＜DAY 02＞ (April 26, 2006)
The session started at 8:05 in the morning with an ice breaker from Sri
Lanka participant followed by the invocation.
Case Presentation 3: UST (Unnayan Shahojogy Team) Bangladesh
(By: Munirul Huq & Nazma Begum)
Moderator: Mariper Mercader
Highlights of the Presentation:
 Brief Profile of Bangladesh
 Background of UST
 Context of the area
 Group (Samity) Formation
 GUP Formation and Development
 Bangladesh Government Structure
Central
Divisional
District
Thana
Union
 Vision – People’s Development is in People’s Hand
 Goal – Women Empowerment
(Shabolombee Gram (A Self-Help Village)
 Target Population – the Poor & Poorest of the Rural Community
 Working areas – UST work in different areas of Bangladesh especially they
are from the northern part.
 GUP Structure
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development
April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines
15
GUP STRUCTURE
Executive Body
of
GUP
11 members -1 Pres.
1 Sec.
1 Treas.
8 Gen. members
General Body
of
GUP
Village Representative
COMMUNITY
Community
Village
*10 -15 members in each committee
* village representative comes from the shamity, after being member of
shamity it then becomes a member of GUP
Presentation of the PO Member:
 UST started its activities in the community in 1986 and the PO becomes a
member of that organization
 people do not have their own identity yet then UST helps them
 UST started its activity with the small group
 When UST came to us we learned to the value of saving (1 cup of rice a
day)
 there are 60 shamity
 most of the members do not know how to write their name but through
UST they learned at least to write their names
 UST had put up non formal school in the area
 GO demands in exchange of something. But now with their union they
can protest themselves for support from the GO
 as we draw in the picture of our community there were different types of
difficulties (e.g. hygiene/sanitation problem). All people became together
and ask GO support to solve sanitation problem
 now they work jointly with GO, UST, GUP and takes care of their
organization
(Please refer to Annex 7 for the details of the presentation).
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development
April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines
16
Salient points/Clarifications:
Q: What is the role of men in your organization? What is the role of the
LGU in your organization?
Response: Ther are no men, all women. LGU has no participation but with
the formation of GUP the LGU started to get involved. Female dominated
our men. Our target is to support women not to be prostituted.
Q: What is the involvement of men in your community:
Response: We came from the poorest community where there is domination
and abuse by men in our society. It happened in our home/family were
female are abused by men. My parents handed me over to a man. In our
place we had a difficulty with our collaboration with LGU/GO. But with
GUP we started to work collaborately (100% sanitation of the village). GUP is
ready to do programs with the LGU.
Q: How could these activities (e.g. group meeting, savings) is sustained?
Response: It is a process oriented activities. The group needs to be matured
for at least 5 years. We provided them with trainings. Through this they
became conscious on how they will manage the group. GUP is the key actor
of UST. If UST phases out GUP can run/operate for themselves. The group
have also different activities (e.g. savings mobilization). I think they can
manage themselves.
Q: UST did not give capital to GUP. GUPs money comes from their own but
you said GUP members are poor, how was it?
Q: GUP don’t seek assistance from the rich people in their area. Is this a
policy of the GUP?
Response: Its not a policy. We can ask support anywhere now that we are
already empowered.
Q: Your programs is only for women, it can create burden to them?
Response: It depends on the context of the area. In our place, male are
busy with their work. Females are the key actors in the family. It’s a
mandatory for the group members to have consultations with their
husbands.
Q: In your meetings you are only talking about microfinance but not talking
about women’s problem. Do you discuss women problem in your meetings?
Response: There is a forum for sharing all kinds of issues (e.g., dowry, child
marries). We go to them and discuss with the community. GUP is a forum
for all kinds of issues among the shamity members.
Q: It is good to know that you are following stages of maturity for your group
formation, may I know how you were able to set its stage of maturity? Did
you have any experience along the way were critical indicators was not met,
what was that? Is there any difference with the roles along the way of GUP,
PO, etc.?
Response: We encourage them to move forward. We protect them from the
giant domination. Our concern is to keep money to the people’s hands so
that they can send their children to school and also for their health services.
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development
April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines
17
Framework (Stages of Maturity)
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
UST
Community
UST
C
O
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
Q: What is the contribution of men in your society?
Response: In the family level, if I take loan I buy bicycle for my husband. It’s
the contribution of women to men and the men recognize it. We don’t see
any problem about this.
Q: Who pays for the loan?
Response: It’s the men who paid the loan. They give the money to her wife to
pay for the loan.
Q: What is the strategy of UST & LGU to motivate shamity members to be
active as development workers? If there are other development partners also
working in the same area and with the same program, how do you cooperate
or complement with each other?
Response: Through motivation our program runs. The role of UST staff is to
introduce the process among the shamity members. The group becomes
mature then negotiate with the stakeholders (LGU). Government has no
rules of prohibiting development workers in the same area. It is open for all
and anybody can do it. We have monthly coordination meeting and we have
collaboration with other NGOs working in the same area.
Q: How about the protection of women and children’s rights?
Response: Women and children’s rights are protected.
After all the important issues were clarified, the core team (Joel & Edil)
presented the synthesis of key points to wit:
SYNTHESIS OF KEY POINTS:
By: Joel Quinanahan & Barangay Captain Ediltrudes Bermejo
* People’s Development in People’s Hands
Why PAD?
 Gender bias (women)
 Limited scope of empowerment
 Poverty (somes 1 meal a day)
 Children’s rights are not protected
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development
April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines
18
Processes & Strategies:
 work with female (women dev’t.)
 formation Mohila samity of all poorest women
 bottom-up from community to  gen. body (GUP)
 executive body of GUP
 provides forum (samity general assembly)
 PO development
 Employment and income generation
 Self-help savings
 Saving and sharing > age group – 18-45
Members from neighboring households
 10-15 members in each samity
 Keeping occupational homo
 1 member from 1 family in the same samity
How they capacitate:
 Training & education
How they promote participation:
 starting in small groups and legworking
 attendance to weekly meetings
Sustainability Mechanisms:
 by-laws
 personal savings < - phase out on the 5th year
- the need to invest savings
 group savings (weekly savings collection)
 formation of GUP (Central Democ. Org.)
- carry out CD process
- expedite livelihood programs
 indicators of intervention (how to balance)
 poor can generate resources
After the synthesis, Mariper took the floor and gave a summary of the issues
that arose from the lengthy discussion which are the following:
 Microfinance is evident as seen in their case study. Intervention is
more focusing on the side of the women.
 On the contextualization of NGOs intervention, there is a context why
this program was designed as such. Intervention focuses on women
since men are already employed.
 NGOs has to discuss among themselves the issue of role
complementation
 Indicators of intervention in making sure that communities are
empowered to grow along the process and how do you balance such
kind of framework.
 GO is not yet stable and there is not much collaboration. People are
independent and it fits to their context.
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development
April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines
19
Case Presentation 4: Cambodia
(By: Dr. Heng Lim Try/Sovannarith Sok/
Peanh Sinal)
Moderator: Josephine B. Alindajao
Highlights of Presentation:
 Government Structure of Cambodia
 Behavior Change Communication by National Center for Health
Promotion/MOH
 Civil Society Networking & Capacity Building by MEDiCAM
 People Participation in Development by MODE
 Cambodia Profile
 Background of NCHP/MOH
 BCC Project Purpose – to improve the capacity of national, provincial and
district health providers to deliver effective BCC in Cambodia
 BCC expected Project Results
 History of MEDiCAM
 The Mandates
 Major Activities
 Designation with organization
(Please refer to Annex 8 for further details of the presentation).
Salient points/Clarifications:
Q: Is there a duplication between the GO & NGO-made structures?
Response: The Village Development Committee members are also members
of the village network so there is no duplication but they are working
separately. VDC is working under GO, while VN is mandated by NGO.
Ministry of Rural Development
Village Dev’t. Committee
Village Network
by NGO
Q: Is there any integration with each other?
Response: Decentralization process of Cambodia is very new. Role of VN are
as observers, involved in meetings or just like an advocacy group. VN is an
advocacy network raising the voice of the people in the village to the VDC.
VDC are the ones implementing the program.
Q: How far this parallel structure would help in the decentralization of your
community? On cow bank, what was this? How does this operate?
Response: The CVO are well informed about the government structure. We
have a harmonized plan and structure. Beneficiaries of the cow bank are the
widows. Widows use this as a draft animal. It is for the widow since there
are lots of widows in my working area and some other parts of the
community. The reason we provide cow (group beneficiary) is to help them
in the farm activities. There are a lot of widows because of the civil war.
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development
April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines
20
Q: Have you experienced a networking problem?
Response: This is a pilot project. We still did not yet experience a problem.
The network is very new only started early this year.
Q: Why do you fund home-based care activity?
Response: GO has limited budget to support this type of program. AOV
truck can’t be provided by the government. NCHADs/MOH developed homebased care structure and counseling unit and is implemented by the NGO at
the grassroots level to provide awareness for HIV/AIDS.
Health Sector Structure (finalized in 1999)
PHD/MHD
OD
HC
RH
Community Network
HCMC
VHSG



We have one policy – principle for community participation
Working from the top to the community
All NGOs worked with the government
Q: What is the percentage affected by HIV?
Response: 1.9% for the whole population. Now it decreases in 2006, it was
2.6 before.
Comments/Insights:
 Cambodia has the same situation with the Philippines in terms of the
convergence of donors. They are working in parallel with the donors.
 They use participatory methodology that proves to be very effective. MOH
puts effort which changed the behavior of health workers.
After the lively exchange of ideas, the synthesis of the key points was
presented.
SYNTHESIS OF KEY POINTS:
By: Ruben G. Santos, Makiko Torikai & Corazon Tatoy
Why PAD?
 transparency and accountability
 people’s participation
 food security
 income generation
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development
April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines
21
Health Issues:
-
HIV-AIDS
Clean water and sanitation
Basic Health Care
 To improve the delivery of effective BCC
Sustainability Mechanisms:
Process:
 strengthening and capability building of PHPV & other stakeholders
 establishment of technical working groups
 establishment of provincial network
Resources:
 gathering of NGOs, Donors, bilateral and multi-lateral agencies
 resource accessing from funders
Process:
 capability building and strengthening of partners
 networking
 data base
- medi news
- library
 PTM methodology
People’s Participation:
 elect VN members who will represent in commune council
 involvement in the management and development of their community
Roles of Stakeholders:
GO:
 strengthen the national BCC/PHPU
 capability building of NCHP
 provision of BCC materials > Behavioral Change
NGO:








capacitate other NGOs
Organize Provincial Network
Active members of TWG
Advocacy
Linkage building
Co-facilitator with NCHP
Community Organizing
Community Integrated Development Project
PO: Village network
 Attend meetings to monthly commune council
 Present main needs: Annual Planning Process
 Mediator during conflict
 Info dissemination
 Attend capability building and other activities
 Community mobilization
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development
April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines
22
Community:
 Elect the VN member
 Financial Contribution for LD
Having done with the presentation of the synthesis JoBas gave a summary of
the issues/learnings to wit:
 stakeholders should avoid having duplication of structure in PAD
 In creating a committee or group, elite does not dominate the
marginalized ones
 Decentralization is new, stakeholders are working in convergence.
Worked together in participatory annual planning
Before the session ended for a lunch break, Mariper made some important
announcements.
Documenter’s Note:
It is also important to note the presence of the local media (DXRP and
Philippine Information Agency) who interviewed representatives coming from
foreign countries such as Cambodia, Sri Lanka, India, Bangladesh and Japan
to make the people of Mindanao aware about the on-going International
Workshop.
The afternoon session resumed at 1:45 with an ice breaker facilitated by
Francis of Sri Lanka.
Presentation of Backgrounder of Philippine Situation
(By: Ruben G. Santos/Cynthia B. Manlapus
& Lydio B. Sullano)
Highlights of Presentation:
 The Republic of the Philippines
 Demographics
 Language
 Religion
 Republic Act (RA) 7160 – Otherwise known as the Local Government Code
of the Philippines
(Please refer to Annex 9 for details of the presentation).
Salient points/Clarifications:
Q: What is the Development Council’s authority?
Response: The elected official of the local council comes up with policies and
laws. The Local Development Council is the development arm of the LGU.
Coming up with strategies, plans and programs it is submitted to the
municipal council for approval/adoption. Once adopted it becomes the basis
for the AIP.
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development
April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines
23
Comments:
 POs are accredited to work for their concerns.
 IPHC represents in different committees at the regional level. NGOs
representation is legal.
 LGUs are dependent to IRA. Their problem is how to maintain the
devolved functions due to limited budget.
Q: I did not understand the Philippine Organizational Structure, can you
explain further?
Response: There are 26 Cabinet members. We called them the Secretaries.
These are appointed by the President. These are political positions covered
by the Civil Service. At the regional administrative set up these are mainly
representatives of the national government agencies. These are civil service
officers.
Q: How about the inter-local health zones?
Response: These are not mandated under the local code. It is only a part of
strategies. The presenter illustrated the health sector structure as shown
below:
Health Sector Structure (Philippine Situationer)
Dept. of Health
DOH Secretary
Province
Provincial Governor
Hospitals
Province/
Dist. Hospitals
Prov’l. Health Office
Provincial Health
Officer
Regional Health Office
Regional Director
DOH Representative
Municipality
Mayor
Municipal Health
Office
MHOfficer
Brgy. Midwife & Brgy.
Health Workers
At this point in time, the arrival of the Municipal Mayor of New Corella in the
person of Mayor Jose Recarido P. Federiso was recognized.
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development
April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines
24
Case Presentation 5: SIAD New Corella Experience
Davao del Norte, Philippines
(By: Joel Quinanahan)
Highlights of Presentation:
 SIAD: The New Corella Experience
 The Partnership
 Brief Profile of New Corella
 What is SIAD? Why SIAD?
 The SIAD Development Framework
 Areas where People take part in the Process
 The Management Cycle
 Some Results of the Peoples Participation
 The Innovations
 Some SIAD Projects and Programs
 SIAD Learnings
 Barangay-based SIAD
(Please refer to Annex 10 for details of the presentation).
Salient points/Clarifications:
Q: Why did the 4 barangays did not continue the phase 2 of SIAD
implementation?
Response:
(Mayor): These 4 barangays really are not active with the process. The
personalities of the Barangay Captains are authoritarian and can dominate
even the barangay council. The SIAD process affects the political process in
the barangay.
(Joel): It is a waste of time convincing these 4 barangay captains because in
the first phase they are not interested and open to the SIAD process. Their
decisions are respected but the positive thing is that it would be a basis of
comparing area with SIAD and non-SIAD.
Q: What is the indicator of 65% below poverty line?
Response: The indicator is family income which is below P5,000/month.
SIAD started at the municipal level. The NGO brought us to Irosin for an
exposure about SIAD.
Q: How about transparency?
Response: The grassroots will recommend projects to the EBDC before they
prepare their budget. Projects being responded at the barangay level comes
from the grassroots level. The budget being made are reported by the Mayor
during the report to the people.
Q: What are the role of the stakeholders:
Response: Before the MOA was made into contract, the role of each
stakeholders was discussed during the meeting attended by the BC, POs,
Head of Office and the municipal level, NGO and sectoral representatives.
Q: How often is the BMT monitoring?
Response: No set of rules yet as to when they meet, but the monitoring is
scheduled as need arises.
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development
April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines
25
Q: How was PIAD made into SIAD?
Response: IPHC evolved into a much wholistic organization started with the
Katiwalas. Intervention of IPHC then is just a clinic. Then it slowly moved
into agriculture. In 1996 IPHC is in New Corella. Every year we do our
assessment if there is any impact of our intervention in the area. This
triggered IPHC to change its strategies. Our exposure to Irosin is an AHA
experience. It opened our eyes and shifted our paradigm. People in LIKAS
are development oriented. IPHC started with municipal entry.
Q: Can you give a specific example why business sector is involved?
Response:
(Ruth): Our organization (cooperative) is a member of the Federation. We
operate in the public market. The building we used is owned by the LGU.
We empower ourselves. Our participation in SIAD is through the planning
process since we have members who are representatives to the EBDC. We
also give health aid to the barangay. We have trust fund for calamities
(typhoon and floods). We have budget for that which the barangay can avail.
(Mayor): We encouraged our business sector to be involved in the process.
By coming up with their participation we have our common decisions
gathered. This is one of the impact of the business sector. There is an RA
were business sectors are regulated.
Q: For the barangays who did not renew the MOA, what is the position of the
NGO partners? Will they still support these barangays or the NGO have any
initiative on how to do with it – who will fund them?
Response:
(Mayor) : Since we are in democratic form of government we cannot force
them to sign or renew the MOA. Whether they decide to renew or not we are
open to that.
(Nancy): They still implement their own project since they have budget out
of the development fund.
(Mariper): The decision not to renew does not rely with the decision of the
Barangay Captains. They have their own reasons. In fairness with the ABC
they have made a move to convince the said barangays. The lesson learned
here is that Political Will is a major factor for participatory governance. It is
important to have the willingness of the political leaders to go on with the
challenges.
Q: Do you implement only the SIAD plan or are there any other plan?
Response: SIAD definition alone states it is integrated or wholistic or
comprehensive thus it has health plan, agriculture, land use plan being
discussed by the BDC. Once it is discussed and prioritized BDC approved
and adopted the package plan. There is no conflict between these plans.
Comment:
 Technically it is not correct. Land use plan is mandated. RDCs to come
up with their Municipal Framework Plan. These are the so-called mother
of all plans.
Response: There is no such the so-called SIAD Development Plan. I am
explaining the Barangay Development Plan in our case.
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development
April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines
26
Comments:
 The question was addressed to New Corella experience. Whether it is right
or wrong, it was how the barangay had implemented its plan. It might
confuse us with our different point of views. I hope our foreign friends
can realize that there are several ways on how the barangay will adopt it.
 As IPHC Participatory Local Governance is our local entrance as a
sustainable mechanism. Since NGOs come and go we are looking
structures that are permanent in the community. We have our niche that
we have to focus on.
 We don’t violate provisions on standard planning. AIP are reviewed by the
EMDC.
 It is not the duty of EMDC to be vigilant.
Q: If there is a change in political leader, what will happen to SIAD?
Response: If the Mayor and the Vice Mayor is not in good terms the project
might be changed. But if they are in good terms then the program will be
continued.
Comments:
 Since our Mayor will be ending his term, the Vice Mayor was invited to
join this workshop. We hope that we can continue with our plans with
our successor.
 In terms of the VMG the plan will remain. Though the budget might
change based on priority needs.
 We are still following a standard plan. We have a common concern and
that is the fruit of our partnership with IPHC and AHI.
 Election is a barrier. That is why we shifted to barangay-based SIAD
because the community chose the people to be elected.
Q: How do you sustain this process since there two groups the winning
parties and the opposition?
Response: Through empowerment process we involve the opposing parties.
With all the concerns clarified, the session break for a dinner and decided to
go back at 8:00 pm.
The session resumed with the case presentation of Brgy. Capt. Alex Paña.
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development
April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines
27
Case Presentation of Barangay Mambing
(By: Barangay Captain Alex Paña)
Highlights of Presentation:
 Barangay Profile
 SIAD Experience
 Process
 Tangible/Intangible Gains
 Provision of Livelihood Assistance to Farmers
 Social Infrastructure
 Facilitating/Hindering Factors
 Sustainability Mechanism
(Please refer to Annex 11 for the details of the presentation).
Salient points/Clarifications:
Q: What makes it possible to have a regular monthly meeting every month?
Response:
(BC) What triggered their attendance to meeting is that they wanted to know
the disbursement of the funds. Every assembly there is a report of the
barangay treasurer.
(Mariper): It is also a socialization venue after the meeting or general
assembly. They play basketball. Puroks are organized and conducted
meetings regularly. Maybe this one of the factors that sustain their
enthusiasm as active members of the community.
Comment:
 One beauty of SIAD in governance is there is constant interaction between
the government and the people. Relationship is built with this interaction.
It also goes down to feedbacking. There is transparency. People are
satisfied, they know it since everything had been discussed.
Q: How many members participated in the meeting?
Response: Last year, an average of 72% were attending the General
Assembly meeting even if there were cases of flooding.
Q: How much you can use for your development plan?
Response: We use 20% or P120,000 out of P680,000 Internal Revenue
Allotment
Q: What made you to be a Barangay Captain?
Response: My intention is just to serve. I am lucky because when I run into
office I have no opponent.
Q: You are in your second term and still has your last term, what are your
plans to prepare your successor?
Response: Without me the BDC can sustain the activities because they
knew the process. Without me, Mambing will still be Mambing.
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development
April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines
28
Comment/Insight:
 One of the best barangays in New Corella is Mambing. There are so many
activities we can learn from the area. But due to the peace and order
situation we decided not to include the area for the field exposure.
Having done with the open forum, synthesis of the discussion was presented.
SYNTHESIS OF KEY POINTS:
By: Josephine B. Alindajao
Why PAD?
• Community problems needs convergence of resources from all
stakeholders
• Do away from the traditional top-down planning to bottom-up
approach
• People’s empowerment
Process:
 MOA signing
 Benchmarking to Irosin, Sorsogon
 Expansion of the MDC and BDCs
 Making BDCs functional (with an average of 35 members)
 Expansion of Local Special Bodies
 Creation of a functional Technical Working Group (TWG), Project
Monitoring Council (municipal level) and Barangay Monitoring Team
(barangay level)
 Deployment of community organizers
 SAPBRIME
 Data gathering, problem identification & analysis
 Purok consultation
 EBDC planning
 EMDC workshop
 Budgeting and Resource mobilization
 Implementation
 Monitoring and Evaluation
 Capability building (at all levels)
People’s Participation:
 Providing venue to participate
 General assembly
 People’s congress
 Purok consultation & dialogue
 Membership in the LSB
 Volunteer works
 Public hearings
 Involvement in SAPBRIME
 Taho sa barangay and etc.
 Capability building (LCO training, BMT training, etc.)
 Participation rate is not less than 70%
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development
April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines
29
Role of Stakeholders:
 GO/LGU
 Initiator
 Financial support to POs, Barangays
 Political support (ordinances, EO)
• NGO
 facilitator
 Resource mobilizer
 Community organizer
 Catalyst
 Trainer
• Barangay LGU
> implementer
> integration of plans
> planner
> monitor
> financial support/fund allocation
 PO
 Provides funds
 Participate in all SIAD activities
 Ensure participatory decision making at their level
Balance Between Process and Tangible Gains:
• Followed the SIAD framework (both process
• Process has been installed, second liners identified and trained
• Tangible gains (health, economic, governance)
• Needs to do more resource mobilization to produce the gain
Sustainability Mechanisms:
 Creation of BTWG
 Designating Barangay LCOVs
 Issuance of ordinances and resolutions
 SIAD process contained in the approved long term planning document
 Growing number of allies (CBDAO-NC, Coalition for Good Governance,
Business coalition, SEED, etc.)
 Continuous resource mobilization
 Elevate unfunded programs to the next level
 Conduct of regular assembly
 Using portion of the general fund for development projects
Strategies:
 Integration and legitimization of plan
 Formulation & legitimization of policies
 Cost sharing
 Passing of resolutions and issuance of EO
 Community organizing
 Regular assembly (monthly)
The session ended at 9:00 in the evening with some announcements for the
field exposure on the next day.
International Workshop on Participatory Area Development
April 25-May 2, 2006/Davao City & New Corella, Davao del Norte, Philippines
30