ENHANCING LOCAL GOVERNANCE PARTICIPATION:

THE PDI EXPERIENCE IN LGU-NGO PARTNERSHIP

Aurea G. Miclat-Teves
Project Development Institute
44 Segundo Street, Heroes Hill
Quezon City

I. Introduction

The Project Development Institute was established in 1989 with the vision of “building
self reliant communities through people’s initiatives.”

It is committed to the pursuit of genuine land reform and rural development of peasants
and indigenous peoples. The strength of PDI lies in its participatory approach not only
toward development programming but also in transforming these development initiatives
at the ground level into policy for advocacy at the regional and national levels. Its
strength also lies in its negotiating strategy that obliges the government to provide land
and other resources as well as resolve issues in favor of the peasants and indigenous
people.

PDI has been active in the marginal areas of Central Luzon and Northern Palawan.
Gains have been achieved in empowering the marginalized people in the countryside by
transforming landless peasants to small-owner cultivators, and turning the indigenous
peoples into successful claimants of their ancestral domain and actively participating in
local governance.

The vision of PDI provides a guide for a people-centered approach to genuine and
sustainable development anchored on good local governance. We adhere to the following
principles:

The primacy of developing the full human potential in which people are at
the core of development initiatives.

Holistic science and appropriate technology. The search for solutions in

the complex milieu of development problems has to be undertaken with the
perspective that situates specific problems in the larger social and ecological
context. This approach facilitates the use of sustainable agriculture and
appropriate technology.

Cultural, moral and spiritual sensitivity that nurtures the inherent strengths of
local and indigenous knowledge, practices, and beliefs while respecting the cultural
diversity, moral norms and spiritual essence of Filipino society.

Self-determination that respects the right of the people to decide on the course
of their own development and relying on the inherent capacity to achieve this.

Gender sensitivity that recognizes the importance and complementary roles and
the empowerment of both men and women in development.
 Institutional viability that acknowledges that sustainable development is
a shared, collective and indivisible responsibility which calls for institutional
structures that are build around the spirit of solidarity, convergence and
partnership between and among different stakeholders.

Ecological soundness that upholds nature as our common heritage and thus
respecting the limited carrying capacity and integrity in the development process
to ensure the right of present and future generations to this heritage.

These principles guide PDI in its mission to institute partnerships with people’s
organizations, NGOs, local government units and the private sector in land reform and
rural development. They are built upon a community-based approach to management of
land and resources recognizing and encouraging the participation of communities in the
development process and seek to address the full needs of the peasant and indigenous
people in PDI’s areas of work. They aim to develop the full human potential of peasants
and IPs. However, sustainable human development cannot be achieved without
responsible governance.

The Integrated Participatory Development Programming (IPDP): PDI’s

Development Framework

The IPDP framework is being used by PDI in all its development initiatives. It aims to
develop grassroots-oriented Integrated Area Development Plans, which will detail and
prioritize the necessary intervention projects appropriate to specific communities. The
IPDP has three main components: community development planning, area management
and review and assessment.

The IPDP is participatory. Development planning is undertaken through a participatory

development process. This process allows the people to discuss freely their problems,
their present condition as well as finding ways to overcome any predicament.

The IPDP is integrated. It integrates the various sectors involved in development. It allows
the various sectors to come and work together for sustainable human development, including
health services, education, agrarian reform, agriculture, etc. These sectors complement each
other toward achieving the development vision and goals of the community.

The IPDP is sustainable. The activities of the IPDP are planned according to the
capabilities of the people.

It is adaptable because it is easy to use and can be applied as an effective planning tool by any
sector of society. The IPDP is an adequate and suitable development approach or strategy that
comprehensively addresses the needs of the people. (Full text of the IPDP is found in Annex I)

Based on the environmental scanning and problem-focused group discussion (through

the IPDP) conducted by PDI in Central Luzon and Northern Palawan in the mid-nineties,
the key issues and problems that concern the peasant and IP communities are as
follows: weak POs or unorganized peasants; lack of leadership capacities and skills,
especially in engaging and negotiating with the government; they lack skills to engage
others in discourse or push their agenda; but their basic problem is their lack of land
and other resources for a decent human existence.
Defining the problems and issues provided avenues for PDI to recommend solutions with
the following objectives:

1. To strengthen the capabilities of peasants and IPs and peoples’ organizations in land
reform and rural development initiatives, particularly in enhancing PO management skills.
2. To provide a package of services in project development and related areas to further
strengthen their organizations, upgrade skills, and broaden their service coverage.
3. To develop community-based Comprehensive Development Programs using
participatory methods in pursuit of genuine land reform.
4. To conscientize other sectors of society, especially intellectuals and professionals to
participate in the process of realizing genuine land reform and rural development.

II. Laying down the foundation: Enhancing the participation in Good

Governance through institutional capacity building of PO leaders

PDI has realized that in order for the communities to achieve self-reliance, the peasants and
indigenous people should first have the capacity to initiate and lead the community, engage
other sectors of society to push for their agenda and institute change at the community level.

PDI first capacitated them through organizing, training and education at the
grassroots level. PDI utilizes development approaches such as participatory planning,
integrated area development, training and education for people empowerment in
institution building and formed organizations committed to the pursuit of genuine land
reform and rural development.

By December 2006, PDI already had established three regional federations: NMGL
for farmers (founded in 2001), BUKAL for Indigenous people (founded in 2004) and
PASAMAKA-L for rural women (founded in 2003). Within the three regional formations
are 103 people’s organizations with a membership of 9,689. Of this total 4,339 (44.7%)
are men, 5,164 (53.2%) are women, and 186 (1.9%) are youth.

Table 1
PDI-NMGL PO Building
November 2004-November 2006

Number of Members
Province Level/Scope
POs Men Women Youth Total
Pampanga 6 Barangay Level 62 93 0 155
Tarlac 7 Barangay Level 24 177 0 201
Aurora 9 Barangay Level 118 248 39 405
Bataan 12 Barangay Level 580 387 54 1,021
Bulacan 9 Municipal Level 197 228 0 425
Nueva Ecija 23 Barangay Level 110 364 0 474

1 Municipal, 28
Zambales 29 1,021 986 0 2,007
Barangay Level

1 Municipal, 7
Palawan 8 2,227 2,681 93 5,001
Barangay

2 Municipal, 101 4,339 5,164 186

Total 103 9,689
Barangay (44.7%) (53.2%) (1.9%)
To empower communities it is imperative to establish strong autonomous peasants, IPs
and women’s organizations that are able to take up sectoral and community concerns
with government bodies. They are now capacitated to claim and exercise their right to
be heard and to influence local government processes and decisions.

III. Enabling the peasants and indigenous people for multi-stakeholder

partnership and participatory governance: Penetration of Local Government
Bodies

The continuous expansion of community-level POs has increased the capacity of the
PDI-NMGL/BUKAL/PASAMAKA-L alliances to strengthen local governance participation by
penetrating local bodies. Organizational activities and mobilizations generally get the
attention of local authorities and the general public thus increasing the influence of POs.
They serve as primary force in the peasant’s and IP’s advocacy and claim-making in
agrarian reform and ancestral domain struggles.

At the local level, a PDI area management team and its partner POs meet weekly
to assess, solve and define solutions to problems at the municipal level. Provincial
representatives meet at the regional level twice monthly and the federation officials
meet monthly at the national level to discuss the progress of work, find solutions to
problems that require the intervention of PDI and schedule and monitor program of
activities. The active participation of PO groups enhances the accountability and sense of
responsibility of the PO member.

PDI and its partner POs pursue rural development through partnerships and alliances
with people’s organizations and sectoral groups such as farmers, women-IP and youth
groups, the local government units, and government line agencies.

Table 2
Peasant Organization Building
As of June 2007

Number of
Province Level/Scope
POs

Aurora 9 Barangay Level

Bataan 12 Barangay Level
Bulacan 9 Municipal Level
Nueva Ecija 23 Barangay Level
Palawan 8 1 Municipal, 7 Barangay
Pampanga 6 Barangay Level
Tarlac 7 Barangay Level
Zambales 29 1 Municipal, 28 Barangay Level
Total 103

PDI and its three partner POS were able to establish 103 village-based organizations in
eight provinces as shown in Table 2 by June 2007. The organizations are autonomous and
can independently engage local and barangay units and government line agencies on issues
of vital concern such as land tenure improvement, the provision of basic infrastructures,
livelihood projects and other development initiatives. PDI has been continuously developing
these organizations through constant training, consultations and meetings to increase the
capacities of the members by enhancing their leadership and negotiation skills.

Participation in Local Government Bodies

A testament to the strength and effectivity of local organizing is the degree of penetration
by our allied POs of local government bodies. As shown in Table 3, we have 285 PO
leaders who have become members of various local government units and line agencies.
In the field of local governance, our member-POs include 32 IP chieftains, 50 municipal
Councilors, 16 Barangay Captains, 10 Barangay Secretaries, six Barangay Treasurers,
three Municipal sectoral representatives and 49 Committee Officers. In Local government
agencies, our members include 37 Barangay Health Workers, 12 Social Workers, 55 day
care workers and 15 Barangay Agrarian Reform Committee (BARC) leaders.

Table 3.
Local Government Representation, by Province
As of June 2007

Province Local Representatives/

Officers
8 Chieftains
35 Councilors
25 Brgy. Health Workers
47 Committee Officers
2 BARC
5 Brgy. Captain
Zambales 5 Brgy. Secretary
5 Brgy. Treasurer
9 Social Workers
6 Daycare Workers
42 Daycare officers
3 BARC
3 Sectoral Representatives
17 Chieftains
Bataan 2 Brgy. Health Workers
4 Councilors
3 Brgy. Captains
Pampanga 1 Brgy. Secretary
2 BARC

Bulacan 5 BARC

2 Councilors
4 Brgy. Health Workers
3 Brgy. Captains
Palawan
4 Chieftains
1 Treasurer
1 Brgy. Health Workers
1 Brgy. Councilor
Tarlac 1 Daycare President
1 BARC
2 Councilors
1 Social Workers
3 Brgy. Health Workers
Nueva Ecija 1 Committee Officer
1 Brgy. Secretary
2 BARC
2 Daycare worker
3 Chieftains
6 Councilors
2 Brgy. Health Workers
1 Committee Officer
Aurora
5 Brgy. Captain
3 Brgy. Secretary
2 Social Workers
4 Daycare Workers
285 Local Reps and Officers
Total
practicing Local Governance
Local Governance and People Empowerment

People participation in local governance has been brought to a new level. On top of or
in conjunction with mass mobilizations, dialogues and consultations and other forms of
actions as non-state actors, the POs have deployed capable leaders and members to
directly participate in decision-making processes of local bodies. These actions produce
a convergence of pressure from within and from the outside, thus hastening local
government response to issues.

POs have been very effective in leveraging their strength and capabilities to mobilize
local government resources for rural development needs. From 2004 to December 2006,
they managed to mobilize some PhP21.4.million public and private funds for various
social services (see Table 4). Most of the resources generated were for goods and
services for the general public. Around 90% of these consisted of physical infrastructure
(such as roads, bridges, irrigation canals) that benefited the general public. Thus, the
actual number of beneficiaries extended far beyond the membership of the POs.

Table 4
Resources Generated by POs
in 2004-2006, by province

Value of
Province Resources Main bulk of resources
(In PhP)
Bulacan 1,848,000.00 Water impounding, barangay road
Bridge, farm-to-market road, school
Zambales 7,461,000.00
building
Non-formal education (supplies, learning
Aurora 264,000.00
center)
Tarlac 214,000.00 School building, daycare center, sewerage

Palawan 465,000.00 Education, literacy

Bataan 3,129,200.00 Road, school building

Nueva Ecija 8,050,000.00 Irrigation, farm-to-market road

Total 21,431,200.00

Thus, in three years time, the POs succeeded in leveraging their strength and
capabilities to mobilize PhP21.4 million worth of local government resources for rural
development needs. The level and intensity of engagements and the value of resources
generated vary from province to province.

• Bulacan – The major arena for engagement is the city government of San Jose
del Monte. During the last three years (2004-2006) SAMAKA was able to generate
PhP1.84 million worth of resources from the city government through the City
Development Council and the City Agriculture Office. These resources included
PhP800,000 for a barangay road that benefited 400 families, a PhP1 million water
impounding project that benefit 150 families and PhP48,000 in capital assistance
for the production of Red Lady papaya.

• Zambales – The POs in Zambales engaged government at various levels, from

local government units to national government offices, including the Office of the
President. LAKAS, SAMATT-K, SAMATT-K Narra and IP communities in Pasambot,
 Botolan, and San Juan were able to mobilize PhP7.46 million worth of government
and private sector assistance from 2004 to 2006. The biggest chunk was a PhP5
million bridge lobbied for by LAKAS with the Office of the President and which
currently benefits 200 families. The next biggest chunk was a PhP1 million farm-
to-market road that SAMATT-K in Narra lobbied for. This road currently benefits
106 families. The rest consists of various assistance such as: a PhP300,000 day
care center in Botolan that benefits 200 learners; a PhP600,000 school building
donated by a private citizen that currently benefits 200 students; a PhP175,000
community lighting system that benefits 200 families in the LAKAS settlement
area; a PhP120,000 water project that benefits agricultural areas of 100 families
in Pasambot; and various other forms of assistance that benefited children (e.g.
a feeding program), non-formal education (NFE) learners (e.g. honorarium for
facilitators, books), poor families (e.g. medicines) and community leaders (e.g.
trainings).

• Aurora – In Aurora, the focus of engagement was the municipal LGU of Dingalan,
the provincial capital. In 2004-2006, the POs were able to generate PhP264,000
worth of resources mainly for their NFE projects. These consist of a community
learning center (a PhP90,000 building), school supplies for 150 learners
(PhP54,000), contracting scheme for literacy skills benefiting 11 barangays
(PhP50,000) and a PhP70,000 Alternative Learning System (ALS) program.

• Tarlac – In Tarlac, the main arena of engagement was the municipal government
of Sta. Barbara. However, PO engagements included targets such as the Philippine
National Railways (PNR) and TESDA. In 2004-2006, the POs were able to generate
PhP214,000 worth of resources. The biggest chunk of assistance generated was
a PhP100,000 school building donated by the PNR. This building benefits 761
pupils. The rests consisted of the following: a PhP55,000 day care center for
100 learners, a PhP20,000, 20-meter sewerage system for 35 families, TESDA
vocational courses (PhP34,000) benefiting 285 trainees and a PhP5,000 solid
waste management project that benefit 500 families.

• Bataan – The POs in Bataan engaged various actors at various levels to generate
additional resources for the communities. These engagements included lobby,
dialogue and consultations with the DAR, Catholic Church hierarchy, the provincial
government and the municipal governments of Limay, Orion, Bagac and Morong.
In 2004-2006, these engagements produced PhP3.12 million worth of resources.
The biggest chunk was a PhP2 million farm-to-market road project of the DAR/
ARCDP II in Orion, Morong and Bagac. The others consist of the following: a
PhP800,000 school building in Limay, PhP328,000 education assistance from the
Catholic Church and an amount of PhP1,200 local government assistance for ALS
in Morong.

• Nueva Ecija - In Nueva Ecija, the main engagements were directly with national line
agencies like the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) and the Department of Labor
and Employment (DOLE). The resources generated during the period totaled PhP8.05
million. The biggest chunks were a PhP5 million farm-to-market road project and the
PhP3 million irrigation canal project from the DAR which benefit around 80 families in
Pantoc, San Isidro and Casareal, plus PhP50,000 in financial assistance from the DOLE
to benefit 25 women members of a local cooperative in Gabaldon.
 • Palawan – The POs in Palawan engaged provincial and municipal government
units and local counterpart offices of national line agencies like the Department
of Education, Department of Social Welfare and Development, Department
of Agriculture, and the Office of Muslim Affairs (OMA). These engagements
produced PhP465,000 worth of resources in 2004-2006. The biggest chunk was
a joint DepEd and LGU assistance worth PhP360,000 for a literacy contracting
scheme that benefited 774 participants in 12 barangays. The rest consisted of
the following: PhP25,000 for a training seminar on entrepreneurship in Marupo,
PhP20,000 participatory coastal assessment in Buenavista, and PhP60,000 DepEd
for a seminar workshop of ALS implementers in Coron.

Typology of Resources Generated

The NMGL has practical needs especially for the internal development of its organizations
and the livelihood needs of their members. However, they exercised their leverage not
only for their internal requirements. In fact, most of the resources generated were
goods and services for the general public. The main contribution of the POs to resource
generation is increasing the pace of decision-making and influencing the direction of the
assistance. Around 90 percent of these consist of physical infrastructure (such as roads,
bridges, irrigation canals). Thus, the actual number of beneficiaries extends far beyond
the membership of the POs. In Bulacan, for example, SAMAKA has been able to bring its
pineapple production to the market using the barangay road it lobbied for.

Table 5
Type and Value of Resources
generated by POs in 2004-2006
Type of Resources Value
Generated (in PhP)
   

Agriculture 48,000.00

Infrastructure 20,210,000.00
Small and Medium Business
50,000.00
Support
Education 984,200.00

Social Services 25,000.00

Capacity Building 114,000.00

Total 21,431,200.00

Lobbying and vigilance proved to be successful strategies for the POs since they
were able to get funding support for their communities. Even residents who are not
members of any organization benefited from their efforts. As a result, the POs generated
much goodwill in their communities. Most of these resources benefited Zambales and
Pampanga and were used to build infrastructure – farm-to-market roads, water supply
systems and school improvements.
Table 6
Resources Generated by POs
By province, January to June 2007
Value of
Province Resources Main bulk of resources
(In PhP)
Farm to market road , school
Zambales 1,889,550.00
improvements
 Pampanga 1,050,000.00 Water Supply, Farm-to-market road
Non-formal education (supplies, learning
Aurora 85,000.00
center)
Agricultural production support, inputs,
Palawan 582,000.00
supplies, trainings
Post harvest facility, infra-support,
Nueva Ecija 259,400.00
sanitation facilities
Bulacan 200,000.00 Livelihood project, commercial store

Total 4,065,950.00

IV. PDI Experiences in Partnership Arrangement with the Local Government

The following case studies attempt to capture the existing condition in local governance
participation of PDI in its critical collaboration with the LGUs in its areas of operation.

The cases presented were based on the experiences of PDI and is used as reference
to illustrate possible areas and preconditions where cooperation with the Local
Government Unit is possible. It also serves as a take off point to define the requisites
in partnerships, including the facilitating and constraining factors in local governance
participation. Emerging insights and lessons are provided.

a) The Land Resettlement Arrangement in Fort Magsaysay, Laur, Nueva Ecija

On July 10, 1990, a powerful earthquake, with a magnitude of 7.7, hit Central and
Northern Luzon killing hundreds and destroying millions of pesos worth of properties.
Relief and rehabilitation efforts focused mainly on the economic centers of the
affected provinces while the remote areas, which were also devastated, received very
little assistance.

The earthquake did not spare the small tribal village in Caranglan. The tremor created
wide cracks on the earth and caused massive erosion. The slightest rainfall dislodged
huge boulders which tumble down the mountains that surround the communities.
There have also deaths and unexplained illnesses among the people.

The three tribes of Kalanguyas, Ibaloys, and Kankan-eys, decided to look for another
land to settle on because of the continuing devastation around them. Some 110
families, accompanied by Sister Julia Gonzales, a nun of the Religious of the Good
Shepherd (RGS), requested the assistance of PDI to help them resettle. PDI had
identified a piece of land in Barangay San Isidro in 1991 as a possible resettlement
site.

PDI sought the assistance of the Department of Agrarian reform and the Provincial
Government of Nueva Ecija through Governor Edno Joson, to provide for the Igorot
farmer-victims lands to re-establish their way of life. A memorandum of agreement
was signed between PDI, DAR/DND (Department of National Defense) and the LGU.

The property is located in a portion of the Fort Magsaysay military reservation, in

Laur, Nueva Ecija. This was a pioneering initiative since it was the first time that a
military reservation covering 3,100 hectares was converted for agricultural purposes.
The DAR/DND provided each of the Igorot families with three hectares of agricultural
land. Through further negotiations, the Igorot earthquake victims and original farmer-
settlers were able to receive their land titles.

PDI negotiated with the government to provide electricity, a small water impounding
system and a complete road network for the new resettlement area. The labor
counterpart was provided by the Igorots, now organized as the Tribal Union for
Agricultural Development or TUNAD.

PDI, with assistance from NCOS, a Belgian funding agency, organized and established
POs in the area and provided for indigenous housing and the settlers’ much-needed
production assistance.

The former reservation is now composed of several thriving communities.

b) The Zambales Experience: Resettlement and Reconstruction – An

Integrated Response to the Problems Caused by the Mount Pinatubo
Eruption (LGU-NGO-PO partnership)

PDI adheres to the Genuine Asset reform (GAR) framework, which argues that
rural development and self-reliant communities can be achieved by the positive
combination of changes in land tenure and social and economic support services,
minus the influence of vested interests that impede progress. In this regard, PDI’s
main role is to encourage and support farmers, farm workers, women and indigenous
people who aspire to assert and protect their rights and who pursue their autonomous
goals in their communities.

In 1991, PDI was assisting the peasants of Central Luzon in developing a regional
development program. In the middle of the process, Mount Pinatubo erupted in June
1991, causing massive displacement of the affected population in Central Luzon,
especially in Zambales, Tarlac and Pampanga.

After the eruption, instead of producing the Central Luzon Development Plan, PDI
assessed the overall condition and analyzed the landscape and basic needs of
the peasants and indigenous communities. PDI developed the Resettlement and
Reconstruction Program for the displaced farmers and Aeta indigenous people.
Using agrarian reform as a core strategy, PDI responded with a resettlement program
for the disaster victims.

PDI negotiated with the provincial government through Governor Amor Deloso and
DAR to provide agricultural land and support services to the displaced people. The
program was different from other resettlement sites, mostly initiated by government
agencies, in that it provided home lots and agricultural lands to the victims. The
problem after the eruption was the total loss of the land and not merely the lack of
support services. The program responded according to these situations. Under the
program, DAR provided each family a 240-square meter homelot and a 1.3-hectare
farm lot from the government which allocated 429 hectares of land in Barangay
Bulawen, Salaza, Palauig, and Zambales.
 PDI and the farmer-victims were able to negotiate with the local government for
the parcellary mapping of the land, the establishment of a road network, and
electrification.

PDI, with assistance from EED, provided organization building and institutional
development and support services in the form of housing, establishment of a water
system, health service and food production assistance, which are necessary to sustain
the people through the long and arduous process of resettlement in a new place.

The program had already completed the resettlement phase. Sibol, the name given
by the people to their new home is now a new community.

As a monument to the success of the program, the resettlement community of Sibol

has now become a vibrant community with settlers owning the land they till. The
residents, including women, are now active participants in local governance led by
their organizations.

PDI has succeeded in this development intervention built upon an agrarian-based

model – a model agrarian reform community. PDI’s concept of the model agrarian
reform community was adopted by the Department of Agrarian Reform, which
called it the ARC Program. DAR adopted the concept of the model agrarian reform
community but revised the operational design. The ARC Program of DAR has brought
in billions of ODA funds to the department for the development of agrarian reform
areas. This led to the identification and formation of DAR-ARCs all over the country.

The success story has, in fact, been shared with the international community when
PDI was invited to participate in the World EXPO 2000 in Hannover, Germany. It
serves as an example of best practices on how to handle programs and projects in
the new millennium.

c) Sustainable Agriculture Project in Coron, Palawan: The LGU/DA-PDI-

Tagbanua PO Partnership

PDI’s Sustainable Agriculture (SusAg) program is a community development project

being implemented by PDI with the Tagbanuas in partnership with the municipal
government of Coron and the municipal agricultural office. The goal of the sustainable
agriculture project is to increase the income of the Tagbanuas through sustainable
agricultural practices. The challenge to PDI is to develop and impart practical and
cost-efficient farming practices to the Tagbanuas.

The SusAg program is focused on Coron, Palawan. Through this project, the Tagbanuas
worked with PDI and an agriculturist of the Municipal government to learn and promote
sustainable agricultural practices. The initial involvement has borne fruit with more
farmers becoming interested in SusAg. The municipal agriculturist provided the technical
expertise while PDI provided institutional capacity building and the need support
services. The demo farms and technical assistance provided helped considerably in
spreading the word about the benefits of Sustainable Agriculture. (See Table 7)

Continued coordination with the Office of the Provincial Agriculturist (OPA), Office
of the Municipal Agriculturist (OMA) and the local government units (LGUs),
coupled with the organizing efforts of the community members have proven
effective in promoting sustainable agriculture in the rural areas. In fact, the
Organic Vegetable Projects which PDI adapted in the farming communities are
now being extended to the public elementary schools in Coron through Vegetable
Gardening classes.

Table 7
Sustainable Agriculture
Coron, Palawan
TECHNOLOGIES TRANSFERRED
January to June 2007
I. Agricultural Production
1. Rice Production
2. Integrated Pest Management (IPM)
3. Sloping Agriculture Land Technology (SALT)
4. Bio Intensive Gardening (BIG)
II. Organic Fertilizer Making
1. Composting
2. Compost Fungus Activator (CFA)
3. Carbonized Rice Hull making
4. Fermented Fruit Juice (FFJ)
5. Fermented Plant Juice (FPJ)
III. Livestock and Aquaculture
1. Swine Raising
2. Seaweeds Propagation
3. Seganid Monitoring and Management
IV. Demos
1. Farmer Field School
2. Rice Varietal Demo-farm
3. Vegetable Demo-farm

In collaboration with the Department of Agriculture of Puerto Princesa and the

Municipal Agriculture Office, simultaneous trainings on Organic Vegetable Production
were conducted.

PDI is also working with the Regional Fisheries Training Center of the Bureau of
Fisheries & Aquatic Resources for trainings on Seaweeds Farming and Nursery
Management to enhance the skills of the Tagbanuas in seaweed production. PDI has
been providing seaweed production assistance to the Tagbanuas.

The partnership program of PDI with the Municipality of Coron has expanded with
a new arrangement in the agricultural development program under the Medium
Term Development Program of the Municipality involving an annual investment
fund of PhP4.4 million for 2007 alone. This amount has been pledged by the
Mayor to the peasants and Tagbanuas in a memorandum of agreement signed
in February 2007. The adjacent municipality of Busuanga, also in Palawan, has
forged a partnership agreement with PDI similar to the program of Coron, also in
2007.
d) Partnership Arrangement in the Non Formal Education

PDI implements a Non-Formal Education program in the provinces of Aurora, Bataan,

Palawan and Zambales. The Program targets the out-of-school youth and illiterate
adults of the Dumagat, Aeta and Tagbanua tribes.

The NFE responds to the same compelling problems of marginalization of IP

communities where education is a lost opportunity. The right to education has
taken a new light with the acquisition of ancestral domain rights that require
adequate knowledge and skills in protecting and developing vast tracks of
the uplands. NFE has become more relevant at the current stage where IP
communities need to develop, protect and strengthen ownership of their ancestral
domains.

Indigenous people want to rejuvenate the basic elements of their learning

systems, while they learn new ideas and skills to survive in their rapidly changing
environment. Indigenous people also want to learn modern sciences, but in the
context of their own culture and in their own terms and according to their own
pace.

Indigenous peoples want education in their own languages, in a manner appropriate

to their cultural methods of teaching and learning. They demand their right to speak
their own language, along or with the practice of their indigenous education, since
language cannot be divorced from the struggle for self-determination and ancestral
domain.

Thus, in supporting the Alternative Learning System, PDI is emphatic that

assistance must put premium on addressing the learning needs of the IP
community. This enabling clause is crucial to secure a planned integration of the
local practices. Given this thrust, PDI, in effect, also seeks to re-orient and sharpen
the Alternative Learning System to become one that is truly situation-based and
action-oriented.

NFE or the Alternative Learning Systems (ALS) involves the acquisition of knowledge
even outside the school. It is aimed at attaining specific learning objectives for the
IPs. For the out-of-school youth and illiterate adults, NFE includes a functional literacy
program for the non-literate and semi-literate and integrates basic literacy with
livelihood skills training.

The non-formal education program being implemented by PDI addresses the

necessary learning competencies of formal school curricula. This is carried
out in coordination with municipal governments and the district offices of the
Department of Education. This assistance seeks to assure the basic learning and
capacity building needs of out-of-school youths and adults. The courses offered
are namely:

Level I – Offered to those with no literacy skills; comparable to grades I and II.
Level II – Offered to semi-literates; reinforces basic reading, writing and math skills,
similar to Grades III and IV.
Level III-V – Flexible competency exercises, designed for functional literates.
Level III – Equivalent to Grades V and VI.
Level IV – For adequately functional literates; comparable to 1st and 2nd years of
secondary school
Level V – Autonomous Learning Level, equivalent to 3rd and 4th year of secondary
school.

ALS is a parallel learning system that provides a viable alternative to the existing
formal education curriculum. It emphasizes both formal and informal sources of
learning. Its course of study covers the following areas: communication skills,
critical thinking and problem solving, sustainable use of resources, development
of a sense of self and community and expansion of the student’s vision of the
world.

To implement the NFE program, PDI, the Local Government Unit and the
Department of Education signed a Memorandum of Agreement and mobilized
parateachers. The MOA provides for the form and conditions of the NFE program.
The MOA also spells out the role and responsibilities of all parties concerned.
PDI assumes responsibility over the project’s execution in collaboration with the
NFE coordinator assigned by the DepEd. The NFE coordinator undertakes field
visitation and is responsible for the supervision and delivery of required technical
know-how. PDI monitors and evaluates the classes. DepEd takes care of the
venue and administration. Material development is the responsibility of both PDI
and DepEd.

The curriculum and material development for the NFE Program involves the design
and production of at least 29 modules for 150 hours of sessions for each competency
level. Indigenous knowledge systems are used and IP traditions, culture and values
are taken into consideration in the implementation. Each module consists of a
teacher’s manual and session guide.

The PDI Area Coordinator and the NFE Coordinator meet frequently to discuss
implementation issues and formulate remedial measures. They also refine and
calibrate existing NFE curricula to be responsive to the actual situation of the IPs and
the expressed needs of the NFE students.

NFE is conducted in coordination with the Local Government Units in the area and the
District Offices of the Department of Education through its ALS.

In 2006, the Program handled 537 learners (see Table 9). Of this total, 368 or 68
percent graduated (see Table 10). More females (239) graduated than males (129)
(see Table 11). The Dumagats of Aurora province produced the best percentage of
learners who graduated (74 percent). Some learners do not graduate because of
economic reasons, such as when the family has to move to where the parents can
earn a livelihood. For the Tagbanua fisher folk, this means following the fish that
move around the waters depending on seasons and tides. For the Aetas, this means
going to places where there is farm work to be done or finding new areas in the
mountains that can be cleared for kaingin (slash-and-burn-farming). And where the
father goes to earn a livelihood, the whole family follows.

For 2007, PDI’s entire Non-Formal Education program will teach 539 learners.
 Table 9
PDI Non Formal Education Learners
2004-2007
Ethnic
Location Partner 2004 2005 2006 2007
Group

Dept. of Educ. District of

Aurora Dumagat Dingalan, Local Gov’t. Unit 112 124 70
of Dingalan

Dept. of Education District

Bataan Aeta of Morong, 124 35 16 15
Local Gov’t. Unit of Morong

Dept. of Education District

Palawan Tagbanua of Coron, 184 231 349 230
Local Gov’t. Unit of Coron

Dept. of Education District

Zambales Aeta of Botolan, 60 35 48 224
Local Gov’t. Unit of Botolan

TOTAL 368 413 537 539

Table 10
PDI Non-Formal Education Graduates
By Literacy Level
2006-2007

Level Level Level Level Level Level

Province
0 I II III IV V
92
Aurora 92
11
Bataan 2 2 7
228
Palawan 163 30 35
37
Zambales 20 5 6 6
168
TOTAL 20 130 43 7 368

Table 11
PDI Non-Formal Education Graduates
By Gender
2006-2007
Province Males Females Total
31
Aurora 61 92
2
Bataan 9 11
81
Palawan 147 228
15
Zambales 22 37
TOTAL 129 239 368

Partners in Non-Formal Education

PDI and the Department of Education trained parateachers to implement the NFE
Program. Parateachers are not the usual public school teachers who wait for the
students to enroll and then teach in classrooms. Parateachers seek out-of-school
youth and adults in the indigenous communities and among poor peasants in
 remote and mountainous barangays, conducting surveys to determine the size
and profile of their potential students. They also look for places where they can
hold classes. If there are no suitable sites, they hold classes under the trees, as in
some Aeta communities in Zambales and Aurora provinces. Parateachers also have
to adjust the schedule of classes according to the farming and fishing activities
of the tribe. Some parateachers hold classes on a Sunday if it happens to be the
community’s free day.

At present, PDI employs 23 parateachers. Most of them come from the same tribe as
the students to facilitate acceptance and integration.

The NFE Program has been helpful in improving literacy among the Aetas,
Tagbanuas and Dumagats. In October 2005, the program was awarded 4th place by
the Department of Education in its Regional Search for Most Outstanding Literacy
Program. It has also been awarded Certificates of Recognition by the Department
of Education’s Division Offices in Coron in Palawan, Morong in Bataan, Botolan in
Zambales, and in Dingalan and San Luis in Aurora.

In 2007, at the initiative of the DepEd, the Zambales parateachers and our PDI
community organizers developed three instruction manuals and five modules for
teaching Aetas. The modules cover the following subject matters:

1. Ancestral Domain
2. Aeta Culture and Traditions
3. Livelihood Activities
4. Cleanliness and Personal Hygiene

The modules are pioneering efforts in teaching Indigenous Peoples. They are written
in Sambal, the language of the Aetas. They integrate the Aeta’s culture, traditions
and values in teaching Reading, Writing and Arithmetic. Its workbooks are illustrated
with drawings of Aetas in various everyday activities.

The modules have been cited by the Department of Education’s Bureau of Alternative
Learning Systems because of its sensitivity and adherence to the Aeta’s cultural
heritage. As a result, the lessons are now included in the Department of Education’s
teaching modules for Aetas.

e) The Bulacan Experience: Representation in the City Development Council

provided impact to the communities

The PDI and the farmer representatives of San Jose del Monte, Bulacan, were able
to negotiate and succeeded in vying for seats in the City Development Council. They
were able to participate in the planning for the fiscal year, particularly in allocating
the financial resources in the local agricultural sector. Farmer representatives
along with PDI were able to influence the Council to increase the total annual
budget allocation for the agricultural sector from 17% to 20.5%, an increase of
3.5%. Previously the agricultural sector only received PhP147,000 from the City
Agriculture Office. This has now been increased to PhP152,145.00 worth of support
services.
The farmer representatives of the POs, with guidance from PDI, were also successful in
pushing for the City Planning and Development Council to pass a Comprehensive Land
Use Plan (CLUP) to protect the farmers and the agricultural sector from rampant illegal
conversion in San Jose del Monte, Bulacan. About 250 farmers lobbied city hall for the CLUP.
The Land Use Plan designated the farmlands in San Jose as the food basket, the source of
vegetables and fruits, not only of Bulacan but also of the surrounding areas, especially Metro
Manila. The city of San Jose del Monte has thus developed a clear Land Use Plan.

During the last three years (2004-2006) SAMAKA, the PO of Bulacan, was able to generate
PhP1.84 million worth of resources from the city government through the City Development
Council and the City Agriculture Office. These include PhP800,000 for a barangay road that
benefit 400 families, a PhP1 million water impounding project that benefit 150 families and
PhP48,000 in capital assistance for the production of Red Lady papaya.

f) Support for Indigenous Peoples Ancestral Domain Rights

The right of the IPs to their ancestral land is the basic tenet of the Indigenous
People’s Rights Act. The IPs’ claim-making over their ancestral domain must be
vigorously pursued in the halls of justice.

It is the responsibility of the government, specifically the National Commission on

Indigenous People (NCIP) and the Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
to provide the ancestral land titles to the indigenous people. Some gains have
been achieved in the distribution of the ancestral domain title by the NCIP since its
enactment of the IPRA law in 1997. The right to ancestral domain of the indigenous
people as a social justice issue should not be left in the hands of the government
officials, most of whom represent the landowning class who also wield economic power.
Without pressure from POs and NGOs, the ancestral domain claims of the indigenous
people would not be heard. The IPs lack of education, due largely to their poverty, has
left them helpless in the face of such government officials. PDI’s negotiation strategy
has laid the foundation that assists the IPs in their struggle for their lands.

IPRA depends heavily on the quality of civil society participation and on social
consensus. There is evidence that government-led IPRA implementation with the
top-down approach and narrow bureaucratic execution fails to provide the ancestral
domain titles of the indigenous people.

With regard to support for the IP’s right to their ancestral domains, PDI was able to cause for
the processing of 34,973 hectares of ancestral domain lands to 3,324 members of the Aeta
IP communities in Pampanga, Bataan and Zambales (see Table 12). The biggest ancestral
domain grant being processed consists of 22,400 hectares located in Botolan, Zambales.

Table 12
Ancestral Domain Lands Processed
for Indigenous Communities

Location Size (in Hectares) Number of Beneficiaries

Florida Blanca, Pampanga 8,218 1,424
Hermosa, Bataan 4,355 700
Botolan, Zambales 22,400 1,200
Total 34,973 3,324
PDI’s intervention in the IP arena is rooted in its agrarian reform advocacy. It
has discovered that DAR had insensitively sought to treat IPs as agrarian reform
beneficiaries and not IPs with prior rights to their ancestral domains. The resulting
bureaucratic tangle between the NCIP, DAR, the DENR and local government units
exacerbated the bottlenecks in processing ancestral domain claims. PDI stepped in to
clear this anomaly.

The NCIP is perceived to be one of the weakest national agencies of government in

terms of resources and capacities to enforce its mandate. Delays in processing of
CADC/CADT application are a common occurrence due to lack of resources and field
personnel, inadequate surveying capacity or pure bureaucratic inefficiency. This is
not to mention the fact that NCIP actions are vulnerable to legal and bureaucratic
contestations by the DAR, DENR or LGUs. LGUs, for example, generally resent the
reduction of their territories with the issuance of CADCs/CADTs that are under the
mandate of the NCIP. Similarly, for the DENR, CADT/CADC issuances entail additional
processes and procedures in the approval of mining and commercial timber license
applications.

Having established its influence at the central stage of national line agencies, PDI
was able to unclog the bottlenecks by simultaneously negotiating with the LGUs
to issue permits for the recognition of the ancestral claims and allow the survey of
the ancestral domain. It has moved DAR to honor the ancestral domain lands and
prompted the NCIP to process the ancestral domain titles. Thus, in Zambales where
the CADC claim has been sitting at the NCIP since 1997, PDI was able to unclog the
processes and influence the grant of ownership within two years.

The above, however, resulted not only from PDI’s effective engagement with
government agencies and reform-minded officials. Internally, it involved painstaking
work on fundamental requisites that the IPs were not able to prepare for lack of
attention from the NCIP. The PDI staff had to strengthen the IP claims by setting
certain requirements such as genealogies and technical specifications of the lands
being claimed (e.g. through land survey and maps) as well as preparing the IP
organizations to assume ownership of their domains. The same also indicates the
versatility of PDI staff in responding to community needs.

Implications

The recognition of 34,973 hectares as ancestral domain land is momentous for the
Aetas of Zambales, Pampanga and Bataan. After years of divestment (e.g. the
utilization of their ancestral domains as U.S. Military Bases in Clark and Subic),
marginalization and deprivation and displacement (due to the Mount Pinatubo
eruption), they have re-acquired control and ownership over their ancestral domains.
The same is also momentous for the fact that most ancestral domains in the country
are now at risk due to the Supreme Court’s December 2004 ruling that affirmed the
constitutionality of the Mining Act of 1995. It reversed its January 2004 decision
declaring that some provisions of the Mining Act and its implementing rules and
regulations (IRR) were unconstitutional.

That was the year when Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s government started to

aggressively promoted mining as a new major arena for foreign investments. In
January 2004, GMA signed Executive Order 270, otherwise known as the National
Policy Agenda on Revitalizing Mining in the Philippines. This formed the basis of the
formulation of the Mineral Action Plan that practically opens up 70 percent of national
territory to mining investments.

The Mineral Action Plan also shows how the government is willing to sacrifice the
interests and rights of IPs over their ancestral domains. The plan suggests that the
government is willing to reduce NCIP certification processes by 27 percent and to
hasten the issuance of Environment Clearance Certificate (ECC) if only to induce
foreigners to invest in mining.

The threats to IP ancestral domains do not only come from mining. In fact, they are
already reeling from extreme natural resource degradation. According to the DENR,
97 percent of the country’s forests has been logged for timber and that only 18
percent of the Philippines has forest cover. As of 2001, only 1 million hectares (of the
country’s 30 million hectares) is covered with primary forests.

PDI’s unprecedented success in ancestral domain advocacy in Central Luzon has come
under extreme adversity both at the level of policy changes at the national level and
at the operational level where PDI has to deal with bureaucratic barriers put up by
local governments and the NCIP.

V. Facilitating and Constraining Factors in Local Governance Participation

Facilitating Factors and Requisites in the Partnership Arrangement:

The partnership arrangement between the PDI and the LGU has been successful
because of the following reasons:

• Throughout its 17 years in development work, PDI has embraced its

vision – “to build self-reliant communities through people’s initiatives”
– by developing effective personnel and PO leaders who commit
themselves to tackling challenges, help their community articulate their
problems and needs, and build the commitments and wherewithal to
improve the lives of people in the community. Organization building
and leadership development are at the heart of PDI’s work to improve
communities and to create sustainable development.

• The establishment of people’s organizations in the areas of operation

before any engagement with the government is imperative because it
provides a vital link to the success of the undertaking. The voices of the
people are heard and their needs shape the form of engagement with
the local government units. Projects instituted in partnership with the
LGU are based on the people’s needs.

• The Local Government Code of 1991 provides for and guarantees

people’s participation in local special bodies, development planning and
budgeting, and the system of direct accountability provisions of local
government officials. This increases the involvement of POs and NGOs.
 The practice of local governance at the grassroots level is slowly veering
away from the traditional mode of partnership and is now including the
POs and NGOs.

• It is important that the LGU knows that PDI has grassroots constituents.

• PDI was able to establish itself in the areas of operation. The LGUs
respect the capacity and skill of PDI in development work and trust PDI’s
capacity and structure.

• PDI’s knowledge of negotiations is a key factor in presenting the agenda

of the POs to the LGU and in securing the commitment of the LGUs and
work with government bureaucratic processes. PDI was able to leverage its
expertise and skills to bargain with local government units in order to oblige
them to pledge their counterpart in any activity done with the government.

• The LGUs see the relationship as mutually beneficial and enables

multilateral exchanges of resources, knowledge and skills. It is mutually
beneficial because it defines the contribution of each party in terms of
funds, available skills, and work. The cooperation is also clear cut in terms
of the skills of each party to ensure the success of the project undertaking.
Furthermore, the cooperation helps each party to fulfill what is mandated in
the program of work (e.g. the survey and parcellary mapping of the land).
Each party gives contributions to fulfill its obligation.

• There are clear parameters for partnership, meaning the terms of reference
were the product of consultations among all parties concerned (LGU-
PDI-PO). Each party knows its role and responsibility in the partnership
arrangement, and agrees on the goals and strategies and understands the
limitations and possibilities of each other’s systems and processes.

• Partnership has concrete and immediate effects because PDI has always
insisted on undertaking activities based on specific terms of reference
and only after guidelines have been promulgated and clarified. The
partnership arrangement has brought in tangible outputs (like the
establishment of a completely new barangay for the peasant-victims of
Mount Pinatubo and the provision of support services). The program of
work discussed is complete based on the specific time frame. The aims
of the project were accomplished on time and the program has direct
benefit to the communities.

• Strong monitoring. PDI, together with the POs closely monitor project
implementation.

Constraining Factors in the Partnership Arrangement:

The following serve as constraining factors in the LGU-PDI relationship.

• Limitations in funding. LGU budgets do not reflect local needs. It is not

unusual that LGUs lack budget for implementing the decentralized programs
 of the government. Decentralization without the required financial resources
or the capacity to generate local revenues hinder the effective delivery of
services, much more so the people’s participation in any undertaking.

• Many LGUs are weak in terms of capacity to deliver basic services,

generating revenues, fiscal administration and translating policies and
procedures into actions.

• Bureaucratic bottlenecks and procedures in the LGU hamper program

implementation.

• National policies should be upheld and not contradicted, instead be

supported by the LGUs

• Lack of communication and coordination among national and local actors

lead to confusion and misunderstanding in the interpretation of laws
and ordinances, and in the implementation of rules and procedures,
administrative orders and memoranda.

• LGU devolved agencies like the DENR do not deliver the requirement
specified in the terms of agreement.

• NGOs and LGUs distrust of each other due to previous experiences.

Attitudinal biases both among LGU and NGO representatives.

• NGO is responsive to the needs of the communities while the LGU is

reactive

VI. Emerging Insights and Lessons in Critical Collaborative Undertakings with

Local Governments:

The requisite for a successful LGU-NGO partnership is openness, trust, mutual

respect, and a common goal of achieving an improved quality of life for the people in
the community.

Furthermore, based on PDI’s experiences in critical collaborative undertakings with

the local government unit and even with the national government, the following
salient points are key factors in building a partnership:

1. Community development requires working within the context of the community’s

culturally instituted structure to ensure functional relevance and acceptability.

2. Humility amongst the key persons involved in the partnership arrangement is an

asset. Accepting shortcomings and limitations while knowing our areas of strength
make us humble. It also defines our terms of engagement in the partnership.

3. A recognition of the distinct competencies of the LGU and the PDI. Before any
partnership can ensue, both parties should recognize each other’s inherent capacities
and capabilities.
4. The acceptance of the LGU and the PDI as partners in development with a well
defined written agreement in any undertaking. A written agreement protects the
project partner from the dislocations caused by replacement of government officials.

5. Implementing guidelines are important. It is not advisable to undertake a contract

or project before the guidelines are issued.

6. Personalities in government make a lot of difference in program implementation.

Any change in program personnel affects project implementation.

7. Goals of development, both quantitative and qualitative, can only be pursued

and realized if partners are willing to make substantive contributions and share
commensurate responsibility in an undertaking and are conscious of organizational
factors affecting the NGO and LGU sectors.

8. Teamwork is important in any joint undertaking. LGUs and NGOs can work together
as long as roles and functions are clarified. Nevertheless, the NGO, as a catalyst,
should push for and closely coordinate the project. Attitudinal biases among the LGUs
and NGOs can be overcome after some time of working together.

9. The trust inherent between the inter-acting parties is very important in LGU-NGO
partnership. When one starts to feel that the other is just taking advantage of the
partnership for its own self-interest, then the collaboration starts to break down.

10. The community’s culturally instituted structures to ensure functional relevance

and acceptability must be respected.

In order to sustain the LGU-NGO/PO partnership in local governance, the following

need to be address:

1. The need for an information and education program on the NGOs and LGUs. There
is a need for an information and education program within the LGUs that will help
various line agencies realize a common and clear operational definition of NGOs
that will allow them to fully grasp the concrete importance of the NGOs based
on their principles, approaches, methods of work and operation. On the other
hand, NGOs lack basic information on available programs and services offered by
government agencies, thereby depend only on their personal relationship with
officials in government to be able to work together. If such remains the case, there
will be no systematic dissemination by LGUs of their program of work, nor will
there be an efficient culling of information by the NGO of LGU work.

2. Institutionalization of systems and procedures that are workable and acceptable

to both the LGU and the NGO/PO. There are basic differences in the systems and
procedures that hinder or enhance LGU-NGO/PO partnerships. This has been
overcome partly by the personal relationships among personalities within potential
LGU-NGO/PO partners. The importance of personal ties has been recognized in
forging desired modes of collaboration. However, more can be done to improve
LGU-NGO relationships. Mutual respect between the concerned parties needs to
be developed. There is also a need for a clear-cut policy on collaboration, and a
 translation of the personal relationship into a formal and concrete system and
procedure that is workable and acceptable to both parties. Therefore, in order
to have a meaningful relationship, a common policy, systems and procedures
covering the tie-up should be drawn up.

3. A recognition of the invaluable assistance of the funding institutions in pursuing

development work, even as we realize that the requirements accompanying their
donations strongly shape actual program implementation.

The possible fields of critical collaboration could be land acquisition and distribution,
extension services, training and education, legislation, manpower development and
research. There may be possible areas of conflict, given the existing differences
in structure, systems, approaches and strategies between the LGU and the NGO.
However, these differences can be overcome through dialogues and consultations in
order to work out a jointly agreed framework for critical collaboration.