philippines corridor learning final

8/22/2019 Philippines Corridor Learning Final

1/87

i

Corridor Learning from Sierra Madre and Palawan

Corridor Learning InitiativeFinal Report

Socioeconomics and Policy UnitSeptember 2007


2/87

ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

! " # $"% &'"$'"%( ) $&*%$&+%"$&%,$&-%

, , $&*%

Summary Table A. Experiences in the Corridor Strategy Formulation PhaseAspects in corridor

approachSMBC experience PBC experience

Context assessment Undertaken within longertime frame (1998 to 2001)

CI staff mainly, withconsultations involving

experts for biological data

Consultants hired for socio-economic data followingRACE technique

Consultations with regionalgovernment agencies,provincial LGUs, academe,key NGOs

Undertaken within shortertime frame (mid-2002-2003)

Consultants tapped for dataon species, conservation

status, socio-economicdata, policy issues,biodiversity threats,conservation initiatives.

Generated and validatedwith broad engagement ofstakeholders fromgovernment at provincial andselected municipal LGUs,NGOs, academe, grassroots

Corridor strategyframework development

Achieved by CI staff, withdata inputs from and

validation by regionalgovernment agencies,provincial LGUs, academe,key NGOs

Achieved with broadengagement of stakeholders

from government atprovincial and selectedmunicipal LGUs, NGOs,academe, grassroots

Dissemination Undertaken widely with keypartners (agencies),popularized at regional andprovincial level of agencies

Undertaken widely with keyagencies, popularized widelyat all levels


3/87

iii

& * !, $!&+%" +"*$*%.*

.

Summary Table B. Setting Goal and Focus in the Corridor Strategy

Aspects in corridorapproach

SMBC experience PBC experience

1. Short-term goal :o establishment of PAso dissemination of

corridor vision

o build conservationconstituency in thecorridor (partnership)

3 items in short term goaladdressed corridor-wideEstablishment or expansion ofprotected areas as most

stressed

3 items in short term goaladdressed corridor-wideEcosystem/habitat managementas specific goal expressed in

Surublien), articulatedconcretely as establishment ofprotected area (later developedas target)

2. Focus in directimplementation ofconservation actions

CI-P focus on PAs (2), partneragencies in other PAs/criticalsites

Focus on PA (1)

Formulation/updatingplans : land use,

physical framework

Facilitation at regional levelDirect role in formulation inselected sites(Focus in 2 PAs)

Direct role in formulationFocus on PA (1)

Strengthening ofmanagement plan and

unit/s in focus site/s

Strengthening of resource usemanagement systems

- capacity building among keyagencies, cooperative LGUs

Capacity building/strengtheningstill at level of key agencies

Scope beyond terrestrialecosystem

Freshwaters, coastal and marinezone development andmanagement. recognized,planning and actualimplementation still beingaddressed

Freshwaters, coastal and marinezone development andmanagement. recognized,planning and actualimplementation still beingaddressed

*&+*+ **

" & - " ! ! ,


4/87

iv

Summary Table C. Role in Implementation PhaseAspects in corridor

approachSMBC experience PBC experience

o focus on terrestrial ecosystem( CBFM)

o expansion in coastal areas as

recent direction

o focus on terrestrial ecosystemo coastal and marineecosystems covered by

parallel unit of CI

Direct implementation :building up/strengthening resource

use managementsystems/programs

Direct implementation in sites offocus PAs (selectedmunicipality in Cagayan andQuirino) :

PA expansion managementplan preparation in expansionsites; capability building ofmgmt. unit; forest enrichment;training in agroforestry forvegetative enrichment andlivelihood

PA establishment all stages

Direct implementation in site offocus PA (in Mt. Mantalingahanspanning several municipalities) :

PA establishment all stages

Facilitation in- -improvement ofresource management

Undertaken with partners in focussites and beyond, but CI-Pimplementation is focused onselected sections of PA

Undertaken with partners in focussite and beyond, though still inplan

-- advocacy Undertaken as corridor (region-wide); stress in focus sites

Undertaken as corridor (province-wide; stress in focus sites

-- law enforcement Assumed as government agencyrole

Partners (government and non-government) assisted in activities

Summary Table D. Knowledge management in links of ecosystem services,human well-being, and conservation

Aspects in corridorapproach SMBC experience PBC experience

Knowledge managementaccdg. to CI standard :Science-based methodTechnical expertiseIterative learningacross levels

Data/informationgeneration sustainedto scale up, update

Proceeding as CI-P standard,with conservation awarenessraising and advocacy tostakeholders

Proceeding as CI-P standard,with information, education andcommunication (advocacy) tostakeholders

Recent, focus in city forwatershed management through

sustainable financing but projectcomponents and stakeholdersexpanding to PAProceeding through partners(REECS, Danum ti umili)

Recent, in research phaseinvolving consultants

Link to ecosystemservices

Carbon sequestration throughreforestation

None yet


5/87

v

Direct implementation inpopulation and environmentintegration in anothermunicipality in Cagayan(Baggao)

Through partners, recent activity

Agroforestry training and

assistance in focus barangays inPA, other sites under partnerNGOs (1 partner facilitated,other partners in independentprograms)

Community development

Targetted in focus PAThrough facilitation of partnerNGOs, LGUs, POs, businesssector

Human well-being link

Scope in livelihoodenhancement still confined toagro-foresty in focus site

None yet

Successes in the corridor and unique strengths of CI-P

Assessment of the experience highlights the following strong points :

Context assessment, strategy formulation, and dissemination as protocol weresuccessfully completed to start a corridor-wide appreciation of conservation action. Amore compact and shorter time-frame was adopted in Palawan as a learning from the SierraMadre experience. Another lesson learned by Palawan from the SMBC experience includedbroad-based multi-sectoral engagement of stakeholders to ensure a wider buy-in process,but at a provincial scale to benefit from timely decision-making by executive agencies of thelocal government at the provincial level.

The wider scope in SMBC corridor establishment spanning three regions and involving sixprovinces requires a longer investment. To work beyond resource limitations, the units

iterative approach in context assessment, stakeholder participation, and institutionalizationeven up to implementation of the corridor plans has been a very successful practical move.There are several specific investments on this situation that were facilitative :

one, the Protected Area approach allocated across agencies in keeping with thespirit of partnership is the scheme that has worked best. The PA approach guidesthe selection of priority sites, management arrangements, types of projects topursue, and workplan to observe; and

two, collective (cf. selective) partnership is a strategic type of collaboration withpartners in conservation which CI-P is building up.

To build up a corridor-wide network of agencies and stakeholders pursuing conservation, CI-P and partners have evolved some workable strategies to address issues faced in the field :(i) maximizing/ seeking out windows of opportunity among receptive potential partners (ii)starting small and building on demonstrable results to encourage broader participation (iii) infocus sites, linking livelihood enhancement and engaging communities in forest protection.


6/87

vi

/ * "01"0, , &

!0 "!"0"0, , " "0,"0, "0 , , 2

1 , , , 3 , , 3( 3

The corridor strategy is being marketed to donors to mobilize resources . CI has takenon an active role in developing proposals based on the identified projects/activities in thestrategy, encourages partners to seek funding for corridor-related projects, and links localpartners with prospective donors. The unit has been aggressive in addressing the need forpublic-private investments by influencing and strengthening institutional mechanisms thatcould ensure sustainable financing for biodiversity corridor strategy-related activities. These

include tapping into 20% allocation from the internal revenue allotment of local governmentunits, accessing resources from the Integrated Protected Area Funds (IPAF), ensuring theappropriate use of water district funds allocated for forest development and facilitating theformation of foundations that would generate finances for resource management projects.

Gaps and constrains in corridor management

& , !Regarding knowledge managements, conservation science in the corridors has yet to

be strengthened : to reach connectivity of KBAs/protected areas, the link betweenterrestrial and marine ecosystems, relationship of settlement management withecosystem services, and lead in/be responsive to challenges in climate change . Theinvolvement of NGOs and GOs in fisheries and marine resources has not been strongly feltbecause of the PA focused approach. This gap is currently being addressed starting with theassessment of marine resources in SMBC and the parallel initiatives of another CI-P unit inPalawan. The ecosystem inter-connectivity has to be a scaling up direction.


7/87

vii

As a direction of collective partnership, agencies within the corridor have yet toreview what aspects of the conservation-development dynamics can be addressed ina better way. Inputs from partner agencies in their technical studies in land use planning,policy updates, resource valuation, poverty reduction, and social services (health, education,and others) are not linked up systematically in planning. As an example, ideas from expertsin resource assessment (RACE) early on since corridor establishment were available but not

maximized in planning and strategy formulation to emphasize and build up the strategy fromresults linking social factors and natural resources (i.e., economic trends and conservationissues). Poverty reduction, increasing population, and deforestation continue, however, yetimproved initiatives have been successfully expanding and strengthening the conservationconstituency.

Enabling actions in conservation (training, IEC, environmental education, livelihoodenhancement) has worked well in focus sites (PPLS, QPL and Baggao). These need to becomplemented more strongly by the investment of other agencies within the focussites and in critical sites where partners lead.

1&4* In addition, CI-P has also taken astrong role in institutionalizing biodiversity conservation through the corridor approach. Ithas taken advantage of existing policies, systems and procedures in advancing the corridorapproach. The NIPAS law, the local government code, land use planning, among others,provide the biodiversity conservation corridor strategy with a legal and institutionalframework that would help ensure its adoption. The difficulty, however, lies in theweaknesses of these institutional mechanisms, systems and procedures. A case in point isthe planning process at the barangay level. While the local government code clearlyoutlines how this is to be done, the reality is far from ideal. The systems need to bereinforced through capacity building in order for these to function effectively in support ofresource management and biodiversity conservation.

Lastly, inasmuch as the biodiversity conservation corridor has just been recently adapted byCI- Philippines and is quickly accepted across levels and regardless of scale with thesuccesses in the two corridors, there is a need to learn from experience and to documentthese learning for purposes of enhancing future work. To some extent, CI does thisinternally through its annual planning and quarterly meetings. Generating lessons,however, could be done and documented more deliberately. As it stands, much of thelessons gained over the passed years have contributed to modifications in strategies. They,however, have remained undocumented. Documented lessons would aid in scaling up.


8/87

viii

* '" )

A. Process and approach in corridor establishment

Learning # 1 : Starting corridor establishment is more opportune if handled rapidlybut efficiently comprehensive or at a provincial scale. Context assessment andstrategy formulation can be successfully achieved in a more compact, shorter time-frame andbroad buy-in process. This was the experience in Palawan.

Learning #2 : Working in a regional scale was a constraint in efficiently achievingcontext assessment as close as possible to the more realistic level of provincial-leveldecision-making and management. As a result, the buy-in process has been gradualand had been proceeding in a longer time-frame.

Learning #3 : In terms of scale, involvement of regional agencies was deemed less

critical in Palawan since the whole biodiversity corridor is situated within a singleprovince. Aside from DENR, no regional agencies were engaged in the strategyformulation.

Learning #4 : Nonetheless, iterative crafting, sustained broad dissemination andimplementation of the corridor strategy best characterize the experience of SMBCwhich this document on learning emphasizes as one of the field units majorachievements even if retrospectively.

B. Stakeholder engagement in a partnership arrangement

Learning #5 : By stressing the recognized role of local organizations as key elementin partnership, this scheme is a strength in CI-Ps approach in corridor management.

Considering the breadth of the area to be covered, work using theProtected Area approach had been apportioned among CI-P and its partners.Building up collective partnership is a facilitating factor in running corridorconservation over several management regions.

Learning #7: Focused implementation in selected sites has been most successful indemonstrating multi-stakeholder and public-private collaboration in conservationactions for critical sites for protection, such as Key Biodiversity Areas andwatersheds.

Learning #8 : As CBC, performance of role as facilitator or implementor wasencouraged by such delineation of lead roles among partners.

Learning #9: Partnership with NGOs and the government sector and engagement ofthe grassroots is being sustained as a basic feature in the Palawan corridor. Unlikethe case of the SMBC, the opportunity for community consultation and communityengagement was realized even during the assessment and strategy formulation,


9/87

ix

most maximized despite limited time and funding. This is still a challenge inpartnership when there is turfing across agencies and sectors.

!!"#$%&'!(!

$

Learning #11 : Science and technical expertise has been most successful as CI-Psrole in the conservation corridor, which all stakeholders across scales at all levelsrecognized. Conservation-guided mapping, information system and spatial analysisare most requested even beyond the current corridors, with much welcomeassistance in pursuing the inter-agency physical, structural and managementplanning exercises of the government.

Learning #12 : Planning, coordinating and facilitation techniques in the context ofpolitically-informed and bureaucratic set up of governance at the local level werefacilitated by a number of factors that CI-P evolved in the two corridors : (i) broadrepresentation in transparent consensus-forming venues, (ii) key leadership of well-accepted local agencies with track record in multi-sectoral processes, (iii) proximityto the regional center which facilitates communication, coordination and access tosupport and information on follow-through activities.

Learning #13: Capacity building in conservation action is being sustained in (i)institutional structures across various levels of governance; (ii) strengthening throughensuring adequate human resources for appropriate tasks in conservation

management, (iii) enforcement of forest regulations; (iv) skills improvement inproject management.

Learning #14 : Inputs from experts in resource assessment (RACE, annualstakeholder conferences, watershed mapping and management by partners) havebeen available but not maximized in planning and strategy formulation to emphasizeand build up the strategy from results linking social factors and natural resources(i.e., economic trends and conservation issues).

Learning #15: Systematically planned and periodic training needs assessment has tobe pursued among the next steps..

Learning #16 : Conservation science in SMBC has yet to be strengthened to reachconnectivity of KBAs/protected areas, link settlement management with ecosystemservices, and lead in/be responsive to challenges in climate change. Climate changeinitiatives are still a new direction in corridor work, which undoubtedly is among thebigger next steps of CI-P that is leading in the terrestrial ecosystem.


10/87

x

D.

Learning #17 : As a major accomplishment in SMBC, the establishment of theagency for volunteer funds is a unique model in public-private enterprise. Thecorridor unit has yet to review how to scale up and institutionalize the experiment to

maintain it as a sustainable financing scheme.

Learning # 18 : As big constraint in conservation, poverty reduction and eco-governance require long-term investment beyond the term of administrative (political)office of leaders, regardless of level or scale of governance. Resource mobilizationstill has to be beefed up throughout the corridor.

Learning # 19 : Appropriate use of technical and scientific expertise has to bestrengthened and expanded throughout the corridor among partners andstakeholders.

Learning # 20: Enabling actions in conservation (training, IEC, environmental

education, livelihood enhancement) has worked well in focus sites (PPLS, QPL andBaggao) to complement the investment of other agencies in human well-beingaspects, but these need to be sustained and expanded throughout the corridor.

5 &&! ,

5 ,6


11/87

xi

Table of Contents

Section Content PageExecutive Summary i - xTable of Contents xi

List of Acronyms xiiList of Tables xiiiIntroduction 1

Section One Background and Context of the Biodiversity Conservation Strategy 4Sierra Madre Biodiversity Corridor 4

Bio-geographic context 5Socio-economic context 6

Palawan Biodiversity Corridor 8Bio-geographic context 8Socio-economic context 9

Section Two Corridor rationale and project objectives 11Section Three Methodology 14Section Four Results and next steps 16

I. The Case of Sierra Madre 17

A. Background: Establishing the Biodiversity Corridor(Strategy Formulation Phase) 17

Context assessment in the Corridor 18Developing a Corridor Strategy Framework 18

B. Implementing the Corridor Strategy 21Expanding Protected Areas in SMBC 23Strengthening PA Management 25Reforestation, Carbon Sequestration and Climate Change Initiatives 31Ensuring Sustainable Financing 32

C. Linking Human Well-being and Biodiversity Conservation 33Bridging Livelihood Needs and Forest Protection 33Influencing Population Growth 36Strengthening Environmental Awareness 36

II. The Case of Palawan 37

A. Background : Context assessment and developing the strategy(Strategy Formulation Phase) 38

Context Assessment 38Putting Together a Corridor Strategy 40

B. Implementing the Corridor Strategy 42Awareness-raising and capacity strengthening in conservation 42Partnership and Community Engagement in Palawan 43Establishing a Protected Area in Palawan 45

III. Institutionalizing Biodiversity Conservation in the Corridor 52A. Critical involvement in Physical Framework Plan preparation 52B. Forming planning and coordinating bodies among institutions 54

Section Five Lessons Learned 58I. Strategy formulation phase 58II. Corridor strategy implementation phase 61

*', 61B. CIPs Role as Facilitator in the Corridor 64Creating a conservation constituency in the corridor 64Building partnerships 65Marketing the corridor strategy to donors in mobilizing resources 67Providing technical support, capacity building and strengtheningpartners motivation

67

Facilitating learning, scaling up and institutionalization 68C. Operationalizing Science, Partnership and Human Well-being 69References 73


12/87

xii

LIST OF ACRONYMS

ADSDPP Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development and Protection Plan

CADC/CALC Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim/ Certificate of Ancestral Land Claim

CADT/CALT Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title/ Certificate of Ancestral Land TitleCBFM Community Based Forest Management

CBFMA Community Based Forest Management AgreementCENRO Community Environment and Natural Resources OfficerCEPF Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund

CI Conservation InternationalCI Counterpart International

DA Department of AgricultureDAO DENR Administrative OrderDENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources

DILG Department of Interior and Local Government

EC European CommissionELAC Environmental Legal Assistance Center

EMB Environmental Management BureauENR Environment and Natural ResourcesEO Executive Order

FLA Forest Lease Agreement

FMB/FMS Forest Management Bureau/ServicesGEF Global Environmental Facility

GRP Government of the Republic of the PhilippinesICC Indigenous Cultural CommunityIFMA Integrated Forest Management Agreement

IP/ICC Indigenous People/Indigenous Cultural CommunitiesIPRA Indigenous Peoples Rights Act

IRR Implementing Rules and Regulations

JBIC Japan Bank for International CooperationJICA Japan International Cooperation Agency

LGC Local Government Code

LGU Local Government UnitLSBs Local Special Bodies

MAO Municipal Agricultural Officer

MC Memorandum CircularNCIP National Commission on Indigenous People

NGO Non-Government OrganizationNIPAS National Integrated Protected Areas SystemPA Protected Area

PAMB Protected Area Management BoardPASu Protected Areas SuperintendentPAWB Protected Areas and Wildlife Bureau

PCSD Palawan Council for Sustainable Development

PD Presidential DecreePENRO Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Officer

PL Protected LandscapesPO Peoples OrganizationPPDO Provincial Planning and Development Office

RA Republic ActREECS Resources Environment and Economics Center for Studies, Inc.

SEP Strategic Environmental Plan

SIFMA Socialized Integrated Forest Management Agreement

UNDP United Nations Development ProgramUSAID United States Agency for International Development

WFR Watershed Forest Reserve


13/87

xiii

LIST OF TABLESTable No. Title Page

Summary Table A Experiences in the Corridor Strategy Formulation Phase IiSummary Table B Setting Goal and Focus in the Corridor Strategy Iii

Summary Table C Role in Implementation Phase IvSummary Table D Knowledge Management in Links of Ecosystem Services, Human Well-being, and Conservation

iv-v

Table 1 Scope of Corridor Learning in CIP 14Table 2 Biodiversity Sites and Partners in SMBC 22Table 3 Progress on 13 Steps Towards Establishing Mt. Mantalingahan as PA

under NIPAS Law, Palawan, December 200848-49

Table 4 Experiences in the Corridor Strategy Formulation Phase 51Table 5 Setting Goal and Focus in the Corridor Strategy 52Table 6 Role in Implementation Phase 53Table 4 Knowledge Management in Links of Ecosystem Services, Human Well-

being, and Conservation55

LIST OF FIGURESFigure No. Title Page

Figure 1 Sierra Madre Biodiversity Corridor 5Figure 2 Palawan Biodiversity Corridor 8Figure 3 Penablanca Protected Landscape and Seascape 26Figure 4 Mt. Mantalingahan Protected Landscape 47


14/87

Corridor Learning Initiative Report, Conservation International - PhilippinesPre-final Report March 2007, Final Report September 2007

1

Corridor Learning from Sierra Madre and Palawan

Introduction

The corridor approach in the Philippines is a very rich source of learning in conservation.After 10 years of experience in implementing projects in the country and, subsequently, theidentification of Philippine hotspots in 1998 and biodiversity conservation priority sites in2002, Conservation International - Philippines (CI-P) has scaled up its work in order tocreate a greater impact by using the corridor strategy. 1 2 What followed were series ofactivities leading to the formulation and implementation of corridorwide strategies in priorityareas following the institutional framework in biodiversity conservation.

This report on the Corridor Learning Initiative (CLI) in Sierra Madre and Palawan focuses onhow the three pillars in conservation - science, partnership and human well-being - areoperationalized in the corridor approach pioneered in the Philippines by CI. Engaging variedlevels of institutions and stakeholders goes beyond involving them in any activity to supportconservation. The spirit of partnership oriented toward institutionalization and sustainabilityequipped with the standard of science and technical experience is being purposefullyachieved in a scaled up scope and vision. As a source of learning, the experiences in twocorridors in these aspects are compared, the similarities and differences in approaches areanalyzed, and the lessons on what processes work or do not work are documented andassessed. These learning points may be appreciated not only throughout the country buteven globally in similar contexts.

To advance the conservation of species and habitats, establishing a corridor is a challengingstrategy in a country where biodiversity values are not evidently prioritized in institutionalmechanisms and policy framework because of enormous challenges in development.

First, rapid habitat alteration and biodiversity loss cannot be effectively addressed easilybecause of weak governance demonstrated in issues in inter-agency structures andpractices, intra-unit priorities and capacities, and policy consistency across levels. Forexample, some officially declared protected areas are not handled well because themandated agency is in conflict with competing management schemes (under a privatelogging company or mining exploration, ancestral domain rights of indigenous people,community based forest management by upland dwellers, the local government unit with itsown programs and service delivery). As a result, actions in protection tend to be constrainedin scale, politically leveraged, and difficult to sustain.

Second, extractive and destructive natural resource-based economic activities as well asurban development are the priorities in centrally designed and controlled government

1The corridor strategy aims to connect biodiversity areas through a patchwork of sustainable land uses,

increasing mobility and genetic exchange among individuals of fauna and flora even in the absence of large

extensions of continuous natural habitat (http://www.cepf.net/xp/cepf/where_we_work/philippines/full_strategy.xml).


15/87


2

programs. Constituency building in conservation among local government units andcommunities is slowed down by externally controlled programs.

Third, poverty incidence and population growth rate increase (from both high fertility and in-migration) as development pressure intensifies, aggravated by weak asset-basedimprovements to counter inequitable access and control over resources. Poverty reduction

and population control are often devolved to resource-poor local government units. With theexpansion of human settlements in degraded lands, investments are neither sufficient forwell-being concerns nor prioritized for protection of habitats and ecosystem services.

Lastly, at a general level, mismanagement as well as human abuse and neglect ofbiological resources palpably stem from a lack of genuine understanding and appreciation ofenvironmental sustainability. Across scales, synergy has to be achieved and sustained ineducation and awareness raising about conservation and human well-being.

The corridor strategy is one clear recourse to scale up conservation initiatives that addressthe fragmentation of habitats while supporting convergence, expansion and strengthening ofactions among stakeholders across levels. The two corridors prioritized by CI-P have the

most diverse, intact and highest degree of conservation status. These also benefit from thewidest variety of players that can be engaged : heterogeneous population in localcommunities of indigenous peoples, traditional ethnic groups and settlers as primarystakeholders; local government units and national government agencies with respectivemandates that need to be integrated and maximized; investors in logging, mining, plantationestablishment, industrial development, tourism and large-scale fishing with corporateresponsibilities and business interests that can be mobilized; and a broad range of local,national and international support agencies with conservation and development initiatives tobuild from and connect.

The challenges in the corridor approach are indeed extensive. As CBC, ,an assessment ofwhat we have learned is &

!))",77 7 ,& " , " *'"((

* '" ( " ( 8 ,+(& ,


16/87


3

& * 9+*&*, +

) , ,& , $.%!$:%"03) , ! 0&"0

!+, $ % "0 & !"0


17/87


4

Section One :Background and Context of the Biodiversity Corridor Strategy

The bio-geographic and socio-economic context of each corridor presented in the sectionemphasizes the similarities in species richness, status of threats being addressed and spatial scope

being covered. This information set is a baseline to understand the details in the corridor-widemanagement approach of CI-P as multi-stakeholders across scales are engaged.

Guided by the identified biodiversity hotspots, Conservation International-Philippines (CI-P)began its efforts to establish biodiversity corridors starting in the Sierra Madre MountainRange in 1998, then the province of Palawan in 2002 and subsequently in the EasternMindanao Region in 2005. Sierra Madre and Palawan, the focus of this report, are the toptwo corridors with highest richness and endemism in species in terrestrial ecosystems thatneed protection. Both areas are also known for the rich biodiversity in marine ecosystems.

Sierra Madre Biodiversity Corridor

The Sierra Madre Biodiversity Corridor (SMBC) covers a land area of 1.8 million hectaresspread across 10 provinces (Batanes, Cagayan, Isabela, Nueva Vizcaya, Quirino, NuevaEcija, Aurora, Bulacan, Rizal, and Quezon) in 3 administrative regions (Regions 2, 3 and 4).These administrative regions that cut up the corridor have their respective priorities indevelopment and environmental plans, the first challenge in corridor management schemes.

Bio-geographic context

Located within the Greater Luzon Bio-geographic Region, SMBC is mostly terrestrial andserves as the backbone of Luzon and is also the longest mountain range in the country.Its northernmost tip has some of the Batanes-Babuyan Islands and shorelines facing the

South China Sea and the Northern Pacific region.

This location and physiography gives it the greatest number of protected areas (68 nationalparks, watershed forest reserves, natural monuments, marine reserves, protectedlandscapes and seascapes) and the most extensive forest cover in the country (about 1.4million hectares, accounting for 25% of the country's forest resources, including more than40% of the remaining old growth forests). The Northern Sierra Madre National Park is thelargest and most important because it was the precursor for the Corridor Concept forConservation and has served a model for other regions in the Philippines. Half of theroughly 800,000 hectares of primary forest that remain in the archipelago are found in thecorridor, hence the corridors importance.

SMBC is home to about more than 3,500 plant species (about 45% of species recorded inthe country, 58% endemism within the corridor and 41% endemism nationwide), 106 ofwhich are in the IUCN Red List of threatened plant species (42% of the total threatenedspecies of Philippine flora). Animal life in the area is also diverse, hosting at least 80% of allresident breeding birds of Luzon, fourteen (20%) of the country's 65 threatened bird species,about 38 mammals, 40 reptiles and 17 amphibians. Five mammals and six reptiles arethreatened with extinction. A total of 25 threatened higher vertebrates are present in thecorridor, 75% of them endemic to the Philippines.


18/87


5

Fig. 1. Sierra Madre Biodiversity Corridor

Despite its very diverse species and habitats as described above, the biodiversity status ofthe corridor is highly threatened. Loss of forest cover and severe habitat fragmentation hasled to the disappearance of numerous endemic species and pushed others to the brink ofextinction.

These forests are believed to be a refuge for about 50 percent of the threatened animals inthe country, including the Philippine eagle, Philippine crocodile, Golden crowned flying fox,and the Luzon slender tailed cloud rat. The coastal waters of the Sierra Madre is also home

to several threatened marine life such as the whale shark, giant clam, and various seaturtles.

The forest cover in the SMBC is the most extensive in the Philippines about 1.4 millionhectares, accounting for 25 percent of the countrys forest resources, including more than40 percent of the remaining old-growth forests. Of the 13 forest types in the Philippinesrecognized by Whitmore (1984a), 11 were reported present in the Corridor, including tropical


19/87


6

evergreen rainforest, upper and lower montane rainforests, limestone forest, beach forest,and wetlands such as mangrove forest and freshwater swamp. Plant biodiversity is highwith more than 3,500 species recorded in the area and the highest known level of plantendemism within the Philippines. Generic endemism is also high, with 68 percent ofendemic genera found in the Corridor.

The number of threatened plant species on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species is 106for the Corridor or 42 percent of the total threatened Philippine flora species.

With regard to conservation status, at least 28 faunal species are threatened: 17 birds,including the Philippine Eagle (Pithecophaga jefferyi); 5 mammals, including the Golden-crowned flying fox (Acerodon jubatus); and 6 reptiles, including the Philippine crocodile(Crocodilos Mindorensis). Records revealed that 21 of these threatened species (75%) areendemics.

Socioeconomic context

The corridor is home to many ethnic groups : the dominant Ilocanos from the linguistic familyin the northern and central sections of the corridor (covering the provinces of Cagayan,Isabela, Vizcaya, and Quirino), the Tagalogs in the southeastern section (Quezon andRizal), and the indigenous peoples with their abode spread throughout the corridor.

Dominant ethnic groups survive from services and regular employment in urban areas andagriculture in wide lowland settlements. Human, financial and physical assets are welldeveloped and covered by government services in these areas. Elsewhere, among theindigenous peoples, the Agtas reside along the coastal areas, while the Bungkalots andDumagats occupy the hinterlands. Their communities are less served by governmentprograms in health, education and economic activities, while physical (infrastructure) andfinancial assets are very low. These communities therefore rely on small-scale agriculture,forest product collection, and hunting for cash income and subsistence, relying on betternatural resource attributes and social assets in contrast with those in lower elevation andurban areas. Other indigenous peoples are the Isneg, Ibanags, Ikalahans, Gaddangs,Ifugao, Kalinga, Kankanays, and Ilonggots. Except for the Ikalahan and Ilonggots, most ofthese people reside among dominant ethnic population in compact settlements in thelowlands.

Corporate investments with government support in resource extractive development trends,population pressure, and weak governance are priority sources of threat in biodiversity butare also the bases of unstable quality of life in the corridor.

Commercial logging has historically degraded forests throughout Sierra Madre over

centuries but most particularly in the last four decades. Beyond extensive timber productionthat deforested the corridor, large-scale operators have built logging roads that furtherreduced forested areas and still continue to induce in-migration.


20/87


7

High population growth rate and poverty incidence particularly in upland communities arefaulted for environmental degradation. Following the opening of forest lands for large-scalelogging and settlement expansion, growing population survived on erosive land foragriculture, non-timber forest product gathering, poaching and the like, thus underminingcritical forest lands through unsustainable yet expanding small-scale agriculture as well asdestructive small-scale legal and illegal logging. In the absence of economic alternatives,

land conversion and destructive resource use continue as main source of income.

Several industrial development plans are pending : large-scale mining applications, furtherroad development and improvement through forested areas, the establishment ofgovernment designated special economic zones in Cagayan and Quezon provinces. Fivelateral roads and four coastal roads have been identified to traverse the Sierra MountainRange. Claims for mineral extraction cover 661,341 hectares in Sierra Madre: 333,989hectares under 32 exploration permit applications; 311,000 hectares under 8 FinancialTechnical Assistance Agreements; 16,000 hectares by Mineral Production SharingAgreements; and 352 hectares by sand and gravel claims. Applications for these have beendelayed or withdrawn as these have been contested by the conservation constituency beingset up and strengthened over the last decade

In short, the presence of these industries have triggered the access and movement ofpopulation to or near the biologically sensitive areas of the corridor with the ensuing smallscale logging/hunting/cultivation activities that further exacerbate the already degraded stateof much of the forest ecosystem. At the same time, logging and mining concessionsincluding small scale illegal activities, have influenced the development of support industriesin the lowlands catering to the processing of timber and mineral products. The cycle ofinterdependence created in the economy of the corridor by these industries reinforces theirexistence and serve to influence political support and tolerance for abuses.


21/87


8

Palawan Biodiversity Corridor

The Palawan Biodiversity Corridor, on the other hand, covers the entire province of Palawanconsisting of 23 municipalities or a total of 1,489,600 hectares of land. Palawan is acomplex of more than 1,700 islands and islets in the Philippines, having a total land area ofmore than 11,000 sq.km. and is therefore the fifth largest province in the country.

Bio-geographic context

Palawans land formations are interestingly diverse botanically, from the ultrabasicformations in Mt. Mantalingahan and Anapahan, to the primary forest of Mt. Puyos, the karstformation of the rugged terrain in the mainlands northern portion and the Calamianes groupof islands.

Fig. 2. Palawan Biodiversity Corridor.

It serves as refuge to some 106 globally important terrestrial and marine species. Palawanoften is called the Philippines last biodiversity frontier because it still retains almost 50% ofits original forest cover. The biological importance of Palawan is recognized both nationallyand internationally. In 1990, UNESCO declared the entire area as a Biosphere Reserve.


22/87


9

The region includes several existing Proclaimed Conservation Areas - namely, CoronIslands (7,580 hectares), El Nido Marine Reserve (89,140 hectares), Malampaya Sound(90,000 hectares), and St. Paul's Subterranean River National Park.

The island has a large block of old growth forest and is home to many wildlife speciesincluding the Philippine macaque, porcupine, the Palawan hornbill, and the critically

endangered Philippine cockatoo. Palawan supports 11 amphibians (46%) endemic to thePhilippines - eight of which are found only in Palawan. The island is also home to 25Philippine endemic birds (15%), including 16 (62%) that occur only in Palawan, 18 endemicmammals (33%), including 15 (83%) that are endemic to Palawan, and 24 endemic reptiles(36%). Meanwhile, it has been estimated that the island contains about 1,522 species offlowering plants with 15-20% endemism. The northern part of the island is home to theendemic plant genus Adonidia (Palmae).

The entire province has also been declared a mangrove reserve. There are still abundantcoral reefs and sea grass beds with miles of mangroves dotting the coastline. It straddlestwo of the worlds most important marine areas the Sulu and China seas. Part of theCoral Triangle, Palawan accounts for 82 percent of the 462 coral reef species occurring in

the country (Veron and Fenner, 2000). More than 1,700 species of flowering plants andabout 41 percent of the countrys terrestrial vertebrates currently known to science are foundin the corridor. Palawan often is called the Philippines last biodiversity frontier, because itstill retains more than 50 percent of its original forest cover (1998 LandSat image analysis).

In terms of conservation status, 23 faunal species are threatened: nine birds, six mammals,five reptiles, and one amphibian. At least 14 of the threatened species (61%) are endemic.

Socio-economic context

The richness and threats in biodiversity are matched by the state of human population and

well-being. The corridor has a high population growth rate (3.6%) exceeding the nationalaverage (2.3%), and largely from natural fertility (65%) more than in-migration (35%).Density is higher in in-migration sections that have no more alienable and disposable lands(for private ownership), such that settlement expansion now requires land use planning todiscourage migration into critical areas.

The indigenous peoples are in the upland and interior areas or along banks of rivers orcoasts. These groups who have traditionally depended on natural resources both for incomeand for important cultural and social reasons are threatened in their natural resource base.Three land-based ethnic minority groups reside in increasingly degraded lands and waters(Batak, Palawan and Tagbanua). These indigenous people have their land rights to betapped as pro-conservation opportunity. Specifically in Coron Island in the north, the

Tagbanuas have ancestral rights over the Island, with the national government givingrecognition through the Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title (CADT) covering a total area of22,284 hectares of land surrounding waters.

4Conserving Earth's Living Heritage: A Proposed Framework for Designing Biodiversity Conservation Strategies.

http://portals.conservation.org/downloads/storedfile/Document/Conserving%20Earths%20Living.PDF, page29. October 6, 2006.


23/87


10

-( +!,!0

/

The major threats to biodiversity conservation in the Palawan Corridor are numerous :scattered and unorganized small scale illegal logging, unregulated collection of timber andnon-timber forest products, large and small-scale mining, rapid conversion of mangrovesinto fishponds and ricefields, overfishing and illegal fishing, and population pressure. In themarine realm, overfishing and rampant use of destructive fishing techniques has broughttremendous pressures to coral reefs and related ecosystems. It is probable that less than10 percent of the provinces coral reefs, determined to be in pristine condition a decade ago(Gomez et al. 1994), may no longer be in good health.

Any development trend must be corrected, to be sustained by local resources within theregenerating capacity asset improvement. The local government units need to invest inresource assessment, valuation, carrying capacity studies.

As a positive situation, the policy climate offers a significant opportunity for biodiversityconservation. There are basic institutional and legal mechanisms that allow for a localizedsystem of PA delineation that complement the national integrated protected areas system.Palawan is the only province with its own Strategic Environmental Plan (SEP) Law (RepublicAct 7611) as policy framework, a zoning scheme referred to as Environmentally CriticalAreas Network (ECAN) to protect unstable and threatened habitats and the PalawanCouncil for Sustainable Development (PCSD) as institutional structure.


24/87


11

Section Two: Corridor rationale and project objectives

* - & % .!.,$

& $ % $ % 8 , .;;; + & % ( ?*"- )

a) establishing the SMBC participatory planning and implementation frameworkb) gathering additional socio-economic and biophysical benchmark informationc) strengthening the capacities of stakeholders in open access areasd) establishing SMBC data base, communication and education framework and the

monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systeme) developing a corridor-wide economic and policy intervention

While the SMBC project was mid-way through its implementation, a similar project waslaunched in Palawan in mid-2002, this time, with a 1-year grant from the Critical EcosystemPartnership Fund (CEPF). The expected results of this project included:

a) a data base that consolidates biological and abiotic information and a maprepresenting the preliminary biological vision of the minimum requirements to ensurethe representation and persistence of Palawans biodiversity

b) spatial analysis and associated maps of social, economic and policy information andanalyses

c) a strategy document of Palawan conservation that includes 5 years outcomes, riskof habitat loss, and other spatial analysis, conclusion of the social, economic andpolicy assessment and recommendations for action.

These processes in preparing for corridor-wide conservation are elemental but are leadingto the goal of creating and managing new or expanded protected areas to be linked along acommon direction among partners. By being able to prioritize within a wide range ofpossible areas of intervention within the corridor, partners and stakeholders fromconservation organizations, local government units, relevant government agencies, and civilsociety sectors to adopt the corridor design*+ , 4$;% 244 , ' @ ' A ' * 4, + 2 $+2%


25/87


12

2B$2B%*-3&$*-3*-&% & &+

"0,* , 9 + * & ,32 C + ).


26/87


13

Guided by science, partnership and human well-being, how does conservationin the corridor most successfully proceed?

To assist in achieving conservation outcomes, what actions and componentsmost effectively require attention either corridor-wide or only at specificlevels?

How are stakeholders and partners productively and sustainably engaged inconservation? What principles can we identify as essential in working withpartners?

Related to the phases are processes essential to achievement of the objectives at eachstage, which often cut across and which this CIL project attempts to assess :

(a). constituency building and partnership building at different levels of operation(b). community engagement

(c). capacity building both individual and institutional(d). resource mobilization(e). influencing policies(f). monitoring, evaluation and institutional learning(g). scaling up(h). institutionalization

In addition, CIs core strategies (science, human welfare and partnership) serve as constantpoints of reference in the process of establishing the corridor and its operationalization. Theoverall view is to consolidate a corridor designed to meet conservation targets and addressexisting and emerging threats while generating socioeconomic benefits and limitingopportunity costs. 4

Two sets of specific questions also come to fore as we deal with the topic of assessing thebiodiversity corridor experiences : First, what does it mean to have an establishedcorridor; what are the elements of a consolidated corridor and how do we know wehave achieved this? Second, what does corridor facilitation mean and what roles,functions and skills does it entail?

By clearly articulating the answers to these issues, CI-P would be in a better position toassess the status of its work and define ways by which such work could be enhanced.There had been adequate experiences and lessons over the past six years to define theselessons and directions.


27/87


14

Section Three: Methodology

* " ( % .$ %( "( ( ( (," ( ,!,"((!"($/,, , !" "

,!"(,,,-$

The studys geographic foci are two biodiversity conservation corridors: Sierra Madre andPalawan. Corridor-wide and level assessment covered corridor establishment and thepursuit of direct and indirect conservation actions in adaptive management such asenforcement, policy enhancement and advocacy, information and education campaign, andcapacity building. To have a more detailed and in-depth assessment of engagingstakeholders in conservation actions, the scope in the CLI project was further restricted to 1key biodiversity area in each site, where relatively more advanced biodiversity conservationefforts have taken place. These are the Peablanca Protected Landscape and Seascape

(PPLS) in the Sierra Madre Biodiversity Conservation Corridor (SMBC) and Mt.Mantalingahan Range in the Palawan Biodiversity Corridor (PBC).

The CLI project has a time frame from October 2006 to March 2007. The period covered bythe review in the corridor experiences is that of strategy formulation as background and theimplementation period as focus, up to the first quarter (March) of 2007. " :==D'"(/$%%

!"Scale Focus Period within corridor time frame

covered by CLI projectEstablishmentContext assessment

Strategy Formulation

SMBC1998 20012002 2004

Palawan2002 2002-2003

Implementation(Adaptivemanagement)

Direct protection

Indirect (enabling)actions

2001 March 2007 2003-March 2007

Corridor-wide

Recent developments April June 2007 April June 2007PPLS2001-March 2007

Mt. Mantalingahan2006-March 2007

Recent developments April June 2007 April June 2007Baggao

Focus KBA/project

site

2002-March 2007


28/87


15

Data collection relied solely on the review of documents and informal/unstructuredinterviews with key persons from among CI-P staff and technical units. Reviewed projectdata included those at the time the corridor strategy and context assessment were pursued.As needed and made possible in coordinated opportunities, the evident process wasdocumented; particularly in SMBC, documentation was relied upon re-constructively throughinterviews.

Focused group discussions, supplemented by surveys using semi-structured questions andinformal interviews were undertaken with varied groups of stakeholders and partners togenerate more in-depth discussions to enrich and validate data. The entire data gathering,processing and initial analysis was pursued iteratively, obtaining feedback, solicitingadditional insights and sharing lessons that may enrich work related to the biodiversitycorridor strategy.

Selection of focus KBA within the corridor and specifically what communities to visit at thevillage (barangay) level was more difficult in SMBC than Palawan. SMBC is larger, KBAswith focused work are three, and these are not with similar purposes and projectcomponents to match the CLI project objectives. Palawan, on the other hand, has a more

recent experience in KBA-based work when the CLI project started * ("8" , &9+* @ ( 8? $ , %

The CLI project therefore pursued a more focused exploration of human well-beingelements in CI-Ps activities, but both partially in Peablanca and Banggao in Cagayan for aminimum set of human welfare indicators identified during the National BiodiversityMonitoring Workshop. The indicators to be used in the exploratory objective of the CLIproject were assumed to be tested in how useful and appropriate they are in a corridorstrategy design incorporating human wellbeing. As the research results subsequentlyshowed, several assumptions were clarified on the status of human well-being integration inthe corridor conservation agenda, another learning point for detailed discussion.


29/87


16

Section Four: Results and next steps

The section analyzes what has and has not been working in the corridor experiences of CI-P, thereasons as covered in the discussion, and gaps that can be addressed as next steps. These learningpoints are summarized in italicized font. , the dynamics in corridor-wide management inthe CI-P experience from the establishment of the corridors with context assessment as shared

starting point, followed by strategy formulation, and subsequently advancing to implementation ofplans in adaptive management.

Use of the PA approach is prioritized corridor-wide, with CI-P and partners complementing roles

" 0#. * # - "$1"-,"23,(4&253%&' 6 (" ,(" !(- "!4(,("!(',$" (! -%&'7-((4,$

The biodiversity conservation strategy in the corridor is intended to (a) lead to coordinatedaction among players in the conservation field, moving further to maximization of resourcesand better understanding of issues, threat and opportunities for conservation; (b) serve asguide for NGOs, government and communities in focusing and prioritizing conservationaction; and (c) provide a road map for grant-making and future investment of conservationresources.5

The stage of corridor establishment has involved the assessment of the biophysical, social,economic and policy contexts of the biodiversity corridor, identification of biodiversity threatsand key activities/strategies to respond to these threats, consultation with stakeholders,

refine of the strategies, culminating in endorsement and acceptance of the corridor strategy.In the case of the Philippines, the end products of the processes are: the Sierra MadreBiodiversity Corridor Design and Implementation Frameworkand the Surublien: Strategiesto Conserve Palawans Biodiversity , both published in 2004. & ! , "0$%- 3 $ % , ! * $ % 3 ( ! ! !

5Surublien: Strategies to Conserve Palawans Biodiversity, 2004


30/87


17

$*%$"8%!,E&

+/+ C+- " 2,F ! ) $.% * $:% ,",*"

"*9+*

I. The Case of Sierra Madre

A. Background : Establishing the Biodiversity Corridor(Strategy Formulation Phase)

Much of the work in the early stages of corridor establishment focused on assessment of thecorridor leading to the formulation/consolidation of a biodiversity conservation strategy.Important learning points in the experience are the following:

Learning #1 : Iterative crafting and implementation of the corridor strategy bestcharacterizes the experience of SMBC which this document on learning emphasizesas one of the field units major achievements.

Learning #2 : Working in a regional scale was a constraint in efficiently achievingcontext assessment as close as possible to the more realistic level of provincial-leveldecision-making and management. As a result, the buy-in process has been gradualand had been proceeding in a longer time-frame.,

Learning #3 : Inputs from experts in resource assessment (RACE) were available butnot maximized in planning and strategy formulation to emphasize and build up thestrategy from results linking social factors and natural resources (i.e., economictrends and conservation issues).

E*,?2"-+B4,)*G-?423531*&H:==I",1,


31/87


18

To set up a conservation landscape over three administrative regions has been an earlytough recognition, such that gradual strategy formulation and coverage has to proceed froma base (Cagayan) for the entire range, expanding in geography and functional aspects overthe years. Assessment of biodiversity status and threats had proceeded as widebenchmarking activity only at the beginning, with species-specific protection shelved to give

way to corridor establishment through a buy-in process with institutional players andstakeholders who were involved in corridor establishment. Three to five years of suchinvestment completed the strategy formulation phase with various sources of support. (TheSMBC Design and Implementation Framework benefited from the generous support of theUnited States Agency for International Development (USAID) under the Biodiversity CorridorPlanning and Implementation Program (Corridor) Cooperative Agreement No. LAGA-00-99-00046-00 and Critical Ecosystem.) Subsequently, implementation required mutual benefitsfrom strategy framework refinement and detailed context assessment as adaptive corridormanagement advanced (with support from the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund, otherdonors and partner agencies).

Context Assessment in the Corridor

Consistent with CIs science-based approach, the assessment focused heavily on the stateof biodiversity in the corridor. This is to establish floral and faunal endemism and diversity inthe area and to identify/locate threatened species and their respective habits. The findingslead to identification of priority biodiversity areas that are then earmarked for intervention.The information are also intended to serve as baselines for species and habitat monitoringand evaluation of intervention outcomes/results. Data collection in this regard relies heavilyon existing records and scientific studies as well as actual field assessments. Corridorassessment also defined the human context within which the biodiversity corridor will beestablished. In particular, the assessment looked into existing resource managementschemes and the existing and potential threats to biodiversity in the area. Social, economic,and policy environments also figured in the assessment. The identification of biodiversity

threats, in particular, led to the identification of appropriate intervention actions in each ofthe key biodiversity areas within the corridor.

The biological assessment was conducted mainly by compiling information from biologicalsurveys/explorations conducted by various scientists in the region in the past 100 years.This process of compiling data was spearheaded by CI staff. Data were enriched throughthe information collected on the Sierra Madre Mountain Range, specifically in Mt. CaguaComplex in Gonzaga, Cagayan; Mt. Cetaceo in Peablanca and Baggao, both also inCagayan; Mt. Lataan in Central Sierra Madre/Nagtipunan, Quirino and Mt. Binuang in thesouthern corridor area/ General Nakar Quezon. Considering the amount of work and detailinvolved, as well as the area covered, the research in the biological conditions of thecorridor remains an ongoing process. Review of the information provided in the Sierra

Madre Biodiversity Corridor Design and Implementation Framework and discussion withSMBC staff indicate that the state of the marine ecosystems in the SMBC, especially in thenortheastern region still requires more intensive documentation, given that the protectedareas in this region include marine ecosystems.


32/87


19

Biophysical assessment also included extensive collection and generation of maps andreview of geographic information. These include information on administrative boundaries,land use, forest types, land cover and vegetation, slope, settlement and roads, hot spots forillegal logging, fishing, and smuggling of logging products, among others7. Maps weresubsequently digitized and used as input in planning activities.

For the assessment of the socioeconomic situation, CI engaged the expertise of a RACEadvisor to develop terms of reference for the Rapid Assessment of Conservation Economics(RACE). A resource economist was hired to manage and supervise the conduct of theRACE. Prior to the implementation, social and economic data had been collected by CI stafffrom relevant government line agencies. The RACE itself was conducted in 2001 by fourexternal consultants, completed in two months and results were validated in a number ofexperts focused group meetings at the national, regional and provincial levels andsubsequently incorporated in the corridor strategy design. It focused on a) identifyingeconomic incentives and underlying causes of biodiversity threats, b) assessing economicprofitability of land uses, c) determining the opportunity cost of conservation and d)presentation of strategy options in resource management.8

The assessment process through RACE brought in the knowledge and expertise ofscientists and other specialists, but also engaged was available information at the local levelfrom local agency partners among various government agencies and local government unitswith whom data gathering, consolidation, validation and processing had to be done. Datasharing among the agencies and NGOs was and continues to be a foundation upon whichfurther areas and partnerships are formed. For instance, data sharing among partnersextended beyond the strategy development stage because of the formation of a RegionalGeographic Information Network (RGIN) that will continue the efforts of improving datamanagement and data utilization through the use of GIS technology. Data sharing amongpartners also became the take off point of the collaboration in revising the Regional PhysicalFramework Plan of Region 2.

Methods used in situation analysis relied mainly on existing information. There had beenminimal primary data collection and data validation. This may be largely due to timeconstraint and the lack/weakness of the institutional mechanisms for grassroots involvementin data collection and validation. Subsequent steps, however, seek to redress this gapthrough next phases in baseline construction which is being sustained as corridormanagement surfaces new tasks and implementation aspects.

Developing a Corridor Strategy Framework

Data that were collected were subsequently consolidated, analyzed in order to identify areasfor intervention, and validated by key partners who are a) knowledgeable in the area and b)are potential partners in implementation of intervention measures.

The main venue for such consultations in the SMBC was the Annual SMBC stakeholdersConference initiated in 2002. Discussions in this 2-day conference focused on a) updateson the work that CI is doing in the SMBC, b) the status of the biodiversity in the area and c)

7

FY00 Annual Progress Report on USAID Biodiversity Corridor Planning and Implementation Program,

January 15, 2001.8

RACE presentation slides in the Final Report on Provincial Stakeholders Orientation/Consultation. PCED

Hostel, UP Diliman, Quezon City, July 25, 2001.


33/87


20

the experiences of various government and non-government organizations in implementingconservation programs/projects. At the end of the workshops, the participants resolved tosupport the biodiversity conservation and protection program of the government and toadopt the Sierra Madre Biodiversity Corridor strategy designed by CI in consultation andcollaboration with all stakeholders. 9 This resolution forged at the end of the firstStakeholders Conference signified support for the general principle of a corridor approach

to biodiversity conservation. Details of the strategy are still to be formulated in subsequentconferences.. In the year that followed, more organizations were able to share theirexperiences in resource management. In one of the workshops, Conference participantsidentified conservation issues and the management strategies applicable to the region. CIstaff then consolidated this output and the results of previous researches, and thesebecame major sections of the corridor strategy10, now known as the Sierra MadreBiodiversity Corridor Design and Implementation Framework, which was published in 2004.

Key feature of this document is the ten-year vision map for the SMBC which aims to put thewhole Sierra Madre Range under a permanent protection status through a network ofdesignated conservation areas. Based on the analysis, the SMBC will be strategicallymanaged under the National Integrated Protection Area System (NIPAS) that governs the

Protected Area approach, through the establishment of 9 permanent conservation areas.The corridor plan also aims to harmonize all compatible management systems includingdevelopment programs and projects of the local government units. It also envisions betterpartnership among stakeholders and in the involvement of local communities in thesustainable management of and conservation of the entire SMBC.11

)% %% +2(%2,'? ' ? % !%

The use of a broad scale covered in context assessment and limited time within which thestrategies were to be completed were constraints in strategy formulation. These factors alsodid not allow direct consultation with people affected by the project.. A review of the list ofparticipants to this conference indicates representation of two major sectors: the Departmentof Natural Resources and Environment (DENR) and non-government organizations, with ahandful of local government unit officials and peoples organizations12.

The entire range of the SMBC was also not necessarily equally represented. Thus, it maybe fair to say that the consultations in strategy formulation had been limited to scientists andacademic experts, development practitioners, government personnel and elected officialswho purportedly represent a wider constituency. Trickling down of information to these

9

Proceedings of the Sierra Madre Biodiversity Program Stakeholders Annual Meeting, Baguio City,

September 26-27, 2002.10

See pages 33-35, 39-41, 45, 49, 53-55, 59-60, 64,68-69, 73-74 of Sierra Madre Biodiversity Corridor Designand Implementation Framework, 2004.

11Sierra Madre Biodiversity Corridor Design and Implementation Framework

12Proceedings of the Sierra Madre Biodiversity Corridor: 2

ndAnnual Stakeholders Conference, Baguio City,

October 8-10, 2003


34/87


21

constituencies and aggregating and articulation of their interests were not necessarily a partof the consultation process.

The attendant activities, however, provided opportunity to undertake parallel consultationswith primary stakeholders. In SMBC consultation/information campaign came alongsideconsultations in relation to the proclamation of the protected areas. NIPAS procedures

mandate such consultation while narrower in focus, it paves the way to the broaderunderstanding of the whole corridor biodiversity conservation strategy. The process ofconsultation with communities is by no means complete. Hence, in the post strategy-development period, much work has been devoted to a downward dissemination of thestrategy especially in the southern regions of the corridor through meetings, conferences,orientation session as well as through direct engagement with communities in theimplementation of specific projects and/or community organizing activities.

Conference proceedings also do not clearly show how the baseline information wasincorporated in the identification of conservation issues and management strategiesapplicable to the region. It is particularly important to explicitly address the link betweeneconomic activities and conservation issues. Considering that the interplay between social

factors and natural resources is strongly economic in character, RACE results are veryimportant inputs in the planning and strategy formulation for the corridor. The link betweensuch results and the strategy needs to be strengthened

Other conferences that followed yielded additional suggestions on improving the strategyand its implementation. The third of these annual conference yielded discussions andrecommendations on broad strategies to be adopted in the corridor. These includedresearch, integrated planning, information, education and communication,collaboration/partnership building, capability building and fund sourcing. The fourth and fifthconferences also yielded additional recommendations for field implementation therebycontributing to refinement of the overall corridor strategy.

B. Implementing the Corridor Strategy " " " (4

8Considering the breadth of the area to be covered, work using theProtected Area approach had been apportioned among CI-P and its partners, andthis was a facilitating factor in running corridor conservation over severalmanagement regions.

Learning #5 : By stressing the recognized role of local organizations as key elementin partnership, this scheme is a strength in CI-Ps approach in the corridor

management.

Learning #6 : As CBC, performance of role as facilitator or implementor wasencouraged by such delineation of lead roles among partners.


35/87


22

Learning #7: Focused implementation in selected sites has been most successful indemonstrating multi-stakeholder and public-private collaboration in conservationactions for critical sites for protection, such as Key Biodiversity Areas andwatersheds.

Of the nine areas identified as conservation priorities, CI has direct field activities in two -Peablanca Protected Landscape and Seascape and the Quirino Protected Landscape.Partners leading the process of protected area expansion in the sites include CagayanValley Partnerships for Peoples Development (CAVAPPED), Aurora ResourceDevelopment Initiatives Association, Inc. (ARDIA) and Yakap Kalikasan Tungo sa Kaunlaranng Pilipinas, Inc. (YAKAP), while those engaged in area rehabilitation and communitydevelopment are Process Luzon, Friends of the Environment for Development andSustainability, Inc. (FRENDS) as well as the DENR, LGU, PAMB and the PASu. The tablebelow presents the areas where these partners work.

Table 2. Biodiversity Sites and Partners in SMBC.BIODIVERSITY AREA PARTNERS INVOLVED

1) North-eastern CagayanConservation Area

Cagayan Valley Partnerships for PeoplesDevelopment (CAVAPPED)Process Luzon

2) Peablanca Protected Landscapeand Seascape

Conservation InternationalCounterpart internationalREECSRARE

3) Northern Sierra Madre Natural Park DENR, NGO, LGU, PAMB PASU, CI4) Quirino Protected Landscape Conservation International5) Nueva Vizcaya Conservation Area Friends of the Environment for

Development and Sustainability, Inc.(FRENDS)

6) Aurora Memorial National Park Initially, Conservation InternationalAurora Resource Development InitiativesAssociation, Inc. (ARDIA)

7) Southern Corridor ConservationArea

Yakap Kalikasan Tungo sa Kaunlaran ngPilipinas, Inc. (YAKAP)

8) Southern Isabela ConservationArea9) Northern Aurora Conservation Area

Identified as long term priority areasbecause of existing Timber LicenseAgreements (TLA) in the areas.

The establishment or expansion of protected areas took up a great deal of the work duringthe 5-year period and much of the work after that as discussed below. Direct and enablingconservation actions include rehabilitation and development of protected zones throughreforestation, as well as efforts to address population and livelihood issues though thesehave been happening still on a smaller scale in the focus implementation sites of CI-P andpartners in their respective assigned sites.


36/87


23

Expanding Protected Areas in the SMBC

The Presidential proclamation of the Peablanca Protected Landscape and Seascape(PPLS), an expansion of the Peablanca Protected Landscape (PPL) from 4,136 to 118,108 hectares in October 6, 2003, can perhaps be considered as one of the milestones in theSMBC. The proclamation was preceded by two years of work revolving around the 13

steps of the NIPAS law. With funds provided by CEPF, CI Philippines worked with theDENR on the expansion of the protected area. Interviews with the persons directly involvedin the process indicate that the work was greatly enhanced by the mutually supportiveworking relations between the PASu and CI field staff as well as the personal/ professionalrespect between CI personnel and the PASU borne out of previous working relations.

The proclamation entailed community consultations in and complete enumeration ofresidents (SRPAO) in 7 expansion barangays. Accounts indicate that with minimal funding,the field staff worked untiringly even during weekends and holidays and braving dangersbrought by bad weather conditions. Support from the municipal government of Peablancacame in the form of two personnel assigned by the Municipal Planning and DevelopmentOffice (MPDO) through request made to the Municipal Mayors office. Support from the

Provincial Office, on the other hand, culminated with endorsement of the proposedexpansion in December 200213 and the provincial governors endorsement to the RegionalDevelopment Council. Both endorsements helped pave the way for the PresidentialProclamation and subsequent Congressional action.

In addition, efforts towards the protection of the Northeastern section of the corridor wereundertaken with the backing of the provincial governor of Cagayan Province. In August 14,2003, the governor issued Executive Order 11, putting the entire Cagayan Sierra MadreBiodiversity Corridor under protected area status. This proclamation includes five othermunicipalities apart from Peablanca - Santa Ana, Gonzaga, Lal-lo, Gattaran and Baggao.In the same E.O., the governor also requested the DENR to undertake and facilitate theprocess for the Presidential and Congressional Proclamation of the Cagayan Protected

Landscape and Seascape15. This facilitated the way towards putting the entire North-eastern section of the SMBC under permanent protection status. In December 2004, theCagayan Valley Partners in Peoples Development (CAVAPPED), started to work on therequirements for a Presidential Proclamation of the North-eastern Cagayan ProtectedLandscape and Seascape, picking-up from the provincial executive order that put the areaunder protected area status.

With CEPF funding, CI undertook similar efforts to establish the Quirino ProtectedLandscape and take initial steps toward the expansion of the Aurora Memorial NationalPark. The Provincial Government of Quirino Province had been supportive in this endeavor,even recommending the inclusion of three municipalities in addition to the tworecommended by CI for protection. After two years of work, the Quirino Protected

Landscape was proclaimed through Presidential Proclamation 548 in February 9, 2004. Theprotected area encompasses 206,875.411 hectares distributed among the municipalities ofDiffun, Cabarroguis, Aglipay, Maddela and Nagtipunan.

13

http://www.bayanihan.org/html/article.php/20021212072032207. September 26, 2006.15

Executive Order No. 11, Series of 2003. The Province of Cagayan.


37/87


24

Work in Aurora also received the support and endorsement of the Aurora ProvincialDevelopment Council in 2003; it, however, experienced some resistance at lower levelshence work towards the expansion did not progress smoothly. Some sectors16 werereportedly against the expansion of the National Park. They were, instead, seekingadditional funds for the management of the existing protected site. Following this impasse,CI had put its work on hold to devise a different approach. The work was later picked-up in

2005 by a local partner, the Aurora Resource Development Initiatives Association, Inc.(ARDIA). CEPF provided funds for this project while CI, for its part, provided ARDIA with thedocuments and background information necessary to proceed with the NIPAS steps. Thistime, there had been greater responsiveness to the issue of environmental protection due inpart perhaps, to various flood and landslides that swept the country in the interim. Also, therecent election brought pro-environment leaders into office, thus paving the way for acontinuance of previous discussions on PA establishment. The local links of ARDIA alsocame into play in speeding up the work. As of present writing, the Initial Protected AreaPlan (IPAP), which forms part of step 7 in the NIPAS process, has been written up.

Another local partner, the Yakap Kalikasan Tungo sa Kaunlaran ng Pilipinas, Inc. (YAKAP),started to work on the proclamation of a protected area in the Mt Irid- Mt Angilo area. The

work commenced in June, 2005 and is expected to continue till the end of 2006.

Except for the work in Peablanca and Quirino, the task of establishing protected areasacross SMBC has been delegated to local partner NGOs with funding from CEPF andtechnical support from CI. This strategy enables simultaneous actions in different section ofthe SMBC without putting too great a strain on the resources of CI. It will be noted that PAestablishment undertaken by these local partners remains anchored on the notion of abiodiversity conservation corridor and is a priority strategy as stipulated in the Sierra MadreBiodiversity Corridor Design and Implementation Framework. This, of course, is notsurprising considering the close partnership between CI and CEPF and their shared visionof conserving key biodiversity areas and biodiversity corridors.

Also by engaging these local partners, CI working closely with CEPF is also able tocontribute to strengthening the roles and capacities of civil society groups in biodiversityconservation and environmental protection. In fact, PA establishment in SMBC was fundedunder CEPFs Strategic Direction 3 (Building capacity of civil society to advocate for bettercorridor and protected area management and against development harmful toconservation)17 indicating CEPFs and CIs intention to meaningfully and substantivelyengage civil society in biodiversity conservation.

A case in point is the NGO called FRENDS (Friends of the Environment for Developmentand Sustainability, Inc.), a local NGO operating in Nueva Vizcaya. FRENDS has receivedCEPF funding in 2004 and a second grant in 2006 to undertake partnership building andinformation campaign activities. Although FRENDS has not been involved in PA

establishment, engaging FRENDS in such projects is purportedly intended to beef upFRENDSs credentials and strengthen its capacity to undertake bigger projects within thecorridor including, perhaps, the task of establishing/ expanding PAs.

16

PENRO17

http://www.cepf.net/xp/cepf/recent_grants/grantsbyregion.xml?region=The+Philippines&year= 2004 .

September 27, 2006.


38/87


25

With CI and its partners working in their designated areas, much of the Sierra MadreMountain Range is now moving towards protected area status. The only areas that are notcovered by PA proclamation activities are the South Isabela and Northern AuroraConservation Areas. These areas are currently under Timber License Agreements andIntegrated Forest Management Agreements. Because of the legal and politicalrepercussions, little work towards PA establishment can be done until the TLAs have

expired.

Although the actors are different, the processes are similar across sites since all areas areguided by the NIPAS steps for PA proclamation. Adherence to the NIPAS law provides theinstitutional and legal framework of the SMBC PAs. Variations in the experiences of thesepartners and the lessons that each may have learned in the process are perhaps worthdocumenting, especially if these would lead to recommendations for the improvementprocedures for PA proclamation. At present, there is little venue for cross-learning and fordocumentation of lessons learnt by the partners. To some extent, the annual StakeholdersConference provides space for such discussions. The cross-learning and documentation,however, could be facilitated more deliberately, focusing on topic areas that could lead toimprovement of the processes associated with PA declaration.

Strengthening PA Management

PA proclamation alone does not guarantee natural resource protection and biodiversityconservation. The NIPAS law provides for institutional mechanisms that would support theoperations of the protected areas. These include the creation of the Protected AreaManagement Board (PAMB) and the preparation of a two-tiered management plan.Following the NIPAS prescriptions, one of CIs earliest steps in implementing the corridorapproach was to address gaps in PA management. This line of work is currently underwayin three areas: the existing protected area the Northern Sierra Madre Natural Park and theexpanded protected area the Peablanca Protected Landscape and Seascape and the

new protected area- the Quirino Protected Landscape.

Since the Northern Sierra Madre Natural Park is an older and relatively establishedprotected area, preparation of plans was deemed unnecessary. Intervention in PAmanagement in this area comes in the form of strengthening management capacity, whilemanagement interventions In Peablanca and Quirino start with plan preparation.


39/87


26

Fig. 3. Peablanca Protected Landscape and Seascape

Developing management plans

For Peablanca, two documents: the PPLS manual of operation and the PPLS managementplan were developed and approved on December 14, 2004. The first document outlines thestructure, composition, functions, duties and responsibilities of the Protected AreaManagement Board in accordance with the provisions of the NIPAS Act. The secondprovides a description the geophysical, biolog

philippines corridor learning final

Documents