Shelter Development for Informal Settler Families (PH0054)

What is the public problem that the commitment will address?: The commitment will attempt to address two glaring issues confronting the government at present towards the establishment of a sustainable resettlement program- 1) the continuous downward spiral in the state of well-being of families resettled in inadequate government sites and 2) how to carry out peoplecentered, rights-based, and community-led shelter undertaking of families about to be displaced due to typhoon Yolanda and Oplan Likas programme. The supply driven shelter program of the National Government and Local Government Units have not been responsive to the needs, aspirations and paying capacities of the Informal Settler Families. Continued implementation without the requisite social preparation and developmental activities such as Community Organizing and Community Development leads to inefficient use of public funds as beneficiary families inadvertently pay for the inadequacies in locational advantage, basic facilities and social services in off-site resettlement projects.; What is the commitment?: PCUP in coordination with the national government agencies (NHA, SHFC and the DILG) will implement Community Organizing and Community Development programs for the following: • 18 Resettlement Sites established 2013-2016 under “Oplan Likas” • 12 Resettlement Sites established 2016-present under “Oplan Likas” • 29 Old Resettlement Sites established 1994-2012 • 25 Pre-Resettlement People’s Organizations in the NCR established 2013-present.; How will the commitment contribute to solve the public problem?: The CO-CD undertaking aims to strengthen and capacitate informal settler families to become active partners of the National and Local Governments in the planning and implementation of truly responsive shelter and housing initiatives/solutions. This pioneering approach to be attempted by the PCUP will result in a much more participative and client driven implementation of the Government’s Socialized Housing Program. Being “People Centered”, this innovation will thus result in more responsive and “grounded” policies and programs that will be more sensitive and attuned to the complexities of housing the informal settler families.; Why is this commitment relevant to OGP values?: Transparency Community Organizing and Community Development will be documented through profiling of Community Issues and Actions. Such documents will be made public through Open Data Philippines Accountability Issues based organizing being the grounding of PCUP’s CO-CD approach involves the identification of relevant stakeholders and holding them to their mandates in the resolution of issues on Basic and Social Services as well as adequacy of housing units constructed Participation The empowerment of client communities through the CO-CD approach increases their levels of participation and “owning” of the project /undertaking thus ensuring sustainability and responsiveness of the housing program.; Additional information: This commitment is in line with Chapter 5 of the Philippine Development Plan 2017-2022 on Ensuring People-Centered, Clean, and Efficient Governance. This pursuit also supports the pronouncement of President Duterte during the National Housing Summit in NHA, to wit: 1. All disaster-related housing now free. 2. No demolition without relocation 3. Prioritization of onsite development, incity relocation 4. Comprehensive resettlement townships with full public utilities and services 5. Climate resilient homes 6. Livelihood and employment as central response to urban poverty, anchored on national industrialization and genuine land reform.

10. Improve delivery of public services by capacitating Informal Settler Families and Resettled Families through Community Organizing and Community Development (CO-CD) Approach

Commitment text from action plan:

“PCUP in coordination with the national government agencies (NHA, SHFC and the DILG) shall implement Community Organizing and Community Development programs for the following:

• 18 Resettlement Sites established 2013-2016 under “Oplan Likas”
• 12 Resettlement Sites established 2016-present under “Oplan Likas”
• 29 Old Resettlement Sites established 1994-2012
• 25 Pre-Resettlement People’s Organizations in the NCR established 2013-present.”

Milestones: ^[141]

1. "Conduct CO-CD activities in 59 relocation sites
2. CO-CD in 25 People’s Plan under the Social Housing and Finance Corporation’s High Density Housing Program by December 2018
3. Conduct CO-CD activities in 59 relocation sites
4. CO-CD in 25 People’s Plan under the Social Housing and Finance Corporation’s High Density Housing Program by December 2019"

Editorial Note: For the complete text of this commitment, please see Philippines’ action plan at https://www.opengovpartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Philippines_-Action-Plan_2017-2019_updated.pdf

Context and Objectives (Commitment Design)

This commitment aimed to help improve the condition of resettlement areas through the conduct of “people-centered, rights-based and community-led” Community Organizing and Community Development (CO-CD). CO-CD, implemented by the Presidential Commission for the Urban Poor (PCUP) and other key agencies, would ensure that relocatees are involved in the planning, resource management, and implementation of shelter and housing projects. ^[142] To achieve this, the commitment aimed to support the strengthening of “People’s Plans,” which organized communities in the country formulated. ^[143]

The Housing Industry Roadmap of the Philippines pegged the housing backlog at 3.9 million housing units as of 2012, with an estimated 832,000 homeless families. ^[144] The housing backlog is expected to increase to 10.1 million in 2030, according to this roadmap. ^[145] The Medium-Term Development Plan (MTPDP) 2011–2016, meanwhile, pegged the housing backlog at 5.6 million in 2016. The number of families in slum areas in city centers where services and jobs are more accessible is also growing exponentially. The urban housing problem is characterized by informal housing arrangements, substandard structures, congestion and overcrowded spaces, lack of access to social services, rising criminality, land use conflicts, and supply shortages. ^[146] Meanwhile, resettlement areas are inadequate in ensuring the well-being of resettled families. Relocation sites have incomplete facilities, insufficient supply of light and power, and limited access to livelihood, school, and other social services. ^[147]

The 1987 Philippine Constitution guarantees that “that the State will make available at affordable cost, decent housing and basic services to underprivileged and homeless citizens in urban centers and resettlement areas,” and the Philippines has two main laws designed to address the housing problem – the Urban Development and Housing Act (UDHA) of 1992 and the Comprehensive Shelter Finance Act (CISFA) of 1994. ^[148] Nevertheless, the inadequate housing conditions persist.

The commitment contained a long list of CO-CD activities in a target number of relocation sites. Despite having some verifiable activities, it was challenging to determine which among the many relocation sites in the country were supposed to be covered by this commitment and how different this commitment was from ongoing CO-CD work of the PCUP and other housing agencies.

If fully implemented as written, this commitment was expected to have minor potential impact. The commitment stood to empower a number of citizens who were affected by the housing crisis by facilitating their participation in decision-making processes. Although the government is already investing resources to address the housing deficit, the participation of citizens, and the potential beneficiaries in particular, would help ensure that resources are allocated more efficiently in response to beneficiary needs.

While such participation was anticipated as a positive development in service delivery in this area, the commitment was limited in scope. Specifically, efforts to sustainably address the needs and concerns of relocatees would also need to consider other important factors such as sustaining government support and investment and sustaining steady sources of livelihood. The IRM also found that the CO-CD approach was a common feature of other resettlement processes prior to this commitment, and it was thus unclear how the commitment would represent or lead to a significant improvement from the status quo. ^[149]

Commitment Implementation

This commitment’s implementation was limited at the end of the implementation period. According to the government’s end-of-term self-assessment report, the limited completion of the key milestones 2 and 4, which cover CO-CD implementation in 50 total People’s Plans under the Social Housing and Finance Corporation’s High Density Housing Program, is particularly notable.

This commitment did not result in a change in government practices in regard to citizen participation in public service delivery. As noted above, this commitment aimed to ensure the conduct of “people-centered, rights-based and community-led” activities that would ensure that the relocatees were involved in the planning, resource management, and implementation of shelter and housing projects. The government provided evidence of many capacity-building and dissemination activities across the country in 2018 and 2019. However, there is no evidence that these activities led to widespread citizen engagement in key moments of the delivery of public services, such as planning and resource management in resettlement efforts. As there is limited mention of citizens being consulted about specific problems facing their settlement locations, ^[150] these activities do not, as envisioned, ensure citizens are “active partners of the National and Local Governments in the planning and implementation of truly responsive shelter and housing initiatives/solutions.” ^[151]

Next steps

The IRM shared the following recommendations with stakeholders during the prepublication review period for the design section of this report. They are included below for public record. ^[152]

• Given that the CD-CO approach is ongoing and there are numerous resettlement areas in the country with varying levels of urgency/ seriousness of needs, the IRM researcher recommends this commitment be carried forward in future action plans. As a design improvement, the government could consider targeting and giving priority to those communities with fewer CD-CO capacities.
• Future commitments can also be enhanced by exploring whether or how to add components that will make use of access to information and enhanced accountability to contribute to relocatees’ improved well-being.