Forwarded Message ---From: "galeadmin-ips@cengage.com" <galeadmin-ips@cengage.com> To: elgen_ga@yahoo.com.

ph Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 2:33:41 PM Subject: Power Search:The sea around the Philippines: governance and management for a complex coastal ecosystem.

Fernandez, Pepito R., Jr. "The sea around the Philippines: governance and management for a complex coastal ecosystem. " Environment. 51.3 (May-June 2009): 36(16). Expanded Academic ASAP. Gale. Xavier University. 30 June 2011 http://find.galegroup.com/gps/infomark.do?&contentSet=IACDocuments&type=retrieve&tabID=T002&prodId=IPS&docId=A200269397&source=gale&user GroupName=phxu&version=1.0 Full Text:COPYRIGHT 2009 Heldref Publications Spin a globe and plant a finger on it, and it will likely land in an ocean--no area of which remains entirely unaffected by human influence. Indeed, recent research has found that multiple anthropogenic drivers of generally damaging change strongly affect 41 percent of the world's oceans. (1) Fishing plays a prominent role in all marine systems, although we know most about its effects on coastal marine ecosystems, where overfishing has proven to be the most significant factor in marine species extinctions and 90 percent of predatory fish communities have vanished since the advent of industrial fishing. (2) In the Pacific Ocean, for example, fisheries have diminished biomass and the average size of tuna and other top predator species. (3) In many ways, the archipelago of the Philippines represents a microcosm of these problems: the waters around its central islands host the most biodiverse marine ecosystem in the world, (4) and yet overfishing and environmental degradation place it among the most threatened. Around the world, as fish communities collapse along with the fisheries that harvest them, and popular edible species disappear from the grocery shelves, difficult challenges face us with ever more insistence: What sort of governance will lead us out of this crisis? How we can reliably implement management rules that must accompany proper governance? No panacea can restore and maintain the world's tremendously complex coastal marine ecosystems, for the diverse challenges they face entail unique solutions. And tailored responses require better understanding of nature-society connections and outcomes and thus a holistic and interactive view of people and their coastal areas. (5) Such integrative thinking achieves much more when tempered with a cautious, tentative stance rather than quick-fix attempts to control people and their environment. With the Rio Declaration and Agenda 21, the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro brought integrative thinking and the precautionary principle (6) into the overarching sustainable development concept of joining economic development to environmental conservation and social equity. (7) In the Philippines, the agricultural sector has long been aware of the merits of pursuing sustainable development through bottom-up or participatory mechanisms and promoting fair trade at the international level (for example, by eradicating national subsidies and enhancing the capacity of local producers). (8) Integrative thinking opens the door to important concerns and deliberations about which goals should take priority; what resources policymakers, managers, and local people should deploy to achieve them; and on whom these goals should focus. Local people hold invaluable perspectives on coastal problems, and deliberations should include their input--they live on the coast, after all, and are most familiar with problems that occur there.

Complex socioecological problems necessitate good governance--the collective effort of governments, businesses, civil society, local communities, places of worship, political parties, universities, and the mass media. An interactive network of actors, governance relies more on participatory approaches--shared power, relationships among institutions, and accountability-than does a top-down system. (9) Management, on the other hand, takes a more methodological approach, focusing on achieving objectives. The 7,107 islands that make up the Philippines and the sea surrounding them illustrate the complexity of framing a governance system and management strategies for diverse coasts. (10) Coastal governance and management structures throughout the islands have changed in the last three decades in ways that reflect some of these concepts, although the results have left a great deal of room for improvement. But the multilayered Philippine experience is best viewed in context. The Ecological and Social Context of Philippine Coasts In 2005, Old Dominion University marine biologist Kent Carpenter and Smithsonian Institution fish curator Victor Springer published the results of a 10-year multidisciplinary survey of marine and ocean resources. (11) The effort, conducted for the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, involved 101 of the world's leading authorities on marine life and produced 2,983 maps of marine species for the western Pacific Ocean. Their analysis revealed the central Philippines as "the area of highest diversity and endemism"; that is, the area with the highest concentration of species per unit area in the world. (12) The full extent of the Philippines' marine biodiversity is not known, but the best information available reveals an astounding variety of marine life: 5,000 species of clams, snails, and mollusks; 488 species of corals; 981 species of bottom-living algae; and thousands of other organisms, including rare species like the mimic octopus, pygmy seahorse, halogen ghost pipe fish, dugong (sea cow), and mega-mouth shark. Five of the seven sea turtle species known to exist in the world today occur in Philippine waters. (13) Conserving and protecting the wealth of Philippine coasts and seas has therefore become an international concern due to its biotechnological, food security, economic, and even strategic implications. Aside from the SuluSulawesi seascape to the southwest (shared with Indonesia), the Visayan Sea In the center of the islands (see Figure 1 on page 39) is the most productive fishing ground in the country. The coastal and marine resources of the Philippines are of national importance because of their valuable contribution to the national economy, local livelihoods, and social security. The Philippines has a total territorial water area of 2,200,000 square kilometers ([km.sup.2]), including its exclusive economic zone. Its coastal area, which measures 266,000 [km.sup.2], contains 832 municipalities and 75 cities, and, at 36,289 kilometers (km), the coastline ranks as the third longest in the world. Sixty-four of the country's 79 provinces have coastlines. Philippine coral reefs stretch over an area of 27,000 [km.sup.2]. (14) Mangroves, excellent nurseries for marine life and shelter against natural disasters, cover an estimated 240,000 hectares (2,400 [km.sup.2]). (15) Recent estimates reveal that coral reefs contribute US$1.064 billion annually to the economy, while mangroves contribute at least US$83 million. (16) The fisheries sector accounts for about 3.9 percent of the gross domestic product at constant prices and employs about 990,872 Filipinos--roughly 68 percent of whom are engaged in municipal or small-scale fishing. (17) Additionally, fish and fishery products supply up to 70 percent of the total animal protein intake and 30 percent of the total protein intake of Filipinos. (18) The Philippine economy is still largely traditional; a great number of Filipinos derive their income from informal economic activities. According to an Asian Development Bank report, the

Philippine industrial sector, the smallest in Southeast Asia, absorbs only 15 percent of the country's employed labor force. The great majority of Filipinos derive their income and livelihood in the services sector (49 percent) and the primary sector--agriculture, fishery, and forestry (36 percent). But nonwage earners and family laborers comprise two-thirds of the primary sector workforce; in fishery and agricultural sectors, this means small-scale fishers, small-landholding farmers, and upland subsistence farmers. The service sector employs nonwage and family laborers for nearly half of its workforce. All told, about 60 percent of the country's economic activities are informal. (19) Nationwide, poverty exists in urban areas--25 percent of urban dwellers are poor--but it is most acute and widespread in rural areas and coastal municipalities, where 54 percent of the population lives below the poverty line. Poor people in such areas tend to be self-employed, primarily in agriculture, fisheries, or casual labor. They are almost all landless. An Asian Development Bank study in 2007 found that during 1994-2003, incomes did not rise significantly for the majority of the people in the Philippines, and the wealth gap increased. The national Gini index, the measure of inequality of income distribution, is pegged at 44.5 out of 100, ranking it among the highest in Asia--a longstanding problem. (20) Pronounced inequalities in health and education outcomes, assets (including landholdings), and access to infrastructure only compound overall inequality. Recent analysis indicates that in the period 1975-2003, the Philippines experienced anemic economic growth, disappointing poverty reduction performance, and persistent spatial disparities in living standards (favoring Manila and other city centers). As wealth and opportunity grow increasingly uneven, the widening disparities may provoke social, economic, and political tensions. (21) Poverty incidence in coastal communities is extremely high-76 percent--compared with the general level of 41.8 percent in provinces and 34.2 percent nationwide. Based on income class figures, 19 coastal provinces belong to the 24 poorest provinces. In terms of minimum basic needs ranking, 18 of the poorest 20 provinces are coastal provinces. (22) Moreover, most coastal areas have limited social infrastructure. Roughly 28 percent of households lack toilets, and only 22 percent have access to potable water. Residents dispose of garbage primarily by burning it or indiscriminately dumping it in the ocean, vacant lots, or backyards. Less than 5 percent of households report that a municipal solid waste system collects their garbage. (23) Continued environmental deterioration has led to increased poverty and population growth in marginal areas. Roots of Coastal and Related Ecological Problems The 64 years since the end of the Second World War have witnessed a swift and massive deterioration of Philippine coastal and marine resources. Government policies that encouraged or tolerated overfishing and the use of destructive fishing practices--all to achieve rapid economic development and export-led growth--lie at the root of the problem. Analysis of quantifiable and qualitative data from 1850 to 2000 in Southeast Asia reveals abundant and top-grade marine fisheries resources prior to 1945. (24) Government policies to expand the fisheries sector, foreign loans, and strong demand for fish products in Japan and elsewhere later led to the growth of industrial marine fisheries in the region. (25) Following a boom-bust cycle that has also characterized the forestry sector since 1945, (26) the fishing industry exploited fish stocks and habitats in an often uncontrolled, unregulated manner. After depleting one stock, the fleet (trawlers and, later, purse seiners (27)) moved on to the next area or stock. Commercial fishers also carried out this sequential plunder across fisheries, depleting, for example, demersal species (those that live near the seabed) and moving on to

pelagic species (those that live near the surface in open ocean). Declining economic performance of one fishery encouraged transfer or conversion of vessels and crew to a new or developing fishery. By the 1980s, fishing fleets found very few new or underexploited frontiers in the region and very few new types of fisheries to exploit. This remains the situation today in the Philippines as marine fisheries' catch volumes have begun to flatten and the quality of the catch has diminished. (28) Seaweed and aquaculture production have begun to pick up the slack. Institutional weaknesses and poor law enforcement in the Philippines have aggravated the country's most pressing environmental problems. (29) In terms of ecological conservation, throughout the 1950s the national government implemented policies that gave little regard to effective, nonpunitive measures. In addition, the devolution of laws, regulations, and guidelines from the national to local governments has resulted in managers executing rules inconsistently or failing to carry them out at all. Poor and unjust enforcement of rules, in turn, has led to poor compliance and willful violations among resource users. Moreover, many national government agencies have not devolved all coastal and fisheries management functions to local governments. For example, relevant agencies have retained functions pertaining to critical habitats such as mangroves and watersheds, pollution and foreshore management, and urban and industrial development in the coastal areas. And for those functions that have been relinquished to local control, concerns have arisen that local governments lack the technical knowledge, skills, resources, and funding to successfully develop effective management regimes and harmonize various interests operating in the coastal area. A lack of qualified staff prevents the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and other agencies from assisting local governments in effectively carrying out coastal management, conservation, protection, and coordination. Governance Reform and Management Mechanisms A coalition of fisherfolk organizations, church leaders, and legislators promulgated the Fisheries Code (30) beginning in the late 1980s out of concern for the general decline in productivity of marine resources, overexploitation of the near-shore coastal resources, (31) and poverty among municipal fisherfolk. This nongovernmental group helped overthrow the Marcos dictatorship in 1986; soon after, it began to channel energies to environmental and livelihood causes. Key leaders in the executive branch and the Senate supported their quest to provide subsistence fishers with priority access to coastal resources. Passed in 1998, the code now serves as the primary legislation for fisheries and coastal management and protection in the country. A representative from a nongovernmental organization involved in lobbying for the passage of the code in 1998 asserts, however, that the strong lobby of commercial fishers and their legislators pushed to water down key provisions for which the municipal fishers had advocated. For example, a section on expiring Fishpond lease agreements gave renewal priority to former holders who were mostly private investors. (32) The primary legal sources that help guide the Fisheries Code's core principles include the Philippine version of Agenda 21, the 1987 Constitution, and the Local Government Code of 1991-each of which support some aspect of sustainability for the nation's coastal ecosystems and communities. The Philippine Agenda 21 calls for the country to address seven interrelated aspects of local development: economic, political, cultural, social, ecological, human, and spiritual. (33) It serves as a guidebook in planning, implementing, and monitoring local development and management programs in the fisheries sector and other aspects of diverse local economies.

The current Constitution, passed in 1987, protects the rights of subsistence fishers and citizens engaged in fishing, giving them preferential use of communal marine and fishing resources, whether inland or offshore, and support through appropriate technology and research and adequate financial, production, and marketing assistance. However, the Local Government Code, passed in 1991, provides local governments with broad powers to protect and manage the coastal and marine environments, impose local fishery revenues and taxes, delineate their municipal waters, and allocate the use of resources within their waters. The code also mandates the national government to consult with local governments in their responsibilities within their territorial jurisdiction. A key innovation under the Fisheries Code is the creation of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Management Councils at the village, municipal, and intermunicipal levels. Ideally, these councils are comprised of volunteer representatives from the fishing community; local nongovernmental organizations, business, and governments; and national government agencies. Their primary role is to advise in the development of local ordinances and guidelines regarding coastal and fisheries management and enforcement, as well as in their implementation. When properly equipped, oriented in sustainable management, and treated as equal partners in decisionmaking, the councils can promote social equity and effective stewardship of coastal and marine resources. Figure 2 on page 43 illustrates coastal resources management governance in the country, highlighting key actors and potential partnerships at various levels. In addition, the national government has implemented a number of coastal resources management programs since the mid-1980s, largely in response to aid packages and technical assistance from multilateral and bilateral aid agencies and banks. (34) Interventions under these programs resulted in significant positive impacts on biophysical parameters such as in coral cover, fish catch, and biodiversity, notably in marine protected areas. (35) The programs also have improved governance through the participation of local communities in resource management and law enforcement and improved awareness among local officials and coastal communities of the need for conservation and protection of coastal ecosystems. (36) Despite these significant gains, threats to coastal resources and biodiversity persist due to a number of political and institutional complexities. Strategies, Institutions, and Their Missing Pieces Protecting the biodiversity of the Philippine coasts and the seas that run between them depends on the people who inhabit and make their living on the islands, and the challenge is a classic democratic and developmental puzzle: as government, from local to national to international, helps create and enforce the rules to restrict human behavior, the people need to buy in, participate, and keep government in good working order. Adding aid providers to the mix reinforces protections if the providers help strengthen local property and access rights and the capacity of local areas to benefit from their support. Strengthening such rights entails a closer inspection of diverse coastal contexts to support institutions, groups, and actors that can achieve developmental and democratic ideals. Rules to Restrict Use Despite the Fisheries Code's clarity of purpose, resource allocation and access remain problematic, and an important goal of the legislation's initial supporters--giving priority to municipal fisherfolk--has yet to be fully realized. The code does not clearly stipulate who may use and control municipal waters for fishing activities. Article 1, Section 18, states that "all fishery related activities in municipal waters ... shall be utilized by municipal fisherfolk and their cooperatives/organizations who are listed as such," (37) which appears to give municipal fishing

communities the exclusive right to use municipal waters and coincides with the provisions of prior fisheries legislation. However, other provisions in this section leave a significant loophole; they allow commercial fishing (38) in municipal waters, initially through the endorsement of the local chief executive or mayor. Section 18 stipulates that small-and medium-scale commercial fishers may operate in municipal waters 10.1-15 km from the shoreline provided that the local Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Management Council holds a public hearing on the matter, the vessel and crew are certified, they fish in water more than 7 fathoms deep, and they use legal fishing methods and equipment (for instance, passive gears, which are dropped and left in place, rather than active gears, such as those used by trawlers and purse seiners). However, although commercial fishers meet legal requisites and respect the 10-km limit, weak enforcement systems encourage poaching and violation of marine protected area boundaries. The presence of weak enforcement observed in the Visayan Sea from 1998 to 2006 had precisely this effect, especially in offshore island communities. (39) While the restrictions appear substantial, some observers harbor legitimate concerns that current commercial fishing access rights will intensify resource depletion in municipal waters. (40) Others also argue that food security may be jeopardized because the rules allow commercial fishers a greater area of municipal water access than rules permitted prior to the enactment of the Fisheries Code. (41) Moreover, national and provincial agencies regularly receive reports of illegal and unregulated commercial fishing activities within municipal waters (17 percent of total Philippine waters), and in the Visayas region, provincial governments and nongovernmental organizations (such as the Visayan Sea Squadron) have had to deploy their own baywatch teams to augment municipal law enforcement groups. Other complications exist. Current property rights, access rights, and local power relations enable local public officials who own or have indirect business interests in coastal areas and fishing fleets to influence local policy and enforcement outcomes in their favor. (42) Even in the highly publicized success story of Apo Island's marine protected areas--which, according to researchers, helped boost the local fish catch and reduce poverty on the island--recent qualitative findings indicate significant socioeconomic equity issues between and among fishing households and protected area managers. (43) The rules that establish access rights for commercial and subsistence fishers require the government to enforce them effectively and fishers to have the wherewithal to comply with them. National and local governments usually implement closed fishing seasons during the spawning season of commercially viable stocks. The Fisheries Code encourages local governments to create marine protected areas or reserves within 15 km of shore and requires that they set aside 15 percent of municipal waters as marine reserves and sanctuaries. Yet restricting when, where, and bow to fish will remain difficult if local governments lack the power or will to enforce seasonal fishing bans and protected areas and local people cannot find supplementary livelihoods. Even with these weaknesses, through the codification and consolidation of prohibitions on illegitimate fishing practices and delineation of punishments for such violations under the Fisheries Code and local ordinances, the Philippines has taken major steps toward sustainable use of coastal areas and municipal waters. But to ensure that innovations in fishing techniques and gears do not subvert these laws and regulations, state and civil society enforcers need to remain vigilant. The use of baskal, a new fishing method seen in the northern area of the Iloilo province, is a case in point. Using a commercial-scale fishing net, fishers would connect the net to a bamboo raft and float the raft into municipal waters--transforming it into active fishing gear.

Careful examination of its operation revealed its illegal character and prodded a municipality to ban its use. But by then the questionable fishing method had already operated for almost a year. (44) The experience of the Hollo province, which lies among the central Philippines in the Visayan Sea, illustrates much of what has and has not worked. Tables 1 (below) and 2 (on page 46) provide an overview of the province's complex socioecological context. Marine protected areas observed in Iloilo seldom had no-take fishing areas, but all sites banned commercial scale operations and only allowed the use of hook and line fishing.
Table 1. Biophysical context of Northern Ilollo, Visayas, Philippines

Municipality

Ajuy

Balasan

Batad

Carles

Land area ([km.sup.2])

175.52

57.3

52.61

103.52

Surface area of municipal waters ([km.sup.2])

250

0.6

368

Area of coral reefs, mangroves, and seagrasses (hectares)

27

10.622

13.5

33

200.27

Length of shoreline (km)

74.83

3.5

8.2

34.7

Number of islands (0-10, 10-15, and 15 + km from shore)

8 (8, 0, 0)

2 (2, 0, 0)

30 (16, 4, 10)

Municipality

Concepcion

Estancia

San Dionisio

Land area ([km.sup.2])

97.2

30.55

127.07

Surface area of municipal waters ([km.sup.2])

320

10

7.6

Area of coral reefs, mangroves, and seagrasses (hectares)

2.5

16.43

13

6.5

14

Length of shoreline (km)

120

28.51

23.7

Number of islands (0-10, 10-15, and 15 + km from shore)

17 (11, 4, 2)

3 (3, 0, 0)

1 (1, 0, 0)

NOTE: The municipal waters of Northern Iloilo are relatively shallow (less than 80 meters deep). Species targeted by local fishers

as well as encroaching commercial fisheries include anchovies, goatfish, mackerel, sardines, herrings, slipmouth, nemipterids, crevalles, whitings, therapons, blue crabs, squids, shrimps, lobsters, and seashells. Commercial aquaculture ventures raise milkfish, tilapia, prawns, and seaweeds.

Table 2. Major features of governance systems in Northern Iloilo, Visayas, Philippines, 2006

Municipality

Ajuy

Balasan

Batad

Carles

2003 CRM budget, pesos (percent of total municipal budget)

100,000 (0.27%)

100,000 (0.31%)

200,000 (1.0%)

100,000 (0.31 %)

CRM actors

NIACDEV, 1 municipal environment and natural resources officer, MFARMC, 18 BFARMCs/POs, and 4 NGOs

NIACDEV, 1 fisheries technician, MFARMC, and 1 fisheries cooperative

NIACDEV, 1 municipal agricultural officer, MFARMC, and 6 BFARMCs/POs

NIACDEV, 1 fisheries technician, and MFARMC

Wardens and

65, 2 boats

60, 3 boats

100,3 boats

patrol boats (frequency of patrol per week)

(3-5 days)

(7 days)

(7 days)

Year MPAs established

1994, 2002

1997

1996

Number of MPAs (barangay-based)

3 (1 with core zone)

Municipality

Concepcion

Estancia

San Dionisio

2003 CRM budget, pesos (percent of total municipal budget)

970,000 (2.9%)

100,000 (0.29%)

75,000 (0.27%)

CRM actors

NIACDEV, 1 coastal resources management officer, MFARMC, 6 BFARMCs, and 12 NGOs

NIACDEV, MFARMC, BFARMC, 1 NGO, and 3 POs

NIACDEV, 1 fisheries technician, MFARMC, and fisherfolk organizations

Wardens and patrol boats (frequency of

160, 6 boats (7 days)

45, 1 boat (7 days)

inactive

patrol per week)

Year MPAs established

2000, 2002, 2003

2004

Number of MPAs (barangay-based)

9 and 1 seascape (some with core zones)

NOTE: CRM: coastal resources management system: NIACDEV: Northern Iloilo Alliance for Coastal Development: MFARMC: municipal fisheries and aquatic resources management council; BFARMC: barangay (village) fisheries and aquatic resources management council; Pos: people's organizations (grassroots groups; and MPA: marine protected area. Types of MPA or CRM initiatives include mangrove and upland reforestation; artificial reef deployment (the reefs are usually 3-by-5 feet rectangular frames that serve as shelter and aggregating devices for fish); stock assessment: participatory coastal assessment; and CRM, livelihood, paralegal, and law enforcement trainings. In addition, markers, buoys, and guardhouses have been deployed in most MPA sites over the last two years. Concepcion is a showcase for sustainability; the mayor won the best local chief executive award for the Philippines in 2004, and its Convergence program won the 2005 national Galing Pook Award. The Convergence program is a combination of "(i) human resources development; (ii) enterprise development and livelihood enhancement. (iii) resource management, (iv) health, (v) education, and (vi) infrastructure development." See

http://www.galingpook.org/awardees/2004/2004_admin_trail_iloilo.htm (accessed 20 March 2009).

The majority of marine protected areas observed in the Visayan Sea area between 1998 and 2006 did not have the capacity to achieve their goals: they lacked, for example, sufficient markers to establish the boundaries, full-time enforcers to control the use of active fishing gears, and the budget to pay for such needs. (45) Reports of poaching by commercial fleets (and even subsistence fishers from neighboring villages) are a weekly, if not daily, occurrence. The seven municipalities in northern Iloilo have a total marine space of 964 [km.sup.2]. The region's 12,000 registered fishers use about 10,600 fishing boats. (46) Five of the seven municipalities have an average monthly budget of less than US$200 for surveillance and enforcement, and the region lacks the necessary numbers of fishwardens and patrol boats to do the job. Consequently, it has proven difficult to implement punitive measures against those violating fish catch and fish processing rules and ordinances--covering, for example, blue crab meat and fish drying. (47) Observers have reported commercial fisheries encroaching upon municipal waters and marine protected areas and other types of enforcement problems elsewhere. (48) A comprehensive study of community-based marine protected areas in 2000 show that of the 439 such sites in the country, only 71 were strictly enforced with regular patrols and strict implementation and management. On the other hand, 105 were moderately enforced, with irregular patrolling and management. The majority (65 percent) of the sites surveyed were unable to enforce rules and regulations. The chief reasons for poor enforcement included lack of equipment such as patrol boats; lack of local government support and technical personnel; weak organization; and lack of supplementary or alternative livelihoods. (49) Still, the well-managed Apo and Sumilon Island marine protected areas prove that more robust and resilient local management systems do exist, and they often establish closed fishing seasons and marine sanctuaries. (50) Such examples serve the long-term interests of villages and municipalities by promoting managed access and zoning fishing grounds with a priority on the livelihood needs of villagers, as well as the sustainable use of the fishery and coastal resources. Local Participation and Reforms in Governance Although increased state decentralization and local people's participation in decisionmaking and management can be a boon in coastal area governance, the potential for ineffective legislation and rent-seeking behavior (that is, creating bureaucratic schemes to exact fees or privileges for personal gain) still exists. To reduce such probability and enhance participatory governance and legislation, the Fisheries Code mandates the formation of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Management Councils. Some observers have criticized the councils because they act primarily in an advisory capacity, and current law does not require an environmental representative on the councils. These factors tend to erode the clout and potential positive effect of the councils as valuable community instruments for effective governance. Perceived weakness in council power and authority, as well as lack of budget and support from local governments, has led to low attendance or participation at meetings. (51) Potential exists, as well, for councils to serve private interests, especially when members are beholden to local officials or business interests in the fishery sector. In some cases, local politicians have intervened, undermining the ability of the councils in municipalities and villages to defend marine protected areas and municipal waters from poachers. (52) This has manifested

itself in the inability of the councils and baywatch patrols to stop selective law enforcement that favors those with political connections or to enhance the long-term protection of access rights of subsistence fishers not related to or politically allied with local officials or leaders of fishing groups. On the other hand, local government officials have criticized Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Management Councils, marine protected area boards, and baywatch teams for limiting the officials' ability to lead and govern properly. Some of the major fishing grounds in municipalities surrounding the Visayan Sea areas have continued to suffer from the lack of sustainability and stability of governance systems and management mechanisms since 1998, despite the enactment of the Fisheries Code. Usually, the first few years of the establishment and project cycle of intermunicipal Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Management Councils or community-based marine protected area initiatives can be characterized as socioecological successes: fish catches and livelihoods improve, and government and nongovernmental stakeholders coordinate activities (such as patrols and law enforcement) and complement each others' roles by, for example, sharing resources to enforce laws and develop supplementary livelihoods. (53) However, once the initiatives deplete their external funding (54) or government agencies cut their technical support, the communities do not tend to maintain their projects or programs. (55) In other areas, the situation often reverts back to the old patterns of elites capturing scarce resources and landless subsistence fishers eking out a living with limited fishing rights (56) This illustrates the same recurring problems: inequitable property and access rights, law enforcement failures, and the interference of local political leaders and business elite in the fisheries sector. (57) From an institutional and integrative perspective, the Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Management Councils and local development planning councils can incorporate multiactor planning and decisionmaking bodies and processes (known as horizontal integration) for coastal management and development. Establishing better multisectoral representation, funding and technical support, and improved coordinative linkages could enhance vertical integration of such councils with the national development planning bodies and processes. By integrating and coordinating subnational planning bodies, a viable consultation mechanism could be established through which local government and other multiactor groups could meaningfully participate in policymaking and review. In such venues, better ways can be crafted within the same sector or region to assist local government and other stakeholders to carry out their mandate to manage, protect, and develop coastal areas. The ongoing move to integrate governance reforms and management mechanism efforts via a 2006 executive order can address networking, coordination, and integrative needs to help meet sustainable development goals and related international commitments. (58) Executive Order 533 under President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo mandates the adoption of an integrated coastal management plan and affirms the use of related approaches--such as coastal resources management programs (see Figure 2) and Philippine Agenda 21--as the national policy framework to promote sustainable development in marine and coastal environments. The ultimate goal is to achieve food security, create sustainable livelihoods, alleviate poverty, and reduce vulnerabilities to natural hazards--all while preserving ecological integrity. Executive Order 533 also attempts to strengthen the Fisheries Code by institutionalizing education, (59) training, and information dissemination between and among concerned state and non-state actors. The executive order further acknowledges the dynamic process of planning and managing coastal areas with different stakeholders. It will require the gathering and analysis of environmental and socioeconomic data on the implications of development, ecosystem

processes, and interrelationships among land-based and marine-related activities across jurisdictions. Revisions to the Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan (2004-2010) incorporated an integrated coastal management program in 2008. (60) The new version calls all municipalities to prepare plans for such integrated management--plans that include the establishment of marine sanctuaries. Also in 2008, the Philippine court system established more than 100 environmental courts, and Congress and the Department of Education strengthened environmental education and resource management training--all positive steps toward a revitalized state and civil society partnership for the sustainable development of the country's coastal and marine resources. Conclusion Although research has quantified the extraordinary abundance of biological diversity in the waters in and around the Philippines, coastal communities are poverty stricken, capture fishery production is declining, and socioecological conditions remain fragile. The 1998 Philippine Fisheries Code, coupled with Executive Order 533's stipulations on integrated coastal management, can provide a stable framework to enable the sustainable development of fisheries and coastal resources, promote the interests of municipal fisherfolks, and create a more integrative and holistic governance and management system. The Fisheries Code set forth laudable goals for the long-term and resilient social and environmental health of its coastal areas. It clearly mandated that municipal fisheries should gain priority over commercial fishing interests--a goal that can still be realized. But to clarify these major purposes and strategies and prevent vested interests from circumventing the intent of the law, some amendments will be necessary. Research in the Visayan Sea area has revealed that many local governments, particularly in the Iloilo province, are not prepared or do not have the capacity to prevent commercial fishing or poaching in municipal waters. State and civil society groups (including the church) can address this problem and thwart unsustainable fishing practices by enhancing the financial, technological, and human resources within localized and integrated coasts. Otherwise, the national government and supporters must clearly prohibit commercial use of municipal waters. In addition, local governments may still be ill prepared to assume the full responsibility of devolution and enforcement of laws and ordinances. In such cases, the national government can establish oversight, coordinating with state institutions and supporters in civil society. Such coordination ensures that people's representation, via Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Management Councils and development councils, can provide legislative and enforcement support to local governments. Strengthening the leadership, administration, and representation of institutions identified in the Fisheries Code and encouraging the establishment of coordinating regional management organizations can work to check the power of elite policy networks and shelve redundant or ineffective tasks. Such acts of coordination and networking can also facilitate the timely exchange of relevant information, insights, and best practices. New frontiers, including ecosystem services assessment, marine biotechnology, and bioprospecting, are being opened to merge growth and conservation in coastal resources management. However, if we do not consciously govern our coasts using inclusive, coordinative strategies and management systems, these new frontiers will lead to a dead end: further environmental destruction and social inequality. President Arroyo's 2006 executive order on integrated coastal management evokes a hope that the education, training, and databanking it calls for can frame for all stakeholders a future in

which resilient coastal environments, governed by empowered communities, can depend on near-shore fishery resources. But coastal communities also need national and multilateral programs to enhance credit and develop livelihoods. Creating a viable social safety net will work hand-in-hand with efforts to improve education and training needs at the local level. These can all enhance the socioecological and integrative competence of younger generations and aspiring environmentalists. Streamlining national government bureaucracy and attracting international support will help overcome the primary obstacle--funding--to implementing environmental projects and enforcing laws at all levels. Again, coordination and oversight may serve to alleviate the need for more funding by sharing resources and building private sector involvement in natural resource protection and conservation. To meet the ultimate goals of the Fisheries Code--attaining food security and alleviating poverty-the Philippine government needs to continually enhance its commitment to municipal fisherfolks. It can accomplish this by coordinating local efforts to avoid overlapping implementation measures; providing support for public awareness, training, and enforcement; and ensuring that commercial fishing and other profit-oriented interests will become partners for sustainable development. The established framework of the Fisheries Code allows for such measures, but they will also require a new commitment from all stakeholders to strengthen the capacities of local government leadership and administration, encourage sustainable use of municipal waters for livelihoods, and increase community participation in governance and management systems. Creating diverse and resilient governance systems and management strategies can pose a temporal challenge to policymakers: the process to complement the diversity and complexity inherent in coastal ecological and sociocultural systems is neverending and occurs at different scales and during different periods. Actors and coalitions will continually pursue their interests, climate change will test the resiliency of ecological systems, and governance regimes would have to constantly adjust to changing socioecological realities. Whatever the case may be, it is important for those who support sustainable development in and out of government to interact, experiment, and learn by doing within stable yet flexible and participatory governance systems. Pepito R. Fernandez Jr. is an associate professor at the University of the Philippines Visayas and a PhD candidate in human geography at. the Australian National University. His research interests include natural resources management, sustainable development, and environmental governance. During 1998-1999, he was a long-term exchange scientist at Kagoshima University, Japan, Under a Japan Society for the Promotion of Science program on fisheries. In 2001. he received the Bureau of Agricultural Research Director's Award (Philippines) for an international scientific journal publication, "Coastal Area Governance in the Philippines." Since 2003. he has received two International Publication Awards from the University of the Philippines. Fernandez and his family devote their extra time and resources to support environmental movements and basic education in Iloilo, Philippines, He may be contacted at sonny.fernandez@gamil.com. A detailed version of some of the main points in this article will come out as a paper in a monograph series. Crises in Fisheries Development: Views from the Social Sciences, published by the Department of Agriculture (Philippines;. The manuscript is funded and supported by the Department of Agriculture (Philippines)-Bureau of Agricultural Research and the University of the Philippines Visayas. NOTES (1.) B. J. Halpern et al., "A Global Map of Human Impact on Marine Ecosystems," Science 319, no. 5865 (15 February 2008): 948-52.

(2.) J. B. C. Jackson et al., "Historical Overfishing and the Recent Collapse of Coastal Ecosystems," Science 293, no. 5530 (27 July 2001): 629-38; and R. A. Myers and B. Worm, "Rapid Worldwide Depletion of Predatory Fish Communities," Nature 423 (15 May 2003): 28083. (3.) J. Sibert, J. Hampton, P. Kleiber, and M. Maunder, "Biomass, Size, and Trophic Status of Top Predators in the Pacific Ocean." Science 314. no, 5806 (15 December 2006): 1773-76. (4.) K. E. Carpenter and V. G. Springer, "The Center of the Center of Marine Shore Fish Biodiversity: The Philippine Islands." Environmental Biology of Fishes 72. no. 4 (2005): 46780.. no. 4 (2005): 467-80. (5.) S. Fletcher and H. D. Smith, "Geography and Coastal Management" Coastal Management 35, no. 4, (2007): 419-27; and J. Kooiman, M. Bavinck, S. Jentoft, and R. Pullin, eds., Fish for Life: Interactive Governance for Fisheries (Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam Press, 2005). (6.) The precautionary principle holds that the burden of proving that the use of environmental resources will not lead to degradation and destruction should fall on those who exploit or propose to use it rather than on those who want to conserve and manage such resources. In short, in the face of environmental uncertainty, limits to environmental use and exploitation supersede the freedom of such use. (7.) L. Juda, "Rio Pius Ten: The Evolution of International Marine Fisheries Governance," Ocean Development and International Law 33, no, 2 (2002): 109-44. (8.) P. C. Kesavan and M. S. Swaminathan, "Strategies and Models for Agricultural Sustainability in Developing Asian Countries." Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 363, no. 1492(2008): 877-91. (9.) E. Ostrom, 'The Challenge of Common-Pool Resources," Environment 50. no. 4 (July/August 2008): 8-18. (10.) P. R. Fernandez, Y. Matsuda, and R. F. Subade, "Coastal Area Governance in the Philippines" Journal of Environment and Development 9, no. 4 (2000): 341-69.. (11.) Carpenter and Springer, note 4. (12.) Carpenter and Springer, note 4. page 471. (13.) The Philippine center of diversity was found to have the highest species richness for all distributions combined as well as when shore fish distributions were treated separately. Carpenter and Springer. note 4. On rare species, sec also J. Escandor Jr. and A, Papa, "Rarest Shark Caught, Butchered in Donsol," Philippine Daily Inquirer, 8 April 2009,http://www.inquirer.net/special/theenvironmentreport/view.php?db=1& article=20090408198492 (accessed 8 April 2009); and '"Exotic Philippine Biodiversity on Display at Our World Underwater' Show in Chicago." Filipino Journal, 5-20 March 2009,http://www.filipinojournal.com/v2index.php?pagetype=read&article_num=031120092329 31& latest_issue=V23-N5 (accessed 8 April 2009). (14.) Department of Agriculture-Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (DA-BFAR). Philippine Fisheries Profile 2002 (Manila: DA-BFAR. 2002). (15.) B. S. Rivera. "More Mangrove Forest," Philippine Daily Inquirer, 9 August 2005, (16.) World Bank. P DC: World Bank, 2005), 17. (17.) Municipal fishing refers to fishing within municipal coastal and inland waters with or without the use of boats of three gross tons or less. municipal waters include streams, lakes, inland bodies and tidal waters, public forests, or timberlands, forest or fishery reserves, and marine waters within 15 kilometers of the coastline. (18.) DA-BFAR, note 14.

(19.) Asian Development Bank (ADB), Country Governance Assessment: Philippines (Mandaluyong City,, Philippines: ADB, 2005). (20.) Taken from data from United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Human Development Report 2007/2008, Fighting Climate Change: Human Solidarity in a Divided World (New York: UNDP, 2007), http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr2007-2008/ (accessed 11 March 2009); and ADB, Key Indicators 2007: volume 38 (Mandaluyong City, Philippines: ADB, 2007),http://www.adb.org/Documents/Books/Key_Indicators/2007/pdf/Key-Indicators2007.pdf (accessed 11 March 2009). See also Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), The Philippines http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook (accessed 8 November 2008). (21.) R. Rivera-Guieb, D. Turcotte, A. Boyd-Hagart, J. Pangilinan, and R. Santos, Aquatic Resources in the Philippines and the Extent of Poverty in the Sector (Bangkok. Thailand: Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific, Support to Regional and Aquatic Resources Management Initiative, 2002); and A. M. Balisacan, H. Hill, and S. Faye A Piza. "Regional Development Dynamics and Decentralization in the Philippines: Ten Lessons from a 'Fast Starter.'" Departmental Working Paper 2006-14 (Canberra: Australian National University, Department of Economies Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, 2006),http://rspas.anu.edu.au/economics/publish/papers/wp2006/wp-econ-2006-14.pdf (accessed 12 March 2009). (22.) National Statistics Coordinating Board (NSCB), Statwatch, April 2004 (Manila: NSCB, 2004). (23.) ADB, The Philippine Environmental Impact Statement System: Framework, Implementation, Performance and Challenges (Manila: ADB, 2007). (24.) J. G. Butcher, The Closing of the Frontier: A History of the Marine Fisheries of Southeast Asia c. 1950-2000 (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2004). (25.) J. S. Green. A. T. White, J. O. Flores, M. F. Carreon, and A. E. Sia. Philippine Fisheries in Crisis; A Framework for Management (Cebu City, Philippines: Coastal Resource Management Project, Philippine Department of Environment and Natural Resources, 2003). (26.) P. R. Fernandez, "Political Ecology of Forest Loss in the Philippines: Some Implications to Climate Change and Sustainable Development," in Proceedings of the International Conference on Tropical Forests and Climate Change: Status, Issues and Challenges, 19-22 October 1998 (Makati City. Philippines: Asian Institute for Management Center for Continuing Executive Education, 1999),309-21. (27.) Commercial-scale fishing fleets in Iloilo are now equipped with sonar technology. On the other hand, driftnet fishing remains the preserve of small-scale fishers. The most common fishing gears in municipal fisheries are hook and line and gillnets. Small pelagic species are by far the most important component of municipal landings. (28.) See G. T. Silvestre et al., "South and South-East Asian Coastal Fisheries: Their Status and Directions for Improved Management: Conference Synopsis and Recommendations," in G. T. Silvestre et al., eds., Assessment Management and Future Directions for Coastal Fisheries in Asian Countries. WorldFish Center Conference Proceedings 67, Penang. Malaysia, March 2001 (Penang, Malaysia: WorldFish Center, 2003), 13. The author report that surveys conducted from the late 1940s to the late 1980s indicate that larger, more valuable species (e.g. groupers, snappers, sharks and rays) high up in the food chain have declined in relative abundance. Comparatively, small species and genera lists (e.g. triggerfish, cardinal fish, squids/octopus) lower in the food chain have increased in relative abundance."

(29.) World Bank, Governance of Natural Resources in the Philippines: Lessons from the Past, Directions for the Future (Washington, DC: World Bank Rural Development and Natural Resources Sector Unit, 2003); and H. Y. Siry, Making Decentralized Coastal June Management Work for the Southeast Asian Region: Comparative Perspectives (New York: United Nations, 2007). (30.) The Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998, Republic Act 8550, 25 February 1998. Other laws pertinent to fisheries include the National Integrated Protected Areas System Act of 1992, Republic Act 7586, 1 June 1992; and the Wildlife Resources Conservation Protection Act, Republic Act 9147, 30 July 2001. (31.) A number of fisheries scientists and educators argued even prior to the passage of the Fisheries Code that coastal area destruction and degradation were caused primarily by commercial fishing fleet activities (in violation of relevant constitutional and Local Government Code provisions) and the failure of law enforcement and compliance mechanisms. P. M. Fernandez and F Lacanilao, Managing Philippine Fisheries: Information Campaign Expressing Concern on the Fisheries Bills Allowing Entry of Commercial Fishers in Municipal Waters (Quezon City, Philippines: Center for Integrative and Development Studies, University of the Philippines, 1998), 2, 4. This matter is an unresolved and ongoing concern. (32.) B. Balderama, Philippine Fisheries Code; Lessons. Issues and Concerns on Its Implementation and Enforcement from Village to National Level (Quezon City, Philippines; Sentro para sa Ikauunlad ng Katutubong Agham at Teknolohiya (Center for the Development of Indigenous Science and Technology), 2006). (33.) For more details, see Center for Alternative Development Initiatives, Using Sustainable Integrated Area Development (S1AD) for Poverty Eradication, http://www.cadi.ph/SIAD_Poverty_Eradication.htm (accessed 3 March 2009). (34.) P. Christie et al., "Key Findings from a Multidisciplinary Examination of Integrated Coastal Management Process Sustainability," Ocean and Coastal Management 48, no. 3-6 (2005): 46883. (35.) Assessments indicate that marine protected areas have weak socioeconomic complements and focus mainly on biophysical goals. P. Christie, "MPAs as Biological Successes and Social Failures in Southeast Asia," in J. B. Shipley, ed., Aquatic Protected Areas as Fisheries Management Tools: Design, Use, and Evaluation of These Fully Protected Areas (Bethesda, MD: American Fisheries Society, 2004), 155-64. To sustain efforts, conservation sites must succeed socially and economically as well as ecologically. Recent interventions focus on building the capacity of actors across scales in managing ecosystem-based marine protected areas and providing alternative livelihood incentives; see, for example, Project Seahorse, http://seahorse.fisheries.ubc.ca/(accessed 3 March 2009). (36.) World Bank, note 16. (37.) The Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998, note 30, Article I, Section 18. (38.) Private- or business-sector presence in coastal areas and marine fisheries is ubiquitous. Between sustainable management and natural resources use, however'. participation by the private sector has traditionally been more vigorous in the latter through commercial fishing and fish processing. At present, the private sector can participate in natural resources use through three methods: production sharing, joint ventures, and coproduction agreements. (39.) P. R. Fernandez, 'The Relevance of Governance Institutions in Marine Protected Area Design and Management; Lessons from Northeastern Iloilo, Philippines," Diliman Science 18, no. 1 (2006): 19-34; and P. R. Fernandez, "Understanding Relational Polities in MPA

Governance in Northeastern Iloilo. Philippines," Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue 50 (2007): 38-52. (40.) Green. White, Flores, Carreon, and Sia, note 25. (41.) Fernandez and Lacanilao, note 31. Originally, Presidential Decree 704 of 1976 prohibited the use of commercial fishing vessels in municipal waters less than seven fathoms deep. The 1991 Local Government Code extended the recognition of municipal waters to 15 kilo meters from the shore and reinforced the municipalities' control over use of resources within that area. (42.) P. R. Fernandez and G. Caranaje, Resilience and Equity of Coastal Area and Fisheries Comanagement in Western Visayas, Philippines: The Case of Conception, Iloilo and Sagay City, Negros Occidental Before and After 1998, Fisheries Co-management Project Research Report No. 17 (Penang, Malaysia: WorldFish Center 2002); and Fernandez (2006), note 39. (43.) C. Leisher, P. van Beukering, and L. M. Scherl, Nature's Investment Bank: How Marine protected Areas Contribute to Poverty Reduction (Arlington, VA: The Nature Conservancy, Australian Government Department of the Environment and Water Resources, Poverty Reduction and Environment Management Program at Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam, and WWF-Indonesia, 2007), http://www.nature.org/initiatives/protectedareas/howwework/art23185.html (accessed 14 January 2009). (44.) Fernandez (2006), note 39. (45.) Fernandez (2007), note 39. (46.) Northern Iloilo has 12,000 registered fishers, but unregistered fishers and seasonal migrants from other provinces also fish in the area and are difficult to estimate. (47.) Fernandez (2006), note 39, page 30. (48.) Balderama, note 32; and R. V, Eisma, P. Christie, and M. Hershman, "Legal Issues Affecting Sustain ability of Integrated Coastal Management in the Philippines," Ocean and Coastal Management 48, no. 3-6 (2005): 336-59. (49.) Haribon Foundation for the Conservation of Natural Resources, Atlas of Community. Based Marine Protected Areas in the Philippines (Cebu City, Philip pines: Haribon Foundation and Pamana Ka sa Pilipinas (You Are a Legacy to the Philippines), 2005), (50.) A. C. Alcala and G. R. Russ, "No-take Marine Reserves and Reef Fisheries Management in the Philip pines: A New People Power Revolution," Ambio 35, no. 5 (2006): 245-54. (51.) University of the Philippines Visayas Foundation, Incorporated (UPVFI), Fisheries Resource Management Project Community Organizing Year 3, Sapian Bay: Final Report (Miagao, Iloilo, Philippines: DA-BEAR and UPVFI, 2006). (52.) Fernandez (2007), note 39. (53.) P. R. Fernandez, Y. Matsuda, and R. F Subade, "Coastal Area Governance in the Philippines," Journal of Environment and Development 9, no. 4 (2000); 341-69; Fernandez and Caranaje, note 42; and Fernandez (2007), note 39. (54.) Since the 1970s, Philippine national environmental departments have received about twothirds of their developmental budget from foreign donors. Taking on too many programs and projects has spread resources thin and made the process of determining priorities erratic and fragmented. Moreover, local governments allocate only a small share of their budgets for environmental management. As a result, rather than focusing on the needs of local economies and communities, local officials and donors determine priorities according to their own agendas. At the national and local level, transparency in resource allocation decisions, as well as the lack

of community-based access and property rights, are perennial concerns; see World Bank, note 29. (55.) A. T. White, P. Christie, H. D'Agnes, K. Lowry, and N. Milne, "Designing ICM Projects for Sustainability: Lessons from the Philippines and Indonesia," Ocean and Coastal Management 48, no. 3-6(2005): 271-96. (56.) Green, White, Flores. Carreon, and Sia, note 25; and S. Graham and N. Sol, "Rethinking Governance, Social Conflict and Livelihood Choices: Stories from Prieto Diaz, Philippines," paper presented at "The Commons in an Age of Global Transition: Challenges, Risks and Opportunities," the Tenth Conference of the International Association for the Study of Common Property, Oaxaca, Mexico, 9-13 August 2004, htlp://dlc.dlib.indiana.edu/archive/00001403/ (accessed 6 December 2008). (57.) Eisma, Christie, and Hershman, note 48. (58.) R. S. Jara, "Philippine National Marine and Ocean Policy: Status and Challenges," in Proceedings of 4th Global Conference on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands: Advancing Ecosystem Management and Integrated Coastal and Ocean Management by 2010 in the Context of Climate Change, 7-11 April 2008, Hanoi, Vietnam, http://www.globaloceans.org/globalconferences/2008/index.html(accessed 2 September 2008); and International Coral Reel" Initiative (ICRI), General Meeting: 2008 Member's Report on Activities to ICRI Presented by the Philippines, http://www.icriforum.org/secretariat/ICRSGM/PDF/GMJCRS_MR_philippine2.pdf (accessed 1 September 2008). For an overview, see A. C. Oredina, '"Mainstreaming Coastal and Marine Management Concerns into the Philippine Development Plan," presentation at the 4th Global Conference on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands, 9 April 2008, Hanoi, Vietnam. http://www.globaloceans.org/globalconferences/2008/pdf/AraceliOredina.ppt (accesse d 3 March 2009). (59.) In December 2008, Philippine President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo signed into law the Environmental Awareness and Education: Act, which requires all public and private schools to integrate environmental education in their curricula at all levels. Sec GreenPhils, Republic Act 9512: Environmental Awareness and Education Act of 2008, http://greenphils.com/2009/0I/07/repubIic-act-95I2-environmental-awareness-andeducation-act-of -2008/ (accessed 13 March 2008). (60.) National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan (Tasig City, Philippines: NEDA, 2008). htip://www.neda.gov.ph/ads/mtpdp/MTPDP2004-2010/PDF/MTPDP2004-2010.html (accessed 25 March 2009). Gale Document Number:A200269397

2011 Gale, Cengage Learning.