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

spring source is located, and will give them legal clout to run their programmes and projects
for their watershed.
A second potential source would be the provision of water supply to neighbouring villages.
The LK can actually charge watershed-protection service fees along with the cost of
providing water to the barangays concerned. If they are able to delineate the watershed
boundaries and negotiate successfully with LLDA, they can charge LLDA for water supply
that comes from their tributaries. Should the NPC hydropower plant be built in the future, the
LK can also tap them as a potential buyer of water from the Balian watershed.
The point of including this case study is to hypothesise that markets can easily be established
if there are institutional mechanisms such as the LK and the SBPTI that are not only
community based, but are very much part of the culture of the population. Property rights, in
a way, have been established because of the legal mandate of the LK to maintain and
rehabilitate the watershed. Meanwhile, the SBPTI is in charge of maintaining the watersupply
system. And because all other problems downstream are seen to be directly connected
with the watershed, the LK inadvertently applies a comprehensive and integrated approach in
managing the watershed. Social acceptability will potentially be high, given that there is
‘ownership’ of the organisation by the community residents themselves. The only challenge
remaining is to convince the residents to ‘sell’ such services, which may prove to be a
worthwhile task. Not only will it raise money for their organisation, it may even serve as an
alternative livelihood scheme for slash-and-burn farmers still operating in the area.
3.2.6 Lessons learned
The following points highlight the lessons learned from the continuing success of the
institutional set-up of the LK and the SBPTI in protecting their watershed.
One of these is communal ownership of the managing institution. The formation of both the
SBPTI and the LK was initiated by the community residents themselves. Government had
nothing to do with setting them up. NGOs who have worked in the area likewise attest to the
pure or unadulterated characteristic of these organisations, such that their growth was purely
determined by internal dynamics, and was not forced upon them by outside influence. Thus,
residents have always ‘owned’ the organisations, and have always felt they had a major stake
in the organisations’ programmes and projects. Because of this sense of ownership,
commitment to their activities is very high, further ensuring the success and growth of the
organisations.
Another lesson is the importance of the use of cultural traditions in the organisations’
operations. In relation to the above, because the residents themselves were running the
organisations, it was natural for them to use their own traditions in ensuring smooth
operations. The bayanihan tradition is still very strong, which requires that free labour be
given willingly to help neighbours. Hence, in planning for and implementing their watershedprotection
activities, it was natural for the members to give their time and labour for free,
without letting their individual opportunity costs get in the way. This can be interpreted to
mean that the value they attach to the watershed is higher than their individual opportunity
costs. Also, the intense religiosity of Filipinos was taken advantage of. Conflict resolutions
were done during Holy Week, a time when Filipinos seriously take stock of themselves and
become very humble and willing to change for the better.
55