KALIKASAN BCSD Knowledge Series SEVEN

BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
AS THEY SEE IT
COMMUNITY-BASED CONSERVATION
WITH THE MANOBO-TINANANON OF ARAKAN, NORTH COTABATO

ABOUT THE COVER PHOTO

A Philippine Eagle nest was discovered in 1992 at Mt. Mahuson, home of the Manobo-Tinananon Indigenous
community, which lead to the formation of the communitys own Indigenous Peoples Organization, the
Pan-uangdig Lumadnong Panaghiusa.
The Philippine Eagle Pithecophaga jefferyi is an IUCN critically endangered species, with no more than 500
eagle pairs left in the remaining forests of Luzon, Leyte, Samar, and Mindanao.
Cover photo by Klausse Nigge.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The case study writers are grateful to the Indigenous Manobo-Tinananon of Sitio Macati, Arakan, North Cotabato
for the privilege to become a part of their lives. They also thank Dennis Salvador, PEF Executive Director, and
the Board of Trustees of the Philippine Eagle Foundation for providing inspiration and support. The case study
writers also grateful to the following partners: Arakan LGU, Arakan Environment Coordinating Council, Philippine
Long Distance Telecommuncations, United Nations Development Programme, British Petroleum Conservation
Program, Globe Telecommunications, Solar Energy Foundation, Department of Education, Action Against
Hunger, Protected Areas and Wildlife Bureau-DENR, Manobo Lumadnong Panaghiusa, the Peregrine Fund and
the World Agroforestry Center. They also thank Bing Veloso for assistance during data gathering.

BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
AS THEY SEE IT
COMMUNITY-BASED CONSERVATION
WITH THE MANOBO-TINANANON OF ARAKAN, NORTH COTABATO

APRIL 2013
Prepared by the Philippine Eagle Foundation (PEFI) for the Foundation for the Philippine Environment
(FPE) under the Up-Scaling Forest Restoration Efforts in Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) project.
DISCLAIMER
This publication is made possible through the generous support of the American People through the
United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents of this publication are the
sole responsibility of the case study writers and PEFI and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID,
the United States government, or FPE.

MESSAGE FROM

DENR
In this emerging era of climate change, environment and natural resources (ENR)
around the globe are threatened with destruction to an extent rarely seen in
earths history. The mitigation of the pernicious effects of climate change compels
government, particularly us in the DENR, to adapt an integrated approach to ENR
planning and decision making.
Constructive engagement, international partnerships, and collaboration with the
different sectors of society are forged not only to brace up our limited resources,
but more so to create an enabling policy environment that would enhance
institutional and regulatory capacities.
It is in this complicated and complex task of building partnerships with key
stakeholders that we appreciate the role played by the Foundation for the
Philippine Environment (FPE). A catalyst for cooperation, the FPE blazes trails
in efforts to promote and encourage international and local cooperation among
NGOs, business groups, and communities toward developing good policies and
effective programs on biodiversity and sustainable management.
The case studies presented in this publication bear testament to FPEs leading role
in facilitating collaborations for sustainable development. Without the foundations
assistance and effort to involve key stakeholders cooperation, appropriate
assessments regarding the current conditions and trends of eight key biodiversity
areas in Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao would not have been made. Our success,
hence, in establishing reliable bases for developing goals and strategies for future
biodiversity and sustainable management interventions in these areas can only be
ensured with support from the Foundation for the Philippine Environment.

RAMON J. P. PAJE
DENR Secretary

MESSAGE FROM

USAID
The realization of our shared vision of broad-based and inclusive growth is greatly
aided by enhancing environmental resilience and ensuring that the countrys
bountiful natural resources and life-giving ecosystems services are sustainably
managed while reducing the risk of disasters. The U.S. Government holds firm
to its commitment to help the Government of the Philippines to achieve this goal.
Expanding the network of environmental stakeholders and providing continued
support to local governments and communities on proper natural resource
management are crucial strategies to achieve this goal. With these in mind, our
partnership with the Government of the Philippines has yielded a large network of
partners that engages local communities and groups in biodiversity conservation
and natural resource management. We have helped empower our partners to be
more involved in decision-making leading to better management and protection
of natural resources that they depend on.
This publication captures the key strategies applied through the years that Upscaling Forest Restoration Project attempted to scale up in the last two years
in eight key forest areas of the country. Eight case studies feature committed
forest guard volunteers, lessons from science-based forest restoration efforts with
indigenous peoples, and partnership building among government, communities,
and the private sector to restore forest habitats and watersheds. This collection of
stories is a testament to the hard work of our partners, led by the Foundation for
the Philippine Environment, which collaboratively worked with local stakeholders
to ensure that the approaches employed, milestones achieved, and lessons
learned from our forest restoration efforts are carefully documented.
It is our hope that knowledge sharing through publications like this will become
a staple element in how we sustain our efforts in forest management. There is
wisdom from the grassroots, as we have valuably learned through our initiatives,
which have significant impact at the national level. I invite you to read these
stories and share them with your network and other organizations working
towards biodiversity conservation and environmental resilience.

GLORIA D. STEELE

Mission Director, USAID/Philippines

MESSAGE FROM

FPE
FPEs twenty-one years of working with partners to save forests and sustain life have
borne fruit. Eight (8) case studies documenting the progress and challenges in expanding
forest governance in key biodiversity areas (KBAs) are now available to the public.
The cases relate, among others, how our partner in Negros Occidental transformed
a silent subsistence community to active forest protectors; how planting native tree
species revived dying forests and earned income for farmers in Leyte; how synergistic
partnerships among various agencies accelerated watershed rehabilitation in Davao City;
and how the concept of social fencing in the provinces of Quezon and Laguna deepened
the communities collective resolve and shared responsibility in guarding their forests for
life.
These are testaments of progress in FPEs conservation support. But the mission of the
foundation is none more relevant than today, as scarcity of natural resources worsens
hunger, climate change brings collateral damage to conservation investments, and
unbridled population growth threatens the carrying capacity of our remaining forests.
In almost all USAID-FPE Up-Scaling Project sites, our partners continue to face the
challenges of poverty, unsustainable economic development, and fragmented or
uncoordinated conservation initiatives.
Notably, this is the first time in many years that our long-time partners in conservation
took the initiative of assessing and documenting what strategies worked and what could
still work to sustainably protect our forests in KBAs. This is a conscious attempt to create
tools and platforms for knowledge access and sharing.
All these interesting case studies constitute the second set of Kalikasan (Kaalamang
Likas Yaman) Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Development series, one of
FPEs regular publications. The first set describes the results of resource and socioeconomic assessments in selected KBAs. This second set combines best practices and
lessons learned in forest restoration efforts under the USAID-FPE Up-Scaling Project. All
Kalikasan BCSD series are packed with knowledge from projects and field experiences.
FPE does not stop at merely making beautiful publications, but endeavors to translate
knowledge into action towards improving our work and contribution to BCSD.
Allow me to congratulate our project partners, the local government units in project sites,
and USAID for making the case studies of the Up-Scaling Project possible. We hope our
readers distill the lessons to guide future actions for more effective forest restoration and
hunger alleviation.

NESTOR R. CARBONERA
Chair and CEO

MESSAGE FROM

PEFI
We have been doing community-based conservation for two decades now but
our search for an improved theory and practice continues. Our experiences inform
what we do but our work with communities shapes us and our worldviews too.
Each community is unique and there is always space for learning.
This case study is part of an organizational effort to continuously learn and serve
better.
We wish to thank the FPE and the USAID for this opportunity to share what
we have learned. We are also indebted to the Indigenous Manobo-Tinananon
community in Arakan, North Cotabato who have generously given us the privilege
to be a part of their lives.
There is still so much work to do, but we hope that conservation practitioners find
these potential best practices useful in their own BCSD initiatives.

DENNIS I. SALVADOR

Executive Director

KALIKASAN

The BCSD
Knowledge Series of FPE
Kaalamang Likas Yaman or simply, KALIKASAN, is the publication series of the
Foundation for the Philippine Environment (FPE) on biodiversity conservation and
sustainable development (BCSD).
Kaalaman is the Filipino term for knowledge while Likas Yaman is the term for
nature or natural resources. Kaalamang Likas Yaman literally means knowledge of
nature. As FPEs main thrust is BCSD in key biodiversity areas of the Philippines,
this series is essential in presenting and promoting valuable theories, case studies,
site assessments, best practices, and other learning materials.
As Atty. Danny N. Valenzuela, FPE Chair and CEO (2010-2012), explains,
That the work of the Foundation for the Philippine Environment on biodiversity
conservation and sustainable development has gone a long way in the past twenty
years cannot be overemphasized. In fact, it has become imperative for FPE to
embark into an appropriate, meaningful and innovative knowledge management
systems in order to preserve and properly utilize the significant learnings out of its
various collaborations with partners in key biodiversity areas all over the country.
As a major repository of the knowledge base of FPE and its partners, KALIKASAN
will serve as a series of dynamic and enriching resource materials that will educate
the readers, in particular those involved in the environmental protection of key
biodiversity areas, and equip them with both theoretical and practical knowledge.
Kaalamang Likas Yaman may also refer to the richness (yaman) of natural or intuitive
knowledge (kaalamang likas). This is in recognition of the a priori knowledge of
the local communities in FPE areas of operation and concern, especially among
the grassroots communities and indigenous peoples, in environmental protection
and conservation.
KALIKASAN seeks to serve as a comprehensive BCSD reference and research
source while tapping and augmenting the existing knowledge base of its partners,
beneficiaries and communities. This is the legacy of the current FPE leadership
to the next generation of Filipino environmentalists who will continue and further
develop the current advocacies and endeavors of FPE and its partners.

USAID-FPE PROJECT

Up-Scaling Forest Restoration

Efforts in Key Biodiversity Areas
For more than two decades, FPE has been at the forefront of biodiversity
conservation and sustainable development in the Philippines. FPE operates as a
catalyst for cooperation, fund facilitator, and grant maker in order to save species,
conserve sites, and sustain communities.
Capitalizing on previous and existing forest restoration initiatives of its local
site partners, FPE, in partnership with USAID, implemented the Up-Scaling
Forest Restoration Efforts in Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) project from 2011
to 2013. This project seeks to address the decline of the Philippine forests
by strengthening the protection of approximately 170,000 hectares of forest
habitats and reforesting a total of 480 hectares within 8 sites in the bioregions
of Cebu, Negros, Leyte (Eastern Visayas), Luzon and Mindanao. The project has
also instituted mechanisms to sustain conservation efforts and continuously affect
a macro-level of consciousness among stakeholders.
FPE supports its partners on sites in drawing lessons from projects and sharing
results of research and experiences. FPE considers the knowledge gathered
and lessons learned by the forest resource managers peoples organizations
(POs), indigenous peoples organization (IPOs), forest guards and wardens,
and the communities themselves as one of its strategic assets in improving
methodologies, practices and systems toward BCSD.
In Arakan Valley in Mindanao, the Indigenous Manobo tribes, through the assistance
of the Philippine Eagle Foundation (PEFI) have adopted the rainforestation
technology to build forest patches by means of corridors. By doing so, they
would be expanding forest habitats to allow viable populations of the critically
endangered Philippine Eagle (Pithecophaga jeffreyi) to thrive. The USAID-FPE
project enabled PEFI to apply lessons learned in conservation work with the IPs,
using its community-driven conservation and development framework.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACRONYMS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

METHODOLOGY
Case Study Site: Description and Timeline of Events

Data Collection and Analysis

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Rural Livelihood Outcomes

Consevation Outcomes

Potential Practices and Lessons

10

CONCLUSION

13

REFERENCES

14

ACRONYMS
ACF

Action Against Hunger

AFCDP

Arakan Forest Corridor Development Project

BCSD

Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Development

BOD

Board of Director

CADC

Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claims

CBC

Community-based conservation

CDP

Community Development Plan

CSR

Corporate Social Responsibility

DENR

Department of Environment and Natural Resources

DepEd

Department of Education

DOLE

Department of Labor and Employment

ESSC

Environmental Science for Social Change

FFS

Farmer Field School

FPE

Foundation for the Philippine Environment

GPS

Global Positioning System

ICDP

Integrated Conservation and Development Programs

ICRAF

World Agroforestry Center

IEK

Indigenous Ecological Knowledge

IK

Indigenous Knowledge

IKSP

Indigenous Knowledge, Systems and Practices

IPO

Indigenous Peoples Organization

IUCN

International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources

LCO

Local community organizers

MALUPA

Manobo Lumadnong Panaghiusa

MAO

Municipal Agriculture Office

MLGU

Municipal Local Government Unit

NGP

National Greening Program

NRM

Natural Resource Management

NTFP

Non-timber Forest Product

PALUPA

Pan-uangdig Lumadnong Panaghiusa

PAWB

Protected Areas and Wildlife Bureau

PEF

Philippine Eagle Foundation

PLDT

Philippine Long Distance Telecommunications

SLF

Sustainable livelihoods framework

UNDP

United Nations Development Programme

USAID

United States Agency for International Development

1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Community-based conservation has become the hallmark of a country-wide effort to save Philippine biodiversity. Despite a number
of criticisms against it, programs where rural people are an integral component of conservation have yet to be implemented
in earnest. Using a community-based conservation program with the Indigenous Manobo-Tinananon of Arakan, North Cotabato,
evidence is provided that partnerships could indeed supply tangible benefits toward achieving sustainable rural development and
clear conservation outcomes. In this paper, potential best practices for conservation work, using a flagship species at the grassroots
level are highlighted.

INTRODUCTION
Community-based Conservation (CBC) whereby rural people are an integral part of biodiversity conservation has become the
hallmark of environmental actions in the Philippines. The key elements of CBC include local communities driving resource planning
and management, and more importantly, gaining economically from conservation. As a bottom-up rather than a top-down approach,
CBC advocates see it as an exercise in democracy, where local people become active players in wildlife protection, letting them
decide how to use and protect their lands, instead of having policies imposed from above (Berkes 2004, Horwich and Lyon 2007).
Despite a seemingly global adoption of CBC approaches to nature conservation, there remains criticism against it. For example,
Li (2004) argued that community-based NRM practice in the country remains an imposed environmental agenda that is ..at best
a partial response to the need of upland people to secure the benefits of a fuller citizenship (pg. 266). Talking generally about
Integrated Conservation and Development Programs (ICDPs) and how it lacks genuine indigenous peoples participation, Chapin
(2004) commented that these programs were ..generally paternalistic, lacking in expertise, and one-sideddriven largely by the
agendas of the conservationists, with little indigenous input. (pg. 20).

However, we agree with Berkes (2004), in that the failure of community conservation is not due to the weakness or impracticality
of the concept, but rather to its improper implementation. Therefore, practitioners with their insightful experiences and the lessons
learned during implementation can contribute greatly to identifying what techniques would work and would not in which particular
contexts.
Our goal therefore for this paper is to contribute to a healthy and continuous interrogation of the practice of CBC by describing what
we see as potential best practices in community engagement, particularly with marginalized indigenous peoples in the Philippines.
Using a case study conducted with the Indigenous Manobo Tinananon of Arakan, North Cotabato, we particularly aim to provide an
example of how local aspirations and community commitment to achieve imagined futures can be harnessed to bring about the
desired conservation outcomes.
In the succeeding sections, we will provide a background of the case study site, as well as describe the socio-ecological set-up of
the study area, the conceptual framework used to design the CBC program, the strategies or steps that could be considered as best
practices, and the preliminary evidence that such strategies do achieve both conservation and development goals.

METHODOLOGY
Case Study Site: Description and Timeline of Events
The case described in this paper is centered at Sitio Macati, Barangay Ganatan, Arakan, North Cotabato (Figure 1), a small village
comprised of at least 40 households who belong to the Indigenous Manobo-Tinananon ethno-linguistic group. The community holds
a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim (CADC No. 11) covering 1047 hectares of forests, grasslands, and farms. The ancestral
domain covers most of the northern slopes of Mt Mahuson, one of the three forest islands in Arakan comprising a meager 4 % of
the towns total land area of nearly 69,500 ha.

Projections by the ESSC (1999) showed that prior to American colonization the whole Arakan town was nearly covered with
forests. However, towards the end of the 20th century, about 95% of the original forest had been lost primarily through commercial
logging, cattle ranching, and cash-based agriculture (Kaliwat Theater Collective, 1995). At Macati, commercial logging spanned three
decades, beginning in the mid 1950s.
The traditional governance system gave way to the states unified and centralized political structure in the 1950s. The village-specific,
multiple-authority system of chieftains, elders, wise men, priests/priestesses, and warriors who collectively maintained political and
socio-economic order, often through kin-based customs and sanctions, was substantially undermined (Manuel, 1973). Immediately
after logging ceased in 1985, the Manobos faced another political exigency with the occupation by insurgents of their territory. The
whole community evacuated, and re-settled a few years later only after the rebels left.
Shortly after a Philippine Eagle nest was discovered at Mt Mahuson in 1992, the community organized its own Indigenous Peoples
Organization called the Pan-uangdig Lumadnong Panaghiusa (PALUPA). Its officers are elected through a popular vote and a Board
of Directors, made up of the Chieftain and a group of traditional elders and leaders supervise them. Thereafter, PALUPA became the
focal management entity for conservation and development projects within the ancestral domain in partnership with PEF and FPE.
In 2010, as part of a revitalized three-year landscape-level conservation plan for the whole Arakan Valley using a forest corridor
approach, the sustainable rural livelihoods framework (SLF) became the conceptual model for planning community-based
interventions with PALUPA (Box 1). SLF has gained popularity in rural development work, including environmental projects where the
causes of degradation are tied to poverty issues and the need for stable and resilient livelihoods (see Solesbury, 2003). PEF also
launched a conservation agreement scheme whereby the community is provided with financial or in-kind incentives in return for
either collective or individual environmental service.

Prior to American colonization, the whole Arakan town was nearly covered with forests but commercial logging, cattle
ranching and cash-based agriculture caused the loss of 95% of its original forest (PEFI File Photo).

Definitions of Sustainable Livelihood Capitals (all adapted from

Scoones 1998:7-8, except cultural which is from Lertzman 1999)
Natural capital the natural resource stocks and environmental
services from which resource flows and services for livelihoods are
derived
Economic or financial capital the capital base (cash,
credit, savings, and other assets, including infrastructure, production
equipment, and technologies) essential for livelihood pursuits
Human capital the skills, knowledge, ability to labor and good
health and physical capability important for livelihoods
Social capital the social resources (networks, social claims, social
relations, affiliations, associations) upon which people draw when
pursuing different livelihood strategies
Cultural capital resources of shared knowledge, beliefs, and
values upon which communities are based

In 2011, a community development planning session was facilitated using an

Indigenous planning approach anchored on the SLF. The framework looked into
community strengths and assets rather than deficiencies, among other things (Figure
2). This planning framework is a product of a literature review of best practices in
community-based planning coupled with analyses of interviews and focus-groups with
10 Indigenous tribes in Mindanao (Ibanez, et al forthcoming). The planning process
fundamentally drew from a collective Indigenous worldview in identifying development
aspirations and priority outcomes. The community planning also gave an opportunity
for training and engaging Indigenous community organizers. Since then, the resulting
CDP has become PALUPAs basis for conservation and other development investments.

Data collection and analysis

The case study used qualitative data gathered during project implementation by PEF
and PALUPA from 2010 to 2013. Analysis was focused on this period because it
was during these years that lessons learned from previous implementation had been
proactively incorporated into the annual project design. We also believe that community
participation and project ownership were also at their highest during the last three
years. Data came from project reports, outputs of planning workshops, semi-structured
interviews (focused group and individuals), and participant observations. To complement
previous data and validate initial case study results, focus groups were also held in late
2012.
We analyzed transcripts of meetings, workshop outputs, project reports, and field notes.
Two of the authors spent considerable time living with the community to facilitate project
activities (Ibanez in 2011 and Carig in 2011 and 2012). Veloso and Carig spent a
few days in the village between September and October 2012, doing key informant
interviews and focus groups to validate data collected from project documents, interview
transcripts and supplemental interviews of PEF staff who had worked with PALUPA since
2010 (Box 2).

TIMELINE OF KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS

AND FOCUS GROUPS WITH PALUPA IN 2012

09.25

09.26-28

09.29-10.04

10.05

Planning and
preparation for
interviews and
focus groups at the
Philippine Eagle
Center, Davao City

Key Informant
Interviews and
focus groups with
PALUPA

Consultation of
results with PEF
team and FPE

Validation of results
with PALUPA

Figure 2. Indigenous framework

for planning sustainable
livelihoods and natural resource
management goals within
Manobo-Tinananon ancestral
domains in Arakan, North
Cotabato. This process is an
amalgamation of communitybased planning processes
described in the literature and
the results of focus groups with
10 indigenous communities.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

1. Rural livelihood outcomes
Social capital The number of project partners have increased, broadening community access to more resources
and development actors. Apart from PEF (who continuously brokers development assistance for PALUPA) and FPE
(who has been providing crucial support to NRM activities and community capacity strengthening since 2000),
development aid from public and private institutions that were packaged as conservation incentives has increased.
In 2010, PLDT supported a food security project and the construction of a day care facility, while ICRAF undertook
a case study with Indigenous researchers on smallholder agro-forestry at Macati. SEF gave solar lamps as a
rainforestation incentive, while the DepEd began adult literacy sessions in 2011. In 2012, USAID and FPE provided
substantial conservation funds and the MAO instituted the Field Farmer School (FFS). ACF also gave tools and seeds.
Project allies for 2013 include the MLGU, DepEd, and PLDT (primary school), PAWB-DENR (new home gardens and
water system repairs), and Globe (25,000 cacao seeds and nursery supplies).
PALUPA got registered with DOLE and became part of local coordinating bodies. They joined the Civil Society
Organization of Arakan in 2010 and regularly went to its meetings. They also became part of the Arakan Environment
Coordinating Council, a local NRM think-tank that recommends policies and supervises environmental programs.
PALUPAs membership in the MALUPA federation of Arakan Manobos was also renewed. Its DOLE registration, on
the other hand, bolstered eligibility to the NGP in 2012.
Economic/financial capital The community is receiving payments for environmental services through reforestation
and engagements in research and other project activities. The community as a whole is paid with cash incentives

Under the USAID-FPE project, communities set up their nursery chambers to raise seedlings needed for reforestation of denuded areas in Arakan alley (FPE File Photo).

in exchange for the care of communal tree nurseries, whereas household-based incentives were awarded for land
preparation, planting, and maintenance of reforestation plots and fire breaks. Since 2009, PALUPA received at least
a total of Php 218,400.00. In 2012, nursery earnings were used to electrify each home using a generator. On the
other hand, individual cash incentives were used either to set-up backyard farms, buy farm seeds or fertilizer, pay for
childrens school fees, or meet other basic needs. Local experts are also compensated for the knowledge they share
during research and biological inventories.
Human capital The knowledge and capabilities of PALUPA officers and members in various aspects of
organizational and project management are continuously enhanced. From 2009-2010, they were trained in (i)
process documentation, (ii) Indigenous governance systems, (iii) project implementation, monitoring and evaluation;
and (iv) paralegal procedures. In 2011, the officers participated in organization leadership sessions and training
on financial management. Practice followed theory through active involvement in project decision-making and
management.
Three Manobo youth - a college graduate and two undergraduates - were also chosen by the community in
2011 to undergo a crash course as local community organizers (LCOs) with PEF. For one week, Jimmy Ubay,
Danny Catihan and Airene Umbaoy joined trainees from two more Indigenous villages in Arakan for special sessions
on basic community organizing, development planning, agroforestry, GPS mapping, and farm planning. They also
joined exposure trips to other ancestral domains in Mindanao to interact with and learn from other IPOs. Two more
community members were hired as LCOs this year, Rey Namansila and Inday Namansila.
Learning sessions and coaching on agroforestry are sustained by project field technicians. Just recently, thirty
households enrolled in the FFS program to learn about permaculture. FFS students also receive seeds and seedlings
of agro-forestry crops, such as fruit trees, bamboo, coffee, and cacao for propagation. In 2011, households also
participated in a grassfire prevention and management training facilitated by municipal fire fighters.
PAGE 8 | BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AS THEY SEE IT:
Community-based conservation with the Manobo-Tinananon of Arakan, North Cotabato

Natural capital As a farming community, land is their most important natural asset, yet a large part of the ancestral
domain is made up of unproductive grasslands. But through rainforestation, they aim to reclaim these grasslands
while restoring wildlife habitats. At present, a total of 38 hectares of idle lands are being converted into agro-forestry
sites of native trees. This year, an additional 70 hectares will be rehabilitated through the NGP and the AFCDP 3.
The forest is also an important community asset as it is a source of immediate ecological services (water, local
climate regulation), supplemental food (bush meat, honey, rattan shoots, etc.), and NTFPs (rattan, ferns, romblon).
Community foot patrols protect the Mahuson forest from slash-and-burn practices, illegal logging, and other forms
of encroachment. Additionally, periodic wildlife inventories, biodiversity monitoring and other NRM activities also
generate information necessary for making conservation plans, which, if socially marketed properly, results in more
external support for forest conservation.
Cultural capital Indigenous knowledge systems and practices (IKSP) were provided space by employing best
efforts to integrate Indigenous knowhow into project implementation. In doing reforestation for example, we relied
on Indigenous expertise in species selection, identification of mother trees, and collection of wildlings. For forest
monitoring, we used local values and knowledge in the selection of species and habitat indicators and what metrics
to use. Tapping into such Indigenous ecological knowledge (IEK) and compensating its knowledge holders contribute
to empowerment (Wilson 2004, Garnett et al 2007).
There is also investment to support traditional gatherings. Apart from its spiritual benefits, we also believe they are
analogues of modern day team-building inspiring and bringing about cohesion and unity. The suksok sa kal-lo every
January, for example, sanctifies the farming season by praying for spiritual guidance and blessing farm implements.
The annual Foundation Day for Sitio Macati every October also provides a venue for reviving Indigenous games
and talents. These annual gatherings are witnessed by the whole community and thus are a good opportunity for
cross-generational learning as well.
A few more project policies that help revive IK systems include the mandatory practice of religious rituals before any
major project activity and the engagement of elders in resolving conflicts arising from project-related issues. We also
support community calls for dagyaw, the practice of communal labor to accomplish project activities such as the
repair of roads, setting-up backyard demo farms, and the construction of school buildings.

2. Conservation Outcomes
The ancestral forest has remained intact over the years. We believe this resulted from the synergy of conscientious
forest use and a market-oriented farming economy. Timber and non-timber forest products remained largely
subsistence. Trees were felled occasionally, but the harvested woods meet domestic needs, not commercial. Timber
poaching has been controlled as well, unlike in the neighboring Indigenous territories where chainsaws are regularly
heard.
Wildlife and NTFPs close to depletion have been given time to recover. Deer and wild pig hunting and rattan
gathering were controlled because the elders believe these resources are already close to depletion. Interviews
indicate that prior to receiving the CADC, the forest was an open-access resource, with outsiders freely moving in
and out of the ancestral domain harvesting game, rattan, and timber without control. The latest forest patrol showed
that the state of these resources seem to have improved. Today, outsiders are still banned from harvesting NTFPs
and game, and regular foot patrols guard the ancestral domains from trespassers.

Permanent agriculture close to market infrastructures seem to have also eased off the pressure to deforest. Cashcrop farming is the main income source, and because the forests are far from the roads, traditional kaingin and
home gardens inside the forests have been abandoned in favor of farming in accessible sections of the ancestral
domain. Based on the latest forest patrol, no one resides inside the forests anymore and no new slash-and-burn
farms were detected.
The CBC flagship, a Philippine eagle couple, appears safe and is breeding well inside the ancestral forests. Six
nesting attempts have been verified since 1992 and all resulted in the young flying off from the nest. The eaglet
produced during the 2011-12 breeding season was captured and instrumented, and satellite telemetry readings
indicate that the bird stayed unharmed despite flying close to villages. Since 1992, no eagles were trapped, shot,
or killed within the area.
The community is actively involved in forest restoration. Last year, PALUPA signed a 3-year contract with DENR for the
communitys participation in the NGP. Fifty hectares of invasive Imperata grassland and Buyo-buyo Piper aduncum
growths close to the eagle nest site was targeted for afforestation this year. Small patches of rainforestation plots
are slowly being created as well. Although procedural challenges remain, the teams continuous trouble-shooting
and consultation with the community resulted in promising innovations in land preparation and plant maintenance.
3. Potential best practices and lessons
Six key approaches contributed to promising BCSD outcomes with PALUPA:

working with a socio-economically and culturally homogenous group;

harnessing existing governance systems and other social institutions;
identifying and achieving community development goals on their terms and in accordance with their values;
engaging Indigenous researchers;
compensating the community for ecological services they perform; and
engaging private and public sectors to meet community goals.

Working with a relatively small, socio-economically homogenous group, whose members share bonds of kinship
and common customs and traditions, helped facilitate equitable community access to benefits, resulting in a
generally positive attitude towards the program. In the community, there is no elite minority capturing the benefits of
development projects. All households belonged to a single income bracket. When asked why there seems to be no
rich household amongst them, LCO Rey Namansila commented in Cebuano that it is because there is still a strong
sense of equality and reciprocity in the community, so that accumulating wealth is uncommon; and cultural norms
still demand that those with more share their resources with those who have less.
Harnessing traditional governance systems, where elders and traditional leaders remain accountable to the
community and not to any external source of authority, seemed to have also ensured community ownership over

PAGE 10 | BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AS THEY SEE IT:

Community-based conservation with the Manobo-Tinananon of Arakan, North Cotabato

the program. The elders and leaders owe their position to

the community members; thus, they are beholden to no one
else except the community members. As a result, they tend
to behave in culturally acceptable ways as expected by their
constituents, lest they face shame and ostracism. Such forms
of social reprimand are known to be effective in small villages
where every member practically knows everyone (Berkes et al
2000). Village-level engagements also seem to protect against
what Colchester (1994) called lairdism - the cooptation,
corruption and undemocratic tendency of some Indigenous
leaders (Li 2002).
Apart from community respect of elders and wise-mens
wisdom over the management of community affairs, they also
highly regard codes of behavior and conduct that exhibit an ethic
of equity, reciprocity, and sharing. All of these informal social
institutions facilitate BCSD goals.
A community-driven conservation and development agenda
also promotes a strong sense of community ownership. The
Indigenous planning framework was predicated upon this
principle, and the results of interviews with participants showed
over-all satisfaction with the process (Ibanez et al forthcoming).
As a result, a CDP that is drawn from their own worldview (Box
3), values and imagined futures is now in place.
Addressing issues they dont consider important generates
frustration. Expressing disappointment over outsider-driven
development agenda in the past, PALUPA BOD Lito Namansila
commented, Tsinelas lang ang among kinahanglan pero abi
nila sapatos ang among gipangayo- We only wanted slippers
yet they thought shoes are what we needed. In contrast, there
is a general sentiment now that the CBC at Macati is consistent
with the needs that they perceive. Apart from a general feeling of
satisfaction, it seems to motivate them more.
There is also an effort to engage and strengthen local expertise
as much as possible for project sustainability. Evidence from
research and conservation projects indicates that harnessing

Because there
is still a strong
sense of equality and
reciprocity in the community,
accumulating wealth is
uncommon. Cultural norms still
demand that those with more
share their resources with
those who have less.
REY NAMANSILA
PALUPA
Community
Organizer

We only
wanted slippers,
yet they thought
shoes are what we
needed.
LITO NAMANSILA
former chairman
and now BOD
member of
PALUPA

Manobo-Tinananon conception (worldview) of their relationship with their

lands and natural resources.
For us Manobo-Tinananons whose culture and identity is closely tied to our ancestral land,
nature is our life and livelihood. We know our forests more than other people. We draw our
water, food, medicine, farm materials and other needs from the forests. It is important for
us to maintain good ties with the land because it nurtures our crops. We respect nature
because it nourishes us for free. We seek permission from the spirits before we use these
resources so we can be properly guided and become safe from sickness and danger. We
believe that if we abuse our natural resources, the spirit owners will harm us.

community human capital increase the chances for success of these projects (Garnett et al., 2009). Because they
share the culture and values of the community, it is easier for the local organizers to convey information and muster
support from the community. We also witnessed livelier and more productive meetings and workshops whenever
LCOs facilitate meetings using their Indigenous dialects, perhaps because of the familiarity and a wider range of
vocabulary they can draw from their mother tongue to express their thoughts and insights.
Engaging local counterparts in research and projects is also a form of transformative participation, empowering these
community members to apply the skills and modes of thinking they have gained to new endeavors (White, 1996;
Garnett et al 2009). Thus, the community can benefit from these new skill sets and knowledge.
The very act of engaging poor but knowledgeable people can be transformative as well in that it diversifies means
of income. Given that diversifying income sources is the primary route out of poverty (Krishna, 2007), engaging
community members can be seen as one potentially useful means of alleviating poverty. Justly compensating
communities for the ecosystem services they employ is also consistent with evidence that community-based
conservation is effective only if it enhances the social capital of households and local institutions and increases
incomes (Mazur & Stakhanov, 2008). Paying Indigenous peoples for the services (knowledge, skill or labor) they
provide is also compatible with the growing advocacy that Indigenous ways of knowing are as legitimate as the
mainstream (scientific) ways (Berkes 2009).
Engaging the private or corporate sector (through their CSR projects) and the government in the delivery of basic
services as an incentive for doing environmental projects also worked in sustaining community enthusiasm. This is
all the more important as education, agricultural support and off-farm livelihood - not biodiversity conservation or
forest restoration - topped the list of development priorities in five community planning we have supported from
2011 to 2012. We facilitate assistance based on what is on the CDPs. Because it has become a practical basis for
monitoring and evaluation, the community also perceives success based on how well the community has achieved
its targets in the the annual CDP action plan.

CONCLUSION
The Manobo-Tinananon case has shown how holistic, human-in-nature approaches to biodiversity conservation can bring
about outcomes consistent with an Indigenous communitys aspiration for themselves. The Indigenous peoples represent the
most politically and socio-economically marginalized sector of our society. On moral and ethical grounds, the conservation
work that they do should be fairly recognized. The example at Macati showed how CBC can tap into pre-existing informal
institutions to enforce rules and incentives that favor conscientious and sustainable uses of resources. Indigenous communities,
as exemplified by Macati, have innate ways of knowing that can be harnessed to conserve species and habitats. To bring about
empowerment, there should be just compensation for the knowledge, skills and labor that Indigenous peoples provide. The
government and the private sector has an important role to play in motivating community participation to conservation, mainly
by providing forms of incentives: cash or in-kind. However, one should always bear in mind that what works in one place may
not necessarily work in others because community contexts and milieus are not always the same. Every community will always
be unique. So practitioners do not lose sight of this, we should endeavor to constantly seek learning with (not separate from)
the communities we assist.

13

REFERENCES
Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C. 2000. Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as adaptive management.
Ecological Applications 10, 1251-1262.
Berkes, F. 2004. Rethinking community-based conservation. Conserv Biol 18(3):621-630.
Berkes, F.2009. Indigenous ways of knowing and studies of environmental change. Journal of the Royal Society
of New Zealand 39, 151-156.
Chapin, M. 2004. A challenge to conservationists. World Watch: Vision for a sustainable world. Excerpted from
the November/December 2004 WORLDWATCH magazine.
Colchester, M. 1994. Salvaging Nature: Indigenous People, Protected Areas and Biodiversity Conservation.
UNRISD Discussion Paper No. 55, Geneva, Switzerland.
Delima, E. M. M., F. B. Ates & J. C. Ibaez (2006): Species composition and microhabitats of frogs within Arakan
Valley Conservation Area, Cotabato, Mindanao Island, Philippines. Banwa, 3: 1630.
Garnett, S. T., J. A. Sayer, and J. du Toit. 2007. Improving the effectiveness of interventions to balance conservation
and development: a conceptual framework. Ecology and Society <http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/
vol12/iss1/art2/>
Garnett, S.T. G. M. Crowley, H. Hunter-Xenie, W. Kozanayi, B. Sithole, C. Palmer, R. Southgate, and K. K. Zander.
2009. Transformative knowledge transfer through empowering and paying community researchers.
Biotropica. 41(5): 571577 2009.
Gomez, RKSC, JC Ibanez and ST Bastian, Jr. 2005. Diversity and community similarity of pteropodids and notes
on insectivorous bats in the Arakan Valley Conservation Area, Mindanao. Sylvatrop 15:87102.
Helgen, K. M., D. Kock, R.K.S. Gomez, N. R. Ingle, and M. H. Sinaga. Taxonomy and natural history of the
SouthEast Asian fruit-bat Genus Dyacopterus. Journal of Mammalogy, 88(2):302318, 2007.
Horwich, R.H. and J. Lyon. 2007. Community Conservation: Practioners Answer to Critics. Oryx, 41(3), 376385.
Ibanez, J.C. 2009. Gaynawaan 2004: Conservation of threatened vertebrates at Mount Sinaka, Mindanao. Final
Project Report. Philippine Eagle Foundation, Davao City.
Kaliwat Theater Collective. 1996. Arakan: where rivers speak of the manobos living dreams. Arakan Valley,
Cotabato. Philippines.
Krishna, A. 2007. For reducing poverty faster: Target reasons before people. World Dev. 35: 1947 1960.
Lertzman, D.A. 1999. Planning between cultural paradigms: traditional knowledge and the transition to
ecological sustainability, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, School of Community and Regional Planning,
(University of British Columbia, Vancouver).

Li, T. M. 2002. Engaging simplifications: community-based resource management, market processes and state
agendas in upland southeast Asia. World Development 30(2):265-283.
Manuel, E.A. 1973. Manuvu` social organization. The Community Development Research Council, University of
the Philippines. Diliman, Quezon City.
Mazur, R. E., AND O. V. Stakhanov. 2008. Prospects for enhancing livelihoods, communities, and biodiversity
in Africa through community-based forest management: A critical analysis. Local Environ. 13:405421.
Scoones, I., 1998, Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: a framework for analysis, IDS Working Paper No 72,
Brighton: IDS
Solesbury, W. 2003. Sustainable Livelihoods: A Case Study of the Evolution of DFID Policy. Overseas
Development Institute. London, Uk. pp. 28.
White, S. C. 1996. Depoliticising development: The uses and abuses of participation. Dev. Pract.6:615.
Wilson, W. A. 2004. Indigenous Knowledge Recovery Is Indigenous Empowerment. American Indian Quarterly.
28 (3 & 4): 359-372.

CASE STUDY WRITERS

Jayson Ibanez is the Research and Conservation Director of the Philippine Eagle Foundation, working on
the behaviour, ecology, and reintroduction of the IUCN critically endangered Philippine Eagle (Pithecophaga
jefferyi). He is a conservation biologist, with a Masters Degree in Biology from Ateneo de Davao University. He
is currently finishing his PhD at the Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods (formerly School of
Environmental Research) at Charles Darwin University in Australia, investigating the integration of Indigenous
Ecological Knowledge and Western Science in Indigenous planning.
Hadassah Carig is currently the community development officer of the Philippine Eagle Foundation (PEFI).
A biology graduate from the University of the Philippines-Mindanao, she started working as a student biologist
for Project Mallambugok: Conservation and Research on the endangered Philippine Eagle within the Eastern
and Central Mindanao Biodiversity Corridor in 2006, then worked full time the following year as an advocacy
assistant for PEFI. Since then, she has served as the Education Officer, Community Development Officer, and
Project Officer for various PEFI forest protection and conservation projects. She has A Bachelors Degree in
Biology from UP Mindanao and is currently finishing up her Masters Degree in Environmental Resource and
Management at the University of Southeastern Philippines.

FPE MANAGEMENT TEAM

Godofredo T. Villapando, Jr.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Liza M. Vida
OIC-MANAGER, PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT UNIT
Mary Ann B. Leones
MANAGER, INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONS UNIT
Fernando M. Ramirez
MANAGER, LUZON REGIONAL UNIT
Myrissa L. Tabao
MANAGER, VISAYAS REGIONAL UNIT
Armando C. Pacudan
MANAGER, MINDANAO REGIONAL UNIT

USAID-FPE PROJECT TEAM

Maria Felda S. Domingo
NATIONAL PROJECT COORDINATOR
Rosalie G. Pasibe
LUZON REGIONAL COORDINATOR
June Arthur P. Banagodos
VISAYAS REGIONAL COORDINATOR
Joseph Thaddeus R. Rabang
MINDANAO REGIONAL COORDINATOR/
NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SPECIALIST
Cherylon A. Herzano
NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SPECIALIST (Sept 2011-June 2012)
Michelle D. Alejado
PARTNERSHIP BUILDING SPECIALIST
Ma. Rhodora C. Veloso
KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT SPECIALIST (Feb-Sept 2012)
Florence C. Baula
KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT SPECIALIST
Constancia S. Bacolod
PROJECT ASSISTANT
Carina Dacillo/
Charity Marces/
Anita T. Tungala
BOOKKEEPER

The American people, through the United States Agency for International Development, have provided economic
and humanitarian assistance worldwide for over 50 years. In the Philippines, USAID works in partnership with the
national government in creating a more stable, prosperous and well-governed country through programs that
promote broad-based and inclusive economic growth, increase peace and stability in Mindanao, and reduce
risks from natural disasters.
For more information about USAIDs programs in the Philippines, visit http://philippines.usaid.gov.

FPE is the first and largest grant-making organization for civil society environmental initiatives in the Philippines.
Its support went primarily to protecting local conservation sites and strengthening community and grassroots-led
environmental efforts in more than 65 critical sites through more than 1,300 projects grants. The establishment
of FPE on January 15, 1992 was meant to abate the destruction of the countrys own natural resources. As
many as 334 NGOs and grassroots organizations, along with 24 academic institutions, helped set its course
through a process of nationwide consultations. Subsequently, Philippine and United States government agencies
and NGOs raised the foundations initial $21.8-million endowment through an innovative debt-for-nature swap.
Today, FPE remains committed in fulfilling its roles as a catalyst for cooperation, grant maker, and fund facilitator
for biodiversity conservation and sustainable development.
For more information about FPE, visit http://www.fpe.ph.

PEFI is a non-profit organization dedicated to saving the endangered Philippine Eagle (Pithecophaga jefferyi)
and its rainforest habitat. Organized in 1987, it had before that time been operating as a project undertaking
research, rehabilitation and captive breeding. Staffed by highly trained and dedicated personnel, it has today
evolved into the countrys premiere organization for the conservation of raptors. PEFI believes that the fate of
the vanishing Philippine Eagle, the health of the environment, and the quality of Philippine life are inextricably
linked. Thus, it is committed to promote the survival of the Philippine Eagle, the biodiversity it represents, and the
sustainable use of forest resources for future generations to enjoy.
Know more about PEFI at http://philippineeagle.org/

BIODIVERSITY
CONSERVATION
AND SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT
AS THEY SEE IT
COMMUNITY-BASED CONSERVATION
WITH THE MANOBO-TINANANON
OF ARAKAN, NORTH COTABATO

United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Philippines

Annex 2 Building
U.S. Embassy
1201 Roxas Boulevard
1000 Ermita, Manila
Philippines
Fax: (02) 301 6213

Foundation for the Philippine Environment (FPE)

77 Matahimik Street
Teachers Village, Diliman
Quezon City 1101
Philippines
Telephone: (02) 927 2186/ 926 9629/ 927 9403
Fax: (02) 9223022

Philippine Eagle Foundation, Inc. (PEFI)

Malagos, Baguio District
Davao City 8000
Philippines
Telephone: (082) 271 2337