Báo cáo khoa học nông nghiệp " Introduction of the principles of GAP for citrus through implementation of citrus IPM using Farmer Field Schools " MS10 pdf

Ministry of Agriculture & Rural Development

Introduction of the principles of GAP for citrus
through implementation of citrus IPM using Farmer
Field Schools

CARD 037/06VIE




MS10: Project Completion Report

August 2010


2

1. Institute Information
Project Name
Introduction of the principles of GAP
for citrus through implementation of
citrus IPM using Farmer Field Schools
Vietnamese Institution
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
Development, Plant Protection Department
Vietnamese Project Team Leader
Mr Ngo Tien Dung
Australian Organisation
University of Western Sydney

Australian Personnel
Oleg Nicetic, Robert Spooner-Hart
Date commenced
March 2007
Completion date (original) February 2010
Completion date (revised)
August 2010
Reporting period
Completion report
Contact Officer(s)
In Australia: Team Leader
Name:
Oleg Nicetic (til 2/07/10)
Robert Spooner-Hart (from 3/07/20)
Telephone:
+61245701329
Position:
Research Program Coordinator
Fax:
+61245701103
Organisation
University of Western Sydney
Email:


In Australia: Administrative contact
Name:
Gar Jones
Telephone:
+6124736 0631

Position:
Director, Research Services
Fax:
+6124736 0905
Organisation University of Western Sydney Email:

In Vietnam
Name:
Mr
Ngo Tien Dung
Telephone:
+84-4-5330778
Position:
National IPM coordinator
Fax:
+84-4-5330780
Organisation
Plant Protection Department
Email:



3
2. Project Abstract

3. Executive Summary
The objectives of this project were to develop GAP production procedures for the
Vietnamese citrus industry that will be published as a manual and to introduce GAP practices
using the FFS model. Through the FFS training program a national cadre of citrus IPM/GAP
master trainers and provincial level FFS facilitator teams have been established. The key
methodologies used were participatory based learning and action based research. The
objective of both techniques is to fully engage participants and allow them to direct the
learning and research to best meet their needs. A key component of this project was Training
of Trainers and Master Trainers in citrus GAP including IPM. Trainers conducted FFSs in
their provinces and together with the trained farmers became leaders in citrus production
aligned to GAP.

The first objective was met by completing a GAP Manual which consists of two parts: a
more theoretical part that introduced the concept of GAP and a practical part that included
procedures and formats for GAP implementation and compliance. Complementary to the
GAP Manual, an on-farm recording system was developed in 2007 and was successfully
implemented in 2008 and 2009. The record keeping books are now used by farmers several
years after the completion of FFSs. In some provinces, extension services have reprinted the

book and distributed them to farmers. In focus group discussions in all 13 provinces, the
acceptance of record keeping was overwhelming with 97% of farmers finding record keeping
useful and with 91% of farmers saying they will continue to keep records.

IPM compliance requirements are covered in the GAP manual but, to meet extension services
and farmers’ needs for practical guide for implementation of IPM, the Field Guide for Citrus
Pest and Diseases was developed and published in 2008. This book is co-authored by Dr
Pham Van Lam from PPRI, Oleg Nicetic (UWS/UQ), Ngo Tien Dung and Dinh Van Duc.
Mr Nguyen Tuan Loc and master trainers who facilitated FFSs edited the guide and made
The key objective of this project was to align the Vietnamese citrus industry with world standard
production practices and open opportunities for export markets. Adoption of sustainable integrated
pest management (IPM) aligned to principles of good agricultural practice (GAP) leads to both
economic and environmental benefits, and will enable Vietnamese citrus growers to be at the
forefront of production in the Asia-Pacific region. Production of export quarantine-compliant
citrus fruit with pesticide levels below international minimum residue levels (MRLs) as the result
of this project will open new market opportunities in the competitive export markets and will
enhance food safety for domestic consumption. The project was based on an interactive learning
and action research paradigm, and uses the farmer field school (FFS) model. Leading research
institutions from Southern and Northern Vietnam, together with extension officers from PPD and
farmer organisations including VACVINA and Farmers Union have been working together to
produce a GAP procedures tailored to suit Vietnamese conditions. They were also working closely
with the farmers on validation of the GAP manual and providing training of trainers and farmers
in IPM and GAP through FFS. Project activities were conducted in 5 provinces in the Mekong
delta and 8 provinces of Central and Northern Vietnam. The IPM component is based on practices
developed in project 036/04 VIE which have been adjusted in consultation with key personnel
from Northern Vietnam, to account for local conditions.

4
changes to the original text to make it more easily understandable to citrus growers. Five
thousand copies of the Field Guide were printed by Agricultural Press in Hanoi and

distributed to PPSDs, DARDs, trainers and farmers. However, the Guide is still too technical
and contains a deal of information that was not easily understood by many farmers. To
overcome this problem a simple, a very practical 2-page brochure “Guide for management of
major pest and diseases” was developed and printed on waterproof paper in 2009.

Successful implementation of the FFSs program over three years has resulted in a total of
3000 farmers been trained. Out of the 3000 farmers, 2,451 have been trained using AusAID
CARD funds and approximately 540 additional farmers have been trained using provincial
funds. Farmers increased their knowledge and skills for many components of citriculture
including density of plantings, pruning, plant nutrition and integrated pest management. Most
of the farmers can now keep records of the main operations on their farm. Record keeping
also helped farmers to improve their understanding of pesticide and fertiliser dose
calculations and application of the correct amount of pesticides and fertilisers, and at the
right time. Farmers’ abilities to critically evaluate the citrus production process and elements
of the agro-ecosystem were also improved.

In the years following the FFSs, farmer practices changed considerably resulting in better
canopy management, reduction of pesticide use, changes in the type of pesticides used from
broad spectrum pesticides with high negative environmental impacts to softer pesticides,
better soil management with increased use of organic fertilisers and more frequent
application of smaller amount of fertilisers. In the Mekong delta the vast majority of farmers
have introduced weaver ants into their orchards and regularly use Trichoderma sp. mixed
with compost. They also use PSO as part of IPM strategy for control of mites and leafminer.
This makes the Mekong delta one of the most advanced regions in implementation of IPM in
citrus, not just in Vietnam, but probably in Southeast Asia. It is interesting to note that in Ha
Giang province the use of pesticides actually increased, but with a corresponding
improvement in fruit quality.
Changes in practices resulted in significant economic benefits for farmers including
increased fruit yield, quality and price, reduction of input costs and greater profitability.
Changes in practices also reduced detrimental impacts of citrus cultivation on the

environment and, thus, improved ecosystem health. These positive impacts on the
environment are mainly a result of reduced pesticide through implementation of IPM
strategies that farmers learned in the FFSs. In all provinces, positive effects on the
environment were noticed as increased number of beneficial arthropods in orchards and
reduced pollution from pesticide and fertiliser packaging. In the Mekong delta, positive
impacts on the environment also included increased abundance of fish in the farm canals and
in Hoa Binh province, farmers observed increased numbers of birds. In the Mekong delta all
farmers who participated in the impact assessment now rear weaver ants in their orchards.

The project had very positive social impacts as a result of participatory approach used as well
as very strong support from local government and farmer organisations, including the
Farmers’ Unions and the Women’s Unions. One of the FFSs participants become president of
local Farmer Union organisation (Phu Tho province), and three participants became leaders
of their hamlets (Ha Giang and Ha Tay provinces). In Yen Bai province, the Women’s Union
meetings were used as a platform for sharing knowledge and information from FFSs.


5
In most communities where FFSs were held, social activities increased and better
relationships have been built between the community members. FFS participants shared their
knowledge and experiences with their neighbours and, as a result, their standing in the
community increased. On a personal (human) level the self-esteem and confidence of FFS
participants increased. Farmers’ clubs were formed after FFS completion in Yen Bai, Tuyen
Quang, Tien Giang and Ben Tre provinces. In Vinh Long province, activities in My Hoa
cooperatives increased as result of FFSs, and the cooperative received GAP certification.

The first successful GAP implementation and certification was achieved in Vinh Long
province where FFSs were conducted for 26 members of My Hoa cooperative in Binh Minh
district. Farmers from the cooperative cultivate a total of 22 ha of pomelo. The cooperative
secured financial support to implement GLOBALG.A.P. from the supermarket chain Metro

in 2007 and our project also supported involvement of VACVINA for short farmer training
activities on specific GAP issues. All these effort resulted in GLOBALG.A.P. certification
being granted to the cooperative on 19 September 2008, by SGS Vietnam.

GAP implementation activities were also conducted in Dong Thap province where our
project team headed by Dr Vo Mai worked with a group of 11 farmers from Long Hau
village, Lai Vung district, with the aim of achieving VietGAP certification. Technical
support and training of farmers was provided by VACVINA members and extension officers
from Lai Vung district Plant Protection Station. The Farmers’ Union and local government
have provided great support, including a subsidy towards the building of toilets in the fields.
Both local government and the Farmers’ Union see GAP certification as a very prestigious
achievement because of the political support the accreditation scheme has from both the
central and provincial government.

The approach to GAP implementation with the Long Hau village group has been very
different to that in My Hoa. The Long Hau group has been implementing GAP via a much
longer process of learning and have been making adjustments in their production practices by
themselves, under the guidance of VACVINA consultants; nothing has actually been done
for farmers by the consultants. This group of growers is much smaller than in My Hoa, with
only 11 members cultivating a total area of 3.45 ha. They are all neighbours with adjacent
properties and the initiative for GAP certification and leadership in implementation came
from two members of the group with the highest production and good connections with the
market. The group members sell their product at traditional markets just before the
Vietnamese New Year holiday (Tet), so they achieve a very high price with the average net
profit per group member of 70,000,000 VND to 226,470,000 VND/ha, 3 times above the
industry average. So the group members are high achievers with the vision that VietGAP
certification will differentiate their product on the market. They hope to capitalise on
certification by obtaining higher prices as a result of selling their product to supermarkets
or/and on their own market stall in Ho Chi Minh City clearly marked with the sign “Safe
mandarins”.

Initial certification inspection was conducted and the farmer group met all VietGAP
requirements, except that they do not have packing facility. At the time of writing this report,
the group is in the process of building the packing facility with funds provided by the
provincial government. After its completion, it is expected that VietGAP certification will be
granted.


6
4. Introduction & Background
Citrus fruit is one of the major fruit crops in Vietnam (MARD 2004) and citrus production is
an important source of income for many Vietnamese farmers. However, productivity and
production of citrus in Vietnam is considerably lower than in Australia and major citrus
producing countries of the world such as Brazil and the USA. It has been stated by MARD
that “in general, citrus cultivation has not been significantly developed over the past few
years, largely because of the serious damage of pests and diseases, especially greening
disease (officially known as huanglongbing) and therefore studies on their control methods,
in combination with managing citrus plantations and using advanced and intensive
technology is a vital necessity” (MARD 2004).

The objectives of this project were to develop GAP production procedures for the
Vietnamese citrus industry that will be published as a manual and to introduce GAP practices
using the FFS model. Through the FFS training program a national cadre of citrus IPM/GAP
master trainers and provincial level FFS facilitator teams are established. The key
methodologies used were participatory based learning and action based research. The
objective of both techniques is to fully engage participants and allow them to direct the
learning and research to best meet their needs. A key component of this project was Training
of Trainers and Master Trainers in citrus GAP including IPM. Trainers conducted FFSs in
their provinces and together with the trained farmers became leaders in citrus production
aligned to GAP.

Multiple outputs from FFS training have been demonstrated in previous CARD projects in
citrus. These include: farmer empowerment through increased knowledge of the agro-
ecosystem; the conservation of biodiversity and protection of the environment through
reduced pesticide application as a result of improved knowledge of pests and diseases and
more effective control measures; increased food security through enhanced production; and
protection of the health of farming communities and consumers of fruit through reduced
pesticide use in fruit production. In addition to these outputs project established a locally
relevant GAP framework and initiated the process of implementation of these practices in
citrus production. Implementation of GAP will open new market opportunities in both the
domestic and export markets.

7
5. Progress to Date
5.1 Implementation Highlights
The key objective of this project was to develop resources for GAP implementation: a GAP
manual, reference material for farmers and trainers (books and brochures) and on-farm record
keeping system. The project also aimed to increase Vietnamese capacity to develop and
implement citrus IPM strategies aligned to GAP requirements. The project employed a FFS
approach that included training of master trainers who then, together with the researchers
from Vietnamese research institutions, conducted Training of Trainers (TOT) for extension
workers in citrus IPM. These trained extension workers then conducting FFSs in their local
districts. The objectives were achieved through implementation of all the activities
documented in the project contract.

Details of project implementation are documented in the Milestone reports, and the major
highlights are listed below.

5.1.1. Objective 1: To develop GAP manual for citrus that includes IPM guidelines and
Objective 4: Develop procedures/formats for compliance with GLOBALG.A.P. in
areas other than IPM

The developments with regard to GAP in Vietnam, since the time the original project
proposal was written in 2005, have been so dynamic that adjustments have had to be made to
the terminology and deliverables stated in the project document. In the project proposal and
subsequent project documents we used the terms GAP procedures and GAP handbook. The
GAP procedures were to include GAP implementation check points and the handbook was to
provide a more general framework for GAP implementation. However, SOFRI already
published a GAP Handbook (2007) based on EurepGAP (GLOBALG.A.P. since 09/2007)
that provides a general framework for all fruit crops, including citrus. At a meeting in SOFRI
in June 2007 it was concluded that rather than repeating work already done, we should write
a GAP Manual which will consisted of a more theoretical part that would introduce the GAP
concept and a practical part that would include procedures and record-keeping formats for
GAP implementation and compliance. In essence, the material that was originally planned to
be covered in two separate parts (viz. handbook and procedures) has now been put together
in a single manual, which was completed in 2008.

The GAP manual is based on GLOBALG.A.P. requirements but it can easily be adapted and
use as reference material for VietGAP implementation. VietGAP is based on GlobalG.A.P,
with GlobalGAP being more comprehensive in its requirements. Thus, the GlobalG.A.P-
based manual for citrus production can be used for implementation of VietGAP with the
requirements that are not compulsory for VietGAP not having to be implemented.

On-farm recording system based on the GAP manual was developed in 2007 and was
successfully implemented in 2008 and 2009. The record keeping books are now used by
farmers several years after the completion of FFSs. In some provinces, extension services
have reprinted the book and distributed them to farmers. In focus group discussions in all 13
provinces the acceptance of record keeping was overwhelming, with 97% of farmers finding
record keeping useful and 91% of farmers reporting they will continue to keep records.
Farmers recognised the following advantages of record keeping: awareness of input costs
(53% of respondents), awareness of labour costs (33%), awareness of income from fruit sale

8
(44%), awareness of production profitability (85%), awareness of fertilisers used so the
farmer can assess their effectiveness (30%), prediction of pest occurrence (33%), and
awareness of pesticides used, enabling farmers to assess their effectiveness (49%). Another
advantage of using records mentioned by several farmers was selection of a cheaper pesticide
shop (based on prices recorded by farmers who then became aware of different prices
between shops).

IPM compliance requirements are covered in the GAP manual, but to meet extension
services’ and farmers’ needs for practical guide for implementation of IPM a Field Guide for
Citrus Pest and Diseases was developed and published in 2008. The book is co-authored by
Dr Pham Van Lam from PPRI, Oleg Nicetic (UWS/UQ), Ngo Tien Dung and Dinh Van Duc.
Mr Nguyen Tuan Loc and master trainers who facilitated FFSs edited the guide and made
changes to the original text to make it easily understandable to citrus growers. Five thousand
copies of the Field Guide were printed by Agricultural Press in Hanoi and distributed to
PPSDs, DARDs, trainers and farmers in the Northern provinces. Farmers and trainers from
the Mekong delta used Field Guide developed and published as part of the previous CARD
project 036/04 VIE.

The Field guide for the North Vietnam was very well accepted by extension officers but the
guide was still too technical and contained a deal of information that was not easily
understood by many farmers. To overcome this problem a simple, very practical 2-page
brochure “Guide for Management of Major Pests and Diseases” was developed and printed
on waterproof paper in 2009.

5.1.2. Objective 2: To establish a national cadre of citrus IPM/GAP master trainers and
province level FFS facilitator teams.

Training of master trainers (TOMT) was conducted in Kim Linh Hotel in Hanoi from

8-12/03/07. Four master trainers from the Mekong delta and six master trainers from the
North of Vietnam attend the TOMT. At the TOMT, the curriculum to be used for the
subsequent TOT and in FFSs in 2007 was formulated.

Training of 98 trainers from 13 provinces was conducted via a continuous participatory
learning process over the three years. In 2007, two TOTs for the Northern provinces were
held in Regional Plant Protection Centre 4 in Vinh, Nghe An province: the first from
19/03/07 to 2/04/07 and the second from 28/05/07 to 12/06/07. The TOT for the Mekong
delta was conducted from 13/04/07 to 27/04/07. TOTs were facilitated by master trainers,
senior PPD staff trained in previous FAO and CARD projects, researchers from research
institutions and universities, and Australian experts. During 2007, trainers then conducted a
total of 24 FFSs funded by CARD and an additional 17 FFSs funded by provincial
governments. Each FFS had 21 sessions, conducted over one growing season. Topics
covered principles of GAP including record keeping, IPM consistent with GAP,
understanding of the citrus orchard ecosystem, influence of pruning and tree density on yield
and tree health, and understanding of the influence of organic and mineral nutrients on soil
health and citrus orchard productivity.

In the second year of the project (2008), refresher TOTs were held in Vinh from 26-29
February and from 03-06 March; and in My Tho from 04-07 March. Refresher TOTs focused
on discussions about GAP and ways in which it could be implemented in Vietnam, and on
the identification of citrus pests and diseases and the importance of spray application,

9
including spray calibration, calculation of spray volumes and pesticide doses and their impact
on successful pest and disease control. In 2008, trainers conducted 57 FFSs following a
curriculum similar to the 2007 curriculum.

The trainers’ learning process continued at project review workshops that were conducted in
Ha Tinh on 21 November, in Ha Tay on 25 November and in Yen Bai on 27 November,

2008. At these workshops it was decided to select two out of four FFSs conducted in 2008
and to continue with training and FFS activities with same farmers trained in 2008. This was
because the farmers’ skills developed during a one-season program were not at a level which
would be able to be translated into significant changes to practices. In Phu Tho, the
provincial government funded additional FFSs, so all 4 FFSs conducted in 2008 continued in
2009. To meet farmers’ specific needs in this second season of FFSs trainers, in cooperation
with researchers from PPRI and PPD research centres, developed curricula for their own
provinces. This represents a significant step in capacity building of PPSD staff in the
provinces and had very positive influence on achieving significant changes in farmers’
practices.

After completion of the project, the PPD now have highly competent cadre at the national
and provincial level that can facilitate farmers’ participatory learning and collective actions
to implement IPM and GAP, particularly in citrus. This high level of knowledge and skills
developed by the PPD senior staff has been recognised by international organisations and
donors. Two of our facilitators have been recently hired by FAO to support their activities in
Cambodia and Nepal.



5.1.3. Objective 3: Enhanced capacity of farmers to implement citrus IPM compliant
with GAP standards.

Successful implementation of the FFSs program over three years has resulted in a total of
3000 farmers been trained (Table 1). Of these 3000 farmers, 2,451 were trained using
AusAID CARD funds and approximately 540 additional farmers were trained from
provincial funding. Farmers were trained in principles of GAP, including record keeping,
IPM, understanding of he tcitrus orchard ecosystem, influence of pruning and tree density on
yield and tree health, and understanding of the influence of organic and mineral nutrients on
soil health and citrus orchard productivity.

The FFSs were conducted throughout one growing season. In 2007, FFSs started at the time
of the major citrus flowering period (April-May) and finished at harvest. In 2008 and 2009 in
all eight Northern provinces, FFSs started at harvest and continued until the next harvest. In
the Mekong delta FFSs in 2008 were still held from April until December. Each FFS in 2007
and 2008 had 21 sessions. On-farm record keeping was part of each FFS and every farmer
participating in the FFS received a record keeping book. It was a requirement for all farmers
to demonstrate that they kept records before they were granted the certificate for FFS
completion.

In 2009, eighteen selected FFSs from 2008 continued the FFS program for the second year.
These FFS were chosen because farmers needed more input from facilitators to develop skills
sufficient to enable them to implement the significant changes in practices necessary for
successful and sustainable production. The new curriculum for the second season of FFSs

10
was developed by trainers specifically for each province. It concentrated on specific farmer
needs identified in the previous season.

Farmers’ enhanced capacity to implement integrated crop management practices compliant
with GAP standards was demonstrated through positive changes in practices that resulted in
significant economic, social and environmental impacts (presented in Section 5.2
Smallholder benefits).

5.1.4. Objective 5: Assess effectiveness of FFS for implementation of IPM and GAP

GAP standards and certification schemes, with the current level of support they are receiving
from the Vietnamese Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, provide a good
framework for sustainable production of citrus. Our project has provided the necessary
requirements for GAP implementation in citrus through the development of a series of

reference materials. The project has also demonstrated that the benefits from developed GAP
standards and an implementation manual can be maximised if they are used as a framework
for development of the curriculum for participatory farmer education (i.e. FFSs). Even
though the GAP standards are, by definition, rigid and cannot be modified by farmers in a
participatory process, the way current practices can be changed to reach the required
standards can still be defined by farmers.

Impact assessment undertaken as a part of the project suggests that the participatory approach
taken for GAP implementation is pivotal for sustainability of the whole GAP certification
process. It was shown that even though farmers from only two FFS actually achieved GAP
certification, the development and implementation of GAP-based curricula enabled
implementation of certain components of the GAP requirements that made production more
sustainable, reduced impact on the environment and benefited farmers (and potentially,
consumers).

For more details on the use of the participatory model for GAP implementation, see Section
5.1.5.

Table 1. Location of FFSs completed in 2007

Province Number of FFS Number of
farmers trained
(
CARD FFS only)
Proportion of
female
participants
MEKONG DELTA
Tien Giang 9 + 2
1

276 14
Dong Thap 3 + 1
1
105 11
Vinh Long 8 240 3
Can Tho 8 + 2
1
240 10
Ben Tre 5 + 5
1
150 14
Sub-Total 33+10
1
1011 10.4%
NORTHERN VIETNAM
Ha Tinh 6
2
180 44
Nghe An 6
2
+7
1
180 30
Hoa Binh 6
2
+1
1
180 28
Ha Tay 6
2

180 29
Phu Tho 6
3
180 38

11
Yen Bai 6
2
180 26
Tuyen Quang 6
2
180 18
Ha Giang 6
2
180 18
Sub-Total 48+8
1
1440 28.9%
TOTAL 81+18
1
2451 21.3%
1
Funded by local government
2
Two FFSs commenced in 2008 followed 2 year program
3
Two FFSs commenced at 2007 followed 3 years program, and four FFSs commenced in
2008 followed 2 years program. Provincial government covered additional costs.

5.1.5. Objective 6: Implementation of GAP in one of the cooperatives in Mekong delta

The first successful GAP implementation and certification was achieved in Vinh Long
province. In that province, a total of 12 FFSs were conducted of which nine were financed by
AusAID CARD and three by the provincial government. At these FFSs 350 farmers were
trained, of which 342 were male and 8 were female. As a result, IPM is practiced on 140 ha
out of a total area of 240 ha of pomelo in the province. One of these FFSs was conducted for
26 members of My Hoa cooperative in Binh Minh district. Our project also supported
involvement of VACVINA for additional short farmer training on specific GAP issues. The
total area of pomelo grown by these farmers is 22 ha. The cooperative secured financial
support to implement GLOBALG.A.P. from the supermarket chain Metro in 2007 and on 19
September 2008 they were granted GLOBALG.A.P. certification by SGS Vietnam. The total
production of pomelo for the 12 month period from May 2007 to June 2008 was 970T. My
Hoa Cooperative exported 120 T of pomelo mainly to the Netherlands, Metro bought 50 T
and about 800 T was sold on the domestic market.

In an interview held with the cooperative’s vice-director in February 2009, we were told that
even though Metro provided substantial funds to be used for GLOBALG.A.P. certification
the supermarket chain did not commit to buy fruit from the cooperative. Funds were used to
hire consultants to provide additional one-to-one training and to help farmers keep the
required records, to subsidise costs of building infrastructure necessary for GAP compliance,
including a pesticide storage facility and field toilets, and the remainder of the funds were
used for the certification process itself. According to the interviewed vice-director and
several farmer-members of My Hoa cooperative, after the certification process was
completed and the consultants’ support was terminated, farmers had problems with keeping
records on their own, and neither the cooperative nor the farmer-members had any significant
increase in income as result of the GAP certification. We talked with a representative of the
exporter to the Netherlands and she said that GAP certification is not required for export and
that Dutch importers perform their own quality control checks including testing for pesticide
residues, Thus, GAP certification will not influence export procedures or increase the price
of the exported pomelo. Since My Hoa cooperative is the only citrus producer that received

GAP certification, probably the most beneficial aspect was the positive media coverage. The
Vice-director of My Hoa Cooperative expressed doubt that the certification will be renewed
after it expires.

In Dong Thap province, our project team headed by Dr Vo Mai worked with a group of 11
farmers from Long Hau village, Lai Vung district, with the aim of achieving VietGAP
certification. Technical support and training of farmers was provided by VACVINA
members and extension officers from Lai Vung district Plant Protection Station. The
Farmers’ Union and the local government provided great support, including a subsidy

12
towards the building of toilets in the field. Both local government and the Farmers’ Union
see GAP certification as a very prestigious achievement, because of the political support the
accreditation scheme has from the central and provincial governments.

The approach to GAP implementation with the Long Hau village group is very different to
that in My Hoa. The Long Hau group has been implementing GAP over a much longer
timeframe, through a process of learning and making adjustments to production practices by
themselves, under the guidance of VACVINA consultants, although the consultants have not
done anything directly for the farmers. This group of growers is much smaller than in My
Hoa with only 11 members cultivating a total area of 3.45 ha. They are all neighbours with
adjacent properties and the initiative for GAP certification and leadership in implementation
came from two members of the group with the highest production and good connections with
the market. The group members sell their product at traditional markets just before the
Vietnamese New Year holiday (Tet) so they achieve a very high price, with the average net
profit per group member being 70,000,000 VND to 226,470,000 VND/ha, three times above
the industry average. So the group members are high achievers with the vision that VietGAP
certification will differentiate their product on the market. They hope to capitalise on that by
obtaining a higher price as a result of selling their product to supermarkets or/and on their
own market stall in Ho Chi Minh City, clearly marked with the sign “Safe mandarins”.

An initial certification inspection was conducted and the farmer group met all VietGAP
requirements except they do not have packing facility. At the time of writing this report, the
group is in the process of building the packaging facility with funds provided by the
provincial government. After its completion, it is expected that VietGAP certification will be
granted.
5.2 Smallholder Benefits
The individual situation of small holders was investigated in detail in a farmer practice
baseline study conducted at 13 FFS in June 2007 and during an assessment of economic,
social and environmental impacts using focus group discussions. Focus group discussions
were conducted from 24 to 27 March in Northern Provinces, from 26 to 29 April 2010 in the
Northern Central Provinces and from 3 to 7 May 2010 in the Mekong delta. In the Northern
provinces two focus group discussions were held in each province: one focus group
discussion with five farmers that graduated from FFSs in 2007 (one growing season FFSs)
and another with five farmers that graduated from 2008/2009 FFSs (two growing season
FFS). In the Mekong delta only one focus group discussion was conducted with five farmers
that graduated from FFSs in 2007. Detailed results from the impact assessment analyses can
be found in Milestone 9 and only the major findings will be presented here.

Farmers increased their knowledge and skills for many components of citriculture; including
density of plantings, pruning, plant nutrition and integrated pest management. Most of the
farmers can now keep records of the main operations on their farm. Record keeping also
helped farmers to improve their understanding of pesticide and fertiliser dose calculations
and application of the correct amounts of pesticides and fertilisers, at the right time. Farmers’
abilities to critically evaluate the production process and elements of the agro-ecosystem
were also improved.


13
In the years following FFSs, farmer practices changed considerably resulting in better canopy

management, a reduction in pesticide use, changed pesticide- use from broad spectrum
pesticides with high negative environmental impacts to softer pesticides, and better soil
management with increased use of organic fertilisers and more frequent applications of
smaller amounts of fertilisers. In the Mekong delta the vast majority of farmers had
introduced weaver ants into their orchards and now regularly use Trichoderma sp. mixed
with compost. They also use PSO as part of IPM strategy for control of mites and leafminer.
This makes the Mekong delta one of the most advances regions for implementation of citrus
IPM, not just in Vietnam, but in Southeast Asia. It is interesting to note that in Ha Giang
province the use of pesticides was increased but this resulted in significant improvements in
fruit quality.
Changes in practices resulted in significant economic benefits for farmers as well as positive
social and environmental impacts. Economic benefits in Northern Central provinces included
increases in yield and quality (Ha Tinh, Ha Tay ), increased price of fruits (Ha Tinh) and
higher profitability of production (Nghe An and Hoa Binh). In Hoa Binh farmers claimed an
increase in income, from 20-30,000,000 VND before the FFS to 70,000,000 after the FFS,
and in Nghe An from 20-30,000,000 VND before the FFS to 50,000,000 after FFS.

In the Northern provinces economic benefits included reduction in input costs (Phu Tho, Yen
Bai and Tuyen Quang), increased yield and quality of fruit (Ha Giang and Tuyen Quang) and
higher profitability (all 4 provinces).

In the Mekong delta farmers claimed a reduction in input costs, a slight increase in yield,
increased fruit quality and higher profitability (Ben Tre and Vinh Long). In Tien Giang and
Dong Thap, farmers stated a reduction of input costs, increased fruit quality and higher
profitability. In Can Tho, farmers introduced production of rambutan resulting in a
significant increase in profitability in comparison to previously grown oranges.

Social impacts in the eight Northern provinces included sharing of knowledge and
experiences, a increase in social activities and better relationships in the community, and an
increase in farmers’ confidence and self-esteem. In Ha Tay participants of the FFS also

claimed improved social standing in their community. In Tuyen Quang one farmer club was
formed and in Yen Bai a farmer club that was formed during the FFS is looking at forming
into a cooperative. In Ha Giang one and in Ha Tay two of FFS participants become hamlet
leaders, and in Phu Tho one FFS participant became president of local Farmers’ Union
branch.

In all five provinces in the Mekong delta farmers claimed an increase in sharing of
knowledge and experiences, and an increase in social activities and better relationships in the
community as results of the FFSs. They also claimed an increase in their confidence and self-
esteem. In all provinces except Vinh Long, FFS participants stated an improvement in their
social standing in the community. In Ben Tre and Tien Giang provinces the FFS instigated
formation of social clubs and Vinh Long province the FFS increased activities in an existing
cooperative. In Ben Tre the Farmers’ club will now buy a computer that will be used to
access agricultural extension material.

The main environmental impacts in all eight Northern provinces were an increase in the
number of beneficial arthropods in orchards, a reduced number of pests and a reduced need
for pesticide applications. In Ha Tinh and Hoa Binh provinces, farmers also introduced
weaver ants in their orchards for biological control of pests. Farmers in Hoa Binh claimed an

14
increase in the number of birds and in Nghe An and Ha Tay provinces, farmers now collect
and burn their pesticide packaging resulting in reduced pollution in their orchards.

In all five provinces in the Mekong delta, similarly to the Northern provinces, farmers
reported an increase in the number of beneficial arthropods in their orchards. Weaver ants
were introduced into all orchards. Farmers from all provinces except Dong Thap claimed an
increase in abundance of fish in their canals. In Ben Tre, Tien Giang and Vinh Long
provinces farmers now collect and burn pesticide packaging resulting in reduced pollution in
their orchards. In Tien Giang and Dong Thap farmers reported improvement in their own

health as result of the reduced number of pesticide sprays and the change from more toxic to
IPM-compatible pesticides.

5.3 Capacity Building
The institutional capacity of the PPD to facilitate farmer participatory training is high and
this project further enhanced that capacity by addressing capability gaps in relation to
specific knowledge about GAP. In the second year of the project, trainers worked with
farmers on implementation of elements of GAP related to IPM, farmer and environmental
safety, and record keeping. At the review workshop it was clear that the trainers’
understanding of GAP had improved, but there was is still lot of conceptual confusion in
differentiating between IPM and GAP. At refresher TOTs, the concept of GAP and the
potential impacts of GAP implementation were studied and discussed. At the end of the TOT,
the GAP implementation strategies were drafted.

Forming linkages between all stakeholders involved in the project is a critical component of
capacity building and all efforts were made to build linkages between institutions in Northern
and Southern Vietnam. This project has successfully facilitated sharing of expertise and
knowledge related to GAP between stakeholders from the Mekong delta, who have higher
levels of GAP knowledge and experience, and the stakeholders from the Northern provinces
with less exposure to GAP. A very important linkage has been established between PPD staff
and the non-government organisation VACVINA, which is now driving implementation of
GAP.

Mr Nguyen Tuan Loc, vice-director from PPD Regional Centre 4 who has been key person in
development and implementation of FFS curriculum in the North, was commissioned by
FAO to develop a FFS program on citrus in Nepal. FAO will also organise visits for
researchers and extension officers from Nepal to visit some of our project sites.
5.4 Training Programs
Training is a major component of this project and during 2007 it has been conducted at two
levels. At the trainer level, ten master trainers completed a four day workshop in Hanoi and a

total of 98 extension officers, mainly from PPD but some from ARD and NGOs, received
training in citrus IPM and GAP. These trainers then facilitated a total of 24 FFSs in their
local regions funded by CARD and an additional 17 FFSs funded by provincial governments.
In 2008 trainers facilitated a further 57 FFSs.

At the farmer level, training focussed on integrated crop management which included IPM,
plant nutrition and pruning. With regard to GAP training, the focus was on record keeping.
At workshops in November 2007 and refresher TOTs in February-March 2008 it was

15
concluded that in Northern Vietnam the focus should remain on Integrated Crop
Management (ICM) and record keeping, while in Mekong delta other elements of GAP could
be included in FFS curriculum.

Refresher TOTs were used for discussion about GAP principles and the ways in which GAP
could be implemented in Vietnam. Discussion focused particularly on the role of
cooperatives in implementation of GAP. Other important parts of the refresher TOTs were
the identification of pests and diseases in the orchard and practical exercises to calibrate
knapsack sprayers and to calculate doses of pesticide applied. Participants also assessed the
spray coverage of citrus canopy. At the end of refresher TOTs, practical exercises for FFS
orchards were designed and were subsequently implemented.

At the review workshop in November 2008, trainers developed curricula specific for their
provinces. In 2009 they successfully implemented two FFSs in each province following their
curriculum. That marked the end of three years of learning for the trainers where, in the first
year (cycle) they were taught by scientists and master trainers about citrus ICM and GAP
which they then implemented, then in the second year learning was based on the appraisal of
farmer-specific needs in each FFS where trainers modified implementation of curricula in
each FFS (2
nd

learning cycle) and finally, the trainers developed curricula for their provinces.
5.5 Publicity
In the Mekong delta, television reporters were invited to all major project events such as the
stakeholders meetings, workshops and the opening and closing of FFS. The Vietnamese
project team regularly participated in the program “Farmer’s Bridge” on several local TV
stations in the Mekong delta. Unfortunately, there is no similar media coverage in the North.

On 29 May 2009, Oleg Nicetic was awarded a medal for his outstanding contribution to
agricultural and rural development by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development in
Vietnam. The medal was officially presented to Oleg by Vice Minister of Agriculture, Dr Bui
Ba Bong, at a ceremony in Cao Lanh, Dong Thap province on 25 September 2009. This was
reported in newspapers and on VIETNet

Oleg Nicetic submitted two papers at the 9
th
International Federation of Systems Farming
(European group) conference in Vienna 4-7/07/2010. The first paper, titled “From knowing it
all to learning to engage – experiences from Australian interventions in agricultural research
and development in Vietnam” pointed out some advantages of the CARD approach to
research for development in comparison to the ACIAR approach. The second paper titled
“Good Agricultural Practice (GAP) as a vehicle for transformation to sustainable citrus
production in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam” describes our experiences in implementation of
GAP, and specificity of GAP in Vietnam.

5.6 Project Management
PPD provided effective management of the project with all activities organised and delivered
on time. Overall project coordination and oversighting were governed from the PPD Head
Office in Hanoi. Activities in the North of Vietnam were managed by PPD Regional Centre 4
in Vinh City and activities in the Mekong delta were managed by the Southern Regional
Plant Protection Centre in My Tho.

.

16
6. Report on Cross-Cutting Issues
6.1 Environment
The focus of FFSs was to increase the farmers’ understanding of the citrus agroecosystem
and the influence than human activities have on it. This approach resulted in a reduction of
the detrimental impacts of citrus cultivation on the environment and, thus, improved
ecosystem health. These positive impacts on the environment are mainly due to reduced
pesticide use as result of implementation of the IPM strategies that farmers learned in the
FFSs. In all provinces, positive effects on environment appeared as increased numbers of
beneficial arthropods in orchards and reduced pollution associated with pesticide and
fertiliser packaging. In the Mekong delta positive impacts on environment also included an
increase in abundance of fish in canals and in Hoa Binh province farmers observed increases
numbers of birds. In the Mekong delta all farmers who participated in impact assessment
currently rear weaver ants in their orchards. This has two major benefits:
a) reduction in pest pressure and associated reduced pesticide use and
b) weaver ants are good indicators of IPM-compatible pesticides.
6.2 Gender and Social Issues
In the training of master trainers and trainers, about 30% of the total number of trainers were
female. This proportion of males and females is reflective of the overall PPD trainer gender
balance. In the Mekong delta, however, only 9% of trained farmers were women, whereas in
Northern Vietnam female participation was 29%. This reflects the differences in the
traditional roles of women between these regions.

All project activities were strongly supported by the local governments and farmer
organisations, including the Farmers’ Union and the Women’s Union. One of the FFS
participants became president of the local Farmers’ Union (Phu Tho province), and three
participants became leaders of their hamlets (Ha Giang and Ha Tay provinces). In Yen Bai
province, Women’s Union meetings were used as a platform for sharing knowledge and

information from FFSs.

In most communities where FFSs were held, social activities increased and better
relationship between the community members were reported to have been built. FFS
participants shared their knowledge and experiences with their neighbours and, as a result,
their standing in community increased. On a personal (human) level the self-esteem and
confidence of FFSs participants increased.

Farmer clubs were formed after completion of the FFS in Yen Bai, Tuyen Quang, Tien Giang
and Ben Tre provinces. In Vinh Long province, activities in the My Hoa cooperative
increased as a result of the conducting of the FFSs and the cooperative also received GAP
certification.


17
7. Implementation Issues
7.1 Issues and Constraints
Overall, the citrus industry in Vietnam is far from meeting GLOBALG.A.P. requirements.
There are many infrastructural changes (e.g. improvements to the sewerage system and the
construction of packing houses) that need to be made before compliance with
GLOBALG.A.P. or even VietGAP could be possible on a larger scale. To overcome these
infrastructural limits to GAP implementation, major investment, particularly financial, is
necessary.

However, at present, it seems there are no substantial economic benefits for GAP certified
producers that would justify significant investment by farmers. Farmers from the GAP
certified My Hoa cooperative stated during focus group discussions that they are now selling
fruit outside the cooperative in the local market because they can obtain a higher price. As
previously discussed, we were told that even though Metro provided substantial funds to be
used for GLOBALG.A.P. certification the supermarket chain did not commit to buy any

fruit from the cooperative. In we reported that GAP is not required for export of pomelo to
the Netherlands, that Dutch importers perform their own quality control checks, including
levels of pesticide residues, and that GAP certification does not currently increase the return
to farmers of exported pomelo.

Besides the infrastructural requirements, a prerequisite for GAP certification is the existence
of medium-sized cooperatives, or at least, coherent farmer groups that have a large enough
area of citrus to make GAP certification viable. In the Northern provinces, there are very few
farmer groups and it does not seem that there is a will to form groups or cooperatives. In the
Mekong delta, however, the situation is much better with many existing farmers groups and
the formation of a number of new ones. However, even in Mekong delta the financial
resources of these groups are limited and no major infrastructural improvements can be
achieved without government help.

Another major limit to implementation of GAP is the lack of properly registered pesticides
for use in citrus. That problem was raised in the previous CARD citrus project (036/04 VIE)
but the situation has not significantly improved in past three years. Many pesticides that are
recommended for use in citrus in other countries and that are IPM compatible are not
specifically registered for citrus in Vietnam. Farmers are aware of the need to use registered
products and to comply with the withholding period. However, farmers and PPSD staff do
not have a full understanding of the GAP requirement for use of only registered products.
The GAP requirement for a registered pesticide is that the pesticide is specifically registered
for the targeted crop (citrus, in our case) and for specific pest, whereas the PPD staff
normally described a registered product as a pesticide registered for any crop in Vietnam that
has not been placed on the list of banned pesticides. Consequently, if no specific pre-harvest
interval has been set for citrus (because the product is not registered for citrus) then no
compliance with this requirement is possible. It is generally accepted that a 14 day pre-
harvest withholding period is acceptable for any pesticide.

18

7.2 Options

There is no easy solution for these problems outlined above. The newly opened market, as a
result of Vietnam’s membership of the WTO, and the associated likely increase citrus
imported from China and Thailand, may eventually stimulate the formation of larger and
stronger cooperatives that can compete with this cheaper, imported citrus. Stronger
cooperatives will build post-harvest facilities and GAP implementation and certification may,
therefore, become more widespread.

To address the problem of GAP implementation in the area of plant protection, there needs to
be an overhaul of the pesticides currently registered for use on citrus. This could be done in
partnership between the government and the pesticide companies and would, hopefully,
recommend and encourage the use of new generation pesticides that cause less disruption to
the environment, provide financial incentives to pesticide companies to register these
pesticides and provide incentives for farmers to comply with these new registrations. Without
any government initiative, the use of old generation registered pesticides and the use of new
generation unregistered pesticides will continue to make GAP certification challenging.

7.3 Sustainability

The network of trainers developed as result of this project will be very important part of any
GAP implementation and certification process. To keep the momentum going, the trainers
will also need continuous funding to operate and conduct further FFSs. A number of
provincial governments have demonstrated their interest in and support for FFSs by funding
additional FFSs during the timeframe of the project and, in some provinces, this will be
continued after the project’s completion. However, the financial capacity of many provinces
is limited and full reliance on government funding is inherently unsustainable. In the
previous project (036/04 VIE) the cost of FFS per participant was estimated at $ A 70.62,
which was only 1.60% of the estimated average net profit per hectare. Based on these
estimates, the cost of FFS would be offset in just one season as a result of the reduction in

inputs and the increased yield. The cost of FFS in citrus is similar to or only slightly higher
than that reported for rice; whereas, returns for citrus are several times higher than for rice.
Given the low investment costs and the excellent returns on investment in FFS, farmer
contribution to the cost of FFS through a small levy, either immediately or in the future,
should be considered, especially if farmers are members of citrus clubs or cooperatives.

The formation of cooperatives in the Mekong delta after the completion of FFSs has been an
important first step in sustaining the increased capacity of farming communities to improve
citrus production after the completion of FFSs. However, to sustain the benefits realised by
these FFS, farmer groups need financial support with credit facilities to enable them to
develop post-harvest operations in order to improve their market access. Sustainability of the
project outcomes is likely to be lower in the North, because there are fewer cooperatives and
farmers currently show less interest in establishing farmers groups as well less initiative for
collective action.

19
8. Next Critical Steps

Termination of the AusAID CARD program in Vietnam without any other Australian
organisation with a similar mandate will hinder opportunities to build on the resources and
human capacity built in this project.

9. Conclusion
The main outcome of our project with regard to GAP implementation is the development of
resources for GAP implementation: a GAP manual, reference materials for farmers and
trainers (books and brochures) and an on-farm record keeping system. The project also
developed a significant pool of trained farmer that will be able to implement GAP and gain
GAP certification if the market requirement for GAP-certified citrus fruit grows and if
farmers can obtain a premium price by accessing the upper end of the domestic market (i.e.
supermarkets, hotels and restaurants).

The impact assessment undertaken as a part of the project indicates that the participatory
approach we used for GAP implementation is pivotal for the sustainability of the whole GAP
certification process. It shows that even though farmers from only two FFS actually achieved
GAP certification, the development and implementation of GAP-based curricula enabled the
implementation of certain parts of the GAP requirements in citrus that made production more
profitable and sustainable, reduced its impact on the environment and benefited farmers and,
potentially, consumers.

The high level of Vietnamese support, as demonstrated by some local governments as well as
national government and non-government organisations during the project’s implementation,
as well as the understanding and cooperation between all the stakeholders which was
established during the project, are likely to sustain the impacts of the project after its
completion.




20
Project Progress Against Proposed Objectives

Project Title: Introduction of the principles of GAP for citrus trough implementation of citrus IPM using Farm Field School
Vietnamese Implementing Institution: Plant Protection Department
PROPOSAL PROGRESS REPORT
Narrative Information Required Performance Measures Assumptions/Risks Information Required
OBJECTIVES
1

2










3





To develop GAP manual for citrus that
includes IPM guidelines that are compliant
with GAP standards

To establish a national cadre of citrus
IPM/GAP master trainers and province
level FFS facilitator teams.








Enhanced capacity of farmers to implement
citrus IPM compliant with GAP standards




GAP manual and IPM guidelines
compliant with GAP standards and
suitable for local conditions exist.

Training of master trainers at
national level conducted and
reported.
Training of trainers at regional
level conducted and reported.
Cadre of competent national
master trainers and provincial FFS
facilitators exist to champion GAP
principles and IPM aligned to GAP
in their region.

Citrus IPM/GAP FFS conducted.
Trained farmers knowledge on
citrus IPM and GAP increased.
Trained farmer implement IPM
aligned to GAP (commenced in

Low risk because of MARD
need to comply with APPPC
requirements. Study is also
aligned with
VACVINA/VinaFruit strategic
goals to develop export oriented
citrus industry hence proponents
will have high level of
institutional support.

Low risk because high self
motivation of master trainers,
high level of institutional
support and for reasons stated in
2.1.






Low risk. See 2.1 and high level
of community and institutional
support to achieve the objective.



All objectives achieved. For details
see Implementation Highlights
section of the report.


21

4












5



6










Develop procedures/formats for compliance

with EUREPGAP/ASIAGAP in areas other
then IPM but related to IPM including on-
farm recording system formats and
responsible/safe use, handling and storage
of pesticide and post-harvest handling.







Assess effectiveness of FFS for
implementation of IPM and GAP


Implementation of GAP in one of the
cooperatives in Mekong delta.
FFS participant orchards).
Reduced pesticide use.
Increased food safety and
protection of health of farming
communities and consumer of
fruits.

Increased capacity of citrus
industry to implement GAP and be
prepared for new market
conditions after Vietnam enter
WTO.

Increased capacity of GOs and
NGOs to assist small holders
transition to unprotected market
environment.
Increased capacity of VinaFruit to
facilities export of Vietnamese
citrus.

Comprehensive analysis reported.



GAP implemented.







See 4.1 and high level of
community and institutional
support to achieve the objective.

Low risk since methodology is
already developed in CARD
project 36/04 VIE.

Medium because some elements
of GAP like use of certified
planting material cannot be
implemented in existing
orchards.