PARTICIPATORY 3D MAPPING IN BRIDGING THE INTEGRATIONOF INDIGENOUS RESILIENCY CULTURE INTO COMMUNITY-LED
DISASTER RISK REDUCTION: THE CASE OF TUBLAY, PHILIPPINES
Abner O. Lawangen

Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Oﬃce of Tublay, Philippines

A very good day to everyone! I will be presenting our local project in our municipality
on bridging the integration of indigenous resiliency culture into community-led
disaster risk reduction through participatory three dimensional (3D) mapping. Tublay is
an indigenous town in the province of Benguet in Northern Philippines, with about
18,000 inhabitants belonging to three ethnic tribes. It is the most economicallydeprived town among the thirteen municipalities of the province, highly depending onagriculture. In our municipality, we believed that disasters caused degradation ofintangible cultural heritage (ICH) either by damaging ICH physical assets or bydisplacing the community, which further lead to degradation as people findthemselves in new environment and societies (Figure 1). The new environment is
totally different from their way of living, thereby restricting them from practicing theirusual day to day activities and leading to the incremental loss of ICH.
This situation is not new to the Philippines. Being a country frequented by different
types of disasters, significant efforts have been made to protect the people and theproperties. Unfortunately, there is a huge dichotomy of approaches between
significant players – local communities, technical and policy sectors (Figure 2). If you
zoom in, there are various potentials and opportunities offered by these sectors, yetle� unutilized due to fragmentation of programmes. The local communities arerepositories of rich indigenous resiliency efforts, tested overtime, flexible, locallyappropriate and more importantly connected to the people. These are practicalFigure 1

ICH-disaster operational framework of the project.

WORKSHOP PAPERS
SESSION 3 : ENHANCING DIALOGUE BETWEEN ICH AND DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT077

Figure 2

Local-technical-policy integrated nexus in DRRM of Tublay.

adaptations normally transmitted orally and non-written knowledge. Due to theincreasing and intensifying impacts of disasters and climate change, these local
adaptations are overwhelmed. These local practices and knowledge are promising
approaches in resiliency building but are significantly threatened by disasters. Yet, they
are o�en neglected by disaster risk reduction and management (DRRM) efforts. On
the one hand, the technical sector offers promising futuristic state of the art,
sophisticated, high technologies generated from researches. Yet, the system ofdevelopment, transmittal and dissemination o�en is locally non-friendly. They areacademically structured and o�en engaged few specialists in the development. Mostof these technical innovations embed technical data and form that are hard to beinterpreted by lay people. Moreover, the local communities are not familiar with thetechnologies. These instances result to poor support from the locals as they felt
alienated and no sense of ownership on the programs. On the contrary, the policies
are o�en copied or based on external contexts, most are top-down in approach,non-flexible and are untested if its relevant to the local communities. Policies are o�en
prepared by technical people and local inputs are rarely considered. These limitationsin the current policy development resulted in legislations that are less responsive, lessengaging and are less accepted and supported by the public.
It is now one of the objectives of the municipality of Tublay to strengthen local DRRM
and promote safeguarding and nurturance of this intangible cultural heritage or local
knowledge and practices by integrating them on local programs and policies. Within
this framework, the local government initiated a local project in partnership withresearchers from the University of Auckland, New Zealand and the University of thePhilippines-Diliman.
This project dubbed ‘Participatory 3 Dimensional Mapping (P3DM) in resiliency
building’ showcases the integration of local sectors in DRRM programs particularly onhazard and risk assessment, vulnerability and capacity identification and intervention
development (Figure 3). It has four components: a) 3D map development; b)
participatory hazard and risk assessment; c) local resiliency profiling; and d)
integration of indigenous knowledge, system and practices (IKSP) and ICH in DRRM.

078

PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASIA-PACIFIC REGIONAL WORKSHOP ON INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE
AND NATURAL DISASTERS

Figure 3 Local stakeholders brainstorming during the P3DM. (Source: Lawangen 2016)

Figure 4Children (le�) and women (right) participating during the P3DM.
(Source: Lawangen 2016)

This tool is very interactive and inclusive and encourages the participation of different
sectors including young people, women and other minorities and more importantly, it
breaks the dichotomy of technical and local efforts (Figure 4). This P3DM commenced
with the development of the 3D scale model of the municipality which was preparedusing scaled map prepared by the mapping unit of the municipality and an elevation
map from the online digital elevation model (DEM). The 3D map was prepared by thestakeholders using local materials like bamboo sticks, common nails, push pins, yarns,paper and Styrofoam.
The different geophysical features of the municipality were reflected on the 3D map
starting from rivers, forests, roads, public spaces and infrastructures, farms, houses,schools and others (Figure 5). Disaster prone areas were also identified by thecommunity based on actual experiences. The places where disasters occurred wereplotted and the assets, families and resources affected were identified. TechnicalWORKSHOP PAPERS
SESSION 3 : ENHANCING DIALOGUE BETWEEN ICH AND DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT079

Figure 5

The 3D scale model of the municipality (le�); the legend for the features (center); andthe disaster historical proﬁle (right). (Source: Lawangen 2016)

people based on their assessment also indicated risky areas. This now leads to theidentification of local hazards, which include typhoons, monsoon rains, drought,
earthquakes, infrastructural fires and pest and diseases. These hazards then wereranked according to their significance based on agreed criteria, which are 1) frequencyof occurrence and 2) impacts. The risks of the individual hazards were also identified
and consolidated making it available for the community and to local government
oﬃces. Most serious risks of the different hazards include:
1) Damage of crops
2) Low production/income and bankruptcy
3) Damage of properties and farms/facilities
4) Decrease in the local food supply and food shortage (at home)5) Reduce capacity to buy/access suﬃcient and nutritious foods and malnutrition
6) Increase in diseases
7) Landslides, loss of vegetation
8) Scarcity of water and injuries and deaths9) Socio-cultural disruptionA�er plo�ng the different land uses and houses, and the high risk areas, thecommunity started to profile assets and resources at risk. Families on these areas
were tagged as priorities. With the 3D map providing a visual reference, it is now
easier and convincing for the communities to determine elements at risk. Informationand data from this activity were recorded by the participants and copy furnished to
the local government for use.
Interestingly, the community were asked on the specific impacts of these disasters toICH. They mentioned the following observable impacts:
1) Accelerated loss of ICH and indigenous practices2) Disconnection of people to the land/space where these ICH and practices arelinked (i.e. farms, rivers, forests, etc.)
3) Pressure among local people to move to new communities with different culture4) Stoppage of oral transmittal to generations
5) Assimilation of the practices and cultural heritage

080

PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASIA-PACIFIC REGIONAL WORKSHOP ON INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE
AND NATURAL DISASTERS

A�er risk assessment, the participants were asked how the different land uses andresources stayed intact despite the numerous disasters that occurred in thecommunity. This leads to the identification of local adaptation and resiliency efforts.
The following are some of these ICH identified that are contributory to localresiliency.
1) The ‘Ampasit and the forest’This is an example of indigenous world view and belief linked on their naturalresources. Ampasit(s) is/are supernatural being living in the pristine forest. Theyare the overseer of this natural landscape. They have the power to makesomeone who harms their home ill. The high respect to these supernatural beings
that live in this natural ecosystem and the belief that something bad will happen
to anyone who harms these forests contributed to the preservation andprotection of these ecological resources. The outcome of this belief contributes tothe minimization of landslides and erosions at the same time improve local
hydrology and availability of water, which are among the primary risks of disasters
identified. Ecologically speaking, the more intact the forest, the more resilient it is(Figure 6).

Figure 6
Protected forest.
(Source: Feliciano 2017)

2) Daw-es and Am-am
These are cultural rituals related to disasters. Daw-es is a cleansing ritual a�ercalamities or accidents while Am-am is generically a thanksgiving and offeringritual for good fortune, good health or a good harvest. These are usuallycelebrated by the families affected (on their own homes) and in extreme
occasions (say a�er a severe disaster or mass casualty accident) participated by
the whole community. Usually, a Mambunong (shaman priest) presides theserituals. Animals (usually chicken or pig) are butchered and shared by the people

WORKSHOP PAPERSSESSION 3 : ENHANCING DIALOGUE BETWEEN ICH AND DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT081

who attended. These rituals provide avenues for community and familysocialization and opportunity for family members and acquaintances to see eachother.
3) Aduyon/alluyon/kamal
These are innate social practices among indigenous communities. These arevoluntary participations of community members in civic activities stronglyobserved during diﬃcult times like disasters and emergencies and other activities
for public welfare such as sourcing and installation of water system and roadclearing.
4) Uma and payew (indigenous upland farm and rice ecosystems)
Indigenous farming system has been scientifically recognized as sustainable andresilient. In Tublay, indigenous rice farming (payew) and upland farming (uma) still
exist. These two farming systems are integrated local technologies carefully
designed to optimize biophysical and socioeconomic resources and opportunitiesof the farm (Figure 7). It showcases sustenance of ecological balance andeconomic viability of the farm, conservation of agrobiodiversity and continuationof social-cultural farming traditions, which are fundamentals in the sustainability
and resiliency of the farm. The sound co-existence of these different farmcomponents creates compensating and supplementing interactions among themto withstand environmental perturbations. This farming system addresses some ofthe primary issues during disasters including economic loss, food shortage,
landslides on farms, soil and fertility loss and other.
5) Tuﬁng (indigenous slope protection)
Tuﬁng is skilful slope protection and engineering technology of the indigenouspeople in the Cordillera region in the Philippines including the ITublays. It is apreventive and conservation technology adapted in the high elevation and steep
upland farms to prevent erosion and landslides at the same time conserve water,Figure 7
Indigenous vegetable andrice farm in Tublay.
(Source: Cangsan 2018)

082

PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASIA-PACIFIC REGIONAL WORKSHOP ON INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE
AND NATURAL DISASTERS

Figure 8
Tuﬁng along farm slopes inBenguet.
(Source: Benguet TourismOﬃce 2015)

soil nutrients and soil particles. Indigenous farmers skilfully stacked stones alongslopes of terraces creating resilient and picturesque farms (Figure 8).
6) Kuwelo (indigenous low cost water impoundment and water conservation)
This is a local water conservation
adaptation along high elevation
farms where water supply isscarce. This is a very simple
strategy where farmers dig
earthen impoundment andprovide plastic linings on the sideto prevent water from sepage.
The capacity of the impoundment
depends on the avaiability ofspace in the farms and thepreference of the farmer. O�en,these impoundments wereprepared before the onset of therainy season, which coincides withland preparation of most farms.
This local innovation adresses theproblem of the farmers on water
scarcity, especially during drought(Figure 9).
Figure 9 Kuwelo (water impoundment).
(Source: Balinggan 2018)

WORKSHOP PAPERS
SESSION 3 : ENHANCING DIALOGUE BETWEEN ICH AND DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT083

7) Food preservation
Indigenous communities have rich technologies and practices on foodpreservation. These technologies and practices enabled them to cope with theworse environmental and climatic conditions. Unfortunately, these practices aredeteriorating hastily due to convenience brought by modern technologies. In thelocality of Tublay, there are few remaining practices but on the verge ofdegradation. These include kini-ing/kinuday and bekol/bu’ko (Figure 10).
The kinuday/kini-ing is an ancient way of preserving meat (usually pork, beef orcarabeef) by smoking and drying while the bu’ko is a local system of preserving
sweet potato by sun drying it in chips. These are indigenous ways of foodstockpiling. Historically, these were practiced to ensure food availability during thelean season, which usually during extreme hydro meteorological or socialconditions. Sweet potatoes cannot be produced throughout the year; hence,drying some of it during abundance is the most adapted way of preserving for thelean period. These local food preservations and stockpiling strategies can address
food shortage and inaccessibility to food supplies during disasters, which wereidentified by the people as among the common concern during disasters.
A�er understanding the local hazards, risks and the local resiliency efforts, we now
have a better understanding of the interconnectivity of these interests. The local
government strategized on how to ensure the integration of these local knowledge
and ICH to DRRM policies and programs and had come up with four activities. Theseare through:1) Local ordinances and policies – the output of this activity and related innovations
were shared with local legislative bodies for consideration in the developmentof policies.
2) Integrated program (Seal of good barangay governance) – under this program,

Figure 10 Kini-ing/kinuday (indigenous meat preservation) (le�); and bu’ko (right).
(Source: Maddela 2010; The Cordillera Connection 2013)

084

PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASIA-PACIFIC REGIONAL WORKSHOP ON INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE
AND NATURAL DISASTERS

the use of local innovations and knowledge in local development is one of thecriteria
3) Recognition of best practices on local government – incentives were provided
to local barangays with innovative programs showcasing local resiliency
4) Community based program (Brigada sa barangay) – is a municipal wide program
aimed at furthering local knowledge in risk warning and preparedness
Thank you very much.

WORKSHOP PAPERSSESSION 3 : ENHANCING DIALOGUE BETWEEN ICH AND DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT085