Vietnam is acknowledged to be REDD+ pioneer country, having adopted REDD+ in 2009. This paper is an updated version of Vietnam’s REDD+ Country Profile which was first published by CIFOR in 2012. Our findings show that forest cover has increased since 2012, but enhancing, or even maintaining, forest quality remains a challenge. Drivers of deforestation and degradation in Vietnam, including legal and illegal logging, conversion of forest for national development goals and commercial agriculture, weak law enforcement and weak governance, have persisted since 2012 up to 2017. However, with strong political commitment, the government has made significant progress in addressing major drivers, such as the expansion of hydropower plants and rubber plantations.Since 2012, Vietnam has also signed important international treaties and agreements on trade, such as Voluntary Partnership Agreements (VPAs) through the European Union’s (EU) Forest Law Enforcement. These new policies have enhanced the role of the forestry sector within the overall national economy and provided a strong legal framework and incentives for forestuser groups and government agencies to take part in forest protection and development. Nevertheless, new market rules and international trade patterns also pose significant challenges for Vietnam, where the domestic forestry sector is characterized by state-owned companies and a large number of domestic firms that struggle to comply with these new rules.The climate change policies, national REDD+ strategy and REDD+ institutional setting has been refined and revised over time. However, uncertain and complex international requirements on REDD+ and limited funding have weakened the government’s interest in and political commitment to REDD+. REDD+ policies in Vietnam have shown significant progress in terms of its monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) systems, forest reference emission levels (FREL), and performance-based and benefit-sharing mechanisms by taking into account lessons learnt from its national Payment for Forest Environmental Services (PFES) Scheme. Evidence also shows increasing efforts of government and international communities to ground forestry policies in a participatory decision-making processes and the progress on developing safeguarding policies in Vietnam between 2012 and 2017 affirms the government’s interest in pursuing an equitable REDD+ implementation. Policy documents have fully recognized the need to give civil society organizations (CSOs) and ethnic groups political space and include them in decision making. Yet, participation remains token. Government provision for tenure security and carbon rights for local households are still being developed, with little progress since 2012.The effectiveness of REDD+ policies in addressing drivers of deforestation and degradation has not be proven, even though the revised NRAP has recently been approved. However, the fact that drivers of deforestation and degradation are outside of the forestry sector and have a strong link to national economic development goals points to an uneasy pathway for REDD+. The business case for REDD+ in Vietnam has not been proven, due to an uncertain carbon market, increasing requirements from donors and developed countries, and high transaction and implementation costs. Current efforts toward 3Es outcomes of REDD+ could be enhanced by stronger political commitment to addressing the drivers of deforestation from all sectors, broader changes in policy framework that create both incentives and disincentives for avoiding deforestation and degradation, cross-sectoral collaboration, and committed funding from both the government and developed countries.

The Vietnam Forestry Development Strategy (VFDS) is one of the country’s most important plans for the forestry sector. The strategic directions, objectives and solutions within it differ from time to time, depending on the political goals and perspectives of the moment, as well as the role that the forestry sector plays in Vietnam’s overall socio-economic development. Regardless of such changes, inheriting lessons learned, developing the next strategy off the back of the experience gained from solving previous challenges, and taking advantage of opportunities, are always the top priorities of the Government of Vietnam. This report is the result of a collaboration between the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) and the Vietnam Administration of Forestry (VNFOREST); it is intended to provide VNFOREST with input as they develop the new strategy. Based on secondary document research and stakeholder interviews, the report reviews achievements and challenges in the implementation of VFDS 2006–2020, as well as provides recommendations for policy makers to consider in the process of developing the new strategy. Research results show that, by 2020, Vietnam had exceeded a number of the goals set out in VFDS 2006–2020, including: (i) accelerating the growth of production value in the sector; (ii) increasing the export value of wood and forest products; (iii) increasing domestic wood production; and (iv) planting protection forest (PTF) and special-use forests (SUF). However, the forestry sector still faces many challenges when it comes to other key performance indicators, such as: (i) increasing the area of production forests (PDF) with certification of sustainable forest management (SFM); (ii) increasing large-diameter timber production; (iii) increasing revenue for forest environmental services (FES); (iv) securing forest and forest land for the purposes of allocation and leases; (v) reducing the number of poor households in forestry areas; and (vi) increasing the rate at which forestry workers are trained. Although some anticipated targets were not achieved, others were exceeded, for example: forest cover; reforestation after logging; reduction of forest protection violations; and scattered tree planting. That these goals were achieved or exceeded is the result of strong political commitment, policies trend-matching the market, improvements in central and local management capacity, the active support of international donors, and the involvement of civil society and the private sector. That some targets were not achieved is due to the challenges of implementing policy effectively, efficiently and equitably at grassroots level, lack of resources and funding, and some ambitious goals and targets not being realistic in the current economic, political and market contexts. Addressing these challenges requires a new approach and more effective economic, social and technical solutions. Development of VFDS 2021–2030 and the 2050 vision needs to consider the implementation achievements and challenges of the previous policy, as well as how to align with global trends, and balance these with the current political, economic and social development context in Vietnam. The direction of the new strategy must also be considered in the context of international requirements, to facilitate the mobilization of domestic and foreign financial resources to help modernize the industry, as well as enhance the forestry sector’s role and value in terms of poverty reduction, sustainable economic development and ensuring sustainable forest ecosystems.

REDD+ must be transformational. REDD+ requires broad institutional and governance reforms, such as tenure, decentralisation, and corruption control. These reforms will enable departures from business as usual, and involve communities and forest users in making and implementing policies that a ect them. Policies must go beyond forestry. REDD+ strategies must include policies outside the forestry sector narrowly de ned, such as agriculture and energy, and better coordinate across sectors to deal with non-forest drivers of deforestation and degradation. Performance-based payments are key, yet limited. Payments based on performance directly incentivise and compensate forest owners and users. But schemes such as payments for environmental services (PES) depend on conditions, such as secure tenure, solid carbon data and transparent governance, that are often lacking and take time to change. This constraint reinforces the need for broad institutional and policy reforms. We must learn from the past. Many approaches to REDD+ now being considered are similar to previous e orts to conserve and better manage forests, often with limited success. Taking on board lessons learned from past experience will improve the prospects of REDD+ e ectiveness. National circumstances and uncertainty must be factored in. Di erent country contexts will create a variety of REDD+ models with di erent institutional and policy mixes. Uncertainties about the shape of the future global REDD+ system, national readiness and political consensus require  exibility and a phased approach to REDD+ implementation.

Recognizing the invaluable role of forests in the fight against climate change, countries and the international community have established a framework known as Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation, and the role of conservation, sustainable forest management, and the enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries (REDD+). This framework aims to encourage countries to reduce deforestation and degradation by offering financial rewards or results-based payments (RBPs) for verified emission reductions, at the same time promoting sustainable development. While the existence of various international RBPs and carbon market schemes valuing emission reductions (ERs) presents multiple opportunities for countries participating in REDD+, there is a critical need to clarify ERs rights and determine who benefits from REDD+ results. This study offers a comprehensive comparative analysis that focuses on the nature and allocation of ER rights, as well as the legal entitlements associated with REDD+ outcomes. To conduct this study, legislation from more than twenty countries across Africa, Asia and the Pacific, and Latin America was reviewed between November 2021 and June 2023.