world bank documentdocuments.worldbank.org/curated/en/943921468762952903/pdf/multi-page.pdf ·...

1I7 9cS4Sore I q(o

Local EnvironmentalAction in Metro Manila

Models of Community Governance

Prepared by theMetropolitan Environmental Improvement Programin Metro Manila

Metropolitan Environmental Improvement ProgramEnvironment and Natural Resources Division, Asia Technical Dept.The World Bank, 1818 H Street, NW, Washington, DC 20433 USATel. (202) 458-2726, Fax. (202) 522-1664

MEIP-Manila -

.. ......... | uDepartment of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR)PJ c I D Visayas Avenue, Diliman, Quezon City, Metro Manila, the PhilippinesM E I t Tel. (63-2) 928-2965, Fax. (63-2) 928-2965

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Local Environmental Action in Metro ManilaModels for Community Governance

INTRODUCTION

The Metropolitan Environmental Improvement Program (I,EIP) was established by theWorld Bank and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in 1989. Its missionis to help selected metropolitan regions in Asia develop and implement appropriate andworkable solutions to rapidly increasing environmental problems in these areas. MEIPbelieves that solutions to these problems begin when concerned sectors understand theproblems and their solutions. These sectors are in turn the foundation for the development ofcommunity governance over environment, where processes and solutions arrived at arelocally based and sustainable.

In 1990, five national governments including the Philippines endorsed the Program. MetroManila, the country's National Capital Region, became an MEIP city, and a national programcoordinating office was established in late 1991 and located within the national government'sDepartment of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). MEIP Manila is managedthrough a multisectoral/interagency Steering Committee that is composed of representativesfrom seven national government agencies, two regional government units, two industryrepresentatives, and two NGO representatives. The day-to-day implementation of theProgram itself is managed through a National Program Coordinator chosen by the DENRwith concurrence of the World Bank.

Metro Manila is an excellent venue for the implementation of MEIP because it presents amagnified study of the environmental and developmental issues and priorities that effecturban environments in the developing world. Metro Manila is a study of contrasts. It has anarea of only 636 square kilometers or 1 percent of the country's total land area, and yet it ishost to some 9 million or roughly 12 percent of the country's population.

The recent resurgence of the economy has made Metro Manila a metropolis of glitteringhigh-rise and impressive shopping mall development, and yet nearly a third of its populationstill lives in slum conditions. The metropolis generates some 6,300 tons of solid waste daily,and yet only has two sanitary landfills in nearby provinces that can only take just over halfthat amount.

Metro Manila also has over one million registered motor vehicles. It is home to over 50percent of the country's large industries, leading to exceedance of World HealthOrganization (WHO) ambient air standards. Yet, vehicular emissions control and monitoringsystems are rudimentary at best. Furthermore, Metro Manila is recognized as one of the

MODELS OF COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE 3

world's megacities, and yet less than 15 percent of the metropolis is served by a primarysewerage system.

Clearly, Metro Manila must make considerable investments in funds and effort in order tobring environmental problems under control. Yet, the limited funds of its constituent citiesand towns generated from taxes and other revenue initiatives must also pay for other basicservices such as health, education, local infrastructure, and peace and order. The NationalGovernment is hard pressed to provide all the necessary funding. With funds frominternational funding agencies and subsidies from the National Government taken intoconsideration, total available resources are still insufficient to finance the investmentsrequired.

However, environmental enhancement programs and initiatives need not be financed bygovernment budgets or international assistance alone. The experience of MEIP in MetroManila and nearby areas shows that there is a myriad of resources. Communities, privatecorporations, industry associations, NGOs, public organizations and other groups canconsolidate their resources and ban together to improve the urban environment. Harnessingsuch resources not only reduces the strain on government's financial burden, but enhancesthe delivery of environmental programs and projects.

The following programs and projects undertaken together with the full support of the DENRas well as various local governments, NGOs and private sector groups lend substance tothese observations. Although not all were originally initiated by MEIP-Manila, all of themhave been successfully replicated elsewhere in Metro Manila and the rest of the countrythrough the catalytic efforts of MEIP and the DENR.

4 LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION IN METRO MANILA

COMMUNITY-BASED ENVIRONMENTAL INITIATIVES

Ecological Waste Management, Boon to Local Government Units

With solid waste management under the jurisdiction of local government units as providedfor under the Philippine Local Government Code, communities all over the country havesought ways and means of developing environmentally acceptable solid waste managementschemes that are also economically feasible and sustainable. Zero waste management, whichwas first espoused in 1972 by the Recycling Movement of the Philippines, has offeredcommunities the opportunity to unite environment and economics in a low-technologysolution for the management of solid waste.

MEIP-Manila saw an opportunity in the zero waste management approach to work with lowcost, low technology and local alternatives to expensive and often controversial means ofsolid waste disposal. MEIP-Manila national program coordinator, Bebet Gozun, coined theterm Ecological Waste Management in order to encompass other aspects of anenvironmentally sound management system as society slowly learns and moves toward thezero-waste ideal.

In Ecological Waste Management, the tenets of waste reduction -- waste segregation,composting, recycling and re-use -- address the basic reasons behind excessive wastegeneration, improper waste management, and the spread of disease. It provides income-generating opportunities for farnilies and communities, and reducing waste management costsfor local governments. It also promotes more efficient collection systems and the properdisposal of currently non-recyclable residuals through sanitary landfills and bioremediation.

Waste reduction addresses excessive waste generation. Waste segregation prepares solidwaste at the source for renewed usefulness as compost or animal feeds for the biodegradablecomponents and as recyclables and reused riaterials. Composting returns organic wastesback to their original source--the earth, instead of providing a breeding ground for diseasevectors. The resulting organic fertilizer also helps new life spring from the earth, whilehelping rehabilitate soil exhausted from years of chemical fertilizer use. Recycling returnsinorganic materials back to factories where they find new lives in new products, or are re-used repeatedly for the same purpose.

Composting and recycling means additional income generation from what is normallyconsidered as "waste." This income helps make ecological waste management attractive tocommunities and thus, sustainable as a waste management scheme. The reduced volume of


waste, on the other hand, saves money for national and local governments, as well ascommunities. The money would otherwise have gone for payment of proper collection anddisposal of larger volumes of solid waste.

Although Ecological Waste Management was already being practiced countrywide in manysmall communities with the support of environmental NGOs, the larger scale practice of thesystem emerged in two municipalities some 50 kilometers north of Metro Manila -- Bustosand Sta Maria, both in Bulacan Province. Although situated in one of the rice granaries ofthe Philippines, these communities are beginning to feel the sprawl of its giant urban neighborto the South, with the dispersion of industries and housing developments.

The Bustos experience emphasizes the house-to-house approach to Ecological WasteManagement. With the cooperation of the Recycling Movement of the Philippines and local-based NGOs and the strong support of the local government unit, each household in Bustosreceived training how to segregate its waste. It was definitely a help that the mayor ofBustos, Pablito Mendoza, and his wife are both physicians. Beyond this, however, they alsodid not want to use too much land in Bustos for a landfill, because Bustos has a rather smallland area with 30,000 people.

In Bustos, the compost from the small-scale backyard systems is applied to household andcommunity gardens. Recyclables, on the other hand, are collected in community collectioncenters, one center per barangay (Tagalog term for "local community" or the smallestpolitical unit in the country). Junk dealers or recyclers from the Metro Manila area pick upthe recyclables from the center on a regular basis.

The mayor of Bustos together with the NGOs also established an Ecology Training Center.This Center showcases the achievements of the town as well as serves as a training venue forhandicrafts made from recycled materials. The town's residents do a brisk trade in sellingstraw hats made, Christmas decorations, handmade paper and other fine crafts using recycledplastic drinking straws, cartons and paper.

Population 40,609Area 4,750 ha.Waste Generation 150 tons/monthNo. of Barangays 14Participating Barangays 100%

Sta Maria, on the other hand, was a cooperation between business, the community, and thelocal government. The Vice Governor of Bulacan and the mayor of Sta Maria becameconcerned about their growing solid waste problem in Sta. Maria. The urban sprawl ofMetro Manila was beginning to effect the town, and in no time at all, the solid waste problem


would overrun Sta Maria without proper solid waste management. Furthermore, theneighboring town of Marilao, where they were dumping their waste, was no longer willing toaccept Sta Maria's garbage. Yet, within Sta. Maria, no one was willing to sell land to thelocal government for garbage disposal usage. Sta Maria was therefore in a bind.

Becoming AWARE of Wastes Worth

With the help of a townmate now residing in the United States, Mr. Louie Vargas, efforts inSta. Maria began in earnest. First, Mr. Vargas attended a zero waste management seminarand learned about composting. He also touched base with the Department of Science andTechnology (DOST) in order to know more about waste management systems. Togetherwith the local government officials and the Santa Maria Economic Development Foundation,they realized that as much as forty percent of the town's waste was being generated by theSta. Maria Public Market and the communities in its immediate vicinity; and, that compostingcould be an answer to this problem. The market was therefore the logical first target forecological waste management. Mr. Louie Vargas established the Assorted WasteAdministration and Recycling Enterprises (AWARE), which hired experts to develop detailedproduction and marketing plans for market waste-based compost. AWARE also invested inthe project.

After much public consultation to address the social acceptability issue, the local governmentidentified and acquired a site not only for disposal, but also for the composting plant. Sta.Maria also provided a loan of P500,000 interest-free to AWARE, with a payment period often years. The local government saw that this was a better use of its funds since it showedthe promise of self-liquidation, instead of the continuing expense of collecting and dumpingthe town's solid waste.

The Santa Maria Economic Foundation together with the Recycling Movement of thePhilippines then undertook an information, education and communication campaign to informand educate the vendors and the market personnel about proper waste segregation.

The composting plant has been operational for the past two years. Biodegradable wastes aresegregated by the market vendors, collected in push carts by the market personnel, and thenshredded mechanically on the premises in order to reduce the total volume of waste andfacilitate decomposition. These are then picked-up in trucks by the local government anddelivered to the composting plant. The plant now processes some four tons of organics dailyplus other wastes from nearby farms such as animal manure and burned rice husks. The plantproduces some 2,400 50-kilo sacks of organic fertilizer called "Kalikasan" (Tagalog for"nature") The sacks sell for P155/kilo, mainly to farmers in nearby provinces and to theDepartment of Agriculture. Production cost is about P85 per sack, which means that Sta.Maria and AWARE are able to realize a profit of P70 per sack, from what is basicallygarbage. Thus, there is proof that waste makes money.


Ta;:: N.... .. ..

PaPoulation 1 10,000Area 8,775 ha.Waste Generation 20 tons/dayPercentage of Waste under Ecological 40%iWaste Management__________Recover 50%Daily Production (including manure, 4 tons/dayrice husks and additives)Production Cost P75/50 kl. bagSelling Price P155/50 kl. Bag

Paco Gets a Clean, Green Market

The Pasig River is the main river system of the metropolis. The Paco Estuary, a tributary ofthe Pasig River, is one of the most polluted in the heart of the City of Manila. Located alongits banks are the Paco Public Market and Unilever-PRC. The latter is the localmanufacturing plant of one of the world's largest food processing multinationals formerlyknown as Philippine Refining Company. Low and lower-middle income families, as well assquatter communities live along the banks of the estuary in the highly populated area betweenthe market and industry.

In 1993, three persons from that area died, allegedly due to the ingestion of dirty estuarywvater. Unilever-PRC was accused of indirectly causing these deaths by polluting the estuary.The City Council of Manila even conducted a formal investigation of the charges against

Unilever-PRC. Justifiably proud of its adherence to ISO standards for product and processquality, Unilever-PRC commissioned the Foundation for Ecological Development Studies(FEDS), an NGO from the respected University of the Philippines (UIP), to conduct a studyof the water quality of the estuary. The study eventually determnined that the principal sourceof the organic pollution of the Paco Estuary was actually the Paco Public Market and thesurrounding communities. It was at this point that FEDS invited MEIP for support, knowingthat it has acquired considerable experience in community-based environmental initiatives.

The results of the study were presented in a workshop that included the Paco marketvendors, street hawkers, the community residents, the market administration, city andbarangay officials, and representatives of the then Metro Manila Authority and the DENR.Initially, everyone pointed a finger at each other as the culprit, but all eventually realized thatif the market was to survive as a viable enterprise, then everyone had to participate incleaning up the mess. The workshop ended with an agreement among these variousstakeholders that they indeed have a solid waste management problem, and that they should


all work together to solve it. A newly created ad hoc committee coordinated the initialphases of project planning and implementation.

Representatives of the City of Manila, the barangay leadership, a national government agency(DENR), an international environmental program (MEIP), various NGOs and industry(Unilever-PRC) provided technical assistance and support for the project.

With the assistance from MEIP using funds from the Swedish International DevelopmentAgency (SIDA) World Bank Participation Fund, surveys were conducted on wastegeneration and disposal and on the community's perception of the problem. MEBIPconsultants conducted the first surveys with the people, and subsequent surveys wereconducted by members of the beneficiary communities themselves, under the guidance of theconsultants. This would later serve as key inputs to the planning and implementation of theproject. These were then validated through consultative meetings that were held right in themarket itself, and in the alleys of the neighboring squatter communities.

From this foundation, MEIP trained a core group of leaders who were chosen by the peoplethemselves. The Paco-Pandacan-Soriano Market Vendors Cooperative that operates in thearea, integrated environmental management into the regular seminars that they conduct fortheir members. With technical support from the DENR, MEIP and Unilever-PRC, thecommunity was organized. Simultaneously, MEIP tapped environmental NGOs to supportan extensive information campaign on ecological waste management. These campaigns wereled by the trained members of the community and included focus group discussions amongthe vendors, hawkers, and other residents of the area.

Having laid the educational foundation, the community began devising solutions for theirenvironmental problems. They discussed general concepts and details such as the garbagecollection routes and the number of containers needed to segregate the compostables, therecyclables and the residual wastes. Further discussions 'led to container placement, themethod for moving the waste materials within the market and the community. Theyconsidered collection plans that could cover the entire area in as short a time as possible.

Armed with their plan, they proceeded to have dialogues with market and city officials.Unilever-PRC and MEIP agreed to provide the containers. The City of Manila assignedgarbage collection trucks in accordance with the garbage collection schedule and promised toidentify a composting site for the biodegradable waste.

Members of the community have since divided themselves into four committees--education,enforcement, collection and engineering. A buyer now regularly collects the recyclables. Tomake segregation more efficient, the chairperson of the collection committee suggested thatthe project buy the recyclables directly from the vendors and hawkers themselves. White theproject will earn less, expectations are that the volume of recovered recyclables will growand, more importantly, the practice of segregation will be more widely accepted.


Problems have been encountered including erratic collection during rainy days. Errors inproject design exist. For example, sack hangers used for waste segregation are too large forthe market aisles, which are already too narrow. Also, half drums containing the residualswere too heavy to unload in the trucks. Nonetheless, the now-named Paco EnvironmentalEnhancement Project (PEEP) appears to be moving towards the direction of a trulysustainable success.

....... ~ ~ ~ Tbi ?.b 3:: : B Pac E_. ironmenal; EnancementPoe t PEEP

Population (Paco District) 58,454No. of Vendors and hawkers 1,089.Percentage of vendors and hawkers 60%participatingDaily waste generation 16 tonsPercentage composted 33%(as of March 1996)

In 1995, the Paco Public Market received an award from Philippine First Lady Mrs. Amelita"Ming" Ramos, for being the cleanest public market in Metro Manila. Mrs. Ramos widelypromotes the Clean and Green program and is instrumental in encouraging communitygovernance as the means to provide solutions for local environmental problems.

Residents around Paco note that, for the first time in many years, they did not experience anyflooding during the monsoon season. More importantly, they now have a sense of pride inbelonging to the Paco community. Most recently, Paco started composting its waste in a siteprovided by the DENR at its Ninoy Aquino Parks and Wildlife Nature Center in neighboringQuezon City. The DENR, MEIP, AWARE, Unilever-PRC, and Recycling Movement of thePhilippines were determined to make the Paco Public Market composting site a veritablecomposting garden that would serve as a showcase of Ecological Waste Management to thevisiting public.

Spreading an Idea from the Local Market to the Global Community

Through the MEIP, the DENR has adopted Ecological Waste Management as its flagshipresponse to the solid waste management problem of the country. This year, PhilippineEnvironment Secretary Victor 0. Ramos declared Ecological Waste Management one of histop three priorities along with the end of illegal logging and air pollution in the country.

Although MEIP operates only in Metro Manila and neighboring areas, DENR asked MEIP-Manila to act as an Ecological Waste Management resource for the rest of the country.MEIP continues to work with the Recycling Movement of the Philippines, AWARE, Green


Coalition, Green Forum, Balikatan Women's Council and other environmental NGOs.Together they spread the gospel of Ecological Waste Management to other cities and townsacross the Philippines. For example, MEIP was instrumental in launching Ecological WasteManagement in the Philippines' third largest metropolitan area -- Davao City in the southernisland of Mindanao. The local DENR office, MEIP and the City of Davao coordinated toestablish a composting plant for processing waste from the city's public markets andslaughterhouse. It was operational in under two months time. Naga and Legaspi cities in thesouthern part of Luzon Island and the nearby town of Iriga achieved similar results.

Nothing succeeds like success. Ecological Waste Management has now snowballed into amajor movement. Over twenty cities and towns in the Philippines have started or are nowimplementing Ecological Waste Management. Through encouragement of DENR, localgovernments are including Ecological Waste Management in key action plans. In 1996,DENR is asking its field officials to implement at least one Ecological Waste Managementproject in the 77 provinces and vows to reach out to all local governments by the end of1997. To this end, the DENR through the cooperation of MEIP has produced aninstructional video and calendar on Ecological Waste Management. They have receivedendorsement from media personalities. The DENR has also embarked on training some 300information officers throughout the country on how to present Ecological WasteManagement to local governments and communities. Low cost, low tech, and local efforthave gone a long way.

How to Build a Better PSF

Another example of how a sense of community ownership has contributed to a project'ssustainability is the Public Sanitation Facilities (PSF) project of the World Bank. Originatingin the Eighties by the Metro Manila Commission, this project set up 41 facilities for publictoilets and baths, standpipes, and laundry areas within highly congested and depressed areasin Metro Manila.

In 1994, MEIP-Manila decided to assess the status of these 41 PSFs. Around 65 percentwere still operating and still needed by many communities. PSFs that were managed by userassociations were more successful than those operated by other entities. These associationsdecide the amount of user fees to be charged as well as the mode of collection. Theseassociations then take care of maintaining and operating the facilities. Some of theseassociations have parlayed earnings into other projects that improve the community, such aspaving footpaths, constructing basketball courts, and even setting up cooperative stores usingthe participative process in managing such facilities.

Given its experience in the effectiveness of community-based approaches, MEIP decided totake a more in-depth approach. This led to the further study of the needs of two operatingPSFs that would be representative of the various conditions and factors faced by the


operating PSFs. Locations for PSFs were identified in Marikina in eastern Metro Manila,and the other in Kalookan City in northern Metro Manila.

The Marikina PSF depended on ground water, was used only as a source of water by thecommunity, and operated completely by the PSF user association. The leadership of thisassociation, however, had become inactive over time. The Kalookan PSF was fed by watersupply from the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS), was used both asa water source and a sanitation facility, and was operated only by a management team. In theMarikina PSF, the barangay council was not involved; while in the Kalookan PSF, thebarangay had planned to take over management of the PSF.

Although both PSFs were still operating and recommended for rehabilitation, they had someproblems that needed addressing. The PSF in Marikina, for example, was beginning to showsigns of physical deterioration. The deterioration of the PSF indicated that there may bemore than just infrastructure problems. This PSF was operated by an association. M1EIPdecided to field community organizers to assist the users themselves identify the problemsand develop solutions. The community organizers discovered that the problem was moreinstitutional than technical. The community members had lost confidence in their associationleadership.

After a series of formal and informal consultations, the users elected a new leadership. Themembers of the community really wanted individual water connections, rather than the mererehabilitation of their facility. At that time, the entire community using the PSF mainly as awater source, and had constructed individual toilets in their own homes. The community wasbeing serviced by a confusing labyrinth of some 30 hoses connected to a limited number offaucets in the facility, which had proven themselves inadequate for the demands of thecommunity members.

To respond to this need, MEIP hired a consultant from the UP College of Engineering. Theconsultant had the task of designing an individual connection system for all 108 households inthe community. The consultant estimated that the entire system would cost aroundP115,000. Not deterred, the members of the community to adopt that system, and to fund itthe best they could.

The new leaders mobilized the members to raise 70 percent of the cost, both in cash and inkind. The money paid not only for the repair of the PSF, but also to provide each user withindividual water connections. First of all, the new leader of the PSF association requestedeach household to contribute P100 each, thus accumulating some P10,800 in cash to beginthe project. It turned out that the community capitalized on a wealth of semi-skilled andskilled labor for carpentry, masonry, plumbing and painting tasks. Everyone pitched in todig the ditches for the new pipes in front of their respective homes. The associationleadership provided guidance to the local laborers, since he had just returned from SaudiArabia working in a construction company.


Through SIDA World Bank Participation Fund, MEIP-Manila provided a matching grantcovering approximately 25 percent of the total project cost. The new associationsuccessfully negotiated for supplier's credit for water meters. These meters monitoredindividual household connection in order that charging reflected actual householdconsumption. Individual households have thus become quite conscious about conservingwater. Total water consumption dropped as evidenced by the drop in the operating time ofthe deep well pump for drawing groundwater.

~~~~~Mrkn ''SI, :1tr Mai:a''',..:.,.,....,,,....,....:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~........... .. .... ..'''.'

Year Established 1984Number of Households 108Total Population 540Average monthly income of PSF P45 (2-4 family members)

P75 (5 or more family members)Cost of Rehabilitation P115,000 (cash plus labor)* Community.counterpart P 70,200 plus labor. MEIP investment . P 30,000

On the other hand, the congestion in the community that had PSF in Kalookan City did notallow for individual toilets and baths. Nonetheless, they were keen on rehabilitating theirPSF, and to even expand it. However, MEIP's community organizers noted that thiscommunity had some problems. This time, the problem was external to the PSF association;the barangay captain of the community wanted to take over control of PSF management

. .. . . . .. . . . . . . .. ... . ... . . . .

because it was earning money.

MEIP interceded with the Mayor of Kalookan to resolve the conflict between the PSFassociation and the barangay captain. With a promise from the barangay captain to not takeover the PSF during discussions of resolution, MEIP was able to persuade both parties towork together to delineate roles and share PSF management responsibilities. The barangayassumed responsibility for supervising the PSF and auditing the association. The associationconcentrated on the day-to-day running of the facility. In turn, the leader of the PSFassociation became an ex-officio member of the barangay council.

An agreement gave part of the income of the PSF to the barangay, the amount of whichwould be decided by the Kalookan city council. Furthermore, the PSF was situated on landowned by the city government; it was proper to share some of the proceeds to the barangay.With these basic agreements, MEBIP provided a grant to rehabilitate and improve their PSF.


Year Established 1984No. Of Households 1,075Total Population 5,373Average monthly income of PSF P8-9000Cost of Rehabilitation P21,000 (cash plus labor). Community counterpart a labor and supervision not quantified

MEIP investment * P21,000

MEIP made an effort to bring the Marikina and Kalookan PSFs to meet that they may sharelessons and experiences. The World Bank's Urban Health and Nutrition Project with theDepartment of Health (DOH) decided to use MEIP's successful community-based andparticipatory approach in establishing additional PSFs in Metro Manila, Metro Cebu, andMetro Cagayan de Oro in southern Philippines. MIEIP also provides technical assistance tothe DOH in implementing this project.

Given that the need to set up more PSFs in other highly congested and depressedcommunities in the metropolis had been established, MEIP also helped interested localgovernment units in packaging project proposals. Nine local governments responded, withlocal governments helping in determining sites and the number of beneficiaries, and then localcommunities validating these through community-based action planning. Five localgovernments received assistance in packaging proposals for additional PSFs under theSecond Metro Manila Sewerage Project, with a total of US$2 million requested for thispurpose. While the local governments had identified the need for the PSFs, community-based action planning validated the demand. Although the Metropolitan Waterworks andSewerage System (MWSS) and the World Bank agreed to include the PSFs as a componentof the Metro Manila Sewerage Project (METROS) II, the country's own National Economicand Development Authority (NEDA) disapproved it. Nonetheless, MEIP is still helpingsearch for other donors or other projects on which these proposals can be piggy-backed orcreate a suitable community environmental management project vehicle that includessanitation.


INDUSTRIES ARE COMMUNITIES, TOO

Pollution Management Appraisals: Convincing Industries to Come Clean

Community-based initiatives make good sense from a local community point of view.However, the MLEIP experience has shown that industries, too, are communities inthemselves, with many of the same dynamics, and the same problems that apply to localcommunity-based projects.

This was the experience from the implementation of the DENR's Pollution ManagementAppraisal (PMA) or environmental audits for volunteer industrial firms throughout thecountry. The PMA program was first implemented by the DENR's EnvironmentalManagement Bureau (EMB) through the USAID-funded Industrial EnvironmentalManagement Project (IEMP). The PMA program focuses on identifying opportunities forwaste minimization, clean and low cost or no cost technologies. This approach not onlyimproves the firm's productivity and profitability, but also reduce the pollution load of thefirm on the environment.

MEIP-Manila also ran a PMA program in 1994 limited to the Metro Manila area and thesurrounding provinces through its Industrial Efficiency and Pollution Control (IEPC) project.

The IEPC study determined the extent of the contribution of industry to urbanenvironmental degradation. IEPC determined the following:

1. Because of its wastewater, industry was a major contributor to biochemical oxygendemand (BOD) loading, the bulk of which comes from food processors, slaughterhouses andpiggeries, beverage makers, chemical industries, and dyes and textile factories.

2. Toxic and hazardous wastes (THW) are a growing problem, with most of thememanating from industrial plants. Furthermore, the problem with THW was quite critical,because they did not degrade over time, and thus the hazards posed were accumulative.

3. The appropriate strategy to respond to these problems was to encourage industry toadopt waste minimization and reduction, and not to rely solely on end-of-pipe clean-upinterventions.

MEIP then packaged a grant in 1993 from the United States Technical and DevelopmentAgency (USTDA) that government and industry may be able to act jointly on the findingsand recommendations of the IEPC. The components of this grant were pollutionmanagement appraisals (PMAs) for up to 25 companies, training for both government and


industry counterparts, and technology matching visits. When the package was made, therewas a conscious effort to upgrade the technical capability of government workers andindustry at the same time. In the process, better relationships and understanding developedbetween the two sectors on the premise that both of them should be partners inenvironmental protection and management.

MEIP created its PMA teams, each with a foreign specialist, a local consultant, technical stafffrom the volunteer firm, and technical representatives from the environmental regulatoryagencies: DENR or the Laguna Lake Development Authority (LLDA). The participation ofgovernment representatives in the PMA team is a feature unique to MEIP. Volunteer firmsunder MEIP PMAs received assurance in writing by the DENR Secretary that informationacquired during the strictly confidential audits would not be used against them bygovernment.

In order to maximize the impact of MEIP's PMAs, the Program targeted the most pollutiveindustry sectors in terms of organic (BOD) pollution and THW. Thus, the tannery andelectroplater sectors were added, while the dye and textile sector was dropped due to lack offunds and work force.

In the tradition of methods used in Ecological Waste Management, MEIP brought togetherseveral industrial firms through their industry subsector associations and mountedinformation workshops on the benefits of PMAs. These industry associations also helpedidentify the volunteer firms. Training workshops for each industry type were co-sponsoredby their respective associations, while information gained from technology matching visits tothe United States by the industry association leadership was shared with other members.

MEIP's unique achievements in its PMAs hinge on the fact that it was able to establish aworking rapport with industry, and thus re-establish a relationship of trust between theseindustries and DENR/LLDA. Only the MEIP PMA teams sent out to appraise volunteerindustries regularly included a DENR representative, which was quite unheard of in the past.

The combination of the PMAs, technology matching visits, and intense informationworkshops on waste minimization have had substantial results. For example, the PhilippineElectroplaters Association developed a waste minimization program for its 40 members.Individual firms enrolled under MEIP's PMA program have also begun to realize savings orbenefits from their own appraisals. Central Macaroni Company, Inc., was able to realize a14.28 percent savings in diesel fuel used in steam generation, involving some 20,000 liters ofdiesel a year worth around P140,000. They were also able to reduce water consumption by50 percent between 1993 and 1995. A chemical company called ALPOLAC, on the otherhand achieved zero waste water discharge from the cleaning of their emulsion reactor in1995.


Industry groupings as a whole have also benefited from, these PMAs. The trainingworkshops as well as the technology matching visits have been quite effective in providingtechnical assistance to other industry members, thus strengthening and sustaining their wasteminimization efforts. Furthermore, these industry groups gain strength, since their membersnow receive concrete services from them. As a result, these industry groups have attractedmore members.


ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS FOR A NEW GENERATION

Eco Campers are Happy Campers

The examples of community and industrial initiatives to improve the environment are clearlylaudable, and present a hopeful vision of a society taking into its hands the means totransition to sustainable development. However, we need not go to the extremes ofenvironmental degradation to develop environmental conscience among Filipinos.Environment must always be at the core of an individual's formation. It is this belief that hasdriven MEIP-Manila to invest in the future of the Filipino youth and their role asenvironmentally responsible citizens. Information, education and communication must beginwith the young.

Since 1992, MEIP has been working with an NGO, Philippine Council for Peace and GlobalEducation (PCPGE) conducting annual Youth Ecology Camps. The Camps include highschool student leaders and teachers from schools in Metro Manila and nearby provinces.These Youth Camps feature presentations on the state of the environment, eco-spiritualreflections, and eco-trips to natural and degraded ecosystems in Metro Manila and itsenvirons on Luzon Island. These camps also help youth participants and teachers exploretheir vision for a better future for the earth and the environment. MEIP is conducting itsSeventh Youth Ecology Camp with PCPGE.

Already, the Youth Ecology Camps have reached out to over 500 student leaders andteachers from 45 schools in the Metro Manila and neighboring areas. Although the numbersmay seem small, these youths are school leaders, accomplished both in academics and extra-curricular activities. It is hopeful that today's lessons will guide them in positions ofleadership in the future.

. .. . . . . ............. .................... . - ......... .. . . . . . .

d ... .... ... o

No. of Schools 45No. of Participants 510

The Youth Ecology Camps begin with a "reading of the times" in order to find out how theparticipants feel about the environment. Are they optimistic about the prospects of theenvironment, indifferent, or downright pessimistic?

After this initial assessment, the participants divide into group workshops. These smallergroup discussions cover current environmental issues, the extent of the environmental


problem, the various sources of and solutions for the problem. Carefully selected resourcepeople lead the workshops bringing with them the most credible sources of information fortheir particular subject.

Field visits translate learning from the workshops into tangible examples. During these fieldvisits, environmental problems and solutions become evident to the participants. The visits,therefore, show a mix of the realities of environmental degr-adation and the successes ofenvironment rehabilitation undertaken by various sectors.

Participants from the previous Youth Ecology Camps return to talk to the currentparticipants about how they are implementing their own environmental action programs fromtheir experience at the Camp. With this exposure, the Eco Campers make their own actionplans for their respective schools, for groups of schools in a given geographic area, and forthe whole network of that Youth Ecology Camp.

It is after these activities that one sees a marked change among the participants. Pessimism,skepticism or even indifference in the beginning usually shifts to profound optimism and astrong willingness to act for and on behalf of the environment after attending the Camp.

The Youth Ecology Camp network perpetuates itself through the PCPGE with "alumni" orPCPGE Junior Associates. This youth environment network is now conducting its owninformation, education and communication activities and publishing a regular newsletter. Itconducts seminars on the environment in their respective schools. MEIP and PCPGE arealso planning a network for Youth Ecology Camp alumni who have gone on to college.During the school year, MEIP and PCPGE and the Junior Associates hold an InterscholasticEcology Week where many awareness-building initiatives. Activities include poster-making,essay-writing and oratorical contests, exhibitions, an environmental quiz bee, and a songfest.

The network started an Adopt-a-Forest project with the first site in Montalban, Rizal northof Metro Manila. M:EIP and PCPGE in cooperation with the local DENR offices started theproject. Adopt-a-Forest gives students an opportunity to work toward the rehabilitation of awhole eco-system, and not just undertake a one-time tree planting effort.

MEIP and PCPGE also conduct echo seminars on Ecological 'WVaste Management, as well asanti-smoke belching. These seminars have resulted in the adoption of these programs inparticipating schools, where they have become success stories for local environmental action.

With the Youth Ecology Camps, the one voted most likely to succeed is.. the environment ofthe future.


WHILE OTHER GENERATIONS TRY TO CATCH UP

A Breath of Fresh Air for All: The Anti-smoke Belching Campaign

While the youths envision and work toward a future clean environment, their parents aremaking efforts today to make the air cleaner, or at least livable, by curbing air pollution levelsin Metro Manila. This urban area has 42 percent of the country's over 2 million registeredmotor vehicles.

Pollution levels in Metro Manila have reached alarming levels. Total suspended particulate(TSP) levels exceed VVHO standards by five times, particulate matter 10 microns or less(PM10) by three times, and lead and sulphur dioxide at critical levels, In response, the DENRthrough MEIP formulated a Clean Air 2000 Action Plan in 1994. The Philippine Council forSustainable Development adopted this plan as part of the Philippine Agenda 21, forendorsement by President Fidel V. Ramos.

The Clean Air Action Plan is meant to address air pollution as a comprehensive andintegrated strategy. The Plan's formulators included the DENR, NGOs, private industry andorganizations, public groups, and other government agencies. They agreed that one of itsmajor components should be an intensified anti-smoke belching campaign targeted atoffending vehicles. After all, any action against smoke belchers would be a move readilyappreciated by the public.

The DENR, therefore, mounted an information campaign on the scourge of air pollution inMetro Manila. Public awareness of the problem was an important ingredient to any effort atimplementing specific actions to address the problem. Thus, the different "publics" wereidentified, to which specific information materials and communications plans were targeted.Letters to Cabinet members and the Legislature were sent out, white arrangements for mediaexposure of resource people were also made.

Special effort was also made to reach out to motorists, especially drivers of publicconveyances. In the past, whenever there were efforts to apprehend smoke belchers, thedrivers of these public conveyances always threatened to go on strike. However, the resultsof the UP College of Public Health study for WHO showed that drivers received greatestexposure to air pollution and were at highest risk for developing chronic respiratory illnesses.The disclosure of this study helped persuade them to support the campaign. In turn, they

can help pressure the owners and operators of public conveyances to spend more on routinemaintenance of engines to lessen the risks of exposure.


The next step was to network with the other agencies that had a role to play in air pollution.Most significant of these were the local government units, who, under the Local GovernmentCode, have jurisdiction over anti-smoke belching. It was therefore urgent that they bemobilized for this campaign.

Meetings with the Metro Manila Authority (now called the Metro Manila DevelopmentAuthority) resulted in immediate creation of their own Metro Manila Air Pollution ActionTeams. The teams received training from DENR and MEIP before being sent out in the fieldto Metro Manila's major thoroughfares. First the teams distributed information materials fortwo weeks, and then started actual testing of smoke belchers with Hartridge smoke meterslent by the DENR.

After two weeks, actual apprehension of excessive smoke belchers commenced with thestandard pegged at 80 to 100 percent density on the Ringelmann Chart. These standardsmarked the criteria to begin apprehension of the worst offenders, and thus signalling thebeginning of the program. In order not to add to Metro Manila's infamous traffic jams,violators were apprehended after the morning rush hours and before the afternoon commute.Apprehending teams wore clearly marked vests or shirts with identification cards clearly

marking them as operatives of the program. These teams also moved from area to area tospot and apprehend the smoke belchers in different pathways.

Apart from the Metro Manila Authority, its constituent local governments also participated inthe program. Quezon and Manila cities participated, soon followed by municipalities ofMakati and Muntinglupa (which have since become cities). DENR lent the Hartridge smokemeters to these local governments. Given the limited number of available testing equipment,other local governments started their own campaigns, with apprehended vehicles sent topooled testing facilities.

With part of the funds raised from collected fines, the local governments invested in theirown testing equipment. The City of Makati, for instance, is one of the most successfulimplementors of this program, earning as much as P6 million from their portion of finesalone. This additional income has led them to sustain their efforts against smoke belchers.Of course, their local program is also supported by a champion within the city council,Councillor Bong Daza. The DENR is now preparing a video documentary of Makati's anti-smoke belching program as part of its efforts to showcase successful local-basedenvironmental initiatives.

Other government agencies have followed in implementing their own programs. Forinstance, the Land Transportation Office sent out its own mobile enforcement teams. ThePhilippine National Construction Corporation, which operates the North and South LuzonTollways, set up its own teams to apprehend violators along the tollways. Over 100,000vehicles use the tollway daily to and from Metro Manila. By monitoring at the tollway,smoke-belching vehicles from outside Metro Manila cannot drive into the metropolis.


Meetings were also held with the Department of Interior and local government and thePhilippine National Police to enlist their support. Police Officers are among the mostexposed to air pollution as they patrol their beats or control traffic. The police agreed tomobilize and assist in the apprehension of smoke belchers.

The private sector likewise mobilized to do their share. This has resulted in some of themore creative measures undertaken under the program. The Philippines' first multinationalcompany, the San Miguel Corporation, responded by using its clout to influence its suppliersand employees to meet vehicular emissions standards.

The Pollution Control Officer of San Miguel's brewery in Polo, Valenzuela, Metro Manila,was alarmed by the air quality monitoring reports issued by the DENR. He recommended tohis management that the company conduct business only with suppliers whose trucks ordelivery vehicles meet the government emissions standards. Management supported andimmediately implemented the recommendation. After all, they were the ones directlybreathing the emissions from smoke-belching trucks. DENR trained the staff on emissionstesting and initially lent the brewery a Hartridge smoke meter. Only vehicles that passed theemissions test drove inside the brewery's premises.

With an average of 200 truck and other commercial vehicles in and out of the area every day,the firm soon decided to purchase two Hartridge smoke meters, at a cost of P400,000 each.San Miguel requires that vehicles be tested every six months period and issues stickers totrucks that pass the test. The administrative cost for each vehicle tested is about P150.

San Miguel does not expect nor intend to recover its investment. This company is a goodexample of working with an environmental conscience, willing to spend its funds to helpclean the environment even if this does not result in immediate or direct corporate profits.

When the testing first started, some 30 percent of the vehicles failed the test. Today, thatfigure is down to 5 percent or less. All these vehicles have stopped magnifying the airpollution problem wherever they go. This program has expanded and San Miguel is nowencouraging their employees to have their personal vehicles tested.

Some 80 companies, 3 schools and a subdivision have taken up on the San Miguel model.One of the country's largest banks, the Far East bank and Trust Company, has even donateda Hartridge smoke meter for the use of the City of Makati and other local governmentsrunning similar programs.


MEIP, A RICH HARVEST OF LESSONS LEARNED

The MEIP Movement

In the five years of MEIP operation in the Philippines, many lessons learned throughexperiences validate the MEWP thesis of community-based environmental initiatives.Experience has shown that there are substantial resources in the hands of communities,private corporations, industry associations, and NGOs. Put to use these resources canactually improve the delivery of environmental service in urban areas, and even complementthose that are already being provided for by government. Mobilizing the limited resource indeveloping countries not only reduces the burden of national and local governments forenvironmental projects, but actually sharpens the edge of their own limited initiatives.

It bears repeating that nothing succeeds like success. It has been important for MEIP to seekout communities where the ingredients combine into a successful project, and where theactivities can be emulated, where future community-based interventions can be tested.Among the factors which MEW believes are critical for achieving success include thefollowing:

First, the community must understand the problem and must be willing to act. Itusually starts with awareness of a specific problem that directly effects them, and a realizationthat something must be done about it. However, it is important that the community identifythe problem themselves, be convinced that there is a solution, and apply the solutionthemselves.

For instance, in the ecological waste management municipality of Bustos, the mayor refusedto devote excessive land area for garbage disposal in a town with a small land area. Thisdirective was a factor in the adoption of this solid waste management strategy. Now, Bustosis one of the two pioneer model communities for ecological waste management, the otherbeing Sta Maria.

In the case of the Paco Public Market, awareness came from outside the community, sincethe awareness regarding Paco Public Market's pollution load to the estuary came from a UPstudy. However, this problem was shared with all those concerned--the vendors, the streethawkers, the market administration, the-mayor's office, the barangay councils, the regionalauthority, and the DENR. Initially, there was fingerpointing at everyone, but by the end ofthe day, everyone realized that if they were to survive, they had to clean up. The market wasbeginning to lose regular customers to supermarkets and other cleaner markets. When theyrealized this, they agreed to cooperate in planning and implementing a waste minimizationproject.


Whether the awareness comes from outside or from within does not really matter. What isimportant is that this awareness must be nurtured through an organized campaign involvingthe entire community from the very beginning. Nobody must feel left out, even if it appearsthat complete participation cannot be initially obtained. House-to-house campaigns,community meetings, neighborhood bulletin boards, art contests and other awarenessactivities prove effective in enlisting the support of community members.

A second factor for success is the presence of a champion. In all of the communities thathave been successful, a strong leader is always behind the success as one who generates andsustains interest. A few NGOs have organized communities to solve their problems, andthough some have met with success, none have resulted in truly self-sustaining projects.

The presence of a champion from within the community who will encourage and guide thecommunity has contributed to project success and sustainability. However, these championsmust still work within the framework of the participatory process, involving and consultingthe members of the community in problem identification, planning and implementation.Neither should these champions content at doing things all by themselves.

Third, individual members of the community must have a sense of ownership of theproject itself. The community members must individually feel that they are stakeholders inwhatever project they will undertake. They must believe that the plan is their plan, and thatexecuting this plan is for their benefit.

In the Paco experience, people from diverse backgrounds--NGO, multinational business, thenational government, the City government, the vendors and the hawkers, DENR and MEIPcollectively and individually feel that they won the project. The PSF experience in Marikinais likewise an example of this factor, and where the project ownership has actually resulted ina massive collective effort to overcome funding and material obstacles.

Fourth, we must remember that as no individual is an island, it is also true that no communityis an island. Communities still need outside support. They still need access to availabletechnologies from government, NGOs, the private sector, and foreign-assisted projects.Many communities need technical, financial, and logistic support especially at project start-up. Communities must also establish mutually beneficial linkages with their local governmentunits.

Fifth, there must be a basic willingness from the community to mobilize its ownresources. We can see this in the Marikina PSF association that mobilized its own funds aswell as logistic support for the project. In the Paco Public market, vendors and hawkers tookthe time to clean the Paco estuary and even hired their own street sweepers.

Now, there is some apprehension that some local governments may feel threatened by suchcommunity-based actions, that such actions may be a sign of the local government'sweakness. However, the growth of environmental awareness in the Philippines coupled with


the emphasis on empowerment of the people has had most local governments welcominglocal-based actions. These communities become partners in the overall effort to manage andconserve the environment.

With the presence of these factors for success, projects become doable, but also morereplicable. Initial projects need not be very ambitious, but they must absolutely be successful,and their benefits to the community evident, that other communities may take notice andemulate them.

Just as MEIP-Manila has identified these factors for success, it has also culled from itsexperiences the following lessons:

1. It is not difficult to mobilize local resources when positive environmental impactsare designed from the beginning to show direct and/or tangible economical and/orsocial benefits. People are generally willing to invest time, effort and money onactivities where they will see concrete benefits.

2. External inputs are important, and sometimes absolutely necessary, but need notalways be in the form of capital investment. Traditionally, external assistancemeant the infusion of funds, the procurement of hardware, or infrastructure. Inmany cases, however, external assistance for environmental initiatives can besuccessful even when this comes as technology transfer, innovative managementapproaches or community organization.

3 . The various sectors of a community must develop an environmental conscience asan anchor for all environmental activities. There must be a sustained effort on thepart of government, NGOs, academe, and other environmentally supportivesectors of society to conduct environmental information, education andcommunication activities. The fundamental goal is to awaken and developenvironmental consciousness and consciences among all people. Thedevelopment of an environmental conscience cannot be left to chance alone, sincethis often means that environmental disasters or other serious threats and damageto the environment would have already occurred.

4. Governments must downplay centralized command-and-control approaches infavor of building partnerships with the private sector as a means of achievingenvironmental progress. Government must be a partner rather than viewed as abenefactor or an enforcer.

5. Even as government uses less command and control, it must nonetheless remaindead serious in its implementation and enforcement of environmental laws, rulesand regulations.


These five lessons bring to focus the MEIP approach of bringing solutions to environmentalproblems in the hands of local communities and the private sector, or at least in partnershipwith them. Experience has shown that when a community assumes responsibility for localenvironmental problems and ownership of its solutions, then there is a far greater chance ofsustained effort and involvement in these solutions. Consequently, such communitiesassume greater responsibilities for other areas of public welfare.

MEIP-Manila is confident that community governance is the wave of the future. As moreand more communities assume their rightful role as stakeholders and not just beneficiariesfrom the state, the overall quality of the urban environment will be enhanced. The cost togovernment will be far more realistic. MIEIP and other environment programs must act ascatalysts, helping replicate positive lessons and experiences, and making sure that the factorsfor success are present and well in place.

In this role, therefore, MEIIP becomes less a foreign-assisted, government-linked project, andmore an advocate and facilitator of change. In this regard, MEIP has become a movement.


world bank documentdocuments.worldbank.org/curated/en/943921468762952903/pdf/multi-page.pdf ·...

Documents