ff315c0eb8f29c08a233fdcf1990
ea2389047adf4058a43f8f315f42600dd1c2c53e
53939 F20101113_AAEKQH nguyen_t_Page_048.pro
5381a890164fcd3f10a8a05747538abc
61e6af826f40ea0c08201d73ce34a93bc080bf4c
1393 F20101113_AAEKPS nguyen_t_Page_149.txt
09c8e4e357275ff02522c13274c3ecce
bd61377cc8ffb0e4e3f6cf01589053cb2ca88c89
26033 F20101113_AAEKQI nguyen_t_Page_126.pro
65055516ae672f69bdb27200ec85526f
a0b99b548e88a9b18abf041ee9220ca676db3fa4
5691 F20101113_AAEKPT nguyen_t_Page_109thm.jpg
c6af15257ff666b7a4e6f47afc60998b
51f0e6ddb7160e45e6fc2589f75d572cef682147
120463 F20101113_AAEKQJ nguyen_t_Page_097.jp2
543ddb2c458da23834eefe0769b059f9
3a6ae220112c0b4ff7ff5c0a04be83c01a3d9a5e
2068 F20101113_AAEKPU nguyen_t_Page_119.txt
3b0f3f466c65b0430bebddceb9b8439e
11a28ec5b03ef3a7446849d1a8d05f4b9767ff77
F20101113_AAEKQK nguyen_t_Page_120.tif
f4837717ac8616318f7fc6b988b6a4b4
4fba8f21c688f763f218ae56ef023c76ebf2bc06
2113 F20101113_AAEKPV nguyen_t_Page_059.txt
31d5ae204f1040e12af2cd2acdfcc947
c7a339aa28b2c0069db436a1e304b4ab7dc0c0a0







ROLE OF SOCIAL CAPITAL IN NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION:
A CASE STUDY OF CAT TIEN NATIONAL PARK IN VIETNAM




















By

THUY NGOC NGUYEN


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

2007

































O 2007 Thuy Ngoc Nguyen


































To my parents









ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Dissertation acknowledgments, such as this one, usually enumerate the people and

institutions that made contributions to producing the Einal output. Quite frequently, the first ones

mentioned are the most important for the author and for the work. I do not feel a need to be

different from the traditional dissertation acknowledgement, except that the last one I mention

here is, for me, the most important. I am truly grateful to the following for taking part in the

completion of this small piece of academic work.

The people in three communes of Dang Ha, Doan Ket, Thong Nhat of Bu Dang District,

Binh Phuoc Province, for their cooperation and patience during the interviews; my advisor, Dr.

Janaki R R Alavalapati, for his guidance and instructions that pushed me to Einish this research at

the appropriate time, the members of my committee, Dr. Mark A. Brennan, Dr. Brij esh Thapa,

Dr. Clyde Kiker, and Dr. Marianne Schmink, for their constructive comments during the

defense; the good people in my home institution, especially Dr. Luu Trong Hieu, former Director

of International Programs, Nong Lam University, for encouraging me to pursue the doctoral

program at the University of Florida and Mr. Michael Holsinger, former Vietnam Program

Manager, IFAS International Programs, University of Florida for introducing me to the

interdisciplinary ecology program.

I want to acknowlegde my parents-in-law who came to Gainesville to help take care of our

children, which allowed me to work full time on my dissertation in the Einal writing period. My

appreciation can not be fully expressed in words.

Finally, to my wife, Nga Trinh, for her presence, graciousness, and love which motivated

me to finish my dissertation on time. My beloved daughters, Viet-Phi and Viet-Mi, served as my

inspiration while writing this dissertation.












TABLE OF CONTENTS


page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............. ...............4.....


LIST OF TABLES ................ ...............8............ ....


LIST OF FIGURES .............. ...............10....


AB S TRAC T ............._. .......... ..............._ 1 1..


CHAPTER


1 INTRODUCTION ................. ...............13.......... ......


Statement of Problem ................. ...............16................

Study Objectives............... ...............1
Significance of the Study ................. ...............19.......... .....
Dissertation Organization ................ ...............20.................

2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ................. ...............21........... ....


Theory of Public Goods ................. ...............21................
The Free Rider Problem .............. ... ....... ..............2
Solutions to Positive and Negative Apathy ................. ...............25...............
Trust and Collective Action for Common Management .............. ...............28....
Commons Management as an Assurance Problem .............. .... ...............28..
Establishing Trust through Verbal and Face-to-Face Communication ................... ........29
F eedb ack through Everyday S oci al Interacti on ................. ...............31.............
Social Capital and Natural Resources Conservation .............. ...............32....
Social Capital................ ... ... .. .. .. .. .......3
Social Capital and Natural Resource Conservation............... ..............3
Household Characteristics and Social Capital ................. ...............36........... ...

3 BACKGROUND INFORMATION OF THE STUDY SITE .............. .....................3


National Parks in the World .............. ...............38....
Bufferzones ................ ...... .._._ ....._ .............3
National Parks in Vietnam: An Overview .....___.....__.___ .......____ ...........4
Political Context ........._............._ ...............40.....
The Profiles of National Parks .............. ...............42....
National Park and Bufferzone .............. ...............42....
The Study Site: The Cat Tien National Park ................. .... ...............43
Forest Protection and Rural Development (FPRD) proj ect ................. ............. .......47
The Commune Profiles............... ...............49
The Thong Nhat Commune ................. ...............49................
The Dang Ha Commune ................. ...............51................












The Doan Ket Commune................ .. ... .....................5
Ethnographical Sketch of Population Living in the Three Study Communes.. ...............54
Stieng ethnic ................. .... ......... ... .... .... .... ...............5
Tay, Nung, Hoa, Muong, Man, Dao, Cao Lan, San Diu ethnic minorities ..............55
Kinh people .............. ...... .. .............5
Indigenous Ethnic Groups in Transition............... ...............5
Changes in community structure ........._..._.._ ...._._. ...._._. ...........5
Indigenous knowledge system .............. ....... ... ... ............5
Changing characteristics of family, household and community ........._..._.._ .............57
Commune' s people committee ...._ ......_____ .......___ ............6
Sum mary ............ ..... .._ ...............61...

4 METHODOLOGY .............. ...............62....


Conceptual Framework............... ...............6
Unit of Analy si s ............ ..... .._ ...............64..
Sampling Methods ............... .... ..__ ....___ ... .. .........6
Survey Instrument/Questionnaire Development and Research ................... ...............6
Survey Pre-test............... ...............66
Administration of the Survey ............_ ..... ..__ ...............67..
Concepts and Variables .............. ........ .. ............6
Community Group/Social Organization Membership............... ...............6
Involvement in Community Activities .............. ...............68....
Perception of the Community ............. .......... ...............__ ........._ ........6
Participation in Conservation-Related Activities of the Forest Protection and Rural
Development Proj ect ............ ...... ..._. ...............69....
Conservation Attitudes .................. ...... .............7
Perceptions about biodiversity conservation............... ... ............7
Issues/ problems associated with biodiversity conservation ................. ................71
Impacts of conservation activities ................. ...............71................
Control Variable s/Demographics .............. ...............7 1....
Data Compilation............... ..............7
F actor Analy si s ................. ...............73.......... ......
Linear Regression Models .............. ...............75....
Logistic Regression Models .............. ...............76....
Sum m ary ................. ...............77.......... ......

5 DATA AN ALY SIS AND RE SULT S .............. ...............78....


Frequency of Response Data ................. ...............78.......... ....
Socio-demographic Characteristics ............... .. ........._ ......._._ .............7
Respondent Awareness of Group's Existence in Community ..........._.._._ .........._..__...80
Community Groups/Social Organization Membership .........._...._ ....._.. .............80
Involvement in Community Activities .............. .. ........__........__ ............8
Identifying Dimensions of Social Capital and Conservation Attitude ................. ...............85
Social Capital Dimensions .............. ...............85....
Conservation Attitude Dimensions............... ...............8












Analysis of Social Capital Dimensions .............. ...............92....
Ethnic Groups ................. ...............93.................
Religious Groups ................. ...............94.......... ......
Length of Residency ................. ...............95................
Education............... ...............9
Household Income ................. ...............96.................

A ge .............. .. .... ........... .........9
Analysis of Conservation Attitude............... ...............97
Ethnic Groups ................. ...............97.................
R religion .............. ...............98....
Length of Residency ................. ...............99................
Education............... ...............9
Household Income ................. ...............100................
Linear Re gression Modeling............... ...............10
Logistic Regression Modeling ................. ...............106................
Sum m ary ................. ...............114......... ......


6 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ................ ...............116...............


Overview .............. ... .. .......... .. ...............116.....
Summary of the Findings and Results ................ ...............116..............
Membership and Local Groups/Organizations ....._____ ..... ... ._ .. ........_......117
Effect of Social Capital on Conservation Attitude ......._ ......... ___ ................1 17
Household Participation in Conservation Activities .............. ..... ............... 12
Policy Im plications .............. .. .... ....... ........ .. ... .. .........2
Recommendations for Encouraging Households' Participation in Conservation
A activities ............... .........__ ...............124...
The Limitations of the Study ............_...... ._ ...............125..
Future W orks .............. ...............126....


APPENDIX


A HOUSEHOLD SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRES .............. ...............127....


B BANG CAU HOI DIEU TRA HO .............. ...............134....


C FREQUENCY OF RESPONSES ANALYSIS ITEMS .............. ..... ............... 14


LIST OF REFERENCES ...._.. ................. ........_._ .........15


BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ..........._..._ ...............158......._ ......










LIST OF TABLES


Table page

3-1 Timeline of the development of national park in Vietnam ................. .......................41

3-2 Demographic data for the three selected communes .............. ...............53....

5-1 Frequencies of socioeconomic characteristics for all respondents .............. ..................79

5-2 Frequency of participation in community events and other groups or activities
(n=27 0) ................. ...............83........... ....

5-3 Factor loadings of social capital dimensions .............. ...............87....

5-4 Reliability Analysis for social capital dimensions ................. ..............................88

5-5 Factor loadings of conservation attitude dimensions ................. ................. ..........90

5-6 Reliability analysis for conservation attitude dimensions .............. .....................9

5-8 Comparison of social capital components among different ethnic groups ................... .....94

5-9 Comparison of social capital components among religions groups............... ................94

5-10 Comparison of social capital components between length of residency ................... ........95

5-11 Comparison of social capital components between levels of education ................... .........96

5-12 Comparison of social capital components between incomes............... ................9

5-13 Comparison of social capital components between ages............... ...............97..

5-14 Comparison of conservation attitude among different ethnic groups .............. ..............98

5-15 Comparison of conservation attitude between different religions .............. ...............98

5-16 Comparison of conservation attitude between length of residency .............. .............99

5-17 Comparison of conservation attitude components between levels of education .............100

5-18 Comparison of conservation attitude between different incomes ................. ................1 00

5-19 Linear regression models for conservation attitude variables ................. ................ ...103

5-20 Linear regression models for conservation attitude variables ................. ................ ...105

5-21 Logistic regression analysis of households' participation in conservation activities ......109










5-22 Logistic regression analysis of households' participation in conservation activities ......11 1

5-23 Logistic regression analysis of households' participation in conservation activities ......1 13










LIST OF FIGURES


Figure page

2-1 Classifying goods based on the degree of excludability and rivalry .............. .................21

2-2 Conceptual framework explaining the rationale for social capital in collective action.....24

3-1 Location of the study sites .............. ...............44....

4-1 Conceptual framework to examine the relationship among selected variables ........._......63

4-2 Sampling approach followed to select communes, hamlets, and households....................65

5-1 Respondents' awareness of local groups and organizations .........__. ...... .._._...........81

5-2 Relative frequency of respondents' affiliation to local groups and organizations. ............81

5-3 Percentage of respondents belonged to number of groups/associations (n=273). .............82

5-4 Number of members of each group/organization ..........._ ..... ..__ .. ......__........82









Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

ROLE OF SOCIAL CAPITAL IN NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION: A CASE
STUDY OF CAT TIEN NATIONAL PARK IN VIETNAM

By

Thuy Ngoc Nguyen

August 2007

Chair: Janaki R.R. Alavalapati
Major: Interdisciplinary Ecology

The Cat Tien National Park (CTNP) is one of the last remaining lowland jungles in

Vietnam, which possesses unique biodiversity including the last surviving population of the

Vietnamese Javan Rhinoceros (Rhinoceros sondaicus annamniticus). People inhabiting in and

around the CTNP belong to diverse ethnic groups with different histories, administrative

systems, and land use strategies. One of the World Bank' s proj ects entitled "Forest Protection

and Rural Development Proj ect (FPRDP)," is being implemented in the buffer zone of CTNP

with a dual obj ective of sustaining the CTNP and improving the livelihoods of local inhabitants.

However, conservation and management of CTNP, a typical public or collective good, is not a

trivial task. Drawing from the literature on public goods and collective action, this study explores

the role of social capital on households' conservation attitude and participation in conservation

programs. More specifically, this study explores the relationships among households' socio-

demographic variables, social capital, conservation attitude, and participation in the FPRDP for

those inhabiting in and around the bufferzone of the CTNP.

Data from 270 households representing nine villages were collected, using a structured

questionnaire and a face-to-face interview method, to achieve the study obj ective. A three level

stratified random sampling approach was followed to account for spatial and ethnic diversity of









households living around the park. Factor analysis was employed to identify eight social capital

components and four conservation attitude components and the identified components were used

to construct social capital and conservation attitude indices. Multivariate regression techniques

were used to determine the effect of social capital and other socio-demographic variables on

household attitudes toward conservation of CTNP. Logistic regression models were used to

determine the effect of social capital, demographic variables, and conservation attitude on

household's participation in the FPRDP.

Results suggest that education, social cohesion, familiarity, and social integration have

positive and significant impacts on households perceived benefit of conservation. Households

that scored high on voluntary cooperation and social integration variables tend to perceive less

direct use benefits from the park. Households with higher social commitment and community

support indices feel more secure about forestland ownership. Results also show that land tenure

security can improve participation in conservation activities. Important implications of this study

include (1) a policy or program to increase social capital in general with emphasis on efforts to

enhance social networks among households in and around CTNP; and (2) government should

create a land tenure regime that better encourages households to participate in conservation

activities.









CHAPTER 1
INTTRODUCTION

Managing human impacts on national parks has been a maj or challenge for government

agencies and other natural resources managers (Rao and Geisler, 1990). This task is more

challenging in developing countries such as Vietnam because local human populations--being

driven by poverty--often rely primarily on protected areas for their livelihood (Polet, 2003). The

issue becomes even more complex if protected areas are created on the same land that has been

traditionally used by local communities for generations (Primack, 1993). The decision of natural

resources management, therefore, can affect a number of different stakeholders and may affect

them differently, especially where resources are scarce or of high value.

In order to address this issue, since 1980s, conservation organization have been

implementing approaches that aim to build support among local communities by sharing social

and economic benefits from protected areas (Nguyen and Tran, 2002). Scherl et al. (2004) have

summarized these approaches in protected areas, which have been implementing in the world.

Such approaches include (1) integrated conservation and development proj ects; (2) inclusive

management approaches; and (3) community conservation areas. The goals of these initiatives

include ensuring that local communities derive benefits from protected areas; compensating local

people for depriving their access to protected areas, and providing alternative income sources

that would allow them to benefit economically from conservation while refraining from

environmentally destructive practices.

Integrated conservation and development proj ects (ICDPs) approaches aim at building

support among local communities by sharing social and economic benefits from protected areas.

In practice, evidence suggests that the equitable distribution of Einancial and social benefits from

protected areas can be problematic; for instance, it is often not enough to assume that community









leaders will assure that benefits will accrue to the neediest people. However, in Africa, ICDPs

have shown that accountability is improved if whole communities, including women, are

involved in decision-making (Sherl et al., 2004). More specifically, McShane and Wells (2004)

have summarized the main shortcomings of ICDPs which lead to lack of success because of

failures in identifying, negotiating, and implementing trade-offs between the interests and claims

of multiple stakeholders; focus on activities of social programs and income creation through

alternative livelihoods rather than impacts on biodiversity; and addressing local symptoms while

ignoring underlying policy constraints or conversely dealing with macro-level issues while

ignoring local realities.

Sherl et al. (2004) also explain "Inclusive Management Approaches" as a form of

collaborative management between local communities and technical advisors to ensure that local

communities have a maj or stake in decision-making and receive a maj or share of the benefits

from protected areas. The increased empowerment, skills and trust between local communities

and technical advisors in Kwazula Natal of South Africa are noted as the ingredients to the

success of this approach (Sherl et al., 2004).

"Community Conserved Areas" (CCAs) are defined as "natural and modified ecosystems,

including significant biodiversity, ecological services and cultural values, voluntarily conserved

by indigenous and local communities through customary laws or other effective means"

(Excerpted from Recommendation 5.26. yth IUCN World Parks Congress 2003). The term as

used here connotes a broad and open approach to categorizing such community initiatives, and is

not intended to constrain the ability of communities to conserve their areas in the way they feel

appropriate. Community conserved areas are managed by indigenous and local communities

through customary laws or other effective means. Wishitemi (2002) and Okello et al. (2003)









found that in Kenya and Tanzania, local communities can gain benefits and participate at all

levels of management in a range of conservation and ecotourism enterprises. However, McShane

and Wells (2004) assert that community conservation initiatives can only work when they are

supported by national policy and a legislative environment that enable devolution of meaningful

authority and responsibility for natural resources. Sherl et al. (2004), in terms of the above

approaches, note critically that they may contribute towards reducing poverty through social

empowerment and provision of Einancial benefits to communities in and around protected areas,

but they are rarely enough to achieve significant poverty reduction.

Even though there are several different principles in all of these approaches, they all share

a common interest on building trust between local communities, creation of local groups and

enhancement of networks among communities, commonly referred to as social capital. It is also

thought that this social capital would influence behavior towards collective actions such as

participation in protected areas management (PPP, 2000).

The concept of social capital has emerged in the recent years as a theoretical framework

that explains successes in conservation and development initiatives in developing countries

(Pretty, 2003). To understand social capital as an "applied concept," Scoones (1998), in his

analysis of sustainable livelihoods frameworks, distinguishes five forms of capital--natural,

physical, financial, human, and social. In simple terms, natural capital is what you find, physical

capital is what you make, financial capital is what you save, human capital is what you know and

social capital is whom you know. In the context of environmental conservation and rural

development, the strategies of intervention prescribed by these applied concepts of social capital

also mean promoting the creation of and strengthening of local groups (community associations,

cooperatives, farmer groups, etc.) and their empowerment through participatory methods as a









strategy to transform their practices and social organizations into sustainable and socially just

systems (Pretty and Ward, 2001). Through the creation and support of local groups, building

social capital is a viable mechanism to generate collective practices of natural resources (Pretty,

2003). Thus, participatory management of protected areas has been proposed by scholars of

common property as the most viable option for combining poverty reduction, enhancement of

local level economic development and biodiversity conservation (Pretty, 2003).

Statement of Problem

In Vietnam, several environmentally sensitive areas have been declared as natural

conservation zones and national parks. Several communities inhabit the bufferzones of the

natural conservation zones and national parks and most of them are poor and little educated.

Their subsistence depends on forest products and the related ecosystem. They are generally

indigenous peoples or resettled people. About 90% of hunting and collection of forest products

activities are being carried out by these people in the bufferzone. Furthermore, farming practices

of these people tend to employ a low level of technology and thus agricultural productivity of

these practices are low (Nguyen, 2002).

According to Sunderlin and Huynh (2005), there is a high incidence of poverty in the

remaining stands of natural forest, and forest resources still play an important role in poverty

alleviation of local communities. However, they do not discuss how forest resources can

contribute to the income of local people. The research on forestry, poverty reduction and rural

livelihoods in Vietnam by Dinh (2005) indicates that local communities who depended on forests

have high poverty rates. Specifically the study noted that there exists conflict between forest

protection and biodiversity conservation and people's living improvement.

Bufferzones are designed to filter out negative external influences upon core zones of

protected areas. Bufferzones can help isolate the core zones from surrounding agriculture,









diseases, and noise, air, and soil pollution (IUCN, 2003). The complexity associated with

bufferzones was a main motivation for hosting the international conference on the bufferzones of

protected areas in Vietnam. The summary record of the conference (published in 2002) is

considered as literature for arguments. On that summary record, Vo (2002) overviewed the

problems of bufferzone management including the human complex, poverty, low education, and

the dependence of people on forest. He also argued local people must participate in the proj ects

which are implemented in the bufferzones. Pham et al. (1998) found that to achieve the

obj ectives of national parks and natural reservation zones, managers should not create the

conflicts between conservation and local communities. In addition, Neefies et al. (2002) revealed

that poverty leads to natural resource degradation and believed that proj ects and programs that

improve people's living condition will reduce human pressure on protected areas.

The study in the bufferzone of Tam Dao National park by Do (2003) found that the

establishment and subsequent extension of the park caused a significant loss of productive land

for local people. Local people living nearby lost access to the parks and to collecting forest

products for household consumption. People also lost their grazing lands, and in some cases they

were forced to illegally exploit timber for construction, firewood and for coffins. The research in

Bach Ma National Park by Le et al. (2002) also found that forest products play an important role

in supporting the livelihoods of marginal and poor households. They note that the maj ority of

local people appreciate the benefits of biodiversity conservation in terms of water storage and

erosion control. However, they do not explain how to shift from a protective conservation

approach to encouraging local people to sustainably use and conserve resources.

Various studies on sustainable rural development (Pretty 1995, Dasgupta 2000, Pretty and

Ward 2001, Krishna and Uphoff 2002) have used social capital as an indicator for institutional









results of proj ects aimed at sustainable rural development and conservation at the local level.

Social capital was incorporated as an indicator of successful intervention and therefore became

the new conceptual framework for the strategy of community development and empowerment. It

is thought that social bonds and norms are critical for sustainability--and where social capital is

high in formalized groups, people have confidence to invest in collective activities, knowing that

the others will do so too (Pretty 2003).

This research proj ect will add to that body of knowledge by assessing how social capital

affects the attitude of households toward biodiversity conservation in the Cat Tien National Park

(CTNP) in Vietnam. It will also attempt to analyze the relationship between social capital and

household's participation in conservation activities associated with the Forest Protection and

Rural Development (FPRD) proj ect-a proj ect. This proj ect was started a few years ago and

impacted the communities who reside in the bufferzone of the Cat Tien National Park, Vietnam -

one of the last remaining lowland jungles which holds the last surviving population of Javan

Rhinocerus on mainland Asia.

Study Objectives

Using social capital as an exogenous variable, the researcher seeks to address the general

question: How do households' social capital affect households' attitude towards Cat Tien

National Park?

Specifically, this study attempts to explore the following questions:

* How does household's social capital affect the household's conservation attitude towards
Cat Tien National Park?

* How does household's social capital affect the household's participation in conservation
activities of the FPRD proj ect?

* How does household's conservation attitude affect the household's participation in
conservation activities of the FPRD proj ect?










In the process of exploring the above research questions, the following obj ectives will be

pursued:

to provide a theoretical rational for studying social capital in improving
conservation attitude of local households in the CTNP in Vietnam

to identify dimensions of households' social capital and conservation attitude
toward CTNP, Vietnam

to quantify the relationships among dimensions of social capital and conservation
attitude

to predict the effects of social capital and conservation attitude on households
participation in conservation activities

To develop a better picture of the study population, other demographic variables will be

included in the analysis of social capital and conservation attitude such as ethnicity, religion,

length of residency, education, income, age, marital status, gender.

Significance of the Study

As the study seeks to examine how social capital affects the attitude of households

toward biodiversity conservation in the national park, results of this study helps develop policies

to improve conservation and development in the bufferzone of CTNP in Vietnam. Moreover, this

study generates additional knowledge of the human population characteristics of the Cat Tien

National Park, thus helping managers to better manage the park. Especially, data on ethnicity

may help government and donor agencies plan development interventions. Local perspectives on

development and conservation, which will be collected in this study, will help develop action

plans.

Finally, this study will provide knowledge about social capital literature in Vietnam a

socialist country that is experiencing socioeconomic transformation due to its integration into the

world economy. That would help to compare Vietnam with post-communist countries (Hayoz

and Sergeyev, 2003).









Dissertation Organization

This study consists of five chapters. After this introductory chapter, Chapter 2 will 1)

review relevant theories of public goods and collective action, 2) discuss how social capital

influences collective action, and 3) analyze research related to social capital and conservation.

Chapter 3 presents the background of the study, including an overview of national parks of

Vietnam, the Cat Tien National Park (the study site) and a discussion of the Forest Protection

and Rural Development Proj ect (FPRD). Chapter 4 presents a conceptual framework that guides

the research and discusses the methodologies used to collect and analyze data. Chapter 5 presents

the results of the analyses. Specifically, results from descriptive statistics, factor analyses, and

linear and logistic regression analyses relating to social capital, conservation attitude, and

participation in the FPRD are presented and discussed. Finally, Chapter 6 provides a brief

summary with conclusions and policy implications.









CHAPTER 2
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

This chapter analyzes the role of social capital in the management of collective goods.

Specifically, this chapter 1) discusses the theory of public goods, 2) explores how trust--a key

component of social capital--relates to collective action, and 3) reviews research related to

social capital and resource conservation.

Theory of Public Goods

Paul Samuelson was the first economist to develop a theory of public goods. In his seminal

work, Samuelson (1954) notes that one of the characteristics of a public good is non-rivalry--

when a good is consumed by a person, the amount of that good will not be reduced for other

people to consume. Another characteristic of a public good is non-excludability. This means that

once the good is in place, it is very difficult (if not impossible) to prevent others from consuming

that good. Fresh air and a light house, for instance, may be considered as public goods because

they possess the above two characteristics. Although there may be no such goods as

"completely" non-rival or non-excludable goods, these represent one end of the continuum while

private goods, which are rival and excludable, represent the other end. Both communal (or

collective) goods and toll goods can be shown to exist somewhere between the two ends of

continuum (Figure 2-1).

Public goods Communal goods Toll goods Private goods
(fresh air, light (community lakes, (toll ways, (cakes, books,
house...) grazing areas...) club goods ...) clothes...)




Non-excludable E xcludalble
Non-rival Ra


Figure 2-1. Classifying goods based on the degree of excludability and rivalry









This representation allows us to perceive that it is possible to convert typical public goods

into communal goods or toll goods or perhaps even private goods or vice-a-versa. Privatization

of a national forest is an example of a transformation of a public good into a private good.

From a market perspective, both public and communal goods suffer from under supply and

over use. Non-excludability and ill-defined property rights provide little motivation and fewer

incentives for individuals to invest their resources in the supply of these goods. As such, markets

cannot supply these goods at socially desirable levels. Although one could argue that

transformation of public and communal goods into either toll or private goods can address this

problem, there are often environmental, social, and ethical factors that preclude such

transformations. For examples, privatization of a communal lake (e.g., for fishing), might

alleviate the problems of over use but may still generate significant social and ethical problems.

This suggests that sustainable management of pubic and communal goods is a challenging task

and therefore exploring strategies to address this challenge is important.

The Free Rider Problem

In the process of production and consumption of a private good each rational individual

is expected to allocate his/her time and resources in an optimal manner, given the context.

Collectively speaking, it is conceivable that private goods are both produced and consumed at

socially desirable levels. In the context of a public or communal good (in terms of both

production and consumption) individuals make rational decisions in allocating their scarce

resources. However, collectively they fail to produce and/or consume these goods at a socially

optimum level. Many researchers have investigated this dilemma in various contexts (Olson

(1971), Ostrom (1998) for more details).


SIn the face of well defined property rights, perfect competition, perfect information, and no externalities, markets
will ensure optimum allocation of resources for the production and consumption processes.










In the context of a public or collective good (whether produced or consumed), research

suggests that individuals do not allocate resources at optimum levels because of negative apathy

or positive apathy (Figure 2-2). Positive apathy is a situation wherein an individual in a large

group will reason that the collective good (goal) will be produced (achieved) without his/her

contribution because others will contribute. In other words, an individual thinks that his/her

limited or non-existent contribution is insignificant and the contribution of others will lead to

optimal production of the collective good. This situation is also commonly known as the "free

rider" problem. Negative apathy is a situation wherein an individual in a large group will reason

that the collective good (goal) will not be produced (achieved) with his/her contribution because

others will not contribute. In other words, production of the collective good will not result

because an individual concludes that his/her contribution is insignificant, while the contribution

of others is limited or non-existence. Either way, individuals are less likely to contribute to the

production of a collective good, with the result that the socially optimal level is unattained. In

making consumption decisions about a collective good, similar reasoning suggests that

individuals are more likely to over use a collective good thereby resulting in a "tragedy of

commons" situation. In economics, both positive and negative apathy are extensively studied

through "prisoners' dilemma" or "game theory" models (Nash (1996), Fudenberg (1991) for

more details).2








2 Game theory is a group of mathematical theories first developed by John Von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern
(1953). A game consists of a set of rules governing a competitive situation in which from two to n individuals or
groups of individuals choose strategies designed to maximize their own winnings or to minimize their opponent's
winnings; the rules specify the possible actions for each player, the amount of information received by each as play
progresses, and the amounts won or lost in various situations











Positive
Apathy






Negative
Apathy



Formal Institutions Social Capital
Sanction Trust
Quotas Cohesion
Tax -..





Informal Institutions Environmental
- Norms Education:
- Sanctions Raise Altruism
- Beliefs


Individuals



Households



Communities



Nations


Conservation
Attitude and


Production and
Consumption of
Collective/ Pubhic
Goods.


Sustainability
of Common/

C oloe tisye


Figure 2-2. Conceptual framework explaining the rationale for social capital in collective action









Solutions to Positive and Negative Apathy

Several solutions have been proposed to address positive and negative apathy. They

include decentralization, provision of selective incentives/penalties, and raising altruism of

individuals. Olson (1971) listed several factors influencing public participation (can be

considered as collective good) in large groups. Firstly, the outcome of group action must be of

great value to the individual; secondly, participation must serve both collective and private

interests (selective incentive, monetary and non-monetary, to individual would help); and finally

costs must decline to individuals for participating in the collective action. These factors are more

likely to come together in small groups where individuals know each other very well and tend to

collaborate in collective action. This may be one of the arguments for decentralized decision

making.

Dominant assurance contracts are contracts in which participants make a binding pledge to

contribute to a contract for building a public good, contingent on a quorum of a predetermined

size being reached. Otherwise their money is refunded. A dominant assurance contract is a

variation in which an entrepreneur creates the contract and refunds the initial pledge plus an

additional sum of money if the quorum is not reached. In game theory terms this makes pledging

to build the public good a dominant strategy: the best strategy is to pledge to the contract

regardless of the actions of others.

The Coasian solution proposes a mechanism by which potential beneficiaries of a public

good band together and pool their resources based on their willingness to pay to create the public

good. Case (1960) argued that if the transaction costs between potential beneficiaries of a

public good are sufficiently low, and it is therefore easy for beneficiaries to find each other and

pool their money based on the value of public good to them, then an adequate level of public

goods production can occur even under competitive free market conditions.









If voluntary provision of public goods will not work, then the obvious solution is making

their provision involuntary. One general solution to the problem is for governments or states to

impose taxation to fund the production of public goods. The difficulty is to determine how much

funding should be allocated to different public goods, and how the costs should be split.

Sometimes the government provides public goods using "unfunded mandates." An example is

the requirement that every car be fit with a catalytic converter. This may be executed in the

private sector, but the end result is predetermined by the state: the individually involuntary

provision of the public good (e.g., clean air).

A government may subsidize production of a public good in the private sector. Unlike

government provision, subsidies may result in some form of competitive market. The potential

for cronyism (for example, an alliance between political insiders and the businesses receiving

subsidies) can be limited with secret bidding for the subsidies or application of the subsidies

following clear general principles. Depending on the nature of a public good and a related

subsidy, principal agent problems can arise between the citizens and the government or between

the government and the subsidized producers; this effect and counter-measures taken to address

it can diminish the benefits of the subsidy. Subsidies can also be used in areas with a potential

for non-individualism. For instance, a state may subsidize farmers to maintain certain forest

coverage on their farm to protect the watershed.

The study of collective action shows that public goods are still produced when one

individual benefits more from the public good than it costs him/her to produce it. A group that

contains such individuals is called a privileged group. A strategy to overcome the free rider

problem in this case is to simply eliminate the profit incentive for free riding by buying out all

the potential free riders, making the marginal social benefit meet the marginal social cost









because in this case, they are equivalent to the private marginal benefits and costs. While the

purchase of all potential free riders may solve the problem of underproduction due to free riders

in smaller markets, it may simultaneously introduce the problem of underproduction due to

monopoly. Additionally, some markets are simply too large to make a buyout of all beneficiaries

feasible--this is particularly visible with public goods that affect everyone in a country.

Another solution, which has evolved for information goods, is to create intellectual

property laws, such as copyright or patents, covering the public goods. These laws attempt to

remove the natural non-excludability by prohibiting reproduction of the good. Although they can

solve the free rider problem, the downside of these laws is that they imply private monopoly

power and thus are not Pareto-optimal. For example, in the United States, the patent rights given

to pharmaceutical companies encourage them to charge high prices (above marginal cost), to

advertise to convince patients to nag their doctors to prescribe the drugs, to sue even mild

imitators in court, and to lobby for the extension of patent rights in a form of rent seeking.

Finally, an approach that is increasingly recognized by social scientists to overcome

collective goods production and consumption problems is to promote social capital among

individuals, communities, and corporate actors. If enough people do not think like free-riders, the

private and voluntary provision of public goods may be successful. A free rider might litter in a

public park, but a more "public-spirited" individual would not do so, getting an inherent pleasure

from helping the community. In fact, an altruistic person might voluntarily pick up some of the

existing litter. If enough people do so, the role of the state in using taxes to hire professional

maintenance crews is reduced. This might imply that even someone typically inclined to free-

riding would not litter, since their action would have such an obvious cost. Altruism may be

encouraged by non-market solutions such as tradition and social norms. Therefore, raising









altruism also means creating social capital. The following sections will discuss how

trustworthiness of social structures, information channels; and norms and effective sanctions

(components of social capital) solve collective good problems using natural resource

management examples.

Trust and Collective Action for Common Management

This section explains how trustt, itself a collective good, can be provided spontaneously in

the light of the theory of collective action for commons management. The common-pool

resources may be owned by national, regional or local governments as public goods, by

communal groups as common property resources, or by private individuals or corporations as

private goods.

Commons Management as an Assurance Problem

The problems of collective action in commons management are often described as

assurance problems. The contribution of an individual to a collective action will be more likely if

there is an assurance that others will also contribute. These assurance problems can be solved

through voluntary cooperation to the extent that group members trustt one another to reciprocate

their cooperation. Trustt is a key component of "social capital." defined by Putnam as "features of

social organization, such as trustt, norms, and networks that can improve the efficiency of society

by facilitating coordinated actions." Trustt itself is a public good and its provisions constitute a

second-order social dilemma. Runge (1981) argued that establishing assurance (or trustt) is

needed to solve this second-order social dilemma faced by members of a group through

strategies of reciprocity. Sugden (1986), however, observed that players follow reciprocity

strategies depend on the basis of trustt that other will reciprocate. Adoption of reciprocity

strategies as a solution to a group's assurance problem thus entails the third-order social dilemma

of establishing enough trustt to make those strategies attractive.









Ostrom (1998) studied how to create enough social capital in the form of trust for

reciprocity to bring about voluntary cooperation in a large group assurance problem. She found

that each individual assesses subj ectively the trustworthiness of those with whom they share the

assurance problem. This subjesctive assessment is reassessed over time in the light of how others'

reputations are affected by unfolding evidence of how they have practiced reciprocity. Therefore,

trust and reciprocity mutually reinforce one another through positive feedbacks. When an

individual perceives that reciprocity has increased, this strengthens her trust that others will

reciprocate cooperation in the future. This provides her own incentive to practice reciprocity.

Practicing reciprocity enhances her reputation, thereby increasing others' trust in her and ready

to practice reciprocity with her. Conversely, perceptions that adoption of reciprocity has declined

will weaken the trust and thus the reciprocity. Trust, reciprocity and voluntary cooperation can

thereby strengthen and weaken through spontaneous social dynamics. Betts (1997, p.2) observed

" a group can become engaged in a virtuous circle of reciprocal exchanges where trust and

collaboration beget more trust and collaboration, or a vicious circle where defection and betrayal

lead to more of the same."

Establishing Trust through Verbal and Face-to-Face Communication

The assumption in the prisoners' dilemma game theory is that individuals sharing an

assurance problem are unable to communicate verbally prior to making their choices. This

assumption is obviously unrealistic for many assurance problems where there is scope for each

player to communicate verbally with at least some other players.

This scope can allow a group facing a collective action problem to reduce its costs of

organizing significantly in reaching a shared understanding of the problem and in agreeing to a

solution that clarifies the particular kind of cooperation expected from each group member.

Sometimes, it may not be immediately apparent to all individuals that they are caught in a









collective action problem. Consequently, they could do better for themselves by cooperating than

by acting independently. To the extent that individuals have internalized a norm for promise-

keeping, promises to cooperate that individuals make in the process of agreeing to a solution to

their shared problem can add significantly to their likelihood of actual cooperating. In addition,

when there are repeated opportunities for communication, group members are able to revise their

original agreement if it proves to be unworkable or ineffective in its existing form (Ostrom,

1998).

Ostrom et al. (1994) found that in collective-action laboratory experiments, cooperation

levels have been consistently higher when communication occurs face-to-face compared with

other media. Based on these experiments, Ostrom (1998) gave two explanations for why

cooperation levels are higher when communications occurs face-to-face. The first was that face-

to-face communication enhances individuals' ability to assess other's reputations.

The second explanation was that punishing the defectors and praising the cooperators,

which becomes possible in repeated-play experiments with communication allowed after each

round, has added emotional force when exercised face-to-face. A further explanation is that face-

to-face communication can promote "group identity' and thereby make group members

sufficiently more regarding of each other' s welfare that they become more likely to cooperate

with each other (Dawes et al., 1990).

In reality, each person faces a steady succession of assurance problems. At least in smaller

communities, therefore, it is likely that any given individual will share a variety of such

problems with a common group of others. Ellickson (1991), who studied the governance of cattle

trespass problems in a county of California, noted that farmers typically deal with one another on

a variety of issues, including water supply, controlled burns, fence repairs, social events and









staffing the volunteer fire brigade. He referred to such overlapping relationships as "multiplex"

in contrast to "simplex" relationships between people who interact on a single front only.

An advantage of groups characterized by multiplex relationships, or "dense social

networks," is that individuals are likely to have more "repeat plays of assurance game" with one

another than would be the case if most relationships were simplex. This advantage has a number

of aspects. First, the greater interconnectedness of the "game" strengthens the shadow of the

future for individuals. This is because defection in any single play of one game puts at risk

benefits not only from others cooperating with them in the future plays of that particular game

but in other games as well. Second, the greater frequency of repeat plays increases opportunities

for the feedback that individuals require to establish and maintain their own reputations and

assess the trustworthiness of others. Third, since trustt is strengthened the more it is used, the

greater number of reinforcing encounters in dense networks allows greater flexibility in

practicing reciprocity people can more easily reciprocate cooperation.

Feedback through Everyday Social Interaction

Humans are social creatures and often gain considerable satisfaction from the feedback

processes of monitoring one another. They share what they have seen and heard, and provide

social rewards and punishments. The greater this satisfaction the lower the net cost to individuals

of partaking in such processes.

Jacobs (1992) noted this phenomenon when she observed urban street life in the context of

US inner city neighborhoods. She highlighted an insight now usually attributed to Granovetter

(1973). She observed that strong interpersonal ties tend to be less important than weak ties in

sustaining community cohesion and collective action. Strong ties generally occur among people

who share common bonds. Weak ties tend to more instrumental, and enable the building of a

"social bridge" between groups that less obviously share common bonds. Hence, weak ties are









indispensable for integrating individuals within large groups. After illustrating how weak ties can

generate trust sufficient for a neighborhood of strangers to function effectively as a community,

Jacobs proceeded to describe how such ties can also enable collective action to emerge

spontaneously at the higher level of districts.

Social Capital and Natural Resources Conservation

This section reviews the concepts of social capital and their relationship to natural

resources conservation and management. It also discusses the relationship between household

characteristics and social capital.

Social Capital

Although the concept of social capital was first defined by Pierre Bourdieu in the 1970s

(Bourdieu, 1980), James Coleman has been widely recognized for introducing the concept of

social capital in its current usage within the Hield of development (Coleman 1988, 1990). Social

capital, as envisioned by Coleman, is largely defined by its function and consists of a number of

entities that have at least two elements in common: "they consist of some aspect of social

structures, and they facilitate certain actions of actors--whether persons or corporate actors--

within the structure." Social capital, like physical and human capital, is distinguished from other

social interactions by its productive quality, and as such, should be perceived as a resource that

helps actors achieve their specified interests. Coleman pointed to various forms of social capital

which include obligations, expectations, trustworthiness of social structures, information

channels; and norms and effective sanctions (1988).

While Coleman can lay maj or claim for introducing social capital as a conceptual tool,

there is no doubt that this term gained considerable academic popularity and practical prevalence

through the works of Robert Putnam (1993, 1995) in Italy and the United States. Putnam defines

social capital in this way: "By analogy with notions of physical capital and human capital tools









and training that enhances individual productivity "social capital" refers to features of social

organization such as networks, norms, and social trust that facilitate coordination and

cooperation for mutual benefit" (1995:67). In his highly influential book, Making Democracy

Work: Civic Traditions in M~odern Italy, Putnam provides a convincing argument that the

strongest determinant in Italy for socio-economic development is the vibrancy of what he labels

as "civic involvement" or "civic traditions," which he measures by associational life, newspaper

readership, and other indicators of political participation. Much of the recent thinking on social

capital has developed from the premises and empirical research carried out by Putnam in Italy

and the United States, for as Putnam himself argues that "...working together is easier in a

community blessed with a substantial stock of social capital... The social capital embodied in

norms and networks of civic engagements seems to be a precondition for economic development

as well as for effective government" (Putnam 1993, in Harris and Renzio 1997).

Within the field of economics, particularly strong support comes from the school of

institutional economists, where one can find striking similarities between economists'

description of economic institutions and the way social capital is conceptualized by sociologists

and political scientists (Castle 1998). North describes economic institutions as "the rules of the

game in a society or, more formally, are in the humanly devised constraints that shape human

interactions" (North, 1990 in Castle 1998). North and others in the school of institutional

economics recognize the importance of institutions in socioeconomic development and

distinguish between "formal rules and those constraints embedded in customs, traditions, and

codes of conduct" (Cattle 1998:6). Social capital has also been recognized and embraced by the

World Bank, which cites that "increasing evidence shows that cohesion is critical for societies to

prosper economically and for development to be sustainable. Social capital is not just the sum of









the institutions which underpin a society it is the glue that holds them together" (World Bank

2000). Much as Coleman envisioned with the introduction of the term in the late 1980s, social

capital has "seemed to promise answers which are attractive both to the neoliberal right still

skeptical about the role of the state and to those committed to ideas about participation and

grassroots empowerment. Thus it is that since 1993 'social capital' has become one of the key

terms of the development lexicon, adopted enthusiastically by international organizations,

national government and NGOs alike" (Harris and Renzio 1997:920).

Even though the term has gained wider acceptability both by theorists and practitioners,

social capital remains theoretically and conceptually elusive. There is still great debate on what

exactly constitutes social capital, how it should be assessed and measured, and probably most

importantly for practitioners, how social capital can be created or enhanced, sustained, and

reproduced. While few would disagree with Woolcock' s (1998) broad definition of social

capital, which is, "norms and networks facilitating collective action for mutual benefit," there are

few consistencies concerning social capital's conceptual application beyond this. One reason is

that such terms as norms, trust, and networks that are often used to define social capital are also

incredibly elusive to define and measure as well. Another reason is that the level of analysis for

studying social capital changes with each theorist area of expertise, often stretching the term

beyond its practical use. Where Coleman (1990) explicitly references social capital as endowed

in individuals, Putnam (1993, 1995) pushes much further by endowing social capital as the

property of groups, and even nations (Harris and Renzio 1997). The conceptual and analytical

ambiguity surrounding the term has led some to question its explanatory efficacy (Barron and

Hannan 1994), but a far greater number of theorists support the basic premise surrounding the

concept of social capital--that social relations are fundamental considerations in economic









development and sustainability and as such, are seeking ways to both clarify the terminology

and explicate on its uses (and abuses), as well as its analytical and practical applications in the

field of development economics.

Social Capital and Natural Resource Conservation

The concept of social capital captures the ideas that social bonds and norms are important

for people and communities (Coleman, 1988). As social capital lowers the transaction costs of

working together, it facilitates cooperation. People have the confidence to invest in collective

activities knowing that the others will also do so. They are also less likely to engage in unfettered

private actions with negative outcomes, such as resources degradation (Pretty and Ward, 2001).

As adopted by these authors, the concept of social capital has four important features that

facilitate cooperation: relation of trust; reciprocity and exchanges; common rules, norms, and

sanctions; and connectedness in networks and groups. In rural areas where use of natural

resources has been unsustainable, communities lack social capital, mostly because it was

destroyed by unfavorable policies and structures of social relations.

Krishna and Uphoff (2002)'s study on watershed development in Raj asthan, India found

that an index of social capital is positively and consistently correlated with superior development

outcomes, both in watershed conservation and in cooperative development activities more

generally. These authors used some concrete and rigorous measures of development performance

against which to test and validate the phenomenon of social capital in the very specific rural

context. For them, "Social capital is a matter of more than academic concern." They further

argue that an "examination of social capital deserves all of the rigor that academic analysis can

bring to them, but this analysis must also contribute to an understanding of social capital that can

be applied to real-world setting."









Household Characteristics and Social Capital

Economists, imbued with methodological individualism, prefer to emphasize individual

decisions about social capital. For instance, Glaeser et al. (2002) develop an investment model in

which the individual's stock of social capital (and the flow of investment in social capital

formation) is a function of his or her age, discount rate, expected mobility, opportunity cost of

time, and occupational returns to social skills, as well as aggregate stock of social capital in

specific community and the rate of social capital depreciation (including that due to relocation).

They compare the predictions of the model with available evidence, using data from the General

Social Survey, a repeat cross-sectional survey in the United States. To measure individual social

capital they use membership of organizations rather than subjective measures of trust, arguing

that the latter do not necessarily reflect trusting behavior in practice, while the membership

measure is reasonably well correlated with other measures of community mindedness, such as

working to solve a local problem, forming a new group to solve a local problem, or contacting

local government regarding a local problem. Their results indicate that social capital (1) first

rises then falls with age, (2) declines with expected mobility (3) rises in occupations with greater

returns to social skills, (4) is higher among homeowners, (5) falls sharply with physical distance,

and (6) is correlated with investment in human capital. However, their prediction that social

capital investment falls with the value of time is not supported by the available data. Moreover,

while their model allows for group level effects on individual investment decisions, they find no

robust evidence for such effects. Their overall conclusion is that "individual incentives, not

group membership, drive social capital accumulation decisions."

Analysis of household survey data in a Landcare program in Southern Philippines (Cramb

2004) shows that social capital varied with individual incentives, rising then falling with age

(peaking of 50-59 years) and increasing with farm size and education, but group level factors









were also important. That is, contrary to Glaeser et al. (2002), an individual social capital

depended as much on his or her local community as on individual characteristics. The research

found out that the relationship between social capital and soil conservation is not a

straightforward matter of investing in the rapid formation of self-sufficient community landcare

groups in order to accelerate adoption of soil conservation practices on farm.









CHAPTER 3
BACKGROUND INFORMATION OF THE STUDY SITE

This chapter presents the background information of the study area which includes three

sections. The first section reviews the concept of national parks around the world in general, and

Vietnam in particular. The second section describes the Cat Tien National Park, including a

discussion of the Forest Protection and Rural Development Proj ect (FPRD) that is being

implemented in the bufferzone of the CTNP. The third section describes the profies of the three

study communes.

National Parks in the World

There are many national parks across the world that have been established primarily to

protect biodiversity. These national parks usually provide a haven for a variety of flora and

fauna. Because the intense sunlight makes ecosystems in equatorial regions more productive,

tropical forests make up more than a half of the species in the world even though the area of

tropical forests is only seven percent of earth surface area. For instance, tropical and semi-arid

areas of Africa have about 30,000 species of flora while the tropical regions of Asia including

New Guinea and Australia have about 45,000 species. (World Resources Institute, 2006).

The world's first national park, Yellowstone, is located in the western United States. It was

created by an act of Congress in 1872 and signed into law by President Ulysses Grant.

Yellowstone National Park has about 2.2 million acres of wilderness and is "set apart as a public

park or are the area reserved for the benefit and enj oyment of people." This national park is now

very famous for ecotourism activities. Other countries have created national parks for various

purposes. In Tanzania, numerous national parks form the core of a much larger protected

ecosystem, and have been set aside to preserve the country's rich natural heritage, to provide

secure breeding grounds where its fauna and flora can thrive, and to save them from the









conflicting interests of a growing human population. The existing park system protects a number

of internationally recognized bastions of biodiversity and world heritage sites, thereby redressing

the balance for those areas of the country affected by deforestation, agriculture and urbanization.

In South Africa, most national parks are maintained by the government while the parks in

KwaZulu-Natal are managed by Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife (an amalgamation of the former

National Parks Board and KwaZulu Directorate of Nature Conservation). A number of these

national parks have become Peace parks (or Transfrontier Conservation Areas TFCAs) that

span across boundaries of multiple countries, where the political border sections that are

enclosed within its area are abolished. Private Parks are also starting to have a huge impact on

the conservation scene. (South African National Parks, SANParks--Official website:

http://www. sanparks. ore)

In Southeast Asia, Cambodia, Lao PDR, Thailand and Vietnam have established among

the largest protected area systems in the world as measured by proportions of national territory.

Many of these are national parks (or national protected areas as they are called in Lao PDR), and

nature and wildlife reserves in which no exploitative uses are permitted. These restrictive

national policies are coming under increasing scrutiny because of growing population pressure,

especially the needs of poor communities living in and around protected areas (ICEM, 2003).

Bufferzones

According to Gilmour and Nguyen (2000), a bufferzone is an area identified by a clear

boundary and it is located outside the boundaries of the protected area. Martino (2001) has used

a wide range of literature to understand the concept of bufferzones. He found that there is no

agreement among conservationists regarding the definitions of bufferzones. Although the

obj ective of bufferzones is to protect the biodiversity of the park, this protection has to be

harmonized with the creation of benefits to local people. Martino (2001) concluded that there has










to be a difference between the management and goals of the bufferzone and the management of

the protected area, if not, there would be no logical reason for bufferzones to exist.

The reasoning behind the establishment of bufferzones is generally a need to protect the

park from encroachment from local population and from the destructive activities that take place

outside the park but that affect conservation inside. However, there is recognition of the

legitimate needs of the local population. Martino (2001) revealed that many studies show that by

providing benefits in the bufferzone will create an incentive for local people and provide for their

needs, and the result will be that local people will be less likely to extract resources from the

park. In addition, Rustagi and Garcia (2005) assert that creation of the bufferzone around

protected areas assists in the optimization of the ecological, economic and socio-cultural values

of protected area, through extension and social buffering of the protected area. Martino (2001)

argued the inclusion of local people in development projects that take place either in the

bufferzones or near the protected areas is aimed to protect those areas from local peoples'

discontent rather than to integrate local peoples' need to access the protected area for resources.

This is a crucial point that comes from the very definitions of bufferzones and may explain in

part why bufferzones are not proving to be an effective complement to the conservation of

protected areas.

National Parks in Vietnam: An Overview

Political Context

In Vietnam, forestland is divided into three categories, namely production, protection and

special-use forests. Production forests are earmarked for exploitation in compliance with

approved management plans, while protection forests are designated to protect land and water

sources in critical areas (Nguyen et al., 2000) and their exploitation is restricted to mainly non-

timber forest products in natural forests. Special-use forests are designated based on their










importance for the conservation of Vietnam' s biodiversity, science, tourism or cultural and

historical heritage. In January 2001, Decision No. 08/QD-TTg classified special-use forests into

the following categories: (1) National parks; (2) Nature reserves, which were further divided into

two sub-categories: nature reserves and habitat/species management areas; and (3) Cultural,

Historical and Environmental sites (Landscape conservation areas).

The history of national parks in Vietnam can be summarized as follows (Table 3-1). In

1960, President Ho Chi Minh announced Ordinance No. 18/LCT, also known as the 'Law on

Organization of the Government Council of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam'. This

ordinance included a proposal to establish the General Department of Forestry. In doing so, the

Government of Vietnam had carried out the first actions to preserve natural resources through

promulgating degrees on forest protection. In 1962, Cuc Phuong Protected Forest was

established as the first protected area; and in 1966 it became the first national park in Vietnam. In

1986, decision No. 194/CT decreed the establishment of a further 73 Special-use Forests

nationwide. These Special-use Forests comprised two national parks, 46 nature reserves, and 25

cultural and historical sites. In 1992, the Prime Minister announced Decision No. 08/CT, the

establishment Cat Tien National Park. In 1994, the biodiversity action plan for Vietnam

recommended the strengthening of the national parks and the protected areas system. Currently,

there are 26 national parks in Vietnam.

Table 3-1. Timeline of the development of national park in Vietnam
Year Events
1960 Ordinance No 18/LCT authorizes the General Department of Forestry.
1962 Cuc Phuong Protected Forest (the first protected area) was established.
1966 Cuc Phuong became the first national park in Vietnam.
1986 Decision No. 194/CT establishes 73 Special-use Forests nationwide including
national parks, nature reserves, and cultural and historical sites.
1992 Decision No. 08/CT authorizes Cat Tien National Park
1994 PM Decision No. 845/TTg approves The Biodiversity Action Plan for Vietnam.









The Profiles of National Parks

In Vietnam, the natural conservation zones and national parks were established comprising

areas where natural resources were not acutely devastated (Vo, 2002). The average size of a

national park in Vietnam is about 34,832 ha; Yok Don national park is the largest area with

1 15,545 ha and Xuan Thuy is the smallest park with 7,100 ha. The average size of national parks

in the south is higher than that of the north by approximately 9,200 ha; and the standard

deviation in term of size of 26 national parks in Vietnam is about 29,467 ha. Similar to other

national parks around the world, the purpose of the national parks in Viet Nam is the same--to

conserve valuable and rare flora and fauna; to protect and maintain the representative tropical

forest ecosystem; to provide a platform for environmental education and scientific research; to

develop ecotourism activities; and to create j obs for people living in proximity to the parks.

Further, the national parks are integrated into a master plan which includes ecotourism (and

historical tourism) in order to attract domestic and foreign tourists. In Vietnam, in order to

manage and conserve resources in a sustainable manner, national parks enj oy extensive support

from a variety of donors and non government organizations such as IUCN (The World

Conservation Union), WWF (World Wildlife Fund), GEF (Global Environment Agency) and

JICA (Japan International Cooperation Agency).

National Park and Bufferzone

In Vietnam, the term "national park" was defined through Decision No.62 -2005/QD-BNN

(Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development), and also promulgated the regulation on

criteria for classification of special-use forests. National parks can be "natural areas on the

mainland or on the mainland with some submerged-lands, or sea areas. They are large enough

for the conservation of one or more typical or representative ecosystems. It shall not be affected,

or be affected, to the conservation of endemic or endangered species of present and future









generations. National parks serve as a basis for spiritual, scientific, educational, recreation and

eco-tourist activities which are controlled and have less negative impacts." Decision No.

09/2001/QD-BNN-TCCB (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development of Vietnam) notes

that a bufferzone is a forest area, land area, or wetland area located close/nearby to national parks

or natural protected zone.

According to Vo (2002), the people that live in the bufferzones of Vietnam are mostly poor

and with limited education. Their subsistence depends mostly on forest products or the related

ecosystem. They are generally indigenous peoples or resettled people. These people account for

about 90 % of the hunting and the collecting (of forest products) activities in the bufferzone. The

farming practices of these people reflect low levels of technology and low agricultural

productivity (Nguyen, 2002).

The Study Site: The Cat Tien National Park

As shown in Figure 3-1, the Cat Tien National Park (CTNP) is located in southern

Vietnam, approximately 150 km North of Ho Chi Minh City (Saigon) and nearly 150 km south

of Da Lat. The protected area is comprised of 73,878 ha; a bufferzone of 183,479 ha surrounds

the park. The CTNP can be subdivided into three sectors: Nam Cat Tien (3 8, 100 ha) in Dong Nai

Province, Tay Cat Tien (5,143 ha) in Binh Phuoc Province, and Cat Loc (30,635 ha) in Lam

Dong Province. Cat Loc in the north part of the park is geographically disconnected from the

southern part by a 10 km band of heavy populated rural land.

Nam Cat Tien received protected status in 1978 (Decision 360/TTg of July 7, 1978). It

attained a national park status in 1992 (Decision 08-CT of January 13, 1992). Cat Loc received

protected status from Lam Dong Province in 1992. The area remained managed by Cat Tien

District, and a formal Management Board was established only in 1996. The decision of January

13, 1992 (08-CT) included the suggestion to extend Nam Cat Tien National Park with both Tay












Cat Tien and Cat Loc. Decision 38 1998 QD of February 16, 1998 approved the integration of


Nam Cat Tien, Tay Cat Tien, and Cat Loc in what is currently known as the Cat Tien National


Park. The transfer of responsibility from the Provinces to the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural


Development took place on December 22, 1998.


BOUNDARIES OF CAT TIEN NATIONAL PARK( AND
THE STUDYING COMMUNES IN THE DISTRICT OF BU DANG


CAT LOC


CL\TTIEII


er.n~unrrp rr
j-~'
_I ---
U r -u


Figure 3-1. Location of the study sites'


As mentioned earlier, the area of Cat Tien National Park is currently 73,878 ha. With the


re-demarcation of the park boundary the area will be 70,549 ha in two separate forest blocks: the


Cat Loc sector (26,970ha) in the north, and the Nam Cat Tien and Tay Cat Tien sectors


SCourtesy of the University of Texas Libraries, The University of Texas at Austin









(43,579ha) in the south. The topography of the area varies greatly between the three sectors. Cat

Loc is situated in the beginning of the southern foothills of the Central Highlands and, although

elevations only reach 659m, the topography is steep. Nam Cat Tien and Tay Cat Tien are situated

in the lowlands that are typical of southern Vietnam; the topography of this area is characterized

by low, gentle hills.

Numerous springs and streams originate in the area and drain into the Dong Nai River,

which is the second largest river system in southern Vietnam. The Dong Nai River flows through

the Park, forming the western boundary of Cat Loc and the eastern boundary of Nam Cat Tien.

The lowlands in the north of Nam Cat Tien are poorly drained, resulting in a network of swamps

and lakes, which expands and contracts seasonally. Mean annual rainfall ranges from 2,300 mm

in the lowlands to 2,850 mm at higher elevations.

The flora of Cat Tien region is typical for the Dong Nam Bo bio-geographic region (the

eastern part of the southern Mekong Delta) with Dipterocarpaceae and Lythraceae the most

commonly represented families in areas where human modification is minimal. In forests

disturbed by humans, the maj or families represented are Euphorbiaceae and M~oraceae. Only of

the species found in the Cat Tien region are endemic to Vietnam (FIPI, MOF&WWF, 1995).

These habitats support a rich diversity of biological life. Currently 76 mammal, 320 bird, 74

reptile, 35 amphibian, and 99 fish species have been confirmed in the Park.

As valuable as the number of species, the area is also known to be important for ungulate,

primate, and bird communities. Amongst the ungulates Sambar (Cervus unicolor), Wild Boar

(Susscrofa), and Gaur (Bos gurus) reportedly occur at relatively high densities compared to

other areas in Vietnam (Ling 2000).









Of the fauna occurring in the area, 40 species are IUCN red-listed. The key species

amongst them is the Vietnamese sub-species of the Javan Rhinoceros (Rhinoceros sondaicus

annamniticus), which is the rarest large mammal on earth. The total population of this species is

less than 7, and they are only found in Cat Loc. Other key species include the Orange-necked

Partridge (Arborophila davidi), which is also endemic to this region of Vietnam; the Siamese

crocodile (Crocodylus siamnensis),which were locally extinct but have been re-established in the

Park; the Asian elephant (Elepha~s maximus); the Black-shanked Douc Langur (Pygathrix

nigripes); the Yellow-cheeked Crested Gibbon (Hylobates gabriellae); the white-shoulder ibis

(Pseudibis davisoni); and the white-winged wood duck (Cairna scutulata)

A total of 9,442 people live inside the CTNP. Approximately 81% of these people live at

the edge of the park, but five villages are isolated deep inside the park and contain nearly 1,794

people (CTNP, 2003). They have no land titles in their current location but are treated as de facto

legal inhabitants. A small proportion of these people originate from lowland areas, from which

they departed after people of the Kinh maj ority settled in their ancestral lands. Most of them,

however, settled inside the park as immigrants from other parts of Vietnam following the

American War in the 1960s.

There are 11 ethnic groups living within the CTNP. They can be divided into three main

groups and each has a different history, different connection to administrative structures, and

different land use strategy. These groups are the mainstream Vietnamese (Kinh); some

indigenous ethnic minorities (Stieng and Chau Ma); and recently migrated minorities from the

Northern provinces of Lang Son, Cao Bang, and Bac Kan (Tay, Nung, Dao, Hoa, H'Mong etc.)

The Stieng Chau Ma, and Chau Ro tribes have lived in the region of the park for several

centuries. Village 5, Village 6 and K'Lut (Tien Hoan), K'Lo-K'it (Phuoc Cat 2) are mainly Chau









Ma. Stieng people are concentrated in Village 3 and Phuoc Son (Phuoc Cat 2) and Village 4 (Ta

Lai). These indigenous minorities have a long history of shifting cultivation. For these people, it

takes time to change their traditional cultivation practices and style of living to more sedentary

livelihoods.

The recently migrated minorities from the Northern provinces started arriving around

1987-1988, but most settled after 1990. Their traditional livelihood strategies consist of fishing,

hunting, and shifting cultivation, but now they are mainly engaged in farming. They

predominately occupy the Da Bong Cua area (Dang Ha Commune, Bu Dang District, Binh

Phuoc Province).

The human population of the bufferzone, which comprises 3 1 communes and 2 towns in 8

districts, is far higher than the population inside the CTNP. Nearly 200,000 people live in the

direct vicinity of the Park, and the bufferzone is heavily farmed with little conservation value.

Part of the Park' s boundary is shared with the government-operated State Forest Enterprises

(SFEs), which have previously been logged, or are currently being logged to varying extents.

However, most SFEs are currently under a logging ban. Although illegal settlers have converted

large parts of these SFEs into agricultural lands, these areas also contain large tracts of important

forest habitat with a variety of wildlife.

Forest Protection and Rural Development (FPRD) project

Since 1997, the World Bank has been supporting a proj ect entitled "Forest Protection and

Rural Development" (FPRD). The goal of the project is to improve environmental protection in

Vietnam by protecting and managing remaining natural forests with high biodiversity. The

proj ect obj ectives are (a) the effective protection of high priority protected areas; (b) the effective

management of remaining natural forests in the bufferzone; (c) the reduction in dependency on

protected areas for subsistence and cash income by improving the livelihood status of residents









in the bufferzone; and (d) the strengthening of government capacity to effectively design,

implement, and monitor integrated conservation and development programs.

The proj ect area includes the Chu Mom Ray Nature Reserve (CMRNR) located in Kontum

Province, the previously mentioned Cat Tien National Park (CTNP) located in Dong Nai, Lam

Dong, and Binh Phuoc provinces, and surrounding areas of agricultural and forestry land (i.e.,

the bufferzone). The FPRD proj ect supports only bufferzone community development activities

because of existing Dutch-funded conservation proj ects that apply to Cat Tien National Park.

The bufferzone has been defined as a continuous band of those communes adjacent to the

protected areas; however, it also includes additional contiguous communes within three

kilometers of the national park in which human populations may present an actual or potential

threat to biodiversity conservation. This definition was adopted because the commune is the

smallest administrative unit within the Vietnamese administrative system through which proj ect

activities can be effectively managed.

For the development of the bufferzone, the proj ect aim is to reduce the incursion pressure

on the national park by providing alternative income-generating opportunities, securing land-

tenure, and enhancing the management and use of existing natural forests in the bufferzone.

Development of rural communities, and the better management and use of forests located in the

buffer communes of the national park, are the key to reducing the incursion pressure on the

protected area. A participatory process-oriented approach is used to derive commune action

plans (CAPs) based on priority needs identified by the participating communes. The FPRD

proj ect funded the following activities: (i) community development planning process to

formulate CAPs and negotiate a conservation agreement based on CAPs in exchange for

community cooperation in PA protection; (ii) land allocation to improve access to institutional










credit, promote sustainable land use, control in-migration, and increase social stability; (iii)

social support programs to improve basic social infrastructure and increase incomes and

employment opportunities for communities, particularly those that are very poor; (iv) agricultural

support activities to improve yields and diversify farm incomes; (v) issuance of long term forest

protection contracts to households, in order to j ointly protect the remaining natural forests in the

bufferzone, and a feasibility study to restructure State Forest Enterprises (SFEs) adj acent to the

protected areas as a means to improve management of estates under their control; (vi) small-scale

irrigation expansion and constructions in order to increase food production and security, and road

upgrades to improve service to rural communities and expand market opportunities.

The Commune Profiles

The Thong Nhat Commune

The Thong Nhat Commune was established during the American war. It was also the base

of the revolution (the communists under Ho Chi Minh and resistance to the French back to

1940s). At that time, the area was inhibited mainly by the Stieng indigenous ethnic group who

lived on shifting cultivation After 1975, the new government created some autonomous

hamlets that later became communes, with leadership from military officials and other

government cadres who helped build the local government.

In 1985, the People's Committee of Song Be Province had planned the Thong Nhat State

Forest Enterprise, and Thong Nhat Commune was put under the jurisdiction of the SFE.

However, until October 1987 the Thong Nhat SFE was divided into two enterprises: Thong Nhat

and Nghia Trung SFEs. Since that time, people who lived in Thong Nhat Commune were under




SShifting cultivation, according to Conklin (1957), is any agricultural system in which fields are cleared by fire and
cropped discontinuously.









the management of the two state forest enterprises and people cultivating land there were

considered squatters in the state forest lands.

People who were relocated by the government from the construction of the Tri An

hydraulic dam, together with many war veterans, also came to settle along the Dong Nai River.

Historically, they cultivated wetland rice and other short-term industrial crops. These people

were organized into hamlet 4 of the Thong Nhat commune.

In response to the national immigration plan, in 1991 the government resettled the

population such that the Song Be province established the New Economic Zone (NEZ) of Duc

Lieu. Part of Thong Nhat commune territory belonged to the newly established commune of Duc

Lieu. In 1993, ethnic minorities migrated from different parts of the country, especially from

Cao Bang, Bac Kan, Lang Son provinces (mountainous provinces bordering with China). These

ethnic groups rushed to this area after realizing the potential of this fertile land. This led to

serious deforestation as a result of shifting cultivation. Taking advantage of the master plan for

the hydraulic dam at nearby Thac Mo, many people came and had commercial logging ventures

even in the protected forest that was managed by the state forest enterprises. By 1994, due to

rapidly increased physical population growth the government again decided to separate Thong

Nhat Commune into two communes-Thong Nhat and Dang Ha. The total area of Thong Nhat

Commune now is about 14,085 hectares.

Located in the upper part of the Dong Nai River watersheds, the commune has a network

of creeks which are usually barren in the dry season. As the Dong Nai River runs through the

area, water for irrigation is available throughout the year. This geographical condition has made

the commune suitable for developing industrial crop plantations and home gardens.









In recent years there have been waves of immigration to the area, which has resulted in the

formation of many population clusters. With a total population of 10,860 persons, there are now

about 12 hamlets in the commune that are made up of people who have immigrated from 52

provinces and belong to 15 different ethnic groups. This reflects the diversified population of

Thong Nhat commune.

The Dang Ha Commune

The Dang Ha Commune was established in 1994, from the hamlet 4 (mentioned

previously) that was separated from Thong Nhat Commune. Before 1987, the commune had vast

forestland as part ofNghia Trung Forest Enterprise where several veteran families had migrated

from Lam Dong province. At that time, the people living in the area were mostly self-sufficient.

Moreover, there was no government body and all commercial activities were conducted in the

nearby town of Cat Tien (Lam Dong Province).

In 1988, the Bu Dang District was established as separate district from the District of

Phuoc Long (of the former Song Be Province). Together with the establishment of the new

district, hamlet 4 of Thong Nhat was named with approximately 60 households. At that time

there were no roads and transportation was difficult, being accessible only by boat along the

Dong Nai River. The only source of transportation to meet the need of local people was a two

engine boat running two trips every Wednesday and Saturday. From 1989, the migrants from the

mountainous provinces of Tuyen Quang, Cao Bang, and Lang Son (near the border with China)

rushed to the area and began clearing forests and cultivating wetland rice. In 1990, a major event

changed the life of people living in hamhhhhhhhh~~~~~~~~~let 4. In order to supply sand for building of the Thac

Mo Hydraulic Electricity Plant, the proj ect management board built a new road from Sao Bong

to Dako Bridge. This road became the life blood of subsequent cultural and economic










development of the area. By 1993, hamlet 4 of the Thong Nhat Commune had reached 500

households in size.

To cope with the dramatic change of increased population due to migration to the area, and

in order to better manage the area, the Central Government decided to split hamlet 4 of Thong

Nhat Commune and establish the Dang Ha Commune. In 1996, the People's Committee of Song

Be Province decreed the allocation of 2,598 ha land of the Nghia Trung Forest Enterprise to

Dang Ha Commune to be put under their management.

Currently the total population of Dang Ha Commune is about 6,062 people (1,020

households) distributed in 6 hamlets. Hamnlets 1, 6,8 are mainly comprised of the Tay-Nung

ethnic group that migrated from the Northern provinces and there are no indigenous minorities in

these hamlets. The commune shares the borders with the national park in the southwest. Land

has been allocated to 480 households according to the recent directive (173 CT); among these

households there are 170 households that actually live inside the national park. Since year 2000,

the resettlement of these households has been proposed, but it remains on paper only. Hamnlets 1

and 2 are under the re-demarcation. Some parts of this land will belong to the park and the

affected households will need to be resettled. After 1990 there has been no additional

spontaneous immigration to this area.

Being a remote commune, Dang Ha is still a very poor commune of the district of Bu

Dang, Binh Phuoc Province. Generally, the living standards of the local people here are still very

low compared to other communes throughout the nation.

The Doan Ket Commune

The territory of the Doan Ket Commune was once the ancestral domain of the Stieng.

These people have been living in this area since the 1930s, practicing shifting cultivation as their

main mode of agricultural production. In 1958, the Diem government (American-supported at










the time) relocated the migrants from the central provinces of Vietnam to this area. These

migrants then began living together with the Stieng people to make full use of the land resources

in the region. After the victory in the Bu Dang District of the revolutionaries in 1974, the new

government established the new commune of Thien Hoa, the original name of the then Doan Ket

Commune. Households were organized into cooperatives.

Beginning in 1989, the Tay and Nung ethnics from the northern border provinces

immigrated to this area, began clearing the forests for agricultural cultivation, and formed the

then hamlet 7 of Doan Ket commune. Migrants from the Mekong delta regions also settled

around the area called Dakbon, forming hamlet 5B. In 1994, the Duc Phong town was split from

Doan Ket Commune. Today, the total area of Doan Ket is about 13,065 hectares with 1,250

households numbering 5,731 persons from the following ethnic groups: Kinh, Tay, Nung, Stieng,

Hoa (Statistical Yearbook, Bu Dang District, 2005).

Living standards of the Doan Ket Commune people are considered higher than other

communes. However, there is a big gap between people who are living in some hamlets nearby

the town of Duc Phong and those who live in the remote hamlets where transportation is limited.

Agricultural production is relatively developed with some perennial crops such as coffee,

cashew, black pepper, rubber, and some fruit trees. Animal production includes swine and cattle,

but is not extensively developed. Generally speaking, the weak infrastructure, limited

transportation, lack of technical knowledge/skills, and lack of capital have limited economic

development in Doan Ket commune.

Table 3-2. Demographic data for the three selected communes
Total areas Total Agriculture Persons living Number of
(square Population Households on agriculture person at
kilometers) (persons) working age
Doan Ket 75.50 5,107 1,067 4,908 2,160
Thong Nhat 93.00 10,860 2,410 10,524 4,354
Dang Ha 201.97 6,062 1,225 6,032 2,328











Ethnographical Sketch of Population Living in the Three Study Communes

Stieng ethnic

The Stieng is the indigenous ethnic group that resides mostly in hamlets 6, 2 and 12 of

Thong Nhat Commune and hamlets 6, IB, 5A, 5B and 2 of Doan Ket Commune. The southeast

part of South Vietnam is the traditional niche of Stieng, and they are also found in neighboring

Cambodia.

The Stieng divides itself into two maj or groups: Bulo, or the people above" (upstream);

and Brideh, or "the people below" (downstream). Key informants among the Stieng that were

interviewed also identified local groups called Bulach and Bridip.

The Stieng trace their descent through the male line. Kin are recognized to the third

ascending generation and the third descending generation. Marriage patterns reflect patrilineage

exogamy, rules against marrying the father' s sister's daughter, and preference for marriage with

consanguine kinswomen of the mother' s patrilineage.

Traditionally, an individual of the Stieng has only one name, and it generally does not have

a particular meaning. During the 1950's the government required surnames for identification

cards, so all Stieng were given Dieu as their family name. At present time, the full name of male

Stieng includes a surname and a last name (last name is given in Vietnamese) such as Dieu BDai,

Dieu Tiet, Dieu G~iaray, etc.

The Stieng have traditionally lived together in the same area in separate small houses (no

longhouse remained), thus forming the traditional tribe. But some Stieng families live separately

from their tribe, adj acent to the main road, and they have home gardens and farming practices

like the Kinh or Tay Nung ethnic groups. Some of them intermarry with Kinh people, but

intermarriage with Tay Nung people has not yet been observed.









Although others live far away from the road system, they have been affected by Kinh

culture through their dress, consumption patterns, and housing structures (style of Kinh).

However, they still maintain their traditional activities such as shifting cultivation, food

gathering, wild animal hunting, taking a bath in streams, using traditional tools and equipment

such as crossbow, back-basket, footing, etc.

A few of the Stieng have been resettled in remote areas far away from the road system.

Swidden agriculture practice is the main way to produce their food. Houses are built near each

other (not longhouse), thus forming a true tribe. Their livelihood opportunities are limited and

they have been known to face a six-month shortage of food in a year.

The Stieng language is classified in the South Bahnatic subgrouping of the Mon-Khmer

family within the Austro-Asiatic stock. This language does not exhibit the interesting vowel

register phonemes of many Mon-Khmer languages, but its extensive use of semantic pairing,

onomatopoeia forms and internal rhyming make Stieng a colorful and fascinating language.

Tay, Nung, Hoa, Muong, Man, Dao, Cao Lan, San Diu ethnic minorities

The Tay, Nung, Hoa, Muong, Man, Dao, Cao Lan, San Diu groups are migrants from

various northern provinces of Vietnam. These groups are very similar to each other in terms of

culture, traditions, and farming practices (the so-called VAC system, which stands for

Vuon=Garden, Ao=Fish pond, Chuong=Pig Barn in Vietnamese). They often build big houses

made of several timber species; each family owns a separate house (along with a home garden)

that has a clear spatial boundary. A water source for paddy rice cultivation is important for their

farming and for establishing the VAC system; therefore they often select low-lying sites for

building their hamlets.

They usually assist each others in terms of technical and financial assistance; in some cases

they are willing to receive newly migrated persons into their area, allowing them to stay on their









own farms for at least one year. During this period, the new migrants have to work hard and save

money in order to be able to establish their own (separate) farms. They are patient and dedicated

farmers, known for saving money and building up their wealth from the land.

Kinh people

The Kinh people are the maj or ethnic group in Viet Nam (and in the study communes, as

well), and linguistically belong to the "Viet-Muong." The Kinh migrated from the Mekong

Delta, the Central Coastal area, and the neighboring province of Dong Nai. The Kinh prefer to

live along the sides of main roads, or deep in the basal soil forest area. Their religious affiliations

include ancestor worship, Buddhism, and Roman Catholicism.

Farming systems in Kinh households in the commune include plantations with more

diversity than those of other ethnic groups and are generally based on commercial and perennial

tree crops like cashew nut, coffee, and rubber trees. Like some of the other ethnic groups, a

portion of the Kinh have migrated into the area around CTNP. These migrated Kinh that have

come from the North were former government officials, soldiers, or displaced migrants (due to

the land shortage pressure in the North) familiar with the VAC system in the North, who prefer

to apply this farming system in the new areas area. The Kinh that migrated from the Central

Coastal areas are skilled in wetland rice cultivation, and they always seek to find lowland areas

in order to apply their paddy rice cultivating technique in other parts of the country.

The Kinh that came from the Mekong Delta are skilled in fruit tree species, and have

established fruit orchards with longan, or sapodilla. The Kinh that came from the southern parts

of the Central Highland or from the Dong Nai or Lam Dong provinces have both the funds and

technical knowledge to invest in coffee and rubber plantations.










Indigenous Ethnic Groups in Transition

Changes in community structure

The traditional system of administration in the ethnic tribal areas is the council of elders

led by certain individuals who know the traditional regulations of the tribe and are respected by

the local community. When the commune was established, the Stieng had representation in the

local assembly (called Hoi Dong 1Khanr Dan Xa), and the role of elders was now limited to giving

suggestions to local government. It may be that traditional regulations and the indigenous

knowledge will be eroded in the future. Kinship still has strong influence on the household

economics of the Stieng people.

Indigenous knowledge system

As with the other ethnic groups in Vietnam, the Stieng owned precious indigenous

knowledge--not only in agriculture, traditional medicine, traditional regulations, and community

administrative, but especially in natural resource management. At the present time, the

indigenous knowledge of the Stieng is changing from knowledge and skills related to traditional

shifting cultivation into cashew nut based agro-forestry practices.

Changing characteristics of family, household and community

Before 1975, the Stieng tribe was distributed from the center of Dong Xoai Town to deep

within the forest. Under the wave of migration pressure, however, the Stieng is now concentrated

in small tribes living together in small settlement areas called "bon," and are led by an elder.

The "Bon" tends to be topographically isolated from the Tay-Nung. Because the livelihood

activities of the Tay-Nung are based on the VAC system, a water source is most important for

fishpond digging and paddy rice cultivation. Thus, the Tay-Nung select low-elevation sites for

establishing their settlement while the Stieng prefer to select high-elevation sites in order to

establish their "bon," which is more appropriate for their swidden activities.










On the other hand, however, during the cropping season almost all members of the Stieng

households have left their houses to stay in the M~iir (swidden field), and return back to the "bon"

only on the weekend, as they do not like to live near other ethnic groups with which they are

unfamiliar. However, Kinh houses can be alternated with Stieng in the "bon" for business

activities; Kinh also supply the needs and food for Stieng during food shortage period, and offer

credit to Stieng by pre-buying agriculture product (rice, tuber, root, cashew nut...).

In general, there are 3 main types of Stieng settlement areas found in the study communes.

The original type of "bon" structure, where houses were built next each others; there are no

plants in settlement area. Their swidden areas are usually located in the surrounding area or far

away in the natural forest. Their main crop is upland rice grown with sesame.

The second type of "bon" is composed of separate houses with home gardens and clear

boundaries that separate individual dwellings. The Stieng 's home garden usually includes fruit

trees like bananas, ananas; and spices such as chili, lime grass, zingers, feed for pig like wild taro

(Aloca~sia macrorrhiza), livestock-shed, etc. However, they still strongly depend on swidden

agriculture as well, especially for growing upland rice and other food crops in the natural forest.

They also grow cassava; rice and other food crops are typically alternated with cashew trees.

The third type of "bon" is the most advanced where the bon elder leader allocates land

alongside of the road, and each household includes house, kitchen garden, cashew-field, swidden

combined with clear boundary. Animal raising and cashew nut production are part of the income

generating activities.

There is no longhouse even in the original type of "bon." The houses of the Stieng are

constructed on the ground; the key informant (elder) related that in the 1950s they had been

forced to adopt this style by the government.










A typical Stieng house is small and low with small poles, thatch roof, exterior and interior

walls that are formed by split bamboo. Internal arrangement varies, but a common pattern is to

have a bamboo platform about a half meter high, which is used as the bed, and an open hearth

with three stones set in a hole in the ground. At the present time there is no flat gong and rice

alcohol jar in the Stieng household. The back-baskets, the fish-catching baskets, and the rice-

winnowing baskets are all hung on the bamboo wall or on the beam. On the floor is the mortar

that is used for husking rice.

Some Stieng houses are presently constructed with bridge and cement (these are influenced

by Kinh culture), but the kitchen still remains in the Stieng style. Some advanced Stieng

households may own a radio, a TV set, a cassette player, and/or a motorcycle. For example, this

study observed 2 TV sets, 3 radio-cassettes, and 9 bikes that were owned by households of a

"bon" of 11 Stieng families that live in a remote area. Other outside influences on the Stieng are

evidenced by the women that now know how to make-up themselves, paint their fingernails, dye

their hair, and use luxurious soaps and dress slippers at home.

The family is the basic social unit and the household is the basic unit of production.

Similar to the Kinh which is strongly influenced by Confucianism, the social structure of the

Stieng is also traced descent through the male line. Everyone knows the name and the village of

the second or third ascending generations. Weddings and funerals bring matrilineal kin together

to strengthen their ties not only by contact but also through recitation of ancestor' s names as

ritual offerings are made.

Marriage is often intro-ethnic and an important event in the life of an ethnic group. Almost

all Stieng now belong to the Baptist religion, and are influenced by Kinh culture. The Stieng's

wedding ceremony is very simple; there is no bride price for marriage. At the present time, the









Stieng and Kinh have been practicing intermarriage. This study found no intermarriage between

the Stieng and Tay-Nung groups because the Tay-Nung people are new migrants who have not

yet adapted to the new social environment.

After marriage, a new split house is established which then receives assistance from the

community. The families in the village usually have many children. The average numbers of

children in the family in the study site is 4 to 5.

Commune's people committee

A commune is an official political entity at the local level, and is administered by an

institution called "Hoi Dong A~71(an Dan Xa (People' s Council of the Commune). This

institution is considered by law to be the decision-making body when it comes to commune

issues. It elects the executive committee, which is called "Uy Ban A~71(an Dan Xa (People

Committee of the Commune). At present, the Chairs of both the Doan Ket and Thong Nhat

Communes belong to the predominant Kinh group, but the Chair of Dang Ha is a male from the

Tay ethnic community.

Local mass organizations, such as Women's Union, Farmer's Union, Youth Union,

Veteran's Association, Red Cross Society, Gardening Association, Association of Elderly

People, exist in each commune. They are considered as implementing tools for accomplishing

obj ectives and targets set by the local government. These organizations, however, are very active

and are regarded as effective local partners in many development proj ects; the Women' s Union,

Farmer' s Union, and Veteran' s Association in particular. Every one or two months, the

commune people' s committee will organize meetings with the leaders of these organizations to

inform them of government decisions and plans. The leaders, in turn, are expected to disseminate

the information to the villagers.









Beside the above mentioned local association which are sponsored by the government,

other groups such as religious groups, credit groups (rotating credit associations), and kinship

groups are also found in the villages. However, almost all respondent tended not to mention

about those informal groups, especially those who belonged to protestant religion.

Summary

This chapter presented a general overview of the location-related background information

that is central to the study. In particularly, distinct characteristics of the CTNP and its bufferzone

were described, which also highlights the challenges for biodiversity conservation in the park.

Similar to other national parks in Vietnam, the people who live in the bufferzone of the CTNP

are mostly indigenous minorities or resettled households and are very poor with limited

education. Their subsistence depends mostly on forest products or related ecosystems. In term of

sociodemographic conditions, each ethnic group has a different history, a different connection to

administrative structures, and a different livelihood strategy. The ethnographic sketch of the

population living in the three study communes was presented with a particular focus given to the

transition of the Stieng--an indigenous ethnic group--from a subsistence mode of living to a

commercial farming system. This implies a socioeconomic transformation of the Stieng (as well

as of other ethnic groups making this transition). Besides the traditional institutions that govern

natural resources, many other new modern institutions are now in place such as local

organizations that are either sponsored by the government or are civil society organizations. The

nature and importance of these organizations, as well as households' participation in them, will

be further discussed in the analysis chapter.









CHAPTER 4
IVETHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the methods and scientific reasoning behind the study. The steps

documented in this chapter were used to access household social capital and conservation

attitude toward the Cat Tien National Park in Vietnam. Included is a discussion of the conceptual

framework used to establish relationship among variables, the units and levels of analyses, study

sites selection criteria, data collection efforts, and the overall research design used in this study.

Conceptual Framework

This study focuses on households' social capital and its effect on conservation attitude and

behavior toward the CTNP--specifically where the World Bank supported proj ect--Forest

Protection and Rural Development project--is in place. Drawing on the literature, a conceptual

framework (Figure 4-1) was developed to assess the relationships among various variables This

framework shows that a set of demographic variables would impact households' social capital.

Social capital index is shown to have various components including trust, social cohesion, social

commitment, community support, voluntary cooperation, familiarity, social integration, ethnic

interaction. It is conceivable that both demographic variables and components of social capital

are expected to influence households' attitude towards the conservation of CTNP. Since

household attitude is expected to influence the behavior, it is shown that all three sets of

variables (demographic, social capital, and attitude) would influence household behavior towards

the CTNP.








SNote that the components or dimensions of social capital and conservation attitude listed in this figure are derived
from factor analysis described latter in this chapter.































Various dimensions
of Social Capital

Trust: people in community can
be trusted, help any time, work
together to solve problems...

Social Cohesion: share
common interest, connected
through associations..

Social commitment: association
make decision, willing to make a
better place..

Community support show support,
obey com codes, covenants

Voluntary cooperation volunteer In
community


Familiarity: get along, have
mutual respect

Social Integration know most people,
feel a part of community


Ethnic Interaction: accept the
ethnic diversity, help making
better community..


Forest Protection Discuss Conservation
Training Agreement


Various dimensions of
Conservation Attitude


Perceived Benefit of
Conservation


Conservation
Awareness


Perceived Short-term
Use Benefit


Perceived Ownership
of Forestlands


Demographics:
* Age
* Gender
* Education
* Length of residence
* Household size
* Household Income
* Ethnicity
* Religion
* Marital status


Household Participation in
Various Conservation Activities


Land Use
Planning


Figure 4-1. Conceptual framework to examine the relationship among selected variables


t


Agro-foresry
Training Program









Unit of Analysis

Individual households are the unit of analysis in this study. The attitudes, interactions with

other households, and experiences and opinions of respondent households were used to measure

social capital as well as the factors that contribute to it (Narayan and Cassidy, 2001). Households

were chosen as the unit of analysis because, in the rural context of Vietnam, the household is the

basic unit of production that governs the daily activities of all people, including their attitudes

and behaviors toward natural resource conservation.

Sampling Methods

A total of 270 households from the three communes of Thong Nhat, Dang Ha, Doan Ket

were identified for participation in this study using a stratified sampling design. Several steps

determined this sample size. First, based on the total number of households in the three

communes (4,702 households), the minimum number of completed questionnaires needed was

determined to be 253 (based on the number of available households). This sample size is

considered appropriate since the population presents a homogenous structure; moreover, it is also

sufficient to limit sampling error and still be statistically representative of the population at a

level of .05 (Kraemer and Thiemann, 1987; Isaac and Michael, 1997). The selection of samples

is generally outlined in Figure 4-2.

Stratified sampling allows the researcher to select respondent households from three main

groups mentioned in the previous chapter. These groups are the mainstream Kinh (Vietnamese),

the indigenous ethnic minorities (Stieng), and recently migrated minorities from the Northern

provinces (mainly Tay, Nung, and Hoa). At the commune level (i.e., the first strata), three out of

five communes were purposefully selected. These communes represent the characteristics of the

population of Binh Phuoc province which belong to the bufferzone of CTNP because the various

distances from these communes to the national park, as well as the diversity of the ethnic groups










in these communes. At the hamlet level (second strata), three hamlets were chosen from each

commune, with each hamlet representing the characteristics of each of three groups above.

Because the population in each hamlet is relatively homogenous, 30 households out of more than

100 households were randomly selected. Thus, a total sample size of 270 households (3

communes x 3 hamlets x 30 households = 270) was determined.

Three out of five
bufferzone
communes of Bu
Communes I lDang District were
selected


From each commune
Hamlets a three hamlets are
selected randomly




From each hamlet 30
Households I households are selected
(270 households in total)
Figure 4-2. Sampling approach followed to select communes, hamlets, and households

Survey Instrument/Questionnaire Development and Research

A survey instrument was developed to obtain household data on social capital,

participation in the FPRD, attitudes towards biodiversity conservation, and demographic

characteristics of respondents. These are the main areas of the instrument and can be observed in

the sample questionnaire presented in Appendix A. The design of the questionnaire followed the

suggested formatting of the Tailored Design Method (Dillman, 2000). The development of the

questionnaire was based on information from semi-structured interviews with key informants in

the study sites. These interviews were conducted by the principal investigator with different key

informants in summer 2003 in the three study communes. Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA)










reports (FPRD, 2000; FPRD, 2001) for three communes Thong Nhat, Dang Ha, Doan Ket

produced by the World Bank project in these areas were also helpful, especially in terms of

identifying community groups, social organizations, and development activities in the study

sites.

Survey Pre-test

A pre-test of the questionnaire was conducted in order to identify any incorrect or

misleading survey items, problems with data collection methodology, and/or additional areas for

research that were not present in the literature. As such, a random sample of 20 households was

drawn from the residents list in the Thong Nhat Commune to be interviewed for this purpose.

This commune was chosen for two reasons: (1) it is more accessible than the other two

communes, and thus minimized the cost of the pre-test; and (2) it has more diversified ethnic

groups with different languages and social structures, which provided a desired amount of

variability for the pre-test. The selection of 20 residents would be considered an adequate sample

size for this pilot test (Isaac and Michael, 1997; Babbie, 1998). Testing was conducted in the first

week of April 2005.

The pilot test was conducted following the planned methodology used in the overall study.

In addition, respondents were asked to comment on the questionnaire content, design, clarity,

wording, and format. Where possible, all respondents were gathered together to discuss the

survey in a group setting or focus group. Additional issues that were discussed include the

wording of certain items, how to approach respondents who live deep inside the Park, etc. Based

on this pretest, revisions were made to the questionnaire and, where necessary, the data

collection methods.









Administration of the Survey

The survey proper was conducted from 20 April to 10 August 2005. The questionnaire

was translated into Vietnamese and administered orally by a team of two trained research

assistants assigned to each commune. These interviewers are extension workers who worked in

the areas and have a good rapport with the local people. As respondents might be reluctant to

answer sensitive questions, extension workers were chosen to conduct the interviews in order to

avoid the potential bias that may be caused by hiring foresters. The response rate was 100%

(270/270) due largely to the fact that the survey was conducted through face-to-face interviews

that were pre-arranged.

Concepts and Variables

This study is focused on three primary concepts: social capital, participation in the FPRD

proj ect activities, and general attitudes toward biodiversity conservation. The first two factors are

hypothesized as being key components that influence the conservation attitude of given

respondent households. Thus the conservation attitude is also utilized as a dependent variable.

There are two main types (or categories) of social capital: structural forms and cognitive

forms (Krishna and Uphoff, 2002). Both pertain to and affect social relationships and

interactions among people, and both affect and are affected by expectations. Structural social

capital facilitates mutually beneficial collective actions through established roles and social

networks that are supplemented by rules, procedures, and precedents. Cognitive social capital,

which includes shared norms, values, attitudes, and beliefs, predisposes people toward mutually

beneficial collective action (Krishna and Uphoff, 2002).

Participants in the survey were asked to express their opinions on a series of questions

about their involvement with, and perceptions about, their neighbors. A Likert scale was used to

record the responses. General topics covered by the questionnaire include organizations that the










respondent belongs to; collective activities participated in the last 12 months, feelings towards

neighbors, friends.

Community Group/Social Organization Membership

Respondents were asked if they are aware of, or belong to, various groups, associations,

and/or organizations that exist in their community, such as farmer unions, women's unions,

youth unions, veteran's association, Red Cross Society, Gardening Association, Association of

Elderly People, Religious groups, Credit groups. These groups/associations were listed according

to the pre-existing information available in the study site. The following questions were asked:

Are you aware of this group existence in your community? 1) No 2) Yes

Do you belong to this group? 1) No 2) Yes

Involvement in Community Activities

Involvement in community activities was measured by asking respondents how often

they performed various activities in the past year (Kasarda and Janowitz, 1974; Riger and

Lavrakas, 1981; Luloff et al. 1995, Brennan, 2006, Brennan, 2007). These activities include

community events, sporting events, meetings, training, and work projects. Information about

these activities was also derived from the semi-structured interviews with key informants before

the survey was conducted. The following question was asked:

In the past year have you participated in the following activities n ithr your neighbors or

other people in the village ? For each activity indicate how often you performed the

activity: 1) Never; 2) Once/year; 3) Few times/year; 4) Once/month; 5) Few times/month.

Perception of the Community

Perceptions about one's community are important for social action and interaction

(Wilkinson, 1991). Thus, the respondent' s perception about their community was measured by

asking each respondent household to agree or disagree with 30 related statements. These









statements were derived from the integrated questionnaire for measuring social capital used by

the World Bank (Grootaert et al., 2004), and were modified to suit the specific context of this

study. The questionnaire explores the respondent' s subj ective perceptions of the trustworthiness

of other people, and of the key institutions that shape their lives; as well as the norms of

cooperation and reciprocity that encompass attempts to work together to solve problems (i.e.,

cognitive social capital). These perception variables can then be measured through 32 items

(Appendix A) which are related to trust and social commitment, participation, social cohesion

and inclusion, etc (Grootaert et al., 2004). Below is an example of the Likert scale used for

responding to the example statements which follows:

Please tell us how do you feel about the following statements using the scale fr~om 1 to 5, 1

being strongly disagree (SD), 2 being disagree, 3 being neutral, 4 being agree, 5 being

strongly agree.

c. M~ostpeople in this village are willing to help each other whenever they can.

(1) strongly disagree; (2) disagree; (3) neutral; (4) agree; (5) strongly agree.

Participation in Conservation-Related Activities of the Forest Protection and Rural
Development Project

The main goals of the Forest Protection and Rural Development Projesct (FPRD) are to

protect and manage the forests with high biodiversity. Households' participation in FPRD can

take many forms. In the case of the bufferzone of the CTNP, a variety of FPRD project activities

have been identified through the Commune Action Plan (CAP) that was available to the principal

investigator prior to the implementation of the survey.

The conservation related activities include attendance at meetings to discuss a conservation

agreement, attending training on forest protection, agroforestry training, land use planning









training, etc. Each respondent were asked to report if they participated in specific proj ect

activities in the past 12 months. For example:

In the past 12 nuoubsrlr have you:

Participated in training on forest protection? 1) No 2) Yes

A attended meeting to discuss conservation agreement? 1) No 2) Yes

Participate in land use planning? 1) No 2) Yes

Participated in Training on Agroforestry? 1) No 2) Yes

Conservation Attitudes

An attitude is defined as the organization of beliefs about an obj ect or situation that

influences one' s response to that obj ect (Rokeach, 1968). Conservation attitudes of the

respondents are measured on the basis of their reactions to 18 statements (Appendix A) that were

adapted from the survey in the Royal Chitwan National Park, Nepal (Nepal, 1993), and

subsequently modified to suit the particular context of this study. The following sections provide

sample questions in order to illustrate how conservation attitudes were elicited.

Perceptions about biodiversity conservation

Respondent' s perception toward biodiversity conservation is thought to be an important

factor influencing their behavior toward a protected area (Nepal, 1993; Mehta and Kellert, 1998).

Perceptions were measured by asking respondents to express their feelings about statements such



"It is important to keep the park for the survival of various plants and animal \1 ,Ie ile t

The ParkPPPPP~~~~~~~PPPPPP is our country 's pride and is essential for a healthy environment." Responses

were measured via the Likert scale as above.









Issues/ problems associated with biodiversity conservation

Respondents were also asked to rank issues or problems currently facing their community.

These responses are believed to provide an overall measurement of household attitude toward

biodiversity conservation, and include statements such as

"Conservation has takent~~~~ttttt~~~~tttt land thus farmers do not have enough land to cultivate."

Again, responses are measured via a five response Likert scale.

(1) strongly disagree; (2) disagree; (3) neutral; (4) agree; (5) strongly agree.

Impacts of conservation activities

The Likert scale was also used to measure the impacts of conservation activities upon

respondent households by asking them to agree or disagree with the following statements:

"Farmers have benefited frons the conservation program;

"Forest land allocation ensures farmers ownership of the forestland;tlt~l~lt~t~lt "

"Farmers can get more income because of forest protection and nzanagentent activities. "

Responses are measured via a five response Likert scale.

(1) strongly disagree; (2) disagree; (3) neutral; (4) agree; (5) strongly agree.

Control Variables/Demographics

A substantial amount of recent literature has shown that household-level socio-

demographic variables influence the level of social capital and community participation of

households, as well as their attitudes toward natural resource conservation (Israel et al., 2001;

Glaeser et al., 2002; Cramb, 2004; Israel and Beaulieu, 2004; Masozera and Alavalapati, 2004;

Brennan and Luloff, 2007). Thus, several socio-demographic variables were included in this

study and used as control variables in the analysis. This allows for differences in opinion to be

compared among various household characteristics. These variables also serve as a mechanism

for understanding relationships between other variables and help to confirm and elaborate on









generalizations that are drawn from the findings (Babbie, 1998). Finally, socio-demographic

variables were also used in the sample validation process to determine how well the sample of

respondents matches the overall population.

The following control variables and the corresponding item values were used:

* ETHNICITY. (1) Kinh; (2) Tay; (3) Hoa; (4) Stieng; (5) others.

* RELIGION. (1) Buddhism; (2) Catholic; (3) Protestant; (4) others.

* LENGTH OF RESIDENCY. (1) Less than 10 years; (2) 10-20 years; (3) 20-30 years;,(4) more
than 30 years.

* EDUCATION. (1) Elementary school (grade 1-5); (2) some high school (grade 6-9); (3)
high school (grade 10-12); (4) college.

* HOUSEHOLD CO1VPOSITION. (1) 1-4 persons; (2) 5-8 persons; (3) more than 8 persons.

* HOUSEHOLD INCO1VE. (1) Less than VND 5,000,000; (2) VND 5,000,000 10,000,000;
(3) VND 10,000,000 20,000,000; (4) more than VND 20,000,000.

* AGE. (1) 18-29 yrs old; (2) 30-39 yrs old; (3) 40 -49 yrs old; (4) 50 59 yrs old; (5) 60
yrs olds or above.

* MARITAL STATUS. (1) Single; (2) married; (3) divorced; (4) widowed.

* GENDER. (1) Male; (2) female.

Data Compilation

Upon the completion of the survey, all data from each survey were put in a template file

using Microsoft Excel. This template essentially reflects the household survey questionnaire.

Data from each household were transcribed into this format for later analysis. Research assistants

in three different communes were asked to enter data onto data sheets in the Vietnamese

language in order to avoid any ambiguity. This task was done under the supervision of the

principal investigator (PI), especially with regard to the handling of specific ambiguities in

questionnaire responses. Finally, the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) was used

to handle all necessary data analyses. Reversed coding was used when necessary.










Factor Analysis

Factor analysis is a crucially important component of this research study. Factor analysis is

designed to study the pattern of relationships between a number of dependent or independent

variables and how the nature of (as of yet unknown) factors may affect them (Darlington, 2006).

There are two approaches to factor analysis: exploratory and confirmatory. Because social

capital and conservation attitude are designed as exploratory measures, exploratory factor

analysis was used. There are three purposes of exploratory factor analysis in scale development

(De Vellis, 2003). The first purpose is to determine how many dimensions account for most of

the variance in the scale. Second is to allow researchers to condense a scale, using a few items to

represent the construct. Finally, exploratory factor analysis helps researchers to define the

meaning of factors that characterize a group of items.

Exploratory factor analysis assumes that the number of underlying factors is less than the

number of overall items. In addition, because exploratory factor analysis is applied to a

correlation matrix (as opposed to raw data), assumptions relevant to Pearson's correlation

coefficient are relevant to exploratory factor analysis. Correlation assumptions include a large

number sample size (in this study, n=270), and variables measured on an interval scale (Pett,

Lackey, and Sullivan, 2003). Exploratory principle components factor analysis was used in this

study to identify the factor structures for the 32 items designed to measure social capital and 18

items to measure conservation attitude.

In this study, the factor structures were rotated using Varimax orthogonall) rotation. The

goal of rotation is a simple structure. That is, high loadings on one factor and low factor loading

on all others. Orthogonal rotation ensures that the factors remain unrelated, by not allowing the

axis that are rotated to move beyond perpendicular to each other (George and Mallery, 2001).

Rotation allows for a clearer interpretation of the results. Jeffreys, Massoni and O'Donell (1997)









identified Varimax rotation as the best way to determine the appropriate number of common

factors by analyzing the eigenvalues and adjusted correlation matrix.

As suggested by Hair, Anderson, Tatham and Black (2004) factors with eigenvalues

greater than 1.0 were considered for further analysis. Kaiser (1960) was the first to recommend

this procedure for factor inclusion. In addition, as first proposed by Cattell (1966), a scree plot of

eigeinvalues was analyzed in order to arrive at a Einal number of factors. Following the

recommendation of Hair, Anderson, Tatham and Black (2004), items with a factor loading of

0.40 or greater were kept. Items that double loaded (loaded on 2 or more factors at 0.40 or

greater) were dropped from the factor in which it loaded least, and kept on the factor in which it

loaded highest. Reliability testing was conducted for each factor. Factors with a Cronbach alpha

of 0.50 or greater were considered acceptable (Baumgartner and Jackson, 1999).

Jeffrey, Massoni, and O'Donnell (1997) recommend the use of the Kaiser-Myer-Olking

(KMO) statistic as a check for the appropriateness of exploratory analysis as a method of

analysis for the items in questions. KMO compares the magnitude of the observed correlation

matrix to the magnitude of the partial correlation coefficients. A small KMO (<0.5) suggests that

exploratory factor analysis may not be a suitable approach. In this study, the KMO was equal to

.874 for the factor analysis of social capital and 0.789 for conservation attitude. This is indicating

that exploratory factor analysis was an appropriate method of inquiry.

The exploratory factor analysis identified eight factors for social capital, which account for

61.85% of the total variance. It also identified four factors for conservation attitude, which

account for 57.8% of the total variance.

The social capital and conservation attitude variables were calculated by summing scores

for all items. The use of a scale allowed for more manageable data, and reduced random errors









that could impact reliability and validity (Carmine and Zeller, 1979). The scale was tested by

means of Cronbach' s alpha to provide a measurement of their reliability (Carmine and Zeller,

1979). Cronbach' s alpha is a measure of reliability in which a score ranges from zero to one. The

higher the score, the higher reliability of the variables involved.

Linear Regression Models

Multiple regression modeling serves to describe a phenomenon, explain relationships, and

to a general extent predict events or phenomenon (Barbie, 1998). By inclusion of a wide range of

variables and relationships, multiple regression models can increase the power of statistical

models. Such models allow us to separate the effects of interrelated independent variables.

In this study, a series of multiple regression models using ordinary least squares (OLS) was

estimated to assess the effects of each predictor on various conservation attitude variables

(measured as continuous variables). These dependent variables represent different dimensions of

conservation attitude such as perceived benefit from conservation, conservation awareness,

perceived benefit from using the park, and perceived ownership of forestland. These

conservation attitude variables were derived from the factor analysis described previously and

were calculated as indices. The socio-demographic variables (age, gender, length of residence,

level of education, household size, income, ethnicity, religion) and social capital variables (social

trust, social cohesion, social commitment, community support, voluntary cooperation,

familiarity, social integration, and ethnic interaction) are used as independent variables in the

multiple linear regression models.

The linear regression model is specified as follows:

Y = p,+ 7,X,l + pX22 +...+ pX, + E









Where Y is the conservation attitude, P o is the intercept term, P i, P 2, k are the

coefficients associated with each explanatory variable X1, X2, ..., Xk and E is the error term. The

explanatory variables include socio-demographic variables such as age, gender, length of

residence, education, household size, household income, ethnicity; and social capital.

Five multiple linear regression models were developed for conservation attitude variables.

The first model was developed for the perceived benefit from conservation. The second model

focused on the conservation awareness. The third model was used to predict the perceived

benefit from using the park. The fourth model focused on the perceived ownership. Finally, a

general model was developed for the overall (aggregated) conservation attitude toward the

CTNP .

Logistic Regression Models

Participation in conservation activities is the dependent variable. It is a binary variable

which takes a value of 1 for household participating in conservation activities and a value of 0

for not participating in any conservation activities.

The logistic regression model characterizing the participation of the sample households is

specified as follows:

In[r: /(1- J)] = po + IXI, 2X2 Pzxz kX,

Where Pi is the probability of a household to participate in conservation activities and (1-

Pi) is the probability of a household not to participate, P is the intercept term and P i, P 2, ,

pk are the coefficients associated with each explanatory variable X1, X2, ..., Xk. The

explanatory variables used to explain household participation of each household include socio-

demographic variables such as age, gender, length of residence, education, household size,









household income, ethnicity; and social capital and conservation indices which are derived from

factor analysis.

Summary

This chapter presented the methods and scientific reasoning behind the study including a

conceptual framework, units and levels of analyses, study sites selection criteria, data collection

efforts, and overall research design that were used in this study. A detailed discussion of the

maj or concepts and variables measuring social capital, conservation attitude and participation in

conservation activities was provided. In addition, research approach and data analysis methods

that are used to achieve the obj ectives of the study were also discussed.

The next chapter begins by presenting descriptive statistics of socioeconomic variables.

Factor analysis results will then be presented to identify social capital and conservation attitude

components. Based on these results, indices for social capital and conservation attitude are

calculated and used as dependent variables and/or explanatory variables in linear regression and

logistic regression models. The relationships among sociodemographic variables, social capital,

conservation attitude, and conservation behavior are assessed.









CHAPTER 5
DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

In order to scientifically explore the research questions of this study, an analysis of

household survey data was first conducted. Specific conditions were identified, controlled,

explored, and interpreted. Several statistical analysis methods were used. Univariate and

bivariate analyses were first conducted to determine the impacts of a variety of characteristics on

social capital indices and their relationship to conservation attitudes. To calculate these indices,

a series of factor analyses were first used to identify components of social capital and

conservation attitude.

Frequency of Response Data

Socio-demographic Characteristics

Analysis of data began with a review of overall responses for each maj or conceptual area.

Table 5-1 presents the frequency of responses for the main socio-demographic variables.

The data in Table 5-1 are categorical in nature and are therefore presented as frequencies,

relative frequencies, and cumulative frequencies. The data for respondents are distributed across

Hyve age categories, with the majority of respondents being between 30 and 50 years old (68%).

This was expected because these individuals are the household heads. Males accounted for 89%

of the respondents which indicates that there are very few female-headed households. The

maj ority of the respondents had low levels of education: 7% of respondents are illiterate, while

40% have completed primary school and 40% have completed secondary school. Only 12%

have completed high school and 1% has completed college. Respondents were distributed across

ethnicity, in the following manner: 28% belong to the Kinh group, 22% were Tay, 13% Nung,


IA full presentation of all responses to all survey items included in this analysis can be found in the Appendix C.

2 Secondary school in Vietnam is roughly equivalent to Junior High School in the U.S.











Table 5-1. Frequencies of socioeconomic characteristics for all respondents

Demographic Characteristics Relative Cumulative
Frequency
(n=270) Frequency Frequency

AGE

18-29 39 14.4% 14.4%

30-39 93 34.5% 48.9%

40-49 90 33.3% 82.2%

50-59 34 12.6% 94.8%

60 or more 14 5.5.2% 100.0%

GENDER

Male 240 88.9% 89.9%

Female 30 11.1% 100.0%

ETHNICITY

Kinh 74 27.4% 27.4%

Tay 60 22.2% 49.6%

Nung 35 13.0% 62.6%
Hoa 4 1.5% 64.1%

Stieng 94 34.8% 98.9%
Others 3 1.1% 100.0%

EDUCATION

None 19 7.0% 7.0%

Grade 1-5 108 40.0% 47.0%

Grade 6-9 109 40.4% 87.4%

Grade 10-12 32 11.9% 99.3%

College 2 0.7% 100.0%
MARITAL STATUS

Single 5 1.9% 1.9%
Married 253 93.7% 95.6%

Divorced 2 0.7% 96.3%

Widowed 10 3.7% 100.0%

HOUSEHOLD INCOME (VND)
Less than 5 M VND 25 9.3% 9.3%

5-10 M VND 57 21.1% 30.4%

10-20 M VND 68 25.2% 55.6%

More than 20 M VND 120 44.4% 100.0%









1% Hoa, 3 5% Stieng, and 1% others. Ninety four percent of the respondents were married, 2%

were single, only two cases (account for 1%) were divorced or separated, and 3% were widowed.

In general, divorce is still very rare in the study site, and in other rural areas of Vietnam.

Finally, respondents were asked about their annual household income. Income is presented

in Vietnamese Dong (VND), which has the following exchange rate: US$1=16,000VND. Nine

percent of households reported income of less than five million VND, 21% reported income

between 5 to 10 million VND, and 25% had income between 10 to 20 million VND. Forty five

percent reported incomes of 20 million VND or more.

Respondent Awareness of Group's Existence in Community

Respondents were initially asked if they were aware of any community groups,

organizations, or associations (Figure 5-1). Most reported that they were aware of the Farmer' s

Union (95%), Women's Union (89%), Veteran Association (88%), Youth Union (78%), and the

Red Cross Society (76%). These numbers closely match data collected from the semi-structured

interviews with key informants during preliminary data analysis. The Farmer's Union is

considered to be the most active in conducting extension activities, which is likely the reason for

the extremely high level of awareness exhibited by this organization. Both the Women's Union

and the Veteran Association were also mentioned as active in helping their members; again the

high level of awareness of the organization reflects this observation.

Community Groups/Social Organization Membership

The next few questions continued this line of inquiry by asking respondents if they belong

to any community groups/organizations, or clubs. Figure 5-2 shows that a wide maj ority of

respondents (83%) reported belonging to at least one group/organization. This indicates that a

very large proportion of the households living near the CTNP are at least somewhat engaged in

their local community.














300 -/ I Farmer's Union
250.; MYouth Union
200- 20 238OWomen's Union
0 Vete ran As sociation
150- 19 Red Cross Society
100.7~ 1 Gardening Association
SAssociation of Elderly People
50- O Religious groups
0, m Credit groups


Figure 5-1. Respondents' awareness of local groups and organizations






100.00%

80.00%

60.00% I No

40.00%/ IesI Yes

20.00%

0.00%



Figure 5-2. Relative frequency of respondents' affiliation to local groups and organizations

To the extent that membership in local groups/organizations reflects engagement in the

local community, the association made above is confirmed by Figure 5-3. More than 65% of


respondents stated that they belong to 2 or more groups. The breakdown is as follows: 14%

reported belonging to only one group, 32% belonged to two groups, 17% reported belonging to

three groups, 14% reported belonging to four groups, and 6% reported that they belong to more

than five groups. Seventeen percent (17%) of the respondents reported not belonging to any


group at all.












35%

30% 3220% 5 groups
25% 51 group
20%- I 02 groups
15%~/ ~17.40% 1 03 groups
10%~Y / 1 4 groups
5% / 55 or more
0%


Figure 5-3. Percentage of respondents belonged to number of groups/associations (n=273).

Respondents were then asked to specifically identify the groups to which they belong. The

same list of organizations listed in Table 5-1 was provided to each respondent. Not surprisingly,

the Farmer' s Union had the highest number of members; this was followed by the Red Cross

Association, Religious groups, and the Veteran Association. The Women's Union is very active;

25 of the 30 female respondents were found to be associated with this organization.




Farmer's Union
Youth Union
150- 0 I Women's Union
O Veteran Association
100-y I Red Cross Society
SGardening Association
50Y1 5I Association of Elderly People
56 6 O Religious groups
0A25 1 Credit groups


Figure 5-4. Number of members of each group/organization

Involvement in Community Activities

To assess the level of involvement in community and local level activities, a series of


questions were asked that inquired about the regularity with which respondents participated in

activities in the past year. These data are presented in Table 5-2. Included were participation in

community events like village festivities (e.g., harvesting, officiating sacrifices) (54%


respondents reported never participating), clubs/groups activities (e.g., picnic, outing) (83%









never participated), sports (e.g., soccer, volleyball) (68% never participated), village meetings to

solve problems inside and outside the village (only 4% never participated), training (e.g.,

extension, conservation) (36% never participated), and work proj ect (e.g., tree planting on Lunar

New Year, clean up village) (17% never participated).

Table 5-2. Frequency of participation in community events and other groups or activities
(n=270)

Types of Activities Never Once/ Few times/ Once/ Few times/
year Year Month Month
Community events 145 39 63 12 11
Clubs/groups activities 225 28 5 11 1
Sports 185 30 42 121
Meetings 10 14 166 63 17
Training 96 75 70 25 4
Work projects 45 93 99 30 3

In the previous section, the data suggests that many households are engaged in the local

community based on their membership in various groups. However, the data on actual

participation in these groups indicates that this is not the case. In rural Vietnam, people are

encouraged to join mass organizations such as Farmer' s Union, Youth Union, Women's Union,

Veteran Associations, etc. To some extent, these organizations can help their members to access

to information and financial resources. However, to what extent that the membership of these

organizations can help each individual household can be an issue that needs further investigation.

Given the fact that there is no other "real" civil society organization, the existence of these

associations still plays a crucial role in mediating between local people and government.

Overall, the above descriptive statistics have shown that households are very diverse in

terms of age, gender, ethnicity, education, and income. Their participation in community

activities and organizations are not homogeneous either. These observations would be useful to

understand the variations in conservation attitude and behavior among households. Furthermore,









these results help decision makers and project managers develop target specific programs or

policies in the Cat Tien National Park.

In Vietnam, people are encouraged to join mass organizations which are under the

leadership of the Communist Party such as Farmer' s Union, Youth Union, Women' s Union,

Veteran Associations, etc. Even though these organizations are considered as the "extended

hands" of the local government to implement their policies, it is found in the study sites that at

the grass-root level, these organizations were working very effectively in organizing and

facilitating development activities. For instance, with the funding from the Forest Protection and

Rural Development (FPRD) Proj ect, the Farmers' Union in the three study communes has

successfully organized many extension training for its members while the Women's Union

helped its members in organizing micro-credit proj ects.

Given the Vietnamese socio-political context, it is suggested that conservation programs

should use these organizations as local partners to implement the activities. Moreover, through

the participation in these proj ects, these organizations can be strengthened themselves, thereby

attracting more people to join. Such institutional strengthening, in turn, will bring about

voluntary cooperation for collective action.









Identifying Dimensions of Social Capital and Conservation Attitude

Following the descriptive analysis of the socio-demographic data, a series of factor

analyses were employed in the evaluation of the data collected and construction of several

variable indices. Specifically, factor analysis was used to determine the various dimensions Of

social capital and conservation attitude. These dimensions were then analyzed in order to

augment the analysis of the socio-economic data described in the previous section.

Data gathered through this survey were factor analyzed using principal axis factoring and

rotation models. The criteria established in advance of the selection of factor items were factor

loading of 0.40 or higher; at least 0. 10 difference between the item's loading with its factors and

each of the other factors, and interpretability (Kim and Mueller, 1978). Review of factors with

eigenvalues of greater than 1.0, and subsequent analysis of scree test plots, indicated that either a

one (or at best a two) factor solution would be most appropriate since the scree test had distinct

and obvious breaks at these points (Kim and Mueller, 1978).

Social Capital Dimensions

The exploratory factor analysis identified eight factors, which accounted for 61.85% of the

total variance. Thirty one of the thirty two items used to measure social capital loaded on one of

the eight factors (Table 5-3). Items loading highest on the first factor were related to social trust.

These eight items yielded a reliability coefficient (i.e. Cronbach alpha) of 0.86. Trust is an

important dimension of social capital and this factor accounted for the most variance in the social

capital items. For the study respondents, the mean value of Trust Indexs was 3.88 (Table 5-4).


3 Factor names were scrutinized and developed through a focus group discussion among graduate students from
different academic disciplines.

4 Following the recommendation of Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black p Is r'4), items with a factor loading of .40 or
greater were kept.
5 Trust and other social capital indices were measured on a scale of 1 to 5.









The second factor was dominated by items related to social cohesion. These four items

show strong factor loadings, and including all four items also produced a strong scale reliability

(alpha = 0.73). Social cohesion is one of the most important components of social capital. The

mean of social cohesion score was 3.92.

Items loading on the third factor were related to social commitment. Although the item

"people are willing to make the community a better place to live" loaded moderately on this

factor (0.455), the inclusion of all four of these items in this factor produced the strongest scale

reliability (0.77) and seemed to make the most sense conceptually.

The strongest loading for the fourth factor were for the following items, "People in this

community show support for a cause that may not directly benefit them but benefits the

community as a whole," "Some of my neighbors attend several community functions," "For the

most part, people in the community obey community codes and covenants," "People in this

community offer enough chances for a person to do volunteer work." These four items yielded a

reliability coefficient of 0.71 and are clearly focused on the construct of community support.

The fifth factor was dominated by items related to voluntary cooperation. Three items

clearly show strong factor loadings and produced a reliability coefficient of 0.64. The mean of

voluntary cooperation index was highest as shown by a mean value of 4.02.

The sixth factor was related to familiarity. These three items loaded only moderately on

this factor and produced the lowest scale reliability of 0.58 (as compared to other factors), but

this factor shown the highest score with a mean value of 4.02.

Three items loading highest on the seventh factor were related to social integration. These

three items produced a reliability coefficient of 0.65 with a mean of 3.41.













Table 5-3. Factor loadings of social capital dimensions
Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor
Items*1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Most people in this community can be trusted .757

I think people in this community can be trusted .711

I can count on my neighbor for help any time .659

Most people in my community do voluntary work for community .606
Most people in this community are involved in activities that benefit .3
the community
People in this community are easy to contact .527

People in this community work together to solve problems .500

Usually people in this community greet one another .407

People in the community share common interests .674

For the most part, people in this community are friendly .654
Most people in the neighborhood are connected through the .5
association

People in this community do get involved in community activities .484

I trust my association to make decision on my behalf .744
Most people in this village are willing to help each other whenever .3
they can
Most people in this village are concerned about their own welfare .708
For the most part, people are willing to make the community a better45
place to live
People in this community show support for a cause that may not73
directly benefit them but benefits the community as a whole

Some of my neighbors attend several community functions .695
For the most part, people in the community obey community codes .6
and covenants
People in this community offers enough chance for a person to do45
volunteer work

I always greet my neighbors when I first see them .706

I volunteer in my community .657

This community is a safe place for children .620

I know most people in my village .639

People in this village have mutual respect for one another .532

People in this community get along with each other .434

I know some people in this community, most are strangers .762

Most people in this do not feel they are a part of this community .759

Very few people socialize in the community .748
My actions have impacts making this community a better place to .4
live in
The community is a mix of different cultural ethnic groups .762

Number of items 8 4 4 4 3 3 3 2

Eigenvalue 9.60 1.99 1.74 1.57 1.45 1.25 1.16 1.05

Percentage of variance explained 29.99 6.21 5.42 4.90 4.53 3.91 3.61 3.28

Cumulative variance explained 29.99 36.20 41.62 46.52 51.05 54.96 58.58 61.85

Cronbach Alpha .86 .73 .77 .71 .64 .58 .65 .71
* Variables coded on 5-point scale with 1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neutral, 4=Agree, 5=Strongly Agree













Table 5-4. Reliability Analysis for social capital dimensions
Corrected Alpha If
Dimensions Questionnaire Items Mean SD Item Total Item
Correlation Deleted

Most people in this community can be trusted 3.86 .67 .60 .85
I think people in this community can be trusted 3.85 .66 .64 .85

I can count on my neighbor for help any time 3.92 .69 .57 .85

Most people in my community do voluntary work for community 3.84 .65 .62 .85

Trust ~Most people in this community are involved in activities that benefit the 38 6 6 8
community
People in this community are easy to contact 3.90 .59 .58 .85

People in this community work together to solve problems 3.83 .62 .63 .85
Usually people in this community greet one another 3.97 .61 .59 .85

Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha = 0. 86 3.88 0.65

People in the community share common interests 3.91 .60 .60 .62
For the most part, people in this community are friendly 3.97 .57 .48 .69

Cohesion Most people in the neighborhood are connected through the association 3.83 .65 .54 .66

People in this community do get involved in community activities 3.95 .51 .47 .70
Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha = 0. 73 3.92 0.58

I trust my association to make decision on my behalf 3.81 .71 .64 .68
Most people in this village are willing to help each other whenever they can 3.90 .70 .70 .64
SocialMost people in this village are concerned about their own welfare 3.90 .65 .56 .72
commitment
For the most part, people are willing to make the community a better place to 4.02 .56 .40 .79

Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha = 0. 77 3.91 0.66
People in this community offers enough chance for a person to do volunteer 3.88 .66 .52 .63

People in this community show support for a cause that may not directly3.8 6495
benefit them but benefits the community as a whole
Community
support Some of my neighbors attend several community functions 3.90 .50 .49 .66
For the most part, people in the community obey community codes and 3.98 .54 .50 .64

Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha = 0. 71 3.89 0.58

Usually people in this community greet one another 4.11 .56 .51 .45

Voluntary I volunteer in my community 3.97 .56 .46 .52
cooperation This community is a safe place for children 3.98 .61 .37 .64

Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha = 0.64 4.02 0.58

People in this community get along with each other 4.02 .53 .40 .40
I know most people in my village 4.04 .81 .32 .57
Familiarity
People in this village have mutual respect for one another 4.00 .57 .40 .39
Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha = 0.58 4.02 0.64

I know some people in this community, most are strangers 3.49 1.09 .49 .52

Social Most people in this do not feel they are a part of this community 3.22 1.10 .47 .55
integration Very few people socialize in the community 3.52 1.03 .44 .59

Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha = 0.65 3.41 1.07

My actions have impacts making this community a better place to live in 3.87 .62 .55
Interaction The community is a mix of different cultural ethnic groups 4.00 .48 .55

Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha = 0. 71 3.94 0.55
* Variables coded on 5-point scale with 1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neutral, 4=Agree, 5=Strongly Agree









The final factor was dominated by two items expressing ethnic interaction. These two

items loaded very high on this factor (0.85 and 0.76). These two items also showed high

reliability (0.71) with a mean of 3.94.

In sum, items loaded cleanly into the eight factors representing important constructs

underlying social capital. In addition, the mean scores are rather high with 7 of 8 social capital

dimensions having a value greater than 3.50.

Conservation Attitude Dimensions

The factor analysis of the conservation attitude items generated four factors explaining

57.8% of the total variance (Table 5-5). Items loading highest on the first factor were related to

perceived benefit from conservation. These five items generated a reliability coefficient of 0.88.

This factor accounted for the most variance in the attitude items with a mean value of 3.68.

The second factor was dominated by the items related to conservation awareness. All five

items showed strong loadings and produced a strong scale reliability (alpha=0.84) (Table 5-6).

Conservation awareness has the highest mean value of 4.20.

Items loadings for the third factor were related to perceived benefit of using the park.

These items yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.71. The mean value was 2.32.

The final factor was dominated by two items related to perceived ownership of forest land.

These two items loaded nicely on this factor and yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.65. The

mean value was only 3.68.

In sum, most of the attitude items loaded cleanly into four factors. The factors that were

identified seemed to make most sense conceptually. Particularly, the third factor perceived

benefit of using the park--shows a lowest mean value of 2.32.







































It is good if some land within the park is allocated to the local people .750

The park is for those who enjoy wildlife viewing and we do not enjoy this, as we have to68
face problems from the park

Since the wildlife of the park are causing us trouble, wildlife hunting should be allowed65
under strict supervision

The park is for outsiders and we are not even allowed to visit the park .621

Conservation has taken land thus farmers do not have enough land to cultivate .616


Since the park is a waste of land, it is better to distribute the land among local people .577


Forest land allocation (FLA) ensures farmers ownership of the forestland .772

Forest land allocation ensures my ownership over the forest land .769

Number of Items 5 5 6 2

Eigenvalue 4.44 2.77 2.38 1.38

Percentage of variance explained 23.39 14.61 12.54 7.27

Cumulative variance explained 23.39 38.00 50.54 57.81


Cronbach Alpha .88 .84 .72 .65


Table 5-5. Factor loadings of conservation attitude dimensions

Items*

Farmers can benefit from forest replanting in the bufferzone

I can get more income from the forest protection and management activities

I have benefited from the conservation program

Farmers can get more income because of forest protection and management activities

Farmers have benefited from the conservation program

The national park should be protected for the benefit of our future generation

The park is our country pride and is essential for a healthy environment

Although we need more land for agriculture, it is necessary to set aside some land for the
protection of plants and animals

It is important to keep the park for the survival of various plants and animal species

The illegal cutting of trees, wildlife trapping and hunting should be discouraged


Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4
.855

.843

.836

.797

.665













Table 5-6. Reliability analysis for conservation attitude dimensions

Corrected Alpha If
Item Total Item
Questionnaire Items Mean SD Correlation Deleted
Perceived Benefit from Conservation

Farmers can benefit from forest replanting in the bufferzone 3.66 .84 .77 .84

I can get more income from the forest protection and management activities 3.60 .85 .75 .84

I have benefited from the conservation program 3.65 .88 .70 .85

Farmers can get more income because of forest protection and management activities 3.74 .78 .73 .85

Farmers have benefited from the conservation program 3.73 .76 .61 .87

Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha =.88 3.68 0.82

Conservation awareness

The national park should be protected for the benefit of our future generation 4.35 .60 .70 .79


The park is our country pride and is essential for a healthy environment 4.26 .59 .67 .79

Although we need more land for agriculture, it is necessary to set aside some land for 41 6 68
the protection of plants and animals

It is important to keep the park for the survival of various plants and animal species 4.11 .74 .63 .81

The illegal cutting of trees, wildlife trapping and hunting should be discouraged 4.17 .65 .55 .83

Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha =.84 4.20 0.64

Perceived benefit from using the park

It is good if some land within the park is allocated to the local people 2.20 .93 .55 .66

The park is for those who enjoy wildlife viewing and we do not enjoy this, as we 2.7 9565
have to face problems from the park
Since the wildlife of the park are causing us trouble, wildlife hunting should be 22 9 4 6
allowed under strict supervision

The park is for outsiders and we are not even allowed to visit the park 2.52 .93 .46 .68

Conservation has taken land thus farmers do not have enough land to cultivate 2.17 .90 .42 .69

Since the park is a waste of land, it is better to distribute the land among local people 2.28 1.49 .40 .73

Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha =. 74 2.32 1.01

Perceived land ownership

Forest land allocation (FLA) ensures farmers ownership of the forestland 3.61 .78 .48

Forest land allocation ensures my ownership over the forest land 3.75 .73 .48

Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha =.65 3.68 0.76

* Variables coded on 5-point scale with 1= Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neutral, 4=Agree, 5=Strongly Agree










Analysis of Social Capital Dimensions

To explore the relationship between some of the social capital dimensions and selected

variableS6, data were recorded and collapsed into new categories for ANOVA and regression

analyses (Table 5-7). The sample respondents were categorized into the following three ethnic

groups with 28% of the respondents were Kinh, 37% were Tay-Nung-Hoa, and 3 5% were

Stieng. In terms of religion, 25% identified themselves as Buddhists, 20% as Christian and 55%

indicated that they had no religion,

Table 5-7. Socioeconomic profile of respondents (n=270)
Variables Frequencies Percentage
Ethnic groups
Kinh 74 27.7%
Tay Nung Hoa 99 37.1%
Stieng 94 35.2%
Religion
No religion 147 54.9%
Buddhism 67 25.0%
Chri sti an 54 20.1%
Length of Residency
Less than 10 years 51 18.9%
10-20 years 114 42.2%
More than 20 years 105 38.9%
Education
Under grade 5 127 47.4%
Grade 5-12 141 52.6%
Income
Less than 10M VND 82 30.5%
10M 20M VND 68 25.2%
More than 20 M VND 120 44.4%
Age
18-29 yrs old 39 14.4%
30-39 93 34.4%
40-49 90 33.3%
50 and over 48 17.8%





6 ANOVA analysis focused on only six socio-demographic variables because it was thought that these variables
would significantly affect social capital and conservation attitude indices.










Approximately 19% of the respondents indicated they had lived in the area less than 10

years, 42% had lived 10-20 years, and 39% had been in the area more than 20 years. About 47%

reported that they never Einished grade 5, while 53% reported that they had Einished grade 5 or

higher. About 31% indicated that their income was less than 10 million Vietnamese Dong

(VND), 25% with income from 10 to 20 million VND, and 44% with income more than 20

million VND. About 15% were about 18-29 years old, 34% were 30-39 years old, 33% were 40-

49 years old, and 18% were 50 years old or greater.

To explore the relationship between social capital dimensions and selected explanatory

variables, the ANOVA technique was used to test whether or not social capital indices differed

between groups of respondents.

Ethnic Groups

For the ethnic groups (Kinh, Tay-Nung-Hoa, Stieng), four of eight social capital constructs

showed significant differences at the oc = .05 level (Table 5-8). Social trust, voluntary

cooperation, familiarity and ethnic interaction did not differ significantly across these ethnic

groups. Based on the mean values (a higher value indicates more social capital index), there is

higher cohesion among Tay-Nung-Hoa ethnic group (mean = 4.02) than either the Kinh (mean =

3.84) or the Stieng (mean = 3.86). The Tay-Nung-Hoa group also had a higher social

commitment index (mean = 4. 12) than both the Kinh (mean = 3.83) and Stieng (3.76). The Tay-

Nung-Hoa group showed a stronger community support (mean = 4.00) than Stieng ethnic group

(mean = 3.76). The Kinh group was more socially integrated (mean = 3.72) than Tay-Nung-Hoa

(mean = 3.23) or the Stieng (mean = 3.36) ethnic groups.

These results are supported by the fact that Tay-Nung-Hoa groups who originated from

mountainous Northern provinces have been known to have very high community spirits. When










they moved to the new place, the whole village moved together which created a higher level of

population pressure for the buffer zone and the park itself.

Table 5-8. Comparison of social capital components among different ethnic groups
Ethnicity groups
Index* Kinh Tay Nung Hoa Stieng F value
Cohesion Index 3.84a 4.02b 3.86a 4.57
Social commitment 3.83a 4.12b 3.6a147
Index
Support Index 3.90ab 4.00b 3.7a .7
Social integration 3.72b 3.3a336 80
Index
* Only indices showing significant differences are shown. Values shown are mean importance scores. Values with
different superscripts are significantly different at the .05 level based on Scheffe's post hoc test.
**Significance at .01 level (2-tail significance)
***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance)

Religious Groups

Religion was the next independent variable examined; respondents were categorized as "no

religion," Buddhism, or Christian. Based on ANOVA analysis, only two of the social capital

constructs differed significantly among religions (Table 5-9).

Table 5-9. Comparison of social capital components among religions groups
Religions
Index* No religion Buddhism Christian F value
Social commitment 4.04b 3.72a 3.81a 11.47
Index
Support Index 3.94b 3.86ab 3.76a 3.71*
* Only indices showing significant differences are shown. Values shown are mean importance scores. Values with
different superscripts are significantly different at the .05 level based on Scheffe's post hoc test.
**Significance at .01 level (2-tail significance)
***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance)

The first dimension was social commitment. Those respondents who considered

themselves as having no religion had a higher social commitment index value (mean = 4.04) than

either Buddhism or Christian followers. They also showed higher community support (mean =

3.94) than Christians (mean = 3.76). These results might be conflicting with Emile Durkheim

(1965) conviction about religion can provide a certain degree of social commitment. Note,

however, that in Vietnam people often report "no religion" when asked, although most of them










are influenced by Confucianism--a religion that believes humans should live in harmony with

their surroundings.

Length of Residency

The next independent variable, length of residency, was operationalized as "How long

have you been settled in this area?" ANOVA results indicated that two out of eight social capital

constructs showed significant differences (Table 5-10). The social commitment index was higher

in respondents who were settled in the area less than 20 years, compared to those who had lived

there for a longer period of time. The new settlers also showed stronger community support than

the residents who have lived there longer. These results may be explained by the fact that those

households who are newly migrated to the area have to help and support each others to start their

new lives in the forest frontier. They have to be united to struggle for their existence.

Table 5-10. Comparison of social capital components between length of residency
Length of Residency
Index* Less 10 yrs 10-20 yrs More than 20 yrs F value
Social commitment 3.97b 4.01b 3.77a 7.38
Index
Support Index 3.99b 3.92ab 3.79a 4.55*
* Only indices showing significant differences are shown. Values shown are mean importance scores. Values with
different superscripts are significantly different at the .05 level based on Scheffe's post hoc test.
**Significance at .01 level (2-tail significance)
***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance)

Education

For levels of education, only two out of eight social capital indices show statistically

significant differences (Table 5-11). The first dimension is social commitment index. Those

respondents with higher education (grade 5 12) had a higher social commitment index value

(mean = 3.99) than those with lower education (under grade 5) (mean = 3.83). The second

dimension of community support also showed statistically significant differences. Based on the

mean values, households with higher education (mean = 3.95) had higher community support

index than those households with lower education (mean = 3.82). This result is consistent with










the finding of Helliwell and Putnam (1999) that education is the most important predictor of

political and social engagement.

Table 5-11i. Comparison of social capital components between levels of education
Education
Index* Under grade 5 Grade 5-12 F value
Social commitment 3.83 3.99 6.69***
Index
Support Index 3.82 3.95 6. 16**
Only indices showing significant differences are shown. Values shown are mean scores.
**Significance at .01 level (2-tail significance)
***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance)

Household Income

For the household income variable, only one social capital construct showed a statistically

significant difference (Table 5-12). Based on the mean values, households with annual income

more than 20 million VND (mean = 3.56) were more integrated into community than households

with annual income 10 20 million VND (mean = 3.35). However, there was no statistically

significant difference in social integration index between households with annual income more

than 20 millions and households with annual income less than 10 million VND (mean = 3.33).

There is the fact that people with higher income are more socially integrated than those with

lower income. This result is not very clear whether or not income is contributing to the level of

social integration of respondents.

Table 5-12. Comparison of social capital components between incomes
Incomes
Index* Less than 10M VND 10-20M VND More than 20M VND F value
Social 3.33ab 3.25a 3.56b 3.65*
integration
* Only index showing significant differences is shown. Values shown are mean importance scores. Values with
different superscripts are significantly different at the .05 level based on Scheffe's post hoc test.
**Significance at .01 level (2-tail significance)
***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance)

Age

Age was the last control variable examined. Based on ANOVA, six out of eight social

capital constructs differed significantly (Table 5-13).










The first significance dimension was trust index. Respondents who were 30 years old or

over (mean = 3.90) had higher trust index scores than those who were 18 to 29 years old (mean =

3.64). The same results were found for the cohesion index and social commitment index. For the

familiarity index and voluntary cooperation index, those respondents between 30 to 49 years old

had higher values than respondents between 18 to 29 years old. For the social integration

dimension, 18 to 29 year-old respondents were less socially integrated than those respondents

over 50 years old. These results are in part consistent with Cramb's findings in Southern

Philippines that social capital rises then falls with age (peaking of 50-59 years) (Cramb, 2004).

Table 5-13. Comparison of social capital components between ages
Ages
Index* 18-29 yrs 30-39 yrs 40-49 yrs Over 50yrs F value
Trust Index 3.64a 3.90b 3.90b 3.98b 4.40*
Cohesion Index 3.72a 3.95b 3.95b 3.95b 3.24*
Social commitment 3.60a 3.97b 3.94b 3.97b 5.99
Index
Familiarity 3.82a 4.07b 4.06b 4.03ab 3.00*
Voluntary cooperation 3.82a 4.07b 4.06b 4.03ab 3.00*
Social integration 3.27a 3.35ab 3.36ab 3.74b 3.34*
* Only index showing significant differences are shown. Values shown are mean importance scores. Values with
different superscripts are significantly different at the .05 level based on Scheffe's post hoc test.
**Significance at .01 level (2-tail significance)
***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance)

Analysis of Conservation Attitude

To explore the relationship between some of the conservation attitude dimensions and

selected variables, data were recorded and collapsed into new categories (Table 5-7). The

ANOVA techniques were used to test whether conservation indices vary across groups of

respondents. Unlike in the previous section, none of the conservation attitude constructs differed

significantly for the age variable. Therefore, this variable is not discussed in this section.

Ethnic Groups

For "ethnic groups," two out of the four conservation constructs showed significant

differences (Table 5-14). Based on the mean value (a higher value indicate higher or positive










conservation attitude), Kinh (mean = 4.24) and Tay-Nung-Hoa (mean = 4.40) groups have higher

conservation awareness as compared to Stieng (mean = 3.95). For the construct of "perceived

benefit from using the park," Stieng (mean = 2.46) and Tay Nung Hoa (mean = 2.40) perceived a

higher economic benefit from using the national park then the Kinh (mean = 2.05). This is most

likely because the ethnic minorities such as Stieng, Tay, Nung, Hoa have traditionally used

forests as their main livelihood strategies unlike the Kinh who used to live in the lowland.

Perceived benefit from conservation and perceived ownership of forest land did not differ across

ethnic groups.

Table 5-14. Comparison of conservation attitude among different ethnic groups
Ethnicity groups
Index* Kinh Tay Nung Hoa Stieng F value
Awareness Index 4.24b 4.40b 3.958 23.83***
Perceived Benefit from 2.05b 2.40" 2.46" 8.79***
using the park Index
* Only indices showing significant differences are shown. Values shown are mean importance scores. Values with
different superscripts are significantly different at the .05 level based on Scheffe's post hoc test.
**Significance at .01 level (2-tail significance)
***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance)

Religion

Religion, the next independent variable, was examined. When the ANOVA techniques

were applied, only one out of eight social capital indices differed significantly (Table 5-15).

Conservation awareness index was higher in respondents who considered themselves as having

"no religion" (mean = 4.35) than someone who belonged to Christian (3.93) or Buddhism (4.09).

Interestingly, even though reported as "belong to no religion" most people in Vietnam are

influenced by Confucianism where rites for the ancestors are important ceremonies.

Table 5-15. Comparison of conservation attitude between different religions
Religions
Index* Christian Buddhism No religion F value
Awareness Index 3.93" 4.09" 4.35b 18.55***
* Only index showing significant differences are shown. Values shown are mean importance scores. Values with
different superscripts are significantly different at the .05 level based on Scheffe's post hoc test.
**Significance at .01 level (2-tail significance)
***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance)










Most Vietnamese homes have an alter dedicated to the family ancestors, decorated with

candlesticks, incense bowls, flower trays and the tablet containing the names of ancestors who

have died in the past Hyve generations. Confucianism believes that humans should live in

harmony with their surroundings.

Length of Residency

Length of residency was the next independent variable examined. Based on ANOVA, only

one out of the four conservation attitude constructs, conservation awareness, differed

significantly (Table 5-16). Those respondents who lived in the area more than 20 years (mean =

4.00) had lower conservation awareness index as compared to those who live less than 10 years

(4.38) or 10 to 20 years (4.31). This may be because household heads of newly immigrated

households are young and they have been benefiting from training on conservation.

Table 5-16. Comparison of conservation attitude between length of residency
Length of Residency
Index* Less 10 yrs 10-20 yrs More 20 yrs F value
Awareness Index 4.38b 4.31b 4.00a 16.846***
* Only indices showing significant differences are shown. Values shown are mean importance scores. Values with
different superscripts are significantly different at the .05 level based on Scheffe's post hoc test.
**Significance at .01 level (2-tail significance)
***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance)

Education

The next variable examined was level of education. Two out of four conservation attitude

indices shown significant difference at the oc = 0.05 level (Table 5-17). The first dimension was

conservation awareness. Based on the mean values, those households with higher education level

(mean = 4.35) had a higher conservation awareness index than those with lower education level

(mean = 4.04). The second dimension was perceived ownership of forest land. Households with

higher education had a higher perceived ownership index (mean = 3.76) than those with lower

education (mean = 3.59). These results have been support by Infield (1988) that a better










education results in a more positive attitudes and that literacy and perceived rights to collect

forest products (Heinen, 1993).

Table 5-17. Comparison of conservation attitude components between levels of education
Education
Index* Under grade 5 Grade 5-12 F value
Conservation Awareness 4.04 4.35 29.09
Perceived Ownership 3.59 3.76 4.34
* Only indices showing significant differences are shown. Values shown are mean scores.
**Significance at .01 level (2-tail significance)
***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance)

Household Income

Income was the next independent variable to be examined. Based on ANOVA, respondents

reporting income less than 10 million VND a year express higher conservation awareness as

compared to those whose income 10 to 20 million or more than 20 million a year. (Table 5-18).

Table 5-18. Comparison of conservation attitude between different incomes
Incomes (VND)
Index* Less 10M 10-20M More 20M F value
Awareness Index 4.40b 4.13a 4.11a 9.97***
* Only indices showing significant differences are shown. Values shown are mean importance scores. Values with
different superscripts are significantly different at the .05 level based on Scheffe's post hoc test.
**Significance at .01 level (2-tail significance)
***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance)
This is difficult to explain because it is often thought that income will positively affect household

conservation attitude. In this case, there have been some education programs targeting poor

households in the areas, about the value of conservation. This might contribute to raising the

conservation attitude of these households.

Linear Regression Modeling

As mentioned previously, this study utilizes a series of regression models to assess the

effects of each predictor on various conservation attitude variables (measured as continuous

variables). Five dependent variables (perceived benefit from conservation, conservation

awareness, perceived benefit from using the park, and perceived ownership of forestland)

represent different dimensions of conservation attitude and an overall (aggregated)









conservation attitude index. These conservation attitude variables were derived from the factor

analysis described previously and were calculated as indices. The socio-demographic variables

(age, gender, length of resident, level of education, household size, income, ethnicity, religion,

marital status) and social capital variable as an index and its individual components (social trust,

social cohesion, social commitment, community support, voluntary cooperation, familiarity,

social integration, and ethnic interaction) are used as independent variables in the multiple linear

regression models.

Five multiple linear regression models were developed for conservation attitude variables.

The first model (Model I) was developed for the perceived benefit from conservation. The

second model (Model II) focused on the conservation awareness. The third model (Model III)

was used to predict the perceived benefit from using the park. The fourth model (Model IV)

focused on the perceived ownership. Finally a fifth model (Model V) was used to predict the

overall (aggregated) conservation attitude index. The Eindings for each model are presented in

Table 5-19 and Table 5-20.

Model I is presented in Table 5-19; overall, the variables were found to account for 13% of

the variance in the Model I (Adj. R2=0. 131). This model indicates that education level has a

positive relationship with the perceived benefit from conservation and is statistically significant

at the a = 0.10 level. This indicates that as education increases, the perceived benefit from

conservation also increases. Household income, however, shows a statistically significant

negative relationship at the a = 0.10 level. This means that as household income increases, the

perceived benefit from conservation decreases. This contradicts the general belief that

households with higher income are more likely to hold a favorable attitude toward conservation.

The Stieng residents were more likely than other ethnic groups to perceive higher benefits from









conservation, as shown in the positive relationship between Stieng ethnic group and the

perceived benefit from conservation (statistically significant at the a = 0.05 level).

Four out of eight social capital indices (cohesion, community support, familiarity and

social integration) showed positive relationships with the perceived benefit from conservation.

First, the cohesion index shows a positive relationship with the perceived benefit from

conservation, and is statistically significant at the a = 0.05 level. This indicates that residents

with a higher cohesion index are more likely to perceive higher benefits from conservation than

those with a lower cohesion index. The community support index was also found to be

statistically significant at the a = .10 level. Residents showing more community support also

showed a higher perceived benefit from conservation. Familiarity was found to be very

significant at the a = 0.01 level. The last social capital index, social integration, has significant

positive relationship with the perceived benefit from conservation (at the a = 0.05 level).

Model II was developed in order to analyze conservation awareness. Explanatory variables

in the Model II were found to account for 23% of the variance in the model (Adj. R2 = 0.234).

However, only two explanatory variables regressed on conservation awareness were observed to

be statistically significant at the a = 0.05 level: household income and ethnic interaction.

Household income was found to have a negative relationship with conservation awareness,

which indicates that households with higher incomes are more likely to have a negative attitude

toward conservation than households with lower incomes. This may be due to the increase of the

market price for cashew nut, households that derive income from cashew plantations are likely

more interested in having additional land for producing this important cash crop. In addition, the

promotion of cashew and other industrial crops by the government is likely influential on the

observed relationship between household income and conservation awareness. Another











explanation may be that efforts to raise conservation awareness in the low income groups

(recently made from some conservation and development projects) are affecting this relationship.

Table 5-19. Linear regression models for conservation attitude variables
Model I Model II
Perceived benefit from conservation Conservation awareness
Standardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients
Socio demographic variables
Age 0.082 0.087
Gender (male=1) 0.021 0.094
Length of residence -0.023 -0.108
Education 0.131* 0.105
Household size 0.062 -0.040
Household income -0.135* -0.142**
D_ Stieng (Stieng=1) 0.224** -0.091
D_ Tay (Tay=1) -0.026 -0.008
D_ Religion (Yes=1) -0.081 -0.074
D Marital (Yes=1) 0.029 0.004
Social capital variables
Trust Index -0.117 -0.028
Cohesion Index 0.178** 0.118
Social commitment Index -0.063 -0.007
Community support Index 0.136* 0.054
Voluntary cooperation -0.061 0.103
Familiarity 0.286*** 0.077
Social integration 0.142** 0.028
Ethnic Interaction 0.050 0.123**
Intercept 0.531 2.358
Adjusted R' 0.131 .234
F-value 3.219*** 5.478***
Cases 264 264
Significance at the .10 level ** Significance at the .05 level *** Significance at the .01 level

Ethnic interaction was found to have a positive relationship with conservation awareness,

statistically significant at 0.05 level. This can be explained by the fact that respondents who are

more interactive with individuals from other groups are also more aware of conservation.

Model III was developed for the perceived benefit from using the park. There was only one

socio-demographic variable that had a statistically significant positive relationship with the


dependent variable. The Tay-Nung-Hoa ethnic group was more likely than the other groups to









perceive higher benefit from using the park. This can be explained by the fact that this group has

immigrated from the mountainous Northern provinces as mentioned earlier, and they are known

to be skillful hunters.

Three of the social capital indices were found to have a significant relationship with the

perceived benefit from using the park. The voluntary cooperation index has a negative

relationship with the dependent variable at the a = 0.05 level. This indicates that respondents

with a higher voluntary cooperation index perceived lower benefit from using the park.

However, the familiarity index has a positive relationship with the perceived benefit from using

the park, and is statistically significant at the a = 0.10 level. The social integration index has a

very significant and negative relationship with the perceived benefit from using the park at the a

= 0.01 level. This indicates that respondents who are more socially integrated perceive lower

benefits from using the park. One explanation might be that when people are more integrated

into community they tend to recognize the conservation value of the park more than those who

just see the obvious benefit from using the park. Overall, this model accounted for approximately

17% of the variance in the model (Adj. R2 = 0. 165).

Model IV was developed for the perceived ownership of forestland. Household size is

statistically significant and positively related to the dependent variable at the 0.10 level. Two

social capital indices (social commitment, community support) were both found to be positively

related to the perceived ownership of forestland. The significance of these variables indicates

that residents with higher social commitment and community support indices were more likely to

perceive higher ownership of forestland. The independent variables accounted for about 5% of

the variance in the model (Adj. R2=0.051).











Table 5-20. Linear regression models for conservation attitude variables
Model III Model IV Model V
Perceived use benefit of park Perceived land ownership General conservation attitude
Standardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients
Socio demographic variables
Age 0.004 0.048 .079
Gender (male=1) 0.004 0.114 .050
Length of residence 0.102 -0.132 -0.139
Education -0.060 0.090 0.175**
Household size 0.002 0.128* 0.079
Household income 0.032 -0.125 -0.186***
D_Stieng (Stieng=1) 0.074 0.108 0.037
D_Tax (Tay=1) 0.192** -0.129 -0.170**
DReligion (Yes=1) 0.064 -0.081 -0. 109
D Marital (Yes=1) 0.102 -0.099 -0.066
Overall Social Capital Index 0.357***
Trust Index 0.044 -0.148
Cohesion Index -0. 129 -0.044
Social commitment Index 0.103 0.147*
Community support Index 0.027 0.200**
Voluntary cooperation -0.142** -0.025
Familiarity 0.131* 0.104
Social integration -0.301*** 0.067
Ethnic Interaction -0.050 0.023
Intercept 2.782 2.215 9.353
Adjusted R' 0.165 0.051 .203
F-value 3.893*** 1.791** 7.117***
Cases 264 264 264
Significance at the .10 level ** Significance at the .05 level *** Significance at the .01 level

In addition to these four models, another multiple linear regression equation was developed


using the general (aggregated) conservation attitude index as the dependent variable with the

overall social capital index as an independent variable (Model V).

The results show that education has a positive relationship with the overall conservation

attitude and is statistically significant at the 0.05 level. This indicates that as this variable

increases, the general conservation attitude also increases. This result has been supported with

other findings from various countries such as Nepal (Mehta and Heinen 2001) and South Africa


(Infield 1988). Similar to the Model I, household income was found to a have negative









relationship with the general conservation attitude, which indicates that households with higher

income are more likely to have negative attitude toward conservation than households with lower

income. The explanation for this may be the same that gave to the result in Model I, that is,

households that derive income from cashew plantations are likely more interested in having

additional land for producing this important cash crop.

Tay Nung Hoa minority group was more likely than the other groups to have negative

conservation attitude. The explanation is that this group has moved into region from the

mountainous areas and they have been traditionally relied on hunting for their livelihood. These

people, who are known as skillful hunters, may have believed that conservation efforts will limit

their hunting activities.

Finally, in this model (Model V) aggregated social capital was found to have positive and

very significant relationship (at the 0.01 level) with the overall conservation attitude. This

indicates that respondents with higher social capital will have a higher conservation attitude

toward the Cat Tien National Park. This was expected and supported by theories that are guiding

this study.

Logistic Regression Modeling

The four dependent variables representing participation in conservation activities were

measured as binary values, where 1 = Yes, and 0 = No.Therefore, logistic regressions were used

to model these four variables as well as two composite models. To predict the effects of social

capital and conservation attitude variables on the participation of households in conservation

activities, six logistic regression models were developed; they are given the prefix "LR" to

distinguish them from the linear regression models discussed previously.

Model LR-1 was developed to examine household participation in forest protection

training. Model LR-2 used "meeting to discuss conservation agreement" as the dependent









variable. Model LR-3 was used to predict household participation in the agroforestry training

program, and the dependent variable for Model LR-4 was the participation in land use planning.

Model LR-5 was developed to predict whether or not households participated in at least one of

these conservation activities. As in the previous linear regression modeling (and for a more

practical policy purpose), an additional logistic regression model (Model LR-6) was developed

using overall social capital index and overall conservation attitude index as independent

variables. The results for these 6 models are presented in Table 5-21, Table 5-22 and Table 5-23.

Model LR-1 shows a positive and significant relationship between household income and

respondent participation in forest protection (a = 0.05), suggesting that households with higher

incomes are more likely to participate in training on forest protection. For every unit increase in

household income, the odds of participation (vs. non participation) increased by a factor of 1.787

(e.57). This is explained by the fact that households with higher incomes are less likely affected

by the restrictions associated with the CTNP management and are more likely to participate in

forest protection activities. The Tay-Nung-Hoa ethnic groups show a very significant positive

relationship in term of respondent participation in training on forest protection. Table 5-21 shows

that the odds of being participating in forest protection activities are 4.64 times better if the

household belongs to the Tay-Nung-Hoa group. This can be explained by the fact that the FPRD

has generally paid more attention to this group, encouraging them to participate in forest

protection activities. This has subsequently restricted their forest dependent activities such as

hunting and clearing forest for crops cultivation.

For the social capital variables, voluntary cooperation was found to be negatively related

(a = 0.05) to the participation in forest protection training. This indicates that people having a

SThe logistic regression coefficient for household income is .575 (see Table 5-21). Therefore, the odds ratio is
calculated as e m= _1.78.










higher voluntary cooperation index are less likely to participate in training in forest protection

than those with a lower index. This implies that for every unit increase in voluntary index, the

odds of participation (vs. non participation) decrease by a factor of 0.23.

Familiarity, however, is positive and very significant at the a = 0.01 level. This means that

the higher familiarity index, the more likely the respondent is to participate in training for forest

protection. For every unit increase in familiarity index, the odds of participation (vs. non

participation) will increase by a factor of 3.47. Conservation awareness is another variable that

was found to be negative and statistically significant at the a = 0.01 level. This implies that

people having a higher conservation awareness index are less likely to participate in forest

protection training than those with a lower index. Further, for every unit increase in the

conservation awareness index, the odds of participation (vs. non participation) decreased by 0.35.

This contradictory result reflects the fact that many households participate in forest protection

training activities with their main motivation being the economic benefit they will get afterward.

Recently, the government made a huge financial investment to encourage people to participate in

forest protection on a contractual basis. Attracted to this new source of income, many households

participated in the program even though they had a low their awareness levels.

Model LR-2 shows a positive and significant relationship between ethnic Tay-Nung-Hoa

and "meeting to discuss conservation agreement" at the a = 0.10 level. This indicates that the

Tay-Nung-Hoa group is more likely to participate in the meeting to discuss conservation

agreement than are the other groups. The odds of meeting to discuss about conservation

agreement are 2.78 times better if the household belongs to the Tay-Nung-Hoa group.











Table 5-21. Logistic regression analysis of households' participation in conservation activities
Model LR-1 Model LR-2
Participate in training on forest protection Meeting discuss conservation agreement
b eb b eb
Age .112 1.119 .231 1.260
Gender 1.115 3.049 .763 1.260
Length of Residence -.076 .927 .301 1.351
Education .189 1.208 .007 1.007
Household size .097 1.102 .056 1.058
Household income .575** 1.777 .076 1.079
D_Stieng (Stieng= 1) .275 1.317 -.842 .431
D_ Tay (Tay= 1) 1.3**4.643 1.022* 2.778
D_ Religion (Yes=1) .286 1.331 .593 1.809
D_ Married (Yes=1) .758 2.135 .407 1.502
Social Trust .209 1.232 -2.146^^ .117
Social Cohesion .019 1.019 1.260** 3.524
Social Conunitment .773 2.165 .323 1.381
Community support -.116 .890 .493 1.637
Voluntary cooperation -1.489** ~ .226 .189 1.208
Familiarity 1.243** 3.466 -.209 .811
Social integration .276 1.318 .237 1.267
Ethnic Interaction .647 1.909 .007 1.007
Perceived Cons. Benefit .352 1.421 .222 1.248
Conservation Awareness -.4* .353 -.464 .629
Perceived Use Benefit -.146 .864 .086 1.089
Perceived Ownership .303 1.354 .142 1.153
Intercept -9.976 -4.417 .012
-2LL 239 268
Weighted N 265 265
*F Significance at the .10 level ** Significance at the .05 level *** Significance at the .01 level

Trust--a maj or component of social capital--was found to be negative and statistically


significant at the a = 0.01 level. This is hard to explain in the absence of data on the real

behavior of the local households. Information from key informants revealed that households

within the community trust each other but do not seem to trust the outsider--in this case the


proj ect personnel.

Cohesion was observed to be statistically positive and significant at the a = 0.05 level. For


every unit increase in the cohesion index, the odds of attending meeting (vs. non attending)









increased by a factor of 3.52. The cohesion variable was operationalized as someone who shares

common interests and was connected through an association. This can help explain the fact that

people who are more cohesive are more likely to participate in activity in which they are have a

common interest (e.g., discussing conservation agreement).

Model LR-3 (Table 5-22) shows a positive and significant relationship between

participation in agroforestry training and Stieng and Tay-Nung-Hoa groups. The odds of

participation in agroforestry training are 6. 11 times better if the household belongs to the Stieng

ethnic, and 3.88 times better if the household belongs to the Tay-Nung-Hoa group. This indicates

that both Stieng and Tay-Nung-Hoa groups are more likely than the Kinh group to participate in

this training activity.

The familiarity, social integration and interaction indices found a positive and significant

relationship at the oc = 0.05 level. These results are expected because familiarity, social

integration and ethnic interaction would help households know more about the benefit of

agroforestry techniques can help to improve the production and conserve the environment at the

same time. For every unit increase in familiarity index, the odds of participation in agroforestry

programs (vs. non participation) is expected to increase by a factor of 3.049 and for every unit

increase in social integration index, the odds of participation will increase by a factor of 1.46.

Similarly, for every unit increase in ethnic interaction index, the odds of participation (vs. non

participation) is likely to increase by a factor of 2.09.











Table 5-22. Logistic regression analysis of households' participation in conservation activities
Model LR-3 Model LR-4
Participate in training. on agroforestry Participate in land use pann
b B eb
Age -.077 .926 .154 1.166
Gender .676 1.966 -.506 .603
Length of Residence -.367 .693 .229 1.257
Education -.041 .960 .152 1.164
Household size .212 1.236 -.113 .894
Household income .241 1.272 .353* 1.423
D_Stieng (Stieng=1) 1.810** 6.109 .040 1.041
D_ Tay (Tay= 1) 1363.880 1.125** 3.081
D_ Religion (Yes=1) .534 1.705 .558 1.748
D_ Married (Yes=1) 1.137 3.118 .994 2.702
Social Trust .091 1.095 -.8* .205
Social Cohesion -.821* .440 1.429** 4. 176
Social Conunitment -.425 .654 .212 1.237
Community support -.154 .858 .216 1.241
Voluntary cooperation -.699* .497 -.095 .909
Familiarity 1.115** 3.049 .228 1.256
Social integration .378** 1.459 .282 1.326
Ethnic Interaction .740** 2.095 .445 1.560
Perceived Cons. Benefit .357 1.429 .356 1.428
Conservation Awareness -.198 .820 -.346 .708
Perceived Use Benefit -.355 .701 -.093 .911
Perceived Ownership .339 1.404 .051 1.052
Intercept -4.835 .008 -8.434 .000
-2LL 360 290
Weighted N 265 265
*F Significance at the .10 level ** Significance at the .05 level *** Significance at the .01 level

Model LR-4 shows a positive relationship between household incomes and participation in


land use planning, statistically significant (oc = 0.10). This is can be explained by the fact that the


households with higher incomes are more accessible to land use. Model results also show that the

odds of participating in land use planning activities are 3.08 times better if the household belongs

to the Tay-Nung-Hoa group. This implies that Tay-Nung-Hoa is more likely than the other ethnic


groups to participate in land use planning because this group migrated from the mountainous









Northern provinces, having been driven by scarcity of land in their native place. This helps to

explain why they are more interested in land use issues.

Again, like the previous models, trust was found to be negative and statistically significant

with respondent participation in land use planning. This reason can be explained in the same

manner. People tend to trust each other within the community and not toward the outsiders.

Cohesion is another social capital variable found to be positive and statistically significant with

participation in land use planning at the a = 0.05 level. For every unit increase in cohesion index,

the odds of participation (vs. non participation) increases by a factor of 4. 18. Social cohesion is

an important aspect for households to deal with the important issues in rural society, especially

land use and land tenure.

Model LR-5 was developed as a general model to predict whether or not a given household

participates in at least one conservation activities. This model shows that both the Stieng group

and the Tay-Nung-Hoa group variables are positive and significantly related to the dependent

variable. This means that these groups are more likely than the Kinh to participate in at least one

conservation activities. These relationships were very significant at the a = 0.01 level. Religion

was also found to be statistically significant and positive at the 0.05 level. People who belong to

a religion are more likely to participate in at least one conservation activity. Once again, trust--

the very important dimension of social capital--was found to have a negative relationship.

However, familiarity was positive and significant.

Similar to Model LR-1, in this model conservation awareness was found to be negative and

statistically significant. Perceived ownership has a positive and statistically significant

relationship with respondent participation in at least one conservation activity. This can be

explained by the fact that when people feel more secured with land tenure, they are more likely












to participate in conservation activities. According to various studies, land security leads to a


farming system that is productive, stable and sustainable (Fortmann and Bruce, 1988; Persoon,


1992).


Table 5-23. Logistic regression analysis of households' participation in conservation activities
Model LR-5 Model LR-6
Participate in at least one activity Participate in at least one activity
b eb b eb

Age .164 1.179 0.047 1.048
Gender -.032 .969 0.068 1.071

Length of residence -.038 .962 0.046 1.047
Education .184 1.202 0.158 1.171
Household size .137 1.147 0.251 1.285
Household income .281 1.325 0.224 1.251
D Stieng (Stieng=1) 1.778*** 5.916 1.630*** 5.104


D_ Tay (Tay=1)
D_ Religion (Yes=1)
D_ Married (Yes=1)
Overall SC Index
Social Trust
Social Cohesion
Social Commitment
Community support
Voluntary cooperation
Familiarity
Social integration
Ethnic Interaction
Overall CA Index
Perceived Cons. Benefit
Conservation Awareness
Perceived Use Benefit
Perceived Ownership
Intercept
-2LL

Weighted N
* Significance at the .10 level


2.122***
.891**
.851


-2.206**
.171
-060
.244
.182
1.626***
.042
-.079


8.345
2.437
2.342


1.727***
0.866**
0.761
-0.034


5.622
2.377
2.141
0.966


.110
1.187
.941
1.276
1.199
5.086
1.043
.924
0.214**

1.480
.464
.827
1.785
.032 -5.560
304
265

***F' Significance at the .01 level


1.239


.392
-.767*
-.190
.579**
-3.433
272
265

**' Significance at the .05 level


Finally, Model LR-6 was developed to answer a more practical question of how overall


social capital and general conservation attitude affect the household's participation in


conservation activities. Result shows that both Stieng (indigenous ethnic) and Tay-Nung-Hoa










group variables (migrated minorities) are shown to have a positive and significant impact.

Results show that the odds of participation in one or more conservation activities are 5.10 times

better if the household belongs to the Stieng ethnic and 5.62. Religion was also found to be

statistically significant and positive at the oc = 0.05 level. The odds of participating in

conservation activities are 2.3 8 times better if the household belongs to religion.

Overall (aggregated) conservation attitude was found positive and statistically significant.

For every unit increase in overall conservation attitude index, the odds of participation in at least

one conservation activity (vs. non participation) is shown to increase by a factor of 4. 18.

Summary

This chapter presented the analysis and results of the study. A range of the statistical

analysis methods were used to test the conceptual model of this study. In doing this, numerous

important findings were identified. Overall descriptive statistics have shown the diverse

characteristics of household respondents and the various groups/organizations to which they

belong. Factor analysis identified eight different components of social capital (e.g., social trust,

social cohesion, social commitment, community support, voluntary cooperation, familiarity,

social integration, and ethnic interaction) and four components of conservation attitude (e.g.,

perceived benefit of conservation, conservation awareness, perceived use benefit, perceived

ownership) that serve as basic for social capital and conservation attitude indices. All of these

components were later used either as dependent or independent variables in the linear and

logistic regression models.

Five linear regression models explored the impacts of the various social capital variables

and the socio-demographic variables on the various conservation attitude variables. (Table 5-19

and Table 5-20). Six logistic regression models were used to assess the impact of social capital









and conservation attitude on the participation in conservation activities of the sample households.

(Table 5-21, Table 5-22, and Table 5-23). The summary of the results of these linear and logistic

regression models as well as their policy implications will be presented in the next chapter.









CHAPTER 6
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Overview

This last chapter contains four sections. The first section summarizes the study and maj or

Endings. In particular, the effects of social capital on conservation attitude and the household's

participation in conservation activities of the World Bank-supported Forest Protection and Rural

Development Proj ect (FPRD) are discussed. The second section discusses the policy implications

of this work, specifically as it regards the ability of the FPRD to protect the forest and improve

living standards for local rural inhabitants. Recommendations are provided that might help

redesign and improve the FPRD proj ect. The third section describes a few limitations of this

study. The last section suggests some future work and areas of focus that are worth investigating

further.

Summary of the Findings and Results

This study is based on the premise that the social capital of local households impacts

household's conservation attitude towards the Cat Tien National Park, Vietnam. Drawing on the

literature from common property resource management and public choice theory, it was argued

that social capital would have a negative impact on households' positive and negative apathy

towards collective resource conservation and management. Accordingly, it was thought that

improvements to social capital may be an effective strategy to muster public participation and

address the "tragedy of the commons" problem. In order to operationalize this proposition 270

households, covering three communes, were interviewed in order to collect various sets of

information. The survey instrument was designed to solicit a wide range of information on

household characteristics, social capital and conservation attitudes, and the participation of

households in conservation activities such as FPRD. The data collection effort was instrumental









in exploring the research obj ectives of the study: to identify differences between households

groups in terms of social capital, conservation attitude and participation in the FPRD; and to

identify the key factors influencing households' attitude towards conservation activities and their

participation in conservation activities of the FPRD proj ect.

Members hip and Local Groups/Organizations

Both the qualitative data and quantitative data of this study indicate that households are

very diverse in term of age, gender, ethnicity, education, income. In addition, results of the

frequency plots show that respondents belong to different social groups/organizations and exhibit

a diverse level of involvement in community activities. Although these data suggest that most of

the household heads hold membership in various groups/organizations, their actual participation

in the activities of these groups/organization suggests otherwise. This is likely due to the fact that

these organizations are mainly sponsored and promoted by the government under the umbrella of

the Vietnam Fatherland Front, which is a pro-government "mass movement" under the direct

leadership of the Vietnamese Communist Party. Thus, they should not be considered "authentic"

civil society groups/organizations because they have not originated spontaneously and

independent of government influence. Nevertheless, organizations such as the Farmer' s Union,

Women's Union, and the Veteran Association still play an important role in implementing

conservation and development proj ects.

Effect of Social Capital on Conservation Attitude

In exploring the effect of social capital on conservation attitude, several useful results

emerged that will have significant implications for future conservation decisions and policy in

the study region. These results will also be useful for similar studies conducted in the future.

First, factor analysis identified eight social capital components (Social Trust, Social

Cohesion, Social Commitment, Community Support, Voluntary Cooperation, Familiarity, Social










Integration, and Ethnic Interaction) and four conservation attitude components (Perceived

Conservation Benefit, Conservation Awareness, Perceived Use Benefit, Perceived Ownership)

that serve as the basis for the social capital and conservation attitude indices. All of these

components were later used either as dependent or independent variables in linear and logistic

regression models.

Second, assessment of the relationship between the households' perceived benefit of

conservation and both demographic variables and social capital indices suggested that household

education has a positive impact on the perceived benefit of conservation. Social cohesion,

familiarity and social integration components of social capital are found to influence the

perceived benefits of conservation. The cohesion factor in this study means that households share

common interests, are connected through associations, and get involved in community activities.

These characteristics (of the cohesion concept) are very crucial in common resources

conservation and management which is dependent upon cooperative behavior and collective

action. The familiarity and social integration components were also found to impact household's

perceived benefit of conservation. Both familiarity (how individuals familiarize and get along

with each other) and social integration (whether or not households know most people in the

community, feel to be part of the community, and socialize in the community) are vital to "the

process of building relationships that increase the capacity of local people to unite and act"

(Brennan and Luloff, 2007, p.54).

Third, assessment of factors influencing households' conservation awareness indicated that

ethnic interaction has a positive impact. This finding is key because, as individuals build a better

and more diverse ethnic community, it provides a mechanism to facilitate the expression of









common interests and needs across diverse segments of local society (Wilkinson 1991; Brennan

2007).

Fourth, analysis of the household' s perceived benefit from short-term, direct use of the

park indicated that migrated minorities from the Northern provinces (i.e. Tay, Nung, Hoa)

perceived higher benefits from exploiting the park. As such their resentment toward the

conservation of the CTNP is higher relative to other households. Another result that came out of

this analysis is that households that are taking part in more voluntary cooperation, and that are

more socially integrated, tend to perceive less direct-use benefits of the park. This also means

that they are more conservation oriented. These findings help decision makers formulate target

specific activities to promote conservation of the park.

Fifth, the assessment of perceived ownership of forestland suggested that the social

commitment and community support indices have a positive relationship with the perceived

ownership of forestland. Social commitment was measured by the extent to which the

respondents have confidence in their associations, their willingness to help each other, and their

concerns about the community welfare (i.e., making community a better place to live).

Community support was operationalized as a respondent' s support for a cause that benefits the

community, such as attending several community functions or obeying community codes and

covenants. As perceived ownership is central for long-term investment of scarce resources (time

and capital), this finding suggests that investing in social commitment and support is an effective

way to improve collective action in cooperative behavior.

Finally, examination of household' s conservation attitude toward the CTNP indicated that

education was found to have a positive impact on the conservation attitude of a given household.

The Tay-Nung-Hoa minorities are found to have less favorable attitude toward conservation









efforts relative to other groups. The aggregated social capital variable was found to have a

positive impact on conservation attitude toward CTNP.

Household Participation in Conservation Activities

In order to assess the impact of social capital and conservation attitude on the participation

in conservation activities of the sample households, six logistic regressions were developed. The

first four logistic regression models examined whether or not a given household participated in

the FPRD conservation activities such as training on forest protection, meeting to discuss

conservation agreement, training on agroforestry and participation in land use planning. The last

two models examined whether or not a given household participated in at least one conservation

activity mentioned above. One of these two models (Model LR-5) used multiple variables to

represent (i.e., proxy for) social capital and conservation attitude while the other model (Model

LR-6) used a single overall social capital index and a single overall conservation attitude index

as independent variables. The results highlighted in this summarized section below, however, are

focused on the last two models.

In both of these logistic regression models, ethnicity and religion variables were found to

have positive and statistically significant relationships with household participation in

conservation activities. The ethnic minorities such as Stieng, Tay, Nung, Hoa are more likely

than the Kinh to participate. Households that practice a religion are more likely than those

reported as "no religion" to participate in conservation activities.

One of the seemingly counter intuitive Eindings is that the social trust component of social

capital has a negative impact on households' participation. One explanation might be trust was

measured as the level of trust that respondents trust each other within the community but not to

the outsiders. In this case, people do not participate in conservation activities simply because

they do not trust the proj ect personnel. As observed in the Hield, sometimes, people in community









informed each other of the presence of forest guards so that they could avoid them while they

were clearing forest for crop cultivation. This action is considered as a forest violation and can

be fined heavily. Model LR-5 shows that both familiarity and perceived ownership of forestland

have a positive impact on participation in conservation activities (oc = 0.05). The familiarity

factor means that individuals get along with and know each other. These characteristics (of the

concept familiarity) are important in building relationships that increase the local people's

participation in collective action. The perceived ownership of forestland (or feeling security of

land tenure) encourages households to participate in conservation activities.

In the overall logistic regression model (Model LR-6) which used overall (aggregated)

social capital index and overall (aggregated) conservation attitude index as independent

variables, the overall conservation attitude was found to have a positive impact on participation

thereby supporting the theoretical premise used in this study.

Policy Implications

The main conclusion that can be drawn from this study is that education greatly influenced

conservation attitude. Therefore, conservation programs should focus on improving human

capital by providing more training and better education for local people. Diverse ethnic groups

exist in the CTNP with different histories and languages. However, the current government

education program seems to present shortcomings when only Kinh language (Vietnamese

official language) is being used in class. As a result, many children from ethnic groups such as

the Stieng have dropped out of school early simply because they cannot keep up with the rest of

the class. This implies that parallel to the study of the Kinh language, these children should have

the opportunity to learn in their own language. Such improvement to education would help

contribute to conservation awareness and community involvement in local conservation efforts.









The results from the linear regression suggest that in order to effectively protect the CTNP,

it is necessary for local inhabitants to recognize the value of biodiversity conservation or to

improve the households' perceived benefit from conservation. The study has shown that when

households perceived higher benefits of conservation, they are more likely to protect the forests

and wildlife in the park through the participatory management of the national park. As

highlighted in the previous section, social cohesion, familiarity and social integration strongly

influenced the perceived benefit of conservation. These results imply that more networking is

needed to improve social cohesion among households. In the Vietnamese socio-political context,

the strengthening of local associations such as farmers' union, women 's union, veteran 's

associations are the best strategy to promote collective behavior in natural resource conservation.

Through these existing organizations, conservation programs can help improve local people's

conservation attitudes and their participation in conservation activities.

Results from the study also reveals that in the natural resource conservation area,

community based efforts building upon familiarity and social integration will facilitate the

collective action thus help protecting the park. For the CTNP management, in order to improve

familiarity and social integration park managers should facilitate more interactions between

individuals, thus leading to more understanding about community issues, including biodiversity

conservation issue. At the same time this strategy will help individuals to integrate into social

groups thus raising their perceived benefit of conservation and should eventually lead to a

positive conservation attitude toward the CTNP.

This study suggests that ethnic interaction is very important. When individuals from

different ethnic groups interact with each other, they tend to be more aware of conservation. In

the CTNP, it is necessary that conservation programs design activities which can help to









facilitate ethnic interaction. Activities such as cultural festivals and other events as well as

venues for facilitating interaction, should be organized so that different ethnic groups can interact

on a formal and informal basis. Such interaction increases the awareness and familiarity

necessary to improve local conservation attitudes. Included in these activities can be

environmental education programs and opportunities for citizen involvement that help raise

conservation awareness.

Conservation programs should direct efforts to help the minorities that recently immigrated

from the Northern provinces (e.g., Tay, Nung, and Hoa groups) to recognize the long-term value

of conserving the park. These programs should provide income opportunities such as facilitating

ecotourism proj ects, etc. that help them to generate an alternative source of income. This could

aid in changing their perception about short-term direct uses of the park. Many conservation

proj ects have successfully included local people to their sustainable ecotourism proj ect (Boo,

1992; Lindberg et al., 1994; Dubin et al., 1996; Goodwin et al., 1996). These can provide good

lessons and suggestions for the CTNP manager to learn and apply.

Many efforts from government agencies and NGOs have been made towards conserving

biodiversity of the CTNP. However, there is still not enough effort in supporting local

communities by inspiring them to work together, thus building their social commitment and

community support. One option which should be considered is to revive local traditional culture,

such as buffalo sacrifice festivities, where the whole community comes together to drink and

dance. In this manner they can also conserve their traditional culture as well. In fact, in recent

years, the Vietnamese government has taken some steps to revive these traditional cultural

activities. Unfortunately, the approach that government uses to conduct this policy is

controversial. Much funding was allocated to each hamlet to build a "communal house" (which









is named "hamlet cultural house"). Without the participation of local villagers, however, these

structures looks like a modern government building rather than a common house that the ethnic

minorities have had in the past. This has thus alienated them.

Participatory approach should be used as part of any rural development and conservation

proj ect. By encouraging local participation, government can avoid obvious short-comings as was

demonstrated above. Vietnamese rural societies have been transformed rapidly in recent years

when the communist government started to adopt market-oriented economic policy. A vibrant

civil society needs to be further developed in order to help the poor to cope with some of the

negative market forces as well.

Recommendations for Encouraging Households' Participation in Conservation Activities

Results have shown that the World Bank-supported Forest Protection and Rural

Development (FPRD) project has a special focus on ethnic minorities. While it is necessary to

include the Kinh (some are very poor and landless people) as participants in conservation

activities, a comprehensive approach for protecting the CTNP should include all local

households with different demographic backgrounds, i.e. gender, religion, ethnicity, age,

education. Currently this type of broad inclusion is lacking. In the same way, conservation

efforts should pay more attention to the "no religion" group so as so encourage them to

participate in conservation programs. This can only be done when the FPRD proj ect is able to

support more activities that can help households interact and can also facilitate households

helping each other.

In order to improve familiarity and social integration, the proj ect should facilitate more

interactions between individuals that can lead to greater understanding about community issues,

including the issue of biodiversity conservation. For example, in conducting the environmental

education program targeting inhabitants of the bufferzone, the proj ect should identify and










support/sponsor the local Youth Union as a strategic partner because the mandate of this

organization is to promote youth group activities (e.g., cultural events, sport game festivals,

annual camping trips). Promotion of these activities will hopefully facilitate increases in the level

of social integration and familiarity among local people.

The study shows that land tenure security can improve participation in conservation

activities. It is, therefore, necessary for the government to design a better land tenure regime that

can encourage household participation in conservation activities. In fact, it has been one

obj ective of the FPRD proj ect. However, as seen in the study site, even though the proj ect has

Einancially been supporting the land allocation process, the implementation of this task is still

very slow. That is, in part, due to the lack of technical personnel in various government agencies.

The proj ect, therefore, should take immediate action to expedite this land allocation process and

thus improve household access to institution credits and promote sustainable land use.

The Limitations of the Study

Even though the principal investigator (PI) was familiar with the area and had conducted

some PRAs exercises before undertaking the Hield research, the author believes that spending

more time within the study communities would have helped. The most limiting factor in terms of

the survey was that preliminary fieldwork was insufficient prior to the initiation of the Einal

survey. The survey instrument would have been strengthened by advance work but budget

constraints had hindered this activity.

More time would have allowed researchers to conduct more in-depth interviews. This

would have been more informative in term of collecting more detailed information on local

associations/organizations. Especially how these local organizations performed their function

vis-a-vis the issues facing biodiversity conservation.










Future Works

First, Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) can help capture the path of impact of

independent variables on dependent variables. Specifically, in order to deal with latent variables

such as social capital and conservation attitude, SEM provides an effective mechanism to assess

the relationships. Second, one of the key variables that was not included in this study but may

have significant influence on household's conservation attitude and participation in conservation

activities is its dependency on collective resources. Future studies can incorporate the

dependency variable into the model. Third, social capital varies over time and space. This study

focused on one time and was limited to only three communities. Longitudinal studies with more

spatial variability would be useful. Fourth, how ecotourism activities are impacting household

income and livelihoods and if these in turn influence household's conservation attitude and

behavior are also worth exploring.









APPENDIX A
HOUSEHOLD SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRES

The School of Natural Resources and Environment at the University of Florida is
conducting an independent research study about the Cat Tien National Park, Vietnam. In
order to understand the factors affecting conservation, research assistants are conducting
face-to-face interviews with households around the forest park. The households are
randomly selected, in order to get representative data from the various communities around
the forest park.

You have been randomly selected from this community to be a respondent. Privacy is a
key principle of this survey. There are no wrong or right answers, most importantly candid
and honest answers are the most useful. If you have any questions about this survey, please
feel free to contact either the following offices: the Department of Rural Development,
University of Agriculture and Forestry, Thu Duc, Ho Chi Minh City, or the Cat Tien
National Park's Management Board.

Commune: Hamlet:

Date and time:

Name of respondent: Age: Sex:

Occupation: (list all)

Education:

Section I: SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONS

1. What is your gender?
O Male
O Female
2. What is your ethnicity?
O Kinh
O Tay
O Hoa
O Stieng
O Other, specify
3. What is your religion
O Buddhism
O Catholic
O Protestant
O Other
4. How long have you been settled in this area?
O Less than 10 years
O 20-30 years
O more than 30 years










5. What is your highest level of education
O Grade 1-5
O Grade 6-9
O Grade 10-12
O College
6. How many people live in your house (including you)
O 1-4 persons
O 5-8 persons
O more than 8 persons
7. What is your current annual household income from all the members of the household?
O Less than VND 1,000,000
O VND 1,000,000 5,000,000
O VND 5,000,000 10,000,000
O More than VND 10,000,000
8. To what age group do you belong to:
O 18-29
O 30-39
O 40-49
O 50-59
O above 60
9. What is your marital status:
O Single
O Married
O Divorced
O Widowed


Section II. SOCIAL CAPITAL QUESTIONS

1. Of the groups/associations/organizations listed below (check one for each A and B)

1.1. Are you aware of this group's existence in your community?

2. 1.Do you belong to this group?

Group s/As soci ati on s/Organi zati on A. Aware of B. Belong to
No Yes No Yes
a. Religious groups
b. Farmers' Union
c. Women Union
d. Youth Union
e. Veteran Union
f. Old People Union
g.Gardener association
h. Credit group
i. Other, please specify:










2. In the past year have you participated in the following activities with your neighbors or

other people in the village? For each activity indicate how often you performed the activity

(For each, circle one).





officiatin sariics ...)

Spornty events like tournament or games hret 1 2 3 4 5

Meetings like hamlet meeting, garden club 1 2 3 4 5
meeting ..
Trainin (extension, conservation) 1 2 3 4 5
Work proj ect like tree planting on Lunar New 1 2 3 4 5
Year, clean up village
Meeting to resolve problems inside and outside the 1 2 3 4 5
village
Other, please specify 1 2 3 4 5




3. Please tell us how you feel about the following statement using the scale of 1 to 5, 1

being Strongly Disagree (SD), 2 being Disagree (D), 3 being Neutral (N), 4 being Agree

(SA) and 5 being Strongly Agree (SA). Circle one appropriate number of every statement.
SD D N A SA
a. I know most pole in m village 1 2 3 4 5
b. People in this village look out for one another 1 2 3 4 5
c. Most people in this village are willing to help each 1 2 3 4 5
other whenever the can
d. Most people in this village are concerned about their 1 2 3 4 5
own welfare
e. I can count onmy neighbor for help any time 1 2 3 4 5
f. I trust association to make decision on my behalf
g. People in this village have mutual respect for one 1 2 3 4 5
another
h. For the most part, people are willing to make the 1 2 3 4 5
community a better place to live
i. People in this community do get involved in 1 2 3 4 5
community activities
j.Ialways reet m neighbors when I first see them
k. This community is a safe place for children 1 2 3 4 5










1. Most people in my community do voluntary work for 1 2 3 4 5
commumty
m. Most people in this community can be trusted 1 2 3 4 5
n. Most people in the neighborhood are connected 1 2 3 4 5
through the association
0. Most people in this community are involved in 1 2 3 4 5
activities that benefit the community
p.People in this community are easy to contact 1 2 3 4 5
q. For the most part, people in this community are 1 2 3 4 5
friendly
r. I know some people in this community, most are 1 2 3 4 5
strangers
s. Usually people in this community greet one another 1 2 3 4 5
t. This community offers enough chance for a person to 1 2 3 4 5
do volunteer work
u. People in this community work together to solve 1 2 3 4 5
problems
v. Most people in this community do not feel they are a 1 2 3 4 5
part of this community
w. People in this community get along. with each other 1 2 3 4 5
x. I volunteer in my community 1 2 3 4 5
y. For the most part, people in the community obey 1 2 3 4 5
community codes and covenants
z. Very few people socialize in the community 1 2 3 4 5
aa. People in this community show support for a cause
that may not directly benefit them but benefits 1 2 3 4 5
community at a whole
bb. Some of my neighbors attend several community 1 2 3 4 5
functions
cc. I think people in this community can be trusted 1 2 3 4 5
dd. People in the community share common interests 1 2 3 4 5
ee. My actions have impacts making this community a 1 2 3 4 5
better place to live in
ff. The community is a mix of different cultural ethnic
groups


Section III: PARTICIPATION INT FPRD PROJECT ACTIVITIES

1. We would like to know how much your household participates in the FPRD project. We

are going to ask you about activities that you have involved in during the past 12 months









In the past 12 months have you .... No Yes

Participated in training on forest protection 1 2
Attended meetings to discuss conservation agreement 1 2
Participated in training on water management 1 2
Participated in land use planning 1 2
Participated in Training on Agroforestry 1 2

2. Have you ever participated in ... 1) No 2) Yes

Attended training on improved use and management of cash crops and 1 2
trees
Been provided with new and improved seedlings for agricultural crops 1 2
Participated in training on animal husbandry 1 2




3. Have you ever ... 1) No 2) Yes

Had electricity connection (through FPRD proj ect) 1 2
Worked on dyke construction against flooding 1 2



4. Credit support 1) No 2) Yes

Training on micro credit management 1 2
Got a loan for fertilizer and pesticide 1 2


Section III: CONSERVATION ATTITUDE AND BEHAVIOR

A. CONSERVATION ATTITUDES

Please tell us how you feel about the following statement using the scale of 1 to 5, 1 being
Strongly Disagree (SD), 2 being Disagree (D) 3 being Neutral (N), 4 being Agree (A), 5
being Strongly Agree. Circle one appropriate number of every statement.

SD D N A SA


II It is important to keep the park for the survival of various
plants and animal species


S1 2 3 4 5










Although we need more land for agriculture, it is necessary to 1 2 3 4 5
set aside some land for the protection of plants and animals
The park is our country's pride and is essential for a healthy 1 2 3 4 5
environment.
The national park should be protected for the benefit of our
1 23 4 5
future generations
The illegal cutting of trees, wildlife trapping and hunting 2 3 4 5
should be discouraged
If hunting and grazing are allowed, all the animals will soon 1 2 3 4 5
disapa
Conservation has taken land thus farmers do not have enough
land to cultivate
Since the wildlife of the park are causing us trouble, wildlife
hunting should be allowed under strict supervision
It is good if some land within the park is allocated to the local
people
Since the park is a waste of land, it is better to distribute the
1 23 4 5
land among. local people
The park is for outsiders and we are not even allowed to visit
1 23 4 5
the pr
The park is for those who enj oy wildlife viewing and we do 1 2 3 4 5
not enj oy this, as we have to face problems from the pr
Farmers have benefited from the conservation program 1 2 3 4 5
Forest land allocation (FLA) ensures farmers' ownership of
1 23 4 5
the forestland
Farmers can get more income because of forest protection and
1 23 4 5
management activities
Farmers can benefit from the forest replanting in the buffer
1 23 4 5
zone
Conservation agreement allows farmers to share responsibility 1 2 3 4 5
in park management
Conservation agreement allows farmers access to NTFP 1 2 3 4 5


B. BEHAVIOR TOWARDS THE PARK

1. Do you ever go to the forest park?

(If no, go to # 10, if yes go to #1 1)
2. If NO why don't you ever go there?

[] Fear of rangers O Fears of
O No time O Too far
3. If YES, why do you go there?


O Yes


O No


animals


O No interest

Other- Specify


























Items Hours/trip Trips/week Amount/trip Total/month
Fuelwood
Building materials
Handcraft materials
Hone
Hunting
Medical plants
Fishing


O Health related O Hunting O Building materials
0 Fuelwoods 0 Grazing 0 Worship

0 Others -specify

4. How many working hours do you spend per trip, including time of travel to and from, to
collect items from the park? hours

5. How many trips do you make per week? trips


6. How many items do you collects per trip?


items


7. How many people from your household collect items from the park?

8. What is your income from the forest (if any) per month?


persons









APPENDIX B
BANG CAU HOI DIEU TRA HC)

Trubng Thi nguyin Thidn nhidn vB M8i trabng cula Dai hoc Florida thluc hien m~t nghidn
c~ud~ 1p i ua QicGia Cat Ti~n, Viet Nam. DB bi~t vi nhaing y~u t8 anh hubng
d~n c8ng tic bao t~n, cic nghidn c~u vidn se thluc hien m~t cu~c ph6ng vin truc tiep cic
hb sing chung quanh vubn quic gia. Nhting n8ng h8 duqcr chon Ilua mbt cich ng~lu nhidn
di c6 th& thu th~p duqcr thong tin tir nhaing c~ng ding khic nhau chung quanh vubn quic
gia.

Ban di duqcr chon ng~u nhidn tir cic c~ng dong ndy d& ph6ng vin. T8n trong slu ring tu li
nguyin tic bit bu~c trong cu~c dieu tra ndy. SE kh8ng c6 chlu tra lai du~ng hay sai, quan
trong nhilt li slu tra lbi th~t th8 vB thang than se rilt giup ich cho chung t8i. N~u ban c6 thac
mac gi vi cic chlu h6i chla chung t8i, xin vui long li~n 140 vbi cic dorn vi sau dily: B8 m8n
Phit trien N8ng th8n, Dai hoc N8ng Lim Tp H8 Chi Minh, hoic Ban Quan ly vubn Quic
Gia Cat Tidn.

XE: Th8n:

Thbi didm ph6ng vin: Ng~y thing gid:

Tin ngubi tra lbi ph6ng vin. Tu8i Gibi

Nghe" nghiep: (liet ki tit ca)

Trinh d8 van ho8:

Phin I: CAC CAU HOI VE~ DAC DIAM DAN SO XA HOI

1. Xin cho bidt gibi ?
O Nam
O NDi
2. Xin cho bidt din t~c nio?
O Kinh
O Thy
O Hoa
O Sting
O Khic, ndu tin
3. Xin cho bidt ban theo dao nio?
O Ph~lt giko
O C8ng giko
O Tin linh
O Khic, ndu tin
4. Ban di dinh cu b vung ndy duqcr bao nhidu nam r8i?
O Dudi 10 nam
O 20-30 nam
O Horn 30 nam









5. Trinh d8 hoc vin cao nhit?
O L~p 1-5
O L~p 6-9
O L~p 10-12
O Dai hoc
6. Nha ban c6 bao nhidu ngubi (ki ca ban)
O 1-4 ngubi
O 5-8 ngubi
O hon 8 ngubi
7. Thu nhip hidn nay c~la gia dinh ban c~la moi ngubi trong h8 gia dinh?
O It hon VND 1,000,000
O VND 1,000,000 5,000,000
O VND 5,000,000 10,000,000
O Hon VND 10,000,000
8. Ban thu8c vao nh6m tu8i nao?
O 18-29
O 30-39
O 40-49
O 50-59
O tr~n 60
9. Tinh trang h8n nhin c~la ban:
O D8c thin
O C6 gia dinh
o Ly di
O Goa bua


Phin II. CAC CAU HOI VE~ VON XA HC)I
1. Trong s8 nhaing nh6m/doan thi/t8 chtc ki tin dubi day (Danh dau m~t cho mii trabng
ho'p A va B)
1.1. Ban c6 bidt slu hidn dian c~la cac nh6m doan th& trong c8n d88 c~la ban kh8 g?
2.1.Ban c6 thu8c nh6m nao dubi dykh8ng?
Nh6m/Dohn th4/T6 chirc A. Bilt B. Thuoc
Kh8ng Co Kh~ng C6
a. Nh6m T8n Giao
b. H~iN8ng din
c. H8i Phu nti
d. Doan Thanh niin
e. H8i Cuu Chidn binh
f. H8i Phu 150
g.H8i lam vubn
h. Nh6m tin dung
i. Nh6m khac, ki tin:









2. Trong nim vira qua, ban c6 tham gia vio cac hoat dong sau dily v~i nhaing ngubi hang
x6m hay nhaing ngubi khac trong ling nay kh8ng? D~i v~i m~i hoat dong liet k6 dubi dily
cho bidt m~c dO thuang xuyin ma ban tham gia (m8i hoat dong, khoanh tro~n).





a. Su' kien xay ra trong c~ng ding nhu cac li h~i 1 2 3 4 5
(li h~i thu hoach, cung te thin,.)
b. Hoat dong. Nh6m/CLB nhu t8 chtc di cho'i 1 2 3 4 5
c. Hoat dong th& thao nhu thi diu th& thao, cac 1 2 3 4 5
h8i thao
d. H~i hop (nhu hop th8n, hop x6m, ..) 1 2 3 4 5
e. Tiphuin (Khuyn n8n, bao t~n) 1 2 3 4 5
f. Lao dong c8ng ich nhu Teit tr~ng cAy, don v4 1 2 3 4 5
sinh ling. x6m,
g. Hop din d& giai quyet cac vin d& trong c~ng 1 2 3 4 5
d8ng
h. Hop din d& giai quy~t cac vin d& ngoai c~ng 1 2 3 4 5
d8ng
i. Khic, Xin n~u ri 1 2 3 4 5

3. Xin vui lo~ng cho chung t8i bidt ban cam thay t&nov hn htbd a is
du'ng thang didm tir 1 din 5, 1 li Rit kh8ng d~ng 9 (SA), 2 Kh8ng d~ng 9 (D), 3 Sao c~ing
duo'rc (N) 4 D8ng 9 (A), 5 Rat D8ng 9 (SA). Xin khoanh tro~n m~t s8 thich ho'p.
SD D N A SA
a. T8i bidt hiu hit moi ngubi trong. lignd 2 3 4 5
b. Moi nui trong lingnyqun timn din nhau 1 2 3 4 5
c. Moi ngubi trong ling ndy san long giup dG~ nhau khi ho c6 th 1 2 3 4 5
d. Moi ngubi trong ling ndy db~u quan timn din phuc lovi chung 1
cha ho.
e. T8i c6 th~ nurng tua vio h~n x6m bit cih luc nio 12 3 4 5
f. T~i tin tubng do~n thi cha t~i ra quyt dtinh thymgt tai 1 2 3 4 5
g. Ngubi dfin trong ling ndy t8n trong lin nhau. 12 3 4 5
h. N6i chung moi ngubi trong ling ndy s~n sing xfiy dung ling 1 2 3 4 5
tr6 thinh m8t noli sinh sain tit
i. Ngubi dfin trong cang diang ndy db~u tham gia vio cac hoat dtang 1

j.T8i lu8n chio hai h~gx6m cha tai (khi ggp) 1 2 3 4 5
k. C8n diang rfit li an ninh cho tr6 nit. 1 2 3 4 5









1. H~u hit ngubi dfi trong cang diang db~u lim cing vi~c tinh 12345
nguyn cho cong dong
m. T8i ngh? li ngubi dfin trong cang dtang ndy da~u c6 th6 tin 1

n. H~u hit moi ngubi trong x6m giving ndy db~u c6 quan h@ v~Yi 1
nhau qua~cc do~n th~
0. Hfiu hit moi ngubi trong cong dtang ndy da~u tham gia vio cic 1
host d~ng giu ich cho c8ng dtang12
p.DE ding. lian lac v~yi ngubi dfin trong. c8ng. din ny 2 3 4 5
q. N6i chung, ngubi dfin trong cang diang thi thin thin 12 3 4 5
r. T8i bidt m8t vii ngu bi 6 khu dfin cu, ci~n phfin 16n IA ngubi 14 1 2 3 4 5
s. Ngubi dfin trong ctangdnn lu8n lu8n chio hai nhau 1 2 3 4 5
t. Cang diang ndy lu8n tao dtibu ki n cho moi ngubi lim nhaing 12345
c8ng vi c tinh ngu~
u. Ngubi dfin trong cang diang cung nhau giai quy~t nhaing v~n di 1 2 3 4 5
v. H~u hit ngubi dfin trong cang dtang ndy khang camn thiy ho li 1
m8t phin csa cing n
w. Ngubi dfin trong cang diang ndy chung sang ho& thu~in v~Yi 12345
nhau
x. T8i tinh ngyn lim vi c cho ctn dng cha tai 1 2 3 4 5
y. N6i chung, ngubi dfin trong cang diang tufin theo nhaing dtibu 12345
lufit vi n8i uycha c8ng. dtng
z. Rit it ngubi dfin ho& nhgp xi h8i trong. c8n din ny 2 3 4 5
aa. Ngubi dfin trong cang diang 6ng ha nhang nghla ch c6 th 1 2 5
kngtruc tiap c6 lai cho ho nhan c6 lgi cho toin th6 c8ng dang
bb. Nhting ngubi h~ng x6m cha t~i giti mat vii vai tri6 trong cang 12345
dtang
cc. T8i ngh ngui dfin tron ctn dng db~u c6 thi tin tubYng duqcr 1 2 3 4 5
dd. Ngub~i din trong c8n1g dang ndiy cu~ng chiae x hinlg mii quan~ 1 2 3 4 5
timn chung
ee. Hinh dtang clia t~i rit c6 anh huong di~n vi~c Ilm cho cang 12345
dtang trby thinh m8t nori sinh sing tit hen.
ff. C8ng diang IA m8t hin ho cic sic dfin vi vin h6a khic nhau 1 2 3 4 5


Phin III: Tham gia du' an Bao v4 rirng vB Phat trien N8ng th8n
1. Chung t8i muon bidt m~c dO tham gian cula hO gia dinh ban vio


du' an Bao v4 rirng vB phat


trien N8ng th8n. Chung t8i se h6i ban v6 nhaing hoat dong mB ban da tham gia trong suit 12

thang qua.










Trong 12 thing qua ban di ... Kh 8ng C 6

Tham gia cac khoa huin luyen vi bio v4 rirng 1 2
Dw cac bu8i hop thio lugn vi giao keo bio tin 1 2

Tham gia huin luy~n vi quin 19 nguin nu~c 1 2
Tham gia vao quy hoach st drung dit 1 2
Tham gia huin luy~n vi N8ng Lim kit hop 1 2


Tham dlu huin luy~n vi chi ti~n st dung va quin 19 c~y 1 2
ning s~n hang h6a
Duqcr cung cap giong mail va giong duqcr chi thin cho mua 1 2
vu ning nghiep
Tham gia khoa huin luy~n vi chin nubi 1 2


Hoa mang ludi dien 1 2
Tham gia lam d$p ngin 18i 1 2


Huin luy~n vi quin 19 tin drung nho 1 2
Vay m~t khoin ti~n mua phin b6n va thu~c trir shu 1 2


Phin IV: THAI DO VA HANH VI DOI VOsI BAO TON DA DANG SINH HOC
A. THAI DO DOI VOsI BAO TON
1. Xin vui lo~ng cho chung t8i bidt ban cim thiy th& nao vi nhaing phat bidu sau diy, st dlung
thang didm tir 1 din 5; 1 Rit kh8ng dang 9 (SA), 2 Kh8ng dang 9 (D), 3 Sao c~ing duqcr (N) 4
D8ng 9 (A), 5 Rit D8ng 9 (SA). Xin khoanh tro~n m~t s8 thich hop.

I SD D N A SA
a.Ci ~: p h lr~i rii c6 vu bn qu i c g ad b ot n c cloa i cr y va h u kh 1 2 3 4 5 I


2. Ban da tirng tham gia ...


1) Kh8ng


2) C6


3. Ban di ...


1) Kh8ng


2) C6


4. H8 trcr vi tin dung


1) Kh8ng


2) C6










b. M~c did can dit dS~ san xuit ning nghi~p, vi~ec dS giinh di~t nhiml 1
bio v~ cfiy vi thu~ li cfin thi~t
c. Vubn li nibm tu hio cha di~t nubc vi dt giti cho mai tnrung 1
duqcr trong. sach
d. Vubn qucga nen duqcr bio ve cho th# he mai sau 2 3 4 5
e. C~n han chi vi~c chgvt phi cfiy ru~ng v& s~n bin thu ~ I 1 2 3 4 5
f. N~u vi~c s~n bin va chin th8 ductw cho phep trong vubn thi thu 5
hoang si bi bian mfit
g. Bio tan dti liy hit di~t dai cha chhng t8i nin khang co~n di~t canh 1
tic
h. B~yi vi thu~ trong vubn tao phiin t6ai cho chu~ng tai, nin cho phep 12345
s~n bin v~yi su hu~ng din cha c~n b8 vubn
i. N~u dtem di~t trong vubn QG chia cho ngubi dfin dtia phuang thi 1
thit li tit
j. B~yi vi dit d~ lim VQG li ling phi nin chia di~t cho ngubi din 1
dtia phung
k. VQG chi gidnh cho ngubi ngo~ai. Chu~ng t8i thaim chi khang duc 1 2 3 5
vio ban trong vubn
1. VQG chi gianh cho nhang ngubi thich xem thu~, co~n chu~ng t8i 12345
phdi ggp3 nhi~u ric r~i
m. N~ng. dfin ductw hubng. lgi tih change. trinh bio tan 1 2 3 4 5
n. Giao di~t rung dim~u bio quyin sbY h~ju dt cha ngubi dinI 1 2 3 4 5
0. N~ng dfin c6 them thu nh~ip qua cic hoat dtang quin ly bio v 1 2 5
rung
q.Vie c iao di~t ru~ng bio dimu quyin sbY h~jCtu ditai cha tai 1 2 3 4 5
r. T8i c6 th~m thu nhgip nha vio cic hoat dtang quin ly vi bio v 1 2 5

s. T8i ductw hubYng lgi tih vi c tr~ng rimg 6y vhng dtm 1 2 3 4 5


B. HANH VI

1. C6 bao gib ban vio vwbn quic gia chua?
ndu c6 sang chu h6i #13)
2. N~u KHONG, tai sao ban kh8ng vio d6?

a) So' kidm lim b) So' thu dt
d) Kh8ng c6 thbi gian e) Xa qui
3. N~u CO, tai sao ban vio d6?

a) Li~n quan d~n s~c khoe b) S~n bin
d) Culi e) Tha trilu be
g) Khic k6 ra


C6/Kh8ng (N~u kh8ng, sang chu h6i #12,




c) Kh8ng quan tim
d) Nguyin nhin khic- K6 ra


c) Vit li~u lim nh8
o f) Thb cung









4. Moi chuyen di inmg keo dii bao 1Bu, bao g8m ca thbi gian di vB v4, d& thu nh~t lim san trong
vuon quoc gia glo
5. Mit tuin di mily chuyin? chuyin
6. C6 bao nhidu v~t drung duo'cr thu nh~t m~i chuyin v~lt drung


V~lt dung Gib/chuyin Chuyin/tuin S81uo'ng/chuyin T8ngc~ng/thing
C~li

V~lt lieu xily du'ng
V~lt lieu lim d8 th6l c8ng
Mglt ong
Thu s~n

C~y thu8c
Cg chu


C6 bao nhidu ngubi trong h8 di thu hii lim san trong vwbn QG?
Thu nh~p tir rnmg c~la hO gia dinh (neu c6) hang thing?


ngubil
VND











APPENDIX C
FREQUENCY OF RESPONSES ANALYSIS ITEMS

Age


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 18-29 yrs 39 14.4 14.4 14.4
30-39 yrs 93 34.4 34.4 48.9
40-49 yrs 90 33.3 33.3 82.2
50-59 yrs 34 12.6 12.6 94.8
60 yrs and above 14 5.2 5.2 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Male 240 88.9 88.9 88.9
Female 30 11.1 11.1 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0


Education


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Not at all 19 7.04 7.0 7.0
Grade 1-5 108 40.00 40.0 47.0
Grade 6-9 109 40.37 40.4 87.4
Grade 10-12 32 11.85 11.9 99.3
College 2 .74 .7 100.0
Total 270 100.00 100.0



Marital Status


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Single 5 1.85 1.9 1.9
Married 253 93.70 93.7 95.6
Divorced 2 .74 .7 96.3
Widowed 10 3.70 3.7 100.0
Total 270 100.00 100.0


Gender















Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Less than 5M VND 25 9.26 9.3 9.3
5-10M VND 57 21.11 21.1 30.4
10-20M VND 68 25.19 25.2 55.6
More than 20M VND 120 44.44 44.4 100.0
Total 270 100.00 100.0


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 0 2 .7 .7 .7

1 3 1 .1 1 .1 1 .9
2 3 1 .1 1 .1 3.0
3 24 8.9 8.9 11.9
4 19 7.0 7.0 18.9
5 26 9.6 9.6 28.5
6 55 20.4 20.4 48.9
7 60 22.2 22.2 71.1
8 57 21.1 21.1 92.2
9 21 7.8 7.8 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0




Aware of Religious groups


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 73 27.0 27.0 27.0

yes 197 73.0 73.0 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0


Annual Income


TOTAL AWARE















Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 14 5.2 5.2 5.2

yes 256 94.8 94.8 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0



Aware of Women Union


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 30 11.1 11.1 11.1

yes 240 88.9 88.9 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0


Aware of Youth Union


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 59 21.9 21.9 21.9

yes 211 78.1 78.1 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0



Aware of Veteran Union


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 32 11.9 11.9 11.9

yes 238 88.1 88.1 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0



Aware of Old People Union


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 105 38.9 38.9 38.9

yes 165 61.1 61.1 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0


Aware of Farmer Union
















Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 230 85.2 85.2 85.2

yes 40 14.8 14.8 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0



Aware of Red Cross Association


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 64 23.7 23.7 23.7

yes 206 76.3 76.3 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0



Aware of Credit Group


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 141 52.2 52.2 52.2

yes 129 47.8 47.8 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0



TOTAL BELONG


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 0 47 17.4 17.4 17.4

1 37 13.7 13.7 31.1
2 87 32.2 32.2 63.3
3 47 17.4 17.4 80.7
4 37 13.7 13.7 94.4
5 8 3.0 3.0 97.4
6 3 1.1 1.1 98.5
7 3 1.1 1.1 99.6
9 1 .4 .4 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0


Aware of Gardener Association














Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Never 145 53.7 53.7 53.7
Once/year 39 14.4 14.4 68.1
Few times/year 63 23.3 23.3 91.5
Once/month 12 4.4 4.4 95.9
Few times/Month 11 4.1 4.1 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0


b. Activities of clubs/groups


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Never 225 83.3 83.3 83.3
Once/year 28 10.4 10.4 93.7
Few times/year 5 1.9 1.9 95.6
Once/month 11 4.1 4.1 99.6
Few times/Month 1 .4 .4 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0


c. Sport events


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Never 185 68.5 68.5 68.5
Once/year 30 11.1 11.1 79.6
Few times/year 42 15.6 15.6 95.2
Once/month 12 4.4 4.4 99.6
Few times/Month 1 .4 .4 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0


d. Meetings


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Never 10 3.7 3.7 3.7
Once/year 14 5.2 5.2 8.9
Few times/year 166 61.5 61.5 70.4
Once/month 63 23.3 23.3 93.7
Few times/Month 17 6.3 6.3 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0


a. Community events














Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Never 96 35.6 35.6 35.6
Once/vear 75 27.8 27.8 63.3
Few tinles/vear 7() 25.9 25.9 89.3
Once/nlonth 25 9.3 9.3 98.5
Few tinles/Month 4 1.5 1.5 1()(.()
Total 27() 1)(.() 1()(.()


f. Work project

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Never 45 16.7 16.7 16.7
Once/vear 93 34.4 34.4 51.1
Few tinles/vear 99 36.7 36.7 87.8
Once/nlonth 3() 11.1 11.1 98.9
Few tinles/Month 3 1.1 1.1 1()(.()
Total 27() 1)(.() 1()(.()


g. Meeting to resolve problems


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Never 4() 14.8 14.8 14.8
Once/vear 43 15.9 15.9 3().7
Few tinles/vear 135 5).() 5).() 8().7
Once/nlonth 35 13.() 13.() 93.7
Few tinles/Month 17 6.3 6.3 1()(.()
Total 27() 1)(.() 1()(.()


Ethnicity

Ctunulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Kinh 74 27.41 27.4 27.4

Tay 6() 22.22 22.2 49.6
Nung 35 12.96 13.() 62.6
Hoa 4 1.48 1.5 64.1
Stieng 94 34.81 34.8 98.9
Others 3 1.11 1.1 1()(.()
Total 27() 1()(.()( 1()(.()


e. Training


















Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Kinh 74 27.4 27.7 27.7
TayNungHoa 99 36.7 37.1 64.8
Stieng 94 34.8 35.2 100.0
Total 267 98.9 100.0
Missing System 3 1.1
Total 270 100.0


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 205 75.9 75.9 75.9

yes 65 24.1 24.1 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0



Belong to Farmer Union


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 88 32.6 32.6 32.6

yes 182 67.4 67.4 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0


Belong to Women Union


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 233 86.3 86.3 86.3

yes 37 13.7 13.7 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0


Recoded Ethnicity


Belong to Religious groups














Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 232 85.9 85.9 85.9

yes 38 14.1 14.1 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0



Belong to Veteran Union


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 214 79.3 79.3 79.3

yes 56 20.7 20.7 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0



Belong to Old People Union


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 247 91.5 91.5 91.5

yes 23 8.5 8.5 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0



Belong to Gardener Association


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 252 93.3 93.3 93.3

yes 18 6.7 6.7 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0


Belong to Youth Union












Belong to Red Cross Association


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 156 57.8 57.8 57.8

yes 114 42.2 42.2 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0



Belong to Credit Group


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 215 79.6 79.6 79.6

yes 55 20.4 20.4 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0


Gender


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 0 30 11.1 11.1 11.1
Male 240 88.9 88.9 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0


Belong to Women Union


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 240 88.9 88.9 88.9

yes 30 11.1 11.1 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0



Belong to Women Union


Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 245 90.7 90.7 90.7

yes 25 9.3 9.3 100.0
Total 270 100.0 100.0










LIST OF REFERENCES

Agresti, A., and B. Finlay. 1997. Statistical M~ethods for the Social Sciences. 3rd Edition. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1997.

Babble, E. 2001. The Practice ofSocialResearch. 9th Edition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth
Publishing Company.

Barron, D. N. Elizabeth West and M. T. Hannan. 1994. A Time to Grow and a Time to Die:
Growth and Mortality of Credit Union in New York, 1914-1990. American Journal of
Sociology 100:381-349.

Baumgartner, T., & Jackson, A. 1999. Measurement for Evaheation in Physical Education and
Exercise Science (6th ed.). Boston: W.C. Brown.

Betts, K. 1997. Social Capital and Cultural Diversity. Paper presented to the Social Capital
Conference, 11 July, Brisbane.

Boo, E. .1992. The ecotourism; boom: planning for development and nzanagentent. WHN
Technical Paper Series Paper 2, World Wildlife Fund.

Bookbinder, M. P., E. Dinerstein, A. Rijal, H. Cauley, and A. Rajouria. 1998. Ecotourism's
Support of Biodiversity Conservation. Conservation Biology 12 (6), 1399-1404.

Bourdieu, P. 1985. The Forms of Capital. In Handbook of Theory and Research for Sociology of
Education. Ed. J.G. Richardson, pp. 241-58. New York: Greenwood.

Brennan, M.A. and A.E. Luloff. 2007. "Exploring Rural Community Agency Differences in
Ireland and Pennsylvania." Journal ofRural Studies 23(1):52-61.

Carmines, E. and R. Zeller. 1979. Reliability and Validity Assessment. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage
Publications.

Castle E. N. 1998. A conceptual framework for the study of rural places. American Journal of
Agricultural Economics 80: 621-63 1.

Castle, E. N. 2003. "The Social Capital Paradigm: Bridging Across Disciplines An Overview."
American Journal ofAgricultural Economics 85 (5): 1208-1210

Cattell, R. 1966. The Scree Test for the number of factors. M~ultivariate Behavioral Research, 1,
245-276.

Case, R. H. 1960. The Problem of Social Cost. Journal ofLaw and Economics, vol 3, pp. 1-44.

Coleman, J. S. 1988. Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. American Journal of
Sociology, Vol. 94, Supplement s95-sl20.

Coleman, J. S. 1990. Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge: Harvard University Press










Conklin, H. C. 1957. Hanunoo Agriculture: A Report on an Integral System of.1/nlfrln
Cultivation in the Philippines. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations.

Cordes, S., J. Allen, R.C. Bishop, G.D. Lynne, L.J. Robinson, V.D. Ryan and R. Shaffer. 2003.
"Social Capital, Attachment Value, and Rural Development: A Conceptual Framework and
Application of Contingent Valuation." American Journal ofAgricultural Economics 85
(5): 1201-1207

Cramb, R.A. 2004. Social Capital and soil conservation: evidence fr~om the Philippines.
Contributed paper, 48th Annual Conference, Australian Agricultural and Resource
Economics Society, Melbourne, 10-13 February 2004.

Darlington, R. 2006. Factor Analysis. [cited 3 May, 2007]. Available from internet site:
http ://comp9.psych.cornell .edu/darlington/factor.htm

Dasgupta, P. 2000. Economic progress and the idea of social capital. In: Social Capital: A
Multifaceted Perspectives eds. P. Dasgupta, and I. Serageldin. Washington, DC: World
Bank.

Daws, R., A. J. C. van de Kragt and J. M. Orbell. 1990. Cooperation for the benefit ofus? Not
me, or my conscience. In Beyond Selflnterest, ed. J. Mansbridge. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.

DeVellis, R. 2003. Scale Development: Theory and Applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.

Dinh, Thuan D. 2005. Forestry, poverty reduction and rural livelihoods in Vietnamn, MARD:
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. [cited 11 May 2006]. Available from:
http: inne vietnamforestry. org. vn/Research~en.html.

Do, Ha T. 2003. Establishment of TamTTTTTTTT~~~~~~~~~ Dao National Park livelihoods and roles ofwomen.
Case study in Tan Lap village, Dao Tru commune, Lap Thach district, Vinh Phuc
Province: Workshop Proceeding. Hanoi: Research Centre for Gender and Sustainable
Development.

Durbin, J.C. and S.N. Ratrimoarisaona. 1996. Can tourism make a major contribution to the
conservation of protected areas in Madagascar?. Biodiversity Conservation 5 (1996), pp.
345-354.

Durkheim, E., 1965 [1912]. The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life. New York (NY): Free
Press.

Ellickson, R. C. 1991. Order 0I without Law: How Neighbors Settle Disputes. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press.

Foley, M.W. and B. Edwards. 1998. Beyond Tocqueville: Civil Society and Social Capital in
Comparative Perspective. American Behavioral Scientist 42(1): 5-20. Sage Publication.










Fortman, L. and J.W. Bruce, eds. 1988. Whose Trees? Proprietary Dimensions ofForestry.
Boulder and London: Westview Press.

FPRD. 2000. PRA Report: Thong Nhat Conanune, Bu Dang District, Binh Phuoc Province,
Vietnamn.

FPRD. 2001. PRA Report: Doan Ket Conanune, Bu Dang District, Binh Phuoc Province,
Vietnamn.

FPRD. 2001. PRA Report: Dang H~a Conanune, Bu Dang District, Binh Phuoc Province,
Vietnamn.

George, D., and P. Mallery. 2001. SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and
Reference 10.0 Update. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Glaeser, E.L., D. Laibson and B. Sacerdote. 2002. An economic approach to social capital.
Economic Journal Vol. 112 (November), F437-F458. Blackwell Publishers.

Goodwin, H. and I.R. Swingland. 1996. Ecotourism, biodiversity, and local development.
Biodiversity Conservation 5 (1996), pp. 275-276.

Granovetter, M. 1973. The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology 78(6), ppl1360-
1380

Grootaert, C., D. Narayan, V.N. Jones, M. Woolcock. 2004. Measuring social capital: an
integrated questionnaire. (Work Bank Working Paper, no. 18). Washington, DC: World
Bank.

Hair, F., R. Anderson, R. Tatham and W. Black. 2004. Midltivariate Data Analysis (5th ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Harris, J. and P. De Renzio. 1997. Missing Link: The Concept of Social Capital. London:
Development Studies Institute, London School of Economics.

Hayoz, N. and V. Sergeyev. 2003, Social networks in Russian politics. In: Social Capital and the
Transition to Democracy, Badescu, G., Uslaner, E, 46-60. London: Routledge.

Hydon, Goran. 1997. "Civil Society, Social Capital, and Development: Dissection of Complex
Discourse." Study in Comparative hIternational Development. 32 (1): 3-30.

ICEM International Centre for Environmental Management. 2003. Vietnamn National Report on
Protected Areas and Development. Review ofProtected Areas and Development in the
Lower M~ekong River Region. Indooroopilly, Queensland, Australia. [cited May 9, 2006].
Available from: http ://www.mekong-protected-areas. org/ vietnam/docs /vietnam-pad.pdf.

Infield, M. 1988. Attitudes of a rural community toward conservation and a local conservation
area in Natal, South Africa. Biological Conservation. 45:21-46.










IUCN, 1996. Resohttions and recommendations, Montreal: World Conservation Congress
(Canada), 13-23 October, 1996. [updated 25 November 2004; cited 2 September 2006].
Available from: http://www.iucn. org/Resoluti ons/IUCNENx/00000021l.pdf

IUCN, 2003. The Vth IUCN World Park Congress, Durban, South Africa, 8-17 September, 2003.
[updated 25 November 2004; cited 2 September 2006. Available from
http://www.iucn. org/themes/wcpa/wpc2003/

Jacobs, J. 1992. The Death and ife of Great American Cities. New York: Vintage Books.

Jeffreys, M., M. Massoni, and M. O'Donnell. 1997. Student evaluation of courses: Determining
the reliabiliy and validity of three survey instruments. Journal of Nursing Education, 36,
397-400.

Kaiser, H. 1960. The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational
Psychology M\~ea;surentent(20), 141-151.

Klem, Laura. 1995. Path Analysis. In Reading and understanding multivariate statistics, eds. L.
Grimm and P. Yarnold. American Psychological Association, Washington D.C.

Krishna, A. 2000. Creating and harnessing social capital. In Social Capital: A M~ultifaceted
Perspectives, eds. P. Dasgupta and I. Serageldin. Washington DC: World Bank.

Krishna, A. and Uphoff, N. 2002. Mapping and measuring social capital. In The Role of Social
Capital in Development: An Empirical Assessment, eds. C. Grootaert, T. van Bastelaer.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Le, L. V., S. Ziegler, and T. Grever. 2002. Utilization of forest products and environmental
services in Bach Ma National Park, Vietnam. [updated 11 June 2004; cited 2 May 2007].
Available from: http ://www.mekong-protected-
areas.org/vietnam/docs/bach~ma forest_products.pdf).

Lindberg, K. and J. Enriquez. 1994. An Analysis of Ecotourism's Economic Contribution to
Conservation in Belize. Comprehensive Report, Vol. 2. Belize: World Wildlife Fund and
Ministry of Tourism and the Environment.

Martino, D. 2001. Buffer Zones around Protected Area;s: A Brief Literature Review, Issue 14,
Electronic Green Journal, http://egj.1ib .uidaho.edu/egj 15/martino l.html.

Marx, K. 1967. Capital: A Critique ofPoliticalEcononzy. New York, NY: International
Publi shers.

McShane, T. and M. Wells. 2004. Getting Biodiversity Projects to Work: Towards M~ore
Effective Conservation and Development. NY: Columbia University Press.
Narayan, D. and M. F. Cassidy. 2001. A dimensional approach to measuring social capital:
development and validation of a social capital inventory. Current Sociology 49 (2): 59-
102.










Neefjes K., Y. T. Nguyen, T. M. Nguyen and C. M. Van. 2002. An approach of Oxfam Hong
Kong for supporting livelihoods in the buffer zone of Vu Quang Natural Preservation
Zone. Netherlands Research Program VNRP, Proj ect AVA/VIE/94/24, Vinh University
of N ghe An Province. In The sunanary record of an international conference: "Bufferzone
of natural reserves in Vietnamn. Hanoi: Agricultural Publishing House.

Nepal, S. K. and K.E. Weber. 1993. Strugle fo~r Existence: Park -People Conflict in the Royal
Chitwan National ParkP~~~~PPPPP~~~~PPPP Nepal. (HSD Monograph, 28) Bangkok: Asian Institute of
Technology.

Nguyen, San V. and D. Gilmour. 2000. Forest Rehabilitation and Practice in Vietnamn.
Proceedings ofa National Workshop, Hoa Binh, Vietnamn. November 4-5, 1999. IUCN
Vietnam.

Nguyen, Hoi N. and H. N. Tran. 2002. Access of indigenous communities inside the natural
reserve zones and national parks based on the linkage between biodiversity conservation
and culture-diversity conservation. Netherlands Research Program VNRP, Proj ect
AVA/VIE/94/24, Vinh University of Nghe An Province. In The sunmanay record ofan
international conference: "Bufferzone of natural reserves in Vietnamn. Hanoi:
Agricultural Publishing House.

Nguyen, Thu B. 2002. Policies for special-used forest in Vietnam. Forest protection department.
Vietnam Netherlands Research Program-VNRP, Proj ect ALA/VIE/94/24, Vinh University
of N ghe An province. In The sunanary record of an international conference: "Buffer zone
of natural reserves in Vietnamn. Hanoi: Agricultural Publishing House.

North, D. C. .1990. hIstitutions, hIstitutional Change andEconontic Performance. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

Okello, M., S. Ole Seno and B. Wishitemi. 2003. Maasai community wildlife sanctuaries in
Tsavo-Amboseli, Kenya. PARKS 13 (1) 62-75.

01son, M. 1982. The rise and the decline of nations: Economics gain th1 l, .\10.glutlionl and social
rigidities. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Olson, M. 1971. The Logic of Collective Action. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

Ostrom, E. 1994. Constituting social capital and collective action. Journal of TheoreticalPolitics
6(4): 527-562.

Ostrom, E. 1998. A Behavioral Approach to the Rational Choice Theory of Collective Action.
American Political Science Review, vol 92, pp. 1-22.

Ostrom, E., R. Gardner and J. Walker. 1994. Regularities from laboratory and possible
explanation. In Rules, Games, and Conanon Pool Resources, eds. E. Ostrom, R. Gardner
and J. Walker. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.










Persoon, Gerard A. 1992. Research on Local Communities and Forest Use: A Summary. In
Forestry for People and Nature: Field Research and Theory on Environment and
Development in the Cagayan Valley, Philippines, ed. G. A. Persoon. Isabela: Cagayan
Valley Program on Environment and Development.

Pett, M., N. Lackey, and J. Sullivan. 2003. Making Sense ofFactor Analysis: The use ofFactor
Analysis for hIstruntent Development in Health Care Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.

Pham, Quyen B.,H. Q. Truong, T. V. Hoang and H. V. Phan. 1998. Causes of biodiversity loss in
Vietnamn: The sunmanay record of a national workshop. Hanoi: Ministry of Technology and
Science.

Polet, G. 2003. Co-Management in Protected Area Management: the Case of Cat Tien National
Park Southern Vietnam. In Co-Managentent ofNatural Resources in Asia: A
Comparative Perspective, eds. G.A Persoon, D.M.E. Van Est and P.E. Sajise. Copenhagen:
Nordic Institute of Asian Studies

Polet, G. and M. V. Tran. 2003. Developing the Capacity to Manage Protected Areas, the case of
Cat Tien National Park Vietnam. In Capacity Needs to Manage Protected Areas in Asia,
eds. J. Carabias, K. Rao. Arlington: The Nature Conservancy.

Portes, A. 1998. "Social Capital: Its Origin and Applications in Modern Sociology." Annual
Review ofSociology, 24: 1-24.

PPP. 2000. Consolidating Conservation through People 's Participation. Kathmandu: Park
People Program (DNPWC/UNDP).

Pretty, J. 2003. Social Capital and the Collective Management of Resources. Science Vol. 302,
pp. 1912-1914.

Pretty, J. and H. Ward. 2001. Social Capital and the Environment. WorldDevelopnzent 29 (2):
209-227

Pretty, J. and D. Smith. 2004. Social Capital in Biodiversity Conservation and Management.
Conservation Biology 18 (3): 631-638

Primack, R. 1993. Essentials of Conservation Biology. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.

Putnam, R. D. 1993. Making Democracy Work. Civic tradtions~r~rt~r~rt~r~rt~ in modern Italy. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.

Putnam, R. D. 1995. Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital. The Journal of
Democracy, 6:1, pp. 65-78.

Putnam, R.D. 2000. Bowling alone: The collapse and revival ofAnzerican conanunity. New
York: Simon and Schuster.










Rao, K and C. Geisler. 1990. The social consequences of protected areas development for
resident populations. Society and Natural Resources 3: 19-3 2.

Robison, L.J. and J. L. Flora. 2003. The Social Capital Paradigm: Bridging Across Disciplines."
American Journal ofAgricultural Economics 85 (5): 1187-1193

Rodriguez, Luis C. and P. Unai. 2004. Land clearance and social capital in mountain agro-
ecosystems: the case of Opuntia scrubland in Ayacucho, Peru. Ecological Econontics 49
(2004) 243-252.

Rokeach, Milton. 1968. Beliefs, attitudes, and vahtes: a theory of organization and change. 1st
Edition. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Runge, C.F. 1981. Common Property Externalities: Isolation, assurance, and resource depletion
in a traditional grazing context. American Journal ofAgricultural Economics, vol 63, pp.
595-605.

Rustagi, D. and J. Garcia. 2005. Protected Areas in Pandensoniunt: Will optimisation of different
vahues lead to sustainability? ZEF Bonn, Bonn: Center for Development Research
Universitat .

Sanjayan, M. A., S. Shen, M. Jansen. 1997. Experiences With hItegrated Conservation
Development Projects in Asia. World Bank Technical Paper. No.388.

Scherl, L., A. Wilson, R. Wild, J. Blockhus, P. Franks, A. Jeffrey and O. Thomas. 2004. Can
Protected Areas Contribute to Poverty Reduction? Opportunities and Limitations. IUCN,
Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

Scoones, I. 1998. Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: A Framework for Analysis, IDS Working Paper
72, Brighton: Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex.

South African National Parks. SANParks-Official website. [updated 17 May 2007, cited 19 May
2007]. Available from http://www.sanparks. org

Sugden, R. 1986. The Economics ofRights, Co-operation and Welfare. Oxford: Blackwell.

Sunderlin W. and B. T. Huynh. 2005. Poverty alleviation and Forests in Vietnamn. Bogor: Center
for International Forestry Research.

Taylor, M. 1982. Conanunity anarchy and liberty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Vo, Quy. 2002. About buffer zone management in Vietnam: The initial experiences. Vietnam
Netherlands Research Program-VNRP, Project ALA/VIE/94/24, Vinh University of Nghe
An province. In The sunmanay record of an international conference: "Buffer zone of
natural reserves in Vietnamn. Hanoi: Agricultural Publishing House.

Wall, E., G. Ferrazzi, and Schryer. 1998. Getting the Goods on Social Capital. Rural Sociology
63(2).










Wilkinson, Kenneth P. 1991. The Community in Rural America. New York, NY: Greenwood
Press.

Wishitemi, B. 2002. Amboseli/Longido Heartlands, Kenya/Tanzania a community partnership
for conservation and sustainable development. Case Study 7. In Management Guidelines
for IUCN Category VProtectedAreas: Protected Landscapes/Sea scac~pes, ed. A. Phillips,
Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK: IUCN The World Conservation Union.

Woolcock, M. 1998. Social Capital and Economic Development: Towards a Theoretical
Synthesis and Policy Framework. Theory and Society, 27: 15 1-208.

Woolcock, M. 2002. Social capital in theory and practice: Where do we stand? In Social capital
and economic development: Well-being in developing countries, eds. J. Isham, T. Kelly
and S. Ramaswamy, 18-39. Chetlenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publications.

Wu, Bin and J. Pretty. 2004. "Social connectedness in marginal rural China: The Case of farmer
innovation circles in Zhidan, north Shaanxi." Agriculture and Human Values 21: 81-92.









BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Born in a central province of Vietnam, Thuy Nguyen came to study at the University of

Agriculture and Forestry (UAF) in Ho Chi Minh City, where he graduated with a B.S. degree in

agronomy in 1994. Three years later, he received a scholarship from the Ford Foundation to

pursue a master's degree in social development at the Department of Sociology and

Anthropology, Ateneo De Manila University-Philippines. He then returned to his home country

and j oined the UAF as a lecturer, mainly teaching undergraduate courses in the field of rural

development. In 2002, with a four-year fellowship from the Ministry of Education of Vietnam,

he came to the United States to begin the Ph.D. program in interdisciplinary ecology at the

University of Florida and received his Ph.D. in August 2007. He, his wife, and his five-year-old

daughter have benefited from exploring and experiencing American culture. While residing in

the US, his family has expanded by the addition of another daughter. Upon completion of his

studies, he intends to go back to Vietnam and continue as a lecturer with his present employer,

UAF .





PAGE 1

1 ROLE OF SOCIAL CAPITAL IN NATU RAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION: A CASE STUDY OF CAT TIEN NATIONAL PARK IN VIETNAM By THUY NGOC NGUYEN A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2007

PAGE 2

2 2007 Thuy Ngoc Nguyen

PAGE 3

3 To my parents

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Dissertation acknowledgments, such as this one, usually enumerate the people and institutions that made contribu tions to producing the final output Quite frequently, the first ones mentioned are the most important for the author and for the work. I do not feel a need to be different from the traditional di ssertation acknowledgement, except that the last one I mention here is, for me, the most important. I am truly grateful to the following for taking part in the completion of this small piece of academic work. The people in three communes of Dang Ha, Do an Ket, Thong Nhat of Bu Dang District, Binh Phuoc Province, for their cooperation and pa tience during the interviews; my advisor, Dr. Janaki R R Alavalapati, for his gui dance and instructions that pushed me to finish this research at the appropriate time, the members of my committ ee, Dr. Mark A. Brennan, Dr. Brijesh Thapa, Dr. Clyde Kiker, and Dr. Marianne Schmink, for their constructive comments during the defense; the good people in my ho me institution, especially Dr. Luu Trong Hieu, former Director of International Programs, Nong Lam Universit y, for encouraging me to pursue the doctoral program at the University of Florida and Mr Michael Holsinger, former Vietnam Program Manager, IFAS International Programs, Univer sity of Florida for introducing me to the interdisciplinary ecology program. I want to acknowlegde my parents-in-law who cam e to Gainesville to help take care of our children, which allowed me to work full time on my dissertation in the final writing period. My appreciation can not be fully expressed in words. Finally, to my wife, Nga Tri nh, for her presence, graciousness, and love which motivated me to finish my dissertation on time. My beloved daughters, Viet-Phi and Viet-Mi, served as my inspiration while wri ting this dissertation.

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...............................................................................................................4 LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................. ..........8 LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................................ .......10 ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................... ............11 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................13 Statement of Problem........................................................................................................... ..16 Study Objectives............................................................................................................... ......18 Significance of the Study...................................................................................................... ..19 Dissertation Organization...................................................................................................... .20 2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK..........................................................................................21 Theory of Public Goods......................................................................................................... .21 The Free Rider Problem..................................................................................................22 Solutions to Positive and Negative Apathy.....................................................................25 Trust and Collective Action for Common Management........................................................28 Commons Management as an Assurance Problem.........................................................28 Establishing Trust through Verbal and Face-to-Face Communication...........................29 Feedback through Everyday Social Interaction...............................................................31 Social Capital and Natura l Resources Conservation..............................................................32 Social Capital................................................................................................................. ..32 Social Capital and Natura l Resource Conservation.........................................................35 Household Characteristics and Social Capital.................................................................36 3 BACKGROUND INFORMATI ON OF THE STUDY SITE................................................38 National Parks in the World...................................................................................................38 Bufferzones.................................................................................................................... .........39 National Parks in Vietnam: An Overview..............................................................................40 Political Context..............................................................................................................40 The Profiles of National Parks........................................................................................42 National Park and Bufferzone.........................................................................................42 The Study Site: The Cat Tien National Park..........................................................................43 Forest Protection and Rural De velopment (FPRD) project.............................................47 The Commune Profiles....................................................................................................49 The Thong Nhat Commune......................................................................................49 The Dang Ha Commune...........................................................................................51

PAGE 6

6 The Doan Ket Commune..........................................................................................52 Ethnographical Sketch of Population Li ving in the Three Study Communes.................54 Stieng ethnic.............................................................................................................54 Tay, Nung, Hoa, Muong, Man, Dao, Cao Lan, San Diu ethnic minorities..............55 Kinh people..............................................................................................................56 Indigenous Ethnic Grou ps in Transition..........................................................................57 Changes in community structure..............................................................................57 Indigenous knowledge system.................................................................................57 Changing characteristics of fa mily, household and community..............................57 Communes people committee.................................................................................60 Summary........................................................................................................................ .........61 4 METHODOLOGY.................................................................................................................62 Conceptual Framework...........................................................................................................62 Unit of Analysis............................................................................................................... .......64 Sampling Methods............................................................................................................... ...64 Survey Instrument/Questionnaire Development and Research..............................................65 Survey Pre-test................................................................................................................ ........66 Administration of the Survey..................................................................................................67 Concepts and Variables......................................................................................................... .67 Community Group/Social Or ganization Membership.....................................................68 Involvement in Comm unity Activities............................................................................68 Perception of the Community..........................................................................................68 Participation in Conservation-Related Activities of the Forest Protection and Rural Development Project....................................................................................................69 Conservation Attitudes....................................................................................................70 Perceptions about biodiv ersity conservation............................................................70 Issues/ problems associated with biodiversity conservation....................................71 Impacts of conservation activities............................................................................71 Control Variables/Demographics....................................................................................71 Data Compilation............................................................................................................... .....72 Factor Analysis................................................................................................................ .......73 Linear Regression Models......................................................................................................75 Logistic Regression Models...................................................................................................76 Summary........................................................................................................................ .........77 5 DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS....................................................................................78 Frequency of Response Data..................................................................................................78 Socio-demographic Characteristics.................................................................................78 Respondent Awareness of Group s Existence in Community........................................80 Community Groups/Social Organization Membership...................................................80 Involvement in Comm unity Activities............................................................................82 Identifying Dimensions of Social Capital and Conservation Attitude...................................85 Social Capital Dimensions..............................................................................................85 Conservation Attitude Dimensions..................................................................................89

PAGE 7

7 Analysis of Social Capital Dimensions..................................................................................92 Ethnic Groups..................................................................................................................93 Religious Groups.............................................................................................................94 Length of Residency........................................................................................................95 Education...................................................................................................................... ...95 Household Income...........................................................................................................96 Age............................................................................................................................ ......96 Analysis of Conservation Attitude..........................................................................................97 Ethnic Groups..................................................................................................................97 Religion....................................................................................................................... ....98 Length of Residency........................................................................................................99 Education...................................................................................................................... ...99 Household Income.........................................................................................................100 Linear Regression Modeling.................................................................................................100 Logistic Regression Modeling..............................................................................................106 Summary........................................................................................................................ .......114 6 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS...................................................................................116 Overview....................................................................................................................... ........116 Summary of the Findings and Results..................................................................................116 Membership and Local Groups/Organizations..............................................................117 Effect of Social Capita l on Conservation Attitude........................................................117 Household Participation in Conservation Activities.....................................................120 Policy Implications............................................................................................................ ...121 Recommendations for Encouraging House holds Participation in Conservation Activities..................................................................................................................... ......124 The Limitations of the Study................................................................................................125 Future Works................................................................................................................... .....126 APPENDIX A HOUSEHOLD SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRES.................................................................127 B B NG CU H I I U TRA H .......................................................................................134 C FREQUENCY OF RESPONSES ANALYSIS ITEMS.......................................................141 LIST OF REFERENCES.............................................................................................................150 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.......................................................................................................158

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF TABLES Table page 3-1 Timeline of the development of national park in Vietnam................................................41 3-2 Demographic data for the three selected communes.........................................................53 5-1 Frequencies of socioeconomic ch aracteristics for all respondents....................................79 5-2 Frequency of participation in commun ity events and other groups or activities (n=270)........................................................................................................................ .......83 5-3 Factor loadings of social capital dimensions.....................................................................87 5-4 Reliability Analysis fo r social capital dimensions.............................................................88 5-5 Factor loadings of cons ervation attitude dimensions.........................................................90 5-6 Reliability analysis for c onservation attitude dimensions.................................................91 5-8 Comparison of social capital co mponents among different ethnic groups........................94 5-9 Comparison of social capital components among religions groups...................................94 5-10 Comparison of social capital comp onents between length of residency...........................95 5-11 Comparison of social capital compon ents between levels of education............................96 5-12 Comparison of social capita l components between incomes.............................................96 5-13 Comparison of social cap ital components between ages...................................................97 5-14 Comparison of conservation atti tude among different ethnic groups................................98 5-15 Comparison of conservation attit ude between different religions.....................................98 5-16 Comparison of conservation attit ude between length of residency...................................99 5-17 Comparison of conservation attitude co mponents between levels of education.............100 5-18 Comparison of conservation atti tude between different incomes....................................100 5-19 Linear regression models for conservation attitude variables..........................................103 5-20 Linear regression models for conservation attitude variables..........................................105 5-21 Logistic regression analysis of households participation in c onservation activities......109

PAGE 9

9 5-22 Logistic regression analysis of households participation in c onservation activities......111 5-23 Logistic regression analysis of households participation in c onservation activities......113

PAGE 10

10 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 2-1 Classifying goods based on the degr ee of excludability and rivalry.................................21 2-2 Conceptual framework expl aining the rationale for social capital in collective action.....24 3-1 Location of the study sites................................................................................................ .44 4-1 Conceptual framework to examine th e relationship among selected variables.................63 4-2 Sampling approach followed to sel ect communes, hamlets, and households....................65 5-1 Respondents awareness of lo cal groups and organizations..............................................81 5-2 Relative frequency of respondents aff iliation to local groups and organizations.............81 5-3 Percentage of respondents belonged to number of groups/associations (n=273)..............82 5-4 Number of members of each group/organization..............................................................82

PAGE 11

11 Abstract of Dissertation Pres ented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy ROLE OF SOCIAL CAPITAL IN NATURA L RESOURCE CONSERVATION: A CASE STUDY OF CAT TIEN NATIONAL PARK IN VIETNAM By Thuy Ngoc Nguyen August 2007 Chair: Janaki R.R. Alavalapati Major: Interdisciplinary Ecology The Cat Tien National Park (CTNP) is one of the last remaining lowland jungles in Vietnam, which possesses unique biodiversity in cluding the last surviv ing population of the Vietnamese Javan Rhinoceros ( Rhinoceros sondaicus annamiticus ). People inhabiting in and around the CTNP belong to diverse ethnic group s with different histories, administrative systems, and land use strategies. One of the Wo rld Banks projects entitled Forest Protection and Rural Development Project (FPRDP), is be ing implemented in the buffer zone of CTNP with a dual objective of sustaini ng the CTNP and improving the live lihoods of local inhabitants. However, conservation and manage ment of CTNP, a typical public or collective good, is not a trivial task. Drawing from the literature on public goods and collec tive action, this study explores the role of social capital on hous eholds conservation attitude a nd participation in conservation programs. More specifically, this study explores the relatio nships among households sociodemographic variables, social cap ital, conservation attitude, and participation in the FPRDP for those inhabiting in and around the bufferzone of the CTNP. Data from 270 households representing nine villages were collecte d, using a structured questionnaire and a face-to-face interview method, to achieve the study objective. A three level stratified random sampling approach was followed to account for spatial and ethnic diversity of

PAGE 12

12 households living around the park. Fa ctor analysis was employed to identify eight social capital components and four conservation attitude compone nts and the identified components were used to construct social capital and conservation att itude indices. Multivariate regression techniques were used to determine the effect of social capital and other socio-demographic variables on household attitudes toward conservation of CTNP. Logistic regression models were used to determine the effect of social capital, demogr aphic variables, and conservation attitude on households participation in the FPRDP. Results suggest that education, social cohesi on, familiarity, and social integration have positive and significant impacts on households perc eived benefit of conservation. Households that scored high on voluntary cooperation and soci al integration variable s tend to perceive less direct use benefits from the park. Households with higher social commitment and community support indices feel more secure about forestland ownership. Results also show that land tenure security can improve participati on in conservation activities. Impor tant implications of this study include (1) a policy or program to increase social capital in general with emphasis on efforts to enhance social networks among households in and around CTNP; and (2) government should create a land tenure regime that better encourages households to participate in conservation activities.

PAGE 13

13 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Managing human impacts on national parks has been a major challenge for government agencies and other natural resources managers (Rao and Geisler, 1990). This task is more challenging in developing countries such as Vietnam because local human populationsbeing driven by povertyoften rely primarily on protect ed areas for their liv elihood (Polet, 2003). The issue becomes even more complex if protected ar eas are created on the same land that has been traditionally used by local communities for genera tions (Primack, 1993). The decision of natural resources management, therefore, can affect a num ber of different stakeholders and may affect them differently, especially where res ources are scarce or of high value. In order to address this issue, since 1980s, conserva tion organization have been implementing approaches that aim to build s upport among local communities by sharing social and economic benefits from protected areas (N guyen and Tran, 2002). Scherl et al. (2004) have summarized these approaches in protected areas which have been implementing in the world. Such approaches include (1) in tegrated conservation and devel opment projects; (2) inclusive management approaches; and (3) community conser vation areas. The goals of these initiatives include ensuring that local communities derive benefits from protected areas; compensating local people for depriving their access to protected area s, and providing altern ative income sources that would allow them to benefit economica lly from conservation while refraining from environmentally dest ructive practices. Integrated conservation and development pr ojects (ICDPs) approaches aim at building support among local communities by sharing social and economic benefits from protected areas. In practice, evidence suggests that the equitable distributi on of financial and so cial benefits from protected areas can be problematic; for instance, it is often not enough to assume that community

PAGE 14

14 leaders will assure that benefits will accrue to the neediest pe ople. However, in Africa, ICDPs have shown that accountability is improve d if whole communities, including women, are involved in decision-making (Sherl et al., 2004). More specifically, McShane and Wells (2004) have summarized the main shortcomings of IC DPs which lead to lack of success because of failures in identifying, ne gotiating, and implementing trade-offs between the interests and claims of multiple stakeholders; focus on activities of social programs and income creation through alternative livelihoods rather than impacts on biodiversity; and a ddressing local symptoms while ignoring underlying policy constr aints or conversely dealing w ith macro-level issues while ignoring local realities. Sherl et al. (2004) also expl ain Inclusive Management Approaches as a form of collaborative management between local communities and technical advisors to ensure that local communities have a major stake in decision-maki ng and receive a major share of the benefits from protected areas. The increased empowermen t, skills and trust between local communities and technical advisors in Kwazu la Natal of South Africa are noted as the ingredients to the success of this approach (Sherl et al., 2004). Community Conserved Areas (CCAs) are defined as natural and modified ecosystems, including significant biodiversit y, ecological services and cultura l values, voluntarily conserved by indigenous and local communities through cu stomary laws or other effective means (Excerpted from Recommendation 5.26. Vth IUCN World Parks Congress 2003). The term as used here connotes a broad and ope n approach to categorizing such community initiatives, and is not intended to constrain the ability of communities to conserve their areas in the way they feel appropriate. Community conserved areas are managed by indigenous and local communities through customary laws or other effective mean s. Wishitemi (2002) and Okello et al. (2003)

PAGE 15

15 found that in Kenya and Tanzania, local communiti es can gain benefits and participate at all levels of management in a range of conservati on and ecotourism enterprises. However, McShane and Wells (2004) assert that community conserva tion initiatives can only work when they are supported by national policy and a legislative environment that en able devolution of meaningful authority and responsibility for natural resource s. Sherl et al. (2004), in terms of the above approaches, note critically that they may cont ribute towards reducing po verty through social empowerment and provision of financial benefits to communities in and around protected areas, but they are rarely enough to ach ieve significant poverty reduction. Even though there are several diffe rent principles in all of th ese approaches, they all share a common interest on building trust between loca l communities, creation of local groups and enhancement of networks among communities, commonl y referred to as social capital. It is also thought that this social capital would influence behavior toward s collective actions such as participation in protected areas management (PPP, 2000). The concept of social capital has emerged in the recent years as a theoretical framework that explains successes in cons ervation and developm ent initiatives in developing countries (Pretty, 2003). To understand social capital as an applied concept, Scoones (1998), in his analysis of sustainable livelihoods frameworks, distinguishes five form s of capitalnatural, physical, financial, human, and social. In simple terms, natural capital is what you find, physical capital is what you make, financial capital is wh at you save, human capital is what you know and social capital is whom you know. In the cont ext of environmental conservation and rural development, the strategies of intervention prescr ibed by these applied con cepts of social capital also mean promoting the creation of and strengthening of local groups (community associations, cooperatives, farmer groups, et c.) and their empowerment thr ough participatory methods as a

PAGE 16

16 strategy to transform their practic es and social organizations into sustainable and socially just systems (Pretty and Ward, 2001). Through the cr eation and support of local groups, building social capital is a viable mechanism to generate collective practices of natural resources (Pretty, 2003). Thus, participatory management of prot ected areas has been proposed by scholars of common property as the most vi able option for combining pove rty reduction, enhancement of local level economic development and bi odiversity conserva tion (Pretty, 2003). Statement of Problem In Vietnam, several environmentally sensit ive areas have been declared as natural conservation zones and national parks. Severa l communities inhabit the bufferzones of the natural conservation zones and national parks an d most of them are poor and little educated. Their subsistence depends on forest products an d the related ecosystem. They are generally indigenous peoples or resettled people. About 90% of hunting and collection of forest products activities are being carried out by these people in the bufferzone. Furthermore, farming practices of these people tend to employ a low level of technology and thus agricu ltural productivity of these practices are low (Nguyen, 2002). According to Sunderlin and Huynh (2005), ther e is a high incidence of poverty in the remaining stands of natural forest, and forest re sources still play an im portant role in poverty alleviation of local communities. However, they do not discuss how forest resources can contribute to the income of local people. The research on forestry, pove rty reduction and rural livelihoods in Vietnam by Dinh (2005) indicates that local communities who depended on forests have high poverty rates. Specifi cally the study noted that there exists conflict between forest protection and biodiversity conservation and peoples living improvement. Bufferzones are designed to filter out negati ve external influences upon core zones of protected areas. Bufferzones can help isolate the core zones from surrounding agriculture,

PAGE 17

17 diseases, and noise, air, and soil pollution (I UCN, 2003). The complexity associated with bufferzones was a main motivation for hosting the international conference on the bufferzones of protected areas in Vietnam. The summary reco rd of the conference ( published in 2002) is considered as literature for arguments. On th at summary record, Vo (2002) overviewed the problems of bufferzone management including the human complex, poverty, low education, and the dependence of people on forest. He also argued local people must participate in the projects which are implemented in the bufferzones. Pham et al. (1998) found that to achieve the objectives of national parks and natural reservation zones, managers should not create the conflicts between conservation and local communities In addition, Neefies et al. (2002) revealed that poverty leads to natural res ource degradation and be lieved that projects and programs that improve peoples living condition will reduce human pressure on protected areas. The study in the bufferzone of Tam Dao Na tional park by Do (2003) found that the establishment and subsequent extension of th e park caused a significan t loss of productive land for local people. Local people living nearby lost access to the parks and to collecting forest products for household consumption. People also lost their grazing lands, and in some cases they were forced to illegally explo it timber for construction, firewood and for coffins. The research in Bach Ma National Park by Le et al. (2002) also found that forest products play an important role in supporting the livelihoods of marginal and po or households. They note that the majority of local people appreciate the benef its of biodiversity conservation in terms of water storage and erosion control. However, they do not explai n how to shift from a protective conservation approach to encouraging local people to sustainably use and conserve resources. Various studies on sustainable rural devel opment (Pretty 1995, Dasgupta 2000, Pretty and Ward 2001, Krishna and Uphoff 2002) have used social capital as an indicator for institutional

PAGE 18

18 results of projects aimed at sustainable rural de velopment and conservation at the local level. Social capital was incorporated as an indicato r of successful interventi on and therefore became the new conceptual framework for the strategy of community development and empowerment. It is thought that social bonds and norms are critical for sustainabilityand wh ere social capital is high in formalized groups, people have confidence to invest in collective activities, knowing that the others will do so too (Pretty 2003). This research project will add to that body of knowledge by assessing how social capital affects the attitude of households toward biodiver sity conservation in the Cat Tien National Park (CTNP) in Vietnam. It will also attempt to an alyze the relationship between social capital and households participation in conservation activitie s associated with the Forest Protection and Rural Development (FPRD) projecta project. This project was starte d a few years ago and impacted the communities who reside in the buffe rzone of the Cat Tien National Park, Vietnam one of the last remaining lowland jungles whic h holds the last surviving population of Javan Rhinocerus on mainland Asia. Study Objectives Using social capital as an exogenous variable, the researcher seeks to address the general question: How do households social capital a ffect households attitude towards Cat Tien National Park? Specifically, this study attempts to explore the following questions: How does households social capit al affect the households co nservation attitude towards Cat Tien National Park? How does households social capit al affect the households pa rticipation in conservation activities of the FPRD project? How does households conservati on attitude affect the hou seholds participation in conservation activities of the FPRD project?

PAGE 19

19 In the process of exploring the above resear ch questions, the followi ng objectives will be pursued: to provide a theoretical rational fo r studying social capital in improving conservation attitude of local hous eholds in the CTNP in Vietnam to identify dimensions of households so cial capital and conservation attitude toward CTNP, Vietnam to quantify the relationships among dimens ions of social capital and conservation attitude to predict the effect s of social capital and cons ervation attitude on households participation in conservation activities To develop a better picture of the study popul ation, other demographic variables will be included in the analysis of soci al capital and conservation attit ude such as ethnicity, religion, length of residency, education, inco me, age, marital status, gender. Significance of the Study As the study seeks to examine how social capital affects the a ttitude of households toward biodiversity conservation in the national pa rk, results of this stud y helps develop policies to improve conservation and development in the bu fferzone of CTNP in Vietnam. Moreover, this study generates additional knowledge of the human population characteristics of the Cat Tien National Park, thus helping manage rs to better manage the par k. Especially, data on ethnicity may help government and donor agencies plan de velopment interventions. Local perspectives on development and conservation, which will be coll ected in this study, will help develop action plans. Finally, this study will provide knowledge about social capital liter ature in Vietnam a socialist country that is experiencing socioeconomi c transformation due to its integration into the world economy. That would help to compare Vi etnam with post-communist countries (Hayoz and Sergeyev, 2003).

PAGE 20

20 Dissertation Organization This study consists of five chapters. After this introductory chapter, Chapter 2 will 1) review relevant theories of public goods and co llective action, 2) disc uss how social capital influences collective action, and 3) analyze resear ch related to social capital and conservation. Chapter 3 presents the background of the study, including an overview of national parks of Vietnam, the Cat Tien National Park (the study site) and a disc ussion of the Forest Protection and Rural Development Project (FPRD). Chapter 4 presents a conceptual framework that guides the research and discusses the me thodologies used to collect and an alyze data. Chapter 5 presents the results of the analyses. Specifically, results from descriptive statistics, factor analyses, and linear and logistic regression analyses relating to social capital, cons ervation attitude, and participation in the FPRD are presented and discussed. Finally, Chapter 6 provides a brief summary with conclusions and policy implications.

PAGE 21

21 CHAPTER 2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK This chapter analyzes the role of social capital in the manageme nt of collective goods. Specifically, this chapter 1) discusses the theory of public goods, 2) explores how trusta key component of social cap italrelates to collective action, and 3) reviews research related to social capital and resource conservation. Theory of Public Goods Paul Samuelson was the first economist to develop a theory of public goods. In his seminal work, Samuelson (1954) notes that one of the characteristics of a pub lic good is non-rivalry when a good is consumed by a person, the amount of that good will not be reduced for other people to consume. Another char acteristic of a public good is nonexcludability. This means that once the good is in place, it is very difficult (if not impossible) to prevent others from consuming that good. Fresh air and a light house, for instan ce, may be considered as public goods because they possess the above two characteristics Although there may be no such goods as completely non-rival or non-excludable goods, thes e represent one end of the continuum while private goods, which are rival and excludable, represent the other end. Both communal (or collective) goods and toll goods can be shown to exist somewh ere between the two ends of continuum (Figure 2-1). Figure 2-1. Classifying goods based on the degree of ex cludability and rivalry Non-excludable Non-rival Excludable Rival Public goods (fresh air, light house) Communal goods (community lakes, grazing areas) Toll goods (toll ways, club goods ) Private goods (cakes, books, clothes)

PAGE 22

22 This representation allows us to perceive th at it is possible to c onvert typical public goods into communal goods or toll goods or perhaps even private goods or vice-a-versa. Privatization of a national forest is an example of a tr ansformation of a public good into a private good. From a market perspective, both public a nd communal goods suffer from under supply and over use. Non-excludability and ill-defined property rights provide little motivation and fewer incentives for individuals to inve st their resources in the supply of these goods. As such, markets cannot supply these goods at socially desira ble levels. Although one could argue that transformation of public and communal goods into ei ther toll or private goods can address this problem, there are often environmental, social and ethical factors that preclude such transformations. For examples, privatization of a communal lake (e.g., for fishing), might alleviate the problems of over use but may still generate significant social and ethical problems. This suggests that sustainable management of pubic and communal goods is a challenging task and therefore exploring stra tegies to address this challenge is important. The Free Rider Problem In the process of production and consumption of a private good1, each rational individual is expected to allocate his/her time and resour ces in an optimal manner, given the context. Collectively speaking, it is conc eivable that private goods are both produced and consumed at socially desirable levels. In the context of a public or communal good (in terms of both production and consumption) indi viduals make rational decisions in allocating their scarce resources. However, collectively they fail to pr oduce and/or consume these goods at a socially optimum level. Many researchers have investigat ed this dilemma in various contexts (Olson (1971), Ostrom (1998) for more details). 1 In the face of well defined property rights, perfect compe tition, perfect information, and no externalities, markets will ensure optimum allocation of resources for the production and consumption processes.

PAGE 23

23 In the context of a public or collective good (whether produced or consumed), research suggests that individuals do not al locate resources at optimum levels because of negative apathy or positive apathy (Figure 2-2). Positive apathy is a situation wherein an individual in a large group will reason that the collect ive good (goal) will be produced (achieved) without his/her contribution because others will contribute. In ot her words, an individual thinks that his/her limited or non-existent contributio n is insignificant and the contri bution of others will lead to optimal production of the collect ive good. This situation is also commonly known as the free rider problem. Negative apathy is a situation wherein an individual in a large group will reason that the collective good (goal) wi ll not be produced (achieved) w ith his/her contribution because others will not contribute. In other words, production of the collect ive good will not result because an individual concludes th at his/her contribution is insi gnificant, while the contribution of others is limited or non-existe nce. Either way, individuals are le ss likely to contribute to the production of a collective good, with the result that the socially op timal level is unattained. In making consumption decisions about a coll ective good, similar reas oning suggests that individuals are more likely to over use a collective good there by resulting in a tragedy of commons situation. In economics, both positive and negative apathy are extensively studied through prisoners dilemma or game theory models (Nash (1996), Fudenberg (1991) for more details).2 2 Game theory is a group of mathematical theories first developed by John Von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern (1953). A game consists of a set of rules governing a co mpetitive situation in which from two to n individuals or groups of individuals choose strategies designed to maximize their own winnings or to minimize their opponent's winnings; the rules specify the possible actions for each pl ayer, the amount of information received by each as play progresses, and the amounts won or lost in various situations

PAGE 24

24 Figure 2-2. Conceptual framewor k explaining the rationale for so cial capital in collective action Negative Apathy Individuals Households Communities Nations Tragedy of Common/ Public Goods Conservation Attitude and Cooperation Behavior in Production and Consumption of Collective/ Public Goods. Sustainability of Common/ Collective Goods Excessive behavior in Common/ Public good Consumption Limited Contribution or Participation in Production of Collective/ Public Goods Positive Apathy Formal Institutions Sanction Quotas Tax Social Capital Trust Cohesion Environmental Education: Raise Altruism Informal Institutions Norms Sanctions Beliefs

PAGE 25

25 Solutions to Positive and Negative Apathy Several solutions have been proposed to address positive and negative apathy. They include decentralization, provision of selective incentives/pen alties, and raising altruism of individuals. Olson (1971) listed several factors influencing pu blic participation (can be considered as collective good) in large groups. Fi rstly, the outcome of group action must be of great value to the individual; secondly, partic ipation must serve both collective and private interests (selective incen tive, monetary and non-monetary, to individual would help); and finally costs must decline to individuals for participatin g in the collective action. These factors are more likely to come together in small groups where individuals know each other very well and tend to collaborate in collective action. This may be one of the argumen ts for decentralized decision making. Dominant assurance contracts are contracts in which participants make a binding pledge to contribute to a contract for building a public good, contingent on a quorum of a predetermined size being reached. Otherwise their money is refunded. A dominant assurance contract is a variation in which an entreprene ur creates the contract and ref unds the initial pledge plus an additional sum of money if the quor um is not reached. In game theory terms this makes pledging to build the public good a dominant strategy: the be st strategy is to pl edge to the contract regardless of the actions of others. The Coasian solution proposes a mechanism by which potential beneficiaries of a public good band together and pool their re sources based on their willingne ss to pay to create the public good. Coase (1960) argued that if the transacti on costs between potential beneficiaries of a public good are sufficiently low, and it is therefor e easy for beneficiaries to find each other and pool their money based on the valu e of public good to them, then an adequate level of public goods production can occur even under competitive free market conditions.

PAGE 26

26 If voluntary provision of public goods will not work, then the obvious solution is making their provision involuntary. One genera l solution to the problem is for governments or states to impose taxation to fund the production of public g oods. The difficulty is to determine how much funding should be allocated to different public goods, and how the costs should be split. Sometimes the government provides public goods using "unfunded mandates." An example is the requirement that every car be fit with a catalytic converter. This may be executed in the private sector, but the end result is predeter mined by the state: the individually involuntary provision of the public good (e.g., clean air). A government may subsidize production of a public good in the private sector. Unlike government provision, subsidies may result in so me form of competitive market. The potential for cronyism (for example, an alliance between political inside rs and the businesses receiving subsidies) can be limited with secret bidding for the subsidies or applic ation of the subsidies following clear general principles. Depending on the nature of a public good and a related subsidy, principal agent problems can arise between the citizens and the government or between the government and the subsidized producers; this effect and c ounter-measures taken to address it can diminish the benefits of the subsidy. Subsid ies can also be used in areas with a potential for non-individualism. For instance, a state may s ubsidize farmers to maintain certain forest coverage on their farm to protect the watershed. The study of collective action shows that public goods are still produced when one individual benefits more from the public good th an it costs him/her to produce it. A group that contains such individuals is called a privileged group. A strate gy to overcome the free rider problem in this case is to simply eliminate the profit incentive for free riding by buying out all the potential free riders, making th e marginal social benefit meet the marginal social cost

PAGE 27

27 because in this case, they are equivalent to th e private marginal benefits and costs. While the purchase of all potential free ri ders may solve the problem of underproduction due to free riders in smaller markets, it may simultaneously in troduce the problem of underproduction due to monopoly. Additionally, some markets are simply too large to make a buyout of all beneficiaries feasiblethis is particularly visible with public goods that affect everyo ne in a country. Another solution, which has evolved for info rmation goods, is to create intellectual property laws, such as copyright or patents, covering the public goods. These laws attempt to remove the natural non-excludability by prohibi ting reproduction of th e good. Although they can solve the free rider problem, the downside of th ese laws is that they imply private monopoly power and thus are not Pareto-optimal. For exampl e, in the United States, the patent rights given to pharmaceutical companies encourage them to ch arge high prices (above marginal cost), to advertise to convince patients to nag their doctors to prescrib e the drugs, to sue even mild imitators in court, and to lobby for the extension of patent righ ts in a form of rent seeking. Finally, an approach that is increasingly recognized by so cial scientists to overcome collective goods production and consumption pr oblems is to promote social capital among individuals, communities, and corporate actors. If enough people do not think like free-riders, the private and voluntary provision of public goods may be successful. A free rider might litter in a public park, but a more public-spi rited individual would not do s o, getting an inherent pleasure from helping the community. In fact, an altruis tic person might voluntarily pick up some of the existing litter. If enough people do so the role of the state in us ing taxes to hire professional maintenance crews is reduced. This might imply that even someone typically inclined to freeriding would not litter, since th eir action would have such an obvious cost. Altruism may be encouraged by non-market solutions such as tr adition and social norms. Therefore, raising

PAGE 28

28 altruism also means creating social capit al. The following sections will discuss how trustworthiness of social stru ctures, information channels; an d norms and effective sanctions (components of social capital) solve colle ctive good problems using natural resource management examples. Trust and Collective Action for Common Management This section explains how trust, itself a collective good, can be provi ded spontaneously in the light of the theory of collective action for commons management. The common-pool resources may be owned by national, regiona l or local governments as public goods, by communal groups as common property resources, or by private individuals or corporations as private goods. Commons Management as an Assurance Problem The problems of collective action in comm ons management are often described as assurance problems. The contribution of an individua l to a collective action will be more likely if there is an assurance that others will also contribute. These assurance problems can be solved through voluntary cooperation to th e extent that group members trus t one another to reciprocate their cooperation. Trust is a key component of socia l capital. defined by Putnam as features of social organization, such as trust, norms, and netw orks that can improve the efficiency of society by facilitating coordinated actions Trust itself is a public good and its provisions constitute a second-order social dilemma. Runge (1981) argued that establishing assu rance (or trust) is needed to solve this second-order social dilemma faced by members of a group through strategies of reciprocity. S ugden (1986), however, observed that players follow reciprocity strategies depend on the basis of trust that ot her will reciprocate. A doption of reciprocity strategies as a solution to a groups assurance prob lem thus entails the third-order social dilemma of establishing enough trust to make those strategies attractive.

PAGE 29

29 Ostrom (1998) studied how to create enough social capital in the form of trust for reciprocity to bring about vol untary cooperation in a large gr oup assurance problem. She found that each individual assesses subjectively the tr ustworthiness of those with whom they share the assurance problem. This subjective assessment is reassessed over time in the light of how others reputations are affected by unfoldi ng evidence of how they have prac ticed reciprocity. Therefore, trust and reciprocity mutually reinforce one another through positive feedbacks. When an individual perceives that reciprocity has increas ed, this strengthens her trust that others will reciprocate cooperation in the fu ture. This provides her own incen tive to practice reciprocity. Practicing reciprocity enhances her reputation, thereby increasing others trus t in her and ready to practice reciprocity with her. Conversely, perceptions that adop tion of reciprocity has declined will weaken the trust and thus the reciprocity. Trust, reciproc ity and voluntary cooperation can thereby strengthen and weaken through spontaneous social dynami cs. Betts (1997, p.2) observed a group can become engaged in a virtuous circ le of reciprocal exchanges where trust and collaboration beget more trust a nd collaboration, or a vicious circ le where defection and betrayal lead to more of the same. Establishing Trust through Verbal and Face-to-Face Communication The assumption in the prisoners dilemma game theory is that individuals sharing an assurance problem are unable to communicate verb ally prior to making their choices. This assumption is obviously unrealistic for many assura nce problems where there is scope for each player to communicate verbally with at least some other players. This scope can allow a group facing a collect ive action problem to reduce its costs of organizing significantly in reachi ng a shared understanding of the problem and in agreeing to a solution that clarifies the pa rticular kind of cooperation expected from each group member. Sometimes, it may not be immediately apparent to all individuals that they are caught in a

PAGE 30

30 collective action problem. Consequently, they could do better for themselves by cooperating than by acting independently. To the ex tent that individuals have in ternalized a norm for promisekeeping, promises to cooperate th at individuals make in the pro cess of agreeing to a solution to their shared problem can add significantly to their likelihood of actual cooperating. In addition, when there are repeated opportuni ties for communication, group member s are able to revise their original agreement if it proves to be unworkable or ineffective in its existing form (Ostrom, 1998). Ostrom et al. (1994) found that in collectiv e-action laboratory experiments, cooperation levels have been consistently higher when co mmunication occurs face-to-face compared with other media. Based on these experiments, Os trom (1998) gave two explanations for why cooperation levels are higher when communications occurs face-to-f ace. The first was that faceto-face communication enhances individuals ability to assess others reputations. The second explanation was that punishing th e defectors and praising the cooperators, which becomes possible in repeated-play experiments with communication allowed after each round, has added emotional force when exercised f ace-to-face. A further expl anation is that faceto-face communication can promote group identity and thereby make group members sufficiently more regarding of each others welfar e that they become more likely to cooperate with each other (Dawes et al., 1990). In reality, each person faces a steady succession of assurance problems. At least in smaller communities, therefore, it is likely that any gi ven individual will share a variety of such problems with a common group of others. Ellick son (1991), who studied the governance of cattle trespass problems in a county of California, noted that farmers typically d eal with one another on a variety of issues, including wa ter supply, controlled burns, fen ce repairs, social events and

PAGE 31

31 staffing the volunteer fire brigade. He referred to such overlapping relationships as multiplex in contrast to simplex relationships betw een people who interact on a single front only. An advantage of groups characterized by mu ltiplex relationships, or dense social networks, is that individuals ar e likely to have more repeat plays of assurance game with one another than would be th e case if most relationships were simplex. This advantage has a number of aspects. First, the greate r interconnectedness of the game strengthens the shadow of the future for individuals. This is because defecti on in any single play of one game puts at risk benefits not only from others coope rating with them in the future plays of that particular game but in other games as well. Second, the greater frequency of repeat plays increases opportunities for the feedback that individuals require to establish and main tain their own reputations and assess the trustworthiness of others. Third, since trust is stre ngthened the more it is used, the greater number of reinforcing en counters in dense networks a llows greater flexibility in practicing reciprocity people can more easily recipr ocate cooperation. Feedback through Everyday Social Interaction Humans are social creatures and often gain considerable satisfaction from the feedback processes of monitoring one anot her. They share what they ha ve seen and heard, and provide social rewards and punishments. Th e greater this satisfaction the lo wer the net cost to individuals of partaking in such processes. Jacobs (1992) noted this phenomenon when she observed urban street lif e in the context of US inner city neighborhoods. She highlighted an insight now usually attributed to Granovetter (1973). She observed that strong in terpersonal ties tend to be le ss important than weak ties in sustaining community cohesion and collective action. Strong ties genera lly occur among people who share common bonds. Weak ties tend to more instrumental, and enab le the building of a social bridge between groups that less obviously share common bonds. Hence, weak ties are

PAGE 32

32 indispensable for integrating individuals within large groups. After illustrating how weak ties can generate trust sufficient for a neighborhood of st rangers to function eff ectively as a community, Jacobs proceeded to describe how such ties can also enable collective action to emerge spontaneously at the high er level of districts. Social Capital and Natural Resources Conservation This section reviews the con cepts of social capital and their relationship to natural resources conservation and management. It also discusses the relationship between household characteristics and social capital. Social Capital Although the concept of social capital was firs t defined by Pierre Bourdieu in the 1970s (Bourdieu, 1980), James Coleman has been wide ly recognized for introducing the concept of social capital in its current usage within th e field of development (Coleman 1988, 1990). Social capital, as envisioned by Coleman, is largely defi ned by its function and consists of a number of entities that have at least two elements in co mmon: they consist of some aspect of social structures, and they facilitate certain actions of actorswhethe r persons or corporate actors within the structure. So cial capital, like physical and human cap ital, is distinguished from other social interactions by its productive quality, and as such, should be perceived as a resource that helps actors achieve their specified interests. Coleman pointed to various forms of social capital which include obligations, expect ations, trustworthiness of so cial structures, information channels; and norms and e ffective sanctions (1988). While Coleman can lay major claim for introduc ing social capital as a conceptual tool, there is no doubt that this term gained consid erable academic popularity and practical prevalence through the works of Robert Putn am (1993, 1995) in Italy and the United States. Putnam defines social capital in this way: By analogy with no tions of physical capital and human capital tools

PAGE 33

33 and training that enhances individu al productivity socia l capital refers to features of social organization such as networks, norms, and soci al trust that facil itate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit (199 5:67). In his highly influential book, Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy Putnam provides a convinc ing argument that the strongest determinant in Italy for socio-economic de velopment is the vibrancy of what he labels as civic involvement or civic traditions, wh ich he measures by associational life, newspaper readership, and other indicators of political participation. Much of the recent thinking on social capital has developed from the premises and empi rical research carried out by Putnam in Italy and the United States, for as Putnam himself ar gues that working together is easier in a community blessed with a substa ntial stock of social capital The social capital embodied in norms and networks of civic engagements seem s to be a precondition for economic development as well as for effective government (Putnam 1993, in Harris and Renzio 1997). Within the field of economics, particularly strong support comes from the school of institutional economists, where one can fi nd striking similarities between economists description of economic instituti ons and the way social capital is conceptualized by sociologists and political scientists (Castle 1998). North desc ribes economic institutions as the rules of the game in a society or, more formally, are in th e humanly devised constraints that shape human interactions (North, 1990 in Castle 1998). No rth and others in the school of institutional economics recognize the importance of institutions in socioeconomic development and distinguish between formal rule s and those constraints embedded in customs, traditions, and codes of conduct (Cattle 1998:6). Social capital has also been recognized and embraced by the World Bank, which cites that incre asing evidence shows that cohesi on is critical for societies to prosper economically and for development to be su stainable. Social capital is not just the sum of

PAGE 34

34 the institutions which underpin a society it is the glue that holds them together (World Bank 2000). Much as Coleman envisioned with the intr oduction of the term in the late 1980s, social capital has seemed to promise answers which are attractive both to the neoliberal right still skeptical about the role of the state and to those committed to ideas about participation and grassroots empowerment. Thus it is that since 1993 social capita l has become one of the key terms of the development lexicon, adopted enth usiastically by intern ational organizations, national government and NGOs alike (Harris and Renzio 1997:920). Even though the term has gained wider accep tability both by theori sts and practitioners, social capital remains theoretically and conceptua lly elusive. There is st ill great debate on what exactly constitutes social capital, how it should be assessed and measured, and probably most importantly for practitioners, how social capital can be created or enhanced, sustained, and reproduced. While few would disagree with Wool cocks (1998) broad definition of social capital, which is, norms and networks facilitating collective action for mutual benefit, there are few consistencies concerning soci al capitals conceptual appli cation beyond this. One reason is that such terms as norms, trust, and networks that are often used to define social capital are also incredibly elusive to define and measure as well. Another reason is that the level of analysis for studying social capital changes with each theorist area of expertise, of ten stretching the term beyond its practical use. Where Coleman (1990) exp licitly references social capital as endowed in individuals, Putnam (1993, 1995) pushes much further by endowing social capital as the property of groups, and even nati ons (Harris and Renzio 1997). Th e conceptual and analytical ambiguity surrounding the term has led some to question its explanatory efficacy (Barron and Hannan 1994), but a far greater number of theo rists support the basic premise surrounding the concept of social capitalthat social relations are fundamental considerations in economic

PAGE 35

35 development and sustainability and as such, are seeking ways to both clarify the terminology and explicate on its uses (and abuses), as well as its analytical and practical applications in the field of development economics. Social Capital and Natural Resource Conservation The concept of social capital captures the ideas that social bonds and norms are important for people and communities (Coleman, 1988). As soci al capital lowers the transaction costs of working together, it facilitates cooperation. People have the conf idence to invest in collective activities knowing that the others will also do so. They are also le ss likely to engage in unfettered private actions with negative ou tcomes, such as resources degr adation (Pretty and Ward, 2001). As adopted by these authors, th e concept of social capital has four importa nt features that facilitate cooperation: relation of trust; reciprocity and excha nges; common rules, norms, and sanctions; and connectedness in networks and groups. In rural areas where use of natural resources has been unsustainable, communities l ack social capital, mostly because it was destroyed by unfavorable policies an d structures of social relations. Krishna and Uphoff (2002)s study on waters hed development in Rajasthan, India found that an index of social capital is positively and consistently corre lated with superior development outcomes, both in watershed conservation and in cooperative developm ent activities more generally. These authors used some concrete an d rigorous measures of development performance against which to test and validat e the phenomenon of social capita l in the very specific rural context. For them, Social capital is a matter of more than academic concern. They further argue that an examination of social capital deserv es all of the rigor that academic analysis can bring to them, but this analysis mu st also contribute to an understa nding of social capital that can be applied to real-world setting.

PAGE 36

36 Household Characteristic s and Social Capital Economists, imbued with methodological indivi dualism, prefer to emphasize individual decisions about social capital. For instance, Glaese r et al. (2002) develop an investment model in which the individuals stock of so cial capital (and the flow of investment in social capital formation) is a function of his or her age, di scount rate, expected mobility, opportunity cost of time, and occupational returns to social skills, as well as aggregate stock of social capital in specific community and the rate of social capital depreciation (including th at due to relocation). They compare the predictions of the model with available evidence using data from the General Social Survey, a repeat cross-sectional survey in the United States. To measure individual social capital they use membership of organizations rather than subject ive measures of trust, arguing that the latter do not necessarily reflect trusting beha vior in practice, while the membership measure is reasonably well correla ted with other measures of community mindedness, such as working to solve a local problem, forming a ne w group to solve a local problem, or contacting local government regarding a local problem. Their results indicate that social capital (1) first rises then falls with age, (2) de clines with expected mobility (3) rises in occupations with greater returns to social skills, (4) is higher among homeowners, (5) falls sharply with physical distance, and (6) is correlated with investment in human capital. However, their prediction that social capital investment falls with the value of time is not supported by the available data. Moreover, while their model allows for group level effects on individual investment decisions, they find no robust evidence for such effects. Their overall conclusion is that ind ividual incentives, not group membership, drive social capital accumulation decisions. Analysis of household survey data in a Landcare program in Southern Philippines (Cramb 2004) shows that social capital varied with indi vidual incentives, rising then falling with age (peaking of 50-59 years) and increasing with fa rm size and education, but group level factors

PAGE 37

37 were also important. That is, co ntrary to Glaeser et al. (2002) an individual social capital depended as much on his or her local community as on individual characteristics. The research found out that the relationship between soci al capital and soil conservation is not a straightforward matter of investing in the rapid formation of self-sufficient community landcare groups in order to accelerate adoption of soil conservation practices on farm.

PAGE 38

38 CHAPTER 3 BACKGROUND INFORMATI ON OF THE STUDY SITE This chapter presents the background inform ation of the study area which includes three sections. The first sectio n reviews the concept of national pa rks around the world in general, and Vietnam in particular. The second section desc ribes the Cat Tien National Park, including a discussion of the Forest Prot ection and Rural Development Pr oject (FPRD) that is being implemented in the bufferzone of the CTNP. The th ird section describes the profiles of the three study communes. National Parks in the World There are many national parks across the world that have been established primarily to protect biodiversity. These national parks usually provide a haven for a variety of flora and fauna. Because the intense sunlight makes ecosy stems in equatorial regions more productive, tropical forests make up more than a half of the species in the world even though the area of tropical forests is only seven pe rcent of earth surface area. For instance, tropical and semi-arid areas of Africa have about 30,000 species of flor a while the tropical regions of Asia including New Guinea and Australia have about 45,000 species. (World Resources Institute, 2006). The worlds first national park, Yellowstone, is located in the western United States. It was created by an act of Congress in 1872 and si gned into law by President Ulysses Grant. Yellowstone National Park has about 2.2 million acres of wilderness and is "set apart as a public park or are the area reserved for the benefit and enjoyment of people." This national park is now very famous for ecotourism activities. Other countries have created national parks for various purposes. In Tanzania, numerous national parks form the core of a much larger protected ecosystem, and have been set aside to preserve the countrys rich natura l heritage, to provide secure breeding grounds where its fauna and flor a can thrive, and to save them from the

PAGE 39

39 conflicting interests of a growing human populati on. The existing park system protects a number of internationally recognized bas tions of biodiversity and world he ritage sites, thereby redressing the balance for those areas of the country affect ed by deforestation, agricu lture and urbanization. In South Africa, most national parks are main tained by the government while the parks in KwaZulu-Natal are managed by Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife (an amalgamation of the former National Parks Board and KwaZulu Directorate of Nature Conservation). A number of these national parks have become Peace parks (or Tran sfrontier Conservation Areas TFCAs) that span across boundaries of multiple countries, where the political border sections that are enclosed within its area are abolished. Privat e Parks are also starting to have a huge impact on the conservation scene. (South African Na tional Parks, SANParksOfficial website: http://www.sanparks.org ) In Southeast Asia, Cambodia, Lao PDR, Th ailand and Vietnam have established among the largest protected area systems in the world as measured by proportions of national territory. Many of these are national parks (o r national protected areas as th ey are called in Lao PDR), and nature and wildlife reserves in which no expl oitative uses are permitted. These restrictive national policies are coming under increasing scrutiny because of growing population pressure, especially the needs of poor communities li ving in and around prot ected areas (ICEM, 2003). Bufferzones According to Gilmour and Nguyen (2000), a bu fferzone is an area identified by a clear boundary and it is located outside the boundaries of the protected area. Martino (2001) has used a wide range of literature to understand the conc ept of bufferzones. He found that there is no agreement among conservationists regarding th e definitions of bufferzones. Although the objective of bufferzones is to prot ect the biodiversity of the pa rk, this protection has to be harmonized with the creation of benefits to local people. Martino (2001) c oncluded that there has

PAGE 40

40 to be a difference between the management and goals of the bufferzone and the management of the protected area, if not, there would be no logical reason for bufferzones to exist. The reasoning behind the estab lishment of bufferzones is gene rally a need to protect the park from encroachment from local population and from the destructive activ ities that take place outside the park but that aff ect conservation inside. However, there is recognition of the legitimate needs of the local population. Martino ( 2001) revealed that many studies show that by providing benefits in the bufferzone will create an incentive for local people and provide for their needs, and the result will be that local people will be less likely to extract resources from the park. In addition, Rustagi and Garcia (2005) as sert that creation of the bufferzone around protected areas assists in the opt imization of the ecological, econom ic and socio-cultural values of protected area, through exte nsion and social buffering of th e protected area. Martino (2001) argued the inclusion of local people in devel opment projects that take place either in the bufferzones or near the protecte d areas is aimed to protect those areas from local peoples' discontent rather than to integrate local peoples' need to access the prot ected area for resources. This is a crucial point that comes from the ve ry definitions of bufferzones and may explain in part why bufferzones are not proving to be an effective complement to the conservation of protected areas. National Parks in Vietnam: An Overview Political Context In Vietnam, forestland is divided into thr ee categories, namely production, protection and special-use forests. Production forests are ea rmarked for exploitation in compliance with approved management plans, while protection fo rests are designated to protect land and water sources in critical areas (Nguyen et al., 2000) and their exploitati on is restricted to mainly nontimber forest products in natural forests. Speci al-use forests are designated based on their

PAGE 41

41 importance for the conservation of Vietnams bi odiversity, science, tourism or cultural and historical heritage. In January 2001, Decision No. 08/QD-TTg classifi ed special-use forests into the following categories: (1) National parks; (2) Na ture reserves, which were further divided into two sub-categories: nature rese rves and habitat/species manage ment areas; and (3) Cultural, Historical and Environmental site s (Landscape conservation areas). The history of national parks in Vietnam can be summarized as follows (Table 3-1). In 1960, President Ho Chi Minh announced Ordinan ce No. 18/LCT, also known as the Law on Organization of the Government Council of th e Democratic Republic of Vietnam. This ordinance included a proposal to establish the General Department of Forestry. In doing so, the Government of Vietnam had carried out the firs t actions to preserve natural resources through promulgating degrees on forest protecti on. In 1962, Cuc Phuong Protected Forest was established as the first protected area; and in 1966 it became the firs t national park in Vietnam. In 1986, decision No. 194/CT decreed the establishm ent of a further 73 Special-use Forests nationwide. These Special-use Forests comprised two national parks, 46 na ture reserves, and 25 cultural and historical sites. In 1992, the Prim e Minister announced Decision No. 08/CT, the establishment Cat Tien National Park. In 1994, the biodiversity action plan for Vietnam recommended the strengthening of the national pa rks and the protected areas system. Currently, there are 26 national parks in Vietnam. Table 3-1. Timeline of the developm ent of national park in Vietnam Year Events 1960 Ordinance No 18/LCT authorizes th e General Department of Forestry. 1962 Cuc Phuong Protected Forest (the fi rst protected area ) was established. 1966 Cuc Phuong became the first national park in Vietnam. 1986 Decision No. 194/CT establishes 73 Sp ecial-use Forests nationwide including national parks, nature reserves, a nd cultural and historical sites. 1992 Decision No. 08/CT authorizes Cat Tien National Park 1994 PM Decision No. 845/TTg approves The Biodiversity Action Plan for Vietnam.

PAGE 42

42 The Profiles of National Parks In Vietnam, the natural conservation zones a nd national parks were established comprising areas where natural reso urces were not acutely devastated (Vo, 2002). The average size of a national park in Vietnam is about 34,832 ha; Y ok Don national park is the largest area with 115,545 ha and Xuan Thuy is the smallest park w ith 7,100 ha. The average size of national parks in the south is higher than that of the nor th by approximately 9,200 ha; and the standard deviation in term of size of 26 national parks in Vietnam is about 29,467 ha. Similar to other national parks around the world, the purpose of the national parks in Viet Nam is the sameto conserve valuable and rare flora and fauna; to protect and maintain the representative tropical forest ecosystem; to provide a platform for envi ronmental education and scientific research; to develop ecotourism activities; and to create jobs for people livi ng in proximity to the parks. Further, the national parks are integrated into a master plan which includes ecotourism (and historical tourism) in order to attract domestic and foreign tourists. In Vietnam, in order to manage and conserve resources in a sustainable manner, nationa l parks enjoy extensive support from a variety of donors and non government or ganizations such as IUCN (The World Conservation Union), WWF (World Wildlife Fund), GEF (Global Environment Agency) and JICA (Japan Internationa l Cooperation Agency). National Park and Bufferzone In Vietnam, the term national park was defined through De cision No.62 -2005/QD-BNN (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Developm ent), and also promulgated the regulation on criteria for classification of sp ecial-use forests. National park s can be natural areas on the mainland or on the mainland with some submer ged-lands, or sea areas. They are large enough for the conservation of one or more typical or repr esentative ecosystems. It shall not be affected, or be affected, to the conservation of endemi c or endangered species of present and future

PAGE 43

43 generations. National parks serve as a basis for sp iritual, scientific, educ ational, recreation and eco-tourist activities which are controlled a nd have less negative impacts. Decision No. 09/2001/QD-BNN-TCCB (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development of Vietnam) notes that a bufferzone is a forest area, land area, or wetland area located close/ nearby to national parks or natural protected zone. According to Vo (2002), the people that live in the bufferzones of Vietnam are mostly poor and with limited education. Thei r subsistence depends mostly on forest products or the related ecosystem. They are generally indigenous peoples or resettled people. Th ese people account for about 90 % of the hunting and the collecting (of forest products) ac tivities in the bufferzone. The farming practices of these pe ople reflect low levels of technology and low agricultural productivity (Nguyen, 2002). The Study Site: The Cat Tien National Park As shown in Figure 3-1, the Cat Tien Nationa l Park (CTNP) is located in southern Vietnam, approximately 150 km North of Ho Ch i Minh City (Saigon) and nearly 150 km south of Da Lat. The protected area is comprise d of 73,878 ha; a bufferz one of 183,479 ha surrounds the park. The CTNP can be subdivided into thre e sectors: Nam Cat Tien (38,100 ha) in Dong Nai Province, Tay Cat Tien (5,143 ha) in Binh P huoc Province, and Cat Loc (30,635 ha) in Lam Dong Province. Cat Loc in the north part of th e park is geographically disconnected from the southern part by a 10 km band of heavy populated rural land. Nam Cat Tien received protected status in 1978 (Decision 360/TTg of July 7, 1978). It attained a national park status in 1992 (Decision 08-CT of Janua ry 13, 1992). Cat Loc received protected status from Lam Dong Province in 1992. The area remained managed by Cat Tien District, and a formal Management Board was es tablished only in 1996. The decision of January 13, 1992 (08-CT) included the suggestion to exte nd Nam Cat Tien National Park with both Tay

PAGE 44

44 Cat Tien and Cat Loc. Decision 38 1998 QD of Fe bruary 16, 1998 approved the integration of Nam Cat Tien, Tay Cat Tien, and Cat Loc in what is currently known as the Cat Tien National Park. The transfer of responsibility from the Provi nces to the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development took place on December 22, 1998. Figure 3-1. Location of the study sites1 As mentioned earlier, the area of Cat Tien National Park is currently 73,878 ha. With the re-demarcation of the park boundary the area will be 70,549 ha in two separate forest blocks: the Cat Loc sector (26,970ha) in the north, and th e Nam Cat Tien and Tay Cat Tien sectors 1 Courtesy of the University of Texas Libraries, The University of Texas at Austin

PAGE 45

45 (43,579ha) in the south. The topography of the area va ries greatly between th e three sectors. Cat Loc is situated in the beginning of the southern foothills of the Central Highlands and, although elevations only reach 659m, the topography is st eep. Nam Cat Tien and Tay Cat Tien are situated in the lowlands that are typical of southern Vietnam; the topography of this area is characterized by low, gentle hills. Numerous springs and streams originate in the area and drain into the Dong Nai River, which is the second largest river system in s outhern Vietnam. The Dong Nai River flows through the Park, forming the western boundary of Cat Lo c and the eastern boundary of Nam Cat Tien. The lowlands in the north of Nam Cat Tien are p oorly drained, resulting in a network of swamps and lakes, which expands and contracts seasona lly. Mean annual rainfall ranges from 2,300 mm in the lowlands to 2,850 mm at higher elevations. The flora of Cat Tien region is typical fo r the Dong Nam Bo bio-geographic region (the eastern part of the southern Mekong Delta) with Dipterocarpaceae and Lythraceae the most commonly represented families in areas where human modification is minimal. In forests disturbed by humans, the majo r families represented are Euphorbiaceae and Moraceae Only of the species found in the Cat Tien region ar e endemic to Vietnam (FIPI, MOF&WWF, 1995). These habitats support a rich diversity of biological life. Currently 76 mammal, 320 bird, 74 reptile, 35 amphibian, and 99 fish species have been confirmed in the Park. As valuable as the number of species, the ar ea is also known to be important for ungulate, primate, and bird communities. Amongst the ungulates Sambar (Cervus unicolor) Wild Boar (Susscrofa) and Gaur (Bos gaurus) reportedly occur at relatively high densities compared to other areas in Vietnam (Ling 2000).

PAGE 46

46 Of the fauna occurring in the area, 40 sp ecies are IUCN red-li sted. The key species amongst them is the Vietnamese sub-species of the Javan Rhinoceros (Rhinoceros sondaicus annamiticus) which is the rarest large mammal on eart h. The total population of this species is less than 7, and they are only found in Cat Loc. Other key species incl ude the Orange-necked Partridge ( Arborophila davidi) which is also endemic to this region of Vietnam; the Siamese crocodile ( Crocodylus siamensis), which were locally extinct but ha ve been re-established in the Park; the Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) ; the Black-shanked Douc Langur (Pygathrix nigripes) ; the Yellow-cheeked Crested Gibbon (Hylobates gabriellae) ; the white-shoulder ibis (Pseudibis davisoni) ; and the white-winged wood duck (Cairna scutulata) A total of 9,442 people live inside the CTNP Approximately 81% of these people live at the edge of the park, but five villages are isol ated deep inside the pa rk and contain nearly 1,794 people (CTNP, 2003). They have no land titles in their current location but are treated as de facto legal inhabitants. A small proportion of these pe ople originate from lowland areas, from which they departed after people of the Kinh majority settled in their ancestral lands. Most of them, however, settled inside the park as immigrants from other parts of Vietnam following the American War in the 1960s. There are 11 ethnic groups living within the CTNP. They can be divided into three main groups and each has a different history, different connection to administrative structures, and different land use strategy. These groups ar e the mainstream Vietnamese (Kinh); some indigenous ethnic minorities (Stie ng and Chau Ma); and recently migrated minorities from the Northern provinces of Lang Son, Cao Bang, and Bac Kan (Tay, Nung, Dao, Hoa, HMong etc.) The Stieng Chau Ma, and Chau Ro tribes have lived in the region of the park for several centuries. Village 5, Village 6 and KLut (Tien Ho an), KLo-Kit (Phuoc Cat 2) are mainly Chau

PAGE 47

47 Ma. Stieng people are concentrated in Village 3 and Phuoc Son (P huoc Cat 2) and Village 4 (Ta Lai). These indigenous minorities have a long hist ory of shifting cultivation. For these people, it takes time to change their traditi onal cultivation practices and styl e of living to more sedentary livelihoods. The recently migrated minorities from the Northern provinces started arriving around 1987-1988, but most settled after 1990. Their traditio nal livelihood strategies consist of fishing, hunting, and shifting cultivation, but now they are mainly engaged in farming. They predominately occupy the Da Bong Cua area (Dang Ha Commune, Bu Dang District, Binh Phuoc Province). The human population of the bufferzone, whic h comprises 31 communes and 2 towns in 8 districts, is far higher than the population insi de the CTNP. Nearly 200,000 people live in the direct vicinity of the Park, and the bufferzone is heavily farmed with little conservation value. Part of the Parks boundary is shared with the government-ope rated State Forest Enterprises (SFEs), which have previously been logged, or are currently being logged to varying extents. However, most SFEs are currently under a logging ban. Although illegal settlers have converted large parts of these SFEs into agricultural lands, these areas also contain large tracts of important forest habitat with a variety of wildlife. Forest Protection and Rural Development (FPRD) project Since 1997, the World Bank has been supporting a project entitled F orest Protection and Rural Development (FPRD). The goal of the proj ect is to improve envi ronmental protection in Vietnam by protecting and managi ng remaining natural forests with high biodiversity. The project objectives are (a) the eff ective protection of high priority protected areas; (b) the effective management of remaining natural forests in th e bufferzone; (c) the reduction in dependency on protected areas for subsistence and cash income by improving the livelihood status of residents

PAGE 48

48 in the bufferzone; and (d) the strengthening of government capacity to effectively design, implement, and monitor integrated c onservation and development programs. The project area includes the Chu Mom Ray Na ture Reserve (CMRNR) located in Kontum Province, the previously menti oned Cat Tien National Park (CTNP) located in Dong Nai, Lam Dong, and Binh Phuoc provinces, and surrounding areas of agricultural and forestry land (i.e., the bufferzone). The FPRD project supports only bufferzone community development activities because of existing Dutch-funded conservation proj ects that apply to Cat Tien National Park. The bufferzone has been defined as a conti nuous band of those communes adjacent to the protected areas; however, it al so includes additional conti guous communes within three kilometers of the national park in which human populations may present an actual or potential threat to biodiversity conservation. This defi nition was adopted because the commune is the smallest administrative unit with in the Vietnamese administrative system through which project activities can be effectively managed. For the development of the bufferzone, the proj ect aim is to reduce the incursion pressure on the national park by providing alternative income-generating opportu nities, securing land tenure, and enhancing the manage ment and use of existing natural forests in the bufferzone. Development of rural communities, and the better management and use of forests located in the buffer communes of the national park, are the ke y to reducing the incursion pressure on the protected area. A participatory process-oriented approach is used to derive commune action plans (CAPs) based on priority needs identifi ed by the participating communes. The FPRD project funded the following activities: (i) community development planning process to formulate CAPs and negotiate a conservation agreement based on CAPs in exchange for community cooperation in PA prot ection; (ii) land allocation to improve access to institutional

PAGE 49

49 credit, promote sustainable land use, control in -migration, and increase so cial stability; (iii) social support programs to improve basic so cial infrastructure and increase incomes and employment opportunities for communities, particular ly those that are very poor; (iv) agricultural support activities to improve yiel ds and diversify farm incomes; (v) issuance of l ong term forest protection contracts to households, in order to jointly protect the remaining natural forests in the bufferzone, and a feasibility study to restructure St ate Forest Enterprises (SFEs) adjacent to the protected areas as a means to improve management of estates under their control; (vi) small-scale irrigation expansion and constructions in order to increase food production and security, and road upgrades to improve service to rural comm unities and expand market opportunities. The Commune Profiles The Thong Nhat Commune The Thong Nhat Commune was established during the American war. It was also the base of the revolution (the communists under Ho Chi Minh and resistance to the French back to 1940s). At that time, the area was inhibited ma inly by the Stieng indigenous ethnic group who lived on shifting cultivation. After 1975, the new government created some autonomous hamlets that later became communes, with lead ership from military officials and other government cadres who helped build the local government. In 1985, the Peoples Committee of Song Be Pr ovince had planned the Thong Nhat State Forest Enterprise, and Thong Nhat Commune was put under the jurisdiction of the SFE. However, until October 1987 the Thong Nhat SFE wa s divided into two enterprises: Thong Nhat and Nghia Trung SFEs. Since that time, people who lived in Thong Nhat Commune were under Shifting cultivation, according to Conklin (1957), is any ag ricultural system in which fields are cleared by fire and cropped discontinuously.

PAGE 50

50 the management of the two state forest ente rprises and people cultivating land there were considered squatters in the state forest lands. People who were relocated by the government from the construction of the Tri An hydraulic dam, together with many war veterans, also came to settle along the Dong Nai River. Historically, they cultivated wetland rice and other short-term industr ial crops. These people were organized into hamlet 4 of the Thong Nhat commune. In response to the national immigration plan, in 1991 the government resettled the population such that the Song Be province esta blished the New Economic Zone (NEZ) of Duc Lieu. Part of Thong Nhat commune territory belo nged to the newly established commune of Duc Lieu. In 1993, ethnic minorities migrated from di fferent parts of the country, especially from Cao Bang, Bac Kan, Lang Son provinces (mountainous provinces bordering with China). These ethnic groups rushed to this area after realizing the potential of this fertile land. This led to serious deforestation as a result of shifting cultivation. Taking advantage of the master plan for the hydraulic dam at nearby Thac Mo, many people came and had commercial logging ventures even in the protected forest th at was managed by the state fore st enterprises. By 1994, due to rapidly increased physical popula tion growth the government ag ain decided to separate Thong Nhat Commune into two comm unesThong Nhat and Dang Ha. The total area of Thong Nhat Commune now is about 14,085 hectares. Located in the upper part of the Dong Nai Ri ver watersheds, the commune has a network of creeks which are usually barren in the dry season. As the Dong Nai Ri ver runs through the area, water for irrigation is available throughout the year. This geographical condition has made the commune suitable for developing indus trial crop plantations and home gardens.

PAGE 51

51 In recent years there have been waves of immi gration to the area, which has resulted in the formation of many population clusters. With a total population of 10,860 pe rsons, there are now about 12 hamlets in the commune that are made up of people who have immigrated from 52 provinces and belong to 15 differe nt ethnic groups. This reflects the diversified population of Thong Nhat commune. The Dang Ha Commune The Dang Ha Commune was established in 1994, from the hamlet 4 (mentioned previously) that was separated from Thong Nh at Commune. Before 1987, the commune had vast forestland as part of Nghia Trung Forest Enterpri se where several veteran families had migrated from Lam Dong province. At that time, the people living in the area were mostly self-sufficient. Moreover, there was no government body and all commercial activities were conducted in the nearby town of Cat Tien (Lam Dong Province). In 1988, the Bu Dang District was established as separate district fr om the District of Phuoc Long (of the former Song Be Province). T ogether with the esta blishment of the new district, hamlet 4 of Thong Nhat was named with approxi mately 60 households. At that time there were no roads and transportation was difficult, being accessible only by boat along the Dong Nai River. The only source of transportation to meet the need of local people was a two engine boat running two trips every Wednesday a nd Saturday. From 1989, the migrants from the mountainous provinces of Tuyen Quang, Cao Bang, and Lang Son (near the border with China) rushed to the area and began clearing forests an d cultivating wetland rice. In 1990, a major event changed the life of people living in hamlet 4 In order to supply sand for building of the Thac Mo Hydraulic Electricity Plant, the project management board built a new road from Sao Bong to Dako Bridge. This road became the life blood of subsequent cultural and economic

PAGE 52

52 development of the area. By 1993, hamlet 4 of the Thong Nhat Commune had reached 500 households in size. To cope with the dramatic change of increase d population due to migr ation to the area, and in order to better manage the area, th e Central Government decided to split hamlet 4 of Thong Nhat Commune and establish the Dang Ha Comm une. In 1996, the Peoples Committee of Song Be Province decreed the allocation of 2,598 ha la nd of the Nghia Trung Fo rest Enterprise to Dang Ha Commune to be put under their management. Currently the total population of Dang Ha Commune is about 6,062 people (1,020 households) distributed in 6 hamlets. Hamlets 1,6,8 are mainly comprised of the Tay-Nung ethnic group that migrated from the Northern provinces and there are no indigenous minorities in these hamlets. The commune shares the borders with the national park in the southwest. Land has been allocated to 480 households according to the recent directive (1 73 CT); among these households there are 170 households that actually live inside the national park. Since year 2000, the resettlement of these households has been proposed, but it remains on paper only. Hamlets 1 and 2 are under the re-demarcation. Some parts of this land will belong to the park and the affected households will need to be resettled. After 1990 there has been no additional spontaneous immigration to this area. Being a remote commune, Dang Ha is still a very poor commune of the district of Bu Dang, Binh Phuoc Province. Generally, the living sta ndards of the local peopl e here are still very low compared to other communes throughout the nation. The Doan Ket Commune The territory of the Doan Ket Commune wa s once the ancestral domain of the Stieng. These people have been living in this area sin ce the 1930s, practicing shifting cultivation as their main mode of agricultural production. In 1958, the Diem government (American-supported at

PAGE 53

53 the time) relocated the migrants from the centr al provinces of Vietnam to this area. These migrants then began living together with the Stie ng people to make full use of the land resources in the region. After the victory in the Bu Dang District of th e revolutionaries in 1974, the new government established the new commune of Thien Ho a, the original name of the then Doan Ket Commune. Households were orga nized into cooperatives. Beginning in 1989, the Tay and Nung ethnics from the northern border provinces immigrated to this area, began clearing the fore sts for agricultural cult ivation, and formed the then hamlet 7 of Doan Ket commune. Migrants from the Mekong delta regi ons also settled around the area called Dakbon, forming hamlet 5B In 1994, the Duc Phong town was split from Doan Ket Commune. Today, the total area of Doan Ket is about 13,065 hectares with 1,250 households numbering 5,731 persons from the following ethnic groups: Kinh, Tay, Nung, Stieng, Hoa (Statistical Yearbook, Bu Dang District, 2005). Living standards of the Doan Ket Commune people are considered higher than other communes. However, there is a big gap between people who are living in some hamlets nearby the town of Duc Phong and those who live in the remote hamlets where transportation is limited. Agricultural production is relativ ely developed with some pere nnial crops such as coffee, cashew, black pepper, rubber, a nd some fruit trees. Animal pr oduction includes swine and cattle, but is not extensively deve loped. Generally speaking, the weak infrastructure, limited transportation, lack of technical knowledge/skills, and lack of capital have limited economic development in Doan Ket commune. Table 3-2. Demographic data fo r the three selected communes Total areas (square kilometers) Total Population (persons) Agriculture Households Persons living on agriculture Number of person at working age Doan Ket 75.50 5,107 1,067 4,908 2,160 Thong Nhat 93.00 10,860 2,410 10,524 4,354 Dang Ha 201.97 6,062 1,225 6,032 2,328

PAGE 54

54 Ethnographical Sketch of Population Living in the Three Study Communes Stieng ethnic The Stieng is the indigenous ethnic group that resides mostly in hamlets 6, 2 and 12 of Thong Nhat Commune and hamlets 6, 1B, 5A, 5B and 2 of Doan Ket Commune. The southeast part of South Vietnam is the traditional niche of Stieng, and they are also found in neighboring Cambodia. The Stieng divides itself into two major groups: Bulo or the people above (upstream); and Budeh or the people below (downstream). Key informants among the Stieng that were interviewed also identified local groups called Bulach and Budip The Stieng trace their descent through the ma le line. Kin are recognized to the third ascending generation and the third descending ge neration. Marriage pattern s reflect patrilineage exogamy, rules against marrying the fathers sist ers daughter, and preference for marriage with consanguine kinswomen of th e mothers patrilineage. Traditionally, an individual of the Stieng has only one name, and it generally does not have a particular meaning. During th e 1950s the government required surnames for identification cards, so all Stieng were given Dieu as their family name. At present time, the full name of male Stieng includes a surname and a last name (l ast name is given in Vietnamese) such as Dieu BDai, Dieu Tiet, Dieu Giaray etc. The Stieng have traditionally liv ed together in the same area in separate small houses (no longhouse remained), thus forming the traditional tribe. But some Stieng families live separately from their tribe, adjacent to the main road, a nd they have home gardens and farming practices like the Kinh or Tay Nung ethnic groups. Some of them intermarry with Kinh people, but intermarriage with Tay Nung pe ople has not yet been observed.

PAGE 55

55 Although others live far away from the road system, they have been affected by Kinh culture through their dre ss, consumption patterns, and housin g structures (style of Kinh). However, they still maintain their traditiona l activities such as shifting cultivation, food gathering, wild animal hunting, taking a bath in streams, using traditional tools and equipment such as crossbow, back-basket, footing, etc. A few of the Stieng have been resettled in re mote areas far away from the road system. Swidden agriculture practice is the main way to produce their food. Houses are built near each other (not longhouse), thus forming a true trib e. Their livelihood opportu nities are limited and they have been known to face a sixmonth shortage of food in a year. The Stieng language is classified in the South Bahnatic subgrouping of the Mon-Khmer family within the Austro-Asiatic stock. This language does not exhibit the interesting vowel register phonemes of many Mon-Khmer languages, but its extensive use of semantic pairing, onomatopoeia forms and internal rhyming make Stieng a colorful and fascinating language. Tay, Nung, Hoa, Muong, Man, Dao, Cao Lan, San Diu ethnic minorities The Tay, Nung, Hoa, Muong, Man, Dao, Cao Lan, San Diu groups are migrants from various northern provinces of Vietnam. These gr oups are very similar to each other in terms of culture, traditions, and farming practices (t he so-called VAC system, which stands for Vuon= Garden, Ao= Fish pond, C huong= Pig Barn in Vietnamese). They often build big houses made of several timber species; each family owns a separate house (along with a home garden) that has a clear spatial boundary. A water source for paddy rice cultivation is im portant for their farming and for establishing the VAC system; ther efore they often select low-lying sites for building their hamlets. They usually assist each others in terms of t echnical and financial assistance; in some cases they are willing to receive newly migrated persons into their area, allowing them to stay on their

PAGE 56

56 own farms for at least one year. During this period, the new migrants have to work hard and save money in order to be able to es tablish their own (separate) farms. They are patient and dedicated farmers, known for saving money and building up their wealth from the land. Kinh people The Kinh people are the major ethnic group in Viet Nam (and in the study communes, as well), and linguistically bel ong to the Viet-Muong. The Kinh migrated from the Mekong Delta, the Central Coastal area, and the neighbor ing province of Dong Nai. The Kinh prefer to live along the sides of main roads, or deep in the basal soil forest area. Their religious affiliations include ancestor worship, B uddhism, and Roman Catholicism. Farming systems in Kinh households in the commune include plantations with more diversity than those of other et hnic groups and are generally ba sed on commercial and perennial tree crops like cashew nut, coffee, and rubber tr ees. Like some of the other ethnic groups, a portion of the Kinh have migrated into the ar ea around CTNP. These migrated Kinh that have come from the North were former government offici als, soldiers, or displaced migrants (due to the land shortage pressure in the North) familia r with the VAC system in the North, who prefer to apply this farming system in the new areas area. The Kinh that migrated from the Central Coastal areas are skilled in wetla nd rice cultivation, and they alwa ys seek to find lowland areas in order to apply their paddy rice cultivating technique in other parts of the country. The Kinh that came from the Mekong Delta ar e skilled in fruit tree species, and have established fruit orchards with longan, or sapodill a. The Kinh that came from the southern parts of the Central Highland or from the Dong Nai or Lam Dong provinces have both the funds and technical knowledge to invest in coffee and rubber plantations.

PAGE 57

57 Indigenous Ethnic Groups in Transition Changes in community structure The traditional system of administration in the ethnic tribal areas is the council of elders led by certain individuals who know the traditional regulations of the tribe and are respected by the local community. When the commune was esta blished, the Stieng had representation in the local assembly (called Hoi Dong Nhan Dan Xa ), and the role of elders was now limited to giving suggestions to local government. It may be that traditional regulations and the indigenous knowledge will be eroded in the future. Kinship still has strong influence on the household economics of the Stieng people. Indigenous knowledge system As with the other ethnic groups in Viet nam, the Stieng owned precious indigenous knowledgenot only in agriculture, traditional medi cine, traditional regulations, and community administrative, but especially in natural re source management. At the present time, the indigenous knowledge of the Stieng is changing fr om knowledge and skills related to traditional shifting cultivation into cashew nut based agro-forestry practices. Changing characteristics of fa mily, household and community Before 1975, the Stieng tribe was distributed fr om the center of Dong Xoai Town to deep within the forest. Under the wave of migration pressure, however, the Stieng is now concentrated in small tribes living together in small settlement areas called bon, and are led by an elder. The Bon tends to be topographically isol ated from the Tay-Nung. Because the livelihood activities of the Tay-Nung are based on the VAC system, a water source is most important for fishpond digging and paddy rice cultivation. Thus, th e Tay-Nung select low-elevation sites for establishing their settlement while the Stieng pref er to select high-elevat ion sites in order to establish their bon, which is more a ppropriate for their swidden activities.

PAGE 58

58 On the other hand, however, during the cropping season almost all members of the Stieng households have left thei r houses to stay in the Miir (swidden field), and return back to the bon only on the weekend, as they do not like to live near other ethnic groups with which they are unfamiliar. However, Kinh houses can be altern ated with Stieng in the bon for business activities; Kinh also supply th e needs and food for Stieng during food shortage period, and offer credit to Stieng by pre-buying agriculture product (rice, tuber, root, cashew nut). In general, there are 3 main types of Stie ng settlement areas found in the study communes. The original type of bon structure, where houses were built next each others; there are no plants in settlement area. Thei r swidden areas are usually locate d in the surrounding area or far away in the natural forest. Their main crop is upland rice grown with sesame. The second type of bon is composed of separate houses with home gardens and clear boundaries that separate individu al dwellings. The Stieng s home garden usually includes fruit trees like bananas, ananas; and spices such as chili lime grass, zingers, feed for pig like wild taro ( Alocasia macrorrhiza ), livestock-shed, etc. However, they still strongly depend on swidden agriculture as well, especially for growing uplan d rice and other food crops in the natural forest. They also grow cassava; rice and other food crop s are typically alternat ed with cashew trees. The third type of bon is the most advan ced where the bon elder leader allocates land alongside of the road, and each household includes house, kitchen garden, cashew-field, swidden combined with clear boundary. Animal raising an d cashew nut production are part of the income generating activities. There is no longhouse even in the original t ype of bon. The houses of the Stieng are constructed on the ground; the ke y informant (elder) related that in the 1950s they had been forced to adopt this style by the government.

PAGE 59

59 A typical Stieng house is small and low with sma ll poles, thatch roof, ex terior and interior walls that are formed by split bamboo. Internal arrangement varies, but a common pattern is to have a bamboo platform about a half meter high, wh ich is used as the bed, and an open hearth with three stones set in a hole in the ground. At the present time there is no flat gong and rice alcohol jar in the Stieng househol d. The back-baskets, the fish-cat ching baskets, and the ricewinnowing baskets are all hung on the bamboo wall or on the beam. On the floor is the mortar that is used for husking rice. Some Stieng houses are presently constructed wi th bridge and cement (these are influenced by Kinh culture), but the kitchen still remains in the Stieng style. Some advanced Stieng households may own a radio, a TV set, a cassette pl ayer, and/or a motorcycle. For example, this study observed 2 TV sets, 3 radio-cassettes, and 9 bikes that were owned by households of a bon of 11 Stieng families that live in a remote area. Other outside influences on the Stieng are evidenced by the women that now know how to ma ke-up themselves, paint their fingernails, dye their hair, and use luxurious soap s and dress slippers at home. The family is the basic social unit and the household is the ba sic unit of production. Similar to the Kinh which is strongly influenced by Confucianism, the so cial structure of the Stieng is also traced descent th rough the male line. Everyone know s the name and the village of the second or third ascending generations. Weddings and funerals bring matrilineal kin together to strengthen their ties not only by contact but also through recitation of ancestors names as ritual offerings are made. Marriage is often intro-ethnic and an important event in the life of an ethnic group. Almost all Stieng now belong to the Baptist religion, a nd are influenced by Kinh culture. The Stiengs wedding ceremony is very simple; there is no bride price for marriage. At the present time, the

PAGE 60

60 Stieng and Kinh have been practic ing intermarriage. This study found no intermarriage between the Stieng and Tay-Nung groups because the TayNung people are new migrants who have not yet adapted to the new social environment. After marriage, a new split house is establishe d which then receives assistance from the community. The families in the village usually have many children. The average numbers of children in the family in the study site is 4 to 5. Communes people committee A commune is an official political entity at the local level, and is administered by an institution called Hoi Dong Nhan Dan Xa (Peoples Council of the Commune) This institution is considered by law to be the decision-making body when it comes to commune issues. It elects the executive committee, which is called Uy Ban Nhan Dan Xa (People Committee of the Commune). At present, the Ch airs of both the Doan Ket and Thong Nhat Communes belong to the predominant Kinh group, but the Chair of Dang Ha is a male from the Tay ethnic community. Local mass organizations, such as Wome ns Union, Farmers Union, Youth Union, Veterans Association, Red Cross Society, Gard ening Association, Association of Elderly People, exist in each commune. They are considered as implementing tools for accomplishing objectives and targets set by the local government. These organizations, however, are very active and are regarded as effective local partners in many development projects; the Womens Union, Farmers Union, and Veterans Association in particular. Every one or two months, the commune peoples committee will organize meetings with the leaders of these organizations to inform them of government decision s and plans. The leaders, in tu rn, are expected to disseminate the information to the villagers.

PAGE 61

61 Beside the above mentioned local associat ion which are sponsored by the government, other groups such as religious groups, credit gro ups (rotating credit asso ciations), and kinship groups are also found in the villages. However, almost all respondent tended not to mention about those informal groups, especially t hose who belonged to protestant religion. Summary This chapter presented a general overview of the location-related background information that is central to the study. In particularly, distinct characteristic s of the CTNP and its bufferzone were described, which also highlights the challe nges for biodiversity c onservation in the park. Similar to other national parks in Vietnam, th e people who live in the bufferzone of the CTNP are mostly indigenous minorities or resettled households and are very poor with limited education. Their subsistence depends mostly on forest products or re lated ecosystems. In term of sociodemographic conditions, each ethnic group has a different hist ory, a different connection to administrative structures, and a different live lihood strategy. The ethnogr aphic sketch of the population living in the three study communes was presented with a pa rticular focus given to the transition of the Stiengan indigenous ethnic groupfrom a subsistence mode of living to a commercial farming system. This implies a soci oeconomic transformation of the Stieng (as well as of other ethnic groups making this transition). Besides the traditional institutions that govern natural resources, many other new modern institutions are now in place such as local organizations that are either s ponsored by the government or are civil society organizations. The nature and importance of these organizations, as well as households participation in them, will be further discussed in the analysis chapter.

PAGE 62

62 CHAPTER 4 METHODOLOGY This chapter presents the methods and scie ntific reasoning behind the study. The steps documented in this chapter were used to acce ss household social cap ital and conservation attitude toward the Cat Tien National Park in Vi etnam. Included is a discussion of the conceptual framework used to establish rela tionship among variables, the units and levels of analyses, study sites selection criteria, data collection efforts, and the overa ll research design used in this study. Conceptual Framework This study focuses on households social capital and its effect on cons ervation attitude and behavior toward the CTNPspecifically wh ere the World Bank supported projectForest Protection and Rural Development projectis in place. Drawing on the literature, a conceptual framework (Figure 4-1) was developed to a ssess the relationships among various variables1. This framework shows that a set of demographic vari ables would impact house holds social capital. Social capital index is shown to have various components including trust, social cohesion, social commitment, community support, voluntary cooperat ion, familiarity, social integration, ethnic interaction. It is conceivable that both demogra phic variables and components of social capital are expected to influence households attit ude towards the conservation of CTNP. Since household attitude is expected to influence the behavior, it is shown th at all three sets of variables (demographic, social capital, and attitude) would infl uence household behavior towards the CTNP. 1 Note that the components or dimensions of social capital and conservation attitude listed in this figure are derived from factor analysis described latter in this chapter.

PAGE 63

63 Figure 4-1. Conceptual framework to examin e the relationship among selected variables Various dimensions of Conservation Attitude Various dimensions of Social Ca p ital Trust: people in community can be trusted, help any time, work together to solve problems... Social Cohesion: share common interest, connected through associations.. Social commitment: association make decision, willing to make a better place.. Community support: show support, obey com. codes, covenants Voluntary cooperati on: volunteer in community Familiarity: get along, have mutual res p ect Social integration: know most people, feel a part of community Ethnic Interaction: accept the ethnic diversity, help making better community.. Perceived Ownership of Forestlands Household Participation in Various Conservation Activities Forest Protection Training Discuss Conservation Agreement A gro-forestry Training Program Land Use Planning Demographics: Age Gender Education Length of residence Household size Household Income Ethnicity Religion Marital status Perceived Short-term Use Benefit Conservation Awareness Perceived Benefit of Conservation

PAGE 64

64 Unit of Analysis Individual households are the uni t of analysis in this study. The attitudes, interactions with other households, and experiences and opinions of respondent house holds were used to measure social capital as well as the factors that contribute to it (Narayan and Cassidy, 2001). Households were chosen as the unit of analysis because, in the rural context of Viet nam, the household is the basic unit of production that governs the daily acti vities of all people, including their attitudes and behaviors toward natural resource conservation. Sampling Methods A total of 270 households from the three communes of Thong Nhat, Dang Ha, Doan Ket were identified for participati on in this study using a stratifie d sampling design. Several steps determined this sample size. First, based on the total number of households in the three communes (4,702 households), the minimum number of completed questionnaires needed was determined to be 253 (based on the number of available households). This sample size is considered appropriate since the population presents a homogenous stru cture; moreover, it is also sufficient to limit sampling error and still be st atistically representative of the population at a level of .05 (Kraemer and Thiemann, 1987; Isaac and Michael, 1997). The selection of samples is generally outlined in Figure 4-2. Stratified sampling allows the researcher to select responden t households from three main groups mentioned in the previous chapter. Thes e groups are the mainstream Kinh (Vietnamese), the indigenous ethnic minorities (Stieng), and recently migrated minorities from the Northern provinces (mainly Tay, Nung, and Hoa) At the commune level (i.e., th e first strata), three out of five communes were purposefully selected. These communes represent the characteristics of the population of Binh Phuoc province wh ich belong to the bufferzone of CTNP because the various distances from these communes to the national par k, as well as the diversity of the ethnic groups

PAGE 65

65 in these communes. At the hamlet level (second strata), three hamlets were chosen from each commune, with each hamlet representing the ch aracteristics of each of three groups above. Because the population in each hamlet is relativ ely homogenous, 30 households out of more than 100 households were randomly selected. Thus, a total sample size of 270 households (3 communes x 3 hamlets x 30 households = 270) was determined. Figure 4-2. Sampling approach followed to select communes, hamlets, and households Survey Instrument/Questionnair e Development and Research A survey instrument was developed to obtain household data on social capital, participation in the FPRD, attitudes toward s biodiversity conservation, and demographic characteristics of respondents. These are the main areas of the instrument and can be observed in the sample questionnaire presented in Appendix A. The design of the questionnaire followed the suggested formatting of the Tailored Design Method (Dillman, 2000). The development of the questionnaire was based on information from semi-s tructured interviews with key informants in the study sites. These interviews were conducted by the principal investigator with different key informants in summer 2003 in the three study co mmunes. Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) Households From each hamlet 30 households are selected (270 households in total) From each commune three hamlets are selected randomly Communes Three out of five bufferzone communes of Bu Dang District were selected Hamlets

PAGE 66

66 reports (FPRD, 2000; FPRD, 2001) for thr ee communes Thong Nhat, Dang Ha, Doan Ket produced by the World Bank project in these areas were also helpful, especially in terms of identifying community groups, social organiza tions, and development activities in the study sites. Survey Pre-test A pre-test of the questionnaire was conducte d in order to identify any incorrect or misleading survey items, problems with data collection methodology, and/or additional areas for research that were not present in the literature. As such, a random sample of 20 households was drawn from the residents list in the Thong Nhat Commune to be interviewed for this purpose. This commune was chosen for two reasons: (1) it is more accessible than the other two communes, and thus minimized the cost of the pre-test; and (2) it has more diversified ethnic groups with different language s and social structures, whic h provided a desired amount of variability for the pre-test. The se lection of 20 residents would be considered an adequate sample size for this pilot test (Isaac and Michael, 1997; Babbie, 1998). Testing was conducted in the first week of April 2005. The pilot test was conducted following the planned methodology used in the overall study. In addition, respondents were asked to comment on the questionnaire content, design, clarity, wording, and format. Where possible, all responde nts were gathered together to discuss the survey in a group setting or focus group. Additio nal issues that were discussed include the wording of certain items, how to approach respon dents who live deep inside the Park, etc. Based on this pretest, revisions were made to th e questionnaire and, where necessary, the data collection methods.

PAGE 67

67 Administration of the Survey The survey proper was conducted from 20 April to 10 August 2005. The questionnaire was translated into Vietnamese and administer ed orally by a team of two trained research assistants assigned to each commune. These inte rviewers are extension workers who worked in the areas and have a good rapport with the local people. As re spondents might be reluctant to answer sensitive questions, extens ion workers were chosen to conduc t the interviews in order to avoid the potential bias that may be caused by hiring foresters. The re sponse rate was 100% (270/270) due largely to the fact that the su rvey was conducted through face-to-face interviews that were pre-arranged. Concepts and Variables This study is focused on three primary concepts : social capital, participation in the FPRD project activities, and gene ral attitudes toward biodiversity cons ervation. The first two factors are hypothesized as being key components that infl uence the conservation attitude of given respondent households. Thus the co nservation attitude is also util ized as a dependent variable. There are two main types (or ca tegories) of social capital: structural forms and cognitive forms (Krishna and Uphoff, 2002). Both pertai n to and affect social relationships and interactions among people, and bot h affect and are affected by e xpectations. Structural social capital facilitates mutually beneficial collective actions through established roles and social networks that are supplemented by rules, proc edures, and precedents. Cognitive social capital, which includes shared norms, values, attitudes, and beliefs, predisposes people toward mutually beneficial collective action (Krishna and Uphoff, 2002). Participants in the survey were asked to e xpress their opinions on a series of questions about their involvement with, and perceptions about, their neighbors. A Likert scale was used to record the responses. General topi cs covered by the questionnaire include organizations that the

PAGE 68

68 respondent belongs to; collective act ivities participated in the la st 12 months, feelings towards neighbors, friends. Community Group/Social Organization Membership Respondents were asked if they are aware of or belong to, various groups, associations, and/or organizations that exis t in their community, such as farmer unions, womens unions, youth unions, veterans associa tion, Red Cross Society, Gardeni ng Association, Association of Elderly People, Religious groups, Credit groups. Th ese groups/associations were listed according to the pre-existing information available in the study site. The following questions were asked: Are you aware of this group existence in your community? 1) No 2) Yes Do you belong to this group? 1) No 2) Yes Involvement in Community Activities Involvement in community activities was measured by asking respondents how often they performed various activit ies in the past year (Kasar da and Janowitz, 1974; Riger and Lavrakas, 1981; Luloff et al. 1995, Brennan, 2006, Brennan, 2007). These activities include community events, sporting events, meetings, tr aining, and work projects. Information about these activities was also derived from the semi-str uctured interviews with key informants before the survey was conducted. The following question was asked: In the past year have you participated in th e following activities with your neighbors or other people in the village? For each ac tivity indicate how often you performed the activity : 1) Never; 2) Once/year; 3) Few times/year; 4) Once/month; 5) Few times/month. Perception of the Community Perceptions about ones community are impor tant for social action and interaction (Wilkinson, 1991). Thus, the respondents percep tion about their community was measured by asking each respondent household to agree or disagree with 30 related statements. These

PAGE 69

69 statements were derived from the integrated qu estionnaire for measuring social capital used by the World Bank (Grootaert et al., 2004), and were modified to suit the specific context of this study. The questionnaire explores the respondents subjective perceptions of the trustworthiness of other people, and of the key institutions th at shape their lives; as well as the norms of cooperation and reciprocity that en compass attempts to work toge ther to solve problems (i.e., cognitive social capital). Thes e perception variables can then be measured through 32 items (Appendix A) which are related to trust and soci al commitment, particip ation, social cohesion and inclusion, etc (Grootaert et al., 2004) Below is an example of the Likert scale used for responding to the example statements which follows: Please tell us how do you feel about the following statements using the scale from 1 to 5, 1 being strongly disagree (SD), 2 being disagree, 3 being neutral, 4 being agree, 5 being strongly agree. c. Most people in this village are wil ling to help each other whenever they can (1) strongly disagree; (2) disagree; (3) ne utral; (4) agree; (5) strongly agree. Participation in Conservation-Related Acti vities of the Forest Protection and Rural Development Project The main goals of the Forest Protection a nd Rural Development Project (FPRD) are to protect and manage the forests with high biodiversity. Households participation in FPRD can take many forms. In the case of the bufferzone of the CTNP, a variety of FPRD project activities have been identified through the Commune Action Plan (CAP) that was available to the principal investigator prior to the imp lementation of the survey. The conservation related activities include atte ndance at meetings to discuss a conservation agreement, attending training on forest protect ion, agroforestry training, land use planning

PAGE 70

70 training, etc. Each respondent were asked to repo rt if they participated in specific project activities in the past 12 months. For example: In the past 12 months have you: Participated in traini ng on forest protection? 1) No 2) Yes Attended meeting to discuss conservation agreement? 1) No 2) Yes Participate in land use planning? 1) No 2) Yes Participated in Training on Agroforestry? 1) No 2) Yes Conservation Attitudes An attitude is defined as th e organization of beliefs about an object or situation that influences ones response to that object (Rokeach, 1968). Conservati on attitudes of the respondents are measured on the basis of their reac tions to 18 statements (Appendix A) that were adapted from the survey in the Royal Ch itwan National Park, Nepal (Nepal, 1993), and subsequently modified to suit the particular c ontext of this study. The following sections provide sample questions in order to illustrate how conservation attitudes were elicited. Perceptions about biodiversity conservation Respondents perception toward biodiversity conservation is thought to be an important factor influencing their behavi or toward a protected area (Nep al, 1993; Mehta and Kellert, 1998). Perceptions were measured by aski ng respondents to express their f eelings about statements such as It is important to keep the park for the survival of various plants and animal species The Park is our countrys pride and is essential for a he althy environment. Responses were measured via the Li kert scale as above.

PAGE 71

71 Issues/ problems associated with biodiversity conservation Respondents were also asked to rank issues or problems cu rrently facing their community. These responses are believed to provide an ove rall measurement of household attitude toward biodiversity conservation, and in clude statements such as Conservation has taken land thus farme rs do not have enough land to cultivate Again, responses are measured via a five response Likert scale. (1) strongly disagree; (2) disagree; (3) ne utral; (4) agree; (5) strongly agree. Impacts of conservation activities The Likert scale was also used to measur e the impacts of conservation activities upon respondent households by asking them to agree or disagree with the following statements: Farmers have benefited from the conservation program; Forest land allocation ensures farme rs ownership of the forestland; Farmers can get more income because of forest protection and management activities. Responses are measured via a five response Likert scale. (1) strongly disagree; (2) disagree; (3) ne utral; (4) agree; (5) strongly agree. Control Variables/Demographics A substantial amount of recent literature has shown that household-level sociodemographic variables influence the level of so cial capital and community participation of households, as well as their att itudes toward natural resource c onservation (Israel et al., 2001; Glaeser et al., 2002; Cramb, 2004; Israel and Beaulieu, 2004; Ma sozera and Alavalapati, 2004; Brennan and Luloff, 2007). Thus, several socio-de mographic variables were included in this study and used as control variables in the analysis. This allows fo r differences in opinion to be compared among various household characteristics. These variables also serve as a mechanism for understanding relationships between other vari ables and help to confirm and elaborate on

PAGE 72

72 generalizations that are drawn from the findings (Babbie, 1998) Finally, socio-demographic variables were also used in the sample valida tion process to determine how well the sample of respondents matches the overall population. The following control variables and the corresponding item values were used: ETHNICITY. (1) Kinh; (2) Tay; (3) Hoa; (4) Stieng; (5) others. RELIGION. (1) Buddhism; (2) Catholic; (3) Protestant; (4) others. LENGTH OF RESIDENCY. (1) Less than 10 years; (2) 10-20 ye ars; (3) 20-30 years ;(4) more than 30 years. EDUCATION. (1) Elementary school (grade 1-5); (2) some high school (grade 6-9); (3) high school (grade 10-12); (4) college. HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION. (1) 1-4 persons; (2) 5-8 persons; (3) more than 8 persons. HOUSEHOLD INCOME. (1) Less than VND 5,000,000; (2) VND 5,000,000 10,000,000; (3) VND 10,000,000 20,000,000; (4) more than VND 20,000,000. AGE. (1) 18-29 yrs old; (2) 30-39 yrs old; (3) 40 yrs old; (4) 50 59 yrs old; (5) 60 yrs olds or above. MARITAL STATUS. (1) Single; (2) married; (3) divorced; (4) widowed. GENDER. (1) Male; (2) female. Data Compilation Upon the completion of the surve y, all data from each survey we re put in a template file using Microsoft Excel. This template essentia lly reflects the household survey questionnaire. Data from each household were tran scribed into this format for late r analysis. Research assistants in three different communes were asked to ente r data onto data sheets in the Vietnamese language in order to avoid any ambiguity. This task was done under the supervision of the principal investigator (PI), especially with re gard to the handling of specific ambiguities in questionnaire responses. Finally, th e Statistical Package for the So cial Sciences (SPSS) was used to handle all necessary data analyses. Re versed coding was used when necessary.

PAGE 73

73 Factor Analysis Factor analysis is a crucially important component of this res earch study. Factor analysis is designed to study the pattern of relationships between a number of dependent or independent variables and how the nature of (as of yet unknown) factors ma y affect them (Darlington, 2006). There are two approaches to factor analysis: exploratory and confirmatory. Because social capital and conservation attitude are designed as exploratory measures, exploratory factor analysis was used. There are three purposes of ex ploratory factor analysis in scale development (De Vellis, 2003). The first purpose is to determin e how many dimensions account for most of the variance in the scale. Second is to allow researchers to condense a scale, using a few items to represent the construct. Finally, exploratory factor analysis he lps researchers to define the meaning of factors that ch aracterize a group of items. Exploratory factor analysis a ssumes that the number of underlyi ng factors is less than the number of overall items. In addition, because exploratory factor analysis is applied to a correlation matrix (as opposed to raw data), assumptions relevant to Pearsons correlation coefficient are relevant to expl oratory factor analysis. Correla tion assumptions include a large number sample size (in this study, n=270), and vari ables measured on an in terval scale (Pett, Lackey, and Sullivan, 2003). Exploratory principle components factor analysis was used in this study to identify the factor stru ctures for the 32 items designed to measure social capital and 18 items to measure conservation attitude. In this study, the factor st ructures were rotated using Varimax (orthogonal) rotation. The goal of rotation is a simple structure. That is, hi gh loadings on one factor and low factor loading on all others. Orthogonal rotation ensures that th e factors remain unrelated, by not allowing the axis that are rotated to move beyond perpendicu lar to each other (Geo rge and Mallery, 2001). Rotation allows for a clearer interpretation of th e results. Jeffreys, Massoni and ODonell (1997)

PAGE 74

74 identified Varimax rotation as the best way to determine the appropriate number of common factors by analyzing the eigenvalues and adjusted correlation matrix. As suggested by Hair, Anderson, Tatham a nd Black (2004) factors with eigenvalues greater than 1.0 were considered for further analysis. Kaiser (1960) was the first to recommend this procedure for factor inclus ion. In addition, as first proposed by Cattell (1966), a scree plot of eigeinvalues was analyzed in order to arrive at a final number of factors. Following the recommendation of Hair, Anderson, Tatham and Bl ack (2004), items with a factor loading of 0.40 or greater were kept. Items that double loaded (loaded on 2 or more factors at 0.40 or greater) were dropped from the factor in which it loaded least, and kept on the factor in which it loaded highest. Reliability testing was conducted for each factor. Factors with a Cronbach alpha of 0.50 or greater were considered ac ceptable (Baumgartner and Jackson, 1999). Jeffrey, Massoni, and ODonnell (1997) reco mmend the use of the Kaiser-Myer-Olking (KMO) statistic as a check for the appropriatene ss of exploratory analysis as a method of analysis for the items in questions. KMO compares the magnitude of the observed correlation matrix to the magnitude of the partial correlati on coefficients. A small KMO (<0.5) suggests that exploratory factor analysis may not be a suitable approach. In this study, the KMO was equal to .874 for the factor analysis of social capital and 0.789 for conservation attit ude. This is indicating that exploratory factor analysis wa s an appropriate method of inquiry. The exploratory factor analysis identified eight factors for social capital, which account for 61.85% of the total variance. It also identified four factors for cons ervation attitude, which account for 57.8% of the total variance. The social capital and conservation attitude variables were calculat ed by summing scores for all items. The use of a scale allowed for mo re manageable data, and reduced random errors

PAGE 75

75 that could impact reliability and validity (Car mine and Zeller, 1979). The scale was tested by means of Cronbachs alpha to provide a measurem ent of their reliability (Carmine and Zeller, 1979). Cronbachs alpha is a measure of reliability in which a score ranges from zero to one. The higher the score, the higher reliabi lity of the variables involved. Linear Regression Models Multiple regression modeling serves to descri be a phenomenon, explai n relationships, and to a general extent predict events or phenomenon (Barbie, 1998). By inclus ion of a wide range of variables and relationships, multiple regression models can increase the power of statistical models. Such models allow us to separate the effects of interrelated independent variables. In this study, a series of multiple regression models using ordinary least squares (OLS) was estimated to assess the effects of each predictor on various conservation attitude variables (measured as continuous variables). These dependen t variables represent different dimensions of conservation attitude such as perceived bene fit from conservation, conservation awareness, perceived benefit from using the park, a nd perceived ownership of forestland. These conservation attitude variables were derived from the factor analysis described previously and were calculated as indices. The socio-demographi c variables (age, gender, length of residence, level of education, household size, income, ethnicity, religion) and so cial capital variables (social trust, social cohesion, social commitment community support, voluntary cooperation, familiarity, social integration, and ethnic interac tion) are used as independent variables in the multiple linear regression models. The linear regression model is specified as follows: 01122...iikkiYXXX

PAGE 76

76 Where Y is the conservation attitude, 0 is the intercept term, 1, 2,, k are the coefficients associated with each explanatory variable X1, X2, Xk and is the error term. The explanatory variables include so cio-demographic variables such as age, gender, length of residence, education, house hold size, household income, et hnicity; and social capital. Five multiple linear regression models were developed for conservation attitude variables. The first model was developed for the perceive d benefit from conserva tion. The second model focused on the conservation awareness. The thir d model was used to predict the perceived benefit from using the park. The fourth mode l focused on the perceived ownership. Finally, a general model was developed for the overall (a ggregated) conservation attitude toward the CTNP. Logistic Regression Models Participation in conservation activities is the dependent variable. It is a binary variable which takes a value of 1 for household participat ing in conservation activ ities and a value of 0 for not participating in a ny conservation activities. The logistic regression model ch aracterizing the participation of the sample households is specified as follows: 1101122ln[/(1)]...iikkiPPXXX Where Pi is the probability of a household to partic ipate in conservation activities and (1Pi) is the probability of a household not to participate, 0 is the intercept term and 1, 2,, k are the coefficients associated with each explanatory variable X1, X2, Xk. The explanatory variables used to explain househol d participation of each household include sociodemographic variables such as age, gender, le ngth of residence, e ducation, household size,

PAGE 77

77 household income, ethnicity; and so cial capital and conservation i ndices which are derived from factor analysis. Summary This chapter presented the methods and scie ntific reasoning behind the study including a conceptual framework, units and levels of analys es, study sites selection criteria, data collection efforts, and overall research desi gn that were used in this stu dy. A detailed discussion of the major concepts and variables measuring social cap ital, conservation attitude and participation in conservation activities was provide d. In addition, research appro ach and data analysis methods that are used to achieve the objectives of the study were also discussed. The next chapter begins by presenting descri ptive statistics of socioeconomic variables. Factor analysis results will then be presented to identify social capital and conservation attitude components. Based on these results, indices for social capital and conservation attitude are calculated and used as dependent variables and/or explanatory va riables in linear regression and logistic regression models. The relationships am ong sociodemographic variables, social capital, conservation attitude, and cons ervation behavior are assessed.

PAGE 78

78 CHAPTER 5 DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS In order to scientifically e xplore the research questions of this study, an analysis of household survey data was first conducted. Sp ecific conditions were identified, controlled, explored, and interpreted. Seve ral statistical analysis methods were used. Univariate and bivariate analyses were first c onducted to determine the impacts of a variety of characteristics on social capital indices and their relationship to co nservation attitudes. To calculate these indices, a series of factor analyses were first used to identify components of social capital and conservation attitude. Frequency of Response Data Socio-demographic Characteristics Analysis of data began with a review of ove rall responses for each major conceptual area. Table 5-1 presents the frequency of responses for the main socio-demographic variables.1 The data in Table 5-1 are categorical in nature and are therefore presented as frequencies, relative frequencies, and cumulative frequencies. The data for respondent s are distributed across five age categories, with the majority of respondents being between 30 and 50 years old (68%). This was expected because thes e individuals are the household heads. Males accounted for 89% of the respondents which indi cates that there are very fe w female-headed households. The majority of the respondents had low levels of e ducation: 7% of respondents are illiterate, while 40% have completed primary school a nd 40% have completed secondary school2. Only 12% have completed high school and 1% has complete d college. Respondents were distributed across ethnicity, in the following manner: 28% bel ong to the Kinh group, 22% were Tay, 13% Nung, 1 A full presentation of all responses to all survey items included in this analysis can be found in the Appendix C. 2 Secondary school in Vietnam is roughly equivalent to Junior High School in the U.S.

PAGE 79

79 Table 5-1. Frequencies of socioeconomic characteri stics for all respondents Demographic Characteristics (n=270) Frequency Relative Frequency Cumulative Frequency AGE 18-29 39 14.4% 14.4% 30-39 93 34.5% 48.9% 40-49 90 33.3% 82.2% 50-59 34 12.6% 94.8% 60 or more 14 5.5.2% 100.0% GENDER Male 240 88.9% 89.9% Female 30 11.1% 100.0% ETHNICITY Kinh 74 27.4% 27.4% Tay 60 22.2% 49.6% Nung 35 13.0% 62.6% Hoa 4 1.5% 64.1% Stieng 94 34.8% 98.9% Others 3 1.1% 100.0% EDUCATION None 19 7.0% 7.0% Grade 1-5 108 40.0% 47.0% Grade 6-9 109 40.4% 87.4% Grade 10-12 32 11.9% 99.3% College 2 0.7% 100.0% MARITAL STATUS Single 5 1.9% 1.9% Married 253 93.7% 95.6% Divorced 2 0.7% 96.3% Widowed 10 3.7% 100.0% HOUSEHOLD INCOME (VND) Less than 5 M VND 25 9.3% 9.3% 5-10 M VND 57 21.1% 30.4% 10-20 M VND 68 25.2% 55.6% More than 20 M VND 120 44.4% 100.0%

PAGE 80

80 1% Hoa, 35% Stieng, and 1% othe rs. Ninety four percent of the respondents were married, 2% were single, only two cases (account for 1%) were divorced or separated, and 3% were widowed. In general, divorce is still very rare in the study site, and in other rural areas of Vietnam. Finally, respondents were asked about their a nnual household income. Income is presented in Vietnamese Dong (VND), which has the following exchange rate: US$1=16,000VND. Nine percent of households reported income of less than five m illion VND, 21% reported income between 5 to 10 million VND, and 25% had inco me between 10 to 20 million VND. Forty five percent reported incomes of 20 million VND or more. Respondent Awareness of Groups Existence in Community Respondents were initially asked if they were aware of any community groups, organizations, or associations (Figure 5-1). Most reported that they were aware of the Farmers Union (95%), Womens Union (89%), Veteran A ssociation (88%), Youth Union (78%), and the Red Cross Society (76%). These numbers closely match data collected from the semi-structured interviews with key informants during prelim inary data analysis. The Farmers Union is considered to be the most active in conducting ex tension activities, which is likely the reason for the extremely high level of awareness exhibited by this organization. Both the Womens Union and the Veteran Association were also mentioned as active in he lping their members; again the high level of awareness of the or ganization reflects this observation. Community Groups/Social Organization Membership The next few questions continued this line of inquiry by asking respondents if they belong to any community groups/organizations, or club s. Figure 5-2 shows that a wide majority of respondents (83%) reported belongin g to at least one group/organi zation. This indicates that a very large proportion of the households living near the CTNP are at least somewhat engaged in their local community.

PAGE 81

81 256 211 240238 206 40 165 197 129 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Farmers Union Youth Union Womens Union Veteran Association Red Cross Society Gardening Association Association of Elderly People Religious groups Credit groups Figure 5-1. Respondents awareness of local grou ps and organizations 17.40% 82.60% 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% No Yes Figure 5-2. Relative frequency of respondents affiliation to local groups and organizations To the extent that membership in local gr oups/organizations reflect s engagement in the local community, the association made above is confirmed by Figure 5-3. More than 65% of respondents stated that they belong to 2 or more groups. The breakdown is as follows: 14% reported belonging to only one group, 32% belo nged to two groups, 17% reported belonging to three groups, 14% reported belonging to four groups and 6% reported that they belong to more than five groups. Seventeen percent (17%) of the respondents reporte d not belonging to any group at all.

PAGE 82

82 17.40% 13.70% 32.20% 17.40% 13.70% 5.60% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 0 groups 1 group 2 groups 3 groups 4 groups 5 or more Figure 5-3. Percentage of re spondents belonged to number of groups/associations (n=273). Respondents were then asked to specifically id entify the groups to which they belong. The same list of organizations listed in Table 5-1 was provided to each respondent. Not surprisingly, the Farmers Union had the highest number of members; this was followed by the Red Cross Association, Religious groups, and the Veteran Asso ciation. The Womens Union is very active; 25 of the 30 female respondents were found to be associated with this organization. 182 38 25 56 114 18 23 65 55 0 50 100 150 200 Farmers Union Youth Union Womens Union Veteran Association Red Cross Society Gardening Association Association of Elderly People Religious groups Credit groups Figure 5-4. Number of member s of each group/organization Involvement in Community Activities To assess the level of involvement in commun ity and local level activities, a series of questions were asked that inquired about the regu larity with which respondents participated in activities in the past year. These data are presented in Table 5-2. Included were participation in community events like village festivities (e.g., harvesting, of ficiating sacr ifices) (54% respondents reported never participating), clubs /groups activities (e.g., picnic, outing) (83%

PAGE 83

83 never participated), sports (e.g., soccer, volleyball) (68% never participated), village meetings to solve problems inside and outside the village (only 4% never participated), training (e.g., extension, conservation) (36% neve r participated), and work projec t (e.g., tree planting on Lunar New Year, clean up village) ( 17% never participated). Table 5-2. Frequency of participation in co mmunity events and other groups or activities (n=270) In the previous section, the data suggests that many households are engaged in the local community based on their membership in various groups. However, the data on actual participation in these groups indicates that this is not the case. In rural Vietnam, people are encouraged to join mass organizations such as Farmers Union, Youth Union, Womens Union, Veteran Associations, etc. To some extent, thes e organizations can help their members to access to information and financial resources. However, to what extent that the membership of these organizations can help each indi vidual household can be an issue that needs further investigation. Given the fact that there is no other real ci vil society organization, the existence of these associations still plays a cr ucial role in mediating betw een local people and government. Overall, the above descriptive statistics have shown that households are very diverse in terms of age, gender, ethnicity, education, a nd income. Their participation in community activities and organizations are not homogeneous either. These obs ervations would be useful to understand the variations in conservation attitude and behavior among households. Furthermore, Types of Activities Never Once/ year Few times/ Year Once/ Month Few times/ Month Community events 145 39 63 12 11 Clubs/groups activities 225 28 5 11 1 Sports 185 30 42 12 1 Meetings 10 14 166 63 17 Trainings 96 75 70 25 4 Work projects 45 93 99 30 3

PAGE 84

84 these results help decision makers and project managers develop target specific programs or policies in the Cat Tien National Park. In Vietnam, people are encouraged to jo in mass organizations which are under the leadership of the Communist Party such as Farmers Union, Youth Union, Womens Union, Veteran Associations, etc. Even though these or ganizations are considered as the extended hands of the local government to implement their policies, it is found in the study sites that at the grass-root level, these or ganizations were working very effectively in organizing and facilitating development activities. For instance, with the funding from th e Forest Protection and Rural Development (FPRD) Project, the Farmers Union in the three study communes has successfully organized many extension training s for its members while the Womens Union helped its members in organizing micro-credit projects. Given the Vietnamese socio-political context, it is suggested that conservation programs should use these organizations as local partners to implement the activities. Moreover, through the participation in these projects, these organi zations can be strengthen ed themselves, thereby attracting more people to join. Such institut ional strengthening, in turn, will bring about voluntary cooperation for collective action.

PAGE 85

85 Identifying Dimensions of Social Capital and Conservation Attitude Following the descriptive analysis of the so cio-demographic data, a series of factor analyses were employed in the evaluation of th e data collected and c onstruction of several variable indices. Specifically, factor analysis was used to determine the various dimensions3 of social capital and conservation attitude. These dimensions were then analyzed in order to augment the analysis of the socio-economic data described in th e previous section. Data gathered through this survey were factor analyzed using princi pal axis factoring and rotation models. The criteria established in advan ce of the selection of factor items were factor loading of 0.40 or higher; at l east 0.10 difference between the item s loading with its factors and each of the other factors, and in terpretability (Kim and Mueller, 1978). Review of factors with eigenvalues of greater than 1.0, and subsequent analysis of scree test plots, indicated that either a one (or at best a two) factor so lution would be most appropriate si nce the scree test had distinct and obvious breaks at these poi nts (Kim and Mueller, 1978). Social Capital Dimensions The exploratory factor analysis identified eight factors, which accounted for 61.85% of the total variance. Thirty one of the thirty two items used to measure social capital loaded on one of the eight factors4 (Table 5-3). Items loading highest on the fi rst factor were related to social trust. These eight items yielded a reliability coeffi cient (i.e. Cronbach alpha) of 0.86. Trust is an important dimension of social capit al and this factor accounted for the most variance in the social capital items. For the study respondents, the mean value of Trust Index5 was 3.88 (Table 5-4). 3 Factor names were scrutinized and developed through a focus group discussion among graduate students from different academic disciplines. 4 Following the recommendation of Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black (2004), items with a factor loading of .40 or greater were kept. 5 Trust and other social capital indices we re measured on a scale of 1 to 5.

PAGE 86

86 The second factor was dominated by items re lated to social cohesion. These four items show strong factor loadings, and including all four items also pr oduced a strong scale reliability (alpha = 0.73). Social cohesion is one of the most important com ponents of social capital. The mean of social cohesion score was 3.92. Items loading on the third factor were rela ted to social commitment. Although the item people are willing to make the community a bett er place to live loaded moderately on this factor (0.455), the inclusion of a ll four of these items in this factor produced the strongest scale reliability (0.77) and seemed to make the most sense conceptually. The strongest loading for the fourth factor were for the following items, People in this community show support for a cause that may not directly benefit them but benefits the community as a whole, Some of my neighbors attend several community functions, For the most part, people in the community obey commun ity codes and covenants, People in this community offer enough chances for a person to do volunteer work. These four items yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.71 and are clearly focused on the construct of community support. The fifth factor was dominated by items re lated to voluntary cooperation. Three items clearly show strong factor loadings and produced a reliability coefficient of 0.64. The mean of voluntary cooperation index was highest as shown by a mean value of 4.02. The sixth factor was related to familiarity. These three items loaded only moderately on this factor and produced the lowe st scale reliability of 0.58 (as co mpared to other factors), but this factor shown the highest score with a mean value of 4.02. Three items loading highest on th e seventh factor were related to social integration. These three items produced a reliability coe fficient of 0.65 with a mean of 3.41.

PAGE 87

87 Table 5-3. Factor loadings of social capital dimensions Items* Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5 Factor 6 Factor 7 Factor 8 Most people in this community can be trusted .757 I think people in this community can be trusted .711 I can count on my neighbor for help any time .659 Most people in my community do voluntary work for community .606 Most people in this community are involved in activities that benefit the community .531 People in this community are easy to contact .527 People in this community work together to solve problems .500 Usually people in this community greet one another .407 People in the community share common interests .674 For the most part, people in this community are friendly .654 Most people in the neighborhood are connected through the association .558 People in this community do get involved in community activities .484 I trust my association to make decision on my behalf .744 Most people in this village are w illing to help each other whenever they can .734 Most people in this village are concerned about their own welfare .708 For the most part, people are willing to make the community a better place to live .455 People in this community show support for a cause that may not directly benefit them but bene fits the community as a whole .738 Some of my neighbors attend several community functions .695 For the most part, people in the community obey community codes and covenants .569 People in this community offers enough chance for a person to do volunteer work .456 I always greet my neighbors when I first see them .706 I volunteer in my community .657 This community is a safe place for children .620 I know most people in my village .639 People in this village have mutual respect for one another .532 People in this community get along with each other .434 I know some people in this community, most are strangers .762 Most people in this do not feel th ey are a part of this community .759 Very few people socialize in the community .748 My actions have impacts making this community a better place to live in .849 The community is a mix of different cultural ethnic groups .762 Number of items 8 4 4 4 3 3 3 2 Eigenvalue 9.60 1.99 1.74 1.57 1.45 1.25 1.16 1.05 Percentage of variance explained 29.99 6.21 5.42 4.90 4.53 3.91 3.61 3.28 Cumulative variance explained 29.99 36.20 41.62 46.52 51.05 54.96 58.58 61.85 Cronbach Alpha .86 .73 .77 .71 .64 .58 .65 .71 Variables coded on 5-point scale with 1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neutral, 4=Agree, 5=Strongly Agree

PAGE 88

88 Table 5-4. Reliability Analysis for social capital dimensions Dimensions Questionnaire Items Mean SD Corrected Item Total Correlation Alpha If Item Deleted Most people in this community can be trusted 3.86 .67 .60 .85 I think people in this community can be trusted 3.85 .66 .64 .85 I can count on my neighbor for help any time 3.92 .69 .57 .85 Most people in my community do voluntary work for community 3.84 .65 .62 .85 Most people in this community are i nvolved in activities that benefit the community 3.84 .68 .68 .84 People in this community are easy to contact 3.90 .59 .58 .85 People in this community work together to solve problems 3.83 .62 .63 .85 Usually people in this community greet one another 3.97 .61 .59 .85 Trust Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha = 0.86 3.88 0.65 People in the community share common interests 3.91 .60 .60 .62 For the most part, people in this community are friendly 3.97 .57 .48 .69 Most people in the neighborhood are connected through the association 3.83 .65 .54 .66 People in this community do get involved in community activities 3.95 .51 .47 .70 Cohesion Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha = 0.73 3.92 0.58 I trust my association to make decision on my behalf 3.81 .71 .64 .68 Most people in this village are willing to help each other whenever they can 3.90 .70 .70 .64 Most people in this village are concerned about their own welfare 3.90 .65 .56 .72 For the most part, people are willing to make the community a better place to live 4.02 .56 .40 .79 Social commitment Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha = 0.77 3.91 0.66 People in this community offers enough chance for a person to do volunteer work 3.88 .66 .52 .63 People in this community show support for a cause that may not directly benefit them but benefits the community as a whole 3.78 .61 .49 .65 Some of my neighbors attend several community functions 3.90 .50 .49 .66 For the most part, people in the community obey community codes and covenants 3.98 .54 .50 .64 Community support Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha = 0.71 3.89 0.58 Usually people in this community greet one another 4.11 .56 .51 .45 I volunteer in my community 3.97 .56 .46 .52 This community is a safe place for children 3.98 .61 .37 .64 Voluntary cooperation Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha = 0.64 4.02 0.58 People in this community get along with each other 4.02 .53 .40 .40 I know most people in my village 4.04 .81 .32 .57 People in this village have mutual respect for one another 4.00 .57 .40 .39 Familiarity Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha = 0.58 4.02 0.64 I know some people in this community, most are strangers 3.49 1.09 .49 .52 Most people in this do not feel th ey are a part of this community 3.22 1.10 .47 .55 Very few people socialize in the community 3.52 1.03 .44 .59 Social integratione Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha = 0.65 3.41 1.07 My actions have impacts making this community a better place to live in 3.87 .62 .55 The community is a mix of different cultural ethnic groups 4.00 .48 .55 Interaction Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha = 0.71 3.94 0.55 Variables coded on 5-point scale with 1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neutral, 4=Agree, 5=Strongly Agree

PAGE 89

89 The final factor was dominated by two items expressing ethnic interaction. These two items loaded very high on this factor (0.85 and 0.76). These two items also showed high reliability (0.71) with a mean of 3.94. In sum, items loaded cleanly into the eight factors representing important constructs underlying social capital. In additi on, the mean scores are rather hi gh with 7 of 8 social capital dimensions having a value greater than 3.50. Conservation Attitude Dimensions The factor analysis of the conservation attit ude items generated four factors explaining 57.8% of the total variance (Table 5-5). Items load ing highest on the first f actor were related to perceived benefit from conservation. These five items generated a reliability coefficient of 0.88. This factor accounted for the most variance in the attitude items with a mean value of 3.68. The second factor was dominated by the items related to conservation awareness. All five items showed strong loadings and produced a str ong scale reliability (alpha=0.84) (Table 5-6). Conservation awareness has the highest mean value of 4.20. Items loadings for the third factor were rela ted to perceived benefit of using the park. These items yielded a reliability coeffi cient of 0.71. The mean value was 2.32. The final factor was dominated by two items re lated to perceived ownership of forest land. These two items loaded nicely on this factor a nd yielded a reliability coefficient of 0.65. The mean value was only 3.68. In sum, most of the attitude items loaded clea nly into four factors. The factors that were identified seemed to make most sense conceptu ally. Particularly, the third factor perceived benefit of using the parkshow s a lowest mean value of 2.32.

PAGE 90

90 Table 5-5. Factor loadings of conservation attitude dimensions Items* Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Farmers can benefit from forest replanting in the bufferzone .855 I can get more income from the forest protection and management activities .843 I have benefited from the conservation program .836 Farmers can get more income because of forest protection and management activities .797 Farmers have benefited from the conservation program .665 The national park should be protected fo r the benefit of our future generation .806 The park is our country pride and is essential for a healthy environment .778 Although we need more land for agriculture, it is necessary to set aside some land for the protection of plants and animals .768 It is important to keep the park for the survival of vari ous plants and animal species .766 The illegal cutting of trees, wildlife trapping and hunting should be discouraged .725 It is good if some land within the park is allocated to the local people .750 The park is for those who enjoy wildlife view ing and we do not enjoy this, as we have to face problems from the park .680 Since the wildlife of the park are causing us trouble, wildlife hunting should be allowed under strict supervision .659 The park is for outsiders and we are not even allowed to visit the park .621 Conservation has taken land thus farmer s do not have enough land to cultivate .616 Since the park is a waste of land, it is better to distribute the land among local people .577 Forest land allocation (FLA) ensures farmers ownership of the forestland .772 Forest land allocation ensures my ownership over the forest land .769 Number of Items 5 5 6 2 Eigenvalue 4.44 2.77 2.38 1.38 Percentage of variance explained 23.39 14.61 12.54 7.27 Cumulative variance explained 23.39 38.00 50.54 57.81 Cronbach Alpha .88 .84 .72 .65

PAGE 91

91 Table 5-6. Reliability analysis fo r conservation attitude dimensions Variables coded on 5-point scale with 1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3= Neutral, 4=Agree, 5=Strongly Agree Questionnaire Items Mean SD Corrected Item Total Correlation Alpha If Item Deleted Perceived Benefit from Conservation Farmers can benefit from forest replanting in the bufferzone 3.66 .84 .77 .84 I can get more income from the forest protection and management activities 3.60 .85 .75 .84 I have benefited from the conservation program 3.65 .88 .70 .85 Farmers can get more income because of forest protection and management activities 3.74 .78 .73 .85 Farmers have benefited from the conservation program 3.73 .76 .61 .87 Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha =.88 3.68 0.82 Conservation awareness The national park should be protected fo r the benefit of our future generation 4.35 .60 .70 .79 The park is our country pride and is essential for a healthy environment 4.26 .59 .67 .79 Although we need more land for agriculture, it is necessary to set aside some land for the protection of plants and animals 4.13 .60 .66 .80 It is important to keep the park for the survival of vari ous plants and animal species 4.11 .74 .63 .81 The illegal cutting of trees, wildlife trapping and hunting should be discouraged 4.17 .65 .55 .83 Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha =.84 4.20 0.64 Perceived benefit from using the park It is good if some land within the park is allocated to the local people 2.20 .93 .55 .66 The park is for those who enjoy wildlife viewing and we do not enjoy this, as we have to face problems from the park 2.47 .91 .56 .65 Since the wildlife of the park are causi ng us trouble, wildlife hunting should be allowed under strict supervision 2.29 .92 .44 .69 The park is for outsiders and we are not even allowed to visit the park 2.52 .93 .46 .68 Conservation has taken land thus farmer s do not have enough land to cultivate 2.17 .90 .42 .69 Since the park is a waste of land, it is better to distribute the land among local people 2.28 1.49 .40 .73 Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha =.74 2.32 1.01 Perceived land ownership Forest land allocation (FLA) ensures farmers ownership of the forestland 3.61 .78 .48 Forest land allocation ensures my ownership over the forest land 3.75 .73 .48 Overall Index Standardized Item Alpha =.65 3.68 0.76

PAGE 92

92 Analysis of Social Capital Dimensions To explore the relationship between some of the social capital dimensions and selected variables6, data were recoded and collapsed into new categories for ANOVA and regression analyses (Table 5-7). The sample respondents we re categorized into th e following three ethnic groups with 28% of the respondents were Ki nh, 37% were Tay-Nung-Hoa, and 35% were Stieng. In terms of religion, 25% identified themselves as Buddhists, 20% as Christian and 55% indicated that they had no religion, Table 5-7. Socioeconomic pr ofile of respondents (n=270) Variables Frequencies Percentage Ethnic groups Kinh 74 27.7% Tay Nung Hoa 99 37.1% Stieng 94 35.2% Religion No religion 147 54.9% Buddhism 67 25.0% Christian 54 20.1% Length of Residency Less than 10 years 51 18.9% 10-20 years 114 42.2% More than 20 years 105 38.9% Education Under grade 5 127 47.4% Grade 5-12 141 52.6% Income Less than 10M VND 82 30.5% 10M 20M VND 68 25.2% More than 20 M VND 120 44.4% Age 18-29 yrs old 39 14.4% 30-39 93 34.4% 40-49 90 33.3% 50 and over 48 17.8% 6 ANOVA analysis focused on only six socio-demographic variables because it was thought that these variables would significantly affect social cap ital and conservation attitude indices.

PAGE 93

93 Approximately 19% of the res pondents indicated they had live d in the area less than 10 years, 42% had lived 10-20 years, and 39% had been in the area more than 20 years. About 47% reported that they never finished grade 5, while 53% reported that they had finished grade 5 or higher. About 31% indicated that their income was less than 10 million Vietnamese Dong (VND), 25% with income from 10 to 20 million VND, and 44% with income more than 20 million VND. About 15% were about 18-29 year s old, 34% were 30-39 years old, 33% were 4049 years old, and 18% were 50 years old or greater. To explore the relationship be tween social capital dimensi ons and selected explanatory variables, the ANOVA technique was used to test whether or not social capital indices differed between groups of respondents. Ethnic Groups For the ethnic groups (Kinh, Tay-Nung-Hoa, Stieng), four of eight social capital constructs showed significant differences at the = .05 level (Table 5-8). Social trust, voluntary cooperation, familiarity and ethnic interaction did not differ significantly across these ethnic groups. Based on the mean values (a higher value i ndicates more social capital index), there is higher cohesion among Tay-Nung-Hoa ethnic group (m ean = 4.02) than either the Kinh (mean = 3.84) or the Stieng (mean = 3.86). The Tay-N ung-Hoa group also had a higher social commitment index (mean = 4.12) than both the Kinh (mean = 3.83) and Stieng (3.76). The TayNung-Hoa group showed a stronger community support (mean = 4.00) than Stieng ethnic group (mean = 3.76). The Kinh group was more socially integrated (mean = 3.72) than Tay-Nung-Hoa (mean = 3.23) or the Stieng (mean = 3.36) ethnic groups. These results are supported by the fact that Tay-Nung-Hoa groups who originated from mountainous Northern provinces have been known to have very high community spirits. When

PAGE 94

94 they moved to the new place, the whole village m oved together which created a higher level of population pressure for the buffer zone and the park itself. Table 5-8. Comparison of social capita l components among different ethnic groups Ethnicity groups Index* Kinh Tay Nung Hoa Stieng F value Cohesion Index 3.84a 4.02b 3.86a 4.57** Social commitment Index 3.83a 4.12b 3.76a 14.71*** Support Index 3.90ab 4.00b 3.76a 7.71*** Social integration Index 3.72b 3.23a 3.36a 8.07*** Only indices showing significant diff erences are shown. Values shown are mean importance scores. Values with different superscripts are significantly different at the .05 level based on Scheffes post hoc test. **Significance at .01 le vel (2-tail significance) ***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance) Religious Groups Religion was the next independent variable ex amined; respondents were categorized as no religion, Buddhism, or Christ ian. Based on ANOVA analysis, only two of the social capital constructs differed significantly among religions (Table 5-9). Table 5-9. Comparison of social cap ital components among religions groups Religions Index* No religion Buddhism Christian F value Social commitment Index 4.04b 3.72a 3.81a 11.47*** Support Index 3.94b 3.86ab 3.76a 3.71* Only indices showing significant diff erences are shown. Values shown are mean importance scores. Values with different superscripts are significantly different at the .05 level based on Scheffes post hoc test. **Significance at .01 le vel (2-tail significance) ***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance) The first dimension was social commitment. Those respondents who considered themselves as having no religion had a higher so cial commitment index value (mean = 4.04) than either Buddhism or Christian followers. They also showed higher community support (mean = 3.94) than Christians (mean = 3.76). These results might be conflicting with Emile Durkheim (1965) conviction about religion can provide a certain degree of social commitment. Note, however, that in Vietnam people often report n o religion when asked, although most of them

PAGE 95

95 are influenced by Confucianism a religion that believes huma ns should live in harmony with their surroundings. Length of Residency The next independent variable, length of residency, was operationalized as How long have you been settled in this ar ea? ANOVA results indicated that tw o out of eight social capital constructs showed significant differences (Table 5-10). The social commitment index was higher in respondents who were settled in the area less than 20 years, compared to those who had lived there for a longer period of time. The new settlers also showed stronger community support than the residents who have lived there longer. These results may be explained by the fact that those households who are newly migrated to the area have to help and support each others to start their new lives in the forest frontier. They have to be united to struggle for their existence. Table 5-10. Comparison of social capital components between length of residency Length of Residency Index* Less 10 yrs 10-20 yrs More than 20 yrs F value Social commitment Index 3.97b 4.01b 3.77a 7.38*** Support Index 3.99b 3.92ab 3.79a 4.55* Only indices showing significant diff erences are shown. Values shown are mean importance scores. Values with different superscripts are significantly different at the .05 level based on Scheffes post hoc test. **Significance at .01 le vel (2-tail significance) ***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance) Education For levels of education, only tw o out of eight social capita l indices show statistically significant differences (Table 5-11). The first dimension is social commitment index. Those respondents with higher education (grade 5 12) had a higher so cial commitment index value (mean = 3.99) than those with lower educat ion (under grade 5) (mean = 3.83). The second dimension of community support also showed st atistically significant di fferences. Based on the mean values, households with higher educat ion (mean = 3.95) had higher community support index than those households with lower education (mean = 3.82). Th is result is consistent with

PAGE 96

96 the finding of Helliwell and Putnam (1999) that e ducation is the most important predictor of political and social engagement. Table 5-11. Comparison of social capital components between levels of education Education Index* Under grade 5 Grade 5-12 F value Social commitment Index 3.83 3.99 6.69*** Support Index 3.82 3.95 6.16** Only indices showing significant difference s are shown. Values s hown are mean scores. **Significance at .01 le vel (2-tail significance) ***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance) Household Income For the household income variable, only one so cial capital cons truct showed a statistically significant difference (Table 5-12 ). Based on the mean values, hous eholds with annual income more than 20 million VND (mean = 3.56) were more integrated into community than households with annual income 10 20 million VND (mean = 3.35). However, there was no statistically significant difference in social integration index between househol ds with annual income more than 20 millions and households with annual income less than 10 million VND (mean = 3.33). There is the fact that people w ith higher income are more socially integrated than those with lower income. This result is not very clear whethe r or not income is contributing to the level of social integration of respondents. Table 5-12. Comparison of social ca pital components between incomes Incomes Index* Less than 10M VND 10-20M VND More than 20M VND F value Social integration 3.33ab 3.25a 3.56b 3.65* Only index showing significant differences is shown. Values shown are mean importance scores. Values with different superscripts are significantly different at the .05 level based on Scheffes post hoc test. **Significance at .01 le vel (2-tail significance) ***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance) Age Age was the last control variable examine d. Based on ANOVA, six out of eight social capital constructs differed significantly (Table 5-13).

PAGE 97

97 The first significance dimension was trust i ndex. Respondents who we re 30 years old or over (mean = 3.90) had higher trust index scores th an those who were 18 to 29 years old (mean = 3.64). The same results were found for the cohesi on index and social commitment index. For the familiarity index and voluntary cooperation inde x, those respondents between 30 to 49 years old had higher values than respondents between 18 to 29 years old. For th e social integration dimension, 18 to 29 year-old res pondents were less socially inte grated than those respondents over 50 years old. These results are in part co nsistent with Crambs findings in Southern Philippines that social capital rises then falls with age (peaking of 50-59 years) (Cramb, 2004). Table 5-13. Comparison of social capital components between ages Ages Index* 18-29 yrs 30-39 yrs 40-49 yrs Over 50yrs F value Trust Index 3.64a 3.90b 3.90b 3.98b 4.40** Cohesion Index 3.72a 3.95b 3.95b 3.95b 3.24** Social commitment Index 3.60a 3.97b 3.94b 3.97b 5.99*** Familiarity 3.82a 4.07b 4.06b 4.03ab 3.00** Voluntary cooperation 3.82a 4.07b 4.06b 4.03ab 3.00** Social integration 3.27a 3.35ab 3.36ab 3.74b 3.34** Only index showing significant differences are shown. Values shown are mean importance scores. Values with different superscripts are significantly different at the .05 level based on Scheffes post hoc test. **Significance at .01 le vel (2-tail significance) ***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance) Analysis of Conservation Attitude To explore the relationship between some of the conservation attitude dimensions and selected variables, data were recoded and co llapsed into new categories (Table 5-7). The ANOVA techniques were used to test whether conservation i ndices vary across groups of respondents. Unlike in the previ ous section, none of the conserva tion attitude constructs differed significantly for the age variable. Therefore, this variable is not disc ussed in this section. Ethnic Groups For ethnic groups, two out of the four conservation constructs showed significant differences (Table 5-14). Based on the mean value (a higher value indicate higher or positive

PAGE 98

98 conservation attitude), Kinh (mean = 4.24) and Tay-Nung-Hoa (mean = 4.40) groups have higher conservation awareness as compared to Stieng (mean = 3.95). For the c onstruct of perceived benefit from using the park, Stieng (mean = 2.46) and Tay Nung Hoa (mean = 2.40) perceived a higher economic benefit from using the national park then the Kinh (mean = 2.05). This is most likely because the ethnic minorities such as Stieng, Tay, Nung, Hoa have traditionally used forests as their main livelihood strategies unlike the Kinh who us ed to live in the lowland. Perceived benefit from conserva tion and perceived ownership of forest land did not differ across ethnic groups. Table 5-14. Comparison of conservation attitude among different ethnic groups Ethnicity groups Index* Kinh Tay Nung Hoa Stieng F value Awareness Index 4.24b 4.40b 3.95a 23.83*** Perceived Benefit from using the park Index 2.05b 2.40a 2.46a 8.79*** Only indices showing significant diff erences are shown. Values shown are mean importance scores. Values with different superscripts are significantly different at the .05 level based on Scheffes post hoc test. **Significance at .01 le vel (2-tail significance) ***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance) Religion Religion, the next independent variable, was examined. When the ANOVA techniques were applied, only one out of ei ght social capital i ndices differed signific antly (Table 5-15). Conservation awareness index was higher in re spondents who considered themselves as having no religion (mean = 4.35) than someone who belonged to Christ ian (3.93) or Buddhism (4.09). Interestingly, even though reported as belong to no religion most people in Vietnam are influenced by Confucianism where rites fo r the ancestors are important ceremonies. Table 5-15. Comparison of conservation attitude between di fferent religions Religions Index* Christian Buddhism No religion F value Awareness Index 3.93a 4.09a 4.35b 18.55*** Only index showing significant differences are shown. Values shown are mean importance scores. Values with different superscripts are significantly different at the .05 level based on Scheffes post hoc test. **Significance at .01 le vel (2-tail significance) ***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance)

PAGE 99

99 Most Vietnamese homes have an alter dedica ted to the family ancestors, decorated with candlesticks, incense bowls, flower trays and th e tablet containing the names of ancestors who have died in the past five generations. Conf ucianism believes that humans should live in harmony with their surroundings. Length of Residency Length of residency was the next independe nt variable examined. Based on ANOVA, only one out of the four conservation attitude c onstructs, conservation awareness, differed significantly (Table 5-16). Thos e respondents who lived in the ar ea more than 20 years (mean = 4.00) had lower conservation awareness index as compared to those who live less than 10 years (4.38) or 10 to 20 years (4.31). This may be because household heads of newly immigrated households are young and they have been benefiting from training on conservation. Table 5-16. Comparison of conservation attitude betw een length of residency Length of Residency Index* Less 10 yrs 10-20 yrs More 20 yrs F value Awareness Index 4.38b 4.31b 4.00a 16.846*** Only indices showing significant diff erences are shown. Values shown are mean importance scores. Values with different superscripts are significantly different at the .05 level based on Scheffes post hoc test. **Significance at .01 le vel (2-tail significance) ***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance) Education The next variable examined was level of edu cation. Two out of four conservation attitude indices shown significa nt difference at the = 0.05 level (Table 5-17). The first dimension was conservation awareness. Based on the mean values those households with higher education level (mean = 4.35) had a higher conservation awarene ss index than those with lower education level (mean = 4.04). The second dimension was perceived ownership of forest land. Households with higher education had a higher pe rceived ownership index (mean = 3.76) than those with lower education (mean = 3.59). These results have be en support by Infield (1988) that a better

PAGE 100

100 education results in a more posi tive attitudes and that literacy and perceived rights to collect forest products (Heinen, 1993). Table 5-17. Comparison of cons ervation attitude components be tween levels of education Education Index* Under grade 5 Grade 5-12 F value Conservation Awareness 4.04 4.35 29.09*** Perceived Ownership 3.59 3.76 4.34 ** Only indices showing significant difference s are shown. Values s hown are mean scores. **Significance at .01 le vel (2-tail significance) ***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance) Household Income Income was the next independent variable to be examined. Based on ANOVA, respondents reporting income less than 10 million VND a year express higher conservation awareness as compared to those whose income 10 to 20 million or more than 20 million a year. (Table 5-18). Table 5-18. Comparison of conservation attitude between different incomes Incomes (VND) Index* Less 10M 10-20M More 20M F value Awareness Index 4.40b 4.13a 4.11a 9.97*** Only indices showing significant diff erences are shown. Values shown are mean importance scores. Values with different superscripts are significantly different at the .05 level based on Scheffes post hoc test. **Significance at .01 le vel (2-tail significance) ***Significance at .001 level (2-tail significance) This is difficult to explain because it is often t hought that income will positively affect household conservation attitude. In this case, there have been some education programs targeting poor households in the areas, about the value of cons ervation. This might contribute to raising the conservation attitude of these households. Linear Regression Modeling As mentioned previously, this study utilizes a series of re gression models to assess the effects of each predictor on various conservati on attitude variables (m easured as continuous variables). Five dependent variables ( perceived benefit from conservation conservation awareness, perceived benefit from using the park, and perceived ownership of forestland ) represent different dimensions of conservation attitude and an overall (aggregated)

PAGE 101

101 conservation attitude index These conservation attitude variab les were derived from the factor analysis described previously and were calculat ed as indices. The socio-demographic variables (age, gender, length of resident level of education, household size, income, ethnicity, religion, marital status) and social capital variable as an index and its individual components (soc ial trust, social cohesion, social commitment, community support, voluntary cooperation, familiarity, social integration, and ethnic intera ction) are used as independent variables in the multiple linear regression models. Five multiple linear regression models were developed for conservation attitude variables. The first model (Model I) was developed for the perceived benefit from conservation. The second model (Model II) focused on the conservation awareness. The third model (Model III) was used to predict the perceived benefit from using the park. The f ourth model (Model IV) focused on the perceived ownershi p. Finally a fifth model (Model V) was used to predict the overall (aggregated) conservati on attitude index. The findings fo r each model are presented in Table 5-19 and Table 5-20. Model I is presented in Table 5-19; overall, th e variables were found to account for 13% of the variance in the Model I (Adj. R2=0.131). This model indicates that education level has a positive relationship with the perceived benefit fr om conservation and is statistically significant at the = 0.10 level. This indicates that as educ ation increases, the pe rceived benefit from conservation also increases. Household income however, shows a statistically significant negative relationship at the = 0.10 level. This means that as household income increases, the perceived benefit from conservation decreases. This contradicts the general belief that households with higher income are more likely to hold a favorable attitude toward conservation. The Stieng residents were more likely than other ethnic groups to perceive higher benefits from

PAGE 102

102 conservation, as shown in the positive re lationship between Stieng ethnic group and the perceived benefit from conservati on (statistically significant at the = 0.05 level). Four out of eight social capital indices (cohesion, community support, familiarity and social integration) showed positive relationships with the perceived benefit from conservation. First, the cohesion index shows a positive rela tionship with the perceived benefit from conservation, and is statistically significant at the = 0.05 level. This indi cates that residents with a higher cohesion index are mo re likely to perceive higher benefits from conservation than those with a lower cohesion index. The comm unity support index was also found to be statistically significant at the = .10 level. Residents showin g more community support also showed a higher perceived benefit from conser vation. Familiarity was found to be very significant at the = 0.01 level. The last so cial capital index, social integration, has significant positive relationship with the perceived benefit from conservation (at the = 0.05 level). Model II was developed in order to analyze conservation awareness. Explanatory variables in the Model II were found to account for 23% of the variance in the model (Adj. R2 = 0.234). However, only two explanatory variables regresse d on conservation awareness were observed to be statistically significant at the = 0.05 level: household inco me and ethnic interaction. Household income was found to have a negative relationship with conservation awareness, which indicates that households w ith higher incomes are more likely to have a negative attitude toward conservation than households with lower incomes. This may be due to the increase of the market price for cashew nut, households that deri ve income from cashew plantations are likely more interested in having additional land for pr oducing this important cash crop. In addition, the promotion of cashew and other i ndustrial crops by the government is likely influential on the observed relationship between household inco me and conservation awareness. Another

PAGE 103

103 explanation may be that efforts to raise c onservation awareness in the low income groups (recently made from some conservation and develo pment projects) are affecting this relationship. Table 5-19. Linear regression models for conservation attitude variables Model I Perceived benefit from conservation Model II Conservation awareness Standardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients Socio demographic variables Age 0.082 0.087 Gender (male=1) 0.021 0.094 Length of residence -0.023 -0.108 Education 0.131* 0.105 Household size 0.062 -0.040 Household income -0.135* -0.142** D_ Stieng (Stieng=1) 0.224** -0.091 D_ Tay (Tay=1) -0.026 -0.008 D_ Religion (Yes=1) -0.081 -0.074 D_ Marital (Yes=1) 0.029 0.004 Social capital variables Trust Index -0.117 -0.028 Cohesion Index 0.178** 0.118 Social commitment Index -0.063 -0.007 Community support Index 0.136* 0.054 Voluntary cooperation -0.061 0.103 Familiarity 0.286*** 0.077 Social integration 0.142** 0.028 Ethnic Interaction 0.050 0.123** Intercept 0.531 2.358 Adjusted R2 0.131 .234 F-value 3.219*** 5.478*** Cases 264 264 Significance at the .10 level ** Significance at the .05 level *** Significance at the .01 level Ethnic interaction was found to have a positiv e relationship with c onservation awareness, statistically significant at 0.05 leve l. This can be explained by th e fact that res pondents who are more interactive with individuals from other groups are also more aware of conservation. Model III was developed for the perceived benefit from using the park. There was only one socio-demographic variable that had a statistically significant positive relationship with the dependent variable. The Tay-N ung-Hoa ethnic group was more like ly than the other groups to

PAGE 104

104 perceive higher benefit from using the park. This can be explained by the fact that this group has immigrated from the mountainous Northern provin ces as mentioned earlier, and they are known to be skillful hunters. Three of the social capital indices were found to have a significant relationship with the perceived benefit from using the park. The voluntary cooperation index has a negative relationship with the depe ndent variable at the = 0.05 level. This indi cates that respondents with a higher voluntary cooperation index perc eived lower benefit from using the park. However, the familiarity index has a positive relationship with the perceived benefit from using the park, and is statisti cally significant at the = 0.10 level. The social integration index has a very significant and negative relationship with th e perceived benefit from using the park at the = 0.01 level. This indicates that respondents who are more socially integrated perceive lower benefits from using the park. On e explanation might be that when people are more integrated into community they tend to recognize the cons ervation value of the park more than those who just see the obvious benefit from using the park. Overall, this model acco unted for approximately 17% of the variance in the model (Adj. R2 = 0.165). Model IV was developed for the perceived ow nership of forestland. Household size is statistically significant and positiv ely related to the dependent va riable at the 0.10 level. Two social capital indices (social commitment, community support) were both found to be positively related to the perceived owners hip of forestland. The significan ce of these vari ables indicates that residents with higher social commitment and community support indices were more likely to perceive higher ownership of forestland. The in dependent variables acco unted for about 5% of the variance in the model (Adj. R2=0.051).

PAGE 105

105 Table 5-20. Linear regression models for conservation attitude variables Model III Perceived use benefit of park Model IV Perceived land ownership Model V General conservation attitude Standardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients Socio demographic variables Age 0.004 0.048 .079 Gender (male=1) 0.004 0.114 .050 Length of residence 0.102 -0.132 -0.139 Education -0.060 0.090 0.175** Household size 0.002 0.128* 0.079 Household income 0.032 -0.125 -0.186*** D_Stieng (Stieng=1) 0.074 0.108 0.037 D_Tay (Tay=1) 0.192** -0.129 -0.170** D_Religion (Yes=1) 0.064 -0.081 -0.109 D_Marrital (Yes=1) 0.102 -0.099 -0.066 Overall Social Capital Index 0.357*** Trust Index 0.044 -0.148 Cohesion Index -0.129 -0.044 Social commitment Index 0.103 0.147* Community support Index 0.027 0.200** Voluntary cooperation -0.142** -0.025 Familiarity 0.131* 0.104 Social integration -0.301*** 0.067 Ethnic Interaction -0.050 0.023 Intercept 2.782 2.215 9.353 Adjusted R2 0.165 0.051 .203 F-value 3.893*** 1.791** 7.117*** Cases 264 264 264 Significance at the .10 level ** Significance at the .05 level *** Significance at the .01 level In addition to these four models, another mu ltiple linear regression equation was developed using the general (aggregated) c onservation attitude index as the dependent variable with the overall social capital index as an independent variable (Model V). The results show that education has a posit ive relationship with the overall c onservation attitude and is statistically si gnificant at the 0.05 level. This in dicates that as this variable increases, the general conservati on attitude also increases. This result has been supported with other findings from various countries such as Nepal (Mehta and Heinen 2001) and South Africa (Infield 1988). Similar to the Model I, house hold income was found to a have negative

PAGE 106

106 relationship with the general conservation attitude which indicates that households with higher income are more likely to have negative attitude toward conservation than households with lower income. The explanation for this may be the same that gave to the result in Model I, that is, households that derive income from cashew plan tations are likely more interested in having additional land for producing this important cash crop. Tay Nung Hoa minority group was more likely than the other groups to have negative conservation attitude. The explanation is that this group has moved into region from the mountainous areas and they have been traditionally re lied on hunting for th eir livelihood. These people, who are known as skillful hunters, may ha ve believed that conservation efforts will limit their hunting activities. Finally, in this model (Model V) aggregated social capital was found to have positive and very significant relati onship (at the 0.01 level) with the overall conservation attitude. This indicates that respondents with higher social cap ital will have a highe r conservation attitude toward the Cat Tien National Park. This was ex pected and supported by th eories that are guiding this study. Logistic Regression Modeling The four dependent variables representing pa rticipation in conservation activities were measured as binary values, where 1 = Yes, and 0 = No.Therefore, logistic regressions were used to model these four variables as well as two co mposite models. To predic t the effects of social capital and conservation attitude variables on the participation of households in conservation activities, six logistic regressi on models were developed; they are given the prefix LR to distinguish them from the linear regr ession models discussed previously. Model LR-1 was developed to examine househ old participation in forest protection training. Model LR-2 used meeting to discus s conservation agreement as the dependent

PAGE 107

107 variable. Model LR-3 was used to predict household participati on in the agroforestry training program, and the dependent variable for Model LR -4 was the participatio n in land use planning. Model LR-5 was developed to pred ict whether or not households par ticipated in at least one of these conservation activities. As in the previ ous linear regression m odeling (and for a more practical policy purpose), an additional logist ic regression model (Model LR-6) was developed using overall social capital i ndex and overall conservation at titude index as independent variables. The results for these 6 models are presented in Table 5-21, Table 5-22 and Table 5-23. Model LR-1 shows a positive and significant relationship between household income and respondent participation in forest protection ( = 0.05), suggesting that households with higher incomes are more likely to participate in traini ng on forest protection. Fo r every unit increase in household income, the odds of participation (vs. non participation) increa sed by a factor of 1.787 (e.575). This is explained by the fact that households with higher incomes are less likely affected by the restrictions associated w ith the CTNP management and are more likely to participate in forest protection activities. The Tay-Nung-Hoa ethnic groups show a very significant positive relationship in term of respondent participation in training on fo rest protection. Table 5-21 shows that the odds of being particip ating in forest protection activ ities are 4.64 times better if the household belongs to the Tay-NungHoa group. This can be explained by the fact that the FPRD has generally paid more attention to this gr oup, encouraging them to participate in forest protection activities. This has subs equently restricted their forest dependent activities such as hunting and clearing forest for crops cultivation. For the social capital va riables, voluntary cooperation wa s found to be negatively related ( = 0.05) to the participation in forest protectio n training. This indicates that people having a 7 The logistic regression coefficient for household income is .575 (see Table 5-21). Therefore, the odds ratio is calculated as e.575=1.78.

PAGE 108

108 higher voluntary cooperation index are less likely to participate in training in forest protection than those with a lower index. This implies that for every unit increase in voluntary index, the odds of participation (vs. non particip ation) decrease by a factor of 0.23. Familiarity, however, is positive and very significant at the = 0.01 level. This means that the higher familiarity index, the mo re likely the respondent is to pa rticipate in training for forest protection. For every unit increase in familiari ty index, the odds of participation (vs. non participation) will increa se by a factor of 3.47. Conservation aw areness is another variable that was found to be negative and st atistically significant at the = 0.01 level. This implies that people having a higher conservation awareness inde x are less likely to participate in forest protection training than those with a lower index. Further, for every unit increase in the conservation awareness index, the odds of participation (vs. n on participation) decreased by 0.35. This contradictory result reflects the fact that many households pa rticipate in forest protection training activities with their main motivation be ing the economic benefit they will get afterward. Recently, the government made a huge financial inve stment to encourage people to participate in forest protection on a contractual basis. Attracted to this new s ource of income, many households participated in the program even though they had a low their awareness levels. Model LR-2 shows a positive and significan t relationship between ethnic Tay-Nung-Hoa and meeting to discuss conservation agreement at the = 0.10 level. This indicates that the Tay-Nung-Hoa group is more likely to particip ate in the meeting to discuss conservation agreement than are the other groups. The odds of meeting to discuss about conservation agreement are 2.78 times better if the house hold belongs to the Tay-Nung-Hoa group.

PAGE 109

109 Table 5-21. Logistic regression analysis of households particip ation in conservation activities Model LR-1 Participate in training on forest protection Model LR-2 Meeting discuss conservation agreement b eb b eb Age .112 1.119 .231 1.260 Gender 1.115 3.049 .763 1.260 Length of Residence -.076 .927 .301 1.351 Education .189 1.208 .007 1.007 Household size .097 1.102 .056 1.058 Household income .575** 1.777 .076 1.079 D_Stieng (Stieng=1) .275 1.317 -.842 .431 D_ Tay (Tay=1) 1.535*** 4.643 1.022* 2.778 D_ Religion (Yes=1) .286 1.331 .593 1.809 D_ Married (Yes=1) .758 2.135 .407 1.502 Social Trust .209 1.232 -2.146*** .117 Social Cohesion .019 1.019 1.260** 3.524 Social Commitment .773 2.165 .323 1.381 Community support -.116 .890 .493 1.637 Voluntary cooperations -1.489** .226 .189 1.208 Familiarity 1.243** 3.466 -.209 .811 Social integration .276 1.318 .237 1.267 Ethnic Interaction .647 1.909 .007 1.007 Perceived Cons. Benefit .352 1.421 .222 1.248 Conservation Awareness -1.041*** .353 -.464 .629 Perceived Use Benefit -.146 .864 .086 1.089 Perceived Ownership .303 1.354 .142 1.153 Intercept -9.976 -4.417 .012 -2LL 239 268 Weighted N 265 265 Significance at the .10 level ** Significance at the .05 level *** Significance at the .01 level Trusta major component of social capitalw as found to be negative and statistically significant at the = 0.01 level. This is ha rd to explain in the abse nce of data on the real behavior of the local households. Information fr om key informants revealed that households within the community trust each other but do not seem to trust the outsiderin this case the project personnel. Cohesion was observed to be statistica lly positive and significant at the = 0.05 level. For every unit increase in the cohe sion index, the odds of attending meeting (vs. non attending)

PAGE 110

110 increased by a factor of 3.52. The cohesion variab le was operationalized as someone who shares common interests and was connected through an associ ation. This can help explain the fact that people who are more cohesive are more likely to participate in activity in which they are have a common interest (e.g., discussi ng conservation agreement). Model LR-3 (Table 5-22) shows a positive and significant relationship between participation in agroforestry training and Stieng and Tay-Nung-Hoa groups. The odds of participation in agroforestry tr aining are 6.11 times better if th e household belongs to the Stieng ethnic, and 3.88 times better if th e household belongs to the Ta y-Nung-Hoa group. This indicates that both Stieng and Tay-Nung-Hoa groups are more likely than the Kinh group to participate in this training activity. The familiarity, social integration and inter action indices found a positive and significant relationship at the = 0.05 level. These results are e xpected because familiarity, social integration and ethnic interac tion would help households know more about the benefit of agroforestry techniques can help to improve th e production and conserve the environment at the same time. For every unit increase in familiarity index, the odds of participation in agroforestry programs (vs. non participation) is expected to increase by a f actor of 3.049 and for every unit increase in social integration index, the odds of participation will incr ease by a factor of 1.46. Similarly, for every unit increase in ethnic inte raction index, the odds of participation (vs. non participation) is likely to increase by a factor of 2.09.

PAGE 111

111 Table 5-22. Logistic regression analysis of households particip ation in conservation activities Model LR-3 Participate in training on agroforestry Model LR-4 Participate in land use planning b B eb Age -.077 .926 .154 1.166 Gender .676 1.966 -.506 .603 Length of Residence -.367 .693 .229 1.257 Education -.041 .960 .152 1.164 Household size .212 1.236 -.113 .894 Household income .241 1.272 .353* 1.423 D_Stieng (Stieng=1) 1.810*** 6.109 .040 1.041 D_ Tay (Tay=1) 1.356*** 3.880 1.125** 3.081 D_ Religion (Yes=1) .534 1.705 .558 1.748 D_ Married (Yes=1) 1.137 3.118 .994 2.702 Social Trust .091 1.095 -1.583*** .205 Social Cohesion -.821* .440 1.429** 4.176 Social Commitment -.425 .654 .212 1.237 Community support -.154 .858 .216 1.241 Voluntary cooperation -.699* .497 -.095 .909 Familiarity 1.115** 3.049 .228 1.256 Social integration .378** 1.459 .282 1.326 Ethnic Interaction .740** 2.095 .445 1.560 Perceived Cons. Benefit .357 1.429 .356 1.428 Conservation Awareness -.198 .820 -.346 .708 Perceived Use Benefit -.355 .701 -.093 .911 Perceived Ownership .339 1.404 .051 1.052 Intercept -4.835 .008 -8.434 .000 -2LL 360 290 Weighted N 265 265 Significance at the .10 level ** Significance at the .05 level *** Significance at the .01 level Model LR-4 shows a positive relationship betw een household incomes and participation in land use planning, statis tically significant ( = 0.10). This is can be e xplained by the fact that the households with higher incomes are more accessible to land use. Model results also show that the odds of participating in land use planning activit ies are 3.08 times better if the household belongs to the Tay-Nung-Hoa group. This implies that TayNung-Hoa is more likely than the other ethnic groups to participate in land use planning becau se this group migrated from the mountainous

PAGE 112

112 Northern provinces, having been driven by scarcity of land in their native place. This helps to explain why they are more inte rested in land use issues. Again, like the previous models, trust was found to be negative and sta tistically significant with respondent particip ation in land use planning. This r eason can be explained in the same manner. People tend to trust each other within the community and not toward the outsiders. Cohesion is another social capital variable found to be positive and sta tistically significant with participation in land use planning at the = 0.05 level. For every unit increase in cohesion index, the odds of participation (vs. non participation) increases by a f actor of 4.18. Social cohesion is an important aspect for households to deal with the important issues in rural society, especially land use and land tenure. Model LR-5 was developed as a general model to predict whether or not a given household participates in at least one c onservation activities. This model shows that both the Stieng group and the Tay-Nung-Hoa group variables are positive and significantly related to the dependent variable. This means that these groups are more like ly than the Kinh to participate in at least one conservation activities. These relationships were very significant at the = 0.01 level. Religion was also found to be statistically significant and positive at the 0.05 level. People who belong to a religion are more likely to participate in at least one conservation activity. Once again, trust the very important dimension of social capit alwas found to have a negative relationship. However, familiarity was positive and significant. Similar to Model LR-1, in this model conser vation awareness was found to be negative and statistically significant. Per ceived ownership has a positive and statistically significant relationship with respondent par ticipation in at least one cons ervation activity. This can be explained by the fact that when people feel mo re secured with land tenure, they are more likely

PAGE 113

113 to participate in conservation activities. Accordin g to various studies, land security leads to a farming system that is productive, stable a nd sustainable (Fortmann and Bruce, 1988; Persoon, 1992). Table 5-23. Logistic regression analysis of households particip ation in conservation activities Model LR-5 Participate in at least one activity Model LR-6 Participate in at least one activity b eb b eb Age .164 1.179 0.047 1.048 Gender -.032 .969 0.068 1.071 Length of residence -.038 .962 0.046 1.047 Education .184 1.202 0.158 1.171 Household size .137 1.147 0.251 1.285 Household income .281 1.325 0.224 1.251 D_ Stieng (Stieng=1) 1.778*** 5.916 1.630*** 5.104 D_ Tay (Tay=1) 2.122*** 8.345 1.727*** 5.622 D_ Religion (Yes=1) .891** 2.437 0.866** 2.377 D_ Married (Yes=1) .851 2.342 0.761 2.141 Overall SC Index -0.034 0.966 Social Trust -2.206** .110 Social Cohesion .171 1.187 Social Commitment -.060 .941 Community support .244 1.276 Voluntary cooperation .182 1.199 Familiarity 1.626*** 5.086 Social integration .042 1.043 Ethnic Interaction -.079 .924 Overall CA Index 0.214** 1.239 Perceived Cons. Benefit .392 1.480 Conservation Awareness -.767* .464 Perceived Use Benefit -.190 .827 Perceived Ownership .579** 1.785 Intercept -3.433 .032 -5.560 -2LL 272 304 Weighted N 265 265 Significance at the .10 level ** Significance at the .05 level *** Significance at the .01 level Finally, Model LR-6 was developed to answer a more practical que stion of how overall social capital and general conservation attit ude affect the households participation in conservation activities. Result shows that both Stieng (indig enous ethnic) and Tay-Nung-Hoa

PAGE 114

114 group variables (migrated minorities) are shown to have a positive and significant impact. Results show that the odds of participation in one or more conservati on activities are 5.10 times better if the household belongs to the Stieng ethnic and 5.62. Religion was also found to be statistically significant and positive at the = 0.05 level. The odds of participating in conservation activities are 2.38 times better if the household belongs to religion. Overall (aggregated) conserva tion attitude was found positive and statistically significant. For every unit increase in overall conservation attitude index, th e odds of participation in at least one conservation activity (vs. non participation) is shown to increase by a factor of 4.18. Summary This chapter presented the analysis and resu lts of the study. A range of the statistical analysis methods were used to test the concep tual model of this study. In doing this, numerous important findings were identified. Overall de scriptive statistics have shown the diverse characteristics of household respondents and the various groups/organizations to which they belong. Factor analysis identified eight different components of so cial capital (e.g., social trust, social cohesion, social commitment, community support, voluntary cooperation, familiarity, social integration, and ethnic in teraction) and four components of conservation attitude (e.g., perceived benefit of conservation, conservation awareness, perceived use benefit, perceived ownership) that serve as basic fo r social capital and conservation attitude indices. All of these components were later used either as dependent or independent variab les in the linear and logistic regression models. Five linear regression models explored the imp acts of the various social capital variables and the socio-demographic variables on the variou s conservation attitude variables. (Table 5-19 and Table 5-20). Six logistic regression models were used to assess the impact of social capital

PAGE 115

115 and conservation attitude on the participation in conservation activities of the sample households. (Table 5-21, Table 5-22, and Table 5-23). The summary of the results of thes e linear and logistic regression models as well as their policy implica tions will be presented in the next chapter.

PAGE 116

116 CHAPTER 6 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Overview This last chapter contains four sections. Th e first section summarizes the study and major findings. In particular, the effects of social capital on conservation attitude and the households participation in conservation activities of the World Bank-supported Fore st Protection and Rural Development Project (FPRD) are discussed. The s econd section discusses th e policy implications of this work, specifically as it regards the abilit y of the FPRD to protect the forest and improve living standards for local rural inhabitants. Recommendations are provided that might help redesign and improve the FPRD project. The third section describes a few limitations of this study. The last section suggests some future work and areas of focus that are worth investigating further. Summary of the Findings and Results This study is based on the prem ise that the social capital of local households impacts households conservation attitude towards the Cat Tien National Park, Vietnam. Drawing on the literature from common property resource management and pub lic choice theory, it was argued that social capital would have a negative impact on households positive and negative apathy towards collective resource conservation and ma nagement. Accordingly, it was thought that improvements to social capital may be an effec tive strategy to muster public participation and address the tragedy of the commons problem. In order to operationalize this proposition 270 households, covering three communes, were interv iewed in order to collect various sets of information. The survey instrument was designe d to solicit a wide range of information on household characteristics, social capital and conservation attitude s, and the participation of households in conservation activitie s such as FPRD. The data colle ction effort was instrumental

PAGE 117

117 in exploring the research object ives of the study: to identify differences between households groups in terms of social capital, conservation at titude and participation in the FPRD; and to identify the key factors influenc ing households attitude towards conservation activities and their participation in conservation activities of the FPRD project. Membership and Local Groups/Organizations Both the qualitative data and qua ntitative data of this study indicate that households are very diverse in term of age, gender, ethnicit y, education, income. In addition, results of the frequency plots show that responde nts belong to different social groups/organizations and exhibit a diverse level of involvement in community activ ities. Although these data suggest that most of the household heads hold membership in various gr oups/organizations, their actual participation in the activities of these groups/org anization suggests otherwise. This is likely due to the fact that these organizations are mainly sponsored and pr omoted by the government under the umbrella of the Vietnam Fatherland Front, wh ich is a pro-government mass movement under the direct leadership of the Vietnamese Communist Party. Thus, they shoul d not be considered authentic civil society groups/organizati ons because they have not or iginated spontaneously and independent of government influe nce. Nevertheless, organizations such as the Farmers Union, Womens Union, and the Veteran Association st ill play an important role in implementing conservation and development projects. Effect of Social Capital on Conservation Attitude In exploring the effect of social capital on conservation attitude, several useful results emerged that will have significant implications fo r future conservation decisions and policy in the study region. These results will also be useful for similar st udies conducted in the future. First, factor analysis identif ied eight social capital com ponents (Social Trust, Social Cohesion, Social Commitment, Community Support, Voluntary Cooperation, Familiarity, Social

PAGE 118

118 Integration, and Ethnic Interactio n) and four conservation att itude components (Perceived Conservation Benefit, Conser vation Awareness, Perceived Use Benefit, Perceived Ownership) that serve as the basis for the social capital and conservation attitude indices. All of these components were later used either as dependent or independent variables in linear and logistic regression models. Second, assessment of the relationship betw een the households pe rceived benefit of conservation and both demographic variables and social capital i ndices suggested that household education has a positive impact on the perceived benefit of conservation. Social cohesion, familiarity and social integration components of social capital are found to influence the perceived benefits of conservati on. The cohesion factor in this study means that households share common interests, are connected through associations, and get invo lved in community activities. These characteristics (of the cohesion concep t) are very crucial in common resources conservation and management which is depende nt upon cooperative behavior and collective action. The familiarity and social integration components were also found to impact households perceived benefit of conservation. Both familiari ty (how individuals familiarize and get along with each other) and social integration (wheth er or not households know most people in the community, feel to be part of the community, and socialize in th e community) are vital to the process of building relationships that increase the capacity of local people to unite and act (Brennan and Luloff, 2007, p.54). Third, assessment of factors influencing househ olds conservation awareness indicated that ethnic interaction has a positive impact. This finding is key because, as individuals build a better and more diverse ethnic community, it provides a mechanism to facilitate the expression of

PAGE 119

119 common interests and needs acro ss diverse segments of local society (Wilkinson 1991; Brennan 2007). Fourth, analysis of the households perceived benefit from short-term, direct use of the park indicated that migrated minorities from the Northern provinces (i.e. Tay, Nung, Hoa) perceived higher benefits from exploiting the pa rk. As such their resentment toward the conservation of the CTNP is higher relative to ot her households. Another result that came out of this analysis is that households that are taking part in more voluntary cooperation, and that are more socially integrated, tend to perceive less di rect-use benefits of th e park. This also means that they are more conservation oriented. These findings help de cision makers formulate target specific activities to promote conservation of the park. Fifth, the assessment of perceived ownership of forestland suggested that the social commitment and community support indices have a positive relationship with the perceived ownership of forestland. Social commitment was measured by the extent to which the respondents have confidence in thei r associations, their willingness to help each other, and their concerns about the community welfare (i.e ., making community a better place to live). Community support was operationalized as a respondents support fo r a cause that benefits the community, such as attending several commun ity functions or obeying community codes and covenants. As perceived ownershi p is central for long-term invest ment of scarce resources (time and capital), this finding suggests that investing in social commit ment and support is an effective way to improve collective acti on in cooperative behavior. Finally, examination of households conservation attitude toward the CTNP indicated that education was found to have a positive impact on the conservation attitude of a given household. The Tay-Nung-Hoa minorities are found to have less favorable attitude toward conservation

PAGE 120

120 efforts relative to other groups. The aggregated social capital variab le was found to have a positive impact on conservation attitude toward CTNP. Household Participation in Conservation Activities In order to assess the impact of social capital and conservation attitude on th e participation in conservation activities of the sample households six logistic regressions were developed. The first four logistic regression models examined whether or not a given hous ehold participated in the FPRD conservation activities such as training on forest protection, meeting to discuss conservation agreement, training on agroforestry a nd participation in land use planning. The last two models examined whether or not a given house hold participated in at least one conservation activity mentioned above. One of these two mode ls (Model LR-5) used multiple variables to represent (i.e., proxy for) social capital and c onservation attitude while the other model (Model LR-6) used a single overall social capital index and a single over all conservation attitude index as independent variables. The results highlighted in this summarized section below, however, are focused on the last two models. In both of these logistic regression models, ethnicity and religion va riables were found to have positive and statistically significant rela tionships with household participation in conservation activities. The ethnic minorities such as Stieng, Tay, Nung, Hoa are more likely than the Kinh to participate. Households that practice a religion are more likely than those reported as no religion to partic ipate in conservation activities. One of the seemingly counter intu itive findings is that the soci al trust component of social capital has a negative impact on households participation. One e xplanation might be trust was measured as the level of trust that respondents trust each other within the community but not to the outsiders. In this case, people do not partic ipate in conservation activities simply because they do not trust the project personnel. As observe d in the field, sometimes, people in community

PAGE 121

121 informed each other of the presence of forest gua rds so that they could avoid them while they were clearing forest for crop cultivation. This ac tion is considered as a forest violation and can be fined heavily. Model LR-5 shows that both familiarity and perceived ownership of forestland have a positive impact on particip ation in conservation activities ( = 0.05). The familiarity factor means that individuals get along with a nd know each other. These characteristics (of the concept familiarity) are importa nt in building relationships th at increase the local peoples participation in collective action. The perceived ownership of fore stland (or feeli ng security of land tenure) encourages households to pa rticipate in conservation activities. In the overall logistic regression model (Model LR-6) which used overall (aggregated) social capital index and overall (aggregated) conservation at titude index as independent variables, the overall co nservation attitude was found to have a positive impact on participation thereby supporting the theoretica l premise used in this study. Policy Implications The main conclusion that can be drawn from th is study is that education greatly influenced conservation attitude. Therefore, conserva tion programs should focus on improving human capital by providing more training and better edu cation for local people. Diverse ethnic groups exist in the CTNP with different histories and languages. However, the current government education program seems to present shortc omings when only Kinh language (Vietnamese official language) is being used in class. As a result, many children from ethnic groups such as the Stieng have dropped out of school early simply because they cannot keep up with the rest of the class. This implies that pa rallel to the study of the Kinh la nguage, these children should have the opportunity to learn in their own language. Such improvement to education would help contribute to conservatio n awareness and community involvemen t in local conservation efforts.

PAGE 122

122 The results from the linear regression suggest th at in order to effec tively protect the CTNP, it is necessary for local inhabitants to recogni ze the value of biodivers ity conservation or to improve the households perceived benefit from conservation. The study has shown that when households perceived higher benefits of conservation, they are more likely to protect the forests and wildlife in the park through the particip atory management of the national park. As highlighted in the previous section, social cohe sion, familiarity and social integration strongly influenced the perceived benefit of conservation. These results imply that more networking is needed to improve social cohesion among households In the Vietnamese so cio-political context, the strengthening of local associations such as farmers union, women s union, veteran s associations are the best strate gy to promote collective behavior in natural resource conservation. Through these existing organizations, conservatio n programs can help improve local peoples conservation attitudes and their par ticipation in conservation activities. Results from the study also re veals that in the natural resource conservation area, community based efforts building upon familiarity and social integra tion will faci litate the collective action thus help prot ecting the park. For the CTNP ma nagement, in order to improve familiarity and social integration park manage rs should facilitate more interactions between individuals, thus leading to more understanding about community issues, including biodiversity conservation issue. At the same time this strategy will help individuals to integrate into social groups thus raising their percei ved benefit of conservation and should eventually lead to a positive conservation attitude toward the CTNP. This study suggests that ethnic interaction is very importa nt. When individuals from different ethnic groups interact with each other, they tend to be more aware of conservation. In the CTNP, it is necessary that conservation programs design activities which can help to

PAGE 123

123 facilitate ethnic interaction. Activ ities such as cultural festivals and other events as well as venues for facilitating inte raction, should be organized so that different et hnic groups can interact on a formal and informal basis. Such inter action increases the awareness and familiarity necessary to improve local conservation att itudes. Included in these activities can be environmental education programs and opportunities for citizen involvement that help raise conservation awareness. Conservation programs should direct efforts to help the minorities that recently immigrated from the Northern provinces (e.g., Tay, Nung, a nd Hoa groups) to recognize the long-term value of conserving the park. These programs should pr ovide income opportunities such as facilitating ecotourism projects, etc. that help them to generate an alte rnative source of income. This could aid in changing their perception about short-term direct uses of the park. Many conservation projects have successfully included local people to their sustainable ecotourism project (Boo, 1992; Lindberg et al. 1994; Dubin et al. 1996; Goodwin et al. 1996). These can provide good lessons and suggestions for the CT NP manager to learn and apply. Many efforts from government agencies and NGOs have been made towards conserving biodiversity of the CTNP. However, there is still not enough effort in supporting local communities by inspiring them to work together, thus building their social commitment and community support. One option which should be consid ered is to revive local traditional culture, such as buffalo sacrifice festivities, where th e whole community comes together to drink and dance. In this manner they can also conserve thei r traditional culture as well. In fact, in recent years, the Vietnamese government has taken some steps to revive thes e traditional cultural activities. Unfortunately, the approach that government uses to conduct this policy is controversial. Much funding was allocated to ea ch hamlet to build a communal house (which

PAGE 124

124 is named hamlet cultural house). Without the pa rticipation of local vi llagers, however, these structures looks like a modern government build ing rather than a common house that the ethnic minorities have had in the past. This has thus alienated them. Participatory approach should be used as pa rt of any rural development and conservation project. By encouraging local participation, gove rnment can avoid obvious short-comings as was demonstrated above. Vietnamese rural societies ha ve been transformed rapidly in recent years when the communist government started to ad opt market-oriented economic policy. A vibrant civil society needs to be further developed in or der to help the poor to cope with some of the negative market forces as well. Recommendations for Encouraging Households Participation in Conservation Activities Results have shown that the World Ba nk-supported Forest Protection and Rural Development (FPRD) project has a special focus on ethnic minorities. While it is necessary to include the Kinh (some are very poor and landless people) as participants in conservation activities, a comprehensive approach for pr otecting the CTNP shoul d include all local households with different dem ographic backgrounds, i.e. gende r, religion, et hnicity, age, education. Currently this type of broad inclusion is lacking. In the same way, conservation efforts should pay more attention to the no religion group so as so encourage them to participate in conservation programs. This can on ly be done when the FPRD project is able to support more activities that can help households interact and can also facilitate households helping each other. In order to improve familiarit y and social integration, the pr oject should facilitate more interactions between individuals that can lead to greater understanding about community issues, including the issue of biodivers ity conservation. For example, in conducting the environmental education program targeting i nhabitants of the bufferzone, th e project should identify and

PAGE 125

125 support/sponsor the local Youth Union as a strategic partner because the mandate of this organization is to promote youth group activitie s (e.g., cultural events, sport game festivals, annual camping trips). Promotion of these activities will hopefully facilitate increases in the level of social integration and familiarity among local people. The study shows that land tenure security can improve participation in conservation activities. It is, theref ore, necessary for the government to de sign a better land tenure regime that can encourage household participation in conser vation activities. In fact, it has been one objective of the FPRD project. However, as seen in the study site, even though the project has financially been supporting the land allocation proce ss, the implementation of this task is still very slow. That is, in part, due to the lack of technical personne l in various government agencies. The project, therefore, should ta ke immediate action to expedite this land allocation process and thus improve household access to institution cr edits and promote sustainable land use. The Limitations of the Study Even though the principal investigator (PI) was familiar with the area and had conducted some PRAs exercises before undertaking the fiel d research, the author believes that spending more time within the study communities would have helped. The most limiting factor in terms of the survey was that preliminary fieldwork was in sufficient prior to the initiation of the final survey. The survey instrument would have been strengthened by advance work but budget constraints had hindered this activity. More time would have allowed researchers to conduct more in-dep th interviews. This would have been more informative in term of collecting more detailed information on local associations/organizations. Especially how thes e local organizations performed their function vis--vis the issues facing biodiversity conservation.

PAGE 126

126 Future Works First, Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) can help captu re the path of impact of independent variables on dependent variables. Specifically, in order to deal with latent variables such as social capital and conservation attitude SEM provides an effective mechanism to assess the relationships. Second, one of the key variables that was not included in this study but may have significant influence on hous eholds conservation attitude and participation in conservation activities is its dependency on collective reso urces. Future studies can incorporate the dependency variable into the mode l. Third, social capital varies over time and space. This study focused on one time and was limited to only three communities. Longitudina l studies with more spatial variability would be useful. Fourth, how ecotourism activities are impacting household income and livelihoods and if these in turn influence households conservation attitude and behavior are also worth exploring.

PAGE 127

127 APPENDIX A HOUSEHOLD SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRES The School of Natural Resources and Envir onment at the Univers ity of Florida is conducting an independent research study about the Cat Tien National Park, Vietnam. In order to understand the factors affecting c onservation, research a ssistants are conducting face-to-face interviews with households around the forest park. The households are randomly selected, in order to get representa tive data from the various communities around the forest park. You have been randomly selected from this community to be a respondent. Privacy is a key principle of this survey. There are no wr ong or right answers, most importantly candid and honest answers are the most useful. If you have any questions about this survey, please feel free to contact either the following o ffices: the Department of Rural Development, University of Agriculture and Forestry, Thu Duc, Ho Chi Minh City, or the Cat Tien National Parks Management Board. Commune:________________________Hamlet:____________________________ Date and time:________________________________________________________ Name of respondent:_________________Age:__________________Sex:_________ Occupation: (list all)____________________________________________________ Education:____________________________________________________________ Section I: SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONS 1. What is your gender? Male Female 2. What is your ethnicity? Kinh Tay Hoa Stieng Other, specify _______ 3. What is your religion Buddhism Catholic Protestant Other 4. How long have you been settled in this area? Less than 10 years 20-30 years more than 30 years

PAGE 128

128 5. What is your highest level of education Grade 1-5 Grade 6-9 Grade 10-12 College 6. How many people live in your house (including you) 1-4 persons 5-8 persons more than 8 persons 7. What is your current annua l household income from all the members of the household? Less than VND 1,000,000 VND 1,000,000 5,000,000 VND 5,000,000 10,000,000 More than VND 10,000,000 8. To what age group do you belong to: 18-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 above 60 9. What is your marital status: Single Married Divorced Widowed Section II. SOCIAL CAPITAL QUESTIONS 1. Of the groups/associations/organizations lis ted below (check one for each A and B) 1.1. Are you aware of this groups existe nce in your community? 2.1. Do you belong to this group? Groups/Associations/Organization A. Aware of No Yes B. Belong to No Yes a. Religious groups b. Farmers Union c. Women Union d. Youth Union e. Veteran Union f. Old People Union g. Gardener association h. Credit group i. Other, please specify: ___________________

PAGE 129

129 2. In the past year have you participated in the following activities with your neighbors or other people in the village? For each activity indicate how often you performed the activity (For each, circle one). Never Once/Year Few times/Year Once/ Month Few times/ Month Community events like vill age festivities (harvest, officiating sacrifices, ) 1 2 3 4 5 Sport events like tournament or games 1 2 3 4 5 Meetings like hamlet meeting, garden club meeting, .. 1 2 3 4 5 Training (extension, cons ervation) 1 2 3 4 5 Work project like tree planting on Lunar New Year, clean up village 1 2 3 4 5 Meeting to resolve problems inside and outside the village 1 2 3 4 5 Other, please specify_______________ 1 2 3 4 5 3. Please tell us how you feel about the followi ng statement using the scale of 1 to 5, 1 being Strongly Disagree (SD), 2 being Disagr ee (D), 3 being Neutra l (N), 4 being Agree (SA) and 5 being Strongly Agree (SA). Circle one appropriate number of every statement. SD D N A SA a. I know most people in my village 1 2 3 4 5 b. People in this village look out for one another 1 2 3 4 5 c. Most people in this village are willing to help each other whenever they can 1 2 3 4 5 d. Most people in this villag e are concerned about their own welfare 1 2 3 4 5 e. I can count on my neighbor for help any time 1 2 3 4 5 f. I trust my association to make decision on my behalf g. People in this village have mutual respect for one another 1 2 3 4 5 h. For the most part, people are willing to make the community a better place to live 1 2 3 4 5 i. People in this community do get involved in community activities 1 2 3 4 5 j. I always greet my neighbors when I first see them k. This community is a safe place for children 1 2 3 4 5

PAGE 130

130 l. Most people in my community do voluntary work for community 1 2 3 4 5 m. Most people in this community can be trusted 1 2 3 4 5 n. Most people in the neighborhood are connected through the association 1 2 3 4 5 o. Most people in this community are involved in activities that benefit the community 1 2 3 4 5 p. People in this community are easy to contact 1 2 3 4 5 q. For the most part, people in this community are friendly 1 2 3 4 5 r. I know some people in this community, most are strangers 1 2 3 4 5 s. Usually people in this community greet one another 1 2 3 4 5 t. This community offers enough chance for a person to do volunteer work 1 2 3 4 5 u. People in this community work together to solve problems 1 2 3 4 5 v. Most people in this community do not feel they are a part of this community 1 2 3 4 5 w. People in this community get along with each other 1 2 3 4 5 x. I volunteer in my community 1 2 3 4 5 y. For the most part, people in the community obey community codes and covenants 1 2 3 4 5 z. Very few people socialize in the community 1 2 3 4 5 aa. People in this community show support for a cause that may not directly benefit them but benefits community at a whole 1 2 3 4 5 bb. Some of my neighbors a ttend several community functions 1 2 3 4 5 cc. I think people in this community can be trusted 1 2 3 4 5 dd. People in the community share common interests 1 2 3 4 5 ee. My actions have impacts making this community a better place to live in 1 2 3 4 5 ff. The community is a mix of different cultural ethnic groups Section III: PARTICIPATION IN FPRD PROJECT ACTIVITIES 1. We would like to know how much your househ old participates in the FPRD project. We are going to ask you about activities that you ha ve involved in during the past 12 months

PAGE 131

131 In the past 12 months have you No Yes Participated in training on forest protection 1 2 Attended meetings to discuss conservation agreement 1 2 Participated in training on water management 1 2 Participated in land use planning 1 2 Participated in Training on Agroforestry 1 2 2. Have you ever participated in 1) No 2) Yes Attended training on improved use an d management of cash crops and trees 1 2 Been provided with new and improved s eedlings for agricultural crops 1 2 Participated in training on animal husbandry 1 2 3. Have you ever 1) No 2) Yes Had electricity connecti on (through FPRD project) 1 2 Worked on dyke construction against flooding 1 2 4. Credit support 1) No 2) Yes Training on micro credit management 1 2 Got a loan for fertilizer and pesticide 1 2 Section III: CONSERVATION ATTIT UDE AND BEHAVIOR A. CONSERVATION ATTITUDES Please tell us how you feel about the following statement using the scale of 1 to 5, 1 being Strongly Disagree (SD), 2 being Disagree (D) 3 being Neutral (N), 4 being Agree (A), 5 being Strongly Agree. Circle one appr opriate number of every statement. SD D N A SA It is important to keep the pa rk for the survival of various plants and animal species 1 2 3 4 5

PAGE 132

132 Although we need more land for agriculture, it is necessary to set aside some land for the prot ection of plants and animals 1 2 3 4 5 The park is our countrys pride and is essential for a healthy environment. 1 2 3 4 5 The national park should be protected for the benefit of our future generations 1 2 3 4 5 The illegal cutting of trees, wildlife trapping and hunting should be discouraged 1 2 3 4 5 If hunting and grazing are allowe d, all the animals will soon disappear 1 2 3 4 5 Conservation has taken land t hus farmers do not have enough land to cultivate 1 2 3 4 5 Since the wildlife of the park are causing us tr ouble, wildlife hunting should be allowed under strict supervision 1 2 3 4 5 It is good if some land within the park is allocate d to the local people 1 2 3 4 5 Since the park is a waste of la nd, it is better to distribute the land among local people 1 2 3 4 5 The park is for outsiders and we are not even allowed to visit the park 1 2 3 4 5 The park is for those who en joy wildlife viewing and we do not enjoy this, as we have to face problems from the park 1 2 3 4 5 Farmers have benefited from the conservation program 1 2 3 4 5 Forest land allocation (FLA) en sures farmers ownership of the forestland 1 2 3 4 5 Farmers can get more income because of forest protection and management activities 1 2 3 4 5 Farmers can benefit from the fo rest replanting in the buffer zone 1 2 3 4 5 Conservation agreement allows farmers to shar e responsibility in park management 1 2 3 4 5 Conservation agreement allows farmers access to NTFP 1 2 3 4 5 B. BEHAVIOR TOWARDS THE PARK 1. Do you ever go to the forest park? Yes No (If no, go to # 10, if yes go to #11) 2. If NO why dont you ever go there? Fear of rangers Fears of animals No interest No time Too far OtherSpecify 3. If YES, why do you go there?

PAGE 133

133 Health related Hunting Building materials Fuelwoods Grazing Worship Others specify 4. How many working hours do you spend per trip, including time of travel to and from, to collect items from the park? _______________ hours 5. How many trips do you make per week? _______________ trips 6. How many items do you collects per trip? _______________ items Items Hours/trip Trips/week Amount/trip Total/month Fuelwood Building materials Handcraft materials Honey Hunting Medical plants Fishing 7. How many people from your household co llect items from the park? _________persons 8. What is your income from the forest (if any) per month?

PAGE 134

134 APPENDIX B B NG CU H I I U TRA H Tr ng Ti nguyn Thin nhin v Mi tr ng c a i h c Florida th c hi n m t nghin c u c l p v V n Qu c Gia Ct Tin, Vi t Nam. bi t v nh ng y u t nh h ng n cng tc b o t n, cc nghin c u vin s th c hi n m t cu c ph ng v n tr c ti p cc h s ng chung quanh v n qu c gia. Nh ng nng h c ch n l a m t cch ng u nhin c th thu th p c thong tin t nh ng c ng ng khc nhau chung quanh v n qu c gia. B n c ch n ng u nhin t cc c ng ng ny ph ng v n. Tn tr ng s ring t l nguyn t c b t bu c trong cu c i u tra ny. S khng c cu tr l i ng hay sai, quan tr ng nh t l s tr l i th t th v th ng th n s r t gip ch cho chng ti. N u b n c th c m c g v cc cu h i c a chng ti, xin vui lng lin l c v i cc n v sau y: B mn Pht tri n Nng thn, i h c Nng Lm Tp H Ch Minh, ho c Ban Qu n l v n Qu c Gia Ct Tin. X:________________________________Thn:________________________________ Th i i m ph ng v n: Ngy_____________thng _______________gi :_____________ Tn ng i tr l i ph ng v n._____________________Tu i _______Gi i_____________ Ngh nghi p: (li t k t t c ) _________________________________________________ Trnh v n ho:__________________________________________________________ Ph n I: CC CU H I V C I M DN S X H I 1. Xin cho bi t gi i ? Nam N 2. Xin cho bi t dn t c no? Kinh Ty Hoa Sting Khc, nu tn _______ 3. Xin cho bi t b n theo o no? Ph t gio Cng gio Tin lnh Khc, nu tn _______ 4. B n nh c vng ny c bao nhiu n m r i? D i 10 n m 20-30 n m H n 30 n m

PAGE 135

135 5. Trnh h c v n cao nh t? L p 1-5 L p 6-9 L p 10-12 i h c 6. Nh b n c bao nhiu ng i (k c b n) 1-4 ng i 5-8 ng i h n 8 ng i 7. Thu nh p hi n nay c a gia nh b n c a m i ng i trong h gia nh? t h n VND 1,000,000 VND 1,000,000 5,000,000 VND 5,000,000 10,000,000 H n VND 10,000,000 8. B n thu c vo nhm tu i no? 18-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 trn 60 9. Tnh tr ng hn nhn c a b n: c thn C gia nh Ly d Go b a Ph n II. CC CU H I V V N X H I 1. Trong s nh ng nhm/ on th /t ch c k tn d i y ( nh d u m t cho m i tr ng h p A v B) 1.1. B n c bi t s hi n di n c a cc nhm on th trong c ng ng c a b n khng? 2.1. B n c thu c nhm no d i y khng? Nhm/ on th /T ch c A. Bi t Khng C B. Thu c Khng C a. Nhm Tn Gio b. H i Nng dn c. H i Ph n d. on Thanh nin e. H i C u Chi n binh f. H i Ph lo g. Hi lm v n h. Nhm tn d ng i. Nhm khc, k tn: ___________________

PAGE 136

136 2. Trong n m v a qua, b n c tham gia vo cc ho t ng sau y v i nh ng ng i hng xm hay nh ng ng i khc trong lng ny khng? i v i m i ho t ng li t k d i y cho bi t m c th ng xuyn m b n tham gia (m i ho t ng, khoanh trn). Khng bao gi M t l n/ N m Vi l n/ n m M t l n/ Thng Vi l n/ Thng a. S ki n x y ra trong c ng ng nh cc l h i (l h i thu ho ch, cng t th n, ) 1 2 3 4 5 b. Ho t ng Nhm/CLB nh t ch c i ch i 1 2 3 4 5 c. Ho t ng th thao nh thi u th thao, cc h i thao 1 2 3 4 5 d. H i h p (nh h p thn, h p xm, ..) 1 2 3 4 5 e. T p hu n (Khuy n nng, b o t n) 1 2 3 4 5 f. Lao ng cng ch nh T t tr ng cy, d n v sinh lng xm, 1 2 3 4 5 g. H p dn gi i quy t cc v n trong c ng ng 1 2 3 4 5 h. H p dn gi i quy t cc v n ngoi c ng ng 1 2 3 4 5 i. Khc, Xin nu r__________ 1 2 3 4 5 3. Xin vui lng cho chng ti bi t b n c m th y th no v nh ng pht bi u sau y, s d ng thang i m t 1 n 5, 1 l R t khng ng (SA), 2 Khng ng (D), 3 Sao c ng c (N) 4 ng (A), 5 R t ng (SA). Xin khoanh trn m t s thch h p. SD D N A SA a. Ti bi t h u h t m i ng i trong lng ny 1 2 3 4 5 b. M i ng i trong lng ny quan tm n nhau 1 2 3 4 5 c. M i ng i trong lng ny s n lng gip nhau khi h c th 1 2 3 4 5 d. M i ng i trong lng ny u quan tm n phc l i chung c a h 1 2 3 4 5 e. Ti c th n ng t a vo hng xm b t c lc no 1 2 3 4 5 f. Ti tin t ng on th c a ti ra quy t nh thay m t ti 1 2 3 4 5 g. Ng i dn trong lng ny tn tr ng l n nhau. 1 2 3 4 5 h. Ni chung m i ng i trong lng ny s n sng xy d ng lng tr thnh m t n i sinh s ng t t 1 2 3 4 5 i. Ng i dn trong c ng ng ny u tham gia vo cc ho t ng c a c ng ng. 1 2 3 4 5 j. Ti lun cho h i hng xm c a ti (khi g p) 1 2 3 4 5 k. C ng ng ny r t l an ninh cho tr nt. 1 2 3 4 5

PAGE 137

137 l. H u h t ng i dn trong c ng ng u lm cng vi c tnh nguy n cho c ng ng. 1 2 3 4 5 m. Ti ngh l ng i dn trong c ng ng ny u c th tin t ng c 1 2 3 4 5 n. H u h t m i ng i trong xm gi ng ny u c quan h v i nhau qua cc on th 1 2 3 4 5 o. H u h t m i ng i trong c ng ng ny u tham gia vo cc ho t ng gip ch cho c ng ng 1 2 3 4 5 p. D dng lin l c v i ng i dn trong c ng ng ny 1 2 3 4 5 q. Ni chung, ng i dn trong c ng ng th thn thi n 1 2 3 4 5 r. Ti bi t m t vi ng i khu dn c cn ph n l n l ng i l 1 2 3 4 5 s. Ng i dn trong c ng ng ny lun lun cho h i nhau 1 2 3 4 5 t. C ng ng ny lun t o i u ki n cho m i ng i lm nh ng cng vi c tnh nguy n 1 2 3 4 5 u. Ng i dn trong c ng ng cng nhau gi i quy t nh ng v n 1 2 3 4 5 v. H u h t ng i dn trong c ng ng ny khng c m th y h l m t ph n c a c ng ng 1 2 3 4 5 w. Ng i dn trong c ng ng ny chung s ng ho thu n v i nhau 1 2 3 4 5 x. Ti tnh nguy n lm vi c cho c ng ng c a ti 1 2 3 4 5 y. Ni chung, ng i dn trong c ng ng tun theo nh ng i u lu t v n i quy c a c ng ng 1 2 3 4 5 z. R t t ng i dn ho nh p x h i trong c ng ng ny 1 2 3 4 5 aa. Ng i dn trong c ng ng ng h nh ng ngh a c c th khng tr c ti p c l i cho h nh ng c l i cho ton th c ng ng 1 2 3 4 5 bb. Nh ng ng i hng xm c a ti gi m t vi vai tr trong c ng ng 1 2 3 4 5 cc. Ti ngh ng i dn trong c ng ng u c th tin t ng c 1 2 3 4 5 dd. Ng i dn trong c ng ng ny cng chia x nh ng m i quan tm chung 1 2 3 4 5 ee. Hnh ng c a ti r t c nh h ng n vi c lm cho c ng ng ny tr thnh m t n i sinh s ng t t h n. 1 2 3 4 5 ff. C ng ng l m t h n h p cc s c dn v v n ha khc nhau 1 2 3 4 5 Ph n III: Tham gia d n B o v r ng v Pht tri n Nng thn 1. Chng ti mu n bi t m c tham gian c a h gia nh b n vo d n B o v r ng v pht tri n Nng thn. Chng ti s h i b n v nh ng ho t ng m b n tham gia trong su t 12 thng qua.

PAGE 138

138 Trong 12 thng qua b n Kh ng C Tham gia cc kho hu n luy n v b o v r ng 1 2 D cc bu i h p th o lu n v giao ko b o t n 1 2 Tham gia hu n luy n v qu n l ngu n n c 1 2 Tham gia vo quy ho ch s d ng t 1 2 Tham gia hu n luy n v Nng Lm k t h p 1 2 2. B n t ng tham gia 1) Khng 2) C Tham d hu n luy n v c i ti n s d ng v qu n l cy nng s n hng ha 1 2 c cung c p gi ng m v gi ng c c i thi n cho ma v nng nghi p 1 2 Tham gia kho hu n luy n v ch n nui 1 2 3. B n 1) Khng 2) C Ho m ng l i i n 1 2 Tham gia lm p ng n l 1 2 4. H tr v tn d ng 1) Khng 2) C Hu n luy n v qu n l tn d ng nh 1 2 Vay m t kho n ti n mua phn bn v thu c tr su 1 2 Ph n IV: THI V HNH VI I V I B O T N A D NG SINH H C A. THI I V I B O T N 1. Xin vui lng cho chng ti bi t b n c m th y th no v nh ng pht bi u sau y, s d ng thang i m t 1 n 5; 1 R t khng ng (SA), 2 Khng ng (D), 3 Sao c ng c (N) 4 ng (A), 5 R t ng (SA). Xin khoanh trn m t s thch h p. SD D N A SA a. C n ph i c v n qu c gia b o t n cc l ai cy v th khc nhau 1 2 3 4 5

PAGE 139

139 b. M c d c n t s n xu t nng nghi p, vi c ginh t nh m b o v cy v th l c n thi t 1 2 3 4 5 c. V n l ni m t ho c a t n c v gi cho mi tr ng c trong s ch 1 2 3 4 5 d. V n qu c gia nn c b o v cho th h mai sau 1 2 3 4 5 e. C n h n ch vi c ch t ph cy r ng v s n b n th 1 2 3 4 5 f. N u vi c s n b n v ch n th c cho php trong v n th th hoang s b bi n m t 1 2 3 4 5 g. B o t n l y h t t ai c a chng ti nn khng cn t canh tc 1 2 3 4 5 h. B i v th trong v n t o phi n tai cho chng ti, nn cho php s n b n v i s h ng d n c a cn b v n 1 2 3 4 5 i. N u em t trong v n QG chia cho ng i dn a ph ng th th t l t t 1 2 3 4 5 j. B i v t lm VQG l lng ph nn chia t cho ng i dn a ph ng 1 2 3 4 5 k. VQG ch ginh cho ng i ngai. Chng ti th m ch khng c vo bn trong v n 1 2 3 4 5 l. VQG ch ginh cho nh ng ng i thch xem th, cn chng ti ph i g p nhi u r c r i 1 2 3 4 5 m. Nng dn c h ng l i t ch ng trnh b o t n 1 2 3 4 5 n. Giao t r ng m b o quy n s h u t c a ng i dn 1 2 3 4 5 o. Nng dn c them thu nh p qua cc h at ng qu n l b o v r ng 1 2 3 4 5 q. Vi c giao t r ng b o m quy n s h u t ai c a ti 1 2 3 4 5 r. Ti c thm thu nh p nh vo cc ho t ng qu n l v b o v r ng 1 2 3 4 5 s. Ti c h ng l i t vi c tr ng r ng vng m 1 2 3 4 5 B. HNH VI 1. C bao gi b n vo v n qu c gia ch a?______C/Khng (N u khng, sang cu h i #12, n u c sang cu h i #13) 2. N u KHNG, t i sao b n khng vo ? a) S ki m lm b) S th d c) Khng quan tm d) Khng c th i gian e) Xa qu d) Nguyn nhn khcK ra 3. N u C, t i sao b n vo ? a) Lin quan n s c kho b) S n b n c) V t li u lm nh d) C i e) Th tru b f) Th cng g) Khc k ra

PAGE 140

140 4. M i chuy n i r ng ko di bao lu, bao g m c th i gian i v v thu nh t lm s n trong v n qu c gia _______________ gi 5. M t tu n i m y chuy n? _______________ chuy n 6. C bao nhiu v t d ng c thu nh t m i chuy n _______________ v t d ng V t d ng Gi /chuy nChuy n/tu n S l ng/chuy n T ngc ng/thng C i V t li u xy d ng V t li u lm th cng M t ong Th s n Cy thu c C cu 7. C bao nhiu ng i trong h i th hi lm s n trong v n QG? _______ ng i 8. Thu nh p t r ng c a h gia nh (n u c) hng thng? _______ VND

PAGE 141

141 APPENDIX C FREQUENCY OF RESPONSES ANALYSIS ITEMS Age Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent 18-29 yrs 39 14.4 14.4 14.4 30-39 yrs 93 34.4 34.4 48.9 40-49 yrs 90 33.3 33.3 82.2 50-59 yrs 34 12.6 12.6 94.8 60 yrs and above 14 5.2 5.2 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 Gender Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Male 240 88.9 88.9 88.9 Female 30 11.1 11.1 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 Education Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Not at all 19 7.04 7.0 7.0 Grade 1-5 108 40.00 40.0 47.0 Grade 6-9 109 40.37 40.4 87.4 Grade 10-12 32 11.85 11.9 99.3 College 2 .74 .7 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.00 100.0 Marital Status Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Single 5 1.85 1.9 1.9 Married 253 93.70 93.7 95.6 Divorced 2 .74 .7 96.3 Widowed 10 3.70 3.7 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.00 100.0

PAGE 142

142 Annual Income Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Less than 5M VND 25 9.26 9.3 9.3 5-10M VND 57 21.11 21.1 30.4 10-20M VND 68 25.19 25.2 55.6 More than 20M VND 120 44.44 44.4 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.00 100.0 TOTAL_AWARE Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent 0 2 .7 .7 .7 1 3 1.1 1.1 1.9 2 3 1.1 1.1 3.0 3 24 8.9 8.9 11.9 4 19 7.0 7.0 18.9 5 26 9.6 9.6 28.5 6 55 20.4 20.4 48.9 7 60 22.2 22.2 71.1 8 57 21.1 21.1 92.2 9 21 7.8 7.8 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 Aware of Religious groups Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent no 73 27.0 27.0 27.0 yes 197 73.0 73.0 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0

PAGE 143

143 Aware of Farmer Union Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent no 14 5.2 5.2 5.2 yes 256 94.8 94.8 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 Aware of Women Union Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent no 30 11.1 11.1 11.1 yes 240 88.9 88.9 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 Aware of Youth Union Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent no 59 21.9 21.9 21.9 yes 211 78.1 78.1 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 Aware of Veteran Union Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent no 32 11.9 11.9 11.9 yes 238 88.1 88.1 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 Aware of Old People Union Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent no 105 38.9 38.9 38.9 yes 165 61.1 61.1 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0

PAGE 144

144 Aware of Gardener Association Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent no 230 85.2 85.2 85.2 yes 40 14.8 14.8 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 Aware of Red Cr oss Association Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent no 64 23.7 23.7 23.7 yes 206 76.3 76.3 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 Aware of Credit Group Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent no 141 52.2 52.2 52.2 yes 129 47.8 47.8 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 TOTAL_BELONG Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent 0 47 17.4 17.4 17.4 1 37 13.7 13.7 31.1 2 87 32.2 32.2 63.3 3 47 17.4 17.4 80.7 4 37 13.7 13.7 94.4 5 8 3.0 3.0 97.4 6 3 1.1 1.1 98.5 7 3 1.1 1.1 99.6 9 1 .4 .4 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0

PAGE 145

145 a. Community events Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Never 145 53.7 53.7 53.7 Once/year 39 14.4 14.4 68.1 Few times/year 63 23.3 23.3 91.5 Once/month 12 4.4 4.4 95.9 Few times/Month 11 4.1 4.1 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 b. Activities of clubs/groups Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Never 225 83.3 83.3 83.3 Once/year 28 10.4 10.4 93.7 Few times/year 5 1.9 1.9 95.6 Once/month 11 4.1 4.1 99.6 Few times/Month 1 .4 .4 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 c. Sport events Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Never 185 68.5 68.5 68.5 Once/year 30 11.1 11.1 79.6 Few times/year 42 15.6 15.6 95.2 Once/month 12 4.4 4.4 99.6 Few times/Month 1 .4 .4 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 d. Meetings Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Never 10 3.7 3.7 3.7 Once/year 14 5.2 5.2 8.9 Few times/year 166 61.5 61.5 70.4 Once/month 63 23.3 23.3 93.7 Few times/Month 17 6.3 6.3 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0

PAGE 146

146 e. Training Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Never 96 35.6 35.6 35.6 Once/year 75 27.8 27.8 63.3 Few times/year 70 25.9 25.9 89.3 Once/month 25 9.3 9.3 98.5 Few times/Month 4 1.5 1.5 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 f. Work project Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Never 45 16.7 16.7 16.7 Once/year 93 34.4 34.4 51.1 Few times/year 99 36.7 36.7 87.8 Once/month 30 11.1 11.1 98.9 Few times/Month 3 1.1 1.1 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 g. Meeting to resolve problems Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Never 40 14.8 14.8 14.8 Once/year 43 15.9 15.9 30.7 Few times/year 135 50.0 50.0 80.7 Once/month 35 13.0 13.0 93.7 Few times/Month 17 6.3 6.3 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 Ethnicity Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Kinh 74 27.41 27.4 27.4 Tay 60 22.22 22.2 49.6 Nung 35 12.96 13.0 62.6 Hoa 4 1.48 1.5 64.1 Stieng 94 34.81 34.8 98.9 Others 3 1.11 1.1 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.00 100.0

PAGE 147

147 Recoded Ethnicity Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Kinh 74 27.4 27.7 27.7 TayNungHoa 99 36.7 37.1 64.8 Stieng 94 34.8 35.2 100.0 Valid Total 267 98.9 100.0 Missing System 3 1.1 Total 270 100.0 Belong to Religious groups Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent no 205 75.9 75.9 75.9 yes 65 24.1 24.1 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 Belong to Farmer Union Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent no 88 32.6 32.6 32.6 yes 182 67.4 67.4 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 Belong to Women Union Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent no 233 86.3 86.3 86.3 yes 37 13.7 13.7 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0

PAGE 148

148 Belong to Youth Union Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent no 232 85.9 85.9 85.9 yes 38 14.1 14.1 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 Belong to Veteran Union Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent no 214 79.3 79.3 79.3 yes 56 20.7 20.7 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 Belong to Old People Union Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent no 247 91.5 91.5 91.5 yes 23 8.5 8.5 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 Belong to Gardener Association Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent no 252 93.3 93.3 93.3 yes 18 6.7 6.7 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0

PAGE 149

149 Belong to Red Cross Association Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent no 156 57.8 57.8 57.8 yes 114 42.2 42.2 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 Belong to Credit Group Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent no 215 79.6 79.6 79.6 yes 55 20.4 20.4 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 Gender Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent 0 30 11.1 11.1 11.1 Male 240 88.9 88.9 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 Belong to Women Union Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent no 240 88.9 88.9 88.9 yes 30 11.1 11.1 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0 Belong to Women Union Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent no 245 90.7 90.7 90.7 yes 25 9.3 9.3 100.0 Valid Total 270 100.0 100.0

PAGE 150

150 LIST OF REFERENCES Agresti, A., and B. Finlay. 1997. Statistical Methods fo r the Social Sciences 3rd Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1997. Babbie, E. 2001. The Practice of Social Research 9th Edition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company. Barron, D. N. Elizabeth West and M. T. Hanna n. 1994. A Time to Grow and a Time to Die: Growth and Mortality of Credit Union in New York, 1914-1990. American Journal of Sociology 100:381-349. Baumgartner, T., & Jackson, A. 1999. Measurement for Evaluation in Physical Education and Exercise Science (6th ed.). Boston: W.C. Brown. Betts, K. 1997. Social Capital and Cultural Diversity. Paper presented to the Social Capital Conference, 11 July, Brisbane. Boo, E. .1992. The ecotourism boom: planning for development and management WHN Technical Paper Series Paper 2, World Wildlife Fund. Bookbinder, M. P., E. Dinerstein, A. Rijal, H. Cauley, and A. Rajouria. 1998. Ecotourism's Support of Biodivers ity Conservation. Conservation Biology 12 (6), 1399. Bourdieu, P. 1985. The Forms of Capital. In Handbook of Theory and Research for Sociology of Education. Ed. J.G. Richardson, pp. 241-58. New York: Greenwood. Brennan, M.A. and A.E. Luloff. 2007. Explorin g Rural Community Agency Differences in Ireland and Pennsylvania. Journal of Rural Studies 23(1):52-61. Carmines, E. and R. Zeller. 1979. Reliability and Validity Assessment Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Castle E. N. 1998. A conceptual framework for the study of rural places. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 80: 621. Castle, E. N. 2003. The Social Capital Paradigm : Bridging Across Disciplines An Overview. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 85 (5): 1208-1210 Cattell, R. 1966. The Scree Test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1 245-276. Coase, R. H. 1960. The Problem of Social Cost. Journal of Law and Economics, vol 3, pp. 1-44. Coleman, J. S. 1988. Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. American Journal of Sociology Vol. 94, Supplement s95-s120. Coleman, J. S. 1990. Foundations of Social Theory Cambridge: Harvard University Press

PAGE 151

151 Conklin, H. C. 1957. Hanunoo Agriculture: A Report on an In tegral System of Shifting Cultivation in the Philippines. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Cordes, S., J. Allen, R.C. Bishop, G.D. Lynne, L.J. Robinson, V.D. Ryan and R. Shaffer. 2003. Social Capital, Attachment Value, and Rural Development: A Conceptual Framework and Application of Contingent Valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 85 (5): 1201-1207 Cramb, R.A. 2004. Social Capital and soil conservation: evidence from the Philippines Contributed paper, 48th Annual Conference, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, Melbourne 10-13 February 2004. Darlington, R. 2006. Factor Analysis. [cited 3 May, 2007]. Available from internet site: http://comp9.psych.cornell.edu/darlington/factor.htm Dasgupta, P. 2000. Economic progress a nd the idea of soci al capital. In: Social Capital: A Multifaceted Perspectives eds. P. Dasgupta, and I. Serageldin. Washington, DC: World Bank. Daws, R., A. J. C. van de Kragt and J. M. Orbell. 1990. Cooperation for the benefit of us? Not me, or my conscience. In Beyond Self Interest ed. J. Mansbridge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DeVellis, R. 2003. Scale Development: Theory and Applications Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Dinh, Thuan D. 2005. Forestry, poverty reduction and rural livelihoods in Vietnam MARD: Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Devel opment. [cited 11 May 2006]. Available from: http://www.vietnamforestry .org.vn/Research_en.html. Do, Ha T. 2003. Establishment of Tam Dao National Pa rk livelihoods and roles of women. Case study in Tan Lap village, Dao Tru commune, Lap Thach district, Vinh Phuc Province: Workshop Proceeding Hanoi: Research Centre for Gender and Sustainable Development. Durbin, J.C. and S.N. Ratrimoarisaona. 1996. Ca n tourism make a major contribution to the conservation of protected areas in Madagascar?. Biodiversity Conservation 5 (1996), pp. 345. Durkheim, E., 1965 [1912]. The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life New York (NY): Free Press. Ellickson, R. C. 1991. Order without Law: How Ne ighbors Settle Disputes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Foley, M.W. and B. Edwards. 1998. Beyond Tocquevi lle: Civil Society and Social Capital in Comparative Perspective. American Behavioral Scientist 42(1): 5-20. Sage Publication.

PAGE 152

152 Fortman, L. and J.W. Bruce, eds. 1988. Whose Trees? Proprietary Dimensions of Forestry Boulder and London: Westview Press. FPRD. 2000. PRA Report: Thong Nhat Commune, Bu D ang District, Binh Phuoc Province, Vietnam. FPRD. 2001. PRA Report: Doan Ket Commune, Bu D ang District, Binh Phuoc Province, Vietnam. FPRD. 2001. PRA Report: Dang Ha Commune, Bu D ang District, Binh Phuoc Province, Vietnam. George, D., and P. Mallery. 2001. SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference 10.0 Update Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Glaeser, E.L., D. Laibson and B. Sacerdote. 2002. An economic approach to social capital. Economic Journal Vol. 112 (November), F437-F458. Blackwell Publishers. Goodwin, H. and I.R. Swingland. 1996. Ecotou rism, biodiversity, and local development. Biodiversity Conservation 5 (1996), pp. 275. Granovetter, M. 1973. The stre ngth of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology 78(6), pp13601380 Grootaert, C., D. Narayan, V.N. Jones, M. Woolcock. 2004. Measuring social capital: an integrated questionnaire (Work Bank Working Paper, no.18). Washington, DC: World Bank. Hair, F., R. Anderson, R. Tatham and W. Black. 2004. Multivariate Data Analysis (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Harris, J. and P. De Renzio. 1997. Missing Link: The Concept of Social Capital London: Development Studies Institute London School of Economics. Hayoz, N. and V. Sergeyev. 2003, Social networks in Russian politics. In: Social Capital and the Transition to Democracy Badescu, G., Uslaner, E, 46-60. London: Routledge. Hydon, Goran. 1997. Civil Society, Social Capital, and Development: Dissection of Complex Discourse. Study in Comparative International Development 32 (1): 3-30. ICEM International Centre for Environmental Management. 2003. Vietnam National Report on Protected Areas and Development. Review of Protected Areas and Development in the Lower Mekong River Region. Indooroopilly, Queensland, Australia. [cited May 9, 2006]. Available from: http://www.mekong-protect ed-areas.org/ vietnam/docs /vietnam-pad.pdf Infield, M. 1988. Attitudes of a rural community toward conser vation and a local conservation area in Natal, South Africa. Biological Conservation. 45:21-46.

PAGE 153

153 IUCN, 1996. Resolutions and recommendations Montreal: World Conservation Congress (Canada), 13 October, 1996. [updated 25 N ovember 2004; cited 2 September 2006]. Available from: http://www.iucn.org/Resolutions/IUCN_ENx/00000021.pdf IUCN, 2003. The Vth IUCN World Park Congress, Durba n, South Africa, 8-17 September, 2003. [updated 25 November 2004; cited 2 September 2006. Available from http://www.iucn.org/themes/wcpa/wpc2003/ Jacobs, J. 1992. The Death and Life of Great American Cities New York: Vintage Books. Jeffreys, M., M. Massoni, and M. O'Donnell. 19 97. Student evaluation of courses: Determining the reliabiliy and validity of three survey instruments. Journal of Nursing Education, 36 397-400. Kaiser, H. 1960. The application of elec tronic computers to factor analysis. Educational Psychology Measurement (20), 141-151. Klem, Laura. 1995. Path Analysis. In Reading and understanding multivariate statistics eds. L. Grimm and P. Yarnold. American Psychol ogical Association, Washington D.C. Krishna, A. 2000. Creating and harnessing social capital. In Social Capital: A Multifaceted Perspectives eds. P. Dasgupta and I. Sera geldin. Washington DC: World Bank. Krishna, A. and Uphoff, N. 2002. Mapping and measuring soci al capital. In The Role of Social Capital in Development: An Empirical Assessment eds. C. Grootaert, T. van Bastelaer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Le, L. V., S. Ziegler, and T. Grever. 2002. U tilization of forest products and environmental services in Bach Ma National Park, Vietna m. [updated 11 June 2004; cited 2 May 2007]. Available from: http://www.mekong-protectedareas.org/vietnam/docs/b ach_ma_forest_products.pdf ). Lindberg, K. and J. Enriquez. 1994. An Analys is of Ecotourism's Economic Contribution to Conservation in Belize. Comprehensive Report Vol. 2. Belize: World Wildlife Fund and Ministry of Tourism and the Environment. Martino, D. 2001. Buffer Zones around Protected Areas: A Brief Literature Review, Issue 14, Electronic Green Journal, http://egj.lib.uidaho.e du/egj15/martino1.html Marx, K. 1967. Capital: A Critique of Political Economy New York, NY: International Publishers. McShane, T. and M. Wells. 2004. Getting Biodiversity Projects to Work: Towards More Effective Conservation and Development. NY: Columbia University Press. Narayan, D. and M. F. Cassidy. 2001. A dimensi onal approach to measuring social capital: development and validation of a social capital inventory. Current Sociology 49 (2): 59102.

PAGE 154

154 Neefjes K., Y. T. Nguyen, T. M. Nguyen and C. M. Van. 2002. An approach of Oxfam Hong Kong for supporting livelihoods in the buffer zone of Vu Quang Natural Preservation Zone. Netherlands Research Program VNR P, Project AVA/VIE/94/ 24, Vinh University of Nghe An Province. In The summary record of an intern ational conference: Bufferzone of natural reserves in Vietnam. Hanoi: Agricultural Publishing House. Nepal, S. K. and K.E. Weber. 1993. Struggle for Existence: Park People Conflict in the Royal Chitwan National Park, Nepal (HSD Monograph, 28) Bangkok: Asian Institute of Technology. Nguyen, San V. and D. Gilmour. 2000 Forest Rehabilitation and Practice in Vietnam. Proceedings of a National Workshop, Hoa Binh, Vietnam November 4-5, 1999. IUCN Vietnam. Nguyen, Hoi N. and H. N. Tran. 2002. Access of indigenous communities inside the natural reserve zones and national parks based on th e linkage between biodiversity conservation and culture-diversity conservation. Nether lands Research Program VNRP, Project AVA/VIE/94/24, Vinh University of Nghe An Province. In The summary record of an international conference: Bufferzone of natural reserv es in Vietnam. Hanoi: Agricultural Publishing House. Nguyen, Thu B. 2002. Policies for special-used forest in Vietnam. Forest protection department. Vietnam Netherlands Research Program-VNRP Project ALA/VIE/94/24, Vinh University of Nghe An province. In The summary record of an internat ional conference: Buffer zone of natural reserves in Vietnam. Hanoi: Agricultural Publishing House. North, D. C. .1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Okello, M., S. Ole Seno and B. Wishitemi. 2003. Maasai community wild life sanctuaries in Tsavo-Amboseli, Kenya. PARKS 13 (1) 62. Olson, M. 1982. The rise and the decline of nations: Ec onomics growth, st agflation and social rigidities. New Haven: Yale University Press. Olson, M. 1971. The Logic of Collective Action Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. Ostrom, E. 1994. Constituting soci al capital and collective action. Journal of Theoretical Politics 6(4): 527-562. Ostrom, E. 1998. A Behavioral Approach to th e Rational Choice Theory of Collective Action. American Political Science Review vol 92, pp. 1-22. Ostrom, E., R. Gardner and J. Walker. 1994. Regularities from laboratory and possible explanation. In Rules, Games, and Common Pool Resources, eds. E. Ostrom, R. Gardner and J. Walker Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

PAGE 155

155 Persoon, Gerard A. 1992. Research on Local Communities and Forest Use: A Summary. In Forestry for People and Nature: Field Research and Theory on Environment and Development in the Cagayan Valley, Philippines ed. G. A. Persoon. Isabela: Cagayan Valley Program on Environment and Development. Pett, M., N. Lackey, and J. Sullivan. 2003. Making Sense of Factor Analysis: The use of Factor Analysis for Instrument Developm ent in Health Care Research Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Pham, Quyen B.,H. Q. Truong, T. V. Hoang and H. V. Phan. 1998. Causes of biodiversity loss in Vietnam: The summary record of a national workshop Hanoi: Ministry of Technology and Science. Polet, G. 2003. Co-Management in Protected Area Management: the Case of Cat Tien National Park Southern Vietnam. In Co-Management of Natural Resources in Asia: A Comparative Perspective eds. G.A Persoon, D.M.E. Van Est and P.E. Sajise. Copenhagen: Nordic Institute of Asian Studies Polet, G. and M. V. Tran. 2003. Developing the Ca pacity to Manage Prot ected Areas, the case of Cat Tien National Park Vietnam. In Capacity Needs to Manage Protected Areas in Asia eds. J. Carabias, K. Rao. Arlington: The Nature Conservancy. Portes, A. 1998. Social Capital: Its Origin and Applications in Modern Sociology. Annual Review of Sociology 24: 1-24. PPP. 2000. Consolidating Conservation through Peoples Participation Kathmandu: Park People Program (DNPWC/UNDP). Pretty, J. 2003. Social Capital and th e Collective Management of Resources. Science Vol. 302, pp. 1912-1914. Pretty, J. and H. Ward. 2001. Social Capital and the Environment. World Development 29 (2): 209-227 Pretty, J. and D. Smith. 2004. Social Capital in Biodiversity Conserva tion and Management. Conservation Biology 18 (3): 631-638 Primack, R. 1993. Essentials of Conservation Biology. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates. Putnam, R. D. 1993. Making Democracy Work. Civic traditions in modern Italy Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Putnam, R. D. 1995. Bowling Alone: Amer ica's Declining Social Capital. The Journal of Democracy 6:1, pp. 65-78. Putnam, R.D. 2000. Bowling alone: The collapse and r evival of American community New York: Simon and Schuster.

PAGE 156

156 Rao, K and C. Geisler. 1990. The social conseq uences of protected areas development for resident populations. Society and Natural Resources 3:19-32. Robison, L.J. and J. L. Flora. 2003. The Social Capital Paradigm: Bridgi ng Across Disciplines. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 85 (5): 1187-1193 Rodriguez, Luis C. and P. Unai. 2004. Land clea rance and social capital in mountain agroecosystems: the case of Opuntia scrubland in Ayacucho, Peru. Ecological Economics 49 (2004) 243-252. Rokeach, Milton. 1968. Beliefs, attitudes, and values: a theory of organization and change 1st Edition. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Runge, C.F. 1981. Common Property Externalities: Is olation, assurance, a nd resource depletion in a traditional grazing context. American Journal of Agricultural Economics vol 63, pp. 595-605. Rustagi, D. and J. Garcia. 2005. Protected Areas in Pandemonium: Will optimisation of different values lead to sustainability? ZEF Bonn, Bonn: Center for Development Research Universitt Sanjayan, M. A., S. Shen, M. Jansen. 1997. Experiences With Integrated Conservation Development Projects in Asia World Bank Technical Paper. No.388. Scherl, L., A. Wilson, R. Wild, J. Blockhus, P. Franks, A. Jeffrey and O. Thomas. 2004. Can Protected Areas Contribute to Povert y Reduction? Opportunities and Limitations IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. Scoones, I. 1998. Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: A Framework for Analysis IDS Working Paper 72, Brighton: Institute of Developm ent Studies, University of Sussex. South African National Parks. SANParksOfficial website [updated 17 May 2007, cited 19 May 2007]. Available from http://www.sanparks.org Sugden, R. 1986. The Economics of Rights, Co-operation and Welfare. Oxford: Blackwell. Sunderlin W. and B. T. Huynh. 2005. Poverty alleviation and Forests in Vietnam. Bogor: Center for International Forestry Research. Taylor, M. 1982. Community anarchy and liberty Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Vo, Quy. 2002. About buffer zone management in Vietnam: The initia l experiences. Vietnam Netherlands Research Program-VNRP, Project ALA/VIE/94/24, Vinh University of Nghe An province. In The summary record of an internati onal conference: Buffer zone of natural reserves in Vietnam. Hanoi: Agricultural Publishing House. Wall, E., G. Ferrazzi, and Schryer. 1998. Getting the Goods on Social Capital. Rural Sociology 63(2).

PAGE 157

157 Wilkinson, Kenneth P. 1991. The Community in Rural America New York, NY: Greenwood Press. Wishitemi, B. 2002. Amboseli/Longido Heartlands, Kenya/Tanzania a community partnership for conservation and sustainable development. Case Study 7. In Management Guidelines for IUCN Category V Protected Areas: Protected Landscapes/Seascapes, ed. A. Phillips, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK: IU CN The World Conservation Union. Woolcock, M. 1998. Social Capital and Econom ic Development: Towards a Theoretical Synthesis and Policy Framework. Theory and Society 27:151-208. Woolcock, M. 2002. Social capital in theory and practice: Where do we stand? In Social capital and economic development: Well-being in developing countries, eds. J. Isham, T. Kelly and S. Ramaswamy, 18-39. Chetlenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publications. Wu, Bin and J. Pretty. 2004. Socia l connectedness in marginal rura l China: The Case of farmer innovation circles in Zhidan, north Shaanxi. Agriculture and Human Values 21: 81-92.

PAGE 158

158 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Born in a central province of Vietnam, Thuy Nguyen came to study at the University of Agriculture and Forestry (UAF) in Ho Chi Minh C ity, where he graduated with a B.S. degree in agronomy in 1994. Three years later, he received a scholarship from the Ford Foundation to pursue a masters degree in social devel opment at the Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Ateneo De Manila UniversityPhili ppines. He then returned to his home country and joined the UAF as a lecturer, mainly teach ing undergraduate courses in the field of rural development. In 2002, with a four-year fellowship from the Ministry of Education of Vietnam, he came to the United States to begin the Ph.D program in interdisciplinary ecology at the University of Florida and received his Ph.D. in August 2007. He, his wife, and his five-year-old daughter have benefited from exploring and expe riencing American culture. While residing in the US, his family has expanded by the additi on of another daughter. Upon completion of his studies, he intends to go back to Vietnam and c ontinue as a lecturer w ith his present employer, UAF.