Recognising Land Rights For Conservation?

Tenure Reforms In The Northern Sierra

Madre, The Philippines
Author(s): Jan van der Ploeg, Dante M. Aquino, Tessa Minter and Merlijn van Weerd
Source: Conservation & Society , 2016, Vol. 14, No. 2 (2016), pp. 146-160
Published by: Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment and Wolters
Kluwer India Pvt. Ltd.

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26393237

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/26393237?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
This content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0
International License (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). To view a copy of this license, visit
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/.

and Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment are collaborating with JSTOR
to digitize, preserve and extend access to Conservation & Society

This content downloaded from

202.125.103.103 on Sun, 01 Aug 2021 16:26:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Conservation and Society 14(2): 146-160, 2016

Article

Recognising Land Rights For Conservation? Tenure Reforms In The Northern

Sierra Madre, The Philippines
Jan van der Ploega,#, Dante M. Aquinob, Tessa Minterc, and Merlijn van Weerdd
WorldFish, Auki, Solomon Islands
a

b
College of Forestry and Environmental Management, Isabela State University, Cabagan, The Philippines
c
Institute of Cultural Anthropology and Development Sociology, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands
d
Mabuwaya Foundation, Cabagan, The Philippines

#
Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract
The legalisation of the customary land rights of rural communities is currently actively promoted as a strategy
for conserving biodiversity. There is, however, little empirical information on the conservation outcomes of these
tenure reforms. In this paper, we describe four conservation projects that specifically aimed to formalise land
rights in the Philippines, a country widely seen as a model for the devolution of control over natural resources to
rural communities. We demonstrate that these legalistic interventions are based on flawed assumptions, on: 1) the
capacity of the state to enforce tenure; 2) the characteristics of customary land rights; and 3) the causal links
between legal entitlements and sustainable natural resource management. As a result, these state-led tenure reforms
actually aggravate tenure insecurity on the ground, and ultimately fail to improve natural resource management.

Keywords: community-based natural resource management, land tenure, biodiversity conservation, tenure
reforms, territorialisation, legal surrealism, Philippines

INTRODUCTION (Larson et al. 2010a; Sikor and Stahl 2012). The underlying
premise is that statutory property rights are a precondition
The legalisation of the customary land rights of rural for community-based natural resource management; people
communities is currently actively promoted as a strategy for are only willing to protect natural resources if their rights to
conserving biodiversity (Stevens 1997; Eaton 2005; Nelson use these resources are recognised and secured by the state
2010). It is argued that conservation organisations have a (Lynch and Talbott 1995).
moral responsibility to respect the rights and livelihoods This reasoning has stimulated conservation organisations
of people living in or adjacent to protected areas (Alcorn around the world to invest in the legal recognition of the land
and Royo 2007; Campese et al. 2009). Besides these ethical rights of rural communities. In practice, this takes the form of
concerns, it is claimed that the formalisation of land tenure an agreement between the state and groups of people, which
can also actually improve natural resource management legalises informal user rights and, at the same time, specifies
obligations to protect biodiversity (Snelder and Persoon
Access this article online 2005; Borrini-Feyerabend et al. 2007). Non-governmental
Quick Response Code: organisations (NGOs) usually play a facilitating role in these
Website: instrumental co-management arrangements. Well-known
www.conservationandsociety.org
examples are indigenous reserves in Brazil (Schwartzman
and Zimmerman 2005), community-based forestry in Mexico
DOI: (Johnson and Nelson 2004), wildlife conservancies in southern
10.4103/0972-4923.186336 Africa (Lindsey et al. 2009), and forest restoration in China
(Yi et al. 2014).1

Copyright: © Ploeg et al. 2016. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits
unrestricted use and distribution of the article, provided the original work is cited. Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow, Mumbai | Managed by the
Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE), Bangalore. For reprints contact: [email protected]

This content downloaded from

202.125.103.103 on Sun, 01 Aug 2021 16:26:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Land rights for conservation? /  147

However, the causal links between formalising land Peluso (1995: 389) called the “lack of fit between abstract
rights and biodiversity conservation are poorly understood space and lived space”.4 We argue that ‘state-led’ tenure
(Walters 2012; Ojanen et al. 2014). The scientific literature on reforms (Sikor and Müller 2009: 1307) are often based on
co-management remains highly polarised. On the one hand, naïve, and sometimes even erroneous, notions of communal
there are advocates who idealise local communities as the land ownership and rural livelihoods, and tend to underestimate
stewards of the environment; on the other hand, are opponents the bureaucratic and political obstacles to tenure reforms.
who, by definition, consider the devolution of control over In practice, the Department of Environment and Natural
natural resources as a deviation from the protectionist agenda Resources (DENR) and Local Government Units (LGUs), the
(Brechin et al. 2003; Borgerhoff Mulder and Coppolillo 2005). mandated government agencies for managing natural resources
These ideological positions, and the often inconsistent use of in the Philippines, are incapable to grant and enforce land
terminology, hinder a critical assessment of the effectiveness rights. As a result, efforts to facilitate the legislation of land
of interventions that aim to legalise customary land rights in rights of rural communities often aggravate tenure insecurity,
order to protect biodiversity (Robinson et al. 2013).2 There is, in and ultimately fail to improve natural resource management.
fact, little empirical information on the conservation outcomes
of such tenure reforms (Ojanen et al. 2014). In this paper, we METHODOLOGY
describe four cases where conservation organisations aimed to
protect biodiversity by improving tenure security of people in This paper is based on longitudinal action research in four
and around the Northern Sierra Madre Natural Park, the largest sites in the northern Sierra Madre on Luzon (Figure 1). These
protected area of the Philippines. four sites present a variety of formal tenure arrangements
The Philippines is widely regarded as a model for the ranging from strict protected public lands to privately-
recognition of the customary land rights of rural communities owned lands. What they have in common is the presence of
(Poffenberger et al. 2006; Larson and Pulhin 2012). The a NGO that aims to facilitate the provision of formal land
country has implemented several policy reforms that devolve ownership to local resource users with the explicit objective
control over natural resources from the state to communities. to conserve biodiversity. In the municipality of San Mariano,
International donors have subsequently invested substantial the Northern Sierra Madre Natural Park Conservation Project
amount of money to improve the tenure security of poor (NSMNP-CP), an integrated conservation and development
farmers and fishers in ecologically valuable areas (Guiang project implemented by Plan International, assisted farmers
2004).3 Following a few successful and widely publicised to secure government certification of land ownership in
cases, most notably the recognition of the ancestral domains of the buffer zone of the Northern Sierra Madre Natural
the Ikalahan in Nueva Vizcaya (Rice and Pindog 2005) and of Park (section 4.1). The Mabuwaya Foundation, a local
the Tagbanua in the Calamian Islands (Zingapan and de Vera environmental organisation dedicated to the protection of the
1999), most conservation organisations in the archipelago now Philippine crocodile in the wild, tried to formalise the land
actively promote the legal recognition of customary land rights claims of farmers living adjacent to the Philippine crocodile
of people living in and around protected areas (Bryant 2002; habitat (section 4.2). In the municipality of Divilacan,
Austin and Eder 2007). On Luzon, for example, Conservation WWF-Philippines planned to improve park management by
International facilitated the release of tenure instruments to harmonising the land use plans of the DENR, the LGU, and
rural communities on the forest frontier (Antolin 2003: 12). individual landowners and users (section 4.3). And in the
On Mindanao, a consortium of environmental NGOs aimed municipality of Palanan, the Nordic Agency for Development
to strengthen the protection of the Mount Kitanglad Range
Natural Park by reconciling conflicting land claims (Goldoftas
2006). On Palawan, the Haribon Foundation prepared an
application for the legal recognition of indigenous land rights
in the Puerto Princesa Subterranean River National Park
(Novellino 2000). And on Sibuyan, WWF-Philippines tried
to legalise the customary land rights of indigenous people
in the Mount Guiting-Guiting Natural Park (Tongson and
McShane 2006).
This paper is organised as follows; the next section provides
details on the research methodology. The third section, based
on a review of the existing scientific and juridical literature,
describes the formal institutions that regulate the use of, access
to, and control over land in the Philippines. We then present
four case studies, based on our fieldwork in the northern Sierra
Madre on Luzon, which highlight the fundamental mismatch Figure 1
between de jure and de facto tenure, or what Vandergeest and The northern Sierra Madre mountain range on Luzon

This content downloaded from

202.125.103.103 on Sun, 01 Aug 2021 16:26:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
148  / Ploeg et al.

and Ecology (NORDECO), a Danish consultancy firm, community profiles prepared by the NSMNP-CP provided
provided technical assistance to the DENR to proclaim an additional secondary information on formal land tenure
ancestral domain for the Agta, the indigenous people of the in the study sites. We compiled all available information
northern Sierra Madre (section 4.4). and produced sketch maps of four sites to illustrate the
We have been involved in several research and conservation fundamental disconnection between de jure and de facto
projects at these four sites and have made regular field trips tenure in the northern Sierra Madre (Figures 2-5).6
since 1999.5 This long-term engagement enables us to better
understand changes in land tenure and land use over time DE JURE LAND TENURE IN THE PHILIPPINES
in these four sites, and to assess the conservation outcomes
of project interventions (Sayer and Campbell 2004; Larson In 1521, Ferdinand Magellan claimed all lands in the
et al. 2010b). To understand changes in land use and land Philippines for the Spanish Crown. In theory, Spanish law
tenure, we adapt a ‘causal historical’ analytical lens as required respect for pre-existing communal property rights; the
advocated by Walters and Vayda (2009: 540). This pragmatic Spanish colonial government could only claim and distribute
interdisciplinary research method aims to explain human- land that was not used by the indigenous population (Lynch
environment interactions through a process of eliminative and Talbott 1995). In practice, however, the feudal principle
inference and logical reasoning from effects to causes. of the Regalian Doctrine prevailed; namely, that private land
Specific information on land tenure was gathered during semi- ownership could only be granted by the Crown (Pulhin 2002).
structured interviews and informal conversations with DENR The doctrine, reaffirmed by the US Congress in 1902, still
staff, local government officials, barangay (the smallest forms the cornerstone of Philippine land law. The Public Land
administrative unit in the Philippines) leaders and farmers Act of 1903 specified that only land classified by the state as
during field trips to Didadungan in March 2006, Divilacan Alienable and Disposable (A&D) can be privately owned;
in July 2010, and the Ilaguen and Disulap River Valleys in everything else remains the property of the state.
July 2013 and January 2014. We tried to assure the accuracy The management of all supposedly uninhabited, uncultivated,
and validity of the information obtained in these interviews and unclaimed lands became the responsibility of the Insular
through triangulation (Stake 2005). We complemented our Bureau of Forestry (Pulhin 2002; Bankoff 2013). 7 The
data with information from the grey literature on the region colonial administrators set up a Torrens system to register
(NGO project proposals and reports, government plans, and private ‘possessions’; but as this procedure was voluntary
unpublished scientific papers). We obtained official land and involved considerable costs, few people actually applied
classification maps from the office of the Protected Area for these so-called Homestead Patents (McDiarmid 1953:
Superintendent of the Northern Sierra Madre Natural Park, 864). Ever since, the ‘forestland question’ has haunted
and the Municipal Planning and Development Offices of the Philippine policymakers.8 It is estimated that more than 25
municipalities of San Mariano, Divilacan, and Palanan. The

a
a

b b
Figure 2 Figure 3
(a) De facto land use in the Disulap River Valley (b) De jure land (a) De facto land use in the Ilaguen River Valley (b) De jure land
classification in the Disulap River Valley classification in the Ilaguen River Valley

This content downloaded from

202.125.103.103 on Sun, 01 Aug 2021 16:26:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Land rights for conservation? /  149

b
Figure 4
(a) De facto land use in Divilacan (b) De jure land classification in
Divilacan
b
million people currently reside in and cultivate public lands Figure 5
(a) De facto land use in Didadungan (b) De jure land classification in
without formal land rights (Guiang 2004; Pulhin et al. 2007).
Didadungan
The resulting tenure insecurity is widely seen as a barrier to
rural development and the root cause of the on-going civil
with the management plan calculated to conserve and
insurgency in the country (Goldoftas 2006; USAID 2011).
protect the forest resources.
Since the 1950s, statutory tenure reforms have been a
political priority, giving rise to a variety of government policies Farmers could conditionally use public land, with the
that aim to reclassify and redistribute public land (Table 1). exception of steep slopes and riparian buffer zones. In 1982,
The Marcos regime (1965-1986), for example, initiated a land the Integrated Social Forestry (ISF) programme was initiated
reform programme that provided possibilities for farmers on to “democratise the use of public forests and to promote more
public lands to gain provisional land rights (Magno 2001). equitable distribution of the forest bounty” (Pulhin 2002: 33).
The Revised Forestry Code of 1975 (Presidential Decree 705) Farmers could apply for a Certificate of Stewardship Contract
marked a policy shift from ejecting farmers on public land (CSC), allowing them to continue cultivating public lands.
towards regulating their presence. It stipulated that: The restoration of democracy in 1986 initiated further
[K]aingineros, squatters, cultural minorities and other people-centred tenure reforms that emphasised poverty
occupants who entered into forest lands […] shall not alleviation, social justice, and equitable access to land.
be prosecuted: provided that they do not increase their The Local Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act 7160)
clearings [and] that they undertake […] activities to devolved national government powers to provinces and
be imposed upon them by the Bureau in accordance municipalities, including the responsibility of the ISF

This content downloaded from

202.125.103.103 on Sun, 01 Aug 2021 16:26:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
150  / Ploeg et al.

Table 1
Overview of legal land tenure instruments in the Philippines
Tenure instrument Legal basis Remarks
Alienable and Philippine Public Land Act 962 of 1903 Individual land ownership limited to 16 ha. Voluntary survey and
Disposable (A&D) registration of land titles (Homestead Patent)
Emancipation Patents (EP) Presidential Decree 27 of 1972 Under ‘Operation Land Transfer’ rice and corn fields were
transferred to tenants. Tenants received a Certificate of Land
Transfer, and after completing payments an EP
Certificate of Stewardship Integrated Social Forestry (ISF) The ISF programme provided a CSC for 7 ha to upland farmers for
Contract (CSC) programme of 1982  (Letter of 25  years, renewable for another 25  years, on the condition that 20%
Instruction 1260) of the area should be under permanent forest cover  (since 1995
under CBFM programme‑see below)
Certificate of Land Ownership Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law The CARL aims to improve the equity and productivity of
Awards (CLOA) (CARL) of 1988  (Republic Act 6657) agricultural lands. A CLOA is issued to individual farmers. It can
be inherited, but not sold or used as collateral
Protected Area Community‑ National Integrated Protected Area A PACBRMA is a tenure instrument awarded to a People’s
Based Resource Management System  (NIPAS) Act of 1992 Organisation whose members are ‘tenured migrants’ or
Agreement (PACBRMA) (Republic Act 7586) indigenous people living in a protected area
Community‑Based DENR Department Administrative Order A CBFMA is an agreement between a migrant community and the
Forest Management 2 of 1993; Executive Order 263 of 1995 DENR to develop, utilize and conserve a forest area, awarded to
Agreements (CBFMA); a People’s Organisation for 25 years. A CADC is issued by DENR
Certificate of Ancestral Domain to an indigenous cultural community in recognition of a communal
Claim (CADC) claim to ancestral lands occupied since time immemorial, awarded
to an People’s Organisation
Socialised Industrial DENR Department Administrative A SIFMA is an agreement for 25 years between the DENR and
Forest Management Order  24 of 1996 individual farmers or cooperatives to produce forest products
Agreement (SIFMA) (max. 10 ha for individuals and 500 ha for cooperatives)
Industrial Forest Management DENR Department Administrative An IFMA is a 25‑year production sharing agreement between
Agreement (IFMA) Order  4 of 1997 DENR and an individual or corporation to utilize public land
to grow and harvest timber
Certificate of Ancestral Domain Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA) A CADT is a land title awarded by the NCIP to an indigenous
Title (CADT) of 1997  (Republic Act 8371) community
Source: Guiang 2004; Harrison et al. 2004; DENR 2008

programme, the enforcement of environmental legislation 1997 (Republic Act 8371) recognised the customary rights of
and the right to collect taxes on real property. President indigenous people on public lands. The newly created National
Corazon Aquino (1986-1992) made agrarian reform a priority Commission on Indigenous People (NCIP) was tasked to
for her administration (Goldoftas 2006). The Department of legalise these rights, in the form of a Certificate of Ancestral
Agrarian Reform became responsible for the acquisition and Domain Title (CADT).
redistribution of private agricultural lands to poor landless Table 1 recapitulates the most common legal tenure
farmers under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law instruments issued by the state to farmers in the Philippines.
(CARL). Public lands, however, remained under the control In theory, these govern the use, access and control of natural
of the DENR. The Community-based Forest Management resources in remote, rural areas such as the northern Sierra
(CBFM) programme became “the national strategy to ensure Madre. But in practice, as we will see below, these land rights
social justice and the sustainable development of the country’s are seldom enforced by government, and local resource users
forest resources” (Magno 2001). The CBFM programme informally define and enforce land rights among themselves.
fundamentally transformed the rights of rural communities
and the responsibilities of government—rural communities DE FACTO LAND TENURE IN THE NORTHERN
were granted long-term access and user rights through a SIERRA MADRE
Community-based Forest Management Agreement (CBFMA)
or a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim (CADC). In 1992, In the pre-colonial societies of the northern Philippines land
the National Integrated Protected Area System (NIPAS) Act was held in usufruct—after securing the permission of the
was passed through Congress (Republic Act 7586). This elders, households could open a swidden and cultivate crops
provided a regulatory framework for the declaration and until the soil was exhausted (Scott 1994). More permanent
participatory management of protected areas and specifically user rights existed for fields that required substantial labour
recognised the rights of indigenous communities. Communities investments: irrigated rice fields, for example, could be
in protected areas can now harvest forest resources under inherited (Barton 1919; Prill-Brett 1994). Common property,
a so-called Protected Area Community-based Resource tenancy arrangements, slavery, debt-bondage and tribute in
Management Agreement (PACBRMA). the form of goods and labour resulted in a variety of tenure
State-led tenure reforms continued under President Ramos systems that varied from village to village (Wiber 1991;
(1992-1998). The Indigenous People’s Rights Act (IPRA) of Vargas 2003).

This content downloaded from

202.125.103.103 on Sun, 01 Aug 2021 16:26:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Land rights for conservation? /  151

During Spanish colonial rule large tracts of land in the do not trust the legal system and try to avoid costly and lengthy
Cagayan Valley were appropriated by religious orders, colonial judicial procedures (Franco 2008). Many farmers have secured
officers and indigenous elites, mainly for the production of a ‘tax declaration’ from the LGU, which is widely regarded as
tobacco (De Jesus 1980). The Spanish colonisers depended a first step towards gaining an official land title.11
on native leaders to control the population, extract taxes and San Mariano, Divilacan and Palanan are among the poorest
labour. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, these municipalities of the Philippines: 60% of the people live on
local chiefs used their new powers and privileges to acquire less than one USD per day (NSCB 2010). A few prominent
large landholdings, either by falsifying ownership documents families rule the countryside through patronage networks
or by acting as pawnbrokers.9 In the lowlands of Cagayan and control the local economy. In recent years, farmers have
Valley, most farmers were, in effect, reduced to tenants become increasingly dependent on traders who supply credit
working on the haciendas econtrolled by this new dominant for seeds, fertiliser and pesticides and, in return, demand
class in society. People who resisted compulsory labour and exclusive procurement rights. Many farmers have become
conversion fled to the forested valleys of the northern Sierra indebted as a result of harvest failures and excessive interest
Madre; their descendants are today referred to as the Kalinga rates—20% interest, locally called ‘five-six’, over a cropping
(Keesing 1962). period is not uncommon. Traders accept land as collateral
Corporate logging in the Sierra Madre boomed after the and some have acquired large land holdings in this way. The
construction of the Maharlika Highway in 1965 (Van den New People’s Army (NPA) provides some form of protection
Top 1998). Remote towns such as San Mariano grew rapidly; for rural communities against land grabbing, but the Maoist
five logging companies and 10 sawmills operated in the insurgents also levy ‘revolutionary taxes’ or ask for a
municipality in the 1970s (Persoon and Van der Ploeg 2003). ‘voluntary contribution’ from farmers. As in many other rural
Along the Pacific coast, several towns developed around the areas in the Philippines, clientism and the threat of violence
barracks and sawmills of logging companies; Divilacan and characterise tenure (Kerkvliet 1990; Borras 2001). The rule
Didadungan were new settlements centred on logging. During of law remains an abstract concept on the forest frontier of the
these ‘years of plunder’ the Marcos administration issued northern Sierra Madre.
forest concessions to political cronies (Broad and Cavanagh
1993). In most cases, these concessions were illegally sub- Disulap River Valley
contracted to local entrepreneurs who organised the harvesting
and processing of the wood. Rapid population growth, land The Disulap River rises in the mountains of the Sierra Madre
scarcity, and the construction of logging roads led to a massive and flows westwards to San Mariano town, where several sitios
influx of Ilocano farmers from west and central Luzon to the (sitios=hamlets) are located along a forest frontier (Figure 2a).
forests of the northern Sierra Madre. A new wave of migrants, To the east are the forests of the Sierra Madre, to the west land
mainly from Ifugao Province, settled in the northern Sierra use intensifies. Approximately 4,250 people live in this area
Madre in the late 1990s (Van der Ploeg et al. 2007). (NSCB 2010)that was deforested in the 1980s by commercial
At present, claims to land are still mainly secured by logging companies and slash-and-burn farmers. San Isidro is
clearing forest and making the land productive. Most the largest sitio ) and most people in the valley belong to the
households cultivate 3 to 4 ha. Farmers practice slash-and- Ilocano ethnic group, but several Agta communities also live
burn techniques (kaingin) to clear vegetation. Fences are rarely along the forest frontier.12 Immigrant farmers bought large
used; corners of agricultural plots are marked with stones or tracts land from Agta families for a nominal fee, sometimes
trees. Creeks, cliffs, and ridges also function as boundaries. literally for ‘three bottles of gin and a radio with batteries’.
Both men and women informally own specific plots, but Other immigrants have purchased land from these pioneers, or
there are major differences between ethnic groups.10 Ilocano cultivate the land under various sharecropping arrangements.
custom, for example, prescribes equal inheritance of property. Farmers cultivate multiple and widely dispersed plots and
By contrast, among the Ifugao agricultural plots are, ideally, in the valleys, they have constructed irrigated rice paddies.
not divided and land is given by the parents to the eldest son The vegetation on exposed hills is dominated by Imperata
upon marriage; consequently, younger siblings rarely inherit cylindrica. In the dry season, these unclaimed marginal
any land. grasslands are burned to facilitate hunting and grazing.
Farmers know that they do not formally own the land, Accessibility is a major constraint for rural development,
but informal land claims, so-called ‘possessions’, are particularly in the rainy season when the roads become
generally respected, also on fallow land. Possessions are impassable.
sold, mortgaged or temporarily leased to other farmers. Such Most land in the Disulap Valley is officially classified as
transactions—‘agreements’—are recorded by the Sangguniang non-tenured public land (Figure 2b). Only the flat areas south
Barangay, the elected village council. There is a variety of of Disulap and around the sitio of Villa Miranda are classified
such agreements between land owners and tenants—most as A&D lands. These areas are owned by local politicians from
tenants pay a fixed share of the harvest, ranging between San Mariano town and cultivated by tenants. The area east of
10 and 50%. Conflicts over land are usually ‘amicably settled’, San Jose was classified as an ISF target area in the 1980s and
but occasionally disputes result in violence. Farmers generally a number of farmers here have CSCs. Later, a CBFMA was

This content downloaded from

202.125.103.103 on Sun, 01 Aug 2021 16:26:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
152  / Ploeg et al.

issued to a cooperative in San Jose. The upper Catalangan which are all located on the west bank of the river. Over
River forms the boundary of the strict protection zone of the the years, Ilocano and Ibanag immigrants have bought or
Northern Sierra Madre Natural Park.13 A one kilometre buffer mortgaged land from the Kalinga, who now often work on these
zone extends eastwards. Most farmers in the Disulap River lands as tenants. The grasslands and secondary forests south
Valley, however, are ignorant of the boundaries, zones or of Buyasan remain a NPA stronghold and there are frequent
regulations relating to the protected area. violent clashes between the army and the rebels.
From 1997 to 2002, the NSMNP-CP assisted farmers in the The lowland areas around Cadsalan are classified as A&D
Disulap Valley to apply for a SIFMA in an effort to rehabilitate (Figure 3b). When the land was released in 1976, the titles
degraded forests, prevent agricultural encroachment and were allegedly seized by a teacher from the local elementary
improve rural livelihoods in the buffer zone of the Northern school. Illiterate Kalinga farmers signed papers, under the
Sierra Madre Natural Park. The idea was to facilitate a impression that the teacher would assist them in acquiring land
transition to sustainable agriculture by providing “security ownership. However, these tillers do not pay any shares to the
of land tenure to landless residents” (General 2005: 197). formal landowner—‘he may own the paper, but we own the
After extensive consultations, land surveys and lobbying land!’ The DENR also released the lands around Buyasan in
activities, the DENR issued SIFMAs to 81 farmers in San the 1980s. Allegedly, the survey was based on existing maps
Isidro (Mangabat et al. 2009).14 The NSMNP-CP provided and did not include an on-site verification. The A&D lands,
seedlings, fertiliser and technical assistance to the farmers to therefore, not only encompass the flat areas around the village
establish fruit and timber tree plantations. but also cover the surrounding hills. The farmers who cultivate
The long-term impact of the project has, however, been these A&D lands do not have formal land titles. In 1998, the
limited. A few farmers successfully integrated coconut, DENR aimed to issue a CADC covering almost the entire
gmelina, citrus and coffee into their farms, but the poor upper Ilaguen River Valley to the Agta of San Mariano.15 The
condition of the roads inhibits the marketing of these fruits. proposed CADC (13,591 ha) covered Cadsalan and Tappa,
Land use has rapidly intensified over the past years; in 2002, and includes large parts of Ibujan and Buyasan. The ancestral
the hilly landscape around San Isidro was characterised by domain overlaps significantly with the A&D lands, but the
regenerating swiddens, grasslands, and bamboo groves, NCIP refused to recognise the CADC, and now aims to issue
interspersed with banana plantations and upland rice fields. a CADT to the Kalinga. As a result, the current legal status of
Today, most farmers cultivate hybrid yellow corn and cassava. the land remains non-tenure public land (Local Government
Meanwhile, illegal logging and agricultural encroachment of San Mariano 2014).
continue unabated in the protected area (Van der Ploeg et al. In 2004, the Mabuwaya Foundation tried to formalise the
2011a). There is persistent uncertainty about the legal status of land claims of 35 households living adjacent to Dinang Creek.
the SIFMA plots. The DENR issued a series of administrative This shallow creek is prime habitat for the critically endangered
orders in 2006 cancelling all SIFMAs in the country following Philippine Crocodile. To protect the species in the wild, the
widespread non-compliance with the terms of the agreements, foundation aimed to proclaim the creek as a protected area
but SIFMA holders in San Mariano have never been informed (Van der Ploeg and Van Weerd 2004). After several community
about the implications. More recently, the SIFMA plots in the consultations in sitio Lumalug, local inhabitants consented
Disulap Valley have been targeted for the contract-growing of to the creation of a crocodile sanctuary, on condition that
sugar cane by a large bioethanol distillery plant in San Mariano, their customary land rights were formalised. The DENR
which became operational in San Mariano in 2012 (Borras subsequently conducted a land survey and advised the farmers
and Franco 2012). Many farmers have leased their land to the to apply for a CBFMA. On the official land classification
company and sugar cane is planted on an increasingly larger maps, however, a large part of the creek appeared as A&D
scale in the Disulap River Valley. Overall, the efforts of the land, which prevented several farmers from applying for a
NSMNP-CP to facilitate the issuance of SIFMAs to farmers tenure instrument on the land they were tilling. Other farmers
in the buffer zone of the Northern Sierra Madre Natural Park refused to apply for a communal, temporal and conditional
has not improved security of tenure, livelihoods or protected agreement, and demanded individual land titles. This brought
area management. the entire application process to a halt and led to friction
between farmers, and between the farmers and DENR, LGU,
Ilaguen River Valley and the Mabuwaya Foundation. Indeed, rumours spread that
the efforts to protect crocodiles were actually a conspiracy to
The Ilaguen River is a major tributary of the Cagayan River. grab the land and develop large-scale tourism facilities (Van
Land use along the upper Ilaguen River is characterised by der Ploeg and Van Weerd 2005).
irrigated rice fields in the valleys, banana plantations on the In 2005, the barangay council declared Dinang Creek as
steep slopes, and upland rice, cassava and corn on the hill a crocodile sanctuary with a five metre buffer zone. Most
tops (Figure 3a). The forests in this area were clear-cut by farmers, however, disregard the ordinance and continue to
commercial logging companies in the 1970s. Around 3,500 cultivate their fields right up to the waterfront. The number
people live in this remote area with the Kalinga ethnic group of households in Lumalug has increased in recent years, from
forming a majority in Cadsalan, Ibujan, Buyasan and Tappa, 20 households in 2003 to 54 in 2011. Land use is intensifying,

This content downloaded from

202.125.103.103 on Sun, 01 Aug 2021 16:26:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Land rights for conservation? /  153

wetlands are converted into rice fields and riparian vegetation Park as an ancestral domain, which is causing considerable
is cleared. Nonetheless, Dinang Creek remains an important friction with DENR and LGUs (Minter et al. 2014). In order
breeding area for the Philippine Crocodile. This positive to address these discrepancies, WWF-Philippines aimed to
conservation outcome can certainly not be attributed to the ”elucidate, harmonise and strengthen land tenure in the park”
efforts of the Mabuwaya Foundation to legalise land rights. (WWF-Philippines 2004). This included integrating the
Indeed, the failed attempt to provide a CBFMA to farmers management plan of the park in the Comprehensive Land Use
living adjacent to Dinang Creek fuelled feelings of mistrust Plans of the LGUs, and allocating legal tenure instruments to
and insecurity, which impeded in-situ conservation efforts. local communities.
For a variety of reasons, WWF-Philippines failed to
Divilacan facilitate the legalisation of people’s land rights, but the project
managed to rewrite the municipality’s Comprehensive Land
Divilacan is a relatively small municipality in the coastal area Use Plans. The LGU, however, continues to develop plans
of Isabela with around 5,000 inhabitants (NSCB 2010). Large that potentially conflict with the regulations of the protected
parts of Divilacan remain forested (Figure 4a). Artisanal fishing area and increasingly sees the protected area as a barrier to
is an important livelihood activity along the Pacific coast, and development. The planned construction of a road from Ilagan
copra and rice are the main agricultural products. In addition, to Divilacan, crossing the Sierra Madre, is illustrative in this
people cultivate swiddens with cassava, taro and other crops regard. This major infrastructural project is promoted by the
for subsistence. These agricultural areas are mainly located LGU, the provincial government and DENR to ‘boost tourism
along the coast and in the river valleys. Accessibility is a and economic opportunities in Divilacan’ (Visaya 2014). If the
major problem in the coastal area of Isabela as there is no road road is constructed, it will fundamentally transform land tenure
crossing the Sierra Madre. Rice shortages often occur during in Divilacan, and have a major impact on the protected area. In
the rainy season (September to January), when rough weather anticipation of the construction of the road, several politicians
makes sea travel impossible. Approximately 550 Agta live in and businessmen have recently started to buy large tracts of
the municipality and hunting, fishing, and gathering forest lands along the coast, and several Agta families in barangay
products form an important part of their livelihood. Many Agta Dimasalansan have been chased from their campsites on the
households also work as tenants on the land of Ilocano farmers. beach. Clearly, the efforts of FWWF-Philippines to strengthen
In 1954, the land around Divilacan was released by the customary land rights have not improved tenure security or
Magsaysay administration. The Bureau of Lands divided the park management.
land into squares of 16 ha (Figure 4b) and distributed these
A&D lands to ‘rebel returnees’ and veterans. Most of these Didadungan
plots have never been cleared of their forest vegetation. Indeed,
many settlers left after a few months discouraged by the The southern coastline of the municipality of Palanan is a
difficult conditions and lack of healthcare and education. The rugged and sparsely populated area (Figure 5a). Accessibility
few settlers that stayed in Divilacan built their houses along the is difficult as cliffs, coral reefs, and strong waves prevent
coast and cultivate the land adjacent to their homes. Divilacan boats from anchoring in most places. In 1965, the Bello
officially became a municipality in 1969. By that time the entire logging company constructed a sawmill in Didadungan, but
area was covered under a Timber License Agreement issued to this concession was closed in 1978. Today, Didadungan is a
the ACME Plywood and Veneer Company. In 1979, all public small fishing village and functions as a loading point for illegal
lands in Divilacan were included in the Palanan Wilderness logging operations along the Pacific Coast. Around 900 people
Area. In 1983, CSCs were issued to most households in inhabit this remote coastal area. Agta households camp on the
barangay Dicatian under the ISF programme. Today, the entire beaches to fish, harvest lobster, collect rattan and swiftlet nests,
municipality of Divilacan falls within the Northern Sierra and hunt for wild pig and deer.
Madre Natural Park. In the management plan of the park, all The Northern Sierra Madre Natural Park covers the entire
inhabited areas are classified as multiple-use zones (for clarity, municipality of Palanan. The DENR classified the southern
purposes not shown in Figure 4b). coast as a strict protection zone, with the exception of the
The Northern Sierra Madre Natural Park Act classified agricultural areas around Didadungan, Kanaipang and Diguyo,
the forested A&D lands as strict protection zones (DENR which are classified as multiple and sustainable use zones
2001a), but in practice land clearing continues; DENR officials (Figure 5b). Here, the Agta cultivate swiddens. But former local
say they cannot prohibit private landowners from making government employees from Palanan use tax declarations to
their land productive. In fact, land conversion is actively attest de jure ownership of these fields and beaches.
encouraged by municipal governments. The LGU of Divilacan, In 1996, the DENR issued a CADC to the Agta inhabiting the
for example, subsidises rice production to prevent food coastal area of the municipality of Palanan, but Agta leaders and
shortages, which is leading to the reclamation of freshwater local government officials raised concerns about the ancestral
wetlands. Furthermore, conflicts between government agencies domain claim, which did not include important fishing grounds
hamper effective park management. For example, the NCIP and, in some areas, overlapped with land claims of migrants
plans to proclaim the entire Northern Sierra Madre Natural (NORDECO and DENR 1998; Magana 2003). Therefore,

This content downloaded from

202.125.103.103 on Sun, 01 Aug 2021 16:26:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
154  / Ploeg et al.

the claim was revised with the technical and financial support application for a CBFMA in Dinang Creek, for example, took
of NORDECO. After a lengthy process, the Agta, LGU, and 30 months and cost more than PHP 100,000 (USD 2,000), a
DENR endorsed the revised Ancestral Domain Sustainable prohibitive sum for most farmers in this remote rural area, and
Development and Protection Plan in 2001. However, the NCIP, ultimately led to nothing.
who had by that time taken over the responsibility of the issuance In part, this chaos is caused by an overly complex and
of ancestral domains, did not accept the ancestral domain and inconsistent legal framework. Frank Hirtz (1998: 251-252)
the whole process started again from scratch. After a first aptly describes the ‘administrative nightmares’ of tenure
tumultuous meeting in Didadungan in 2007 the LGU refused reforms in the Philippines:
to work with the NCIP any longer and actually denied NCIP
“Legislative institutions come up with innumerable
staff access to the municipality. The negotiations have strained
laws and letters of instruction, hosts of presidential
relations between Agta and migrants (Minter 2010). After almost
decrees and executive orders, constantly revised
20 years of community consultations and participatory mapping
implementation handbooks for every imaginable
exercises, the Agta still do not have any formal recognition of
situation, finely-tuned administrative guidelines,
their ancestral land and have become deeply frustrated with the
sophisticated court proceedings and precedents,
entire process. Illegal logging, dynamite fishing, and the use of
repeals, annulments, and exceptions.”
snare traps continue to threaten biodiversity and the livelihoods
of the Agta on the Palanan Coast. Despite the good intentions, Overlapping mandates and institutional conflicts within the
the efforts of NORDECO have made little difference in tenure DENR, between the DENR and LGUs and between the DENR
and resource use in Didadungan. and the NCIP further complicate the legislation of customary
land rights in relation to public lands. In the Disulap River
DISCUSSION Valley, for example, confusion about the jurisdiction of two
DENR district offices and inaccurate maps obstructed the
These four cases demonstrate the incongruence between issuance of a CBFMA to a farmer’s cooperative in San Isidro.16
de jure and de facto tenure in the northern Sierra Madre, and In Palanan, the LGU issued tax declarations for plots located in
highlight several flawed assumptions underlying the idea the strict protection zone of the Northern Sierra Madre Natural
that legalising the customary land rights of communities will Park; and in the Ilaguen River Valley, the NCIP disregarded
protect biodiversity. First, advocates tend to underestimate the earlier efforts by DENR to declare an ancestral domain.
bureaucratic and political obstacles to tenure reforms (Neumann This administrative and institutional complexity is also often
1997; Ribot et al. 2006). Second, the idea to grant conditional used as a pretext for incompetence, corruption, or political
rights to groups of people often misrepresents de facto tenure interference (Grainger and Malayang 2006; Van der Ploeg
in these remote rural areas (Naughton-Treves 1999; Li 2002). et al. 2011a). Many DENR, LGU, and NCIP officials do
Third, the supposed link between de jure land rights and not fully understand the procedures and requirements of the
sustainable resource management is highly tenuous (Zerner different tenure instruments. Low morale and a bureaucratic
2000; Gibson et al. 2002). These flaws make state-led tenure culture that belittles fieldwork hinder the implementation of
reforms a problematic strategy for conserving biodiversity. people-centred policies (Van den Top 1998). The numerous
inaccuracies in official land classification maps are largely
Weak governance caused by so-called ‘table-top surveys’, in which cadastral
maps are prepared without groundtruthing. Government
The devolution of property rights to local communities is officials rarely visit remote locations and, when they do, limit
dependent on effective, accountable and legitimate government their stay as much as possible. Heat, rain, accessibility, and
institutions (Pomeroy and Berkes 1997). But the DENR, NCIP, excessive alcohol consumption often inhibit comprehensive
and LGUs lack the resources, technical capacity, and political fieldwork. Moreover, petty corruption has become a ‘standard
support to implement these tenure reforms (Utting 2000; World operational procedure’ in the DENR bureaucracy; without
Bank 2003). informal payments, official approval of tenure applications
The registration and issuance of land rights is, as we have is indefinitely delayed (Van den Top 1998: 231). In addition,
seen above, surrounded by perpetual confusion and chaos. The laws and regulations are selectively interpreted or simply
bureaucratic procedures relating to obtaining a legal claim ignored to accommodate elite interests (Pulhin and Dressler
on land are “inaccessible, incomprehensible, and expensive” 2009; Larson and Pulhin 2012). In San Mariano, for example,
(Prill-Brett 1994: 696). Farmers are confronted with “complex the DENR and LGU identified the SIFMA areas—which, in
paperwork” (Mangabat et al. 2009: 467), and “long delays in principle, are meant to encourage smallholders to produce
the bureaucratic processing” (Romero 2006: 145). Cadastral forest products and cannot be transferred—as potential areas
information is inaccurate and not easily accessible (USAID for the production of sugar cane and actively encouraged
2011). Land classification maps are notoriously unreliable, farmers to lease their land (Philippine Daily Inquirer 2011).
and often do not reflect the physical conditions on the ground The confusion over land tenure is thus, at least to a certain
(Kummer 1992; Aquino 2005). This red tape forms an almost extent, deliberately created and maintained by government
unsurmountable obstacle to formalising land rights. The officials (Garrity et al. 2001).

This content downloaded from

202.125.103.103 on Sun, 01 Aug 2021 16:26:53 UTC6 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Land rights for conservation? /  155

Without effective and accountable government institutions, are only allowed to practice ‘subsistence’ agriculture and use
attempts to secure tenure and thereby improve natural resource ‘traditional’ hunting techniques, after prior DENR approval
management will fail. But despite numerous policy reforms (DENR 2001a: 19). Moreover, in most policies that devolve
and significant donor investments over the past 25 years, the control over land to communities people are required to form
capacity of DENR, NCIP and LGUs to devolve and enforce cooperatives or associations, but efforts to create such groups
property rights remains weak (World Bank 2003; Guiang 2004; fail in most cases (Hirtz 1998; Van der Ploeg et al. 2015).
La Viña et al. 2010; Minter et al. 2012). These bureaucratic Much has been written on the dangers of oversimplifying
problems form a major, but often overlooked, hindrance for land tenure in the Philippine public lands (Wiber 1991; Bryant
tenure reforms. 2000; Dressler et al. 2006). Of importance for our argument is
that policies to grant land rights to communities misrepresent
Imagined communities political and socioeconomic realities on the ground, and
therefore, do not have the intended outcomes when they are
Efforts to formalise customary land rights in order to protect implemented.
biodiversity are often based on idealised notions of local
communities. Policies such as CBFM, NIPAS, and IPRA fail Tenuous links
to recognise the divisions within rural communities and the
influence of external actors and institutions on tenure (Li 2002). Government interventions that aim to conserve natural resources
Most people in the northern Sierra Madre are immigrants by legalising tenure, such as the CBFM programme, are based
who settled in the area in the 1970s. The indigenous peoples on the premise that local users will only manage natural
of the Sierra Madre, the Agta, and the Kalinga, nowadays form resources sustainably if they have formal ownership. There
small minorities. Traditional property systems that regulated is increasing evidence, however, that formalising customary
access to swiddens, hunting areas, and fishing grounds have land rights does not necessarily lead to positive conservation
disappeared. Communal working parties have been replaced outcomes (Sayer et al. 2008; Robinson et al. 2013).
by paid labour. On the western side of the Sierra Madre, large In the Disulap River Valley, the only case described in
areas have been cleared of forest vegetation. People in the this article where land claims were sucessfully legalised, the
Disulap and Ilaguen River Valleys are no longer dependent SIFMAs did not promote a transition to sustainable land use
of forest resources, although logging remains an important and failed to counter agricultural encroachment in the Northern
source of cash for many communities along the forest frontier Sierra Madre Natural Park. Land use in the valley is rapidly
(Van der Ploeg et al. 2011a). Most farmers produce cash crops intensifying and farmers continue clearing forest vegetation.
for urban markets and desire modern consumer goods. Today, Many beneficiaries are unaware of the specific conditions of
tenure is largely based on private land ownership. Conflicts the SIFMA programme, such as maintaining 90% forest cover.
about land are common between family members, neighbors, Others do not think these obligations are in their interest and
families or villages and occasionally lead to violence. Land simply ignore these rules (Mangabat et al. 2009). The SIFMAs
use in these rural areas is, to a large extent, determined by stimulated some farmers to establish gmelina tree plantations
outside political and economic influences, such as credit and orchards, but these initiatives are hampered by low
systems, transportation networks, government subsidies and timber prices and transport problems. Most SIFMA holders
market prices. Traders play an important role in agricultural are now cultivating hybrid yellow corn or leasing their land
intensification by providing inputs for corn cultivation and for the production of sugar cane, exactly the industrial-scale
procuring harvests. schemes that forest tenure reforms aim to counter. Clearly, the
Only the Palanan Coast, where a few Agta communities legal recognition of property rights by the state is, in itself,
hunt and fish, might be compatible with the image of isolated, not sufficient to promote sustainable land use and prevent
traditional, indigenous and forest-dependent communities that deforestation (Zerner 2000).
features so prominently in the co-management discourse. But Many conservationists envision a more ‘intricate’ link
here, too, the local reality is at odds with the assumptions between formalising land rights and conservation; the idea
of these people-centred policies. Kinship relations between is that efforts to secure land rights will increase local support
the Agta and the Ilocano, for example, make differentiation for conservation (Ipara et al. 2005: 644). The Mabuwaya
between indigenous and non-indigenous people problematic. Foundation, for example, assisted farmers in the Ilaguen River
In many instances, the Agta have sold land to farmers, which Valley in applying for a tenure instrument in exchange for their
complicates the proclamation of an ancestral domain. The consent to create a crocodile sanctuary. And the NSMNP-CP
extraction of lobster, swiftlet nests, bushmeat, and timber by facilitated the issuance of SIFMAs in the Disulap River Valley
the Agta is not sustainable and largely controlled by traders primarily to ease hostile attitudes towards conservation. But
who market these products. Indeed, by making land rights the effectiveness of this indirect logic often remains uncertain
conditional on specific forms of social organisation and and efforts to formalise user rights frequently create, rather
sustainable outcomes, tenure reforms such as the IPRA impose than reduce, uncertainty and conflicts over land, thereby
unrealistic and unenforceable restrictions on local resource impeding conservation action (Sjaastad and Cousins 2008;
users. Under the NIPAS Act, for example, indigenous people Ubink 2009). In Dinang Creek, for example, the difficulties

This content downloaded from

202.125.103.103 on Sun, 01 Aug 2021 16:26:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
156  / Ploeg et al.

surrounding the issuance of a CBFMA strained relations empower rural communities to exercise their rights over natural
between farmers and the Mabuwaya Foundation. Discussions resources. The long-term outcomes of such a transformative
about crocodiles suddenly became dominated by allegations community-based conservation approach are, as yet, unclear
of land grabbing and corruption, disputes over land between and important questions remain, but it presents an alternative
neighbours and incomprehension about why the DENR could strategy for conservation organisations to secure people’s rights
not issue land titles. Such ‘surrogate’ conflicts (Nie 2001: 1) over natural resources and thereby conserve biodiversity (Lele
can aggravate tenure insecurity and erode trust between local et al. 2010; Bawa et al. 2011).
people, conservationists and government agencies.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
CONCLUSION
This research was carried out in the framework of the academic
The legal recognition of customary rights by the central partnership between Isabela State University and Leiden University.
state is currently widely regarded as a precondition for J.D. van der Ploeg, S. de Rooij, G.A. Persoon, Anna Yeadell-Moore
community-based natural resource management. In this and two anonymous reviewers provided valuable comments on
paper, we demonstrated that the conservation outcomes of the manuscript. We are grateful for the patience and support of the
these statutory tenure reforms are often elusive.17 Granting editorial team of Conservation & Society, particularly Hetal Hariya
and Haripriya Rangan.
conditional land rights to rural communities only leads
to improved natural resource management under specific
NOTES
social, ecological, and institutional conditions (Sayer et al.
2008; Larson et al. 2010b; Robinson et al. 2013). In forest
1. These initiatives reflect the convergence of the conservation
frontiers such as the northern Sierra Madre, characterised agenda with global policy discourse on participatory
by unprecedented land use transitions, poverty, rapid social development, decentralisation and indigenous peoples’ rights
change, chaotic and unaccountable governance and a history in the 1990s (Roe 2008; Larson et al. 2010). Since then, securing
of state-sponsored resource plunder, this is not the case. the customary land rights of local communities has been used
This paper highlights the radical discontinuity between as an instrument to link biodiversity conservation to goals as
de jure and de facto tenure in the northern Sierra Madre. It diverse as poverty alleviation, gender equity, and climate change
documents how the state systematically neglects actual land use mitigation.
and tenure, but is at the same time incapable of enforcing the 2. To avoid the ‘conceptual muddiness’ that often characterises the
legal entitlements it is projecting onto rural areas. As a result, discourse on tenure reforms, it is essential to define some key
the discourse on people-centred tenure reforms is painfully concepts (Naughton-Treves 1999: 312). Land rights refer to a
at odds with social realities. The problem is that in order to bundle of rights guiding the access, use, control or transfer of
facilitate the legalisation of tenure by the state, conservation land (Schlager and Ostrom 1992). This bundle can include rights
that are defined by law, de jure, and rights that are defined locally,
organisations have to adopt and adhere to this ‘legal surrealism’
de facto. Tenure consists of the social relations and institutions
(Erie 2012: 38). The dangers of this bureaucratic capture are that enforce these rights. Tenure security is the degree to which
evident—it reinforces government power and authority over people perceive their land rights are safe. Tenure reform is the
marginal areas and people (Bryant 2002), erodes credibility legalisation of tenure, usually by granting conditional rights to
of and local support for conservation organisations (Jepson people already using the land (Larson et al. 2010b).
& Canney 2003), and deviates attention and resources from 3. USAID, for example, has invested more than USD 110
alternative solutions that can effectively defend local people’s million since 1990 in projects to formalise the rights of rural
rights and protect biodiversity (Sayer et al. 2008). communities in order to improve environmental management
The recognition that the state is, in effect, not the exclusive (Guiang and Castillo 2007). In 1994, The World Bank provided
source of regulatory action in society opens up possibilities USD 20 million to a project that aimed, among other things, to
to move beyond top-down tenure reforms (Rangan 1997; recognise the land rights of indigenous people and settlers in
Sikor and Lund 2009). One promising bottom-up approach newly proclaimed protected areas (The World Bank 2004). More
recently, UNDP initiated the USD 11 million New Conservation
emerging from field experiences throughout the Philippines
Areas in the Philippines Project that aims to expand the existing
is the participatory development of community-based land
protected area system by ‘recognising ancestral domain lands,
use plans (Posa et al. 2008; Weeks et al. 2010). In the Disulap which are associated with the traditional territories of upland
River Valley, for example, the Mabuwaya Foundation supports culture peoples and which typically coincide with areas of
barangay councils in the design and enforcement of ordinances greatest surviving endemism’ (NewCAPP 2012: 2).
protecting wetlands and watersheds. These locally-defined 4. Aswani (1999: 422) likewise describes the gap between
rules successfully banned the use of destructive fishing ‘cognised entitlements’, the perceptions of property rights, and
practices and stimulated farmers to maintain riparian buffer ‘effective entitlements’, the actual enforcement of those rights.
zones (Van der Ploeg and Van Weerd 2004; Van der Ploeg et al. 5. MvW worked as wildlife biologist for the NSMNP-CP from
2011b). By taking de facto tenure on the ground as a starting 1999 to 2003, and conducted biological fieldwork in Divilacan
point, instead of imaginary de jure rights, and by reflecting and the Disulap River Valley. In 2003, JvdP and MvW set up
local knowledge, values and concerns, these ordinances the Mabuwaya Foundation and, since then, have worked with

This content downloaded from

202.125.103.103 on Sun, 01 Aug 2021 16:26:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Land rights for conservation? /  157

DENR, LGUs and rural communities in these four sites to Park Act (Republic Act 9125), proclaiming a large part of the
protect the Philippine Crocodile in the wild (Van Weerd and remaining forests of Isabela Province as a protected area. A
Van der Ploeg 2012). TM conducted ethnographic fieldwork in complex zoning system regulates access to and use of forest
Divilacan and Didadungan for her Ph.D. dissertation from 2003 resources in the park. All uninhabited areas were labeled as strict
to 2005 and, since then, has made repeated field visits to these protection zones, and areas that were ‘actually and continuously
areas (Minter 2010: 2014). DA has served as resource person occupied such areas for five years prior to March 10, 1997’ were
for the NSMNP-CP, WWF-Philippines and the Mabuwaya classified as multiple-use zones and their inhabitants labeled as
Foundation and, in this capacity, has made frequent visits to ‘tenured migrants’ (DENR 2001b: 6). A buffer zone was created
the municipalities of Divilacan, Palanan, and San Mariano. around the park, initially five kilometres wide but later revised
6. These sketch maps clearly cannot be used in any way to validate to one kilometre, to provide ‘an extra layer of protection around
or contest individual land claims. the protected area’ (DENR 2001b: 10).
7. In practice, the Bureau of Forestry was mainly focused on 14. Most beneficiaries are from Disulap. In San Jose many
facilitating the exploitation of forest resources by logging households did not participate in the SIFMA programme as they
corporations. The American foresters generally regarded slash- feared that the staff of the NSMNP-CP would grab their lands
and-burn farmers (kaingineros) in the forests as destructive (General 2005: 201).
squatters that should be expelled (Klock 1995; Villamor 2006). 15. Most people who live in the CADC are, in fact, Kalinga; a few
After independence, the forestry sector continued to receive Agta communities live along the forest frontier near barangay
preferential treatment in government decisions on the allocation Buyasan. In fact, none of the CADC holders were Agta,
of public lands: Timber License Agreements (TLA) were issued nor people living along the Ilaguen River; of the identified
to logging corporations for a nominal fee, while forest-dwelling ‘communal leaders’ nine were Ilocano and four Kalinga, who
people and upland farmers were criminalised (Magno 2001). all lived in barangay Dibuluan and do not remember what
8. Policymakers in the Philippines usually equate ‘public land’ they actually have signed (Magana 2003). It seems that this
with ‘forest land’ or ‘upland’. Public lands are areas held in omission of the DENR was primarily caused by the need of
trust by the state. Forest lands are areas that are classified by the DENR personnel to meet specific targets and quotas.
state as forest. Public lands are assumed to be uninhabited and 16. In 2004, the San Isidro Agroforestry Multipurpose
uncultivated, and thus forested (Borras 2006). Over the past 100 Development Cooperative applied for a SIFMA at the
years, large tracts of public land have been deforested; but that Community Environment and Natural Resources Office
does not automatically imply that the legal classification of the of the DENR in Naguilian. After a survey the Naguilian
land changed. Hence, the paradox in official statistics on land office concluded that a SIFMA could not be issued, as the
classification and forest cover in the Philippines; over 50% of the reforestation site was located in the buffer zone of the Northern
total land area is classified as public land, whereas forest cover Sierra Madre Natural Park, and advised the cooperative
amounts to less than 17%. Land classified by the government to apply for a CBFMA at the office of the protected area
as forest land is by definition public land, but not all forests are superintendent in Palanan. The office of the superintendent
on public land; timber plantations, coconut groves and orchards subsequently endorsed the application for a CBFMA to
are usually privately owned. The term ‘upland’ is used to refer the Provincial Environment and Natural Resource Office.
to hilly or mountainous areas, in contrast to ‘lowlands.’ By law, Unfortunately, the provincial office could not approve the
all upland is defined as areas ‘with slopes steeper than 18% and application because on its maps the plantation was located in
above 100 m’, and classified as public lands (Walpole 2010). the strict protection zone of the park. It acknowledged that this
9. Through a so-called pacto de retrovendendo, land was pawned to was solely due to inaccurate maps. By the time this problem
raise cash. This informal credit system, effectively still in place was solved, the DENR suspended the issuance of all CBFMA
in many remote rural areas in the archipelago, was subject to in the country because of persistent allegations of fraud and
much abuse. Moneylenders charged excessive interest rates and mismanagement. The process led to much frustration among
used these contracts to grab land from farmers (Larkin 1993). the members of the cooperative.
10. By law men and women have equal property rights in the 17. This suggests a significant bias in the scientific literature, as
Philippines. However, patriarchal attitudes and stereotypes most published case studies from the Philippines depict success
regarding the role of women persist in society. The CARL and stories.
the IPRA, for example, award land titles or certificates to the
head of the household, in most cases a man.
SUPPLEMENTARY PHOTOGRAPHS
11. Legally, local governments cannot collect tax on informal claims
on public lands, but there have been precedents in which courts
upheld land ownership based on such tax declarations (USAID Photo 1: SIFMA plots in the Disulap River Valley (photo by
2011). J. van der Ploeg 2007)
12. The Agta, the indigenous hunter-gatherers in the forests on Photo 2: C ADC in the Ilaguen River Valley (photo by
Luzon, have loose notions of communal ownership of land J. van der Ploeg 2012)
based on cognatic kinship relations and reciprocal sharing Photo 3: A&D lands in Divilacan (photo by J. van der Ploeg
arrangements: relatives can fish, hunt, and farm in a watershed 2008)
after securing permission from the resident group (Minter 2010). Photo 4: CADC in Didadungan (photo by J. van der Ploeg
13. In 2001, Congress passed the Northern Sierra Madre Natural 2004)

This content downloaded from

202.125.103.103 on Sun, 01 Aug 2021 16:26:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
158  / Ploeg et al.

REFERENCES decentralizing national parks management in the Philippines. Political

Geography 25(7): 789–816.
Alcorn, J.B. and A.G. Royo. 2007. Conservation’s engagement with human- Eaton, P. 2005. Land tenure, conservation and development in Southeast
rights: “traction”, “slippage” or avoidance? Policy matters 15: 115–139. Asia. London: Curzon.
Antolin, A.T. 2003. Saving the hottest of the hotspots: the Sierra Madre Erie, M.S. 2012. Property rights, legal consciousness, and the new media
biodiversity corridor strategy. In: The Sierra Madre Mountain in China: the hard case of the ‘toughest nail-house in history’. China
Range: global relevance, local realities (eds. Van der Ploeg, J., A.B. Information 26(1): 35-59.
Masipiqueña and E.B. Bernardo). Pp.3-16. Cabagan: CVPED. Franco, J.C. 2008. Peripheral justice? Rethinking justice sector reform in the
Aquino, D.M. 2005. Resource management in ancestral lands: the Bugkalots Philippines. World Development 36(10): 1858–1873.
in northeastern Luzon. Ph.D. thesis. Leiden, the Netherlands: Leiden Garrity, D.P., V.B. Amoroso, S. Koffia and D. Catacutan. 2001. Innovations
University. in participatory watershed resource management to conserve tropical
Aswani, S. 1999. Common property models of sea tenure: a case study from biodiversity. In: Seeking sustainability: challenges of agricultural
the Roviana and Vonavona Lagoons, New Georgia, Solomon Islands. development and environmental management in a Philippine watershed
Human Ecology 27(3): 417–453. (eds. Coxhead, I. and G. Buenavista). Pp.112–37. Laguna: PCARRD.
Austin, R.L. and J.F. Eder. 2007. Environmentalism, development, and General, A. 2005. Co-management of the environment through the Socialized
participation on Palawan Island, Philippines. Society and Natural Industrial Forest Management Agreement: the San Mariano experience.
Resources 20(4): 363–371. In: Comanagement in practice; the challenges and complexities of
implementation in the Northern Sierra Madre Mountain Region (eds.
Bankoff, G. 2013. “Deep forestry”: shapers of the Philippine forests.
Snelder, D.J. and E.C. Bernardo). Pp.195–210. Quezon: Ateneo de
Environmental History 18: 523–556.
Manila University Press.
Barton, R.F. 1919. Ifugao law. American Archaeology and Ethnology 15(1):
Gibson, C.C., F.E. Lehoucq and J.T. Williams. 2002. Does privatization protect
1–186.
natural resources? Property rights and forests in Guatemala. Social
Bawa, K.S., N.D. Rai and N.S. Sodhi. 2011. Rights, governance, and Science Quarterly 83(1): 206–225.
conservation of biological diversity. Conservation Biology 25(3),
Goldoftas, B. 2006. The green tiger. The costs of ecological decline in the
639–641.
Philippines. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Borgerhoff Mulder, M. and P. Coppolillo. 2005. Conservation: linking ecology,
Grainger, A. and B. Malayang III. 2006. A model of policy changes to secure
economics, and culture. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
sustainable forest management and control of deforestation in the
Borras, S.M. 2001. State-society relations in land reform implementation in Philippines. Forest Policy and Economics 8: 67–80.
the Philippines. Development and Change 32: 545–575.
Guiang, E.S. 2004. Environmental analysis USAID/Philippines strategy for
Borras, S.M. 2006. Redistributive land reform in ‘public’ (forest) lands? 2005-2009. Assessment of conservation initiatives of tropical forests
Lessons from the Philippines and implications for land reform theory and biological diversity in the Philippines. Manila: DENR and USAID.
and practice. Progress in Development Studies 6(2): 123–145.
Guiang, E.S., and G. Castillo. 2007. Trends in forest ownership, forest
Borras, S.M. and J.C. Franco. 2012. Global land grabbing and trajectories of resources, tenure and institutional arrangements in the Philippines: are
agrarian change: a preliminary analysis. Journal of Agrarian Change they contributing to better forest management and poverty reduction?
12(1): 34–59. In: Understanding forest tenure in South and Southeast Asia. Forestry
Borrini-Feyerabend, G., M. Pimbert, M.T. Farver, A. Kothari and Y. Renard. Policy and Institutions Working Paper No. 14. Rome: FAO.
2007. Sharing power; a global guide to collaborative management of Harrison, S.R., N.F. Emtage and B.E. Nasayao. 2004. Past and present forestry
natural resources. London: Earthscan. support programs in the Philippines, and lessons for the future. Small-
Brechin, S.R., P.R. Wilhusen, C.L. Fortwangler and P.C. West (eds). 2003. scale Forest Economics, Management and Policy 3(3): 303–317.
Contested nature; promoting international biodiversity with social Hirtz, F. 1998. The discourse that silences: beneficiaries’ ambivalence towards
justice in the twenty-first century. New York, NY: SUNY. redistributive land reform in the Philippines. Development and Change
Broad, R. and J. Cavanagh. 1993. Plundering paradise; the struggle for the 29(2): 247–275.
environment in the Philippines. Berkeley, CA: University of California Ipara, H.I., J.J. Akonga and J.S. Akama. 2005. The tenure factor in wildlife
Press. conservation. International Journal of Environmental Studies 62(6):
Bryant, R.L. 2000. Politicized moral geographies: debating biodiversity 643–653.
conservation and ancestral domain in the Philippines. Political Jepson, P. and S. Canney. 2003. Values-led conservation. Global Ecology and
Geography 19(6): 673–705. Biogeography 12: 271–274.
Bryant, R.L. 2002. Non-governmental organizations and governmentality: Johnson, K. A. and K.C. Nelson. 2004. Common property and conservation: the
consuming biodiversity and indigenous people in the Philippines. potential for effective communal forest management within a national
Political Studies 50: 286–292. park in Mexico. Human Ecology 32(6): 703–733.
Campese, J., T. Sunderland, T. Greiber and G. Oviedo. 2009. Exploring issues Keesing, F.M. 1962. The ethnohistory of northern Luzon. Stanford, CA:
and opportunities in rights based approaches to conservation. Bogor: Stanford University Press.
CIFOR, IUCN and CEESP. Kerkvliet, B. 1990. Everyday politics in the Philippines: class and status
De Jesus, E.C. 1980. The tobacco monopoly in the Philippines: bureaucratic relations in a Central Luzon village. Berkeley, CA: University of
enterprise and social change, 1766-1880. Quezon City: Ateneo de California Press.
Manila University Press. Klock, J.S. 1995. Agricultural and forest policies of the American colonial
DENR (Department of Environment and Natural Resources). 2001a. Republic regime in Ifugao territory, Luzon, Philippines, 1901-1945. Philippine
Act 9125. Palanan: DENR. Quarterly of Culture and Society 23: 3–19.
DENR. 2001b. Management plan Northern Sierra Madre Natural Park. Kummer, D.M. 1992. Deforestation in the postwar Philippines. Manila: Ateneo
Palanan: DENR. de Manila University Press.
DENR. 2008. Philippine forestry statistics. http://forestry.denr.gov.ph/ Larkin, J.A. 1993. Sugar and the origins of modern Philippine society.
stat2008.htm. Accessed on June 10, 2015. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Dressler, W.H., C.A. Kull and T.C. Meredith. 2006. The politics of Larson, A.M., D. Barry, G.R. Dahal and C.J.P. Colfer (eds). 2010a. Forest for

This content downloaded from

202.125.103.103 on Sun, 01 Aug 2021 16:26:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Land rights for conservation? /  159

people: community rights and forest tenure reform. London: Earthscan. Island, the Philippines: Is there a future? Land reform: land settlement
Larson, A.M., D. Barry and G.R. Dahal. 2010b. New rights for forest-based and cooperatives 1: 56–72.
communities? Understanding processes of forest tenure reform. NSCB (National Statistical Coordination Board). 2010. 2010 Philippine
International Forestry Review 12(1): 78–96. statistical yearbook. Makati: NSCB.
Larson, A.M. and J.M. Pulhin. 2012. Enhancing forest tenure reforms through Ojanen, M., D.C. Miller, W. Zhou, B. Mshale, E. Mwangi and G. Petrokofsky.
more responsive regulations. Conservation and Society 10(2):103–113. 2014. What are the environmental impacts of property rights regimes
La Viña, A.G.M, J.L. Kho and M.J. Caleda. 2010. Legal framework for in forests, fisheries and rangelands? A systematic review protocol.
protected areas: Philippines. IUCN-EPLP 81. Gland: IUCN. Environmental Evidence 3(1): 19.
Lele, S., P. Wilshusen, D. Brockington, R. Seidler and K. Bawa. 2010. Beyond Persoon, G.A. and J. van der Ploeg. 2003. Reviewing the projected future of
exclusion: alternative approaches to biodiversity conservation in the San Mariano, a boomtown at the Sierra Madre forest fringe. Philippine
developing tropics. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability Studies 51(3): 451–473.
2(1): 94–100. Philippine Daily Inquirer. 2011. Isabela farmers protest bioethanol project.
Li, T.M. 2002. Engaging simplification: community-based resource February 06, 2011. http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/
management, market processes and state agendas in upland Southeast regions/view/20110206-318832/Isabela-farmers-protest-bioethanol-
Asia. World Development 30(2): 265–283. project. Accessed on May 20, 2015.
Lindsey, P. A., S.S. Romanach and H.T. Davies-Mostert. 2009. The importance Poffenberger, M., R. Soriaga and P. Walpole. 2006. Communities and forest
of conservancies for enhancing the value of game ranch land for large stewardship; regional transitions in Southeast Asia. Tagbilaran: Asia
mammal conservation in southern Africa. Journal of Zoology 277(2): Forest Network.
99–105. Pomeroy, R.S. and F. Berkes. 1997. Two to tango: the role of government in
Local Government of San Mariano. 2014. Municipal forest land use plan. San fisheries co-management. Marine Policy 21(5): 465–480.
Mariano: Municipal Planning and Development Office. Posa, M.R.C., A.C. Diesmos, N.S. Sodhi and T.M. Brooks. 2008. Hope for
Lynch, O. and K. Talbot. 1995. Balancing acts: community based forest threatened tropical biodiversity: lessons from the Philippines. Bioscience
management and national law in Asia and the Pacific. Washington, 58(3): 231–240.
DC: World Resources Institute. Prill-Brett, J. 1994. Indigenous land rights and legal pluralism among
Magana, D.S. 2003. The Agta foragers in the Northern Sierra Madre Natural Philippine highlanders. Law and Society Review 28(3): 687–697.
Park: ancestral domains in theory and practice. In: The Sierra Madre Pulhin, J.M. 2002. Trends in forest policy of the Philippines. Policy Trend
Mountain Range: global relevance, local realities (eds. Van der Ploeg, J., Report: 29–41.
A.B. Masipiqueña and E.C. Bernardo). Pp.241-257. Cabagan: CVPED.
Pulhin, J.M., M. Inoue and T. Enters. 2007. Three decades of community-
Magno, F. 2001. Forest devolution and social capital; state-civil society based forest management in the Philippines: emerging lessons for
relations in the Philippines. Environmental History 6(2): 264–286. sustainable and equitable forest management. International Forestry
Mangabat, C.B., D.J. Snelder and W.T. de Groot. 2009. Tree adoption in the Review 9(4): 865–883.
North-East Philippines uplands: analysis of a GO-NGO partnership. Pulhin, J.M., and W.H. Dressler. 2009. People, power and timber: the politics
Small-Scale Forestry 8: 463–478. of community-based forest management. Journal of Environmental
McDiarmid, A. M. 1953. Agricultural public land policy in the Philippines Management 91(1): 206–214.
during the American period. Philippine Law Journal 28: 851–888. Rangan, H. 1997. Property vs. control: the state and forest management in the
Minter, T. 2010. The Agta of the northern Sierra Madre; livelihood strategies Indian Himalaya. Development and Change 28: 71–94.
and resilience among Philippine hunter-gatherers. Ph.D. thesis. Leiden, Ribot, J.C., A. Agrawal and A.M. Larson. 2006. Recentralizing while
the Netherlands: Leiden University. decentralizing: how national governments reappropriate forest resources.
Minter, T., V. de Brabander, J. van der Ploeg, G.A. Persoon and T. Sunderland. World Development 34(11): 1864–1886.
2012. Whose consent? Hunter-gatherers and extractive industries in Rice, D. and M.O. Pindog. 2005. The Ikalahan in northern Luzon. In: The
the northeastern Philippines. Society & Natural Resources 25(12): future of the Sierra Madre: responding to social and ecological changes
1241-1257. (eds. Van der Ploeg, J. and A.B. Masipiqueña). Pp.333-338. Tuguegarao:
Minter, T., J. van der Ploeg, M. Pedrablanca, T. Sunderland and G.A. Persoon. CVPED.
2014. Limits to indigenous participation: the Agta and the Northern Robinson, B.E., M.B. Holland and L. Naughton-Treves. 2013. Does secure
Sierra Madre Natural Park, the Philippines. Human Ecology 42(5): land tenure save forests? A meta-analysis of the relationship between
769–778. land tenure and tropical deforestation. Global Environmental Change
Naughton-Treves, L. 1999. Whose animals? A history of property rights to 29: 281–293.
wildlife in Toro, western Uganda. Land Degradation and Development Roe, D. 2008. The origins and evolution of the conservation-poverty debate:
10: 31–328. a review of key literature, events and policy processes. Oryx 42(4):
Nelson, F. 2010. Community rights, conservation and contested land. The 491–503.
politics of natural resource governance in Africa. London: Earthscan. Romero, M.R. 2006. Investing in the land: agricultural transition towards
Neumann, R.P. 1997. Primitive ideas: protected area buffer zones and the sustainable land use in the Philippines forest fringe. Ph.D. thesis. Leiden:
politics of land in Africa. Development and Change 28: 559–582. Leiden University.
NewCAPP (New Conservation Areas in the Philippines Project). 2012. Long- Sayer, J. and B. Campbell. 2004. The science of sustainable development;
term solutions for biodiversity conservation in the Philippines. Manila: local livelihoods and the global environment. Cambridge: Cambridge
UNDP-GEF-DENR. University Press.
Nie, M.A. 2001. The sociopolitical dimensions of wolf management and Sayer, J., J. McNeely, S, Maginnis, I. Boedhihartono, G. Shepherd and B.
restoration in the United States. Human Ecology Review 8(1): 1–12. Fisher. 2008. Local rights and tenure for forests: opportunity or threat
NORDECO (Nordic Agency for Development and Ecology) and DENR. for conservation? Washington, DC: Rights and Resources Initiative.
1998. Integrating conservation and development in protected area Schlager, E. and E. Ostrom. 1992. Property-rights regimes and natural
management: Northern Sierra Madre Natural Park, the Philippines. resources: a conceptual analysis. Land Economics 68(3): 249–262.
Manila: NORDECO and DENR. Schwartzman, S. and B. Zimmerman. 2005. Conservation alliances with
Novellino, D. 2000. Recognition of Ancestral Domain Claims on Palawan indigenous peoples of the Amazon. Conservation Biology 19(3): 721–727.

This content downloaded from

202.125.103.103 on Sun, 01 Aug 2021 16:26:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
160  / Ploeg et al.

Scott, W.H. 1994. Barangay: Sixteenth-century Philippine culture and society. Cabagan: CVPED.
Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press. Van der Ploeg, J., A.B. Masipiqueña, M. van Weerd and G.A. Persoon. 2011a.
Sikor, T. and C. Lund. 2009. Access and property: a question of power and Illegal logging in the Northern Sierra Madre Natural Park. Conservation
authority. Development and Change 40(1): 1–22. and Society 9(3): 202–215.
Sikor, T. and D. Müller. 2009. The limits of state-led land reform: an Van der Ploeg, J., M. Cauilan-Cureg, M. van Weerd and W.T. de Groot. 2011b.
introduction. World Development 37(8): 1307–1316. Assessing the effectiveness of environmental education: mobilizing
Sikor, T. and J. Stahl (eds). 2012. Forests and people: property, governance, public support for Philippine crocodile conservation. Conservation
and human rights. London: Routledge. Letters 4(4): 313–323.
Sjaastad, E. and B. Cousins. 2008. Formalisation of land rights in the South: Van der Ploeg, J., M. Balbas and M. van Weerd. 2015. Reforestation and
an overview. Land Use Policy 26: 1–9. producer organizations in the Philippines. ETFRN News 57: 84–90.
Snelder, D.J. and G.A. Persoon. 2005. Co-management of natural resources: Van Weerd, M. and J. van der Ploeg. 2012. The Philippine crocodile: ecology,
introduction. In: Co-management in practice; the challenges and culture and conservation. Cabagan: Mabuwaya Foundation.
complexities of implementation in the Northern Sierra Madre Mountain Vargas, A. 2003. The Philippines country brief property and land markets.
Region (eds. Snelder, D.J. and E.C. Bernardo). Pp. 3–36, Quezon City: Madison: Land Tenure Center.
Ateneo de Manila University Press. Villamor, G.B. 2006. The rise of protected area policy in the Philippine
Stake, R.E. 2005. Qualitative case studies. In: The SAGE handbook of forest policy: an analysis from the perspective of Advocacy Coalition
qualitative research (eds. Denzin, N.K. and Y.S. Lincoln). Pp.443–466. Framework. Forest Policy and Economics 9(2): 162–178.
London: Sage. Visaya Jr., V. 2014. Former log road to get 2.9-B loan for repair. Philippine
Stevens, S. (ed). 1997. Conservation through cultural survival: indigenous Daily Inquirer. http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/645429/former-log-road-to-
peoples and protected areas. Washington, DC: Island Press. get-p2-9-b-loan-for-repair. Accessed on July 18, 2015.
Tongson, E. and T. McShane. 2006. Securing land tenure for biodiversity Walpole, P. 2010. Figuring forest figures. Manila: ESSC.
conservation in Sibuyan Island, Romblon, Philippines. Policy Matters Walters, B.B. 2012. Do property rights matter for conservation? family
14: 286–296. land, forest and trees in Saint Lucia, West Indies. Human Ecology 40:
Ubink, J.M. 2009. Legalising land rights in Africa, Asia and Latin America: 863–878.
an introduction. In: Legalising land rights; local practices, state Walters, B.B. and A.P. Vayda. 2009. Event ecology, causal historical analysis,
responses and tenure security in Africa, Asia and Latin America (eds. and human-environment research. Annals of the Association of American
Ubink, J.M., A.J. Hoekema and W.J. Assies). Pp.7–31. Leiden: Leiden Geographers 99(3): 534–553.
University Press.
Weeks, R., G.R. Russ, A.A. Bucol and A.C. Alcala. 2010. Incorporating local
USAID (United States Agency for International Development). 2011. tenure in the systematic design of marine protected area networks.
Philippines; property rights and resource governance. Manila: USAID. Conservation Letters 3(6): 445–453.
Utting, P. 2000. An overview of the potential and pitfalls of participatory Wiber, M.G. 1991. Levels of property rights, levels of law: a case study from
conservation. In: Forest policy and politics in the Philippines: the the Northern Philippines. Man 26(3): 469–492.
dynamics of participatory conservation (ed. Utting, P.). Pp. 171–215. World Bank 2003. Governance of natural resources in the Philippines:
Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press, UNRISD. lessons from the past, directions for the future. Washington, DC: Rural
Vandergeest, P. and N. Peluso. 1995. Territorialization and state power in Development and Natural Resources Sector Unit.
Thailand. Theory and Society 24(3): 385–426. World Bank. 2004. Philippines. Conservation of Priority Protected Areas
Van den Top, G.M. 1998. The social dynamics of deforestation in the Sierra Project. Implementation completion report. Washington, DC: The
Madre, Philippines. Ph.D. thesis. Leiden: Leiden University. World Bank.WWF-Philippines. 2004. Northern Sierra Madre Natural
Van der Ploeg, J. and M. van Weerd. 2004. Devolution of natural resource Park Conservation and Development Project (NSMNPCDP) Phase 2.
management and crocodile conservation: the case of San Mariano, Manila: WWF-Philippines.
Isabela. Philippine Studies 52(3): 345–382. Yi, Y., G. Köhlin, and J. Xu. 2014. Property rights, tenure security and forest
Van der Ploeg, J. and M. van Weerd. 2005. Contested crocodiles? Philippine investment incentives: evidence from China’s collective forest tenure
crocodile conservation and indigenous peoples’ rights in the northern reform. Environment and Development Economics 19(1): 48–73.
Sierra Madre. In: The future of the Sierra Madre: responding to social Zerner, C. 2000. People, plants and justice: the politics of nature conservation.
and ecological changes (eds. Van der Ploeg, J. and A.B. Masipiqueña). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Pp.339-362. Tuguegarao: CVPED. Zingapan, K. and D. de Vera. 1999. Mapping the ancestral lands and
Van der Ploeg, J., G.A. Persoon and M.D. Masipiqueña (eds). 2007. Ifugao waters of the Calamian Tagbanwa of Coron, Northern Palawan.
migrants in and around the Northern Sierra Madre Natural Park. Manila: PAFID.

Received: January 2015; Accepted: November 2015

This content downloaded from

202.125.103.103 on Sun, 01 Aug 2021 16:26:53 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms