Perspectives on Cultural Landscapes The Case of the Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras Regina Coeli Tan
[ CULTURE AT WORK ]
I rapporti di ricerca
[Culture at work]
[Culture at work]
Perspectives on Cultural Landscapes
The Case of the Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES [Culture at work]
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES [Culture at work]
Collana
[Culture at work]
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES [Culture at work]
La “Fondazione Santagata per l’Economia della Cultura” è stata costituita il 13 aprile 2018 su impulso del Centro Studi Silvia Santagata-EBLA.
La Fondazione raccoglie le esperienze e le competenze svolte negli anni passati dal Centro Studi e si propone di proseguire l’attività di studio iniziata da Walter Santagata, pioniere internazionale di Economia della Cultura, che nasceva proprio il 13 aprile 1945.
Le aree di lavoro della Fondazione, attiva su progetti di ricerca e trasferimento delle conoscenze, riguardano due filoni tematici principali: un primo legato ai modelli per la gestione del patrimonio culturale, con particolare riferimento allo sviluppo economico dei territori e ai programmi UNESCO, e un secondo legato alla produzione di cultura e all’innovazione culturale.
Organizzazione: Alessio Re, Segretario Generale Paola Borrione, Head of Research Martha May Friel. Responsabile Sede di Milano
Coordinamento scientifico: Francesco Bandarin, Consigliere Speciale ICCROM e membro dello Steering Committee dell’Aga Khan Trust for Culture Enrico Bertacchini, Università di Torino Sergio Foà, Università di Torino Angelo Miglietta, Università IULM Giovanna Segre, Università di Torino
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES [Culture at work]
Perspectives on Cultural Landscapes The Case of the Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras
Regina Coeli Tan
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES [Culture at work]
The research was conducted by Regina Coeli Tan, it is the final dissertation of theMaster in Economic Policy in the age of globalization. The study was supervised by Professor François Moreau, Université Paris 13 Sorbonne Paris Cité, and Professor Enrico Eraldo Bertacchini, Università degli studi di Torino.
Photo credits: See single photos credits
ISBN 9788899745066 Anno 2017 Fondazione Santagata per l’Economia della Cultura Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 43, 10129 Torino [email protected]
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES [Culture at work]
Summary of contents
Introduction
Definition of terms
1. Review of related literature
1.1 The importance of economic valuations in contemporary studies 1.2 Perspectives on value and sustainablity relating to cultural landscapes: The environmental sciences The landscape and geography studies The cultural commons 1.3 Merits of complementary approaches in understanding cultural landscapes: a multidisciplinary framework 2. Case study: the rice terraces of the philippine cordilleras
2.1 Introduction and background of the case 2.2 Challenges and efforts 2.3 Re-approaching values and sustainability through the CVM model and cultural commons
Summary and conclusion
References
List of abbreviations
Index of tables and figures
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES [Culture at work]
Batad Rice Terraces PERSPECTIVESFonte: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice_Terraces_of_the_Philippine_Cordilleras#/media/File:Batad_Rice_Terraces.jpg ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES [Culture at work]
ecological discipline may not explicitly include such Introduction changes.
The term Landscapes owe its origin to the art discipline Drawing from Throsby’s Cultural Capital Framework of paintings, however it is quite evident from the (Throsby, 1999) wherein culture is treated as a capital growing literature, academic, journalistic or literary, with asset characteristics, stock and flows both in that throughout the years the concept has seen an economic and cultural terms in any one point in time, evolving and growing application. it is mentioned that three factors may change the level of cultural capital (depreciation, maintenance One of which is the emerging literature on Cultural or new investment), and that with positive support Landscapes; a phenomena partly catalysed by the the sustained levels may be achieved. Such may be election of the World Heritage Committee in its 16th the case for natural resources (from which much session of the term as an option to be included in parallelism is drawn) and built heritage but not so the World Heritage Lists, characterizing those mixed much on cultural landscapes; especially living ones type of heritages which neither had purely natural that exemplify traditional knowledge and lifestyle nor purely cultural properties (Fowler, 2003). The (Diaz, 2015; Dizon et. al, 2012). This is because the 1992 World Heritage Convention therefore heralding sustainability of the heritage comes not from only the not only the first recognition of an international site sustaining itself (possibly answering the financial legal instrument of the need to protect cultural dimension problem through tourism revenue) but landscapes, especially those inscribed on the lists, but also the actors’ cultural values’ sustainability that also spearheading the proliferation of studies from leads to the reformation of the living landscape states, specialists and academics on the different (Costanza, 1996; Throsby, 2002). aspects surrounding the concept such as but not limited to its identification, assessment, listing, and Overlooking such changes may be an integral reason management; resulting to a general increase in its as to why some financial support to cultural landscapes visibility and interest (Fowler, 2003). sometimes does not meet its end of sustainability. Aside from which, most studies on cultural heritage From a priori review of cross disciplinary studies were conducted using methodologies (f.e. Contingent linked to cultural economics however, one Valuation, Travel Cost Method, Hedonic Pricing) disconcerting yet imminent trend is the continued that may capture such values as residual to economic deterioration of some cultural landscapes, even ones or focus on particular beneficiaries such as with financial intervention from States and Non- tourist connecting a heritage’s sustainability to its Government Organizations (NGOs) (Laureano, capacity for tourism and other economically related 2003); such that amidst the increased popularity, developments (Boccella, & Salerno, 2016; CCRU & cultural landscapes remain in the brink of danger ADAS, 2007). and loss of culture. A problem that could be linked towards a limitation on the understanding of the One case of this cultural landscape is the Rice sustainability of cultural landscapes borne of Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras which was single disciplinary approaches that might provide inscribed in the UNESCO World Heritage List in profound but haloed understanding on the concepts 1995 as it manifested an outstanding universal value surrounding this complex form of cultural heritage. and a cultural testimony that spans 2000 years of the Ifugao Community’s harmonious interaction One such limitation is the possible underestimation with their environment, their traditional knowledge, of the importance of the changing common values and lifelong association with agriculture and rice of inhabitants directly linked to the landscape. production (Diaz, 2015). However, as with other In particular this could refer to the generational cultural landscapes in rural settings, the same is perspectives and opportunity costs that may be currently facing sustainability problems such as altered due to the introduction of outside factors physical deterioration and socioeconomic challenges such as urbanization, tourism and recreational along with intergenerational issues (Dizon et al., pressure (Antrop, 2006). Such may be considered 2012) and outmigration. So much so that in 2001, it threats to existing heritage values and subsequently was put in the List of World Heritage in Danger and its sustainability (Antrop, 2005) however cultural was removed only recently through restoration and economics frameworks mostly drawn from the
Batad Rice Terraces Fonte: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice_Terraces_of_the_Philippine_Cordilleras#/media/File:Batad_Rice_Terraces.jpg PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 9 [Culture at work] reconstruction efforts of governmental and non- cultural heritages properties especially when the governmental institutions. Thus… intricacies that belie within its socio-cultural, ecological and economic spheres are not tackled Main Research Question: Does the act of possibly collectively; in this research’s case the limitation of underestimating the changing values of cultural landscape underestimating the impacts of direct inhabitants’ inhabitants essential towards its sustainability? common values. In a policy point of view, the study may also reveal possible weaknesses on current Aside from the main research question, this research policies especially those related to the case being is set to answer the following questions relating to studied. In effect, this research will be analytical and the sustainability of cultural landscapes in general exploratory in nature, and although there definitely and the Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras will be several limitations of this type of study, given in particular: that it should provide a bridge between disciplinary views on the topic, subsequent researches may find a) What are the different perspectives on the its results of interest. relationship between values and sustainability from different disciplinary sciences tackling The research after this introductory section is cultural landscapes? structured as follows; the second section starts with a brief definition of terms followed by an extensive b) Applied on a real life case, what are possible overview of existing literature from complementary impacts of underestimating the non-use disciplines that may shed light on the different and cultural values of inhabitants to cultural perspectives between values and sustainability, the preservation and sustainability? third section culminating on a multidisciplinary framework that presents the focal points and merits To accomplish such analysis and reveal aspects not of this approach. The next section will present and considered in a purely cultural economic or singular start an analysis of the case, applying/comparing approach, this research aims to provide an extensive findings from the previous sections on this specific cross disciplinary literature review followed by a cultural landscape. The fifth and final section will case study. Specifically, these consists of drawing provide conclusions, recommendations and topics from other disciplines similarly studying cultural for further research. landscapes such as ecological sciences (Costanza et al., 1997; MA, 2003; Klain et al., 2014), landscape and geography studies (Terkenli, 2001; Antrop, 2005; Stephenson, 2008), and even cultural psychology (Schönpflug, 2001), putting emphasis on cultural commons (Bertacchini et al., 2012; Ostrom, 1990) as a new research agenda providing complementary perspectives to complex cultural landscapes. A process that culminates into a multi-disciplinary framework that aims to propose a more profound perspective on complex heritage subjects such as cultural landscapes; the mix of methodology chosen in order to provide a conceptual overview on the limitations plus an additional real life application of the findings. The case was chosen based on personal interest, its nature, complexity and fit for the study in question.
This type of study aims to shed light on the limitations of employing a single approach thus favouring the consideration of multiple disciplines as a means to understand cultural landscapes. It also purports to reveal the difficulties of preserving, managing and supporting cultural landscapes with integrated
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 10 [Culture at work]
come to an end in some point in time in the past (f.e. Definition of terms UK’s Stonehenge). And finally (3)Associative Cultural Landscape those inscribed by virtue of a strong What is a Cultural Landscape? How are Sustainability artistic, cultural and often religious association of and Culture defined? And what are the Cultural the natural element even amidst the absence of Values that this study purports to discuss? There the related material cultural evidence such as the are wide variations of these four abovementioned Tongariro National Park in New Zealand. Of those concepts, inherent from their abstract and complex mentioned, this paper adopts the one of UNESCO nature with studies transcendent across disciplines. as the primary definition for Cultural Landscapes in this study, owing to the vastness of its scope coupled Beginning with the subject of Cultural Landscapes with the parallelism of the case studied. which for Sauer (1925), one of the most influential geographers who has popularized the term in the Sustainability is another broad concept that this United States (James & Martin, 1981), is classically research purports to discuss. Introduced in the 1970’s defined as “a landscape fashioned from a natural landscape within the realm of a pure ecological approach, the by a cultural group. Culture is the agent, the natural area is term has since then expanded overarching themes of the medium, the cultural landscape is the result.” centring socio-economic, environmental and cultural spheres, on the resulting land, usually delimited from the evolving into the related principle of Sustainable rest of the world, contoured over time through the Development, the most quoted definition coming from strong influence of culture (Sauer, 1925). Another the United Nations’ 1987 Brundtland Commission similar but more profound definition is furnished Report “Our Common Future” as “development that by Antrop (2006), extending landscapes beyond meets the needs of the present without compromising the their material-physical manifestations towards the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (UN- immaterial existential values and symbols which WCED, 1987). In the report, the difference between they signify. Other researchers such as Groth (1997) “growth” and “development” was highly stressed, and Stephenson (2008) contest that the values focus driven not only on the quantitative but also themselves not only contribute to the tangible the qualitative aspect of improvement and progress environment formed but also to the shared identity which incorporates all related dimension beyond and diversity of the local inhabitants shaping their the economic base (Abrahamson, 1997). A concept locale. All these definitions reflective of the 3rd that Lütteken and Hagedorn (1999) describes as annex of the UNESCO operational guidelines on people-centred and conservation based, exhibiting World Heritage List (WHL) inscription of cultural the close interaction between the dynamism of both landscapes where it is simply defined, verbatim, as the human economic and the ecological systems. “a diversity of manifestations of the interaction between The idea of sustainable development being the humankind and its natural environment” (UNESCO, promotion of the balance between maintaining 2008) further classified into three main groups, stocks and achieving human ascribed goals within (1) Designed Cultural Landscapes those usually but the three interrelated systems of the natural (f.e. not limited to gardens and parklands, such as the genetic diversity and resistance), economic (f.e. Lednice-Valtice of the Czech Republic; (2) Organically satisfaction of basic needs and enhancement of Evolved Landscapes further subdivided into those equity) and societal (f.e. cultural diversity and “living” and “relict” cultural landscapes which are institutional sustainability) (Barbier, 1987). This three “reflections of the evolutionary process of a social, economic, pillar approach however has limitations especially administrative, and/or religious imperative that has developed in consideration of cultural sustainability (Soini & in its present form by association with and in response to its Dessein, 2016). In particular, landscape studies have natural environment” (UNESCO, 2008). The former questioned the viability of the term as it contradicts retaining its active role in contemporary local society with the basic characteristic of what a landscape is; as it continuously exhibits the traditional way of life, a subject that evolves continuously in ways that may dynamic in its response to the changing times; in not be predictable, even chaotic, in response to the particular this research’s case of the Rice Terraces changing needs of a particular society at any one of the Philippines Cordilleras is a representative point in time (Antrop, 2003). Antrop (2006) provides of this category, and the latter often extraordinary a link between these two seemingly divergent ideas, remnants of an evolutionary process that has already
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 11 [Culture at work] defining sustainability in landscape terms as the (1) they are on par with (Petty and Cantillion cited on the conservation of landscape of different types Aspromourgos, 2013), to classical economists such and (2) the sustainability of the landscape itself as Smith (1776), Ricardo (1817) and Marx (1867) to function as it is in the future, referring to its theoreticians who furthered the debate on labour potentiality to withstand the irreversible impacts aspects and founded on the cost of production as and processes of urbanization and globalization. A the main basis of embodied value in a good, leading definition that coincides with what was discussed so the majority of the nineteenth century economic far, with sustainable development as a complex co- schools of thought, to the neo-classical approaches evolutionary process that envisions an appropriate to value (Stigler, 1950), a marginalist revolution and equitable balance between conservation, under a subjective and individualist perspective that sustainability, and development contributing to the defines value independent of the inputs that came socio-economic status and the quality of life of the into its production and instead dependent on the communities belonging to the cultural landscape good’s marginal utility or the additional satisfaction (UNESCO-WHC, 2017). a person derives from one additional unit of good consumed. Value has and must always “hold a pivotal position, as the chief tool of analysis in any pure theory that Undoubtedly one of the most difficult concepts works with a rational schema.” (Schumpeter, 1954). owing to its multiple interpretations across disciplines, briefly, this research has chosen to adopt the definition Nevertheless, as much as the debate on what really of Culture by Williams (1985) as expounded by constitutes a good’s value has evolved throughout (Soini & Dessein, 2016), of culture as “(1)… a general academic history, difficulties and limitations are process of intellectual, spiritual or aesthetic development; (2) a still and probably will always be confronted with, particular way of life, whether of a people, a period, a group, in general with all goods using the theory of price or humanity in general; and (3) works and intellectual artistic as an indicator of value and in particular within activity...”. The three main meanings providing both the realm of cultural goods that have peculiarities the “broad” and “narrow” way of understanding the making valuing more complex. For one, if referring term, the former relating to the first two definitions to the utility theory put forth by the neo-classicals, as culture that encompasses all domains of human an inherent criticism against this definition is the life, embedding itself to all that transpires within argument that value in the cultural context is socially and through it, and the second a more particular constructed (Berger & Luckmann, 1991), determined definition relating to artistic evolutions, movements not by individual atoms but by some consensus of and their resulting products and influence (Williams, a community from which the value is formed and 1985). In relation to the study of cultural landscapes, is conversely formed from it. This is why in most culture here falls under both “broad” and “narrow” cases, cultural goods carry distinct values, borne not definitions, the relationship between human and only through the uniqueness and irreproducibility of nature and the resulting intangible cultural heritage the good (f.e. it is impossible to recreate an authentic that develops within the dynamic co-evolution Bernini’s Apollo and Daphne sculpture even if one is representing the broad aspect while the site itself able to master the skills required to do so, or through is the tangible manifestation of such developments the latest 3D printing technology), but also through signifying its narrow and more evident result. what it signifies, it’s role in the society and in this case, history of baroque art. If discussing more on Finally the concept of Value enters into our built cultural heritages, site specificity also carries discussion; a concept that has formed many a weight in the discussion, including not only the foundation of discourse and economic thought visual stimulation given by the historical monument from pre-classical philosophers as Aristotle who or landmark itself, but also the overall atmosphere has originally distinguished the value of a good in and milieu that the experience provides (De Rojas, use and value of a good in exchange, quoting from & Camarero, 2008). This is but one of the reasons the IX’s part of the Politics (Medema & Samuels, deemed contributory to the imperfect substitutability 2004) ‘Of everything which we possess, there are two of tourist destinations, and the presence of uses; For example a shoe is used for wear and it is used for superstars among them (Frey, 1998; Cuccia, & Rizzo, exchange’, to pre-classical economists who attempted 2011). Both properties affecting the value ascribed to to elaborate value in terms of labour or land value a particular cultural good or heritage.
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 12 [Culture at work]
Furthermore, cultural goods manifest both private the good/site/tradition, further yet considering and public good characteristics, the former case at the utilities and usages obtained from it, and as least allowing for market transactions from which this research plans to discover whether it be or not prices potentially exist, and the later where possible integral in the sustainability of a cultural landscape. no observable prices are available (Throsby, 2001). Elaborating on the former case faces further complications, such as an accumulative consumption and time-dependent curve on the demand side, where additional knowledge and exposure on a particular cultural field enhances the experience to be derived in future consumption (Stigler & Becker,1977 ; Adler, 1985), and possibly non-profit maximizing artists/producers in the supply side of the equation, creative individuals that may have other non-monetary motivations driving their productivity such as passion and love for their craft (Throsby,1994; Throsby, 2001; Alper & Wassall, 2006). Nonetheless, it is without doubt that economic valuation under the domain of culture has also seen slow but apparent developments, the usages of proxies to market prices (f.e. box-office ticket sales, museum entrance fees, contemporary art bids and offers) to empirically test within cultural markets is prolific, with methodologies to value non-market transacted assets such as a cultural heritage sites and landscapes, as will be discussed in the subsequent sections, not lacking as well.
Note however that these developments mostly represent but one of the main values within cultural assets, there being two, economic and cultural value. The former encompassing both the direct valuation that consumers of the cultural good/services garner from consuming the said good/services (use value) and the indirect benefit of the cultural good/ service’s existence, optionality and bequeathal (non- use values) while the latter is composed of culturally valued aspects of an asset, idiosyncratic between and within individuals and communities, such as their aesthetic beauty, spiritual/religious significance, social relevance, historical connection and symbolic meaning (Thorsby, 2002).
So what then is value for this study? Of the many definitions mentioned in this section, this research has chosen the definition proposed by Brown et al. (2002) that of “people hold certain values also express value for certain objects”; a dual understanding of the concept in terms of its intrinsic properties (value in itself), and expressed value (value in one’s self). In effect something that has worth, individually and socially, beyond the labour and cost of production embodied within
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 13 [Culture at work]
Banaue Rice Terrace Fonte:PERSPECTIVES https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Banaue_Rice_Terrace_Close_Up_(2).JPG ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 14 [Culture at work]
1. Review of Related Literature
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES [Culture at work]
socially optimal levels. 1.1 the Importance of Economic Valuations in Contemporary Studies Additionally, the importance of economic valuations is not limited within heritage conservation efforts The public funding and financial support of cultural but also within its balanced management under heritage has long been a decision policy makers are the changing fabric of urbanization and outside confronted with whether in the national or local development pressures (Nijkamp, 2009). One can’t administrative level. This is especially the case in help but associate such with recent developments contemporary times when coupled with the increase in the capital of the Philippines, Manila, where the in budgetary constraints, engendered by the crises issue of being in or not in favour of the construction and the growing scope of national expenditures, of Torre de Manila, a high-rise condominium the common trajectory within political agendas is to behind the Rizal Monument, a national landmark revise the so-called “Welfare State” model towards that commemorates the country’s national hero, is the convenient reduction of governmental presence a subject for demolishment or not (Torres-Tupas, in important, but highly expensive fields (Jaba, et al. 2017). Proponents of its removal cite that if 2014). Although much debate is generated regarding completed the condominium would “stick out like a the treatment of cultural industries, which includes sore thumb” dwarfing its surroundings thus destroying heritage management and conservation, whether the general historical atmosphere conveyed by the they be considered as “merit goods” that generally monument, while DMCI homes, the developer, produce commodities that are welfare enhancing but defends its position to a lost tuning to Php 250 with low market values thus needing subsidies or Million, roughly 50 Million EURs, and legislative support for their continued existence and operation, loopholes filing a lift in the indefinite temporary or a “growth” or “innovative” sector that drives restraining order in its construction operations. But growth in the economy, creating employment and how much really would have been the estimated cost supporting the regeneration and development of or lost in aesthetic or other cultural values on the side new industries beyond their own scope through of the Filipino nationals in this particular case? positive externalities (Potts & Cunningham, 2008), the fact of the matter is, cultural heritage is more Although undeniably complex and multi-faceted, often than not a mixed good, both with public and years of academic pursuit has allowed the private properties, as mentioned above, therefore development of several tools within the economic producing and requiring more often than not, both toolbox that can potentially bring light to the difficult types of market and non-market support for its features of cultural heritages and landscapes. maintenance and functioning; the public counterpart often coming from the coffers of the national Table 1 shows a summarized overview of the main treasury, politicians numerically sensitive to the approaches in the field, as adapted from the study projects they invest public money in. of Nijkamp (2009), and enriched by the subsequent review of landscape researches that employ each This is generally where economic valuation comes of the methodologies cited. Special attention is to into the picture, as methodologies that enable be warranted on the second to the last row which officials to quantitatively decide preference over shows each methodology’s suitability to evaluate projects that are valuable for the society and and value cultural landscapes, the majority of which viable in its sustainability (Navrud, & Ready, 2002 focusing on a cultural landscapes’ use values. This is ; Mourato, & Mazzanti, 2002). Such an example is quite understandable considering that non-use and the study conducted by Tuan and Navrud (2008) cultural values are most of the time immeasurable which attempted to capture the economic benefits and considered augmentative to the values computed. of preserving and restoring the My Son World Nevertheless, further scrutiny of those that can value Heritage site, a large complex of religious temples these non-use components of cultural landscapes, in the Quangnam province, Vietnam, in order to in particular the stated preference methodologies, justify further investments into the site. In the study point towards a blind side as to the reasons behind the authors were able to determine an entrance such values. Are these values integral to a cultural price regime that could potentially increase revenue landscape’s sustainability? The following section while decreasing visitor congestion, furnishing tackles this issue through further review of multi- policy suggestions to aid in sustaining the site within disciplinary studies relating to cultural landscapes.
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 16 [Culture at work] I rapporti di ricerca del CSS-EBLA The research reports of CSS-EBLA
Table 1: Summary of Economic Valuation Methodologies relating to Cultural Landscapes
Source: Adapted from Nijkamp (2009) and enriched by author
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 17 [Culture at work]
of altruistic motives behind these existence values, Perspectives on Value and 1.2 such that individualistic or non-paternalistic altruism Sustainability relating to Cultural were proposed to not alter cost-benefit analysis Landscapes since the altruist would be impartial as to the source of other’s well-being while paternalistic altruism the Environmental Sciences would be concerned with other’s use of the existing resource. Aspects that in the end lead to a good’s use It seems but proper to begin our investigation on value, maybe not as a user per se but as an enabler the relationship of non-use and cultural values, often of others. Possibly the most controversial aspect set aside as discussed in the previous section, and however is the “pure existence value” that dwells sustainability with the ecological sciences where its within a good, motivated by environmental ethics or relation to landscapes began to grow footing. One its intrinsic value. Researches continuously arguing of the earliest articulations of this linkage was on its suitability in decision making process without developed by Weisbrod (1964) who conceptualized consensus; proponents (Vucetich et al., 2015) citing a good’s “Option Value” providing additional social justice and socio-cultural evidence to reassert justification to support the continued provision of intrinsic value as axiomatic to conservation while certain goods/services that may not be operating others (Maguire & Justus, 2008) refute the claim profitably, rather than curtailing them or using the stating the vague and emotional formulation of resources for alternative use as is dictated through the concept that renders weak support in choosing cost-benefit analysis. Option value essentially being between competing demands. Although Weisbrod the amount that current non-users are willing to pay and Krutilla’s argument primarily dealt with the in anticipation of future consumption whether these allocative efficiency problem of these types of actually materializes or not (Weisbrod, 1964). A point goods and not necessarily of its sustainability, their that was applied to National park visits, another is concepts were important developments in expanding hospital services, representing commodities that the role of non-use values in economic valuation, have infrequent and uncertain consumption1 as well engendering researches that attempt to capture as a production process that is difficult to reinitiate beyond a resource’s use value. when its form and use is changed2, where although current demand and revenue from admission may be Further scrutiny of these non-use values, excluding lower than the cost of sustaining the good/service, pure existence value, within the ecological sciences accounting for the option value may be grounds for however point towards their somewhat subordinated government intervention on the site. role in the sustainability process as merely signals as to which forms of ecological services are to be Another important contribution in the field came maintained for the functioning of the ecosystem (MA, subsequently with Krutilla’s (1967) conceptualization 2003) in this paper’s case a landscape. Ecosystem of a natural resource’s existence value, which to services here popularly defined as “goods (such as him encompasses far beyond a good’s option value, food) and services (such as waste assimilation) representing implying the possibility of market failure associated the benefits human populations derive, directly or indirectly, with allocative efficiency if left unsupported. Two from ecosystem functions” (Costanza et al., 1997). Thus, points contributed to this in Krutilla’s original simply put, as to the many ecological services that a discussion, (1) as benefits immeasurable in present landscape can potentially provide, what are those that terms due to the serendipitous nature of returns can be ascribed with worth because of its utilitarian associated with them3 and (2) the sentimental aspect function in humanity’s well-being? A cognitive design linked to the mere existence but not the present of “Ecological Function-to Services-to Value” that is or future use of the good. Furthering the debate, quite evident under the widely accepted Ecosystem Madariaga & McConnell (1987) argued on the role Services Framework (ES) adopted by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) process of the UN 1 Visitors choose to purchase at their own leisure or none at all (MA, 2003; TEEB, 2010) wherein political decisions 2 It could take hundreds of years to re-establish a forest ecosystem when it is harvested for timber are made through an integrated assessment of 3 In the paper these were the possible scientific ecosystem conditions, capacity to service provision, discoveries from the stock of biodiversity that may and implications to humanity (MA, 2003). Four be irreversible once lost/extinct and the accumulative types of ecosystem services are organized under characteristic of future recreational benefits from nature
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 18 [Culture at work] this approach; (1) provisioning services-products 2003) and remain as is. obtained from ecosystem such as food, fuel and water, (2) regulating services- benefits obtained from Although possibly successful in communicating and regulation of ecosystem processes, such as climate, influencing decision makers to realize the connection flood, and disease control, (3) cultural services- non- between nature conservation and social well-being material benefits from ecosystem, such as sense of (Boyd, 2011), albeit through numerical terms which place, cultural heritage, recreation and aesthetic values provoke moral and ethical concerns about monetizing and (4) supporting services-those that are necessary the value of a priceless resource as nature, it can be in the production of other ecosystem services such argued that in a landscape’s case, especially those in as soil formation and nutrient cycling. Although relation to living cultural landscapes, such triumph the framework already boasts of a multi-sectorial may only answer to one condition of a landscape’s approach in its assessments, Daniel and others sustainability, the one relating to the conservation of (2012) notes however that most of the ecologists values that maintain and organize the site and not and economists who have advanced research on the the other defined as its potentiality to function as it issue rarely focus on the third component (cultural is in the future withstanding the impacts of external ecosystem services-CES) due to the difficulties forces that may potentially unbalance it. deemed in quantifying it in biophysical or monetary terms. A trend that is of interest for this research as, in definition, CES coincides with what is known in cultural economics as cultural value. Adding to these are studies such as those of Klain and others (2014) that support the deeper integration of CES in ES owing to the indispensability of socio-cultural dimensions in human-ecosystem relationships as factors that strengthen community resilience, traditional practices, conflict management, grow trust and collaborative management (Poe et al., 2013). Points that may directly or indirectly influence the sustainability of a cultural landscape, especially in terms of a target/concerned community’s acceptance of the decisions resulting from the framework (Poe et al., 2013; Turner et al., 2008; Wondolleck & Yaffee, 2000). Not to be removed as well are those stream of literature relating to a resource’s intrinsic value that rejects the instrumental notion underlying those above, championing conservation based not on what is measurable but what cannot be measured. Nevertheless, it is contestable that within this ethical initiative the argument remains seated on the conservation of the resource and not sustainability itself. Thus it can be deemed that in the ecological sciences the relation of non-use and cultural values to sustainability remains a bit distant. A treatment of non-use values that act more as a justification for maintaining and supporting, usually financially through government funding or NGO involvement, the system that functions to provide the services linked to these (Boyd, 2011) or the conservation of an existing environmental order. Sustainability that can be, in a narrow sense, just the maintenance of the biological potential and capacity of an ecosystem to continuously provide eco-systemic services (MA,
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 19 [Culture at work]
The landscape and Geography enters into the discipline centred on the subject, the landscape and geography studies, adapted from studies Stephenson’s (2008) extensive discussion on the Existing landscape studies reveal that there are topic. several factors affecting cultural landscapes that may Geographers have always had a fixation to define not exactly be solved through financial interventions, the nature of cultural landscapes; traditional Antrop (2005) classifies four main driving forces that representations approached the landscape as simultaneously affect landscapes in varying degrees. simply a background for human activities, external Accessibility - The spatial connectivity of a place to civilizations and to be understood solely on affecting the rate with which modernization, its material grounds (Mackinder, 1887). This th economic and political influence reaches the area perspective changed during the middle of the 20 (Taaffe et al., 1996). Those are not easily accessible century when a school of thought led by famed by people are more often than not characterized geographer Carl Sauer redirected the emphasis as stable natural landscapes that when disclosed towards the role of humans in shaping the landscape through new transportation infrastructure may start (Sauer, 1925), which he accomplished largely using changing rapidly (Antrop, 2005). empirical approaches coupled with morphological analysis and cultural history. Subsequently, while Urbanization - A process whereby community still focused on the human dimension, the post- lifestyles are transformed from rural towards modernism and humanism movement of the late city living that reaches even the most remote of 20th century influenced researches towards a more country sides (Van Eetvelde & Antrop, 2001); symbolic and interpretative approach exchanging further complicated by issues in changing land spatial determinism with ideological and experiential usages, uncontrolled development, migration and subjectivism (Cosgrove & Daniels, 1988; Jackson, abandonment of properties which generates both 1989). Another development during the 1980’s was negative and positive implications on the landscape the inclusion of a “Time” element into the formative (Champion, 2001; Batty et al., 2003). aspects of a landscape (Daniels, 1989), while more contemporary studies extend this further by Globalisation - very often a process that disrupts the combining the abstracts of space and time into one intimate relationship and rootedness of a place to unified concept. Proponents of this later idea claim its locality and localness (Antrop, 2005); globalisation that this relationship between the two is integral affects landscapes through the integration of culture, to societal practices and experience (May & Thrift, ideas, processes and decisions between the local core 2003), whereby the past continuously interacts with and influential international powers. This may also the present through the landscape and through this include the neutralization of place and distance forms it. This line of thinking is parallel to what through advancements in technology and other spill Ingold (2000) proposed as “dwellings perspective” over effects (Sassen, 2000). wherein the interactions between an area and its inhabitants, subsequently and continuously generates And finally, Calamities - Of particular importance a landscape’s culture and spatial features as they dwell to living landscapes, especially those inhabited and within it; an approach that tries to bridge the two intensively used areas, calamities create situations polar views of traditional naturalism (landscape as wherein rapid actions and decisions are undergone, a background) and cultural subjectivism (landscape possibly without proper economic/environmental as symbolic) within the geographical studies. This impact assessments or local participation, in order priori investigation on the conceptualization of a to immediately repair damages and subdue the crisis cultural landscape’s nature is important to this study atmosphere (Antrop, 2005). because how a landscape is perceived reflects how its components are valued. Following the aforementioned factors that can potentially shape a landscape’s evolution, it can be A point further exemplified through the comparison noted that a more profound analysis of non-use of three recent models that purports to provide an and cultural values and sustainability beyond the integrated approach to the concept of landscapes ecological sciences is warranted. As such, this section which are observably based on the theoretical
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 20 [Culture at work] underpinnings mentioned above. Terkenli’s (2001) of practices that encompasses systemic activities of “aspects of a landscape”, Soini’s (2001) “model of the present and past of both natural (ecological) and landscape multi-functionality” and Tress and Tress’s human (socio-cultural) types. What is interesting in (2001)’s “dimensions of landscape”, illustrate a high her model is that aside from categorizing these facets, level of congruency in ideas as to what constitutes Stephenson goes further to indicate the conjoint a landscape, mostly providing a three level analysis nature of corresponding values (use/non-passive/ composed of physical qualities (visual form- Terkenli, and cultural on the inner circle on the left side of 2001; landscape qualities- Soini, 2001; spatial entity- figure 1) that in turn generates these components, if Tress & Tress 2001), meanings that define human perceived in a dynamic sense, to “continually interact to relationships (meanings- Terkenli, 2001; value systems- create the landscape” (Stephenson, 2008). Values thus in Soini, 2001; mental entity- Tress & Tress, 2001) and this sense, do not merely act as a passive ingredient the action or processes undergone within the space to justify supporting a landscape’s conservation but itself (Experiential Aspect- Terkenli, 2001; landscape an active part to its continued sustainability. functions- Soini, 2001; Systems- Tress & Tress (2001)). These theoretical backgrounds from contemporary Furthermore on a field study of two New Zealand landscape studies formed part of the foundations communities in the South Island at Bannockburn that Stephenson (2008) used to develop her Cultural and Akaroa, Stephenson (2008) further proposed Values Model (CVM- figure 1) which aims to explain a temporal dimension within landscape values held the potential values present in a landscape and the depending on the length of time, spent, dwelled or subsequent relationship between these values. interacted within the area. Insider/Embedded values were highlighted in this discourse, where those that As illustrated above, the CVM model is likewise built have relatively long experience considered values around three dimensions, forms that aim to capture the far beyond physical forms/surface values, relating physical features of landscapes that are observable not only to present sensory perspectives of the and measurable, relationships that represents the place but also to the past socio-cultural dimension interactions between people, of people and their embedded within that reinforces both the landscape’s place, and even those outside the human domain, and present and future forms. In relation to economic
Figure 1: The Cultural Value Model
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 21 [Culture at work] valuation studies, this somehow implies that within landscapes, the value-sets of those directly attached to it is different to those merely visiting the area, or “experts” and therefore may not be captured at all by valuation tools employed (O’Neill & Walsh, 2000). A finding that is incoherent when the greatest impact of the resulting decisions are in fact the landscape’s communities.
Although the Cultural Values Model provides an important backbone to this research’s analysis, illustrating the close interaction between values and sustainability, a criticism to the model is that it presupposes the constant regeneration of values across time, while as aforementioned, cultural landscapes as in other resources are continuously confronted with factors that may unbalance it. Farina (2000) notes on this considering a landscape’s resilience and fragility against disturbances, citing cultural values again as a key filter in supporting a cultural landscape system’s recovery and sustainability.
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 22 [Culture at work]
The cultural commons and mutual monitoring on top of the underlying strong rivalry and weak excludability properties of As the last section of literature review and following the shared resource, Hess (2008) argues that “new the aforementioned factors that can potentially shape commons” such as cultural landscapes and tourism a landscape’s evolution, this paper will introduce the commons can arise out of these traditional forms. concept of Cultural Commons (Bertacchini et al., Thus in favour of evaluating the sustainability of 2012), a relatively new research agenda that might cultural landscapes with integrated natural and shed light on change within a cultural landscapes’ cultural properties these principles stemming from values, which as this paper argues are integral building the original commons framework of Ostrom could blocks that regenerate a landscape’s sustainability. be of significance.
Beyond those of the natural kind and its derivatives however, recent academic studies have also distinctly Cultural commons stem from the discipline of extended the “Commons” perspective towards other managing shared resources fraught with problems open access goods that face enclosure movements of two kinds, high levels of rivalry- once a good or are commoditised (Boyle, 2003) such as digital is consumed others cannot benefit from the same content and information (Lessig, 2002). Unlike good, and low levels of excludability- it is very difficult natural resources however, these intangible assets or even impossible to restrict others’ access to the are not plagued with the problem of rivalry in its good. Originally conceptualized to tackle open original sense. Once information, say an online access natural resources that face both predicaments article/entry as in Wikipedia, is consumed or used, such as a forest, grazing fields or fishing grounds nothing prevents others from benefiting from the to name a few, economics Nobel Laureate Elinor same good. Nevertheless if mediocre information Ostrom (1990) a pioneer in the field, suggests three is overproduced within the site, and inadequate measures to counter the degradation and depletion controls are unable to prevent the dilution of high of the resource in question; privatization of the quality information, the common resource likewise good (as greatly argued by Hardin’s (1968) tragedy suffers quality entropy. Cultural commons are of the commons), government ownership and her similarly developed from this modified application contribution on commons resource management of the commons perspective. It is argued however (Ostrom, 1990). that in this case, the resource suffers not from the overproduction of the flows that add to the stock of In addition to this, within Ostrom’s seminal work resource but in its underproduction in regenerating on Governing the Commons she revealed eight design the resulting culture (Bertacchini et al., 2012). principles that could contribute to the “success” manifested by long-enduring cases (Ostrom, Within the cultural commons perspective, three 1990), these are: (1) the presence of clearly defined dimensions are keys to understanding a commons boundaries on the resource and its usage, (2) shared; culture, space, and community (Bertacchini et al., congruence between the rules governing resource 2012). For the purpose of this research however we use with local needs and conditions, (3) collective- extend beyond the cases cited in the illustration (see choice agreements or the participatory nature in figure 2), as languages and scientific communities, modifying operational rules, (4) establishment of a using this framework to analyse the common values self-monitoring mechanism, (5) graduated sanctions and knowledge1 within the landscape itself as the for divergent behaviours/violations, (6) rapid access cultural commons integral to its sustainability. to low cost conflict resolution mechanism, (7) Traditional/Indigenous knowledge was identified acknowledgement of external authorities of the as another type of cultural value derivative within right of resource users to operate under their own living cultural landscapes, as the technical aspect rules and (8) nested enterprises or the coherence 1 From herein termed as common between multiple layers of operational rules, values and knowledge are values derivable monitoring, sanctioning, conflict resolution and other activities for those belonging in larger systems. from non-use and cultural values; in specific Although conceived from those natural resources from the second one, the former from social, facing both problems of credible commitment historical, spiritual and symbolic values and the later from educational values.
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 23 [Culture at work] supporting the physical forms of a cultural landscape as building blocks to sustainability. (Dei, 1994; Berkes, 1999; Berkes et. al, 2000). Another significant contribution that this commons In this case, it can be deduced that landscape values, perspective can provide is its proposals on how which are shared by area bounded localities within cultures evolve, decline, and are replaced. Two social tightknit communities, interacting and exchanging dilemmas or factors that influence the commons knowledge externalities through everyday life can were mentioned in Bertacchini and other’s (2012) be located within the locus of “cultural districts”. extensive discussion on the issue, which are (1) the A parallel approach to viewing cultural commons classic free-riding problems on commons, wherein where instead of the competitive advantage that some individuals benefit from the resource without emerges from the positive externalities derived contributing to its maintenance and that associated through constant interrelations between firms that with (2) the reproduction of the common resource, accumulate knowledge and social capital within a from one generation to the next. Although both cultural district as the “third Italy” or the Los Angeles issues can be inherent in supporting knowledge and multimedia complex (Santagata, 2002), values common values, this paper focuses on the latter case interact among the three dimensions to generate the as more suitable to study a landscape’s sustainability common values and knowledge associated with the across temporal and well-bounded space as, in cultural landscapes, once again reinforcing their role effect that they are intangible values within a local
Figure 2 : The three dimenions of cultural commons
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 24 [Culture at work] community, their regeneration within will in turn transmission would be problematic to the society feed the level of commons necessary to sustain as the former would not have the ability to respond a landscape. This is something akin to a dynamic to the new challenges of the world while the later version of Throsby’s cultural capital framework would not permit intergenerational coordination. (1999). Nevertheless, the first social dilemma will not be disregarded, in consideration of factors that may impact the local community from outside their core cultural sphere.
In Bertacchini and other’s (2012) theoretical conceptualization of this second social dilemma, a cultural game was played with two players, the “traditionalist”-those that value the traditional culture more and the “innovators”- those that prefer a new/alternative one, coexisting within the population concluding with scenarios depending on the value of payoffs when the two groups eventually interact. Such that, if the parties prefer to meet others with the same cultural values, then the only stable equilibrium will be when there is only one type of culture that exists, otherwise the common culture shared degenerates. Conversely, if the parties benefit from interacting with those having alternative values, then a stable equilibrium does exist with coexistence. As with the case of the landscapes, as per Farina’s (2000) discussion on disturbances, resilience, and fragility, and Antrop’s (2005) pointers on factors influencing its change, it can be inferred that in cases of isolated cultural values, as is often the case with cultural landscapes (Sauer, 1925) especially of the rural kind, exposures with alternative perspectives seem to lead to a change in the landscapes at least in terms of its function. A process that in turn may cause its decline as is evident, but not on absolute terms, with much of the rural landscapes in Europe that experienced abandonment after the influence of urbanization and resulting outmigration of inhabitants (Antrop, 2005).
Moreover, this point is also echoed in the psychological sciences which investigated the transfer of values from one generation to another, known in the discipline as Intergenerational transmission. A process that is integral to cultural persistence (Cavalli-Sforza & Feldman, 1981) and as Schönpflug (2001), stresses, “may be seen as a core issue of cultural maintenance and culture change as values provide the standards for actions that regulate day-to-day behaviour as well as important and critical life decisions”. However, not all influences are negatively construed, Boyd and Richerson (1985) argues that both direct replication of cultural values in successive generations and complete failure in
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 25 [Culture at work]
that generate culture within the landscape asserting merits of complementary 1.3 the idiosyncratic relationships and community values approaches in understanding present within each case studied. Perspectives that cultural landscapes: a separately might be inclined to communicate a multidisciplinary framework concentrated view in support of targeted visions but together provide a richer understanding of As is often the case with the disciplinary sciences, we the observed phenomena. Such that the focus of “stand on the shoulder of giants1” nevertheless in one becomes a complementary aspect to which instances where the studied terrain is vast and wide, other’s limitations are answered; starting with the it might be of profit to see beyond the perspectives Environmental Sciences which is deeply rooted of a single giant towards the sights of many. A multi- in answering the financial aspects and public good disciplinary approach that was employed within dilemma that plagues natural resources through an the second part of this literature review as visually evaluation of both its determined and potential represented in figure 3 below. use value to the larger majority and its intrinsic value as commanded by environmental ethics. A As shown, each perspective renders a different but perspective that greatly focuses on the conservation complementary approach to values and sustainability of the landscape as a natural resource with noted but within a cultural landscape, with one end of secondary roles of non-use and cultural values towards the spectrum favouring a more quantitative and sustainability. A limitation that in turn is the subject instrumental approach to valuation as exemplified of Geography and Landscape studies which focuses by the economic valuation methodologies that aim on the symbiotic relationship between all elements to assist decision makers on funding competing present within a cultural landscape. Stephenson demands through cost-benefit analysis on a (2008)’s Cultural Values Model in particular showing landscape’s utilitarian function to humanity, while this as a constant interaction between land, people, the other end emphasizes on the qualitative aspect culture and time that profoundly explains the active role that non-use and cultural values play in 1 Famed quote of Sir Isaac Newton in a letter to Robert Hooke, 1676, “If I have seen further, it is by standing on ye regenerating the cultural landscape within temporal shoulders of giants.” Digital copy of the letter available online space. Although factors that affect landscapes exist http://digitallibrary.hsp.org/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/ within the said academic literature, a criticism to object_id/9285
Figures 3 : Comparative merits of a multidisciplinary approach
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 26 [Culture at work] the CVM is its exposition within a seeming state of continuity. An important feature towards the dynamic interpretation of the relationship between values and sustainability that is in turn expounded under the new research agenda on Cultural Commons that explains the transition of common values in a state of flux. Its focal point discussing the mechanisms in which values are eroded, maintained or transmitted on the level of the inhabitants, communities and common culture formed within the landscape. While capable of discussing the atomic building blocks of a living cultural landscape, it is arguable that within the commons perspectives the question of conserving or not the resource should have already been answered, thus the multi-disciplinary approach goes full-circle returning to economic valuation methodologies stemming from the environmental sciences as one of the ways to prudent decision making. Another more qualitative alternative to valuation being Ostrom’s (1990) design principles on long enduring commons that may act as a signal to policy makers on the qualitative viability of future efforts, fortifying the results of quantitative economic valuations that may be financially feasible but realistically complicated when applied to living cultural landscapes. Note that using Ostrom’s commons framework targets the sustainability issues linked to the tangible cultural manifestation that originates from the natural resource commonly managed while Bertacchini and other’s (2012) proposition on cultural commons is applied to the main discourse on the relationship of non-use and cultural values, and sustainability.
Thus, from the aforementioned discussion and as illustrated in figure 3, it can be reasonably argued that engaging on a multi-disciplinary approach to the topic yields an advantageous perspective and understanding of not only the principles working between values and sustainability within the landscape, its culture, and inhabitants but also to political decision making that is applied on the studied area. An understanding that may be missed or may even lead to ill-begotten decisions if made standing on just one shoulder of a giant.
The next section provides a real-life application of these findings through the case of the Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras2.
2 The site is also known as the Ifugao Rice Terraces referring to the name of the province and indigenous community owning the terraces
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 27 [Culture at work]
A village in the Batad rice terraces Fonte: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ifugao#/media/File:Banaue_Philippines_Batad-Rice-Terraces-02.jpg PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 28 [Culture at work]
2. Case Study: The Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES [Culture at work]
2.1 introduction and background Description Incorrectly known locally to be solely the Banaue of the case Rice Terraces, the five clusters inscribed within the “The Stairway to Heaven” (UNESCO/NHK, 2010) UNESCO WHL can be found scattered across four and “The Eighth Wonder of the World” (Dizon et out of the eleven municipalities within the Ifugao al. 2012), are amongst the numerous accolades that Province. These are the Nagacadan, the Hungduan, have been bestowed upon the Rice Terraces of the central Mayayao, Bangaan, and the Batad terrace Philippine Cordilleras, a UNESCO world heritage clusters in the Kiangan, Hungduan, Mayayao and cultural landscape that manifests more than two Banaue municipalities respectively (see figures 4 millennia of the Ifugao Community’s harmonious and 5); those deemed most preserved in the region, interaction with their environment, their traditional both in terms of tribal eco-management and cultural knowledge and lifelong association with agriculture practices (UNESCO, 1995). These terraces have and rice production (Diaz, 2015). However, as with remained intact through families across generations other cultural landscapes in rural settings, the same through primogeniture rule, regardless of gender, is currently facing sustainability problems such as while selling the land to non-relatives are considered physical deterioration and socioeconomic challenges taboo (Conklin, 1980). along with intergenerational issues (Dizon et al., 2012) and outmigration. This case investigates Although not uncommon in Asia, where stone on these components through a multidisciplinary or mud walls are built to cultivate rice on hilly or approach, focusing on those aspects relating to mountain terrains where water source must be values and sustainability. directed to tilled paddies, the rice terraces of the Philippines Cordilleras stand out from the rest due
Figures 4 : The Ifugao Province and Rice Terraces Location Map
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 30 [Culture at work] to their characteristically higher altitude (700 and agro-ecosystem1 (see figure 6). 1500m above sea-level) and steeper slopes <70°, f.e. compared to that of Bali with 40° maximum One cannot even begin to explain the (UNESCO, 1995). Moreover, this high-land indistinguishable tie between the Ifugao people’s cultivation is also based on a special cold tolerant traditional knowledge, beliefs, and farming lifestyle. organic strain of rice, the tinawon or “yearly” in the Such is exemplified through the numerous rituals Ifugao dialect (Conklin, 1980) signifying its single- 1 Woodlots are located around the rice terraces and hamlets. cropping season yield, which grows chest-high and Privately owned and maintained by clans or families, they are is thus apt for manual harvesting on slopes that are usually inherited from one generation to another. They provide too steep for animals or machinery (Castonguay et. two important functions, (1) as source of wood for the fuel, construction and raw material for village’s wood carving industry, al, 2016). and (2) regulator of precipitation from the upper primary forests trapping water and nutrients from rainfall, slowly releasing them Another distinctive feature of the terraces is the to nourish the fields black ( arrow). These goes hand in hand undeniably symbiotic relationship between the with the water sources, below and above the terraces that are various components within the mountainous terrain transported through the use indigenous irrigation channels and and the Ifugao community’s agricultural lifestyle and bamboo conveyor troughs, for irrigation, washing and drinking. Swidden Fields are lands too steep for making terraces. They cultural practices. A mastery of watershed ecology are cleared and cultivated for planting sweet potatoes, vegetables and terrace engineering that ensures the harmonious and legumes that provides additional sustenance in lean months interactions between five major components (DENR, and yearlong supply of animal feeds. Ownership is usufruct 2008), namely: the woodlot (muyong), communal/ in nature and any member of the village can cultivate on the lands after it is laid to fallow. The Rice Paddies are in the public forest (ala), swidden farms (habal), rice shape of terraces that allows optimal nutrients absorption and terraces (payo), hamlets/settlement areas (boble), and minimal erosion, despite the steepness of its slope. It is the most water bodies and irrigation systems (liting) that not dominant type of agriculture land-use in the region. It is also only respect the unilateral function of each within a mini-aquatic ecosystem with some marine species requiring a healthy woodlot to be inundated the whole year. Finally all the landscape but also their contribution to its total the products harvested from the surroundings are taken to the hamlet/settlement area (white arrow) where the communities inhabit and raise native livestock. (Same sources as figure 6)
Figures 5 : The five rice terraces clusters inscribed in the UNESCO World Heritage List
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 31 [Culture at work] given each year associated with the agricultural cycle, History: rice planting, and consumption (see table 2 and figure The Ifugaos do not have written history as to the 7). The observance of such also positively linked evolution of their terraces and studies of their with terrace maintenance, as in pest control, topsoil origin remain inconclusive (Table 3). As to their regeneration and nutrients preparation (Guimbatan, ancient history, two competing theories arise from 2008). One of these practices, the Hudhud Chants, the literature: American anthropologist Otley Beyer’s was even inscribed in 2001 as a UNESCO Intangible “three wave migration theory” where immigrants Cultural heritage2. 2000 years ago from Indo-China with knowledge of wet terraces cultivation arrive in the Lingayen 2 Thought to originate as early as the 7th century, the Hudhud, Gulf settling northwards to the area (Beyer, 1947) comprises of more than 200 chants that is practiced during and those of Keesing (1962) who theorizes that the rice harvesting season, recalling tales about ancestral heroes, customary laws, religious beliefs and traditional practices Ifugaos came from Magat River dwellers that were that all reflect the importance of rice cultivation to their pushed to their present location by the Spanish in society (SITMo, 2008). While the Hudhud, are mainly led the seventeenth century. Meanwhile, archaeological by women elders in the village, serving both as historians evidences point towards an estimate that is and preachers, other rituals are led by the mumbaki or pagan priest, another important figure within the Ifugao social strata. somewhere in between the two proposals (Maher, 1973).
Figures 6: The Ifugao Rice Terraces System
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 32 [Culture at work]
Table 2: The Ifugao Rituals Associated with Rice Production and Consumption
Adapted from Pagada 2006 in Acabado, S., & Martin, M. (2016). The Sacred and the Secular: Practical Applications of Water Rituals in the Ifugao Agricultural System. TRaNS: Trans-Regional and-National Studies of Southeast Asia, 4(02), 307-327.
Figures 7: Ifugao Rituals associated with the Agricultural Calendar defined by the Tinawon or “once-a-year” crop
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 33 [Culture at work]
Table 3: Dates Proposed for the Inception of the Ifugao Rice Terraces
Adapted from Acabado, S. (2009). A Bayesian approach to dating agricultural terraces: a case from the Philippines. Antiquity, 83(321), 801.
Table 4: Timeline of Major Events in the Ifugao Rice Terraces
Adapted from Charette-Castonguay, A. (2014) and enriched by author
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 34 [Culture at work]
Ask an Ifugao however how the terraces came about 37,339.86Php (about 720 Eurs), less than half of its and the answer is simply “hidin kanaman” meaning in Metro Manila counterpart (PSA, 2012). the past (DENR, 2008). A reason as to why some families have diversified Nevertheless, as to their contemporary history, Table into associated industries such as crafts making, 4 shows the timeline of landmark developments trade and even the tourism sector (SITMo, 2008). within the landscape during the past century. Unfortunately, the same report on the impact Particular attention should be given to the legislative of tourism industry reveals that the primary initiatives issued to support the site as well as the beneficiaries of this are those from the Banaue changing management and agencies, responsible for municipality receiving 85% of the tourism visits in the terraces within each presidential administration. 2006, a small 0.57% of the overall tourist arrivals in The table also shows the introduction of several the country, with negligible benefits to the farmers, measures in vain to support the landscape as well as the primary maintainers of the rice terraces. This natural disasters that plagued the area. is possibly the reason why when asked whether the tourism sector is beneficial to local economic Demographics: progress, the farmers posted the lowest agreement The Ifugaos call themselves Ipugo3 meaning “from rating of 55%, although they remain positive as to the earth” and rightfully so with more than 80% of its prospects. Another contribution to these income the whole population of the province involved in streams is through migrant remittances (about 1.5% the agriculture sector (see Table 5); the agroindustry in 2010 (PSA, 2017)) that indirectly bring benefits serving as one of the primary means of subsistence to those left in the fields to invest in agriculture in the region, the rice harvests however inadequate (Mckay, 2003). Poor agricultural knowledge however to feed a regular family for more than five months leads to a loss of investment that may be one of the (SITMo, 2008). Furthermore, recent Human causes for the low interest shown by Ifugao youth to Development Index (PSA, 2012) cite that the Ifugao farming (Dizon et. al, 2012). Table 6 provides other region belong amongst the lowest 27% of the 81 relevant socio-demographic information as to the provinces studied in the Philippines, second lowest province of Ifugao. in the Cordilleras Administrative Region it belongs to, with an annual per capita income of about 3 It is believed that the Spaniards changed it to “Ifugaw” while subsequently the Americans, during their occupation revised it to “Ifugao” (SITMo, 2008).
Table 5: Ifugao Rice Terraces: Area Ranking, Distribution and Population
Source: BSWM and NSO, 2000 and Ifugao Poverty Map (2006) in Department of Environment and Natural Resources-DENR, Philippines (2008).
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 35 [Culture at work]
Table 6: Ifugao Demographic Statistics (QuickStats)
Compiled by the KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND COMMUNICATIONS DIVISION of the Philippines Statistics Authority (April, 2017) https://psa.gov.ph/quickstat/ifugao
Table 7: Factors affecting the Ifugao Rice Terraces (1995- 2016)
11 The threats indicated are listed does not constitute a classification according to the importance of their impact on the property. Furthermore, they are presented irrespective of the type of threat faced by the property, i.e. with specific and proven imminent danger (“ascertained danger”) or with threats which could have deleterious effects on the property’s Outstanding Universal Value (“potential danger”) -UNESCO (1995-2016)
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 36 [Culture at work]
Table 8: Efforts Implemented for the Ifugao Rice Terraces (1995- 2016)
Table 9: Colour-Coded Challenges and Efforts Implemented for the Ifugao Rice Terraces (1995- 2016)
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 37 [Culture at work]
2.2 Challenges and Efforts: (6) Socio-Cultural- representing issues related to community valuation, transfer and interest on Such complex living structures as a cultural indigenous culture, knowledge and involvement in landscape undoubtedly face several challenges and rice terrace maintenance. disturbances that test its sustainability. Drawing from this research’s two-toned definition of sustainability Note that the challenges identified were based on those by Antrop4 (2006), conservation reports from tackled within the report and may constitute of UNESCO (1999 to 20165) including the nomination sub-issues within each factor, f.e. “illegal activities” document for inscribing the cultural landscape were encompassed both projects not conforming to perused to determine the factors that the community prior environmental impact assessments such as and local administration encountered during the the Hungduan flood control project in 2006 and period and their subsequent reaction to confront illegal mining explorations identified in some terrace these issues, potentially revealing the importance of clusters in 2011. A point particularly relevant for values to sustainability as discussed in the literature those relating to the environmental aspects, with review. The summaries of findings are presented related literature identifying pressing problems that in Table 7 and 8 with each factor classified into six aggravate the predicament, such as the presence of groups “Tourism”, “Admi/Mgt/Leg”, “Infra/Env”, invasive species, the giant earthworm (Conklin, 1980) “Economic”, “Socio-Economic” and “Socio-Cultural”: and the golden apple snail (Joshi et al. 2001), menaces that not only lower harvest yields but also damage (1) Tourism- representing activities that either the structures of the rice terraces. Although arguably creates negative impact to inhabitants leading to site incomparable with regards to the challenges they degradation, local fabric disorders and uncontrolled caused, the factors were collated in order to provide tourism related infrastructures (challenges) or those a snapshot of the identified categorical issues and that aim to support, promote and develop the the subsequent efforts implemented in response to industry (efforts); them. Likewise, the efforts implemented section neither shows the duration of each project, although some (2) Administrative/Managerial/Legislative- reports mention their persistence, nor their failure representing issues related to developing plans, or success but simply the focus that were laid upon research, designation of management authorities them on that particular period. and issuance and enactment of related laws; Nevertheless, much can be extracted from the (3) Infrastructures/Environment- representing overview, beginning with the tourism rubric that is issues related to physical changes within the site seen to be causing more negative rather than positive (degradation or reparation) and its surrounding areas repercussions especially to the hamlet inhabitants. either caused by man or nature; These may be due in part of the sporadic attempts to develop and implement a more inclusive tourism (4) Economic- representing issues related program, a joint SITMo-UNESCO (2008) report to sustainable funding for the functioning of on the impact of tourism to the Ifugaos stressing management agencies; that the main beneficiaries of this industry are not the farmers or caretakers of the terraces themselves (5) Socio-Economic- representing issues related but those owners of tourism facilities in the Banaue to community development and financial self- municipalities that are able to supply the needs of the sufficiency. tourists. Literature also support these findings (see 4 To recall, (1) the conservation of landscape of different types f.e. Greffe, 2004), especially when the local carrying and (2) the sustainability of the landscape itself to function as it is in the future, referring to its potentiality to withstand the irreversible capacity, acceptance and coordination were not impacts and processes of urbanization and globalization considered before the tourism sector was launched. 5 Note that each year’s report presents a one year lag from when the actual challenges and efforts took place. Another consideration is the constant turnover and For example, on “efforts” section on table 7 Setting up of transient nature of the responsible bodies developing an administrative body (IRTCHO) to support the rice terraces was and supporting these planned programs with each noted as it was reported at year 2003 when in fact as shown in table 4’s chronological events it was established in 2002. passing administration. The Ad Hoc nature of these The year-lag however, does not present any considerable authorities resulting not only to loss of organizational difference on the research’s findings hence it was maintained.
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 38 [Culture at work] knowledge of the on-going projects (Malabonga, 2.3 Re-approaching Values and 2016) but also of human resources and capabilities, Sustainability through the CVM such as in 1999 when organizational developments in BRTTF led to the displacement of most staffs model and Cultural Commons: who received GIS training under the WHF Technical Using the aforementioned findings, Co-operation grant (UNESCO, 2000). a re-evaluation of the case can Possibly the only segment not seemingly stressed in be done in relation to previous table 7 would be the Infrastructures/Environment, literature. with infrequent notations. However, careful analysis of the reports indicate that this might be because Briefly, as to the CVM model of Stephenson the short-term solutions frequently employed by (2008), these six categories can be considered as the the administrative authorities are those of the different relationships, processes and practices that can environmental kind, directly related to the reparation be found within a cultural landscape, while a direct and reforestation of the damaged rice terraces impact of such would be the physical forms that are and irrigation systems (Malabonga, 2016). This is manifested therefrom. The socio-cultural group in especially the case in post emergency situations often particular, regenerating the values embedded in the after a natural catastrophe as a typhoon or massive pie such that when disregarded impacts the whole earthquake (f.e. typhoon Emong and Juaning in negatively rendering the interacting parts weakened 2009 and 2011 respectively; see in UNESCO State and incomplete. Meanwhile employing the commons of Conservation Reports 2009-2012), where the perspective on the two values (knowledge and common primary objective is to alleviate the area’s state of value) shows additional sustainability challenges calamity rather than sustain the landscape (Antrop, forthcoming. 2005). Coupled with the diminishing local capabilities on indigenous knowledge and actual workforce to First with knowledge as a commons within the repair and maintain the terraces as well as sourcing community; notwithstanding its importance in funds mostly from external aid and government providing positive externalities in local sites as with spending6 lead to a questionable stance as to this cultural districts (Santagata, 2002), knowledge as methodology’s long term sustainability. identified previously in the literature is integral to the technical maintenance and functionalities of Comparing the two tables, one stark realization is a landscape in general (Dei, 1994; Berkes, 1999; that although observably mentioned during the Berkes et. al, 2000) and to the Ifugao rice terraces beginning of the site’s inscription in 1995, the issues (Conklin, 1980) in particular. Indigenous traditional relating to the changing value sets and disinterest knowledge that allows for sensitive total ecosystem of the inhabitants were not tackled until 2002 when utilization (Castonguay et. al, 2016) harnessing the the cultural landscape was already included in the mountainous terrains’ productive capacity (Jenista, World Heritage in Danger list. An approach very 1987). Such that lack of indigenous knowledge may prominent perusing tables 7 and 8 simultaneously. lead to exacerbating the natural problems including Table 9, a color-coded version of the same provides uninformed introduction of invasive species a better visual representation of this argument, the that bring detrimental effects to the site’s natural socio-cultural group driving most of the community ecological functions (Joshi et al. 2001). Moreover, related initiatives, involvement and growth until the these problems are aggravated when farmers are site’s removal in 2012. Although the implementation confronted with terrace damages either from of an integrated approach is one of the primary mismanagement or natural causes, and its reparation reasons for site improvements (Tsaur, et. al, 2006), are hampered by insufficient human resources such actions that mobilize and reinforce community values that even the traditional system of labour sharing and traditional knowledge seem to also generate a (bayanihan, ubphuh, baddang, ubbu’, Malabonga, 2016) positive impact to sustainability (Fun et al., 2004; are displaced resulting to many terrace owners Choi, & Sirakaya, 2006). depending on hired labour to tend the terraces (DENR, 2008). Even those who invest savings in 6 Most of government funds plowed into the rice terraces were the terraces, as the overseas Ifugao migrant workers, directly used to repair and restore damaged rice terraces and irrigation could be ill-begotten without enough indigenous systems (UNESCO State of Conservation Reports 1999-2016).
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 39 [Culture at work] knowledge. One case cited is the transformed UNESCO (2008) impact of tourism report discussing land use by planting garden beans instead of the the dichotomous perception of WHL inhabitants, traditional rice due to its cash-crop nature. Although exposing the enmity that farmers from the Banaue economically beneficial in the short term, Mckay 7clusters feel against the tourism establishments (2003) mentions that doing so strips the land of that reap majority of the economic benefits, while significant nutrients thus allowing rotation with only those of other undeveloped municipalities remain “input intensive” hybrid varieties of rice. Community optimistic to a tourism plan that is more equitable and disputes as to inequitable water usages may also arise distributive in nature (f.e. inclusive and responsible due to these uninformed land use changes. eco-tourism plans discussed in Calderon et al. 2008).
As to the second cultural commons dilemma, Nevertheless, possibly the most important point beyond the initiatives to transmit indigenous stated above is the breaking of the linkage between knowledge to younger Ifugaos shown in table 8, the rituals and the values it embodies. A pertinent quite evident is this generation’s decreasing interest issue studied under the lens of the second social to inherit the said knowledge. A study by Dizon dilemma of the commons. At this point however, and others (2012) on youth perceptions from within one needs to dig deeper into the common value the five terrace clusters reveal that around 25% of that the Ifugao people ascribe for the terraces to the sample studied will likely engage on agriculture profoundly understand their value payoffs. Why are related occupations in the future; the respondents the terraces culturally significant for them? What mostly coming from older students of lower income is their motivation to perform these traditional families. This means that those youth with greater practices and rituals held of universal value by the financial capacities and brighter are more likely WHL? Although there may be varied responses to to out-migrate, engaging in less labour intensive these integral questions, the simple answer would be and better paying lowland careers in the future. A “for survival”. Ancient Ifugaos tended the paddies, sentiment that is even shared by the older generation maintaining the irrigation channels and symbiotic Ifugaos, sending their children to school to achieve balance between nature and humans in order to a more congenial lifestyle so as to not return to their support their people and future descendants. Rituals villages except as visitors (UNESCO, 1995). This and other indigenous practices gaining favour or translates to the landscape having two competing appeasing pagan gods were meant for one main goal, knowledge values one prioritizing the indigenous to protect and increase their harvest yield (SITMo, traditional knowledge and another the western 2008). Thus with this frame of mind, another type of modern education popularized during the detachment can be seen, which is of the common colonization periods (Conklin, 1980; SITMo, 2008) values and their significance to survival. Quite the payoffs from their meeting discordant with the evident with the limited yields that the traditional later type preferred by both generations. Thus, until a rice varieties provide, in addition to abovementioned future where the fusion of both types of knowledge socio-economic difficulties in the Ifugao province sums up to positive payoffs, it can be assumed that (PSA, 2012). An irreversible separation of common the traditional knowledge commons would not be values between man, ritual, and nature that possibly fruitfully transferred to the succeeding generations, was initially disconnected during the 1950’s causing much problems for the cultural landscape. Christianization movement within the province (SITMo, 2008). Therefore going back to the second Secondly is with the common values in which both dilemma, the transmission of these common social dilemma problems are found applicable; the values seems bleak. Not only are their original free-riding problem clearly embodied within the values eroded with new societal measurements tourism situation in the terrace clusters where not and modernity but these disturbances also form only are terrace owners delineated as to the limited stronger alternative common values that provide gains from the sector but also greatly exposed to its better survival probabilities for the community. Such negative impacts that commodify their rituals to suit that, even if the Ifugaos retain their pride, sense of the taste of visitors (SITMo, 2008). A deterioration belonging, and identity from conserving the terraces, of religious, spiritual and symbolic values due to the value transmission will culminate empty unless the commercialization of traditional culture for 7 The Banue Cluster is the first cluster to develop and tourism purposes (Bulilan, 2007). The Joint SITMo- promote the tourism industry and receives majority of the tourist visitors amongst all those inscribed in the UNESCO WHL.
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 40 [Culture at work] they provide value useful for the current needs of are responsible for trials and conflict resolution that the Ifugao society. maintains peace and cooperation within the cultural landscape. Low cost graduated mechanisms are used Finally, following Ostrom’s design principles to settle the disputes10. discussed in the literature review, it is possible to extend the discussion and qualitatively analyse the The Ancient Ifugaos are consummate diplomats state of affairs within the Ifugao terrace clusters (DENR, 2008), although they do not have a formal amidst these changing values. To evaluate the written rule on usage of common resources, the management of the cultural commons emerging rules themselves are embedded within their societal from the natural resource component shared, this roles and practices. Another point of interest is section proposes two states classified as ancient or Acabado’s (2009) argument that beyond the cognatic before and contemporary or after the revealed erosion bilateral descent that characterizes the Ifugao kinship of knowledge and common values within the Ifugao system; the “house” concept of Levi-Strauss (1982) community. is also explicative, suggesting the possibility of rule adaptation to perpetuate the agricultural community First is the Ancient Ifugaos, it is observable through thus further reinforcing the strengths of societal ethnographic accounts (Conklin, 1980; Acabado, ties for communal management. With regards to 2009) that each member then had clearly defined roles the credible commitment and monitoring dilemma within the area8 bounded community that govern of commons management, it is also observable both the rules of resource use (in this case the living that within the ancient Ifugaos the long term cultural landscape) and its linkages to societal and benefits that can be obtained by following the rules, religious organization. Five distinct classifications such as survival of kin and descendants through are identifiable: a) theomona t - or the ritual leader cooperative subsistence farming and maintenance of an agricultural district responsible for the of goodwill that strengthens community continuity, synchronization of farming activities that maintains far outweighs the short term net benefits that labour availability, promotes paddy productivity, transgression can potentially provide11. A strong manage water resources and pest control9, b) the bond forged by the interrelated ties between the mumbaki- village pagan priest responsible for other use, non-use and cultural values within the cultural rituals and the recital of genealogical lineage that landscape, such that any member would be inclined venerates ancestors and validates their respective to monitor their neighbours’ actions as cooperation heirs, a practice of particular importance due is strictly beneficial to survive amidst the harsh to the primogeniture rule of estate/rice terrace natural conditions of the mountainous terrains. A inheritance within the community, c) the kadangyan or elites owning the larger rice terraces which are 10 For example, with regards to swidden fields and public usually secondly worked on after the puntunagan forest use, an offense of say cutting a tree from a claimed land would be sanctioned with reprimand on the first offense, due to their requirement for additional labour, d) a demand of payment from the monkalun on the second and as demand in turn supplied by the ubphuh, baddang, or far as violence on the third since it signifies lack of respect to ubbu’ customary communal workgroups which are the owner. On the other hand, disputes on terrace property either other rice terrace owners or non-owners that boundaries would be settled through the provision of provide reciprocal contributions in kind. Otherwise, genealogical evidence, possibly through the mumbaki or council of elders, in addition to a trial ordeal (haddaccan) supervised by non-owners (nawotwot as per Mckay, 2005) may also the council and monkalun involving either an i uggub or traditional opt to cultivate taro, vegetables and other crops on reed and egg throwing practice or a wrestling match (i bultong) unclaimed swidden fields for sustenance, so long as between the two disputants or their kin representatives to ensure they follow the ownership and fallowing rules that the fairness of the match. After the ordeal, a peace-pact (hidit) witnessed by the community and the mediator is performed maintain soil fertility. And finally e) the council of to ensure reconciliation between the parties (Acabado, 2009). elders and the monkalun (third party negotiator) which 11 This applies to any of the 5 roles mentioned above. For example, a kadangyan, would risk displeasing the pagan gods, 8 Recall in figure 6 the natural/spatial societal embarrassment, pest infestation or lack of labour to boundaries present within the cultural landscape manage his/her fields if he/she decides to supersede the topdad. 9 This is accomplished through the topdad (tomona sponsored Moreover since the fields are equitably flooded and the harvest ritual) and subsequent planting of the puntunagan (land owned by season once a year, there are not much short term benefits to the tomona) that commences the Ifugao’s single-cropping season transgression. Of similar case is for a non-owner who risks kinship after which other members of the himpuntungan (agricultural problems or worst expulsion from the agricultural community, district) can start working on their fields (Acabado, 2009) the only clear path to survival within the area, if uncooperative.
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 41 [Culture at work] cultural commons management that was respected above, it has yet to be harmonised with other related by external authorities due to their coincidental pre-existing laws (DENR, 2008). A divergence that exclusion from the same nation-state12. may have been rooted on the permeation of the Regalian Doctrine on Philippine agricultural and Evidently much has changed since; the Contemporary forestry policies, vesting all ownership of land to the Ifugao society bares dwindling resemblance state, automatically placing the untitled Ifugaos along to their ancient forefathers. For one, the roles with their indigenous sustainable practices under that previously governed the cultural commons government control and regulation (DENR, 2008). resource use are now in danger while the societal In addition to this, the 2006 UNESCO Conservation and religious linkages therefrom eroded. Aguilar Report also mentioned stakeholders’ frustration and (2017) reports that less than twenty mumbaki remain confusion as to the opportunities and constraints active within the whole Ifugao province, whereas linked to the World Heritage Commitment that both the kadangyan who receive their status through further embeds contemporary Ifugaos within inheritance and the nawotwot who used to provide multiple layers of uncoordinated goals and activities. reciprocal labour for a portion of rice harvests or farmed on unclaimed swidden fields are unbalanced Possibly the greatest transition however is felt as well, the former only able to hire paid labour through the credible commitments and mutual due to human resource shortage thus preferring monitoring problems within the cultural commons to cultivate “input intensive” crops that generate managed, especially as the agricultural community faster return on investment while the later engage transforms from subsistence to simple commodity/ on depleting forests to extract lumber and convert market oriented farming (Mckay, 2005) where the swidden fields to market-oriented gardens both influence of urbanization and modernity created arguably ill-begotten on their impacts to the whole alternative paths to survivability, destabilising terrace agro-ecosystem13 (Mckay, 2005); possibly the social and cultural norms. In effect there comes a factors of widespread evangelisation (SITMo, 2008), reversion of values such that in the contemporary integration to the nation state (Conklin, 1980; Sajor Ifugao community, transgression from cooperative 1999), and influence of modernization during the management leads to favourable chances of survival mid-20th century driving the change in the region. and social class mobility whereas participatory actions are relegated to those unable to seize the As to the second point, Sajor (1999) notes that opportunity. Without the minimum number of subjecting the Ifugaos to national policies have followers, the monitoring agents likewise decrease affected their traditional land use system, for example their confidence on the system, overall rendering it Presidential Decree 705 or the Revised Forestry powerless and discordant. Of notable congruency is Code of the Philippines state that no public land the phenomenon that is simultaneously experienced beyond a slope of 18° shall be classified as alienable when the Ifugao’s knowledge and common values or disposable when in fact most of the rice terraces are dislodged from their original sense, eroding not are located in hilly slopes making the contemporary only cultural common values that are present within Ifugao people squatters of their own lands. Another the cultural landscape, but also, as this section has is Proclamation No. 573 regarding parcel no. 1 Magat revealed, the cultural commons manifested from River Forest Reserve that automatically pronounces its natural component weakening the total system the whole province of Ifugao as a watershed area of commons whether in its tangible or intangible prohibiting the communities’ use of sustainable representations. timber without government permit. Although efforts to align the rights and rules of land usage Summary of this section- The Case of the Rice have been recognize through Republic Act 8371 or Terraces of the Philippines Cordilleras the Indigenous People’s Rights Act in 1997, as shown 12 Recall from table 4 that the Ifugaos were only recognized By studying the case of the Rice Terraces of the within the nation state around the middle of the 20th century Philippine Cordilleras this section has shown a 13 In this case, planting input intensive crops causes real-life application of the importance of non- disturbances to the biodiversity of the rice paddy ecosystem use and cultural values, expounded in the case as and inequitably uses water resources, meanwhile the act of depleting the forests create problems as the muyongs knowledge and common values-derivatives of the also serve as a regulator of precipitation; both land-use two, in the sustainability of cultural landscapes. changes therefore detrimental to the whole agro-ecosystem.
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 42 [Culture at work]
topic to ensure its accuracy and thus may be of Summary and service to those leading authorities managing the site, to improve understanding on the importance of Conclusion community and stakeholder involvement in program implementation. After which these findings were th The World Heritage Committee in its 16 session then used to reapply the case under the cultural value inscribed Cultural Landscapes, characterizing those model of Stephenson (2008), cultural commons mixed type of heritages which neither had purely perspectives of Bertacchini and others (2012) and natural nor purely cultural properties, as an option design principles of Ostrom (1990), revealing vital yet to be included in the World Heritage Lists thus unsettling trajectories as to the future sustainability spearheading the proliferation of studies from states, of the cultural landscape. Such that, even if the prior specialists and academics on the different aspects section indicated on-site improvements on landscape surrounding the concept (Fowler, 2003). Amidst management and community involvement, deeper the increased popularity coupled with support from analysis on the underlying knowledge, common government and supranational agencies however, values and commons resource management point some cultural landscapes remain in the brink of towards their detachment from their ancient societal danger and loss of culture. A pressing issue that after and survival roles consequently unbalancing not a priori review of cross-disciplinary studies linked to only the tangible aspects in the case but also their cultural economics point towards certain limitations value payoffs and therefore prospects for future that might be integral in understanding a cultural transmission. A situation that may very well lead landscape’s sustainability, henceforth forming to either cultural decline, replacement or futile the main research question “Does the act of possibly conservation that could be of great concern to policy underestimating the changing values of cultural landscape makers, government and humanitarian agencies inhabitants essential towards its sustainability?” and within which are continuously supporting and funding the the argument what are the different perspectives cultural landscape. between values and sustainability? And applied in a real life case what are the possible impacts of Overall, what this study has achieved is a cross- underestimating them? disciplinary approach in dealing with a complex subject, cultural landscapes, revealing the difficulties In search of answers, the literature review opened of preserving, managing and supporting those with with an overview of methodological approaches integrated cultural heritages properties especially that form part of the tools available to economically when intricacies that belie within its socio-cultural, evaluate cultural landscapes (Nikjamp, 2009) revealing ecological and economic spheres are not tackled a need to further study the different disciplines collectively. The proposed multidisciplinary tackling cultural landscapes, especially within the framework (figure 3) arguing on the merits of aspect of the non-use/cultural values. The following studying beyond singular approaches to provide an section then expounded on this relationship between advantageous perspective in understanding the topic. values and sustainability, accomplishing it through a Moreover, emphasize on underlying non-use and multi-disciplinary approach which not only revealed cultural values, in this research’s case the limitation the differences in treatment between disciplines but of underestimating the impacts of direct inhabitants’ also presented the linkages and merits between them knowledge and common values, has also provided thus favouring multiple perspectives rather than a a novel and fresh perspective to the topic. Findings single approach in studying cultural landscapes. A that may not be explicitly discussed upon economic thrust that was maintained when analysing the case valuation tools that normally put aside such values as of the Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras residual or augmentative to use values when in fact which perused State of Conservation Reports they provide much feedback and influence over a from 1999 to 2016 to showcase the progression of site’s sustainability. problems and development of solutions throughout the site’s contemporary history. Although limited in In a policy point of view, the research’s findings terms of a single source and descriptive in nature1 resonate towards political decision making that goes such was seconded by available literature on the beyond quantitative economic valuation techniques 1 In addition to other limitations mentioned during the that indeed might aid in obtaining financial support actual section discussion
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 43 [Culture at work] and civil awareness towards the conservation of the of transformation along different time periods natural properties of the cultural landscape but not which may reveal the developmental trajectory its living sustainability. A further stretch towards with which cultural landscapes follow, resulting to a qualitative analysis of similar cases is inherent better conservation and sustainability initiatives. in forming decisions as to whether living cultural Another angle mentioned but not emphasized is the landscapes are viable to sustain and in understanding conservation of intangible cultural heritage that co- the grassroots areas that needs to be supported to exists in living cultural landscapes and their explicit regenerate the landscape from within its cultural relationships with the underlying common values and caretakers. Again, figure 3 shows the interlocking commons resource managed. Furthermore, during disciplines that could provide merits when applied to the investigation several instances pointed towards complex cases as the Rice Terraces of the Philippine the divergent values between what international Cordilleras. In a way, this also translates towards the agencies refer to as “universal” values and those need to form grassroots policies that directly impacts that locals hold as “true” values within them relinking community values, especially livelihood (Zhang, 2017). In fact, some instances even delayed related aspects, to the cultural landscape sustained development within the area, f.e. building the mini- as it is seen to positively impact sustainability; hydro plant that benefited locals in terms of energy possibly an insufficiency that has led towards many source and conservation funding, issues that are an abandoned cultural landscape that was unable to pertinent if sustainable development are to be sphere cope up with the changing demands of time. Within headed and the livingness promoted within cultural this initiative, another challenge to policy makers is landscapes; topics that both present limitations and to align the multiple layers of values, f.e. international opportunities for development within the debate. organizations, national and local administrations and agricultural communities, laws and initiatives towards Finally, and possibly the most important the one vision of sustainability. As mentioned in the consideration, is the genuine difficulty in sustaining case study, especially for living cultural landscapes, living cultural landscapes that fundamentally requires commons management that respects and harmonizes a definite political stand to continuously support with indigenous rules and values are integral to its long it beyond economic valuations and budgetary endurance. For those that are within the middle of constraints. A process that reinforces the continuous transformation between ancient and contemporary regeneration of not only the physical aspects of the status however, this research somehow also reveals site but also the underlying values within, woven the differences within the values of authorities, between each societal strand of a living history that conservators and experts to those directly attached forms the fabric of what the world perceives as to the cultural landscape, so much so that a re- cultural landscapes. evaluation of the type of desired sustainability is warranted to collectively decide upon.
Although seemingly painting a dark future for these cultural landscapes with eroding value-sets, by no means does this directly point towards an abandonment of the project but a stark realization of the difficulties imbibed in sustaining cultural landscapes, especially those of the living kind. This research however does not discuss upon these measures that may bring about positive value payoffs to promote the transfers of values from one generation to another and does not benefit from empirical data which opens up room for future research on the topic. Furthermore, the exploratory nature of this study has also paved way to conceptualizing promising research directions such as comparisons between rural landscapes in Europe and Asia. Cases that experienced varying degrees
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 44 [Culture at work]
References
Acabado, S. (2009). A Bayesian approach to dating agricultural terraces: A case from the Philippines. Antiquity, 83(321) 801-814.
Acemoğlu, Daron. (2008). Growth with Overlapping Generations. Introduction to Modern Economic Growth. Princeton University Press. 327–358.
Adler, M. (1985). Stardom and talent. The American Economic Review, 75(1), 208-212.
Aguilar, J. (2017). Ifugao’s Mumbaki population in decline. ABS-CBN News. Retrieved 4 June 2017, from http://news.abs-cbn.com/focus/05/04/17/ifugaos-mumbaki-population-in-decline
Alper, N. O., & Wassall, G. H. (2006). Artists’ careers and their labor markets. Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, 1, 813-864.
Andreoni, J. (1989). Giving with impure altruism: Applications to charity and Ricardian equivalence. Journal of Political Economy, 97(6), 1447-1458.
Antrop, M., (2003). Continuity and change in landscapes. Landscape change and the urbanization process in Europe. In: Mander, U., Antrop, M. (Eds.), Multifunctional Landscapes, vol. 3: Continuity and Change, Southampton. WIT Press, Adv. Ecol. Sci., 16.
Antrop, M., (2005). Why landscapes of the past are important for the future. Landscape and Urban Planning, 70 (1–2), 21–34.
Antrop, M. (2006). Sustainable landscapes: contradiction, fiction or utopia?. Landscape and Urban Planning, 75(3), 187-197.
Araral, E. (2013). What makes socio-ecological systems robust? An institutional analysis of the 2,000 year-old Ifugao society. Human Ecology, 41(6), 859-870.
Arler, F. (2000). Aspects of landscape or nature quality. Landscape Ecology, 15(3), 291-302.
Arrow, K., Solow, R., Portney, P. R., Leamer, E. E., Radner, R., & Schuman, H. (1993). Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation. Federal Register, 58(10), 4601-4614.
Aspromourgos, T. (2013). On the origins of classical economics: distribution and value from William Petty to Adam Smith. Routledge.
Barbier, E. B. (1987). The concept of sustainable economic development. Environmental conservation, 14(02), 101-110. Retrieved from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/ aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0376892900011449
Batty, M., Besussi, E., & Chin, N. (2003). Traffic, Urban Growth and Suburban Sprawl. UCL Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis Working Papers Series. 70. London, November 2003. Retrieved from: http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/216/1/paper70.pdf
Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1991). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge (No. 10). Penguin UK.
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 45 [Culture at work]
Bergin, J., & Price, C. (1994). The travel cost method and landscape quality. Landscape Research, 19(1), 21-23.
Berkes, F. (1999). Sacred ecology: Traditional ecological knowledge and resource management. Taylor and Francis. London Science and the St Elias, 203.
Berkes, F., Colding, J., & Folke, C. (2000). Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as adaptive management. Ecological applications, 10(5), 1251-1262. Retrieved from http:// onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010%5B1251:ROTEKA%5D2.0. CO;2/full
Bertacchini, E. E. (Ed.). (2012). Cultural commons: a new perspective on the production and evolution of cultures. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA.
Beyer, H.O. (1947). Outline Review of Philippine Archaeology by Islands and Provinces. Philippine Journal of Science 77:205-374.
Boccella, N., & Salerno, I. (2016). Creative Economy, Cultural Industries and Local Development. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 223, 291-296.
Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (1985). Culture and the Evolutionary Process. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Boyd, J. (2011). Economic Valuation, Ecosystem Services and Conservation Strategy. In Measuring Nature’s Balance Sheet of 2011 Ecosystem Services Seminar Series. Edited by Coastal Quest and Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, 177-189. Palo Alto: Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, 2012. PDF e-book retrieved from https://www.moore.org/materials/ white-papers/Ecosystem-Services-Seminar-3-Valuation.pdf
Boyle, J. (2003). The second enclosure movement and the construction of the public domain. Law and contemporary problems, 66(1/2), 33-74.
Brown, G. G., Reed, P., & Harris, C. C. (2002). Testing a place-based theory for environmental evaluation: an Alaska case study. Applied Geography, 22(1), 49-76.
Buckley, R., Ollenburg, C., & Zhong, L. (2008). Cultural landscape in Mongolian tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(1), 47-61.
Bulayo, Z. (1998). Tinawon Production Among the Namulditan Farmers in Hingyon, Ifugao. Master’s Thesis. University of the Philippines, College of Baguio, Baguio, Philippines.
Bulilan, C. M. R. (2007). Experiencing cultural heritage and indigenous tourism in Banaue. Philippine Quarterly of Culture and Society, 35(1/2), 100-128.
Burgess, J., Harrison, C. M., Clark, J. V., & Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), Swindon (United Kingdom);. (1997). Valuing nature: what lies behind responses to contingent valuation surveys?. Economic and Social Research Council.
Carson, R. T., Mitchell, R. C., Hanemann, M., Kopp, R. J., Presser, S., & Ruud, P. A. (2003). Contingent valuation and lost passive use: damages from the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Environmental and resource economics, 25(3), 257-286. Retrieved from: http://econweb.ucsd. edu/~rcarson/papers/ExxonERE.pdf
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 46 [Culture at work]
Calderon, M. M., Dizon, J. T., Sajise, A. J. U., Andrada, R. T., Bantayan, N. C., & Salvador, M. G. (2008). Towards the development of a sustainable financing mechanism for the conservation of the Ifugao Rice Terraces in the Philippines. EEPSEA, IDRC Regional Office for Southeast and East Asia, Singapore, SG.
Castonguay, A., Burkhard, B., Müller, F., Horgan, F., & Settele, J. (2016). Resilience and adaptability of rice terrace social-ecological systems: a case study of a local community’s perception in Banaue, Philippines. Ecology and Society, 21(2).
Cavalli-Sforza, L. L., & Feldman, M. W. (1981). Cultural transmission and evolution: a quantitative approach (No. 16). Princeton University Press.
Cesario, F. J. (1976). Value of time in recreation benefit studies.Land economics, 52(1), 32-41.
Champion, T. (2001). Urbanization, suburbanization, counterurbanization and reurbanization. Handbook of urban studies, 160, 1.
Charette-Castonguay, A. (2014). Assessment of resilience and adaptability of social-ecological systems: a case study of the Banaue rice terraces. Doctoral dissertation, Christian-Albrechts Universität zu Kiel.
Choi, H. C., & Sirakaya, E. (2006). Sustainability indicators for managing community tourism. Tourism management, 27(6), 1274-1289.
Clawson, M. (1959). Methods of measuring the demand for and value of outdoor recreation. Reprint No. 10, Resources for the Future. Washington, DC
Conklin, H.C. (1980). Ethnographic Atlas of Ifugao. London. New Haven.
Cosgrove, D., & Daniels, S. (1988). The iconography of landscape: essays on the symbolic representation, design and use of past environments (Vol. 9). Cambridge University Press.
Costanza R. (1996). Ecological economics: Reintegrating the study of humans and nature. Ecological Applications 6: 978-990
Costanza, R., d`Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O`Neill, R.V., Paruello, J., Raskin, R.G., Sutton, P., & Belt M. (1997): The value of the world`s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387, 253-260.
Countryside and Community Research Unit (CCRU) and ADAS (2007): A study of the social and economic impacts and benefits of traditional farm building and drystone wall repairs in the Yorkshire Dales National Park. London: English Heritage, 216. Retrieved from: http://www. englishheritage.org.uk/content/publications/publicationsNew/study-social-economic- impact-benefits-trad-farm-building-drystone-repairs-yorks-dales/YorkshireDale-Study.pdf
Cuccia, T., & Rizzo, I. (2011). Tourism seasonality in cultural destinations: Empirical evidence from Sicily. Tourism Management, 32(3), 589-595.
Cummings, R. G., Harrison, G. W., & Rutström, E. E. (1995). Homegrown values and hypothetical surveys: Is the dichotomous choice approach incentive-compatible?. The American Economic Review, 85(1), 260-266.
Daniel, T. C, et al. (2012). Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services agenda. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(23), 8812-8819.
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 47 [Culture at work]
Daniels, S. (1989). Marxism, culture and the duplicity of landscape. New models in geography, 2, 196-220.
Daugstad, K. (2008). Negotiating landscape in rural tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(2), 402-426.
De Rojas, C., & Camarero, C. (2008). Visitors’ experience, mood and satisfaction in a heritage context: Evidence from an interpretation center. Tourism management, 29(3), 525-537.
Dei, G. J. (1994). Indigenous African knowledge systems: local traditions of sustainable forestry. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, 14(1), 28-41.
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). (2008). Conservation and adaptive management of Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS): The Ifugao Rice Terraces, Philippine Project Framework. Ifugao Province, Philippines.
Desvousges, W., Reed, J., Dunford, R., Boyle, K., Hudson, S., & Wilson. N. (1992). Measuring Natural Resource Damages with Contingent Valuation: Tests of Validity and Reliability. A paper presented at the Cambridge Economics, Inc., Symposium, Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment, Washington, D.C., April 1992.
Diaz, J. B. (2015). Ifugao Rice Terraces: Preservation and Change. UNESCO National Commission of the Philippines. Pasay, Philippines.
Diamond, P., Hausman, J., Leonard, G., & Denning, M. (1992). Does Contingent Valuation Measure Preferences? Experimental Evidence. A paper presented at the Cambridge Economics, Inc. Symposium, Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment, Washington, D.C., April 1992.
Dizon, J. T., Calderon, M. M., Sajise, A. J. U., Andrada II, R. T., & Salvador, M. G. (2012). Youths’ perceptions of and attitudes towards the Ifugao Rice Terraces. Journal of Environmental Science and Management, 15(1), 52-58. Retrieved from: https://journals.uplb.edu.ph/index. php/JESAM/article/viewFile/754/689
Drake, L. (1992). The non-market value of the Swedish agricultural landscape. European review of agricultural economics, 19(3), 351-364.
Enriquez, P. (2014). How about a rice terraces mountain adventure?. Lifestyle.inquirer.net. Retrieved 12 May 2017, from http://lifestyle.inquirer.net/156263/how-about-a-rice-terraces- mountain-adventure/
Farina, A. (2000). The cultural landscape as a model for the integration of ecology and economics. BioScience, 50(4), 313-320.
Fleischer, A. & Tsur, Y. (2000). Measuring the recreational value of agricultural landscape. European review of agricultural economics, 27(3), 385-398.
Fowler, P. J. (2003). World Heritage Cultural Landscapes 1992 - 2002 in World Heritage Papers 7, Cultural Landscapes: the Challenges of Conservation. UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Paris, France.
Franco, D., Franco, D., Mannino, I., & Zanetto, G. (2001). The role of agroforestry networks in landscape socioeconomic processes: the potential and limits of the contingent valuation method. Landscape and Urban Planning, 55(4), 239-256.
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 48 [Culture at work]
Frey, B. S. (1998). Superstar museums: an economic analysis. Journal of Cultural Economics, 22(2-3), 113-125.
Fun, F. S., Chiun, L. M., Songan, P., & Nair, V. (2014). The impact of local communities’ involvement and relationship quality on sustainable rural tourism in rural area, Sarawak. The moderating impact of self-efficacy.Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 144, 60-65.
Garrod, G. D., & Willis, K. G. (1995). Valuing the benefits of the South Downs environmentally sensitive area. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 46(2), 160-173.
Grahn-Danielson, B., Rönn, M., & Swedberg, S. (2013). Policies and Compensation Measures: The Impact of Land Development on the Values of Cultural Heritage Sites in a Democratic Landscape. Rio Kulturkooperativ. Retrieved from http://www.kulturland.se/wp-content/ uploads/2015/11/Policies-and-Compensation-Measure-English_final.pdf
Greffe, X. (2004). Is heritage an asset or a liability?. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 5(3), 301-309.
Gregory, R., & Trousdale, W. (2009). Compensating aboriginal cultural losses: An alternative approach to assessing environmental damages. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(8), 2469-2479.
Groth, P. E., & Bressi, T. W. (1997). Chapter 1: Frameworks for Cultural Landscape Study in Understanding ordinary landscapes. Yale University Press.
Guimbatan (2008) in SITMo. (2008). IMPACT: The Effects of Tourism on Culture and the Environment in Asia and the Pacific: Sustainable Tourism and the Preservation of the World Heritage Site of the Ifugao Rice Terraces, Philippines. UNESCO, Bangkok.
Hanley, N., MacMillan, D., Wright, R. E., Bullock, C., Simpson, I., Parsisson, D., & Crabtree, B. (1998). Contingent valuation versus choice experiments: estimating the benefits of environmentally sensitive areas in Scotland. Journal of agricultural economics, 49(1), 1-15.
Hanley, N., Mourato, S., & Wright, R. E. (2001). Choice modeling approaches: a superior alternative for environmental valuation?. Journal of economic surveys, 15(3), 435-462.
Hardin, G. (1968). The Tragedy of the Commons. Reprint (2009) Journal of Natural Resources Policy Research, 1(3), 243-253.
Hess, C. (2008). Mapping the new commons a paper presented at Governing Shared Resources: Connecting Local Experience to Global Challenges, the 12th Biennial Conference of the International Association for the Study of the Commons, University of Gloucestershire, Cheltenham, UK, July 14–18, Retrieved from: https://www.traficantes.net/sites/default/files/SSRN- id1356835.pdf
Ifugao, P.G. (2015). Conservation Report of the Rice Terraces of the Philippines Cordilleras. Ifugao: Provincial Government of Ifugao.
Ifugao. (2017, April 21). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved May 12, 2017, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ifugao&oldid=776540416
Ingold, T. (2000). The perception of the environment: essays on livelihood, dwelling and skill. Psychology Press.
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 49 [Culture at work]
Jaba, E., Balan, C. B., & Robu, I. B. (2014). The relationship between life expectancy at birth and health expenditures estimated by a cross-country and time-series analysis. Procedia Economics and Finance, 15, 108-114.
Jackson, P. (1989). Maps of meaning: an introduction to cultural geography. Psychology Press.
James, P. E. & Martin, G. (1981). All Possible Worlds: A History of Geographical Ideas. John Wiley & Sons. New York.
Jenista, F. L. (1987). The white apos: American governors on the Cordillera Central. New Day Publishers.
Joshi, R. C., Delacruz, M. S., Martin, E. C., Cabigat, J. C., Bahatan, R. G., Bahatan, A. D., Abayao, E. H., Choy-Awon, J., Chilagan N. P. & Cayong, A. B. (2001). Current status of the golden apple snail in the Ifugao rice terraces, Philippines. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 18(2-3), 71-90.
Keesing, F. M. (1962). The ethnohistory of northern Luzon (Vol. 4). Stanford University Press.
Klain, S. C., Satterfield, T. A., & Chan, K. M. (2014). What matters and why? Ecosystem services and their bundled qualities. Ecological Economics, 107, 310-320.
Kling, C. L. (1989). A note on the welfare effects of omitting substitute prices and qualities from travel cost models. Land Economics, 65(3), 290-296.
Koster, H. R., van Ommeren, J. N., & Rietveld, P. (2016). Historic amenities, income and sorting of households. Journal of Economic Geography, 16(1), 203-236.
Krutilla, J. V. (1967). Conservation reconsidered. The American Economic Review, 57(4), 777-786.
Lancaster, K. J. (1966). A new approach to consumer theory. Journal of political economy, 74(2), 132-157.
Laureano, P. (2003). Oases and other forms of living cultural landscape. In Cultural landscapes: the challenges of conservation (pp. p-71). UNESCO WHC.
Lazrak, F., Nijkamp, P., Rietveld, P., and Rouwendal, J.. (2011a). Cultural Heritage and Creative Cities: An Economic Evaluation Perspective in Sustainable City and Creativity, ed. L. Fusco Girard, and P. Nijkamp. 225–245. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Lazrak, F., Nijkamp, P., Rietveld, P. & Rouwendal, J. (2011b). The Market Value of Listed Heritage. Research Paper, Department of Spatial Economics, VU University, Amsterdam.
Le Goffe, P. (2000). Hedonic Pricing of Agriculture and Forestry Externalities. Environmental and Resource Economics 15, 397-401
Lessig, L. (2002). The future of ideas: The fate of the commons in a connected world. Vintage.
Levi-Strauss, C. (1982). The way of the masks. Translated by Sylvia Modelski. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Lütteken, A., & Hagedorn, K. (1999). Concepts and issues of sustainability in countries in transition: an institutional concept of sustainability as a basis for the network. REU Technical Series (FAO). Retrieved from: http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/ad238e/ad238e08.htm
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 50 [Culture at work]
Mackinder, H. J. (1887). On the scope and methods of geography. Proceedings of the Royal Geographical Society and Monthly Record of Geography 9(3), 141-174.
Madariaga, B., & McConnell, K. E. (1987). Exploring existence value. Water Resources Research, 23(5), 936-942.
Maguire, L. A., & Justus, J. (2008). Why intrinsic value is a poor basis for conservation decisions. BioScience, 58(10), 910-911.
Maher, R. F. (1973). Archaeological investigations in central Ifugao. Asian Perspectives, 16(1), 39-70.
Malabonga, R.L. (2016). Project Evaluation Report- CER for the Prince Claus Fund on the Rehabilitation of the Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras (August-September 2016). Philippines, Manila.
Marx, Karl (1876). Capital, Volume I. Trans. Ben Fowkes (1990). London: Penguin Books.
Mas-Colell, A., Whinston, M. D., & Green, J. R. (1995), Chapter 16: Equilibrium and its Basic Welfare Properties in Microeconomic Theory, Oxford University Press.
May, J., & Thrift, N. (Eds.). (2003). Timespace: geographies of temporality. Routledge.
McKay, D. (2003). Cultivating new local futures: Remittance economies and land-use patterns in Ifugao, Philippines. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 34(2): 285-306.
McKay, D. (2005). Reading remittance landscapes: Female migration and agricultural transition in the Philippines. Geografisk Tidsskrift-Danish Journal of Geography, 105(1), 89-99.
Medema, S. G., & Samuels, W. J. (2004). The history of economic thought: a reader. Routledge.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA). (2003). Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, Ecosystems and Human Well-being: A Framework for Assessment. Island Press, Washington, DC.
Miller, R. E. & P. D. Blair (1985). Input-Output Analysis: Foundations and Extensions. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Moro, M., Mayor, K., Lyons, S., & Tol, R. S. (2013). Does the housing market reflect cultural heritage? A case study of Greater Dublin. Environment and Planning A, 45(12), 2884-2903.
Mourato, S. & Mazzanti M. (2002). Economic valuation of cultural heritage: evidence and prospects in M. de la Torre (Ed.), Assessing the Values of Cultural Heritage. Research Report, The Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles.
Murphy, P. E., & Carmichael, B. A. (1991). Assessing the Tourism Benefits of an Open Access Sports Tournament: The 1989 B.C. Winter Games. Journal of Travel Research, 29: 32-36.
Naidoo, R., & Ricketts, T. H. (2006). Mapping the economic costs and benefits of conservation. PLoS biology, 4(11), e360.
Navrud, S., & Ready, R. C. (Eds.). (2002). Valuing cultural heritage: Applying environmental valuation techniques to historic buildings, monuments and artifacts. Edward Elgar Publishing.
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 51 [Culture at work]
Nurturing Indigenous Knowledge Experts- National Commission of Indigenous People (NIKE-NCIP) and Ananayo, Z. (2009). A video of Ifugao Rice Terrace Construction. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBMji3e3c04&t=569s
O’neill, J., & Walsh, M. (2000). Landscape conflicts: preferences, identities and rights. Landscape ecology, 15(3), 281-289.
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons. Reprint (2015) Cambridge university press.
Pagada (2006) in Acabado, S., & Martin, M. (2016). The Sacred and the Secular: Practical Applications of Water Rituals in the Ifugao Agricultural System. TRaNS: Trans-Regional and- National Studies of Southeast Asia, 4(02), 307-327.
Poe, M. R., Norman, K. C., & Levin, P. S. (2014). Cultural dimensions of socioecological systems: key connections and guiding principles for conservation in coastal environments. Conservation Letters, 7(3), 166-175.
Potts J. & Cunningham S. (2008) Four models of the creative industries. International Journal of Cultural Policy 14(3), 233-247
Philippines Statistics Authority (PSA). (2012). Human Development Index and Its Components: 2012. Manila, Philippines. Retrieved from: https://psa.gov.ph/
Philippines Statistics Authority (PSA). (2017). Ifugao Quickstat- April 2017. Manila, Philippines. Retrieved from: https://psa.gov.ph/quickstat/ifugao
Ricardo, D. (1817). On the Principles of Political Economy, and Taxation. Reprint (2015) Cambridge Books.
Riesgo, L., & Gomez-Limon, J. A. (2006). Multi-criteria policy scenario analysis for public regulation of irrigated agriculture. Agricultural Systems, 91(1), 1-28.
Rosen, S. (1974). Hedonic prices and implicit market: Product differentiation in pure competition. Journal of Political Economy, 82, 34-55.
Rundcrantz, K., & Skärbäck, E. (2003). Environmental compensation in planning: a review of five different countries with major emphasis on the German system.European Environment, 13(4), 204-226.
Sajor, E. (1999). Cutting trees and the dynamics of social change: the case of the Ifugao Muyong in the Philippine uplands. Working Papers/Institute of Social Studies (Netherlands).
Santagata, W. (2002). Cultural districts, property rights and sustainable economic growth. International journal of urban and regional research, 26(1), 9-23.
Sassen, S. (2001). The global city: New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton University Press.
Sauer, C. (1925). The Morphology of Landscape. University of California Publications in Geography, 22. 19-53
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 52 [Culture at work]
Save the Ifugao Terraces Movement (SITMo). (2008). IMPACT: The Effects of Tourism on Culture and the Environment in Asia and the Pacific: Sustainable Tourism and the Preservation of the World Heritage Site of the Ifugao Rice Terraces, Philippines. UNESCO, Bangkok. Retrieved from http://unesdoc. unesco.org/images/0018/001826/182647e.pdf
Schumpeter, J. A. (1954). History of Economic Analysis. (2006) Routledge.
Sheehan, J. (2000). Compensation for the Taking of Indigenous Common Property: The Australian Experience. Conference Paper presented at the Eighth Biennial Conference of the International Association for the Study of Common Property (IASCP) “Constituting the Commons: Crafting Sustainable Commons in the New Millennium”, Indiana University, Bloomington Indiana, USA. June 6, 2000.
Sheppard, S. (2010). Measuring the impact of culture using hedonic analysis. Center for Creative Community Development, 28.
Schönpflug, U. (2001). Intergenerational transmission of values: The role of transmission belts. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(2), 174-185.
Smith, A. (1776). Wealth of nations. Reprint (2005) University of Chicago Bookstore, Chicago.
Snowball, J. D. (2008). Measuring the Value of Culture: Methods and Examples in Cultural Economics. Springer Verlag, Berlin.
Soini, K. (2001). Exploring human dimensions of multifunctional landscapes through mapping and map-making. Landscape and Urban Planning, 57(3), 225-239.
Soini, K. & Dessein, J. (2016). Culture-Sustainability Relation: Towards a Conceptual Framework. Sustainability, 8(2), 167.
Stephenson, J. (2008). The cultural values model: an integrated approach to values in landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 84(2), 127-139.
Stigler, G. J. (1950). The development of utility theory. I. Journal of Political Economy, 58(4), 307- 327.
Stigler, G. J., & Becker, G. S. (1977). De gustibus non est disputandum. The American Economic Review, 67(2), 76-90.
Stynes, D. J. (1997). Economic impacts of tourism: a handbook for tourism professionals. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois, Tourism Research Laboratory, 1-32.
Taaffe, E., Gauthier, H., & O’Kelly, M., (1996). Geography of Transportation. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
The Economics of Ecosystem Biodiversity (TEEB). (2010). The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: mainstreaming the economics of nature: a synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB. UNEP, Progress Press, Malta.
Terkenli, T. S. (2001). Towards a theory of the landscape: the Aegean landscape as a cultural image. Landscape and Urban Planning, 57(3), 197-208.
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 53 [Culture at work]
Throsby, D. (1994). A work-preference model of artist behavior in Cultural economics and cultural policies, 69-80. Springer Netherlands.
Throsby, D. (1999). Cultural capital. Journal of Cultural Economics, 23(1-2), 3-12.
Throsby, D. (2001). Economics and culture. Cambridge University Press.
Throsby, D. (2002). Cultural Capital and Sustainability Concepts in the Economics of Cultural Heritage in De la Torre, M. (2002) Assessing the Values of Cultural Heritage. Research Report. The Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles. Retrieved from: https://www.getty. edu/conservation/publications_resources/pdf_publications/pdf/assessing.pdf
Torres-Tupas, T. (2017). Torre de Manila developers seek SC nod to resume condo work. Newsinfo. inquirer.net. Retrieved 2 April 2017, from http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/813107/813107
Tress, B., & Tress, G. (2001). Capitalising on multiplicity: a transdisciplinary systems approach to landscape research. Landscape and Urban Planning, 57(3), 143-157.
Tsaur, S. H., Lin, Y. C., & Lin, J. H. (2006). Evaluating ecotourism sustainability from the integrated perspective of resource, community and tourism. Tourism Management, 27(4), 640- 653.
Tuan, T. H., & Navrud, S. (2008). Capturing the benefits of preserving cultural heritage. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 9(3), 326-337.
Turner, N., Gregory, R., Brooks, C., Failing, L., & Satterfield, T. (2008). From invisibility to transparency: identifying the implications. Ecology and society, 13(2).
Tversky, A., & Shafir, E. (1992). Choice under conflict: The dynamics of deferred decision. Psychological Science, 3(6), 358-361.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (1995).World Heritage List: Rice Terraces of the Cordilleras. No 722. Retrieved from: http://whc.unesco.org/ en/list/722/documents/
UNESCO. (1999-2012). State of Conservation Report for Rice Terraces of the Cordilleras for years 1999 to 2012. Retrieved from: http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/722/documents/
UNESCO. (2014). 2014 State of Conservation Report for Rice Terraces of the Cordilleras. Retrieved from: http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/722/documents/
UNESCO. (2016). 2016 State of Conservation Report for Rice Terraces of the Cordilleras. Retrieved from: http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/722/documents/
UNESCO (2008). Guidelines on the inscription of specific types of properties on the World Heritage List. Operational Guidelines 2008. Annex3. http://whc.unesco.org/archive/opguide08-en. pdf#annex3
UNESCO. (2017). World Heritage and Sustainable Development. Whc.unesco.org. Retrieved 21 March 2017, from http://whc.unesco.org/en/sustainabledevelopment/
UNESCO TV/NHK Nippon Hoso Kyokai. (2010, June). Stairways to Heaven: The Rice Terraces of the Philippines Cordilleras [mms://stream.unesco.org/culture/NHK/cordilleras_philippines. wmv]. Retrieved from http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/722/
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 54 [Culture at work]
United Nations General Assembly (UN-GA) (1987) Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. Transmitted to the General Assembly as an Annex to document A/42/427 – Development and International Co-operation: Environment.
Van Eetvelde, V., & Antrop, M., (2001). Comparison of the landscape structure of traditional and new landscapes. Some European examples in Mander, Ü., Printsmann, A., Palang, H. (Eds.), Development of European Landscapes. Conference Proceedings IALE European Conference 2001, vol. 2. Publicationes Instituti Geographici Universitatis Tartuensis: Tartu, 275.
Van Leeuwen, E. S., Nijkamp, P. & Rietveld, P. (2006). Economic Impacts of Tourism: A Meta- analytic Comparison of Regional Output Multipliers in Giaoutzi M. & Nijkamp, P. (Eds.), Tourism and Regional Development: New Pathways, Aldershot: Ashgate, 115–132.
Vanslembrouck, I. & Van Huylenbroeck, G. (2005). Impact of agriculture on rural tourism: a hedonic price approach, Journal of Agricultural Economics 56(1), 17-30.
Verbič, M., & Slabe-Erker, R. (2009). An econometric analysis of willingness-to-pay for sustainable development: a case study of the Volčji Potok landscape area. Ecological Economics, 68(5), 1316-1328.
Vucetich, J. A., Bruskotter, J. T., & Nelson, M. P. (2015). Evaluating whether nature’s intrinsic value is an axiom of or anathema to conservation. Conservation Biology, 29(2), 321-332.
Walsh, M. (1997). The view from the farm: farmers and agri-environmental schemes in the Yorkshire Dales. The North West Geographer, 1, 17-28.
Walter, R. K., & R. J. Hamilton. 2014. A cultural landscape approach to community-based conservation in Solomon Islands. Ecology and Society 19(4), 41.
Weisbrod, B. A. (1964). Collective-consumption services of individual-consumption goods. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 78(3), 471-477.
Williams, R. (1985). Keywords. A Vocabulary of Culture and Society; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK.
Wondolleck, J. M., & Yaffee, S. L. (2000). Making collaboration work: Lessons from innovation in natural resource management. Island Press.
Zhang, R. (2017). World Heritage listing and changes of political values: a case study in West Lake Cultural Landscape in Hongzhou, China. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 23(3), 215-233.
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 55 [Culture at work]
List of abbreviations
BRTTF Banaue Rice Terraces Task Force CA Cultural Assets CC Cultural Commons CES Cultural Ecosystem Services CPH Census of Population and Housing CVM Cultural Values Model DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources ES Ecosystem Services Framework GIAHS Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems ICHO Ifugao Cultural Heritage Office IRTCHO Ifugao Rice Terraces and Cultural Heritage Office ITC Ifugao Terraces Commission MA Millennium Ecosystem Assessment POPCEN Census of Population PSA Philippines Statistics Authority SITMo Save the Ifugao Terraces Movement TEEB The Economics of Ecosystem Biodiversity UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UN-GA United Nations General Assembly WHL World Heritage List WHS World Heritage Site
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 56 [Culture at work]
Index of figures and Tables
Batad Rice Terraces...... p. 8 Banaue Rice Terrace...... p. 14 The cultural value model...... p. 21 The three dimensions of cultural commons...... p. 24 Comparative merits of a multidisciplinary approach...... p. 26 A village in the Batad rice terraces...... p. 27 The Ifugao Province and rice terraces location map...... p. 30 The five rice terraces clusters inscribed in the unesco World Heritage List...... p. 31 The Ifugao Rice Terraces System...... p. 32 Ifugao Rituals associated with the agricultural calendar defined by the Tinawon or “once-a- year” crop...... p. 33
Table 1: Summary of economic valuation methodologies relating to cultural landscapes...... p. 17 Table 2: The Ifugao Rituals associated with rice production and consumption...... p. 33 Table 3: Dates proposed for the inception of the Ifugao Rice Terraces...... p. 34 Table 4: Timeline of Major Events in the Ifugao Rice Terraces...... p. 34 Table 5: Ifugao Rice Terraces: Area Ranking, Distribution and Population...... p. 35 Table 6: Ifugao Demographic Statistics (QuickStats)...... p. 36 Table 7: Factors affecting the Ifugao Rice Terraces (1995- 2016)...... p. 36 Table 8: Efforts Implemented for the Ifugao Rice Terraces (1995- 2016)...... p. 37 Table 9: Colour-Coded Challenges and Efforts Implemented for the Ifugao Rice Terraces (1995- 2016)...... p. 37
PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURAL LANDSCAPES 57
Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 43, 10129 Torino www.fondazionesantagata.it [email protected] ISBN: 9788899745066