LINKING SOCIAL AND BIOPHYSICAL VARIABLES OF WATER GOVERNANCE: An application of the model by Angela Grace Toledo-Bruno A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry Syracuse, New York April 2009 Approved: Department of Forest and Natural Resources Management ___________________________ ____________________________ VALERIE A. LUZADIS, PhD CHRISTOPHER WHIPPS, PhD Major Professor Chair, Examining Committee ____________________________ _____________________________ DAVID H. NEWMAN, PhD S. SCOTT SHANNON Department Chairperson Dean, Instruction and Graduate Studies Acknowledgements This achievement in my academic, professional and personal endeavor is dedicated to all those who unconditionally walk with me in this journey: TO GOD and my whole family (Eric and Elijah; Mama Nene and Papa Vidal; Zeny and Mike; Ann, Obeth, Jami and Emil; Boyet, Des, Karen, Francis and Nathalie) – the reason for my existence. To Prof. Valerie A. Luzadis, a mentor and a friend, who broadened my understanding of how the world works, who offered her wisdom and hugs so I continue to hang on in my academic journey; To Prof. Sharon D. Moran, Dr. John G. Ferrante, Prof. John S. Stella for the ideas in the conceptualization of this study; to Prof. Richard Smardon, Prof. Robin Kimmerer, Prof. Chris Whipps, Prof. Laura Lautz and all ESF faculty who mold my intellectual abilities; To my research partners : RWSA (Engr. Maryjane; Kuya Bert Okit); DWSA (Roroy, Ate Norma, Ate Ling); MCGWSS (Ms. Gina Bionson); Malaybalay LGU (Ms. Dadang, Ms. Aileen); DCWD (Sir Nilo Garcia; Roger, Ms. Lea Flores); NAPOCOR (Engr. Alfred Macamay, Roy Aguanta; Allan Nallano; Engr. Eric); NIA (Engr. Kris Orqui, Ate Rose Pastrano, LIA BODs), Ate Ging Morales, Ayi Amor, Thea Rivera, Jonathan Rizalda and all my respondents who shared their time, views and sentiments so I will better understand the many facets of water governance; To my “advisors”: Pedro Walpole, S.J., Engr. Ray Rodriguez, Eric Bruno, Andres Ignacio, Prof. Raul Orongan for their valuable ideas to improve my research; To my support group: (Philippines) Emily, Ruby, Nara, my CMU-CF colleagues, Ting, Wing, Rommel, Reza, Sayong, Veron, Alice, IFP Cohort 2005; (Syracuse): Tita Lhee, Aileen, Yaying, Dennis, Marvin, Arnold, Renato, Nilo, Chellie, Melissa, Carla, Andrew, Michaela, Suzzane, Julie, Amanda; Jess, Zeny, Auntie Delen, Kate, Kris and Jessica; for the encouragement, prayers, laughter, advise and free food! To the International Fellowship Program of the Ford Foundation (Ms. Tammy), the Philippine Social Science Council (Ma’am Luisa Lucas-Fernan and Ma’am Dada Doble), International Social Forestry Fund (Prof. Allan Drew) and the taxpayers of New York for providing me the opportunity for professional growth. To all water users, the governance actors and the water resources for the inspiration to work on this study. Madakel/Daghang/Maraming salamat po! TO GOD BE THE GLORY! ii Table of Contents Cover page ……….………. i Acknowledgements ……….………. ii Table of Contents ……….………. iii List of Tables ……….………. v List of Figures ……….………. vi List of Appendices ……….………. ix Abstract ……….………. x CHAPTER 1. Introduction ……….………. 1 1.1. Research overview ……….………. 1 1.2. Water governance in the Philippine context ……….………. 3 Historical background of water resource governance ……….………. 3 The evolution of Philippine environmental policies ……….………. 6 Philippine water institutions and politics ……….………. 9 CHAPTER 2: UNDERSTANDING WATER GOVERNANCE: ………. 14 AN ANALYTICAL MODEL LINKING SOCIAL AND BIOPHYSICAL DIMENSIONS OF GOVERNANCE Abstract ……….………. 14 2.1. Introduction ……….………. 14 2.2. A review on concepts and theories on governance ……….………. 18 2.3. The social dimension of water resource governance ……….………. 20 Understanding value ……….………. 20 Institutions and the institutional mechanisms ……….………. 23 Management of complex systems ……….………. 26 2.4. The biophysical dimension of water resource governance ……….………. 30 2.5. An alternative model to understand water governance ……….………. 31 2.6. Suggested methods when applying the governance framework ……….………. 36 2.7. Application and Contribution of the Framework to Understanding ……….…… 38 water resource governance iii 2.8. Challenges, limitations and caveats ……….………. 40 CHAPTER 3. LINKING SOCIAL AND BIOPHYSICAL VARIABLES……… 42 OF GOVERNANCE: Cases of water governance in Bukidnon, Philippines Abstract ……….………. 42 3.1. Background of the study ……….………. 42 The research problem ……….………. 42 Rationale of the study ……….………. 45 3.2. Theoretical and conceptual framework of the study ……….………. 46 3.3. Objectives and methodology of the study ……….………. 50 Location of research sites ……….………. 50 Objectives of the study ……….………. 50 Research methods ……….………. 52 Limitations of the study ……….………. 57 3.4. Results and Discussion ……….………. 58 The social and biophysical variables of governance ……….………. 58 Water users’ values ……….………. 60 Institutions and institutional mechanisms ……….………. 62 Management goals and interventions ……….………. 66 Quantity and quality of water resources ……….………. 68 Linkages and gaps in governance ……….………. 79 3.5. Water governance gap analysis model: insights and learnings ……….………. 87 3.6. Conclusion and recommendations ……….………. 89 CHAPTER 4. CONCLUSIONS ……….………. 94 LITERATURE CITED ……….………. 97 APPENDICES ……….………. 105 RESUME ……….………. 196 iv LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1. Philippine environmental laws ……….………. 8 Table 1. 2. Water Institutions and Organizations in the Philippines and Bukidnon … 11 Table 2.1. Key questions and methods ……….………. 37 Table 3.1. Case profile ……….………. 53 Table 3.2. Criteria for gap analysis ……….………. 56 Table 3.3. Interview data results ……….………. 59 Table 3.4. Physical characteristics of study sites/cases ……….………. 69 Table 3.5. Summary of biophysical results ……….………. 71 Table 3.6. Instantaneous contaminant load (ICL) ……….………. 73 Table A.1. Profile of respondents ……….………. 108 Table A.2. Organizations/agencies operating in the research sites ……….………. 109 Table A.3. Area per land cover type in Manggipanaw catchment ……….………. 119 Table A. 4. Area per land cover type in Agutayan catchment ……….………. 129 Table A. 5. Area per land cover type in Kibalabag catchment ……….………. 141 Table A.6. Area per land cover type in Pinamaloy Lake catchment ……….………. 155 Table A. 7. Area per land cover type in Laligan catchment ……….………. 169 Table A. 8. Area per land cover type in Pulangi Lake catchment ……….……… 181 Table A.9. Summary of governance dynamics across all levels (based on interviews).. 186 Table A.10. Implications of national institutions to the different levels of governance … 190 Table A.11. Water system levels applied in the Philippine potable water system …… 192 v LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1. Timeline of environmental institutions vis-à-vis political ……….………. 7 events in the Philippines Figure 2.1. Norgaard's coevolutionary thinking ……….………. 16 Figure 2.2. The total economic value framework ……….………. 21 Figure 2. 3. Water institution: illustrative inter-linkages ……….………. 25 Figure 2. 4. Water sector: institution-performance linkages ……….………. 25 Figure 2.5. Flow chart of integrated water resource management ……….………. 28 Figure 2.6. Three dimensions of water governance in the Philippines ….……… 32 Figure 2.7. 3 Pillars and 1 beam, the basis for quality river basin evaluations ……. 32 Figure 2.8. The water governance model ……….………. 35 Figure 3.1. The water governance gap analysis model ……….………. 47 Figure 3.2. Land cover of Bukidnon indicating location of research sites ……….. 51 Figure 3.3. Estimated stream discharge ……….………. 75 Figure 3.4. Discharge ratio ……….………. 75 Figure 3.5. Monthly total rainfall in Malaybalay, Bukidnon ……….………. 76 Figure 3.6. Monthly total rainfall per municipality in Bukidnon ……….………. 76 Figure 3.7. Total suspended solids (TSS) in study sites ……….………. 77 Figure 3.8. Nitrate concentration in study sites ……….………. 77 Figure 3.9. Bacterial contamination in study sites ……….………. 78 Figure 3.10. Percentage of tree/woodland and cropland per catchment.…….………. 78 Figure 3.11. Water governance gap analysis: case 1 ……….………. 80 Figure 3.12. Water governance gap analysis: case 2 ……….………. 80 vi Figure 3.13. Water governance gap analysis: case 3 ……….………. 80 Figure 3.14. Water governance gap analysis: case 4 ……….………. 80 Figure 3.15. Water governance gap analysis: case 5 ……….………. 81 Figure 3.16. Water governance gap analysis: case 6 ……….………. 81 Figure A. 1. Land cover map of Manggipanaw catchment ……….………. 118 Figure A.2. Manggipanaw Stream estimated discharge ……….………. 120 Figure A.3. Manggipanaw Stream bacterial analysis ……….………. 120 Figure A.4. Manggipanaw Stream total suspended solids (TSS) ……….………. 120 Figure A.5. Manggipanaw Stream nitrate concentration ……….………. 120 Figure A.6. Land cover map of Agutayan catchment ……….………. 128 Figure A.7. Agutayan Stream estimated discharge ……….………. 130 Figure A.8. Agutayan Stream bacterial analysis ……….………. 130 Figure A.9. Agutayan Stream total suspended solids (TSS) ……….………. 131 Figure A.10. Agutayan Stream nitrate concentration ……….………. 131 Figure A.11. Land cover map of Kibalabag catchment ……….………. 140 Figure A.12. Kibalabag River total suspended solids (TSS) ……….………. 142 Figure A.13. Kibalabag River nitrate concentration ……….………. 142 Figure A.14. Kibalabag River estimated discharge ……….………. 143 Figure A.15. Kibalabag River bacterial analysis ……….………. 144 Figure A.16. Land cover map of Pinamaloy catchment ……….………. 154 Figure A.17. Pinamaloy Lake