A Report on the Cultural Protection and Development Summit

A REPORT ON THE

CULTURAL PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT SUMMIT October 6 -7, 2016 Heritage Hotel, Manila

National Commission for Culture and the Arts Produced under the Planning and Policy Office of the Plan/Policy Formulation and Programming Division of the National Commission for Culture and the Arts Text by Technical Working Committee Design by Mervin Concepcion Vergara Photos by Marvin Alcaraz Copyright Š 2016 by the National Commission for Culture and the Arts 633 General Luna Street, Intramuros, 1002 Manila, Philippines.

Telephone: (+63 2) 527-2192, (+63 2) 527-2202 Facsimile: (+63 2) 527-2191, (+63 2) 527-2194 E-mail: info@ncca.gov.ph Web site: www.ncca.gov.ph

OUTLINE OF THE REPORT Table of Contents 4 6

29

39 42 43

I. Introduction II. Philippine Culture: A Situationer A. Philippine Cultural Traditions B. The Physical Environment C. The Policy and Institutional Environment D. The Economic Environment E. The Socio-Political Environment F. International Developments Concerning Culture G. Conclusion

III. Challenges for the Culture Sector A. Shallow understanding and experiencing of Philippine culture,

and weak appreciation of the impacts of culture, and the importance of cultural education B. Inadequate and restrictive State policies on culture C. Insufficient and inappropriate promotion of culture D. Challenges related to culture, tourism and the private sector E. Human resource-related challenges in culture F. Weaknesses in soft and hard infrastructure support for culture G. Onerous access to funding support, and limited funding for culture H. Challenges concerning IPs and Bangsamoro I. Limited constituency and champions for culture, and governance

weaknesses in cultural processes IV. Goals and Outcomes

V. Recommendations

A. Consolidated Policy Recommendations 1. Policy Recommendations on Access to Cultural Resources 2. Policy Recommendations on Conservation and Safeguarding

of Cultural Properties and Heritage 3. Policy Recommendations on Cultural Education 4. Policy Recommendations on Culture-based Sustainable Development 5. Other Policy Recommendations

49

52

58

B. Policy Recommendations Clustered by Target Offices 1. For the Office of the President and/or the Office of the Cabinet Secretary 2. For Philippine Congress 3. For Cultural Agencies 4. For Cultural Agencies in Collaboration with Other Agencies / Government Units 5. For Allied Agencies

C. Recommended Programs and Partnerships 1. Program/Partnership Recommendations: Access to Cultural Resources 2. Program/Partnership Recommendations: Conservation

and Safeguarding of Cultural Resources 3. Program/Partnership Recommendations: Cultural Education 4. Program/Partnership Recommendations: Culture-based Sustainable Development

V. Annex A:Clustered Challenges

3

INTRODUCTION

T

he culture sector recognizesthe government support for culture across different Administrations.

The passage of different laws such as the RA No. 7356, the Law Creating the National Commission for Culture and the Arts and the National Endowment Fund for Culture and the Arts, the fund to support cultural development programs;RA No. 10066, the Cultural Heritage Law of 2009; as well as other legislations to institutionalize government support for culture, are proofs of such intent.

President Rodrigo Roa Duterte’s administration wants to push this further as it now places culture at the heart of a positive transformative change. The administration’s socio-economic agenda unequivocally include a goal that explicitly focused on culture and creativity. Goal # 5 of the Social Development Agenda is stated as, “Develop a culture-sensitive development program that advances artistic expression and strengthens Filipino identity and nationalism”.

On the other hand, the networks of cultural workers, artists, educators, social activists and development workers throughout the country are resolute to prove that culture indeed can aid the fight against poverty, the war against drugs, the resolve to restore peace and order, and, the effort to strengthen communities in achieving freedom of want and freedom from fear.

In order to provide a venue for multi-stakeholder discussion on goals, challenges and outcomes on culture as well as craft strategies to address priority challenges for 2017 – 2022, a Summit on Cultural Protection and Developmentwas conductedon October 6-7, 2016 at the Heritage Hotel in Metro Manila. More than 200 participants from cultural workers and artists’ groups, government agencies (cultural and allied), regional development councils, local governments, private sector, and international partners attended the Summit.

The objectives of the Summit were: 1. To provide a venue for multi-stakeholder discussion on challenges, goals and outcomes on culture 2. To craft strategies to address the identified challenges on culture for 2017-2022; and 3. To provide input for the “Chapter on Culture� of the Philippine Development Plan 2017-2022 This Report expresses the challenges and the recommended strategies that were raised during the Summit.

Additional data have been provided to contextualize and elaborate on the challenges and recommendations in consideration of the envisioned readers and users of this Report.

In addition, the participants express confidence that the present administration would build more windows, open more doors, as well as pave more pathways, to strengthen the Filipino culture as a crucial pillar in sustainable and inclusive growth of the Philippine society.

5

PHILIPPINE CULTURE: A SITUATIONER

T

he 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines declares, “The State shall foster the preservation, enrichment, and dynamic evolution of a Filipino national culture based on the principle of unity in diversity in a climate of free artistic and intellectual expression.”

The UNESCO World Conference on Cultural Policies (Mexico, 1982) defines culture as ” “set of distinctive spiritual, material, intellectual, and emotional features of society or a social group, and that it encompasses, in addition to art and literature, lifestyles, ways of living together, value systems, traditions and beliefs”. It includes “knowledge, beliefs, arts, morals, laws, customs, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by [a human] as a member of society.”

While culture is considered to be the way of life of a people, it is also dynamic. It is continuously restructured as new generations innovate, create and change certain aspects of culture to make these relevant to current and emerging demands.

Philippine Cultural Traditions The Philippine indigenous culture fragmented during the colonial rule into three traditions. There is a basic ethnic Malay tradition whose cultural expressions are still found intact among cultural communities, some of whom were Islamized, who were pushed to the periphery of Philippine society in the wake of colonial rule. The lowland Hispanized Christian tradition is found among major ethno-linguistic groups which comprise more than 80% of the country’s population. An Americanized/Western tradition affects the first two traditions, propagated as it were by the educational system and the mass media, and which is predominant among urbanized groups.

6

This cultural fragmentation has been manifested in various ways in the course of post-colonial history. There is lack of understanding and also mistrust among various ethno-linguistic groups. Parochialism or regionalism tends to prevail in the way Filipinos conduct their affairs. The Western paradigm dominates not only popular culture but even executive planning and legislation. These have affected the evolution of a national culture.

Over the past six decades, many positive contributions from artists and cultural workers, the academe, government, communities and the private sector have enabled the further development of culture. A national culture continues to evolve and grow. A limited concept of culture that is confined to the arts is no longer the dominant view. There is better appreciation of culture not only as a vital aspect of development, but as central to any form of development.

Nevertheless, much is still to be desired. The physical, legal, economic, political and socialenvironments that surround and predicate the condition of our cultural resources, whether tangible or intangible, are not so conducive to their overall conservation and safeguarding.

Our precious heritage of history, habitat, monuments, built edifices and movable works, and most especially our traditions, lifeways, and artistic expressions is continually periled each day by the vicissitudes of time and technology, as well as by the effects of globalization and modernization. There are also other factors that impinge on them, causing various levels of vulnerability, neglect, distortion, as well as disregard. In the process, the call for greater conservation and protection demands greater attention.

The Physical Environment The natural catastrophes in the last ten years, most especially the Bohol earthquake, the Yolanda storm surge, and the recurrent typhoons, landslides, flash floods, reveal the fragile nature of our eco-systems. Aggravating these unexpected phenomena are the rampant man-made exploitative violations on our natural resources that further hasten debilitation, loss, destruction, and death in the bio-diversity in our waters, forests, air, and soil. All these coalesce in the bigger scenario of global warming and climate change. As an evidence of the extent of our ecological crisis, the Philippines filed a case of climate injustice [violation of rights to life] against 42multinational corporations responsible for the largest bulk of carbon emissions of the world.

These onslaughts on our natural heritage take a toll on the continued existence of our cultural resources: centuries-old churches, sites and monuments, ancestral homes, are wiped out; objects of arts are laid waste; culture-based livelihoods are disrupted and discontinued, causing long periods of grief, trauma, displacement, ennui. In many cases, efforts at reconstruction, repair, rehabilitation, or resurrection, tend to lose aspects of our historical and cultural memory.

This sorely shows the country’s inadequate experience, expertise and facilities, let alone preparedness, in the protection of our heritage in the face of natural disasters.

The Policy and Institutional Environment Commonwealth Act No. 184, November 13, 1936, An Act to establish a National Language Institute mandated to study the Philippine dialects in general for the purpose of evolving and adopting a common national language based on one of the existing native tongues. Presidential Decree No. 15, October 5, 1972 established the Cultural Center of the Philippines, which is mandated to construct, establish and maintain in a single site a national theater, a national music hall, an art gallery and such other buildings and facilities as are necessary or desirable for the holding of conferences, seminars, concerts and the like; awaken the consciousness of our people to our cultural heritage, and to encourage them to assist in its preservation, promotion, enhancement and development; cultivate and

7

enhance public interests in, and appreciations of, distinctive Philippine arts in various fields; discover, assist and develop talents, connected with Philippine cultural pursuits and create greater opportunities for individual and national self-expression in cultural affairs; and encourage the organization of cultural groups, associations or societies and the holding or staging of cultural exhibitions, performances and similar activities.

Republic Act (RA) No. 9470 of 2007, establishingthe National Archives of the Philippines mandated to preserve, conserve and store the public archives and be made available to the public.

RA No. 3873 established the National Library of the Philippines, which mandated theNLP as the repository of the printed and recorded cultural heritage of the country and other intellectual literary and information sources shall provide access to these resources for our people’s intellectual growth, citizenship building, life-long learning, and enlightenment.

RA No. 8492 of1998 or the “National Museum Act of 1998” was enacted establishing the National Museum as an educational institution, as scientific institution and as a cultural center.

RA No. 10086 of 2009 or the “National Historical Commission of the Philippines Act” established the NHCP as the primary government agency responsible for history and has the authority to determine all factual matters relating to official Philippine history.

RANo. 7356 created the National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA) and establishing the National Endowment Fund for Culture and the Arts (NEFCA). The NCCA is mandated to formulate policies for the development of culture and the arts; to implement policies in coordination with affiliated cultural agencies to administer the National Endowment Fund for Culture and the Arts (NEFCA); to encourage artistic creation within the climate of artistic freedom; to develop and promote the Filipino national culture and the arts; and, to preserve Filipino cultural heritage.

All the above-mentioned agencies have past decades of work delivered to the nation in their respective programs and services towards preserving and promoting the country’s astounding array of cultural legacies.

The Philippine Agenda 21 likewise pronounces that, “a consensus is emerging, in the Philippines and abroad that people and the integrity of nature and culture are at the center of development initiatives. Therefore, a central goal of development is the improvement of human wellbeing, and the quality of life. The development of people and their culture – both as the ultimate end and as a means for attaining that goal – has been the guiding principle for development policies and strategies” Moreover, the National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA) and its Affiliated Cultural Agencies through RANo. 10066, pursue the following objectives: a) protect, preserve, conserve and promote the nation’s cultural heritage, its property and histories, and the ethnicity of local communities; b) establish and strengthen cultural institutions; and, c) protect cultural workers and ensure their professional development and well-being.

Furthermore, the General Welfare Clause (Section 16) of the Local Government Code of the Philippines (RA No. 7160) pronounces that “Local government units, within their respective territorial jurisdictions, shall ensure and support, among other things, the preservation and enrichment of culture, promote health and safety, enhance the right of the people to a balanced ecology, encourage and support the development of appropriate and self-reliant scientific and technological capabilities, improve public morals, enhance economic prosperity and social justice, promote full employment among their residents, maintain peace and order, and preserve the comfort and convenience of their inhabitants.”

The presence of the national cultural agencies and the increase of centers of arts and culture in the local levels provide a most promising picture of cultural work. However, it has been observed that many of these agencies have overlapping mandates and programs. Existing laws do not provide clear guidelines for conservation

8

of cultural properties. This has led to many occasions of confusion and tension not only between and among these agencies but moreover, with the local communities with whom they are engaged with.

Basic communities in the more marginalized sectors of our society tend to be left out in the equation of cultural protection.

The Economic Environment Protecting culture has never been a priority in economic programs and services. Budgetary allocations from the national and local governments suffer an all-time low in comparison to other programs, resulting in non-implementation of desired programs from infrastructure development, to programs on capability building for conserving and safeguarding heritage. Insufficiency of funds impedes the realization of programs on the study and actual practice of restoration, rehabilitation, documentation, or revitalization. The general attitude to how culture is not central to holistic development impacts upon the low level of economic support provided for its secured survival and continuity. On top of all these, requirements for scientific conservation truly demand not a meager availability of funds.

The Socio-Political Environment The general situation of poverty amongst our communities caused by unemployment, inadequate access to opportunities, low education, surrounds and weaves into all aspects of cultural work.

The system of education of the Philippines is a product of centuries of colonization. While there are attempts at present to localize and contextualize the curriculum in the formal education, this has only been worked only on the surface. Much has to be done to provide a culture-based education that protects cultural diversity and promotes national unity.

Furthermore, traditional patronage in Philippine political life has proven to impact on the continuity and disposition of cultural practice and management. Choice of cultural activities, designation of cultural officers and staff, creation of cultural offices or departments, are dependent on the personal choice of the local executives who in several instances reflect actual biases or low knowledge or awareness of the nature and gamut of true cultural development work. Continuous shifts in political administration sorely affect the continuity of positive cultural activities.

Many cultural scholars bemoan the historical injustice on the treatment of our Indigenous and Moro Peoples. In Mindanao for instance, our nation’s most exemplary haven of cultural diversity, many indigenous communities thrive across the breadth of that region. However, the social exclusion and discrimination they suffer from and the non-conclusion of peace talks among the different warring groups hamper access to cultural assets and vigorous continuance of heritage practice.

The present scenario of fear and violence precipitated by the rash of unexplained killings cause instability and confusion, which is favorable atmosphere for the protection of cultural heritage.

The question and discourse on national identity is a much-contentious field of contestation and disagreements. Our TV shows and movies extol visual and aural symbols, characters, designs, replete with cultural ignorance and misinformation. Â Communities in general do not care about their heritage or do not bother to know more about it and its importance. The low appreciation of the culture of our indigenous communities, the problems of misrepresentation and misleading appropriation, problematize further the need for cultural conservation and safeguarding.

Lastly, local government unitsrarely apply a cultural perspective to the resolution of key development issues such as poverty alleviation or social cohesion. In fact, the social benefits of activities in cultural heritage and cultural expression may well be greater in developing countries than in industrialized societies.

9

The Cultural Center of the Philippines The Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP) is the national center for the performing arts. It is mandated to promote excellence in the arts through the initiation and implementation of activities that aim to improve and elevate standards among cultural workers, artists and audiences and to recognize the multiplicity and differences of aesthetic experiences and standards encompassing the arts from grassroots to those formulated by academytrained artists.

10

11

The National Archives of the Philippines The National Archives of the Philippines (Pambansang Sinupan ng Pilipinas) is the official repository of the nation’s permanent records and records of archival and historical value. The task of guaranteeing that documents and records are stored, indexed and made accessible to the public lies with the National Archives of the Philippines. As such, it also has the lofty goal of preserving evidence of our Filipino heritage.

12

13

Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino The Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino (KWF) is tasked to undertake, coordinate and promote researches for the development, propagation and preservation of Filipino and other Philippine languages. It is the mission of the KWF to formulate, coordinate and implement research programs/projects to enhance the further development and enrichment of Filipino as a medium of general communication as well as for intellectual pursuits. It is the KWF’s vision to make Filipino a modern language, which can be used as an effective instrument for national development.

14

15

The National Library of the Philippines The National Library of the Philippines (NLP) serves as the country’s premier repository of printed and recorded materials which reflect the intellectual, literary and cultural heritage of the Philippines as well as the knowledge and wisdom of peoples elsewhere in the world. While acquiring and maintaining a comprehensive national collection of library resources, the NLP promotes access to these research and information materials and makes them available for the use of the present and future generations of Filipinos.

16

17

The National Commission for Culture and the Arts As the government arm for culture and the arts, the National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA) is the overall policy-making, coordinating, and grants-giving agency for the preservation, development and promotion of Philippine arts and culture; and executing agency for the policies it formulates; and an agency tasked to administer the National Endowment Fund for Culture and the Arts (NEFCA).

18

19

The National Historical Commission of the Philippines The NHCP, as an arm in the culture and development agenda of the government, envisions “a Filipino society with citizens informed of their history, who love their country and proud of their cultural heritage.� Its mission is the promotion of Philippine history and cultural heritage through research, dissemination, conservation, sites management and heraldry works. It aims to inculcate awareness and appreciation of the noble deeds and idealsof our heroes and other illustrious Filipinos, to instill pride in the Filipino race and to rekindle the Filipino spirit through the lessons of history.

20

21

The National Musuem of the Philippines The National Museum (NM) is tasked with the preservation, conservation and protection of movable and immovable cultural properties and for the enjoyment of present and future generations. With a three-dimensional goal covering diverse fields of knowledge through various educational, scientific and cultural activities, it is envisioned as the premier institution and repository of our heritage, and as an exciting, informative, and enjoyable place to visit—a place that inspires people to learn from our traditions so as to help shape a better future.

22

23

International Developments Concerning Culture The UNESCO describes culture as both a driver and an enabler, both as means and ends of sustainable development.

“Culture as a means, is an enabler of sustainability, through the specific contributions that it makes --as knowledge capital and a sector of activity --- to promote inclusive social and economic development, environmental sustainability, harmony, peace and security.

Cultural resources, such as tangible and intangible heritage, arts, cultural expressions, are essential elements for the development of people and communities.

On the other hand, culture as an ends, is a driver for sustainable development, a source of meaning and vitality, a wellspring of creativity and innovation, and a resource to address challenges and find appropriate solutions.

Culture enhances the opportunities of all human beings, framed within a rights-based approach and the recognition and respect for cultural diversity.”

Further, UNESCO has defined the power of culture for development: 1. “Culture a Vehicle for Economic Development” 2. “Culture a Vehicle for Social Cohesion and Stability” 3. “Culture a Vehicle for Environmental Sustainability” 4. “Culture a Vehicle for Resilient Communities” In a number of countries, economic contributions of culture are accounted for, like in: • Mali’s culture sector accounts for 5.8% of employment in 2004 and 2.38% of GDP in 2006 (2007 IBF for the EC).

24

• Colombia’s craft production brings an annual income of US$400 million [including US$40 million in exports]. This helps to provide workers in the sector income ranging from US$140 to US$510 annually (2009 UWR).

Their 650,000 tourists brought in revenues of US$800 million (2009 UWR).

• Morocco’s crafts production forms 19% of its GDP [including exports estimated at US$63 million] (2009 UWR).

Their tourism industry contributed 6.5% of GDP (2009 UWR).

• Brazil’s ‘creative’ sector has contributed 6.7% of GDP in 1998.

• In Guatemala, cultural industries grew at a rate of 7.3% annually from 2001to 2005. This was a higher rate than that in most other sectors of the economy. Cultural industries also employed 7.14% of the labor force (2008 UNCTAD, Creative economy report).

• Thailand’s craft-workers are estimated to be 2 million with almost a half working full-time (2009 UWR).

• Australia’s 15 World heritage areas contribute to the GDP with over AU$12 billion, and more than 40,000 jobs (2008 DEWHA).

• UK’s GDP owes over £20 billion to heritage tourism and £5 billion annually to music (2010 MLA).

• EU’s television, cinema, music, performing arts and entertainment generated €654 billion or 2.6% of the GDP in 2003 employing 5.8 million people in 2004 (2006 EC).

25

According to the same UNESCO report in 1980s and early 1990s, international efforts at modernization and development recognized the need to place people at the center of development processes and with that the significance of culture. In 1982, The World Conference on Cultural Policies in Mexico constituted a landmark for the acknowledgment of the indivisibility of culture and development.

In 1988 - 1998, UNESCO launched the World Decade on Culture and Development to advocate for the contribution of culture in national and international development policies. This has lead to establishing international standard-setting instruments and demonstration tools, such as cultural statistics, inventories, and mapping of cultural resources, as well as to an increasing focus on cultural industries.

UNDP launched in 1990 the publication of the Human Development Report emphasizing the idea of development as the enlargement of choices and in 1992-1996, UN World Commission on Culture and Development prepared a report espousing an expanded view of cultural diversity to recognize all forms of difference that excluded people from the development processes and outcomes.

By 1998, an Intergovernmental Conference on Cultural Policies for Development in Stockholm recognized cultural diversity as essential for development, emphasizing the value of cultural pluralism and creative diversity. Likewise, in 1999 UNESCO – World Bank Intergovernmental Conference, “Culture Counts: Financing Resources and the Economics of Culture in Sustainable Development” in Florence, acknowledged the cultural capital as being crucial to advancing sustainable development and economic growth.

In 2001, UNESCO’s Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity recognized culture and cultural diversity as an ethical imperative and as vital to achieving economic and social development. Finally, in 2005, UNESCO’s Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions acknowledged culture’s contribution to sustainable development and put culture and development together at its core Following all these local and global trends, the more than two hundred (200) participating artists, cultural workers, art administrators and development workers in the Culture Protection and Development Summit have affirmed that there are substantial evidences on the significant role of culture in sustainable development.

26

In the global arena, the UNESCO has long been a leading advocate for the need to broaden the development paradigm in ways that embrace the fullness of the human and cultural dimension of development. The report of the World Commission on Culture and Development states: “Sustainable development and the flourishing of culture – the ever-changing flow of human meanings, memories and bonds – should be seen as interdependent… and the access to and participation in cultural life being a fundamental right of individuals in all communities, governments have a duty to create conditions for the full exercise of this right.” (Our Cultural Diversity, 1995) Moreover, the UN Resolutions on “Culture and Development” acknowledge culture as an important factor of social inclusion and poverty eradication, and call for the mainstreaming of culture into development policies and strategies, thus underscoring culture’s intrinsic contribution to sustainable development (UN Resolution N. 65/166, 2010 and N.66/208, 2011).

Dr. Raul N. Sunico, President of the Cultural Center of the Philippines opines that culture impacts on society in terms of addressing challenges and in generating changes. This is evidence by the success of the various programs such as “Arts for Poverty Alleviation and Values Transformation, Political Art, Schools of Living Tradition, Culture as a force in Environment Conservation, among others.

Professor Felipe M. de Leon, Jr., the Chairman of the NCCA, asserts that all models of development are essentially cultural; they reflect a culture’s perception of the problems faced by the society, and they incorporate solutions to those problems based on that perception, and developed from the cultural resources of the society itself. Culture is society’s life support system (Building and Healing the Nation through Culture and Arts, 2016).

27

Conclusion The above discussionof culture and its environments clearly defines the significance of culture in the development of the country and its people.

Hence, there is an urgent challenge to more mainstream effectively cultural policies and programs in governance including the operational support arrangements to advance the principles of culture-in-sustainable development.

The Social Development Agenda of the Duterte Administration will pave the way for the engagement of civil society and the artist communities in the framing of public policies aimed at advancing the contributions of culture in holistic human development.

Likewise, the Agenda may encourage new means of private funding, from major foundations to small companies as supplementary sources of funds, particularly with a view to supporting the creation, the expression and the dissemination of contemporary works. Furthermore, the Agenda will push further dialogue and exchanges for the local communities to broaden their understanding of the content of cultural rights as an integral part of human rights.

It is from these contexts, that the participants of the Cultural Protection and Development Summit shared more specific challenges in the development of culture, ensuring improved access to cultural resources, conservation and safeguarding of cultural resources, development of responsive cultural education programs and process, sustaining culture-in-governance, and, promotion of a vibrant cultural industry.

28

PHILIPPINE CULTURE: CHALLENGES

T

his section summarizes the significant issues on cultural practice that were raised in the four (4) thematic workshops. Generally, the participants commentedthat, “while countless policies and programs on culture have been made at both the national and local levels, the gap between this discourse and actual practice remains very wide.”

Hence, culture takes a back seat in development leaving the enormous cultural assets or resources of the communities continuously depreciate because most policy makers and development administrators in the local levels consider viable culture-led development policies and programs as the least in their priorities. This neglect is evident, among others in the following negative, albeit challenging conditions mentioned in this section.

“The poverty of spirit, of beliefs and of expression is as debilitating as poverty of goods.

By the same token, the safeguard of cultural diversity is as important as the achievement of economic self-sufficiency…”

29

There were many challenges identified during the Summit. They have been clustered into the following (see Annex A for the full clustering): A. Shallow understanding and experiencing of Philippine culture, and weak appreciation of the impacts of culture, and the importance of cultural education B. Inadequate and restrictive State policies on culture C. Insufficient and inappropriate promotion of culture D. Challenges related to culture, tourism and the private sector E. Human resource-related challenges in culture F. Weaknesses in soft and hard infrastructure support for culture G. Onerous access to funding support, and limited funding for culture H. Challenges concerning IPs and Bangsamoro I. Limited constituency and champions for culture, and governance weaknesses in cultural processes The challenges are each described in the succeeding section.

A. Shallow Understanding and Experiencing of Philippine Culture, and Weak Appreciation of the Impacts of Culture, and the Importance of Cultural Education Philippine mainstream society’s identity was shaped by the experience of imperialism and colonization by Spain for almost four centuries. This had an impact in various levels – (a) governance (by the mestizo class); (b) feudal-based economy; (c) European-influenced arts; and,(d) religion– the predominantly Catholic nation in Asia.

30

This identity created dualities. Those who were not subject to Spanish rule were branded as infieles y barbaro (infidels and barbarians), the label attached to communities who practiced pre-colonized cultures. Thus, the other came to be defined as the Philippine indigenous peoples --- “... original inhabitants who have not been colonized, who managed to resist centuries of colonization and have retained their own customs, traditions and lifeways” (http://www.ncip.gov.ph/resources/ethno.php).

Colonization became a defining feature of who the indigenous and non-indigenous population at present.

The United States occupied the country roughly only 50 years, yet Philippine identity continues to be shaped by the U.S. through neo-colonialist strategies. The Philippine economy has become dependent on American capitalist policies. Economic dependence has its own social effects: the creation of class difference and diaspora of the Filipino as early as the 1950s. Even among mainstream cultures, emulated identities come from an American society. The effect has permeated in many aspects of the Filipino life such as in education, expressions of art, and media. Chairman Felipe de Leon and film director/producer Kidlat Tahimik see kapwa as the core value from which the Filipino can anchor one’s identity.

There is an elitist view of art and culture that favours Western tastes, styles, and practices. Besides, there is a commercial appreciation of culture that looks for “star value.”

Furthermore, a mind-set privileges the dictates of economy over the needs of culture. A strong colonial education reinforces alienating Western aesthetics. The absence and/or ignorance of culture-rooted governance devalued our own cultural integrity and sense of pride as a nation. The elitist and commercialized view of art and culture undermine the rich cultural resource left untapped.

In more contemporary times, a rampant disregard for human rights that hinder the protection of cultural resources has been noted. This violation of human rights is seen the aspects of: (a) welfare and life of the indigenous peoples; (b) present condition of marginalized sectors; (c) natural heritage and climate injustice; and,(d) peace and security.

It was only quite recently that the Philippine educational system emphasized the need to localize and contextualize content in the formal educational setting. Localization according to Department of Education (DepEd) means “Freedom for schools or local authorities to adapt the curriculum to local conditions and relating the context of the curriculum and the process of teaching and learning to the local environment”...

(Taylor 2004).

Since 2014, teachers and school heads have been encouraged to localize cultural content in their respective schools. However, this has been a painstaking process. Teachers across the nation complain that there is a dearth of learning materials, whichare localized.

Indeed years of colonial educational system has produced a generation of skilled, educated Filipinos but with little or no rootedness to culture. While attempts have been made by the DepEdto create a culture-based program, this has been rather too slow and derailed by so much bureaucracy. It has been observed for example that textbooks do not even reflect the different cultural communities of the country.

Consensus was reached on the need to mainstream cultural education not just in the nation’s educational system [basic to tertiary and technical vocational] but also in alternative learning modalities that allow out-of-campus lifelong culture-focused, rights-based education of fellow Filipinos. Such a program must be designed to strengthen national identity, instil pride of place, and celebrate the shared heritage of our multicultural peoples in the shared journey toward a sustainable, resilient, and inclusive future.

Likewise, a strong consensus was reached in the institutionalization and mainstreaming of crosscutting cultural education in formal, out-of campus and alternative learning systems. Such culture-focused and rights-based comprehensive education program celebrates the shared heritage designed to strengthen national identity in the context of multicultural diversity.

31

There is a need to develop a more comprehensive and sustain training program encompassing basic, advance and specialized skills and knowledge.

Cultural education should not only be confined in the formal educational setting. This can also be sustained in the non-formal and alternative settings. Very few academic institutions embark on programs that focus on culture and the arts, much more its institutionalization.

Included in the system is the need to overhaul the curriculum from the basic to higher education to make teaching culturally relevant. As enablers of culture, teachers need to be trained and rooted in a culture-based philosophy and pedagogy.

B. Inadequate and Restrictive State Policies on Culture All cultural institutions of government have their respective laws and mandates. A cursory look at those laws manifests an overlap on the tasks of conservation and protection of cultural resources, despite delineation on the areas or subjects of actual conservation. Hence, there is a need to review all existing laws on heritage and the charters of these cultural agencies.

On the other hand, there has been failure to adopt international covenants and resolutions on culture.

Lack of inclusive responsive policy on culture needs to be felt in the grassroots whereby an inter-agency convergence is encouraged. Management of cultural resources, especially access, safeguarding and conservation and education should be prioritized over tourism programs.

There is also lack of penalty clauses in state policies, hence, local government may choose not to enforce stipulations of laws that allow wider culture dissemination.

There are limitations posed by the Cultural Heritage Act. It does not relate or make reference to other laws like the Philippine Mining Act of 1995, the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act of 1997 or the IPRA law, etc.

There are no related heritage policies in the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010 (RA 10121). In the Yolanda affected areas, the damages identified for rehabilitation were only those declared as cultural landmarks or treasures. Some local government unitsproposed rehabilitation for structures without considering that there were significant old municipal buildings that needed attention too as well.

Policies on protection, export, sale and the acquisition of cultural properties are wanting, including coordination system and protocols in planning and implementing conservation projects. In several cases, parish priests are not informed of conservation policies before they undergo rehabilitation of damaged churches or convents. Local community stakeholders expressed the lack of consultation or discussion on plans for the rehabilitation of their cultural structures.

There indeed is a need to revisit all existing laws on heritage. The workshop noted that there is a lack of congruence among these laws and policies on heritage conservation, and these do not provide clear guidelines for conservation of cultural property and the safeguarding of cultural resources. This fact accentuates the possibility of creating a single comprehensive law on heritage.

While there is absence or lack of awareness and appreciation of cultural heritage there is also lack of incentives to private owners to preserve cultural properties.

32

C. Insufficientand Inappropriate Promotion of Culture There are few incentives or encouragement for greater participation and involvement in State-sponsored programs and projects by communities. There are very few sustained consultations or dialogues between culture agencies, local governments, non-government organizations and indigenous communities. If these venues for conversations are ill-sustained, local ownership and active participation in culture is not encouraged. Thus, little or no investment is given to social issues that affect the life ways of communities and culture is rarely mobilized to foster greater ends.

Bureaucracy and the tedious processes it spawns greatly prevent active participation of peoples in the cultural life of their communities.

The media is a powerful tool for education. However, in the Philippine setting, its influence pervades Philippine culture, oftentimes to the detriment of a healthy Filipino consciousness. Most of the programs portray negative images of the Filipino, which contribute to a sense of inferiority. Instead of highlighting Filipino strengths and characteristics, the media especially television and film depict a Filipino image of subservience and colonial mentality. Through the years, there are attempts by media practitioners to contribute to nation building through the various documentaries and programs, which portray the diversity of Philippine cultures, but these programs remain on the fringes rarely landing on a prime time slot in television. Film producers will have to take a substantial risk if the film is about a historical figure or event.

With majority of the Filipinos in the youth bracket, the media can be tapped to enhance cultural education all over the country.

D. Challenges Related to Culture, Tourism and the Private Sector The perception that higher economic gains can be derived from tourism rather than culture affects support for culture.

There are no incentives to private owners to preserve cultural heritage.

There are also no incentives for investment in culture to advance corporate social responsibility; and new models of innovative Investment for culture are not available.

E. Human Resource-related Challenges in Culture There is a lack of professional cultural workers for the conservation and safeguarding of the Philippine heritage The recent process of rehabilitating the damaged churches and civic structures after the Bohol and Cebu earthquake and the Yolanda storm surge reveals many realities in the praxis of cultural conservation. Our local communities, architects, engineers, are not fully and adequately equipped with the knowledge of materials and skills in conservation processes and methods. No one ever thought that such devastation would happen in such a great scale. Foreign experts had to be flown in to study the nature and extent of the damage and propose solutions. In almost all the cases, there are no comprehensive documentation / record of the structures, to which rehabilitation could be based.

Important centers of cultural conservation are few and far between in the Philippines. The National Historical Commission of the Philippines, the National Museum of the Philippines, the UST Graduate School – Center for Conservation of Cultural Property and Environment in the Tropics and the Conservation Studio under the College of Architecture at the University of San Carlos in Cebu City, are just but few centers that concentrate of scientific conservation. There is a crying need to develop more expertise in this important field that will encompass the protection of both tangible and intangible cultural resources that will take into account the local cultural context.

33

There is a dearth in conservation and safeguarding skills, especially in the research and documentation of cultural resources. This leads to an absence of comprehensive data on local heritage, undermining cultural mapping and documentation efforts by cultural agencies.

There is need to define career opportunities for culture and the arts.

There are around 1,200 secondary schools in the Philippines offering Special Program for the Arts of the Junior High School Program. Through the Senior High School Program, students have the choice to take the Arts and Design Track Program. In both cases [in Junior and Senior High School], students may opt to pursue their college education in the field of arts and culture. A wide range of employment is open to either High School or College graduates, which include career opportunities in art management, advertising, cultural researcher, teaching arts and culture, art production and other related field.

Unfortunately, there has been a predominant perception that career opportunities for culture and the arts are limited. AmbisyonNatin 2040 report enumerated the most preferred field of study. Sadly, careers related to culture and arts do not even get a 5% share.

F. Weaknesses in Hard and Soft Infrastructure Support for Culture Support for cultural infrastructure is weak and insufficient. All participants spoke from their direct experience of implementing cultural programs. These endeavours are little helped by the lack of required infrastructure for culture.It was noted there are few efforts at promoting and developing culture, art and artists at the local level.

There are very few resources or content in languages other than Filipino and English. Others raised issues of inclusivity especially for people with disabilities and special needs. There are few facilities, services and resources and inclusivity is not actively promoted.

There were also concerns regarding the “carrying capacity� of institutions, notably frontline services. An illustration was when the National Museum lifted its entrance fees - audience numbers rose but there consequent burdens on museum services [e.g., exhibit guides] and infrastructure like the underground river.

There is need for more scholarly and new researchers on cultural education.

Research informs and builds a discipline. Research also plays an important role in education, as its output becomes the source of materials that can be taught in the classroom setting. Research that focuses on cultural education is almost non-existent. This is perhaps the field of cultural education has not been given much attention. Aside from this, the Commission on Higher Education (CHEd) and other research funding agencies have always encouraged research in the sciences. The government supported scholars who were sent for further study abroad only if this was again in the field of sciences and engineering.

Despite the long-standing efforts of the cultural agencies, research about culture still needs to be pursued.

Recent findings of historical researches on how the Americans colonizers controlled and manipulated our system of education have not yet been clearly explained and incorporated into the history textbooks and curriculum. The Filipino-biased perspective in history still takes the back seat.

Though we recognize multiple perspectives, it is necessary to give primary emphasis on Filipino perspective in looking at the history. On the other hand, the effect of Martial Law, such as:the emergence of extra-judicial killings; massive violations of human rights; prevalent control of government agencies by the Marcos cronies; as well as how the Filipino people through the EDSA uprising brought back the democratic space and institutions --- are some of the historical accounts that have not been incorporated into the curriculum and textbooks of secondary and college education. Errors and omissions in history need to be corrected.

34

Moreover, there is a need for a comprehensive cultural database that covers cultural statistics, inventory, and disaggregated data. The need for access to cultural resources and database calls for an establishment of a comprehensive functional local culture and arts councils. An inter-agency mechanism in collation of national statistics calls for an evidence-based-policy-making. Inform agenda for creative industry building and other development agenda.

G. Onerous Access to Funding Support, and Limited Funding for Culture Numerous concerns fall under the key challenge broadening information dissemination and access to available cultural resources There is little effort to popularise and promote cultural resource in a way that is attractive and compelling to grassroots communities. One reason this is not implemented is that there are very few marketing arms and promotional strategies for cultural agencies; hence, there is little clarity on information on what exactly that can be accessed.

A related but very salient concern would be the relevance of these resources to the everyday life of communities. Two workshop participants eloquently discussed this issue: what do communities, especially those impoverished prioritise, their daily needs or those offered by cultural agencies like performances or venues like public libraries? The cost of physical access (i.e., entrance fees, ticket prices) as well as proximity in terms of physical distance was raised as strong determinants. A representative from a youth peasant group noted there is limited dissemination of information regarding resources like funding and venues.

Indeed majority of the Summit participants have had experience in working with limited or insufficient funding to propel their projects forward.

Whatever budget is allotted for the sector tends to be inadequate. Moreover, whatever funding there may be is perceived to be unequal and unsustainable, and rarely enjoyed by the marginalized sectors.

Members from the national cultural agencies present lament over their limited physical space, program support, staff personnel and field operations. The Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino, National Archives of the Philippines and the National Historical Commission of the Philippines need more land area and infrastructure to carry on their work.

The government released an initial rehabilitation budget to restore, repair, reconstruct damaged churches and civic structures in Bohol, Cebu and Leyte, but the actual envisioned expenditures are indeed enormous.

On top of these, there are still quite a number of built heritage structures across the country that pleads for attention, from north to south, across regions and cultures.

Likewise, limited funds are aggravated by tedious process of applying for grants and funds. A good number of participants noted the perceived bureaucracy in the DBM, DSWD and COA chain, the result of corruption cases and the siphoning of funds to bogus organizations. This caused the low NEFCA disbursement or absorptive capacity in 2016. Everyone agreed that cultural groups should not be burdened by application requirements for funding. As it is, there is already great difficulty for sourcing support to sustain the cultural practice.

Moreover, funding for the wide range of scientific methods of conservation and safeguarding our cultural resources are indeed wanting. The workshop group also stressed that conservation processes and materials are expensive.

Aside from the need to restore tangible cultural properties, there is an equally important urgency to document, identify, protect and safeguard the best of our country’s intangible cultural heritage. Much misunderstood, marginalized, easy victims to disintegration due to outside influences, our oral traditions, performing

35

arts, traditional local crafts, rituals, customs, ways of life, are besieged by outside global fads and trends, and easy prey to emasculation and disappearance.

Many youths of the indigenous peoples move to the cities to find work, and the elders who are bearers of their heritage are getting fewer by the day. There has been no systematic funding support to conserve these delicately ephemeral cultural treasures and provide venues for their continued practice.

On the other hand, there is a perception that funds for cultural programs may be mis-used or diverted through various forms of corruption or utilized – if at all – in incestuous arrangements by barkadas of cultural, if not political, decision-makers.

The culture of patronage among LGUs abuses funds intended for the art and culture programs often less prioritized or worst diverted to fund personal agendas of policy makers. The critical safeguarding of fund allocation against organized corruption needs the proactive assertions of proper and appropriate utilization of funds intended for the art and culture especially cultural minorities.

H. Challenges Concerning IPs and Bangsamoro Consultations with indigenous peoples on education strategies is limited and recognition of indigenous knowledge systems and practices(IKSP) remain low.

Despite passing the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA), there remains an urgent need to consult indigenous peoples (IP) on the integration of IP education and history within the formal education curriculum.

A participant from an indigenous community strongly noted that while some aspects of indigenous culture have already been integrated into school curricula, teachers tasked to facilitate classes are rarely informed about indigenous culture.

Among the possible cultural education program that should be pursued are research and documentation of Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices (IKSP). Efforts for cultural education programs and IKSP documentation support initiatives to protect cultures. 67.3% of Filipinos deemed cultural diversity and its protection important.

There is need for strong institutional support for IPs and Bangsamoro.

Indigenous Peoples (IPs) and the Bangsamoro lack opportunities to earn on their crafts and products, including knowledge products and systems. There is a lot of difficulty in the implementation of programs for the IPs’ ancestral domains. Their traditional practices are ignored or given mere cursory value. The right to self-determination and assertion of the IPs and Bangsamoro is intrinsic in their language, chants, dances and material culture.

A strong institutional support is needed to ensure the continuity and survival of our living art and culture.

Likewise, a specialized IP desk is needed to address the IP specific programs on product development, social enterprise, IPR. The weak implementation of the IPRA law prompts NCIP assertion and visibility in the LGUs mandated to protect, uphold, safeguard and promote the rights and IKSP of the IPs and CCs. Observably, there does not seem to be respect for or protection of the community intellectual property rights (CIPR) of indigenous community and the Bangsamoro.

36

I. Limited Constituency and Champions for Culture in Governance, and Governance Weaknesses in Cultural Processes It is difficult to mainstream culture in governance.

Patronage politics and political intervention get in the way of anchoring and sustaining art and culture with local government units (LGUs) and their development plans. Likewise, cultural initiatives face the lack of appreciation and cooperation of government institutions and legislators. A representative from a congressional office noted there are few and competent heads of government agencies that implement programs to address and advance culture-in-governance. There is also the lack of participatory governance for art and culture project implementation in local government unitsespecially in areas where Culture and Arts Councils are non-existence. As observed, except for very few instances, the mandated establishment of Culture and Arts Councils in all LGUsremains unfulfilled. On the other hand, cultural groups, programs and institutions are faced with inadequate financing, insufficient resources, and the only partial recognition of the economic and social importance of culture.

Indeed, local politics was deemed influential on outcomes of initiative concerned with access to cultural programs and resources as well as on conservation of cultural properties. The local autonomy clause also hinders the implementation and realization of projects to make resources available to a wide community base.

Moreover, there were specific cases cited on the negative impacts of local partisan politics on indigenous political structures. And, the absence or non-representation from Indigenous Peoples or cultural experts in the local councils continue to degrade the quality of implementation and mainstreaming of culture in governance for a nationwide policy reforms.

Culture-based approaches to disaster preparedness are an imperative.

The climate crisis calls for a serious change in governance in bridging the gaps in preparedness, survival, resilience, recovery, rehabilitation and rebuild. The short-sighted mechanism of emergency relief reflects a future urban setting of bunkhouses. A homogeneous emergency response mechanism lacks the sensitivity to tap into local resource and utilization of IKSP and local experts. Disaster preparedness and management needs to understand the local environment with culture-focused interventions in the local CCA-DRR. There is need for mechanism responsive to proper management of cultural diversity.

In an archipelago of 7,100 islands, there is a dire need to welcome cultural pluralism in policies, programs, partnerships, and constituency-building initiatives. The current homogenous programming in education calls for a new perspective to welcome the potentials of cultural diversity and rich pluralism with empowered local actors asserting their unique cultural identity.

A people-centered governance calls for decentralization and localization of local government codes, policies and programs addressing specific needs of each of the stakeholders, IPs and cultural communities.

37

GOALS AND OUTCOMES

The President Rodrigo Duterte’s Administration does recognize Culture as both a Sector and a Development Theme. The long-term Goal as well as the intermediate outcomes of culture upholds the 2017-2022 Vision Statement - “AmbisyonNatin” – aptly translated as the “Life We Want”. The document from NEDA declares that “AmbisyonNatin” is: • • • • •

A long-term (25 years) vision for the Philippines A basis for unity among Filipinos A vision, NOT a plan An anchor for development planning across administrations A guide for engaging with international development partners

This section presents the elements of the Goals and Outcomes of Culture, in relation to the over-all Vision of the current administration. The section also shows the hierarchy of results that Culture, both as a theme and a sector aspires to achieve.

The three (3) layers of Vision for 2017 to 2022, as articulated by the National Economic Development Authority are: 1.

VISION OF FILIPINOS FOR SELF:

“In 2040, we will all enjoy a stable and comfortable lifestyle, secure in the knowledge that we have enough for our daily needs and unexpected expenses, that we can plan and prepare for our own and our children’s future. Our family lives together in a place of our own, and we have the freedom to go where we desire, protected and enabled by a clean, efficient, and fair government.”

38

2.

VISION OF FILIPINOS FOR COUNTRY:

“The Philippines shall be a country where all citizens are free from hunger and poverty, have equal opportunities, enabled by fair and just society that is governed with order and unity. A nation where families live together, thriving in vibrant, culturally diverse, and resilient communities.”

3.

VISION OF FILIPINOS FOR ACTION:

“Build trust in government, enforces peace and order, resume peace talks, and create social and cultural awareness and values formation.”

Further, the Philippine Development Plan (PDP) 2017-2022 Framework shows two complementary results: balancing growthand development opportunitiesandenhancing the social fabric.

Enhancing the social fabric by promoting awareness in and valuing cultural diversity means: • Build trust in public institutions through efficient delivery of public services, swift and fair administration of justice; • Promote peace, public order and ensure security through relentless drive against criminality and pursuing an inclusive peace process; • Promote and value cultural diversity through awareness, sensitivity and embracing a shared heritage.

On the other hand, Agenda # 8, as culled from the Socio-Economic Agenda crafted by the Department of Finance, is stated as: “Promote S&T and CA (creative arts) to enhance innovative and creative capacities needed for self-sustaining inclusive development and participation in global knowledge economy.”

In the Social Development Initiatives Summit held last August in Davao City emerged three high-level goal statements that have bearing on culture. These higher goals emerge out of agenda-setting processes that were initiated by agencies with representation in the Cabinet. These are: Goal # 5: “Develop a culture-sensitive development program that advances artistic expression and

strengthens Filipino identity and nationalism” Goal # 4. “Promote accessible, inclusive, nationalist, all-encompassing, and rights-based education” Goals # 10. “Uphold rights to self-determination of IPs, Bangsamoro and other peoples” Finally, for the Cultural Summit, the proposed primary Goal for Culture takes off from Social Development Goal # 5, and is consistent with and contributes to the vision of the President Duterte’s Administration, as shown in the matrix below. However, this statement of outcomes has been enhanced to: (a) go beyond being a program; (b) encompass not just artistic expression but the broader cultural expression; and, (c) recognize the links between culture and development

39

Proposed Strategic Result on Culture VISION/GOAL STATEMENTS

OUTCOMES

AmbisyonNatin Vision for the Country (2017-2022):

“Enhanced social fabric and valuing of cultural diversity”

“The Philippines shall be a country where all citizens are free from hunger and poverty, have equal opportunities, enabled by fair and just society that is governed with order and unity. A nation where families live together, thriving in vibrant, culturally diverse, and resilient communities.”

“Culture-sensitive development that advances cultural expressions and strengthens Filipino identity and nationalism”

a) Equitable access to cultural resources b) Improved conservation and safeguarding of cultural resources c) Enhanced cultural education d) Strengthened Culture-driven sustainable development

Lastly, it was emphasized during the inter-agency pre-summit meetings that the elements of cultural awareness and values formation articulated in the 2017-2022 vision to action have already been incorporated in the four above-stated outcomes statements.

40

Working Definitions: Outcomes

a) Access to Cultural Resources refers to access to cultural resources, spheres and degrees of participation; “the right to cultural participation� b) Conservation of Cultural Heritage Resources refers to processes and measures of maintaining the significance of tangible cultural resources that encompasses preservation, restoration, reconstruction, protection, adaptation or any combination.

Safeguarding of Cultural Heritage Resources refers to measures aimed at ensuring the viability of the intangible cultural heritage, including identification, documentation, research, preservation, protection, promotion, enhancement, transmission, particularly through formal and non-formal education, as well as the revitalization of the various aspects of such heritage c) Cultural Education pertains to how culture is sustained and evolves through the development of human resources such as the welfare and training of artists and cultural workers, and fostering of values among citizens; also concerns creative content and the enablers of cultural resources, and promotion through tourism and diplomacy. According to the Heritage Law (RA 10066) cultural education shall refer to the teaching and learning of cultural concepts and process d) Culture-Driven Development refers to how culture is an enabler and a driver of the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development

41

RECOMMENDATIONS

T

his section presents the priority strategies and identifies key players who will be engaged in pursuing the desired changes in the culture-and-development arena. The Summit proposed strategies surfacing the importance of responsive policies, outcomes-based programs and projects, and effective partnerships that promote national, regional, and local cooperation and interventions. These will be designed to raise the awareness and appreciation of the general population and decision-making bodies on the necessity of factoring culture in the process of sustainable development.

The recommendations are also in line with the UNESCO Convention on Culture and Development: a) the enhancement of human and institutional capacities that will propel responsive culture-in-governance as well as a flourishing creative industry; b) the firming up of legal and policy environments that will facilitate, in the local and national levels, the promotion of culture-in-development; c) the development of new partnership models and innovative investment strategies to support the research, innovation, production, promotions, marketing, and distribution of local cultural goods and services throughout the Philippines; d) the drawing up and implementation of advocacy programs, projects, and activities designed to promote the economic, social, and environmental dimensions of culture for development; and, e) the continued production of benchmarks and impact indicators to monitor and evaluate the contribution of culture to sustainable development.

42

A.

Policy Recommendations 1. Policy Recommendations on Access to Cultural Resources a) Review and amend agency charters/policies to broaden access and participation to government cultural resources and activities • Drafting institutional policies on access to cultural agency resources • Implement the provisions of the NCCA Law on the administration of NEFCA • Factor and consider peculiarities of grassroots organizations in the application for funding and other assistance • Rethink neoliberal policies as they impact on cultural programs • Enhance programs/strategies of NCCA and cultural agencies, providing opportunities for engagement in cultural activities • Sustained consultations, dialogues, and the like, in partnership with LGUs and NGOs regarding accessibility and access • Encourage artists’ groups to create works in support of the peace process and offer incentive for participation b) Expansion of fund sources for culture and widen access to the same • EO/CARO to mandate all government agencies, GOCCs, and instrumentalities to allocate at least 10% of their annual budget to fund cultural programs, similar to PCW’s GAD • Legislate direct funding. Congress will enact the passage of a Culture-Based Sustainable Development Fund. This will facilitate direct funding to LGUs to broaden the interventions on art, culture, and heritage management programs, thereby expanding the number of partner communities. This fund will provide another window of opportunity for cultural workers and communities, especially those in the rural areas, in accessing funding for culture and the arts – instead of the present situation where groups vie for a small pie of the National Endowment for Culture and the Arts (NEFCA) managed by the NCCA. • The decentralization paradigm should be effectively undertaken for equitable application to the different provinces. While the Local Government Code promotes the principles of devolution and decentralization from the central government to the local government, the ideal condition is the establishment of a federal form of government.

The Office of the President will flag the Congress on priority bills, such as the bill on federalism.

• Policy reform on the budget of the cultural agencies. The Office of the Cabinet Secretary will initiate a review of the optimization of the funds of cultural agencies in order to recommend to the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) not to impose budget cuts and budget cap. Armed with the appropriate annual budget, the cultural agencies will now be able to achieve their mandates to the optimum.

• While the law stipulates that organizations wishing to handle government funds should first secure the appropriate certification from the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), the culture sector would like to seek an exemption from this time-consuming piece of legislation. The Cabinet Cluster on Poverty Reduction, Culture, and Education will recommend to the Office of the President the issuance of an Administrative Order to the different agencies to iron out issues and fast track the delivery of financial and technical assistance to the cultural sector, especially to the marginalized and vulnerable but organized and deserving cultural groups. Moreover, an alternative accreditation system may be explored and institutionalized for grassroots-based cultural implementer

43

c) Utilization of technology for increased access to cultural resources • Wider dissemination like TVs and posters • Draft MOA with LGUs regarding inclusion of ICT counterpart • Implement open-access policy d) On governance of culture • A system that shifts priority away from the centre through federalism was raised as viable answer to state policies that are either feeble or rarely implemented because of weak political will • Decentralize and, if possible, federalize arts and culture (e.g. NCCA: island-level planning as a form of support to decentralization of culture and the arts) • Lessen and eliminate bureaucracy • Strengthen established local culture and arts centers • Establish and fund multi-functional community centers for culture and the arts at the regional, provincial/barangay level • Collaborate and partner with stakeholders, GOs, NGOs through dialogues/FGDs and project proposals Under IPRA Law of 1996, Sec. 16 2. Policy Recommendations on Conservation and Safeguarding of Cultural Properties and Heritage a) Declare a “national holiday” for the Indigenous Peoples The important role of the Indigenous Peoples (IP) and their culture in the strengthening of the national identity and their contribution to national development has been pushed forward by the enactment of IPRA. Declaring a national holiday for IP is a positive act to continue the government support for the Indigenous communities. b) Passage of a law towards the establishment of a National Academy for Culture and the Arts This envisioned institution will develop courses in the primary, secondary, and tertiary levels, which will provide professional training for artists and cultural workers across all the fields of the artistic disciplines like music, drama, dance, visual arts, literature, architecture, film, creative media, and other allied arts. The academy will also train teachers in the fields of cultural education in each of these disciplines, like music education, visual arts education, dance education, and so forth. A major characteristic of this academy would be its balance between being rooted in Philippine artistic expressions and the inclusion of skills training comparative to what is being conducted in the world.

It is highly recommended that said Academyshould establish regional arts training centers in view of the fact that there are already a number of arts programs in various colleges and universities in Metro Manila. Moreover, the regional centers or regional academies will reinforce the study in theory and in practice of what is considered as the most representative and excellent forms of cultural expressions in the area, thus further nurturing the local “artistic genius” of the place.

The current plan of DepEd to set up regional High School for the Arts modelled on the present Philippine High School for the Arts in Mt. Makiling, Laguna is an idea that would complement or could be integrated in the establishment of this National Academy.

Major actors and stakeholders: The Lead Agency: NCCA, in collaboration with the other cultural agencies, House of Representatives, Senate. Other supporting actors: Cultural communities, Schools for Living Traditions, DepEd, CHEd, TESDA, DOST and other Higher Educational Institutions

44

c) Passage of a law institutionalizing a Cultural Conservation and Development Fund The availability of said fund will sustain budgetary requirements for cultural conservation and safeguarding activities. It will underwrite clearly defined and delineated programs and projects of the national cultural agencies in the conservation of tangible cultural assets (preservation, restoration, reconstruction, protection, adaptation or any combination thereof ); likewise, in safeguarding intangible cultural assets (identification, documentation, research, preservation, protection, promotion, enhancement, transmission, particularly through formal and non-formal education, as well as the revitalization of the various aspects of such heritage). The law may also stipulate financial incentives to private owners and managers of heritage sites and assets as just compensation for their efforts in protecting and sharing the nation’s cultural patrimony.

Major actors and stakeholders: The Lead Agency: NCCA, in collaboration with the other cultural agencies, House of Representatives, Senate. Other supporting actors include, the Local Government Units, Regional Development Councils, Department of Finance, Department of Budget and Management. The Regional Development Councils should be able to reinforce its passage being the highest planning and policy-making body in the region. d) Passage of a law for the establishment of an Institute for Cultural Conservation of the Philippines (ICCP) The ICCP is dedicated to advancing the field of heritage science while also improving the science and practice of art conservation and cultural resource safeguarding. The focus areas of the Institute are in conservation, technical and technological studies of cultural artefacts, non-destructive testing of built heritage, and development of sustainable preservation strategies. Other areas such as cultural teachers’ trainings and development of course/curriculum and instructional materials will be pursued. It will identify, study, and integrate in the curriculum local and traditional methods of conservation and safeguarding as a mode of keeping local best practice alive and sustaining.

Major actors and stakeholders: The Lead Agency: NCCA, in collaboration with the other cultural agencies, House of Representatives, Senate. Other supporting actors: Local Government Units, Regional Development Councils, Department of Finance, Department of Budget and Management. The Regional Development Councils should be able to reinforce its passage being the highest planning and policy-making body in the region. e) Creation of policies for local government units to mainstream arts and cultural heritage in development planning Each local government unit in the country shall be required to institutionalize arts and cultural heritage programs in its development planning and implementation cycles as a major pillar and strategy for the holistic development of their constituency. This will supplement and strengthen the already available DILG Memorandum Circular on the creation of Local Cultural Councils.

Cultural strategies in terms of policies, programs, and services should be a major component in the LGU’s crafting of its Comprehensive Development Plan, Executive and Legislative Agenda, Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Annual Investment Plan, Disaster and Risk Reduction Management Plan, and other major planning instruments.

Aside from drafting policies legislating cultural productions and promotions, a major requisite program shall be the conduct of research into local cultural assets, tangible and intangible.

45

An Executive Order instructing all LGUs to submit an inventory of all heritage resources in their area of jurisdiction is in order, as baseline data and basis for subsequent program planning in all divisions of the LGUs. Major actors and stakeholders: The Lead Agency: Office of the President, Department of the Interior and Local Government, in collaboration with all cultural agencies, House of Representatives, Senate. Other supporting actors: Local Government Units, Regional Development Councils, Department of Finance, Department of Budget and Management. f) Passage of a comprehensive law on land use that compels LGUs to protect and preserve heritage This concern has been integrated in the 2013 CLUP Guide on special areas and thematic concerns where heritage zoning is a part of the land use planning process. Annex 8-4 of the Guide states that the National Historical Commission of the Philippines, the National Museum, in consultation with the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board or other concerned agencies shall designate heritage zones to protect the historical and cultural integrity of a geographical area.

Nevertheless, a major policy instrument such as a law on land use prescribing local government units to protect and conserve heritage-laden land is needed to ensure the sustaining use of these basins of patrimony. The CLUP Guide is not enough to realize such goal. The Philippine Senate Economic Planning Office produced a study on the Requisites of a Land Use Policy that underscores essential principles and issues that bear upon this discourse on cultural conservation: These guidelines can help include other land-based concerns aside from those of the indigenous peoples. Local governments in cities, provinces, towns, and even sitios, should be guided in methods and principles in identifying heritage sites in their land areas, in developing protocols for land utilization and control, and in protecting the natural bio-and cultural diversities existing therein with the well-being of the community in mind. Thus, an overarching law that will stipulate all major concerns for land use protecting heritage is a step needing an urgent response from the concerned agencies of legislation.

Major actors and stakeholders: The Lead Agency: NCCA, in collaboration with the other cultural agencies, House of Representatives, Senate. Other supporting actors: NEDA, Department of Natural Resources, Department of Local Government Units, Regional Development Councils, Department of Finance, Department of Budget and Management. The Regional Development Councils should be able to reinforce its passage being the highest planning and policy-making body in the region. g) Establishment of IP Desk in concerned national agencies (DOT, DENR, NCCA, DepEd, CHEd, DSWD, DTI, PNP, etc.)

To ensure that the life, livelihood, and cultural rights issues of the indigenous peoples are protected and upheld, the workshop group strongly recommends the establishment of a structural and administrative mechanism in all the concerned agencies of government. All these will be in cooperation with the National Commission for the Indigenous Peoples, which is mandated to “formulate and implement policies, plans, programs and projects for the economic, social, and cultural development of the IPs.” Each of the concerned national agencies then will formulate respective plans, programs, and services that will particularize the needs and concerns of the cultural communities within the ambit of its own specific mandate. A major example would be the creation of a Bureau for Indigenous Peoples’ Education under the DepEd.

46

Major actors and stakeholders: The Lead Agency: NCIP and the NCCA, in collaboration with the other concerned cultural agencies, House of Representatives, Senate. Other supporting actors: NEDA, Department of Natural Resources, Department of Local Government Units, Regional Development Councils. The Regional Development Councils should be able to reinforce its passage being the highest planning and policy-making body in the region. h) Passage of a comprehensive Heritage Law that provides clear steps, guidelines and standards for conservation and safeguarding of the country’s cultural heritage resources This comprehensive national legal instrument will build upon, expand, enhance, improve the content, scope, and provisions of the existing RA 10066, or the Cultural Heritage Law. To accomplish these policies towards its implementation, the following essential policy requirements should be in place: • Review of all existing laws heritage-related laws and agencies’ charters; • LGUs’ submission of a list of existing policies concerning presentation of heritage resources (tangible and intangible) in their locality; • A comprehensive and evidence-based study on incentives, policies; and, • Provisions for a comprehensive policy on incentives for heritage conservation and protection with a clear Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) and a clear system of incentives.

Major actors and stakeholders: The Lead Agency: NCCA, in collaboration with all the other cultural agencies, House of Representatives, Senate. Other supporting actors: Department of Finance, Department of Trade and Industry, Board of Investments, Bureau of Internal Revenue, Bureau of Customs, private owners, academe, NEA, LGUs, DILG, DND, DOT, TIEZA, Cultural communities, Schools for Living Traditions, DepEd, CHEd, TESDA, DOST and other higher educational institutions.

3. Policy Recommendations on Cultural Education a) Institutionalize culture based-education in the basic, higher and in the technical-vocational education system • Strengthen partnership with DepEd, CHEd and TESDA • Develop teaching –learning materials on culture-based education.

• Conduct massive teacher education and training on culture based education b) Role of media in image-building and cultural education • Develop cultural education modules for media • Draft regulatory policies for media on promoting cultural or culturally-grounded content • Provide tax incentives to media that promote culturally-oriented content shows • Incorporate corporate social responsibility of media corporation mainstreaming of Filipino epics, legends, in media such as TV, radio, broadcast, billboard (encourage more primetime exposure) • Require private companies to advertise socially-relevant media programs c) To address perceived inferiority due to colonial complex • Develop program highlighting the strength of Filipinos and pride in their identity • Create rules and regulations for Ad Board • Repeal MTRCB law PD 1986

47

4. Policy Recommendations on Culture-based Sustainable Development a) Policy on mainstreaming culture in LGU programs • The LGUs, in partnership with art and culture groups in the community, will mainstream culture and arts development in all government programs and services through local ordinances.

• Heeding the call of community groups and networks of art and cultural workers, pertinent government agencies and LGUs will establish a favorable policy environment and develop mechanisms for sustainability. b) Policy on incentives for investments in culture • The Office of the President, together with inter-agency collaboration, as well as the LGUs, community groups, and cultural workers will ensure the enactment of laws relating to tax breaks especially for the full development of cultural industries and to encourage more contributions from artists in cultural advancement and sustainable progress.

• In partnership with the NCCA, Department of Finance (DOF), Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), and Department of Tourism (DOT), the Office of the President will help in the promotion of art and culture, especially with initiatives from the President himself, to encourage investors and gain their trust in the contribution of culture toward economic development. c) Policy on the institutionalization cultural statistics/cultural database inventories • A collaborative team spearheaded by the NCCA, in partnership with the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) and LGUs, will enforce the implementation of pertinent existing policies, such as DILG MC 2002-81 (Creation of Local Culture and Arts Council).

• The cultural agencies (NCCA, CCP, NHCP, NLP, KWF, NM, NAP), together with the Department of Education (DepEd), the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), and Allied Agencies – such as, but not limited to, the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), Department of Tourism (DOT), National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), and National Commission on Muslim Filipinos (NCMF), among others – will mainstream policies such as the Philippine Statistical Development Plan 2011-2017, Chapter 5, Cluster 16 (Education and Cultural Statistics) and the 2009 UNESCO Framework for Cultural Statistics.

• The cultural agencies, in partnership with the DepEd, CHEd, and allied agencies, as well as the LGUs, will launch, in a nationwide, inter-agency scale, the collation of cultural statistics for evidence-based policy-making. d) Policy on culture-focused interventions on climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction (CCA-DRR) • Climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction should be integrated in community plans and practices. Because climate hazards threaten lives and property, there must be unconditional support to cultural programs that help build a culture of discipline and resilience. Congress will amend the Local Government Code (LGC) so that the capacities, competence, and commitment of the human resource in the DRR offices will be augmented and that the Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management (LDRRM) Council will be made more functional with the engagement of cultural workers and other specialists.

• Culture-based CCA-DRR strategies and mechanisms must be explored and implemented, with pertinent budgets. LGUs will provide sufficient funds/budgets for culture-focused DRRM programs and services. With the assistance of national government agencies (NGAs), civil society organizations (CSOs), and other stakeholders,

48

local governments will be capacitated to access special funds in this regard, such as the People’s Survival Fund. Foreign funding will also be looked into.

• LGUs and regional councils, including special regulatory and administrative bodies, such as the Protected Area Management Board (PAMB) will strengthen the implementation of plans and programs directed toward the protection and conservation of cultural and natural resources. The same actors will access more funds for the inventory, monitoring, and management of cultural resources in their respective jurisdictions, in line with Republic Act 10066. e) Policy on the appropriate management of cultural diversity • Congress, in collaboration with LGUs, National Commission on Muslim Filipinos (NCMF), Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF), Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC), Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), Komisyon ng Wikang Filipino (KWF), Office of the Presidential Assistant for the Peace Process (OPAPP), Department of Justice (DOJ), National Democratic Front (NDF), and Indigenous Peoples (IPs), will push for the broadest decentralization and devolution of political and economic power. This requires the operationalization of the principles and rights of IPs and the Bangsamoro to self-determination. For instance, conflicting policies must be resolved, such as the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA) and the Philippine Mining Act of 1995. There is also a need for the speedy passage of the Bangsamoro Basic Law (BBL). Moreover, the clamour in support for the Duterte Administration’s priority in pushing for a federal form of government must be heeded.

5. Other Policy Recommendations a) Advocacy for the Creation of the “Department of Culture” The following are the areas for consideration in the creation of a Department of Culture: • The need to represent culture at the Cabinet level as way of mainstreaming it in the national development agenda; • Harmonization of the different cultural agencies; • Stronger institutional presence in the regions; • Strengthen administrative and technical structures to undertake cultural programs all over the country; • Upholding the strong participation of the private sector in the policy and program development for culture; and, • Structure that considers the volunteerism ethos of NCCA and the facilitative aspect of a Department of Culture.

B.

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS CLUSTERED BY TARGET OFFICE 1. For the Office of the President and/or the Office of the Cabinet Secretary a) Review the agency charters and heritage-related laws with the perspective of updating outdated ones, streamlining mandates, and encouraging the decentralization and, if possible, federalization of culture. Establish inter-agency technical working groups and ensure consultations. The decentralization paradigm should be effectively undertaken for equitable application to all provinces. b) Require cultural agencies to articulate clearly institutional policies and processes to achieve equitable access, encourage participation and engagement in cultural activities, implement open access, and lessen bureaucracy. c) Declare a national holiday for indigenous peoples.

49

d) Study the strategy of mainstreaming the promotion of culture by mandating all government agencies, GOCCs, local governments and other instrumentalities to allocate a set percentage of their annual budget to support cultural protection and development initiatives. e) Advise DBM to restore NEFCA administration to NCCA. f ) Mandate concerned national agencies such as the DOT, DENR, NCCA, DepEd, CHEd, DSWD, DTI, and PNP, among others to establish IP desks g) For the President himself to encourage private sector investments in cultural development contributes towards sustainable development h) Require media regulatory agencies to work with cultural agencies in crafting policies encouraging media to promote cultural or culturally grounded content for primetime exposure; harness corporate social responsibility of media corporations to mainstream Filipino epics and legends in broadcast, print, visual, and new media. i) Repeal the MTRCB law (PD 1986) j) Consider the advocacy on the creation of the Department of Culture 2. For the Philippine Congress a) Review the GAA stipulation on accreditation by DSWD to address problems encountered in the implementation and to improve the system. Factor in peculiarities of grassroots organizations and the oral traditions of IPs in the application for funding and other assistance

50

b) Review the heritage-related laws towards the passage of a comprehensive heritage law that provides clear steps/guidelines and standards for conservation, and creating incentives for heritage. Look into the establishment of an Institute for Cultural Conservation of the Philippines. As part of the preparations, conduct a comprehensive and evidence-based study on incentives. c) Enact a law providing tax breaks to artists and cultural workers who contribute in cultural advancement and sustainable progress, and tax incentives to media that promote culturally-oriented content shows d) Ensure that efforts to amend laws on land use mandate LGUs to protect and preserve natural and cultural heritage e) Ensure that amendments to the Local Government Code of 1991 (RA 7160) or the National Disaster Risk and Reduction Act of 2010 (RA 10121) include the involvement of cultural workers in LDRRM Councils; provide sufficient funds for culture-focused DRRM programs and services; and require the formulation of a plan, implementation, and provision of funds for the protection and conservation of cultural resources 3. For Cultural Agencies a) In collaboration with local governments, agencies and other stakeholders, for cultural agencies to establish or strengthen and fund multi-functional community centers for culture and the arts at the regional, provincial/barangay level

51

b) For NCCA to issue a resolution mandating the expansion of cultural education and culture-and-development programs 4. For Cultural Agencies in Collaboration with Other Agencies/Government Units a) Improve the collaboration of cultural agencies with NCIP and the NCMF b) Strengthen inter-agency collaboration in the implementation of the Department of Education’s initiative to set up Regional Academies of the Arts c) For cultural agencies and the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) to mainstream policies such as the Philippine Statistical Development Plan 2011-2017, Chapter 5, Cluster 16 (Education and Cultural Statistics), and the 2009 UNESCO Framework for Cultural Statistics; and launch a nationwide/inter-agency collation of cultural statistics for more evidence-based policy-making d) For DOLE and the cultural agencies to enter into partnerships to create programs that encourage careers in culture and arts e) For DILG and NCCA to issue a directive instructing all LGUs to submit an inventory of all heritage resources in their area of jurisdiction f ) For NEDA, DILG and NCCA to issue guidance to local governments that ensure that cultural protection and development are included in local development planning g) For NCCA to enter into MOA with LGUs regarding the inclusion of ICT as counterpart 5. For Allied Agencies A. For the Department of Education to create a Bureau of IPED B. For DILG to assess and reinforce the implementation of existing policies such as DILG MC 2002-81 (Creation of Local Culture and Arts Council); and encourage LGUs to mainstream culture and arts development in programs and services through local ordinances

C.

RECOMMENDED PROGRAMS AND PARTNERSHIPS

The recommended policies outlined in the preceding section needs to be complemented with effective programs and strengthened partnerships forged by multi-stakeholders. These are substantiated in this particular section, bearing the following thrusts: • Providing of mechanisms to open opportunities for increase in funding to support greater participation of communities in the cultural development process • Facilitating broadest dialogue and exchanges for the local communities to further understand and clarify the content of cultural rights as an integral part of human rights; • Developing instruments to measure cultural development • Encouraging inter-cultural dialogues towards firming-up a culture of peace, unity and strengthening the shared cultural symbols of a distinct cultural identities; • Advancing closer coordination and inter-agency convergence programs; • Ensuring widest support the intensification of cultural action projects in the grassroots towards recognition and protection of indigenous people’s rights and in fostering harmony in cultural diversity; Detailed below are the recommendations of the Summit participants on the key programs and partnerships arrangements that are aligned with the themes that were tackled during the Summit, namely: a) b) c) d)

Access to Cultural Resources; Conservation and Safeguarding of Cultural Resources; Cultural Education; and, Culture-based Sustainable Development.

52

1. Programand Partnership Recommendations: Access to Cultural Resources PROGRAMS/PARTNERSHIPS

RESPONSIBLE ENTITY

Community-based participatory content development of cultural resources using ICTs and mother tongue languages

NLP, Public libraries / LGUs, DepEd, Schools, National /local authors, writers, artists, NGOs

Provision of ICTs to local cultural access points in LGUs (libraries, museums) for use by community members

NLP, NM, LGUs, DICT, Private sector (IT companies), Computer schools (for training), NGOs and service providers

Outreach, mobile library, travelling exhibits

NGOs, LGUs and other Stakeholders

Integration of IP education and history to formal education curricula

IP, DepEd, IKS

Digitization, and online copies/archives of literary works

NLP, National Archives, Publishing companies

Strengthen relationships among artists-cultural managers for better coordination

Networks of artists and cultural organizations

Coordinate arts events, festivals on a national and regional scale

NCCA

Communication plan flyers/brochures/collaterals with the social media

NCCA

2. Program and PartnershipRecommendations: Conservation and Safeguarding of Cultural Resources PROGRAMS/PARTNERSHIPS

RESPONSIBLE ENTITY

Expand Funding Sources

Cultural Agencies, Congress, DBM, LGUs, Cultural Communities, other stakeholders

• Feasibility Study • Plans Formulation on Conservation Management Plan, Cultural Mapping, Assessment, Heritage Development Plan

53

Lead: NCCA

PROGRAMS/PARTNERSHIPS

RESPONSIBLE ENTITY

Professionalization of cultural workers

Cultural agencies, Congress, DBM, CHEd, State Universities and Colleges; Lead: NCCA

• Teachers’ Training • Program Development • Curriculum Development • Instructional Materials Development

Research and documentation

Office of the President, LGUs/Cultural Agencies, Community/Stakeholders

• Cultural Mapping of local tangible and intangible heritage • Manual(s) on how to conduct heritage documentation • Database

Heritage awareness and appreciation

DepEd / CHEd/ LGUs

• Programs on Education/training, capability building manual, training modules for youth to appreciate cultural heritage • Programs sa pagkilala sa pinakatampok na pinuno ng LGU na may matagumpay na programa sa heritage conservation • Programs that include media to improve their appreciation of culture and development of local policies to encourage local media to allocate time for culture including use of local languages and encourage culture journalism in the educational curriculum for social media to be a terrain for promoting local languages

Promotion of human rights through culture

Greenpeace, GPH, Office of Sol-Gen, CHR, private sector support climate change com• Programs for the establishment of local IP museums, mission, volunteer lawyers, LGUs, NGOs, NGAs, more SLTs (schools for living traditions/multi-purpose private partnerships communities, IPs, NCCA, cultural halls) DepEd, civil society, government and private sectors, DILG, PNP, AFP, people’s organizations, • Publication of an IP encyclopaedia and IP “Wikipedia” Civil society private sectors and communities • IEC to intensify cultural sensitivity for all sectors, particularly for those at the laylayan and IEC on peace, intercultural or across various Philippine communities – walang patayan, Tahimik na kapaligiran at mapayapang pamayanan, paggalang sa sarili at kapwa, yumayabong ang kalikasan at kultura, masayang mga pagdiriwang sa ibat-ibang fiesta at nadaramang kaginhawaan

54

3. Program and PartnershipRecommendations: Cultural Education PROGRAMS/PARTNERSHIPS

RESPONSIBLE ENTITY

Building critical support systems •

NHCP, DepEd, CHEd, NCCA, LGUs and relevant POs;

Establish a network of committees that will review and determine essential historical and cultural topics Work with public publishers to screen errors; that have to be taught in schools, both in the nation- Involvement of local teachers in crafting material and local levels. (relative to content, form and als, cultural based lesson plan and textbooks philosophy)

Development of comprehensive cultural education program •

DepEd / CHEd, NCCA, PO

Craft a comprehensive plan for cultural education in all levels that will encompass instructional materials, teacher training, curriculum

Expand support scholarly and new researches

NCCA, CHEd, DepEd, NAP,PSSC

•

Institutionalization of research grants;

NHCP, NLP, NA, NM, NGOs

•

Research on local Philippine heroes, historical events, cultural artefacts

•

Review inventory and listing of institutions that support research on culture and culture education

•

Promotion of existing research grants on Culture and Arts

•

Research Capacity Building

Expand training of artists and cultural works:

NCCA, CHEd, DepEd, TESDA, CCP;

•

Inventory and listing of Courses

NCCA, NLP, NA, NM

•

Development of new training programs to fill gaps as determined by the inventory per region

Development of career opportunities for culture and the HEIs/CHEd, LGUs, Communities, NCCA-PCEP, arts DOLE, TESDA; •

Cultural Career networking forum

•

Policy Formulation on career opportunities in culture and arts

Congress

55

PROGRAMS/PARTNERSHIPS

RESPONSIBLE ENTITY

Economic gains from tourism while protecting culture

DOT-CentralOffice,

•

Incorporate the cultural aspects (traditions, practices, etc.)on the Philippine tourism campaign

TPB, DOT R.O., NCCA-PCEP

•

Incorporation of indigenous knowledge in higher education in the fields of business, sciences and technology

Program to utilize media in image-building and cultural education

NCCA, MTRCB, FDCP, NBN/PCOO

•

NCCA partnership with media bodies for image-building programs, drafting of curriculum, and creation of documents, bearing in mind the following considerations:

MTRCB

•

Will privately owned media be mandated to adhere to clarified role?

Emphasize the differences on cultural values and practices, to minimize / avoid misunderstanding on curriculum look into what is being taught in the professional schools that produced current media professionals

•

Draft regulatory policies that promote cultural or culturally-grounded content

Develop incentives to media that promotes culturally-ori- BIR, Congress, KBP ented content NBN, PCOO shows •

Mainstream Filipino epics, legends, in media such as TV, radio, broadcast, billboard

•

Establish linkages with CSR programs corporations

•

Require private companies to advertise socially-relevant media programs

56

4. Program and PartnershipRecommendations: Culture-based Sustainable Development PROGRAMS/PARTNERSHIPS

RESPONSIBLE ENTITY

Stakeholders:

Program on culture-focused interventions on climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction (CCADRR) •

•

a) LGUs

Develop and implement culture-focused and responsive DRRM Plans a. Capacity building, b. planning, c. implementation

b) Cultural Agencies

Disaster preparedness, e.g. culture-bound mitigation and adaptation, revitalization of IKSP on early warnings

d) CSO and other stakeholders

c) NGAs

Program on mainstreaming culture in LGU program •

Information, education, communications campaign

•

Training and capability enhancement

•

Provision of local incentives

Implement the cultural statistics/ cultural database inventories •

Provide capacity-building for collection of statistical data related to culture

•

Create a unified cultural statistics database (can be accessed by the public)

•

Update the cultural statistics database (frequency to be determined by the PSA)

Management of cultural diversity program •

Lead: LGUs in partnership with Culture and Arts groups in the Community

Cultural agencies, Philippine Statistics Authority, civil society organizations private individuals, local community, LGUs

NCMF, LGUs, MILF, OIC, NCIP, Congress, Senate, AFP, MNLF, KWF, OPAPP, DOJ, NDF, IPs

Measured and culture-sensitive interventions for inclusive and sustainable peace

Program on participatory governance in culture •

Deliberate involvement of all stakeholders in planning, implementing, monitoring and evaluating process which will formulate a comprehensive development program represented by the different sectors and communities

•

Cultural orientation and mainstreaming for local government units

57

National government agencies, civil society organizations, local government units, artists and cultural workers,Indigenous Peoples and Bangsamoro leaders

PROGRAMS/PARTNERSHIPS

RESPONSIBLE ENTITY

Sustained support for (natural and cultural) resource management in the ancestral domain

National government agencies, civil society organizations,local government units,cultural artists and workers, Indigenous Peoples

ANNEX A: CLUSTERED CHALLENGES 1. Shallow understanding and experiencing of Philippine culture, and weak appreciation of the impacts of culture, and the importance of cultural education • There are errors and omissions in history (Cultural Education) • An absence or lack of awareness and appreciation of cultural heritage (Conservation and Safeguarding) • Inappropriate / Poor management of cultural diversity (Culture-Driven Sustainable Development) • There is need to sustain and institutionalize critical cultural education programs.

• Marginalization and social exclusion (Culture-Driven Sustainable Development) • Perceived inferiority due to colonial experience (Cultural Education) • There is a prevalent culture of fear and violence, characterized by a rampant disregard for human rights hindering the protection of cultural resources. This violation of human rights is seen the aspects of: (a) welfare and life of the indigenous peoples; (b) present condition of marginalized sectors; (c) natural heritage and climate injustice; and, (d) peace and security (Conservation and Safeguarding) • High vulnerability to disasters, hazards and risks due to limited culture-focused interventions on climate change adaptation and disaster-risk reduction (Culture-Driven Sustainable Development) 2. Inadequate and restrictive State policies on culture • Ineffective State policies (Access) • An absence of a single comprehensive law on heritage (Conservation and Safeguarding) • Shallow policymakers’ understanding of culture as an essential ingredient in economic development (Culture-Driven Sustainable Development) 3. Insufficient and inappropriate promotion of culture • Insufficient promotion and lack of information dissemination (Access) • Unclear role of media in image-building and cultural education (Cultural Education) 4. Challenges related to culture, tourism and the private sector • Perceived higher economic gain on tourism rather than culture (Cultural Education) • A lack of incentives to private owners to preserve cultural heritage (Conservation and Safeguarding) • Lack of incentives for investment in culture to advance corporate social responsibility; and, lack of new models of innovative Investment for culture (Culture-Driven Sustainable Development) 5. Human resource-related challenges in culture • Lack of professional cultural workers in conservation and safeguarding of heritage (Conservation and Safeguarding) • A dearth in conservation and safeguarding skills, especially in the research and documentation of cultural resources (Conservation and Safeguarding)

58

• Limited training of artists and cultural workers (Cultural Education) • Perceived limited career opportunities for culture and the arts (Cultural Education) 6. Weaknesses in soft and hard infrastructure support for culture • Weak and insufficient support for soft and hard infrastructure and inadequate resources (Access) • Absence of comprehensive data on local heritage (Conservation and Safeguarding) • Lack of cultural statistics/cultural database inventory (Culture-Driven Sustainable Development) • Critical support systems to promote cultural education are still lacking: integration of culture-based content in the curriculum, localization, textbooks, teacher-trainings (Cultural Education) • Lack of innovative and scholarly research on cultural education (Cultural Education) • Lack of technological support (Access) 7. Onerous access to funding support, and limited funding for culture • Lack of funding support, ineffectual policy and bureaucratic process on funding release (Access) • Insufficient funding for conservation and safeguarding (Conservation and Safeguarding) • Very cumbersome requirements for civil society in implementing cultural projects (Cultural Education) • Limited funding and support (Culture-Driven Sustainable Development) 8. Challenges concerning IPs and Bangsamoro • There is a lack of recognition of IKSP for many IP groups (Cultural Education) 9. Limited constituency and champions for culture, and governance weaknesses in cultural processes • Weak governance (Access) • Limited participation (Access) • Absence of participatory governance in culture (Culture-Driven Sustainable Development) • Limited consultation with IPs on education strategies (Access) • Low awareness / appreciation leading to difficulty of mainstreaming culture in LGU programs (Culture-Driven Sustainable Development) • Limited prominence of arts and culture in local and national conversations [i.e. peace agenda, health agenda, environment agenda, etc.] (Culture-Driven Sustainable Development) • Shallow policymakers’ understanding of culture as an essential ingredient in economic development; need for Cabinet-level voice for culture nuances of national discourse to be more holistic / balanced (Culture-Driven Sustainable Development)

59

National Commission for Culture and the Arts Planning and Policy Office of the Plan • Policy Formulation and Programming Division

w w w . n c c a . g o v . p h