dancing into the bossom of the land

7/29/2019 Dancing Into the Bossom of the Land

1/24

1 | D a n c i n g i n t o t h e B o s o m o f t h e L a n d

Dancing into the Bosom of the Land:

The Cultural Construct of Social Development of the Ambala Aytas in Sitio AlibangBy Angelito B. Meneses

Abstract

In todays era of developmentalism and globalism, the Ambala Aytas still hold the pre-

colonial notion of a good life that is tied to the land. The cultural construction of social

development of the Ambala Aytas in Sitio Alibang which they named kahampatan is a reiteration

of the worldview that land is life.

When Mt. Pinatubo erupted in 1991, development interventions also exploded. Different

development agencies inundated the affected indigenous communities with various

development projects. On the one hand, these development efforts which were driven by the

sense of mission and best of intentions resulted to the assimilation of indigenous people to the

industrial, capitalist and modern living. They were also became target of mission works by

religious organizations that led to their Christianization. On the other hand, development

interventions failed to recognize the indigenous knowledge and spiritual base of development

since the development orientation is patterned from the western intervention philosophy, the

proverbialthe white mans burden.

This paper addresses the issue by engaging the Ambala Aytas to participate in the

process of indigenous research to determine their worldview of development with identity and

culture. The study makes use of the fieldwork-immersion method and other participatory

research approaches. Since development is also about power, the Ambala Aytas were asked to

identify and make an assessment on the different development interventions and projects

provided to them since the Mt. Pinatubo eruption and evaluated them along side with their

notion of a good life they called kahampatan.

In determining the most significant development that occurred in their community, the

Ambala Aytas saw the use of modern technologies like electricity (light) as the most significant. It

is because they considered light as an instrument to come together to socialize and strengthen

their cooperation. The implications of this study especially on community development and social

work practice are enumerated and discussed. It offers a decolonizing approach to development

interventions taking into account the uniqueness of the indigenous communities. The study

suggests and promotes decolonizing methodologies and approaches in working with indigenous

communities.


2/24


Introduction

Take up the White Man's burden--

Send forth the best ye breed--

Go, bind your sons to exile

To serve your captives' need

That above stanza from the poem The White Mans Burden by Rudyard Kipling which was

published in McClures Magazine in 1899, whose subtitle is: The United States and the Philippine

Islands had made a case for the justification of the spread of western civilization. For Frank

(2008), he refers to the White Mans Burden as the perceived duty of Americans and

Europeans to spread their culture onto the other people of the earth.

This intervention philosophy of the Eurocentric culture continues up to this time.

Indigenous peoples have been struggling to liberate themselves from that intervention

philosophy of colonialism implied in that literary work. For instance the Grand Council of

American Indians in 1927 succinctly articulated:

"The white people who are trying to make us over into their image, they want us to be what

they call assimilated, bringing the Indians into the mainstream and destroying our own way

of life and our own cultural patterns. They believe we should be contented like those whose

concept of happiness is materialistic and greedy, which is very different from our way. We

want freedom from the white man rather than to be integrated. We don't want any part of

the establishment; we want to be free to raise our children in our religion, in our ways, to be

able to hunt and fish and to live in peace. We don't want power, we don't want to be

congressmen, bankers; we want to be ourselves. We want to have our heritage, because we

are the owners of this land and because we belong here. The white man says there is

freedom and justice for all. We have had "freedom and justice," and that is why we have

been almost exterminated. We shall not forget this."

The 2009 film Avatar illustrates how development interventions into the indigenous

communities, like education that will help them develop like humans have undermined the life

ways of indigenous people. Chambers (1997) reiterated the same concept in Whose Reality


3/24


Counts? as he quotes Paulo Freire saying: It appears that the act of extension, in whatever

sector it takes place, means that those carrying it out need to go to another part of the world to

normalize it, according to their way of viewing reality: to make it resemble their world.

In the Philippines like in many parts of the world, indigenous peoples suffer from a history

of aggressions brought about by the dominant development that has further pushed them on

the peripheries of the larger society in which they exist. As a result, their distinct cultures were

undermined and their spiritualities and values were diluted as they are being assimilated into

the mainstream development model.

Development does not only cause damages to the land, territories and resources- the very

source of life of the indigenous people but also altered their collective consciousness andcherished values as Corpus (2010) articulated:

These values include equity, reciprocity, solidarity, harmony between us and nature,

collectivity and conservation of natural wealth for the seventh generation, among others.

Our indigenous systems or paths of these and our traditional livelihoods still exist because

we actively or passively resisted development, modernity and the violation of our human

rights. We adapted to the changes which came into our communities and accommodated

some aspects of modernity. But this does not mean that we have totally abandoned our

systems, worldviews and values. Some of our perspectives and values resonate with the

essence of the human rights-based approach to development and the ecosystems approach,

thus we are partial to the use of these framework to promote self-determined development.

We can see, according to Corpus (2010) that development, progress and modernity are

issues indigenous peoples tackle head-on in struggles for survival, identities, basic human rights

and fundamental freedoms. Likewise Robbins (2010) notes that it is widely acknowledged that

the history of development is littered with astounding errors born of the very best of intentions.

Statement of the Problem

One of the highlights of the Focus Group discussion between UNDP and representatives of

the indigenous peoples expert group on development with culture and identity held in New

York in 2010 states that the question on human development and the review of 20 years can be

turned around to reflect about the losses on: how much has been lost due to development


4/24


projects?; how much land has been lost?; how many languages have disappeared?; how many

forests have been destroyed and how much natural resources depleted (UNDP,2010)?

It means that there has been a growing consciousness among the indigenous people on

the effects of development introduced to them. Corpus (2010) argues that from colonization to

the present, indigenous peoples in various parts of the world have struggled against the

dominant development paradigm and the policies and projects enforced to pursue it. The

awareness has led the indigenous people to devise strategies for ending colonial pattern. With

that situation in mind, this study has looked into the worldview of the Ambala Aytas on

development with identity and culture. Worldview means as cognitive, perceptual, and affective

maps that people continuously use to make sense of the social landscape and to find their ways

to whatever goals they seek. Thus, this study is about the Ambala Aytas worldview ofdevelopment towards decolonizing development interventions among the indigenous people. It

sought to answer the following questions:

1. What is the Ambala Ayta notion of development with identity and culture?2. What development interventions were conducted for the Ambala Aytas since the

eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in 1991 up to the present?

3. How do they view about the outcomes of these development interventions in relationto the indigenous concept of development with identity and culture?

4. What are the most significant developments to have happened in their community inline with their view of development?

Research Objectives

Another highlight of the focus group discussion (2010) reiterates the importance of

putting into the center of any discourses the indigenous worldviews especially if these have

something to do with their life as indigenous people. In the document they assert their right to

self-determination by way of self- definition:

From an indigenous perspective, human development should be defined by indigenous

peoples, from indigenous peoples, and for indigenous peoples. This is the essence of self-

determination, its collective dimension and the recognition as peoples by the UN General

Assembly


5/24


This study is anchored on that above assertion and therefore seeks to contribute to the

process of centering (Smith, 1999) the Ambala Aytas worldview of development with identity

and culture. Specifically it sought to:

1. Describe the Ambala Ayta notion of development with identity and culture.2. Identify the different development interventions brought in to their community since

the Mt. Pinatubo eruption in 1991 up to the present and examine the outcomes of

these development interventions in relation to the indigenous concept of development

with identity and culture.

3. Determine the most significant development to have occurred in their community inrelation to their view of development.

4.

Develop a decolonizing development framework that is based on the Ambala Aytasworldviews.

Research Methodology

The research methodologies of this study were greatly influenced by the idea put forward by Smith

(2011) on decolonizing the methodologies of research projects being conducted in the indigenous

communities. According to Smith decolonizing methodologies is not so much with the actual technique of

selecting a method but much more with the context in which research problems are conceptualized and

designed, and with the implications of research for its participants and their communities (Smith, 2011).

The process of decolonization is about centering the indigenous peoples concepts and

worldviews and coming to know and understand theory and research from their own

perspectives and for their own purposes. The selection of methodologies in this study is also based in

the context of indigenous research. Indigenous research as it differs from research on, with and about

indigenous peoples means research done by scholars who develop indigenous theorizing, identify

and use indigenous concepts, and build their projects on an indigenous research paradigm

(Posanger, 2010).


6/24


The study focused on defining development with identity and culture among the Ambala Aytas and

on the analysis of development interventions being brought in to their community. Sitio Alibang, Subic,

Zambales was selected as a site of the study because of the intention of the Extension Service Center of the

College of Arts and Sciences of St. Josephs College of Quezon City to establish partnership with indigenous

communities. It is primarily chosen because the Ambala Aytas have been beneficiaries of the development

interventions of St. Francis Learning Center, Inc., which is managed by the SFIC sisters.

This research made use of several approaches in doing qualitative research to ensure the centering

of the indigenous peoples worldviews. The first approach is doingfieldwork-immersion. Fieldwork and

immersion go hand in hand with doing indigenous research. Yin (2012) noted that working in the field

requires establishing and maintaining genuine relationships with other people and being able to converse

comfortably with them. The fieldwork first approach was done for the purpose of definingthe researchproblems. The researcher started the immersing himself with the Aytas of Sitio Alibang since 2012. During

the fieldwork-immersion, relevant bits of information gathered from the qualitative interview were

recorded in the researchers field notes, sketches and drawings and in a Sony digital voice recorder.

The second approach is qualitative interviews. Qualitative interviews are conversations in which a

researcher gently guides a conversational partner in an extended discussion. The researcher elicits depth

and details about the research topic by following up on answers given by the interviewee during the

discussion. In qualitative interview the researcher learns from the people rather studying them. Thus the

researcher follows the hints provided by Yin in doing qualitative interviewing such as: 1. Speaking in modest

amount, 2. Being non-directive, 3. Staying neutral, 4. Maintaining rapport, 5. Using an interview protocol, 6.

Analyzing when interviewing (Yin, 2012). In qualitative interviews each conversation is unique, as the

researcher match the questions to what each interviewee knows and willing to share (Rubin and Rubin,

2005).

The third is the Focus Group interviewing. The groups are focused on two generations, the older

which is composed ofkalalakihan and kababaihan or adults and the kabataan or youth. In these focused

groups, the participatory analysis as capability approach (Sen, 2009) was also applied. The capability

approach in examining the different development interventions vis--vis development with

identity and culture determined by the indigenous people have elicited confidence on their part

to define what is and what is not development for them. Participatory analysis is a process of giving


7/24


the people the opportunity to see what is important to each member and enabling the community to draw

its own conclusions. For convenience, the researcher would like to propose the term Participatory

Interventions Analysis or PIA to provide specific name for the participatory analysis of the

capability approach. PIA is a systematic process that engages the indigenous people in an in-

depth assessment of development interventions offered, brought and conducted by non-

indigenous, they may be individuals, groups, organizations, agencies, institutions and

corporations to the indigenous communities. The overall aim of PIA is to assert the indigenous

peoples concept of development with identity and culture or self-determined development. PIA

is a qualitative way of analyzing development interventions which involves participation of the

indigenous people themselves. The analysis helps the indigenous people to understand

development processes, ideologies and methodologies and to articulate their own path to

development.

The PIA approach will then be supplemented with the use of a combination of data gathering

methods. The first method- a culture-sensitive tool for local people is the Participatory Rural Appraisalor

PRA. PRA is described as growing body of methods to enable local people to share, enhance, and analyze

their knowledge of life and the conditions to plan, act, monitor and evaluate (Kumar, 2002). The use of PRA

tools is meant to facilitate guided interaction (Calub, 2004) between the indigenous people and the

researcher and it requires a change in attitudes and behaviors between and among the participants. The

essence of PRA is changes and reversals of role, behavior, relationship and learning. Outsiders do not

dominate and lecture; they facilitate, sit down, listen and learn (Chambers, 2003). In the study, the

community will be asked to draw a map of different development interventions showing what types of

interventions, who provided the interventions, what are the methodologies and what are the outcomes.

The second method used is a modified Most Significant Change or MSC technique. The most

significant change (MSC) technique is a form of participatory monitoring and evaluation. It is

participatory because many project stakeholders are involved both in deciding the sorts of

change to be recorded and in analyzing the data (Davies and Dart, 2005). MSC is a process of

collecting significant change (SC) stories emanating from beneficiaries and then panels of

designated stakeholders or staff systematically select the most significant change story. In this

study the most significant development will be used. The participants tell their stories of most

significant development they consider to have happened in their community and then


8/24


collectively analyze using the identity and culture tool of analysis and select three most

significant and rank them according to most cherished development. The most significant

development must be linked to the indigenous people concept of self-determined development.

Since this study is a qualitative research, protocol was preferred over the classic research

instrument. Protocol according to Yin (2012) is a broad set of behaviors the researcher is to undertake,

rather than any tightly scripted interaction between the researcher and any source of evidence, such as field

participant.

For the analysis of data, the researcher followed the five phases of analysis of

qualitative data as presented by Yin (2012). Analysis means the process of breaking down

something into components parts, which can then be addressed. Analysis started by compilingand sorting field notes amassed from the researchers fieldwork, qualitative interviews of key

informants, focus group interviews and workshops. The data then were disassembled or broken

down into smaller fragments and assigning labels or codes. It was followed by using themes. The

themes were interpreted to create new narratives with accompanying tables and illustrations.

Then the researcher drew conclusions and implications from the entire study.

Discussions

The Notion of Development with Identity and Culture

The researcher has noted during fieldwork the term hana guminhawa as the local term

that describes the Ambala Aytas notion of development with identity and culture. The term then

was used as a springboard for discussion during the Focus Group Interviews (FGI). However, the

participants started to question the term hana guminhawa for its appropriateness to their

notion of development. The Ambala Aytas, after exchanges of opinions during the FGI almost

unanimously agreed that the right Ambala term to describe their notion of development is

Kahampatan.


9/24


It was observed during the discussion that the notion hana guminhawa is more related

to the individual or the clans aspiration of development while kahampatan is articulated as a

notion for the collective or the communitys development.

Kahampatan is an Ambala Ayta word which can be translated in Filipino as mabuting

buhayand in the English language as a good life. There is parallelism in the Ambala Ayta notion

of kahampatan to the notion of development with identity and culture among the indigenous

people in Latin America. For instance Cunningham (2010) mentioned sumak kawsayin Qhichwa,

suma qamaa in Aymara, sumak andereco in Guarani, laman laka in Miskitu and Buen Vivir

Bien in Spanish. These are summed up in the concept that living well does not merely refer to

per capita income or economic growth (Cunningham, 2010), which is almost exactly the same

concept of a good life for the Ambala Aytas.

It is articulated that kahampatan is not a result of a planned change or an envisioned

future but a series of phases showing the interlocking and interdependence of three elements

namely kasaganaan (abundance), kagalingan (well being), and kaginhawaan (Freedom). The

three elements are essential constituents of a good life, so kahampatan is further understood as

pagtuloy-tuloy (continuity) and pagpapatagal (sustainability). Continuity is linked with their

survival as people who are highly dependent on land and natural resources; and sustainability is

associated with their relationship with the source of their continuity. Thus the ways of life of the

Ambala Aytas like other indigenous peoples are rooted in the earth and their survival is rooted

to land since land is the primary source of resources.

Kahampatan can be illustrated by the use of an indigenous symbol of continuity and

sustainability like the pako (fern) (see figure 1). This symbol of a good life for Ambala Aytas

marks commonalities with other indigenous people symbols for instance that of the Mori of

New Zealand called the koru. The koru is a spiral shape based on the shape of a new unfurling

fern frond and symbolizing new life, growth, strength and peace.


10/24


The Three Fronds of Kahampatan

1. Kasaganaan as Abundance

It was observed from the descriptions and articulations of the Ambala Aytas that the

first frond to unfurl to have a good life is abundance. Interestingly, abundance for them refers to

as the source rather than the resource. The source is the land where it naturally produces the

forest and the forest becomes the lifeblood which provides the necessary resources for their

survival. For them, land guarantees kasaganaan which is a requisite for a good life. It reflects

what Macliing Dulag, a Kalinga pangat leader forcefully articulated the worldview that land is

sacred and land is life (Bennagen, 1998). As it was also observed by Shimizu (2001) he said that

the first step for the Aytas toward restoring their self-sufficient way of life with their ethnic

dignity and cultural heritage starts, by all means, with the secured land. For land to be the

producer of abundance the two notions about it as sacredand securedare to be sustained. For

abundance to unfold the indigenous culture should be affirmed and strengthened. For instance,

there is a need to sustain, in their consciousness as indigenous people, the worldview that land

is sacred to deter them from doing abusive and destructive activities that destroy the source. At

the same time, there is a need to secure their land from outside influences to maintain its

Figure 1. The sketch of pako as a symbol for kahampatan and as a decolonized development framework


11/24


primary purpose in providing their needs and sustenance. Cultural development should be

focused on the land since it has material, cultural and spiritual dimensions for the Ambala Aytas.

For them kasaganaan can be attained through the paggagasak (fixed cultivation) and

pangangalap (gathering). There are cultural meanings and dynamics attached to these.

Paggagasak does not only mean the productive work they employ on the land but it is a

symbolic expression of the relationships among them, and, between them and the land. For

instance, when asked about how they do the paggagasak, they explained Tulong tulong kami sa

paglilinis, halimbawa magpapagasak ako, tatawagin ko ang mga kasama ko para tulungan ako

sa paglilinis ng bahagi ng lupa. Walang bayad iyon, pakakainin ko lang sila kasi kung sila naman

ang may kailangan, tutulong din ako ng buong puso. (We help each other in the cleaning, for

example I want to have my swidden, I will call my comrades to help me clean parts of the land. Iwill not pay them; I will only serve them with food because the moment they are also in need, I

will also help them with all my heart.) Reciprocity and collectivity are the reinforced values in

paggagasak.

The pangangalap is the harvesting of wild products in the forest such as boho (type of

bamboo) cogon grass, orchids etcwhich are supplied naturally by land. Fascinatingly, they

recognize the role of other creatures in producing the resources such as the bees for honeys and

the birds for banana blossoms. For instance, they owe the birds a sense of gratitude for planting

wild bananas in the mountains. The birds greatly contribute to their livelihood. They explained it

more succinctly Ang mga maliliit na ibon ang natatanim ng mga saging. Kinakain nila iyong

bunga at itinatae nila yong buto, at iyong buto tumutubo kaya maraming saging sa bundok na

pinagkukunan namin ng puso (The little birds plant the bananas. They eat the fruits then poop

the seeds and the seeds grow that is why there are many bananas in the mountain where we

gather banana blossoms). As a reciprocal way to show their respect and gratitude, they do not

trap or harm these birds. However, they have expressed the need to educate their children so to

appreciate the symbiotic connection between them and the birds because the birds became a

fun target of some of the Ayta boys with their slingshots.


12/24


2. Kagalingan as Wellbeing

Kagalingan as the second frond of a good life centers on the processes of economic

development. The cultural development that is taking place in kasaganaan is meant to re-affirm

the indigenous worldviews on the source- the land. It is the same concept of resource

management articulated by the Tbolis that without land the culture will not survive (Awed,

2010). It is observed that kagalingan for the Ambala Ayta is all about the re-production and

management of resources the yields from the land. The stable and sustainable flow of

resources ensure their welfare such as food for daily life and surplus to sell to buy for other food

necessities like salt, coffee, sugar. The Ambala Ayta economic development is not geared

towards absorbing them into the cash and throw-away economies but on re-affirming

subsistence economy. Subsistence economy is best for the land (source) as a counterbalance tothe effects of over exploitation and consumption of resources. Kagalingan can be attained if the

kasaganaaan is well in place. Kagalingan is further conceptualized into four economic activities

namely, pagtatanim (planting) of different root crops, fruit bearing trees, pangangalap

(gathering) of wild crops such as pulot(honey) andpuso ng saging (banana blossoms) andpag-

aalaga ng hayop (animal husbandry) like kalabaw (water buffalo), kambing (goat), native

chickens and pigs, andpag-uuling (charcoal making).

Another interesting concept among the Ambala Aytas economic activities is their notion

of pag-iimpok (savings). Raising domesticated animals like goat, chicken, carabaos are in

themselves could be considered savings. According to them, during emergencies like in case of

illness that requires hospitalization, they can always withdraw the animals. They sell whatever

available raised animals to have cash to cover the hospitalization expenses.

The frond of kagalingan in their notion of kahampatan can be said to have taking place

when their economic activities are sustained and remained consistent to their cultural ways that

will bring wellbeing described as happiness, peace of mind and prosperity.

Table 1 shows the economic-related activities of the Ambala Aytas from gathering,

planting, animal raising, manufacturing, and the products they buy from the market. According

to them, if only these needs become sustainably available in their community, then the general


13/24


wellbeing characterized by contented state of being happy, healthy and prosperous will be

attained.

Gathering Planting Animal Raising Manufacturing Products boughtfrom the market

Pulot

Puso ng saging

Boho

Kawayan

kugon

Isda

Taro

Ube

Talong

Kamoteng kahoy

Kamoteng baging

Papaya

Langka

Mangga

Kasoy

Kambing

Manok

Kalabaw

Uling salt

coffee

sugar

spices

cooking condiments

mantika, suka, patis

tinapay

bigas

3. Kaginhawaan as Freedom

Kaginhawaan as the third frond of kahampatan is social development characterized as

freedom. It was explicitly articulated by Opener Ayson: Para sa akin maginhawa ang buhay

kapag malaya kang nakakapaghanapbuhay, may kalinisan sa kapaligiran at nagkakaunawaan

kami dito (For me there is good life if you are free to work for livelihood; there is cleanliness in

the environment; and we understand each other here). Kaginhawaan reflects the state of

freedom where the emphasis is on both an individual and the social nature of humans. When an

individual promotes his or her own development properly he or she cannot help but promote

the development of the society to which he or she belong;, conversely, when a society develops

itself properly it cannot help but contribute to the development of the individuals who comprise

it (Montemayor,1980). And for the Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen (2000) this is development as

freedom -the ability to do and to be.

This part of the frond to complete the picture of kahampatan focuses on harmonious

relationship with fellow indigenous and non-indigenous people. Their concept of peace and

justice for instance reveals that the Ambala Aytas are peace loving and they value peaceful co-

existence. It has been noted that lowlanders have encroached their territories. Currently, 18

families of lowlanders have settled in Sentro ng Allibang. Sentro ng Alibang as the name

connotes means the center of the village and yet the lowlanders dominantly occupied the place.

Table 1. Economic-related activities of the Ambala Aytas


14/24


The reason why they allow this to happen, at first, was that the lowlanders have developed

friendship with them. And so out of friendship and pity (based on understanding the lowlanders

situation) they allow the lowlanders to build their houses inside their village until more and

more lowland families continue to arrive and settled in Sentro ng Alibang. The Aytas gave up the

area and moved to the other side of the mountain they called Alibang Bugaw which literally

means to drive away. They have been driven away from their own territory yet they maintain

peaceful relationship with the lowlanders. The processing of their claim of ancestral domain

made them aware of the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act or IPRA law and their rights as

indigenous people. Susan Cohig, the present chieftain, explained that they are not going to drive

the lowlanders out of their village but have warned them to stop from where they are and never

attempt to encroach on the ancestral lands. They made a similar decision of not taking back the

vast parcel of land which was taken by a lowlander for his mango and dragon fruits plantation. Itis because they aspire to havepakikipagkapwa tao (good human relation) and to live without

away(trouble), nagkakaisa (united) and nagkaka-unawaan (there is understanding).

Analysis of Development Interventions

The eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in 1991 had displaced the Aytas in Zambales. The ethnic

lifestyles were also affected. Followed by the eruption was the outbreak of development

interventions by individuals, groups, organizations, agencies and institutions in the form of

outreach programs, extension services, mission works etc which were intended to help the

Aytas of Central Luzon recover from the ashes of the disastrous event. More than two decades

passed, the Ambala Aytas in reminiscing the past recounted that in the past there was

kahampatan. The Mt. Pinatubo eruption in 1991 brought hardship because kahampatan was

disrupted and became elusive after then.

During the focus group interviewing, they were asked to identify the different

development institutions, what projects they have provided and what were the outcomes of

these development projects. They identified several major organizations or agencies which

provided development interventions. The KAPISU (which they are not certain about the

meaning) then later became Saint Francis Learning Center, Inc. brought in development projects

such as housing, livelihood and school. The DSWD, a government agency has provided them


15/24


with relief goods and the 4Ps or known to them aspantawid. The NCIP, another government

agency mandated by the state to look into the concerns of indigenous people has assisted them

in the application of their ancestral domain claim. A Korean missionary constructed water tank,

day care center, toilets and church. The municipal mayor of Subic provided water hose and set

up the hanging bridge. ZAMECO, the electric company in the province of Zambales installed

electricity in the area.

Development

Projects

Who provided Description Process and Outcome

Pabahay KAPISU 16 na sementado na bahay na yero

ang bubong

Nasira na sa kalumaan at di makabili ng

yero

Hanapbuhay KAPISU 2 kalabaw na aalagaan Hindi napaunlad kasi matatanda na ang

kalabaw

Kambing Namili ng mga buho sa halagang 4.00 piso

bawat isa at ang piso ay kinakaltas paramaka-ipon ng pambili ng kambing. Kaya ang

pondo na pinambili ng kambing ay galing

din sa amin.

Mga puno ng mangga Tumubo pero hindi namumunga dahil

walang pampa-spray.

Palaisdaan Nagawa pero hindi naman tumakbo

Araro Di nagamit dahil di angkop ang araro sa

bundok. Nawala ang mga araro.

Pag-aalaga ng baboy na hybrid Hindi nagtagumpay kasi mahirap isustine

ang pagkain.

Pag-aalaga ng 45 days namanok Di rin nagtagumpay kasi mahal ang kinakain

na commercial feeds.

Pagtatahi Nagsanay manahi ng basahan atpagpapahiram ng 2 makina pero ibinalik din

kasi mahina ang kita.

Patubig KAPISU Paggawa ng tangke Sinira ng mga Bisaya na nakatira sa bundok

Pastor Paggawa ng tangke Di na gumana simula noong umalis ang

pastor

Mayor Pagbibigay ng hose Nagagamit kaya lang kulang

Lupaing Ninuno NCIP Pagsusukat sa nasasakupan ng

lupaing ninuno na may sukat na 42

ektarya

Hindi pa tapos

4 Ps

Relief goods

DSWD Pagkakaloob ng tulong pinansiyal

sa pamilya

Pagbibigay ng mga relief goods

Sa 25 pamilya na mga katutubo, 10 lamang

ang napiling grantees ng 4Ps. Pinili ang 10

pamilya na ito sa pamamagitan ng raffle sa

computer.

Paaralan St. Francis Learning

Center

Paaralan pang matanda

Paaralan pambata na mula unang

baiting hanggang ika-anim na

baitang

Ibinigay ito noong pagkatapos pumutok ang

Pinatubo

Nagpapatuloy ang paaralan sa Sentro ng

Alibang at nag-aaral ang mga anak namin.

Ilaw ZAMECO Pagkakabit ng kuryente sa Sitio

Alibang

Masaya kapag may ilaw nagkaka-ipun-ipon

kaming mga katutubo

Table 2. Development interventions as viewed by the older generation


16/24


Development

projects

Who provided Description Process and Outcome

Simbahan Pastor Pamanila Nagpatayo ng simbahan ng

Born Again sa Alibang Bugaw

Tinuturuan kami ng magandang asal.

Kaya lang natigil na noong umalis na si

pastor.School

Day Care Center

SFLC

Pastor Cho

Nagpatayo ng paaralan mula

grade 1 hanggang grade 6 sa

Sentro ng Alibang

Nagpatayo ng day care center

sa Alibang Bugaw katabi ng

simbahan

Nagpapatuloy

Di na nagagamit ang day care center

simula noong umalis sina pastor.

Hanging bridge Mayor Pagpapagawa ng hanging

bridge sa ilog ng Alibang

Nagagamit pag tumatawid sa ilog

papunta sa bayan

In terms of analyzing the outcomes in relation to kahampatan, the participants said that

projects such as kalabaw, kambing, mangga, patubig are very much in line with their notion

development with identity and culture. However, they raised the question in terms of the

process and the quantity and quality of the project. For instance, they were provided with just a

pair of carabao, as far as their analysis is concern, the carabaos were already old and incapable

of reproducing offspring. If they were only consulted, they said, they would have preferred

younger ones and at least more than one pair. The projects they perceived to be not at all

aligned to their kahampatan were the raising of 45-day broiler chickens and hybrid swine, and

sewing of pot holders. The raising of hybrid animals required commercial foods, things that

cannot be produced by land. According to them, in raising hybrid chickens expenses spent for

their food and vitamins have exceeded the expected profit. The outcome of the sewing project

was not successful because only two sewing machines were lent to them and the income from

sewing pot holders is lesser than they go for gathering banana blossoms and manufacture

charcoals. For the adults, the school provided them the opportunity to learn how to write, read

and compute which are skills they needed in their transactions with the lowlanders. For the

kabataan (younger generation) they consider the school as an escape to the economic poverty

being experienced by their family. According to them when they finish school they will easily get

a job and the job provides them with the means (salary) to buy what they want like stereo,

television sets, mobile phone and even motorcycle. However, they opt to do thepangangalap

(gathering ) over schooling because in gathering boho for instance they can earn money faster

than in attending school.

Table 3. Development interventions as viewed by the younger generations


17/24


The Most Significant Development

Table 4 presents a summary of the most significant changes to have occurred in Sitio

Alibang. After telling their stories about the most significant development that occurred in their

community, the older generation selected the time when they became literate that is learning

to read and write so that they can read and write their lives, and when they learned to

communicate with others, first in the rank of the most significant development. They see their

being together now in one place as the second significant development and by having light

generated by electricity in their place as the third most significant. The lighting project according

to them made them come together for socialization in the evening.

For the youth, they identified the court (playground) where they can play basketball andother ball games as the first significant development to have occurred in their community. The

second most significant is having electricity that resulted in coming together in one place.

Pangangalap or gathering of boho is the third significant development for the youth.

The most significant development when compared as perceived by the older and

younger generation shows more similarities than differences. For instance, the two generations

are well oriented on the importance of coming together for socialization and they both mention

like light for older and electricity for the younger as significant means to socialize. The

purpose of becoming literate for the older generation and having a court for the younger is also

to socialize, for instance the term pakikipagkapwa tao and to play ballgames are ways of

socialization.

Older Generation Younger Generation

1. Natutong sumulat at bumasa at makihalubilosa kapwa

2. Nagka-ipon-ipon ang mga katutubo sa baryona dati ay kalat-kalat

3. Pagkakaroon ng ilaw

1. Pagkakaroon ng court para sa libangan2. Pagkakaroon ng kuryente na dahilan ng

pagkakalapit-lapit ng bahay3. Kahalagahan ng pangangalap

Table 4. Responses on the Most SignificantDevelopment among the Ambala Aytas


18/24


Conclusion and Implications

Kahampatan is the path of development with identity and culture among the Ambala Aytas.

As described, kahampatan covers the holistic dimensions of human development. It is

symbolized as a fern in its continuous unfurling. This notion of development includes three

fronds - the kasaganaan (abundance), kagalingan (wellbeing) and kaginhawaan (freedom).

These fronds can be interpreted as the cultural, economic and social aspect of their self-

determined development. The study suggests that from the Ambala Ayta perspective the path

to development with identity and culture should be defined bythem, from them, and for them.

The results of the study have implications to community development practice and social

work practice with indigenous people. Interventions can be helpful or undermine the culturalidentities of indigenous people.

The findings imply the following:

Good intentions for interventions should be coupled with capability approach . Thecapability approach developed by Amartya Sen views development as a process of

expanding peoples human capabilities or their ability to achieve things they have

reason to value. Sen highlights the need to refocus development on people and points

out the necessity of viewing human beings as ends in themselves and never as only

means to other ends (Sen, 1990). Do fieldwork first for the purposes of knowing their

condition before intervening by bringing in pre-packaged development projects and

assistance. In this study for instance, the profiling process was done by the Ambala

Aytas with the participation of the researcher. Community participation in indigenous

research means that the researcher should participate in the indigenous peoples

activities. This is one way to decolonize the methodology of research by breaking away

from the usual approach of making a profile of a community for instance where the

people participate in information giving and the outsider -researcher analyzes and

interprets the data. Research done in the indigenous communities such profiling should

be initiated by the indigenous people so that they will take pride in discovering that they

can do research through indigenous methods like drawing and storytelling. We all have


19/24


the good intentions but we should always be circumspect that our good intention brings

with it the extension of our own prejudices and ways of knowing and looking at the

world. The danger of this might be that the transfer of outsiders ways of life would

result to further colonization and enculturation of the indigenous consciousness.

Development should be defined together with the indigenous people. It is very evidentthat indigenous people have their own way of defining the concept of development

based on their identity and culture. In the case of the Ambala Aytas, development is

good life which they called kahampatan. There is no way for us, outsiders to appreciate

and understand their worldview of development if we keep on imposing what we know

is good for them. The development initiatives that we are bringing in to indigenous

communities are rather counterproductive and counterintuitive because with theoutsiders development framework instead placed the Aytas in socio-economically

disadvantaged position. For an Ayta to live like the unat or lowlanders way of life would

mean poverty. An Ayta starts to look at himself/herself as poor when he cannot afford

to buy a television, a radio which can be owned only through transaction by the use of

money. Economic development for the indigenous people differs in contents and values

from the economic development perspective of the outsiders. For instance, economic

development for many outsiders generally aims at getting the indigenous people to be

converted from subsistence to cash economies and thus to increase their participation

in the capitalist economy. This is very evident in the outsiders wishes for the Aytas to be

educated. Educated for what? To improve their future through education is a capitalist

driven economic idea. When the Aytas expressed the desire to become literate

especially after the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo, they mean they want to read and write

their own life. Education here means to expand their capabilities to communicate into

the text world that they find significant in their socialization with other people. But

outsiders define education for them as just enrolling in a formal school and study

subjects like English, math, science etcoffered by the mainstream curriculum. So they

become schooled not educated.

We should start on what the indigenous people have and build on what they know. Ifwe really want to help the indigenous people as our sense of mission directs us to do,


20/24


then enter with just an exit plan on hand. The indigenous people know how to analyze

their issues and problems as they also know how to articulate their needs and the

solutions to their problems. In this study for instance, the Aytas know what they want

to do with their life to have a good life i.e. kahampatan by simply ensuring good

relationship with the source (land) that yield for resources they need for survival and

sustainability. Most often they are left at the sidelines and mere recipients in the

development process. Starting from where they are and building on what they know are

strategies to decolonize development interventions. By this approach in development

work, we are centering the indigenous articulations of what it means to have a good life.

And we should even be honest to accept that we are learning a lot from them.

Indigenous people do not oppose development as long as development is deeplyrooted in their social context as people with distinct mindset and lifestyle . It is

contrary to the perception of outsiders that indigenous people tend to be resistant to

innovation which they even attached a name they called tribalism. As discussed by Kling

and Schulz (2012) for instance that people in isolated villages view new productive

techniques as threats. In part, this is because innovations are associated with outsiders.

Moreover, innovations threaten to disrupt local traditions that have sustained

community cohesion for many generations. This study reveals the sentiments of the

Ambala Aytas with regards to the approach and outcomes of development

interventions. What they had been articulating about kahampatan was not being

addressed because outsiders already have prior beliefs that what they have brought in,

are what the indigenous people need to take them out from poverty to prosperity.

In decolonizing development interventions, organizations, agencies and institutions whoare called to serve (because most often intentions to help the indigenous people are

driven by religious, ideological or nationalistic persuasions) in the indigenous

communities should not just intervene armed with the models of modernization or

evangelization and act like the white people who are trying to make the indigenous

people over into their image, they want the indigenous to be what they call assimilated,

bringing them into the mainstream and destroying their own way of life and their own

cultural patterns. In decolonization, we have to rewrite and reright (Smith, 2012)


21/24


history. By doing this we remove the status attached to the indigenous people as

specimen as what Merata Mita being quoted by Smith (2012) pointed out: We have a

history of people putting Maori under a microscope in the same way a scientist looks at

an insect. The ones doing the looking are giving themselves the power to define. For

faith-driven development interventions, the new evangelization framework proposed by

Leonardo Boff will make sense in decolonization. According to Boff (1991),

evangelization that occurred among the indigenous communities entailed the

transposition of the institutions, symbols, concepts, and oral habits of European

Christian culture. In decolonization process, new evangelization should bring the good

news which is good only if transformations occur in these miserable social realities: if

instead of unfair they become humane, instead of being unjust they become social

relations productive of justice and participation (Boff, 1991). Finally, in decolonizingdevelopment interventions, we must use the indigenous capabilities, strengths and

talents to address issues and concerns that they deem relevant, so that they will own

the whole development process. In this case we are getting off the grip of the colonial

history of development.

Implications to the Social Work Practice with Indigenous People

Non Directive Approach: Social workers work for the development of people. Thedevelopment process should also be the realization of social justice in itself.

Development is very vague and general term which every person will interpret

according to his or her own ideas of what is good. Thus what the social worker regards

as development for the people with whom he works they may not regard as betterment

for themselves. As what was found out when the Ambala Aytas evaluated the different

development interventions. The non-directive approach goes along with the concept of

cultural competency. Cultural competency describes the set of knowledge and skills that

a social worker must develop in order to be effective with multicultural clients

(Lum,1999). Social workers working with indigenous people should not try to guide or

persuade them to accept his values or ideas, but focus on helping them to find their own

values for themselves.


22/24


Entervention Strategy: For purposes of this study, it makes sense to use the termentervention to illustrate a strategy of the non-directive approach in working with

indigenous people. It is contrary to the intervention model of social work in casework,

family and groupwork. Entervention strategy should not start with a pre-packaged with

pre-determined goals development projects. How much our intervention becomes

undermining in working with indigenous people? In entervention strategy social

workers should not work for further assimilation of indigenous people to the

mainstream development paradigm, instead journey with them to know and

understand the idea of betterment or a good life by the indigenous people and from

there start to work with them. This strategy emphasizes the participation-in-

development rather than participatory development. Kumar (2002) explains it as a

bottom-up form of participation in the sense that the local people have full control overthe process and the project provides for necessary flexibility.

Searchers not Planners: Among the indigenous people, the context a good life is not aunilinear progress. Social workers should consider the disempowering implications of

the traditional approach as planners, so to change the role as searchers especially in the

context of working with indigenous people. As planners we have good intentions to help

but dont motivate the people to help themselves. As searchers we find things that work

(Easterly, 2006) because we start from what they have and what they want to do with

their lives. Indigenous people have the capacity to determine their own path to

development and all we have to do is to search this path and journey with them. And we

stop acting out the white mans burden.


23/24


References

Awed, S. (2010). Dunong at Batas: Documenting Indigenous Wisdom and Customary Law. Tebtebba

Foundation.

Bamba, J. (2010). Self-determined Development: Lessons from Kalimantan Credit Union Movement.Tebtebba Foundation, Philippines.

Bennagen and Fernan. eds.(1996).Consulting the Spirits, Working with Nature, Sharing with Others:

Indigenous Resource Management in the Philippines. Sentro Para saGanapnaPamayanan.

Boff, L. (1991).New Evangelization: Good News to the Poor. Orbis Books. Maryknoll, New York.

Calub, B. (2004). Participatory Rural Appraisal Guidebook. 2nd

ed. University of the Philippines Los Banos.

Chambers, R. (2003). Whose Reality Counts? Putting the First Last. ITDG Publishing. London.Uk.

Corpus,V.(2010). Indigenous Peoples Self-determined Development: Challenges and Trajectories.

Tebtebba Foundation, Philippines.

Easterly, W. (2006). The White Mans Burden: Why the Wests Efforts to Aid the Rest Have Done So Much

Ill and Si Little Good. Penguin Books. USA.

Hall, Tony (2003). The American Empire and the Fourth World: The bowl with one spoon. McGill-Queen's

native and northern series, 34.. Montreal; Ithaca: McGill-Queen's University Press.

Hernando, M.V.A.(2009). The Development Planning Process from Indigenous Peoples Perspectives.

Rooted to Land: Strengthening Indigenous Peoples Community Processes. REDO-CSWCD.

Human Development and Indigenous People: Focus Group Discussion between UNDP and

Representatives of the Indigenous Peoples Expert Group on Development with culture andIdentity.New York, 2010.pdf.

Kling, A. and Schulz, N. (2009). From Poverty to Prosperity: Intangible Assets, Hidden Liabilities and the

Lasting Triumph Over Scarcity. Encounter Books. New York.

Kumar, S. (2002). Methods for Community Participation: A Complete Guide for Practitioners. Vistaar

Publications. Delhi.

Lum, D. (1999). Culturally Competent Practice: a Framework for Growth and Action. Brooks/Cole

Publishing Company.Canada.

Manalili, A. (2013). Pag-oorganisa ng Pamayanan: Tungo sa Kaunlarang Mula sa Tao Para sa Tao. Sentro ng

Wikang Pilipino. University of the Philippines. Quezon City.

Perry, R. (1996). From Time Immemorial: Indigenous Peoples and State Systems. University of Texas Press,

Austin.

Posanger, J. (2011). Self-determination and indigenous research: capacity building on our own terms.

Towards an Alternative Development Paradigm: Indigenous Peoples Self-Determined Development.

2011. Tebtebba Indigenous Peoples International Centre for Policy Research and Education.


24/24


Rubin,H. (2005). Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data. 2nd

ed. Sage Publications.

Salonga, J. etal. (2010). Dunong at Batas: Documenting Indigenous Wisdom and Customary Law. Tebtebba

Foundation.

Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. Anchor books. New York.

Shimizu, H. (2001). The Orphans of Pinatubo: The Ayta Struggle for Existence. Solidaridad Publishing

House. Manila.

__________ (1989) Pinatubo Aytas: Continuity and Change. Quezon City, Philippines: Ateneo de Manila

University Press.

Smith, L. (2012). Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. 2nd

ed. London: Zed

Books.

Yin, R. (2011). Qualitative Research from Start to Finish. The Guilford Press. New York.

Internet

The Whites Man Burden by Rudyard Kipling McClure's Magazine 12, Feb. 1899. Wikipedia.

http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/photograph/2422/the-koru

Film

Avatar.2009 written and directed by James Cameron.

Agno. Produced by Cordillera Peoples Alliance and ST-Exposure
http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/photograph/2422/the-koruhttp://www.teara.govt.nz/en/photograph/2422/the-koruhttp://www.teara.govt.nz/en/photograph/2422/the-koru

dancing into the bossom of the land

Documents