the other inconvenient truths

8/9/2019 The Other Inconvenient Truths

1/40

The Other Inconvenient TruthsReport of the National Conference

on Asset Reform and Climate Change

UP-Ayala Techno-Hub,Commonwealth Avenue, Diliman,

Quezon City, Philippines26 May 2010

Project Development Institute

Department of Agrarian Reform


2/40

1

3

5

8

11

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

30

32

Message From DAR Sec. Virgilio de los Reyes

FOREWORD

INTRODUCTION

Summary: Ushering a Climate of Change

Keynote Address

Dr. James Putzel

Panel Presentaons 1

Prof. Walden Bello: Climate Change and Global Development

Dr. Saturnino Jun Borras, Jr.: Climate Change, Global Land Issues

and Implicaons for Land Reform

Mr. Francisco Pancho Lara: Climate Change and Conict

Panel Presentaons 2

Usec. Rosalina Bistoyong: Collecve Acon in the Peasant Sector:

the ARC Experience

Director Maria Grace Pascua: Collecve Acon in the Upland Resource Sector

Loida Rivera: Collecve Acon in the Womens Sector

Panel Presentaons 3Dr. Laura David: Collecve Acon in the Marine Resource Sector

Mr. Jude Esguerra: Collecve Acon in the Water Resource Sector

Usec. Narciso Nieto: Recasng the Agrarian Reform Strategy

Panel Presentaons 4

Dr. Rosa Perez: Result of Luzon Workshop

Dr. Buenaventura Dargantes: Result of Visayas Workshop

Virginia Verora: Result of Mindanao Workshop

Discussions and workshops: themes, quesons, answers

Concluding Points

Miss Aurea Teves: Next Steps

Appendices

Contents


3/40


4/402


5/40

FOREWORD

National Conference on

Asset Reform and Climate Change

Ushering A Climate ofChange isa call to the newadministration to reverse theeffects and impact of climatechange in the Philippines byrecasting government policies

that address rural poverty.

Climate change threatens foodsecurity and might even

lead to global food scarcity. ThePhilippines is among the mostvulne-rable countries with 80% ofthe population at risk.

Climate change aggravates thevarious types of marginalizationof the vast majority of the peopleand increases the vulnerabilityof the rural poor, particularlywomen.

3


6/40

The conference aims to address the serious

deficit in the role of policies and people

empowerment by emphasizing on a shift in

power relations which have increased the

economic and political uncertainties and the

multiple risks associated with unclear and

unresolved property rights in rural areas andheightened the vulnerability of the rural poor

to environmental and climate change.

Our goal is to understand how asset reform

and environmental change strategies impact

on the larger issues of economic growth and

rural and urban conflict.

The main objective is to create a forum for

assessing and learning from collective action

strategies that marries asset reform withenvironment protection.

The Specific objectives of the conference are

as follows:

1. To rediscover how the rural

distribution of power shapes and

is shaped by collective actions that

enable communities to protect their

livelihood and deal with risks.

2. To define the role and

responsibility of DAR, DENR

and the NCIP in the creation of a

stronger link between asset reform

and peoples vulnerability to

environment and climate change.

3. To identify and craft collective

actions that lessen the risks of

group, community and local

conflict as people prepare for

environmental crisis and upheaval.

Based on the above objectives, we have

achieved the following results:

1. New policy proposal and advocacy

map that reform, recount andstrengthen collective action

strategies at the community and

local level.

2. Define the role of farmer

beneficiaries and the DAR in

meeting the new political and

economic challenges.

3. Formulation of a Call to Action.

4. Establishment of a broad network

that brings AR and environmental

activities, and state and non-

state agents together in constant

dialogue.

This national conference was preceded by

three regional conferences that established

the significance and connection of asset

reform to climate change.

Aurea M. TevesConvenor, National Conference

on Asset Reform and Climate Change

4


7/40

INTRODUCTION

The climate change agenda has been,and remains, strongly biased towards

science and technology. Its anticipated

effects are often quantified and confoundedwith quick revelations of how much higher

global temperatures will be, of how many

plant and animal species are at increased

risk of extinction, of what temperature range

spikes will spell decreased productivity

and increased hunger for citizens. In the

same vein, government leaders, when

brainstorming about climate change

responses, unleash a laundry list of

economic measures that are inextricable

from the principles of science andtechnology. Paradoxically, however, these

figures and data can make the eventuality of

climate change seem less real and tangible,

making the climate change discourse seem

like a conversation only for the learned and

hosing down the interests of the common

individual.

This brand of discourse has consequently

isolated some issues that are, in fact, critical

to any measure of success for frameworks

on climate change responses. A countrys

contextual history and reality ought to be

accounted for when building the blueprint

for climate change adaptation and mitigation.

In the Philippines, the protracted histories

of agrarian reform, of indigenous peoples

struggles and of a robust social movement

seem to have been detached from climate

change talks. Though the problematic 20-

year-old Comprehensive Agrarian ReformProgram (CARP) has been extended with

reforms for another five years, doubts persist

over its satisfactory completion by 2014.

Perpetuating this doubt and heightening fears

is the escalation of the climate change agenda

in the governments menu of priorities

On the 23rd of October 2009, President

Gloria Macapagal Arroyo signed the

landmark Philippine Climate Change Act

of 2009 (otherwise known as Republic Act

9729) which mandates the establishment of

a National Framework Strategy and Programon Climate Change and the creation of the

the Climate Change Commission under

the Office of the President. As much as

it is hailed as a big step forward for the

governments response to climate change,

R.A. 9729 could possibly cause retracted

steps for the unfinished agrarian reform

program and the Indigenous Peoples Rights

Acts (IPRA). For one, the blatant exclusion

of the Department of Agrarian Reform

(DAR) and the National Commissionon Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) from the

Advisory Council of the Climate Change

Commission is already indicative of a

climate change response framework that

is unmindful of ongoing asset reform

processes and that enables the leverage

of land to widen the social, political and

economic gaps in the country.

While the state declares it a policy to

systematically integrate the concept of

climate change in various phases of policy

formulation, development plans, poverty

reduction strategies and other development

tools and techniques by all agencies and

instrumentalities of the government1,

it failed to declare that reinvigorated

commitments to asset reform and to

indigenous peoples rights are also requisite

ingredients in this systematic integration.

Social movements, communities andconcerned citizens are, therefore, obligated

to grab the ball of responsibility and call

on the government to re-examine its major

policy blunder. Through collective action,

the governments vision can be unclouded

as to the centrality of most affected peoples

and communities in the national climate

change framework, action plan and budget

allocation.

5


8/40

It is with these assumptions and aspirations

that this event, the National Conference on

Asset Reform and Climate Change, was

conceptualized. The Project Development

Institute, together with the Department of

Agrarian Reform, hopes to trumpet the

need for the inclusion of asset reform and

local action in the national climate change

framework. In addition, the inclusion

of asset holders in the formulation and

implementation of climate change action

plans is a banner call of the conference.

By highlighting the persisting land tenure

issues in the country, the conference aims

to strengthen the argument that the DAR

and the NCIP are necessary placements in

the Climate Change Commission.

This conference aims to thickenthe discourse on climate change by

highlighting the phenomenons undeniable,

yet still overshadowed, links to agrarian

reform, indigenous peoples rights and

collective action of communities that have

direct stakes on land and other natural

resources. The panel presentations tackled

the correlation of climate change to land

reform, to conflict, and to collective actions

for water, marine, and upland resources.

The nexus between climate change

and the womens and peasants sectorswere also sought out in the presentations.

Recommended actions for all the

stakeholders involved in the climate change

agenda are proposed.

In a series of regional conferences in

Mindanao, Visayas and Luzon, the

conference organizers provided platforms

for the voices of affected communities,

asset holders, rights claimants and

other local stakeholders such as local

government units, local offices of national

government agencies, NGOs, academic

institutions and individual advocates, to

be heard. These voices were synthesized

into regional reports presented in Panel 4

presentations of the conference.

With this convergence of both dedicated

experts and eager learners about climate

change, the organizers hope to sustain the

chatter over the centrality of asset reform

and collective action in influencing the

national discourse on climate change.What are not yet seen in the formative

national climate change framework and

national climate change action plan

are incovenient truths that need to be

addressed. The conference does not

aim to challenge the role of science and

technology in climate change adaptation

and mitigation. On the contrary, it

seeks to find the relevance of science

and technology in the realities of power

imbalances, peoples rights and the

tortuous asset reform processes. Thepotency of climate change adaptation and

mitigation strategies would be enhanced

if people and their rights claims are

not alienated from the requisite science

and technology to manage increasing

uncertainties in the natural world.

Narciso Boy Nieto

Undersecretary

Department of Agrarian Reform

6


9/407


10/40

Redistributing property rights through agrarianreform is a key policy direction that should be

taken by the new administration of president apparent

Benigno Aquino III to help the country adapt to climate

change, experts on land reform and asset change said at

a recent conference.

The National Conference on Asset Reform

and Climate Change organized by the Project

Development Institute, an NGO advocating agrarian

reform, and the Department of Agrarian Reform,

on Wednesday called on the incoming Aquinoadministration to reverse the effects and impact of

climate change by reshaping government policies

toward the rural poor, who are the most vulnerable to

the vagaries of the environment.

James Putzel of the Crisis States Research Center at theLondon School of Economics, who has done extensive

studies on land reform in the Philippines, said a rise in

the sea level threatens the livelihoods and survival of

70 percent of the countrys 1,500 seaside municipalities

along the Philippines 32,000-kilometer discontinuous

coast line one of the longest in the world.

Climate change also will affect access to and

management of fresh water and likely aggravate the

impact of natural disasters on the country, and cause

declines in agricultural production.

DAR Undersecretary Narciso Nieto said the agency

is thinking about recasting its strategy on building

agrarian reform communities to meet the effects of

SUMMARY

8


11/40

climate change and how this will shape the over-all

nature and priorities of the Comprehensive Agrarian

Reform Program.

He said climate change will prove costly to

investments already made on water impounding

systems and communal irrigation, which were not

built to withstand the expected increased demand for

household consumption during the El Nino months

or the expected large volumes of rain during the

monsoon season.

Climate change also will render upland communities

vulnerable to landslides during the rainy season and to

bush and forest fires during the dry spells, he said.

In addition, entrants or migrants fleeing the deadly

effects of climate change in their areas will create

tension and pressure on communities they decide

settle in. Such conflicts can now be seen in the Bicol

region, Mindoro, Negros and Central and Northern

Mindanao, Nieto said.

The challenges from climate change confronting the

country are highly political, deeply connected to

immediate problems of poverty, Putzel said.

The challenges also raise immediate issues of national

policy in relation to strategies for agricultural and

industrial production and redistributive reform not

least agrarian reform, he said.

Climate change adaptation measures need, first

and foremost, to reduce the vulnerability of both

communities and production systems to the instabilities

of climatic conditions, he said.

This entails the distribution and redistribution of land

rights to encourage investments and improvements on the

land and gain access to credit lines to finance them, he said.

We have long known that small holders deal better

with the microclimates that characterize farmingeverywhere and in conditions of capital scarcity they

make better use of labor and land than do large farm

operators, he said.

He said the country needs a new kind of agribusiness

that will move away from the practices of the old

landed elites in the Philippines as exemplified by

the Aquino family-run Hacienda Luisita that merely

retain their vast landholdings without developing high

value agricultural production, seek niche markets for

9


12/40

Philippine products abroad, promote food processing

and boost agricultural exports.

The country needs an agribusiness industry

that combines the energies of small producers,

cooperatives and entrepreneurs willing to deploy new

technologies and take risks, he said.

The President-elect could demonstrate that his

government represents generational change by setting

an example and convincing his family to finally put

the story of Hacienda Luisita behind them change

it from a story of land held in violation of successive

legal efforts to redistribute it and from a story of

successive protests and even killings to put down socialmobilization, to a story of justice and forward looking

development, Putzel said.

The question now is whether the threats posed

by climate change will be enough to provoke the

formation of a new coalition that rises above family

interests, narrow class interests whether of capital

or labor local community interests, to take the

necessary risks and launch the long term programmes

required to make the country as a whole more

productive and in ways that are environmentally

sustainable, he said.

Ria Teves, executive director of the Project

Development Institute, proposed several immediate

steps to address climate change through asset reforms.

She pushed for the recasting of the governments

agrarian reform policy by incorporating the threat of

climate change so that the new agrarian reform strategy

would involve the agrarian reform beneficiaries

and their organizations and NGOs in land tenure

improvement and economic support services to develop

livelihoods while considering environmental mitigation

and adaptation measures.

There should also be bottom-up consultations with

the communities concerned that should involve the

beneficiaries, DAR and other stake-holders, she said.

The new strategy and new models on dealing with

climate change should then be presented for adoption

by the incoming government and the international

community that provides development assistance for

agrarian reform.

10


13/40

Dr. Putzel is the Director of the Crisis StatesResearch Centre in the Development Studies

Institute at the London School of Economics and

Political Science. He wrote the book A Captive Land:

the Politics of Agrarian Reform in the Philippines

in 1992 about the political economy of the agrarian

reform policy and its implementation during the time

of Ferdinand Marcos and of Cory Aquino. To this day,

he remains as the most authoritative figure on Hacienda

Luisita. His extensive research and publications portfolio

range from analysis of the politics of the financial crisis

, the politics of development in Southeast and East

Asia, democratic transition and the roles of foreign

and NGOs in development. He was a Visiting Senior

Lecturer in Political Science and a Visiting Research

Associate at the School of Economics at the University

of the Philippines in the late 1980s.

Dr. James Putzel opened the conference with an emphasis

on the fact that the problem of climate change presentsdeep and fundamental challenges. He expounded that

though the problem is primarily perceived relative to the

physical environment, climate change challenges are, in

fact, highly political in nature and are deeply related to

the immediate causes of poverty. Bearing this in mind,

national policies for climate change adaptation should,

therefore, be designed to similarly respond to social and

economic pressures. He emphasized that these policies

should also promote strategies for agricultural and

industrial production and for redistributive reforms.

He further opined that the failure of the Philippine elite

to fully industrialize the country means that there is no

urgent need for the country to reduce its greenhousegas emissions, in fact, evidence shows that the country

contributes very minimally to global warming. In

addition, he continued, the position of the Philippines

as a net carbon sink can be maximized to rally

necessary resources for climate change adaptation.

The professor additionally outlined the impacts of climate

change as they relate to the Philippine context, arguing

that the serious and negative impacts of climate change

on the agriculture and fisheries sectors will severely

affect the poor. He pointed out that one clear threat isthat on communities living along coastlines. As it is - he

stressed out - these communities are already vulnerable

due to problems of access to and management of limited

resources, such as fresh water. The vulnerability they

suffer is further aggravated by natural disasters.

Dr. Putzel identified urgent actions necessary for climate

change adaptation. These include measures that reduce

the vulnerabilities of communities and production

systems and also measures to ensure the redistribution of

land rights. He reiterated that people will be unwilling to

invest in land improvement if they do not hold the rights

over their land, stressing further that small landholders

should be rightly incentivized because they control the

backbone of the countrys productivity. It is they who

invest more on land, with their hard labor, more so than

large or small absentee land owners.

The respected professor noted that climate change

imposes more pressure on agricultural systems. He

added that land reform, thus, needs to contribute toimproving land productivity through two approaches.

The first approach he identified is the rehabilitation and

improvement of irrigation. This recommendation, he

proposed, would address the fact that less than half of

land equipped for irrigation is actually developed for

irrigation. The second land reform approach Dr. Putzel

recommended is the development of the countrys

agribusiness sector which plays an important role in

expanding production. The development strategies

could include investment in green technology and

Keynote AddressDr. James Putzel

11


14/40

in new kinds of agribusiness, and could also include

contract managements that combine new technology

and stakeholders partnership.

Speaking about developmental asset redistribution,

the professor argued that neoliberal strategies do not

accelerate growth. He added that there is a need to boost

the effectiveness of the states regulatory powers, and

that strong markets do not emerge without this strong

regulatory capacity of the state. He described the state as

weak because it serves the short-term interests of the elite,

a tradition that can be challenged by a social movement

that is strong enough to press for palliative change. He

stated that the minimal investments put towards newsmallholders only create perverse incentives such as

engaging in speculation and land selling. Thus, he added,

the regulatory powers of the state should incorporate

the implementation of a viable land registration system,

especially since a system of taxation on land and

improvement in agriculture is impossible without clear

12

ownership rights. Further, he emphasized that agrarian

reform needs to be swift and comprehensive, otherwise, it

becomes a drain on state resources.

Dr. Putzel drew attention to the declining foreign

aid to agriculture and manufacturing sectors, and the

shift of donor agencies focus on good governance.

He pointed out that the agencies need to refocus their

aid programmes on the development of agricultural

production systems.

As a closing note, the professor emphasized that turning

failure into success is possible through agricultural

modernization and industrialization. According to him,tapping new technologies and improving the agriculture and

manufacturing sectors in ways that are environmentally-

friendly are keys to success. The establishment of a political

organization capable of creating alternatives for productive

investments, and which social movements consider

legitimate, is of utmost necessity


15/40

Climate Changeand Global Development

Prof. Bello is an elected Congressman of theAkbayan partylist and a former professor of

Sociology at the University of the Philippines.

He writes on issues about development, trade and

globalization, and is a founder and Board member of

several organizations.

Prof. Bello began his discussion by establishing the link

between climate change and global development,

first laying his points for arguments in the second stage

of the global economic crisis which was triggered by the

near-bankruptcy of Greece, the collapse of the financial

market and, possibly, the government. He stressed that

this crisis has had major impacts on the components of

the real economy, namely, in production, consumption,

investment and employment

Prof. Bello is an elected Congressman of the Akbayan

partylist and a former professor of Sociology at theUniversity of the Philippines. He writes on issues about

development, trade and globalization, and is a founder

and Board member of several organizations.

Prof. Bello began his discussion by establishing the link

between climate change and global development, first laying

his points for arguments in the second stage of the global

economic crisis which was triggered by the near-bankruptcy

of Greece, the collapse of the financial market and, possibly,

the government. He stressed that this crisis has had major

impacts on the components of the real economy, namely, in

production, consumption, investment and employment.

Further, he elaborated that this crisis on the real economy

has bearing on the debates on climate change and

sustainable development, especially since the present

international economy is heavily characterized by fossil

fuel-intensive transportation and accelerated integration

of production and market. He argued that the collapse

of the export-oriented global economy has led to de-

globalization, or a falling back on local markets with

de-globalized production structures. This collapse calls

for change in the reigning economic development model

which as he pointed out, de-globalization could respondto with its more climate-friendly, ecological ways of

organizing economic life. De-globalization opens up to

low consumption practices that are based on sustainable

and decentralized production processes.

The professor shared his strong opinion that the

assumptions of techno fixes solving climate change

problems and perpetuating consumption trends are

illusions. Proposed fixes such as the use of biofuels and of

market-based mechanisms, such as carbon sequestration

and carbon trading, are part of the illusions. He referred to

the resistance of Annex 1 countries against legally-binding

emission cuts as the cause of failure of the COP 15 climate

change negotiations. The voluntary cuts were set at very

low levels and rich countries were reluctant to come up with

minimum commitments for aid. He pointed out that the

negotiations actually displayed the reliance on international

financing institutions to finance adaptation measures.

Prof. Bello opined that even the most ambitious

agreements for climate change mitigation and adaptationwill be a mere band-aid if the fundamental driver of

climate change the export-oriented globalized capitalist

economy will continue to reign. He called for the

dethroning of the export-led model, and in its place

adopt climate-sensitive and people-sensitive models.

These models should further integrate elements of de-

globalization of production, namely, the reorientation

of production to the domestic market, the recreation of

sustainable agriculture and industry and the promotion of

more egalitarian distribution of assets and income.

Panel Presentations 1

Prof. Walden Bello

13


16/40

Climate Change, Global Land Issues and

Implications for Land Reform

Dr. Borras is a holder of the Canada Research Chairin International Development Studies and is a

professor at St. Marys University in Nova Scotia, Canada.

He fervently researches on agrarian reform and rural

development issues, has published a number of books and

works with various international development institutions.

Dr. Borras started off by stating that the debates around

climate change have provoked the development discourse

on land grabbing in the global context. He related that

the global agro complex of energy and food and the

convergence of energy, finance, and food crises in recent

years have posed serious implications for land debates as

companies and governments rush to invest in resource-rich

countries. Consequently, he added, the re-evaluation of the

importance of land for food-for-export and agro-fuel crops

has given rise to the current phenomenon of land grabbing.

He argued that the mainstream development framework

holds land as an important resource for which resources

are poured, and the ideal regulation of which isapparently through codes of conduct. He disagreed and

instead stressed that this only facilitates land grabbing.

Land reform, he maintained, remains relevant, but has

been rendered narrow and shallow.

Dr. Borras acknowledged that global land grab is a

useful and relevant term, but is rather a catch-all phrase.

He instead proposed a reframing of the concepts

framework to include such aspects as the analyses of

land use charges, land property relations change and

the direction of change. Governments and civil society

organizations, he said, should look at how these relate.

Current discourse is apparently limited to the examinationof export-related changes but fails to consider land

use change for local exchange. He cited the example

of biofuel for export which is captured in debates, but

biofuel for domestic use is not. Current discourses on

land grabbing, according to him, also exclude potential

reformist perspectives such as Not all land use changes

are bad or Land property changes are highly political.

He informed the conference attendees that the direction

of land use change can take four forms: a) food to food;

b) food to biofuel; c) non-food to food; and d) non-foodto biofuel. The occurrence of these forms of land use

change especially in rural regions is inadequately captured

in the current land grabbing discourse. The prevailing

analyses focus on the conversion of land devoted to food

for domestic exchange into land for production of export

crops and biofuel which both threaten food security. But

there are actually positive reformist outcomes of land use

change that also need to be considered and he mentioned

as examples the conversion of wasteland for food or of

biofuel for domestic use. He emphasized that there are

characters of land use change that are equally important to

understand, but are missed out in current discourses.

The directions of land property relations change,

meanwhile, include redistribution (zero-sum game),

distribution (positive sum game), non-redistribution

(maintains the status quo), and reconcentration.

Dr. Borras revealed that there is a trend towards

maintaining the status quo and reconcentration, but

radical discourse on land grabbing is focused on

reconcentration while the other types are not addressed.He lay emphasis on the importance of studying where

the Philippine Comprehensive Agrarian Reform

Program fits in these quadrants.

Additionally, the professor shared that the land grabbing

debate is too focused on foreign land grabs. Focus, he

surmised, should be on the character of change that the deals

have brought upon agrarian structures. He encouraged that

the political economy framework be used in studying land

reform, land policy, and land grabbing issues.

14

Dr. Saturnino Jun Borras, Jr.


17/40


18/40

Collective Action in the Peasant Sector:

the ARC Experience

Usec. Bistoyong is the Undersecretary for SupportServices at the Department of Agrarian Reform.

Prior to joining the DAR in 2007, she was working

with the National Commission on Indigenous People.

Usec. Bistoyong shared the highlights of some of

DARs recent activities concerning climate change.

The DAR, in collaboration with the Climate Change

Congress of the Philippines and the Climate Change

Commission, co-organized a series of consultations

(3 island-wide and 1 national), attended by 700

participants. The consultations aimed to interface

climate change initiatives of civil society with that of

government and create awareness on climate change

among various sectors. She relayed that the results

of the consultations were submitted for inclusion inthe formulation of the national framework strategy on

climate change.

She imparted that one of the issues raised in the

consultations is climate change and its effects on

rural communities and rural activities (e.g., typhoons

and heavy floods damage lives, insufficiency of

water supply for irrigation, depleting fish supply).

One other issue brought forth was that of land

conversion, which reduces the land area available for

distribution. Communities, she stressed, are interested

in reforestation projects but do not have the land to

devote to them. The other issues discussed in the

consultations, she added, were the anthropogenic

causes of environmental degradation such as mining,

the need for effective governance, and the impacts on

indigenous peoples.

As she conveyed, one major recommendation during

the DAR consultations was the formulation of anintegrated water management program that cuts across

political boundaries and appropriates importance on

indigenous knowledge and practices. She believed

that the DAR and NCIP should take the lead for such

programs.

The Undersecretary presented the DARs latest

accomplishment report and discussed the details of

its ARC Strategy its principles, modalities, and

accomplishments. She reported that the agency

has a remaining target of 1.57 million hectares for

distribution.

She reiterated that climate change will magnify the

poverty situation, adding that the special ARCs like

those in IP areas will be the most affected by the

change. She presented the specific priority steps to be

taken by DAR: 1) intensification of land distribution;

2) integration of modules on climate change in the

ARB capacity development program; 3) integration

of climate change adaptation, mitigation and disasterrisk management in the ARC development plans; 4)

clustering of ARCs for resource pooling; 5) collective

watershed management, 6) documentation and

dissemination of best practices (e.g., pest management,

organic farming), 7) development of a climate

change communication program; 8) installation of

monitoring and evaluation systems; 9) strengthening of

partnerships with other agencies; 10) intensification of

resource mobilization; and 11) promotion of collective

actions for climate change adaptation and mitigation.


Usec. Rosalina Bistoyong

16


19/40

Collective Action in

the Upland Resource Sector

Director Pascua is the Director for the Office ofPolicy Planning and Research at the National

Commission for Indigenous People.

Director Pascua raised the concerns of the more than

14 million indigenous peoples (IP) representing 110

ethnolinguistic groups and occupying some 7.7 million

hectares in the Philippines. She referred to IPs as the

social group upon whom climate change will have

severe impacts even as they have the least to contribute

to climate change. She pointed out that it is exactly

because the IPs are considered the stewards of the forest

that sustaining their knowledge, systems and practices

for livelihood and environmental management that

they should be considered as primary tools for climate

change adaptation. Engagement with them is a requisite

component in land use planning, disaster preparednessstrategies and in sustainable development plans.

Director Pascua presented various policy instruments

that can support the IPs in dealing with the effects of

climate change: Kyoto Protocol, Bali Action Plan, ILO

Convention No. 169, UN Declaration on the Rights of

IPs, Convention on Biological Diversity, Indigenous

Peoples Rights Act, and the Medium-Term Philippine

Development Plan for Indigenous Peoples (MTPDP-IP).

Under the IPRA, IPs are accorded security over their

ancestral domains through the issuance of Certificates of

Ancestral Domain Titles and Certificate of Ancestral Land

Titles (i.e.,154 CADTs issued covering 4,196,501.1737

benefiting 911,369 rights holders; 241 CALTs issued

covering 14,084.7238 hectares benefiting 7,963 rights

holders). Additionally, the formulation of their Ancestral

Domain Sustainable Development Protection Plan (i.e.,

85 ADSDPPs formulated, 45 on-going), and securing the

IPs Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) through

proper processes (261 Certificate of Compliance to FPICProcess issued; 1,368 Certificates w/o Overlap Issued) are

expected to provide support to indigenous people.

The Director stressed that the IPs are actually already

practicing climate change adaptation measures. They

implement diversified cropping systems, plant crops

in between stone walls, and build greenhouses that

minimize harvest failure and ensure food security.

In order to advance the situation of the IPs, the Director

recommended the formulation of an IP Master Plan

that complements government policies and programs,

generates resources for IPs, respects Indigenous

Knowledge Systems and Practices and strengthens their

organizations. Other proposed actions from the Director

were the support to the disaster risk management bill2, the

institutionalization of a national disaster risk management

framework and the promotion of a sustainable economy.

Dir. Maria Grace Pascua

17


20/40

Collective Action

in the Womens Sector

M s. Rivera is a woman farmer fromPampanga who has held leadership

positions in a number of f armer organizations,

such as President of Pagkakaisa ng Samahang

Magsasakang Kababaihan ng Central Luzon

(PASAMAKA-CL),

Secretary-General of

Nagkakaisang Magsasaka

ng Gitnang Luzon

(NGML) and President of

Samahang Magsasaka ng

Tianabang.

Ms. Rivera lamented

that climate change is

unlikely to be gender-

neutral. This is extremelyunfortunate, especially as

women are some of the

most vulnerable to climate

change. In designing

any climate change

response, policymakers

need first to recognize

womens contribution

to food production and

agriculture. She reiterates

the 1996 calls to action by the International

Womens Conference on the APEC:

Adoption of the eco-feminist framework

Women access to economic resources and

political decision making

For governments to allocate 20 percent of the

national budget to social services

To regulate TNCs and ensure observance of

social and environmental standards To recognize womens contributions, knowledge

and skills in food production and sustainable

agriculture

To ensure social and environmental standards of

development programs

To protect local and national biodiversity

against TNC exploitation

To protect workers rights and womens informal

labor

Launching of Muscovado and Sugarcane Processing Center in Sto. Rosario, Magalang,Pampanga on February 4, 2010, an agribusiness own and operated by a peoples organizationin partnership with Project Development Institute.

Ms. Loida Rivera:

18


21/40


Collective Action

in the Marine Resource Sector

Dr. David teaches Oceanography at the Universityof the Philippines Marine Science Institute. She

holds a PhD degree from the University of South

Carolina and is one of the pioneers of motion remote

sensing in the Philippines.

Dr. David began by emphasizing the paradoxical

reality of Philippine coastal areas being populated

despite the high risk and the destructive effects on

housing and livelihood from typhoons. Peoples

natural reaction is to create protection. With climate

Dr. Laura David

change, she articulated, the impacts are compounded

damage is caused to property, livelihood and food

source. She articulated that peoples natural response

to the dwindling food supply is to increase fish catch,

reactions that are meant to be first-aid but sometimes

end up exacerbating the problem.

As a specialist in the marine resource sector, she

imparted the little known fact that coral reefs provide

protection against climate change. Seagrass, coralreefs, and mangroves provide protection to coastal

communities as they naturally buffer against high-

energy waves, even under scenario of sea-level rise.

She said though, that a multi-level information and

education campaign (IECs) is required to make all

sectors understand the importance of coral reefs.

Dr. David identified some specific climate change

adaptation strategies: a) practice of non-destructive fishing

(e.g., mariculture that is climate proof); b) protection

of coastal habitats; c) development of strategies for

accelerated and synergetic effects; d) governance (i.e.,

transparency in access to natural resources); e) crafting

of IECs; and f) formalization of consultations with

various stakeholders. She further cautioned against

privatization of the coastal commons and underscored the

need for the national government to build the resilience

of communities. It is ideal, she contended, that coastal

residents be included in tenurial policies.

18


22/40

Collective Action

in the Water Resource Sector

Mr. Esguerra is the Executive Director of theInstitute for Popular Democracy. He is an

established economist and sociologist.

Mr. Esguerra started off by recognizing that collective

action failed in the irrigation system, and that an

analysis of this failure will contribute to understanding

collective action problems and to designing

government support for the water resources sector.

He noted that the problem is manifested in the non-

functioning one-third portion of the downstream system

in national irrigation and communal irrigation systems.

The climate change-induced erratic rainfall pattern

and dry spells, he continued, only further indicate the

necessity for rehabilitating irrigation systems.

He referred to a study by Hayami and Kikuchi3 to

illustrate reasons for failure of collective action in

irrigation systems. Collective action, according to the

researchers, fails when water is abundant or severely

scarce and succeeds when water is moderately

scarce. This is attributed to the fact that an abundance

of water supply does not provide incentive to

communities to save on consumption or supplement

the supply. On the other hand, cooperation among

users is difficult to achieve as conflicts arise

especially between upstream and downstream users

during periods of scarcity.

Mr. Esguerra continued sharing the findings of Hayami

and Kikuchi, specifically, that the size of areas that

needs irrigation also influences the failure or success of

collective action, where compliance is better observed

in smaller areas. Collective action is also made more

difficult if farmers have more access to off-farm or non-

farm livelihoods than when farming is the dominanteconomic activity in a community. When the community

is older, collective action becomes more successful.

As the topics of poverty and inequality were not taken

up by the cited study, Mr. Esguerra complemented

the findings with his statement that these are also

influential in the success or failure of collective action.

He explained that when the poor prioritize their

survival needs, they tend to place less value on the

management of their water resources.

Having had an extensive experience with community

engagement, Mr. Esguerra emphasized the important role

communities play in designing resource management

projects. He insisted that institutional arrangements

introduced in communities should enhance rural

managerial capacities, and consequently, enhance

natural resource management in these communities. He

criticized the patronage system that dominates the present

operations of the National Irrigation Administration where

service delivery and responsiveness to community needsare directed by objectives for political coalition building.

Offering his proposition to the incoming Aquino

administration, he asserted that rural poverty can be

addressed through social protection strategies that go

beyond public works to provide employment guarantee

schemes (much like those in India). He continued to

say that farmers are risk averse, but that an employment

guarantee scheme can encourage them to invest in the

productivity of their farms.

Mr. Patrocinio Jude Esguerra

20


23/40

Recasting the Agrarian Reform Strategy

He proceeded to identify three main areas ofconcern within which the costly effects of climate

change can be gravely felt. First, he elaborated, climate

change will hit investments on water impounding

systems because they are not built to withstand

consumption needs during droughts or increased

rainfall episodes. Second, the vulnerability of ARCs in

fragile and coastal areas will be heightened (i.e. risks

of landslides during the rainy season and forest fires

during dry spells). Finally, he explained that climate

change will also increase the risk of conflict resulting

from the entry of migrants into the ARCs. He claimed

that these risks put to test the DARs ARC approach,

yet the experience and expertise of the agency also

serve to address these.

He advised that a careful evaluation of the ARC

development plans is timely, especially as the threats of

climate change impact even those communities outside

ARCs. The support services available under the ARC

strategy, he revealed, were not designed to respond tothe effects of climate change.

The undersecretary likewise conveyed his doubts

over the strategy of land distribution in the public

domain. He surmised that this action might have

literally reshaped the environment and now

contributes to deforestation, landslides or droughts,

thus imposing intensifying the possible effects of

climate change on agrarian reform beneficiaries. He

called for a more careful study and analysis of this

area of concern.

In closing, Usec. Nieto urged the DAR to be proactive,

to recast its agrarian reform policy to promote collective

action among various stakeholders. Concretely, he

recommended the formulation of an AR Development

Program that identifies the geographical areas which

are most vulnerable to climate change and that outlines

strategies for enhancing community resilience.

Usec. Narciso Nieto

21


24/40

Result of Luzon Workshop

Dr. Perez is a member of the Inter-governmentalPanel for Climate Change and is a retired

hydro-meteorologist at the Philippine Atmospheric,

Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration

(PAGASA). She has published a number of papers on

the vulnerability of the Philippine coastal and marine

resources to climate change, sea level rises and urban

flooding, among others.

Dr. Perez, prior to discussing the results of the Luzon

workshop, briefly noted that, in addition to the

extreme climactic events, land use change also creates

uncertainties, pushing farmers to migrate to less

productive land and endangering biodiversity.


She then continued by stressing that it is of utmost

importance to highlight the human face of the effects

of climate change, more than merely highlighting the

levels at which temperatures will increase. In fact, she

argued, the increased risks of communities to climate

change were caused by socio-economic hazards and

vulnerabilities, rather than by erratic climate patterns.

Resources for climate change mitigation and adaptation

should also be perceived as investments and not

expenditures.

Dr. Perez shared that the issues broached during the

Luzon workshop included increasing temperatures,

drying up of rivers, scarcity of resources, soil

degradation, and disrupted economic activities. The

recommendations crafted by the workshop participants

were as follows:

Completion of redistributive reform, securing

land from conflicting laws;

Encouragement of active participation of small

farmers in projects and programs;

Development and inclusion of environmental

indicators in government programs

Forging of strategic partnerships among rural

movements and other stakeholders

Adaptation of effective measures, safety nets,

and climate change catastrophic risk insurance.

Dr. Rosa Perez

22


25/40

Result of Visayas Workshop

Dr. Dargantes is the Coordinator for the Programon Integrated Water Resources Management,

Research & Extension. He is also the Director of the

Institute for Strategic Research and Development

Studies at Leyte State University.

Dr. Dargantes conveyed at the conference that the

Visayan region is faced with challenges related to its

water resources. He shared that the Visayas workshop

gave communities the opportunity to share lessons and

compile the following recommendations:

Inclusion of climate change issues in CARPER

Calling on accountability of LGUs on non-

implementation of laws LGUs respond

differently from national mandates Repeal of automatic debt servicing and instead

use of the budget to finance climate change

mitigation and adaptation programs

Implementation of renewable energy strategies

such as the development of the regions

coconut industry

Integration of climate change concerns in

Comprehensive Land Use Programs (CLUPs)

Customization of education on climate change

for basic sectors, taking account of rural vs.

urban needs

Inclusion of climate change issues in student

curricula (to include topics on watershed

management, renewable energy)

Advocacy of climate change issues in local

special bodies

Documentation of local actions in vulnerable

communities (ex. vulnerabilities caused by geo-

hazards and human-induced such as mining)

Documentation of displacement due todevelopment aggression and policies (cases

that deny people the use and control of

the resource base should be part of the

documentation)

Forging of partnership between communities

and government by integrating community

participation in local development planning

Mainstreaming of issues in local and national

levels through participatory planning

Setting-up of incentives to protect the

environment

Inclusion of gender and development agenda

in climate change agenda, emphasizing its

differential impact

Dr. Buenaventura Dargantes:

23


26/40

Result of Mindanao Workshop

Ms. Verora is the Community Development/Gender Specialist and Chief of Operations of

the IFAD-supported Northern Mindanao Community

Initiatives and Resource Management Project.

Ms.Verora began by reporting at the conference

that the Mindanao workshop successfully tackled

the DAR experience in CARAGA, experiences

of an NGO in.practical climate change responses,

indigenous peoples perspective on climate change,

and the denudation of the Taguibo watershed due to

mining and illegal logging activities She conveyed

that the Mindanao workshop focused on four areas

in constructing the recommendations gender, crop

technology, planning and policy. The specific yet

brief recommendations, as she relayed them, were as

follows:

Acceleration of relevant information

dissemination to all sectors starting withgovernment

Development of low/zero carbon

technology

Propagation of indigenous species

Mainstreaming of resource propagation

techniques

Policy coverage for indigenous seeds

Multi-cropping in watershed areas

Values formation for the youth (mobilize

students to plant trees)

Food protection sustainable livelihood

Allocation of community forests per

barangay

Community support for poverty alleviation

programs in the barangay

Determination of the carrying capacities of

communities and natural resources

Ms. Virginia Verora

24


27/40

Discussions and Workshops: themes, questions, answers

Salient Points of

Keynote Address Discussion

agrarian reform is written for the elites favour

and social movements have been unable to change

elite behaviour. In fact, social movements have

been unable to alter their own behaviour, which

exhibits their focus on the language of the

international donor. They should instead focus

the dialogue on industrialization and boosting

agricultural production. Indeed, redistributive

reform is difficult in democracy, but there have

been exemplary experiences in some countries.Democratic states have the power of imminent

domain, whereby they can set compensations at

the levels that they want. Moments of crisis in

such states actually offer opportunities for reform,

such was the case in the Philippines in 1986

though the political debate was lost during the

crafting of the AR program. What seems more

pressing now is for the country to rehabilitate

its agriculture sector. The country is better

off engaging in a process of registering lands,

and the government should offer incentives for

better usage of the land.

With the new AR law embodied in the CARPER,

the government intends to complete land

redistribution, plug loopholes and address the

lack of support services. The efficient delivery

The primary argument hurled against agrarianreform is the efficiency of economies of

scale. Doubts exist as to the readiness of small

producers in addressing a problem as big as

climate change. The long-term objective in the

Philippines, therefore, should be to get people

out of the land, to create vibrant employment

and industries.This can then make large-scale

farming possible in time, although large scale

farming can be unsustainable. In the Philippines,labor is an important resource, and in small-scale

farming, labor can be an investment for improved

land productivity. Agribusiness can provide

technology but maintenance of land is controlled

by smallholders or owners.

Defining and harmonizing adaptation measures are

a challenge for the country. These actions need to

be designed in such a way that yields opportunities

for the government to demand resources. For

instance, in demanding to keep the countrys

forests and re-establish its forests, climate change

adaptation measures could include the reduction of

farming intensity.

Swift asset reform seems difficult in procedural

and democratic regimes. In the Philippines,

25


28/40

of support services is a major condition for the

success of agrarian reform, and for this, Php150

billion has been appropriated over the next five

years. Landlord resistance and control of

the police force remain as major challenges

that prevent settling of reform beneficiaries.

Resolving these would necessitate strong

political will, support of the DAR and skilled

people at the grassroots level.Local power iscentral to the success of the AR program, for

without the mobilization of peasant movements,

for example the Sumilao farmers march, the

CARPER law would not have been enacted.

Agrarian reform in the Philippines represents

the partial successes of peoples struggles. It is

important to recognize the need for the creation of

an enabling environment that encourages people

to invest in agriculture. As stakeholders struggle

to maximize the CARPER, they should not

lose sight of the strategic needs, specifically,

of creating approaches and alliances that

promote increased agricultural investments.

To complement this, the Congress should reignite

the debate about land ownership documentation,

and social movements should help by pushing the

executive to prioritize the documentation.

Agribusiness of good quality is also essential.

Malaysia and Rwanda represent interesting

examples of this. In Rwanda, the state provides

incentives to agribusiness owners to work with

smallholders and introduce new technology. Now,

Rwanda supplies coffee to European markets,

whereas Philippine coffee struggles to attract

investments. The countrys social movements

should think about developing new products, and

entrepreneurs should invest in these.

26


29/40

contributing to motives and incidences of land

grabbing. In Germany, the increased demand for

biodiesel production based on grapeseed oil has

resulted in the expansion of oil palm plantations in

Indonesia that yield grapeseed oil substitutes to be

used for consumer goods manufacturing.

For the DAR, the problem really is the

enforcement of the contract and not the code

of conduct itself. The framework of the codeof conduct is already problematic, and with the

inevitable expansion of investments, management

becomes a hefty obstacle. Since the DAR is

outside the purview of the decentralization

process, it can unlike other agencies deal

directly with local governments units in relation

to environmental management. The issue of

land reform should be a shared agenda of

government departments and the challenge

of policy and mandate harmonization should

be overcome. The drawbacks from lacking

and inefficient resource allocation and weak

legislative support should also be resolved.

Experience shows that disasters, such as thoseinduced by climate change, can similarly lead

to social cohesion. But the disasters can also have

negative implications vis-a-vis migration. Social

cohesion between inhabitants and the new entrants

can become seeds for conflict (e.g., clan relations)

as they become rivals over the same set of resource.

Refugee movements offer lessons for dealing with the

issue of climate change migrants and conflict. Politicalreorganization and the identification of the terms

and discourse of action are vital in preventing

conflict induced by climate change impacts. At

present, there are diverse trends and experiences in

new moves towards agriculture investments.

Land grabbing is far from being a fresh topic.

However, land grabbing in the name of

climate change is a relatively new discourse

generatedby the fusion of industrial agro-food

complex and energy complex. For instance,

the unsustainability of fossil-based agriculture

has renewed corporate interest in land, thereby

Salient Points of Panel 1 Discussion

27


30/40

Climate change is expected to exacerbate theeffects of illegal fishing. Gaining conviction

against illegal fishers is almost impossible due to

a lack of awareness of environmental laws on the

part of LGUs, lawyers and judges. Some NGOs,

such as the Alternative Law Groups (ALG), ELAC

and Tanggol Kalikasan, help educate judges

and lawyers on pertinent environmental laws.

Unfortunately, where there is technical capacity for

apprehending the criminals, conviction rates stillremain low.

Information and education campaigns for

climate change and its effects should be

mainstreamed in the communities. Information

such as PAG-ASAs climate forecasts and seasonal

forecasts should be disseminated in communities

to plan better for planting season. Payment for

environmental services could also be an approach

to environmental management, for example,

people residing downstream could pay upland

residents to protect watersheds. Unfortunately,

some documented cases of such arrangements point

to conflict breeding as an unintended outcome.

The potential benefits of fees collection from

decentralized environmental management, and its

propensity for local politician capture, still needs to

be sought out and documented.

With the prevailing problems surrounding

distributed lands illegal land conversions,conflicts with IP claimants and expansion of

agrofuel crop production the concern that the

DAR eases out of social justice issues persists.

Even with the enactment of CARPER, there

remains 1 million hectares of land awaiting

distribution to some 450,000 farmers. The DAR

should be careful not to use climate change

to justify non-distribution of these lands, if

failure in distribution does indeed become the

result of the extended agrarian reform law.

The ADSDPP is a crucial instrument inaligning the overlapping development

plans and approaches of various government

agencies. It clarifies the steps and procedures for

collaborating with other agencies and civil society

organizations in the implementation of development

plans. In addition, CADT processing has sufficient

provisions that respect existing property rights.

The DAR collaborates with PAGASA bymainstreaming major programs based on risk maps

provided by PAGASA.

The problem of unfair pricing is perceived by

some to be an even worse obstacle than the

impacts of climate change. As a response, the

DAR emphasizes the importance of value addition

in consonance wit organization of farmers. The

DAR has helped coconut farmers by urging them

towards production of virgin coconut oil and coco

coir and by assisting them in complying with

BFAD requirements on quality standards. In other

instances, the DAR has helped farmers diversify

into atchara and soap production, from previously

selling just their papaya crops in the market.

Salient Points of Panel 2 Discussion Salient Points of Panel 3 Discussion

28


31/40

Stakeholders from the regional workshops also

conveyed that they hope to receive capacity-building

to deal with the link between poverty and climate

change. Raising communities awareness in calling for

transparency and accountability of programs relevant

to food and climate change was also an indicated need.

Any information dissemination drive toincrease awareness of climate change issues

should be integrated in both formal and non-

formal education systems. Local government

units should be held responsible in allocating

budget for this action.

The discussions showed that the productionand dissemination of IEC materials

on climate change is a common need.

Additionally, the impacts of the change at the

community level need to be identified and

publicized. A community-based knowledge

system would be of great benefit.

IEC materials should be designed and targeted

relative to specific sectors needs and issues.

Tapping local special bodies would be strategic

in the dissemination of information on climate

change.

Salient Points of Panel 4 Discussion

29


32/40

Concluding Points

The real challenge in the climate change dialogues, shemaintained, is mustering energies towards addressing

the links between climate change and power, which

was why the discussion of collective action strategies

were at the core of the conference.

Politics, Ms. Teves stressed, is excised from debates on

climate change. In fact the traditional response to climate

change issues has been to form national coalitions and

inter-agency bodies. As she clearly put it, these are puny

solutions that mistake inputs for outcomes.

The conference presentations and workshops

engendered the following conclusions:

The threat of rapid climate and environmental

change requires a democratization of power

in favour of those directly affected by the

changes. This calls for a review of the state

of countrys endowments and entitlements

afforded to the rural and urban poor population.

Subsequently, this necessity restores asset

reform as the central component in crafting

climate change responses. That asset reform

should be at the center of climate change

discourse should be recognized. A bottom-up

approach is vital in leveraging the interests

of those most vulnerable and in operating on

a strategy that aims for outcomes from the

national down to the village level.

There is a strong demand for synergizing

responses from central and local government,

private sector, and civil society. The task ofthe central government, then, is to create

and foster the institutional setting to protect

vulnerable sectors.

The state and its centralized agencies should take

the lead in allocating strategic investments for

climate change adaptive measures such as those

for flood control, irrigation, and resettlement.

Local governments, for their part, should craft

useful ordinances and should facilitate local

budget that enables environmental protection.

Ms. Miclat-Teves is the Executive Director ofProject Development Institute and Conference

Host.

Ms. Teves began her summation of the conference

by drawing attention to the role that power plays in

the climate change discourse. She noted that the new

administration (that of Noynoy Aquino) campaigned on a

platform of anti-corruption and good governance, which

presented hope for addressing poverty and vulnerability.

The efficiency of the state to influence, however, should

be underlined by a credible commitment to tackle political

power in addressing climate change.

She went on to say that good governance can hold

different meanings for different people, especially as

it relates to the climate change response. Some people

argue that it would mean transferring the burden ofresponsibility to the private sector and to international

development agencies. Others, meanwhile, suggest that

the civil society come up with concrete responses, such

as village-level disaster management committees. Still,

others argue that nothing can be achieved unless regional

and global agreements are put in place. But she asserted

that these agreements will only reduce the actions to

global and regional meetings that yield very few results

and exclude support to potential and existing climate

change initiatives, such as asset reform programs.

Ms. Aurea Miclat-Teves

30


33/40

The budget should, in turn, address the real needs

of communities, protect vital ecological resourcesand attract climate sensitive investments.

Non-government organizations should focus

on enhancing capabilities and capacities. They

should harness their track record in developing

collective action solutions. The private sector,

meanwhile, can take the reigns in developing

alternative technology and other crucial

environmental projects of the government (ex.

La Mesa Watershed Protection).

With regard to the Department of Agrarian

Reform, the proposed next steps are toincorporate credible commitments into the

budget. Usec. Nieto spoke of a renewed agency

policy direction that reinforces the Agrarian

Reform Communities (ARC) model as a viable

village-level collective action response to climate

change. The DAR is best prepared to tackle the

issue of power and collective action strategies

at the bureaucracy and local levels. It has

consistently engaged the civil society and private

sector, and is in fact the only remaining rural-

focused national line agency with a nationwide

portfolio and structure. The agency has proven

that it is central in settling disputes in the case of

land and asset reform and in providing support

services. Through the years, it has shown that it

has a direct role as the vehicle in the transfer of

power from the haves to the have-nots.

From the issues and challenges that were raised

in the conference, three immediate responses to

climate change should be taken:

1. Recasting the agrarian reform strategy

This should be accomplished by developing

a new policy framework that incorporates the

threats of climate change and is guided by the

following equation:

Agrarian Reform = [Peoples

Participation (LTI+ESS+PBD) x CC

effects and impacts Vi}

The previous 1986 framework had

already involved the LTI + ESS + socialinfrastructure building. The reformulated

agrarian reform program should be people-

centered, placing people at the center of

all DAR activities. This includes showing

credible commitment to its goals. More

importantly, a bottom-up process is critical in

implementing these activities.

The improved policy framework should expend

considerable work on the documentation

of landholdings. The participation of socialmovements, peoples organizations and

nongovernment organizations should be

enlisted in the documentation, and also in the

implementation of land tenure improvement

initiatives.

At present, the direction of agrarian reform

activities contrast with some of those

recommended in the Luzon, Visayas and

Mindanao workshops. For example, the

governments promotion of HYVs and of

biofuel is actually perceived as disadvantageous.

In recasting a new AR framework, the

recommendations of different stakeholders, as

represented in the three workshops, should be

seriously considered and fully integrated.

2. Strengthening collective action strategies a

the community level

This should be done through bottom-up

consultations and planning processes. Theexpected output should be a new development

plan that clearly defines the roles of the

stakeholders.

3. Presenting the development plan to national and

international community.

Models on the approaches to climate change

adaptation and mitigation within and outside of

ARCs - should be developed and presented. These

models can be showcased for donor assistance,

31


34/4032

(Footnotes)

1 R.A. 9729 Sec. 2 Declaration of Policy

2 The day after the conference, Republic Act 10121 or the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of

2010 was enacted by PGMA.

3 Fujie, M., Y. Hayami and M. Kikuchi. (2005). The conditions of collective action for local commons management: The

case of irrigation in the Philippines. AgEcon 33: 179-189.

A. Conference Papers 1. Usec. Narciso Nieto

2. Aurea Teves

3. Dr. James Putzel

4. Mr. Francisco Lara, Jr.

5. Usec. Rosalina Bistoyong

6. Dir. Marie Grace Pascua

7. Ms. Loida Rivera

8. Mr. Jude Esguerra

9. Dr. Laura David

10. Dra. Rosa Perez

11. Dr. Buenaventura Dargantes

12. Ms. Virginia Verora

Luzon

1. Dra. Rosa Perez

2. Ms. Aleli Marcelino

3. Mr. Danny Carranza

4. FIAN-Philippines

5. Mr. Alejandro Carillo - PDI

6. Mr. Arthur Casio - PDI

Visayas

1. Dr. Buenaventura Dargantes2. Mr. Emil Justimbaste

3. Rev. Fr. Herminio Dajao La Via

Mindanao

1. Ms. Virginia Verora

2. Mr. Feliciano Radana

3. Mr. Ernie Ruiz

4. Mr. Alejandro Otacan

B. Conference Programme

C. List of Participants

D. Steering Committee

E. Secretariat

Appendices


35/40

Appendix A - Conference Programme

Project Development Instute Department of Agrarian Reform

May 26, 2010, UP- Ayala Land Techno Hub

Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines

PROGRAMME

8:00 A.M. - 8:30 A.M. REGISTRATION

8:30 A.M. - 8:40 A.M. Naonal Anthem

Introducon

8:40 A.M. - 9:00 A.M. Opening Remarks Sec. NASSER C. PANGANDAMAN

DAR Secretary

9:00 A.M. - 9:30 A.M. Keynote Address: Is Asset Reform an Indispensable Component for Responding

to Environmental and Climate Change?

DR. JAMES PUTZEL

Professor, London School of Economics

9:30 A.M. - 10:00 A.M. OPEN FORUM

10:00 A.M. - 10:45 A.M. PANEL I: ASSET REFORM, ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS AND CLIMATE

CHANGE

Speaker 1.Climate Change and Global Development

DR. WALDEN BELLO

Congressman, Akbayan Partylist

Speaker 2. Climate Change, Global Land Issues and Implicaon for Land Reform

DR. JUN BORRASSt. Mary University, Canada

Speaker 3. Climate Change and Conict FRANCISCO LARA, JR.

Crisis States Research Center,

London School of Economics

10:45 A.M. - 11:15 A.M. OPEN FORUM

Panel Facilitator: MR.JOHN PHILIP SEVILLA,

Princeton University

Board Member, PDI

33


36/40

11:15 A.M. - 11:45 A.M. PANEL II: COLLECTIVE ACTION STRATEGIES

Speaker 1. Collecve Acon in the Peasant Sector: The ARC Experience

USEC. ROSALINA L. BISTOYONG

DAR Undersecretary for Support Services

Speaker 2. Collecve Acon in the Upland Resource Sector

Director MARIE GRACE PASCUA, NCIP

Speaker 3. Collecve Acon in the Women Sector

LOIDA RIVERA

President, Federaon of Peasant Women in

Luzon (PASAMAKA-L)

11:45 A.M. - 12:15 P.M. OPEN FORUM

Panel Facilitator: Dir. HERMINIA SAN JUAN,DAR-SSO

12:15 P.M. -1:30 P.M. LUNCH BREAK

1:30 P.M. - 2:00 P.M. PANEL III: CLIMATE CHANGE, WATER RESOURCES AND COLLECTIVE ACTION

Speaker 4. Collecve Acon in the Water Resource Sector

JUDE ESGUERRA,

Execuve Director, IPD

Speaker 5. Collecve Acon in the Marine Resource Sector

DR. LAURA T. DAVID

Physical Oceanography,

UP Marine Science Instute

2:00 P.M. - 2:45 P.M. OPEN FORUM

Panel Facilitator: Mr. RAMON MICLAT,

UP Marine Science Specialist

2:45 P.M. - 3:00 P.M. Recasng the Agrarian Reform Strategy

USEC. NARCISO B. NIETO

DAR Undersecretary,

Finance and Administraon/

Project Implementaon Ocer, FAPs

3:00 P.M. -3:15 P.M. BREAK

34


37/40

3:15 P.M. 4:00 P.M. PANEL IV: BROADER EFFECTS

I. Result of Luzon Workshop DRA. ROSA PEREZ

Naonal Climate Expert

II. Result of Visayas Workshop DR. BUENAVENTURA DARGANTES, Visayas

State University

III. Result of Mindanao Workshop MS. VIRGINIA VERORACoordinator, IFAD

4:00 P.M. - 4:30 P.M. OPEN FORUM

Panel Facilitator: MS. CARIDAD ASPIRAS, DAR

4:30 P.M. - 4:45 P.M. Next Steps AUREA M. TEVES

Execuve Director, PDI

President, FIAN-Philippines

4:45 P.M. - 5:00 P.M. Closing Remarks: Message from the President of PRRM

Mr. ISAGANI SERRANOMember of PhilDel to the Climate Negoaons

(Cope 16, Bonn Intercessional)

5:30 P.M. COCKTAILS

Overall Facilitators: Aurea M. Teves

Francisco Lara Jr.

USHERING A CLIMATE OF CHANGE :

NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ASSET REFORM AND CLIMATE CHANGE

35


38/40

Appendix B - LIist of Parcipants

NAME ORGANIZATION

Donor Agencies

1. Agusna Musa ADB

2. Agnes Pantasco GTZ3. Takehike Sakata EoJ

4. Yolando Arban IFAD

5. Anna de Guzman German

Embassy

6. Joy delos Reyes JICA

7. Erlinda Dolatre GTZ

8. NPC dela Rosa Internaonal

Alert

9. Etsuko Taneda JICA

Speakers

10. Buenaventura Dargantes ISRDS-VSU

11. Jun Borras SMU Canada

12. Danny Carranza Rightsnet

13. Virginia Verora DAR-NMCIREMP

14. James Putzel LSE

15. Sunny Sevilla PDI Board

16. Rosa Perez

17. Walden Bello Congress18. Grace Pascua NCIP

19. Ramon Miclat MSN c/o

Comecab UPMST

20. Laura David UPMSI

21. Jude Esguerra IPD

22. Loida Rivera PASAMAKA-L

23. Ria Teves PDI

Government Organizaons

24. Anselmo Sang Tian Butuan City

Water District

25. Ernie Ruiz Butuan City

Water District

26. Elmo Baanes DAR

27. Alexis Arsenal DAR

28. Julita Raganlang DAR

29. Felix Aguhob DAR

30. Faiser Mambuay DAR - Caraga

31. Alejandro Otacan DAR - Caraga

32. Casiano Eclar Jr. DAR

33. Teolio Q. Inocencio DAR

34. Lev Nikko Macalintal DA

35. Engr. Jeanee Manuel NCIP36. Marcy Ballesteros DAR-PDMS

37. Anania Tagudin DAR-PDMS

38. Renato Navata DAR

39. Manuel Abad DTI-CARP

40. Marissa Presentasyon NIA

41. Joel Pilapil PCA

42. Narciso Nieto DAR-USEC

43. Tony Evangelista DAR

44. J. Dominador Gomez NEDA/CEDS

45. A.S. Sallidao NCIP-CO

46. Ireneo Ramos DA/BSWM

47. Ofelia Mendoza DENR/PDO

48. Corazon Checa DENR/PEO

49. Homer Toblas DARPO I

50. Aaron Lozada DAR

51. Dianne delos Reyes DAR

52. Roland Manalysay DARAB

53. Romeo Reyes IAS

54. Pearl Armada DAR IV-B55. Ay. Ivy Magabo DAR

56. Ma. Elena Cabanis BARBD

57. Romeo Mendizabal DENR-CARP

58. Boobie Ceno LBP

59. Herminia San Juan DAR Director

60. Rosie Villamin DPWH

61. Shiela Marie Encabo NEDA

62. Atanacia Guevarra BARC

63. Jaime Mata DAR OIC-Chief

64. Medel Mercado DAR

65. Alberto Obcena DAR

66. Isabelita Estrada PARC Sec.

67. Bong Mendoza UP

68. Nelia Manahan DAR

69. Rodolfo BM Bueno DAR

70. Nestor Bayoneto DAR

71. Dante de Leon DAR

72. N. Briones DAR

36


39/40

73. Perla Baltar DA-PPO

74. Chris Morales DA-PS

75. Wilfredo Cabagua DAR-PS

76. Sally Manuel DAR

77. Jessie Colto DAR

78. Rosalina Bistoyong DAR

79. Liza Nepotedis SSO

80. Cynthia Cander DAR81. Ma. Susana Perez DAR-FAPSO

82. Datu Yusoph Mama DAR

83. R.T Inson DAR

84. Arnold Arriela DAR

85. Noemi Carpio DA

86. Catalino Aus DAR

87. Lina Manlucao DAR

88. Romualdo Mun DAR

89. Mike Benjamin

90. Celesna Tam DAR

91. J.S. Nepomuceno DAR/FAPSO

92. Ay. Percival Peralta DAR/FAPSO

93. Ramon Estanislao III DAR Bulacan

94. MBV Tenetrancia DAR

95. Vergel Algador LGU

96. Virgilio Acua DAR

97. Corazon Cozy DAR

98. Gerundio Madueo Usec. DAR

Non- Government Organizaons

99. Lisa Alano AFRIM/ED

100. Reyduard Gelera JPMAP/ President

101. Emil Jusmbaste PFI

102. Philip Arandia

103. Ay. Lee Bagadiong

104. Elin Mondejar PDI Board

105. Dra. Leila dela Llana FIAN

106. Kaiser Recabo, Jr. LMDA

107. Ray Abanil KAISAMPALAD

108. Arnold Tapere Propegemus FI

109. Rodel Sango Kaisampalad

110. Joanne Dulce SoG

111. Elvis Ayuda FIAN

112. Leonora Ayuda FIAN

113. Jeremy Balondo

114. Lorie Beyer EED-TFIP

115. Isagani Serrano PRRM/President

116. Miriam C. UP

117. Romeo Royandoyan CSI

118. Raegan Gabriel La Liga

Policy Instute

119. Anthony Marzan Kaisahan

120. Jennifer Corpuz Tebtebba

121. Voltaire Tupaz TFIP

122. Aida Vidal CCODP123. Carmina Flores-Obanil Focus on the

Global South

124. Heidi Fernandez Kaisampalad

125. Catherine Briola FIAN Phils.

126. Ray Rey Hipolito FIAN Phils.

127. Aison Garcia Saligan

128. Arnold de Vera Saligan

129. Mary Ann Manahan Focus on the

Global South130. Ricky Gonzales IPD

131. Larry Santos IPD

132. Ricardo Reyes Akbayan

133. Men Sta. Ana AER

134. Ruel Punongbayan PDI

135. Ramon Ayco PDI

136. Jofre Manankel

Peoples Organizaons

137. Wynona Corilla SAMATT

138. Danilo Salonga NASAKA-K

139. Fernando Luis CRPMPC

140. Carling Domulot, Sr. BUKAL

141. Jessie Rey Davocol NASAKA-K

142. Acod Ampuan Kasabwahan,

Mindanao

143. Arthur Casio Mindanao

144. Amado Higante NMGL

145. Baby Mangilit PASAMAKA146. Eva Manglicmot SMC

147. Azineth Cagaoan PASAMAKA

148. Helen Abarra EPIK

149. Al Carillo PASAMBOT

150. Adora Ferrer NMGL

151. Lita Domacena LAKAS Women

152. Salome Hugante NMGL

153. Lourdes Macabasag NMGL

154. Violeta de Guzman NMGL

37


40/40

Appendix C - Steering Commiee

1. Usec. Narciso Boy Nieto

2. Ria Miclat-Teves

3. Francisco Pancho Lara

4. Eddie Quitoriano

Appendix D - Secretariat

DAR

1. Caridad Aspiras

2. Gemma Falgus

PDI

3. Myrna Arandia

4. Gina de Fiesta

5. Analyn Osias

6. Dianna Ydia

Ramon T. Ayco, Sr.- photos, grahic arts and lay-out

the other inconvenient truths

Documents