• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Masteral Thesis on Cooperative Governance
 

Masteral Thesis on Cooperative Governance

on

  • 4,873 views

Cooperative Governance & Poverty Alleviation

Cooperative Governance & Poverty Alleviation

Statistics

Views

Total Views
4,873
Views on SlideShare
4,873
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
154
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Masteral Thesis on Cooperative Governance Masteral Thesis on Cooperative Governance Presentation Transcript

    • Cooperative Governance and Poverty Alleviation: The Pangasinan Experience Edwin BR. Gbargaye A masteral thesis of Pangasinan State University, Urdaneta City, March 2010 Presented by: Josefina B. Bitonio Acting Director- CDA
      • Poverty reduction is one of the major affairs of the Philippine government.
      • The integration of governance into cooperative programs emphasizes the significant role of cooperatives as public service delivery system for poverty reduction and rural development.
      • According to Bautista (2002), governance is one aspect of poverty reduction that affects the different phases of program implementation. In his view, good governance involves the design, processes and strategies of implementing and managing cooperative program for poverty reduction and rural development.
      • Scholars and development institutions argue that good governance is not only an essential component but also a pre-condition for development. That is, development cannot exist without good governance ( Leftwich 1993, Boeninger 1993, UNDP 1997, ADB 2003).
      • Thus, good governance is necessary in the planning and implementation of local, regional and national development programs that focus on poverty reduction initiatives for the impoverished sectors in the rural areas-the landless, indigenous peoples and the marginal farmers and fishermen
      • Good governance provides a working framework and doable strategies for implementing cooperative program as a strategy for poverty reduction and rural development. Its desirable outcomes focus on the needs-based and equity-laden delivery of pertinent public services to the socially targeted beneficiaries and the profit able cooperative operations of the civil society and business sectors.
      • Cooperatives have been the forefront of people empowerment. Since the enactment of the cooperative Code of the Philippines in 1990, the promotional effort of public and private sectors alike created a momentum that saw the flowering of cooperatives in various productive facets of the economy.
      • Cooperatives are in the savings mobilization, provision of credit, production, processing and marketing of agri-based products, manufacturing, food service, transport, hospital and health services, housing and insurance (Nito, 1998).
      • From RA 6938 six (6) types: Credit, Consumers, Marketing, Producer, Service, and Multi Purpose
      • To RA 9520 18 types namely: Credit, Consumers, Marketing, Producer, Service, Multi Purpose, Advocacy Cooperative, Agrarian Reform Cooperative, Cooperative Bank, Dairy Cooperative, Education Cooperative, Electric Cooperative, Financial Service Cooperative, Fishermen Cooperative, Health Services Cooperative, Housing Cooperative, Transport Cooperative, Water Service Cooperative Workers Cooperative, and others
      • The $1, $1.25,and $2 a day benchmarks are used to measure absolute consumption poverty across countries.
      • In August 2008, the World Bank revised their global poverty estimate benchmark upwards from $1 a day to $1.25 a day. Using this current benchmark 1.4 billion people are subsisting below the poverty line in difference to the 984 million with the older measure of $1 a day in 2004. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) estimates that an additional 1.7 billion people might be living on $2 a day by 2015 (UNDP, 2005)
    •  
      • Given that the reduction in global poverty has been rather sluggish, even the promoters of cooperative do not disagree that cooperative alone is enough to reduce poverty.
      • For the alarming incidence of poverty in the world to be reduced, governments, donors, NGOs and individuals must be able to clearly identify the policies and initiatives that work and how they can be tailored to better serve the intended beneficiaries.
      • This can only be achieved through the right measurement techniques and possibly firsthand account by the poor themselves.
      • Therefore, reducing poverty is a call to action that we all must heed because while there has been some improvement at the global level, wide discrepancies and unevenness persists among the various regions in the world.
    • Scope and Delimitation of the Study
      • The study was limited to the four cities of Pangasinan
      • * Urdaneta City
      • * Dagupan City
      • * San Carlos City
      • * Alaminos City
      • Characteristics:
        • savings and credit operation
        • operating for 3 years and above
        • 3. with a minimum paid up capital of at least 1 million, on their savings and credit operation
      • 4. Belonging to cooperative growth and development (4 th stage) and cooperative transition and transformation (5 th stage) of development by Tayko, et al, 2004
    • Scope…
      • These cooperatives had been recognized and awarded by various institutions and organizations, both public and non-government sectors because of their contribution and exemplary performance not only to the cooperative sector but also to their respective communities in Pangasinan.
    • Statement of the Problem
      • What is the organizational profile of cooperatives in terms of :
          • a. date registered;
          • b. articles of cooperation and by laws;
          • c. number of employees;
          • d. assets;
          • e. membership;
          • f. deposits;
          • g. trainings conducted;
          • h. services rendered;
          • i. linkages; and
          • j. core management team?
    • 2. What governance model strengthens confidence in cooperatives relative to: a. traditional b. corporate c. democratic and d. eclectic? 3. What is the level of practice in governance activities of the officers in terms of: a. accountability b. transparency c. predictability and d. participation?
    • 4. what are the services implemented by the cooperative in alleviating poverty of their members in terms of: a. provision of credit b. employment generation c. educational assistance d. mutual aid fund e. health benefits f. community involvement?
    • 5. What are the problems in cooperative governance along the following: a. accountability; b. transparency; c. predictability; and d. participation?
    • Conceptual Framework Fig. 1 Paradigms showing the schematic organization of the Study Services of Cooperatives Addressing Poverty a. Provision of credit b. Employment c. Educational Assistance d. Mutual Aid Fund e. Health Benefits f. Member’s Benefit g. Community Involvement
      • Organization profile of cooperatives in the province four cities
        • date registered;
      • Articles of Cooperation & By Laws
      • number of employees;
      • membership
      • assets,
      • deposits
      • trainings conducted
        • h. services rendered
        • i. linkages
        • j. Core Management Team
      Level of practice in governance a. accountability b. transparency c. predictability and d. participation Governance Model a. traditional b. corporate c. democratic d. eclectic Problems in cooperative governance Figure 7: A schematic paradigm showing the organization profile of cooperation, level of governance activities, governance model with the problems in cooperative govrnance
    • Findings Conclusions Recomendations
    • Organizational Profile of Alaminos City
      • Five coop respondents
      • Registered 1991-2000 (2)
      • 2001- 2010 (1)
      • 1981 -1990 (2)
      • - Re - registered RA 9520
      • 28 employees
      • 1884 membership
      • P 34,745,665.00 assets
      • P 7,185,043.08 deposits
      • 7 training conducted
      • Services rendered: lending,
      • consumers, trading
      • Linkages: local (5), National (1)
      • Core Management Team 25
    • Organizational Profile of San Carlos City
      • Three coop respondents
      • Registered 1991-2000 (1)
      • 1961 – 1970 (1),
      • 1951-1960 (1)
      • - Re –registered RA 9520
      • 25 employees
      • 1222 membership
      • P 144,839,715.73 assets
      • P 69,779,847.56 deposits
      • 7 training conducted
      • Services rendered: lending,
      • consumers, trading, production
      • Linkages: local (8), National (2)
      • Core Management Team 24
    • Organizational Profile of Dagupan City
      • Five coop respondents
      • Registered 2001 -2010 (1)
      • 1991 – 2000 (4)
      • Re –registered RA 9520 (4)
      • RA 6938 (1)
      • 42 employees
      • 2138 membership
      • P 27,685,063.60 assets
      • P 7,714,198.87 deposits
      • 2 training conducted
      • Services rendered: lending,
      • consumers, trading, production
      • service, training, consultancy
      • Linkages: local (10), National (1)
      • Core Management Team 11
    • Organization Profile of Urdaneta City
      • Two coop respondents
      • Registered 1991-2000 (2),
      • 2001- 2010 (2)
      • - 9 registered RA 9520
      • 28 employees
      • 704 membership
      • P 42,957,736 assets
      • P 2,541,344 deposits
      • 6 training conducted
      • Services rendered: lending,
      • consumers
      • Linkages: local (1), National (3)
      • Core Management Team 9
    • Organization Profile of Pangasinan
      • 15 coop respondents
      • Registered: 2001-2010 (2)
      • 1991-2000 (9), 1981 – 1990 (2)
      • 1961 – 1970 (1), 1951-1960 (1)
      • 14 re registered RA 9520
      • - RA 6938
      • 123 employees
      • 5948 membership
      • P 250, 228,180.33 assets
      • P 87,220,433.50 deposits
      • 22 training conducted
      • Services rendered: lending,
      • consumers, trading, service,
      • training & consultancy
      • Linkages: local (24), National (7)
      • 69 Core Management Team
    • Model of Governance Model AWM Descriptive Traditional model laid emphasis on the values for respect for elders and traditions, the family type of cooperative in which the operations are passed on from one generation to the other. Corporate model refers to the business way in which a cooperative is operated with board members, shareholders, and audit reports, among others. 3.59 Much Democratic model gives emphasis on participation and inclusivity. The manner of freedom and respect given to each member or associate of the cooperative to carry out the affairs of the institution 4.07 Much Ecletic model refers to the mixture of any of the models either corporate and democratic or traditional and corporate being used by cooperative 3.07 Much
    • Level of Practice in Governance Elements in Governance AWM Descriptive Accountability refers to the conduct and way in which the affairs of the cooperative is being run through defined roles, responsibilities, and level of authorities, duties and its parameters/boundaries as well as understanding the benefits and risks by all cooperators. 4.29 much Transparency covers transactions within the parameters of coop rules and regulations, regular audit and records are open to member 4.28 much Predictability refers to the continuity of programs and policies of the cooperative 4.03 much Participation refers to the decision making process of each and every member in the institution. The way in which ordinary members express their opinions about matters concerning their wellbeing and the cooperative. 3.75 much Summary 4.08 much
    • Services by Cooperatives in Alleviating Poverty 1. Provision of Credit Alaminos City Dagupan City San Carlos City Urdaneta City Total 30,396,307.79 44,352,001 203,281,150.40 16,985,043 P295,014,502.30
    • Member Borrowers & Interest Rate Alaminos Dagupan San Carlos Urdaneta Total 824 1184 8895 689 11592 5 24% 4 15% 3 18% 2 12% 1 36%
    • Types of Loan Providential Productive Agricultural Microfinance Cattle dispersal Livelihood Regular Secured Loan Medical Education Personal Petty Cash Salary Rice Loan Emergency
    • Employment Generation 2. Employment Generation Alaminos Dagupan San Carlos Urdaneta Total a. Self Employed Assisted 30 535 2643 515 3723 b. Work Abroad 0 56 179 75 310 c. Coop Employed 28 42 25 9 104 Total 58 633 2847 599 4137
    • Educational Assistance 3. Educational Assistance Alaminos Dagupan San Carlos Urdaneta Total 1. Scholarship 1 1 1 3 2. Study Now Pay Later Plan 1 1 3. No. of Beneficiaries 5 1 20 10 36 4. Amount Spent P2500 P 5000 P 20,000 P 250,000 P 277,500
    • Trainings Attended Training Attended Alaminos Dagupan San Carlos Urdaneta Total 1. Local 5 5 3 1 14 2. National 1 2 3 3. International 1 1 Total 6 6 5 1 18
    • Mutual Aid Assistance 4. Mutual Aid Assistance Alaminos Dagupan San Carlos Urdaneta Total
      • Death
      • Aid
      1 3 2 6 2. Damayan 1 4 1 5 3. Amount P 464,093.50 P 80,000 P 109, 500 P 81,170 P 734,763.50 4. No. of Families Benefited 14 27 20 16 77
    • Member's Benefit Gross Revenue 12,547,063.37 11,854,564 33,311,953.25 4,172,089.50 61,885,670 Net Surplus 2,402,384.30 1,613,220.7 1,671,112,92 2,336,690 6,519,408 Members Benefit Total ISC/PR: 973,948.98 1,583,421.71 1,337,908 1,889,986.90 5,785,266 Interest on Share Cap 885,424.49 1,094,489 936,433.54 1,337,432 4,253,779 Patronage Refund 885,424.49 488,932.71 401,474.52 55,254.90 1,531,487
    • Community Involvement 1. Environmental concerns a. Orientation on sanitation b. Mangrove planting c. Tree planting d. Vegetable seed distribution e. Compost 2. Fertilizer Subsidy 3. Donation to church 4. Training sponsor 5. Fingerlings Distribution.
    • Community Involvement 6. Piglet Distribution 7. Donation Flood/Typhoon 8. Feeding program 9. Donation medicine 10. Donation toilet bowl 11. Sport sponsorship Alaminos Dagupan San Carlos Urdaneta Total Total 14 6 5 3 28 Amount P 50,000 P 34,000 P 114,527 P122,000 P320,527.00
    • Problems in Cooperative Governance Cooperative Governance AWM Description
      • Accountability
      1.99 Sometimes 2. Predictability 1.62 Sometimes 3. Transparency 1.76 Sometimes 4. Participation 1.61 Sometimes Summary 1.75 Sometimes
      • Majority of the millionaire cooperatives of the four cities in Pangasinan are older and have re registered under the Philippine Cooperative Code of 2008 or Republic Act 9520. They have regular training program for officers, staff and membership, large membership base and owning and managing small to large cooperatives in terms of assets
      • Democratic model is most predominantly practiced by cooperatives
      • The elements of governance namely: accountability, transparency, predictability, transparency is “much practiced”
      Conclusions
    • Conclusions
      • Cooperatives have contributed significantly to poverty reduction through their provision of services, and direct investments on community projects and programs.
      • There exists issues and challenges on cooperative governance particularly on members’ participation which show low rating on majority of the cooperatives in the four cities.
    • Conclusions
      • The integration of good governance in cooperative management intends to improve its service delivery methods
      • Good governance is therefore very important for the sustainability of cooperatives for the following reasons: to prevent fraud and mismanagement, promote sound decision-making, avoid costly fines and litigation, create/maintain a positive corporate image, attract and retain financing and investment.
      • All officers should undergo training on good governance before they assume their positions.
      • On the governance problems, there is an ardent need to establish reforms in weak areas of cooperative governance along accountability, transparency, predictability and participation.
      Recomendations
      • Members should elect officers with strong leadership as cooperative success largely depends on good leadership of its officers.
      • The adoption and application of the cooperative governance by all cooperatives is indeed an effective means for poverty alleviation.
      • Cooperatives must ascribe to the tenets of good governance as a mechanism, practice, and media in which they help improve their members.
      Recomendations
    • thank you for your attention