 |
Kumander Leopoldo Lalang (left) and Kumander Johnny
Akbar (right) reflecting lessons on livelihood projects
provided to conflict affected communities. |
“Right after the signing of historic
September 2, 1996 Final Peace Agreement between the GRP and MNLF, huge amount
of money were poured by agencies for IDPs livelihood project, but heartbreakingly,
money were just wasted...worst of all, money mismanagement destroyed our brotherhood
and sisterhood” a sad sharing of Commander Johnny Akbar also known as “Ka
Johnny” and Commander Leopoldo Lalangan also known as Ka Polds, both MNLF Combatant
Peace Champion during their recent meeting with the Mindanao Journey.
Ka
Johnny and Ka Polds observed that many agencies repeatedly use the same
strategy of organizing 20-30 member People’s Organization (PO) on every
livelihood project support to IDPs, but still, failure re-occurs. I then asked why?
Ka
Johnny said “There are 3 main reasons that we know why livelihood projects for
conflict affected community fails”.
“First - Most PO leaders were military commanders. 1 year series
of seminars is not enough to empower poor PO members in the rural conflict
affected areas to question how their leaders manage their funds”.
“Second -Poor civilians in
the rural conflict affected communities need quick income to feed their
families daily. Their family will starve to death if they wait until patronage
refund will be distributed to members”.
“Third-Most seminars focus
on organizational and livelihood development. We observed that, no matter how
successful the PO was, members remained poor because there is no immediate
impact of the livelihood to the members. If a 30 member PO have net income of
PhP300K/year, it means PhP27/member/day income-not enough to feed their family.
Only the PO or Cooperative grows, the members remained poor in conflict
affected community setting”.
With
much interest on the discussion, I then asked “what do you think Ka Johnny and Ka Polds are the appropriate strategy for a
livelihood project to be successful?”
Ka
Johnny and Ka Polds answered “We suggest that supporting agencies must re-strategize to
prevent committing of the same mistake as always happening”.
- Supporting agency must integrate continuous social preparation activities not only to rebuild community confidence to work with the government but also to develop their confidence and full potential in expanding and sustaining their livelihood project”;
- Market driven practical skills seminar in partnership with TESDA or DTI is perfect for immediate application and practice of quick impact livelihood project that if possible could command daily income i.e. hair dressing skills training with business plan then support to parlor establishment with equipments and materials, etc.”;
- Livelihood intervention might consider micro-lending concept in clustered type base from their individual simple business plan (if they’ll repay 100%, they could have it back as reward to be used for their business expansion). i.e. group of 5 for easy monitoring and management. In this way, funds will be distributed equitable, thus, benefits and income is measured per household. Dole out mentality will be eliminated”; and
- Establish and/or support to sustainability mechanism and plans for community public market center with public vehicle terminal. This will become their central commerce and gateway for their agri-product external market linkages”.
“Since
the GRP-MNLF 1996 FPA livelihood project lots of livelihood project was given
to conflict affected communities, then, eventually failed. We hope that bad
history on livelihood project will NOT repeat itself” Ka Johnny ended.
