results and discussion of my thesis on political dynasty
DESCRIPTION
Thesis on the degree Social SciencesTRANSCRIPT
17
Chapter IV
Results and Discussion
Findings. This section presents the findings of the study. The corresponding interpretations were
discussed: socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents, relationship of the selected barangay
officials, the determinants in encouraging relatives to run in public service, and their concept of political
dynasties. The chapter is divided into several parts:
4.1 Socio Demographic Characteristics
4.2 Relationship of Barangay Officials
4.3 Concept of Political Dynasty
4.4 Determinants in Encouraging relatives to seek public office.
18
4.1 Socio Demographic Characteristics of the Respondents.
Table 1 Descriptive Statistics of Socio-demographic Characteristics
Frequency Percent
Age
31-40 4 11.2
41-60 30 83.3
61-75 2 5.6
Status
Single 1 2.7
Married 34 94.4
Widow 3 8.1
Gender
Female 6 16.7
Male 31 83.3
Position
Barangay Chairman 3 8.3
Kagawad 27 73.0
Secretary 4 10.8
Treasurer 3 8.3
Barangay
Cabisuculan 10 27.0
Matingkis 8 21.6
Naglabrahan 9 24.3
San Antonio 10 27.0
Length of Service in the barangay
1 year and below 3 8.3
1-3 3 8.3
4-19 11 30.6
8-11 7 19.4
12-15 6 16.7
16-19 4 11.1
20-31 1 2.8
32-35 1 2.8
Educational attainment
Elementary 1 2.8
Elementary Graduate 3 8.3
High school Level 5 13.9
High School Graduate 8 22.2
College Level 7 19.4
College Graduate 6 16.7
Vocational 6 16.7
Profession
ABC President 1 2.78
Farmer 31 86.11
Security Guard 2 5.56
Tricycle Driver 1 2.78
None 3 8.33
Monthly Income
5,000 and below 16 44.4
5,000-10,000 8 22.2
10,000-15,000 2 5.6
15,000-20,000 1 2.8
20,000-25, 000 2 5.6
25,000-30,000 1 2.8
Family experience in public service.
Yes 19 52.8
No 17 47.2
Relatives serving in the city
Yes
No
5
31
13.5
83.8
19
Most of the respondents were in the ages of 41-60 (83.3%) mainly because generally most of the
leaders in our country ranges from that age, 94.4% of the respondents were married mainly because
majority of them were in the ages 41-60.
Most of the respondents were males (83.3%) reason for this is that men dominate Philippine
politics. Overall the study consists of 37 positions in the barangay, most of the respondents were
Barangay kagawad (73%) cause in each barangay the council are composed of seven kagawads, 1
chairman, and the treasurer and secretary. The sample of the study were supposed to compose of 40
respondents but the researcher was unable to reach three of them. The study was lacked of one barangay
captain, one kagawad, and treasurer mainly because of their business engagement and other important
concerns during the conduct of the study.
Seventy-seven and eight percent (77.8%) of the respondents serve the barangay from 4-19 years,
many of them were reelected and able complete their terms others started from a small position then
pursue a much higher position, others stated that they start being a kagawad then run for barangay
chairman, other started as a barangay chairman then became a kagawad, some started as youth leader.
Most of the respondents were high school graduates (22.2%) reason for this is that the officials
belong to second and third class families, while 16.7% of the respondents were college graduates which
can be considered significant because instead of pursuing a high paying job or position they opted to
serve the barangay.
Majority of the respondents were farmers mainly because barangays are situated mostly in rural
areas while 8.33% of the respondents were full time barangay officials. Most of the respondents earned a
monthly income of P 5,000 and below, reason for this is that the honorarium of the barangay officials
ranges from P2000-P5000.
Fifty-two and eight percent(52.8) of the respondents family has experienced in public service,
stated that they have relatives who serve in the barangay as Barangay Chairman, kagawad, treasurer
others said that their family was joining activities in the barangay.
20
4.2 Relationship of Barangay Officials. This part shows the relationship of the barangay officials with the
other officials serving in the barangay.
Table 2
Relationship of Barangay Officials
Frequency Percent Relatives serving in the barangay
Yes
28 77.8
No
8 22.2
Relationships with the barangay officials
Missing
2
5.56
None
8
22.22
Brother in Law
2
5.56
Sister in Law
1
2.78
Cousin
17
47.22
Nephew/Niece
3
8.33
Sibling
4
11.11
Auntie/Uncle
4
11.11
Spouse
2
5.56
Table 2 shows the degree of relationship of the respondent barangay officials to the elected
barangay and city officials and employees.
The researcher was able to trace their relationship for possessing the same surnames. In Barangay
Matingkis, most of the barangay officials there were cousins, the Barangay Chairman and one of the
kagawad with similar surnames were cousins, while two of the kagawads who have similar surnames
were cousins.
The result showed that majority of the barangay officials have relatives also serving in the
barangay which means that a large percentage of barangay officials in the locale of the study are relatives
in various degree of consanguinity and affinity.
21
Almost three-fourths of the respondents are blood relatives stating that their relationship with the
barangay officials where in the second degree or siblings to fourth degree or cousins. Some barangay
officials are related by affinity being related with other officials for being brothers and sisters in law.
Only less than a quarter of the respondents are in any manner related with other barangay
officials.
In Barangay San Antonio, the Barangay Captain has a similar surname with one of the kagawad;
the kagawad was the sister of law of the barangay captain while two of the kagawad also have similar
surname having uncle and nephew relationship.
In Barangay Cabisuculan, two of the kagawad has similar surnames. Their relationship were
brother and sister in- Law.
In Barangay Naglabrahan, the barangay captain and one of the kagawad, who have surnames,
were siblings and the treasurer and secretary who have similar surnames has a relationship of uncle and
nephew
22
3.3 Concept on Political Dynasties. This section contains the conceptual definition of the barangay
officials on their concept of political dynasties.
Table 3.1
Responses of the Barangay Officials on their concept of political dynasty Response
F %
Family Rule
Ang political dynasty ay ang pamumuno ng isang pamilya o magkakamaganak sa isang lugar tulad ng
barangay lungsod at probinsya.
Tuloy tuloy na pamumuno ng isang angkan
Ang pagbibigay kapahintulutan ng nakaupong politiko sa isang kamaganak na tumakbo sa anumang
posisyon sa gobyerno habang siya nakaupo din.
Ang buong pamilya o angkan na ayaw bitawan ang politika sa kanilang lugar.
Ang pagkakaisa ng magkakamaganak namumuno sa isang lugar o barangay
Sunod sunod na pamamahala ng magkakamaganak
Ang pagkakaisa ng magkakamaganak na namumuno.
Pagsunod sa yapak nang kanilang mga ninuno sa pulitika.
Magkamaganak sa pulitika at magkakampi sa isang partido
.
Public Service
Tuloy tuloy na pagtulong.
Kagustuhan maglingkod sa kabarangay
Nagkakaisa ang mga kamaganak sa mga adhikain sa barangay yung iba corrupt.
Maglingkod sa mga mamamayan.
Isang pulitiko na may plano sa kabarangay.
Ok lang naman sakin, kasi nakakatulong naman sila
Depende naman yan sa namumuno, lalo na kung nakakatulong sila.
Kung Minsan maganda, dahil kung minsan nakakatulong
Power
Manipulasyon ng kapangyarihan
Pamilyang ayaw bitawan ang kapangyarihan
Sakim sa kapangyarihan, May sariling interes
19 61.3
8 25.8
4 12.9
23
Table 3 shows the various responses of the respondents on the open-ended question regarding their
concept of political dynasty. The researcher descriptively interpreted the responses to arrive at three
categories namely family rule, public service and power.
More than half of the respondents stated that political dynasty is a form of family rule. The
respondents conceptualized political dynasty as a family or group of persons related by blood or
affiliation that hold various public offices simultaneously or successively.
The first situation occurs when a family member simultaneously seek elective office and won on
the same election under one ticket or group while the second situation occurs when a family member
follows the footsteps of their ascendants in politics with the permission to run in an elective position and
in the process transferring their power and influence to the said relative.
One of the respondents cited the case of the Alvarez in Science City of Muñoz in transferring
power the members of the family.
One out of four respondents perceived that political dynasty positively by looking into it as a
form of public service. They state that political dynasty is a continuum in public service of a family
member that is restricted by the term of office prescribed by law and necessary to continue serving their
constituents under one platform of development.
Twelve and ninth percent of the respondents conceptualize political dynasty as necessary evil to
maintain power within the family. They perceived political dynasty negatively because it promotes self-
interest, greed, and monopoly of power.
24
Table 3.2 Descriptive Statistics on their stand on Political Dynasty
Frequency Percent
Nakakabuti ba ang political dynasty sa inyong barangay?
Ou
Hindi
17
14
45.9
37.8
Dapat ba ibagbawal ang political dynasty? Oo 18 50.0
Hindi
15 41.7
Saang level dapat ipagbawal ang political dynasty? Lahat maliban sa Brgy.
Lungsod/Bayan
Nasyonal
Probinsya
1
2
13
2
2.8
5.6
36.1
5.6
After the researcher got the concept of the respondents, the researcher determines their stands on
the issue of political dynasty on whether it brought goodness in their barangay, it should be prohibited,
and in what level should it be prohibited.
Table 3.2 showed that most of the respondents agreed that political dynasties brought goodness to
their barangay (45.9%), respondents state that leaders in their barangay were able to serve the residents
regardless if they belong to a political dynasty others states that it is difficult to socialize with other
officials who is not a relative. Respondents who said “no” got 37.8%, respondents stated that the priorities
of the barangay officials were in their cronies others said that it would not lead to development and others
said it is better if the officials were composed of different backgrounds and families and to avoid
conspiracy, other said it will left an image to people . There were respondents who did not answer the last
part of the questionnaire so there were missing data. Fifty percent of the respondents want to prohibit
political dynasties; most of the respondents said that the skills of others must be shown; there were
Barangay officials in who have similar surnames with the other officials in the barangay that wants to
prohibit political dynasties. Forty- one and seven percent (41.7%) do not want to prohibit mainly because
Philippines is a democratic country it is the people who choose their leaders and they were elected in a
democratic and legal manner. Other respondents stated that it should not be prohibited especially if the
leaders were able to fulfill their duties and to provide equal access to public service. Some of the
respondents were not able to answer this part.
25
From the 50% percent of the respondents who want to prohibit political dynasties 36.15% wanted
to prohibit it in the national level mainly because others were not given the chance to lead the barangay
and to avoid extreme corruption, followed by province and city (5.6%) that one’s of the respondents
stated that it is prone to dynasty, and all levels except the barangay mainly because there are barangays in
which most of all the residents are mostly relatives and belong to one clan (2.8%)
4.3 Determinants in encouraging relatives to seek elective office. The results in this section indicated that
the work of Dubrin (2002) could be used to know the determinants in encouraging relatives seek elective
office. Dubrin distinguishes on how a person can gain power, influence, and used organizational politics.
26
Table 4.1 Descriptive Statistics for the Determinants in Encouraging Relatives to seek Public Office.
Determinants Indicators
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Depends on
the situation
Agree
Strongly
Agree
Power
1. Hinihikayat ang mga kamag-anak tumakbo
para sa puder sa barangay.
Frequency
Percent
Frequency
7
19.4
8
3
8.3
4
9
25.0
18
13
36.1
5
4
11.1
1 Percent 22.2 11.1 48.6 13.5 2.7
2. Hinihikayat ang mga kamag-anak tumakbo
para baguhin ang barangay
Frequency 6 10 8 6 7
Percent 16.7 27.0 22.6 16.2 18.9
3. Hinihikayat ang mga kamag-anak tumakbo
para maipagpatuloy ang mga plano sa barangay.
Frequency
7
4
6
7
12
Percent 18.9 10.8 16.2 18.9 32.4
4. Hinihikayat ang mga kamag-anak tumakbo
para baguhin ang katayuan ng mga kabarangay.
Influence
Frequency
8
6
7
9
6
Percent
Frequency
Percent
21.6
5
13.0
16.2
7
19.4
18.9
8
22.2
24.3
12
33.3
16.2
4
11.1
5. Hinihikayat ang mga kamag-anak tumakbo
para hikayatin ang mga tao sa paniniwalang
pulitikal.
Frequency
9
9
16
3
0
Percent 24.3 24.3 43.2 8.1 .0
6. Hinihikayat ang mga kamag-anak para
matutong mamuno.
Frequency
8
5
8
10
5
Percent 21.6 13.5 21.6 27.0 13.5
7. Hinihikayat ang mga kamag-anak para sa
respeto.
Frequency
4
6
4
13
8
Percent 10.8 16.2 10.8 35.1 21.6
8 Hinihikayat ang mga kamaganak tumakbo para
bigyan inspirasyon ang mga taga barangay...
Frequency
5
6
7
13
5
Percent 13.5 16.7 18.9 35.1 13.5
Organizational Politics
9. Hinihikayat ang mga kamag-anak na tumakbo
para sa pabor ng nanunungkulan sa munisipyo..
Frequency Percent
Frequency
10 13.9
9
5 19.4
9
14
38.9
13
4 11.3
3
3 8.3
1
Percent 24.3 24.3 35.1 8.1 2.7
10. Hinihikayat ang mga kamag-anak tumakbo
para lumawak ang koneksyong pulitikal.
Frequency
12
11
7
5
2
Percent 32.4 29.7 18.9 13.5 5.4
11. Hinihikayat ang mga kamag-anak tumakbo
mapalapit sa tao.
Frequency
9
8
6
5
7
Percent 24.3 21.6 16.2 13.5 18.9
12. Hinihikayat ang mga kamag-anak na tumakbo
upang maihanda ang sarili sa pagtakbo sa mga
susunod na eleksyon.
Frequency 11 6 12 5 2
Percent 29.7 16.2 32.4 13.5 5.4
Table 4 shows the determinant indicators in encouraging relatives to seek elective office. The
researcher grouped the following determinants based on the work of Andrew Dubrin into three: Power,
Influence, and Organizational Politics.
27
For better understanding, the three determinants given particular descriptions by the researcher.
Statements 1-4 are descriptives of the use of power that pertains to the strengthening of authority in the
barangay. Items 5-8 are descriptives of influence or the ability to encourage others even the person is not
vested with power. Items 9-12 are descriptives of organizational politics that pertains to acquisition of
mass base for purposes of soliciting future votes.
In first statement(encouraging to gain power) majority of the respondents cannot decide whether
they agree or disagree, since their decision is based on the situation, if their relatives have the skills they
might be encouraged but if not they’ll not be encouraged. In the second statement (encouraging to change
the barangay) most of the people disagree, reason for this is that that respondents can change or develop
the barangay alone, most of the respondents strongly agree in the third statement encouraging relatives to
continue plans for the barangay reason for this is that elective positions in the barangay is limited only to
three terms.
Twenty-four and three percent (24.3%) of the respondents agree on Statement 4(to encourage
relatives to change the quality of life living in the barangay), reason for this is that they cannot do it all
alone and they will look for someone, which they can trust to do it.
Majority of the respondents were undecided whether they will encourage relatives to run for their
political ideologies, reason for this is that their ideologies is different from their relatives. Most of the
respondents agree on the statement encouraging relatives to learn how to govern the residents in the
barangay reason for this is that there preparing their relatives to become leaders. In Statements 7 and 8
most of the respondents agreed gaining 35.1 percent mainly because in becoming a politician more people
will pay more respect while in statement 8 if the relatives of the politician are highly successful, surely,
they will give inspiration to the residents. In Statement 9 most of the respondents were undecided while
in Statement 10 (Encouraging relatives to widen political connection) and 11(to get
28
closer to people) most of the respondents strongly disagree and in statement, 12(prepare myself for the
next election) most were undecided.
The researcher grouped overall the statements and it shows that, the barangay officials, agreed
that they encourage relatives in terms of power; most of these were in the statement encouraging relatives
to continue the plans for the barangay, in terms of influence 33.3% agree they’ll encourage relatives to
seek in elective office more of these were in the state encouraging relatives to gain respect and giving
inspiration for the residents, in terms of organizational politics majority of the respondents were
undecided most of these were in the statement to gain favors from the city and to prepare himself for the
next election. If we will look overall at the determinants, most of the respondents were on the degree of
undecided or depends on the situation mainly because of the circumstances in which they might decide to
encourage their relatives to run.
Table 4.2
Correlation between Encouraging Reasons for Power, Influence and Organizational Policies vs. SDC of Monthly Allowance,
Family that has an experienced in public service, Relatives that serving in the barangay and Relatives that serving in the city.
Monthly Income
My family has an
experienced in public
service.
I have relatives
serving in the
barangay
I have relatives
serving in the city
Corr p-value Corr p-value Corr p-value Corr p-value
Power .110 .561 .206 .229 .180 .293 -.437** .008
Influence -.039 .836 .290 .086 .073 .673 -.383* .021
Organizational
Politics .001 .995 .403* .015 .057 .741 -.408* .014
The above table shows that among the various indicators used in the socio-demographic characteristics,
there is a significant relationship between the socio demographic characteristics and the determinants in
encouraging relatives to seek elective office.
First, data show a trend that the respondents that answers that they have no relatives in the city has a
strong agreement in the three determinants. This significant relationship means that those barangay
officials without an elective official relative in the higher position are much motivated to encourage their
29
other relatives to seek elective positions other than those with known relatives. This shows that since they
have no influence or power in the higher officials, they opt to concentrate in their own barangays in
increasing their power and influence as well as widen their political base.
This situation is associated with the importance of barangay officials in local elections, with more power,
influence and organization in the barangay level; this will give them the bargaining power that is
necessary to secure grass root level votes.
Second, respondents with family that has experience in public service has a strong agreement with the
indicators in the organizational politics determinant. This significant relationship reveals a trend that
having exposure in public service gives more motivation to barangay officials to encourage their relatives.
This might be for the purpose of either gaining favors from the city officials and widening of political
connection in preparation to their future political bid.
This trend is associated with the Filipino culture that those who are nearer the kitchen receive more favors
than the others do
30
Chapter V
Conclusions and Recommendations.
This chapter contains conclusions and recommendations of the researcher on the conceptual
definition of political dynasty.
Based on the results most of the respondents were married and with ages ranging from 41-60.
Their professions are mostly farmers, because the locale of the study is a farming village, earning a
monthly income of P 10,000 below since plurality of them are high school graduates, most served the
barangay from 4-19 years and their families have experience in public service.
The study reveals that these indicators show no significant relationship with the determinants
encouraging relatives to seek elective office.
Most of the barangay officials have relatives also serving in the barangay and their relationship
were mostly cousins.
The study reveals the various responses of the barangay officials regarding their concept of
political dynasty, which was thematically interpreted by the researcher into three categories namely
family rule, public service and power.
Respondents who stated, political dynasty as a form of family rule conceptualized political
dynasty as a family or group of persons related by blood or affiliation that hold various public offices
simultaneously or successively. Others perceived political dynasties as a form of public service stated that
political dynasty is a continuum in public service of a family member that is restricted by the term of
office prescribed by law and necessary to continue serving their constituents under one platform of
development. While other respondents conceptualize political dynasty as necessary evil to maintain
power within the family. They perceived political dynasty negatively because it promotes self-interest,
greed, and monopoly of power.
31
After the researcher got the concept of respondents barangay officials, he determined their stand
on the issue of political dynasty. Most of the respondents stated that political dynasties brought goodness
in their barangay especially if the leaders can fulfill their duties and having unity to serve. When it comes
to the prohibition of political dynasties most of the respondents agreed to prohibit political dynasties
significantly some of them has similar surname with the other officials stating that political dynasties
brought extreme corruption, conspiracy, self-interest and manipulation of power. From the respondents
who wanted to prohibit dynasties half of them wanted to prohibit it on the national level to give chance to
others and for the development of the country.
The study reveals that the various indicators used in the determinants in encouraging relatives to
seek elective office have a significant relationship between the socio demographic characteristics in terms
of having relatives in the city and family experienced in public office.
Having no relatives in the city has a strong agreement in the three determinants, the significant
relationship means that those barangay officials without an elective official relative in the higher position
are much motivated to encourage their other relatives to seek elective positions other than those with
known relatives since they have no influence or power in the higher officials, they opt to concentrate in
their own barangays in increasing their power and influence as well as widen their political base. With
more power, influence and organization in the barangay level; this will give them the bargaining power
that is necessary to secure grass root level votes.
33
While respondents with family that have, experience in public service have a strong agreement
with the indicators in the organizational politics determinant. This significant relationship reveals a trend
that having exposure in public service gives more motivation to barangay officials to encourage their
relatives. This might be for the purpose of either gaining favors from the city officials and widening of
political connection in preparation to their future political bid. This trend is associated with the Filipino
culture that those who are nearer the kitchen receive more favors than the others do.
Recommendations
1. The future study is recommended which has more respondents’ barangays other than four respondent
barangays.
2. Future studies should develop a 4- point scale to measure the reasons for encouraging relatives to seek
elective office.
3. Future studies should let the respondents define the various indicators on the determinants for
encouraging relatives to seek in public office.
4. The prevalence of political dynasty in the grassroots level call for the legislation to define and prohibit
political dynasty.
33
References
1987 Constitution of the Philippines.
Abueva, Jose.2013. “Self-serving political dynasties weaken our State, keep our people poor, and our
country undeveloped”. Jose V. Abueva Blog. http://joseabueva.wordpress.com/2013/05/20/self-
serving-political-dynasties-weaken-our-state-keep-our-people-poor-and-our-country-undeveloped
(September 14, 2014).
Aquino, Rachel. 2005(?). “Five Municipal Case Studies on the Philippine Barangay (Village) Mediation
System”. Mediators Network for Sustainable Peace, Inc., Philippines.
Baxter, Pamela and Susan Jack., “Qualitative Case Study Methodology: Study Design and
Implementation for Novice Researchers”. The Qualitative Report 13(December):544-559.
http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR13-4/baxter.pdf (Accessed January 13, 2015).
Beja, Edsel L., Ronald U. Mendoza, Victor S. Venida, and David Yap. 2013. “Political dynasties and
poverty: Resolving the “chicken or the egg” question”. Aim Working Paper 13-017. Asian
Institute of Management.
Bolong, Leilani E., Rouselle F Lavado, Allan S. Layug, Ida Marie T. Pantig. 2010. “Do Barangays Really
Matter in Local Services Delivery? Some Issues and Policy Options”. DISCUSSION PAPER
SERIES NO. 2010-03: Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
Black, Henry, C. [1891] 2009. Black’s Law Dictionary. Ed. J. A Garner. Minnesota: Thompson Reuters
Center for People’s Empowerment and Governance.2010.”Barangay: Grassroots Democracy or Clan
Politics” Bulatlat, 4 November. http:bulatlat.com/main/2010/11/04/cenpeg-barangay-grassroots-
democracy-or-clan-politics (December 26, 2014).
34
Cresswell, John.2003. Research Design Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Method Approaches
California: Sage Publications.
Dubrin.Andrew.1974. Fundamentals of Organizational Behavior. Thompson-Westerns
Fidel, Maya. 1984. “The Case Study Method: A Case Study”. LISR 6(1984): 273-288.
Fernandez. Lira Dalangin.2013.” THEIR VIEW | Why is the barangay chairman important in PH
setting?” InterAksyon.com, 28 October. http://wew.interaksyon.com/article/73584/their-view--
why-is-the-barangay-chairman-important-in-ph-setting (November 23, 2014).
Hague, Rod and Martin Harrop.2004. Comparative Government and Politics. 6th ed. New York: Palgrave
Macmillan
Kurtz, Donn M Jr.1989. "The Political Family: A Contemporary View”, Sociological Perspectives 32 (3):
331 – 352.
Lagman, Edcel .2007. The Barangay: The Smallest yet Greatest Political Unit. Speech delivered at the the
2007 Oath Taking Ceremonies of Barangay Officials of the First Congressional District of Albay.
Lasswell, Harold, D. 1936. Politics Who Gets What, When and How. New York: Whittlesey house
Local Government Code of 1991
Magno, Francisco A. 2010(?). “Participatory Local Governance and the Protection of Vulnerable
Sectors”.
City Planning and Development Office.2013.Muñoz City Profile.
Querubin, Pablo. 2011. “Political Reform and Elite Persistence: Term Limits and Political Dynasties in
the Philippines”. Harvard Academy for International and Area Studies, Harvard University, Los
35
Angeles, California. http://pclt.cis.yale.edu/leitner/resources/papers/Querubin_Term_Limits.pdf
(December 9, 2014).
Sunico, Rocky.2013. “0156E: Political Dynasties Are Bad For The Philippines”. I Geek, Therefore I Am.
http://www.rockysunico.com/2013/04/0156e-political-dynasties-are-bad-for.html (December 9,
2014).
Valdeheusa, Manny.2010. “Essential Attributes of the Barangay”. October 8.
Yin,Robert. 1994. Case Study Research Design and Methods. California: Sage Publications.
Yusingco, Michael Henry.2012 (?). “POLITICAL DYNASTIES: AN AFFRONT TO OUR HUMAN
RIGHTS”. http://mhyusingco.wordpress.com/2014/06/30/political-dynasties-an-affront-to-our-
human-rights (December 7, 2011)
35