Reforesting Bare Hills in Vietnam: Social and Environmental Consequences of the 5 Million Hectare Reforestation Program

Background

Vietnam launched the 5 Million Hectare Reforestation Program (5MHRP) in 1998 to reforest 5 million hectares of land by 2010. Although the program secured substantial funding and achieved significant progress, it also created unintended consequences with potentially severe social, environmental, and economic impacts, particularly for marginalized communities. The program prioritizes converting "bare hills" and "wastelands" into plantations, operating under the assumption that this automatically improves livelihoods and enhances environmental conditions. However, these so-called "bare hills," often labeled as "degraded" and "unused," actually provide critical resources for local communities. They supply fuelwood, offer grazing areas for livestock, and support the collection of various non-timber forest products (NTFPs), all of which sustain the income and well-being of the people who depend on them.

Goals and Methods

This paper assesses reforestation in Vietnam by analyzing historical trends in forest management and reforestation and presenting a case study on the impacts of the 5MHRP in Ha Tinh province. Between 2000 and 2001, the researcher collected both quantitative and qualitative data through household surveys on fuelwood use and income, surveys on forest product dependency, participant observations, oral histories from community members, key informant interviews, focus group discussions, and vegetation transects. By using this mixed-methods approach, the author evaluates the program’s influence on forest cover while also examining its effects on local livelihoods, resource access, and power dynamics within the affected communities.

Conclusions and Takeaways

The 5MHRP has restricted vulnerable households' access to critical resources, displaced the diverse native vegetation they rely on, and reduced their income-generating opportunities, increasing their vulnerability. At the same time, the program has disproportionately benefited wealthier households, widening the gap between rich and poor. This dynamic has stratified landholdings and amplified inequality within the province. Furthermore, by replacing diverse native vegetation with monocrop plantations, it undermines biodiversity, weakens ecosystem resilience, and harms soil and water resources. To address these issues, the author urges stakeholders to conduct more thorough assessments that recognize the ecological and economic value of so-called “degraded” and “unused” lands and develop reforestation approaches that align with local needs. The author also calls for equitable distribution of reforestation benefits, prioritizing support for the poorest households, and incorporating local knowledge and priorities into the design and implementation of reforestation initiatives.