LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   Improving  Land  Sector  Governance  in  the   Philippines     Implementation  of  Land  Governance  Assessment  Framework   (LGAF)   Floradema  C.  Eleazar,  Brian  Garcia,  Ernie  Guiang,  Annabelle  Herrera,   Lina  D.  Isorena,  Roel  Ravanera  and  Ernesto  Serote         August  2013   The  LGAF  was  coordinated  by  LETS  in  consultation  with  various   stakeholders  led  by  DENR  and  with  support  from  the  World  Bank   1 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   TABLE  OF  CONTENTS   Acknowledgements  .....................................................................................................................  10   EXECUTIVE  SUMMARY  ........................................................................................................................  11   1   INTRODUCTION  ............................................................................................................................  28   1.1   Background  and  Overview  of  LGAF  ......................................................................................  28   1.2   LGAF  Process  ................................................................................................................................  30   1.3   Scope  of  Assessment  ..................................................................................................................  33   2   BACKGROUND  DATA  AND  INFORMATION  ....................................................................................  35   2.1   General  Data  and  Information  ...............................................................................................  35   2.1.1   Historical  Context  of  Land  in  the  Philippines  ............................................................................  35   2.1.2   Philippine  Geography  ...........................................................................................................................  36   2.1.3   Administration  ........................................................................................................................................  36   2.1.4   Demography  .............................................................................................................................................  37   2.1.5   Current  Economic,  Social  and  Policy  Issues  in  the  Philippines  ..........................................  38   2.2   Land  Issues  ...................................................................................................................................  41   2.2.1   Overview  of  Land  Tenure  in  the  Philippines  .............................................................................  41   2.2.2   History  and  current  status  of  land  policies  .................................................................................  46   3   LAND  GOVERNANCE  ASSESSMENT  ...............................................................................................  49   Module  1  -­‐  Legal  and  Institutional  Framework  ...........................................................................  49   LGI  1  -­‐  Recognition  of  Rights  ...........................................................................................................................  49   LGI  2  -­‐  Enforcement  of  Rights  .........................................................................................................................  53   LGI  3  -­‐  Mechanisms  for  recognition  of  rights  ...........................................................................................  56   LGI  4  -­‐  Restrictions  on  Rights  ..........................................................................................................................  62   LGI  5  -­‐  Clarity  of  Institutional  Mandates  ....................................................................................................  64   LGI  6  -­‐  Participation  and  Equity  in  Land  Policies  ...................................................................................  69   Module  2  -­‐  Land  Use  Planning,  Management  and  Taxation  ....................................................  74   LGI  7  -­‐  Transparency  of  Land  Use  Restrictions  .......................................................................................  74   LGI  8  -­‐  Efficiency  of  land  use  planning  ........................................................................................................  77   LGI  9  -­‐  Speed  and  Predictability  of  enforcement  of  restricted  land  uses  .....................................  79   LGI  10  -­‐  Transparency  of  valuations  ............................................................................................................  80   LGI  11  -­‐  Tax  collection  efficiency  ...................................................................................................................  84   Module  3  -­‐  Management  of  Public  Land  .........................................................................................  89   LGI  12  -­‐  Justification  of  public  land  ownership  and  management  clarity  ....................................  89   LGI  13  and  14  -­‐  Justification  and  fairness  of  expropriation  procedures  ......................................  93   Module  4  -­‐  Public  Provision  of  Land  Information  ......................................................................  96   LGI  16  -­‐  Completeness  of  Registry  ................................................................................................................  96   LGI  17  -­‐  Reliability  of  the  registry  ...............................................................................................................  100   LGI  18  -­‐  Cost  effectiveness  and  sustainability   ........................................................................................  102   LGI  19  -­‐  Transparency  ......................................................................................................................................  104   Module  5  -­‐  Dispute  Resolution  and  Conflict  Management   .....................................................  107   LGI  20  -­‐  Accessibility  of  conflict  resolution  mechanisms  ..................................................................  107   LGI  21  -­‐  Efficiency  of  conflict  resolution  ..................................................................................................  108   Module  6  -­‐  Large  Scale  Acquisition  of  Land  Rights   ...................................................................  111   LSLA  1  –  2  Land  rights  recognition  and  conflicts  .................................................................................  111   LSLA  3  –  4  Land  use  planning  and  practices   ...........................................................................................  114   LSLA  5-­‐11  Investments  ....................................................................................................................................  115   2 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   LSLA  12-­‐13    Environmental  and  social  safeguards  .............................................................................  120   LSLA  14  –  16    -­‐  Institutional  capacity  and  coordination  ...................................................................  121   Module  7  -­‐  Forestry  .............................................................................................................................  123   FGI  1  -­‐  Commitment  to  sustainability  and  climate  change  mitigation  ........................................  123   FGI  2  -­‐  Recognition  of  public  goods  aspects  of  forests  and  promoting  their  sustainable  use   127   FGI  3  -­‐  Supporting  private  sector  to  invest  sustainably  in  forest  activities  ..............................  130   FGI  4  -­‐  Livelihood  aspects  of  local,  traditional  and  indigenous  forest-­‐dependent   communities  ...........................................................................................................................................  131   FGI  5  -­‐  Forest  land  use,  tenure  and  land  conversion  ...........................................................................  132   FGI  6  -­‐  Controlling  illegal  logging  and  other  forest  crimes   ...............................................................  133   4   POLICY  ANALYSIS  AND  POLICY  RECOMMENDATIONS  ................................................................  135   5   CONCLUSIONS  ...........................................................................................................................  146   5.1   Methodological  Lessons  .........................................................................................................  146   5.2   Scope  for  Further  Work  ..........................................................................................................  147   6   ANNEXES  ...................................................................................................................................  150   6.1   Country  Scorecard  for  the  Philippines  ..............................................................................  151   6.2   Policy  Matrix  ..............................................................................................................................  156   6.3   References  ..................................................................................................................................  170   3 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   LIST  OF  TABLES   Table  1.    Rating  Scale  of  LGAF  Dimensiones   27   Table  2.    Scope  of  Philippines  LGAF   31   Table  3.    Philippines  Population   35   Table  4.    Philippines:  Country  Basic  Facts   37   Table  5.    Land  Tenure  Instruments  in  Forest  Lands  and  National  Parks   40   Table  6.    Land  Classification,  Responsible  Agencies  and  Population  Estimates   41   Table  7.    Summary  of  Philippines  Land  Tenure  Typology   42   Table  8.    Status  of  LGU  Updating  of  SMVs  as  of  2013   81   Table  9.    Land  Related  Cases  in  Tacloban  City  RTC   108   Table  10.  Public  Goods  Aspects  of  Forests  Protected  by  Laws  in  the  Philippines   126   LIST  OF  FIGURES   Figure  1.  Structure  of  the  Assessment  Framework   27   Figure  2.  Sample  of  Coded  Statements  for  LGAF  Dimensions   28   Figure  3.    LGAF  Implementation  Process  in  the  Philippines   28   Figure  4.    Major  Land  Classification  in  the  Philippines,  2011   41   LIST  OF  BOXES   Box  1.  Land  Governance  Reform  Agenda   23   Box  2.  Expected  Impacts  of  Land  Governance  Reforms   24   Box  3.  Analysis  of  Philippine  Economic  Performance,  PDP  2011-­‐2016   37   Box  4.    Main  Findings  from  the  Institutional  Arrangements  Study  of  Land  Related  Agencies,  PA   64   LAMP   Box  5.    Private  Encumbrances  Recorded  on  the  Title   97   4 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   LIST  OF  ACRONYMS   A  &  D   Alienable  and  disposable   ADB   Asian  Development  Bank   ADSDPP   ancestral  domain  sustainable  development  and  protection  plan   AFFLA   agroforestry  farm  lease  agreement   AFP   Armed  Forces  of  the  Philippines   ALI   Agrarian  Law  Implementation   ANGOC   Asian  NGO  Coalition   AO   Administrative  Order   APD   areas  for  priority  development   APECO   Aurora  Province  Economic  Zone  Corporation   ARBs   agrarian  reform  beneficiaries   ARCDP   Agrarian  Reform  Community  Development  Program   ARMM   Autonomous  Region  for  Muslim  Mindanao   ARNow   Agrarian  Reform  Now   BARC   Barangay  Agrarian  Reform  Council   BIR   Bureau  of  Internal  Revenue   BJS   Barangay  Justice  System   BLGF   Bureau  of  Local  Government  Finance   BOI   Board  of  Investments   C   Carbon     CA   Commonwealth  Act   CADT   Certificate  of  Ancestral  Domain  Title   CALT   Certificates  of  Ancestral  Land  Title   CALABARZON   Cavite,  Laguna,  Batangas,  Rizal  and  Quezon  provinces   CAR   certifícate  authorizing  registration   CARL   Comprehensive  Agrarian  Reform  Law   CARP   Comprehensive  Agrarian  Reform  Program   CAS   Country  Assistance  Strategy   CBD   Convention  on  Biodiversity   CBFMA   community  based  forest  management  agreement   CBFMP   community  based  forest  management  program   CDC   Clark  Development  Corporation   CENRO   Community  Environment  and  Natural  Resources  Office/r   CFP   Community  Forestry  Program   CFSA   community  forest  stewardship  agreement   CITES   Convention  on  International  Trade  of  Endangered  Species   CLOA   certificate  of  land  ownership  award   CLUP   comprehensive  land  use  plan   CMP   Community  Mortgage  Program   COA   Commission  on  Audit   CoP   Convention  of  the  Parties   CSC   certificates  of  stewardship  contracts   CSR   corporate  social  responsibility   5 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   DA   Department  of  Agriculture   DAO   Department  Administrative  Order   DAR   Department  of  Agrarian  Reform   DBP   Development  Bank  of  the  Philippines   DENR   Department  of  Environment  and  Natural  Resources   DILG   Department  of  Interior  and  Local  Government   DoF   Department  of  Finance     DoJ   Department  of  Justice   DPWH   Department  of  Public  Works  and  Highways   DTI   Department  of  Trade  and  Industry   ECC   Environmental  Clearance  Certificate   EIA   Environmental  Impact  Assessment   EIS   Environmental  Impact  Statement   EMB   Environmental  Management  Bureau   ENR   environment  and  natural  resources   ENRM   environment  and  natura  resources  management   EPIRA   Electric  Power  Industry  Reform  Act   eTRACS   Enhanced  Tax  Revenue  and  Assessment  System   FAO   Food  and  Agriculture  Organization   FBs   famer  beneficiaries   FLAg   special  forest  land  use  agreement   FLAgT   Forest  Land  Use  Agreement  for  Tourism  purposes   FLMA   forest  land  management  agreement   FLUP   forest  land  use  plan   FP   Free  Patent   FPIC   Free  Prior  and  Informed  Consent     GDP   gross  domestic  product   GIS   geographic  information  system   HLURB   Housing  and  Land  Use  Regulatory  Board   HP   Homestead  Patent   HUCs   highly  urbanized  cities   HUDC   Housing  and  Urban  Development  Council   ICCAs   indigenous  community  conserved  areas   IEE   initial  environmental    examination   IEM   integrated  ecosystems  management   IFAD   International  Fund  for  Agirculture  Development   IFMA   Industrial  Forest  Management  Agreement   IKSP   indigenous  knowledge  systems  and  practices   ILC   International  Land  Coalition   IPs   indigenous  peoples   IPAF   Integrated  Protected  Area  Fund     IPRA   Indigenous  Peoples  Rights  Act   IPSAP   Institute  of  Private  Sector  Appraisers   IRA   internal  revenue  allotment   6 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   ISF   Innovation  Support  Fund   ITC   International  Institute  for  Aerial  Survey  and  Earth  Sciences   JAO   Joint  Administrative  Order   JFPR   Japan  Fund  for  Poverty  Reduction   JICA   Japan  International  Cooperation  Agency   JT   Judicial  titles   KBAs   key  biodiversity  areas   LA   land  administration   LAMP   Land  Administration  and  Management  Project   LAM   land  administration  and  management   LAMS   land  administration  and  management  system   LARA   Land  Administration  Reform  Act   LARRIPP   Land  Acquisition,  Resettlement,  Rehabilitation  and  Indigenous  Peoples  Policy   LBP   Land  Bank  of  the  Philippines   LC   land  classification   LETS,  Inc.   Land  Equity  Technology  Services,  Inc.   LGAF   Land  Governance  Assessment  Framework   LGC   Local  Government  Code   LGI   land  governance  indicator   LGUs   local  government  units   LMB   Land  Management  Bureau   LP   Lupon  Tagapamayapa  (Peace  Council)   LRA   Land  Registration  Authority   LSDF   Lands  Sector  Development  Framework   LSLA   large  scale  land  acquisition   LTCP   Land  Titling  Computerization  Project   LTI   land  tenure  improvement   LUP   land  use  planning   LVT   land  valuation  and  taxation   MAG   Mass  Appraisal  Guidebook   MIMAROPA   Marinduque,  Oriental  and  Occidental  Mindoro,  Romblon  and  Palawan  provinces   MRPAAO   Manual  on  Real  Property  Appraisal  and  Assessment  Operations   MRVs   monitoring  reporting  and  verification     MSA   Miscellaneous  Sales  Agreement   NAMRIA   National  Mapping  and  Resource  Information  Authority   NCI   National  Convergence  Initiative   NCIP   National  Commission  on  Indigenous  Peoples   NCPAG   National  College  of  Public  Administration  and  Governence   NCR   National  Capital  Region   NEDA   National  Economic  and  Development  Authority   NGO   non  government  organization   NGP   National  Greening  Program   NHA   National  Housing  Authority   NHMFC   National  Home  Mortgage  Finance  Corporation   7 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   NIPAS   National  Integrated  Protected  Areas  System   NPC   National  Power  Corporation   NRIP   National  Resettlement  Implementation  Plan   NRM   natural  resources  management   NSDI   National  Spatial  Data  Infrastructure   NTRC   National  Tax  Research  Center   OCT   original  certificate  of  title   PADCC   Philippine  Agricultural  Development  and  Commercial  Corporation   PAFID   Philippine  Association  for  Intercultural  Development   PAMB   Protected  Area  Management  Boards   PASUs   Protected  Area  Superintendents   PAWB   Protected  Areas  and  Wildlife  Bureau   PCBRMA   protected  area  community  based  resource  management  agreement   PCCI   Philippine  Chamber  of  Commerce  and  Industry   PD   Presidential  Decree   PDP   Philippine  Development  Plan   PDAP   Partnerships  for  Development  Assistance  in  the  Philippines   PDF   Philippine  Development  Forum   PDP   Philippine  Development  Plan   PENRO   Provincial  Environment  and  Natural  Resources  Office/r   PES   payments  for  ecosystems  services   PEZA   Philippine  Economic  Zone  Authority   PFDA   private  forest  development  agreement   PIN   parcel  identification  number   PLM   public  land  management   PNB   Philippine  National  Bank   PNOC   Philippine  National  Oil  Company   PPA   Philippine  Ports  Authority   PVS  of  LRA/RoD   parcel  verification  service   PVS   Property  Valuation  Standards   PWPA   Philippine  Wood  Producers  Association   RA   Republic  Act   RAPs   Resettlement  Action  Plans   RCBC   Rizal  Commercial  Banking  Corporation   RDs   Registry  of  Deeds   RED   Regional  Executive  Director   REDD+   Reducing  Emmissions  from  Deforestation  and  Degradation   REGALA   Local  Government  Revenue  Generation  and  Land  Administration  Reform   RELs   reference  emission  levels   RoD   Register  of  Deeds   RoW   right  of  way   RPT   real  property  taxes   RPUs   real  property  units   RTC   Regional  Trial  Courts     8 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   SBMA   Subic  Bay  Metropolitan  Authority   SEF   special  education  fund   SIFMA   Socialized  Industrial  Forest  Management  Agreement   SLP   special  land  use  permit   SMEs   small  and  medium  enterprises   SMVs   schedule  of  market  values   SOCKSARGEN   North  Cotabato,  Sarangani,  Sutan  Kudarat  provinces  and  Cotabato  and  General  Santos   cities   SPLULA   special  land  use  lease  agreement   SUCs   State  Universities  and  Colleges   SUDECOR   Surigao  Development  Corporation   TCT   transfer  certificate  of  title   TDN   tax  declaration  number   TFLA   tree  farm  lease  agreement   TLA   timber  license  agreement   TOR   terms  of  reference   TRO   temporary  restraining  order   UDHA   Urban  Development  and  Housing  Act   UNFCCC   United  Nations  Framework  Convention  on  Climate  Change   US   United  States   USAID   United  States  Agency  for  International  Development   VRA   Valuation  Reform  Act   WB   World  Bank   9 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   Acknowledgements   The authors wish to express gratitude to the many experts, government officials, members of NGOs, and the private sector for participating in the panels, technical validation workshop and policy dialogue; and in providing valuable information and comments on the study. The strong interest generated through the LGAF process helped make the scorecard truly reflective of the Philippines situation in land governance. The  process  was  likewise  supported  by   the   Department   of   Environment   and   Natural   Resources,   thru   Undersecretary   Adobo,   who   encouraged   the   participation   of   stakeholders   to   the   various   workshops.   The   support   of   the   Department   of   Finance,   thru   Executive   Director   of   Bureau   of   Local   Government   Finance   Salvador   del   Castillo   and   Undersecretary   Jim   Paul   are   likewise   appreciated.     This   study   was   supported   by   the   World   Bank,   and   executed   through   the   Land   Equity   Technology   Services,   Inc.   We   wish   to   thank   the   Bank   for   this   opportunity   to   be   involved   in   such   an   important   undertaking,   as   well   as   the   technical   guidance   from   Dr.   Klaus   Deininger   and   Ms.   Thea  Hilhorst.  Mr.  Mr.  Keith  Bell  and  Ms.  Tere  Quinones  provided  valuable  comments.     We  hope  the  report  will  serve  as  a  useful  platform  for  regular  review  of  state  of  governance  in   the   lands   sector,   and   in   propelling   land   governance   in   the   national   agenda.   As   the   current   administration   continues   to   place   governance   as   a   key   priority;   and   with   the   recent   pronouncement  of  the  President  to  legislate  the  Land  Administration  Reform  Bill,  we  hope  the   attention  and  stakeholder  engagement  that  was  spurred  thru  the  LGAF  will  be  sustained.     This  report,  and  other  relevant  LGAF  materials  are  available  at   http://econ.worldbank.org/programs/lgaf.         10 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013     EXECUTIVE  SUMMARY   Introduction   Land   is   considered   a   vital   resource   for   any   nation.   It   serves   as   the   platform   for   carrying   out   social,   cultural   and   economic   activities.   Access   to   land   is   an   important   means   for   promoting   growth   and   equity   and   achieving   social   justice   in   many   countries.   The   process   by   which   decisions  are  made  regarding  access  to  and  use  of  land,  the  manner  in  which  those  decisions  are   implemented   and   the   way   that   conflicting   interests   in   land   are   reconciled   are   crucial   in   determining   whether   the   country   has   what   it   takes   to   derive   the   desired   benefits   from   this   limited  natural  capital.     The   Land   Governance   and   Assessment   Framework   (LGAF)   was   developed   by   World   Bank   and   its   partners   to   provide   a   tool   for   diagnosis   of   land   governance   issues,   establishment   of   benchmarks  and  monitoring  progress  over  time.  It  comprises  a  set  of  detailed  indicators  to  be   rated  on  a  scale  of  pre-­‐coded  statements  (from  lack  of  good  governance  to  good  practice,  A-­‐D).   The  process  helps  to  establish  a  consensus  and  priority  actions  on:  (i)  gaps  in  existing  evidence;   (ii)  areas  for  regulatory  or  institutional  change,  piloting  of  new  approaches  and  interventions  to   improve   land   governance   on   a   broader   scale;   and   (iii)   criteria   to   assess   the   effectiveness   of   these  measures.  Thus,  LGAF  helps  put  in  place  a  structure  and  process  to  systematically  track   progress  in  improving  land  governance  over  time.1     At  the  time  of  LGAF  completion  in  the  Philippines,  about  36  countries  have  carried  out  and/or   are   in   the   process   of   undertaking   similar   studies;   with   a   number   of   them   effectively   using   the   results   for   broader   stakeholder   engagement   on   land   issues,   and   developing   policy   options   for   moving   forward.   Other   countries   such   as   Peru,   for   example,   have   set   up   independent   land   observatories   to   keep   on   tracking   progress   in   the   implementation   of   actions   identified   from   the   LGAF.     LGAF  in  the  Philippines   The   country   study   commenced   in   December   2012   with   the   engagement   of   Land   Equity   Technology  Services,  Inc.  (LETS,  Inc.)  as  the  Country  Coordinator.  The  scope  of  the  Philippines   LGAF  covered  seven  modules:     Core  Modules   Legal   and   Institutional   Framework     -­‐   assessed   the   extent   to   which   the   range   of   existing   land   rights   is   legally   recognized.   It   also   reviewed   the   level   of   documentation   and   enforcement,   and   the   cost   of   enforcing   or   gradually   upgrading   these   rights.   The   scope   included   an   examination   as   to   whether   regulation   and   management   of   land   involve   institutions   with   clear   mandates   as   well   as  policy  processes  that  are  transparent  and  equitable.     Land   Use   Planning,   Management   and   Taxation   –   examined   land   use   restrictions   and   whether   these   are   justified   on   the   basis   of   the   public   interest.   It   also   looked   at   promptness   and   transparency   in   the   granting   of   necessary   exemptions;   as   well   as   the   efficiency   of   land   use   planning   in   major   cities.   Finally,   it   investigated   the   transparency   of   determining   taxes   on   land   and  real  estate,  and  efficiency  in  collection.     Management   of   Public   Land   -­‐   assessed   the   extent   to   which  public   landholdings   are   justified   and   transparently   inventoried   and   managed;   whether   expropriation   procedures   are   applied   in   the   1  Deinenger,   Klaus;   Harris   Selod   and   Anthony   Burns.   The   Land   Governance   Assessment   Framework:   Identifying   and   Monitoring   Good  Practice  in  the  Land  Sector.  2012.  The  World  Bank.   11 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   public  interest  through  clear,  transparent,  and  fair  processes  involving  the  compensation  of  all   those  who  lose  rights;  and  transparency  and  monitoring  transfer  or  devolution  of  state  land.       Public  Provision  of  Land  Information  –  determined  whether  land  information  systems  provide   sufficient,   relevant,   and   up-­‐   to-­‐date   data   on   land   ownership   to   the   general   public   and   accessibility,  affordability,  and  sustainability  of  land  administration  services.     Dispute   Resolution   and   Conflict   Management   –   assessed   the   existence   of   affordable,   clearly   defined,  transparent,  and  unbiased  mechanisms  for  the  resolution  of  land  disputes  and  whether   these  mechanisms  function  effectively  in  practice.   Optional  Modules   Large-­‐Scale   Acquisition   of   Land   Rights   –   examined   land   rights   recognition,   conflicts   and   land   use  planning  and  practices;  incentives,  procedures  and  requirements  for  investments;  as  well  as   environmental  and  social  safeguards.     Forestry   –   assessed   the   country   commitment   to   sustainability   and   climate   change   mitigation;   policies  for  recognition  of  public  goods  aspects  of  forests  and  promoting  their  sustainable  use;   actions   to   support   private   sector   to   invest   sustainably   in   forest   activities;   recognition   of   livelihood  aspects  of  traditional  and  indigenous  forest  dependent  communities;  and  forest  land   use,   tenure   and   land   conversion;   and   effectiveness   of   controlling   illegal   logging   and   other   forest   crimes.     In  all,  the  assessment  covered  30  indicators  involving  108  dimensions  of  the  LGAF  (see  section   7.2  LGAF  scorecard).   Its  implementation  followed  the  general  steps  described  in  the  Manual  which  consist  of  expert   investigation   to   prepare   background   materials   and   panel   briefing   notes;   panel   workshops   to   review  the  preliminary  scoring  by  Experts;  technical  validation  workshop  to  discuss  the  initial   results  with  stakeholders;  and  policy  dialogue  to  present  the  key  findings  and  recommendations   to   government   officials   and   other   sectors.   In   all,   about   90   individuals   from   39   agencies   and   organizations   from   academe,   private   sector,   government,   NGO   groups,   LGU   and   the   World   Bank   participated  in  the  LGAF  discussions.  This  report  reflects  the  consensus  ratings;  as  well  as  the   main  recommendations  resulting  from  the  above  process.   Philippine  Context     The   LGAF   is   set   against   an   interesting   era   in   Philippine   politics,   democratic   and   governance   reforms,  and  economic  transformation.     No   less   than   the   President   has   placed   good   governance   on   top   of   his   agenda.   His   ascent   into   power   in   2010   reflects   a   huge   backing   by   the   public   to   rid   the   country   of   corruption,   widely   perceived   as   the   root   cause   of   poor   economic   performance;   low   investor   confidence,   mismanagement  of  the  government  budget,  among  others.  The  many  decisions  demonstrate  the   government’s   strong   political   will   to   carry   this   out;   thus   earning   investor   confidence   in   the   process;   and   freeing   up   crucial   public   funds   for   important   priority   projects   that   would   have   otherwise  been  “lost”  to  corruption.   The  country’s  economic  performance  for  the  two  quarters  in  2013  effectively  captures  the  fruits   of  such  work,  along  with  the  ranking  of  the  Philippines  to  investment  grade  by  two  international   investment  grading  agencies.2     Indeed,   the   country   is   at   the   crossroads   of   economic   growth.   After   decades   of   being   a   developing  country,  it  has  recently  gained  a  status  of  lower  middle  income  country.    No  longer   the  “sick  man”  of  Asia,  the  Philippines  has  attained  modest  growths  over  the  last  few  decades,   albeit  at  a  much  slower  pace  than  most  of  its  Asian  neighbors.  The  challenge  is  how  to  sustain   this   growth,   yet   at   the   same   time,   address   the   inequities   that   have   resulted   from   past   policies   2  Fitch  and  Standard  and  Poor’s  ratings  given  in  2013.     12 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   and  institutions.  A  higher  goal  is  to  reduce  mass  poverty  that  is  at  the  root  cause  of  instability,   political  alienation,  exodus  of  Filipino  talents  and  skills,  among  others.   In   terms   of   land   governance,   the   country   currently   has   a   number   of   initiatives   that   address   some  of  the  key  policy  and  institutional  issues  that  affect  the  ability  of  government  to  provide   the   preconditions   for   more   equitable,   transparent,   and   participatory   decision   making   processes   on  matters  affecting  land.     The   attention   to   the   issues   in   the   lands   sector   had   its   beginnings   as   early   as   1998   when   the   DENR,   sought   the   assistance   of   the   World   Bank   to   undertake   an   assessment.   The   Joint   government   and   Expert   group   produced   a   report   called   the   Informal   Policy   Note,   which   outlined   the   key   issues   and   the   priority   actions   that   require   attention.     Since   then,   the   government  has  been  making  strides  in  addressing    the  interrelated    issues  through  testing  of   cost  effective  procedures,  policy  studies,  and  pilots  of  innovative  approaches.     There   is   a   commitment   to   complete   land   redistribution   under   the   Comprehensive   Agrarian   Reform   Program,   by   end   of   2014.     This   should   effectively   transfer   lands   to   the   actual   tillers,   and   the  same  time,  remove  the  uncertainties  in  the  rural  land  market.  Concomitant  with  this,  is  an   institutional  study  on  a  post  CARP  scenario  to  determine  the  most  appropriate  role  of  agencies   upon  completion  of  redistribution.     There  is  currently,  an  active  debate  on  a  National  Land  Use  Act  policy,  that  was  almost  legislated   by   the   end   of   Congress’   session   in   June,   2012.     This   has   been   a   two   decades   old   proposal   to   ensure   the   proper   allocation   of   land   to   various   uses;   and   that   land   conversion   and   development   are   guided   by   a   framework   to   meet   the   country’s   long   term   requirements   for   food   security,   settlements,  industrial  and  economic  development,  among  others.   A  long  process  towards  harmonization  of  implementing  policies  and  procedures  of  DENR,  DAR,   DoJ/LRA   in   the   issuance   of   tenurial   instruments   in   public   lands   was   completed,   leading   to   a   Joint  Administrative  Order  in  2012.   Following  the  lessons  from  LAMP1,  which  was  carried  out  from  the  period  2001  to  20053;  the   second   phase   of   Land   Administration   and   Management   Project   (LAMP)   is   nearing   completion,   poised   to   implement   the   roll   out   of   land   administration   and   management   systems   (LAMS)   to   computerize  the  title  and  survey  records  in  DENR.  The  Project  has  also  successfully  rolled  out   systematic  titling  in  three  provinces,  using  more  streamlined  approaches.     There   is   currently,   a   growing   uptake   by   LGUs   in   land   administration   and   management;   evidenced  by  experiences  fromLAMP2;  ADB  REGALA  Project,  linking  improved  tenure  security,   better  land  use  planning  with  increased  local  revenues  and  strengthening  local  governance.   Two   major   bills   have   been   submitted   to   Congress   as   a   result   of   LAMP’s   work:   the   Land   Administration  Reforms  Act  (LARA)  and  the  Property  Valuation  Reforms  Act  (VRA).  These  are   meant   to   address   the   systemic   constraints   affecting   service   delivery   in   land   administration;   and   in  the  adoption  of  market  based  valuation  of  properties  by  LGUs,  respectively.     A  Lands  Sector  Development  Framework  (LSDF)  was  completed  which  provides  a  roadmap  for   a   20-­‐year   program   on   LAM   reform   and   implementation.   This   was   submitted   to   NEDA,   and   portions  have  been  taken  up  by  the  Philippine  Development  Plan  (PDP).   Despite  the  above,  several  key  challenges  are  expected  to  highlight  the  importance  of  improving   land  governance  in  the  Philippines.     First,   the   country   has   one   of   the   fastest   growing   population   in   Asia.   With   a   population   nearing   100   million,   this   is   expected   to   place   undue   pressure   on   use   of   land   and   its   rational   and   equitable  allocation  among  competing  uses.    Population  distribution  is  highly  skewed  in  favor  of   the   key   cities   and   urban   areas,   representing   65%   of   the   total   population,   growing   at   a   rate   of    The  first  phase  of  LAMP,  or  otherwise  known  as  LAMP  Learning  and  Innovation  Loan,  was  funded  by  the  World  Bank;  in  parallel   3 with  the  AusAID  funded  technical  assistance  named  Philippine  –  Australia  LAMP.     13 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   2.9%.   These   areas   also   experience   rapid   urbanization   processes.   The   rural   population   on   the   other   hand,   is   where   poverty   is   concentrated,   thus   posing   additional   challenges   for   planning   and  budget  allocation.   Second,   investments   in   agriculture   and   property   development   are   being   stymied   by   continuing   property   rights   problems   and   inconsistent   policy.   Property   rights   in   the   countryside   are   also   insecure.     Confirmation  of  ownership  through  titles  would  help  in  stimulating  investments  and   providing  incentives  for  greater  farm  productivity  and  increased  incomes.       Third,   smaller   sized   farms   resulting   from   completion   of   land   redistribution   pose   challenges   in   improving  productivity  to  meet  food  security.  Concomitant  policies  to  encourage  investments  in   large   scale   agriculture   should   provide   for   adequate   social   safeguards   for   small   farmers   or   CLOA   holders  and  indigenous  peoples;  and  environmental  safeguards.   Fourth,   degradation   of   the   country’s   forests   and   natural   resources   has   continued,   affecting   the   poor  greatly,  due  to  their  dependence  on  these  resources.     More  secure  property  rights  for  tenure   holders,   consistent   policy,   would   provide   incentives   for   improved   sustainable   resource   management.     Fifth,  as  the  country  scales  up  public  investments  in  infrastructure  to  promote  inclusive  growth,   it  becomes  more  crucial  to  set  clear  and  equitable  policies  on  expropriation  and  safeguards  for   those  whose  properties  would  be  affected.     Finally,   the   challenges   of   creating   an   improved   environment   for   private   investments   are   associated   with   having   a   well-­‐functioning   land   market,   that   is   backed   up   by   access   to   reliable   land  information,  an  efficient  and  complete  registry,  and  clear  and  transparent  procedures  for   rights  registration  and  transactions  on  real  property.     Underlying   all   the   above   is   the   fact   that   the   country   still   ranks   poorly   in   international   comparisons   of   the   enforcement   of   law   and   contracts,   and   competition   measures.     It   ranks   105   among  176  countries  in  a  2012  global  corruption  index,  with  a  score  of  34.     The  assessment  is  therefore  considered  very  timely,  in  light  of  the  current  issues,  initiatives  and   strong   political   will   to   improve   governance   in   all   fronts,   as   a   way   of   achieving   the   goal   of   inclusive  growth.     LGAF  Major  Findings  and  Recommendations   Overall,   the   ratings   reflect   the   strong   legal   and   policy   framework   for   land   in   the   Philippines,   backed   up   by   centuries   old   legislations   and   program   to   recognize   long   held   rights   and   the   Constitutional   provision   for   recognition   of   indigenous   peoples’   customary   rights.   The   assessment  also  showed  elements  of  best  practice  in  policies  related  to  land  redistribution,  land   use   planning,   housing   provision,   partnerships   between   investors   and   communities,   and   LGU   authorities   on   land   use   and   zoning;   and   taxation.   Key   constraints   to   realizing   their   full   potential   include   weaknesses   in   implementation,   institutional   overlaps,   gaps   in   operational   procedures,   lack   of   policies   in   for   example,   fair   compensation   for   expropriated   properties;   and   absence   of   systematic  monitoring  of  sector  performance.     Indicators  and  Dimensions  with  High  Governance  Ratings  (A  Ratings)   Strong  legal  framework  and  clear  land  policies   The  country  fared  high  on  the  strength  of  its  legal  framework  for  land  rights  recognition.  In  the   rural   areas,   the   Comprehensive   Agrarian   Reform   Program   (CARP),   Commonwealth   Act   141,   Republic   Act   636   and   the   recently   issued   Republic   Act   10023   all   put   in   place   the   policies   for   recognition   of   rights   of   more   than   90%   of   the   country’s   rural   population;   including   long   held   individual  and  group  rights.  Likewise,  procedures  have  been  developed  such  that  formal  fees  for   first  time  registration  under  the  administrative  mode  of  disposition  –  that  is,  Free  Patent  mode   14 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   –   are   affordable   estimated   at   0.27   to   0.44   %   of   the   market   value.   This   is   considered   as   best   practice  standards.     The   Indigenous   Peoples’   Rights   Act   (IPRA)   on   the   other   hand,   laid   out   the   policy   for   recognition   of   customary   rights   and   the   systems   and   procedures   for   mapping   and   registration   of   these   lands;  relying  on  both  documentary  and  non-­‐documentary  forms  of  evidence.   The   Forestry   Code   and   the   National   Integrated   Protected   Areas   System   (NIPAS)   Act   both   recognize  the  public  goods  aspects  of  forest  lands;  serving  as  the  rationale  for  maintaining  these   lands  under  the  public  domain.     Disturbance   compensation   for   changes   in   land   use   involving   conversion   of   rural   to   urban   conversion   is   provided   for   under   the   CARP   law,   to   protect   the   interests   of   the   tenant   and/or   rights  holder.     Appropriate   management   of   common   property   in   condominiums   is   recognized   under   the   Condominium  law  of  1966.   While   there   are   restrictions   on   land   use,   ownership   and   transferability   on   rural   lands,   these   are   deemed  justified  on  the  basis  of  public  interest;  mainly  to  balance  the  equity  goals  espoused  in   land  policies.   There   are   policies   governing   expropriations,   but   the   laws   are   very   clear   that   these   cannot   be   used  for  private  interests.   In   cases   of   conflict,   the   country   has   in   place,   a   Barangay   Justice   System   which   serves   as   the   mechanism   for   first   level   community   resolution   of   disputes   before   these   are   brought   to   the   formal   courts.   The   BJS   is   recognized   as   part   of   the   formal   system,   yet   is   accessible   and   provides   for  a  resolution  in  the  first  instance  of  conflict.  To  strengthen  the  BJS,  the  courts  do  not  accept   cases  lodged  before  them  without  a  certification  that  these  were  not  resolved  at  the  barangay   level.     Good  Governance  Practices   Strong   campaign   for   good   governance,   computerization   efforts,   and   advocacies   for   greater   transparency   in   government   all   contributed   to   the   country’s   best   practice   ratings   in   the   following    aspects.   There  is  strong  public  participation  in  the  formulation  of  land  policies,  owing  to  the  vibrant  civil   society   sector,   and   the   democratic   space   created   by   the   legislative   process.   Likewise,   several   laws   reinforce   the   requirement   for   public   consultations   in   the   formulation   of   policies   at   the   national  and  local  levels,  enabling  inputs  from  stakeholders  in  policy  making.   Government   agencies   are   mandated   to   make   their   reports   public   on   a   regular   basis;   thus   providing   better   basis   for   accountability   and   independent   monitoring   of   progress   in   policy   implementation.     In  the  same  way,  public  display  of  fees  in  the  registry  is  widely  practiced,  as  well  as  very  clear   and   transparent   procedures   in   processing   of   residential   building   permit   applications.   The   period   by   which   these   permits   are   issued   (less   than   two   weeks)   is   considered   best   practice,   per   LGAF  standards.       Technology   has   improved   transparency   and   access   to   information   in   a   less   discretionary   way.   Zonal   values   of   the   Bureau   of   Internal   Revenue   (BIR)   are   publicly   available   on   line.   The   computerization   of   the   registries,   made   possible   through   the   Land   Titling   Computerization   Project   (LTCP)   of   the   Land   registration   Authority   (LRA)   has   increased   efficiency   in   access   to   records  provided  proper  fees  are  paid.     Also   considered   good   practice   is   the   way   economically   relevant   private   encumbrances   are   reflected   in   the   registry   records;   as   well   as   public   restrictions   on   the   property.   The   country’s   registry  is  considered  financially  sustainable,  with  the  LRA  and  RoD  earning  more  than  double   15 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   its   budget   requirements.   In   fact,   the   agency   is   one   of   the   highest   earning   agencies   in   government.   Finally,   there   is   sufficient   capital   investment   in   the   registry   through   the   build   operate  and  own  (BOO)  scheme  adopted  under  the  LTCP.     Areas  Needing  Improvement  (B  Rating)   The  Philippines  was  rated  as  “B”  –  to  mean  the  country’s  performance  represent  the  second  best   set   of   options   that   make   progress   towards   good   land   governance.   In   a   number   of   cases,   improvements  in  the  systems  and  procedures  could  translate  into  best  practice,  while  in  some  –   the  lack  of  policies  would  block  opportunities  for  further  improvement.       Legal  and  Institutional  Framework   Existing  policies  do  not  recognize  rights  of  informal  settlers,  which  constitute  about  15%  of  the   country’s   urban   population.   Alternative   modes   of   formalization   include   relocation;   and   low   cost   housing  programs  in  identified  areas  in  the  urban  centers.     Tenure  individualization  of  collective  rights  (CLOAs  and  CMPs)  is  a  complex  process  and  takes  a   long   time   to   complete.   In   the   case   of   CLOAs,   the   inclusion   and   exclusion   process   is   the   main   cause  of  delay;  while  in  the  case  of  CMPs,  completion  of  payments  is  required  before  collective   rights  are  divided.     The   country’s   efforts   at   recognition,   mapping   and   registration   of   ancestral   domains   are   still   considered  second  best  practice,  with  only  56%  completion.  In  the  face  of  continuing  threat  to   ancestral  lands,  this  is  considered  an  urgent  priority.     Because  protected  areas  are  established  mainly  on  public  lands;  the  country  lacks  policies  and   procedures  for  compensation  for  loss  of  rights  in  case  of  establishment  of  protected  areas.  As  a   matter  of  procedure,  what  are  recognized  are  prior  rights.   Other  options  for  first  time  registration,  such  as  thru  Miscellaneous   Sales,  require  higher  formal   fees,   estimated   at   1.7   to   1.8%   of   market   values.   This   applies   to   residential   properties   more   than   200  sq  m;  and  in  areas  that  have  not  been  zoned  as  residential.     While  procedures  allow  the  use  of  non-­‐documentary  forms  of  evidence,  alongside  formal  proofs   in  recognition  of  rights;  these  are  still  not  regarded  as  best  practice  standards.     There   are   minimal   vertical   overlaps   in   responsibilities   within   land   agencies   and   with   LGUs.   Clarity  in  the  delineation  of  responsibilities  among  levels  of  government  would  be  required.   Land  Use  Planning  and  Management   Urban   land   use   restrictions   on   ownership,   use,   easements   and   danger   zones,   are   generally   justified,  but  are  not  enforced;  thereby  they  do  not  achieve  their  objectives.       Public   participation   in   land   use   and   classification   processes   such   as   CLUPs,   forest   boundary   delineation,  forest  land  use  planning,  and  PA  management  planning  can  still  be  improved  to  be   more  meaningful,  and  encompass  various  stages  in  the  processes.     LGUs  have  not  taken  advantage  of  land  use  planning  as  a  mechanism  to  determine  urban  form;   and   anticipate   changes   arising   from   demand   for   land   for   various   uses.   In   practice,   changes   in   land   use   planning   are   mainly   driven   by   national   infrastructure   projects   and   investments   by   private  sector,  thus  resulting  in  uncontrolled  growth  and  direction  of  urban  development.   On  Property  Valuation  and  Taxation   Current   practices   have   resulted   in   lost   opportunities   for   capture   of   appropriate   levels   of   revenues   from   property   taxes   which   could   have   been   used   by   LGUs   to   finance   local   development  projects.     Market  based  valuation  is  provided  for  under  the  Local  Government  Code,  and  supplemented  by   a   Mass   Appraisal   Guidebook   (MAG)   issued   recently   by   the   Bureau   of   Local   Government   Finance   16 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   (BLGF).   However,   LGUs   do   not   use   these   and/or   have   no   capacities   to   undertake.   Thus,   in   the   Philippines;  only  six  LGUs  have  applied  market  based  valuation  of  properties  and  used  these  in   their  SMVs.     Very  few  LGUs  have  complied  with  the  mandatory  provision  for  regular  updating  of  SMVs  every   three  years.  As  of  June  2013;  62  out  of  80  provinces  and  114  out  of  144  cities  are  in  default  in   their  SMV  updating.     The  above  factors  work  in  combination  resulting  in  LGU  assessed  values  that  are  way  below  the   true   market   values   –   sometimes   the   difference   is   1000%.   As   basis   for   property   tax   determination,  these  impact  heavily  on  internal  revenue  generation  capacity  by  LGUs.   Large  Scale  Land  Acquisition   A   number   of   pre   requisites   to   good   governance   in   large-­‐scale   investments   in   rural   lands   and   portions   of   the   public   domain   are   in   place.   However,   there   remain   inadequacies   in   implementation,  monitoring,  and  provision  of  information  required  by  both  investors  and  host   communities.   Altogether,   these   have   resulted   in   creating   a   negative   perception   on   intents   of   large   scale   investments   thereby   undermining   its   effectiveness   as   a   strategy   for   stimulating   inclusive  growth  in  the  rural  sector.     Mapping   of   forest   lands   boundary   has   been   completed   except   for   the   Autonomous   Region   of   Muslim   Mindanao   (ARMM).   However,   the   mapping   and   registration   of   all   individual   and   communal  rights  within  forest  lands  are  still  huge  tasks  that  require  resources  and  attention.     Land  use  restrictions  on  rural  land  can  generally  be  identified  on  the  ground  for  CARP  areas,  but   this  is  not  so  for  forest  lands,  ancestral  domains  and  national  parks.     Policies  and  guidelines  encourage  direct  negotiations  between  rights  holders  and  investors  but   in   most   cases,   these   are   not   always   transparent.   Reports   of   improper   procedures   in   securing   free,  prior  and  informed  consent  (FPIC),  lack  of  full  disclosure  on  the  proposed  investments,  and   misrepresentation  have  been  documented.     Between   national   agencies   and   LGUs,   the   information   required   from   investors   are   not   consistently  applied,  thus  creating  confusion  and  opportunities  for  discretion.     Generally,   investment   applications   receive   a   response   within   six   months.   However,   this   could   take   longer   with   the   Department   of   Agrarian   Reform   (DAR)   if   it   involves   land   tenure   improvement  issues.  Other  factors,  such  as  community  apprehensions,  lack  of  understanding  by   host  communities  and  limited  transparency  further  delay  the  process.     Environmental  and  social  safeguards  are  in  place,  but  there  is  weak  monitoring  of  compliance.     There   are   avenues   to   lodge   complaints   by   affected   parties   with   responsible   agencies   depending   on   the   nature   of   the   complaint,   such   as   Department   of   Labor   and   Employment   (DOLE),   Department   of   Environment   and   Natural   Resources   (DENR),   and   DAR.   This   could   be   further   improved  with  a  common  or  dedicated  lodgment  of  complaints  on  matters  involving  LSLA.     On  Forestry   The  country’s  public  lands  constitute  about  half  of  the  country’s  total  land  area.  Large  portions   of   these   are   classified   forest   lands,   key   biodiversity   areas   and   protected   areas,   and   ancestral   domains.  Regardless  of  official  land  classification,  these  are  essentially  forested  areas,  managed   to   provide   ecosystem   services,   forest   production   and   livelihood,   and   forest-­‐based   industries.   The   assessment   confirmed   that   while   most   of   the   policies   are   already  in  place,   much  could   be   improved   with   effective   implementation   and   consistent   application;   resourcing,   and   re   allocation  of  resources.   The   country   is   signatory   to   most   important   international   conventions,   but   there   are   limited   resources   to   implement   them.   These   include   the   Convention   on   Biodiversity   (CBD),   UN   17 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   Framework   on   Convention   on   Climate   Change   (UNFCC),   Convention   on   International   Trade   of   Endangered  Species  (CITES),  and  Ramsar  Convention.   Historically,  forest  management  plans  and  public  funds  have  focused  on  increasing  forest  cover,   and  rehabilitating  degraded  forests.  Equal  attention  should  be  given  to  providing  incentives  for   forest  communities  and  tenure  holders  to  encourage  sustainable  behavior.   Forest   certification   and   chain   of   custody   systems   are   still   in   their   infant   stage.     A   recommendation   is   to   accelerate   this   process,   to   improve   competitiveness   of   forest   products   and   forest   based   industries.     These   actions   should   be   complemented   by   effective   control   of   illegal  logging  and  illegal  harvesting  of  forest  products,  to  enable  the  certification  system  to  be   beneficial.       There  is  a  commitment  to  SMEs,  but  the  country  could  do  more  to  promote  competition,  income   generation   and   productive   rural   employment.   With   about   one   third   (30   million)   of   the   population   living   in   the   uplands,   a   more   positive   environment   for   incentives   driven   forest   management   systems   is   expected   to   stimulate   rural   economic   growth;   provided   sufficient   safeguards  are  in  place.     FLUP  process  allows  public  participation  in  planning  and  land  use  allocation;  however,  it  is  not   yet   widely   implemented.   The   recent   moves   to   integrate   the   FLUP   processes   into   CLUPs,   and   enhance   FLUP   to   be   more   inclusive   of   the   entire   public   domain   (including   protected   areas,   ancestral  domains  and  other  reservations);  as  well  as  integrated  biodiversity,  disaster  risk,  and   vulnerability  concerns  are  in  the  right  direction.     There   have   been   some   gains   in   the   campaign   and   enforcement   of   regulations   against   illegal   logging,  hunting,  and  trade  of  prohibited  wildlife.  Efforts  at  illegal  logging  could  be  improved  if   assessed   against   domestic   supply   and   demand   of   wood   in   the   country.     Considered   good   practice   is   the   strong   inter   and   intra   agency   efforts   and   multi-­‐agency   efforts   to   combat   forest   crimes  in  the  Philippines  but  these  are  patchy,  and  not  sustainable.   Recommendations  to  Improve  Governance     Addressing  the  above  involve  a  combination  of  actions  designed  to  improve  implementation  of   existing  policies  and  procedures  already  in  place.  These  include:   • Compliance   to   Local   Government   Code   to   regularly   update   CLUPs   and   SMVs   with   concomitant  capacity  development  support  to  enable  LGUs  to  use  the  appropriate  tools   and   methods   already   available.   In   the   case   of   property   taxation,   support   to   LGUs   to   improve   tax   mapping,   computerization   of   records   and   linking   with   other   revenue   collection  functions  can  do  a  lot  to  improve  capacities  to  generate  local  revenues.   • Simplify   procedures   to   make   more   affordable,   transparent   and   participatory   process   for   individualization   of   collective   CLOAs,   payments   for   Miscellaneous   Sales   Patents,   and   titling  using  the  Free  Patent  procedures  in  partnership  with  LGUs.   • Support   institutions   to   develop   their   capacities   to   carry   out   their   mandates   (NCIP,   Local   Peace  Councils,  LGUs  in  use  of  market  based  values  in  SMV  updating)   • Pursue  current  proposals  and  plans  to  install  the  forest  certification  system,  roll  out  of   LAMS,   upscaling   of   PES,   implementation   of   REDD+,   and   benefit   sharing   in   the   use   of   forest  resources.   • Develop   new   policies   to   address   deficiencies   and   gaps.   These   include   interim   tenure   instrument   for   informal   settlers,   compensation   for   loss   of   rights   in   PA   establishment;   and  de  politicization  of  SMV  updating  through  the  Valuation  Reform  Act.     Areas   Where   Philippines   is   Struggling   to   Meet   Good   Governance   Criteria   (C   or   D   Ratings)   Registry   records   do   not   reflect   land   ownership   by   women.     The   country   has   progressive   laws   and   policies   that   provide   equal   opportunities   for   women.   Existing   policies   likewise   18 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   recognize   ownership   rights   of   women,   however,   forms   and   agency   records   do   not   capture   gender  date  thus  making  it  impossible  to  report  on  the  extent  of  land  owned  by  women.  There  is   a   need   to   revise   judicial   forms   and   titling   application   forms   to   reflect   gender   data   and   continuously  analyze  gender  disaggregated  ownership  information.   The   practice   of   informal   payments   to   secure   first   time   titles   is   very   common.    While  the   level   of   informal   payments   is   low   in   proportion   to   formal   fees,   studies   in   some   provinces   revealed   the   prevalence   of   the   practice,   thus   acting   as   a   disincentive   for   mass   titling.   A   more   comprehensive   study   on   the   extent   of   the   practice   in   remaining   provinces   is   needed;   and   appropriate  measures  implemented  to  eliminate  this  behavior.     Except  for  CARP,  there  is  lack  of  regular  and  meaningful  monitoring  of  land  policies.    Land   policies  have  strong  equity  objectives.  It  is  essential  to  institutionalize  policies  for  regular  and   meaningful   monitoring   of   progress   and   impact   of   land   policies   into   equity   goals/objectives   through  NEDA,  Philippine  Institute  for  Development  Studies  (PIDS),  or  appropriate  institution.   Except   for   CARP,   there   are   serious   inadequacies   in   budget,   resources   and   institutional   capacity   to   implement   land   policies.     These   include   implementation   of   the   IPRA,   the   Free   Patents  Act,  and  other  laws  thereby  creating  serious  gaps  in  achievement  and  serious  delays  in   the   realization   of   benefits.   It   is   crucial   that   resources   be   prioritized   to   develop   capacities   and   funding   to   institutions   in   charge   of   implementing   land   policies   –   NCIP;   DENR   (titling   and   cadastral  surveys);  LGUs  through  LGU  led  LAM  innovations   Weak  land  use  planning  and  implementation  of  land  use  restrictions.     Land   use   planning   in   major   cities   has   been   ineffective   in   controlling   the   pace,   direction   and   intensity   of   urban   development.   As   a   result,   major   cities   in   the   Philippines   face   uncontrolled   urban  expansion,  with  services  not  being  able  to  keep  pace  with  demands.  LGUs  should  be  more   proactive   in   urban   planning,   making   sound   projections   on   directions,   scope   and   extent   of   urban   growth  so  that  services  and  infrastructures  can  be  projected  in  advance.  To  address  the  lack  of   synergy   between   the   plans   of   national   and   local   governments,   consistency   of   plans   should   be   observed   across   LGU   boundaries   and   within   provinces   and   economic   regions   through   a   hierarchy  of  land  use  policies  to  better  guide  local  governments.     While  there  have  been  active  development  of  new  housing  units  in  the  largest  city,  these  mainly   respond   to   demand   and   investments   rather   than   meeting   housing   needs.   Thus,   there   is   still   growing  informality;  urban  planning  is  still  unable  to  cope  with  urban  growth.  LGUs  should  seek   to   increase   their   landholdings   to   give   them   a   stronger   hand   in   leveraging   compliance   with   socially  desirable  patterns  of  urban  development.   There   are   wide   variations   between   allowed   and   actual   residential   plot   sizes   due   to   lack   of   monitoring.    There  are  a  large  proportion  of  land  (forests,  foreshore),  whose  actual  use  are  not   in   line   with   use   plans;   signifying   a   clear   lack   of   monitoring.     In   addition   to   improving   LGU   capacities  to  monitor  land  use  change;  it  is  important  to  consider  devolving  to  LGUs,  regulation   of   ownership,   acquisition   and   disposition   of   properties.     It   would   also   help   is   provinces   and   their   component   cities   and   municipalities   be   held   jointly   responsible   in   regulating   land   use   within  their  territorial  jurisdiction.   In  forest  lands,  a  review  of  the  18%  slope  criteria  in  classification  of  forest  lands  is  in  order  to   consider  placing  areas  below  30%  in  slope  and  below  as  alienable  and  disposable  lands.     There   are   strong   horizontal   overlaps   in   mandates   of   key   land   agencies.     These   include   DAR,   DENR,   LRA,   and   NCIP,   reflecting   the   many   agencies   issuing   original   titles,   review   and   approval   of   survey   plans,   and   maintenance   of   land   records   in   various   forms.   These   affect   efficiency   in   service   delivery   and   prohibit   access   by   the   public   and   government   agencies   to   complete  and  reliable  land  records.  Furthermore,  the  current  state  of  records  and  overlapping   mandates   create   confusion   among   the   public   and   create   long   standing   disputes   owing   to   contradictory   rulings   issued   by   the   agencies.   All   these   combined   create   fertile   ground   for   19 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   syndicates,   informal   payments   and   additional   costs   on   the   part   of   the   clients.     In   most   cases,   the   ‘victims’  are  the  poor  and  uneducated  who  are  not  familiar  with  procedures  and  laws.       The   most   recent   DAR-­‐DENR-­‐NCIP-­‐DoJ/LRA   Joint   Administrative   Order   (JAO)   is   a   step   in   right   direction.   More   importantly,   it   is   crucial   that   priority   be   given   to   earlier   proposals   for   the   approval   of   the   Land   Administration   Reform   Act   (LARA).   Successful   implementation   of   this   action  would  constitute  one  of  the  pillars  of  good  land  governance.     A  large  number  of  urban/residential  and  rural  properties  are  still  untitled.  It  is  estimated   that   approximately   11   million   parcels   in   the   Philippines   have   not   been   issued   titles.   In   cities   such   as   Alaminos,   Pangasinan;   the   proportion   is   about   60%   of   all   parcels   are   untitled.   While   there   have   been   discussions   about   the   accuracy   of   such   estimates,   a   more   systematic   land   tenure   improvement   planning   at   each   LGU   would   reveal   the   extent   of   the   problem,   after   having   secured  all  the  records  from  the  land  agencies.     For  a  country  with  so  much  informality  in  land  tenure;  it  is  expected  that  the  contribution  of  the   property   market   to   GDP   would   be   much   less   optimal.   The   situation   constrains   the   effective   functioning  of  the  land  market  and  affects  investments  in  property  development.  Insecure  land   tenure  likewise  exposes  the  property  owners,  particularly  the  poor,  to  undue  risks.  On  the  part   of  LGUs,  having  a  large  proportion  of  untitled  properties  result  in  incomplete  tax  rolls,  thereby   affecting  their  ability  to  properly  collect  property  taxes.     The  study  recommends  that  titling  be  given  a  boost,  but  this  would  require  a  good  inventory  of   land   records   to   ascertain   estimates   and   identify   propriety   areas   where   there   are   huge   proportions  of  untitled  properties.  The  titling  roll  out  can  consider  the  streamlined  procedures   implemented   under   LAMP   and   the   REGALA   Project,   done   in   partnership   with   LGUs   –   which   stands  to  benefit  most  through  improved  ability  to  collect  property  taxes.     There  are  strong  disincentives  to  registration  of  land  transactions.  High  transfer  taxes  and   other   costs;   coupled   with   perceived   bureaucratic   processes,   work   to   discourage   formal   registration   of   land   transactions.   In   the   Philippines,   capital   gains   tax   is   placed   at   6%   of   assessed   or  zonal  values;  and  1.5%  documentary  stamp  tax.    Additional  costs  include  the  IT  fee  imposed   by   RoD   with   the   computerization   of   registries.   Against   the   international   benchmark   of   less   than   1%   of   the   property   values;   the   cost   of   transfers   in   the   country   have   been   computed   at   approximately  10%  of  market  value;  62%  of  assessed  value;  and  30%  of  the  value  reflected  in   the  Deeds  of  Sale.     Coupled   with   the   large   numbers   of   untitled   properties,   the   situation   impacts   on   the   completeness  of  the  registry,  the  ability  of  government  to  collect  appropriate  fees  and  taxes,  and   breeds   dishonesty   in   registration   of   transfers.   It   is   recommended   that   a   study   be   undertaken   to   simulate   the   impacts   of   reducing   the   rate   of   transfer   taxes   and   other   related   costs;   with   the   aim   of  encouraging  more  property  owners  to  formally  register  their  transactions.   Information   on   the   registry/cadastre   is   not   up   to   date.    This  situation  arises  from  the  high   transfer  costs  which  discourages  many  property  owners  from  registering  their  transactions;  the   high  proportion  of  untitled  properties  and  thus  transactions  on  these  properties  remain  outside   the  formal  system;  incomplete  cadastral  surveys  and  outdated  tax  maps.  Combined,  these  result   in  unreliable  land  records;  high  cost  of  securing  accurate  records,  as  clients  have  to  pay  for  their   own   research   to   verify   the   accuracy,   particularly   for   large   investors.   These   also   contribute   to   delays  in  the  formalization  of  housing,  as  it  takes  time  to  ensure  the  records  are  correct  before   transactions   are   brokered   between   the   beneficiaries   and   third   parties.   Outdated   land   records   likewise  have  the  effect  of  reducing  overall  investor  confidence  in  the  registry.     The  recommendations  related  to  addressing  the  causes  of  outdated  land  records  would  have  the   impact   of   improving   the   situation.   These   include   review   of   transfer   taxes   and   related   costs   to   encourage   greater   registration   of   transactions;   accelerate   titling   of   untitled   properties   for   greater  coverage;  completion  of  cadastral  surveys  in  the  country;  and  improvement  in  sharing   of  records  between  LRA  and  DENR.  The  recent  initiatives  to  roll  out  the  land  administration  and   20 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   management   system   by   DENR   to   all   regions   would   greatly   enhance   the   inventory   of   records   within  the  agency,  and  funding  support  to  complete  the  cadastral  surveys  are  steps  in  the  right   direction.  However,  these  actions  need  to  be  coupled  with  greater  data  sharing  between  the  LRA   and   DENR.     The   restrictions   associated   with   the   LTCP   contract   on   records   sharing   have   to   be   addressed  for  this  to  be  realized.     There   are   complex   processes   for   formalization   of   urban   housing.   Among   the   available   modes  for  urban  housing  formalization,  on  site  development  is  the  most  preferred  by  informal   settlers,   with   free   hold   as   the   only   means   available   to   secure   formal   property   rights.     The   process  becomes  complex  in  light  of  the  low  reliability  of  records  from  the  land  agencies,  thus   causing  substantial  delays  and  costs  in  the  purchase  of  properties  by  community  beneficiaries.   For   communities   willing   to   relocate,   the   difficulty   lies   with   the   absence   of   comprehensive   shelter  plans  by  LGUs  to  cater  to  the  needs  of  the  informal  urban  sector,  despite  the  provisions   in   the   Local   Government   Code.   The   result   is   growing   informality   in   the   urban   areas,   thereby   affecting   tenure   of   urban   settlers,   the   values   of   prime   urban   properties,   and   disrupting   the   land   use  plans  and  zoning.     The  study  recommends  considering  alternative  modes  of  formalization,  such  as  interim  tenure   in   light   of   refusal   of   informal   settlers   to   relocate.   This   action   should   be   combined   with   strengthening   and   fast   tracking   the   Community   Mortgage   Program.   LGUs   should   be   encouraged   to   develop   comprehensive   shelter   plans   and   engage   in   urban   housing   for   the   poor   and   underprivileged.   This   can   be   done   by   identifying   in   the   CLUPs,   areas   for   low   cost   housing   programs,  and  by  engaging  in  land  banking  to  make  available,  areas  for  future  requirements  of   cities.     The   public   does   not   capture   benefits   arising   from   changes   in   permitted   land   use.  Sections   240-­‐245  of  the  Local  Government  Code  authorizes  the  LGUs  to  capture  about  60%  of  the  cost  of   public   projects   benefitting   private   property   owners,   in   the   form   of   special   levy,   or   what   is   internationally  known  as  betterment  taxes.  However,  this  has  not  been  implemented  by  LGUs,   thereby   depriving   the   government   the   opportunity   to   recover   portions   of   the   cost   of   public   infrastructure   projects.     In   practice,   these   are   used   for   private   gains,   as   individuals   or   corporations   who   benefit   from   such   investments   appropriate   such   ‘windfalls’   for   themselves.   In   worst  cases,  such  investments  have  benefitted  certain  individuals  by  influencing  the  location  of   public  infrastructure.       It   is   recommended   that   BLGF   undertake   pilot   studies   and   prescribe   specific   guidelines   on   special  assessment  for  use  by  LGUs  to  comply  with  the  Local  Government  Code  provisions.  It  is   also   crucial   to   institutionalize   donation   as   an   alternative   application   of   worsement   compensation  and  betterment  levy  through  LGU  ordinance.     LGUs   have   not   maximized   their   internal   revenue   generation   capacity.  Use  of  inappropriate   valuation   methodologies,   lack   of   regular   updating   of   LGUs   SMVs,   poor   collection   efficiency,   unclear  policies  on  LGU  authority  to  grant  exemptions,  result  in  low  levels  of  internal  revenue   generation.     Only   six   cities   have   complied   with   the   Local   Government   Code   provision   to   use   market   based   valuation   in   the   updating   of   SMVs   despite   the   issuance   by   BLGF   of   the   Mass   Appraisal   Guidebook.   This   is   seen   as   a   huge   gap   in   capacities   among   local   Assessors   and   Treasurers  that  need  to  be  addressed  with  urgency.    An  effect  of  this  is  the  use  of  very  low  levels   of   assessed   values   as   basis   for   compensation   of   properties   in   cases   of   expropriation   for   local   infrastructure   projects.   Likewise,   the   highly   political   process   of   SMV   updating   has   prevented   many  LGUs  from  regularly  updating  their  SMVs.    Most  LGUs  have  also  exceeded  their  authorities   in   granting   exemptions   from   payments   of   property   taxes,   in   their   bid   to   attract   investments.     The   poor   state   of   LGU   tax   records,   outdated   tax   maps,   non-­‐imposition   of   administrative   and   judicial  remedies  in  handling  delinquencies,  have  all  resulted  in  low  collection  efficiencies.  For   the   period   2003-­‐2010,   the   average   collection   rate   is   only   59%.     Finally,   the   very   low   proportion   of   LGU   earnings   from   real   property   taxes   creates   a   cycle   of   increased   dependence   on   the   IRA,   21 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   which   in   turn   create   disincentives   to   increase   internally   generated   revenues.   As   of   June   2013;   IRA  dependence  stood  at  80%  for  provinces;  76%  for  municipalities;  and  43%  for  cities.     Sort   term   recommended   actions   could   aid   in   addressing   some   of   the   capacity   constraints   and   improving  implementation  of  existing  policies,  and  are  expected  to  result  in  limited  increases  in   property   tax   collections.   These   include   support   to   LGUs   to   develop   their   capacities   to   use   market   based   valuation,   adopt   property   tax   systems   and   formulate   local   policies   to   improve   revenue   generation.   These   would   require   a   massive   program   considering   the   huge   gap   across   some   1,600   LGUs   in   the   Philippines.   Implementation   of   sanctions   for   Treasurers   for   not   imposing   administrative   and   judicial   recourse   to   delinquent   tax   payers   should   likewise   be   enforced.    Long  term  actions  that  could  address  the  systemic  issues  associated  with  the  above   include:   (i)   refilling   of   the   Valuation   Reform   Act   to   depoliticize   the   updating   of   SMVs   and   adoption  of  market  based  valuation  procedures  in  the  process;  (ii)  review  of  levels  of  transfer   taxes   to   minimize   disincentives   for   under   declaration   of   property   values   in   transactions;   and   (iii)   examination   of   IRA   provisions   in   the   LGC   to   remove   disincentives   for   generating   internal   revenues.     The   government   has   no   resettlement   policy   that   would   define   just   compensation   for   socio   economic   and   income   losses   (small   businesses   and   commercial   establishments)   arising  from  public  expropriation  proceedings.  Existing  policies  on  expropriation  are  varied   and   inconsistent.   The   preparation   of   resettlement   action   plans   (RAPs)   is   not   supported   by   a   national   policy,   thus   only   foreign   assisted   projects   have   RAPs   by   the   strength   of   the   loan   and   grant   agreements   between   the   donor   and   Philippine   government.   Outside   of   these,   agencies   have   no   legal   basis   to   prepare   RAPs   and   payment   of   adequate   compensation.   The   use   of   market   values   and   upfront   payment   in   compensating   owners   of   properties   subject   of   expropriation   is   only   guaranteed   in   national   infrastructure   projects;   thereby   creating   an   uneven   application   of   fairness   in   compensation.   Other   types   of   projects   use   only   assessed   values   as   basis   for   compensation,  and  need  only  to  pay  15%  of  the  total  value  to  acquire  the  property.     These   are   clear   policy   gaps   that   should   be   given   attention   in   the   medium   term;   as   the   government   increase   its   investments   in   infrastructure   development   to   stimulate   growth.     In   the   immediate  term,  some  actions  should  be  implemented  to  improve  transparency  and  monitoring   or   payments   made   to   owners   of   expropriated   properties.     Agencies   should   be   able   to   develop   their   own   RAPs   on   the   basis   of   administrative   policies   until   a   national   law   is   passed.   Concerned   government   agencies   should   also   make   accessible   to   the   public,   through   their   own   webs,   expropriation  data.  Finally,  agencies  involved  should  engage  external  monitoring  agents  to  keep   track   of   promptness   of   compensation,   values   paid,   and   other   indicators.   Over   the   long   term,   the   government   should   formulate   a   national   resettlement   policy   to   provide   for   prompt   compensation   and   entitlements,   grievance   redress   and   sustainable   livelihood   restoration   and   improvement   program.   A   related   action   would   be   amendment   of   R.A.   8974   to   cover   locally   implemented  projects  and  those  implemented  by  LGUs.     The   processes   for   appeal   of   land   dispute   rulings   are   lengthy   and   expensive.     The   study   revealed  that  cases  decided  by  the  Supreme  Court  in  2012  showed  that  in  more  than  90%  of  the   cases  it  took  more  than  20  years  for  cases  to  be  resolved  with  finality.    Even  cases  first  filed  with   the  lower  courts  as  far  back  as  1970  were  only  decided  by  the  Supreme  Court  in  2012.    In  fact,  it   is  commonly  acknowledged  that  land  related  cases  take  a  very  long  time  to  be  resolved,  in  many   cases  spanning  decades,  and  in  some,  outliving  the  parties  involved.     Serious  reforms  in  the  administration  of  justice  system  is  warranted  to  unlock  the  potential  of   these   properties   and   minimize   the   social   costs   of   delays.     Organization   of   court   records   could   also  help  in  monitoring  of  land  cases.    In  the  long  term,  the  setting  up  of  dedicated  Land  Courts   and/or   Land   Adjudication   Boards   would   need   to   be   considered   as   option   among   others,   to   speed  up  the  resolution  of  land  cases.     22 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   Conflicts   related   to   use   or   ownership   rights   and   directly   or   indirectly   related   to   land   acquisition   are   relatively   frequent;   and   the   inability   to   address   these   conflicts   expeditiously  and  in  a  transparent  manner  results  in  long  pending  disputes.     In   the   Philippines,   large   scale   land   acquisition   takes   the   form   of   investor   agreements   with   farmers/CLOA   holders,   forest   tenure   holders   and   indigenous   peoples   communities   to   make   available   large   tracts   of   land   to   support   plantations,   and   other   agri   forest   enterprises.   Modest   ratings   in   the   indicators   and   dimensions   in   these   areas   are   linked   with   over   regulation,   overlapping   policies   and   jurisdictions,   weak   monitoring   for   compliance,   lack   of   investor   incentives,  and  vulnerability  of  community  organizations.     Conflicts   usually   arise   due   to   unfulfilled   promises,   low   rentals;   noncompliance   with   FPIC   procedures,   and/or   when   IP   rights   are   not   recognized.   Public   institutions   involved   in   land   acquisitions  are  regularly  audited,  and  their  reports  made  public,  but  these  are  based  on  general   audit   and   civil   service   rules.   There   are   written   but   unclear   provisions   in   law   or   regulations   regarding  incentives  for  investors  and  their  applicability  have  to  be  negotiated  on  a  case  by  case   basis   in   a   way   that   is   often   discretionary.   Mechanisms   to   allow   the   public   to   obtain   benefits   from   the   investment   (or   investing   party)   other   than   compensation   (e.g.,   schools,   roads,   etc.)   are   rarely   used   or   applied   in   a   discretionary   manner.     While   procedures   to   fully   cover   economic,   social,  and  environmental  issues  for  joint  venture  agreements  in  public/community  land  are  in   place,   these   are   not   implemented   effectively.     Finally,   compliance   with   safeguards   related   to   agricultural  investments  is  weak  and/or  inadequately  monitored  on  a  regular  basis.     The  potential  for  large  scale  investments  in  agriculture  to  spur  rural  development  is  limited  by   the   above,   thus   creating   a   general   negative   perception   on   the   intents   of   the   program.   It   is   important  to  establish  standards  for  benefit  sharing  that  is  understood  by  both  the  communities   and   investors;   strengthen   monitoring   systems   for   compliance   with   agreements   –   preferably   through  an  independent  entity;  and  establish  a  code  of  ethics  for  government  staff  (national  and   LGU)  and  private  sector  for  LSLA.    It  is  also  important  to  support  capacity  development  of  local   communities/rights  holders  to  ensure  they  are  in  a  position  to  ask  the  relevant  questions  from   the   investors,   demand   appropriate   rights,   and   understand   their   responsibilities   and   risks.   Finally,   it   is   crucial   that   the   capacities   of   BJS   in   resolving   conflicts   related   to   LSLA   be   developed   to  address  disputes  arising  in  the  first  instance.     Incentives   such   as   PES   and   REDD+   are   still   in   their   infant   stage   in   the   Philippines.   The   national   policies   governing   these   are   not   yet   fully   developed,   and   implementation   has   mainly   been  through  pilots  only.  Thus,  their  potential  to  contribute  to  sustainable  forest  management   and  effective  management  of  protected  areas  has  not  yet  been  realized.     Classification  of  forests  into  various  uses  and  ownership  are  not  yet  clearly  defined  and   demarcated.    While  the  delineation  and  demarcation  of  forest  boundaries  is  almost  complete;   specific   uses,   tenure   and   leases   within   forest   lands   have   not   been   completely   inventoried   and   registered.     The   delineation   and   demarcation   of   protected   areas,   while   proceeding   under   a   program,  lacks  the  necessary  budget  and  resources  to  complete  in  the  immediate  term.  All  these   information  should  be  reflected  in  an  integrated  map  showing  all  the  interests  in  public  lands,   and   made   accessible   to   the   public.   This   program   should   be   initiated   as   soon   as   possible   to   ensure  proper  allocation  and  recognition  of  clear  use  rights  and  improve  accountability  in  forest   conservation,  exploitation  and  benefit  sharing.   Summary   The   assessment   revealed   that   the   country   achieved   good   governance   ratings   in   enabling   laws,   policies   and   procedures   –   strong   and   clear   land   policies.   Furthermore,   the   strong   democratic   space   allows   participation   and   public   inputs   in   development   and   monitoring   of   policies   and   programs.   The   government   commitment   to   good   governance   promotes   adherence   to   transparency,  public  provision  of  information;  thereby  enabling  the  Philippines  to  achieve  best   practice  standards  in  the  relevant  dimensions.  Finally,  adoption  of  information  technology  and   23 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   modernization  has   contributed  to  good  governance  –  e.g.,  LTCP  –  resulting   in   more   transparent,   efficient  provision  of  land  administration  services.   The   application   of   the   LGAF   has   demonstrated   too,   that   it   could   be   a   powerful   instrument   for   prioritizing   actions   and   establishing   benchmarks   for   governance   in   land.   Modest   governance   ratings   were   given   in   implementation   of   policies   owing   to   resource   constraints,   weak   procedures,  or  simply  lack  of  compliance  (weak  incentives,  ignoring  policies);  weak  monitoring.   Thus,   for   dimensions   rated   as   second   best   practice,   the   study   has   surfaced   areas   where   best   practice   standards   can   be   achieved   by   way   of   addressing   procedural   and   implementation   weaknesses   of   existing   policies;   increasing   the   level   of   resource   allocation   in   certain   areas;   capacity   building   and/or   institutional   development;   and   those   requiring   more   focused   studies   to  better  inform  policies,  and  develop  cost  effective  options.     Addressing   dimensions   where   the   country   is   rated   as   “struggling   to   meet   good   governance   criteria”   would   require   more   comprehensive   measures,   improved/new   policies,   but   will   address  systemic  issues.  For  most  of  these  dimensions,  it  is  clear  that  addressing  the  underlying   causes   of   poor   governance   would   require   new   policies   or   revision   of   existing   policies;   and/or   investments  over  the  medium  to  long  term  to  address  huge  gaps  in  coverage.     The   above   assessment   has   likewise   shown   that   the   beyond   improving   governance   in   the   identified   areas;   the   proposed   actions   will   have   far   ranging   impacts   on   inclusive   growth,   equity,   tenure   security   of   the   poor,   and   economic   growth   in   both   urban   and   rural   areas.     On   the   part   of   government,  the  reform  measures  would  have  the  effect  on  the  ability  to  increase   revenues  that   are  crucial  for  fuelling  public  investments  for  socio  economic  development.     It   is   important   to   note   that   the   government   has   already   laid   out   a   Lands   Sector   Development   Framework  (LSDF)  –  a  20  to  30  year  program  that  is  meant  to  address  the  inadequacies  in  the   lands   sector.   The   LGAF   reinforces   the   LSDF   by   way   of   establishing   clear   benchmarks   of   governance   following   internationally   accepted   indicators,   that   will   be   useful   for   monitoring   progress   over   time.   Further,   the   LGAF   has   clearly   identified   areas   for   priority   actions   that   should  be  given  attention  in  the  medium  and  long  term,  thus  providing  a  strong  basis  for  more   strategic  response.         Box  1.  Land  Governance  Reform  A genda     Policy  Reforms:     National  policy  on  resettlement     Re  filing  of  following  Bills:                  (i)        Land  Administration  Reform  Act                  (ii)      Property  Valuation  Reform  Act                (iii)      National  Land  Use  Act     Amendment  of  Local  Government  Code  (further  study)     Review  of  National  and  Local  Property  Taxes  and  Fees     Judicial  Reforms  in  the  Disposition  of  Land  Related  Cases     Programs     1. Accelerated  titling  of  public  lands     2. Upscale  LGU  led  initiatives  in  local  LAM  reforms     3. Establishment  of  a  National  Spatial  Data  Infrastructure     24 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013       Impacts  of  Weak  Land  Governance  –  Social,  Economic,  and  Fiscal  Costs   of  Inaction   The  above  assessment  has  confirmed  that  the  costs  of  inaction  would  have  far  ranging  impacts   on   the   economy,   social   protection   of   the   poor   and   vulnerable,   and   the   government’s   fiscal   position.   These   underscore   the   importance   of   improving   land   governance,   as   an   effective   instrument  for  addressing  the  interconnected  issues  affecting  the  sector.     The   following   paints   a   scenario   where   there   is   status   quo   or   delayed   action   on   the   indicators   and  dimensions  assessed  as  “struggling  to  meet  good  governance  criteria”.     The   huge   gap   in   titling   renders   a   high   proportion   of   the   country’s   population   with   weak/insecure   tenure.   These   are   usually   the   poor   and   vulnerable,   such   as   rural   farmers   and   indigenous   peoples.   Such   high   informality   subsequently   discourages   investments   and   affects   land  market  activity.  Thus,  the  contribution  of  the  property  sector  to  the  country’s  GDP  would   remain  below  potential.     In  prime  urban  centers,  the  growing  informality  would  continue  to  affect  land  values,  uses  and   development   potential   of   the   cities;   in   addition   to   the   social   unrest   normally   associated   with   huge  informal  settlements.     The  persistence  of  strong  horizontal  overlaps  among  land  agencies  will  continue  to  deprive  the   public   access   to   reliable,   up   to   date   records.   The   unnecessary   redundancies   in   budgets   and   staff   will   also   prevail.     The   situation   will   continue   to   affect   investment   confidence   in   the   registry,   huge  costs  of  delays  in  formalization  of  rights,  and  contribute  greatly  to  long  -­‐  standing  conflicts.   Inability   to   address   property   valuation   and   taxation   reform   measures   will   perpetuate   LGU   dependence   on   the   IRA   as   the   main   source   of   funding   for   local   socio   economic   development   programs,   as   this   will   reduce   the   opportunity   to   collect   property   taxes   essential   for   development  and  delivery  of  government  services.     Unresolved   disputes   will   continue   to   lock   away   the   properties   in   question   out   of   the   land   market;  create  uncertainty  and  prolong  conflicts  in  land.   Weak   support   systems   for   forestry,   public   land   management   and   large   scale   land   acquisition   will   restrain   rural   development,   employment   and   promoting   equity   and   benefit   sharing   from   sustainable  use  of  land  and  forest  resources.   Inadequate   mapping,   inventory   of   use   rights   and   tenure   in   lands   of   the   public   domain   will   continue   to   constrict   investment   potential,   discourage   sustainable   management   of   resources;   and  sow  confusion,  thereby  leading  to  more  long  standing  disputes.   All   the   above   considered,   there   will   continue,   an   environment   which   creates   strong   opportunities   for   syndicates   and   other   professionals   to   take   advantage   of   the   situation   for   their   own  benefit  at  the  expense  of  the  poor,  landless  and  the  vulnerable.     Surely,   the   above   scenario   is   not   consistent   with   the   current   government’s   thrust   of   god   governance  and  inclusive  growth,  with  a  focus  on  ensuring  the  poor  and  disadvantaged  benefit   from   the   fruits   of   development.     On   the   one   hand,   the   expected   benefits   of   improved   land   governance  reforms  would  help  lay  the  foundations  and  essential  elements  for  achieving  these   objectives.   25 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013       Box  2.  Expected  Impacts  of  Land  Governance  Reforms     ü More  secure  property  rights     ü Reduced  incidence  of  conflicts   ü Improved  socio  economic  well-­‐being  of  communities/IP  groups     ü Reduced   informality   in   prime   urban   areas,   thus   affecting   land   values,  uses  and  development  potential     ü Increased   investments   in   property   development,   improved     contribution  of  property  sector  to  GDP,  revitalized  land  market   activity     ü Improved  revenues     ü Enhanced  rural  development  potential   Suggestions  on  Way  Forward   The   following   actions   are   suggested   to   advance   consideration   of   the   recommendations   presented  in  this  study.   Firm  up  the  formulation  of  a  Land  Governance  Agenda  thru  the  establishment  of  a  multi  sectoral   body  to  review  the  recommendations  vis  a  vis  the  LSDF.    Such  group  could  form  the  backbone  of   what   may   be   called   a   Land   Governance   Coalition   sharing   a   common   vision   of   advocating   and   monitoring   actions   to   address   the   main   findings   from   the   LGAF.   It   is   recommended   that   in   view   of   the   cross   cutting   concerns   of   LGAF,   an   oversight   agency   senior   official   be   named   as   the   Chair,   in  alternate  with  a  civil  society  or  a  land  agency  representative.     On  the  basis  of  the  above,  the  body  or  coalition  should  seek  consensus  to  prioritize  the  actions   for   implementation   and   allocate   responsibilities   among   the   key   member   organizations   and   personalities.  These  actions  could  be  categorized  as  those  requiring  inclusion  in  the  legislative   agenda;   those   requiring   investments   to   scale   up   implementation;   and   those   requiring   administrative   actions   or   improvement   in   procedures   and   systems   to   provide   incentives   for   compliance.     Present   the   Land   Governance   Agenda   to   the   Cabinet/President   for   adoption.   These   could   be   used   to   update   the   current   PDP   and/or   used   as   basis   for   engagement   with   development   partners  through  the  PDF  mechanism.   Monitor   implementation   through   institutionalization   of   LGAF   to   track   progress   in   land   governance.   A   repeat   of   the   LGAF   could   be   made   in   2016   to   establish   the   achievements   undertaken,  and  use  the  results  to  feed  into  the  next  PDP  of  the  incoming  new  President.     To  take  advantage  of  the  expertise  and  experience  already  gained  in  the  LGAF  country  study,  it   is  recommended  that  more  focused  LGAF  be  undertaken  on  the  following  to  further  investigate   the  unique  issues  present  in  these  situations:     • Mindanao  LGAF  to  determine  priorities  in  a  regional  setting  which  is  currently  the  focus   of   development   interventions,   and   yet   is   abundant   in   land   and   natural   resources.   The   rich   cultural   history   of   the   region   would   also   offer   a   good   backdrop   to   surface   the   distinct  issues  and  determine  how  these  impact  on  land  governance.   • More  detailed  investigation  of  the  large  scale  land  acquisition  module  is  recommended   to  address  the  main  limitations  posed  in  this  study.  This  could  be  done  in  parallel  with   the  Mindanao  LGAF.  It  is  envisaged  that  as  CARP  is  completed  in  2016,  the  challenge  in   stimulating  rural  agricultural  growth  would  include  among  others,  providing  a  suitable   environment   for   LSLA   to   operate   in   a   way   that   benefits   the   rural   economy,   small   farmers,  and  also  contribute  to  meeting  food  security.     26 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   • Metro   Manila   LGAF   to   explore   land   governance   issues   in   a   highly   urban   setting.     It   is   expected   this   will   offer   a   different   perspective   to   both   the   national   and   Mindanao   LGAF;   and  help  provide  a  model  for  other  cities.       27 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   1 INTRODUCTION   1.1   Background  and  Overview  of  LGAF   Land  is  a  vital  resource  for  any  nation.  It  serves  as  the  platform  for  carrying  out  social,  cultural   and   economic   activities.   Access   to   land   is   an   important   means   for   promoting   growth   and   equity   and   achieving   social   justice   in   many   countries.   The   process   by   which   decisions   are   made   regarding  access  to  and  use  of  land,  the  manner  in  which  those  decisions  are  implemented  and   the  way  that  conflicting  interests  in  land  are  reconciled  are  crucial  in  determining  whether  the   country  has  what  it  takes  to  derive  the  desired  benefits  from  this  limited  natural  capital.     The  Land  Governance  Assessment  Framework  was  developed  by  World  Bank  and  its  partners   to   provide   a   tool   for   diagnosis   of   land   governance   issues,   establish   benchmarks,   and   monitor   progress  over  time.  It  comprises  a  set  of  detailed  indicators  to  be  rated  on  a  scale  of  pre  –  coded   statements   (from   lack   of   good   governance   to   good   practice,   A   –   D).   The   process   helps   to   establish   a   consensus   and   priority   actions   on:   (i)   gaps   in   existing   evidence;   (ii)   areas   for   regulatory   or   institutional   change;   and   (iii)   criteria   to   assess   the   effectiveness   of   these   measures.   Thus,   LGAF   helps   put   in   place   a   structure   and   process   to   systematically   track   progress  in  improving  land  governance  as  measures  are  implemented.  4   Based   on   country   experiences,   its   implementation   has   proven   that   it   can   serve   as   an   effective   tool  for  surfacing  key  policy  issues  and  their  prioritization.  It  has  also  been  shown  that  even  in   highly  complex  situations  with  weak  land  governance,  the  technical  and  participatory  nature  of   the  process  helped  provide  an  unbiased  assessment  of  the  land  sector  and  an  agreement  on  next   steps  that  is  backed  by  stakeholders.5     At  the  time  of  LGAF  completion  in  the  Philippines,  about  36  countries  have  carried  out  and/or   are   in   the   process   of   undertaking   similar   studies;   with   a   number   of   them   effectively   using   the   results   for   broader   stakeholder   engagement   on   land   issues,   and   developing   policy   options   for   moving   forward.   In   other   countries,   LGAF   results   are   feeding   into   land   policy   development   (Georgia,   Nigeria   and   Malawi),   design   of   land   projects   (Ukraine),   land   regularization   pilots   (Nigeria),  improving  land  administration  and  large  scale  land  related  investments  (Ghana),  and   further   development   of   Reducing   Emissions   from   Deforestation   and   Degradation   (REDD+),   forestry   and   indigenous   peoples   (IP)   agenda   (Indonesia)6.   Other   countries   such   as   Peru,   for   example,   have   set   up   independent   land   observatories   to   keep   on   tracking   progress   in   the   implementation  of  actions  identified  from  the  LGAF.     This   document   represents   the   country   report   for   the   Philippines.   It   describes   the   process   for   implementation  and  the  country  context.  The  assessment  of  land  governance  is  also  presented,   as   well   as   the   policy   analysis,   conclusions   and   recommendations.   The   report   is   intended   to   serve   as   a   reference   guide   for   government   and   other   land   practitioners   in   non-­‐   government   organizations,  private  sector,  academe  and  other  groups  to  help  shape  the  direction,  focus  and   support   for   the   land   sector,   and   how   progress   in   improving   governance   can   be   effectively   monitored.     The   LGAF   consists   of   five   core   modules   and   two   optional   modules.   Each   module   has   a   set   of   indicators  to  be  investigated,  which  in  turn  is  composed  of  several  dimensions  to  be  assessed.   There   LGAF   structure   therefore   is   hierarchically   arranged,   from   the   module   to   the   dimension.   A   typical  structure  of  dimension  is  shown  in  Figure  1.       4  Deinenger,  Klaus;  Harris  Selod  and  Anthony  Burns.  The  Land  Governance  Assessment  Framework:  Identifying  and  Monitoring   Good  Practice  in  the  Land  Sector.  2012.  The  World  Bank.   4  Ibid.   6  Bell,  Keith.  December,  2012.  Land  Governance.  Powerpoint  presentation.   28 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   Figure  1.  Structure  of  the  Assessment  Framework       Score Area Indicators Dimensions   A   B C   D   Recognition  of  a   continuum  of  rights   Land  tenure  rights  recognition   A   (rural)     Enforcement  of  rights     Land  tenure  rights  recognition   (urban)   Legal  and   Mechanism  for   Rural  group  rights  recognition       Institutional   recognition  of  rights   Framework   Restrictions  on  rights   Urban  group  rights  recognition   in  informal  areas     Clarity  of  institutional     mandates   Opportunities  for  tenure   individualization     Equity  and     nondiscrimination  in   decision  making     process     The   LGAF   consist   of   a   number   of   pre   identified   indicators   and   dimensions;   each   with   a   corresponding  set  of  pre  coded  statements  to  choose  from  that  corresponds  to  specific  ratings.   The  selection  consists  of  a  four  -­‐  point  scale  that  ranges  from  best  practice  to  lack  of  governance.     Table  1.  Rating  Scale  for  LGAF  Dimensions   LGI-­‐X,   Assessment     Dimension  I     Brief   A   –   Dimension   description   is   the   best   option   towards   a   good   land   governance   description  of   scenario.   dimension     B   –   Dimension   description   is   generally   the   second   best   set   of   options   that   make  progress  towards  good  land  governance.   C   –   Dimension   description   generally   struggles   to   meet   the   criteria   for   good   land  governance  however  some  attempts  are  being  made.     D   –   There   are   no   attempts   in   this   area   that   indicate   good   land   governance   operates       The   description   of   rating   scales   and/or   coding   were   based   on   international   experience;   and   were   uniformly   applied   in   all   countries   adopting   the   LGAF,   thus   enabling   benchmarking   with   global   best   practice   standards.   Figure   2   illustrates   a   typical   scoring   system   for   the   dimension   “mapping/charting  of  registry  records  is  complete”  under  the  indicator  “completeness  of  the   registry”  in  Module  6  –  Public  Provision  of  Land  Information.   29 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013     Figure  2.  Sample  of  Coded  Statements  for  LGAF  Dimensions         Assessment   A  –  More  than  90%  of  records  for  privately   held  land  in  the  registry  are  readily  identifiable     in  maps  held  by  the  registry  or  the  cadastre.   LGI  16,   B  –  Between  70%  and  90%  of  records  for       Dim.  I privately  held  land  in  the  registry  are  readily     Mapping/   identifiable  in  maps  held  by  the  registry  or  the   cadastre.     charting  of   registry   C  –  Between  50%  and  70%  of  records  for     records  is   privately  held  land  in  the  registry  are  readily   complete     identifiable  in  maps  held  by  the  registry  or  the     cadastre.     D  –  Less  than  50%  of  records  for  privately   held  land  in  the  registry  are  readily  identifiable     in  maps  held  by  the  registry  or  the  cadastre.     1.2   LGAF  Process   As   laid   out   in   the   LGAF   Implementation   Manual,   the   process   is   led   by   a   National   Country   Coordinator   working   with   National   Experts   to   prepare   background   analysis   using   already   existing  studies,  information  and  data.  Initial  assessments  were  given  by  the  Specialists  which   were   then   considered   and   assessed   by   panels   of   national   experts   from   various   backgrounds.   The   aim   is   for   consensus   scoring   on   the   dimensions.   The   results   were   then   validated   at   a   national  technical  workshop  to  identify  key  policy  recommendations.  The  conclusions  from  the   process  were  then  presented  to  policy  makers  through  a  Policy  Dialogue.  Figure  3  presents  the   LGAF  implementation  process  in  the  Philippines.     Figure  3.  LGAF  Implementation  Process  in  the  Philippines June  –  July  2013   Technical  Validation  Workshop  and   Policy  Dialogue       Finalization  of  LGAF  Country  Report   April  -­‐  May  2013   Preparation  of  Panel  Aide   Memoire  and  Draft  LGAF  Report   March  and  M ay  2013   Panel  Workshops   March  2013   Panel  Briefing  Notes     Feb  -­‐  March  2013   Expert  Investigations   January  2013   Tenure  Typology  and   Institutional  M apping   December  2012   Appointment  of   Country  Coordinator   30 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   The   study   began   in   December   2012   with   the   selection   of   the   Country   Coordinator   and   was   completed   in   June,   2013.   Preparatory   activities   included   coordination   with   the   Department   of   Environment   and   Natural   Resources   (DENR)   officials   as   the   agency   with   the   most   responsibilities   in   land   management   in   the   Philippines.   Introductions   by   the   World   Bank   likewise   helped   in   ensuring   that   the   Country   Coordinator,   through   Land   Equity   Technology   Services,  Inc.;  are  properly  acknowledged  as  the  entity  responsible  for  carrying  out  the  study.   The  following  describes  the  major  steps  taken  in  the  LGAF:   Review  of  LGAF  Definitions  and  Dimensions   The  LGAF  contains  a  set  of  definitions  applied  in  the  analysis.  The  review  found  that  most  of  the   definitions  are  applicable  to  the  Philippines.  Nonetheless,  there  were  terms  in  the  Manual  that   refer  to  more  specific  circumstances  in  the  country  context.  For  example,  rural  lands  as  referred   in   the   LGAF   are   used   to   denote   all   types   of   lands   including   forests,   national   parks,   and   agricultural  lands;  whereas  in  the  Philippines,  there  is  a  distinction  between  agricultural  lands   which   are   considered   private,   and   public   lands   in   forest   areas   and   national   parks.   In   the   assessment,  qualifications  were  made  to  clearly  distinguish  how  the  dimensions  were  applied.     The  review  of  dimensions  involved  determination  of  their  relevance  to  the  country  situation.  A   key   decision   was   made   whether   or   not   to   tackle   the   dimensions   in   the   optional   modules   considering  the  tight  budget  for  the  study.  In  the  end,  the  importance  of  issues  in  forestry  and   large   scale   land   acquisition   (LSLA)   in   the   Philippines   prevailed.   All   the   dimensions   were   included   in   the   assessment   and   a   table   was   produced   indicating   the   possible   sources   of   information  for  each.  These  were  given  to  the  Experts  as  guide  in  their  investigations.   Expert  Investigations   Primary   background   studies   on   land   tenure   and   institutional   mapping   of   land   agencies   were   undertaken   by   the   Land   Tenure   and   Institutions   Expert.   Data   gathering   was   guided   by   the   instructions  and  templates  provided  in  the  Manual.  The  tenure  typology  and  institutional  map   were  provided  to  the  Experts  for  their  guidance.   A  total  of  six  Experts  were  recruited  for  the  LGAF:   • Land  Tenure  and  Administration  Expert  (Mr.  Brian  S.  Garcia)   • Urban  Land  Use  Planning  and  Development  Expert  (Professor  Ernesto  Serote)   • Land  Valuation  and  Taxation  Expert  (Ms.  Lina  Isorena)   • Resettlements  Expert  (Ms.  Annabelle  Herrera)   • Large  Scale  Land  Acquisition  Expert  (Professor  Roel  Ravanera)   • Forestry  and  Natural  Resources  Management  Expert  (Dr.  Ernersto  S.  Guiang)   The  investigations  were  designed  to  be  short;  and  relied  heavily  on  available  data  and  studies.   For  some  dimensions,  primary  data  were  gathered  to  illustrate  the  situation  from  examples,  and   not   to   establish   a   national   level   trend   or   data.   The   outputs   of   Experts   were   Panel   Briefing   Notes   on  the  dimensions  assigned.  Expert  investigations  benefited  greatly  from  the  studies  and  wealth   of  information  undertaken  under  the  two  phases  of  the  Land  Administration  and  Management   Project  (LAMP).  These  pertain  to  the  modules  on  land  tenure,  land  policy,  land  administration,   and  property  valuation  and  taxation.     Panel  Workshops   A   total   of   nine   workshops   were   organized   for   this   study.   Eight   of   these   were   held   in   March,   while   the   Forestry   Panel   workshop   was   held   in   May,   2013.   Due   to   the   short   period   between   the   completion  of  panel  briefing  notes  and  the  workshops;  some  of  the  background  materials  were   not  circulated  well  in  advance  as  planned.     31 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   As   the   draft   panel   notes   were   received   from   the   Experts   and   reviewed   by   the   Country   Coordinator,  these  were  submitted  for  review  by  the  Word  Bank.  These  enabled  the  conduct  of   the  workshops  as  scheduled.     Aide  Memoires  were  prepared  by  the  Country  Coordinator  upon  completion  of  the  workshops,   and   circulated   to   the   panel   members   for   comments.   These   form   part   of   the   documentation   of   the  study.   Technical  Validation  and  Policy  Dialogue     The  Workshop  was  held  on  June  4,  2013;  and  involved  key  officials  from  government  agencies,   NGOs,   members   from   the   academe,   private   sector,   professional   groups,   basic   sector   groups,   and   WB  representatives.  About  70  participants  attended  the  workshop,  in  light  of  the  broad  range  of   topics  covered  by  the  country  study.     The   Validation   Workshop   served   as   an   opportunity   for   wider   review   of   the   assessment   of   dimensions,  and  confirmed  the  ratings.  It  also  strengthened  the  analysis  particularly  of  modules   where  panel  attendance  was  limited.   LGAF  Experts  made  presentations  on  the  assessment  of  governance  on  the  following:   • Land  Tenure  and  Administration   • Urban  Land  Use  Planning  and  Development   • Property  Valuation  and  Taxation   • Expropriation  of  Properties   • Large  Scale  Land  Acquisition   • Forestry  and  Public  Land  Management   A  key  output  of  the  workshop  was  a  policy  matrix  containing  priority  policy  recommendations   emanating   from   the   assessment   of   dimensions.   These   were   presented   to   senior   government   officials  and  key  stakeholders  for  consideration.   The   Policy   Dialogue   was   held   on   June   6,   2013;   attended   by   key   officials   from   DoF,   DENR,   HLURB,   DAR,   DA,   and   other   agencies.   In   addition   to   confirming   the   main   findings,   the   participants   commented   on   the   analyses,   and   expressed   interest   on   major   recommendations.   Towards   the   end,   the   DENR   and   DoF   officials   supported   the   creation   of   an   informal   Technical   Working   Group   to   consider   in   detail   the   actions   necessary   to   implement   the   priority   recommendations  arising  from  the  study.       Other  Activities   During   the   course   of   LGAF   implementation,   the   Country   Coordinator   had   the   opportunity   to   attend  the  Annual  Land  and  Poverty  Conference  in  Washington  in  April  2013.  The  Philippines   LGAF   experience   was   presented   during   the   Pre-­‐Conference   Workshop   with   development   partners   on   April   8,   2013.   Valuable   insights   were   shared   by   other   Country   Coordinators   well   advanced  in  the  LGAF  process,  particularly  those  who  have  initiated  monitoring  of  performance   in   governance,   implementation   of   sub   national   LGAFs,   and   are   using   the   results   to   influence   major  land  policies.     Briefing   notes   were   prepared   for   one   on   one   meetings   with   the   DAR   Secretary,   LRA   Administrator,   NEDA   Director   General   and   DENR   Secretary   during   their   separate   visits   in   Washington.   These   meetings   with   WB   officials   raised   the   profile   of   Philippine   LGAF   and   stimulated   interest   in   the   outcomes.   An   exploratory   meeting   was   also   held   with   the   WB   Executive  Director  of  the  Philippines  and  the  WB  Country  Coordinator  to  consider  whether  the   ongoing   discussions   to   formulate   the   Country   Assistance   Strategy   (CAS)   can   accommodate   additional  programs  emanating  from  the  LGAF.  In  June  2013;  a  briefing  was  also  made  by  WB   with  the  DoF  Secretary,  during  the  G8  Summit.     32 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   As  a  result  of  the  above  coordination  work,  a  high  level  presentation  was  made  with  DAR  and   DENR   Secretaries   and   the   LRA   Administrator   on   May   24,   2013   to   present   the   main   findings   and   policy   recommendations.   The   officials   acknowledged   the   conclusions   from   the   study,   and   expressed  support  for  most  of  the  recommendations.     As  a  result  of  linkages  established  with  the  Philippine  Development  Forum,  two  presentations   were  made  –  one  in  mid  February  2013;  and  the  other  on  May  23,  2013.  The  first  presentation   was   aimed   at   providing   an   overview   and   background   on   the   study,   its   scope   and   schedules.   The   May   presentation   discussed   the   main   findings   and   recommendations.   The   study   was   well   received,  where  the  members  confirmed  the  assessment  results  and  ratings.  The  PDF  members   also  appreciated  the  recommendations,  and  made  suggestions  on  how  the  report  can  be  more   widely   circulated   and   brought   to   the   attention   of   policy   makers.   The   development   partners   present   also   expressed   interest   to   further   discuss   the   final   report,   as   basis   for   future   engagement  with  government.     1.3   Scope  of  Assessment   The   country   study   covered   the   five   core   modules   including   the   two   optional   modules.   In   all,   these  involved  a  total  of  30  indicators  with108  dimensions:   Table  2.  Scope  of  Philippines  LGAF   Thematic  Area   Indicators   Dimensions   Core  Modules   Legal  and  Institutional  Framework   6   27   Land  Use  Planning,  Management  and  Taxation   5   17   Management  of  Public  Land   4   16   Public  Provision  of  Land  Information   4   13   Dispute  Resolution  and  Conflict  Management   2   7   Optional  Modules   Large  Scale  Land  Acquisition   3   16   Forestry   6   12   TOTAL   30   108     Core  Modules   Legal   and   Institutional   Framework     -­‐   assessed   the   extent   to   which   the   range   of   existing   land   rights   is   legally   recognized.   It   also   reviewed   the   level   of   documentation   and   enforcement,   and   the   cost   of   enforcing   or   gradually   upgrading   these   rights.   The   scope   included   an   examination   as   to   whether   regulation   and   management   of   land   involve   institutions   with   clear   mandates   as   well   as  policy  processes  that  are  transparent  and  equitable.     Land   Use   Planning,   Management   and   Taxation   –   examined   land   use   restrictions   and   whether   these   are   justified   on   the   basis   of   the   public   interest.   It   also   looked   at   promptness   and   transparency   in   the   granting   of   necessary   exemptions;   as   well   as   the   efficiency   of   land   use   planning   in   major   cities.   Finally,   it   investigated   the   transparency   of   determining   taxes   on   land   and  real  estate,  and  efficiency  in  collection.     33 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   Management   of   Public   Land   -­‐   assessed   the   extent   to   which  public   landholdings   are   justified   and   transparently   inventoried   and   managed;   whether   expropriation   procedures   are   applied   in   the   public  interest  through  clear,  transparent,  and  fair  processes  involving  the  compensation  of  all   those  who  lose  rights;  and  transparency  and  monitoring  transfer  or  devolution  of  state  land.       Public  Provision  of  Land  Information  –  determined  whether  land  information  systems  provide   sufficient,   relevant,   and   up-­‐   to-­‐date   data   on   land   ownership   to   the   general   public   and   accessibility,  affordability,  and  sustainability  of  land  administration  services.     Dispute   Resolution   and   Conflict   Management   –   assessed   the   existence   of   affordable,   clearly   defined,  transparent,  and  unbiased  mechanisms  for  the  resolution  of  land  disputes  and  whether   these  mechanisms  function  effectively  in  practice.   Optional  Modules   Large-­‐Scale   Acquisition   of   Land   Rights   –   examined   land   rights   recognition,   conflicts   and   land   use  planning  and  practices;  incentives,  procedures  and  requirements  for  investments;  as  well  as   environmental  and  social  safeguards.     Forestry   –   assessed   the   country   commitment   to   sustainability   and   climate   change   mitigation;   policies  for  recognition  of  public  goods  aspects  of  forests  and  promoting  their  sustainable  use;   actions   to   support   private   sector   to   invest   sustainably   in   forest   activities;   recognition   of   livelihood  aspects  of  traditional  and  indigenous  forest  dependent  communities;  and  forest  land   use,   tenure   and   land   conversion;   and   effectiveness   of   controlling   illegal   logging   and   other   forest   crimes.       34 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   2 BACKGROUND  DATA  AND  INFORMATION   2.1 General  Data  and  Information   2.1.1 Historical  Context  of  Land  in  the  Philippines   More   than   three   centuries   of   Spanish   occupation   of   the   Philippines   has   created   large   disparities   in   land   ownership.   Under   this   rule,   the   concept   of   communal   use   was   replaced   with   the   concept   of  Regalian  Doctrine  and  private  individual  ownership  of  lands  through  the  adoption  of  the  Law   of   the   Indies   and   Maura   Law   or   the   Spanish   Mortgage   Law.   During   this   period,   there   was   massive   disenfranchisement   of   land   when   the   Spanish   crown   issued   royal   land   grants   to   colonists   who   developed   large   plantations   in   Luzon,   then   the   nation’s   heartland.   Filipino   landowners   were   dispossessed   and   their   tenant   farmers   were   placed   under   the   authority   of   new   landlords.   Such   large   inequality,   accompanied   by   oppression,   fueled   the   revolt   in   the   Philippines  against  the  Spanish  rule.     During   the   American   regime,   Filipinos   were   given   greater   responsibility   for   governing   their   own   land.   Many   Philippine   officials   replaced   Spanish   haciendas   with   their   own   large   plantations,  thus  perpetuating  the  inequality  in  land  ownership.  The  US  government  attempted   to   address   this   land   tenure   problem   through   redistribution   of   many   large   parcels   of   church-­‐ owned   land   that   had   been   expropriated   by   the   Spanish   in   the   16th   century   through   public   offerings   for   sale,   in   what   are   now   termed   as   friar   lands.   However,   this   program   failed   to   transfer   land   ownership   to   the   farmers   but   allowed   few   Filipinos   with   resources   to   increase   their  landholdings.  Thus,  this  had  the  effect  of  prolonging  the  landlord-­‐tenant  relationship  that   had  become  synonymous  with  Philippine  agriculture.7     Subsequent  political  changes  did  little  to  alleviate  the  basic  Philippine  problems  of  poverty  and   land   tenure.   Partly   due   to   its   historically   high   inequality   there   has   long   been   intermittent   incidence   of   peasant   unrest   and   rural   insurgencies   in   the   Philippines.   As   a   result,   the   issue   of   land   reform   (or   ‘agrarian   reform’   as   more   commonly   called   in   the   Philippines,   of   which   land   reform  constitutes  the  major  part)  has  continuously  been  on  political  agenda  at  least  since  the   early  part  of  the  twentieth  century.8     Policies   enacted   by   the   Philippines   in   the   19th   century   were   all   directed   at   dismantling   the   skewed  distribution  of  land,  and  the  formalization  of  land  rights  but  still  following  much  of  the   Regalian  Doctrine  introduced  under  the  Spanish  era.     Subsequent  policies  include  the  Land  Registration  Act  of  1902;  the  Cadastral  Act  of  1913;  and   the   Public   Land   Act   of   1936.   These   policies   strengthened   the   concept   of   private   ownership   of   what   are   called   alienable   and   disposable   lands   (A   and   D).   On   the   other   hand,   the   Regalian   Doctrine   was   further   carried   in   the   1987   Constitution   that   upheld   that   all   lands   belong   to   the   state   unless   alienated.   This   explains   the   large   expanse   of   public   lands   that   are   under   the   management   of   government   instrumentalities.   Perhaps   the   key   exception   to   this   was   the   Indigenous  Peoples  Rights  Act,  which  confirmed  that  lands  held  under  customary  law,  belong  to   the  indigenous  peoples,  and  were  not  considered  public.     7 Greenberg,   Lawrence,   1987.   A   Case   Study   of   a   Successful    Anti-­‐Insurgency   Operation    in   the   Philippines,   1946-­‐1955.   (http://www.history.army.mil/books/coldwar/huk/ch1.htm).     Analysis  Branch    U.S.  Army  Center  of  Military  History    Washington,   D.C.,  1987.   8  Fuwa,  Nobuhiko,  2000.  Politics   and   Economics   of   Land   Reform   in   the   Philippines:   A   Survey.  A  background  paper  prepared  for   a   World   Bank   Study,   Dynamism   of   Rural   Sector   Growth:   Policy   Lessons   from   East   Asian   Countries.   (http://www.h.chiba-­‐ u.ac.jp/mkt/LANDREF.pdf.)   35 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   2.1.2 Philippine  Geography   The   Republic   of   the   Philippines   is   an   archipelagic   country   with   a   total   land   area   of   approximately   30   million   hectares,   distributed   among   some   7,100   islands.  About  1,000  of  these  islands   are   inhabited,   and   less   than   one   half   of   these   are   larger   than   2.5   square   kilometers.   Eleven   large   islands   take  up  about  95%  of  the  total  land   area.   The   country   is   located   around   800   km   from   mainland   Asia   and   is   situated   between   Taiwan   and   Borneo.   Luzon   and   Mindanao   are   the  two  largest  islands.     Based  on  the  Constitution,  there  are   only   four   major   land   classifications   in   the   Philippines:   agricultural,   mineral   lands,   forest   lands   and   national   parks.   Lands   of   the   public   domain   comprising   forest   lands,   mineral   lands   and   national   parks   constitute   about   50   %   of   the   total   land   area;   while   alienable   and   disposable   lands,   comprising   private   agricultural   lands,   residential,   commercial   and   industrial  –  constitute  about  47%  or   14.19   million   hectares.   The   rest  are   still   unclassified   pending   final   evaluation.   Customary  lands,  or  what  are  called   in   the   Philippines   as   ancestral   domains   -­‐   straddle   between   A   and   D   and   public   domains.   However,   by   virtue   of   the   Indigenous   Peoples   Rights   Act   (IPRA)   which   recognized   IP   rights   to   these  properties;  these  are  classified  as  private  property.     2.1.3 Administration   In   terms   of   its   political   geography,   Philippines   is   divided   into   a   hierarchy   of   local   government   units   with   81   provinces   as   the   primary   unit.   The   provinces   are   further   subdivided   into   cities   and  municipalities,  which  are  in  turn,  composed  of  barangays.  The  barangay  is  the  smallest  local   government  unit.     The   Local   Government   Code   of   1991   devolved   many   functions   and   responsibilities   to   LGUs.   Among   the   land   related   functions   include   taxation   of   properties,   land   use   planning   and   development,   cadastral   surveys.   LGUs   likewise   have   their   own   executive   and   legislative   authorities  as  defined  under  the  Code.  Among  the  authority  vested  with  the  LGUs  is  the  power   to  exercise  eminent  domain;  handed  down  from  the  national  government.     Other   national   government   functions   were   likewise   devolved   in   1991,   such   as   health   and     agricultural  extension  services,  and  some  environment  and  natural  resources  functions  such  as   solid   waste   management   and   management   of   communal   forests.   Much   of   the   public   land   36 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   management   responsibilities,   including   land   administration   functions   were   retained   by   the   national  government.     The   Philippines   is   also   divided   into   17   regions   with   all   provinces   grouped   into   one   of   the   16   regions   for   administrative   convenience.   The   government   bureaucracy   works   along   these   regional  divides,  for  ease  of  providing  services.  The  National  Capital  Region  (NCR)  however,  is   divided   into   four   special   districts.   All   regions,   except   for   the   Autonomous   Region   for   Muslim   Mindanao  (ARMM),  have  no  political  power.     All   regions   except   one   (Metro   Manila)   are   subdivided   into   provinces.   Each   province   is   headed   by   a   governor.   Its   legislative   body   is   the   Sangguniang   Panlalawigan   (Provincial   Board)   composed   of   the   different   members   from   Sanggunian   districts,   which   in   most   cases   are   contiguous  to  the  congressional  districts.   Regions,   aside   from   having   provinces   may   also   have   independent   cities,   classified   either   as   highly   urbanized   or   independent   component   cities.   These   are   cities   that   are   not   under   the   jurisdiction   of   a   province,   and   therefore   they   do   not   share   their   tax   revenues   with   the   province,   and   in   most   cases   their   residents   are   not   eligible   to   elect   or   be   elected   to   provincial   offices.   Cities   that   are   politically   a   part   of   a   province   are   called   component   cities.   Municipalities   are   always  components  of  a  province,  except  Pateros,  Metro  Manila,  which  is  independent.   Cities   and   municipalities   are   headed   by   a   Mayor.   The   legislative   arm   of   these   units   are   the   Sangguniang   Panlungsod   City   Council)   for   cities   and   Sangguniang   Bayan   (Municipal   Councils)   for   municipalities,   which   are   composed   of   councilors   elected   at-­‐large   or   in   some   cases,   by   Sanggunian  district.  These  Councils  serve  as  the  local  legislative  bodies  at  the  LGU  levels.     Cities   (both   component   and   independent   ones)   and   municipalities   are   further   divided   into   barangays.   The   barangay   is   the   smallest   political   unit.   In   some   populous   cities,   barangays   are   grouped   into   zones   and/or   into   districts   for   administrative   purposes.   In   rural   areas,   sitios   or   puroks   are   the   preferred   ways   of   subdividing   barangays   for   administrative   purposes.   Each   barangay  is  headed  by  a  Barangay  Chairman.   Below   barangays   are   smaller   communities   known   as   sitios   and   puroks.   Not   all   barangays   are   so   sub-­‐divided.  Their  leadership  is  not  a  recognized  Local  Government  Unit  and  are  not  elected  in   regular  general  elections.  These  are  most  common  in  less  populated,  rural  barangays  where  you   might   have   several   pockets   of   population   spread   out   over   a   wider   area   and   surrounded   by   farms  or  undeveloped  mountainsides,  or  even  on  different  islands.   Among   the   regions,   MIMAROPA,   a   cluster   of   large   islands   in   Luzon;   and   Davao   region;   are   the   largest   in   terms   of   land   area;   although   these   are   predominantly   rural   regions.   These   regions   also  host  the  biggest  areas  of  the  public  domain  in  the  Philippines.  The  National  Capital  Region   is   the   seat   of   industry,   commerce,   business   and   government,   and   is   considered   the   most   populous,  with  an  estimated  population  of  11.8  Million  as  of  2010  census,  which  is  about  12.7%   of  the  country’s  total  population.     2.1.4 Demography   The   Philippines   has   a   rapidly   growing   population.   Based   on   2010   census,   the   country’s   population   is   placed   at   92.33   Million.   This   is   higher   by   15.83   million   compared   to   the   2000   population   of   76.51   million;   thus   representing   a   growth   rate   of   1.9   percent   annually   on   the   average  during  the  period  2000-­‐2010.  In  1990,  the  total  population  was  60.70  million.   Table  3.  Philippine  Population    Philippine  Population   Annual  Growth  Rate     Census  Year   (in  million)   (in  percent)   2010   92.34   1.90  (2000-­‐2010)   2000   76.51   2.34  (1990-­‐2000)   37 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   1990   60.70     By   2040,   it   is   expected   that   the   Philippine   population   will   reach   141.67   Million;   or   a   population   density  of  4.72  persons  per  hectare;  against  the  current  density  of  3.08.     Compared   to   other   countries   in   the   region,   the   Philippines   has   one   of   the   fastest   growing   population.   Indonesia   has   maintained   a   population   growth   rate   of   1%;   while   Thailand   has   maintained   a   modest   0.6%   growth,   compared   to   the   Philippines’   annual   growth   rate   of   1.7%.     Thus,   in   1970,   when   both   Thailand   and   the   Philippines   have   populations   of   36   million   each;   Thailand   has   maintained   its   population   in   2009   to   66.5   million;   compared   to   the   Philippines’   92.2  million.   Among  the  17  regions,  CALABARZON  had  the  largest  population  with  12.61  million,  followed  by   the   National   Capital   Region   with   11.86   million   and   Central   Luzon   with   10.14   million.   The   population   of   these   three   regions   together   comprised   more   than   one-­‐third   (37.47   percent)   of   the  Philippine  population.  These  figures  indicate  a  rapidly  growing  urban  population  within  and   around   the   major   urban   center   of   NCR   –   the   seat   of   the   country’s   capital.   The   least   most   populous   regions   include   Cordillera   Administrative   Region   (1.6   million);   CARAGA   region   with   2.42  million;  and  MIMAROPA  with  2.74  million.     Among   the   provinces,   Cavite   had   the   largest   population   with   3.09   million.   Bulacan   had   the   second   largest   with   2.92   million   and   Pangasinan   had   the   third   largest   with   2.78   million.   Both   provinces  are  considered  within  the  peri  urban  areas  of  Metro  Manila;  and  are  recipients  of  spill   over  growth  of  the  capital.     Six  other  provinces  surpassed  the  two  million  mark:  Laguna  (2.67  million);  Cebu,  excluding  its   three  highly  urbanized  cities  Cebu  City,  Lapu-­‐Lapu  City,  and  Mandaue  City  (2.62  million);  Rizal   (2.48  million);  Negros  Occidental,  excluding  Bacolod  City  (2.40  million);  Batangas  (2.38  million)   and  Pampanga,  excluding  Angeles  City  (2.01  million).   The   provinces   with   a   population   of   less   than   100,000   persons   were   Batanes   (16,604),   Camiguin   (83,807),  and  Siquijor  (91,066).   Of   the   33   highly   urbanized   cities   (HUC),   four   surpassed   the   one   million   mark.   Three   of   such   HUCs   are   in   NCR:   Quezon   City   (2.76   million),   City   of   Manila   (1.65   million),   and   Caloocan   City   (1.49   million).   Outside   NCR,   only   Davao   City   has   a   population   of   more   than   one   million   (1.45   million).                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           2.1.5 Current  Economic,  Social  and  Policy  Issues  in  the  Philippines   The   Philippines   is   currently   at   the   cross   roads   of   economic   growth.   After   decades   of   being   a   developing  country,  it  has  recently  gained  a  status  of  lower  middle  income  country.    No  longer   the  “sick  man”  of  Asia,  the  Philippines  has  attained  modest  growths  over  the  last  few  decades,   albeit  at  a  much  slower  pace  than  most  of  its  Asian  neighbors.  A  more  serious  concern  is  that   the  benefits  of  such  progress  have  remained  with  a  few  section  of  the  population  thus  not  really   making  a  difference  in  the  inequity  that  has  plagued  the  country  for  many  centuries.  An  added   dimension  to  the  critical  problem  facing  the  Philippines  is  the  widespread  perception  of  massive   corruption  and  questions  of  political  legitimacy.     Thus,   the   ascent   into   power   of   President   Benigno   Aquino   III   in   2010,   is   a   reflection   of   the   Filipino  aspirations  of  what  he  strongly  stood  for  –  promoting  good  governance,  and  upholding   the  rule  of  law.     The   Philippine   Development   Plan   of   2011-­‐2016   therefore   embodies   such   ideals.   Banking   on   the   concept   of   inclusive   growth,   it   purports   to   address   the   inequities   created   out   of   the   policies   and   institutions   of   the   past;   and   reduce   mass   poverty   that   is   at   the   root   cause   of   instability,   political   alienation,  exodus  of  Filipino  talents  and  skills,  among  others.  It  is  also  aimed  at  preventing  the   38 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   “middle   income   trap”   by   ensuring   that   such   growth   will   be   sustained,   and   propel   the   Philippine   economy  to  the  next  level.   Indeed,   the   historical   performance   of   the   Philippine   economy   has   been   characterized   as   erratic.   An  analysis  of  the  Philippine  economy  as  described  in  the  PDP  is  presented  in  Box  1.     Table  4.  Philippines:  Country  Basic  Facts   Country  Basic  Facts  (Year  :2011)     Population,  total  (millions)   94.85   Population  growth  (annual  %)   1.7   Surface  area  (sq.  km)  (thousands)   298   Life  expectancy  at  birth,  total  (years)   69   Literacy  rate,  youth  female  (%  of  females  ages  15-­‐24);   98   (2008)   Prevalence  of  HIV,  total  (%  of  population  ages  15-­‐49)   0.1   GDP  (2011,  US$)  (billions)   224.8       GNI  (2011,  US$)  (billions)   209,72     GNI  per  capita,  Atlas  method  (2011,  US$)   2210   Foreign  direct  investment,  net  inflows  (%  of  GDP)   1,869,000,000   0.83%   Time  required  to  start  a  business  (days)   36   o Source:  www.worldbank.org/data/onlinedatabases/onlinedatabases.html     Box  3.  Analysis  of  Philippine  Economic  Performance  (source:  PDP  2011-­‐2016)   Since  1981,  growth  has  averaged  only  3  percent  annually.  This  is  well  below  the  postwar  growth  rates  of   several  high-­‐performing  A sian  economies.   With  population  still  increasing  at  more  than  2  percent  per   year,   per-­‐  capita  incomes  have  risen  only  20   percent  in  real  terms  from  1981  to  2009.     Over   the   same   period,   by   comparison,   per   capita   income   increased   four-­‐fold   in   Malaysia,   five-­‐   fold   in   Thailand,  and  11-­‐fold  in  PR  China,  an  era  in  which  absolute  mass  poverty  was  basically  eradicated  in  these   countries.1   While  poverty  incidence  did  decline  between  1991  and  2009,  the  rate  of  decline  has  been  exceedingly  slow.   There  have  been  periods,  such  as  between  2003  and  2006,  when  the  poverty  incidence  actually  increased   despite  above-­‐average  economic  growth.     For  every  percentage-­‐  point  increase  in  income-­‐growth  in  the  Philippines,  poverty  incidence  falls  by  about   1.5   percentage   points   compared   with   the   range   of   2.9   to   3.5   for   high-­‐performing   economies   and   the   2.5   average   for   a   set   of   47   developing   countries.   Relative   to   international   experience,   therefore,   Philippine   economic  growth  thus,  by  far,  has  largely  bypassed  the  poor.   Compared  to   other   countries  in  the   region,  income  inequality   in   the  Philippines  is  high.   The   Gini   ratio,   a   measure  of  inequality,  is  in  the  mid-­‐40s,  whereas  in  Indonesia  and  Vietnam  the  Gini  ratio  is  pegged  at  38-­‐ 39.  Moreover,  there  has  been  no  secular  tendency  towards  falling  inequality;  movements  in  the  Gini  ratio   have   been   erratic   at   best,   declining   in   the   early   1990s,   rising   until   2000,   then   falling   slightly   before   leveling  off  at  a  still-­‐high  level  by  2006.  In  general,  it  is  safe  to  conclude  that  the  trade-­‐off  between  growth   and   inequality   that   is   commonly   observed   in   other   countries   still   raises   no   policy   dilemma   in   the   Philippines,  where  low  growth  has  been  accompanied  by  increasing  or  high  inequality.   The   PDP   has   identified   three   major   structural   underpinnings   that   prevent   the   country   from   achieving  inclusive  growth.  These  are:   • Inadequate  infrastructure  due  to  weak  investments;   • Weak  institutions  and  governance  failures;     • Inadequate  levels  of  human  development;  and   39 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   • Poor  and  degraded  state  of  environment  and  natural  resources.   In   terms   of   governance,   the   Plan   acknowledged   that   the   country   also   ranks   poorly   in   international  comparisons  of  the  enforcement  of  law  and  contracts,  and  competition  measures.   Furthermore,  it  notes  that:   “Risks  to  large-­‐  scale  investments  can  also  arise  from  the  bias,  incompetence,  or  outright   corruption  on  the  part  of  some  regulatory  agencies  and  other  oversight  bodies,  as  well  as   lead   to   a   culture   of   litigiousness,   encouraged   by   misplaced   judicial   activism.   Less   sensationally   but   with   not   less   damage,   local   governments   impose   their   own   share   of   arbitrary  requirements  and  demands  for  corruption  rents,  which  take  a  toll  especially  on   the  investment  and  employment  decisions  of  many  small-­‐  and  medium-­‐scale  enterprises.”   In   agriculture,   the   importance   of   securing   property   rights   in   the   pursuit   of   governance   and   stimulating  investments  were  underscored:   “In   agriculture,   meanwhile,   investment   has  been   stymied   by   continuing   property-­‐  rights   problems   and   inconsistent   policy.   Property   rights   in   the   countryside  are   also   insecure.   In   the   remaining  areas   under   land   reform   coverage,   for  example,   slow   implementation   creates  uncertainty  of  ownership,  both  on  the  side  of  traditional  landowners,  and  the  new   landowners,  many  of  whom  have  yet  to  receive  individual  titles  to  their  cultivated  parcels.”   The  role  of  improving  the  state  of  the  country’s  environment  and  natural  resources  in  realizing   inclusive   growth   is   recognized.   A   deteriorated   state   is   felt   most   by   the   poor,   who   depend   on   natural  resources  for  their  livelihood  and  survival.     The  LGAF  therefore  is  quite  timely  in  the  Philippine  context  because  it  addresses  the  very  issues   that  the  Philippines  are  trying  to  confront.     Governance   is   a   key   pillar   of   the   current   administration,   and   since   the   historical   roots   of   inequality   has   been   associated   with   uneven   distribution   of   land   as   assets;   the   results   of   LGAF   are   expected   to   sharpen   the   country’s   strategies   in   this   regard.   Moreover,   there   have   been   a   number  of  recent  actions  taking  place  in  the  Philippine  political  landscape,  which  makes  LGAF   highly  relevant  at  this  point  in  time.   There  is  a  commitment  by  the  Aquino  administration  to  complete  land  redistribution  by  the  end   of  2016.  There  is  therefore  an  urgency  to  fast  track  the  survey,  mapping  and  registration  of  the   individual  and  collective  rights  resulting  from  this  process.  Related  to  this,  there  is  an  ongoing   institutional  study  on  land  administration  and  management  that  aims  to  develop  options  for  a   post  CARP  scenario.   There   is   an   active   national   land   policy   debates   and   discussions   on   a   20   year   proposal   for   a   National  Land  Use  Act.  The  intent  is  to  provide  a  national  framework  for  land  use  allocation  that   will   enable   the   country   to   meet   its   demand   for   housing,   food   security,   environment   and   natural   resources   services,   and   industry.   This   is   expected   to   put   some   order   in   what   is   currently   an   anarchic  expansion  of  certain  land  uses  to  the  detriment  of  other  equally  important  uses.   A  number  of  related  Bills  have  likewise  been  filed  in  Congress  that  addresses  the  key  issues  in   the   lands   sector.   These   are:   the   Land   Administration   Reform   Act   (LARA)   –   which   seeks   to   establish  a  single  land  agency;  the  Property  Valuation  Reform  Act  (VRA)  that  aims  to  improve   compliance   to   regular   revision   of   SMVs,   and   mandate   the   use   of   market   prices   in   LGU's   SMV,   among  others.   The  country  has  completed  a  very  long  consultative  process  at  developing  the  National  REDD+   Strategy   and   the   National   Climate   Change   Action   Plan.   As   a   result,   a   strong   constituency   has   been   established   in   support   of   these   programs.   These   would   address   the   readiness   of   the   country  for  an  eventual  REDD+  international  agreement;  while  at  the  same  time  put  in  place  the   40 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   necessary   safeguards   and   actions   to   mitigate   the   impacts   of   climate   change   and   improve   resiliency.   There   were   projects   completed,   ongoing   and   planned   in   the   lands   sector   that   sought   to   address   some   of   the   deficiencies   identified.   These   include   the   Land   Titling   Computerization   Project   (LTCP);   which   has   recently   completed   the   computerization   of   about   85%   of   the   country’s   Registry  of  Deeds  offices.  The  two  phases  of  the  Land  Administration  and  Management  Project   (LAMP)   also   initiated   investigations   of   the   policy   and   institutional   constraints   to   effective   governance  and  which  developed  a  long  term  agenda  for  the  LAM  sector,  called  the  Lands  Sector   Development   Framework   (LSDF).   The   LAMP   projects   also   tested   and   rolled   out   in   selected   provinces,  streamlined  procedures  for  titling  in  partnership  with  LGUs,  and  the  computerization   of   land   records   within   the   DENR   regional   offices.   The   ongoing   REGALA   Project   shows   the   benefits   to   LGUs   of   local   led   LAM   reforms   in   terms   of   improved   internal   revenue   generation   capacity,  better  governance  and  service  delivery,  and  enhanced  planning  and  local  development   in  participating  cities.     2.2 Land  Issues   2.2.1 Overview  of  Land  Tenure  in  the  Philippines   In   the   Philippines,   lands   are   either   public   domain   (State-­‐owned)   or   alienable   and   disposable   (A&D).   Publicly   owned   lands   include   classified   forest   lands,   mineral   lands,   and   national   parks   (1987   Constitution,   Article   XII,   Section   2),   and   as   such   are   subject   only   to   usufruct   and   resource   utilization   rights   under   certain   conditions   (Llanto,   2003).   Only   A&D   lands   can   be   privately   owned,   (which   include   agricultural   lands   and   reclassified   lands)   and   privately   owned   lands   (based   on   State   grants   or   laws   passed   since   colonization)   These   lands   are   subject   to:   1)   purchase  which  vests  ownership;  or  2)  lease  which  vest  only  the  right  to  occupy  and  use  for  the   period   agreed   upon.   In   2003,   64.8%   of   lands   classified   as   alienable   and   disposable   were   privately  owned.     Customary   ownership   rights   over   ancestral   lands   are   recognized   in   the   Constitution   and   Indigenous  Peoples‘  Rights  Act  (IPRA).    The  Supreme  Court  ruled  that  colonizers  only  acquired   dominion   over   unoccupied   or   unclaimed   portions   of   the   Philippine   archipelago,   and   ancestral   lands   are   deemed   private   lands   based   on   customary   or   native   title   outside   the   scope   of   the   Regalian  doctrine.   Aside  from  ownership,  other  forms  of  tenure  for  which  there  are  laws  governing  their  practice   in   the   Philippines   include   lease   (of   land   or   residential   units),   usufruct,   and   cooperative   housing.   Intermediate  or  temporary  tenure  systems  are  not  provided  for  by  law,  but  are  established  on   the  project  level.  Examples  of  intermediate  tenure  instruments  that  confer  use  rights  and  some   degree   of   security   of   tenure   would   be   the   certificates   of   lot   awards   issued   by   the   National   Housing   Authority   (NHA)   to   beneficiary   families,   for   units   in   resettlement   projects   or   areas   subject  to  presidential  land  proclamations.   The   primary   land   tenure   systems   operating   in   the   Philippines   are   associated   with   the   country’s   land   classification.   Thus,   lands   of   the   public   domain   or   state   lands   are   managed   through   a   system  granting  tenure  rights  to  use  and  occupy  portions  of  the  domain.  The  Philippines’  total   land   area   of   about   30   million   hectares   is   legally   classified   into   two   major   classifications:   (i)   forestlands,  and  national  parks;  and  (ii)  alienable  and  disposble  lands.       As   of   2011,   classified   forestlands   and   established   national   parks   covered   15.05   million   hectares   or   50%;   unclassified   forestland   of   0.755   million   hectares   or   3%   and   alienable   and   disposable   lands   spanning   14.19   million   hectares   or   47%.     Of   the   15.05   million   hectares   of   the   public   domain,  about  4.1  million  are  not  covered  by  any  tenure  agreement  or  instrument,  which  leaves   them  essentially  under  open  access  conditions.  (Table  5).     41 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   Most  of  the  country’s  ancestral  domains  are  located  within  forest  lands.  By  virtue  of  the  IPRA,   these  are  carved  out  of  the  public  domain  as  certificates  of  ancestral  domain  titles  (CADTs)  are   issued.  On  the  other  hand,  once  unclassified  forest  lands  are  determined  suitable  for  alienation   and  disposition;  these  will  form  part  of  areas  subject  to  titling.     Table  5.  Land  Tenure  Instruments  in  Forest  Lands9   No.   LTI  Type   Number   Area  (has)   1   Timber  License  Agreement  (TLA)    3      177,085.00   2   Industrial  Forest  Management  Agreement  (IFMA)        146   1,034,192   3   Socialized   Industrial   Forest   Management   Agreement   1,872            35,918   (SIFMA)   4   Agroforestry  Farm  Lease  Agreements  (AFFLA)        8                1,275   5   Tree  Farm  Lease  Agreement  (TFLA)            75              6,815   6   Forestland   Grazing   Management   Agreement   (FLGMA      325              89,634   &  FLGA)     7   Special  Land  Use  Permit  (SLP)    175   889   8   Special  Land  Use  Lease  Agreement    (SPLULA)          17                          87   9   Forest   Land   Use   Agreements   for   Tourism   Purposes          32                    992   (FLAgT)   10   Special  Forest  Land  Use  Agreement  (FLAg)          15                2,592   11   Community-­‐Based   Forest   Management   Program       (CBFMP)   11.1              CBFM  Agreement   1,790       1,633,892.11   11.2   Other  CBFM  Tenure  (CSC,  FLMA,  CFSA,  CFP,  etc.)     3,314   3,200,024.02   12   Approved  CADT  and  CALT          414   4,276,639.25   13   PACBRMA   (protected   area   community   based                58            22,240.03   resource  management  agreements)   14   Areas  under  Other  Management  Arrangements         14.1   Philippine  National  Oil  Corporation  (PNOC)        266,326.00   14.2   National  Power  Corporation    (NPC)        337,721.00   14.3   National  Irrigation  Administration              22,243.00   14.4   Co-­‐Management  Agreement  with  LGUs        153      485,536.65     TOTAL   8,427   11,668,974.71     Total  forestland     15,805,325.00     Tenured     11,668,974.71     Untenured        4,136,350.29   There   are   no   comprehensive   estimates   of   the   population   occupying   the   forest   lands,   national   parks  and  other  portions  of  the  public  domain.  In  2000,  it  was  estimated  that  some  20  Million   Filipinos,   representing   about   26%   of   the   country’s   population,   live   in   the   uplands10.   In   the   1980s,   a   more   comprehensive   study   was   undertaken   which   estimated   that   about   one   third   of   the  population  live  in  the  uplands11     The   country’s   14.19   Million   of   alienable   and   disposable   lands   are   given   to   private   ownership;   and  subject  to  a  system  of  titling,  purchases,  leases,  registration  and  recording.  This  includes  the   agricultural  lands  subject  to  redistribution  under  the  CARP.     Figure   4   illustrates   the   major   land   classification   in   the   Philippines,   while   Table   10   shows   the   major  land  classifications,  responsible  agencies  and  population  estimates  in  these  lands12.     Table  6  shows  the  land  tenure  typology  in  the  Philippines,  following  the  LGAF.   9  Philippine  Forestry  Statistics,  2011.  Note  that  this  does  not  reflect  the  4.06  million  of  terrestrial  protected  areas  in  the  Philippines.     10  www.fao.org/docrep/009/ag256e/AG256E02.htm.   11  Cruz,  Ma.  Concepcion,  et.al.   Population   Pressure   and   Migration:   Implications   for   Upland   Development   in   the   Philippines,   Journal  of  Philippine  Development,  1988,  Vol.  XV,  No.  1-­‐b.   12  The  areas  within  forest  lands  and  national  parks  include  those  claimed  by  indigenous  peoples.  The  4.3  Million  hectares  represent   only  those  portions  of  ancestral  domains  where  CADTs  have  been  issued.     42 LGAF  Philippines   Final  Report   August  2013   Table  6.  Land  Classifications,  Responsible  Agencies  and  Population  Estimates   Land  Classifications   Responsible  Agencies   Area  Estimates   Population  Estimates   Alienable  and  disposable   LRA-­‐RoD  for  registration       lands   Lands  Management  Bureau       • Urban  and  rural   for  titling  of  public   residential  lands   alienable  and  disposable   14.19  million  hectares   No  estimates13     lands   • Agricultural  lands     Department  of  Agrarian   • Public  alienable  and   Reform  for  redistribution   disposable  lands   Public  lands         • Forest  lands   DENR  and  other  agencies   15.05  million  hectares   20  million  (estimates)     for  watersheds  under   • National   jurisdiction  of  other   parks/protected  area   agencies     • Mineral  lands     • Other  reservations     Ancestral  domains   NCIP   7.7  million  (estimates)   12-­‐14  million  (estimates)   13  By  deduction,  the  estimate  of  population  in  these  areas  could  reach  58.3  million.  That  is,  total  population  of  92.3  M  as  of  2010;   minus  the  34  Million  population  of  IPs  and  upland  occupants. 43 Table  7.  Summary  of  Philippine  Land  Tenure  Typology14         Tenure  Type   Legal  Recognition  and  Characteristics   Remarks   Established  Tenure  in  Private  and  Public  Land   Registered/titled  individual   Legal  Recognition:  RA  386  as  amended     property  ownership  in  Urban  and   (Book  II  of  the  Philippine  Civil  Code  –   Rural  Areas   Property  Ownership  and  its   Modifications);  PD  1529  or  the  Philippine     Land  Registration  Decree  of  1978;  CA  141   Full  freehold     or  the  Public  Land  Act;  CA  2259  or  the   Cadastral  Act;  RA  6657  or  the   -­‐Judicial  Decrees/Titles   Comprehensive  Agrarian  Reform  Act;  RA   -­‐Miscellaneous  Sales  Patents   10023  or  the  Residential  Free  Patent  Act     -­‐Residential  Free  Patents     -­‐delayed  freehold  titles  that  have   Registration/Recording:  Recorded  in  the   matured  or  prescribed  into  full   Registry  as  maintained  in  the  local   freehold   Registry  of  Deeds  offices  in  cities  or   provinces       Delayed  freehold   -­‐  Free  Patent  (Agricultural)     -­‐Homestead  (Agricultural)   Transferability:  Yes.  Transferable  with  no   -­‐CLOAs  (Agricultural  –  Agrarian   restriction  for  full  freehold.    Delayed   Reform)     freehold  titles  have  restriction  on  transfer   and  mortgages  ranging  from  5  to  25  years.   Registered/titled  private   Legal  Recognition:    RA  386;  PD  1529;  RA     ownership  of  groups/communal   4726  or  the  Philippine  Condominium  Act   of  1966.;  RA  6657;  Republic  Act  8371  or     Condominium  Titles  (Shared  equity   the  Indigenous  Peoples  Rights  Act   tenure)   Registration/Recording:  Yes.    Titles  are   registered/recorded  in  the  local  registry   Collective  CLOAs  (Agricultural  –   office   Agrarian)   Transferability:  Yes.  Subject  to  certain   restrictions  on  common  areas.   CADT/CALTs  of  Indigenous  Peoples   in  the  Ancestral  Domain/Land   Claims   Unregistered  private  ownership     Legal  Recognition:    RA  386  Book  II  –  Civil   Formalization  of  these  lands  can  be   Code;    CA  141  (Title  III,  Chapter  VIII,   done  either  through  judicial  or     Section  65);  RA  730;  RA  10023   administrative  process.     This  refers  to  land  which  have   (Residential  Free  Patent);  PD  1529;       qualified  with  the  30  years     prescription  and  occupant  have  been   Registration/Recording:     The  judicial  process  involves   deemed  to  have  acquired  an   confirmation  of  imperfect  titles  by  filing   imperfect  title.   Eligible  for  Registration  upon   petitions  for  ordinary  land  registration   formalization.   proceedings  through  the  Municipal  or     Regional  Trial  Courts.     In  the  case  of  Residential  Free     Patents  the  prescription  period  is  10   In  cases  where  patents  have  already  been   years.   issued  but  still  unregistered,  the  actual   Titling  can  also  be  done   patents  are  usually  held  pending  at  the   administratively.    Administrative  titling   RoD.    The  records  of  the  patents  issued   through  three  (3)  tracks  depending  on   14  Extracted   from   Land   Tenure   Typology,   LGAF   Philippines   Country   Study.   January   2013.   Prepared   by   Brian   S.   Garcia,   LGAF  Land  Tenure  and  Administration  Expert.  Land  Equity  Technology  Services,  Inc.   Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report       Tenure  Type   Legal  Recognition  and  Characteristics   Remarks   are  maintained  by  the  agencies  which   the  qualification  of  the  land  and  the   issued  the  patent.    Compliance  with  the   qualification  of  the  occupant/applicant.   requirements,  usually  payment  of  fees,  by   Formalization  can  be  done  through   the  grantee  shall  cause  the  patents  to  be   Miscellaneous  Sales,  either  by  public   registered.   auction  or  direct  sales,  or  starting  in   2010  through  issuance  of  Free  Patents     to  residential  lands.     Transferability:  Possible.    Possessory   The  enactment  of  RA  10023  was   rights  are  usually  transferred  informally.     expected  to  fast-­‐track  the  titling  of   The  relevant  laws  recognize  the  transfer   residential  lands  in  cities  and   of  possessory  rights  even  if  informal  with   municipalities  which  have  long  been   the  provisions  of  taking   untitled.    However,  the  accomplishment   possession/occupation  of  predecessors-­‐in   appears  to  be  much  lower  than   interest.     expected  with  less  than  100,000   residential  free  patents  issued  as  of   2012.   Registered   government   Legal  Recognition:  RA  386  Book  II  –  Civil   RA  10023  provides  for  the  issuance  of   ownership   including   insular   Code;   special  patents  over  public  land  actually   properties   and   undisposed   friar   occupied  and  used  for  public  schools,   lands     municipal  halls,  public  plazas  or  parks   Registration/Recording:   and  other  government  institutions  for   Presidential  Proclamation  is  required.     public  use  or  purpose.    Since  the   Unless  the  occupation  has  been  officially   enactment  of  this  law  no  government   proclaimed  said  occupation/ownership   lands  have  been  titled  under  this   cannot  be  registered  and  recorded.     provision.    The  implementation  of  this   Special  patents  issued  by  LMB  are   provision  of  RA  10023  is  currently   registered  in  the  local  registry  offices   under  review  since  the  Office  of  the   where  the  property  is  located   President  is  concerned  that  this  can  be   abused  by  some  LGUs.         Transferability:      Possible.  But  any  further   disposition  of  any  land  titled  under  special   patents  requires  Congressional  approval   for  those  named  under  national   government  agencies  and  their  respective   Sanggunian  (local  councils)  for  those   under  the  name  of  local  government.   Temporary  or  Provisional  Tenure   Leases   and   rentals   in   Private   Legal  Recognition:  RA  386    Civil  Code   There  is  no  requirement  and  no   Lands     Book  II  and  Book  IV  (Laws  on  Obligations   provision  for  registration  of  rentals   and  Contracts)     particularly  short  term  ones.   Registration/Recording:  Possible   Leases  can  be  recorded/annotated  in  the   titles  at  the  registry.       Transferability:  Yes,  subject  to  the   lease/rental  agreement   Leases  and  Rental  in  Public  Lands   Legal  Recognition:  RA  386    Civil  Code   With  most  of  government  lands   Book  II  and  Book  IV     unregistered  there  is  also  no  means  of   registering  long  term  leases  in     government  lands.    In  few  where   Registration/Recording:  Possible   ownership  is  also  registered  with  either   a  national  government  agency  or  local   Transferability:  Possible.   government,  long  term  leases  can  be   registered   Tenure  instruments  are  used  as  means   to  recognize  use  and  occupation  in   45 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report       Tenure  Type   Legal  Recognition  and  Characteristics   Remarks   public  domain.  See  Table  9.   Emerging  Tenure   Occupation  in  unclassified  public   Legal  Recognition:  None,  until  the  land  is     lands   classified  either  as  A&D  or  as  forestland   then  the  appropriate  tenurial  instrument     can  be  issued  as  appropriate       Registration/Recording:    No,  until   classified  and  formalized     Transferability:    No,  unless  formalized   Informal  occupation  and    use  in   Legal  Recognition:  None.    But   Informal  settlers  in  the  Philippine   privately  owned    and  government   formalization  possible  pursuant  to  the   context,  is  defined  as  households  whose   lands  (informal  settlement)   UDHA  Law   tenure  status  is  “rent-­‐free  without   consent  of  owners.”     UDHA  uses  the  term  homeless  and   Registration/Recording:  No   underprivileged  citizens.     The  UDHA  required  the  LGUs  and  NHA   Transferability:  No.     to  conduct  a  census  of  informal  settlers.     However,  only  a  handful  of  LGUs     conduct  regular  “censuses”  and  report   their  findings  to  HUDCC.     The  UDHA  also  explicitly  declares  that   “squatter  evictions  will  be  discouraged   as  a  practice.”   2.2.2 History  and  current  status  of  land  policies   In  the  Philippines  prior  to  the  Spanish  Colonization  land  is  held  communal  in  nature.    With   the   barangay   as   the   administrative   unit,   land   is   tilled   by   all,   including   the   datu   and   his   family,   and   everybody   has   access   to   land   for   their   subsistence.   These   arrangements   are   normally  governed  by  customary  laws  and  established  traditions  (Constantino,  1975).  The   notion   of   private   ownership   of   land   was   irrelevant   in   the   barangay   social   order,   being   an   extension   of   the   family.   It   was   said   that   during   this   time,   it   did   not   make   sense   to   claim   particular   tracts   permanently,   given   there   was   much   land   available   (Francia,   2010).   Per   William   Henry   Scott,   the   first   historian   to   discuss   Philippines   pre-­‐Hispanic   land   tenure,   “these   lands   were   held   in   usufruct,   not   in   fee   simple   –   that   is   to   use   but   not   to   own   or   alienate”   (May,   2004).     These   ancestral   lands,   communal   in   use   by   the   barangays   before   the   colonization  of  the  Philippines,  are  now  recognized  as  part  of  the  ancestral  domain.       With  the  Spanish  colonization  of  the  Philippines,  the  concept  of  communal  use  was  replaced   with   the   concept   of   the   Regalian   Doctrine   and   private   individual   ownership   of   lands   through  the  adoption  of  the  Law  of  the  Indies  and  Maura  Law  or  the  Spanish  Mortgage  Law.     When  the  Philippines  was  ceded  by  Spain  to  the  United  States  of  America  by  the  Treaty  of   Paris,   the   American   introduced   the   Torren’s   System   of   Registration   based   on   the   Massachusetts  Law.      The  Americans  also  enacted  the  Friar  Lands  Act  of  1903  by  which  an   estimated  166,  000  hectares  of  friar  lands  were  acquired  for  redistribution  purposes.     46 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report The  1987  Philippine  Constitution  declares  that  all  lands  of  the  public  domain  belong  to  the   State  (Art.  7,  Sec.  2).  State  ownership  is  premised  on  the  Regalian  Doctrine  (jura  regalia),  the   legal   concept   employed   by   the   Spanish   Crown   in   claiming   exclusive   dominion   over   the   Philippine   archipelago   upon   conquest   in   1521.   Under   this   doctrine,   title   to   all   lands   became   vested   in   the   Crown,   and   private   ownership   was   acquired   only   through   royal   grants   or   decrees.   This   was   continued   during   United   States   (US)   colonization,   the   Philippine   Commonwealth   period   under   the   1935   Constitution,   and   upon   independence   in   the   1973   and   1987   Constitutions.   The   Constitution   classifies   the   public   domain   into   agricultural,   forest   or   timber,   mineral   lands   or   national   parks   (Art.   7,   Sec.   3).   Of   these,   only   public   agricultural  lands  may  be  alienated  (i.e.,  subject  of  private  ownership)  and  further  classified   by  law  according  to  use  (Art.  7,  Sec.  3).     On   November   6,   1902,   the   Philippine   Commission   enacted   Act   496   known   as   the   Land   Registration   Act   which   established   the   Torren’s   System   of   Registration   in   the   Philippines.     The   Cadastral   Act   (Act   2259)   which   was   enacted   on   February   11,   1913   provided   for   compulsory  registration  of  land  titles  with  private  ownership.  Under  this  Act,  registration  of   titles   was   judicial   in   nature.   The   enactment   of   the   Public   Land   Act   of   1936   provided   measures   by   which     public   agricultural   lands   can   be   disposed   or   alienated   through   homestead,  free  patent  (by  prescription),  sale  or  leases.   In  the  period  after  World  War  II,  government  tried  to  contribute  to  the  improvement  of  land   tenure  system  in  the  Philippines  through  the  enactment  of  land  reform  laws  such  as  Land   Reform   Act   of   1955   (redistribution   of   large   estates)   and   Agricultural   Land   Reform   Code   (abolishing   share   tenancy   arrangements).   In   1972,   a   more   decisive   land   reform   law   was   promulgated  through  Presidential  Decree  No.  27  placing  all  rice  and  corn  lands  with  more   than  seven  (7)  hectares  under  the  redistribution  program.     After  the  historic  EDSA  People  Power  revolution  the  major  land  reform  laws  are  the  1988   Comprehensive   Agrarian   Reform   Law   (CARL)   and   the   1992   Urban   Development   and   Housing  Act  (UDHA).     The   CARL   broadened   the   scope   of   rural   land   reform   by   including   private   and   public   agricultural  lands  regardless  of  crops  and  tenure  arrangements,  and  providing  for  support   services   to   agrarian   reform   beneficiaries,   including   infrastructure,   capability-­‐building   and   credit/marketing   assistance.   Lands   were   to   be   distributed   to   landless   farmers   and   farm   workers   within   a   period   of   10   years,   but   when   this   was   not   achieved,   the   law   was   extended   for  another  10  years,  and  then  again  extended  until  2014.  Up  to  this  date,  the  land  reform  in   the   Philippines   is   still   an   unfinished   business,   with   a   commitment   to   complete   land   redistribution  under  the  term  of  President  Aquino  till  2016.     The  UDHA  established  the  legal  framework  for  urban  land  reform  and  housing  for  informal   settlers,  slum  dwellers  and  other  underprivileged.  Key  provisions  include  the  prohibition  on   summary   evictions   and   demolition   of   dwellings   without   due   process   and   adequate   resettlement,  and  the  provision  of  government  loans  to  low-­‐income  households  through  the   Community  Mortgage  Program.   On   9   March   2010,   Congress   passed   Republic   Act   10023   which   aims   to   facilitate   the   registration  of  residential  lands  in  areas  which  have  been  classified  as  public  alienable  and   disposable   lands.   The   law   allows   the   issuance   of   a   free   patent   requiring   only   10   years   of   actual   occupation.   It   covers   all   lands   zoned   as   residential   areas,   including   town   sites   and   military   reservations.     By   virtue   of   this   law,   any   actual   occupant   may   apply   for   a   free   patent   for   up   to   200   square   meters   in   highly   urbanized   cities,   up   to   500   square   meters   in   other   cities,  up  to  750  in  first  and  second  class  municipalities,  and  up  to  1000  square  meters  in  all   47 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report other  municipalities.  This  law  can  facilitate  the  poor  people’s  access  to  untitled  land  in  the   urbanizing  areas.   The   Civil   Code   of   the   Philippines   (Republic   Act   386)   provides   the   general   controlling   guidelines  on  property  ownership  including  guidelines  governing  the  leases  and  rentals  of   urban  and  rural  lands.  The  Rent  Control  Act  of  2009,  on  the  other  hand,  provides  for  more   specific  regulations  on  rent  increases  for  residential  units.   Overall,   the   legal   framework   establishing   the   rules   of   access   to   secure   tenure   in   the   Philippines   favors   the   legal   acquisition   of   land   or   housing   tenure   through   ownership   or   freehold.   Rules   governing   proprietary   rights   and   the   transfer   of   ownership   of   land,   for   instance,  are  much  more  developed  than  rules  on  renting,  long-­‐term  leases,  or  usufruct.     48 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report 3 LAND  GOVERNANCE  ASSESSMENT   Module  1  -­‐  Legal  and  Institutional  Framework   INDICATORS  ASSESSED:   LGI  1  –    Recognition  of  rights  –  extent  to  which  range  of  rights  is  recognized  by        law   LGI  2  –    Enforcement  o f  rights  -­‐  whether  the  rights  recognized  by  law  are  enforced   (including  secondary  rights  as  well  as  rights  of  minorities  and  women)   LGI  3  –    Mechanisms  for  recognition  of  rights  –  consistency  and  affordability  of  rights   recognition  mechanisms  (formalization)  with  existing  tenure  practices       LGI  4  –    Restrictions  on  rights  –  justifications  of  restrictions  o n  land  rights   LGI  5  –    Clarity  of  institutional  mandates  -­‐  clarity  of  mandates  of  land  institutions,   effectiveness  of  the  land  administration  system  in  avoiding  horizontal  and  vertical   overlaps,  and  the  ability  to  share  land-­‐related  information   LGI  6  –    Participation  and  equity  in  land  policies  -­‐  equity  and  transparency  of  land  policy   formulation  and  implementation   LGI  1  -­‐  Recognition  of  Rights             Score   LGI-­‐ Topic   A   B   C   D   Dim     LGI  1  -­‐  Recognition  of  Rights     1   i   Land  tenure  rights  recognition  (rural)                   Assesses  the  extent  of  the  legal  recognition  of  the  rights  held  by  households   in  rural  areas.   1   ii   Land  tenure  rights  recognition  (urban)                   Assesses  the  extent  of  the  legal  recognition  of  the  rights  held  by  households   in  urban  areas.   1   iii   Rural  group  rights  recognition                   Assesses  the  extent  to  which  regulations  concerning  group  rights  in  rural   areas  define  how  user  groups  can  organize  themselves,  impose  internal   rules,  interact  with  the  outside,  and  call  on  external  agencies  to  enforce   rules.   1   iv   Urban  group  rights  recognition  in  informal  areas                   Assesses  the  extent  to  which  regulations  concerning  group  rights  in  urban   areas  define  how  user  groups  can  organize  themselves,  impose  internal   rules,  interact  with  the  outside,  and  call  on  external  agencies  to  enforce   rules.   1   v   Opportunities  for  tenure  individualization                   This  assesses  whether  the  law  provides  adequate  mechanisms  to  accompany   the  transition  of  customary  or  collective  tenure  towards  individualization  if   so  desired  by  land  users.     49 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report Existing  legal  framework  provides  for  recognition  of  rights  held  by  more  than  90%  of   the  country’s  rural  population.     The   country   has   sufficient   policies   and   laws   to   recognize   rights   of   more   than   90%   of   the   rural  population  either  through  a  range  of  freehold,  customary  rights,  forest  and  protected   area  land  tenure,  and  even  tenants  in  agricultural  lands.   The   existing   Torrens   System   of   Registration   recognizes   the   rights   of   individuals   in   privately   held   lands.   The   Comprehensive   Agrarian   Reform   Program   (CARP)   and   related   laws   allowed   the   distribution   of   lands   to   actual   tillers,   tenants   and   other   eligible   farmer   beneficiaries   (FBs),   subject   to   a   maximum   five-­‐hectare   retention   limit   on   agricultural   land   ownership.   This   law   also   allowed   agricultural   cooperatives   or   organizations   to   be   issued   collective   certificates  of  land  ownership  award  (CLOAs).     In  the  case  of  public  lands,  existing  laws  allow  for  recognition  of  rights  of  actual  occupants;   either  through  formal  titles  in  lands  which  have  been  classified  as  agricultural  alienable  and   disposable  lands,  or  issuance  of  tenure  instruments  in  what  are  considered  to  be  part  of  the   country’s  public  domain.     For  public  agricultural  alienable  and  disposable  lands,  the  Public  Land  Act  of  1936  provided   measures   by   which   these   types   of   properties   can   be   disposed   or   alienated   through   homestead,   free   patent   (by   prescription)   or   by   leases.   Essentially,   the   issuance   of   Free   Patent,   which   is   the   most   commonly   used   form   of   disposition,   recognizes   long   term,   unchallenged  possession  through  the  use  of  non-­‐documentary  forms  of  evidence.     In   lands   of   the   public   domain   (classified   forest   lands   and   protected   areas),   the   rights   of   occupants   are   recognized   through   a   range   of   individual   or   collective   instruments   such   as   community  based  forest  management  agreements,  socialized  industrial  forest  management   agreements,  and  certificates  of  stewardship  agreements  (CSCs).  These  have  a  duration  of  25   years,   which   are   renewable   for   another   25   years   maximum.   There   is   no   clear   policy   though,   on  what  happens  once  all  such  agreements  expire.  Currently,  there  are  a  number  of  expiring   CSCs,  and  clear  guidelines  have  not  been  issued.  In  protected  areas,  the  rights  of  occupants   thereto   are   recognized   provided   they   have   been   there   prior   to   establishment.   Long   term   protected   area   community   based   resource   management   agreements   (PACBRMA)   are   issued   by   the   DENR   to   allow   such   communities   continued   occupation   subject   to   certain   restrictions.     Existing   laws   provide   for   recognition   of   rights   held   by   urban   population   (70-­‐90%),   except  those  of  informal  settlers     The   Land   Registration   Act,   Cadastral   Act   and   Property   Registration   Act   provide   legislative   and   policy   support   for   titling   of   urban   lands   for   residential,   commercial   and   other   purposes   through   judicial   titling.     Commonwealth   Act   141   also   includes   provision   for   titling   of   residential   and   commercial   lands   through   Miscellaneous   Sales   Patents.     Republic   Act   730   allowed  for  titling  of  lands  actually  used  for  residential  purposes  without  the  requirement   of  public  auction  (direct  sale).       On   9   March   2010,   Congress   passed   Republic   Act   10023   which   aims   to   facilitate   the   registration  of  residential  lands  in  areas  which  have  been  classified  as  public  alienable  and   disposable   lands.     Essentially,   it   extended   the   titling   instrument   which   used   to   apply   only   to   public  alienable  and  disposable  agricultural  lands  to  residential  lands.    It  also  reduced  the   number  of  years  of  actual  possession  required  before  a  patent  can  be  issued  (i.e.,  from  30  to   10  years).    It  covers  all  lands  zoned  as  residential  areas,  including  town  sites  and  military   50 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report reservations.    By  virtue  of  this  law,  any  actual  occupant  may  apply  for  a  free  patent  for  up  to   200  square  meters  in  highly  urbanized  cities,  up  to  500  square  meters  in  other  cities,  up   to   750   in   first   and   second   class   municipalities,   and   up   to   1000   square   meters   in   all   other   municipalities.   This   law   can   facilitate   the   poor   people’s   access   to   untitled   land   in   the   urbanizing   areas;   as   long   as   they   meet   the   qualifications;   one   of   which   is   evidence   of   long   held   possession   or   occupation.     The   law   also   provided   for   titling   of   lands   claimed   by   agencies  of  the  government  through  the  issuance  of  Special  Patent.   Given   the   above,   the   rights   of   urban   informal   settlers   in   private   and   public   lands   are   not   recognized   by   law.     The   National   Housing   Authority   (NHA)   indicated   the   magnitude   of   informal   settlers   as   of   July   2011   at   total   of   1,502,336   families   or   more   than   9   million   population  which  represents  15  %  of  the  estimated  total  urban  population  of  62  million  at   the  time.   To   provide   protection   for   informal   settlers,   the   Urban   Development   and   Housing   Act   (UDHA)   was   enacted   in   1992.   It  established   the   legal   framework   for   urban   land   reform   and   housing   for   informal   settlers,   slum   dwellers   and   other   underprivileged.     Key   provisions   include   the   prohibition   on   summary   evictions   and   demolition   of   dwellings   without   due   process   and   adequate   resettlement,   and   the   provision   of   government   loans   to   low-­‐income   households  through  the  Community  Mortgage  Program  (CMP).  The  UDHA  also  provides  for   a  clear  policy  and  processes  through  which  their  rights  can  be  formalized  either  through  on-­‐ site   development   or   relocation.   This   law   mandates   local   governments   to   conduct   land   inventory,   register   informal   settlers   and   allocate   land   for   secure   tenure.   It   also   compels   housing  developers  to  provide  land  or  funds  for  social  housing.     There  are  no  more  recent  reliable  estimates  of  urban  informal  settlers  in  the  Philippines.  It   is   important   that   their   magnitude   and   distribution   be   determined   so   that   LGUs   can   integrate   tenure   improvement   concerns   for   informal   settlers   in   the   preparation   of   comprehensive  shelter  plans.    It  is  thus  essential  for  the  National  Statistics  Office  (NSO)  to   fast   track   the   census   of   informal   settlers   and   incorporate   these   in   the   socio   economic   statistics  to  serve  as  basis  for  planning  CMPs  and  land  tenure  improvements  by  LGUs.       The  tenure  of  most  groups  in  rural  areas  is  formally  recognized  and  clear  regulations   exist  regarding  groups’  internal  organization  and  legal  representation.   Considered   best   practice,   Philippine   laws   and   regulations   recognize   most   forms   of   group   rights   in   rural   areas.     These   include   collective   Certificates   of   Land   Ownership   Award   (CLOAs)  for  agrarian  reform  beneficiaries,  certificates  of  ancestral  domain  titles  (CADTs)  for   indigenous  peoples,  and  other  tenure  instruments  in  forest  lands  such  as  community  based   forest  management  agreements  (CBFMAs);  and  PACBRMA  in  protected  areas.     All   of   these   group   tenure   rights   except   for   the   CADT,   are   governed   by   duly   registered   organizations  with  internal  rules  and  procedures.    These  organizations,  commonly  referred   to   as   peoples’   organizations   or   POs,   can   enter   into   contracts   or   legal   agreements   with   other   parties  for  joint  venture  arrangements,  land  rentals,  and/or   benefit  sharing  schemes.    CADT   holders  also  have  such  rights,  but  their  organization  should  be  registered  with  government   to  enter  into  legal  contracts  with  other  parties.     Tenure  holders  in  public  forests  are  given  long  term  access  rights  for  25  years,  renewable   for   another   25   years.     In   the   case   of   CBFM,   forest   occupants   are   assisted   in   forming   a   People’s   Organizations   (POs)   which   is   then   given   the   privilege   to   occupy,   possess,   utilize   51 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report and   develop   forestlands   and   its   resources   and   to   be   entitled   to   the   sustainable   utilization   of   forest  resources  within  their  areas,  but  with  corresponding  obligation  to  protect  their  areas.       Group   tenure   in   informal   urban   areas   is   formally   recognized   and   clear   regulations   exist  regarding  the  internal  organization  and  legal  representation  of  groups.   Also   considered   best   practice   in   land   governance,   recognition   of   urban   group   tenure   in   informal   urban   areas   is   possible   through   the   CMP   under   the   UDHA.   It   is   directed   at   small   and   medium-­‐sized   informal   settler   communities   inhabiting   privately   owned   lands   whose   owners   are   willing   to   sell   their   property.   Presidential   proclamations   cover   informal   settlers   occupying  government-­‐owned  lands  that  have  not  been  used  for  the  purpose  for  which  they   were  acquired  or  allocated.  Finally,  government  and  private  sector  employees  who  want  to   buy   land   and/or   construct   or   improve   a   house   apply   for   housing   loans   provided   by   government  pension  funds  and  financial  institutions.   CMP   developed   as   a   result   of   the   need   to   resolve   land   tenure   problems   faced   by   communities   threatened   with   eviction.     Organizations   of   the   urban   poor   lobbied   for   the   enactment   of   the   Urban   Development   and   Housing   Act   in   1992,   which   established   legal   safeguards   against   forced   evictions   and   mandated   the   implementation   of   social   housing   programmes   for   informal   settlers.   This   law   gave   stronger   legal   basis   and   additional   incentives  to  presidential  land  proclamations  and  programs  such  as  the  CMP.  Given  that  the   CMP   was   designed   to   be   a   demand-­‐driven   approach,   it   is   the   community   needing   assistance   which   decides   to   participate   in   the   programme   and   initiates   the   moves   leading   to   such   participation.       Opportunities   exist   for   tenure   individualization   of   collective   rural   and   urban   group   rights,  but  the  procedure  is  costly  and  takes  a  long  time  to  complete   In   the   rural   areas,   opportunities   exist   for   tenure   individualization   of   collective   CLOAs   and   CADTs.   The   subdivision   of   collective   CLOAs   into   individual   CLOAs   for   agrarian   reform   beneficiaries  (ARBs)  require  the  conduct  of  further  documentation  of  ARBs  and  they  have  to   undergo  an  inclusion  and  exclusion  process,  conduct  and  approval  of  parcellary  survey,  and   the   issuance   and   registration   of   individual   CLOAs.   This   could   prove   to   be   a   difficult   and   expensive   process,   particularly   the   survey   and   registration   of   individual   rights.   DAR   provides   a   very   small   budget   for   surveys   that   is   considered   way   below   the   tariff   prescribed   by   Surveyors.   The   process   also   involves   subdivision   survey   review   and   approval   at   the   DENR,  which  usually  take  a  long  time  to  complete.     The   demand   for   individualization   is   increasing   among   LGUs,   who   have   concerns   that   the   presence  of  collective  CLOAs  have  prevented  them  from  collecting  the  appropriate  amount   of  property  taxes,  since  it  is  not  clear  who  and  how  payments  can  be  apportioned  among  the   members.   In   the   interest   of   strengthening   individual   rights,   a   few   LGUs   have   started   to     provide   assistance   for   the   subdivision   of   collective   CLOAs,   in   many   instances   shouldering   the  expenses  associated  with  surveys  and  registration.     Individualization   of   communal   rights   is   provided   for   under   section   12   of   the   Indigenous   Peoples  Rights  Act  (IPRA).  However,  the  law  that  applies  would  be  the  Commonwealth  Act   141  or  the  Land  Registration  Act  496.  Thus,  only  a  few  have  availed  of  this  provision,  since  it   essentially   runs   counter   to   most   common   customary   laws   of   communal   ownership.   Only   17,293  hectares  have  been  covered  by  257  certificates  of  ancestral  land  titles  (CALTs).     In   the   urban   areas,   tenure   individualization   is   possible   only   after   the   community  has   fully   acquired  the  property  under  the  CMP.  Amortizing  owners  under  the  CMP  or  of  resettlement   lots   and/or   housing   units   enjoy   secure   tenure   without   the   right   to   sell   the   subject   lot   or   52 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report housing  unit.  This  restriction  is  contained  in  legally  binding  contracts.  But  while  they  cannot   sell  their  units/lots,  amortizing  owners  cannot  be  evicted  and  therefore  virtually  enjoy  full   tenure   security.     Once   the   housing   loan   is   paid   in   full,   former   informal   settlers   who   have   either   become   beneficiaries   of   resettlement   programmes   and   the   CMP   acquires   a   freehold   or  a  full  title  which  is  the  highest  form  of  tenure.  With  full  ownership  comes  the  right  to  sell   the  land  and/or  housing  unit.   LGI  2  -­‐  Enforcement  of  Rights               Score   LGI-­‐ Topic   A   B   C   D   Dim     Enforcement  of  Rights   2   i   Surveying/mapping  and  registration  of  claims  on  communal  or                   indigenous  land   Assesses  the  extent  to  which  boundaries  to  communal  land  have  been   surveyed  /  mapped  and  the  communal  rights  registered.   2   ii   Registration  of  individually  held  land  in  rural  areas           Assesses  the  extent  to  which  majority  of  individual  properties  in  rural   areas  are  formally  registered15   2   iii   Registration  of  individually  held  land  in  urban  areas                   Extent  to  which  majority  of  individual  properties  in  urban  areas  are   formally  registered.   2   iv   Women’s  rights  are  recognized  in  practice  by  the  formal  system                   (urban/rural)   Extent  to  which  the  tenure  rights  of  women  are  enforced  through  the   registration  of  land  in  their  names  or  jointly   2   v   Condominium  regime  that  provides  for  appropriate  management  of                   common  property   2   vi   Compensation  for  loss  of  rights  due  to  land  use  changes                   2   via   Rural  to  urban  conversion           2   vib   Establishment  of  national  parks/protected  areas           Customary  rights  are  recognized  by  law,  but  coverage  needs  to  be  improved   The   recognition   of   customary   rights   by   indigenous   peoples   (IPs)   is   strongly   protected   by   the   Constitution   and   more   specifically   through   the   Indigenous   Peoples   Rights   Act   (IPRA).   Following  this  law,  the  National  Commission  on  Indigenous  Peoples  (NCIP)  has  undertaken   a   program   of   survey,   mapping   and   registration   of   ancestral   domains   with   the   aim   of   issuing   a  certificate  of  ancestral  domain  title  (CADT).  Since  the  program  started  in  2002,  a  total  of   158   CADTs   have   been   approved   and   registered   covering   4.3   million   hectares.   In   addition,   the  NCIP  has  also  approved  257  certificates  of  ancestral  land  titles  (CALTs),  covering  some   17,293  hectares.    Combined,  these  represent  about  56%  of  the  total  area  occupied  by  some   12-­‐15   million   IPs   in   the   Philippines.   This   is   still   below   the   90%   coverage,   which   is   the   accepted  LGAF  standard  of  best  practice.     There   has   been   a   slow   down   of   CADT   registration   since   2012;   where   only   2   CADTs   were   approved,   compared   to   the   period   2008-­‐2010   period   where   as   high   as   45   CADTs   (2009)   with   an   area   of   more   than   1   million   hectares   had   been   approved.   Approximately   3.4   million   hectares  of  ancestral  lands  are  either  undergoing  social  preparation,  survey  or  on  process   15  ‘Registered’  does  not  necessarily  mean  that  the  final  certificate  or  title  has  been  issued.  ‘Registered’  may  mean  that  the  rights   are  recorded  unambiguously  in  the  land  administration  system  and  there  are  generally  few  disputes  over  the  recorded   information.   53 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report for  approval  of  CADT  or  CALT.  The  2009  draft  IP  Master  Plan    targeted  the  completion  of  the   remaining  more  than  3  million  hectares  in  five  year  time.     Acceleration   of   CADT   issuance   is   affected   by   tribal   boundary   conflicts,   limited   funds   to   undertake  the  necessary  surveys;  and  issues  related  to  overlaps  with  other  tenure  rights.  In   January   2012,   the   NCIP,   DENR,   DAR   and   LRA/DoJ   signed   a   Joint   Administrative   Order   suspending  the  registration  of  all  CADT  applications  which  are  subject  of  overlaps  with  DAR   and   DENR;   until   such   time   that   these   have   been   validated   in   the   surveys,   and   appropriate   exclusion   processes   have   been   undertaken   to   take   these   out   of   the   CADT,   or   annotate   the   existence  of  other  long  term  tenure  instruments  in  the  registration  of  CADTs.     In   the   face   of   continuing   threat   to   ancestral   lands;   and   the   need   to   find   suitable   areas   for   agricultural   investments   for   food   security,   the   mapping   of   registration   of   the   remaining   ancestral  domains  is  an  urgent  concern.     A  large  proportion  of  individually  held  urban  and  rural  parcels  are  not  registered     Despite   the   existence   of   Public   Land   Act   since   1936;   there   remain   large   portions   of   individually  held  land  in  both  urban  and  rural  areas  that  are  not  registered.  Estimates  vary   greatly  since  there  is  no  complete  inventory  of  untitled  public  A  and  D  lands.  The  time  taken   between  cadastral  survey  to  record  the  extent  of  claims  by  land  holders  and  the  processing   of   individual   properties   has   allowed   informal   subdivision,   transfers,   mortgages   on   these   properties   even   prior   to   titling   thereby   making   it   more   complicated   as   titling   gets   further   delayed.   A   more   comprehensive   study   undertaken   under   the   Land   Administration   and   Management   Project   Phase   1   (LAMP1)   estimate   that   that   only   54%   of   an   estimated   total   24.2   million   parcels   are   titled   (13,051,132   parcels).   Of   these   70%   or   9.1   million   are   residential.16     Thus,   there   are   about   11.132   million   parcels   that   are   still   to   be   titled.   City   and   municipal   level   mapping   conducted   as   part   of   the   study   also   indicates   a   range   of   between   0.9  –  34%  untitled  lands  in  the  urban  centers  of  the  Philippines.    The  mega  urban  areas  of   National  Capital  Region,  Cebu  and  Davao  reported  less  than  20%  untitled  lands.    With  the   enactment   of   Republic   Act   10023,   the   DENR   has   been   able   to   title   at   least   100,000   residential  lands  in  2011  –  2012.  It  is  safe  to  assume  that  at  least  50%  of  individual  lands  in   urban  areas  are  formally  registered.   Any  country  with  so  much  wealth  remaining  informal,  can  expect  that  the  economy  would   have  a  limited  contribution  from  the  property  sector.     The  constraints  to  titling  have  been  assessed  and  addressed  in  some  ways.  Under  the  two   phases   of   LAMP,   expedited   procedures   for   processing   of   titles   were   tested   and   rolled   out   in   a   few   provinces.   These   include   simplifying   the   requirements   and   more   reliance   on   non-­‐ documentary   forms   of   evidence   to   recognize   long   term,   unchallenged   possession.   Modifications   to   the   procedures   have   likewise   been   made   to   provide   for   stronger   partnership  with  LGUs,  thereby  reducing  the  cost  to  the  national  government,  at  the  same   time   enhancing   the   ability   of   LGUs   to   properly   collect   property   taxes.   More   recently,   Republic   Act   10023   was   enacted,   paving   the   way   for   streamlined   processes   for   titling   of   residential  properties  within  size  limits;  and  reducing  the  formal  fees  that  have  to  be  paid.   The  DENR  has  also  recently  allocated  substantial  investments  in  the  completion  of  cadastral   surveys;  however,  this  does  not  extend  to  titling  of  surveyed  properties.     In   addition   to   securing   ownership   for   the   remaining   46%   of   A&D   land   parcels,   LAMP   has   proposed   in   the   land   laws   and   the   tenancy   study   reports   that   secondary   rights   be   16  Philippine  –  Australia  Land  Administration  and  Management  Project.  Land  Tenure  Study.  2004   54 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report registered,   such   as   long   term   leases.     The   use   of   the   land   tax   declaration   certificate   as   a   proxy   for   a   title   deed   is   very   extensive   (21.5   M   less   13.1   M,   or   8.4   Million   parcels)   in   the   rural  areas.  This  fact  when  seen  in  the  light  of  experience  in  LAMP  land  titling  municipalities   in  Leyte  where  the  SNS  (boundary  adjudication  document)  is  perceived  as  providing  good   evidence   of   land   tenure,   should   lead   policy   makers   to   re-­‐think   the   traditional   approach   to   land   titling   in   the   Philippines,   so   that   the   whole   country   could   enjoy   tenure   security   in   a   reasonably   shorter   time-­‐frame   and   at   a   reduced   cost   than   otherwise   will   be   the   case.   The   case  is  different  however,  in  the  urban  areas,  where  city  dwellers  and  informal  settlers  have   preference   for   formal   titles.   The   issuance   of   intermediate   instruments   would   have   to   be   tested  to  improve  efficiency  and  cost  effectiveness  in  recognition  of  long  term  rights.   Women’s  land  rights  are  recognized,  but  are  not  properly  recorded  in  the  registry     While   the   law   does   not   discriminate   the   registration   of   properties   in   the   name   of   women   owners   either   individually   or   jointly;   in   practice,   titles   are   issued   in   the   name   of   the   head   of   the   family,   usually   the   male   member.   Under   LAMP,   such   practice   has   been   rectified,   such   that   more   detailed   investigation   of   whether   possession   as   acquired   through   the   male   or   female   spouse,   and   subsequently   recorded.   However,   this   is   not   widely   implemented   in   other  areas  outside  of  the  LAMP  covered  provinces.     Moreover,   the   fact   remains   that   no   gender   data   are   available   on   the   ownership   of   lands   titled   through   judicial   means   (i.e.,   Original   Certificate   of   Title   and   Transfer   Certificate   of   Title).   This   is   because   the   land   records   database   of   the   Register   of   Deeds   (ROD)   are   not   gender-­‐disaggregated.  The  process  of  title  registration  does  not  require  the  identification  of   sex/gender  of  the  title  holders.  Gender-­‐  disaggregation  of  land  records  is  also  difficult  for  all   types   of   land   titles   –   both   administratively   and   judicially   issued   –   because   land   tenure   judicial   forms   do   not   bear   the   sexes   of   the   owners   -­‐-­‐   sex-­‐disaggregation   at   this   period   relies   merely  on  the  sounds  of  the  names  of  holders  –  and  do  not  indicate  the  nature  of  ownership   of  lands  titled  to  married  individuals  (i.e.,  individual  or  conjugal  properties).  To  determine   the  true  extent  of  any  gender  bias,  would  require  the  RODs  to  keep  a  record  of  gender  data   for  ownership  of  all  parcels  and  to  keep  it  up  to  date  as  transfers  occur.   Common  property  under  condominiums  is  recognized  and  there  are  clear  provisions   in   the   law   to   establish   arrangements   for   the   management   and   maintenance   of   this   common  property   Republic  Act  4726  or  the  Philippine  Condominium  Act  of  1966  provides  for  clear  policies  on   the  management  of  common  property  in  condominiums.   Section  5  of  the  said  law  defines  condominium  as  an  interest  in  real  property  consisting  of   interest   in   a   unit   and   an   undivided   interest   in   common,   directly   or   indirectly,   in   the   land   upon  which  it  is  located  and  other  common  areas  of  the  building.  Further,  the  law  specifies   that   title   to   the   common   areas,   including   the   land,   may   be   held   by   a   corporation   specially   formed   for   the   purpose.   in   which   the   holders   of   interest   are   automatic   members.   to   the   exclusion  of  others,  in  proportion  to  the  appurtenant  interest  of  their  respective  units  in  the   common  areas.   There  is  compensation  for  loss  of  rights  due  to  rural  to  urban  conversion,  but  not  in   establishment  of  protected  areas     Current  policies  do  not  provide  for  compensation  for  loss  of  rights  due  to  land  use  changes   resulting   from   the   establishment   of   protected   areas;   since   the   areas   subject   to   these   are   essentially  part  of  the  public  domain.  Occupants  therefore,  do  not  have  secure  rights,  unless   they   have   tenure   instruments   prior   to   establishment.   Nonetheless,   in   all   cases,   there   are   55 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report legal  recognition  of  prior  rights,  such  as  community  based  forest  management  agreements,   mining  exploration  permits;  and  in  practice,  these  are  allowed  to  expire  until  their  full  term.   However,   economic   activities   may   be   affected   if   these   are   not   compatible   with   conservation   objectives.   For   communities   without   tenure,   these   are   formalized   through   a   process   of   review  and  issuance  of  community  based  protected  area  resource  management  agreements,   which   allow   them   to   continue   their   occupation,   enjoy   the   benefits   of   sustainable   resource   use  compatible  with  protected  area  management,  for  a  period  of  25  years.     In   the   case   of   rural   to   urban   conversion   to   residential,   commercial   or   industrial   purposes,   the  process  goes  through  a  rigorous  process  by  DAR,  upon  approval  by  the  LGU  of  a  zoning   ordinance,   specifying   the   reclassification   of   the   lands.   These   processes   can   also   happen   in   private  agricultural  lands,  in  which  case,  there  are  direct  negotiations  between  the  owners   and   buyers.   Farmers   affected   can   also   enter   into   joint   venture   arrangements   with   corporations,   and   they   can   jointly   apply   for   conversion.   The   proliferation   of   large   subdivisions   to   meet   urban   housing   demand,   have   mainly   been   done   through   these   conversions,  or  in  the  parlance  of  LGUs,  changes  in  zoning.  The  law  provides  for  disturbance   compensation   equivalent   to   five   (5)   times   the   average   of   the   gross   harvests   on   the   landholding   during   the   last   five   preceding   calendar   years   or   a   certain   percentage   of   the   converted  land,  whichever  is  higher,  as  determined  by  DAR.17     The  more  important  issue  however,  is  the  extent  to  which  such  conversion  may  be  allowed   all  throughout  the  Philippines,  the  location  of  such  land  use  changes;  and  their  overall  effect   on   the   total   food   security   of   the   country.   These   issues   are   addressed   in   the   proposed   National  Land  Use  Act,  which  has  been  in  Congress  for  about  two  decades.  It  is  hoped  that   there  will  be  better  rationalization  of  land  use  changes,  such  that  these  do  not  necessarily   affect  the  ability  of  the  country  to  meet  its  land  requirement  for  various  uses.     LGI  3  -­‐  Mechanisms  for  recognition  of  rights               Score   LGI-­‐ Topic   A   B   C   D   Dim     Mechanisms  for  Recognition   3   i   Use  of  non-­‐documentary  forms  of  evidence  to  recognize  rights                   3   ii   Formal  recognition  of  long-­‐term,  unchallenged  possession                   Assesses  the  presence  of    legal  process  to  recognize  long-­‐term,  unchallenged   occupation  of  land   3   iii   First-­‐time  registration  on  demand  is  not  restricted  by  inability  to  pay                   formal  fees     iiia   Under  Free  Patent  mode  –  RA  10023             iiib   Under  the  Miscellaneous  Sales  Patent  (MSP)  mode             iiic   Under  the  judicial  titling  mode           3   iv   First-­‐time  registration  does  not  entail  significant  informal  fees18                   Assesses  as  to  whether  the  demand  for  first  time  registration  is  not   restricted  by  demands  for  unofficial  or  informal  fees.   3   v   Formalization  of  residential  housing  is  feasible  and  affordable.                   3   vi   Efficient  and  transparent  process  to  formally  recognize  long-­‐term                   unchallenged  possession   Assesses  if  processes  to  regularize  the  informal  occupation  of  land  are   clearly  defined,  transparently  and  efficiently  implemented   17  R.  A.  6389.  Code  of  Agrarian  Reforms  of  the  Philippines.  1971   18  Rating   is   between   B   and   C.   Amount   of   informal   fees   is   “not   significantly   less”   than   formal   fees   but   generally   not   equal   to   the   formal  fees.  The  score  given  therefore  was  between  B  and  C.     56 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report Policies   and   procedures   allow   the   use   of   non-­‐documentary   forms   of   evidence   to   obtain  recognition  of  a  claim  to  property  along  with  other  documents     Although   still   considered   second   best   practice,   there   is   wide   use   of   non-­‐documentary   forms   of  evidence  along  with  other  documents  to  support  a  claim.    These  have  the  same  strength   as  the  provided  documents.     Current  DENR  processes  for  administrative  titling  allows  for  the  acceptance  of  testimonial   evidences   where   no   documentary   evidences   are   available.     Testimonial   evidences   as   contained  in  a  Joint  affidavit  of  two  disinterested  person  or  adjacent  property  owners  can   be  executed  to  support  the  application19.     The   DAR   process   for   identification   of   agrarian   reform   beneficiaries   is   also   not   fully   dependent  on  documentary  form  of  evidences.     In   the   recognition   of   ancestral   lands,   proof   of   claims   include   the   testimony   of   elders   or   community   under   oath,   and   other   documents   directly   or   indirectly   attesting   to   the   possession  or  occupation  of  the  area  since  time  immemorial  by  such  ICCs/IPs  in  the  concept   of  owners.  Any  one  (1)  of  the  following  authentic  documents  is  recognized:   • Written  accounts  of  the  ICCs/IPs  customs  and  traditions;     • Written  accounts  of  the  ICCs/IPs  political  structure  and  institution;     • Pictures   showing   long   term   occupation   such   as   those   of   old   improvements,   burial   grounds,  sacred  places  and  old  villages;     • Historical   accounts,   including   pacts   and   agreements   concerning   boundaries   entered   into  by  the  ICCs/IPs  concerned  with  other  ICCs/IPs;     • Survey  plans  and  sketch  maps;     • Anthropological  data;     • Genealogical  surveys;     • Pictures   and   descriptive   histories   of   traditional   communal   forests   and   hunting   grounds;     • Pictures   and   descriptive   histories   of   traditional   landmarks   such   as   mountains,   rivers,  creeks,  ridges,  hills,  terraces  and  the  like;  and     • Write-­‐ups  of  names  and  places  derived  from  the  native  dialect  of  the  community.   Legislation  exists  to  formally  recognize  long-­‐term,  unchallenged  possession   in  public   lands     There   is   strong   recognition   of   long-­‐term   unchallenged   possession   under   Philippine   laws.   However,   all   these   apply   only   to   public   lands.   Adverse   possession   of   private   lands   is   not   recognized  under  Philippine  laws.  What  is  duly  recognized  however,  is  the  long  held  right  of   the  private  property  owner.   Commonwealth   Act   141   recognizes   30   years   possession   either   by   himself   or   through   his/her  predecessors  in  interest,  portions  of  public  agricultural  lands  subject  to  disposition.     The  Civil  Code  on  the  other  hand,  recognizes  10  years  possession  in  good  faith,  and  30  years   possession  in  bad  faith.     The  most  recent  legislation,  that  of  Republic  Act  10023  or  the  Residential  Free  Patent  Law,   recognizes  continuous  possession  of  10  years  to  support  a  claim.     19  DENR  Manual  of  Land  Disposition.   57 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report In   the   case   of   ancestral   lands,   occupation   since   time   immemorial   is   recognized   under   the   Constitution,  and  the  IPRA.   Formal  fees  are  not  deterrent  to  first  time  registration     Among  all  the  titling  options,  the  administrative  process  (Free  Patent,  for  both  agricultural   and   residential)   is   more   widely   used   since   it   is   more   streamlined   and   entails   the   least   amount  of  fees;  in  both  cases  not  exceeding  0.5%  of  the  property  value.  Titles  issued  under   this  mode  however,  carry  a  five  year  restriction  on  transfers  and  mortgage.  The  relevance  of   such   restriction   should   be   reviewed   in   light   of   the   requirement   of   30   and   10   years   possession  under  the  CA  141  and  RA  10023.     For   residential   properties,   the   Free   Patent   has   limited   application   to   areas   not   exceeding   200   sq.   m   and   those   that   are   zoned   residential   in   the   land   use   plans   of   LGUs   and   actually   used   as   residential.     Properties   outside   of   these   will   have   to   be   titled   either   through   Miscellaneous  Sales  or  Judicial  titling.   Miscellaneous   Sales   Patent   require   the   claimant   to   repurchase   the   property   by   paying   a   certain  proportion  of  the  assessed  value.  This  mode  of  titling  therefore  is  more  costly  on  the   part   of   the   claimant;   estimated   to   be   less   than   2%   of   the   market   value;   which   is   still   considered   second   to   best   by   LGAF   standards.   Properties   acquired   through   MSP   carry   the   same  restrictions  on  sale  and  mortgage  as  in  Free  Patent  issued  titles.   While   judicial   titles   do   not   carry   with   them   any   restriction   upon   issuance;   it   is   the   most   expensive   mode   of   first   time   registration;   exceeding   25%   of   the   market   value   of   the   property.  This  is  due  to  the  payments  that  need  to  be  made  to  lawyers.  RDs,  Local  Assessors   and   DENR   Land   Officers   and   Clerk   of   Courts   estimate   the   cost   to   be   not   lower   than   P   150,000  per  parcel.     Experience   from   LAMP1   confirm   that   administrative   titling,   mainly   through   the   Free   Patent   mode,   can   be   completed   in   two   months   in   agricultural   areas;   and   about   much   faster   in   residential  areas  (based  on  REGALA  experience).  Likewise,  the  testing  of  titling  procedures   undertaken  in  LAMP1  attest  that  the  judicial  titling  mode  is  very  complex  and  takes  a  long   time  to  complete.  In  the  case  of  parcels  in  Leyte,  two  years  was  not  enough  to  complete  the   entire  process  of  judicial  titling,  as  this  require  the  Office  of  the  Solicitor  General  to  file  the   cases,  and  several  appearances  in  courts.     For   other   types   of   urban   lands   such   as   commercial   and   industrial   lands,   the   policies   for   appraisal  and  processes  need  to  be  reviewed  to  facilitate  titling.     There  are  informal  fees  that  need  to  be  paid  to  effect  first  time  registration     Cases   of   payment   of   informal   fees,   while   quite   common   in   practice,   are   seen   as   not   very   significant  overall,  on  the  average  not  exceeding  the  amount  of  formal  fees.  In  some  places   however,  the  amount  could  be  significant,  and  has  historically  been  regarded  as  one  of  the   key  disincentives  to  first  time  titling,  particularly  on  demand.     While   the   proportion   of   informal   fees   is   against   formal   fees   is   a   good   measure   of   governance,  how  widespread  the  practice  is  among  title  applicants  is  a  serious  concern.   It  is   common   knowledge   that   rural   titling   has   been   beset   with   too   much   delays,   informal   payments,  and  opaque  procedures,  particularly  the  sporadic  processes  adopted  before  the   introduction   of   systematic   procedures.     These   were   widely   documented   in   a   number   of   studies  undertaken  under  LAMP1  and  LAMP2.     58 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report In  a  study  undertaken  in  Leyte  province  under  LAMP2  on  the  cost  and  time  to  issue  titles   under  the  Free  Patent  mode  of  titling  of  agricultural  lands,  the  following  key  findings   emerged20:   • More  land  claimants  under  the  sporadic  –  regular  titling  procedures  had  to  follow  up  their   application,  and  incurred  the  highest  expense  compared  to  applicants  under  the  LAMP   systematic  titling  procedures  and  under  the  comprehensive  agrarian  reform  program   (CARP);   § Of   the   composition   of   costs   incurred   in   following   up   of   applications,   those   under   the   sporadic   regular   procedures   had   to   pay   an   average   of   Php   330   (US   $   8.25)   for   tips   to   employees,  which  constitute  about  43%  of  the  costs  incurred;   § For  about  40%  of  respondents  under  the  sporadic  regular  titling  procedures,  there  was  no   need   to   follow   up   on   their   applications.   They   hired   or   paid   somebody   to   do   this   task   for   them.  The  average  amount  spent  per  lot  was  P  9,382.35,  (US  $  234)  or  equivalently,  P  0.82   per   square   meter.   Payments   were   made   to   friends   (4),   surveyors   (2),   relatives   (2),   and   an   employee   at   the   assessor’s   office.   The   others   (7)   did   not   identify   the   person   to   whom   payments  were  made.  (See  Table  below).     In   a   similar   study   undertaken   in   the   provinces   of   Bohol   and   Bukidnon,   the   same   trend   emerged21:   § 39%   of   the   responses   for   CARP   said   they   followed   up   on   the   application   while   majority   of   the   respondents   for   LAMP   (60%)   said   that   they   did   nothing   and   just   waited   for   the   notice   of   release  for  their  land  titles.     § A   significant   number   of   applicants   under   CARP   (9%)   revealed   that   they   gave   gifts   and   services  to  inspectors/employees  of  the  government.  It  is  significant  to  note  that  none  of  the   respondents  from  LAMP2  had  to  go  through  this  experience  to  get  their  titles.   § CARP  applicants  had  to  spend  as  much  as  ten  times  on  the  average  for  application  fee  (Php   500   to   600,   when   the   official   application   fee   is   only   Php   50);   compared   with   their   counterparts  under  the  LAMP2  systematic  adjudication  procedures.     § With   respect   to   composition   of   costs,   CARP   applicants   had   to   spend   for   the   services   of   Surveyors   while   applicants   under   the   systematic   titling   procedures   did   not   spend   for   this   item.     The  systematic  titling  is  now  more  widely  used  in  a  number  of  provinces  –  Leyte,  Bukidnon,   Bohol,  Ilocos  Norte.  This  means  the  regular  sporadic  titling  on  demand  for  agricultural  areas   is   still   applied   but   only   in   areas   where   there   is   no   roll   out   of   LAMP.     A   number   of   LGUs   have   likewise   adopted   the   systematic   titling   approach,   but   combined   with   tax   mapping   processes,  such  as  those  initiated  under  the  LAMP2  Innovation  Support  Fund.     Experiences   from   Bayawan,   San   Carlos,   Legazpi   and   Ilocos   Norte   indicate   that   the   fastest   time  for  new  OCTs  to  be  issued  under  the  LTCP  is  4  months.    Under  the  Bayawan  CLAIMS   Project   Systematic   Titling,   some   patents   are   still   pending   registration   two   years   after   transmittal   to   the   RD.     Some   property   owners   who   want   to   fast   track   the   registration   are   forced  to  deal  with  the  payment  of  facilitation  fees  to  get  their  OCTs  in  much  faster  time.22   In  Olongapo  City,  several  property  owners  paid  thousands  of  pesos  to  some  personnel  of  the   CENRO   and   local   assessor’s   office   to   prepare   sketch   plans   thinking   that   it   can   already   be   20  Study  on  Cost  and  Time  to  Issue  Titles  Under  Systematic  and  Sporadic  land  Titling  Procedures,  Research  Grant  under   LAMP2.  ALICIA  A.  BALAGAPO  Gabino  P.  Petilos,  Ph.D.,  Manuel  R.  Espina,  Ed.D.,  Malaquias  A.  Conde,  Ph.D.,  Marcial  M.  Monge,   D.M.,  Leonardo  G.  Oñate,  Ed.  D.    Leyte  Normal  University,  August  2008.     21  LAMP  2.    Study  on  the  Cost  and  Time  to  Secure  and  Issue  Free  Patent  Titles  under  LAMP2  and  DENR-­‐CARP  funded  Titling   Procedures,  June  2010.       22  Interviews  with  clients  of  RoD  Dumaguete  City   59 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report used   to   support   their   Miscellaneous   Sales   Applications.23  Individually   the   facilitation   fees   paid   are   not   really   that   much,   ranging   from   a   few   hundreds   to   a   couple   of   thousands.     But   if   these  informal  fees  paid  to  facilitate  completion  at  various  stages  of  the  process  are  added   up  it  can  be  significant  in  value.    For  those  who  have  more  patience  however  and  are  willing   to  wait  the  process  can  still  be  completed  even  without  payment  of  facilitation  fees.   Geodetic  Engineers  and  Lawyers  who  offer  their  services  for  titling  of  lands  intimated  that   they   usually   already   factor   the   cost   of   informal   fees   that   they   anticipate   they   will   have   to   pay  for  when  they  quote  their  rates  to  clients.    The  fees  go  through  all  agencies  involved  in   the  titling/registration  process  -­‐  from  the  local  assessor’s  to  DENR  to  BIR  and  RDs.   The   lack   of   general   knowledge   of   procedures,   the   complexity   of   processes,   among   others,   have   contributed   to   clients   preferring   to   make   informal   payments   to   facilitate   titling.   This   increases  the  real  cost  of  titling  on  the  part  of  applicants  and  therefore  discourages  people   to  be  part  of  the  formal  system.     While   it   is   clear   that   reports   and   feedback   reveal   the   prevalence   of   informal   payments   in   first   time   registration   on   demand,   more   regional   data   is   needed   to   provide   better   assessment.   The   results   could   then   be   used   in   monitoring   this   governance   dimension   in   a   national  titling  roll  out.     The   requirements   for   formalizing   housing   in   urban   areas   are   not   clear,   straight-­‐ forward,   or   affordable   but   many   applicants   from   informal   areas   are   managing   to   satisfy  the  requirements.   In   the   Philippines,   the   ultimate   meaning   of   formalization   is   “converting   squatters   to   the   status   of   freeholders   or   titled   property   owners”.   There   are   four   modes   of   formalization   pursued   by   the   government:   1)   relocation   or   resettlement   with   secure   tenure   on   the   new   site;   2)   Outright   purchase   or   expropriation   by   the   local   government   of   private   estates   illegally   occupied   and   resale   of   the   acquired   property   to   the   occupants   thereof   on   easy   terms;  3)  comprehensive  slum  upgrading  with  secure  land  tenure  usually  on  government-­‐ owned   land   that   had   been   illegally   occupied;   and   4)   CMP   of   the   National   Home   Mortgage   Finance  Corporation  (NHMFC)  which  involves  land  acquisition,  site  development,  and  house   improvement  by  organized  informal  settler  communities  with  loan  funds  initially  provided   by   originators   who   are   in   turn   reimbursed   by   purchasing   the   mortgage   by   the   NHMFC,   a   government  agency.  The  subject  site  may  be  already  occupied  by  the  beneficiaries  or  may   be   located   elsewhere.   Fund   originators   may   include   local   government   units,   national   government   agencies,   non-­‐government   organizations,   socio-­‐civic   organizations,   or   private   banking   institutions.   The   first   three   steps   involve   a   very   long   and   protracted   process,   and   entail   the   most   expense   by   the   government.   The   CMP   is   considered   the   most   affordable   and   accessible,  yet  is  beset  with  many  difficulties.   The  requirements  for  applying  for  a  CMP  loan  are  spread  over  three  to  six  steps  depending   on   site   circumstances   namely,   1)   release   of   purchase   commitment   line   (PCL);   2)   site   development;   3)   vertical   development;   4)   community   organization;   5)   letter   of   guarantee   (LOG);  and  6)  mortgage  takeout.  The  length  of  time  it  takes  to  complete  the  requirements   ranges   from   two   years   to   four   years.   The   delays   may   be   attributed   to   the   difficulty   of   securing   the   necessary   documents.   Reportedly,   delays   are   also   caused   by   changing   requirements  with  each  changing  administration.   23  Interviews  with  clients  of  DENR,  Olongapo  City   60 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report In  a  case  study  by  Yap,  et.al.24;  it  was  clearly  documented  how  the  CMP  process  can  become   laborious   and   protracted.   This   is   because   of   poor   records   of   agencies,   thus   creating   confusion  on  the  identity  of  real  owners  of  the  property  where  the  informal  settlements  are   located.  In  the  said  study,  it  took  four  presidents  and  about  40  years,  and  yet  the  community   has   not   been   successful   in   acquiring   the   property.     The   same   is   true   in   the   case   of   experience  of  LAMP  in  Quezon  City,  where  informal  settlers  are  preyed  upon  by  syndicates   capitalizing   on   the   many   agencies   people   have   to   deal   with,   the   unorganized   records   of   these   agencies,   and   the   informal   fees   that   people   have   to   pay   to   secure   accurate   records,   information  and  processes.     Because   no   other   forms   of   tenure   are   used   by   the   government   to   formalize   informal   settlements   except   by   freehold,   those   who   cannot   afford   the   cost   of   acquiring   property   remain  property-­‐less  and  are  in  constant  threat  of  eviction  or  dislocation.  To  be  sure  some   intermediate   modes   of   holding   off   eviction   such   as   renting   and   usufruct   do   exist.   Often   however,   renter  informal  settler  families   (ISFs)  rent  space  from  fellow  ISFs  who  are  equally   under  threat  of  eviction.  Even  in  a  so-­‐called  usufruct  arrangement,  defined  in  NSO  reports   as  “occupied  free  with  owner’s  consent”,  the  owner  may  not  have  given  his  consent  freely   and  voluntarily.   The  complexity  of  the  existing  land  administration  system  is  seen  to  restrict  access  to  legal   tenure   and   formalization   of   housing.   Multiple   institutions   that   manage   the   system   have   overlapping   functions   or   implement   inconsistent   mandates.   Problems   associated   with   the   system   also   include   high   transaction   costs   and   the   difficulty   in   obtaining   land   records.     In   the   midst   of   the   complicated   and   lengthy   legal   processes   involved   in   securing   tenure,   a   dynamic   informal   land   market   thrives   with   syndicates   selling   land   rights   to   city   dwellers   who   are   unable   to   afford   payments   for   buying   and   owning   land,   or   even   acquiring   use   rights,   legally.   Other   issues   related   to   formalization   include   the   high   cost   of   subdivision   of   properties   to   small   parcels,   and   the   high   cost   of   registration   of   these   newly   subdivided   properties.     The   population   of   the   Philippines   currently   stands   at   near   100   million,   of   which   63%   live   in   cities   and   the   urban   areas.   If   the   current   trends   prevail,   the   Philippines   is   projected   to   be   70%  urban  less  than  a  decade  hence,  or  an  urban  population  of  around  86  million.  Given  the   size   of   the   urban   poor   population,   a   major   challenge   confronting   development   agencies,   policymakers,  and  social  actors  concerned  with  addressing  poverty  is  how  to  provide  better   access  to  secure  housing  tenure.     Efforts  to  provide  secure  tenure  to  informal  settlers  are  made  difficult  by  the  fact  that  many   of   them   live   in   danger   areas.     Around   50%   or   760,000   of   the   total   1.5   million   informal   settler  families  live  in  communities  situated  along  river  lines  which  are  frequently  affected   by   typhoons   and   sea   surges;   along   coastal   (shoreline)   or   seashores   which   are   affected   by   seasonal   rains,   sea   surges   and   erosion;   in   communities   that   developed   in   infill   or   open   dumpsite   and   most   households   earn   from   scavenging;   and   along   major   highways   which   are   along  heavily  trafficked  roads  and  corners.   There   is   a   clear   need   for   LGUs   to   strengthen   and   improve   the   processes   for   delivery   of   government’s  urban  poor  housing  initiatives.    Improved  access  to  reliable  land  records  can   do  so  much  to  ease  the  process,  particularly  in  privately  owned  and  public  lands.  It  is  also    Yap,   David   Leonides   T.;   Tarita   L.   Ledesma;   and   Myla   A.   Cruz.   2003.   Four  Presidents  and  the  Quest  for  Land  Ownership:  Formal   24 and  Informal  Land  Acquisition  Processes  in  Riverside  Barangay  Santolan,  Pasig  City.  Philippine-­‐Australia  LAMP  Research  Grants.     61 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report important  to  complete  the  census  of  informal  settlers  to  provide  sound  bases  for  planning   and  management  of  land  tenure  improvement  activities.     There   is   a   clear,   practical   process   for   the   formal   recognition   of   possession   but   this   process  is  not  implemented  effectively,  consistently  or  transparently.   Overall,   existing   processes   to   formalize   possession   are   governed   with   clear   rules.   These   pertain   to   informal   urban   settlement   on   private   and   public   lands,   as   well   as   informal   occupation   in   forest   lands   and   protected   areas.   However,   difficulties   in   implementation;   coupled   with   rapid   growth   in   urban   population;   has   resulted   in   rising   informality   in   the   urban  areas.  In  addition  to  the  constraints  discussed  above,  the  preference  for  freehold  as   the   form   of   formalization   has   resulted   in   many   occupants   without   secure   tenure,   particularly   in   the   urban   areas.   An   added   issue   is   the   limitation   of   the   law   for   cities   and   provinces  only  to  undertake  CMP.     In   the   case   of   forest   lands   and   protected   areas,   the   speed   of   formal   recognition   of   occupation  through  issuance  of  tenure  instruments  is  overtaken  by  the  pace  by  which  new   settlements   are   established   in   forest   lands.   While   the   forest   demarcation   is   almost   complete,   there   is   still   a   need   to   reinforce   these   with   on   the   ground   management   by   engaging   local   government   units   and   other   local   bodies   to   share   in   the   responsibility.   The   expanse  of  forest  lands  and  protected  areas  is  too  large  for  DENR  to  handle  by  itself.     LGI  4  -­‐  Restrictions  on  Rights                 Score   LGI-­‐ Topic   A   B   C   D   Dim     Restrictions  on  Rights     4   i   Restrictions  regarding  urban  land  use,  ownership  and  transferability                     Assess  the  potentially  harmful  impact  of  land  rights  restrictions  in  urban   areas.   4   ii   Restrictions  regarding  rural  land  use,  ownership  and  transferability                   Assess  the  potentially  harmful  impact  of  land  rights  restrictions  in  rural   areas.   The  country  has  a  set  of  restrictions  on  property  that  are  justified  largely  to  serve  the   public   interest,   but   in   many   cases,   these   are   largely   violated   or   not   enforced;   thereby   not  fully  achieving  their  objectives.     The  Constitution  of  the  Philippines  spells  out  the  basic  restrictions  on  land  ownership  –  that   is;   only   Filipino   citizens   can   own   properties.   This   policy   protects   the   Filipino   interests   so   that   they   do   not   end   up   being   dispossessed   of   lands   from   foreigners   who   have   more   resources  to  buy  properties.  However,  in  practice,  this  is  circumvented  through  the  use  of   dummies;  of  Filipino  spouses  registering  ownership  of  properties  in  behalf  of  their  foreign   spouses.  This  provision  is  one  of  the  subjects  of  the  proposal  to  amend  the  Constitution  on   the  grounds  of  encouraging  more  foreign  investments  in  the  Philippines.   In  private  agricultural  lands,  the  CARP  law  has  set  five  hectares  as  the  maximum  area  that   can   be   owned   by   the   landholder;   with   three   hectare   each   for   members   of   the   immediate   family.  The  excess  is  subject  to  redistribution  under  the  agrarian  reform.  These  restrictions   are  at  the  core  of  the  country’s  social  justice  agenda,  to  promote  equity  in  land  ownership.   Conversion   into   nonagricultural   uses   is   strictly   prohibited,   as   is   the   case   of   transfers,   mortgage,  sale  or  inheritance  during  the  prescription  period  of  10  years.  These  provisions   62 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report are   to   ensure   that   the   ARBs   continue   to   benefit   from   the   program   as   designed.   However,   there   have   been   reported   cases   of   transfer   of   rights   within   this   restriction   period;   mainly   in   times  of  distress  and/or  abandonment  of  farming  by  the  original  beneficiaries.  The  extent  to   which   this   is   happening   has   not   been   comprehensively   documented,   but   this   is   common   knowledge.   There   have   also   been   cases   of   agrarian   lands   being   reverted   back   to   their   original  owners;  and/or  informally  consolidated  to  improve  productivity  and  incomes.  The   lack  of  capital  and  investments  on  the  part  of  ARBs  are  factors  that  have  contributed  to  this.   The   government   is   aggressively   pursuing   its   agrarian   reform   community   development   program   (ARCDPs),   in   order   to   provide   the   necessary   support   services   to   beneficiaries.     Moreover,   it   has   set   up   polices   to   support   beneficiaries   in   evaluating   proposals   for   joint   venture   agreements   with   private   companies   to   protect   them   from   undue   negative   effects   of   indiscriminate  large  scale  land  acquisition.     For  public  agricultural  lands  awarded  to  long  time  occupants  under  the  Free  Patent  mode  of   original   titling;   there   is   a   five   year   restriction   on   transfers   and   mortgage;   though   there   have   been  reported  cases  of  informal  transfer  of  rights  or  ownership  within  this  period.  Much  of   this  is  on  account  of  the  very  long  time  between  survey  approval,  at  which  time  the  claimant   is   recorded;   and   the   processing   of   titling,   at   which   time   the   titles   are   awarded   and   registered   with   the   RoD.   The   same   CARP   restrictions   on   size   of   landholding   apply,   although   in   the   procedures   established,   it   is   impossible   to   check   the   total   area   owned   by   the   beneficiary  across  different  locations.  Confirmation  of  long  held  occupation  in  public  A  and   D   lands   is   considered   part   of   the   agrarian   reform   program,   although   this   does   not   essentially  involve  redistribution.     By   law,   forest   lands   and   protected   areas   belong   to   the   state   and   are   therefore   not   to   be   alienated   for   private   purposes.   The   government   however,   issues   various   tenurial   instruments   to   recognize   long   term   occupation   and   as   part   of   the   overall   management   strategy.   In   forest   lands,   tenure   instruments   are   granted   to   communities   through   the   community   based   forest   management   agreements   (CBFMAs);   and   to   individual   families   through  certificates  of  stewardship  contracts  (CSCs)  for  a  period  of  25  years,  renewable  for   another   25   years.   The   issuance   of   CSCs   has   long   been   suspended   to   give   way   to   more   communal   way   of   forest   management.   However,   there   has   been   a   clamor   for   individualization  of  these  rights  due  to  the  volatility  of  community  organizations,  making  it   impossible   to   clearly   allocate   rights,   resources   and   responsibilities   across   its   members.   Many   of   the   CSCs   granted   more   than   two   decades   ago   are   also   expiring   soon,   and   calls   for   a   clear   policy   on   how   these   should   be   governed.   Despite   these   provisions,   resource   use   is   heavily  regulated  by  DENR.  CBFMAs  are  supposed  to  prepare  their  management  plans,  and   all  resource  uses  need  permits  from  DENR.  In  the  recent  past,  there  have  been  suspensions   in  the  issuance  of  resource  use  permits  and/or  harvesting  in  CBFMA  areas  thereby  serving   as   disincentives   for   participants.   A   more   stable   policy   needs   to   be   in   place   that   should   provide  sufficient  incentives  for  CBFMA  and  other  forest  tenure  holders  to  become  effective   partners  in  sustainable  forest  management.   In   protected   areas   (PA),   the   tenure   instrument   is   called   the   protected   area   community   based   resource   management   agreements   (PACBRAMA)   with   a   period   of   25   years,   renewable   for   another   25   years.   The   intent   is   to   ensure   that   the   communities   within   the   PA   become  active  agents  of  management,  through  some  form  of  incentives  that  allow  them  to   benefit   from   resource   uses   that   are   compatible   with   PA   management.   A   key   constraint   however,   is   the   limited   funds   to   effectively   keep   pace   with   the   census   and   registration   of   occupants,   issuance   of   PACBARMA,   and   provision   of   technical   support   to   these   communities.     63 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report There   is   a   set   of   restrictions   as   well   on   CADTs   issued   by   NCIP.   By   law,   the   principle   of   Regalian   Doctrine   does   not   apply   to   ancestral   domains.   Thus,   CADTs   are   considered   private   property   by   virtue   of   the   IPRA.   This   interpretation   however,   has   been   challenged   in   the   Supreme  Court,  without  a  definitive  resolution  since  the  decision  resulted  in  a  split  opinion   among  the  justices.  Thus,  there  are  some  who  continue  to  hold  on  to  the  view  that  ancestral   domains   are   part   of   the   country’s   public   lands.   Nonetheless,   the   restrictions   include   prohibition   on   sale,   transfer   or   mortgaging   of   CADTs.   However,   the   IPs   can   enter   into   agreements  with  investors  for  the  development  of  portions  of  their  domain  subject  to  their   ancestral   domain   sustainable   development   and   protection   plan   (ADSDPP).   A   clear   responsibility   however,   is   for   IPs   to   ensure   the   conservation   of   portions   of   their   domains.   Since  the  process  of  determining  the  extent  of  ancestral  domains  is  through  self  ascription,   there   are   no   limits   to   their   size.   Thus,   CADTs   cover   large   expanses   of   forests,   and   coastal   areas   of   the   Philippines.   Recently,   ancestral   domains   have   become   the   magnets   of   investments   due   to   their   size,   and   overlaps   with   areas   with   expansive   forest   cover,   highly   productive  zones,  and  mineral  deposits.  These  developments  signal  a  clear  need  to  develop   sufficient   safeguards,   and   capacity   development   of   IP   communities,   so   that   they   can   make   informed   decisions   about   their   domains;   while   at   the   same   time   ensuring   the   cultural,   spiritual,  and  environmental  values  of  their  territories  are  not  compromised.     The   current   restrictions   on   urban   land   use,   ownership,   transferability   and   rent   control   were   largely   developed   with   the   aim   of   protecting   the   public   interest,   in   practice,   these   have   not   been   enforced   and/or   do   not   achieve   their   objectives.   A   revisiting  of  these  restrictions  and/or  their  implementation  or  enforcement  would  have  to   be  made  to  ensure  they  serve  their  desired  purposes.     In  the  urban  areas,  land  use  is  controlled  through  the  zoning  regulations,  although  for  many   LGUs  which  have  not  updated  their  comprehensive  land  use  plans  (CLUPs)  regularly,  zoning   is  largely  dictated  by  actual  land  use  rather  than  being  used  as  an  instrument  for  better  land   use   allocation.   Size   limits   apply   only   to   the   lands   under   the   UDHA,   which   is   ironic   since   it   applies   only   to   those   who   cannot   afford   to   buy   properties.   Land   prices   is   essentially   controlled   by   the   market,   except   for   some   244   areas   identified   for   priority   development   (APDs);  that  are  subject  to  low  cost  housing  by  government.  These  are  mainly  government   owned   lands   that   have   been   identified   for   the   segment   of   the   urban   population   without   secure  tenure,  the  homeless,  and  underprivileged.     Rent   control   in   the   urban   areas   has   the   opposite   effect   of   pushing   up   the   rental   rates   due   to   the   cut   off   mark.   As   practiced,   property   owners   merely   quote   rates   above   the   cut   off   in   order   to   evade   coverage   under   the   law.   There   is   thus   a   need   to   revisit   the   Rent   Control   Law   so  that  it  achieves  the  desired  objectives;  or  whether  such  law  is  relevant  at  all.     LGI  5  -­‐  Clarity  of  Institutional  Mandates                 Score   LGI-­‐ Topic   A   B   C   D   Dim     Clarity  of  Mandates   5   i   Separation  of  institutional  roles                     5   ii   Institutional  overlap                   Assesses  if  there  is  a  clear  delineation  of  institutional  responsibilities  with   respect  to  the  spectrum  of  land  related  issues.   5   iii   Administrative  overlap                   Assesses  level  with  which  central,  regional,  and  local  institutions  dealing  with   land  have  clearly  assigned  functions  and  responsibilities   5   iv   Information  sharing                   64 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report             Score   LGI-­‐ Topic   A   B   C   D   Dim     Assesses  whether  land-­‐related  information,  both  textual  and  spatial,  is   maintained  in  a  uniform  way  that  is  accessible  at  reasonable  cost  by  all  the   institutions  that  might  have  an  interest  in  land  issues  and  need  this   information.  Such  public  institutions  may  include  land  use  planning  agencies,   local  authorities,  courts,  disaster  management  agency,  etc.     A   study   on   institutional   arrangements   undertaken   under   LAMP1   has   concluded   that   the   present   land   administration   system   is   highly   inefficient.   This   is   because   the   structure   of   the   system  has  major  defects  and  the  system  is  administered  badly.25  (Box  1).   Box  4.  Main  Findings  from  the  Institutional  Arrangements  Study  of  Land   Administration  Agencies  (PA  –  LAMP,  2002).   The  m ajor  structural  defects  of  the  present  system  are:   • conflict  between  laws  regulating  the  system  and  its  administration;   • two  procedures  for  titling  land  (administrative  and  judicial  procedures);   • multiple  forms  of  ownership  rights  in  land;   • multiple  land  valuation  methods;   • counter-­‐productive  interaction  between  procedures  for  real  property  taxation  and  title   registration.         These  structural  defects  in  turn  give  rise  to  significant  duplication  and  overlap  in  the  roles,   functions  and  activities  of  the  key  land  administration  agencies.         The  m ajor  administrative  defects  of  the  present  system  are:   • poor  segregation  of  functions  and,  related  to  this,  a  lack  of  focus  on  the  delivery  of  good   service  to  users  of  the  land  administration  system  (other  government  agencies  and   members  of  the  public);   • cumbersome  decision-­‐making  structures;   • excessive  ‘corporate  overhead’  and  staffing  of  ‘support’  functions,  including    that  resulting   from  the  number  of  agencies  involved;   • a  lack  of  formal  incentives  and  penalties  related  to  performance;   • widespread  perceptions/allegations  of  conflicts  of  interest  and  corruption.       There   are   separation   of   roles   and   responsibilities   of   the   agencies   involved   in   the   administration   and   management   of   lands   based   on   respective   mandates.   However,   there  are  apparent  overlaps.   The   country   rating   for   this   dimension   fits   into   the   following   pre   coded   statement:   In   situations   that   can   entail   conflicts   of   interest   or   abuse   (e.g.   transfers   of   land   rights)   there   is   some   separation   in   the   roles   of   policy   formulation,   implementation   of   policy   through   land   management  and  administration  and  the  arbitration  of  any  disputes  that  may  arise  as  a  result   of  implementation  of  policy  but  there  are  overlapping  and  conflicting  responsibilities  that  lead   to  frequent  problems.   The   institutional   set   up   of   land   related   agencies   in   the   Philippines   is   that   there   is   clear   separation  of  roles  between  the  executive,  legislative  and  judiciary  in  terms  of  execution  of   25  Philippine  Australia  Land  Administration  and  Management  Project.  Institutional  Arrangements  Policy  Study.  July  2002.     65 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report laws,   law   making,   and   arbitration   of   disputes   arising   from   implementation   of   policies;   respectively.     Between   the   judiciary   and   executive   branches   however,   there   are   overlaps   in   terms   of   issuance   of   first   time   titles.   There   are   parallel   judicial   and   administrative   means   of   titling   properties; which   lead   in   issuance   of   double   titles.   Likewise,   the   Courts   can   reconstitute   titles  if  there  is  a  representation  that  these  have  been  lost  or  burned.  However,  a  common   cause   of   double   titles   is   the   issuance   of   reconstituted   titles   in   the   name   of   somebody   else   over  properties  where  original  titles  still  exist.       Within   the   executive   branch   however,   the   separation   is   not   quite   distinct,   such   that   that   there   are   overlapping   and   conflicting   responsibilities   that   lead   to   frequent   problems.   For   example,   a   number   of   government   agencies   own   land;   make   decisions   on   land   administration   and   management;   and   decide   on   appeals   against   these   decisions.   These   include  the  DENR,   which   owns  and   manages   public  lands   and   some  government   properties;   it   is   also   involved   in   disposition   of   lands   through   an   adjudication   process.   The   Public   Reclamation   Authority   (PRA)   is   another   agency   that   owns   and   manages   public   lands,   and   disposes  of  such  lands  through  bidding  processes.  The  Philippine  Ports  Authority  (PPA)  also   reclaims   land,   and   at   the   same   time   disposes   of   lands.   The   DAR   likewise   is   in   charge   of   redistribution,   formulates   specific   policies   related   thereto,   and   hears   and   decides   on   agrarian  disputes.     There   are   horizontal   overlaps   among   institutions   involved   in   land   administration   and   management   leading   to   confusion,   double   titling,   and   overlapping   tenurial   instruments   There  is  a  wide  degree  of  horizontal  overlap  among  the  land  related  agencies.  In  titling  for   example,   DENR   issues   patents   for   different   types   of   land   –   Homestead   and   Free   Patent   over   agricultural   lands,   Miscellaneous   Sales   Patents   for   residential,   commercial   and   industrial   lands,  and  Residential  Free  Patents  for  residential  lands  –  the  courts  also  adjudicates  claims   of   ownerships   and   judicially   confirm   imperfect   titles   over   all   types   of   A&D   lands.     There   have   been   a   lot   of   reported   cases   wherein   parcels   of   lands   have   been   issued   a   patent   by   DENR  and  a  judicial  decree  by  the  Court  to  different  owners  with  both  titles  registered  with   the  RD.    DAR  also  undertakes  titling  in  public  A&D  lands.    For  claimants  of  agricultural  lands   this   made   the   process   even   more   confusing   as   they   don’t   know   where   to   go   for   the   titling   of   their   agricultural   lands.     With   DENR   and   DAR   both   exerting   all   efforts   to   accomplish   their   respective   targets,   this   shared   jurisdiction   has   caused   a   lot   of   tension   and   conflict   among   operators   of   both   agencies   as   they   compete   for   areas   and   beneficiaries.     To   address   the   issue,   DAR   and   DENR   issued   Joint   Memorandum   Circular   14   and   19   clarifying   jurisdiction   over   public   agricultural   A&D   lands.     But   even   with   this   issuance,   the   tension   has   never   completely   disappeared   as   operators   from   both   agencies   developed   their   own   conflicting   interpretations  of  what  is  otherwise  a  clear  delineation  of  jurisdiction.    Several  cases  in  the   courts   are   due   to   duplicate   issuance   of   titles   by   DENR   and   the   Courts   as   well   as   by   DENR   and  DAR.     NCIP   issues   CADTs   and   CALTs   over   ancestral   domains   of   indigenous   peoples   which   are   mostly   in   forest/timberland   area.     With   DENR   issuing   tenure   instruments   to   formalize   rights  of  forest  occupants,  there  is  potential  for  these  issuances  to  overlap  with  each  other,   particularly   since   delineation   surveys   by   the   two   agencies   are   done   in   isolation   of   each   other.   Several   national   agencies   are   conducting   their   own   land   surveys   for   titling   and   other   purposes.   These   land   surveys   are   done   using   different   standards   and   systems   and   most   66 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report often   than   not   performed   without   any   coordination   between   the   agencies.     Generally   land   surveys  are  reviewed  and  approved  by  DENR.    But  even  within  DENR  there  are  still  some   confusion   about   the   level   of   authorities   required   for   the   monitoring,   review   and   approval   despite  a  fairly  extensive  and  detailed  Manual  of  Approvals.           Roles  and  responsibilities  of  DENR  while  defined  in  the  Manual  of  Land  Surveys  (DAO  2007-­‐ 09)  and  Manual  of  Approvals  (DAO  98-­‐24)  are  sometimes  disregarded.    An  example  of  this   is   the   cadastral   survey   project   in   the   remaining   unsurveyed   area   of   Olongapo   City   conducted  in  2009  –  2010.    The  survey  firm  contracted  by  the  Regional  Office  to  undertake   the   survey   commenced   started   without   coordinating   with   the   CENRO   and   the   City   Government.    The  Regional  Office  even  failed  to  notify  the  CENRO  that  the  survey  team  of   the   winning   contractor   has   already   been   mobilized   and   started   work   in   the   area.     When   the   survey   project   started   to   get   problematic   the   Regional   Office   blamed   the   CENRO   for   not   providing  Project  oversight.  This  is  also  the  situation  that  happened  in  Negros  Oriental  with   the   recent   political   boundary   survey   contracts   awarded   by   Region   VII   in   that   area.     The   survey   contractor   commenced   work   without   notice   to   CENRO   Dumaguete.     Yet   when   problems   started   to   surface   the   Regional   Office   transferred   supervision   to   CENRO   Dumaguete.       Both   DENR   and   LRA   have   authority   to   approve   subdivision   and   consolidation   surveys   for   lands  that  are  already  titled.    Technically  it  is  difficult  to  contemplate  an  agency  such  as  LRA   approving   subsequent   subdivision   or   consolidation   of   lots   when   it   does   not   have   in   its   possession   records   of   the   original   survey.     Records   of   LRA   approved   surveys   are   also   not   furnished   to  DENR   and   this  means  that  even   if   DENR   wants   to   it   cannot   reflect   these   new   surveys  to  update  the  cadastre.   The   NCIP   conducts   and   approves   its   own   survey   of   ancestral   domain   claims.     Considering   that   there   is   no   sharing   of   survey   information   between   DENR   and   NCIP,   cases   of   conflicts   and   overlaps   in   issuance   of   tenure   instruments   such   as   CBFMA   in   ancestral   lands.   The   recent  Joint  Administrative  Order  between  NCIP,  DENR,  DAR  and  LRA  should  correct  these   overlaps  in  the  future  processing  of  tenurial  instruments  and  ancestral  domain  claims.     Thus,   it   can   be   concluded   that   the   mandated   responsibilities   of   the   various   authorities   dealing  with  land  administration  issues  are  defined  but  institutional  overlap  with  those  of   other  land  sector  agencies  and  inconsistency  is  a  problem.   The   overlaps   in   policy   implementation   and   institutional   mandates   have   persisted   for   a   long   time   and   has   resulted   in   long   standing   disputes,   and   has   led   to   many   problems.   The   overlaps  and  conflicts  persists  even  with  issuance  of  joint  memorandum  circulars  between   the   agencies   since   field   offices   tends   to   have   different   interpretations.   It   is   hoped   that   the   2012  Joint  Administrative  Order  No.  1  among  NCIP,  DAR,  DENR  and  LRA/DoJ  would  provide   solution  to  these  long  standing  issues.   The  government  should  consider  giving  high  priority  to  the  refilling  of  the  LARA  Bill  in  the   next   Congress.     This   should   address   the   institutional   overlaps,   and   address   the   systemic   weaknesses  that  plague  the  delivery  of  services  in  the  LAM  sector.  Addressing  this  issue  will   impact   on   titling,   ease   of   registration,   and   facilitate   the   formalization   rights   by   informal   settlers  in  the  highly  urbanized  areas.     Division   of   land-­‐related   responsibilities   between   the   different   levels   of   administration  and  government  is  clear  with  minor  overlaps   Within  agencies,  there  are  some  vertical  overlaps  as  well.  The  DENR  is  one  of  the  largest  of   the   agencies   of   the   Philippine   government.     It   has   a   very   diverse   mandate   and   a   very   67 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report complex  organization.    It  is  common  in  these  types  of  organizations  to  have  some  overlap  of   functions  and  a  lot  of  confusions  regarding  levels  of  authority.    Potential  areas  of  overlaps   are  in  those  delegated  functions  such  as  in  approval  of  Patents.    Patents  with  areas  up  to  5   hectares   are   approved   by   the   Provincial   Environment   and   Natural   Resources   Officer   (PENRO)   while   those   with   areas   in   excess   of   5   hectares   are   approved   by   the   Regional   Executive   Directors   (RED).   Patents   in   excess   of   10   hectares   have   to   be   approved   by   the   DENR  Secretary.    In  2009,  the  former  Secretary  revoked  the  delegation  of  signing  authority   to   the   PENROs   and   REDs   and   ordered   that   only   the   Secretary   can   approve   all   types   of   Patents   issued   by   DENR.     This   was   subsequently   rescinded   by   the   next   Secretary   and   the   delegation  to  the  PENROs  and  REDs  were  returned.       The   DENR   Manual   of   Approvals   clearly   set-­‐out   the   levels   of   authority   for   each   and   every   function,   including   its   land   related   responsibilities.     The   manual   provides   a   succinct   guide   which   when   followed   should   ensure   that   overlaps   are   avoided.     The   other   land   administration   and   management   agencies   are   not   as   complex,   with   focused   mandates   and   simple   organization   that   overlaps   are   not   common.     DAR   is   only   responsible   for   land   acquisition  and  redistribution  as  well  as  provision  of  support  services  to  beneficiaries  of  the   comprehensive   agrarian   reform   program   (CARP).     The   responsibilities,   functions   and   levels   of   authority   from   the   Central   Office   to   its   different   regional   offices   down   to   its   provincial   and   municipal   offices   are   well   defined   and   easy   to   observe   with   very   little   opportunities   for   overlap.     The   delineation   of   responsibilities   and   functions   between   the   LRA   and   its   Register   of  Deeds  in  the  Provinces  and  Cities  are  also  well  defined  with  no  areas  of  overlaps  seen.   More  important  than  overlaps,  the  bigger  problem  is  the  often  lack  of  coordination  between   the  different  offices  at  different  levels  even  within  each  of  the  agencies.   Information   related   to   rights   in   land   is   available   to   interested   institutions   and   although  this  information  is  available  at  reasonable  cost,  it  is  not  readily  accessible  as   the  information  is  not  maintained  in  a  uniform  way.   The   overlaps   or   duplication   in   the   functions   of   land   related   agencies   has   resulted   in   the   maintenance   of   separate   records/information   that   do   not   conform   to   some   standard,   thus   precluding   sharing   of   these   among   agencies.   This   situation   has   contributed   to   further   inefficiencies  as  cited  in  the  Institutional  Arrangements  Study.   The   National   Mapping   and   Resource   Information   Authority   (NAMRIA)   makes   available   at   uniform  scale  topographic  maps  to  all  users  at  reasonable  cost.  Most  national  agencies  use   NAMRIA   maps   as   basis   for   the   preparation   of   various   thematic   maps.   It   is   these   agency-­‐ prepared   thematic   maps   that   are   not   easily   available   or   accessible.   Parcel-­‐based   land   information  is  usually  available  at  the  city  or  municipal  assessors’  offices.  However,  not  all   local  assessors  regularly  and  systematically  update  their  data  entries.   Land   use   information   and   maps   are   prepared   by   cities   and   municipalities   usually   in   connection  with  the  formulation  or  updating  of  their  CLUPs.  These  are  generally  accessible   to   the   public   on   request.   But   these   are   poorly   maintained   especially   the   maps   in   analog   format   making   retrieval   difficult   if   not   impossible.   Increasing   use   of   GIS   systems   however   is   bound  to  lead  to  improved  data  management  at  the  local  level.   The   LAMP   Policy   Study   on   Access   to   Land   Information   revealed   that   the   following   major   problems   surfaced:   (1)   the   difficulty   in   securing   land-­‐related   data   from   government   agencies;  (2)  the  lack  of  ownership  among  agencies  to  establish  a  database  of  land  record   information;   (3)   the   significant   costs   and   efforts   required   to   improve   accuracy   of   land   records;  and  (4)  the  difficulty  of  linking  land  records  of  different  government  agencies.  So   68 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report far,  there  is  no  clear  policy  for  data  sharing  among  government  agencies  and  access  by  the   public  to  land  information  and  for  avoiding  the  potential  duplication  of  efforts  to  gather  and   process  the  same  land  information  needed  by  various  stakeholders.26   Each   of   the   LAM   agencies   has   their   own   system   of   records   management.     DENR’s   records   are   usually   organized   by   jurisdiction   or   location   (province,   municipality,   barangay)   and   use   cadastral   lot   numbers   as   reference.     RoD’s   records   are   organized   sequentially   using   the   title   number  as  reference.    LGU  Assessor’s  records  are  organized  by  barangay  and  use  the  Parcel   Identification  Number  (PIN)  or  tax  declaration  number  (TDN)  as  reference.   While  sharing  of  land  information  between  agencies  is  not  a  major  issue,  the  use  of  different   systems  and  references  in  the  management  of  records  poses  difficulty  in  access.     The   agencies   of   the   government   responsible   for   maintaining   and   managing   land   records   should   develop   a   unified   data   standards   so   that   land   records   management,   particularly   storage   and   retrieval   can   be   harmonized   across   all   agencies,   including   local   government   units;  which  are  at  the  receiving  end  of  the  process.  The  lack  of  access  to  updated  registry   records   is   affecting   the   ability   of   LGUs   to   complete   its   tax   maps,   thereby,   resulting   in   inefficiencies  in  property  tax  collections.  Moreover,  lack  of  access  to  survey  records  prevent   the  LGUs  from  engaging  in  proper  land  tenure  improvement  planning  and  delivery  of  titling   services  to  its  constituents.   LGI  6  -­‐  Participation  and  Equity  in  Land  Policies                 Score   LGI-­‐Dim     Topic   A   B   C   D   Equity  and  Non-­‐Discrimination   6   i   Clear  land  policy  developed  in  a  participatory  manner                   The  extent  with  which  land  policy  statement  draws  on  wide  input  from   different  sectors   6   ii   Meaningful  incorporation  of  equity  goals                 Measures  impacts  of  land  policies  on  equity  issues  and  monitoring   6   Iii   Policy  for  implementation  is  costed,  matched  with  the  benefits  and  is                   adequately  resourced       Measures  efficiency  and  transparency  by  comparing  expected  benefits  of  land   policies  with  corresponding  costs  and  availability  of  adequate  resources   6   iv   Regular  and  public  reports  indicating  progress  in  policy  implementation                   Measures  progresses  in  policy  implementation  by  looking  at  existence  of   publicly  accessible  reports.   The  country  has  clear  land  policies  developed  in  a  participatory  manner   The  Philippines  rates  high  in  this  governance  dimension,  owing  to  its  comprehensive  land   policy  and  the  democratic  processes  that  enable  the  public  to  fully  participate  in  decisions   affecting  them.     The  Philippine  Constitution  provides  the  basic  land  policy  for  the  state.    Many  laws  laid  out   in   detail   the   different   state   policies   on   lands.     The   Philippine   land   legal   infrastructure   is   fractured   and   several   key   legislations   from   the   Land   Registration   Act   of   1903   to   the   1913   Cadastral   Act,   the   Public   Land   Act   of   1936,   the   Revised   Forestry   Code,   the   1988    Llanto,   Gilberto   M.,   Marife   M.   Ballesteros,   and   Aniceto   C.   Orbeta.   Policy  Study  on  Access  to  Land  Information.   Philippine-­‐ 26 Australia  Land  Administration  Project.    January  2005.   69 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report Comprehensive  Agrarian  Reform  Law,  the  Urban  Development  and  Housing  Act  of  1992,  the   Indigenous  Peoples  Act  of  1997,  to  the  Residential  Free  Patent  Act  of  2010  and  many  laws  in   between  provides  an  insight  into  the  evolution  of  state  policies  and  governance  of  lands  in   the  Philippines.   In   the   past,   laws   were   passed   with   very   little   benefit   of   consultations,   particularly   the   Presidential  Decrees  issued  during  the  Martial  Law  era  of  the  Marcos  administration.    But   after  the  EDSA  Revolution  of  1987,  the  legislative  processes  became  more  consultative.    The   Philippine   Congress   conducts   extensive   public   hearings   across   the   country   in   legislating   new  laws.    The  House  Rules  Declaration  of  Principles  and  Policies  states  that  “The   House   of   Representatives   is   the   House   of   the   People.   The   involvement   and   participation   of   the   people   in   the  processes  of  legislation  shall  be  encouraged,  guaranteed  and  sustained.”     The   sessions   of   the  Congress  are  also  open  to  the  public.       Even   executive   issuances   such   as   implementing   rules   and   regulations,   administrative   orders,   etc.   are   required   to   undergo   public   hearings   and   consultations   to   ensure   that   the   sentiments   of   the   key   stakeholders   are   considered   in   the   drafting   and   finalization   of   the   laws  and  other  issuances.    The  legislative  and  policy  making  process  in  the  Philippines  have   become   more   conscious   of   social   development   principles   and   being   inclusive   of   all   stakeholders’  concerns.       Many  of  the  recent  landmark  legislation  are  products  of  demands  from  the  community  and   major  stakeholders  such  as  the  Urban  Development  and  Housing  Act  of  1992  which  was  a   response   to   the   issues   of   the   rapidly   growing   urban   poor   population.     The   IPRA   law   was   passed  to  address  the  issues  of  the  indigenous  peoples  whose  rights  are  being  marginalized,   pushed   out   of   their   ancestral   lands   by   the   government   for   infrastructure   projects,   and   by   private   farming   interests   and   natural   resource   concession   holders.     The   Residential   Free   Patent   Law   was   borne   out   of   the   clamor   from   the   communities   for   the   titling   of   their   residential  lands  since  the  existing  mode  then  was  very  costly  to  access.   More  recently,  the  debates  relating  to  the  National  Land  Use  Act  has  been  very  participatory   but  protracted.  May  sectors  have  made  known  their  positions  on  certain  issues,  and  various   fora  and  technical  discussions  were  held  to  debate  on  the  many  dimensions  of  the  proposed   Bill.     Law   making   however,   is   a   highly   political   process,   and   although   there   are   public   inputs,   the   resulting   policy   could   still   be   a   mixture   of   interests   and   compromises   to   account   for   the   views  of  many  sectors.     Land   policies   in   the   Philippines   incorporate   equity   goals.   These   are   meaningfully   monitored,   but   this   can   be   improved   to   clearly   establish   their   impacts   on   achievement  of  objectives.     The   1987   Philippine   Constitution,   Article   II   (Declaration   of   Principles   and   State   Policies)   laid  out  the  basic  policies  of  the  State  to  promote  a  just  and  dynamic  social  order  that  will   ensure   the   prosperity   and   independence   of   the   nation   and   free   the   people   from   poverty   through   policies   that   provide   adequate   social   services,   promote   full   employment,   a   rising   standard  of  living  and  an  improved  quality  of  life  for  all  (Section  9).    It  values  the  dignity  of   every   human   person   and   guarantees   respect   for   human   rights   (Section   11).     It   recognizes   the  role  of  women  in  nation-­‐building,  and  shall  ensure  the  fundamental  equality  before  the   law   of   women   and   men   (Section   14).     It   promotes   social   justice   in   all   phases   of   national   development  (Section  10).    It  also  promotes  comprehensive  rural  development  and  agrarian   70 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report reform   (Section   21);   and   recognizes   and   promotes   the   rights   of   indigenous   people’s   communities  within  the  framework  of  national  unity  and  development  (Section  22).   In   line   with   these   state   policies,   the   government   passed   several   landmark   legislations   and   pursued  many  projects  to  operationalize  the  declared  state  principles  and  policies.    In  1987,   the   Comprehensive   Agrarian   Reform   Law   was   passed   to   formalize   the   Comprehensive   Agrarian   Reform   Program   to   redistribute   lands   to   landless   farmers   and   farmworkers   to   fast-­‐track   rural   development   and   promote   social   justice.     Migrants,   seasonal   farmworkers   and  women  are  recognized  and  given  equal  access  to  the  Program  as  qualified  beneficiaries.     The  rights  of  indigenous  peoples  are  recognized  and  protected.    The  Presidential  Agrarian   Reform  Council  (PARC)  provides  policy   direction   and   implementation   oversight   to   DAR   and   other  CARP  Implementing  Agencies.    It  also  monitors  the  implementation  and  achievement   of  the  Program  objectives.   In   1992,   the   UDHA   was   passed   to   address   landlessness   in   the   urban   sector.     The   Act   lays   down  the  groundwork  for  a  comprehensive  and  continuing  urban  development  and  housing   program.   It   addresses   the   right   to   housing   of   the   homeless   and   underprivileged   Filipino   people.   This   law   seeks   to   provide   social   housing   to   the   marginalized   sector   by   addressing   their   access   to   land   and   housing,   relocation,   demolitions,   and   promoting   private   sector   participation   in   housing.  The   HUDC,   HLURB,   NHA   and   DILG,   implements   and   monitors   the   implementation  of  activities  for  this  law.     Also   in   1992,   the   enactment   of   the   Women   in   Development   and   Nation-­‐Building   Act   (RA   7192)  mandated  the  NEDA,  with  the  assistance  of  the  National  Commission  on  the  Role  of   Filipino   Women,   to   ensure   that   the   different   government   departments,   including   its   agencies   and   instrumentalities   which,   directly   or   indirectly,   affect   the   participation   of   women   in   national   development   and   their   integration   therein   to   (1)   formulate   and   prioritize   rural   or   countryside   development   programs   or   projects,   provide   income   and   employment   opportunities   to   women   in     the   rural   areas   and   thus,   prevent   their   heavy   migration  from  rural  to  urban  or  foreign  countries;  (2)  include  an  assessment  of  the  extent   to  which  their  programs  and/or  projects  integrate  women  in  the  development  process  and   of   the   impact   of   said   programs   or   projects   on   women,   including   their   implications   in   enhancing   the   self-­‐reliance   of   women   in   improving   their   income;   (3)   ensure   the   active   participation   of   women   and   women's   organizations   in   the   development   programs   and/or   projects  including  their  involvement  in  the  planning,  design,  implementation,  management,   monitoring  and  evaluation  thereof;  (4)  collect  sex-­‐disaggregated  data  and  include  such  data   in   its   program/project   paper,   proposal   or   strategy;   (5)   ensure   that   programs   and/or   projects   are   designed   so   that   the   percentage   of   women   who   receive   assistance   is   approximately   proportionate   to   either   their   traditional   participation   in   the   targeted   activities   or   their   proportion   of   the   population,   whichever   is   higher.   Then   in   2008,   Republic   Act   9710   or   the   Magna   Carta   for   Women   was   enacted.     The   MCW   is   a   comprehensive   women's  human  rights  law  that  seeks  to  eliminate  discrimination  through  the  recognition,   protection,   fulfillment   and   promotion   of   the   rights   of   Filipino   women,   especially   those   belonging   in   the   marginalized   sectors   of   the   society.   It   conveys   a   framework   of   rights   for   women  based  directly  on  international  law.  One  of  its  salient  features  is  giving  equal  status   to   men   and   women   on   the   titling   of   the   land   and   issuance   of   stewardship   contracts   and   patents.    However,  even  with  these  legislation  there  seems  to  be  no  meaningful  monitoring   of   women’s   equitable   access   to   land   considering   the   dearth   of   data.     In   fact   the   current   system  or  process  in  the  registry  does  not  allow  gender  disaggregation  of  data.    Many  of  the   field  offices  of  DENR  and  DAR  are  also  not  so  conscious  about  gender  rights  and  protection   in  the  investigation  and  recording  of  land  rights.   71 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report In   1997,   the   Philippine   Government   enacted   Republic   Act   No.   8371,   known   as   the   Indigenous   Peoples‟   Rights   Act   (IPRA),   to   give   effect   to   the   constitutional   recognition   of   indigenous   peoples‟   rights.   The   IPRA   recognizes   indigenous   peoples‟   inherent   rights,   including   their   right   to   self-­‐determination,   to   ancestral   domains   and   the   applicability   of   customary   laws   governing   property   rights,   to   self-­‐determined   development   and   to   the   requirement  that  free  prior  informed  consent  be  obtained  in  relation  to  any  developments   that   have   impact   on   them.   It   also   recognized   ancestral   domain   rights,   acknowledging   indigenous  peoples‟  time  immemorial  collective  possession  of  their  ancestral  domains  and   establishing  mechanisms  for  these  to  be  delineated  and  formalized.     Local   migration   is   most   often   driven   by   search   for   more   productive   jobs   and   livelihood.     This  is   perhaps   the   reason   why   the   mandate   to   oversee   their   welfare   fell   into   the   Philippine   Department   of   Labor   and   Employment   (DOLE).     However,   the   agency’s   priority   is   clearly   on   temporary   migrant   workers   overseas,   such   that   not   much   attention   is   being   paid   to   local   migration   issues.     The   Local   Government   Units   may   be   in   better   position   to   do   a   more   meaningful   monitoring   of   local   migrant   since   many   of   them   usually   confronts   housing   issues  and  ends  up  in  the  informal  settlements  and  contributes  to  the  growing  magnitude  of   informal   settlers   especially   considering   that   migration   pattern   is   usually   from   rural   communities   to   urban   communities   where   it   is   perceived   there   are   more   and   better   employment  opportunities.         There  are  serious  inadequacies  in  the  implementation  of  land  policies;  in  the  area  of   budget,  resources,  and  institutional  capacity   The  abundance  of  laws  has  resulted  in  insufficient  budgets  for  their  implementation.  While   in   the   crafting   of   legislations,   costs   are   considered   as   these   are   requirements   for   deliberation;   in   reality   many   laws   are   unfunded   or   has   no   clear   funding   source.   In   instances   like   this   the   agencies   are   forced   to   source   funds   from   their   existing   appropriation   to   fund   the   implementation   of   the   new   policy/legislation.     This   therefore   means   that   it   cannot   be   funded   fully   and   therefore   cannot   be   fully   implemented.     In   many   cases,   agencies   were   in   default  of  the  implementation  required  under  the  law.  Also  by  re-­‐appropriating  funds  this   can  mean  that  activities  where  the  funds  were  sourced  will  also  suffer.    An  example  of  laws   with   no   clear   funding   source   is   the   Residential   Free   Patent   Law.     CA   141   and   succeeding   amendments   extending   the   period   of   issuance   of   agricultural   Free   Patents   also   had   no   clear   funding   source,   which   meant   that   after   many   years,   titling   of   public   agricultural   lands   has   not  been  completed.  The  Free  Patent  is  partially  funded  under  the  CARP  program,  however,   these  are  not  sufficient  to  complete  titling  of  untitled  agricultural  lands.     The  IPRA  law  obviously  has  no  secure  funding  which  has  contributed  to  the  slow  process  of   CADT  processing  and  issuance.  The  NCIP  is  also  severely  under  resourced  such  that  there  is   very   little   provision   for   operating   funds   of   its   regional   and   provincial   offices.   These   constraints  have  affected  the  NCIP’s  ability  to  deliver  on  the  intents  of  the  IPRA  law.   The   National   Integrated   Protected   Areas   System   (NIPAS)   Law   is   also   severely   underfunded.   The  law  mandates  the  completion  of  establishment  of  all  protected  areas  under  the  system   to   be   completed   in   three   years   since   it   took   effect   in   1992.   However,   more   than   twenty   years  after,  there  are  still  huge  gaps  in  the  coverage  of  the  national  protected  area  system,   due  to  limited  funding  allocations,  and  lack  of  capacities  in  the  agencies  and  LGUs.     Among  all  the  laws,  only  CARP  has  secure  source  of  funding  based  on  its  legislation.  Despite   this,  its  implementation  has  been  extended  due  to  implementation  shortfalls.     72 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report There   is   a   clear   need   to  reconsider   the   funding   and   resource   allocation   to   agencies   in   order   to  provide  adequate  levels  of  support  to  implement  existing  land  laws,  and  enable  them  to   achieve  their  objectives.     Formal   land   institutions   report   on   land   policy   implementation   in   a   regular,   meaningful,  and  comprehensive  way  with  reports  being  publicly  accessible   The  assessment  rates  the  Philippines  as  one  with  best  practice  in  this  dimension.    As  part  of   the   Aquino   administration’s   strong   thrust   on   transparency   and   good   governance,     all   reports  are  uploaded  into  the  respective  agency  websites.     Thus,   all   of   the   land   agencies/institutions   implementing   the   different   land   policies   are   required   to   report   the   implementation   progress   regularly.     These   are   usually   contained   in   the  annual  reports  submitted  by  the  agencies.    The  different  agencies  also  produce  several   reports  that  can  be  issued  monthly,  quarterly  or  semi-­‐annual.    However,  in  some  cases  the   reports   that   can   be   accessed   starts   only   from   2010.         Reports   previous   to   2010   would   have   to   be   accessed   from   the   physical   records   of   the   agency.     Agencies   like   DENR,   DAR,   NHA   usually  print  out  yearbooks  containing  the  agency’s  reports  of  accomplishment  against  their   mandates.     Copies   of   these   annual   publications   are   usually   maintained   in   the   agency’s   libraries.   The   progress   of   the   CADT/CALT   issuance   for   example   can   be   accessed   through   the   Ancestral   Domains   Database   Information   System   (ADDIS).     The   list   of   approved   CADTs,   CALTs,   certificate   of   preconditions   and   compliance   certificates,   the   list   of   approved   ADSDPPs   as   well   as   the   maps   showing   approved   CADTS   in   the   different   ethnographic   areas   can  easily  be  accessed  through  the  agency  website  www.ncip.gov.ph.       Progress   and   updates   on   CARP   implementation   can   be   accessed   from   the   DAR   website   (www.dar.gov.ph).     A   summary   of   the   CARP   accomplishment   from   areas   surveyed,   issued   with   CLOAS   or   Patents   to   number   of   beneficiaries   and   support   services   can   be   viewed   from   the  agency  website.       In   addition   to   public   reporting,   the   agencies   provide   regular   reports   to   Congress   during   annual   budget   hearings   on   the   status   of   their   programs,   and   during   exceptional   reporting   when  there  are  queries  on  program  implementation.         73 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report   Module  2  -­‐  Land  Use  Planning,  Management  and  Taxation   INDICATORS  ASSESSED:   LGI   7   –   Transparency   of   land   use   restrictions   -­‐   extent  to  which  land  use  and  management   regulations  are  justified  and  transparent   LGI  8  –    Efficiency  of  land  use  planning  -­‐  adequacy  of  land  use  plans  and  regulations.   LGI  9  –    Speed  and  predictability  of  enforcement  of  restricted  land  uses  -­‐   transparency  and   efficiency  in  the  process  for  the  delivery  of  permissions  for  restricted  land  uses.   LGI  1 0  –  Transparency  of  valuations  -­‐  transparency,  accuracy,  and  public  availability  of  land   and  property  valuations.   LGI  1 1  –  Tax  collection  efficiency  -­‐  extent  to  which  authorities  effectively  implement  tax   collection.     LGI  7  -­‐  Transparency  of  Land  Use  Restrictions               Score   LGI-­‐ Topic   A   B   C   D   Dim     Transparency  of  Land  Use   7   i   In  urban  areas,  land  use  plans  and  changes  to  these  are  based  on  public                   input     Assesses  extent  of  public  input  in  urban  land  use  plans  and  in  changes  to   these  plans   7   ii   In  rural  areas,  land  use  plans  and  changes  to  these  are  based  on  public                   input     Assesses  extent  of  public  inputs  in  rural  land  use  plans  and  in  changes  to   these  plans   7   iii   Public  capture  of  benefits  arising  from  changes  in  permitted  land  use                     Assesses  existence    and  transparency  of  mechanisms  to  allow  the  public  to   capture  significant  part  of  the  gains  from  changing  land  use.   7   iv   Speed  of  land  use  change                   Assesses  whether    majority  of  land  where  land  use  has  changed  is   transferred  to  its  destined  use  within  a  period  of  3  years.     There  is  inadequate  public  input  in  urban  land  use  planning   Existing   guidelines   for   land   use   planning   provide   for   extensive   consultation   during   the   process.   However,   in   practice,   public   consultation   is   conducted   toward   the   end   of   the   process,   i.e.,   when   a   draft   plan   is   nearly   completed   and   is   then   presented   to   various   stakeholders   for   comments.   People’s   comments   and   reactions   may   or   may   not   result   in   some  revisions  of  the  draft  plan.    In  very  few  cases,  such  as  those  of  Quezon  City  and  Puerto   Princesa   City,   public   input   is   built   into   the   planning   structure   through   the   organization   of   sectoral   and   functional   committees   with   multi-­‐stakeholder   representation   and   into   the   process   by   getting   these   committees   involved   in   all   steps   of   the   planning   process.   The   issues,  concerns  and  advocacies  espoused  by  these  sectoral  representatives  find  their  way   into  the  plans.    This  practice  however,  is  dependent  on  the  willingness  of  the  LGU  to  follow   the  prescribed  process.     74 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report In  the  majority  of  cases,  the  plans  are  not  revised  or  changed  until  they  “expire”  and  then  a   new   one   is   prepared.   Plan   revision   is   not   normally   done   as   a   result   of   monitoring   and   evaluating  the  success  or  failure  of  the  plan,  nor  of  feedback  from  the  people.  A  few  plans  do   get   revised   or   changed   when   there   is   a   change   of   administration   or   when   applications   for   reclassification   of   large   areas   of   agricultural   land   are   brought   up   for   decision   by   the   local   legislative   body.   Local   legislative   bodies   are   often   sympathetic   to   proposals   to   reclassify   agricultural  lands  because  of  the  prospect  of  deriving  higher  revenues  from  taxes  assessed   on  non-­‐agricultural  lands.   It  is  therefore  essential  for  LGUs  to  place  more  efforts  in  ensuring  there  is  regular  updating   of   their   CLUPs,   including   meaningful   public   participation   in   the   land   use   planning   and   updating  processes.  The  DILG  and  HLURB  can  assist  in  this  regard  by  providing  appropriate   technical   assistance,   developing   capacities,   and   inclusion   of   relevant   LGAF   dimensions   in   monitoring  land  governance  at  the  LGU  level.   There  is  wide  variability  in  public  participation  in  rural  land  use  planning   Land   use   planning   and   changes   in   land   use   plans   in   rural   areas   happen   in   the   following   types  of  lands/processes:   Land   classification,   evaluation   delineation   and   demarcation   –   this   process   involves   the   determination  of  the  forest  line  boundaries  and  assessment  of  the  status  of  lands.  This  also   results   in   the   determination   of   public   agricultural   alienable   and   disposable   lands   which   can   be   released   through   the   titling   process.   The   delineation   process   is   a   largely   technical   exercise,   and   involves   less   public   inputs.   The   results   are   maps   of   forest   boundaries,   their   delineation,   and   demarcation   on   the   ground   with   the   assistance   of   local   community   representatives   and   LGUs.   The   results   are   to   be   compiled   and   submitted   to   Congress   for   enactment  of  the  country’s  final  forest  line.     In   classified   forest   lands   –   many   local   government   units   have   undertaken   forest   land   use   planning  (FLUPs)  as  part  of  their  local  development  planning  functions;  even  if  forest  land   management   is   not   entirely   their   responsibility.   The   FLUPs   results   from   public   participation,  particularly  the  forest  communities  who  are  affected  by  the  process.  In  most   instances,   these   FLUPs   are   mainstreamed   in   the   LGUs   comprehensive   land   use   plans   (CLUPs).  There  are  moves  now  by  the  DENR  to  roll  out  FLUP  in  all  LGUs,  and  incorporate   these  in  all  CLUPs.    FLUP  processes  do  not  result  in  changes  in  land  use.  The  main  result  is   clear  allocation  of  forest  lands  to  various  uses  and  tenurial  instruments,  the  prioritization  of   watersheds  to  be  managed,  and  the  identification  of  open  access  areas  which  are  potential   for   co   management   between   DENR   and   the   LGUs   concerned.   The   preparation   of   FLUPs   however,  is  not  a  mandated  practice;  and  depends  on  the  commitment  and  interest  of  the   LGU.   In   ancestral   domains   –   the   process   follows   self   delineation   by   the   IP   communities,   with   support  from  NCIP  and  other  NGOs.  In  many  cases,  there  is  no  input  by  other  sectors,  such   as   LGUs   and   DENR;   which   often   results   in   overlaps   (in   the   case   of   DENR),   and   non-­‐ recognition  (in  the  case  of  LGUs)  of  the  CADT.   In   establishment   of   protected   areas   –   this   entails   a   change   in   land   use   classification   from   forest  lands  to  national  park.  The  process  follows  a  13-­‐step  procedure  as  prescribed  under   the   NIPAS   Act;   which   provides   for   a   lengthy   consultation   process   with   the   immediate   communities,   as   well   as   discussions   in   Congress,   prior   to   enactment   of   legislation   authorizing  the  change  in  legal  classification.  Once  the  protected  area  is  established,  there  is   also   an   extensive   consultation   process   to   develop   the   PA   management   plan.   Public   inputs   75 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report are   likewise   sought   in   the   preparation   of   this   plan,   which   specifies   the   detailed   land   uses   within  the  protected  area.     Mechanisms  to  allow  the  public  to  capture  benefits  from  changing  land  use  are  rarely   used  and  applied  in  a  discretionary  manner   The  Philippines  rates  poorly  in  this  dimension.  The  implementation  of  relevant  policies  to   enable   public   capture   of   benefits   arising   from   changes   in   permitted   land   use   has   largely   been  ignored;  thereby  resulting  in  some  members  of  society  unduly  benefitting  from  these.   At  best,  such  benefits  are  captured  in  changes  in  property  tax  assessment,  but  because  the   LGU  schedule  of  market  values  is  way  below  the  true  market  values  and  almost  always  out   of   date,   this   does   not   materialize.   Full   implementation   of   this   law   will   also   prevent   those   with   vested   interest   to   unduly   influence   the   location   of   major   public   infrastructure   projects   for   their   benefit.   In   a   similar   way,   compensation   for   expropriated   properties   or   those   affected  by  ROW  or  other  government  projects  are  not  compensated  fairly.   There   are   at   least   three   beneficiaries   from   whom   benefits   of   public   works   investments   should   be   captured   for   the   public:   the   general   consumers;   the   direct   users   of   the   facility;   and   the   landowners   within   the   immediate   vicinity   of   the   public   improvement   project.   The   mechanisms   of   capture   are   the   consumption   tax,   user   fees   and   charges,   and   the   special   benefit  assessment,  respectively.  The  first  two  are  in  active  use  in  the  Philippines;  the  third   mechanism,  though  authorized  by  existing  laws,  is  hardly  applied  at  all.   The  law  on  special  benefit  assessment  or  betterment  levy  has  been  in  existence  for  nearly   three-­‐quarters   of   a   century.   It   first   appeared   in   the   Assessment   Law   (Commonwealth   Act   470)   dated   June   16,   1939.   The   same   provision   was   carried   over   in   two   other   subsequent   laws.   The   special   assessment   provision   was   contained   in   Sections   47-­‐55   of   the   Real   Property   Tax   Code   (Presidential   Decree   464)   of   1974,   then   it   appeared   again   as   Sections   240-­‐245   of   the   1991   Local   Government   Code   (Republic   Act   7160.   So   far   there   are   no   records   of   its   application   in   any   part   of   the   country.   While   some   countries,   notably   Colombia,   Mexico,   and   some   states   of   the   United   States   of   America,   finance   substantial   portions  of  their  public  works  projects  through  this  tax,  the  Philippines  has  not  even  tried  to   tap  this  veritable  gold  mine.   A   variation   of   the   betterment   levy   is   however   observed   to   be   rampant   in   the   Philippines.   This  refers  to  the  practice  of  landowners  donating  a  portion  of  their  land  for  use  as  a  site  for   public   institutions   such   as   a   school,   a   health   center,   a   barangay   hall,   and   the   like,   in   obvious   anticipation   of   windfalls   in   the   form   of   business   opportunities   to   be   generated   by   the   government  project  in  the  immediate  vicinity  as  well  as  in  terms  of  increases  in  the  value  of   the  remaining  portion  of  their  property.  In  such  a  transaction,  the  government  does  not  find   it   necessary   to   capture   for   the   public   the   land   value   increment   because   it   did   not   have   to   pay  compensation  to  the  land  owner  in  the  first  place.  The  Filipino  localism  for  this  practice   is   “quits”.   The   Americans   have   an   equivalent   practice   which   they   aptly   call   “wipeouts   for   windfalls”.   The  only  mechanism  for  public  capture  of  the  benefits  of  changed  land  use  from  landowners   is   the   real   property   tax.   But   the   benefits   are   not   captured   in   real   time   due   to   the   fact   that   land  value  assessment  is  not  done  systematically  and  regularly.  The  very  wide  discrepancy   between  the  LGU  schedule  of  market  values  and  the  current  market  values  can  hardly  make   up  for  the  difference  in  terms  of  public  capture  of  benefits  through  property  taxes.     It   is   therefore   about   time   that   the   government   should   enforce   the   existing   provisions   of   sections   240-­‐245   of   RA   7160   or   the   Local   Government   Code,   pertaining   to   special   76 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report assessment.     The   BLGF   can   assist   in   developing   specific   guidelines   and   appropriate   training   for  LGU  Assessors  on  these.     Monitoring  land  use  change  based  on  their  assigned  use  is  not  yet  widely  practiced  in   the  Philippines   Monitoring  land  use  change  is  not  yet  an  established  practice  in  the  Philippines.  Thus,  it  is   very   difficult   to   determine   the   rate   of   change;   and   whether   land   use   changes   are   in   accordance  with  the  plan  or  in  spite  of  the  plan.    Few  isolated  attempts  at  analyzing  land  use   change  as  an  integral  part  of  the  CLUP  planning  process  were  undertaken  in  Dagupan  City,   Puerto  Princesa  City,  and  Quezon  City,  with  varying  results  and  utility  for  CLUP  updating.   It   can   be   assumed   that   the   speed   of   land   use   change   is   directly   related   to   the   rate   of   urbanization,   therefore   it   can   be   assumed   that   it   is   highest   in   Metro   Manila   and   environs.   Such   changes   are   influenced   largely   by   national   government   investments   in   road   construction   and   by   private   investments,   big   and   small.   Local   governments,   on   whose   shoulders   land   use   regulation   falls,   tend   to   be   passive   onlookers   rather   than   proactively   determining  the  direction  and  pace  of  development  through  their  land  use  plans.  Unplanned   development  also  results  in  inefficiencies  in  land  use  allocation.   This   is   an   important   area   that   requires   attention   in   order   to   prevent   speculation   and   capture  of  benefits  by  only  a  few.  Updating  of  CLUPs  should  be  based  on  the  assessment  of   the  extent  to  which  changes  in  land  use  were  adhered  to  in  the  previous  plan,  as  basis  for   policy  making,  and  better  alignment  of  the  updated  CLUP  with  demands  and  actual  land  use   changes.     LGI  8  -­‐  Efficiency  of  land  use  planning               Score   LGI-­‐ Topic   A   B   C   D   Dim     Efficiency  of  Land  Use  Planning   8   i   Process  for  planned  urban  development  in  the  largest  city                   A  process  for  planned  urban  development  is  followed  in  practice  in  the   largest  city  in  the  country.   8   ii   Process  for  planned  urban  development  in  the  4  largest  cities  (exc.  largest)                   Assesses  whether  a  process  for  planned  urban  development  is  followed  in   practice  in  the  4  largest  cities  other  than  the  largest  city  in  the  country.   8   iii   Ability  of  urban  planning  to  cope  with  urban  growth                   Assesses  the  ability  of  urban  planning  to  cope  with  urban  growth.   8   iv   Plot  size  adherence                     Measures  the  share  of  the  population  that  violates  plot  size  restrictions  is   low.   8   v   Use  plans  for  specific  land  classes  (forest,  pastures  etc.)  are  in  line  with  use                     Verifies  that  the  proportion  of  land  use  in  contravention  of  existing   regulations  or  land  use  plans  in  rural  areas  is  small.     Urban   land   use   planning   is   not   effective   in   controlling   urban   growth   and   spatial   development     Urban   growth   is   happening   in   an   ad   hoc   manner   in   most   of   the   urban   centers   of   the   Philippines,  signifying  a  breakdown  in  urban  planning.  This  creates  pressure  on  the  location   of   government   infrastructure   development,   and   service   provision   for   the   growing   city   population.   Unplanned   development   also   creates   inefficiencies   in   land   use   allocation,   such   that  prime  properties  can  be  subject  to  informal  settlements  and  other  low  value  uses.     77 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report In   the   case   of   Quezon   City   which   is   the   most   populous   city   in   the   Philippines;   its   development   was   triggered   by   expansion   of   Manila   and   that   its   growth   was   meant   to   receive  the  spill  over  development  from  Manila  and  San  Juan  cities.  The  formal  planning  of   Quezon  City  was  to  prepare  it  as  the  country’s  national  capital.  City  planning  then  benefitted   from  the  technical  services  of  the  National  Planning  Commission.  When  this  support  ceased,   urban   expansion   and   development   has   not   been   effectively   controlled.     Rather,   the   key   drivers   of   urban   expansion   were   the   circumferential   roads   that   were   built   at   the   center   and   around  Metro  Manila  (C1  to  C7).     The  same  situation  holds  true  for  the  next  four  largest  cities  in  the  Philippines.  A  key  issue  is   that   LGUs   are   not   fully   utilizing   their   regulatory   powers   in   land   use   through   the   zoning   process.   This   also   stems   from   the   fact   that   there   is   still   that   widely   held   belief   that   if   land   is   private,   then   LGUs   cannot   control   its   use   and   development.   An   associated   concern   is   that   LGUs  are  not  doing  land  banking;  instead,  this  is  done  by  the  private  sector  for  speculative   investments.   A   few   LGUs   who   undertake   land   banking   is   doing   this   mainly   for   shelter,   rather   than   for   urban   development.   Increased   awareness   and   education   is   required   to   improve  LGUs  appreciation  of  the  value  of  planning  and  zoning;  and  the  regulatory  powers   associated   with   development   rights.   A   related   concern   is   poor   compliance   by   LGUs   of   the   mandated  regular  updating  of  CLUPs.  Thus,  the     The  situation  has  become  an  excellent  ground  for  speculation  and  elite  capture  of  benefits   from   land   use   and   zoning,   particularly   in   rapidly   urbanizing   areas   in   key   cities   of   the   Philippines.   To   address   these,   the   LGUs   should   therefore   be   more   proactive   in   urban   planning,  making  sound  projections  on  directions,  scope  and  extent  of  urban  growth  so  that   services   and   government   infrastructure   can   be   projected   in   advance.   More   importantly,   consistency   of   plans   across   LGU   boundaries   and   within   provinces   and   economic   regions   should  be  made,  through  national,  regional  and  provincial  land  use  policies,  to  better  guide   local  development.  This  could  be  achieved  with  the  passage  of  the  National  Land  Use  Act.   Urban  planning  is  not  able  to  cope  with  urban  growth   The   LGAF   used   the   indicator   “number   of   new   formal   dwellings”   to   measure   the   ability   of   urban   planning   to   cope   with   urban   growth.   However,   in   the   Philippines,   this   indicator   is   considered  inadequate.   A  unique  feature  of  urbanization  in  the  Philippines  is  that  while  there  is  robust  residential   property   development   in   Manila   and   key   cities   particularly   in   construction   of   condominiums,   this   does   not   reflect   the   ability   of   urban   planning   to   cope   with   urban   growth.   The   fact   is,   there   remains   a   huge   unmet   demand   for   housing   and   growing   informality   in   the   urban   areas.     Thus,   the   current   oversupply   of   housing   is   not   effectively   reducing   housing   need,   currently   placed   at   5   million   units.   Rather,   supply   is   driven   by   perception   of   what   is   needed.   It   is   estimated   that   there   has   been   a   47%   increase   in   new   condominium   units   since   2012.   Rather,   the   current   boom   in   condominium   development   caters   to   the   upper   middle   to   high-­‐   income   classes,   and   responds   more   to   speculative   demands  for  investment.     The   NHA   and   HUDCC   therefore   should   encourage   LGUs   and   the   private   sector   to   invest   more   in   meeting   the   housing   demands   of   the   lower   and   middle   income   sectors   of   society   to   effectively   reduce   informality.   In   addition,   the   mandate   of   municipal   governments   with   respect  to  socialized  housing  provision  should  be  clarified.     There  is  low  compliance  on  residential  plot  size  in  urban  areas   78 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report A   survey   of   compliance   on   residential   plot   size   was   not   feasible   at   the   time   of   LGAF   assessment.   However,   it   is   common   knowledge   that   there   are   huge   deviations   between   what  are  allowed  and  what  actually  exists  on  the  ground  in  terms  of  residential  plot  sizes.   Requirements   for   residential   lot   houses   are   prescribed   in   two   existing   laws,   PD   957   for   commercial   housing   and   BP   220   for   low-­‐cost   housing.   To   the   extent   that   residential   development   projects   submit   themselves   to   the   regulatory   system   of   government,   the   standards   are   assumed   to   be   fully   complied   with.   But   it   is   a   known   fact   that   not   all   builders   secure  the  necessary  clearances  and  permits  and  that  local  building  officials  are  not  known   to  conduct  field  inspections  to  ferret  out  violations.  Hence,  the  incidence  of  violations  may   be  significant.  Variations  across  cities  may  be  more  in  degree  than  in  kind.   Worth   noting   here   is   the   practice   of   “re-­‐subdivision”   which   is   common   practice.   Re-­‐ subdivision   is   resorted   to   in   the   case   of   formerly   approved   subdivisions   under   the   provisions   of   PD   957   that   are   not   sold   out   or   abandoned   by   the   developer   for   whatever   reasons.  These  are  later  subdivided  again  by  other  developers  or  by  ISFs  usually  place  them   under  the  CMP  scheme.  But  this  time  the  re-­‐subdivision  standards  are  lower  adhering  to  the   provisions  of  BP220.     It  is  therefore  essential  that  proper  zoning  and  monitoring  of  subdivisions  should  be  made   to  ensure  adherence  to  plot  size  standards.  More  importantly,  the  restrictions  on  plot  sizes   should   be   revisited   in   terms   of   how   it   contributes   to   the   objective   of   urban   land   reform   and   providing  equal  opportunity  for  all  Filipinos  to  own  land.   Use   plans   for   specific   rural   land   classes   (forests,   pastures,   etc.)   are   generally   not   in   line  with  use   There   was   outright   consensus   among   panel   members   that   in   the   case   of   areas   under   the   public  domain  –  forest  lands  and  protected  areas,  use  plans  are  not  in  line  with  actual  use.   This   is   due   to   the   fact   that   classifications   of   land   are   legal   statutes   following   technical   criteria,  and  are  not  necessarily  based  on  actual  use.     A  good  example  of  the  above,  the  panel  noted,  is  the  status  of  forest  cover  of  what  are  legally   classified  as  forest  lands.  A  good  proportion  of  forest  lands  are  not  necessarily  covered  with   forests;   and/or   are   used   for   other   purposes.   In   the   absence   of   specific   data   on   this   dimension,     it   is   estimated   that   about   30-­‐50%   of   lands   set   aside   for   specific   uses   are   in   contravention  with  existing  regulations.     The   general   public   needs   to   be   educated   on   the   meaning   and   purpose   of   the   legal   classification  of  land  to  raise  the  level  of  their  compliance.  More  importantly,  this  situation   underscores   the   fact   that   there   is   a   general   breakdown   of   land   use   classification   and   allocation;   such   that   areas   designated   for   specific   purposes   are   already   de   facto   used   for   other   uses.   The   enactment   of   the   National   Land   Use   Act   would   provide   the   broader   framework   for   rationale   land   use   allocation   at   the   national   level,   in   consideration   of   the   current   and   future   needs   of   the   country,   thereby   achieving   more   approximate   use   plans   with  actual  use.  A  review  of  the  18%  slope  criteria  in  the  classification  of  forest  lands  is  in   order   to   consider   areas   below   30%   in   slope   to   be   classified   as   alienable   and   disposable   lands.     LGI  9  -­‐  Speed  and  Predictability  of  enforcement  of  restricted  land  uses               Score   LGI-­‐ Topic   A   B   C   D   Dim     Speed  and  Predictability   79 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report             Score   LGI-­‐ Topic   A   B   C   D   Dim     9   i   Applications  for  building  permits  for  residential  dwellings  are  affordable                   and  processed  in  a  non-­‐discretionary  manner.   Assesses  whether  the  requirements  for  building  permits  for  residential   dwellings  are  clearly  disseminated  and  applications  are  affordable  and   processed  in  a  non-­‐discretionary  manner.   9   ii   Time  required  to  obtain  a  building  permit  for  a  residential  dwelling                     Assesses  whether  the  time  needed  to  obtain  a  building  permit  for  residential   dwellings  is  short.   The   country   rated   highly   in   terms   of   dimensions   relating   to   the   indicator   on   speed   and   predictability  of  enforcement  of  restricted  land  use.  The  policies  and  procedures  for  ranting   building  permits  are  well  developed,  and  are  implemented  by  LGUs.     Residential  building  permits  are  granted  promptly  and  transparently   The   requirements   by   LGUs   for   the   processing   of   building   permits   essentially   follow   the   provisions  of  the  National  Building  Code.  Thus,  locational  clearance,  fire  safety  inspections,   and   copies   of   titles   are   deemed   justified   and   reasonable.   The   length   of   time   to   issue   the   permits   likewise   depend   on   the   completeness   of   the   requirement   submitted   by   the   applicant.   In   cases   where   the   requirements   are   complete,   the   issuance   of   the   permit   does   not  take  two  weeks,  which  is  well  within  the  best  practice  standards  of  three  months.     The  fees  likewise  are  standard  across  all  LGUs,  following  the  fee  schedule  issued  regularly   by  the  DPWH.     These  requirements  and  fees  are  publicly  available  in  the  LGU  offices,  and  in  the  websites.   LGI  10  -­‐  Transparency  of  valuations                 Score   LGI-­‐ Topic   A   B   C   D   Dim     Transparency  of  Valuation   10   i   Clear  process  of  property  valuation                   Assesses  the  extent  to  which  the  process  of  property  valuation  for  tax   purposes  is  clear,  transparent,  and  comprehensive,  and  if    based  largely  on   market  prices  and  regularly  updated.   10   ii   Public  availability  of  valuation  rolls                   Assesses  public  availability  of  valuation  rolls.     Property  assessment  for  tax  purposes  are  not  based  on  market  prices  and  valuation   rolls  are  not  updated  regularly   The   Local   Government   Code   (LGC)   of   1991   clearly   prescribed   that   assessment   of   properties   subject   to   taxation   should   be   based   on   market   prices.27  Section   201   of   the   Code   provides   that  “all  real  property,  whether  taxable  or  exempt,  shall  be  appraised  at  the  current  and  fair   market  value  prevailing  in  the  locality  where  the  property  is  situated.”      Section  219  of  the   Code   further   provides   that   “LGUs   shall   undertake   a   general   revision   of   real   property   assessments   within   two   years   after   the   effectivity   of   the   Code   and   every   three   years   thereafter.”   27  The  LGC,  or  Republic  Act  No.  7160  was  approved  on  October  10,  1991  and  became  effective  January  1,  1992.     80 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report There   is   however,   wide   disparity   between   what   the   law   says   and   practice.   Three   factors   basically   influence   the   wide   gap   between   the   recorded   values   and   the   market   prices:   (i)   the   use   of   and   reliance   on   the   understated   values   submitted   by   property   owners   as   basis   of   valuation;  (ii)  outdated  methodology  for  determining  schedule  of  market  values  (SMVs)  and   (iii)   very   poor   record   of   local   government   units   (LGUs)   in   regular   revision   of   their   SMVs   thus  rendering  the  recorded  values  outdated  and  obsolete.     While   there   are   clearly   prescribed   methods   for   estimation   of   LGUs   SMVs,   the   practice   has   been  that  property  owners  understate  the  value  of  their  properties  when  reporting  to  both   to   the   national   and   local   governments   to   avoid   paying   the   appropriate   taxes28.     LGUs   rely   strongly  on  the  official  documents  submitted  by  property  owners  as  basis  for  determining   the   market   values   for   fear   of   being   sued   by   the   property   owner   even   though   the   real   transaction   prices   are   practically   everyone   in   the   community.   They   would   rather   be   safe   and   use   the   official   documents   even   if   the   prices   contained   therein   are   much   lower   than   the   actual  transaction  cost.       Prior   to   the   issuance   of   the   Mass   Appraisal   Guidebook   (MAG)   which   describes   in   very   detailed  terms  how  market  values  are  determined,  LGUs  followed  a  formula  in  the  Manual   on   Real   Property   Appraisal   and   Assessment   Operations   (MRPAAO)   whereby   they   get   the   average   and   the   median   of   the   sales   values   as   reported   to   the   assessor   by   the   property   owners,   added   up   the   two   values,   then   divided   the   sum   by   two   and   the   resulting   figure   became   the   base   unit   market   value.     There   is   deviation   from   market   values   using   this   formula  because  to  begin  with,  the  recorded  sales  values  are  understated.       Based  on  what   the  valuation  experts  are  saying,  there  should  be  no  averaging  of  values.       In  many  instances,  the  practice  is  that  the  LGU  or  local  officials  predetermine  how  much  the   SMV  should  increase  (say,  10%  or  15%)  without  regard  to  what  is  existing  in  the  property   market.  On  this  basis,  the  whole  process  of  SMV  revision  just  becomes  a  desk  exercise.    This   is  the  reason  why  there  are  values  up  to  the  last  two  decimal  places  or  centavos  –  such  as   P157.45  per  square  meter.       Under  the  MAG,  the  assessor  is  supposed  to  gather  sales  data  and  not  just  rely  on  what  is   submitted,  validate  these  data  and  analyze  the  results  of  the  validation  together  with  data   from   secondary   sources   as   well   as   from   their   own   local   knowledge.     If   Assessors   follow   this   process,   they   should   be   able   to   capture   the   real   market   values.     The   problem   now   is   that   even  with  the  MAG,  only  the  LAMP,  and  now  the  REGALA  LGUs,  have  been  trained  on  this   reformed   valuation   process.     There   is   no   information   as   to   whether   the   other   LGUs   have   adopted  the  MAG  or  still  following  the  old  processes  and  procedures.     Thus,  most  of  the  recorded  values  in  the  SMVs  are  understated.  In  the  1980s,  the  National   Internal   Revenue   Code   was   amended   to   address   these   very   low   market   values.   The   Code   authorized   the   Bureau   of   Internal   Revenue   (BIR)   to   divide   the   Philippines   into   different   zones  and  to  establish  zonal  values  for  lands  to  be  used  as  basis  for  collecting  the  national   taxes   related   to   land   transfers.     Prior   to   this,   the   BIR   also   used   the   SMV   as   the   basis   for   collecting   land-­‐related   national   taxes.     Thus,   at   present,   while   local   governments   use   their   SMVs   for   collecting   property   taxes,   the   national   government   uses   the   zonal   values   and   in   28  National  taxes  paid  on  property  transfers  are  the  capital  gains  tax  or  the  estate  or  donor’s  tax,  whichever  applies,  and  the   documentary  stamp  tax.    These  taxes  amount  to  approximately  7.5%  of  the  transaction  price.  The  local  governments,  on  the   other  hand,  collect  the  local  tax  on  transfers  (one  half  percent  of  the  transaction  price)  and  the  annual  real  property  tax  which   is  a  maximum  of  2%  for  cities  and  1%  for  provinces,  of  the  taxable  base.       81 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report almost  all  cases,  the  two  values  are  different.  Although  there  may  be  some  exceptions,  the   zonal  values  are  usually  higher  than  the  LGUs’  SMVs.   In  terms  of  LGU  compliance  with  the  mandatory  general  revision  of  their  SMVs  every  three   year;   there   is   a   declining   trend   through   the   years.   From   a   high   of   83%   in   1993,   less   and   less   LGUs  have  revised  their  Schedule  of  Market  Values  (SMV)  as  the  table  below  would  show.   Year     %  of  LGUs  that  Revised  their  SMVs   1993     83%   1996     63%   1999     54%   2002     36%   2005     31%   2008     25%   Non-­‐compliance  with  the  regular  revision  of  the  SMV  is  aggravated  by  the  fact  that  the  LGC   does  not  provide  a  sanction  for  LGUs  that  do  not  revise.    In  a  bid  to  force  the  LGUs  to  comply   with   the   Code,   the   Department   of   Finance   and   the   Department   of   Interior   and   Local   Government  issued  Joint  Circular  2010-­‐01  (October  18,2010)  reiterating  the  LGC  provision   and  directing  all  LGUs  to  revise  their  SMVs  and  conduct  a  general  revision.    Pursuant  to  this,   52  LGUs  (21  provinces  and  31  cities  revised  their  SMVs  over  the  period  2011  to  2013.     More  recent  data  from  BLGF  reveal  that  as  of  2013,  only  about  22%  of  provinces  and  cities   have  updated  SMVs.     Table  _____.  Status  of  LGU  Updating  of  SMVs  as  of    201329     Provinces   Cities   Maximum  age  of  SMVs   28   24   Minimum  age  of  SMVs   1   1   Mean  age  of  SMVs   7.05   9.5   No.   of   LGUs   with   SMVs   4   62   114   years  old  and  over       (%  of  total  number  of   (78%)   (79%)   LGUs)   Total  Number  of  LGUs   80   144   To   illustrate   how   wide   the   disparities   are   between   the   recorded   values   and   the   market   prices,  the  following  data  from  selected  LGUs  are  presented30:   Naga  City  –   In   a   2009   study   undertaken   under   the   Land   Administration   and   Management   Project  2  (LAMP2);  the  values  in  effect  were  based  on  1995  market  prices  making  the  SMV   almost   14   years   old.   Property   values   increased   significantly   after   the   revision.   In   the   case   of   residential   lands,   increases   ranged   from   150%   to   900%.   For   commercial   lands,   the   increases  were  from  16%  to  171%;  while  for  agricultural  lands,  the  increases  ranged  from   42%  to  209%.   29  Source:  BLGF   30  Based  on  studies  under  the  WB-­‐AusAID  funded  Land  Administration  and  Management  Project,  Phase  2.     82 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report Mandaue  City  –  In  a  similar  study  under  the  above  Project,  the  SMV  was  affectively  based  on   1989   market   values   making   it   obsolete   by   approximately   20   years.   With   the   revision,   the   average   increase   in   the   values   of   residential   lands   was   2148%;   for   commercial   lands,   it   was   1484%;  and  for  residential  lands,  the  average  increase  was  1523%.     Other  case  studies  using  first  hand  data  illustrate  the  same  points:31   Tayabas   City   -­‐   in   2012,   the   city’s   SMV   are   approximately   ten   years   old.   The   gap   in   the   recorded   values   and   the   market   prices   ranges   from   535%   to   2098%   for   residential   lands   and  from  1049%  to  1712%  for  commercial  lands.   Legazpi  City    -­‐  in  2012;  their  current  SMV  is  based  on  2002  market  values.    The  gap  between   the  recorded  values  and  market  prices  range  from  306%  to  871%  for  residential  lands  and   from  193%  to  347%  for  commercial  lands.   San  Carlos  City  -­‐  the  disparities  between  the  recorded  values  and  market  prices  are  not  so   wide   because   the   city   has   been   regularly   revising   its   SMV   in   accordance   with   the   law.     Its   last  SMV  revision  was  in  2008.    Thus,  the  gap  in  the  values  ranges  from  131%  to  227%  for   residential  lands  and  from  115%  to  127%  for  commercial  lands.   Bayawan  City   -­‐   its   SMV   was   last  revised   in  2011.    The  gap  between   the  recorded   values   and   market   prices   ranges   from   67%   to   300%   for   residential   lands.     In   the   case   of   commercial   lands,  the  gap  is  between  18%  to  122%.   To   facilitate   the   implementation   of   the   new   concepts   of   real   property   appraisal   and   assessment   envisioned   in   the   Local   Government   Code,   the   Department   of   Finance/Bureau   of   Local   Government   Finance   have   recently   promulgated/issued   the   Philippine   Valuation   Standards   (PVS),   the   MRPAAO   and   the   MAG.       These   documents,   particularly   the   MAG,   explain   in   detail   how   the   correct   market   values   can   be   determined   given   the   existing   conditions  in  the  property  market.    They  are  supposed  to  help  the  Assessor  in  performing   his/her   function   of   property   appraisal   and   assessment.       It   may   be   safe   to   assume,   however,   that   despite   the   promulgation   of   these   executive   issuances,  only  six   LGUs   are   practicing   the   procedures  and  methodologies  prescribed  for  the  reformed  valuation  process.  32     A   key   factor   behind   the   non-­‐updating   of   SMVs   is   that   the   process   has   become   politicized   such   that   those   running   for   elections   are   hesitant   to   provide   regular   updates   for   fear   of   voters’   backlash.   In   theory,   the   Assessors   have   the   power   to   do   valuation,   but   the   Local   Legislative   Councils   of   the   LGUs   have   the   power   to   approve   the   SMVs;   which   is   proving   difficult.  Thus,  immediately  after  the  approval  of  the  Local  Government  Code,  83%  of  LGUs   updated   their   SMVs.   However,   there   has   been   a   declining   trend   ever   since,   such   that   in   2005,  only  25%  of  LGUs  were  complying;  and  in  2013,  only  22%  were  complying.   An  added  complication  to  the  above  is  the  fact  that  people  equate  SMV  updating  with  higher   taxes;   which   should   not   be   the   case.   However,   the   more   LGUs   delay   their   updating   of   SMVs,   the  more  this  will  result  in  substantial  increases  in  market  values  which  can  lead  to  higher   tax   burdens   if   no   mitigating   measures   are   introduced   in   the   tax   structure.   Regular   updating   every   three   years   should   result   in   minimal   increases   in   the   tax   burden.   Increases   in   tax   rates  results  not  only  from  updating  of  SMVs.  In  the  case  of  Mandaue  city,  changes  in  land   31  Based  on  studies  under  the  ADB  –  Japan  Fund  for  Poverty  Reduction  funded  REGALA  Project  (Support  to  Local  Government   Revenue  generation  and  Land  Administration  Reforms).  The  Project  provides  technical  assistance  to  partner  LGUs  in  the   revision  of  their  SMVs. 32  Five  of  these  were  assisted  by  the  ADB  REGALA  Project,  namely:  Bayawan  City;  Legazpi  City;  Tayabas  City;  San  Carlos  City   and  Alaminos  City.  Naga  city  is  the  6th  city,  which  was  a  pilot  site  of  LAMP2.     83 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report use   were   largely   responsible   for   increases   in   tax   rates.   However,   this   is   not   because   of   proactive   zoning,   but   rather   zoning   by   default   since   the   subject   areas   were   already   being   used  for  industrial  purposes.   The  proposed  Valuation  Reform  Act  (VRA)  should  provide  authority  to  the  VRA  to  approve   SMVs,  in  order  to  remove  the  political  influence  in  the  updating  of  SMVs.  Further,  the  VRA   has  a  provision  which  states  that  if  LGUs  do  not  update  their  SMVs,  they  lose  their  authority   to  collect  taxes.  This  provision  could  provide  enough  sanction  for  LGUs  not  updating  their   SMVs  regularly.     Valuation  rolls  are  publicly  accessible   The   zonal   values   used   by   the   BIR   for   the   whole   country   are   uploaded   to   its   website   and   anyone  may  access  this  information  by  going  online.    In  the  case  of  the  local  governments,   the   BLGF   has   likewise   uploaded   to   its   website   the   SMVs   used   by   LGUs.     Anyone   can   download   from   the   website   the   scanned   copy   of   the   SMV   as   well   as   the   ordinance   that   authorized  it.    The  SMVs  are  also  available  in  hard  copies  at  the  Assessor’s  office  and  anyone   who   may   want   to   get   information   about   the   market   values   for   a   particular   place   or   location   can   go   to   the   Assessor   and   request   for   it.     Technically,   the   SMVs   are   public   records   that   should  be  accessible  to  everyone.   LGI  11  -­‐  Tax  collection  efficiency               Score   LGI-­‐ Topic   A   B   C   D   Dim     Tax  Collection  Efficiency   11   i   Exemptions  from  property  taxes  are  justified                   Checks  that  tax  proceeds  are  not  significantly  reduced  by  a  high  number  of   exemptions  to  the  payment  of  land  and  property  taxes.   11   ii   Property  holders  liable  to  pay  property  tax  are  listed  on  the  tax  roll                   Assesses  the  completeness  of  the  tax  roll   11   iii   Assessed  property  taxes  are  collected                   Measures  the  closeness  amount  of  tax  revenue  collected  to  the  potential.   There   is   wide   discretion   in   the   application   of   exemptions   to   payments   of   property   taxes   The   LGC   effectively   repealed   all   RPT   exemptions   previously   given   under   special   laws.     It   limited   the   number   of   properties   that   will   enjoy   tax   exemption.     Section   234   enumerates   them  as  follows:   1. Real   property   owned   by   the   Republic   of   the   Philippines   or   any   of   its   political   subdivisions   except   when   the   beneficial   use   thereof   has   been   granted,   for   consideration  or  otherwise,  to  a  taxable  person.   2. All   charitable   institutions,   churches,   parsonages   or   convents   appurtenant   thereto   including   mosques,   non-­‐profit   or   religious   cemeteries   and   all   lands,   buildings   and   improvements   which   are   actually,   directly   and   exclusively   used   for  religious,  charitable  or  educational  purposes.   3. All   machineries   and   equipment   that   are   actually,   directly   and   exclusively   used   by   local   water   districts   and   government-­‐owned   or   controlled   corporations   engaged   in   the   supply   and   distribution   of   water   and/or   generation   and   transmission  of  electric  power,   84 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report 4. All  real  property  owned  by  duly  registered  cooperatives  as  provided  under  RA   No.  6938  (the  Cooperatives  Law).   5. Machinery   and   equipment   exclusively   used   for   pollution   control   and   environmental  protection.   The   exemptions   provided   in   the   LGC   are   clearly   based,   in   addition   to   equity   and   constitutional   grounds,   on   national   development   policy   and   social   considerations   and   there   is  no  problem  in  their  implementation.       In   practice,   however,   some   LGUs   resort   to   the   taxation   powers   vested   in   them   under   the   LGC   to   grant   exemptions.     In   their   desire   to   attract   investments   into   their   locality,   LGUs   offer   real   property   tax   exemption   as   an   incentive.     This   exemption   is   usually   contained   in   the   investments   incentives   ordinances   that   many   LGUs   enact.     Giving   up   revenues   in   exchange  for  more  economic  activities  is  seen  by  LGUs  as  a  better  policy  that  can  address   problems  of  unemployment  and  non-­‐utilization  of  the  other  resources  of  the  LGU.       The  following  cases  illustrate  the  points  above:       Alaminos,   City   in   Pangasinan   passed   Ordinance   2006-­‐11   on   October   13,   2006   providing  incentives  to  investors  in  the  city.  This  include  exemption  from  the  basic   real   property   tax   due   to   the   city   but   excluding   the   shares   of   barangays   for   a   period   of  two  years  from  the  start  of  the  commercial  operations  of  the  business  enterprise.         Mandaue  City  gives  a  25%  to  50%  real  property  tax  discount  (based  on  the  amount   of   investments)   to   new   businesses   and   existing   enterprises   planning   to   expand   their   investments.     This   practice   is   clearly   not   in   consonance   with   the   LGC   because   an   LGU   can   condone   or   reduce   the   real   property   tax   only   “in   case   of   a   general   failure   of   crops   or   substantial   decrease   in   the   prices   of   agricultural   or   agri-­‐based   products,  or  calamity”  in  the  area.   San  Carlos  City  in  Negros  Occidental  passed  in  1998  an  ordinance  entitled  the  San   Carlos   City   Investment   Incentives   Code.     It   provides   incentives   to   business   establishments   locating   in   the   city   which   include   full   tax   exemption   from   the   basic   RPT   and   SEF   for   five   years   from   registration   or   start   of   commercial   operations,   whichever  comes  earlier.     Another  instance  when  LGUs  have  granted  tax  exemptions  is  when  they  give  real  property   tax  amnesty  to  delinquent  taxpayers.    This  is  a  common  practice  among  LGUs  in  their  desire   to   raise   revenues.   Some   of   the   LGUs   that   have,   at   one   time   or   another   in   the   past,   issued   tax   amnesties  are  Quezon  City,  Caloocan  City,  Meycauayan  City  and  several  others.   Without  clear  policies,  the  granting  of  exemptions  can  be  subject  to  abuse  and  discretion,  to   benefit   private   interests.   It   is   recommended   that   BLGF/DOF,   together   with   DILG   and   the   DOJ,   should   review   the   power   of   LGUs   to   grant   RPT   exemptions   and   their   use   to   attract   investments.  In  the  meantime  that  no  definitive  official  position  is  in  place,  BLGF  should  be   more   pro-­‐active   in   giving   advice   to   LGUs   in   the   correct   implementation   of   the   RPT   exemption  authority  allowed  to  them.         A  large  proportion  of  property  tax  payers  are  not  listed  on  the  tax  roll   Section   205   of   the   LGC   prescribes   that   Provincial   or   City   Assessors   shall   maintain   an   assessment   roll   listing   all   real   property,   whether   taxable   or   exempt,   located   within   the   85 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report territorial  jurisdiction  of  the  LGU.    Real  property  shall  be  listed,  valued  and  assessed  in  the   name  of  the  owner  or  administrator,  or  anyone  having  legal  interest  in  the  property.   The  records  of  the  BLGF  show  that  as  of  December  2011,  there  were  a  total  of  28,882,312   taxable   real   property   units   (RPUs)   all   over   the   country.     No   breakdown   is   available   but   these   RPUs   include   lands,   buildings/improvements   and   machineries.     By   actual   use,   the   properties  are  further  subdivided  into  residential,  commercial,  industrial  and  agricultural.   However,   Assessors   are   not   able   to   accomplish   this   list   fully   and   accurately   because   of   their   strong  dependence  on  the  property  owners  reporting  to  them  the  details  of  their  properties   and   very   often,   the   property   owners   do   not   report   to,   or   provide   accurate   reports   to   the   Assessor.      This  is  particularly  true  of  buildings  and  improvements  and  machineries.    Only   when   the   Assessor   and/or   his   staff   go   on   ocular   inspections   do   they   discover   new   buildings   and   improvements   and   it   is   not   unusual   for   these   buildings/improvements   to   have   been   existing   for   several   years   before   they   are   discovered   by   the   Assessor   and   listed   in   the   assessment  roll.    The  same  is  true  for  machineries.   Moreover,   under   the   LGC,   there   are   several   government   officials   and   private   persons   who   are  required  to  furnish  the  Assessor  certain  information  but  fail  to  do  so.    This  includes  the   following:   • Registrar   of   Deeds   to   prepare   and   submit   to   the   provincial   city   and   municipal   assessor   an   abstract   of   his   registry   “which   shall   include   brief   but   sufficient   description   of   the   real   properties   entered   therein,   their   present   owners,   and   the   date   of   their   most   recent   transfer   or   alienation   accompanied   by   copies   of   corresponding  deeds  of  sale,  donation  or  partition  or  other  forms  of  alienation.”   • Any   public   official   or   employee   who   issues   to   any   person   “a   permit   for   the   construction,   addition,   repair,   or   renovation   of   a   building,   or   permanent   improvement   on   land,   or   a   certificate   of   registration   for   any   machinery,   including   machines,  mechanical  machines  contrivances,  and  apparatus  attached  or  affixed  on   land  or  to  another  real  property,  shall  transmit  within  30  days  of  its  issuance,  a  copy   of  such  permits  or  certificates,  to  the  assessor  of  the  province,  city  or  municipality   where  the  property  is  situated.”     • All   geodetic   engineers,   public   or   private,   are   required   to   furnish   free   of   charge   “to   the   assessor   of   the   province,   city   or   municipality   where   the   land   is   located   with   a   white   or   blue   print   copy   of   each   of   all   approved   original   or   subdivision   plans   or   maps   executed   by   them   within   30   days   from   receipt   of   such   plans   from   the   Lands   Management  Bureau,  the  Land  Registration  Authority  of  the  Housing  and  Land  Use   Regulatory  Board,  as  the  case  may  be.”   With  the  above  legal  provisions,  notwithstanding,  the  Assessor  is  usually  not  provided  on  a   regular  basis  by  the  persons  concerned,  the  information  that  is  supposed  to  be  transmitted   to  him.    One  of  the  reasons  for  this  is  lack  of  sanctions  for  non-­‐compliance.     In   the   case   of   lands,   the   ones   that   are   not   usually   listed   in   the   assessment   roll   are   those   covered   by   the   Comprehensive   Agrarian   Reform   Program   (CARP)   that   have   already   been   transferred   to   the   beneficiaries.     Since   the   implementation   of   the   CARP   involves   several   agencies/institutions,   the   procedures   are   somewhat   complicated   such   that   information   is   not  always  given  or  received  on  time  by  the  concerned  party.    Thus,  the  non-­‐listing  of  the   CARP  beneficiaries  who  are  now  the  new  owners  of  the  land,  in  the  assessment  roll.   Another   case   when   property   owners   are   not   listed   in   the   assessment   roll   is   when   a   particular   land/property   had   already   been   bought   but   the   new   owner   did   not   report   the   86 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report sale  or  transfer  to  the  Assessor.    The  property  is  carried  in  the  Assessment  Roll  under  the   name  of  the  previous  owner  making  this  piece  of  information  incorrect.    The  same  can  also   be   said   for   many   heirs   who   inherited   properties   from   their   deceased   parents   and   who   refuse   to   report   to   the   Assessor   even   if   the   property   had   already   been   informally   or   even   officially  divided  among  the  heirs.    The  subdivision  of  properties  is  not  usually  reported  to   the  Assessor  or  if  it  is,  it  can  be  long  after  the  subdivision  has  taken  place.   Updating  of  tax  maps  is  also  a  function  of  LGU  capacities  and  the  practice  of  due  diligence.  In   the   case   of   some   LGUs,   investments   in   GIS   and   mapping   capabilities,   the   establishment   of   databases,   the  installation   of  property  tax   and   revenue   collection   computerized   systems;   as   well  as  regular  field  inspections  have  all  helped  in  ensuring  the  tax  rolls  are  up  to  date.  In   many  cases,  this  had  the  effect  of  improving  tax  collection  efficiency  while  at  the  same  time   improving  their  service  to  the  public.  The  experience  of  REGALA  and  LAMP  ISF  LGUs  have   shown  that  much  can  be  achieved  if  a  combination  of  capacity  development  and  local  LGU   tax  policies  can  be  enforced  at  the  LGU  level.  These  should  be  pursued  more  widely  in  order   to  improve  capacities  to  collect  property  taxes.   Property  tax  collection  efficiency  is  very  low     In   a   study   undertaken   by   the   National   Tax   Research   Center   (NTRC),   it   was   revealed   that   for   the  period  2003  to  2010,  an  average  of  59%  of  the  real  property  taxes  due  were  collected  by   LGUs.    Broken  down  annually,  the  ratios  of  the  taxes  collected  are  as  follows:     YEAR       PERCENT  OF  RPT  COLLECTED33     2003       57%     2004       58%     2005       61%     2006       66%     2007       61%       2008       57%     2009       59%     2010       54%       Under   LAMP2   and   REGALA   Project,   Tax   Compliance   Studies   were   undertaken   for   selected   LGUs.   These   studies   applied   more   rigorous   methodology   which   involved   inventory   of   all   properties,  the  taxes  due  during  the  current  and  prior  years;  and  analyses  of  variations  in   collections  across  property  types  and  localities  within  the  LGU  jurisdictions.  The  following   illustrate  the  collection  efficiencies  based  on  this  method:       Naga  City  (2007)     -­‐   63%     Mandaue  City  (2008)     -­‐   67%     Bayawan  City  (2009)     -­‐   36%     Legazpi  City  (2009)     -­‐   33%     Alaminos  City  (2011)     -­‐   74%     San  Carlos  City  (2011)   34 -­‐   60%     Tayabas  City  (2011)     -­‐   40%     Records   of   the   BLGF   on   the   collection   efficiency   of   LGUs   show   that   for   2011,   the   average   efficiency  for  all  LGUs  is  78%  broken  down  into  79%  for  cities  and  76%  for  provinces.    On  a   33  Basic  RPT  only   34  Data  for  San  Carlos  and  Tayabas  cities  are  preliminary 87 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report regional  basis,  Region  11  has  the  highest  collection  efficiency  at  101%  followed  by  Regions   2   and   3   which   both   registered   97%   efficiency.     At   third   place   are   Regions   4A,   6   and   10   at   86%.     The   least   efficient   in   collecting   RPT   is   Region   8   which   reported   a   33%   efficiency   followed   by   Region   4B   at   48%.     Closely   following   is   CAR   with   49%   efficiency   followed   by   Regions  12  and  1  with  34%  and  55%,  respectively.   The   manner   of   computing   and   reporting   on   tax   collection   efficiency   is   a   concern.   The   above   BLGF  data  shows  regions,  cities  reporting  more  than  100%  efficiency,  which  is  theoretically   not   possible.   Based   on   the   listing,   there   were   LGUs   that   recorded   more   than   200%   and   300%  efficiency.    The  initial  explanation  for  these  numbers  is  that  the  collection  figure  for   these   LGUs   combined   both   the   current   year   and   prior   years   collection   thereby   making   unequal   the   equation   of   collectibles   versus   actual   collection.     BLGF   however,   is   in   the   process  of  cleansing  the  database.     The   high   dependence   of   many   LGUs   on   the   internal   revenue   allotment   (IRA)   creates   disincentives  to  collect  property  taxes.  As  it  is,  the  IRA  increases  every  year  thus  benefitting   all  LGUs  in  the  process.  On  the  average,  provinces  and  municipalities  have  IRA  of  80  percent   and   76   percent,   respectively   of   their   total   budget,   while   cities   have   a   more   balanced  ratio   (43   percent),   based   on   average   consolidated   data   from   2001-­‐2010.   Cities'   performance   is   largely   attributable   to   special   cities   and   HUCs,   hence   there   are   many   other   cities   with   relatively  high  dependency  on  IRA.  There  is  definitely  some  value  in  looking  at  the  impacts   of   IRA   on   local   revenue   performance,   and   devise   ways   to   use   this   as   incentives   for   to   improve  internal  revenue  generation  capacity  and  collection  efficiency.     The  above  collection  record  also  shows  that  administrative  and  judicial  remedies  provided   in  the  LGC    for  the  collection  of  delinquent  RPT  are  not  rigorously  implemented.    Sanctions   for   local   officials   (primarily   the   treasurer   and   his   staff)   for   not   collecting   the   RPT   are   not   utilized.         Treasurers  should  therefore  be  required  to  seriously  carry  out  their  task  of  ensuring  that  all   property  taxes  that  are  due  are  collected  and  appropriate  sanctions  should  be  meted  out  for   non-­‐compliance.   To   assist   Treasurers   in   their   task,   BLGF   should   conduct   intensive   trainings   on  the  use  of  administrative  and  judicial  remedies  for  collecting  delinquent  taxes.   As   the   REGALA   Project   has   shown,   the   cleansing   and   computerization   of   tax   records   have   likewise   produced   the   benefit   of   improving   LGU   capability   to   increase   its   property   tax   collection.    Part  of  such  support  to  LGUs  therefore,  would  be  the  promotion  of  appropriate   integrated   computerized   systems   for   property   tax   assessment   and   collection.   In   addition,   LGUs   should   regularly   conduct   tax   compliance   studies   to   determine   their   collection   efficiency  and  serve  as  basis  for  developing  an  improved  revenue  collection  program.           88 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report     Module  3  -­‐  Management  of  Public  Land   INDICATORS  ASSESSED:   LGI  1 2  –    Identification  of  public  lands  –  assesses  whether  public  land  ownership  is  justified,   inventoried,  under  clear  management  responsibilities,  and  relevant  information  is   publicly  accessible.   LGI  1 3  –    Incidence  of  expropriation  -­‐  assesses  whether  expropriations  occur  in  the  public’s   general  interest  and  whether  it  is  efficiently  resorted  to.   LGI  1 4  –    Transparency  of  expropriation  procedures  -­‐  assesses  the  transparency  of   expropriation  procedures  and  fairness  of  associated  compensation   LGI  1 5  –    Public  land  allocated  transparently       LGI  12  -­‐  Justification  of  public  land  ownership  and  management  clarity                 Score   LGI-­‐Dim     Topic   A   B   C   D   Identification  of  Public  Land     12   i   Public  land  ownership  is  justified  and  implemented  at  the                   appropriate  level  of  government   Assesses  whether  public  land  ownership  is  justified  by  cost-­‐effective   provision  of  public  goods  (or  avoidance  of  externalities)  at  the   appropriate  level  of  government.   12   ii   Complete  recording  of  publicly  held  land                   Assesses  whether  all  public  land  and  property  is  inventoried  in  a   way  that  allows  clear  and  unambiguous  identification  of   boundaries.     12   iii   Assignment  of  management  responsibility  for  public  land                   Assesses  whether  responsibility  for  managing  different  types  of   public  land  is  clearly  assigned.   12   iv   Resources  available  to  comply  with  responsibilities                   Assesses  whether  institutions  responsible  for  managing  public  lands   have  resources  available  to  comply  with  their  responsibilities.   12   v   Inventory  of  public  land  is  accessible  to  the  public                   Assesses  whether  information  in  the  public  land  inventory  is   accessible  to  the  public  (Information  includes  property  lists,  details   of  current  use,  maps  etc.).     12   vi   Key  information  on  land  concessions  is  accessible  to  the  public.                   Assesses  whether  key  information  for  concessions  (the  locality  and   area  of  the  concession,  the  parties  involved  and  the  financial  terms   of  the  concession)  is  recorded,  up-­‐to-­‐date  and  publicly  accessible.   89 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report   Public   land   ownership   is   justified   in   most   cases   by   provision   of   public   goods   but   responsibility  is  often  at  the  wrong  level  of  government.     In  the  Philippines,  the  government  is  the  biggest  landowner  since  it  manages  about  half  of   the   country’s   territory   through   the   issuance   of   tenure   rights   and   regulation   of   uses   over   these  areas.     Under   the   Philippines   1987   Constitutions,   lands   of   the   public   domain   are   classified   as:     agricultural,   forest/timber   lands   protected   areas-­‐national   parks,   and   mineral   lands.     Only   agricultural  lands  may  be  alienated  and  can  be  subjected  to  agrarian  reform.    Forest  lands   that  have  been  classified  as  agricultural  can  be  subjected  also  to  land  reform.   State  “ownership”  of  the  public  domain  -­‐  forest  lands  and  protected  areas;  are  justified  on   the   basis   of   provision   of   environmental   and   other   public   goods   and   services.   As   a   country   facing   high   risk   of   natural   disasters   and   related   events,   the   protection   and   sustainable   management   of   forest   lands   and   key   biodiversity   areas   are   important   for   improving   the   resiliency  of  its  ecosystems.  Further,  as  an  archipelagic  country,  the  continued  provision  of   ecosystem   services   such   as   water   and   other   environmental   goods   and   services   is   important   for  its  food  security  and  sustained  economic  growth.     However,   management   of   these   lands   rest   mainly   with   DENR,   through   the   grant   of   long   term   agreements   with   communities   for   onsite   effective   management.   Resource   use   and   planning  is  still  heavily  regulated,  and  subject  to  changing  policies  of  DENR.  This  situation   has   discouraged   communities   to   establish   long-­‐term   perennial   crops.     With   no   access   to   loan   financing,   communities   remain   dependent   on   LGUs,   DENR,   NGOs   and   donors   for   support  in  development  activities.   It  is  essential  that  greater  devolution  of  management  responsibilities  be  given  to  LGUs,  and   stronger   recognition   of   the   role   of   local   communities   and   other   organizations   in   their   management.   While  the  main  responsibility  for  public  land  management  rest  with  DENR,  other  agencies   also  have  some  interests  in  lands  of  the  public  domain.  These  include  DAR,  Department  of   Energy,  National  Commission  on  Indigenous  Peoples  (NCIP),  and  the  many  Bureaus  under   the  DENR.  This  has  resulted  in  overlaps  in  the  issuance  of  tenure  instruments  and  permits,   thus   causing   a   lot   of   conflicts   and   incompatible   uses.   It   is   common   for   portions   of   forest   lands   or   protected   area   to   have   within   these,   overlaps   with   ancestral   domains,   mining   claims,   energy   exploration   permits,   among   others.   The   recent   issuance   of   Joint   NCIP,   LRA,   DAR,   DENR   Administrative   Order   could   prevent   overlaps   and   conflicts   in   the   future.   Another   outcome   of   such   ambiguity   is   that   it   has   resulted   in   some   form   of   impasse   in   terms   of   enforcement   of   rights,   and   investments   in   the   development   of   public   lands,   thus   essentially  rendering  large  portions  of  public  lands  under  open  access  conditions.     More  than  50%  of  public  land  is  clearly  identified  on  the  ground  or  on  maps.   The   DENR   has   been   successful   in   the   mapping   and   demarcation   of   the   country’s   forest   estate.     Except   in   the   Autonomous   Region   of   Muslim   Mindanao   (ARMM),   forest   boundary   delineation  for  the  whole  country  is  completed  and  now  on  its  final  stages  of  evaluation  and   in   some   areas,   legislation.     In   all,   about   79,245   km   of   forest   boundaries   have   been   delineated.     90 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report Tenured   areas   within   forest   lands   and   protected   areas   are   delineated   in   maps   available   within   the   DENR   offices.   There   is   no   single   reference   however,   of   all   these   interests   in   a   single  map  that  is  available  to  the  public.     In   the   case   of   protected   areas   needs   to   be   done,   such   that   these   are   clearly   mapped   and   boundaries  properly  demarcated.  Only  12  of  the  113  proclaimed  protected  areas  have  fully   demarcated  boundaries.     It  is  important  for  DENR  to  proceed  with  the  final  stages  of  evaluating  the  forest  boundary   delineation  and  the  process  of  legislation  as  required  by  the  Constitution.  This  will  be  useful   for   planning   and   land   use   allocation,   both   at   the   national   level,   and   at   the   level   of   individual   LGUs.   To   be   useful   to   LGUs   and   other   users,   it   would   be   necessary   to   make   this   information   available  on  line  and  in  digital  form  for  LGUs.     There   is   enough   ambiguity   in   the   assignment   of   management   responsibility   of   different  types  of  public  land  to  impact  to  some  extent  on  the  management  of  assets.   Such   ambiguity   manifests   in   the   way   inventories   of   public   lands   and   information   on   concessions   are   held.   There   are   inventories   and   maps   of   tenure   types   and   resource   managers  over  portions  of  forest  lands,  in  the  field  offices  of  DENR.  However,  these  are  in   various  forms,  in  most  cases,  not  ground  validated.  There  have  also  been  reports  of  undue   influence   in   the   forest   boundary   delineation   such   that   the   validation   parties   found   forest   sections  that  do  not  meet  the  prescribed  criteria  to  be  released  as  A  and  D.     There   is   no   single   reference   map   or   database   which   shows   all   the   interests   on   the   forest   lands  and  protected  areas.  One  has  to  go  to  each  different  database  and  map  to  find  out  all   the   tenure   types   and   status   of   a   particular   forest   land   or   protected   area.   The   same   holds   true   for   information   on   land   concessions.   These   are   scattered   among   the   Mines   and   Geosciences   Bureau   (MGB)   for   mining   permits   and   licenses;   with   the   PAWB   for   protected   areas   and   key   biodiversity   areas   and   the   permits   within;   with   the   Lands   Management   Bureau  for  titled  and  untitled  properties  as  well  as  public  A  and  D  lands;  and  with  the  Forest   Management   Bureau   for   industrial   forest   management   agreements   (IFMA),   CBFMA,   and   other   tenure   and   interests.   An   added   layer   would   be   the   CADTs   issued   by   NCIP,   energy   exploration  permits  issued  by  the  DoE,  and  CLOAs  issued  by  DAR.     There  is  clearly  a  need  for  more  integrated  approach  to  the  management  of  these  lands,  to   veer   away   from   the   commodity   driven   management   and   planning   of   public   lands   and   resources   therein.   The   recent   integrated   ecosystems   management   (IEM)   approach   that   is   being  promoted  hopes  to  achieve  some  convergence  of  these  approaches,  and  create  a  sense   of  better  management  of  portions  of  watersheds,  through  sound  resource  use  and  allocation   to  achieve  commonly  agreed  objectives.  Within  an  LGU  territory,  a  better  understanding  of   all   such   interests   in   the   public   domain   can   be   achieved   through   the   FLUP   process,   where   all   these   information   are   put   together   for   the   appreciation   of   the   LGU.   However,   only   a   few   LGUs  have  been  into  FLUPs.     There  are  significant  constraints  in  the  budget  and/or  human  resource  capacity  but   the   system   makes   effective   use   of   limited   available   resources   in   managing   public   lands.  –  particularly  in  PA  management   Despite   these   huge   responsibilities,   there   are   serious   funding   and   resource   gaps   in   these   agencies  to  effectively  fulfil  their  land  management  functions.  However,  the  system  makes   effective   use   of   limited   resources   in   managing   public   lands.   Among   the   responsibilities,   forest  management  has  historically  been  the  recipient  of  investments,  focusing  on  massive   reforestation,   forest   boundary   delineation,   and   the   current   National   Greening   Program.   The   91 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report cadastral   program   has   recently   received   huge   allocations   too,   since   2012   with   the   aim   of   completing  all  unsurveyed  areas  in  the  country.     What  is  needed  is  attention  to  the  protected  area  management  program  so  that  the  National   Integrated  Protected  Areas  System  (NIPAS)  can  be  implemented  according  to  the  intents  of   the  law.  This  should  boost  the  efforts  towards  conservation,  protection,  rehabilitation  and   management  of  these  areas.     Additional  support  is  also  required  for  the  NCIP  so  that  it  is  able  to  accelerate  the  survey,   mapping   and   registration   of   CADTs,   and   support   the   capacity   development   of   IP   organizations.   Information  in  the  public  land  inventory  is  incomplete   There   are   inventories   and   maps   of   tenure   types   and   resource   managers   over   portions   of   forest   lands,   in   the   field   offices   of   DENR.     However,   these   are   not   readily   accessible   to   the   public  and  seldom  available  in  digital  form.    Protected  areas  are  also  mapped  and  included   in  the  database  of  the  PAWB.       What  is  severely  lacking  is  information  on  public  A  and  D  lands  such  as  cadastral  maps,  as   well  as  the  location  of  titled  and  untitled  properties.  This  information  is  crucial  for  LGUs  in   their   planning   functions   and   in   the   implementation   of   their   land   tenure   improvement   programs.   In   most   cases,   these   land   related   records   and   information   are   not   properly   inventoried  in  the  DENR,  many  records  have  been  damaged  from  fires,  floods,  while  some   are  missing  due  transfers  of  offices,  and  removal  from  the  files.  The  current  effort  under  the   additional   financing   of   LAMP2   to   inventory   and   computerize   the   DENR   land   records   through  LAMS  would  contribute  greatly  to  resolving  the  situation.       The  FLUP/CLUP  processes  can  serve  as  important  tools  for  making  information  on  tenured   areas,   public   A   and   D   and   other   allocations   are   more   transparent   and   accessible   to   the   public.  These  LGU  initiated  efforts,  with  DENR  and  NCIP  support  will  greatly  aid  in  planning,   validation,   and   promotion   of   investments   for   development   and   conservation.   Acceleration   of  more  inclusive  FLUP  and  CLUP  processes  should  therefore  be  strongly  supported.     Key   information   for   land   allocations/concessions   are   recorded   but   is   not   publicly   accessible   Information   on   concessions   and   other   interests   in   public   land   are   recorded   in   the   DENR,   distributed  across  its  various  Bureaus  and  agencies.       In  the  case  of  mining  concessions  and  exploration  permits,  these  are  uploaded  at  the  MGB   website.   The   PAWB   maintains   a   database   of   all   protected   areas.   However,   the   list  of  Special   Use   Agreements   in   Protected   Areas   (SAPA),   and   other   activities   where   there   are   existing   Memorandum  of  Agreements  with  DENR  are  maintained  at  the  regional  offices.    In  the  case   of   tenurial   instruments   in   forestlands,   these   are   available   at   the   FMB,   with   more   detailed   information   at   the   regional   offices.   NAMRIA   maintains   the   maps   showing   the   location   of   forest  lands.  However,  for  public  alienable  and  disposable  lands  and  the  cadastral  maps,  this   information   are   not   readily   available   and   one   has   to   go   to   the   different   regional   offices   to   locate  these  and  validate  on  the  ground.   Many  of  the  government  properties  held  by  the  national  government  agencies  and  LGUs  are   not   titled,   and   there   is   no   integrated   database   which   contains   all   these   information.   The   opportunity   offered   by   RA   10023   to   facilitate   the   issuance   of   Special   Patents   to   government   92 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report properties  has  not  been  maximized  in  view  of  the  lack  of  implementing  guidelines  pertinent   thereto.   Other   public   lands   include   reclaimed   areas   whose   records   are   maintained   by   the   Public   Reclamation  Authority  (PRA).  Such  list  is  not  readily  available  to  the  public  either.     The  lack  of  a  comprehensive  repository  of  all  these  maps  and  information  and  lack  of  access   to   the   public   to   these   data   has   affected   planning   by   LGUs   and   others   who   might   have   an   interest  in  engaging  in  joint  venture  agreements  in  public  lands.       In  some  instances,  even  NAMRIA  had  difficulty  in  identifying  which  lands  are  to  be  reverted   to  forest  lands  resulting  from  misclassification  by  the  Land  Evaluation  Parties;  in  the  course   of   their   work   in   validation   of   forest   boundaries.   This   stem   from   lack   of   information   on   which   lands   have   been   released   as   A   and   D,   and   out   of   these,   which   properties   have   been   titled.  This  situation  created  opportunities  for  those  with  vested  interest  to  benefit  by  way   of   appropriating   for   themselves,   portions   of   forest   lands   that   should   not   be   released   as   A   and  D.35   Other   examples   include   difficulty   in   implementing   the   conversion   of   abandoned   fishpond   lease   agreements   to   mangroves,   in   light   of   lack   of   good   information   on   the   owners   and   locations  of  expired  fishpond  lease  agreement  holders.     The   current   efforts   of   NAMRIA   and   the   DENR   regional   units   in   updating,   validating,   correcting  records  of  the  Land  Evaluation  Parties  (LEPs)  could  help  harmonize  overlaps  and   make   this   information   accessible   to   the   public.     NAMRIA   should   also   accelerate   its   master   mapping   of   all   information   on   land   concessions   by   province,   city   and   municipality   for   dissemination  and  use  of  the  public.     LGI  13  and  14  -­‐  Justification  and  fairness  of  expropriation  procedures                 Score   LGI-­‐Dim     Topic   A   B   C   D   Incidence  of  Expropriation   13   i   Transfer  of  expropriated  land  to  private  interests                   13   ii   Speed  of  use  of  expropriated  land                   Transparency  of  Procedures   14   i   Compensation  for  expropriation  of  ownership                   14   ii   Compensation  for  expropriation  of  all  rights                     14   iii   Promptness  of  compensation                   14   iv   Independent  and  accessible  avenues  for  appeal  against  expropriation                   There   is   room   for   strengthening   the   policy   framework   in   the   Philippines   so   that   expropriation   fairly   compensates   all   those   who   lose   rights,   and   follows   clear   and   transparent  processes.     Laws   provide   that   expropriation   be   used   solely   for   public   interests,   but   there   is   no   monitoring  of  transfers  of  expropriated  lands   In  the  Philippines,  expropriation  of  private  property  is  solely  for  public  use  and  interests.  In   the   absence   of   data   however,   on   transfers   of   all   expropriated   land   in   the   country,   it   is   difficult  to  determine  whether  portions  of  these  were  transferred  to  private  interests.  Data   on   expropriation   are   scattered   among   many   agencies,   and   there   is   very   little   monitoring   on   35  Panel  9  LGAF  Workshop.  Aide  Memoire.   93 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report the   extent   of   expropriated   land,   the   amount   of   compensation,   promptness   of   compensation,   and  use  of  expropriated  land.    These  data  are  also  not  publicly  accessible.   Some   reporting   and   monitoring   mechanisms   need   to   be   in   place   to   keep   track   of   this   function  of  government.  LGUs  are  also  authorized  to  expropriate  by  virtue  of  the  LGC,  and   have  done  so,  for  purposes  of  establishing  low  cost  housing  projects,  or  settlement  projects   for   informal   settlers.   A   few   isolated   cases   have   been   reported   about   LGUs   transferring   expropriated   land   for   commercial   purposes,   but   these   need   to   be   more   fully   documented.   The   extent   to   which   portions   of   these   have   been   transferred   for   private   use   is   still   undetermined.   There  is  inconsistency  in  the  values  used  to  compensate  expropriated  properties     Only   national   infrastructure   projects   have   clear   policies   for   expropriation   and   compensation   using   market   rates   (RA   8974).   There   is   currently   no   policy   to   provide   compensation   for   income   losses.   In   the   case   of   national   infrastructure   projects,   the   BIR   zonal   value   is   used   as   basis   for   valuation   despite   the   fact   that   there   are   other   standards   cited  in  said  law  for  valuing  land.  For  other  projects,  the  policies  that  apply  are  PD  1533  and   EO  1035  which  uses  the  values  declared  by  the  owner/administrator  or  as  determined  by   the   Assessor   pursuant   to   the   Real   Property   Tax   Code,   whichever   is   lower,   as   basis   for   compensation.  These  values  are  way  below  market  rates,  in  some  cases  undervalued  by  as   much   as   1000%;   due   to   the   outdated   LGUs’   schedule   of   market   values;   and   because   SMVs   are   not   based   on   market   prices.   These   amounts   will   not   enable   the   affected   property   owner   to  find  replacement  property  of  equal  value.   Only   national   infrastructure   projects   pay   prompt   compensation   for   expropriated   properties   There   are   varying   provisions   in   existing   laws   with   regard   to   the   promptness   of   compensation.  Most  favored  are  expropriated  properties  of  national  infrastructure  projects,   wherein   based   on   RA   8974,   100%   payment   should   be   made   immediately   to   the   owners.     Payment  is  based  on  the  value  of  the  property  based  on  the  current  relevant  zonal  valuation   of   the   Bureau   of   Internal   Revenue   (BIR).   Payment   shall   also   include   the   replacement   cost   of   improvements  and/or  structures  upon  filing  of  the  complaint  and  after  due  notice.       For   projects   other   than   national   infrastructure   and   those   projects   of   the   LGUs,   property   owners   are   not   compensated   promptly.   In   the   case   of   the   former,   PD   1533   and   EO   1035   provide   that   the   government   can   immediately   take   possession,   control,   and   disposition   of   the  property  upon  payment  of  10%  of  the  assessed  value  of  the  property  based  on  the  tax   declaration   of   the   owner.   In   the   case   of   projects   of   LGUs,   the   applicable   law   is   RA   7160   that   allows  the  LGUs  to  take  possession  of  the  property  upon  payment  of  15%  of  the  value  of  the   property  based  on  the  tax  declaration.     There  are  delays  in  the  transfer  of  expropriated  properties  to  their  destined  use   Speed   of   use   of   expropriated   land   is   affected   by   delays   owing   to   project   approvals,   negotiations,  release  of  budgets,  payments,  particularly  for  foreign  assisted  projects.  Thus,   the   panel   opined   that   it   is   safe   to   say   that   less   than   50%   of   expropriated   land   have   been   transferred  to  their  destined  use  in  the  last  three  years.  This  does  not  augur  well  for  good   governance.     There   is   no   national   resettlement   policy   that   would   ensure   displaced   households   maintain  their  prior  social  and  economic  status;  and  provide  for  a  grievance  redress   system     94 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report Current   policies   on   compensation   do   not   distinguish   urban   and   rural   properties   in   terms   of   fairness,   compensated   rights   and   timeliness   of   compensation.   In   the   case   of   urban   registered  properties,  there  is  no  legislation  that  will  provide  for  compensation  for  loss  of   future  income  by  business  establishments.  Similarly,  for  registered  rural  properties,  there  is   no   legislation   that   would   allow   for   compensation   for   future   income   losses   from   agricultural   production.     For   unregistered   properties,   there   is   no   legislation   that   provide   for   compensation.   In   the   case  of  foreign  assisted  projects  where  resettlement  action  plans  (RAPs)  are  prepared,  these   types   of   compensation   are   recommended.   The   types   and   estimates   of   compensation   therefore,   very   depending   on   the   policy   of   the   donor   institution   on   RAPs.   The   lack   of   legislation   has   also   affected   consistency   in   implementation.   There   were   even   cases   where   DPWH  ROW  agents  encounter  difficulties  due  to  disallowances  by  the  Commission  on  Audit.     There   is   therefore   an   urgent   need   to   have   a   national   resettlement   policy   that   embodies,   aside   from   proper   and   prompt   compensation   and   entitlements,   grievance   redress   and   sustainable   livelihood   restoration   and   improvement   program.   This   policy   should   apply   uniformly   to   all   types   of   government   projects,   regardless   of   the   funding   source,   and   the   level   of   who   executes   it.   Such   grievance   redress   system   should   also   be   accessible   and   affordable   to   poor   property   owners   affected   by   expropriation.   This   is   made   worse   by   RA   8975   which   prohibits   the   lower   courts   to   issue   temporary   restraining   orders   (TRO),   preliminary   injunctions,   or   preliminary   mandatory   injunctions   on   national   government   infrastructure   projects.   While   DPWH   has   a   Land   Acquisition,   Resettlement,   Rehabilitation   and   Indigenous   Peoples   Policy   (LARRIP);   it   is   not   founded   on   legislation,   but   an   Administrative  Order  issued  by  the  agency.  Hence,  it  has  no  legislative  basis,  and  therefore,   subject  to  audit  interpretations  anytime.  There  is  a  National  Resettlement  Implementation   Plan  (NRIP)  which  was  produced  in  2003  through  WB  support;  but  this  needs  updating.       95 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report   Module  4  -­‐  Public  Provision  of  Land  Information   INDICATORS  ASSESSED:   LGI  1 6  –    Completeness  of  registry  -­‐  extent  to  which  the  registry  provides  a  complete   geographic  coverage  of  land  parcels  and  its  accessibility  to  land  users.   LGI  1 7  –    Reliability  of  records  –  reliability  of  information  contained  in  the  registry   LGI  1 8  –    Cost  effective,  accessible,  sustainable  -­‐  cost-­‐effectiveness  and  financial   sustainability  of  land  administration  services   LGI  1 9  –    Transparency  -­‐  whether  fees  are  determined  and  collected  in  a  transparent  manner     LGI  16  -­‐  Completeness  of  Registry                 Score   LGI-­‐ Topic   A   B   C   D   Dim     Completeness  of  Registry   16   i   Mapping  of  registry  records                   The  share  of  registered  private  rights  readily  identifiable  on  a  map  is  high.     16   ii   Economically  relevant  private  encumbrances                     Assesses  completeness  of  registry  information  about  economically  relevant   private  encumbrances.   16   iii   Economically  relevant  public  restrictions  or  charges                   Assesses  completeness  of  registry  information  about  economically  relevant   public  restrictions  and  charges.   16   iv   Searchability  of  the  registry  (or  organization  with  information  on  land                   rights)   Assesses  whether  records  can  be  searched  by  both  right  holder  name  and   parcel   16   v   Accessibility  of  records  in  the  registry  (or  organization  with  information                   on  land  rights)   Assesses  accessibility  of  Information  in  the  registry  by  all  interested   parties.   16   vi   Timely  response  to  a  request  for  access  to  records  in  the  registry  (or                   organization  with  information  on  land  rights)   Assesses  timeliness  of  response  to  a  request  for  access  to  records  in  the   registry     A  large  proportion  of  registered  privately  held  rights  are  not  readily  identifiable  on  a   map     The   Philippines   has   only   one   register   of   all   land   records.   However,   there   are   various   agencies   involved   in   surveying,   mapping   and   recording   and   approval   of   cadastre;   and   therefore,   information   relating   to   surveys   and   cadastral   and   municipal   maps   are   spread   across  these  organizations.   96 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report The   Land   Management   Bureau   and   its   regional   offices   in   the   DENR   are   responsible   for   cadastral   survey   of   all   alienable   and   disposable   lands   that   are   subject   to   original   titling.   Review   and   approval   of   survey   plans   are   also   the   responsibility   of   the   LMB   and   DENR   regional  offices.   The   Land   Registration   Authority   (LRA)   was   also   vested   authority   to   review   and   approve   survey  plans.  It  maintains  its  own  cadastral  index  maps  based  on  the  survey  plans  it  reviews   and  approves;  and  this  information  are  not  shared  with  the  DENR.  Furthermore,  there  are   differences  in  the  projection  of  the  index  maps  maintained  by  the  LRA  and  DENR.     There   is   no   complete   inventory   or   index   map   showing   the   location   of   the   various   records   and   plans,   customers   are   required   to   visit   all   three   locations   in   order   to   build   a   complete   picture   over   the   area.   The   information   in   respect   to   patents   is   also   stored   in   these   three   locations.   All   titles   registered   at   the   different   Register   of   Deeds   Offices   nationwide   are   supposed   to   be   supported   by   an   approved   survey.     Therefore   all   titles   in   the   Registry   should   be   reflected   in   the   cadastre.     However,   the   RoD’s   do   not   usually   hold   copies   of   these   cadastral   maps.     Maps   are  also  not  used  in  the  operations  of  the  registries.    Cadastral  maps  are  held  by  DENR  and   mostly   are   not   updated   to   reflect   subsequent   transaction   such   as   subdivision   or   consolidation   even   if   the   surveys   for   these   transactions   are   also   being   approved   by   the   agency.     A   lot   of   records,   including   maps   have   been   either   lost   or   destroyed   due   to   fires,   natural   calamities   and   the   last   war   (World   War   II).     Many   of   these   lost   or   destroyed   records   have   never   been   reconstructed/reconstituted.     The   inventory   of   land   records   were   never   taken  seriously  by  the  agencies  that  holds  the  records  such  that  it  is  impossible  to  assess  the   actual  number  of  records  that  still  exist  and  those  that  have  been  lost  or  destroyed.       In   the   case   of   Legaspi   city,   the   records   of   the   survey   including   the   cadastral   maps   were   destroyed   during   the   fire   which   burned   down   the   Office   of   the   DENR.     The   DENR   is   now   currently   being   assisted   by   the   City   Government   in   reconstructing   the   cadastre   using   information  from  the  titles  in  the  City  Register  of  Deeds.    There  are  other  LGUs  in  the  same   situation.         The   lack   of   a   complete   map   of   registry   records   has   resulted   in   weak   planning   for   tenure   security,  among  others.  Comparing  the  latest  land  sector  statistical  report  of  LMB  with  the   results   of   the   2004   LAMP   Land   Tenure   Status,   the   2004   study   indicated   a   total   of   13,051,132  land  parcels  titled  yet  the  inventory  of  approved  lots  in  LMB’s  statistics  is  only   7,080,540.    This  represents  a  gap  of  5,970,592  or  the  approved  lots  represent  only  45%  of   parcels  titled  in  the  Registry.    The  huge  gap  can  be  attributed  to  the  fact  that  DENR  do  not   anymore   account   for   subdivisions   (or   consolidations)   subsequently   approved   after   the   approval   of   the   cadastral   or   original   survey.     These   isolated   surveys   are   usually   not   anymore  updated  into  the  cadastral  maps.    The  authority  of  LRA  to  approve  surveys  of  titled   lands  further  complicates  the  situation.    LRA  approved  surveys  are  not  usually  shared  with   DENR  and  the  LRA  also  do  not  hold  the  cadastral  maps  and  therefore  cannot  update  it.       Further  contributing  to  the  state  of  land  records  is  the  fact  that  cadastral  survey  is  not  yet   complete   across   the   country.     There   are   still   many   municipalities   that   are   still   either   partially  surveyed  or  unsurveyed.    Since  2010,  DENR  has  contracted  out  massive  cadastral   survey  projects.    Several  political  boundary  surveys  are  also  on-­‐going  nationwide.   Phil-­‐LARES   as   part   of   its   commitment   in   the   LTCP   is   currently   working   on   producing   an   index  map  for  Metro  Manila  by  digitizing  title  information,  building  up  the  cadastre  parcel   97 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report by  parcel  using  the  technical  descriptions  found  in  the  title.    The  problem  with  this  process   is  it  cannot  capture  untitled  lands  and  therefore  cannot  reproduce  the  whole  cadastre.   This  state  of  affairs  has  been  identified  as  one  of  the  many  justifications  for  establishing  a   single  land  agency.  Merging  the  registry  and  cadastre  agencies  would  benefit  the  public,  and   pave  the  way  for  a  unified  system  of  records  management.     Economically   relevant   private   encumbrances   are   consistently   recorded   and   can   be   verified  at  low  cost   Recording   of   private   encumbrances   are   on   voluntary   or   on-­‐demand   process   but   are   recorded  consistently  and  in  a  reliable  fashion  as  annotation  at  the  back  of  the  titles.       Where   no   fee   is   specified,   registration   or   annotation   of   this   encumbrances   will   require   Box 5. Private Encumbrances recorded on the payment  of  registration  fee  which  uses  a  schedule   title (from   a   low   of   PhP   21   to   a   high   of   PhP   8,796)   • Registration and release of mortgages based   on   the   assessed   value   of   the   land   or   the   • Court or judicial orders – PhP 60 amount   in   consideration   whichever   is   higher,   • Long-term leases • Sale of portion or partial transfer plus  issuance  and  certification  fee  and  IT  service   • Conditional sale fee  (PhP  344.93/deed,  instrument  or  entry).   • Option to purchase or promise to sell • Sale subject to redemption or Anybody   interested   to   check   or   verify   repurchase/redemption of properties sold encumbrances   attached   to   the   title   can   access   it   • Surety and bonds for   a   fee   (PhP   215.58   IT   service   fee   for   • Powers of attorney, letters of administration, query/research).     They   can   also   secure   true   appointment of guardian, resolution or copies  of  the  title/documents  for  a  fee.     revocation – PhP 120 • Levy Socially  and  economically  relevant  public   • Adverse claims restrictions  are  consistently  recorded   • Lis pendens – PhP 30 • Extra-judicial settlement Recording   of   relevant   public   restrictions   are   • Right or ways recorded  consistently  and  in  a  reliable  fashion  as   • Rent contract annotation   at   the   back   of   the   titles.     The   public   • Attachments • Building and improvements – PhP 60 restrictions   recorded/annotated   in   the   titles   includes:   • Levy   • Tax  liens  –  PhP  30   • Easements   • Right  of  way,  public  highways  or  roads   • Limitation   to   disposition   of   properties   arising   from   agrarian   reform   laws   and  regulations   Where   no   fee   is   specified   registration/annotation   of   this   encumbrances   will   require   payment   of   registration   fee   which   uses   a   schedule   (from   a   low   of   PhP   21   to   a   high   of   PhP   8,796)   based   on   the   assessed   value   of   the   land   or   the   amount   in   consideration   whichever   is   higher,  plus  issuance  and  certification  fee  and  IT  service  fee  (PhP  344.93/deed,  instrument   or  entry).   The  registry  is  searchable  by  both  right  holder  name  and  parcel   The  Land  Titling  Computerization  Project  (LTCP)  of  the  LRA  has  made  possible  any  search   by   owners   name   or   title   easier,   faster   and   more   accessible   with   the   launch   of   the   A2A   (Anywhere  to  Anywhere  Service)  and  PVS  (Parcel  Verification  Service).    In  a  computerized   Registry  (on-­‐line  to  the  LTCP)  the  primary  key  for  searching  the  registry  is  the  title  number.     98 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report The  cadastral  lot  number  can  also  be  used  to  search  the  registry.    The  facility  to  search  using   property  holders  was  however  recently  deactivated  such  that  the  RoD  now  have  to  revert  to   the  manual  search  of  the  title  if  only  the  title  holders  name  is  known  or  given.   If   searches   have   to   be   done   manually,   the   easiest   way   is   if   the   title   number   is   known.     Titles   searches  can  also  be  done  using  the  cadastral  lot  number  or  name  of  the  title  holder  but  this   will  take  more  time  to  do.   Copies   or   extracts   of   documents   recording   rights   in   property   can   be   obtained   by   anyone  who  pays  the  necessary  formal  fee   Titles  and  other  documents  in  the  different  Registry  are  considered  public  document  and  by   operation  can  be  accessed  by  anyone.    The  searching  of  the  records  of  the  RODs  is  permitted   by  Property  Registration  Decree  1529.  Section  56  therein  provides:   “All   records   and   papers   relative   to   registered   land   in   the   office   of   the   Register   of   Deeds   shall   be   open   to   the   public   in   the   same   manner   as   court   records,   subject   to   such   reasonable   regulations   as   the   Register   of   Deeds,   under   the   direction   of   the   Commissioner  of  Land  Registration  (now  administrator  of  LRA),  may  prescribe.”   The  LTCP  has  made  it  more  accessible  to  the  public  such  that  anywhere,  there  is  an  on-­‐line   RoD,  anybody  can  search  for  pertinent  title  information.    An  interested  person  in  Manila  can   go   to   any   of   the   on-­‐line   Registry   anywhere   in   Manila   to   secure   copies   of   titles   or   title   information   for   lands   located   in   Cebu   City   for   example   or   anywhere   as   long   as   the   RoD   in   the  location  of  interest  is  also  already  on-­‐line.  Access  to  the  information  or  copies  of  the  title   documents  do  require  payment  of  fees,  including  the  IT  service  fee.    Securing  a  certified  or   true  copy  for  1  title  for  example  can  cost  PhP  401.30.   There  is  timely  response  to  request  for  access  to  records  in  the  registry   Obtaining   copies   or   extracts   of   documents   from   the   different   Registry   of   Deeds   Offices   is   reasonably   easy   and   fast.     Even   in   Registries   still   using   manual   process   (such   as   Legaszpi   City  RoD)  these  can  be  secured  within  the  day  of  request.    Interviews  of  clients  coming  from   Legazpi   City,   San   Carlos   City,   Ilocos   Norte,   Bayawan   City   mostly   revealed   that   it   is   not   difficult   to   get   certified/true   copies   of   titles   and   other   documents   from   the   RoD   and   most   get   it   within   the   day   of   request   (interviewees   were   selected   from   clients   who   are   transacting  with  the  local  assessor’s  office)   The  LTCP  has  made  this  process  even  more  accessible  and  faster.    That  is  for  titles  that  are   already  in  the  system.    However,  for  titles  or  documents  that  are  not  yet  in  the  system  the   time   taken   to   actually   obtain   the   requested   copies   can   vary   from   3   weeks   to   3   months.     Actual  observations  were  made  in  3  of  the  computerized  RoD  (San  Carlos,  Ilocos  Norte  and   Negros  Occidental)  and  generally  those  clients  who  requested  copies  of  titles  of  documents   obtain   it   within   the   day.     In   less   than   10%   of   cases   their   requested   copies   cannot   be   provided   within   the   day   as   these   involved   relatively   recent   transactions   and   the   titles/documents  are  not  yet  in  the  system.   Officers   of   Banks   such   as   Land   Bank   of   the   Philippines   (LBP),   Rizal   Commercial   banking   Corporation   (RCBC),   Philippine   National   Bank   (PNB),   Allied   Bank   gave   good   ratings   indicating  that  they  can  usually  get  their  request  within  the  day  or  at  least  the  day  after  they   made  their  request.   A  more  important  concern  however,  is  the  reliability  of  records  kept  at  the  registry.  While   access   to   information   is   fast   and   easy,   the   RoDs   do   not   retire   old   records   which   partly   99 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report explains   why   searching   by   name   would   yield   various   records,   even   if   these   pertain   to   the   same  property.     LGI  17  -­‐  Reliability  of  the  registry               Score   LGI-­‐Dim     Topic   A   B   C   D   Reliability  of  Records   17   i   Focus  on  customer  satisfaction  in  the  registry                   17   ii   Registry/  cadastre  information  is  up-­‐to-­‐date                     17   iia   Registry           17   iib   Cadastre             Service  standards  are  published,  but  not  effectively  monitored     Citizen’s  Charter  such  as  the  one  pictured  above  (taken  from  Legazpi  City  RoD)  laying  out   the  service  standards  for  the  different  RoD  transactions  are  displayed  prominently  outside   the   offices   of   the   entire   RoD’s.   The   Citizen’s   Charter   covers   all   transactions   in   the   RoD   providing  detailed  description  of  the  processes  and  procedures,  fees,  requirements,  persons   responsible  for  completing  the  transactions,  processing  time  under  ideal  situations  and  the   outputs.    There  were  also  differences  in  the  published  Citizen’s  Charter  between  RoDs  that   are  still  in  the  manual  system  against  those  that  are  already  on-­‐line  to  LTCP.  The  differences   are  mainly  on  processing  times  and  fees.    These  Citizen’s  Charters  (for  LRA  and  RoDs)  are   also  published  in  the  LRA  website  (http://lra.gov.ph).     There   are   some   concerns   though   in   terms   of   monitoring   RoD   performance   against   the   published  service  standards.  Feedback  from  some  indicated  that  the  LTCP  system  tracks  the   progress  of  the  transaction  and  these  are  used  to  monitor  staff  performance.    But  it  is  not   clear   whether   the   individual   performances   are   being   consolidated   to   assess   the   performance   of   the   Office   as   a   whole   against   the   Citizen’s   Charter.   Performances   and   issues   are  reportedly  usually  discussed  during  national  meetings  organized  by  LRA.       The   panel   reported   that   the   difficulty   in   lodging   a   complaint   against   a   government   employee  could  be  one  of  the  reasons  why  there  are  not  so  many  known  actions  taken  on   nonperformance.     100 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report The  registry  and  cadastre  information  are  not  up  to  date   There   are   a   number   of   reasons   why   information   in   the   registry   and   cadastre   are   not   updated.   First,  the  fact  that  some  40%  of  the  country’s  A  and  D  lands  are  untitled;  and  that  there  are   informal   transactions   already   happening   in   these   parcels   mean   that   the   cadastre   and   registry  records  are  utterly  incomplete.   Second,   many   of   the   land   surveys   have   been   approved   years   ago   and   that   while   land   claims   have  changed  since  then,  these  are  not  captured  in  the  cadastral  maps  held  by  DENR.       Third,   LGU   records,   which   are   considered   to   reflect   the   closest   to   the   reality   on   the   ground;   are   also   incomplete.   This   is   because   majority   of   the   LGUs   are   not   conducting   tax   mapping   and/or  updating  tax  maps  as  a  regular  function.       Another  reason  is  that  there  is  poor  sharing  of  information  among  the  LGU  Assessors,  LRA   and  DENR.  In  many  instances  isolated  surveys  approved  by  DENR  and  LRA  (subdivision  and   consolidation)  are  not  shared  with  the  local  assessor’s  offices.  There  are  several  instances   where   surveys   approved   by   the   DENR   Regional   Offices   are   not   even   furnished   to   the   field   offices.     It   has   been   the   experience   under   the   LAMP   2   Innovation   Support   Fund   and   the   ADBJFPR-­‐REGALA  Project  that  CENROs  do  not  have  a  complete  copy  of  the  cadastral  maps   and   other   survey   records.     The   CENROs   are   also   not   regularly   furnished   copies   of   subdivision   plans   (if   furnished   at   all).     The   active   maps   within   the   DENR   and   LRA   are   its   projection   maps   but   these   maps   are   treated   as   closely   guarded   secrets   and   never   shared   with  other  agencies.       Another   reason   is   that   a   large   portion   of   property   owners   does   not   register   their   transactions  due  to  a  number  of  factors.  A  few  RoD  and  LGU  Assessors  interviewed  in  the   course  of  LGAF  estimate  that  between  10-­‐20%  of  such  transactions  are  not  registered.  The   reasons  given  were:   • High  cost  of  capital  gains  tax   • High  costs  of  surveys  and  lengthy  process  of  survey  approval   • Requirement   for   tax   clearance   from   the   Assessors’   office   which   can   entail   higher   expense  particularly  if  the  owner  is  in  default  in  payments   In   a   study   under   LAMP236  to   determine   the   extent   to   which   subsequent   transactions   have   occurred  on  titles  and  Certificates  of  Land  Ownership  Award  (CLOAs)  issued,  and  how  these   transactions  are  captured  in  the  RoD,  the  following  were  the  key  findings:   § 84%  of  all  titles  issued  were  still  in  the  names  of  original  owners  as  registered  with   the  RoD;  16%  of  parcels  have  new  lot  owners;   § More   than   half   of   those   reportedly   under   new   owners   have   unregistered   transactions;   Major   reasons   given   for   not   registering   subsequent   transactions   include   the   high   cost   of   transfers;   lack   of   familiarity   with   the   process;   too   many   requirements;   lack   of   knowledge   of   the  need  to  register;  presence  of  red  tape  or  fixers;  high  cost  of  back  taxes  that  need  to  be   paid;  and  no  knowledge  on  where  to  register.     When   respondents   were   asked   about   suggestions   on   how   to   improve   the   registration   36  LAMP2.   Study  on  Registration  of  Subsequent  Land  Transactions.   June   2010.   The   study   was   undertaken   in   Leyte,   Bohol   and  Bukidnon.  The  study  covered  titles  that  were  released  during  the  period  1996-­‐2000;  meaning  the  titles  have  passed  the   restriction  period  and  are  eligible  for  subsequent  transactions.     101 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report system;  the  following  were  given.     § create   awareness   on   the   importance   of   land   registration   through   information   and   education  campaign;   § adopt  a  simplified  registration  system  with  less  requirements;     § reduce  registration  fees;  and     § establish  One  Stop  Shop  for  lands  services     Among   the   38   percent   of   respondents   who   encountered   problems   and   difficulties   in   the   registration  process,  the  following  feedback  were  given:     § processing  at  RoD  is  time  consuming  and  slow;   § the  OSS/RoD  is  located  far  from  their  residences;   § presence  of  red  tapes/fixers;   § too  many  requirements,  some  of  which  are  difficult  to  produce;   § expensive  due  to  high  costs  of  transport  and  other  expenses  in  following  up  titles;   § it  takes  too  long  for  the  relocation  survey  to  be  done;       § cadastral   survey   is   very   slow   and   expensive,   surveyors   not   readily   available,   and   surveys  are  not  done  properly;   § subdivision  of  mother  titles  is  very  expensive;   § it  is  difficult  to  locate  the  boundaries  of  their  properties;   § processing  at  DENR  is  very  long  and  high  expenses  for  payment  of  taxes.   This  situation  has  affected  the  credibility  of  the  registry  and  cadastre;  and  the  reliability  of   records   kept   therein.   Such   state   affects   the   time   and   cost   required   to   start   investments,   and   property  development,  since  verification  and  payments  for  such  services  would  have  to  be   required.   A   classic   case   was   the   well-­‐publicized   hearing   of   the   Supreme   Court   Justice   impeachment   trial;   where   the   LRA   records   yielded   so   many   properties   of   the   Justice   registered  under  his  name;  only  to  find  out  that  most  of  these  have  subsequent  transactions   on  them.       For   those   involved   in   the   CMP,   participants   have   found   it   difficult   to   secure   reliable   records   from  the  registry  thus  delaying  the  process  for  acquisition.  The  inconsistent  records  held  by   various   agencies   –   LMB,   LRA   and   Assessors   Office   has   further   fueled   the   business   of   syndicates   to   benefit   from   the   poor   state   of   records.   A   number   of   case   studies   and   documentations   have   revealed   that   this   situation   has   contributed   to   the   slow   pace   of   formalization  in  the  urban  areas;  and  in  the  titling  program  of  the  government.       LGI  18  -­‐  Cost  effectiveness  and  sustainability                 Score   LGI-­‐Dim     Topic   A   B   C   D   Cost  Effective  and  Sustainable   18   i   Cost  of  registering  a  property  transfer                   18   ii   Financial  sustainability  of  the  registry                   18   iii   Capital  investment                   18   iiia   Registry           18   iiib   Cadastre               102 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report The   cost   of   registering   a   property   transfer   is   considered   high:   about   10%   of   the   property  value   Against   a   global   standard   of   less   than   one   percent   of   the   property   values;   the   Philippines   has   a   record   high   of   about   10%.   Such   high   cost   in   transfer   of   properties   has   always   been   cited  as  the  primary  deterrent  for  registration  of  subsequent  transaction.    The  capital  gains   tax  is  computed  at  6%  of  the  sale  value,  assessed  value  or  zonal  value  whichever  is  highest,   plus   1.5%   documentary   stamp   tax.   Reducing   the   capital   gains   tax   on   transfers   may   encourage  registration  of  subsequent  transaction  and  will  ensure  that  the  cadastre  can  be   kept  up  to  date.       In   a   study   undertaken   on   the   impacts   of   national   and   local   land   related   property   taxes,   it   was  noted  that  the  “present  practices  associated  with  the  administration  of  the  capital  gains   tax   have   also   reduced   the   potential   revenues   that   could   be   generated   by   this   tax.   The   frequent   use   of   values   for   capital   gains   assessment   purposes   that   are   considerably   below   current   market  levels  significantly  reduces  the  revenue  potential  of  this  tax  in  its  current  form.”37   This  prohibitive  rate  has  encouraged  a  lot  of  informality  in  the  registration  of  transactions.   It  is  almost  common  practice  to  have  two  versions  of  the  Deeds  of  Sale:  one  which  reflects   the   true   value   of   the   transaction   and   kept   between   the   seller   and   the   buyer;   and   second   the   document   which   reflects   lower   values   of   sale   and   used   as   basis   for   the   determination   of   capital   gains   taxes   and   other   transfer   taxes.   This   second   version   is   also   used   as   reference   in   registration   of   the   sale   with   the   Registry   of   Deeds.   Related   to   this,   the   above   study   also   noted  that  “property  transaction  compliance  costs  are  further  increased  by  the  frequent  need   to  make  unofficial  payments  to  bureaucrats  to  facilitate  the  completion  of  land  transactions,   especially  for  the  registration  of  land  transfers.”   The  cost  of  registering  the  transfer  at  the  RD  has  also  increased  significantly  due  to  the  IT   service   fees.     This   cost   can   even   go   higher   in   registration   in   more   complex   registration   where   there   are   more   supporting   documents   attached.       The   fees   are  PhP   344.93  per   deed/instrument   processed   for   registration,   including,   but   not   limited   to   supporting   documents   that   are  indispensable   to   the   registration   of   the   main   document   and   PhP   215.58   for  issuance  of  every  title.    There  might  still  be  some  room  for  rationalization  of  the  fees  to   make  it  more  affordable  and  accessible  to  the  property  owners.   The  registry  is  financially  sustainable  through  fee  collection   The   LRA,   through   its   RoD,   is   one   of   the   government’s   top   earning   agencies.   Its   income   exceeds   its   operating   costs   by   more   than   half.   Data   gathered   from   the   agency’s   website   showed   that   for   2012;   its   appropriation   is   Php   925   Million;   while   its   income   for   the   first   six   months  is  already  Php  2.3  Billion.     Given  the  Philippines’  “one  fund  policy”,  all  earnings  are  remitted  to  the  Bureau  of  Treasury   and  the  agency  cannot  retain  any  of  its  earnings.    The  agency  is  always  dependent  on  what   the  national  government  will  appropriate  for  its  operation.    If  the  agency  can  be  allowed  to   retain  a  higher  percentage  of  its  surplus  then  this  can  allow  the  agency  to  undertake  much   needed  projects  that  can  further  improve  its  capacity  to  perform  its  mandate.   There  is  investment  capital  in  the  system,  but  insufficient  to  ensure  medium  to  long   term  sustainability     37  LAMP2.  2007.  Land  Equity  International.  Review  of  National  and  Local  Land  Related  Taxes  and  Fees.     103 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report The  LRA  has  for  some  years,  been  applying  modern  technologies  to  improve  its  land  records   management  system.    A  combination  of  microfilm  and  computerized  database  system  was   introduced  in  the  past  and  has  greatly  improved  the  security,  reliability  and  accessibility  of   land   title   information   in   the   registries.     More   recently,   starting   in   the   early   2000’   the   LRA   has   embarked   on   a   massive   computerization   and   modernization   project   at   no   cost   to   the   government.     The   LTCP,   currently   on   its   Phase   IV   has   successfully   computerized   and   modernized   114   RDs   nationwide   under   a   “Build   Operate   Own   (BOO)”   scheme   in   partnership   with   Phil-­‐LARES   as   the   private   sector   investor.     The   LTCP   made   possible   queries   on   the   status   of   land   title   anywhere,   anytime   from   on-­‐live   RDs   nationwide.     The   system   allowed   LRA   and   its   RDs   to   shift   from   largely   paper-­‐based   to   a   paperless   system   thereby  ensuring  tighter  control  over  land  titles,  faster  turn-­‐around  time  in  the  generation   and   issuance   of   land   title.     The   system   also   made   possible   tracking   transaction   status   on-­‐ line.   In  a  few  months’  time  the  DENR’s  LMB  will  also  undertake  a  massive  computerization  and   modernization  project  of  its  land  records  management.    Through  a  World  Bank  additional   financing  of  the  Second  Land  Administration  and  Management  Project  (LAMP  2),  the  Land   Administration   Management   System   (LAMS)   will   be   rolled-­‐out   to   the   Regional   and   other   field   offices.     This   will   computerize   land   records   management   for   surveys   and   public   land   applications.   The   LAMS   will   also   facilitate   access   by   agencies   to   land   records,   the   LGUs   in   particular,   to   be   of   use   for   land   use   planning,   development,   and   property   assessment   and   taxation.     The   DENR   has   also   allocated   some   P   3   Billion   to   complete   the   cadastral   surveys   in   the   Philippines   until   2016.   This   investment   should   contribute   to   completing   the   records,   and   facilitate  the  titling  of  the  remaining  untitled  parcels.   These  initiatives  will  boost  the  capability  of  the  LMB/LMS  to  provide  the  needed  services  to   LGUs  and  other  clients,  through  better  records.     Given   the   above,   the   registry   is   still   seen   as   having   better   prospects   of   being   more   financially  sustainable,  through  incomes  from  subsequent  transactions.  On  the  other  hand,   the   investment   in   the   DENR/LMB   to   improve   cadastral   records   represents   a   one-­‐time   capitalization.     LGI  19  -­‐  Transparency               Score   LGI-­‐Dim     Topic   A   B   C   D   Transparency   19   i   Schedule  of  fees  is  available  publicly                   19   ii   Informal  payments  discouraged                   The  schedule  of  fees  for  different  services  is  publicly  accessible   The   fees   for   the   transactions   in   the   Registries   are   accessible   to   the   public   as   this   are   published   in   the   Citizen’s   Charter   posted   in   the   offices   of   the   LRA   and   the   different   RDs   nationwide.     That   these   Charter   are   actually   displayed   prominently   has   been   verified   through  visits  to  the  LRA  and  7  RDs  (Leyte,  Ilocos  Norte,  Negros  Oriental,  Legazpi  City,  San   Carlos   City,   Dumaguete   City,   and   Tacloban   City).     There   is   no   reason   to   doubt   that   the   Citizen’s  Charter  is  also  displayed  prominently  in  the  rest  of  the  Registries  nationwide.    In   addition   the   fee   schedule   is   published   in   the   LRA   website:   104 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report http://www.lra.gov.ph/files/lrafeeschedule1.pdf   and   http://www.lra.gov.ph/files/adjitfees.htm.     In  contrast  DENR  is  not  as  consistent  in  displaying  its  Citizen’s  Charter  and  schedule  of  fees.     While  the  fees  are  published  in  the  agency  website,  the  lay-­‐out  of  its  offices  does  not  make   the  fees  as  readily  accessible  as  the  fee  schedule  in  the  LRA  website.   The  LAMP  conducted  several  studies  to  examine  the  extent  to  which  payments  were  made   for   services   without   receipts.   The   results   confirmed   that   indeed,   there   were   certain   transactions   and   payments   made   without   official   receipts;   both   at   the   RoD   and   at   the   DENR   offices.  It  is  expected  that  as  the  LTCP  is  rolled  out,  this  will  minimize  these  practices  within   the   RoD.   Similarly,   in   DENR,   it   is   expected   that   as   titling   services   follow   the   systematic   procedures,   and   involve   LGU   staff,   the   procedures   will   be   more   transparent   and   simple;   thus   eliminating   the   need   for   informal   payments   to   secure   titles   and   approve   subdivision   surveys.   Mechanisms   to   detect   and   deal   with   illegal   staff   behavior   exist   in   some   registry   offices   The   LTCP   computerized   system   which   had   been   rolled-­‐out   in   most   of   the   RDs   nationwide   already   serves   as   a   major   deterrent   in   illegal   staff   behavior.     The   system   allows   for   tracking   of   each   and   every   transaction   from   lodgment   to   approval   and   on   the   principle   of   “first   in,   first   out”;   RDs   are   able   to   detect   irregularities   (such   as   transactions   getting   preferential   treatment   over   other   earlier   transactions)   and   can   immediately   investigate   to   check   if   indeed   there   are   suspicious   or   anomalous   informal   transactions   on   the   side.   There   is   also   “ageing”   of   transaction   and   even   LRA   do   track   this   on-­‐line   (for   live   RDs)   and   can   immediately  call  the  attention  of  the  RD.       In   compliance   with   Civil   Service   rules,   each   RD   also   has   put   in   place   a   simple   feedback   mechanism   following   the   “Mamamayan   Muna,   Hindi   Mamaya   na”   (loosely   translates   as   Citizen   Now   and   Not   Later)   program.     Suggestion   boxes   are   in   place   in   most   RDs.     Complaints  received  are  given  due  course  following  the  prescribed  Civil  Service  Rules  and   Regulations.  Any  complaints  received  by  the  RD  are  endorsed  to  the  LRA  for  investigation   and  proper  disposition.    Another  track  that  any  citizen  can  take  for  any  redress  or  grievance   is   through   the   Ombudsman.     In   the   interest   of   due   process,   the   experience   in   government   is   it   takes   time   for   complaints   and   cases   filed   against   erring   government   employees   to   be   resolved  with  finality.   While   it   is   quite   difficult   to   record   the   incidences   and   extent   to   which   informal   payments   are   being   practiced   in   the   registry,   an   illustrative   case   would   be   relevant   for   the   analysis.   Under   LAMP2,   two   Exit   Surveys   of   the   One   Stop   Shop   in   Leyte   were   undertaken   to   determine   client   experiences   on   service   delivery.     These   were   carried   out   before   the   computerization,   and   therefore   reflective   of   the   manual   method   of   service   delivery.   The   following  were  the  key  findings  from  the  2008  study:38   § There  were  reported  cases  of  clients  paying  more  than  the  indicated  official  actual   costs,  payments  made  without  official  receipts,  and  payments  made  outside  the  Cash   office  have  been  reported.   § There  were  documented  cases  of  non-­‐official  payments/fees  to  fixers  and  Assisting   Professionals;       § About   25%   of   respondents   had   concerns   with   the   process;   in   about   9%   of   the   cases,   someone  asked  for  an  amount  not  part  of  the  official  fees   38  LAMP2.    2009.  Report  of  the  OSS  Independent  Monitor.     105 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report § Among   the   perceived   reasons   for   not   being   able   to   complete   their   transactions   on   their   first   visit,   44%   cited   personal   reasons   which   include:   (i)   I   know   someone   inside  the  OSS  who  can  facilitate  things  for  me;  (ii)  I  am  a  regular  client;  (iii)  I  call  up   the  office  before  I  come;  (iv)  I  submitted  documents  some  time  ago  to  someone  else;   and  (v)  I  paid  someone  who  has  been  helping  others  in  their  land  transactions.   It   should   be   mentioned   that   there   is   a   widespread   perception   of   corruption   and   informal   payments  in  the  land  related  agencies.  It  would  be  important  to  monitor  the  impacts  of  the   computerization   and   other   procedural   reforms,   including   efforts   to   improve   transparency   and   reduce   discretion   in   the   delivery   of   land   related   services.   Thus,   regular   independent   monitoring   through   client   surveys   would   be   important   tools   to   keep   track   of   progress   in   governance.         106 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report   Module  5  -­‐  Dispute  Resolution  and  Conflict  Management   INDICATORS  ASSESSED:   LGI  20  –    Assignment  of  responsibility  -­‐  accessibility  and  adequacy  of  existing  conflict   resolution  mechanisms.     LGI  21  –  Low  level  f  pending  conflict  -­‐  whether  an  efficient  institutional  framework  can  limit   the  opportunity  for  costly  disputes  to  arise  before  they  have  a  chance  to  become   established,  or  where  there  are  legitimate  disputes,  if  the  institutional  framework   can  deal  with  those  disputes  in  a  reasonable  time .   LGI  20  -­‐  Accessibility  of  conflict  resolution  mechanisms                 Score   LGI-­‐Dim     Topic   A   B   C   D   Assignment  of  Responsibility   20   i   Accessibility  of  conflict  resolution  mechanisms                   20   ii   Informal  or  community  based  dispute  resolution                   20   iii   Forum  shopping                   20   iv   Possibility  of  appeals                     State  sanctioned  conflict  resolution  mechanisms  are  available  at  the  community  level   The  Philippines  has  instituted  a  Katarungang  Pambarangay  (Barangay  Justice  System   –  BJS)   as  an  alternative,  community  based  mechanism  for  dispute  resolution.  It  is  operated  by  the   smallest   of   the   LGU   –   the   barangay   and   overseen   by   the   barangay   chairman,   the   highest   elected   officials   of   the   barangay.   These   panel   mechanisms   were   designed   to   make   available,   a   way   of   administering   justice   and   resolving   and/or   mediating   conflict   at   the   local   level   through  non-­‐adversarial  means.  The  BJS  is  designed  not  merely  to  decongest  the  courts  of   cases   but   to   address   inequalities   in   access   to   justice,   particularly   experienced   by   marginalized   communities.   The   primary   role   of   the   system   is   not   to   decide   disputes   and   impose  a  solution  on  the  parties  but  to  assist  the  parties  in  discussing  the  possible  amicable   settlement   of   their   disputes.   Before   cases   are   accepted   by   the   Courts   or   agencies,   a   certification   from   the   Lupon   Tagapamayapa   (Peace   Council)   that   the   case   has   been   heard   at   the  BJS.     A   concern   however,   is   the   capacity   of   the   Peace   Councils   to   mediate   land   related   cases.   In   the   experience   of   LAMP,   such   councils   need   support   to   familiarize   themselves   with   the   provisions  of  relevant  laws,  and  to  improve  their  mediation  skills.  A  regular  assessment  of   capacities   would   have   to   be   made   as   new   officials   are   elected,   and   adequate   support   provided,   so   that   these   mechanisms   can   serve   as   effective   instruments   for   mediating   land   related  cases  at  the  local  level.      For  agrarian  cases,  the  CARP  provides  for  the  establishment  of  Barangay  Agrarian  Reform   Committees  (BARC)  in  very  barangay  in  rural  communities.  It  is  dedicated  to  hearing  cases   related   to   tenancy,   tenure   and   disturbance   compensation.   All   other   related   agrarian   cases   107 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report are  taken  up  at  the  Agrarian  Law  Implementation  (ALI).  Very  often,  the  BARC  Chairman  is   invited   by   the   Barangay   Chairman   and   the   Lupon   Tagapamayapa   on   most   land   disputes.   Parties   have   the   option   to   elevate   their   case   to   provincial   and   regional   agrarian   reform   committees,  if  these  are  not  resolved  at  the  BARC.   Decisions  reached  at  the  BARC  and  BJC  are  recognized  by  the  courts.   There  is  minimum  scope  for  forum  shopping   The   Rules   of   Courts   provides   for   a   clear   assignment   of   responsibilities   for   resolving   conflicts.    Rule  7,  Section  5  requires  a  certification  from  the  BJS/LP  before  it  accepts  cases   filed  before  higher  courts.     However,   while   there   are   rules   there   are   still   several   reported   instance   when   certain   litigants  do  resort  to  forum  shopping.    In  one  of  the  recently  decided  cases  by  the  Supreme   Court,   G.R.   No.   193415,   the   Court   found   the   petitioner   in   a   real   property   mortgage   foreclosure   case   guilty   of   forum   shopping   for   filing   multiple   suits   based   on   similar   facts   while  seeking  similar  reliefs—acts  proscribed  by  the  rules  on  forum-­‐shopping  and  failing  to   report   the   filing   of   their   Second   Complaint   within   five   (5)   days,   in   violation   of   their   undertaking  to  do  so.   Processes   for   appeal   of   land   dispute   rulings   entails   high   cost   and   takes   a   long   time   to   resolve   The  Rules  of  Courts  provides  a  clear  mechanism  for  appeals.    Rule  40  provides  the  process   for   appeals   from   decisions   of   the   Municipal   Trial   Court.     The   process   for   appeals   from   decisions   of   the   Regional   Trial   Courts   are   contained   in   Rule   41.     Rule   43   provides   for   the   process  of  petitioning  for  review  of  RTC  decision  to  the  Court  of  Appeals.    Rules  44  –  55  lays   down   the   procedures   for   appeals   at   the   Court   of   Appeals.     Rule   56   B   contains   the   procedure   for  appeals  in  the  Supreme  Court.   While  a  clear  process  exist  to  appeal  rulings  of  land  cases,  the  process  is  very  costly  and  can   take  years  to  be  finally  resolved.    A  review  of  cases  decided  by  the  Supreme  Court  in  2012   showed   that   in   more   than   90%   of   the   cases   it   took   more   than   20   years   for   cases   to   be   resolved  with  finality.    Even  cases  first  filed  with  the  lower  court  as  far  back  as  1970  were   only  decided  by  the  Supreme  Court  in  2012.       Some  reforms  in  the  administration  of  justice  system  is  warranted  to  unlock  the  potential  of   these  properties  and  minimize  the  social  and  economic  costs  of  delays.     LGI  21  -­‐  Efficiency  of  conflict  resolution                 Score   LGI-­‐Dim     Topic   A   B   C   D   Low  Level  of  Pending  Conflicts   21   i   Conflict  resolution  in  the  formal  legal  system                   Checks  the  proportion  of  land  disputes  in    court  cases   21   ii   Speed  of  conflict  resolution  in  the  formal  system                   Checks  if  land  conflicts  are  resolved  within  a  reasonable  amount  of  time   21   iii   Long-­‐standing  conflicts  (unresolved  cases  older  than  5  year)                   Assesses  level  of  long-­‐standing  cases  in  the  formal  system.       108 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report Land   related   cases   constitute   a   small   percentage   of   cases   filed   in   Courts;   however   cases  take  many  years  to  be  resolved   In  the  Philippines,  land  related  cases  are  classified  as  civil  cases.  Data  taken  from  Tacloban   City  Regional  Trial  Courts  (RTC)  in  the  course  of  the  LGAF  study  showed  that  land  related   disputes  constitute  43%  of  the  total  number  of  civil  cases,  or  about  7%  of  the  active  cases  in   Court.  These  ranges  are  supported  by  estimates  from  other  Courts  in  Quezon  City,  Legaspi,   San  Carlos  City,  Bayawan  city,  and  Laoag  City,  which  place  at  less  than  10%,  the  proportion   of  land  related  cases  in  Courts.  Since  the  courts  do  not  have  databases  of  their  cases,  further   research   would   need   to   be   required   to   get   more   accurate   statistics.     Nonetheless,   it   is   common  that  criminal  offenses  are  also  made  in  the  course  of  land  related  conflicts,  so  there   could   be   a   case   of   under   reporting   if   viewed   from   the   proportion   of   active   civil   cases   in   Court.     Table  9.  Land  Related  Cases  in  Tacloban  City  RTC     Number    of   Average  Time  to   Type  of  Dispute   conflicts   Resolve   (in  sample  or   (months)   dataset)     Total  cases  in  sample/dataset  =  586   civil  cases  from  2008  –  2012  of   which  256  involves  land  related  disputes   Inheritance/family  dispute   15   Ø 5  years   Property  transaction/contract   47   Ø 5  years   Challenge  to  ownership   101   Ø 5  years   Expropriation   6   Ø 5  years   Boundary  dispute       Dispute  over    use   3   Ø 5  years   Trespass       Right  of  access/passage   4   Ø 5  years   Mortgage/loan       Other  (please  specify)  Land   80   Ø 5  years   acquisition   A  more  important  concern  is  the  length  of  time  for  land  related  cases  to  be  resolved,  such   that  in  the  Philippines,  it  is  almost  impossible  for  such  cases  to  be  settled  within  one  year  in   the   first   instance   Court   anywhere   in   the   Philippines.   In   the   Tacloban   case,   the   Executive   Judge  reported  that  it  is  common  for  land  cases  to  take  more  than  5  years  in  the  courts  to   get   resolved.     Other   RTCs   reported   too   that   it   is   very   common   to   have   land   cases   still   unresolved  in  the  lower  courts  that  are  more  than  10  years  old.     A  review  and  analysis  of  all  cases  decided  by  the  Supreme  Court  in  2012  revealed  that  of  the   total  961  cases  decided  with  finality,  163  involved  land  dispute  cases.    Of  these,  159  or  97%   took  more  than  5  years  for  the  lower  courts  to  issue  decisions.   A   key   reason   for   this   is   the   fact   that   civil   cases   traditionally   are   given   less   importance   in   the   lower   courts.   In   the   case   of   Philippine   Courts   which   are   characteristically   undermanned,   due  to  the  low  percentage  of  such  cases  in  their  portfolio.    Priority  is  given  to  criminal  cases   especially   where   the   accused   are   already   in   jail.   In   some   courts,   only   1   civil   case   is   109 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report scheduled   for   hearing   each   week.   In   some   cases,   an   average   of   2   land   cases   were   decided   each  year.  Moreover,  there  are  very  few  lawyers  who  specialize  in  land  laws  and  even  those   who   do   so   are   not   familiar   with   the   complexities   of   the   land   laws   and   the   land   administration  system.     The  lengthy  process  for  the  Courts  to  reach  a  decision  on  land  related  cases  have  a  bearing   on   the   cost   to   the   parties.   The   filing   fee,   for   instance,   depends   on   the   size   of   the   land   in   question,  and  is  assessed  based  on  certain  percentage  of  its  value.  The  protracted  process   necessitates  payments  to  lawyers,  and  expenses  in  documentation  and  Court  hearings.     It  is  thus  common  for  parties  to  resolve  their  cases  outside  the  Courts  given  the  slow  pace  of   the  justice  system.  The  situation  is  alarming,  as  land  is  a  sensitive  issue,  which  is  known  to   divide   families;   and   affect   investments   in   property   development   and   transactions   on   the   land.  Further  research  would  have  to  be  made  on  the  extent  and  nature  of  land  related  cases   brought   to   the   Courts;   how   such   conflicts   are   resolved   outside   of   the   formal   system;   to   determine  the  kind  of  judicial  reforms  that  would  be  required  to  address  the  deficiencies.         110 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report   Module  6  -­‐  Large  Scale  Acquisition  of  Land  Rights       Score   LSLA     Topic   A   B   C   D   1   Most  forest  land  is  mapped  and  rights  are  registered                   2   Conflicts  generated  by  land  acquisition  and  how  these  are  addressed                     3   Land  use  restrictions  on  rural  land  parcels  can  generally  be  identified.                   4   Public  institutions  in  land  acquisition  operate  in  a  clear  and  consistent  manner.                   5   Incentives  for  investors  are  clear,  transparent  and  consistent.                   6   Benefit  sharing  mechanisms  for  investments  in  agriculture                     There  are  direct  and  transparent  negotiations  between  right  holders  and           7   investors.   Information  required  from  investors  to  assess  projects  on  public/community           8   land.39   9   Information  provided  for  cases  of  land  acquisition  on  public/community  land.           Contractual  provisions  on  benefits  and  risks  sharing  regarding  acquisition  of           10   land       11   Duration  of  procedure  to  obtain  approval  for  a  project             12   Social  requirements  for  large  scale  investments  in  agriculture             13   Environmental  requirements  for  large  scale  investments  in  agriculture                   Procedures  for  economically,  environmentally,  and  socially  beneficial                   14   investments.40   15   Compliance  with  safeguards  related  to  investment  in  agriculture                     Procedures  to  complain  if  agricultural  investors  do  not  comply  with                   16   requirements.   LSLA  1  –  2  Land  rights  recognition  and  conflicts   Boundaries  of  the  country’s  forest  estate  and  the  classification  into  various  uses  and   ownership  are  clearly  defined  and  demarcated   The   Philippines   has   been   successful   in   delineating   the   boundaries   of   the   country’s   forest   estate.   Demarcation   of   forest   land   boundary,   accompanied   by   ground   marking   of   the   boundaries   between   forest   land   and   alienable   and   disposable   land,   began   in   2000   in   accordance  with  DENR  Administrative  Order  No.  2000-­‐24,  and  completed  in  2012  spanning   79,245   km   of   forest   line.     The   completed   forest   line   boundary,   however,   has   not   included   the   forest   land   in   the   Autonomous   Region   of   Muslim   Mindanao   (ARMM).     Work   in   ARMM   was  initiated  by  DENR  after  signing  a  memorandum  of  agreement  with  ARMM  to  undertake   a  joint  effort  in  the  conduct  of  forest  line  boundary  delineation,  which  runs  to  about  3,475   km.   The   survey   results   are   being   assessed   and   validated   by   the   National   Assessment   and   Delineation  Committee  (NADC)  on  a  per  province  basis  for  final  approval  and  endorsement   to   the   House   of   Representatives.   According   to   Sec.   4,   Article   XII   of   the   1987   Philippine   Constitution,  the  final  forest  lines  have  to  be  enacted  into  law  by  Congress.   In  delineating  the  forest  lines,  land  classification  (LC)  maps  were  used  by  DENR  as  reference   39  D  for  LGUs;  A  for  Philippine  Agribusiness  Development  Corporation  (PADC)   40  Not  applicable.  Public  and  community  lands  cannot  be  transferred.   111 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report to  determine  the  location  of  the  survey  lines.       Most  forest  lands41  that  are  under  tenurial  arrangements  or  stewardships  are  mapped  and   registered  at  DENR  Regional  Offices  (sometimes  available  at  the  PENRO  and  CENRO  levels).     In  protected  areas,  only  12  out  of  the  113  proclaimed  protected  areas  have  fully  demarcated   boundaries.   There   are   ongoing   efforts   to   delineate   and   demarcate   the   boundaries   of   all   proclaimed  protected  areas.  All  of  the  protected  areas  however,  are  fully  mapped,  as  these   are   the   bases   for   their   establishment.   The   survey   and   registration   of   protected   area   occupants   however,   is   still   an   ongoing   effort.   Only   58   protected   area   community   based   resource   management   agreements   (PACBARMA)   have   been   issued,   covering   22,000   hectares.     There   are   parallel   efforts   to   clearly   demarcate   other   ownership   and   uses   within   forest   lands,  but  this  is  proving  difficult  due  to  inaccurate  mapping  undertaken  in  the  early  years   of   forest   boundary   delineation.   Ground   validation   is   ongoing   to   ensure   boundaries   are   accurate,  and  that  the  resulting  maps  are  reflected  on  common  rectified  topographic  maps.   This   process   however,   is   slow   due   to   the   limited   manpower   in   the   National   mapping   and   Resource   Information   Authority   (NAMRIA),   the   agency   responsible   for   all   mapping   activities.     Completion  of  ground  validation,  updating  of  maps  based  on  the  results;  and  documentation   of   all   tenure   and   other   interests   in   the   public   domain;   including   the   CADTs,   would   be   an   important   step   towards   identifying   available   areas   for   large   scale   production   activities.   A   key  element  of  such  effort  is  ensuring  that  NCIP  maps  of  CADTs  follow  the  same  standards,   and  that  these  are  capable  of  being  reflected  in  an  integrated  map  showing  all  the  interests   in  the  land.   Land  acquisition  generates  conflicts   There  are  a  number  of  avenues  by  which  land  and/or  use  rights  are  acquired  for  large-­‐scale   investments   in   agriculture.   In   the   case   of   agricultural   areas   where   CLOAs   have   been   awarded,   the   mechanism   is   through   leaseback   and   outgrower   arrangements   between   the   CLOA  holders  and  the  investors.  While  there  are  regulations  and  rules  set  by  DAR  governing   such  arrangements,  there  have  been  well  documented  cases  where  the  CLOA  holders  end  up   renting   out   their   properties   under   long   term   arrangements   with   corporations,   with   the   farmers  being  hired  as  wage  laborers.  In  some  cases,  the  rent  is  quite  low  and  the  terms  not   followed   which   generates   conflicts   eventually.   In   the   case   of   oil   palm   plantations,   some   of   the   grievances   reported   include   the   lack   of   financial   support   to   farmer   beneficiaries,   the   vulnerability   of   small   holders   to   leaseback   schemes   for   which   they   receive   low   rent,   and   unfulfilled   promises   of   employment   and   other   benefits.   As   a   result,   many   of   the   farmers   who  enter  such  schemes  remain  impoverished  while  having  abdicated  access  to  and  control   of  their  lands.   In  public  forests,  particularly  in  areas  awarded  with  community  based  forest  management   agreements  (CBFMAs),  the  mechanism  is  through  joint  venture  agreements  with  investors   which   grant   the   latter   the   right   to   use   portions   of   the   area   under   CBFMAs   for   other   productive   use.   Conflicts   arise   when   the   area   designated   for   development   is   not   in   accordance   with   the   community   based   resource   management   framework   of   the   CBFMA   holders.   Furthermore,   there   had   been   reported   cases   of   conversion   of   portions   of   areas   41  In  the  Philippines,  forest  land  is  a  legal  land  classification;  to  distinguish  it  from  areas  covered  with  forests.  Other  interests   in   areas   with   forest   cover   include   ancestral   domains.   These   are   excluded   from   the   forest   land   classification.   In   the   same   manner,  national  parks  or  protected  areas  are  excluded  from  the  forest  land  classification.     112 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report covered  with  natural  forests  to  give  way  to  plantations.   In  the  case  of  development  activities  within  ancestral  domains,  the  scheme  is  by  securing  a   Free  and  Prior  Informed  Consent  (FPIC)  with  the  community  before  permission  is  given  to   develop  portions  of  the  ancestral  domain.  Conflicts  arise  when  there  is  disagreement  among   community  members  about  the  Project,  when  there  is  misrepresentation  by  some  IP  leaders   on   the   wishes   of   the   entire   community;   and   in   extreme   cases,   lack   of   information   by   investors  of  the  full  terms  and  expectations  of  the  agreement.     Another  way  of  large  scale  investments  that  is  fully  protected  by  law  is  the  establishment  of   economic   zones.   Conflicts   arise   when   the   existence   of   IP   communities   are   not   recognized,   when   their   participation   is   not   sought   in   decision   making,   and   when   their   views   are   not   considered  or  in  some  cases  disregarded.    There  is  also  this  policy  conflict  between  the  IPRA   and  the  laws  establishing  the  economic  zones,  particularly  RA  7916  section  29,  which  states   that:     Eminent  Domain.  –  The  areas  comprising  an  ECOZONE  may  be  expanded  or  reduced   when  necessary.  For  this  purpose,  the  government  shall  have  the  power  to  acquire,   either   by   purchase,   negotiation   or   condemnation   proceedings,   any   private   lands   within   or   adjacent   to   the   ECOZONE   for:   (a)   consolidation   of   lands   for   zone   development  purposes;  (b)  acquisition  of  right  of  way  to  the  ECOZONE;  and(c)  the   protection   of   watershed   areas   and   natural   assets   valuable   to   the   prosperity   of   the   ECOZONE.     If   in   the   establishment   of   a   publicly-­‐owned   ECOZONE,   any   person   or   group   of   persons  who  has  been  occupying  a  parcel  of  land  within  the  Zone  has  to  be  evicted,   the  Philippine  Economic  Zone  Authority  (PEZA)  shall  provide  the  person  or  group  of   persons  concerned  with  proper  disturbance  compensation:  Provided,  however,  That   in   the   case   of   displaced   agrarian   reform   beneficiaries,   they   shall   be   entitled   to   the   benefits  under  the  Comprehensive  Agrarian  Reform  Law,  including  but  not  limited   to   Section   36   of   Republic   Act   No.   3844,   in   addition   to   a   home   lot   in   the   relocation   site  and  preferential  employment  in  the  project  being  undertaken.   In   such   instances,   conflicts   arise   when   ECOZONE   authorities   do   not   recognize   traditional   resource   management   systems   and   indigenous   knowledge   systems   and   practices   (IKSP).   The   right   to   governance   and   management   of   the   AD   by   the   IPs   is   compromised   as   traditional  leadership  structures  as  well  as  justice  systems  are  supplanted  by  the  EcoZone   Management  Authorities  created  by  the  Law  re:  Subic  Bay  Metropolitan  Authority  (SBMA),   Clark  Development  Corporation  (CDC),  among  others.  Furthermore,  land-­‐use  zoning  which   should   be   the   exclusive   authority   of   the   IPs   under   IPRA   has   been   taken   over   by   the   Corporate  Planning  Offices  of  the  Eco-­‐zones.    In  extreme  cases,  traditionally  sensitive  areas   such  as  ritual  grounds,  burial  grounds  and  other  reserves  set  aside  by  IP  communities  are   not  respected,  such  as  when  SBMA  established  the  Freeport  zone  overlaps  with  the  sacred   groves  of  the  Aeta  communities.     In   other   areas,   there   have   been   cases   of   harassment   and   intimidation   sometimes   by   the   paramilitary   and/or   forced   eviction   from   their   land   –   as   in   the   case   of   Agusan   del   Sur   in   the   80’s.       Thus,  large  scale  land  acquisition  of  land  rights  generate  numerous  conflicts,  and  that  due  to   the   lack   of   access   to   legal   recourse,   lack   of   understanding   of   labor   and   corporate   laws,   limited   information,   weak   capacities,   of   the   aggrieved   parties   (usually   the   small   holders,   113 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report tenured  populations,  and  indigenous  peoples);  it  takes  a  long  time  for  these  conflicts  to  be   resolved.     These   cases   have   painted   a   negative   perception   on   large   scale   land   acquisition   in   the   country.   Despite   these,   such   investments   are   seen   as   necessary   to   stimulate   rural   development   and   alleviate   the   many   rural   poor,   particularly   the   forest   dwellers   and   IP   communities,   from   poverty.   However,   the   government   should   provide   a   strong   support   system  to  ensure  adequate  safeguards  are  followed,  and  that  there  is  credible  independent   monitoring   of   such   deals.   Government   efforts   in   developing   incentives   and   promotion   towards  the  private  sector  would  be  put  to  waste  if  these  issues  are  not  addressed.     An  important  player  in  these  acquisitions  is  the  LGUs.  They  can  issue  business  permits  and   permits   to   operate;   as   well   as   reclassify   lands.   Proper   technical   assistance   would   be   needed   for   the   LGUs   to   play   a   more   responsible   role   in   promoting   investments   in   large   scale   agriculture  development  in  the  Philippines.     LSLA  3  –  4  Land  use  planning  and  practices   Land   use   restrictions   on   majority   of   rural   land   parcels   (40-­‐70%)   are   difficult   to   identify  on  the  ground   While   there   are   no   on   the   ground   inventories   made   on   the   rural   parcels;   it   is   common   knowledge   that   except   for   areas   covered   by   CARP   (which   should   include   most   of   the   agricultural  areas);  areas  within  riparian  zones  and  easements,  other  land  use  restrictions   cannot   easily   be   identified   on   site.   People   interested   in   knowing   such   restrictions   would   have  to  rely  on  local  knowledge,  but  this  can  prove  to  be  not  reliable.     Forest  lands  for  example,  are  determined  on  the  basis  of  slope  and  other  technical  criteria   and   not   solely   on   the   extent   of   their   forest   cover.   The   forest   boundary   demarcation   however,   should   ease   the   identification   of   the   extent   of   forest   line,   particularly   if   these   have   been   ground   validated   through   community   participation.   There   would   therefore   be   local   knowledge  of  the  extent  of  such  boundaries.     Ancestral   domains   are   likewise   difficult   to   pinpoint   due   to   the   large   expanse   of   their   coverage,   and   also   because   their   boundaries   do   not   respect   whether   these   are   A   and   D   or   forest  lands.  There  are  overlapping  claims,  use  rights  and  classifications  over  these  lands.    A   case   in   point   is   that   most   of   ancestral   lands   are   within   forest   lands,   protected   areas   and   mining   applications.   It   is   therefore   important   that   the   ancestral   domain   sustainable   development   and   protection   plan   (ADSDPP)   be   integrated   with   the   LGU’s   CLUPs,   and   that   the   CLUPs   should   also   capture   the   tenurial   status   and   land   classifications   of   all   lands   within   their   territories.   A   key   issue   however,   is   the   lack   of   coordination   among   agencies   responsible  for  the  issuance  of  use  rights  over  the  public  domain;  lack  of  openness  of  some   IP   communities   and   NCIP   to   engage   with   other   stakeholders;   and   the   weak   public   consultation  process  in  the  development  of  the  CLUPs.   In  order  to  promote  investments  in  large  scale  acquisition  therefore,  it  is  important  that  the   LGUs   have   updated   CLUPs   and   that   these   should   reflect   all   the   applicable   restrictions   on   rural   lands.   Those   who   have   gone   through   the   FLUP   and   CLUP   processes   have   found   it   very   useful  as  a  tool  for  directing  investments  and  identifying  areas  which  should  be  protected  to   supply  public  goods  and  services.       114 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report Public   institutions   involved   in   large   scale   land   acquisition   maintain   high   level   of   ethical  standards   Public   institutions   involved   in   land   management   and   acquisitions   include:   DENR,   DAR,   NCIP,  PADCC,  DTI,  BOI,  and  the  LGUs.  All  these  institutions  are  regularly  audited  and  their   reports  can  be  made  public  upon  request.     PADCC   as   a   government   owned   and   controlled   corporation   operating   as   an   agribusiness   promoter  under  the  DA  submits  all  reports  to  its  mother  agency  (DA)  and  the  Office  of  the   President.   Reports   are   listed   in   the   PADCC   website   and   are   available   upon   request.   The   Commission  on  Audit  (COA)  of  the  Philippine  Government  audits  PADCC.   While  all  agencies  have  clear  standards  of  ethical  performance  being  part  of  the  civil  service,   implementation   is   quite   variable;   with   some   members   personally   involved   in   brokering   deals   with   investors   that   are   most   often   disadvantageous   to   small   holders,   indigenous   peoples  and  tenured  communities.     At  the  local  level,  LGUs  exercise  substantial  influence  on  the  investors,  the  community  and   even   on   national   government   agencies.   After   all,   LGUs   are   the   ones   issuing   permits   to   operate.  Unfortunately,  their  performances  vary  and  may  depend,  to  a  greater  extent,  on  the   local  executives.   A   case   study   commissioned   by   the   Asian   NGO   Coalition   (ANGOC)   in   Quezon,   Bukidnon   revealed  the  complexity  of  the  dynamics  at  the  local  level  where  LGUs  can  facilitate  or  stop   projects   in   their   localities.   In   this   case   and   in   the   absence   of   a   comprehensive   land   use   plan,   the  provincial  government  approved  the  establishment  of  a  pineapple  plantation.  And  yet,  a   study  commissioned  by  the  municipal  government  showed  the  investment  will  contaminate   their  source  of  potable  water.  Eventually,  the  project  was  stopped.     What  is  lacking  in  government  is  proactive  involvement  in  monitoring  the  implementation   of   agreements   directly   entered   into   between   the   farmers,   IPs   and   local   communities   and   investors  of  large  scale  agricultural  production  areas.    Thus,  in  most  cases,  they  are  left  on   their   own   to   deal   with   conflicts   and   issues   that   arise   out   of   such   agreements.   Usually,   support   organizations   such   as   NGOs   and   other   cause   oriented   groups   take   on   the   responsibility   of   conducting   detailed   investigations   and   providing   legal   and   technical   support   to   ensure   their   concerns   are   raised   and   dealt   with   properly   by   appropriate   agencies.     LSLA  5-­‐11  Investments     Incentives  for  investors  are  not  consistently  applied   In  general,  incentives  for  investors42  are  clear  and  transparent  as  in  the  following:   Board  of  Investments  (BOI)   To   register   with   BOI   and   avail   of   incentives   (which   require   certain   conditions   to   be   met),   the  following  conditions  are  given:   • Filipino  enterprises:     1) If  project  is  in  the  list  of  preferred  projects  in  the  current  Investments  Priority   Plan  (IPP)  which  BOI  issues  yearly;     42Incentives  for  investors  includes  any  mechanism  to  increase  the  attractiveness  of  investments  (tax  breaks,  subsidies,  waiver   of  fee  or  licensing  requirements,  improved  credit  facility,  improved  insurance  facility,  etc.)   115 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report 1a)        If  project  is  not  listed,     i)            At  least  50%  of  the  production  is  for  export;     ii) At   least   70%   of   production   is   for   export   (for   enterprises   with   foreign   ownership  greater  than  40%)   • Foreign-­‐owned   firms/those   whose   foreign   participation   exceeds   40%   of   the   outstanding  capital  stock  who  intend  to  engage  in  domestic-­‐oriented  activities:   1) Proposal  to  engage  in  an  activity  listed  in  the  IPP  as  pioneer   1a)   If   it   fails   to   meet   the   pioneer   classification,   it   can   opt   to   be   an   export-­‐ oriented  firm,  with  export  requirement  of  at  least  70%  of  actual  production.   • In   terms   of   size,   there   is   no   minimum   figure   determined,   as   long   as   the   project   is   for   commercial  operation.   DENR   also   provides   the   following   incentives   with   corresponding   requirements   for   its   Integrated  Forestry  Management  Agreement  (IFMA/DAO  99-­‐53):   • May  interplant  secondary  crops  between  trees  within  areas  designated  for  IFP.   • All   trees   and   other   crops   established   pursuant   to   the   IFMA   belong   to   the   IFMA   holder   who  shall  have  the  right  to  harvest,  sell  and  utilize  such  trees  and  crops.   • Allow  the  IFMA  holder  without  restriction  to  export  logs,  lumber  and  forest  products   derived   from   IFMA   area;   provided   that   logs   harvested   from   naturally   growing   trees   (not  planted)  in  the  IFMA  area  and  the  lumber  manufactured  from  such  logs  will  not   be  exported.   • All   plantation   products   derived   from   an   IFMA   area   shall   be   exempted   from   forest   charges;   provided,   that   logs   from   trees   growing   naturally   (not   planted)   and   other   forest   products   naturally   growing   in   an   IFMA   as   well   as   logs   from   trees   planted   in   compliance   with   TLA   reforestation   obligations   of   TLAs   shall   be   subject   to   forest   charges  stipulated  in  RA  7161.   • Entitlement   to   all   relevant   incentives   provided   for   under   the   Omnibus   Investment   Code   and   to   all   applicable   incentives   enumerated   under   Section   36   of   PD   705,   as   amended.   • Transfer   developed   plantations   that   are   at   least   three   (3)   years   old   to   a   cooperative   upon   fair   compensation   or   payment   thereof   by   the   cooperative   itself   or   through   a   financing  institution  or  to  compensation  or  payment  thereof  by  the  cooperative  itself   or  through  a  financing  institution  or  to  open  up  public  investment   • Use   stable   plantation   crops   that   are   at   least   three   (3)   years   old   as   collateral   or   security  for  loans   PADCC   is   not   mandated   to   give   incentives   but   under   the   Philippine   Laws   an   investor   is   entitled   to   incentives   as   laid   out   in   the   omnibus   investment   code,   RA   9367   (Biofuels   Act),   RA   9513   Renewable   Energy   Act),   BOI   guidelines,   PEZA   guidelines   and   Local   Government   Investment  Code.   In   forest   plantations,   the   incentives   for   investors   are   affected   by   changing   policy   environments.  For  example,  in  the  late  1990s,  the  DENR  Secretary  suspended  the  issuance   of   resource   use   permits   in   CBFMAs.   More   recently,   cutting   was   suspended   in   natural   forests;   thus   affecting   the   incentives   under   the   IFMA   and   CBFMAs.   Such   instability   does   not   bode  well  for  encouraging  investments,  particularly  if  investors  have  incurred  huge  loans  to   116 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report support   their   operations;   and   that   feasibility   assumptions   considered   the   returns   from   harvesting  from  portions  of  the  natural  forests.     CBFMAs   also   lack   incentives,   since   these   instruments   cannot   be   used   for   collateral.   Thus   access   to   capital   is   a   constraint.   Joint   venture   agreements,   which   are   allowed   under   CBFMAs,   have   weak   uptakes   due   to   the   inconsistency   of   the   policy   environment   and   too   much  regulation.     Benefit  sharing  mechanisms  are  not  well  developed   There   is   much   room   to   improve   in   the   area   of   establishing   clear   policies   and   mechanisms   for  benefit  sharing  regarding  investments  in  agriculture,  including  game  farm/conservation.   What  happens  is  direct  negotiation  on  the  terms;  and  that  such  sharing  happens  out  of  the   investor’s   social   responsibility   agenda.   This   results   in   uneven   implementation,   too   much   latitude   for   negotiation,   and   lack   of   standards   for   host   communities   to   benefit   from   the   investments.     There  are  direct  negotiations  between  investors  and  right  holders  but  is  not  always   transparent   Almost   all   negotiations   between   agrarian   reform   beneficiaries   (ARBs)   and   investors   are   done   directly   and   many   are   beyond   the   knowledge   of   DAR.   The   agribusiness   venture   agreements,   however,   need   to   be   filed   and   approved   by   DAR.   While   resulting   agreements   are  almost  always  to  the  benefit  of  farmers  some  investors  complain  of  “overregulation”.     PADCC   only   facilitates   the   negotiation   involving   land   deals.   The   investor   should   present   their   business   arrangement   or   scheme   prior   to   any   negotiation   and   if   deemed   acceptable,   the   land   owner/s   or   cooperatives   or   associations   may   enter   into   agribusiness   venture   arrangement,   subject   to   governing   rules   and   regulations   of   the   concerned   agencies   to   ensure  that  investor  and  farmers  are  mutually  benefiting  from  the  project.   For  the  EIA  process,  a  public  consultation  (scoping)  is  required  first,  as  stated  in  the  social   acceptability  clause  of  PD  1586  and  in  the  ECC.     At   the   local   level,   investors   have   to   get   approval   from   LGUs.   Depending   on   the   local   executives,  the  process  may  not  be  that  transparent  and  often  discretionary.   In   the   case   of   ancestral   lands,   the   IPRA   is   very   clear   on   the   direct   negotiation   between   IP   communities   and   investors,   or   any   project   proponent   for   that   matter,   under   the   FPIC   mechanism.   However,   in   practice,   there   has   been   strong   discretion   by   NCIP   of   the   FPIC   process.    The  existing  procedures  where  the  applicant  pays  NCIP  for  the  processing  of  FPIC   with   the   IP   community   may   have   to   be   revisited.   Timing   is   also   important   in   securing   the   FPIC.  Moreover,  many  FPICs  issued  by  NCIP  have  been  disputed  by  the  IP  communities  who   were  supposed  to  issue  them  in  the  first  place.   There   were   also   reported   cases   that   negotiations   take   place   between   the   investors   and   some   so   called   community   leaders   or   representatives   who   have   no   mandate   whatsoever   from  the  whole  community.  This  results  in  confusion  and  capture  of  benefits  only  by  the  so   called   leaders   or   elite   members   of   the   community,   to   the   disadvantage   of   the   rest   of   the   community  affected.   More   important   than   ensuring   there   is   direct   negotiations   is   the   manner   by   which   such   decisions   were   secured;   and   the   information   that   were   made   available   upon   which   decisions  were  made.  There  have  been  documented  cases,  where  rights  holders  complain  of   not   being   fully   informed   about   the   returns   and   other   conditions   associated   with   the   117 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report agreements;   thus   resulting   in   conflicts   and   disputes.   Direct   negotiation   also   assumes   that   both  parties  have  equal  levels  of  awareness  about  the  deals,  and  are  equally  empowered  to   specify   the   terms   and   conditions   of   the   agreements.   In   cases   of   negotiations   between   corporate   officers   and   IP   communities,   CLOA   holders   and   forest   communities,   this   seems   not   to   be   the   case.   Thus,   this   calls   for   technical   support   from   third   parties   to   ensure   the   rights   holders   are   fully   aware   of   the   potential   benefits   and   risks   associated   with   these   agreements.  NGOs  have  so  far  performed  such  role.  However,  in  cases  where  there  are  no   NGOs   operating   in   the   area,   there   is   hardly   any   source   of   independent   assessment   of   proposals.     Sufficient  information  is  required  from  investors  to  assess  the  desirability  of  projects   on  public/communal  land   Investments   in   large   scale   agriculture   are   required   by   national   government   agencies   to   comply   with   environmental   impact   assessments,   and   other   technical,   social   and   financial   feasibility  criteria.  While  these  are  deemed  sufficient,  the  LGUs  are  not  fully  aware   of   these.   Most  LGUs  do  not  have  sufficient  standards  with  respect  to  the  information  that  should  be   submitted  to  review  the  feasibility  of  large  scale  projects.  It  is  common  practice  that  there  is   no   rigid   review   of   information   from   the   investors   or   proponents,   even   from   the   perspective   of   the   communities.     In   this   regard,   it   was   felt   that   both   communities   and   LGUs   should   be   capable   of   careful   assessment   of   investment   proposals,   such   that   they   should   be   aware   of   what  questions  to  ask.  While  DTI  representatives  are  called  in  to  assist  the  LGUs,  these  are   almost   always   made   after   a   decision   has   been   made.   Current   LGU   readiness   to   conduct   objective  review  of  proposals  is  quite  poor,  and  this  is  a  gap  that  must  be  addressed,  in  light   of  the  extended  role  of  LGUs  in  approval  of  investment  proposals.    Other  support  could  take   the  form  of  providing  technical  assistance  in  terms  of  what  types  of  crops  to  promote  based   on  assistance  from  DA,  rather  than  relying  on  investors  to  do  so.     To   promote   transparent   decision   making,   PADCC   organizes   community   consultations   on   investment  proposals.  However,  this  mechanism  would  only  be  useful  if  the  participants  are   able  to  ask  the  relevant  questions.  In  all  these,  the  IP  communities  are  the  most  vulnerable   because   of   their   weak   capacity   to   engage   with   investors   and   ask   the   right   questions,   particularly  on  technical  and  economic  matters.   For   cases   of   land   acquisition   on   public/community   land,   investors   are   required   to   provide  information;  but  these  are  not  publicly  accessible   On   the   part   of   the   Board   of   Investments,   their   office   does   not   give   out   information   on   investors   as   a   matter   of   policy;   unless   there   is   a   Court   order   or   if   there   is   expressed   permission  from  the  investor  to  do  so.     DAO   16   0f   2012   as   an   addendum   to   DAO   42   requires   the   Private   Forest   Development   Agreement   (PFDA)   holder   to   submit   a   Development   and   Management   Plan   with   the   assistance   of   Foresters   from   CENRO   Office.   The   PFDA   Holder   is   also   required   to   submit   annual  progress  report  to  CENRO  concerned.   In  ancestral  domain  areas,  the  NCIP  AO  3  provides  the  list  of  needed  requirements  and  the   comprehensive   process   by   which   investors   inform   the   community   and   the   public.   As   outlined   in   Section   22   of   this   AO,   the   applicant/investors   need   to   present   to   the   community   the   operation   plan,   costs   and   benefits   to   ICC/IP,   adverse   effects   and   mitigating   measures,   among  other  information.     Sharing   by   experts   and   other   stakeholders   including   NGAs,   LGUs,  NGOs,  and  IPO  are  also  welcomed  and  encouraged.  The  information  provided  will  also   have  to  be  validated  by  NCIP.   118 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report While  these  are  the  provisions  of  existing  laws,  there  is  no  regular  monitoring  of  whether   investors  actually  give  out  all  the  essential  information  about  the  project.  There  is  also  no   depository  of  such  information,  and  one  has  to  research  these  from  the  different  agencies.   Communities   and   interested   parties   requiring   more   detailed   information   on   the   investments  would  have  to  undertake  their  own  research.     There  are  no  clear  standards  for  benefit  sharing  with  communities  in  large  scale  land   acquisition  projects     While  there  are  direct  negotiations  between  the  landholders  and  investors  in  CARP  covered   areas,   these   terms   are   reviewed   and   approved   by   the   appropriate   agrarian   reform   committee   (i.e.,   provincial,   regional,   etc.).   Despite   these   however,   it   is   not   clear   in   these   policies   whether   benefit   and   risk   sharing   is   required.   What   is   ensured   in   these   policies   is   that   such   arrangements   do   not   generate   transfer   of   ownership   from   the   landholder   to   the   investor;   and   to   ensure   that   there   is   fair   and   just   treatment   of   landowners.   There   are   provisions   however,   of   transfer   of   skills   to   agrarian   reform   beneficiaries.     In   most   cases   however,   these   agreements   result   in   employer-­‐employee   relationship   between   the   CLOA   holders  and  the  investor,  thus  negating  the  very  intent  of  the  CARP.     In   ancestral   domains,   any   contract   or   agreement   that   the   tribe   must   enter   into   should   be   tripartite   with   NCIP.     In   some   agreements,   NCIP   has   shares   in   the   benefits   as   well.   In   the   case   of   the   Joint   Management   Agreement   between   the   IP   community   and   the   Subic   Bay   Management  Authority  (SBMA),  there  are  provisions  for  benefit  sharing.   Thus,   there   are   no   standards   or   policies   that   prescribe   benefit   sharing   between   the   investors   and   communities   or   rights   holders.   What   happens   is   purely   discretionary   and   dependent  on  the  direct  negotiations  between  the  parties.  There  is  clearly  a  need  to  put  in   place  such  standards  so  that  there  are  clear  expectations  in  order  to  avoid  conflicts  in  the   future.     Most  investment  applications  are  reviewed  and  receive  a  response  within  six  months   In   general,   existing   prescribed   processes   specify   certain   periods   for   the   completion   of   reviews  of  applications.  In  the  case  of  agrarian  reform  areas,  DAR  is  involved  in  the  process.   While   the   processing   time   is   reasonable,   in   most   cases,   approval   takes   a   longer   time   particularly  if  there  are  issues  related  to  land  tenure  improvement.     In  securing  FPIC  in  ancestral  lands,  the  NCIP  facilitates  the  process.  There  is  a  prescriptive   period  of  55  days  to  process  the  FPIC,  but  it  is  common  for  parties  to  go  beyond  this  period,   particularly  when  there  are  apprehensions  on  the  project  by  the  communities.     The   role   of   DENR   is   in   the   review   of   EIA   and   issuance   of   ECC.     In   CBFM   areas,   there   is   no   need   for   ECC,   instead,   only   an   IEE   is   required;   except   in   areas   exceeding   100   hectares.     There   are   prescribed   periods   for   the   review   of   EIA,   but   in   some   cases,   the   documents   are   sent  back  to  the  proponents  for  further  study.   Despite   the   above   standards,   there   are   cases   where   there   has   been   wide   discretion   in   the   review   of   documents   and   additional   requirements   set   to   finalize   the   review   and   approval   process.  The  reasons  are  many,  but  the  most  important  pertain  to  community  perceptions   or   social   acceptability   of   the   project.   In   some   cases   too,   there   were   conflicting   decisions   made   by   various   layers   of   government,   such   as   between   the   provincial   and   municipal   LGUs.   These  kinds  of  uncertainties  contribute  to  the  poor  transparency  in  the  processes.     119 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report LSLA  12-­‐13    Environmental  and  social  safeguards     Social  and  environmental  safeguards  for  investors  are  implemented  with  discretion   Under   DAR   AO9,   conditions   for   approval   of   any   agribusiness   venture   agreements   include   social   safeguards   such   as   assurance   of   economic   profitability,   reasonable   level   of   risks,   availability   and   suitability   of   basic   facilities,   agrarian   reform   beneficiaries   skills   development,  etc.  The  same  AO  makes  reference  to  environmental  considerations  in  the  use   of   agricultural   technology   and   ensuring   the   productive   capacity   and   sustainability   of   land   and  natural  resources.    However,  there  have  been  reported  cases  of  negative  environmental   impacts  resulting  from  plantations.   For  DENR  and  NCIP,  there  are  provisions  in  the  law  that  require  bonds,  MOA,  CSR  to  state   the  public  benefits,  as  stated  in  the  following  laws:   o EIA  /  PD  1586,  in  its  social  acceptability  clause  and     o NCIP  AO  3,  series  of  2012  states  the  requirement  to  post  bond  which  shall  be   clearly  stated  in  the  MOA   PD   1151   or   the   Philippine   Environmental   Policy   also   prescribes   guidelines   for   EIA   and   compliance  with  environmental  standards.  This  policy  states:     All  agencies  and  instrumentalities  of  the  national  government,  including  government-­‐ owned  or  controlled  corporations,  as  well  as  private  corporations  firms  and  entities   shall  prepare,  file  and  include  in  every  action,  project  or  undertaking  which  significantly   affects  the  quality  of  the  environment  a  detail  statement  on:   o the  environmental  impact  of  the  proposed  action,  project  or  undertaking   o any  adverse  environmental  effect  which  cannot  be  avoided  should  the              proposal  be  implemented;     o alternative  to  the  proposed  action;   o a  determination  that  the  short-­‐term  uses  of  the  resources  of  the  environment                are  consistent  with  the  maintenance  and  enhancement  of  the  long-­‐term                productivity  of  the  same;  and   o whenever  a  proposal  involve  the  use  of  depletable  or  non-­‐renewable                resources,  a  finding  must  be  made  that  such  use  and  commitment  are                warranted.   Before  an  environmental  impact  statement  is  issued  by  a  lead  agency,  all  agencies   having  jurisdiction  over,  or  special  expertise  on,  the  subject  matter  involved  shall   comment  on  the  draft  environmental  impact  statement  made  by  the  lead  agency  within   thirty  (30)  days  from  receipt  of  the  same.   Implementation   of   these   policies,   however,   is   to   some   extent   discretionary,   and   in   some   cases,  have  resulted  in  conflicts.  Further,  there  are  no  guidelines  that  set  the  standards  by   which   both   parties   shall   be   assessed   for   compliance.   There   are   also   no   systematic   monitoring   on   how   socials   safeguards   are   being   adhered   to.   There   are   cases   though,   of   reviews   in   exceptional   cases   where   there   are   reported   serious   breaches   of   agreements,   particularly  in  cases  involving  ancestral  lands.   There  are  mechanisms  with  the  various  agencies  to  check  on  compliance  with  safeguards.   DAR  has  a  committee  that  inspects,  evaluate  findings  and  even  cancellation  of  agribusiness   agreements.  DENR  has  also  multi-­‐stakeholder  monitoring  teams  to  check  for  compliance.     However,  these  compliance  mechanisms  are  generally  weak.    It  is  common  knowledge  that   implementation  of  actions  to  address  findings  is  not  consistently  implemented.  There  have   been  issues  with  exacting  compliance  with  agreements  resulting  from  monitoring.    This  is   120 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report associated  with  the  fact  that  compliance  monitoring  is  financed  by  the  investor,  which  can   become   self   -­‐   serving.   The   same   arrangement   holds   true   in   securing   FPIC,   where   the   budget   for  the  validation  and  consultation  processes  are  sourced  from  the  proponent,  and  given  to   NCIP.   There   are   also   numerous   reports   from   the   field   that   these   agreements   are   not   complied   with.  For  example,  permits  may  be  issued  for  sand  and  gravel  operation  but  mining  is  the   activity  actually  implemented.   These   practices   undermine   the   overall   credibility   of   safeguards,   and   overall   confidence   in   the   systems.   Government   should   be   serious   in   this   respect,   or   appoint   independent   monitoring  teams  to  regularly  report  on  effectiveness  of  implementation.     LSLA  14  –  16    -­‐  Institutional  capacity  and  coordination     Procedures   are   in   place   to   identify   and   select   economically,   environmentally,   and   socially  beneficial  investments     There  are  existing  procedures  for  identification  of  beneficial  investments  but  these  are  not   implemented  effectively.     Under   PADCC,   land   owner/s   submits   their   letter   of   intent   to   offer   their   lands   for   investments.   Submissions   with   complete   documentation   will   be   included   in   the   land   inventory   list   for   development.   Lands   under   DENR,   DAR,   and   NCIP   that   are   classified   as   marginal   or   underutilized   are   being   offered   for   agribusiness   investments   to   local   and   international   investors,   including   areas   under   the   jurisdiction   of   Armed   Forces   of   the   Philippines  (AFP)  and  state  universities  and  colleges  (SUCs)  subject  to  governing  rules  and   regulations.     PADCC,   together   with   the   other   rural   development   agencies,   then   conducts   stakeholders’   meetings  and  briefings.     The  investor  should  present  their  business  arrangement  or  scheme  prior  to  any  negotiation   and  if  deemed  acceptable,  the  land  owner/s  or  cooperatives  or  associations  may  enter  into   agribusiness   venture   arrangement,   subject   to   governing   rules   and   regulations   of   the   concerned   agencies   to   ensure   that   investor   and   farmers   are   mutually   benefiting   from   the   project.   If   the   project   is   acceptable   to   the   community,   the   investor   complies   with   the   agri-­‐ investment  requirements  of  the  LGU,  DA,  DENR,  DAR,  BOI  and  BIR.  Social  and  environment   hazards   as   well   as   risk   and   benefits   are   detailed   in   the   documents   required   by   these   agencies.   PADCC’s  role,  however,  is  facilitative  and  effective  implementation  will  depend  on  other  line   agencies   and   LGUs.   LGUs   exercise   substantial   authority   and   influence   that   may   and   may   not   have  result  to  what  is  expected.   More   often   than   not,   the   direct   negotiation   process   results   in   a   one   sided   deal,   with   the   community   not   being   able   to   properly   weigh   the   terms   and   conditions   of   the   proposed   venture.   In   many   cases,   these   realizations   set   in   during   implementation   which   lead   to   conflicts.     There  are  avenues  with  different  agencies  for  lodgment  of  complaints  if  investors  do   not  comply  with  requirements  but  there  is  no  monitoring  of  agreements     121 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report In   cases   of   complaints,   there   are   various   agencies   involved   depending   on   the   type   of   land   involved   and   the   nature   of   the   complaint.     In   CLOAs,   DAR   steps   in   to   look   into   the   complaints,  particularly  if  it  involves  tenure  rights.  If  the  complaints  are  labor  related,  then   the   Department   of   Labor   and   Employment   is   involved.   If   the   complaints   concern   environmental   issues,   then   DENR   takes   the   lead,   and   the   LGU   for   other   matters.   The   DTI   also   has   an   Investment   Settlement   Dispute   mechanism,   however,   this   does   not   include   agricultural   investments   since   their   focus   is   more   industry   based.   DTI   however,   has   negotiators  for  trade  and  investments  that  can  assist  LGUs  if  requested.   Since  lodgment  of  complaints  rests  with  various  agencies,  the  aggrieved  party  should  have   knowledge   on   the   agency   responsible   for   its   resolution.   This   set   up   makes   it   difficult   for   those  affected  to  raise  their  concerns.  Moreover,  it  is  not  clear  from  various  examples  how   these   are   eventually   resolved,   how   long   it   takes   for   these   concerns   to   be   resolved,   and   what   actions  are  taken  if  there  is  continued  disregard  for  safeguards.     There  is  also  no  systematic  monitoring  of  how  agreements  resulting  from  these  processes   are  resolved,  or  complied  with  by  the  investors;  and  what  happens  if  there  is  no  compliance   with  such  agreements.         122 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report   Module  7  -­‐  Forestry               Score   FGI-­‐Dim     Topic   A   B   C   D           1     i   Country  signature  and  ratification  of  international  conventions           Implementation   of   incentives   to   promote   climate   change   mitigation   1   ii   through  forestry           2   i   Public  good  aspects  of  forests  recognized  by  law  and  protected           Forest   management   plans   and   budgets   address   the   main   drivers   of   2   ii   deforestation  and  degradation           Country’s   commitment   to   forest   certification     and   chain-­‐of-­‐custody   systems   to   promote   sustainable   harvesting   of   timber   and   non-­‐timber   3   i   forest  products           Country’s   commitment   to   SMEs   as   a   way   to   promote   competition,   3   ii   income  generation  and  productive  rural  employment           Recognition   of   traditional   and   indigenous   rights   to   forest   resources   by   4   i   law           Sharing  of  benefits  or  income  from  public  forests  with  local  communities   4   ii   by  law  and  implemented           Boundaries   of   the   countries   forest   estate   and   the   classification   into   5     i   various  uses  and  ownership  are  clearly  defined  and  demarcated           In  rural  areas,  forest  land  use  plans  and  changes  in  these  plans  are  based   5   ii   on  public  input.           Country’s  approach  to  controlling  forest  crimes,  including  illegal  logging   6   i   and  corruption           Inter   and   intra   agency   efforts   and   multi-­‐stakeholder   collaboration   to   6   ii   combat  forest  crimes,  and  awareness  of  judges  and  prosecutors   FGI  1  -­‐  Commitment  to  sustainability  and  climate  change  mitigation     The   country   is   signatory   to   almost   all   the   relevant   international   conventions   on   forestry,   environment,   climate   change   and   biodiversity,   with   fairly   good   implementation,   following   its  capacities.       The  most  important  of  these  treatises  are  as  follows:   Convention  on  International  Trade  of  Endangered  Species  (CITES)   The   country   is   active   in   the   implementation   of   CITES.   A   national   legislation   in   support   of   illegal  wildlife  trade  was  issued  in  the  form  of  RA  9147  –  Wildlife  Resources  Conservation   and   Protection   Act   in   2001.   DENR   Administrative   Order   2007-­‐01   issued   the   National   List   of   Philippine  Plants  and  their  categories.  RA  9147  and  its  IRR  allow  the  collection  of  plants  in   the   list   only   for   scientific   and   propagation   purposes,   and   only   by   accredited   individuals,   business,   research,   educational   and   scientific   entities.   It   considers   it   unlawful   for   any   person,  group  or  entity  to  collect  and/or  trade  the  species  listed  therein  unless  such  acts  are   covered  by  a  permit  issued  by  the  DENR.     123 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report The   Philippines   works   in   close   coordination   with   law   enforcement   agencies   to   combat   international  illegal  trade  of  prohibited  wildlife  and  resources;  such  as  those  perpetrated  by   foreigners   on   Philippine   territory.   Celebrated   cases   such   as   black   corral   harvesting   and   smuggling;   and   collection   of   turtles   by   foreigners   for   sale   in   their   countries   have   brought   to   fore  the  importance  of  strengthening  patrols  and  confiscations.   In   the   recent   CoP   of   CITES   in   Bangkok   Thailand;   the   Philippines   played   an   active   role   in   the   newly   formed   Ivory   Enforcement   Task   Force   together   with   representatives   from   China,   Kenya,   Malaysia,   South   Africa,   Thailand,   Uganda,   the   United   Republic   of   Tanzaia   and   Vietnam  to  combat  illegal  ivory  trade.     Convention  on  Biodiversity   The   Philippines   is   one   of   the   first   countries   to   sign   the   CBD.   As   early   as   1992,   it   already   has   a   National   Integrated   Protected   Areas   System     (NIPAS)   Law,   which   provides   the   legal   framework   for   the   establishment   and   management   of   protected   areas   as   a   key   strategy   to   conserve   the   country’s   biodiversity.   A   total   of   240   protected   areas   covering   4.06   Million   hectares   of   terrestrial   ecosystems   have   been   established   so   far,   with   113   reaching   proclamations  by  the  President,  and  about  13  protected  areas  legislated  into  law.     The  country  is  active  in  the  international  discussions  of  the  CBD,  and  is  seen  as  one  of  the   frontrunners   of   the   implementation   of   section   8(j)   recognizing   indigenous   community   conserved   areas   (ICCAs),   as   a   way   of   achieving   the   Aichi   targets.   It   submits   regular   national   reports  to  the  CBD,  and  monitors  its  performance  in  achieving  international  commitments   such  as  the  Program  of  Work  on  Protected  Areas  and  the  Aichi  targets.  The  government  is   currently   updating   its   National   Biodiversity   Strategy   and   Action   Plan,   following   CBD   guidelines.   Three   main   barriers   have   been   identified   in   the   effective   conservation   of   the   country’s   biodiversity.   These   are:   biogeographical   representativeness   of   the   Philippine   PA   system;   institutional,   systemic   and   individual   capacities,   and   weak   PA   financing   sustainability.     Current  programs  are  underway  to  squarely  address  these  issues.     Ramsar  Convention  on  Wetlands   Six  sites  have  been  designated  as  wetlands  of  international  importance,  with  a  surface  area   of   154,409   hectares.   These   are:   (i)   Agusan   Marsh   Wildlife   Sanctuary;   (ii)   Las   Pinas   –   Paranaque   Critical   Habitat   and   Ecotourism   Area;   (iii)   Naujan   Lake   National   Park;   (iv)   Olango   Island   Wildlife   Sanctuary;   (v)   Puerto   Princesa   Subterranean   River   National   Park;   and  (vi)  Tubbataha  Reefs  National  Park.    Tubbataha  Reefs  was  recently  legislated  in  2012  as   a  national  park  under  NIPAS.     The  country  has  been  regularly  submitting  national  reports  to  the  Convention  since  1999.  In   its   2012   submission,   the   Philippines   reported   that   it   is   updating   its   1998   Philippine   National  Wetland  Action  Plan;  and  issued  Executive  Order  797  in  2009  which  adopted  the   National   Action   Plan   for   the   Coral   Triangle   Initiative   on   Coral   Reefs,   Fisheries   and   Food   Security.  The  latter  is  in  support  of  the  multilateral  partnership  of  six  countries:  Indonesia,   Malaysia,  Papua  New  Guinea,  Solomon  islands,  and  the  Philippines  to  safeguard  the  region’s   marine  and  coastal  biological  resources.     The   limitations   in   implementation   of   Convention   agreements   include:   inventory   and   mapping  of  wetlands  with  focus  on  inland  wetlands  to  include  river  basins/watersheds;  and   nomination  of  Ramsar  sites.       124 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report UN  Framework  Convention  on  Climate  Change   The  Philippines  legislated  Republic  Act  9729,  otherwise  known  as  the  Climate  Change  Act  of   2009   which   established   the   lead   policy   making   body   tasked   to   coordinate,   monitor   and   evaluate   its   programs   and   action   plans   as   regards   to   climate   change.   It   is   Chaired   by   the   President.   Consistent   with   the   law,   the   National   Framework   Strategy   for   Climate   Change   was   signed   on   April   28,   2010;   and   shortly   thereafter,   the   National   Climate   Change   Action   Plan  (NCCAP)  was  formulated.     The  NCCAP  provides  for  the  twin  agenda  of  adaptation  and  mitigation  for  2011  to  2028.  Its   goal   is   to   build   the   adaptive   capacities   of   women   and   men   in   their   communities,   increase   the   resilience   of   vulnerable   sectors   and   not   ecosystem   to   climate   change,   and   optimize   mitigation   opportunities   towards   gender-­‐responsive   and   rights   based   sustainable   development.  It  has  seven  strategic  priorities:   • Food  security   • Water  sufficiency   • Ecosystems  and  environmental  stability   • Human  security   • Climate  smart  industries  and  services   • Sustainable  energy   • Knowledge  management  and  capacity  development   Republic  Act  10174  created  a  Peoples’  Survival  Fund,  allocating  Php  1  Billion  to  implement   local  climate  change  action  plans  and  make  communities  more  resilient  to  climate-­‐induced   disasters.   It   will   also   finance   adaptation   programs   and   projects   based   on   the   National   Strategic  Framework  on  Climate  Change.    Many  other  programs  are  being  implemented  by   the  Commission  to  ensure  country’s  adaptation  strategies.   The   country   is   active   in   international   discussions   of   the   UNFCCC,   leading   the   advocacy   towards   seeking   firm   commitments   from   developed   countries   to   reduce   their   GHG   emissions  and  providing  funding.       Cartagena  Protocol  on  Biosafety   The  Philippines  has  a  National  Biosafety  Framework  as  per  Executive  Order  514  (E.O.  514)   issued  on  17  March  2006.  Guidelines  are  in  place  for  risk  assessment  of  agricultural  plants   and   plant   products   by   way   of   a   Department   of   Agriculture   Administrative   Order   No.   08,   series   of   2002.   The   DENR   is   formulating   regulations   for   genetically   modified   forest   and  wildlife   resources.   Guidelines   are   also   in   place   for   Contained   Use   of   LMOs   which   is   being   implemented   by   the   Department   of   Science   and   Technology.     Guidelines   are   also   in   place   for   the   planes   release   of   GMOs   and   potentially   harmful   exotic   species   issued   on   September  8,  1998.     Overall,  the  country  is  committed  but  it  has  to  strengthen  implementation  by  improving  on-­‐ site  conservation  and  management  of  protected  and  high  biodiversity  areas  in  collaboration   and  partnership  with  LGUs,  communities,  and  environmental  partners.  The  country  has  also   to  invest  more  resources  for  improving  internal  capacity  and  allocating  more  resources  to   highly  threatened  areas;  and  in  monitoring  the  overall  impacts  of  these  actions  in  improving   biodiversity  status.   During   the   panel   discussions,   the   panel   added   that   the   country   plays   an   active   role   in   the   international  discussions;  on  many  occasions,  partnering  with  other  countries  with  similar   interests   to   press   and   lobby   strongly   for   key   positions   on   sensitive   issues,   such   as   financing   125 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report for   climate   change.   In   other   Conventions   such   as   the   CBD,   Ramsar   and   CITES,   the   country   submits  regular  reports  and  is  able  to  provide  continuity  in  attendance  in  various  meetings   of  the  parties,  including  its  relevant  Technical  Working  Groups.     The  panel  recommended  though,  that  there  should  be  consolidated  reporting  on  Philippine   compliance   and   status   of   country   implementation   of   these   international   environmental   treatises.  There  should  also  be  a  collection  of  official  positions  of  the  Philippines  on  critical   issues,  and  these  should  be  discussed  more  widely,  and  made  accessible  to  the  public.       The   use   of   incentives   such   as   PES   and   REDD+   are   still   in   their   infant   stage   in   the   Philippines   While  there  have  been  many  PES  pilots,  only  a  few  have  been  successfully  implemented  in   the   absence   of   an   enabling   policy   framework.   On   REDD+,   while   there   has   been   a   national   strategy   that   has   been   developed,   activities   are   still   focused   on   grooming   the   country   for   an   eventual   REDD+   implementation.   These   include   forest   resource   assessment,   information   and   education   and   capacity   building.   At   most,   there   are   a   few   pilots   of   REDD+,   but   since   there  is  no  secure  funding  window  yet  for  REDD+  under  the  UNFCCC  and  there  is  no  firm   national   policy   yet   on   carbon   rights   in   the   Philippines;   this   funding   mechanism   is   not   yet   fully  in  place.   The   potential   for   REDD+   in   the   Philippines   in   terms   of   mitigating   climate   change   by   reducing  net  carbon  emission  is  not  large.    However,  the  Philippines  has  a  critical  mass  of   technical   expertise   that   contribute   in   developing   simple,   sub-­‐national,   and   practical   approach   to   establishing   RELs   and   carrying   out   MRVs   at   the   ecosystem,   LGU,   and   right’s   holder   levels   (tenured   and   domain   areas,   conservation   areas,   etc.).     The   Philippines   can   build   on   its   extensive   background   in   carrying   out   forest   inventories   and   assessments   of   timber,   non-­‐timber,   fauna,   and   key   socioeconomic   variables.     This   approach,   however,   should   be   modified   to   fit   the   needs   of   different   resource   management   units   at   the   sub-­‐ national   levels.     Methodologies   for   establishing   RELs   and   doing   MRVs   have   yet   to   be   developed,  refined,  adopted,  and  scaled  up.    Local  level  land  use  planning  now  integrates  the   ecosystem   and   lands   of   the   public   domains   in   preparing   comprehensive   land   use   plans   of   LGUs.       There   is   very   limited   information   on   the   potential   costs   and   benefits   of   REDD+   in   developing   countries   like   the   Philippines.   In   a   study   by   Lasco,   et.   al.,     an   estimate   was   made   of   the   range   of   likely   financial   benefits   of   REDD+   implementation   in   the   country   under   various  forest  degradation  and  mitigation  scenarios.  Findings  show  that  reducing  the  rate  of   forest  degradation  by  a  modest  5  to  15  %  annually  while  increasing  the  doubling  the  rate  of   reforestation  to  1.5  %  annually  could  reduce  C  emissions  by  up  to  about  60  million  t  C  by   2030.  These  are  equivalent  to  US$  97  to  417  million  of  mean  C  credits  annually  at  US$  5  per   ton   C.   These   figures   are   much   higher   than   the   total   budget   of   the   government   and   official   development   assistance   for   forestry   activities   in   the   country   which   amounted   to   US$   46   million   in   2005   and   US$   12   million   in   2006,   respectively.   Given   these   assumptions,   the   study   concluded   that   REDD+   C   credits   could   be   a   significant   source   of   financing   for   forestry   projects  in  developing  countries  like  the  Philippines.   REDD+   can   contribute   to   strengthening   the   climate   change   resiliency   of   highly   diverse   flora   and   fauna   of   the   country,   reduced   vulnerabilities   of   affected   communities   especially   for   landslides,  flooding,  and  storms.    It  can  further  support  social  and  environmental  safeguards   in   highly   diverse   areas   and   in   marginalized   communities   based   on   gender   and   equity   through  local  and  national  mechanisms.   126 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report There  is  currently  no  policy  framework  yet  which  clearly  sets  the  carbon  rights.  Discussions   are  still  on  going  on  the  applicability  of  the  Regalian  Doctrine  meaning  the  state  ownership   of  natural  resources  and  forests;  as  well  as  the  rights  of  communities  and  IP  communities   actually  responsible  for  effective  management  of  forests.    There  is  still  no  registry  to  speak   of,  which  makes  it  difficult  at  this  stage  to  assess  the  cost  effectiveness  and  financial  benefits   from   REDD+.   Thus,   there   have   been   many   reported   cases   of   voluntary   carbon   exchange   which  are  highly  questionable,  particularly  if  directly  negotiated  by  communities  and  third   parties.     The   potential   for   PES   is   still   not   fully   explored,   in   the   absence   of   an   enabling   policy.   At   best,   there   are   a   number   of   pilots   implementing   PES,   but   these   are   directly   negotiated   and   brokered   between   communities,   and   some   institutional   users.   Thus,   PES   is   not   yet   widely   used  as  a  source  of  financing  and  incentives  for  sustainable  forest  management.     It  is  thus  essential  that  clear  policies  should  be  developed  on  the  use  of  PES  as  an  incentive   mechanism   for   rewarding   communities   and   other   institutions   to   produce   environmental   services  and  for  those  who  benefit  therefrom  to  pay  for  the  enjoyment  of  such  services.  On   the  REDD+,  clear  policy  guidance  on  carbon  rights  and  how  the  proceeds  therefrom  should   be  shared  between  the  state  and  the  forest  managers  should  be  in  place.       FGI   2   -­‐   Recognition   of   public   goods   aspects   of   forests   and   promoting   their  sustainable  use     Public  goods  aspects  of  forests  (biodiversity,  soil  and  water  conservation,  social  and   cultural  values)  are  recognized  by  law  and  protected   The   Philippines   leads   in   formulating   policies   that   capture   the   public   goods   of   ENR   assets   including   the   various   ecosystems   goods   and   services   that   they   provide.   It   realizes   the   existing   and   potential   values   of   the   ENR   assets   especially   for   the   supply   of   water   for   irrigation,   energy   generation,   domestic   use,   recreation,   and   other   uses.     The   ENRM   approaches,   however,   marginally   link   with   the   sustainable   and   predictable   supply   of   ENR   goods   and   services.     Governance   remains   to   be   the   issue   with   different   policies,   controls,   and   regulations   that   guide   implementation   of   different   land   and   natural   resources   programs.   The   Philippines   Development   Plan   for   2011-­‐2016   supports   the   integration   of   ENR  management  with  the  other  key  sectors  at  the  watershed-­‐ecosystem  level  through  the   national  convergence  initiative  (NCI)  and  climate  change-­‐related  programs.             Table  10.  Public  Goods  Aspects  of  Forests  Protected  by  Laws  in  the  Philippines   Public  Good   Relevance   Status  in  Law   Type  of  Actions  and  their   Remarks   Effectiveness   Biodiversity   High   With  enabling   Actions  are  being  taken  to   There  is  an  urgent  need   laws  such  as   place  all  priority  key   to  effectively  conserve   NIPAS,  specific   biodiversity  areas  (KBAs)   and  manage  NIPAS  areas   laws  for  some   under  the  NIPAS  system  and   included  in  the  KBA   protected  areas,   recognize  those  under   system,  include  the   Wildlife  Act   ancestral  domains  as   remaining  highly   indigenous  community   diverse  areas  as  part  of   conserved  areas  (ICCAs)     the  NIPAS,  and  dis-­‐ establish  initial   There  are  issues,  however,   components  that  no   on  how  to  fast  track  dis-­‐ longer  qualify  for   establishment  of  other  PA   biodiversity   areas  included  under  the   conservation.   127 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report Public  Good   Relevance   Status  in  Law   Type  of  Actions  and  their   Remarks   Effectiveness   initial  components  of  NIPAS   An  increasing  need  to   but  are  not  included  as  part   engage  the  partnership   of  the  KBAs  (about  60%  of   of  LGUs,  communities,   areas  under  the  NIPAS).     and  CSR  companies  in   DENR  has  yet  to  effectively   PA  management   conserve  and  manage  the   NIPAS  areas  covered  by   An  increasing  need  to   KBAs  to  ensure  that   generate  additional   biodiversity  is  protected   revenues  from  the  PAs   and  managed.   to  help  finance   conservation  and   LGUs  and  communities  are   management   marginally  involved  in   biodiversity  conservation.       Soil   Medium   PD  705;  various   Soils  are  mostly  conserved   Soil  conservation  has   declarations  and   or  protected  from  ongoing   become  more  of  the   reservations  for   rehabilitation  activities  and   concern  of  the   conserving  soil   marginal  management  of   Department  of   and  water  in   watershed  reservations   Agriculture  and   watersheds   watershed  management   of  the  multi-­‐purpose   dams   Water   High   Clean  Water  Act;   The  government  has  taken   The  need  to  shift   Executive  and   more  serious  efforts  in   individual  efforts  into   Administrative   trying  to  focus  management   more  coordinated  and   Order  on   of  water  and  watersheds   complementary  actions   Watershed-­‐ through  their  recent   in  watersheds   Ecosystem   initiatives.       The  need  for  the  strong   Management;   The  major  challenge  now  is   engagement  of  LGUs  and   various  memo   how  the  different  efforts   forest  management   circulars;  Biofuel   will  complement  each  other   units  in  management  of   and  Renewable   to  secure  water  for  on-­‐site   water  and  benefit   Energy  Act;   and  off-­‐site  uses  and   various  PES   communal   minimize  their  impacts   arrangements   watersheds  in   during  flashfloods  and   the  Local   landslide  during  times  of   Government   natural  calamities   Code   The  gradual  shift  of   planning  and   implementation  towards   integrated  ecosystem   management  might  help   water  management  become   effective   Cultural  and   High   IPRA  Law;  NIPAS   Serious  efforts  are  being   The  need  for  the  LGUs,   Religious   Law   taken  now  to  help  the  IPs  –   national  agencies,  and   aspects  (such   holders  and  claimants  of   NGOs  to  collaborate  and   as  protection   domains-­‐  to  conserve,   incentivize  management   of  sacred   develop,  and  manage  their   of  domains  in  their   groves)   forests  and  forest  lands  and   respective  areas.   natural  resources   Areas  under  domains   sustainably  and  effectively.   that  overlap  with  PAs,   tenured  forest  lands,   reservations,  and  other   public  domains  must  be   128 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report Public  Good   Relevance   Status  in  Law   Type  of  Actions  and  their   Remarks   Effectiveness   delineated  and  resolve   accordingly  to  ensure   effective  management.   Others   Low   Specific   Some  recipients  –   Recipients  of  these   (energy,   legislations;  civil   universities  and  colleges,   allocated  lands  for   research  and   reservations  for   LGUs,  military,  and  others   research,  extension,   education)   research,  energy,   are  taking  steps  to   energy,  and  the  like   and  education   effectively  manage  their   must  be  held   purposes   respective  areas.    Funding,   accountable  and   however,  remains  the   responsible  based  on   problem  in  protecting,   their  defined  authorities   rehabilitation,  enforcement   and  planned  actions  in   and  conservation  in  these   these  areas.   sites.   Addressing  the  drivers  of  deforestation  and  degradation  appears  are  given  the  same   level  of  priority  as  other  activities  in  forest  development  plans  and  budgets.   The   panel   identified   the   various   drivers   of   deforestation   and   degradation.   These   are:   (i)   poverty   and   landlessness   in   the   lowlands,   coupled   with   increasing   population;   (ii)   increasing   demand   for   forest   products   with   the   boom   in   infrastructure   development;   (iii)   lack  of  access  roads  linking  forest  products  to  markets.    The  panel  then  commented  that  the   current  high  budget  National  Greening  Program  (NGP)  is  more  directed  at  producing  more   forests  rather  than  protecting  existing  forests.  Similarly,  there  is  not  enough  incentives  for   resource  managers  to  encourage  sustainable  forest  management  in  light  of  the  suspension   of   the   following:   (i)   award   of   resource   use   permits   to   holders   of   community   based   resource   management   agreements;   (ii)   ban   on   logging   in   residual   natural   forests;   (iii)   con   management   agreements   between   DENR   and   DILG.   The   latter   could   have   served   as   an   important  strategy  for  placing  the  country’s  open  access  forestlands  under  the  management   of  LGUs,  through  a  Joint  Agreement  with  DENR.   Some   panel   members   argued   that   one   of   the   objectives   of   the   NGP   is   to   alleviate   poverty   through  job  creation  and  improving  the  conditions  of  degraded  watersheds.  However,  other   panel   members   explained   that   in   the   case   of   NGP   partnership   with   CBFMAs,   these   are   more   in   the   form   of   contractual   agreements   to   plant   open   spaces   rather   than   joint   venture   agreements   within   existing   CBFMA   areas.   In   the   same   manner,   the   private   sector   representative  explained  that  the  partnership  between  the  private  sector  and  government   under   the   NGP   is   more   of   the   same   nature   as   a   contractual   relation,   and   is   directed   at   planting   open   access   areas   outside   of   the   IFMA   areas.   Another   panel   member   commented   that  if  the  focus  is  on  open  access  areas,  then  there  is  no  management  group  or  individuals   who  can  be  accountable  for  management  of  these  new  forests.   There   is   a   need   to   prioritize   investments   and   policy   improvements   in   support   and   for   strengthening  self-­‐interested  actions  on  the  part  of  forest  management  units,  LGUs.    Given   the  amount  of  NGP  funds  that  will  support  reforestation  in  the  Philippines,  the  urgent  need   is   to   focus   investments   in   priority   watershed-­‐ecosystems   that   support   KBAs,   ENR-­‐ dependent   industries,   facilities,   and   economic   activities   including   tourism   and   in   partnership   with   LGUs   and   holders   of   tenure   and   domain   lands.     To   achieve   the   NGP   outcomes   and   outputs   a   major   shift   to   strengthening   LGUs,   tenure   and   domains   holders   are   needed   especially   in   establishing   forest   and   high   value   plantations   that   are   expected   to   129 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report sustain   supply   of   food,   fiber,   and   ecosystems   goods   and   services.     There   are   also   urgent   needs  for  actions  that  will  focus  on  key  drivers  of  deforestation  and  degradation  in  highly   threatened   areas   such   as   those   near   urban   areas   and   highly   vulnerable   watershed-­‐ ecosystems.     A   combination   of   enforcement,   decentralization,   livelihood   support,   and   creating  other  lowland  economic  magnets  will  be  needed  to  address  the  continuing  loss  of   the  natural  forests  and  existing  forest  plantations.   FGI  3  -­‐  Supporting  private  sector  to  invest  sustainably  in  forest  activities     Government   supports   forest   certification   and   chain   of   custody   systems,   but   policies   are  not  yet  in  place   While   forest   certification   is   not   yet   required,   there   is   already   a   draft   policy   that   is   being   discussed,   including   a  policy  that  will  put  in  place   chain   of  custody   systems.   However,  the   panel  commented  that  this  is  not  very  useful  due  to  the  current  ban  on  cutting  of  wood  from   the  natural  forests.     An   ITTO   study   was   conducted   for   two   companies   to   secure   certification   -­‐   Surigao   Development   Corporation   (SUDECOR)   and   Compostela   Valley   CBFMA.   However,   the   pilot   proved   certification   has   no   added   value   since   they   were   not   allowed   to   transport   round   wood  logs.  The  continued  supply  of  timber  from  illegal  sources  also  makes  certified  wood   not  profitable.     The   absence   of   clear   policies   on   forest   certification   and   chain   of   custody   systems   could   potentially  affect  the  competitiveness  of  the  forest  industry.   The  absence  of  these  systems   also   weakens   the   ability   to   monitor   the   extent   to   which   forest   resource   managers   apply   sustainable   management   systems   in   their   areas.   More   importantly,   there   should   be   a   sound   enabling  environment  for  forest  certification.  This  includes  revisiting  current  policies  which   ban  cutting  in  the  natural  forests;  effective  control  of  illegally  supplied  logs;  and  favorable   policies  allowing  unimpeded  transport  of  forest  certified  logs  and  wood  products.     There   is   commitment   to   SMEs   as   a   way   to   promote   competition,   income   generation   and  productive  rural  employment;  but  government  could  do  much  better   The  following  summarizes  the  situation  in  the  Philippines  with  respect  to  support  to  SMEs:   • In   the   forestry   sector,   there   is   no   defined   form   of   support   to   forest-­‐based   SMEs   except   those  enterprises  that  process  export-­‐oriented  products.       • There   is   unpredictable   supply   of   materials   because   of   highly   regulated   harvesting   of   forest  products  in  both  natural  and  planted  forests.       • Support  for  improving  the  value  chains  (quality  control,  design,  financing,  linkaging,  etc.)   of   competitive   forest-­‐based   goods   has   not   been   institutionalized   and   largely   project-­‐ driven.       • Shifting  to  planted  raw  materials  was  largely  a  private  sector  response  towards  a  highly   regulatory  environment.    Most  of  plantations,  however,  have  been  established  in  private   lands.   • Despite   the   potential   of   SME   for   generating   local   economic   activities,   support   has   been   largely  in  paper  rather  than  alignment  and  improving  government  services  in  this  specific   forestry   sub-­‐sector.     Weak   tenure   rights   for   tenure   holders   (CBFMAs   and   IFMAs)   combined   with   lack   of   long-­‐term   financing   for   forest   plantations   and   regulatory   environment   have   constrained   SMEs   (from   production,   processing,   trading,   and   marketing)  in  this  sector.   130 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report • IFMAs   and   CBFMAs   as   tenure   instruments   cannot   be   used   as   collateral   for   forest   development  loans  even  with  Government  Financing  Institutions.   A   more   aggressive   program   for   promoting   small   and   medium   enterprises   in   the   forestry   sector  should  be  developed  to  maximize  the  sectors’  contribution  to  rural  employment  and   increases   in   incomes.   This   would   require   openness   to   forest   investments   in   productive   areas;  clearly  setting  aside  areas  for  protection;  setting  standards  for  sustainable  harvesting   of   forest   products;   technical   assistance   to   SMEs;   and   creating   a   financing   window   that   is   sensitive   to   the   needs   of   SMEs.   The   CBFM   program   can   be   expanded   to   cover   these   aspects.   Other  models,  such  as  the  Vietnam  experience  can  be  examined  to  develop  other  options  for   stimulating  investments  and  sustainable  management  in  forest  management.   FGI   4   -­‐   Livelihood   aspects   of   local,   traditional   and   indigenous   forest-­‐ dependent  communities     Philippine   laws   strongly   recognize   traditional   and   indigenous   rights   and   guarantee   security  of  access  to  forest  dependent  communities.     The  Philippines  has  a  very  strong  policy  framework  for  the  recognition  of  ancestral  domains   of   indigenous   peoples,   including   the   right   to   practice   their   customary   or   traditional   governance   systems   in   the   management   of   their   resources.   These   are   enshrined   in   the   Constitution  and  embodied  in  the  IPRA.       However,  the  absolute  rights  of  indigenous  peoples  in  terms  of  access  to  natural  resources   in  these  areas  continue  to  be  challenged.  In  some  cases,  DENR  has  argued  that  the  agency   should   maintain   their   regulatory   powers   with   respect   to   resource   such   as   harvesting,   processing,   transporting   of   minor   forest   products.   This   issue   is   currently   contentious.   A   recent   move   was   to   issue   a   Joint   DENR   NCIP   Administrative   Order   recognizing   the   traditional   resource   management   systems   of   IPs;   and   use   these   as   basis   for   exemption   of   IP   groups  from  said  regulations.  However,  the  NCIP  and  IP  communities  have  maintained  that   this   is   not   necessary   since   their   rights   are   absolute   with   respect   to   resources   within   their   domains.     In   some   cases,   the   IPRA   provisions   have   worked   against   investments   in   ancestral   domain   areas.   The   meticulous   FPIC   process   has   impeded   the   entry   of   private   sector   in   entering   into   long-­‐term   supply   contract   from   IPs   who   have   been   able   to   access   use   rights   for   forest   products  i.e.  rattan  harvesting,  initial  processing  and  marketing.   For  IP  communities  to  benefit  fully  from  the  IPRA  legislation,  PES  arrangements  that  benefit   the   IPs   as   holders   of   domains   especially   for   ENR-­‐dependent   facilities   such   as   those   for   energy  generation,  irrigation,  domestic  water  and  recreation,  should  be  developed.   Rules  and  mechanisms  for  benefit  sharing  with  communities  are  still  undeveloped   The  LGC  of  1991,  Forest  Charges  Law,  EPIRA  Law  (energy),  and  NIPAS  provide  mechanism   for  the  communities  to  benefit  from  income  from  the  public  forests;  operational  guidelines   for  this  sharing  mechanism,  re-­‐distribution,  and/or  re-­‐investment  are  so  unclear,  and  site-­‐ specific  with  poor  governance  arrangements  resulting  to  “free  riding  behaviors”,  or  use  of   funds  for  different  purposes  at  the  local  level.   Under   the   NIPAS   Law,   the   use   of   IPAF   does   not   clearly   specify   its   use   in   support   of   communities.    The  work  and  financial  plan  for  the  use  of  the  IPAF  will  specify  the  sharing   mechanisms  between  the  PAMB/PASU,  LGU,  and  communities.       131 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report Mechanisms  for  charging  fees  from  local  water  districts,  recreation  facilities,  farmers  with   irrigated  farms  that  benefit  from  sound  management  of  watersheds  are  not  in  place.    This   process  requires  facilitation  and  entering  into  social  contracts.   The   fragmented   nature   of   existing   policies   for   generating   and   sharing   benefits   from   the   use   of  natural  resources  including  forestry  need  further  refinement,  harmonization,  localization,   and  accountability.   In   some   IP   communities,   there   are   agreements   between   the   investor   and   the   community,   but  these  are  not  based  on  clear  terms  of  benefit  sharing;  but  more  of  part  of  the  investors’   community  relations  work.  These  involve  construction  of  roads,  school  building  and  tribal   halls.  These  are  not  clearly  benefit  sharing  on  equal  terms  in  the  use  of  resources.  Royalty   entitlements  are  provided  under  the  IPRA;  but  there  are  no  implementing  rules  yet  on  how   this   can   be   done   with   adequate   safeguards.   What   happens   is   direct   negotiations   between   the  IP  communities  and  the  investors,  with  the  assistance  of  NCIP.  There  are  no  clear  rules   regarding  such  engagement.     It   is   essential   that   implementing   rules   and   regulations   be   developed   to   provide   adequate   guidance,  safeguards  and  standards  for  benefit  and  income  sharing  from  public  forests  and   protected  areas  with  communities.  In  the  case  of  IPs,  there  are  clear  provisions  in  the  IPRA   law  on  royalties,  but  the  mechanism,  and  process  have  not  been  sufficiently  established  to   guide   both   parties.   In   the   case   of   local   communities,   the   CBD   provisions   ought   to   be   translated   into   national   policies   and   implementing   rules.   These   mechanisms,   if   designed   well,  can  provide  added  incentives  for  local  communities  to  protect  and  sustainably  manage   the   resources;   and   improve   their   socio   economic   well-­‐being   as   well.   These   could   be   essential   instruments   of   addressing   poverty,   employment,   and   inclusiveness   in   resource   management.   FGI  5  -­‐  Forest  land  use,  tenure  and  land  conversion   As   discussed   under   the   LSLA   module,   mapping   and   demarcation   of   the   country’s   forest   estate  is  almost  complete.  What  remains  are  areas  under  the  Autonomous  Region  of  Muslim   Mindanao   (ARMM).   However,   there   is   a   need   to   clearly   map   the   various   tenure   instruments   and   other   rights   and   classifications   within   the   public   domain,   with   priority   to   protected   areas.     The   FLUP   processes   which   were   initially   tested   under   the   EcoGov   project   provided   for   strong   mechanisms   for   public   participation.   However,   FLUP   is   only   beginning   to   be   recognized   as   an   important   component   of   forest   management,   and   that   it   needs   to   be   promoted   more   widely   to   serve   as   an   instrument   for   more   inclusive   and   comprehensive   planning  at  the  LGU  level.    It  is  also  essential  that  FLUPs  be  more  accessible  to  the  public.   LGU  FLUPs  are  important  inputs  or  components  of  CLUPs  in  terms  of  addressing  projected   changes  in  current  uses  of  A  and  D  and  lands  of  the  public  domain  and  ancestral  lands.     In  the  Philippines,  land  use  planning  guidelines  are  increasingly  moving  towards  integrated   management   of   land,   water,   and   living   resources   within   watershed-­‐ecosystem   landscapes   and  at  LGU  levels.    Tools  and  processes  in  carrying  and  translating  this  direction  will  have   to  be  effectively  and  efficiently  developed  for  the  use  at  the  watershed-­‐ecosystem,  LGU,  and   resource  management  unit  levels.    This  integrated  approach  to  land  use  management  must   be   fully   incorporated   and   embedded   in   the   current   draft   of   the   proposed   Land   Use   Act   which  might  be  proposed  again  in  the  next  session  of  Congress.   132 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report   FGI  6  -­‐  Controlling  illegal  logging  and  other  forest  crimes     The  government  partially  monitors  the  extent  and  types  of  forest  crimes  and  makes   partial  and  unsystematic  efforts  to  control  it.   Monitoring  forest  crimes  has  largely  been  focused  on  illegal  logging,  timber  poaching,  and   large  scale  conversion.   Reports  on  illegal  activities  in  forests  and  forest  land  and  on  forest  crimes  are  fragmented   and   generally   not   available   to   the   public.     There   are   few   written   reports   that   are   widely   distributed.     The   biggest   indicator   of   forest   crimes,   however,   is   not   seen   immediately   as   the   quality  of  natural  forest  stands  have  increasingly  become  fragmented  especially  those  that   are  highly  accessible.  There  is  no  systematic  reporting  on  conversion  of  forests  and  forest   lands  into  other  uses.   In   terms   of   illegal   logging,   DENR   has   reported   that   the   number   of   illegal   logging   hotspots   has  significantly  decreased  due  to  intensified  collaboration  between  the  agency,  the  police   and   the   military.     However,   the   effectiveness   of   these   efforts   is   being   challenged   due   to   reports   from   the   private   sector   that   despite   the   ban   on   cutting   in   natural   residual   forests,   increasing   demand   from   construction   boom,   and   the   tightening   of   efforts   against   illegal   logging;  wood  prices  did  not  increase  significantly.       There   is   also   the   issue   of   supply-­‐demand   gap   especially   with   demand   for   fuelwood,   construction   timber,   and   other   wood-­‐based   products.     Estimates   of   the   volume   of   legal   supply  open  doubts  on  the  “other  sources”  for  meeting  the  estimates  for  domestic  demand.   Monitoring  by  the  private  sector  reveal  that  supply  from  wood  imports  did  not  increase  as   much.   Based   on   calculations   of   the   volume   of   imports   and   local   supply   and   domestic   demand,   there   are   about   800,000   cu.   m.   of   wood   that   entered   the   market   from   illegal   sources.   A   more   systematic   analysis   of   the   country’s   wood   requirements   and   domestic   supply   is   therefore   needed   to   improve   assessment   of   the   extent   to   which   illegal   supply   enters   the   market.   This   would   provide   a   better   indication   of   the   effectiveness   of   efforts   against  illegal  logging.   Campaign   against   illegal   activities   should   also   be   coupled   with   strengthening   governance   at   the  local  level;  such  that  LGUs  and  resource  management  units  (tenure  and  domain  holders,   PA  and  watershed  managers,  reservation  holders,  etc.)  must  be  held  accountable  for  forest   crimes-­‐  especially  illegal  poaching  and  land  conversion,  encroachments-­‐  in  their  respective   areas   of   responsibilities.   Existing   mechanisms,   policies,   and   procedures   put   heavy   burden   on   DENR   field   units   and   military   to   curb   illegal   activities   and   forest   crimes   in   forests   and   forest  lands.   Thus,   the   panel   assessment   concluded   that   while   there   is   good   effort   overall   by   the   government,   it   is   really   difficult   to   cover   all   aspects,   unless   there   are   strong   accountable   management  units  at  the  local  level.     There   is   strong   collaboration   between   government   and   other   sectors   in   combatting   forest  crimes   In   the   Philippines,   there   is   vibrant   collaboration   between   government,   civil   society   and   other  sectors  to  combat  forest  crimes.  This  was  triggered  in  the  early  90s,  when  the  World   Bank   supported   a   huge   effort   to   organize,   facilitate,   and   support   the   beginnings   of   multi-­‐ sectoral   approach   to   combating   forest   crimes   especially   illegal   logging   and   poaching.     The   133 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report media,   LGUs,   the   military,   NGOs,   and   the   church   fully   supported   this   effort.     Over   time,   however,   support   for   sustaining   grassroots   initiatives   waned   down   because   limited   resources.   With   DENR,   LGUs,   and   advocates   in   the   forefront,   however,   this   multi-­‐sectoral   approach  may  be  strengthened  and  focus  more  on  monitoring  various  forest  management   units,   establishing   data   base   for   spatial   monitoring   and   evaluation   as   part   of   the   enforcement  process  including  broadening  the  coverage  to  include  the  other  forest  crimes.   Within   protected   areas,   multisectoral   Protected   Area   Management   Boards   (PAMBs)   have   been   institutionalized,   with   the   objective   of   not   only   broadening   participation   in   the   management  of  protected  areas,  but  also  ensure  there  is  sufficient  support  in  the  campaign   against  illegal  and  incompatible  activities  that  threaten  biodiversity  resources.   The  Courts  have  also  designated  environmental  courts,  and  a  number  of  prosecutors  have   been   trained   on   environmental   legal   laws.   Recently,   the   Supreme   Court   issued   the   guidelines   for   Writ   of   Kalikasan   (Environment)   which   provides   for   ordinary   citizens   legal   recourse   to   file   actions   against   government   for   failing   to   act   on   environmental   issues   and   performance  of  their  mandates.     At   the   community   level,   the   DENR   is   engaged   in   continued   training   and   deputation   of   forest   guards,   or   Environmental   Offices,   with   official   powers   to   implement   environmental   laws   and   regulations.   In   most   cases   however,   their   efforts   are   undermined   by   “big   time”   offenders  such  as  political  and  military  figures  involved.   Currently,   there   have   been   active   support   from   the   church,   media   and   environmental   groups   against   illegal   logging   and   other   forms   of   forest   crimes;   including   management   of   protected   areas,   and   illegal   hunting   and   trade   of   wildlife.   Some   efforts   have   reached   the   stage   of   advocating   against   planned   development   activities   both   by   government   and   the   private   sector;   which   are   deemed   incompatible   with   sustainable   forest   management   and   biodiversity  conservation  in  the  country’s  protected  areas.     However,   overall,   other   than   the   policy-­‐designated   multi-­‐sectoral   groups   and   boards   such   as   PAMB,   watershed   management   councils   in   watershed   reservations,   and   Water   Quality   Management   Councils   or   Boards,   other   forms   of   inter-­‐agency   collaboration   are   simply   “project-­‐driven”   and   based   on   “coalition   of   the   willing”.         With   the   worsening   impacts   of   erratic   weather   conditions,   inter-­‐sectoral   agencies   will   play   a   major   role   especially   in   aligning   land   and   resources   uses   within   watershed-­‐ecosystem   landscape.     This   direction   deserves  increased  attention  and  policy  support.     134 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report 4 POLICY  ANALYSIS  AND  POLICY  RECOMMENDATIONS   The   implementation   of   LGAF   in   the   Philippines   has   helped   identify   areas   where   there   is   relatively   good   governance;   and   areas   where   much   work   is   needed   to   address   key   weaknesses.  These  are  discussed  below.   Legal  and  institutional  framework   Reforms  in  the  land  administration  system  through  the  reduction  of  overlaps  could  have  far   reaching   impacts   on   the   recognition   of   rights   in   the   urban   areas.     This  should  be  considered   a  priority,  coupled  with  actions  to  address  the  varying  reference  points  in  the  land  records   of   the   LRA,   DENR   and   the   LGU   Assessors   Offices.   The   proposals   to   create   a   Land   Administration   Authority   (LAA),   coupled   with   the   establishment   of   National   Spatial   Data   Infrastructure   (NSDI),   are   right   directions   in   this   regard.     While   these   are   long   term   solutions,   short   term   measures   can   be   developed   such   as   creating   avenues   for   open   discussion   of   administrative   resolution   of   overlaps,   and   technical   solutions   to   the   land   records  and  improving  sharing  among  agencies.   Difficulties  in  individualization  of  group  tenure,  particularly  collective  CLOAs,  have  affected   LGUs   ability   to   collect   appropriate   property   taxes.   On   the   one   hand,   this   has   facilitated   linkages   or   joint   venture   agreements   with   investors.     It   is   recommended   that   existing   collective  CLOAs  be  reviewed  with  a  view  to  facilitating  the  processes  for  individualization   if  the  members  so  desire.   There   is   a   need   to   accelerate   the   issuance   of   CADTs   in   order   to   clearly   map   and   register   the   ancestral   domains.     It   is   expected   that   the   most   recent   DENR-­‐NCIP-­‐DAR-­‐DOJ/LRA   Joint   Administrative  Order  should  improve  the  quality  of  the  CADTs  issued,  but  it  should  also  not   result  in  further  delays  in  the  registration  of  CADTs.   Considering  the  potential  impacts  and  benefits  of  titling  of  the  remaining  A  and  D  lands  in   the  rural  areas  as  well  as  residential  properties,  efforts  should  be  made  to  provide  adequate   funding   to   complete   these   in   the   short   term.   The   simplified   procedures   developed   under   LAMP2,  which  provides  for  cost  effective  implementation  and  shared  responsibilities  with   LGUs   –   could   be   used   to   conduct   massive   titling   at   lower   cost.     The   experience   of   the   REGALA   LGUs   can   also   be   reviewed   to   develop   improved   and   cost   effective   strategies   for   accelerating  titling  that  provides  benefits  too  for  the  LGUs  in  terms  of  their  ability  to  update   tax  maps  and  improve  tax  collection.   The  government  should  consider  giving  high  priority  to  the  refilling  of  the  LARA  Bill43  in   the   next   Congress.     This   should   address   the   institutional   overlaps,   and   address   the   systemic   weaknesses  that  plague  the  delivery  of  services  in  the  LAM  sector.  Addressing  this  issue  will   impact   on   titling,   ease   of   registration,   and   facilitate   the   formalization   rights   by   informal   settlers  in  the  highly  urbanized  areas.     There  is  a  need  to  revisit  the  justifications  for  the  restrictions  on  land  use  and  ownership,   and   determine   their   relevance   to   current   situation.   The   arguments   on   relaxing   foreign   ownership   of   properties   should   also   be   looked   into   to   assess   their   potential   impacts   and   consider   various   options   for   consideration.   On   the   restrictions   on   Free   Patent,   this   should   be   weighed   too   considering   their   impact   on   the   increasing   informality   and   transfers   on    During  the  State  of  the  Nation  Address  delivered  by  President  Aquino  on  July  22,  2013;  he  mentioned  his  administration’s   43 priority  to  the  passage  of  the  LARA  Bill.     135 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report properties.     Efforts  should  be  made  to  assess  the  extent  to  which  land  policies  consider  equity  goals,  and   address   gaps   if   necessary.     There   is   also   an   urgent   need   to   develop   more   comprehensive   monitoring  of  progress  and  impacts  of  land  policies  to  determine  the  extent  to  which  they   contribute   to   the   envisaged   goals   of   promoting   equity   and   social   justice;   and   their   associated  effects  on  land  markets,  productivity,  and  economic  growth.   The  CLUP  process  should  be  more  inclusive  of  all  lands  within  the  LGU  territory  –  to  cover   forest   lands,   protected   areas   and   ancestral   domains.   The   existing   efforts   of   HLURB,   in   partnership   with   DENR,   should   continue   to   come   up   with   more   participatory   oriented   integrated  land  use  planning  processes.   Land  use  planning,  management  and  taxation   While  there  are  existing  laws  and  systems  in  place  for  formalization  of  urban  housing,  the   process  is  too  complicated,  due  in  large  part  to  the  poor  and  unreliable  land  records  held  by   agencies.   Coupled   with   weak   capacities   and   understanding   of   land   administration   system,   informal   settlers   often   fall   prey   to   syndicates   who   take   advantage   of   the   situation.   Affordability  becomes  less  of  an  issue  with  the  support  of  LGUs  in  CMPs,  which  is  the  most   feasible   among   all   available   options.   A   key   policy   concern   though,   is   the   lack   of   clear   mandate   in   law   by   municipalities   to   undertake   CMPs.   The   policy   proposal   therefore,   should   clarify  the  legal  provision  to  authorize  municipalities  to  undertake  CMPs  to  formalize  urban   residential  housing.   In   light   of   the   persistent   problem   associated   with   the   refusal   of   informal   settlers   to   be   relocated   from   their   current   dwellings,   alternative   modes   of   formalization   and   tenure   types   would  have  to  be  developed  to  reduce  informality  in  the  housing  sector.   The  current  restrictions  on  urban  land  use,  ownership,  transferability  and  rent  control  were   largely  developed  with  the  aim  of  protecting  the  public  interest,  in  practice,  these  have  not   been   enforced   and/or   do   not   achieve   their   objectives.   A   revisiting   of   these   restrictions   and/or   their   implementation   or   enforcement   would   have   to   be   made   with   the   aim   of   developing  more  cost  effective  means  of  achieving  their  intents;  or  whether  these  are  at  all   relevant  in  the  current  context.  More  specifically,  the  rent  control  law  should  not  establish  a   cut   off   mark;   parcel   sizes   should   be   relaxed;   and   monitoring   of   current   ownership   regulations  should  be  undertaken.     In  the  forest  lands,  the  huge  informality  that  is  taking  place  has  placed  a  large  portion  of  the   forest   lands   occupied   by   many   settlers   and   communities.   It   is   time   that   the   18%   slope   criterion   for   classifying   forest   lands   be   reviewed   to   consider   areas   below   30%   slope   be   categorized  as  alienable  and  disposable  lands.   Access   to   land   records   is   made   difficult   by   the   fact   that   the   systems   in   place   by   the   agencies   with   custody   of   these,   and   property   references   constrain   free   sharing   and   cross   checking   of   land   records   across   agencies.   National   land   agencies   and   LGU   Assessor   Offices   should   address  the  poor  records  system  so  that  it  serves  the  interest  of  the  public,  and  meets  the   need  for  more  speedy  acquisition  of  properties  for  low  cost  housing  programs.  At  the  core   of  this  issue  is  the  need  for  an  agreement  on  a  common  reference  system  for  land  records  to   facilitate  validation  across  agencies;  and  improve  reliability  of  information  held  therein.   There   is   room   for   improved   and   meaningful   participation   of   the   public   in   land   use   planning   processes   and   changes   in   these   plans.   This   could   be   one   of   the   indicators   for   measuring   governance  index  at  the  LGU  level.  More  importantly,  compliance  to  regular  CLUP  updating   136 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report needs  to  be  improved  and  monitored.  Monitoring  of  land  use  change  should  be  tracked  as   well,  to  determine  the  effectiveness  of  land  use  zoning  and  allocation;  and  use  these  as  basis   for  formulating  or  updating  land  use  plans.  The  DILG  and  HLURB  can  assist  in  this  regard  by   providing   appropriate   technical   assistance,   developing   capacities,   inclusion   of   relevant   LGAF  dimensions  in  monitoring  land  governance  at  the  LGU  level,  among  others.   The   implementation   of   relevant   policies   to   enable   public   capture   of   benefits   arising   from   changes  in  permitted  land  use  has  largely  been  ignored;  thereby  resulting  in  some  members   of   society   unduly   benefitting   from   these.   At   best,   such   benefits   are   captured   in   changes   in   property  tax  assessment,  but  because  the  LGU  schedule  of  market  values  is  way  below  the   true   market   values   and   almost   always   out   of   date,   this   does   not   materialize.   Full   implementation  of  this  law  will  also  prevent  those  with  vested  interest  to  unduly  influence   the   location   of   major   public   infrastructure   projects   for   their   benefit.   In   a   similar   way,   compensation   for   expropriated   properties   or   those   affected   by   ROW   or   other   government   projects   are   not   compensated   fairly.   Government   should   therefore   enforce   the   existing   provisions   of   sections   240-­‐245   of   RA   7160   or   the   Local   Government   Code,   pertaining   to   special   assessment.   The   BLGF   can   assist   in   developing   specific   guidelines   and   appropriate   training  for  LGU  Assessors  on  these.     Urban   growth   is   happening   in   an   ad   hoc   manner   in   most   of   the   urban   centers   of   the   Philippines,  signifying  a  breakdown  in  urban  planning.  This  creates  pressure  on  the  location   of   government   infrastructure   development,   and   service   provision   for   the   growing   city   population.   Unplanned   development   also   creates   inefficiencies   in   land   use   allocation,   such   that  prime  properties  can  be  subject  to  informal  settlements  and  other  low  value  uses.  LGUs   therefore   should   be   more   proactive   in   urban   planning,   making   sound   projections   on   directions,   scope   and   extent   of   urban   growth   so   that   services   and   government   infrastructure   can   be   projected   in   advance.   More   importantly,   consistency   of   plans   across   LGU   boundaries   and   within   provinces   and   economic   regions   should   be   made,   through   national,   regional   and   provincial   land   use   policies,   to   better   guide   local   development.   This   could  be  achieved  with  the  passage  of  the  National  Land  Use  Act.   There   is   a   large   unmet   demand   for   housing   in   many   of   the   Philippine   cities,   but   these   are   not   being   addressed   by   the   current   supply   of   high   end   condominiums   and   property   development  projects.  The  NHA  and  HUDCC  should  encourage  LGUs  and  the  private  sector   to  invest  more  in  meeting  the  housing  demands  of  the  lower  and  middle  income  sectors  of   society  to  effectively  reduce  informality.   There  are  huge  deviations  between  what  are  allowed  and  what  actually  exists  on  the  ground   in   terms   of   residential   plot   sizes.   Proper   zoning   and   monitoring   of   subdivisions   should   be   made   to   ensure   adherence   to   plot   size   standards.   More   importantly,   the   restrictions   on   plot   sizes  should  be  revisited  in  terms  of  how  it  contributes  to  the  objective  of  urban  land  reform   and  providing  equal  opportunity  for  all  Filipinos  to  own  land   On  property  valuation  and  taxation   Property   assessment   for   tax   purposes   are   not   based   on   market   prices   and   valuation   rolls   are  not  updated  regularly.  These  lead  to  very  wide  disparities  between  the  SMV  and  actual   market  values   There   is   wide   discretion   in   the   application   of   exemptions   to   payments   of   property   taxes,   leading  to  loss  of  potential  revenues.   A  large  proportion  of  property  tax  payers  are  not  listed  on  the  tax  roll.  This  is  due  to  various   reasons:   (i)   mandated   agencies   such   as   DENR   and   LRA/RoD   do   no   provide   updated   137 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report information   as   required;   (ii)   inadequate   efforts   by   the   LGU   to   update   their   tax   maps;   (iii)   large  portions  of  untitled  properties;  (iv)  presence  of  collective  CLOAs  within  the  LGU.   Across  all  LGUs,  property  tax  collections  is  very  low  at  an  average  of  61%.  The  IRA  acts  as   disincentive  for  improving  property  tax  collection  efforts.   The  revision  of  the  LGC  should  take  into  account  amending  the  basis  for  computation  of  IRA   allocations   so   that   it   does   not   serve   as   disincentive   for   LGUs   to   exert   more   effort   in   collecting   RPTs,   and   regular   updating   of   SMVs   based   on   true   market   values.   In   relation   to   this,   the   current   sharing   of   proceeds   from   RPT   collections   among   LGU   tiers   should   be   reviewed  to  provide  improved  incentives  for  municipalities  to  expand  their  collection  drive.   BLGF,  together  with  DILG  and  the  Department  of  Justice  should  review  the  power  of  LGUs  to   grant  exemptions  in  real  property  tax  payment;  as  well  as  the  use  of  such  as  incentives  for   attracting  investments  in  the  LGUs;   BLGF  to  provide  better  guidance  to  Treasurers  in  terms  of  collection  of  arrears  so  as  not  to   undermine  taxpayer  initiatives  to  pay  current  taxes  due;   In   addition   to   the   professionalization   of   Assessors,   performance   of   Treasurers   should   be   regularly   monitored   in   terms   of   implementation   of   required   remedies   to   collect   property   taxes;   There   should   be   renewed   support   to   the   proposed   VRA   that   include   provisions   for:   (i)   mechanisms   for   certification   that   the   proposed   revised   property   valuations   comply   with   valuation  standards  prior  to  their  implementation  by  the  LGUs;  (ii)  strict  compliance  with   regular  updating  of  SMVs;  (iii)  giving  back  to  the  DOF  the  authority  to  approve  SMVs  (from   the  present  system  where  the  local  councils  are  the  approving  authorities).  LGUs  will  not  be   allowed  to  collect  the  real  property  tax  if  the  SMV  is  not  updated  regularly.         There   should   be   effort   to   strengthen   implementation   of   existing   provisions   related   to   the   mandatory   requirement   for   LRA/RoD   and   other   agencies   to   provide   up   to   date   property   information  to  LGUs;   LGUs  should  improve  their  capacities  to  appropriately  assess  and  collect  RPTs  through  the   following:   (i)   technical   assistance   in   the   development   of   market   based   SMVs;   (ii)   regular   updating  of  their  tax  maps  and  related  records;  (iii)  undertaking  of  tax  compliance  studies   and   development   of   clear   plans   for   improved   collection   of   property   taxes   based   on   the   outcomes;   and   (iv)   adoption   of   integrated   computerized   systems   for   property   tax   assessment   and   collections,   as   in   the   e   TRACS 44 ;   and   (v)   enhancement   of   collection   practices.   This   includes   being   proactive   in   revenue   collection,   taking   action   against   delinquent  filers  and  payers,  conducting  taxpayer  registration  drives  and  cleaning  taxpayer   registries   regularly.   In   this   regard,   the   panel   considered   the   lessons   and   experiences   from   the   Innovation   Support   Fund   (ISF)   component   of   LAMP2   as   well   as   the   ongoing   REGALA   Project,   and   strongly   recommended   a   wider   roll   out   of   similar   projects   to   improve   LGU   capacities  on  property  valuation  and  taxation,  among  others.   Public  provision  of  land  information   Under  this  module,  a  number  of  areas  with  weak  governance  were  noted.    While  the  LTCP   has   helped   in   making   transactions   more   transparent   and   efficient,   a   few   remaining   areas   require  attention  to  improve  governance:       44  Enhanced  Tax  and  Revenue  Assessment  Systems   138 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report • DENR   and   RoD   should   start   to   capture   gender   data   among   its   records,   in   keeping   with  Philippine  laws,  particularly  the  Family  Code  and  Women  and  Development  in   Nation  Building  Act;   • DENR   to   address   the   widespread   practice   of   informal   fees   associated   with   first   time   titling;   • Measures   should   be   made   to   address   the   barriers   to   registration   of   transfers   and   subsequent   transactions.   Foremost   of   these   is   the   high   rate   of   capital   gains   tax,   strong   information   campaign   particularly   in   the   rural   areas;   simplifying   procedures,   among  others.  These  should  ensure  that  the  information  and  records  in  the  registry   are  reliable  and  up  to  date.     Public  land  management   Only   national   infrastructure   projects   have   clear   policies   for   expropriation   and   compensation   using   market   rates   (RA   8974).   There   is   currently   no   policy   to   provide   compensation   for   income   losses.   In   most   cases,   the   BIR   zonal   value   is   used   as   basis   for   valuation  despite  the  fact  that  there  are  other  standards  cited  in  said  law  for  valuing  land.   For  other  projects,  the  policies  that  apply  are  PD  1533  and  EO  1035  which  uses  the  values   declared  by  the  owner/administrator  or  as  determined  by  the  Assessor  pursuant  to  the  Real   Property  Tax  Code,  whichever  is  lower,  as  basis  for  compensation.   There   is   no   national   policy   yet   on   resettlement.   While   DPWH   has   a   Land   Acquisition,   Resettlement,  Rehabilitation  and  Indigenous  Peoples  Policy  (LARRIP);  it  is  not  founded  on   legislation,   but   an   Administrative   Order   issued   by   the   agency.   Hence,   it   can   be   questioned   by  the  Commission  on  Audit  anytime.  There  is  a  National  Resettlement  Implementation  Plan   (NRIP)  which  was  produced  in  2003  through  WB  support.  The  document  needs  updating.   Currently,   there   is   no   recourse   to   complain   against   expropriation   akin   to   a   grievance   redress  system.  This  is  made  worse  by  RA  8975  which  prohibits  the  lower  courts  to  issue   temporary   restraining   orders   (TRO),   preliminary   injunctions,   or   preliminary   mandatory   injunctions  on  national  government  infrastructure  projects.     Existing   policies   are   not   fair   in     the   sense   that;   legitimate   owners   are   only   given   compensation  which  is  way  below  market  values.   With   respect   to   disposition   of   government   properties,   the   Public   Reclamation   Authority   (PRA)   is   responsible   for   auctioning   all   government   owned   properties,   particularly   those   reclaimed.     However,   the   Philippine   Ports   Authority   (PPA)   acts   as   both   a   regulator   and   implementer  at  the  same  time.  The  agency  does  its  own  reclamation  too.   Data   on   expropriation   are   not   publicly   accessible;   and   scattered   among   many   agencies.   There   is   very   little   monitoring   on   the   extent   of   expropriated   land,   the   amount   of   compensation,   promptness   of   compensation,   and   use   of   expropriated   land.   Relevant   expropriation   data   should   therefore   be   publicly   accessible   to   enable   independent   monitoring,   and   improve   accountability.   Agencies   should   put   up   such   information   in   their   websites.   External   Monitoring   Agents   (EMA)   who   are   independent   of   Government   are   engaged  by  DPWH  to  do  such  tasks  among  others,  for  WB  assisted  projects  as  part  of  Loan   Agreement.  However,  this  is  not  necessarily  so  for  other  projects,  particularly  those  that  are   locally  funded.     There   is   unfair   compensation   for   expropriation   since   the   basis   for   valuation   are   zonal   values   (in   the   case   of   national   infrastructure   projects)   and   tax   declarations   (in   the   case   of   LGU  and  other  infrastructure  projects);  both  of  which  are  way  below  market  values.    These   139 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report amounts  will  not  enable  the  affected  property  owner  to  find  replacement  property  of  equal   value.  Relevant  laws  should  be  revised  to  reflect  market  values  as  basis  for  compensation.     Promptness  of  payment  is  also  an  issue  with  other  and  LGU  infrastructure  projects  whereby   properties  can  be  possessed  even  with  15  or  10%  payments  to  owners.   RAPs   are   only   prepared   for   foreign   assisted   projects,   thereby   creating   inconsistency   in   compensation.   There   is   no   clear   legislation   for   compensating   income   losses   of   medium   to   large-­‐   scale   businesses   and   agro-­‐industrial   enterprises   as   a   result   of   involuntary   resettlement.   As   a   result,   almost   all   property   holders   affected   by   expropriation   become   worse   off.   There   should  be  a  legislation  that  provides  for  clear  policy  framework  for  compensation  of  income   losses   by   medium   to   large-­‐scale   business   and   agro-­‐industrial   enterprises   following   involuntary  resettlement.     There   is   no   national   resettlement   policy   that   embodies,   aside   from   proper   and   prompt   compensation   and   entitlements,   grievance   redress   and   sustainable   livelihood   restoration   and   improvement   program.   Such   grievance   redress   system   should   also   be   accessible   and   affordable  to  poor  property  owners  affected  by  expropriation.  These  could  be  embodied  in  a   national  resettlements  policy.   Agencies   dealing   with   expropriation   and   resettlement   should   develop   their   own   resettlement  action  plans,  and  these  should  be  applied  to  all  projects,  regardless  of  funding   source,  type  of  property  and  to  all  who  will  lose  their  access  and  use  rights.    There  should  be   a   parallel   capacity   development   program   to   enable   such   agencies   to   prepare   their   respective  RAPs.     Dispute  resolution  and  conflict  management   There   are   strong   mechanisms   for   dealing   with   land   related   disputes   at   the   local   or   community   level   that   are   formally   sanctioned.   A   key   concern   however,   is   the   capacity   at   the   level   of   the   BJS   to   carry   out   these   mandates.   A   comprehensive   capacity   development   program  for  BJS  is  essential  for  them  to  become  familiar  with  existing  laws  and  policies,  as   well   as   ways   of   handling   or   mediating   land   related   disputes.     This   should   potentially   contribute  to  speedy  resolution  of  cases  and  the  unclogging  of  cases  in  Courts.   The  formal  process  of  addressing  land  related  disputes  is  expensive  and  slow.    It  is  evident   that   some   reforms   in   the   administration   of   justice   system   are   warranted   to   unlock   the   potential   of   these   properties   and   minimize   the   social   and   economic   costs   of   delays.     A   more   thorough  study  of  the  nature  of  these  disputes  whereby  the    ageing  of  land  dispute  related   cases,  the  development  of  databases,  and  the  feasibility  of  setting  up  dedicated  land  courts   in  areas  where  disputes  are  high  can  be  examined.     Large-­‐scale  land  acquisition   The   modest   rating,   even   low   in   some   dimensions,   on   large   scale   acquisition   of   land   rights   is   linked  to  the  following  issues:  overregulation,  overlapping  policies  and  jurisdictions,  weak   monitoring   for   compliance,   lack   of   investment   incentives,   and   vulnerability   of   community   organizations.  The  following  recommendations  were  identified  to  improve  land  governance.   • Practices  in  large  scale  land  acquisition  should  be  governed  by  acceptable  “code  of   conduct”   to   ensure   certain   standards   are   in   place   in   the   provision   of   information,   adherence  to  community  processes  and  consultations;  compliance  with  safeguards;   140 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report fair  and  equitable  benefit  sharing;  respect  for  rights  and  culture;  and  observance  of   proper  procedures.   • The  policies  governing  the  use  of  land  as  an  asset  are  still  weak;  there  is  a  need  to   ensure  there  is  good  investment  climate  for  the  use  of  land.  In  agricultural  lands  and   CBFMA  areas,  there  is  too  much  regulation  of  investors  mainly  emanating  from  the   perception  that  investors  generally  have  negative  motivations.  This  discourages  low   profit  margins  and  long  gestation  investments.  Policies  need  to  be  developed  around   providing   a   level   playing   field   for   all   investors,   while   at   the   same   time   providing   enough  safeguards  and  proper  monitoring  by  government.   • There   is   a   need   to   address   overlapping   policies   and   jurisdictions   especially   in   ancestral   domain   areas   where   claims   overlap   with   agricultural   lands   covered   by   CARP,   with   forestlands,   with   lands   designated   as   special   economic   zones   and   even   with  lands  occupied  by  academic  institutions.  Many  of  the  disputes  are  the  results  of   these   overlays.   One   needing   urgent   attention   is   the   provision   in   the   law   that   does   not   require   CADTs   to   be   registered   with   RoD.   The   panel   noted   also   that   considering   the   large   extent   of   ancestral   domains,   the   direction   of   investments   in   large   -­‐   scale   agriculture   would   be   in   these   areas   and   should   therefore   be   given   appropriate   attention.   The   effectiveness   of   the   recent   DA-­‐DAR-­‐DENR-­‐NCIP-­‐LRA/RoD   Joint   Administrative  Order  should  be  reviewed  in  terms  of  addressing  how  there  can  be   resolutions  to  existing  overlaps.   • A   good   monitoring   system   for   compliance   that   is   independent   will   reduce   or   eliminate   unfair   treatment   of   farmers   and   IPs   in   the   process   of   implementing   projects.  Similarly,  conversion  of  lands  to  uses  not  agreed  upon  in  the  contracts  or   not  allowed  in  the  framework  can  be  avoided.  Government  should  also  refrain  from   unhealthy  practices  like  requiring  investors  to  finance  compliance  monitoring.   • In   support   of   a   good   monitoring   system   is   the   establishment   of   a   mediating   mechanism   where   there   is   a   designated   “arbiter”   through   which   communities   can   lodge   complaints   in   case   of   abuse   by   investors.   The   creation   of   informal   dispute   resolution   mechanisms   would   also   help   facilitate   the   processes   for   resolving   such   complaints   more   efficiently.   Complaints   should   also   cover   government   staffs   that   abuse  their  responsibilities  to  circumvent  laws.   • Providing   appropriate   incentives   in   agricultural   projects   will   not   only   increase   investments   but   also   promote   best   practices   in   dealing   with   landholders   and   communities,   and   in   conserving   the   natural   resources.   In   ancestral   domains,   there   needs   to   be   systems   in   place   to   encourage   investments   that   addresses   the   socio   economic  needs  of  the  IP  communities,  that  is  fair  and  equitable,  and  respects  their   rights.   This   should   be   undertaken   in   the   context   of   sound   ADSDPPs,   clearly   identifying   indigenous   community   conserved   areas   so   as   not   to   compromise   the   culture  and  environmental  values  of  the  domains.   • Enhancing   capacities   of   landholders   not   only   in   managing   their   organizations   but   also   in   relating   with   investors   cannot   be   overemphasized.   Clear   and   transparent   terms   of   engagement   between   the   landholders   and   investors   need   to   be   fully   understood   by   the   communities   and   landholders.   In   many   IP   areas,   it   was   noticed   that  those  directly  negotiating  are  better  performing  than  those  that  are  supported   by   government,   suggesting   high   transaction   costs.   However,   this   suggests   strong   capability   on   the   part   of   communities   to   negotiate   with   investors   on   their   own.   141 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report Development   of   community   capabilities   could   be   one   area   where   the   government   can  provide  support.   Forestry   The   Philippines   is   party   to   all   the   most   relevant   international   Conventions   affecting   forestry,  biodiversity  conservation  and  climate  change.  It  is  also  actively  engaged  in  global   discussions   on   issues   of   importance   to   Philippine   interests;   and   is   implementing   its   commitment  with  these  Conventions,  within  its  capacity.   The  use  of  incentives  to  promote  climate  change  mitigation  through  forestry  -­‐  such  as  PES   and   REDD+,   are   still   in   its   infant   stage   in   the   Philippines,   in   the   absence   of   clear   policy   framework.  At  best,  the  use  of  PES  is  quite  isolated  and  patchy,  while  on  REDD+,  attention  is   currently  focused  on  improving  readiness,  capacity  development  and  awareness  building.     There   are   strong   policies   in   place   that   recognize   and   protect   the   public   goods   aspects   of   forests.   However,   the   effectiveness   of   these   policies   is   constrained   by   limited   funding   and   resources  for  protected  area  management;  and/or  protecting  existing  forests.   Current   plans   and   budgets   are   still   not   fully   aligned   with   addressing   the   key   drivers   of   deforestation   and   degradation.   This   framework   can   be   used   to   review   the   composition,   scope  and  location  of  investments  in  forestry  and  protected  areas.   The   Philippines   is   still   lagging   behind   in   terms   of   forest   certification   and   chain-­‐of   custody   systems   thereby   affecting   the   competitiveness   of   its   industry.   The   absence   of   these   systems   also   weakens   the   ability   to   monitor   the   extent   to   which   forest   resource   managers   apply   sustainable  management  systems  in  their  areas.   There   is   very   little   support   to   the   development   of   small   and   medium   enterprises   in   the   forestry   sector;   which   constrains   its   potential   to   generate   income,   promote   rural   employment  and  competition;  and  in  stimulating  economic  activity  in  the  rural  areas.   While  there  are  enabling  policies  for  benefit  sharing  from  public  forests  and  protected  areas   with   communities;   the   absence   of   clear   and   specific   guidelines   has   prohibited   many   communities   to   fully   enjoy   the   benefits   and   get   their   fair   share   from   the   natural   wealth.   Thus,   implementation   has   been   discretionary,   without   standards   and   transparent   safeguards,  and  undefined  rules  for  doing  so.     Mapping   and   demarcation   of   forest   boundaries   is   almost   complete.   However,   most   of   the   tenure,   classifications   and   various   uses   of   the   public   land   (forest   lands,   protected   areas   and   public   A   and   D);   are   not   clearly   defined   and   demarcated   –   thereby   ownership   is   widely   contested.  This  stems  from  poor  and  inaccurate  mapping,  and  lack  of  demarcation  of  most   of  these  lands.     FLUP  offers  an  excellent  platform  for  public  participation  in  forest  land  use  planning,  and  in   making   available,   all   information   and   interests   in   the   public   forests.   However,   very   few   LGUs  have  FLUPs;  and  this  is  not  yet  a  mandatory  requirement  for  all.     Efforts   in   combatting   forest   crimes   have   focused   mainly   on   illegal   logging.   Monitoring   encroachment,   land   use   conversions,   and   other   offenses   should   be   given   attention   too.   A   more   systematic   analysis   of   the   country’s   wood   requirements   and   domestic   supply   is   needed  to  improve  assessment  of  the  extent  to  which  illegal  supply  enters  the  market   Suggestions  for  Reforms   142 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report The   above   key   findings   and   recommendations   have   pinpointed   clear   areas   for   reforms   to   address  weak  governance  in  the  lands  sector.   Support  the  passage  of  the  Land  Administration  Reform  Act     The   establishment   of   a   single   land   agency   is   key   to   improving   land   governance.   This   should   address   the   structural   defects   of   the   system   through   the   reduction   of   horizontal   overlaps   in   the  mandates  of  key  agencies  that  impact  on  the  following:   • Efficiency  in  service  delivery;   • Access  to  complete  and  reliable,  up  to  date  records;   • Improving  confidence  in  the  land  related  agencies;  and   • Reducing  opportunities  for  syndicates,  informal  payments  and  other  inappropriate   practices   In  support  of  these,  the  government  should  develop  a  National  Spatial  Data  Infrastructure   (NSDI)  that  will  facilitate  exchange  and  sharing  of  land  related  information  among  agencies,   and  make  these  more  accessible  to  the  public.   Support  the  passage  of  the  Property  Valuation  Reform  Act   The  proposed  Bill  should  address  the  systemic  issues  associated  with  LGU  failure  to  adopt   market  based  valuation  and  conduct  regular  updating  of  SMVs.  This  should  also  impact  on   poor  collection  efficiency,  and  unclear  policies  on  LGU  authority  to  grant  exemptions.     The   current   situation   is   that   low   collections   from   property   taxes   perpetuates   LGU   dependence  on  the  IRA  while  non-­‐adherence  to  market  values  affects  the  determination  of   just  compensation  for  properties  expropriated  by  LGUs.     The  VRA  should  be  coupled  with  proposals  to  amend  the  Local  Government  Code  to  address   the  disincentives  offered  by  the  IRA.     Support  the  passage  of  the  National  Land  Use  Act   The   Bill   should   be   able   to   provide   a   broader   policy   framework   governing   land   use   allocations,  limits  to  conversion,  and  expansion  of  selected  uses;  thereby  ensuring  there  is   balance   overall   to   meet   future   demands   for   food   security,   housing   and   shelter,   industry   and   commerce,  at  the  same  time  providing  adequate  allocations  for  the  protection  of  forests  and   national  parks  to  deliver  public  goods.   Remove/minimize  disincentives  for  registration  of  land  transactions   High   transfer   taxes,   particularly   the   capital   gains   tax,   perceived   bureaucratic   processes,   low   confidence  in  the  registry,  all  contribute  to  the  non-­‐reliability  and  not  up  to  date  records  in   the  registry.     Coupled   with   the   large   number   of   untitled   parcels,   these   impact   on   the   completeness   of   the   registry,  cost  of  securing  accurate  records,  and  the  collection  of  appropriate  fees  and  taxes   by   government.   These   also   contribute   to   delays   in   formalization   of   housing   for   informal   settlers  in  the  urban  areas.   Develop  a  National  Resettlements  Policy   This  is  a  clear  policy  gap  that  can  be  given  attention  in  the  medium  term;  as  the  government   increases  its  investments  in  infrastructure  development  to  stimulate  growth.   This   proposal   should   address   the   fairness   and   promptness   of   compensation,   and   should   apply   to   all   government   projects   regardless   of   funding.   The   policy   should   also   ensure   143 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report consistency   in   implementation   across   all   agencies   and   LGUs   involved   in   expropriation   and/or  resettlement  in  implementation  of  projects.   Undertake  an  accelerated  titling  program   The   high   proportion   of   untitled   properties   constrain   the   effective   functioning   of   the   land   market   and   affects   investments   in   property   development.   It   also   exposes   the   property   owners,   particularly   the   poor,   to   undue   risks.   Titling   also   have   the   added   benefit   of   improving   the   property   tax   roll   of   the   LGUs,   thereby   contribute   to   increased   property   tax   collections.     In  rolling  out  titling,  prioritization  can  be  made.  The  benefits  of  tackling  urban/residential   properties   which   are   easier   to   adjudicate,   where   occupants   have   more   complete   records,   procedures   are   simpler,   and   properties   are   more   highly   valued;   can   be   considered.   The   design   can   also   consider   streamlined   procedures   for   titling   tested   under   LAMP1   and   LAMP2,  which  could  be  rolled  out  in  partnership  with  LGUs,  who  will  stand  to  benefit  most   through  improved  ability  to  collect  property  taxes.     Upscale  LGU  led  initiatives  in  improving  land  governance   The   LAMP   Innovation   Support   Fund   and   the   REGALA   model   have   proven   that   land   governance  can  be  addressed  at  the  local  level  through  LGU  initiated  projects.  These  tackle   issues   of   priority   importance   to   the   LGUs,   and   provide   sufficient   incentives   because   it   provides   clear   results:   (i)   improved   service   delivery;   (ii)   enhanced   LAM   interagency   cooperation  at  the  national  level  (where  it  is  difficult  to  achieve  nationally);    (iii)  increased   internally  generated  revenues;  and  (iv)  improved  governance  capacities.     Support   to   upscaling   of   similar   programs   beyond   the   nine   LGUs   participating   could   generate  a  “snow  ball”  effect  on  land  governance  in  the  country;  even  if  the  major  reforms   identified  above  are  not  fully  in  place.     Develop   a   comprehensive   approach   to   improving   the   environment   for   large   scale   land   acquisition  in  the  country   As  the  country  aims  to  address  food  security  amid  smaller  farms,  there  is  a  need  for  more   comprehensive  approach  to  these  issues.       The   response   should   include   greater   incentives   and   more   stability   of   policies   on   investments   in   forest   lands;   more   transparent   procedures   in   investments   in   ancestral   domain  areas;  development  of  safeguards;  monitoring  of  large  scale  acquisitions;  support  to   communities.   The  recommendations  mentioned  above  can  be  considered  essential  elements  of  a  basket  of   approach   to   developing   more   responsive   policies   and   support   to   enable   large   scale   land   acquisition   to   contribute   to   food   security   and   stimulate   rural   employment   and   economy   without  endangering  the  environment,  compromising  rights,  and  ensure  there  is  respect  for   culture   and   traditions.   These   investments   are   also   badly   needed   in   these   areas,   so   a   more   suitable  code  of  ethics  and  acceptable  standards  would  have  to  be  in  place.   Initiate  reforms  in  the  Court  system     The  situation  is  unacceptable  for  parties  involved  in  land  disputes:   ¨ Cases  decided  by  the  Supreme  Court  in  2012  showed  that  in  more  than  90%  of  the   cases  it  took  more  than  20  years  for  cases  to  be  resolved  with  finality.       144 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report ¨ Even  cases  first  filed  with  the  lower  court  as  far  back  as  1970  were  only  decided  by   the  Supreme  Court  in  2012.       The   reforms   should   address   the   key   issues   associated   with   the   lengthy   and   expensive   processes   for   appeal   of   land   dispute   rulings.   The   reforms   in   the   administration   and/or   disposition   of   such   cases   are   warranted   to   unlock   the   potential   of   these   properties   and   minimize  the  social  costs  of  delays.   Provide  better  incentives  to  local  forest  managers  to  improve  sustainable  forest  management   Crucial   to   better   protection,   increased   incomes,   and   to   improve   the   potential   of   forest   lands   to   stimulate   the   rural   economy,   would   be   to   consider   the   set   of   recommendations   mentioned  above.     At  the  center  of  such  recommendations  include  greater  consistency  in  policies  for  resource   use;   more   rational   regulation   of   CBFMAs   and   wood   industry;   promoting   certification   and   value  chain;  and  development  of  benefit  sharing  mechanisms.     These   strategies   should   be   complemented   with   identifying   protection   and   conservation   areas;  mapping  of  all  interests  in  the  forest  lands  and  national  parks;  as  well  as  the  financial   terms  of  such  concessions.   Tools  to  support  these  would  include  the  preparation  of  inclusive  FLUPs,  greater  access  to   information;   and   the   adoption   of   an   integrated   ecosystems   management   framework   that   rationalizes  all  tenure,  activities,  rights  and  plans  in  watersheds  to  seek  consensus  on  and   achieve  agreed  objectives.       145 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report 5 CONCLUSIONS       5.1 Methodological  Lessons   The   application   of   the   LGAF   in   the   Philippines   confirmed   the   main   findings   from   earlier   studies  on  the  situation  in  the  lands  sector.  Thus,  it  reinforced  the  main  recommendations,   particularly  the  reform  proposals  to  address  the  systemic  issues  nagging  the  sector.  Because   it  provides  a  snap  shot  of  an  existing  situation,  it  could  serve  as  an  important  scoping  tool  to   identify   key   weaknesses   and   therefore   areas   requiring   priority   attention,   both   in   terms   of   policy;   and   action   programs.   In   hindsight,   this   could   have   been   very   useful   when   the   Philippines   was   trying   to   take   stock   of   the   existing   situation,   and   identifying   areas   for   priority   support,   determining   the   options;   weighing   the   costs,   benefits,   and   feasibility   of   each.  It  serves  as  a  very  comprehensive  guide  for  countries  to  assess  their  land  governance   status  in  a  more  systematic  way.  The  assessment  undertaken  in  the  Philippines  in  1998  was   therefore  not  as  “complete”,  did  not  explore  as  much  and  not  undertaken  from  a  governance   perspective.     Nonetheless,  the  added  advantage  of  LGAF  is  that  because  of  the  pre  coded  statements  on   the  ratings;  it  provided  a  standard  against  which  to  aim  for;  that  is,  to  improve  governance   given  the  current  assessment  of  the  relevant  dimension  in  the  country.  It  would  therefore   be   an   important   monitoring   tool   to   gauge   the   progress   of   actions   taken   with   respect   to   dimensions   with   weak   governance.   The   statements   associated   with   the   ratings   can   serve   as   benchmarks   that   can   specify   the   indicators   for   measuring   improvements   over   time.   Thus,   for  example,  registration  of  50%  of  individually  held  rights  in  the  rural  areas  in  five  years   would  be  a  better  defined  target  rather  than  aiming  for  improved  security  of  tenure  in  the   rural  areas.   The   inclusion   of   large   scale   land   acquisition,   forestry,   expropriation,   and   public   land   management  in  the  analysis  likewise  enabled  a  broader  assessment  of  how  land  governance   impinge  on  these  related  issues.  Thirdly,  the  rapid  and  participatory  process  involved  in  the   rating   of   dimensions   and   analysis;   including   high   level   engagement   enabled   broad   ownership  of  and  credibility  of  the  results.   In   the   Philippines   context,   the   LGAF   could   be   used   to   monitor   progress   in   the   implementation  of  the  Lands  Sector  Development  Framework  (LSDF)  of  2010  –  the  agenda   developed  out  of  the  work  of  LAMP1  and  LAMP2.  The  LSDF  was  formulated  to  identify  key   policy   statement   and   strategies   to   achieve   a   20-­‐year   vision   for   a   modernized   land   sector,   having   in   mind   a   detailed   long   term   plan   to   follow.   The   LSDF   could   be   broadened   to   include   the   additional   themes   mentioned   above;   with   clearly   specified   targets   to   aim   for   improvement   of   governance   ratings   over   time.   By   clearly   targeting   governance   objectives,   the  LGAF  could  help  propel  the  LSDF  into  discussions  at  the  higher  level;  thereby  giving  it   the  attention  it  deserves.     The  LSDF  therefore  could  be  updated  to  incorporate  the  following:   • Agenda   for   reforms   and   actions   in   expropriations,   public   land   management,   large   scale  land  acquisition  and  forestry;   • Specifying  the  ratings  for  relevant  dimensions;   146 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report • Identifying   areas   where   further   information   and   evidence   would   be   required   (as   noted   in   the   LGAF   assessment),   and   implementing   a   plan   of   action   to   make   these   available;   • Determining   the   objective   in   terms   of   improving   governance   in   identified   priority   areas  following  the  LGAF  processes;   • Preparing  a  plan  of  action  to  achieve  these  objectives  by  end  of  2016.     The  action  plan  should  clearly  specify  the  responsible  parties,  the  resources  required,  and   the  estimated  timetable  by  which  changes  are  expected  to  happen  to  enable  improvement   in  governance  ratings.   The   "LGAF-­‐ied"   LSDF   could   then   be   integrated   into   the   updated   Philippine   Development   Plan  and  progress  reviewed  by  end  of  2016.     5.2 Scope  for  Further  Work   In  addition  to  the  above,  it  became  clear  from  the  processes  that  follow  up  actions  could  be   made  on  the  following:   Preparation  of  a  Mindanao  LGAF   The   Mindanao   case   offers   a   rich   ground   for   further   investigation   of   land   issues.   It   is   the   second   largest   major   island,   currently   experiencing   conflicts   and   key   development   challenges.   • It  is  home  to  majority  of  the  country’s  IPs;       • Some  of  its  key  cities  (Davao  and  Cagayan  de  Oro)  are  currently  experiencing  rapid   economic  growth,  yet  some  regions  (ARMM)  are  lagging  behind  in  terms  of  poverty   index  and  regional  GDP;   •  A   large   portion   of   the   Mindanao   island   is   forest   lands   and   national   parks;   a   number   of   its   provinces   serve   as   the   timber   corridor   of   the   Philippines,   and   where   illegal   logging  hotspots  are  also  identified;   • The   island’s   limited   agriculture   area   is   fertile   ground   for   large   scale   land   acquisitions,  including  its  forest  lands  and  ancestral  domains;   • Key  provinces   in  Mindanao   are   being   developed   to   supply   agricultural   products   to   the  rest  of  the  Philippines  and  for  exports.   The   Mindanao   LGAF   would   offer   an   opportunity   to   assess   how   the   dimensions   will   play   out   in  the  regional  context,  and  provide  a  better  lens  for  examining  the  state  of  governance  in   such   a   complex   situation.   More   concretely,   it   will   enable   the   formulation   of   appropriate   actions  and  priorities  for  improving  land  governance  in  Mindanao.   Urban  LGAF    -­‐    Metro  Manila  and  its  environs   The   Metropolitan   Manila   area,   or   the   National   Capital   Region   (NCR),   consists   of   16   cities   and   one   municipality.   It   is   the   center   of   government,   commerce,   and   business   in   the   Philippines.   With   a   rapidly   growing   urban   population,   the   key   challenges   faced   by   the   expanding  metropolis  are  as  follows:   • Uncontrolled   urban   growth,   with   infrastructure   and   other   basic   services   not   being   able  to  keep  pace  with  the  demands  of  a  rapidly  growing  population;   • Mounting   informality   in   the   urban   areas;   with   many   cities   not   able   to   formalize   housing   to   the   urban   poor   and   informal   settlers;   thus   causing   urban   decay   and   contributing  to  inequity;     • Active  reclamation  projects  along  the  coastal  areas;   147 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report • Spillover   of   developments   along   the   urban   fringes   of   Cavite,   Laguna   and   Bulacan   provinces,   thus   creating   pressure   on   planning   and   development   of   secondary   and   tertiary  cities;   • Active   land   market   and   property   development   projects   for   the   higher   middle   income   population,   yet   with   increasing   gap   in   housing   for   the   poor   and   lower   income  population;   • Skyrocketing   land   prices   brought   about   by   land   banking   and   speculation   by   the   private  sector;   • High   income   LGUs,   with   potential   for   capturing   betterment   taxes   and   increased   property  taxes  and  fees  from  improved  valuation  and  taxation  practices.     The  NCR  offers  a  classic  case  of  how  governance  impact  on  the  ability  to  respond  adequately   to  urban  issues  in  the  Philippines.       In  Depth  Assessment  of  Large  Scale  Land  Acquisition  Module   This   proposal   stems   from   the   lack   of   time   and   detailed   data   to   provide   the   basis   for   adequate   assessment   of   the   module.   It   is   also   anticipated   that   as   the   redistribution   of   agricultural  lands  is  completed  in  the  near  term  as  planned  by  the  Aquino  administration;   the   result   would   be   preponderance   of   small   sized   farms   in   the   Philippines.   With   growing   population,  the  demand  for  improved  food  security  would  require  either  intensification  to   enhance   farm   productivity;   and/or   consolidation   of   small   farms   to   make   better   business   case  for  economies  of  scale  and  large-­‐scale  production.  With  reduced  public  investments  in   agriculture,   the   private   sector   is   predicted   to   provide   the   much   needed   boost   to   improve   production.     Large   scale   land   acquisition   is   therefore   foreseen   to   intensify   as   one   of   the   modes   for   increasing   investments   and   production   in   the   agriculture   and   forest   industry   sectors.   The   timing   is   therefore   quite   appropriate   for   the   Philippines   to   put   in   place,   the   essential   elements   to   ensure   there   is   a   level   playing   field,   and   there   is   fair   and   equitable   sharing   of   benefits   therefrom.     The   recommendations   presented   herein   from   the   assessment   of   the   dimensions  under  the  LSLA  module  can  be  sharpened  with  such  a  focused  study;  as  well  the   formulation  of  specific  actions  to  address  areas  with  weak  governance.  Such  a  study  can  be   tied  with  a  Mindanao  LGAF  as  a  priority.   Explore   the   use   of   provincial   or   city/municipal   LGAF   as   incentives   for   national   level   investments   A  pilot  can  be  undertaken  to  assess  how  the  LGAF  can  be  used  to  assess  the  way  by  which   strong  or  weak  governance  impacts  on  economic  performance  at  the  provincial  or  regional   level.  The  hypotheses  being,  in  provinces  where  tenure  systems  are  weak;  economic  growth   would   be   driven   simply   by   the   amount   of   government   subsidy   or   lack   of   it.   LGAF   results   from  each  province  may  point  to  the  obvious  –  land  as  a  major  natural  resource  could  spell   local,   more   equitable   economic   development   with   the   right   incentives.   The   national   government   can   also   use   LGAF   as   a   tool   to   measure   the   strength   of   land   governance   in   a   given  province  or  jurisdiction;  and  on  the  basis  thereof,  use  the  results  to  allocate  incentives   or  rewards  for  those  meeting  good  governance  indicators.         148 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report       149 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report 6 ANNEXES   150 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report 6.1   Country  Scorecard  for  the  Philippines   Core  set  of  indicators               Score   LGI-­‐Dim     Topic   A   B   C   D   Recognition  of  Rights     1   i   Land  tenure  rights  recognition  (rural)                   1   ii   Land  tenure  rights  recognition  (urban)                   1   iii   Rural  group  rights  recognition                   1   iv   Urban  group  rights  recognition  in  informal  areas                   1   v   Opportunities  for  tenure  individualization                   Enforcement  of  Rights   Surveying/mapping  and  registration  of  claims  on  communal  or  indigenous  land   2   i                   Registration  of  individually  held  land  in  rural  areas   2   ii           Registration  of  individually  held  land  in  urban  areas   2   iii                   Women’s  rights  are  recognized  in  practice  by  the  formal  system  (urban/rural)   2   iv                   Condominium  regime  that  provides  for  appropriate  management  of  common   2   v                   property   2   vi   Compensation  due  to  land  use  changes                   2   via   Rural  to  urban  conversion           2   vib   Establishment  of  national  parks/protected  areas           Mechanisms  for  Recognition   3   i   Use  of  non-­‐documentary  forms  of  evidence  to  recognize  rights                   3   ii   Formal  recognition  of  long-­‐term,  unchallenged  possession                   3   iii   First-­‐time  registration  on  demand  is  not  restricted  by  inability  to  pay  formal  fees                     iiia   Under  Free  Patent  mode  –  RA  10023             iiib   Under  the  Miscellaneous  Sales  Patent  (MSP)  mode             iiic   Under  the  judicial  titling  mode           3   iv   First-­‐time  registration  does  not  entail  significant  informal  fees45                   3   v   Formalization  of  residential  housing  is  feasible  and  affordable                   3   vi   Efficient  and  transparent  process  to  formally  recognize  long-­‐term  unchallenged                   possession   Restrictions  on  Rights     4   i   Restrictions  regarding  urban  land  use,  ownership  and  transferability                     4   ii   Restrictions  regarding  rural  land  use,  ownership  and  transferability                   Clarity  of  Mandates   5   i   Separation  of  institutional  roles                     5   ii   Institutional  overlap                   5   iii   Administrative  overlap                   5   iv   Information  sharing                   Equity  and  Non-­‐Discrimination   6   i   Clear  land  policy  developed  in  a  participatory  manner                   6   ii   Meaningful  incorporation  of  equity  goals                 45  Rating  is  between  B  and  C.  Amount  of  informal  fees  is  “not  significantly  less”  than  formal  fees  but  generally  not  equal  to  the   formal  fees.  The  score  given  therefore  was  between  B  and  C.     151 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report             Score   LGI-­‐Dim     Topic   A   B   C   D   6   iii   Policy  for  implementation  is  costed,  matched  with  the  benefits  and  is  adequately               resourced   6   iv   Regular  and  public  reports  indicating  progress  in  policy  implementation                   Transparency  of  Land  Use   7   i   In  urban  areas,  land  use  plans  and  changes  to  these  are  based  on  public  input                     7   ii   In  rural  areas,  land  use  plans  and  changes  to  these  are  based  on  public  input                     7   iii   Public  capture  of  benefits  arising  from  changes  in  permitted  land  use                     7   iv   Speed  of  land  use  change                   Efficiency  of  Land  Use  Planning   8   i   Process  for  planned  urban  development  in  the  largest  city                   8   ii   Process  for  planned  urban  development  in  the  4  largest  cities  (exc.  largest)                   8   iii   Ability  of  urban  planning  to  cope  with  urban  growth                   8   iv   Plot  size  adherence                     8   v   Use  plans  for  specific  land  classes  (forest,  pastures  etc.)  are  in  line  with  use                     Speed  and  Predictability   9   i   Applications  for  building  permits  for  residential  dwellings  are  affordable  and                   processed  in  a  non-­‐discretionary  manner.   9   ii   Time  required  to  obtain  a  building  permit  for  a  residential  dwelling                     Transparency  of  Valuation   10   i   Clear  process  of  property  valuation                   10   ii   Public  availability  of  valuation  rolls                   Tax  Collection  Efficiency   11   i   Exemptions  from  property  taxes  are  justified                   11   ii   Property  holders  liable  to  pay  property  tax  are  listed  on  the  tax  roll                   11   iii   Assessed  property  taxes  are  collected                   11   iv   Property  taxes  correspondence  to  costs  of  collection  (NO  DATA)                   Identification  of  Public  Land     12   i   Public  land  ownership  is  justified  and  implemented  at  the  appropriate  level  of                   government   12   ii   Complete  recording  of  publicly  held  land                   12   iii   Assignment  of  management  responsibility  for  public  land                   12   iv   Resources  available  to  comply  with  responsibilities                   12   v   Inventory  of  public  land  is  accessible  to  the  public                   12   vi   Key  information  on  land  concessions  is  accessible  to  the  public.                   Incidence  of  Expropriation   13   i   Transfer  of  expropriated  land  to  private  interests                   13   ii   Speed  of  use  of  expropriated  land                   Transparency  of  Procedures   14   i   Compensation  for  expropriation  of  ownership                   14   ii   Compensation  for  expropriation  of  all  rights                     14   iii   Promptness  of  compensation                   14   iv   Independent  and  accessible  avenues  for  appeal  against  expropriation                   14   v   Appealing  expropriation  is  time-­‐bounded  (NO  DATA)                   Transparent  Processes  (NO  DATA)   15   i   Openness  of  public  land  transactions                   15   ii   Collection  of  payments  for  public  leases                   152 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report             Score   LGI-­‐Dim     Topic   A   B   C   D   15   iii   Modalities  of  lease  or  sale  of  public  land                     Completeness  of  Registry   16   i   Mapping  of  registry  records                   16   ii   Economically  relevant  private  encumbrances                     16   iii   Economically  relevant  public  restrictions  or  charges                   16   iv   Searchability  of  the  registry  (or  organization  with  information  on  land  rights)                   16   v   Accessibility  of  records  in  the  registry  (or  organization  with  information  on  land                   rights)   16   vi   Timely  response  to  a  request  for  access  to  records  in  the  registry  (or  organization                   with  information  on  land  rights)   Reliability  of  Records   17   i   Focus  on  customer  satisfaction  in  the  registry                   17   ii   Registry/  cadastre  information  is  up-­‐to-­‐date                     17   iia   Registry           17   iib   Cadastre           Cost  Effective  and  Sustainable   18   i   Cost  of  registering  a  property  transfer                   18   ii   Financial  sustainability  of  the  registry                   18   iii   Capital  investment                   18   iiia   Registry           18   iiib   Cadastre           Transparency   19   i   Schedule  of  fees  is  available  publicly                   19   ii   Informal  payments  discouraged                   Assignment  of  Responsibility   20   i   Accessibility  of  conflict  resolution  mechanisms                   20   ii   Informal  or  community  based  dispute  resolution                   20   iii   Forum  shopping                   20   iv   Possibility  of  appeals                   Low  Level  of  Pending  Conflicts   21   i   Conflict  resolution  in  the  formal  legal  system                   21   ii   Speed  of  conflict  resolution  in  the  formal  system                   21   iii   Long-­‐standing  conflicts  (unresolved  cases  older  than  5  year)                                           153 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report Large  Scale  Acquisition  of  Land  rights                 Score   LSLA     Topic   A   B   C   D   1   Most  forest  land  is  mapped  and  rights  are  registered                   2   Conflicts  generated  by  land  acquisition  and  how  these  are  addressed                     3   Land  use  restrictions  on  rural  land  parcels  can  generally  be  identified.                   4   Public  institutions  in  land  acquisition  operate  in  a  clear  and  consistent  manner.                   5   Incentives  for  investors  are  clear,  transparent  and  consistent.                   6   Benefit  sharing  mechanisms  for  investments  in  agriculture                     7   There  are  direct  and  transparent  negotiations  between  right  holders  and  investors.           8   Information  required  from  investors  to  assess  projects  on  public/community  land.46           9   Information  provided  for  cases  of  land  acquisition  on  public/community  land.           10   Contractual  provisions  on  benefits  and  risks  sharing  regarding  acquisition  of  land               11   Duration  of  procedure  to  obtain  approval  for  a  project             12   Social  requirements  for  large  scale  investments  in  agriculture             13   Environmental  requirements  for  large  scale  investments  in  agriculture                   14   Procedures  for  economically,  environmentally,  and  socially  beneficial  investments.47                   15   Compliance  with  safeguards  related  to  investment  in  agriculture                     16   Procedures  to  complain  if  agricultural  investors  do  not  comply  with  requirements.                     Forestry                   Score   FGI-­‐Dim     Topic   A   B   C   D           1     i   Country  signature  and  ratification  of  international  conventions           Implementation   of   incentives   to   promote   climate   change   mitigation   through   1   ii   forestry           2   i   Public  good  aspects  of  forests  recognized  by  law  and  protected           Forest   management   plans   and   budgets   address   the   main   drivers   of   deforestation   2   ii   and  degradation           Country’s   commitment   to   forest   certification     and   chain-­‐of-­‐custody   systems   to   3   i   promote  sustainable  harvesting  of  timber  and  non-­‐timber  forest  products           Country’s   commitment   to   SMEs   as   a   way   to   promote   competition,   income   3   ii   generation  and  productive  rural  employment           4   i   Recognition  of  traditional  and  indigenous  rights  to  forest  resources  by  law           Sharing  of  benefits  or  income  from  public  forests  with  local  communities  by  law  and   4   ii   implemented           Boundaries  of  the  countries  forest  estate  and  the  classification  into  various  uses  and   5     i   ownership  are  clearly  defined  and  demarcated           In  rural  areas,  forest  land  use  plans  and  changes  in  these  plans  are  based  on  public   5   ii   input.           6   i   Country’s   approach   to   controlling   forest   crimes,   including   illegal   logging   and   46  D  for  LGUs;  A  for  Philippine  Agribusiness  Development  Corporation  (PADC)   47  Not  applicable.  Public  and  community  lands  cannot  be  transferred.   154 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report             Score   FGI-­‐Dim     Topic   A   B   C   D   corruption           Inter  and  intra  agency  efforts  and  multi-­‐stakeholder  collaboration  to  combat  forest   6   ii   crimes,  and  awareness  of  judges  and  prosecutors           155 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report 6.2 Policy  Matrix48     48  Based  on  outputs  of  the  Technical  Validation  Workshop   156 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report LAND  GOVERNANCE  ASSESSMENT  FRAMEWORK   POLICY  MATRIX49               POLICY  ISSUE   PROPOSED  ACTION   MONITORING   RANK   CATEGORY50   INDICATOR     Legal  and  Institutional  Framework   There  are  no  reliable  data   DENR  to  complete  the   Number  of   1   A   cadastral  survey  for  the   available  on  the  extent  of   municipalities  and   whole  country   titled  and  untitled  lands  both   areas  completely   in  the  urban  and  rural  areas     surveyed       Consolidated  maps  of   surveyed  areas  for  the     whole  country     Inventory  and   DENR,  DAR,  LRA,  and   mapping  of  areas   NCIP  to  conduct  a   covered  with  tenurial   thorough  inventory  and   instruments  (all  types)   cross-­‐reference  land   to  identify  gaps  and   tenure  issuances   overlaps           NSO  and  LGUs  to  conduct   Census/Inventory  of   a  census  of  informal   informal  settlers   settlers  and  incorporate     into  socio-­‐economic   statistics  for  planning  and     management  of  CMP  and     other  similar  housing   initiatives         DENR  and  LGUs  to   Inventory  of   complete  inventory  of   occupants  in  forest   occupants  of  forest  lands   lands  and  protected   and  protected  areas     areas  conducted     49  Output  from  the  Technical  Validation  Workshop,  June  4,  2013  at  Dolce  Latte  Restaurant,  Quezon  City   50  A  =  requiring  strict  implementation  of  existing  laws  and  procedures;  B  =  requiring  improvements  in  existing  policies  and   procedures;  C  =  requiring  new  policies/legislations   157 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report           POLICY  ISSUE   PROPOSED  ACTION   MONITORING   RANK   CATEGORY50   INDICATOR   While  there  are  many   Strengthen  and  fast-­‐track   Proportion  of  urban   1   A   the  Community  Mortgage   modalities  by  which   informal  settlers   Program   formalization  of  urban   formalized  and/or   residential  housing  can  be     provided  residential   achieved,  all  of  these  are   Encourage  LGUs  to   housing     quite  expensive  on  the  part   develop  comprehensive   of  government,  and  take  a   shelter  plans  and  to   long  time  to  complete   engage  in  urban  housing   for  the  poor  and  the     underprivileged     The  registry  do  not  support   The  LRA  and  other  LAM   Gender  disaggregated   1   B   agencies  to  revise   generation  of  gender   data  produced  and   processes  (procedures,   disaggregated  data  on  land   published   forms  and   holdings   documentations)  to     provide  mechanism  that   will  enable  generation  of     gender  disaggregated   data  on  land  tenure.       The  are  many  overlaps  in   The  government  should   LARA  enacted   1   C   prioritize  the  refilling  of   policy  implementation  and   LARA  Bill  in  the  new   institutional  mandates  which   Congress     have  persisted  for  a  long   time  and  has  resulted  in  long   standing  disputes,  and  has   led  to  many  problems   Agencies  have  different  land   The  agencies  of  the   Agreed  data  standards   1   B   government  responsible   record  systems  that  make   for  maintaining  and     access  difficult.  DENR’s   managing  land  records   records  are  organized  by   Revised  land  records   should  develop  a  unified   location  and  use  cadastral  lot   management  policies   data  standards  so  that   numbers  as  reference;  RoDs   land  records   records  are  organized   management,  particularly   sequentially  using  title   storage  and  retrieval  can   numbers  as  reference;  while   be  harmonized  across  all   the  LGU  Assessor’s  records   agencies,  including  local   are  organized  by  barangay   government  units   and  use  Parcel  Identification     Number  or  Tax  Declaration   Number  as  reference     158 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report           POLICY  ISSUE   PROPOSED  ACTION   MONITORING   RANK   CATEGORY50   INDICATOR   CBFMA  and  other  group   DENR  to  investigate   Policy  paper  on   2   B   feasibility  of  providing   tenure  in  the  forest  lands   individualization  of   individual  tenures  in   and  protected  areas  cannot   tenure  (long-­‐term   forest  lands  and  protected   be  individualized  under   leases)  in  forest  lands   areas  and  pursue  changes   existing  laws   and  protected  areas     in  policies  and  laws  if     desirable       Bills  filed  in  Congress   and  law  enacted  (if   desirable)   While  RA  10023  (Residential   DENR  to  review  the   Revised  administrative   2   B   policies  for  appraisal  and   Free  Patent)  provides  for   orders  issued   revise  where  appropriate   inexpensive  titling  of   to  facilitate  titling   residential  lands,  titling  of   other  types  of  urban  lands   are  still  very  expensive  and   difficult   Payment  of  informal  fees   LAM  agencies  to  facilitate   Study  conducted  and   2   B   the  conduct  of  a  deeper   remains  a  common  practice   completed   study  in  informal  fees   but  the  level  of  significance   than  the  one  done  in     needs  deeper  investigation   LAMP  to  provide  for  a       more  regional  data  for   better  assessment         LRA,  DENR  and  other   Complaints  filed,   LAM  agencies  to   investigated  and  given   institutionalize   appropriate  actions   mechanism  for  easier   lodgement  of  complains     for  undesirable  staff   behavior   There  is  no  systematic  and   Encourage  government  to   Agency  policies  issued   2   B   institutionalize  policies   meaningful    monitoring  of   for  regular  and     progress  and  impacts  of   meaningful  monitoring  of   meeting  equity  goals  in  land   Equity   progress  and  impact  of   policy   goals/objectives   land  policies  into  equity   monitored  regularly     goals/objectives   and  meaningfully   159 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report           POLICY  ISSUE   PROPOSED  ACTION   MONITORING   RANK   CATEGORY50   INDICATOR   While  the  Philippines  have  a        Codification  of  land  laws   Land  Code  passed  by   3   C   strong  legal  framework  for     Congress   land  tenure  rights   Streamline  process  of   recognition,  the     agencies  and  improve   implementation  has  been   information  sharing   Agreements  of  LAM   very  slow  and  difficult  due   using  a  common   agencies  on  unified   to  the  preponderance  of   database   data  standards  and   tenure  rights  and   data  sharing   instruments  issued  by   various  agencies  without  a     clear  reference  to  a  common   LAM  agencies   database     database  systems   provides  mechanism   for  cross-­‐ referencing,  linking   or  integration   The  restriction  in  transfer   The  DENR  should  work   Law  passed  by   3   C   for  the  repeal  of  this   and  conveyances  of  Free   Congress  repealing   restriction.    This  is  one   Patents  (Agricultural)  is   the  restriction   area  to  be  seriously   unjustified  considering  the   considered  if  there  is  any   FP  process  mainly  confirms   effort  to  pass  a  Land  Code   long  held  rights  through  the   issuance  of  titles.  Applicants   have  to  qualify  with   continuous  unchallenged   possession  over  a  period  of   30  years,  so  the  restriction  is   unnecessary     This  restriction  was  already   removed  for  residential   lands  in  RA  10023     Poor  implementation  of   Identify  and  provide   Implementing  policy   3   A   section  108  of  RA  8550   fisherfolk  settlements   issued     which  provides  DA,  in   near  fishing  grounds     coordination  with  other     Proportion  of  informal   government  agencies  (i.e.   Assess  fisherfolk  land   fisherfolks  given   NHA)  to  identify  and   rights   settlements   provide  FISHERFOLK   SETTLEMENTS  near  fishing   grounds     Land  Use  Planning  and  Management     No  overarching  national   Congress  to  enact  a   National  Land  Use   1   C   policy  framework  on  land   National  Land  use   Act  enacted   use   policy   160 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report           POLICY  ISSUE   PROPOSED  ACTION   MONITORING   RANK   CATEGORY50   INDICATOR   Attendance  in  public  in   Develop  a  policy   Memo  Circular   2   A   land-­‐use  planning  may  not   requiring  the  real   issued  by  DILG   be  representative  of  the   stakeholders     real  stakeholders  in     particularly  the   Attendance  sheets   Land   property  owners  to   in  public   participate  and   consultation   contribute   conducted   substantially  to  the   process  of  land  use   planning  (DILG  Memo   Circular)   LGUs  are  mostly  land  poor   NG  (DBM,  NEDA  and   LGU  Land  Banking   3   A   but  do  not  make  an  effort   DILG)  to  assist  LGUs  to   Fund  established     to  increase  their   embark  on  land     landholdings   banking  for  more   Ratio  of  value  of   effective  urban  land   LGU  landholding  to   management  thru  a   total  value  of  LGU   LGU  Land  Banking   assets   Fund  (taken  from  the   sale  of  NG  assets)   Non-­‐implementation  of   BLGF  to  make  pilot   Detailed  procedural   4   A   law  provisions  in  special   studies  and  prescribe   guidelines   benefit  assessments   specific  guidelines  on     special  assessments         Institutionalize   LGU  Ordinance   donation  as  alternative   Issued     application  of     worsement   %  of  ROWs   compensation  and   acquired  through   betterment  levy  (LGU   donations   Ordinance)   No  systematic  monitoring   Develop  methodologies   Systems  put  in  place   4   A   of  land  use  change   for  monitoring  land  use   change  in  urban  and   rural  areas:     -­‐ Assessors  Office  for   A&D   -­‐ DENR-­‐CENRO  for   public  domain/City   ENRO   National  Government   Enforce  LGC  provision   Formal  agreements   4   A   investments  strongly   on  mandatory   or  co-­‐management   influence  urban  form  of   consultation  for  major   arrangements   LGUs   NGA  investments  in     local  government   Directive  from  the   territories  (enforce  by   Office  of  the   OP)   President   161 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report           POLICY  ISSUE   PROPOSED  ACTION   MONITORING   RANK   CATEGORY50   INDICATOR   LGU  authority  to  regulate   Study  the  feasibility  of   Study  Report   4   B   land  is  weak  without   empowering  LGUs  to     power  to  regulate   regulate  ownership,   Appropriate  laws   ownership,  acquisition   acquisition,  disposition   enacted   and  disposition  of   and  use  of  land   property  as  well   Rampant  practice  of   Study  feasibility  of   Study  Reports   4   B   informal  subdivision   devolving  to  LGUs  the   power  to  regulate   informal  subdivisions   to  enforce  standards  on   lot  size,  lot  access  and   open  space   requirements   Extensive  settlement   Educate  people  on  the   Improved   4   C   encroachment  in   meaning  and  purpose   Compliance   Timberland   of  land  classification         Revisit  the  18%  slope      Review  Report   basis  for  delineating   Timberland     Land  Valuation  and  Taxation   Assessment  of  most   Intensive  training  of   Proficiency  of   1   A     properties  is  still  not   assessors  in  the  use  of   assessors  on  the   C  for  VRA   based  on  market  prices   the  reformed  valuation   correct  valuation   process;  roll-­‐out  of  PVS   process   and  MAG  to  all  LGUs;   pursue  the  passage  of   VRA  bill  (medium  and   long-­‐term  solution)   Revision  of  SMVs  is  not   DOF/BLGF  to  strongly   Proportion  of  LGUs   1   A   regularly  undertaken  as   direct  and  assist  LGUs   compliant  with   provided  in  the  LGC   in  revising  their  SMVs;     regular  updating  of   pursue  the  passage  of   SMVs     the  VRA  bill   Collection  efficiency  for   Assist  treasurers  in   Improved  RPT   2   A   the  RPT  is  about  59%  for   developing  an  efficient   collection  efficiency   the  whole  country     revenue  collection   program  based  on  the   regular  conduct  of  a  tax   compliance  study   Sanctions  for  local  officials   Strictly  implement  the   Number  of   2   A   deficient  in  collecting   LGC  provisions   deficient/erring   property  taxes  are  not   ensuring  the  efficient   Treasurers  given   utilized   collection  of  property   sanctions     taxes   162 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report           POLICY  ISSUE   PROPOSED  ACTION   MONITORING   RANK   CATEGORY50   INDICATOR   Exemption  authority  of   DOF/BLGF/DILG/DOJ   A  definitive  official   2   B   LGUs  “stretched”  in   to  review  the  power  of   position  from   practice   LGUs  to  grant   DOF/BLGF  on  the   exemptions  and   LGUs’  grant  of   propose  amendments   property   to  LGC  if  warranted;  as   exemptions   short-­‐term  solution,   DOF/BLGF  to  advise   and  monitor  LGUs  on   the  appropriate  way  of   exercising  their   exemption  authority   under  the  LGC     Public  access  to  SMVs  is   BLGF  to  collect  LGUs’   Availability  of  LGU   2   A   limited   SMVs  and  upload  in   SMVs  at  the  BLGF   their  website   website   Assessors  do  not   BLGF  to  require   Updated   2   A   vigorously  pursue  their   assessors  to  regularly   assessment  rolls  as   task  of  updating  the   update  their   revealed  in  regular   assessment  roll   assessment  rolls     monitoring  of  the   BLGF   Administrative  and   BLGF  to  conduct   Number  of   2   A   judicial  remedies  available   intensive  training  for   treasurers/staff   under  the  LGC  to  collect   the  treasurers  and   trained;  number  of   delinquent  property  taxes   their  staff  on  the  use  of   warrant  of  levies   are  not  maximized     administrative  and   issued  and  conduct   judicial  remedies  to   of  public  auctions   enforce  RPT  collection   Officials/private  persons   Require  all  those   Regular   3   A   mandated  under  the  LGC   mandated  under  the   transmission  of   to  provide  information  to   LGC  to  provide   information  to  the   assessors  do  not  comply   information  to  the   assessors  from   assessors  to  comply   those  concerned   through  MOAs  or  face   sanctions   LGUs  depend  too  much  on   Review  the  IRA  to   Proposed   3   C   IRA  at  the  expense  of   minimize  its   amendments  to  the   collecting  internal   “disincentive”  to  collect   IRA  formula   revenues   internal  taxes;  explore   the  use  of  collection   efficiency  as  a  factor  in   developing  a  new  IRA   formula   No  comprehensive  studies   Conduct  a  study   Study  completed   3   B   on  the  cost  of  collecting   estimating  the  ratio  of   and   property  taxes   the  cost  of  collecting   recommendations   both  national  and  local   identified   property  taxes  to  actual   collections   163 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report           POLICY  ISSUE   PROPOSED  ACTION   MONITORING   RANK   CATEGORY50   INDICATOR     Dispute  Resolution     While  there  is  an   Build  capacity  of  Lupons   Capacity  program   1   A   institutionalized   in  the  handling  of  land   developed   community-­‐based   related  disputes   alternative  dispute   Capacity  building   resolution  accessible  to  the   activities  conducted   community,  there  are  some   weaknesses  particularly  in   the  capacity  of  the  Lupon  to   handle  land related   disputes It  is  difficult  to  determine   The  courts  to  improve   lnventory  of  cases   2   B   the  extent  or  magnitude  of   inventory  and  tracking   land  related  disputes  in  the   of  cases   Case  tracking   court  system   database  developed,   Installation  of  database   installed  and   system  for  inventory   operational   and  tracking  of  court   cases,  ideally  with   capability  to  segregate   and  age  cases   The  formal  process  of   Investigate  the   Policy  option   3   C   addressing  land  related   feasibility  of  setting  up   developed  for  setting   disputes  is  expensive  and   dedicated  land  related   up  dedicated  land   slow.  Some  reforms  in  the   courts  in  areas  where   courts   administration  of  justice   disputes  are  high  and   system  are  warranted  to   pursue  if  desirable       unlock  the  potential  of  these   properties  and  minimize  the   The  government  should   Policy  option  and   social  and  economic  costs  of   seriously  consider  the   legislation  on  the   these  delays proposal  for  the  creation   creation  of  a  Land   of  a  Land  Adjudication   Adjudication  Board   Board  with  quasi-­‐ judicial  powers  to   facilitate  resolution  of   land  cases         164 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report           POLICY  ISSUE   PROPOSED  ACTION   MONITORING   RANK   CATEGORY50   INDICATOR     Public  Provision  of  Land  Information   Agencies  have  different  land   The  agencies  of  the   Agreed  data   1   B   record  systems  that  make   government  responsible   standards   access  difficult.  DENR's   for  maintaining  and   records  are  organized  by   managing  land  records   Revised  land  records   location  and  use  cadastral   should  develop  a  unified   management  policies   lot  numbers  as  reference;   data  standards  so  that   RoDs  records  are  organized   land  records     sequentially  using  title   management,   numbers  as  reference;  while   particularly  storage  and   the  LGU  Assessor's  records   retrieval  can  be   are  organized  by  barangay   harmonized  across  all   and  use  Parcel  identification   agencies,  including  local   Number  or  Tax  Declaration   government  units   Number  as  reference51     While  the  LRA,  RoD  and   Encourage  LAM  agencies   Reports  on   2   A   other  LAM  agencies  have   to  actively  monitor   monitoring  of  service   published  their  service   performance  against   standards   standards,  there  is  however,   service  standards   a  lack  of  meaningful   for  continuous   Policy  issuances  for   monitoring  of  performance   process  improvement   process   against  it   improvements   Studies  undertaken  by   Review  the  structure  for   Policy  option  for   3   C   LAMP2  identified  several   taxes  on  real  properties   restructuring   factors  that  discourages   with  the  view  of   transfer  taxes   registration  of  subsequent   reducing  the  rates  to   (relevant  provisions   transaction,  primarily  the   encourage  the   of  National  Internal   high  cost  attributable  to   registration  of   Revenue  Code)     payment  of  transfer  taxes,   subsequent  transfers     which  results  in  registry  not   Amendment  of   up  to  date     relevant  provisions   of  the  LIRC  (if  so   desired)           51This  is  already  reflected  in  the  policy  matrix  for  legal  and  institutional  framework,  repeated  only  to  highlight  as  a  cross-­‐ cutting  concern.   165 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report           POLICY  ISSUE   PROPOSED  ACTION   MONITORING   RANK   CATEGORY50   INDICATOR     Expropriations     Agencies  dealing  with   RAPs  are  only  prepared  for   RAP  Reports  for  all   1   A   foreign  assisted  projects   expropriation  and   projects  regardless   and  other  major  capital   resettlement  should   of  source  of  funding,   projects  (in  most  cases)   develop  their  own   published  in   resettlement  guidelines,   websites  of   and  these  should  be   implementing   applied  to  all  projects,   agencies   regardless  of  funding   source,  type  of  property   and  to  all  who  will  lose   their  access  and  use   rights.   Promptness  of  payment  for   Payment  of  100%  of   Post  RAP   2   B   locally  funded  projects  and   appraised  value  instead   implementation   those  implemented  by  LGUs   of  just  a  portion  of  it   reports  that  are   (10%  for  local  and  15%   accessible  through   for  those  implemented   implementing   by  LGUs)   agencies’  websites   Unfair  compensation  for   Strict  implementation  of   Post  RAP   2   A   expropriated  property,   Section  5  of  R.A.  8974   implementation   which  are  way  below   must  be  done.   reports  that  are   market  values.   accessible  through   implementing   agencies’  websites   Data  on  expropriation  are   Agencies  should  put  up   Status  of   3   A   scattered  among  various   expropriation  data  and   expropriation  cases   implementing  agencies.     updates  in  their   posted  in  websites  of   These  data  are  not  publicly   websites.   implementing   available   agencies   There  is  very  little   External  Monitoring   Reports  of  EMAs   4   A   monitoring  done  on   Agents  (may  be  a  private   posted  in  websites  of   expropriation  cases,  except   entity,  an  NGO/CSO,  or   implementing   for  foreign  assisted  projects   an  individual)  who  are   agencies   with  loan  covenants   independent  of   requiring  it   Government  must  be   engaged  by   implementing  agency  to   do  such  tasks  among   others,  whether  project   is  foreign  assisted  or  not   166 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report           POLICY  ISSUE   PROPOSED  ACTION   MONITORING   RANK   CATEGORY50   INDICATOR   There  is  no  national   A  national  resettlement   Enactment/passing   1   C   resettlement  policy  that   policy  should  be   of  law  embodying  a   embodies,  aside  from   formulated  to  provide   national   proper  and  prompt   for  prompt   resettlement  policy   compensation  and   compensation  and   that  will  cover  both   entitlements,  grievance   entitlements,  grievance   the  formal  and   redress  and  sustainable   redress  and  sustainable   informal  sectors   livelihood  restoration  and   livelihood  restoration   improvement  program.   and  improvement   program.   Absence  of  clear  legislation   There  should  be  a   Reports  on  payment   1   C   for  compensating  income   legislation  that  provides   for  income  losses  of   losses  of  medium  to  large-­‐   for  clear  policy   medium  to  large   scale  businesses  and  agro-­‐ framework  for   scale  businesses  and   industrial  enterprises     compensation  of  income   agro-­‐industrial   losses  by  medium  to   enterprises.    This   large-­‐scale  business  and   may  also  be  posted   agro-­‐industrial   in  websites  of   enterprises  following   implementing   involuntary   agencies   resettlement.   Basis  for  property  valuation   Amendment  of  R.A.  8974   Reports  of  EMAs   2   C   different  for  national  and   to  cover  locally   posted  in  websites  of   local  infrastructure  projects   implemented  projects   implementing   and  those  implemented  by   and  those  implemented   agencies   LGUs   by  LGUs     Large  Scale  Land  Acquisition     Conflicts  resulting  from  land   Legislate  a  national  land   Law  enacted  by  June   1   C   acquisition   use  plan  to  ensure  that   6,  2013   lands  and  resources  are     protected  and  utilized  in   Presentation  of  LGAF   a  manner  that  will  be   before  legislators  on   beneficial  and   June  5,  2013   sustainable  for  all     sectors  of  society   IRR  on  NLUA     formulated  and   budgeted     Implementing  and   monitoring   guidelines   167 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report           POLICY  ISSUE   PROPOSED  ACTION   MONITORING   RANK   CATEGORY50   INDICATOR   Need  for  a  clear,   Adopt  CFS  VG  and  other   #  of  clear   1   A   transparent  and  consistent   international  guidelines   implementation  and   policy  on  agricultural   on  land  management   monitoring   investments   (e.g.  UNDRIP,  CBD)   guidelines       formulated  (e.g.  DAR   Need  for  greater   AO  on  Agri-­‐business   understanding  of  these   Venture   international   Agreements)   agreements  among     stakeholders   FPIC  (revised)     guidelines   Implement  existing  laws,   implemented   policies  that  regulate     land  and  water   investments  (e.g.,  FPIC   of  IPRA)       Overlapping  mandates  of   The  Joint  DAR-­‐DENR-­‐ #  of  multi-­‐ 1   A   government  agencies   LRA-­‐NCIP  AO  No  01-­‐12   stakeholders     clarifies  the  respective   consultations   policies  and  programs  of   conducted     the  agencies  and   #  of  CSO  inputs  and   instituted  mechanisms   recommendations   to  resolve  jurisdictional,   adopted   operational,  and  policy   #  of  land  conflicts   issues   managed  or  resolved     in  favor  of  the  small   Need  for  greater   food  producers   consultation  with  CSOs     and  basic  sectors  on  this   AO     LSLA  in  Mindanao   Conduct  further  studies   #  of  cases   1   A     on  land  issues,  especially   documented   LSLA,  in  Mindanao   (positive  and     negative)   #  of  RTDs  conducted   to  validate  findings   and  review   recommendations   #  of  policies   recommended  and   adopted   Mechanism/s   created  to  monitor   and  address  land   conflicts     168 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report           POLICY  ISSUE   PROPOSED  ACTION   MONITORING   RANK   CATEGORY50   INDICATOR     Public  Land  Management  and  Forestry     Complete  compliant   Configure  existing   Consolidated  spatial   1   A   database  system  for   system  for  spatial   database  accessible   generating,  verifying,   database  generation,   to  all  relevant   validating,  analyzing  and   verification,  validation,   government  offices   reporting  for  all   storage,  analyses,   and  continuously   international  commitments   retrieval  and  use  to   updated   (CITES,  UNFCCC,  CBD,   comply  with   Ramsar  Convention  etc.)   international   commitments  –DENR   and  attached  agencies,   CCC   2   B   Harmonizing  and  unifying   Issue  a  relevant  policy   DAO’s  issued  by  the   various  laws  and  policies   for  a  unified  tenure   DENR   that  govern  access,  use,   system  (i.e.  unified   RA  on  Trust  Fund  for   compliance  and   Forest  Management   communities  (PES)   management  of  public   Agreement)   or  MOA’s  for  PES   goods  from  forests  and  their   Issue  a  policy  on   between  LGUs  and   environmental  goods  and   certification  of  forest   local  DENR   services   plantations   Monitoring  system   Issue  a  policy  to  improve   for  every  forest   incentives  for  forest   management  unit,   based  SMEs     using  maps  and  data   on  land  cover  from   Issue  guidelines  for  PES   NAMRIA  as  baseline   and  benefit  sharing   information   arrangements  between   LGUs  and  communities   Issue  guidelines  on  co-­‐ management  (currently   in  process)   Capacity  building   support  for  DENR,  LGUs   and  target  management   units   Issue  guidelines  for   Forest  Land  Use  Plan   (FLUP)  preparation  and   demarcation  and   delineation  of  zones   inside  management   units     169 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report 6.3 References   ADB/JFPR  REGALA.  2011.  Tax  Compliance  Studies  for  Alaminos,  San  Carlos,  Tayabas  cities.   (unpublished  reports).   ADB/JFPR  REGALA.  2012.  Studies  on  the  SMV  Revision  of  the  REGALA  LGUs  (Tayabas  City,   Alaminos  City,  Bayawan  City  and  San  Carlos  City).  Unpublished  reports.   Acosta,  R.  2000.    Assessment  of  Forest  Plantations  in  the  Philippines.  FAO.   Alaminos  City.  LGU  Ordinance  2006-­‐11   Alcazaren,  Paulo  G.   et.   al.   Quezon   City,   the   Rise   of   Asia’s   City   of   the   Future.   Local  Government   of  Quezon  City,  2010   Anda,   Alexander   and   Marlon   M.   Atienza.   November   2011.   Fiscal   Gap   and   Financing   Protected  Areas  in  the  Philippines.  EPSEEA  funded  study.  Draft  Report.     Anzorena,  Eduardo  Jorge,  S.J.,  Housing  the  Poor:  The  Asian  Experience,  2d  ed.  (Cebu  City:   The   Asian   Coalition   on   Housing   Rights,   1994);   Housing   the   Poor   in   the   New   Millennium   (Cebu   City:   Pagtambayayong-­‐-­‐A   Foundation   for   Mutual   Aid,   Inc.,   2004);   “The   Community   Mortgage  Program”,  Selavip  Newsletter  (April  2005)   Ancestral   Domain   Database   Information   System   (ADDIS)   accessed   through   the   NCIP   website  (http://addis.ncip.gov.ph/adis/public/default.aspx),  viewed  on  February  14,  2013   Ateneo   de   Manila   University.   2012.     FAA   118/119.   Assessment   of   Tropical   Forest   and   Biodiversity  Conservation  in  the  Philippines.    USAID/Manila.   Balisacan,   Arsenio.   “Raising   Living   Standards   of   the   Urban   Poor,”   in   A   Strategy   to   Fight   Poverty.   East   Asia   and   Pacific   Region:   The   World   Bank   Country   Operations   Division,   March   1996.   Bell,  Keith.  December,  2012.  Land  Governance.  Powerpoint  presentation.   BLGF.   Report   on   the   RPT   Collection   Performance   of   LGUs   (2010   and   2011);   and   Status   of   SMV  Updating.  (unpublished  reports).   BLGF  Report  on  compliance  with  DOF-­‐DILG  Joint  Circular  2010-­‐01.  (Unpublished  report)   CLUP  Now!  Undated.  Managing  our  land  resources  and  securing  our  future:  A  Briefer  on  the   National  Land  Use  and  Management  Act  (NLUMA).     CARP   Status   of   Land   Distribution   as   of   December   2011.   (http://www.dar.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=92&Itemid=161   Chemonics  International.  2011.    External  Evaluation  of  EcoGov  2  Project.    USAID,  Manila.   City  Ordinance  No.  10-­‐26  Revenue  Code  of  San  Carlos  City,  Negros  Oriental   Climate  Change  Commission.  National  Climate  Change  Action  Plan:  2011-­‐2028.   Commonwealth   Act   141.   Public   Land   Act   of   1936.   Chan   –   Robles   Virtual   Law   Library.   www.chanrobles.com     Commonwealth   Act   496.   Land   Registration   Act   of   1902.   Chan   –   Robles   Virtual   Law   Library.  www.chanrobles.com     Commonwealth   Act   2259.   Cadastral   Act   of   1913.   Chan   –   Robles   Virtual   Law   Library.   www.chanrobles.com   170 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report Comprehensive   Land   Use   Plan   and   Zoning   Ordinance   of   Dagupan   City,   Puerto   Princesa   City,   and  Quezon  City   Cruz,  Ma.  Concepcion,  et.al.  Population  Pressure  and  Migration:  Implications  for  Upland   Development  in  the  Philippines,  Journal  of  Philippine  Development,  1988,  Vol.  XV,  No.  1-­‐ b.   DAI.  2012.    CBNRM  Stock  Taking  in  the  Philippines.    USAID.   DAR   Administrative   Order   No.   02   series   of   2008   –   Guidelines   Governing   Lease   of   Lands   under   Agribusiness   Venture   Arrangements   (AVA)   in   Agrarian   Reform   Areas   and   the   Determination  of  Lease  Rental  Thereof.   DAR   Administrative   Order   No.   9   series   of   2006.   Revised   Rules   and   Regulations   Governing  Agribusiness  Venture  Arrangements  (AVAs)  in  Agrarian  Reform  Areas.   Deinenger,   Klaus;   Harris   Selod   and   Anthony   Burns.   2012.   The   Land   Governance   Assessment  Framework:  Identifying  and  Monitoring  Good  Practice  in  the  Land  Sector.   The  World  Bank.   De  la  Cruz,  Leland  Joseph  R.  2004.  Social  and  Institutional  Dynamics  of  Informal  Settler   Communities.    Philippine  Australia  LAMP.     De   los   Reyes,   Gil.   2013.   Land   titling/management   and   CARP   implementation.   A   power   point   presentation  to  Xavier  Science  Foundation  BOT,  February  8,  2013.   DENR,  2009.   Assessing  Progress  Towards  2010  Biodiversity  Target:  Fourth  National  Report  to   the  Convention  on  Biodiversity.  Republic  of  the  Philippines.   DENR.   2013.   Draft   policy   on   Forest   Certification   submitted   to   Policy   Technical   Working   Group.     DENR   Administrative   Order   No.2007-­‐09.   Systematic  Adjudication  Administrative  Order   Manual  of  Land  Disposition.   DENR  DAO  No.  16,  series  of  1992.  Addendum  to  DAO  42  which  provides  the  regulations   and   Guidelines   Governing   the   Establishment   and   Development   of   Industrial   Forest   Plantations.  April  20,  1992.   DENR  DAO  No.  24,  Series  of  1996.  Socialized  Industrial  Forest  Management  Program.     DENR   DAO   99-­‐53,   series   of   1999.   Regulations   Governing   the   Integrated   Forestry   Management  Agreement.  December  23,  1999.   DENR   Administrative   Order   No.   2000-­‐24.   Guidelines   for   the   Implementation   of   CY   2000   Banner   Program   –   Delineation   and   Establishment   of   Permanent   Forestland   Boundaries.   March  09,  2000.     DENR  Administrative  Order  No.  2008-­‐26.    Revised  Implementing  Rules  and  Regulations  of   Republic   Act   No.   7586   or   the   National   Integrated   Protected   Areas   System   Act   of   1992.   December  24,  2008.   DENR-­‐DILG   Joint   Memorandum   Circular   2003-­‐01.   Strengthening   and   Institutionalizing   the   DENR-­‐DILG-­‐LGU  Partnership  on  Devolved  and  Other  Forest  Management  Functions.   DENR/FASPO.  2011.    2011  Annual  Report:    DENR  Foreign-­‐Assisted  Projects.    DENR,  FASPO.   DENR-­‐NCIP   Joint   Administrative   Order   No.   2008-­‐01.   Guidelines   and   Procedures   for   the   Recognition,   Documentation,   Registration   and   Confirmation   of   all   Sustainable   Traditional   and   Indigenous   Forest   Resources   Management   Systems   and   Practices   (STIFRMSP)   of   171 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report Indigenous  Cultural  Communities  or  Indigenous  Peoples  in  Ancestral  Domain/Land.  July  8,   2008.     DENR/RBCO.     DENR/RBCO’s   current   efforts   for   the   development   of   master   plans   for   18   river  basins.  (unpublished  report)   DPWH  Land  Acquisition  Resettlement  Rehabilitation  &  Indigenous  Peoples  Policy  (3rd  Ed.   2007)   EcoGov  1  Report.    Development  Alternatives,  Inc.  Mindanao  forest  cover  mapping.  EcoGov  1   Technical  Report.   EcoGov   1.   2004.     Audit   report   of   Smartwood   on   the   forest   certification   of   NFEFI   CBFMA   holder.   EcoGov2   –   Development   Alternatives,   Inc.   Guidelines   for   Sustainable   Forest   Land   Use   Planning.     Eleazar,   Floradema,   2011.   Assessment   of   ENR   Performance   (2005-­‐2010),   and   DENR   Medium  Term  Expenditure  Program  (2010-­‐2016),  DBM-­‐IDF/WB  Study.   ENRMP/GEF   Project.   2012.     Draft   policy   for   the   adoption   of   IEM   as   a   strategy   under   PDP   2011-­‐2016   and   ongoing   piloting   of   IEM   framework   preparation   in   watershed-­‐ecosystems.   (unpublished  report).   ENRMP/GEF  Project.  2013.    Proceedings  of  the  DENR-­‐LGU-­‐NCIP  Workshop  on  IPRA   implementation.  (unpublished  report).   Executive  Order  226.  The  Omnibus  Investments  Code  of  1987.  June  16,  1987.   Executive  Order  263.  Adopting  Community  based  Forest  Management  as  the  National   Strategy  to  Ensure  the  Sustainable  Development  of  the  Country’s  Forestlands  Resources  and   Providing  Mechanisms  for  its  Implementation.  July  19,  1995.     Executive  Order  23.  Declaring  a  Moratorium  on  the  Cutting  and  Harvesting  of  Timber  in  the   Natural  and  Residual  Forests  and  Creating  the  Anti-­‐Illegal  Logging  Task  Force.  February  1,   2011.     Executive   Order   1035.   Providing   the   Procedures   and   Guidelines   for   the   Expeditious   Acquisition   by   the   Government   of   Private   Real   Properties   or   Rights   Thereon   for   Infrastructure  and  other  Government  Development  Projects.  June  25,  1985.     Executive  Order  209.  The  Philippine  Family  Code  of  the  Philippines.  July  6,  1987.     Fernando,   Edwino   S.,   Leonardo   L.   Co,   Daniel   A.   lagunzad,   Wiliam   SM   Gruezon,   Julie   F.   Barcelona,   Domingo   A.   Madulid,   Aida   B.   lapis,   Gregorio   I.   Texon,   Antonio   C.   manila   and   Presciliano   M.   Zamora.   Threatened   Plants   of   the   Philippines.   A   Preliminary   Assessment.   www.pawb.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc...   FMB  Annual  Report.  2012.  Status  of  NGP  Implementation  in  power  point.    NLBI  Workshop.     Fersal  Hotel.  2013.   FMB   Annual   Report   for   2012.     Power   point   presentation   during   the   NLBI   Workshop   at   Fersal  Hotel.  2013.   Forest  Management  Bureau.  2011.    Philippine  Forestry  Statistics   Fuwa,  Nobuhiko,  2000.  Politics  and  Economics  of  Land  Reform  in  the  Philippines:  A   Survey.  A  background  paper  prepared  for  a  World  Bank  Study,  Dynamism  of  Rural  Sector   172 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report Growth:  Policy  Lessons  from  East  Asian  Countries.  (http://www.h.chiba-­‐ u.ac.jp/mkt/LANDREF.pdf.)   Garcia,  Brian  S.  January  2013.  Land  Tenure  Typology,  LGAF  Philippines  Country  Study.   World  Bank  -­‐  Land  Equity  Technology  Services,  Inc.   GEF.     2008.     GEF   Country   Portfolio   Evaluation:     The   Philippines   (1992-­‐2008).     Evaluation   Report  No.  36.  GEF,  Washington,  D.C.   Genzola,   Ma.   Cecilia   M.   2003.   Squatting   Syndicates  :   From   the   Viewpoint   of   Informal   Settlers.  Philippine-­‐Australia  LAMP  Research  Grants.     GIZ.  2011.  Drivers  of  Deforestation  and  Degradation.     GIZ.   October   2012.   Sustainable   Integrated   Management   and   Planning   for   Local   Government  Ecosystems  (SIMPLE).     GIZ.   2012.   Socioeconomic   Baseline   for   the   REDD+   Project   Sites   in   Southern   Leyte,   Philippines.  November  2011.   Greenberg,  Lawrence,  1987.  A  Case  Study  of  a  Successful    Anti-­‐Insurgency  Operation    in   the  Philippines,  1946-­‐1955.   (http://www.history.army.mil/books/coldwar/huk/ch1.htm).    Analysis  Branch    U.S.  Army   Center  of  Military  History    Washington,  D.C.,  1987.   Guiang  E  and  F  Esguerra.    2008.  Devolved  and  Decentralized  Forest  Management  in  the   Philippines:     Triggers   and   Constraints   in   Investments.   In   Lessons   from   Forest   Decentralization:  Money,  Justice  and  the  Quest  for  Good  Governance  in  Asia-­‐Pacific.  CIFOR,   2008.   Guiang,  E.  S.  and  Castillo.  2006.    Assessment  of  Tenure  Holders  in  Forest  Lands.    EcoGov   2  Project  Reports.   Hagman,  Donald  and  Dean  Misczynski.   Windfalls  for  Wipeouts:  Land  Value  Capture  and   Compensation,  (American  Society  of  Planning  Officials,  1978).   House   Bill   6545:   An   Act   Instituting   a   National   Land   Use   and   Management   Policy.   Working   Draft.   House  Bill  3533:  National  Land  Use  Act  of  the  Philippines    (15th  Congress  2013)   Housing   and   Land   Use   Regulatory   Board   Administrative   Order   No.   2   (May   17,   2004)   Schedule  of  Fees   Joint  DAR-­‐DENR-­‐LRA-­‐NCIP  Administrative  Order  01-­‐12.  January  25,  2012.     LAMP2  Gender  Mainstreaming  Guidebook.  December  2009.   LAMP   1   and   LAMP   2.     Tax   Compliance   and   SMV   Studies   Conducted   for   Naga,   Mandaue,   Bayawan,  Legazpi    (2008-­‐2012);  unpublished  powerpoint  presentations.   LAMP   2.     Study   on   the   Cost   and   Time   to   Secure   and   Issue   Free   Patent   Titles   under   LAMP2  and  DENR-­‐CARP  funded  Titling  Procedures.  June  2010.       LAMP2.   Study   on   Cost   and   Time   to   Issue   Titles   Under   Systematic   and   Sporadic   land   Titling   Procedures.   Research   Grant   undertaken   by   Alicia   Balagapo,    Gabino   P.   Petilos,   Ph.D.,  Manuel  R.  Espina,  Ed.D.,  Malaquias  A.  Conde,  Ph.D.,  Marcial  M.  Monge,  D.M.,  Leonardo   G.  Oñate,  Ed.  D.    Leyte  Normal  University,  August  2008.     LAMP   2.     Study   on   the   Cost   and   Time   to   Secure   and   Issue   Free   Patent   Titles   under   173 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report LAMP2  and  DENR-­‐CARP  funded  Titling  Procedures,  June  2010.       LAMP  2.  OSS  Independent  Monitor  Report.  2009.     LAMP2.  Study  on  Registration  of  Subsequent  Land  Transactions.  June  2010.   LAMP2.   2007.   Land   Equity   International.   Review   of   National   and   Local   Land   Related   Taxes  and  Fees.     Lasco.   Rodel   D.,   Rizza   Karen   A.   Veridiano,   Marie   habito   and   Florencia   B.   Pulhin.     Reducing   Emissions   from   Deforestation   and   Forest   Degradation   in   the   Philippines:   Will   it   make   a   Difference   in   Financing   Forest   Development?   in   Mitig   Adap   Strategy   Global   Change.   DOI   10.1007/s11027-­‐012-­‐9411-­‐5.  22  July  2012  #  Springer  Science+Business  Media  B.V.  2012.     Legazpi  City,  Albay.  DRRMCCA  Plans.     Llanto,   Gilbert   M.,   Marife   M.   Ballesteros,   and   Aniceto   C.   Orbeta.  “Policy  Study  on  Access  to   Land  Information.”  Philippine-­‐Australia  Land  Administration  Project.    January  2005.   LMB   Consolidated   Land   Sector   Statistical   Report   as   of   December   31,   2011.   (http://www.lmb.gov.ph),  viewed  February  11,  2013       Lopez,  Salvador  P.    “Quezon  City:    Cinderella  Capital  of  the  Philippines”.   Philippine  Planning   Journal,  Vol.  IV,  No.  2,  April  1973  &  Vol.  V,  Nos.  1  &  2,  October  1973  –  April  1974,  9-­‐13.   NEDA.  2010.  Philippine  Development  Plan:  2010-­‐2016.   NCIP   Administrative   Order   No.   3,   series   of   2012.   The   revised   guidelines   on   free   and   Prior   Informed  Consent  (FPIC)  and  related  processes  of  2012.  April  13,  2012.   NCIP  15th  Year  Anniversary  of  IPRA  Press  Kit,  October  30,  2012   National  Tax  Research  Center.  Revenue  Performance  of  Local  Governments  CYs  2003-­‐2007   (January  5,  2009).  Unpublished  report.   NRMP   2   and   EcoGov1   Reports   on   Developing   C&I   for   certifying   CBFM   holders   under   the   FSC-­‐Smartwood  Forest  Certification  System.  (unpublished  report)   Official  Gazette.  DENR  Completes  Delineation  of  Forest  Line  Boundaries.  Press  Release  from   DENR  dated  August  23,  2012.     PAWB   and   Ateneo   de   Manila   University.   2012.     Communities   in   Nature:     State   of   the   Protected  Areas  Management  in  the  Philippines.   PAWB-­‐NewCAPP.   Proceedings   of   the   Technical   Workshop   on   LGU   experiences   in   FLUP   preparation.  February  2012.  (unpublished  report)   Philippine-­‐Australia  Land  Administration  and  Management  Project  (PA-­‐LAMP).  2002.   Land   Tenure  Study.   Philippine   Australia   Land   Administration   and   Management   Project.   Institutional   Arrangements  Policy  Study.  July  2002.   Philippine  –  Australia  Land  Administration  and  Management  Project.   Land   Tenure   Study.   2004   Philippine  Constitution  of  1987.   Philippines   REDD+   Strategy   Team   (spearheaded   by   DENR,   FMB   and   CodeREDD   Philippines).  The  Philippine  National  REDD  –  plus  Strategy.   174 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report Philippines.   Urban   Population.   http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/philippines/urban-­‐ population   Presidential   Decree   892.   Discontinuance   of   the   Spanish   Mortgage   System   of   Registration   and  of  the  Use  of  Spanish  Titles  as  Evidence  in  Land  Registration  Proceedings.  The  LawPhil   Project,  Philippine  Law  and  Jurisprudence  Databank.  www.lawphil.net   Presidential  Decree  464.  Enacting  a  Real  Property  Tax  Code.  June  1,  1974.   Presidential   Decree   1812.   Amending   Presidential   Decree   No.   464,   As   Amended,   Otherwise   Known   as   the   Real   Property   Tax   Code,   by   Granting   Special   Authority   to   the   President,   to   Provide   Flexibility   in   the   Real   Property   Tax   System   to   Meet   Economic   Exigencies   and/or   Promote  the    General  Welfare.    January  16,  1981.     Presidential  Decree  705.  Revised  Forestry  Code.  May  19,  1975.     Presidential   Decree   1096.   Building   Code   of   the   Philippines   and   Implementing   Rules   and   Regulations.  2005  edition.   Presidential  Decree  1151.  Philippine  Environmental  Policy.  June  6,  1977.   Presidential   Decree   1508   (repealed   by   Republic   Act   7160).   Establishing   a   System   of   Amicably  Settling  Disputes  at  the  Barangay  Level.  June  11,  1978.     Presidential   Decree   1529.   Property   Registration   Decree,   1978.   Chan   –   Robles   Virtual   Law   Library.  www.chanrobles.com   Presidential  Decree  1533.  Establishing  a  Uniform  Basis  for  Determining  Just  Compensation   and  the  Amount  of  Deposit  for  Immediate  Possession  of  the  Property  Involved  in  Eminent   Domain  Proceedings.  June  11,  1978   Presidential   Decree   1586.   Establishing   an   Environmental   Impact   Statement   System,   including  other  environmental  management  related  measures  and  for  other  purposes.  June   11,  1978.   Ramos,   Norman   R.     “Urban   Land   Development   Trends   in   the   Philippines”.   Philippine   Planning  Journal,  Vol.  XXVII,  No.  2,  April  1996,  13-­‐26.   Ravanera  R.  and  V.  Gorra.  Commercial  pressures  on  land  in  Asia:  An  overview.  International   Land  Coalition  with  IFAD  and  CIRAD.  2011.   Rebullida,   Ma.   Lourdes,  et.  al.  Housing  the  Urban  Poor,  Policies,  Approaches,  Issues.   UPCIDS,   1999   Rebullida,  Ma.  Lourdes.  Local  Government  Originated  CMP,  PBSP,  1998   Republic  Act  2000.  The  Limited  Access  Highway  Act.  June  22,  1957.   Republic  Act  386.  An  Act  to  Ordain  and  Institute  the  Civil  Code  of  the  Philippines.  June  18,   1949.   Republic   Act   No.   4726.   An   Act   to   Define   Condominium,   Establish   Requirements   for   its   Creation  and  Government  of  its  Incidents.    June  18,  1966.   Republic  Act  6389.  An  Act  Amending  Republic  Act  3844,  As  Amended,  Otherwise  Known  as   the  Agricultural  Land  Reform  Code,  and  for  Other  Purposes.  September  10,  1971.   Republic   Act   6657.   An   Act   Instituting   a   Comprehensive   Agrarian   Reform   Program   to   Promote   Social   Justice   and   Industrialization,   Providing   the   Mechanism   for   its   175 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report Implementation,   and   for   other   Purposes.   June   10,   1988.   (http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1988/ra_6657_1988.html)     Republic  Act  7160.  An  Act  Providing  for  a  Local  Government  Code  of  1991.     Republic  Act  7192.  An  Act  Promoting  the  Integration  of  Women  as  Full  and  Equal  Partners   of  Men  in  Development  and  Nation  Building  and  for  Other  Purposes.  February  12,  1992.     (http://www.coa.gov.ph/gad/downloads/RA_Circular/RA_7192.pdf)     Republic   Act   No.   7279.   An   Act   to   Provide   for   a   Comprehensive   and   Continuing   Urban   Development   and   Housing   Program,   Establish   the   Mechanism   for   its   Implementation,   and   for   other   Purposes.   March   24,   1992.   (http://www.chanrobles.com/republicactno7279.htm#.USiAf6XBudc)     Republic   Act   7586.     An   Act   Providing   for   the   Establishment   and   Management   of   National   System   of   National   Integrated  Protected  Areas  System,  Defining  Its   Scope   and   Coverage   and   for  Other  Purposes.     Republic   Act   7916.   An   Act   Providing   for   the   Legal   Framework   and   Mechanisms   for   the   Creation,   Operation,   Administration,   and   Coordination   of   Special   Economic   Zones   in   the   Philippines,  Creating  for  this  Purpose  the  Philippine  Economic  Zone  Authority  (PEZA),  and   for  other  Purposes.  February  24,  1995.       Republic  Act  No.  9367.  An  Act  to  Direct  the  Use  of  Biofuels,  Establishing  for  this  Purpose  the   Biofuel  Program,  Appropriating  Funds  Therefor,  and  for  Other  Purposes.  January  12,  2007.   Republic   Act   8371.   An   Act   to   Recognize,   Protect   and   Promote   the   Rights   of   Indigenous   Cultural  Communities/Indigenous  Peoples,  Creating  a  National  Commission  on  Indigenous   Peoples,   Establishing   Implementing   Mechanisms,   Appropriating   Funds   Therefor,   and   for   Other  Purposes.  October  29,  1997.   Republic  Act  8424.  Tax  Reform  Act  of  1997.  An  Act  Amending  the  National  Internal  Revenue   Code,  as  Amended,  and  for  other  Purposes.     Republic  Act  8974.  An  Act  to  Facilitate  the  Acquisition  of  Right-­‐of  Way,  Site  or  Location  for   National  Government  Infrastructure  Projects  and  for  Other  Purposes.  November  7,  2000.     Republic  Act  9136.  An  Act  Ordaining  Reforms  in  the  Electric  Power  Industry,  Amending  for   the  Purpose  Certain  Laws  and  for  Other  Purposes.  July  2011.   Republic   Act   9341.   An   Act   Establishing   Reforms   in   the   Regulation   of   Rent   of   Certain   Residential  Units,  Providing  the  Mechanisms  Therefor  and  for  other  Purposes   Republic   Act   9700.   An   Act   Strengthening   the   Comprehensive   Agrarian   Reform   Program   (CARP),   Extending   the   Acquisition   and   Distribution   of   all   Agricultural   Lands,   Instituting   Necessary  Reforms,  Amending  for  the  Purpose  Certain  Provisions  of  Republic  Act  No.    6657,   Otherwise   Known   as   the   Comprehensive   Agrarian   Reform   Law   of   1988,   as   Amended,   and   Appropriating  Funds  Therefor.  August  7,  2009.     Republic  Act  10023.  An  Act  Authorizing  the  Issuance  of  Free  Patents  to  Residential  Lands.   July  27,  2009.     Republic   Act   9514.     An   Act   Establishing   a   Comprehensive   Fire   Code   of   the   Philippines,   Repealing  Presidential  Decree  No.  1185  and  for  Other  Purposes.  December  19,  2008.     San  Carlos  City  Ordinance  No.  198  series  of  1998   176 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report Senate   Bill   No.   3091  (In  substitution  of  SBN  109,  141,  647,  1369  and  2673):  An   Act   Instituting   a  National  Land  Use  Policy.  Working  draft  (as  of  January  21,  2013).   Serote,   Ernesto   M.   Financing   Local   Development   through   Special   Assessments.   Philippine  Planning  Journal,  Vol.  VIII,  No.  2,  April  1977,  42-­‐49.   Serote,   Ernesto   M.     Measuring   the   Conversion   of   Lands   to   Urban   Uses   in   the   Philippines:   Residential   Subdivision   Development   as   Surrogate   Data.   Philippine   Planning  Journal,  Vol.  XIX,  Nos.  1  &  2,  October  1987  –  April  1988,  7-­‐15.   Tesoro,  F.  and  Angeles  L.  2010.    Creating  space  for  private  sector  financing  in  forestry  – removing   constraints   to   investments   in   the   Philippines.     In   Growing   Green   Assets:     Removing  constraints  to  private  sector  investment  in  forestry  in  Asia  and  the  Pacific.  FAO.   Bangkok.  2010.   Veneracion,  Cynthia  C.  Partnerships  for  Slum  Improvement,  IPC-­‐AdMU,  2004   Veneracion,   Cynthia   C.   Capability   Building   for   Slum   Upgrading,   Views   from   Five   Communities  in  Quezon  City.  IPC-­‐AdMU,  2008   Xavier   Science   Foundation.   Facing   Goliath:   A   municipality   takes   on   the   race   for   land   in   Quezon,  Bukidnon.  Lok  Niti,  Volume  18/1.  2012.   Yap,   David   Leonides   T.;   Tarita   L.   Ledesma;   and   Myla   A.   Cruz.   2003.   Four   Presidents   and   the   Quest   for   Land   Ownership:   Formal   and   Informal   Land   Acquisition   Processes   in   Riverside  Barangay  Santolan,  Pasig  City.  Philippine-­‐Australia  LAMP  Research  Grants.       Persons  Interviewed   Engr.  Aurora  C.  Ciego,  City  Planning  and  Dev’t  Coordinator,  CPDO  Caloocan  City   Mr.  Jonathan  De  la  Cruz,  Planning  Officer  III,  CPDO  Caloocan  City   Mr.  Rodolfo  D.  Reyes,  Project  Dev’t  Officer,  CPDO  Manila   Ms.   Beatrice   Gay   D.   Fenomeno,   Housing   and   Homesite   Regulation   Officer   II,   Urban   Settlement    Office.  Manila.   Engr.     Christopher   B.   Jacinto,   Office   of   Building   Official   (OBO)   and   Municipal   Engineer,   Municipality  of  Piddig,  Ilocos  Norte   Engr.  Venonie  V.  Coloma,  OBO  of  the  Municipality  of  San  Nicolas,  Ilocos  Norte   Engr.  Marlon  Transpadillo,  OBO  and  City  Engineer  of  San  Carlos  City,  Negros  Occidental   Engr.  Antonio  S.  Aguilar,  OBO  and  OIC  City  Engineer  of  Bayawan  City,  Negros  Oriental   Eng.    Francis  Pacaigue,  OBO  and  OIC  City  Engineer  of  Tayabas  City,  Quezon   Mr.   Pancho   Villasis,   City   Planning   and   Development   Coordinator,   Bayawan   City,   Negros   Oriental   Mr.  Jonathan  P.  Badel,  SFO4,  Bureau  of  Fire  Protection  San  Carlos  City,  Negros  Occidental   Ms.  Prescila  Galicia,    Zoning  Officer,  City  Planning  and  Development  Office,  Legazpi  City   Mr.  Roderick  Ante,  Applicant  building  permit  for  Residential.    Barangay  17,  Legazpi  City.           Mr.   Rodolfo   D.   Reyes,   Project   Development   Officer   V,   City   Planning   and   Development   Office,   Manila   177 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report Jerry  Pacturan,  Undersecretary  for  Support  Services,  DAR   Ruel  Limbo,  Secretariat,  TWG,  Agribusiness  Venture  Agreements,  DAR   Mariz  Agbon,  President,  Philippine  Agricultural  Development  and  Commercial  Corporation   Eliza  Pabillore,  Provincial  Director,  Department  of  Trade  and  Industry,  Misamis  Oriental   Lourdes  Ellen  Kionisala,  Head,  Board  of  Investments,  Cagayan  de  Oro  City   Jose  Reyes,  Division  Chief,  Forest  Resources  Conservation,  DENR  Region  10       Enrique  Tuquib,  Forester,  Regional  CBFM  Division,  DENR  Region  10   Ranoray  Love  Noro,  PAWCZMS,  DENR  Region  10   Engr.   Chona   B.   Labaon,   MPA,   Chief   of   Technical   Services   Management   Division,   National   Commission  on  Indigenous  Peoples,     Interviews  of  Register  of  Deeds  and  Records  Officers  of  2  City  RoD  (Legazpi  City,  Albay  and   San  Carlos  City,  Negros  Occidental)  and  2  Provincial  RoD  (Ilocos  Norte  and  Negros  Oriental)   Interviews  with  RoD  staff,  20  clients  from  Tacloban  City,  Legazpi  City,  Bayawan  City,  San   Carlos  City,  Laoag  City,  and  Dumaguete  City.   Interviews  with  Local  Assessors  and  Treasurers  from  Legazpi  City,  San  Carlos  City,  Bayawan   City,  and  Ilocos  Norte.     Tacloban  City  RTC,  Bayawan  City  RTC,  Laoag  City  RTC,  Legazpi  City  RTC,  and  San  Carlos  City   RTC.     Websites   Website  of  the  Bureau  of  Local  Government  Finance.  www.blgf.gov.ph   Website  of  the  Department  of  Agricultures.  www.da.gov.ph   Website  of  the  Department  of  Agrarian  Reform.  www.dar.gov.ph   Website  of  the  Department  of  Environment  and  Natural  Resources.  www.denr.gov.ph   Website  of  the  Department  of  Finance.  www.dof.gov.ph   Website  of  the  Forest  Management  Bureau.  www.fmb.gov.ph   Website  of  the  Land  Management  Bureau.  www.lmb.gov.ph   Website  of  the  Land  Registration  Authority.  www.lra.gov.ph   Website  of  the  National  Mapping  and  Resource  Information  Authority.  www.namria.gov.ph   Website  of  the  National  Commission  on  Indigenous  Peoples.  www.ncip.gov.ph   Website  of  the  Philippine  Senate  http://www.senate.gov.ph/     Website   of   the   Philippine   Congresshttp://www.congress.gov.ph/download/15th/houserules.revised.pdf   1987  Philippine  Constitution  (http://www.lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html)   Republic  Act  6657  (http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1988/ra_6657_1988.html)     Republic  Act  7279  (http://www.chanrobles.com/republicactno7279.htm#.USiAf6XBudc)     178 Philippines LGAF Revised Draft Report Republic  Act  7192  (http://www.coa.gov.ph/gad/downloads/RA_Circular/RA_7192.pdf)     Republic  Act  9710  (http://pcw.gov.ph/law/republic-­‐act-­‐9710)   Republic  Act  8371  (http://www.chanrobles.com/republicactno8371.htm#.USiBLKXBudc)   http://baseswiki.org/en/Barangay_Justice_System_(BJS),_Philippines     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katarungang_Pambarangay   Supreme  Court  Administrative  Circular  14-­‐93;   http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/rulesofcourt/RULES%20OF%20COURT.htm#rule_4   Supreme  Court  of  the  Philippines   (http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/court%20issuances/rules/index.php)     http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/decisions.php   PAKISAMA.  www.pakisama.         179