Local environmental action in Metro Manila - models of community governance

1I7 9cS 4Sore I q(o Local Environmental Action in Metro Manila Models of Community Governance Prepared by the Metropolitan Environmental Improvement Program in Metro Manila Metropolitan Environmental Improvement Program Environment and Natural Resources Division, Asia Technical Dept. The World Bank, 1818 H Street, NW, Washington, DC 20433 USA Tel. (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 Philippines M E I t Tel. (63-2) 928-2965, Fax. (63-2) 928-2965  I  Local Environmental Action in Metro Manila Models for Community Governance INTRODUCTION The Metropolitan Environmental Improvement Program (I,EIP) was established by the World Bank and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in 1989. Its mission is to help selected metropolitan regions in Asia develop and implement appropriate and workable solutions to rapidly increasing environmental problems in these areas. MEIP believes that solutions to these problems begin when concerned sectors understand the problems and their solutions. These sectors are in turn the foundation for the development of community governance over environment, where processes and solutions arrived at are locally based and sustainable. In 1990, five national governments including the Philippines endorsed the Program. Metro Manila, the country's National Capital Region, became an MEIP city, and a national program coordinating office was established in late 1991 and located within the national government's Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). MEIP Manila is managed through a multisectoral/interagency Steering Committee that is composed of representatives from seven national government agencies, two regional government units, two industry representatives, and two NGO representatives. The day-to-day implementation of the Program itself is managed through a National Program Coordinator chosen by the DENR with concurrence of the World Bank. Metro Manila is an excellent venue for the implementation of MEIP because it presents a magnified study of the environmental and developmental issues and priorities that effect urban environments in the developing world. Metro Manila is a study of contrasts. It has an area of only 636 square kilometers or 1 percent of the country's total land area, and yet it is host 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 glittering high-rise and impressive shopping mall development, and yet nearly a third of its population still 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 half that amount. Metro Manila also has over one million registered motor vehicles. It is home to over 50 percent of the country's large industries, leading to exceedance of World Health Organization (WHO) ambient air standards. Yet, vehicular emissions control and monitoring systems 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 primary sewerage system. Clearly, Metro Manila must make considerable investments in funds and effort in order to bring environmental problems under control. Yet, the limited funds of its constituent cities and towns generated from taxes and other revenue initiatives must also pay for other basic services such as health, education, local infrastructure, and peace and order. The National Government is hard pressed to provide all the necessary funding. With funds from international funding agencies and subsidies from the National Government taken into consideration, total available resources are still insufficient to finance the investments required. However, environmental enhancement programs and initiatives need not be financed by government budgets or international assistance alone. The experience of MEIP in Metro Manila and nearby areas shows that there is a myriad of resources. Communities, private corporations, industry associations, NGOs, public organizations and other groups can consolidate their resources and ban together to improve the urban environment. Harnessing such resources not only reduces the strain on government's financial burden, but enhances the delivery of environmental programs and projects. The following programs and projects undertaken together with the full support of the DENR as well as various local governments, NGOs and private sector groups lend substance to these observations. Although not all were originally initiated by MEIP-Manila, all of them have been successfully replicated elsewhere in Metro Manila and the rest of the country through 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 provided for under the Philippine Local Government Code, communities all over the country have sought ways and means of developing environmentally acceptable solid waste management schemes that are also economically feasible and sustainable. Zero waste management, which was first espoused in 1972 by the Recycling Movement of the Philippines, has offered communities the opportunity to unite environment and economics in a low-technology solution for the management of solid waste. MEIP-Manila saw an opportunity in the zero waste management approach to work with low cost, low technology and local alternatives to expensive and often controversial means of solid waste disposal. MEIP-Manila national program coordinator, Bebet Gozun, coined the term Ecological Waste Management in order to encompass other aspects of an environmentally sound management system as society slowly learns and moves toward the zero-waste ideal. In Ecological Waste Management, the tenets of waste reduction -- waste segregation, composting, recycling and re-use -- address the basic reasons behind excessive waste generation, improper waste management, and the spread of disease. It provides income- generating opportunities for farnilies and communities, and reducing waste management costs for local governments. It also promotes more efficient collection systems and the proper disposal of currently non-recyclable residuals through sanitary landfills and bioremediation. Waste reduction addresses excessive waste generation. Waste segregation prepares solid waste at the source for renewed usefulness as compost or animal feeds for the biodegradable components and as recyclables and reused riaterials. Composting returns organic wastes back to their original source--the earth, instead of providing a breeding ground for disease vectors. The resulting organic fertilizer also helps new life spring from the earth, while helping rehabilitate soil exhausted from years of chemical fertilizer use. Recycling returns inorganic 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 normally considered as "waste." This income helps make ecological waste management attractive to communities and thus, sustainable as a waste management scheme. The reduced volume of MODELS OF COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE 5  waste, on the other hand, saves money for national and local governments, as well as communities. The money would otherwise have gone for payment of proper collection and disposal of larger volumes of solid waste. Although Ecological Waste Management was already being practiced countrywide in many small communities with the support of environmental NGOs, the larger scale practice of the system emerged in two municipalities some 50 kilometers north of Metro Manila -- Bustos and Sta Maria, both in Bulacan Province. Although situated in one of the rice granaries of the Philippines, these communities are beginning to feel the sprawl of its giant urban neighbor to the South, with the dispersion of industries and housing developments. The Bustos experience emphasizes the house-to-house approach to Ecological Waste Management. 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 Bustos received training how to segregate its waste. It was definitely a help that the mayor of Bustos, Pablito Mendoza, and his wife are both physicians. Beyond this, however, they also did not want to use too much land in Bustos for a landfill, because Bustos has a rather small land area with 30,000 people. In Bustos, the compost from the small-scale backyard systems is applied to household and community gardens. Recyclables, on the other hand, are collected in community collection centers, one center per barangay (Tagalog term for "local community" or the smallest political unit in the country). Junk dealers or recyclers from the Metro Manila area pick up the 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 for handicrafts made from recycled materials. The town's residents do a brisk trade in selling straw hats made, Christmas decorations, handmade paper and other fine crafts using recycled plastic drinking straws, cartons and paper. Population 40,609 Area 4,750 ha. Waste Generation 150 tons/month No. of Barangays 14 Participating Barangays 100% Sta Maria, on the other hand, was a cooperation between business, the community, and the local government. The Vice Governor of Bulacan and the mayor of Sta Maria became concerned about their growing solid waste problem in Sta. Maria. The urban sprawl of Metro Manila was beginning to effect the town, and in no time at all, the solid waste problem 6 LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION IN METRO MANILA  would overrun Sta Maria without proper solid waste management. Furthermore, the neighboring town of Marilao, where they were dumping their waste, was no longer willing to accept Sta Maria's garbage. Yet, within Sta. Maria, no one was willing to sell land to the local 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 in Sta. Maria began in earnest. First, Mr. Vargas attended a zero waste management seminar and learned about composting. He also touched base with the Department of Science and Technology (DOST) in order to know more about waste management systems. Together with 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 the Sta. Maria Public Market and the communities in its immediate vicinity; and, that composting could be an answer to this problem. The market was therefore the logical first target for ecological waste management. Mr. Louie Vargas established the Assorted Waste Administration and Recycling Enterprises (AWARE), which hired experts to develop detailed production and marketing plans for market waste-based compost. AWARE also invested in the project. After much public consultation to address the social acceptability issue, the local government identified 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 of ten years. The local government saw that this was a better use of its funds since it showed the promise of self-liquidation, instead of the continuing expense of collecting and dumping the town's solid waste. The Santa Maria Economic Foundation together with the Recycling Movement of the Philippines then undertook an information, education and communication campaign to inform and educate the vendors and the market personnel about proper waste segregation. The composting plant has been operational for the past two years. Biodegradable wastes are segregated by the market vendors, collected in push carts by the market personnel, and then shredded mechanically on the premises in order to reduce the total volume of waste and facilitate decomposition. These are then picked-up in trucks by the local government and delivered to the composting plant. The plant now processes some four tons of organics daily plus other wastes from nearby farms such as animal manure and burned rice husks. The plant produces 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 the Department 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 basically garbage. Thus, there is proof that waste makes money. MODELS OF COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE 7  Ta;:: N.... . . .. PaPoulation 1 10,000 Area 8,775 ha. Waste Generation 20 tons/day Percentage of Waste under Ecological 40%i Waste Management__________ Recover 50% Daily Production (including manure, 4 tons/day rice husks and additives) Production Cost P75/50 kl. bag Selling 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 of the Pasig River, is one of the most polluted in the heart of the City of Manila. Located along its banks are the Paco Public Market and Unilever-PRC. The latter is the local manufacturing plant of one of the world's largest food processing multinationals formerly known as Philippine Refining Company. Low and lower-middle income families, as well as squatter communities live along the banks of the estuary in the highly populated area between the market and industry. In 1993, three persons from that area died, allegedly due to the ingestion of dirty estuary wvater. 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 process quality, Unilever-PRC commissioned the Foundation for Ecological Development Studies (FEDS), an NGO from the respected University of the Philippines (UIP), to conduct a study of the water quality of the estuary. The study eventually determnined that the principal source of the organic pollution of the Paco Estuary was actually the Paco Public Market and the surrounding communities. It was at this point that FEDS invited MEIP for support, knowing that it has acquired considerable experience in community-based environmental initiatives. The results of the study were presented in a workshop that included the Paco market vendors, street hawkers, the community residents, the market administration, city and barangay 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 that if the market was to survive as a viable enterprise, then everyone had to participate in cleaning up the mess. The workshop ended with an agreement among these various stakeholders that they indeed have a solid waste management problem, and that they should 8 LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION IN METRO MANILA  all work together to solve it. A newly created ad hoc committee coordinated the initial phases 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 Development Agency (SIDA) World Bank Participation Fund, surveys were conducted on waste generation and disposal and on the community's perception of the problem. MEBIP consultants conducted the first surveys with the people, and subsequent surveys were conducted by members of the beneficiary communities themselves, under the guidance of the consultants. This would later serve as key inputs to the planning and implementation of the project. These were then validated through consultative meetings that were held right in the market 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 people themselves. The Paco-Pandacan-Soriano Market Vendors Cooperative that operates in the area, integrated environmental management into the regular seminars that they conduct for their members. With technical support from the DENR, MEIP and Unilever-PRC, the community was organized. Simultaneously, MEIP tapped environmental NGOs to support an extensive information campaign on ecological waste management. These campaigns were led by the trained members of the community and included focus group discussions among the vendors, hawkers, and other residents of the area. Having laid the educational foundation, the community began devising solutions for their environmental problems. They discussed general concepts and details such as the garbage collection routes and the number of containers needed to segregate the compostables, the recyclables and the residual wastes. Further discussions 'led to container placement, the method for moving the waste materials within the market and the community. They considered 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 assigned garbage collection trucks in accordance with the garbage collection schedule and promised to identify 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. To make segregation more efficient, the chairperson of the collection committee suggested that the project buy the recyclables directly from the vendors and hawkers themselves. White the project will earn less, expectations are that the volume of recovered recyclables will grow and, more importantly, the practice of segregation will be more widely accepted. MODELS OF COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE 9  Problems have been encountered including erratic collection during rainy days. Errors in project design exist. For example, sack hangers used for waste segregation are too large for the market aisles, which are already too narrow. Also, half drums containing the residuals were too heavy to unload in the trucks. Nonetheless, the now-named Paco Environmental Enhancement Project (PEEP) appears to be moving towards the direction of a truly sustainable success. ....... ~ ~ ~ Tbi ?.b 3:: : B Pac E_. ironmenal; EnancementPoe t PEEP Population (Paco District) 58,454 No. of Vendors and hawkers 1,089. Percentage of vendors and hawkers 60% participating Daily waste generation 16 tons Percentage 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 widely promotes the Clean and Green program and is instrumental in encouraging community governance 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 any flooding during the monsoon season. More importantly, they now have a sense of pride in belonging to the Paco community. Most recently, Paco started composting its waste in a site provided by the DENR at its Ninoy Aquino Parks and Wildlife Nature Center in neighboring Quezon City. The DENR, MEIP, AWARE, Unilever-PRC, and Recycling Movement of the Philippines were determined to make the Paco Public Market composting site a veritable composting garden that would serve as a showcase of Ecological Waste Management to the visiting public. Spreading an Idea from the Local Market to the Global Community Through the MEIP, the DENR has adopted Ecological Waste Management as its flagship response to the solid waste management problem of the country. This year, Philippine Environment Secretary Victor 0. Ramos declared Ecological Waste Management one of his top 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 10 LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION IN METRO MANILA  Coalition, Green Forum, Balikatan Women's Council and other environmental NGOs. Together they spread the gospel of Ecological Waste Management to other cities and towns across the Philippines. For example, MEIP was instrumental in launching Ecological Waste Management in the Philippines' third largest metropolitan area -- Davao City in the southern island of Mindanao. The local DENR office, MEIP and the City of Davao coordinated to establish a composting plant for processing waste from the city's public markets and slaughterhouse. It was operational in under two months time. Naga and Legaspi cities in the southern part of Luzon Island and the nearby town of Iriga achieved similar results. Nothing succeeds like success. Ecological Waste Management has now snowballed into a major movement. Over twenty cities and towns in the Philippines have started or are now implementing Ecological Waste Management. Through encouragement of DENR, local governments are including Ecological Waste Management in key action plans. In 1996, DENR is asking its field officials to implement at least one Ecological Waste Management project in the 77 provinces and vows to reach out to all local governments by the end of 1997. To this end, the DENR through the cooperation of MEIP has produced an instructional video and calendar on Ecological Waste Management. They have received endorsement from media personalities. The DENR has also embarked on training some 300 information officers throughout the country on how to present Ecological Waste Management to local governments and communities. Low cost, low tech, and local effort have gone a long way. How to Build a Better PSF Another example of how a sense of community ownership has contributed to a project's sustainability is the Public Sanitation Facilities (PSF) project of the World Bank. Originating in the Eighties by the Metro Manila Commission, this project set up 41 facilities for public toilets and baths, standpipes, and laundry areas within highly congested and depressed areas in Metro Manila. In 1994, MEIP-Manila decided to assess the status of these 41 PSFs. Around 65 percent were still operating and still needed by many communities. PSFs that were managed by user associations were more successful than those operated by other entities. These associations decide the amount of user fees to be charged as well as the mode of collection. These associations then take care of maintaining and operating the facilities. Some of these associations have parlayed earnings into other projects that improve the community, such as paving footpaths, constructing basketball courts, and even setting up cooperative stores using the participative process in managing such facilities. Given its experience in the effectiveness of community-based approaches, MEIP decided to take a more in-depth approach. This led to the further study of the needs of two operating PSFs that would be representative of the various conditions and factors faced by the MODELS OF COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE 11  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 the community, and operated completely by the PSF user association. The leadership of this association, however, had become inactive over time. The Kalookan PSF was fed by water supply from the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS), was used both as a water source and a sanitation facility, and was operated only by a management team. In the Marikina PSF, the barangay council was not involved; while in the Kalookan PSF, the barangay had planned to take over management of the PSF. Although both PSFs were still operating and recommended for rehabilitation, they had some problems that needed addressing. The PSF in Marikina, for example, was beginning to show signs of physical deterioration. The deterioration of the PSF indicated that there may be more than just infrastructure problems. This PSF was operated by an association. M1EIP decided to field community organizers to assist the users themselves identify the problems and develop solutions. The community organizers discovered that the problem was more institutional than technical. The community members had lost confidence in their association leadership. After a series of formal and informal consultations, the users elected a new leadership. The members of the community really wanted individual water connections, rather than the mere rehabilitation of their facility. At that time, the entire community using the PSF mainly as a water source, and had constructed individual toilets in their own homes. The community was being serviced by a confusing labyrinth of some 30 hoses connected to a limited number of faucets in the facility, which had proven themselves inadequate for the demands of the community members. To respond to this need, MEIP hired a consultant from the UP College of Engineering. The consultant had the task of designing an individual connection system for all 108 households in the community. The consultant estimated that the entire system would cost around P115,000. Not deterred, the members of the community to adopt that system, and to fund it the best they could. The new leaders mobilized the members to raise 70 percent of the cost, both in cash and in kind. The money paid not only for the repair of the PSF, but also to provide each user with individual water connections. First of all, the new leader of the PSF association requested each household to contribute P100 each, thus accumulating some P10,800 in cash to begin the project. It turned out that the community capitalized on a wealth of semi-skilled and skilled labor for carpentry, masonry, plumbing and painting tasks. Everyone pitched in to dig the ditches for the new pipes in front of their respective homes. The association leadership provided guidance to the local laborers, since he had just returned from Saudi Arabia working in a construction company. 12 LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION IN METRO MANILA  Through SIDA World Bank Participation Fund, MEIP-Manila provided a matching grant covering approximately 25 percent of the total project cost. The new association successfully negotiated for supplier's credit for water meters. These meters monitored individual household connection in order that charging reflected actual household consumption. Individual households have thus become quite conscious about conserving water. Total water consumption dropped as evidenced by the drop in the operating time of the deep well pump for drawing groundwater. ~~~~~Mrkn ''SI, :1tr Mai:a''' ,..:.,.,....,,,....,....:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~........... .. .... ..'''.' Year Established 1984 Number of Households 108 Total Population 540 Average 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 not allow for individual toilets and baths. Nonetheless, they were keen on rehabilitating their PSF, and to even expand it. However, MEIP's community organizers noted that this community 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 PSF association and the barangay captain. With a promise from the barangay captain to not take over the PSF during discussions of resolution, MEIP was able to persuade both parties to work together to delineate roles and share PSF management responsibilities. The barangay assumed responsibility for supervising the PSF and auditing the association. The association concentrated on the day-to-day running of the facility. In turn, the leader of the PSF association 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 which would be decided by the Kalookan city council. Furthermore, the PSF was situated on land owned 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. MODELS OF COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE 13  Year Established 1984 No. Of Households 1,075 Total Population 5,373 Average monthly income of PSF P8-9000 Cost 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 share lessons and experiences. The World Bank's Urban Health and Nutrition Project with the Department of Health (DOH) decided to use MEIP's successful community-based and participatory approach in establishing additional PSFs in Metro Manila, Metro Cebu, and Metro Cagayan de Oro in southern Philippines. MIEIP also provides technical assistance to the DOH in implementing this project. Given that the need to set up more PSFs in other highly congested and depressed communities in the metropolis had been established, MEIP also helped interested local government units in packaging project proposals. Nine local governments responded, with local governments helping in determining sites and the number of beneficiaries, and then local communities validating these through community-based action planning. Five local governments received assistance in packaging proposals for additional PSFs under the Second Metro Manila Sewerage Project, with a total of US$2 million requested for this purpose. While the local governments had identified the need for the PSFs, community- based action planning validated the demand. Although the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) and the World Bank agreed to include the PSFs as a component of the Metro Manila Sewerage Project (METROS) II, the country's own National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) disapproved it. Nonetheless, MEIP is still helping search for other donors or other projects on which these proposals can be piggy-backed or create a suitable community environmental management project vehicle that includes sanitation. 14 LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION IN METRO MANILA  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 in themselves, with many of the same dynamics, and the same problems that apply to local community-based projects. This was the experience from the implementation of the DENR's Pollution Management Appraisal (PMA) or environmental audits for volunteer industrial firms throughout the country. The PMA program was first implemented by the DENR's Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) through the USAID-funded Industrial Environmental Management Project (IEMP). The PMA program focuses on identifying opportunities for waste minimization, clean and low cost or no cost technologies. This approach not only improves the firm's productivity and profitability, but also reduce the pollution load of the firm on the environment. MEIP-Manila also ran a PMA program in 1994 limited to the Metro Manila area and the surrounding provinces through its Industrial Efficiency and Pollution Control (IEPC) project. The IEPC study determined the extent of the contribution of industry to urban environmental degradation. IEPC determined the following: 1. Because of its wastewater, industry was a major contributor to biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) loading, the bulk of which comes from food processors, slaughterhouses and piggeries, beverage makers, chemical industries, and dyes and textile factories. 2. Toxic and hazardous wastes (THW) are a growing problem, with most of them emanating 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 to adopt waste minimization and reduction, and not to rely solely on end-of-pipe clean-up interventions. MEIP then packaged a grant in 1993 from the United States Technical and Development Agency (USTDA) that government and industry may be able to act jointly on the findings and recommendations of the IEPC. The components of this grant were pollution management appraisals (PMAs) for up to 25 companies, training for both government and MODELS OF COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE 15  industry counterparts, and technology matching visits. When the package was made, there was a conscious effort to upgrade the technical capability of government workers and industry at the same time. In the process, better relationships and understanding developed between the two sectors on the premise that both of them should be partners in environmental protection and management. MEIP created its PMA teams, each with a foreign specialist, a local consultant, technical staff from the volunteer firm, and technical representatives from the environmental regulatory agencies: DENR or the Laguna Lake Development Authority (LLDA). The participation of government representatives in the PMA team is a feature unique to MEIP. Volunteer firms under MEIP PMAs received assurance in writing by the DENR Secretary that information acquired during the strictly confidential audits would not be used against them by government. In order to maximize the impact of MEIP's PMAs, the Program targeted the most pollutive industry sectors in terms of organic (BOD) pollution and THW. Thus, the tannery and electroplater sectors were added, while the dye and textile sector was dropped due to lack of funds and work force. In the tradition of methods used in Ecological Waste Management, MEIP brought together several industrial firms through their industry subsector associations and mounted information workshops on the benefits of PMAs. These industry associations also helped identify the volunteer firms. Training workshops for each industry type were co-sponsored by their respective associations, while information gained from technology matching visits to the 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 a working rapport with industry, and thus re-establish a relationship of trust between these industries and DENR/LLDA. Only the MEIP PMA teams sent out to appraise volunteer industries regularly included a DENR representative, which was quite unheard of in the past. The combination of the PMAs, technology matching visits, and intense information workshops on waste minimization have had substantial results. For example, the Philippine Electroplaters Association developed a waste minimization program for its 40 members. Individual firms enrolled under MEIP's PMA program have also begun to realize savings or benefits from their own appraisals. Central Macaroni Company, Inc., was able to realize a 14.28 percent savings in diesel fuel used in steam generation, involving some 20,000 liters of diesel a year worth around P140,000. They were also able to reduce water consumption by 50 percent between 1993 and 1995. A chemical company called ALPOLAC, on the other hand achieved zero waste water discharge from the cleaning of their emulsion reactor in 1995. 16 LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION IN METRO MANILA  Industry groupings as a whole have also benefited from, these PMAs. The training workshops as well as the technology matching visits have been quite effective in providing technical assistance to other industry members, thus strengthening and sustaining their waste minimization efforts. Furthermore, these industry groups gain strength, since their members now receive concrete services from them. As a result, these industry groups have attracted more members. MODELS OF COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE 17  ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS FOR A NEW GENERATION Eco Campers are Happy Campers The examples of community and industrial initiatives to improve the environment are clearly laudable, and present a hopeful vision of a society taking into its hands the means to transition to sustainable development. However, we need not go to the extremes of environmental degradation to develop environmental conscience among Filipinos. Environment must always be at the core of an individual's formation. It is this belief that has driven MEIP-Manila to invest in the future of the Filipino youth and their role as environmentally responsible citizens. Information, education and communication must begin with the young. Since 1992, MEIP has been working with an NGO, Philippine Council for Peace and Global Education (PCPGE) conducting annual Youth Ecology Camps. The Camps include high school student leaders and teachers from schools in Metro Manila and nearby provinces. These Youth Camps feature presentations on the state of the environment, eco-spiritual reflections, and eco-trips to natural and degraded ecosystems in Metro Manila and its environs on Luzon Island. These camps also help youth participants and teachers explore their vision for a better future for the earth and the environment. MEIP is conducting its Seventh Youth Ecology Camp with PCPGE. Already, the Youth Ecology Camps have reached out to over 500 student leaders and teachers from 45 schools in the Metro Manila and neighboring areas. Although the numbers may 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 of leadership in the future. . . . . . . . ............. .................... . - ......... .. . . . . . . d . .. .... ...o No. of Schools 45 No. of Participants 510 The Youth Ecology Camps begin with a "reading of the times" in order to find out how the participants feel about the environment. Are they optimistic about the prospects of the environment, indifferent, or downright pessimistic? After this initial assessment, the participants divide into group workshops. These smaller group discussions cover current environmental issues, the extent of the environmental 18 LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION IN METRO MANILA  problem, the various sources of and solutions for the problem. Carefully selected resource people lead the workshops bringing with them the most credible sources of information for their particular subject. Field visits translate learning from the workshops into tangible examples. During these field visits, 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 of environment rehabilitation undertaken by various sectors. Participants from the previous Youth Ecology Camps return to talk to the current participants about how they are implementing their own environmental action programs from their experience at the Camp. With this exposure, the Eco Campers make their own action plans for their respective schools, for groups of schools in a given geographic area, and for the 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 a strong 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" or PCPGE Junior Associates. This youth environment network is now conducting its own information, education and communication activities and publishing a regular newsletter. It conducts seminars on the environment in their respective schools. MEIP and PCPGE are also 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 Interscholastic Ecology 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 north of Metro Manila. M:EIP and PCPGE in cooperation with the local DENR offices started the project. Adopt-a-Forest gives students an opportunity to work toward the rehabilitation of a whole 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 as anti-smoke belching. These seminars have resulted in the adoption of these programs in participating 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 of the future. MODELS OF COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE 19  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 are making efforts today to make the air cleaner, or at least livable, by curbing air pollution levels in Metro Manila. This urban area has 42 percent of the country's over 2 million registered motor 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 DENR through MEIP formulated a Clean Air 2000 Action Plan in 1994. The Philippine Council for Sustainable Development adopted this plan as part of the Philippine Agenda 21, for endorsement by President Fidel V. Ramos. The Clean Air Action Plan is meant to address air pollution as a comprehensive and integrated strategy. The Plan's formulators included the DENR, NGOs, private industry and organizations, public groups, and other government agencies. They agreed that one of its major components should be an intensified anti-smoke belching campaign targeted at offending vehicles. After all, any action against smoke belchers would be a move readily appreciated by the public. The DENR, therefore, mounted an information campaign on the scourge of air pollution in Metro Manila. Public awareness of the problem was an important ingredient to any effort at implementing specific actions to address the problem. Thus, the different "publics" were identified, to which specific information materials and communications plans were targeted. Letters to Cabinet members and the Legislature were sent out, white arrangements for media exposure of resource people were also made. Special effort was also made to reach out to motorists, especially drivers of public conveyances. In the past, whenever there were efforts to apprehend smoke belchers, the drivers of these public conveyances always threatened to go on strike. However, the results of the UP College of Public Health study for WHO showed that drivers received greatest exposure 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 routine maintenance of engines to lessen the risks of exposure. 20 LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION IN METRO MANILA  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 Government Code, have jurisdiction over anti-smoke belching. It was therefore urgent that they be mobilized for this campaign. Meetings with the Metro Manila Authority (now called the Metro Manila Development Authority) resulted in immediate creation of their own Metro Manila Air Pollution Action Teams. The teams received training from DENR and MEIP before being sent out in the field to Metro Manila's major thoroughfares. First the teams distributed information materials for two weeks, and then started actual testing of smoke belchers with Hartridge smoke meters lent by the DENR. After two weeks, actual apprehension of excessive smoke belchers commenced with the standard pegged at 80 to 100 percent density on the Ringelmann Chart. These standards marked the criteria to begin apprehension of the worst offenders, and thus signalling the beginning 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 to spot and apprehend the smoke belchers in different pathways. Apart from the Metro Manila Authority, its constituent local governments also participated in the program. Quezon and Manila cities participated, soon followed by municipalities of Makati and Muntinglupa (which have since become cities). DENR lent the Hartridge smoke meters to these local governments. Given the limited number of available testing equipment, other local governments started their own campaigns, with apprehended vehicles sent to pooled testing facilities. With part of the funds raised from collected fines, the local governments invested in their own testing equipment. The City of Makati, for instance, is one of the most successful implementors of this program, earning as much as P6 million from their portion of fines alone. 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-based environmental initiatives. Other government agencies have followed in implementing their own programs. For instance, the Land Transportation Office sent out its own mobile enforcement teams. The Philippine National Construction Corporation, which operates the North and South Luzon Tollways, set up its own teams to apprehend violators along the tollways. Over 100,000 vehicles 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. MODELS OF COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE 21  Meetings were also held with the Department of Interior and local government and the Philippine National Police to enlist their support. Police Officers are among the most exposed to air pollution as they patrol their beats or control traffic. The police agreed to mobilize and assist in the apprehension of smoke belchers. The private sector likewise mobilized to do their share. This has resulted in some of the more creative measures undertaken under the program. The Philippines' first multinational company, the San Miguel Corporation, responded by using its clout to influence its suppliers and 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 to his management that the company conduct business only with suppliers whose trucks or delivery vehicles meet the government emissions standards. Management supported and immediately implemented the recommendation. After all, they were the ones directly breathing the emissions from smoke-belching trucks. DENR trained the staff on emissions testing and initially lent the brewery a Hartridge smoke meter. Only vehicles that passed the emissions 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 to trucks 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 good example of working with an environmental conscience, willing to spend its funds to help clean 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, that figure is down to 5 percent or less. All these vehicles have stopped magnifying the air pollution problem wherever they go. This program has expanded and San Miguel is now encouraging 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 donated a Hartridge smoke meter for the use of the City of Makati and other local governments running similar programs. 22 LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION IN METRO MANILA  MEIP, A RICH HARVEST OF LESSONS LEARNED The MEIP Movement In the five years of MEIP operation in the Philippines, many lessons learned through experiences 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 can actually improve the delivery of environmental service in urban areas, and even complement those that are already being provided for by government. Mobilizing the limited resource in developing countries not only reduces the burden of national and local governments for environmental 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 seek out communities where the ingredients combine into a successful project, and where the activities can be emulated, where future community-based interventions can be tested. Among the factors which MEW believes are critical for achieving success include the following: First, the community must understand the problem and must be willing to act. It usually starts with awareness of a specific problem that directly effects them, and a realization that something must be done about it. However, it is important that the community identify the problem themselves, be convinced that there is a solution, and apply the solution themselves. For instance, in the ecological waste management municipality of Bustos, the mayor refused to devote excessive land area for garbage disposal in a town with a small land area. This directive was a factor in the adoption of this solid waste management strategy. Now, Bustos is one of the two pioneer model communities for ecological waste management, the other being Sta Maria. In the case of the Paco Public Market, awareness came from outside the community, since the awareness regarding Paco Public Market's pollution load to the estuary came from a UP study. However, this problem was shared with all those concerned--the vendors, the street hawkers, the market administration, the-mayor's office, the barangay councils, the regional authority, and the DENR. Initially, there was fingerpointing at everyone, but by the end of the day, everyone realized that if they were to survive, they had to clean up. The market was beginning to lose regular customers to supermarkets and other cleaner markets. When they realized this, they agreed to cooperate in planning and implementing a waste minimization project. MODELS OF COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE 23  Whether the awareness comes from outside or from within does not really matter. What is important is that this awareness must be nurtured through an organized campaign involving the entire community from the very beginning. Nobody must feel left out, even if it appears that complete participation cannot be initially obtained. House-to-house campaigns, community meetings, neighborhood bulletin boards, art contests and other awareness activities 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 that have been successful, a strong leader is always behind the success as one who generates and sustains interest. A few NGOs have organized communities to solve their problems, and though 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 the community has contributed to project success and sustainability. However, these champions must still work within the framework of the participatory process, involving and consulting the 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 the project itself. The community members must individually feel that they are stakeholders in whatever project they will undertake. They must believe that the plan is their plan, and that executing this plan is for their benefit. In the Paco experience, people from diverse backgrounds--NGO, multinational business, the national government, the City government, the vendors and the hawkers, DENR and MEIP collectively and individually feel that they won the project. The PSF experience in Marikina is likewise an example of this factor, and where the project ownership has actually resulted in a 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 community is an island. Communities still need outside support. They still need access to available technologies 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 government units. Fifth, there must be a basic willingness from the community to mobilize its own resources. We can see this in the Marikina PSF association that mobilized its own funds as well as logistic support for the project. In the Paco Public market, vendors and hawkers took the 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 such community-based actions, that such actions may be a sign of the local government's weakness. However, the growth of environmental awareness in the Philippines coupled with 24 LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION IN METRO MANILA  the emphasis on empowerment of the people has had most local governments welcoming local-based actions. These communities become partners in the overall effort to manage and conserve the environment. With the presence of these factors for success, projects become doable, but also more replicable. 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 and emulate them. Just as MEIP-Manila has identified these factors for success, it has also culled from its experiences the following lessons: 1. It is not difficult to mobilize local resources when positive environmental impacts are designed from the beginning to show direct and/or tangible economical and/or social benefits. People are generally willing to invest time, effort and money on activities where they will see concrete benefits. 2. External inputs are important, and sometimes absolutely necessary, but need not always be in the form of capital investment. Traditionally, external assistance meant the infusion of funds, the procurement of hardware, or infrastructure. In many cases, however, external assistance for environmental initiatives can be successful even when this comes as technology transfer, innovative management approaches or community organization. 3 . The various sectors of a community must develop an environmental conscience as an anchor for all environmental activities. There must be a sustained effort on the part of government, NGOs, academe, and other environmentally supportive sectors of society to conduct environmental information, education and communication activities. The fundamental goal is to awaken and develop environmental consciousness and consciences among all people. The development of an environmental conscience cannot be left to chance alone, since this often means that environmental disasters or other serious threats and damage to the environment would have already occurred. 4. Governments must downplay centralized command-and-control approaches in favor of building partnerships with the private sector as a means of achieving environmental progress. Government must be a partner rather than viewed as a benefactor or an enforcer. 5. Even as government uses less command and control, it must nonetheless remain dead serious in its implementation and enforcement of environmental laws, rules and regulations. MODELS OF COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE 25  These five lessons bring to focus the MEIP approach of bringing solutions to environmental problems in the hands of local communities and the private sector, or at least in partnership with them. Experience has shown that when a community assumes responsibility for local environmental problems and ownership of its solutions, then there is a far greater chance of sustained effort and involvement in these solutions. Consequently, such communities assume greater responsibilities for other areas of public welfare. MEIP-Manila is confident that community governance is the wave of the future. As more and more communities assume their rightful role as stakeholders and not just beneficiaries from the state, the overall quality of the urban environment will be enhanced. The cost to government will be far more realistic. MIEIP and other environment programs must act as catalysts, helping replicate positive lessons and experiences, and making sure that the factors for success are present and well in place. In this role, therefore, MEIIP becomes less a foreign-assisted, government-linked project, and more an advocate and facilitator of change. In this regard, MEIP has become a movement. 26 LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION IN METRO MANILA