Overseas Fieldwork Report 2015:

Palawan Province, The Philippines

Graduate School of International Development
Nagoya University

Overseas Fieldwork Report 2015

Palawan Province, The Philippines

March 2016
Graduate School of International Development
Nagoya University
Nagoya, Japan

Overseas Fieldwork Report 2015
Palawan Province, The Philippines
Copyright © GSID 2015

Graduate School of International Development, Nagoya University
Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, Japan 464-8601
http://www.gsid.nagoya-u.ac.jp/

Introduction
Field Studies Concerning Four Dimensionsof “Tourism and Development” for the OFW 2015
in Coron, the Philippines

Naoko Shinkai, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Graduate School of International Development
Nagoya University

Service sector has been the largest in the Economy of the Philippines in terms of the contribution to GDP
and it explains more than a half. Service sector has been growing due to the increase in tourists has become
one of the major sources of income for citizens also in Palawan province. Given these circumstances, “Tourism
and Development” was established as the Leading Theme for the OFW 2015. The emphasis on tourism wasfound among the local government units of the Coron municipality. The Department of Tourism, thePhilippines, also had thrown out the “Visit the Philippines Year 2015” campaign. For the OFW 2015, thisLeading Theme was tackled from Four Dimensions, “Tourism and Economic Development”, “Tourism andGovernance”, “Tourism and Educational Development”, and “Tourism and Cultural Development”. Thesefour dimensions were investigated by four groups of graduate students from Graduate School of International
Development (GSID), Nagoya University and College of Public Affairs and Development (CPAf), theUniversity of the Philippines, Los Baños. These four groups have identified their own research questions
related to the above-mentioned dimensions and applied appropriate methodologies of their choices in order toexamine those questions. Although these dimensions are studied and analyzed separately by each group in the
Municipality of Coron, outcomes are inter-related.
Research questions are as follows: “The Economic Effects of Tourim on Local Fishermen in Coron island,
Palawan Province” for Group 1, “Tagbanua People’s Participation in Tourism in Coron” for Group 2 on
“Tourism and Governance”, “Education in fisheries for sustainable Coastal Resource Utilization in Coron” forGroup 3 on “Tourism and Educational Development”, and “The Coexistence of Indigenous Culture andTourism: A Case Study of the Tagbanua of Northern Palawan” for Gorup 4 on “Tourism and Cultural
Development”.
iMethodologies of group field studies are mostly qualitative based on key informant interviews except forGroup 3, which used a quantitative method based on field interviews to individual fishermen.
Analyses by Group 1 and Group 3 are complementary since both groups selected the livelihood offishermen as main research objectives. Group 1 investigated income of fishermen and its various links with
tourism as economic resources, whereas environmental knowledge and practices of fishermen, which
represents the nexus of human resources and environment, were centers of exploration for Group 3. Analyses
by Group 2 and Group 4 are also complementary as they both address issues in indigenous communities. Group
2 investigated the role of the Tagbanua in decision-making process in relation to tourism, while perspectivesof cultural tourism of the Tagbanua are examined by Group 4.
All in all, this report cannot cover all the issues lying between tourism and development. However,certainly this report can become a milestone for international cooperation, given that participated students are
originated from seven countries.
Lastly, I would like to take this opportunity to show our appreciation to the Coron Municipality, theHonarable Clara Reyes, Mayor of Coron, the Honarable Jim Pe, Vice-Mayor of Coron, Stuart, Fay, and other
LGU officers, Barangay chiefs, Barangay citizens, Fishermen, Tagbanua communities, Tourist guides,
Commercial establishments, who cooperated with our group interviews despite their busy schedules, all theAssistant Professors, Advisors from GSID, Nagoya University and CPAf, the University of the Philippines,
Los Baños for overseeing groups and having provided continuous support. Last but not least, we are very
grateful to Dr. Aser Javier for deliberate coordination regarding OFW 2015 in Coron.

ii

Table of Contents

Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... i
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................................ iii
List of Participants .......................................................................................................................................... v
Program of OFW 2015 .................................................................................................................................. vii
Preparatory Seminar at GSID ...................................................................................................................... vii
Interim Presentations of Research Findings ............................................................................................... viii
Presentation of Research Findings at GSID ............................................................................................... viii
Overall Schedule of Fieldwork in the Philippines ...................................................................................... viii
Detailed Schedule of Fieldwork by Each Working Group ........................................................................... ix

Introduction to Coron ..................................................................................................................................... 1

Working Group 1
The Economic Effects of Tourism on Local Fishermen in the Municipality of Coron, Palawan Province,
Philippines ........................................................................................................................................................ 3
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 6
2. Literature Review ....................................................................................................................................11
3. Research Methods ................................................................................................................................... 16
4. Results & Discussion .............................................................................................................................. 20
5. Recommendation & Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 37
References ................................................................................................................................................... 41

Working Group 2
Tagbanua People’s Participation in Tourism Development in Coron ....................................................... 43
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 45
2. Objectives and Significance of the Study ................................................................................................ 46
3. Methodology and Limitations ................................................................................................................. 47
4. Literature Review .................................................................................................................................... 49
5. Findings ................................................................................................................................................... 55
6. Conclusion and Recommendations ......................................................................................................... 65
Acknowledgement ....................................................................................................................................... 71
References ................................................................................................................................................... 72iii

Working Group 3
Education in Fisheries for Sustainable Coastal Resource Utilization in Coron ....................................... 75
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 76
2. Literature review ..................................................................................................................................... 81
3. Methodology............................................................................................................................................ 85
4. Results and Findings................................................................................................................................ 91
5. Conclusion and Recommendation ......................................................................................................... 106
Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................................110
References ..................................................................................................................................................112
Appendices .................................................................................................................................................115

Working Group 4
The Coexistence of Indigenous Culture and Tourism: A Case Study of the Tagbanua of Northern
Palawan ......................................................................................................................................................... 119
Acknowledgments ..................................................................................................................................... 122
1. Background to the Research .................................................................................................................. 123
2. Problem Statement................................................................................................................................. 123
3. Literature Review .................................................................................................................................. 124
4. Research Objectives .............................................................................................................................. 129
5. Research Questions ............................................................................................................................... 129
6. Methodology.......................................................................................................................................... 130
7. Results ................................................................................................................................................... 131
8. Recommendations ................................................................................................................................. 143
9. Discussion.............................................................................................................................................. 146
10. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................... 147
Appendices ................................................................................................................................................ 149
References ................................................................................................................................................. 150

List of Individual and Company Donors to the Overseas Fieldwork Fund ........................................... 153
海外実地研修基金に拠出いただいた個人・企業一覧（受け入れ順） ............................................... 154

iv

List of Participants
Faculty Members (9)Working Groups

Advisors from
GSID, Nagoya University

Advisors from
University of the Philippines Los
Banos (UPLB)

WG1Naoko Shinkai

Ma. Kristina G. Alinsunurin

WG2

Isamu Okada

Aser B. Javier

WG3

Yuki Shimazu

Ephraim C. Quinones

WG4

Yoshikazu Oshima

Evelie P. Serrano

Logistics/Coordination

Jing Liu

Interpreters from UPLB and Local Government Unit of Municipality of Corn (8)
WG

Name

Sex

WG

M

Gil Espenido (UPLB)
WG1

Name

Sex

Almira Lumbres (UPLB)FMarco Saclet

M

Mark Fellizar (UPLB)

M

Gorgonio Pulilan

M

WG3
Faye Ormido

M

Marjorie Resuello (UPLB)

F

WG2

WG4
Jonthan P. Dabvit

F

GSID Students (19)
Group
No.

Name

Sex

Nationality

Dept
Advisor1

Yumi Hirayama

F

JapaneseDID

2

Ryo Hasegawa

MJapanese

DID

3

Dandan Li

F

ChineseDICOM

4

Kataka Joseph*M

KenyanDID

5

Yambao Ryn Nhick**

M

Filipino

DICOS

6

Navalta Razel Andrea Dizon*

F

Filipino

DICOS

7

Natsumi Yoshida**

F

Japanese

DICOS

Prof. Isamu

8

Jirathawornlerk Aunthicha

F

Thai

DICOS

Okada

9

Da Silva Nakamura Luiza

F

Brazilian

DICOS

Prof. Naoko
WG1

Shinkai

WG2

v

10

Mai Goshima

F

Japanese

DICOS

11

Chengyang Yao

MChineseDICOM

12Miki Onidani**

F

Japanese

DID

WG3

Prof. Yuki
Shimazu
13

Minori Fukuura*

F

Japanese

DICOM

14

Takashi Watanabe

M

Japanese

DICOS

15

Stewart Jennifer Leanne**F

Canadian

DICOS

16

Hiroki Yamada

MJapanese

DICOS

17

Olum Michelle AdhiamboF

Kenyan

DICOS

Prof.
Yoshikazu

WG4

18

Keitai Tsuchihashi

M

Japanese

DID

19

Rie Takagi*

F

Japanese

DICOS** Group leader, * Sub-leader,
DID: Department of International Development;
DICOS: Department of International Cooperation;
DICOM: Department of International Communication.

vi

OshimaProgram of OFW 2015

Preparatory Seminar at GSID
Date
1

2

Title of the Lecture and the Lecturer

April 24 (Fri.)“Introduction to 2015 OFW and Campus ASEAN”

14:45-16:15

By Prof. Naoko Shinkai, Prof. Yuki Shimazu, Prof. Jing Liu, GSID.

May 13 (Wed.)
14:45-16:15“Introduction to the Philippines 1: Economic Development, Green Revolution, andFood Security in the Philippines”
By Prof. Jonna P. Estudillo, National Graduate Institute For Policy Studies.

3

May 20 (Wed.) “Introduction to the Philippines 2: Overall introduction to the Philippines”
By Prof. Aser Javier, UPLB, Visiting Researcher to GSID.
14:45-16:15

4

May 27 (Wed.) “Introduction to the Philippines 3: Comparative education on the Philippines”
By Prof. Hirofumi Nagahama, Mejiro University.
14:45-16:15

5
6
7
8
9

10

11

12

13
14

15

June 3 (Wed.)“Introduction to the Philippines 4: About Coron Island”

14:45-16:15

By Prof. Aser Javier, UPLB, Visiting Researcher to GSID.

June 10 (Wed.) “Introduction to the Philippines 5: Governance in the Philippines”
14:45-16:15

By Prof. Wataru Kusaka, GSID.

June 17 (Wed.) “Introduction to the Philippines 6: Culture and Community Development
14:45-16:15

By Prof. Aser Javier, UPLB, Visiting Researcher to GSID.

June 24 (Wed.) “Introduction to Fieldwork 1: How to make a research proposal"
14:45-16:15

By Prof. Frank Peddie, GSID.

July 1 (Wed.)“Introduction to Fieldwork 2: How to conduct interview”

14:45-16:15

By Prof. Frank Peddie, GSID.

July 3 (Fri.)
16:30-18:00
July 8 (Wed.)
14:45-16:15
July 15 (Wed.)
14:45-16:15“Introduction to Fieldwork 3: Infectious Disease Risks and the Precautionary
Principle”
By Dr. Hitoshi Kikuchi, Meitetsu Hospital Vaccinations Center.
“Introduction to Fieldwork 4: Why and how we need Integrated Disaster Risk
Management- Ongoing challenges in Japan and other Asian countries”
By Prof. Norio Okada, Kwansei Gakuin University.
“Introduction to Fieldwork 5: Experiences and lessons learnt from personal
fieldworks”
By Prof. Isamu Okada and Prof. Jing Liu, GSID.

July 22 (Wed.)“Introduction to Fieldwork 6: Introduction to PCM”

14:45-16:15

By Prof. Tetsuo Umemura, GSID.

July 29 (Wed.)

Group Presentations of Research Proposals

16:30-18:00
July 30 (Thu.)
16:30-18:00“Introduction to the Philippines 7: Community Development in the Philippines ～via NGO activities”
By Mr. Toshihiro Ueda, RISE ASIA Foundationvii

Interim Presentations of Research Findings
The interim presentation of research findings was held at Municipality of Coron on Sept. 24th, 2015. Basedon the comments received in Coron, participants made another interim presentation in the University of thePhilippines of Los Banos on Sept. 26th, 2015. Each WG presented for 20 minutes and followed by Q&A
session by the participants.

Presentation of Research Findings at GSID
The presentation of research findings was held at GSID by each working group to disseminate and to collectfeedback from colleagues on Oct. 28th, 2015.

Overall Schedule of Fieldwork in the Philippines
Date
Sept.7 (Mon.)

Activities
13:00-15:00 Pre-survey Orientation on OFW2015 at GSID
7:20 Meeting at Chubu International Airport

Sept.12 (Sat.)

9:35 Departure from Nagoya (PR437)
12:45 Arrival at Manila (Accommodation: EL CIELITO Hotel )Sept.13 (Sun.)

8:40 Departure from Manila (PR2031)
9:35 Arrival at Municipality of Coron, Palawan

Sept. 14 (Mon.)

9:00-11:00 Orientation by the LGU
17:00 Get-to-know-each-other Party

Sept. 14 (Mon.) - Sept.18 (Fri.) Field survey by each WG
Sept. 19 (Sat.) - Sept. 20 (Sun.) Free time
Sept.21 (Mon.) - Sept.23(Wed.)
Sept.24 (Thu.)

Field survey by each WG
Preparation for presentation on site.
16:00 Presentations of Research Findings at Darayonan Hotel
18:30 Farewell Party hosted by GSID, Nagoya University

Sept.25 (Fri.)

9:55 Departure from Municipality of Coron (PR2032)
10:50 Arrival at Manila
14:00-15:00 Courtesy visit to ADB
15:00- Back to UPLB

Sept.26 (Sat.)

8:30-9:00 Courtesy to UPLB
9:00-11:00 Presentation of Research Results
Free Activities & Back to Manila

Sept.27 (Sun.)

13:50 Departure from Manila (PR438) 18:55 Arrival at Nagoyaviii

Detailed Schedule of Fieldwork by Each Working Group
WG1
Date

Mon

Sept.14

Tue

Sept.15

Wed

Sept.16

Thu
Fri
Mon

Sept.17
Sept.18
Sept.21Tue

Sept.22

Wed

Sept.23

Place
Orientation by the Local Government Unit
Municipal Planning and Development Office,
Coordinating with Municipal Agri Office (MAO),
facing into FARMC possible meeting Tourism
Officer
Economic Development Committee Tourism
Committee, Pilot testing for the questionnaire
WG1A
Calamianes Association of Tourism Enterprises(Gift shops, restaurants, hotels), Fishermen / Fishingvillages
Restaurants and bars in Poblacion, FishermenLive Fish Association
Random tourists on restaurants & bars
Calamianes Cultural Conservation Networks, Inc.
(CCCNI)
Fishermen

Who

What

Officers

Meeting

Officers

Interview

Households

Interview

Fishermen
Tourists

Interview
Interview
Interview

NGO leader

Meeting, Interview

Fishermen

Interview

WG2
Date

Mon

Sept.14

Tue

Sept.15

Place
Municipal of Tourism, Municipal of
Administration, Municipal of Assessor,
Municipal of Business Licensing
Municipal of Planning,
Legislative Meeting,National Committee of Indigenous People andSarag punta
Tagbanua Tribe of Coron Island Association(TTCIA) (Kanyanan Lake (Island)),Wed

Sept.16

Thu

Sept.17

Fri

Sept.18

Hikari Company,
Kanyanan Lake (Fee Collected Office)Banuang Daan Village
Department of Interior and Local GovernmentBanuang Daan Village

Mon

Sept.21

Lajala Village (Barangay)

Tue

Sept.22

The Coron Initiative

ix

Who

What

Officers,
Household

Meeting, Interview

Officers,
HouseholdInterview, Meeting

Watchman,Resident
managerandFinancial officers

Interview

Household,
Officers
Household
Officers,
Household
Al Linsangan

Interview
Interview
Interview
Meeting

WG3
Date

Place

Mon

Sept.14

Tue

Sept.15

Wed

Sept.16

Thu

Sept.17

Fri

Sept.18

Local Government Unit,
Municipal Environment Office,
Palawan Council for Sustainable Development,
Planning Office & Agricultural Office
Pilot test in Tagumpay
Legislative Council (SB) Meeting
Fisherfolks in Tagumpay
Fisherfolks in Bintuan
Fisherfolks in Tagumpay
Tagbanua tribes of Banuang Daan(islet)

Mon

Sept.21

Tagbanua tribes of Lahala (islet)

Tue

Sept.22

Who

What

Officers

Meeting,
Interviews

Households
Officers
Households

Interviews, Meeting
Interviews

Households

Interviews
Interviews

ECOFISHHouseholds
Officers,
Households
Staffs

Place

Who

What

Officers

Meeting, Interview

Officers, doctor

Interview, Meeting

Households

Interview

Households
Tourists
Households
NGO leader,
Officer
Tourists

Interview
Interview
Interview

Interviews
Interviews

WG4
Date
Mon

Sept.14

Tue

Sept.15

Wed

Sept.16

Thu
Fri
Mon

Sept.17
Sept.18
Sept.21Tue

Sept.22

Local Government Unit,
Indigenous
PeoplesCommittee
Office,Saragpunta
Food and Nutrition OfficePlanning Office
Municipal doctor
Legislative Council (SB)
Tagbanua tribes of Barangay Balisongan,
Saragpunta
Tagbanua tribes of Banuang Daan (islet)
Mt. Tapyas
Homestay on Caluit Island
NGO day,
Tourism Office,
Mt. TapyasxInterviewIntroduction to Coron

Aser B. Javier, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
College of Public Affairs and Development
University of the Philippines Los Baños

Coron is located in Palawan Island in the Philippines. Palawan Islands is declared as the best island in theWorld by Conde Nast Traveler’s Readers’ Choice Awards for the year 2014 and 2015. Coron is one of thethree municipalities of Calamianen Group of Islands in the Philippine frontier of Northern Palawan and is
blessed with picturesque islands, pristine waters, world-class wreck diving, and unspoiled countryside making
it the leading tourist destination among the 23 municipalities of Palawan and getting known as a prime tourist
destination of the country.
Coron is home of two Hall of Fame Awards as the Cleanest and Greenest Inland Bodies of Water-Lake
Category in 1997-1999. Also, the concentration of eight out of twelve Japanese shipwrecks in one area, theincredibly clear waters, and the spectacular marine life puts Coron in the Forbes Traveler Magazine’s Top 10
best scuba diving sites in the world.
The municipality has a land area of 69,247.14 hectares with 50 islands and islets divided into 23 barangays. The
thriving fishing and tourism industries led to influx of migrants from neighboring towns and provinces. The
population has notably increased from 17,852 in 1970 to 40,007 in 2007 with 3.13 percent growth rate for the
past four decades (Coron SEP, undated). With tourists, both foreign and local, visiting its beaches, lakes, divesites, and other natural tourist attractions all throughout the year, tourist arrivals boomed from 2,580 in 2006
to 91,590 in 2013 (Municipal Government of Coron, 2014) making tourism its top industry. Nowadays, Coron
is no longer just a small fishing town but has been growing slowly and is being recognized in the global tourism
industry.
The Tagbanua tribes (Coron’s first inhabitants) were awarded a Certificate of Ancestral Domain
Title (CADT) for Coron Island with over more than 22,000 hectares of land and sea through the landmark
Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA). Coron Island is considered part of their ancestral domain giving them
the right to manage tourism activities and preserve Kayangan and Barracuda Lakes which are the only lakes
in the island open to visitors.

1These situations have then lead to tourism as an economic driver through investment attraction, job
creation, and opportunities for entrepreneurship with locals being engaged in tourism activities as well as
hotels, resorts, restaurants, and other businesses catering to the needs of tourists. Undoubtedly, tourism has
contributed to the socio-economic development of the community.
However, several challenges have been observed in tourism planning and management. Poverty still
persists despite tourism development. Coron is a community in transition as a result of the boom in the tourism
sector and its traditional practices. The way forward is for tourism to be seen as a shared responsibility of allactors - facilitative roles of national and local governments, concerted efforts of the community, and active
engagement of the private sector - in advancing local tourism development and sustain local economic
development (LED). The locals need to capitalize on opportunities from tourism with local governments
having a key enabling role and strong influence in conserving its resources as well as stakeholders and thecommunity participating in planning and decision making (Javier and Ferido, 2010). The need for sustainable
livelihoods in tourism mean also sustainable environmental management of its resources. This is coupled witha look at how the culture is slowly being eroded and what are the necessary interventions to preserve its
indigenous practices in light of the changes happening.
To help address this, the results of the research and immersion in the community through the Overseas
Field Work of the students by the Graduate School of International Development (GSID) in Nagoya University
can assist local partners in developing local policies and programs. Further, the field work and its results has
become very timely as a contribution of GSID for Coron as a sustainable tourism destination area in celebrationof Tourism Year in year 2015.

References
Javier, Aser B. and Ferido, Miguel P. (2010). Can Tourism be Pro Poor? The Tourism Act of 2009 and the
Local Government of the Philippines. Skills Development for the Emerging New Dynamism in AsianDeveloping Countries under Globalization. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) andNagoya University. Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Municipal Government of Coron. (2014). Tourist Arrival Report. Coron, Palawan

2Working Group 1

Tourism and Economic Development

The Economic Effects of Tourism on Local Fishermen in the Municipality ofCoron, Palawan Province, Philippines

Group Members:
Joe Kataka**
Ryn Nhick Yambao*
Yumi Hirayama
Ryo Hasegawa
Dan Dan Li
Gil Espenido

Group Advisors:
Associate Prof. Naoko Shinkai
Assistant Prof. Maria Kristina Alinsunirin** Group Leader* Sub-leader

3

Table of Contents
1. Introduction
1.1 Economic development and tourism
1.2 Background
1.3 Problem statement
1.4 Purpose statement
1.5 Research questions
1.6 Objective
1.7 Significance of study
1.8 Limitations of study
1.9 Conclusion
2. Literature Review
2.1 Fishing and poverty
2.1.1 The endogenous nature of poverty
2.1.2 The exogenous nature of poverty
2.2 Value chain analysis of small-scale fishermen
2.3 Income diversification for small-scale fishermen
2.4 Conclusion
3. Research Methods
3.1 Conceptual framework
3.2 Target groups
3.3 Research design
3.3.1 Key informant interviews
3.3.2 Questionnaires
3.3.3 Validity and reliability
4. Results & Discussion
4.1 Results based on vertical analysis
4.1.1 Selling routes
4.1.2 Key findings for fishermen
4.1.3 Key findings for fish traders
4.1.4 Key findings for restaurant & hotels owners and discussion
4.1.5 Tourists
4.2 Results based on horizontal analysis
4.2.1 Average household income of fishermen in each surveyed area
4.2.2 Income from fishing: key findings & discussion
4.2.3 Income from alternative activities44.3 Conclusion
5. Recommendations & Conclusion
5.1 Addressing power relations and value chain management
5.2 Need for a value addition policy within the fishery sector to improve the income of fishermen
5.3 Market development strategies for small-scale fishermen
5.4 Promotion of alternative income strategies
5.5 Conclusion
References51. Introduction
1.1 Economic development and tourism
Tourism has been recognized as the fastest growing industry that brings accelerated growth for individual
national economies worldwide (Creaco, 2003; WTO, 2006). It is in this regard that there exists a generalconsensus by proponents that tourism has a positive influence on economic growth at a country level(Armstrong and Read, 2000; Balaguer and Cantavella-Jorda, 2002) resulting in development of local regional
economies, employment opportunities and foreign exchange earnings (Lea, 1998; Sinclair,1998; Creaco, 2003).
These outcomes have been supported by a steady growth in tourist numbers at an average annual rate of 6.5%,
from 25 million in 1950 to 825 million as of 2007 (WTO, 2007). Critics, on the other hand, opine that in small
island economies that exclusively depend on tourism, its contribution to economic growth is poor if not failing(Bryden, 1973; Patullo, 1996; Fagence, 1999). Further, incidences of leakage (in the case of tourism imports)
and revenue paid out to national and foreign stakeholders dilute its impact on the host country’s economy.
However, contrary to dissenting views on the impact of tourism on island economies, the abundance of uniquenatural resources, including premium scenic locations for sightseeing, marine parks, beaches, and fish species(as a source of food) has ensured a steady flow of tourists into these regions. It is therefore worth noting that
this window of opportunity is what has driven a majority of countries worldwide to invest heavily in the
tourism sector. Investments have included taking advantage of the ripple effect of tourism to other sectors of
the economy such as fishing, which is one of the related businesses that is largely tied to the sector.
The importance of fishing as an economic activity cannot be overstated. In many nations, it contributes
to providing not only employment, but livelihood for the majority of fishing communities. Fishermen derive
their livelihood directly from fishing, as do other household members who may be employed in activities
within the fish value or supply chain, either in processing or transportation and marketing. Given the diverse
varieties of species available, the abundance of unique species places a particular country and destination at acomparative advantage to its competition. This does not only draw large numbers of tourists, but also leads tothe development of food tourism as a product (Hall and Mitchell, 2000). Turning focus to the Philippines, a2012 Food and Agricultural Office report ranked the nation in seventh position (2.66%) in the production offish and sea products such as crustaceans, mollusks, and aquatic plants (including seaweeds). In recognitionof the growing fish industry, the central government enacted the Local Government Units Act of 1991, which
decentralized governance and helped transform municipal governments into the vanguard of spearheading
regional development initiatives. The act also mandated the National Department of Agriculture through its

6

Bureau for Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) to work closely with local governments to boost sector
performance, as well as promote sustainability.
One key region which is of interest to our study was the Municipality of Coron, located in Palawan
Province. The fishing industry in Coron has grown steadily, with the latest figures from the municipal
government’s Department of Agriculture data from 2015 reporting catches of 617,672 tons (fresh fish),167,733 (dried fish), 430,828 (live fish), 13,403 (crabs) and 2,391 (seaweed). The Municipal Government ofCoron’s tourism blueprint is based on the Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP) 2014-2024, which aims
to empower local communities for self-reliance through the identification of sectors that can promote economic
growth. With tourism as a key sector for economic growth in the Municipality of Coron and its environs, thelocal government (through stakeholder meetings and consensus building) embarked on and developed thetourist structure plan for Coron-Busuanga. In it, Tourist Development Areas (TDAs) were identified byconsidering transport infrastructure, existing environmentally sensitive zones and potential tourist sites, as wellas tourism service centers and their linkages. These TDAs serve as a cluster of sites through which the potential
for tourism in the region can be exploited. Categorization of TDAs was based mainly on the uniqueness of anarea and the available features and includes limestone landscapes, reefs & shipwrecks, and wildlife. In keepingwith the objectives of the CDP, the Municipal Government of Coron has placed emphasis on developing thefishing industry with a view to uplifting the livelihoods of small-scale fishermen who depend on the tourism
sector as a source of income generation.

1.2 BackgroundFor small-scale fishermen in the Municipality of Coron, the booming tourism sector presents a good
opportunity through which they can eke out a living, considering that fishing is the mainstay of their survival.
The majority take up the activity as part of family tradition passed down from father to son through years of“on the job training”. The local fishing industry is vibrant and largely driven by demand from tourists for local
sea food delicacies and by the huge export market through its port to Manila and further overseas. The steady
inflow of tourists, which peaked at 91,590 in 2013 (based on the municipal government’s 2015 Department ofPlanning report) has contributed to transient migration. The report also showed an increase in fishermen to
4,498, comprising 46% of the 9,777 total households, with a total population estimated at 45,951.
Coron’s fishing industry is characterized by various players, with local fishermen supplying the fish to
fish traders both at the local market (for dead fish) and export market (live fish). Live fish trading is an upwardtrending activity with most fishermen engaged in capture of the red grouper Lapu-Lapu due to its high demand7

in the overseas markets of Hong Kong and mainland China. Pomeroy (2008) found that the international
demand for live fish trading had increased steadily. This observation was a follow-up of Parilla (2003), whose
study singled out Palawan as the premier destination for live fish trading. These studies were further supported
by a 2009 Palawan Live Fish Trade for Food trade report which estimated production at the time to be worth
well over US $25 million. Statistics from (Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources, 2013) report revealed
the high rankings of seaweed (in second position behind tuna), shrimps and prawns (in third position), while
performance of Lapu-Lapu and crabs for exports was also notable. These figures explain the enthusiasm withwhich local fishermen have turned their attention to live fish trading as a viable income generator. However,despite this positive outlook, fishermen are ranked at the bottom of the industry chain, with little income toshow despite a booming live fish trading sector

1.3 Problem statement
Sampang’s 2007 study established that fishing was one of the main occupations in Coron, with anestimated 3,283 people engaged in fishing activities. These statistics were later revised during our researchwhere secondary data from the Local Government Planning office placed the numbers at 4,498. This increaseis testament to the emergence of the Municipality of Coron as a premier tourist destination owing to its diverse
fish species and exotic natural beaches and facilities. As a result, a bustling local economy has emerged, as
seen through the mushrooming of tourist-related businesses and activities, all of which have ensured a steadysupply of employment opportunities for local residents and migrants alike. Data obtained during this research
revealed that tourist expenditure on fish dishes has risen sharply, leading to expansion of the fishing sector
through the introduction of diverse products to meet tourist expectations and ensure satisfaction.
For the local fisherman, this portends great opportunity that has important implications for his income.
While data from the Coron Department of Planning shows that fishing is the top livelihood activity, at 22.2%,
this does not translate into automatic income benefits. As a result, the majority of fishermen within the area
still live below the poverty line. Statistics further show that show that 44.73% of total households live below
the food subsistence level. This figure, while lower than the provincial average of 54.95%, falls short of thenational average, which stands at 22.3%. Given the fact that the fisherman is ranked at the bottom within thefish value chain, there is pressure to maximize catch per day so as to yield sufficient stock that can earn him agood profit. The fish market chain has its self-regulatory mechanism that determines prices of fish based on
consumer demand. There also exists a classification system where live fish trading attracts higher income than8

fresh fish. Fishermen within communities in the Municipality of Coron therefore embark on many fishing trips
aimed at catching live fish (Lapu-Lapu) so as to secure income for their livelihoods.
However, there are many challenges that are faced by the fisherman in this regard. First, sustainable fishstocks require time to allow for breeding. As pointed out by Jacinto & Pomeroy (2008), many fish are
migratory and do not observe human-determined boundaries. This means that local fishermen’s catch per day
and consequently their income is determined by the volume and types of fish caught. Second, many fishinghouseholds lack sufficient fishing equipment such as boats, many of which were destroyed by the Typhoon
Haiyan in 2013. Resource limitations and logistical challenges hamper speedy interventions by government or
support agencies in regions affected. For local fishermen, coping with this challenge means that they engage
in group fishing, which reduces profit margins per households. Third, there is the challenge brought about by
increased local investor presence in the fishing sector which (from the fisherman’s perspective) has encroachedon their access to fishing grounds, leading to longer trips out to sea to catch fish. Fourth, there is a lack of skills
and knowledge to carry out value addition to certain fish stock before selling. This leads to lower prices forfish caught, with greater benefits going to other players within the value chain (fish market traders). Fifth, thelack of an umbrella organization for collective bargaining makes fishermen vulnerable to market forces which
in most cases are not favorable to boosting their income. Sixth, there are limited to no culturing facilities for
popular fishes and other seafood favorites among tourists, meaning the fishermen lose out in cases where thefish caught does not meet size requirements and therefore fetches a lower price in the market.
Therefore, while fishermen play a pivotal role in sustaining the fishing industry, they remain poor and are
economically disadvantaged by being at the bottom of the fish value chain. These challenges show that there
is a need to investigate chain activities to seek solutions that would improve the overall position of the local
fisherman. It is not clearly known to what extent the thriving fishing industry benefits the fisherman’s
individual income prospects. Even more important is given the seasonality trends of fishing livelihood in Coron,
there is a need to focus on the plight of the fisherman by analyzing what income benefits are realized fromfishing through analyzing vertical chain activities, and what are the alternatives for income diversification to
enable sustained income generation within the horizontal chain.

1.4 Purpose statement
The purpose of this descriptive study is to investigate the income effect of tourism on local municipal
fishermen within the fishing value chain in the Municipality of Coron.

91.5 Research questions
1.

How does tourism affect the income of the local fisherman?

2.

How does the local fisherman cope with lack of income during lean months?

1.6 Objective
To assess the impact of tourism on the local fishermen’s income

1.7 Significance of study
1.

To highlight the important role played by local fishermen in sustaining the local fishing industry

2.

To explore the income benefits (if any) that local fishermen derive within the fish value chain

1.8 Limitations of study
Time constraint did not allow for a thorough investigation into the economic effect of tourism on the local
fisherman’s income. This meant that it was not possible and practical to analyze the exact value chain (specificsets of players). As a result, there is still a need to carry out an in-depth analysis of the fish value chain so as
to get more detailed information on the extent to which value is added by each player.

1.9 Conclusion
This research sought to investigate how tourism-related activities in the Municipality of Coron impacted
on local fishermen. Specifically, an analysis of the income of fishermen within the vertical and horizontal fishvalue chain was carried out with a view to assessing the effect of tourism on income as well as the alternative
income opportunities to cushion fishermen against shocks occasioned during lean months. As the literature
review in this research shows, a majority of studies on small-scale fishermen paint a dim picture as to theeconomic benefits derived from fishing, with some linking it to causes of sustained poverty levels among
fishermen households (FAO, 1974; Bene, 2003). Bene further stressed this point by positing two schools ofthought; that ‘fishermen are the poorest of the poor’ and ‘fishing is the activity of last resort’. In line with thisassertion, the research took a closer look at fishermen’s income within the value chain.
Attention was placed on activities within the vertical chain, where the role of the fishermen, from catching
the fish to selling it to fish trader, local market, restaurants and tourists, was analyzed. The aim of this was toassess the income benefits derived in comparison to other players in the chain. By studying the horizontal
activities as carried out by fishermen within the chain, the study sought to investigate alternative income
10

livelihood activities outside of fishing. This is because the Municipality of Coron is plagued by natural shocks
caused by variations in the weather, such as the annual monsoon and typhoons, both of which have adverse
effects on local residents’ livelihood. In the literature review carried out, contrary opinions (Smith, 1979, 1981;
Wright, 1990; Payne, 2000) to Bene’s assertion attributed the sustained poverty of fishermen to natural
occurrences, health related concerns, and economic shocks, hence making our focus on income diversification
prospects even more relevant.
The research methods applied in this study lay emphasis on fishermen’s activities and used interviews
and questionnaires. All key respondents within the vertical chain took part, with questions directed at thefisherman focusing on mode of fishing, frequency, catch per day, price of fish caught, operational costs andalternative income opportunities. These were aimed at establishing differences in costs and revenue to assess
net income earned. Other respondents, such as fish traders, were probed with a view to investigating thepurchase prices and fish sold to them, the frequency of purchase, and popular species. Restaurants and hotels
were probed to establish fish suppliers, prices, frequency and the favored fish dishes of tourists. Tourists, on
the other hand, were asked about favorite dishes and frequency of consuming fish dishes, which aimed at
establishing how popular fish dishes spur demand from restaurants.
Findings from the research were categorized as vertical and horizontal as defined by the research questions,and it is worth noting that the primary focus of this study was fishermen’s income in the Municipality of Coron.
To this end, results under the vertical analysis are pegged on a fisherman’s income prospects within the chain.
In addition, factors affecting a fisherman’s income were analyzed and the results are presented herein, as wellas the challenges faced along the chain, including power relations with other actors. In the horizontal analysis,
findings were also anchored on fishing income, but with a focus on how seasonality and fluctuation of income
is addressed through the pursuit of alternative income.
Finally, recommendations to be made herein include addressing power relations and value chain
management, the need for value addition policy within the fishery sector to improve the income of fishermen,
market development strategies for small-scale fisherman, and the promotion of alternative income strategies

2. Literature Review
The literature review is an important chapter in this research because it provides background information
on previous related research as presented by various scholars. This information is useful in highlighting thesignificance of the study and is intended to allow the reader to get a clear understanding on the plight of local
fishermen in the Municipality of Coron. Organization of the literature review will be based on key themes,
11including fishing and poverty, fish value chain analysis, and income diversification in fishermen communities.
First, under fishing and poverty, this study will focus on the income of small-scale local fishermen. Byhighlighting the discourse around this subject matter, it is hoped that a clear picture will emerge as to why
fishermen tend to remain below the poverty line even while operating in thriving sectors of tourism and fishing.
Second, a review of fishing value chain analysis will be carried out. The aim here is to look at fishermen’s
income prospects from the vertical and horizontal perspective within the chain. Under the vertical approach,past studies targeting fishermen will be examined to establish trends, similarities and differences in income
compared to other activities and players within the chain. In the case of the horizontal analysis, identificationof past studies that highlight alternative income generating activities for local fisherman are of great
importance.

2.1 Fishing and poverty
2.1.1 The endogenous nature of poverty
Numerous studies carried out in fishing communities have tended to approach them from the perspectiveof poverty. Gordon’s study (1954) produced a paper on the economics of fisheries and their open-access nature,in which he sought to explain persistent low income among Canadian fishermen. He concluded that ‘rent
dissipation’ was a direct result of the fisheries’ ‘common property nature’. This conclusion seems to imply
that by sharing common resources for their livelihood pursuit, fishermen’s income continues to decrease. In
addition, Hardin (1968) implied that over-exploitation of natural resources in pursuit of livelihood by man had
a devastating effects on fishermen’s livelihoods and biodiversity as a whole.
In addition, from the mid-1970s into the 1980s, more studies were conducted that led to a common
perception that communities living within and engaging in fishing activities were bound to remain poor (FAO,
1974; Smith, 1979, 1981; Panayotou, 1982 et al). This shared view seemed to draw from the school of thought
linking rural poverty and fishing attributed to Bene (2003). In his observations, he stated that fishermen belong
to the poorest of the poor and that they engage in fishing as a last resort owing to a lack of alternatives.
Furthermore, Copes’s study (1999) contributed to this thinking by opining that poverty among fishermen isrelated to low levels of natural resources; thereby confining the origin and causes of their poverty to what hetermed as ‘conventional wisdom on poverty in fisheries’. Copes’s thinking was based on the fact thatfishermen’s poverty resulted from over-exploitation of resources (over-exploitation = low catch = low income= poverty).

12

In contrast to these views, other studies have argued that fishermen where not necessarily ‘the poorest of
the poor’ in monetary terms but suffered from vulnerabilities in what Bene (2003) and Allison et.al. (2006)
attribute to natural and economic shocks, health issues and natural disasters as a cause of poverty. This counterargument supported an earlier assertion by Jazairy et.al (1992) in a study commissioned by International Fund
Agricultural Development, which concluded that small scale fishermen were among the most vulnerable
groups, leading to low income and poverty.

2.1.2 The exogenous nature of poverty
Bene (2003) also looked at ‘low opportunity incomes’ available to fishermen, and concluded that with thelack of viable alternatives to livelihood income, fishermen are bound to remain in sustained poverty. His view
seemed to receive support from Cunningham (1993), who based his assumption on a perfect market scenario
comprising open-access fishing, perfect labor mobility and a standard two sector model (that is, the fishingand non-fishing sectors). In Cunningham’s argument, he suggested that owing to the geographical location offishing communities and limited access to alternative income sources, poverty among fishermen is inevitable.

2.2 Value chain analysis of small-scale fishermen
The value chain concept, initially proposed by Porter (1985), as adopted by Kaplinsky and Morris (2000),
refers to the full range of activities necessary to transform a product or service from conception, through thestages of production, to final consumer (including logistics and final disposal). Within the context of the fishindustry, Jacinto (2004) aptly defined the chain as a series of activities involved transforming fish products
from capture or culture, through the different phases of production and delivery, to final consumers. Kaplinsky
and Morris further asserted that value chain analysis not only provides a good base from which to understandpolicy as it relates to resource distribution within the domestic economy, but also helps shed light on a sector’s
performance within the global economy.
While there has been a growing number of market development studies carried out in many agricultural
product chains (Kanji and Barrientos, 2002; Dorward et al., 2003; MacFayden et al.), Jacinto and Pomeroy(2008) observed that little has been done on small-scale fishermen. They further argued that despite many
development programs initiated within the small scale fisheries sector, fishermen have largely remained poor
due to their inability to tap into local and international markets. By virtue of their place on the lower end of
the value chain, fishermen fetch lower prices for fish products. This, according to Jacinto (2004), results from13

governance and distributional mechanisms that favor fish traders, processors and other intermediaries oversmall-scale fishermen.
A major contributing factor to the marginalization of fishermen within the value chain stems from theirlack of organization. The majority operate independently, thereby weakening their socioeconomic andperformance within the fishing industry as an economic sector (FAO, 2004). In addition, the lack of collective
action leaves fisherman with no bargaining power, which leaves them vulnerable to other more experienced
operators with better capital, including traders, processors, and exporters. The report concluded by citing
asymmetric information flows, lack of transparency in price formulation, challenges of capital for technology
upgrades, and inadequate post-harvest equipment, including cold chains, which are critical within the fishingsector.

2.3 Income diversification for small-scale fishermen
In their studies, Ellis (1998) and Bryceson (1999) pointed out that income diversification has not received
due attention at the public policy level despite the critical role it plays to rural household sustainability. Studies
have been conducted on the reasons for and trends in livelihood pursuit, culminating in the development andadoption of the Sustainable Livelihood Approach (SLA) (DFID, 1999). The SLA framework reveals that ruralcommunities in low-income countries are prone to diversified livelihood pursuit. In the case of fishing, whichis regarded as a high-risk occupation (Sethi, 2010), fishermen face high financial risks due to annual income
fluctuations. These include concerns of seasonality, cyclical fluctuations in stock size and location, as well as
the risk to a fisherman’s life, all of which point to income diversification as a viable option against livelihood
failure at the household level (FAO, 2013). In their study on occupational and geographical mobility within
the Thai fish sector, Panayotou & Panayotou (1996) opined that shifts in and out of fishing, while relatively
lower than that of non-fishing activities, are usually greater than shifts into fishing. They attributed this outward
migration to economic incentives and prospects from alternative livelihoods.
In addition, Olale and Henson (2012) pointed out that empirical evidence shows fishing communities indeveloping countries are among the poorest communities (Smith 1981; Panayotou, 1985, 1988; Platteau, 1989;
Jansen, 1997; Pauly, 1997; Bene, 2004; Nevin, 2005; Salagrama, 2006). However, past studies have generally
failed to investigate ways of reducing poverty among these communities. Olale and Henson’s study focused
its attention on addressing this research gap by proposing the investigation of income diversification as apotential way out of poverty. In particular, the study analyzed the determinants of income diversification
decisions among fishing communities, with a focus on those living on the Kenyan shores of Lake Victoria.
14

The results showed that education level, access to credit, and membership of associations are the key factorsthat explain income diversification behaviour among fish workers. Also, the study discovered that income
diversification can be stimulated by focusing on these determinants.
However, Kasperski and Holland (2013) introduced the concept of risk into the debate. They envisioned
the existence of a dome-shaped relationship between the variability of individual income and income
diversification. In their study, they argued that a small amount of diversification does not reduce income risk,
but that higher levels of diversification can substantially reduce the variability of income from fishing. This isbecause some fishermen may diversify their income with non-fishing sources during low-income periods when
they have more time to pursue income from some non-fishing source. Thus, total income variation may bemuch lower for those that have alternative income sources that are flexible, which would be a good risk-coping
strategy.
Interestingly, while appreciating the discourse on income diversification from a risk and poverty
dimension, it is perhaps worth noting that Fabinyi (2010) in his paper “The intensification of fishing and therise of tourism: competing coastal livelihoods in the Calamianes Islands, Philippines’” highlighted the ways
in which coastal residents deal with the changes in the fishing and tourism industries. The conclusions of thepaper revealed that, despite the push for and growth of tourism as a more sustainable alternative livelihood tofishing, resident behaviour towards outward shifts was determined by local geographical and social factors,
particularly their experiences and priorities. Fabinyi added that fishing remains irreplaceable to most fishermen,
backed by the evidence of increasing levels of capital intensification in the live reef fish for food trade. The
paper demonstrated two important trends, which are that fishing is marked by increasing levels ofintensification, and that tourism has the potential to exclude fishermen from many of its purported benefits.

2.4 Conclusion
The review undertaken was aimed at addressing key concerns within the purpose statement for thisresearch. The study seeks to investigate tourism’s effect on fishermen’s income and coping mechanisms duringlean months. Through the course of the review, literature addressing fishermen and poverty has highlighted
views raised by scholars regarding the state of fisherman poverty and how it affects income. Our choice ofstudies for review has therefore been influenced by this driving need to investigate whether or not low income
is synonymous with fishing and the position fishermen hold within the value chain. Within the scope of thisresearch, the fish value chain is linked closely to tourism in the Municipality of Coron. Fishermen are the entry

15

point into the chain, and they provide fish (dead or live) to fish traders, either at the local market or supply
them directly to restaurants, bars and hotels.
The debate on value chain has highlighted the key role played by fishermen within the fish value chain,and brought to light the lack of market development strategies targeting them for improved income. Also, key
concerns of fragmentation among fishermen leading to lack of bargaining power in price negotiation have beenraised. On income diversification, it has been clearly pointed out that fishing as a risky occupation necessitates
alternative livelihoods for fishing households. While the discourse has produced varied dimensions touchingon poverty and risk as well as key issues under income diversification choice, it has also been noted that not
all fishermen shift away from fishing to alternative income livelihoods.
Most studies as outlined in the review have focused on evidence of poverty among fishing communities
in developing countries. While these are important in adding to the body of knowledge, there is need for close
scrutiny and investigation of small-scale fishermen within the value chain so as to address challenges that
result in low income prospects and sustained poverty. Researchers have failed to investigate potential strategies
that can be pursued to reverse the poverty situation. Besides, the role of certain potential alternative income
sources in a fisherman’s total income is not yet known. In order to address this research problem, this study
proposes to investigate alternative income sources as a potential poverty reduction strategy.
It is therefore worth noting that our study strives to make use of the literature reviewed to help design the
research methodology, including the paradigm, research design, data collection techniques and analysis
methods. Based on our problem statement as outlined in Chapter 1, investigating fishermen’s income trends
may require adoption of mixed methods of research that allow for factual information and statistics on income
trends as well as testimony from players within the chain regarding events as they occur within the fishingindustry in Coron. We also address the different role of alternative income in dealing with the fluctuation offishermen’s income in Coron. In addition to helping generate policies for reducing poverty among fishingcommunities, information generated from this study will fill the gaps in the literature concerning the income
diversification behaviour of fishing communities.

3. Research Methods
This chapter focuses on explaining the methods used in investigating the research gaps as outlined in the
problem statement, and pointed out in the literature review. In carrying out this research, the study adopted aconcurrent mixed methodology, which Creswell (2009) described as a study that combines quantitative andqualitative data necessary for comprehensive analysis of a research problem. In this research, data collection
16

sought to get a direct account of events from the testimony of players in the fish industry while also collecting
data to fact check their opinions. This proved very effective in light of the varied responses that cited challenges
faced by fishermen within the value chain.

3.1 Conceptual framework
To clarify the impact of tourism on the income of fishermen, the conceptual framework described in
Figure 1 was developed and used to show the linkage between fishermen and tourists. It is used to display alist of actors within the vertical chain that formed the basis of the research study and specifically to show theextent to which tourist spending on fish dishes affected a fisherman’s income judged by his position on the
chain hierarchy. Players involved in the supply chain of fish include fish traders, restaurants, and hotels, aswell as fishermen (at the bottom) and tourists (at the top). For the purposes of this research, the analysis oflinkages between fishermen and tourists along the chain will be referred to as ‘vertical analysis’, while analysis
of fishermen’s alternative income prospects will be referred to as 'horizontal analysis’. Therefore, verticalFigure1 Conceptual Framework

Source: Created by the authors.

analysis tries to trace how fish flow from fishermen to tourists and how much value is added by each player
along the chain, thereby focusing exclusively on the income from fishing. On the other hand, horizontal
analysis sheds light on the diverse composition of income of fishermen from other activities besides fishing.

17

3.2 Target groups
Target respondents for our research comprised stakeholders within the fishing industry in the Municipalityof Coron and included municipal government agencies, the Legislative Assembly, tourism sector associations,and local NGOs, as well as players within the fish value chain, namely local fishermen, fish traders, restaurants,
bars, and tourists.

3.3 Research design
Rather than increasing the size of the sample, the coverage of expected patterns of fish trading andcharacteristics of samples was prioritized, with qualitative data taking center stage. Regarding vertical analysis,
information was sought on which actors engaged in fish trading and roles played. Questionnaires were used tocollect information on tourists’ expenditure on fish dishes.

3.3.1 Key informant interviews
In an effort to establish clear linkages among players, interviews with fishermen, fish traders, restaurants
and hotel owners were used to gather information on the selling and buying price of fish, frequency of dealings,
and operation costs. Specifically, a number of key informant interviews were carried out with various
stakeholders connected to the fish industry. These included interviews with local government officers(legislative assembly members and executive officers), tourism related municipal associations, a privatecompany and a NGO in order to elicit comprehensive opinions about tourism and the fishing industry. For
local government officials, four key informant interviews were carried out, including with the Coron Local
Government Legislative Assembly members, which aimed to establish what support mechanisms were in place
to support local fishermen within the fishing industry. Others included three key informant interviews with theexecutive officers under the municipal government (Planning and Development Officer, Agricultural Officer
and Tourism Officer). Each of these interviews sought to establish what support measures were in place by
respective offices to promote fishermen’s performance within the local economy. They also served to provide
key background information on the performance of the tourism and fishing sectors in Coron, which formed
the basis for secondary data needed in our analysis.
In addition, one interview as done with the Calamianes Tour Guide Association (CTGA) and fourinterviews with officials and members of the Calamianes Tourists Boat Association (CTBA). In the case of
CTGA, questions about tour guide operations were raised with a view to establishing whether fishermen who
shifted from fishing took up tour guide operation as an alternative livelihood. For the CTBA, questions raised18

centered on tour boat operations, entry and boat registration requirements, as well as income earned by boat
captains (who are mainly former fishermen).
Furthermore, interviews with the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) in Coron sought tounderstand the bureau’s operations and role within the local fishing industry, as well as to obtain informationon legal actions and regulations on fishing activities. Other interviews with Hikari Pearl Farm manager helped
to shed light on the impact of private investment on the local fishing industry, and specifically its effect on
local fishermen. Finally, interviews with local NGOs, including Coron Initiative and ECOFISH, provided
insights into their contributions to the fishery situation.

3.3.2 Questionnaires
Table 1 shows the list of participants in the fieldwork survey. Three sites, Sitio Marupo, Sitio Biguyboy
and Sitio Canipo, were used in the study. Questionnaires were administered to both fishermen (23) and fish
traders (7). For fishermen, the aim was to establish their socioeconomic characteristics, including fish-related
assets owned, fishing patterns, prices for fish products, frequency of supply and to whom, as well as questions
regarding coping with lean months through alternative income sources. Under alternative income sources, thesurvey focused on probing fishermen on activities carried out to subsidize fishing income.
For fish traders, the survey involved both fresh fish traders as well as live fish traders. Local fish traders
were questioned about income earned, fish product prices, and relationships with fishermen, including supply
and payment options. Live fish traders were probed on live fish trading price setting mechanisms, prices oflive fish (at purchase from fishermen and selling for export to Manila) among other issues. In order to conduct
interviews with fishermen and investigate their income conditions, we conducted nine interviews in Sitio
Marupo, seven interviews in Sitio Biguyboy, and nine interviews in Sitio Canipo respectively. In addition to
the interviews with fishermen, seven interviews with fish traders in the local market and one in the fish tradecompany named KITKIT Fish Traders Co. Limited were conducted to gain information on fish trading
activities. Other respondents included thirty four tourists to establish the relationship between fishermen andtourists, and seven interviews with restaurants and bars to trace connections with fishermen, fish traders andtourists.

19

Table1 List of Interviewees on Fieldwork Survey
Respondents

Place

NumberFishermen

Coron Public Market, Sitio Marupo,

23

Fish traders

Sitio Diguyboy, Sitio Canipo

7

Restaurants and bars

Coron Town

7

Tourists

Coron Town

34

Source: Created by the authors.

3.3.3 Validity and reliability
Since our research employed a mixed methodology, we sought to verify data received from thequestionnaires (fishermen, fish traders, restaurants and bars and tourists). The researchers also employed theuse of the member check system (by taking back transcripts to respondents for verification). It was hoped thatthrough this exercise, accounts as recorded during in-depth interviews could be confirmed. Audit trails werealso used for ensuring records of all activities as they happened during the research process. Most important
was the use of the triangulation technique to confirm data provided within the survey. According to Jick (1979),
this technique was adopted as a way to seek convergence across qualitative and quantitative methods, and has
proved successful in many studies across disciplines.

4. Results & Discussion
The results were analyzed based on the research questions that formed the basis for our study. Data
collected as described in the methodology section was used in the analysis. Results were categorized based on
the two research questions: How does tourism affect the income of a fisherman (vertical analysis) and How
does the local fisherman cope with the lack of income in lean months (horizontal analysis). The organizationof this section involves the presentation of results followed by discussion for both vertical and horizontal
analysis as well as the chapter conclusion.

4.1 Results based on vertical analysis
In the vertical analysis, the research sought to establish the amount of fishing income for the fishermenalong the chain of activities. To this end, emphasis was placed on selling routes as the basis of the chaininteraction between fishermen and other actors. In addition, key findings from each player within the value
chain under study are reported. Finally, a detailed description of findings is analyzed based on key factors
20

observed to affect the vertical chain during the research, including fish type and catch volume, mode of fishing(solo or group), verbal supply contracts with fish traders, restaurants and bar owners, as well demand for fish
dishes.

4.1.1 Selling routes
As shown in Figure 2, the route of fish from fishermen to tourists is classified into two patterns. First,
fishermen sell directly to restaurants and hotels and subsequently to tourists for consumption. Second,
fishermen sell to fish traders, who then supply to restaurants and hotels or directly to tourists. In addition, there
are other selling routes which do not directly involve tourists which have local residents and outsiders as buyersof fish. Although these two additional patterns obviously contribute to the income of fishermen, our findings
were limited to selling routes that display fisherman-to-tourist linkages as they form the basis for our verticalanalysis, which is determined by tourists’ expenditure.

Figure2 Selling Routes

Source: Created by the authors.

4.1.2 Key findings for fishermen
As shown in Figure 2 above, fishermen, fish traders, restaurants and hotels, and tourists engage in the fish
trade. During the research, twenty three interviews conducted with fishermen revealed that species of fishcaught varied by location, as well as explaining their relationship with fish traders. The study found that the
average price of fish differed from species to species, and in particular Lapu-Lapu has a remarkably high price.
The type of available fish and the average price of fish by species are summarized in Table 2.

21

It was also revealed that the catch of fish is greatly affected by seasonality based on the peak season (Juneto September) and low season (October to May) for fishing in the municipality. Some species, such as Samaral
and Danggit, are available throughout the year. Figure 3 illustrates the comparison of income of one fisherman
where overall net income is analyzed with and without the contribution of Lapu-Lapu live fish on CanipoIsland.

Table 2 Type of Fish and Selling Prices
Fish type

Selling price (pesos)/kg

Kanuping

60

Maya-maya

70

Sagisi70

Tambacol80

Talakito

80

Alamahan

80

Squid

100

Dalangang Bukid

Peak:100 Low:120

Crab

Peak:200 Low:350

Shrimp550

Source: Created by the authors.

(Pesos)Figure 3 Income Comparison between Net Income Without Contribution of Lapu-Lapu
100,000
80,00060,00040,00020,0000-20,000-40,000-60,000-80,000-100,000Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec(Month)Overall income

Income without Lapu-lapu

Source: Created by authors.

224.1.2.1 Discussion
First, from Figure 3 above, reflecting the contribution by Lapu-Lapu, the annual net income isdisaggregated by the monthly level to reflect seasonality. In addition, monthly income is expressed in two
ways; as “overall net income” which refers to net income from selling all fish, and as “net income without
Lapu-Lapu (live)”, which refers to net income earned minus live Lapu-Lapu sales for the fisherman. In theanalysis, income earned without Lapu-Lapu sales is calculated by deducting net income of selling Lapu-Lapu
from the overall net income. In this analysis, the data analyzed represents a sample fisherman who engages
exclusively in fishing activities and does not have any other income-generating activity. With the exception of
Lapu-Lapu, other fish caught are non-seasonal species, meaning his ability to make profits and remain above
the national poverty line totally depends on the seasonal catch of Lapu-Lapu.
Second, it was also observed that the mode of fishing also affected the income of fishermen. While somefishermen engage in solo fishing, others fish in a group. In group fishing, the profit is divided equally, withthe boat owner getting an extra share for his boat (which is considered as a member of the group) towards
maintenance fees. From fishermen’s testimonials, the interpretation of this sharing arrangement varied
depending on agreed terms, where in some cases the boat owner got two shares and in others it counted as 1.5
shares. It was observed that in solo fishing, all the proceeds from the catch went to the fishermen. On the other
hand, group fishing enables them to invest more in their equipment and use more sophisticated fishing tools,
such as fish finders, which help to improve catch volume. In contrast, solo fishing brought with it challenges
including insufficient funds to rent equipment such as fish finders and motor engines that would allow for
greater offshore access to more lucrative fish species.
Third, besides catching fish, since fishermen had no official contracts to supply fish, they had to sourcefor buyers based on verbal contracts. From the interviews carried out, it was revealed that almost all fishermensold their catch to fish traders who also set the dealing price. This, it was observed, heavily favored the fish
trader, as evidenced in one fishing village in where fish traders also rented equipment to boost the catch tofishermen and recovered the costs from the fish supplied. In this case, while accessing rental equipment
enabled the fishermen to make longer trips further offshore, their profits were affected by this arrangement. It
was, however, interesting to note that in this example, fishermen were caught up in a perpetual rental scheme
which ensured maximum benefit for the fish trader. Some fishermen sold directly to local residents and tourists
at the local fish market, while others had unwritten contracts to supply either to local hotels and restaurants aswell as Manila.

23

4.1.3 Key findings for fish traders
During the research, it was observed that fish traders have exclusive decision rights on the dealing priceof fish. During the study, three fish traders were interviewed in the local fish market. Tables 3-5 below
summarize the selling price of Lapu-Lapu as reported by fish traders interviewed in this research.

Table3 Value-added Activity by Fish Traders (Case1)

Fish type
LapuLapu
Tuna
ShrimpCrabSamaralDanggit
Squid

Whole year
Whole year
Full moon(1)Buyingprice (per kg)
90-100100-110
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
50-60
40
N/A

Fish trader 1(2)Selling
price (per kg) (2)-(1)Value added200
100-110250
140-150
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
40-50
10
50
10
N/A
N/A

Lean moon

N/A

N/A

Season
Peak
Lean
Peak
Lean

N/A

Source: Created by authors

Table4 Value-added Activity by Fish Traders (Case2)

Fish type
LapuLapu
Tuna(1)Buyingprice (per kg)
200
250
100
110
N/A
N/A

Fish trader 2(2)Selling(2)-(1)Value
price (per kg)
added
250
50
300
50
130-140
30-40
160
50
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A

50

N/A

N/A

50
N/A

80
N/A

30
N/A

Lean moon N/A

N/A

N/A

Season
Peak
Lean
Peak
Lean

ShrimpCrabSamaralDanggit
Squid

Whole
year
Whole
year
Full moon

Source: Created by the authors.

24

Table5 Value-added Activity by Fish Traders (Case3)

Fish typeLapu-Lapu
Tuna

Season
Peak
Lean
Peak
Lean

ShrimpCrabSamaralDanggit

Squid

Whole
year
Whole
year
Full
moon
Lean
moon

Fish trader 3(1)Buyingprice (per kg)
230
230
100
100
N/A
N/A

(2)Selling
price (per kg)
280
280
130
130
N/A
N/A

(2)-(1)Value
added
50
50
30
30
N/A
N/A

40-50

100

50-60

40-50

80

30-40

20

200

180

50

200

150

Source: Created by the authors.

4.1.3.1 Discussion
First, from fish trader interviews, it was revealed that except in some extreme cases for species such as
Lapu-Lapu and squid, by and large 10-50 pesos was added on the fish trader’s selling price. This ensured thatfish traders enjoyed a stable added value and profits regardless of seasons year round. Notably the selling pricevaries from trader to trader. This indicates that there seems to be no market mechanism for regulating pricesof fish. However, due to the nature of their agreement, which is verbal, price information is based on the two
actors and determined by the fish trader. There are cases, for instance, where a trader may have verbal contracts
with up to ten fishermen.
Second, it was also established that fish traders accrued high operational costs, including rents for the
selling place, delivery costs, and cooling item for preventing spoilage, which were mainly recovered in the
selling price. One trader cited challenges faced due to the fragile infrastructure, including the lack of a garbage
process system and stable water supply, as the difficulties she is facing.
Third, since fish traders are price makers, it enables them to offset the fluctuation of price caused byseasonality. This gives them an advantage over fishermen, who are price takers and are unaware of thevariations in dealing price and miss opportunities for seeking optional buyers. Also, the unwritten verbal

25

contracts and tapped information on dealing price gives fish traders advantages in setting dealing price, while
fishermen have little bargaining power.

4.1.4 Key findings for restaurant & hotels owners and discussion
Restaurants and hotels were crucial during this study as they served as final suppliers of fish to tourists.
First, the study found that tourists’ demand for fish dishes influenced the demand for fish from restaurants andhotel owners. During the research, interviews focused on discovering the number of tourists served during
peak and low seasons, sources, how fish was procured, the price of fish, and their overall perceptions of tourism.
Second, it was revealed that similar to seasonality in fish catches, the tourism sector also had its peakseason (October to May) and low season (June to July). In particular, the month of October (beginning of theschool season in the municipality) was cited as a low point for tourist arrivals in Coron. Interestingly, it wasobserved that the peak season for tourism corresponds to the low season for fish catches.
Third, hotels and restaurants procure fish from both fishermen and fish traders. There were cases wheresome had fixed relationships with fishermen who supplied them regularly based on an order list, which served
as a guide for what fisherman would supply. Mutual trust dominated the unwritten contractual agreements, anarrangement with which most respondents interviewed were happy. In addition, respondents also stated thatprocuring fish in this way cost less than buying fish at the local fish market.
The procurement price by species is summarized in Table 6 below, which shows that procuring crabs andshrimps come with relatively higher costs than other species. It was also worth noting that two of the
respondents attested to having observed an increase in procurement costs in the last five years.

Table 6 Procured Fish and Cost
Respondet1
Price (per kg)

Respondet2
Price (per kg)

Respondent3
Price (per kg)

200

180

200

200
450

150
500

Mad crab

400-500

Not procured

Alimasag
SamaralDanggitSquid

180-200
Not procured
400200

Not procured
Not procured
Not procured
220

130
450
S=350/
M=500/L=600
Not procured
Not procured
Not procured
180

Fish typeLapu-Lapu(cultured)
Tuna
ShrimpSource: Created by the authors.
26

4.1.5 Tourists
Tourists formed the basis for this research study as their significant and continuous flow in numbers since2008 had positively impacted the local economy through their increased expenditure. In the context of thisresearch, spending on fish dishes by tourists was expected to affect the income of fishermen through the supply
chain of fish. The results of the tourist questionnaire are summarized in Figures 4 to 7.

Figure 4 Incentive for Ordering Fish Dishes
18
16(No of tourists)

14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0

1. Coron is famous forfish

2. I like fish

3. Both (1 &2)

4. Other

N/A(Incentive)

Total

Domestic

International

Source: Created by the authors.

Figure 5 Frequency of Having Fish Dishes
25

No of tourists*

20

15

10

5

0

Crab

ShrimpLapu-lapu
Total

Tuna

Domstic

Source: Created by the authors.
27

Squid

International

DanggitSamaralFigure 6 Average Spending on Fish Dishes

Domestic

35%

International 0%

50%

64%

0%

10%

20%

Less than 200 peso

30%

40%

200-400 peso

50%400-580 peso

60%

5%

7%

14%

70%

80%

More than 580 peso

5%

5%

14%

90%

100%

N/A

Source: Created by the authors.

Figure 7 Preferred Fish Dishes by Fish Species (Multiple Choices)25

No of tourists*

20

15

10

5

0

Crab

ShrimpLapu-lapu
Total

Tuna

Domstic

Source: Created by the authors*Tourists who order or plan to order

28

Squid

International

DanggitSamaral4.1.5.1 Discussion
First, it was noted that the major trigger for ordering fish dishes is that the fact that the island is famous
for its fish dishes, which is mentioned in 17 responses in total (Figure 7).
Second, while there is no clear difference in incentives for ordering fish dishes between domestic tourists
and international tourists, figures 5 and 6 suggest that international tourists order more frequently and spend
more on fish dishes. Results from these figures show that 71 per cent of international tourists ordered fish
dishes more than once a day and 35 per cent spent more than 400 peso per dish, whereas 40 per cent of domestic
tourists ordered and 15 per cent of them spent more than 400 pesos.
Third, crab was found to be the preferred dish among both domestic and the international tourists, followedby shrimp, Lapu-Lapu and tuna. The lack of response by international tourists for Danggit and Sammaral
might imply that simply they do not prefer those fish dishes or they are not familiar with them.

4.2 Results based on horizontal analysis
This section discusses the key findings related to the horizontal analysis, where a study of the fisherman’s
total household income was calculated and summarized. This was aimed at establishing what percentage ofincome earned by fishermen comes exclusively from fishing-related activities. In addition, alternative income
sources were also calculated and analyzed to establish the income source options available for fishermenbesides that which is derived from fishing, and will also be analyzed with a view to assessing how fishermenin the Municipality of Coron cope during lean or low seasons.

4.2.1 Average household income of fishermen in each surveyed area
From data collected in the three sites sampled during the research, the average total household income of
Sitio Marupo was estimated at 101,371.7 pesos per year, with fishing income accounting for 46% andalternative income claiming the remaining 54%. Likewise, in Sitio Biguboy, average total household income
was estimated at 274,919 pesos per year, with fishing income accounting for 92%. In the case of Sitio Canipo,
the average total household income stood at 260,444 pesos per year, with fishing income accounting for about
88% of the total income. This analysis revealed that the lowest share of fishing income was in Sitio Marupo,with the two other sites registering a significant share. From this analysis, it was further observed that even if
all respondents had the same occupations, the composition of their income would vary. The comparison ofannual average incomes for fishermen households surveyed are displayed in figure 8 below.

29

Figure 8 Comparison of Annual Average Fisherman’s Household Income Source among Areas

Source: Created by the authors.

4.2.2 Income from fishing: key findings & discussion
From the fishing income analysis carried out, four findings were made. First, the results established thatfishing activities were affected by seasonality (peak and low season), which in turn had an effect on fishingincome, as shown in both figures 9 (low) and 10 (peak). Respondent interviews also revealed that fishingincome increased between May and October (peak) and decreased between November and April (low).
Interestingly, this observation only affected fishing income, unlike the case of alternative income (which will
be analyzed in this section as well).

Figure 9 Seasonality of Fishing Income (Case 1)(Pesos)

Source: Created by the authors.
30

Figure 10 Seasonality of Fishing Income (Case 2)(Pesos)

Source: Created by the authors.

Second, results from study also revealed that fishing income fluctuated based on the great variations inmonthly income. Figure 11 and 12 below show remarkable cases of fluctuation.

Figure11 Fluctuation of Fishing Income (Case 1)(Pesos)

Source: Created by the authors.

31

Figure 12 Fluctuation of Fishing Income (Case 2)(Pesos)

Source: Created by the authors

Third, fish selling prices varied depending on fish species, and this affected income. However, it wasnoted that fishing styles have a greater impact in terms of income gain. Although previously analyzed undervertical analysis, an evaluation of types of fish species caught and their selling price was an important indicatorof fisherman household income. This is because fishing was observed to be the main income source forlivelihood during this study. From the analysis of table 2 (see the figure above), types of fish and their selling
prices were summarized. The data showed that fish are bought at approximately 100 pesos per kilogram on
average, while crabs and shrimps had a relatively higher selling price.
Lastly, it was worth noting that live fish generated higher income than fresh fish (dead fish). This is owed
to the fact that besides common fish species caught, the Municipality of Coron is famous for Lapu-Lapu, which
fetch the highest market selling price. It was interesting to observe that the price of Lapu-Lapu was determinedby whether they were dead or alive, as well as on their color and size. Further, a closer look at size revealed
that there were three colors of Lapu-Lapu species traded, including red, pink and brown. Size of Lapu-Lapu
was also established as an important criterion for determining selling price and included three categories,
namely live, red and good (which fetched the best selling price, especially during the low season).
From data presented in table 7 below, they are trading prices for Lapu-Lapu in peak and low seasons aswell as whether they are cultured or caught in the wild. It can therefore be observed that the price of wild LapuLapu during the low season fetches the highest price, at approximately 3000 pesos per kilogram. Figure 8, on
the other hand, shows the categorization chart which ultimately determines the price of Lapu-Lapu. Data32

presented shows that 0.5 to 0.99 kilograms is categorized as good-sized Lapu-Lapu, while the undersized arecultured.

Table7 Price of Red Lapu-Lapu
SeasonLive (pesos/Kg)

Fresh (pesos/Kg)

CultureWild

Culture

Wild

Peak

2300

2800

400

980

Low

2300

3000

400

1000

Source: Created by the authors.

Table8 Size Categorization of Lapu-Lapu
Size

Range

Good

0.5-0.99 (kg)Over

1.5 (kg)

SS

1-1.5 (kg)Under

0.3-0.48 (kg)

Source: Created by the authors.

A comparison of fisherman household income with Lapu-Lapu sales averaged 145,662 pesos per year,
while income without Lapu-Lapu averaged 198,824 pesos per year. This observation was notable, considering
the high market value for Lapu-Lapu. From respondent interviews, it was established that this phenomenon
could be explained by the fact that fishing styles (mode of fishing) had an impact on fisherman income. Further,interviews revealed that fishermen who caught Lapu-Lapu tended to fish as a group, while those who did notwent solo. This meant that catch from a group fishing trip would be divided evenly amongst all fishermen(including the boat), thereby explaining the lower amount of annual income for Lapu-Lapu fishermen.
In Sitio Biguyboy, fishermen instead engaged in catching crabs and shrimps which sold at approximately
500 pesos per kilogram. As mentioned, these prices are well above those for normal fish, with interviews
showing crabs and shrimps could fetch stable market prices year round. This was an important observation
because of its contribution to stabilizing fisherman annual total income. In the case of Sitio Biguyboy, all33respondents stated that they fished solo, covered all the operational fishing costs, and collected all revenue
from the catch sold individually. Further, it was established that they engaged in catching crabs and shrimps
in shallow and muddy water, which from interviewee responses was less costly compared to sea fishing.
Consequently, it was established that although local fishermen did not engage in catching Lapu-Lapu, theirsolo fishing style used for catching crabs or shrimps gave them an expectation of higher fishing income.
A comparison of fishing incomes for fishermen in Sitio Marupo and Sitio Canipo showed huge disparities
despite the fact that both villages engaged in Lapu-Lapu fishing. Estimates of fishing income for Sitio Marupo
stood at 54,263 pesos per year, while that of Sitio Canipo was 230,410 pesos per year. This difference,
according to respondents queried, was explained by the great expertise of Sitio Canipo fishermen in catching
live Lapu-Lapu compared to their counterparts in Sitio Marupo. From this observation, it became evident thatlive fish generated higher income for fishermen than fresh fish.

4.2.3 Income from alternative activities
Results from studying alternative income opportunities illustrated three phenomena. First, yearly operated
alternative jobs not only contributed towards raising total income levels but also compensated for the low
fishing season. Second, culturing of fish, especially Lapu-Lapu, contributed to the stabilization of fishermen’shousehold income. Third, tourism-related jobs such as boat captains generated higher income for fishermen,
thereby having great potential to compensate for income loss experienced during low season of fishing.
As mentioned above, it was observed that alternative income exceeded fishing income in Sitio Marupo,
owing to its widespread seaweed farming activity practiced by the majority of respondents. As a result, themunicipal government in Coron had become actively involved in the promotion of seaweed production as analternative livelihood for fishermen. Besides seaweed farming, fishermen’s households also engaged in otheryear round alternative income sources including livestock rearing, construction work, carpentry and tour guide
operation. These income sources helped to level up the fishermen’s total household income above fishingincome.
On the other hand, in Sitio Biguyboy alternative income was treated purely as a “sideline” opportunitythat was used to compensate for the low/lean season of fishing. In Sitio Canipo, respondents emphasized theimportance of culturing fish. Figure 13 below shows an example of fishermen engaging in Lapu-Lapu culturing
and a Sari-sari store for their alternative income sources. It was observed that culturing Lapu-Lapu accounted
for nearly 80% of total household income during the peak season of fishing. From respondent feedback, it was
34

further observed that the price of fish in the peak season was lower than that of the low season. Similarly,
income generated from fishing and the live fish trade was smaller in peak than lean months. It was, however,noted that Lapu-Lapu culturing played a significant role in stabilizing household income during the peakseason of fishing.
Interviews were also conducted with boat owners who had shifted from fishing to alternative touristrelated jobs. Respondent comments were reviewed and analyzed with a view to comparing previous andcurrent income. From the analysis, it was observed that boat captainship generated higher monthly income
than fishing income on average. Further, since the peak season of fishing and that of tourism were notoverlapping, there was a high possibility for fishermen to engage in both fishing and tourism activities within
a year to boost total income. However, revelations from respondents during interviews stated that current
regulations prohibited the use of tour boats for fishing activities. Therefore, the only way one would engage intour boat operations was by giving up fishing altogether. Figure 14 below displays a comparison between
fishing and boat captain income.

Figure 13 Decomposition of a Fisherman’s Household Net Income

38%

77%
(Pesos)

Source: Created by the authors.

35

Figure 14 Comparison of Income from Fishing and Boat Captain(Pesos)

Source: Created by the authors.

4.3 Conclusion
From the analysis of the vertical chain, it was established that factors affecting fisherman income included
the type of fish caught, the mode of fishing, verbal contracts with fish traders and restaurants/bars, and tourist
demand for fish dishes. First, results from studying respondents (restaurants and hotels, tourists) suggest thatwhile there may be a demand for fish dishes by tourists, which triggers a trickle-down effect for demand along
the vertical chain for fish, the income benefits from tourism activities are not evenly spread to the fishermen.
While they engage fully in the activity, conditioned by high risk, they seem bound to remain at the bottom of
the chain given the current circumstances. This observation would seem to cement the assertion made by Bene
(2003) that fishermen are poor because they are fishermen. Second, the favoring of fish traders over fishermen,
who from respondent interviews appear to remain at the bottom of the chain, would also fit in with Jacinto’s
observation (2004) that attributed fishermen’s income woes to poor governance and distributional mechanisms
due to underdeveloped markets. Another clear outcome from the vertical analysis relates to dealings in pricewhich point to the fish trader having an upper hand. Finally, as mentioned in a study by FAO (2004), collective
action yields bargaining power. The fact that local fishermen are not organized in large groups that can givethem bargaining power leaves them vulnerable and marginalized, with no market information on price.
Therefore, it is clear from the research that opening up of new market opportunities may lead to improved
income for fishermen. The unbalanced bargaining power gives fish traders an edge, as does market information
not being evenly disseminated. It is worth noting that despite high operational costs and seasonality in catch,the majority is still relatively able to save and establish capital owing to this advantage in their bargaining36

position. This is evidenced in the results from the case where fishermen continually rent equipment but cannot
afford to buy it, while the fish trader benefits more from the arrangement.
From the analysis of the horizontal chain, in line with Kapserski & Holland’s observation (2013) on risks
and coping mechanisms, it was concluded that local fishermen cope with the lack of income during the leanmonths by having alternative jobs, such as construction and carpentry. However, since fishing income
fluctuates year-round, fishing households engage in year round alternative livelihood activities such as
seaweed farming and Lapu-Lapu culturing to boost their household income. It was further noted that tourismrelated employment, such as the popular boat captainships, generated higher income and had great potential tocompensate for income loss during the low season of fishing. This observation is in line with Pabayatou &Panayatou’s observation (1996) about outward shift into non-fishing activities for better income prospects.
In conclusion, this chapter has provided key results for the research questions as outlined, as well as
providing detailed discussions to interpret these findings. It is therefore clear that there is a need forstakeholders to design mechanisms that will ensure a smooth, vibrant and competitive fishing sector thatprovides mutual benefit for all actors within the fish value chain. Therefore, the concluding chapter of thisresearch provides suggestions and policy recommendations that can provide a good start towards achieving
this goal.

5. Recommendation & Conclusion
This study focused on investigating the effect of tourism on local fishermen’s income. As outlined in theprevious chapter, results have been grouped into vertical and horizontal analysis based on the researchquestions. The findings reveal that within the fishing industry in the Municipality of Coron, fishermen invest
a large stake into the chain, with little to show for it due to low income earned from selling their fish. In
recognition of the crucial role played by fishermen within the chain, this chapter will first propose solutions in
the form of policy recommendations that can be considered by local stakeholders within the fishing industry.
Second, the chapter will conclude by summarizing the outcome of the research process by highlighting goals
established, activities carried out, and finally the reporting on findings.

5.1 Addressing power relations and value chain management
Power relations between actors are a critical area of focus in effective chain operations. In the course of
the research, it was established that local fishermen operate at the low end of the chain where despite theirlarge role of supplying fish products, they remain disadvantaged with regard to income benefits. As aptly noted37

by Jacinto and Pomeroy (2011), small-scale fishermen need to strengthen their organizations to improve their
management of resources. The lack of organization plays a major role in reduced bargaining power. This fact
has been evident throughout the research, where it was observed that fishermen have no say in pricenegotiations, contractual terms and agreements (which are mainly verbal), as well as in negotiating credit terms
as advanced by fish traders. In addition, as pointed out by Jacinto and Pomeroy (2011), addressing relationshipconcerns and inequalities between fish traders and fishermen is crucial to ensure increased returns and thebetter sustainability of fish resources by fishermen. Further, Jacinto (2004) study of the Seaweed Industry
Association of the Philippines (SIAP) showed that despite vertical integration within the seaweed chain, themajority of seaweed farmers were not organized, thus minimizing their income benefits through reduced
negotiating power. Therefore, the study proposes a stakeholder forum comprised of local government
agricultural officers, BFAR, fishermen and fish trader representatives to chart a course for strong andcapacity-building fishermen associations. It is hoped this will help uplift the income prospects of local
fishermen and boost chain management operations as well as sustainability prospects for the fish resource.

5.2 Need for a value addition policy within the fishery sector to improve the income of fishermen
In the course of the research, it was established that the fishing industry is driven by supply and demand.
The fish catch is sold immediately. In this case, fishermen are disadvantaged due to competition and the lackof value added products to boost price. As noted by Sauzade and Rousset (2013), their study of the Moroccan
small fisheries sector revealed that the largest marginal increase in value occurs at the ‘first sale stage’. In theirassessment, this is the point at which fishermen completely lose ownership of their catch to other players in
the chain. In addition, the study further states that fishermen associations have purchased fish stock fromfishermen and sold it on their behalf to minimize loses. In the course of this research, it was observed at landingsites and market points that most fishermen were faced with similar situations, where prices offered were notgood but with no choice and lack of storage facilities, they had to abide by these market-set prices. Therefore,
the study proposes the training and promotion of local fishermen on simple value added technologies
that are cost effective with high market value.
It is envisioned that municipal government agricultural officers would lead this effort. As a follow-up to
training, it is also proposed that a policy on the establishment of post-harvest infrastructure be
formulated. This will require coordination from the Executive Office at the Mayor’s office in close
collaboration with Legislative Assembly, and followed by lobbying of both the central government and donor
agencies to finance this venture. The existence of cold chain and processing facilities would offer storage of38

surplus stock and offer value addition services respectively, thereby boosting prices based on the supply anddemand principle. Bene, MacFayden and Allison, (2007) supported this view by concluding that interventionsin the post harvest sector (processing and trading) can help in poverty alleviation. They further added that
promoting local processing and value added products boosts local economic development, with Delgado et.al(2003) summing it all up with their assertion that fish income retained locally from production and processing
has a nearly double net income effect on the community when compared to the value of fish sales. They are,however, quick to point out that this requires sound labor rights legislation that ensures fair redistribution andpromotes local as opposed to foreign investment in processing and trading in fish products.

5.3 Market development strategies for small-scale fishermen
While it is widely stated that markets are required products, Jacinto and Pomeroy (2011) argue about theneed to ensure a stable supply of fish before engaging in market development activities. However, they statedthat it is difficult to ensure this stabilization by small-scale fisheries for long enough, so as to allow for market
development. This they attribute to problems with overfishing due to high demand, and position the future offish production in aquaculture. In the course of the research, it was noted that certain species, including LapuLapu and shrimps, fetched high income for fishermen and attracted high demand within the value chain. In thecase of Lapu-Lapu, live fish trading proved to be a lucrative source of income compared to traditional fresh
fish capture. With the increased capture, fish stocks are shrinking, as is size. The research team witnessed
several instances of rejected stock due to weight requirements. In this case fishermen lose out despite time andmoney invested in the catch. Likewise, at the local market, it was noted that shrimps fetch high value yetinterviews revealed that culturing is not done locally. Therefore, it is proposed that a Lapu-Lapu and shrimp
culturing facility be established locally in Coron. This can be done through collaboration between
Fisherman Associations, local NGOs, BFAR and local government agricultural officers. This would ensure asteady supply of fish and sea food species that the research survey shows attract high demand locally (tourist
demand as shown in survey findings) and overseas (export of Lapu-Lapu to Hong Kong and China).

5.4 Promotion of alternative income strategies
During the course of this research, it was established that the tourism cycle has peak and low seasons.
During low seasons, fishermen income was affected, especially for those who supply fish directly to restaurants
and hotels or to tourists, as outlined in the results section in the previous chapter. Interviews carried out
revealed that fishing households engaged in sideline income generating activities including operation of sari
39sari stores, carpentry, brick making and seaweed farming. It is proposed that strategies to boost the
production and market development of seaweed farming be enhanced judging from its good performanceas outlined in national BFAR statistics. It was further noted that there was an outward shift by fishermen totour boat operation, with those interviewed affirming that income proceeds were better than in traditional
fishing. This observation is perhaps supported by Panayotou and Panayotou (1996), which notes that whereas
shifting in and out of fishing exists, the trend is lower when compared to shifts in non-fishing occupations. In
addition, they assert that movement of labor away from fishing is greater that movement into it, and attribute
this outward migration to favorable economic incentives. To prevent an influx of boat operators leading tomarket saturation, it is proposed that the local government’s Tourism Department explore other creative
tourism livelihoods, such as promotion of a year-round tourism fishing package. This would be a joint
collaborative effort between local fishing communities and the local government with the support of
stakeholders.

5.5 Conclusion
This research sought to investigate the effects of tourism on fisherman income in the Municipality ofCoron. In carrying out the research, the team was guided by two research questions that focused on fisherman
income prospects within the local fish value chain, as well as income sources during lean months and further
occasioned by seasonality in tourist numbers. In an effort to address these questions, the research made use of
concurrent mixed methodology through the use of interviews and survey questionnaires to targeted
respondents. Results revealed a growing disconnect between the fisherman’s role in the fish value chain andrevenue distribution. It also revealed that alternative income prospects were not as promising and that moreneeded to be done so as to ensure stability in his income stream.
It is therefore worth noting that to ensure better income prospects for fishermen while guarding against
overfishing, increasing the value of the fish caught as opposed to stock quantity is crucial. This can only berealized through effective ecosystem management by all stakeholders. The effective management of marine
water resources is important. In addition, the fishermen’s capacity must be built through strengthened
associations which grant them better negotiation and a larger stake in Coron’s thriving fish industry.
Finally, proposed recommendations are solely based on observations and findings carried out during the
research. These proposals represent the research teams’ assessment of some challenges facing the sector(within the scope of the research), and suggests interventions to improve income livelihood prospects for local
fisherman.
40

References
Bailey, C & Jentoft, S. (1990). Hard Choices in Fisheries Development. Marine Policy, 333-334.
Béne ́, C. (2003). When fishery rhymes with poverty, a first step beyond the old paradigm on poverty in smallscale fisheries. World Development, 31(6), 949-975.
Béné, C., Macfadyen, G. & Allison, H. (2007). Increasing the contribution of small-scale fisheries to poverty
alleviation and food security. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Department of Agriculture (2013). Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources. Manila, Philippines.
Municipal Government of Coron, Comprehensive Development Plan Municipal Government of Coron. (20142024). Palawan Province, Philippines.
Ellis, F. (1998). Household strategies and rural livelihood diversification. Journal of Development Studies;35(1), 1-38.
Gordon, H. (1954). The economic theory of a common property resource: the fishery. Journal of Political
Economy; 62,124-142.
Jacinto, E. & S. Pomeroy. (2011). Chapter 9: Developing markets for small-scale fisheries: utilizing the value
chain approach. In Pomeroy, R.S. and N. Andrew (Eds.) Small-scale fisheries management: frameworks
and approaches for the developing world (160-177). CABI Publishing, Oxfordshire, UK and Cambridge.
MA, USA.
Jazairy, I., Alamgir, M. & Panuccio, T. (1992). The State of World Rural Poverty: An Inquiry into Its Causes
and Consequences, New York: New York University Press for IFAD.
Kaplinsky, R. & Morris M. (2003). A handbook for value chain research. IDRC-International Development
Research Center. Ottawa. Canada.
Kasperski, S., & Holland, D. S. (2013). Income diversification and risk for fishermen. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, 110(6), 2076-2081.
Macfadyen, G & Corcoran, E. (2002). Literature review of studies on poverty in fishing communities and of
lessons learned in using the sustainable livelihoods approach in poverty alleviation strategies andprojects. FAO. Rome.
Olale, E., & Henson, S. (2012). Determinants of income diversification among fishing communities in Western
Kenya. Fisheries Research, 125, 235-242.
Palawan Council for Sustainable Development and Palawan State University. (2009). Palawan Live Reef Fish
for Food Trade: Sustainability Draft Plan 2009–2013. Palawan Province. Philippines.

41

Panayotou T, Panayotou D. (1986). Occupational and geographical mobility in and out of Thai fisheries. FAOFish Technical Paper Issue Number 271. FAO. Rome. Italy.
Risso, W. & Brida J. (2009). The Contribution of Tourism to Economic Growth: An Empirical Analysis for
the Case of Chile. European Journal of Tourism Research, 2(2), 178-185.
Seetanah, B. (2011). Assessing the Dynamic Economic Impact of Tourism for Island Economies. Annals of
Tourism Research, 38(1), 291-308.

42

Working Group 2

Tourism and GovernanceTagbanua People’s Participation in Tourism Development in Coron

Group Members:
Natsumi Yoshida**
Razel Andrea Navalta*
Luiza Nakamura
Aunthicha Jirathawornlerk
Marjorie ResuelloGroup Advisors:
Associate Professor Isamu Okada
Associate Professor. Javier Aser** Group Leader* Sub-leader

43

Table of Contents
1. Introduction
1.1 Coron Island
1.2 IPRA Law in the Philippines
1.3 Tagbanuaon Coron Island
1.4 Tourism development on Coron Island
1.5 Governance and tourism in the Philippines
2. Objectives and Significance of the Study
3. Methodology and Limitations
3.1 Methodology
3.2 Limitation
4. Literature Review
4.1 Governance and Participation
4.2 Indigenous people's rights and tourism development

4.2.1 The characteristics of indigenous tourism
4.2.2 The basic rights of indigenous people and tourism development
5. Findings
5.1 Stakeholder Identification
5.1.1 National Government
5.1.2 Local Government Units (“LGU”)
5.1.3 Investors
5.1.4 NGOs
5.1.5 Tagbanua Community
5.2 Social Network Analysis
5.3 Stakeholder Analysis
5.3.1 Protect
5.3.2 Partnership5.3.3 Awareness
5.3.4 Monitor
5.4 Discussion
6. Conclusion and Recommendations
6.1 Conclusion
6.2 Recommendations
Acknowledgement
Reference44

1. Introduction
1.1 Coron Island
Coron Island is about 170 nautical miles southwest of Manila and it is part of the larger Municipality ofCoron. The island is composed of two villages, which are Banuang Daan and Cabugao, and the majority ofthe population on the island is Tagbanua. It is a part of the ancestral domain of the indigenous Tagbanua people
and it covers both land and water around the island. In 1967, Coron Island was first declared as national reserve,
and as a Tourist Zone and Marine Reserve later in 1978. Coron Island was included in the priority protectedareas under both the National Integrated Protected Areas Program and Strategic Environmental Plan.

1.2 IPRA Law in the Philippines
Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act of 1997 (hereafter IPRA) was enshrined in the Philippine Constitution inorder to be the fundamental basis for the rights of indigenous peoples in the Philippines. The law gives theprotection to indigenous peoples’ rights in the use of natural resources in their ancestral domain. The mostimportant issue emerging from IPRA is the recognition of the property rights of indigenous peoples over theirancestral domains and ancestral lands. Such ownership is in the form of a Certificate of Ancestral Domain
Title (CADT) (Mayo-Anda, Cagatulla, & La Viňa, 2006). Tagbanua have to first claim the land to be ancestral
domain, and once it is approved, then the Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim (CADC) is approved to beconverted to CADT by the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP). To convert CADC into a
Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title is another challenge for the Tagbanua. Furthermore, IPRA grants power
to the traditional tribal council, which is composed of the tribal chief, council members and spiritual advisors,in order to draft policies on natural resource use and development plans in the ancestral domain autonomously
in each area.

1.3 Tagbanua on Coron Island
Tagbanua are known as indigenous people of the Calamianes, and live on Coron Island as well as otherrural areas of the municipality (Fabinyi, 2011). In 1992, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources(DENR) gave an administrative order which awarded a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim (CADC). By
1998, the Tagbanua of Coron Island were awarded a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title (CADT) over morethan 22,000 hectares of land and sea by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (Corrigan &Granziera, 2010). CADT is the title to the land and the sea that have sustained the communities for centuries.
It gives the Tagbanua indigenous people the right to manage the area and preserve its rich marine and land45

resources (Tomeldan 2009).The majority of people still rely on traditional livelihoods such as fishing, seaweedfarming and seashell catching.

1.4 Tourism development on Coron Island
The Municipality of Coron, in general, is being promoted by both provincial and national governments
as a new tourist destination of the Philippines (Fabinyi, 2011). Coron Island, being the largest island in the
Municipality of Coron, and as home to Kayangan Lake, lagoons, rich Tagbanua culture and limestone cliffs,
it now attracts many tourists from both inside and outside the Philippines. While a popular tourism destination
with an increasing number of tourists, Coron Island is also a major natural resource protected area, and as of2012, Coron Island accepts only 1000 tourists a day. Lakes, which are ancestral domain, are considered sacredby Tagbanua, and among many lakes found on the island, only two of them are open to tourists, namely
Kayangan and Luluyuwan, with both lakes being awarded as cleanest lake in the Philippines. Also, beaches
are restricted to tourists and only seven out of thirty three existing beaches are open for visitors.

1.5 Governance and tourism in the Philippines
The Philippines completed its first national tourism master plan, called the 1991-2010 Tourism Master
Plan (TMP), in 1991 as the framework and guide of the Department of Tourism (DOT) for the sustained
development and expansion of the tourism industry throughout the Philippines. The code (Section 17) gives
Local Government Unit’s (LGUs) responsibility for basic services and facilities that include tourism
development and promotion programs, tourism facilities and other tourist attractions, including the acquisitionof equipment, regulation and supervision of business concessions, and security services for such facilities.
LGUs, as a corporate entity (Section 15) are also vested corporate powers with full autonomy (Dualresponsibilities of LGU).

2. Objectives and Significance of the Study
The objective of this research is to find out the dynamic of the relationship among different stakeholders
in tourism development in Coron Island. Among the identified stakeholders, we decided to focus on how such
relationship affects the participation of Tagbanua people; since they are the proprietors of the most visited
TDAs in the municipality of Coron and thus are subjected to diverse effects of the changes brought about by
tourism. In addition to the relationship of stakeholders, we will look at the possible ways in which Tagbanua
people can currently participate in tourism development with regard to legal aspects, and also see if those46

relationships and legal aspects lead to different knowledge and attitude among different stakeholders toward
Tagbanua participation in tourism development.
The research on tourism and governance is very significant, due to the great potential of tourism on Coron
Island. We believe that governance issues play a major role in the development of the locality, and aparticipatory approach for all stakeholders in the tourism development plan is necessary for comprehensive
development of the island as a whole. The capability of coordinating and managing tourism development while
comprehensively involving all stakeholders in the tourism plan can propel the long-term success ofdevelopment in the area. Therefore, this study aims to provide significant insights on the governance of tourism
development on Coron Island.
In particular, the participation of the Tagbanua in tourism development in Coron Island is of special
significance, since it highlights the challenges that arise with the boom of tourism in protected areas.
Considering the remaining poverty and vulnerability of the Tagbanua, despite increasing revenues from
Tourism in the area, we believe that understanding their participation is crucial for identifying the gaps between
tourism development and better living conditions in Coron Island and, thus, find alternative ways forchanneling tourism development for poverty alleviation and increased well being.
In the academic field, we would like to contribute to the theoretical debate regarding Indigenous People’s
participation in tourism development, drawing lessons from both critics of the impacts of the tourism industry
and enthusiasts of the potential of tourism to improve the livelihoods of Indigenous Peoples and the community
in general.

3. Methodology and Limitations
3.1 Methodology
The objective of this paper is to assess the participation and involvement of Tagbanua people in thedevelopment of tourism on Coron Island. In order to do so, the researchers conducted semi-structured
interviews with different stakeholders.
Due to time limitations, only 18 in-depth interviews were conducted. Our interviewees were composedof officers from the administrative and legislative department of the Coron Local Government Unit (LGU),
NCIP, an investor, NGOs, members of the Council of Elders of the Tagbanua and individual community
members from two barangays. The complete list of the interviewees can be seen in Appendix 1. Theinterviewees were reached through a contact person who was working in the Coron LGU.

47

The researchers categorized the main components of analysis to answer the three variables from theobjective. The interviews were analyzed qualitatively through the combination of the Logical Framework
Approach (LFA) (Stakeholders Analysis [SA] and Problem Analysis) and Social Network Analysis (SNA)
methods.
LFA is an analytical and management tool that was developed in the 1960s by the US Agency ofInternational Development to improve the planning, monitoring and evaluation of their projects overseas. The
LFA has been an integral part of participatory projects, especially in its consideration of the roles that different
stakeholders play in the success of projects (European Integration Office, 2011).
Two LFA methods were used in this paper. First, the stakeholder analysis was used specifically to identify
the major stakeholders, assess their influence on the current situation, and evaluate their level of importancein promoting the participation of Tagbanua people in tourism development in Coron.
However, stakeholder analysis often takes for granted the effects of communication or social networks inunderstanding stakeholder relationships (Prell, Hubacek & Reed, 2009). To fill this gap, we used Social
Network Analysis. We analyzed the social networks by using a map of relationship indicators to see theexisting structural pattern among the stakeholders.
The Problem Analysis, on the other hand, was used to identify the current problems and constraints in theparticipation of the Tagbanua people in tourism development. Through the identification of the root causes
and the effects of the problem, the researchers were able to find opportunities that were used to resolve issues
that hinder the building of a harmonious relationship between all the stakeholders in managing tourism
development in Coron.
The interview data was triangulated with the secondary data that were collected, such as books, journals,
government reports, statistical data, development plans, project plans, and so forth.

3.2 Limitation
Due to time constraints, we were only able to visit two Tagbanua communities. Therefore, we decided tobase our analysis on the data that we got from the villages of Banuang Daan and Lajala. Most of the households
we interviewed were located near the shore, since they were the most accessible. Furthermore, although we
recognize that the fieldwork scope was mainly these two Tagbanua villages and that other villages might havedifferent experiences with regard to tourism development, we would like to extend our recommendations to
the whole municipality of Coron.

48

In addition, we think that since we were introduced as guests of the Coron LGU doing academic researchon the area, opinions and perceptions of the respondents might not be free of bias.

4. Literature Review
4.1 Governance and Participation
The relationship between development and participation might seem a given in project formulation
nowadays due to the mainstreaming of the concept; however, it was relatively recently that development
studies and practice shifted towards local participation and empowerment. Parallel to the incorporation of civilsociety as a main actor in development, terms such as stakeholders and local governance emerged. This socalled new paradigm has argued for an agenda of more localized, empirically based and inductive approaches
to development that can be materialized in, for example, the implementation of Participatory Poverty
Assessments, an increasing valorization of local knowledge, and the need for locally-determined development.
Though there is no consensus over the definition of participation the term can be simply defined as
granting influence over decisions to those groups or individuals affected by those decisions. The concept ofparticipation emerged alongside with democratization processes that happened throughout the world during
the 1960s and has become widely used in a series of different governance fields such as education and urban
planning, as well as tourism development.
While most development projects, both national and international, now use the jargon of participation in
their planning and monitoring systems, some scholars argue that solely listening to communities and thegeneral public’s views at hearings is insufficient to comply with the definition of participation. In this sense,
actual participation only occurs when these views are incorporated in the decision itself, in other words, when
they directly affect decision-making.
Beyond its wide acceptance as a requirement for good governance and for bottom-up approaches toproject cycle planning, management and monitoring, participation is an crucial issue particularly whendifferent groups of citizens start to demand increasing shares of power to affect decision-making in government
decisions, normally accompanied by claims of inequitable or unjust distribution of such power.
Discussing participation in decision-making within the context of governance is especially needed in thefield of tourism development, as according to Johnston (2013) with tourism governments tend to be morecaught up in the industry than in other fields of the global economy, with major state investments and tax
incentives making it difficult to differentiate between the scopes of action of the private and public sectors.

49Within the context of tourism development the participatory approach framework emerged alongsideissues of collaborative planning, eco-tourism, and community-based tourism initiatives starting from the mid1980s. According to Bramwell& Lane (1993), broad stakeholder involvement in tourism planning can lead todeeper consideration of social-economic and political issues that come with becoming a tourist destination
area. In this sense, the use of participatory approaches and stakeholder engagement are often recognized as
essential features for sustainable tourism. At the same time, participation itself can be a driving force forincreased independence and awareness of community issues, by building capacities and balancing competinginterests, as well as feelings of shared responsibility (Warner, 1997).
Participation is broadly included in tourism development through the concept of collaborative planning.
This term usually refers to a direct dialogue between participating stakeholders, aiming to generate
negotiations that enable shared decision-making and the building of consensus regarding tourism objectives
and strategies (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999).

Nevertheless, as in many other fields of development,

participation in tourism planning can often be instrumentalized for confirmation and legitimacy purposes,
when it is limited to gathering information and one-way consultation processes.
While initially most research on participatory approaches to tourism development tended to focus on theimpacts of tourism on environmental and cultural conservation, the concept of pro-poor tourism emerged as aperspective that prioritizes tourism effects on the livelihoods of the most socio-economically vulnerable,
focusing on how pro-poor strategies can increase the contribution of tourism to poverty reduction. This focus
on responding to unequal economic gains and distribution of tourism profits generally happens through the
integration of local communities in the planning process, and thus tries to incorporate indigenous communities
not as resources for exploitation or obstacles to development goals, but as the main end behind tourism
development (Ashley and Roe, 2002).
On the other hand, critiques of participatory tourism planning processes call attention to the possibility ofreinforcing pre-existing power structures within communities and, thus, reinforcing alienation as well as
creating further conflict through social disintegration when networks of interaction are not established(Koutsouris, 2009).
Taking into consideration assessments of participatory tourism planning initiatives, one fundamental
aspect in making successful participatory plans seems to be trust, particularly in the process of decision making.
Institutional trust, as the extent to which each stakeholder, and governments in particular, can be relied on
based on previous experiences, plays a major role in effective participatory tourism development (Nunkoo and50Ramkissoon, 2011). This notion arises as a special concern within the case of the Tagbanua’s participation intourism development in Corón Island, as shall be discussed further in the findings of our research.
As the brief overview of the application of participatory approaches to tourism development provide
above shows, several scholar have argued for the potential of participatory tourism, in particular for thenecessity of effective involvement at an early stage in the decision-making process, allowing in this way forthe possibility of denying further tourism development as a whole. Accordingly, the term community
participation seems to incorporate both a new type of development intervention and a theoretical framework
and political standpoint in the field of tourism development.
When it comes to Indigenous Peoples’ right to participation, it is noted that the pressure to carry out
consultation is building across industries, as each country moves to incorporate the ideas of Ancestral Domain
and Free and Prior Informed Consent into their national legal frameworks. Within the scope of tourism
development, the idea of community participation, which includes both power over decision-making andbenefit-sharing, is central, but remains a burdensome requirement to a significant part of the industry (Johnston,2013) .
One of the primary questions with regard to Indigenous Peoples’ participation in tourism development is
who can give consent, as even among Indigenous Peoples there is often great ambiguity regarding identity as
well as internal coordination and representation (Johnston, 2013). Our research attempts to bring further lighton the literature by discussing the issues surrounding the Tagbanua’s internal organization and mechanisms ofrepresentation such as the Tribal Council, as well as trying to draw lessons from the experiences of other
Indigenous Peoples’ participation in tourism development, as shall be further discussed in the following section.

4.2 Indigenous People rights and tourism development
The tourism activities which are related to Indigenous People are significantly different from other types
because there are key challenges about how to have an effective balance between Indigenous People’s rights
and interests in light of tourism development. Therefore, in this section, we will systematically separate thisissue into two aspects: (1) the characteristics of indigenous tourism and (2) the basic rights of Indigenous
Peoples.

4.2.1 The characteristics of indigenous tourism
The distinctiveness of Indigenous Peoples’ inheritance of land and culture is being in the on-going trendof tourism activities for other people who would like to experience intriguingly inherited natural resources and51

culture from unique native people in various areas in the world. Hence, it is vital to find the uniquecharacteristics of indigenous tourism in light of the relation between Indigenous People and tourism
development issues.
In the relation to the meaning of the phrase ‘‘indigenous people’’, there are various ways to explain thecharacteristics of indigenous people. However, there is the interesting elaboration from Hinch (2004) who
describes that basically ‘‘indigenous people’’ refers to nations, communities, and peoples that could mainly
continue their livelihood the same as their historical experience in the period of pre-invasion and precolonialsocieties. Moreover, there is the definition defined in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights ofIndigenous Peoples: A Manual for National Human Rights Institutions by the Asia Pacific Forum of National
Human Rights Institutions (APF) and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights(OHCHR) (2013) which refers to people who:

[C]onsider themselves distinct from other sectors of societies now prevailing in those territories,
or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined topreserve, develop, and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic
identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own
cultural patterns, social institutions and legal systems (p.6).

After defining the meaning of Indigenous People, the next issue which is worth understanding in thiscontext is the concept of indigenous tourism. The indigenous tourism is the type of tourism activities by meansof controlling and serving traditional culture of Indigenous People as well as natural resources in their ancestral
areas that are the core attraction to the tourists who come from outside communities (Hinch, 2004).
Therefore, the inherited tourism spots and traditional culture are the unique characteristics of indigenous
tourism, and these characteristics are significantly related to the basic rights of Indigenous People and tourism
development.

4.2.2The basic rights of Indigenous People and tourism development
The two main types of rights, which consist of (1) the basic rights of Indigenous People in general, and(2) the legal framework of the Philippines, will be stated in this section.
(1) The basic rights of Indigenous People in general52According to Johnston (2003), when Indigenous People are involved in tourism activities, the humanrights and indigenous rights are the discourses that parallel the tourism development issues. On the one hand,
it is necessary to be aware of human rights because the general human rights issues can be connected to tourism
development. In the relation to human rights discourse, there are the following six most relevant tourism
activities involving in the human rights issues: (i) the distorted notion of rights among consumers; (ii)willful
ignorance of consumers; (iii) high demand for affordable travel;(iv) the prevalence of sustainable products;(v) the absence of effective regulation; and(vi) misrepresentation of ecotourism.
On the other hand, when we discuss about the rights of Indigenous People in general, the other issue
besides the human rights is Indigenous People’s rights. In light of Indigenous People rights, there are two
predominant indigenous rights issues, which are self-determination and prior informed consent.

(2) The right of Indigenous People in the legal framework of the Philippines
There are the two main legal instruments which structure the main framework for the rights of Indigenous
People in the Philippines: the Constitution of the Philippines and the Indigenous People’s Right Act.
The Philippine Constitution of 1987
The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines Constitution contains legal provisions which define the state’s
absolute jurisdiction to control natural resources such as fisheries and other coastal resources, as well as pay
attention to the roles of local communities and Indigenous Peoples.
Specifically, Article 12, Section 5 of the constitution states that:

The State, subject to the provisions of this Constitution and national development policies andprograms, shall protect the rights of indigenous cultural communities to their ancestral lands toensure their economic, social, and cultural well-being. The Congress may provide for theapplicability of customary laws governing property rights or relations in determining theownership and extent of ancestral domain.

This article is the foundation of the legal framework to guarantee the rights of Indigenous Peoples in thePhilippines, which means it is the legal safeguard protecting the rights of and giving preferential treatment to
Indigenous People as a necessary measure of social justice and equity.

Indigenous People’s Right Act of 1997
53

The Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act of 1997 (IPRA) is part of the Constitution of the Philippines and thefundamental framework for Indigenous Peoples in the Philippines. The law gives protection to Indigenous
Peoples’ right to use natural resources in their ancestral domain.
The most important issue from IPRA is the recognition of the property rights of Indigenous Peoples overtheir ancestral domains and ancestral lands. Furthermore, IPRA grants power to the traditional tribal council,
which is composed of the tribal chief, council members and spiritual advisers, in order to draft policies onnatural resource use and development plans in the ancestral domain autonomously. The tribal council is able
to implement community rights by traditional tribal justice systems as a signature of their cultural identity andautonomy from the national laws.
The principle of the recognition of the property rights of Indigenous Peoples leads to the legal framework
which grants the Indigenous People the right to refuse or to allow the entry of development projects into theirancestral domain. Thus, the Indigenous People have their own priorities in development issues and conserve
their right to have self-determination and recognition of their cultural integrity.
Basically, before any person is permitted to access resources, the Free and Prior Informed Consent (FPIC)of the community should be granted in accordance with the customary laws in each area. The FPIC is describedin Part 3, Section 3 of the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples Administrative Order No. 1, or the
Implementing Rules and Regulations of IPRA, as follows:

The indigenous cultural communities/indigenous peoples shall, within their communities,
determine for themselves policies, development programs, projects and plans to meet theiridentified priority needs and concerns. The indigenous cultural communities/indigenous peoples
shall have the right to accept or reject a certain development intervention in their particularcommunities.

In conclusion, there are legal frameworks that have expressed the understanding on Indigenous People’s
rights and their needs as well as their interests. Furthermore, the laws mentioned above represent thecommitments to establish the legal frameworks recognizing Indigenous People’ s rights so as to assist them tolive peacefully in their ancestral areas and traditional system of management. To sum up, Tagbanua people arerecognized as Indigenous People under the Philippine Constitution of 1987 and Indigenous Peoples’ Rights
Act of 1997, as well as holding the Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title (CADT).

54

5. Findings
5.1 Stakeholder Identification
In order to analyze the dynamic of the governance within the municipality, it was necessary to identify
the relevant stakeholders in the context of governance and tourism development in the Municipality of Coron.
Therefore, we identified the following main five stakeholders.

5.1.1 National Government
In the Philippines, it is not only the local government unit which has duties to support the municipality,
but also various organizations from the national government which have vital roles to support both the local
government and Indigenous People. With reference to our fieldwork, we recognized that there are many
entities from the national government which take part in the governance and tourism development process.
However, because of time limitation of our research, we could interview representatives from only two national
government entities which act in the municipality to reinforce the indigenous community and local government
units in their objectives. The details of the two national government entities are explained below.

(1) National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (“NCIP”)
With reference to the Indigenous People Rights Act 1997 (RA 8371) (“IPRA”), the NCIP is theorganization which protects and promotes the interests and well-being of Indigenous People.

(2) Department of Interior and Local Government (“DILG”)
With reference to the Local Government Code of the Philippines, the DILG has its own objectives tostrengthen the capacity of local government units and establish a system of coordination and cooperation
among the citizenry, local executives, and the department in order to ensure effective and efficient delivery ofservices to the public.

5.1.2 Local Government Units (“LGU”)
With reference to Book I, Section 15 of the Local Government Code of 1991, the LGU exercises powers
as a political subdivision of the national government and as a corporate entity representing the inhabitants of
its territory. There are two LGU organs which take part in the tourism development process in Coron:- The legislative power has the main functions in legislative purposes in order to promulgate local
laws, rules, and policies to regulate in the municipality.

55

- The executive power has the main functions in administrative purposes in order to implement laws
and rules from the legislative power, as well as manage the local governance system in Coron.
With regard to administration by the LGU in the Tagbanua community, we found that there is the
Barangay unit, which is the smallest unit and plans and implements government policies, plans, programs,
projects and activities in the community.

5.1.3 Investors
With the tourism boom in Coron since the early 2000s, there has been a great deal of investment fromtourism-related enterprises such as hotels, restaurants, and other facilities to support tourists, to enterprises
related to natural resources. In our fieldwork, we had the opportunity to interview a representative from the
Hikari SSP Corporation, which is a foreign investor from Japan that has been running a pearl business basedon the natural resources of Coron Island.

5.1.4 NGOs
In the context of governance, we have to accept that not only the national agencies, local government
unit, and investors are important stakeholders, but also the NGOs that have been reinforcing the livelihood of
Indigenous People are also vital for tourism development. NGOs are supposed to be the stakeholders who
reinforce the cooperation between Indigenous People and national agencies as well as the local government
unit in order to have inclusive development of the governance system in the Coron community.
During the fieldwork, we had the opportunity to interview the a representative from Coron Initiative, a
local NGO with the objective of encouraging sustainable development and tourism facilitation for Coron and
the Calamianes Islands’ businesses, agencies, non-governmental and non-profit organizations, small andmedium enterprises (SME’s), and the Calamianes Islands community.

5.1.5 Tagbanua Community
The Tagbanua community is the essential stakeholder, and we found that there are three main organs
related to decision-making processes and tourism development on Coron Island:(1) The Council of Elders
With reference to the IPRA and customary law of the Tagbanua people, the council of elder is the cultural
leadership system that leads the community of Tagbanua people, mainly in making decisions about matterswhich are important to their community.
56

(2) Tagbanua Tribe of Coron Island Association (“TTCIA”)
TTCIA is the association which was founded by the Tagbanua people in order to work on the managementof the ancestral domain and tourism management in the tourism destination areas on Coron Island. It hasvarious duties, such as finance, security, and marketing.
(3) Federation of CalamianesTagbanua Indigenous People (Saragpunta).
Saragpunta is one of the stakeholders which assists the Tagbanua people to develop their own livelihood.
The difference between Saragpunta and other assisting stakeholders is Saragpunta was founded by Tagbanua
people themselves and consists of representatives from each group of Tagbanua. The main role of Saragpunta
is as the broker and support agency for the socio-economic needs of the local member organizations.

5.2. Social Network Analysis
Following the identification of the main stakeholders directly or indirectly involved in the Tagbanua
People’s participation in tourism development in Coron and their respective mandating laws and institutionalroles, we felt the need to systematically understand how these stakeholders interact with each other, taking
into account their knowledge of applicable laws and regulations, attitudes towards each other, and perceptions
on the nature of their current relationship. The diagrammatic representation of this relationship is presented in
the Social Network Analysis below.

Figure 1 Social Network Analysis

Source: Created by the authors

57

Through the application of the simplest form of social network analysis we mapped out the ties ofinteraction from the perspective of the Tagbanua individual, considering not only his/her centrality to our
research focus, but also the importance of reaching those in the most vulnerable positions, generally excluded
from representation even within their own communities. Each one of the nodes (balloons) represents an
individual or organization, connected by ties of interdependency that signify socially meaningful relations(Prell, Hubacek& Reed, 2009). The width of the arrows indicates the strength of the tie between stakeholders,
based on the frequency of their interaction and intensity of the relationship. On the other hand, the distance
between the nodes and their positioning indicates the closeness of the relationship both in terms of intimacy
and trust.
From our fieldwork analysis we could observe that the Tagbanua individual has a close and strong tie to
the Council of Elders, since this is their indigenous political structure. This manifests itself in the direct
consultation with the elders for solving issues within the community, reliance on them for communicating
concerns about the management of the ancestral domain, and in theory being the first ones to be informed
whenever people from the community have problems regarding tourism. The council of elders seems to havea high degree of centrality, holding strong ties also to the National Commission for Indigenous Peoples (NCIP),
the Barangay, and the Tagbanua Tribe of Coron Island Association (TTCIA).
When it comes to information sharing, particularly concerning matters of Ancestral Domain and grantingof Free and Prior Informed Consent, there seems to be no direct connection between NCIP and the individualTagbanua, giving that most were unable to recognize the organization’s roles in the community and claimed
to get their information only through meetings conducted by the elders. Other organizations, such as
developmental NGOs engaging in reconstruction work, particularly after Typhoon Hayan, seem to have acloser relationship to the Tagbanua individuals, often being mentioned as carrying out projects in the area,such as Cordaid, for example. In this sense, the Council of Elders acts as an intermediary connector between
the community and NCIP, which have no direct connection to each other.
As for the relationship between the Council of Elders and the Barangay officials, our observations showed
that, although they are in frequent contact and closely related through their belonging to the same small
community, there is clearly a conflict over overlapping jurisdictions and responsibilities of the two decision–
making bodies. Barangay officials do not feel represented either by the elders or TTCIA and feel like theirauthority is not recognized within the community, since issues of higher complexity tend to be handled by theCouncil of Elders, even when falling within the legal scope of the Barangay. According to the statements of
the Banuang Daan Barangay officials, it was only after the Hayan Hurricane, with the visit from a national58

officer, that they recognized their legal entitlement to be “on the same level” as the Council of Elders. Such acomplex relationship is a direct reflection of the overlapping of the IPRA Law and the Local Government Unit
code.
Similarly, despite the closeness of the relationship and strong ties between the Council of Elders and the
TTCIA, this proximity is not reflected in transparency in information sharing nor in the power of the council
over matters in tourist destination areas. This is a paradox, considering that TTCIA’s Board of Trustees andemployees are appointed by the Council of Elders. Even though TTCIA members claim that the highest
authority for decision-making in tourism matters lies with the elders, there is a great disconnect between their
guidelines and the actions carried out in issues such as the limit of tourist’s arrivals per day to Kayagnan Lakeand the closing time of the ancestral domain. On the same note, there is a gap between the information provided
by the elders and TTCIA on the share of the earnings that is assigned to the elders.
Considering that actors sharing strong ties are more likely to influence one another (Wellman and Frank2001), the Council of Elders is placed in an strategic position for influencing participation within the Tagbanua
community, since they share strong ties with four stakeholders and work as a bridge between the individualTagbanua and NCIP.
The Local Government Unit is placed closely to the investors, given that the municipality’s main policy
priorities for tourism development consist of making Coron a business-friendly town and meeting international
standards for the further attraction of investments. This proximity reflects the level of influence of businessover tourism development, since actors who are closer to each other may be able to exert more power thanthose who are distant (Prell, Hubacek& Reed, 2009).
On the other hand, there is no direct tie between the LGU and the Tagbanua individual, and theirinteraction relies on weak ties between the individuals and the Barangay representatives, and the Barangay
representatives and the LGU. These weak ties can be considered one of the reasons behind the difficulties incommunication of complex information and lack of trust in one another (Bodin, Crona and Ernstson, 2006).
What is more, taking into account the importance of the distance among actors as a macro-characteristic of the
network (Bodin, Cronaand Ernstson, 2006), the distance between the LGU and a great part of the network(situated on the right side of the figure), is an indicator of the lack of channels for Tagbanua participation intourism development. According to the Introduction to Social Network Methods textbook (Retrieved fromhttp://faculty.ucr.edu/~hanneman/nettext/C7_Connection.html) large

distances may lead to slower

information sharing and higher costs of conducting exchanges between stakeholders.

59

We chose to represent the relationship between the LGU and NCIP with the justice symbol, since this tie
is characterized by the judicialization of the connection among the two government bodies in the Municipalityof Coron. There have been a series of misunderstandings between the two bodies, both over the legitimacy ofthe mandatory indigenous people’s representative, since the elected representative has not been recognized by
the Legislative, as well as matters of jurisdiction in Ancestral domains, where there seems to be no clear
understanding over the limits of the Municipality authority, particularly on what concerns taxation. It can beargued that this conflictive relationship is a consequence of the absence of strong ties between the two
stakeholders that has gradually eroded into antagonistic attitudes.
We believe that by focusing on the structure of the ties between stakeholders, instead of understanding
them as discrete units of analysis (GTZ, 2007), we are able to see the role this structure plays in shaping theway Tagbanua People participate in tourism development on Coron Island. The application of the Social
Network Analysis theoretical framework helps to uncover conflicts of interest, such as the one between the
LGU and NCIP, as well as exposing hidden connections in order to better visualize patterns of interaction
among stakeholders (GTZ, 2007).
The given indicators presented in this section help to identify key actors and provide systematic
information on relevant stakeholders, providing necessary preliminary data on the effects of communicationand social network in understanding stakeholder analysis. The following section builds from those findings toapply the stakeholder analysis framework to the governance of tourism development in the Municipality ofCoron.

5.3 Stakeholder Analysis
The stakeholder analysis reflects characteristics of each stakeholder, which consists of individuals, groups,
and organizations. In order to have the effective analysis which is based on the practical method, we would
apply the global framework of the Importance/Influence Matrix defined by the Department for International
Development (DFID), the Government of the United Kingdom to our stakeholder analysis. According to theTools for Development by DFID (2003), there is the way to explain the stakeholder analysis by the frameworkof the Importance/Influence Matrix by grouping each stakeholder regarding the degree of its importance andinfluence.
In order to apply the meaning of Importance/Influence Matrix based on DFID’s global framework to thisresearch, we would identify the meaning of the importance and influence by the following two points:

60

First of all, “importance” means the recognition of the great value of indigenous participation in tourism
development among other stakeholders in relation to the social network analysis. In addition, “influence”
means the degree of each stakeholder’s outreach in decision-making processes among other stakeholders(DFID, 2003).
Furthermore, in the light of the practical solutions, there is the integrated scheme relating to thestakeholder analysis by Asian Project Management Support Programme (APMAS) which applies theImportance/Influence Matrix to be four categories of the practical solutions which are protect; partnership;
awareness; and monitor (APMAS, 2010).
Therefore, we consider that stakeholder analysis is necessary to our research not only for understanding
the current situation, but also to make suitable recommendations to each stakeholder. The objective of
stakeholder analysis is to propose well-rounded and appropriate solutions to each of stakeholder as well as theissues they should pay most attention to (Golder & Gawler, 2005).
The diagram below shows the stakeholder analysis which can be used to generate knowledge about
relevant actors in order to understand their behaviour, intensions, interrelations, agendas, and interests, which
illustrate the importance and influence of each stakeholder in the Coron community (DFID, 2003, Brugha &Varvasovszky, 2000).

Figure 2 Stakeholder Analysis

Source: Created by the authors.

61

According to the diagram, there are two perspectives for stakeholder analysis. On the one hand, thevertical aspect is the importance perspective of the stakeholder, and on the other hand, the horizontal aspect is
the influence of the stakeholder. With reference to our fieldwork, we found that there are ten relevant
stakeholders in the tourism development on Coron Island which could be grouped by considering the degreeof importance and influence in order to find the explicit solutions in the following four categories: protect;partnership; awareness; and monitor.

5.3.1 Protect
We submit that there are the three following stakeholders who are supposed to be protected in the Coron
community.
First, individual Tagbanua people on Coron Island are the most important stakeholder in this context
because they are the most disempowered group of people among the stakeholders. They are the least influential
stakeholders compared to others in the Coron community because they are individuals who cannot take partin the decision-making processes nor have much impact on others. Therefore, we propose that the individualTagbanua are the stakeholders who are supposed to be the most protected by other stakeholders.
Second, Saragpunta, which is the organization representing the group of Tagbanua people, is the second
most important stakeholder because it is the support agency for the socio-economic needs of the local
Tagbanua members from each village. Nevertheless, according to Saragpunta’s website (2015), there are fiveentities which Saragpunta cooperates with: (1) Green and Purple Sanctuary; (2) Attorney Josefina Rodriguez;(3) Peace & Equity Foundation; (4) Lian J Graphics and Printing; and (5) NCIP. Therefore, from our pointof view, Saragpuntahas less influence than other stakeholders because it has a limited network compared toother stakeholders, especially the LGU.
Lastly, the Council of Elders is the third most important stakeholder from the reason that it is theindigenous political structure which consists of adult members in the community who take part in the decisionmaking process by the power of customary law. Therefore, in our opinion, we would recognize the Council ofElders as an important stakeholder which is directly relevant to the decision-making process for the Indigenous
People on Coron Island. Although the Council of Elders is an important structure inside the indigenous
community, it does not have much influence on other stakeholders outside the community.

5.3.2 Partnership

62For partnership, we aver that there are the following three stakeholders which are supposed to havepartnership with one another in order to strengthen cooperation in tourism development on Coron Island.
First, the TTCIA is the organization founded by Tagbanua people in order to manage tourism
development in the tourism destinations. Therefore, we argue that the TTCIA is an important stakeholder. At
the same time, it has more influence than individual Tagbanua people, Saragpunta, and the Council of Elders
because it takes part in the decision-making process of tourism development on Coron Island and this role isrelevant to the interests and well-being of Tagbanua people.
Second, NCIP is the national government agency which assists and supports Tagbanua people to accessthe plans by government to ensure that Tagbanua people can actively participate in development. Thus, in our
opinion, we identify NCIP as another influential stakeholder.
Lastly, we submit that the LGU is the most influential stakeholder in this category because of its role todevelop the municipality as well as the well-being of Tagbanua people by means of planning and developing
the tourism development plan.

5.3.3 AwarenessWe propose there are the two stakeholders which are supposed to have awareness, the Barangay
representatives and tourists.
On one hand, the Barangay is part of the LGU, but we separate it in order to show that this entity is lessinfluential than other units in the LGU. However, the Barangay representation is important as it is the structureof the LGU closest to the Tagbanua community. Therefore, we state that the Barangay has a high level ofimportance, but it has less influence than other stakeholders in decision-making processes.
On the other hand, tourists, even if they are one of the important factors of tourism development throughspending money to travel to the tourism destinations on Coron Island, are not high on the level of importanceor influence in the decision–making process. Therefore, we assert that tourists are the group of people who aresupposed to be recognized by other stakeholders.

5.3.4 Monitor
There are two stakeholders in this category, investors and NGOs, which should be monitored in order tohave balance in the tourism development of Coron Island.
On one hand, investors are the second-most influential of the stakeholders on Coron Island because they
have been having an impact on other stakeholders through their investments. Nevertheless, in our point of63

view, we think that investors are the least important of all of the stakeholders from the perspective of theirimportance in decision-making processes. However, it is necessary to monitor investment in order to keep abalance in the benefit-sharing among Tagbanua people, LGU, and investors themselves.
On the other hand, in our opinion NGOs are at the level of influential stakeholders which have been
assisting Tagbanua people and cooperating with other stakeholders in order to raise the well-being of Tagbanua
people. Nonetheless, NGOs are not at the level of the priority stakeholders who need reinforcement, such asindividual Tagbanua people, Saragpunta, and the Council of Elders.

5.4 Discussion
Through the application of the Logical Framework Approach in the analysis of the collected data we wereable to identify the main stakeholders involved in the participation of the Tagbanua People in tourism
development in Coron, understand recurring patterns of the social network of participation, and establish
strategies of intervention targeting protection, partnership, awareness and monitoring of the stakeholders.
These findings provide significant insights into the ways Tagbanua People participate in tourism developmentin Coron through the dynamics of participation, as well as the knowledge, attitudes and perceptions ofstakeholders.
First, it can be observed that the dynamics of interaction between the stakeholders with regard toparticipation are characterized by a general distrust and disconnect between significant actors, visible in the
opposing perceptions the Local Government Unit, national institutions, investors, and the Tagbanua
community have of each other. The presence of many weak ties and great distances between the Local
Government Unit and the Tagbanua individual is another example of the mentioned disconnect. The
aforementioned conditions affect the existence of institutional channels, thus limiting the participation of the
Tagbanua people in tourism development.
Second, although the legal apparatus establishes the grounds for participation under IPRA Law throughnecessary procedures of indigenous decision-making, the diverse interpretations of the existing laws,
particularly on the granting of Free Prior and Informed Consent, hinders the presupposed channels forparticipation. This is observable in the conflicting understandings of who grants consent and what are therequired procedures, confirming the concern raised by the literature on tourism and Indigenous Peoples overthe issue of ambiguity with regard to identity, internal coordination and representation (Johnston, 2013).
Finally, there are different levels of knowledge, diverse perceptions and attitudes about Tagbanua
participation in tourism development. The knowledge of how planning for tourism development occurs and64

on the particularities of participation in ancestral domain seem to be highly concentrated in a few people,
namely those directly involved in the management of the Tourist Destination Areas, such as TTCIA, and those
directly involved in legal advising on Ancestral Domain claims, such as NCIP and interested NGOS. The
diverse perceptions and attitudes can be observed both in terms of the negative perceptions of the intentionsof different stakeholders towards tourism development and in contrasting expectations of the ultimate goals
and paths of tourism development in the region.
It can be concluded from the three statements presented above that the conflictive relationship among thestakeholders in tourism development planning on Coron Island leads to the Tagbanua peoples’ limited
participation in the decision-making process. Still, further study on the level of participation should be
conducted, so that participation of indigenous people in tourism development can be fully understood andmaximized.

6. Conclusion and Recommendations
6.1 Conclusion
In conclusion, regarding the initial hypothesis we made, stakeholders involved in the tourism
development of Coron Island each have different interests, and Tagbanua people, with less financial influence
over the decision making of both investors and the LGU, tend to have a lower participation level than otherstakeholders. Although there is a relationship among those stakeholders with regard to the participation of
Tagbanua that gives each stakeholder a different role in considering participation, there also seems to be somedisconnect between different stakeholders, which hinders them from coordinating with each other effectively.
There are legal frameworks and regulations at both the local and national level which promote theparticipation of Tagbanua in tourism development in various ways. However, the different level of knowledgeof each stakeholder is currently resulting in inefficiency and underutilization of those legal frameworks andregulations. Also, we discovered that stakeholders have different attitudes and perceptions towards
participation of Tagbanua in tourism development, and current policies and tourism plans are not in accordancewith the diversified interests of those stakeholders.

6.2 Recommendations
The goal of the Overseas Fieldwork Course was not only to introduce students to the academic aspect offieldwork research, but also to give students the experience of being development practitioners. Therefore, we65were tasked to think of possible recommendations and projects that can improve policies with regards totourism.
For the governance group, we used the Problem Analysis of the Logical Framework Approach inanalyzing the current situation and issues in the participation of Tagbanua people in the tourism developmentof Coron Island. The problem analysis is carried out to deeply analyze the causes and effects of the focal
problem before identifying the objectives that can be targeted in providing policy recommendations andprojects. This is usually done through mapping a problem tree (European Integration Office, 2004), as seen in
figure 1. The problem was identified beforehand in the preliminary research, and was triangulated with theinterviews that were conducted with all the stakeholders (See 5.1 Stakeholder Identification) and secondary
data that were collected while in the field. As written on the trunk of the tree in figure 3, the focal problem

Figure 3 Problem Tree/ Problem Analysis

Source: Created by the authors.

was established as the limited participation of the Tagbanua people in tourism development. The causes, on
the other hand, were written on the roots. These were then analyzed to find out the reasons underlying the focal
problem. From the causes, we identified the impacts that became the branches of the tree. The impacts
demonstrate the visible consequences of the root causes. Addressing the root causes of the problem willcorrespond to the relevant activities that will be recommended, while the impacts substantiate the need for
implementing such projects.
Accordingly, we were able to observe five visible impacts that demonstrate the limited participation of
the Tagbanua people in tourism development. Expounding on this, we looked at why or in which context these
impacts exist.
66

(1) There is no unified direction for tourism development.
The tourist influx in Coron was described as something that “just happened” by most of our intervieweesfrom different stakeholder groups. Tourists started increasing significantly after Kayangan Lake won the“Cleanest and Greenest Inland Lake” award given by the Department of the Interior and Local Government
for three consecutive years from 1997 to 1999 (COA, 2012). Although there is a National Tourism
Development Plan drafted every administrative term, municipalities in the Philippines are mandated to design
their own tourism development plan. For the municipality of Coron, they are still in the process of doing one.
Currently, they are relying on a Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) commissioned study from1995 to 1997 on the Northern Palawan Sustainable Tourism Development Plan (JICA, 2011).
The lack of unified plan for tourism development is deemed as the reason for the diverse strategies andplans that each stakeholder adopts in engaging with tourism-related opportunities.

(2) Delay in the implementation of Community Development and Tourism Projects
For implementation of any project in an area claimed to be an Ancestral Domain, FPIC has to be obtained.
However, since the guidelines for obtaining FPIC are still unclear, it causes a delay in the implementation ofprojects. The overlapping mandates of the existing laws have made the implementation of such rules andregulations ambiguous. Currently, it is also apparent that there is a lack of coordination strategies with regards
to tourism development and implementation of welfare projects in communities, thus furthering the delay.

(3) Adverse Ancestral Domain claims
The Coron LGU claims that most of the 69,2467.14 hectares of the municipality of Coron remain untitled.
This gives an opportunity for many adverse claimants to come to the fore. There are also claims to areas where
there are current non-Tagbanua residents and established businesses, causing friction between the factions thatfrequently leads to legal battles. One example is the case of a hotel on Bulalacao Island, one of the two islands
in Coron that were given a CADT. The business was forced to close down for sometimes following a temporary
restraining order handed down by NCIP. The hotel, on the other hand, was asked to pay 2.5 million pesos for
permission to operate and an annual fee of 500,000 pesos and 2% of gross sales as lease payment for the island(Inquirer.net, 28 March 2014).
Furthermore, the LGU claims that this causes the delay in implementing projects in lands where there are
pending claims, because once claimants are awarded the Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim no projects

67can be implemented in the area until a decision is made. While the lands remain contested, further developmentof the area remains stagnant.

(4) There is an imbalance in the influence of stakeholders
The conflicting interests of all the stakeholders divide them into those who are directly benefiting fromtourism and those who are concerned about cultural and environmental preservation.
Using the social network analysis (see figure 1), we gauged the influence of the current situation of eachstakeholder based on the interview data. From the data, the disparity in the degree of influence is observed.
Currently, the stakeholder that has the most influence in tourism development planning is the LGU.
Furthermore, since their current proposal for tourism development are Public-Private Partnership and investorfriendly policies, we can assume that investors also have a significant influence on the current trajectory of
tourism development in the Municipality of Coron.
The limited participation of the Tagbanua people in tourism development led to their low ranking in termsof their influence. This is mainly because of the lack of representation of the Tagbanua people in the LGU ofCoron. In fact, there is a pending case between the LGU and the NCIP regarding the non-recognition of the
Indigenous Peoples Mandatory Representative (IPMR) by the Legislative Council of Coron LGU. The CoronLGU is questioning the legitimacy of the current IPMR, stating that the IPMR did not undergo the properelection guidelines during the selection process. However, Saragpunta claims that the IPMR has received theCertificate of Affirmation from NCIP, which means that the IPMR has undergone the said process.
In general, the imbalance in influence among the stakeholders reflects the level of participation of eachstakeholder in tourism development.

(5) There is continuing poverty in the Tagbanua community despite increasing revenue from tourism
The main livelihoods of the Tagbanua are fishing, shellfish catching, swift-nest farming, and slash andburn farming. However, most of these cannot be practiced anymore as per wildlife conservation andenvironmental regulations mandated by the Palawan Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD) The
regulations are implemented without follow-up projects for alternative livelihood, leaving the Tagbanua
without a source of income. The delay of implementation of welfare projects in the community further
diminishes their chances for a better quality of life. Moreover, Tagbanua participation in tourism-related
activities was deemed limited. Thus, even with the success of the TDAs that are owned and managed by the68Tagbanua as viable income-generating activities, Tagbanua communities remain poor. This is attributed to theunequal profit sharing occurring in the current system of management of the TDAs.
Considering the issues that were observed, we came up with the following recommendations. The goalof the recommendations is to target the impacts and root causes of the focal problem.
As for the recommendation to all stakeholders involved in tourism development on Coron Island withregard to the participation of Tagbanua, we recommend several solutions. As discussed in the conclusion andproblem tree, the existing relationship among all stakeholders is not resulting in effective coordination due tosome disconnections (distrust) and a lack of unified direction in tourism development, and this will lead toconfusion about the expected achievements. Therefore, it is recommended that there should a “the mastertourism development plan” to unify the direction of all goals regarding tourism development on Coron Island.
In creating the plan, there should first be the establishment of a specialized Indigenous People officecomposed of people from the Tagbanua community, and the holding of reconciliation dialogues between all
stakeholders in order to disseminate information equally to every stakeholder. By disseminating information
equally among all stakeholders, each stakeholder is able to have an influence in decision making regarding
tourism development, and the imbalanced influence of different stakeholders can be mitigated. In addition, themaster plan should not only consider information dissemination, but also the carrying capacity of the islandwith culturally sensitive development plans, alternative livelihoods for the Indigenous People who previously
relied on natural resources such as fishing, seaweed farming and shell catching, and also the existing Ancestral
Domain Sustainable Development and Protection Plan.
As for the delay in implementation of community development projects and also the adverse Ancestral
Domain claims, there should be a “Systematic Guideline for EPIC Implementation” by NCIP to unify theinterpretation of the existing laws and simplify the legal processes within tourism development. Coron Island
itself does not have the issue of adverse ancestral domain due to the fact that the whole island has already been
titled as Ancestral Domain; however, we believe that the guideline will be useful for the purpose of future
development in the Municipality of Coron,
Finally, in order to improve the issue of continuing poverty within the community despite the increase intourism-related income, we recommend the establishment of a self-managed multi-sector institutional structure
for equal profit sharing and improving the well-being and livelihood of the Tagbanua community. The officeshould be managed by IPs, but all sectors of the community, such as elders, barangay representatives andcommunity representatives, should be the part of structure.

69

Figure 4 Stakeholder Targeted Recommendations

Source: Created by the authors.

Each recommendation stated above is targeted at not just one stakeholder, but at all concerned
stakeholders. As we have divided stakeholders into four different categories (protect, partnership, awarenessand monitor, as in figure 3) using stakeholder analysis, each recommendation can be categorized to determine
the responsible stakeholders. The provision of a “municipal tourism development master plan” is useful for allof four purpose and all stakeholders should be involved in the process. Reconciliation dialogues should also
be conducted between and among all stakeholders so that there will be no gap between different stakeholders
in the amount of information they receive. The establishment of a specialized IP office should be done by the
IP themselves for the protection of the IP community, but the partnership group should also be included in theprocess, as they will be coordinating with the office. For information dissemination, it is targeted at the protect,partnership, and awareness groups. Being the actors on the island who will be strongly affected by the arrivalof tourists and investors, it is recommended that they exchange information effectively. In the creation of aguideline for Free and Prior Informed Consent (FPIC),the protect and partnership groups are expected to be
involved in the process, due to their responsibilities and also the rights to determine the consent for theAncestral Domain. Finally, being least influential in the current situation, but most important in theparticipation of Tagbanua people in the tourism development of Coron Island, the Tagbanua community in theprotect group should create a self-managed multi-sector institutional structure, but the partnership groupshould also be involved in the process, especially TTCIA, as it is currently responsible for managing anddistributing the income and resources to the Tagbanua community.

70

Acknowledgement
We would like to show our appreciation to all the people who supported us in conducting this research.
First, to the Tagbanua people, Barangay officials, local government officials, people from Sarag Punta,
and Mr. Argustin from the Hikari company in the Municipality of Coron who patiently answered all of ourquestions for the research. Without support from them, we would have never been able to complete ourresearch.
To the boat drivers, the tricycle drivers, and the van driver who took us to the fields and islands, and to
the staff at Darayonan Lodgewho took a very good care of us during our two weeks stay in Coron.
To Professor Liu Jing, who organized all the field trip to Coron and took care of us before, during andalso after the trip with all necessary documentations and support.
To all professors from Nagoya University who made this research possible.
To Jonathan who supported us in arranging interviews and accompanied us to the interviews.
To all the staff and professors from the University of the Philippines Los Baños who warmly welcomed
us to the Philippines for our research.
Lastly, we would like to thank our supervisors, Professor Okada from Nagoya University, and Dr. Aserfrom the University of Philippines Los Baños who were always patient with us while writing a research
proposal, interviewing, and writing the final paper, and who always trusted us to do this research on our own,
and who always kept our research group warm, fun and supportive of each other.

71

References
Ashley, C., & Roe, D. (2002). Making tourism work for the poor: strategies and challenges in southern
Africa. Development Southern Africa, 19(1), 61-82.
Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions (APF) & the Office of the United Nations
High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) (2013). The United Nations Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous Peoples: A Manual for National Human Rights Institutions. Retrieved fromwebsite: http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/IPeoples/UNDRIPManualForNHRIs.pdf
Asian Project Management Support Programme (APMAS) (2010). Importance-Influence Matrix in
Stakeholder Analysis. Retrieved from website: http://www.apmasnetwork.org/node/80
Bodin, Ö., Crona, B., & Ernstson, H. (2006). Social networks in natural resource management: what is there
to learn from a structural perspective. Ecology and Society, 11(2), 2.
Bramwell, B., & Lane, B. (1993). Sustainable tourism: An evolving global approach. Journal of Sustainable
Tourism, 1(1), 1-5.
Bramwell, B., & Sharman, A. (1999). Collaboration in local tourism policymaking. Annals of tourism research,
26(2), 392-415.
Brugha, R., & Varvasovszky, Z. (2000). Stakeholder analysis: a review. Health policy and planning, 15(3),239-246.
Commission on Audit. (2012). Annual Audit Report. Retrieved from http://www.coa.gov.ph/index.php/localgovernment-units/2012/category/1324-provinces?download=6405:region-iv-b
Corrigan, C., & Granziera, A. (2010). A handbook for the Indigenous and community conserved areas registry:UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge.
Department for International Development (DFID) of Government of the United Kingdom (2003). Tools forDevelopment: A handbook for those engaged in development activity. Retrieved from website
http://www.mspguide.org/sites/default/files/tool/dfid_toolsfordevelopment.pdf
European Integration Office. (2011). Guide to the Logical Framework Approach: A Key Tool for Project
Cycle Management. Retrieved from http://www.evropa.gov.rs/Evropa/Show Document.aspx? Ty
pe=Home&Id=525
Fabinyi, M. (2011). Fishing for fairness: Poverty, morality and marine resource regulation in the Philippines(Vol. 7). ANU E Press.
Golder, B., & Gawler, M. (2005). Cross-cutting tool: Stakeholder analysis. Retrieved fromwww.panda.org/standards/1_1_stakeholder_analysis
72

Gomes, R. C. (2004). Who are the relevant stakeholders to the local government context? Empirical evidenceson environmental influences in the decision-making process of English Local Authorities. BARBrazilian Administration Review, 1(1), 34-52.
GTZ, (2007). Mainstreaming Participation - Multi-stakeholder management: Tools for Stakeholder Analysis:
10 building blocks for designing participatory systems of cooperation. Retrieved fromhttp://www.fsnnetwork.org/sites/default/files/en-svmp-instrumente-akteuersanalyse.pdf

Hinch, T. (2004). Indigenous people and tourism. In A. A. Lew, C. M. Hall, & A. M. Williams(Eds.), A companion to tourism (pp. 246-257). Oxford, England: Blackwell.
Hirtz, F. (2003). It takes modern means to be traditional: On recognizing indigenous cultural communities in
the Philippines. Development and Change, 34(5), 887-914.
Robert, A. H., & Mark, R. (2005). Introduction to Social Network Methods: Chapter 7: Basic. Retrieved fromhttp://faculty.ucr.edu/~hanneman/nettext/C7_Connection.html
Japan International Cooperation Agency. (2011). Ex-Post Evaluation of Japanese ODA Loan Project:
Sustainable environmental conservation project in northern Palawan. Retrieved fromhttp://www2.jica.go.jp/en/evaluation/pdf/2011_PH-P225_4.pdf
Johnston, A. M. (2003). Self-determination: Exercising indigenous rights in tourism. In S. Singh, D. J.

Timothy, & R. K. Dowling (Eds.), Tourism in destination communities (pp. 115-133).
Cambridge, MA: CABI.
Johnston, A. M. (2013). Is the sacred for sale: Tourism and indigenous peoples. London, England:

Earthscan.
LGU,

investors

cry

foul

on

IPRA

implementationin

Coron.

(n.d.).

Retrievedfrom

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/589710/lgu-investors-cry-foul-on-ipra-implementation-incoron#ixzz3s
nIhZyeZ
Mayo-Anda, G., Cagatulla, L. L., & La Viňa, A. G. (2006). Is the Concept of “Free and Prior Informed
Consent” Effective as a Legal and Governance Tool to Ensure Equity among Indigenous Peoples?
(A Case Study on the Experience of the Tagbanua on Free Prior Informed Consent, Coron Island,
Palawan, Philippines). Retrieved from http://dlc.dlib.indiana.edu/dlc/bitstream/handle /10535 /22
04/mayo_anda_grizelda_cagatulla_la_vina.pdf?sequence=1
Nunkoo, R. & Smith, S.L. (Eds.). (2014). Trust, Tourism Development and Planning, Routledge.
Prell, C., Hubacek, K. & Reed, M. (2009). Stakeholder Analysis and Social Network Analysis in Natural
Resource

Management.

Society&

NaturalResources.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/08941920802199202
73

RetrievedfromSaragpunta. (2015), Our Network. Retrieved from http://www.saragpunta.org/
Tomeldan, M. V. (2009). Tourism Structure Plan of Busuanga and Coron, Northern Palawan: Comprehensive
Development through Tourism. Muhon, 1(1), 16-27.
Warner, M. (1997). ‘Consensus’ participation: an example for protected areas planning. Public Administration
and Development, 17(4), 413-432.
Wellman, B., & Frank, K. (2001). Network capital in a multilevel world: Getting support from personalcommunities. In L. Nan, K. S. Cook, & R. S. Burt (Eds.), Social capital: Theory and research(pp. 233-273). New Jersey, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

74

Working Group 3

Tourism and Environment Education
Education in Fisheries for Sustainable Coastal Resource Utilization in
CoronGroup Members
Almira Lumbres
Chengyang Yao
Mai Goshima,
Miki Onidani**
Minori Fukuura*
Takashi WatanabeGroup Advisers
Assistant Professor Yuki Shimazu
Assistant Professor Ephraim C. Quinones** Group Leader* Sub-leader75

1. Introduction
1.1 Background of study
The core and major tourism spots in the municipality of Coron are highly dependent on coastal resources,
such as diving spots having special value because of Japanese World War Ⅱ wrecks and abundant marine
ecosystem and coral reefs (Tomeldan, 2009). Another important pull factor for tourists is fresh seafood,especially grouper being served in local restaurants and hotels. However, continuing issues of destructive
fishing practices such as harvesting juvenile fish, especially leopard coral grouper locally called lapu-lapu
under reproductive size, using fine mesh under the locally-regulated size, and noxious or damaging substances(e.g. sodium cyanide and dynamite) are still observed among fishermen in Coron. These destructive fishingpractices cause the degradation of the marine ecosystem, which in turn has negative impacts on the livelihoodof the fishermen themselves and all the people in Coron who are increasingly dependent on coastal resources
because of the promotion of tourism development. Therefore, the fishery is the key sector to be addressed as
an agent of change for the sustainable utilization of coastal resources. A positive change toward sustainable
coastal resource utilization in the fishery would benefit the livelihood of the people in Coron, while also
fostering sustainable tourism development.
In the municipality of Coron, fishing has been an important livelihood since the first inhabitants, theseafaring Tagbanuas tribe, settled there five thousand years ago. The fishery has been shaping the lives of thepeople culturally, economically, socially and ecologically until today. The introduction of large-scale fishingin 1947 encouraged the migration of fishermen from neighbouring towns and provinces such as Luzon and
Visayas, which caused a boom in the fishing industry, especially from the 1970s up to the 1990 (Municipalityof Coron, Planning Office, n.d.). However, the rapid expansion of the fishing sector with the improvement offishing methods, such as more effective gear and targeting methods through mechanization, led to intense
natural resource extraction. As the result, natural resources have been depleted and damaged throughexploitative fishing methods such as the use of dynamite or sodium cyanide (Geen, White, Flores, Carreon andSia, 2003).
Meanwhile, international trade of live reef fish started in the mid-1970s and has expanded to Southeast
Asia and the Philippines, especially to the Calamian Islands in Palawan. This industry started growing in the
1980s in the Calamianes through the efforts of traders incessantly searching for new fishing grounds. They
found in the Calamian Islands an abundant source of the leopard coral grouper locally called lapu-lapu (Fabinyi,2007). Recently, with the technological improvement of transportation, the value chain of live reef fish trade76

has expanded not only to Manila but also to Hong Kong and mainland China, which is now bringing morethan US$100 million dollars annually to islands in Palawan (World Wildlife Fund, 2009).
With this boom-or-bust business, fishing communities started gaining additional income through theintensive harvesting of the leopard coral grouper. This is the one of the reasons that approximately 37 to 41
percent of the labor force in Coron was still working in the fishery in 2007 (Municipality of Coron, Planning
Office, n.d.). The boom in the fishing industry has significantly contributed to the local economy, withincreasing demand from the global market in recent years. However, this economic opportunity has become
one of the motivations for some fishermen to continue using sodium cyanide or dynamite for easy capturing
even after the establishment of the Republic Act 8550 in 1998, which prohibits fishermen from using
obnoxious substances as well as increases recognition of destructive fishing methods (Fabinyi, 2007).
Furthermore, the trade resulted in a vicious cycle among local fishmen in terms of the intensive harvest of theleopard coral fish, which has to be “plate size” for the global market. The intensive harvest of the “plate size”
leopard coral grouper diminished the number of groupers reaching reproductive size, which is 28 cm in thefishing ground of Coron (Padilla, Mamauagu, Braganza, Brucal, Yu and Morales, 2003). It eventuallyencouraged fishermen to harvest juvenile fish and curtailed their natural reproduction. The Philippine Statistic
Authority (2015) shows the volume of production of groupers in Palawan from 2002 to 2014 both in municipal
and commercial fisheries. As for municipal fisheries, the volume has significantly decreased, from 6,105.22
in 2008 to 2,274.73 in 2014. As for commercial fisheries, it has decreased from 1,034.24 in 2008 to 547.36 in2014 (Philippine Statistic Authority, 2015).
Dr. Geoffrey Muldoon, Live Reef Fish Strategy Leader for World Wildlife Fund’s Coral Triangle
Program, stated that “Surveys undertaken show that 60 percent of all fish taken from the reefs around Palawan
are now juveniles, which is a good indication that the adults have been removed from the ecosystem and thatit has been highly overfished.” He further asserted that “Under a business as usual scenario, Palawan’s live
reef fish trade will become economically unviable within the next decade and without a comprehensive
management plan and the introduction of an appropriate quota system, communities that depend on the fisheryfor their livelihoods face a significant food security threat.”(World Wildlife Fund, 2009).
Because of the expanding recognition of depleted natural resources, attempts at institutionalizing various
forms of management and conservation referred to as Integrated Coastal Management (ICM) has beenpromoted (Fabinyi, 2007). In the guideline of Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), ICM is defined as adynamic process by which actions are taken for the use, development and protection of coastal resources andareas to achieve national goals established in cooperation with user groups and regional and local authorities
77

(FAO, 2006). Thus, participation and cooperation among various sectors are the key components to achieve
the goal through ICM. In the area of the Calamianes, the establishment of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) is
one of the significant results of ICM (Fabinyi, 2007). To manage MPAs and also prevent destructive fishingpractice outside of MPAs, monitoring is important, though it is costly for the institutions to provide the function.
Thus, to reduce the cost, many institutions and local governments in coastal areas of the Philippines are
utilizing the principles of Community Based Coastal Resource Management (CBCRM), which is defined asprocess by which residents of a coastal community take responsibility to manage their own resources bydefining their needs, goals and aspirations, and make decisions toward taking actions affecting their well-being(Pomeroy and Carlos, 1997). CBCRM is expected to manage resources efficiently through mutual monitoringby the community residents.
The theoretical foundation of the mutual monitoring system is the creation of collective action andparticipation among community residents toward resource management. In Coron, to create the basis offishermen’s participation and collective action, seminars are conducted to distribute information about MPA
management, regulated fishing practice and the marine ecosystem by various sectors, such as NGOs
(ECOFISH), international organizations (FAO), government agencies (Bureau of Food and Agricultural
Resources) and the private sector (Malampaya Foundation). Those who acquire management knowledge orskills among fishermen in Coron are working as bantay dagat, who are sea police tasked with preventing
destructive fishing practices. Some are paid and others are volunteer watchmen designated by institutions.
Also, some institutions use a reporting system, especially for dynamite and sodium cyanide fishing. Thoseseminars are conducted under the premise that people have an innate capacity to understand and act on theirown problems. It starts from where the people are, what the people already know, and builds on this knowledge
further for new consciousness. It is expected to foster the participation of the fishermen in planning,
implementation and evaluation of coastal resource management (Ferrer and Nozawa, 1997). The fundamental
objective of these seminars is to encourage every fisherman to acquire the correct knowledge for appropriate
resource utilization. In sum, the expected fishermen’s internalization of the knowledge distributed in theseminars and its translation into their practice through the coordination of ICM are established on thetheoretical foundation of CBCRM, supported by the rationale of collective action.

1.2 Problem statement
Despite the efforts being made through the process of ICM, the knowledge disseminated in the seminars
is not successfully translated into behaviour. The results of the failure are seen in the depletion of natural78

resources, especially the diminishing number of the groupers reaching reproductive size, which is encouraging
an excessive effort of fishermen to harvest juvenile groupers. Another concern is continuing destructive fishingpractices using dangerous substances such as sodium cyanide and dynamite, which causes the degradation ofcoral reefs and other marine habitats in the fishing ground. Also, the use of fine mesh smaller than the locallyregulated size (7cm) is still common practice among fishermen in Coron, which implies the harvest of juvenile
fish. These practices are negatively influencing the rapid depletion of fish stocks and degradation of marine
habitats in Coron and making it much harder, especially for small-scale fisheries with limited capacity, toaccess the resources and obtain a sufficient harvest. This in turn potentially curtails the capacity of fishermen
to generate income and endangers their livelihood. The issue is not only about the fishery, but also thedegradation of marine resources, which has negative impacts on the livelihood of all the people who are largely
depending for their livelihood on coastal resources, such as those in the tourism industry. Therefore, addressing
the issues of the failure of the ICM in the stage of knowledge distribution, based on the theoretical foundationof CBCRM in fisheries, is crucial to enhance the capacity for the holistic development of Coron.

1.3 Research objectives and questions
The objectives of this study are: 1.a.) to identify the internal or external factors which curtail theeffectiveness of ICM in the stage of knowledge distribution to fishermen in terms of translating it into theirpractice; 1.b.) to identify external factors (e.g. socio-economic and demographic factors) that encourage
fishermen to use destructive fishing practice; and 2) to investigate the relationship between the capacity toaccess resources and destructive fishing practice as a basis for collective action, which is the theoreticalfoundation of CBCRM.
Therefore, the research questions are: 1.a.) What are the internal or external factors, if any, which curtailthe effectiveness of ICM in the stage of knowledge distribution to fishermen for translating it into their
behaviour?; 1.b. ) What are the external factors (e.g. socio-economic and demographic factors), which
encourage fishermen to use destructive fishing practices? ; 2.) What is the relationship between the capacity
to access the resources and destructive fishing practice as a basis for collective action?

1.4 Hypothesis
Our hypotheses or expected results for research questions are 1.a. and 1.b are:1.a. We hypothesize that knowledge and attitude are two key internal factors that predict non-destructive
fishing practice.
79

1.b. External factors (e.g. socio-economic and demographic factors, seminars) will predict non-destructive
fishing practice.
Based on previous research, we expect to find 2 as the answer to our second research question:
2. Without a fair, orderly and efficient method of resource allocation, such as fishing methods or technology
to access resources, fishermen are obliged to use destructive fishing practice.

1.5 Conceptual framework
The main focus of this study is to understand non-destructive and destructive fishing practices on an
individual level by utilizing the theoretical frameworks of pro-environmental behaviour. The definition of proenvironment behaviour: behaviour that consciously seeks to minimize the negative impact of one’s actions on
the marine environment (Kollmuss & Agyean, 2002).

Figure 1 Conceptual Framework

Source: Authors80

1.6 Significance and limitation of the study
This study is expected to contribute to understanding the complexity of Common Pool Resource (CPR)
management by utilizing the theoretical foundation of pro-environmental behaviour. It is expected todetermine the capacity of small-scale fisheries to accept the expected theoretical foundation of CBCRM under
the influence of social dynamics created by uncertainties such as market force or environmental change of
CPR itself. This will allow policy makers to identify the areas of intervention for sustainable coastal resource
management through addressing the issues in the fishery. This will in turn affect the overall livelihood in Coron,
which is increasingly depending on coastal resources because of the promotion of tourism development.
However, the limited time of the survey constrained the number of respondents and the scope of the study,
resulting in an individual level survey. Thus, there need more studies at the community level to create better
linkages between the theoretical foundation of pro-environmental behaviour and CPR management.

2. Literature Review
2.1 Common-Pool Resources (CPRs)
CPR literature is key to understand the CBCRM. Many institutions and projects for coastal resource
management in the Philippines are also employing the theoretical foundation from CPR literature. CPRs arecharacterized by difficulty of exclusion and subtractability of resource units and are threatened by overuse,leading to congestion or even destruction of the resource (Ostrom, 2003). Fishing grounds are a typicalexample of CPRs. Ostrom (1990) identified the capacities and limitations of self-governing institutions forregulating many types of resources by showing successful and unsuccessful efforts to govern and manage
resources, and using an institutional mode of analysis, then explained how communities of individuals govern
the commons.
To understand Ostrom’s claim, one needs to comprehend influential models explaining the mechanismof collective action toward resource management. Hardin (1968) wrote the influential article “The Tragedy of
the Commons”. He described the degradation of the environment to be expected whenever many individuals
use a scarce resource in common and regarded individual users as problems hindering the effective
management of fisheries, rather than as the solution. The tragedy of the commons is based on the prisoner’s
dilemma. If each individual chooses the best strategy to gain benefits independently without engaging in
bidding contracts, this negatively affects other community members. In this case, the equilibrium outcome ispareto-inferior. A pareto-optimal outcome occurs when there is no other outcome strictly preferred by at least
one person that is at least as good for the others. The paradox here is that individual rationale strategies lead81

to a collectively irrational outcome (Ostrom, 1990). Therefore, Hardin (1968) insisted that such individuals,
acting rationally under the scenario of CPRs by following their own self-interests, will eventually deplete
limited natural resources regardless of their realization that the situation is not in anyone’s long-term interests.
To avoid the overexploitation of the resource and its depletion, Hardin (1968) claimed the importance of strong
external authorities such as government intervention or privatization of right to the resources to govern user’s
extraction.
Another important model to understand collective action was introduced by Mancur Olson (1965). He
challenged the grand optimism expressed in group theory that the possibility of expected benefits would be
sufficient to generate collective action. His argument was that unless the group is intermediate sized, but alsothat actors within the group must be actively engaged and motivated to contribute to the common good throughsome kind of mechanism. If not, self-interested individuals will act for their individual benefits rationally andnot act to achieve common interests (Olson, 1965).
The tragedy of the commons, the prisoner’s dilemma and Olson’s logic of collective action haveconsistency in viewing individual problems to achieving collective action. The core of this view lies in the
problem of the free rider. Whenever one person cannot be excluded from the benefits that others provide, each
person is tempted to free-ride off the efforts of others (Ostrom, 1990).
However, Ostrom et al (1999) identified the failure of government intervention and privatization of rights
to the resources in a number of instances. She concluded that the solution for sustainable resource management
is the community itself. The most important feature of community is shared norms, which contain strategies
available to individuals to take opportunistic actions. In some top-down settings, such as government
intervention or the privatization of rights to resources, substantial benefits are obtained as a result of investment
in monitoring and the sanctioning arrangement. In other settings focusing on community, a shared norm is
expected to reduce the cost of monitoring and sanctioning activities by utilizing social capital in solving CPR
problems such as overuse and crowding effects. This is under the presumption that norm-adopting individuals
take contingent strategies in complex and uncertain environments. Such individuals can be expected to makecontingent commitments to follow rules, which are the principles needed for stable CPR arrangementssuggested by Ostrom and her colleagues. Those define a set of appropriators who are authorized to use a CPR(design principle 1), related to the specific attributes of the CPR and the community of appropriators using theCPR (design principle 2), are designed by local appropriators (design principle 3), are monitored by individuals
accountable to local appropriators (design principle 4), and are sanctioned using graduated punishments(design principle 5). Community members are expected to follow these principles if most similarly situated82

individuals adopt the same commitment and the long-term expected net benefits are greater than the long-term
expected net benefits for individuals pursing short-term gains (Ostrom, 1990).
In other words, without a fair, orderly, and efficient method of expected long–term resource allocation,
local appropriators have little motivation to contribute to the continued provision of the resource system. In
addition, if there is a local appropriator who has problems in his or her livelihood already, such as poverty,
that person may refuse to undertake the provision activities, especially when the problems become severe
because compliance has de-equalizing effects (Ostrom, 1990). This is one of the reasons why there are stillrisks of the tragedy of the commons occurring in a variety of situations affected by external and internal
uncertainties even if CPRs are managed by communities following the principles.
Though the great body of CPRs literature provides the mechanism of collective community action toward
management strategies, the examination of its foundation to foster collective action is little discussed,
especially as many community started adopting community based resource management without questions.
This rapid adoption, highlighting the mechanism of collective action, has the potential to overshadow thecapacities of individuals to accept the rationale of CBCRM affected by social dynamics, combined withuncertainties, such as market forces or the environmental change of CPR itself. Therefore, comprehension of
an individual’s behaviour in the area of CPRs management could serve as a key to examine the acceptabilityof the principles of community based resource management. The focus on individual behaviour is expected to
identify the capacity of individual fishermen to take provision activities expected in the mechanism of CBCRM
while maintaining their livelihood.
Thus, the next theme in the literature review is the understanding of an individual’s pro-environmental
behaviour, which is defined as minimizing the negative impact of one’s actions on the natural environment(Kollmuss & Agyean, 2002). Gifford (2007) points out that theories explaining pro-environmental behaviour
rarely interact with literature of natural resource management. Therefore, creating linkages between thosetheories and natural resource management could serve as a tool to evaluate the capacities of individuals to
accept the principles of community based resource management under the social dynamics emerging fromuncertainties such as market forces or the environmental change of a CPR itself.

2.2 Pro-Environmental Behaviour
The oldest and simplest models of pro-environmental behaviour were based on linear progression models(Appendix A). The scholars assumed that environmental knowledge leads to environmental awareness andattitudes, which lead to pro-environmental behaviour. These rationalist models assumed that teaching people
83about environmental knowledge and issues would automatically result in more pro-environmental behaviour(Burgess, Harrison & Filius, 1998). However, these models were proved to be wrong in the early 1970s. Such
research explained that in most cases, increases in knowledge and awareness did not lead to pro-environmental
behaviour (Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002). After that, scholars developed theoretical frameworks tounderstand pro-environmental behaviours. Here, we mention two types of frameworks, which had the mostinfluence on the present understanding of pro-environmental behaviour.
Schwartz (1977) conceived of moral norms as feelings of strong moral obligation that people experienced
to engage in pro-social behaviour. This theory assumes that altruistic behaviour increases when a person
becomes aware of other people’s suffering, and at the same time feels a responsibility for alleviating thissuffering. The basic premise of the norm-activation model is that moral or personal norms are direct
determinants of pro-social behaviour. Hines et al. (1986/87) found a mean correlation of r = .33 between afeeling of moral obligation to preserve the environment and pro-environmental behaviour. The formation as
well as activation of moral norms tends to be based on the interplay of cognitive, emotional, and social factors(Bierhoff, 2002). In the field of pro-environmental behaviour, the most important elements which contributeto develop moral norms are cognitive preconditions, such as the awareness of and knowledge about
environmental problems. Causal attribution seems to be the second important element to develop moral norms.
The internal attribution of related to a harmful behaviour often triggers emotional reactions, especially feelingsof guilt, which is closely related to social norms. A perceived mismatch between one’s own behaviour andsocial norms leads to feelings of guilt (Baumeister, 1998). The internalization of the group view as appropriate
in a specific context provides personal moral norms.
Ajzen conceived the Theory of Planned Behaviouur (Ajzen, 1991) based on a more hedonistic model ofhuman behaviour. The assumption was that people are motivated to avoid punishments and to seek rewards.
According to this model, decision-making is guided by a rational evaluation of behavioural consequences.
Thus they assumed that behaviour is not controlled by unconscious motives or overpowering desires (Fishbein& Ajzen, 1975). As the sum of perceived positive and negative consequences determines their attitude towarda behavioural option, attitudes are determined only indirectly via behavioural intention. Intention itself isviewed as summarizing the interplay of cognitive (action skills, knowledge of action strategies and issues) as
well as personality variables (attitudes, locus of control, and personal responsibility) (Bamberg and Moser,2007).
The Theory of Planned Behaviour also stresses the importance of situational constraints. This is because
people estimate their ability to perform this behaviour through their perceived behavioural control over it.
84Social norms are the third factor influencing decision-making, since it is basically conceptualized as perceived
social pressure that is an external force influencing whether a person performs or not. In other words, fear ofsocial exclusion is analyzed as a primary motive of people’s tendency to fulfill social norms. To sum up,
attitude, perceived behavioural control and social norms are thought to determine only indirectly via theirimpact on intention.
Hines et al. (1986/87) conducted meta-analysis of 128 pro-environmental behaviour based on the Theory
of Planned Behaviour, which found that intention to act and objective external factors are more strong
determinants of pro-environmental behaviour than cognitive preconditions such as the awareness of andknowledge about environmental problems. External factors are considerations such as the economic, social,educational, infrastructural and cultural situation. These external factors do not only decrease proenvironmental behaviour but have the possibility to increase responsible pro-environmental behaviour.
Hines et al. (1986/87) pointed out that the model (Appendix B) they established indicates several areasthat are amenable to change with the effects of external factors such as effort in environmental knowledge
distribution. It can approach internal factors such as both affective and cognitive experience to enhance anddevelop skills that to lead pro-environmental behaviour. They concluded that components of knowledge andskills in knowledge distribution can be addressed via issue identification and investigation.
Despite the numerous theoretical frameworks developed by scholars to comprehend pro-environmental
behaviour, the theoretical frameworks presently used are less successful in explaining pro-environmental
behaviour itself. However, from these previous influential frameworks, including numerous other studies,many scholars posit that the current best framework to explain pro-environmental behaviour would be the
combination of internal factors and external factors (Bamberg, Moser, 2006).
In this study, we also employ a framework synthesized from both internal and external factors (Appendix
C) to identify the determinants of fishermen’s individual pro-environmental behaviour (non-destructive fishingpractices) to evaluate the acceptability of the foundation of CBCRM by individuals under the social dynamics
arising from uncertainties such as market force or the environmental change of the CPR itself.

3. Methodology
This research mainly utilized a quantitative approach. Additionally, a qualitative approach was utilized
for the key informants and local government officials.
3.1 Population

85

The research population of this study includes all individual fishermen in the municipality of Coron, who
number 4,498 and compose 11.2 percent of the total population (40,006 in 2007). In this survey, four barangays
were chosen as subject areas: Tagumpay, Bintuan, Lajala (islet) and Banuang Daan (islet). The local
government categorizes barangay into urban and rural areas depending on population density and urbanizationlevel. The population living in the rural areas of the municipality is estimated at 24,176, which is 60 percentof the total municipal population, while the population living in the urban center is estimated at 15,831, which
is 40 percent of the total municipal population. In 2007, the census showed that barangay Tagumpay iscategorized as urban and the most populated barangay among the 23 total barangays. Other barangays are
categorized as rural areas. The total population of fishermen in these four barangay is 9690 (see Table 1).

3.2 Unit and sampling
The research unit is the individual fishermen, since they are the primary users of CPR, which is the fishingground. Among nonprobability sampling methods, snowball sampling was utilized for 59 respondents. The
number and percentage of the sampling size was decided based on the limited time and availability of accessto the research sites (see Table 2).

Table 1 Population Distribution and Sampling Size
Tagumpay

BintuanBanuang Daan

LajalaCategory

Urban

Rural

Rural, islet

Rural, islet

Individuals

5655

2146

700

1189

Households

1041

479

129

255

Fishermen

692

237

50

226

Percent of sample

4.6%

6.8%

14%

3.1%

Sampling size

29

16

7

7

Source: Municipality of Coron, Office of the agriculturist, n.d.

3.3 Definitions of terms and variables
・

Knowledge: The information that fishermen have about fishing practices which cause deterioration of themarine environment;

・

Attitude: Personal positive or negative feelings of socio-economic constraints for environmental
concerns;
86・Pro-environment Behaviour: Behaviour that consciously seeks to minimize the negative impact of one’s
actions on the marine environment. In this study, we translate the term Pro-environment Behaviour into
non-destructive fishing practices depending on the context and the contents of this report.

In this study, the following variables were utilized to measure the knowledge, attitude and non-destructive
fishing practices (pro-environmental behaviour) based on the general issue identification of fishing practiceand the marine environment. They are: 1) species of the fish; 2) amount of the fish; 3) size of the fish; 4) sizeof the mesh of the net; 5) use of destructive substances (e.g. dynamite and cyanide); 6) use of anchors on coral
reefs; 7) targeting and collecting spawning aggregations; and 8) controlling boat engines in MPAs. However,for the analysis of their non-destructive fishing practice (pro-environmental behaviour), “size of the fish” and“size of the mesh of the net” were emphasized because of the limitation of accurate measurement. For the “thesize of the fish”, 28cm is the indicator specifically for lapu-lapu, since its reproductive size and cycle are
identified in the fishing ground of Coron through the research done by Padilla, Mamauagu, Braganza, Brucal,
Yu and Morales in 2003. For the “the size of the mesh of the net”, 7 cm is the indicator based on the local
regulation. The tested variables regarding socio-economic, demographic and institution-based seminars areshown in the questionnaire (Appendix D).

3.4 Data collection
A structured questionnaire was utilized in the survey. The questionnaire was divided into four parts. The
first part was composed of questions regarding the socio-economic and demographic profile of the respondents
and their experience of having attended seminars through the coordination of ICM. The second part consistedof questions measuring the respondents’ knowledge. Respondents were asked “yes”, “no” or “do not know”
questions designating a corresponding level of knowledge. The third part was composed of attitude statements
and respondents were asked whether they agreed or disagreed with the statements using a 5-point Likert scale.
The fourth part was composed of questions on the behaviour of the respondents. Open-ended and multiplechoice questions were asked and scores indicated the level of pro-environmental behaviour. A semi-structured
interview questionnaire was utilized with the key informants among fishermen. Additionally, government
officials were interviewed to understand the current situation of ICM and CBCRM.

3.5 Analysis

87

To answer research question 1.a., chi square (𝒳𝒳2) was used to analyze the impact of seminars as a part of
ICM on fishermen’s knowledge acquisition, attitude improvement and its translation into their behaviour.
Generally, chi square (𝒳𝒳2) is utilized to examine whether there is a significant difference between variables.
As mentioned above, the emphasized variables are size of the fish and mesh of the net. The analysis followed
this formula:(𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂 – 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸)2
𝑥𝑥 = �
𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒
2・

Null hypothesis 1: there is no relationship between learning specific knowledge in seminars andfishermen’s knowledge acquisition in the total sampling.

・

Null hypothesis 2: there is no relationship between the knowledge acquisition and behaviour.

Given the observed distribution of values for the two separate variables, the conjoint distribution wascomputed as if there were no relationship between the two variables. The result of this procedure is expected
frequency for all the cells in the contingency table. Then, this expected distribution is compared with the
distribution of cases actually found in the sample data, which determines the probability that the discovered
discrepancy could be a result of sampling error (Earl, 2010).
Second, Spearman's rank-order correlation was used to analyze the relationship between knowledgeattitude and attitude-behaviour, since the non-parametric data observed in the collected data assumes that there
is a monotonic relationship. Spearman's correlation coefficient measures the strength of association between
two ranked variables. The analysis followed this formula:𝜌𝜌 = 1 −6Σ𝑑𝑑 2𝑛𝑛(𝑛𝑛2 1)

・

Null hypothesis 1: the ranks of knowledge do not covary with the ranks of the attitude.

・

Null hypothesis 2: the ranks of attitude do not covary with the ranks of the behaviour.
Third, to answer research question 1.b., a Mann-Whitney test was used to determine if there is asignificant difference between the socio-economic and demographic variables and destructive fishing practice.
The analysis followed this formula:

𝑈𝑈𝑎𝑎 = 𝑛𝑛𝑎𝑎 𝑛𝑛𝑏𝑏 +𝑛𝑛𝑎𝑎 (𝑛𝑛𝑎𝑎 + 1)
− ∑𝑅𝑅𝑎𝑎
2

88

𝑈𝑈𝑏𝑏 = 𝑛𝑛𝑎𝑎 𝑛𝑛𝑏𝑏 +𝑛𝑛𝑏𝑏 (𝑛𝑛𝑏𝑏 + 1)
− ∑𝑅𝑅𝑏𝑏2

In the data processing and based on previous literature, the following variables were identified, and areshown in the following null hypothesis.
・

Null hypothesis 1: the distribution of primary income is the same across the categories of the type of theboat (paddle / pump).

・

Null hypothesis 2: the distribution of size of lapu-lapu (cm) is the same across the categories of the typeof the boat (paddle / pump).

・

Null hypothesis 3: the distribution of the size of lapu-lapu (cm) is the same across the categories of
personally owned pump boat.

・

Null hypothesis 4: the distribution of primary income is the same across the categories of the size of themesh of the net (over 7cm / less than 7cm).
For measuring the level of primary source of income and size of lapu-lapu based on market outlet, both

the Mann-Whitney test and Mood’s median test were used for testing more than two variables.
・

Null hypothesis 5: the distribution of size of lapu-lapu (cm) is the same across the categories of the market
outlet (neighbour community / public market / broker).

・

Null hypothesis 6: the distribution of primary income is the same across the categories of the market
outlet (neighbour community / public market / broker).
For all analyses, SPSS and Microsoft Excel were utilized.

3.6 Schedule
Seven days were allocated to conduct the survey. The first two days were used for gathering the current
overall picture of coastal resource management, especially information about seminars conducted by multiple
stakeholders such as the local government, NGOs, international organizations and the private sector. Also, apilot test was conducted in Tagumpay. Based on the interview with officials and the pilot test, the contents of
the questionnaire were revised. After the revision, the group conducted questionnaire surveys with fishermenin Tagumpay, Bintuan, Banuan Daan and Lajala. On the last day, the team was divided into an analysis group
and NGO visiting group (Table 2).

89

Table 2 Schedule of activities
Date

Place

Who

What

MON

Sep.14

Local government, PCSD

Officials

Interviews

TUE

Sep.15

Tagumpay

Fishermen

Pilot survey

Legislative council, Local government

Officials

Interviews

Public Market

Merchants

Survey on fish species, price and market size

WED

Sep.16

Tgumpay

Fishermen

SurveyTHU

Sep.17

Bintuan, Tagmpay

Fishermen

SurveyFRI

Sep.18Banan Daan

Fishermen

SurveyMON

Sep.21

LajalaFishermen

SurveyTUE

Sep.22ECOFISHNGO worker

Interviews

Source: Authors

904. Results and Findings
4.1 Summary of statistics (all respondents)
Table 3 Summary of socio-economic and demographic data (all respondents)
Number

Minimum

Maximum

MeanStandard Deviation

59

1.0

60.0

28.26313.2113

Age

59

21.0

70.0

40.153

11.6216

Sex

59

0 = female

1 = male

.847

.3626

Indigenous People

59

0 = non IP

1 = IP

.288

.4568

Educational Attainment

59

1.0

14.0

6.966

2.8221

1.983

.4731

Length of Stay in thevillage (years)(years)
Civil Status59

1 = single, 2 = married, 3 = separated, 4 =widow

Bantay Dagat

59

0 = not bantay

1 = bantay

.220

.4180

Position of the fishermen59

0 = no position

1 = position

.288

.4568

Primary source of income

59

0 = others

1 = fishing

.780

.4180

Primary income (Pesos /

59

450.0

16000.05084.463

4141.1648

Secondary source of income

59

0 = none

1 = others

.763

.4291

Secondary income (Pesos /

59

0.0

12000.02165.468

2451.8282

Years fishing

59

2.0

54.0

18.15310.1825

Fisher Association

59

.136

.3453

Own gear59

0 = not own

1 = own

.932

.2536

Own boat59

0 = not own

1 = own

.576

.4984

Paddle or pump

59

0 = paddle

1 = pump

.678

.4713

Valid N59

month)

month)

0 = not belonging 1 = fishers association

Source: Authors914.2 Summary of Statistics (fishermen catching lapu-lapu)
Table 4 Summary of Socio-economic and Demographic Data (fishermen catching lapu-lapu)
Number

Minimum

Maximum

MeanStandard Deviation

Primary income (Pesos / month)

28

450.0

15000.04644.643

2884.1951

Type of boat

28

0.0

1.0

.750

.4410

Own boat

28

0.0

1.0

.500

.5092

Size of lapu-lapu

28

0

1

.61

.497

Size of lapu-lapu(cm)

28

13.0

40.0

28.2507.2604

Knowledge

28

0

1

.18

.390

Attitude

28

1

5

2.86

1.208

Attend seminar

28

0.0

1.0

.464

.5079

Attend seminar and learned about

28

0.0

1.0

.286

.4600

(0 = under 28cm; 1 = above 28cm)

size of fish
Valid N

28

Source: Authors

4.2.1 Effectiveness of ICM in the stage of knowledge distribution (issues of catching juvenile lapu-lapu)
in terms of translating knowledge into behaviour
To measure the effectiveness of ICM in the stage of knowledge distribution (seminars) to fishermen interms of translating knowledge into behaviour, a chi square test was utilized. The first assumption is theattendance in seminars and learning about the size of fish has a positive impact on knowledge acquisition. The
survey showed that fishermen attended institution-based seminars and learned about issues related to the sizeof fish. As the first step, the following hypotheses were tested.
・

H0: there is no relationship between learning about issues of catching juvenile fish in seminars andfishermen’s knowledge acquisition.

・

H1: there is a relationship between learning about issues of catching juvenile fish in seminars andfishermen’s knowledge acquisition.

92

Table 5 Rate of Knowledge Acquisition among Fishermen Attending Seminars and Learning
About the Size of Fish
Knowledge
Total
0

1

Count

16

4

20

learned about issues% fishermen who learned about juvenile fish

80.0%

20.0%

100.0%of catching juvenile% with knowledge

69.6%

80.0%

71.4%

Count

7

1

8

% fishermen who learned about juvenile fish

87.5%

12.5%

100.0%% with knowledge

30.4%

20.0%

28.6%

Count

23

5

28

% fishermen who learned about juvenile fish

82.1%

17.9%

100.0%% with knowledge

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

Attended seminar and

fish

.0

1.0

Total

Source: Authors

The chi-square test shows no statistical difference between the fishermen’s attendance and learning about
issues of catching juvenile fish and the likelihood of knowledge acquisition (𝒳𝒳2=.219, df=1, p=.640>.05).

As the second step, the assumption that knowledge acquisition in seminars has a positive impact on

fishermen’s behaviour was to be tested. However, the result of the first step revealed that there was no basis
for this premise because of the statistically significant low tendency of knowledge acquisition regarding
juvenile fish, specifically about lapu-lapu, through seminars. Besides, because a limited number of fishermen
learned about the issues (See Table 5), the total sample size of fishermen catching lapu-lapu (n=28) was
employed to measure the following hypotheses.
・

H0: there is no relationship between knowledge acquisition and behavioural improvement.

・

H1: there is a relationship between knowledge acquisition and behavioural improvement.
This resulted in rejecting H1 and accepting H0 ((𝒳𝒳2 = .949, df =1, p=.330>.05)). No statistical difference

was found between the fishermen who acquired knowledge through seminars and their behaviouralimprovement.

For the analysis of the interrelationship between knowledge and attitude toward catching juvenile fish,
Spearman's rank-order correlation was used. However, the result showed little relationship between knowledge
and attitude (r = -.176, n = 28, p =.370 > .05).
93

For the analysis of the relationship between attitude toward catching juvenile fish and behaviouralimprovement, Spearman's rank-order correlation was used. However, no relationship was found (r = .081, n =28, p =.682 > .05).

4.2.2 Discussion: External factors which curtail the effectiveness of ICM in the stage of knowledge
distribution (issues of catching juvenile lapu-lapu) in terms of translating it into behaviour
The tested hypothesis 1.a., which is the knowledge and attitude are two key internal factors that predictpro-environmental behaviour, was rejected for the issue of catching juvenile lapu-lapu. Why is thisphenomenon happening in Coron in spite of seminars conducted by multiple stakeholders? Based on thefindings, there might be a lack of specific content and information about the issues of catching juvenile fish in
the fishing ground of Coron as a focus of the seminars. As Table 5 shows, 28.6 % of fishermen catching lapulapu learned about the issue of catching juvenile fish in the seminars and only 12.5 % of total fishermencatching lapu-lapu have correct knowledge about the reproductive cycle of lapu-lapu. This is attributed to theobjective and the priority of those seminars, which is to inform fishermen about regulated fishing practices
mentioned in Republic Act 8550, local regulations (such as size of net mesh) and ordinances for MPA
management as a basis for collective action for monitoring each other. There is a possibility that this limitationof content, which mainly focuses on fishing codes, is limiting knowledge acquisition among fishermen (SeeFigure 2 and Table 6). This should be changed to address the current issues for sustainable resource
management.
Other reasons the lack of specific content about the reproductive size and cycle of lapu-lapu are
uncertainties such as fish depletion and the increasing demand for lapu-lapu in the global live reef fish market,
making this issue a low priority for institutions and individuals. These remaining uncertainties are also
affecting the establishment of a local fisheries code in Coron, despite serious concerns about fish depletion.
As mentioned by Dr. Geoffrey Muldoon, Live Reef Fish Strategy Leader for WWF’s Coral Triangle Program,surveys undertaken show that 60 percent of all fish taken from the reefs around Palawan are now juveniles,
which indicates that the adults have been removed from the ecosystem and that it has been highly overfished.
In this situation, the improvement of individual fishermen’s behaviour will be the key to address the
problems of resource extraction for sustainable coastal resource utilization. For this purpose, first, researchand development need to be done to investigate and identify the uncertainties, especially fish depletion and theoverfishing of juvenile lapu-lapu. Then, the translation of the identified knowledge into ICM as sharedstrategies will have the possibility to improve the effectiveness of ICM through the transformation of the94uncertainties to certain knowledge, which will be the basis for the content of the seminars. Also, awarenessshould be raised among the institutions about the necessity of updating the knowledge of individual fishermen,
as they are the agents of managing resources.

Figure 2 Accuracy of the Knowledge Test Scores Across the Variables of Destructive Fishing Practiceand Its Linkages to Their Livelihood.
Linkage between marine and livelihood
Linkage of coral reefs and diversity of fish
Coral reefs as habitas of coral fish
Moderating boat engine
Ancoring coral reefs
The use of cynide
Size of the mesh net
Amount of the fish
Size of the fish
Species of the fish

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Source: Authors

Table 6 Comparison among Official Regulations and Level of Knowledge Acquisition
Destructive fishing

RA 8550

Local regulation

Knowledge level

Species of the fish

×

×

×

Size of the fish

×

×

×

Amount of the fish

×

×

×

Moderating boat engine for corals

×

×

×

Size of the mesh of the net

◯

◯

◯

Use of cyanide and dynamite

◯

◯

◯

Source: Authors

4.2.3 External factors as predictors of destructive fishing practice (catching juvenile lapu-lapu)
To measure the external factors which encourage fishermen to catch juvenile lapu-lapu, a Mann-Whitney
test was used to determine if there was a significant difference between two categorical variables. The
assumption was that there is a relationship between the level of primary income and access to resources (e.g.
use of pump boat and owning a boat). The capacity to access the resource has an impact on the size of lapu-

95

lapu harvested. The size of lapu-lapu harvested differs according to market outlet, which may differentiate theincome level generated from fishing.
・

H0: the distribution of primary income is the same across the categories of boat type (paddle / pump).

・

H1: the distribution of primary income is different across the categories of boat type (paddle / pump).

Figure 2 Mann-Whitney Test Result 1

Source: Authors

0 = Paddle, 1 = Pump

The result of Mann-Whitney test shows that distribution of primary income is significantly different
across the categories boat type (Paddle / Pump) (U=151, n = 28, p=.031 < .05). The median of the income
generated from fishing by paddle boat users is 3000 peso per month, but for pump boat users it is 4750 peso
per month. This result shows that there is a relationship between the capacity to invest capital (income level
generated from fishing) to fishing activities and the type of boat. .
The second assumption was measured through Mann-Whitney test, which is that the capacity to accessthe resource (type of boat) affects the size of lapu-lapu that fishermen harvest. The following hypotheses were
tested.
・

H0: the distribution of size of lapu-lapu (cm) is the same across the categories of boat type (paddle /pump).

・

H1: the distribution of size of lapu-lapu (cm) is different across the categories of boat type (paddle /pump).

96

Figure 3 Mann-Whitney Test Result 2

Source: Authors

0 = Paddle, 1 = Pump

The result of Mann-Whitney test shows that distribution of size of lapu-lapu (cm) is significantly different
across the categories of boat type (U=122, n = 28, p = .008 < .05). Also, the median size of lapu-lapu for paddle
boat users is 20cm, while for pump boat users it is 30cm. This result shows that the capacity to access theresource has an impact on the size of lapu-lapu that fishermen harvest.
Additionally, the following hypotheses were tested under the premise that there is a significant differencein the size of lapu-lapu that fishermen harvest across the categories of fishermen’s ownership of the pump boat
and others.
・

H0: the distribution of the size of lapu-lapu (cm) is the same across the categories of owning a pump boat.

・

H1: the distribution of size of lapu-lapu (cm) is difference across the categories the categories of owninga pump boat.

・
Figure 4 Mann-Whitney Test Result 3

Source: Authors

0 = Others, 1 = Own pump boat

97

The result of Mann-Whitney test shows a significant difference in the distribution of harvested size of
lapu-lapu across the categories of pump boat ownership and others (U=151, n = 28, p < .05).
Finally, whether the size of lapu-lapu harvested and income generated from fishing differs according tomarket outlet was measured by the Mann-Whitney test and Mood’s median test was utilized to test thefollowing hypotheses.
・

H0: the distribution of the size of lapu-lapu / primary income is the same across the categories of market
outlet (neighbouring community / public market / broker).

・

H1: the distribution of size of lapu-lapu / primary income is difference across the categories of market
outlet (neighbouring community / public market / broker).

Figure 5 Mood’s Median Test Result

Source: Authors 1 = Neighbouring community, 2 = Public market, 3 = Broker

The result of Mood’s median test shows a significant difference in the distribution of primary source ofincome across the market outlet (median: neighbouring community; 3000P / public market; 4750P / broker;
985000P) (n = 28, p=.004 < .05). Though there is no significant difference in the size of lapu-lapu (cm) acrossthe categories of market outlet (n = 28, p = .128> .05)., the median shows that those who sell their products inthe neighbouring community have a greater tendency to catch juvenile fish than those who are selling to the
public market and brokers (median: neighbouring community 26cm / public market 32cm / broker 35cm, 26cm
is under the reproductive size.) However, between the neighbouring community and both public market andbroker, we see a statistically significant difference in the income level generated from fishing (U=162, n=28,
p=.001 < .05) (Figure 6) and size of lapu-lapu (U=136, n = 28, p=.047 < .05). The following is the summary(Figure 7)..

Figure 6 Mann-Whitney Test Result 4

Source: Authors 1 = Neighbouring community, 2 = Public market and broker

Figure 7 Mann-Whitney Test Result 5

Source: Authors; 1 = Neighbouring community, 2= public market and broker

994.2.4 Discussion: External factors which encourage fishermen to use destructive fishing practice(catching juvenile lapu-lapu)
Tested hypothesis 1.b., which is external factors (e.g. socio-economic and demographic factors)
predicting pro-environmental behaviour (catching mature lapu-lapu) was accepted. Though the various
demographic and socio-economic variables were tested as mentioned in the methodology, statisticallysignificant variables are mobility (type of boat and boat ownership) and level of primary source of income(income from fishing).
For mobility, the possibility of fish depletion inside Coron Bay, especially of matured lapu-lapu, requires
fishermen to make efforts to move to alternative fishing ground to maintain their livelihood, if they are rational.
In addition, the establishment of MPAs and the closing of areas are also limiting their fishing zones. Thissuggests that those who have capital to invest in pump boats may find it easier to move to an alternative fishingground, while for those who do not have enough capital to invest may have more difficulty to access analternative zone. This, in turn, limits their capacity to access the resources to maintain their livelihood.
Hannesson (1998) suggested that marine reserves and limited mobility may result in extreme hardship tocommunities or individuals to access the resources by forcing fishermen to travel much farther to unfamiliar
grounds, which also increases the risks to those with smaller vessels.
The results show that the majority of fishermen who have access to pump boats are catching mature sizeof lapu-lapu and tend to have more connection to brokers and the public market, since their products can meetthe market size requirement. However, those who do not access to pump boats tend to end up with catching
juvenile lapu-lapu before reaching the alternative fishing ground due to the depletion of the mature lapu-lapu
inside Coron Bay. After the harvest, they sell it in the neighbouring community, since the fish are not market
size.
Therefore, mobility is not only a predictor of the destructive fishing practice of catching juvenile lapulapu, but also indicates the de-equalizing effects of the capacity to access the market. In consequence, it isaffecting how much some fishermen can earn from fishing. During the survey, one of the informants mentioned
the reason why he is earning much more than other fishermen. He stated that engagement in the live reef fish
trade by catching large-size lapu-lapu, which meets the global market size requirement, is the key factor todifferentiate his income level. His answer obviously shows that the capacity to access the resource is thenecessary condition to participate in the market economy, which generates a high level of income from fishing(Fishermen [005-0003], Lajala, September 21, 2015).

100

The situational factor of fish stock depletion and the socio-economic constraint of access to the resource
are leading to the destructive fishing practice of catching juvenile lapu-lapu, which also has de-equalizing
effects on the capacity to access the market economy and the level of income generated from fishing. This isthe vicious cycle ecologically and socially in Coron. The risks the fishermen might face by traveling toalternative fishing grounds potentially encourage those fishermen to harvest juvenile fish within their mobility
capacity rather than facing the risks. This attitude and destructive fishing practice will accelerate thedeterioration of marine resources, while making their livelihood more vulnerable with the increasing
uncertainties of the sustainability of the resource itself.

4.2.5 Discussion: The relationship between the capacity to access the resource and destructive fishingpractice as a basis for collective action
Though the great body of CPRs literature provides the mechanism for collective community action toward
management strategies, the examination of its foundation to foster the collective action are little discussed,
especially as many communities adopted the mechanism of community based resource management without
questioning how to efficiently manage by reducing the costs of monitoring. This rapid adoption has thepotential to overshadow the capacities of individuals to support the mechanism, which is affected by social
dynamics and uncertainties such as market forces or environmental changes. Therefore, identifying thecapacity of individual fishermen to implement provision activities expected in the mechanism of community
based resource management could serve as a key to address the complexities and failure of ICM by elucidating
the root causes.
To reach the root causes, the question which should be asked is whether individuals in a community havethe basis to accept the principles and mechanism of CBCRM. About the basis, Ostrom (1990) mentioned thenecessity of a fair, orderly, and efficient method of expected long–term resource allocation, such as fishingmethods or technology to access the resources, without which fishermen have little motivation to contributeto the continued protection of the resource system. Also, Ishikawa (1990) explained the importance of the basisof collective action in the area of agriculture, which is an emancipation of landless farmers from uncertainties
about whether they can earn tomorrow or not.
When this rationale of collective action as a mechanism of CBCRM is applied to Coron, we could not
say there is the basis of collective action. This is strongly attributed to individual fishermen’s capacity to accessthe resources and maintain their livelihood. Ostrom (1990) also pointed out that in a particular CPR, if
problems associated with the appropriation of subtractable resource units become severe, local appropriators101may refuse to undertake provision activities.

This statement also suggests the reason for the ineffectivenessof ICM in the stage of knowledge distribution in terms of translating it into their behaviour. There is a great
possibility that correct knowledge acquisition does not necessarily lead to behavioural improvement, becauseof the external factors threatening their livelihood. This is examined in the next section.

4.3 Summary of Statistics (fishermen using net)
Table 8 Summary of Socio-economic and Demographic Data (Fishermen using net)
Number

Minimum

Maximum

MeanStandard Deviation

27

2.0

10.0

5.630

1.832427

500.015000.03788.270

3063.7985

27

0.0

8000.02026.2072012.8873

Knowledge

27

0

1

.96

.192

Attitude

27

1.0

5.0

3.222

1.1209Attend seminar

27

0

1

.63

.492

27

0

1

.81

.396

Size of mesh (cm)Primary

income(Peso)/

month
Secondary income (Peso) /month

Attend seminar and learned
about net
Valid N

27

Source: Authors

4.3.1 Effectiveness of ICM in the stage of knowledge distribution (size of the mesh of the net); translatingknowledge into behaviour
To measure the effectiveness of ICM in the stage of knowledge distribution (seminars) to fishermen andtranslating it into their behaviour, a chi square test was utilized. The analysis and assumption taken here are
the same measurement as the one for the size of lapu-lapu. As the first step, the following hypotheses were
tested.
・

H0: there is no relationship between learning about the size of the meh of the net in seminars andfishermen’s knowledge acquisition.

・

H1: there is a relationship between learning about the size of the meh of the net in seminars andfishermen’s knowledge acquisition.
102

Table 7 Rate of Knowledge Acquisition among Fishermen Who Attended Seminars and Learned
About the Size of the Fish
Knowledge
Total

Attendedseminar

0
and

.0

1.0

1

4

5

20.0%

80.0%

100.0%% with Knowledge

100.0%

15.4%

18.5%

Count

0

22

22

0.0%

100.0%

100.0%% with Knowledge

0.0%

84.6%

81.5%

Count

1

26

27

3.7%

96.3%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

Count% fishermen who attended seminar and learned about

learned about net

net

1% fishermen who attended seminar and learned about
net

Total

% fishermen who attended seminar and learned aboutnet% with Knowledge

Source: Authors

The chi-square test shows that there is a statistically significant difference between those who attended
seminars and correct knowledge acquisition about the use of the net. (�2=4.569, df = 1, p=.033 < .05). This
result indicates that the seminars are effective for generating knowledge.
Then, the next question is whether it is translated into their behaviour or not. For this measurement, a chisquare test was used to test the following hypotheses.
・

H0: there is no relationship between knowledge acquisition and behavioural improvement.

・

H1: there is a relationship between knowledge acquisition and behavioural improvement.

A statistically significant relationship was found between the high level of knowledge acquisition andlow level of its translation into their behaviour(𝒳𝒳2 = 4.569, df = 1, p > .05). The majority of the fishermen

who have correct knowledge about the size of the mesh are using fine mesh, which is under 7cm, although103they are not catching small fish such as anchovy. In spite of the successful knowledge generation through theseminars, why are fishermen not translating knowledge into behaviour?
To answer this question, the interrelationship between knowledge and attitude toward using fine mesh
was also measured through Spearman's rank-order correlation. However, the result shows little relationshipbetween knowledge and attitude (r = -.136, n = 27, p =.497> .05). Also, the result of the measurement of therelationship between attitude and behaviour was not significant (r = .020, n = 28, p=.922 > .05).

4.3.2 Discussion: External factors which curtail the effectiveness of ICM in the stage of knowledge
distribution (size of the mesh of the net) and translating knowledge into behaviour
Though the result (Table 7) shows that the seminars are effective in generating knowledge about theeffects of the use of fine mesh on the marine environment, it was found that the knowledge does not necessarily
improve either their attitude or behaviour toward using fine mesh to catch as much as possible. The resultshows that it is common practice for the fishermen to use fine mesh under the size of the local regulation of
7cm. The mean of the size of the mesh is 5.63 cm in the summary of statistics table.
The findings suggest that knowledge from the seminars is not enough for fishermen to comply with thelocal regulation. Besides, it was not enough to foster the mutual monitoring among fishermen as an outcomeof knowledge acquisition. This indicates that there is an absence of design disciplines of community based
resource management defined by Ostrom (1990). That is, monitoring by individuals accountable to local
appropriators (design principle 4), which results in a system of sanctions using graduated punishments (designprinciple 5).
Thus, the direct cause of the failure of compliance seems to be the lack of a monitoring system, as it is
not reflecting the principles. However, there is a need to investigate the root causes that explain why thefishermen are not following the principles, in spite of institutional arrangements to prepare fishermen to follow
the law. Regarding the basis of collective action as a mechanism of community based resource management,
Ostrom (1990) claimed that if people in a community are similarly situated to make their livings, they are
expected to follow these principles towards collective long-term gains (Ostrom, 1990). This suggests that, inCoron, there might be some individuals in a community who are not similarly situated to adopt the samecommitment as others, which is related to the lack of capacity of individuals to access the resource and generate
income from fishing as discussed in a previous section. If so, there might be a lack of ground for collective
action as a mechanism of CBCRM, which should be investigated as an area of intervention or policy
amendment.
1044.3.3 External factors as prediction of destructive fishing practice (using fine mesh)
To measure the external factors which encourage fishermen to use fine mesh under the regulated size, aMann-Whitney test was used to determine if there was a significant difference between two categoricalvariables. The assumption is that there is a relationship between the level of primary income and the size ofthe mesh.
・

H0: the distribution of primary income is the same across the categories of mesh size (over 7cm / lessthan 7cm).

・

H1: the distribution of primary income is different across the categories of mesh size (over 7cm / lessthan 7cm).

・Figure 8 Mann-Whitney Test Result 6

Source: Authors

0= Mesh size: less than 7cm, 1=Mesh size: over 7cm

The result of the test shows that distribution of primary income is statistically different across thecategories of the size of the mesh (U=88.5, n = 27, p=.033 < .05). The median of the income generated fromfishing for those who are using illegal mesh size is 2875 pesos per month. On the other hand, for those who
are using the legal size it is 5000 pesos per month. This result clarified the relationship between the low levelof income generated from fishing and the tendency to use illegal mesh size.

4.3.4 Discussion: The relationship between the capacity to access the resources and destructive fishingpractice as a basis for collective action
As a basis of the collective action, Ostrom (1990) mentioned that in a particular CPR, if problems
associated with the appropriation of subtractable resource units become severe, local appropriators may refuse
to undertake provision activities. When this rationale of collective action as a mechanism of CBCRM istranslated into the situation of Coron, we can say that if fishermen’s livelihood problems, such as income
105

reduction, become severe because of complying with the regulated mesh size, which is spurred by thesituational factor of the fish stock depletion inside the Coron Bay, the fishermen refuse to undertake provision
activities. In other words, knowledge generated through the seminars about the size of the mesh are notsuccessfully internalized as the fishermen’s shared norm among a certain group, who are generating relatively
low income from fishing compared to those who are using legal mesh size. This phenomena, in turn leads toan absence of mutual monitoring, in spite of the expectations of the institutions arranging the seminars.

5. Conclusion and Recommendation
5.1 Conclusion
The examination of PEB by triangulating the norm-activation model and the Theory of Planned Behaviourin the area of coastal resource management revealed the strong attribution of external and situational factors,
in spite of the successful cognitive realization through correct knowledge acquisition and attitude improvementin the seminars. The findings of this study disproved the norm-activation model because of the failure of theinternalization of a collective view among certain groups of small-scale fishermen in terms of translatingknowledge into behaviour.
The norm-activation model presumes that a group has a basis of shared norms. In the case of coastal
resource management, that is the optimal utilization of coastal resources by the individuals of the community
in the name of common property. Therefore, to identify the internal or external factors which curtail theeffectiveness of ICM in the stages of knowledge distribution and behaviour modification, it is essential toidentify if the group has shared collective norms before discussing the improvement of the contents of theseminars in the area of coastal resource management.
To examine the basis of sharing norms, we examined hypothesis 2, which is that without fair, orderly andefficient methods of resource allocation, such as fishing methods or technology to access the resource,
fishermen are encouraged to use destructive fishing practice. For the fishermen harvesting lapu-lapu, thishypothesis was affirmed through examining the relationships of the variables such as access to the resource,
the size of lapu-lapu harvested, the size of lapu-lapu harvested relative to the market outlet, and income
generated from fishing. The findings showed that those who do not have enough access to the alternative
fishing ground because of using paddle boats tend to harvest lapu-lapu under reproductive size and sell thejuvenile lapu-lapu in neighbouring communities and end up earning only half the income of those who areusing pump boats and selling their products to public market and brokers. Also, for the fishermen using thenet, hypothesis 2 was affirmed. The findings showed that those who are using the illegal mesh under 7cm,
106

regardless of their correct knowledge acquisition, generate income from fishing only half of that of those who
are using the legal mesh size. Therefore, there is a possibility that those who do not have a fair, orderly andefficient method of resource allocation are having difficulty sharing norms, because harvesting juvenile lapulapu and using fine mesh are their forms of coping strategies toward environmental change in the CPR itself,
which is the fish depletion inside Coron Bay spurred by market forces.
To examine the effectiveness of the seminars, hypothesis 1.a., which is that knowledge and attitude are
two key internal factors that predict non-destructive fishing practices (pro-environmental behaviours) was
examined. However, it was rejected because of the issue of catching juvenile lapu-lapu. The findings showeda low level of knowledge acquisition regarding the reproduction of lapu-lapu. There is a possibility that theprioritized content, mainly regarding fishing codes and MPA ordinances, is limiting the knowledge acquisition
about lapu-lapu reproduction, which should be updated to address the current issues by creating new
consciousness among fishermen for sustainable resource utilization. The low priority of this issue in theseminars is largely due to uncertainties such as fish depletion, along with the increasing demand for lapu-lapu
in the live reef fish trade of the global market. Without research and development these remaining uncertainties
might cause the deterioration of marine resources, which eventually damages not only the livelihood of thesmall-scale fishermen but also the fishing industry and the tourism industry in Coron because of the its large
dependency on coastal resources.
What should be done to support fishermen to become the agents of the change for sustainable coastal
resource utilization? The first priority is that development agencies need to recognize that there is a lack ofcollective action currently in the coastal communities for the coordination of ICM. This has the potential toovershadow the capacity of individual fishermen to accept the rationale of collectivity, which is a foundationof CBCRM. We pose a question on this point because the fishermen in Coron are facing the environmental
change of the CPR itself spurred by market forces, which is creating unfair, non-orderly, and inefficientmethods of long–term resource allocation, thus making certain group of small-scale fisheries vulnerable.
Ostrom (1990) claimed that such individuals have difficulty following the rules to manage coastal resources
while maintaining their minimum level of livelihood, especially when compliance with the rules has deequalizing effects on their household production. That makes it difficult for certain groups of fishermen to
become the agents of change for sustainable coastal resource utilization. Therefore, emancipating thevulnerable individual fishermen from uncertainties about whether they can earn tomorrow or not is the first
key to address the issues of destructive fishing practices. This is a basis for collectivity as a preparation for107

effective seminars on ICM coordination, which will encourage fishermen to translate their cognitive
improvement into non-destructive fishing practices, thus utilizing coastal resources at an optimal level.
After this, the coordinators of seminars should recognize the need to update the knowledge acquired
among the fishermen to create new consciousness about the current issues of fish depletion. Raising awarenessamong the coordinators of the seminars is expected to be the engine to foster research and development
investigating marine biodiversity and sustainable resource utilization. The identification of destructive fishingpractices and the ineffectiveness of ICM in the stage of knowledge distribution are expected to highlight thecapacity of individual fishermen to accept the rationale of collective action, which might be overshadowed by
the name and expected mechanism of CBCRM focusing on community-level analysis. Through this study, we
expect to contribute to helping small-scale fishermen to become the agents of change for sustainable coastal
resource utilization by creating a space for them to participate in costal resource management as members of
the community and emancipating them from uncertainties about whether they can earn tomorrow or not. This
positive change is expected to support the livelihood of all the people in Coron who increasing depend oncoastal resources with the promotion of tourism development.

5.2 Recommendations
Based on the findings of this study, we provide the following recommendations for sustainable fisheries
and marine resource utilization.

5.2.1 Local government
1.

Foster research and development to update the knowledge of fishermen: the findings of study
indicate the low level of knowledge about the reproductive cycle of lapu-lapu among fishermen in spiteof the increasing concerns about the stock’s depletion and the rapid decline of its availability in all of
Palawan. This might be due to the remaining uncertainties, such as how much lapu-lapu are exploitedand endangered in the fishing ground of Coron. The knowledge discovered through research anddevelopment should be shared as a basis for the seminars among coordinators of ICM (local government,
NGOs, private sectors and international organizations) to update the knowledge of fishermen, creating
new consciousness and moving toward sustainable resource utilization.

2.

Develop a local fisheries code in Coron: there is a possibility that the lack of research and development
is resulting in the delay of the establishment of a local fisheries code, except for the mesh size of the net.
The findings showed that there is a great possibility that the existence of a local fisheries code could108

contribute to enhancing knowledge and improving attitudes toward optimal resource utilization. However,there needs to be deep examination of the effects of establishing new regulations, such as the regulationof the landing size of lapu-lapu, which might bring about other issues such as post-harvest losses.
3.

Coordinate the monitoring and reporting system by providing incentives: this study recommends
intensifying the monitoring and reporting systems of illegal and destructive fishing practice, since thelimited effects of mutual monitoring because of the lack of the basis of shared norms were identified.
Also, the information about how and where to report should be distributed to all the fishermen since wefound that only those who have positions in the institutions tend to have such awareness and information.
Those who do not have positions should be encouraged to acquire the information and participate in themonitoring process. Therefore, in the case of Coron, there needs to be government intervention andcoordination to prepare the individual fishermen to participate in the effective monitoring system.
Incentives should be considered as a means of effective monitoring.

5.2.2 Institutions as providers of the seminars (local government, NGOs, the private sector andinternational organizations)1.

Develop strategies to target the participants of job diversification programs: this study recommends
targeting and prioritizing small-scale fishermen who do not have enough access to alternative fishinggrounds and resources, which is characterized by the use of paddle boats and often selling their products
only in local communities. Current strategies, which involve the fishermen who own pump boats entering
the tourism industry by providing them opportunities to be tour guides, is not addressing the issue ofexcessive fishing, since those who do not have enough access to the resource are more likely to harvest
juvenile fish and use fine mesh to harvest as much as possible within their limited capacity.

2.

Intensify job diversification programs with skill development of small-scale fishermen: this study
revealed that a majority of fishermen who responded to this survey has been fishing as their livelihood
after they finished their education (mean of education attainment: elementary graduate). Therefore, thelivelihood programs should be concerned with how to develop employment for securing and sustaining
the source of income of their household from the alternative jobs. If not, there is a possibility that they
will continue fishing in spite of the limited access to the resources which has the potential to perpetuate
poverty and encourage excessive fishing practices, such as harvesting juvenile fish and using fine mesh.

3.

Create content for the seminars reflecting the specific issues in Coron beyond the contents of thefisheries code and MPA ordinances: in particular, the knowledge of the reproductive cycle of lapu-lapu
109

and its current endangered status should be updated with fishermen to create new consciousness forsustainable resource utilization.

Acknowledgements
Our deepest gratitude to all the people who supported OFW 2015 in order for us to learn from the fieldresearch and lessons and prepare ourselves for future work. These include:
1. Nagoya University
Assistant Professor Liu Jing
Professor Naoko Shinkai
Associate Professor Isamu Okada
Assistant Professor Yuki Shimazu
Associate Professor Yoshikazu Oshima
Assistant Professor Francis Peddie
2. University of the Philippines
Dean Josefina Dizon
Dean Dong Camacho
Director Rowena Baconguis
Professor Aser B. Javier
Assistant Professor Ephraim C. Quinones
Ms. Almira Lumbres
3. Local government
Mayor: Ms. Clara C. Espiritu-Reyes
Vice mayor: Mr. Jim Gerald L. PE
Environment officer: Mr.Reynario R. Labrador
Planning officer: Mr. Michael Adran
Agriculture officer: Mr. Gerry Gevela
Information officer：M r. Lyle Coruna

Legislative Council Chair Person on Fishery
Ms. Dorcas Besa from Palawan Council for Sustainable Development
Mr. Marco Sacle
110

4. ECOFISH

5. Respondents in each village (Tagumpay, Bintuan, Banuang Daan and Lajala)111

References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behaviour and Human decision Processes,
50(2). Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/074959789190020T
Bamberg, S., & Moser, G. (2007). Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysisof psycho-socio determinants of pro-environmental behaviour, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27,
14-25.
Baumeister, R. F. (1998). The self. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social
psychology (pp. 680-740). Boston: MacGraw-Hill.
Bierhoff, H.W. (2002). Pro-social behaviour. Hove: Psychology Press.
Burgess, J., Harrison, C., & Filius, P. (1998). Environmental communication and cultural politics ofenvironmental citizenship, Environment and Planning A, 30, 1445-1460.
Earl, B. (2010). The Practice of Social research (12th ed.), Belmont: Wadsworth.
Fabinyi, M. (2007). Illegal Fishing and Masculinity in the Philippines: A Look at Calamianes Island in
Palawan. Philippines Studies, 55(4), 509-529. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277209226_Illegal_Fishing_and_Masculinity_in_the_Philippines_A_Look_at_the_Calamianes_Island
s_in_Palawan
FAO. (2006). Integrated Coastal Management Law Establishing and strengthening national legal framework
for integrated coastal management. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/docrep/012/a0863e/a0863e00.pdf
Ferrer, E. M., & Nozawa, C. M. C. (1997). Community-Based Coastal Resource Management in thePhilippines.

Diliman:

University

of

the

Philippines.

Retrievedfromhttps://idl-

bnc.idrc.ca/dspace/bitstream/10625/33448/1/121922.pdf
Fishbei, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behaviour: an introduction to theory andresearch, Addition-Wesley: Massachusetts.
Geen, J. S., White, T. A., Flores, O. J., Carreon, F. M., & Sia, A. E. (2003). Philippine Fisheries in Crisis: A
framework for Management. Retrieved fromhttp://oneocean.org/download/db_files/philippine_fisheries_in_crisis.pdf
Gifford, R. (2007). Environmental psychology and sustainable development: Expansion, maturation, andchallenges. Journal of Social Issues, 63(199). Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.
1111/j.1540-4560.2007.00503.x/fullHannesson, R. (1998). Marine Reserves: What would they accomplish? Marine Resource Economics, 13, 159170.
112

Hardin, G. (1968). The Tragedy of the Commons. Science, 162 (3859), 1243-1248. Retrieved fromhttp://www.geo.mtu.edu/~asmayer/rural_sustain/governance/Hardin%201968.pdf
Hines, J.M., Hangerford, H. R., & Tomera, A. (1986/87). Analysis and Synthesis of Research on Responsible
Environmental Behaviour: A meta-Analysis. Journal of Environmental Education, 18(2), 1-8. Retrieved
from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00958964.1987.9943482
Ishikawa, S. (1990).Kaihatsukeizaigaku no kihon mondai (Basic problem of development economics), Tokyo:
Iwanami-shoten.
Kollmuss, A., & Agyean, J. (2002). Mind the Gap: Why people act environmentally and what are the barriers
to promote pro-environmental behaviour. Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 239-260. Retrieved
from http://psychsustain.voices.wooster.edu/files/2014/01/Mind-Gap.pdf
Municipality of Coron. (n.d.). The Sectoral Studie 1-60. Coron: Planning Office.
Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action: Public goods and theory of groups. Harvard: Harvard
Economic Studies.
Ostrom, M. (1990). Governing the Commons: The evolutions of institutions of collective action. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Ostrom, M. (1999). Revisiting the Commons: Local lessons, global challenges. Science, 234(5412), 278-282.
Retrieved from http://www.sciencemag.org/content/284/5412/278.short
Padilla, E. J., Mamauagu, S., Braganza, G., Brucal, N., Yu, D., & Morales, A. (2003). Sustainability
Assessment

of

the

live-reef

fish

for

food

industry,

Philippines.

Retrievedfrom

http://www.livefoodfishtrade.org/fishery/pdf/WWF_Philippines_SustainabilityAssessmentReport.pdf
Philippine Statistic authority. (2015). Volume of production of grouper in province of Palawan. Retrieved fromhttp://countrystat.psa.gov.ph/
Pomeroy, S. R., & Carlos, B. M. (1997). Community-based coastal resource management in the Philippines:
A review and evaluation of programs and projects: 1984-1994. Elsevier, 21(5). Retrieved fromhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X9700016X
Schwartz, S.H. (1977). Normative influence on altruism. Advances in experimental social psychology, 10, 221279. New York: Academic Press.
Tomeldan, V. M. (2009). Tourism Structure Plan of Busuanga and Coron, Northern Palawan: Comprehensive
Development through Tourism. A Journal on Agriculture, Landscape Architecture and the Designed
Environment, 3, 16-27. Retrieved from http://journals.upd.edu.ph/index.php/muhon/article/view/1316

113

World Wildlife Fund. (2006). Endangered groupers to stay off dining plates under Philippine dial. Retrieved
from http://wwf.panda.org/homepage.cfm?158261/endangered-groupers-to-stay-off-dining-platesunder-philippines-deal

114

Appendices

Appendix A
Linear progression models

Appendix B
Hines, J.M., Hangerford, H. R., & Tomera:, A. (1986/87)

115

Appendix C
The framework synthesized both internal and external factors

Internal
Pro-environmental

Factorbehaviour
External
Factor116

Appendix D Questionnaire

117

118

Working Group 4

Tourism and Culture

The Coexistence of Indigenous Culture and Tourism: A Case Study of
the Tagbanua of Northern PalawanGroup Members:
Jennifer Stewart **Rie Takagi *Michelle Olum
Keitai Tsuchihashi
Hiroki YamadaGroup Advisors:
Assoc. Prof. Yoshikazu Oshima
Assoc. Prof. Evelie Serrano
Asst. Prof. Mark Fellizar** Group Leader* Sub-leader

119

Table of Contents

1. Background to the Research
2. Problem Statement
3. Literature review
3.1 What is culture?
3.2 Cultural change
3.3 Cultural tourism
3.4 Indigenous people in the Philippines
3.5 The Tagbanua and their culture
4. Research Objectives
5. Research Questions
6. Methodology
6.1 Research framework and research site
6.2 Data collections methods and participants
6.3 Analysis
6.4 Limitations
7. Results
7.1 The current tourism situation
7.1.1 Poverty and malnourishment
7.1.2 The Tagbanua’s inclusion in tourism
7.2 The Tagbanua and tourism
7.2.1 Helpful features of tourism
7.2.2 Adverse features of tourism
7.3 The Tagbanua and their culture
7.3.1 Food and rituals of the Tagbanua culture
7.3.2 The changing of the Tagbanua culture
7.3.3 The Tagbanua people
7.4 Tourism initiatives to preserve culture
7.4.1 Festivals and events
7.4.2 Museums and restaurants120

7.4.3 Homestay program
7.5 Tourists’ knowledge of indigenous culture in Coron
7.5.1 General findings
7.5.2 Increasing awareness of indigenous people
8. Recommendations
8.1 Capacity building
8.2 Coordination and cooperation
8.3 Incorporation of culture
8.4 Childhood education
9. Discussion
10. Conclusion
Appendices
References

Abbreviations
ADSDPP

Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development Protection Plan

CADC

Certificate of Ancestral Domain

FPIC

Free Prior and Informed Consent

ILO

International Labour Organization

INDISCOInterregional Programme to Support Self-Reliance ofIndigenous Tribal Peoples through Cooperatives and Self-Help
Organizations

IP

Indigenous People

IPRA

Indigenous People’s Rights Act

LGU

Local Government Unit

NCIP

National Commission for Indigenous Peoples

NGO

Non-Governmental Organization

PRO 169

Project to Promote ILO Policy on Indigenous Tribal Peoples

UPLB

University of the Philippines, Los Baños

UNDRIP

United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People121

Acknowledgments
For all their support in helping us achieve our research objectives, our sincere appreciation goes out to the
Local Government Unit of Coron, Mayor Fems Reyes, Vice Mayor Jim Pe, the Department of Fisheries andAgriculture, the Department of Food and Nutrition, the Department of Planning, the Department of Tourism,
the Department of Health, the Saragpunta, the Tagbanua tribes of Balisongan and Banuang Da’an, thehomestay families of Caluit, Coron Initiative, and the University of the Philippines Los Baños.

122

1. Background to the Research
The Calamian Islands are a group of limestone islands in the northern part of Palawan province in thePhilippines. The island group is 310 km southwest of Manila, the capital city of the Philippines. Busuanga is
the largest of these islands, followed by Culion Island and Coron Island. The municipality of Coron covers theeastern half of Busuanga Island, the whole of Coron Island, and several other smaller islets. The Municipalityof Coron is politically subdivided into 23 barangays (villages), which are the smallest administrative divisions
in the Philippines. Coron has a land area of 689 km2 and a population of over 42,000 people, according to the2010 census (Census, 2010: 31).
Coron Island and its surrounding islets are part of the ancestral dwelling of the indigenous Tagbanua
people, who are also one of the oldest indigenous groups in the Philippines (Bernardo et al, 2014). According
to folk history, the Tagbanua had an early relationship with Brunei, and formal settlement of Palawan beganfrom 1521 (Diaz, 2014). Presently the Tagbanua make up around 40% of the total population of Coron, with
about 18,000 people living within the municipality (Okazaki, 2008: 518; Diaz, 2014). The Tagbanua language
is the third most common spoken language at 12% of the population of Coron, behind Cuyunon at 32% andTagalog at 31% (Javier, 2015).
The Municipality of Coron is part of the ancestral domain of the Tagbanua people. This term indicatesthat the Tagbanua’s relationship with the land is based on ancestry as well as spiritual and cultural aspects thatare often not acknowledged in colonial systems of individual property ownership and land title. The Tagbanua
people of Coron thus invoke a mutual responsibility and relationship between land, people, and ancestors, andthey often prefer to be described as custodians or guardians of their ancestral domain rather than ‘owners’, inthe modern sense of the word (Lightfoot, 2008).
In 1997 the Tagbanua were recognized as an indigenous people and were protected by the national
government and the international community under the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA), which also
granted them the right to either give or withhold consent for development projects (Hill et al, 2010). In addition,in 1998 they were awarded the Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim (CADC) (Rimban, 1998), which
extended environmental protection into the waters. After consultation with the municipal government in 2001,
the Tagbanua decided to open the islands and natural sites to tourism (Ranada, 2014).

2. Problem Statement
The Tagbanua essentially own the land and water rights to their ancestral domain in and around Coronand have explicitly allowed tourism to develop. Since 2001 tourism has flourished. In the year 2000 there were123

only 28 recorded tourists to the island, and in 2001 this number jumped to 1,158, after which it continued toincrease at such a rate that in 2013 there were 91,590 tourists (Javier, 2015). However, to date no studies havebeen done that determine the role of the Tagbanua culture in tourism promotion to Coron and whether tourism
and culture can coexist in a mutually beneficial way. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to determine how
the culture of the Tagbanua can promote sustainable tourism to Coron and how tourism can contribute topreserving that culture.

3. Literature Review
3.1 What is culture?
Culture encompasses many aspects of life and society and can also be representational. It is rooted inanthropology, and it is socially constructed and symbolically represented (Linnekin, 1997). Geertz (1973: 5)
says that “[b]elieving, with Max Weber, that man is an animal suspended in webs of significance he himself
has spun, I take culture to be those webs, and the analysis of it to be therefore not an experimental science insearch of law but an interpretive one in search of meaning”. Culture is therefore the attitudes, customs,
characteristics, and beliefs that define a group of people and distinguish them from another group. Culture canbe defined as shared patterns of behaviours and interaction, cognitive constructs, and affective understandingthat are learned through socialization and allow members to form an identity as part of a group while
distinguishing themselves from other groups (CARLA, 2015). Culture includes knowledge, art, morals, beliefs,
customs, and other capabilities and habits acquired by individuals in society (Said, 1974). There are both
visible and invisible aspects of culture. For instance, Nakamura (2011: 106) says that food, art, architecture,and fashion are visible parts of culture, while ethics, religion, communications, values, and relationships areinvisible. Rather than inherited, culture is learned within and from society. Hofstede (1997: 5) says that culture
is derived from one’s social environment and not from one’s genes, and that it should be distinguished fromboth human nature and individual personality. Although there are numerous definitions of and approaches toculture, they all explain that it is strongly related to our daily life and is transmitted throughout history. Urry
(1990: 83) also notes that tourism in intrinsically part of the contemporary experience of culture, and thus
cannot be separated from wide-ranging cultural developments in contemporary society.
For the purpose of our study, drawing on the previous definitions, we will look at culture as daily life
activities as well as concealed elements that create meaning in the Tagbanua’s lives. By daily activities, forinstance, we refer to practices and customs that are in a sense ‘traditional’. By this we mean what types ofpractices, routines, and rituals are unique to the Tagbanua that have been passed down over generations and124are not part of the larger Filipino culture. These may be farming practices, fishing techniques, planting rituals,
wedding rituals, or feasts and festivals that are not practiced by the wider Filipino society and have been in
existence in the Tagbanua community before colonial times. By hidden elements of culture we have identified
culture as based on beliefs and spiritual meanings that have permeated into society. In some ways these beliefs
are directly related to daily life activities. For example, a crop planting ritual may be based on a belief that by
doing so in a certain way a crop will produce abundantly, or the appearance or sound of a certain animal
signifies the impending arrival of harm or misfortune.

3.2 Cultural change
In an era of mass communication, today’s cultures have come to be characterized by postmodernism. A
postmodern definition of culture involves a dissolving of boundaries between separate cultures, such as
through contact with ‘outsiders’, and also among different cultural forms, such as art, sport, education, andarchitecture (Urry, 1990: 82). Based on these descriptions, it is possible then to discuss culture as a conceptthat is fluid in nature and always evolving, either naturally or as a result of external influence. It is after all
widely agreed that culture is inevitably subject to gradual change (Spenser-Oatey 2012). Cultural change canbe seen as both a process and as a modification in the way of life of a given society. Cultural processes andchanges are classified as growth, disintegration, reintegration, acculturation, and diffusion (Spindler andSpindler, 1959: 38).
The theory of cultural change has been an initial attempt at explaining clear patterns of how culture changes.
Developed by Julian Steward between 1902 and 1972, this refers mainly to the adaptation of human beings totheir changing environments, thereby identifying changes in the natural environment as a cause of culturalchange (Steward 1955). Spenser-Oatey (2012) also identifies innovation, discovery, invention and diffusion
as causes of cultural change. Cultural diffusion can be described as “the spreading of cultural items from one
culture to another” and is considered the main cause of cultural change (Spenser-Oatey 2012: 13).
Consequently, diffusion should be examined more closely when carrying out studies on cultural change,
particularly in relation to tourism development in previously remote areas. A key attribute of cultural diffusion
is that it is a two-way process, meaning that both sides of the exchange are in a position to gain and loseelements of their own culture, although not necessarily equally. Also important to note is that it is not oftenthat borrowed aspects of culture are transferred into another culture in their original form, and some cultural
traits are more easily diffused than others (Spenser-Oatey 2012). Through the process of diffusion elements ofculture will be adopted and adjusted to fit into the host society. With this fluidity, the word ‘traditional’ is also
125

open to debate, since culture is always changing in response to modernization, globalization, and external
contact.
Even though there are interactions between the host society and tourists, it is usually understood that
cultural changes occur mainly in the host society’s lives, customs, traditions, and values, rather than in thoseof the tourists. As Valangendonck and Leman (2007: 127) say, “peoples and places, ways of life and pastnarratives (cultural heritage) are increasingly created, packaged, shaped or transformed fostering and nurturingmass tourism in confrontation with mass tourism.” Since tourism has a very wide scope of human interaction,
it provides many opportunities for the outcome of cultural processes and for positive changes through newforms of cultural expression. Today more people are able to travel and have opportunities to encounter different
cultures, which mean travelers will have an effect on the community and indigenous people’s culture and wayof life.

3.3 Cultural tourism
Tourism is a major source of employment and economic gain worldwide and easily translates into billionsof dollars a year (Chavez, 1999). It is seen as a shortcut to rapid development and a useful tool for debt-ridden
countries. Tourism affects culture in many areas, such as lifestyle, language, social practices, and rituals.
Tourism affects culture in both positive and negative ways. Hall, Gossling and Scott (2015: 180) show somepositive impacts, such as putting a spotlight on local communities and their culture, the strengthening of
cultural identity, cross-cultural exchange, and mutual education. They also mention some negative impacts,
such as loss of cultural identity, standardization of culture, staged authenticity and dilution of cultural traditions.
Cultural tourism is a form of tourism that is marketed to the public by highlighting the customs ofindigenous and exotic peoples in distant or remote places (Yang, 2011: 562). Thus it has been seen as animportant strategy for regional socio-economic development, and images of ethnic people are often used to
attract tourists to local places. Urry states that this can be harmful to indigenous people, since tourism thenruns the risk of becoming organized around ‘staged authenticity’ of cultural traditions, practices, rituals,
performances, dances, and dress, in order to appeal to the tourist gaze (2008: 9). In ethnic tourism ‘culture’
may imply the commodification and exploitation of indigenous peoples for tourism promotion (Capistrano,
2010:2). For instance, ceremonies that were once considered important and sacred may becomecommercialized and enter the realm of the profane, for example when individuals allow themselves to be
photographed in their traditional clothes, or when the original meaning and importance of a song is lost126

(Chavez, 1999). This detracts from their symbolic and spiritual significance and can result in a loss of cultural
identity and understanding.
Due to the Tagbanua’s animist beliefs there are also taboos attributed to certain areas that foreigners do notknow about, thus causing offence to the local people. For example, tourists have bathed nude in waterfalls inCoron, which is discouraged by the local community (Chavez, 1999). Traditional clothes, dances, and rituals
thus are at risk of losing their value and cultural importance when these sacred practices become profane.
Unfortunately, under the influence of tourism there may be a loss of authenticity and identity of traditional
cultures, such as food, folklore, ceremonies, and entertainment, among others, as well as a tendency to mimic
foreigners, in order to satisfy the desires of the mass tourists (Dogan, 1989: 217-218). It is therefore necessary
to discover if and how tourism and culture can coexist in a mutually beneficial way by providing income andemployment to the area without eroding indigenous cultures.

3.4 Indigenous people in the Philippines
While a number of attempts have been made to define exactly who is indigenous, indigenous peoples in thePhilippines can be defined as having historical continuity with a pre-colonial society and consider themselves
distinct from other dominant groups of society; they thus form a non-dominant part of society and aredetermined to preserve their culture in spite of modernization processes (Doyle, 2009: 45).
The International Labour Organization has recognized a long history of discrimination against andexploitation of indigenous peoples of the Philippines, who are usually farmers, fishers, hunters, or forest
dwellers (Candelaria, 2007: 1), and has thus developed two projects: the Project to Promote ILO Policy on
Indigenous Tribal Peoples (PRO 169) and the Interregional Programme to Support Self-Reliance of Indigenous
Tribal Peoples through Cooperatives and Self-Help Organizations (INDISCO). The aims of these projects are
to protect the cultures and traditional lifestyles of indigenous peoples who are often marginalized andexperience increasing poverty due to tourism and development.
The Free Prior and Informed Consent Act (FPIC) is a component of the United Nations Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous People (UNDRIP), and article 8.1 states that “Indigenous peoples and individuals havethe right not to be subjected to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture” (United Nations, 2008: 6).
This means that any changes that are planned on indigenous peoples’ land or domain must pass through theresiding indigenous group and receive their approval. This has been an important step in providing indigenous
people around the world with the voice to speak up against ‘development’ projects that could potentiallybecome a source of cultural exploitation. While other groups of indigenous people live in Coron and the127Calamianes, presently the Filipino Government has only officially recognized the Tagbanua as indigenous
people. According to the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA), ‘indigenous people’ is defined as

A group of people or homogeneous societies identified by the exploitation and ascription byothers, who have continually lived as organized communities on community-bounded and defined
territory, and who have, under claims of ownership since time immemorial, occupied, possessed
and utilized such territories, sharing common bonds of language, customs, traditions and otherdistinctive cultural traits, or who have, through resistance to political, social and cultural inroadsof colonization, non-indigenous religions and cultures, become historically differentiated fromthe majority of Filipinos (Cariño, 2012: 2).

Based on this definition, along with their claims of ancestral domain over their land with regard to tourism
development, the Tagbanua people and their culture were the main subjects of our research. The Tagbanuaalso are part of the Saragpunta, which is an umbrella organization for indigenous peoples in Coron that helps
to protect the rights of local indigenous and minority peoples. The Saragpunta is also involved in formal
documentation of the Tagbanua culture, arranging indigenous schools for children to learn about theirtraditional culture, working with individuals who would like to study English, arts and crafts production anddistribution, financial management training, and working with NGOs for the betterment of the Tagbanua. For
the purpose of this study, unless specified otherwise, the term ‘indigenous people’ will be used to refer to the
Tagbanua only.

3.5 The Tagbanua and their culture
The last few decades have been marked by several important turning points for the Tagbanua. After the
IPRA was granted in 1997 and the CADC was granted in 1998, the Tagbanua subsequently decided to open
their island to tourism. Tourism has since been recognized as a powerful resource to stimulate the economic
growth of Coron Island while sustaining the health and beauty of the natural environment. The local municipal
government, elected in 2004 and re-elected in 2007, has made tourism a top priority, building new hotels andguesthouses, while reconstruction of the airport has also succeeded in bringing investors and tourists to theisland (Fabinyi, 2010: 421-422). Fabinyi (2010) also suggests that in the Philippines, and in Palawan province
in particular, ‘ecotourism’ has become the new buzzword as governments try to both cash in on the financial
windfall of tourist profits and to emphasize various forms of ecotourism as a way of shifting local engagement
128with marine resources away from purely extractive uses. However, this also means that there is the challenge
for the Tagbanua of dealing with outside stakeholders and in their relationships with others (Mayo, Grizelda,
and Antonio, 2006)
Traditionally a seafaring people, the Tagbanua mainly gain their income and sustenance from fishing, while
hunting, farming, honey extraction, and seaweed cultivation practices have also been employed (Dressler,
2005: 21). They subscribe to a deeply animist belief system, which attributes souls to plants, inanimate objects,
and natural phenomena, and a belief in a supernatural power that organizes the universe. There are four main
deities in Tagbanua beliefs: Mangindusa, the lord of the heavens; Polo, the benevolent spirit of the sea;
Sedumunadoc, the god of the earth; and Tabiacoud, who lives deep within the bowels of the earth (Diaz, 2014).
Many local places are sacred to the Tagbanua and are believed to be guarded by spiritual beings and deceased
ancestors, and if you enter a taboo area without the spiritual beings’ approval you will start to ‘get a bad feeling’(Ranada, 2014). It is currently unknown if and to what degree the influence of cultural tourism may cause aloss of cultural authenticity and identity in areas such as traditional food, folklore, ceremonies, entertainment,
and language utilized in order to satisfy the desires of large numbers of tourists (Dogan, 1989: 217-218).

4. Research Objectives
1. Identify the impacts of tourism on Tagbanua culture;
2. Determine the role of the Tagbanua culture in tourism promotion; and3. Examine how the Tagbanua are responding to tourism activity.

5. Research Questions
To achieve our research objectives, we devised the following main research questions and sub-questions toguide us in collecting the necessary information.
1. What initiatives are currently being employed within tourism to promote the Tagbanua culture?
1.1 Are the Tagbanua involved in these initiatives?
1.2 How is the Tagbanua culture being used as a tourist attraction?
1.3 What do tourists understand about the Taganua and their culture?

2. How is the Tagbanua culture responding to tourist activities?
2.1 How does tourist activity contribute to the preservation or erosion of the Tagbanua culture?
2.2 What is effect of tourism on cultural awareness among the Tagbanua?

129

6. Methodology
6.1 Research framework and research site
Our research was case study in design as we chose to focus as deeply as time would allow on the
Tagbanua people living in and around Coron and Busuanga. The main site for our fieldwork was in Coron
town, including the barangay Balisongan and also Banuang Da’an on Coron Island. We also went to thebarangay Japnai on Calauit Island in the northern part of Busuanga.

6.2 Data collections methods and participants
Focus group discussions – We conducted a total of five focus group discussions (FGDs). On 16 September we
conducted two FGDs in Balisongan, consisting of five and eleven participants, respectively. 1) The participantsin the first FGD were married or widowed women aged 46 to 67 who were all seaweed farmers and housewives
originally from Balisongan. 2) The participants in the second FGD consisted of four men aged 26 to 56 andseven women aged 33 to 70. All participants were married, originally from the same sitio (a smaller subdivisionof a barangay) of Balisongan, and were seaweed and root crop farmers. 3) We conducted a third FGD withcouncil members of the Saragpunta consisting of nine participants. There were eight male participants aged 38
to 54 and one 36-year-old female participant. All were married and had come from various barangays
throughout Coron and Busuanga. On 17 September we conducted two FGDs in the barangay Banuang Da’an.
1) The first consisted of six male participants aged 39 to 85 and three female participants aged 60 to 69. Seven
were married except for one man and one woman who were each widowed, and they were mainly fishermen,
while two men were identified as the village secretary and the village elder. One participant was from barangay
Cabugaw, and the rest were from Banuang Da’an. 5) The second FGD was held with three men originallyfrom Banuang Da’an. They were 48, 48, and 56 years old, married, and fishermen as well as council members.

Key informant interviews – We conducted a total of five interviews with individuals we believed were
important to our research, including Local Government Unit (LGU) officials, the Municipal Agriculture
Officer, the Tourism Officer, Planning Director, and a municipal doctor. We also conducted a group interview
with Legislative Council members and a question-and-answer session with the founder and coordinator of thelocal NGO Coron Initiative.

Field observations – The nature of our research allowed us to participate in a tourist-targeted homestay programwith a Tagbanua family from 19 to 20 September. Although a regular experience usually is about three days
130

and two nights, we went for two days and one night. The homestay was on the island of Caluit in the northernpart of Busuanga in the barangay Japnai. This opportunity allowed us to experience a day in the life of a
Tagbanua family. We were able to watch and experience rice harvesting, fishing, crab catching, cooking, andmeal time, as well as visit a local school and jewelry maker.

Informal interviews and discussions – This was largely carried out during the homestay program, as we wereable to spend a large amount of time in a relaxed setting. We had some questions prepared before the homestay,and many new questions arose throughout the weekend. The main informants were the family member withwhom we stayed, Amie and Aliot Vergara, their son Gerald Vergara, and our boat driver, Armond. We could
also get some information regarding schools and education as well as how jewelry is made, distributed, andsold.

Survey – Our survey was conducted with tourists in Coron. We spent two two-hour evenings on the top of Mt.
Tapyas, as this is a popular tourist destination in Coron town. We conducted surveys with a total of 30 Filipino
and foreign tourists to find out what information is already known about indigenous people, their culture, andthe Tagbanua, as well as tourists’ level of interest in learning about or experiencing indigenous peoples’ culture
and way of life.

6.3 Analysis
We did narrative analysis of our FGDs, formal and informal interview, and field observation findings andquantitative analysis of our survey findings.

6.4 Limitations
The most obvious limitation to our research was time, especially since we were conducting what could beclassified as a cultural study. Since ethnographic studies typically take months or years to complete, we were
not able to get such an in-depth analysis of the current tourism situation in only six days of fieldwork.

7. Results
7.1 The current tourism situation
7.1.1 Poverty and malnourishment

131

The tourism industry in Coron is made up of multiple individuals and corporate bodies, and we were able
to identify the Tagbanua, the LGU, the National Council of Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), the private sector, andNGOs, including the Saragpunta. Despite the economic gains from tourism, it is difficult to ignore the poverty
levels among the Tagbanua. In Balisongan, we witnessed one family receiving food rations from the Food andAgriculture Organization, while also still relying on their traditional root crops and seaweed production for
nourishment (Photo 1). Poverty among the Tagbanua was further confirmed by the municipal doctor who
identified malnutrition, parasitism, and poor sanitation as plaguing mostly the inland communities. In
comparison, during the homestay, our host family seemed to have an abundance of food, including rice,bananas, fish, chickens, and crabs.

7.1.2 The Tagbanua’s inclusion in tourism
Tourism activities are mainly concentrated in the two barangays, Banuan Da’an and Lahala, which has
left the Tagbanua communities further inland both unexposed to tourism and unprepared for any form ofinteraction with tourists and the tourism sector. This is largely due to a lack of inclusive planning, an ineffective
system of wealth redistribution, and insufficient community participation. It is important to note how illequipped the Tagbanua were in general for the introduction of tourism. One of the members of the Saragpunta
stated that “There was no prior co-ordination between the IPs and the LGU and tourism sort of ‘happened’ tous. We lack the capacity to properly manage Kayangan Lake and maintain our culture. We have alreadyPhoto 1 Root Crops and Cultivated Seaweed

Note: Corot (left) is poisonous unless soaked in saltwater overnight.
Source: Photos taken during focus group discussion in Balisongan.

compromised some of our beliefs for the sake of the wider community” (Saragpunta member A, Coron, 16132September 2015). This indicates to us that tourism seems to have been pushed on the Tagbanua without theirfull understanding or approval of what it might entail.
Concerning the LGU, the study revealed that there is largely a focus on environmental conservation,
ecotourism, and developing a ‘sustainable’ type of tourism. A study was supposedly underway to determine
the carrying capacity of Coron, or how many tourists, businesses, and investors the area is able to handle.
Despite this focus on environmental sustainability, plans to expand infrastructure and other amenities to betteraccommodate tourists’ needs seem to be prioritised over the needs of the Tagbanua, such as better health care,education facilities, and improved security in income generation. There are few working plans oriented towards
the preservation of the Tagbanua way of life and culture, although a major challenge stated by the LGU is a
general lack of funding for future plans. It was also revealed that while there are intentions to include
indigenous peoples’ culture in future tourism plans, the LGU and has no direct involvement with the Tagbanua
community, which could make it difficult to see any cultural tourism plans to fruition. On the other hand, theprivate sector seems to be more aware of the potential for cultural preservation and cultural tourism, withCoron Initiative, for example, having created various packages related to cultural tourism. Other NGOs havealso been involved in projects with the Tagbanua, but these projects are uncoordinated, and the lack of ascreening has resulted in some cases of exploitation and abuse of some vulnerable members of the community,
such as children.
While tourism in Coron is received with both optimism and reservation by the Tagbanua and otherstakeholders, there seem to be conflicting ideas and a general lack of coordination about what ‘development’should consist of, with the LGU focused on building a modern city and the Tagbanua focused on social,educational, and health benefits. According to a Saragpunta program coordinator, “Our idea of development
is not expanding roads, big airports, and big malls” (Saragpunta member B, Coron, 21 September 2015). Whileboth the LGU and the Tagbanua have been developing their own plans that include tourism – the Tagbanuawith the Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development Protection Plan (ADSDPP) – there is no consultation
between the two. The public sector seems to have conflicting interests as well, with the NCIP working closelywith the Tagbanua, while at the same time not coordinating with the LGU where cultural preservation is needed.
There seems to be a general lack of awareness regarding the importance and potential of the Tagbanua culture
as a source of tourism promotion, with the need to conserve that culture going largely unrecognised. Many
stakeholders appear to have very little information as to how a mutually beneficial approach to cultural tourism
can be developed. While the few Tagbanua who are aware of the importance of their culture and its
vulnerability to exploitation have taken some form of initiative to protect it, such as writing a book, partnering
133with individual investors to manage a beach, or construct a mini museum, these initiatives do not always create
income and social equality among the Tagbanua.

7.2 The Tagbanua and tourism
While many Tagbanua are interacting more with tourists and tourism activities, not all are. This is partly
due to the fact that the Tagbanua have a history of being discriminated against, being called ‘primitive’ anddepicted as having ‘uncivilized’ cultural practices, and not being respected or valued by those in tourism anddecision-making activities. The Planning Officer of Coron stated that the tourism boom originating in 2001
began because of the Tagbanua deciding to open access to Kayangan Lake, and it was apparent to us that only
the Tagbanua living in coastal areas and near tourist destinations receive monetary benefit from tourism.
Respondents in Balisongan said that they have never met tourists within their villages, since they live inlandand far from beaches and other attractive sites. Tagbanua living away from tourism activities were more visiblypoor that those in coastal regions, and our observations were confirmed by the municipal doctor, who statedthat many Tagbanua are still malnourished. Therefore, we were able to find that whether the Tagbanua benefit
from tourism or not is related to their location in Coron and whether they live near tourism activities. Throughour interviews with the Tagbanua living in different areas we found that tourism can be both helpful andharmful to the Tagbanua peoples’ lives and their culture.

7.2.1 Helpful features of tourism
The Human Resources Development Officer of Coron mentioned that tourism plays a critical role byproviding jobs and income to families in many communities. For example, as more tourists come to Coron,
more fish are sold in markets and restaurants, which creates employment opportunities for fisherfolk, boatowners, and restaurant owners. However, these beneficiaries are not necessarily Tagbanua, and we found no
instances of Tagbanua owning their own business in the commercial sector of Coron.
The Tagbanua themselves expressed to us that they have felt economic benefits from tourism, as we asked
focus groups in each village what their understanding of tourism is and what are their perceptions and opinionsof it. For instance, many respondents answered that tourism is important and is good for the community, as it
brings in money, and families can now send their children to school. One male respondent who works as aboat engine mechanic could gain new income by repairing boats more often, as well as by selling seaweed torestaurants. Another woman’s daughter now had the opportunity to go to university and study about tourism,

134

thanks to income from tourism. Respondents in Banuang Da’an also mentioned they have learned how to scuba
dive and can perform rescue activities on the beach and in the ocean.
We found that the Tagbanua generally have a positive attitude when it comes to interacting with tourists
with the only major exception being the language barrier. This was the main obstacle to achieving closer
relations with tourists, and respondents in all focus groups with Tagbanua respondents stated that they would
like to be able to communicate more effectively with tourists. However, despite this difficulty incommunicating, many respondents said that they try their best to communicate with tourists using the English
or Tagalog words that they know, as well as gestures.

7.2.2 Harmful impacts of tourism
Despite the positive attitude toward tourism and tourists, there are also negative impacts of tourism. When
we conducted interviews in Balisongan, two respondents mentioned that tourism is not good because tourists
bring drugs, and one respondent recalled a story of his son being punched in the face by a drunken tourist.
Also, even though the Tagbanua are positive about the increase in income generated through tourism, there
are also negative economic impacts. Preparing meals and food which could previously be done inexpensively
or for free now requires money to buy ingredients due to the rise in market prices caused by the tourism
industry. For example, the price of a coconut has gone up from 3PHP to 50PHP in the last fifteen years, andmany Tagbanua in poorer communities of Balisongan cannot afford diesel for their boat or tricyle, which is a
motorcycle with a sidcar attached to it.
Another drawback is in education. During our meeting with the legislative council, we discovered that there
is a concern that the current method of educating the Tagbanua children will ultimately result in a complete
erosion of their traditions and culture as they follow a mainstream Filipino curriculum. However, education,
especially learning English, is important for employment in the tourism industry, so it will be necessary for
the Tagbanua, the LGU, and those in education to reach an agreement on how to educate Tagbanua children
to be competitive and valuable workers while retaining elements of their culture.

7.3 The Tagbanua and their culture
7.3.1 Food and rituals of the Tagbanua culture
The dietary habits of the Tagbanua are different from that of other Filipinos, and they eat mainly root crops
as a staple food. They did not traditionally eat rice, but these days farm both upland and lowland varieties fortheir own consumption and to sell to markets. Some of their traditional root crops include corot, camote, and135

cassava. Older generations mentioned that they do not enjoy eating onions and garlic, but younger generations
do not seem to have a problem. Although their traditional rice wine and coffee is rarely made and drunk
anymore, they mentioned that the consumption of beer and spirits has been increasing since the 1990s. Manyof the Tagbanua we met, especially those who hosted us during the homestay, were living an entirely selfsufficient life. Their way of agriculture and seafood attainment is still conducted using traditional methods,
such as slash-and-burn farming, harvesting rice and vegetables by hand, hand and line fishing, spear fishing,and crab cages placed in mangrove bushes.
We also found that the Tagbanua have many traditional dances and ceremonies. However, it is rare for thepeople to perform these now. One ceremony that is still practiced today is the traditional marriage ceremony
with a hand and wine ritual between husband and wife 1. The Full Moon festival was started in 2011 at therequest of tourists and is held yearly in the late summer. While a mix of traditional dances and songs, thefestival itself is a recent creation targeted to tourists. Some rituals that are no longer practiced include
agriculture rites related to planting and harvesting. For instance, before planting a crop the community elder
would go out early in the morning and walk across the field naked while praying for a good harvest, and during
harvest several people would cross the field one after the other in a line. It is also traditionally believed thatplanting two fields at the same time would not yield abundant crops, although this ritual is not necessarily
practiced anymore.

7.3.2 The changing of the Tagbanua culture
The Tagbanua of Balisongan said that they have been experiencing cultural change since the 1960-70s,
which is before the arrival of large numbers of tourists. The Tagbanua food culture is gradually changing
because of the arrival of outside products, including rice, fruits, and soft drinks. Furthermore, their selfsufficient lifestyle is also changing, as it is becoming very easy to buy premade and ready-to-eat foods in themarkets. However, this means that the Tagbanua need money to buy their food, which is an increasing concern
among lower-income communities. NGOs, such as Coron Initiative and the Saragpunta, have said that one of
the ways that the diet of the Tagbanua is changing is due to the decrease of fish compared to fifteen years ago.
They pointed out this loss is a result of overfishing and excessive demand for seafood from the tourism industry.
This also causes a change in the methods used to catch fish, with more need to use deep-sea fishing methods,
since staying near the shore does not generate a large enough catch to feed or support families. Cultural change

1

To respect Filipino laws on publishing indigenous rituals, we will not describe this ritual in detail.
136

may be inevitable now, but Coron Initiative has said that it has already started documentation of the traditional
elements of the Tagbanua culture.

7.3.3 The Tagbanua people
Many Tagbanua seemed to be quite reserved but also proudly identify themselves as Tagbanua. In ourinterview with the Saragpunta, it was explained that the Tagbanua are generally very shy and quiet. This makes
it difficult for them to communicate with others, especially tourists. But the Saragpunta also mentioned that
the Tagbanua people are developing their communication skills and are becoming more confident throughincreased interactions with tourists. This indicates that previous social reservations may change as English is
now taught to children, and the younger generation is becoming more able to speak English without hesitation.
Easier communication between Tagbanua and tourists may be beneficial in helping the Tagbanua share theirculture with outsiders. Although there are some aspects of their culture that they are not willing to share, andany sharing must receive approval by elders, the Tagbanua seemed to be happy to share their culture with those
who are interested. During focus group discussions many Tagbanua described themselves as respectful,understanding of each other, able to empathize with others’ experiences, and eager to share their blessings withothers. During our focus group discussion in the sitio in Balisongan, our respondents said that until we asked
them about their culture they had never considered it deeply, but being made to think about it during ourmeeting, it was obvious that they realized how proud they were to be Tagbanua.

7.4 Tourism initiatives to preserve culture
7.4.1 Festivals and events
We were able to discover several different ways in which tourism and the Tagbanua culture are apparently
coexisting in Coron. Since our explanation of culture includes festivals and rituals based on the Tagbanua preChristianity belief system, we were interested in finding out what role these events play in tourism promotion
today. One particular festival that we heard about several times was the Full Moon Festival or Full Moon
Dance. Initially we believed that this had been performed for many years and was an indigenous dance andperformance by the Tagbanua people. However, we eventually discovered that it was in fact only created in2011 by Coron Initiative. The event is held once a year toward the end of summer and was started for the
benefit of and upon request from tourists. It is held in Banuang Da’an, has a maximum of 50 guests, anddisplays elements of the Tagbanua culture, including a war dance and sung poems. While Coron Initiative
provides the sequence and flow of the event, all dances, performances, and songs are done by volunteer
137

Tagbanua people, usually elders, who wear traditional clothes and festival costumes. The sounds are all natural,and no amplifiers, speakers, or technology is used, and the event is enjoyed by tourists, local people, and the
Tagbanua. Unfortunately, due to timing, we were not able to observe and experience this event.
When speaking with the tourism officer of the LGU about any strategies to include the Tagbanua culture
as a tourist attraction, we uncovered another event that will take place for the first time in 2015 and regularlyin the future. It is called Coron Night at Coron Bay, which would include various dances and arts and crafts
on display and for purchase. Currently this event is marketed mainly by private tour companies and NGOs,
such as Coron Initiative. The event will be held at Coron Bay and there will be no entrance fee for viewers.
The aim of the event is for indigenous people to showcase their culture, although it is unclear if ‘indigenous
people’ includes other groups besides the Tagbanua. There are also plans to include a space for the Tagbanua
to sell arts, crafts, and other goods at the local market.
In general, the Tagbanua who we spoke to seemed willing to share their culture with tourists, including
festivals and dance performances. However, it became clear that although many in the younger generations do
not see a problem with performing for tourists, many of our respondents stated that they must first receive
permission from elders before sharing traditions and rituals with cultural outsiders. For instance, we were told
some of the customs and formalities that take place within a Tagbanua wedding, and while our respondents
were willing to describe these details to us, they expressed concern and were not willing to have them publishedor allow outsiders to attend a traditional wedding ceremony. We later found some exceptions or contradictions
to this while, during our homestay observations, we heard a story about a Canadian couple who had been
granted permission to be married in a complete Tagbanua ceremony, which is officially and legally recognized.
Perhaps the Tagbanua did not see this couple as outside observers, or there are discrepancies among barangays
regarding the desire to share sacred cultural elements.

7.4.2 Museums and restaurants
The barangay Lahala also holds the only mini museum that we could locate that is dedicated to the
Tagbanua people and their culture. It is organised in collaboration with Coron Initiative and one local
Tagbanua family in an effort to promote cultural tourism and preserve some aspects of the Tagbanua culture
in addition to other guided tribal activities, such as bird watching. The purpose of these activities andenterprises in Lahala are to allow tourists to learn some of the history of the Tagbanua while interacting withlocal people. There is awareness of the cultural commercialisation that comes with museums, but the NGO has
stated that it wants the Tagbanua to be proud of who they are and showcase their culture, although we did not138learn how the larger population of the Tagbanua feel about these initiatives and their opinions on whether theirculture is being exploited for commercial tourism purposes. We did hear from many Tagbanua that tourism isgenerally perceived of as good, since it helps bring money into the community, though this may come at theexpense of cultural integrity. Although not museums, there are several souvenir shops in Coron town
containing wood carvings and woven goods. They are beautiful and interesting and clearly resemble what one
would expect of ‘indigenous arts and crafts’, but we could not detect who was making the goods. Whether
they are made by the Tagbanua, other indigenous people, non-indigenous local people, or mass made in Manila
and shipped to Coron, the shops contained no signage or information explaining the crafters, the meanings ofcarvings, or any indigenous information for tourists.
There is one ‘Tagbanua inspired’ fusion restaurant in Coron that we could find called Kawayanan Grill
Station, although we were not able to verify that the food was actually based on traditional Tagbanua dishes.
Also, the interior of the restaurant did not seem to display or publicise that the meals contained elements of
Tagbanua food, such as indigenous root crops, rice, and seaweed dishes. This is an area that the LGU may
want to pursue further, as tourists may be interested in learning about indigenous food and culture during theirvacation in Coron.

7.4.3 Homestay program
We were very fortunate to have the opportunity to participate in the homestay program that is organisedby the Saragpunta with a family in the barangay Japnai off the northern part of Busuanga Island. Our stay was
two days and one night, while a regular stay is usually three days and two nights, with the longest stays lastingfor one week. Tourists do not come often, and the last guests that our family hosted was in December 2014.
Guests are usually European. We were unable to find the information on the Saragpunta website and instead
heard about it from one of our interview respondents, who also ended up being our guide and translator during
the experience. The homestay program was started in 2010 with families hosting guests on Calauit, Malaowig,
and Culion Islands. The only requirements for a family to open their home to tourists is the willingness andcommitment to guide, feed, provide a place to sleep, and host their stay. They should have their own source offood and their own boats. In the village we visited, only four families have opened their households to tourists.
Our family stated that the maximum number of people they would be able to comfortably host is ten – they
once hosted fifteen guests, but this was too difficult to manage. The purpose of the homestay program is toallow tourists the opportunity to experience the Tagbanua way of life. All fees that tourists pay to participate
in the stay go directly to the family, and the Saragpunta does not take any earnings but only helps facilitate.
139

Although we stayed with one family it is common for the entire community to take responsibility in keeping
guests safe. Activities during the homestay include many daily doings, and guests usually just ‘tag along’ withthe family as they do their regular tasks, such as fishing, hunting, and cooking.
On our first day we traveled by small boat through a mangrove forest to our village on Calauit. Once there
we were welcomed by our host family and served lunch consisting of coconut water, rice, and fish, served incoconut shells and banana tree bark. We then learned the difference between the lowland wet rice that has been

Photo 2 Four Stages of Harvesting Upland Rice

Note: The rice stalks are cut by hand, stepped on to separate the leaves, pounded toremove the outer husk, and shaken to remove access dust before cooking.
Source: Photos taken during the homestay program on Calauit.

introduced by the LGU and the upland dry rice that is preferred by the Tagbanua, although the farming style
employs the controversial slash-and burn method. We then proceeded with our host, Gerald, to cut and collectthe stalks of rice, separate the leaves from the grains, and remove the hulls to prepare for cooking (Photo 2).
We also accompanied Gerald and Armond on their boats to go hand line and spear fishing, which are methods
traditionally practiced by the Tagbanua. Upon returning to the household we checked previously set crab traps,
although there was only one crab and the rest were empty. Our hosts mentioned that fish and crab catches havebeen decreasing in recent years, which is largely attributed to overfishing and illegal fishing by non-Tagbanua
people. Over dinner we had informal discussions with our host family who was able to tell us some traditional
beliefs and stories, although since the introduction of Christianity and modernization many of the younger
generations are forgetting Tagbanua tales and legends. We spent the night in houses that are on raised stilts toprevent damage from termites and slept on traditional woven sleeping mats.
On our second day we visited a local school and spoke briefly with a grade three class and a grade eightclass. We also visited a local crafter who makes necklaces and bracelets to sell in her small shop. The initiative
to form a jewelry committee began two or three years ago, and the jewelry is bought by locals, tourists whocome to the village, and is distributed to buyers in Coron. The items are made from seeds found in the140mountains, but there is only one hand crank drill used, so it is inconveniently rotated among villages. Lunch
was spent with Gerald’s family in the village, and we were served the fish caught the previous day as well as
the rice that we had harvested. We also learned that although many people use Western medicine provided bya nurse in the community, many still visit traditional healers and rely on herbal medicines to treat some ailments,
such as snake bites. During our stay we were fortunate to have several English, Filipino, and Tagbanuatranslators who could assist us with language difficulties, but it seemed that a regular homestay experiencewould not necessarily have a language facilitator. This has the potential to make communication quite difficult
depending on the level of English of the host family as well as the guests.
The founder of Coron Initiative stated that the commercialisation of culture “is on its way whether wewant it or not” but also that he does not want to create another ‘tourist disaster’, such as that on Borocay, withits beaches littered with souvenir shops and restaurants, crowds of people throughout the island, andharassment from locals (Coron Initiative member A, Coron, 22 September 2015). It would be nearly impossible
to prevent some changes in the Tagbanua culture, especially since there have already been many changes with
the introduction of Christianity and domination by Filipino society. And while ‘progress’ and ‘development’in Coron may presently include tourism and tourism promotion, it is important to remember the indigenous
people and cultures of the area. There currently seems to be a lack of balance between increased tourism andpreservation of indigenous cultures. A middle ground has not been reached that does not trivialize, ignore, or
capitalize on the Tagbanua culture to their disservice.

7.5 Tourists’ knowledge of indigenous culture in Coron
7.5.1 General findings
We conducted a survey with tourists who visited Coron to find out their knowledge and understanding ofCoron and its indigenous peoples by spending two two-hour evenings on the top of Mt. Tapyas, a popular
tourist destination, on the 18th and 22nd of September. We spoke with a total of 30 respondents, sixteen ofwhom were Filipino and fourteen of whom were foreign tourists, to find out what information is already known
about indigenous peoples, their culture, and tourists’ level of interest in learning about or experiencing
indigenous peoples’ culture and way of life.
According to our survey, we found that tourists generally planned to stay three to five days in Coron, but
if they could stay longer, many would like to stay for about two weeks. Most of the tourists we surveyed had
found out about Coron through a website, such as blog, travel page, social media or through their friends. The
reason why tourists chose to come to Coron is generally because of the beautiful nature and marine sports,
141such as scuba diving and snorkeling. Tourists knew some information regarding the area before they actuallycame to Coron, such as the beauty of the island, sightseeing spots, and shipwrecks.
Regarding knowledge of indigenous peoples, only three Filipino tourists knew the indigenous peoples inCoron, and only one person knew the name Tagbanua (Chart 1). This means that 90% of the tourists did notknow who the Tagbanua are. Despite this, 24 respondents, or 80%, were interested in learning about orexperiencing indigenous peoples’ culture during their vacation in Coron, including a homestay program, while
10% were not interested and 10% were undecided (Chart 2). Both Filipino and foreign tourists were equallyinterested in learning about indigenous cultures.

7.5.2 Increasing awareness of indigenous people
Based on what we have found through the survey, first it is possible to mention that there is a need toprovide information about culture of indigenous people and the Tagbanua to tourists, since most of the tourists
142did not know about any indigenous peoples but were interested. If the tourists can easily get information on
the Tagbanua, such as on travel brochures or internet sites, more tourists might be interested in their culture,
which would encourage them to participate in cultural activities such as a homestay program. Second, it is truethat in general foreign tourists did not know about the existence of indigenous peoples, and even among
Filipinos tourists only three out of 16 knew about the indigenous in Coron. One Filipino respondent mentionedthat she knew about the Tagbanua because she learned about indigenous peoples in her school days, but thiswas a rare case. However, even though the tourists did not know who the Tagbanua are, as we have seen earlier
most were interested in somehow participating in the culture of the Tagbanua, but they did not know about
any program or activity that would provide educational activities regarding indigenous culture. This meansthat there is lack of connection between tourists’ desires and programs which provide opportunities for learning
about and experiencing the culture of the Tagbanua. For example, about one third of our respondents wereinterested in participating in a homestay program, and while there are some homestay programs on threeislands, few tourists have experienced this. If the desires of tourists and the NGO which organizes the homestay
program complement each other, it would mean that more tourists could not only learn about the culture of the
Tagbanua but also share their knowledge with their friends. For example, in the homestay program organizedby the Saragpunta, families provide participation in traditional activities of the Tagbanua, such as harvesting
rice and fishing, and tourists can learn how to prepare traditional meals and then enjoy them. Thus, homestay
programs can promote a wider range of experiences that tourists cannot experience normally.

8. Recommendations
We found that there are several challenges when considering incorporating Tagbanua culture within the
tourism industry in Coron. These include lack of coordination among actors, educational limits among the
Tagbanua that prevent them from actively participating, the risk of cultural exploitation and erosion,community cooperation, and differing opinions on future tourism development. In order to address thesechallenges, we identified four areas for improvement: capacity building, coordination and cooperation,
incorporation of culture, and childhood education.

8.1 Capacity building
Aref and Redzuan identify that capacity building is essentially about empowerment and state that “[t]hesuccess of tourism development requires that all stakeholders understand that investments in community
capacities are necessary for development” (Aref & Redzuan, 2009: 24). Based on this understanding, the study
143

identifies a need for capacity building for the LGU, the Tagbanua, and NGOs. One of the main challenges of
the Tagbanua suddenly finding themselves managing tourism businesses in their villages is the language
barrier. Therefore, an immediate solution such as English language training courses is required to enable
increased participation of adult Tagbanua in tourism activities. There is room for improvement in meeting andmanaging tourist expectations. While the LGU and the private sector may have adequate skills to manage
various tourism activities, more education and training on the culture and the way of life of the Tagbanua will
help in harmonizing future tourism development plans among stakeholders. The LGU would also benefit fromproviding training for the Tagbanua on how to manage and promote cultural tourism, while at the same timepreserving their culture and avoiding exploitation. In Table 1 we propose several recommendations forcapacity building, their target stakeholders, and the coordinating body.

Table 1: Recommendations for Capacity Building

TargetActivity
stakeholder
recommendation
English language training
Training on tourism andcultural tourism
Safety practices; managing
tourist expectations
Business and financial
management
Community involvement
and tourism development

Tagbanua

LGU

NGOs

LGU

o
o

o

o

o

o

LGU in partnership with theSaragpunta and NCIP
Private sector and LGU
NGOs in partnership with
LGU

o
o

Co-ordinating bodyoIn recommending these training programs we do not ignore the likelihood of financial limitations.
Development organisations such as the World Bank have previously supported cultural preservation efforts
within the tourism industry. One such example is the US$ 45 million Cultural Heritage Preservation andTourism Sector Support Project in Haiti funded by the World Bank (Report no. PAD610, 2014). This project
was targeted at conservation and management of cultural and natural sites that drive and service tourist
demands, while supporting the tourism sector of development through community engagement, tourism
planning, product development, and institutional capacity building. On a smaller scale, a tourism sector
training budget could be established by the LGU to facilitate the programs, since capacity building is a key
component for sustainable tourism development.
144

8.2 Coordination and cooperation
We identified a need for coordination and cooperation between the four main stakeholders in Coron, theTagbanua, the LGU, the private sector, and NGOs, since several cultural tourism activates were planned but
not effectively implemented. However, considering the danger of erosion and commercialization of the culture,
coordination and cooperation between these stakeholders must make a significant effort to protect and promote
the Tagbanua culture equitably. We have identified four specific recommendations to increase coordinationand cooperation. The first is a regular meeting held by the LGU to discuss tourism development among
stakeholders, since this can provide a space to share opinions and discuss cultural tourism plans. The second
is to establish a separate governing body to increase coordination, accountability, and transparency among
stakeholders. The third recommendation is positive protection policy as recommended by the WorldIntellectual Property Organization, since this would give the Tagbanua community the rights to theirindigenous knowledge and empower them to promote traditional medicinal knowledge and prevent
commercial exploitation. The final recommendation is the implantation of formal safety standards in thecurrent homestay program, including a health insurance system. For instance, when we travelled to thehomestay on Calauit and went fishing to a different island, there were no lifejackets on the boats in the eventof the boat tipping. Also, the people on Calauit used both traditional and Western medicine, but there were not
any hospitals and doctors available. The host of the homestay family has already committed to the
responsibility of caring for tourists’ safety, but this has not yet been achieved at an appropriate level.

8.3 Incorporation of culture
The promotion of the history of Coron and indigenous peoples’ culture can play a positive part in tourism
development. Although one third of the tourists we surveyed did not know about the Tagbanua, we found thatmost of them wanted to know about and experience the Tagbanua culture. One of the reasons that they do notknow is that there is no place to learn about the history and culture in Coron, including the Tagbanua’s festivals,
feasts, music, crafts, and dances. If there is a space, such as a museum, Coron tourists may become moreinterested in the Tagbanua culture. If tourists are interested in the Tagbanua culture, the incentive to join ahomestay program will also be increased. Moreover, the Tagbanua themselves have a generally positive
opinion regarding promoting their culture as a tourism attraction. That is why incorporation of culture andtraditions in tourism planning is beneficial for not only the preservation of culture but also tourism
development in Coron. However, cooperation between the LGU and the Tagbanua is essential to achieve this
goal.
145

8.4 Childhood education
We have identified three ways that education can be beneficial in promoting cultural tourism and preventing
loss of traditional culture in Coron. First, we believe that the Tagbanua culture should be taught to nonTagbanua Filipinos, since there are some people who look down on the Tagbanua and their way of life.
Education of the local population on the Tagbanua culture, customs, and traditions should hopefully create abetter understanding of the Tagbanua and a more positive understanding and attitude toward the uniquenessof their culture, rather than their culture be a source of ridicule. This would not only instill more pride in the
Tagbanua and make them more willing to show their culture to outsiders, but it would also create an interest
among the non-Tagbanua population to attend cultural events and shows. Since even Filipino tourists hardly
know about the Tagbanua, this information should be taught as part of the regular school curriculum evenoutside of Coron. Second, incorporation of cultural classes targeted to Tagbanua children in formal educationis needed. Particularly, education about the Tagbanua language, traditions, beliefs, and cultural practices canbe incorporated into the regular education system and taught by trained Tagbanua instructors so that children
and future generations do not forget their distinctive culture in the process of globalization and the increased
diffusion of foreign cultural elements that comes from catering to tourists and tourists themselves. Third, earlyeducation taught in the Tagbanua language is important. Nowadays more children are studying in Filipino or
English and not Tagbanua, but fewer opportunities to learn and use the Tagbanua language will eventuallylead to the death of the language. Loss of the language would also result in a loss of traditional songs, stories,
and knowledge, as well as communication with elders. Language loss may lead to a decrease of cultural
knowledge and traditional ways of life, so in order to prevent this, early education in the Tagbanua language
is important. Having people who can speak Tagbanua could also be incorporated into tourism, as Tagbanua
tour guides could teach tourists original words and their meanings, or even hold Tagbanua language lessons
prior to or as a part of the homestay program.

9. Discussion
It is unfortunate that the Tagbanua culture may be trivialized, ignored, or underestimated in its ability topromote tourism in a way that is also beneficial to the Tagbanua. Although there was some understanding of
the need to preserve the unique culture of the Tagbanua, it often comes second to the needs of tourists, such asbuilding infrastructure and more toilets. This lack of coordination for projects and communication with the
Tagbanua is already creating tensions between stakeholders, and despite owning the land rights in Coron, theTagbanua are still fairly powerless against big government and tourism development plans.
146

Only recently has the Tagbanua culture been recognized as a target of documentation, which is evident in
the lack of information. Therefore, written and photographic documentation strategies are necessary inrecording this information, since younger generations are starting to forget traditions, beliefs, stories, andknowledge. This not only benefits the Tagbanua themselves by helping them maintain their identity in the faceof cultural change, but can also provide information for tourism planners who wish to collaborate with the
Tagbanua to promote their culture as a tourist attraction. Of course this must be met with the complete approvaland management of the Tagbanua so commercialization and commodification of culture does not occur. For
instance, cultural tourism may be a way to preserve festivals, dances, and songs that would otherwise gradually
be performed less and less frequently. However, in performing significant events and rituals there must also
be efforts to maintain the original meanings behind them so that they are not forgotten or become just a show
for tourists. In this way it is apparent that the idea of cultural tourism can create a type of tourism that is twosided, and we are not endorsing the idea of unconditional cultural tourism. Rather, any tourism developmentthat plans to include the Tagbanua culture must be managed by the Tagbanua themselves at all times, and all
involved should be very aware of the dangers of cultural commodification, erosion, and staged authenticity.
The Tagbanua must be given the power to permit any activities to take place and also prevent or interfere in
activities that are or become exploitative.
Although at present the Tagbanua culture does not play a major role in tourism, there are some small
initiatives and plans. However, reaching a mutually beneficial form of cultural tourism will have its challenges,
especially with so many differing perspectives about the future of tourism in Coron. Also, different
stakeholders must learn to work together, and the Tagbanua should not become the dominated stakeholder
who is coerced into performing their sacred dances and songs. Instead the culture should be protected througheducation to appreciate its uniqueness and to eliminate discrimination against the Tagbanua. Like many otherindigenous peoples, the Tagbanua are in a vulnerable position, which is why steps must be taken to preserve
the culture and their traditional ways of life. Therefore, we can say that currently the Tagbanua culture is
responding to tourism in that people are slowly becoming aware of the Tagbanua and their culture, and efforts
are increasingly being made to document cultural practices. These efforts can be interpreted as a move topromote culture as a tourist attraction or as an attempt to preserve it in the face of future tourism development.

10. Conclusion
We have outlined that tourism can potentially contribute to cultural erosion; on the other hand, that culture
need not exist in conflict with tourism. Instead, a balance must be found that benefits the Tagbanua while also147

stimulating the local economy, thus improving the lives of the Tagbanua, non-Tagbanua, and tourists in Coron.
The Tagbanua culture is a rich resource for tourism development if used fairly, and can be used to benefit boththe tourism sector as well as the Tagbanua themselves. Therefore, tourism development in Coron should not
overlook the Tagbanua culture and way of life as resource to promote tourism. However, the Tagbanua mustalso be actively involved in future decision making, cultural tourism planning, development, and management
so as to prevent exploitive activities before they begin.

148

Appendices
Sample focus group discussion questions
1. What are your opinions about tourism?
2. How would you describe your interaction with tourists? If no interaction, please explain why, and do you
want to interact more with tourists?
3. Have you noticed any changes in your culture since you started interacting with tourists?
4. How do you showcase your culture to tourists? Do you perform any special dances or ceremonies?
5. How do you feel about sharing your culture with? What aspects of your culture would you like to share with
tourists?
6. Do you think tourism will help protect the Tagbanua way of life? Will it make the Tagbanua forget theirtraditions? How, or why not?

Sample key informant interview questions
1. What is the local governments’ vision for tourism in Coron? What is your vision for tourism?
2. Do you think tourism is helping contribute to the social development of the indigenous people/
3. Do you know the Saragpunta and what activities they’re involved in? Are you willing to work with them?
4. Have you considered including the indigenous peoples’ culture as a tourist attraction?
5. Do you think tourism and culture can be mutually beneficial?
6. Would the LGU be willing to partner with the Tagbanua to develop a centre for making and selling crafts?
7. What are your opinions on tourism and the indigenous peoples’ culture?
8. Are you contributing to the preservation of the indigenous peoples’ culture? If so, how?

Sample survey questions
1. How did you find out about Coron?
2. What did you do or are planning to do in Coron?
3. What did you enjoy or not enjoy?
4. What do you know about Coron?
5. Do you know the indigenous people of Coron?
6. (If yes) Do you know their names? What do you know about them? Have you interacted with them?
7. Are you interested in learning about or experiencing their culture during your vacation in Coron?
8. What would you like to experience and how?
149

References
Aref, F. & Redzuan, M. B. (2009). Community Capacity Building for Tourism Development. Human Ecology
27(1), 21-25
Bernardo, A. V., Rodriguez, A. Z., Fuentebella, V. A., Lee, A., Gulfo, R. L., Maghacot, J., & Banaguas, G.
(2014). ‘Creating climate-disaster resiliency on the indigenous people, “Tagbanuas”, in Coron,
Palawan’. Retrieved from Environmental and Climate Change Research Institute, De La Salle
Araneta University website:
http://www.dlsu.edu.ph/conferences/dlsu_research_congress/2014/_pdf/proceedings/SEEIV-035FT.pdf
Cariño, J. K. (2012). Country Technical Note on Indigenous Peoples Issues: Republic of theRetrieved

fromInternational

Fund

for

Agricultural

Development

Philippines.

(IFAD)

website:http://www.ifad.org/english/indigenous/pub/documents/tnotes/philippines.pdf.
Candelaria, S. M., Dinopol, V. P., Gust, G. A., Lacson, R. D. C., Lopez, J., Medina, C. P. JR., &Arquiuza Y. D. (2007). The road to empowerment: Strengthening the Indigenous Peoples
Rights Act Volume 1, Old Ways, New Challenges. Retrieved from International Labour
Organization website: http://www.ilo.org/manila/publications/WCMS_124793/lang-en/index.htm
Capistrano, R. C. G. (2010). Indigenous peoples, their livelihoods and fishery rights in Canada andPhilippines: paradoxes, perspectives and lessons learned. Division for Ocean Affairs

theand the Lawof the Sea Office of Legal Affairs, The United Nations New York. Retrieved from the UN website:
http://www.un.org/depts/los/nippon/unnff_programme_home/fellows_pages/fellows_papers/capistra
no_0910_philippines.pdf
Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition (CARLA). Retrieved from Center for CARLA
University of Minnesota website: http://carla.umn.edu/culture/definitions.html.
Chavez, R. (1999). Globalisation and tourism: Deadly mix for indigenous people. Third World Resurgenceissue No. 103. Tebtebba Foundation.
Coron, Palawan (2008, Oct. 17). Majika’s Island Resort. Retrieved fromhttps://majikaislandresort.wordpress.com/2008/10/17/coron/
Diaz, P. B. (2014). “Tagbanua”. DocSlide, 23 Nov. 2014. Retrieved from docslide.us on 13 June
2015.
Dogan, H. Z. (1989). Forms of adjustment: Sociocultural Impacts of Tourism. Annals of Tourism
Research, 16(2), 216-236. doi:10.1016/0160-7383(89)90069-8

150Doyle, C. (2009). Indigenous peoples and the Millenium Development Goals – ‘sacrificial lambs’ or equal
beneficiaries?

The

International

Journalof

Human

Rights,13(1),

44-71.

doi:

10.1080/1364298082532431.
Dressler, W. (2005). Disentangling Tagbanua Lifeways, Swidden and Conservation on Palawan Island.
Society for Human Ecology, Human Ecology Review 12(1), 21-29.
Geertz, C. (1973). Chapter 1 Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture. The Interpretationof Cultures (pp. 3-32). Basic Books, Inc., Publishers: New YorkFabinyi, M. (2010). The Intensification of Fishing and the Rise of Tourism: Competing CoastalLivelihoodsin the Calamianes Islands, Philippines. Human Ecology, 38, 415-427.
Hall, M. C., Stefan, G., & Daniel, S. (2015). Tourism and Cultural change. In Melanie, K. S. (Eds.), The
Routledge Handbook of Tourism and Sustainability (pp.175-184). Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group:
London and New York
Hill, C., Serena, L., & Michael, S. (2010). Guide to Free Prior and Informed Consent. Retrieved from Oxfam,
Australia website: http://resources.oxfam.org.au/pages/view.php?ref=1321&k
Hofstede, G. (1997). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. 1st edition, McGraw Hill: USA
Javier, A. (2015). ‘Introduction to the Philippines 4: About Coron’ [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from
Nagoya University Seminar on Overseas Fieldwork.
Lightfoot, S. (2008). Indigenous Rights in International Politics: The Case of “Overcompliant”Liberal States.
Alternatives: Global, Local, Political 33 (1), 83–104. doi:10.1177/030437540803300105.
Linnekin, J. (1997). Consuming cultures: Tourism and the commoditization of cultural identity in the island
Pacific. In Picard, M. (1997). Tourism, Ethnicity and the State in Asian and Pacific Societies (pp. 215–
250). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press.
Mayo-Anda, G., Loreto, L. C., & Antonio, G. M. La Viňa (2006). Is the Concept of “Free and Prior Informed
Consent” Effective as a Legal and Governance Tool to Ensure Equity among Indigenous Peoples? (ACase Study on the Experience of the Tagbanua on Free Prior Informed Consent, Coron Island, Palawan,
Philippines). Survival of the commons: mounting challenges and new realities, the 11th Conference of
the International Association for the Study of Common Property, Bali.
Nakamura, Y. (2011). Intercultural Communication and Experiential Education, Annual report of the
Humanities Research Institute: Chikushi Jogakuen University and Junior College, 22:103-114
Okazaki, E. (2008). A community-based tourism model: It’s conception and use. Journal of Sustainable
Tourism,16(5), 511-529.

151

Philippines Government Census of Population and Housing (2010). Retrieved from Philippines Statistics
Authority website https://psa.gov.ph/statistics/census/population-and-housing
Ranada, P. (2014 July 9). Talking ecotourism with the Tagbanua. Retrieved from Rappler website:
http://www.rappler.com/rappler-blogs/pia-ranada/62729-talking-ecotourism-tagbanua-coron
Rimban, L. (1998 June 25). Tagbanua win first ever ancestral waters claim. Retrieved from Philippine Center
for Investigative Journalism website: http://pcij.org/stories/1998/coron.html
Said, E. (1978). Orientalism. Pantheon Books: USA
Spencer-Oatey, H. (2012). What is Culture? A compilation of Quotations. Retrieved from University of
Warwick website:http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/al/globalpad/openhouse/interculturalskills/gl
obal_pad_what_is_culture.pdf
Spindler, S. L & Spindler, D. G (1959). Culture Change. Biennial Review of Anthropology, 1, 37-66 Stanford
University Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2949200
Steward, J. (1955). Theory of Culture Change: The Methodology of Multilinear Evolution. Retrieved from:http://anth198.pbworks.com/f/Steward+(1955)++Theory+and+Method+of+Cultural+Ecolo
gy.pdf Accessed: 24-06-2015
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People (2008). Retrieved from United Nations
website: http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdf
Urry, J. (1990). The tourist gaze: Leisure and travel in contemporary societies. Sage Publications,London Newbury Park: New Delhi.
Valangendonck, M. & Johan, L. (2007). Tourism and cultural change: an empathic understanding
approach an introduction to tourism, anthropology and ethnicity. Omertaa Journal for
Applied Anthropology, 126-130. Retrieved from http://www.omertaa.org/archive/omertaa0016.pdf
World Bank (2014) Sustainable Development Department Report (No. PAD610). Haiti: Cultural
Heritage

Preservation

andTourism

SectorSupportProject.

Retrievedfrom

http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2014/04/19456117/haiti-cultural-heritage-preservationtourism-sector-support-project
Yang, L. (2011). Ethnic tourism and cultural representation. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(2),561-585. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2010.10.009.

152

List of Individual and Company Donors to the Overseas Fieldwork Fund
(In order of receipt)

Taguchi Fukujukai Foundation
The Aichi Bank, Ltd.
The Bank of Nagoya, Ltd.
The Chukyo Bank, Ltd.
Aichi Steel Corporation
The Daisan Bank, Ltd.
Toyoda Machinary Corporation
Chubu Electric Power Co., Inc.
Okaya & Co., Ltd.
The Tokai Bank, Ltd.

Year 1991
Otake Corportaion
Tsushima Kogyo Co., Ltd.
Tomita Co., Ltd.
Showa Seiyaku Co., Ltd.
Hotta Setsubi Kogyo Co., Ltd.
Sankichi Kondo, CPA
Nakamo Sun Route Co., Ltd.
Hayashi Yaokichi Co., Ltd.
Kazuo Oguri
Matsukazeya Co., Ltd.
Toyota Motor Corporation
The Kitankai
Hoyu Co., Ltd.
Daito Sanshin Co., Ltd.
Yamasei Sangyo Co., Ltd.
Tachibana Shouten Co., Ltd.
Asahi Kako Co., Ltd.

Central Japan Railway Company
Nagoya Railroad Co., Ltd.
Toyota Industries Corporation
Japan Transcity Corporation
Takisada Co., Ltd.
The Hyakugo Bank, Ltd.
Shikishima Baking Co., Ltd.
Chuo Seisakusho, Ltd.
Toyoshima & Co., Ltd. Nagoya headquarter
Toho Gas Co., Ltd.
Matsuzakaya Co., Ltd.
Maruei Department Store Co., Ltd.
Muto Shoukai Co., Ltd.
Yoshiyuki Hattori, CPA
Nagoya Mitsukoshi, Inc.
CPA Mitsuoka Akira Office
Howa Setsubi Kogyo Co., Ltd.
Kowa Company, Ltd.
Daido Steel Co., Ltd.
Sankyo Kasei Sangyo Co., Ltd.
NGK Spark Plug Co., Ltd.
NGK Insulators, Ltd.

Year 1992
Sintokogio, Ltd.
Dai Nippon Construction
TOENEC Corporation
Aichi Toyota Motor Co., Ltd.
The Tono Shinkin BankThe Juroku Bank, Ltd.
UNY Co., Ltd.
The Ogaki Kyoritsu Bank, Ltd.
Pacific Industrial Co., Ltd.
Toyoda Gosei Co., Ltd.
Nippondenso Co., Ltd.
Aisin Seiki Co., Ltd.
Toyota Tsusho Corporation
153

海外実地研修基金に拠出いただいた個人・企業一覧（受け入れ順）
平成 3 年度

財団法人田口福寿会

株式会社大竹製作所

株式会社愛知銀行

津島興業株式会社

株式会社名古屋銀行

富田株式会社

株式会社中京銀行

昭和製薬株式会社

愛知製鋼株式会社

ホッタ設備工業株式会社

株式会社第三銀行

公認会計士

豊田工機株式会社

近藤三吉

株式会社ナカモ・サンルート

中部電力株式会社

株式会社林八百吉商店

岡谷鋼機株式会社

小栗和夫

株式会社東海銀行

株式会社松風屋

東海旅客鉄道株式会社

トヨタ自動車株式会社

名古屋鉄道株式会社

社団法人キタン会

株式会社豊田自動織機製作所

ホーユー株式会社

日本トランスシティ株式会社

大東三進株式会社

瀧定株式会社

山清産業株式会社

株式会社百五銀行

株式会社立花商店

敷島製パン株式会社

朝日化工株式会社

株式会社中央製作所
豊島株式会社名古屋本社

平成 4 年度

東邦ガス株式会社

新東工業株式会社

株式会社松坂屋

大日本土木株式会社株式会社丸栄株式会社トーエネック

株式会社武藤商会

愛知トヨタ自動車株式会社

公認会計士

東濃信用金庫株式会社名古屋三越

株式会社十六銀行

公認会計士

ユニー株式会社

朋和設備工業株式会社

株式会社大垣共立銀行

興和株式会社

太平洋工業株式会社

大同特殊鋼株式会社

豊田合成株式会社

三協化成産業株式会社

日本電装株式会社

日本特殊陶業株式会社

アイシン精機株式会社

日本ガイシ株式会社

豊田通商株式会社
154

服部義之
光岡朗事務所