Mismatches between policy planning and implementation on the actively living with flood approach in the Vietnamese Mekong Delta

Figures & data

Figure 1. OECD Principles on Water Governance.

Source: OECD (2015, p. 4).

Figure 2. Analytical model showing the methods used to collect information about the different phases.

Table 1. Interviewed officials at different levels

	Provincial (P)		District (D)			Commune (C)
	An Phu		Tri Ton			Tinh Bien
Level	DARD	DONRE	An Phu	Tri Ton	Chau Phu	Phu Huu	Vinh Loc	Ta Đanh	Van Giao	Vinh Trung	Nui Voi
Number	6	2	2	1	1	1	2	1	1	2	2
Total	8		4			9

Note: Official interviews are coded according to their level and order of interviewing, for example, P1 = provincial level, interviewed first.

Table 2. List of projects related to LWF

No	Project	Implementing agency	Partners	Period	Locations (provinces)
1	Experiment Flood-based Livelihood Models to Support Water Retention Strategy in the Upper of the Mekong Delta (EFLM)	An Giang province	Private sector (Coca-Cola), international organization (IUCN)	2018–20	An Giang, Long An, Dong Thap (Tinh Bien and Tri Ton districts)
2	Mekong Delta Integrated Climate Resilience and Sustainable Livelihoods Project (MD-ICRSL) – Sub-component 2 (WB9)	Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development	International Financial Institution (World Bank)	2017–22	11 provinces in the Mekong Delta including An Giang
3	Integrated coastal management programme (ICMP)		German and Australian governments	2011–15	An Giang, Soc Trang, Bac Lieu, Ca Mau, and Kien Giang
4	Mekong Climate Resilience Programme (MCRP) phases 1 and 2		German government	2016–24	Hanoi and eight provinces in the Mekong Delta, including An Giang
5	Development of Amphibious Homes for Marginalized and Vulnerable Populations in Vietnam		Global Resilient Partnership, University of Waterloo	2016–19	An Giang and Long An
6	North Vam Nao Water Control Project (NVN)	Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development	Australian government	2002–07	An Giang (Phu Tan and Tan Chau district)

Sources: Interview expert P1 and review of other documents: ICMP project (GIZ, 2018) and WB9 project (MARD, 2016).

Figure 3. Historical development of the Living with Flood (LWF) concept, alongside key policy shifts.

Source: Adapted from Luu et al. (2022).

Table 3. Description of selected projects

Project	Policy	Time frame	Investment (US$ millions)	Intended objectives	Actual implementation	Actual outcomes
NVN	Ricefirst	2001–07	Total: 26.27 AusAID: 14.43 Government of Vietnam (GoV): 11.84	Effective water management: socially and environmentally sustainable and benefits the local economy	Control flooding high dyke development triple rice	100 km high dyke, 16 major sluices; rapid increase in rice production and areas; decrease of wild fish and soil quality; higher lost for the poor
WB9	R120	2017–22	Total: 29.6 World Bank: 23.3 An Giang: 6.1 Private sector: 0.1	Increase the adaptive capacity and flood management. Increase income for local people by livelihood transformation	Control flooding; low-dyke development; double rice and other livelihoods	50.167 km low dyke, 15 sluices; diversified livelihood models; move from rice to vegetables or fruits; reduce water and chemicals used
EFLM	R120	2018−20	Total: 0.1 Coca-Cola through IUCN: 0.041 Farmers: 0.059	Store water through livelihood transformation for climate change adaptation; increase income for local people	Increase flood water storage; reduce the dependence on rice monoculture; develop naturally fed rice–lotus–fish model combined with tourism	Rice–lotus–fish model in about 150 ha; store about 1.4 million m^3 floodwater; economic gain from lotus in 2018, economic lost in 2019 and 2020

Figure 4. 3Ps proposed conceptual framework based on the results of this study.

Table 4. Indicators used to measure the effectiveness of floodwater management policies

A	The level of actor’s consensus
A1	Similarities of the perceptions
A2	Divergences of the perceptions
B	The level of target realization
B1	The added volume of floodwater stored in the floodplain
B2	The level of livelihood diversification and nature-based
B2.1	The number of households with different types of livelihoods
B2.2	The number of flood-based crops
B2.3	The level of reduction of fertilizers and pesticides used
B2.4	The level of increase of products’ value
B3	The area of the implemented project
B4	The population of the implemented project
B5	The level of awareness on the role of ‘living with floods’ approach

Table A1. Characterization of different Living with Floods (LWF) paradigms based on the literature review

	General	Vietnamese context
Aspect	LWF concept	Traditional LWF	Flood control period	LWF policies	Actively LWF policies
Period		Before 1975	1975–2000	2000–17	Since 2017
Philosophy	Occasional flooding of land is allowed while flood impacts are reduced	Adapting to and living with nature	Controlling nature	Reducing disaster risk while obtaining flood benefits	Social development and nature-based adaptation to climate change
General perception on flood	Floods as natural phenomena with a vital natural function	Floods as essential natural phenomena for life in the delta; flood as yearly rising water season	Floods are a danger; neglect ofenvironmental importance of floods	Floods can be dangerous but also provide valuable resources; infrastructure must be development to reduce flood risk	Floods as basis for environmental sound and sustainable development (Resolution 120)
Livelihoods	Flood resilient livelihoods	Flood-based livelihoods	Expansion and intensification of rice production	Triple rice cropping in high dyke areas	Livelihood diversification
Infrastructure	Protection of vital infrastructure; no large-scale infrastructure to keep the floods out all the time	Limited infrastructural development; clearing land through construction of canals	Increase in infrastructure development: canals and low dykes; ‘closing-off’ the delta	High dyke construction	Water retention in reservoirs and wetlands; preserve space for flood drainage; construction of flood control gates (Resolution 120)

Table

Full name: Contact:	Code: Position in the organization:
Organization:	Tasks:

OECD. (2015). OECD Principles on Water Governance. Centre for Entrepreneurship, SMEs, Regions and Cities, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

 Google Scholar

GIZ. (2018). From innovation to transformation. The integrated coastal management programme. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH.

 Google Scholar

MARD (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development). (2016). Regional environmental impact assessment on Mekong Delta integrated climate resilience and sustainable livelihood project.

 Google Scholar

Luu, T., Verhallen, M., Tran, D. D., Sea, W. B., Nguyen, T. B., & Nguyen, H. Q. (2022). Statistically examining the connection between dike development and human perceptions in the floodplains’ socio-hydrology system of Vietnamese Mekong Delta. Science of the Total Environment, 810, 152207. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.152207

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar