Final Draft Hakaluki Evaluation

GEF
BGD/99/G31- Coastal and Wetland Biodiversity

Management Project: Hakaluki Haor Component
(Draft Final)
Natural Resource Economic Evaluation

of Hakaluki Haor
(Contract No: ADM/250/52/2005)
Prepared for:
Department of Environment
Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of Bangladesh

Prepared & Submitted by:
IUCN-Bangladesh
In association with
Center for Natural Resource Studies (CNRS)
July 2006
Contents
1. Introduction........................................................................................................................... 1
The issues............................................................................................................................... 1
The CWMBP Project ............................................................................................................... 1
Aims of the study..................................................................................................................... 1
2. Description of the project site ............................................................................................. 1
Area, location and significance................................................................................................ 1
Agricultural production ............................................................................................................ 1
Natural resources.................................................................................................................... 1
Wetland goods, services and economic values ....................................................................... 4
3. Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 5
Steps in undertaking the study ................................................................................................ 5
Scoping and training ............................................................................................................... 6
Identifying wetland goods, services and values....................................................................... 6
Conducting a household survey .............................................................................................. 7
Estimating the economic value of wetland goods and services ............................................... 7
Constructing a wetland bio-economic model ........................................................................... 8
Assessing the economic impacts of wetland management options ......................................... 8
4. Socio-economic profile and local wetland resource use................................................... 9
Selection of the Study Area and Sample Distribution .............................................................. 9
Profile of households living around Hakaluki ........................................................................... 9
Dependence on the Haor Resources .................................................................................... 12
Local support for wetland conservation ................................................................................. 15
5. The economic value of wetland goods and services ...................................................... 16
6. Ecological-economic linkages........................................................................................... 19
Component 1: Biological Processes...................................................................................... 20
Component 2: Economic Activities ........................................................................................ 20
Component 3: Management Options..................................................................................... 21
7. Economic impacts of wetland management options ....................................................... 22
Management goals and actions for Hakaluki haor................................................................. 22
Economic simulation ............................................................................................................. 22
Economic impacts of management options ........................................................................... 23
Summary of wetland benefits under different management options ...................................... 24
Management intervention 1: Sedimentation Control.............................................................. 25
Management Intervention 2: Establishment of Sanctuary ..................................................... 25
Management Intervention 3: Afforestation............................................................................. 25
Limitation of the bio-economic model .................................................................................... 26
8. Conclusions ........................................................................................................................ 27
References .............................................................................................................................. 28
Appendix A.............................................................................................................................. 29
Appendix B.............................................................................................................................. 33
Appendix C.............................................................................................................................. 33
Appendix D.............................................................................................................................. 33
Appendix E.............................................................................................................................. 40
Appendix F .............................................................................................................................. 58
List of tables
Table 1: Steps in undertaking the study...................................................................................... 5
Table 2: Summary of wetland goods, services and economic values ......................................... 7
Table 3: Distribution of population by upazila and main occupation of head of the household in
Hakaluki haor ECA .............................................................................................................. 9
Table 4: Social Identity of the Household by Occupation of Household Head........................... 10
Table 5: Distribution of Monthly Family Income Head ............................................................... 10
Table 6: Income by Sources (annual) ....................................................................................... 10
Table 7: Membership by a member of the household with an organization............................... 11
Table 8: Source of Collection of Fuel ........................................................................................ 11
Table 9: Top 10 assets and properties owned by households .................................................. 12
Table 10: Who creates obstacles to access haor resources ..................................................... 12
Table 11: Fishing rights on the Beels........................................................................................ 13
Table 12: Economic Activities in the Haor................................................................................. 14
Table 13: Initiators of Income Generating Activities in the Haor................................................ 14
Table 14: Annual Income of Households from Haor related Economic Activities ...................... 14
Table 15: Income per hectare from Hakaluki haor .................................................................... 15
Table 16: Economic Activities Involvement and Haor Protection .............................................. 16
Table 17: Value of wetland goods and services in Hakaluki haor ............................................. 17
Table 18: Comparative Analysis of Benefits from Hakaluki haor Management Policies and its
impact................................................................................................................................ 25
List of figures
Figure 1: Hakaluki haor – the project site in Sylhet and Maulvibazar Districts............................. 2
Figure 2: How different aspects of the study link together........................................................... 6
Figure 3: Total economic value of wetlands ................................................................................ 6
Figure 4: Steps in generating a wetland bio-economic model ..................................................... 8
Figure 5: Support for Conservation among the Local People......................................................16
Figure 6: Bio-economic Model Hakaluki haor Resources......................................................... .19
Figure 7: Effect of Embankment ............................................................................................... 23
Figure 8: Impact of Afforestation Program ................................................................................ 23
Figure 9: Effect of silt control, sanctuary creation, embankment and afforestation.................... 24
Figure 10: Impact of silt control, sanctuary creation and afforestation activities ........................ 24
Abbreviation, acronyms and glossary
Aman Rice planted before or during the monsoon beginning in July/August and
harvested in November.
Aus Rice planted during March-April and harvested during July and August
Baor An oxbow lake or wetland formed in an abandoned arm of a river
Beel A saucer-shaped depression, which generally retains water throughout the year
BEMP Bangladesh Environment Management Program
Boro Winter rice planted in December and January and harvested before the onset of
monsoon in April and May
BTM Benefit Transfer Methods
Chara Narrow perennial stream in hilly areas
CIDA Canadian International Development Agency
CNRS Centre for Natural Resources Studies
CWBMP Coastal and Wetland Biodiversity Management Project
ECA Ecologically Critical Area
DoE Department of Environment
ELPA Economic , Law and Policy Assessment Programme of IUCNB
Ezmali Common property resources
FAP Flood Action Plan
FGD Focus Group Discussion
GEF Global Environmental Facility
GoB Government of Bangladesh
Haor A back swamp or bowl-shaped depression located between the natural levees of
rivers and may comprises of a number of beels
IUCN The World Conservation Union
IUCNB IUCN Bangladesh Country Office
Jalmohal Section of river, individual or group of beels (depression), or individual pond
owned by the government but leased out for fishing. They are also called Jalkar,
or Fishery
Jheel A fresh water marsh
Kanda Ridges that are higher than the Haor basin but lower than homestead land
Katha Pile of branches of trees in the water bodies
Khal Bengali term for a drainage channel usually small, sometimes man-made
Khas land Public lands and water bodies not registered in the name of any individual or
corporate body, regarded by land administration officials as belonging to the
state
Kua Kua is the deeper site in the flat agricultural fields that continue to carry water
during dry periods
LLP
MACH Management of Aquaculture Through Community Husbandry
MoEF Ministry of Environment and Forest
NACOM Nature Conservation Management
NEMAP National Environnent Management Action Plan
NEMREP Northeast Regional Environment Management, Research and Education Project
NFNRPS Non-fish and Non-rice Products and Services
NFWP Non-Fisheries Wetland Products
NGO Non Government Organization
NPD National Programme Director
NRM Natural Resource Management
PEV Participatory Environmental Valuation
PIC Project Implementation Committee
PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal
REEP Regional Environmental Economics Programme of IUCN
RRA Rapid Rural Appraisal
SEMP Sustainable Environment Management Plan
SIPP Social Investment Program Project
TEV Total Economic Value
Thana The lowest tier of administration
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UP Union Parishad: Lowest administrative unit in the rural areas
UNO Upazila Nirbahi Officer- chief executive of an Upazila (sub-district)
UNV United Nations Volunteer
Upazila Sub-district
USAID United States Agency for International Development
VC Village Committee
Waqf Property vested with religious institutions viz. mosque, religious schools, orphan
centre, etc.
WB World Bank
Zamindar Landlord. The word 'Zamindar' has for some time been used for a person who
owns vast land
1. Introduction
The issues
Wetlands in Bangladesh have long been facing serious degradation and loss, due to many
natural and anthropogenic factors. Besides natural causes, factors like overuse of resources,
lack of property rights, human encroachment, conversion to other uses and also absence of
effective enforcement of laws are some of the most important factors for the decline in wetland
biodiversity of the country (Islam, Irfanullah 2005).
Hakaluki haor1 is one of the major wetlands of Bangladesh. With a land area of 18,386
hectares, it supports a rich biodiversity and provides direct and indirect livelihood benefits to
nearly 190,000 people (CWBMP pro-doc 2000).
Because of the critical conditions of the haor ecology, the government of Bangladesh declared
Hakaluki as an Ecologically Critical Area (ECA) in April 1999. There are 8 ECAs in the country
which are considered to be under severe threat. The government has designated these as
ECAs to bring them under a management strategy which will ensure their conservation and
sustainable use.
The CWMBP Project
The Coastal Wetland Biodiversity Management Project (CWBMP) is implemented by the

Department of Environment, and funded by UNDP/GEF. The project is concerned with ensuring
sustainable management of Hakaluki haor. A management plan ensuring people’s participation
in the management of the haor resources is being prepared. The development of the
management plan is founded on the recognition that a proper understanding of the
interconnectivity between man and nature in the haor basin is vital for establishing an
acceptable master plan for the management of the hoar. The study reported in this document
was undertaken in support of the CWBMP. A list of inventory related to the project activities is
given in Appendix B.
Aims of the study
This study aims to provide information on the values of conserving Hakaluki haor in terms of its
economic, ecological and social benefits for local communities and for the nation at large. It has
the following objectives:
x To understand the inter-linkages between economic and ecological functions of the haor
system and to understand the pros and cons with respect to changes in the quality of the
environment.
x To find a ‘value’ for measuring change in the quality of the environment.
x To develop a bio-economic model describing and illustrating the interactions between the
people, resources and economic activities.
x To contribute towards developing a strategic policy for management of the haor so that it
is used as a decision-support tool for wetland management which is currently being
developed by the CWBMP and policy makers.
x To determine a feasible set of economic and financial instruments to ensure wise use of
the resources of the Haor basin.
1
A back swamp or bowl-shaped depression located between the natural levees of rivers and may comprises of a
number of beels. A beel is wetland which generally retains water throughout the year.
1
2. Description of the project site
Area, location and significance
Hakaluki haor is a complex ecosystem, containing more than 238 interconnecting

beels/Jalmahals (CWBMP 2005).2 The most important beels are Chatla, Pinlarkona, Dulla,
Sakua, Barajalla, Pioula, Balijhuri, Lamba, Tekonia, Haorkhal, Tural, Baghalkuri and Chinaura.
The total area of the haor is approximately 18,000 ha, including the area which is completely
inundated during monsoon. Of this total area, beels (permanent wetlands) cover an area of
4,635 ha. This 18,000 ha area represents area demarcated as ECA declared by the
Government of Bangladesh for Hakaluki haor.
Hakaluki haor lies between latitude 24q 35' N to 24q 45' N and longitude 92q 00' E to 92q 08' E. It
is bounded by the Kushiara River as well as a part of the Sonai-Bardal River to the north, by the
Fenchuganj-Kulaura Railway to the west as well as to the south, and by the Kulaura-Beanibazar
Road to the east. Hakaluki haor falls under the two administrative districts (Maulvibazar and
Sylhet) and five upazilas (Barlekha, Kulaura, Fenchuganj, Golapganj and Juri).
Some 190,000 people live in the area surrounding Hakaluki haor. The two main sources of
livelihood for these people are fisheries and agriculture. Depending on how water levels are
controlled, tensions arise between the area available for fish versus the area befitting for
agricultural production. An important task facing wetland managers is thus to find equitable
ways to achieve the balance between these sometimes competing forms of production.
Agricultural production
There are three major rice crops in Bangladesh: Aus, Aman and Boro. Of them, Boro is the
main form of production in the haor area, while Aus and transplanted Aman are almost
universally found on highland and medium highland floodplain ridge soils. Aus are widely
transplanted in this wet region; elsewhere, sprouted seeds are sown on wet puddle soils. Most
such land remains fallow in the rabi season. With irrigation, HYV Boro is followed by rain fed
transplanted Aman.
On lower land, mixed Aus and Aman or deepwater Aman are the traditional practices on basin
margins, with local Boro paddy or grass land (used for dry season cattle grazing) in basin sites.
With LLP irrigation, the area under Boro paddy — mainly early maturing local varieties — has
greatly expanded in the past 30 years, thus considerably reducing the area formerly under
grassland and reed swamp. Rabi crops such as vegetable, spices, sweet potato, potato, pulses
and mustard are mainly grown on loamy-bank soils.
Natural resources
Fisheries
Haors and Floodplains in Bangladesh are important sources of fisheries resources for the
country. Kalibaus, Boal, Rui, Ghagot, Pabda and Chapila are the main fish species of the Haor.
From the Kushiyara there are frequent upstream movements of fish towards the beels and
tributaries of Hakaluki.
Beels in Hakaluki haor are important for fisheries. They provide the winter shelter for the mother
fisheries, and in early monsoon these mother fisheries produce millions of fries for the entire
downstream fishing communities. Consequently, protection of these fisheries not only benefits
2
According to CNRS-IUCN-Netherlands study report (2001-2), there are 238 beels in Hakaluki haor. Few of them are
privately owned, some have disputes with the Government regarding ownership and most of them fall under
jalmohals (one or more beels form a jalmohal).
1
local people, but also all the people in the lower floodplains. Floodplains are also an important
source of fisheries resources within the ECA.
Figure 1: Hakaluki haor – the project site in Sylhet and Maulvibazar Districts
Source: CNRS, GIS Unit
2
At the same time it important to note that each of these beels also provide a natural habitat for
different species of fishes. However, many of the beels have lost their capacity to provide
shelter as mother fisheries, and hence are subjected to severe degradation due to a) sand
deposits from upstream rivers and canals, b) using complete dewatering technique for fishing
activities and c) absence of aquatic plants to provide feed and shelter for parent fish. Chatla
Beel has come under threat of sedimentation from the Juri River. To counteract this threat, an
embankment was constructed to deflect river sediments away from the beel.
Most of these beels are leased out by the Government of Bangladesh for fishing activities for at
least a period of three years, with provision for renewals. Each beel has a surrounding land area
known as kanda where reeds and swamp forests used to exist in the past. Over time, human
pressure, encroachment and also land allocations by the government to the landless has
reduced the reed and the swamp forest area which provided shelter and feed for fish during the
monsoon.
There are claims that under the current practice of land leasing, Hakaluki haor is in danger of
losing nearly 32 fish species out of 107 because of over fishing by the lessee. This is a serious
threat to fish stocks in the haor.
Waterfowl
Hakaluki haor is a very important resting place for migratory waterfowls flying in from the north.
The most interesting species is the Barheaded Goose, which is now very rare in fresh water
wetlands. Other important species include Adjutant Stork, Bear's Pochard, Falcated Teal,
Broadbill Sandpiper, Spotted Redshank, Nordmann's Greenshank, Temmiinck's Stint, Steppe
Eagle and Osprey. In a survey conducted under FAP 6 in 1994, 64,000 waterfowl were counted
in Haorkhal and 15,000 waterfowl were counted in Chatla beel. Illegal poaching has been a
threat to the waterfowl population.
Vegetation
Ecological characteristics, particularly vegetation patterns, differ sharply between the permanent
and seasonal water bodies in Hakaluki haor. Within the permanent water bodies, vegetation is
less dense in the monsoon than in winter, since the vegetation becomes submerged and does
not thrive without light. However, the aquatic vegetation that exists begins germinating with the
onslaught of the monsoon floods. Aquatic vegetation occurs mainly in the shallower parts of the
Haor. Other than the shorelines (kanda), most of the open water areas are weed-free.
Livestock
Hakaluki haor is known as good grazing land. People from villages around the haor and also
from distant areas send their herds for grazing in winter. During this time, herders make
permanent shelters near the beels and graze their animals for a period of 4-5 months. During
monsoon, many keep their herds in-house or send them to nearby hills for grazing.
Forests
Hakaluki haor contained a very dense swamp forest in the past, but deforestation and the lack
of conservation practices have virtually destroyed this unique forest in the last two decades.
Two small patches of swamp forest remain in the Hakaluki haor. One is in Chatla beel another
is near the village of Kalikrishnapur. The plants which are common in this type of forest are also
found in homestead groves. With the exception of these two swamp forest patches, the
vegetation surrounding Hakaluki haor is unique since it includes both swamp forest as well as
mixed evergreen rain forest.
Thatching material is the most useful natural wetland product of the area. The people in the
vicinity use this material in various ways: for example as roofing, wall or wall panel material for
their houses and for making mats. The utilization of wetland products is now less intensive,
because in recent years the vegetation has decreased considerably.
3
Another important use of the resources from this wetland is for fuel wood. Due to the scarcity of
fuel wood around homesteads, the people are becoming increasingly dependent on this source
of fuel. Swamp forest trees, except for hijol, are the most popular fuel wood in these areas.
However, all woody shrubs including grasses are also used for this purpose. The naturally
regenerating saplings in the swamp forests are being harvested at a non-sustainable rate
because of the scarcity of fuel.
Wetlands products are also used as bio-fertilizer or green manure. All the small herbs and
grasses grown in the Haor are used as green manure. Farmers living around the Haor use
these materials instead of chemical fertilizer. The soft aquatic plants are gathered immediately
after the monsoon and placed in piles in the fields, to allow them to decompose.
There are many aquatic plants which are grown in the Haor area, and are used as food,
medicinal plants, duck feed, or for fuel. These common property resources are of considerable
importance to the poor.
Wetland goods, services and economic values
The haor system provides a wide range of economic and non-economic benefits to the local
people as well as to the people of Bangladesh and the world at large. These include benefits in
terms of fish production, rice production, cattle and buffalo rearing, duck rearing, collection of
reeds and grasses, and collection of aquatic and other plants. The haor system also protects
the lower floodplains from flash floods occurring in the months of April-May, recharges the water
tables, maintains the supply of fish in other lower riparian water bodies, provides habitat for
migratory and local waterfowl, and generates important carbon sequestration services. At the
same time, the unique haor system is a natural beauty both during the monsoon months and
the dry season. In monsoon, its unique physical characteristics make it a huge natural bowl of
water and in the dry season it is a natural grassland with a horizon nearly 35 km wide, with
pockets of beels serving as the resting place for migratory birds. Such a unique natural system,
if appropriately marketed, could be a major attraction for tourists. However, as of today, there is
little evidence of this.
The property rights regime of the haor is complex. Most of the agricultural lands in the haor
basin are private land. While the majority of the water bodies are owned by the government and
are generally leased out for fishing activities, smaller water bodies are sometimes owned by
local villages or by a few families. The banks of the water bodies, which were once tracts of
swamp forests, are public land.
The cycle of economic activities in the haor region also varies significantly with changes in the
seasons. During the monsoon months, most of the land is under water and so fishing is the
major economic activity. However, during this time leaseholders have no control over fish,
because they are spread over a large area and people are able to catch them freely.
During the dry season, a large number of activities take place.. Agricultural land under private
ownership is often put under Boro rice production. The banks of the wetland provide grazing
grounds, and herds of cattle and buffaloes are brought in. Water bodies are more organized and
defined, and leaseholders take full control of their fish harvests. Local people collect building
materials such as reeds for fences, various plants and fuel wood for personal and commercial
use, and sometimes are engaged in hunting and poaching of migratory birds.
4
3. Methodology
Steps in undertaking the study
The valuation exercise involved several steps and stages, as outlined in Table 1.
Table 1: Steps in undertaking the study

Step Involves Results in Chapter of the report
Developing a detailed Necessary
plan for the study, conditions
Scoping and training informing local established to 3
communities, and commence the
training fieldworkers study
Identifying and listing
different wetland
goods and services, List of wetland
Identifying wetland
their economic goods, services,
goods, services and 2, 3
benefits, and benefits and
values
determining the valuation methods
methods to be used to
value benefits
Information on the
Administering a
Conducting a local use of wetland
questionnaire to local 4
household survey resources, and their
community members
value
Establishing a model
which describes the
inter-linkages Information on
Constructing a wetland between biophysical wetland ecological-
5
bio-economic model and socio-economic economic
aspects of wetland relationships
status and
management
Estimating the Quantification of the
Estimate of the
economic value of monetary value of
value of the 6
wetland goods and wetland goods and
wetland
services services
Simulating the
economic impacts of Estimates of the
Assessing the
different wetland economic impacts
economic impacts of
management options of planned wetland 7
wetland management
in terms of their management
options
effects on key goods strategies
and services
Each component of the study also provides information which feeds into other aspects. As
illustrated in Figure 2, household surveys on the value of wetland goods and benefit transfer
analysis of the value of wetland services provide the basic information which is fed into the bio-
economic model which describes the links between wetland ecology and economic processes.
Using these data and this model, it is then possible to simulate the economic effects of
alternative wetland management options for Hakaluki haor.
5
Figure 2: How different aspects of the study link together
Household
Householdsurveys
surveys Benefit
Benefittransfer
transferanalysis
analysis
Value
Valueof
ofwetland
wetlandgoods
goods Value
Valueof
ofwetland
wetlandservices
services
Bioeconomic
Bioeconomicmodelmodel
Interlinkages
Interlinkagesbetween
between
wetland
wetlandecology
ecologyand
and
economic
economicprocesses
processes
Simulation
Simulation
Economic
Economicimpacts
impactsof
of
specific
specificwetland
wetland
management options
management options
Scoping and training
This involved developing a detailed plan for visiting the project site in order to determine the
actual uses to be valued, to finalize the method for valuation, to know the communities to be
surveyed, and to train the fieldworkers. In the process, awareness workshops on wetland
valuation were conducted among the various stakeholders involved to sensitize them on uses of
such results. At this stage, two workshops and several field trips were conducted.
Identifying wetland goods, services and values
To value the haor resources one needs to have an in-depth assessment of all environmental
goods and services produced. Field trips and key informant interviews using unstructured
questionnaires were used to assess and identify the resources of the haor. This provided actual
information on the beneficiaries, property rights, conflicts for resource management,
marginalization and institutional success/failures.
Once the environmental goods and services associated with Hakaluki haor had been identified,
it was necessary to assess how these benefits had economic value. A total economic value
(TEV) framework was used to do this. TEV is composed of both use and non-use values, and
use values can come in the form of direct and indirect uses (see Figure 3 below).
Figure 3: Total economic value of wetlands
DIRECT VALUES INDIRECT VALUES OPTION VALUES NON-USE VALUES

Production and Ecosystem Premium placed Intrinsic
consumption functions and on possible future significance of
goods such as: services such as: uses or resources and
Water, Fish, Water quality and applications, ecosystems in
Firewood, flow, Water such as: terms of:
Building poles, storage and Agricultural, Cultural value,
Thatch, Wild foods recharge; Nutrient Industrial, Leisure, Aesthetic value,
Medicines, Crops, cycling; Flood Pharmaceutical, Heritage value,
Pasture, Transport, attenuation, Micro- Water use, Bequest value,
Recreation, climate, … etc ... … etc ...
… etc ... … etc ...
Having identified the key economic benefits associated with Hakaluki haor, different methods
were identified which could be used to value these wetland goods and services. These were:
6
x Conducting a household survey
x Estimating the economic value of wetland goods and services
x Constructing a wetland bio-economic model
x Assessing the economic impacts of wetland management options
Table 2: Summary of wetland goods, services and economic values

Benefits Valuation method used
Fish harvest
Fish hatchling supplies
Fish trading
Rice production Market values (through household
Direct values
Non Fish Non Rice Products survey)
Duck rearing
Cattle and buffalo rearing
Other benefits
Watershed benefits
Flood control benefits
Biodiversity benefits (birds, migratory Benefit transfer
Indirect values
birds, aquatic flora and fauna, non-
aquatic flora and fauna)
Carbon sink Not valued
Existence values Aesthetic benefits Benefit transfer
Conducting a household survey
To determine the nature of dependence of the people on the haor resources and to estimate the
use value of haor resources, household level survey of 837 randomly chosen households were
conducted between Jan-April 2006. A modular questionnaire was developed to elicit information
from these households. To value the productivity value of the Hakaluki haor, a structured
questionnaire was used with the following modules:
Module 1 on General Information: This included general information about the households
such as total number of family members, number of earning members, education, religion,
occupation, food habit, sanitation, drinking water, energy source, involvement with micro-credit
system etc. This part was designed to find out the socio-economic condition of the population
living around the haor area.
Module 2A: Agricultural Activities: This part includes questions on agriculture, land
ownership, expenditure and income from agricultural production, types of crops grown in the
haor area, irrigation etc. It was designed to investigate agricultural production functions and
income generation from agro-products in the haor area.
Module 2B: Fisheries: This part was designed to collect data on fish diversity of the study
area, existing fish catch system, fishing expenditure, production cost and earnings from fishing.
Module 3: Access and Rights to Collect Haor Resources: The questions of this section
concerned rights of the inhabitants to haor resources, obstacles and hindrance they face during
resource collection, labour market, partnership and economic activities based on haor
resources.
Module 4: Livelihood, Haor Resources and Other Non-use Value: This segment of the
questionnaire consisted of questions on livelihood aspects such as full time/part time fishing,
fish cultivation, livestock, collection of wetland plants and other resources.
Estimating the economic value of wetland goods and services
This brings together the information gained from the household survey about the economic
value of wetland resource use with an analysis of the economic value of wetland services. The
benefit transfer method was used to value wetland services such as watershed, flood control,
7
biodiversity, carbon sink and aesthetic benefits. This involved extrapolating the results of a
valuation exercise carried out in a similar wetland elsewhere in Bangladesh, which had
established values for wetland services. The resulting values are expressed per hectare.
Constructing a wetland bio-economic model
Calculating the economic value of wetlands is a means and not an end in itself. It was evident
during the discussions and various reports that a bio-economic model highlighting the inter-
linkages between the man and nature in the haor basin would be very useful to develop a
proper management strategy. Consequently a schematic bio-economic model was developed
as a means of providing information which can be used to make better and more informed
choices about how resources are managed, used and allocated. Such a model would help the
decision-making processes as it can be used to trace the economic implications of changes in
the stock of wetland resources, flows of wetland services, or attributes of wetland systems that
result from following a particular course of action, and factor them into measures of its economic
desirability.
In the context of this study (as a first phase), it is particularly important to be able to trace the
likely and actual impacts of project activities on wetland economic value, and to relate changes
in environmental status to economic indicators.
Figure 4: Steps in generating a wetland bio-economic model
This type of model involved a number of iterative steps (see Figure 4) establishing an
economic baseline from which to measure wetland changes, linking physical changes in
wetland status and integrity to changes in these economic values, and expressing the results as
indicators or measures that can be integrated into broader economic appraisal or analysis
processes.
Assessing the economic impacts of wetland management options
This takes the management interventions and strategies of CWBMP and models their economic
impact in terms of changes in the supply of key wetland goods and services, using the bio-
economic model developed. It compares the present value of future flows of wetland goods and
services under these different management options.
8
4. Socio-economic profile and local wetland resource use
Selection of the Study Area and Sample Distribution
To select a representative sample, Census data on 11 Unions as provided by CNRS was used.
From this the sample size was determined using a bivariate population characteristics table.
The matching characteristics are distribution of population by union and occupation of the head
of the households. However, since the survey is expected to determine the extent of
dependence on haor resources, a reconnaissance field trip and a Focus Group Discussion
(FGD) with the CWBMP field team were conducted to develop the sample for this survey.
Hakaluki haor lies mainly within the five upazilas of Moulvibazar and Sylhet districts. These are:
Barlekha, Kulaura, Fenchuganj, Golapganj and Juri. Ten out of 11 unions from these Upazilas
were selected for the survey, representing a varying degree of the state of environment in the
haor basin and the degree of anthropogenic factors affecting the resource extraction. A total of
837 households were interviewed using systematic random sampling procedure. The household
were selected based on their occupational distribution and dependency on haor resources. Data
were collected from 14 villages from all sides of the Haor in 10 unions and in 4 upazilas.
After developing the initial questionnaire, it was pre-tested in the field to find out its suitability
and accuracy with regards to the answers and also to identify non-responsive questions in the
questionnaire. Based on the this feedback, the questionnaire was altered and additional
questions were added to capture the cattle-rearing folks. A number of 15 local enumerators
were trained through a one-day long training workshop before they were finally sent to the field.
Profile of households living around Hakaluki
Occupation and social identity

As illustrated in Table 3, the primary occupation of households living around Hakaluki haor is
agriculture, closely followed by fishing. Just under half of the population are engaged in other
activities, many of them wetland-based, including manual labourers, boatmen, small traders
and remittances from abroad.
Table 3: Distribution of population by upazila and main occupation of head of the household in Hakaluki haor
ECA
Upazila
Barlekha Fenchuganj Golapganj Juri Kulaura Total
Main Occupation Agriculture 27.8% 38.0% 26.0% 37.9% 51.3% 37.9%
Fishing 27.5% 30.8% 32.7% 14.1% 19.2% 23.3%
Labour 22.4% 6.2% 6.1% 13.4% 6.2% 11.4%
Boatman 0.2% 0.1% 1.2% 0.4% 0.1% 0.3%
Small trading 6.5% 7.0% 7.1% 11.3% 5.0% 7.3%
Remittance 8.7% 7.2% 17.5% 8.7% 11.1% 10.3%
Others 6.9% 10.7% 9.4% 14.1% 7.1% 9.4%
Total 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 99.90% 100.00% 99.90%
Source: CNRS Census Data 2005
In terms of the social identity of the people in the area, the occupation of head of the
households was used for this survey. Table 4 provides the occupational distribution of
household heads.
9
Table 4: Social Identity of the Household by Occupation of Household Head
Small business
Others
8%
11% Agriculture
Remittance 37%
10%
Day laborer
Boatman
11% Fishing
1%
22%
Occupation of the Head of the Household Percent

Agriculture 36.80
Fishing 22.22
Boatman 0.96
Day labourer 10.87
Small business 7.53
Remittance 10.16
Others 11.47
Total Number of Observations 837
Source: IUCN Survey, 2006
As illustrated in Table 5, there is variation in average monthly income between households.

Approximately half of the population earn between 1,500 and 5,000 BDT, and half above 5,000
BDT a month.
Table 5: Distribution of Monthly Family Income Head
Income Range Observations Percent

Less than 1500 BDT 22 2.63
1500-3000 BDT 128 15.29
3000-5000 BDT 299 35.72
5000-7000 BDT 191 22.82
Above 7000 197 23.54
Total 837 100
Average Income of the Households

However, it was also clear during our reconnaissance survey that the majority of the people
living in the haor basin are absentee landlords, and that most of the land are used only for one
crop. This means that land is not tilled as intensively as in other regions, a positive sign for the
environment. Consequently, the questionnaire included questions regarding the source of
income.
Table 6 shows that a large majority of local residents receive their income from crops (reflecting
a dependency on haor land for rice cultivation), the next important source is remittance received
from abroad (people in this region have a high migration rate to Europe and the US), the third
important source of income is river or waterbodies. Average income from crop selling
(agriculture) was BDT 20,793 and 45.28% of the respondents earned this amount. The second
main source of income is share cropping and annual income was BDT 13,419. Remittance from
the expatriate Bangladeshis is the third source of income for 27.72%.
Table 6: Income by Sources (annual)

Source of Income Percent Average in Tk
10
Income from crops 45.28 20793.46
Share cropping 42.53 13419.24
Foreign remittance 27.71 91353.45
River/Water 27.12 32685.46
Agriculture 25.20 18346.45
Others 22.46 38502.66
Industry and business labour 11.23 21944.68
Shop 10.87 38841.77
Poultry 10.87 10987.36
Livestock 9.080 12455.26
Pond 5.73 10852.08
Inland remittance 4.06 53210.59
Forestry and Nursery 2.62 12022.73
River transportation 2.50 22023.81
Small Industry 1.91 35687.5
Road transportation 1.67 37642.86
Handicraft 1.67 26821.43
In terms of membership of organizations (a proxy for social capital) only 13% of the households
were found to be involved directly, of which 82.6% was male and 17.4% was female.
Table 7: Membership by a member of the household with an organization
Category Label Observation Percent
Irrigation/pump 3 2.54
Farmer cooperative 5 4.24
Fisherman 17 14.41
Farmer-labour 1 0.85
Voluntary 21 17.80
Cooperative 26 22.03
Youth cooperative 9 7.63
Women Cooperative 8 6.78
Others 28 23.73
Total 118
Quality of life
Quality of life is an important element of decision – making in conservation efforts. Types of
toilet used, source of electricity and source of fuel are considered good proxy variables for
quality of life. In terms of toilet facilities 54% of the households use ring slab, 26% uses sanitary
latrine. In terms of source of lighting, only 32% uses electricity (or had access to electricity) and
the large majority uses kerosene. In terms of source of water, people use multiple sources: 95%
uses tube-wells and the another 70% uses ponds and rivers. Overall these indicators are above
the national average for most of these variables.
For the source of fuel for cooking, data shows that timber residue and cow-dung are the two
major sources of fuel for cooking purposes. Over a quarter of respondents state that they collect
these fuel sources from the haor.
Table 8: Source of Collection of Fuel
Source of collection Observations Percent
From Haor 219 26.20
From village 158 18.90
From hill 30 3.59
From market 665 79.55
From own land/garden 369 44.14
Neighbourhood 159 19.02
Others 46 5.50
Total 836
Ownership of Properties
Nearly all respondents own their houses in the Hakaluki haor area. This reinforces the
observations above that people in the Hakaluki haor basin are comparatively well-off in terms of
property ownership, compared to other parts of Bangladesh.
11
Table 9: Top 10 assets and properties owned by households
100
% households
80
60
40
20
0
Homestead
Cultivable land
Poultry
Tube well
Cow-buffalo
Pond
Paddy/rice/wheat/
equipments
Boat/trawler
Ornaments
Fishing
flour
Type of property owned Observations Percent
Homestead 813 97.13
Cultivable land 490 69.01
Poultry 449 66.22
Tube well 359 54.31
Cow-buffalo 339 51.36
Pond 319 51.29
Paddy/rice/wheat/flour 232 37.72
Fishing equipments 213 35.68
Boat/trawler 189 33.04
Ornaments 185 32.01
Dependence on the Haor Resources
The property rights regime in the haor has several dimensions. First, agricultural land is
privately owned and operated; second, the leased out beels are also private property for the
period of lease while government regulates operations through its district administration; and
third, the kanda land is government land with no private claims on it. These lands are the rural
commons where grazing activities, collection of reeds, duck rearing activities take place.
Various departments of the Government of Bangladesh including the Ministry of Environment
and Forests have claims on this land or on part of this land. To implement a management
strategy for the haor resources, it is important to understand the connectivity of people with this
land.
Who collects haor resources from the commons and the private lands
About two thirds of the households living in the region regularly visit the haor in order to collect
wetland resources. However, they face the threats from private operators. Our survey reveals
that 46% of them face such obstructions during collection of resources. 90.8% of them said that
the barriers come while fishing in the beels (whereas big beels are leased out there are many
small beels inside the haors which are part of the rural commons but the leaseholders often
encroach into their rights as common people do not have legal papers to defend their access to
these commons); 29.48% have reported resistance during bird hunting (which shows that
government campaigns to protect birds in the haors have found its footage); 19.3% faced
hindrance during fuel wood collection and 13.9% faced difficulties while grazing herds in the
commons. In terms of who the players are in creating such obstacles, Table 710 shows that
nearly 75% of the people found the obstacles coming from the lease-holders, government
officials were next in the line and then the land owners. Local influential people, interestingly, do
not violate the rights of the common people on the beels/haor resources.
Table 10: Who creates obstacles to access haor resources
12
100
80
% households
60
40
20
0
Government Lessee of the beels Influential locals Lands owners Others
officials
Category label Observations Percent

Government officials 182 42.92
Lessee of the beels 321 75.71
Influential locals 67 15.80
Lands owners 171 40.33
Others 24 5.66
Table 11 shows that only 25% of beel lease holders and cooperatives have legal fishing rights.
Nearly 50% of the beels are ‘open access’ resources, 22% are under private ownership, in 1.2%
of beels villagers have common rights, and in some beels rights are not well defined (0.5%).
This provides a picture of the potential for conflicts if there is an initiative to unify or to redefine
their rights without appropriate consultation or participation and without amending legal regimes
in the haor area.
Table 11: Fishing rights on the Beels
Others Cooperative
Individual ownership
1% 10%
22% Leasing
Village based right 17%
1%
Open fish catch

49%
Rights for Fishing Percent

Cooperative 9.6
Leasing 16.7
Open fish catch 50
Village based right 1.2
Individual ownership 22.0
Others 0.5
Economic Activities in the Haor

Other than fishing and rice cultivation, there are various economic activities from which people
benefit. Table 12 shows that fishing and fish related activities is the major source of livelihood
for the people. Nearly 83% of people are involved in activities related to fish production from the
haor. Cattle grazing and duck rearing is also very common in the haor and nearly 97 and 87
percent of the people are involved in it respectively. Fuel wood collection is also an important
economic activity while poaching of birds is also crucial for nearly 16% of the people. About 9%
people are involved in sand extraction while about 6% are engaged in reed collection.
13
Table 12: Economic Activities in the Haor
Category Label Observations Percent
Fishing related activities 700 83.63
Fuel wood collection 140 16.73
Poaching 131 15.65
Reed collection 48 5.73
Sand extraction 75 8.96
Cattle grazing 812 97.01
Duck rearing 724 86.50
Others 8 0.96
Table 13 shows that private individuals are the main initiators of economic activities. Only 9.8%
of the jobs are initiated by the Lessee of the beels. Similarly, local Member of the Parliament, or
members of the elected local government institutions are responsible for nearly 5% of the
economic activities.
Table 13: Initiators of Income Generating Activities in the Haor
Category Label Observations Percent

Local MP 24 2.87
Lessee 82 9.80
Private Individuals 707 84.47
Influential people 21 2.51
Chairman/members of LGI 3 0.36
Total 837 100
Income Generated from Economic Activities

Table 14 shows household income generated from various economic activities. It shows that
average income from capture fisheries is over 16,000 BDT per household, and that nearly half
of households are engaged in this. However, culture fishing is also a growing industry in the
area, providing an average income of 14,440 Taka for participating households. Just under half
of the population are engaged in collecting other wetland products for their residential use, and
about 6% in direct income-generation from haor resources.
Table 14: Annual Income of Households from Haor related Economic Activities
Number Percent Annual Income
Aquatic resources
Involved in Capture fisheries, including: 405 48.39 16,307.27
Full time fishing 51 6.09 36,911.76
Part time fishing 156 18.64 25,066.67
Fishing for self consumption 200 23.89 2,807.73
Fish drying 3 0.36 666.67
Net weaving 209 24.97 -
Other gadgets for fishing 209 24.97 -
Others 7 0.84 35,428.57
Involved in Culture Fisheries, including: 25 2.99 14,440.00
Release/transport fries 2 0.24 2,250.00
Provide food and fertilizer in fish cultivation pond 1 0.12 5,000.00
Selling of cultivated fish 22 2.63 15,977.27
Fish trading 75 8.96 31,826.67
Poultry farming (snail/Jhinuk) 4 0.48 1,400.00
All Aquatic resources (fisheries+fish trading+poultry farming) 436 52.09 21,463.41
Other productive goods
Involved in other productive goods from haor, including: 352 42.05 3,755.96
Food for human 9 1.08 3,480.00
Feed for cattle 264 31.54 3,430.78
Roofing materials 7 0.84 1,085.71
Fencing materials 25 2.99 888.00
Medicinal plants 39 4.66 3,551.28
Fuel 79 9.44 2,620.89
14
Number Percent Annual Income
Others 4 0.48 2,425.00
Animal husbandry
Involved in Animal Husbandry, including: 528 63.08
Earning reported in Animal Husbandry 166 19.83 8,513.43
Cattle rearing 329 39.31
Goat rearing 51 6.09
Sheep rearing 10 1.19
Buffalo rearing 30 3.58
Duck keeping 185 22.10
Chicken keeping 314 37.51
Other income-generating activities
Involved in other income-generating activities, including: 53 6.33 14,318.87
Small business 10 1.19 26,300.00
Handicrafts 3 0.36 7,600.00
cane made materials 3 0.36 5,833.33
vegetable cultivation 23 2.75 2,613.04
others 3 0.36 60,666.67
Fish cultivation 13 1.55 16,423.08
Rice production
Rice Production 555 66.31 7,050.00 per hectare
Table 15 summarises information on participation in wetland activities, and income arising from
this, in order to express earnings per hectare of wetland. It shows that a high proportion of
households are engaged in wetland activities, generating substantial income. Fishing, rice
production and cattle rearing cater high incomes in terms of income generated per hectare.
Table 15: Income per hectare from Hakaluki haor
16,000.00 Tk/ha % of hhs 70%

14,000.00 60%
% of households
12,000.00
50%
10,000.00
40%
Taka
8,000.00
30%
6,000.00
20%
4,000.00
2,000.00 10%
0.00 0%
hatchlings
productive
productive
harvest
trading
culture
rearing
rearing
supplies
Cattle
Duck
services
Fish
Rice
goods
Fish
Other
Other
Fish
Income in BDT per Percent of Area in ha in

IG Activities
hectare household Hakaluki haor
Fish harvest 13,586.43 48% 13,595
Fish hatchlings supplies 761.69 3% 13,595
Fish trading 5,010.90 9% 13,595
Rice cultivation 7,050.00 66% 13,418
Other productive goods 5,330.37 42% 7,116
Duck rearing 11.89 0.5% 13,595
Cattle rearing 5,466.82 19% 7,116
Other productive services 3,063.27 6% 7,116
Source: IUCN Survey, 2006. Data for the last column derived from GIS Survey of CNRS.
Local support for wetland conservation
In addition to collecting information on the economic value of wetland resource use, the study
also investigated local perceptions of and participation in wetland conservation. As illustrated in
Table 16, 687 out of 837 or 82% of households are engaged in economic activities in the haor
area. Among them, 83% of them are 'friends' of the ECA and are likely to strengthen the efforts
15
of the DoE. The other 17% are Figure 5: Support for Conservation among the Local
still not 'the friends' of the ECA. People
They can either be persuaded
with a strong 'campaign' to
become friends of the ECA or
else kept disengaged from the
ECA management related
activities so that they cannot be
the 'power brokers' at the ECA
groups. Figure 5 and Table 15%
the summary of this discussion.
Finally the other 18% of the

people are currently not
engaged in any type of
economic activities inside the
haor (despite the fact that they
live in the villages surrounding
the haor). However, it was also
observed in the survey that
81% of these 'disengaged'
households are 'friends' of the
haor. Consequently, they are
likely to derive 'existence value from the haor'. We have not valued them but it was clear from
our study that they shall be included in the activities of the ECA management team.
Table 16: Economic Activities Involvement and Haor Protection

No protection needed Protection is needed Total
Not engaged in economic activities 29 (19.33%) 121 (80.67%) 150 (17.9%)
Are engaged in economic activities 112 (16.33%) 575 (83.67%) 687 (82.1%)
Total 141 696 837
Source: IUCN Survey, 2006.
In terms of the support geared towards conservation of haor, Figure 5 shows that support
significantly differs across the unions. On the north-western side of the haor, the Kushiara river
flows and the haor is partially degraded with silt deposits. Clearly, support for conservation of
haor is the least in this area (green color indicates the proportion of support for conservation
and red color indicates proportion of people did not support conservation). In the southwestern
part of the haor, urbanization is taking place with influence from the nearby Kulaura township
and in this area people are no less supportive of haor conservation. At the same time, the
south-eastern part of the haor (where the Juri river meets the haor) is also found to have
degraded and support for conservation has also decreased. Clearly, there is a link between
public support for conservation and the quality of haor. It is, therefore, important to note that if
the haor cannot be protected from its physical degradation (either due to silt deposits or due to
encroachment) the public support for conservation effort will diminish. This is an important
issue related to conservation effort financed by UNDP, Government of Bangladesh and other
organizations.
Our survey has also revealed that people engaged with micro-finance activities and are
members of NGO groups have a much more positive mindset towards conservation than others.
This is an important issue with respect to management of haor or raising awareness for
conservation.
5. The economic value of wetland goods and services

It is evident from the preceding discussion that the Hakaluki haor ecosystem generates a set of
economically valuable goods and services. These serve over 80% of the people living in the
16
haor basin. These economic values arise from: a) fisheries production, b) rice production and c)
NFNRPs.
Besides these direct use values, the wetland ecosystem also provides several other streams of
indirect values. These include the economic benefit of a) watershed services - maintaining the
waterflow and supplies by recharging, storing and regulating water flows, b) flood control
services - through storing waters during flash floods, so the downstream people in the river
basins are protected from flash floods and crop damages, c) biodiversity benefits - by
conserving rich and diverse wetland biodiversity, d) carbon sink services - wetland ecosystems
also serve as carbon sinks and therefore benefit the global community and e) recreational and
knowledge benefits for tourists, academics and researchers.
Although direct uses can be valued through the information collected via the household
questionnaire, this survey instrument did not provide data which would enable indirect values to
be calculated. In order to express these values in monetary terms, the benefit transfer method
was used. This relies on detailed recent work carried out by the MACH project in Hail haor,
located in Mouvibazar. As many of the conditions and services provided by Hail haor and
Hakaluki haor are extremely similar, the results of valuation carried out for Hail haor were
considered suitable for extrapolation to the Hakaluki haor case. It should however be noted that
three significant wetland services have been omitted from valuation: water quality
improvements, aquifer recharge and carbon sequestration. This underlines the fact that the
values specified for Hakaluki haor are very conservative, and represent a minimum estimate.
Collating the information on wetland goods (direct values) and services (indirect values), it is evident that
Hakaluki Haor is worth an average of Tk 48 thousand per hectare, or almost Tk 585.75 million in total (see
Table 17). Of this total, wetland goods comprise the major amount (84%), and fisheries and rice
production are of particular importance.
Table 17: Value of wetland goods and services in Hakaluki haor
Land Area BDT per Total %
in Ha Hectare value (Tk total
mill) per
year
Wetland goods
Fish harvest 13,595.10 13,586.43+ 184.71 28%
Fish hatchlings supplies 13,595.10 761.69+ 10.36 2%
Fish trading 13,595.10 5,010.90+ 68.12 10%
Rice Production 16,102.19 7,050.00+ 113.52 15%
Non Fish and Non Rice Products 7,115.87 5,330.37+ 37.93 11%
Duck rearing 13,595.10 11.89+ 0.16 0%
Cattle and buffalo rearing 7,115.87 5,466.82+ 38.90 11%
Other benefits 7,115.87 3,063.27+ 21.80 6%
Wetland services
Watershed benefits 13,595.10 1,020.93* 13.88 2%
Flood control benefits 13,595.10 2,242.04* 30.48 5%
Biodiversity benefits (Birds, Migratory birds, aquatic flora and fauna,
13,595.10 4,174.63* 56.75 9%
non-aquatic flora and fauna)
Aesthetic benefits 13,595.00 671.91* 9.13 1%
Total 48,390.89 585.75 100%
Source:+IUCN Study 2006; *Hail Haor MACH Project Study, USAID 2002, values are adjusted for 2006 using CPI.
17
6. Ecological-economic linkages
Biological process models designed to depict agro-ecological processes can be used to
simulate the impact of changes in biological and anthropogenic processes on an ecosystem.
These models are quite useful to understand the process of inter-linkages and determine
impacts of policy changes as well as rationalize policy decisions.
Most of the bioeconomic models uses 'mechanistic' or 'theory driven' relationships to model the
'biological processes' and determines the impacts of changes in the nature. Very few of these
models (Pulina, et al. 1999; King et al 1993; Coughenour et al, 2000; Shepherd and Soule,
1998; Maxell et al, 1999, Milne et al, 1999; Milne and Sibbald, 1998; Van Noordwijk, 1999 and
2000; Kaufman, 2000 and Metherell et al, 1996) include human components explicitly in the
model specification beyond the part played in specifying the management regime for the
scenario under simulation. However, these models use a set of accounting equations to
determine benefits and costs (economic and biological) associated with various strategies or
scenarios. These models do not explicitly optimize any variables but they do provide an analysis
from which it is possible to take decisions which are welfare maximizing.
In Bangladesh, no bio-economic models were ever been developed that links the economy and
the bio-physical world of haor area to understand the impact of changes. From the discussion
above, it is clear that there is a strong economic tie between people living in the area and the
changes in the quality of the ecosystem that prevails in the Hakaluki haor.
Figure 6: Bio-economic Model Hakaluki haor Resources
Developed by Dr.A.K. Enamul Haque, 2006
19
Based on the survey data, the field trips and discussions with various individuals and
stakeholders we developed the schematic bio-economic model for understanding the choices
that lies ahead in developing a management strategy for Hakaluki haor (Figure 6). The model
has three distinct components. Component 1 shows the biological processes and exchanges
between the nature and human actions, component 2, shows the economic activities based on
the natural resources in the haor basin, and component 3 shows the policy options for
developing a management strategy for the the Hakaluki haor.
Component 1: Biological Processes
Water Resources
It has been assumed in the model that Hakaluki haor area consists of the ECA as demarcated
by the Department of Environment. Biologically, the ecosystem is under threat from sand
deposits flowing into the beels through some of the rivers and canals during monsoon months. It
reduces the productivity of the beels. Total area of floodplains, beels, rivers and canals in the
ECA is 13,395 hectare (GIS information from CNRS). Fish catch, fry production and also fish
trading are the major economic activities based on this resource.
Paddy Land
Most of the land used for agriculture in the Hakaluki haor are Boro crop land and our survey has
shown that nearly 90% of the Boro land of the for 66% of the people living in the haor area are
located inside the haor. Compared to this only 6-10% people have aus and aman crop land
inside the haor area and that too is less than 50 percent. In our model we are ignoring the aus-
aman crops from the analysis. Paddy land is also threatened by sand deposits from the rivers.
Kanda Land or Banks of the Beels

Banks of the beels are the commons which serve a multiple purposes. During the dry season,
these are the grass lands used for cattle grazing, whereas during monsoon, the reeds provide
shelter to young fish, providing them with feed. It helps growth of fisheries output. Area of
Kanda land is used to produce goods and services other than fish and rice in the haor area.
They are usually encroached by farmers who use these lands if better irrigation facilities are
made available and if embankments can be erected for expanding Boro cultivation.
Component 2: Economic Activities
Fisheries activities
From Table 12, we have seen that there are three major activities based on water resources in
the haor. These are fish catch from the beels, fish trading, and fish fry supplies and related
trades. Returns on these activities depend on a) the quality of water resources (both land area
and water quality), b) type of fishing gears used by the people, c) road networks that exists in
the region and d) efforts given by the people involved in various economic activities
Rice Production
Table 12 also shows the productivity of Boro rice in the region. A total of 13,418 ha of land is
currently under Boro cultivation. Boro production depends on a) irrigation facilities, b) labor
supply, c) soil quality and d) the possibility of flash floods during early monsoon months.
Other goods and services production

Table 12 further shows that the kanda land area is used as the launching ground for a) cattle
grazing, b) duck keeping, c) collection of fuelwood, food plants, other plants, and d) other goods
and services using the haor resources. This production is a function of a) the area of kanda
land, b) the quality of water bodies and c) time used to collect resources (effort). Major threats in
this production are a) expansion of Boro crop land b) decay in the quality of vegetation.
20
Component 3: Management Options
Option 1: Sedimentation control

During the field trips to the area it was evident from discussions with local people, DoE officials
and local elected representatives that sedimentation control is a major issue both for fisheries
group and rice producers. As a result, any effort to bring local people in the fold of management
of Hakaluki haor would require a well designed policy adoption to control silt deposits on the
beels and the paddy land. The general demand is to construct barrages (temporary) to avoid
sedimentation.
Option 2: Sanctuary
Fishing is the life-blood of the people of the haor area. Most of the fishermen are quite aware of
the consequences of over fishing, but due to leasing of major beels, there is a growing pressure
on the stock of fish. In the recent months, the pressure is more intense because some
leaseholders use dewatering techniques in beels to catch fish. As a result the entire fish stock is
depleting. It was also clear during field trips, focus group discussions and interviews that there
exists a popular demand for establishment of sanctuaries in various parts of the haor basin. The
local elected officials expressed their strong desire to establish at least one sanctuary per union.
This policy is also endorsed by the DoE officials.
Option 3: Submergible Embankments

Boro crops are often threatened by early monsoon flash floods. Consequently, the probability of
crop damage is very high in the haor basin. In fact, it is the major problem in the area. This has
resulted in another popular demand for construction of submergible embankments so that rice
can be salvaged from the onslaught of early monsoon floods. Although popular, this proposition
runs in conflict with environmental interests for two reasons a) such construction will lead to
expansion of Boro land and so a reduction of kanda land will occur and b) it might prohibit fish
migration during crucial periods of fish movement and will therefore reduce fish stock.
Option 4: Afforestation
Hakaluki haor like other haors in Bangladesh provides fuelwood, medicinal plants, reeds and
grass for the people. The swamp forests in the haor basin are unique forests that survive deep
flooding during monsoon months. However, due to human pressure these forests are virtually
non-existent. As a result, the poor groups of people suffer the most. The ecology also suffers as
fish stocks decline and erosion occurs. Considering these, there has been also popular demand
for continuing with afforestation programs. This is also the most pro - poor effort because much
of the benefit from such programs (if designed properly) would directly benefit the poor people in
the haor area who would collect fuelwood, construction materials and also medicinal herbs from
these new plantations.
Using the above three components, it is possible to develop an elaborate bio-economic model
where all the relationships are well developed and the policy options are weighed in terms of
maximum returns.
21
7. Economic impacts of wetland management options
Management goals and actions for Hakaluki haor
The CWBMP reflects the DoE’s aim of establishing and demonstrating an innovative system for
management of ECAs in Bangladesh that will have a significant and positive impact on the long
term viability of the country's biodiversity resources. It is expected that this project would ensure
the conservation and sustainable use of globally significant wetland biodiversity at Hakaluki haor
site through its management as an ECA. Activities of the project among other things include, a)
plantation of trees, shrubs, etc. for habitat rehabilitation, homestead protecting and villager
sustainable use; b) urgent conservation activities for swamp forest regeneration; and c)
preparation of site management plans proposing conservation and sustainable use measures
with zoning and critical habitat identification.
Economic simulation
The following simulation of the economic impacts of different wetland management options is
based on the goals of the CWBMP in Hakaluki haor, as well as on the information gathered
during the course of field surveys conducted as part of this study. The study presents below a
summary of benefits to be derived from Hakaluki haor if various management options are
introduced in order to improve the condition of the wetland. In other words it looks at different
conservation and sustainable use scenarios, not at scenarios which involve further degradation
of the wetland. For the purpose of this study a 30 year lifetime of the project is assumed.
It incorporates the four management options for developing a management strategy that are
articulated in the bio-economic model described in the preceding chapter (silt control,
establishment of a sanctuary, construction of embankments, and afforestation). Each of these
management options has different implications for wetland costs and benefits — for example
those associated with changes in the area or stocks available for different resource uses, and
with changes in the quality or quantity of ecosystem services generated by the wetland.
Result of the bio-economic model is analyzed using four management perspectives. First,
benefit for the fishing folks – accrued to the people who are directly or indirectly linked with
fishing or related activities in the haor area. Second benefit for the farmers – accrued to the
people involved in rice farming. Third, benefit to the poor – for the people involved in duck-
keeping, cattle-rearing, collection of fuelwood, medicinal herbs, and other construction materials
for houses. Fourth, benefit to the environment – in terms of watershed benefits, biodiversity
benefits, aesthetic benefits and flood control benefits. Management options are, therefore,
weighted in terms of these four benefits to understand the pros and cons for the management
of Hakaluki haor.
Using the results of the valuation exercise, and the relationships specified in the bio-economic
model, the simulation looks at the economic impacts of these different management options,
both individually and as aggregates. The results are presented below.
The results of the simulation exercise were judged using the following criteria: a) the business
as usual scenario presents what would happen if nothing is done in terms of conservation
efforts in the haor; b) different management options were simulated using the dynamic bio-
economic model and simulation results in terms of total economic value and compared with
business as usual scenario; c) the NPV of benefits were calculated from the stream of predicted
benefits and the higher differences between the values, greater is the net gain in welfare; d) the
flow of TEV is also examined to determine if the effort is sustainable implying that future flow of
benefits cannot go down in case of sustainable conservation effort. In all the figures below we
present a) Total Benefits – implying TEV over time, b) Fisheries benefits – implying benefits
accrue due to fishing and fishing related activities, c) rice benefits – meaning benefits related to
rice and rice production related benefits, d) environmental benefits – implying environmental
benefits in terms of flood control, biodiversity, recreational and watershed benefits, and e)
22
production for poor – implying portion of benefits accrue directly to poor due to their use of
kanda land.
Economic impacts of management options
Construction of an embankment will not bring in net additional benefits, as illustrated in

Figure 7. Although there are gains in rice production, loss in kanda land would outweigh the
gains. Overall the total benefits are declining and so the option is unsustainable.
Figure 7: Effect of Embankment
2: Production for poor
Source: Simulation by Enamul Haque, 2006
Similarly, simulation exercises using option 1 (sedimentation control), option 2 (establishment of

sanctuary), option 3 (afforestation) and option 4 (embankment) are all unsustainable if adopted
as a standalone activity of the project. As long as the total productive value of the haor
declined, we assumed that the management regime is unsustainable. For example, the current
emphasis on afforestation in the ECA will also be unsustainable. Figure 8 shows that the total
economic value (Total Benefits), except for poor’s environmental benefits, fisheries benefits,
and rice benefits are also declining despite the fact that there is a positive growth in the value
of NFNRPs.
Figure 8: Impact of Afforestation Program
Source: Simulation by Enamul Haque
23
Consequently, the simulation exercise using a combination of policies were used to determine
the sustainability of the Hakaluki haor ecosystem. Figure 9 illustrates the result of a simulation
exercise with effective silt control, sanctuary creation on 5000 ha of land, embankment
construction and also afforestation and this also shows the total productive value is still
declining and hence such an intervention is also unsustainable.
Figure 9 : Effect of sedimentation control, sanctuary creation, embankment and afforestation
Finally, we simulated a management combination without the embankment construction and the
result is shown in Figure 10. It shows that the total benefits, environmental benefits, poor’s
benefits and also fisheries benefits increasing over time. Rice benefits remain constant
because we assumed that there will be no further increase in rice area covered in the haor.
Figure 10: Impact of silt control, sanctuary creation and afforestation activities
Summary of wetland benefits under different management options
As summarised below in Table 18, different management options for Hakaluki haor have
differing economic implications. However, both the sustainability and present value of productive
24
goods and services from Hakaluki haor is highest under a management regime which combines
sedimentation control, establishment of a sanctuary and afforestation.
Table 18: Comparative Analysis of Benefits from Hakaluki haor Management Policies and its impact
Changes in the PV of Benefits from Hakaluki haor in BDT millions (for 30 year
life time with a 5% rate of discount)
Economic Environmental
Total Benefits Poors' Benefit
Benefits Benefits
Sediment control 651.90 578.20 73.69 -
Sanctuary 854.95 827.85 27.10 -
Afforestation 362.09 347.76 14.32 347.76
Embankment (230.47) (230.47) - (468.69)
Sediment Control + Sanctuary 1,323.30 1,249.61 73.69 -
Sed con.+ Sanct. +
1,685.39 1,597.37 88.02 347.76
afforestation
Sed. Con. + Sanct. + Affor. +
1,454.92 1,366.90 88.02 (120.93)
Embankment
Note: - means no change, numbers in parenthesis means negative effect.
Three types of benefits are included in Table 18. In terms of total benefits the highest benefit is
accrued when the management policy includes sedimentation control, establishment of
sanctuary, including dry season beel area which is the refuse for parent fish and continuation of
afforestation activities in the haor area. In terms of distribution of benefits, poor receive most of
the benefit from the afforestation activities provided that the afforestation activities take care of
the following aspects during its implementation: a) involvement of the poor during plantation and
its protection, b) selection of plants, herbs and trees that would provide fuelwood supplies,
herbs and materials for home constructions, c) ensuring the rights of the poor to collect these
materials from the haor, d) guaranteeing their rights for using kanda for cattle-buffalo rearing
and duck keeping during winter months. Sedimentation control provides the maximum benefit
for fishers and farmers. However, there are some environmental benefits too.
Management intervention 1: Sedimentation Control
In terms of impacts, the simulation result shows that this option would generate nearly 651
million taka in terms of additional benefits in 30 years time (at 5% rate of discount). Of these,
88.7% will be economic benefits and 11.3% will be environmental services benefits. All the
economic benefits will accrue to people related to fishing and the farming. In the simulation
exercise we assumed that the level of sedimentation control will not exceed the rate of
sedimentation in the beels of the haor. As such we assumed that the area of wetland will
remain same over time.
Management Intervention 2: Establishment of Sanctuary
Establishment of sanctuary is seen as a crucial element to conserve the freshwater fishes. Our
model shows that nearly 854 million taka would be received in terms of additional benefits if this
policy is pursued for 30 years time. 96% of these benefits will be in terms of increased fishing
output and the rest in terms of biodiversity benefits. During the simulation exercise we assumed
that about 2000 ha of land (less than 50% of the beel area) will come under sanctuary.
Sanctuaries will have a 5 year delay in increasing the fish production and it would eventually
come under production after the fifth year. However, there will be a rotation to ensure that 50%
of the total water body remains as temporary sanctuary. This implies that after every fifth year
the particular sanctuary can be harvested while a new area will become sanctuary for the next 5
years. Such conservation effort is expected to double the fish production from the beels in the
five years time.
Management Intervention 3: Afforestation
Afforestation activities is an ongoing activity of the current management regime. Pursuing this
activity would generate an additional income for the poor if they have access to such forest
products and services. It was assumed that Kanda land will continue to be used by local poor
25
people under a prescribed guidelines so that they continue to enjoy the services of nature in
terms of a) cattle rearing, duck rearing, buffalo rearing, b) collection of fuelwood, medicinal
herbs, and c) collection of housing materials for roof and wall. It was also assumed that such
efforts by the project official will consider these aspects while planting saplings in the kanda
land.
Limitation of the bio-economic model
The bio-economic model developed above represents a stylized fact and it is designed to elicit
the outcome of conservation effort in terms of economic values. Results of the simulation
exercises could be improved using an interdisciplinary team to improve the parameters and
assumptions used in this model.
At the same time, it would be fair to conclude that the results of this model are indicative in
terms of the benefits from conservation effort. They are never assumed to be the actual values
but the true value will follow the trend presented by this model. The model helps us determine
the impact of conservation using tables and diagrams and it provides an authentic estimate of
the gesture that we often use to argue for conservation.
Hakaluki haor is an important biological resource in Bangladesh. This study is not expected to
provide a value for its resources. It simply provides a glimpse in terms of changes that would
take place if the resources are not conserved properly. Consequently, the NPV estimates are
also indicative of the amount of maximum feasible investment for conservation of haor in the
next 30 years time.
26
8. Conclusions
The fact that Hakaluki haor has been designated as an Ecologically Critical Area signifies its
importance as a reservoir of disappearing natural resources. This study underscores the reality that that
Hakaluki also constitutes an important source of natural capital, which yields high economic and
livelihood values to surrounding populations and the country as a whole.
Survey findings show that more than 80% of local households depend on wetland resources, and that
the bulk of income-earning and livelihood opportunities in the area are wetland-based. The wetland also
generates a series of economically important ecosystem services, which function to underpin, support
and safeguard essential production and consumption processes. In total, it has been estimated that
Hakaluki haor is worth at least BDT 585 million, or an average of BDT 48,000/hectare.
The study describes the complex inter-linkages between wetland ecology and economic processes. In
addition to confirming the economic value attached to wetland conservation, it highlights the costs
associated with the loss or degradation of wetland goods and services in terms of losses to livelihoods
and the economy.
By modelling and simulating the economic effects of alternative management options for the wetland,
the study points to important conclusions with regards to the costs and benefits of conservation.
Although achieving conservation goals remains a priority for Hakaluki haor, there is an additional need
to factor in consideration of the economic implications of different conservation actions and alternatives.
Study findings confirm that the most economically sustainable policies for sustainable management of
the Hakaluki haor are:
– Silt control to ensure that no new beels are damaged by it

– Sanctuary creation in 2000 ha of wetlands in all unions and the effect of such conservation
activities are felt after at least 5 years and
– Afforestation activities continued as has been started by the CWBMP project. The objective
of such afforestation activities shall be to improve the livelihood of the people.
The NPV of benefits from the new activities indicates the maximum sustainable investment for
conservation of this haor for the next 30 years time period with a 5% rate of discount.
One of the major objectives of this study was to recommend best practices in applying economic and
financial instruments for management of Hakaluki haor which are mentioned above. Using the bio-
economic model developed in this study it has been shown that to ensure sustainable management of
the haor. The results show that construction of submergible emabankments will act against sustainable
use of the haor system.
It also shows that sanctuary development is a major step to be adopted by CWBMP which will ensure
sustainable use of haor resources. Furthermore, result also concludes that sediment control in the haor
is the most important step which must be adopted to ensure sustainable use of haor resources. In fact,
the model concludes that without sediment control the total resource base in the Hakaluki haor will
become unsustainable. At the same time, it reveals that afforestation activities must be planned to
ensure that the poor can appropriate the benefits. This is the most poor-friendly component of the
project. However, it is also important that afforestation activities guarantee access to and also
participation of the poor. Finally, cattle rearing are also poor friendly and to manage the haor resources
sustainably, CWBMP should concentrate on these aspects of the project management.
27
References
Carolyn Fischer, Edwin Muchapondwa, and Thomas Sterner,2005 Bioeconomic Model of Community
Incentives for Wildlife Management Before and After CAMPFIRE, Resource for the Future, March.
Carolyn Fischer, Edwin Muchapondwa, and Thomas Sterner,2005 Bioeconomic Model of Community
Incentives for Wildlife Management Before and After CAMPFIRE, Resource for the Future, March.
CNRS, 2003. Biophysical and Socioeconomic Characterization of Hakaluki Haor: Step towards Building
Community Consensus on Sustainable Wetland Resources Management
Colavito, L., 2002, ‘Wetland Economic Valuation Using a Bioeconomic Model: the case of Hail haor,
Bangladesh’, paper presented at Workshop on Conservation and Sustainable Use of Wetlands:
Learning from the World, IUCN The World Conservation Union, Kathmandu
CWBMP, 2005. Hakaluki Haor Management Plan (Draft)
Douglas R. Brown, 2000, A Review of Bio-Economic Models, Paper prepared for the Cornell African
Food Security and Natural Resource Management (CAFSNRM) Program. Cornell University.
Douglas R. Brown, 2000, A Review of Bio-Economic Models, Paper prepared for the Cornell African
Food Security and Natural Resource Management (CAFSNRM) Program. Cornell University.
Flood Action Plan, Northeast Regional Water Management Project (FAP 6). 1994. NEMREP: Northeast
Region Environment Management, Research and Education Project. Pre-feasibility Study Final
Report.
Flood Action Plan, Northeast Regional Water Management Project (FAP 6). 1994. Summary
Flood Action Plan. Northeast Regional Water Management Project (FAP 6). “Wetland Resources
IUCN 2006. Inception Report: Economic Evaluation of Hakaluki Haor
Specialist study (final draft), Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), April 1993.
28
Appendix A
Table A1: Unions in Hakaluki ECA

District Upazila Union
Barni
Barlekha
Talimpur
Bakshimali
Kulaura
Moulvi Bazar Baramchal
Sujanagar
Juri Pachimzuri
Zafarnagar
Bhatera
Fenchuganj
Gilachahara
Sylhet
Sharifganj
Golabganj
Uttar Bade Pasha
Source: CWBMP website
Table A2: Activities hindered during collection

Activities No. of Observation Percent
Fish catch 385 90.80
Hunting birds/animal 125 29.48
Fuel wood collection 82 19.34
Cattle grazing 59 13.92
Plant collection 31 7.31
Tree cutting 24 5.66
Poultry grazing 18 4.25
Collecting cattle feed 16 3.77
Cow dung collection 16 3.77
Collecting food 6 1.42
Extract sand 3 0.71
Others 3 0.71
Source IUCN Survey 2006. n=424
Table A3: Monthly expenditure for transportation/communication

Expenditure Range Percent
Less than 100 BDT 21.70
100-200 BDT 35.01
200-400 BDT 23.62
400-500 BDT 8.27
above 500 BDT 11.39
Table A4: Mode of transportation

Category Label Percent (luggage transport) Percent (family member vehicle)
Rickshaw 45.15 44.79
Van 3.35 0.48
Taxi/jeep 0.96 0.96
Pick up/van/truck 10.30 1.20
Bus/mini bus 3.23 8.74
Motor van/scooter 33.77 46.47
Motor cycle 0.48 1.80
Bi Cycle 1.44 3.35
Boat 28.86 21.44
Engine Boat 0.60 0.72
Walking 65.27 67.66
Others 1.80
Source IUCN Survey 2006. n = 835
29
Table A5: Benefits from Migratory Birds
Category label No. of Obs Percent
Food 108 13.00
Selling 77 9.27
Rearing/pet 30 3.61
Increase number of fish by providing fertilizer 525 63.18
Aesthetic/tourism 603 72.56
Higher rice yield 458 55.11
Others 46 5.54
Table A6: Reasons for Haor Protection

Category Label No. of Percent
Obs
Source of livelihoods 689 82.7
Source of foods 517 62.1
Natural fertilizer provider through siltation 528 63.4
Fuel wood source 72 8.6
Increase in fish number 398 47.8
Source of fresh water 165 19.8
Easy route of transportation 91 10.9
Aesthetic beauty 19 2.3
Recreation 3 0.4
Table A7: Utilizing income gained from Haor resources for Haor development
Observation Percent
Yes 1 0.13
No 831 99.87
Total 832 100
Table A8: Percentage of yearly income spent to improve/restore haor resources

Category Label Obs Percent
Less than 10% 10 1.21
10%-20% 1 0.12
Total 11 1.33
Table A9: Annual Average Income

Annual Average
Number Percent
Income
Involved in Capture fisheries 405 48.39 16,307.27
Full time fishing 51 6.09 36,911.76
Part time fishing 156 18.64 25,066.67
Fishing for self consumption 200 23.89 2,807.73
Fish drying 3 0.36 666.67
Net weaving 209 24.97 -
Other gadgets for fishing 209 24.97 -
Others 7 0.84 35,428.57
Involved in Culture Fisheries 25 2.99 14,440.00
Release/transport fries 2 0.24 2,250.00
Provide food and fertilizer in fish cultivation pond 1 0.12 5,000.00
Selling of cultivated fish 22 2.63 15,977.27
Fish trading 75 8.96 31,826.67
Poultry farming (snail/Jhinuk) 4 0.48 1,400.00
Total in Aquatic resources 436 52.09 21,463.41
Source IUCN Survey 2006.
30
Table A10: Average Income from non-aquatic resources
Items Observation Percent Average Annual Income
Involved in non-aquatic resources 352 42.05 3,755.96
Food for human 9 1.08 3,480.00
Feed for cattle 264 31.54 3,430.78
Roofing materials 7 0.84 1,085.71
Fencing materials 25 2.99 888.00
Medicinal plants 39 4.66 3,551.28
Fuel 79 9.44 2,620.89
Others 4 0.48 2,425.00
Source IUCN Survey 2006.
Table A11: Annual income from other income generating activities

Observation Percent Annual average income
Involved in other IG activities 53 6.332139 14,318.87
Small business 10 1.19 26,300.00
Handicrafts 3 0.36 7,600.00
cane made materials 3 0.36 5,833.33
vegetable cultivation 23 2.75 2,613.04
Others 3 0.36 60,666.67
Fish cultivation 13 1.55 16,423.08
Source IUCN Survey 2006
Table A12: Basic Amenities
Toilet
n=832
Category Label No. of Observation Percent
Sanitary 223 26.80
Ring/Slab 451 54.21
Kacha 193 23.20
Open Latrine 19 2.28
Others 2 0.24
Source of Water
n=836
Deep tube well 19 2.27
Shallow tube well 797 95.33
Dug well 2 0.24
Ponds/Rivers 589 70.45
Others 3 0.36
Source of Light
n=835
Kerosene 773 92.57
Electricity. 273 32.69
Candle 19 2.28
Others 1 0.12
Source of fuel
n=837
Cow dung 171 20.43
Timber residue 569 67.98
Hijol-Koroch wood 7 0.84
Fuel wood 59 7.05
Sun grass 39 4.66
Nolkhagra - Reed 31 3.70
Leaves 124 14.81
Others 23 2.75
Collection source of fuel
n=836
31
From Haor 219 26.20
From village 158 18.90
From hill 30 3.59
From market 665 79.55
From own land/garden 369 44.14
Neighborhood 159 19.02
Others 46 5.50
Source IUCN Survey 2006
32
Appendix B
Table B1: Information on leased Jalmahal situated in Hakaluki Haor under Sylhet District
Sl.No Name of Beel Contact of Lease Amount in BDT
01. Nadarjuri Group Jalmahal 1413 Bengali Year 2,40,000
02. Boyaljur group Jalmahal -do- 80,000
03. Kittamurti group Jalmahal 1412-1414 Bengali Year 1,20,000
Total revenue from Sylhet district 4,40,000

Source: District Commissioner’s Office (Revenue), Sylhet
Table B2: Information on leased Jalmahal ( area above 20 acres) situated in Hakaluki Haor under Moulvibazar District
Sl.No Name of Jalmahal Area in Lease duration Lease money
Acre (in Bengali Year) (Annual in BDT)
01. Hayaburni & Footbeel Group (Closed) 474.90 1411-1413 8,05,000
02 Gorkuri beel (closed) 72.02 1412-1414 4,50,000
03. Torol beel (closed) 147.35 1410-1412 2,05,000
04. Chatol been group (closed) 518.00 1410-1412 13,06,000

05. Vitorgavi beel (closed) 60.75 1411-1413 35,550
06. Aygor beel (closed) 22.20 1412-1414 85,000
07 Koklong Gobar Kuri Chikon Mati group (closed) 50.71 1412-1414 1,70,150
08. Naguya Dolia group Fishery (closed) 605.00 1413 5,81,000
09. Chakia been --- Fishery (closed) 918.00 1410-1412 9,00,108
10. Mychalar Dak (closed) 63.45 1411-1413 41,505

11. Dodeya beel (closed) 39.84 1412-1414 1,05,000
12. Mychalar beel group (closed) 208.90 1413-1415 2,41,150
13. Hagla Chadalu & Kala chandra Dahar group (closed) 73.08 1412-1415 1,76,066
14. Kalapani beel (closed) 286.08 1412-1415 1,68,725
15. Pinklar Dabi (closed) 42.50 1410-1412 5,500/
16. Meda beel (closed) 73.87 1411-1413 36,350
17. Gotaura Haorkal group (closed) 1406.90 1411-1415 14,22,000
18. Keyraskon been (closed) 75.20 - 55,000
19. Byia beel (closed) 150.45 1410-1412 1,25,100
20. Chilaura Aagar group (closed) 27.83 1412-1415 91,440
21. Padda beel (closed) 39.49 1410-1415 14,000
22. Uttar Gujuya Dakhin Gujuya beel (closed) 112.75 1411-1413 41,000
23. Katuya & Kurur Dabi beel (closed) 272.93 1412-1415 2,22,750
24. Tekuni beel Byrar Mura & Keysab Dohar group 80.48 1412-1415 70,000
(closed)
25. Polo Vagai Murasunai & Chakonuti beel group (closed) 395.75 1411-1413 2,20,400
26. Chilaura group (closed) 118.29 1412-1414 2,42,000
27. Jaya Faryana Votar Kona Balajuri Banijuri & Kkya 1035.64 1412-1415 10,13,188
Mugura group (closed)
28. Haramdiga beel (closed) 50.15 1411-1413 40,000
29. Miya juri beel (closed) 28.20 1412-1414 38,100
30. Batmuri beel (closed) 101.15 1410-1412 23,200
31. Pinklar Kana tartir group (closed) 546.06 1411-1415 5,06,250
32. Chandra beel & chandra Dopta (closed) 22.42 1410-1414 10,000
33. Dil beel (closed) 85.68 1410-1412 41,505
.34. Muchan been (closed) 116.75 1413-1415 51,500
35. Malam beel (closed) 428.92 1410-1412 3,00,000
36. Niyabeel & Kala (closed) 34.52 1413-1415 32,551
37. Ronchi beel (closed) 224.00 1410-1412 1,40,100
38. Hogla Barong Tamlakuri & Singjuri Nadi group (closed) 55.98 1411-1413 3,00,100
39. Naguya Loribaiya beel (closed) 226.68 1410-1412 2,25,100
40. Singjuri Aagar (closed) 27.70 1413-1415 87,250
41. Satbeela beel (closed) 22.00 1411-1413 10,500
42. Siuri Diga beel (closed) 20.75 1412-1414 33,500
43. Tolar Biyra (closed) 65.62 1411-1413 26,000
Total revenue from Maulvibazar district 1,06,99638
Source: Revenue Deputy Collector’s Office, Moulvibazar
33
Appendix C
Table C1: Information on beels in Hakaluki Haor area
AREA
BEEL NAME (Acre) OWNER UNION UPAZILA
1 Malam Beel 416.71 Govt. Leased Talimpur & Barmi Barlekha
2 Nimu 21.32 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
3 Monoshi Beel 6.69 Govt. Leased Talimpur & Barmi Barlekha
4 Chirua Beel 19 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
5 Padma 7.7 Govt. Leased Dakshin Bade Pasha Golapganj
6 Baiya Beel 11.05 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
7 Dhalaikuri Beel 4.44 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
8 Charpani 14.77 Govt. Leased Dakshin Bade Pasha Golapganj
9 Morua Beel 14.78 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
10 Halli 24.52 Govt. Leased Dakshin Bade Pasha Golapganj
11 Munshi Beel 6.54 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
12 Baghekhaori Beel 7.95 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
13 Raoti 2.49 Govt. Leased Dakshin Bade Pasha Golapganj
14 Chhoto Malam Beel 142.44 Govt. Leased Talimpur and Dakshin Badepasha Golapganj & Barlekha
15 Kamar Jung 3.21 Govt. Leased Talimpur and Dakshin Badepasha Golapganj & Barlekha
16 Lamba Beel 341.75 Govt. Leased Talimpur and Dakshin Badepasha Golapganj & Barlekha
17 Gila Beel 7.22 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
18 Hallir Dara 39.68 Govt. Leased Dakshin Bade Pasha Golapganj
19 Gochhakuri Beel 1.1 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
20 Kheter Back 14.48 Govt. Leased Dakshin Bade Pasha Golapganj
21 Khetora 25.36 Govt. Leased Dakshin Bade Pasha Golapganj
22 Foda Bherat Beel 26.59 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
23 Kalachander Dar 3.66 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
24 Kharu 1.25 Govt. Leased Dakshin Bade Pasha Golapganj
25 Kheter Par 3.31 Govt. Leased Dakshin Bade Pasha Golapganj
26 Dheuri Beel 1.17 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
27 Poalta Beel 333.3 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
28 Choudalur Bara Beel 12.17 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
29 Morua Beel 4.63 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
Gilachhara and Dakshin Bade
30 Handigori 47.56 Disputed Pasha Fenchuganj & Golapganj
31 Satbila Beel 15.77 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
32 Chaoudalu Beel 7.43 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
33 Matijora 3.33 Govt. Leased Dakshin Bade Pasha Golapganj
34 Dujonikuri Beel 1.67 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
35 Lamba Beel 1.18 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
36 Tokia Beel 2.04 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
37 Gatua Beel 5.23 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
38 Dodhai Beel 360.42 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
39 Karati Beel 1.95 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
Gilachhara and Dakshin Bade
40 Parjore Beel 46.58 Disputed Pasha Fenchuganj & Golapganj
41 Mekuri Beel 0.75 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
42 Lomba 4.18 Govt. Leased Dakshin Bade Pasha Golapganj
43 Gaimara Beel 0.95 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
44 Akulerkuri Beel 1.1 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
45 Atkeari Beel 1.1 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
46 Kutra Beel 9.08 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
47 Gochhardubi Beel 1.44 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
48 Arikhai 3.45 Disputed Gilachhara Fenchuganj
49 Siltated Kushiara 6.91 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
50 Kutaler Dak 1.93 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
34
AREA
51 Matichhara Beel 2.25 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
52 Nolua Beel 324.25 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
53 Hogla Beel 4.09 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
54 Facra 1.24 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
55 Katakhali Beel 2.65 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
56 Aola 3.05 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
57 Nad Anjuri 85.34 Disputed Gilachhara Fenchuganj
58 Kalakuri Beel 2.61 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
59 Dhopakhala 4.35 Disputed Gilachhara Fenchuganj
60 Ulukhara 5.52 Disputed Gilachhara Fenchuganj
61 Hingiala Beel 1 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
62 Chetchri Beel 1.23 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
63 Nad Anjuri 29.26 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
64 Gorchhikona Beel 15.49 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
65 Hoglar Chepti Beel 1.1 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
66 Khataora Beel 0.87 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
67 Sharika 0.88 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
68 Ninkhuria 1.83 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
69 Murti 8.94 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
70 Halua 9.53 Disputed Gilachhara Fenchuganj
71 Chilaban Beel 6.36 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
72 Murti 40.26 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
73 Dulla Beel 5.84 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
74 Pabijuri Beel 4.94 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
75 Maulvir Beel 0.91 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
76 Parchhikona Beel 13.47 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
77 Ninkuri Beel 0.51 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
78 Yalli Beel 5.71 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
79 Bagherkona Beel 5.52 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
80 Futkhair 7.54 Govt. Leased Gilachhara & Talimpur Fenchuganj & Barlekha
81 Handikuri 3.97 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
82 Katiar Gungra Beel 67.63 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
83 Bachar Kuri 2.24 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
84 Hingiala Beel 3.65 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
85 Baddakuri Beel 3.99 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
86 Natbiler Dala 3.99 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
87 Hingairala Beel 43.38 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
88 Jamitopa 2.11 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
89 Moudubi Beel 2.84 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
90 Patchbila 9.06 Disputed Gilachhara Fenchuganj
91 Putia 12.7 Disputed Gilachhara Fenchuganj
92 Haor Khal Beel 1373.56 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
93 Barti 13.53 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
94 Ranga Aoti 16.04 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
95 Bakhar Kona Beel 0.99 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
96 Aminmara Dubi 1.02 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
97 Gungrakata Beel 1.09 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
98 Balijuri Beel 409.92 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
99 Rangarkuri Beel 6.09 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
100 Manikmara 6.39 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
101 Mazhir Beel 1.97 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
103 Koiya Magura Beel 36.24 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
35
AREA
104 Dholi 8.48 Disputed Gilachhara Fenchuganj
106 Chhitizira 10.31 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
107 Bhulajuri Beel 36.29 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
108 Naoria 43.61 Disputed Gilachhara Fenchuganj
109 Putia 2 Disputed Gilachhara Fenchuganj
110 Choula Beel 34.68 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
111 Parolor Kona Beel 4.21 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
112 Tekoni Beel 83.53 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha & Fenchuganj
113 Jolla Beel 423.11 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
114 Bara Beel 5.2 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
115 Singra 1.58 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
116 Chhoto Beel 0.84 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
117 Moiyajuri Beel 27.93 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
118 Naiori 1.76 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
119 Rangikuri Beel 2.99 Govt. Leased Talimpur & Sujanagar Barlekha
120 Bargatu 2.56 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
121 Garia 0.63 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
123 Jollar Haor 16.97 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
124 Dhurua Bhutukrona 72.31 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
125 Gajua MZ 3.31 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
126 Vitargalu 1.92 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
128 Magutia 3.99 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
129 Fata 4.55 Disputed Gilachhara Fenchuganj
130 Gajua MZ 3.71 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
131 Maichhla Beel 54.65 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
132 Bhitargavi 35.39 Disputed Gilachhara Fenchuganj
133 Shiali Beel 17.42 Govt. Leased Sujanagar Barlekha
135 Katua Beel 148.48 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
137 Japakuri 2.47 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
138 Moua 2.57 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
139 Parjolla 155.72 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
140 Padma 34.27 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
141 Lamba Beel 4.53 Govt. Leased Talimpur & Sujanagar Barlekha
142 Kodali Beel 2.77 Govt. Leased Sujanagar Barlekha
143 Shiali Beel 8.58 Govt. Leased Sujanagar Barlekha
144 Charua 9.1 Disputed Gilachhara Fenchuganj
145 Ambari MZ 4.28 Govt. Leased Sujanagar Barlekha
146 Kukurdubi Beel 164.41 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
147 Ghoramara 1.15 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
148 Chanukuri Beel 6.7 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha & Fenchuganj
149 Maistar Dak Beel 59.25 Govt. Leased Talimpur Kulaura & Barlekha
150 Balikuri Beel 110.27 Govt. Leased Jaifamagar & Talimpur Barlekha & Kulaura
151 Boaljur 70.49 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
152 Aminer Dubi 1.97 Govt. Leased Sujanagar Barlekha
153 Katua Beel 92.03 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
154 Shilamara 1.62 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
155 Bhaia Beel 148.56 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha & Fenchuganj
156 Khartir Beel 19.41 Govt. Leased Talimpur Kulaura & Barlekha
36
AREA
157 Jallar Haor MZ 57.08 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
159 Kotali Beel 36.34 Govt. Leased Sujanagar Barlekha
160 Gojua Beel 107.41 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
161 Chhoto Gobadi Beel 1.5 Private Sujanagar Barlekha
162 Garkur 3.75 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
165 Meda Beel 71.25 Private Fenchuganj & Talimpur Barlekha & Fenchuganj
166 Paglapur 16.5 Govt. Leased Gilachhara Fenchuganj
167 Derua Beel 3.17 Govt. Leased Talimpur & Sujanagar Barlekha
168 Barogobadi Beel 10.97 Private Sujanagar Barlekha
170 Polobangxa 81.68 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
171 Agder Beel 3.27 Govt. Leased Jaifamagar & Talimpur Kulaura
172 Portir Beel 202.96 Govt. Leased Talimpur & Sujanagar Kulaura & Barlekha
173 Goghra 2.62 Disputed Gilachhara Fenchuganj
174 Fatacharua 35.63 Disputed Gilachhara Fenchuganj
175 Bhitor Gavi Beel 105.85 Govt. Leased Talimpur Kulaura
176 Radhar Dubi Beel 1.62 Private Sujanagar Barlekha
177 Ronchi Beel 165.79 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
178 Dholia Beel 546.81 Disputed Talimpur & Jaifamagar Kulaura & Barlekha
179 Haramdiga Beel 48.57 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
180 Musna 60.86 Govt. Leased Talimpur & Sujanagar Barlekha
181 Pingla Beel 355.14 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
182 Bula Beel 2.19 Govt. Leased Sujanagar Barlekha
184 Kalapani Beel 251.95 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
185 Radhakuri Beel 62.07 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
186 Shaldigha MZ 4.1 Govt. Leased Sujanagar Barlekha
187 Cheoridigha Beel 5.2 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
188 Baghakhaori Beel 7.5 Govt. Leased Talimpur & Paschim Juri Barlekha
Baralekha,Fenchuganj &
189 Upar Meda Beel 7.16 Govt. Leased Baramchal, Talimpur & Gilachara Kulaura
190 Lamba Beel 4.63 Govt. Leased Sujanagar Barlekha
191 Atakaori Beel 2.96 Govt. Leased Sujanagar Barlekha
192 Kochu Boddha Beel 1.19 Govt. Leased Talimpur & Paschim Juri Barlekha
193 Katijaori Beel 4.71 Govt. Leased Sujanagar Barlekha
194 Dariol Beel 3.36 Govt. Leased Sujanagar Barlekha
195 Nagua Beel 217.93 Govt. Leased Talimpur & Baramchal Kulaura & Barlekha
196 Rupai Beel 3.7 Govt. Leased Sujanagar Barlekha
197 Katijaori Beel 4.99 Govt. Leased Sujanagar Barlekha
198 Baradimsha Beel 3.51 Govt. Leased Paschim Juri Barlekha
199 Majher Padma Beel 7.55 Govt. Leased Paschim Juri Barlekha
200 Tural 155.38 Govt. Leased Talimpur & Jaifamagar Kulaura & Barlekha
Majher Chinaura
201 Beel 70.66 Govt. Leased Talimpur & Paschim Juri Kulaura
202 Udgai Beel 74.64 Govt. Leased Talimpur & Jaifamagar Kulaura & Barlekha
203 Dakshin Padma Beel 7.71 Govt. Leased Paschim Juri Barlekha
204 Bilaura Beel 1.99 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
205 Tolar Beel 64.17 Private Talimpur Barlekha
206 Chatla Beel 731.39 Govt. Leased Talimpur Kulaura
207 Parani Beel 33.6 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
208 Khagteka MZ 9.36 Govt. Leased Paschim Juri Barlekha
37
AREA
209 Jaydarbuk Beel 16.27 Govt. Leased Paschim Juri Barlekha
210 Koiyadora Beel 19.75 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
211 Chinaora Beel 42.3 Govt. Leased Jaifamagar & Paschim Juri Kulaura & Barlekha
212 Nagua Beel 96.83 Govt. Leased Jaifamagar Kulaura
213 Badesingnad MZ 28.63 Govt. Leased Baramchal & Talimpur Kulaura & Barlekha
214 Padma Pingla Beel 8.05 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
215 Howa Beel 162.46 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
216 Chokia Beel 869.08 Govt. Leased Talimpur, Jaifa & Bhakshimoil Kulaura & Barlekha
217 Uzan Beel 164.04 Govt. Leased Jaifamagar Kulaura
218 Hingaire Beel 58.94 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
219 Badesingnad MZ 7.69 Govt. Leased Talimpur Barlekha
220 Kodali Beel 72.94 Govt. Leased Talimpur, Jaifa & Bhakshimoil Kulaura & Barlekha
221 Khair Kona Beel 12.93 Govt. Leased Jaifamagar Kulaura
222 Fut Beel 140.86 Govt. Leased Baram & Talim & Bhakshimail Kulaura
223 Dupa Beel 4.79 Govt. Leased Baramchal Kulaura
224 Digar Beel 83.74 Govt. Leased Bhakshimail Kulaura
225 Katua Beel 46.93 Govt. Leased Bhakshimail Kulaura
226 Burburi Beel 25.26 Govt. Leased Bhakshimail Kulaura
227 Uga Katua Beel 9.07 Govt. Leased Bhakshimail Kulaura
228 Chikonkuri 73.45 Govt. Leased Bhakshimail & Jaifamagar Kulaura
229 Pani Khaoa Beel 1.4 Govt. Leased Bhakshimail Kulaura
230 Korbanpur MZ 5.93 Govt. Leased Bhakshimail Kulaura
231 Moishmara Beel 7.59 Govt. Leased Bhakshimail Kulaura
233 Gaterdubi Beel 1.63 Govt. Leased Bhakshimail Kulaura
Madar Haroy
234 Beel/Medi 1.07 Govt. Leased Bhakshimail Kulaura
236 Baradubi Beel 2.22 Govt. Leased Bhakshimail Kulaura
237 Barujor Beel 1.45 Govt. Leased Jaifamagar Kulaura
238 Rejuderua Beel 31.01 Govt. Leased Sujanagar Barlekha
38
Appendix D
Table D1: Present Value of Benefits and its Distribution from Various Hakaluki haor Management Policies
PV of Productive Goods and Services from Hakaluki haor in BDT millions (for
30 year life time with a 5% rate of discount)
Total Benefits Economic Environmental Poors' Benefit
Benefits Benefits
Business As Usual 7,019.25 6,381.71 637.54 1,379.60
Silt control 7,671.15 6,959.91 711.24 1,379.60
Sanctuary 7,874.20 7,209.56 664.65 1,379.60
Afforestation 7,367.02 6,729.47 637.54 1,727.36
Embankment 6,788.78 6,151.24 637.54 910.91
sedimentation + Sanc 8,342.55 7,631.32 711.24 1,379.60
Sedimentation control + Sanc + 8,690.32 7,979.08 711.24 1,727.36
afforest
Sedimentation control + Sanc + 8,459.85 7,748.61 711.24 1,258.67
afforest + embankment
9,000.00
8,000.00
Business As Usual
7,000.00
6,000.00 Silt control
5,000.00 Sanctuary
4,000.00 Afforestation
3,000.00
Em bankm ent
2,000.00
Silt + Sanc
1,000.00
Silt + Sanc + afforest
0.00
Environmental
Poors' Benefit
Total Benefits
Economic
Benefits
Silt + Sanc + afforest +

Benefits
em bankm ent
39
Appendix E: Survey Questionnaire
Serial
Survey Questionnaire
IUCNB with support from UNDP has initiated a research study under CWBMP of Ministry of
Environment and Study on economic evaluation of Hakaluki Haor. We have come here to take
your interview as a part of the research. We will use the information given by you for
evaluation of Hakaluki Haor.
1) District Code Upazila Code Mouza Union Code
2) Name:
3) Father’s Name:
4) Number of Family Members
5) Number of Earning Family Members
6) Educational Qualification:
0= Illiterate; 1=Primary (Class 1-5); 2= Secondary (Class 6-10); 3=SSC/ Dakhil/

Equivalent;
4=HSC/Fazil/ Equivalent, 5= Graduate 6=Masters 7= Medical/ Engineering 8=
Diploma/ polytechnic 9= Others
7) Religion
[Code] 1 = Islam 2 =Hindu 3 = Buddhist 4= Christian 5 = Others -------------------
8) Village:
9) Para (Area):
District Code: 1= Mouvibazar 2= Sylhet

Upazila Code: 1 = Barlekha, 2= Kulaura, 3=Juri, 4 = Golapganj, 5 = Fenchuganj
Union Code: 1 = Talimpur, 2=Sujanagar 3= Borni 4= Jaifarnagar, 5=West Juri, 6=Bhatera,
7=Bhukshimul 8=Gilachara, 9=Shorifganj, 10= North Badepasha
Date of Interview:
Name of the Interviewer:
Signature of the Interviewer:
Name of the Field Supervisor:
Signature of the Field Supervisor:

40
Module 1: General
10. What is the main occupation of your family?
1= Agriculture (own land, leased, orchard, nursery)
2= Fishing (full time, part time, leased, guard, trader)
3=Transport related activities (Boatman, bus driver)
4= Laborer (Agriculture, industrial, trading)
5= Small business (handicraft etc.)
6= Remittance
7= Others (Livestock, poultry, herbal healers student, service holder))
11. Average monthly income?

1. Maximum 1500 BDT
2. 1500 - 3000 BDT
3. 3000 - 5000 BDT
4. 5000 - 7000 BDT
5. Above 7000 BDT
12. What was the source of income last year?
Sources Income
Agriculture From crops
Leased
Nursery and orchard
Laborer Agriculture
Industrial and Trade
Fishing/ Fish From river, haor, beel
cultivation Pond
Transportation Road
Water way
Business Handicrafts
Shops
Small industry
Remittance Foreign
Inland
Rearing Livestock
Poultry
Others
13. Type of house: Please provide information on type of house you are living (only for
bedroom, kitchen and drawing room)
41
Type of wall Material used for roofing
Straw Tin Cement Others

Straw
Bamboo
Wood/tin
Brick and cement
Others
14. Type of latrines in the house: two types (If there are two latrines)
1= Sanitary 2=Ring/slab
3= Open latrine 4= Bush/ open place/canal/river bank
5= Others---------------------
15. Source of water for drinking, cooking and bathing (main two sources)
1= Deep tube-well 2= Shallow tube-well 3= Well
4= Pond/canal/river water 5= rain water 6=Tap water
7= Others---------------------
16. Source of light (main two sources)
1= Kerosene 2= Electricity 3= Bio-gas

4= Candles 5= solar lamp 6= Battery powered light
7= solar power 8= Others
17. Information on energy sources
(1) What are the major three sources of energy used in your house?
1= Cow dung 2= Fuel wood
3= Hijol/ Karach 4= Dry tree
5= Chon/ straw 6= Nol/ Khagra
7= leafs 8= Others
(2) What are the places of collection? (Main 3 sources)

1. Haor 4. Local market
2. Village 5. Homesteads
3. Hills 6. Neighborhood
7. Others
42
18. Please mention if you own any of these properties given in the following table?
Unit code of land: 1=decimal; 2=Kear (times decimal); 3=Acre; 4=Kora(____times
decimal);
5=Katha; (times Katha); 7=Others (please mention)
Unit code for food 1= gram; 2=kilo-gram; 3= pound ; 4=Liter ; 5= Sher; 6=Mound; 7=Taka;
8=Hali (4 piece); 9=Others
1=Yes If yes please mention the Is it your If ‘yes’ please

2=No quantity part of mention the
income amount you
1=yes earned in last
2=no 12 months
Quantity Unit code
1=House
2=cultivable land
3= pond
4=other house/shops Number
5=poultry Number
6= cow/buffalo Number
7= goat/sheep Number
8= cycle Number
9= Motor cycle Number
10=non-motor vehicle Number
11= motor vehicle Number
12=big tree Number
13= radio/cassette player Number
14= TV/VCD Number
15= Fridge Number
16=Jewelry (gold/silver) Number
17=Swing machine Number
18=tube well Number
19= land phone/mobile Number
phone
Quantity Unit code
20= rice/wheat/paddy/flour
21=fishing equipments Number
22= Tractor/ Agricultural Number
equipment
23=Others (please mention) Number
43
19.Please mention the food that was the main part of your food intake last week?
Unit 1= Gram 2= Kilogram 3= Pound ; 4=Liter ; 5= Sher; 6=Mound; 7=BDT; 8=Hali; 9=Others
Type of food Quantity Unit code

1=rice
2=potato
3= vegetables
4=pulse
5=milk and milk-made food
6=Edible oil
7= beef/mutton
8=chicken/duck
9=egg
10=fish
11= fruits
12= Others
20. Other expenditure by the family
Area of Expenditure Expenses Time code

1 =daily
2=weekly
3 =monthly
4 =yearly
Clothing
Education
Health/ treatment
Electricity
Energy
Transport
Entertainment
Others
21. a) Are you or any individual of your family member of any cooperative organization?
(1=Yes 2=No)
b) Name of the organization (any three)
(Please mention the type of organization involved)
1=Irrigation/ Pump 2= farmer’s association 3=Fishermen society

4= farmer-labor union 5=industrial labor union 6=volunteer
7=cooperative 8=youth society 9= women cooperatives 10= others
c) Family members who are involved (1=male 2=female)
44
22. Are you or your family member of any credit organization ? Yes =1 No =2
23. Question related to credit/ loan for income
1= Government
Banks 1= self Code 1=Retail
2=Agricultural Bank 2=husband 1= weekly 2=Transportation
3=BRDB Yes=1 3=wife 2= monthly 3=Whole Sale
4=Grameen bank No=2 4=collective 3=quarterly 4=Livestock
5=BRAC 5=father 4= half yearly 5=Vegetable
6=CNRS 6=mother 5=annual Plantation
7=ASHA 7=son 6=Rice & Jute
8=Heed Bangladesh 8=daughter 7=Poultry
9=FIVDB 9=brother/sister 8=Fish trading
10=CARITAS 10= others 9=Dry Fish
11=VERD Business
12= Money lender 10=Timber Wood
Business
13=Employer
11=Sand Business
14=Friend/relatives/n
eighbor 12=Others
15=Others
Sl Male=1 Female=2 Source Training for User Intere Installme Number of Purpose/Use
capacity st nt amount installment
building rate
45
Module 2A: Agriculture
Please answer the following questions based on Aman, Aus and Boro crop production in the
last year
24. Do you own the land where you grow crops? 1= Yes 2=No, 3=Lease+ own
25. Where the most of your land is situated?

Unit code: 1=Decimal; 2=Kear ( times decimal); 3=Acre; 4=Kora ( times decimal);
5=others (please mention)
Type of land High Unit in Medium Unit in Low Unit in

land code haor high code haor land code Haor
area % land % area %
area
Aus crop
Aman crop
Boro crop
Vegetables
Others
Please
mention
46
26 A. Crop produced in last 12 B. How much did C. How much of D. How much of E. If you are not F. How far is
months you produce in last the crops did you the crop produced the owner how your land
12 months ( consume in last 12 in last 12 months much of the crops situated inside
including months? you kept as you have to share the haor is from
consuming, selling seeds? with the owners? the nearest
and sharing)? Beel?
Crop Crop’s name 1=Yes Quantity Unit Quantity Unit Quantity Unit Quantity Unit Distance Unit
code 2=No code code code code code
1 Bona Aus, LV
2 Bona Aus, HYV
3 Ropa Aus, LV
4 Ropa Aus, HYV
5 Bona Aus/Aman
mixed
6 Bona Aman, LV
7 Bona Aman, HYV
8 Ropa Aman, HYV
9 Boro LV
10 Boro HYV
11 Pulse
12 Mustered
13 Borbati
14 Winter vegetables
15 Other vegetables
16 Fruits
17 Other (mention)
Code for question B, C, D, E : 1= gram 2= Kilo Gram 3= Pound 4= Liter 5= Sher 6= Mound 7= Sac ( holding capacity)
8= Pali 9= Katha 10= Taka 11= Others
Code for F: 1 = kilometer 2 = Mile 3= Yard 4= hand 5= Others ------------------- ( how many times of the kilometer)
47
27. Production A. Chemical Fertilizer B. Organic Fertilizer (cow C. Pesticides Seed ( if bought)
dung etc)
Crop Crop’s name Quantity Unit Total Quantit Unit Total Quantity Unit Total Quantity Unit Total
code expenses y expenses expenses expense
s
1 Bona Aus, LV
2 Bona Aus, HYV
3 Ropa Aus, LV
4 Ropa Aus, HYV
5 Bona Aus/Aman mixed
6 Bona Aman, LV
7 Bona Aman, HYV
8 Ropa Aman, HYV
9 Boro LV
10 Boro HYV
11 Pulse
12 Mustered
13 Borbati
15 Other vegetables
16 Fruits
17 Other (mention)
Unit code : 1= gram 2= Kilo Gram 3= Pound 4= Liter 5= Sher 6= Mound 7= Sac ( holding capacity)
8= Pali 9= Katha 10= Taka 11= Others
48
28. Production A. Animal Power B. Machine power C. Irrigation D. Family member’s E. Paid labor Others
labor
Cro Quantity Expenses Number Expense Numbe Expense Numbe Expenses Numbe Expenses Expense
p s r of s r of r of s
cod people people people
e
1 Bona Aus, LV
2 Bona Aus, HYV
3 Ropa Aus, LV
4 Ropa Aus, HYV
5 Bona Aus/Aman mixed
6 Bona Aman, LV
7 Bona Aman, HYV
8 Ropa Aman, HYV
9 Boro LV
10 Boro HYV
11 Pulse
12 Mustered
13 Borbati
15 Other vegetables
16 Fruits
17 Other (mention)
49
Module 2B: Fisheries Resource
29.
1= Ruhi 6=Nola 11=Chingri 16= Puti 21=Batashi 26= Ghoinna 31=Ektota
2= Katla 7=Shol 12= Dela 17=Tengra 22= Foli 27=Bhada 32=Kakia
3= Mrigel 8=Magur 13=Cheora 18= Chanda 23=Gaora 28=Kholisha 33=Kalbaush
4=Aair 9=Koi 14 = Chapila 19= Baain 24=Mola 29=Gulsha 34=Chitol
5= Boal 10=Shing 15=Taki 20= Boicha 25=Pabda 30=Gilachaki 35= Others
30. Have you been to any trip for fishing in the last one year 1= Yes 2= No
Daily Trip
Name/T A. B. C. Daily hours D. Numver E. Number F. Expenses G. H. Information on fishing
ypes of Number Average spent of fishers of family /trip Information net
Fish of number of in group members on boat
month trip/ within 1= Moshari net
month fishers 2=Hator net
3=Bhel net
4=Jhoki netj
5=Current net
6=Koi net
7=Lar borshi
8=Hatt borshi
9=Lotka borshi
10=Chai
11=Runga
12=Queen
13=Dori
14=Pelun net
15=Paron
16=Others ( please mention)
Number Number hours Number Number Amount Numb Typ Expense type Expenses/trip
er e s/trip
Big fish A Unit amount Unit
m
o
u
nt
Médium
size
Small
fish
Geol. fish
shrimp
Others
Code: 1= taka 2= Mound 3= KG 4= Others ( please mention how much it Hill be in KG)
50
31. Do you catch fish in any other way apart from using boat 1= Yes 2= No
Fish Name A. type of B. Anuual C. Anuual

cod equipement income Expenses
e 1= Moshari net
2= Par Boris
3=Lar Boris
4=Hat Boris
5= Lotka Boris
6=Chai
7=Dori
8= Felón net
9= Paron
10= Others
1 Big fish
2 Médium size
3 Small fish
4 Geol. fish
5 Shrimp
6 Others
51
Module 3: Haor Resource Extraction and Rights
32) Do you visit the haor to extract its natural resources? yes=1 no=2
33) Do you face any restrictions during resource collection? yes=1 no=2
34) What are the activities get hindered in haor

(1) During fishing (2) Tree cutting
(3) Fuel wood collection (4) Herb collection
(5) Hunting (6) Sand extraction
(7) Food collection 8) Fodder collection
(9) Grazing (10) Poultry
(11) Cow dung collection (12) Others
35) Who imposes the restrictions?
1. Government
2. Lease holder
3. Influential persons
4. Land owner
5. Others
36) Are you or your family members involved in fishing
1. Fish catching
2. Whole selling
3. Individual selling
4. Fish drying
5. Fish weaving
6. Net selling
7. Fishing boat
8. Labor
9. Ice selling
10. Ice factory
37) What are the existing fisheries resource management practices?
1. Community based management

2. Leasing system
3. Open access
4. Equal right
5. Village right
6. Individual right
7. Others
38) How do people participate in the existing fishing

system?
52
1. Labor
2. Trading
3. Food collection
4. Service
5. Grazing
6. Poultry
7. Others
39) What are the economic activities that depend on haor resources
1. Comercial fishing
2. Fuelwood collection
3. Bird hunting
4. Nol Chagra selling
5. Sand extraction
6. Grazing
7. Poultry
8. Others
40 Who are the initiators and who are the workers in implementing the
A) activities?
1. Local MP
2. Lease holder
3. Local people
4. Influential persons
5. Others
40 B) Who are working as labors?
1. Locals
2. Villagers
3. Day labors
4. Others
53
Module 4: Livelihood and Environment
41. Please mention the economic activities you are involved in the last one year?
Yes=1 Annual
Activities
No =2 income
A. Fish catch 1. Full time fishing
2. Part time fishing
3. For eating
4. Dry fishing
5. Net weaving
6. Fishing equipment making
7. Others (please mention)
B. Fish culture 1. Fry releasing/ fry carrying
2. Provide fertilizer and fish to pond
3. Marketing
4. Others
C. Fish Trading
D. Poultry (snail/ shinai collection)
E. Co Go She Buffal Duck He
w at ep o n
F.Herbs/plant Reason for collection What type of things

collection from 1. Food
wetland
2. Fodder
3. Shading
4. Fencing
5. Medicine
6. Housing
7. Fuel
8. Sand extraction
9. Turtles/crab/busin
ess
10. Others
G. Other income 1. Small business

generating 2. Handicraft
activities
3. Bamboo made products
4. Cane made products
5. Vegetable cultivation
6. Others
7. Fish culture
55
42. Please answer the followings if you and/or your family members are involved in
any haor resource collection/extraction
Description
Vegetable
Grass/Nol
Chan/Bhe
Hijol/Kara
Shingara/
medicinal
Paniphol
Peat soil
/Khagra
da/Eilla
Snails/
Others
ch/fuel
Herbs/
/ Food
plants
shinai
Birds
Fish
Crab/
turtle
[Code for B 1. Selling/comercial 2. For eating 3.Personal use 4. Others (
Please mention ____________________________)]
[Code for C 1. Fodder 2. Fuel 3. Fencing 4. Shading 5. Katha 6. Embankment
protection 7. Duch reering 8. Fish food 8. others (Please mention
____________________________)]
[Code for D 1. Boishakh 2. Joishto 3. Ashar 4. Sravan 5. Barda 6. Ashwin 7. Kartik
8. Agrohayan 9. Poush 10. Magh 11. Falgun 12. Chaitra]
[Code for E: Source of collection 1. River 2. Beel 3. Canal 4. Kanda 5. Jungle 6.
others (Please mention ____________________________)]
[Code for F 1. No restriction 2. none knows that I collect 3. pay toll and collect 4.
collect in partnership 5. Exchange of labor 6. leasing 7. work for lessee 8. for eating,
no restriction 9. collect resource alter lessee 10. Others others (Please mention
____________________________)]
[Code for H 1. 0-100 Taka 2. 101-500 Taka 3. 501-1000 Taka 4. 1001-5000 Taka, 5.
5001-10000 Taka 6. 10001-20000 Taka
7) 20001-50000 Taka 8) 50001- 100000 9) 100000 Taka and above
43. Do you sell anything that you collect from Haor? Yes =1 No =2
44. How much that contributes to your income?
1) Below 10%
2) 10% - 50%
3) 50% - 90%
4) 90% - 100%
45. Do you spend any money that you earn for haor development? Yes =1 No =2
46. If ‘Yes’ then how do you spend the money?

1) By releasing fries
2) Planting trees
3) Others
56
47. How much of your annual income you spend on enhancing and regenerate haor
resources?
1) Below 10%
2) 10% - 20%
3) 20% - 30%
4) Above 30%
48. What vehicle you and your family members use carry luggage [main 2]
1 = Rickshaw 2 = Non motorized van 3 = Taxi/ jeep

4 = Pick up van/ truck 5 = Bus/ Mini Bus
6 = Motorized van/ Baby taxi 7 =Motor cycle
8 = Cycle 9 = Boat
10 = Engine Boat 11= Walking 12=Others-------------
49. What are the vehicles you and your family members use for transportation?
(Example: for going to school, office, market etc) [Main 2]
1 = Rickshaw 2 = Non motorized van 3 = Taxi/ jeep

4 = Pick up van/ truck 5 = Bus/ Mini Bus
6 = Motorized van/ Baby taxi 7 =Motor cycle
8 = Cycle 9 = Boat
10 = Engine Boat 11= Walking 12=Others-------------
50. What is your monthly expenditure on transportation?

1) Below 100 Taka
2) 100 - 200
3) 200 - 400
4) 400 - 500
5) Above 500 Taka
51.How are you benefiting from migratory birds?
1) Meat as food 2) Selling 3) Pet/breeding 4) Increases fish number 5) Aesthetic

6) Enhance rice production by providing fertilizer 7) Others
52.What is the reason of flooding in haor area in your opinion?
1) Decreased depth of the river bed due to sedimentation 2) Decreased depth of the
haor bed due to siltation 3) Absence of embankment 4) Fish culture 5) Others --------
--------
53. Why should we protect the haor: (Please mention any 5 of the below)
1) Source of livelihood 2) Source of food 3) Source of silt that that make the land
fertile 4) Source of fuel 5) Increase fish production 6) supply of water 7) Good
transportation route 8) Protect the natural beauty 9) Aesthetic and source of
recreation 10) Others --------------
57
Appendix F
Table F1 : On-going activities of CWBMP

Outcomes Activities
1. Regulatory framework developed and 1. ECA mapping project sites area and boundary defination
physical delineation for ECAs in Cox's 2. GPS data collection and satellite image interpretation
bazar and Hakaluki haor (Output 1. 1, 3. ECA regularity framework development; seminars, meeting and field
2.1, 3.1) based community awareness.
1. Community Mobilization for ECA natural resource management: sub-
contract w NGO/ Cox's Bazar sites.
2. Community Mobilization for ECA natural resource management: sub-
2. Community Mobilization for ECA contract w NGO/ Hakaluki haor sites.
natural resource management in 3. Community meeting in Hakaluki haor and Cox's Bazar to establish
Cox's Bazar and Hakaluki haor. VCGs and local ECA committees and initialize project site ECA
(Output 1.3, 1.5, 2.3, 2.5, 3.4) management plan
4. Conduct awareness programme and materials made to facilitate local
participation and inter-sectoral coordination.
5. Awareness campaign in schools on ECA Management.
1. Natural Resource Economic Evaluation (NREE) of Hakaluki haor.
2. ECA site Migratory Bird Surveys including support to National
Waterfowl Census.
3. ECA Baseline Surveys: Fauna/flora-biodiversity gap filling and critical
3. Collection and use of ecological data habitat identification: Beel mapping -HH; Communities - Demographic
for Cox's Bazar and Hakaluki & Socio-Economic.
haor. (Output 1.4 and 2.4) 4. Produce Awareness materials: Site brochures, ECA field information
boards.
5. Produce Documentary Video Film: State of Ecosystem and
Biodiversity.
6. Water quality and water level monitoring.
1. Urgent conservation activities for mangrove regeneration /CB sites
2. Plantation of trees, shrubs, etc. for habitat rehabilitation, homestead
4. Management plans for sustainable
protecting and vilageres sustainable use
use of Cox's Bazar and Hakaluki haor
3. Urgent conservation activities for swamp forest regeneration/Hakaluki
are developed and urgent
haor
conservation measures
4. Preparation of first draft Project site management plans proposing
undertaken (Output 1.5 and 2.5)
conservation and sustainable use measure with zoning and critical
habitat identified.
1. Collaboration meeting with partner projects & organizations for activity
planning/implementation
5. Implementation of Project Start-up,
2. Stackeholder workshop
Operation and Development (Output
3. Monitoring and evaluation of implementation of activities
3.5)
4. Training on ECAMU staff on awareness and biodiversity Management
5. Organizing field level meeting
58

Final Draft Hakaluki Evaluation

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Final Draft Hakaluki Evaluation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GEF

BGD/99/G31- Coastal and Wetland Biodiversity

Natural Resource Economic Evaluation

Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of Bangladesh

The CWMBP Project

The Coastal Wetland Biodiversity Management Project (CWBMP) is implemented by the

Aims of the study

x To find a ‘value’ for measuring change in the quality of the environment.

Hakaluki haor is a complex ecosystem, containing more than 238 interconnecting

Source: CNRS, GIS Unit

Wetland goods, services and economic values

Steps in undertaking the study

Table 1: Steps in undertaking the study

Scoping and training

Identifying wetland goods, services and values

Figure 3: Total economic value of wetlands

DIRECT VALUES INDIRECT VALUES OPTION VALUES NON-USE VALUES

Table 2: Summary of wetland goods, services and economic values

Conducting a household survey

Estimating the economic value of wetland goods and services

Constructing a wetland bio-economic model

Figure 4: Steps in generating a wetland bio-economic model

Assessing the economic impacts of wetland management options

Selection of the Study Area and Sample Distribution

Profile of households living around Hakaluki

Occupation and social identity

Occupation of the Head of the Household Percent

As illustrated in Table 5, there is variation in average monthly income between households.

Table 5: Distribution of Monthly Family Income Head

Income Range Observations Percent

Average Income of the Households

Table 6: Income by Sources (annual)

Dependence on the Haor Resources

Table 10: Who creates obstacles to access haor resources

Category label Observations Percent

Table 11: Fishing rights on the Beels

Open fish catch

Rights for Fishing Percent

Economic Activities in the Haor

Table 13: Initiators of Income Generating Activities in the Haor

Category Label Observations Percent

Income Generated from Economic Activities

Table 15: Income per hectare from Hakaluki haor

16,000.00 Tk/ha % of hhs 70%

Income in BDT per Percent of Area in ha in

Local support for wetland conservation

Finally the other 18% of the

Table 16: Economic Activities Involvement and Haor Protection

5. The economic value of wetland goods and services

Developed by Dr.A.K. Enamul Haque, 2006

Component 1: Biological Processes

Kanda Land or Banks of the Beels

Component 2: Economic Activities

Other goods and services production

Option 1: Sedimentation control

Option 3: Submergible Embankments

Economic impacts of management options

Construction of an embankment will not bring in net additional benefits, as illustrated in

Figure 7: Effect of Embankment

2: Production for poor

Source: Simulation by Enamul Haque, 2006

Similarly, simulation exercises using option 1 (sedimentation control), option 2 (establishment of

2: Production for poor