Launching in July: 2018 State of the World Volunteerism Report

via @EvidenceUNV. FIRST PRINT of the 2018 State of the World Volunteerism Report, with the title ‘The Thread That Binds: Volunteerism and Community Resilience’

FINALLY, the much-awaited UN Volunteers flagship report 2018 State of the World Volunteerism Report (SWVR) with the theme Building Community Resilience in a Turbulent World which “sets out the value of volunteerism in relation to other types of resilience interventions” will be launched during the UN High Level Political Forum (HLPF) on the Sustainable Development Goals on 9 to 18 July 2018 in New York City. The year-long journey to the launch has been tremendously challenging considering the scale of work in putting everything together – largely done by volunteers no less – but ultimately rewarding for all involved.

Focus of the research were on these key questions: 1) in what ways do the distinctive characteristics of volunteerism help or hinder resilience?, and 2) what wider structures, policies, and norms affect volunteerism for community resilience? Field research was done simultaneously in 15 countries including the Philippines in 2017.

Development of the research conceptual framework, training of the international team of volunteers, and writing of the world report was commissioned to the research lead/consultant Benjamin Lough of the University of Illinois. Country researches were done by international and national volunteer-researchers in coordination with national UNV partner-organizations, and guided by international mentors, also volunteers, who served as link between the researcher-volunteers and the UNV team in Bonn.

On completion of the field research and country reports, a series of voluntary discussions were organized worldwide to obtain wider policy recommendations based on emerging findings culled from the country researches. Strategic “soft launches” such as at UN Climate Conference (COP 23) were also done.

It is the objective of SWVR 2018  that in the HLPF, member States, will have greater insight into the role and impact of volunteers and volunteerism and thus adopt the necessary policy measures to encourage and sustain volunteerism and support volunteers for resilience building.

Followers and readers of this blog are enjoined to visit the SWVR dedicated webpage on the UNV site here and here for more background information on the research process and related resources. On Twitter, follow @EvidenceUNV for updates. On Facebook, UNV will facilitate during the launch a live conversation between volunteers, member states and development partners on how best to collaborate with communities to deliver the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Agenda 2030. Audiences are invited to send polling questions, live comments and tweets using #SWVR18.

Also visit the High Level Political Forum 2018 website here for more information on the Forum (including countries’ Voluntary National Reviews on the SDGs (Philippines’ 2016 here)).

 

Advertisements

A Radically Different Imaginative Landscape — Watershed Discipleship

Following my earlier post on the proposed National Bible Day, here is an excellent way to put biblical teachings into action (which the country needs more of), in keeping with the call to preserve biodiversity:

I learned about watershed discipleship while hanging out with some Mennonites about a year ago… the proponents of watershed discipleship invite Christians to become “disciples” who emphasize and attend to specific “bioregions,” that is, watersheds. The term “watershed” simply designates the reality that every region is attached to complex, interconnected sources of water, which shape the surrounding region. Watershed discipleship is taking seriously the unique context (cultural, biological, etc.) in which discipleship takes place… What does the particular community surrounding your watershed think about time? What seasons or events are significant to that particular region? What kind of people must we be to care well for our watershed? And what kind of spaces are appropriate to our watershed (i.e. do we really need another parking lot or do we need a green space populated with beneficial plant life?)? Finally, how does being a people who all depend upon the same source of water resist and finally unravel the idea of anonymity?…

Perhaps we will find our own unique way to be disciples in our watershed, disciples who take seriously the call to grow our roots deep into the soil of the city to which we’ve been called.

via A Radically Different Imaginative Landscape — Theology Forum

Baguio City: UNESCO City of Crafts and Folk Art

​The role of culture is…now taken into account particularly within Sustainable Development Goal n°11 to “Make cities inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable”. UNESCO and other stakeholders have been actively advocating for the integration of culture and creativity in the international development agenda.

2030 Sustainable Development Goals

It is first and foremost at local level that culture and creativity are lived and practised on a daily basis. It is therefore by stimulating cultural industries, supporting creation, promoting citizen and cultural participation and approaching the public sphere with a new perspective that public authorities, in cooperation with the private sector and civil society, can make the difference and support a more sustainable urban development suited to the practical needs of the local population.
The contribution of culture to urban development is also acknowledged in the New Urban Agenda (led by UN Habitat).

Building partnerships and sharing practices lies among the key principles of the (UNESCO Creative Cities) Network. However, despite significant effort to improve the geographical balance of the Network, cities from the Global South are still under-represented. Ensuring equitable representation from different regions is a strategic objective to ensure the sustainability of the Network through inclusiveness as well as its capacity to demonstrate the power of creativity for sustainable development in diverse social and economic contexts, in line with the core values of UNESCO. Opening up the Network to cities from the Global South also offers the opportunity to explore new dimensions of creativity, often more intimately linked to local development, which is also a source of mutual learning for member cities.
The seven creative fields provide an anchor to characterize each city, ensure their visibility and facilitate fundraising to support their programmes. The categories also reflect the identity and strategic positioning of the Network and constitute an added value for its visibility. 

Baguio City joins UNESCO’s Creative Cities Network, as a City of Crafts and Folk Art.

Baguio City UNESCO Creative City Crafts & Folk Art
via UNESCO webpage

So happy for the City! So proud for the woodcarvers, weavers, knitters, painters, tattooists, folk singers, writers, dancers and choreographers, jewelry makers, etc.! They have faithfully preserved their craft even when it has gotten difficult over time. Indeed the global recognition is a dream come true and opens up a world of possibilities for both the community and the City.


Quoted texts (except par.2), source: Building a Collective Vision for the Future, UNESCO Creative Cities Network (UCCN) Strategic Framework 2017-2021

Quoted text, par.2, source: Why Creativity? Why Cities?, UNESCO UCCN website

On human greed

‘Balance’ is an Oscar-awardee short animation film. It’s theme touches on human greed. I’ve had it for several years but it’s only recently that I watched it again.

My thoughts watching it is that greed is part and parcel of being human, it’s in fact a spectrum and the challenge is not to eliminate greed at all, because to an extent greed is necessary for human survival and continuity, but rather, as this brilliant animation shows, it’s striking a balance between “good” and “bad” greed. Extricating greed from the human system is impossible without causing irreversible harm to the human psyche. The less harmful way is to make dormant the “bad”. Or, better yet, to work out for a yin-yang situation.

“Good” greed is what pushes us to want to know about things in our environment, discover treasures, recognize the contribution (well, also the deceit) of others and allow them with us on the playing field, and so forth. 

Greed that veers toward the extreme end is one which sees the world as a place where there is only ‘me’ or ‘I’. In such a scenario, as what the film suggests, who’s going to help ‘me’ haul in the treasure chest? figure out how to open it? sell them if need be? Nobody. ‘Me’ ends up essentially with nothing. Greed of this degree completely contradicts the creation story of ‘us’ and ‘we’ hence is tauted as one of The Seven Deadly Sins.

The success of democracy (and free markets) rests on the framework of balance. Too much (eg. unregulated free market systems in which greed is given absolute rein) or too little (eg. communism wherein greed is altogether repressed in the service of community) causes a situation of imbalance which in turn implies the constant work of re-balancing.

The one lesson Filipinos have yet to learn going forward

Unity quote

We thwart the one who’s leading us. We wilfully disobey. We insist that our way is the only way. We don’t take well to suggestion or correction. Our pride and pocket hurting, we push the one who’s leading us into the waters and look for a puppet to replace the one who we’ve felled. But what does our history tell us? With or without a leader, whether he’s or she’s a puppet or dictator, highly educated or not, professional or actor, reluctant or eager to take the reins, each Filipino is rowing his or her own way.

Do we want to move forward to modernization? Then we need to sacrifice today. Modernization of transportation should’ve been done eons ago but it didn’t happen and when the government did make one commies were successful in thwarting the plan by labeling it as “anti poor”. BS! (Or, should I say what else do we expect from that ideology?) Thanks to them the problem of outmoded transportation has again overtaken us, now, together with an altogether new generation of commuters riddled with the result of past inaction.

Earth’s time space is forward (not backward) moving hence it’s inevitable that any change in our world is going to be in the form of improved versions of yesterday’s. Anybody who’s conscious of this fact yet insists otherwise, in effect wishing the nation and country to stay unimproved like the vineyard worker who instead buried the talents given him, is obviously a painter of an anti-human progress narrative, an anti-God.

In this day of advanced communication and planning models a smart transport union or association will not hijack the needs of the community just because they can (although such a capacity was rendered irrelevant with Malacanan declaring nationwide two-day suspension of classes and work). The group should’ve come up yesteryears pa sana with it’s side of the modernization plan and asked to speak and negotiate with authorities. That’s the win-win move. That’s business with a brain. That’s business with a strategy. That’s business with responsibility.

Members of Congress who publicly oppose the modernization plan thereby adding fire to the misdirected protest and undermining authority should be held accountable for sheer rebelliousness against a lawful order which eventually benefits the country and nation no less the jeepney drivers (because then with improved green-compliant jeeps the dagdag pamasahe they’re demanding every year or so is justified.

Iconic jeepney by thecolorofred

We Filipinos are crazy for agreeing, out of awa, to pay more and more for crap facilities and lousy service. Awa in these instances are misplaced.).

On the proposed ‘Bikini Bottom’ down South

With the approval of the 2017 national budget of PHP3.35T of which PHP2.5B is allotted for tourism, the country’s thirteen regions can now start implementing their tourism plans. But especially this year having declared 2017 as the Year of Sustainable Tourism for Development the UN reminds nations that it’s not just tourism. This test for sustainability came early to our shores, in Coron Palawan last year’s ‘Best Island in the World’ according to Travel+Leisure where a Nickeldeon theme park has been proposed. An environmentalist group claiming the proposed park will involve underwater development mounted a social media campaign against it.

Without additional information than what’s reported online, I cannot say whether or not the group has it right. However, their campaign against the development highlights two things that are also faced by the rest of the country which compel vigilant groups to react thus.

First: the more legitimate group of people to voice what, why, where, and how development should happen be it in their barangay, municipality, city, province, or region are the insiders or residents (voters and taxpayers in the area, technically). That’s not happening though. Yes, locals talk among themselves when development activities negatively affect them but such do not reach the camps of decisionmakers. Are they scared? Maybe. Cynical? Perhaps. Regardless of reason, local people have effectively surrendered their collective right to development, viz.

Recognizing that development is a comprehensive economic, social, cultural and political process, which aims at the constant improvement of the well-being of the entire population and of all individuals on the basis of their active, free and meaningful participation in development and in the fair distribution of benefits resulting therefrom,

Recalling also the right of peoples to exercise, subject to the relevant provisions of both International Covenants on Human Rights, full and complete sovereignty over all their natural wealth and resources,

Recognizing that the human person is the central subject of the development process and that development policy should therefore make the human being the main participant and beneficiary of development,

Proclaims the following Declaration on the Right to Development:

1.   The human person is the central subject of development and should be the active participant and beneficiary of the right to development.   

2.   All human beings have a responsibility for development, individually and collectively, taking into account the need for full respect for their human rights and fundamental freedoms as well as their duties to the community, which alone can ensure the free and complete fulfilment of the human being, and they should therefore promote and protect an appropriate political, social and economic order for development.

Abdication from the inside has given rise for outsiders, be it civil society groups and organizations, media, academia, and such like, to step in and determine “in behalf” of locals what is best for them. This is not to say that outsiders have no business doing so, but rather if and when outsiders must go in they are duty-bound to ensure informed and meaningful participation of local people. At the end of the day, the decision of local people should be respected. In committing to this process, not only are outsiders protecting local people’s right to development but also set the stage for greater awareness, knowledge, and capacity for self determination.

In the cited Palawan development case, the voice of locals are absent in the campaign and media reports. What do they know? What do they say? Theirs is the most important.

Second: We can get too focused on the immediate negative costs of the project that we forget we’re living in an age of technological advancement in architectural and engineering design, methods, materials, and tools hence lose what could otherwise be greater benefits of the project. Don’t Filipinos make regular pilgrimages to Disneyland in HongKong, Gardens by the Bay in Singapore, or Palm Island in Dubai? Weren’t these places developed at the scale that it’s disapproved here? The latter two are on reclaimed land.

Development is the future. We cannot live in huts forever. Sooner or later, a tide of such great height will come and wash it away. Nor live off bananas and coconuts straight from the trees everyday. The more intelligent way forward therefore is to pay more attention to developers’ plans to mitigate unsustainable effects and impacts of their projects, and if such are absent or mitigation measures inadequate it is the place of local people to say so.

This is done through the standard development process known as Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) System, or what’s referred to in the Philippines as the Philippine EIS System (PEISS). This is not only just an SOP in development planning, but in this country a legal requirement under Presidential Decree 1586 passed in 1978 subsequently enhanced in 1981 through Proclamation 2146.

Coron is an Environmentally Critical Area (ECA) hence under PD 2146 development projects sited there shall comply with the PEISS. The figure below illustrates the EIA processes corresponding with the phases in the project development cycle:

Here in more detail are the different stages in EIA. Public input are required during (1) EIA study scoping, (2) EIA study/report, (3) review and evaluation of EIA, and (4) environmental monitoring and evaluation or audit.

At the time former President Marcos signed off on PDs 1586 and 2146 the country was under a centralized government system which explains identification of the Ministry of Human Settlements as lead agency of the PEISS. The National Environmental Protection Council (DENR now) served as Secretariat. In 1991 during Corazon Aquino’s administration LGUs were given authority over devolved activities of national government. DENR took over the PEISS mandate and in more recent years specifically through DENR MC 2007-08 clarified the LGUs’ involvement in the Process .

In reality, however, the PEISS has been largely flouted. The concrete result of this we see on the landscape. Therefore I do understand the immediate negative reactions to the Coron development. To be blunt, nothing brings out the “dirt” in development than this side of the planning process ie. permits and approvals from planning boards, zoning authorities, conservation and/or historical commissions, and environmental authorities. It’s good training ground for fresh out of university urban planners though.

How do you face an angry mob of locals? You don’t. There’s a roundabout way to deal with that. It’s called the impact fee and it’s legal. Here and abroad. The LGU planning officer (or other assigned personnel) negotiates with the developer for the best monetary deal in the name of mitigation measures. The fee could amount to anything as name your price. What these impact fees are actually spent on- locals don’t usually hear about it either. It could be a handful of trees for all the community know. Regardless, and from all angles, the developer walks away the winner in these deals. They could pass on the impact fee amount to buyers.

When an LGU has been paid the impact fee and there’s no improvement seen or felt in the locality… this is when the importance of organization hits community residents. They need to have legal entity with legal rights to acquire funding and therefore employ professional expertise, lobbying power. I have yet to see in the country a community-based group organized around property or development rights and sustainable development.

How do I conclude? Real estate development can be quite a jungle but it’s not to say development projects per se are bad. This country is being groomed and marketed as a “more fun” tourist destination and to deliver on that promise we need to upgrade services and infrastructures in order to compete with other destinations worldwide. What makes development bad is when locals are deliberately left out of the process and gain nothing or little from development projects.