Ministry of Agriculture & Rural Development _ Project Progress Report April 2009 to June 2010 Project Name 037/06VIE_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) August 2010 Completion date (revised) Reporting period April 2009 to June 2010 Contact Officer(s) In Australia: Team Leader Oleg Nicetic (til 2/07/10) Telephone: Robert Spooner-Hart (from 3/07/20) Research Program Coordinator Position: Fax: Organisation University of Western Sydney Email: Name: +61245701329 +61245701103 o.nicetic@uws.edu.au In Australia: Administrative contact Gar Jones Name: Director, Research Services Position: Organisation University of Western Sydney Telephone: Fax: Email: +6124736 0631 +6124736 0905 g.jones@uws.edu.au Telephone: Fax: Email: +84-4-5330778 +84-4-5330780 ipmppd@fpt.vn In Vietnam Mr Ngo Tien Dung Name: National IPM coordinator Position: Organisation Plant Protection Department 1 Project Abstract The key objective of this project is 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 is 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 are working together to produce a GAP procedures tailored to suit Vietnamese conditions They are also work 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 are conducted in provinces in the Mekong delta and 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 Executive Summary All activities undertaken in the third year of the project resulted in successful completion of all planned FFSs and application for certification of the farmer group in Dong Thap was submitted Within the reporting period a total of 18 FFS in provinces were completed with 660 farmers successfully completed the 2nd year of FFSs following curriculum developed for their own situation Farmers completed first year FFS in 2008 when they learned about the principles of GAP including record keeping, IPM, understanding of 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 this second year they applied the principles they learned in the first year to manage pest and diseases and address nutrient deficiency specific for their orchards This second year of program resulted in significant practice change 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 is provided by VACVina members and extension officers from Lai Vung district Plant Protection Station The Farmer Union and local government have been providing great support including a subsidy towards the building of toilets in the field Application for VietGAP was submitted and the certification inspection was carried out The group complied with all VietGAP requirements except the group does not have packaging facilities The group applied and was granted funds to build packaging facility building of which is currently in progress Project evaluation team collected all impact assessment data in April-May 2010 The management structure that was improved after the first year of the project performed very effectively resulting in on time implementation of all activities 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 are to develop GAP production procedures for the Vietnamese citrus industry that will be published as a handbook 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 will be established The key methodologies adopted are 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 is Training of Trainers and Master Trainers in citrus GAP including IPM Trainers will conduct FFSs in their provinces and together with the trained farmers will become 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 agroecosystem; 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 it is expected that this project will establish a locally relevant GAP framework and begin 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 Progress to Date 4.1 Implementation Highlights The activities undertaken in the third year of the project have resulted in all objectives being achieved and delivering outputs on time The activities undertaken in this period are detailed below 4.1.1 Complition of FFFs Successful implementation of the program for previous two years has resulted in 98 trainers being effectively trained in citrus IPM and GAP These trainers conducting FFS at 18 locations in provinces in the northern part of Viet Nam (Table 1) Table 1: Location of FFSs number of participants and gender ratio in 2009 Proportion of Province Number of FFS Number of farmers trained female participants (%) Ha Tinh 60 34 Nghe An 60 33 Hoa Binh 60 29 Ha Tay 60 28 Phu Tho 2+2* 120 39 Yen Bai 60 27 Tuyen Quang 60 19 Ha Giang 60 18 TOTAL 16+2 660 28.37 * Funded by local government A total of 660 farmers have been trained in 2009 of which 28.37% were female (Table 1) It should be noted that all participants in FFSs in 2009 participated in FFSs in 2008 However while in 2008 they followed general curriculum framework addressing principles of IPM and GAP and studying their own production situation, in 2009 FFSs concentrated on implementation of practice change following curriculum specific for each province and developed at the review workshop in November 2008 (see previous report) The second year of FFS with the new curriculum was introduced after assessment of the first year of FFSs showed very slow progress in farmers’ adoption of new practices Assessment conducted after the second year of FFSs showed significant improvement in most of assess FFSs Results of the impact assessment will be shown in Impact assessment report 4.1.3 Implementation of GAP Our 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 were female As a result IPM is practiced on 140 out of a total area of 240 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 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 help farmers keep required records, to subsidise costs of building infrastructure necessary for compliance with GAP including 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 few farmermembers of My Hoa cooperative after certification process was completed and the consultants’ support terminated, farmers have problems with record keeping on their own, and cooperative and farmer-members did not have a significant increase in income as result of GAP certification We talked with a representative of the exporter to the Netherlands and she said that GAP is not required for export and that Dutch importers perform their own quality control checks including pesticide residue so GAP certification will not influence export procedures or increase the price of exported pomelo Since My Hoa cooperative is the only citrus producer that received GAP certification probably the most beneficial aspect was positive media coverage The Vice-director of My Hoa Cooperative also expressed doubt that the certification will be renewed after it expired 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 is provided by VACVina members and extension officers from Lai Vung district Plant Protection Station The Farmer Union and local government have been providing great support including a subsidy towards the building of toilets in the field Both local government and Farmer Union see GAP certification as a very prestigious achievement because of the political support the accreditation scheme has from the central and provincial government 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 in a much longer process of learning and making adjustments in production and practices by themselves, under guidance of VACVina consultants, but nothing has actually been done for farmers by the consultants This group of growers is much smaller then My Hoa with only 11 members cultivating a total area of 3.45 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 connection 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 or 226,470,000 VND/ha, which is times above industry average So the group members are high achievers with the vision that VietGAP certification will differentiate their product on the market and they hope to capitalise on that by getting 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” Initial certification inspection was conducted and farmer group met all VietGAP requirement except they not have packaging facility At the time of writing this report group is in process of building the packaging facilities with funds provided by provincial government After the completion of packaging house it is expected that VietGAP certification will be granted 4.1.5 On farm record keeping system On farm record keeping system was developed based on VietGAP requirements and consists of very simple, cheap record book that was evaluated by farmers in the first year of FFS The record keeping books are now used by farmers few years after the completion of FFSs In some provinces extension services have reprinted the book and distributed them to farmers In focus group discussions conducted as part of impact assessment process acceptance of record keeping was overwhelming with farmers recognising following advantages of record keeping: awareness of input costs (53% of respondents), awareness of labour costs (33%), awareness of income from fruit sale (44%), awareness of production profitability (85%), awareness of fertiliser used so farmer can assess their effectiveness (30%), record help farmers to predict pest occurrence (33%), awareness of used pesticide so farmer can assess their effectiveness (49%) Other advantages of using records mentioned by few farmers was selection of a cheaper pesticide shop (based on price recorded farmers became aware of different in prices between shops) Detail findings from interviews are presented in Annex 4.2 Capacity Building The institutional capacity of the PPD to facilitate farmer participatory training is high and this project is further enhancing that capacity by addressing capability gaps in relation to specific knowledge about GAP In the second year of the project trainers working with farmers on implementation of elements of GAP related to IPM, farmers and environmental safety, and record keeping At the review workshop it became clear that trainers understanding of GAP improved but there is still lot of conceptual confusion in differentiation between IPM and GAP At refresher TOTs the concept of GAP and 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 are being 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 Mekong delta, who have higher levels of GAP knowledge and experience, and stakeholders from the Northern provinces with less exposure to GAP The very important linkage has been established between PPD staff and non-government organisation VACVINA that now driving implementation of GAP Mr Nguyen Tuan Loc vice-director from PPD Regional Centre who has been key person in development and implementation of FFS curriculum in the North was commissioned by FAO to develop FFS program on citrus in Nepal FAO will also organise visit for researchers and extension officers from Nepal to visit some of our project sites 4.3 Training Programs Training is a major component of this project and during 2007 it has been conducted at two levels At the trainers’ level 10 master trainers completed a 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 government In 2008 trainers are facilitating further 57 FFSs At the farmers level training focussed on integrated crop management that included IPM, plant nutrition and pruning In regards to GAP training, the focus has been on record keeping At workshops in November 2007 and refresher TOTs in February-March 2008 it was 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 may be included in FFS curriculum Refresher TOTs were used for discussion about GAP principles and the ways GAP can be implemented in Vietnam Discussion focused particularly on the role of cooperatives in implementation of GAP Another important part of refresher TOTs was the identification of pests and diseases in the orchard and practical exercises to calibrate knapsack and calculate dose of pesticide applied Participants also assessed spray coverage of citrus canopy At the end of refresher TOTs practical exercises for FFS orchards were designed and they have been implemented over last months At review workshop in November 2008 trainers have developed curriculum specific for their provinces In 2009 they successfully implemented FFSs in each province following their own curriculum That marked the end of years learning for trainers where in the first year (cycle) they were thought by scientist and master trainers about citrus ICM and GAP which they then implemented, then in the second year based on appraisal of farmers specific needs in each FFS trainers modified implementation of curriculum putting more emphasis on specific needs in each FFS (2nd learning cycle) and finely trainers develop curriculum for their provinces 4.4 Publicity In Mekong delta television reporters have been invited to all major project events such as meetings and the opening and closing of FFS Vietnamese project team regularly participate in program “Farmer’s bridge” on several local TV stations in 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 papers at 9th International Federation of System Farming (European group) conference in Vienna 4-7/07/2010 First paper titled “From knowing it all to learning to engage – experiences from Australian interventions in agricultural research and development in Vietnam” points out some advantages of CARD approach to research for development in comparison to ACIAR approach, 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 (both papers are presented in Annex 2) 4.4 Project Management After adjustments made to management structure within the first year of the project and reported in 2nd Six-monthly report project management worked efficiently in current reporting period Report on Cross-Cutting Issues 5.1 Environment The focus of FFS is to increase the farmers understanding of the ecosystem and the impact of human influences on it This approach has the potential to reduce the detrimental impacts of human activities on the environment The IPM strategies farmers learn and implementation of GAP should result in improved ecosystem health At this stage of the project it is too early to detect any evidence of environmental improvement 5.2 Gender and Social Issues In the training of master trainers and trainers about 30% of the total number of trainers was females This proportion of males and females is reflective of the overall PPD trainer gender balance In the Mekong delta only 9% of trained farmers were woman and in Northern Vietnam woman participation was 29% This reflects the differences in traditional roles of women between the regions All project activities are strongly supported by local government and farmer organisations including the Farmers Union and The Women’s Union Participants in FFS are encouraged to actively engage with their local community and share knowledge acquired in FFS From previous CARD projects we have evidence that the FFS participants became the founders and core members of farmer’s clubs and cooperatives and it can be anticipated that FFS participants will become actively involved in dissemination of their newly acquired information in this project as well Implementation Issues 6.1 Issues and Constraints VietGAP certification required packaging house to be certified at the same time as citrus field production Even though our GAP group met all VietGAP requirements in production of citrus they not have packaging house so certification could not be granted Oleg Nicetic was offered full time position as project scientist on ACIAR project in NW Vietnam which he accepted and from 1/08/2009 to 2/07/2010 he was on leave without pay from UWS and on 2/07/10 he terminated his employment at UWS However, ACIAR and University of Queensland (Oleg’s new employer) agreed that Oleg will still continue with activities in CARD citrus project Oleg’s employment in NW Vietnam did not affect implementation of CARD project activities and Oleg spent more than contracted number of day in Vietnam but his full time employment with UQ resulted in delay in submission of milestones 6.2 Options Farmers supported by VACVina applied for funds to provincial government and they were awarded finance to build small packaging house Completion of packaging house and award of VietGAP certification is expected by the end of the year Robert Spooner-Hart took over leadership of citrus project from 2/07/2010 and will submit all milestone according to new schedule: Progress reports (3 Milestones at the beginning of August 2010), preliminary impact assessment and completion report by 31/08/10 and full impact assessment by 30/09 Next Critical Steps The finalisation of packaging house and submission of all milestones Conclusion Project team achieved significant improvement in capacity of trainers who are now able to develop and implement their own curriculum GAP implementation was successful and results of our project have been presented on international conferences with papers printed in peer reviewed proceedings Success of successive citrus projects was recognised by awarding of MARD Medal to Oleg Nicetic Sign-Off Prepared by Oleg Nicetic, Ngo Tien Dung and Ho Van Chien, Nguyen Tuan Loc and Robert Spooner-Hart Authorised by: Robert Spooner-Hart Countersigned by: [Vietnamese Team Leader] Date: 16 November 2007 Project Progress Against Proposed Objectives, Outputs, Activities And Inputs 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 Narrative OBJECTIVES Information Required PROPOSAL Performance Measures Assumptions/Risks To develop GAP manual for citrus that includes IPM guidelines that are compliant with GAP standards GAP manual and IPM guidelines compliant with GAP standards and suitable for local conditions exist 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 To establish a national cadre of citrus IPM/GAP master trainers and province level FFS facilitator teams 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 Enhanced capacity of farmers to implement citrus IPM compliant with GAP standards Citrus IPM/GAP FFS conducted Trained farmers knowledge on citrus IPM and GAP increased Trained farmer implement IPM aligned to GAP (commenced in All objectives achieved Low risk because high self motivation of master trainers, high level of institutional support and for reasons stated in 2.1 PROGRESS REPORT Information Required Low risk See 2.1 and high level of community and institutional support to achieve the objective 10 Australians As was the case for the Australian partners, positive achievements at the farmer level not necessarily contribute to the performance evaluation of the Vietnamese researchers However, they generally obtain a significant financial reward from participation in international collaborative projects Therefore, it would be fair to assume that they may be reluctant to provide negative feedback on project achievements towards the Australian partners The performance evaluation of extension personnel is more directly related to changes in farmers’ practices The extension officers’ reputation with and influence on farmers is their most valuable asset because the respected and influential extension officers are more likely to generate additional income by participating in international projects and cooperating with input suppliers So even if improvements in farmers’ livelihood are not fully recognised in the extension officers’ review they are compensated with income outside their institution The predominant performance indicator for the private industry (input supplier) is their sales volume, which is a direct function of farmers’ decisions to use or not to use a product (in our case, the mineral spray oil) As was demonstrated in our play, when research is funded by private industry, feedback from farmers flows much faster and more powerfully to the researchers than through the government funding agency However sales volume is only acceptable as an indicator of technology adoption, not as an indicator of improvement in farmers’ livelihood It is; in fact, very difficult to determine what should or can be measured to estimate the impact of a stakeholder focused FFS model that involved so many beneficiaries, as was the case in the second and third CARD projects Economic indicators are commonly used but to identify and precisely quantify all costs in the Vietnamese context is barely possible Moreover, environmental and social indicators are often limited due to difficulties in capturing change and the cost involved in rigorous evaluation (Bartlett 2005; Fleischer et al 2004) Making the change from a hard science, technology focused approach to a stakeholder and process focused approach without institutional support implied some very difficult personal decisions for the researchers involved It posed a dilemma between farmers’ benefits and the individual researcher’s personal benefit within their institution The differences in performance indicators that apply for different partner organisations and stakeholders participating in research and development projects should be openly acknowledged within teams and efforts should be made to harmonise them References ACIAR (2010) ACIAR page at the Australian Embassy in Manila, the Philippines, website, Accessed on 14/01/10 http://www.philippines.embassy.gov.au/mnla/ACIAR.html Agnello, A.M (2002) Petroleum-derived spray oils: chemistry, history, refining and formulation In: Beattie GAC, Watson DM, Stevens ML, Rae DJ, Spooner-Hart RN (Eds.) Spray Oils Beyond 2000 Sydney: University of Western Sydney, pp 2-18 Bartlett A (2005) Farmer field schools to promote integrated pest management in Asia: the FAO experience Proceedings of the ‘Workshop on Scaling Up Case Studies in Agriculture’ International Rice Institute, Bangkok, Thailand, 16-18 August 2005 Bawden, R (2005) Systemic development at Hawkesbury: some personal lessons from experience Systems Research and Behavioural Science 22(2), 151-164 CARD (2000) Extension of citrus IPM in Viet Nam Internal project document CARD (2010) CARD website Accessed on 14/01/2010 http://www.card.com.vn/news/index.aspx FAO 32 Davis J., J Gordon, D Pearce and D Templeton (2008) Guidelines for assessing the impacts of ACIAR’s research activities ACIAR Impact Assessment Series Report No 58, Canberra: ACIAR, pp 120 FAO (2004) Statistical Yearbook Country profile Accessed http://www.fao.org/es/ess/yearbook/vol_1_2/pdf/Viet-Nam.pdf on 8/07/2007 Fleischer G., H Waibel and G Walter-Echols (2004) Egypt: How much does it cost to introduce participatory extension approaches in public extension services? In W Rivera & G Alex (Eds.), Volume 3: Demand-driven approaches to agricultural extension: Case studies of international initiatives ARD Discussion Paper 10 Washington: The World Bank, pp 40-49 Nguyen, N.D., T Uchiyama and K Ohara (2005) Vietnam agricultural extension: Its roles, problems and opportunities Bulletin of Faculty of Bioresources, Mie University 32: 7994 Nicetic O., L.V Phạm, D.T Ngô and D.V Duc (2008) Field guide for pests, diseases and nutrient deficiency of citrus in Northern Vietnam Hanoi: Agricultural Press, pp 62-67 Van de Fliert, E J., D T Ngo, O Henriksen and J P T Dalsgaard (2007) From Collectives to Collective Decision-making and Action: Farmer Field Schools in Vietnam Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension 13 (3), 245-256 33 Private Industry Caltex Australian Researchers Gov‘t Funding Agency ACIAR Vietnamese Researchers Marketing Extension Agencies Farmers Figure 1: Communication flows between stakeholders in technology centred research approach (Act 1) 34 Australian Researchers Private Industry SK Energy Gov Fund Agency CARD Canberra Vietnamese Researchers Extension Agencies Marketing Farmers Figure 2: Communication flows between stakeholders in technology focused research and extension approach (Act 2) 35 Gov Fund Agency CARD Program management unit Ha Noi Australian Researchers Extension PPD Farmers Local Government FFS program - platform for communication between all stakeholders NGO VACVINA Private Industry SPC Vietnamese Researchers Figure 3: Communication flows between stakeholders in stakeholder focused research and extension approach using FFS model (Act 3) 36 Good Agricultural Practice (GAP) as a vehicle for transformation to sustainable citrus production in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam Oleg Nicetica, Elske van de Flierta, Ho Van Chienb, Vo Maic, Le Cuongb a Centre for Communication and Social Change, School for Journalism and Communication, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia b Plant Protection Department, Southern Regional Plant Protection Centre, My Tho, Vietnam c The Vietnamese Gardening Association, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam Abstract: Pressure from the emerging Vietnamese middle class for access to “safe food” has prompted changes in the traditional food supply chain from: individual farmer → middle man → traditional markets (formal, informal and hawkers) to: farmers organised in cooperatives or less formal farmer groups → supermarkets This process has gained significant government support resulting in the introduction of policies and support for “safe vegetable production” and recently the establishment of Vietnamese Good Agricultural Practice (VietGAP) standards VietGAP is a government decree laying out the principles for sustainable and safe agricultural production supported by certification and auditing systems These consumer driven market transformations together with government policies has increased the pressure on farmers to adopt more sustainable production practices This paper examines GAP as a framework to secure food safety and sustainable production, and farmer field schools (FFSs) as a platform for GAP learning and establishment of GAP collective action and practices under specific Vietnamese smallholder conditions where the GAP process is strongly driven by government Our results indicate that a participatory approach to GAP implementation resulted in successful joint government-private sector intervention in citrus production It is, however, too early to draw conclusions about the sustainability of GAP certification since the economic benefits for the GAP certified farmers in comparison to noncertified farmers are not yet clear Regardless of the sustainability of GAP certification, improvements in economic, social, human and environmental capital as a result of citrus FFSs conducted in the GAP implementation process will have long term positive effects on sustainable citrus production in the Mekong Delta Keywords: citrus, Vietnam, good agricultural practice, farmer field schools, participation, collective action Introduction The rise of supermarkets is an important phenomenon with huge implication for farmers (MSM, 2008) They were established in the US in the 1930s and soon after in some European countries including England, France and Germany They spread throughout Latin America in the 1980s (Reardon and Berdegue, 2002) and reached Asia in 1990s The first Asian supermarkets were established in Malaysia and then they rapidly extend throughout the region including China, where the number of supermarkets increased 40% per year (Shepherd, 2005) In Vietnam the number of supermarkets increased dramatically between 1993 and 2004 with the increase in Ho Chi Minh City between 2000 and 2004 being 17% per year This raise in supermarket number in Vietnam is a result of incentives from government that promote ideals of food safety and modernisation (Moustier et al., 2006) and demand from the emerging Vietnamese middle class for quality and especially safety of food products (Figuie and Dao, 2004) Results of our own survey of market agents conducted in 2008 at Hanoi Long Bien wholesale market, from where fruit and vegetables go to street and small suburban market vendors, show that food safety was put last as a criterion for selecting product 37 below that of appearance, taste, origin of product and storage ability, indicating that food safety is still not the main concern of lower income consumers Even though food safety, especially safety of vegetables, is one of the main attractions of supermarkets for wealthier Vietnamese consumers and a rising number of expats living in Vietnam, the system of compliance is fragile and in Hanoi there has been no adequate system of vegetable quality assurance and field certification since 2002 (Moustier et al., 2006) Supermarkets insist that farmer associations and cooperatives take responsibility for safety assurance and take care of auditing for compliance with regulations for safe food production Indeed most cooperatives and farmer associations that supply fresh fruit and vegetables to supermarkets practise quality control similarly to participatory guarantee systems developed by the international organic movement It is based on commitment by farmers to follow production protocols and procedures Compliance is occasionally checked by random inspections, followed by warnings and sanctions However, the major thrust for compliance comes from the farmers themselves, who regularly check on one another (Vu and Le, 2006; Moustier et al., 2006) A cross check conducted by our research team during visits to several cooperatives that produce “safe vegetables” on the outskirts of Hanoi and Hue showed that not one of them had sufficiently detailed written records of fertilisers and pesticides used to show the time of application and dose applied Food safety has been a major concern for Vietnamese central and local governments and has led to the “Safe vegetable program” launched by the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD) of Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City in the early 1990s (Moustier et al., 2006) The program then extended to the most of provinces with the strong support from the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD) Finally on 28 January 2008, MARD issued decree No 379/QD-BNN-KHCN that established VietGAP as the main standard and guidelines for production of safe fruit and vegetables The aim of VietGAP is to prevent and minimise the risk of hazards which occur during production, harvesting and postharvest handling of fruit and vegetables (VietGAP, 2008) A critical issue for the safe vegetable production program was lack of capacity for auditing and certification by Vietnamese authorities For VietGAP MARD authorised a number of mainly private quality control assurance providers to issue certification for compliance with VietGAP and the full cost of the certification process is paid by the producers This different approach to auditing and certification taken by MARD in administering VietGAP may lead to wider implementation of VietGAP on condition that producers who obtain certification can achieve a high enough increase in profitability to justify investment in VietGAP certification In this paper we will look at the potential of VietGAP to provide a framework for sustainable agro-production and catalyse transformation from production on individual small farms (usually smaller than ha) to larger scale cooperative farming We will particularly examine the use of Farmer Field Schools (FFSs) as a platform for GAP learning and establishment of GAP collective action and practices Finally we will present two cases of citrus farmer groups that received GAP certification These cases illustrate conditions in which GAP implementation may be successful GAP and specificity of implementation in Vietnam GAP framework (GLOBALG.A.P and VietGAP) Good agricultural practice (g.a.p.) refers to the practices that farmers engage in to minimise the detrimental environmental impacts of farming operations; reduce the use of chemical inputs; and ensure a responsible approach to worker health and 38 safety, as well as ensure animal welfare Good Agricultural Practice when capitalized refers to an official certification process used to ensure that good agricultural practices including prevention or reduction of the risk of hazards occurring during production, harvesting and post-harvest handling of produce In essence G.A.P is a certification scheme for the verification of g.a.p use GLOBALG.A.P is the most widely used g.a.p standard and certification scheme with 89 accredited certification bodies implemented in 80 countries worldwide GLOBALG.A.P is the successor of EurepGAP with the name change introduced on the 7th of September 2007 to reflect the global adoption of the scheme EurepGAP was formed in the mid 90’s by retailers that shared the vision of an organisation that could develop harmonised standards for agricultural production rather than develop many individual retailer production requirements Today GLOBALG.A.P is governed by retailers and producers (Garbutt, 2005) This change in governance from retailers only to joint retailers-producers reflects accomplished partnerships between retailers and producers in the implementation of efficient certification standards and procedures It should be noted that in Europe governments have not been part of the g.a.p implementation and certification process but the process was driven by retailers and then embraced by producers and both actors achieved benefits that are not just economic, through the higher price of certified products, but also include a significant reduction of liability risks and effective compliance with government environmental and worker safety regulations However in Vietnam the government is the main driver in the introduction of VietGAP and government institutes with assistance from donor organizations and foreign experts are the main actors in development, implementation and certification of VietGAP Even though there is good reason for the high level of government involvement, namely a weak retail sector and a lack of large producers, the fact that major actors (producers and retailers) who are supposed to voluntarily use VietGAP have not been a significant part of the VietGAP development process may result in a very limited level of VietGAP implementation and consequently marginal impact on sustainable production of safe food VietGAP was developed based on GLOBALG.A.P with slightly lower criteria for compliance in the areas of worker protection and environmental issues but not in areas that directly affect food safety including compliance with pesticide and fertiliser use or microbiological contamination VietGAP provides standards for: a) Site assessment and selection, b) Planting material, c) Soil and substrate management, d) Fertilisers and soil additives, e) Water and irrigation, f) Crop protection and use of chemicals, g) Harvesting and post harvest handling, h) Waste management and treatment, i) Worker health and welfare, and j) Record keeping, traceability and recall (VietGAP, 2008) Even though GAP certification may have only a minor impact on raising food safety for Vietnamese consumers, particularly in the short term, the GAP concept has great support from donors Dr Bernd Eisenblatter from GTZ stated that EurepGAP is valuable in developing public private partnerships for development of sustainable supply chains between the developed and the developing world and for raising social standards in agriculture (In:EUROPGAP Global Report 2005 see reference for Garbutt, 2005) The Australian Assistance in Development organisation (AusAID) funded at least four projects over the last years as part of the Collaboration for Agriculture and Rural Development Program (CARD) that have focused on GAP implementation in a variety of crops including leafy vegetables, tomatoes, cucumbers, dragon fruit and citrus 39 Compliance of the Vietnamese citrus industry with GAP standards and feasibility of GAP implementation A survey was conducted in 13 provinces at the beginning of the project to establish the status of existing citrus producers in relation to GLOBALG.A.P requirements and to assess feasibility of GLOBALG.A.P implementation in the citrus industry GLOBALG.A.P requirements were chosen because at the time of the survey (2007) VietGAP was not yet developed Those surveyed included five randomly selected farmers from one village in each province (total of 65 farmers) Even though sample size was only 2.5% of the total number of the farmers involved in the project, very similar production methods throughout the province reduce variation between surveyed farmers, allowing the survey to provide a reasonably representative picture of the level of compliance with GLOBALG.A.P requirements Survey showed that the average size of citrus orchards in the Mekong Delta is around 0.5 and in the Northern parts of Vietnam around However, revenues from citrus in the Mekong Delta are higher due to higher market prices, so income per household does not differ greatly throughout Vietnam There is a high degree of specialisation in the varieties of citrus grown within provinces in Vietnam, with farmers in Dong Thap province almost exclusively growing mandarins and farmers in Nhge An province almost exclusively growing oranges Pomelo is grown in a majority of provinces and the area planted has increased in the last decade Different varieties of citrus provide very different returns to farmers While the net profit per year averaged over citrus species and provinces was VND 78,620,000/ha (1 € = 22,000 VND), farmers growing mandarins had the highest average net return of VND 100,000,000/ha followed by pomelo growers with VND 93,330,000/ha, in contrast with orange farmers who only had an average profit of VND 37,880,000 Not surprisingly, the highest profits of over 100,000,000 VND/ha were recorded in Tien Giang and Dong Thap provinces where mandarins are predominantly grown Compared with rice the net return from citrus is to times higher Above results imply that individual farmers in provinces with most profitable production have an income of about 50,000,000 VND per family per year The cost of certification for GLOBALG.A.P is about 30,000,000 VND per year and for VietGAP about 10,000,000 VND per year However, farmer groups can get collective certification for not much higher cost as long as their properties are close to each other in the same area The data also show that citrus production is profitable and farmers have some financial capital they could invest in GAP implementation providing the certification secures higher returns on production and/or stable access to the premium market These results imply that GAP implementation is possible through collective action of organised farmers, either in cooperatives or less formal farmer groups Another possibility would be if initiatives for GAP implementation and certification would come from retailers (supermarkets) that would enter into a long term contractual relationship with farmers and provide farmers with initial capital to make the necessary adjustments for GAP compliance on their farms There were no producers in any of 13 provinces that complied with GLOBALG.A.P requirements and who could be awarded certification with minimum adjustments Results show non compliance to be highest for site history, post-harvest and product traceability Individual farmers cannot make changes to comply with requirements in these categories because a complete change in the production and distribution chain is necessary In Vietnam there is virtually no post-harvest management of citrus fruit such as washing, waxing and packaging Fruit are collected from the farmers by ‘middle men’ or in some cases the farmers sell directly to consumers at the farm or a nearby market Some cooperatives in the Mekong delta have their own shops where fruit are categorised and branded with labels, but the amount of fruit sold that way is negligible The requirement for use of certified nursery material is very difficult to 40 meet on the larger scale because the production of certified nursery material is far below demand From the survey results in the Mekong Delta only 17% of planting material came from certified nurseries even though 70% of interviewed farmers have a positive attitude towards nursery planting material but could not buy it Compliance with pesticide and fertiliser use requirements in most cases can be met with reasonably small adjustments of current practices Farmers are aware of the need to use registered products and to comply with the withholding period However farmers and extension officers not have a full understanding of the GAP requirement for a registered product The GAP requirement for a registered pesticide is that the pesticide is specifically registered for the targeted crop (citrus in our case), while PPD staff 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 preharvest interval was set for citrus (because the product was not registered for citrus) then no compliance with this requirement is possible It is a generally belief of Vietnamese farmers that a 14 day pre-harvest withholding period is acceptable for any pesticide Compliance with the pre-harvest interval requirement is also very difficult in the Mekong delta because of the practice of continuous harvesting throughout the year Compliance with the requirement for training in pesticide use is relatively high and compliance with the requirement for use of safety gear is partially met in most cases However we found no appropriate record keeping and pesticide storage and disposal practices in any of surveyed provinces Overall the citrus industry in Vietnam is far from meeting GLOBALG.A.P requirements There are many infrastructural changes (eg sewage system and construction of packaging warehouses) that need to be made before compliance with GLOBALG.A.P could be possible Also improvements in the pesticide registration system need to be made so that appropriate pesticides are registered for citrus Considering the realities of the citrus industry we had two options as to how to proceed with the project: a) concentrate all efforts in a very small area and get a very limited number of farmers to the level of compliance to be able to achieve certification or b) involve large numbers of farmers in a learning process using the GAP framework as the basis for curriculum development while trying to make improvements in practices in certain areas like plant protection to the level of compliance with GAP requirements In our judgment the first approach would be unsustainable since most infrastructural adjustments would have to be made through project subsidies (i.e building of storage facilities, field toilets etc) and impact would be limited to a very small number of farmers It might be argued that a small group of compliant farmers could be used as a model for scaling up but we also find this unrealistic because of the lack of available capital for other farmers to follow the model and unclear market opportunities for certified fruit So we decided to involve large number of farmers in a participatory approach to g.a.p implementation We used the field farmer schools (FFSs) model as a platform for experiential learning but we also hoped that FFSs would facilitate communication between actors involved including farmers, extension and technical personnel of government departments and non-government organisations, the private sector including input providers and supermarkets, researchers from institutes and universities, and local government officials to establish GAP collective action and practices Farmer Field Schools (FFSs) as a platform for GAP learning and establishment of GAP collective action and practices 41 In Vietnam, traditional approaches to farmer extension have been through programs that involve dissemination of information from experts to farmers in a uni-directional manner Most if not all training effort by government or non-government extension services that train farmers in GAP or safe vegetable production have been organised in that way typically in a format of 2-3 day courses Farmer Field Schools, however, are based on the principles of non-formal education involving multiple cycles of participatory, experiential learning with evaluation embedded in each cycle Local knowledge is valued and researchers become learners while participants actively engage in research Facilitation of the learning cycles that involve multiple stakeholders is seen as more important than the unilateral dissemination of expert knowledge, with learning expected to occur for all parties involved (O’Leary 2005) Our main partners in Vietnam were the Plant Protection Department (PPD) of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development and VACVina, the largest Vietnamese gardening association with more than 600,000 members Scientists from the Southern Fruit Research Institute (SOFRI) in Tien Giang Province, Mekong Delta, developed the Manual for implementation of GAP in citrus using GLOBALG.A.P framework The manual is valuable resource material for professionals who will be engaged as extension officers or consultants in GAP implementation but it is of no use for the farmers Even though nominally in the project document GAP implementation and development of resources for GAP was the main focus of the project, in fact the participatory learning and assessment of GAP framework and implementation methods provided the major value of the project The learning process happened at two levels: professional agricultural practitioners’ level (mainly employees of PPD) and farmers’ level Professionals became trainers and during the year project 10 master trainers and 98 trainers in 13 provinces developed knowledge and competency in citrus IPM and GAP as well as in methods of participatory training and research with farmers These trainers facilitated a total of 72 FFSs in their local regions funded by CARD and an additional 17 FFSs funded by provincial government A total of 2700 citrus farmers participated in year-long FFS programs starting with the postharvest activities in the orchard at the beginning of the calendar year to the harvest at the end of the calendar year At the farmer level learning and experimental activities focussed on integrated crop management including IPM, plant nutrition and pruning, which are all in agreement with GAP principles Considerable effort was invested in development and implementation of on-farm record keeping systems as a precursor for implementation of GAP On-farm recording system comprise of a series of record keeping notebooks with each notebook for one of the requirements of GLOBALG.A.P The notebooks have very large space between lines so that farmers can write large letters First record keeping note book that were developed that according to our surveys they preferred We conducted surveys on record keeping habits of citrus growers in Mekong delta at the beginning of the project and found out that only 24% of respondents kept records of the quantity of fertilisers and pesticides they purchased, 8% had records of observed pests and diseases and only 12% had records of quantity of fruit produced and breakdown of income per date of sale Most farmers only know the total income of sale at the end of the season A year after the on-farm recording system was introduced feedback was very positive Most farmers stated that records improve their capacity to select appropriate pesticides and improved their ability to make decisions based on cost effectiveness All farmers stated that they will continue record keeping and 85% stated that they are prepared to pay 3,000 to 15,000 VND to buy the record books 42 Even though impact assessment of the project will not be completed until mid 2010, a good indication that FFS and project activities have been well accepted by farmers and other stakeholders is the fact that in 2007 local governments of various provinces financed 17 FFSs, in addition to the 24 CARD financed FFSs FFS have functioned as a very adaptive communication vehicle that has delivered training content appropriate to the level of farmers’ skills and knowledge that varied in different provinces and villages All farmers were trained in Integrated Pest Management (IPM), record keeping, soil management and pruning but the level and complexity of the training was adapted for each FFSs In some northern provinces FFSs were extended to two growing seasons to accommodate farmers’ learning needs Preliminary impact assessment one year after completion of the first FFSs based on semi-structured interview with 60 farmers shows that 47% of the total number of interviewed farmers reduced input costs, 38% increased yield, 17% increased quality of fruits, and 13% increased the sale price of their fruit Major changes in practices recorded in interviews with farmers were visible in the increased use of compost and manure followed by a change in the number of pesticide sprays used (slight decrease) and a significant change from use of broad spectrum pesticides (primarily synthetic pyrethroids) to less disruptive pesticides like mineral spray oils and imidacloprid Implementation of more sustainable practices resulted in an increased number of beneficial insects in orchards and an increased abundance of fish in canals Participation in FFS raised confidence in the ability of participants to manage their citrus agroecosystem It also improved relationships between farmers who participated in FFS and increased their influence in the community It increased activities in growers’ clubs and in few cases led to formation of several cooperatives Attendance in the FFS assisted in transition of farm management knowledge from father to son (four cases) and daughter (one case) and from husband to wife (three cases) Positive impacts on other stakeholders include increased capacity of extension officers to facilitate farmer participatory training, increased knowledge about citrus IPM and GAP, and enhanced participatory research skills for scientists involved Probably the most important result is the establishment of strong linkages and understanding between researchers, trainers and farmers that have influenced research and extension efforts Linkages in many cases also include the private sector (i.e input providers and supermarkets) with Farmer Union and local government officials In two cases these strong linkages resulted in GAP certifications: GLOBALG.A.P certification for My Hoa cooperative and VietGAP certification for a farmer group in Long Hau village Implementation of GAP in My Hoa cooperative and Long Hau village Our 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 and three by the provincial government At these FFSs 350 farmers were trained of which 342 were male and were female As a result IPM is practiced on 140 out of a total area of 240 of pomelo in the province One of these FFSs was conducted for 26 members of My Hoa cooperative in Binh Minh district The total area of pomelo grown by these farmers is 22 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 43 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 help farmers keep required records, to subsidise costs of building infrastructure necessary for compliance with GAP including 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 few farmer-members of My Hoa cooperative after certification process was completed and the consultants’ support terminated, farmers have problems with record keeping on their own, and cooperative and farmer-members did not have a significant increase in income as result of GAP certification We talked with a representative of the exporter to the Netherlands and she said that GAP is not required for export and that Dutch importers perform their own quality control checks including pesticide residue so GAP certification will not influence export procedures or increase the price of exported pomelo Since My Hoa cooperative is the only citrus producer that received GAP certification probably the most beneficial aspect was positive media coverage The Vice-director of My Hoa Cooperative also expressed doubt that the certification will be renewed after it expired (GLOBALG.A.P certificate is valid for year) That of course does not mean that implemented g.a.p will not continue A similar case happened with a vegetable grower in Dalat He was awarded EurepGAP certification in 2006 but the certificate was not renewed afterwards Nevertheless, production is still at a high level of compliance with GLOBALG.A.P and the grower still uses his expired certificate for marketing purposes In Dong Thap province our project team worked with a group of 11 farmers from Long Hau village, Lai Vung district, with the aim of achieving VietGAP certification For this group VietGAP is more appropriate than GLOBALG.A.P because they grow Tieu mandarin, which is a very popular variety on the Vietnamese market but has low prospects for export Technical support and training of farmers is provided by VACVina members and extension officers from Lai Vung district Plant Protection Station The Farmer Union and local government have been providing great support including a subsidy towards the building of toilets in the field Both local government and Farmer Union see GAP certification as a very prestigious achievement because of the political support the accreditation scheme has from the central and provincial government 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 in a much longer process of learning and making adjustments in production and practices by themselves, under guidance of VACVina consultants, but nothing has actually been done for farmers by the consultants This group of growers is much smaller then My Hoa with only 11 members cultivating a total area of 3.45 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 connection 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 or 226,470,000 VND/ha, which is times above industry average So the group members are high achievers with the vision that VietGAP certification will differentiate their product on the market and they hope to capitalise on that by 44 getting 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” The group leaders seized the opportunity to access project funds and local political support to implement VietGAP to potentially maximise profit from production and to secure a leading role in the community as the champions of new government initiatives The question remains as to whether the few subsidised success stories will be enough to spark implementation on larger scale High level of government support will help scaling up and it is possible that increasing demand for supermarket produce will subsequently increase production of GAP certified fresh products in the future However, because there is higher public anxiety about pesticide residues in vegetables than other fresh products it is likely that GAP certification will be more readily sought by vegetable producers than by citrus and other fruit producers Conclusions 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 a transition towards more sustainable production of safe fruit and vegetables MARD have provided prerogatives for GAP implementation through development of a series of manuals for GAP implementation for a variety of crops and by authorising government and non-government entities to provide auditing and certification of GAP implementation If embraced by supermarkets and made a prerequisite for acquisition of fruit and vegetables, GAP certification will have an impact on farmer production and transformation towards more sustainable agrofood systems Equally important is that if any implementation of VietGAP goes ahead it will initiate new and strengthen existing farmers’ associations and cooperatives The cost and complexity of GAP implementation and certification is beyond the capacity of the vast majority of Vietnamese farmers Hence to be able to implement GAP and access supermarkets, farmers will need to form associations or cooperatives However, as stated by Paule Moustier et al (2006), “the key point is that these organisations should build from farmers’ own initiatives rather than from administration” We should also add that it is equally important for farmer associations and success of GAP implementation that the farmers who are members and implement GAP are able to reap economic benefits in a relatively short timeframe Indeed if farmer associations sell their VietGAP certified fruit and vegetable to supermarkets then they can expect increased income Increased values of 42% for litchi, 25% for vegetable from Soc Son and 400% for water convolvulus produced around Ho Chi Minh City have been reported when these products were sold through supermarkets However only 0.9% of the total volume of fruit and vegetables is sold in supermarkets with 85% sold on the street or at ordinary market stalls (Moustier et al., 2006) So if the government objective is to raise food safety for the majority of citizens then the price premium for GAP certified products should be realised at traditional markets and not just supermarkets Since that is unlikely to happen VietGAP certification will be probably limited to a relatively small number of producers supplying a relatively small proportion of wealthier citizens The benefit of developed GAP standards and the implementation manuals can be maximised if they are used as a framework for development of the curriculum for participatory farmer education Standards are by definition rigid and cannot be modified by farmers in a participatory process but the way practices are changed to reach the required standards may still be defined by the farmers Donors may 45 support implementation of certain parts of the GAP requirements that benefit farmers and consumers and make production more sustainable and reduce impact on the environment without ever reaching certification level However, if and when demand for certified products rise and provide economic stimulus for farmers to seek certification then the farmers that were part of the GAP education process will be able to make the necessary adjustments and supply GAP certified fruit and vegetables References Figuie, M and T.A Dao (2004) Food consumption in Vietnam: food markets, food habits, diversity and trends Hanoi MALICA (CIRAD-IOS-RIFAV-VASI) pp 18 Garbutt, N (2005) EUREPGA-The journey so far In: EUREPGAP Global Report 2005 Cologne FoodPLUS GmbH, pp 54 MSM-Maastricht School of Management (2008) The rise of supermarkets: Change in spinach retailing in Tanzania http://www.roundtableafrica.net/ Moustier P, T.A Dao, B.A Hoang, T.B Vu, M Figuie, T.T.L Nguyen, T.G.T Phan (eds.) (2006) Supermarkets and the poor in Vietnam Hanoi: CIRAD/ADB, pp 324 O'Leary Z (2005) Researching Real-World Problems: A Guide to Methods of Inquiry London: Sage Reardon, T and J.A Berdegue (2002) The rapid rise of supermarkets in Latin America: challenges and opportunities for development Development Policy Review 20(4): 371388 Shepherd, A.W (2005) The implications of supermarket development for horticultural farmers and traditional marketing systems in Asia Revised version of paper first presented to the FAO/AFMA/FAMA Regional Workshop on the Growth of Supermarkets as Retailers of Fresh Produce in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 4-7 Oct 2004 VietGAP (2008) Good agricultural practices for production of safe fresh fruit and vegetables in Vietnam (VietGAP) Hanoi Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, pp 23 Vu M.H and V.B Le (2006) The development of fruit and vegetables in relation to the nutrient situation in Vietnam Presented to the FAO Workshop on the Fruit and Vegetable for Health in Seoul, Korea, 15-16 Aug 2006 46 ... 2007 Project Progress Against Proposed Objectives, Outputs, Activities And Inputs Project Title: Introduction of the principles of GAP for citrus trough implementation of citrus IPM using Farm Field. .. of resources for GAP was the main focus of the project, in fact the participatory learning and assessment of GAP framework and implementation methods provided the major value of the project The. .. in the formulation of the third CARD project which focused on implementation of Good Agricultural Practice (GAP) in the citrus industry The major objective of the third CARD project (200 7-2 010)