Review of Related Literature
The UNDP (2011) describes development as: “the three essentials of development include the ability to lead a long and healthy life, to acquire knowledge and to have a decent standard of life. Development can be then also measured by looking into main development points such as: * Employment * Poverty * Health * Education * Social Cohesion * Security * Governance
From the points above, we could set up parameters to measure. Taking for example security, we could measure development as we look into data regarding crime rates, number of security personal and etc. . Another basis is the GNP and GDP of a country or state as net income could become a factor to measure development quantitatively (Turtle, 2011).
Moreover, to form a more holistic view of development, Smith and Todaro (2012) determined the three core values in development; namely – sustenance, self-esteem and freedom. First, sustenance is a value that indicates one’s ability to meet basic needs. This needs specifically comprise of food shelter health and protection. When people lack these needs, it is suggested by Smith and Todaro that these people are underdeveloped. Second, having self-esteem is part of the core values. This is a determinant on how one may value respect, dignity and principle. These values may help an individual to be recognized in a community to bring honor in an individual. It is believed by Smith and Todaro that having self-esteem will be better for an individual who works hard to meet his needs and participate in the community. Lastly, freedom from servitude is also important in development. This is freedom to live away from oppression. Choices could be made and decided by an individual without constraints and intervention from others. As suggested by Smith and Todaro an individual may choose according to one’s preference with this development value to support his needs and wants as a person.
Having explained a brief overview of what should be in thought in decision making and planning of development projects, we then move on to the topic of the study – relocation. To begin, economic development relies on construction of new physical infrastructure to cater to the increasing needs of growing populations. Infrastructure development, in turn, often requires acquisition of land and other assets that are privately owned. Such acquisition can adversely affect the socioeconomic well-being of the people whose assets are acquired, as well as the communities they live in. Impacts include physical relocation, disruption of livelihoods, and potential breakdown of communities.
Resettlement can have serious repercussions that cannot be exclusively measured in economic terms. Breakdown of established community relationships, social disarticulation among people who find themselves in a different socio-cultural environment can be severe if efforts to design and implement resettlement programs are not sensitive to the needs and preferences of communities.
Well-designed and well-implemented resettlement can, however, turn involuntary resettlement into a development opportunity. The challenge is to not treat resettlement into a development opportunity. The challenge is to not treat resettlement as an imposed externality but to see it as an integral component of the development process and to devote the same level of effort and resources to resettlement preparation and implementation as to the rest of the project. Treating resettlers as project beneficiaries can transform their lives in ways that are hard to conceive of if they are viewed as projects that affected people who somehow have to be assisted so that the main project can proceed.
Implementing resettlement as a development program not only helps the people who are adversely affected but also promotes easier, less-troubled implementation of development projects. Projects that do not address resettlement issues adequately are often subject to delays because of opposition from displaced persons. Displacement necessitating involuntary resettlement of populations can be caused by a variety of triggers, including natural disasters, such as earthquakes, hurricanes, and floods; political events, such as wars and internal conflicts; and resettlement addresses only issues related to development-induced displacement, offer the means and mechanisms to help DPs improve their standards of living. Development-induced displacement provides a unique opportunity for the project team to systematically plan and implement the resettlement program on the basis of consultations with the DPs, along with making adequate provisions for funding, implementation arrangements, monitoring, and redress of grievances. Failure to capitalize on the tremendous potential of development-induced displacement to improve the lives of resettlers would impose a high opportunity cost on the development process.
Realizing the development impact of well implemented resettlement programs, some countries, states, and private sector companies consciously design development-oriented programs that follow standards higher than the minimum needed to restore people’s standards of living. The argument for providing such resettlement assistance is that the incremental effort helps achieve overall development of the displaced community and that this overall development results in savings because the resettled community does not need to be targeted for different development programs. It could be years before the development results in savings because the resettled community does not need to be targeted for different development programs. It could be years before the development process touches a resettled community again, so it makes good sense to address most of the community’s development needs as part of the resettlement program.
The challenge of resettlement is no longer restricted to large infrastructure projects with substantial resettlement impacts; many projects require minor land acquisition or relocate people only a few hundred meters. A linear project cuts through many administrative jurisdictions, posing a unique institutional challenge to resettlement practitioners. An increasing number of projects do not involve any land acquisition or physical relocation, but they impose restrictions on people’s access to legally designated parks and protected areas. Diverse approaches are needed to address the impacts of such restrictions on the livelihoods of affected people. Resettlement practitioners have duly responded to approaches and methodologies applicable to different situations.
Involuntary resettlement is an essential and historically underappreciated aspect of development. Unsuccessful resettlement has often been the result of both a lack of insensitivity to this issue and a deficiency of operational guidance on the “how to” of resettlement design and implementation. In fact today, many governments are convinced of the need to adopt a “resettlement-with-development” approach and provide affected people with benefits from the projects that displace them. Although attitudes toward resettlement have undergone a sea change for the better over the past decade, this book aims to fill the current gap in available guidance on resettlement. It is hoped that global practice will benefit from lessons learned by the World Bank. By helping people plan and implement better resettlement programs, this book will make a difference in the lives of people displaced by development projects around the world (IRS, 2004).
With assistance from multinational agencies like the World Bank, Rural areas can also develop. As suggested by Maxwell, people in rural areas may focus on creating a symbiotic relationship in order to preserve nature and their sustainability. By practicing Green Revolution, they may be able to cover more of its necessities as rural people gather their resources from the environment.
The growth of market in rural areas depends on agriculture. Stability in economy may be possible as long they are able to gather their resources in the environment specifically agricultural products. These products can be sold to the private sector for further process to continue the flow of money and resources from rural areas to urban areas. However, food security will still be a concern for those in rural areas for them to focus more on agriculture rather than other industries (Maxwell, 2001).
Policies may also be formulated in order to protect and regulate the agricultural production. In this manner, the rural people can secure their food. However, if these policies fail, they may freely control their agricultural production and build partnerships among themselves before linking to bigger and broader companies in regions who needs their raw products. By following the Green Revolution, they may also adapt to the changes and go for sustainable agriculture. This aims to create social mobilization among the rural people in order for them to broaden their scope when it comes to agricultural products (Maxwell, 2013).
In the paper explained by Cavaye (2001), he suggested that there are ways to successful develop a rural community. First, the community must be able to build partnerships among communities and organizations that could help them develop in various ways. In this manner, the community will be able to expand its network and are capable to share resources to develop the community. Secondly, the community must gather their constituents to form a plan and act accordingly. By doing this, the projects of the community will have a path to take on as they go with the project. Having a directed path to development will help them achieve their goals and focus for the benefit of the community. Thirdly, the community must be accessible and open to all. Information and services must be shared among them. This is to develop also participation among its constituents and may also extend their networks for more intervention. Also they may initiate coordination to further improve their integration on planning for the community. The community will also be able to build systems that will create interactive relationships and thus, provide cooperation among individuals and organizations to help a certain community. Lastly, a close relationship with the constituents in a community is needed in order to know the strengths of the community and identifying assets in business, agriculture and infrastructure which should be maximized in order to gather optimum outputs from their projects. This will also aid the people in directing their community to what they have envisioned in the process.
However, community development workers also encounter challenges according to Cavaye (2001). Challenge in values of a community since they will need to consider the priorities set by the communities. Another challenge is on confidence. This is to check the ability of the community developers to arrive at the best result for the project. Funding, planning and competency of the development workers are being tested in this case. There is also a challenge in perception for the development workers as they help a community. This is where their relationship with the community comes in. They should be able to grasp the minds of the people whether they want to change or stick with their traditional plans. Participation of the community members is also a challenge. Some may not be able to participate since they might not be active or disinterested in the focus of the plans. That is why the plan should be integrated to touch most of the sectors in the community. Lastly, the government plays a major role in community development. In this case, the intervention from the government must be effective to gain the trust of the people. They must be reactive and responsive to the concerns of their people (Cavaye, 2001).
Not only should the community be active in the process, but also a chance for NGOs to help in managing and assisting the LIAC in charge of the project. NGOs (Non-government Organizations) play a vital role in disseminating information and assisting the LGU (Local Government Units) in their projects to alleviate, or at the least improve living standards in the urban sector. A group of NGOs in Cebu City, Philippines formed Kaagab in order to lobby the needs and concerns in the processes of the LGU. Since the establishment of this NGO coalition in 1992, they have actively engaged and participated alongside the local city government in order to help execute and recommend programs and policies for LGU projects such as governance, livelihood, housing and social welfare.
Soon after the Marcos democracy in 1986, followed a wave of establishment and partnerships to create NGOs and People’s Organizations (PO) which was recognized in the 1986 constitution by Corazon Aquino. These organizations were initiated to participate in all levels of social, political and economic decision making. It is also in the Local Government Code of the Philippines (1991) to provide mechanism to enable the common folk participate in local governance. The Comprehensive Commission for the Urban Poor (CCUP) was created in 1998 Tomas Osmena, who won the position of city mayor, wherein it was the pioneer of its kind in the country recruited NGO leaders and various development workers to join and plan for projects to address the needs of the urban poor which prevailed during that time. Seeing the effectiveness of the CCUP, numerous NGO formed a coalition which would be Kaagab.
One of the issues tackled by Kaagab was the housing especially securing land tenure by the urban poor community. Even before the Urban Development and Housing Act (UDHA) was created in 1992, the CCUP had already started such tasks and requirements to spearhead projects addressing the affected sector; land inventory, identification of relocation sites and describing who were qualified in socialized housing programs were some of the endeavors that the CCUP had already started, moreover, accomplished. The Pagtambayayong Foundation was their version of a Community Mortgage Program (CMP), which later on adopted as a national program in succeeding programs for socialized housing. The CMP was a partner of the local government in undertaking processes like community mobilization, supervision and implementation of CMP/LGU projects, loan collection, site acquisition and furthermore, the development of acquired resettlement sites.
In 1997, the city identified 517 lots suitable for socialized housing in 37 barangays. 3 years after, the city government entered a memorandum with Pagtambayayong and Lorega Homeowners Association and allocated a loan amounting to PHP 822,474 for the construction of starter houses for 150 victims of a fire incident in the area. From 1990 up to November of 2003, the city government spent PHP 293,764,884 for lot acquisitions for low-cost housing which benefited 497 homeowner associations totaling to 41,570 households.
The advocacy of the Fellowship for Organizing Endeavors (FORGE) focuses on fast tracking the delivery of basic services for on-site and off-site relocation, a moratorium on demolition without acceptable relocation and NGO/PO representation on the Local Housing Board. The formation of Tawhanong Pagpuyo, which a tripartite body composed of GO (Government Organization) –NGO-PO embodied by FORGE, Department of Welfare for Urban Poor (DWUP) and another NGO, the Community Organizing in the Philippine Enterprises, facilitated the first formal coordination between national shelter agencies and the city government which was held in 1999 which resulted into resolving problems in 13 barangays. Since 2001, two PO representatives and an NGO have been participating in the Local Housing Board. FORGE has also paved the way in organizing and facilitating lot acquisitions for the relocation of KAPASAR, a PO whose approximate number of members are 1,000 where relocated after their shanties were demolished to pave the way for the construction of the South Coastal road. Partnering up with FORGE, World Vision, another NGO, provided financial assistance amounting to PHP 25,000 for each household to KAPASAR members for wall construction.
Rooting from the KAPASAR experience, NGOs like FORGE initiated steps for securing off-site relocation sites and site development for their beneficiaries. Subsequently, the event produced a manual containing guidelines and processes for acquisition and disposition of acquired resettlement sites which were proven effective through testing by the DWUP.
Moving into depth with the study and the nature of the relocation project, it has been proven that the development and existence of an effective railway system would help enhance the economy in numerous ways. As observed in Sweden, major cities namely Stockholm, Gothenburg and Malmö were interconnected by a railway system in 1864 promoted economic activities such as trading by providing an efficient transport system. In Philippine context, developing the existing railway system would not only help decongest the highly dense metropolitan area but would also jumpstart economic growth and progress in the region.
The Philippine National Railway (PNR) stretches from La Union in Central Luzon to the southern region of Bicol are deteriorated through weather and are infested by informal settlers that reside along the tracks. Regardless the danger of in residing in these areas, migrants would still opt to stay in these areas which are significantly cheaper that flats in the metro.
The Northrail-Southrail Linkage Project (NSLP) called for the relocation of these informal settlers along the rail right-of-way of the PNR. Since the project started, 20,211 families out of the total of 37,416 in the northern segment had been already relocated clearing the 32.08 kilometer of the Northrail system. In the southern part of the railway, 6,126 of 50,313 families have been relocated in settlements south of the National Capital Region. An assessment of previous project dealing with resettlement and relocation showed that the people who were beneficiaries of these projects returned to the previously cleared areas. Other cases would show that families would either refuse to pay the monthly amortization or were unable to continue to fund the house. There were also some reports that owners eventually sold their properties or abandoned their house. Administrative Order No. 111 in 2004 was issued by Former President Arroyo which mandated the Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council (HUDCC) to take charge of the resettlement and relocation programs and designated the National Housing Authority (NHA) as the implementing agency for the NSLP.
The previous resettlement programs under the NHA had a history of resistance with shades of violence from the members of the informal community to be relocated. Programs are mostly subsidized from land acquisitions to site development. Several key factors contributed to the exodus of lot owners from the lots: (Valenciano, 2007)
-Unsatisfactory conditions in the resettlement sites, such as inadequate spatial provisions in lot or unit sizes, road widths;
-Lack of livelihood or employment and commercial opportunities;
-Lack or absence of community facilities such as schools, hospitals or clinics;
-Distant, inaccessible sites which made the relocation traumatic and economically dislocated household heads from their sources of income; and
-Substandard quality of housing components and land development, owing to the haste in project implementation or unscrupulous practices by developers.
Other concerns confronted during relocation were:
a) refusal of recipient Local Government Units (LGUs) to accept relocatees from other areas;
b) lack of understanding of the affected families on the relocation process;
c) uncertainty in the continuity of National Government Agencies’ (NGAs) and LGU support in the provision of basic services; and d) lack or absence of private sector support in the delivery of services and livelihood interventions. If those problems or concerns are not addressed, those relocatees would again squat elsewhere, thereby rendering the whole resettlement program fruitless.
The relocation projects would have the existing National Bilibid Prison (NBP) to be transferred to Tanay, Rizal as the 50-hectare portion of the NBP reservation areas has been identified as a resettlement site for informal settlers that would come from 8.30 km railway track along Muntinlupa City with an estimate of 10,555 families. The land use plan for the whole 416-hectare NBP compound was drafted by the Metro Manila Urban Services for the Poor Project (MMUSP) of the HUDCC and the Asian Development Bank.
In accordance to the provisions of Presidential Proclamation 234 to formulate guidelines for the disposition of the property, the Local Inter-Agency Committee (LIAC) was formed by the following national and local agencies: HUDCC as the lead agency, NHA as the project administrator, Department of Justice and Bureau of Corrections which were the land owners, Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) for land-titling, Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) for the necessary infrastructure such as road network and development and the Local Government of Muntinlupa City and its Local Housing Board.

--------------------------------------------
[ 1 ]. The Community Mortgage Program (CMP) aims to secure land tenure for the landless poor by giving financial assistance for the purchase of land in order to resettle away from areas of priority development.
[ 2 ]. The starter houses consist of firewalls and a two vault septic tank.
[ 3 ]. The Local Housing Board is expected to give out clear policy directions/guidelines and develop and implement a housing plan for the city, with an emphasis on social housing as primary strategy.
[ 4 ]. World Vision is a Christian humanitarian organization dedicated to working with children, families, and their communities worldwide to reach their full potential by tackling the causes of poverty and injustice.
[ 5 ]. “Spotlight on Sweden”, Johnson (1995)
[ 6 ]. National Housing Authority Status Report of Northrail-Southrail Linkage Project (June, 2006)