1 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT

OF THE

SUPPORT TO PARCELIZATION OF LANDS FOR INDIVIDUAL TITLING (SPLIT)

PROJECT

DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Environmental and Social Assessment (ESA) evaluate the Project’s potential

environmental and social risk and impacts. Project SPLIT or the Support to Parcelization of

Lands for Individual Titling involves the subdivision Collective Certificate of Land Ownership

Awards (CCLOAs) into individual titles for the agrarian reform beneficiaries. Apart from being

a requirement of the World Bank under ESS1, an assessment of the potential environmental

and social risks and impacts will provide an opportunity to examine project alternatives,

identify ways of improving the project selection, planning design and implementation and seek

opportunities to enhance the positive impacts of the project.

Project SPLIT intends to cover 1.369 million hectares of CCLOAs in 78 provinces

encompassing more than a thousand municipalities. However, not all of the CCLOAs are

within the alienable and disposable (A&D) lands since some has unintentionally overlapped

with timberland, forest, and protected areas. An estimate of 31 provinces reveals that there are

approximately 124,000 hectares covered by 1,259 CCLOA which are within the timberland

and protected areas. Thus, the SPLIT project will prevent any further inappropriate utilization

of these inalienable lands and exclude the same from the parcelization process. However, an

appropriate farm technology shall be adopted to ensure protection of forest areas should such

lands still be covered by SPLIT.

Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries (ARBs) are recipients/holder of any of the following: (i)

Emancipation Patent (EP); (ii) Certificate of Land Ownership Award (CLOA); (iii) CARP

Beneficiary Certificate (CBC); or (iv) Leasehold contract/agreement. From year 1972 until

December 31, 2018, the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) registered and distributed a

total net area of 4.798 million hectares to 2,867,293 ARBs. In terms of the CCLOAs involved

in the SPLIT project, there are approximately 1.14 million ARBs who are recipients thereof,

including those from the indigenous group or community. There has been an initial report from

15 provinces which indicated 1,542 CCLOAs that are within the ancestral domain wherein a

total of 11,552 ARBs listed in the Master List are from the indigenous group/community.

Moreover, 28 provinces reported that there are 3,633 CCLOAs with 46,661 ARBs coming from

the indigenous community.

The issuance of individual title is expected to improve the ARB’s security of tenure and

stabilize the property rights of ARBs currently occupying lands covered by a mother CLOA.

Moreover, it is expected to provide the ARBs with incentives that would create land

improvements, increased farm productivity, and household incomes.

The SPLIT project will neither involve civil works nor activities with direct impact to the

environment. On the other hand, the project is beneficial to the environment since it will

improve soil conservation and minimize the sedimentation of waterways. In addition, the ARBs

will be encouraged to engage in sustainable land management practices, invest in permanent

structures, and plant permanent crops. Likewise, portions of inalienable lands which has been

2 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

mistakenly covered by a CCLOA shall be returned to their former Timberland and/or Protected

Areas status.

Although the ESA has been formulated to identify the project’s possible environmental risks,

the actual impact of the project can only be ascertained during the conduct of the SPLIT

activities. The peculiar environmental and social issues surrounding each CCLOA shall be

considered, assessed and addressed at the ground level. All CCLOA to be parcelized will be

subject to an environmental and social screening, rapid and participatory rural assessment

mainly focused on the environmental conditions of the CCLOA area, covering issues such as,

land classification status, actual terrain, soil erosion, prevailing unsustainable farming

practices, and pest management, soil erosion, micro watersheds, involuntary resettlement

issues, indigenous communities and vulnerable households. Based on the rapid assessments

and with the above mitigation options as guide, CCLOA-based management plans including

Resettlement Action/Compensation Plans for those displaced or those whose rights were

reduced, will have to be prepared. Hence, the project will need to develop and adopt the

following safeguard frameworks: (i) Environmental and Social Management Framework; (ii)

Resettlement Policy Framework; (iii) Indigenous Peoples Policy Framework; and Labor

Management Plan and Stakeholder Engagement Plan. These frameworks and plans will also

include grievance mechanisms and capacity building plan for DAR and Project Management

Units (PMU).

3 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

ACRONYMS

ARB = Agrarian Reform Beneficiary

ARCDP = Agrarian Reform Communities Development Project

ARCCESS - Agrarian Reform Community Connectivity and Economic Support Services

BARC =Barangay Agrarian Reform Committee

AD = Ancestral Domain (of certain ICCP/IP group)

ESS= Environmental and Social Standard

CLOA = Certificate of Land Ownership Award

CCLOA = Collective Certificate of Land Ownership Award

CARP = Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program

CARL = Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law

DAR = Department of Agrarian Reform

DENR = Department of Environment and Natural Resources

DA = Department of Agriculture

A&D=Alienable and Disposable

ES = Environmental and Social

ESF = Environmental and Social Framework

ESMF = Environmental and Social Management Framework

FMB = Forest Management Bureau

GRMF = Grievance Redress Mechanism Framework

IPRA = Indigenous Peoples Rights Act

IPPF = Indigenous Peoples Policy Framework

ICC/IP = Indigenous Cultural Community/Indigenous People

LMP = Labor Management Plan

LMB = Land Management Bureau

LRA = Land Registration Authority

LBP = Land Bank of the Philippines

NCIP = National Commission on Indigenous Peoples

OLT = Operation Land Transfer

RPF = Resettlement Policy Framework

VLT = Voluntary Land Transfer

VOS = Voluntary Offer to Sale

4 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 1 Acronyms ................................................................................................................................... 3 Table of Contents ....................................................................................................................... 4 I. Background ............................................................................................................................. 5 II. Project Description ................................................................................................................ 5

Project Components ............................................................................................................... 6 Project Activities and Their Locations .................................................................................. 6 Titling Process ....................................................................................................................... 6

III. Environmental Profile of the Project Area ........................................................................... 8 General Location .................................................................................................................... 8 Agroecological Zones ............................................................................................................ 9

IV. Socioeconomic Profile of the Project Area ....................................................................... 12 Demographic Profile of ARBs ............................................................................................. 12 Ethnicity ............................................................................................................................... 12 Literacy and Educational Attainment .................................................................................. 13 Socioeconomic Conditions of CARP Beneficiary Households ........................................... 14 Support Services .................................................................................................................. 14

V. Environmental Risks and Impacts....................................................................................... 17 VI. Social Risks and Impacts ....................................................................................................... VII. ES Risk Capacity of the Implementing Agency ............................................................... 23 VIII. Management Measures ................................................................................................... 23

Management Options ........................................................................................................... 24 Frameworks ......................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Design Measures .................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. Mitigation Measures ............................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined. Dealing with each CCLOA on the Ground .......................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) For CCLOA ....................... 27 Involuntary Resettlement Policy Framework ...................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Indigenous Peoples Policy Framework ................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

References ................................................................................................................................ 27

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Breakdown of Collective CLOAs as of January 1, 2016 (Ballesteros, et al. 2018) .... 9 Table 2. Agroecological zones of CARP Areas (Ballesteros et al 2018) ................................ 10 Table 3. Crops planted on areas likely to covered by the project (Source: Ballesteros et al,

2018). ....................................................................................................................................... 11 Table 4. Living Conditions of the CARP beneficiary households compared with Non-CARP

beneficiary households............................................................................................................. 14

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. CCLOA Parcelization Process under SPLIT .............................................................. 7 Figure 2. Upland CCLOA areas to be covered by the Project ................................................. 11

5 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

I. BACKGROUND

The Support to Parcelization of Lands for Individual Titling (SPLIT) is a major project of the

Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) which would involve the subdivision of the Collective

Certificate of Land Ownership Award (CCLOAs) into individual CLOA titles. The project is

being considered for funding by the World Bank and will be subject to its new Environmental

and Social Framework (ESF). This Environmental and Social Assessment (ESA) is undertaken

in order to comply with the requirements of the ESF, specifically, the standards for "Assessment

and Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts" (ESS1).

The objective of this assessment is to determine the environmental and social risks and impacts

associated by the project and, based on the result of the assessment, discuss the risks and

impacts mitigation/management options for the project. The scope of the assessment will cover

all of the World Bank's Environmental and Social Standards (ESS).

In particular, this ESA will identify, assess, and discuss the management options for the risks

and impacts of the project with respect to:

WB ESS2 - Labor and Working Conditions

WB ESS3 - Resource Efficiency and Pollution Prevention and Control

WB ESS4 - Community Health and Safety

WB ESS5 - Involuntary Resettlement and Restrictions of Access

WB ESS6 - Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Management of Living Natural

Resources

WB ESS7 - Indigenous People

WB ESS8 - Cultural Heritage

WB ESS10- Stakeholder Engagement

II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The SPLIT project will involve subdivision or parcelization of the currently "collective" or

"common" land titles called collective CLOAs (or mother CLOAs), into individual land parcels

and issuing individual titles. The collective CLOAs were issued by DAR to groups of farmers

sometime in the 1990s, as part of the strategy to fast track the distribution of lands under the

Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) of the government. DAR has been

subdividing these CCLOAs and issuing individual land titles, but the process had been slow

and as of present there are still over a million hectares of CCLOAs that have not been

subdivided. Project SPLIT will help accelerate the subdivision of CCLOAs and generation of

individual titles by (a) strengthening DAR’s institutional capability through technical

assistance and capacity-building; (b) provision of support to parcelization survey and

individual titling of CCLOAs; and (c) strengthening coordination and collaboration with other

agencies involved in the project (i.e. DENR, NCIP and LRA).

The issuance of individual titles is expected to improve land tenure security and stabilize

property rights of ARBs currently occupying mother CLOAs. A more secured property right is

expected to provide ARBs with incentives to make land improvements towards increased farm

productivity and household incomes. This objective is in support of the development goal of

the government of reducing poverty and promoting economic growth in the countryside.

6 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

Project Components

The project will have the following components:

Component 1: Parcelization of Collective CLOAs. This component aims to complete the

parcelization of CCLOA for the remaining agricultural lands under CCLOA with time and cost

efficiencies. This will require the hiring of additional human resources, adoption of a clear

communication and outreach program, testing and rolling out of more efficient parcelization

process, the adoption of modern survey techniques, and the development and deployment of

digital processes and document management. There will be five (5) sub-components:

1.1 Improved Regulatory Framework for SPLIT

1.2 IT Support for SPLIT

1.3 Completing the Inventory of CCLOA

1.4 Field testing of improved procedures to subdivided CCLOA in Regions I, VIII and IX

1.5 Rolling out improved procedure in other Regions to complete Project SPLIT

Component 2. Capability Building and Technical Assistance. Project SPLIT will introduce a

range of efficiency and change to workflow procedures and explore innovative approaches that

requires necessary training of existing and additional staff of the DAR and cooperating line

agencies. A comprehensive human resource development plan shall be developed early in the

program. A consultant will be engaged to prepare the comprehensive plan.

Component 3. Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation. This component aims to

provide the necessary supervision, technical and funding assistance to the project implementing

units and partner agencies at the central, regional and provincial levels to support the

management and coordination of project activities including planning, budgeting, technical

assistance, financial management procurement and disbursement, monitoring and evaluation,

environmental and social safeguards

Project Activities and Their Locations

The project will be implemented mainly in the rural and agricultural areas of the countryside

which include remote and hilly agricultural lands, declared ancestral domain lands of

indigenous group/community, and lands outside of the public forests and/or protected areas.

The project’s ground activities and processes on parcelization will be site-specific involving

1,368,883 hectares of CCLOAs (in target project sites spread over 78 provinces and about

1,252 municipalities) and include the conduct of meetings/consultations with stakeholders,

field validation, segregation/subdivision surveys, field inspection, and distribution of

individual titles. There will be no civil works or activities in this project and as such the project

is not covered under the Philippine EIS System and would not require Environmental Clearance

Certificate from DENR.

Titling Process

Titling Process. The entire individual titling process must first involve inventory of CCLOA

and verification of land classification of these CCLOAs pursuant to Chapter 2 of DAO No. 2.

series of 2019. The inventory will identify ARBs in the collective CLOA and ensure the master

list of ARBs is appropriately documented and approved. The process will confirm land type,

7 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

survey status, ARB group/type, actual land use of each landholding, and identify CCLOA with

pending legal cases. Preparing the inventory will require desk work and ground verification.

Confirming that the land classification (LC) of each collective CLOA has the status of

agricultural land (alienable and disposable) is the final step in completing the inventory.

Regular land classifications are mandate of the DENR and confirming land classification is the

responsibility of the DENR CENRO per DENR DAO No. 9 series of 2012.

Verification of the mother CLOA in terms of whether they overlap with Public Land

(Timberland) classification. If there are overlaps with Timberlands, the portion that overlaps

would normally be carved out of the mother CCLOA . The next step would be to validate the

ARBs and their parcels inside the CCLOA. The validation would involve documentary

reviews, consultation meetings, house to house visits, boundary walkthroughs, and formal

surveys.

>

Figure 1. CCLOA Parcelization Process under SPLIT

Validation of Land Classification (LC). The validation of land classification would be based

on the Land Classification Map of the National Mapping and Resource Information Authority

(NAMRIA) of DENR. Most of the CCLOAs issued way in the 1990s were supposed to be

segregated from inalienable lands or so-called Timberland. However, there were some errors

as to the projection of Land Classification map boundaries into the ground, resulting in overlaps

of some CCLOAs in Timberlands, Protected Areas and Ancestral Domain lands. The cleansing

of CCLOAs remain as part of the DAR’s unfinished balance for land distribution. Hence, under

Project SPLIT, CCLOAs will be subject to verification with respect to LC to determine the

areas to be included in parcelization and areas to be turned over to the DENR.. In addition to

the projection of CCLOA in the LC maps, the verification should also consider the dates of the

issuance of the derivative title of the CCLOA. If such was issued before May 19, 1975 (PD

705) the project can proceed to its parcelization regardless of land classification. If the

derivative title was issued after May 19, 1975, classification of unclassified forest except for

protected areas can be done by administrative function of the DENR as recommended by the

Secretary and approved by the President.

The inventory will identify CCLOA that have serious issues that need to be addressed before

parcelization can commence.

Validation of ARBs and Firming –up of Master List and Lot Allocation. The validation of ARBs

will be based on the ARBs registered in the CCLOAs. There may be replacements

("inclusions") or disqualifications ("exclusions") based during the validation of the ARBs,

depending on the status and current occupants of a particular parcel in the CCLOAs. The

exclusions and inclusions will be guided by: (a) the basic eligibility criteria of farmers/tillers

Conduct CCLOA Inventory& Status of Data Gathering

Validation & Firming -up the ARB Masterlist/ Lot Allocation

Subdivision SurveyGeneration/Rgistration of Individual

CLOA

Distribution of Individual CLOA to

Qualified ARBs

8 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

to qualify as CARP beneficiaries as provided for in the DAR Administrative Order (AO) 09,

series of 2011:

1) Landless as defined by RA 6657;

2) Filipino citizen;

3) Permanent resident of the barangay and/or municipality where the landholding is

located;

4) At least 15 years of age at the time of identification, screening, and selection; and,

5) Willing, able, and equipped with the aptitude to cultivate and make the land

productive; and,

(b) the specific provision of the RA 6657 which lists down qualified CARP beneficiaries in

this order of priority: (1) agricultural lessees and share tenants; (2) regular farmworkers; (3)

seasonal farmworkers; (4) other farmworkers; (5) actual tillers/occupants of public lands; (6)

collectives/cooperatives of the above beneficiaries; and (7) others directly working on the land.

Labor Requirements. The project plans to engage about 5,000 workers to implement activities

on parcelization. Most of these workers will be skilled (i.e. surveyors, geodetic engineers, legal

officers, researchers and support field staff for field surveys and validation). Community

volunteers may be allowed to support project survey teams.

III. ENVIRONMENTAL PROFILE OF THE PROJECT AREA

General Location

The project will be implemented mainly in the rural and agricultural areas of the countryside

which include remote and hilly agricultural lands, declared ancestral domain lands of

indigenous group/community, and lands outside of the of public forests and/or protected areas.

From 1972 to 2018, DAR has distributed a total of almost 4,993,773 hectares of land to

3,057,227 beneficiaries. Almost 50% of these lands are in Regions XII (Cenral Mindanao),

VIII (Eastern Visayas), III (Central Luzon), VI (Western Visayas) and II (Cagayan Valley).

These areas distributed are public lands that have been declared as alienable and disposable

(A&D), a good portion of these lands would be in the rolling or hilly terrain. In the same

manner, forty-five percent of the unsubdivided Collective CLOAs targeted by the project are

located in the same regions of Eastern Visayas, Western Visayas, and Central Mindanao.

Table 1. Collective CLOAs by Region

Geographical Area Total CCLOA area (has) targeted for

project coverage

Total CCLOA area

(has.) with overlaps on

forests/ protected areas1

Philippines 1,158,005 123,369

Region VIII 166,495 4,248

Region VI 158,272 16,682

Region XII 111,863 10,771

Region XI 91,152 2,449

Region IX 90,823 34,986

CARAGA 87,207 4,380

Region V 84,494 1,795

Region X 81,549 20,017

Region II 77,854 9,167

Region VII 46,139

Region I 38,683 1,164

CAR 36,493 7,645

Region IV-B 34,849

9 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

Region III 29,656 10,007

Region IV-A 22,476 58 1 Based on initial submission of 31 provinces per Memo 485.

Data initially submitted by the DARPOs as of 25 November 2019 show that some 1,259 mother

CLOAs covering a total of 123,369 hectares have overlaps with inalienable lands. More than

half of these areas are in Region VI (16,682 hectares), Region IX (34,986 hectares) and Region

X (20,017 hectares).

Based on the above data, the 20% estimate made by the DAR officials translates to 24,673

hectares of lands which may actually overlap with inalienable lands, which is roughly two (2%)

percent of the project’s target area of 1.369 million hectares that will be possibly excluded from

parcelization. This figure however, is yet very raw as these CCLOAs will be subjected to

inventory and validation.

Agroecological Zones

Collective CLOAs Overlapping with Timberland and Forest/Protected Areas. Based on Table

2 below, there are about 115,816 hectares that are within timberland, forest and watersheds.

This constitutes about 10% of all the remaining un-subdivided CCLOAs. As planned, these

CCLOAs will no longer be subdivided but will be reverted back to DENR. However, it is

expected that there may still have timberland overlapping in the remaining CCLOAs due to

errors in the projection of boundaries from the land classification maps to the ground. This

would particularly be found in CCLOAs from government owned lands (GOL), settlements

and KKK declared lands.

To date, however, both the DAR and DENR are working on the Directive of the President,

requesting that forest land overlapping with CCLOA should not be returned to DENR (and

should not be excluded from Project SPLIT). It seems to be a viable way forward for the Project

as these lands that have been issued CCLOAs inside forest zones have already been converted

to agricultural uses long ago due to population pressure and some due to Presidential

Proclamation for reclassification into resettlement areas before the new Constitution took

effect.

Table 2. Breakdown of Collective CLOAs as of January 1, 2016 (Source: Ballesteros, et al. 2018)

Total Area of Collective CLOAs Issued (Total Scope) 2,168,116

Less already subdivided plus not for subdivision

Already subdivided 1,064,746

Not for subdivision: timberlands, forest, road, watershed, etc. 115,816

Not of subdivision: co-owners opt not to subdivide (prefer collective title) 139,134

Total not for subdivision 254,950

Subtotal (Already Subdivided and Not for Subdivision) 1,319,696

Balance for Subdivision 848,420

Nonpriority for Subdivision:

Awarded to farmers' associations 22,295

Awarded to farmers' cooperative 43,406

VLT under co-ownership 203,153

Total Non-priority for subdivision 268,854

Priority for Subdivision:

LBP-compensable lands (CA, VOS, OLT, and GFI) 228,604

non-LBP compensable lands (LES, SETT, and KKK/ GOL) 350,962

Total Priority for subdivision 579,566 Adopted from Ballesteros et al (2018)

CA=Compulsory Acquisition; VOS= Voluntary Offer to Sell; OLT=Pre-CARP "Operation Land Transfer" titles, distributed under Presidential Decree No. 27; GFI = Lands foreclosed by Government Financial Institutions; LES =Landed Estates; SETT=Settlements

10 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

KKK/GOL = Kilusan Kabuhayan and Kaunlaran Program declared/Government Own Lands; VLT = Voluntary Land Transfer

Table 3. Agroecological zones of CARP Areas (Ballesteros et al 2018)

Mode of Acquisition Lowland

Irrigated

Lowland

Non-Irrigated Upland Total

VLT/DPS 523 729 417 1669

Modes where CCLOAs

are priority for

Subdivision

CA 83 202 174 459

VOS 96 333 298 727

OLT 184 214 242 640

GFI 5 13 24 42

KKK/GOL 1 14 11 26

SETT 51 64 73 188

LES 8 6 6 20

Total 428 846 828 2102

% 20.36 40.25 39.39 100

All parcels 951 1575 1245 3771

Table 4. Estimated area of CCLOA that overlaps with Timberland and Protected Areas by Region

Region Unsubdivided CCLOA

(ha)

Estimated area of Overlap

with Timberland/or

Protected Areas (ha)*

Percent

Region IX 90,823 34,986 38.52

Region X 81,549 20,017 24.55

Region VI 158,272 16,682 10.54

Region XII 111,863 10,771 9.63

Region III 29,656 10,007 33.74

Region II 77,854 9,167 11.77

CAR 36,493 7,645 20.95

CARAGA 87,207 4,380 5.02

Region VIII 166,495 4,248 2.55

Region XI 91,152 2,449 2.69

Region V 84,494 1,795 2.12

Region I 38,683 1,164 3.01

Region IV-A 22,476 58 0.26

Region VII 46,139 -

Region IV-B 34,849 -

Total 1,158,005 123,369 10.65 *Based on reports submitted by 31 provinces as of 25 November 2019

Based on this table, the collective CLOAs likely to be covered by the Project would involve

around 60% lowland and 40%. It is in the upland areas where environmental issues may be

present due to its terrain. Lands in these areas would be prone to soil erosion and to long term

land degradation. Most of the lands parcels in these areas have long been occupied and

subjected to cultivation; even before they had been transferred to ARBs. Currently they may

have been planted with a mix of seasonal food or cash crops such as corn, upland rice and

sugarcane, and perennial crops such as coconut, rubber, coffee and cacao. However, some

portions of the land parcels in these areas may still contain small tickets in gullies, that provide

habitat to some birds and faunas, and waterways that are critical components of micro

watersheds.

Site visits conducted by DAR so far confirms that occupants in lands within CCLOAs are

planting permanent crops, such as coconuts and fruits on these lands.

11 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

Table 5. Crops planted on areas likely to covered by the project (Source: Ballesteros et al, 2018).

Mode of Acquisition Irrigated Lowland Non-Irrigated Lowland Upland

CA rice rice, banana, corn coconut, corn, banana

VOS rice, sugarcane sugarcane, banana, rice corn, coconut, sugarcane

OLT rice rice, corn corn, coconut, rice

GFI rice, calamansi rice, coconut corn, coconut

KKK/GOL rice rice, coconut, banana sugarcane, corn

SETT rice corn, rice coconut, corn, rice

LES rice corn coconut

Figure 2. Upland CCLOA areas to be covered by the Project

CCLOAs in Areas Still Classified as Timberland/Public Forest

Due to difficulty in the delineating agricultural lands from public forest, some collective

CLOAs have overlaps with lands that are still officially classified as Timberlands (or Public

Forest) and even on lands within officially declared Protected Areas or Natural Park. Although

these land parcels may have already been occupied during the issuance of mother CLOA,

initially the project is proposing to carve them out from the mother CLOA and turned over to

DENR for management and possible issuance of a different tenurial instrument. With the

President’s Directive to both DAR and DENR, that forest land overlapping with CCLOA

should not be returned to DENR (and should not be excluded from Project SPLIT) another

option is made available for the Project.

The exact area of overlaps between CCLOAs and Timberland Classification or the number of

CCLOAs involved still cannot be ascertained. According to a study by Philippine Institute of

Development Studies (Ballesteros, et al, 2018), there are closed to 115,000 hectares of these

overlaps which will not be subdivided but returned to DENR (Table 2). Initial data submitted

by the DARPOs as of 25 November 2019 show that some 1,259 mother CLOAs covering a

total of 123,369 hectares have overlaps with inalienable lands and more than half of these areas

are in Western Visayas (16,682 hectares), Zamboanga Peninsula (34,986 hectares) and

Northern Mindanao (20,017 hectares) (Table 6). It should be noted that Timberland or Public

Forest land classification does not necessarily mean forested area or serving as natural habitat.

In fact, it is very likely that these lands covered by CCLOAs have been already occupied and

12 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

in continuous cultivation since long time ago (some as early back to 70 years). The current

agricultural use of these lands makes it difficult to delineate exactly the boundaries of forest

land versus Alienable and Disposable (A&D) lands. Land classification maps in the Philippines

dates back to the 1950s when population was only 20-25 and while need for agricultural lands

has increased many folds, land reclassification was very slow. The agroecological profile of

these lands would most like involve rolling terrain and steep slopes with patches of agricultural

clearings and isolated thickets or natural vegetations.

Table 6. CCLOAs that overlap with timberland classification and number of ARBs/

Geographical

Area

Total Mother

CLOA area (has)

targeted for

project coverage1

No. of ARBs1 in

the Mother

CLOA

Estimated Mother

CLOA areas with

overlaps on

forestland/protect

ed areas2

Estimated No. of

ARBs2 in the

Mother CLOAs

with forestland

overlaps

Region IX 90,823 75,686 34,986 12,119

Region X 81,549 67,958 20,017 6,152

Region VI 158,272 131,893 16,682 5,615

Region XII 111,863 93,219 10,771 4,492

CAR 36,493 30,411 7,645 3,610

CARAGA 87,207 72,673 4,380 2,115

Region XI 91,152 75,960 2,449 1,224

Region V 84,494 70,412 1,795 975

Region VIII 166,495 138,746 4,248 931

Region I 38,683 32,236 1,164 653

Region II 77,854 64,878 9,167 630

Region IV-A 22,476 18,730 58 27

Region III 29,656 24,713 10,007 ND

Region IV-B 34,849 29,041 0 0

Region VII 46,139 38,449 0 0

Total 1,158,005 965,004 123,369 38,543 1 From BLTI, as of Dec 2018 2 Based on initial submission of 49 provinces as of Nov 25, 2019

IV. SOCIOECONOMIC PROFILE OF THE PROJECT AREA

Demographic Profile of ARBs

The 2000 Census of Population data have captured 459,489 households who have members

that are agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARB). The households represent about 3.0 percent of

the total households in the country. About half of them were found in four regions: Central

Luzon (15%), Southern Tagalog (12%), Western Visayas (10%), and Cagayan Valley (7.5%).

The heads of CARP beneficiary households (which are assumed to be the beneficiary

themselves) were found to be generally older than non-CARP beneficiaries. In 2000, the

median age of CARP beneficiary household head was 47 while that of non-CARP beneficiary

agricultural household is only 43.

Ethnicity and Presence of Indigenous Cultural Communities

Close to 20 percent of the ARBs classified themselves as Tagalog, 16 percent Ilocano and at

30% are Visayans. This is expected since Regions III (Central Luzon) and IV (Southern

Tagalog) recorded the highest number of CARP beneficiaries.

13 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

The Census data also revealed that about 9.6% of the CARP beneficiary households (44,410

households) belong to Indigenous Cultural Communities/Indigenous Peoples (ICC/IPs) as

defined under the Philippine Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA). In fact, some of the ARBs

registered in CCLOAs targeted for parcelization under the project are members of the ICC/IPs.

This was confirmed by the DAR Preparation Team during a site visit to one CCLOA site in

Iloilo Province. It is expected that most of the CCLOAs are outside the ICC/IPs declared

Ancestral Domains which are the official territories of the ICC/IP, nevertheless there is a

chance that the Project may encounter CCLOAs inside the Ancestral Domains.

The actual area or number of CCLOAs that overlap or located within the ADs are still not

known. Initial data from the DARPOs counted a total of about 1,541 mother CLOAs involving

37,032 hectares of lands with about 11,552 IP-ARBs. These mother CLOAs may have portions

that overlaps or are located entirely within the declared Ancestral Domains of ICC/IP (Table

6). It is not indicated in the data when these CLOAs were issued or whether the CCLOAs are

entirely within the ancestral domains. This shall be assessed further during the inventory and

validation to determine the magnitude of mother CLOA lands that may be subjected to

provisions and processes under the IPRA during parcelization, i.e., if the provisions of Joint

DAR-DENR-LRA-NCIP Administrative Order No.1 s. 2012 applies as well as the number of

IP-ARBs, whether all or only some of them are within lands overlapping with ADs. An

assessment and screening tool will be included in the Environmental and Social Management

Framework and the IPPF implementation.

Table 7. Mother CLOAs with likely overlaps in Ancestral Domain of ICC/IPs and estimated number of

IP-ARBs

Region Total Mother

CLOA area (has)

targetted for

project coverage1

No. of ARBs1 Mother CLOA

areas with

overlaps on

ancestral

domains2

No. of IP- ARBs2

Region XII 111,863 93,219 8,130 2,975

CARAGA 87,207 72,673 7,256 1,080

Region V 84,494 70,412 580 284

Region X 81,549 67,958 5,941 3,636

Region VII 46,139 38,449 164 208

Region II 77,854 64,878 12,124 1,788

Region IX 90,823 75,686 1,639 1,181

CAR 36,493 30,411 1,198 400

Region I 38,683 32,236 0 0

Region III 29,656 24,713 0 0

Region IV-A 22,476 18,730 0 0

Region IV-B 34,849 29,041 0 0

Region VI 158,272 131,893 0 0

Region VIII 166,495 138,746 0 0

Region XI 91,152 75,960 0 0

Total 1,158,005 965,004 37,032 11,552 1 From BLTI as of Dec 2018 2 Based on initial submission of 49 provinces as of November 25, 2019

Literacy and Educational Attainment

14 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

The heads of households with CARP beneficiaries had a literacy rate of 88.9 percent, lower

than the literacy rate (90.8 percent) of heads of households without CARP beneficiaries. About

45% of the CARP beneficiary household heads have high school or higher levels education.

Socioeconomic Conditions of CARP Beneficiary Households

About 82.8 percent of heads of households with CARP beneficiaries were economically active

but only 71 percent of them consider themselves farmers, forestry workers and/or fishers.

Seven percent (7%) were laborers and unskilled workers; 5.0 percent plant and machine

operators and assemblers and 4.5 percent traders and related workers. It should be noted

however that while 28.9 percent of the heads were not engaged in agriculture, fishery and

forestry, other household members may be the ones engaged in this sector.

Table 8. Living Conditions of the CARP beneficiary households compared with Non-CARP beneficiary

households

Amenities ARB HH Non-ARB HH

Have electricity for lighting 60.2 % 64.1%

Use Kerosene for lighting 36.4% 33.0%

Use Wood for Cooking 50.2% 46.7%

Use LPG for Cooking 37.0% 40.4%

Ownership of Radio/TV 52.8% 75.0%

Ownership of Motor Vehicles 18.5% 12.0%

With GI sheets for roof materials 67.6% 69.2%

With Nipa/cogon roof materials 24.1% 23.0%

With concrete/tile roof materials 5.2% 3.5%

With concrete/brick/stone outer walls 32.0% 33.0%

Bamboo and other light materials 25.1% 21.4%

Wood 21.6% 24.7%

Need minor repairs 69.4% 72.2%

Need major repairs 17.7% 16.3%

Under construction/renovation 4.3% 3.6%

Housing unit median floor area 24.6 sq.m. 26.3 sq.m.

Household with less than 30sqm 60% 56.4%

Source: Profile of ARBs through CARP (Results from the 2000 Census of Population and Housing (Tia,

Mercedita E. & T.M. Orteza)

In general CARP beneficiaries are slightly lower level socioeconomic development than non-

ARB households. CARP beneficiary households have generally lower percentage in terms of

use of electricity for lighting and ownership of radio/TV sets, compared to non-ARB HH(Table

7). CARP beneficiary households tend to use kerosene lamps for lighting and fuelwood for

cooking but have more motor vehicles than non-CARP beneficiary households which also

reflect their remote locations. They are also at the slightly lower level in terms of housing

conditions. ARB households generally lived in slightly smaller housing units and tend to be

built on light materials compared to non-ARB households. However, the differences are not

very pronounced.

Support Services

A key feature of the CARP is the provision of support services for the beneficiaries. There had

been numerous programs of government that were designed to support the ARBs.

(1) ARC and ARB organizations. DAR adopted the ARC strategy in the provision of support

services to ARBs and agrarian reform areas. ARCs are formed through clustering of contiguous

15 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

barangays where the concentration of ARBs is highest. The ARCs are envisioned as economic

growth points in rural areas and as such have received substantial resources from ODA funds,

including from the World Bank, under ARCDP I and II. The investment in the ARCs benefits

both ARBs and non-ARBs and encompasses a wide spectrum of development assistance that

includes infrastructure such as farm-to-market roads, irrigation, and farm facilities. As of 2016,

about 1.5 million ARBs are already covered by ARCs while around 1.3 million are still outside

of ARCs. Despite the substantial resources provided to ARCs, studies noted only minimal

gains. In particular, the Asia-Pacific Policy Center (APPC) reported that although the income

of ARBs in ARC areas is higher than ARBs in non-ARCs, the difference is negligible (APPC

2007 as mentioned by Ballesteros et al, 2018).

(2) Agrarian Reform Community Connectivity and Economic Support Services (ARCCESS). In 2012, DAR adopted the ARCCESS strategy to address the high production

cost, low profit, and low income of smallholder farmers. These goals are to be met by

strengthening farmers’ organizations by providing them access to farm machinery and

equipment, and services. A component of the ARCCESS is the provision of common service

facilities (CSFs) to smallholder farmers’ organizations. CSFs are farm implements, equipment,

and machinery that were given as grants to farmers’ organizations on condition that these will

be used as a business asset. On the other hand, access to services includes professional support

for capacity building on business development, agri-extension, farm equipments/machineries

and access to credit and crop insurance. The interventions under ARCCESS are channeled to

farmers’ associations or agrarian reform beneficiary organizations (ARBOs) in both ARC and

non-ARC areas. The interventions include collaborative efforts and partnerships programs

among government agencies (e.g., DA, DILG, DTI, DSWD, DOH, and DepEd) designed to

improve farm productivity and income, ensure food security, and mitigate levels of

malnourishment and other poverty. As of end of 2017, there are 5,228 ARBOs operational

wherein 4,268 (82%) are in ARCs and 960 (18%) in non-ARCs (Table 8).

Table 8. Operational ARBOs By Type of Organization in ARC & Non ARCs Type of Organization No of ARBOs

In ARCs In Non-ARCs Total

Cooperatives 2,126 401 2,527

Non-cooperatives 2,142 559 2,701

Farmers Association/Organization 1,296 427 1,723

Irrigators Association 506 69 575

Women’s Association 156 44 200

Water Users’ Association 153 16 169

Other types of Organizations 31 4 34

Total 4,268 960 5,228

Source: 2018 ITeMA Report

(3) Sugarcane Block Farming (SBF). A major project that emerged from ARCCESS and

considered to be a good model of support services is the sugarcane block farming (SBF), which

enabled smallholder farmers to synchronize their efforts without compromising their property

rights. SBF entails consolidation of small farms into business units to result in: (1) reduced cost

of production; (2) increased farm productivity from 60 to 75 tons of cane/ha; and (3) at least

one agribusiness activity established per block farm.

(3) Agribusiness Venture Arrangements (AVA). The AVA has been adopted as a strategy for

agribusiness development especially for reformed lands cultivated for commercial crop

production since 1998 intended to address the concerns on economies of scale. AVAs may

involve ARB, individually or as an ARB association, entering into a lease agreement with

16 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

investors for the control and management of the land; or an ARB, individually or collectively,

entering into a marketing ("contract growing" and "joint ventures") arrangement with investors

wherein the ARB individually or collectively remains as the operator or manager of the farm.

As of 2015, a total of 452 AVAs nationwide (involving a total of 59,195 ARBs) had been

recorded, with nearly 92 percent (approximately 71,330 ha) in Mindanao involving commercial

crops. Crops involved in these arrangements include banana, pineapple, fruit trees, root crops

and oil palm.

Legal Status of the current occupants of the land inside CCLOAs

Since the CCLOAs were issued some 15-20 years ago, many of the current occupants of the

land parcels within the CCLOAs are no longer the original ARBs registered in the CCLOAs.

If the average age of ARBs at the time of the award was 47 years, then they would be by now

in their 60s and 70s and many may have already died and left their landholdings to their heirs

while some may have already informally sold or mortgaged their rights and occupation over

the landholdings to other farmers. This is actually confirmed by the DARPO officials and

during site visits conducted by the DAR project preparation team to at least three CCLOA sites

have actually confirmed this situation.

According to DARPO officials, previous parcelization efforts involving determination of

individual ARBs who are listed in mother CCLOAs and the identification of actual occupants

of the CCLOA landholdings revealed that there were ARBs originally listed as collective

owners that were found already deceased and replaced by heirs; or some ARBs were no longer

tilling the land and had transferred their rights to other farmers; or some actual tillers were not

in the original list of ARBs. In addition, some CCLOAs were in the name of farmers’

organization but the names of the collective owners or ARB members were not annotated in

the same document.

These non-beneficiary occupants may either be the heirs or relatives of the original ARBs,

“informal buyers,” or few opportunist encroachers who occupied abandoned farm lots. There

may also be poor tillers or agricultural workers employed by the original ARBs or their heirs.

These occupants who could include elders, women or minors may also belong to vulnerable or

disadvantaged groups who may be unable to equitably access or share the same project benefits

and privileges as the qualified ARBs. Some of these occupants may also not qualify as agrarian

reform beneficiaries.

Attitudes Toward the Project

The site visits confirmed that the overwhelming support of the ARBs towards parcelization.

All of the ARBs which DAR talked with during the site visits in a few mother CCLOA sites,

are eager to go ahead with the individual titling. They have always wanted to have proof of

their landholdings and to be able to formally pass on the property to their heirs. Some ARBs

also complained that until CCLOA is subdivided they have nothing to present as proof of

ownership against encroachers and squatters, particularly for properties that are located along

the road. Some of the ARBs also said they are worried about not being able to pay for their

amortization. The DAR has talked with various agencies, including FMB and LMB and LRA

who have all expressed strong support for the project.

The 2015 Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Survey conducted by the Philippine Statistical

Research and Training Institute showed that ARBs and households income of collective

17 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

CLOAs holders are higher at P213,613 and P195,150, respectively compared with ARBs

(P177,404) and households (P155,113) income of with individual title. Such was attributed to

the collective management of the land. The bigger pooled size of the land for CCLOA holders

facilitated efficient production and other income generating activities of for ARBs. Also, the

same survey reported that more parcels transferred through individual type are still cultivated

by the ARBs (95%) compared to those in collective type (84.87%). Though, the survey results

showed better outlook for the collective CLOAs in terms of income, it also presented that more

parcels of land transferred through individual CLOA are still cultivated by the ARBs at 95%

compared to the collective CLOA holders at 85%.

Likewise, the DAR project preparation team have met with NCIP officials both in Central

Office and the Regions. NCIP agreed that CLOAs issued before AD are honored under IPRA.

The NCIP officials expressed their agency’s need for support to undertake CADT and CALT

delineation activities, having very limited budget to finance geodetic surveys. Defining the

boundaries of proposed ancestral domains is required for titling and these could be projected

vis-à-vis the agricultural lands covered by the CCLOAs and other alienable and disposable

lands as well as protected areas and other lands of the public domain. They further conveyed

that the NCIP will have much better capacity to protect the rights and welfare of indigenous

peoples if it is able to delineate AD claims against any future encroachments. As Project SPLIT

covers parcelization of collective CLOAs issued to ARBs including IPs in areas outside of their

AD. For CCLOAs that might have overlapped with Ancestral Domain, meaningful

consultation with the affected IPs shall be done wherein the pros and cons of the parcelization

of their CCLOA or just keeping it collective shall be disclosed to the IPs to help them come up

with an informed decision. Further support for the IP-ARBs may come from other assistance

of the DAR like the Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Development Support Program

(ARBDSP).

DAR project preparation team has also talked with some NGOs who are active in ARB

development efforts and who support the project.

V. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL RISKS AND IMPACTS

The project will not involve civil works or activities that have adverse impact to the

environment. On the other hand, SPLIT is beneficial to the environment since it will promote

soil conservation which minimizes sedimentation of waterways. In addition to the security of

tenure that results from the issuance of individual titles, it is expected to encourage ARBs to

engage in sustainable land management practices, invest in permanent structures and plant

permanent crops. Also, areas that are mistakenly issued with CCLOAs will be reverted to a

Timberland and/or Protected Area status.

Occupational Health and Safety and Labor Mangement

The project will mobilize limited people on each CCLOA site during its implementation hence,

only minimal occupational and community health and safety issues are anticipated. The project

will engage the services of about 5,000 workers composed of enumerators, geodetic engineers

and legal officers. These project workers may be exposed to certain occupational and health

and safety (OHS) risk during the conduct of SPLIT activities, such as working on rough or

unstable slopes, cliffs, unforeseen calamities, and limited access to facilities. Community

volunteers including the ARBs themselves, the BARC and representatives of the Barangay

LGUs may be needed to support the project survey teams and may be exposed to the

aforementioned OHS risks. Overall, occupational health and safety concerns is expected to be

18 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

minimal and manageable. In all cases, proper courtesy to the local government units, should be

done together with the Municipal Agrarian Reform Program Officers prior to the field works

or survey. There may also be situations where assistance from the police force may be needed

and should be properly coordinated with concerned authorities.

The Labor Management Procedures laid down by DAR shall be complied with to promote

sound worker-management relationships and enhance the development benefits of the project.

Likewise, the protection against OHS risk to the workers embodied in various international

laws, national laws and administrative issuances governing the public sector, shall be observed.

The concerned DAR office shall ensure that the workers are well protected against possible

OHS risks. Moreover, the locality shall be the source of labor support such that the project

workers to be engaged are preferably residents of the barangay or municipality where the

landholding covered by the CCLOA is located.

Resource Efficiency and Pollution Control

The project will have no significant impact on water and energy consumption as well as on air

and water pollution. The project does not include nor support activities or processes that require

the use of fertilizers or pesticides, as well as water for irrigation. However, the project’s

outcome of secure land tenure resulting from stabilization of the ARBs’ property rights is

expected to encourage heavier investments for intensified and diversified crop production,

which is likely to result increased use of, or dependence on, fertilizers and pesticides, as well

as higher demand on limited water resources for irrigation.

On the other hand, erosion and sedimentation are likely to be reduced in the long term as

farmers are expected to switch to perennial crops which does not need frequent tillage and/or

invest more on permanent soil conservation structures. However, if not given adequate

technological support, such as Good Agricultural Practice (GAP), farmers receiving individual

titles may initially engage in erosive cultivation practices.

Community Health and Safety

The community health and safety risk for this project is deemed negligible. Project field

personnel will be dispersed/ deployed into thousands of CCLOA sites, with only around six (6)

personnel to work at any given site during project implementation. The ground activities will

be limited to the conduct of land survey, consultation meetings, house-to-house visits and

walkthroughs. Workers would include a few organic and contractual staff of DAR from the

municipal and provincial offices and staff of the private survey contractors. Nevertheless, the

DAR teams and private survey contractors will be required to observe a code of conduct for

workers which would address community health and safety risks, including risks of gender-

based violence. Proper coordination shall be done with the barangay local government units at

all times prior to the conduct of surveys and ‘pulong –pulong’. In special cases, the DARMO

may request the assistance of the Philippine National Police for security reasons which is being

done by the DAR during ARBs installation for peace and order purposes.

Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resources

19 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

The impacts and risk on Biodiversity and Sustainable Management of Living Natural

Resources is assessed to be low. The Project will be implemented mainly in the rural

agricultural areas of the country. The estimated 115 to 123 thousand hectares of CCLOA that

overlap with Timberland (or Public Forest) classification will be returned to DENR once their

status are validated. It should be noted that timberland or public forest classification in the

Philippines merely indicates official public domain status and should not necessarily mean they

contain forest or serving watershed and ecological functions. These lands however are usually

high or mountainous. If there are overlaps, the lands in question are likely to be already

agricultural in use, although they may still have significant potentials for natural habitat and

ecological functions. Reverting these lands back to their original status is legally expedient but

would only marginally contribute to conservation as these lands would continue to be occupied

and cultivated under a less secure tenure. It has been estimated that 20-30% of the Philippine

population live in lands still classified as "forestlands" (Esplana and Quizon, 2017). There will

be however significant social impacts on the reversion of lands to public domain status which

will be discussed under social impacts below.

For lands that would remain with CARP, the issuance of individual land titles is expected to

encourage owners to invest in permanent soil conservation and enhancements measures and

more sustainable cropping systems. This positive impact would likely be significant in the

uplands, particularly those with sloping and rolling terrains. This, however, is not guaranteed

to automatically happen, and farmers need to be provided technical support and access to

sustainable land management technologies. Finally, there is a possibility that the issuance of

individual titles may trigger land use change that would lead to the clearing of the remaining

pockets of tickets in the gullies and waterways in these lands. These pockets of natural

vegetations provide habitat to some birds and faunas and often serve as critical components of

micro watersheds.

Potential Displacements and Land Use Restrictions of Occupants of Land Parcels falling within Forestland Classification

The validation and rectification of collective CLOAs with respect to official government

Alienable and Disposable (A&D), Inalienable (Forestlands) and Protected Areas land

classification would result in the return of some parcels of land back to Timberland/Forestland

and/or Protected Area status. This would in turn result in the attenuation of tenurial rights of

the affected ARBs, or even result in their displacement if they are not issued any alternative

tenurial instruments under DENR's regulation. During the validation of mother CLOAs,

landholdings that fall within areas classified as Timberland/Forestland and/or Protected Areas

will be carved out from the CCLOA and reverted back to DENR. ARBs on lands turned over

to DENR would be subject to the laws on public lands and protected areas. Current regulations

allow awarding of limited tenurial rights (25-year lease or stewardship grants) on portions of

Timberland for qualified occupants. The substitution of individual CLOAs with alternative

tenurial rights clearly constitute an attenuation of the land rights of the ARBs. In the case of

Protected Areas, the National Protected Areas System (NIPAS) law generally allow restricted

access by traditional forest occupants and forest dependent communities to some zones of the

protected area. Specifically, it allows economic activities within areas considered as buffer

zones. ARBs of parcels falling within officially declared Protected Areas therefore are expected

to retain possession of their parcels subject to regulations by the protected area authorities.

However, both the DAR and DENR are now working on the implementation of the President’s

20 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

Directive to that the issued collective CLOAs that overlapped with forest land should not be

returned to DENR hence, should not be excluded from Project SPLIT.

The number of ARBs in CCLOAs with potential overlaps on official timberland classification

initial estimate is around 38,543. It is always possible that some ARBs may be disqualified

and lose access to land under the DENR regulations. However, DAR plans to re-subdivide the

remaining lands within CCLOAs after carving out the timberlands among the all ARBs such

that all ARBs will still end up with some land parcels, albeit of reduced sizes. DAR estimates

that around 20% out of the 123,369 hectares of CCLOAs with overlaps, or 24,673 hectares

would actually fall within timberland/forest classification and thus would be carved out from

the mother CLOAs before parcelization. This leaves around 98,965 hectares of A&D lands for

the "cleansed" CCLOAs which roughly translate to 2.5 hectares each for the 38,543 ARBs.

This lot size is more than twice the average area awarded by DAR which, according to the

DAR-BLTI, stands at 1.2 hectares per ARB. Thus, the possible reclassification of the remaining

24,673 hectares of lands back to forest land or protected area will not impact much on the

individual ARBs. Under this plan, no ARBs would be at risk of being displaced while those

occupying portions that are being returned to forestlands will generally be allowed to continue

with their agricultural production under a weaker, less secure tenure arrangements with DENR.

These ARBs, be it CLOA or another tenure instrument holder must have access and be provided

with necessary support services to ensure productivity of their farms and for the ARBs to

continue or establish their own economic activities.

Potential Displacements of Current Occupants of Parcels due to disqualification or eviction due to illegal status

Since the mother CLOAs were issued many years back, some of the land parcels within the

CLOA are now occupied by persons who were not the original ARBs but who may have been

tilling, building structures and making improvements on the land. The process of individual

titling will involve validation of the legal status of current occupants of the land parcels within

the mother CLOA. This may result in the displacement of a few of the current occupants of the

lands within the mother CLOA as some of them may be ruled illegal or may be disqualified.

The current occupant could be a buyer of land rights from the original awardee, a

tenant/caretaker of the original awardee, an heir, or an informal settler with permission from

the owner, or an opportunistic encroacher/squatter. Because of these, before titling DAR will

undertake a thorough review of the circumstances of the occupancy and the validity of the

transfer from the original awardees to the current occupants. In most cases this would result in

a transfer of award from the original ARB to the current occupant. However, there is always a

possibility that the current occupant would be deemed ineligible under the law and hence

would be displaced or lose their rights on the parcels they currently occupy.

Initial assessment by the DAR-WB safeguards team during project preparation mission (field

visits in Iloilo province and discussions with select DAR regional and provincial officials

during a mission workshop in Cavite province) showed that, indeed, there are non-beneficiary

occupants who may be actually tilling the lands for quite some time who may possibly face

potential threats of eviction after issuance of individual titles. It should however be noted that

as far as DAR is concerned there has been no instance in the past eight years where

parcelization resulted to any eviction of non-beneficiary occupants.

21 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

Presence of Indigenous Cultural Communities/Indigenous Peoples

The risk to indigenous group/community is initially assessed to be low as the project does not

involve interventions that would adversely impact ARBs. Formal subdivision of lands that are

already individually occupied will not have any significant impact on land use either on the

members of the ICC/IP or the community. Moreover, each individual ARBs or group of ARBs

can actually opt out of the individual titling and continue to have collective titles.

However, some of the mother CLOAs covered by the project could be located within or overlap

with the Ancestral Domain of certain indigenous communities which may require compliance

with the IPRA law and the World Bank ESS7. There are also ARBs that are members of the

ICC/IP communities which should require compliance with the World Bank ESS7.

Overlaps of CCLOAs with Ancestral Domain. Based on submitted data from DARPOs as of 25

November 2019, there are 1,541 mother CLOAs involving 37,032 hectares of lands with

11,552 IP-ARBs in eight (8) of the 15 regions that may either overlap or be located entirely

within declared or proposed ancestral domains (ADs). The area comprises around five (5)

percent of the total lands targeted for parcelization. The total IP-ARBs occupying these lands

constitute around three (3) percent of target project beneficiaries. It is not indicated in the data

when these CLOAs were issued. Nor which of the lands are, in their entirety, or just portions

thereof, within ancestral domains. This shall be assessed further on the ground to determine the

magnitude of mother CLOA lands that may be subjected to provisions and processes under the

IPRA during parcelization, as well as the number of IP-ARBs, whether all or only some of

them are within lands overlapping with ADs. During the stakeholders engagement, the intent

of Project SPLIT shall be disclosed to the concerned IPs and their communities, together with

NCIP representatives.

ARBs who are members of the ICC/IP communities. Regardless of whether the CCLOA is

within AD or outside, the ESS7 will apply as long as ICCP/IP communities are involved. Based

on submitted data from DARPOs as of 25 November 2019, there are 46,661 IP-ARBs in 11 of

the 15 regions covered by the project, or around 4.8 percent of the target project beneficiaries

of 1.16 million farmers. This is also about the same number captured in the Census data of

2000 (See Ballesteros et al 2018).

Legal status of CCLOA or portions thereof that are inside IPRA

CCLOAs or individual CLOAs inside ancestral domain are deemed legal if they were issued

before the ancestral domain claim was declared as the IPRA recognizes and honors all pre-

existing rights within AD. It should be noted that the CARL (RA 6657) was enacted in 1988

while IPRA (RA8371) was enacted only on 1997 and was implemented only starting 2000

when the National Commission on Indigenous People (NCIP) started delineating and

approving ancestral domain claims. Hence, it is expected that only a few CCLOA may have

legal issues with respect to IPRA. In any case, there is a Joint Administrative Order (JAO)

among DAR, DENR, LRA and NCIP (JAO No.1 s. 2012) that would guide in addressing such

concerns. Potential land boundary disputes during individual parcel delineation

Since the current occupants of land parcels have only informal boundaries, it is expected that

there would be boundary disputes during the formal delineation of boundaries under the

project. Cases of ARB's conflicts have been noted in many reports and is one of the many

reasons for delays or stalled processing of individual titles. To resolve this concern, the

22 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

inventory, pulong-pulong, land validation and ARB validation shall help firm-up the master

list of ARBs and lot allocation shall be firmed up early on in the parcelization process.

Involvement of the BARC and the Barangay Chairperson and the ARBs themselves will help

address grievances related to boundary delineation. Presence of friendly police forces may also

provide support in settling said disputes, not to threaten the ARBs but to provide peace and

order in the conduct of said project-related activity.

Contested inheritance of parcels within CCLOAs

Another likely scenario on the ground is when the parcel to be titled is being contested by heirs

of deceased ARBs. Many of the land parcels whose ARBs have died or have retired are now

occupied by their heirs. However, sometimes the ownership of the parcel by the occupying heir

is contested by the other heirs. It is highly likely that project may inadvertently weigh in on the

side of the current occupant. The project should adopt a clear and fair policy in dealing with

this situation, including possible validation of the occupant status with the original ARB if

he/she is still available, and/or validation inheritance documents, consultation and seeking the

extrajudicial agreement of other heirs, etc.

Concerns about fees, unpaid taxes and amortizations being heavy economic burden to ARBs

In addition to the IPs, there are other vulnerable groups and individuals that qualifies as agrarian

reform beneficiaries such as the tillers or farm workers, single-family HH, women-led HH,

elders/senior citizens and the poor who would be impacted by Project SPLIT. Among the

benefits foreseen by the government through the project aside from improved land tenure

security and stabilized property rights of ARBs in their CARP-awarded lands are payments of

land amortization and tax payments. The project will finance all fees and charges to be incurred

in the subdivision of mother CLOAs and the titling fees required for the generation and

registration of individual CLOAs. However, since most of the mother CLOAs were issued ten

to twenty years ago, unpaid real property taxes on the project-covered mother CLOAs have

accumulated and could pose a potential risk or challenge in the registration of generated

individual CLOAs before the Register of Deeds, which requires full payment of property taxes

prior to registration. Moreover, most ARBs in the CCLOAs have not been able to pay

amortization due to lack of individual titles and those who had started to pay were stopped by

the Land Bank pending issuance of the Land Distribution and Information Schedule (LDIS).

This concern is beyond the DAR’s jurisdiction but has nevertheless initial consultations with

concerned agencies (DOF, DILG, Bureau of Local Government Finance, LGUs, etc.) on

possible arrangements (like restructured, staggered or deferred payments, or even to the extent

of condonation, or application for tax amnesty as may be granted by the LGU) that can be

agreed upon to resolve the issue. Initial representations with LGUs at the field level are being

done by some DAR Provincial Offices. Once the results of inventory and validation are

available, further assessment and dialogues shall be done to with the LGUs, the DILG and

BLGF/DOF to determine the appropriate institutional agreements to be forged by the

concerned agencies to avoid risks posed by accumulated and unpaid taxes.

23 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

Concerns that ARBs recipient of titles may immediately sell their lands resulting in loss of means of livelihood and eventual impoverishments When their new individual CLOAs are awarded (post-parcelization), there is potential risk that

farmer-beneficiaries may resort to selling portions of their awarded lands in order to raise

money to repay debts or make investments to the extent of rendering the remaining unsold

parcel of their awarded lands unviable for agriculture. However, the 2015 ARB Survey

presented that the percentage of awarded land sold by ARB is higher for collective at 6.5%

compared with that of individual CLOAs at 2.79%. The survey reported further that the 99.28

individual parcels are still with ARBs whereas for collective parcels about 92% are still with

ARBs and that 97.28% of awarded lands under individual type are currently used for

agriculture while only 90% of awarded lands under collective scheme are currently used for

agriculture.

This will be assessed further once the results of the inventory and validation of CCLOAs are

available to determine specific safeguards to be developed to avoid or minimize such risk.

One is making support services readily available to the enable farmer-beneficiaries from

various government agencies to enhance their livelihood and income, as well as negotiate (with

the possible assistance of DAR) for restructured or staggered repayments and lower fees on

their loans.

VII. ES RISK MANAGEMENT CAPACITY OF THE DAR

DAR does not currently have specialize or fully dedicated unit that handles environmental and

social safeguards matters for its projects. Capacities for safeguards are developed on a per

project basis, and experienced staff are assigned to the project as needed. For this project, a

team consisting of four (4) organic DAR staff has been formed to undertake the preparation of

the required safeguards instruments. At least two (2) of these staff have worked on safeguards-

related assignment in one of the DAR's World Bank-funded projects and ADB-funded projects.

Under Project SPLIT, project management shall hire the services of an Environment and Social

Safeguards Specialist and a Junior ES Specialist all throughout the project life, to provide

capacity development, and mentor the regular DAR personnel who would be designated as

safeguards point persons in the provinces and regions. It will also engage safeguards

consultants who provide necessary technical assistance in the preparation of safeguards

instruments and its implementation.

VIII. ES RISK MANAGEMENT/MITIGATION OPTIONS

This ESA has identified the likely risks and impacts which the project will encounter during

the implementation of the project. However, it is clear that each collective CLOA will likely

have its own peculiar environmental and social issues which can only be ascertained during

project implementation. These issues will have to be assessed and addressed at the ground level

on a per collective CLOA basis. Thus, for each CCLOA, there is a need to conduct

environmental and social screening, rapid and participatory rural assessment mainly focused

on the environmental conditions of the CCLOA area, covering such issues as, land

classification status, actual terrain, soil erosion, prevailing unsustainable farming practices, and

pest management, soil erosion, micro watersheds, involuntary resettlement issues, and

indigenous peoples and vulnerable households. Based on the rapid assessments and with the

above mitigation options as guide, CCLOA-based management plans including Resettlement

Action/Compensation Plans for those displaced or those whose rights were reduced, will have

24 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

to be prepared. Hence, the project will need to develop and adopt the following safeguard

frameworks: (i) Environmental and Social Management Framework; (ii) Resettlement Policy

Framework; (iii) Indigenous Peoples Policy Framework; and Labor Management Plan and

Stakeholder Engagement Plan. These frameworks and plans will also include grievance redress

mechanisms and capacity building plan for DAR and Project PMU.

Management Options for Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts

Occupational Health and Safety Risks concerns. Bidding documents for geodetic surveys shall

include occupational health and safety provisions not only for hired personnel but also

community volunteers when allowed to assist in surveys. Survey contractors will be required

to provide their workers with necessary personal protective equipment (PPEs) such as boots,

hardhats and harnesses when working on cliffs and rough or unstable slopes.

Potential increase use of pesticides and agrochemicals. DAR shall coordinate with DA and the

LGU to provide ARBs awarded with new individual titles with training on Good Agricultural

Practices, Organic Farming and IPM. CCLOA areas shall be covered by DA's SAKA

KALIKASAN Program. These measures may include DAR’s provision of trainings for ARBs

on sustainable farming technologies and practices like the Farm Field School and Farm

Business School approaches though these will not be financed by the project. The regular

programs and projects of the DAR and partner agencies can be tapped to Push for organic

agriculture and good agricultural practices to avoid the excessive use of pesticides and agro-

chemicals.

Community Health and Safety concerns. Only a few workers would come from outside the

communities and only for a few days. Community health and safety concerns due to the

presence of these workers, transmissible diseases, criminality and the gender-based violence,

will be dealt with under the Code of Conduct for Workers which DAR shall prepare and which

contractors shall abide by. This include the courtesy call and proper coordination with the

LGUs of the project team prior to their entry to the community. In special cases, coordination

or request for police assistance is necessary to ensure peace and order in the conduct of project

activities. The Code of Conduct shall also address potential exposure of the workers to endemic

vector-borne diseases in the area such as malaria and schistosomiasis. See also management

options for labor and working conditions below.

Soil erosion and long-term land degradation due to erosive farming practices. DAR will

coordinate with the Department of Agriculture and get the commitments of the LGU to provide

farmers in hilly areas with sloping land agriculture technologies or encourage farmers to plant

less erosive and permanent crops in their parcels.

Protection of micro watersheds within CCLOA areas. Lands within Timberland will be carved

out of the CCLOA and reverted back to Timberland status under the management of DENR

FMB pending final implementation arrangements of both DAR & DENR on the President’s

Directive regarding CCLOAs in forest/timberland areas..Farmers beneficiaries in hilly and

rolling areas shall continue their current farming practices and encouraged to improve and

preserve existing waterways, gullies and patches of natural vegetations.

25 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

Labor Management Issues. A separate Labor Management Plan shall be prepared by DAR

which shall include a grievance redress mechanism that conform with WB ESS and national

law and regulations on occupational health and safety

Potential Displacement, Loss or Attenuation of rights of ARBs in parcels classified as Forest

Lands. Based on the current plan, DAR would first review and carve out the portions of

CCLOAs that overlap with timberland/forestland classification and Protected Areas, then re-

subdivide the remaining areas to the ARBs. This should avoid ARBs being potentially

displaced or end up with no title. This also minimizes the impacts of reversion of affected

parcels to DENR on the individual ARBs. This is theoretically feasible on the broader scale,

but realities on the ground may be different such as for example when an entire CCLOA need

to be reverted to timberland/forestland classifications, or when there is not enough land

available nearby to replace lands reverted to timberland/forestland classifications. In these

cases, the reversion of CCLOAs or portions thereof may require relocation of household or

farmstead or may have impacts on their agricultural production and livelihoods..

Another option being considered is for DAR to still cover/subdivide the CCLOA regardless of

overlaps, particularly with lands classified as forest lands but are already being cultivated and

planted with crops, or those deemed to be more suitable for agricultural use. This is also in line

with the directive of the President, and both the DAR and DENR are working on the

implementation of this directive.. This measure, when adopted, will further increase the

average area to be awarded to the ARBs, or may allow additional new beneficiaries to be

included under these CCLOAs should the average land size to be awarded to current ARBs

exceed the limit of three (3) hectares per beneficiary.

To address these potential situations on the ground, the project will adopt a Resettlement Policy

Framework (RPF) to provide guidelines, among others, on dealing with potential loss of rights

and resettlement issues arising from, the carving out of timberland overlaps from the mother

CLOAs. The resettlement policy framework should include consultations with DENR-FMB

over the suitable alternative tenurial instruments such as Certificate of Stewardship Contract

(CSC) to individual ARB or Community-Based Forest Management Agreement (CBFMA) that

might be awarded to ARBOs in case the lands they currently occupy are reverted back to

DENR. The RPF shall also consider other concerned agencies apart from DAR to provide

appropriate necessary assistance/support to offset any attenuation of land rights of any affected

ARBs or other occupants resulting from substitution of the mother CLOAs with less superior

land rights under different tenurial instruments. The RPF shall also include screening tools to

identify as early as possible the mother CLOAs with overlaps.

Potential Displacements of Current Occupants. There is a need to further assess the extent and

prevalence of these risks on the ground during project implementation. The detailed policy and

approach to address potential displacements will be contained in the Resettlement Policy

Framework which will be developed and adopted for this project. The framework shall address

both the potential cases of displacement/relocation/resettlement of ARBs due to reversion of

current landholdings to timberland status, and cases of displacements/exclusions of current

occupants as a result of disqualification.

Potential Conflict in Boundaries and Contested Claims. DAR has a system for dealing with

boundary issues on contested claims. If the project encounters such conflict during the conduct

of delineation of individual land parcel boundaries, the case will be referred to the Barangay

Agrarian Reform Committee (BARC). The BARC acts as mediator and conciliator in agrarian

disputes and assists in the identification of qualified beneficiaries and landowners. It also attests

26 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

to the accuracy of the parcellary mapping of CARP lands and helps in the initial determination

of land values.

Potential Loss or Attenuation of rights of ARBs in parcels classified as Forest Lands.

Conversely, the DAR may also decide to recommend that, notwithstanding such overlaps, lands

classified as forest lands but are already being cultivated and planted with crops, or those

deemed to be more suitable for agricultural use, will still be covered by the project.

Reclassifying large tracts of inalienable lands into agricultural use may cause potential negative

environmental impacts in terms of reduction of forest covers.

Screening tools shall be developed during project preparation and inventory of mother CLOAs

to find out early on the actual extent and magnitude of these overlaps and consider/include such

mother CLOAs for parcelization only in the latter years of project implementation when

segregation surveys are done to give time for further assessment of potential risks and impacts

and preparation of specific mitigation measures and actions like proper turnover of excluded

lands to the jurisdiction of the DENR.

Presence of ICC/IPs. There are two cases for these: One is when the CCLOA is within an

Ancestral Domain; The other is when the CCLOA or the land parcel to be titled is outside the

Ancestral Domain but is owned by members of the ICC/IP.

(a) When land parcels to be issued title is inside AD. The ancestral domain is a territory

which the ICC/IP collectively has jurisdiction and control. According to the IPRA law

and its implementing rules and regulations, when the project or intervention is within

Ancestral Domain it will normally be subject to the process of free and prior informed

consent under the auspices of NCIP, except when the project itself is a government

project specifically benefiting the ICC/IP or if the intervention is part of the ICC/IP's

Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development and Protection Plan (ADSDPP). In both

cases, the NCIP will provide a Certificate of Precondition for intervention that complies

with the rules. The project will therefore comply with the IPRA requirements when the

parcels to be titled are within Ancestral Domain.

(b) When CCLOA is outside AD and the ARBs to be issued title are members of the ICC/IP.

The World Bank ESS7 however, does not depend upon the concept of Ancestral

Domain. On the other hand, if the land parcels subject to titling are owned by members

a group of the ICC/IP but outside the Ancestral Domain, the situations will be further

assessed to determine if free and prior informed consent is required.

In both of these cases, culturally appropriate consultation process will be conducted and

ICC/IPs communities inside or outside ADs may opt out of the parcelization and continue

collective land ownership status within the collective CLOA.

Legal issues: CARP versus IPRA. Both CARL and IPRA are land rights laws. But IPRA has

an additional concept of Ancestral Domain which defines the territory under control of the

ICC/IP for which the AD is awarded to. The instrument for this is called Certificate of Ancestral

Domain Title (CADT). Within CADT the NCIP can issue individual titles for land parcels

called Certificate of Ancestral Land Title (CALT) which carries with it a number of restrictions,

including non-transferability outside the ICC/IP group that owns the CADT. The IPRA

recognizes pre-existing vested rights (i.e. other forms of ownership titles) on land within

ancestral domains. Therefore, collective CLOAs or CLOAs issued prior to the declaration of

the AD do not conflict with IPRA or Ancestral Domain rules. But Collective CLOAs or

27 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

individual CLOAs that overlap with or are entirely within AD and which are issued after the

AD is declared, are technically in conflict with the IPRA. Thus, CCLOAs issued after IPRA

took effect will require further assessment and consultations with the IPs and NCIP officials to

discuss how to resolve any legal, cultural and such other issues raised before these are included

for parcelization. There is an existing Joint Administrative Order between DAR, DENR, LRA

and NCIP which was intended to deal with these conflicts. The JAO No.1 s2012 is clarifying,

restating and interfacing the respective jurisdictions, policies, programs and projects of the four

(4) agencies in order to address jurisdictional and operational issues between and among the

agencies. The project will abide by this agreement or any update thereof.

An adequate review of the IPRA and related regulations like the requirements for FPIC shall

be undertaken and considered in the formulation of an IPPF to serve as guidance in preparing

the project’s site-specific IP Plans, when required/needed, for parcelization of lands that

overlap with ADs or lands outside ADs with IP-ARBs. The IPPF will be made integral part of

the project operations manual.

ES Risk Management Capacity Building for the Project

There is a need for DAR to hire a safeguards specialist consultant, with strong background in

involuntary resettlement, during the project implementation to provide advisory and oversight

functions at Project Management Office (PMO). In addition, social development specialists

should be hired at the regional levels to provide technical support to provincial and municipal

offices in the implementation of the ESMF. At the provincial and municipal levels, safeguards

focal persons shall be designated and trained implementation of the ESMF and the associated

plans, frameworks and protocols.

Hence, as mentioned earlier, under the Project SPLIT, the DAR shall engage the services of

Environment and Social Development Specialists and consultants who will provide necessary

technical assistance in the preparation of safeguards instruments and its implementation and

provide capacity development and mentor the regular DAR personnel who would be designated

as safeguards point persons in the provinces and regions.

REFERENCES

The World Bank (2009). Land Reform, Rural Development, and Poverty in the Philippines:

Revisiting the Agenda. Technical Working Paper Final Report. The World Bank in the

Philippines, 2009.

Tia, Mercedita E. and Teodoro M. Orteza (2004) "Profile of Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries

through CARP (Results from the 2000 Census of Population and Housing)" 9th National

Convention on Statistics (NCS), EDSA Shangri-la Hotel, Garden Way, Ortigas Center,

Mandaluyong City , October 4-5, 2004

Esplana, M.R.P, and A.B. Quizon (2017) "Status of tenure reform in public lands under the

Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program", Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and

Rural Development (ANGOC) March 2017

Ballesteros, M. M., J.A. Ancheta, and T.P. Ramos (2018). "The Comprehensive Agrarian

Reform Program After 30 Years: Accomplishments and Forward Options," Philippine Institute

of Development Studies, Research Paper Series No. 2018-03.

28 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

DAR (2019), "Support to Parcelization of Land for Individual Titling" Project Proposal

Submitted to the World Bank, March 29, 2019.

Philippine Statistical Research and Training Institute. “2015 Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries

Survey”.

29 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

30 | P a g e D R A F T SPLIT-ESA.29Nov2019

Figure 1: Map of the Philippines