Puerto Princesa ECAN Resource Management Plan

Supervised Field Experience in Human Settlements Planning
Department of Community and Environmental Resource Planning

College of Human Ecology
University of the Philippines Los Baños
In partnership with
Palawan Council for Sustainable Development
ECAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN

OF PUERTO PRINCESA CITY, PALAWAN
(2017-2022)
Cuebillas, Arkin Miguel D.

Defensor, Christianne Katriel C.
Esguerra, Janmari Lorenzo G.
Falcon, Fermella Emily B.
Mejico, Mussaenda Sirikit F.
Padilla, Mary Joy Daphne P.
May 2016
Supervised Field Experience in Human Settlements Planning
Department of Community and Environmental Resource Planning
College of Human Ecology
University of the Philippines Los Baños
In partnership with
ECAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN OF PUERTO PRINCESA CITY,

PALAWAN (2017-2022)
Cuebillas, Arkin Miguel D.

Defensor, Christianne Katriel C.
Esguerra, Janmari Lorenzo G.
Falcon, Fermella Emily B.
Mejico, Mussaenda Sirikit F.
Padilla, Mary Joy Daphne P.
May 2016
ECAN Resource Management Plan of Puerto Princesa City (2017-2022)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report is commissioned to come up with the ECAN Resource Management

Plan of Puerto Princesa, Palawan through the process of ecanization in pursuance to the
mandate provided by the SEP Act of 1992. This document contains the threats present
within the city, specifically within the ECAN zones, as well as the possible plan of actions
and strategies that will play a key role in addressing and mitigating these issues. The SEP
uses Environmentally Critical Areas Network (ECAN) as its main strategy for ensuring the
protection of vulnerable areas. It is constructed to balance environmental conservation and
economic growth of the locality. Under this strategy is the ECAN management called
ecanization wherein boundaries of different zones are delimited; allowable activities and
resource per zone are identified; and regulatory measures are enforced. In lieu to this, the
Palawan Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD), the implementing agency of the
SEP, had a memorandum of understanding with the Department of Community and
Environmental Resource Planning (DCERP) of the College of Human Ecology (CHE) to
send six practicum students to the city of Puerto Princesa to assist in the formulation and
mainstreaming of the ECAN Resource Management Plan into the city’s CLUP.
The formulation of the ERMP includes the formulation of the city’s Ecological
Profile and Integrated Threats Analysis. Secondary data such as the city’s
Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP), Forest Land Use Plan (FLUP), Comprehensive
Development Plan (CDP), Annual Investment Plan, and accomplishment reports from the
various departments and offices of the local government unit were gathered for the
Ecological Profile. Key Informant Interviews were then conducted in order to identify the
existing and prevailing threats and issues, opportunities, local government initiatives, and
response within the city relative to the identified ECAN zones. The city’s profile with the
results of the KII comprises the Integrated Threats Analysis. All the acquired data were
presented and validated during the Participatory ECAN Planning Workshop held last April
15, 2016 at the new city hall. During the workshop, threats were prioritized by the
stakeholders present, and a comprehensive action plan per zone was accomplished.
The prioritized threats per zone identified by the stakeholders are as follows:
Core Zone
1. Illegal occupancy and intrusion of local people to perform extractive and
destructive activities such as: (1) timber poaching; (2) tourism expansion; and (3)
unsustainable fishing and agricultural practices.
Restricted Use Zone

1. Illegal wildlife trade and timber poaching
2. Unsustainable agricultural practices in upland areas
3. Unregulated quarrying (specifically in Brgy. Montible)
Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla i

4. Intrusion of people to claim lands and perform extractive and destructive

activities
Controlled Use Zone

1. Unregulated quarrying
2. Tenured migrants and intrusion of local people to perform destructive and
extractive activities
3. Unsustainable agricultural practices
4. Illegal poaching of wildlife and timber
Traditional Use Zone

1. Concerns on illegal occupancy, and selling of CADC and CADT
2. Weak Law Enforcement on Charcoal Making, Timber and Wildlife Poaching, and
Unregulated Quarrying
Multiple Use Zone

1. Waste Management
2. Weak Law Enforcement
3. Inadequacy of Agriculture and Fisheries Support
4. Insufficient Support Infrastructures
5. Conflicting Land Use Options
Tribal Ancestral Use Zone

1. Intrusion of Non-IPs and Land Grabbing
To formulate an effective ECAN Resource Management Plan, the ECAN Planning

Workshop should be done at the barangay level to encourage participatory planning within
communities. Locals should be involved in the process because they will soon adopt these
plans of action. Scope of stakeholders should be widened. Representatives from barangays
and other community interest group should be included during the process. Empowerment
of communities on ‘ecanization’ should be done through proper representation.
Participatory ECAN Planning Workshop should be designed for a 2-day or 3-day workshop
to have more time for the breakout sessions where participants validate data gathered and
then discuss and formulate comprehensive plans of action. The schedule should not also
be during the campaign for election period because of the unavailability of some
participants thereby sending their representatives which are not well-immersed with the
undertaking. Incentives for the workshop participants who completed the undertaking
could be provided. Plaques of appreciation and awards can be given to city
offices/barangays or private institutions who actively participated on the 2-day or 3-day
workshop. DPSIR Framework should be structured per ECAN zone, per sector present in
the particular zone. This is because social and economic issues and concerns on core and
buffer zones tend to be overlooked by some key-informants. Zonal and sectoral DPSIR
Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla ii

framework will give a comprehensive analysis on the threats in each zone in consideration
with the existing sectors on it. Logical framework could be formulated that will allow on
project planners and evaluators to specify components of the activities and to identify the
logical linkages. Logical framework can help set proper objectives, define indicators of
success, critical assumptions and resources needed and identify means of verifying plan
accomplishments. Integration of primary and secondary data in formulation of DPSIR
framework should be performed.
With the results incurred, it is necessary that the ECAN Resource Management Plan
of Puerto Princesa City should be implemented and mainstreamed with the city’s other
planning document specifically the CLUP.
Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................... i

LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................... vi
LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... ix
LIST OF ANNEXES ..........................................................................................................x
ACRONYMS .................................................................................................................... xi
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................1
1.1 Purpose and Scope of the ECAN Zoning Plan ...........................................................1
1.2 Target Users of the ECAN Zoning Plan .....................................................................1
1.3 Legal Bases of the ECAN Zoning Plan ......................................................................1
1.4 Existing Land Use Planning and Regulatory Frameworks in Palawan ......................5
CHAPTER II: ECOLOGICAL PROFILE OF PUERTO PRINCESA CITY.............6
2.1 Historical Background of Puerto Princesa City .........................................................6
2.2 Geo-Physical Environment Sector .............................................................................7
2.3 Population and Social Profile ...................................................................................32
2.4 Local Economy ........................................................................................................57
2.5 Infrastructure, Public Utilities, and Facilities...........................................................67
2.6 Local Institutional Capability ...................................................................................73
2.7 Ecological Footprint .................................................................................................83
CHAPTER IIII: THE ECAN ZONING STRATEGY .................................................86
3.1 The ECAN Zones as Management Unit ...................................................................87
3.2 Components of ECAN Zones ...................................................................................87
3.3 Criteria and Parameters in the Delineation of the ECAN Zones ..............................89
3.4 Allowable Activities in the ECAN Zones ................................................................93
3.5 Delineation of the ECAN Zones Using GIS ............................................................95
CHAPTER IV: MAJOR STEPS IN THE ECAN ZONING
PLAN PREPARATION ..................................................................................................97
4.1 The ECAN Zones Management in Planning Process ...............................................98
4.2 A Guide in the Development of a Detailed ECAN Zoning Plan..............................99
CHAPTER V: INTEGRATED THREATS ANALYSIS............................................116
5.1 Objectives of Threats Analysis...............................................................................116
5.2 Framework of Integrated Threats Analysis ............................................................116
Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla iv

5.3 Methodology for Integrated Threats Analysis .......................................................118

5.4 Results and Discussion ...........................................................................................120
CHAPTER VI: THE ECAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN .......................161
6.1 Goals and Objectives of the ECAN Zones Management Plan ...............................161
6.2 The ECAN Resource Management Plan of Puerto Princesa City ..........................161
6.3 Ridge-to-Reef ECAN Management Framework and Land/Water Use Strategies .164
6.4 ECAN Zones Management Guidelines ..................................................................170
6.5 Special Management Areas ....................................................................................182
6.6 ECAN Resource Management Program (2017-2022) ...........................................184
CHAPTER VII: ADMINISTRATIVE OF THE ECAN ZONING PLAN ...............200
7.1 Administrator and Implementer of the ECAN Zoning Plan...................................200
7.2 Immediate Activities ..............................................................................................201
7.3 Possible Sources of Funds ......................................................................................202
7.4 Monitoring and Evaluation.....................................................................................204
REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................206
ANNEX A: Summary Documentation of the Participatory ECAN Planning
Workshop........................................................................................................................210
ANNEX B: Participatory ECAN Planning Workshop Design for ECANizing Puerto
Princesa City...................................................................................................................214
ANNEX C: Key Informant Interview Threats Questionnaire ...................................230
ANNEX D: Questionnaire for Stocktaking ................................................................234
ANNEX E: Attendance Sheets .....................................................................................237
ANNEX F: Computation for Ecological Footprint ....................................................240
ANNEX G: Incorporating the SEP and ECAN into Local Land Use Plans.............241
Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla v

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1 Sections of PCSD Resolution 05-250 related to the ECAN Zoning Plan
Table 1.2 Laws and issuances related to local land use and development planning
Table 2.1 List of barangays and land areas in Puerto Princesa City
Table 2.2 Elevation Distribution and Percentage Composition of the Land Area of Puerto
Princesa City
Table 2.3 Slope Classification and Distribution of Urban and Rural Barangays of Puerto
Princesa City
Table 2.4 Soil Type Distribution in Puerto Princesa City
Table 2.5 Area and Percentage Distribution of Land in Puerto Princesa City
Table 2.6 Areas of ECAN Zones
Table 2.7 Land Use Distribution of the Total Land Area of the City
Table 2.8 Available Land Uses and its Distribution in the Central Business District (CBD)
and Periphery
Table 2.9 List of Barangays and Tenurial Lands in the City
Table 2.10 Location and Estimated Reserve of Mineral Resources in Puerto Princesa City
Table 2.11 Major Rivers and Catchment Areas of Puerto Princesa City
Table 2.12 Status of threatened species in Puerto Princesa City
Table 2.13 Distribution of Areas Identified to be Landslides Susceptible
Table 2.14 ECAN Zones by Barangay, Puerto Princesa City, Palawan
Table 3.1 Historical Population Growth of the Puerto Princesa City, Palawan, 1960-2010
Table 3.2 Total Population by Barangay, Puerto Princesa City, Palawan, 2010
Table 3.3 Urban-Rural Distribution and Population Density of Puerto Princesa City per
Barangay, 2010
Table 3.4 Comparative Population Data, 2000 – 2010
Table 3.5 Sex Distribution per Age Group, 2010
Table 3.6 Ten Leading Causes of Mortality in Puerto Princesa City for the year 2014 and
2015
Table 3.7 Deaths with Medical Assistance and Deaths by Sex in Puerto Princesa City,
2015
Table 3.8 Ten Leading Causes of Morbidity in Puerto Princesa City for the year 2014 and
2015
Table 3.9 Vital Health Indices, 2015
Table 3.10 Prevalence Rate of Malnutrition (Weight-for-Age), 2012-2015
Table 3.11 Access to Health Care, 2009 and 2012
Table 3.12 Social Welfare Programs and Services Available, 2014
Table 3.13 Selected Poverty Indicators, 2012
Table 3.14 Literacy rate of Puerto Princesa City, 2012
Table 3.15 Projected School-Going Population for the next five years, and five years
thereafter
Table 3.16 Total Number of Public Elementary Schools Enrollees in Puerto Princesa City
Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla vi

Table 3.17 Total Number of Public Secondary Schools Enrollees in Puerto Princesa City
Table 3.18 Type of Toilet Facilities Owned by Households
Table 3.19 Number of Households by Tenure Status of the Lot, Puerto Princesa City
Table 3.20 Housing and Sanitation Situation of Households per Barangay, 2012
Table 3.21 Number of OFWs per Barangay, 2012
Table 4.1 Total land area of long-term and periodic crops in Puerto Princesa City, 2012
Table 4.2 Crop Yield of Puerto Princesa City, 2012
Table 4.3 Poultry and Livestock Inventory, Puerto Princesa City, 2008-2012
Table 4.4 Number of Heads and Kilos for the Past Years and Present
Table 4.5 Food Self-Sufficiency Assessment, Puerto Princesa City, 2012
Table 4.6 Building Permits Issued, Puerto Princesa City, 2009-2012
Table 4.7 List of Banks and its Classification, Puerto Princesa City, 2012
Table 5.1 Road Network by Administrative Classification and Surface Type, 2012
Table 5.2 Existing Bridges, by Administrative Classification and Bridge Type, 2012
Table 5.3 Water Service Connection by type, 2012
Table 5.4 PALECO Customers by type, 2010-2012
Table 5.5 Electric Power Consumption (kwh) by type of Connection, 2010-2012
Table 6.1 Directory of City Officials (2013-2016)
Table 6.2 Revenue Profile of Puerto Princesa City, 2012
Table 6.3 Expenditures by Item, Puerto Princesa City (2015)
Table 6.4 Summary of Legislations by Sector, 2013-2015
Table 6.5 Accredited NGO’s and PO’s Approved by the Sangguniang Panlungsod as of
Jan 2016
Table 6.6 Development Control and Environmental Protection Committee of Puerto
Princesa City
Table 6.7 Members of the DCEPC TWG-ENVI and DCEPC TWG-ECO
Table 6.8 Composition of the City Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council
Table 7. Ecological Footprint of Puerto Princesa City
Table 8. Parameters and criteria in the delineation of terrestrial ECAN Zones (PCSD, 2014b)
Table 9. Parameters and criteria in delineating coastal/marine ECAN zones (PCSD, 2014b)
Table 10. Activities allowed in the ECAN Zones (PCSD, 2014b, PCSD, 2014c)
Table 11. Spatial and non-spatial data sources related to ECAN mapping
Table 12. Data requirements for ECAN zones management planning
Table 13. NIPAS Areas of Palawan Province
Table 14. Thematic planning modules for use in ECAN planning
Table 15. A sector- based list of spatial data needs for sustainable development planning
(adapted from Loterte-Avillanosa, unpublished)
Table 16. Sample log frame for the forestry sector (Phil-CSD 2013)
Table 17. Sample core themes for sustainable development planning
Table 18. Possible sustainability criteria for projects in Palawan
Table 19. Possible courses of action in the forest and biodiversity sector (Phil-CSD 2013)
Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla vii

Table 20. Possible courses of action in the municipality

Table 21. Major Steps of Threats and Solutions Analysis
Table 22. DPSIR Table of the Terrestrial and Tribal Ancestral Component
Table 23. DPSIR Table of the Coastal/Marine Core and Multiple Use Zone
Table 24. Current Initiatives in Environmental Governance of Puerto Princesa City
Table 25. The major issues of Puerto Princesa and the strategies that address them
Table 26. Areas of ECAN Zones
Table 27. Ridge-to-Reef Management Framework of ECAN Zones
Table 28. Recommended strategies to address general threats to sustainable development
of ECAN zones
Table 29. ECAN Zones Management Goals and Framework Applicable to the City of
Puerto Princesa
Table 30. Activities allowed in the ECAN zones (based on PCSD Resolution 05-250 and
PCSD Resolution 06-270) vis-à-vis general and specific strategies in each zone
Table 31. Estimated Budget Requirements for ECAN Zoning Implementation and Related
Environmental Management Programs
Table 32a.Strategy-based ECAN Resource Management Plan for the Terrestrial and Tribal
Ancestral Components
Table 32b. Strategy-based ECAN Resource Management Plan for the Coastal Core and
Multiple Use Zones
Table 33. Comparison table for SEP ECAN zones and HLURB general land use zones.
Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla viii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Hierarchy and linkages of plan (HLURB 2006, modified)

Figure 2.1 Slope Map of Puerto Princesa City
Figure 2.2 Land Classification Map of Puerto Princesa City
Figure 2.3 Land Use Map of Puerto Princesa City
Figure 2.4 Urban Land Use Map of Puerto Princesa City
Figure 2.5 Geohazard Map of Puerto Princesa City
Figure 2.6 ECAN Zone Map of Puerto Princesa City
Figure 3.1 Top Ten Populous Barangays of Puerto Princesa City
Figure 3.2 Tempo of Urbanization, 2000 – 2010
Figure 3.3 Satellite Clinics in Puerto Princesa City
Figure 3.4 Mortality in Puerto Princesa City by Age Group, 2015
Figure 4.1 The percentage of building permits issued in the City of Puerto Princesa, 2012
Figure 4.2 Trend in Tourist Arrival Puerto Princesa City, 2013-2015
Figure 5.1 Existing Road Network Map of Puerto Princesa City
Figure 6.1. Organizational Structure of the Local Government Unit of Puerto Princesa
City, Palawan
Figure 7. Configuration of biosphere reserve zones
Figure 8. Terrestrial ECAN Zones map of Palawan Province
Figure 9. Palawan Tribal Ancestral Zones (TAZ) proclaimed by PCSD
Figure 10. A proposed general model of a sustainable development project (Salafsky et
al. 2008, modified)
Figure 11. Interrelationship of Problems in the Core Zone
Figure 12. Interrelationship of Problems in the Restricted Use Zone
Figure 13. Interrelationship of Problems in the Controlled Use Zone
Figure 14. Interrelationships of Problems in the Traditional Use Zone
Figure 15. Interrelationship of Problems in the Multiple Use Zone
Figure 16. The positive reinforcing outcomes of SEP-ECAN
Figure 17. Logical Framework of Puerto Princesa City ECAN Management
Figure 18. Institutionalization of the ECAN
Figure 19. The SEP ECAN integration process into the CLU
Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla ix

LIST OF ANNEXES
ANNEX A: Summary Documentation of the Participatory ECAN Planning Workshop in

Puerto Princesa City
ANNEX B: Participatory ECAN Planning Workshop Design for ECANizing Puerto
Princesa City
ANNEX C: Key Informant Interview Threats Questionnaire
ANNEX D: Questionnaire for Stocktaking
ANNEX E: Attendance Sheets
ANNEX F: Computation for Ecological Footprint
ANNEX G: Incorporating the SEP and ECAN into Local Land Use Plans
Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla x

ACRONYMS
A&D Alienable and Disposable
ADSDPP Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development and Protection Plan
AIP Annual Investment Program
ALS Alternative Learning System
BFP Bureau of Fire Protection
BHW Barangay Health Worker
BMC Barangay Management Council
CADC Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim
CADT Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title
CALC Certificate of Ancestral Land Claim
CARP Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program
CASSAPS Creation of Council on Anti-Squatting Syndicate and Professional
Squatters
CBFM Community-Based Forest Management
CBMS Community-Based Monitoring System
CDA Coop Development Authority
CDP Comprehensive Development Plan
CDRRMC City Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council
CGDH City Government Department Head
CHO City Health Office
CLUP Comprehensive Land Use Plan
CPDO City Planning and Development Office
CPH Census of Population and Housing
CSWDO City Social Welfare and Development Office
CTO City Tourism Office
CVO City Veterinary Office
DCEPC Development Control and Environmental Protection Committee
DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources
DepEd Department of Education
DILG Department of Interior and Local Government
DOH Department of Health
DPSIR Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response
DPWH Department of Public Works and Highways
DTI Department of Trade and Industry
ECC Environmntal Compliance Certificate
ECAN Environmentally Critical Areas Network
EF Ecological Footprint
ELAC Environmental Legal Assistance Center, Inc.
ERMP ECAN Resource Management Plan
EZP ECAN Zone Plan
FGD Focus Group Discussion
FLUP Forest Land Use Plan
IEC Information, Education, and Communication
IP Indigenous People
Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla xi

Continuation of Acronyms
IPRA Indigenous People’s Rights Act
ITA Integrated Threats Analysis
KBA Key Biodiversity Areas
LGBTQ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Queer
KII Key Informant Interview
LGU Local Government Unit
MDG Millennium Development Goal
MGB Mines and Geosciences Bureau
MMT Multi-partite Monitoring Team
MRF Materials Recovery Facility
NGP National Greening Program
NIPAS National Integrated Protected Area System
NPC National Power Corporation
NSO National Statistics Office
OCA Office of the City Agriculturist
OFW Overseas Filipino Worker
OTOP One Town, One Product
PAGASA Philippine Atmospheric and Geophysical Administration
PALECO Palawan Electric Cooperative
PCSD Palawan Council for Sustainable Development
PCSDS Palawan Council for Sustainable Development Secretariat
PGR Population Growth Rate
PPA Philippine Ports Authority
PPCPO Puerto Princesa City Police Office
PPCWD Puerto Princesa City Water District
PPGI Palawan Power Generations, Inc.
PPSRNP Puerto Princesa Subterranean River National Park
PSA Philippine Statistics Authority
PSR Pressure-State-Response
PSU Palawan State University
PWRCC Palawan Wildlife and Resource Conservation Center
RCCP Reinforced Concrete Cylinder Pipelines
RHU Rural Health Unit
RSC Rural Satellite Clinic
SDG Sustainable Development Goal
SEMP Sustainable Environmental Management Project
SEP Strategic Environmental Plan
SIFMA Socialized Integrated Forest Management Agreement
TWG Technical Working Group
WHO World Health Organization
Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla xii

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE ECAN ZONING PLAN
By virtue of Republic Act 7611 (the 1992 Strategic Environmental Plan for
Palawan Act, or the SEP Law), Palawan Province is to be subdivided according to a zoning
strategy called the ECAN (Environmentally Critical Areas Network). The ECAN is a
graded system of protection and development control over the whole of Palawan. The need
for ECAN Zoning arises from Palawan’s characteristics as an area with natural resources
of high conservation value and, increasingly, as a center of economic development.
Furthermore, Palawan’s ecosystems are fragile and vulnerable to natural and man-made
threats like climate change, pollution, environmental degradation, and loss of resources.
The projected increase in Palawan population due to high birth rate and in-
migration is also expected to overshoot the carrying capacity of its natural systems. There
is, therefore, a need to plan ahead for the optimal use of resources and the segregation of
Palawan’s land and water territories into zones that will sustain their land use potential and
life-support systems. This ECAN Plan shall cover the basic strategies for the sustainable
development of Puerto Princesa City. The ultimate goal is to proactively respond to the
evolving challenges and opportunities in the city and to address the issues and problems
encountered by its environmental managers while pursuing sustainable development.
1.2 TARGET USERS OF THE ECAN ZONING PLAN
The target users of this Plan are the city’s local government unit administrators,
district environmental managers, city land use planners, NGOs, academe, and other
stakeholders interested in local land use planning. They are the ones involved in the on-site
implementation of some of the identified plans, programs, and projects in this Plan.
1.3 LEGAL BASES OF THE ECAN ZONING PLAN
The SEP is the rubric of all environmental plans in Palawan formulated by the
government. Section 6 on “legal effects” of the SEP Law provides that the “SEP shall serve
as the framework to guide the government agencies concerned in the formulation and
implementation of plans, programs and projects affecting the environment and natural
resources of Palawan.”
To implement the provisions of the SEP Law, one of the powers and functions
(Section 19) of its administrative body, the PCSD, is to “coordinate with the local
governments to ensure that the latter's plans, programs and projects are aligned with the
plans, programs and policies of the SEP.” The following table summarizes the relevant
provisions of the PCSD Resolution 05-250 and 06-270, which lays down the SEP Law’s
Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla 1

implementing guidelines on the ECAN. These provisions serve as bases and guide for
formulating the ECAN Resource Management Plan.
Table 1.1 Sections of PCSD Resolution 05-250 related to the ECAN Zoning Plan
Relevant section of Provision
PCSD Resolution 05-250
Section 25. After the approval of the ECAN Map, the LGU through its
Preparation of the ECAN Board and with the assistance of the PCSDS, shall
ECAN Zoning Plan prepare an ECAN Zoning Plan taking into consideration
factors relevant to local land/water use planning.
The ECAN Zoning Plan shall include among others the

following:
i. Description of the Area
ii. Goals/Objectives
iii. Zoning Strategy (priorities, methodologies for
marking zone boundaries)
iv. Zone Management (activities, regulatory measures
policy directions)
v. Administration
vi. Monitoring and Evaluation
vii. Annexes (maps and references)
Section 26. The ECAN Zoning Plan shall be prepared by the ECAN
LGU Adoption of the Board to be organized or reconstituted in each
ECAN Zoning Plan municipality/city as provided in Sections 37-39 of these
guidelines. The Plan shall be presented for public hearing
in the respective locality before final adoption by the
Sangguniang Bayan/Panglunsod and endorsement to the
Sangguniang Panlalawigan for subsequent approval of the
Council through the Council Staff.
Section 39. The Board is vested with the following powers and
Powers and Functions of functions: 9. Through the ECAN working teams,
the ECAN Board undertake the following:
a. Provide technical support to the LGU in
implementing the ECAN;
b. Facilitate the flow of activities, documents,
information and decision-making process related to the
efficient and effective implementation of the ECAN;
c. Assist in data acquisition, analysis, monitoring, and
evaluation of environmental conditions in the light of
SEP and ECAN targets and objectives;
d. Assist PCSD in the conduct of information and
education activities;

Relevant section of Provision

e. Facilitate the formulation of ECAN Zoning Plan
and its harmonization with the Municipal
Comprehensive Land and Water Use Plan; and
f. Other activities in pursuance of sustainable and
development objectives
Chapter III. Section 30. ECAN as Framework for Municipal
Harmonization with the Planning. The ECAN Zoning Plan (EZP) shall serve as
Municipal Land and the general physical plan of every municipality/city. It
Water Use Plans shall be the basis of other planning activities such as land
use planning, tourism master planning and resource
management planning as a whole. The Comprehensive
Land and Water Use Plans of the respective LGUs shall be
anchored on the ECAN Zoning Plan.
Section 31. Integration/Harmonization of ECAN

Zoning Plan with the Municipal Comprehensive Land
and Water Use Plan. The implementation of the ECAN
Zoning Plan which may include policy formulation,
legislation, setting up of permitting system, monitoring and
other related activities, as hereinafter provided, shall be the
joint responsibility of the Local Government Units and
the Council Staff through the Municipal ECAN Board.
To attain this objective, the Planmay be integrated into or
harmonized with the Municipal Comprehensive Land &
Water Use Plan.
The following table summarizes the national laws and local issuances relevant to
coming up with a local land use and sustainable development planning in Puerto Princesa
City and other areas of Palawan.
Table 1.2 Laws and issuances related to local land use and development planning
Law/Issuance Description/Related provisions
1987 Constitution, Section 1 – The state shall regulate the acquisition, ownership, use
Article 3 and disposition of property and its increments.
Section 3 – Lands of the public domain are classified into

agricultural, forest or timber, mineral lands and national parks.
Agricultural lands of the public domain may be further classified
by law according to the uses to which they may be devoted.
Alienable lands of the public domain shall be limited to
agricultural lands.

Law/Issuance Description/Related provisions

Section 5 – The State shall protect the rights of indigenous cultural
communities to their ancestral lands to ensure their economic,
social and cultural well-being and shall recognize the applicability
of customary laws governing property rights or relations in
determining the ownership and extent of ancestral domain.
RA 7160 (Local Vests upon the LGUs the responsibility of land use planning and
Government Code) regulation in their capacity as “promoter” of the general welfare
Mandates the provincial, city and municipal legislative bodies of
the LGUs to adopt their respective comprehensive land use plan
and enact the same through zoning ordinances (for city and
municipal levels)
Sec. 20 (c) – The local government units shall, in conformity with
existing laws, continue to prepare their respective comprehensive
land use plans enacted through zoning ordinances which shall be
the primary and dominant bases for the future use of land
resources: Provided, That the requirements for food production,
human settlements, and industrial expansion shall be taken into
consideration in the preparation of such plans.
Sec. 3 (i) – Local government units shall share with the National
Government the responsibility in the management and
maintenance of ecological balance within their territorial
jurisdiction, subject to the provisions of this Code and national
policies.
CLWUP and Zoning Ordinance (LGC Sec. 20, 447, 458, 468)
Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP) and Local
Development Investment Plan (LDIP) (LGC Sec. 109)
EO 72 Provides for the preparation and implementation of the
Comprehensive Land Use Plans of LGUs pursuant to the Local
Government Code
RA 7586 National Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS)
RA 7942 Mineral Resources Development Act
RA 7381 Indigenous Peoples Rights Act
PD 705 Revised Forestry Code
RA 6657 Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law
RA 8435 Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act
RA 9729 Climate Change Act of 2009
RA 10121 Philippines Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010
EO 23 Declaring A Moratorium On The Cutting And Harvesting Of
Timber In The Natural And Residual Forests And Creating The
Anti-Illegal Logging Task Force
EO 79 Institutionalizing And Implementing Reforms In The Philippine
Mining Sector Providing Policies And Guidelines To Ensure
Environmental Protection And Responsible Mining In The
Utilization Of Mineral Resources

1.4 EXISTING LAND USE PLANNING AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS IN

PALAWAN
At the provincial level, the planning situation in Palawan is a preponderance of

overlapping and interconnected mandates, institutions, and plans governing land use. A
flowchart showing the relationship of the several planning documents is shown in the figure
below. It shows multi-objective plans being implemented by multi-level institutions. The
ECAN Plan is shown on the left side of the City/Municipal (C/M) CLWUP. The ideal case
is for the two plans, the ECAN Plan and the CLWUP, to be “horizontally integrated” with
each other.
Figure 1. Hierarchy and linkages of plan (HLURB 2006, modified). The red boxes and lines
show the City/Municipal (C/M) ECAN Zoning Plan, its linkage and horizontal integration with the
C/M CLWUP and its vertical integration with the Provincial ECAN Zoning Plan. The Provincial
ECAN Zoning Plan is likewise linked and horizontally integrated to the Provincial CLWUP.

CHAPTER II
ECOLOGICAL PROFILE OF PUERTO PRINCESA CITY
2.1 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF PUERTO PRINCESA CITY
A local folklore tells a story of a beautiful princess-like maiden who is said to have
visited the land on several occasions in the year, thus the name “Puerto Princesa”. Locals
also attribute the name of the area due to its naval advantage as a seaport. With the area
naturally safe guarded year round and is blessed with depth that can accommodate large
vessels it was dubbed as a royal sanctuary for ships or a personified princess of ports as
described by the Spanish Conquistadores.
Puerto Princesa named in honor of Princess Eulalia, the daughter of the Spanish
Queen Isabel II and her consort, Dr. Fransisco De Cadiz who suffered an untimely death.
In honor of her daughter, her majesty renamed a settlement Puerto Dela Princesa. As time
went by, the place was eventually known to its reduced name, Puerto Princesa
(Encyclopedia Britannica, 2012).
Historically, it was claimed that during the quest of the Spanish Conquistadores’ to
look for a capital site of Asturias (Southern Palawan) in the island of Palawan that they
came across a hill with steep declivity. As they further surveyed the area, they discovered
an extensive plateau hidden across the hills –an ideal location for a settlement. And thus
the Spaniards founded the settlement on the 4 th of March 1872. The settlement was later
renamed as Puerto Dela Princesa. It was said that it did not take a long time after the
settlement’s establishment that Fr. Antonio Muro established the chapel where the first
mass in the city was celebrated.
Due to the ideal location of the area, in May 1872 the port became the center of
Spanish Naval Operations. Furthermore, Royal Decrees issued provided incentives to
settlers in the area. And by year 1883 it was said that the settlement has flourished to
become a pueblo (town) with an established hospital, road network, and port. It was also
taken into account that in the year 1894, Puerto Princesa received recognition from the
government of colonial Manila citing the area as one of the most beautiful pueblos in the
country. It was recorded that the award was given to acknowledge the well planned and
distributed settlement as well as the cleanliness of the city.
With the Spanish occupation ending, the new American government said to have
relocated the province’s capital from the municipality of Taytay to Puerto Princesa in 1911.
Puerto Princesa became the seat of the Palawan Province’s Provincial government with
American Major John Brown as the Lieutenant Governor. After the World War II, the town
of Puerto Princesa stood from the rubbles and rebuilt itself. In January 1, 1970 under RA
5906, the town of Puerto Princesa was converted into a city. This was made possible

through the efforts of the late Assemblyman Ramon V. Mitra. Mayor Felixberto R.
Oliveros became the city’s first mayor.
In 1992, the Strategic Environmental Plan for Palawan (SEP) Law was signed. This
placed the city and other municipalities in the province under careful environmental
planning in order to conserve and properly utilize its natural resources in the hopes of
attaining sustainable development.
In March 26, 2007, the City of Puerto Princesa was converted to a Highly
Urbanized City pursuant to Presidential Proclamation No. 1264 by Former President
Arroyo. The city has been at the heart of the province of Palawan geographically, and has
since been the nerve center of economic activities as well as the seat of public
administration in the province (City Annual Report, 2015).
2.2 GEO-PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT SECTOR
2.2.1 Geographical Location
Puerto Princesa is the capital city of the island province of Palawan. It is located at
Latitude 10˚10’ 26’’ N, Longitude 118˚58’ 23’’ E in the Northeast (Brgy. Marufinas) and
at Latitude 9˚29’ 29’’ N, Longitude 118˚37’ 12’’ E in the Southwest (Brgy. Kamuning).
It is the only city in the province and it is strategically located at the center. It is
approximately 567 kilometers (km) southwest of Manila. It is accessible through air and
sea transport from Manila and nearby provinces, and land transport from neighboring
municipalities.
Puerto Princesa City is bounded by the Municipalities of San Vicente and Roxas in
the north, and the Municipality of Aborlan in the south. The city’s east and west coast faces
the Sulu Sea and the West Philippine Sea respectively.
According to the adopted Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) of the city for the
year 2013-2022 with 66 barangays and a total land area of 219, 339.40 hectares, Puerto
Princesa is also the largest city in the country in terms of land area.
Of which, 31 barangays are rural and 35 are urban. The urban barangays constitute
to only about 6.18% (13, 550.33 hectares) of the city’s total land area, while the rural
barangays represent the majority of the city’s land area with 205,789.08 has. or 93.82%.
Mountains run across the entire city distinctly dividing the area in two- the East and
West Coast. The eastern side consist of swamplands and flat plains to hilly terrains. While
on the other hand the west coast has fewer flat land areas and is mostly comprised of
mountain ranges. This unique natural setting gives the city its one of a kind but fragile
ecology (City Annual Report, 2015).

The city is also home to the famous UNESCO World Heritage site, the Puerto
Princesa Subterranean River National Park (PPSRNP) or commonly known as
Underground River. This protected area covers about 22,200 hectares (has.) of the total
land area of the city. The park is also home to a wide array of endemic flora and fauna.
2.2.2 Political Boundaries
The city’s largest urban barangay in terms of land area is Barangay Bancao-Bancao
with 3,797.4 hectares followed by Sta. Lourdes (2,927.1 has.) and Irawan (2,374.0 has.).
While the three smallest urban barangays are Barangay Pagkakaisa, Seaside, and Mabuhay
with 0.7, 1.1 and 1.8 has. respectively.
On the other hand, the largest rural barangay is Brgy. Bacungan with 40,138.1
hectares, followed by the Inagawan Sub Colony (17,900 has.) and Napsan (15,374.7 has.).
The smallest rural barangays in terms of land area are Barangay Inagawan, Mangingisda
and Maraguyon (Table 2.1).
Table 2.1 List of barangays and land areas in Puerto Princesa City
Barangay Land Area (ha) Barangay Land Area (ha)
Rural Urban
Babuyan 1,830.95 Bagong Pagasa 8.02
Bacungan 17,727.01 Bagong Sikat 105.56
Bagong Bayan 9,757.43 Bagong Silang 20.43
Bahile 10,933.3 Bancao – Bancao 458.19
Binduyan 8,615.04 Irawan 3,763.67
Buenavista 4,408.3 Kalipay 5.54
Cabayugan 12,128.23 Liwanag 5.83
Concepcion 6,163.74 Mabuhay 3.15
Inagawan 755.06 Magkakaibigan 6.24
Inagawan Sub Colony 18,603.25 Maligaya 5.45
Iwahig 12,376.34 Mandaragat 69.96
Kamuning 1,631.92 Manggahan 19.18
Langogan 1,9054.8 Maningning 13.75
Lucbuan 2,219.98 Masigla 3.13
Luzviminda 1,553.52 Masikap 5.05
Macarascas 1,950.8 Masipag 24.31
Manalo 2,843.86 Matahimik 12.28
Mangingisda 1,181.26 Matiyaga 6.59
Maoyon 3,283.22 Maunlad 33.71
Marufinas 12,832.43 Milagrosa 37.72
Maruyogon 969.3 Model 7.58
Montible 6,598.29 Pagkakaisa 3.03
Napsan 14,655.17 Princesa 9.26
New Panggangan 5,704.49 San Isidro 2.53

Barangay Land Area (ha) Barangay Land Area (ha)

Rural Urban
Salvacion 2,481.27 San Jose 924.65
San Rafael 8,629.84 San Manuel 624.2
Simpocan 6,350.31 San Miguel 328.52
Sta. Cruz 3,084.81 San Pedro 646.34
Sta. Lucia 1,781.43 Sicsican 1,114.07
Tagabinet 2,315.45 Sta. Lourdes 3,134.66
Tanabag 3,368.27 Sta. Monica 740.77
Tagburos 1,008.75
Tagumpay 13.15
Tanglaw 18.89
Tiniguiban 366.18
TOTAL: 205,789.1 hectares TOTAL: 13,550.34 hectares
Source: City Planning and Development Office
2.2.3 Topography
Elevation
The city’s topography features mountain ranges cutting across its entire area. About
39.14% or 92,422.57 hectares of the city’s land area has an elevation of 0 to 100 meters
above sea level (masl). Areas which are identified to have an elevation 500 masl and above
are considered to be Core Zones in pursuance to the ECAN strategy of the Palawan Council
for Sustainable Development (PCSD). These areas comprise around 50%, while those
under the Controlled Zones are around 25% of the total land area of the city. The highest
elevation recorded for the city was at 1,529 m above sea level.
Table 2.2 Elevation Distribution and Percentage Composition of the Land Area of
Elevation Range (m) Area (ha) Percent Distribution (%)
0-100 92,422.57 39.14
100-200 62,451.24 26.45
200-300 22,204.67 9.40
400-500 18,030.40 7.64
500-600 13,394.25 5.67
600-700 9,515.17 4.03
700-800 6,972.36 2.95
800-900 4,697.97 1.99
900-1000 2,917.76 1.24
1000-1100 1,800.48 0.76
1100-1200 1,040.61 0.44
1200-1300 470.86 0.20

Elevation Range (m) Area (ha) Percent Distribution (%)

1300-1400 183.23 0.08
1400-1529 38.58 0.02
Source: Global Tenets, FLUP Draft, 2015
Slope
The City Annual Report of 2015 prepared by the Local Government Unit (LGU) of
Puerto Princesa states that around 142,000 hectares or roughly 65% of the city’s total land
area has been classified to have a rugged (18%-30%) to broken (>50%) slopes. This makes
the area very susceptible to soils erosion, landslides and mudslides especially when areas
with critical slopes become denuded. On the other hand, the remaining 35% of the city’s
land is comprised of flat (0%-3%) to moderate slopes (8%-18%). These areas are suitable
for developments in agriculture, urban settlements, upland agriculture and low density
housing. However, developments within the identified areas with moderate slopes need to
adopt engineering interventions to ensure soil conservation and slope stabilization in order
to prevent soil erosion, mudslides and landslides (CPDO, 2015).
Table 2.3 Slope Classification and Distribution of Urban and Rural Barangays of
Slope Classification Urban Area Rural Area Total Area Percentage
Cover (ha) Cover (ha) Covered (ha) Composition
0 - 3% Flat 8,012.91 23,325.57 39,842.57 18.16%
3 – 8% Gentle 836.36 13,092.66 13,929.02 6.35%
8 – 18% Moderate 921.02 22,466.91 23,387.93 10.66%
10 – 30% Rugged 1,105.76 35,859.55 36,965.31 16.65%
30 – 50% Steep 1,642.12 60,385.35 62,222.67 28.37%
Above 50% Broken 832.20 42,154.70 42,906.90 19.60%
Source: Slope Map, CLUP 2013-2022

Source: CLUP, 2013-2022; CDP, 2014-2016

Figure 2.1 Slope Map of Puerto Princesa City

2.2.4 Geology
Rock Formation
Metamorphic Rocks of the Inagawan Rock Formation can be found in the southern
area of the city at the Irawan area. This area is also partly composed of sedimentary Iwahig
Formation, alluvium of consolidated gravel, sand, pebbles, and silt. The Palawan Ophiolite
Complex, composed of ultramafic rocks also characterize the area (LGU, 2015).
The Langogan area in the northern part of the city is mostly comprised of ultramafic
rocks and is also characterized by metamorphic rocks consisting of quartz-fespathic and
mica schists, phyllites, slate, and quartzites. Unaltered serpentenized pridotite, dunite, and
pyrexomite consist the ultramafic rocks present in the area (LGU, 2015).
Irahuam Metavolcanics mainly consists the Babuyan area also located in the
northern part of the city. These rocks resemble the quartz- hematite schist in appearance
and are also friable and weather into dark reddish gray platy fragments. These fragments
are usually found scattered near outcrops of riverbeds. The St. Paul limestone outcrops can
be seen evident in the south and Midwestern part of the catchment. It is comprised of thick,
massive, marbleized limestone with a very well developed karst (LGU, 2015).
Landforms
The city’s vast land area offers a variety of land forms observed in its boundaries.
Predominantly, a mountain range cuts across the entire area dividing the city into its east
and west coasts respectively.
In-spite of the dominant hilly topography of the city, plateaus and plains can also
be found in the area. Islets, rock and limestone formations are also dominant landforms
observable in the city. The highest peak in the area is at the mountain range cutting across
the Marufinas, Binduyan, and Concepcion area which is approximately 1,529 masl. Most
of the mountain ranges both in the northern and southern areas of the city are classified to
be core zones, with some classified to be buffer zones.
Soil Classification
According to the ECAN Zones Management Report (2006), as part of the

Sustainable Environmental Management Project (SEMP) of Puerto Princesa, there are nine
(9) types of soil found in the city. These are the following: Bolinao Clay, Tagburos Clay,
Tapul Clay Loam, Guimbalaon Clay, Bay Clay Loam, Babuyan Silt Clay Loam, Babuyan
Clay, Malalag Clay and Hydrosol. However, according to a commissioned study for the
Forest Land Use Plan (2015) for the city of Puerto Princesa conducted by the Global
Tenets, they have identified, classified and distinguished the distribution of soil types in
the city as shown in Table 2.4.

Table 2.4 Soil Type Distribution in Puerto Princesa City

Soil Type Area (ha)
Rough Mountainous Land 165,808.37
Tagburos Clay 17,748.06
Hydrosol 16,191.42
Tapul Clay Loam 13,545.59
Malalag Clay 6,965.05
Guimbalaon Clay 5,330.51
Aborlan Loam 4,613.32
Bay Clay Loam 3,733.79
Babuyan Silty Clay Loam 566.72
Source: Global Tenets, FLUP Draft 2015
The lowland soils in the city are identified to be mostly alluvial in formation hence
commonly fertile soils. These areas with fertile soils are classified as prime agricultural
lands considering their formation as suitable for irrigation, and have good potentials for
high yields of price, and other agricultural products.
Soil types found in the upland areas of the city are usually formed in a place from
underlying bedrocks. Top soils are usually thin compared to the alluvial deposits found in
the lowland areas of the city. These soils found in the upland areas area also prone to soil
erosion due to the absence of vegetation cover in the area.
Land Capability Classes
The city has a lot of development potential for both urban and agricultural
expansion. These expansion areas include areas in the southern part of the city, as a
potential expansion for agricultural capacity. The new central business district outside the
San Miguel, Bancao-Bancao area is a budding location for settlement expansion. The
current land use of the area is being reclassified in order to accommodate the expansions
in the area. These areas are of close monitoring in order for the local zoning ordinances not
to interfere with the ECAN zones identified.
About 14% of the total Alienable and Disposable (A&D) lands in the city are
located in slopes above 18% has to adopt to soil conservation and engineering in order to
stabilize the slopes and prevent erosion. These measures should be adopted prior to
conversion and expansion of these areas in agriculture and settlements (Global Tenets,
FLUP Draft, 2015).

2.2.5 Land Resources

Land Classification
According to the ECAN Zones Management Report (2006) of Puerto Princesa,

alienable and disposable lands were projected to comprise 15% of the entire land area of
the city. Around 11% of the land area was classified as forestland or timber land areas. The
remaining 74% of the total land area of the city fall under the unclassified public forest
category (Table 2.5).
Table 2.5 Area and Percentage Distribution of Land in Puerto Princesa City
Land Classification Area (ha) Percentage (%)
Alienable and Disposable Land 32857.9 15
Forest Land 24016.5 11
Classified Public Forest Land 162084.8 74
Source: ECAN Zones Management Report, 2006
Under the ECAN strategy, majority of the land area of Puerto Princesa is classified
as Buffer Zone (40.45%), which includes Restricted, Controlled and Traditional Use
Zones. This is followed by the core zones comprising 39.45% of the total land area. Only
20.10% of the city’s land are classified under multiple use zones (Table 2.6).
Table 2.6 Areas of ECAN Zones

ECAN Zone Area (ha) Percentage Distribution
(%)
Core Zone 87,048.7 39.45
Buffer Zone 89,230.6 40.45
 Restricted 70,640.2 32.02
 Controlled 9,874.7 4.48
 Traditional Use 8,715.7 3.95
Multiple Use Zone 44,351.0 20.10
Areas located in slopes above 18% are generally susceptible to erosion and land
degradation when they are developed into agriculture and settlements. It was recorded that
14% or 4,643 hectares of the A&D lands sprawling across 26 barangays of the city belongs
to this slope classification. Barangays Buenavista, Lucban and Maruyugon are the largest
areas in the city classified under A&D lands and are located in slopes above 18%.

Source: CLUP, 2013-2022; CDP, 2014-2016

Figure 2.2 Land Classification Map of Puerto Princesa City

2.2.6 Land Use

Existing General Land Use
Based on the 2013-2022 CLUP of the city, the existing built up area of the city is
at around 3,916.23 hectares. The SEMP claims that the built up area in the city is about
3,935 has. or 1.85% of the city’s total land area. The built up areas of the city have increased
by 1, 617 has. from 2,376 has. in 1999 to what it is now. An average increase of 323 has.
per year has been recorded (LGU, 2013).
The gross potential land supply of the city for urban use is at about 43,560.34
hectares. Of which 6,910.91 has. is already being utilized. The total area identified to be
available for expansion is around 36,649.43 has. General Agriculture Zones cover around
50,364.83 has. of the city’s land area, however only about 19,549 has. or about 10% of
which is being currently cultivated (Table 2.7.). An area of about 2,941 hectares is covered
by the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) and were distributed as follows:
Luzviminda-Mangingisda (38.5%), Tagumpay (30.2%), Manalo (9.1%),
Inagawan/Kamuning (11.8%), and Lucbuan/Maruyugon (10.4%).
Another 1,072 hectares of the city’s land area in Sta. Lucia (formerly part of the
Iwahig Prison and Penal Farm) was allotted as an Environmental Estate pursuant to
Presidential Proclamation 718. Currently, this area is being developed as a site for
ecological research, wildlife, tourism and recreation.
Table 2.7 Land Use Distribution of the Total Land Area of the City
Land Use Total Area (ha)
General Agricultural Zone 50,364.83
Agro Industrial Zone 212.20
Core Zone 97,023.90
Controlled Use Zone 481.00
General Commercial 1 Zone 570.68
General Commercial 2 Zone 131.14
General Industrial Zone 39.15
General Institutional Zone 865.40
General Residential Zone 5,533.58
Light Industrial Zone 67.40
Parks and Recreation Zone 71.90
Protected Agriculture 951.16
Recreational Commercial 216.00
Restricted Use Zone 49,580.26
Rivers and Creeks 1,029.30
Roads 3,041.00
Tourism/ Resort/ Residential Zone 2,465.50

Continuation of Table 2.7

Land Use Total Area (ha)
Traditional Use Zone 467.01
Tribal Zone 6,227.99
TOTAL 219,339.40
Source: CLUP, 2013-2022
Urban Land Use Pattern
The urban area of the city cuts across 35 barangays. These areas cover around
13,550.34 hectares of the total land area (Table 2.1). The table exhibited below was derived
from the Land Use Distribution of the city according to the CLUP of Puerto Princesa
(2013).
Table 2.8 Available Land Uses and its Distribution in the Central Business District
(CBD) and Periphery
Land Use CBD (ha) CBD Periphery (ha)
General Agricultural Zone 2.60 1,438.51
Agro Industrial Zone - 212.20
Core Zone 13.90 3,508.30
General Commercial 1 Zone 570.53 0.15
General Commercial 2 Zone 10.20 74.45
General Industrial Zone - 39.17
General Institutional Zone 192.82 495.53
General Residential Zone 650.64 3,591.59
Light Industrial Zone 8.02 47.99
Parks and Recreation Zone 26.35 33.80
Protected Agriculture - 59.52
Recreational Commercial - 208.32
Restricted Use Zone - 1,684.94
Rivers and Creeks - 186.67
Roads 130.30 362.99
Source: CLUP 2013-2022

Source: CLUP, 2013-2022; CDP, 2014-2016

Figure 2.3 Land Use Map of Puerto Princesa City

Source: CLUP, 2013-2022; CDP, 2014-2016

Figure 2.4 Urban Land Use Map of Puerto Princesa City

Tenurial Land Area
The city has 28 barangays with existing tenured areas. According to the DENR-
CENRO, tenurial instruments include the Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim (CADC),
Certificate of Ancestral Land Claim (CALC), Community-Based Forest Management
(CBFM), Forest Land Use for Agro Forestry, Socialized Integrated Forest Management
Agreement (SIFMA) and National Greening Program (NGP).
Table 2.9 List of Barangays and Tenurial Lands in the City

Barangay CADC (has.) CBFM (has.) SIFMA (has.) NGP (has.)
Babuyan 223.91 - 62.96 154.29
Bacungan 693.21 958.09 429.00 6.00
Bahile - 150.87 - -
Buenavista 3947.19 - - -
Bukana - - - 33.70
Cabayugan 5595.17 - - -
Concepcion - 1685.63 - -
Inagawan Sub. - - - 272.00
Irawan 2217.45 - - 10.71
Iwahig 896.71 - - 29.71
Kamuning - 72.72 - 8.20
Lucbuan 3.28 - - -
Luzviminda - - - 258.34
Magarwak - - 24.35 -
Marascas 177.115 - - -
Maoyon 602.29 - - -
Marufinas 5716.95 722.79 10.25 -
Montible - - - 245.95
Napsan - 196.07 - 33.00
Salvacion - 460.97 12.00 -
San Rafael 1972.57 3326.80 - -
Simpocan 586.86 - - -
Sta. Cruz - 478.88 - 37.03
Sta. Lourdes 143.57 23.10 - 127.79
Sta. Lucia - - - 66.89
Tagabinet 998.75 - - -
Tagburos - 164.81 - -
Tanabag - 1040.43 - -
Source: DENR-CENRO
2.2.7 Mineral Resources
Prior to the implementation of the SEP law and the strong opposition of locals,
Puerto Princesa had been home to mining ventures from 1954 to 1975 (Tabuada, 2016).
The San Jose and Tagburos area were once home to mines producing mercury. Mineral

deposits available in the city include nickel and chromite. The city is also known for its
quarry resources that are closely monitored by the city’s Development Control and
Environmental Protection Committee (DCEPC). As of writing, only river quarrying under
strict guidelines are allowed in the city. Mountain quarrying has since been banned in order
to avoid adverse effects it may deliver such as landslides and erosions.
Table 2.10 Location and Estimated Reserve of Mineral Resources in Puerto

Princesa City
Barangay Minerals Estimated Reserve in metric tons (MT)
Irawan Chromite 59,000
Sta. Lourdes
Bacungan Mercury 5,355,430
Tagburos
Bahile Limestone 109,654,000
Bahile Marble 566,800,000
Sabang
Source: CLUP, 2013-2022
2.2.8 Coastal Resources

Coral Reefs
In an assessment conducted by the PCSD for the SEMP in 2006 it was found out
that the Pinanganakan Island and a small area south of the vicinity of Barangay Napsan are
areas in the western coast of the city were found out to have good coral cover. In spite of
the poor condition of the reefs on the western seaboard, more sea turtles, sharks and other
marine animals were encountered by researchers especially in the Ulugan Bay area.
Coral reefs found in the eastern seaboard of the city are in good to excellent
conditions. Soft corals were also observed to be abundant in the area. The vicinity of Honda
Bay in Sta. Lourdes has a large area of soft corals. Likewise, more than 50% of soft corals
were observed to cover an area in Barangay Kamuning. Hard and soft corals were found
in equally good condition and number in some of the areas surveyed in the eastern coast of
the city (LGU, 2014).
Seagrass Communities
According to the city’s CDP (2014), wide and dense seasgrass meadows occur in
areas within the Puerto Princesa Bay, particularly in Barangays Mangingisda, Iwahig,
Bancao Bancao, and areas southeast of Inawagan. The Honda Bay area from Barangay San
Pedro to Tagburos, Luli Island, and Tadiao Island were observed to have a good cover of
seagrass. A lush meadow of which were also observed in the waters off Concepcion to
Binduyan. The aforementioned areas have more than 50% seagrass cover this indicates that
the seagrass in the area are generally in a good condition.

However, poor seagrass cover was recorded in some parts of Honda Bay
particularly in the areas in Sta. Lucia, Sta. Lourdes, Bacungan, Sta. Cruz, and San Rafael.
The high siltation condition of the area is being attributed as the cause of the poor cover in
the area. An area in the Ulugan Bay was also noted to have sparse seagrass cover.
The coastal waters in the area are known to be home to several species of
seagrasses. These include: Enhalus acoroides and Thalassia hemprichii were
cosmopolitan, Halophila ovalis, Cymodocea rotundata, Halodule uninervis (here
including Halodule pinifolia), and Syringodium isoetifolium were the commonly associated
species, and Cymodocea serrulata and an undetermined species of Halophila occurred less
frequently.
Grazing areas of sea cows (dugong) in the area were identified to be in Kamuning,
Inagawan, Mangingisda, Pundeado Island, Tanabag, Concepcion and Binduyan. These
areas are potential sites to be classified as core zones.
The areas within barangays Kamuning, Inagawan, Mangingisda, Iwahig, Bancao-

Bancao, San Pedro, Tagburos, Pundeado Island, Cowrie Island, and Buenavista were
identified as seagrass ECAN Core Zones. While those identified to be buffer zones include
the barangays adjacent the core zones. These barangays are as follows: Luzviminda, Tadio
Island, Macarascas also some other areas within Mangingisda, Bancao-Bancao and
Buenavista.
Mangrove Forests
The CDP (2014) identifies the following mangrove species found in the city which
includes: Rhizophora apiculata, Rhizophora mucronata, Ceriops tagal, Xylocarpus
granatum, Bruguiera gymnorrhiza, Sonneratia alba, Rhizophora stylosa, Heritiera
littoralis, Bruguiera cylindrica, and Ceriops decandra. The most dominant species present
in the area is that of the Rhizophora apiculata. Consequently, the aforementioned species
was identified to be the most frequent and dense mangrove species recorded. The other
species most frequently encountered and with characteristically dense cover are Bruguiera
gymnorhiza, Ceriops tagal, Sonneratia alba, Rhizophora mucronata, Xylocarpus
granatum, Rhizophora stylosa, Sonneratia caseolaris, and Bruguiera cylindrica.
The Bahile, Sabang, Bat Island, Bakau Island, San Jose, and Dos Palmas areas are
currently being developed and promoted as part of the city’s eco tourist destinations.
Reef Fish Communities

The Marine Survey Team of the ECAN Zoning Project of PCSD in 2006 was able
to identify a total of 293 species of fish distributed across Puerto Princesa City. Of the total
species identified, 25 were indicator species, 128 were major species, and 140 were target
species. Indicator species are used to identify the health condition of the habitat. The

commercially valuable reef fish species are the target fish species. Overall it was found out
that the species richness is higher in the east coast along the Honda and Princesa Bay areas.
2.2.9 Freshwater Resources

Puerto Princesa has 11 watersheds that cover a total of 115,610 hectares. Five (5)
of these watersheds have major river basins while the rest have medium-sized river basins.
The five river basins with the largest area include Babuyan River (25% of the total
catchment area), Montible River (20%), Langogan River (14%), Inagawan River (12%)
and Bacungan River (10%). Irawan Watershed, which is the main source of water supply
in the City, has a small catchment area comprising only 3% of the total catchment area.
Table 2.11 Major Rivers and Catchment Areas of Puerto Princesa City
Major Rivers Catchment Area (ha) Percentage (%)
Babuyan River 28,786 24.89
Montible River 23,156 20.20
Langogan River 16,292 14.09
Inagawan River 14,592 12.62
Bacungan River 11,343 9.81
Sabang River 1,674 1.44
Cabayugan River 3,814 3.29
Irawan River 3,679 3.18
Tanabag River 5,622 4.86
Concepcion River 4,225 3.65
Bahile River 2,427 2.09
Groundwater Resources
Groundwater sources in the area are hard to develop due to its low yield and partial
salt-water intrusion into the fresh water aquifers. Nonetheless, explorations for
groundwater have better potentials in Barangays Sta. Monica, Irawan and Iwahig.
With a pH higher than 7.2 the groundwater quality of the city is relatively poor.
Groundwater samples were also noted to have high content level of calcium and
magnesium making it hard and produce crust deposits when used in boilers (LGU, 2014).
2.2.10 Wildlife and Biodiversity
There are two (2) Key Biodiversity Areas (KBA) identified to be in the jurisdiction
of the City of Puerto Princesa. These areas are the Puerto Princesa Subterranean River
National Park (PPSRNP) (located in Sitio Sabang, northwertern part of the city) and the
Cleopatra’s Needle in Brgy. Concepcion. Current management and facilitation of the
PPSRNP is under the PAMB. Conservation efforts of the city and other agencies such as
the DENR are continuous in the area.

Resource inventories by different organizations and by the PCSD was able to

identify a total of 135 species of fauna in the city. Of which most of the identified species
were birds (94 species). Other species accounted for were mammals (23), amphibians (11),
and reptiles (7). Of these numbers 45 of the 135 identified species are considered to be
endemic species (Fauna Survey Report for Puerto Princesa City, 2006). According to the
same document, the identified number constitutes to 35% of the total number of species in
the Province of Palawan and 34% of the total number of identified species in the
Philippines.
In spite of current conservation and protection efforts of conservationists and the

city government, the study identified 17 threatened species – 15 were identified to be
endemic species. The following species are listed in Table 2.12.
Table 2.12 Status of threatened species in Puerto Princesa City

Scientific Name Common Name Status
MAMMALS
Amblonyx cinereus Oriental Small Clawed Palawan Endemic,
Otter Vulnerable
Eonycleris spelaean Common Nectar Bat Vulnerable
Manis javanica Malayan Pangolin Palawan, Endemic,
Seriously Endangered
Mydaus marchei Palawan Stink Badger Vulnerable
Sundasciurus juvencus Northern Palawan Tree Endemic
Shrew
Susbarbatus ahoenobarbus Bearded Pig Palawan Endemic,
Widespread, Declining and
Heavily Hunted,
Threatened
Tupaia palawanensis Palawan Tree Shrew Vulnerable
BIRDS
Anthracoceros marchei Palawan Hornbill Endemic, Vulnerable
Copsychus niger White-vented Shama Endemic, Near Threatened
Cyornid lemprieri Palawan Blue-flycatcher Endemic, Near Threatened
Otus fuliginosus Palawan Scops-Owl Endemic, Near Threatened
Parus amabilis Palawan Tit Endemic, Near Threatened
Polyplectron emphanum Palawan Peacock Pheasant Endemic, Vulnerable
Prioniturus platenae Blue-headed Raquet-tail Endemic, Vulnerable
Terpsiphone cyanescens Blue Paradise-flycatcher Endemic, Near Threatened
REPTILES
Varanus salvator Philippine Monitor Lizard Common, Threatened
AMPHIBIANS
Barbourula busuangensis Philippine Discoglossid Palawan Endemic, Rare,
Frog Threatened
Source: Fauna Survey Report for Puerto Princesa City, 2006

Puerto Princesa’s forest covers serve as habitat for the aforementioned species.
Protecting these Key Biodiversity Areas would also mean conservation to the fauna found
in the area.
2.2.11 Climate
The city of Puerto Princesa experiences two prevailing climate patterns that are
distinctive for the east and west coasts. The east coast experiences a short dry season and
more months of heavy rainfall. This area is usually dry from January to April and rainy
throughout the rest of the year. Records show that the month with the highest rainfall is
during September. This type of climate system falls under Type 3 classification according
to the Corona classification of Philippine Atmospheric and Geophysical Administration
(PAGASA).
The west coast on the other hand has equal lengths of wet and dry seasons. The dry
season begins in November and lasts up until the month of April. The rainy months starts
in May and would end by October. The rainiest month in the west coast is similar in the
east, September. February has been recorded as the driest month in the area. As indicated
in the CDP (2014), barangays experiencing this climatic condition are New Panggangan,
Marufinas, Cabayugan, Tagabinet, Buenavista, Bahile, Macarascas, Simpocan, Bagong
Bayan, and Napsan. This type of climate system is identified to be Type 1 climate system
according to the Corona classification being used by PAGASA.
Atmospheric Temperature
The city has a relatively high uniform temperature. However, there was no recorded
significant difference in the temperature between areas falling under the first and second
type of climate present in the area. The average recorded temperature for the city is 29
degrees Celsius. Generally, the warmest months are during the months of March, April and
May, while the coolest are during November, December, January and February (LGU,
2014).
Relative Humidity
The humidity in the area is generally uniform- high relative humidity, ranging from
79 to 86% with an annual average of 84%. The changes in the relative humidity of the area
affect the rate of evaporation in such a way that if other factors were momentarily held
constant a lower relative humidity would tend to enhance vaporization (LGU, 2014).
Rainfall
The city of Puerto Princesa is usually wet from the months of May to December
and is experiencing very little rain in the months of January to April. The average rainfall
in the city according to the PAGASA is 1,563.80 millimeter (mm).

2.2.12 Natural Hazards/Constraints

Flooding
High intensity rainfalls associated to various weather systems cause flooding
hazards in the locality. Urban barangays susceptible to flooding include barangays Bagong
Sikat, Bancao-Bancao, Irawan, Maningning, San Isidro, San Jose, San Manuel, and Sta.
Lourdes. Around 25,790.06 hectares of land area in both urban and rural barangays are said
to be susceptible to flooding (Global Tenets, 2015).
Erosion
Considering the slope, elevation and the kind of soil that is present in the city; the
locality is exposed to threats in soil erosion that can lead to mudslides and landslides.
Around 46 of the 66 barangays in the city face the threat of soil erosion. These barangays
are mostly rural areas with mountains and steep slopes (Global Tenets, 2015).
Landslides
The Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB) of the DENR has identified areas
within the city that are highly susceptible to landslides. Areas with slopes from 21% to
55% are identified to be more prone to landslides. Forty-six (46) barangays in the locality
are identified to have low to high susceptibility to landslide. The total area identified to be
susceptible to landslides is at around 196,049.11 hectares. Most of the barangays prone to
landslides are rural areas (Global Tenets, 2015).
Table 2.13 Distribution of Areas Identified to be Landslides Susceptible

Landslide Susceptibility Area (ha)
Low 65753.37
Moderate 79713.64
High 89101.45
Source: Global Tenets, FLUP Draft 2015
2.2.13 ECAN Zones
Pursuant to the Environmentally Critical Areas Network (ECAN) Strategy of the

SEP Act of 1992, the city of Puerto Princesa is further subdivided into ECAN Zones. The
core zones of Puerto Princesa City stretches to 37 barangays, these barangays are mostly
rural areas. In this light, Brgy. Marufinas located in the northwestern part of the city shares
12,035.30 has of the total core zone areas in the city. The aforementioned is home to the
largest core zone cover in the locality. On the other hand the barangay with the smallest
core zone area is Brgy. Sta Monica (10.0 ha).
The buffer zones of the city cover 40.45% of the city’s total land area (SEMP, 2006)
stretching across 26 barangays. Barangay Inagawan Sub Colony has the largest area of
restricted use lands covering 9,968.40 has. while Brgy. Lucbuan has the smallest share with

0.2 hectares. On the other hand, Brgy. Iwahig (southern part of the city) has the largest
controlled zone area with 3,978.50 has. It was also noted that Brgy. Manalo has the smallest
area of controlled use zone (0.1 ha). Subsequently, Brgy. Babuyan has the largest land area
dedicated for the traditional use zone (805.9 ha) and Brgy. Salvacion has the smallest with
0.1 has.
Of the 66 barangays in the locality, only Brgy Montible in the southwestern part of
the city has been identified not to have any multiple use zone areas. All other 65 barangays
have been identified to have the aforementioned zone. With 3,988.30 has of land classified
under the multiple use zone, Brgy. Buenavista has been identified to have the largest share
of the zone while Brgy Pagkakaisa with 1.2 ha was identified to be the smallest.
Table 2.14 ECAN Zones by Barangay, Puerto Princesa City, Palawan

ECAN Zones
Restricte Controlle
Barangays Core Traditiona Multiple Grand
d Use d Use
Zones l Use Use Total
Zones Zones
Babuyan 77.8 237.9 - 805.9 486.3 1607.9
Bacungan 8532.9 808.7 39.9 124.2 8373.7 17879.4
Bagong Bayan 7037.3 1036.0 534.1 - 922.3 9529.7
Bagong Pag-
Asa - - - - 9.4 9.4
Bagong Sikat - - - - 99.6 99.6
Bagong Silang - - - - 15.3 15.3
Bahile 6689.9 2496.5 323.0 - 613.7 10123.1
Bancao –
Bancao - - - - 354.3 354.3
Binduyan 3529.8 4041.9 298.2 413.7 411.1 8694.7
Buenavista 322.2 75.9 - - 3988.3 4386.5
Cabayugan 9924.3 94.0 10.0 12.8 2044.4 12085.5
Concepcion 3357.5 2047.3 - 481.2 255.2 6141.1
Inagawan 44.1 - 42.6 - 647.6 734.2
Inagawan Sub
Colony 4264.2 9968.4 2298.9 - 2011.1 18542.6
Irawan 2398.5 126.3 0.2 - 1232.8 3757.7
Iwahig 3880.5 4524.2 3978.5 - 66.8 12450.0
Kalipay - - - - 5.4 5.4
Kamuning 562.5 - 1.0 - 945.6 1509.2
Langogan 9951.1 8744.7 1336.2 - 861.5 20893.4
Liwanag - - - - 5.2 5.2
Lucbuan 61.2 0.2 - 2.9 2120.4 2184.7
Luzviminda 310.8 21.6 51.3 - 1126.4 1510.1
Mabuhay - - - - 2.7 2.7
Macarascas 307.6 19.9 - - 1767.8 2095.3
Magkakaibiga
n - - - - 5.7 5.7
Maligaya - - - - 6.0 6.0

ECAN Zones
Restricte Controlle
Barangays Core Traditiona Multiple Grand
d Use d Use
Zones l Use Use Total
Zones Zones
Manalo 418.7 - 0.1 - 2712.4 3131.3
Mandaragat - - - - 61.8 61.8
Manggahan - - - - 19.3 19.3
Mangingisda 248.2 - - - 894.6 1142.8
Maningning - - - - 13.7 13.7
Maoyon 112.2 1648.7 - 428.4 1066.0 3255.3
Marufinas 12035.3 3.1 0.9 - 773.2 12812.4
Maruyogon - - - - 964.2 964.2
Masigla - - - - 3.2 3.2
Masikap - - - - 5.6 5.6
Masipag - - - - 22.7 22.7
Matahimik - - - - 12.4 12.4
Matiyaga - - - - 5.4 5.4
Maunlad - - - - 32.4 32.4
Milagrosa - - - - 38.3 38.3
Model - - - - 7.4 7.4
Montible 4225.4 1835.8 537.1 - - 6598.3
Napsan 6452.5 1968.0 2929.5 1.5 3309.4 14660.9
New
Panggangan 2383.2 2689.7 - - 644.3 5717.2
Pagkakaisa - - - - 1.2 1.2
Princesa - - - - 8.6 8.6
Salvacion 214.3 883.4 - 0.1 1294.3 2392.2
San Jose 93.1 - - - 727.7 820.8
San Manuel 80.9 - - - 511.2 592.1
San Miguel - - - - 399.2 399.2
San Pedro - - - - 640.2 640.2
San Rafael 2780.0 4745.9 - 715.1 378.1 8619.1
Santa Cruz 1163.5 1422.6 - 110.4 556.3 3252.8
Santa Lourdes 198.1 1545.8 - - 1554.1 3298.0
Santa Monica 10.0 - - - 713.6 723.6
Seaside - - - - 2.7 2.7
Sicsican 274.8 - - - 635.2 909.9
Simpocan 4014.2 - 1150.8 - 1166.4 6331.4
Sta Lucia 646.3 - 948.6 22.6 27.8 1645.3
Tagabinet 375.1 1213.4 4.5 - 722.3 2315.4
Tagburos 236.3 - - - 761.7 998.1
Tagumpay - - - - 12.8 12.8
Tanabag 2010.4 845.5 - 289.0 219.5 3364.5
Tanglaw - - - - 19.0 19.0
Tiniguiban - - - - 339.4 339.4
99,224.5 49,656.5 219,819.9
Grand Total 6 53,045.52 14,485.33 3,408.05 4 9
Source: Palawan Council for Sustainable Development

There are allowed activities specific per ECAN zone (Table 10, Chapter III). These
activities are anchored on the characteristics of each zone. Other activities and uses not
recognized as allowable should strictly be prohibited to protect and conserve the zones
especially the core zone.
On the other hand, the expanded allowed activities in the Terrestrial and Marine
Core zone, and Buffer-Restricted use zone allowing ecotourism projects are amended in
the PCSD Resolution 06-270 (PCSD, 2014c). The justifications behind the resolution were
enumerated as follows:
(i) Ecotourism can be a tool for environmentally managing ecologically sensitive areas;
(ii) Ecotourism is believed to be compatible with environmental protection considering
that its activities are generally non-consumptive and therefore do not pose
environmental hazard;
(iii) Ecotourism is a growing industry in Palawan which can generate alternative
sources of livelihood; and
(iv) In order to promote and develop ecotourism industry in the province, ecotourism
activities may be permitted in ecologically sensitive areas subject to strict monitoring
and regulation.
Furthermore this expanded activity is still subject to the strict monitoring of the
PCSD. The mentioned “sustainable development” activities may be subjected to the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) System, and to other laws, policies, ordinances
and rules which regulate such development ventures. Also, pursuant to the EIA System and
the SEP Clearance System, compulsory environmental precautions (i.e. periodic multi
partite monitoring) are imposed on these activities.

Source: CLUP, 2013-2022; CDP, 2014-2016


Source: Palawan Council for Sustainable Development


2.3 POPULATION AND SOCIAL PROFILE
2.3.1 Social Composition and Characteristics
According to the 2010 Census of Population and Housing (CPH) of the Philippine
Statistics Authority, the total male population of the city is 109, 540 while the female
population is 107, 370. The male population of the city of Puerto Princesa is significantly
higher than the female population. There are 5 identified local indigenous
group/communities within the city boundaries, namely Cuyunon, Agutaynon, Cagayanon,
Tagbanua and the Batak. The tribe with the highest population are the Cuyunon with
26,052 and the least are the Batak with only 361 tribe members. Most of these tribes are
gatherers; they utilize natural resources such as Almaciga, honey, rattan and bird’s nest.
2.3.2 Population Size and Growth Rate
Puerto Princesa City is a highly urbanized city in the province of Palawan with a
population of 216,910 (NSO, 2010). It increased in 2000 with a growth rate of 3.24%. This
is larger by 60,761 persons compared to its total population of 161,912 in 2000. Thirty (30)
years ago, Puerto Princesa City is comprised with only 60,234 inhabitants. This population
size is less than 30% of the population of the city in the 2010 CPH. If the average annual
population growth rate (PGR) recorded at 3.24% during the period of 2000 to 2010
continues in the future, the population of Puerto Princesa City would double in 22 years.
The chronological history of the population growth of the city is shown in Table 3.1
Table 3.1 Historical Population Growth of the Puerto Princesa City, Palawan, 1960-2010
Decennial Census Total Population (in thousands)
1960 60.2
1990 92.1
2000 161.9
2010 227.7
Source: National Statistics Office, 2010 Census of Population and Housing
4.3.3 Growth of Barangay Population
Table 3.2 shows the distribution of population by barangay in 2010. The barangay
that has the highest population of 20,451 in 2010 is Brgy. San Pedro which is an urban
barangay. On the other hand, the barangay with the lowest population is Santa Lucia, a
rural barangay with a total population of 210. Also presented in Figure 3.1 is a graphical
representation of the top ten populous barangays of the city. All of the barangays included
on this list are urban barangays.

Table 3.2 Total Population by Barangay, Puerto Princesa City, Palawan, 2010
Barangay (Rural) Total Barangay (Urban) Total Population
Population
Bagong Pag-asa (Pob.) 663 Babuyan 2,304
Bagong Sikat (Pob.) 6,994 Bacungan 3,875
Bagong Silang (Pob.) 4,121 Bagong Bayan 743
Bancao-bancao 10,948 Bahile 2,304
Irawan 4,651 Binduyan 1,207
Kalipay (Pob.) 646 Buenavista 1,178
Liwanag 1,204 Cabayugan 2,871
Mabuhay (Pob.) 1,238 Concepcion 1,336
Magkakaibigan (Pob.) 296 Inagawan 1,519
Maligaya (Pob.) 221 Inagawan Sub- 3,621
Colony
Mandaragat 8,947 Iwahig (Pob.) 3,614
Manggahan (Pob.) 1,178 Kamuning 1,734
Maningning (Pob.) 804 Langogan 1,950
Masigla (Pob.) 555 Lucbuan 1,406
Masikap (Pob.) 905 Luzviminda 3,306
Masipag (Pob.) 1,950 Macarascas 1,472
Matahimik (Pob.) 2,347 Manalo 1,970
Matiyaga (Pob.) 591 Mangingisda 4,317
Maunlad (Pob.) 4,027 Maoyon 1,181
Milagrosa (Pob.) 2,670 Marufinas 660
Model (Pob.) 373 Maruyugon 1,485
Pagkakaisa (Pob.) 1,936 Montible (Pob.) 559
Princesa (Pob.) 1,034 Napsan 2,370
San Jose 12,665 New Panggangan 579
San Manuel 10,098 Salvacion 1,184
San Miguel 18,304 San Rafael 1,388
San Pedro 20,451 Santa Cruz 767
Santa Lourdes 5,039 Santa Lucia (Pob.) 210
Santa Monica 13,749 Simpocan 1,077
Seaside (Pob.) 314 Tagabinit 1,066
Sicsican 10,459 Tanabag 553
Tagburos 5,141
Tagumpay (Pob.) 702
Tanglaw (Pob.) 2,075
Tiniguiban 11,170
Source: National Statistics Office, 2010

Top Ten Populous Barangays

Puerto Princesa City, 2010
Bagong Sicat (Pob.)
Mandaragat
San Manuel
Sicsican
Bancao-bancao
Tiniguiban
San Jose
Santa Monica
San Miguel
San Pedro
0 15,000

Figure 3.1 Top Ten Populous Barangays of Puerto Princesa City
2.3.4 Migration Pattern
As indicated in the city’s Local Shelter Plan (2016), Puerto Princesa City is
considered as the melting pot of different cultures for both local and foreign cultures. This
diversity is brought about by migration or the movement of people from one place to
another. In terms of the languages use across the city, the predominant local tongue is the
Cuyuno, but languages such as English and Tagalog as well as some dialects particularly
Bicolano, Cebuano, Ilocano, Hiligaynon are widely spoken.
2.3.5 Population Density
Population density shows the total number of individuals living per hectare. The
total land area of Puerto Princesa City is 232, 889.75 hectares (NSO, 2010). The barangay
with the highest population density is Brgy. Pagkakaisa which is an urban barangay while
Brgy. Marufinas, a rural barangay, has the lowest population density.

Table 3.3 Urban-Rural Distribution and Population Density of Puerto Princesa City per Barangay, 2010
Barangay Population Area (ha) Population Barangay Population Area (ha) Population
Density (per ha) Density (per ha)
Urban Rural
Bagong Pag-asa 663 8.02 82.67 Babuyan 2,304 1,830.95 1.26
Bagong Sikat 6,994 105.56 66.26 Bacungan 3,875 17,727.01 0.22
Bagong Silang 4,121 20.43 201.71 Bagong-Bayan 743 9,757.43 0.08
Bancao-Bancao 10,948 458.19 23.89 Bahile 2,304 10,933.30 0.21
Irawan 4,652 3,763.67 1.24 Binduyan 1,207 8,615.04 0.14
Kalipay 646 5.54 116.61 Buenavista 1,178 4,408.30 0.27
Liwanag 1,204 5.83 206.52 Cabayugan 2,871 12,128.23 0.24
Mabuhay 1,238 3.15 393.02 Concepcion 1,336 6,163.74 0.22
Magkakaibigan 296 6.24 47.44 Inagawan 1,519 755.06 2.01
Maligaya 221 5.45 40.55 Inagawan-Sub 3,621 18,603.25 0.19
Mandaragat 8,947 69.96 127.89 Iwahig 3,814 12,376.34 0.31
Manggahan 1,178 19.18 61.42 Kamuning 1,734 1,631.92 1.06
Maningning 804 13.75 58.47 Langogan 1,950 19,054.80 0.10
Masigla 555 3.13 177.32 Lucbuan 1,406 2,219.98 0.63
Masikap 905 5.05 179.21 Luzviminda 3,306 1,553.52 2.13
Masipag 1,950 24.31 80.21 Macarascas 1,472 1,950.80 0.75
Matahimik 2,347 12.28 191.12 Manalo 1,970 2,843.86 0.69
Matiyaga 591 6.59 89.68 Mangingisda 4,317 1,181.26 3.65
Maunlad 4,027 33.71 119.46 Maoyon 1,181 3,283.22 0.36
Milagrosa 2,870 37.72 76.09 Marufinas 660 12,832.43 0.05
Model 373 7.58 49.21 Maruyogon 1,485 969.30 1.53
Pagkakaisa 1,936 3.03 638.94 Montible 559 6,598.29 0.08
Princesa 1,034 9.26 111.66 Napsan 2,370 14,655.17 0.16


Barangay Population Area (ha) Population Barangay Population Area (ha) Population
Density (per ha) Density (per ha)
San Jose 12,665 924.65 13.70 New Panggangan 579 5,704.49 0.10
San Manuel 10,098 624.20 16.18 Salvacion 1,184 2,481.27 0.48
San Miguel 18,304 328.52 55.72 San Rafael 1,388 8,629.84 0.16
San Pedro 20,451 646.34 31.64 Sta. Cruz 767 3,084.81 0.25
Sta. Lourdes 5,039 3,134.66 1.61 Sta. Lucia 210 1,781.43 0.12
Sta. Monica 13,749 740.77 18.56 Simpocan 1,077 6,350.31 0.17
Seaside 314 2.53 124.11 Tagabinit 1,066 2,315.45 0.46
Sicsican 10,459 1,114.07 9.39 Tanabag 553 3,368.27 0.16
Tagburos 5,141 1,008.75 5.10 Total 222,673 219,339.41 1.02
Tagumpay 702 13.15 53.38
Tanglaw 2,075 18.89 109.85
Tiniguiban 11,170 366.18 30.50
Total 168,667 13,550.34 12.45
Total Rural and Urban 391340 232889.75 1.00

2.3.6 Tempo of Urbanization
The tempo of urbanization is the difference between the urban growth rate and the
rural growth rate. The formula for the annual growth rate is provided below, Table 3.4
presents that there is a slight abating of the trend from the period 2000 to the period 2010.
Figure 3.2 illustrates the comparative urbanization trend by percentage of both the rural
and urban area. The growth rate of the urban population is faster than that of the rural
population from year 2000 to 2010, but individually the urban and rural areas have a
decreasing growth rate from 2000 to 2010.
1
𝑃 𝑛
r={ ( 𝑃𝑡+𝑛 ) − 1} x 100
𝑡
where:
r = average growth rate of the urban or rural population
𝑃𝑡 = urban or rural population from the previous census
𝑃 𝑡+𝑛 = urban or rural population from the current census
𝑛 = time interval (expressed in years) between the current
census and the previous census
Table 3.4 Comparative Population Data, 2000 – 2010

Census Population
Year Urban AGR Rural AGR
2000 121, 748 5.56 40, 164 2.98
2007 161, 818 4.00 48, 690 2.69
2010 166, 667 1.52 54, 006 3.84
2000
Year
2007 Urban
Rural
2010
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Figure 3.2 Tempo of Urbanization, 2000 – 2010

2.3.7 Age-Sex Distribution
The sex distribution of the population per age group of the population is illustrated
in Table 3.5. The total number of males is 109,540, while the total number of female
population is 107, 370. The sex ratio of the population is 102, meaning there are 102 males
per 100 females.
Table 3.5 Sex Distribution per Age Group, 2010

Age Group Sex Total Male and Female Sex Ratio
Male Female
0-4 12,884 10,709 23,593 120.3
5-9 12,913 11,815 24,728 109.3
10-14 12,390 11,692 24,082 106
15-19 12,153 12,897 25,050 94.2
20-24 10,619 10,699 21,318 99
25-29 8,930 9,368 18,298 95.3
30-34 8,079 8,058 16,137 100.3
35-39 6,986 6,876 13,862 101.6
40-44 6,208 6,091 12,299 102
45-49 5,456 5,201 10,657 105
50-54 4,570 4,177 8,747 109.4
55-59 3,223 3,021 6,244 107
60-64 2,195 2,114 4,309 104
65 and over 3,114 3,652 6,766 85.3
Total 109,540 107,370 216,910 102
2.3.8 Dependency Ratio
In 2010, the young dependents (0 to 14 years) comprised 33.8% of the household

population while the old dependents (65 years and over) posted a share of 3.1%. The
working-age population (15 to 64 years) accounted for the remaining 63.1%. The overall
dependency ratio was 58, which indicates that for every 100 working-age population, there
are about 58 dependents (53 young dependents and 5 old dependents). This ratio is lower
than the dependency ratio in 2000 set at 69 dependents per 100 working-age population
(65 young dependents and four old dependents). This decrease in dependency ratio may be
implicated by an increasing employment rate of the city as of the 2010 report.
2.3.9 Health
Health Personnel and Facilities
Puerto Princesa City has three hospitals with higher level medical services, located
in the urban cluster barangays. Ospital ng Palawan is located at Brgy. San Miguel whereas
Palawan Adventist Hospital is located at Brgy. San Pedro. On the other hand, MMG-
Cooperative Hospital is located at the corner of Burgos and Mabini Streets in Brgy.

Masipag. As of 2012, a ratio of 1 hospital bed per 724 population is serving the city.
However, clienteles from nearby municipalities are not included in this ratio as indicated
in the recent CDP (2014) of Puerto Princesa. This ratio qualifies to the national standard
ratio of 1:1000 by the Department of Health in 2011. Aside from the hospitals, the urban
population is also served by specialized clinics. The Western Command of the Armed
Forces of the Philippines also has their own hospital which mainly serves the military
personnel and their families as indicated in the recent CDP.
On the other hand, there are seven satellite clinics with primary health care services
attending the rural dwellers (CPDO, 2015). These are specifically located in the barangays
of Buenavista, Cabayugan, Inagawan, Mangingisda, Napsan, San Rafael, and Salvacion.
As seen in Figure 3.3, the Cabayugan Rural Satellite Clinic (RSC) has three clinics within
its area of influence while San Rafael and Mangingisda RSCs have two clinics each within
their respective area of influence. There are also lower health care services in the Barangay
Health Stations of Marufinas, New Panngangan, and Tagabinet. Considering its distance
to the hospitals in the urban area, the identified need of these clinics is an ambulance service
equipped with necessary medical equipment for quick emergency response (CDP, 2014;
CLUP, 2013).
Overall, Puerto Princesa City has 3 major hospitals, 7 satellite clinics, and 55
barangay health stations according to the City Health Office (2015). Health personnel from
the government-managed hospitals, clinics, and health stations include 7 doctors, 3
dentists, 45 nurses, 62 midwives, 2 nutritionists, 4 medical technologists, 8 sanitary
inspectors, and 317 active Barangay Health Worker (BHW) as of 2015 (Field Health
Service Information System (FHSIS) Annual Report).

Source: City Planning and Development Office, 2015

Figure 3.3 Satellite Clinics in Puerto Princesa City
Health Indicators
Health is one of the important elements in the vision of Puerto Princesa City. In
particular, the city envisions the people to be in good health. The following presents the
data on some health indicators such as births, morbidity, and mortality.
A. Births
As per the City Health Office, there were 4,212 live births recorded for the
year 2015. In relation to the total number of deaths (1,092), it can be implied that
Puerto Princesa City had an increase in population for the previous year (2015).
B. Mortality
Mortality refers to the incidence of death which is measured through the
number of deaths in a population (Kirch, 2008). Listed in Table 4.6 are the ten
leading causes of mortality in Puerto Princesa City along with the number and rate
of reported deaths per 1,000 population in 2014 and 2015.

Table 3.6 Ten Leading Causes of Mortality in Puerto Princesa City for the
year 2014 and 2015
2014 2015
Causes
No. Rate No. Rate
1. Myocardial Infarction 163 0.62 153 0.60
2. Pneumonia 117 0.44 109 0.42
3. Intra Cerebral Haemorrhage 94 0.35 72 0.28
4. Heart Failure 67 0.25 66 0.26
5. Renal Diseases 38 0.14 59 0.23
6. Respiratory Tuberculosis 37 0.14 57 0.22
7. Sepsis/Septicemia 31 0.11 47 0.18
8. Cancer (all forms) 63 0.24 38 0.14
9. Hypertension 32 0.12 19 0.07
10. Diabetes Mellitus 29 0.11 13 0.05
Source: City Health Office
Myocardial infarction or commonly known as ‘heart attack’ was the top

leading cause of mortality with 153 reported deaths in 2015. An insignificant
decrease was observed in the number of reported deaths caused by myocardial
infarction from the year 2014 to 2015, as shown in Table 3.6. Following this top
cause are Pneumonia and Intra Cerebral Haemorrhage with 109 and 72 reported
deaths in 2015, respectively. Almost all leading causes are found to be non-
communicable or lifestyle diseases. Pneumonia is the only communicable disease
identified among the leading causes of mortality (World Health Organization).

Figure 3.4 Mortality in Puerto Princesa City by Age Group, 2015
As shown in Figure 3.4, the age group with the most number of recorded
deaths are aged 65 and above. Old aged people are more susceptible to disability

and diseases particularly chronic and degenerative; hence the old age groups (45-
49 to 65 and above) had the high number of deaths. With this high number of deaths,
it can be implied that the population in the city is growing provided that the number
of deaths in young age groups are relatively small and the total number of births
(4,212) is comparatively large.
There were 1092 deaths recorded in 2015. Although it is smaller than the
total live births, it is still a concern that needs to be considered. As defined by the
World Health Organization (WHO), perinatal deaths refer to the stillbirths and
deaths in the first week of birth. There are 66 perinatal deaths – 33 for both
stillbirths and early neonatal. There were also 4 maternal and 52 infant deaths
reported in the same year (CHO, 2015).
Table 3.7 Deaths with Medical Assistance and Deaths by Sex in Puerto Princesa
City, 2015
Deaths with Medical Deaths by Sex
Total Deaths Assistance Male Female
No. % No. % No. %
1,092 572 52.38 712 65.20 380 34.79
Source: City Health Office, 2015
From the 1092 total deaths recorded, 572 are taken with medical assistance.
These are the deaths that occurred in hospitals, clinics, and other health units
provided with financial and medical support. Table 3.7 also shows the distribution
of deaths by sex where male had the higher number of deaths recorded than female.
C. Morbidity
Morbidity is defined as the disease or injury incidence and prevalence
(Kirch, 2008). Table 3.8 presents the ten leading causes of morbidity in Puerto
Princesa City along with the number and rate of cases per 1,000 population for the
year 2014 and 2015.
Table 3.8 Ten Leading Causes of Morbidity in Puerto Princesa City for the
year 2014 and 2015
2014 2015
Causes
No. Rate No. Rate
1. Acute Respiratory Infection 4,194 16.03 4,336 17.16
2. Bitten by Dog 1,786 6.82 1,290 5.08
3. Respiratory Tuberculosis 778 2.97 704 2.69
4. Complications of Trauma 372 1.42 489 1.92
5. Injuries 628 2.40 441 1.73
6. Diseases of Urinary System 2,171 8.30 348 1.37
7. Hypertension 694 2.65 238 0.93

2014 2015
Causes
No. Rate No. Rate
8. Asthma 241 0.92 196 0.77
9. Malaria (all forms) 293 1.12 133 0.52
10. Gastritis and Duodenitis 193 0.73 74 0.29
Acute respiratory infection was the top leading cause of morbidity with
4,336 reported cases in 2015. It had a significant increase from the data in 2014
as shown in Table 3.8. Overall, the rate of the reported cases in 2014 has
dropped in the year 2015 except for the complications of trauma.
D. Over-all Health Indices
Aside from the health indicators discussed, Table 3.9 also shows fatal
mortality, child morbidity, and senior citizen morbidity and mortality rates as
part of the vital health indices according to the City Health Office (2015).
Table 3.9 Vital Health Indices, 2015

Indicators Male Female Total
Rate
Projected Population (2015) 146,215 115,304 261,519
Morbidity Rate (per 1000 population) 5,500 8,335 13,835 52.9
Mortality Rate (per 1000 population) 712 380 1,092 4.17
Crude Birth Rate (per 1000 population) 2,198 2,024 4,212 16.14
Infant Mortality Rate (0-11 mos.) 31 21 52 12.31
Infant Morbidity Rate (per 1000
354 321 675 159.87
livebirths)
Neonatal Mortality Rate (0-28 days) 23 15 38 9
Perinatal Mortality Rate (0-6 days) 19 14 33 7.81
Fetal Mortality Rate (per 1000
17 17 34 8.05
livebirths)
Maternal Mortality Rate (per 100, 000
- 4 4 94.74
livebirths)
Child Morbidity Rate (per 1000
1,370 1,164 2,534 9.68
population)
Child Mortality Rate (per 1000
35 25 60 14.21
population)
Senior Citizen Morbidity Rate (per
662 1,043 1,705 6.51
1000 population)
Senior Citizen Mortality Rate (per
338 225 563 2.15
1000 population)
The rates were computed based on the projected population for 2015.
Morbidity rate is found to be relatively high with a rate of 52.9 per 1,000 population.
There is also a huge infant morbidity rate per 1,000 livebirths equal to 159.87%.

Senior citizen mortality rate, on the other hand, is relatively small with 2.15 deaths
per 1000 senior citizens.
General Health Situation

A. Nutritional Status
Child malnutrition is more prevalent in the rural cluster with 13.5% than the
incidence rate of 9.11 in the urban cluster in 2012 (LGU, 2014). The proportion of
underweight-for-age children increases a year after a child’s birth due to the
practice of forced early weaning of babies. Weaned children are not provided with
sufficient nutrients from the foods they eat. As a result, these children suffer from
sustained deficiency, excess, or imbalance in one or more nutrients. The effect of
malnutrition to a child may reflect in his poor school performance, reduced mental
and physical capacity, susceptibility to diseases and low productivity in the long
run.
There are 14.21 deaths per 1,000 livebirths (Table 3.9) among children
under five years old in 2015. Three of the leading causes of death due to illness or
disease for all age groups include pneumonia, sepsis, and infectious gastro enteritis
(Table 3.6).
B. Child Nutrition
One of the indicators to look when evaluating the health status of the
population is the proportion of undernourished children below the age of 6 years.
This age group (0 to 5 years) is considered as the development stage of a child
therefore it is essential to give importance to child nutrition. If not monitored,
undernourished children at this age may acquire difficulty that could affect their
development in the long run.
Table 3.10 Prevalence Rate of Malnutrition (Weight-for-Age), 2012-2015

2012 2013 2014 2015
Nutritional
Rate Rate Rate No. Rate
Status No. No. No.
(%) (%) (%) (%)
Normal 25,608 88.30 26,482 90.23 24,899 90.81 23,218 91.51
Underweight 2,441 8.40 2,003 6.82 1,672 6.10 1,431 5.64
Severely
527 1.80 446 1.52 509 1.86 399 1.57
Underweight
Overweight 423 1.40 420 1.43 338 1.23 324 1.28
TOTAL 28,999 29,357 27,418 25,372
Prevalence
Rate of 10.23% 8.34% 7.95% 7.21%
Malnutrition

As shown in Table 3.10, 10.23% of children aged 0-6 years old in 2012
weigh less than what is considered normal for their age. However, the trend of the
prevalence rate of child malnutrition from 2012 to 2015 is decreasing. From 7.95%
PR of malnutrition in 2014, it decreased to only 7.21% in 2015. This implies a good
nutritional status for the following years provided that there are continuous efforts
to improve health and nutrition.
As of 2015, there are 1,431 children who are underweight for their age, and
399 children who are in the extreme condition of being severely underweight.
C. Access to Health Care

Other indicators to evaluate the health status of the population are the
incidence of illness and number of deaths due to illness. These indicators could be
measured through the access to appropriate and adequate health care and facilities
(Table 3.11).
Table 3.11 Access to Health Care, 2009 and 2012

City
Indicator
2009 2012
Children under 5 years old who died of illness per 1, 000 live
18.45 14.41
births
Proportion of women who died due to pregnancy per 1000 0.08 1.31
Proportion of births attended to by health personnel (%) 69.0 80.7
Prevalence of HIV/AIDS per 1000 persons 0.004 0.02
Prevalence of malaria per 1000 persons 3.31 1.98
Prevalence of tuberculosis per 1000 persons 1.40 1.41
Death due to HIV/AIDS per 1000 persons 0 0
Death due to malaria per 100, 000 persons 1.32 0
Death due to tuberculosis per 100, 000 persons 15.02 10.49
Death due to heart diseases per 100, 000 persons 72.74 114.39
Death due to hypertensive vascular disease per 100, 000 persons 15.46 14.78
Death due to accidents per 100, 000 persons 12.81 10.89
Family Welfare Programs
A total of seven family welfare programs are documented for the year 2015.
Parents’ effectiveness service had the most number of beneficiaries with a total of 6,142.
There are also 1,989 issued PhilHealth Membership Data Records. Counselling services
were also offered for both marriage and pre-marriage with 42 and 898 beneficiaries,
respectively.

2.3.10 Social Welfare

Social Welfare Programs and Services Available
The social sector covers the city’s status on education, health and nutrition, housing
and other subsectors. An example of a program for education is the Alternative Learning
System (ALS). This program aims to bridge the missing months of the regular school days
for the drop-out elementary students, mostly from the fisher folks by providing the same
teaching module that a regular teacher offers. Clustered Satellite Rural Health Unit
Development Project, as a health program, aims to standardize the facilities and equipment
needed for a Rural Health Unit (RHU) as required by the Department of Health (DOH). A
complete list of all the social welfare programs and services available within the city is
presented in Table 3.12 along with the program’s targeted clientele and location. The data
used were the results of the Community-Based Monitoring System (CBMS) survey of all
the barangays and households of the city conducted in 2012.
Table 3.12 Social Welfare Programs and Services Available, 2014

Name of Project Target Beneficiaries Location
Clustered Satellite Rural Poor residents and Cabayugan, Napsan,
Health Unit indigenous people in the Mangingisda, Inagawan and San
Development Project identified barangays and Rafael
its neighboring
barangays
Leadership Training for Fifty (50) identified Citywide, Puerto Princesa City
Pag-Asa Youth youth leaders citywide
Association
Development of Various Assigned informal settler Sicsican and Santa Lourdes

Relocation Sites households due for
relocation from the
hazard prone areas
(coastal barangays)
Empowerment of 66 Barangay Children Citywide, Puerto Princesa City

Barangays’ Children Welfare and Protection
Welfare and Protection Coordinator;
Project 66 Barangay Councils
for the Protection of
Children

Name of Project Target Beneficiaries Location

Progressive Education Drop-out elementary Elementary schools of Marufinas,
for Seasonal Student children of fisher folks Sabang-Cabayugan, Talaudyong-
Project (ALS) and farmers of Bacungan, Simpocan and
geographically Tagnipa-Cabayugan
disadvantaged barangays
of the City of Puerto
Princesa
Purchase of Land for Informal settlers of the Identified suitable and

Relocation of Informal City particularly those appropriate lots for resettlement
Settler Families from from coastal barangays
Hazard Prone Areas along Puerto Princesa
Bay
Sheltered Workshop for Persons with disabilities Citywide, Puerto Princesa City
Persons with Disability 15 to 59 years old
Project particularly youth, men
and women in the City of
Puerto Princesa
Self -Employment Three hundred (300) Barangays Langogan, Binduyan,

Assistance to Indigenous members of the Napsan, Babuyan, Concepcion,
People’s Non-Timber indigenous people in 16 Lucbuan, Maruyogon, Manalo,
Forest Products groups/communities Irawan, Sta. Lourdes, Marufinas,
Gathering Project citywide Buenavista, Cabayugan,
Tagabinet, Simpocan, Bagong
Bayan, Puerto Princesa City
Source: Annual Investment Plan, 2014
Selected Poverty Indicators
Another indicator of the status of the general social welfare of the city is the poverty
incidence status. It is measured by determining the proportion of households having income
below the official and mandated ‘poverty line’ for the MIMAROPA region. According to
the 2012 CBMS survey, 16.71% of all households in the city had incomes below the
poverty line of Php15, 952 in urban areas and Php15, 235 in rural areas. This is higher
compared to the province poverty line of Php 14, 038. It also states that 37.17 percent of
rural households is considered income-poor against the 10.07 percent income-poor in urban
areas, also it is stated that 7.8% of the city’s population were below the food threshold. The
effects of poverty on the access of households to various needs can be seen in a number of
related indicators (Table 3.13).

Table 3.13 Selected Poverty Indicators, 2012

Indicators City Urban Rural
Percent of households without access to sanitary toilets 10.10 8.35 15.43
Percent of households without access to at least level II water
3.85 2.15 9.09
supply system
Percent of households whose members eat less than 3 full
0.83 0.42 2.08
meals a day
Percent of households with income below the poverty line 16.71 10.07 37.17
Percent of households who have no secure tenure to housing 9.80 11.09 5.97
Percent of households with dwelling structures unable to
1.2 1.11 1.42
protect them from the elements
Source: CDP, 2014-2016
2.3.11 Education
Literacy Rate
Literacy rate is the proportion of the total population that has the ability to read,
write and do simple arithmetic calculations (CDP, 2014).
Table 3.14 Literacy rate of Puerto Princesa City, 2012

Male (%) Female (%) Total (%)
City 98.20 98.49 98.34
Urban 98.92 99.02 98.97
Rural 96.18 96.77 96.47
Source: CBMS Survey, 2012
Shown in Table 3.14 is Puerto Princesa City’s literacy rate. The overall literacy rate
of the city is 98.34%. Its urban area has a literacy rate of 98.97% while the rural area has
96.47%. There are more literate women than literate men in the city’s population, and in
urban and rural population separately (CBMS, 2012). From 94% in 2007, the literacy rate
in the city is increasing due to more accessible education through the implementation of
programs and projects such as establishment of schools in remote barangays, non-formal
education, multi-grade mobile teaching and drop-out intervention program (LGU, 2014).
Projected School-Age Population
As seen in Table 3.15, gradual increase in the school age population is expected
thus it is possible to have an increase in the demand for educational facilities such as
classrooms, materials, and teachers as well.

Table 3.15 Projected School-Going Population for the next five years, and five years
thereafter
Projected School Going Population
Age group 2010
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2025
5 (Kinder) 4,946 5,534 5,639 5,745 5,854 5,964 6,550
6- 11 29,415 32,912 33,534 34,168 34,814 35,472 38,953
(Elementary)
12- 15 19,459 21,773 22,184 22,603 23,031 23,466 25,769
(Junior HS)
16- 17 10,020 11,211 11,423 11,639 11,859 12,083 13,269
(Senior HS)
18- 22 22,811 25,523 26,006 26,497 26,998 27,508 30,208
(College)
Source of Baseline Population: NSO (2010)
Other Education Statistics
Puerto Princesa City provides public and private education from preschool to
bachelor and doctorate courses. For public schools, as of 2015, District 1 has seven public
elementary schools which have 245 teachers in totality. Puerto Princesa Pilot Elementary
School which is located at Roxas St. has the most number of teachers employed among all
the elementary schools in Puerto Princesa. On the other hand, 35 public elementary
schools, with the total of 630 teachers are located in District 2 of the city. District 3 of
Puerto Princesa has 34 public elementary schools with 237 school teachers. Table 3.16
shows the total number of public elementary school enrollees from 2013 to 2015 (DepEd,
2015) There are more male enrollees than female elementary students for the past three
years and a decline in enrolment was recorded in 2014. In 2015, the teacher-student ratio,
as computed by the researchers, is 1:31 given the total number of enrollees and total number
of teachers. Compared to the ideal ratio for elementary schools which is 1:45 (DepEd, n.d.),
it can be implied that the number of teachers are sufficient to handle the total number of
enrollees as of 2015.
Table 3.16 Total Number of Public Elementary Schools Enrollees in Puerto Princesa City
Year Male Female Total
2013 18,195 16,373 34,568
2014 17,937 16,112 34,049
2015 17,971 16,306 34,277
Source: Department of Education-Puerto Princesa, 2015
For public secondary level, there are 20 public high schools located in different
barangays with 711 teachers in totality. Palawan National School has the most number of
instructors with a total of 235 teachers. The teacher-student ratio for public secondary
schools in the city for 2015 is 1:25. Comparing it to the ideal ratio for high schools which
is 1:50 to 55 (DepEd, n.d.), secondary classes in the city are relatively smaller than the

ideal ratio. Table 3.17 illustrates the total number of public high school students enrolled
for the past three years. There are more female enrollees than male enrollees for the past
three school years (DepEd, 2015). Similar to enrolment records of public elementary
schools, there was also a decline in enrolment in 2014.
Table 3.17 Total Number of Public Secondary Schools Enrollees in Puerto Princesa City
Year Male Female Total
2013 8,173 8,815 16,988
2014 8,163 8,699 16,862
2015 8,475 8,947 17,422
Source: Department of Education-Puerto Princesa, 2015
According to the Department of Education- Division of Puerto Princesa, there are

28 private schools and learning centers that offer education from kindergarten to high
college. Attached in Annex A is the list of private schools in Puerto Princesa and the
educational level each school provides.
Institutes for tertiary education located in Puerto Princesa include three universities
such as Palawan State University (public), Western Philippines University (public) and
Holy Trinity University (private). Palawan State University (PSU), considered as largest
university in the province, has two campuses located in Puerto Princesa: its main campus
in Barangay Tiniguiban and an extension campus in Barangay San Rafael. PSU offers
undergraduate and graduate studies. According to Dr. Lorna C. Gelito, Vice President for
Academic Affairs of PSU, the university has a teacher-student ratio of 1:50 for regular
classes. There are also three colleges namely Fullbright College Inc., Palawan
Technological College and Palawan Polytechnic College; and seven trade
school/vocational/learning centers such as Systems Technology Institute (STI), AMA
Computer Learning Center (ACLC), Puerto Princesa School of Arts and Trade, Puerto
Princesa School of Science and Technology and Life College.
2.3.12 Housing
As reported in CDP 2014-2016, 61.1% of the total households own houses made of
light materials while 27.06% are constructed with strong or concrete materials. Houses
built with mixed materials but predominantly strong is 6.69% and mixed but predominantly
salvaged is 0.25%. According to CBMS Survey (2012), 1.2% (562 households) out of
47,578 households in Puerto Princesa is living in makeshift housing. Barangay San Miguel
has the most number of households that have makeshift houses with a total of 97 which
consists 2% of its household population. On the other hand, there are 4,680 households in
the city which are informal settlers. This group comprises 9.8% of the total household
population. Barangay Bagong Silang (Poblacion) has the largest contribution because it has
729 households (73.2% of its total household population) that have no formal housing

(Table 3.18). About 3, 260 low income families reside along the coastal areas of the city.
The need for relocation of these households to a more suitable area for housing arises
because of the risks and threats they may encounter in their present areas of residence.
Table 3.18 Type of Toilet Facilities Owned by Households
Urban Rural Total
Type of Toilet Facility Number % to Number % to Number % to
of HH* Total of HH** Total of HH Total
HH HH HH
Water-sealed flush to 25,066 69.94 6,522 55.95 31,588 66.51

sewerage/septic tank-own
Water-sealed flush to 7,192 20.07 1,567 13.44 8,759 18.44
sewerage/septic tank-
shared
Closed pit 600 1.67 1,860 15.96 2,460 5.18
Open pit 265 0.74 187 1.60 452 0.95
No toilet 2,684 7.49 1,605 13.77 4,289 9.03
Others 71 0.20 14 0.12 85 0.18
Source: CBMS Census 2012
*Total number of households in urban: 35, 878
**Total number of households in rural:11, 755
Tenure Status
CBMS Survey (2012) results showed that out of 47, 636 households, 43.88%
owned or owned-like the land they occupy while 16.74% does not have any possession
with the house and pay rental fees. Another 15.83% of the total households owns the house
but does not pay rent with consent of the land owner. Table 3.19 further illustrates the
tenure status of the households in Puerto Princesa City.
Table 3.19 Number of Households by Tenure Status of the Lot, Puerto Princesa City
Tenure Status of Lot Number of Households Percentage (%)
Total Households 47,636 100
Owner, owner-like possession of 20,905 43.88
house and lot
Rent house/room including lot 7,976 16.74
Own house, rent lot 1,363 2.86
Own house, rent-free lot with 7,541 15.83
consent of owner
Rent-free house and lot with consent 3,148 6.61
of owner
Rent-free house without consent of 5,095 10.70
owner
Own house, rent-free lot without 187 0.39
consent of owner
Living in a public space with rent 223 0.47

Tenure Status of Lot Number of Households Percentage (%)

Living in a public space without rent 1,135 2.38
Other tenure status 64 0.13
Access to a Water Source
There are 1,831 households without access to safe water in Puerto Princesa. As a
whole, it comprises only 3.85% of total household population in the city. However, almost
10% of the rural households still have no access to this type of service. Barangay Bahile, a
rural barangay, has the most number of households without access to safe water followed
by Brgy. Bacungan which is also a rural barangay (Table 3.20). Perhaps, the distance of
some rural households from potential water sources which will require high investment in
developing a viable water source is the main reason. As a result, there can be a high
exposure to water-borne diseases due to consumption of untreated water.
Access to Sanitary Toilet Facility
In terms of sanitary toilet facilities, Table 3.18 shows the type of toilet facility
owned by the households in Puerto Princesa City. More than half of 47,633 households
both in urban and rural barangays have their own water-sealed flush to sewerage/septic
tank. However, 10.1% of the total households do not have access to any sanitary toilet
facility. Table 3.20 shows that urban areas consist more number of households who do not
have sanitary toilet facilities than those in rural areas. Barangay Bagong Silang, an urban
barangay, comprises the highest number of households without the access to the service.
Table 3.20 Housing and Sanitation Situation of Households per Barangay, 2012
No Access to No Sanitary
No. of Makeshift Informal
Barangay Water Toilet
Households Houses Settlers
Source Facility
Urban HH % HH % HH % HH %
Bagong Pag-asa 150 0 0 73 48.7 0 0 4 2.7
Bagong Sikat 1,164 33 2.8 309 26.5 22 1.9 366 31.4
Bagong Silang 996 0 0 729 73.2 2 0.2 606 60.8
Bancao Bancao 2,267 47 2.1 256 11.3 12 0.5 149 6.6
Irawan 1,250 37 3 17 1.4 18 1.4 52 4.2
Kalipay 152 8 5.3 3 2 1 0.7 0 0
Liwanag 259 26 10 122 47.1 1 0.4 116 44.8
Mabuhay 230 0 0 215 93.5 109 47.4 187 81.3
Magkakaibigan 88 1 1.1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maligaya 49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mandaragat 1,261 1 0.1 40 3.2 5 0.4 257 20.1
Manggahan 162 0 0 43 26.5 6 3.7 2 1.2
Maningning 184 2 1.1 19 10.3 0 0 1 0.5

Source Facility
Urban HH % HH % HH % HH %
Masigla 132 0 0 0 0 3 2.3 1 0.8
Masikap 180 1 0.6 0 0 1 0.6 0 0
Masipag 404 0 0 1 0.2 2 0.5 0 0
Matahimik 660 4 0.6 240 36.4 58 8.8 214 32.4
Matiyaga 127 0 0 3 2.4 7 5.5 0 0
Maunlad 871 1 0.1 12 1.4 21 2.4 1 0.1
Milagrosa 710 0 0 5 0.7 2 0.3 0 0
Model 80 6 7.5 10 12.5 0 0 0 0
Pagkakaisa 305 2 0.7 235 77 0 0 232 76.1
Princesa 267 2 0.7 2 0.7 4 1.5 7 2.6
San Jose 2,111 12 0.6 13 0.6 111 5.3 100 4.7
San Manuel 2,348 18 0.8 12 0.5 16 0.7 24 1
San Miguel 4,844 97 2 563 11.6 120 2.5 7 0.1
San Pedro 3,695 37 1 491 13.3 106 2.9 276 7.5
Sicsican 1,872 11 0.6 58 3.1 6 0.3 74 4
Sta. Lourdes 1,400 1 0.1 372 26.6 106 7.6 174 12.4
Sta. Monica 3,709 9 0.2 63 1.7 13 0.4 11 0.3
Tagburos 745 4 0.5 3 0.4 3 0.4 133 17.9
Tagumpay 141 0 0 1 0.7 5 3.5 0 0
Tanglaw 495 21 4.2 14 2.8 1 0.2 1 0.2
Tiniguiban 2,528 12 0.5 59 2.3 9 0.4 1 0
Sub total 35,836 393 3,983 770 2,996
Rural HH % HH % HH % HH %
Babuyan 534 2 0.4 3 0.6 1 0.2 21 3.9
Bacungan 912 2 0.2 73 8 137 15 173 19
Bagong Bayan 132 3 2.3 9 6.8 64 48.5 27 20.5
Bahile 523 10 1.9 42 8 300 57.4 103 19.7
Binduyan 260 0 0 9 3.5 11 4.2 13 5
Buenavista 253 13 5.1 3 1.2 17 6.7 48 19
Cabayugan 747 1 0.1 7 0.9 3 0.4 66 8.8
Concepcion 299 4 1.33 0 0 5 1.7 25 8.4
Inagawan 381 20 5.2 9 2.4 0 0 41 10.8
Inagawan-Sub 1,138 1 0.1 136 12 32 2.8 350 30.8
Iwahig 110 0 0 2 1.8 44 40 0 0
Kamuning 507 2 0.4 3 0.6 4 0.8 99 19.5
Langogan 419 1 0.2 19 4.5 65 15.5 92 22
Lucbuan 313 10 3.2 2 0.6 48 15.3 37 11.8
Luzviminda 745 50 6.7 55 7.4 25 3.4 124 16.6
Macarascas 291 2 0.7 101 34.7 16 5.5. 20 6.9
Mangingisda 838 8 1 45 5.4 30 3.6 78 9.3
Manalo 477 1 0.2 26 5.5 14 2.9 63 13.2
Maoyon 270 0 0 20 7.4 32 11.9 18 6.7
Marufinas 159 6 3.8 9 5.7 13 8.2 72 45.3

Source Facility
Rural HH % HH % HH % HH %
Maruyugon 333 2 0.6 3 0.9 8 2.4 20 6
Montible 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Napsan 551 7 1.3 7 1.3 58 10.5 76 13.8
New Panggangan 125 0 0 2 1.6 8 6.4 39 31.2
Salvacion 204 1 0.5 2 1 33 16.2 33 16.2
San Rafael 326 3 0.9 9 2.8 0 0 22 6.7
Simpocan 193 6 3.1 1 0.5 35 18.1 28 14.5
Sta. Cruz 194 1 0.5 2 1 1 0.5 20 10.3
Sta. Lucia 33 0 0 2 6.1 0 0 5 152
Tagabinit 218 9 4.1 54 24.8 55 25.2 75 34.4
Tanabag 127 0 0 42 33.1 1 0.8 11 8.7
Sub total 11,656 165 697 1,060 1,799
Total 47,492 558 4,680 1,830 4,795
Source: CBMS, 2012
2.3.13 Employment
Employment Rate
In 2012, the employment rate in Puerto Princesa City is 93.09%. It decreased from
94% in 2009. There is an increase in the percentage of workers involved in non-agricultural
occupations from 58% in 2009 to 83% in 2012. The growing tourism industry of the city
is considered as one of the causes of this increase (City Human Resource Management
Office, 2014).
Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs)

There are a total of 1,105 residents of the city who are working overseas. However,
there are more people working abroad from urban barangays than from rural areas.
Barangay San Miguel, which is an urban barangay, has the most number of residents who
are working overseas. Table 3.21 further shows the number of OFWs per barangay in
Puerto Princesa City as of 2012.
Table 3.21 Number of OFWs per Barangay, 2012

Urban Rural
Barangay No. of OFWs Barangay No. of OFWs
Bagong Pag-asa 8 Babuyan 2
Bagong Sikat 32 Bacungan 13
Bagong Silang 18 Bagong Bayan 1
Bancao-bancao 41 Bahile 3
Irawan 16 Binduyan 3
Kalipay 2 Buenavista 3
Liwanag 5 Cabayugan 3

Mabuhay 6 Concepcion 1
Magkakaibigan 1 Inagawan 12
Maligaya 0 Iwahig 0
Manggahan 12 Kamuning 4
Maningning 7 Langogan 6
Masigla 10 Lucbuan 0
Masikap 8 Luzviminda 12
Masipag 10 Macarascas 4
Matahimik 12 Mangingisda 12
Matiyaga 1 Manalo 7
Maunlad 56 Maoyon 4
Milagrosa 65 Marufinas 1
Model 2 Maruyogon 6
Pagkakaisa 4 Montible 4
Princesa 10 Napsan 0
San Jose 67 New Panggangan 2
San Miguel 121 Salvacion 0
San Pedro 104 San Rafael 1
Santa Lourdes 12 Santa Cruz 0
Santa Monica 82 Simpocan 1
Seaside 1 Santa Lucia 0
Sicsican 79 Tagabinit 1
Tagburos 17 Tanabag 0
Tagumpay 2 TOTAL 106
Tanglaw 15
Inagawan-sub 5
Mandaragat 36
San Manuel 88
Tiniguiban 44
Total 999
Grand Total 1,105
2.3.14 Poverty Incidence
Poverty threshold refers to the cost of the basic food and non-food requirements
(NSCB, 2003). From the results of 2012 CBMS survey, 16.71% of the total household
population or 7,949 households earn below poverty threshold of Php15, 235.00 and Php15,
952 per month for urban and rural area respectively. 54.50% of these households is from
rural barangays while 45.50% is from urban areas. Barangay Inagawan-Sub has the highest
number of households below poverty threshold. On the other hand, food threshold refers
to the cost of the food required to satisfy nutritional requirements for economically
necessary and socially desirable physical activities (NSCB, 2003). In totality, 3,709
households or 7.8% of the population has income below food threshold. Barangay
Inagawan-Sub Colony, a rural barangay, has the highest number of households below food
threshold as well.

2.3.15 Recreation and Sports Facilities
Puerto Princesa City envisions being the promoter of wholesome and healthful
sports and recreation as indicated in the city’s vision (2014). With this, recreation and
sports facilities are present in the whole city for the benefit of the residents and tourists.
There is a major public recreational facility located within the government center in
Barangay Sta. Monica, the Ramon V. Mitra Sports Stadium. The facilities it offers are
considered sufficient to host regional and national sports events and athletic meets. Other
sports and recreational facilities include Magarwak Integrated Recreation and Nature Park,
Boy Scout Camp, Balsahan in Iwahig, and City Beach in Sitio Tagkawayan, Barangay
Bacungan. There are also public plazas, historical sites and the baywalk which are
concentrated in urban areas of the city. Basketball courts are also present in other urban
and rural barangays (Office of the City Mayor, 2014).
2.3.16 Protective Services

Crime Incidence
Puerto Princesa City Police Office (PPCPO) is responsible for the police protection
service in the city. The central headquarters is situated along the national highway in
Barangay San Pedro. PPCPO exercises supervision over two police stations namely
Mendoza Police Station located at Barangay Model which covers 40 barangays and Irawan
Police Station which is situated at Barangay Irawan and supports 26 barangays (PPCPO,
2015). There are seven police outposts placed in barangays Cabayugan, San Jose, San
Isidro, Tagumpay, Bacungan, Mangingisda, and Tanglaw. The city maintains 23 detention
cells housing 418 detainees (City Planning and Development Office, 2014)).
According to PPCPO Annual Accomplishment Report for 2015, the office has a
total of 387 police personnel, 23 of which are Police Commissioned Officers (PCOs) while
364 are Police Non-Commissioned Officers. As of 2015, the police-population ratio is
1:632. Compared to the 1:500 ideal police to population ratio mandate, the ratio is below
the ideal thus it can be implied that there is an insufficient number of police force in the
city.
In 2015, there were 938 crimes reported in PPCPO and among these 293 were
cleared and 236 crimes solved. February was the month when the highest number of crimes
was reported in 2015 with 114 crimes followed by July having 107 crimes.
Fire Protection Services
Bureau of Fire Protection (BFP) of Puerto Princesa is responsible for fire protection
services in the city. Its headquarters is along the national highway of Barangay San Pedro.

From the Bureau of Fire Protection (BPF) Brief Report on Fire Station in Puerto Princesa
City, as of 2015, the unit has 38 personnel, six city trucks (three BFP trucks and three LGU
trucks) and one ladder trucks. There are also fire hydrants strategically located such as fire
hydrants in various points of the city. From 38 fire incidents reported in 2014, occurrences
of fire in the city in 2015 decreased. Among the 35 fire incidents on 2015, 25 of which
happened in residential areas, four vehicular-related incidents and three in business areas.
Barangay San Miguel and Barangay San Manual have the highest percentage of fire
occurrences followed by Barangay Tiniguiban and Bancao-Bancao.
Fire prevention activities are being held and facilitated by the Bureau of Fire
Protection especially during March which is the Fire Prevention and Disaster Preparedness
Month. These include Fire Safety Seminar, “Ugnayan sa Barangay”, Kiddie Junior Fire
Marshall and Fire Drill Seminars and Fire Safety Inspection (BFP- Brief Report on Fire
Situation in PPC, 2015).
Other Protection Services
For protection against terrorism coming from the sea, Naval/Coastal Guard stations
are located in the city port, Ulugan Bay and Barangay Masipag.
2.4 LOCAL ECONOMY

2.4.1 The Primary Sector
Agricultural Crops
According to the Office of the City Agriculturist (OCA), the residents of Puerto
Princesa City rely greatly on agriculture as their main income. These yields in the city are
classified to long-term and periodic crops. The long-term crops include plantation produce,
fruit-bearing trees, and agro-forestry products, while the seasonal crops are corn, rice, root
crops, and vegetables.
A. Agricultural Croplands
According to OCA (2012), there are 13, 556.03 has. of planted crops in the
city, 68% or 9,245.53 has. were composed of long-term crops such as fruit trees
(42%), plantation crops (25%), and the remaining are in the agro-forest products
(1%) (Table 4.1). The remaining 32% of the total agriculture area were distributed
to rice (23%), corn (5%), and other seasonal crops (4%).
Table 4.1 Total land area of long-term and periodic crops in Puerto Princesa
City, 2012
Crop Area Planted (ha) Percent of Total
Permanent Crops 9,245.53 68%
1. Fruit Trees 5,675.98 42%

Crop Area Planted (ha) Percent of Total

2. Plantation Crops 3,353.34 25%
3. Agro-Forest 216.21 1%
Seasonal Crops 4,310.50 32%
1. Irrigated rice 1,156.60 8.5%
2. Non-irrigated rice 1,823.20 13.5%
3. Upland rice 179.92 1%
4. Corn 643.61 5%
5. Vegetables 257.17 2%
6. Root crops 250.0 2%
Total Crop Area 13,556.03
Source: CDP 2014-2016
B. Crop Production
In terms of the percentage of the crop production of the city, the agro-forest
amassed the highest contribution (70.64%), followed by plantation crops (23.84%)
and fruit trees (5.38%). The remaining periodic crops accrued not more than one
percent. All of these composed the 25,134,444.83 MT of the overall volume of
production in the city (Table 4.2).
Table 4.2 Crop Yield of Puerto Princesa City, 2012

Crop Production (MT in Percent of Total
thousands)
1. Agro-forest 17,756.04 70.64%
2. Plantation crops, all types 5,992.02 23.84%
3. Fruit trees, all types 1,352.86 5.38%
4. Rice, all types 11.95 0.05%
5. Root crops 10.00 0.04%
6. Vegetables 6.43 0.03%
7. Corn 5.15 0.02%
Total Crop Production 25,134.44
Livestock and Poultry

A. Number and Volume of Production by Type of Livestock and Poultry
The five major livestock and poultry dominant in the city were carabaos,
cattles, chickens, goats, and hogs (Table 4.3). The population of chicken had
increased by half from 1,051,194 (2008 population, CVO) to 1,599,434 (2012
population, CVO). However, it experienced a slight decrease in 2010 (1,098,701)
compared to the population recorded in 2009 (1,139,695). It continued to grow in
the succeeding years with the help of two multinational poultry enterprises namely
Swift Food Inc. and Magnolia Food, Inc. (CDP 2014). The hog and swine
population in 2008 (41,260) had decreased by almost a quarter in 2012 (33,022),

however, this value has already increased after the lowest thrust of swine population
in 2010 (27,710). The population of goats increased remarkably from 1,925 in 2008
it jumped to 7,070 in 2010 yet there is a slight decreasing trend in 2011 (2%) and
2012 (4%). Carabaos had a total population of 1,756 in 2012 and it peaked in 2009
with 2,315. The numbers of cattle had a hefty decline from 5,715 in 2009 to 1,654
in 2012.
Table 4.3 Poultry and Livestock Inventory, Puerto Princesa City, 2008-2012
Animals 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Chicken 1,051,194 1,139,695 1,098,701 1,145,875 1,599,434
Swine 41,260 39,462 27,710 31,857 33,022
Goat 1,925 1,594 7,070 6,545 6,285
Carabao 2,034 2,315 1,068 1,802 1,756
Cattle 5,518 5,715 1,664 1,522 1,654
B. Livestock and Poultry Production
According to the reports of the City Veterinary Office (CVO), the total meat
produced in 2015 was 4,903.6 MT, this is composed of pork (65.29%), chicken
(23.64%), beef (9.97%), goat (1.05%), and carabeef with 0.05% (CVO Data,
2016). The produce is higher compared to the produce in 2012, however, there is
a margin between the ratio of the total produce, pork industry has provided almost
two-thirds of the total produce matched up to the 50% of 2012. It is also evident
that from the 0.29% of carabeef in 2012, it declined to 0.05% in 2015.
Table 4.4 Number of Heads and Kilos for the Past Years and Present
Year Hog Cattle Carabao
Heads Kilos Heads Kilos Heads Kilos
2013 34,989 2,031,652 2,390 326,517 36 6,823
2014 56,261 3,289,623 3,486 480,771 42 7,157
2015 55,250 3,201,450 4,133 488,799 21 2661
Year Goat Chicken

Heads Kilos Heads Kilos
2013 795 8,998 1,542,855 1,606,707
2014 1,090 12,684 1,362,814 1,320,750
2015 1,681 51,608 1,150,619 1,159,068
Source: City Veterinary Office, 2016

Fisheries
As Puerto Princesa have its 52 out of 66 barangays located near municipal waters,
fishing became another important source of income of the residents. Together with its seas,
many inland water systems have allowed the fisherfolk to yield fishes from the fresh water.
A. Inland Fisheries
According to the report of OCA (2014), there are 499.11 hectares of fishponds
in the whole city, of which 323.75 has. (65%) are developed and 175.36 has. (35%)
are underdeveloped.
Bangus, shrimps, and tilapias are the most common species found on the 134
fishponds in the city, where 57% are private owned and the remaining 43% are leased.
B. Municipal Fisheries
The local economy on municipal fisheries has revealed that there are 5,991
fishermen and 3,020 registered fishing boats, on which 73% are motorized. The fish
harvest also yielded as much as 16,969.90 MT. These are marketed to export
businesses and to local consumers (OCA, 2014).
Food Self-sufficiency Assessment
The City of Puerto Princesa imports food to meet the demand of its rising
population. Grains have the highest inadequacies and imported to nearby communities
(Table 4.5). Sugar, meat, and other livestock products are also brought to the city.
However, the city had sustained and exceeded its needs in terms of fisheries, root crops,
and vegetables.
Table 4.5 Food Self-Sufficiency Assessment, Puerto Princesa City, 2012

Supply Per Capita/Year Demand Excess/
Commodity
(MT) Requirement* (MT) Shortfall
Fish 16, 965.90 0.03065 7,100.65 9, 865.25
Root crops 10, 000.00 0.00730 1,691.18 8, 308.82
Asstd. Veg & Legumes 6, 429.25 0.01265 2,930.61 3, 498.64
Meat 4, 845.4 0.03313 7,675.19 -2, 829.79
Sugar 0 0.02100 4,865.05 -4, 865.05
Grains 17, 094.62 0.11434 26,489.03 -9, 394.41
Source: CDP 2014-2016, *According to FNRI Standards
Forestry
The city follows the mandates of RA 7611 or the SEP Law, it has prohibited
collecting of timber and logging within its forests. SEP ensured sustainable development

to take place in the whole land of Palawan, including its 70% forest cover. With this law,
the only allowed activities are harvesting of non-timber forest product and other small
forest-based activities. Among the activities, rattan and almaciga resin are prevalent.
Almaciga resin businesses harvested a total of 265,721 kilograms (kg) and 80, 961 kg came
from the barangay of Tagabinet, while rattan industry of Maoyon, Babuyan, and San Rafael
had produced 153,052 Linear Meter (LM) (CENRO, 2012).
Agricultural Support Facilities
The city had created many agricultural and fishery support facilities which can be
classified to production support and post-harvest facilities.
A. Production Support Facilities
a.1. Irrigation systems located in Inagawan River and Tagburos River are
provided to farmers by the National Irrigation Administration. These irrigation
systems support 290 hectares of land and 137 farms. The infrastructure is able
to cover a total of 4.1 km main canal, 2.7 km of the Inagawan River and 1.4 km
of Tagburos River, and a total 3.535 km of lesser canals.
a.2. The OCA also provided four (4) units of tractors that can be borrowed by
farmers. It served more than 3 hectares of farmlands within the city (OCA,
2012).
a.3. Agricultural finances and supplies are also allotted to farmers and to
fishpond operators by multiple cooperatives, and various banks in the
Philippines.
a.4. Extension services are provided by the OCA and CVO; they give technical
assistance to farmers, fisherfolks, and the livestock growers.
i. The government offers seminars and trainings, provision of
fertilizers, seeds, and other prerequisites, crop protection and
production, and provision of post-harvest facilities.
ii. Fisherfolk enjoys services such as capacity building for
resources, livelihood trainings and seminars, water quality
monitoring, registration for ID system, assistance for fisheries
projects, and assessment of fisheries related projects.
iii. The CVO helps livestock owners by providing young livestock
for breeding and dispersal, animal health services including
treatment and medications, and technical services from trainings
up to artificial insemination.
B. Post-Harvest Facilities
b.1. According to OCA (2014), farm post-harvest facilities existing in the city
are 52 multi-purpose drier pavements, 27 warehouses, 25 rice mills, and 6
flatbed driers.

b.2. For the fish processing centers, there is a 3, 937.7 m 2 government-owned

fish port complex in Brgy. Matahimik, which harbors up to 30 fishing boats
from different municipality. Minor fish docks are also found in 7 other
barangays in the city. Three ice plants situated in two barangays, are also
located in the city. The city has two major markets, which caters most of the 62
registered fish dealers in the whole city.
b.3. For the livestock and poultry raising, 149 registered meat dealers are
housed in the old and new markets, however, most post-processing facilities are
traced to the backyards of the owners, to address this, the government provided
slaughter services through its slaughterhouse which can process 150 hogs and
55 cows in two hours.
2.4.2 The Secondary Sector
Manufacturing
According to the One Town, One Product (OTOP), program of the DTI, the city’s
main products are cashew and processed marine products such as lamayo, a marinated
semi-dried siganus canaliculatus sp. These indigenous delicacies are highly promoted
because they have a big market potential. These products are now being sold to different
hotels and restaurants in the city.
Many other products are available in the city. Even though the city discourages
large-scale and commercial natural resource extraction. Small and medium enterprises are
dominant in the city, these industries obtain agricultural goods, dairy, essential oil,
industrial rice, and minor forest products. Agricultural goods and minor forest products are
the most dominant industries in the city. It is composed of cashew, coconut, fish, mango,
and meat products for agricultural goods, and rattan, almaciga resins, bamboo, buho,
honey, and papers are the minor forest products that are sold in shops.
Although few, the manufacturing industry is dominated by diverse processing

businesses such as bakeries, furniture shops, handicraft making, hollow block making,
metal works, and rice mills (Office of the City Mayor, 2014).
Construction
The construction industry is one of the stable industries in the city. There are 59
construction firms in 2012 and a growing number of building permits issued as indicated
in the recent CDP (2014). However, the building permits issued in the city have decreased
from its peak of 563 in 2013 to 476 in 2015 (Table 4.6), though compared to the 2014 data,
it marginally increased from its lowest point of 406 throughout 2014. The most common
constructed infrastructure was residential housing for the years 2013-2015 and commercial
use in 2012, while both institutional (11) and agricultural (1) use got smallest percentage

(Figure 4.1). There is also a decreasing trend on the total revenue since 2014. A total of
533,486 m2 are developed from years 2012 to 2015.
Building Permits Issued (2012)
Institutional []
1% []
Residential Commercial
48% 50%
Commercial Residential Institutional Agricultural
Source: City Engineering Department, CDP 2014-2016

Figure 4.1 The percentage of building permits issued in the City of Puerto
Princesa, 2012
Table 4.6 Building Permits Issued, Puerto Princesa City, 2009-2012

Number of Building Permits Issued
Year 2012 2013 2014 2015
Commercial ₱233 ₱225 ₱104 ₱175
Residential 213 329 292 289
Institutional 13 8 10 11
Agricultural 6 1 0 1
Sub-total ₱465 ₱563 ₱406 ₱476
Revenues Generated
Commercial ₱4,294,807 ₱4,255,231 ₱2,315,569 ₱2,170,837
Residential 634,349 1,025,501 1,373,977 1,024,790
Institutional 106,634 64,714 77,664 105,567
Agricultural 16,089 14,825 - 4,175
Sub-total ₱5,051,879 ₱5,360,271 ₱3,767,210 ₱3,305,369
Construction Cost
Commercial ₱868,559,073 ₱994,763,038 ₱994,659,670 ₱491,590,458
Residential 293,863,465 381,942,552 431,628,626 330,160,020
Institutional 16,995,125 35,323,581 48,215,609 47,738,247
Agricultural 1,821,943 128,275 - 21,400
Sub-total ₱1,181,239,606 ₱1,412,157,446 ₱1,474,503,905 ₱869,510,125
Floor Area (sq. m)

Number of Building Permits Issued

Year 2012 2013 2014 2015
Commercial ₱117,789.00 ₱121,744.00 ₱83,726.00 ₱57,273.00
Residential 31,963.00 40,179.00 36,689.00 28,836.00
Institutional 2,939.00 4,159.00 2,800.00 4,106.00
Agricultural 630.00 618.00 - 35.00
Sub-total ₱153,321.00 ₱166,700.00 ₱123,215.00 ₱90,250.00
Source: City Engineering Department, given April 2016
Mining and Quarrying
Mining is prohibited in the whole Puerto Princesa City and left quarrying as the
only extractive activity in the city. According to the City ENRO (2015), there are 32
permits issued for small quarrying activities. Each quarrying enterprises were allowed to
extract 10,000m3 of aggregates annually in the 36 hectares of quarry sites.
Electricity and Gas
Puerto Princesa consumes large amount of power. In 2012 alone, the whole city
had consumed 145,771,410.83 KwH. The electricity of the city comes from the
distributor - Palawan Electric Cooperative (PALECO), which sourced from Palawan
Power Generation Inc. (PPGI), David M. Consunji, Inc. (DMCI) Power Corporation and
Delta Pi. According to Google Earth (2015), there are 53 gas stations in the city, however
most of these are concentrated on the hub of the city.
2.4.3 The Tertiary Sector
The city is the centre of communication, education, public administration, and

commerce. Compared to other municipalities in Palawan, Puerto Princesa City has a hub
of wide-ranging establishments that offer different services.
Financial Institutions
Puerto Princesa contains 188 financial institutions as of 2012, it is home of 26

Puerto Princesa is the home of two out of the 26 banks in the city, namely, Palawan
Development Bank and Cooperative Bank of Palawan. The most common bank category
is universal (Table 4.7), commercial, rural, and thrift bank. Other non-bank financial
institutions are lending agencies (66), pawnshops (42), money changers (34), and insurance
enterprises (20).

Table 4.7 List of Banks and its Classification, Puerto Princesa City, 2012
Bank Category
Asia United Bank (AUB) Universal Bank
Banco de Oro Universal Bank
Bank of the Philippine Island (BPI) Universal Bank
China Banking Corporation (Chinabank) Universal Bank
Development Bank of the Philippines Universal Bank
East West Banking Corporation Universal Bank
Land Bank of the Philippines Universal Bank
Metropolitan Bank and Trust Co. Universal Bank
Philippine National Bank Universal Bank
Rizal Commercial Banking Corp. (RCBC) Universal Bank
Security Bank Corp. Universal Bank
Union Bank Universal Bank
Bank of Commerce Commercial Bank
Maybank Commercial Bank
Philippine Veterans Bank Commercial Bank
Robinsons Bank Commercial Bank
Agribank Rural Bank
Bank of Makati Rural Bank
Cooperative Bank of Palawan (Coop Bank) Rural Bank
East West Rural Bank Rural Bank
First Consolidated Bank Rural Bank
Palawan Development Bank Thrift Bank
Philippine Business Bank Thrift Bank
Philippine Savings Bank Thrift Bank
Rizal Micro Bank Thrift Bank
UCPB Savings Bank Thrift Bank
Wholesale and Retail Trade
Many establishments are engaged in wholesale and retail trade. The city
accommodates not only large companies but also plenty of small and medium enterprises.
It contains three major shopping malls, NCCC Mall, Chinatown Mall, and Robinsons Mall.
A new economic venture is the ongoing construction of the city’s fourth major shopping
mall, Shoe Mart (SM). The city developed infrastructures, such as markets and trade posts,
permit trades of different goods and merchandises. Most common small and medium
establishments are general merchandisers, sari-sari stores, gasoline dealers, department
stores, farm and fish trade industries.

Personal Services
Personal services are also situated in the city. According to the CDP of 2014-2016,
there are at least 96 beauty salons and barber shops, 61 tailoring shops, 50 spas, 32 photo
studios, and 4 funeral parlours in the city. These are mostly located in the urban barangays
of the city.
Community Services
The city has plenty of service establishments for its residents. As of 2012, there are
520 tourism establishments (hotels, inns, etc.), 230 restaurants, 127 canteens, 50
drugstores, 19 manpower agencies, and three hospitals. These important services are easily
accessible to the residents and strategically located in highly populated places in the city.
Tourism
Puerto Princesa as the heart of Palawan, an ecological frontier, is home of many

scenic spots. These tourist attractions include different caves, beaches, islands, and other
beautiful sceneries. The city has 211 existing and potential tourist activities, it also
possessed three of the most popular sites in the country today, the Puerto Princesa
Underground River, Honda Bay, and the Iwahig Penal Colony. These areas hold an
important role in showcasing the rich natural ecosystem in the whole province. The tourist
sites showcase the different culture, diverse flora and fauna, and ecologically significant
spots in the whole country. The sites exhibit the environment by activities, such as eco-
trails, firefly watching, island hopping, and many amusing activities. With more site being
discovered, it is expected that Puerto Princesa will prosper to these developments.
The city has been always flooded by thousands of tourists every year. Renowned
by UNESCO as a “Premier Tourist Destination”, it has sheltered diverse population coming
from all over the world. The scenic environment and beautiful regions in the city had soared
nature lovers, travellers, and researchers to invest in the city. The number of tourist arrivals
are rapidly increasing every year. In 2013 alone, there are 694, 995 tourists, both
international and national travellers, visited the city. Most foreign tourists came from USA
with 38,614, it is also seen that Taiwanese tourists had drastically increased from 4,470 in
2014 to 31,887 in 2015. In the recent figures (CTO, 2016), the number of tourist peaked at
820,976 for the year 2015 alone, it is more than half of the 1.2 million total tourist of the
whole Palawan Province (Pillas, 2015). And with the creation of the new Puerto Princesa
International Airport, it is seen that the number of tourists will rise up to 2 million in total
(City Government, 2014).

Total Number of Domestic and Foreign Toursists in Puerto

Princesa City (2013-2015)
900,000
800,000
700,000
600,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
2013 2014 2015
Foreign 167,521 191,040 244,814
Domestic 525,461 549,232 574,147
Domestic Foreign
Source: City Tourism Office, April 2016

Figure 4.2 Trend in Tourist Arrival Puerto Princesa City, 2013-2015
2.5 INFRASTRUCTURE, PUBLIC UTILITIES, AND FACILITIES

2.5.1 Road Network
Puerto Princesa City has a total road length of 861.31 km, which consists of 28.39%
national road, 30.28% city road and 41.33% rural road. With a total land area of 2,193.40
sq km, the road density of Puerto Princesa is 0.39. The province’s north-south backbone
passes through the city, namely, the Puerto Princesa North Road and the Puerto Princesa
South Road.
In terms of surface type, gravel road comprises 59% of the city’s road network,
followed by concrete roads at 34%, asphalt at almost 5%, and earth roads at less than 3%.
Table 5.1 Road Network by Administrative Classification and Surface Type, 2012
Administrativ
Length
e % Concrete % Asphalt % Gravel % Earth %
(km)
Classification
National Roads 244.554 28.39 158.432 64.78 20.272 8.29 65.85 26.93 0 0
City Urban 260.772 30.28 74.858 28.71 20.065 7.69 158.841 60.91 7.008 2.69
Roads Rural 355.984 41.33 58.633 16.0 0 0 283.531 80.0 13.820 4.00
Total 861.310 100 291.92 33.89 40.34 4.68 508.22 59.01 20.83 2.42
Source: CDP, 2014-2016

Source: CLUP, 2013-2022; CDP, 2014-2016

Figure 5.1 Existing Road Network Map of Puerto Princesa City

2.5.2 Bridges
Puerto Princesa City has ninety (90) bridges with a total length of 2,644.99 m.
Sixty-four (64) bridges are under the administrative supervision of DPWH (CPDO, 2014).
Table 5.2 Existing Bridges, by Administrative Classification and Bridge Type, 2012
Footbridge
Administrative Box
Length Concrete Steel Bailey Timber Spillway / Hanging
Classification Culvert
(m) Bridge
National 2,162.79 1,800.96 361.83 0 0 0 0 0
Local 482.20 124.0 40.0 82.2 26.0 20.0 60.0 130.0
Total 2,644.99 1,924.96 401.83 82.2 26.0 20.0 60.0 130.0
2.5.3 Flood Control and Drainage Facilities

The city’s drainage system is maintained by the national and local government.
There are side drains and cross drains provided to catch runoff from road pavements along
national and city roads. Most areas in the City of Puerto Princesa have open type of
drainage. Only a few area have reinforced concrete cylinder pipes (RCCPs) which can be
found along major thoroughfares. The rest of the areas have open concrete hollow blocks
canal, open riprap canal, open pre-cast canal, and open earth canal (SEPP, 2007).
2.5.4 Domestic Water Supply

The present water supply of Puerto Princesa City comes from twenty-one (21) deep
wells, one spring and three surface water supply sources. These facilities except that of
surface water are generally located within the built-up area of the city.
The current water service area is concentrated mostly in the thirty-five (35) urban
barangays and five rural barangays.
Table 5.3 Water Service Connection by type, 2012

Consumer Frequency % to total
Residential 29,906 97.51
Commercial 633 2.06
Industrial/Institutional 132 0.43
Total 30,671 100
Source: CDP, 2014
The monthly consumption in the city during 2012 was estimated at 577,498.25 m 3.
As to water service classification, Puerto Princesa City Water District (PPCWD) served
633 commercial, 132 industrial/ institutional, and 29,906 residential consumers. Monthly
consumption by type of consumers were estimated at 94.30 m 3 for every commercial
connection, 235.20 m3 for every institutional connection, and 16.28 m 3 for residential
(CPDO, 2014).

2.5.5 Electric Power Supply

Electricity in the city is being provided by PALECO. Out of 66 barangays in the
city, 58 are already served. The remaining barangays which are not covered by their
service are Napsan, Bagong Bayan, Simpocan, Marufinas, New Panggangan, Cabayugan,
Tagabinet and Buenavista which are all from the west coast areas of the city. Of these
barangays, Cabayugan had already been waived by PALECO to Sabang Renewable
Electric Corporation, a consortium of WEnergy and Delta P (CDP, 2014). The table below
shows the frequency of customers from 2010 to 2012:
Table 5.4 PALECO Customers by type, 2010-2012

Customer Class 2010 2011 2012
Residential 51,234 53,439 55,717
Commercial 4,755 5,129 5,511
Public Building
Facilities (PBF) 1,380 1,455 1,517
Streetlights 8,288 127 163
Barangay Power
Association (BAPA) 3 3 0
Industrial 122 122 122
TOTAL 33,157 35,238 63,080
Source: CDP, 2014
Table 5.5 Electric Power Consumption (kwh) by type of Connection, 2010-2012

Public
Barangay Power
Building
Year Residential Commercial Association Industrial Streetlights
Facilities
(BAPA)
(PBF)
2010 55,735,024.16 37,311,921 14,207,994 32,692 10,369,915 4,132,784.00
2011 57,875,741.20 42,586,891 14,562,678 5,639.00 9,273,289 4,101,465.39
2012 62,490,579.00 54,171,814 15,742,410 0 10,139,906 3,226,701.83
Source: CDP, 2014
The main power generator is the National Power Corporation (NPC-Tiniguiban)

which contracted the Palawan Power Generations, Inc. (PPGI) producing net dependable
capacity of 11.40 MW. Another NPC sub-station in Barangay Irawan contracted with
Agrekko producing 10.00 MW as power back-up. On the other hand, Delta P Inc., an
independent power producer supplying major areas in the city generates 13.5 MW.
2.5.6 Transport Facilities

Puerto Princesa is the main gateway to the rest of Palawan. It is accessible from
major cities like Manila and Cebu through daily flights of nineteen (19) commercial airlines

at approximately one hour interval. A cargo ship (2GO) also visits Puerto Princesa from
Manila once a week (CPDO, 2015).
Transportation in the city is dominated by motorized tricycle and multi-cabs. There

are 3,622 registered tricycle units owned and operated by 3,270 owners in 2012. In 2015,
a number of taxis also started to circulate in the city. External routes are served by jeepneys,
air-conditioned shuttle vans, and buses plying between the city and other municipalities.
Registered vans for hire totalled 202 units.
2.5.7 Communication Facilities

Based on the City Development Plan, the city has four service providers of
telecommunication system namely Smart Communications, Globe Telecoms, Inc., PLDT
and Suncellular. Sixty-two (62) barangays have network coverage while PLDT
connections are available in city central barangays.
There are also five radio stations existing in the city providing broadcast service in
the whole province of Palawan and some places outside the country as of 2012.
Moreover, four television networks from Manila provide live telecast in the city.
These are the GMA Channel 12, ABS-CBN Channel 2, ABC TV 5 and the National
Broadcasting Network Channel 4 (CPDO, 2014).
2.5.8 Waste Disposal System

The existing wastewater management system in the city consists mainly of septic
vaults individually installed. A monitoring canal rest in the Old Public Market area cleanses
the wastewater from the market area before draining to the Puerto Princesa Bay. In other
parts of the urban area where open canals and creeks serve as drainage/sewage outfall, no
treatment process is introduced before the sewage is finally thrown out to the sea (CPDO,
2014).
For solid waste management, the city has installed a sanitary landfill facility in
Barangay Sta. Lourdes, covering an area of 26.9 hectares. The facility consists of 11.70
hectares of landfill cells, leachate collection and treatment, 1-km site access road, waste
recovery shed, equipment yard and wash bay, weighbridge, and special waste treatment
(CPDO, 2015). A waste-to-energy facility is also planned to be built in the city in 2016
(City ENRO, 2016).
2.5.9 Port
The Puerto Princesa Port is a first class port situated at the western side of Puerto
Princesa Strait. It is connected to the city proper through Rizal Avenue and Malvar Street.
Managed by the Philippine Ports Authority (PPA), the port has a total port zone delineation
of 479, 615 square meters (SEPP, 2007).

The Fish Port Complex is located in Barangay Matahimik, covering an area of

3,937.7 square meters. Owned and operated by the city government, it caters to the landing
requirements of municipal and commercial fishers from Puerto Princesa and other
municipalities. It can accommodate 20-30 fishing boats simultaneously. Its facilities
include market hall, food stalls, ice stalls and ice plant. It also has commercial spaces
suitable for warehouse/storage area, and parking spaces (CPDO, 2015).
The city also has seven fish wharves/feeder ports located in barangays
Mangingisda, Bancao-Bancao, Macarascas, Bahile, Cabayugan, Sta. Lourdes, and Bagong
Sikat (CPDO, 2014).
2.5.10 City Cemetery

There are a total of 19 cemeteries in Puerto Princesa covering about 101.38 hectares
of land. There are five cemeteries in urban barangays, with an area of 21.37 hectares, two
of which are operated privately; the Puerto Princesa Memorial Park in Barangay San Jose
and Loyola Memorial Park in Barangay Bagong Silang. The other three, which are publicly
managed, are located in barangays Sicsican, Masipag, and Tagburos. Fourteen (14)
cemeteries are in the rural areas which covers an aggregate area of 80.01 hectares. These
are in barangays Bahile, Macarascas, Buenavista, Cabayugan, Maruyugon, San Rafael,
Tanabag, Langogan, Inagawan, Mangingisda, Iwagig, Kamuning, Bagoong Bayan, and
Simpocan.
2.5.11 Slaughterhouse
As of 2012, slaughtering service in the city is provided by a one-hectare

slaughterhouse located in Barangay Tagumpay. It is owned by the city government. In
2013, the slaughterhouse was leased to Areza-Cruz Realty Corp as indicated in the recent
CDP. According to the 2015 Investment Profile, it can process at least 150 hogs and 55
cows in two hours.
2.5.12 Public Market
There are two public markets in the city: the Old Public Market located in Barangay
Tagumpay and the New Public Market in Barangay San Jose. As of 2012, there are 62
registered fish dealers and 149 registered meat dealers/vendors in the old and new public
markets (CDP, 2014).
2.6 LOCAL INSITUTIONAL CAPABILITY

2.6.1 Local Government Structure
The administrative structure of Puerto Princesa City is guided by the Republic Act
No. 7160 or the Local Government Code of 1991. The Local Government Code provides

basis for the administration’s structure, functions, and powers necessary for efficient and
effective governance and those essential for the promotion of general welfare.
The organizational structure consists of the City Mayor, City Vice Mayor, members
of the Sangguniang Panlungsod, and officers from different departments of the city
government (Figure 6.1). The City Mayor, as the governing head of the executive body, is
in charge of the enforcement of laws and ordinances and the supervision of all programs
and projects of the city government. Furthermore, the mayor is also responsible in ensuring
the delivery of basic services and the provision of adequate facilities. The City Vice Mayor
is responsible in directing the activities of the Sangguniang Panlungsod in its function as
the legislative body of the city government.
Table 6.1 Directory of City Officials (2013-2016)

Mayor Hon. Lucilo R. Bayron
Vice Mayor Hon. Luis M. Marcaida III
Sangguniang Panlungsod Members
Hon. Matthew K. Mendoza Hon. Eleutherius L. Edualino
Hon. Modesto V. Rodriguez Hon. Roy Gregorio G. Ventura
Hon. Vicky T. De Guzman Hon. Miguel T. Cuaderno IV
Hon. Gregorio Q. Austria Hon. Rogelio M. Castro
Hon. Peter Q. Maristela Hon. Patrick Alex M. Hagedorn (President
Hon. Victor S. Oliveros of the Liga ng mga Barangay)
Local Government Unit/ Department Heads
Aida G. Dusong City Accountant
Elena M. Vergara-Rodriguez City Administrator
Melissa Theodora U. Macasaet City Agriculturist
Joven C.V. Baluyut City Assessor
Regina S. Cantillo City Budget Officer
Abner L. Maduro City Civil Registrar
Alberto P. Jimenez, Jr. City Engineer
Carlo B. Gomez City Environment and Natural Resources Officer
Tiburcio B. Magay City General Services Officer
Ricardo B. Panganiban City Health Officer
Roberto D. Herrera City Human Resource Management Officer
Henry A. Gadiano City Information Officer
Arnel M. Pedrosa City Legal Officer
George G. Vasquez City Planning and Development Coordinator
Lydia M. Del Rosario City Social Welfare and Development Officer
Aileen Cynthia M. Amurao City Tourism Officer
Ma. Corazon A. Abayari City Treasurer
Indira A. Santiago City Veterinarian

CITY MAYOR SANGGUNIANG PANLUNGSOD

CITY VICE-MAYOR, PRESIDING OFFICER
PERSONAL STAFF
CITY VICE MAYOR

ADMINISTRATIVE COMMUNITY PERMIT & LIBRARY CITY EMPLOYMENT HOUSING CITY DISASTER RISK PUBLIC SLAUGHTERHOUSE
DIVISION AFFAIRS LICENSING SERVICES SPORTS SERVICES DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REDUCTION & MARKET DIVISION
DIVISION DIVISION DIVISION SECTION DIVISION DIVISION INFORMATION MANAGEMENT DIVISION
SYSTEM DIVISION
DIVISION
PERSONAL ADMIN MTOP/ FRANCHISE
CITY ADMINISTRATOR SERVICES
STAFF SECTION
SECTION
ASSISTANT CGDH
OFFICE OF THE SANGGUINANG

ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION
PANLUNGSOD MEMBERS
HUMAN RESOURCE
PERSONAL
CITY GENERAL CITY PLANNING AND CITY CIVIL CITY BUDGET
MANAGEMENT OFFICER
STAFF
SERVICES OFFICER DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR REGISTRAR OFFICER
ASSISTANT CGDH ASSISTANT CGDH ASSISTANT CGDH

ASSISTANT CGDH OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY TO
ASSISTANT CGDH
ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE THE SANGGUINANG PANLUNGSOD
SECTION SECTION
SECTION
ADMINISTRATIVE HUMAN RECRUITMENT EMPLOYEES

BIRTH, DEATH, BUDGET REVIEW BUDGET
& RECORDS RESOURCE / SELECTION/ WELFARE/
PROPERTY PLANS & RESEARCH MARRIAGE & & EVALUATION OPERATION
DIVISION DEVELOPMENT APPOINTMENT BENEFITS & GEN. ZONING PROJECT GIS
PROGRAMS MISC. REGISTRY DIVISION DIVISION
& TRAINING / STATISTICS PERSONNEL & SUPPLY UTILITY EVALUATION DIVISION DEV’T DIVISION
SECTION DIVISION & STATISTICS DIVISION
DIVISION DIVISION SERVICES DIVISION
DIVISION DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE SP COMMITTEE JOURNAL &
DIVISION SECRETARIAT MINUTES
DIVISION DIVISION
CITY ACCOUNTANT CITY LEGAL OFFICER CITY TREASURER CITY SOCIAL WELFARE &
CITY
DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
INFORMATION
OFFICER
ASSISTANT CGDH
ADMINISTRATIVE ACCOUNTING INTERNAL ADMINISTRATIVE INQUIRY & LEGAL ADMINISTRATIVE TREASURY CASH CASH REAL BUSINESS INFORMATION &
& RECORDS SERVICES CONTROL & RECORDS INVESTIGATION RESEARCH DIVISION OPERATIONS RECEIPTS DISBURSEMENT PROPERTY TAX & COMMUNITY CHILD & YOUTH RESEARCH DATA
SECTION DIVISION DIVISION DIVISION DIVISION DIVISION REVIEW DIVISION DIVISION TAX FEES WELFARE AND WELFARE DIVISION
DIVISION DIVISION DIVISION DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT
DIVISION DIVISION
CITY REGISTER CITY HEALTH OFFICER CITY TOURISM OFFICER CITY ASSESSOR
OF DEEDS

ADMINISTRATIVE
SECTION
ADMINISTRATIVE DENTAL NUTRITION ADMINISTRATIVE TOURISM PROMOTION & PRODUCT ADMINISTRATIVE TAX APPRAISAL BUILDING &
DIVISION SERVICES DIVISION & RECORDS STANDARDS & MARKETING PLANNING & & RECORDS MAPPING DIVISION MACHINERIES
DIVISION SECTION SERVICES SERVICES DEVELOPMENT DIVISION DIVISION DIVISION
DIVISION DIVISION SERVICES
DIVISION
MEDICAL ENVIRONMENTAL POPULATION
SERVICES SANITATION & CONTROL
DIVISION DISEASE CONTROL DIVISION
DIVISION
CITY VETERINARIAN CITY AGRICULTURIST CITY ENVIRONMENT AND

CITY ENGINEER
NATURAL RESOURCES OFFICER
ASSISTANT CGDH ASSISTANT CGDH ASSISTANT CGDH ASSISTANT CGDH
ADMINISTRATIVE ANIMAL MEAT AGRICULTURAL HOME MGT PLANNING, CONSTRUCTION MOTORPOOL ADMINISTRATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL LAND USE
SECTION HEALTH & INSPECTION EXTENSION SERVICES DESIGNING & & MAINTENANCE DIVISION DIVISION SERVICES MGT SERVICES
DISEASE DIVISION SERVICES DIVISION PROGRAMMING DIVISION DIVISION SECTION
CONTROL DIVISION DIVISION
DIVISION
FOREST MGT PROTECTED AREAS MINES AND
ADMINISTRATIVE FISHERIES ADMINISTRATIVE PUBLIC SERVICES BUILDING PUBLIC
SERVICES & WILDLIFE GEOSCIENCE
DIVISION SERVICES DIVISION DIVISION SAFETY & ELECTRICAL
DIVISION MANAGEMENT MGT SERVICES
DIVISION DIVISION
DIVISION DIVISION
Figure 6.1. Organizational Structure of the Local Government Unit of Puerto Princesa City, Palawan
*CGDH- City Government Department Head

2.6.2 Local Fiscal Management

Revenues
The Revenue Profile (Table 6.2) shows that the city’s income is mainly derived
from the following sources: internally generated income: (1) Local Taxes: realty, business
and miscellaneous taxes and (2) Non-Tax Revenues: Fees and Charges and receipts from
Economic Enterprises; and the externally sourced income: (1) Internal Revenue Allocation;
(2) Grants and Aids; and (3) Other Receipts such as grants from the PCSO and share from
DBM. A major portion of the local government’s income however, comes from the
national government in the form of the internal revenue allotment. This was augmented by
the locally generated revenue where the bulk comes from the taxes collected from realty,
business and miscellaneous subjects (CTO, 2014).
Table 6.2 Revenue Profile of Puerto Princesa City, 2012

Source Revenue
Local Sources:
Tax Revenues
Real Property Taxes 53,228,473.42
Business Taxes 88,667,152.78
Miscellaneous Taxes 25,609,753.07
Non-Tax Revenues:
Fees and Charges 6,274,022.00
Economic Enterprises:
Public Market 18,344,733.19
Slaughterhouse 8,566,654.72
Bus and Jeepney Terminal 7,266,227.25
Other Economic Enterprises 90,966,106.64
Others:
Discounts on Real Property Tax/ SEF (664,189.41)
External Sources:
Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) 1,290,617,660.00
Internal Revenue Allotment (Monetization)
Grants and Aids
Share from National Wealth
Others Receipts:
Permits and Licenses 25,945,824.24
Service Income 17,994,541.08
Interest Income 327,388.18
Share from PCSO 1,239,718.48
Share from DBM 749,423.26
Miscellaneous Income 125,069,079.86
TOTAL REVENUE 1,760,202,568.76

Expenditures
For the year 2015, the total government spending of the Puerto Princesa City
Government was P1.6 billion, 61.81% of the total appropriation of P2.59 billion. The major
expenditure items are as follows:
Table 6.3. Expenditures by Item, Puerto Princesa City (2015)

Budget Actual %
Personal Services 415 million 363 million 87.35%
MOOE 910 million 756 million 81.84%
Capital Outlay 960 million 213 million 22.21%
Financial Expenses 312 million 271 million 86.97%
Total 2, 597 million 1, 603 million
Source: 2015 Institutional Report, Puerto Princesa City
2.6.3 Development Legislation

Inventory of Resolutions Passed/Ordinances Enacted by Sector
Table 6.4 Summary of Legislations by Sector, 2013-2015
Ordinances Resolutions
Legislations
2013 2014 2015 Total 2013 2014 2015 Total
Rules and Privileges 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
Appropriations 2 1 9 12 12 18 24 54
Ways and Means 0 0 2 2 2 0 2 4
Cooperatives and Livelihood 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
Environmental Protection and 2 0 0 2 59 45 59 163
Natural Resources
Labor and Employment 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 3
Trade, Commerce and Industry 0 0 1 1 0 0 3 3
Local and International Relations 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Social Welfare and Community 0 0 0 0 2 5 1 8
Development
Health and Sanitation 0 1 1 2 1 6 1 8
Food, Agriculture and Fisheries 0 0 2 2 8 25 20 53
Housing and Urban Poor 0 0 1 1 2 1 4 7
Games and Amusements 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 3
Barangay Affairs 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2
Public Markets and 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1
Slaughterhouse
Education and Culture 0 4 1 5 2 1 8 11
Ordinances and Legal Matters 2 0 3 5 53 37 31 121
Women and Family Welfare 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Human Rights and Migration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tourism 1 0 1 2 0 6 1 7
Public Works and Infrastructure 0 0 0 0 1 9 4 14
Youth and Sports Development 0 0 0 0 2 8 0 10
Indigenous People and Cultural 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Communities

Energy, Public Utilities & 0 0 0 0 2 14 11 27

Facilities
Ordinances Resolutions
Legislations
2013 2014 2015 Total 2013 2014 2015 Total
Peace and Order and Public 0 1 0 1 1 2 2 5
Safety
Landed Estate and Urban 0 1 6 7 7 13 16 36
Development
Transportation 1 0 0 1 10 8 1 19
Good Government/Public Ethics 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
and Accountability
People's Organization and Non- 0 0 0 0 19 18 26 63
Government Organization
(NGO) Affairs
Human Resource Development 9 11 20 40 2 6 2 10
and Organization
Information and 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 4
Communications Technology
TOTAL 18 21 47 86 188 228 222 638
Source: Sangguniang Panlungsod
Table 6.4 shows the ordinances and resolutions that were enacted from 2013 to
2015. The total number of legislations from 2013 to 2015 is 724. Out of this number, 86
are ordinances and 638 are resolutions. It can be observed that 47% of the ordinances
passed in the last three years were for human resource development and organization,
followed by appropriations at 14% and landed estate and urban development at 8%. Out of
638 resolutions passed, 25% are for environmental protection, followed by resolutions for
ordinances and legal matters at 19% and people’s organization and NGO affairs at 10%.
2.6.4 LGU-CSO-Private Sector Linkages
It is stated in the Local Government Code that every local government unit must
have a development council that shall assist the Sanggunian in setting the direction of
economic and social development, and coordinating development efforts within its
territorial jurisdiction. It is their function to formulate development plans and policies and
investment programs, and to appraise and prioritize development projects. Their function
also includes the monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of these plans.
The city development council is composed of the following: all punong barangays
in the city, the chairman of the committee on appropriations of the Sangguniang
Panlungsod, the congressman, and representatives of non-government organizations
operating in the city (Local Government Code).

It is further stated in the Local Government Code that a non-government

organization represented in the city development council must be duly accredited. The
participation of NGO’s and PO’s enable the people to pursue their legitimate and collective
interests and aspirations through lawful means. The accredited NGO’s and PO’s in Puerto
Princesa City are listed in Table 6.5.
Table 6.5 Accredited NGO’s and PO’s Approved by the Sangguniang Panlungsod as
of Jan 2016
Name of Organization Date Accredited
Tagbarungis Multi-Sectoral Farmers Association Inc. July 29, 2013
Amateur Boxing Referees/ Judges and Technical Officials Association August 12, 2013
of the Philippines (ABREJAP)
Honda Bay Boat-owners Association Inc. (HOBBAI) August 12, 2013
Jacana Coastal Residents Development Association August 12, 2013
Pandan Marine Products Marketing Cooperative August 12, 2013
Federation of Senior Citizens Association of the Philippines (FSCAP- August 12, 2013
PPC)
Conservation International Philippines August 19, 2013
Kamuning Coastal Residents Development Association Inc. October 7, 2013
World Vision Development Foundation Inc. October 7, 2013
Cooperative Development Council (CCDC) October 14, 2013
Palawan- Filipino- Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry October 14, 2013
Environmental Legal Assistance Center, Inc. (ELAC) November 18, 2013
Alay Lakad Foundation Inc. November 18, 2013
Puerto Princesa City Government Employees Multi-Purpose November 18, 2013
Cooperative
Palawan Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Incorporation November 18, 2013
Pilipinas Shell Foundation Inc. November 18, 2013
Micro Village Club Credit Cooperative November 18, 2013
CK Plus Multi-Purpose Cooperative December 16, 2013
Katala Foundation Incorporated January 27, 2014
Palawan NGO Network Incorporated (PNNI) January 27, 2014
Palawan Red Groupers Corporation March 24, 2014
Center for Environment Settlement and Development Assistance Inc. March 24, 2014
(CESDAI)
United Muslim Converts Association of Palawan, Inc. (UMCAP) April 14, 2014
Palaweño Information and Communication Technology Association, May 5, 2014
Inc. (PICTA)
Puerto Princesa Association of Retired Teachers/ Administrators, Inc. May 19, 2014
(PPART)
Langogan PPC Fisherfolks Association, Inc. June 9, 2014
Manalo PPC Fisherfolks Association, Inc. June 30, 2014
Babuyan PPC Fisherfolks Association, Inc. June 16, 2014
Bagong Sikat PPC Fisherfolks Association, Inc. June 16, 2014
Association of Accredited Tour Operators of Puerto Princesa, Palawan July 28, 2014
Golden Valley Teachers Village TODA (GVTV TODA) August 19, 2014
Macarascas PPC Fisherfolks Association, Inc. September 1, 2014
Lobster Fisherfolk Association of Puerto Princes, Palawan September 22, 2014

Name of Organization Date Accredited

Natural and Historical Foundation of Palawan and the City of Puerto October 7, 2014
Princesa, Inc.
Purok Centro Barangay Tiniguiban Neighborhood Association, Inc. November 12, 2014
Shakba Palawan Association, Inc. December 8, 2014
Ugat sa Kalusugan February 19, 2015
Air Toda Transport Service Cooperative February 18, 2015
Gaqued Y Ang Mga Cuyunon February 23, 2015
Ligaya ng Buhay Community Development Foundation, Inc. February 23, 2015
Tandayak Marine Ventures Association, Inc. February 23, 2015
Maranat Farmers Credit Cooperative February 26, 2015
Puerto Princesa Islands of Wonder Services Cooperative March 16, 2015
Palawan Conservation Corps, Inc. April 13, 2015
Palawan Operators Tourist Multi-Purpose Cooperative April 13, 2015
Puerto Princesa Palawan Gamefowl Breeders Association (3PGBA) July 6, 2015
United Palawan Breeders Association (UPBA), Inc. July 6, 2015
Barangay San Miguel Senior Citizens Association (BSMSCA) July 6, 2015
Babuyan Sandbars CBST August 24, 2015
Philippine National Police Retirees August 24, 2015
Alouette Foundation of the Philippines, Inc. September 1, 2015
Candis III Marketing Cooperative September 14, 2015
PCCI Puerto Princesa Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Inc. September 21, 2015
City Tourism Council of Puerto Princesa, Palawan, Inc. September 28, 2015
Rotonda Multi-Purpose Cooperative October 26, 2015
Human Development Incorporated November 23, 2015
Philippine Air Force Retirees Association of Palawan, Inc. January 25, 2016
Source: Sangguniang Panlungsod
2.6.5 Development Control and Environmental Protection Committee of Puerto

Princesa City
The Development Control and Environmental Protection Committee (DCEPC) is
the committee created to ensure the effective implementation of the Comprehensive Land
Use Plan 2013-2022 and City Ordinance No. 560 (Ordinance Revising the Zoning
Regulations of the City of Puerto Princesa and Providing for the Administration,
Enforcement and Amendment Thereof and for the Repeal of all Ordinances in Conflict
Therewith) of Puerto Princesa City, as stated in Section 18 of the aforementioned
ordinance.
The DCEPC has the power to approve or disapprove land use proposals/project
applications or to prescribe conditions for the approval, to act on complaints for violations
of any provision of the zoning ordinance or of any condition of clearances or permits used,
and to determine whether or not there was a violation committed. They also have the right
to conduct investigations and to inspect properties and buildings in order to determine
factual issues, and to discuss on and formulate procedures, guidelines and rules regarding
matters related to land use management.

To effectively carry out the mandated duties, responsibilities and functions of the
DCEPC, there are technical working groups (TWG) created to render technical and
administrative assistance to the committee. There are two working groups, namely TWG-
ENVI (TWG on Environmental Protection) and TWG-ECO (TWG on Economic
Development). The TWG-ENVI is in charge to render assistance on matters pertaining
and relating to projects and activities affecting the environment (i.e. operations on quarry,
development of land covered by foreshore lease agreement/ special land use permit/ other
tenurial instrument applications), whereas the TWG-ECO is in charge to render assistance
on matters relating to consent on merit, violations of any of the conditions on the clearances
and permits issued, land use administrative complaints and oppositions to locational
clearance applications
The following are the composition of the DCEPC and its technical working groups:
Table 6.6 Development Control and Environmental Protection Committee of Puerto

Princesa City
Chairperson: Hon. Lucilo R. Bayron
Vice Chairperson: Hon. Luis M. Marcaida III
Members:
Acting City Planning and Development Coordinator George G. Vasquez
City Assessor Filemon D. Reynoso
City Engineer Alberto P. Jimenez, Jr.
City ENRO Carlo B. Gomez
City Agriculturist Melissa Theodora U.
Macasaet
City Legal Officer Arnel M. Pedrosa
Chairman, SP Committee on Landed Estate and Victor S. Oliveros
Urban Dev’t
Chairman, SP Committee on Environment Gregorio Q. Austria
Indigenous People Representative Primo S. Loreno
DENR-CENRO Emer D. Gerraez
PCSD Representative Josephine S. Matulac
President, Association of Barangay Chairman Patrick Alex M. Hagedorn
PNNI, Civil Society Representative Bobby Chan
Source: Executive Order No. 11, Office of the City Mayor
Table 6.7 Members of the DCEPC TWG-ENVI and DCEPC TWG-ECO

TWG-ENVI TWG-ECO
Team Leader: Team Leader:
Sr. Environmental Ronilo Liao Zoning Officer IV, Rex Bundac
Management Specialist, OCPDC
City ENRO

TWG-ENVI TWG-ECO
Members: Members:
Aquacultural Joven Zoning Officer III, Edwin Roña
Technologist, City Delgado OCPDC
Agriculturist
DENR-EMP Alexander Engineer IV, City Ricardo Lagrada
Representative, PENRO Coben Engineering Office
PCSD Representative Maila Villaos Sr. Environmental Mary Ann Joylee
Management Madriñan
Specialist, City
ENRO
PNNI Representative Loreta Ms. Delia Martinez
Cagatulla
CENRO, DENR- Emer Gerraez
CENRO
Source: Executive Order No. 11, Office of the City Mayor
2.6.6 City Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council of Puerto Princesa
The City Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (CDRRMC) is the unit
created to ensure proper implementation of Republic Act 10121, otherwise known as the
Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010. The act emphasizes the
importance of recognizing and strengthening the capabilities of the local government unit
and the community in mitigating, preparing for, responding to and recovering from
disasters thus, creating the council to ensure proper coordination and implementation of
the act.
Table 6.8 Composition of the City Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council
Chairman City Mayor
Vice Chairman City Vice Mayor
Members:
City Administrator Representative, Department of Trade and Industry
Representative, Sangguniang Panlungsod Representative, national Food Authority
City Social Welfare and Development Officer Representative, Puerto Princesa City Water District
City Planning and Development Coordinator Representative, PALECO
City Health Officer Representative, Media Sector
City Agriculturist Administrator, Philippine National Red Cross
City Engineer The Chief, PAGASA
City Budget Officer CENRO, DENR
City Veterinarian Representative, Boy Scouts of the Philippines
City Treasurer Manager, Civil Aviation Authority of the Philippines
City General Services Officer District Engineer, DPWH 3rd Engineering District
City Information Officer Chief, Land Transportation Office
Division Chief, Barangay Affairs Division Program Manager, Oplan Linis Program
City Chief of Police- PNP Program Manager, Bantay Puerto Office
City Fire Marshall-BFP Program Manager, Kilos Agad Action Center

City Director- DILG Chief Officer, Civil Security Group

City Schools Division Superintendent, DepEd Alleprina A. Villarez, Administrative Officer II
Representative, Western Command AFP Mary Anne M. Juaniza, Supervising Administrative
Officer
Source: DRRM and CCA Plan 2012-2016
The CDRRMC is responsible in setting the directions, development,

implementation and coordination of disaster risk management programs within the
territorial jurisdiction of the City of Puerto Princesa. Specifically, the powers and functions
of the council are: (1) to take the lead in preparing for, responding to and recovering from
the effects of any disaster if two or more barangays are affected; (2) to approve, monitor
and evaluate the implementation of the Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management
Plan (LDRRMP) consistent with other national and local planning programs; (3) to ensure
the integration of disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation into local
development plans, programs and budgets as a strategy in sustainable development and
poverty reduction; (4) to recommend the implementation of forced or preemptive
evacuation of local residents, if necessary; and (5) to convene the local council once every
three months or as necessary (CPDO, 2012).
2.7 ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT1
Ecological Footprint (EF) is a quantitative measure of human demand (i.e., resource

consumption and waste assimilation) on the ecosystems. It is the area of productive land
and water that is required to support a defined human population and material standard
indefinitely.
EF analysis uses the combined demand for ecological resources (wherever they are
located) and presents them as the global average area (global hectares) needed to support
a specific human activity. Simply put, ecological footprint is the area (in global hectares)
of productive ecosystems outside a city that is required to support life in the city (Odum
and Barrett, 2005). Annex F shows the method used to calculate for the ecological footprint
of Palawan.
The year 2005 is used as the baseline year since the available data on the extent of
cropland, forest, and built up came from 2005 PCSDS GIS data on land use/land cover.
The forest for timber and fuel are terrestrial forests only; mangrove forests are excluded.
Fishing ground is the area of municipal waters (15-km buffer from coasts) provided for in
Fisheries Code.
__________
1
The ecological footprint metric is based on Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth by
Wackernagel and Rees (1996: New Society Publishers, B.C. Canada), and “Securing Sustainable Food, Water, and Wood
Supply for the Future” (unpublished presentation).

The population in the years 2013, 2015, and 2020 are projected using a growth rate
of 2.56% (2000-2010). The formula used for overshoot and reserve is as follows:
Deficit/Reserve (gha) = (Requirement (has.) of population in year x) – (Existing

land use (has.) in 2005)
The findings for Puerto Princesa City are shown in the following table. It presents
the deficient and reserve areas, in global hectares, of forest for water source, cropland for
food, forest for wood, built up area, fishing ground, and grazing lands.
The major findings from the EF computations in Puerto Princesa City, which can
be used in land use decisions for the year 2020 include:
i. the need to allocate additional 96,853.30 hectares for cropland;

ii. the sufficiency of forest area for water in the city;
iii. the sufficiency of forest for fuel and wood consumption;
iv. the sufficiency of fishing grounds;
v. the need to allocate 14,439 has. more for built up areas;
vi. the sufficiency of grazing land; and
vii. the sufficiency of mangrove forest for CO2 uptake.
The computed ecological footprint values should not be treated as absolute

indicators of the sufficiency or insufficiency of material requirements. The ecological
footprint is only a broad, static estimate of land use capability. It does not take into account
technological innovations and rate and efficiency of resource use.

Table 7. Ecological Footprint of Puerto Princesa City 2

Year / Requirement (Deficit)/Reserve Fraction of City Land Area
Ecological
footprint
2013 2015 2020 2013 2015 2020 2013 2015 2020
variable
(gha)
Cropland
requirement 93,104 99,231 116,369 (73,587.80) (79,714.54) (96,853.30) 0.34 0.37 0.45
for food
Required
forest for 2,450 2,611 3,062 156,685 156,524 156,073 0.73 0.72 0.72
water
Required
forest for
22,051 23,502 27,561 137,084 135,633 131,574 0.63 0.63 0.61
timber and
fuelwood
Required
fishing 17,151 18,279 21,436 302,155 301,027 297,870
ground
Required
14,701 15,668 18,374 (10,766) (11,733) (14,439) 0.05 0.05 0.07
built-up area
Required
4,900 5,223 6,125 26,089 25,767 24,865 0.12 0.12 0.12
grazing area
Carbon
dioxide
78,403 83,563 97,995 86,628 81,469 67,036 0.40 0.38 0.31
uptake of
forests
2 The assumptions for the biocapacity by land use type per person in the Philippines (gha/person) are as follows: cropland = 0.38; grazing land = 0.02; forest land (for timber and
fuelwood) = 0.09; fishing grounds = 0.07; built-up area = 0.06; for a total of 0.62 gha/person. Additional biocapacity values are carbon dioxide uptake (consumption footprint) =
0.32; and forest land (for water) = 0.01. The national carbon consumption footprint is used for carbon dioxide uptake instead of biocapacity as there is no biocapacity for CO2
given in the Atlas reference. The source of Philippine biocapacity of all land use types is Ewing et al. (2010, The Ecological Footprint Atlas 2010), except for forest land for water,
in South West resident (2001). Land use hectarage is from PCSDS Land Cover Map 2005 while population (2000 and 2010) is from NSO.

CHAPTER III
THE ECAN ZONING STRATEGY
The ECAN zoning is the central strategy of the SEP Law. It is a zoning system that
encompasses the whole province. It has similar configuration as the biosphere reserves of
UNESCO. Zoning of biosphere reserves is aimed at the protection of environmentally
critical habitats, the zoning scheme being typified by concentric circles (Figure 7).
Figure 7. Configuration of biosphere reserve zones
Generally, the core area is strictly protected to meet conservation objectives.

Around the core area, the buffer zone is delimited for non-extractive uses, while the
transition area is where sustainable development activities with local communities are
organized (Batisse 1992). A network of such reserves is often created inside a management
or conservation unit called a corridor, an ecoregion, or a protected landscape and seascape.
An ECAN zoning map is produced from biophysical and socio-economic criteria

that include the elevation of the land, its slope, forest cover, watershed properties, and
presence of habitat of threatened species, land classification, and the existing land uses. As
with biosphere reserves, the management zones range from the Core Zone or the maximum
area of protection, the Buffer Zone surrounding the Core Zone, and the Multiple Use or
multi-purpose zone. All 23 municipalities of Palawan and the City of Puerto Princesa have
adopted their ECAN zones maps for their respective planning and regulatory agenda.
The adoption of the zoning maps is done through the approval of local government
resolutions. The Palawan ECAN zones, aside from being an on-ground implementation of
Palawan BR, serve as the blueprint for the province’s sustainable development since the

municipal Comprehensive Land and Water Use Plans (CLWUPs) are to be aligned with
the ECAN map. The regulatory function of the map is evident as each zone, from the Core
Zone to the Multiple Use Zone, is prescribed with allowable and prohibited activities.
3.1 THE ECAN ZONES AS A MANAGEMENT UNIT
The designation of the ECAN zones as a management unit is implied by the use of
the ECAN zones map as the basis for finding suitable sites for plans, programs, and projects
that will be introduced in Palawan. It is expected that a locality which adopts its own
scientifically prepared ECAN Map and implements its development objectives based on it
will be better guided in developmental planning and decision making.
The process of ECAN management in Palawan is called “ecanization,” which is

defined as “the process of delineating and marking the boundaries of the different zones in
both land and sea, the identification of prescribed activities and resource use for each zone,
together with the enforcement of regulatory measures to prevent practices that are
destructive of the environment” (PCSD Resolution 94-44). To that end, the Palawan
Province has come up with the following ECAN Map (Figure 8).
3.2 COMPONENTS OF THE ECAN ZONES
The ECAN zoning strategy has three (3) components: the Terrestrial component,
the Coastal/Marine component, and the Tribal ancestral zones (SEP Law, Sections 8-11).
Terrestrial component: This component covers the mountains, low hills, and
lowland areas of the whole province. It shall be further divided into three ECAN
management zones: Core zone, Buffer zone, and Multiple use zone. The Buffer zone is
further subdivided into three sub-zones: Restricted use area, Controlled use area, and
Traditional use area. The zoning of this component is guided by the criteria in the SEP Law
and in PCSD Resolution 05-250 or the Revised Guidelines in Implementing the ECAN
(PCSD, 2014b).
Coastal/Marine component: This component covers the whole coastline up to the

open sea. A simplified zoning scheme is used in the management of this component due to
its geographical characteristics, critical nature, and patterns of resource use. This
component is divided only into two zones: Coastal/Marine Core zone and Coastal/Marine
Multiple use zone. The latter is further subdivided into Transition/Buffer zone and
Sustainable/General use zone. The zoning of this component is guided by the criteria in the
SEP Law and PCSD Resolution 05-250.

Figure 8. Terrestrial ECAN Zones map of Palawan Province (Kalayaan

Municipality is not shown)
Tribal ancestral zone: This last component is a special zone in the land and sea
that is allotted for indigenous cultural communities. This special zone will fulfill the
material and cultural needs of the indigenous peoples (Young, et al.). It shall be delineated
according to the criteria for terrestrial and coastal/marine components. Hence, the tribal

ancestral zone may transcend all ECAN zones. The only difference is the strong emphasis
on cultural considerations.
The identification and delineation of this component is guided by Joint NCIP-

PCSD Memorandum Circular No. 2005-01 (“Harmonization of the Implementation of the
Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) and the Strategic Environmental Plan for Palawan
Act”), as amended (PCSD, 2014a, PCSD, 2014d).
3.3 CRITERIA AND PARAMETERS IN THE DELINEATION OF THE ECAN

ZONES
The following two tables (Tables 8 & 9) is a summary of criteria and parameters
used in the delineation of terrestrial and coastal/marine ECAN zones. A parameter is a
distinct geographic, biological, or physical feature of the area. Examples are elevation,
slope, and land cover. A criterion is a specific range of quantitative values or qualitative
descriptions of the area. Thus, for the parameter of elevation, the criteria can be “above
1,000 meters”, “below 300 meters”, etc.
Table 8. Parameters and criteria in the delineation of terrestrial ECAN Zones (PCSD,
2014b)
ECAN Description Elevation Land Slope Habitat Others
Zone Cover
Area of > 1,000 m Virgin > 50 % Critically Other
maximum forest or (> 26.57 threatened areas
protection primary degrees) /endangere which may
growth d habitats be
forest and identified
habitats of and
rare designated
Core Zone
endangere by the
d species Council
or habitat
of
Palawan
local
endemic
species of
flora and
fauna


Zone Cover
Generally 500 to Poor, 36-50 % Areas In areas
surrounds the 1,000 m stunted (19.80- designated where the
Core zone and and sparse 26.57 as criteria of
provides a stands of degrees) biodiversit elevation,
Buffer: Restricted Use Zone
protective semi- y hotspots slope, or

barrier; Critical deciduous and highly critical
watersheds forest threatened watershed
which were which has by human do not
identified, a low activities apply, a
classified or regenerati based on 200-meter
declared as on scientific belt in the
such by the capacity studies mainland
government and 100-
meter belt
in the
islands
surroundin
g the Core
zone
Encircles and 300 to 19-35 % Areas
Buffer: Controlled Use
provides the 500 m (10.20- within the

outer barrier to 19.80 criteria of
the Core zone degrees) the
Zone
and Restricted Restricted

use zone use zone
where
there is a
communit
y
Areas within Open, > 18% All other
the criteria of brushland slope areas with
Buffer: Traditional Use Zone
the Restricted or (> 10.20 elevation

use zone where grassland degrees) below 300
there is a areas that AND meters
community are still below
classified 300
as meters
timberland elevation
or public
land with
elevation
below 300
meters


Zone Cover
Areas where Built-up < 18% Areas
the landscape or slope classified
has been settlement (< 10.20 as
modified for areas degrees) Alienable
Multiple Use Zone
different forms located in AND and

of land use lowlands below Disposabl
such as (less than 300 e lands
intensive 18% meters
timber slope) elevation
extraction,
grazing and
pastures,
agriculture and
infrastructures
development
Table 9. Parameters and criteria in delineating coastal/marine ECAN zones (PCSD,

2014b)
ECAN
General Description Criteria
Zone
This area shall be  Coral reefs with good to excellent coral
designated free from cover condition or 50%-100% coral cover
any human activity.  Coralline sites containing at least 50% of
This includes
Coastal/Marine Core Zone
coral genera found in the management unit

sanctuaries for rare and of live coral cover ranging from 25-50%
endangered species,  Sea grass beds serving as link habitat of the
selected coral reefs, sea coral core zones and/or providing habitat to
grass, and mangrove rare, threatened and endangered species
ecosystem reserves.  Sea grass beds with at least 50% cover of
more than one species of sea grass
 Sea grass beds with sightings or feeding
tracks of Dugong dugon
 Coastal/marine habitat of endangered
species declared by IUCN or CITES, DA
or DENR or the PCSD

ECAN
Zone
This area shall be  Primary growth mangrove areas and all
Coastal/Marine Core
designated free from areas with standing mangrove forest cover
any human activity. except areas allocated for MSA,
This includes CBMFMA, ISF and FLA
 Fish sanctuaries, spawning areas, nursery
Zone
sanctuaries for rare and
endangered species, areas, breeding/feeding grounds, etc.,
selected coral reefs, sea identified/declared by PCSD, Bureau of
grass, and mangrove Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR)
ecosystem reserves. or under local government zoning
ordinance
The multiple use zones are other coastal/marine areas outside of the core
areas where compatible resource uses may be carried out. The multiple
use zone shall further be subdivided into two major sub-zones (described
below): the buffer zone and the sustainable (general) use zone.
 Uninhabited islands or undeveloped portions thereof not
subject to private rights shall be classified as transition
zone except when identified/declared as ancestral
coastal/marine waters
Coastal/Marine multiple use zone - Transition/Buffer zone
 Uninhabited islands or islets with an area of less than

500 hectares
Coastal/Marine Multiple Use Zone
 Degraded small islands with an area of less than 500

hectares
 Released areas for fishpond development which were
utilized and abandoned including those not utilized for 5
years from the date of the release
 Degraded habitats of endangered marine species
 Denuded mangrove forest
 Areas identified as contributing to important ecological
processes such as spawning, nursery areas,
breeding/feeding grounds that otherwise could have been
classified as coastal-marine core zone but during the
approval of these guidelines, these areas are occupied or
have been released by virtue of existing laws or due to
inappropriate management of local coastal marine areas.
These areas shall be maintained for their existing use or
a phase-out strategy shall be implemented in these areas
reverting them to their natural state or for their
appropriate uses. No further development, growth, or
expansion shall be allowed in these areas to encourage
habitat enhancement or maintenance of the resource to
increase production level or ecosystem maintenance
Continuation of Table 9

ECAN
Zone
It is the development area of the coastal/marine zone where
Sustainable/ General
multiple use zone -
different compatible and sustainable development activities
Coastal/Marine
may be carried out. The zone shall cover all coastal/marine
use zone
areas not classified/delineated as core zone, buffer zone and
ancestral coastal/marine waters. The LGU, if it so desires,
may further classify/divide this zone into the following sub-
zones: Communal Fishing Ground, Tourism Development
Area, Visitor Use Area, Sustainable Development Area and
etc.
3.4 ALLOWABLE ACTIVITIES IN THE ECAN ZONES
The allowable uses of ECAN zones (Table 10) are identified according to the level
of impact of activities and the appropriateness and suitability of the activity to the zone.
The core zone and the restricted use area, or the “protection zones,” are limited to non-
consumptive and soft-impact activities, with the indigenous peoples given special
consideration. The principle behind limiting a specific activity in a zone follows the SEP
philosophy of sustainable development that maintains life-support systems, restores
exploited areas, and supports developmental growth.
Table 10. Activities allowed in the ECAN Zones (PCSD, 2014b, PCSD, 2014c)
Component ECAN Zone Allowable activities within the management zone

Core Zone None, except for:
 Traditional uses of tribal communities for minimal
and soft impact gathering of forest species for
ceremonial and religious purposes, and
 Ecotourism activities as per PCSD Resolution 06-
270
Buffer: Limited and non-consumptive activities which
Terrestrial
Restricted Use include:

Zone  Gathering of wild honey;
 Almaciga tapping;
 Soft-impact recreational activities (hiking, sight-
seeing, bird watching);
 Research;
 Sustainable activities of indigenous peoples;
 Ecosystem restoration or rehabilitation; and
270


Buffer:  Strictly controlled mining;
Controlled Use  Strictly controlled logging which is not for profit
Zone (i.e., communal forest, CBFM, etc.);
 Almaciga tapping;
 Tourism development;
 Research;
 Grazing; and
 Gathering of honey, rattan, and other minor forest
products
Buffer:  Upland stabilization program;
Traditional Use  Catchment management;
Terrestrial
Zone  Hillside farming;

 Industrial tree plantation;
 Reforestation;
 Integrated social forestry; and
 Community-based forest management
Multiple Use  Timber extraction with community-based forest
Zone management;
 Grazing and pastures;
 Agriculture;
 Infrastructure and industrial development;
 Recreation;
 Education;
 Research; and
 Other sustainable activities
Coastal/Marine None, except for:
Core Zone  Navigation purposes of the local fishing
communities where there are no alternative routes;
 Emergency situations such as navigational routes
to save life and property;
 Researches previously authorized by PCSD; and
Coastal/Marine

270
Coastal/Marine  Habitat restoration, rehabilitation and
Multiple Use enhancement activities;
Zone–  Soft-impact activities (swimming/snorkeling;
Transition/Buffe non-motored boating (row boats, kayaks, canoes,
r zone wind surfing, etc.);
 Guided scuba diving;


Coastal/Marine  Fishing using highly-selected gears (i.e., hook &
Multiple Use line and gill net) with specification to be
Zone– determined by studies;
Transition/Buffe
 Pre-approved visit or educational activities;
r zone
Coastal/Marine
 installation of environmental information boards);

and
 Resource enhancement activities
Coastal/Marine All sustainable human activities, with certain

Multiple Use development endeavors subject to the EIA system
Zone– and to other policies regulating development projects
Sustainable/Gen
eral use zone
Activities based on the material and cultural needs of
Ancestral
Tribal
Lands
the indigenous peoples
The PCSD Resolution 06-270 (PCSD, 2014c) further expands the allowable
activities in the Core zone and Restricted use buffer zone by including ecotourism projects.
The rationale behind this are enumerated in the resolution, to wit: (i) ecotourism can be a
tool for environmentally managing ecologically sensitive areas; (ii) ecotourism is believed
to be compatible with environmental protection considering that its activities are generally
non-consumptive and therefore do not pose environmental hazard; (iii) ecotourism is a
growing industry in Palawan which can generate alternative sources of livelihood; and (iv)
in order to promote and develop ecotourism industry in the province, ecotourism activities
may be permitted in ecologically sensitive areas subject to strict monitoring and regulation.
It should be noted that certain “sustainable development” activities to be allowed

in the Buffer zone and Multiple use zone may be subjected to the EIA System and to other
laws and rules which regulate development projects. As part of the EIA System and the
SEP Clearance System, necessary environmental precautions (such as periodic multipartite
monitoring) are imposed on these activities.
3.5 DELINEATION OF THE ECAN ZONES USING GIS

The mapping of ECAN zones in Palawan has been the responsibility of the GIS
Unit of the ECAN Policy and Knowledge Management Division (EPKD) of PCSDS. Aside
from the GIS staff, technical project consultants have been hired to make mapping studies,
to develop methods for ECAN zoning implementation, and to train the PCSD Staff (Ofren
1999; Cabrido 2003; Vinluan 2004). The latest mapping guidelines on ECAN zoning were

instituted in 2005 through PCSD Resolution 05-250. Several versions of the ECAN map
were produced through the years, each version using updated and ground validated ECAN
parameters.
GIS and remote sensing technologies were now routinely used in the mapping of
ECAN zones. Various spatial and non-spatial datasets are needed to perform the task
(Table 11). Spatial datasets include thematic layers derived from thematic mapping and
used as input layers in producing ECAN maps. Thematic mapping is the process of
preparing the required map layers for ECAN overlay analysis and presenting them using a
standard mapping system. The most dynamic of these layers is the land cover-land use
(LC-LU). Mapping land and coastal habitat types had direct contribution to the
configuration of ECAN zones. They formed the major resource base of PCSDS geographic
information.
Table 11. Spatial and non-spatial data sources related to ECAN mapping
Data source Type Description Data acquired,
produced, or
written
ECAN zones Spatial In various editions (preliminary, 1993, 1998, 2001,
revised, updated, refined) 2004, 2005-06
Satellite images Spatial Landsat TM, Landsat ETM+, c.1998, 2002-2006
Spot 5, and IKONOS color
images
Land and coastal Spatial Based on commercial satellite c.1998, 2003-2006
cover images; produced by JAFTA,
PTFPP and SEMP-NP
Relevant Spatial Elevation, slope, habitat of 1950 onwards
thematic layers endangered species, land
and thematic classification, land use
maps
Literature Non- Reports, books and articles by 1983-2006
spatial staff and consultants of PIADP,
SPIADP, PCSDS, PTFPP, and
SEMP-NP
The spatial data are geo-referenced information in the map projection UTM Zone
50, Luzon Datum, Clarke Spheroid 1866. They are available in hardcopy and in digital
format in the PCSDS database.

CHAPTER IV
MAJOR STEPS IN THE ECAN ZONING PLAN PREPARATION
The process of the ECAN Zoning Plan Preparation discussed in this chapter is the
conventional design formulated by the PCSD in framing the ECAN Zoning Plan of the
municipalities in Palawan (specify what municipalities). It also serves as the guideline for
the intern planning teams from the Department of Community and Environmental Planning
(DCERP) in drafting the ECAN Resource Management Plans of the municipalities of
Taytay, El Nido, and Roxas, Palawan in the previous year. These plans are currently on the
review and evaluation of PCSD.
For this year, three intern planning teams the ECAN Resource Management Plans
of Puerto Princesa City and the municipalities of Busuanga and Coron, Palawan. The
process of the preparation was also based on the guidelines below, but with site-specific
modification on some steps due to the limitations encountered by the different teams. In
the case of Puerto Princesa City, the initial plan of conducting a participatory resource
mapping was not followed given the set duration of the conduct of the study and other
circumstances.
Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response framework is used to analyze and present
the integrated threats analysis. The framework illustrates causal links of threats and
problems in a more detailed manner. The framework does not only focus on identification
of threats; moreover, it also identifies the root causes or driving force of the core problem
or threat. Long term impacts of these are recognized as well. Current intervention which
addresses the problems are also one of the elements of DPSIR framework since this can
help the formulation of other preventive measures and actions. In addition, it enables
feedback to policy makers on environmental quality and the resulting impact of the political
choices made, or to be made in the future.
The intern planning team opted to use a strategy-based approach rather than a
problem-based approach in addressing the issues, concerns, and threats identified in the
ECAN zones in order to tailor fit the specific strategies in accordance to each zone. It has
been taken into account that some problems were identified to be occurring as well in
different zones; to address this issue, a specific strategy based approach per zone was used.
The kinds of strategies are being highlighted rather than the problems. Furthermore, the
strategies identified made the formulation of plans more holistic and encompassing.
As for the implementers, using the strategy-based approach would make it easier to
clump and consider collective efforts in order to address several threats across different
zones efficiently. The approach enables the implementers to see the types of strategies, the
proposed projects adhered to it, and the problems it will address per zone. This would
enable the implementers to create an efficient, and harmonized method of doing the
proposals per strategy.

4.1 THE ECAN ZONES MANAGEMENT PLANNING PROCESS
The formulation of the ECAN Plan necessitates an expert appraisal of all the
available information. It includes participatory planning (consultations with all concerned
stakeholders), GIS analyses (thematic mapping), and the selection of relevant sustainable
development indicators (ecological footprints, land cover/land use, land use suitability
assessments, etc.).
The details on the planning process are given in the document “General Strategy
for Horizontal Integration of SEP ECAN Zoning Plan with CLWUP” prepared by the
PCSD Staff. The document contains a suite of methods for executing each step in the
ECAN Resource Management Plan preparation, including the integration of ERMP with
local land use plans. The adaptive approach (i.e., adjusting methods and procedures based
on lessons learned and what worked well) is followed in the planning process.
The ECAN Resource Management Plan is designed to be flexible and practical in

its proposed guidelines and programs on identified ECAN zones use and strategies. It is
envisioned to be a repertoire of comprehensive strategies that will be responsive to the
current situation of the city.
Planning for ECAN zoning is divided into three major parts: (i) ECAN Resource
Management Plan development through primary and secondary data collection,
preparation, and processing; (ii) municipal integrated threats analysis and strategic
planning, and (iii) ECAN Resource Management Plan writing. These successive steps
(details are provided in the next section) are the central activities in the ECAN planning
process-framework.
Primary data include field data acquired through a variety of sources, such as key
informant interviews, ecosystem baseline and monitoring surveys, field studies, and GIS
overlay analyses. Secondary data include previously published or unpublished researches
about the area, thematic maps, and public reports.
During the stage of ECAN Resource Management Plan Development, the

following thematic data, maps, and plans (Table 12), at the minimum, can be consulted in
formulating the ECAN zones management strategies and land use options.
Table 12. Data requirements for ECAN zones management planning

Thematic maps Description Source of data
ECAN zones Graded system of PCSDS and LGU-Puerto
protection and Princesa City
development control

Thematic maps Description Source of data

Soils Land use suitability and DA – Bureau of Soils and
capability; land Water Management
management unit
Geohazards Vulnerability and exposure DENR-MGB, NAMRIA,
of land to physical PCSDS
processes
Ecological footprint Ecosystem goods PCSDS
production; carrying
capacity
SAFDZ (optional) Sustainable Agriculture DA, CAO
and Fisheries Development
Zones
Socioeconomic Socioeconomic data from PPDO
information Community-Based
Monitoring System
(CBMS)
Latest CLWUP Comprehensive Land and CPDO
Water Use Plan
Latest FLUP Forest Land Use Plan LGU – Puerto Princesa
City
4.2 A GUIDE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF A DETAILED ECAN ZONING PLAN
The following are the recommended steps in developing a detailed local/municipal

ERMP. It is partly based on “Appendix 4: Development of a Detailed Management Plan”
of the Strategic Environmental Plan for Palawan towards Sustainable Development (1987).
The performance of the steps may require a combination of ad hoc, Delphi process (round
table discussions), GIS analysis, and the use of decision-support systems. A major step of
ERMP is the conduct of an integrated threats analysis which will be the basis for the
drafting of beneficial, timely, responsive, and adaptable courses of action to be
implemented in the city.
A. Build a sustainable development planning database (ECAN Data Infrastructure

Development)
The objective of this undertaking is to produce a database of sustainable

development indicators of the area. With the ECAN map as a provincial/municipal road
map, the said database will be used to come up with local sustainable development plans
through the synthesis of all the available information (ecological, physical and socio-
economic infrastructures and other attributes). This activity will ensure continuous flow of
up-to-date quality information in ECAN Resource Management Planning.
The following is a checklist of primary and secondary data needs to be collected in
hardcopy or soft copy if available.

1. Geographic Location and Area

 Municipal and barangay areas
2. Physical Environment
 Topography
 Geology
 Soils
 Climate
 Geologic hazards
 Land resources
 Land and sea cover
3. Biological Environment
 Forest resources (Flora report)
 Wildlife resources and biodiversity (Fauna report)
 Coastal and marine resources (coral reefs, reef fish, marine mammals,
and sea turtles, seagrass, invertebrates, mangroves)
4. Socio-economic Profile/Ecological Profile
 Population – population and demographic characteristics
 Social condition – dependency ratios, health and nutrition, educational
status (literacy rate), housing, and basic utilities
 Economic condition – poverty incidence and employment
 Protective services
5. Local Economy
 Labor force and employment
 Economic profile and livelihood services
 Income and expenditures
 Tourism (existing, emerging, and potential tourism sites)
6. Infrastructure, Public Facilities, and Utilities
 Road network
 Road transportation
 Air transportation
 Sea transportation
 Irrigation
 Water supply
 Electric power supply
 Communication facilities
 Facilities
 Drainage and flood control system
 Sewage disposal
 Solid waste disposal system

7. Local institutional capability

 Local government structure
B. Determine the exact boundaries of ECAN zones and administrative boundaries
With the assistance of the GIS Unit, the planning team and the PCSDS District
Management Office (DMO) will determine the extent of ECAN zones of three components
(terrestrial, coastal/marine, and TAZ) specifically in Puerto Princesa City, Palawan.
C. Identify ‘Special Management Areas’ (SMAs)
Prior to actual planning, the site managers/planners should identify first the
‘special management areas’ in the area of operation. These areas are still subject to
ECAN zonation but their management may entail ‘special treatment’ owing to specific
management plans and management authorities intended for the areas.
These special areas may include the following:

1. Habitats of rare and endangered species:
Selected areas in Palawan were already designated as habitats of endangered
species by virtue of local resolutions. Other areas may already be identified by research
studies.
2. Legitimate areas for tribal ancestral zones:
Selected areas in Palawan were declared as ancestral zones for indigenous peoples
by virtue of any of the following instruments.
 Tribal Ancestral Zone (TAZ) through PCSD Administrative Orders (Figure

9)
 Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title (CADT) and Certificate of Ancestral
Domain Claim (CADC)
 Certificate of Ancestral Land Title (CALT) and Certificate of Ancestral
Land Claim (CALC)
3. Areas of cultural, historical, geological, and anthropological interest:
Areas of historical and anthropological significance include the Tabon Cave
Reservation in Lipuun Point, Quezon; the Tau’t Bato Reservation in Singnapan Valley,
Barangay Ransang, Rizal; the Ile Caves in El Nido; the walled fortresses in Balabac,
Cuyo, Linapacan, Taytay, Agutaya, etc.; and other similar sites.

Figure 9. Palawan Tribal Ancestral Zones (TAZ) proclaimed by PCSD
4. Tourism development areas

5. National Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS) areas:
These refer to protected areas declared under the National Integrated Protected
Areas System. Table 13 presents a list of large-scale protected areas in Palawan.

Table 13. NIPAS Areas of Palawan Province

Protected Area Municipality Location
Calauit Game Preserve and Busuanga Calauit Island
Wildlife Sanctuary
(CGPWS)
Coron Island Protected Coron Coron Island
Landscape
El Nido-Taytay Managed El Nido, Taytay Portions of El Nido and
Resource Protected Area Taytay Municipalities
Malampaya Sound Taytay Taytat
Protected Landscape and
Seascape
Tubbataha Reefs Natural Cagayancillo Sulu Sea
Park
Puerto Princesa Puerto Princesa City Northwestern Puerto
Subterranean River Princesa City
National Park (PPSRNP)
Palawan Flora, Fauna and Puerto Princesa City Barangay Irawan
Watershed Reserve
(PFFWR) / Irawan
Watershed Reserve
Rasa Island Wildlife Narra Rasa Island
Reserve
Mount Mantalingahan Quezon, Rizal, Española, Mantalingahan Mountain
Protected Landscape Brooke’s Point, Bataraza Range
(MMPL)
Ursula Island Bird Bataraza Ursula Island, Sulu Sea
Sanctuary
6. Other management units

a. Terrestrial zone
i. Watershed reserves or forest reserves
ii. Municipal parks (terrestrial)
iii. Community-Based Forestry Management Area (CBFMA)
iv. Communal forest areas
v. ISF and other forest-related tenurial instruments
b. Coastal/Marine zone
i. Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), marine parks, fish
sanctuaries, or marine ecosystem reserves – may cover
different benthic habitats, such as coral reefs, seagrass, and
mangroves
ii. Communal fishing grounds
iii. Municipal waters – covering the 15 kilometer limit from the
shoreline

iv. Community Based Mangrove Forest Management Area

(CBMFMA)
v. Sanctuaries of rare and endangered species – e.g., turtle nesting
sites
Planning for these Special Management Areas cannot be monopolized by one
agency or one group of stakeholders. A consultative and participative planning process is
advised for SMAs in order for the plan to gain total acceptance by the affected communities
and management authorities.
D. Develop thematic and integrated planning modules and indicators

Method: GIS mapping overlays, spatial and non-spatial modelling
Input: GIS layers and files, baseline data on environment and socio-economics
Output: thematic maps and indicators
An integrated development planning analysis necessitates a consolidation of
essential planning elements. Hence, there is a need to look at the actual condition of the
area prior to laying out the land use plans and designating activities. To do this, the planners
need to produce several thematic and cross-cutting determinants of physical geography,
ecology, and socio-economics.
The logical next step after defining the planning area is a systematic collation
of scientific information about a site, area, or community needs to be undertaken. A
framework for a possible combinatory analysis of all collected information – the multi-
criteria evaluation – is described in Step 6 below.
This step then is mainly the multi-processing/analyses part of ECAN Plan

development to come up with “integrated thematic planning modules”. It primary
includes studies on land use suitability, capability, and sustainability mapping using
GIS overlay analyses. It will also develop land use profiles and
biophysical/baseline/thematic maps in order to ascertain the economic development
potentials of the land.
The intensity of data collection and data processing will depend on the situation of
a municipality or site. Some areas already have “advanced” materials and data and
will only require the validation of the integrity of the information.
The table below (Table 14) shows the broad classification of thematic planning
modules and indicators and the respective examples for each. Each thematic planning
module has its own data processing design and data needs focus, but collectively their
interconnection is expected to reveal broad patterns of resource use and consumption.
Table 14. Thematic planning modules for use in ECAN planning

Sustainable
Source or
Development Planning Sample Description
Reference
Determinant/Indicator
1. Biophysical Precipitation Map Map showing the PCSDS,
determinants amount of rainfall PAGASA
in mm I selected
areas in Palawan
Geological Map showing that DENR-MGB
Prospectivity of the total area that
Palawan Island is considered
prospective for
metallic mineral
resources
ECAN Resource Map showing the Survey;
Map distribution of community
natural resources Mapping
in Palawan
Land Management Broad BSWM
Unit (LMU) classification
of soils, slope and
landforms, and
land capability
2. Socio-cultural Population Map showing the NSO
determinants Density population density
Map and and growth rate
Population per
Growth Rate Map municipality of
Palawan
ECAN Threats Map showing Various
Map; natural
Climate Change and anthropogenic
Hotspots threats to the
integrity of
ecosystems
3. Economic ECAN Map showing the Survey;
determinants Livelihoods Map population‘s community
existing mapping;
and potential secondary
sources literature
of income
Infrastructure Map Map showing the Survey;
of Palawan location of roads, community
ports, airports, mapping;
schools, markets, secondary
hospitals, and the literature
like

Sustainable
Source or
Development Planning Sample Description
Reference
Determinant/Indicator
4. Governance and CBFM Areas Map showing the Survey
institutional areas allotted for
determinants community forest
management
Ancestral domains Maps showing the IPRA law
habitation and
indigenous
peoples
ECAN zones map A graded system SEP law
of
sustainable
development over
Palawan
Ecological The area (global Wackemagel and
footprint hectares) of Rees 1996
productive
ecosystems
outside a city that
is required to
support life in the
city (Odum and
Barrett, 2005)
The biophysical determinants are the site‘s biological and physical resource
maps. Socio-cultural determinants pertain to socio-economic and demographic
information of the municipality or site. Economic determinants pertain to existing and
potential sustainable economic industries. The governance and institutional
determinants refers to the political and institutional situation of the municipality or site.
The integrated determinants are the interfacing or overlap of any of the

above determinants. They are usually produced from a combinatory processing or overlays
of the above. Land management units and ecological footprint are two examples of
integrated land use determinants.
The next table is a list of thematic planning modules in terms of major

development sectors. The GIS, data sources, and spatial objectives are also indicated.

Table 15. A sector- based list of spatial data needs for sustainable development
planning (adapted from Loterte-Avillanosa, unpublished).
Development Minimum Spatial Data Thematic Data General Spatial Issue
Sector Needs and Layers Sources Objectives Addressed
Security
Demands
Agriculture Essential Crops Agricultural NGA, LMU, Suitability to Food security
and Fisheries food, arable suitability area soil fertility agricultural
land map production
Water Clean water Hydrology River Hydrology, Access to water Sustainable
(surface, Network, LMU, supply water supply
groundwater Coastlines topography
,rain)
Sanitation Drainage, Topography Elevation, Topography, Least risk terrain Health issues
wastes Slope LMU and variations
disposal
Energy Fuel, power Vegetation Vegetation Satellite Suitability/ Energy
supply, Image (land Proximity to sufficiency
power grid cover), wood for fuel
PALECO
Infrastructure Shelter/ Settlement, Built-up Land Proximity to Provision of
housing, development Area, Road cover/land markets or rural basic services
roads, projects Network, use, center
schools, Development infrastructure
health Projects survey
centers,
technology
Environment Clean air, Climate, Rainfall, PCSDS, Suitability/proxi Ecological
and Natural healthy Geology, Soils, DENR- mity to natural viability/enviro
Resources ecosystems, Geohazard, Geohazard, MGB, LMU benefits; flow of nmental
stable Forest cover Protected ecological goods integrity
uplands Areas, Land and services
Use/Cover
Health Clothing, Service Health Infrastructure Proximity to Mortality and
remedies, distribution stations survey markets or rural morbidity
relief goods center
Education and School Service School Infrastructure Availability of Social
Social Welfare supplies, Distribution facilities survey incentive raw articulation
books, materials
skills,
trainings,
values
formation
Income and Crop Vegetation Vegetation, Land cover, Define domain Employment
Livelihoods cultivation, Road LMU, boundaries and
handicrafts, Network vegetation, secure land titles
subsistence interview
Cultural Folklores, Heritage sites Ancestral CADC/T, Proximity to the Culture,
Heritage and customs, domains, ECAN fiscal and aesthetics, and
Tourism patrimony, cultural government income source
folk arts zoning centers
Fiscal Financial Administrative Basic layers Basic Proximity to Eco-
assistance, geographical socio-political governance;
credits, layers responsiveness

Development Minimum Spatial Data Thematic Data General Spatial Issue

Sector Needs and Layers Sources Objectives Addressed
Security
Demands
revenue and legal
shares services
Legal Recognition Political Basic layers Basic Proximity to Justice

of tenurial boundaries/ geographical socio-political
rights, taxation layers and government
security of services
tenure,
territorial
provisions
Community Participatio Demography Population NSO, Social
Organization n census Palawan mobilization;
consensus CBMS, empowerment
building, CBFM
mobility,
cohesion,
resource
stewardship,
and women
empowermen
t
E. Take stock of local environmental governance initiatives

This step takes into account the considerations in the preparation of the ECAN
Zoning Plan, as enumerated in Section 25 of PCSD Resolution 05-250. The data can be
collected from local planners through a questionnaire.
F. Develop an ECAN-based land use spatial optimization algorithm using Multi-

Criteria Analysis. (Optional)
Algorithm: ECAN Planning for Land Use Sustainability (ECAN-PLUS)
Method: Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis
Input: Thematic and integrated planning modules
Output: Best land use options for each ECAN zone
This is an optional step as this may be too complicated and technical depending on
availability of resources. The main objective of the ECAN-based MCA method is to
develop a spatial multi-objective decision support system3 for land and water use
management in Palawan. Given that decision makers currently face conflicting interests
arising from existing and potential activities in each ECAN zone, the MCA will allow for
an objective assessment of various land use options or activities and the determination of
the most suitable option or activity for each zone.
3
J. Looijen, N. Pelesikoti, and M. Staljanssens. 1995. ICOMIS: a spatial multi-objective decision support system for
coastal resource management. ITC Journal 1995-3.

G. Perform integrated threats analysis

An integrated threats analysis is a comprehensive investigation and analysis of
various existing and projected problems confronting a locality. It is thus one way of
analyzing the complex problems and issues within the area. It is also one priority-setting
mechanism that can aid planners and decision makers in: (1) identifying the type of project
intervention to be introduced; and (2) allocating resources to invest in a priority area.
Chapter V provides the theoretical framework, methods, and the results of the
integrated threats analysis.
H. Formulate ECAN zones and resources plan

Method: Planners’ planning workshop
Input: Results of city/municipal integrated threats analysis; latest CLUP and FLUP
Output: ECAN Resource Management Plan with zonal and suprazonal (cross-
cutting) actions
This final stage of planning is composed with determining the sustainable
development actions in the ECAN zones and resources therein. The planning framework
will be guided by the tripartite features of SEP (ecological viability, social acceptability,
and integrated approach) and the ECAN guidelines, as well as the strategies/actions in the
CLUP and the findings of the integrated threats analysis. The workshop facilitator has to
reiterate that the core philosophy or principle of the planning activity is ―sustainable
development and the primary strategy is ECAN Zoning. Note that some steps are optional
due to the additional level of analysis that may be required to satisfy them.
H.1 Agree on a set of sustainable development core themes (or systems of interest) and
prepare log frame for each
The core themes can be ecosystems, resources, or sectors present in the city.
It can also be the ongoing threat (problems and issues) identified in the integrated
threats analysis. As an alternative, the planners may decide to focus on the ECAN
zones as the systems of interest and disaggregate the resources found in each zone.
The following is a sample log frame for the forestry sector, from the Philippine
Council for Sustainable Development (Phil-CSD)4.
_______________
4
Assessment of the Philippine Agenda 21, the Prospects for a Green Economy, and the Institutional Framework for
Sustainable Development (Phil-CSD 2013).

Table 16. Sample log frame for the forestry sector (Phil-CSD 2013)
Goal or Desired State  Rehabilitated forestlands and watersheds under sustainable
management
 Poverty alleviation
Purpose  Forestlands under secure tenure;
 Improved policy environment and enforcement-
implementation capacity
Policies, Plans,  Watershed management approach implemented on the
Projects or Programs ground;
(PPPP) Output or  Attainment of forestry-watershed plan objectives;
Results  Expansion of community-based tenure;
 Establishment of payments for environmental services; and
 Marketing of community-based agro-forestry products
Implemented PPPP  Capacity building and organization of community-based
management;
 A joint LGU-DENR MOA on community management;
 Provision of a community-based management (tenure)
agreement to identified communities; and
 Implementation of a forestry-watershed plan
Preliminary  Establishment of MIS; Identify sources of funding;

Activities Valuation of forest use and non-use benefits; Delineation of
forest boundary and production and protection forests and
watershed management area; Formulation of a forestry-
watershed plan
The themes can be further classified into three clusters (Table 17): Environment,
Socio-economic, and Governance. The following is a sample set of core themes for
Palawan at the provincial level.
Table 17. Sample core themes for sustainable development planning

Cluster Core theme/ecosystem/resource/sector
Environment Fisheries (including CRM, pearl farms, LRFF)
Forest Environment (including Catchment Management and
Development)
Mining and Mineral Resources Development
Water Resources
Agriculture, Land, and Soil (Lowland Resources Development)
Wildlife and Biodiversity
Cave and Cave Resources
Boundary Delineation of Core Zones on the Ground
Socio-economic Ecotourism Development and Visitor Management
Power and Sustainable Energy (including offshore/oil and gas,
renewable energy)
Urbanization (Sustainable City and Urban Centers)
Sustainable Industries (including ICT, green jobs creation)

Cluster Core theme/ecosystem/resource/sector
Socio-economic Ancestral Domains
Basic Services Delivery (Food, Health, Education, Housing,
Work/Employment)
Infrastructure (Water, Transport, Communication)
Solid Waste Management
Governance Climate Change Adaptation
Disaster Risk Reduction and Management
Institutional Arrangements for SD and GE
Partnerships/Linkages/Participation (how to maximize)
Law Enforcement
Sustainable Financing
Institutionalization of ECAN Zoning and Management
Guidelines
Policy Reforms
Mechanisms: (cross-cutting across all four clusters)
Environmental Education/IEC/Institutional Capacity Building
Environmental Monitoring and Evaluation
R&D
H.2 Identify applicable (i) SEP criterion (optional) and corresponding (ii) objectives
and (iii) strategies for each core theme
This step makes sure that the actions for each core theme are compliant to the SEP
as the overarching planning framework. The minimum sustainability criteria for projects
in Palawan, as defined in the SEP law, are ecological viability, social acceptability, and
integrated approach.
Additional criteria can be introduced to enhance the SEP criteria and make it
compliant to a desirable goal (e.g., fulfillment of the requirements for a smooth
transition toward a green economy). The following is a list of criteria and corresponding
indicators that can be used in the ECAN planning process. The first three are required while
the next three are recommended for inclusion.
Table 18. Possible sustainability criteria for projects in Palawan

Criteria (how to make sure the core theme actions are compliant
to principles of SEP and Green Economy)
1. Ecological viability (intact physical and biological cycles,
enhanced/restored natural capital and environmental stock and
quality; sustainable resource stock)
2. Social acceptability (participatory; commitment; equity in
access/distribution/benefits)
3. Integrated approach (holism; coordination and sharing; political
will)
4. Rights-based development (poverty alleviation; protection,

Criteria (how to make sure the core theme actions are compliant
to principles of SEP and Green Economy)
5. fulfilment, and respect for social and economic rights)
6. Climate-smart (reduced carbon emissions; enhanced carbon
stock; decreased vulnerability to climate change impacts;
efficiency in production and resource use)
7. Good governance (increased knowledge and capacity for
environmental stewardship; transparency and accountability)
H.3 Identify (i) courses of action, (ii) coverage (municipality, barangay, sitio, or any
applicable management unit), and (iii) indicators for each criterion/objective/strategy.
The courses of action per criteria are policy covers, plans, programs and projects
(PPPP). They may be existing actions, partially implemented, or proposed. Indicators, on
the other hand, are objectively verifiable and measurable.
Below is a sample of the arsenal of PPP for the establishment of a green economy
in the sector of forest and biodiversity. The selected principles are given the heading of
columns two to four.
Table 19. Possible courses of action in the forest and biodiversity sector (Phil-CSD 2013)
Resource/Sector Stock Restoration, Equity and Production
or Ecosystem Sustainability Poverty Efficiency
Alleviation
Forest Delineation of forest Full recognition Valuation of forest
Environment, protection (no-go) and provision of land use based on
Biodiversity areas (headwater, rich ancestral domain alternative economic
biodiversity, others) rights (PI) products and
(PI); ecosystem/watershed
Institution of services; (PI)
Institution of community-based
sustainable yield or common Institution of forest
harvesting (Annual property resource and damage
Allowable Cut); (Ex) management charges; (PI)
system; (Ex, PI)
Implement National Collection of fees
Biodiversity Strategic Establishment of for environmental
Action Plan (Ex); the community- services; (PI)
National Action Plan managed
for the Sustainable ecosystem; (PI) Promotion of
Use and Protection of ecotourism; (Ex, PI)
Peat lands (PI) Promotion of
cooperative Payments for carbon
marketing of sequestration
processed forest, (application
of REDD+); (PI)


Alleviation
wood, non-timber
products; (PI)
Implement the Setting of Institute sustainable
National Wetlands environment and wildlife resource
Action Plan (Pr) resource use & schemes for the wild
Wildlife collection damage charges to life industry (Ex)
quota (Ex) revert back to the
sector, the local
Imposition of damage forest area, and
charge; %age of community (not to
excess profit (rent) the General Fund)
for forest for environmental
maintenance and maintenance and
rehabilitation; (PI) livelihood; (PI)
Setting of moratorium Forest and

on resource use to biodiversity
rehabilitate and protection and
restore degraded conservation
ecosystem, and supported by the
recover threatened international
species; (PI) community and
multilateral
Effective agencies. (PI)
management of PAs,
restricting access and
particular extractive
land-use practices
(Ex)
Prevention of the
entry of/eradication of
alien species that
could threaten the
ecosystem; (Ex)
Payments for forest

services conservation.
(PI)
Specify the particular

targets for production


Alleviation
and ecological
services (Pr)
H.4 Identify applicable ECAN zone for each course of action.

This is applicable for zonal actions only, which are actions that fall on one or several
specific ECAN zones in the terrestrial, coastal/marine, or tribal ancestral component. The
assignment of ECAN zones will be based on allowable and prohibited uses per ECAN zone
as specified in the ECAN policies and guidelines.
H.5 Identify the (i) implementation schedule, (ii) budgetary requirement, and (iii)
agencies responsible/funding source for each course of action.
The results of the municipal integrated threats analysis can be interfaced or
integrated with this step. The peculiarities of intervention per coverage/site may be
discussed further in the plan.
The following is a matrix summarizing the steps taken to come up with a
detailed local ECAN zones management plan (Table 20). Budgetary requirement,
schedule of implementation, funding source, and agencies responsible per course of action
may be added as columns of this matrix.

Table 20. Possible courses of action in the city

SECTOR (SOCIO- ACTION RESULT ECAN GEOGRAPHIC TIMETABLE LEAD AND BUDGET FUNDING
INSTITUTIONAL, ZONE COVERAGE SUPPORT (PHP) SOURCE
ECONOMIC, ORGANIZATION
ENVIRONMENT)
Core theme/ Problems and issues/ Ecosytem/ Resource
Action 1
Action 2
Action 3
Core theme/ Problems and issues/ Ecosytem/ Resource
Action 1
Action 2
Action 3
*These fields are optional and require further time to conduct participatory workshop with city/municipal stakeholders.

CHAPTER V
INTEGRATED THREATS ANALYSIS5
An integrated threats analysis is a comprehensive investigation and analysis of

various existing problems confronting a locality. It is thus one way of analyzing the
complex problems and issues within the area. It is also one priority-setting mechanism that
can aid planners and decision makers in: (1) identifying the type of project intervention to
be introduced and (2) allocating resources to invest in a priority area. This is because threats
analysis may reveal subtle patterns and causations of issues and problems. The results of
the analysis can also influence the course of project actions and can directly offer optimal
solutions to the identified problems.
5.1 OBJECTIVES OF THREATS ANALYSIS
The general objective for the threats analysis is to recommend new potential
high impact and cost effective programs and projects for the local area of interest. The
programs and projects are expected to contribute to sustainable development of the target
localities, at both the barangay and the municipal levels. We recommend these programs
for the concerned stakeholders to pursue in the city in the next five years.
The specific objectives of the analysis are to:

 Identify the threats/problems in the target locality;
 Analyze threats relationships (problems/opportunities);
 Prepare a zone-specific list of projects to address the threats/problems identified
per ECAN zone; and
 Serve as basis of ECAN guidelines, programs, and projects in this Plan
5.2 FRAMEWORK OF INTEGRATED THREATS ANALYSIS
In the context of biodiversity, a ‘threat’ is defined as a cause of species decline

(IUCN-SSC, 2006)6. ‘Threat’ per se is usually defined as a status, condition, or level of
threat or conservation.
_____________
5This chapter is adapted from the PSU-CSPGI (2013) draft report Rapid Rural Assessment of the Coastal Barangays with
Fishers’ Communities in the Municipalities of Taytay, El Nido, Linapacan, Coron and Culion, in Palawan: Municipality
of Linapacan.
6
IUCN-SSC (International Union for Conservation of Nature – Specoes Survival Commission). 2006. Major threats (version
2.1) Threats authority file. [Online]. Available: http://intranet.iucn.org/webfiles/doc/SSC/RedList/AuthorityF/threats.rtf
(accessed 18 October 2012).

An operational definition of ‘threat’ can be the historical, potential, or existing

danger, stress or pressure to a target in the environment (Ona et al., 2007)7. The target
of the threat is any one of a species (organism), an area (habitat or ecosystem), or a macro-
level area (MPA, corridor, or ecoregion). In this study, the target is the entire municipality.
The propagation of threat gives injury or harm to the target coastal community or to its
aspiration toward sustainable development.
The following definitions are relevant to this study. Although the terms pertain to
‘biodiversity’ as the general target of threat (Salafsky et al., 2008)8, they can be generalized
to the ‘sustainable development’ of the locality:
 Direct threats: The proximate human activities or processes and natural
events that have caused, are causing, or may cause unsustainable
development and/or the destruction, degradation, or impairment of
biodiversity.
 Contributing factors: The ultimate factors (social, economic, political,
institutional, or cultural) that enable or otherwise add to the occurrence or
persistence of proximate direct threats.
 In a situation analysis, contributing factors or underlying causes are
subdivided into indirect threats (factors with a negative effect) and
opportunities (factors with a positive effect).
 Sustainable development actions: Interventions undertaken by project
staff o partners designed to reach the project’s objectives and sustainable
development goals.
The general framework used to ascertain the threats to local sustainable

development is the ‘causal chain’ or cause-and-effect analysis. The normative causation of
threat usually propagates from the domain of the environment to social, economic, and
political arenas.
Careful planning and intervention for project success can be integrated into
the causal chain by directly specifying activities/actions and monitoring their
outcomes. A general model of a project intervention chain must recognize that the action
to solve or address threats can be applied not only to the direct threats but also to
underlying causes and to the targets themselves (Salafsky et al., 2008).
_____________
7
Ona, R.E.A., R..T. Fuentes, P. A. Regoniel, O.T. Alfonso, J.F.A. Pontillas, M.D. Pido, A.V. Regalo, and
T.L. Salva. 2007. An Analysis of Threats to Biodiversity in the Balabac Strait Corridor. Palawan State
University – Center for Strategic Policy and Governance, Inc.
8 Salafsky, N., D. Salzer, A.J. Stattersfield, C. Hilton-Taylor, R. Neugarten, S.H.M. Butchart, B. Collen, N. Cox, L.L.
Master, S. O’Connor, and D. Wilkie. 2008. A standard lexicon for biodiversity conservation: unified classifications of
threats and actions. Conservation Biology, 22: 897-911. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.00937.x Available from -
http://www.iucnredlist.org/documents/Salafsky_et_al._2008_Unified _Classifications_of_Threats_and_Actions.pdf
(accessed June 2013).

We use the following framework (Figure 10) for the integrated threats (plus
solutions) analysis. This is a modification of the model of conservation action by Salafsky
et al. (2008), wherein ‘conservation actions’ are generalized as ‘sustainable development
actions’ to highlight not only the role of conservation but also of economic
development in providing concrete solutions to addressing problems and threats.
Moreover, the biodiversity target is generalized to the entire ECAN of the target
locality and all resources therein.
Figure 10. A proposed general model of a sustainable development project (Salafsky

et al. 2008, modified)
The determination of solutions, strategies, or new projects to break the hierarchical

chain of threats requires a situational analysis of threats. Situational analysis is another
term for integrated threats analysis. The algorithm for the integrated threats analysis is
adapted from Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation, Version 2.0 (CMP, 2007)9.
The framework entails the following assumptions:
1. Threats are the same as the problems of and (negative) issues in the community.
2. The needs and priorities of the community are the combination of threats and
opportunities existing in the community.
3. Identifying threats/problems/issues in a community and evaluating them side by
side with needs/priorities and opportunities will lead to the identification of new
projects to solve or address the threats/ problems/ issues.
4. The desired new projects are sustainable social development (SD) actions and
solutions. To be sustainable, these recommended projects are expected to be: (1)
high impact and (2) cost-effective, and as per the Strategic Environmental Plan for
Palawan Act (SEP Law); (3) ecologically viable; (4) socially acceptable; and (5)
holistic in approach.
5.3 METHODOLOGY FOR INTEGRATED THREATS ANALYSIS
The following table (Table 21) summarizes the major steps, in chronological order,
taken in the conduct of Integrated Threats Analysis.
_____________
9
CMP (Conservation Measures Partnerships). 2007. Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation, Version 2.0.Available from
http://www.conservationmeasures.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/CMP_Open_Standards_Version_2.0.pdf (accessed June 2013).

Table 21. Major Steps of Threats and Solutions Analysis

Action Instrument Outputs
1.Develop threats analysis model Literature review See above
2.Identify critical needs and Key informant DPSIR Table,
threats/problems, current initiatives, interviews (KII), tabular
opportunities, and possible solutions focus group representation of
to these threats/problems discussion (FGD) current initiatives,
mechanics to and opportunities
specific threats
analysis, and field
visit
3.Analyze threats relationships KII and Diagram of
FGD/workshop interrelationship of
problems
4.Prepare list of projects KII and FGD during Solutions matrix
Participatory ECAN
Planning Workshop
5.Social validation of results Validation of Revised report
findings in the
Participatory ECAN
Planning Workshop
6.Formulation of strategy-based Workshop Strategy-based plan
projects per ECAN zone of action per ECAN
zone
For Steps 2 to 4, we can engage the local key stakeholders through interviews
and workshops designed to identify and characterize local threats and their
interrelationships. The field instruments KII threats questionnaire is reproduced in
Annexes C and D.
To ensure the active participation of multiple stakeholders in the planning

workshop, the planning team has to identify local informants from various stakeholder
groups to be engaged in the KIIs and FGD. The target informants for KII are the key ECAN
planners and stakeholders based on the nine stakeholder groups identified in Agenda 21
(Chapter 23 to 32, modified)10. The sectoral representations of these target informants
are the following:
1. Women
2. Children and youth
3. Indigenous peoples (IPs) and Indigenous cultural communities (ICCs)
_____________
10Agenda 21. United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. Rio de Janeiro, 3-14 June 1992. Available
from http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=400&nr=23&menu=35 (accessed 27 August
2013).

4. Workers, trade, unions, and people’s organizations (POs)

5. Farmers, small forest landowners, and fisherfolks
6. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs)
7. Local authorities (local government units or LGU and national government
agencies or NGAs) – head/representative from the City Planning and
Development Office (CPDO), City Environment and Natural Resources Office
(CENRO), City Agriculturist Office (CAO), and City Tourism Office (CTO)
8. Business and industry
9. Scientific and technological communities and the Academe
5.4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
THREATS AND THEIR INTERRELATIONSHIPS
By conducting key informant interviews and reviewing pertinent plans, the threats
present per ECAN zone were identified. However, threats were filtered and clustered based
on the consolidated problems addressed during the interview. These filtered threats were
also validated during the ECAN Planning workshop.
The interrelationship framework includes the interconnection of problems together

with its driving forces and impacts represented in a color-coded outline of figures: (1)
orange for drivers; (2) blue for problems; and (3) black for impacts. These
interrelationships of the problems per ECAN zone are illustrated and summarized in the
following figures.

Limited harvest
Terrestrial and Coastal Core Zone
for IPs
Competition for
resources with IPs
Conflict between
IPs
Market demand Livelihood needs
Mangrove forest
Conversion of
Illegal occupancy and denudation
Demand for Economic interest mangrove areas to
intrusion of local people
tourism settlement areas
Water shortage
infrastructure
Fishing pressure
Loss of Depletion of resources
Timber poaching
forest cover
Tourism Disturbance of wildlife

Insufficient Insufficient law expansion
Wildlife habitat
monitoring enforcement
Loss of sea destruction
and evaluation Fishing
grass bed
practices
Not clearly
defined zones
Destruction
Unsustainable agricultural
of corals
practices
Lack of demarcation
Pollution Soil degradation
Figure 11. Interrelationship of Problems in the Core Zone (Terrestrial and Coastal)

The core zone consists of the environmentally critical areas that require maximum
protection as it is composed of virgin forests or primary growth forests and serve as habitat
for rare endangered species and local endemic species of flora and fauna. The core zone
comprises 39.45% of the total land area of Puerto Princesa. On the other hand, coastal core
zones are those occupied by mangrove forests and those that serve as critical habitat for
rare and endemic marine species. This zone is declared as the “no touch” zone wherein
human intrusion is prohibited except for the traditional practices of tribal communities and
research and monitoring purposes of authorized agencies.
Failure to comply with the “no touch” policy of the zone can result to the
disturbance and destruction of wildlife habitat and depletion of resources. The problem of
illegal occupancy and intrusion of non-IPs or the local people in the core zone is existent
in Puerto Princesa. Due to economic interest and insufficient law enforcement, activities
such as timber poaching, unsustainable kaingin and resource extraction of local people are
present in the terrestrial core zone, while mangrove area conversion, tourism expansion
and fishing are present in the coastal core zone.
Timber poaching or logging results to loss of forest cover while unsustainable

kaingin which is the clearing of areas through burning results to soil degradation and
pollution. Both activities have negative impacts to wildlife habitats. Local people are also
extracting resources such as Almaciga and Rattan in the core zone, which is allowed only
for indigenous people, thus resulting to competition for resources, overextraction and
wrong extraction methods which may harm the trees or the sources of these products. This
further results to the limited harvest of the indigenous people and the conflict between them
as there exists a competition for their source of livelihood.
In the coastal core zone, the conversion of mangrove areas to settlement areas and
logging of mangroves result to the denudation of mangrove forests. The problem of tourism
expansion also exists like the construction of resorts and other tourism infrastructures in
the mangrove forests. Fishing practices, which is prohibited in this zone, are also reported
to be present which results to the loss of seagrass bed and destruction of corals. This also
poses threats to rare and endemic marine species as their habitats are disturbed.
Since the core zone serves as the center of biodiversity processes, any disturbance
to the natural ecosystem therein can pose impacts to both flora and fauna. The allowed
activities in the core zone are soft-impact activities which are sustainable and harmless to
the environment as long as they are regulated. Other means of resource extraction aside
from the Rattan and Almaciga tapping of indigenous people are therefore prohibited in this
zone.

Restricted Use Zone Limited Space for

Land Grabbing Productive Use of Land
Conflict between IPs and Low-

No Visible Boundaries and landers
Not Clearly Defined Zones
Intrusion of
Zone Depletion
People
Economic Interest/ Timber

Livelihood
Opportunities poaching Forest Cover Loss
Ecological
Depletion of Natural Resources Imbalance
Unsustainable
Agricultural Soil Degradation
Practices
Pollution Negative Health

Impacts
Market Demand Illegal Wildlife

Decrease in the number of
(Aggregates, Timber, Trade
species
Charcoal)
Unregulated
Land Use Conversion Quarrying
Insufficient Monitoring and
Evaluation
Figure 12. Interrelationship of Problems in the Restricted Use Zone

Restricted use zone is the immediate buffer to the core zone. The allowed activities
are limited to rehabilitation of degraded areas; wildlife management approved by the
DCEPC; supervised nature-based tourism and recreation; and the traditional activities of
IPs.
The intrusion of people to perform extractive and destructive activities was seen as
the major pressure in the zone. Generally looking at the connection of these pressures, it
can be noticed that the intrusion of people can also serve as one of the driving forces of the
remaining pressures in the framework. This pressure, however, is mainly driven by three
factors: the economic interest of the people and the opportunities they recognize in the area;
livelihood needs; and not visible and clearly defined zones. Regarding the unclear
definition of zones, some of the informants emphasized the unawareness of the majority
with the allowed activities and prohibited uses of each ECAN zone. The intrusion of people
could possibly start a conflict between IPs and low-landers because of the competition for
resources. However, it was clarified by other knowledgeable people that IPs do not extract
beyond what they needed. Other perceived impact of this pressure is the depletion of zone
and the natural resources in it which could further cause ecological imbalance. Ecological
imbalance is caused by any loss in ecosystem interaction that is responsible in keeping the
balance of biodiversity (World Wildlife Fund-Global, n.d.).
Land grabbing is also driven by the economic interest of the people and the unclear
zone definition and visibility. This pressure could result to limited space for productive use
of land which may eventually lead to a conflict between IPs and low-landers. On the other
hand, timber poaching and illegal wildlife trade are both driven by the economic interest
of the people and the opportunities they see in these activities. Specifically, the driving
forces of these pressures are livelihood and market demands for timber and charcoal. Both
lead to depletion of natural resources that, again, causes ecological imbalance. An
unsustainable agricultural practice in the upland areas like kaingin is done by the low-
landers who illegally encroach in the area. This usually happens due to the insufficient
monitoring and evaluation of the concerned agencies. If the pressure continues to exist, it
will lead to forest cover loss, soil degradation, and pollution which may impose negative
health impacts to people from nearby areas.
Quarrying was also identified as a pressure in the restricted use zone despite being
included in the prohibited use of the zone. It was verified during the ECAN Planning
Workshop that unregulated quarrying exists in Barangay Montible which is classified as
restricted and controlled use zone. Insufficient monitoring and evaluation is considered as
the main driver of this pressure. The activity is prohibited in the zone yet the operation still
exists. As observed by the practicum team, Montible River is slowly drying up due to the
intense extraction. This could further lead to ecological imbalance as a result of the
depletion of the natural resources in it.

Insufficient law
Controlled Use Zone
enforcement
Land use
reclassification/conversion
Lack of monitoring Not clearly defined zones and
allowed activities
Degradation of ecotourism
Threatened wildlife and recreation areas
Unregulated quarrying
Tenured migrants and
intrusion of local people
Ecological Timber poaching
Market demand Forest denudation
(Aggregates, imbalance
timber, wildlife
species)
Unsustainable
Kaingin
Economic interest/
opportunities
Livelihood needs
Wildlife
poaching
Figure 13. Interrelationship of Problems in the Controlled Use Zone

Controlled use zone is the outer protective barrier that encircles the core and
restricted use area. Activities allowed in this zone are strictly controlled logging and
extracting almaciga tapping, tourism development and research, grazing and gathering of
honey, rattan, and other minor forest products.
The pressures identified in controlled-use zone are tenured migrants and intrusion
of local people, unregulated quarrying, timber poaching, unsustainable ‘kaingin’ and
wildlife poaching. However, the general pressure identified is tenured migrants and
intrusion of local people to perform extractive and destructive activities. This is driven by
economic interests and opportunities specifically demand in the market and livelihood
needs.
Quarrying, when issued with permit, is allowed in the controlled use zone however
incidence of unregulated quarrying is present in the said zone. There are quarry operations
which go beyond the permit filed. Unregulated quarrying is said to be driven by insufficient
of monitoring of the activity. According to the respondents, another driver of this pressure
is that zones are not also clearly defined and inadequate information dissemination on the
allowed activities. Market demand for aggregates and livelihood needs are also driving
forces in performing unregulated quarrying since more aggregates produce higher income.
When quarry operations will continue to be unregulated in the controlled use zone, it can
lead to reclassification or conversion of land use which could cause the degradation of
ecotourism and recreation areas. Degrading these areas can further cause disruption on the
natural balance of the ecosystem.
Timber poaching and unsustainable kaingin are also driven by market demand for
timber and as a source of income. Recognizing the right of the IPs, they can be allowed to
do kaingin in the controlled use zone, however it becomes unsustainable when lowlanders
conduct this farming practice in non-traditional and unsustainable manner. These
pressures, timber poaching and unsustainable kaingin, can lead to denudation of forest
areas which can threaten wildlife species. Eventually, ecological imbalance can be
consequence of these.
Due to economic opportunities present such as market demand for wildlife species
and for subsistence purposes, wildlife poaching is considered as pressure. It involves illegal
hunting, killing or capturing animal species especially those which are endangered. This
can lead to threatening of wildlife which can eventually disrupt the balance within the
ecosystem.

TRADITIONAL USE ZONE
Inadequate personnel and

Insufficient equipment
funding
Insufficient monitoring
Insufficient IEC Campaign
Livelihood needs
Timber poaching, charcoal

making, and unregulated
quarrying
Economic interest Environmental depletion
Wildlife poaching
Market demand
Limited lowland area for Illegal occupancy

agriculture
Figure 14. Interrelationships of Problems in the Traditional Use Zone

There were six identified major pressures in the traditional use zone: inadequate
personnel and equipment; insufficient IEC campaign; timber poaching, charcoal making
and unregulated quarrying; wildlife poaching; and limited lowland area for agriculture.
These pressures were identified to have originated from the following drivers: livelihood
needs, market demand, economic interest, and insufficient funding.
The inadequacy of IEC campaigns generally pertains to education on the

importance of the natural resources; the lack of it also causes timber poaching, unregulated
quarrying, and charcoal making. The inadequacy of these campaigns is attributed to the
insufficient funding of concerned agencies in order to educate the locals in the importance
of these resources in keeping the ecological balance of the environment. Insufficient
funding is also identified to be the cause of the inadequate number of personnel and
equipment that leads to the lack of monitoring in the area hence the occurrence of these
illegal activities in the traditional use zone.
Illegal activities mentioned including the timber poaching, charcoal making and
unregulated quarrying in the area are also driven by economic interests, market demands,
and livelihood needs due to lack of sustainable livelihood available in the area. The
aforementioned are also identified causes of wildlife poaching. The poaching in the area
usually involves endemic flora and fauna.
Illegal activities present in the area are usually driven by economic needs of the
people in general, as it were identified by locals as an easy way of earning their living. It
was also identified that the limited lowland area for agriculture also pushes the locals into
engaging in these kinds of activities. And later on locals tend to start settling in the area
thereby making them illegal occupants of the zone. Problems tend to pile as the core
reasons of the problems remain unresolved. In totality, these activities lead to the depletion
of natural resources and the quality of the environment.

MULTIPLE USE ZONE
Self-interest Flora and fauna Environment

smuggling depletion
Livelihood needs
Encroachment of
commercial fishing
Market demand Timber poaching vessels
Higher crime
Conflicting land use incidence
Economic Interest
Unsustainable fishing
practices
Land grabbing
Weak law enforcement

Insufficient personnel
Inefficient garbage
Insufficient processing, irrigation, collection
and post-harvest facilities
Problems on waste
Insufficient funding Insufficient support infrastructure and management
facilities (hospitals, roads, drainage, etc)
Absence of sanitation and solid waste

Nearly-filled landfill
disposal facilities
Figure 15. Interrelationship of Problems in the Multiple Use Zone

Various threats and pressures were identified to be in the terrestrial and coastal
multiple use zone. For the terrestrial and coastal multiple use zone, the problems can be
clustered into: crimes against nature and property, conflicting land use options, and
problems on waste management. Crimes against nature include illegal logging,
unsustainable fishing practices and flora and fauna smuggling. The aforementioned
problems can be attributed to four main causes: self-interest, market demand, economic
interests and livelihood needs.
Crimes against property mainly pertain to land grabbing concerns. Land grabbing
has been identified to have been caused by self and economic interests.
Timber poaching has since been an issue to most of the zones in the city.
Unpermitted logging in private spaces is also covered by this pressure. The demand for
timber products co-driven by opportunistic individual’s economic interests becomes the
imminent cause of the problem. Locals who engage in the activity are commonly driven
by the lack of a livelihood that can support their day to day needs.
Flora and Fauna Smuggling in the multiple use zone pertains to the dealings
between poachers and buyers. The flora and fauna being smuggled out of the multiple use
zones come from other zones where the wildlife are observed. The species are only
smuggled in the multiple use zone but these species thrive from other zones such as the
buffer zones and core zone. The main cause of the issue is the market demand of the
wildlife in whatever purpose. Due to the absence of a sustainable livelihood in the area
where the people and wildlife live it has since been the practice of locals to poach instead
for easier money. Opportunistic individuals also use this lack to lure locals into wildlife
poaching. It is common that the wildlife being smuggled only exits through the MUZ of
the city. However, apprehensions are also commonly made in the area as elements of the
law are much more visible than that of the other zones.
For the unsustainable fishing practices, it is a general term for all fishing practices
observed in the area that poses a pressure to the coastal multiple use zone. These activities
include trawl, cyanide, dynamite, and compressor fishing. Fishing using these practices in
increased volumes poses threat to the aquatic resources of the area. Another activity that
falls in this category is the encroachment of commercial fishing vessels in the city waters.
These fishers include both local and international fishermen. Their unregulated and
unpermitted fishing activities are due to economic interests, livelihood needs and market
demand. These unsustainable practices are mainly driven by economic gains from large
scale ‘easy’ fishing.
Problems on waste management primarily focus on the city’s inadequacy of

sewerage and special waste facilities, and drainage. These problems are caused primarily
by insufficient funding. However, reports state that the city has already constructed a

special waste treatment facility for hospital, hazardous and toxic wastes, yet as of writing
the city has failed to secure an Environmantal Compliance Certificate (ECC) from the
DENR-EMB as per the result of the interview of the researchers to the DENR-EMB
Palawan Head.
The insufficiency of personnel also becomes a reason arising from the inadequacy
of funding. With limited personnel, wastes are not efficiently and effectively collected, as
well as laws are not well enforced. Hence more problems arise from the apparent cause.
Impacts of the aforementioned problems include higher crime incidence due to weak law
enforcement, environmental depletion due to extractive activities, and miss development
potentials due to inadequacy of support infrastructures.
DRIVER-PRESSURE-STATE-IMPACT-RESPONSE FRAMEWORK
The DPSIR Framework is a modified Pressure-State-Response (PSR) framework

of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) adopted by the
European Environment Agency (AMP Toolbox, n.d.). The framework has been used as an
instrument on data gathering and analysis. The framework helped the team to gather
important problems, steering forces, effects, conditions, and the current interventions to
address the problems. The framework was used to identify issues and their magnitude and
secede them to every zones.
Integrated threats analysis is structured into the DPSIR framework for a more
specific and elaborate strategies anchored to the objectives given. DPSIR framework is an
integrated approach for reporting, it provides structure on how to present the indicators
needed to enable feedback to policy makers on environmental quality and its resulting
impact. It distinguishes the driving forces, pressures, states, impacts and responses. The
DPSIR framework consists of a chain of causal links starting with ‘driving forces’ through
‘pressures’ to ‘states’ and ‘impacts’ on ecosystems, human health and functions,
eventually leading to political ‘responses.’
The following definitions are relevant to the understanding of the framework and
questionnaire (Annex C) used for the Integrated Threats Analysis:
 Driver/Driving force = needs/issues

 Pressure = threats and problems
 State = current state of environment and natural resources
 Impact = changes in the state of environment and natural resources
 Response = present actions taken to resolve issues and challenges
 Gaps = discrepancies in the actions taken
 Proposed actions = measures that need to be undertaken to address gaps

Table 22. DPSIR Table of the Terrestrial and Tribal Ancestral Component
CORE ZONE
Drivers Pressure Perceived State Impact Current Intervention*
 Economic Illegal occupancy  The forest cover of the  Disturbance of fauna  Free use of farming
interest/opportunitie and intrusion of province of Palawan and wildlife technology i.e. tractors
s local people comprises 70% of its  Limited harvest for for low-landers
 Insufficient total land area. (CENRO, IPs  Participation in the
information 2012)  Conflict on IPs consultation with the
dissemination on  Primary or old growth Sangguniang
ECAN zones forest cover in Palawan Panlungsod
had reduced from 23.5%  Information Education
to 13.1% from 1992 to Communication (IEC)
2005. (State of the campaign for students
Environment, 2009)  Provision of livelihood
 Puerto Princesa has a for farmers
forest cover of 159, 135
ha or 72% of the total
land area of the city.
 The core zone comprises
102,666 ha or 45.7% of
the city’s land area (State
of the Environment,
2015).
 There are reported cases
of illegal human intrusion
in the heavily forested
areas.
 Economic Timber poaching  Illegal logging is one of  Exploitation of natural  Existing other law
interest/opportunitie the most common illegal resources enforcement agencies
s activities undertaken in  Loss of habitat to  Replanting/ reforesting
the forested areas. animal species activities

CORE ZONE
 Weak law
enforcement
 Market demand Timber poaching Baseline data:  Forest cover loss  Rehabilitation of areas
 Livelihood needs  In 1992, Palawan has a  Water shortage i.e. Cleopatra’s Needle
 Culture and tradition forest cover of 789, 488  Forest fire  Efforts on targeting
ha or 55% of the total  Pollution illegal fishers, illegal
area of the province. In  Soil degradation loggers, wildlife
2010, the total forest  Negative health smugglers
cover is 48% or 689, 161 impacts
ha.
 The annual rate of
Palawan’s forest loss is
5,500 hectares/year for
the period 1992 (JAFTA)
- 2010 (NAMRIA).
of logging as
apprehended by the
Bantay Gubat and other
organizations.
Unregulated  There are existing  Planning of programs
agricultural unsustainable agricultural and activities for
practices in practices in upland areas environmental
upland areas such as kaingin. management
 According to a source,  Provision of education
forests in Brgy Sta Cruz to IPs
are denuded.

Continuation of Table 22; Core Zone

CORE ZONE
 Integration of
environmental
Baseline data: management in tertiary
The land area of Palawan curriculum
that is barren or had  Replanting/reforesting
undergone kaingin has activities
(Unregulated  increased from 1,644 ha  Rehabilitation of areas

agricultural in 2005 to 1,775ha in i.e. Cleopatra’s Needle
practices in 2010. (State of the  Efforts on targeting
upland areas) Environment, 2015) illegal fishers, loggers,
 There are 3 reported and wildlife smugglers
incidents of unsustainable
kaingin apprehended by
the management of the
Puerto Princesa
Subterranean River
National Park in 2015.
(2015 City Government
Accomplishment Report)

Continuation of Table 22; Restricted Use Zone

RESTRICTED USE ZONE
 Livelihood needs Intrusion of  There are incidents of  Depletion of natural  Provision of livelihood
 Economic people resource extraction i.e. resources  Free use of farming
interest/opportunities quarrying in restricted use  Competition against technology in low-land
 Insufficient zones. low-landers for areas
information resources  Increase in food
dissemination on  Conflict on IPs production in low-land
ECAN zones Baseline data: communities
 No visible  There are 4 incidents of  Community-based
boundaries illegal quarries sustainable tourism
apprehended by Bantay (CBST) programs and
Gubat in 2014. (2014 projects
City Government
Accomplishment Report)
 Weak law Unregulated  There are existing  Forest denudation  Creation of

enforcement agricultural unsustainable agricultural  Pollution (Violation BantayGubat task force
 Economic practices in practices in upland areas of Clean Air Act)  Environmental
interest/opportunities upland areas such as kaingin.  Soil degradation management programs
 Negative health and activities
Baseline data: impacts  Integration of
 The land area of Palawan environmental
that is barren or had management in tertiary
undergone kaingin has curriculum
increased from 1,644 ha  Replanting/reforesting
in 2005 to 1,775ha in activities
2010. (State of the  Rehabilitation of areas
Environment, 2015) i.e. Cleopatra’s needle
of illegal kaingin


RESTRICTED USE ZONE
covering 80 hectares  Efforts on targeting
apprehended by Bantay illegal fishers, loggers,
Gubat in 2015. and wildlife smugglers
 Economic interest Timber poaching  There are reported  Forest denudation  Integration of
and personal incidents of logging.  Exploitation of environmental
consumption mangrove areas management in tertiary
 Market demand Baseline data: curriculum
(charcoal and timber  An approximate total of  Information
products) 76, 000 board feet of logs dissemination and tree
that were illegally cut planting activities
and/or transported were  Strengthening of
confiscated by Bantay BantayGubat and
Gubat in 2015. BantayBakawan
(Timber  Participation in
poaching) reforestation activities
i.e. Love Affair with
Nature (February 14),
National Greening
Program (NGP)
 Economic Land grabbing Some areas are fenced as  Limited space for Implementation of
interest/opportunities private property. productive use of land property laws and policies
 Insufficient  Conflict on IPs
information
dissemination on
ECAN zones


RESTRICTED USE ZONE
 Market demand Illegal wildlife  There are two (2) key  Decrease in the Management and
 Livelihood needs trade biodiversity areas in number of animal and implementation of laws
Puerto Princesa: PPSRNP plant species and policies
and the Cleopatra’s  Ecosystem imbalance
Needle in Brgy
Concepcion.
 There is a total of 135
species of fauna found in
the city, 45 of which are
considered endemic.
 The Puerto Princesa
Subterranean River
National Park houses 800
plant species, at least 165
birds, 30 mammals, 19
reptiles and 10
(Illegal wildlife  amphibians, some of
trade) which are either
endangered, rare or
endemic wildlife. (State
of the Environment,
2015)
 The Palawan Hornbill has
been classified as
vulnerable and its
numbers have reduced by
at least 20% in the last 10
years with one of the


RESTRICTED USE ZONE
reasons as live bird
trade.(PWRCC)
 There are 34 reported
cases of illegal transport
of flora and fauna in
2015. (City ENRO)
 There are 3,593 animals
(63 mammals, 1,959
avians and 1,571 reptiles)
that were confiscated and
turned over to PWRCC
by different enforcement
agencies from 2011 to
2015. (PWRCC)

Continuation of Table 22; Controlled Use Zone
CONTROLLED USE ZONE

 Weak law Unregulated  Some parts of the  Land use  Moratorium for both
enforcement quarrying Montible River are reclassification or mountain and river
 Market demand desiccated. conversion quarry
(aggregates)  In 2015, 5 checkpoints  Water shortage  Management and
 Insufficient are maintained by the implementation of laws
information City ENRO to monitor and policies
dissemination on extracted and transported
ECAN zones quarry materials by
various permittees.
 There are 2 incidents of
illegal sand and gravel
extraction in the
Cabayugan River wherein
200 sacks of materials
were confiscated by the
PPSRNP Management.
 Sand and gravel
extraction in Palawan
increased by more than
double from 0.5 MT in
2002 to 1.2 MT in 2012.
(State of the
Environment, 2015)

CONTROLLED USE ZONE

Insufficient Tenured migrants Decrease in natural Threatened wildlife  Implementation of laws
information and intrusion of resources available habitat and policies
dissemination on local people to  Survey on protected
ECAN zones perform areas occupants
extractive and
destructive
activities
Livelihood needs Unregulated  There are existing Forest denudation  Integration of
agricultural unsustainable agricultural environmental
practices in practices in upland areas management and SEP to
upland areas such as kaingin. tertiary curriculum
Baseline data:  Reforesting activities
 There are reported cases e.g. “Love Affair with
of illegal kaingin Nature” program,
covering 80 hectares National Greening
apprehended by Bantay Program (NGP)
Gubat in 2015.  Participation in
 The land area of Palawan environmental
that is barren or had campaigns and
undergone kaingin has programs
increased from 1,644 ha  Creation of
in 2005 to 1,775ha in BantayGubat task force
2010. (State of the
Environment, 2015)
 Livelihood needs Timber poaching There are reported incidents  Forest denudation Resolution and ordinances
 Market demand of logging.  Degradation of
(charcoal) ecotourism and
Baseline data: recreation areas

CONTROLLED USE ZONE

 In 1992, Palawan has a
forest cover of 789, 488
ha or 55% of the total
area of the province. In
2010, the total forest
cover is 48% or 689, 161
ha.
 The annual rate of
Palawan’s forest loss is
5,500 hectares/year for
the
 (Timber period 1992 (JAFTA) -
poaching) 2010 (NAMRIA).
of logging as
apprehended by the
Bantay Gubat and other
organizations.
 Livelihood needs Wildlife poaching  There are two (2) key Ecosystem Imbalance Management and
 Self-interest biodiversity areas in implementation of laws
Puerto Princesa: PPSRNP and policies
and the Cleopatra’s
Needle in Brgy
Concepcion.
 The Puerto Princesa
Subterranean River
National Park houses 800
plant species, at least 165
birds, 30 mammals, 19

CONTROLLED USE ZONE

reptiles and 10
amphibians, some of
which are either
endangered, rare or
endemic wildlife. (State
of the Environment,
2015)
 There is a total of 135
species of fauna found in
the city, 45 of which are
considered endemic.
been classified as
 (Wildlife  vulnerable and its
poaching) numbers have reduced by
trade.(PWRCC)
2015. (City ENRO)

Continuation of Table 22; Traditional Use Zone and Multiple Use Zone
TRADITIONAL USE ZONE
No proper Limited land area There are other uses of land  Conflict between IPs Improvement of farming
consultation during for agriculture in the traditional use zone and local people practices of IPs and low-
the delineation thus limiting the area for  Land use landers
process agriculture. reclassification
 Market demand Timber poaching,  There are reported  Depletion of natural  Replanting and
(charcoal) charcoal making incidents of timber resources reforesting activities
 Economic and quarrying poaching and quarrying.  Threatened wildlife  Confiscation of tools
interest/opportunitie from illegal loggers and
s Baseline data: illegal fishermen
 Limited area for  Approximately 600 board
low-land agriculture ft. of timber are illegally
transported were
confiscated in Brgy.
Maoyon.
 Market demand Wildlife poaching There is a total of 135 Ecosystem imbalance Management and
 Livelihood needs species of fauna found in due to decreased implementation of laws
the city, 45 of which are number of species and policies
considered endemic.
Baseline data:
been classified as
vulnerable and its
numbers have reduced by
trade.(PWRCC)


(Wildlife  There are 34 reported

poaching) cases of illegal transport
2015. (City ENRO)
 There are 3,593 animals
(63 mammals, 1,959
avians and 1,571 reptiles)
that were confiscated and
turned over to PWRCC
by different enforcement
agencies from 2011 to
2015. (PWRCC)
MULTIPLE USE ZONE
 Insufficient waste Problems on waste  There is an increase in the  Negative health  Integration of proper
treatment facilities management collected solid wastes by impacts waste segregation in
 Population and a. Absence of 7.78% from 2014-2015.  Pollution school curriculum
tourist influx sewerage/septage The proposed waste-to-  MRFs in every
treatment facilities energy project and landfill barangays
expansion is to be
constructed in June 2016.
b. Insufficient
landfills Baseline data:
c. Insufficient  Average garbage
drainage systems collected per day:
d. Absence of 2014: 92.28 tons
medical and toxic  2015: 99.46 tons
wastes treatment
facilities

Continuation of Table 22; Multiple Use Zone

MULTIPLE USE ZONE
Population and Crime incidence  There are reported Higher risk and threats PNP countermeasures
tourist influx incidents of crime and on the safety and
drug use in the city. security of the people
Baseline data:
 In 2015, there were 938
crimes reported in
PPCPO and among these
293 were cleared and 236
crimes solved.
 The police to population
ratio is 1:632, which is
lower compared to the
national ideal ratio of
1:500.
In 2015, the Bantay-
BANAT (Bayan Against
Narcotics Addiction and
Trafficking) conducted
buy-bust operations on
illegal drugs which
resulted to the arrest of 22
suspected drug pushers
and recovery of 171.55
grams of
methamphetamine
hydrochloride or shabu
and 1,057.58 kilograms of
marijuana with the


MULTIPLE USE ZONE
estimated market value of
P2,058,600.00.
 Bantay –BANAT filed
corresponding criminal
cases before the City
Prosecutor Office of
Puerto Princesa to 51
suspects for violation of
R.A. 9165 otherwise
known the
Comprehensive
Dangerous Drugs Act of
2002.
 Market demand Flora and fauna  There are reported Decrease in population  Continuous policing and
 Livelihood needs smuggling apprehensions of illegal of flora and fauna monitoring
 Self interest smugglers of flora and  Monitoring and
fauna in the city. cooperation with
Baseline data: concerned agencies
2015. (City ENRO)
Unsupervised lands Idle lands There is an observed  Loss in agricultural Collection of real property
(owners are not in decrease in land potential tax
PPC) productivity.  Limited areas for
production
Insufficient funding Insufficient The irrigation systems in  Limited production  Construction of

agricultural Inagawan River and resulting to low yield irrigation facilities in


MULTIPLE USE ZONE
support Tagburos River support 290 of agricultural coordination with
infrastructures hectares of land and 137 products National Irrigation
farms. The infrastructure is  Unsustainable Association
able to cover a total of 4.1 agricultural practices  BUB projects
km main canal, 2.7 km of  Inter-agency
the Inagawan River and 1.4 collaboration (DPWH,
km of Tagburos River, and LUA)
3.535 km of laterals.
Insufficient funding Lack of support  Earth roads comprise  Energy shortage Inter-agency partnership
infrastructure 20.83% of the total road  Adverse impacts on for funding
facilities length of Puerto Princesa. economic
a. Roads  Traffic congestion in the development
b. Hospitals central or Poblacion area  Water shortage
c.Telecommunication is experienced by
s residents and tourists.
d. Power supply  There are recorded 12,446
plants individuals who violated
69 different traffic
provisions in 2012.
 Puerto Princesa has 3
hospitals in the urban
barangays and 7 satellite
clinics in the rural areas.
(Lack of support  Currently, 62 barangays
infrastructure have network coverage
facilities ) while PLDT connections
are available in the city
central barangays.


MULTIPLE USE ZONE
Economic Land Grabbing Some areas are fenced as  Limited areas for Implementation of
interest/opportunities private property. production property laws and policies
 Violation of liberty of
abode
 Weak law Illegal Activities  There are existing Threatened natural  Replanting/reforesting
enforcement a. Kaingin unsustainable agricultural resources activities
 Economic b. Illegal logging practices such as kaingin.  Ground monitoring
interest/opportunities c. Unregulated  There are reported cases  Anti-illegal logging task
quarrying of illegal logging and force
unregulated quarrying
that were apprehended by
authorities.
TRIBAL ANCESTRAL USE ZONE

 Economic Land Grabbing  There is an increasing  Displacement of IPs  Resolutions and
interest/opportunities number of potential tribal  Reclamation of other ordinances
 Lack of basic ancestral zones but the areas within the zone  Concerns have been
education for IPs same number of  Cultural erosion raised to NCIP
proclaimed tribal  Tribal conflict  Consultation with the
ancestral zones from  Unmonitored Traditional Council
2010-2015 (State of the expansiof regarding the issues
Environment) development areas
 There are filed cases of
land grabbing and selling

Continuation of Table 22; Tribal Ancestral Zone
TRIBAL ANCESTRAL USE ZONE

(Land Grabbing) of CADC and CADT. (IP  There are livelihood
Representative from programs for IPs to
PCSDS, 2016) serve as source of
income.
 Economic Intrusion of non- There are reported cases of  Depletion of resources  Resource assessment
interest/opportunities IPs in tribal areas illegal harvesting of available for IPs  Partnering with NGOs
 Livelihood needs for resource Almaciga in the tribal  Reclamation of other in planning
extraction ancestral zones. areas within the zone  Extraction applications
 Unsustainable go through field
resource extraction of validation then FPIC
non-IPs
 Tribal disputes
Table 23. DPSIR Table of the Coastal/Marine Core and Multiple Use Zone
CORE ZONE
 Market demand Mangrove area  Mangrove forests in  Mangrove forest cover  Monitoring and law
 Settlements and deterioration Palawan increased by denudation enforcement c/o city
infrastructures near 0.5% from 2005 to 2010.  Destruction of marine government
the mangrove (State of the habitats  Establishment of
forests Environment, 2015)  Disturbance of fauna Council on Anti-
 Livelihood needs  There are incidents of and wildlife Squatting Syndicate and
 Conversion to illegal mangrove logging Professional Squatters
fishponds and confiscation of sacks (CASSAPS)
of charcoal.  Enforcement of units of
 Reforestation activities Taskforce-Bakawan
are conducted in the
mangrove areas.

CORE ZONE
Baseline data:
2015: 19 individuals were
apprehended for illegal
mangrove (Bantay
Bakawan)
 2015: Confiscation of 60
sacks of charcoal and a
total of 14.13 cubic of
mangroves (Bantay
Bakawan)
 Demand for Tourism  Puerto Princesa has 520 Depletion of natural  Integration of
tourism expansions tourism establishments as resources Environmental
infrastructure of 2012. (Permit and Management in tertiary
 Livelihood needs Licensing Division, curriculum
Office of the City Mayor)  There are programs in
 There are emerging and partnership with PCSD
potential tourism  Updating ECAN maps
developments in the to identify suitable areas
coastal areas. for activities
Baseline data:  Regulations through
 There is a proposed new SEP
naval base of AFP in
Oyster Bay (Palawan
News).
 There is a proposed ocean
park in Turtle Bay
(Interaksyon News).

CORE ZONE
 Economic Encroachment of  City waters are still  Decline in fish catch  BantayDagat task force
interest/opportunities fishing practices in protected compared to  Coral reef degradation  Maritime police
 Weak law core zone other coastal core zones  Loss of sea grass beds Ecanization (Identifying
enforcement in Palawan.  Extended fishing location suitable for
 Bantay Dagat is active in hours activities):
monitoring the coastal a. Regulations through
areas. SEP
b. Partnering with
organizations with
similar projects (WWF
& UNDP
 c. PNNI: targets illegal
fishers, illegal loggers,
wildlife smugglers
MULTIPLE USE ZONE
 Economic Interest Unsustainable  There are recorded Destruction of coral  Continuous
 Fishing pressure fishing practices apprehensions due to use reefs and marine apprehension and
 Lack of support for a. Encroachment of of illegal fishing gears, ecosystems monitoring
aquasilviculture commercial fishing dynamite and cyanide.  Boat and Fishermen
vessels Registration
b. Cyanide fishing Baseline data:  Bantay Dagat Task
c. Use of fine mesh  62 illegal fishers were Force
nets apprehended and 55 units  Support to aquaculture
of compressors utilized in products
illegal fishing activities
were confiscated by the
Bantay Dagat in 2014.

*Current Intervention = Response

CURRENT INITIATIVES IN ENVIRONMENTAL GOVERNANCE
The table below shows the summary of some of the efforts by the local government
unit of Puerto Princesa City along with its DCEPC and institutional partners, in
environmental management and environmental governance.
Table 24. Current Initiatives in Environmental Governance of Puerto Princesa City

Governance aspect Current initiatives
1. Stakeholder’s participation in the  Public/stakeholders consultation and
protection, conservation, development, public hearing
exploitation, and restoration of natural  Information Education and
resources in the area Communication (IECs) campaigns
 Creation of farmer associations
 Capacity-building
 Public hearing and barangay
endorsement on development projects
to avoid opposition
 Inter-agency participation
2. Encroachment of commercial fishing  Information Education
vessels on city waters Communication (IECs) campaigns
 Enforcement of laws and policies
 Civil society participation in protecting
city waters
 Creation of Bantay Dagat task force
3. Treatment of protected areas under  Promotion of responsible tourism
NIPAS/ PA declared by barangays/city  Conduct of tree-planting/mangrove-
planting activities
 Conduct of coastal clean-up
 Enforcement of policy to limit of boats
in Underground River to preserve
natural reservation area
 Information dissemination on
protected areas
 Management of protected areas in
collaboration with PAMB
 Promotion of traditional farming
4. Inter-agency participation  CTO: Initiates meetings
 CSWDO: Secretariat of the Local
Council for the Protection of Children
(LCPC) – mainly concerned on the
welfare of the people
 Creation of Multi-partite Monitoring
Team (MMT)
 Creation of Memorandum of
Agreement with different agencies


regarding farming (Ex. Building of
new trade posts in partnership with
DAR and provincial government)
 Conduct of DCEPC meetings
 Linkages and partnership with
different national and local
government agencies
5. Protection of coastal/marine areas and  Conduct of coral rehabilitation
enforcement of fishery laws activities that are participated by city
departments and other government
agencies, NGOs and POs
 Formulation of policies on protection
of coastal and marine areas
 Information dissemination
 Inter-agency participation and
cooperation on coastal clean-up
activities and Oplan Linis
 Provision of quarantine for pests to
protect products for export
 Prohibited destructive fishing practices
such as use of cyanide, dynamite and
compressor.
 Prohibited live fish trading
 Conduct of mangrove reforestation
projects
 Creation of Bantay Dagat and Bantay
Bakawan task force
 Increase sustainable mariculture
through establishment of fish cages
6. Monitoring and evaluation schemes  Regular monitoring and evaluation of
sanitation, engineering and protective
services, social welfare programs, etc.
by CTO and CSWD
 Monitoring team is composed of
LTO, LTFRB, tourism, and other
concerned departments
 Evaluation is done by the city
government in general
 Provision of technical support on
monitoring and evaluation team
 Conduct of wildlife monitoring
7. Regulatory measures or permitting  CTO: Issuance of permits regarding
system tourism
 CTO: Creation of ordinance for


tourism-related enterprises
 CSDWO: Establishment of social
welfare system to reorganize the
structure and implementation schemes
 Coop Development Authority (CDA):
in-charge of permits which includes
securing the reportorial requirements
8. Application of resource rents or user  Environmental fees for protected areas
charges such as Underground River
 Fees for local operators
 Donation scheme
 Package tours – for operators only
 Garbage fees and environmental fees
in PPSRNP
9. Management of funds from proceeds  Salary of operators, staff, personnel
of license fees and tourist guides
 For protection and management of the
protected areas
 For development projects such as
development of other potential tourism
sites
 Collection goes to local revenue and
trust/general fund
10. Allowable activities for each zone  Activities are based on the ordinances
on City Tourism Code 495
 CTO: Reviews tourism zones to
update identified allowable activities
 Enforcement of Bantay Dagat, Bantay
Gubat and Bantay Bakawan taskforce
11. Development activities in small  Regulation of activities through
islands; imposition of tourism permits based on
ordinances (Ex. Limit the use of jet ski
and other water motor vehicles that
can disturb marine wildlife)
 Imposition of entrance fees (for private
islands)
12. Waste disposal and sewage  Imposition of fines
 Management of existing sanitary
landfill at Brgy. Sta. Lourdes
 Waste-to-Energy project
 Compliance to segregation of garbage
 Creation of irrigation systems
 Proposed Waste-to-Energy project to


 Eliminate and recycle wastes
 Compliance to garbage segregation
 Establishment of irrigation systems
13. Provision of alternative livelihood  Provision of livelihood trainings by
projects TESDA
 CBST programs for livelihood of the
people in barangays
 Provision of fish cages for the whole
barangay
 CTO: Provision of workshops,
English-proficiency lesson, van driver
trainings and life-support seminar
 Conduct of programs on self-
employment assistance aligned with
the needs of the people and targets
sustainable livelihood projects
 Provision of alternative livelihood for
IPs i.e Rattan business
 Promotion of diversified farming
 Provision of seminars and forums that
tackle alternative livelihood
 Linkage to financing institutions for
assistance
 Provision of loans and microfinancing
programs
 Conduct of Payao livelihood project
that aims to improve the productivity
and raise income of fisher folks
 DA: Provides high-yield stocks
seedlings and tractors
 Trainings on sustainable agriculture
14. Protection of the access rights of the  Formulation and strengthening of
community to the natural resources policies
15. Migration and settlement within the  Implementation of policies and
coastal areas ordinances
 Creation of Council on Anti-Squatting
Syndicate and Professional Squatters
(CASSAPS)
 Provision of City Housing Projects
 Relocation of informal settlers
16. Appropriation of funds for the  CTO: Funds are strictly allocated to
implementation of the plan and the tourism-related development projects


Management of the ECAN zones.  CPDO: Funds used for dines,
fuel/transportation during
consultations, validation, and revision
of plans (reclassification)
 Allocation of funds for DCEPC
meetings
17. Others identified to be necessary and  Inter-agency participation in DRRM
relevant (i.e. safety and protection of IP) projects
 Establishment of Road Side
Monitoring
 Enforcement of 50:50 Traffic Scheme
 Establishment of quarry check points
 Construction of road systems i.e. farm-
to-market roads
 Plans on delineating zones with cherry
trees
OPPORTUNITIES
Puerto Princesa, dubbed as the “The City in a Forest”, has been endowed with
various natural resources. The size of the city, being the largest in terms of land area in the
country, serves as a key advantage as well. The city is also regarded as it still holds more
than half of its primary growth forests.
Natural resources available in the city range from endemic flora and fauna to natural
wonders and a lot more. These resources can still be harnessed and developed for a
sustainable livelihood. Forest products (both timber and non- timber) include Almaciga
resin, rattan, copra and other coconut products, cogon and bamboo. Almaciga resin are
often collected by indigenous peoples in the higher areas of the city. In spite of continuous
productivity, Puerto Princesa City’s coconut trees are already aging. Thus, the current
initiatives of the City Agriculture Office is to include replanting of coconut trees in the
areas allowed. Rattan products, including furniture, are being exported. Market for these
products is expanding and a great potential is seen for it.
Fruit trees and plants including cashew, mangoes, and coffee are the most known
products in the area. Due to the arid and acidic soil condition of most of the city’s soil,
cashew trees can be seen in most parts of the city. Tourists visiting the area are known to
take home fried and roasted cashew products for souvenirs. With this potential value added
and innovative rebranding or simple fried and roasted cashew, products like chocolate bars
with cashew nuts, cashew nut brittle, turones de kasuy and a lot more are now being sold
in the market. Mangoes in the city however, are greatly affected by the export ban imposed
by the Department of Agriculture in the province of Palawan due to the proliferation of the

Mango Pulp Weavel Pest. In spite of the export ban on fresh mangoes, processed mangoes
are already available in the market. The Palawan Dried Mangoes though processed in Narra
town, its raw materials mostly come from the city.
Other trees and plant species seen in the area are also regarded to have high
potential in aiding the livelihood for the locals. However, further research will be needed
in order to rebrand and launch products from these materials. These researches will also be
needed to improve its quality, shelf life, and ensure consistency.
Agricultural products and aquatic resources from the city also have a high market
potential. Yellow fin tuna, groupers and other seafood products are available in the area.
Post processing facilities like canning and the like would further improve post processed
quality of the fish and agricultural products. Furthermore other support infrastructures will
also help in realizing the potential of the agriculture sector of the city. Also, idle lands in
the city can be utilized to increase the yield of agricultural products in the area.
As for the tourism potential of the city, apart from the current mainstreamed tourist
destinations in the area, more tourist destinations can still be developed. Professional
advertisers would be of great help in actualizing the tourist spots’ potential. The opening
of these tourist spots will not only open new job opportunities but will also decentralize
the bulk of tourists visiting the same area. Through which the current state of the area will
be protected as well. Apart from natural wonders serving as tourist spots, the city can also
offer tourist activities that do not necessarily require a natural background such as the go
karting circuit at Brgy. Sta. Monica.
Being known as a popular tourist destination to the world, the city owes its income
from tourism related ventures. Aside from the well-publicized PPSRNP and Honda Bay,
the city should also invest in building infrastructures to boost the accessibility of the tourist
areas. The promotion of the festivals celebrated both by the city and the indigenous people
in the area should be taken into account so as to develop its tourism potential.
Puerto Princesa has been known as a paradise to tourists and home to natural
wonders. Opening other tourist destinations for livelihood will also help in actualizing the
city’s vision to be a model city in sustainable development. Balancing the development
and the environment will be the continuous conquest of the city. Realizing the opportunities
of the natural resources of the city will be a step towards achieving their vision.
Human resources and local organizations are also identified as opportunities for
Puerto Princesa City in managing and catalysing resource conservation and sustainable
development. According to the city government officer, the available human resources in
the city are already equipped, provided that the mission and vision of sustainable
development is well-defined. However, the local government unit still target more human
resources. School organizations, professors, and students contribute through their

knowledge and field expertise on environmental management along with their

environment-related activities. Other human resources identified include church
organizations, fisherfolks, and farmers. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are good
in capacitation particularly in teaching people how to perform the activities they advocate.
Some of the NGOs include Haribon Foundation, Environmental Legal Assistance Center,
Inc. (ELAC), Palawan NGO Network Inc. (PNNI), Conservation International Philippines,
National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), Deutsche Gesellschaft für
Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), and other environmentalists. These organizations
have high potential to influence change due to their mobility and flexibility. International
organizations and agencies are also identified as part of the human resource opportunity of
the city. They provide and contribute in the funding of projects related to resource
conservation and sustainable development. Some of the identified international
organizations and agencies are World Wide Fund (WWF), United Nations Children's
Emergency Fund (UNICEF), World Bank, United States Agency for International
Development (USAID), Forest Conservation Association, and International Ocean
Organization.
National and local policies are also perceived as opportunity for the city in
supporting the social, economic, and environmental development in the barangay cluster.
The SEP law is part of the listed laws and policies that are believed to promote
environmental resource conservation and management. There are also national laws
identified that contribute to this undertaking – NIPAS, Chainsaw Act, Clean Air Act,
Ecological Solid Waste Management Act, Toxic Waste Management Act, etc. Local
school-environmental policies in Palawan State University are also addressed. Some of
which are: Clean & Green Campaign, No Straw Policy, Paper recycling, etc. These local
school policies are not really effective at the national level but within the university. There
are also local ordinances addressed by the stakeholders that need strict compliance for its
effectiveness i.e. City Ordinance 110: Ban of Shipment of Live Marine Banned
Compressor Fishing.
On the other hand, only the Investment and Tourism Code are addressed to further
support the economic development of the city. Under the social policies are Department of
Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) laws and related policies; proclamation of the
Penal Colony; ordinances on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Queer (LGBTQ); and laws
on CADC, CADT, and Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development and Protection Plan
(ADSDPP); and National Building Code through the aid of City Engineer Office. These
laws and policies are effective only with the commitment and initiative of the people.
The private and civic society organizations (CSO) are also considered as
opportunity for the city through their support to the undertakings of local development
projects. Puerto Princesa Chamber of Commerce and Industry; Palawan Filipino and
Chinese; Barangay Council for the Protection of Children (BCPC); JCI- Junior Chamber

International; Rotary Club; and Conservation International are some of the organizations
identified.
However, some institutions still lack in capacitation hence there are already
proposed activities towards environmental concerns. The kind of support these
organizations provide to the local development projects varies depending on the existent
needs. Palawan Chamber of Commerce; together with the Puerto Princesa Chamber of
Commerce and Industry; Palawan Filipino-Chinese Chamber of Commerce; and Junior
Chamber International (JCI) provide support mostly through sponsorship. Conservation
International, ELAC, CK PLUS, Malampaya (Shell), NATRIPAL, and other POs seldom
support the local development projects. These organizations only help through their
corporate social responsibility (CSR). Another is the associations of Travel Agencies,
hotels and hotel managers, tour guides, drivers TODA which shall provide active
participation and support manpower. Next is the active participation and support resulting
into an increasing manpower. Tagbalay Foundation also provides scholarship grants on
identified scholars. The environmentalists and Anti-Mining organization aim to resolve
conflict between environmentalists and the LGU: as well as to serving the needs of the
people against environmental conservation.
A trading post was proposed in Barangay Irawan for a more efficient accessibility
to local markets. However, the establishment of this trading post is still ongoing due to
existing problem on lands. On the other hand, financing institutions contribute
opportunities for the city in supporting development projects. Included in these institutions
is the microfinance that provides loan assistance. These financing institutions, however,
must consider providing sustainable assistance. Education and capacitation, as examples,
are what the people truly need for them to establish their own sustainable source of living.
Other financing associations include cooperatives, banks (i.e. Landbank, PNB etc.), and
SMEs which aim to fill in the gaps of the city government that shall be beneficial to the
livelihood of the people.
Water rationing and frequent brownouts are affecting Puerto Princesa City mostly
during summer due to water and power shortage. Irawan watershed is the current and only
main source of water supply in the city. However, there are areas identified by some
knowledgeable people as potential sources of water and energy supply. Rivers, rainwater,
and watershed are among the natural sources of water with high potential in the city.
Specifically, the rivers identified are Babuyan, Balsahan, Lapu-lapu, Mauyon, and
Montible. Barangay Iwahig is also seen as potential water source area and considered by
many as the most possible choice. Even so, there are still negotiations on the plan to place
the Iwahig Prison and Penal Farm under the joint management of the Department of Justice
(DOJ) and the local government unit. On the other hand, dams in barangays Simpucan and
Bagong Bayan; rainwater catchment; and desalinization machine and plant (for seawater)

are the potential man-made sources of water in the city. Groundwater abstraction has good
potentiality in barangays Sta. Monica, Irawan, and Iwahig.
Power shortage is attributed to lack of supply and limited capacity of the local
power distributor in handling heavy power loads (Valente, 2015). West coast areas are not
tapped with energy supply but there are actions already taken by the local government.
Alternative sources of energy supply in the city were identified. First, solar energy is
considered the most feasible potential source of energy provided its limitations. Knowing
that sun is the source of solar energy, it is not feasible during wet seasons and it requires
wide space. Hydrothermal energy particularly from rivers and deep-well is addressed as
another potential. Given the water shortage situation in the city, this is less likely to hold
true during dry season. There is possible geothermal energy identified in Barangay Sta.
Lucia. Nuclear energy is also seen as a potential energy source and is considered somehow
feasible in the city because of its fault-free characteristic. Last of all, coal plant is
considered as an alternative source provided that green coal will not be mined; rather, it
would be produced from bamboos. There is a common difficulty anticipated within these
opportunities in the energy supply of the city. Resources are available but there are no
investors to finance the suggested alternative energy sources.
There are three hospitals and a number of district hospitals and barangay or satellite
clinics located in the city to provide health services. Such emergency cases happen, these
health services are readily available not only for the locals but also for the tourists.
However, lack of opportunities was seen for availability of tertiary hospitals in the city and
not all satellite clinics are functional.
Scholarship programs for students are provided by city and provincial government,
NGOs and private institutions. These programs vary from the type of scholarship offered.
House-to-house mapping is being done to locate the out-of-school youth and then
formulate plans of action to address the issues. Education Assistance Programs conducted
such as Alternative Learning System that provides a practical option to the existing formal
instruction when one does not have or cannot access formal education in schools (DepEd,
n.d.) and “Abot Alam” program, a national strategy that focuses on technical development
of out-of-school youth. There are opportunities on establishment learning centers to remote
areas with high number of out-of-school youth who cannot afford to access education
services in urban areas. Suggestions such as construction of more audio visual rooms and
mobile libraries are being raised. Despite of the programs, projects and technical facilities
for education, the city is still being in the process of preparation for K-12 program.
Additional classrooms and school building are being constructed to cater the enrollees.
However, as of yet, less efforts are being done to address the absence of specialized
education in the city and discrimination of IPs on schools.

Different city agencies and task force are dispersed within the city to maintain the
security and safety of the locals and the tourists. Puerto Princesa City Police Office, Bureau
of Fire Protection, Council Against Squatting Syndicates and Professional Squatters
Program (CASSAPS) and others are performing their duties and responsibilities to provide
protective services for the city.
Budget for settlements was increased resulting to more opportunities for Puerto
Princesa residents to afford housing services. There are six existing relocation sites and
establishment of new and appropriate sites for relocation is being planned to accommodate
the growing number of informal settlers especially in coastal areas. Opportunity on low
cost tenement housing is also perceived to save space. On the other hand, to address the
growing number of tourists, prospects on construction of high-end hotels and pension
houses are seen.
Trainings on other livelihood opportunities the residents can venture on such as

duck raising, egg processing and stuffed toy making and others are being held. There are
also technologies provided to domesticate wildlife resources. Community-based
sustainable tourism and ecotourism are seen to bring livelihood opportunities to rural
communities where community participation, protection and management of natural
resources, culture and indigenous knowledge and practices, environmental education and
ethics, as well as economic benefits are fostered and pursued for the enrichment of host
communities and satisfaction of visitors.
The residents of Puerto Princesa City have an ample support infrastructures and
facilities. There are 861 kilometers of roads and the support infrastructure for locals. The
city plans to create more roads that will connect remote areas. They are also planning to
rehabilitate old roads to cope with the new standards of DPWH. The city provides support
to different institutions, for agricultural support, they have ongoing farm-to-market road
construction and they are also providing mechanical and technical support to farmers in
their farming. They have also provided ports, cold storage, and processing machines for
its fishing and livestock industry. However, the city is lacking on the number of parks,
large trade posts, and floodways. These lacking infrastructure can be address by integrating
these infrastructures when enhancing the city’s road network.
Another perceived opportunity is the availability of sanitation and solid waste

disposal facility. Puerto Princesa City is home to one of the first engineered landfill in the
whole country. Aside from the current infrastructure available, the city has also planned to
enhance the current water treatment plant and create more water treatment plants in
barangays Irawan and Sta. Monica. It is also evident that every barangay has its own
Materials Recovery Facility (MRF). Aside from the infrastructure, policy intervention
regarding waste segregation was also existing, the city collects residual and recyclable
waste, and biodegradable are entrusted to the residents to produce their own compost pits.

However, problems on infrastructure and policy implementation are prevailing. For

infrastructural, the landfill is projected to be at its capacity a decade from now and
additional to this problem is that not all the MRFs are functional. For the policy
implementation, problem arising is improper segregation by the residents and garbage
collectors, themselves. These hindrances can be address by creating additional landfill,
especially medical waste treatment facility, to lessen the load on the present landfills.
Another effort could be consideration of the proposed waste-to-energy project that will
help lessen the residual waste on the landfills.
Other opportunities that can be explored are youth empowerment in terms of active
participation on governance, satellite city halls that can provide accessible services to all
barangays, and comprehensive and appropriate planning on programs and infrastructural
developments.

CHAPTER VI
THE ECAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN
6.1 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE ECAN ZONES MANAGEMENT PLAN
Palawan Province‘s economic potential hinges on several high-profit resource-

based industries such as tourism and fisheries. The increasing number of environmentally
critical projects puts pressure on the natural resources and this implies that regulation and
planning for sustainability must be institutionalized.
Through the SEP Law, the ECAN zoning is made the principal strategy on local
area land and water use planning. The strategy can be applied strategically over and above
other existing planning frameworks due to the adaptive and strategic nature of the ECAN
strategy itself.
The formulation of the ECAN Zones Management Plan is important in optimizing

the uses of Palawan lands and waters, as well as the maximization of benefits
derived from resources therein and the minimization of negative impacts from
introduced activities. At the municipal level, the Plan can serve as a sustainable
development master plan or road map. It can delineate the options and strategies on land
and water use and can determine the most suitable industries in certain resource areas. To
this end, the Plan contains strategies for the proper allocation of assets, investments,
and capital (social, natural, and economic capital).
6.2 THE ECAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN OF PUERTO PRINCESA

CITY
Threats to ECAN Resources and Sustainable Development
Threats were prioritized by the stakeholders in the recently concluded Participatory

ECAN Planning Workshop. These prioritized threats are considered the major issues that
are foreseen to have impacts on the ECAN resources and sustainable development. Under
the column of ECAN Management Programs are the strategies proposed by the planning
team to address the issues, correspondingly. The strategies were incorporated from the
strategy-based plan of actions presented in Tables 31.a. and 31.b. On the other hand, the
lead and support organizations were identified based on the inputs of the planning team
and the stakeholders and on the Palawan Sustainable Development Strategy and Action
Plan for 2015-2020.

Table 25. The major issues of Puerto Princesa City and the ECAN Management
Program components that address them
LEAD (LO) AND

ECAN MANAGEMENT
MAJOR ISSUES SUPPORT
PROGRAM
ORGANIZATIONS (SO)
Core Zone
Illegal occupancy and  Law Enforcement LO: LGU, DPWH, PCSD
intrusion of local people  Information, Education, SO: NAMRIA, DENR,
and Communication Academe, BFAR, PNP,
(IEC) Campaigns NGO, NCIP
 Public Works, Facilities,
and Infrastructures
Deterioration of  Law Enforcement LO: LGU, DENR, BFAR
mangrove areas  Livelihood and SO: PCSD, PNP, NGO,
Ecotourism NCIP
 Environmental Protection
Illegal logging  Law Enforcement LO: LGU, PCSD
 Information, Education, SO: DENR, Academe,
and Communication BFAR, PNP, NGO, NCIP
(IEC) Campaigns
Buffer: Restricted Use Zone
Kaingin and Land  Law Enforcement LO: DENR – MMT, LGU,
Grabbing  Information, Education, PCSD
and Communication SO: Academe,
(IEC) Campaigns NATRIPAL, NCIP,
 Livelihood and CMRB, DENR, Academe,
Ecotourism NATRIPAL
Buffer: Controlled Use Zone
Kaingin and Land  Law Enforcement LO: DENR – MMT, LGU,
Grabbing  Information, Education, PCSD
and Communication SO: Academe,
(IEC) Campaigns NATRIPAL, NCIP,
 Livelihood and CMRB, DENR, Academe,
Ecotourism NATRIPAL
Unregulated quarrying  Public Works, Facilities, LO: DENR , LGU, CMRB
and Infrastructures SO: PCSD, DENR-MMT
 Law Enforcement
 Rehabilitation
Selling of CADC and  Law Enforcement LO: DA, DENR, LGU,
CADT  Livelihood and NCIP
Ecotourism SO: DTI, DOT, DENR,
 Information, Education, Academe, PCSD
and Communication
(IEC) Campaigns

LEAD (LO) AND

ECAN MANAGEMENT
MAJOR ISSUES SUPPORT
PROGRAM
ORGANIZATIONS (SO)
Timber poaching and  Law Enforcement LO: DA, DENR, LGU,
charcoal making  Livelihood and NCIP
Ecotourism SO: DTI, DOT, DENR,
 Information, Education, Academe, PCSD
and Communication
(IEC) Campaigns
Multiple Use Zone
Inadequate Law  Law Enforcement LO: LGU
Enforcement  Human and SO: PCSD, TESDA, PNP,
Organizational PNRC, DILG, MARINA,
Development BFAR, DENR, NGOs,
Academe, PNP
Insufficient Post-Harvest  Law Enforcement LO: LGU, DPWH
Facilities  Public Works, Facilities, SO: PNP, PCSD, DA,
and Infrastructures DENR, DILG , Academe,
DBM, BFAR, LWUA,
PALECO, PPCWD
Conflicts in Land Use  Law Enforcement LO: LGU, DPWH
 Public Works, Facilities, SO: PNP, PCSD, DA,
and Infrastructures DENR, DILG , Academe,
DBM, BFAR, LWUA,
PALECO, PPCWD
Tribal Ancestral Use Zone
Land grabbing and  Law enforcement LO: LGU, NCIP
intrusion of non-IPs  Information, Education, SO: PCSD, NGO,
and Communication Academe,
(IEC) Campaigns
Municipal Breakdown of the ECAN Zones
Majority of the land area of Puerto Princesa are classified as Buffer Zone (40.45%)
which includes Restricted, Controlled and Traditional Use Zones. This is followed by the
core zones comprising 39.45% of the total land area. Only 20.10% of the city’s land are
classified under multiple use zones (Table 26).
Table 26. Areas of ECAN Zones

ECAN Zone Area (ha) Percentage Distribution
(%)
Core Zone 87,048.7 39.45
Buffer Zone 89,230.6 40.45
 Restricted 70,640.2 32.02

 Controlled 9,874.7 4.48

 Traditional Use 8,715.7 3.95
Multiple Use Zone 44,351.0 20.10
The core zones of Puerto Princesa City stretches to 37 barangays, mostly rural
areas. The buffer zones of the city cover 40.45% of the city’s total land area (SEMP,
2006) stretching across 26 barangays. Of the 66 barangays in the locality, only Brgy
Montible in the southwestern part of the city has been identified not to have any multiple
use zone areas. All other 65 barangays have been identified to have the aforementioned
zone.
6.3 RIDGE-TO-REEF ECAN MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK AND

LAND/WATER USE STRATEGIES11
The ECAN zones management approach will be holistic and will follow the ridge-
to-reef approach (Table 27). The ridge-to-reef framework is a strategic approach to the
ECAN management and allows for cross-cutting strategies to be applied across the ECAN
zones on the ground. This means that the management options and strategies are configured
in such a way such that the sphere of influence of the upland includes the lowland down to
the sea.
_____________
11This section partly based on ECAN Zones Management Plan for El Nido Municipality (PCSDS 2006)

Table 27. Ridge-to-Reef Management Framework of ECAN Zones
UPLAND BUFFER ZONE LOWLAND COASTAL

COMPONENT ECAN ZONE
AREAS (UPLAND AND LOWLAND MANAGEMENT) AND URBAN AREAS
Terrestrial Biodiversity
Core zone
conservation
Restricted use Biodiversity Watershed
area conservation management
Controlled use Biodiversity Watershed Upland forest
area conservation management management
Traditional use Biodiversity Watershed Upland forest Upland
area conservation management management stabilization
Lowland and
Multiple use Biodiversity Watershed Upland forest Upland
urban area
zone conservation management management stabilization
management
Coastal/Marine Lowland and
Coastal core Biodiversity Watershed Upland forest Upland CRM + MPA
urban area
zone conservation management management stabilization Management
management
Lowland and
Coastal Biodiversity Watershed Upland forest Upland CRM + MPA
urban area
transition zone conservation management management stabilization Management
management
Coastal Lowland and
Biodiversity Watershed Upland forest Upland CRM + MPA
sustainable use urban area
conservation management management stabilization Management
zone management
Tribal Ancestral Tribal ancestral
Cultural mapping
Lands zone

The Core Zone will mainly use the strategy of biodiversity conservation due to its
limited activities. The strategy, however, is still flexible and not limiting because
biodiversity conservation still allows strategic activities and options that could be
introduced in the Core Zones (e.g., regulated ecotourism).
The buffer zone management strategies will range from biodiversity conservation
in areas that are pristine (as with Core zones), watershed management (in Restricted use
areas), upland forest management (in Controlled use areas), and upland stabilization
(in Traditional use areas). In addition to all these strategies, the multiple use zone will focus
on lowland and urban area management.
The coastal zone will be managed through integrated coastal zone management
(ICZM) in appropriate areas. Since the strategies in the upland will impact the lowland
and coastal areas, the whole gamut of strategies in the upland areas will be a factor in
managing the areas below it.
Note that some commercial activities (or projects) will require the SEP Clearance.
The following specific strategies are recommended to address general threats to
sustainable development in ECAN zones. These strategies can be implemented across
selected or all the ECAN zones.

Table 28. Recommended strategies to address general threats to sustainable development of ECAN zones
Threats To Sustainable
Specific Strategies Description Target ECAN Zones Remarks
Development
Inability to provide for Livelihood support All ECAN zones
basic needs
Threats to food security Conservation and All ECAN zones
sustainable use
Biodiversity loss Protection and Protection and Core zones (land and
preservation preservation of resources water), but other ECAN
in areas highly restricted zones can also allocate
to human activities areas for protection and
preservation
Restoration Restoration in areas to be Buffer zones (land and  Restoration depends on
upgraded or reverted back water) but may be the ecological features
to Core zones expanded to include the of the area being
Core zone and Multiple restored.
use zones  In Core zones, limited
restoration activity
only.
Rehabilitation Rehabilitation in areas or Buffer zone and Multiple
ecosystems which are use zone (land and water)
degraded, denuded, or
polluted and require
intervention such as
reforestation, replanting,
or adoption of pollution
control measures
Natural processes  Conservation and All ECAN zones,
sustainable use especially geohazard areas
Land-based  Law enforcement All ECAN zones, but will
stresses/pressures depend on existing
guidelines

Development
Unsound waste Solid waste management All ECAN zones
management practices
Strong market demand for  Law enforcement Quota system to regulate All ECAN zones
resources  Permitting system volume of resource
harvesting
Lack of livelihood  Livelihood support Reclamation or All ECAN zones
opportunities  Reclamation of conversion to other uses in
conversion to other Multiple use zone (land Multiple use zone (land
uses and water), or in areas and water)
with less productive
ecosystems and where
existing land uses are
irreversible such that
restoration will be costly,
and are therefore best
suited for conversion into
other uses.
Lack of industry support  Industry support All ECAN zones
 Market creation
Uncertainty in Conflict resolution Areas for conflict All ECAN zones Land use situations that
coastal/land tenure resolution are those which may require conflict
(property rights) current or proposed uses resolution are as follows:
under approved CLUPs  Built-up areas within
are in conflict with ECAN core zones or restricted
zoning. Resolution may use zones
involve any or a  A&D lands within core
combination of the zones
following: (a) consultation  Settlements within
and negotiation; (b) strict protections zones
adjudication in court; (c) of NIPAS protected
establishment of

Development
management guidelines areas or within ECAN
for allowable and Core zones
prohibited uses.  Communal forest
within core zone
 Agriculture and urban
development in
unclassified public
forest land
 Infrastructures (roads,
power plants) within
core zones
 Fishpond in mangrove
areas
 Urban development
within Network of
Protected Areas for
Agriculture and Agro-
industrial Development
(NPAAD)
Low level of sustainable IEC All ECAN zones
development awareness
Political issues Capacity building All ECAN zones

Strategies can be cross-cutting and/or suprazonal. This means they can be applied
across more than one ECAN zone. Examples of these strategies include climate change
adaptation and disaster risk reduction, livelihood support, law enforcement, industry support,
conflict resolution, IEC and capacity building.
This plan is divided into four major components: Institutional, Socio-economic,

Infrastructure and Ecological. Specific objectives of these components are the following:
Component Outcome Objective

Institutional Institutional - To effectively uphold and implement existing laws
convergence and and policies regarding environmental protection and
multi-level resource management; and
coordination - To legislate other laws and policies that would
achieved further strengthen environmental protection and
resource management
- To increase public awareness on environmental
laws and policies, and resource conservation
- To manage knowledge and technology for future
reference
- To expand networks and partnerships in research
extension
Socio-economic Benefits from - To empower and develop capacities of communities
sustainable and organizations for inclusive growth
tourism and - To provide sustainable source of income to lowland
support industries and upland communities
equitably
distributed
Infrastructure Adequate and - To establish ground demarcation on protected
climate-resilient areas; and
infrastructure - To construct infrastructure facilities for socio-
services economic development
maintained or
established
Ecological Importance, - To restore exploited areas to an improved form

benefits, and - To develop appropriate environmental standards to
ecological and ensure environmental protection and management
cultural values of
the city ecological
system sustained

6.4 ECAN ZONES MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES
Objectives of the ECAN Zones Management Guidelines
Each of the ECAN zones can be thought of as responding to basic needs and
sustainable development objectives of the ECAN zoning strategy explicitly defined by the
SEP law (see last column of Table 29). With these objectives and in view of the nature and
criteria for delineation of each ECAN zone, the applicable zonal goals and management
framework of the ECAN zones may be defined as in the following table.
Table 29. ECAN Zones Management Goals and Framework Applicable to Puerto
Princesa City
Zonal management Objectives of ECAN
ECAN Zones Zonal goals
framework zones management
(SEP Law, Section 7)
Core zone Ecological Integrity Biodiversity 1. forest conservation
(Terrestrial and conservation; and protection;
coastal) Coastal resource and 2. protection of
MPA management watersheds;
(for coastal) 3. preservation of
biological diversity;
Buffer zone: Water Sufficiency Watershed 4. protection of
Restricted use area management indigenous peoples
and preservation of
Buffer zone: Food Security and Upland forest their culture;
Controlled use Upland Stabilization management 5. maintenance of
Traditional use maximum sustainable
areas yield;
6. protection of rare
Multiple use zone Food Security Lowland and urban and endangered
(Terrestrial and and Sustainable area management; species and their
coastal) Industries & Sustainable habitat;
Services agriculture 7. provision of areas
Coastal resource and for environmental
MPA management research, education,
(for coastal) and training; and
8. provision of areas
for tourism and
recreation

The ECAN as a whole aims to satisfy the zonal goals listed for a particular area. It is
evident from this how the ECAN is conceptualized as a holistic strategy to achieve human
welfare since ECAN is a ridge-to-reef strategy.
The figure below illustrates the positive reinforcing outcomes of SEP-ECAN to

achieving societal well-being and holism. The balance of ecological stability and economic
development is the main driver of water sufficiency and food security, which in turn are
driven by increased knowledge capacity and good governance. Thus, the expected lasting
benefit of SEP, through the management of ECAN zones, is the continuous build-up of
necessary ecological, economic, and social infrastructures to realize a self-sustaining green
economy.
Figure 16. The positive reinforcing outcomes of SEP-ECAN
6.4.1 ECAN Strategies and Use Prescriptions
The zones use prescription defines the allowable uses and prohibited activities in the
respective ECAN zones. It is guided by the management and use prescriptions defined in the
SEP Law and the Revised ECAN guidelines. Strategies and allowable activities and sample
strategies within the ECAN zones are summarized in the table below. Details of these
activities are provided in the succeeding sections.

Table 30. Activities allowed in the ECAN zones (based on PCSD Resolution 05-25012 and PCSD Resolution 06-270) vis-à-vis
general and specific strategies in each zone.
ECAN zone General strategies Specific strategies Allowable activities within

the management zone
Terrestrial component
Biodiversity conservation  Protection and preservation None, except for:
 Declaration of forest reserve  Traditional uses of tribal
 Conservation and sustainable use communities for minimal
 Livelihood support and soft impact gathering of
forest species for
Core zone
ceremonial and religious
purposes; and
 Ecotourism and activities as
per PCSD Resolution 06-
270
 Biodiversity  Protection and preservation Limited and non-consumptive
conservation  Declaration of forest reserve activities which include:
 Watershed management  Conservation and sustainable use
 Livelihood support  Gathering of wild honey;
 Enforcement  Almaciga tapping;
 Monitoring  Soft-impact recreational
 Research activities (hiking, sight-
Buffer zone – Restricted  Capability building seeing, bird watching);
use  Research;
 Sustainable activities of
indigenous peoples;
 Ecosystem restoration or
rehabilitation; and
 Ecotourism activities as per
PCSD Resolution 06-270.



the management zone
 Biodiversity  Protection and preservation  Strictly controlled mining;
conservation  Restoration/Reforestation  Strictly controlled logging
 Watershed management  Rehabilitation which is not for profit (i.e.,
 Upland forest  Conservation and sustainable use communal forest, CBFM,
management  Livelihood support etc.);
Buffer zone – Controlled  Enforcement  Almaciga tapping;
use  Monitoring  Tourism development;
 Research;
 Grazing; and
 Gathering of honey, rattan,
and other minor forest
products
 Biodiversity  Protection and preservation  Upland stabilization
conservation  Restoration/Reforestation program;
 Watershed management  Rehabilitation  Catchment management;
 Upland forest  Conservation and sustainable use  Hillside farming;
Buffer zone – Traditional management  Livelihood support  Industrial tree plantation;
use  Upland stabilization  Upland development  Reforestation;
 Agroforestry  Integrated social forestry;
 Reclassification and land tilting and
 Community-based forest
management
 Biodiversity  Protection and preservation  Timber extraction with
conservation  Restoration community-based forest
Multiple use zone
 Watershed management  Rehabilitation management;
 Grazing and pastures;
 Upland forest  Reclamation or conversion to other  Agriculture;
Multiple use zone
management uses


the management zone
 Upland stabilization  Conservation  Infrastructure and industrial
 Lowland and urban area  Sustainable development activities development;
management  Agricultural production  Recreation;
 Education;
 Research; and
 Other sustainable activities
Coastal/marine component
ICZM  Protection and preservation None, except for:
 Conservation and sustainable use  Navigation purposes of
 Livelihood support local fishing communities
 Capability building where there are no
alternative routes;
 Emergency situations such
Coastal/Marine core zone
as navigational routes to
save life and property;
 Researches previously
authorized by PCSD; and
 Ecotourism activities as per
ICZM  Protection and preservation  Habitat restoration,
 Declaration of mangrove reserve rehabilitation, and
Coastal/Marine multiple  Ecosystem restoration and enhancement of activities;
use zone – rehabilitation  Soft impact activities
Transition/Buffer zone  Conservation (swimming/snorkelling;
 Livelihood support non-motored boating such
as
Coastal/Marine multiple  Regulation row boats, kayaks, canoes,
use zone –  Management planning wind surfing, etc.);
Transition/Buffer zone  Sustainable use  Guided scuba diving;


the management zone
 Fishing using highly-
selected gears (i.e., hook &
line and grill net) with
specification to be
determined by studies;
 Pre-approved visit or
educational activities;
 Installation of
environmental information
boards; and
 Resource enhancement
activities
ICZM  Protection and preservation  Habitat restoration,
 Restoration rehabilitation, and
 Rehabilitation enhancement of activities;
 Reclamation or conversion to other  Soft impact activities
Coastal/Marine multiple uses (swimming/snorkelling;
use zone –  Conservation non-motored boating such
Sustainable/General use  Livelihood support as row boats, kayaks,
zone  Sustainable use canoes, wind surfing, etc.);
 Guided scuba diving;
 Fishing using highly-
selected gears (i.e., hook &
line and grill net) with
Coastal/Marine multiple specification to be
use zone – determined by studies;
Sustainable/General use  Pre-approved visit or
zone educational activities;


the management zone
 Installation of
environmental information
boards; and
 Resource enhancement
activities
Tribal ancestral lands
Management strategies Management strategies that may be Activities based on the
that may be identified identified through consultative material and cultural needs of
through consultative processes and cultural mapping the indigenous peoples
processes and cultural
mapping
Tribal ancestral waters
Management strategies Management strategies that may be  Cultural activities
that may be identified identified through consultative performed by indigenous
through consultative processes and cultural mapping peoples (IPs) according to
processes and cultural their religious rites and
mapping heritage
 IP activities related to their
subsistence and tradition
_____________
12
Title I, Chapter II, and Title II, Chapter II, of PCSD Resolution 05-250.

6.4.2 Strategies and Land Use Options in the Terrestrial Core Zone
The management of Core zone will focus on Biodiversity Conservation, which

includes conservation of both natural diversity and cultural diversity of the area. There are
no intensive activities to be undertaken in Core Zones. Only minimal and soft impact uses
like activities of tribal communities and highly regulated nature tourism may be allowed.
All allowable developmental activities in the Core Zone are subject to the EIA
System, the SEP Clearance System, and other laws and rules regulating development
projects. Any other proposed activity not allowed in the Core zone must require conflict
resolution with the PCSD and other concerned stakeholders.
The land use options and activities in terrestrial core zones are as follows:
1. Ceremonial, religious, and livelihood support activities of tribal communities

The livelihood support activities for IPs include soft impact gathering of
forest species and non-timber forest products (NTFPs) like almaciga resin, honey,
and rattan. This may require the application of SEP Clearance.
Indigenous knowledge systems and practices and indigenous rituals also

allowed for IPs.
2. Ecotourism
As per PCSD Resolution 06-270, the allowed ecotourism activities in both
land and sea are:
 Regulated botanical tours  Swimming

 Bird watching  Scuba diving
 Picture taking  Canoeing
 Trekking  Kayaking
 Mountaineering  Boardwalking
 Caving  Tree climbing
 Dolphin and Whale watching 
All these activities are subject to strict restriction embodied in a code of

conduct to be formulate by the PCSD with the assistance of the Department of
Tourism (DOT). The SEP Clearance will also be required prior to the conduct of
some of the aforementioned activities.
3. Research
While the ECAN guidelines do not explicitly include research-related
activities in Core zones, such may be allowed provided the research is non-
destructive and the research proponent will secure the SEP Clearance from the
PCSD.

4. Other possible activities

The building of telecommunication facilities (cell sites and towers) is subject
to application for the SEP Clearance.
6.4.3 Strategies and Land Use Options in the Terrestrial Buffer Zones
Certain developmental activities in the three terrestrial Buffer zones may be

subjected to the EIA System, the SEP Clearance System, and other rules and regulations
governing development projects.
Restricted Use Area

Since the Restricted Use Area delineates the critical watersheds of Puerto
Princesa City, the management scheme for this ECAN zone will be watershed or catchment
management. As with the Core Zone, the biodiversity conservation activities may be
undertaken in this particular buffer zone and only soft impact activities to be undertaken
in the Restricted Use Areas.
The major activities here are watershed support and ecological restoration. The
enrichment of ecosystems through forest planting and regeneration in this zone and in other
downstream zones can serve as future sources of ecological goods and services. This is a
form of “restorative development” based on expanding resources and improving existing
assets. Restoration is a process of development that adds value to natural ecosystems or built
assets, returning them to their previous condition, and transforming them into a healthier and
more functional condition (Cunningham, 2002).
The possible activities in Restricted use buffer zone area are the following:
1. Harvesting of NFTPs
NFTPs include wild honey and almaciga tapping.
2. Soft-impact recreational activities

This includes hiking, sight-seeing, birdwatching, and the like. As with the
Core zones, the enumerated ecotourism activities cited in PCSD Resolution 06-270
also apply to Restricted use areas.
3. Research
The research in this zone is subject to the guidelines of the PCSD.
4. Sustainable activities of IPs

The activities include almaciga resin tapping. In addition, traditional
indigenous activities like rituals and the practice of indigenous knowledge systems
are allowed in Restricted use are, just like in the Core zone.

5. Ecosystem restoration and rehabilitation

Restoration will be the major watershed support activity in this ECAN zone.
Following the framework of the PaITREES (Palawan Trees for Restoration of
Ecology, Economy, and Society) Programs of PCSD, restoration is defined as the
“return of an ecosystem to a closed approximation of its condition prior to
disturbance” (U.S. National Research Council, 1992).
The specific kind of restoration called for is ‘ecological restoration’, defined

as “the process of assisting the recovery of an ecosystem that has been degraded,
damaged, or destroyed and is intended to repair ecosystems with respect to their
health, integrity, and self-sustainability.” In a broader context, its goal is “to recover
resilient ecosystems that are not only self-sustaining with respect to structure,
species composition and functionality but also integrated into larger landscapes and
congenial to ‘low impact’ human activities” (Society for Ecological Restoration
(SER) International Science and Policy Working Group 2004, in TEEB 2009).
6. Other watershed support activities

These proposed activities may require conflict resolution with the PCSD and
other concerned stakeholders. It may also require an ECC and SEP Clearance.
7. Other possible activities

Similar to the Core zone, the construction of telecommunication facilities
(cell sites and towers) is subject to application for the SEP Clearance, evaluation by
PCSD Staff, and deliberation by the PCSD.
Controlled Use Area
The Controlled Use Area is a critical buffer zone enveloping the “protected” ECAN
core and restricted use zones. Ideally, it still contains a sizeable volume of forest along a
relatively steep gradient. Upland forest management will be the prescribed strategy in this
zone.
The activities here necessitate a rational and sustainable use of land. The forest cover
will be maintained; any harvested or utilized forest resources will be replaced. The following
activities in this particular buffer zone are subject to existing permit regulations:
1. Strictly controlled mining

Following existing national, provincial, and local guidelines and issuances on
mining, strictly controlled mining may be allowed. This may include metallic and
non-metallic mining activities.

2. Strictly controlled logging which is not for profit

Subject to existing forest management guidelines, this logging activity may
fall under forest management schemes like communal forest and CBFM.
3. Almaciga tapping
4. Toursim development
5. Research
6. Grazing
7. Gathering of NTFPs (honey, rattan, and other minor forest products)
Traditional Use Area
The Traditional Use Area management strategy will be Upland Stabilization in

addition to the strategies for the upstream ECAN zones. As the outer buffer or barrier, it will
be devoted to land and livelihoods stabilization. The activities here center on forest
livelihood projects and agricultural food production. The following activities or tenurial
instruments may be allowed:
1. Upland Stabilization Program (USP)
2. Catchment management
3. Hillside farming
4. Industrial Tree Plantation (ITP)
5. Reforestation
6. Integrated Social Forestry (ISF)
7. Community-Based Forest Management (CBFM)
6.4.4 Strategies and Land Use Options in the Terrestrial Multiple Use Zone
The Multiple Use Zone management strategy will focus on Lowland and Urban Area
Management. Where applicable, this outermost ECAN zone will also employ the strategies
of the other ECAN zones. Certain developmental activities in the terrestrial Multiple use
zone may be subjected to the EIA System. Management and control shall be strictly
integrated with the support programs of the SEP and shall be in accord with the LGU and
community-endorsed CLWUP.
The activities in this zone will focus on urban and lowland development:
1. Timber extraction with CBFM
2. Grazing and pastures
3. Agriculture
4. Infrastructure and industrial development
5. Recreation
6. Education
7. Research
8. Other sustainable activities

6.4.5 Strategies and Water Use Options in the Coastal/Marine ECAN Zones
Due to the critical nature of coastal zones, the SEP Law recognizes the distinct
management framework in these areas. The law prescribes “a simplified scheme of
management zone […] due to its geographical characteristics, critical naturee, and patterns
of resource use” (Sec. 10, SEP Law). Hence, the two management philosophies in this
component shall be:
i. equity in access to resources, and
ii. management responsibility by the local community
The PCSD guidelines recognize the jurisdiction of the LGU over their coastal areas.
As such, PCSD Resolution 05-250 (Sec. 14) specifies that the LGU “shall exercise general
supervision and control over the management of their coastal/marine areas subject to prior
clearance from PCSD in accordance with their existing laws, rules, regulations and
agreements.”
The guidelines also provide that, in cases of areas whose management is awarded to
entities by virtue of agreements/contract, they shall be properly marked with buoys provided
by the grantees/awardees with the assistance of PCSDS. In addition, billboards or signage
regarding the management of the area shall be posted by the grantees/awardees for public
information.
Activities in Coastal/Marine Areas

The activities that may be allowed in the coastal zone are the ones enumerated in
Table 10. These activities may be subjected to the EIA System and the SEP Clearance
System.
The development activities may be further supplemented by other programs, project,

and activities identified in any local Coastal Resource Management Plan, Integrated Coastal
Zone Management Plan, or Marine Protected Areas Management Plan, subject to review of
the PCSD pursuant to the ECAN Zoning guidelines.
Other activities that may be allowed in Coastal multiple use zone shall be governed
or determined by the following:
i. resource distribution patterns, and
ii. appropriate uses and management strategies and/or restrictions for each sub-
zone subject to the review of the PCSD pursuant to the ECAN guidelines
Other strategies and land/water use options in the coastal/marine zone may be
determined through participative and consultative processes such as Community-Based
ECAN Zones Management Planning which the PCSD Staff have piloted in selected Coastal
Resource Monitoring (CRM) Learning Centers throughout Palawan.

6.4.6 Strategies and Land/Water Use Options in the Tribal Ancestral Zones
Selected areas in Palawan were declared as ancestral zones/domains for indigenous

peoples by virtue of any of the following instruments.
i. Tribal Ancestral Zone (TAZ) through PCSD Proclamation

ii. Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title (CADT) and Certificate of Ancestral
Domain Claim (CADC)
iii. Certificate of Ancestral Land Title (CALT) and Certificate of Ancestral Land
Claim (CALC)
Although the TAZ is a component of the ECAN, its declaration and management
will have to follow the integrated/harmonized guidelines of the NCIP and PCSD.
The activities in these areas are primarily those based on the material and cultural
needs of the indigenous peoples. The management strategies in TAZ may be identified
through consultative processes and cultural mapping. The Ancestral Domains Sustainable
Development and Protection Plan (ADSDPP) to be formulated must be able to take into
account these activities and management strategies.
6.5 SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREAS
Special Management Areas (SMAs) are areas that have a special use by virtue of
tenurial instruments through legal frameworks. They may have a separate planning and
regulatory guidelines, management, and administration arrangements that must be
harmonized with the ECAN.
SMAs are still subject to ECAN zoning but their management may entail “special
treatment” owing to specific management plans and management authorities intended for
them. SMAs may include any of the following:
1. Habitats of rare and endangered species (Habitat SMAs)

Habitat SMAs are selected areas in Palawan that are designed as habitats of
endangered species by virtue of local resolutions. Management and activities in
Habitat SMAs will follow the guidelines on critical habitat specifies in PCSD
Resolution 13-48113
________________
13“Confirming the Action of the Executive Committee Adopting the Guidelines on the Establishment and Management of
Critical Habitat as May Be Made Applicable in the Province of Palawan, as an Amendment to Section 50 of PCSD
Administrative Order No. 12, Series of 2011.”

2. Areas of cultural, historical, geological, and anthropological interest (including

significant events)
These sites may be identified and declared as SMA by the LGU. Special
management scheme for the sustainable development of these areas may be drafted.
Fuerza de Santa Isabel can be considered as one of the site for cultural and historical
interest.
If the SMA is a cave, the management of such area will have to follow the
guidelines specifiec in PCSD Administrative Order No. 08 “Implementing PCSD
Resolution No. 03-217, Adopting and Revising the DENR Rules and Regulations of
the National Caves and Cave Resources Management and Protection Act as
Applicable in the Province of Palawan.”
3. Tourism development areas (TDAs)

Areas declared or identified as TDAs by the local government will follow the
PCSD guidelines on ecotourism. TDAs will be guided by the strategies prescribed in
National Tourism Master Plan.
4. NIPAS areas
These areas will have to be managed under the NIPAS law and in consonance
with the SEP law. Currently, there are two protected areas in Puerto Princesa City
under the NIPAS namely Puerto Princesa Subterranean River National Park
(PPSRNP) and Irawan Watershed Reserve. PPSRNP was renamed as such under the
Proclamation No. 835, s. 1971.
5. Other management units in the terrestrial zone

Other SMAs that exist may be identified in Puerto Princesa City are as
follows:
i. Watershed reserves of forest reserves
ii. Municipal parks (terrestrial)
iii. Community Based Forestry Management Area (CBFMA)
iv. Communal Forest areas
v. ISF and other forest-related tenurial instruments
vi. Wildlife Eco-Parks
6. Other management units in the coastal/marine zone
i. Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), marine parks, fish sanctuaries, or marine
ecosystem reserves – may cover different benthic habitats, such as coral
reefs, seagrass, and mangroves
ii. Communal fishing grounds
iii. City/Municipal waters – covering the 15-km limit from the shoreline

iv. Community Based Mangrove Forest Management Area (CBMFMA)

v. Sanctuaries of rare and endangered species – e.g., turtle nesting sites
Planning for these SMAs cannot be monopolized by one agency or one group of
stakeholder. A consultative and participative planning process is advised for SMAs in order
for the SMA Plans to gain acceptance by the affected communities and management
authorities.
Harmonization and integration of SMA Plans with the ECAN Plan shall be pursued
as much as possible.
6.6 ECAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (2017-2022)
The ECAN Management Program (ECAN-MP) for the next six years (2017-2022)
shall be implemented by the local government unit of Puerto Princesa City through the
DCEPC in cooperation with and with the support of PCSD Staff and stakeholders including
other concerned government agencies, NGOs, local community organizations, and private
sector organizations operating in the area. The support of national and international funding
organizations (grant and lending institutions) shall also be sought to fund selected activities
of the program components.
The program is designed to directly respond to the major needs and problems
identified in the integrated threats analysis (Chapter V) and in the concluded participatory
ECAN planning workshop.
This Plan envisions Puerto Princesa to become “A prestigious home city of healthy
and educated people, green business, and excellent natural environment”. To be able to
achive the objective of this Plan, ECAN Management Program focuses on four components:
(1) Institutional convergence and multi-level coordination;
(2) Equal distribution of benefits from sustainable tourism and support industries;
(3) Establishment and maintenance of adequate and climate-resilient infrastructure
services; and
(4) Sustenance of the importance, benefits, and ecological and cultural values of the
city ecological system sustained.
The following sections describes the logical framework of the ECAN Zones
Management Program, zones in ECAN where the component is to be implemented,
budgetary requirements and agency complementation.

A prestigious home city of healthy

and educated people, green
business, and excellent natural
environment
Institutional Benefits from Adequate and climate-

convergence and sustainable tourism resilient infrastructure Ecosystem services
multi-level and support industries services established enhanced and sustained
coordination achieved equitably distributed and maintained
Human and
Provision of basic
Law Enforcement Organizational Rehabilitation
services
Development
Informations
Education and Livelihood and
Communication Ecotourism Environmental
Campaign Protection
Research and
Extension
Impact Outcome Output
Figure 17. Logical Framework of Puerto Princesa City ECAN Management

Program

Table 31. Estimated Budget Requirements for ECAN Zoning Implementation and Related Environmental Management
Programs (2017 – 2022) in Thousand Pesos (‘000)
Component/ Activities Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Total

Outcome 1: Institutional
convergence and multi-level
coordination achieved 3,220 3,170 3,270 3,270 3,370 3,370 19,670
1. Law Enforcement 1,695 1,645 1,745 1,745 1,845 1,845 10,520
1.1 Strict enforcement of
environmental laws such as:
 “No touch” policy in the core
zone
 Total Log Ban
 PCSD Res. No. 04-233
(Alamaciga tapping of IPs in
the core zone)
 RA 9147: Wildlife Act
 Chainsaw Act
 IPRA Law
 RA 7942: Mining Act
 RA 9003 :Ecological Solid
Waste Management Act
 Zoning Ordinance No. 560
 Policy on land conversion
(DAR AO No. 01-02) 1,000 1,000 1,100 1,100 1,200 1,200 6,600
1.2 Consistent trainings and capacity
building activities of community
enforcers
75 75 75 75 75 75 450


1.3 Passage of DCEPC resolution
and/or city ordinance imposing higher
penalties and punishments for violators
(land grabbing, illegal quarrying,
illegal kaingin, etc.) 15 15 15 15 15 15 90
1.4 Strengthening of partnership with
agencies and organizations active in
apprehending violators of
environmental laws 50 50 50 50 50 50 300
1.5 Development of ecotourism
guidelines in core zones consistent
with existing laws 25 25 25 25 25 25 150
1.6 Establishment of security outposts
along entry and exit points on
restricted use zone 75 75 75 75 75 75 450
1.7 Improvement of vessel and
fisherman registry to address
encroachment of fishing vessels and
illegal unreported and unregulated
(IUU) fishing 60 60 60 60 60 60 360
1.8 Formation of Law Enforcement

Task Force
75 75 75 75 75 75 450
1.9 Strengthening of patrolling system

110 110 110 110 110 110 660

1.10 Develop incentive mechanism for

enforcers and patrollers
10 10 10 10 10 10 60
1.11 Establishment of the Ecological
Waste Management Division to
strengthen implementation of RA 9003 200 150 150 150 150 150 950
2. Information Education and

Communication Campaign 175 175 175 175 175 175 1,923
2.1 Conduct of periodic IEC to
communities on the following topics:
 SEP, ECAN Zones and
allowable and non-allowable
activities as well as the
penalties for violations
 Production and conservation
of non-timber forest
 Importance of wildlife
 Sustainable farming practices
and techniques
 Water and energy conservation 100 100 100 100 100 100 600
2.2 Mainstreaming of IPRA law on
secondary level modules 75 75 75 75 75 75 450
3. Research and Extension 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 8,100
3.1 Conduct of wildlife-related studies
and researches inclusing inventory and
mapping of endemic and threatened
species 450 450 450 450 450 450 2,700


3.2 Regular conduct of coastal
resources assessment to monitor the
condition of marine ecosystem for
immediate enforcement of protective
and enhancement measures 300 300 300 300 300 300 1,800
3.3 Review and harmonization of
policies 100 100 100 100 100 100 600
3.4 Conduct of researches on the
following issues to recommend
solutions:
 Expansion of existing sanitary
landfill
 Traffic congestion and
creation of traffic management
plan 500 500 500 500 500 500 3,000
Outcome 2: Benefits from

sustainable tourism and support
industries equitably distributed 1,890 1,890 1,890 1,890 1,890 1,890 11,340
4. Human and Organizational
Development
830 830 830 830 830 830 4,980
4.1 Conduct of IEC and social
mobilization activities 100 100 100 100 100 100 600
4.2 Capacitation of Municipal ECAN
Board and functional committees 75 75 75 75 75 75 450
4.3 Establishment of improved
coordination mechanism and
harmonization of policies and
programs 50 50 50 50 50 50 300


4.4 Strengthening of Maritime Police
through modernization of equipment
and increase in number of personnel 200 200 200 200 200 200 1,200
4.5 Linkaging with funding institutions
and partners 75 75 75 75 75 75 450
4.6 Procurement of equipment and
modern devices that can enhance the
skills and capacities of the community 200 200 200 200 200 200 1,200
4.7 Establishment and strengthening of
a Public Safety Office under the office
of the City Mayor 80 80 80 80 80 80 480
4.8 Establishment of an organization of
all tribal leaders which aims to aid
NCIP on addressing tribal conflicts
and other issues re: land ownership 50 50 50 50 50 50 300
5. Livelihood and Ecotourism 1,060 1,060 1,060 1,060 1,060 1,060 6,360
5.1 Provision of alternative livelihood
in consideration of the allowable
activities in each zone 200 200 200 200 200 200 1,200
5. 2 Strengthen CBST programs and
projects 75 75 75 75 75 75 450
5.3 Identification and establishment of
productive areas as legal and
sustainable source of marketable
resources (i.e. fuel wood, marine
resources) 150 150 150 150 150 150 900
5.4 Conduct of lectures and seminars
on appropriate alternative lvelihoods 75 75 75 75 75 75 450
5.5 Provision of equipment to be used
for livelihood 100 100 100 100 100 100 600


5.6 Development of ‘One Barangay
One Product’ concept 150 150 150 150 150 150 900
5.7 Promotion of innovative and
promising industries (i.e. Agro-
Tourism, Green Agriculture, etc) 160 160 160 160 160 160 960
5.8 Provision of sustainable livelihood
activities to IP communities
 Construction of IP center
 Establish/identify IP-made
product market (funded)
 Domestication of animals
(funded)
 Seasonal observation of
tourists on Ips indigenous
practices such as thanksgiving 150 150 150 150 150 150 900
Outcome 3: Adequate and climate-

resilient infrastructure services
maintained or established
6,055 6,055 6,055 6,055 6,055 6,055 36,330
6. Provision of basic services 6,055 6,055 6,055 6,055 6,055 6,055 36,330
6.1. Conduct ground verification of the
boundaries to validate the ECAN map
and installation of markers (physical
monuments and/or bio-fence) to border
the core zone
90 90 90 90 90 90 540
6.2. Installation of proper markings in
different kinds of projects (i.e. quarry,
etc.) 65 65 65 65 65 65 390


6.3. Creation of additional
telecommunications infrastructures,
especially to remote areas 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 9,000
6.4 Establishment of a sewerage
treatment, drainage and pollution
abatement facility 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 6,000
6.5 Construction of irrigation, farm to
market road connections and post-
harvest facilities (including food
processing plants) to increase value
added on products from the city
800 800 800 800 800 800 4,800
6.6 Construction of rain water
catchment for additional irrigation
supply 250 250 250 250 250 250 1,500
6.7 Establishment of an efficient
distribution on supply of water and
power 150 150 150 150 150 150 900
6.8 Identification of sites suitable as

resettlement areas
150 150 150 150 150 150 900
6.9 Creation and development of
supplementary health facilities (i.e.
tertiary hospital, satellite clinics, etc)
1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 10,800
6.10 Establishment of a tribal
community-based schools which aim
to help the young tribal community 250 250 250 250 250 250 1,500


members to increase their value for
education and their awareness on
issues regarding their rights
Outcome 4: Importance, benefits

and ecological and cultural values of
the city ecological system sustained
1,425 1,425 1,425 1,425 1,425 1,425 8,550
7. Rehabilitation 1,425 1,425 1,425 1,425 1,425 1,425 8,550
7.1 Establishment of task force
consisting of staff from concerned
agencies and organizations and people
from the barangay to rehabilitate
quarry areas 15 15 15 15 15 15 90
7.2 Implementation of in-situ and ex-
situ conservation projects to enhance
biodiversity 250 250 250 250 250 250 1,500
7.3 Rehabilitation of abandoned quarry
sites 60 60 60 60 60 60 360
7.4 Rehabilitation and replanting in
denuded mangrove areas using site-
suitable mangrove species and
consistent monitoring of planted
species 100 100 100 100 100 100 600
7.5 Installing coral nurseries in
degraded reefs 500 500 500 500 500 500 3,000
7.6 Construction of artificial reefs and
relocation of rocks/ coral heads to
increase the amount of reef structure 500 500 500 500 500 500 3,000


and habitat available for the corals and
other reef organisms to grow on
8. Environmental Protection 1,805 1,805 1,805 1,155 1,155 1,155 8,880
8.1 Declaration of more protected
areas, wildlife sanctuaries, marine
protected areas and the like with strict
regulation in the area 445 445 445 445 445 445 2,670
8.2 Regular conduct of clean-up in the
environment 200 200 200 200 200 200 1,200
8.2 Promotion of sustainable fishing
practices and tree plantations for
timber product needs
155 155 155 155 155 155 930
8.3 Wildlife tagging and monitoring

280 280 280 280 280 280 1,680
8.4 Strict monitoring of project’s
compliance 75 75 75 75 75 75 450
8.5 Promotion of Community Based
Resource Management (CBRM) 150 150 150 450
8.6 Identification of potential water
and energy sources (i.e. rainwater
catchment, solar, geothermal, and
hydrothermal) 500 500 500 1,500
GRAND TOTAL 12,590 12,540 12,640 12,640 12,740 12,740 75,890

*Budget indicated in the plan is just an estimation; this can vary depending on the degree of implementation to be undertaken.

Table 32.a. Strategy-based ECAN Resource Management Plan for the Terrestrial and Tribal Ancestral Components
STRATEGY PROPOSED PROJECT ORGANIZATION

A. INSTITUTIONAL STRATEGY
A1. Law 1. Strict enforcement of the following: Lead: LGU, DENR,
Enforcement  “No touch” policy in the core zone BFAR
(Monitoring and  Total Log Ban Support: PCSD, PNP,
evaluation,  PCSD Res. No. 04-233 (Alamaciga tapping of IPs in the core NGO, NCIP
formulation of laws zone)
and policies, and 2. Strengthen of the capacities of community enforcers through
enforcement) CORE consistent trainings and capacity building activities
3. Imposing of higher penalties and punishments for violators through a
Objectives: resolution of DCEPC and possible ordinance of the city
1. To effectively 4. Strengthening of partnership with agencies and organizations that are
uphold and active in apprehending violators of environmental laws
implement existing 5. Development of ecotourism guidelines in core zones consistent with
laws and policies existing laws
regarding 1. Stricter implementation of environmental laws: Lead: DENR – MMT,
environmental  Wildlife Act LGU, PCSD
protection and  Chainsaw Act Support: Academe,
resource  Total Log Ban NATRIPAL, NCIP,
management; and
 RA 7942: Mining Act CMRB
2. To legislate other
2. Implementation of feedback mechanism i.e. tourist journals that would
laws and policies
BUFFER: allow them to identify observed activities
that would further
RESTRICTED 3. Formulation of policies and ordinances that would strictly prohibit
strengthen
land grabbing (Ex: AP Land Grabbing Act in India)
environmental
4. Establishment of security outposts along entry and exit points on
protection and
restricted use zone
resource
5. Imposing of stricter reinforcement on city ordinance allowing only IPs
management
to perform traditional subsistence kaingin
6. Increase in fines and penalties for illegal quarries and non-compliance
with the requirements


 Double the amount of the excess extracted aggregates
 Increase rates depending on the number of offenses taken
 Revoking of issued permits for the non-compliance with the
requirements
1. Stricter implementation of environmental laws: Lead: DENR , LGU
 RA 7942: Mining Act Support: PCSD, CMRB
 Zoning Ordinance no. 560
2. Stricter permitting system
 Annual renewal of permits
BUFFER:  Establish a maximum number of issued permits per year
CONTROLLED 3. Establishment of 24-hour outposts security along entry and exit points
4. Imposing of load limits of aggregates through city ordinance which
can be monitored in checkpoints to lessen degradation of road systems
5. Imposing of Environmental Guarantee Fund (EGF) to respond on the
damage to life, health, property, and the environment caused by
quarrying, or requiring rehabilitation or restoration measures
1. Stricter implementation of the IPRA law in forbidding selling of Lead: LGU, NCIP
CADC/T to non-tribal individuals Support: DENR, PCSD
2. Strict implementation of RA 8368: Anti-Squatting Law Repeal Act of
1997
3. Stricter permitting for quarry operators
 Annual renewal of quarry permits
 Establish a maximum number of issued permits per year
BUFFER:  Ban quarry agencies and operators that will extract more than the
TRADITIONAL agreed amount
4. Efficient utilization of the quarry rehabilitation fees
5. Establishment of community-based deputation team by identifying and
providing trainings to potential security personnel until equipped for
deputation
6. Ground monitoring on the intensity of illegal activities in the zone by
identifying locations of the illegal activities and instructing a team that
will evaluate the magnitude of these activities


1. Observance on strict compliance and monitoring of ECC and Lead: LGU, SP
environmental laws Support: PNP, PCSD,
2. Stricter enforcement of RA 9513: Renewable Energy Law TESDA, BIR, DA,
3. Enforcement of the national policy on land conversion (DAR A.O. DOE, DENR, DILG ,
No.01-02) Academe
4. Enforcement of idle land tax or imposing of additional idle land
penalty
5. Enforcement of plastic and styro foam ban and encouragement of the
use of recycled/reusable bags; and production of recycled cartons etc.
6. Creation of an Ecological Waste Management Division under the City
ENRO
7. Lobby to members of Congress to amend environmental laws to
increase penalties and prison sentence to apprehended and guilty
individuals
8. Creation of support ordinances that would legislate backing and
MULTIPLE-USE
funding for the sustainability of the project
9. Creation of plantilla positions for garbage collectors
10. Provision of additional health and hazard benefits to TESDA trained
and licensed landfill operations foreman
11. Increase in members of city task force rangers through
institutionalizing of current special projects task force (i.e. Bantay
Gubat) recruitment and creation of plantilla positions allocating funds
thereof
12. Stricter monitoring and evaluation of idle lands and imposing of
additional idle lands penalty on top of idle land tax
 Penalty will be 25% of the current appreciated value of the
property c/o City Assessor’s Office
13. Conduct of value chain analysis, and need assessment for the
provision of livelihood
14. Conduct of resource valuation and assessment


1. Stricter enforcement of laws related to their land management and Lead: LGU, NCIP
ANCESTRAL ownership such as IPRA law Support: NGO, PCSD
A2. Information 1. Conduct of periodic information communication campaign to Lead: LGU, PCSD
Education and CORE communities regarding the ‘no touch’ policy in the core zone, including Support: DENR,
Communication the corresponding consequences and penalties for violations. Academe
(IEC) Campaign 1. Intensified IECs on production and conservation of non-timber forest Lead: LGU, PCSD
products and protection of wildlife species Support: DENR,
Objective: To  Include in the agenda of ECAN Planning Workshop per Academe, NATRIPAL,
increase public barangay NCIP
BUFFER:
awareness on  Quarterly lecture on the allowed activities and prohibited uses in
environmental laws RESTRICTED
the restricted use zone
and policies, and  Partnership with private institutions to disseminate information
resource to different kinds of audience
conservation
1. Intensified IECs on production and conservation of non-timber forest Lead: LGU, PCSD,
products and protection of wildlife species Academe
 Include in the agenda of ECAN Planning Workshop per Support: DENR,
barangay NATRIPAL, NCIP,
 Quarterly lecture on the allowed activities and prohibited uses in BFAR
BUFFER:
the restricted use zone
CONTROLLED
 Partnership with private institutions to disseminate information
to different kinds of audience
2. Strengthening of the advocacy on natural and organic farming
 Promotion of sustainable farming practices and techniques
through lectures, seminars and workshops
1. Intensified IECs on the importance of wildlife targeting the youth and Lead: NCIP
BUFFER: communities near critical wildlife areas Support: Academe,
TRADITIONAL 2. Strengthening of the advocacy on natural and organic farming DENR, LGU, PAMB,
 Promote and provide high-yielding crops BFAR


 Seminars and trainings on sustainable agricultural practices and
technologies such as rainwater catchment, natural fertilizers and
multi-cropping
1. Intensified IECs on RA 9003: Ecological Solid Waste Management Lead: LGU, DENR
Act and other environmental laws Support: Academe,
MULTIPLE-USE
2. Intensified IECs on water and energy conservation to primary and PCSD, PALECO, DOE
secondary students
1. Mainstreaming of IPRA law on the secondary level modules Lead: LGU, NCIP
ANCESTRAL 2. Intensified IEC on IPRA law and other environmental laws through Support: Academe,
monthly tribal community lectures NGO, PCSD
A3. Research and 1.Conduct of studies and researches to identify wildlife resources and Lead: Research
Extension status including inventory and mapping of endemic and threatened Institutions
CORE wildlife species Support: LGU, DENR,
Objectives: 2.Review of policies that are being implemented in the core zone for BFAR
1. To manage integration/ harmonization purposes
knowledge and 1. Intensified research on other land areas suitable for development Lead: DOST
technology for future BUFFER:  Use of sieved maps on potential development locations Support: LGU,
reference TRADITIONAL  Regular maintenance of inventory of flora and fauna located in Academe
2. To expand zones
networks and
1. Further research on expansion of existing sanitary landfill Lead: LGU
partnerships in
2. Further extensive research on waste to energy project proposals Support: Academe,
research extension
3. Further research on the causes of traffic congestion within the city DPWH
MULTIPLE-USE proper and creation of traffic management plan of the city valid for three
years
B. SOCIO-ECONOMIC STRATEGY
B1. Human and 1. Conduct of trainings to strengthen community-level monitoring Lead: LGU, DENR,
Organizational 2. Capability building of community enforcers BFAR
CORE
Development 3. Encouragement on community response and reporting system through Support: PNP, NGO
provision of incentives and anonymity


Objective: To 1. Conduct of training of security personnel within the barangays Lead: DENR , LGU
empower and classified as restricted use zone to enhance anti-poaching tracking Support: PCSD,
develop capacities of operations Academe
communities and BUFFER: 2. Mobilization of Bantay Gubat task force for their active service and
organizations for RESTRICTED operation
inclusive growth  Develop core team of Bantay Gubat task force in every barangay
 Establish network of relationship between the members of task
force and the barangay leaders through monthly meetings
1. Formation of a team and capacitate them through lectures and Lead: DENR , LGU
trainings to conduct ground delineation, validation, and geo-tagging Support: DA, PCSD,
2. Conduct of training of security personnel within the barangays Academe, NATRIPAL
classified as controlled use zone to enhance anti-poaching tracking
BUFFER: operations
CONTROLLED 3. Conduct of trainings, seminars, workshops on organic, natural, and
diverse farming in the community level
4. Imposing of incentive and reward system (i.e. provision of free
farming tools and of seeds high-yielding crops) for organic, natural, and
diverse farming practitioners
1. Strengthening of CASSAPS (Council on Anti-Squatting Syndicate and Lead: LGU
Professional Squatters) Support: PNP, DENR
 Provision of training to new and current members of CASSAPS
 Provision of modern devices that can help monitor illegal
BUFFER: occupancy such as LiDAR
TRADITIONAL 2. Strengthening of existing enforcement task force (i.e. increasing their
number, providing them adequate and modern equipment, and training
them)
3. Provision of incentives or awards to law abiding communities (i.e.
financial aid and commendation to other funding agencies)
1. Capacitation of waste collectors through mandatory enrolment in Lead: LGU
Sanitary Landfill Operations Course Support: PCSD,
MULTIPLE-USE
2. Effective management and utilization of existing MRFs distributed in TESDA, PNP, PNRC,
the city DILG, MARINA,


3. Establishment and strengthening of Barangay Intelligence Network BFAR, DENR, NGOs,
(BIN) through community empowerment and capacitation Academe
4. Creation of Quick Response Teams in every barangay and allocation
adequate training to members
5. Provision of adequate police and paralegal training to task force
rangers
6. Establishment and strengthening of a Public Safety Office under the
office of the City Mayor (reference: Public Safety Office in Legazpi
City)
7. Forging of partnerships between institutions and NGO networks
8. Provision of incentives to peaceful and crime-free communities i.e.
awards and certificates
9. Support and implementation of youth-oriented and driven activities
such as youth camps and sports fest
10. Review, revisit and reconstitute multi-partite monitoring team
(MMTs)
11. Provision of adequate technical training to farmers (i.e. Farmer
Scientist program and Farmer Field school)
12. Strengthening, capacitation and empowerment of Agriculture and
Fisheries Management Council through provision of adequate trainings
and funding
13. Empowerment of farmers’ cooperatives through funding and
provision of organizational workshops
14. Provision of incentives to green buildings producing less wastes
1. Establishment of an organization of all tribal leaders which aims to aid Lead: LGU, PCSD
ANCESTRAL NCIP on addressing tribal conflicts and other issues re: land ownership Support: NGOs
B2. Livelihood and 1. Specify and declare the soft impact eco-tourism activities allowed in Lead: DENR, DA,LGU
Eco-tourism CORE the core zone (trekking, etc.) Support: NGO
Objective: To 1. Provision of alternative livelihood in line with the allowed ecotourism Lead: DENR , LGU
BUFFER:
provide sustainable activities and other livelihood opportunities in the traditional and Support: PCSD
RESTRICTED
source of income to multiple use zones


lowland and upland  Supervisors, tourist guides, and security personnel within the
communities ecotourism sites
2. Provision of alternative livelihood consistent with the allowed Lead: DENR, LGU
activities in controlled use zone and other livelihood opportunities in Support: PCSD
multiple use zone
 Development of ecotourism sites where residents can manage
BUFFER: and maintain these livelihood opportunities
CONTROLLED 2. Strengthening of CBST programs and projects
3. Identification of productive areas as legal and sustainable source of
marketable resources (i.e. fuel wood, marine resources)
4. Provision of agricultural support on natural and organic farming such
as conduct of lectures and seminars and provision of farming tools
1. Establishment of sustainable charcoal industry Lead: DA, DENR, LGU
2. Provision and promotion of livelihood sources (i.e. Agro-Tourism, Support: DTI, DOT
BUFFER: Non-Timber Forest Products, etc)
TRADITIONAL 3. Provision of additional agricultural support to sustain the shift on their
livelihood practices
4. Designation of areas for sustainable wood production
1. Provision of livelihood trainings to communities on recycling and Lead: LGU, DTI
production of value-added products from residual wastes collected Support: DA, DOST,
2. Promotion of crop diversification DILG, DENR, BFAR,
MULTIPLE-USE
3. Development of ‘One Barangay One Product’ concept Academe, PCSD,
4. Promotion of innovative and promising industries (i.e. Agro-Tourism, NGOs
Green Agriculture, etc)
1. Provision of sustainable livelihood activities to IP communities Lead: LGU
 Establish/identify IP-made product market (funded) Support: NCIP, NGOs
ANCESTRAL  Domestication of animals (funded)
 Seasonal observation of tourists on Ips indigenous practices such
as thanksgiving
C. INFRASTRUCTURE STRATEGY
C1. Public Works, 1. Conduct ground verification of the boundaries to validate the ECAN Lead: LGU, DPWH
CORE
Facilities, and map


Support 2.Placement of signage near or going to the core zones for compliance Support: PCSD,
Infrastructures and monitoring purposes NAMRIA
3. Installation of markers (physical monuments and/or bio-fence) to
Objectives: border the core zone
1. To establish
ground demarcation 1. Installation of physical boundaries for the awareness of people on the Lead: DENR, LGU
BUFFER:
on protected areas; proper delineation of zones i.e. signage, wood fence and bio-fence Support: PCSD,
RESTRICTED
and NAMRIA
2. To construct 1. Establishment of additional strategic outposts to expand the area of Lead: LGU, CMRB
infrastructure coverage for monitoring and apprehension Support: DENR –
facilities for socio- 2.Identification and development of areas suitable for tourism activities MMT, PCSD
economic BUFFER:
and infrastructure (CBST) given the allowed and prohibited activities in
development CONTROLLED
controlled use zone
3. Installation of proper markings in quarry areas i.e. concrete posts and
tarpaulins
4. Creation and renovation of road networks Lead: LGU
 Abiding the current DPWH road guidelines specifically on width Support: NGAs, DPWH
and height of roads
BUFFER:  Development of road networks especially to remote areas
TRADITIONAL 2. Creation of additional telecommunications infrastructures, especially
to remote areas
3. Building and rehabilitation of more outposts on strategic areas for
monitoring and evaluation
1. Establishment of a sewerage treatment facility managed by the city Lead: DPWH, LGU
2. Construction of additional drainage facilities to impound water for Support: DBM, PNP,
further treatment BFAR, PCSD, DENR,
3. Construction of pollution abatement facilities such as water treatment DOT, NIA, DOST,
MULTIPLE-USE plants DOE, LWUA,
4. Construction of irrigation, farm to market road connections and post- PALECO, PPCWD
harvest facilities (including food processing plants) to increase value
added on products from the city
5. Construction of rain water catchment for additional irrigation supply


6. Establishment of an efficient distribution on supply of water and
power
7. Identification of sites suitable as resettlement areas
8. Creation and development of supplementary health facilities (i.e.
tertiary hospital, satellite clinics, etc)
1. Installation of physical boundaries i.e. signage, wood fence, bio-fence Lead: LGU, NCIP
2. Establishment of a tribal community-based schools which aim to help Support: PCSD, DENR,
ANCESTRAL
the young tribal community members to increase their value for NATRIPAL, NAMRIA,
education and their awareness on issues regarding their rights Academe
D. ECOLOGICAL STRATEGY
D1. Rehabilitation 1. Establishment of task force consisting of staff from concerned Lead: DENR – MMT,
BUFFER: agencies and organizations and people from the barangay to rehabilitate CMRB
Objective: To RESTRICTED quarry areas Support: LGU, PCSD
restore exploited
areas to an improved 1. Implementation of in-situ and ex-situ conservation projects to enhance Lead: DENR, LGU
BUFFER:
form biodiversity Support: DOST, PCSD
TRADITIONAL
2. Rehabilitation of abandoned quarry sites
D2. Environmental 1. Declaration of more protected areas supported by NIPAS for stricter Lead: PCSD, DENR,
Protection compliance BFAR
CORE
2. Reclassification of areas that are no longer suitable as core zones (eg. Support: NGO,
Objective: To areas that undergone Kaingin or clearing) Research institutions
develop appropriate 1. Setting up of wildlife sanctuaries with supervised ecotourism activities Lead: DENR
BUFFER:
environmental Support: LGU, PCSD
RESTRICTED
standards to ensure
environmental 1. Designation of areas reserved for sustainable timber production Lead: DENR
protection and BUFFER:
Support: LGU, PCSD
management CONTROLLED
BUFFER: 1. Wildlife tagging and monitoring Lead: DENR
TRADITIONAL 2. Daily monitoring of extracted aggregates Support: LGU, PCSD
1. Promotion of Community Based Resource Management (CBRM) Lead: LGU, PCSD,
MULTIPLE-USE
2. Promotion of the use of climate and pest-resistant crops DENR


3. Promotion of organic and sustainable farming practices (i.e. Good Support: DA, IRRI,
Agricultural Production Practices c/o DA) DOST, DOE
4. Development of science and culture-based sustainable farming
practices modules
5. Promotion of sustainable tree plantations for timber product needs
6. Identification of potential water and energy sources (i.e. rainwater
catchment, solar, geothermal, and hydrothermal)
Table 32.b. Strategy-based ECAN Resource Management Plan for the Coastal Core and Multiple Use Zones
STRATEGY PROJECT ORGANIZATION
A. INSTITUTIONAL STRATEGY
A1. Law 1. Imposition of penalties and punishments for violators through a Lead: LGU, DENR,
Enforcement resolution of DCEPC and possible ordinance of the city BFAR
(Monitoring and 2. Strengthening of the capacities of community enforcers through Support: PCSD, PNP,
evaluation, consistent trainings and capacity building activities NGO, NCIP
CORE
formulation of 3. Strengthening of partnership with agencies and organizations that are
laws and policies, active in apprehending the violators of environmental laws
and enforcement) 4. Development of ecotourism guidelines in core zones consistent with
existing laws
Objectives: 1. Observance on strict compliance and monitoring of ECC and Lead: LGU, SP
1. To effectively environmental laws Support: PNP, PCSD,
uphold and 2. Increase in members of city task force rangers through institutionalizing TESDA, BIR, DA,
implement of current special projects task force (Bantay Dagat, Bantay Bakawan etc.) DOE, DENR, DILG
MULTIPLE-USE
existing laws and recruitment and creation of plantilla positions allocating funds thereof
policies regarding 3. Lobby to members of Congress to amend environmental laws to
environmental increase penalties and prison sentence to apprehended and guilty
protection and individuals


resource 4. Creation of support ordinances that would legislate backing and funding
management; and for the sustainability of the project
2. To legislate
other laws and
policies that
would further
strengthen
environmental
protection and
resource
management
A2. Information 1. Periodic information communication campaign to communities Lead: LGU, PCSD
Education regarding the ‘no touch’ policy in the coastal core zone and the need to Support: DENR, BFAR,
CORE
Communication protect the critical coastal resources (coral reefs, reef fish, marine Academe
(IEC) Campaign mammals and sea turtles, seagrass, invertebrates, mangroves)
1. Intensified IECs on RA 9003: Ecological Solid Waste Management Act Lead: LGU, DENR
Objective: To and other environmental laws on primary and secondary students Support: Academe,
increase public 2. Intensified IECs on water and energy conservation primary and PCSD, PALECO, DOE
awareness on secondary students
MULTIPLE-USE
environmental
laws and policies,
and resource
conservation
A3. Research and 1. Regular conduct of coastal resources assessment to monitor the Lead: Research
Extension condition of marine ecosystem for immediate enforcement of protective Institutions
and enhancement measures Support: LGU, DENR,
Objectives: BFAR
CORE
1. To manage
knowledge and
technology for
future reference


2. To expand
networks and
partnerships in
research
extension
B. SOCIO-ECONOMIC STRATEGY
B1. Human and 1. Conduct of trainings to strengthen community-level monitoring Lead: LGU, DENR,
Organizational 2. Capability building of community enforcers BFAR
CORE
Development 3. Encouragement on community response and reporting system through Support: PNP, NGO
provision of incentives and anonymity
Objective: To 1. Creation of Quick Response Teams in every barangay and allocating Lead: LGU
empower and adequate training to members Support: PCSD,
develop capacities 2. Provision of adequate police and paralegal training to task force rangers TESDA, PNP, PNRC,
of communities 3. Strengthening of Maritime Police through modernization of equipment DILG, MARINA,
and organizations and increase in number of personnel BFAR, DENR, NGOs,
for inclusive 4. Forging of partnerships between institutions and NGO networks Academe
MULTIPLE-USE
growth 5. Review, revisit and reconstitute multi-partite monitoring team (MMT)
6. Provision of adequate technical training to fishermen
7. Strengthening, Capacitation and Empowerment of Agriculture and
Fisheries Management Council
8. Empowerment of fishermen cooperatives and boat operators through
provision of trainings
B2. Livelihood 1. Provision of alternative livelihood in the terrestrial area and coastal Lead: DENR, DA,
and Eco-tourism multiple use zone BFAR, LGU
CORE
2. Establishment of plantation for charcoal use using different plant species Support: NGO
Objective: To 3. Promotion of technology for charcoal alternatives
provide 1. Provision of livelihood training to communities on recycling and Lead: LGU, DTI
sustainable production of value added products from residual wastes collected Support: DA, DOST,
source of income 4. Development of ‘One Barangay One Product’ concept DILG, DENR, BFAR,
MULTIPLE-USE
to lowland, 5. Promotion of innovative and promising industries (i.e. Agro-Tourism) Academe, PCSD,
upland and NGOs
coastal ies


C. INFRASTRUCTURE STRATEGY
C1. Public 1.Placement of signage near or going to the core zones including the Lead: LGU, DPWH
Works, Facilities, CORE corresponding penalties and punishments to violators Support: PCSD, DENR,
and Support 2. Installation of markers (buoys) to border the core zone BFAR
Infrastructures 1. Construction of pollution abatement facilities Lead: DPWH, LGU
2. Improvement of vessel and fisherman registry to address encroachment Support: DBM, PNP,
Objectives: of fishing vessels and illegal unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing BFAR, PCSD, DENR,
1. To establish 3. Construction of fish hatcheries DOT, NIA, DOST,
ground DOE, LWUA,
demarcation on PALECO, PPCWD
protected areas;
and MULTIPLE-USE
2. To construct
infrastructure
facilities for socio-
economic
development
D. ECOLOGICAL STRATEGY
D1. 1. Rehabilitation and replanting in denuded mangrove areas using site- Lead: LGU, DENR
Rehabilitation suitable mangrove species Support: PCSD, NGO
2.Consistent monitoring of mangrove rehabilitated areas
Objective: To CORE 3. Installing coral nurseries in degraded reefs
restore exploited 4. Construction of artificial reefs and relocation of rocks/ coral heads to
areas to an increase the amount of reef structure and habitat available for the corals
improved form and other reef organisms to grow on
D2. 1. Designation of additional marine protected areas Lead: PCSD, DENR,
Environmental 2. Regular conduct of marine (beach and reef) debris clean up BFAR
CORE
Protection Support: NGO,
Research institutions


Objective: To 1. Promotion of Community Based Resource Management (CBRM) Lead: LGU, PCSD,
develop 2. Promotion sustainable fishing practices DENR, BFAR
appropriate 3. Development of science and culture-based fishing practices modules Support: DA, DOST,
environmental 4. Establishment of other marine protected areas (MPAs) DOE
standards to
ensure
environmental MULTIPLE-USE
protection and
management

CROSS-CUTTING STRATEGIES
Aside from the specific plans of action formulated for each ECAN zone, there are
general cross-cutting strategies proposed for the threats identified and these are applicable
to all zones.
Lack of awareness of stakeholders on ECAN strategy is one of the major challenges
encountered in the process. Information, Education and Communication (IECs) on SEP
law and ECAN as a whole is recommended to increase awareness of these stakeholders.
Before conducting IECs, needs analysis or stakeholder’s analysis is done to know the
effective approach for each group of stakeholders. IECs can be in the form of printed
materials such as brochures, posters, wall calendars, billboards and advertisements. Social
media can also be a venue for information dissemination.
With all the proposed programs and projects, sufficient budget allocation is taken
into consideration for the implementation, monitoring, evaluation and sustainability.
Prioritizing the environmental sector in LGU’s budget allocation is a proposed strategy to
support programs and projects on environmental protection and conservation.
Declaration of areas, especially those in core and buffer zones, as Protected Areas
under the National Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS) is another proposed
strategy. Protected Areas (PAs) have individual management plan that serves as a guide in
promoting the preservation of the area and maintenance of its natural condition to the
greatest extent possible. Financial support given if declared as PAs in the national level
will help in provision of maximum protection and management of these areas.
Another cross-cutting strategy is the regular monitoring and evaluation of the
programs and plans to assess if the desired goals and objectives are being achieved.
Through the process, problems arising can be quickly identified and addressed. It also helps
in identifying the most valuable and efficient use of resources. In addition, results or
records from this strategy are important to attest the credibility and accountability of the
projects and plans for the benefit of the funding agencies and stakeholders.
Further research on ECAN zones including validation of these zones is proposed.
With this, allowable activities in each zone and the zone classification can be evaluated
and updated. Intensive studies and assessment could also be done for further identification
of resources and opportunities that can be enhanced or sustainably developed.
To strengthen community involvement and participation in various issues,
programs, and projects on ECAN Zones, empowerment of community and its participation
to planning should be established. Information, Education and Communication campaigns
and capability building seminars to mobilize the community can be prepared. There could
also be a regular meeting of representatives of different stakeholders in the barangay which
aims to know their issues and concerns, and suggestions to address these. Subsequently,
this can be directed to the city government and other concerned parties.

CHAPTER VII
ADMINISTRATION OF THE ECAN ZONING PLAN
7.1 ADMINISTRATOR AND IMPLEMENTER OF THE ECAN ZONING PLAN
This ECAN Zoning Plan is a stand-alone document prepared by the ECAN Board
pursuant to the SEP Law and its guidelines. Its implementation is the joint responsibility
of LGU and PCSDS through the DCEPC of the City (PCSD Resolution 2005-250, Section
31). The DCEPC is also the lead organization in charge of administering the ECAN Zoning
Plan.
The Chairperson of the DCEPC shall act as the ECAN Zoning Plan Administrator.
He/she may appoint a Deputy Plan Administrator who is qualified for the job and whose
nature of work is related to ECAN Zoning.
The PCSDS representative to the DCEPC, the City Environment and Natural
Resources Officer (CENRO), the City Planning and Development Coordinator, and the
other members of the DCEPC shall constitute the ECAN Zoning Plan Advisory Body.
They shall assist the Plan Administrator and Deputy Plan Administrator in the
implementation of the EZP.
The latest revised ECAN guidelines (PCSD Resolution 05-250) have addressed
most of the institutional aspects of the issue. An important function devolved to LGUs in
the Local Government Code (LGC) is the enactment of municipal or city zoning ordinance
based on the formulated CLWUP. The zoning ordinance and the CLWUP are the primary
bases for the future use of land resources (LGC, Section 20(c)).
The implementation of the ECAN Zoning Plan may include the following
functions, some of which are detailed in the ECAN Management Programs in Chapter VI:
1. Policy formulation
2. Legislation
3. Setting up of permitting system
4. Monitoring
5. Other related activities
The implementation and institutionalization of the ECAN is led by the DCEPC with
support from the PCSD, PCSDS, and other public and private agencies. Figure 18 shows
the process of ECAN Zoning institutionalization that is centered on an ECAN-based
CLWUP. In institutionalizing the ECAN in Puerto Princesa City, the important factors to
consider are the experience and expertise of land use planners, the political support of
LGU, the continuity of the development programs, and a common grasp of the roles of

both ECAN and CLWUP in advancing the common good, maintaining the ecological
balance, and promoting sustainable development.
Figure 18. Institutionalization of the ECAN. (Note: The boxed portion in red is the
critical part of EZP Administration)
7.2 IMMEDIATE ACTIVITIES

After formulation and approval of the Plan by the DCEPC, the following activities
are to be undertaken by the DCEPC, with the assistance of the PCSDS.
Adoption of the ECAN Zoning Plan
This activity requires the following sequential steps:
 DCEPC’s endorsement of the Plan to the Sangguniang Bayan
 Public hearing in Puerto Princesa City
 Adoption of the Plan by the Sangguniang Panlungsod and endorsement to the
PCSD
 Approval of the Plan by the PCSD
Integration of the ECAN Zoning Plan with the City CLWUP

The ECAN Zoning Plan as prepared by the DCEPC in behalf of the LGU, shall
serve as the general physical plan of the city. Thus, it shall be the basis of other planning

activities, such as land use planning, tourism master planning and resource management
planning as a whole (PCSD Resolution 05-250, Section 30).
The recommended process in the integration/harmonization of the Plan with the

City CLWUP is called INTEGRATE (Incorporating the SEP and ECAN into Local Land
Use Plans). The INTEGRATE process has six complementary steps, not necessarily
sequential in application, with four integration stages: physical integration, strategic
integration, plan integration, and institutional integration. These steps are outlined in
Annex G.
Adoption of the ECAN Map for Coastal/Marine Component

This activity may involve the following steps:
 Compilation of results of Coastal Resource Assessments (CRA) and
Participatory CRA (PCRA) studies by the PCSDS and other institutions
 Compilation of existing functional and proposed MPA maps as candidates for
coastal/marine ECAN Core Zones and Multiple use zones
 Consultation of major stakeholders (LGU, CAO, CFARMC, BFARMCs)
 As needed, further conduct of Coastal Resource Assessments (CRA) and PCRA
in proposed/priority sites
 Public consultation on areas affected by Coastal/Marine ECAN Maps (priority
on barangays with coastal Core zones)
 Presentation of the Coastal/Marine ECAN Map to the DCEPC who will
deliberate and endorse the map to the Sangguniang Bayan
 Adoption of the Coastal/Marine ECAN Map by the Sangguniang Bayan (with
public hearing) and endorsement to the Sangguniang Panlalawigan
 Approval of the Map by the PCSD
7.3 POSSIBLE SOURCES OF FUNDS
Implementation of the components and activities of ECAN zoning will not be

possible without the active participation of other concerned agencies such as PCSDS,
DENR, DA, DAR, NCIP, PNP, and others. Civil society and the private sector are also
expected to contribute to the implementation of ECAN zoning in as much as the
deterioration of the environment will directly affect their socioeconomic welfare and
business profits, respectively. Tourism, fisheries, agriculture, and forestry are directly
threatened by ecosystem and habitat degradation thereby affecting households and
businesses dependent on natural resources as their source of employment and income.
The funds will not solely come from the LGU. Other cooperating organizations
such as government agencies (DA, DENR, PCSDS, NCIP, etc.), NGOs, and the private
sector (resort owners, business establishments, etc.) will also be tapped to contribute their
share in the implementation of ECAN zoning.

Other potential sources of funds may include the following:

 Share of the Province in the Malampaya Funds
 Special lending windows for environment of the Land Bank of the Philippines
(LBP), Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP), and other private banks
 Shell Philippines Exploration (SPEX) grant for sustainable development
projects
 Malampaya Foundation grant for sustainable development projects
 On-going and pipeline foreign-assisted projects of DENR, DA, and other
government agencies
 Bilateral and multi-lateral donor institutions such as JICA, the World Bank,
ADB, AusAID, USAID, UNDP, GEF (Table 32) lists the multilateral and
bilateral funding agencies which can be tapped for environment and sustainable
development programs and projects.)
 Foreign embassies and international foundations and NGOs
 Local foundations and NGOs
 Philanthropic organizations (local and international)
Table 32. List of potential foreign funding organizations

Bilateral Multilateral
Australian Agency for Asian Development Bank (ADB)
International Development
(AusAID)
Canadian International Development European Union (EU)
Agency (CIDA)
Danish International Global Environment Facility (GEF)
Development Agency
(DANIDA)
Development Fund for International Bank for Reconstruction
International Development and Development (IBRD-World
(DFID) Bank)
German Society for International Financing Corporation
International Cooperation, (IFC)
Ltd. (GIZ)
Japan International Cooperation International Fund for Agricultural
Agency (JICA) Development (IFAD)
New Zealand Agency for United Nations Development Programme
International Development (UNDP)
(NZAID)
Swedish International United Nations Food and Agriculture
Development Agency (SIDA) Organization (UNFAO)
United States Agency for United Nations Environment Programme
International Development (UNEP)
(USAID)
Netherlands Embassy
British Embassy

Activities involving large sums of expenditures such as ecosystem rehabilitation,

sustainable livelihood projects, ground marking of ECAN zones, and law enforcement may
be submitted for foreign funding through the National Economic Development Authority
(NEDA) administered Official Development Assistance (ODA) portfolio or through the
Global Environment Facility (GEF) fund. To avail of foreign funding support through
Official Development Assistance (ODA), the proponent LGU should identify the Country
Program Priorities of the donor agencies and match them with the needs of the locality.
The next step is to prepare project proposal for funding assistance in consultation and with
the collaboration of partner agencies such as DENR, DA, and others. The proposal is then
submitted to NEDA for consideration under its ODA program.
Being one of its kind of undertaking that will employ the management of ECAN
zones on the ground using a combination of various actions will possibly draw the interest
and support of international funding agencies because of the potential local and global
replication of such techniques. The successful implementation of ECAN strategies that will
be developed can be applied in other areas in the country and abroad in sustainably
managing communities and protected areas.
One of the possible international donor institutions that can be approached for this
undertaking is the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) which administers,
together with the World Bank, the GEF fund in the form of a grant.
Likewise, the European Union which had supported a lot of projects on Protected
Areas in Palawan may possibly consider funding selected activities of the Rehabilitation
Component for Puerto Princesa City.
Management of the coastal/marine component of ECAN zones may be supported

by resort owners considering the impacts of their activities in these areas.
7.4 MONITORING AND EVALUATION
Monitoring and evaluation of the plans, programs, and projects prescribed in this
Plan shall be undertaken annually after its adoption by the Sangguniang Panlungsod.
The DCEPC, assisted by the PCSDS, shall perform a self-assessment to gauge the
efficiency and transparency of the administration and management of the ECAN resources
and implementation of the ECAN Zoning Plan.
The constituted Monitoring Team shall recommend the proper management

effectiveness assessment tool to the DCEPC. It may develop and customize performance
evaluation criteria and indicators for the purpose.
The Monitoring Team may use existing evaluation tools developed in other
management areas, particularly those used in similar settings in Palawan. Since Puerto

Princesa and the province of Palawan belongs to the network of biosphere reserves
inscribed by UNESCO, the assessment tools developed for island biosphere reserves can
be used in assessing the management effectiveness of the ECAN Zoning Plan of Puerto
Princesa City.
The monitoring protocol shall include test of sustainability of programs and projects
under the ECAN Zoning Plan which shall cover determination of whether targets have been
completed and assessment of the following aspects of implemented projects:
 Economic Viability
 Ecological Viability
 Technological Viability
 Socio-cultural Viability
 Political Viability
 Institutional Viability
Ideally, the tool should also determine the impact of the SEP and ECAN to the
stakeholders of Puerto Princesa City.

REFERENCES
Acos, R. L., et al. (2014). Terms of Reference: Updating the Ecological Profile of the
Municipality of Bauko, Mt. Province.Los Baños:University of the Philippines.
AMP Toolbox. (n.d.). PERSEUS: Policy-Oriented Marine Environmental Research in the
Southern European Seas. Retrieved May 23, 2016, from http:www.perseus-
bet.eu/site/content/php?artid=2181.
Cimbracruz, F.K., et al. (2015). Municipality of Taytay ECAN Resource Management Plan
2015-2020. Los Baños:University of the Philippines.
City Environment and Natural Resources Office. (2012). Annual Accomplishment Report
City Health Office. (2013). Annual Health Report: Access to Health Care, 2009 and 2012
City Health Office. (2015). Annual Health Report
City of Puerto Princesa. (2015). Annual Accomplishment Report
City of Puerto Princesa. (2015). Bureau of Fire Protection Annual Accomplishment Report
City of Puerto Princesa. (2015). Organizational Structure
City Planning and Development Office. (2014). Annual Investment Plan
City Planning and Development Office. (2014). Comprehensive Development Plan 2014-
2016
City Planning and Development Office. (2013). Comprehensive Land Use Plan 2013-2022
City Planning and Development Office. (2010). Community-Based Monitoring System
Survey
City Planning and Development Office. (2012). Community-Based Monitoring System
Survey
City Planning and Development Office. (2012). Disaster Risk Reduction Management and
Climate Change Adaptation Plan
City Planning and Development Office. (2006). Sustainable Environmental Management
Project
City Planning and Development Office. (2010). List of Barangays with Land Area
Department of Education-Division of Puerto Princesa City. (2015). Multi-year Report on
Total Enrollment in Public Elementary and High Schools
Department of Environment and Natural Resources – Community Environment and
Natural Resources Office. (n.d.). List of Barangays and Tenurial Lands

Department of Environment and Natural Resources-Environmental Management Bureau.

(n.d.). Agenda 21. Retrieved from http://emb.gov.ph/eeid/philagenda.htm on May
28, 2015.
DILG.(n.d.). Guide to ecological profiling. Retrieved on March 6, 2014 from
http://www.dilg.gov.ph/PDF_File/reports/DILG-Reports-2011718491fe6b178.pdf
Encyclopedia Britannica. (2012). Puerto Princesa
Global Footprint Network (2014). Footprint Basics.
http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/footprint_basics_overvi
ew/. Retrieved June 1, 2015.
Global Tenets. (2015). Forest Land Use Plan Draft. City Planning and Development Office
Kirch, W. (Ed.). (2008). Morbidity & Mortality. In Encyclopedia of Public Health (Vol. 2,
p. 966). New York: Springer Science Business Media. Retrieved March 27, 2016,
from https://books.google.com.ph/books?id=eSPK7-
CHw7oC&pg=PA966&dq=mortality and morbidity
definition&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=mortality and morbidity
definition&f=false.
Kristensen, P. (n.d.). The DPSIR Framework. National Environmental Research Institute,
Denmark. Retrieved May 20, 2016, from
http://wwz.ifremer.fr/dce/content/download/69291/913220/file/DPSIR.pdf
National Statistical Coordination Board.(n.d.).In PSGC Interactive. Retrieved February
17, 2015, from http://www.nscb.gov.ph/activestats/psgc/province.asp?regName=
REGION+IVB+%28MIMAROPA%29&regCode=17&provCode=175300000&pr
ovName=PALAWAN
National Statistics Office. (2010). Census of Population and Housing
National Statistics Office. (2010). Explanatory Text. Retrieved May 23, 2016, from
http://www.census.gov.ph/sites/default/files/attachments/hsd/article/Explanatory
%20Text.pdf
Odum, E. P. & Barrett, G. W. (2005). Fundamentals of Ecology. Thomson Brooks/Cole.
Ona, R. E. A., Fuentes, R. T., Regoniel, P. A., Alfonso, O. T., Pontillas, J. F. A., Pido, M.
D., Regalo, A.V. & Salva., T. L. (2007). An Analysis of Threats to Biodiversity in
the Balabac Strait Corridor.
Palawan State University - Center for Strategic Policy and Governance, Inc.
Official Website of the Provincial Government of Palawan - Every Island is an Adventure.
(n.d.). Retrieved March 6, 2015, from http://www.palawan.gov.ph/history.php

Palawan Council for Sustainable Development Staff. (2006). Baseline Report on Coastal
Resources for Taytay, Municipality, Palawan Council for Sustainable
Development, Puerto Princesa City, Palawan.
PCSD 2014a. Harmonization of the Implementation of the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act
(IPRA) and the Strategic Environmental Plan for Palawan Act. In: PCSD (ed.) Joint
NCIP-PCSD 110 Memorandum Circular No. 2005-01. Accessed at
<http://pcsd.ph/resolutions/resolutions/ancestral/joint%20ncip-pcsd%20memo
%20circular%20no.%202005-01.htm.> May 25, 2016.
PCSD 2014b. Resolution Adopting the Revised Guidelines in Implementing the
Environmentally Critical Areas Network, the Main Strategy of the Strategic
Environmental Plan (SEP) for Palawan, Amending PCSD Resolution Nos. 94-44
& 99-144. In: PCSD (ed.) PCSD RESOLUTION NO. 05-250. Accessed at
<http://pcsd.ph/resolutions/resolutions/sep/res05-250.htm.> May 25, 2016.
PCSD 2014c. A Resolution Allowing Ecotourism Activities in Core Zones and Restricted-
Use Zones. In: PCSD (ed.) PCSD Resolution No. 06-270. Accessed at
<http://pcsd.ph/resolutions/resolutions/tourism/res06-270.htm.> May 25, 2016.
PCSD 2014d. A Resolution Amending Section V, 4.2 (B) of the Joint NCIP-PCSD
Memorandum Circular No. 2005-1. In: PCSD (ed.) PCSD Resolution No. 08-375.
Accessed at <http://pcsd.ph/resolutions/resolutions/ancestral/res08-375.htm.> May
25, 2016.
Philippine Statistics Authority, National Statistics Office (2010).2010 Census of
Population and Housing.Retrieved March 3, 2015, from
http://web0.psa.gov.ph/sites/default
files/attachments/hsd/pressrelease/MIMAROPA.pdf
Pillas, Catherine. (February 10, 2015). Palawan targets P19 billion from tourism in this
year. Retrieved April 1, 2016 from http://www.businessmirror.com.ph/palawan-
targets-p19-billion-from-tourism-in-this-year/
Puerto Princesa City Police Office. (2015). Annual Accomplishment Report
"Puerto Princesa." Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference
Suite. Chicago: Encyclopædia Britannica, 2013.
Romualdez Jr., A.G. et. al. (2011). The Philippines Health System Review. Health Systems
in Transition (Vol. 1 No.2 p.90). World Health Organization.
Sandalo, R. and Baltazar T. (1997).The Palawan Biosphere Reserve Philippines.
Retrieved February 16, 2015 from
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0010/001092/109211Eo.pdf.
UNESCO World Heritage Centre (2015).UNESCO World Heritage Sites.Retrieved March
2, 2015 from http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/.

United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (1992). Agenda 21.

Retrieved from
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&nr=23&type=400
on May 28, 2015.
World Bank (n.d.).Stakeholder Analysis: What is Stakeholder Analysis. [Brochure].
Retrieved from:
http://www1.worldbank.org/publicsector/anticorrupt/PoliticalEconomy/PDFVersi
on.pdf.
World Commission on Environment and Development (1987).Our Common Future.
Oxford University Press.
World Health Organization. (n.d.). Maternal and Perinatal Health. Retrieved April 1, 2016,
from
http://www.who.int/maternal_child_adolescent/topics/maternal/maternal_perinata
l/en/
World Health Organization. (n.d.). Risk Factors of Ill Health among Older People.
Retrieved April 1, 2016 from http://www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/Life-
stages/healthy-ageing/data-and-statistics/risk-factors-of-ill-health-among-older-
people
Young, B. E., Lips, K. R., Reaser, J. K., Ibáñez, R., Salas, A. W., Cedeño, J. R., Coloma,
L. A., Ron, S., La Marca, E., Meyer, J. R., Muñoz, A., Bolaños, F., Chaves,
G. & Romo, D. (2001). Population Declines and Priorities for Amphibian
Conservation in Latin America. Conservation Biology, 15, 1213-1223.

ANNEX A: Summary Documentation of the Participatory ECAN Planning

Workshop in Puerto Princesa City
ECAN Planning Workshop

April 15, 2016
New City Hall Legislative Conference Room A
Summary
The Participatory ECAN Zones Management Planning of Puerto Princesa City was
held last April 15, 2016 at Sangguniang Panglunsod Conference Hall A, Puerto Princesa
City Hall. It was facilitated by the PCSD staff together with the practicum team assigned
in the city from UPLB (BS Human Ecology students). The participants invited were local
executives, heads of agencies, DCEPC officials, Sangguniang Panlungsod representatives,
people’s organization representative, business sector representative, enforcement officers,
representatives from selected barangays, indigenous peoples and representatives from the
academe and youth. However, not all these invited were present during the workshop while
some of them sent their representatives. The objectives of the workshop were: to validate
the existing drivers and pressures in each ECAN zone which were collected, processed and
presented by the practicum team; to validate/recommend/modify/propose actions to
address the drivers and pressures identified; to set priorities to be proposed for inclusion in
the City agenda through its Annual Investment Plan (AIP) and Comprehensive
Development Plan (CDP); and to validate conformity of ECAN zones with current use.
The workshop started at 9:05 AM with the prayer and singing of the national
anthem led by Ms. Fermella Emily Falcon. An opening remarks and a brief discussion on
the purpose of the workshop and SEP Law was given by the Executive Director of PCSD,
Mr. Nelson Devanadera. In behalf of the city mayor, Hon. Lucilo Bayron, the City Planning
and Development Officer, Mr. George Vaquez gave a welcoming message. Ms. Cherry
Lyn Jalover then had a lecture on ECAN 101: The Palawan Strategy for the participants to
further understand and appreciate the SEP ECAN as a standard of local sustainable
development. After the open forum on Ms. Jalover’s presentation, the practicum team
presented the ecological profile of the city which was formulated from the secondary data
collected from different city offices. The ecological profile was presented per sector. After
the ecological profile presentation, questions and clarifications were made and some data
were validated by the participants. The results from the key-informant interviews
conducted by the practicum students in DPSIR framework were presented afterwards. In
each ECAN zone, pressures identified by the respondents were shown including the driving
forces of the pressures and the current interventions taken to address these. Proposed
actions by the respondents and by the practicum team were also reported, and the
framework was presented per zone. Break-out sessions were done afterwards. The

participants were grouped into three to discuss each zone: Core zone and tribal ancestral
zone, buffer zone and multiple use zone. This break-out session was to validate the results
of the key-informants interviews and to prioritize pressures and suggest possible
interventions.
After the break-out sessions, the participants were gathered together to the
conference hall to present their outputs. Questions were raised to clarify and address other
concerns. The last part of the program was the discussion of Mr. Mark Ace dela Cruz on
the next steps in formulating the Ecanized Comprehensive Land and Water Use Plan (E-
CLWUP) and Ecanized Zoning Ordinance (E-ZO).
The one-day workshop ended at 4:40 PM and the participants were given certificate
of attendance.
Program Proper
The program started at 9:05 AM. Ms. Christina D. Rodriguez was supposedly the
over-all facilitator of the workshop but was replaced by Mr. Mark dela Cruz at the middle
of the program. The opening prayer and the singing of the national anthem was led by Ms.
Fermella Emily Falcon – the leader of the Practicum Team. This was followed by the
welcoming remarks of the PCSD Executive Director, Mr. Nelson P. Devanadera. He
addressed the need for ECAN by the municipalities and the city of Palawan and cited some
of the glaring problems of Puerto Princesa.
Mr. George Vasquez, the assistant City Planning and Development Officer, gave
another opening message in behalf of the Honorable Mayor Lucilo Bayron. He emphasized
that keeping the balance between environmental conservation and sustainable development
is a great responsibility of all the agencies in Puerto Princesa not just of the City
Government. He also mentioned the impact and use of the ECAN Resource Management
Plan that will be formulated by the Practicum Team. As his ending statement, he asked for
an active participation from the audience.
After the opening remarks, Ms. Rodriguez introduced the participants by calling
the agencies they represented. The representatives are from the following:
1. Barangay Irawan
2. Barangay Iwahig
3. Barangay Luzviminda
4. Barangay Sta. Lourdes
5. Barangay Tagburos
6. Barangay Tanabag
7. City Agriculture Office
8. City Assessors Office
9. City Engineering Office

10. City Environmental and Natural Resources Office

11. City Planning and Development Office
12. City Tourism Office
13. City Social Welfare and Development Office
14. Council Committee on Environment
15. Palawan State University
16. Puerto Princesa Chamber of Commerce
17. DENR-CENRO
18. CGPP-CLO
19. City PNP
20. BFAR-PFO
21. IPMR
22. CAFC
23. PNNI
24. EMS-PPSRNP
After the roll call, Ms. Cherry Lyn Jalover gave a brief lecture on the concept of
ECAN for the participants to understand and appreciate SEP-ECAN as a standard of local
sustainable development. Specifically, the topics she discussed include the ECAN zone
components, criteria, allowable and prohibited uses of each zone, zone strategies, the
integration of ERMP into city’s CLUP and the Ecanization for sustainable development.
The practicum team was then called to present the Ecological Profile of the city and
the DPSIR findings. Mr. Arkin Miguel Cuebillas introduced his groupmates and briefly
explained the methodology used for the formulation of the Ecological Profile.
INTEGRATED THREATS ANALYSIS USING DPSIR FRAMEWORK
After the presentation of the Ecological Profile, Mr. Dela Cruz briefly introduced
the concept of the DPSIR framework. The problems (pressure) per ECAN zone were
identified along with its driving forces (driver). The current intervention (response) of the
city government and agencies to address the problems and their collective proposed actions
were also included in the presentation. Ms. Falcon further elaborated the methodology
employed by the team. Key informant interview was conducted using the questionnaire
structured in a DPSIR framework.
Ms. Falcon presented the pressures identified in the core zone. This was followed
by the restricted and controlled use zone which were discussed by Mr. Esguerra and Ms.
Defensor, respectively. The pressures identified in the traditional use zone was discussed
by Ms. Padilla, while the pressures in multiple use zone and tribal ancestral zone were
presented by Mr. Cuebillas and Ms. Mejico. For each pressure, the drivers, current
interventions and proposed actions were also presented.

BREAK-OUT SESSION
The break-out session started at 1:54 in the afternoon. The participants were
grouped into three: Core Zone (including Tribal Ancestral). Buffer Zone (Restricted,
Controlled, and Traditional Use), and Multiple Use Zone. The purpose of this activity is
for the participants to validate the inputs and prioritize two to three pressures identified per
ECAN zone. Also, the participants were expected to give recommendations for the city-
level priorities and actions including the current and proposed interventions which can be
integrated in these actions. They have also identified the areas to where the pressures exist.
This was done to validate the ECAN map. Each group has assigned a rapporteur to present
their findings after the action planning activity.
Mr. Dela Cruz was assigned as the facilitator for the Core Zone group and was
assisted by Ms. Padilla and Ms. Mejico as documenters. For the Buffer Zone group, Ms.
Maila Villaos facilitated while Ms. Defensor and Ms. Falcon documented the discussion
of the group. Lastly, Ms. Jalover was the assigned facilitator for the Multiple Use Zone
with Mr. Cuebillas and Mr, Esguerra as the documenters.
The prioritized problems per zone and the proposed interventions were presented
after the session. Mr. Cua (PNNI Representative) was the representative for the core zone
whereas Ms. Madriñan (City ENRO Representative) and Ms. Macolor (City ENRO
Representative) represented the buffer and multiples use zone, respectively. It was
suggested by Mr. Eyeza (DENR-CENRO PPC Representative) to include DENR in the
lead agencies for the programs proposed in the core zone. Mr. Valeña (Brgy. Sta. Lourdes
Representative) also suggested to install drones in mangrove areas instead of CCTV. The
presentation ended at 4:29 pm. This was followed with the short lecture of Mr. Mark Ace
Dela Cruz on Harmonizing ECAN to CLUP (E-CLUP). He emphasized that ECAN is
integrated specifically in the step 4 of the CLUP process.
For the last part of the workshop, one representative from each group shared their
insights and impression on the workshop. Ms. Barrios (EMS-PPSRNP Representative) of
the core zone group suggested that the identified core and buffer zones should not be
modified; instead, ECAN zones should still be upgraded depending on the current situation
of the resources. On the other hand, Ms. Evangelista (Brgy. Iwahig Representative) of the
buffer zone group thanked the opportunity given by the workshop to address the problem
of quarrying in their barangay (Iwahig). She hoped that the city government and the
agencies will cooperate in dealing with the problems identified in the workshop. Lastly,
Mr. Valeña (Brgy. Sta. Lourdes Representative) of the multiple use zone group emphasized
that immediate action is needed by the city.
The workshop ended at exactly 4:40 in the afternoon.

ANNEX B: Participatory ECAN Planning Workshop Design

for ECANizing Puerto Princesa City
I. Basic Information
Name of the Activity : Participatory ECAN Zones Management Planning

Duration : April 15, 2016 (1 day)
Target Participants : Local Executives, Heads of Agencies, DCEPC officials,
Sangguniang Bayan representatives, people’s organization,
business sector, and enforcement officers, representatives
from selected barangays, indigenous peoples, among other
stakeholders
Budget : Php 31,000
Source(s) of Funds : City Development Control and Environmental Protection
Committee (P21, 000), Palawan Council for Sustainable
Development (P18, 500)
II. Rationale
The ECAN Resource Management Plan (ERMP) is a stand-alone document prepared by

the City Development Control and Environmental Protection (DCEPC) with the assistance
of Palawan Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD) Staff pursuant to the Republic
Act No. 7611 (SEP Law) and its pertinent guidelines. Its primary objective is to guide the
long-term sustainable management of the city-adopted ECAN Zones map. It uses the ridge-
to-reef general strategy of ECAN and applies it strategically over and above other existing
planning frameworks. It shall serve as the general physical plan of the city and every
municipality in Palawan. Thus, it shall be the basis of other planning activities, such as
land use planning, tourism master planning, and resource management planning as a whole.
The implementation of the ERMP is to be the joint responsibility of the local government
unit (LGU) and PCSD Staff through the ECAN Board which is created to act in its city or
municipal jurisdiction in the same way the PCSD governs SEP concerns at the provincial
level.
The formulation, implementation, and institutionalization of the ERMP, as well as its
integration into the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP), requires the strong support of
the LGU and all concerned stakeholders. Its integration into the CLUP must be a
participatory process. The CLUP needs to be compliant not only to the policies prescribed
by the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) and the rules and regulations
under the Local Government Code of 1991 (LGC or Republic Act No. 7160) but to the
SEP and its policies as well.
The LGC mandates the LGU to co-manage with the state the environment and natural
resources within the LGU’s administrative boundary. One important function devolved by
the state to LGUs is the enactment of municipal or city zoning ordinance based on the
formulated CLUP. The zoning ordinance and the CLUP are the primary bases for the future
use of land resources. The formulation of the ERMP is a major step toward harmonizing
and aligning the provisions of the SEP into the CLUP.

As highlighted, the implementation of ERMP is a joint responsibility of local government

unit (LGU) and PCSD Staff through the ECAN Board. The composition of the DCEPC is
practically the LGU with some representatives from other sectors. Its operationalization in
the whole province had been signaled since 1994 with the issuance of PCSD Res. 94-144,
the Guidelines of the ECAN implementation and later on, in 2005 amended via PCSD Res.
No. 05-250. Since then, operations had been relatively distinct in each of the
municipalities/city. While mandate and functions had been cited in the guideline and more
explicitly in the 2005 issuance of AO 10, various municipalities operate differently in terms
of compositions, functions, and intensity.
With the demands brought about by recent developments, the current PCSD leadership
intends to strengthen and empower the ECAN Boards. This is well emphasized in the
proposed amendment of the SEP Clearance System (PCSD AO 6) where functions of the
ECAN Board is highlighted such that it is given more authority in endorsing/approving
projects and more independent in its decision-making processes. Consequently, the PCSD
AO 10 that instituted the ECAN Board shall likewise be amended accordingly.
III. Objectives and Expected Output

In the 1-day workshop for ECAN Resource Management Plan, stakeholders, particularly
those from local government units, civil society organizations, indigenous peoples’
organizations, business, and the academe, will:
1. Validate the adopted Puerto Pirncesa City ECAN Map in light of new information
at the City;
2. Formulate the ECAN Resource Management Plan (ERMP) in light of new
development at the city; and
3. Discuss steps in formulating ECANnized Comprehensive Land and Water Use Plan
(E-CLWUP) and ECANized Zoning Ordinance (E-ZO).
IV. Program/ Flow of Activities (Program, Objectives and Methods)

Specific Objectives of the workshop:
1. Validate the existing drivers and pressures in each ECAN zone
2. Validate/recommend/propose actions to address specific driver/pressure
3. Set priorities to be proposed for inclusion in the City agenda through its Annual
Investment Plan (AIP) and Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP)
4. Validate conformity of ECAN zones with current use

Time Session Title Objectives and Topics Method Resource Person / Facilitator
Morning Registration of
ECAN Board Secretariat/ Interns
8:00 – 8:30 Participants
To formally open the 1-day workshop with a prayer Prayer and
8:30 – 8:40 Opening Rites and the Philippine national anthem Philippine National PCSD Staff
Anthem
To welcome the participants and give the speakers’
8:40 – 9:00 Opening Message thoughts on the significance of the ECAN Resource Talk City Mayor
Management Plan to the City
 To explain workshop objectives, process and
program
Introduction to the
 To introduce the Consultation organizers (PCSD) Talk with slides Christina D. Rodriguez
9:00 – 9:10 Workshop and
presentation Overall Facilitator
Participants  To introduce the participants and sectors
represented
To understand and appreciate the SEP framework and

the ECAN strategy and their importance to spatial land
SEP: Why It Matters to use planning, including:
Nelson P. Devanadera
Us (with emphasis on  Overview situation of sustainable development and Talk with slides Executive Director
9:10 – 9:20 ECAN strategy, DCEPC, biodiversity and ecosystem values in Puerto presentation Palawan Council for Sustainable
and ECAN Management Princesa City; Development Staff
Planning)  Importance of ECAN Board and ERMP in relation
to critical ecological, economic, socio-cultural and
institutional challenges in Palawan
ECAN 101: The Palawan To understand and appreciate the SEP ECAN as a
Strategy standard of local sustainable development. Topics
include:
From ECAN Map to  ECAN zones components Talk with slides Cherry Lyn Jalover
9:20 – 9:50 presentation and Planning Staff
ECAN Resource  ECAN zones criteria handouts PCSD
Management Plan:  ECAN zones allowable and prohibited uses
A Physical Framework for
City Sustainable  ECAN zones strategies
Development

 ECAN Resource Management Plan (ERMP) and
its integration into city CLWUP
 Ecanization for SD
Open Forum
Participants will:
 Understand and appreciate the situational analysis
of City based on KII, studies, and plans,
specifically on:
Presentation of City
9:50 – - Highlights of Ecological Profile
Stocktaking Results of UPLB Interns
11:30 - Priority Drivers/Pressures and why these
each ECAN Zone
were identified as priorities
(What and Why)
- Recommended, Actions, Responsible
Entities and Time Frame
(How, Who, When)
The participants will validate inputs and
recommendations for city level priorities and actions;
including current or proposed policies, programs Sector 1 (Core):
and projects that can be integrated in these actions. Facilitator 1
Documentor 1
The adopted ECAN map will also be validated. Priority
areas for updating will be indentified. Sector 2 (Buffer):
11:30 – Action Planning Meta Cards, Manila
Facilitator 2
12:00 Workshop paper, Markers
Three groups will be formed: Documentor 2
Core zone (terrestrial, coastal, & tribal)
Buffer zone (terrestrial, coastal, & tribal) Sector 3 (Multiple):
Multiple use zone (terrestrial and coastal) Facilitator 3
Documentor 3
A rapporteur will be assigned to present the findings of
each group. (see Annex A)
12:00 –
Lunch break
1:00

The participants will validate inputs and
recommendations for city level priorities and actions;
including current or proposed policies, programs Sector 1 (Core):
11:30 – and projects that can be integrated in these actions. Facilitator 1
2:30 (1st Documentor 1
Group) The adopted ECAN map will also be validated. Priority
Continuation of areas for updating will be indentified. Sector 2 (Buffer):
Meta Cards, Manila
2:30 – 3:00 Action Planning Facilitator 2
paper, Markers
(2nd Group) Workshop Three groups will be formed: Documentor 2
Core zone (terrestrial, coastal, & tribal)
3:00 – 3:30 Buffer zone (terrestrial, coastal, & tribal) Sector 3 (Multiple):
(3nd Group) Multiple use zone (terrestrial and coastal) Facilitator 3
Documentor 3
A rapporteur will be assigned to present the findings of
each group. (see Annex A for detailed mechanics)
Presentation of Results The participants will be able to present highlights of
3:00 – 4:30 Assigned Rapporteur per Zone
and Open Forum results in each zone. (30 mins each group)
The participants will discuss next steps in formulating Ryan T. Fuentes
4:30 – 5:00 E-CLUP and E-ZO the Ecanized Comprehensive Land and Water Use Plan Planning Staff, PCSD
(E-CLWUP) and Ecanized Zoning Ordinance (E-ZO)
5:00 – 5:15 Closing Messages Members of DCEPC

V. Requirements
1. Venue and Food
2. Personnel Requirements: To successfully conduct the workshop, and achieve the
general and specific objectives, the organizers need a team of internal staff who will
work on the technical, documentary, logistical and other activity requirements
before, during and after each activity.
The said team must include:
 Resource Persons;
 Lead Facilitator and Workshop/Break-out Groups Facilitators;
 Lead Documentor and Junior Documentors; and
 Secretariat (Registration, kits, logistics, other support services)
3. Logistical Requirements.
 Laptops
 LCD/Projectors (3)
 Maps
 Whitescreen (3)
 Whiteboard/Blackboard (3)
 Whiteboard markers/Chalk
 Manila Papers
 Cartolina, cut (for Mood Meter)
 Coupon bond papers
 Pentel Pens
 Ballpens
 Metacards
 ECAN Maps (Clustered)
 Meals and snacks, free-flowing coffee and tea for all the participants
 Tarpaulin
 Sound system
 Venue

Annex B.1:
ECAN Zones Sustainable Action Planning Workshop
Breakout Group Discussion Guide
OBJECTIVES
For each Breakout Group (BG), the group participants will:
1. Validate the existing drivers and pressures of each zone
2. Validate/recommend/propose actions to address specific driver/pressure
3. Identify which actions are short-term, medium-term, and long-term. Set priorities to
be proposed for inclusion in the City agenda through its Annual Investment Plan
(AIP) and Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP)
PARTICIPANTS and BREAKOUT GROUPS

Members of ECAN Board, representatives from indigenous peoples and non-
governmental organizations, local government official, academe, business sector,
mass media, and others.
Breakout Groups:
A Core Zone
B Buffer Zone
C Multiple Use Zone
Each breakout group will have:
 Facilitator
 Documenter
 Resource Person(s)
Round Table Discussion mechanics (Three rounds)
1. First round: First Group for each zone will have 2 hours to discuss and fill-out the
matrices
Core Zone (Group 1)
Buffer Zone group (Group 2)
Multiple Use Zone group (Group 3)
2. Second Round (30 mins.)

Core Zone (Group 1) Multiple Use Zone (Group 1)
Buffer Zone group (Group 2) Core Zone (Group 2)
Multiple Use Zone group (Group 3) Buffer Zone (Group 3)
3. Third round (30 mins.)

Core Zone (Group 2) Multiple Use Zone (Group 2)
Buffer Zone group (Group 3) Core Zone (Group 3)
Multiple Use Zone group (Group 1)  Buffer Zone (Group 1)

Time Activity / Key Questions Additional notes on process

(1.5 hrs) 1. Base on the list, what are the Metacards (Technology of
priority drivers/pressures in Participation)/ Digital editable slides
the ECAN Zone? Are there and Open Discussions
other critical
drivers/pressures in the zone? Facilitator requests for a
volunteer rapporteur for
The documenter should be able plenary reporting, from among
to put the priorities into excel participants.
format (see Matrix 1 below).
Participants are asked to validate the
identified pressures/threats based on
2. Do you agree with the
suggested Sustainable KII and recent studies. On meta-
Development Actions to address cards, write other critical threats.
these drivers/pressures? If not,
what key actions should be Discussion:
done to address the priority  Note to documenters: Identify and
issue/threat? Try to limit to 3 Note the Source of Information –
strategic and doable actions report, agency, person,
for each priority threat. organization –for the questions.
These should help the team to
NOTE: Actions should be verify or follow-up the information
sustainable later.
Criteria of SD Actions  Identify priority threats and
validate given priority actions
A. High impact and cost-effective
B. SMART
C. Ecologically viable
D. Socially acceptable  Facilitator and Documenter use
E. Holistic in approach prepared list of actions and
metacards if added actions are
3. What is the geographic necessary. Facilitator goes through
coverage of the action? Or each Priority drivers/pressures for
where is the action to be the zone and asks the Participants
implemented? to give their answers to the
Note: The coverage is Questions 2 to 6 in sequence.
barangay; sitio; any special  One participant will start and
management areas or others will build on this or add a
management unit (identify new key action and target.
specific protected areas,
mountain range, island, wetland,
cave, river, watershed, etc.)


4. When is the appropriate time
for the action to be
implemented, within 2017-
2021? Identify Timeframe from
start to finish.
Note: The prioritized Actions
(and corresponding results) are
desired to be completed within
2017-2021 (the initial 6 years).
5. Who are the responsible and
lead entities for these Actions?
6. Note: An entity can be an
organization, agency,
institution, or a stakeholder
group.
30 mins. ECAN Maps Validation  Each Cluster will be provided with

(use Matrix 2) ECAN map. Whenever practical,
5-10 small adjoining barangays
Examine the ECAN Zones Map of will share a map and
their barangays and verify their correspondingly evaluate the same
correctness in terms of: map.
 Copies of Land Cover Map with
1. Areas mapped as core zones
topographic overlay will be posted
which are titled or privately
for reference of all participants.
owned
 Representative from PCSDS-GIS,
2. Cores zones which are heavily
Planning Division and DMO will
settled (more than 20 houses
be available to assist the
per cluster)
Baranagay representatives in
3. Core zones whose boundary
evaluating the ECAN Zones Maps.
overlaps with the boundary of
 The participants will mark using
poblacion (barangay center)
contrast colored pens, their
based on approving zones
proposed correction on the map
4. Areas mapped as multiple use
given to them. In making their
zones, CADCs or CADTs
corrections, they will also fill out a
5. Coastal areas mapped as
form which tabulates the code or
multiple use zone whose
number of the correction marking
boundary overlaps with
and the description of the
declared marine sanctuary
correction or suggestions.
6. Primary forests which were not
 The PCSD-GIS and Planning
mapped as core zones; and
Division will collect the maps and
7. Other mapping discrepancies.
tables and evaluate the validity of
the map comments based on
approved guidelines.


Please note that the conflicts
between the ECAN zones and their  Note for facilitator: To remind the
proposed land use is subject to participants that the annotated
Multi-Agency ECAN maps and documentation
matrix will be references for the
(PCSDS,DCEPC,DENR, NGO)
DCEPC and PCSDS once they
evaluation and will not be reflected made their ground validation of the
in the updating/ finalization of the ECAN zones. Note that prior to
ECAN Zones map until properly ECAN map updating, any
verified, confirmed and approved. concerned group will have to write
a request letter to the PCSD.
Summary of Breakout Facilitator summarizes the main

Group Discussions agreements of the Breakout
Discussion (which will be a guide for
the group report in plenary).
Facilitator announces the resumption
of Plenary session for reporting
procedure.

Matrix 1
Core Zone
AREA LEAD AND SUPPPORT

ACTION IMPACT TIMEFRAME
(BARANGAY) ORGANIZATIONS
Priority Driver/Pressure 1
Action 1
Action 2
Action 3
Action 1
Action 2
Action 3
Buffer Zone

Action 1
Action 2
Action 3
Action 1
Action 2
Action 3

Multiple Zone

Action 1
Action 2
Action 3
Action 1
Action 2
Action 3

Matrix 2
Issue Areas
Action Taken
Current Suggested
Bilang Barangay Dahilan kung bakit hindi sang-ayon (Accept/ Reject/For
ECAN Zone ECAN Zone
validation)

Annex B.2: Participants by Zone and Clustered Barangay

(DPSIR and ECAN Map Validation)
Office Name
ECAN Zone
Core Zone
10 City/Municipal Planning
PAMB
IP Representative
Community ENRO
City/Municipal SWDO
NCIP Representative
Representatives from Barangays (yung may
malaking core zone)
City/Municipal FARMC / fishers
representative
Buffer
10 City/Municipal Agriculture
City/Municipal ENRO
NGO Representative
PO Representative
Representatives from Barangays (yung may
malaking buffer zone)
Youth representative
Farmers representative
Academe
Multiple
10 Business Sector
Tourism/Municipal Office
City/Municipal Engineering Office
PNP
Women's group representative
Representatives from Barangays(yung may
malaking multiple zone)
City/Municipal DepEd

Annex B.3: List of PCSD Participants
Assignment Name Municipality/ City

Pre-workshop
1. Venue/Physical Arrangements Maila Victoria Villaos PPC
Leonora Labrador Coron, Busuanga
2. Budget/Logistical Requirements Mark Ace Dela Cruz PPC, Coron, Busuanga
3. Tarpaulin EEE PPC, Coron, Busuanga
4. LCD Projectors/ Vehicles Evarista Palanca Coron, Busuanga
FAD PPC
5. Maps
6. Invitations/Confirmation of Maila Victoria Villaos PPC
Invitees/ Certificate of Appearance
7. Certificate of Participation Design Sha Carino PPC, Coron, Busuanga
8. Audio-Visual Maila Victoria Villaos PPC
Workshop
9.Lead Facilitator (1) Christina D. Rodriguez PPC, Coron, Busuanga
10. Breakout Group Facilitator Mark Ace Dela Cruz PPC, Coron, Busuanga
(3/workshop)
Cherry Lyn Jalover PPC, Coron, Busuanga
Maila Victoria Villaos PPC
11. 6 Documenters (2 each Breakout Mark Anthony Tabangay PPC, Coron, Busuanga
Group)
5/6 UPLB Interns Assigned Team
12. Secretariat (3) Lead: Maila Victoria PPC
Villaos
Support: UPLB Interns Assigned team
Lead: Evarista Palanca Coron and Busuanga
Support: UPLB Interns Assigned team
13. Resource Persons
OED Nelson P. Devanadera/ PPC, Coron, Busuanga
Josephine Matulac/
Adelina Villena
Planning (1) Ryan Fuentes PPC, Coron, Busuanga
Terrestrial (1) Edwin Caabay/ John V. PPC, Coron, Busuanga
Fabello
Coastal (1) Glenda Cadigal PPC, Coron, Busuanga
Tribal (1) Merlinda Hilario PPC, Coron, Busuanga
GIS (1) Wilson Pambid PPC, Coron, Busuanga
14. Co-Coordinator Ms. Maila Victoria PPC
Ms. Leonora Labrador Coron, Busuanga
15. Overall Coordinator Mr. Mark Ace dela Cruz PPC, Coron, Busuanga

Annex B.4: Budgetary Requirements for Puerto Princesa City
LGU
PCSD
Particulars Counterpart
Counterpart
Pre-workshop and Workshop 21,000 18,500

Supplies (bond papers, - 5,000
pens, tarpaulin, etc)
Food @ 420/pax x 1 21,000 -
day(50pax)
Plotter ink, plotter - 13,500
paper, and printheads
for map production
(9 maps @ 500/map)
Post-Workshop 3,000 5,000
Packaging and 5,000
reproduction (@500 x10
pcs)
Final Presentation to 3,000
ECAN Board (@P150x
20)

ANNEX C: KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEW THREATS QUESTIONNAIRE
ECAN Resource Management Planning

Key Informant Interview Questionnaire (ECAN Needs + Projects) DPSIR Model
Questionnaire No.: _______
The needs and priorities of the municipality often depend on the kinds of problems and issues that occur in
it. Before we are able to introduce new projects, we must be able to identify first the threats and opportunities
in our area. Since the problems and issues that confront us are often complex, we must also be able to analyze
what are the causes and the impacts of our major problems. The analysis will help us prioritize our needs and
also the resources we must apply to solve our problems. For the identified
needs/problems/issues/opportunities, we will specify the solutions and actions that will address them.
Analysis will be aided by DPSIR framework1. In this framework, there is a chain of causal links starting with
‘driving forces’ (economic sectors, human activities) through ‘pressures’ (emissions, waste) to ‘states’
(physical, chemical and biological) and ‘impacts’ on ecosystems, human health and functions, eventually
leading to political ‘responses’ (prioritisation, target setting, indicators). The components of the DPSIR
framework are defined in the following:
Driving force = Needs/Issues

Pressure = threats and problems
State = Current state of environment and natural resources
Impact = impact
Response = present actions taken to resolve issues and challenges
Gaps = in the actions taken
Proposed actions = measures that need to be undertaken to address gaps
Note: Bring ECAN Map during the interview (ECAN Map must show boundaries, roads, built-up areas,
and other landmarks for reference)
Municipality: ________________ Barangay: _______________

Date & Time of KII:______________________ Interviewer: ________________________
I. Personal details of respondent
1. Name (Pangalan): _____________________________
2. Address (Sitio, Barangay): ___________________________
3. Occupation (Trabaho): ________________________________
4. Position and Agency (Posisyon at Ahensya): _______________________________
5. Number of years in position (Bilang ng taon sa kasalukuyang posisyon): _____________
1
Based on EEA 1998: Guidelines for Data Collection and Processing - EU State of the Environment
Report. Annex 3.

II. Sustainable Development Analysis of the Community/ Municipality using DPSIR in each of the ECAN Zone
Identify three (3) major problems
6. ECAN Core Zone (Terrestrial and Coastal Core Zones)
Drivers Pressure State Impact Response Gap Proposed Actions

a.
b.
c.
7. ECAN Buffer- Restricted Use Zone (Transition in ECAN Coastal)

a.
b.
c.
8. ECAN Buffer- Controlled Use Zone (Transition in ECAN Coastal)

a.
b.
c.

9. ECAN Buffer- Traditional Use Zone (Transition in ECAN Coastal)

a.
b.
c.
10. ECAN Multiple Use Zone (General Use in ECAN Coastal)

a.
b.
c.
11. Tribal Ancestral Zone (Terrestrial and Coastal)

a.
b.
c.

IV. Opportunities
12. What do you think are the opportunities (or factors that have a positive effect on the
community) that can assist in the sustainable development and livelihood of your municipality
once these are developed or utilized? Categories of opportunities are as follows.
(Ano sa palagay nyo ang mga oportunidad (o mga bagay na may positibong epekto sa
komunidad) na pwedeng makatulong sa pangmatagalang kaunlaran at kabuhayan ng inyong
munisipyo sakaling ito ay ma-develop o magamit?)
13. Provide specific correspondence in each category.
12. Opportunities 13. Particulars Remarks

a. Presence of natural resources that
can be harnessed and developed for
livelihood in a sustainable manner
b. Human resources or local
organizations that can manage and
catalyze resource conservation and
sustainable development
c. National and local policies
supportive of social, economic and
environmental development in the
barangay cluster
d. Private and Civic Society
Organization (CSO) support to the
undertakings of local development
projects
e. Accessibility to local markets
f. Accessibility to financing institutions
to support development projects
g. Availability of conservation
technology for adoption by local
farmers and fishermen
h. Potential supply of water and energy
i. Access to health services

j. Access to education
k. Access to protective services
l. Access to housing services
m. Adequacy of support infrastructure
and facilities
n. Availability of sanitation and solid
waste disposal facilities
o. Others

ANNEX D: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR STOCKTAKING OF CITY

ENVIRONMENTAL INITIATIVES
(for ECAN Zones Management Planning)
Field instrument 2: Stocktaking
PCSD Resolution No. 05-250, Section 25. Preparation of the ECAN Zoning Plan. After the approval of the
ECAN Map, the LGU through its ECAN Board and with the assistance of the PCSDS, shall prepare an
ECAN Zoning Plan taking into consideration the following:
Municipality: ________________ Barangay: _______________

Date & Time of KII:______________________Interviewer: ________________________
I. Personal details of respondent
1.Name (Pangalan): _____________________________
2.Address (Sitio, Barangay): ___________________________
3.Occupation (Trabaho): ________________________________
4.Position and Agency (Posisyon at Ahensya): __________________
5.Number of years in position (Bilang ng taon sa kasalukuyang posisyon): _______
What are the efforts of the city in addressing the following development issues?
1. Stakeholders' participation in the protection conservation, development, exploitation

and restoration of natural resources in the area;
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
2. Encroachment of commercial fishing vessels on city waters;
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
3. Treatment of protected areas under the NIPAS; [include barangay/city declared PAs]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________

4. Inter-agency participation;
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
5. Protection of coastal/marine areas and enforcement of fishery laws;

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
6. Protection of terrestrial areas and enforcement of laws;
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
7. Monitoring and evaluation schemes [to include coastal and terrestrial pollution
monitoring and control to understand pollution of the area and to institute measures
complementary to the PCSDS environmental quality regulation];
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
8. Regulatory measures or permitting system;
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
9. Application of resource rents or user charges;
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
10. Management of funds from proceeds of license fees;
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
11. Allowable activities for each zone; [CLUP land use zones and/or ECAN zones]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
12. Development activities in small islands;
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________

13. Waste disposal and sewage; [solid and liquid waste]

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
14. Provision of alternative livelihood projects;

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
15. Protection of the access rights of the community to the natural resources;
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
16. Migration and settlement within the coastal areas; and

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
17. Appropriation of funds for the implementation of the plan and the management of the
ECAN zones.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
18. Others identified to be necessary and relevant (i.e. safety and protection of IP)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________

ANNEX E: ATTENDANCE SHEETS



ANNEX F: COMPUTATION FOR ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT
A preliminary study of the ecological footprint of Palawan Province in terms of

basic needs resource requirements is undertaken to determine the sufficiency or deficiency
of resources at present and in the future. The objective of the study is to determine whether
there will be enough food, water, and wood for the population of Palawan. Specifically,
the study aims to:
1. Determine the current and future population consumptions for food, water, and wood
supply based on land use types (cropland, fishing ground, grazing, and forest lands) in
terms of global hectares.
2. Compare the population consumptions and the biocapacity based on land use types
(cropland, fishing ground, grazing, and forest lands) in terms of global hectare to determine
food and water sufficiency and wood supply.
In land use planning, the results of ecological footprint study are important in
allocating for certain areas of the land for specific land uses. It can also assist in making
decisions about selecting and prioritizing land development options. The conceptual or
consciousness-raising value of the EF analysis also has implications to policies that will be
crafted to mitigate factors that can contribute to non-sustainable trends of economic
activities and environmental deterioration.
The calculation of EF has the following general procedures (Wackernagel and
Rees, 1996):
1. Estimate of the average person’s annual consumption of particular items from aggregate
regional or national data by dividing total consumption by population size. For various
categories, the national statistics provide both production and trade figures from which
trade-corrected consumption can be computed, using the following formula.
trade-corrected consumption = production + imports - exports
2. Estimate the land area appropriated per capita (aa) for the production of each major
consumption item i. This is done by dividing the annual consumption of that item as
calculated in #1 [c, in kg/capita] by its average annual productivity or yield [p, in kg/ha].
aai = annual demand / annual yield = ci / pi
3. Compute the total ecological footprint of the average person, the per capita footrpint
(ef), by summing all the ecosystem areas appropriated (aai) by all the goods and services
(n) consumed by the person.
ef =Σaai 𝑛𝑖=1
4. Obtain the ecological footprint (EFP) of the study population by multiplying the average
per capita footprint by population size (N).
EFP = N(ef)
In cases where the total area used is available from statistics, the per capita
footprint can be computed by dividing by population.

ANNEX G: INCORPORATING THE SEP AND ECAN

INTO LOCAL LAND USE PLANS (INTEGRATE)
The following guidelines are applicable for municipalities that have CLWUPs in various
development stages. It can be followed even if the CLWUP is still in the initial phase of
development, already in an advanced form or have substantive development strategies and general
land use zones, or already finalized and approved.
The SEP ECAN-CLWUP integration process is called INTEGRATE (Incorporating the

SEP and ECAN Into Local Land Use Plans). The INTEGRATE process will ensure not only that
the CLWUP document has incorporated the SEP ECAN strategy, but also that it is compliant to the
minimum standards set by HLURB. It has five interdependent steps, indicated in the figure below.
It will have six complementary stages, not necessarily sequential in application, with four
integration stages: physical integration, strategic integration, plan integration, and institutional
integration.
Figure 19. The SEP ECAN integration process into the CLUP.
Step 1 (ECAN Zones Mapping or Amendment) is a requirement for all succeeding steps.
Steps 2, 3, and 5 can be performed simultaneously. Planners can proceed to Steps 5 and 6 ahead of
Step 4 (Formulation of ECAN Zoning Plan). The highest level of integration is the “institutional
integration”, i.e., the approval of CLWUP that is compliant to ECAN and SEP.
1. ECAN Zones Mapping or Amendment
The mapping of ECAN zones is described in Chapter 3 while a process of amendment of

ECAN criteria or ECAN zones is outlined in PCSD Resolution No. 05-250. Section 16 specifically
provides for the amendment of ECAN criteria, to wit:

Section 16. Modification of Criteria. Modification or amendment regarding an approved

criteria or guidelines can be initiated by any concerned group: government, non-government or
private in nature. Such move for modification or amendment shall be submitted to the Council Staff
for review and to the Council for approval. It should be supported by official documents, to include
a. resolution by the concerned Sangguniang Bayan/Panglunsod

b. map of 1:50,000 scale with technical descriptions, and
c. rationale and objectives for the proposed modification.
2. Physical Integration
Physical integration will be the screening part of the CLWUP. It involves a direct edge-by-
edge comparison of the proposed CLWUP land use zones and the approved ECAN Zones Map.
The objective of Physical Integration is for the ECAN-CLWUP planning group to seek a common
agreement between the two zoning maps. Note that this step can be done simultaneously with Steps
3 to 5.
Method: Overlay of ECAN zones with HLURB land use zones using GIS
Inputs: ECAN zones map, HLURB general land use zones map and urban land use zones
map
Outputs: Zonal Conflicts Map for validation; Reconciled ECAN-CLWUP zones
The following table can be used as a guide in the overlay of ECAN zones into CLWUP’s
general land use zones. The fields marked by “X” are those that are considered acceptable to
minimum ECAN standards.
Table 33. Comparison table for SEP ECAN zones and HLURB general land use zones.
Multiple Use Zone
Buffer Zone
Detailed Zoning Classification (HLURB)
1. General Residential Zone (GRZ)

An area within a city or municipality for dwelling/ x x x √ √ x x x
housing purposes
2. Socialized Housing Zone (SHZ) Shall be used
principally for socialized housing/ dwelling purposes
for the underprivileged and homeless as defined in x x x √ √ x x x
RA 7279
3. Low Density Residential Zone (R-1)
An area WITHIN A CITY OR MUNICIPALITY principally
for dwelling/ housing purposes with a density of 20 x x x √ √ x x x
dwelling units and below per hectare
4. Medium Density Residential Zone (R-2)
for dwelling/ housing purposes with a density of 21 to
x x x √ √ x x x
65 dwelling units per hectare

Multiple Use Zone

Buffer Zone
5. High Density Residential Zone (R-3)

A subdivision of an area principally for dwelling/
housing purposes with a density of 66 or more
x x x √ √ x x x
dwelling units per hectare
6. General Commercial Zone (GCZ)
An area within a city or municipality for trading/ x x x x √ x x x
services/ business purposes
7. Low Density Commercial Zone (C-1)
for trade, services and business activities ordinarily x x x x √ x x x
referred to as the Central Business District
8. Medium Density Commercial Zone (C-2)
An area WITHIN A CITY OR MUNICIPALITY with
quasitrade business activities and service industries x x x x √ x x x
performing complementary/ supplementary
functions to principally commercial zone (CBD)
9. High Density Commercial Zone (C-3)
An area within a city or municipality intended for
regional shopping centers such as large malls and
other commercial activities which are regional in
scope or where market activities generate traffic and
require utilities and services that extend beyond local
x x x x √ x x x
boundaries and requires metropolitan level
development planning and implementation. E.g. high
rise hotels, sports stadium or sports complexes are
also allowable in this zone
10. Light Industrial Zone (I-1)
A subdivision of an area principally for the following
types of industries: x x x x √ x x x
a. non-pollutive/ non-hazardous
b. non-pollutive/ hazardous
11. Medium Industrial Zone I-2)
types of industries:
x x x x √ x x x
a. pollutive/ non-hazardous
b. pollutive/ hazardous
12. Heavy Industrial Zone (I-3)
types of industries:
a. Highly pollutive/ non-hazardous
b. Highly pollutive/ hazardous x x x √ x x x
c. Highly pollutive/ extremely hazardous x
d. Pollutive/ extremely hazardous
e. Non-pollutive/extremely hazardous

Multiple Use Zone

Buffer Zone
13. General Institutional Zone (GIZ) –

for general types of institutional establishments e.g. x x x x √ x x x
government offices, schools, hospital/ clinics,
academic/research, convention centers
14. Special Institutional Zone (SIZ)
for particular types of institutional establishments
e.g. welfare homes, orphanages, home for the aged, x x x x √ x x x
rehabilitation and training centers, military camps/
reservation/ bases/ training grounds, etc.
15. Agricultural Zone (AGZ)
An area WITHIN A CITY OR MUNICIPALITY INTENDED
for cultivation/ fishing and pastoral activities (e.g. x x x √ √ x √ √
fish, farming, cultivation of crops, goats/ cattle raising
etc.)
16. Agro-Industrial Zone (AIZ)
An area WITHIN A CITY OR MUNICIPALITY INTENDED
primarily for integrated farm operations and related x x x √ √ x x x
product processing activities such as plantation for
bananas, pineapple, sugar, etc.
17. Forest Zone (FZ)
An area WITHIN A CITY OR MUNICIPALITY INTENDED √ √ √ √ √ √ x x
primarily for forest purposes
18. Parks and other Recreation Zone (PRZ)
An area designed for diversion/ amusements and for
the maintenance of ecological balance of the
x x x √ √ x √ x
community
19. Water Zone (WZ)
Are bodies of water WITHIN CITIES AND
MUNICIPALITIES which include rivers, streams, lakes x x x √ √ x √ √
and seas except those included in other zone
classification
20. Tourist Zone (TZ)
Are sites within cities and municipalities endowed
with natural or manmade physical attributes and * * √ √ √ * √ √
resources that are conducive to recreation, leisure
and other wholesome activities

The CLWUP general land use zones boundaries that overlapped with other ECAN zones
will form part of the “Zonal Conflict Map”. The planning group may then assess/evaluate the
conflict map in two ways:
i. Ground truthing – validation of the conflict area through ocular inspection

ii. Social ground truthing – validation of the conflict area through consultation with
key informants (those who are part of the mapping of CLWUP land use zones
and/or those who are affected on the ground by the mapping of the same zones)
One issue to consider here is that the description of each HLURB general land use zones
may be applicable to several ECAN zones. Hence, there may be a need to separate or differentiate
the general land use zones further according to the specific activities in the zones.
3. Strategic Integration
Method: Comparison and review of ECAN strategies and CLWUP strategies

Inputs: Results from thematic mapping, ECAN zones management guidelines,
EZP (if available), CLWUP strategies
Outputs: Strategic Conflict Map/Matrix for validation and action; Integrated
ECAN-CLWUP strategies
This part of the INTEGRATE process is a review of strategic elements in the ECAN and
CLWUP. It will consider both the zonal elements (allowable uses and identified activities in each
zone) and suprazonal elements (strategies and activities that are cross-cutting or that transcend
geographic zones).
This review process can be both quantitative and qualitative in nature and will be guided
by the SEP Law and its policies and guidelines, the LGC, and the HLURB policies and guidelines.
Any conflict that may be identified may be mapped or put in matrix form and will form an integral
part of the Strategic Conflict Map. This map/matrix will then be brought to the local planners and
administrators for their comments and a consensus will be sought in order to reconcile the strategies
in the plans. The satisfactory application of Strategic Integration will lead to integrated ECAN-
CLWUP strategies. A sample Zonal Conflict Matrix is shown in the table below.
Table 34. Issues generated and recommended actions from topology overlays of the ECAN
Map and Existing Forest Land Uses in Roxas (FLUP Roxas 2012, modified).
Possible Location Status Of Proposed How To Resolve Responsible
Conflicting Claim Recommendation The Problem Agency
Forest Land To Resolve The Problem
Uses
IPs/ICCs Tinitan With CALT Apply/comply Follow existing NCIP, PCSD,
Almaciga resin application requirements for PCSD guidelines LGU, POs, IPs,
tapping in Core TA application and NCIP ICCs
zone CADT/CALC
Jolo With CALT Apply/comply Follow existing NCIP, PCSD,
application requirements for PCSD guidelines LGU, POs, IPs,
TA application and NCIP ICCs
CADT/CALC
San Miguel With CALT Apply/comply Follow existing NCIP, PCSD,
CADT/CALC

N. Zabala With CALT Apply/comply Follow existing NCIP, PCSD,

CADT/CALC
Abaroan Proclaimed Apply/comply Follow existing NCIP, PCSD,
TAZ through requirements for NCIP guidelines LGU, POs, IPs,
PCSD CADT/CALC ICCs
Proclamation
No.13
Operational Bagongbayan (133 Declare as special Endorsement NCIP, PCSD,
watershed with ha.) management area for resolution, LGU, POs, IPs,
Core zone Taradungan (114 the protection of Core establishment, ICCs
has.)
zone by the LGU and declaration
Magara (745 has.);
Caramay (745 has.); DENR
Salvacion (745 has.);
Mendoza (687 has.);
Sandoval (300 has.);
Tinitian (528 has.);
Tumarbong (30 has.);
Brgy. IV (61 has.);
Minara (600 has.)
Wateshed in Co-management of MOA (obligation Local Water
ancestral domain overlapping area by of every party), Assocation,
(anticipated) LGU, identify or LGU,
DENR, and IPs delineate DENR, NCIP,
overlapping area PCSD a POs,
NGOs, IPs,
Barangays, and
others to be
identified during
planning
4. Formulation and Approval of ECAN Zoning Plan
ECAN planning for sustainable development requires an integrated approach involving

social, economic, cultural, ecological, and governance variables. This means that developing an
EZP requires an investigation into a variety of data, information, and plans.
In Section 25 of PCSD Resolution 05-250, the considerations in the preparation of the

ECAN Zoning Plan are the following:
Section 25. Preparation of the ECAN Zoning Plan. After the approval of the ECAN Map,
the LGU through its ECAN Board and with the assistance of the PCSDS, shall prepare an
ECAN Zoning Plan taking into consideration the following:
 Stakeholder’s participation in the protection, conservation, development,

exploitation, and restoration of natural resources in the area
 Encroachment of commercial fishing vessels in municipal waters
 Treatment of protected areas under the NIPAS
 Protection of coastal/marine areas and enforcement of fishery laws
 Monitoring and evaluation schemes to include coastal pollution monitoring and
control to understand water pollution of the area and to institute measures
complementary to the PCSDS environmental quality regulation

 Regulatory measures or permitting system

 Application of resource rents or user charges
 Management of funds from proceeds of license fees
 Allowable activities for each zone
 Development activities in small islands
 Waste disposal and sewage
 Provision of alterative livelihood projects
 Protection of the access rights of the community to the natural resources
 Migration and settlement within the coastal areas
 Appropriation of funds for the implementation of the plan and the management of
ECAN zones
 Others identified to be necessary and relevant
The ECAN Zoning Plan shall contain, among others, the following actions:
i. Description of the Area

ii. Goals/Objectives
iii. Zoning Strategy (priorities, methodologies for markingzone boundaries)
iv. Zone Management (activities, regulatory measures policy directions)
v. Administration
vi. Monitoring and Evaluation
vii. Annexes (maps and references)
The recommended steps in coming up with a detailed EZP are the following:
1. Building of a sustainable development planning database (ECAN Data Infrastructure

Development)
2. Determination of the exact boundaries of ECAN zones and administrative boundaries
3. Identification of “Special Management Areas” (SMAs)
4. Development of thematic and integrated planning modules and indicators.
5. Stocktaking of local environmental governance initiatives
6. Development of an ECAN-based land use spatial optimization algorithm using Multi-
Criteria Analysis (OPTIONAL)
7. Integrated threats analysis
8. Formulation of ECAN zones and resources plan
See Chapter 4 for the details of each of the above steps.
5. Plan Integration: Development of ECAN-Based CLWUP
Method: Planning workshops/sessions, consensus building, conflict resolution during

meetings and roundtable discussions
Inputs: Integral zonal and strategic elements of ECAN-CLWUP (outputs of Physical

Integration and Strategic Integration); technical assistance to ECAN Board and to
Municipal Planning and Development Office (MPDO)
Outputs: Draft modules/sections of Municipal ECAN-based CLWUP
After the Physical and Strategic Integration steps, planning for municipal ECAN-based
Comprehensive Land and Water Use Plans can now proceed.

6. Institutional Integration: Approval of ECAN-Based CLWUP
This stage of integration is concerned with social acceptability of the ECAN-CLWUP

integrated plan. The District Management Office (DMO) and the ECAN Planning Team will work
closely with LGU in the institutionalization of the ECAN-compliant CLWUP. This may require
attendance as resource persons to Municipal ECAN Board meetings, municipal council legislative
sessions, and public hearings. The final output is the approved ECAN-Based CLWUP with
institutional support from executive and legislative institutions. The approval of the plan is four-
fold:
1. Approval of the ECAN-based CLWUP by the ECAN Board and endorsement to the
municipal council;
2. Approval of the CLWUP by the municipal council and endorsement to the provincial
council;
3. Approval of the CLWUP by the provincial council (through the Provincial Land Use
Committee) and endorsement to the HLURB; and
4. Approval of the CLWUP by the PCSD.
The yardsticks of the success of this step are the incorporation of the essential elements of
the ECAN Zoning Plan document into the CLWUP document and the institutional support for the
municipal ECAN-based CLWUP.

Puerto Princesa ECAN Resource Management Plan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Puerto Princesa ECAN Resource Management Plan

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Puerto Princesa ECAN Resource Management Plan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Supervised Field Experience in Human Settlements Planning

Department of Community and Environmental Resource Planning

Palawan Council for Sustainable Development

ECAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN

Cuebillas, Arkin Miguel D.

Palawan Council for Sustainable Development

ECAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN OF PUERTO PRINCESA CITY,

Cuebillas, Arkin Miguel D.

This report is commissioned to come up with the ECAN Resource Management

Restricted Use Zone

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla i

4. Intrusion of people to claim lands and perform extractive and destructive

Controlled Use Zone

Traditional Use Zone

Multiple Use Zone

Tribal Ancestral Use Zone

To formulate an effective ECAN Resource Management Plan, the ECAN Planning

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla ii

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................... i

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla iv

5.3 Methodology for Integrated Threats Analysis .......................................................118

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla v

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla vi

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla vii

Table 20. Possible courses of action in the municipality

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla viii

Figure 1. Hierarchy and linkages of plan (HLURB 2006, modified)

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla ix

ANNEX A: Summary Documentation of the Participatory ECAN Planning Workshop in

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla x

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla xi

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla xii

1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE ECAN ZONING PLAN

1.2 TARGET USERS OF THE ECAN ZONING PLAN

1.3 LEGAL BASES OF THE ECAN ZONING PLAN

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla 1

The ECAN Zoning Plan shall include among others the

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla 2

Relevant section of Provision

Section 31. Integration/Harmonization of ECAN

Section 3 – Lands of the public domain are classified into

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla 3

Law/Issuance Description/Related provisions

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla 4

1.4 EXISTING LAND USE PLANNING AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS IN

At the provincial level, the planning situation in Palawan is a preponderance of

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla 5

2.1 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF PUERTO PRINCESA CITY

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla 6

2.2 GEO-PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT SECTOR

2.2.1 Geographical Location

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla 7

2.2.2 Political Boundaries

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla 8

Barangay Land Area (ha) Barangay Land Area (ha)

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla 9

Elevation Range (m) Area (ha) Percent Distribution (%)

Cuebillas, Defensor, Esguerra, Falcon, Mejico, Padilla 10