Developing pro-poor markets for environmental services in the ...

proclaiming all water sources as protected (see Appendix E). 23 In establishing the 100m
radius around these sources, LK discovered that all the surrounding land lots were privately
owned, including the areas where the water sources were located. However, these landowners
did not live locally, and thus were considered to be absentee landlords. Many of them rarely
visited nor did they use their land for their own productive purposes. This posed a real
problem both for LK and the landowners, particularly in protecting these areas against
environmentally damaging activities such as small-scale logging, slash-and-burn farming,
illegal encroachment, and carabao grazing.
In response to this situation, LK came up with a plan that required an agreement with the
landowners to establish boundaries around their lots by planting trees, 24 which could serve as
communal fences. They identified the landowners and have approached some of them
individually. Funds for the seedlings and monitoring activities were either provided by LK
members themselves or from donations from local government, thus the landowners did not
have to spend for the programme. The boundaries further served the latter’s interests because,
before the programme, there was no systematic method of delineating their land, except for
what is termed as ‘living boundaries’, i.e. the existing trees, which were few and far between
and served as boundaries. The LK-planted trees were closer to each other, and uniformly
planted so that the boundaries were obvious. The trees were also part of an agroforestry
scheme, part of the proceeds of which went to the landowners. Finally, because LK
conducted periodic monitoring, the boundaries were able to serve as deterrents against illegal
migrants from neighbouring areas.
To get the upland residents to participate in the programme, the trees were pruned vertically
and the branches served both as fuelwood for the residents and as erosion-control devices.
The agroforestry scheme also provided alternative livelihood opportunities to the residents.
For the carabao grazers, LK was able to get their participation in the scheme – both the labour
of the beasts and their owners. In exchange for these, the LK promised not to report them to
the municipal government for violating an existing ordinance preventing carabao grazing in
the upland areas. 25
Meanwhile, the municipal local government of Pangil has been very supportive of the
programme, mainly because LK took care of the monitoring and enforcement components of
their ordinance, activities which the municipal LGU itself should be conducting. In fact, part
of the penalty system of the LGU is to have those who commit certain crimes pay by
participating in tree-planting activities of LK. Hence, the LK turned out to be the de facto
management body of the watershed of Balian. The municipal LGU has recognised this in
periodic discussions and meetings regarding the watershed, and has consistently awarded LK
annually with trophies in recognition of their watershed-protection activities. The LK is still
working on a municipal resolution to be passed, stating that LK is the designated body
assigned to protect the Balian watershed. This will strengthen their role as the managers of
the watershed, and give them legal teeth in conducting their programmes and projects.
23 Available at http://www.iied.org/eep/.
24 The choice of trees to plant was made in consultation with agroforestry, forestry, and hydrology experts working at the
University of the Philippines in Los Baños, Laguna.
25 The municipal LGU of Pangil, Laguna has an existing ordinance declaring carabao grazing in upland areas as illegal. This
is because most land in the upland areas is privately owned. Furthermore, there is the implicit recognition of the
environmentally damaging effects of carabao grazing such as soil erosion. There is no exception to this ordinance, even if
private landowners agree to carabao grazing within their lands.
51