China and Vietnam have implemented some of the most promising Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) initiatives for watershed conservation and forest management. China's Slope Land Conversion Program (SLCP) and Vietnam's pilot projects for subsequent Decision 380 PES laws are one such initiative. The selected research paper examines how these two actions achieve their environmental and development objectives in terms of institutional arrangements, practical implementation and sustainability prospects. The basic definition of PES has been defined as a voluntary transaction for distinct ecological services, with at least one buyer, one supplier, and based on the condition that payment only proceeds if the supplier(s) provide the services. ecosystem services defined to the buyer over time. period. Although PES is not specifically aimed at poverty reduction, these payments can provide service providers with better opportunities for diversified livelihoods and greater well-being with fair incentives for the exchange of services. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an Original EssaySince both parties can benefit from the results of the PES, acceptance by potential participants may be more favorable to the PES than to government laws or regulations. Incentive-based environmental policy programs, called PES or eco-compensation in China and Vietnam, have experienced rapid development and attracted worldwide attention. There is strong political will to expand pilot programs and learn from experiences of local diversification of national programs for the national and international environment. Due to economic growth, rapid urbanization, population explosion and increased demand for marginal land have negatively impacted environmental conditions and natural resources. The main elements linked to land degradation include soil erosion, deterioration of water resources, deforestation, desertification and loss of biodiversity. Growing social and environmental problems resulting from growing development gaps and denudation of natural resources have taken care of both governments through the introduction of laws, institutional frameworks and public programs. This study aims to create an overview of water and forest management, based on experiences of incentive-based programs in these traditionally command-led countries to achieve their environmental and development goals ; and the implications for large-scale government programs aimed at sustaining the perception of PES from concept to action. This is assessed through examination of the legal and institutional frameworks of the program, its implementation in practice and prospects for long-term sustainability. The two national programs considered here are the Slope Land Conversion Program (SLCP) in China and the PES pilot projects implemented in association with Decision 380 in Vietnam. Background China's SLCP: After the Yangtze River flood in 1998, the Chinese central government recognized the extreme impacts of steep slope agriculture on the ecological loss of forest and grassland services on slopes, particularly the effect on runoff and soil erosion. The SLCP was introduced in 1999 by the government and is also known as Grain for Greenor cropland conversion program to forests and grasslands, as the largest known land withdrawal program in the world. Farmers working in a field on slopes of 15 to 25° or more have the option of transforming the field into an “ecological forest” (timber production) or an “economic forest” (cash farming). In exchange, they received a subsidy in kind, in grain or in cash, on an annual basis. Depending on the type of conversion and the regional location of the land (in relation to the different fertility of the land), the compensation period varied. SLCP, the first national PES program, could engage directly at the household level and encouraged voluntary participation in terms of farmers' choice of participation and type of land management. Vietnam pilot projects implementing Decision 380 and subsequent PES legislation: With mountainous terrain and a monsoon climate, rural highland forest watershed services play an important role in Vietnam's economy, mainly as an agricultural and hydroelectric sector. The incentive-based program, Program 661 (Decision No. 661/QD-TTg/1998), introduced by the Vietnamese government to promote sustainable development which aimed to increase forest cover by five million hectares over a period of 12 years (1998-2010). In 2007, Decision no. 380/QD-TTg/2008, a national PES policy contained legal, institutional and financial guidelines relating to the PES. Important forest watershed services such as regulating water flow, reducing soil erosion and scenic landscapes were economically valued based on Program 380. Son La and Lam Dong provinces identified as pilot testing of PES generates high demand for municipal water and hydroelectric development due to population density; Furthermore, these provinces have the potential to integrate land management activities with biodiversity conservation and tourism of neighboring national parks. Appropriately, three categories of “buyers” were specified: hydroelectric facilities, water suppliers and tourism businesses. In September 2010, the study on the success of pilot projects associated with Decision 380 was developed as the national law on “Payments for Forest Ecosystem Services” (Decree 99-CP, 2010). SLCP frameworks: In the SLCP, several agencies were involved, including the departments of forestry and grain supply, through to finance and land management, including the Ministry of Land and Resources, the Ministry of Agriculture, the State Forestry Administration (SFA) and the Ministry of Environment. Water resources. The agencies were responsible for paying compensation (in cash and grain), managing land contracts with farmers, negotiating disputes, selecting and measuring the area of ​​land to be converted, and distributing young trees or grass species, issuing contracts and monitoring conversion results. There are no specific legal guidelines for implementing PES-type approaches in China. Although full ownership rights to natural resources and state-owned land, the SLCP granted the right to use and manage the land during the term of the SLCP contract. Under this “he who plants, maintains and benefits” policy, land users are allowed to manage and benefit from products and services on the land allocated to them. Decision 380: It elaborates the term “ecosystem services(FES) for the national legal framework by defining the justification for payments, as well as the responsibilities and rights of parties to contracts. In addition, it defines the calculation method, form and duration. Payments Manager manages and implements payment transactions, roles of implementing agencies and budget in relation to funding source. Although the system supports payments based on direct negotiations, the wording of the document implies mandatory participation for both buyers and suppliers of the service. If Decision 380 dictates the specific payment rate for stakeholders, it appears that the tariff and tax approach has been adopted. It appears that participation is not based on voluntary negotiations. The configuration of the institutional framework favors vertical collaboration between different ministries for the preparation of national PES, but horizontal collaboration constitutes a limited and imposing challenge for effective and efficient implementation of PES. Land use rights in Vietnam are restrictive and include factors such as a user group. , type and classification of forests, forest allocation and source of investment. The institutional framework contributes to maintaining and improving environmental well-beingSynergies SLCP Implementation: The SLCP has seen rapid expansion thanks to political support and an ambitious goal, since an initial pilot phase in 2001 with three upstream provinces to reach 25 provinces by 2006. During the same period, the conversion rate increased sixfold. Due to diverse and undocumented local implementation, with limited documentation of opportunities and resources characteristic of the locality, it has been difficult to draw definitive conclusions about the implications of the SLCP. Significant removals of sloping agricultural land were observed, but the associated impact on watershed protection, as a primary objective, was unclear. Furthermore, the emphasis on tree planting was not the only solution to protect sloping soils, but factors such as land use, vegetation cover type and basin size also affect basin management. Additionally, the monoculture approach to afforestation has resulted in limited biodiversity. The lack of study of pre-SLCP prototype forests in the targeted areas limits the ability to substantiate the claims. The budget deficit of local agencies resulted in poor monitoring and implementation of the SLCP and an inability to coordinate with farmers and provide technical assistance for planting. Again, regardless of local conditions, land use practices, or household needs, some farmers have been forced to adopt a program. subscription by neighbors and village councils in order to meet the conversion targets set by the higher central councils. In the poorer Ningxia province, 80% of sampled farmers were forced to participate in the SLCP. Decision 380: This resulted in a huge amount of payment flow. (62 billion VND, equivalent to 2 million US dollars) within one to two years. Since the pilot implementation period was very short (2009-2010), with payments made and the enactment of the law taking precedence, evaluations become difficult. However, for proper implementation, sensitivity analysis for rehabilitation of critical ecological habitats, community level awareness initiatives with capacity building and specialized training were carried out. Furthermore, due to the low availability of information on the state of forests and.