Conflict, Cooperation & Collective Action: land use, water rights and water scarcity in Manupali watershed, southern Philippines

Conflict, Cooperation & Collective Action: land use, water rights and water scarcity in Manupali watershed, southern Philippines
Caroline Duque-Piñon, Delia Catacutan, Beria Leimona, Emma Abasolo, Meine van Noordwijk and Lydia Tiongco
DENR

Outline
Introduction
The Manupali watershed: land use and water balance
Water conflicts
Cooperation and collective actions
Conclusion

1. Introduction
WATER – ESSENTIAL FOR HUMAN SURVIVAL
Water is indispensable to livelihoods and most forms of economic production
However, access to water, its allocation and use, are critical concerns that can drive conflicts

Water conflicts at different geographical scales
International level: between countries that share rivers (e.g. upstream and downstream relation over the use of shared rivers)
National level: between different sectors (e.g. farmers, industries, tourism, environmentalists, etc.) on policies affecting water management
Local level: between users over access to water, or people affected by projects
Political, socio-economic and cultural factors at each level often determine the complexity of water conflicts

Some local-based water conflicts in the Philippines
Conflicting water use: fisheries, transport, drinking water and water sink
Compensation issues for changing water allocations
The Philippines
Misallocation of irrigation water
Angat Dam
Saltwater intrusion
Laguna Lake
San Pablo City
Batangas City
Privatization of local water facility
Tuburan, Cebu
Cebu City
Bayugan City
Local violence on water at the local level are often direct conflicts, and can spill over into wider-scale conflicts

Objectives
Describe the water conflicts and cooperative agreements adopted by different water users in the Manupali watershed, Bukidnon province in southern Philippines
Method
Rapid Hydrological Appraisal (RHA) –scoping issues
Survey-interviews and focus group discussions
Stakeholders’ analysis
Literature review
Local ecological knowledge (LEK)
Policy-makers ecological knowledge (PEK)
Modellers ecological knowledge (MEK)

2. The Manupali watershed: land use change & water availability
Municipality of Lantapan
Land area: 35,465 has
60% agriculture and 40% forest
maximum annual rainfall 2,522 mm (1987-2005)
elevation 320 to 2,954 masl
70% has slopes greater than 18%
51,406 people (2007)
The Philippines
Manupali River
Manupali watershed
Bukidnon Province
Manupali River

Water users in Manupali
Farmers
Households
LGU Water Works
Swine and poultry
Tugasan
Maagnao
Kulasihan
Banana companies
Alanib
Manupali River
NIA - IAs
National Power Corporation

Overall trend: agricultural land expanded while forest lands decreased

Table 1- Perceptions on current hydrological situation in Manupali (LEK and PEK results)

Table 2- Average water balance of Alanib and Kulasihan sub-watersheds during a 12-year GenRiver simulation (MEK results)

RESULTS
Kulasihan River during dry months
CAUSES
Banana plantation in Alanib village
Water diversion for banana plantations

Fig 3- Simulated net water yield during a 12-year simulation period (1994-2005) versus volume of water rights granted (2007) in three sub-watersheds

Sedimentation – damage of reservoir
Source: NPC, 2006

3. Water Conflicts
Conflict: Stealing/cutting of water pipes from rivers
Involved: Farmers VS farmers in the upper communities
Conflict: Destroying small impounding reservoirs
Involved: Upper farmers VS middle farmers
…Issue of ‘who came first’ and ‘benefit-sharing’ between upstream and downstream users

Conflict: Privatization of open-access water
Involved: Land owner (poultry) vs community
Issue of access to springs within private lands

-’Right’ belong to the user in the order in which they apply for
In times of water shortage, those with senior rights can use the full volume allocated to them, while those with junior rights must do with nothing or less
Water Code
Conflicts:
Water rights
Water allocation (upstream and downstream
Institutional weaknesses (e.g. red tape, illegal processing of water rights applications)
Surreptitious water diversion
Involved: Banana companies VS NIA, banana companies VS community people
DOLE-Skyland
MKAVI
NIA

Conflicts:
Water scarcity despite rotations
Social conflicts (illegal diversion of water, killings)
Involved: Among rice irrigators
Rice production area
Conflicts:
Water scarcity
Poor maintenance of canals and dams
Involved: AMSFC VS NIA
AMSFC
Converted to banana and corn
NIA - IAs

Overlapping of water management regimes and uncoordinated watershed management efforts
2. LGU – Local Government Code
1. DENR – NIPAS Act
3. NCIP – IPRA Law
4. NWRB – Water Code
Involved: Indigenous communities, NIA, LGU, DENR, banana companies

Tension between statutory and customary rights (e.g. failure to obtain pre-and-prior informed consent)
Banana companies
LGU Water Works
Involved: Indigenous communities vs. banana companies, DENR, LGU-Lantapan and NIA
DENR

4. Cooperation and Collective Action
Community conservation & livelihood projects
2938
IP communities
Resource
share
HIVAC
Green River Gold Ranch
Income share
Cawayan Village Gov’t
Hilltop Coop
1500
meters above sea level
Financial assistance
1100
DOLE
LGU
NPC
MKAVI
600
Reforestation & livelihood projects
Irrigation service fee
Irrigation service fee
320
AMSFC
ManRIS
Water users

(1)Collective action through cooperative agreements can mitigate hostile confrontations between multiple resource users
!!! These agreements are only short-term solutions and do not address the root cause of water scarcity
Key messages
(2)Evolution of cooperation and collective actions between water users because of mutual recognition of value and scarcity of water, and existence of social capital and legal basis for voluntary agreements
!!! However, cooperation does not emerge easily with self-interest

(3) ‘Fair-sharing’ from voluntary agreements was challenging due to power imbalance
Mutual interest over water resource prompted cooperating stakeholders to secure individual rights by sharing it with others
!!!These forms of cooperation can break down if cooperators cease to interact and adapt to changes
(4) Question: Has collective action in this case addressed the core problem of water scarcity?
Sustainable land use that helps improve water yield and reduce stream flow variability is essential to improve water balance and reduce current water deficits
!!!Exclusion of communities in the benefit-sharing of voluntary agreements, who bear the costs of maintaining water

5. Conclusion
(1) Shared understanding on the link between water balance and land use patterns is important in unpacking complex issues on water
(2)Voluntary agreements are important short-term solutions to resolve immediate water rights conflicts
(3) Land use policies and incentives for sustainable land use are inevitable for the long-term solution of water scarcity
(4) Despite relative vagueness of policies, they provide legal bases for the emergence of voluntary agreements
(5)Therefore, coordinated cooperation among all users is important to foster watershed-level collective action

Acknowledgement
RHA team members Dennis Ferrera, Johnny Mancawan, CelsoPillerin and Carlos Sioquim for generating the data used in this study, and CecilleEgnar for coordinating the Bukidnon-TULSEA project.

Conflict, Cooperation & Collective Action: land use, water rights and water scarcity in Manupali watershed, southern Philippines

by CAPRi on Aug 04, 2010

Accessibility

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

Statistics

Conflict, Cooperation & Collective Action: land use, water rights and water scarcity in Manupali watershed, southern Philippines — Presentation Transcript