Misamis Occidental Provincial Engagement Strategy (PES)

For Philippines-Australia Community Assistance Program (PACAP)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The main problems bugging Misamis Occidental are its poverty heavily attributed to low productivity in the agricultural sector and the alarming condition of its terrestrial and coastal environment. PACAP’s Focused Community Assistance Scheme (FOCAS) is a timely program envisioned to address these issues. In four years, the estimated P86 Million grant assistance from PACAP will assist development projects of four FOCAS areas, namely, 1) Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park Development Project, 2) Save Labo River Project, 3) Iligan Bay Coastal Resource Management Project and 4) the Coconut Industry Rehabilitation and Development Project. The P86 Million will be allocated equally for the four FOCAS areas at P21.5 Million each for four years. Save for a total P12 Million for the four FOCAS Secretariats or at P3 Million each secretariat, the amount will be used to fund development projects. These projects will be implemented separately in and will cover the three cities of Tangub, Ozamiz and Oroquieta. These will also cover eleven out of fourteen municipalities, namely, Bonifacio, Clarin, Tudela, Sinacaban, Jimenez, Panaon, Lopez Jaena, Aloran, Plaridel, Concepcion and Don Victoriano. Chapter 1 of the Provincial Engagement Strategy (PES) discusses the provincial information, plans and situation. The chapter also discusses the involvement of PACAP in the province of Misamis Occidental. Chapter 2 to 5 explains separately the four FOCAS Areas. Each chapter discusses the problems involved in the respective FOCAS areas. It also expounds the strategies on how to address the problems using Logical Framework (LogFrame); list of projects to be undertaken over the period of four years; proposed organization structure to manage and co-manage the FOCAS; the participation and roles of each stakeholders; gender analysis; monitoring and evaluation; sustainability, among others.

CHAPTER 1 – PROVINCIAL INFORMATION

1. Introduction Background For more than ten years, the hampered economic growth and development of Misamis Occidental is generally attributed to concerns on agricultural sector and worsening condition of its terrestrial and coastal environment. Both the government and non-government sectors agreed that a balance has to be made to achieve an integrated and holistic development of the province. On one hand, the recent development trends in the province are still centered on agriculture, considering that the province has broad agricultural base. However, since most of the available agricultural lands are mostly developed, the development activities are geared towards the maximization of agricultural land use and animal production, as well as encouragement of consumer goods industries. Maximization of land use basically includes use of modern methods of agriculture and multicropping. To further support agricultural development, policies that will promote increased agricultural production and productivity are necessary. Some of the important areas for consideration are pricing agricultural commodities, provision of liberalized credits; technical assistance; product processing; and improvement of storage and marketing networks. Also needed are the development of a more effective organizational mechanism for rural mobilization, increased provision of rural infrastructures; and campaign for more diversified and market-oriented agricultural production. Finally, there is a need to look into the possibility of coordinating all the activities of different government agencies which deals with the agricultural sector. On the other hand, to maintain a balanced eco-system, the pristine environment in the province must be conserved and protected. Reforestation of denuded forest areas is very important to prevent soil erosion. The kaingin system and illegal cutting of timber particularly in reserved watershed areas, which are still prevalent, must be stopped. The burning of forest cover leave in its wake the disappearance of a great number of animal and plant species. The forestry sector should generate, opportunities for livelihood through its agro-forestry activities and woodbased industries. An active campaign for reforestation should continuously be undertaken to replenish the forest timber stand status. Rehabilitating the river banks and coastal zones through tree planting, reforestation of mangrove areas, the strict compliance of pollution regulation and policing the said rivers and bays against illegal fishing will go a long way in conserving and developing the marine resources and fishing grounds in and around the province. 1

With this current situation, there is a need to fast track environment and agriculture development of the Province. However, with little resources and vast concerns in other sectors such as health, education, water and sanitation, the local government could only do

1 Misamis Occidental Provincial Development Plan, PPDO, 1995 – 2000 (Under Governor Chiongbian); and Misamis Occidental Provincial Development

Plan, PPDO, 1999 - 2004 (Under Governor Clarete)

Chapter 1 - 2

so much to even make a dent on the impending problems mentioned above. The entry of AusAID and other donor programs in the Province of Misamis Occidental provides means to address these issues. Philippines-Australia Community Assistance Program (PACAP) is not a newcomer when it comes to development contribution in the Province. It has released about P7 Million for ten projects since 1988. Yet with this number, PACAP’s presence in the province is felt less. The need to area focus was deemed necessary to operationalize PACAP’s desired impact of achieving a “critical mass” of development inputs. To area focus (via Integrated Area Development) means providing a more holistic and a more programmatic view so that PACAP’s assistance shall be integrated and complementary. Such approach is viewed to encourage a resource-based program that will promote the participation of area-based delivery structures to implement integrated and sustainable development approach. 2

The Focused Community Assistance Scheme PACAP is one of the numerous donor programs and one of the four (4) major AusAID facilities currently operating in the Province of Misamis Occidental. The other three AusAID programs are PATSARRD, PALS, and PAHRDP. PACAP emphasized that its program will be a facility for non-government and people’s organizations. As a grant facility for Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) and Peoples’ Organizations (POs) PACAP will contribute to the fulfillment of Misamis Occidental Provincial Objectives. PACAP in 2005 literally brought its programs to the Province and set an Office in Oroquieta City for its FOCAS program and initially plans to operate in five (5) years. The Focused Community Assistance Scheme (FOCAS) is a set of interrelated projects addressing community needs related to a geographic area and/or a specific development issue. 3 FOCAS is more likened to integrated area development (IAD). The other program is the Responsive Activity Scheme (RAS). RAS business is what PACAP effectively does – providing assistance for small stand-alone projects of up to P1 Million per year. PACAP’s core business in Misamis Occidental is more of FOCAS than RAS. Figure 1 below illustrates the life of projects in Misamis Occidental relative to the life of FOCAS.

2 “The Mt. Matutum Integrated Conservation and Development (MICADEV) Program”, South Cotabato, CSDO, 1998 3 New PACAP Operations Manual, 2005

Chapter 1 - 3

AAuugg 22000099 AAllll pprroojjeeccttss mmuusstt eenndd

PPrroojjeecctt lliiffee

PPrroojjeecctt 11

PPrroojjeecctt 44

PPrroojjeecctt 22

PPrroojjeecctt 33

PPrroojjeecctt 55

FFeebb 22000055

AAlllloowwaannccee FFoorr EEvvaalluuaattiioonn

Figure 1. MO FOCAS-Project Life The Provincial Engagement is for an initial phase of five years (February 2005 – February 2010). This may be extended based on independent evaluations in Yr 3 and 5. The initial suite of four FOCAS will run from about September 2005 to September 2009. All projects within each FOCAS must be completed within these four years. Any new FOCAS or extensions of existing FOCAS can commence after September 2009. If further funds become available then consideration could be given to instituting a new FOCAS before this time. Each individual projects will have varying periods of implementation from one year to a maximum period of three years. The latest acceptance of three-year projects therefore would be in September 2006 for it to end in August 2009 (see Project 4 above). 2. Misamis Occidental Provincial Profile and Other Information Brief Geographic Information Misamis Occidental, one (1) of the five (5) provinces of Region 10 in Northern Mindanao, is located on the northeastern part of Mindanao. It is bounded on the northeast by Mindanao Sea, east by Iligan Bay, southeast by Panguil Bay and the west by the Provinces of Zamboanga del Norte and Zamboanga del Sur. The Province is accessible by land from Cagayan de Oro City, the regional center, Pagadian and Dipolog Cities. Misamis Occidental has a total land area of 1,939.32 square kilometers. It has 14 municipalities and three cities with a total of 490 barangays. Oroquieta City is the capital of Misamis Occidental. The

AAuugguusstt 22000055 SSttaarrtt ooff pprroojjeecctt ppaacckkaaggiinngg

((iiff ssttrraatteeggiicc ppllaannss aarree aapppprroovveedd))

FFeebb 22001100

Chapter 1 - 4

Province registered a population of 486,723 in 2000. 4 Figure 2 below is the map of Mindanao showing the location of the Province of Misamis Occidental.

Figure 2. Map of Mindanao Under the Corona system climate classification of the country, Misamis Occidental belongs to type IV by virtue of its rainfall pattern or distribution in the area. With this classification, rainfall is more or less evenly distributed throughout the year although the months of February to April are considered drier. There is no incidence of typhoon in the area as majority of Mindanao Island is outside the typhoon belt. The area receives an average annual rainfall that ranges from 1,415 mm to 3,758 mm. Average annual rainfall is at 2,312 mm. The total number of rainy days for a year ranges from 149 days to 270 days with an average of 206 days. 5

SWOT Analysis 6

Strengths Misamis Occidental’s Strengths lie in its location, abundant natural resources, varied tourism attractions, development institutions, and the personnel of various institutions operating in the province.

4 Provincial Water Supply, Sewerage and Sanitation Sector Plan for the Province of Misamis Occidental, Main Report, joint project of JICA

and DILG, CEST Inc., March 2005 5 Ozamiz City Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan (OCISWMP), Ozamiz City Solid Waste Management Project Technical Working

Group, August 2003 6 Updated KFC Strategic Development Plan of Misamis Occidental (2005-2008), August 2005, PATSARRD

Chapter 1 - 5

Located outside the typhoon belt and with rainfall evenly distributed throughout the year, the province is ideal for year-round production of major food and commercial crops, aquaculture and industrial activities. Its alienable and disposable lands which constitute 52% of the total area are highly suitable to most agricultural crops. With vast tract of coconut plantations, there exist in the province a number of coconut mills and coco-based factory which is one of the country’s two coco-based factories. High value crops are also available for agri-based processing. The province has rich aquamarine resources owing to its long coastline, expansive swamplands, and rich fishing grounds, the Panguil, Iligan and Murceillagus Bays. These are recorded as the best spawning grounds of prawn, shrimp, and squid in the Philippines. It has also the biggest area of brackish water fishponds of the region. These explain why the province is the base for most of the region’s aquaculture industries. Misamis Occidental is likewise a place of natural beauty. Tourist attractions include Mt. Malindang, a national park and wildlife sanctuary; Lake Duminagat, a crater lake in the mountains between Ozamiz and Oroquieta Cities; the Sibucal Hot Spring in Oroquieta; and Balacatan Underground River in Tangub. Apart from these, there are various institutions that cater to the various needs of the province and its constituents. These include learning and banking institutions and transportation and communication facilities. Finally, the workforce in the different agencies operating in the province is its most valuable asset. These personnel have been tasked to look after the province’s abundant resources. Weaknesses Although capable, government agencies in the province have inadequate manpower. This results to multi-tasking where some personnel hold two or more positions. Insufficient equipment constrains them from executing their jobs well. The lack of manpower and equipment can be attributed to the agencies’ limited budget, which is supposed to be the fuel that keeps the agencies running. Development oriented programs would have been more successful if carried out by capable personnel. However, capability-building programs can only be sustained if appropriate funding is available A substantial portion of the province’s road network is still unpaved, though the national highway is relatively excellent. Transport of high value agricultural cargoes by air is expensive because the Ozamiz City Airport is not serviceable. Weak farmers’ organizations and the farmers’ difficulty in accessing credit have made marketing of farm products difficult for them and dampened their interest to improve their income and standard of living. Opportunities Mt. Malindang, with its watershed and forest reserve can be turned into a major tourist attraction. A coconut replanting program and the development of non-copra based processing plant will further enhance the province’s coconut industry. Moreover, capturing a share in the growing domestic and international demand for high value crops such as durian,

Chapter 1 - 6

mango, rambutan, and lanzones would be a good opportunity to improve the income of the farmers. The province’s proximity to the Cagayan-Iligan Corridor gives it a good opportunity to supply the needed labor force of the industrial corridor. Investment opportunities are foreseen to upscale in ten years with the construction of the Panguil Bay bridge. Most importantly, the existence of farmers, fisherfolks, women, and youth organizations, supportive LGUs and CSO partners, development programs of local government agencies complemented by the presence of foreign-assisted projects with their financial and technical support can be harnessed to address the development needs of the province or lay the groundwork for the long-term growth of the area. Threats Overfishing in Panguil, Iligan and Murceillagus Bays and the air and water pollution generated by CIC industries may pose serious threats to the environment and marine ecosystems. The illegal cutting of coconut trees simultaneous with the weakening demand for coconut oil in the world market is a major threat to the local economy. Further, considering that Misamis Occidental’s economy is agriculture-based, the unregulated conversion of agricultural lands into residential or industrial has threatened the food security of the province. Finally, the unstable peace and order situation in the province attributed to organized crime has discouraged tourist and investors to establish their businesses in the province. The Provincial Engagement Strategy (PES) The Misamis Occidental PSC recognizes that there is no “cure all” formula for the upliftment of the conditions and plight of the poor people in the province. Recognizing its limitations and its strengths, the PSC believes that PACAP could contribute to addressing the Province’s complex problem through this Provincial Engagement Strategy (PES):

“The Provincial Engagement Strategy resolves to reduce poverty in the region and improving the quality of life of its people by a) augmenting traditional and/or providing alternative livelihood through agri-aqua based food, raw materials, and industrial finished products, b) utilizing reasonably and sustainably the natural resources, and c) considering prominently the rehabilitation, protection, and preservation of the province's vast watershed area and its coastal resources. The Integrated Area Development (IAD) approach is a prime scheme in this strategy in order to effect area- specific project packaging and rational resource allocation. Cutting across all the development sectors in the strategy is the recognition of people empowerment thus, the strong collaboration between LGU and CSO in the development effort, and the participation of the private sector, are given due importance with corresponding thrust to organize, activate, and strengthen Peoples’ Organizations (POs) especially the disadvantaged and vulnerable groups in society.”

This strategy is aligned with the provincial goals and objectives 7 and the current administration’s Executive Agenda articulated in the Provincial “Target 1000” 8.

7 See also webpage www.misocc.gov.ph 8 See also webpage www.misocc.gov.ph

Chapter 1 - 7

Provincial Goals and Objectives The primary goal is the improvement of the quality of life of every individual in the province. This is to be achieved through increased productivity and income especially to those residing in the rural areas, more job opportunities and access to basic services at the shortest time possible. This goal is further refined into the following short term objectives:

1. To be the country’s or even Asia’s potent producer of aquaculture products. 2. To become the country’s or even Asia’s tourist destination. 3. To attain a sufficient production of rice, corn, vegetables and other agricultural crops,

and processed goods and subsequently become a potent provider. 4. To maintain a balanced eco-system through the conservation of the province’s

prestine environment. 5. To enhance the delivery of basic social services through a more systematic

identification and coordinated implementation of critical community projects along health, nutrition, education/skills training, social welfare, housing and others. 9

Potential Contribution to Strategic Guidance Framework (SGF) Misamis Occidental PES will contribute greatly to the Fundamental SGF and will carry the following Supporting SGF:

Economic Governance Security and Stability Rural Living Standards • Strengthen community advocacy for improved local ordinances and legislation (eg improved environmental governance). • Strengthen community capacity to lobby local government for improved legislative compliance. • Enhance transparency and accountability amongst local officials especially in development planning and budgeting. • Strengthen NGO coalitions to manage, monitor and evaluate member activities. • Support LGU capability in assessment or planning activities (e.g project mapping, development planning).

• Promote advocacy within poor and marginalized communities for improved services and planned development. • Promote the individual rights of women and children for a safe and secure home-life (especially VAWC). • Raise awareness and promote the cultural uniqueness of indigenous cultures to improve understanding and preserve heritage. • Build capacity of community service organizations working in high-risk areas.

• Provide livelihood, vocational, distance, or alternate education for Out-of-School Youth • Strengthen the engagement of communities with the LGUs and private sector • Build community capacity in leadership and entrepreneurship. • Provide vocational training to indigenous crafts-people to help broaden their skills, identify new product uses, and build market access.

9 Misamis Occidental PDP, 1995 – 2000 and Provincial Website, www.misocc.gov.ph, downloaded June 2005

Chapter 1 - 8

3. Planning Process and Provincial Governance Committee Selection Criteria for the Selection of FOCAS Areas The Provincial Stakeholders Committee (PSC) decided, after lengthy deliberation, to adapt the following criteria in the selection of FOCAS Areas/Themes:

1. FOCAS Area/Theme should Identify with the real and felt needs of the Province 2. There could only be one FOCAS Area per municipality/city 3. Fund that would be provided by PACAP should be enough to provide an impact for

the geographic area or theme as assessed by the Provincial Stakeholders Committee (PSC, see discussion below).

4. Should contribute to the fulfillment of the Provincial Objectives, priorities and plans 5. Preferably with available extensive studies, plans and other secondary data and

information. This is considered because PACAP does not fund projects solely for research and assessment. Also, if ever granted, conduct of research and assessment will take months or years to finish hence project proposal preparation and implementation may take longer.

The Misamis Occidental FOCAS Areas Matching the needs of the people of the province and the resources of PACAP, the Provincial Stakeholders Committee (PSC) approved en-banc on May 17, 2005 four Focused Community Assistance Scheme (FOCAS) Areas. Each FOCAS Areas separately came up with their respective FOCAS Strategies discussed in succeeding chapters.

1. Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park Development Project (MMRNPDP). MMRNPDP will cover only the Municipalities of Bonifacio, Don Victorino, and Concepcion. MMRNPDP is a geographic FOCAS area.

2. Save Labo River Project (SLRP). SLRP covers the two Cities of Tangub and Ozamiz

and the Municipality of Clarin. SLRP is a geographic FOCAS area.

3. Iligan Bay Coastal Resource Management and Development Project (IBCRMDP). IBCRMDP is a geographic FOCAS area. It will cover the Municipalities of Tudela, Sinacaban, Jimenez, and Panaon.

4. Coconut Industry Rehabilitation and Development Project (CIRDP). CIRDP is the

only thematic FOCAS Area of the province. The theme is agri-focused.

The choice of the four FOCAS areas is strategic itself. The first three features an integrated area development of a complete landscape, from the forested mountains, along the river, and through the coastal area. The fourth FOCAS area also integrates with the other three because it emphasizes on rural development and agriculture, thus complementing environment conservation and protection with rural livelihood. Figure 3 shows the MAP of Misamis Occidental showing the locations or area covered by the FOCASes mentioned above.

Chapter 1 - 9

Figure 3. Misamis Occidental FOCAS Areas Misamis Occidental FOCAS Governance A General Stakeholders Assembly was conducted on April 29, 2005 at the Function Hall of the Provincial Capitol, Oroquieta City. This was attended by development players from various local government units, provincial, city and municipal, national government agencies, civil society organizations and the academe. During the assembly, it was a consensus that the Provincial Stakeholders Committee (PSC) shall be composed of nine members headed by Provincial Governor Loreto Leo Ocampos as chair. The other four shall be coming from the representatives of the mayors of the Province, from the NGOs, from the Peoples’ Organization (POs), and from the academe of Misamis Occidental. The remaining four representations come from the four approved FOCAS areas and were endorsed by the interim PSC on May 17, 2005 and was approved by PAC in June 16, 2005. The Provincial Stakeholders Committee (PSC) is composed of:

1. Governor Leo Ocampos represented by Terry Calamba 2. Mayor Nilo Obot representing Municipal LGUs 3. Mr. Pempe Procianos representing the Peoples’ Organization 4. Ms. Grace Villanueva representing the academe 5. Mr. Ramonito Acaac representing the NGOs 6. Mr. Andy Pestano representing Save Labo River Project FOCAS 7. Mr. Exequil Barillo representing Iligan Bay Coastal Resource Management and

Development Project FOCAS 8. Mr. Zachary Alcoseba representing Coconut Industry Rehabilitation and Development

Project FOCAS 9. Mr. Rolando Dingal representing Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park Development

Project FOCAS Figure 4 below illustrates the Provincial FOCAS governance structure. PSC is tasked to oversee four (4) FOCAS areas and Management Committees.

Chapter 1 - 10

MMRNPDP FMC

FOCAS Secretariat (An NGO or PO)

Project Proponents

CIRDP FMC IBCRMDP FMC

PSC Secretariat (PACAP PPO)

SLRP FMC

PSC

Figure 4. MO FOCAS Governance Structure

PSC handles the overall coordination of PACAP FOCAS implementation in Misamis Occidental. Its secretariat support is carried out by the Provincial Project Officer. Meanwhile, each FOCAS Management Committees (FMCs) will be supported by separate FOCAS Secretariat. The FOCAS Secretariats are chosen by the respective FMCs. A secretariat should be a CSO that is capable of doing committee coordination and administrative work. The FOCAS Secretariat will be treated as a project and will ink a separate Grant Agreement with PACAP. Assessment of Development Approaches in the Province There is a long history of development work in the Province of Misamis Occidental. Civil Society Organizations became active in the Province in the early nineties. With the birth of CSOs in the province, there were great deal of development projects and services with Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) as proponents in many municipalities concentrating mainly on Mount Malindang protected area and the three (3) cities, where most CSOs are based. More recently, secondary organizations of NGOs and Peoples Organizations (POs) were also established. The reason for the strategic convergence however is more of the availability of fund than of the need to coalesce. As a result, when projects terminate, coalitions simply become dormant. They become active again when new funding comes in or, in some cases, they establish new coalitions. Other secondary organizations that linger tend to serve as capacity building provider for member organizations. One primary cooperative, the Paglaum Multipurpose Cooperative, has performed more successfully than other primary and secondary Peoples Organizations (POs) of the Province in terms of area of operation and financial performance. As proof of its success Paglaum MPC reaps awards provincially, nationally and internationally. However they only provide one prominent service – that is micro-finance.

Chapter 1 - 11

With the enactment of the Local Government Code, LGUs, both provincial and municipal, became involved more actively in extension of development services especially towards their constituent barangays. These services highly depend on the priorities of the Provincial, City or Municipal Governments. Meanwhile, NGA or line agencies resigned to providing technical and other support for local government programs instead of taking some lead role in development. Most of the development programs and projects in the Province are uni-sectoral, either LGU or CSO implemented. There were many attempts to do integrated area development covering more than one municipality. Yet, a lot of efforts ended up as good development plans. Examples are the development management of Mt. Malindang Range and Natural Park and Panguil Bay Development Project. If ever there had been projects funded by donor agencies implemented in the area, these had been in the areas of socio-economic surveys, bio-resource assessment, capability building, and micro-enterprise projects which are hardly integrated. NGO-LGU collaboration in development work in the Province seldom happens. Consultations and collaborations are more observed during the planning stage. During implementation of projects, more often either these are done by the LGUs alone, with the assistance of line and donor agencies, or solely by the NGOs, with the support of donor organizations, international and local. There is much yet to be done with regards to Integrated Area Development (IAD) and multi-sectoral approaches to development in Misamis Occidental involving cooperation and collaboration between LGUs, line agencies and CSOs. Development players in the Province of Misamis Occidental have a lot to learn in these areas. Undeniably, multi-sectoral approach to IAD in the Province is relatively new. Gender and Development The Province of Misamis Occidental has incorporated gender sensitivity programs in many aspects of local governance, linkage and coordinating activities with people’s organizations, and socio-economic enhancement programs. GAD principles and mechanics are built into the training curriculums of project operations and management seminars, financial management seminars, organizational strengthening seminars, and leadership training activities that were conducted by provincial offices with the support of NationalGovernmentAgencies and internal funding donors. 10 With the entry of Philippines-Australia Human Resource Development Program (PAHRDP) in the Province, the Provincial LGU puts heavy emphasis on gender sensitivity in capacity building of government employees. The sectoral plan on water 11 reported that there is no specific unit in the provincial machinery that serves as the focal center of GAD programs. This however can be argued. In the contrary the Provincial Government has an Office of the Provincial Gender and Development that focused on Provincial GAD plan formulation, the holding of GAD orientation workshops, coordinating gender programs and projects, linkaging and networking since 2001. But there seems to be a large room for improvement in terms of gender equality 10 Provincial Water Supply, Sewerage and Sanitation Sector Plan for the Province of Misamis Occidental, Main Report, joint project of JICA and DILG, CEST

Inc., March 2005 11 Provincial Water Supply, Sewerage and Sanitation Sector Plan for the Province of Misamis Occidental, Main Report, joint project of JICA and DILG, CEST

Inc., March 2005

Chapter 1 - 12

and sensitivity in the Province beyond formal or informal trainings. We still have to see these done in practice. Gender and development (GAD) should be fully integrated into the mainstream of any FOCAS project. It is recommended that GAD should be discussed in detail and applied in any project and capacity building activity of Governance Committees, project proponents and implementing teams, respectively. 4. Project Budget Summary and Project Time Frame PACAP earmarks about PhP86 Million for Misamis Occidental FOCAS areas in a period of five years. With four FOCAS Areas, the amount was equitably distributed at PhP21.5 Million per FOCAS area. These were consulted, discussed and approved by the respective FOCAS Management Committees (FMCs) and the Provincial Stakeholders Committee (PSC). Details of each project will be discussed in separate proposals that will be developed by FOCAS member proponents relative to the period of their implementation. 5. Report Composition This report consists of five (5) main chapters, namely, the Provincial Information and the four (4) FOCAS Areas of Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park Development Project, Save Labo River Project, Iligan Bay Coastal Resource Management and Development Project and the Coconut Industry Rehabilitation and Development Project. Other pertinent data are included as attachments.

Chapter 1 - 13

References:

1. Misamis Occidental Provincial Development Plan, PPDO, 1995 – 2000 (Under Governor Chiongbian); and Misamis Occidental Provincial Development Plan, PPDO, 1999 - 2004 (Under Governor Clarete)

2. Misamis Occidental PDP, 1995 – 2000 and

3. New PACAP Operations Manual, 2005

4. Ozamiz City Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan (OCISWMP), Ozamiz City Solid Waste Management Project Technical Working Group, August 2003

5. Provincial Water Supply, Sewerage and Sanitation Sector Plan for the Province of Misamis Occidental, Main Report, joint project of JICA and DILG, CEST Inc., March 2005

6. Provincial Website, www.misocc.gov.ph, downloaded June 2005

7. “The Mt. Matutum Integrated Conservation and Development (MICADEV) Program”, South Cotabato, CSDO, 1998

8. Updated KFC Strategic Development Plan of Misamis Occidental (2005-2008), August 2005, PATSARRD

Chapter 1 - 14

CHAPTER 2

MT. MALINDANG RANGE NATURAL PARK DEVELOPMENT PROJECT STRATEGIC PLAN

I. BACKGROUND / RATIONALE

A. Situationer

Mt. Malindang Range was originally proclaimed as national park and watershed reserve on June 19, 1971 through Republic Act No. 6266 with an area of about 53,262 hectares. With the passage of the NIPAS Act of 1992 (R.A. 7586), the said national park became an initial component of the National Integrated Protected Areas System or NIPAS. Pursuant to the provisions of the NIPAS Act, Mt. Malindang was processed, through the assistance of two foreign-funded projects namely the National Integrated Protected Areas Programme (NIPAP) and the CARE Philippines AWESOME Project, into an integrated protected areas system (IPAS). On July 30, 2004 a law (R.A. 9304) was finally approved declaring the said mountain range as Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park. The proclamation covered the core zone of about 34,694 hectares and a buffer zone of 18,334 hectares. The core zone is the remaining forest vegetation while the buffer zone is composed of the open and cultivated portions of the park already occupied by the indigenous people and the tenured migrants.

Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park plays an INDISPENSABLE ROLE in sustaining the total well-being of the entire province of Misamis Occidental. As watershed, it supplies potable water mainly for domestic and agricultural uses of the inhabitants both in the upland and lowland areas. The fresh water also promotes diversity and production of fish and marine resources. The forest in the park enhances formation and collection of rainclouds promoting regular rainfall that sustains agricultural productions in the upland areas. Its forest prevents landslide, serves as carbon sink and oxygen producer. It also provides beautiful scenery and wholesome atmosphere, habitat of diverse species of plant and animal life and the dwelling place of the indigenous people. The mountain range serves as barrier that protects the entire province against strong winds and storms.

The mountain range also contains other important natural resources that could boost the progress of the province. This resources include 15 major rivers and 17 smaller rivers potential for generation of cheap energy through mini-hydro power plant, commercial water utilization and irrigation systems. There are also potential sites for ecotourism development.

There are more or less 4,000 families residing within the boundary of the natural park. About 57% of the total number are members of the Subanen tribe. They are mostly marginal and sub-marginal farmers and vulnerable groups and rarely reached by basic services of the government.

B. Problem Statement

The main problem in Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park is the continuous degradation of its natural resources due to the economic activities of the inhabitants in the area. There are about 3,800 to 4,000 families of marginal and submarginal farmers living inside the park whose income cannot meet the needs of their families. Most of them depend on the resources of the park for firewood and construction timber. When they

Chapter 2 - 1

are in dire needs of cash especially when members of their families are sick, they would gather resources from the park for additional cash. Others gradually encroach the protected area by clearing narrow strips or small patches of forest for agricultural production. Because of poverty, the children of this protected area occupants have no chance to get higher education so they will grow up to become forest dependents in the near future.

The degradation of the resources in the park has already caused several environmental disturbances that adversely affect other ecosystems and most inhabitants in the province. This include shortage of potable water during dry months, destructive floods during rainy season, degradation and loss of soil fertility, siltation and sedimentation of rivers, irrigation systems and coastal areas, changes in rainfall or climatic pattern and degradation of the quality of air and water. The miserable living conditions of the protected area occupants, if not attended, will totally destroy the resources in the park and may trigger occurrence of environmental catastrophes in the entire province.

C. Problem Analysis

Low

Income Lack of Development

Programs No alternative

Livelihood POVERTY

(UPLAND DWELLERS)

Illegal cutting of Timber/Un-

sustainable use

Kaingin / Crude Farming / Land Conversion

Illegal Hunting & Gathering of NTF

DEGRADATION OF PROTECTED AREA / WATERSHED

Loss of Potential

Resources / Opportunities

Environment Related Illness

Decrease FOOD

Production

Water Shortage

Floods / Calamities

POVERTY (PROVINCE WIDE)

Chapter 2 - 2

D. The Importance of PACAP Project The most alarming problem that poses as threat to the lives of all inhabitants in Misamis Occidental is the continuous degradation of the watershed and protected area. The root cause of this problem is the poverty of the people living within and surrounding the protected area. The Local Government and National Agencies in the province lacks the necessary resources to address this problem considering the financial crisis suffered by the country at present. If this problem will not be checked soonest, degradation of the park would become serious that might result to destructive calamities or catastrophes in the future, as experienced by other areas in the country. Besides this point, experiences teach us that rehabilitation of denuded forest ecosystem is very difficult, expensive and yield insignificant results. The FOCAS Project under PACAP Program could be the answer to the prayer of the alarmed stakeholders of Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park. The objective of the program aims to cure the very root cause of the problem prevailing in the said protected area. Although some important and direct aspects of biodiversity protection and conservation is not actually targeted by the program, this could be used as leverage to generate the active participation of the people in the locality, particularly the program beneficiaries, in protecting the park and watershed area against destructive activities of other individuals or groups. E. Significance To Provincial Development Programs The general development strategy of the provincial government of Misamis Occidental is capsulized as CHAMPS which means: C - Competency H - Health A - Agricultural Production M - Maintenance of Peace and Order P - Protection of Environment S - Social Services Each of these programs would certainly fail if the most vital ingredient is absent. This vital ingredient is water which is the primary function of Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park being a prime watershed area. Therefore, any measure geared towards addressing the problem in Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park no matter how big or small it is would support the development progress of the provincial government. F. Other Programs in MMRNP Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park has been a recipient of several foreign funded programs and projects. These include the following:

1. National Integrated Protected Areas Programme (NIPAP) – This was a special program of the DENR funded with grant assistance from the European Union. It was implemented on July, 1996 until March, 2001. This project was mainly aimed at establishing the protected area following the provisions of the NIPAS law or Republic Act No. 7856. The Project was responsible in delineating the protected area boundary, strengthening the Protected Area Management Board (PAMB), having the area proclaimed by the President as NIPAS Area, preparing the General Management Plan, constructing the Protected Area Office, implementing intensive information and education activities, linkaging with various Local and

Chapter 2 - 3

National Government Agencies and intensifying the protection of the biodiversity of the protected area.

2. AWESOME Project of CARE Philippines – AWESOME which means Agencies

Working for the Ecological Sustainability of Mt. Malindang and Environs was designed to continue the activities left by NIPAP on the legal establishment of the protected area and provide livelihood assistance to the protected area occupants. It was funded with a grant from the Royal Netherlands Embassy and implemented starting January, 1999 to December, 2004. Some of its notable achievements were its assistance in the congressional act that proclaimed the mountain range as Natural Park, the monumenting and vegetative demarcation of the protected area boundary, the delineation of various management zones, organization of several people’s organization, assistance in the issuance of land tenure instruments to seven (7) PO’s, implementation of agroforestry (coffee and abacca plantation) projects covering few hundreds of hectares within the buffer zone, rehabilitation of about 300 hectares of denuded area, inventory of flora and fauna in Don Victoriano, linkaging with other NGO’s and different government agencies, information and education program and assistance in forest protection and law enforcement.

3. BRP-SEARCA – is the Biodiversity Research Program for Development in

Mindanao focus on Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park which was jointly implemented by the Southeast Asian Regional Center for Research in Agriculture based at UPLP and a group of Dutch researchers, the project was funded by the Dutch Government. It started in 1999 and ended on May, 2005. it was mainly a research project covering the northern portion of the protected area and the province forming like a wedge.

4. PALS – the Philippines Australia Local Sustainability program only covers

insignificant portions of Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park particularly in communities inside the buffer zone. At the start of the project the Protected Area Office was involved in some activities but as the project goes on, our involvement gradually phased out. The Mt. Malindang PAMB through resolution was even requesting the project management office for brief informations about the projects proposed to be implemented within the communities inside the protected area to prevent possible environmental impacts but no response was made.

II. FOCAS STRATEGY AND LOGFRAME A. Vision

The project envisions a healthy and abundant protected area surrounded by economically developed, ecologically conscious and socially bonded communities working for the protection of biodiversity and conservation of natural resources.

B. Mission

To uplift the living condition and raise the ecological awareness of the people living within and around Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park to generate their active participation in the protection of biodiversity and conservation of natural resources of the protected area and sustain its life-support services for the present and future generations.

Chapter 2 - 4

C. Objectives:

1. To improve the living condition of at least 20% of the protected area occupants within the FOCAS Site by 2010 onwards.

2. To reduce the dependency of the park occupants on the resources of the park by

year 2008 onwards.

3. Increase the forest cover of the park by about 260 hectares and reduce soil erosion from the area by year 2010.

4. Enhance the ecological awareness of about 20% of the upland dwellers by year

2010 and make them active conservation advocates and protectors of the park.

C.1 Impact on Income of Park Occupants The low income of park occupants directly effects the rate of destruction of the biodiversity of the protected area. About 90% of the park occupants in the area are marginal and sub-marginal farmers. Their monthly income ranges from P1,500 to P3,000 monthly. With this, they could hardly send their children to school to get higher education. Without attaining higher education, their children would end up becoming park dependents in the future adding to the mounting pressure against the park. In times of dire needs, they would usually gather resources from the park for additional cash. C. 2 Effects on Dependency of the Park At present, there are about 19,000 families that are considered immediate threats to Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park. Roughly 4,000 of these families are living inside the park particularly in the proclaimed buffer zone and designated multiple-use zones of the protected area. About 57% of these are living within the FOCAS site. Most if not all of this family-inhabitants or park dwellers depend on the park’s resources for firewood and lumber materials for the construction or repair of their houses. For firewood alone, about 10,000 cubic meters of wood are removed from the park monthly or 120,000 cubic meters of wood removed every year. With the prevailing market price of P100 per cubic meter of firewood, the amount lost would reach to P12,000,000 yearly. If the ecological and aesthetic value of the trees cut will be considered based on the value of every tree in MMRNP set by PAMB, the total value of loses from the government would amount to P120,012,000,000 yearly. The cutting and gathering of timber for construction materials is another serious threat to Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park. The pressure is coming from the inhabitants outside the park. At present there are only two (2) concerned areas in MMRNP where illegal cutting of timber has not been solved. Rough estimates show that about Forty (40) cubic meters are cut and removed from this 2 barangays every month or about 480 cu. m. yearly. At an average of 1.5 cubic meters per tree, this would give an average of 26.6 trees felled down every month or 319 trees yearly. Assuming that one tree of the same size is cut in each of the remaining 63 barangays (there are 65 barangays inside the park) within MMRNP every month, this would make a total of 1075 trees or 1,212.5 cubic meters of timber removed form the park yearly. Given the prevailing market price of P5,000 per cubic meter of hardwood, the value of timber lost is P6,062,500. Adding this to the ecological value of big trees at 40,000 each, the total loss would amount to Forty Eight Million, Sixty Two Thousand Five hundred (P48,062,500) pesos. If this amount will be added to the value of firewood lost, the government will lose about One Hundred Twenty Billion, Sixty Million, Sixty Two Thousand Five Hundred (P120,060,062,500) pesos worth of precious natural resources.

Chapter 2 - 5

Another activity of the people in the area that contributes to the degradation of the park is illegal hunting and gathering of non-timber forest products. No estimate has ever been made on the amount of damage resulting from this activity but the impacts are readily observable such as the decrease in population of important fauna and flora. There are even few species of wild animals such as Parrots and Cockato which are already extinct in the area. Several species of flora such as Apitong, Almaciga and Rattan are already endangered. C. 3 Soil Erosion Problem The biggest factor that cause soil erosion is the lost of forest vegetation or soil cover resulting from illegal cutting of timber and slash-and-burn method of farming into the park. The adverse effects of this phenomenon are not only limited to the locality but extends to other ecosystems. This includes denudation or even desertification of the soil, pollution of water sources, sedimentation of siltation of river beds, lowland farms and marine sanctuaries and destruction of potable water and irrigation systems. The value of damage that may result from this phenomenon would be enormous and sometimes shocking on the part of the government, but up to now no study has been made regarding this concern.

C. 4 Advantages on Ecological Awareness Cultivating the awareness of the people about the importance of biodiversity and natural resources is difficult. Most people, especially the upland dwellers, would equate ecological awareness program as strategy to deprive them of their believed right to use the resources of the protected area. Consistency, credibility, patience and time are the most important factors for the success of an ecological awareness program but its effect would help sustain the beneficial functions of the protected area. D. Strategies

1. Design and implement agro-forestry projects within the buffer and multiple-use zones that would prevent further degradation of the soil and maximize land production to raise the family income of park occupants and hillside farmers.

2. Identify and develop natural-resource-based cottage industries that can generate

income for the vulnerable groups particularly the women, the elderly and the indigenous people.

3. Develop and utilize renewable natural resources such as water that would

enhance production, promote industrial activities and support other development programs in the communities.

4. Design and implement appropriate ecological awareness program that would

raise the level of consciousness of the people in the locality and generate their active participation in the total protection of the park and other ecosystems.

5. Rehabilitate ecologically critical portions of the park that would enhance

regeneration of biological diversity and improve the life-support functions of the protected area.

6. Regularly supervise and monitor the different programs and evaluate the

progress of every activity in order to assure success of the project. Agroforestry, as used in this plan, would mean planting suitable combination of short term, medium term and long term agricultural crops and forestry crops on the same piece of land to maximize production and assure sufficient land or soil cover that would prevent or stop

Chapter 2 - 6

soil erosion. Cultivating seasonal cash crops like corn or camote may not necessarily be part of the project but would be helpful to enable the farmer to recover the cost of land preparation and the cost of maintaining the short-term and long-term crops during the first two years of project development. The medium-term and long-term crops to be planted should be those that have been found to be suitable in the project site, have ready market and could give higher income to farmers. Developing cottage industries using renewable natural resources available in the area such as bamboo, abaca fiber, tiger grass, vines and climbing ferns could generate additional income for the family. This could be more appropriate for women and elderly people who may no longer be capable of doing strenuous activities in the field. Utilizing water resources through potable water system and small water impounding system would help much in improving the living condition of the upland dwellers. This would enhance production of crops and livestock which would could increase income to farmers. This would also promote sanitation and good health to beneficiaries thereby reducing if not eliminating the cost of illness and medicines. Potable water when properly manage could generate income for the peoples organization and part of it may be used for the protection and development of Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park. Ecological awareness program is considered the most effective tool in biodiversity protection and conservation of natural resources. Although this has been found to be difficult and expensive due to man’s resistance to change, the effect is lasting which can be gauged through the change in behavior of an individual. It therefore promotes built-in sustainability of the program. This strategy may include information dissemination, distribution of reading materials, installation of billboards and signages and conduct symposia of fora. Audio or audio-visual programs over the radio and television my be included when deemed appropriate or necessary. Rehabilitation of denuded or ecologically critical parts of the protected area would help reduce the volume of soil eroded from the site. This will have beneficial effects not only to the protected area in terms of conserving the soil and regenerating the biodiversity but also in other ecosystems such as reducing the siltation in rivers and coastal areas. Pollution of water is also reduced through this activity. Supervision and administration of the project implementation and monitoring and evaluating the progress of various components or activities are the most important and critical factors that would generate success of any project. For this purpose a technical working group of the PAMB which is equivalent to the FOCAS Management Committee has been organized to facilitate preparation and approval of project proposals while the Protected Area Office of the PAMB under the PASu will facilitate implementation of project activities in the field. Necessary financial and logistic supports are necessary for the purpose. Project Components: The realization of the foregoing strategies would involve the designing and implementation of several detailed projects, such as the following:

1. Agro-forestry Development

1.1 Agricultural Cash/Perenial Crops development 1.2 High-value Fruit Trees Plantation development 1.3 Industrial Tree Plantation development

2. Reforestation of Ecological Critical Areas

Chapter 2 - 7

3. Livestock Production 4. Cottage Industry Development 5. Resource Utilization

− Potable Water System Development − Small Water Impounding System Development

6. Ecological Awareness Enhancement Program 7. Administration / Supervision, Monitoring and Evaluation.

The Target Goal, Location, Time Table and the corresponding budgetary requirement for each of the above-listed projects are indicated on Table I. E. Participation of LGU’s and Key Stakeholders The Local Government officials from the municipal down to the barangay level shall be made to undergo orientation and promotion programs so that they would be able to fully understand and appreciate the project considering that its objectives are geared towards further development of their areas of jurisdiction. Their understanding and appreciation of the project would be used as toll to push them to actively involve in the project implementation by overseeing and monitoring the progress of project activities. Other key stakeholders such as environmental NGO’s and government agencies shall also be included in the process. The DENR and PAMB being the administrator and manager of the protected area where the FOCAS site is located shall take the lead role in coordination the ENR Office of the Provincial Government. F. Stakeholders Analysis The FOCAS Site being a proclaimed natural park and a prime watershed area has a very wide range of stakeholders. They include the inhabitants of the park both indigenous people and tenured migrants, lowland and coastal communities, various government agencies dependent on or utilizing the water generated from the watershed, and environment enthusiasts both coming from within or outside Misamis Occidental. Each group has its own particular interest on the park or forest, but the most focus is the interest of the park occupants who consider the park as their dwelling place and source of living. The economic activities of this group greatly affect the condition of the park. Most members of this group are the poorest of the poor who are farming marginal and sub-marginal lands. Their income could hardly meet the needs of their family so in times of dire necessities, they would turn to the resources of the park for additional cash. Their activities therefore adversely affects the interest of other groups, hence the need for a program that would address this unique and complicated problem. It is also important to note that Mt. Malindang is the home of the very vulnerable Indigenous Peoples’ Group – the Subanoen. The Subanoen, as documented by the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), are the original settlers of Mt. Malindang protected area. These groups ran powerlessly towards the forest when Christians and other settlers invade the lowlands. At present, these tribal peoples are still observed to practice their traditional cultures. Although they only represent lower than 5 percent of the total affected population, it is still worthy to consider them in project implementation anywhere in Mt. Malindang where they live. The primary beneficiaries of the project would be the forest occupants within the FOCAS site. The project site could cover eleven (11) barangays of Don Victoriano, fourteen (14) barangays of Concecpcion and five (5) barangays of Bonifacio. Within this barangays, there is a total of about 2,401 household occupied by about 11,575 individuals per survey and registration of protected area occupants conducted by the DENR Protected Area Office and

Chapter 2 - 8

CARE Philippines in 2000. Of the total protected area occupants, about 57% belong to the indigenous people. The number of protected area occupants-households and gender class is indicated on the following Table to wit:

FOCAS Site Total HH

Total Occupants

Male Female

A. Don Victoriano 1. Napangan 183 886 444 442 2. Gandawan 51 254 130 124 3. Mara-mara 34 173 94 79 4. Petianan 89 438 219 219 5. Liboron 42 192 101 91 6. Nueva Vista 226 1,094 578 516 7. Tuno 172 834 421 413 8. Bagong Clarin 93 443 223 220 9. Lampasan 195 976 505 471 10. Lake Duminagat 55 282 146 136 11. Lalud 394 1,786 844 942

TOTAL 1,534 7,358 3,705 3,653 FOCAS Site Total

HH Total

Occupants Male Female

B. Bonifacio 1. Mapurog 202 1,055 565 490 2. Anonang 36 193 104 89 3. Kanao-kanao 96 498 248 250 4. Buenavista 5 23 8 15 5. Montol 36 176 95 81

TOTAL 375 1,945 1,020 925 FOCAS Site Total

HH Total

Occupants Male Female

C. Concepcion 1. Upper Salimpuno 60 254 132 122 2. Lingatongan 47 163 85 78 3. Pogan 15 81 39 42 4. Virayan 48 197 114 83 5. Marugang 33 147 86 61 6. Small Potongan 42 226 114 112 7. Upper Dapitan 38 195 94 101 8. Upper Dioyo 5 31 14 17 9. Upper Putongan 20 90 42 48 10. Poblacion 21 123 60 63 11. Capule 24 115 59 56 12. New Casul 22 100 53 47 13. Guiban 29 110 60 50 14. Bagong Nayon 88 440 217 223

TOTAL 492 2,272 1,169 1,103 G. Park Protection Program The primary beneficiaries of the project would be required, as a condition of the project, to protect the resources of the park within their respective barangay. Each barangay must recruit, train and deploy a team of at least five (5) bantay kinaiyahan volunteers who will check all who have adverse intentions. The team shall also conduct regular patrol inside the forest within their barangay. The team members may be provided incentives such as accident or health insurance by the project. Secondary beneficiaries such as the water users outside the protected area shall be required to pay water-users fee. The amount collected shall be deposited with the PAMB or

Chapter 2 - 9

the Barangay as Trust Fund. This will be used to sustain the park protection activities after the termination of the project. H. Organizational Structure/Roles and Functions Mt. Malindang Range was proclaimed a protected area under the category of a natural park through Republic Act No. 9304 on July 30, 2004 pursuant to the provisions of the National Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS) Act of 1992 which is RA 7586. As such, the park is managed by a Protected Area Management Board (PAMB) a multi-sectoral body organized pursuant to RA 7586 and RA 9304. Most of its functions are planning and policy formulation. The Protected Area Superintendent (PASu) who is designated by the said laws as the chief executive officer of the Protected Area executes the plan and implements the policy formulated by the PAMB. For the purpose of facilitating the implementation of PACAP in Mt. Malindang range, the Protected Area Management Board (PAMB) on May 12, 2005 execom meeting, organized a technical working group which would serve as the FOCAS Management Committee of the project. The committee composed of the following:

1. PASu Rolando S. Dingal - Chairman 2. Timo-ay Ruben Da. Baliton - IP representative 3. Mrs. Carmelita Ason - PO representative 4. Mr. John Pelare - NGO representative 5. Mrs. Evelyn Dumanjug - LGU Bonifacio representative 6. Mr. Carmelito Semilla - LGU Concepcion representative 7. Mrs. Melquicedes Lagas - LGU Don Victoriano representative

Initially, the office of the Protected Area Superintendent was designated as the FOCAS-MC Secretariat but later on due to problem on qualification per PACAP criteria, the secretariat work was transferred to the Misamis Occidental Federation of Cooperatives. The transfer was made through resolution passed by the PAMB Technical Working Group during a meeting held on August 5, 2005. The secretariat is primarily responsible in overseeing the execution of the project. The FOCAS management committee shall be mainly responsible in assisting preparation of projects proposals by proponent organizations and deliberating the same for submission or endorsement to the Provincial Stakeholders Committee (PSC). The structure of the FOCAS MC is presented on the following table:

Chapter 2 - 10

Structure of Mt. Malindang FOCAS-MC

PASu, MMRNP

FOCAS MC Chairman

FOCAS MC Secretariat (MOFECO)

LGU Rep. Bonifacio

LGU Rep. Don Victoriano

IP Rep. Don Vic.

Women’s

Rep.

PO Rep.

(KATAWHAN-MO) LGU Rep.

Concepcion

Project Proponents &

Implementations

I. Risk Assessment and Mitigations As experienced in the previous projects and management operations in Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park, the risk encountered were man-made and natural phenomena. Man-made destructions include occurrence of forest fires and breakdown of peace and order in the remote areas. Natural phenomena include drought and prolonged intense rainfall. Occurrence of forest or grass fire is often associated with long dry season and carelessness in burning agricultural wastes. This problem can be prevented through information and education program which would give due emphasis on the zero-burning of agricultural wastes and instead convert them to organic fertilizers. In addition, the project beneficiaries shall be required to organized and train a fire brigade who will suppress accidentally generated fire. Break down of peace and order and objection of the community people were usually experienced in areas where people needing basic government services were not punctually attended. The project itself would be used to deter the problem through intensive information and education program. During the process, the advantages and disadvantages of the project shall be discussed vis-à-vis the development programs of the government. Natural phenomena such as drought is experienced in the site every seven (7) to eight (8) years, however, areas near the edge of the forest of Mt. Malindang would not be seriously affected due to the moisture (fogs) coming from the forest. Preventing further degradation, through illegal logging or kaingin-making, of the forest would help solve the problem. The beneficiaries would be the effective protectors of the forest in the barangay.

Chapter 2 - 11

The impact of prolonged intense rainfall in the mountainous or hilly areas would be on soil erosion and possible landslide which is caused mainly by the velocity and volume of surface runoff or overland flow. Constructing canals along the contour which would safely discharge surface runoff to the gullies and creeks would minimize soil erosion and reduce the risk of landslides. J. Failure and Successes of Previous Projects The previous projects implemented in the protected area such as NIPAP (1997-2001) and AWESOME Project of CARE Philippines (1999-2004) experienced delay in the initial implementation of the project due to misconceptions and mis-informations which triggered resistance from several interest groups. However, with the intensive advocacy and promotion, the problem was addressed but lot of time was consumed before the projects finally took-off. Another problem encountered was the sustainability of the projects when they phased out. The DENR and the LGU’s despite their commitments, particularly on NIPAP, failed to sustain the project. The AWESOME project on the other hand got no commitment for sustainability from the DENR because of the tight financial condition of the said agency. Despite the problems some of the project beneficiaries managed to continue some of the project activities like maintaining the areas/plantations that would provide them income or assurance of better future. K. Budget Summary The total estimated budget from PACAP for 4 years for the Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park Development Project is about P 21,500,000. This amount include the budget of FOCAS MC Secretariat in the amount of P3,000,000 for three years. The items, activities and budgetary requirements are indicated on Table 3. The counterpart of PAMB includes building, vehicles, equipments and manpower that would be used for the implementation of the project. L. Monitoring and Evaluation Framework The detailed activities and the target goal indicated on Table 2 shall be used as the barometer in measuring the total success of the project. However the progress of the individual project shall be gauged using the detailed project proposal submitted by the proponent and approved by the PACAP authorities for the purpose. The FOCAS-MC Secretariat shall regularly undertake monitoring activities to detect deficiencies and recommend appropriate corrective measures. M. Sustainability Plan Sustainability is an important factor for the total success of the project. Considering the limited implementation period of PACAP FOCAS Project in Mt. Malindang Range, sustainability program shall be pushed in all project activities such as getting the communities of the project beneficiaries and generating support from other stakeholders’ awareness. The PAMB and FOCAS management committee shall also leverage the project with the Local Government Units, DENR and other government agencies and non-government organizations. Local legislations for the conservation of the park and collection of user’s fee for water generated by the project shall also be considered as source of financial resources that could be used in sustaining the protection of the watershed

Chapter 2 - 12

Chapter 2 - 13

N. Attachments/Supporting Information (Left at the PACAP Provincial Office) Tables:

1. Table 1 – FOCAS Logical Framework 2. Table 2 – Proposed Projects/Activities and Budgetary Estimates 3. Table 3 – Proposed 5-year Budget for MMRNP FOCAS-MC Secretariat

Appendices:

1. List of Barangay and its Barangay Chairman within the FOCAS Project 2. Names of Local Government Officials of the municipalities covered by MMRNP

FOCAS Project. 3. Summary of Protected Area occupants

− Land Classification Map − Land Use Map − Barangay Map − Road Network Map − Vegetation Map − Contour Map − Slope Map − Water Sources Map − Suitability Map for Corn − Suitability Map for Durian & Rambutan − Suitability Map for Abacca − Suitability Map for Coffee − Erosion Map

Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park Development Project Logical Framework

Table I. Logical Framework of MMRNP Development Project GOAL / Objectives Strategy / Input Objectively Verifiable

Indicators (OVI) Means of Verification

(MOV) Important Assumptions

Goal: Sustain or improved the watershed functions and other life-support services of Mt. Malindang Range Natural Park by implementing an Integrated Protected Area Management, promoting environment-friendly farming practices and enhancing stakeholders participation.

Objective No. 1

Improve the living condition of the 10% of the protected area occupants within the FOCAS Site by 2010.

Plant short term, medium term, and long term high-value crops. Develop potable water system and Small Water Impounding System (SWIS). Develop other IGP’s ie. Cottage industry and livestock-raising

− 60 hectares planted to cash crops - 310 hectares planted to high-value crops − 30 hectares planted to high value fruit

trees − 150 hectares of denuded watershed

reforested − Three potable water systems or SWIS

established and operational − 1000 families benefited by potable water

supply or SWIS

− Monitoring and

evaluation report − Maps, pictorials or

documentations of the projects

− Survey and assessment report

− Funding Support − Peace and order maintained − LGU Support − Climate favorable

Chapter 2 - 14

Objective No. 2

Reduce the dependency of the protected area occupants on the resources of the park.

Advocacy Information and Education Campaign Leveraging with beneficiaries

− Project participants stopped gathering

firewood from the PA. − Hunting and gathering of NTF’s in FOCAS

Site Stopped − Absence of illegally cut timber or traces of

illegal cutting in the area. − Absence of kaingin or slash & burn farming.

− Survey and assessment

report − Monitoring and evaluation

report − Pictorials and

documentations − Testimonies of local

officials

− Peace and order maintained − LGU Support − Funding support.

Objective No. 3

Increase the forest cover of the area by about 260 hectares by 2010.

Establish Production Forest Rehabilitate denuded areas

− 150 hectares planted to Industrial Trees − 150 hectares of denuded area reforested

with indigenous tree / plant species

− Project monitoring and

evaluation report − Maps, pictorials and

documentation

− Funding Support − Climate favorable − Peace and order maintained

Objective No. 4

Enhance the ecological awareness of about 20% of the PA occupants within the FOCAS site and make them active conservation advocates and protectors of the park.

Conduct training, seminars, symposia and educational trips Produce & Distribute reading information materials Conduct environmental radio/TV program Environmental Video/Film showing Project leveraging

− At least 400 families practiced agro-forestry

farming systems. − At least 5 Bantay Lasang Volunteers are

designated/appointed and deployed in every barangay within the FOCAS area.

− At least one (1) fire brigade organized in every barangay within FOCAS project site

− 80% of the population in FOCAS project knew the importance of biodiversity and watershed area to their own lives and lives of other people in the surrounding areas.

− Monitoring and evaluation

report − Survey and assessment

report − Accomplishment report − Barangay Checkpoints

− Funding Support − Peace and order maintained − LGU Support

Chapter 2 - 15

Table 3. Mt. Malindang Proposed Projects / Activities and Budget Estimate (Revised 14 October 2005)

PROJECT / ACTIVITY LOCATION (MUN. / BRGY.) TIME FRAME BUDGETARY REQUIREMENT

REMARKS

1. Agri-cash Crops Production (Lutya, Chayote)

Entire MMRNP-FOCAS Area 5 has.

Aug. 2006 to Dec. 2006

50,000 Cost include purchase propagules, planting & maintenance

2. High-value Crops Plantation Dev. ( Abaca – 70 has. Banana-60 has.)

Don Vic – 30 has. Abaca, 20 has. Banana; Concepcion – 40 has. Abaca, 10 has. Banana; Bonifacio-50 has Banana

Aug. 2006 to July. 2008

3,000,000 Cost include purchase propagules, fertilizer, planting & maintenance

3. High-value Fruit Trees Plantation Development

Entire MMRNP-FOCAS Area- 10nhas. (Don vic – 4 has., Concepcion-3 has., Bonifacio-3 has.)

June 2006 to Dec. 2007

300,000 Cost include purchase propagules and fertilizer, planting & maintenance

4. Small and Large Livestock Production Entire MMRNP-FOCAS Area (200 hh) 36 hh – Bonifacio; 50 hh – Concepcion’ 114 hh – Don Victoriano

Jan. 2007 to Dec. 2007

2,000,000 Cost include purchase of stocks & construction of shed

5. Industrial Tree Plantation Development ( Falcatta and Rubber )

Entire MMRNP-FOCAS Area (130 has.) Concepcion- 45 has., Bonifacio- 45 has. Don Victoriano- 40 has.

Jan. 2007 to Dec. 2008

4,000,000 Cost include purchase propagules, fertilizer, planting & maintenance

6. Reforestation of Denuded areas Integrated with potable water system

Don Victoriano & Concepcion (130 has.) June 2007 to Dec. 2008

1,000,000 Cost include purchase propagules and planting.

7. Indigenous-resource based cottage Industry Dev. (Handicraft)

Entire MMRNP-FOCAS Area ( 100 households)

Jan. 2008 to Dec. 2008

250,000

Cost include training and initial purchase of raw materials

8. Ecological Awareness Program Entire MMRNP-FOCAS Area July 2005 to June 2008

600,000

Cost of construction materials

9. Potable Water System Dev. or Small Water Impounding System

Don Victoriano – 2,000,000 Concepcion – 1,000,000

July 2006 to June 2007

3,000,000 Level 2 water system

10. Microfinance Entire MMRNP-FOCAS Area July 2006 beyond 2,000,000 Revolving Fund 11. Personnel and Admin Cost Entire MMRNP-FOCAS Area July 2005 to June

2009 2,300,000 Admin cost

12. Supervision / Administration , (FOCAS-MC Secretariat)

Entire MMRNP-FOCAS Area July 2005 to June 2009

3,000,000

For three years

TOTAL 21,500,000

Chapter 2 - 16

CHAPTER 3 SAVE LABO RIVER PROJECT

STRATEGIC PLAN

Definition of Terms ABC ATRE ARC AWESOME CBO CSO DA DENR-CENRO DENR-EMB DENR-PAO DLR DSWD FOCAS GEMPCO IAD IEC ICC KATAWHAN- MO LGU MAMA MAO MC MIT MOFECO MOELCI 11 MOWD MPDO MU MUCEP NIA NGO OCIADP OCPDO OCSUDA PACAP PALS Program PMO TCPDO TLDC TWG SLRP

- Association of Barangay Captains - Alternative Technology Resource Center - Agrarian Reform Community - Agencies Working for Ecological Sustainability of Mt. Malindang and its Environs - Community Based Organization - Civil Society Organizations - Department of Agriculture - Department of Environment and Natural Resources City Environment Natural Resources Office - Department of Environment and Natural Resources Environmental Management Bureau - Dep’t of Environment and Natural Resources Protected Area Office - Department of Land Reform (formerly DAR) - Department of Social Welfare and Development - Focused Community Assistance Scheme - Green Earth Multi-Purpose Cooperative - Integrated Area Development - Information Education and Communications - Immaculate Conception College - Kwalisyon Alang sa Tinuod ug Walay Hunong Alayon Pangkatawhan sa Misamis Occidental, Inc. - Local Government Units - Malindang Mountaineers Association - Municipal Agriculture Office - Medina College - Misamis Institute of Technology - Misamis Occidental Federation of Cooperatives - Misamis Occidental Electric Cooperatives 11 - Misamis Occidental Water District - Municipal Planning and Development Office - Misamis University - Misamis University Community Extension Program - National Irrigation Administration - Non Government Organization - Ozamiz City Integrated Area Development Plan - Ozamiz City Planning and Development Office - Ozamiz City Subanen Development Association - Philippines –Australia Community Assistance Program - Philippines-Australia Local Sustainability Program - Project Management Office - Tangub City Planning and Development Office - Technology and Livelihood Development Center - Technical Working Group - Save Labo River Project

1. BACKGROUND / RATIONALE A. General Information Misamis Occidental in Region X is situated in the northeastern tip of the Zamboanga peninsula, Mindanao. It has an area of 1, 932.32 sq. km. with a projected population of 516, 000 this year 2005.1 It has 17 political subdivisions with three Cities and 14 municipalities. At the heart of the province lies the Mt. Malindang Natural Park (R.A.9304) covering 53,254 hectares protected area . The province is blessed with 18 major watershed catchments and 32 rivers serving water to the three provinces of Misamis Occidental, Zamboanga del Norte and Zamboanga del Sur. In the last twenty years, Misamis Occidental lost more than 60% of its lush forest cover and is now reduced to a core of 34,694 hectares. Mt. Malindang and its rivers are threatened by mostly human made development activities like: land conversion, logging, agriculture, and migration into the upland areas and river slopes for settlement & agriculture due to the socio-economic & population pressures in the lowlands. Further, the increasing demand for water (agriculture & domestic uses), timber, sand & gravel for household & commercial construction materials aggravates the situation. Within the province, the most threatened rivers and its watersheds are Labo River in Ozamiz City, and Layawan River in Oroquieta City. These two rivers served the two cities where population pressure and watershed degradation is high. Previous programs in the province and funded studies, initiated by the DENR, Misamis University Community Extension Program (MUCEP), Local Government Units (LGUs) & CARE indicated interventions were limited. In comparison, Layawan River was recognized as one of the cleanest river of Region 10 and Oroquieta City a hall of fame awardee as the cleanest and greenest city. The recognition is for the still relatively good condition of Layawan River and its watershed. In comparison, Labo River needed immediate intervention owing to its importance as source of water supply for the domestic, agricultural and commercial needs for the more than 150, 000 residents of Ozamiz City, Tangub City and the Municipality of Clarin. Labor River and its Watershed is located at the southeastern side of the province of Misamis Occidental. It covers an approximate area of 11, 900 hectares from the boundaries of Don Victoriano in the upland headwater, 46 barangays in the whole or part from the municipality of Clarin, Tangub City and Ozamiz City which land area covers one half of the watershed. Studies that characterized Labo River initiated by the DENR-CENRO, and other studies funded by CARE-Philippines’ AWESOME Project indicated that livelihood, trainings and reforestation through MUCEP were initiated. Alternative livelihood assistance and sustainable upland farming technologies reforestation and forest protection were also implemnted by the AWESOME project in the barangays of Hoyohoy, Banglay (Tangub City), Gala & Guimad (Ozamiz City). Figure 1 below shows Labo River Location Map.

1 NSO-PPDO 2000 Census.

Chapter 3 - 2

Figure 1. Labo River Location Map

The LGUs placed priorities to the conservation, protection and rehabilitation of the river as indicated in their Municipal/City Development and Annual Investment Plans. However, funding problems and other equally beneficial development priorities hindered efforts on conservation, protection and rehabilitation. The DENR through the PASu and the PAMB placed importance on the protection of the headwaters of Labo River, but, also faced funding difficulty to sustain the interventions. Given the veracity and the complexity of the problem confronting the Labo River, the Save Labo River Project FOCAS Committee seeks to address the gaps, strengthen and complement the development initiatives by working in partnership with the Labo River key stakeholders. Thus, given the relative importance of Labo River catchments area that covers the Cities of Tangub and Ozamiz and the Municipality of Clarin, it is deemed urgent that Save Labo River Project be implemented. B. Problem Statement The “Poor living conditions of people and the continuing decline & loss of forest in Labo River Watershed catchments area and adjacent communities” brought about by a complex web of problems, conditions and underlying causes that needs an integrated area approach and concerted participation, collaboration & political will of duty bearers. (see fig. 1 – problem analysis) The core problem of Labo River Watershed was due to several factors. Among the underlying causes are: limited ability of service and resource providers resulting to weak governance and thinly spread budget among the many services that also need to be met, the effect is weak law enforcement specially on environment protection. The rapid population

Chapter 3 - 3

growth which caused the high demand for household and commercial use of sand, gravel and other natural resources of Labo River Watershed further contributed to the degradation of the area. The perceived high incidence of crime, illegal drug trade & use issues continue to be unfavorable for investments contributing to unemployment and under employment. The continuing demand for construction sand & gravel, extraction of water for agriculture & household consumption, continuing wildlife hunting/gathering, cutting of forest trees, unsustainable farming practices, occupation of riverbanks for agriculture further results to soil erosion, siltation, low level of productivity and therefore low income among families. The conditions are coupled by the low level of awareness of people of the importance of the watershed and indiscriminate dumping of waste adds to the decline of water quantity & quality. Only modest improvements were seen in the economy over the last few years despite increased budget allocations because these are overtaken mainly by increase of migration & population in the urban, upland and critical areas on the watershed. The foregoing causes of the poor living conditions of people and continuing decline and loss of forest in Labo River Watershed catchments area and adjacent communities was identified by the concerned NGAs, LGUs and CSOs in the area prior to the arrival of PACAP. The DENR-CENRO of Ozamiz City took the lead in the preparation of Labo Watershed Development Plan in 1999. Among the CSOs in 1999 also, a MOA was signed by the Misamis University, CARE-Philippines AWESOME Project, the LGU of Misamis Occidental and DENR for the Save Labo River Project (SLRP). The project’s original goal was to establish a system to protect and conserve the Labo Watershed in accordance with the social and economic aspirations of the people along with the biophysical and legal considerations. In the case of the LGUs, Ozamiz City included in the city’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan (2000) and Feasibility Study for the Ozamiz City Integrated Area Development Project (OCIADP-2001) projects for the watershed, among others Hinterland Greening, Guimad Eco-Village, Livelihood and Institution Building. Tangub also included in their Development Plan, preparations for Hoyohoy Highland Park and Botanical Garden, while the Municipality of Clarin, reforestations. Despite the DENR-CENRO Labo Watershed Development Plan, and although included in the development plans of the LGUs of Ozamiz, Tangub, and Clarin, budgetary constraints and priorities both in the national and local level, not only among the NGAs and LGUs, but also among the CSOs, resulted to modest implementation of SLRP activities. Thus, the problem of Labo River Watershed remained. The identification of Misamis Occidental as AusAID FOCAS area, and the arrival of PACAP in the province, and eventual identification of Save Labo River Project as a FOCAS area, is timely and godsend. The poor living conditions of people and continuing decline and loss of forest in Labo River Watershed catchments area and adjacent communities must be responded, thus, based on the analysis made, the SLRP FOCAS MC during the strategic planning meeting developed the Vision, Mission, Goal and Objectives for SLRP.

Chapter 3 - 4

C. Problem Analysis:

Und

erly

ing

Cau

ses Unfavorable

investment climate, high

un-employment

& under

employment

Weak governance Unaligned priorities and thinly spread budget allocations

Weak law and policy

enforcement on

environment protection

High

incidence of graft & corruption

Rapid increases in prices of oil & cost of living

Rapid population increase

esp. in rural agricultural

areas

Prim

ary

& S

econ

dary

Cau

ses

Poor living conditions of people and the continuing decline & loss of forest in Labo River Watershed Catchment areas and adjacent communities.

HH and comme

rcial demand

for sand and

gravel

Eff

ects

& C

onse

quen

ces

CORE

PROBLEM

Quarrying

Weak & lack of active

community &

people’s organizat

ions participat

ion

Irrigation for

agriculture

Poor infrastruc

ture (water,

systems, post

harvest facilities

& market)

Low awareness

levels

Upland migration, riverbank occupatio

n and Land

Tenure insecurity

Low income lack of capital,

Low productivity & lack of

alternative

livelihood

Unsustainable farming practices

(kaingin), Soil erosion

Inactive River Mgt.

Council. Need of adoption of Labo River

Watershed Mgt Plan

Heavy water use

among HH &

institutions

Improper solid

waste disposal

Presence of illegal cutting of trees & wildlife

gathering

Poor health, sanitation, mal-

nutrition, morbidity, & child mortality

Worsening degradation of the

environment (siltation, decline in water quality

& quantity)

Loss of riverine &

coastal biodiversity

Further in-migration &

encroachment of forestlands & riverbanks

Floods & loss of

properties

Further stagnation of socio-economic conditions

Further widening of disparities of rural,

urban & coastal communities

Increase in the incidence of crime & worsening of peace & order conditions

Figure 2. Problem Analysis – Causal Relationship

Chapter 3 - 5

D. Importance of PACAP Intervention PACAP technical and financial support to the Save Labo River project will facilitate the implementation of the following based on SLRP objectives: Capability building programs for the CSOs, implementing the SLRP, as well as LGUs and NGAs who will benefit from the training attended by their representatives in the SLRP FOCAS MC, and those who will also become members of the proposed re-organization of Labo River Management Council. Implementation of sustainable alternative livelihood projects to increase production and income of households, thus, reduce poverty and improve the standard of living of the residents of Labo River Watershed and adjacent areas. Area development projects and mobilization of stakeholders and resources for the effective conservation, protection, development and management of Labo River Watershed using the integrated area development approach. Moreover, PACAP intervention and experience and expertise in Integrated Area Development will ensure greater success of the SLRP in augmenting livelihood of the residences sustainable use of resources of Labo River Watershed, and sustain the gains made by the SLRP preliminary projects. PACAP fund will also be used as leverage for more investment and as counterpart for LGU budget allocations for the proposed SLRP. The proper use and utilization of the fund would enable the proponents to gain experience, expertise and credibility to access other fund sources-local and foreign for Labo River Watershed. The creation of Provincial Stakeholders Committees and FOCAS Management Committees as one of the PEF will also hasten the partnership and involvement of multi-sectoral and inter-agency participation in solving the complex web of problems, conditions and underlying causes of Labo River Watershed problems. E. Significance of PACAP Intervention to Provincial Development Plan PACAP intervention in terms of technical expertise and experience, and financial grant will support the Misamis Occidental Provincial Engagement Strategy “ to reduce poverty in the region and improving the quality of life of its people by a) augmenting traditional and/or providing alternative livelihood through agri-aqua base food, raw materials, and industrial finished products, b) utilizing reasonably and sustainably the natural resources, and c) considering prominently the rehabilitation, protection, and preservation of the province’s vast watershed area and its coastal resources. Likewise PACAP intervention for Labo River Watershed SLRP will help the province achieve the vision of “Misamis Occidental a major provider of agri-based food, raw materials, industrial, finished products and one of the tourism center in Mindanao through optimum and responsible utilization of resources”. Furthermore, PACAP intervention for Labo River Watershed SLRP is in accordance with PACAP Goal : To reduce poverty and improve the standard of living of poor communities through sustainable economic and social development”. The alternative livelihood, capability buildings and Labo River Watershed strategy to undertake area development projects for the conservation, protection and sustainable development of Labo River Watershed, as well as the strategy to implement environmental protection advocacy activities including Information Education and Communications programs firmly adheres to both PACAP Obligatory and Discretionary strategies.

Chapter 3 - 6

F. Previous Programs and Projects in Labo River Watershed :

Proponent and Program/

Project

Time Frame

Brief Description Coverage/ Area Current Status

1. LGU of Ozamiz City with NIA, DLR

2003 - constructed all-weather farm-to-market and concrete bridge - proposal for another all-weather farm-to-market

ARC of Kinuman Norte DALICAPAN ARC

On-going Planning stage

2. LGU of Tangub City

1998-present

-Implemented eco-tourism and reforestation initiatives in the identified eco-tourism site of the city

Hoyohoy, Tangub City

On-going

3. LGU of Clarin

2000-present

-Reforestation activities Clarin On-going

4. DENR-CENRO

1998-present

-Social Forestry projects

-Hoyohoy, Tangub City -Guimad and Guingona, Ozamiz City

5. CARE-Philippines AWESOME Project

200-2004

-Coffee, Abaca plantations -Capability Building -Agro-Forestry -Livelihood-Consumer store, -Ginger, peanut and ube production -Water system -Reforestation

Hoyohoy, Tangub City -Guiad, Ozamiz City

Finished

6. Misamis University (MUCEP) with DENR_ CENRO, LGU of Ozamiz City and Misamis Occidental, CARE-Philippines AWESOME Project, Misamis University Medical Center

1999-present

-Barangay Guimad Integrated Development approach (BAGIDA)-Livelihood, Engineering Services, Reforestation, Health-Nutrition-Medical- Dental services, etc. -Save Labo River Project :Agro-Forestry-Nursery, Tree planting, PRA, community-based Collect-A-Seed Campaign

-Guimad Ozamiz City -Hoyohoy, Tangub City -Barangays Kinuman Norte, Guimad, Dalapang, Panta-on, Capucao P, and Gala, Ozamiz City

On-going

Chapter 3 - 7

7. DLR-NIA-WB

2000 ARC Development : -all weather twelve (12 kms. ) farm-to-market road, one (1) unit concrete bridge, technical assistance livelihood, irrigation facilitiy, community organizing, capability building -Proposed DALICAPAN ARC: all weather farm-to-market road technical assistance livelihood, irrigation facilitiy, community organizing, capability building

Barangay Kinuman Norte Barangay Dalapang, Liposong, Capucao P and Pantaon, Ozamiz City

On-going On-going

8. KATAWHAN -MO

-Potable water system -Alternative health Care -Community Organizing -Integrated Organic Farming

Finished On-going

9. PIPULI Foundation/ BEA

-Environmental Education -Livelihood, Organic Farming Technlogy

II. The FOCAS STRATEGY AND LOGFRAME A. Vision A “life-giving” watershed protected, conserved and sustained by empowered communities. B. Mission Mobilize stakeholders for the effective conservation, protection, development and management of Labo River Watershed using the integrated area development approach. C. Goal Conserve, protect and rehabilitate the natural resources of Labo River Watershed and uplift the socio-economic well-being of household and communities living within the watershed and adjacent areas.

Chapter 3 - 8

D. Specific Objectives At the end of four (4) years the following specific objectives will be met:

1. Reorganize Labo River Watershed Management Council actively participated by concerned Local Government Units, key stakeholders from National Government Agencies (NGAs), Non-Government Organizations (NGOs), Academe and Private Sector implementing sustainable development program.

2. Implement sustainable alternative livelihood to increase production and income of households.

3. Undertake area development projects for the conservation, protection and sustainable development of Labo River Watershed.

4. Implement environmental protection advocacy activities including Information Education and Communications programs, policy studies and legislations .

E. Strategies

Conservation & Protection of the River Watershed Area and Poverty Reduction, Improvement of the Household Livelihood Security (Quality of Life) of vulnerable groups/communities

Capacity Building & Empowerment of Key Agencies, Stakeholders & Community Organizations

Agri-Forestry Development & Sustainable Resource Utilization

Conservation (Environment Rehabilitation, Reforestation & Protection)

LGUs, Gov’t

Line

Agencies

NGOs

Private

IPs Women

POs Other Disadvantaged Communities

Vulnerable Groups

Integrated Area Development Approach

Alternative Livelihood Development &

increasing the Household Livelihood Security

Figure 3. Sustainable Development Strategy Diagram The strategy is to attain socio-economic and sustainable natural resources management thereby improving the overall household livelihood security of communities through: a. Increasing the capacity and empowerment of community organizations and Labo River Management Council/advocacy group or network of SLRP concerned entities thereby improving the service delivery systems.

Chapter 3 - 9

b. Agro-forestry development and sustainable resource utilization. c. Providing alternative livelihood opportunities through on-farm and off-farm economic activities. d. Conservation, protection and rehabilitation of watershed and other critically denuded areas through IEC, law enforcement, policy advocacy, and area development activities. The Reorganization of Labo River Watershed Management Council (LRWMC)/advocacy group or network of SLRP concerned entities is envisioned to act as catalyst, mobilizing the appropriate concerned National Government Agencies (NGAs), as well as those from the Civil Society Organizations e.g NGOs POs, those from ther Private Sectors-Business, academe, other groups, entities and other stakeholders for the implementation of sustainable development program for Labo River Watershed. The LRWMC shall become the policy-making body/organization/structure asked to oversee the protection of Labo River Watershed. Livelihood intervention is one of the strategies since studies2 and previous experiences show that in protecting the environment the people should be a priority, and their economic needs should be addressed. The sustainable livelihood that will be implemented refers to agro-forestry, agro-ecotourism and other environment–friendly farm and off-farm alternative means of income for the residents of Labo River Watershed. Short, medium, and perennial agricultural crops shall be utilized by the project alongside fruit and timber trees to ensure long term capacity of Labo Watershed to sustain life. Area development projects mean the implementation of vegetative (agro-forestry) and non-vegetative measures for the conservation, protection and sustainable development of Labo River Watershed. The construction of gabions, small water impounding projects, mini dams together with reforestation activities will be applied for Labo Riverbank and Watershed rehabilitation. The commitment and involvement of Labo River Watershed stakeholders shall be obtained through the implementation of intensive environmental protection advocacy activities including Information Education and Communications programs, policy studies and legislations. Ordinances and other legislations shall be enforced, together with strengthening of Community-Based Organizations (CBOs). The involvement and partnership of the government agencies and the private sector in all phases of SLRP shall be made certain, and ensured that it will be institutionalized even after PACAP support, one venue would be the LRWMC. The integrated areas development approach is a prime project approach in these strategies in order to implement area specific socio-economic and natural resources management projects with equity resources allocation. Cutting across all program component strategies are the Gender, Equity & Diversity and Capacity Building of key agencies, stakeholders and community empowerment. All project activities is through collaboration between NGOs, LGUs, NGAs, POs, Private Sectors and participation of the indigenous peoples (Subanen & others), vulnerable and disadvantaged group in the community. Indigenous people (IP) in the area are concentrated in Barangay Guimad-highest with more than 90 % of the 2 United Nations Research Institute for Social Development. Geneva, Switzerland.1994

Chapter 3 - 10

residents3 , and also in Barangays Guingona and Trigos all in Ozamiz City. The IPs role in SLRP shall be enhanced in particular as implementer of forest protection, livelihood and capability building projects. IP and migrant residents in Guimad and in the other two barangays of Ozamiz City are mainly farmers planting corn and root crops, they also raises upland vegetable-carrots, pechay, cabbage, ginger, and sayote. Vegetable cultivations in this barangays particularly in Guingona are already in the buffer zones. Market for their products is Ozamiz City. Project Components: The foregoing strategies shall be implemented through the following proposed projects: 1. Capacity and Institutional Building 2. Agro-Forestry 3. Area Development Projects 4. Advocacy and IEC activities F. Stakeholder Analysis In identifying the Labo River Watershed stakeholders, this stakeholders’ analysis framework was used: Stakeholders Analysis Matrix (SAM)

(A) Important Stakeholders of high importance, but with low influence. This implies that they will require special initiatives if their interests are to be protected -NGAs -Religious Sectors -Individuals – old families -Private Sectors-business - Private and semi-government /GOCCS: NIA-Irrigators, farmers DECS -IPs

(B) Important & Influential Stakeholders appearing to have a high degree of influence on the project, who are also of high importance for its success. This implies that the project will need to establish good working relationships with these stakeholders to ensure and effective coalition for the project -LGU -NGAs -Religious Sectors -NGOs -Academe -ABC -Communities -GOCCs-MOWD, MOELCI

Key Stakeholders (1) Primary -LGU -NGOs/POs --Religious Sectors -Academe -ABC -MOWD -NIA-Irrigators, farmers, etc. -DECS -IPs -Private Sectors: Rotary, Jaycees, business, etc.

(C) Not So Important But Influential Stakeholders with high influence, who can therefore affect the project outcomes, but whose interests are not the target of the

(D) Not Important/Not Influential Stakeholders with low or have no influence on, or importance to project objectives and may require limited monitoring and

(2) Secondary - It was agreed that all sectors are Lbo River Watershed stakeholders owing to the fact that everybody is dependent and

3 BAGIDA Document. College of Arts and Sciences, Misamis University, Ozamiz City

Chapter 3 - 11

project. This conclusion implies that these stakeholders may be a source of significant risks, and they will need careful monitoring and management.

evaluation. They are unlikely to be the subject of project activities or management.

will be affected by Labo River Watershed situation and activities therein.

Parameters for Assessing Stakeholders’ Degree of Importance and/or Influence Parameters Specific Variables MANDATE/VMG

Full (legal) authority and control over the study area Supportive to the Save Labo Project Protection/ conservation focus VMG / mandate -LGUs, NGAs, Academe, Religious Sectors , NGOs, POs, GOCCS-MOWD

PROGRAMS & SERVICES

Provides balanced environmental conservation and economic development related interventions in the area Consistency with its mandate and VMG Significant impact/or with direct link to Save Labo River Project - LGUs, NGAs, Academe, Business ( as users, others negative-quarry), GOCCS-MOWD

COVERAGE

Geographic focus within the study area Clienteles: directly affected and significant in number. - LGU, NGAS, Academe, Private Sector Organizations

IMPACT ON WATER RESOURCES

Quantity Quality Access - All sectors-concentrate on NIA, HHs, industries-water-MOWD

INFLUENCE

Moral and ethical peer pressure Strong opposition/support Leadership (economic and political clout) -Academe. Religious Sectors, CSOs-NGOs, POs, Rotary, Jaycees, etc.

Based on the results of the initial stakeholders’ analysis, the following were initially identified for the proposed re-organization of LRWMC. Table 3 - Proposed LRWMC Sectoral Representatives: Sector Representatives LGU Provincial, Municipality/City LGUs, Barangays-ABC and

communities NGA DENR-PAO, NIA, DAR, DA, DSWD NGO KATAWHAN-MO Group, MOFECO, AWARD, ATRE PO NIA Irrigators’ Ass’n., Farmers Ass’n., MAMA, WOMENS, youth

etc.

Chapter 3 - 12

ACADEME MU, MIT, ICC, Medina College, Local DECS IPs Tribal Chieftains GOCC MOWD, MOELCI, etc. Private Chamber of Commerce, Land Bank, etc. Religious Parish Pastoral Council, Baptist, 7th Day Adventist, etc. G. SLRP Four-Year Project Logical Framework PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

MEANS OF VERIFICATION

ASSUMPTIONS

GOAL Conserve, protect and rehabilitate the natural resources of Labo River Watershed and uplift the socio-economic well-being of household and communities living with the watershed catchments and adjacent areas.

Labo River Watershed Management Plan developed by LRWC and adopted by the LGUs concerned At least 50 Household /year adopting sustainable farming practices. Rehabilitation of at least 150 has in selected Labo River Watershed denuded areas. increased incomes of at least 500 HHs from improved agriculture, new crops, livestock management. Sustained Networking of CBOS, Women’s Assn., LGU, NGAs

Data from Community-Based Monitoring Teams monitoring records of control plots/areas PRA and Baseline Data Income and Household Livelihood Sustainability monitoring data Number of patrol works

Labo River Watershed stakeholders will understand the importance and necessity of the protection, conservation and rehabilitation of Labo River Watershed. Residents of Labo River Watershed needs additional on-farm and off-farm additional means of livelihood

OBJECTIVES 1. Re-organize Labo River Watershed Management Council and strengthen key stakeholders: NGO, NGAs, Academe & Private Sector to implement sustainable development program

Strong and viable Labo River Watershed Management Council, CBOs, BDCs implementing programs and services LRWMC Organized Labo River Watershed Management and Development Plan (LRWMDP) adopted by LGUs Environment Agenda drafted and adopted.

Legal registration papers (SEC, CDA, BRW, etc) LGUs actively participating and resource/budget are allocated for LRWMC Project Management and Implementation prepared projects funded and operational LRWMDP Documents CBOs, Long Range

LGUs/CBOs, agrees/enters in to MOA with LRWMC project

Chapter 3 - 13

Chapter 3 - 14

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

MEANS OF VERIFICATION

ASSUMPTIONS

LGU LRWMDP budget allocations Water Resource Plan Developed

Development Plan CBO Policies and Operating Systems documents/ Manual

2. Implement sustainable alternative livelihood to increase production and income of households

Intensive agricultural production of cash and tree crops, and alternative income-generating enterprises in high priority communities, as an alternative to dependency on the forest or shifting cultivation in Labo River Watershed s and the adjacent areas. Agroforestry, Agribusiness/ Enterprise Technologies Adopted Agro-eco tourism facilities constructed and enterprise created

Actual Verification of SALT and other sustainable practices and structures Farm Plan Documents GCUS Monitoring Reports CBRMP, MOA, etc. Curriculum Developed, Training Design completed, Training reports by trainers and consultants NGAs MOA with SLRP for technical/ financial partnership/ assistance

Financial and other institutional investors e.g. Land Bank of the Philippines, Quedan Cor Region 9 agrees and enters into MOA with CBOs, Women’s Assn., for SLR Projects

3. Undertake area development projects for the conservation, protection and sustainable development of Labo River Watershed

Soil and water Conservation projects: Vegetative : reforestation and riverbank rehabilitation Non-vegetative: Gabions, small water impounding projects

No of has. reforested No of kms of riverbank rehabilitated Approve infra designs, budget and actual construction reports

4. Implementation of environmental protection advocacy activities including IEC programs and policy studies

IEC and advocacy activities in order to raise the level of awareness and take action to support these efforts

M & E reports No of IEC materials produces No of broadcasts/ Air time receipts Approve IEC plan

III. Project Components

PROJECT COMPONENTS

Livelihood Area Development Projects: Soil and Water Conservation Projects

Community Based Envi Protection Program and

Advocacy PRIORITY BARANGAYS

Agro-Forestry Eco-tourism Water system Micro

finance Vegetative /

Reforestation

Non-vegetative /Infrastructure-

gabions, SWSIP

IEC Forest protection

Tangub City: Hoyohoy x x x x x x Ozamiz City: Guimad x x x x x x x Guingona x x x x x x S. Abordo x x x x x Trigos x x x x x Kinuman Norte x x x x x x Gala x x x x x Dalapang x x x x x Capucao P x x x x x Sangay Daku x x x x x Embargo x x x x x Panta-on x x x x x Calabayan x x x x x x Mentering x x x x x Kinuman Sur x x x x x x Cogon x x x x x x Bagacay x x x x x x Cavinte x x x x x x Balintawak x x x x x x Manaka x x x x x x Litapan x x x x x x Labinay x x x x x x Clarin: Kabungahan x x x

Chapter 3 - 16

PROJECT COMPONENTS

Livelihood Area Development Projects: Soil and Water Conservation Projects

Community Based Envi Protection Program and

Advocacy PRIORITY BARANGAYS

Agro-Forestry Eco-tourism Water system Micro

finance Vegetative /

Reforestation

Non-vegetative /Infrastructure-

gabions, SWSIP

IEC Forest protection

Gata Diot x x x Lapasan x x x Gata Daku x x x

Budget 1,000,000 1,000,000

9,000,000 2,500,000

3,000,000

1,000,000

200,000

800,000

Total budget

13,500,000

4,000,000

1,000,000 Budget for Project Components = P18,500,000 Budget for FOCAS Secretariat = P 3,000,000 ------------------- Total Budget for SLRP FOCAS = P21,500,000 ===========

IV. Organizational Structure/Roles and Functions

FMC

Livelihood NGO/PO/CSO/PSO

Area Dev't Projects NGO/PO/CSO/PSO

Capacity Building

Labo River Watershed FOCAS MC

Advocacy

The proponents that will undertake SLRP livelihood, area development projects, and environmental protection and advocacy activities shall be the CSOs-NGOs, POs in partnership with NGAs, LGUs, and those from the Private Sector Organizations. The proponents will submit a proposal based on the priority projects identified by the SLRP FOCAS Management Committee (MC). The selection of the SLRP FOCAS MC was made during the PACAP organized preliminary meeting4 of CSOs-NGOs and POs, LGUs, and NGAs concerned and identified to be involved with various programs and projects in Labo River Watershed area. In the selection of SLRP FOCAS MC, participants agreed to have nine (9) members composed of three (3) members from the LGUs of Ozamiz and Tangub cities, and from the Municipality of Clarin , three (3) members from the NGAs with considerable programs in the area: : DENR-CENRO, DLR and NIA. The remaining three seats were allocated for: NGOs-one, POs-one and academe-one. The NGOs, POs elected among themselves who will be their SLRP FOCAS MC representatives and the academe was represented by Misamis University. The elected and designated FOCAS Secretariat is Misamis University through its extension arm the MUCEP given the fact that it initiated SLRP prior to PACAP arrival in the province. MUCEP shall facilitate the activities of the SLRP FOCAS MC, conduct preliminary assessment of maturity of POs, facilitate linkages and collaboration among institutions, oversee the implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of the SLRP, prepare M & E reports to the PACAP Provincial Action Officer through the Provincial Stakeholders Committee (PSC). V. Promotion of Sound Environment Practices The SLRP proponents of which MUCEP shall be the lead CSO will implement projects that in itself will mobilize stakeholders for the effective conservation, protection, development and management of Labo River Watershed using the integrated area development approach. The goal and the specific objectives of the project are geared towards reorganizing a council for Labo River Watershed, sustainable alternative livelihood, area developments for the

4 1st SLRP FOCAS MC Meeting. May 9, 2005, Function hall, Misamis University , Ozamiz City

conservation, protection and sustainable development of Labo River Watershed as well as implement environmental protection advocacy program. VI. SLRP Sustainability Plan: Sustainability of the SLRP is assured through the following: Re-organization and strengthening of Labo River Management Council/ advocacy group or network of SLRP concerned entities that will assume the policy-making and management functions of SLRP, including legislations and ordinances. Thorough assessment of partner CSOs/project implementers and feasibility of projects. Involvement and participation of all stakeholders-LGU, NGAs, NGOs, POs, Private Sector Organizations in project planning, implementation and management. VII. Attachments/Supporting Information (left at PACAP Provincial Project Office)

- Chronology of Events Prior to PACAP Entry - PACAP Entry and Identification of SLRP as one of Misamis Occidental FOCAS

area. - Statistical Annexes - Local Legislations and Ordinances - SB Resolutions supporting PACAP Program - Cooperating Organizations Executive Brief - FMC Resumes

Chapter 3 - 18

CHAPTER 4 ILIGAN BAY COASTAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT

PROJECT STRATEGIC PLAN

Glossary of Terms

AusAID - Australian Agency for International Development BAT - Bio-resource assessment Team BDP - Barangay development Project BFARMC - Barangay Fisheries and Agricultural Resource Management Council BOT - Board of Trustees CBU - Capital Build-Up CCPL - Coastal Community Problem Loop CRA - Coastal Resource assessment CRM - Coastal Resource Management CRMDP - Coastal Resource Management and Development Project CSO - Civil Society Organization FGD - Focus Group Discussion FMC - FOCAS Management Committee FOCAS - Focus Community Assistance Scheme IAD - Integrated Area Development IBICRMDP – Iligan Bay Coastal Resource Management & Development Project ICM - Integrated Coastal Management IEC - Information Education Communication IECP - Information Education Communication and Promotion LGU - Local Government Units MDP - Municipal Development Project MFARMC - Municipal Fisheries and Agricultural Resource Management Council. MMNRP - Mt. Malindang National Range Park NGA - National Government Agency NGO - Non-government Organization ACAP - Philippines-Australia Community Assistance Program PES - Provincial Engagement Strategy PO - People’s Organization RAS - Responsive Assistance Scheme SGF - Strategic Guidance Framework

Chapter 4 - 1

I. Introduction As defined by Coastal Resource Management experts, Alan White and Nelson Lopez in 1991, Coastal Resource Management (CRM) comprises those activities that achieve sustainable use and management of economically and ecologically valuable resources in the coastal areas which consider interaction among and within resource systems as well as those of humans and their environment.

One reason for instituting Coastal Resource Management (CRM) in Misamis Occidental is its geographical location. The province located in the northwestern part of Mindanao is proximate to important bodies of water. It is bounded on the northeast by the Mindanao Sea, on the east by the Iligan Bay and on the southeast by Panguil Bay. On its western side of the province a mountain range (with peaks as high as Mt. Malindang and Mt Ampiro, approximately 2,425 meters and 1,532 above sea level, respectively) and its rugged terrain that drops, rolls and stretches into plains up to the coast line , where 11 municipalities and 3 key cities with a rapidly increasing population. Another compelling ground for implementing CRM in the province is the development direction of Misamis Occidental as written in its Provincial Development Plan from 1999 to 2004. Misamis Occidental is envisioned to be “a major provider of agri-based food, raw materials, industrial finished products and one of the tourism centers in Mindanao through optimum and responsible utilization of resources.” Set as goal in the same document is the “measurable improvement in the quality of life of the citizenry.” The province can obtain success in its food security and poverty alleviation program, only by expanding its development perspective in the coastal areas beyond fisheries production and by reversing the open access regimes (situation where virtually there is no control in fishing and other activities in the coastal area.) A more recent impetus for putting CRM into action is the results of the Coastal Resource Assessment conducted by the Save Nature Society, Incorporated (SNS) in the past year. The study reveals that indeed the major fishing grounds of the province are severely depleted. The resource base of its fisheries production and other sea-based economic activities like tourism is in a precarious state. Coastal habitats like corals and seagrasses are destroyed, a loss estimated to be at least fifty percent (50%) in the live hard coral cover as well as in the seagrass cover in about 7 to 8 LGUs. There are only about 2 to 3 LGUs that have mangrove areas characterized by abundance of mature trees with large diameters (at breast height) as well as by abundance of seedlings and saplings ensuring regeneration of the mangrove stands. Coastal dwellers in 86 of the 106 coastal barangays visited by the Socio-economic Assessment team complain of economic difficulties. In a great majority of these coastal barangays, respondents of the Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) perceive the lack, if not the absence, of the services of the LGUs and the NGAs, particularly in providing answers or resolutions to problems related to their economic welfare. Also observed in these villages was the greater reliance of fishers, farmers and small enterprise owners on private lending companies than on government credit institutions. With the complexity of issues in resource management, a broad base of support is required to make CRM work. No one organization can effectively address the multi-

Chapter 4 - 2

dimensional and multi-sectoral issues that CRM encompass. The coastal communities, LGUs and national government agencies must thus learn the value of collaboration. While success in resource management is usually attributed to the participation of key stakeholders like coastal communities, the role of LGUs must also be recognized. CRM must be seen as a governance responsibility. The 1991 Local Government Code has devolved to the municipal government a number of functions related to CRM. Most municipalities in Misamis Occidental, however, are constrained by meager budget and lack of technical expertise and trained manpower. In the face of these constraints at the municipal level, the Provincial Government is determined to serve as coordinator of CRM by providing a mechanism for collaboration among and between LGUs, NGAs and NGOs, by leveraging funds and technical expertise to capacitate municipalities meet responsibility for the management of the coastal environment and by increasing public awareness on the importance of coastal resources.

II. ANALYSIS -BACKGROUND/RATIONALE a. Description of the problem in the FOCAS area

Rapid increase in population growth along the coastal areas exerts great pressure on various resources. A big percentage of the current populations are found along the coastal areas. As a result coastal habitats are under considerable strain from human activities. Domestic waste, bio-degradable and non-biodegradable materials are dumped indiscriminately causing pollution. Threats due to oil, petroleum and grease pollution from shipping operations in Jimenez contribute to pollution. Continued denudation of the remaining forested patches in the upper water catchments area due to logging is causing increased soil erosion. A water discoloration is observed in the mangrove areas whenever rains come and the resulting runoff increases the sediment load of coastal waters. Soil erosion leads to increased siltation of creeks, rivers, estuarine waters and the coastal areas. Sedimentation is manifested by the presence of sand dunes in Sinacaban and Jimenez. Mangrove forest conversion into aquaculture ponds, reclamation for housing purposes, wharves, piers, dikes and other infrastructures obstructing the waterways, over-exploitation of the mangrove trees (firewood, fish traps and construction) cause disturbance to and threaten the viability of mangrove areas. Blast fishing is one of many illegal ways of fishing which caused damaged to the coral reefs of Tudela, Sinacaban and Panaon. Another consequence is the depletion of fishes in shallow-water environments. Abrasive wave movement is a major threat in the shoreline areas of Panaon and Jimenez. Erosion of mainland soil and the consequent uprooting of trees along the shore are quite alarming.

Chapter 4 - 3

b. Problem analysis/sector analysis and needs/concern

Rapid increase in population

Pollution from domestic &

industrial waste

Continued denudation of the remaining

forested patches

Water discoloration

Increased sediment load of coastal waters due to runoff

Increased siltation

Sedimentation

Mangrove forest conversion

Waterways obstruction

Over-exploitation of the mangrove

Illegal fishing

Depletion of fishes in

shallow-water environments

Major threat in the shoreline

areas

Uprooting of trees along the

shore

Weak implementation

of coastal waters laws and

policies Illegal logging in mountain areas

Pollution from shipping

operations

Environmental Social

Habitat loss for breeding and

spawning grounds

Poverty

Less opportunity to increase income from traditional fishing

Lack of Funds for fishing development

Lack of alternative livelihood

Attitudinal problems of fisher folks

Financier-labor relationship

Over dependence on coastal resources

Lack of improved technology

Presence of many intermediary traders

Less support on marketing infrastructure

Effe

cts

and

Con

sequ

en- c

es

CO

RE

PRO

BLE

MS

Prim

ary

&

Seco

ndar

y C

ause

s U

nder

lyin

g C

ause

s

Figure 1. Coastal Community Problems Cause-Effect Relations

Chapter 4 - 4

In coastal areas and for families depending on the coastal resources, poverty is often caused by low income and lack of employment opportunities. There also exists the traditional attitude of fishing and so much dependency on coastal resource extraction.

Rural fisher folks find it difficult to venture into a more productive integrated fishing and marine product processing because of the lack of technology and networking information. The fate of the local fishing industry is even bogged down by inefficient and ineffective implementation of the national and local policies and fishery laws.

Both problems on environment degradation and concern on the livelihood of the coastal population should be addressed simultaneously. Providing the people with sustainable livelihood would give the environment a better fighting chance. The same people who abused and overused the coastal resources will also take care of the rehabilitation and protection of the environment if they will be given the proper information. If necessary, adapting the lesson from successful mangrove rehabilitation in Aklan, people will be compensated to take care of the coast, on and off-shore. d. Previous coastal resource development interventions

Coastal waters are considered to be the most productive areas in the marine environment. The distance between nutrient-rich waters from the bottom and the euphotic zone is small due to the shallow depth and strong vertical mixing induced by wind (e.g. upwelling), freshwater runoff and tides (Mann, 1982). The close proximity to the coast and river systems also makes the coastal seas highly vulnerable to the double impact of pollution and aquatic resource exploitation. It is only by understanding the mechanisms which control the behavior of the coastal environment and its biological communities can the full potential and value as an important food source be preserved. Current efforts to manage coral-reef areas involve coastal-zone plans, fishery regulations, and marine parks and reserves. On the whole, these approaches have had a very minimal impact on the status of the reefs and coastal areas of Misamis Occidental. However, some example of isolated successes can provide information useful for future planning. Although several provinces in the country have implemented restrictions on coastal development in specific areas, through zoning or environmental impact regulations, integrated coastal-zone management is still in the developmental stages. However, nationally sponsored reef and coastal environment surveys have been conducted through the effort of the governor’s program using PALS as funding agency was successfully done by the Save Nature Society’s group of expertise in the conduct of Coastal Resource Assessment (CRA) as baseline data for Coastal Resource Management and Development Plan (CRMDP) in the future. The surveys include the inventories of fish stocks, seagrasses, mangroves and the coralline areas of the province as well as the socio-economic status of the people. In many cases, the scope of this project has been limited to the availability of the appropriate funds in the national budgets. Recently, however, international funds from Aus-Aid have become available for work in coastal management, including the coral-reef resources and more importantly the socio-economic aspect. A major effort in this direction is the onset of the Philippines-Australia Community Assistance Program (PACAP) to advocate the Coastal Resource Management and Development Project comprising the municipalities with coastal areas namely: Tudela, Sinacaban, Jimenez

Chapter 4 - 5

and Panaon as one focus area. This program involves interdisciplinary approach between the proponent organization and the people’s organization with sustainable livelihood and environment as the focal point of the task. The CRMDP will use a “bottom-up” approach, based on sociological, economic, and environmental projects at the village level, which will lead to recommendations for local control of the resources, wherever feasible. The integrated approach is particularly necessary when determining what other occupations might be appropriate for fishermen when fishery resources are over-utilized. This approach is particularly applicable and also sustainable in the management of the vast range of coral-reef resources and the coastal zone in general. e. Possible intervention of PACAP

PACAP’s fund facility of PhP21,500,000 pesos for the project can serve as a starter fund to pump prime other stakeholders to pool their resources in whatever forms (i.e. counterpart funds, physical properties, technical support, human resources and others). PACAP’s learned lessons from earlier AFA areas and IAD approach best practices can be of great help when replicated in the same or much improved ways for the coastal waters and communities of Misamis Occidental.

PACAP Program will be an institutional support to provide a mechanism for the formulation of collaborative strategies and management systems so that the community and stakeholders can develop a multi-sectoral participation in resource conservation through integrated strategies in development planning to reduce poverty. PACAP could also help most by supporting alternative livelihood activities to minimize pressure of the coastal and marine resources and socio-economic projects geared toward proper resource use, rehabilitation and or restoration of degraded habitats and ecosystems. f. How intervention will support the PEF, SGF

The FOCAS Strategy is aligned with the first strategy in the PES which is “augmenting traditional and/or providing alternative livelihood through agri-aqua based food, raw materials, and industrial finished products”.

The FOCAS Strategy also is done via the IAD and supports the empowerment and the protection of the vulnerable and disadvantaged groups of people. Formulation of an integrated policy and legislative framework in the FOCAS area will support the Provincial Engagement Strategy and Strategic Guidance Framework. Under this strategy is the strengthening of the institutional capability particularly local communities and the provision of alternative livelihood development of resources to dependent communities.

Chapter 4 - 6

III. THE FOCAS STRATEGY AND LOGFRAME VISION: Productive coastal areas in four municipalities properly managed by capacitated local government units (LGUs) and equally empowered communities towards sustainable development. MISSION: Stakeholders who are deeply committed to implement various socio-economic programs towards sustainable coastal resource development

GOAL: Enhance coastal biodiversity of Iligan Bay by adapting an integrated area development approach, promoting viable and sustainable economic enterprises, developing multi-sectoral partnership and strengthening stakeholders’ participation.

OBJECTIVES: To increase coastal resource productivity and household income by 20% thru

livelihood opportunities.

To equip LGUs and coastal communities with capabilities toward sustainable environment development.

Enhanced coastal biodiversity thru the establishments of marine sanctuary, mangrove rehabilitation, among others.

DESCRIPTION OBJECTIVELY

VERIFIABLE INDICATORS (OVI)

MEANS OF VERIFICATION

(MOV)

IMPORTANT ASSUMPTIONS

(IA) Goal • Enhance coastal

biodiversity of Iligan Bay by adopting an Integrated Area Development approach, promoting viable and sustainable economic enterprises, developing multi-sectoral partnership and strengthening stakeholders’ participation.

• Enhanced Biodiversity • Environment-Friendly

Economic Enterprise Implemented

• Increased mangrove areas, sea grass and coral reefs

• Improved water quality, salinity

• Decrease Illegal fishing activities

• Mobilized deputized fish wardens and activate bantay dagat

• Encouraged stakeholders commitment and participation

• Managed waste disposal • Viable People’s

Organizations • Sustained Organizational

Structure and Financial Management System

• Coastal Resource Assessment

• Project Monitoring and Evaluation Report

• BFARMC and MFARMC minutes of meeting and attendance sheet

• Financial Reports • Conduct of seaborne

patrol • Fish catch reports

• Stakeholders commitment and support

• Fund commitment

• Biodiversity enhancement

• Sustainable economic enterprises

• Reduction of illegal fishing activities

• Peace and order situation maintained

Objective No. 1 • To increase

coastal resource • At least 15 types of

alternative environment-• FMC Periodic

Accomplishment • Stakeholders

Support

Chapter 4 - 7

DESCRIPTION OBJECTIVELY VERIFIABLE INDICATORS

(OVI)

MEANS OF VERIFICATION

(MOV)

IMPORTANT ASSUMPTIONS

(IA) productivity and household income by 20% thru livelihood opportunities

friendly projects developed and sustained by the community

• At least 15 viable POs are organized, strengthen and registered with the authorized registering agency

• At least 150 members of the association or cooperative are classified either residing in the barangay

• At least 1 community organizations per barangay for the entire FOCAS area

• Php 450,000 of Capital Build-Up (CBU) generated by the community organization

Reports • Project status reports • Operations and financial

system records and manuals

• Monitoring and Evaluation/Project visits

• PO registration certificates

• Minutes of meetings and activities

• Attendance sheets • Beneficiaries profiling • FGD, GA, one-on-one

discussions • Organizational profiling • PO Financial Reports

and Subsidiary Ledgers

Objective No. 2 • To equip LGU’s

and Coastal Communities with capabilities toward sustainable environment development

• BDP and MDP developed and adopted

• Iligan Bay ICRMDP formulated and adopted in consonance with Provincial CRMDP

• Five major programs jointly undertaken by the stakeholders complementary to the Provincial Engagement Strategy (PES)

• Copies of BDP and MDP

• Copies of policies, guidelines, and resolutions

• Copies of Iligan Bay CRMDP

• Copies of plans, programs including budget

• Development Plans implemented

• Minutes of meetings and documentation of activities

• Stakeholders Support

• Financial Support

Objective No. 3 • Enhanced

coastal biodiversity thru the establishments of marine sanctuary, mangrove rehabilitation, among others

• Increased Biodiversity population

• Existing mangrove, sea grass and corals habitat maintained

• mangrove protected and rehabilitated

• Annual Bio-Resource Assessment conducted

• degraded sea grass and corals restored

• Four (4) Bio-Resource Assessment Teams (BAT) organized and functional

• Four (4) active and functional Municipal Multi-Sectoral Protection Committees organized and established

• Attendance during meetings and assessments

• Process documentation of each activities

• Municipal Ordinance on the protection of marine sanctuary areas

• Stakeholders Support

• Financial Support

Chapter 4 - 8

DESCRIPTION OBJECTIVELY VERIFIABLE INDICATORS

(OVI)

MEANS OF VERIFICATION

(MOV)

IMPORTANT ASSUMPTIONS

(IA) • established marine

sanctuary areas enhanced

IV. Stakeholder Analysis Matrix

Key stakeholders in

the area

How are they affected by the problem

How they solve the problem

Fishermen and the fisherfolks

Coastal dwellers and the fisherfolks are directly affected by siltation and smothering i.e. soil erosion by improper forestry, agriculture, mining, or construction practices; land reclamation. Loss of shoreline features like filling and dredging and land reclamation, erosion or accretion due to placement of shoreline structures and coral mining and mangrove harvest. Loss of physical habitat due to destructive harvest practices like walking on reefs and breaking corals, blast fishing, drive-in nets, use of poisons, coral or sand mining and mangrove conversion. Excessive fishing effort, hunting of wildlife, illegal and destructive fishing methods like poisons, dynamite fishing, fine mesh nets, drift nets, trawling and over harvesting of benthos animals.

Coastal dwellers and the fisherfolks are organizing themselves into associations and cooperatives to consolidate resources and reduce demand for scarce species by encouraging people to eat fish that are more hardy and easier to cultivate.

Coastal dwellers

- Coastal dwellers and the

fisherfolks are directly affected by the declining fisheries in the locality affected by discharges of industrial wastes and domestic sewage, runoff from urban, agriculture, or mining areas, waste from animal and fish farming, excess agrichemicals and domestic fertilizer use, industrial discharges,

Most of the coastal dwellers are trying their best to capture live food fish using hook and line and trap only and practice resources conservation.

Chapter 4 - 9

Key stakeholders in

the area

How are they affected by the problem

How they solve the problem

municipal sewage, and solid waste and oil exploration and transport.

- Coastal dwellers although less affected than farmers are also vulnerable to unfavorable fish catch and the market buying price.

Local Government Units (Provincial; City; Municipal & Barangays)

Local Government Units (Provincial; City; Municipal & Barangays) could generate only less revenue from these fishery resources.

Local Government Units (Provincial; City; Municipal & Barangays) enact laws that are favorable to the coastal resources management and conservation but needs willful implementation.

Coastal Farmers Associations; Agrarian Reform Communities & other People’s Organizations, Bantay Dagat

Coastal Farmers & other People’s Organizations are the product of unfair and non-equitable economic practices of the major players in the farming industry.

- Coastal Farmers and Fisherfolk Communities & other People’s Organizations consolidate resources to gain favorable prices of their products and access assistance from government line agencies.

- Fisherfolks and peoples organization ensure forest protection and rehabilitation and coastal biodiversity protected area i.e. marine sanctuary.

Non-government Organizations i

Non-government Organizations involved in helping the coastal resources and community development activities are concerned-based organizations envisioning conservation and a fair sustainability livelihood.

Non-government Organizations involved in helping the coastal resources and conservation through identifying other means of income introduced and promote alternative livelihood for fishermen and reef users by emphasizing use of reefs in the eco-tourism program.

Other vulnerable groups such as women and children

Other vulnerable groups such as women and children are indirectly affected through the household income derived from declining fish catch.

Other vulnerable groups such as women and children help in the augmentation of their income through livestocks and hog raising as an alternative source of income but practice the waste segregation and recycling process.

Chapter 4 - 10

Key stakeholders in

the area

How are they affected by the problem

How they solve the problem

Fish traders & marketing intermediaries

Fish traders & marketing intermediaries are the actual beneficiaries of the proceeds in the coastal resource products and not the fishermen and the fisherfolks.

- Some fishermen are trying to get credit sources that have lower interest rates while others are planning to form cooperatives so that their catch will not pass through middlemen who buy it at a very low price.

- Some members of the family particularly the wives, peddle their catch.

Philippine Fisheries Agencies

Fisherfolks and the Bantay Dagat abide by the ban on cutting of mangroves under RA7161 of 1991 and active in the stewardship in the coastal resource management.

List of IBCRMDP FMC Stakeholders 1. LGU of Tudela, Municipality of Tudela, Misamis Occidental 2. LGU of Sinacaban, Municipality of Sinacaban, Misamis Occidental 3. LGU of Jimenez, Municipality of Jimenez, Misamis Occidental 4. LGU of Panaon, Municipality of Panaon, Misamis Occidental 5. Save Nature Society, Inc. (SNS) 6. Paglaum Community Development Foundation Inc. 7. Alternative Technology and Resource Enhancement (ATRE & Co.) 8. Tudela Barangay Development Association, Inc. (TBDAI) 9. Peoples Eco-Tourism and Livelihood (PETAL) Foundation, Inc. 10. People’s Organization of the Coastal Communities of Tudela, Sinacaban, Jimenez

and Panaon 11. Womens Organization of the costal communities of Tudela, Sinacaban, Jimenez

and Panaon 12. Paglaum Cooperative 13. Katawhan Mo 14. Philippine National Bank (Ex-Officio Member) 15. Rural Bank of Oroquieta (Ex-Officio Member) 16. LeoPataSuccessFoundation, Inc. 17. Department of Environment and Natural Resources-PENRO 18. Sinacaban High School Teachers Environmentalist of Misamis Corp.

(SINAHSTEMCO) 19. CEPAS 20. SPSO 21. DLR 22. Mindanao State University –Naawan 23. Marine Science Institute – U.P. Diliman

Chapter 4 - 11

V. Organizational Structure/Roles and functions

STAKEHOLDERS

FOCAS SECRETARIAT

FMC

PIT PIT PIT PIT PIT To ensure implementation of IAD in Iligan Bay, stakeholders organized a technical working group that would serve as the FOCAS Management Committee of the project. The selection of the IBCRMDP FOCAS MC was made during the first meeting of CSOs-NGOs and POs, LGUs, and NGAs concerned and known to have programs and projects in Iligan Bay. Among the present were the NGAs, LGUs of Tudela, Sinacaban, Jimenez and Panaon; Non-government organizations like SNS, ATRE and KATMO; and People’s Organizations such as PAGLAUM, TBIDAI and MOFECO. The participants agreed to have nine members composed of 4 representatives from the LGUs of Tudela, Sinacaban, Jimenez and Panaon, 2 POs, 2 NGOs and 1 NGA represented by PASU Exequiel Barillo who was also designated as the FMC chairman. The FMC shall be responsible in assisting preparation of projects proposals by proponent organizations and deliberate it for endorsement to the Provincial Stakeholders Committee (PSC). The Save Nature Society, Inc. surpassed the criteria for the selection of the lead organization; hence elected as the Secretariat of the FMC – Iligan Bay. The secretariat is primarily responsible in facilitating the activities of the IBCRMDP FOCAS MC, overseeing the execution of the project, conduct preliminary assessment of maturity of POs, facilitate linkages among institutions and prepare M & E reports to the PACAP Provincial Action Officer through the Provincial Stakeholders Committee (PSC). VI. Risk Assessment The increasing population in the communities within the coastal communities will threaten the coastal resources and protected area. For example the municipality of Tudela, Sinacaban and Jimenez, most of their coastal communities has encouraged entry of upland migration. These people usually engage in destructive fishing practices.

Chapter 4 - 12

Chapter 4 - 13

Which, if not properly managed, given the IEC, would result to coastal resource destruction. When majority of the people seeming apathy and lack of cooperation could attribute to the erroneous information dissemination by some NGOs, if the coastal fisherfolks will gradually claim the opportunity to fish and deprive them of their vested rights. This must be aggravated by the program without conflicts and overlaps among fisherfolks. The presence of armed elements believed to be members of some subversive groups could threaten in the implementation of the project and might be the reason for a temporary suspension of the program. Traditional practices among the fisherfolks during fiesta and use the coastal waters for their activities like banca riding contest, fluvial float contest, fish hunting contest and many more cultural events based on their beliefs could attribute waste pollution of the area which are destructive to environmental stability. Late releases of project funds could hamper project operations. In cases like this, project manpower complement could temporarily be reduced and most activities might be suspended.

Chapter 4 - 14

VII. Budget Summary

Environment and Resource Management Livelihood and Enterprise Development

Location Land Area (ha)

TOTAL Pop Mangrove

Rehabilitation

Marine Sanctuary

enhancement

CRM Plan IEC

Community Organizing Seaweeds

Production, Mariculture &

Fishing

Micro Finance

Other Livelihood

PANAON De La Paz 260.1 491 x x x x x x x Lutao 76.5 278 x x x x x x x Punta 67.32 982 x x x x x x x Sumasap 273.4 442 x x x x x x x JIMENEZ Butuay 320 1,751 x x x x x x x Palilan 96 1,466 x x x x x x x Taboo 120 2,723 x x x x x x x SINACABAN Cagay-anon 699.11 1,185 x x x x x x x Sinonoc 239.94 2,432 x x x x x x x Colupan Bajo

194.42 1,403 x x x x x x x

Poblacion 240 2,179 x x x x x x x Libertad Bajo 1,389 x x x x x x x TUDELA Tigdok 76.32 580 x x x x x x x Basirang 232.71 949 x x x x x x x Barra 31.63 1,112 x x x x x x x Cabol-anonan

43.8 1,382 x x x x x x x

Budget 1,500,000 4,500,000 200,000 500,000 400,000 8,400,000 2,000,000 1,000,000

Total budget for project components: P 18,500,000.00 Add: Budget for FOCAS Secretariat: P 3,000,000.00 ---------------------- Grand Total P 21,500,000.00 =============

VIII. Management Plan

MAJOR PROJECT

COMPONENTS/ PROJECT

ACTIVITIES

Location Activities (How to)

Environment and Resource Management Mangrove Rehabilitation

Panaon (Lutao, Punta, De la Paz) Jimenez (Palilan, Butuay) Sinacaban (Poblacion, Colupan, Sinonoc, Cagay-anon, Libertad Bajo) Tudela (Cabol-anonan, Barra, Basirang)

A total of 65 hectares of mangroves will be rehabilitated. This will be done through enactment of local ordinances. An intensive information campaign shall also be conducted to be able to tap the coastal dwellers in the rehabilitation and in the management and protection of the mangrove areas. However, the people’s involvement shall be planned wisely in such a way that they are properly guided and benefited in the process.

Marine Sanctuary enhancement

Panaon (Lutao, Punta) Sinacaban (Poblacion) Tudela (Cabol-anonan)

The management of established marine sanctuaries in Panaon, Sinacaban and Tudela shall be enhanced. A proper management plan shall be crafted to make these sanctuaries functional. (eg. Appropriate management group responsible for planning and policy directions will be organized)

CRM Plan Panaon, Jimenez, Sinacaban, Tudela

Convergence body must be created to conduct detailed assessment and formulation of Coastal Resource Management Plan. The body will be composed of technical personnel from the DENR, BFAR, NGO, MFARMC, BFARMC, LGU Officials and Coastal Community representative/s. The municipal mayor acts as the coordinator and chairperson to all agencies involved. Participating agencies must be tasked with individual component of the plan to avoid duplication of the output.

Chapter 4 - 15

IEC

All coastal barangays of Panaon, Jimenez, Sinacaban and Tudela

- Various IEC materials will be developed to reach out to more communities and other areas to include solid waste, etc. - An educational programme shall be initiated to inform the local people on the rationale of the Coastal Resource Management and Development project. The value of the role of the people shall be emphasized.

Community Organizing (Fisherfolks strengthening, Bantay Dagat strengthening, Women Group formation)

All coastal barangays of Panaon, Jimenez, Sinacaban and Tudela

-Appropriate training and/or workshops will be provided to facilitate knowledge augmentation and skills development in the various areas of coastal management -A seminar on CRM and/or fisheries-related laws will be held. -Training or re-training offish wardens will be facilitated. -Where appropriate, a paralegal training will be conducted. -Development of appropriate policies and ordinances will be facilitated.

Livelihood and Enterprise Development - Seaweeds Production - Mariculture & Fishing - Micro Finance Other livelihood

Seaweeds (Panaon, Tudela) Mariculture (Sinacaban) Micro Finance and other livelihood (all barangays)

Technical assistance will be provided to the development of livelihood opportunities to ensure food security, improve income and more importantly, protect the environment.

Chapter 4 - 16

Figure 1. Map showing the Focas of Iligan Bay Coastal Resource Management and Development Project (Tudela, Sinacaban, Jimenez and Panaon) inset map of Mindanao Island showing the province of Misamis Occidental.

Chapter 4 - 17

CHAPTER 5 COCONUT INDUSTRY REHABILITATION AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

STRATEGIC PLAN Glossary of Terms PACAP- Philippines-Australia Community Assistance Program AusAID- Australian Agency for International Development RAS- Responsive Assistance Scheme FOCAS- Focus Community Assistance Scheme SGF- Strategic Guidance Framework CIRDP- Coconut Industry Rehabilitation & Development Project CIIF- Coconut Industry Investment Fund CTC- Cyclical Technology Corporation, Inc. FMC- FOCAS Management Committee CFAC- Coconut Farmers Agri-business Center (formerly NTC) NTC- Niyog Tulungan Center IAD- Integrated Area Development CSO- Civil Society Organization NGO- Non-government Organization PO- People’s Organization LGU- Local Government Units NGA- National Government Agency PCI- Philippine Coconut Authority PES- Provincial Engagement Strategy

I. Background/Rationale

a. Description of the problem in the FOCAS area

Coconut Industry Rehabilitation and Development Project (CIRDP) is the only thematic, agri-focused, among the four FOCAS Areas of the province.

Misamis Occidental is a predominantly agri-based economy with 118,933 hectares or 61.33% of its total land utilized as cropland. Food crops occupied an area equivalent to 13,861 hectares or 11.65% of its total cropland, while 105,072 hectares or 88.35% are devoted to commercial crops.

Coconut shared the largest area of 101,784 hectares or 96.87% of commercial crops. It is still the main cash crop of the province, even if some considered it a sunset industry. Coconut is a major drag to agricultural growth. The low productivity and the inadequate replanting are the principal issues facing the coconut industry. The main factors responsible for low productivity are the use of planting materials of low genetic potential and the virtual absence of fertilizer used on nutritionally deficient coconut lands. Finally, improper harvesting, drying and storage practices are responsible for the poor quality, which results in low oil extraction rate and higher refining cost.

There are a total of 58,685 coconut farmers in the province. It has 337.9 million nuts production per year from 9.1 million coconut-bearing trees or barely 36 nuts per tree per year which is very low production. 1

Compounding to the above-mentioned problems are the lack of crop diversification and integration of coconut farms, lack of technology and ready market for non-oil coconut products and seemingly few investors venturing into the processing and marketing of these products. Given these conditions, it is believed that the poverty of the province is directly related to the state of coconut industry.

The success of the Coconut Industry Rehabilitation and Development Project extends its significance beyond the farms and rural communities. With very pronounced poverty in rural communities, people, especially the young, seek relief from hard times in urban areas. Less educated and armed only with false hope poor people migrate to cities and mega-cities – many of them exploited and abused. Often they find it difficult to move back to the rural areas when the harsh realities of urban poverty set in. The success of any rural development initiative therefore greatly impacts on the population pressure in urban areas.

When successful, the CIRDP will aid the local governments in developing a template for agricultural community development, even if implemented only in four areas of Misamis Occidental, namely Oroquieta City, Aloran, Lopez Jaena, and Plaridel.

2 Source: Provincial Socio-Economic Profile, 2002 - 2004

Figure 1. Location Map of CIRDP

CIRDP FOCAS Areas

b. Problem analysis/sector analysis and needs/concern

In coconut areas and for families depending on the coconut industry, poverty is often caused by low income and lack of employment opportunities. There also exists the traditional attitude of mono-cropping and so much dependency on copra as farm product.

Rural farmers find it difficult to venture into a more productive integrated farming and coconut by-product processing because of the lack of technology and market information. The fate of the coconut industry is even bogged down by inefficient and ineffective national and local policies.

Lack of Alternative Livelihood

Threatened Coconut Industry

Lack of marketing information

Inefficient and ineffective policies on

coconut industry

Poverty

Low income

Underutilization of coconut land resources

Less opportunity to increase income from

coconut and its by-products

Lack of employment opportunities

Lack of Funds for industry

development

Cutting due to greater demand of

coco trees

Attitudinal problems of coconut farmers

Price instability of copra

None competitiveness of copra products

Poor Tenant-Landowner relationship

Over dependent on copra alone as

farm product

Lack of improved technology

Senile coco trees and unfertilized trees

Industry is of less priority by National

Government & LGUs

Presence of many

intermediary traders

Less marketing support on marketing

infrastructure

Low quality of copra

Farmers’ lack of capital and

knowledge in family fund management

Und

erly

ing

Cau

ses

Effe

cts

and

Con

sequ

en-

ces

CO

RE

PRO

BLE

MS

Prim

ary

&

Seco

ndar

y C

ause

s

Figure 2. COCONUT INDUSTRY PROBLEM CAUSE-EFFECT RELATIONSHIP

Chapter 5 - 4

b. Possible interventions of PACAP

PACAP’s fund facility of PhP21,500,000 pesos for the project can serve as a starter fund to pump primed other stakeholders to pool their resources in whatever forms (i.e. counterpart funds, physical properties, technical support, human resources and others). PACAP’s learned lessons from earlier AFA areas and IAD approach best practices can be of great help when replicated in the same or much improved ways for the coconut industry of Misamis Occidental.

c. Interventions supporting PACAP’s Strategic Guidance Framework

The FOCAS Strategy is aligned with the first strategy in the PES which is “augmenting traditional and/or providing alternative livelihood through agri-aqua based food, raw materials, and industrial finished products”.

The FOCAS Strategy also is done via the IAD and supports the empowerment and the protection of the vulnerable and disadvantaged groups of people.

d. Other programs and donor projects involved; timeframe; description of the programs/ projects; & coverage/areas

Less intervention for the development of the Coconut Industry in the Province has been introduced. The Philippine Coconut Authority centers its intervention on the rehabilitation of senile coconuts through fertilization and replanting activities. Also, efforts from small People’s Organization like cooperatives were of little contribution to the industry. These efforts are in the form of organizing coconut farmers into cooperatives engaged in establishment of cooperative copra trading and some small non-copra product business venture like the coconut vinegar processing and marketing.

II. The FOCAS Strategy and Logframe (Please see LogFrame below)

a. Goal

The general objective of Coconut Industry Rehabilitation and Development Project (CIRDP) is to reduce poverty through income and employment generation from coconut product and by-product utilization. The project will be implemented in Aloran, Lopez Jaena, Plaridel and Oroquieta City.

b. Purpose

1. Develop and provide alternative while developing the traditional coconut-centered livelihood of the farmers and farm hands;

2. Improve coconut production, utilization and processing of the province of Misamis Occidental;

3. Address the socio-economic needs of coconut farmers and other individuals and groups within the coconut industry, especially the women, children and other marginalized and vulnerable sectors.

Chapter 5 - 5

Chapter 5 - 6

4. Promote and advocate policies towards coconut industry rehabilitation, institutionalization, development and sustainability.

c. Objectives

1. To consolidate resources of individual farmers, landowners, investors, government agencies and coconut industry stakeholders.

2. To organize coconut farmer-beneficiaries into institutionalized organizations 3. To provide basic social services to the coconut farmers, farm hands and

neighboring residents of project sites. 4. To rehabilitate & regenerate at least 4,000 hectares of cocoland in the city

of Oroquieta and Municipality of Plaridel by establishing coconut processing centers.

5. To reutilize waste materials from the coconut processing centers. 6. To provide additional income to farmers and farm hands through income

generating projects.

CIRDP Date of this Logical Framework: July 15, 2005 _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

LOGICAL FRAMEWORK MATRIX CIRDP VISION: “A highly productive coconut industry in Misamis Occidental having improved quality of life through enterprising coconut farmers” MISSION: “Committed to improve the quality of life of coconut farmers and stakeholders by rehabilitating coconut farms and enhance entrepreneurial capabilities on integrated coco-based farming” Goal 1: Address the socio-economic needs of coconut farmers and other individuals and groups within the coconut industry, especially the women, children and other marginalized and vulnerable sectors; Objective 1A: To consolidate resources of individual farmers, landowners, investors, government agencies and coconut industry stakeholders.

Key Result Areas (KRAs)

Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVI)

Means of Verification (MoV)

Basic Assumptions & Risks (BAR)

1. Formation of a Consortium of stakeholders of the coconut industry

Criteria for selection of eligible stakeholders for Consortium membership;

By-Laws & Articles of Incorporation; Economic Survey; Bonds & Treasurer’s Affidavit (if cooperative)

Articles of Incorporation; Levels of organizational maturities; By-laws & Bank Statement (if Corporation);

Shares of Stocks or Capital-Build-Up; Business Permits; Provincial & Municipal Accreditations; Consortium Policies & Procedures; Consortium Manual of

Operation/IRR; Consortium Human Resource

Program; Consortium Sustainability Plan; Project’s Operational Plans; Increased number of consortium

members;

Presence of eligible members of the consortium;

Written By-Laws, Articles of Incorporation, Business Plan; Surety Bonds receipts; sworn treasurer’s affidavit & bank certificate;

Shares of Stocks certificates/O.R.; Signed Business Permits; Approved Accreditations; Policies & Procedures Manual; Written Manual of Operation/IRR; Human Resource Dev’t. Manual; 10 Year Sustainability Plan; Project Implementation Plans; PO’s & NGO’s membership; Registered Consortium Two new sites for Processing

Centers

The present government does not drastically change its form;

Chapter 5 - 7

Replication of the Processing Center to other areas

Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions Human

Material(s) Time

PACAP Counterpart

FOCAS Management Committee’s deliberate and sincere efforts to usher forward the formation of the consortium.

PACAP’s approval of the CIRDP project.

2. Capability Building of Consortium Member & Partnership Building

Active consortium members; High level of accountability and

responsibility for all consortium members;

Knowledge, skills, and attitude acquired;

Practices of good KSA’s to project implementation

Capable Consortium representatives; Skilled & technically equip

management personnel; Training Needs Assessment of at

least 10 consortium members.

Active participation in meetings, planning, assessments, evaluations and other consortium related activities of at least 10 consortium members;

Transparent system of recording & high level internal control;

Regular external audit findings & recommendations

At least 6 trainings/year/consotium member conducted

Consolidated Training Needs analysis

Availability of resource persons having the right KSA for the TNA’s consolidated from among the representatives of the consortium and program staff.

Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions Human

Material(s) Time

PACAP Counterpart

Various Training Manuals related to the coconut industry and organizational development are available

Objective 1B: To organize coconut farmer-beneficiaries into institutionalized organizations 1. Community Organizing processes from pre-entry to handover or exit

Presence of active key leaders in farmer cooperatives ; women organization; children & youth organization; water & sanitation organization; & barangay health organization.

A duly registered cooperative with different sub-committees on men; women; children & youth; water & sanitation; and health or;

Individually registered different farmers’ organizations.

Adoption of Community Organizing Standard in the rural community

Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions

Chapter 5 - 8

Human Material(s) Time

PACAP Counterpart

LGU technical assistance and other support available to the community

Objective 1C: To provide basic social services to the coconut farmers, farm hands and neighboring residents of project sites. 1. Installation of Potable Water supply

Hydrologic study; Water System Design & Installation; Community-managed Water &

Sanitation System

Level-II Water pipe system installed;

Registered Water & Sanitation System Association

DOLE registration acquired as early as first year from project start-up;

Social preparation done prior to installation of equipments.

Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions Human

Material(s) Time

PACAP Counterpart

Goal 2: Improve coconut production, utilization, processing, and marketing of the coco-based products in the province of Misamis Occidental; Objective 2A: To rehabilitate & regenerate at least 4,000 hectares of cocoland 1. Installation of coconut processing center

At least 5 hectares of agricultural land in the middle of coconut farmland available for use

Equipments & facilities of coco center installed in 90 days period;

Marketing agreement with potential buyer signed

Daily volume input of 50,000 nuts or 3,300 tons copra per year

2,000 farmer-households income increases at least 500% at the end of first year of project operation & 1,000% at the end of three years

1,500 farmers employed in the coco center

5-hectare lot donated from LGU available for use by CIRDP;

Physical make-up of the mini-coco plant or center;

Marketing contract; Receipts of payments; Farmers savings deposits Farmers increases in capital

contribution Average PhP100,000 per year

farmer-income; Php120 to 200 daily income of

employed farmer or additional PhP62,400 per year.

Executive officers of LGU’s support to the project;

Available farmers to supply 50,000 nuts per day to the coco processing center;

Marketing contracts

Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions Human

Material(s) Time

PACAP Counterpart

2. Setting up of nursery for Available nursery site or provider of Land area for nursery site, or LGU to provide site for the

Chapter 5 - 9

replanting and fertilization program

seedlings; Available farmer-beneficiary; Policies and schemes of Replanting

& Fertilization Program; Number of hectarage planted

commercial seedling provider; List of qualified farmer-beneficiary; Written policies & schemes; At least 800 hectares planted.

proposed nursery; Landowners provision of

land.

Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions Human

Material(s) Time

PACAP Counterpart

3. Set-up of marketing logistics for product handling

Available site for Bodega or existing available stakeholder with marketing logistics;

Available direct marketing channels; Available marketing infrastructure

and logistics; Regular supply of either copra or

aqueous coconuts for marketing

Land area for building a bodega or legal entity of available stakeholder;

Marketing contracts with processors and millers;

Human resources; physical equipments & delivery vehicles;

12 tons of copra or meat per day from Processing Center

LGU to provide site for the proposed bodega;

Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions Human

Material(s) Time

PACAP Counterpart

2. Installation of liquid waste organic fertilizer production plant

Available site for mini-plant of organic fertilizer or available stakeholder engaged in the production of organic fertilizer;

Volume of coco dust available

Land area for building a mini-plant of organic fertilizer or existing stakeholder engaged in production;

Available coconut dust for fertilizer production

LGU to provide site for the proposed organic fertilizer processing mini-plant;

Local stakeholders engaged in organic fertilizer production to purchase waste material.

Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions Human

Material(s) Time

PACAP Counterpart

Goal 3: Provide appropriate technologies and enhance traditional coconut farming system of the coconut farmers and farm workers using sustainable agricultural practices; Objective 3A: To provide additional income to farmers and farm hands through income generating projects 1. Agri-Livelihood Projects Module for Bio-Intensive Gardening At least 2,000 number of farmers Technical assistance on the

Chapter 5 - 10

(BIG) or Food Always In The Home (FAITH);

Module for Organic Livestock Farming;

Module for Sloping Agricultural Land Technology (SALT) system of farming;

Multi-storey cropping or diversified & integrated farming system (DIFS) applied to not less than 4,000 households at the end of three years;

Additional increases in coconut farmers income & productivity

who are actual practitioners of the different modules of sustainable agriculture farming systems after three years of interventions;

At least 4,000 Households’ income increases by not less than 100%;

Food security in the home; Presence of appliances in a

farmers house; Improved housing materials of

individual farmer-beneficiary; More cash circulation in the

community; Providential loans.

different farming systems are available from institutions;

Patent owners of these technologies openly shares their technologies to the coconut farmers.

Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions Human

Material(s) Time

PACAP Counterpart

2. Micro Finance Project to support capital requirement on agri- livelihood projects and small cottage industries of coconut farmers

Installed credit facilitators in the coco processing center or utilized existing creditors with expertise to facilitate supervised credits to not less than 4,000 farmers;

Credit policies & procedure 100% repayments of loans; Interest income

Legal and credible financial creditor with good tract record services not less than 4,000 farmer households;

Loan repayments receipts; Written credit policies &

procedures; Cash available; Farmers’ savings in the bank

Available credible financial creditor willingness to extend its services to the coconut farmers.

Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions Human

Material(s) Time

PACAP Counterpart

3. Small Cottage Industry Modules for various income generating small cottage industries;

At least 50% of total number of beneficiaries has availed the support for small cottage industry projects in the period of three years;

Different cottage industry technologies adoption by farmers;

Increase income of not less than 2,000 farmers from their cottage industry projects;

All family members are sent to

DTI and DOST’s sincere effort in helping the coconut farmers in providing technical assistance and marketing support.

Chapter 5 - 11

Increase household income school. Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions

Human Material(s) Time

PACAP Counterpart

Goal 4: Advocate and implement policies and programs towards coconut industry rehabilitation, planting and replanting, institutionalization, development and sustainability. 1. Monitoring & Evaluation Actual Accomplishments versus

targets; Outcomes on indicative plans; Personnel Performance Reviews; Self-assessments; Mid-term & year end evaluations; Financial Reports & Regular audits; Project reviews; Levels of organizational maturities; Benefits Monitoring External Impact evaluations; Terminal Report consolidation

Monthly Accomplishment Reports Hard Indicators Ratings Performance Review Ratings Self-assessment Ratings Organizational Maturity Ratings Financial statements & audit

findings; Project appraisal reports; Ex-Post Project Benefits evaluation

results; Ex-Post Project Impact Evaluation

findings & recommendations; Written Terminal Reports

All Monitoring tools and Evaluation instruments are prepared by all stakeholders and program staff and are therefore participatory and customized tools.

Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions Human

Material(s) Time

PACAP Counterpart

2. Advocacy Rate of cutting trees; IEC materials produced & distributed; Lobbying in local LGU’s; Radio program on coconut issues &

concerns;

PCA reports & primary data from port authorities;

Posters; billboards and other printing materials;

Ordinances and favorable laws enacted by LGU’s;

Block Time radio program for coconut issues & concerns

Available prime time radio air time for possible contract engagement;

Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions Human

Material(s) Time

PACAP Counterpart

Chapter 5 - 12

Chapter 5 - 13

3. Networking & Linkaging Alliances with CIIF, UCPB, CTC, KAO etc.;

Networking with other Processing Centers;

Networking with other IAD approach implementers;

Networking with other Coco Farmer Groups

MOA’s; marketing agreements & contracts;

Communications; Partnership engagements and

Joint ventures

none

Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions Human

Material(s) Time

PACAP Counterpart

4. Leveraging & Resource Accessing

Project Development Team organized from among the Project Management Committee of the Consortium

Funding agency with the same thematic approach; (example: IAD)

Available human resource for the Project Development Team;

Approved counterpart fund from other funding agencies;

At least 1.5 Million per year accessed from external funding agencies.

Consortium has no track record yet

Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions Human

Material(s) Time

PACAP Counterpart

5. Sustainability Fund Management

Sources of sustainability fund; Sustainability scheme

Coconut Processing Center (reflows, levee, membership fees, etc.)

CIRDP Sustainability Plan

Price stability of copra

Activities Means Costs Pre-conditions Human

Material(s) Time

PACAP Counterpart

III. Stakeholder Analysis Matrix Key stakeholders How are they affected by

the problem What are they doing to

solve the problem Coconut farmers and the coconut farm hands

Coconut farmers and the coconut farm hands are directly affected by the supply and demand condition of the coconut product as their main source of income

Coconut farmers and the coconut farm hands are organizing themselves into associations and cooperatives to consolidate resources

Coconut landowners

Coconut landowners although less affected than farmers are also vulnerable to unfavorable price of copra

Coconut landowners are giving out their extra farm lands to farmers through Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program of the government

Local Government Units (Provincial; City; Municipal & Barangays) particularly of Plaridel, Aloran, Lopez Jaena and Oroquieta City.

Local Government Units (Provincial; City; Municipal & Barangays) could generate only less revenue from these coconut lands

enact laws that are favorable to the coconut industry but needs willful implementation

Coconut Farmers Associations; Agrarian Reform Communities & other People’s Organizations

Coconut Farmers Associations; Agrarian Reform Communities & other People’s Organizations are the product of unfair and non-equitable economic practices of the major players in the coconut industry

consolidate resources to gain favorable prices of their products and access assistance from government line agencies

Non-government Organizations

Non-government Organizations involved in helping the Coconut Industry & coconut farmers are concerned-based organizations envisioning a fair and just coconut industry

identifying other means of income from the coconut that can help increase household income of the farmers. Also helps in organizing these farmers into cooperatives and associations

Other vulnerable groups such as women and children

Other vulnerable groups are indirectly affected through the household income derived from copra and other coconut products

These groups are largely dependent on the decision of head of the family whom are believed to be the head of the family

Coconut traders; concessionaires; & marketing intermediaries

Coconut traders; concessionaires; & marketing intermediaries are the actual beneficiaries of the proceeds in the production process of the coconut products

Philippine Coconut Authority

Philippine Coconut Authority serves the interest of both the people in the government and the coconut farmers

The Philippine Coconut Industry can only do within the auspices of their own means that are limited and restricted to its mandate from the hierarchy

Chapter 5 - 14

List of CIRDP FMC Stakeholders 1. LGU of City of Oroquieta City, Misamis Occidental 2. LGU of Municipality of Panaon, Misamis Occidental 3. LGU of Municipality of Lopez Jaena, Misamis Occidental 4. LGU of Municipality of Plaridel, Misamis Occidental 5. Misamis Occidental Maglulubi Multi-Purpose Cooperative of Oroquieta (MOMCO) 6. Paglaum Community Development Foundation Inc. 7. SIFAMCO of ARC Sibula, Lopez Jaena 8. Tri-People Partnership for Peace & Development (TRIPEACEDEV, Inc.) 9. Integrated Livelihood Cooperative (ILC) 10. Farmers Associations in the city of Oroquieta & the three municipalities 11. Philippine Coconut Authority 12. Paglaum Cooperative 13. Coconut Industry Investment Fund (CIIF) 14. Land Bank of the Philippines (ACCESS Program) 15. Individual Coconut Farmers & Landowners 16. Petals Foundation Inc.

IV. Organizational structure/Roles and functions

CIRDP Consortium

CIIF/CTC

FOCAS Management Committee

Project Management Committee (PMC)

Coconut Farmers

FOCAS Secretariat (Paglaum CDFI)

Project Implementing Team 2

PIT 1 PIT 3

Figure 3. Proposed Organizational Structure of CIRDP

Chapter 5 - 15

ROLES OF PROPONENT (Individual POs/NGOs/LGUs/NGAs/others) & BENEFICIARY (Consortium) ORGANIZATIONS: Each CONSORTIUM shall have one (1) representative to act in behalf of her organizations’ interests. He/she shall have one seat in the CONSORTIUM. They shall chose among themselves members of the PROJECT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE (PMC) who is responsible in the supervision of the entire management of the project. The PMC will act as a policy and decision making body of the project for the highest and best interests of all members of the consortium. They will set forth the implementing guidelines of the purchasing, processing and marketing operations of all the projects. They can only recommend employees to be hired by the individual consortium members and has no power either to appoint or hire any members of the management staff. All consortium members should maintain their autonomy and independent governance. The PMC may participate in the preparation of the monitoring and evaluation tool. They may also conduct their own M & E with the approval of all consortium members. They will be receiving also honoraria for their efforts in the proper implementation of the project. A policy manual shall be formulated for easy implementation of the project. The PMC may endorse qualified employees for the management staff of individual projects. The PMC may enter into marketing agreements and joint venture projects with other business entities like CIIF OR CTC that one way or another has the same vision and thrusts.

A PROJECT IMPLEMENTING TEAM (PIT) will be organized and headed by the Program Manager of all individual projects headed by Project Managers and shall act as facilitator or mediator to all PIT meetings. All Project Managers from each identified projects must seat as independent member in the project implementing team (PIT). A seat may be reserved for the funding agency.

The PIT’s primary function is to act as a consultative organ of the project execution and implementation. It shall formulate policies, guidelines and roles towards achieving successful implementation of the project. It shall also design program that ascertains continuity and sustainability of the project even beyond the donors funding.

The Management Staff for each individual Projects

(1) Project Manager - under policies set by the General Assembly of the Consortium, Project manager shall have general charge of all the phases of the business operations of the individual projects; he shall maintain the business records and accounts in such manner that the true and correct condition is ascertained at any time, he/she shall render annual and periodic statements and reports; preserve books, documents, correspondence and records of whatever kind pertaining to the business. He shall maintain sanitation in the processing center or plant vicinity. He shall make regular report to PACAP and to the Project Management Committee.

(2) Cashier – must be responsible in the daily cash disbursements and collects from the salesperson all sales. He must take care of the regular deposits of the consortium. He will be responsible in all the properties within the perimeter of the processing center. (3) Accountant/Bookkeeper - shall install adequate and effective accounting system; render monthly reports, financial conditions and operations; coordinate with the manager, the operations officer, the salesperson and the audit committee chairperson in the preparation of annual budget; and should preserve book of accounts, documents, vouchers, contract and records of whatever kind related to the business of the consortium. (4) Plant Operations Officer - takes care of all the day-to-day operations of the coco-processing; in charge of personnel management to all direct labor; coordinates with the

Chapter 5 - 16

Chapter 5 - 17

salesperson; and is directly accountable to report weekly to the Project Manager regarding operations in the processing center. (5) Salesperson - is responsible in the distribution and marketing of finished products; daily endorsed cash sales to the cashier; submits daily all documents to the bookkeeper; and is obliged to report weekly to the Project Manager. (6) Contract Labor - directly takes care in the processing of the dried copra. They are under the accountability of the Plant Operations Officer. V. Budget Summary

Counterpart Contributions

Major Budget Line Items Estimated Total Cost

Contribution Of Other Donors Proponent Beneficiaries

Request From

PACAP

-1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 A. Social Infra & Comm. Org., admin, etc

2,200,000

325,000 325,000

1,500,000

B. Coco Processing Center 7,000,000 1,000,000 6,000,000

- Whole nut separation and coconut meat processing unit.

- Husk decorticating unit - Fiber bales production

unit - Coconut peat based

feed and fertilizer production unit

- Marketing, product development and management unit C. Coco Farms Rehabilitation

8,010,000 300,000

165,000 95,000

7,500,000

- Nursery, replanting & fert’n

- Agri-Livelihood, Microfinace & other livelihood D. Basic Social & Other Services - Water supply

840,000 250,000 50,000 40,000 3,500,000 E. FOCAS Secretariat

3,000,000

3,000,000 GRAND TOTAL 24,050,000 550,000 1,540,000 460,000 21,500,000

Chapter 5 - 18

Coconut Industry Rehabilitation and Development Project Budget Summary Proposed Project Distribution Per Municipality

Project Location (No. of Barangays) Major Budget Line Items

Aloran Oroquieta Lopez Jaena Plaridel

Request From PACAP

A. Social Infra & Comm. Org., admin, etc x x x x 1,500,000 B. Coco Processing Center x (or) x 6,000,000

Whole nut separation and coconut meat processing unit. x (or)

x

Husk decorticating unit x (or) x Fiber bales production unit x (or) x

Coconut peat based feed and fertilizer production unit x (or)

x

Marketing, product development and management unit x C. Coco Farms Rehabilitation

7,500,000 Nursery x x x x Replanting x x x x Fertilization x x x x Agri-Livelihood x x x x Micro-finance x x x x Other Livelihood x x x x

D. Basic Social Service - Water Supply x x x x 3,500,000

E. FOCAS Secretariat 3,000,000

Total 21,500,000

Barangays Covered:

• Plaridel • Quirino, 440 has • Cebulin, 480 has • New Look, 22 has • Unidos, 439 has • Mangidkid, 95 has • Tipolo, 190 has • Puntod, 20 has • Clarin, 44 has • Buena Voluntad, 150 has • Mamanga Daku, 120 has

• Aloran • Balintonga, 260 has • Culpan, 160 has • Maular, 452 has • Pelong, 467 has • Sta. Ana, 400 has • Sinampongan, 130 has • Zamora, 427 has • Matipas, 370 has • Caputol, 568 has • Monterico, 494 has

• Lopez Jaena (3,000 has) • Sibugon • Sibula • Molatohan Bajo • Mansabay Alto • Katipa • Molatohan Alto • Rizal • Biasong • Stante • Mansabay Bajo

• Oroquieta City • Apil, 251 has • Bolibol, 253 has • Buenavista, 173 has • Dolipos Alto, 401 has • Dolipos Bajo, 240 has • Dullan Norte, 706 has • Dullan Sur, 413 has • Pines, 91 has • Taboc Sur, 9 has • Talairon, 73 has • San Vicente Alto, 107 has • San Vicente Bajo, 19 has

Chapter 5 - 19

Chapter 5 - 20

Other considerations: 1. Risk Factors, its mitigating circumstance and pre-conditions:

MAJOR PROJECT COMPONENT

Risks Mitigating factors & pre-conditions

1. Social Infrastructure & Community Organizing

Drastic changes in the form of government may shaken relationship between governments of Australia and the Philippines;

Expectations of community of PACAP’s fund facility;

Capability of NGO/PO in community organizing

Strong leadership in the Philippine Government; Immediate signing of contracts between Hassals &

Associates with the Provincial LGU. Approval of PACAP for the CIRDP project; Adoption of CO standard by the implementing NGO

or PO;

2. Coconut Farms Rehabilitation

Community acceptance of the various projects;

Withdrawal of the investments of major contributors of the project;

Government officials unfavorable response to the project;

Absence of continuous supply of raw materials;

Instability of copra prices from processors;

A good social preparation before start-up of projects; Viability and profitability of the project design and

feasibility; Government representation are assured; Favorable & stable price of raw materials; Marketing agreements signed; PCA; CIIF & CTC to provide technical assistance; LGUs to provide fixed asset counterparts;

3. Coconut Waste Product Utilization

Absence or limited availability of technology and technical people;

Resource mapping and feasibility study preparations; Partnerships with National line agencies like DOST

4. Non-coco Product Integration

Availability of practical livelihood projects; Proper selection of capable POs to handle the project;

Technical Assistance on the different farming systems are tap

5. Basic Social Services Limited funds availability to cope up with the need of basic social services;

LGUs provision of technical and physical infrastructure support;

TRAINING & CAPACITYBUILDING

Community’s acceptance to the project; Time availability during calls for training; Duration of training Inavailability of resource persons having the

right KSA.

Positive response and acceptability of the project by the coconut farmers and landowners through proper orientation and good feedback mechanisms;

Availability of training materials and manuals related to the coconut industry;

MANAGEMENT Insufficient funds to hire good managers; FOCAS MC’s sincere efforts to form a consortium;

MAJOR PROJECT COMPONENT

Risks Mitigating factors & pre-conditions

Lesser accountability and responsibilities of project holders.

Efficient fund management and control

GOVERNANCE Ineffective governance Proper selection of representing delegates to the consortium

OTHERS Lack of monitoring Participatory monitoring tools prepared by all stakeholders

Chapter 5 - 21

2. Gender and Development - there are only perceive ways that the project will affect the condition of women and men beneficiaries whether they are positive or negative such as:

mutual economic benefit collective labor women’s empowerment through recognize additional earnings on her contribution

in group action (planning, decision making, governance and even managing) CIRDP will encourage equal opportunity employment among men, women including vulnerable groups. Further, the expertise of the Provincial Gender and Development Office will constantly be requested to enlighten members and stakeholders on this issue.

3. Identified Effects of the Project on the Environment:

MEASURES TO: IDENTIFIED PROJECT EFFECTS ON THE

ENVIRONMENT Enhance Positive Effects Minimize Negative

Effects

POSITIVE

1. Health Utilization of bio-fuel in drying copra hinders emission of hazardous fumes in the atmosphere and in the environment.

Maximized utilization of coconut waste through organic fertilizer production of coco dust and vinegar production of liquid waste-water.

2. Atmosphere Non-chemical processes in waste utilization of coconut water.

Use of renewable resources like the coconut shells in power generation..

NEGATIVE 1. Human consumption Production of quality copra

in the Coconut Processing Center

Quality consciousness from coconut collection, transport, copra processing and marketing

Some project components will demand construction. When this happens, the project will seek first the approval of the Environment Management Board though an Environment Impact Assessment and/or Environment Compliance Certificate. VII. Monitoring and Evaluation Framework PACAP M & E Systems and Tools may be adopted here but there must be a workshop to formulate appropriate tools and instruments before project start-up.

Transparency of financial operations is essential for funding agency to regularly check, monitor, and even proposes recommendations for the improvement of the project. Shared monitoring tools and evaluation are highly appreciated.

Mid-year financial analysis and evaluation will be conducted. All the members of the project implementing team will participate in the evaluation, and if possible one from the funding agency.

Chapter 5 - 22

Financial Accountability of the Proponent The PROJECT PROPONENT shall install appropriate system for project - fund management and internal control in accordance with generally accepted standards of accounting and PACAP’s Financial and Reporting System.

The project grant shall be deposited and maintained in a project bank account, preferably current, under the name of the PROJECT PROPONENT with specific reference to PACAP and/or the approved project’s name or title. Said account shall specifically indicate “Grant Funds”.

Upon the opening of the said project bank account specifically for grant funds, the project proponent shall execute a Special Bank Agreement (SBA) with the depository bank. The original copy of the accomplished Special Bank Account shall be promptly submitted to PACAP.

For projects with reflows or income, the PROJECT PROPONENT shall maintain a separate bank account, either savings or current, again under the name of the PROJECT PROPONENT and specific reference to PACAP and/or the approved projects’ name or title. This second account shall specifically indicate “Project Reflows”. A separate SBA shall also be accomplished for the purpose by the PROJECT PROPONENT.

The project grant shall be maintained and administered separately from other funds owned and controlled by the PROJECT PROPONENT and should not be placed in time-deposit accounts, money market deposit-substitutes, and/or other interest-bearing notes, certificates or other such schemes.

The responsibility to withdraw from the project account shall be vested in at least two (2) authorized individuals of the Project Proponent, one of which should come from the Consortium.

The PROJECT PROPONENT shall maintain a separate bank account and financial records for the project funds consisting of cash receipts book, cash disbursements book, general journal book, general ledger and the applicable subsidiary ledgers.

For projects having sales and marketing component, the PROJECT PROPONENT shall also maintain a sales journal and a purchase journal.

In cases where as part of the approved project, a contract for goods and services exceeding 25,000 in value is to be entered into the, PROJECT PROPONENT shall obtain a formal written quotation from at least three independent suppliers. These suppliers must have government permit to conduct business related to the transaction that is subject of the quotation. Photocopies of the suppliers quotation should be forwarded to PACAP.

Where the amount involved is between P5,000 and P25,000, the Project Proponent should conduct a canvass of cost from at least three independent suppliers which a summary of canvass should be prepared by the PROJECT PROPONENT and on file with the project’s financial records.

The PROJECT PROPONENT agrees to an external audit without prior notice to be conducted by individuals nominated by PACAP at any time during the life of the project.

Audit rights are retained by the Funding Institution for up to two (2) years after the completion of the project. The PROJECT PROPONENT, therefore, shall maintain and preserve all financial records and pertinent documents of the project for the same period.

Chapter 5 - 23

In addition to the external audit, all financial records shall also be made available for inspection by any individual(s) nominated by PACAP at any time during the life of the project.

Reporting Requirements 1. The PROJECT PROPONENT is required to submit the following reports to the Funding

Institution.

a. Quarterly Reports

These reports shall include a discussion of objectives, the status of project implementation and must fully describe the project activities by making a comparison between planned activities and actual activities, the identification of the problems met and actions taken, the gains and benefits derived from the project with reference to the baseline data, the workplan for the succeeding quarter, and any proposed changes to the approved Project Proposal. These reports shall also include a financial statement of project operations for the period covered by the quarterly report. The financial report shall contain such information as, but not limited to, actual expenditures drawn from the grant and those drawn from counterpart funds. These should be supported by schedules of expenditures. A statement of the income derived from the project and the utilization thereof should also be included. These reports should be received by PACAP within fifteen (15) days after the end of each quarter. b. Completion Report

These reports shall contain all the information regarding the implementation of the project. The reports will also include the full acquittal of all the grant funds provided by the PACAP and the total counterpart contribution of the PROJECT PROPONENT. The reports shall also document the level of attainment of set project objectives and assessment of the appropriateness of activities undertaken with reference to the baseline data, impact of the project, its sustainability and the lessons learned in all project stages, i.e. planning, design and implementation. Information on the specific activities that will be continued and how the PROJECT PROPONENT and/or the beneficiaries will sustain these must also be included. These reports should be received by the PACAP not later than thirteen (13) calendar months from the date of the signing of the Grant Agreement, together with the audited Financial Statements. 2. If the PROJECT PROPONENT would like to seek subsequent funding assistance for

the approved project, the PROJECT PROPONENT should submit the Financial Statements and the Completion Reports.

Monitoring and Evaluation

1. The PROJECT PROPONENT shall make available to PACAP the results of its regular

self-evaluation exercises. These will be incorporated in the required reports.

Chapter 5 - 24

2. PACAP reserves the right to conduct its own on-site review, evaluation and/or operations audit during the life of the project.

VIII. Sustainability Plan Sustainability Ensured through Self-reliant scheme

Sustainability of the project is largely influence by three factors: (1) steady supply of raw material and production of quality copra; (2) good management and (3) good marketing strategy. To become self-reliant, we must have the assurance that we have these factors at hand. Thus, a support services scheme should be develop to secure our raw material producers. This will be possible by providing Life Insurance and other benefits to the coconut farmers; continuing education of sanitation and hygiene; technical assistance in advancing appropriate techniques in coconut production and securing impact of the project in their own lives. When supply of quality copra is insured, certainly there will be a production of quality finished product providing we adopt good manufacturing practices and develop hazard analysis critical control points in the plant. Other facilitating factors that can help sustain the project are:

1. Consortium approach 2. Stakeholders’ ownership and participation 3. Installation of a good reflow scheme or sustainability fund 4. Continuous generation of local counterparts 5. External Resources accessing 6. Increase levels of accountability and responsibilities 7. Interdependence among stakeholders

ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES BETWEEN CONSORTIUM AND STAND ALONE

CONSORTIUM

STAND ALONE

Advantages Advantages

- efficient decision- making - wider opportunity of greater

impact - cost effective- Economy of Scale - Sustainability Scheme - Assure market volume (greater command trading/pricing) - have control and direction - farmer has a sense of ownership - Interdependence among CSOs

- empowerment and indigenization - more employment generation - penetrate direction - lesser impact/fragmented

Disadvantages Disadvantages - CIIF control pricing

- higher expenses - minimal chance to market - higher competition

Phase-out Plan

Chapter 5 - 25

Exit plan starts immediately after the start of the project in the sense that the consortium of all stakeholders assumes the over-all responsibility of every stand-alone project of the CIRDP. Final handover of the whole program shall commence after PACAP withdraws from its fund assistance or even before PACAP’s support commitment ends as long as the Consortium can manage its own affairs. IX. Attachments/Supporting Information (Left at the PACAP Provincial Office)

- Background History of the Coconut Industry in the Philippines - List & resume’s of participants of FMC - Statistical annexes - Budget details - Organizational profile of the NGOs involved in the FOCAS formulation - Advantages and Disadvantages between Consortium and various Stand Alone

Organizations to manage CIRDP - Participatory Assessment & Monitoring Tool - Philippine Laws on Coconut Industry - Special Orders

Chapter 5 - 26