IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2018) 9-1

Research article
erd

Policy and Socio-ecological Assessment of the Integrated
Social Forestry Program after 25 Years of Implementationin St. Bernard, Southern Leyte, Philippines
ANGELITA B. ORIAS*
Visayas State University, Baybay City, Philippines
Email: angelita.orias@vsu.edu.ph

MARLITO M. BANDE
Visayas State University, Baybay City, Philippines
Received 3 January 2018

Accepted 5 May 2018(*Corresponding Author)

Abstract The implementation of Integrated Social Forestry (ISF) program involved hugeinvestments from the government and donor agencies. Considering these investments, is
ISF program effective enough in attaining its objectives? In view of this question, an indepth analysis of the Panian ISFP model site was conducted. The study was conceptualized
to assess the policy implementation status and socio-ecological impact of ISFP to theCertificate of Steward Contract (CSC) holders after 25 years from project implementation.
The results of the study showed that CSC holders considered reforestation and agroforestry
activities successful due to the increase in biomass and litter production that considerablyenhances soil fertility. Likewise, the CSC holders had noticed that the water yield in thecommunity significantly improved and there is a reduction of harvest losses because ofreforestation and agroforestry interventions. However, site assessment revealed that most of
the CSC holders have not planted 20% of the area with trees as required in the contract. In
fact, it is common to find CSC areas fully planted with coconuts. This manifests that the
government recognition of forest claims further enhance the conversion of forest land into
agricultural plantations. On the other hand, the result indicated that policy concerning
delegation of responsibilities within ISFP devolution was unclear and confusing since
LGUs’ responsibilities on forest land are still under the supervision, control, and review of
DENR. The LGUs pointed out that financial problems, lack of capability, deficiency in the
management and cooperation, and lack of personnel were the factors that deter them tocontinue the support for Panian ISFP model site.
Keywords community forestry, devolution, tenurial security, forest policy

INTRODUCTION
Philippines has lost a substantial portion of its forest (Era, 2005) which arose in the 1960’s to1970’s (Harrison et al., 2004) due to high domestic and export demand for tropical timber,intensive practice of the traditional slash-and-burn or kaingin farming (Weerd et al., 2002), andurbanization (Era, 2005). The forest degradation contributed to an alarming problem in the country
such as drought, flash floods, soil erosion, siltation, and sedimentation to water bodies (Dolom,1986).
In response, the Philippine government through the Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (DENR) has implemented various forestry programs to minimize the denudation of theforestlands. However, continuous conversion of forestland into agriculture driven by the influx ofpeople that have low economic opportunities in the lowlands is an incessant challenge of thegovernment. Hence, the government adopted the community-based forest management approach on
the premise that sustainability of managing forest resources necessitates building aroundcommunities living within the forestlands and adjacent barangays. This was realized through theimplementation of Integrated Social Forestry Program (ISFP) that was launched in 1981 throughⒸ ISERD

7

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2018) 9-1

the Bureau of Forestry Development (BFD), now the Forest Management Bureau (FMB) of the
DENR pursuant to the Executive Order 192 and Letter of Instruction (LOI) 1260.
ISFP aims to uplift the socio-economic condition of the upland dwellers through improved
incomes from the use of appropriate upland technologies while protecting the environment within
25 years duration and renewable for another 25 years as stipulated in the Certificate of Stewardship
Contract (CSC). Implementation of the program involved investments (i.e., labor, supplies andfinancial resources) from donor agencies, such as the World Bank-funded Central Visayas
Regional Project (CVRP), the Ford Foundation-funded Upland Development Program and the
USAID-funded Rainfed Resources Development Project (RRDP) (Guiang et. al., 2001).
Considering the abovementioned investments, is ISF program effective enough in attaining its
objectives especially upon reaching the expiration date of each beneficiary’s contract? In view ofthis question, an in-depth analysis of the program implementation was conducted in Barangay
Panian, St. Bernard, Southern Leyte.
OBJECTIVE
This study was conducted to assess the policy implementation status and the socio-ecologicalimpact of ISFP on the CSC’s holders and to the model site after 25 years of implementation.
Likewise, factors that facilitates the success of the program and problems were documented andcould be used as basis to revisit and improve the policies of upland development projects in the
country.
METHODOLOGY
Selection and location of the study site: The existence of an ISF model site, the availability of thesecondary data and accessibility of the area were the major criteria considered in the selection of
the study site. The study site is located in Brgy. Panian, St. Bernard, Southern Leyte along
longitude 125˚ 07’05.9” and latitude 10˚17’13.1” under the supervision of Community
Environment and Natural Resource (CENRO) San Juan, Southern Leyte (Fig.1).

Study site
Fig. 1 Location of the study site
Formulation and pre-testing of survey instrument: A semi structured interview schedule wasformulated in English and was translated into Cebuano dialect. The survey instrument answers thefollowing objectives; namely: (a) social, economic, and demographic characteristics of CSC
holders; (b) CSC holders’ perceptions and opinions regarding the impact of ISFP; (c) problems
encountered during project implementation; (d) factors that facilitate the success of the program;and (e) lessons learned of the CSC holders and project personnel during the policy implementation
process. The survey instrument was pre-tested among 10 selected upland farmers in Inopacan,Ⓒ ISERD

8

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2018) 9-1

Leyte. The purpose of the activity was to test the instrument on the following: a) comprehensibilityof the instrument; b) respondents’ sensitivity to questions; and c) appropriateness of terms used.
Calculation of sample size: The total number of respondents was calculated using the equation forsample size determination (Dargantes, 1996).
n(1)§ Nz 2 s 2 ·¨¨¸  z 2s2
2 ¸
© Nd ¹

Where n = number of respondents to be included in the survey; N = total number of respondents inthe lists; Z = coefficient at 95% level of reliability; d = error level expressed in units of the normal
variable; s2 = sample variance of the normal variable. The sample variance used in the equation
was attained using summative size (in ha.) of CSC farms per cultivator as normal variable. Fortyseven respondents were randomly selected out of the 81 CSC holders. Of the 47 respondents, 26
were original CSC holders, 20 were the next-of-kin and one was the successor of the original
holder who was not physically capable of cultivating the land.
Data collection and focus group discussion: The data collection was conducted through thecoordination with the CENRO-San Juan headed by CENR Officer (For. Alejandro Bautista); theMunicipal Mayor (Hon. Napoleon Cuaton) and Panian Brgy. Captain (Hon. Ruperto Rafols). The
data collection includes: gathering of the secondary information, key informants interview, andindividual CSC holder’s farm visit. The results of the key informant’ interview (KII) were
presented during the focus group discussion (FGD). The FGD participants were composed ofrepresentatives from all sectors that were involved during the implementation of the ISF program(i.e., CSC holder-beneficiaries, from CENRO and the Provincial Environment and Natural
Resource Management Office (PENRMO), community organizer of the Panian Model Site, Brgy.
officials and representative from Municipal Local Government Unit (MLGU)). The FGD was done
to triangulate and validate the results obtained during the interview. Secondly, the FGD provided
an avenue for the CSC holders to raise their concerns and listen to the plan of the PENRMO (local
government) and CENRO-San Juan (national government) regarding the renewal of theirindividual CSC.
Data collating and statistical analysis: The data gathered during the interview and FGD werecollated and tabulated using Microsoft Excel. Likewise, descriptive statistical analysis was
conducted using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Table 1 shows the duties and responsibilities of the CSC holders and their perception if each duties
are done and implemented. Most of the CSC holders assumed and implemented their duties andresponsibilities as reflected in the agreement. This manifest that the CSC holders are qualified toapply for renewal. As stipulated in Administrative Order No. 4 (dated Feb. 27, 1991), the issuanceand renewal of CSC is the main responsibility of the CENRO. On the other hand, during the FGD,
the representative from CENRO-San Juan Field Office revealed that the DENR is not anymore
processing any issuance and renewal of CSC contract. The representative cited Executive Order
263 which states that forestland areas with issued CSC are included under the Community-Based
Forest Management Program and a new tenurial instrument (CBFM Agreement) will be issued.
Hence, he strongly recommended that the CSC holders should reactivate their organization toqualify and apply for the CBFM agreement. The expert advice of the CENRO representative andthe information regarding the change in DENR policy on tenure instrument (from CSC to CBFMA)
causes more confusion and even doubt of the holders to apply for the renewal of their CSC contract.
Furthermore, Table 1 shows a considerable number of respondents opted to abstain in answering
the questions during the assessment.
This was clarified during the FGD that those respondents who abstained were the next-of-kinof the CSC holders. The reason of abstaining was they have less information and no personal
involvement during the project implementation since most of them were still very young and not
qualified to attend and participate any of the program related-activity.
Ⓒ ISERD

9

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2018) 9-1

Table 1 CSC holders’ compliance to the duties and responsibilities of the ISF Program (n=47)
Duties and responsibilities
1. Participate in delineation of project area and parcellary surveys

Yes
36%

No
36%

Abstain28%

2. Develop the allocated lands to productive farms

70%

4%

26%

3. Devote at least 20% of the land within the project area to tree farming ofsuitable species
4. Protect and conserve the forest growth within the project area

43%

17%

40%

70%

2%

28%

5. Preserve monuments and other landmarks indicating corners and outlinesof boundaries
6. Prevent and suppress fires

57%

0%

43%

62%

11%

28%

7. Protect and preserve trees and other vegetation within a 20-meter strip ofland from the edge of the normal high waterline of river and streams withchannel of at least 5-meter wide
8. Abstain from cutting or harvesting naturally growing timbers within andadjacent to social forestry area
9. Refrain from transferring or assigning their allocated land

53%

2%

45%

49%

19%

32%

55%

13%

32%

The study of Asio and Bande (2005) revealed that project sustainability and transfer of local
knowledge can be attained through active involvement of the youth on association’s project
activities. In the case of Panian ISF program, the implementers failed to involve the youth sector.
Hence, the social sustainability of the project was jeopardized specially that most of the original
members were dead or physically incapacitated to perform their duties and responsibilities.
Impact Assessment of the Panian ISFP Model Site: Maximize Land Productivity andEcological Stability
The area’s terrain was rolling to steep (60 to 80% slopes) with elevations ranging from 100 to 500
meters above sea level (Tabada & Escasinas, 1993) which classified the areas under timberland.
The beneficiaries were encouraged to adopt appropriate agroforestry technologies since it is the
only way to harmonize productivity and conservation efforts. Contour canal and hedgerows were
the intervention as part of the agroforestry activity. However, during ocular inspection, it wasobserved that contour canals and hedgerows were left unmaintained. Despite of this, therespondents indicated that the landslide and flooding were significantly minimized which
considerably improved their harvest. Likewise, the holders pointed out that the soil-water
conservation measures had significantly increased their on-farm income which could be one of theindicators that the agroforestry intervention was effective. According to Mr. Fredo Ramada1, before
the implementation program, the area was dominated by cogon (Imperata cylindrica) and carabao
grass (Paspalum conjugatum). Cogon grass is one of the vegetative indicators that the area isaggravated by relative low pH, highly leached infertile soil, lack of surface organic matter and highevapotranspiration rate which causes water stress (Sajise, 1990). Other factor that exhilarated thebeneficiary to participate in the reforestation was their area needs immediate rehabilitation because
it is prone to landslide and flashflood due to the geologic characteristics of the site. Moreover, theresult showed that CSC holders consider reforestation activity successful because of the following
observations: (a) biomass and litter production considerably increased that enhances soil fertility on
their CSC-issued farms, (b) water yield in the community was significantly improved due towatershed rehabilitation, and (c) reduction of harvest losses due to minimized flooding and soil
erosion.

1 Mr. Fredo Ramada - project leader of the Panian ISF model site from 1989 until 1992

Ⓒ ISERD

10

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2018) 9-1

Impact Assessment of the Panian ISFP Model Site: Improvement of Socio-economic
Conditions of the Forest Occupants
Majority of the respondents depend on farming as their major source of livelihood wherein 71
percent of their total farm income was derived from the CSC-issued parcel. The agroforestry
perennial crops [i.e., abaca (Musa textilis), coconut (Cocos nucifera), and fruit trees] that were
distributed during the operation had significantly increased the on-farm income of the beneficiaries.
Some of the respondents revealed that they had started harvesting the trees [i.e., yemane (Gmelina
aborea) and mangium (Acacia mangium)] planted on their individual farm. According to the
respondents, the income was used to finance the school expenses of their children. Presently, someof the project beneficiaries’ children got decent and stable jobs because they finished a college
degree. This was one of the manifestations of direct economic benefits of the project to thebeneficiaries. On the other hand, self-confidence, trust of the local people, development of theirleadership abilities, and establishment of good rapport with the local government units including
DENR personnel were documented as positive outcomes in relation to the social impact of ISF
program.
Policy Assessment of Panian ISFP Model Site: CSC Implementation After Devolution
Based on the ocular inspection vis-à-vis CSC policy implementation assessment, the results
showed that most of the CSC holders have not planted 20% of their area with trees as required in
the contract. In fact, it is common to find CSC areas fully planted with coconut and banana. Hence,the community acceptance and government recognition (e.g. Certificate of Stewardship Contract)of forest claims enhances intensive cultivation of food crops or the conversion of forest land into
agricultural plantations (i.e., coconut and abaca). On the other hand, it was mentioned during the
FGD that there had never been support provided by the Municipal and Provincial government after
transferring the responsibility of Panian ISFP model site to the LGU. Presently, the CSC holders
are faced with problems of management, technical capability, and lack of knowledge about thechange of government policy on natural resource management and renewal of stewardshipagreement. During the FGD, it was pointed out by the Municipal Agriculturist that the minor
involvement of the municipality in the monitoring of ISFP activities was because these are usually
initiated in forest areas, and therefore, it is under DENR’s authority. The formulation of the LGUs
responsibilities within the Local Government Code on forest land is that they are under thesupervision, control, and review of DENR. Hence, the LGU’s responsibilities seemed to be barely
recognized by DENR whose officials often claimed that forest lands are under DENR’s authority
exclusively (Groetschel et al., 2001).
Policy Assessment of Panian ISFP Model Site: CSC Renewal
A serious concern brought up during the FGD was the renewal of CSC. All CSC agreements issued
during the implementation of Panian ISFP model site had expired in 2016. As stipulated in thecontract, the CSC holder is qualified for a renewal for another 25 years provided that he/she
complied with the agreement. However, the DENR has adopted and implemented Executive Order
263 (CBFM strategy) which resulted to non issuance or renewal of CSC. Considering this change
on DENR policy, it indicates that the CSC holder will lose their legal claim over the land theycultivated and developed for 25 years. The results of this study indicated that the CSC holders were
not informed about the CBFM program. This could probably lead to a conflict between the CSC
holders and government agencies.
Policy Assessment of Panian ISFP Model Site: Delegation of Responsibilities within
Devolution of ISFPⒸ ISERD

11

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2018) 9-1

The results of this study indicated that policy concerning the delegation of responsibilities within
ISFP devolution was unclear and LGUs were confused. One example was the DENR’s
responsibilities and the functions of the Environment and Natural Officers in the LGUs (bothProvincial and Municipal). It becomes difficult to distinguish respective tasks, mandates,
responsibilities, and authorities. It creates difficulties when some responsibility for ISF program
should have been completely devolved but in fact still partly under DENR’s authority. The
Municipal Agriculturist of St. Bernard reported that beneficiaries under the devolved ISF sites arecoming to their office with questions concerning stewardship renewal, demonstrating publicconfusion with respect to the continuity of the program and the responsible institutions.
Socio-ecological Factors that Influence the Panian ISFP Model Site
Majority of the problems encountered during and after the project implementation were not solved
and even continued to create conflict among project participants and implementers. The major
problems were identified, namely: (a) non-processing of CSC renewal which is inconsistent withthe existing DENR policy as stipulated in the CSC contract; (b) no proper turn-over of project
documents during the devolution of the program; and (c) failure to transfer the knowledge andinformation about the program to the next-of-kin which became a barrier in attaining social,economic, and ecological sustainability. However, the implementation of reforestation andadoption of agroforestry systems significantly improved the bio-physical and environmental
conditions of the area. During the socio-ecological assessment, the success of ISFP as a strategy incommunity-based forest conservation was due to the following salient factors: a) security of tenure;b) environmental awareness; c) commitment and community empowerment; and d) external
support. In addition, the upliftment of the community’s general living conditions and change inattitude of residents towards forest conservation and biodiversity protection in relation to increasein on-farm income was the major achievement of the ISF Program. However, government
recognition through the issuance of CSC over forest land claim further increases conversion oftimber land into agricultural plantations.
CONCLUSION
Even with the policy in place to ensure covering at least part of the land with trees, these areas arestill converted into agricultural plantations as many other cultivated areas (without CSC) in timberland. Hence, the CSC strategy to get commitment from, and time control over forest dwellers who
are operating as kaingineros is not clearly established and implemented under the ISF guidelines. If
the CSCs are to be renewed, there must be a strong commitment to comply with the rules andregulations. Noncompliance with the policy should lead to the cancellation of CSCs andreallocation of the land. Demonstrating the commitment to enforce the laws, combined with publicawareness campaign will further enhance the motivation of the CSC holders to follow the
stipulations in the contract for improvement and development of their individual land. On the other
hand, the municipal and provincial local government units are the key players in all efforts to reachthe rural population. Burdened by the devolution of offices and related tasks, and hit by weakeconomic activities within the boundaries and subsequently low tax revenues, the LGUs could
sustain the basic services for their population through sound management of their assets. Hence,
policy on increasing LGUs assets through communal forestry could be one of the major concernsof the ISF program right from the start of the implementation.
REFERENCES
Asio, V.B. and Bande, M.M. 2005. Innovative community-led sustainable forest resource conservation andmanagement in Baybay Leyte, in the Philippines. Innovative Communities People-Centered Approaches
to Environmental Management in the Asia, Pacific Region, United Nation University Press, 204-224.
Dargantes, B.B. 1996. Socio-ecological case studies on forest lands cultivation in Leyte, Philippines. Ph.D.
Ⓒ ISERD

12

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2018) 9-1

Dissertation, University of Hohenheim, Germany.
Dolom, B.L. 1986. Impact of man’s activities on tropical upland forest ecosystems, Upland development
through social forestry in the Philippine experience. Program Development Section, Social Forestry
Division, BFD. Quezon City, Philippines, 407-419.
Era, M.D. 2005. Enhancing people’s participation and the role of the local government in the management of
the forest, A case of Capoocan Leyte, Philippines. Workshop on Enlarging Citizen Participation andIncreasing Local Autonomy in Achieving Society Harmony, Beijing, 2-11.
Groetschel, A., Aquino R., Bucholz, I., Mazo, T., Ibkendanz, A., Sales, N., Seven, J. and Vicentuan, K. 2001.
Natural resource management strategies on Leyte Island, Philippines. Baybay/Berlin.
Guiang, E.S., Borlagdan, S.B. and Pulhin, J.M. 2001. Community-based forest management in thePhilippines, Preliminary assessment. Institute of Philippine Culture, Ateneo De Manila University,
Quezon City, 4-112.
Harrison, S., Emtage, N. and Nasayao, B. 2004. Past and present forestry support programs in the Philippinesand lessons for the future small-scale forest economics. Management and Policy, 3 (3), 303-317.
Sajise, P.E. 1990. Alang-alang (Imperata cylindrica (L) Beauv) and upland agriculture. Biotrop Spec.
Publication, 5, Bogor.
Tabada, A.T.W. and Escasinas, V.A. 1993. Panian integrated social forestry model site, Saint Bernard, So.
Leyte. Unpublished Research Report, Center for Social Research, ViSCA, Baybay, Leyte, vi+24.
Weerd, M.V., Strijk, J. and Snelder, D. 2002. The importance of forest fragment for birds and local
communities in Northeast Luzon Philippines. SYLVATROP. The Technical Journal of Philippine
Ecosystem and Natural Resources, 13 (1) & (2).

Ⓒ ISERD

13