UP Forum March-April 2014

FORUM UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES

sh a p i ng

m i n d s

t h at

sh a p e

t h e

n at i on

VOLUME 15 NUMBER 2

MARCH-APRIL 2014

Indigenous Studies

2 | Indigenous Research: 4 | The 'Indigenous' in Settle to Unsettle, the Cordillera Studies Learn to Unlearn Center of UP Baguio

T

he method of learning, unlearning, relearning1 for literacy and pedagogy may also be employed as the mantra for research and knowledge production. Scholars of indigenous studies and other related disciplines should unlearn and relearn, if they intend to dismantle the master’s house with the master’s tools, to build a house anew; or, even if they simply want to mitigate their marginal status by merely renovating the master’s house, where they informally reside.

To this day, there is still a complicated and contemporary variant of the master-slave relationship that oils the academic machinery. More

T

he formation of the Cordillera Studies Center was made official by the 928th meeting of the UP Board of Regents on June 26, 1980. It was to be the research arm of the Development Studies Program (DSP) of the then Social Science Department (SSD) of UP College Baguio. The other arm of the DSP was the M.A. in Social and Development Studies (MA SDS) program, which exists to this day. The Center’s first ten-year report (19801990) recounts: “The premises which underlie the establishment of CSC arose from discussions on the concept of development, on the empirical conditions which obtain (sic) in the Cordillera

6 | The Philippines Indigenous Peoples’ Core Curriculum

T

he Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA) provides a strong policy basis for Indigenous Peoples’ Rights to Education. The formulation carries a strong articulation of positive educational outcomes against the colonial foundations of education in the Philippines. Education was used as a key institution during the early twentieth century to drive American colonial policies and programs in the Philippines.

Of the fourfold bundles of IP rights provided for in the IPRA, the implementation of the Right to Social Justice and Human Rights is least studied.

The second volume of The Road to Empowerment: Strengthening the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (Ar-

2 UP FORUM Volume 15 No. 2 March-April 2014

THE INDIGENOUS RESEARCH... continued from page 1

often than not, modern knowledge products from cognition factories are manufactured by extracting raw materials—whether tangible, such as mineral resources, or intangible, such as knowledge— from indigenous repositories, with neither regard nor respect for indigenous communities.

All this plundering performed in the name of reason, science and civilization. Trans- and multi-national processors refine tangible/intangible resources for the grand design of the hegemons and their cohorts. Despite its potential as a neutralizing tool of the powers-that-be, indigenous studies can serve as a venue of resistance, in which those branded irrational, pagan, savage, can claim what is theirs, and engage with ethnocentric researchers who impose labels and universalize truths.

methodologies; the roles of intellectuals in advancing indigenous studies; and the way forward for indigenous studies.”

Inadvertently, the participants seem to settle with the definition of indigenous studies as “field of inquiry which focuses on issues affecting people/s (and their descendants) who on account of colonization (and its consequences) have become historically differentiated and disadvantaged people/s, have suffered/are suffering injustice/s, have been prevented from determining their lives and future, and how their societies will develop.

However, opinions regarding the idea of determining an indigenous person vary. Among the different factors considered in defining indigenous identity are biological inheritance, historical differentiation, and indigenous worldview,8 qualified by (a) a non-anthropocentric orientation where man is merely a small part of the order of things; (b) the primacy of collective goals over individual goals; (c) the ‘earth-rootedness’ of human beings given their reliance on nature for their livelihood, subsistence, and survival; (d) an orientation towards environmental protection and responsibility instead of environmental exploitation; and, (e) an innate preference for harmony or balance among all living things.

Although the indigenous worldview shares “common” features, it does not follow that indigenous groups share one culture—as culture is place- and time-specific, and cultural practices “are often products of years of experience, of adaptation, adjustment, and modification.” Thus, the movement for indigenous rights is never static. The struggle, according to the synthesis paper, evolved “from arguing for communitarian or collectivist ideals versus individualistic goals in the 1970s and 1980s, to asserting indigenous peoples’ rights within a liberal framework and clamoring for better arrangements [among] indigenous peoples within the modern nation-state thereafter.”9 Moreover, the Philippines’ “shift in usage from cultural minorities to indigenous peoples reflects the evolution of the indigenous rights discourse (emphasis added).”

The research methodology for indigenous studies would blur “the dichotomy between the researcher and the object of research,” i.e the indigenous community shall be “an associate of the researcher and an active participant in the research process.” Thus, “the conduct of research, apart from being communitybased, is also community-sanctioned and community-sensitive.”

First among the three themes that emerged during the workshop is the notion of binary categories.10 Regarding another dichotomy, that between the academic and the activist, “the consensus among the participants

was to foster engagement and forge alliances instead of creating and fueling tensions;” while, in dealing with institutions, the indigenous are encouraged to engage.11 In general, the workshop suggests the rejection of instituted binary blackand-white positions and the exploration of a probable half-way rendezvous points, i.e. compromises or gray areas. The second theme considers the participants’ inclination of advocating indigenous studies as if it were a “fight,” while the third theme calls for transcending theory by putting ideas into practice.12

Reset and Resettle: Interrogation Since the academe supposedly hosts debates, it is also expected to encourage formations of forces that combine and ones that contend,13 in the neutral, value-free pursuit of knowledge and for the sake of research.

However, Smith writes, “research has a significance for indigenous peoples that is embedded in our history under the ‘gaze’ of Western imperialism and Western science” and it has “not been neutral in its objectificacontinued on page 3

Ethnic pattern and cover photo from the National Commission on

Upset, Unsettle: Ingestion and Indigestion It is inevitable to mention terms such as benevolent assimilation, white man’s burden, manifest destiny and other justifications for colonization in tracing the roots of indigenous studies.2 The assumed superiority of scientific thinking starts all the way back, when westerners decided to “civilize” the natives and “liberate” them from superstitions.

Ethnocentricism—Euro- and Ameri- centrism in particular—has been circulating in the bloodstreams of the universities since the establishment of the colonial education system. Hence, our mentality has been imbibing the ideological biases of our masters. For instance, the Spaniards demonized our ancestors as pagans, while the Americans ostracized them as illiterates—and some of us bought the demonization and ostracism the colonizers sold.

Institutions established by colonial masters—the church and the public school system—have worked against our own people.

Participants in the workshop organized by UP Baguio and Tebtebba, “Reflections on Indigenous Studies and Research: Taking stock of lessons from the field,”3 convened to collectively resist the objectification of indigenous people studied for the perusal of science, thus the inquiry as to whether the indigenous-scientific dichotomy is “true” and mutually exclusive, among other questions4 that oblige leaders and intellectuals to be excited and unsettled.5 Instinct or common6 sense tells us that something is either black or white, that anything is either one or the other. But beyond these tints, beyond gray areas or middle grounds, exist other hues of possibilities, especially since the current epoch somehow provides opportunities for discourses that were once subdued.

The three-day workshop synthesized7 the inquiries raised which include the nature of ‘indigenous studies’ as a discipline; indigenous way(s) of knowing, worldview(s) and the appropriate research

Artwork by Tilde Acuña

Arbeen Acuña

UP FORUM Volume 15 No. 2 March-April 2014 3

INDIGENOUS RESEARCH... continued from page 2 tion of the Other.”14 Knowledge produced through the colonization of the indigenous people benefits the West and, “in turn, colonize[s] us in what Ngugi wa Thiong’o calls colonization ‘of the mind.’” Thus, Cunningham calls for decolonization of research. She said, “[Scholars] should not produce knowledge and keep it in a library,” as there should be a way for the knowledge to return and to be of purpose to the community.15 The call for internationalization and globalization— as if to connect all humanity into one community committed to the advancement of mankind with facilitating institutions—is another matter, which is quite contrary to decolonization and, eventually, sovereignty and liberation. The key term is human, whose meaning is determined by the ruling power. Qualified humans get to enjoy the fruits of research, science, art and culture. “Humanizing” the savage has been the hobby and advocacy of the so-called liberators, and they ended up with the other end—dehumanization. Sole commitment to knowledge (even cultural) production, as if it were neutral, tends to bring forth scholars “who in the name of science and progress still consider indigenous peoples as specimens, not as humans.”16 Consequently, indigenous theorists, such as Reinaga, resorted to ambidextrous reflexes, to ward off strange, foreign thoughts. He said: “Capitalism is the right hand and Communism the left. With both hands the white man strangles the indigenous nation, slaving us and nature to machines.”17 Reminiscent of the impact of the Zeus Salazar’s indigenization project, Pantayong Pananaw (for-us-from-us18 perspective), Reinaga’s indianismo was seen as problematic, even myopic; yet, like Salazar’s brainchild, it can never be plainly dismissed because of its impact on thought production. Lucero19 explores how Fanon’s anticolonialism somehow shaped Reinaga’s indianismo, and just like Salazar’s ideas, these thoughts would later be critiqued, in an effort to engage in discourse and to advance in theorizing. Bolivian president Evo Morales, Latin America’s first indigenous president, acknowledges Reinaga’s influence, while maintaining a staunch anti-imperialist stance,20 which is, needless to say, anti-capitalist.21 Consistent with its predatory nature (but deodorized through terms such as post-colonialism, economic independence, tribal development, progress, etc.),22 imperialism, currently euphemized as globalization, threatens indigenous cultures and identities. Makere writes, “Beyond the homogenizing influence on material forms of culture is a more fundamental and profoundly significant issue, that of the homogenization of worldviews and constructions of reality and the loss and commodification of indigenous knowledge.”23 More than a fight, it seems indigenous studies exist in a war-torn field, thus the necessity of indentifying allies and enemies even in academia. Criticality shall therefore remain upon analysis of claims fashioned by perceived allies. A healthy skepticism shall be observed, as superficial democratic spaces and apparent consensus shall be scrutinized and queried.

The aforementioned shift attributed to Kymlicka, for instance, seems to normalize or naturalize the status quo. By implying that working within the institution is the destined trend of indigenous movements, Kymlicka seems to legitimize the power of the modern nation state and to suggest the oppressed—indigenous or otherwise—are left with no choice but to negotiate within its instituted (neo)liberal framework.

According to Konig,24 Kymlicka’s “morally and politically opportunist” leaning towards “liberal culturalism, a doctrinal variety able to unify nationalism and multiculturalism,” enforces hegemony. Look back at our country’s policies, such as the Mining Act of 1995, which was later reversed25 in favor of the transnational (read: foreign) mining corporations, giving them the freedom to mine minerals and to plunder other resources, at the expense of the indigenous peoples. With these goings-on, the shift away from the indigenous peoples’ basic “communitarian” rights, such as that of self-determination and of ancestral domain, is illusory as the struggle for collective rights remains relevant. The partiality of liberal political norms towards the property-owners who wanted to overindulge in more property has been violat-

ing already dispossessed people— indigenous or otherwise.

Since the colonial26 until the current neocolonial times, people of our third world country, especially the indigenous, are being ransacked, with the help of the military. In the recent experience of the Tumandoks,27 catastrophic land-grabbing never takes a break, even after the devastation of one of the most powerful, literal typhoons– both of which displace the people, the former however aggravates the latter. Moreover, the military is also instrumental in impeding the education of indigenous children,28 somehow obstructing the Department of Education’s bandaid solution of allocating fund for basic indigenous education.29 As if annual national education budget cuts weren’t enough, a look at the indigenous peoples’ situationer prepared by the UN itself,30 and the accompanying education crises among many other problems, and reality stares us right in the eye.

Bolivia’s attempt to transform education,31 with the help of social movements, intellectuals and think tanks,32 shows that despite the relatively progressive government, radicalizing education takes time, and the process is never a walk in the park. The possibilities of indigenous pedagogy and experiments in advocating intercultural education33 remain a relevant area of concern in indigenous studies.

In essence, one should proceed in education with caution, as it functions as a double-edged sword.

Scholars should be critical of every acquired knowledge and never settle for anything absolute, because education is the most seductive34 aspect of western imperialism.

The “power to narrate or to block other narratives from forming or emerging, is very important to culture and imperialism, and constitutes one of the main connections between them,”35 and among the points where the formal/academic and the informal/folk meet is the intersection of indigenous studies.

Education, especially instituted ones, is a technology of domination, yet, despite being “the primary tool for the submerging of indigenous peoples’ highly developed ‘inner’ ways of knowing under a layer of colonizing ideologies,” it may also be a site for resistance.36 To resist the oppressive educational institutions, “indigenous peoples who are impelled to coexist within neoliberal state formations” must face the call “to re-embed (…)37 principles at the core of indigenous educational movements, organizational structures and economic aspirations,” as doing “otherwise is to become active participants in the processes of imperialism.”38 -------------------Email the author at forum@upd.edu.ph.

For the end-notes and further discussions, visit the UP Forum online at the UP System website, http://www.up.edu.ph.

4 UP FORUM Volume 15 No. 2 March-April 2014

THE 'INDIGENOUS' IN THE CSC... continued from page 1

Raymundo D. Rovillos and Paula Pamintuan-Riva Note: This is an abridged version of a paper read during the International Seminar Workshop on Indigenous Studies held on 26-28 June 2013 in Mandaluyong City, Metro Manila. communities and on the vision of social science practice as relevant to the process of social science transformation” (Mendoza and Ladia 1991, 4). It continues: In keeping with the UPCB plan for development, and in consonance with the obvious needs of cultural communities in this area, the CSC was to be established for data banking, and academic exchange between social scientists and development partners. The Cordillera Studies Center would develop communication, research and extension work with cultural communities in Regions I and II. (Underscoring ours).

Note here the reference to “obvious needs of cultural communities in this [Cordillera] area” and the focus on social science and development at the Center’s core. The CSC was to be a center where information about the region will be collected, curated and kept for development partners.

UP Baguio became a constituent university of the UP System in 2002. The Center was transformed into the University’s research arm, expanding into the humanities and the natural sciences. The introduction to its first ten-year report (1980 to 1990) recounts that it is “an interdisciplinary research institution which focuses on development issues in the uplands. The Cordillera Region’s locus of operation is composed of the provinces of Abra, Benguet, Ifugao, Kalinga-Apayao, Mountain Province and the chartered city of Baguio.”

The Center prioritizes research in the following programs: Biodiversity and Resource Management, Sustainability Science, Governance and Public Policy, Local Languages and Literatures, Material Culture and Climate Change. It also houses the Knowledge and Training Resource Center on Climate Change and Disaster Risk Reduction and Management, seed-funded by the United Nations World Food Program (UN-WFP).

Typologies of categories used As of last count, the Center had released 112 publications, which include working papers, issue papers, monographs, conference proceedings, research reports and issues of the UPB refereed journal, The Cordillera Review.

This includes all texts listed in the Center's publication database from 1983 to 2010. Of these, 30 were working papers, five were issue papers (usually with three to four articles in each), four were issues of The Cordillera Review, six were conference proceedings (some of which had several papers which were relevant to this study), and 52 were research reports.

After intensive readings of the texts, these were categorized according to the “subjects” of the studies. These categories are illustrated in Figure 1 along with the percentage for each.

In addition, some texts used more than one categorization for their subject.

We now turn to a discourse analysis of the key concepts or categories that were commonly used by UP Baguio scholars on Cordillera Studies, limiting our discussion to the following four categories: ethnic groups/ethno-linguistic groups; lowland-upland, migrant-non-migrant, dichotomies; Cordillera/Igorot and Indigenous Peoples.

Figure 1. CSC Publications

Ethnic Groups A good number of the literature surveyed in this study used “ethnic groups” or “ethno-linguistic groups” to refer to the “researched.” Anthropologists and sociologists define ethnic groups as: A segment of a larger society whose members are thought of, by themselves or others, to have a common origin and to share important segments of a common culture and who, in addition, participate in shared activities in which the common origin and culture are significant ingredients (Yinger, 1994, 3 as cited in Eller, 1999, 13. Underscoring ours).

The categories of ethnicity, ethnic groups or ethno-linguistic groups appear to be neutral or objective signifiers, as they presuppose that there are ethnic groups, as long as the common elements mentioned above are present. Hence, there are ethnic groups in the Cordillera, inasmuch as there are continued on page 5

UP FORUM Volume 15 No. 2 March-April 2014 5

THE 'INDIGENOUS' IN THE CSC... continued from page 4 ethnic groups in other regions and provinces in the Philippines. A Kankanaey or Ibaloy is juxtaposed on the same discursive plain as the Tagalog, Ilocano or Bisaya. There is no a priori assumption of unequal power relations among these groups.

Photo from the UP System Information Office

Lowlanders versus highlanders Language is a central concern in discourse. It is the structure through which the creation of meaning is possible. It is interesting how, in the course of reading CSC texts, binary oppositions (highland vs. lowland, local vs. national, traditional beliefs vs. Christian beliefs, etc.) were continually used to describe and identify the subject. This is suggestive of the structuralist view of language and culture as postulated by Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure. That is, meaning is formed through the differences between polar opposites; one cannot be defined without the other. In this type of meaning-making, indigeneity gains traction only when put in the light of mainstream Filipino society.

Aside from defining the region through its difference from the national government, other binary oppositions that emerged were that of the minority versus the majority, highland versus lowland, ethno linguistic groups versus Hispanized groups, outsiders versus insiders and rural landscapes versus urban landscapes.

It would be simple if these oppositions, and their resulting meanings, were fixed as soon as they existed. However, as Jacques Derrida has found, “language is inherently unreliable” and that meaning is forever deferred (Bertens 2008, 97). Aside from a tendency to be overly simplistic, there remains a power relation in how popularly accepted these meanings are. For instance, value judgments exist between differences such as preferences for the national and modern instead of the local and traditional. From the Cordillera Studies Center’s mere existence, there is a conscious effort to redirect attention towards one part of the binary that has been expelled to the margins.

However, the extent to which this will be effective may as well come to how much of it is useful to the communities it wishes to represent.

Cordillera Studies during the late 1990s until the turn of the new millennium (2000-present). It was also during this time when the term gained currency among advocates and activists for indigenous peoples’ rights. In 1997, the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA) was enacted. These developments (in the social movements and the state legislative and executive branches) may have influenced University-based intellectuals and researcher-scholars as well. Indeed, much of the published works by CSC during this period (mid 1990s to present) are replete with references to indigenous peoples.

When one speaks of “Indigenous Studies,” one assumes the historicity (i.e., given and contextualized) and positionality (alterity) of the field of study. This is very much akin to the difference between Feminist Studies versus Gender Studies. Like feminist studies, indigenous studies (versus ethnicity studies) have a clear bias towards the marginalized. They also have a teleological purpose, which is to place the discourse of indigenous peoples, from the periphery to the center of academic life. Indigenous Studies avoids being reified only as an academic project. Rather, it forges alliances with the broader indigenous movements outside of the academe.

Having defined Indigenous Studies, can we therefore say that the works

by UPB faculty under the Cordillera Studies Center may be classified as “Indigenous Studies”? We argue that this is not necessarily the case. It would seem like the term Indigenous Peoples were used by the facultyscholars because it had become the institutional label/definition, by virtue of a republic act and other related national legal instruments. Moreover, the researches conducted under the CSC focused on issues such as natural resource management, ancestral domain and self-determination (autonomy). The focus was NOT indigenous peoples per se, although the CSC studies dwelt on the substantive elements of indigenous peoples’ (ancestral domain, self-determination, time immemorial possession of land and resources, etc). Given this track, it is very possible to create an indigenous studies program under the auspices of the Cordillera Studies Center.

To conclude, it appears that, regardless of social categories used, schol-

Cordillerans and Igorots Not surprisingly, “Cordillera” and “Igorot” have been frequently used as signifiers for the human groups in this geographic area. We can sense a clear conceptual, even ideological, distinction between the two, even though their usage has had, in our view, the same discursive impacts both on the intellectual as Dr. Raymundo Rovillos speaks during the International Seminar Workshop on Indigenous Studies. Beside him well as practical realms. are Dr. Prospero De Vera of the UP NCPAG and TebTebba Foundation Executive Director Victoria Tauli-Corpuz.

“Cordillera” refers to the geographic region that has been represented in the literature as mountainous, rich in natural resources, a host to many national develars on Cordillera Studies assume that there is/are a (n) object/s or subject/s) opmental projects such as mining, hydro-power, logging, etc. However, its worthy of inquiry. The persisting epistemic rupture suggests that history has peoples and communities have been at the margins of national development. not ended.

Its people, the “Cordillerans,” are composed of at least eight (8) major ethno-------------------linguistic groups as well as migrants from other places/regions.

Dr. Raymundo Rovillos is the chancellor of the University of the PhilipThe term “Cordillerans” appears to be a more politically benign and seempines Baguio and is a professor of history. Paula Pamintuan-Riva is a ingly neutral category as compared to the term “Igorot.” The latter is repreuniversity researcher at the Cordillera Studies Center. Email the authors at sented as the collective identity of the various ethnic groups in the Cordillera rayrovillos@gmail.com. region. What distinguishes Igorot from the term Cordillera is its discursive shift of the axis of identify—from mere geographic/territorial and to interplay of historical, cultural and political considerations. Although the term itself is References: Bertens, J.W. (2001). Literary theory: The basics. London: Routledge. much contested and quite tenuous, Igorot simultaneously connotes difference Eller, J.D. (1999). From culture to ethnicity to conflict. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan or “otherness, resistance, self-determination, etc.

Press.

Indigenous Peoples The term “indigenous peoples” began to be cited in the literature on

Mendoza, L.C. & Ladia, M.A.J. (1991). The Cordillera Studies Center (CSC) from June 1980 to December 1990: A ten-year report. Baguio City: Cordillera Studies Center, University of the Philippines Baguio.

6 UP FORUM Volume 15 No. 2 March-April 2014

THE PHILIPPINES IP CORE CURRICULUM ... continued from page 1

Leah E. Abayao

quiza, 2007) illustrates what peoples’ organizations (POs) and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have achieved in their work on indigenous education and indigenous health (see Vargas, 2007), but does not account for the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples’ (NCIP) execution of its mandate in these areas. This essay looks at the delivery of indigenous peoples’ right to education in the Philippines by reviewing one of the most important works of the NCIP—the Indigenous Peoples’ Core Curriculum. This study takes a rights-based approach to make a case for indigenous peoples’ rights to education in the Philippines.

Section 4, Rule VII, Part VI of the IRR also provides for the creation of an Office on Education, Culture and Health (OECH) as the NCIP structure responsible for the effective implementation of educational, cultural, and health-related rights as provided in the Act. The OECH crafted its IP Education work with a view to its role as “an enabling partner” for the IPs’ physical and social well-being, ensuring that programs are “adopted to the peculiarities of the specific ICCs/IPs”(NCIP Annual Report 2006, 22). The OECH aims to harness, integrate, and harmonize multi-sectoral efforts of all stakeholders in safeguarding the educational, cultural, and health-related rights of ICCs/IPs.

Curriculum development for indigenous peoples’ education The OECH raised the issue of ‘inappropriateness’ in the current education system in the Philippines and asserted that this current system “has contributed to the further marginalization and exploitation of IPs.” Thus, the OECH prioritized a program in curricular revisions that positions and prepares the IPs “to be more attuned with needed life-long learning values and life-skills for the development and protection of ancestral domains and their culture and to advocate for IP rights and welfare” (see the NCIP document, “Profile of Education, Culture and Health programs/projects for Indigenous Peoples contained in the MTPDP-MTPIP 20052010: Considerations for the medium-term work and financial plans”).

In a move to address the problem of an already operating and well-entrenched, Western-developed educational system in the Philippines, the OECH, concerned as it was to institute change in the system over the long term, embarked on two tasks: 1) to develop an IP Core Curriculum and 2) to push for policies that will indigenize the existing educational system. This was implemented mainly with the DepEd, in coordination with educational institutions and other organizations through the systematic conduct of activities like workshops, fora, and consultation-meetings that explored new pedagogical approaches and identified the contents needed for curricular development and intervention in Philippine formal education.

In 2004, the OECH collaborated with the Department of Education in a DepEd-led project titled “Development of an Indigenous Peoples’ Core Curriculum,” with funding from UNESCO. The OECH developed a conceptual framework to guide its work in curricular development, and later, its pilot implementation. This framework is concerned with the cultural grounding of IP education in specific ancestral domains, and seeks to promote cultural diversity in the existing educational system. The framework recognizes that the context of education for IPs revolves around their vision for their own communities and the larger society where they move about, and their thinking about their individual and collective existence clearly articulates a vision for self-determination. The OECH believes that it is important for IPs to work from an understanding of the elements and dynamics of their society as the basis for their capacity building as communities. Curricular changes are viewed as important in developing vibrant cultural institutions and facilitating a good teaching-learning process. In the Dep-Ed IP Core Curriculum, education is generally envisioned as ‘enabling’ (for recognition and empowerment), ‘ensuring’ (for protection), and ‘enhancing’ (for development and promotion), a tool for the continued vitality of the indigenous peoples’ ancestral domains and heritage (see Department of Education–Bureau of Alternative Learning System [BALS] 2006, vol. 1).

OECH believes that its curricular program intervention is well guided by the

IPRA’s provision (Section 28) for an Integrated System of Education. The OECH envisions an educational institution relevant to the needs of IPs, and promotes their knowledge systems and practices in the formation of strong cultural character and identities. Thus, the curriculum is seen as the foundation of a long programmatic change in a Philippine educational system which does not account for indigeneity. However, the DepEd takes a different view, believing that this indigenization of the Basic Education Curriculum was a venue to “allow IPs to embrace the Basic Education Curriculum (BEC) while preserving their cultural heritage and traditions” (Lapus 2008). How was the effort to develop an Indigenous Peoples Curriculum reduced to an indigenization of the existing BEC–Alternative Learning System(ALS) curriculum of the Dep-Ed?

IP Core Curriculum design and content The IP Core Curriculum was a special project under the leadership of the Dep-Ed Bureau of Alternative Learning System [BALS]. It was foreign-funded and initially developed to provide IPs with the needed learning values and life skills in the development and protection of their ancestral domains and their cultures. A learner from a certain indigenous cultural community is expected to go through this curriculum with consciousness of the whole context or process to be undertaken and to apply learning to his or her specific community.

This curriculum development program was a response to the clamor of some IP leaders for an IP Core Curriculum after Dep-Ed conducted a series of consultations and dialogues with various stakeholders, local IP leaders, ALS implementers, and IP educators. The dialogues revealed the following: a) the DepEd basic formal education and non-formal education curricula do not respond to the specific needs of IPs; b) IPs are seldom or never consulted in developing the curriculum to suit their peculiar educational needs; c) formal schools and non-formal education sessions continue to use English and Tagalog, rather than IP languages, as the medium of instruction; and d) IP curricula offered by other organizations and mission schools are not recognized by DepEd (see Department of Education–Bureau of Alternative Learning System [BALS] 2006).

With functional literacy as a goal, the IP Core Curriculum sought to develop the following learning strands and competencies aimed at locating IP contributions to national development:

communication skills; problem solving and critical thinking; development of self and a sense of community; practice of ecological sustainable economics; expanding one’s world view and Mothercraft Pagsasarili (Department of Education – Bureau of Alternative Learning System [BALS] 2006). The learning competencies of this curriculum were drawn from the existing DepEd-ALS curriculum for basic literacy at the elementary and secondary levels. The curriculum focused on the following areas which are conceived as core concerns of IPs: family life, health, sanitation and nutrition, civic consciousness, economics and income, and environment.

While the learning strands and competencies were subjected to a series of focused group discussions and validation workshops with leaders and various IP stakeholders, such activities were only consultative in nature, following an already structured procedure (NCIP Annual Report 2005, 32). A Dep-Ed policy was issued in 2010 which provided for the development and pilot-testing of the IP core curriculum and instructional materials for Alternative Learning System (ALS) nationwide (DepEd Order No. 101, series of 2010). This issuance allowed for the further development of the Generic Core Curriculum for IPs on Alternative Learning, a project supported by UNESCO. The curriculum was pilot tested in IP communities from 20052007 with a budget of PhP 67,381.25 and direct cost of PhP 58,592.39 for each site. Pilot testing was undertaken to validate and/or improve the already prepared core curriculum with its learning materials. Other than pilot testing, this core curriculum had modules with corresponding instructional materials, reference guides, and facilitators’ manuals which were translated by the IPs and subjected to a series of focused group discussions, rigorous scrutiny,and refinements, both in the field and at the policy-making levels.

This lengthy and meticulous process served to strengthen the OECH view for IP education where the indigenous communities at large are themselves considered as constituting the entire school. The OECH also advocated the choice of IP language as medium of instruction which is well in keeping with DepEd Order No. 74, series of 2009 on the “Institutionalization of Mother-Tongue Based Multilingual Education.”

The content of the IP Core Curriculum shows that it largely indigenizes the pre-existing curriculum of the Department of Education, and is perhaps the very basis for Education Secretary Brother Armin Luistro’s claim that the curriculum content was revised to deliver the core education goals of IPRA (Ina Hernando-Malipot, “DepEd develops curriculum for indigenous peoples,” Manila Bulletin, September 15, 2010). But closer examination of the curriculum content brings to the surface certain curricular hitches and complications. We can grant good intentions in this attempt to indigenize continued on page 7

UP FORUM Volume 15 No. 2 March-April 2014 7

THE PHILIPPINES IP CORE CURRICULUM ... continued from page 6 an existing curriculum, but the target outcomes (what an IP will manifest after undergoing this curriculum) might end up faulty or incoherent because the curriculum design is not founded on an indigenous learning system or structure, thus delivering mixed messages to teachers and students alike. Take the case of communication skills, where the core areas do not reflect indigenous or traditional formulations (e.g., roles in existing rituals and other affairs that promote community well-being) and the terminal objectives are derived from the national development directive that the IP must make his or her own contribution to Philippine national formation. The indigenization intent failed to change the philosophy of the curriculum, ending up as a structured remedial intervention for IPs in the Philippines. Needless to say, its intervention works to perpetuate hegemonic tendencies in the IP Core Curriculum.

An important problem with the curriculum has to do with its configuration of IP knowledge and practices. The curriculum acknowledges the existence of such knowledge and practices but does not provide the changing or evolutionary character of traditional practices and belief systems. The contemporary relevance of the IP Core Curriculum may need to capture well the changing views of IPs about their kin relations vis-a-vis the conduct of community rituals and the changing views of IPs on the use and management of their natural resources.

If the curriculum is supposed to deliver functional outcomes, cultural traditions should be viewed as evolving entities and not static forms. Functional outcomes need to be drawn systematically from well-articulated vision and goals of changing IP communities, e.g., as expressed or formulated in traditional settings during community ceremonies or in well-defined development plans. While the objectives of the curriculum articulates a strong ‘conceptual support’ to the needs of IPs by emphasizing the relationship between the indigenous peoples and their culture/ ancestral domains, the indigenized content of the curriculum is too weak in its present form to deliver on this goal.

An indigenous peoples core curriculum for national development?

Since the curriculum followed a structured indigenization process allowing IP knowledges and ways/ systems of learning to be subsumed under Western learning categories and designs, the learning outcomes will continue to be measured in terms of mainstream society’s expectations.

Competency is still measured using non-indigenous indicators such as scientific thinking, scientific values, and interpersonal skills. Such expected outcomes still perpetuate the dominant nationalist paradigm for developmental education. The institutions created by the State, such as the DepEd for pedagogical purposes, dispense bureaucratic power that perpetuates the historic colonial past institutions that continue

to pursue the integrationist and meliorist aims of, say, the Commission on National Integration (CNI) in 1957.

The five learning strands of the IP Core Curriculum contain competencies developed from a ‘state integrationist thrust’. Thus far, the contents and pedagogy are removed from the ways in which the indigenous peoples of the Philippines have constructed their social, cultural and natural worlds. While the IP Education Framework developed by the OECH has strongly articulated the indigenousness of the IP Education programs, the IP Core Curriculum as seen in the curricular content does not deliver this. The expected competencies could have been anchored on collective aspirations of indigenous communities, some of which are already officially articulated in the Indigenous Peoples’ Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development Plan (ADSDPP). For it to be meaningful, the IP Core Curriculum should be culturally constructed away from the National Basic Curriculum framework.

The intended goals and the learning strands do not match. In effect, the curriculum was formulated to incorporate, partially, the knowledges of IPs that are determined to be not detrimental to national development goals. It remains a challenge for the IP Core Curriculum to consider the usefulness of important evolving indigenous and traditional knowledge systems that allow IPs to become strategic actors in a changing world, and not as objects of development programs or subjects of tribalized tourism.

Programs aimed at indigenizing the Philippine education system have thus far been about improvements directed at ameliorating and advancing the current bureaucratic practices.

In the Philippines, homegrown or locally developed programs appear to have better chances of sustainability. The case of the SILDAPassisted schools of Davao City in southern Philippines is a case in point. The dynamic conceptualization of several community primary schools was driven by the need of the

communities themselves after several activities that helped the communities to come up with a well-conceived community development plan. IP education was envisioned to play a vital role in the continuity of traditional values and practices needed for their survival in their ancestral domain, so the concept of IP school program was developed around the desire of IP leaders for the revitalization of their traditions and in keeping with their heritage. An IP curriculum, along with instructional materials in local languages, was developed and revised a number of times. After several schools were established, the curriculum was approved by the Dep-Ed. Both the management structure and the curriculum came into sight as the education program was being developed.

After some years of assistance, the community schools were co-managed by the communities and the LGU. Community ownership of the schools was crucial to their sustainability.

-------------------Dr. Leah Abayao is assistant professor of history in UP Baguio. Email her at leabayao@gmail.com.

REFERENCES:

Arquiza, Y.D. (Ed.). (2005). Nurturing the earth, nurturing life. In The road to empowerment: Strengthening the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (Vol. 2). Manila: International Labour Office.

Buasen, C. (n.d.). Profile of education, culture and health programs/projects for indigenous peoples contained in the MTPDP-MTPIP 2005-2010: Considerations for the medium-term work and financial plans. Retrieved from https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:Ac7lc9YA WcwJ:www.ncip.gov.ph/downloads/category/13-programs.html?download%3D55:oechprofileof-education-culture-and-health-programs-for-ips+buasen+considerations+for&hl=fil&gl=ph&

continued on page 11

Artwork by Tilde Acuña

8 UP FORUM Volume 15 No. 2 March-April 2014

THE UP FORUM ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION

Q.

ON INDIGENOUS STUDIES (IS)

How do you define IS in the context of higher edu Do we need a national policy(ies) or law(s) to mak education institutions?

What reforms must higher education university their institutions through curriculum reforms? T extension/public service? dwell on the historical and cultural dimensions of the experience of indigenous peoples. Consistent with the general mandate or mission of universities and learning institutions, IS should also look into the intellectual or philosophical moorings of indigeneity or ethnicitybased claims. In short, IS should be willing to critique its basic premises.

As suggested above, the political, economic, social, and other aspects of the experience of indigenous peoples should also be studied.

I believe there is space for IS in higher education. For the same reason that we value nationalism in our university, I see no reason why studies that privilege “sub-national” identities should not be considered for inclusion in higher education offerings. (I do not think privileging nationalism necessarily means that we have to deny that we have “sub-national” identities.) As long as scholarship norms inform the offering of IS as an academic program, I see no reason why it should not be part of higher education.

The Philippine state should encourage the establishment of IS

Alejandro N. Ciencia Jr., PhD Director, Cordillera Studies Center (CSC) Assistant Professor, College of Social Sciences UP Baguio

I

n my synthesis report for the International Seminar Workshop on Indigenous Studies held in June 2013 in Mandaluyong, I defined “indigenous studies” as that “field of inquiry which focuses on issues affecting people/s (and theirdescendants) who on account of colonization (and its consequences) have become historically differentiated and disadvantaged people/s, have suffered/are suffering injustice/s, have been prevented from determining their lives and future, and how their societies will develop.”

IS reexamines the past to analyze how inhabitants of a particular modern-day nation-state have become classified as “indigenous” or “non-indigenous” and how such labels often meant advantages or privileges (economic, political, social, etc.) for one category at the expense of the other. Given that culture is the “obvious” starting point for making distinctions, IS unavoidably looks into the crucial role of culture in shaping social identities, collective behavior, contemporary political developments, etc. and how these bear on the lives of people today.

In the context of higher education, IS should not only

I

would define indigenous studies as interdisciplinary studies focused on such aspects of indigenous peoples' experience as the arts, cultures, ecologies, economies, histories, identities, knowledge, languages, literatures, music, community and political dynamics, relations with others, and ways of knowing.

In the Philippines, many students are familiar with the sciences and technologies that have been developed in the Western World but are unfamiliar with our own indigenous healing systems, traditional political structures, and local communitydeveloped disaster response mechanisms.

Indigenous studies can be offered in higher education institutions such as the University of the Philippines.

Since it is interdisciplinary in nature, it can be offered as an academic program under one college but working in close collaboration with several

other colleges, institutes, and programs.

At the College of Social Sciences and Philosophy (CSSP), we have a Folklore Studies Program that brings together several disciplines such as anthropology, history, and linguistics. We are currently in the process of broadening the study of folklore (defined as ‘kaalamang-bayan’ or local knowledge) to include other disciplines outside of CSSP. This could be a starting point in the development of the University’s Indigenous Studies Program.

I don’t think there is a need for a national policy or new law to provide space for IS in higher education institutions. We already have Republic Act 8371, otherwise known as the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) of 1997. The Implementing Rules and Regulations of IPRA provides that the State, through the National Commission on Indigenous

Peoples (NCIP), shall “develop and implement school curricula for all levels relevant to the indigenous peoples/indigenous cultural communities using their language, learning systems, histories and culture without compromising quality of education (IPRA IRR Rule VI, Section 6b).” As a matter of fact, former NCIP Chair Zenaida Brigida Hamada-Pawid was already negotiating with our Department in developing a program and curriculum for indigenous studies.

We have to follow up this request with the new NCIP Chair.

The Commission on Higher Education (CHED) and the University of the Philippines should propose a Memorandum of Agreement with the NCIP in instituting a program for indigenous studies. It is also important to look into what programs and courses related to indigenous studies are already in place so that we don’t start from scratch. There are also

several research projects that have been undertaken by scholars on topics related to indigenous knowledge and indigenous technologies. Some of these researches have been funded by the National Research Council of the Philippines (NRCP) as well as by foreign funding institutions.

The institution of an Indigenous Studies Program will also definitely have a link with extension and public service through the University’s cooperation with the NCIP and with specific indigenous communities. On December 12, 2012, the UP Department of Anthropology initiated a dialogue with indig-

Nestor Castro, PhD Chair, Department College of Social S UP Diliman

UP FORUM Volume 15 No. 2 March-April 2014 9

THE UP FORUM ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION ON INDIGENOUS STUDIES (IS) problem is that the essence could be lost in translation from oral to written. Minsan, hindi mo na ma-capture ang essence. The decisionmaking process of the IPs is consensus building, so how do you put this into procedure? When we speak of government or bureaucratic process, it follows a procedure—Step 1, Step 2, Step 3.

Somewhere along the way, the essence of traditional law cannot be captured.

So, I think in the context of public administration that is something that needs to be researched.

Also, traditional governance varies from tribe to tribe; there are general principles—consensus, elders but in each tribe, there are variations. What do you mean by consensus? How

ucation? ke space for IS in higher

officials do to promote IS in Through research? Through

programs in higher education institutions. Still, higher education institutions usually have their own niche or preferred fields of specialization.

They are expected to respond to the needs of the area where they are located and to take into account their existing resources and competencies when building new academic programs. Hence, IS programs in HEIs should be encouraged where they are most needed and where the appropriate faculty resources and competencies are available.

I mentioned in a previous issue of the UP Forum that the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) desperately needs social science graduates, particularly anthropologists, to help the agency do its work. Perhaps, the national government should look into the possibility of establishing a center which will produce the anthropologists and social scientists that pertinent government agencies, like the NCIP, need.

Let me add that it is at the elementary and high school levels where misinformation and mis-education begin and are nurtured. Perhaps it is there

enous peoples' organizations to be able to define our own Department’s teaching, research, and extension agenda related to indigenous peoples. This type of dialogue can be pursued, this time actively involving other units of the University.

-------------------Email the author at nestor.castro@upd. edu.ph.

D

of Anthropology ciences and Philosophy

where an appropriate national policy or law is needed.

At the very least, higher education/university officials should see to it that a course on indigenous peoples is offered in their schools—whether as a GE course, part of a course, etc., and that it is taught well.

I think a major area of reform concerns not teaching, research, or extension, but administration. Officials should see to it that in the hiring of personnel or in school admissions, no person is disqualified on the basis of ethnicity or ethno-linguistic factors.

Inter-university interaction and collaboration are very much needed in this country.

Universities that do work in IS should work together, pool their resources, and learn from each other. Only then can they assist other universities in establishing new IS programs.

------------------Email the author at ali.ciencia@gmail.com.

Hon. Teddy Brawner Baguilat, Jr. Representative, Ifugao Lone District

I

ndigenous Studies (IS) has so many aspects. There is traditional law, governance, culture and arts.

The easiest and probably the most well-researched and studied is indigenous arts, but traditional law is something that needs also to be highlighted especially now that we have so many governance systems that involve traditional governance.

For instance, choosing or selecting IP mandatory representatives.

As a law, that is part of governance but part of the protocol also is following the traditional governance mechanism in the selection of the IP mandatory representatives.

The problem is traditional law is usually oral, so if you want to make it part of the governance structure, you need to codify traditional law so you need additional studies perhaps.

How do you put oral law into a written document that can be a basis when you implement laws that require traditional governance? Aside from the selection of mandatory representatives, the right to self-determination is also important. Many laws already prescribe that as far as indigenous cultural communities are concerned, dapat ang masusunod ay ang self-determination ng mga IPs, especially in the conduct of free prior and informed consent (FPIC).

But what is the traditional decision-making process of specific tribes? Iba-iba yan. Sa ibang pangkat katutubo, it is the elders (who decide). Mayroong kung ano ang sinabi ng datu iyon ang masusunod.

And even in the selection of the elders, there are those who are very patriarchal, which means, mga lalaki lang ang mag-decide. Mayroon namang mga babae lang ang magdecide. Again these are all oral in nature and require codification. The

long is consensus arrived upon? That is the problem with the FPIC. NCIP (National Commission on Indigenous Peoples) would like to impose a deadline—about six months dapat may desisyon na. You cannot impose that on the tribe. Baka sa kanila, eh traditionally two years to decide whether you agree or not. So traditional governance is something that has to be given priority when it comes to indigenous studies in higher education.

Some of the bills we filed are really institutionalizing IP education. We started with basic education. I think there are bills filed in Congress targeting CHED or higher education in terms of including indigenous knowledge in the basic curriculum. When you say indigenous education in higher education, there are several forms. It could be a subject or concepts of indigenous knowledge that are incorporated in the various courses. If it is engineering, how do you incorporate indigenous knowledge in terms of terracing in engineering or organic agriculture? If it is music and the arts, how do you put in traditional music as part of the curriculum of music students? So, basic principles are perhaps needed or should be encouraged. As a matter of policy, I agree that indigenous knowledge should be assimilated into the basic curriculum of higher learning institutions.

The mere fact that you acknowledge indigenous knowledge is very important. Every time we talk with (people) from state universities and other higher education institutions, or CHED, as a matter of policy, indigenous knowledge is important. Maybe, there should be a CHED order because DepEd has already issued a department order recognizing the IP Educational Framework—a seven-point framework continued on page 11

10 UP FORUM Volume 15 No. 2 March-April 2014

I

and around the scattered islands.

In both Sagada and Coron Island ICCAs, land and sea scapes are shaped by history of indigenous activity. This is how “conservation” is to us, as indigenous peoples. We do not define it; we live it.

Studies have shown that in places where ICCAs are located, biodiversity is higher. In contrast, in places where the government implements Protected Area systems, the rate of biodiversity loss is higher. Results of a World Bank Independent Review in 2009

by Elson and Chomitz on the effects of different forms of forest protection including strict protection, multipleuse and indigenous community emphasized that: “indigenous conservation is far more effective in preventing destruction of forests compared to Protected Areas or Multiple-use areas.”

Similarly, a 2010 study by the United Nations entitled “Global Outlook on the Environment” showed that “apart from Parks and Protected Areas of governments, there are hundreds of areas being conserved by indigenous peoples around the world. Included here are sacred forests, streams, mangrove areas and coastal seas.”

The report added that, “higher levels of protection are found in indigenous communities compared to areas where government is solely in charge.” In short, the reason we have pristine forests, lakes and seas is due to indigenous people’s traditional governance systems.

Because conservation is a common agenda in the world’s natural resource and environment domain, the concept of ICCA or conservation is NOT new.

But despite their well-documented roles in knowledge management that have made possible the current breadth of biodiversity, indigenous peoples hardly have a voice in efforts

Indigenous Commun and the Manila Dec Photo from Giovanni Bete Reyes

n recent years, indigenous people’s organizations, principally members of the Koalisyon ng mga Katutubo at Samahan ng Pilipinas/National Coalition of Indigenous Peoples in the Philippines (KASAPI, Inc.), have held regional, national and even international engagements on indigenous community-conserved areas (ICCAs).

ICCAs are areas within ancestral domains including lakes, coastal seas, forests and watersheds imbued with deep spiritual and cultural values for indigenous peoples. ICCA is generic. But under local terms, ICCAs have specific names that indigenous peoples identify them with, including the deepest part of a river, shoreline or sea or the tip of a mountain and argues for long-term use and historical interaction with nature.

In the Kankanaey town of Sagada, Mountain Province, ICCAs are linked with religious ceremonies including soul-calling expeditions, or paying homage to Kabunyan (God) during Begnas—a major religious ceremony of thanksgiving and playing of gangsas (flag gongs with sizes varying from 5 cm. to 8 cm. in rim width and from 26 cm. to 46 cm in diameter) held yearly in March, July, October and December.

Similarly, in Coron Island, Northeastern Palawan, ICCAs include lakes ringed by limestone rocks as well as spots within their ancestral waters like the Teeb Surubliyen and the Panyaan.

The teeb surubliyen is where only traditional fishing is allowed , meaning cyanide and dynamite fishing is strongly prohibited, not only due to their destructive effects on corals but also because adjacent to it is the Panyaan, a spot considered sacred and believed to be the dwelling place of a four-tentacled octopus, and where healers and shamans gather to renew strength and power. Both teeb surubliyen and Panyaan serve as a unifying heritage for all Tagbanuas living in

Giovanni Bete Reyes

to manage and protect the environment.

Most discourses in environment dichotomize between wildlife habitat, protected areas, sustainable development and conservation itself from indigenous traditional knowledge. Yet the ideas and processes in which these are managed are of the same stock.

“Protected areas” address the same ecosystems with the same objectives that have been practiced by indigenous peoples in their own communities through time. These objectives are embodied in the United Nations Convention for Biological Diversity (UNCBD) which sets targets and obligations for the Philippine government to fulfill as a signatory to the UNCBD. Since the objectives of the conservation of biodiversity are what the indigenous peoples are already doing, this means indigenous peoples are implementing biodiversity conservation.

From 2011 and 2012, the KASAPI spearheaded three sub-national and one national ICCA conference to identify and assess threats to ICCAs and develop strategies to protect indigenous peoples. Participants of the national conference ranged from nominated IP leaders to representatives of international organizations such as the UNDP, the International ICCA Consortium, the United Nations

Photos by H. Padchao

Environment Programme – World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC), civil society, donor organizations, the legislature and the academe. Presentations were made from local ICCA experiences based on the subnational workshop. These presentations in turn evolved into Guiding Principles of Collaborative Work and Partnership in ICCAs and the formulation of a unifying Manila Declaration on the ICCAs. The Manila Declaration emphasizes the right to ancestral domains and outlines the role of indigenous communities, government and civil society. For indigenous communities, the Declaration affirms the indigenous peoples’ right to design and “prepare plans for the effective management of ICCAs.” It calls on government to: “View ICCA as a strategy for protection, management, development and Peace Building... ... [and] do not continued on page 11

Top left: Sagada’s Mountain ridges serve as places of soul-calling expedition during Begnas.

Top right: “Danum id Todey” or the waters of Todey, Demang, Sagada.

Most ritual prayers end with invocation to the waters of Todey “who are peaceful and good so that people offering the rituals may likewise live long and be happy.” Bottom left: The teeb surubliyen. Bottom right: The Panyaan.

Coastal seas are not only sources of fish but are ritual sites for Tagbanuas of Coron Island.

UP FORUM Volume 15 No. 2 March-April 2014 11

nity Conserved Areas laration on ICCAs

Presentation of the Manila Declaration on ICCAs to Deputy Speaker of the House, Lorenzo Tañada, III (fourth from right), with the author (third from right) looking on, March 31, 2012, UP National College of Public Administration and Governance.

INDIGENOUS COMMUNITY CONSERVED AREAS.. continued from page 10 invent new systems or processes from somewhere else that will undermine them.” For NGOs, they are called to “simplify things” and “respect spiritual relationships of the indigenous peoples.”

Furthermore, a key decision embodied in the Declaration is the creation of a National ICCA Network in the Philippines. KASAPI was unanimously mandated by the IP participants to create the network.

In February 2013, KASAPI formed the Bukluran ng mga Katutubo Para sa Pangangalaga ng Kalikasan ng Pilipinas or the Philippine ICCA Consortium or simply BUKLURAN. As a platform, Bukluran aims to MAP and document all ICCAs in the Philippines and have them registered in the UNEP-WCMC Registry as another layer of protection.

There is so much that is happening in the indigenous peoples’ village communities which are in many ways the results of conflict between traditional knowledge and official development policy. Indigenous communities point to aggressive development in their territories as closely intertwined with the ‘world economy’ rather than to their interest. Large scale mining, dams and logging have been pointed to as the threats to ICCAs. International economic instruments have even bypassed national barriers so that direct assimilation of indigenous peoples in its many forms have germinated between interior villages and the rest of the world. This global linkage has also been used by KASAPI as it reaches out for support in the protection of IP communities.

In recent months, indigenous peoples have become more involved in various international, national and local activities and processes. They cannot help but be linked to global

events. In all these engagements, we have been consistent with a position based on consensus that conservation planning in our territories without our participation would be to destroy the reason for the ICCAs' being. This consensus forms the framework of our ICCAs programs, projects and advocacy work—including a draft ICCA Bill that is now the subject of discussion among KASAPI members.

-------------------Giovanni Bete Reyes holds a BA in political science and is a candidate for MA at the UP School of Urban and Regional Planning (SURP).

He is the secretary general of the Koalisyon ng mga Katutubo at Samahan ng Pilipinas/National Coalition of Indigenous Peoples in the Philippines (Kasapi) Inc. and founding member and convenor of the Philippines ICCAs Consortium. Email the author at ysagada3912@rocketmail.com.

Photo from Giovanni Bete Reyes

Presentation of the Philippine ICCAs experience at the World Indigenous Network Conference, Darwin, Australia, May 2013. WIN was dubbed the “biggest gathering of IPs worldwide.”

RTD: BAGUILAT... continued from page 9 —access to education, indigenous curriculum, schools that are IP-led, schools for living traditions, etc. I don't know yet with CHED if they have something like this. In my personal advocacies with CHED, lumalabas naman yan, especially in areas where there are significant populations of indigenous peoples. Included also are access to scholarship, a curriculum that is more or less IP-friendly, etc. Sa basic education, at least the mother tongue already incorporates that in certain areas. It is not just the seven major languages. Identified ang mga ito pero ang sinasabi namin, ang Ifugao, Ilocano, these are not our lingua franca.

Tuwali, Kablolo, marami. DepEd recognizes that in schools where the mother tongue is ID or indigenous dialect, this should be the medium of instruction. Maybe that is something CHED should also consider, especially in the Ifugao area.

For instance in schools, do agriculture students study rice terracing? That is our agricultural practice. When we talk about restoring the rice terraces, do our engineers know about restoration?

Or is it the modern lowland engineering that they are acquainted with or schooled in? Each university is autonomous so it can craft its own policies.

But maybe as a national policy, I agree that it has to be a declaration policy that says that indigenous knowledge, if applicable, should be incorporated, at least in universities with IP population, in their basic higher education curriculum. As a national policy, it can be incorporated in the curriculum for the benefit also of the non-IP population.

Pag-aralan din nila ang IP ethics— concepts like sustainability, property ownership, collective tribal ownership.

-------------------Representative Teddy Baguilat took up journalism in UP. Email him through forum@upd.edu.ph.

THE PHILIPPINES IP CORE CURRICULUM... continued from page 7 pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShtT0SI0P8M1vB4PVB j8LwlfWSW0WkKxEOU7mmfLDCQ3QwFWx hhG-z8XuufbPErH3Rataql66WimBCH1CCtX czKDFwbswElxDgjjRlWEzYKhjsrWLQop-6Ii-z 34gmawPnX5_&sig=AHIEtbSHLabLVf1OXJ1 rTL849qJvVuNurQ Buasen, C. (2011.) Education in the context o f Ph i l i p p i n e i n d i g e n o u s p e o p l e s: A synopsis of engagements. Retrieved from http://www. ncip.gov.ph/CentralOffice/ O ff i c e o n E d u c a t i o n C u l t u r e a n d H e a l t h / EducationintheContextofPhilippineIP.aspx.

Department of Education Order No. 62, series of 2011. Adopting the National Indigenous Peoples (IP) Education Policy Framework.

Department of Education Order No. 101, series of 2010. The Alternative Learning System (ALS) Curriculum for Indigenous Peoples (IPs) Education.

Department of Education Order No. 74, series of 2009. Institutionalization of Mother-Tongue Based Multilingual Education.

Department of Education–Bureau of Alternative Learning System [BALS]. (2006). Development of the Indigenous Peoples Education (Vols.

1-2).

Lapus, J.A. (2008, November). The education system facing the challenge of the 21st century – Philippines (Paper presented at a UNESCO conference in Geneva, Switzerland, November 25-28, 2008). Retrieved from http://www. ibe.unesco.org/National_Reports/ ICE_2008/philippines_NR08. pdf NCIP. 2002-2010. Annual Reports.

NCIP Administrative Order No. 1 Series of 1998 – Rules and regulations implementing Republic Act 8371 otherwise known as “The Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act of 1997” Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of the IPRA.

12 UP FORUM Volume 15 No. 2 March-April 2014

In Search of Common Ground

Indigenous Education and Western Academics for Biodiversity Conservation

KIM G. Quilinguing

I

n a rapidly changing world driven by technology, mass media and the effects of climate change, knowledge of biodiversity conservation has become an absolute necessity. And in their eagerness to be able to discover as well as implement various techniques in adapting to the environment, research institutions as well as academia have become more receptive to such alternative sources of expertise as the indigenous communities.

In an interview with the UP Forum, San Francisco State University Professor and Cultural Conservancy President Dr. Melissa Nelson said that in recent years indigenous knowledge has become more attractive for some members of the academe, particularly those pursuing studies in biodiversity conservation, indigenous knowledge and alternative modes of governance.

Nelson said that while Western education has in the past portrayed indigenous knowledge to be unscientific and often based on empirical knowledge, the advent of the recent global economic crisis, climate change and the realization of the significance

Photo from Wikicommons

of the role of indigenous communities in preserving the environment have created an enabling atmosphere for the introduction of indigenous knowledge in academic and research institutions once partial to Western education.

She added that indigenous knowledge is actually essential to the understanding of a better community, particularly since it is mostly derived from humanity’s experience with the natural environment. The traditions and heritage handed down by indigenous communities from one generation to another have been the cornerstone of the continuous existence of these communities through the ages.

In recent years, international organizations such as the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the Convention for Biological Diversity (CBD) and the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) have recognized indigenous knowledge as a very significant factor in the preservation of key biodiversity conservation areas in several countries.

This recognition is exemplified in the

Katutubong Kaalaman sa Pagpapaunlad Celeste Ann Castillo Llaneta

P

ara sa mga Oromo, isang Cushitic na katutubo na naninirahan sa Ethiopia, hilagang Kenya at ilang bahagi ng Somalia, Africa, iisa ang diyos: si Waagaa o Waaqa.

Ayon kay Propesor Workineh Kelbessa ng Addis Ababa University,1 si Waagaa ang “Nauna sa Lahat,” ang tagapaglikha ng mundo. Si Waaga din ang diyos ng kalangitan, at sa aspeto ng mabait na tagapangalaga at tagapagtanggol ng mga tao, si Waagaa ay kulay itim.

Kwento ni Yosef Beco Dubi, isang PhD student ng Addis Ababa University na nagbahagi ng kanyang saliksik tungkol sa “Indigenous Knowledge in Oral Narratives of Oromo Society and Its Significance to Sustainable Development” sa International Seminar Workshop on Indigenous Studies noong Hunyo 2013, maitim si Waagaa dahil para sa mga Oromo, siya ang representasyon ng langit na natatakpan ng makapal na ulap—ulap na nagdadala ng ulan sa isang lugar na dumaranas ng matinding tagtuyot. Ikinabubuhay ng mga Oromo ang pagsasaka at pagpapastol.

Dahil dito, malaking bahagi ng buhay nila ang kalikasan, lalo na ang damo, puno at yamang-tubig. Ayon kay Dubi, si Waagaa ay itim dahil siya ang nagdadala ng ulan. Kung walang ulan, walang damo. Kung walang damo, walang kakainin ang mga hayop. At kung walang mga hayop, walang buhay.

Tulad ng karamihan ng mga katutubong tribo sa iba’t ibang bahagi ng mundo, malalim ang relasyon ng Oromo sa kalikasan. Dahil dito, matagal nang pinag-aaralan ang kanilang sistemang sosyal at pulitikal, halimbawa, ang kanilang pamamahala sa yamang-tubig.2 Ngunit patuloy pa rin ang tunggalian sa pagitan ng mga modernong pamamaraan ng pag-unlad na kalimitan ay hango sa Kanlurang pag-iisip, at ang mga katutubong paniniwala at sistema ng mga katutubong etniko.3 Ang isyu ay hindi lamang tungkol sa mga katutubong etniko. Madalas ding nararanasan ito ng mga maliliit at mahihirap na komunidad sa mga rural na lugar. Habang nariyan ang pag-iisip na “us vs. them”—ang mangmang na komunidad at ang edukadong tagalabas— sagabal ito sa pagpapaunlad ng komunidad.

Ngunit sa isang panayam sa UP FORUM, ipinakita ni Dr. Aleli Bawagan ng Department of Community Development ng College of Social Work and Community Development, UP Diliman, na ang ideya ng tunggalian sa pagitan ng “modernong” pamamaraan at katutubong kaalaman ay isang perspektibo lamang. Sa paggamit ng perspektibong batay sa tulungan at pantay na pagbibigay-halaga sa dalawang kaalaman, mas malaki ang maitutulong nito sa larangan ng community development.

UP FORUM: Sa mga nasulat na, madalas mabasa ang mga terminong indigenous knowledge, community knowledge at local knowledge. Ano ang kai-

bahan ng tatlong ito? Ang indigenous knowledge ba ay ekslusibong ginagamit lamang para sa mga katutubo? Nakakadagdag ba ang mga terminong ito sa kaisipang nakabase sa us vs. them duality?

Sa kasalukuyan, ginagamit ng mga grupong nakikipag-ugnayan sa mga katutubo ang salitang ‘indigenous knowledge systems’ bilang pangkalahatang termino para sa mga kaalaman ng mga katutubo hinggil sa kanilang ugnayan at mga praktika tungkol sa kapaligiran. Ayon sa UNESCO (2003): (the term) ‘Local and indigenous knowledge’ refers to the cumulative and complex bodies of knowledge, know-how, practices and representations that are maintained and developed by peoples with extended histories of interactions with the natural environment. These cognitive systems are part of a complex that also includes language, attachment to place, spirituality and worldview. Many different terms are used to refer to this knowledge: • traditional ecological knowledge; indigenous knowledge; local knowledge; rural peoples’/ farmers’ knowledge; ethnobiology / ethnobotany / ethnozoology; ethnoscience; folk science; and indigenous science.

Lumalabas rin ang mga terminong ito sa mga usaping may kaugnayan sa sustainable development at biodiversity conservation, dahil karamihan sa mga lugar na mataas ang antas ng biodiversity ay mga kabundukan kung saan naninirahan ang mga katutubo. Kahit mga katutubo na nakatira malapit sa karagatan ay tinitingnan din ang kanilang kaalaman hinggil sa pangangalaga at pagpapanatili ng mataas na antas ng biodiversity.

Ngunit ang mga terminong ito ay hindi ginagamit para sa mga katutubo lamang.

Kami na nasa disiplina ng pagpapaunlad ng pamayanan ay nakikita rin ito sa mga pamayanan ng mga magsasaka at mangingisda at kahit mga maralitang tagalunsod, lalo ang mga pamayanan na matagal na sa lugar na kanilang kasalukuyang tinitirhan. Sa mahabang panahon ay may nabuo na rin silang mga lokal na kaalaman na gumagabay sa kanilang mga gawaing pang-kabuhayan at pang-kapaligiran.

Wala namang problema sa paggamit ng mga terminong ito patungkol sa binanggit na ‘us-them’ duality. Malinaw na ang mga termino ay nagagamit dahil sa kanila mismo nagmumula ang kaalamang iyon at iyon ay kinikilala (acknowledged) at pinapahalagahan (valued).

UP FORUM: Meron bang fixed process o standard template na sinusundan sa larangan ng pagpapaunlad ng pamayanan (community development)?

Paano ginagamit ang indigenous knowledge o katutubong kaalaman sa pagpapaunlad ng mga komunidad, lalo na sa mga rural na komunidad at sa mga katutubo?

Maraming tao na rin ang nagsasabi na sila ay nasa disiplina ng pagpapapunlad ng pamayanan, kaya iba-iba na rin ang praktika o practice. Kung kaya wala talagang

UP FORUM Volume 15 No. 2 March-April 2014 13

IN SEARCH OF COMMON GROUND... continued from page 12 institutionalization of the Indigenous Community Conserved Areas (ICCA) mechanism, which provides for the protection of ancestral domain, particularly those threatened by commercial or even government intrusion.

In the Philippines, the ICCA has been instrumental in the protection of ancestral lands as those of the Mano-

bos in Mt. Kitanglad, Bukidnon, the Aetas of Zambales, the Higaonons of Agusan del Sur and the Tagbanua of El Nido, Palawan. These areas, long under the administration of the indigenous communities and preserved through the continued observance of traditional knowledge, are among the few remaining areas in the country that protect the Philippines’ distinct biodiversity.

The indigenous knowledge used by these local communities in the preservation of the ecological balance in their land has become a source of knowledge not only for members of the academe, but also for agencies and workers in government who want to use the same techniques for the promotion of ecological conservation in other parts of the country.

In 2011, the University of the Philippines hosted the 1st National Conference on the Indigenous Community Conserved Areas (ICCA) in the country. In the conference, participants from the various indigenous groups shared their experiences in protecting their ancestral domain, as well as the challenges they have encountered while protecting their ancestral land as well as their way of life.

With the participation of several indigenous communities from all over the country, the event was also attended by representatives from the UNDP, the Koalisyon ng Katutubong Samahan ng Pilipinas, Inc. (KASAPI), the Philippine Association for Inter-Cultur-

al Development, Inc. (PAFID), various units from the university, as well as members of both houses of Congress.

At its conclusion, the delegates from the indigenous groups issued the Manila Declaration, calling upon the government to step up its efforts in protecting the ancestral domain of the cultural communities.

Aside from biological conservation, indigenous knowledge has also become an important factor in the preservation of identity in the global human community. While globalization has brought people from different parts of the world closer via mass media and technology, the inverse effect of this “getting close’ experience is the desire of certain groups for a sense of identity and the preservation of their distinct culture in the face of the introduction of others brought by foreigners.

In the School of Living Traditions of the Talaandig community in Bukidnon, the curriculum is anchored on the cultural heritage of the members of the community which has been handed down from generation to generation.

According to Datu Mingketay Victorino L. Saway the school emphasizes oral traditions particularly the narratives called Nanangen, the epic called Ulaging, and songs about animals called Idangdang Limbay.1 Aside from songs, the school also teaches their students the narrative of the Talaandigs called the Gugud, as well as proverbs contained in the Basahan. Customary laws, called as Batasan, are also taught by the school to orient the students on the political system governing their community.2

Dr. Nelson, who is a member of the Turtle Mountain Chippewa Tribe of North America, believes that should western-oriented academic and governing institutions succeed in overcoming their long-held condescending views towards indigenous knowledge, they would realize that there are traditions which may help scientists, academics and researchers better understand phenomena they have been studying. She believes that indigenous knowledge encompasses not only biodiversity conservation, but also models in governance, agriculture and even climatic conditions.

But the search for common ground between Western education and indigenous knowledge requires the acceptance of either school of thought of the value of the other. After centuries of Western condescension towards indigenous knowledge and tradition, Nelson believes that the marriage of the two would require enormous “humility from Western educators for indigenous knowledge.”

Nelson added that reconciling indigenous tradition with Western education also requires both communities, the indigenous and Westernized, to have open minds as they try to make both bodies of knowledge work for the good and survival of all of humanity.

-------------------Email the author at forum@upd.edu.ph.

REFERENCES:

1 Saway, V.L. The Talaandig. National Commission on Culture and the Arts. Retrieved from http://www.ncca.gov.ph/aboutculture-and-arts/articles-on-c-n-a/article. php?igm=4&i=242 2 Ibid.

ng Komunidad isang proseso na makikita mo sa larangan, at ito ay depende sa ginagamit na perspektiba. Kung ang tingin ng isang tao sa kanyang sarili ay eksperto at mas maraming alam kaysa mga tao sa pamayanan, malamang na hindi siya interesadong intindihin at alamin ang mga katutubong kaalaman sa lugar. Sasabihin na lamang niya kung ano ang gagawin hinggil sa isang proyekto.

Ngunit kung ang perspektiba naman ay mapanlahok (participatory) at kasama ang mga mamamayan sa prosesong pagdadaanan (people-centered), masasabi na pinapahalagahan nito ang ano mang lokal na kaalaman ng mga tao sa mga proyektong sama-sama nilang itataguyod. Sa unang bahagi pa lamang nang pakikipagtuwang (partnership) sa pamayanan at habang nakikipag-aralan sa mga mamamayan, mahalaga ang pagtukoy ng kanilang mga internal na kalakasan bilang isang pamayanan at kasama dito ang kanilang mga lokal na kaalaman hinggil sa kanilang gawaing pangkabuhayan, mga paniniwala, mga pinahahalagahan, atbp.

Kapag ang mga mamamayan ay humaharap sa mga taong nakapagtapos ng pag-aaral, karaniwan nilang sinasabi ay ‘wala silang alam, hindi kami nakapagaral,’ isang manipestasyon ng kawalan ng kapangyarihan (disempowerment).

Ngunit kapag dumadaan sila sa proseso ng pakikipag-aralan at ang nagpapadaloy ng talakayan ay malinaw ang perspektiba hinggil sa pagpapalitaw ng internal na kalakasan at lokal na kaalaman, unti-unting lalabas na sila ay may nalalaman at posibleng ang mga bagay na ito ay hindi alam ng tagapagpadaloy. Ang prosesong ito ay unang hakbang sa pagsasa-kapangyarihan (empowerment); kapag makita ng mga mamamayan na hindi sila mangmang, na may mga kaalaman sila na mahalaga para sa mga programang pangkaunlaran na kanilang ipapatupad, na may mga kalakasan sila na kailangan lamang makilala.

Ilang halimbawa: • mga halaman na nakakatulong sa ilang mga sakit—makakatulong para sa community-based health programs; • mga halaman na alam nilang nakakapagtaboy ng mga insekto na makakasira sa pananim; makakatulong sa sustainable agriculture; • mga lugar na alam nilang mapagkukunan ng tubig—makakatulong sa programang patubig; • pagtatakda ng mga hangganan sa kagubatan kung saan maaaring magsaka, dahil paglagpas ng hangganan na ito ay tinakda na nila itong ‘watershed’— makakatulong sa biodiversity conservation; • para sa mga lugar na umaasa sa ulan para sa kanilang pagsasaka, alam nilang dumarating ang tag-ulan sa Mayo, kaya inihahanda na nila ang kanilang sakahan para makapagtanim sa tamang panahon; • mga lokal na kaganapan na nagbabadya ng mga pangyayaring di kanais-nais, halimbawa kapag naglabasan ang mga insekto o hayop mula sa kanilang mga

lungga—makakatulong sa mga programa hinggil sa paghahanda para sa disaster (disaster preparedness); at iba pa.

Naipapaliwanag din na ang kanilang mga praktika ay may materyal na batayan sa siyensiya. Halimbawa, anong elemento mayroon ang isang halaman na iniiwasan ng mga insekto? Sa ganitong paraan, napapataas ang antas ng kaalaman ng mga mamamayan.

UP FORUM: Paano nakakatulong o nakakasagabal ang paggamit ng scientific approach sa indigenous knowledge sa pagpapaunlad ng pamayanan?

Paano maiiwasan o malalampasan ang us vs. them na pag-iisip, kung saan itinuturing na mas superior ang siyentipikong pamamaraan at mas inferior ang katutubong kaalaman?

Sa mabilis na pagbabago sa ating kapaligiran, may mga lokal na kaalaman na hindi na umaayon sa kasalukuyang kalagayan. Halimbawa, sanay silang magtanim kung buwan ng Mayo dahil ito ang karaniwang panahon ng tag-ulan. Ngunit napapansin nila na hindi na tiyak ang dating ng tag-ulan sa buwang ito. Minsan napapaaga ang ulan, minsan nama’y nahuhuli. Sa mga pagkakataong hindi na nila ito naiintindihan, dito pumapasok ang paliwanag ng tagapagpadaloy o ng community development worker hinggil sa pagbabago ng klima (climate change) at ang epekto nito sa kanilang praktika sa mga gawaing pangkabuhayan.

Sa isang barangay sa San Juan, Batangas, nabanggit ng mga nakatira doon na hindi na tugma ang panahon sa pagtatanim ng mais. Nakapagtanim sila ayon sa nakasanayang panahon, ngunit maliit pa lang ang suloy ng mais ay kinain na ito ng mga uod. Kung kaya wala silang naaning mais sa panahong iyon. Naintindihan nila nang ipaliwanag sa kanila na dahil sa pagbabago ng klima ang mga uod na karaniwan ay sa ilalim lamang ng lupa nakakahanap ng kanilang makakain, ay lumalabas na dahil sobrang tuyo ang lupa at wala na silang makain sa ilalim.

Dinadaan ang bahaginan ng kaalaman mula sa siyensiya at lokal na kaalaman sa pamamagitan pa rin ng pakikipag-aralan. Papasok ang pagpapaliwanag hindi mula sa perspektiba na eksperto kundi mula sa perspektiba ng pakikipagtulungan. Ito ay bahagi ng prosesong pagpapataas ng antas ng kaalaman at kasanayan (community education). Maaaring ang mga kaalamang ibabahagi ay tungkol sa gawaing pangsamahan o pang-proyekto.

Isang halimbawa ng mahusay na pagtutulungan sa pagitan ng siyensiya at pagpapaunlad ng pamayanan ay ang mga magsasaka-siyentipiko ng MASIPAG, isang samahan ng mga magsasaka na nagpapatupad ng sustainable agriculture at organic farming. Natutunan ng mga magsasaka ang siyensiya sa likod ng kanilang pagsasaka at sila na mismo ang naging tagapagsanay sa iba pang mga pamayanan.

Ang mga siyentipiko ay may mababang-loob din at patuloy ang pakikipag-aralan sundan sa pahina 15

14 UP FORUM Volume 15 No. 2 March-April 2014

The Philippines in Support of IP Rights and Indigenous Knowledge Note: In an interview with the UP FORUM, UP alumni and internationally recognized advocates Victoria Tauli-Corpuz and Dave de Vera share their insights on indigenous peoples’ rights and indigenous knowledge. They compare the Philippines with other countries in Asia and the world in terms of support to IP rights and indigenous knowledge. On the issue of ancestral domain and the Mindanao peace process, they also give their views on whether the rights of the IPs and the Lumad are protected in the new peace agreement and suggest ways to ensure their continuous protection. They also talk about their UP education and what in it made them decide to take up the cause of the IPs as an advocacy.

DAVE DE VERA

K

ung suporta sa IP rights at indigenous knowledge ang pag-uusapan, advance ang Pilipinas kumpara sa ibang bansa sa Asya. Ang Pilipinas ang unang una, pioneer, in enacting a National Republic Act that recognizes the rights of indigenous peoples. Very unique tayo dahil mayroon tayong national admission and recognition that there are indigenous peoples within the population. Ibang iba ito dahil napakalakas pa rin ng resistance ng ibang nasyon sa Asya na kilalanin ang distinct ethnicity ng mga tao. Halimbawa, sa Malaysia, hindi nila tanggap na may indigenous peoples.

Wala ang salitang indigenous peoples sa Malaysia. Sa Indonesia, bagama’t lantad na lantad na very distinct ang ethnicity, hindi nila sinasabi na indigenous sila.

Sa China, ang tawag sa mga IP ay nationalities, One China Policy, pero may mga nationalities lang. It’s even worse in Thailand dahil ang mga IP ay walang citizenship. Hindi sila itinuturing na subject ng hari. Hill people o hill tribes ang tawag sa kanila. Malaki ang problema sa Asya. That is not to say na hindi sila lumalaban.

Lumalaban sila.

Sa Pilipinas, malalim ang consiousness natin na may tribu, kaya mayroon tayong Republic Act. Sa ibang bansa, wala pa yan. Ang konseptong ownership ay ipinaglalaban pa nila upang kilalanin. Closest would be what’s happening in Indonesia at present. Kinikilala na ng gobyerno nila ang traditional governance ng forested areas. Sa Cambodia, kahit papaano, nagpasa sila ng national land law na kinikilala ang traditional settlements.

Sa Pilipinas, mayroon tayong sariling RA distinct and specific for indigenous peoples, may sariling opisina at mayroong ownership rights.

Sa bagong peace agreement, hindi mapo-protektahan ang karapatan ng mga IP at mga Lumad. Problema ito. Kaya nga may lobby group ngayon (Hunyo 5) ang mga Tituray at Lagbangeyan sa Maynila, mag-iisang buwan na silang umiikot. Kaya nga ang representative ng mga Lumad sa Transitional Bangsamoro Committee, pumirma sila, with reservations, dahil under the new peace agreement, ang framework at konteksto ng land ownership at governance ay Islamic. Dapat lang dahil

nakipaglaban ang Moro Islamic Liberation Front o MILF. Problema ito dahil ina-assume na ang dynamics ng relationship ng tao sa lupa ay purely from the Islamic point of view, na hindi naman. Napakalawak ng uri ng kultura, hindi lang limitado sa Islamic community ang nasasakop ng peace agreement. Ang pinaka-matatamaan dyan, mga Mamlu, Dulangan, Manobo, Tiruray, Lagbangeyan, atbp. While they have co-existed for years with the Islamized tribes, they maintain their own traditional structures of governance of land, distinct from an Islamic framework or an Islamic point of view. Ikalawa, ang istrukturang gumagarantiya sa karapatan ng indigenous peoples na ibinigay ng IPRA, ay hindi sundan sa pahina 15

VICTORIA TAULI-CORPUZ

C

ompared to other Asian countries, the Philippines is more advanced in terms of legal recognition of indigenous peoples’ rights. We have the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA) which was passed by Congress in 1997. Aside from the Philippines, Taiwan and Nepal, there are no other Asian countries which have legal laws explicitly recognizing the rights of indigenous peoples. In fact, in many countries the very identity and existence of indigenous peoples are denied.

They are called by other names such as primitive tribal groups, hill tribes, ethnic minorities or scheduled tribes. But in terms of the nature of violations of indigenous peoples’ rights, there is not much difference in all of these Asian countries. Indigenous peoples’ rights to selfdetermination, including their right to free, prior, informed consent (FPIC) before any development project is brought to their communities.

There is still a long way to go in the Philippines in terms of serious implementation of the IPRA. For example, while the law stipulates that free, prior and informed consent should be obtained before any license or permit is provided by the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples for any project entering the ancestral lands of indigenous peoples. This is blatantly violated as shown by many documented cases of indigenous peoples being deliberately divided among themselves by the Government, including the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples, and also by corporations. The resistance of various indigenous peoples to big mining projects and hydroelectric dam development which means not giving their consent, has been met with punitive actions by the State in collusion with paramilitary units supported by corporations. Several indigenous activists and leaders directly involved in these protests have been assassinated or have disappeared. These are clear violations of the basic collective and individual human rights of indigenous peoples enshrined in the IPRA and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).

I do not think that the rights of indigenous peoples in Mindanao are adequately protected or that the Lumad were adequately included in these negotiations leading to the new Peace Agreement. I still hope that there will be measures to seriously address this gap. It is in the interest of the Philippine government and the Bangsamoro to ensure the enhanced involvement of Lumad and their issues into the Peace Agreement. Otherwise, we will be witnessing another round of conflicts.

I think UP has beefed up my values for caring for those who are more disadvantaged than me. UP also helped raise further my awareness of the national and global political, social and economic realities within which I can understand further why indigenous peoples are in the state they are in. It is very natural for me to take up indigenous peoples’ rights as my advocacy because I am an indigenous person myself, and I understand fully well what other indigenous peoples are going through within the country and the rest of the world.

-------------------Victoria Tauli-Corpuz is the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. She is also the executive director of the Indigenous Peoples’ International Centre for Policy Research and Education or Tebtebba.

She earned her nursing degree from UP. Email her at vicky@tebtebba.org.

UP FORUM Volume 15 No. 2 March-April 2014 15

KATUTUBONG KAALAMAN... mula sa pahina 13

sa mga magsasaka, at walang dala-dalang aktitud na ‘alam ko ang lahat’ at pangmamaliit sa magsasaka.

UP FORUM: Paano natin maitataguyod o mapapaunlad ang katutubong kaalaman sa mainstream sa paraang nagbibigay-halaga at respeto rito? Dapat bang itaguyod ang indigenous knowledge sa mainstream, o di kaya ilimita lamang ito sa isang partikular na lugar, kultura at konteksto?

Palagay ko ang tanong ay para saan ang pagtaguyod sa mainstream ng kaalamang ito. Ang mahalaga ay ang pagbabahagi sa buhay ng mga maralita, ang kanilang mga lokal na kaalaman at praktika, at ang kanilang mga ginagawang programa para sa pagpapaunlad ng kanilang pamayanan at pagbabago ng kanilang kalagayan.

Mahalagang maipakita na kahit sila ay hirap sa buhay, patuloy silang naghahanap ng paraan upang mapaalwan ang buhay nila, manipestasyon ng kanilang pagsasakapangyarihan sa sarili (empowerment).

UP FORUM: Paano mapapayaman ng indigenous knowledge at indigenous studies ang pamayanan? Paano natin maiaangat ang pagpapahalaga sa indigenous knowledge sa bansa at sa buong mundo?

Maraming mga grupo ang may mga advocacy na nagdadala sa kanila sa mga antas pambansa at antas pangglobal. Tulad ng mga nabanggit ko, ang advocacy ay pagprotekta sa diversity at ancestral domain ng mga katutubo. Mahalaga na

DAVE DE VERA... mula sa pahina 14 kinikilala ng bagong peace agreement.

Totally iba. Problema rin ito dahil ang istrukturang nakasaad sa IPRA ay very specific ang disenyo para protektahan ang karapatan ng mga katutubo na hindi Muslim. Kung hindi ito pwedeng pairalin sa bagong peace agreement, malulusaw ang konsepto ng ancestral domain o lupaing ninuno ng mga katutubo.

Anong pwedeng gawin? Kailangan mag-lobby sa Kongreso. Sa akin, malaking pagkakamali na itinaya nilang lahat ang kanilang pag-asa sa pagkakaroon ng dalawang upuan sa Bangsamoro Transitional Committee. Kung dalawa lang kayo in a big committee, walang mangyayari sa inyo. Unang una, pinapakinggan ka lang naman kung may implied capacity ka for armed resistance. Ang mga tribu, wala naman. Pakikinggan ba sila? Sa sobrang lakas ng pressure na matapos ang trabaho nila, concerns about erosion of traditional land rights of non-IP communities, na-gloss over.

Nawala. Everybody was saying: Salamat, umupo ang mga MILF. Let us not lose the chance. Nakakalungkot dahil they had legitimate gripes, and yet, kung titingnan sa takbo ng diskusyon sa Mindanao, these IP leaders along with their advocates and supporters were branded as spoilers of peace.

Napabayaan ang kanilang argumento.

Nasa Manila sila ngayon para makipagusap sa Kongreso. Dito natin malalaman kung sila’y pakikinggan. Ito ang pagasa nila. Hindi rin natin alam. Hindi pa natin nakikita ang bersyon na isusumite ng Malakanyang sa Kongreso. Sabi sa dyaryo ngayon (Hunyo 5), Malacañang will be making a big announcement soon. I think (I don’t know if I’m being overly optimistic), kaya nagtatagal sa Malakanyang, dahil nabigla sila sa isyung ito. Nakalimutan nga na nawala ang IP rights, ang non-Muslim rights.

Akala nila noon, napaka-minority, na maliit. Hindi biro ang populasyong ito.

We’re talking about millions of people affected here. A lot of people have the

maunawaan ng mas maraming tao ang indigenous knowledge systems upang hindi pagsamantalahan ang mga katutubo. Mahalaga na maisama ang pagpapahalaga sa lokal na kaalaman sa mga polisiya at patakaran sa mga programang pangkaunlaran na pinapatupad ng pamahalaan. Bukod dito, advocacy rin namin ang paggamit ng mga pamamaraang mapanlahok sa mga programang pangkaunlaran na tutulong upang itaguyod ang empowerment ng mga mamamayan.

-------------------Email the author at forum@upd.edu.ph NOTES:

1 Kelbesse, W. (2001). Traditional Oromo attitudes towards the environment: An argument for environmentally sound development (Social Science Research Report Series No. 19). Ethiopia: Organization for Social Science Research in Eastern and Southern Africa. Retrieved from http:// www.africaportal.org/dspace/articles/traditional-oromo-attitudes-towards-environment-argumentenvironmentally-sound 2 Gashe, D.D. (2011). Culture in sustainable development thinking: An indigenous water management system, the case of Borana (Oromo) people. Oromo Studies Collection @ Gadaa.com.

Retrieved from http://gadaa.com/OromoStudies/culture-in-sustainable-development-thinking-anindigenous-water-management-system-the-case-of-borana-oromo-people/ 3 Briggs, J. (2005, April). The use of indigenous knowledge in development: Problems and challenges. Progress in Development Studies, 5(2), 99-114. Retrieved from http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/1094/1/ JBriggs_eprint1094.pdf

mistaken notion na pag sinabi mong Maguindanao, Muslim lahat yan. Hindi.

From Tiruray, Dulangan, Manobo…ang laking populasyon nyan. Hindi alam ng marami na noong bakbakan sa Mindanao, ang maraming foot soldiers ay Tiruray, hindi naman mga Taosug, Maguindanaoan, atbp. Ang marami sa foot soldiers ay galing sa IP communities. Pero kung titingnan, hindi sila nag-graduate into leadership positions. Doon sila sa giyera.…In fact, pag kausap ko ang mga matatanda doon, sinasabi nila na noong panahon ng agawan ng lupa, biktima rin sila. So ang logical na ally nila ay ang MI at MN. Ngayong nag-aayos na, parang nakakalimutan sila, at ito ang problem nila. A lot of the areas claimed, even the camps, are ancestral domain areas.

Ang pag-asa na lang ay kung magtatagumpay sila sa negosasyon. Nakaabot ba sa Malakanyang? Nagkaroon na ng dalawang maliliit na forum dito. Maraming ginawa sa Mindanao pero hindi sila napapakinggan doon. Ang sinasabi nga namin ay bakit ba dyan kayo nag-iingay sa Mindanao?

Kaya ini-encourage namin silang magpunta sa Maynila. Ang giyera dito ngayon ay sa pagitan ng Malakanyang at Kongreso. Kapag nag-certify ang Malakanyang na binigyan ng palugit ang Congress, at ipinasa yan nang mabilisan, tapos na ang boksing.

Ang dapat gawin ay kulitin nila ang Malakanyang at kung hindi makinig, maglobby sila sa Kongreso. Nagtataka ako dahil dapat Mayo pa lang nasa Kongreso na yan, pero bakit hanggang ngayo’y wala pa? May mga nagsasabi na mukhang napakinggan itong mga non-Muslim. Maraming babaguhin. Hindi simple ang magiging implikasyon nito. It could be a deal breaker. Malaki ang iki-claim ng mga non-Muslim, baka buong Maguindanao. Pero ayaw namang manggulo ng mga non-Muslim. In fact, they think that there can be peaceful co-existence. Importante lang na ang bundle of rights provided by IPRA ay kilalanin. So, anong istruktura ang kikilanin? Magulo. Ngayon, minamapa ang non-Muslim area. Whether this is recognized by the Bangsamoro community, hindi natin alam.

Hopefully, they will be able to convince Malacañang and some of the provisions will change to accommodate the recognition of ownership of lands. And then, makapasa sa Kongreso. Kung pangit pa rin ang ilalabas ng Malakanyang, walang choice ang mga non-Muslim kundi matulog sa grounds ng Kongreso. Othewise, mabubura talaga sila. Kailangang mag-reach out din sila dahil they have been branded as peace spoilers and deal breakers. Dapat lumalim ang consiousness na hindi sila ganoon. Ensuring the peace, ito ang dapat. Ano ang silbi ng agreement na minadali? Mas maganda nang pinagpaguran para sigurado tayo.

Sa edukasyong UP, natagpuan ko ang pagpapalalim ng consciousness, na kailangan naiintindihan mo ang nangyayari sa iyong paligid at lipunan. Kapag nasa UP ka, nariyan ang interaksyon sa iba’t ibang paniniwala at idelohiya. Hindi ka nakatali sa isang sektor ng lipunan lang. Nag-uumpisa ka pa lang sa UP, ang kausap mo halos araw-araw ay nagbabago ang pananaw—may kaliwa, may kanan, may gitna. Nabibigyan ka ng pagkakataong palawakin ang iyong kamalayan sa mga nagyayari sa paligid, Binibigyan nito ng pagkakataon ang utak mo na gumana at magsuri at malaman kung anong sektor ang gusto mong alalayan, Every day ibinibigay ng UP ang atmosphere na yan. In fact, sa UP, magkakaroon ka ng overdose sa consciousness mo sa lipunan at halos makalimutan mo na ang iyong sarili para sa bayan. Sa palagay ko, ito ang nagtulak sa akin na mapunta sa ganitong linya.

-------------------Si Dave De Vera ay executive director ng Philippine Association for Intercultural Development, Inc. o PAFID. Nagtapos siya ng BA Political Science sa UP. Maaari siyang padalhan ng email sa devera.dave@gmail.com.

MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT... continued from page 16 to manage risks from natural disasters, mitigate the impact of climate change, strengthen the capacities of IP communities in documenting the richness of biodiversity in their areas, and help formulate appropriate management measures to conserve them.

We commit to this worthy undertaking through our seven constituent units and one constituent college and our fourteen campuses all over the country. I am confident that if UP can produce 36 out of our 37 national scientists; 34 out of our 57 national artists; 7 of our 15 presidents; we will be able to provide the expertise and assistance needed to support the ICCAs so that the likes of Ka Badong, Datu Ampuan, Datu Rio, Datu Vic Saway, and the multitude of IP communities in the country will be empowered to continue their work.

Let me conclude this message with a note of congratulations to the organizers and partners of this conference. I am sure that with the excellent mix of participants gathered today, we will have a productive two-day sharing and consensus building.

Like everyone else gathered here today, we will await with great interest the results of this conference, so that together we can find ways to concretize our cooperation.

ERRATUM In the article "Avoid Obscurantism: Atty. Gatmaytan on the JDF" on page 5 of the July-August 2013 issue of the UP Forum, Atty.

Dante B. Gatmaytan is an associate professor at the UP College of Law, not a professorial lecturer as mentioned. Our apologies for the error.

The UP FORUM Dr. Clarita R. Carlos UP College of Social Sciences and Philosophy Dr. Edna A. Co UP National College of Public Administration and Governance Dr. Emil Q. Javier UP President (1993-1999)

BOARD OF ADVISERS Dr. Orlando S. Mercado UP National College of Public Administration and Governance Dr. Jaime Galvez-Tan UP College of Medicine Sec. Oscar G. Yabes Senate of the Philippines

Prof. Luis V. Teodoro UP College of Mass Communication Dr. Dante M. Velasco UP College of Mass Communication Sec. Gen. Marilyn B. Barua-Yap House of Representatives

J. Prospero E. De Vera III Editor-in-Chief

Arbeen R. Acuña

Frances M. Cabana Editor

Celeste Ann Castillo Llaneta

Flora B. Cabangis Managing Editor

KIM G. Quilinguing

Luis V. Teodoro Copy Editor

Writers

Arbeen R. Acuña Graphic Artist Celeste Ann Castillo Llaneta Layout Artist KIM G. Quilinguing Webmaster: Forum Online Sol R. Barcebal Researcher

Bong Q. Arboleda Misael A. Bacani Jun M. Madrid Photographers Cristy M. Salvador Obet G. Eugenio Alice B. Abear Tom M. Maglaya Victor D. Imbuido Administrative Staff

U P S ystem Inform ati on Of fice  M ez z anine F lo o r, Qu e z on H a l l , U P D i l i m an, Q ue z on C i ty  Te l e fa x 9 2 6 - 1 57 2 , tru nk line 9 81-85 0 0 lo c . 2 5 5 2 , 25 49 , e-mail: fo r um@up.edu.ph

THE UP FORUM

16 UP FORUM Volume 15 No. 2 March-April 2014 University of the Philippines

Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines, 1101

APPROVED PERMIT NUMBER/INDICIA Business Mail Permit No. 2ND-07-010-NCR Entered as Second class mail at the U.P.P.O. Valid until June 30, 2014 Subject to Postal Inspection (for printed matter only)

Message of the UP President

ICCAs at the Core of Development Alfredo E. Pascual Editor's Note: This message was delivered during the First National Conference on Indigenous Community Conserved Areas (ICCAs) held on 29-30 March 2012 at the UP Diliman National College of Public Administration and Governance Assembly Hall.

W

e are here today to give due recognition to the historic role of our indigenous peoples in protecting and preserving our environment. Yes, this conference is a tribute to our lumads whose cultural heritage and religious practices have ensured the preservation of what little is left of our environment.

This tribute is only fitting given our penchant to squander our resources in the mistaken belief that it is limitless. Our indigenous communities, on the other hand, all 144 tribes living in key biodiversity areas all over the country, continue to make sure that there will be resources for the generations to come. They are the real custodians of nature.

ICCA or Indigenous Community Conserved Areas is not really a new concept as far as the Philippines is concerned. Conservation has been the core of the traditional knowledge and world view of indigenous communities spread all over the archipelago even before there was a country named the Philippines.

And our indigenous communities have asserted this belief throughout their struggle for self-determination during the colonial period, land tenure rights during martial law, and the recognition of the ancestral domains after the passage of the IPRA law.

Recent events have placed the concept of ICCA at the core of our development agenda. Typhoon Sendong taught us that environmental degradation destroys life and property in the path of rivers that overflow due to excessive ram, neglected watersheds, and insufficient information to local communities. Recent events also taught us that were it not for the prudent care that our IP brothers and sisters have invested in protecting the highlands of Bukidnon, the disaster caused by typhoon Sendong could have been worse.

In the days following Sendong, we sent a team of UP experts in geosciences, forensic science, medical care, and community health to assist Iligan City as it bravely faced the worst disaster in its recent past.

The UP experts concluded that the worst hit areas were located near river systems inundated by floodwaters that cascaded from denuded watersheds that allowed the accumulated waters to freely and strongly flow down to the cities. Assessments from other studies also show that those areas, which have remained under the care of the indigenous communities in Northern Mindanao, appear to have been less affected by the massive destruction.

These last remaining forests are inhabited and managed by our indigenous communities. They are our last remaining biodiversity areas, and our last protective barrier against the massive destruction of lowland areas.

Unfortunately, this invaluable contribution has gone unnoticed. And many of the contributions of the indigenous communities to the country have been forgotten or ignored. And instead of being honored, oftentimes, they are marginalized in the distribution of basic government services, discriminated in schools, negatively portrayed in the media, and dispossessed of the very lands they have protected and developed despite the passage of the IPRA law. We must put an end to this marginalization and give them the recognition that is long overdue.

It is time to afford stronger recognition to indigenous community conserved areas as a cost effective and equitable way to protect our remaining forests, our biodiversity, and our natural resources while supporting the IPs in strengthening their bond to their culture and tradition that have kept these ICCAs in the condition that they are in today.

Embodied in this recognition is an ingrained respect for their rights, and an obligation to help them pass on the traditional knowledge and practices to the younger generations of IPs. Equally important is the responsibility of government and society to address their basic needs and lift them from poverty.

As the National University created by law to provide a unique and distinctive leadership in higher education and national development, the University of the Philippines is honored and committed to be part of this worthy effort to recognize the contributions of indigenous communities.

As a research university we commit to be part of this worthy undertaking by providing a venue where pressing issues such as biodiversity conservation, the rights of the indigenous communities, and climate change can be discussed by academics, the indigenous communities and the public, and where research and new knowledge can be produced to guide our future action.

Through our National College of Public Administration and Governance, we commit to discuss, learn and develop new governance paradigms that can be adopted in our communities, by local governments all over the country to better protect the environment, sustain our biodiversity, and translated into law to further strengthen the IPRA and develop an enabling environment to sustain the ICCAs. And as a public university we commit to be part of this worthy undertaking by providing technical assistance and partnership with executive agencies, congress, local governments, civil society organizations and communities to help document indigenous knowledge and practices, improve capability continued on page 15