Opportunities and limitations to social learning for sustainability: empirical insights from a participatory approach to community-based resource management in the Philippines

ABSTRACT

Social learning is increasingly identified as a valuable tool in the pursuit of sustainable development agenda in the same manner that participatory processes are seen as important avenues for creating social learning situations. Through an empirical case study of participatory processes undertaken to rehabilitate a community-based irrigation system in the Philippines, this study explores two interrelated questions: what feature of the participatory irrigation management approach implemented in the Philippines facilitates social learning, and what were the limiting factors for its long-term success? One of the most prominent features of participatory approaches elucidated in this case study is the integration of traditional institutions into more contemporary formalized farmer associations. While this approach helped legitimize intervention and enhanced local cooperation for a successful project implementation, our findings underscores the need for carefully designed participatory processes that are specifically aimed at creating long term learning outcomes. Further study is recommended to further explore how social learning can be facilitated beyond the intervention phase of project-based participatory approaches.

KEYWORDS:

• Participatory approach; social learning; sustainability; community-based irrigation management; institutions; collective action; conflict resolution

1. Introduction

In the mid-1970s, through its National Irrigation Administration (NIA) – the government agency responsible for irrigation – the Philippines is one of the countries that pioneered the decentralization of the construction and O&M of both small and large-scale public irrigation systems. Since then, until early 1990s, such model known as ‘participatory approach program’ (PAP) led to consistently positive results (Araral, 2005; Korten, 1984). The PAP was later succeeded by Irrigation Management Transfer (IMT), an expanded version of the O&M turn-over programme. The success of the model attracted worldwide recognition from both development practitioners and scholars (Vermillion, 1997). This success is largely attributed to participatory project implementation.

In the Philippines, irrigation systems are categorized into how they are developed and managed, namely; national irrigation systems (NIS), communal irrigation systems (CIS) and private irrigation systems (PIS). Both the NIS and CIS are managed by the formal association of water users called Irrigators Association (IA) which are viewed as important institutions for water management and sustainable development. IAs are registered as non-stock organizations with the Philippines Securities and Exchange Commission rendering IAs a juridical personality which allows them to negotiate with the government as well as private institutions.

NIS which have a service area of 1,000 hectares or more are primarily constructed and owned by the government. After construction, farmer beneficiaries are organized into IAs which are annually evaluated for their functionality. If they prove to be functional or viable, they can then enter a contracting arrangement for the O&M of the irrigation system including the collection of Irrigation Service Fee (ISF). On the other hand, IA for CIS which have less than 1,000 hectares service area, are formed prior to the construction or rehabilitation of the irrigation system. The project implementer works closely with the IAs concerned to design the irrigation system. After project completion, O&M is fully handed over to the IA.

The implementation of a participatory management approach in the Philippines is widely recognized as a success with impact evaluation showing clear gains for the farmers as well as for the government (Meinzen-Dick, 1997). In addition to cost-saving and efficiency related benefits, the incorporation of farmer participation in the process of irrigation development and management generated optimistic gains in the overall improvement of NIA and IA operation.

The uptake of participatory approach and stakeholder involvement as a main strategy for sustainable agriculture and natural resource management has been increasing (see Fry & Thieme, 2019; Karubanga et al., 2017; Mostert, 2003; Pahl- Wostl, 2007; Salvini et al., 2016). It is argued that through stakeholder participation in the management and supply of resources, facilities and services, the sustainability of development interventions can be ensured (Cleaver, 1999). One of the most significant claims is that, participatory processes can foster social learning (Ballester & Lacroix, 2016; Garmendia & Stagl, 2010; Tippett et al., 2005; Scholz et al., 2014; Garcia-Nieto et al., 2019).

The predominant assumption has been that water can be predicted and controlled by means of infrastructure and therefore should be the exclusive task of technical experts (Pahl-wostl et al., 2007). Although this technocratic approach still dominates the construction and management of large-scale irrigation projects in the Philippines such as NIS wherein IA participation is limited to O&M post-construction, smaller community-based irrigation systems incorporate farmer participation in all aspects of the project as early as the planning and design phase.

Thus, an examination of the process outcome of participatory approach to the construction and management of CIS is expected to provide empirical insights on how to improve the design of similar approaches in the future. Specifically, this paper elucidates how participatory approaches can trigger a transformative change process in the form of social learning.

Social learning is said to occur when a group of individuals pursuing their private interests is transformed to a collective with a common purpose and oriented toward a shared interest (Webler et al., 1995; Wenger, 1998, 2010). An extensive review of the various conceptualizations and definitions of social learning can be found in the field of natural resource management (NRM) with the consensus that social learning requires a participatory setting for different actors to communicate and interact to achieve a common understanding of the problem at hand (Muro & Jeffrey, 2008).

Arguably even though participation helps in facilitation it does not always lead to social learning outcomes (Bull et al., 2008). There is a need to distinguish between the concepts of social learning and its purported outcome (Reed et al., 2010) in order to really understand the function of social learning and the impact of participatory approaches (Armitage etal., 2008; Reed et al., 2009).

Despite claims that the social learning construct remains a fuzzy concept (Muro & Jeffrey, 2012) mainly due to contrasting assertions about the outcomes and processes that support social learning (Cundill & Rodela, 2012), empirical evaluation of social learning has rapidly grown. Social learning scholarship initially dominated by the NRM literature (Rodela, 2011; Wals & Rodela, 2014) has expanded to include studies on community gardens (Bendt et al., 2013); flood management and adaptation (Shaw and Kristjanson, 2013; Johannessen & Hahn, 2013;Tran et al., 2018; Tran & Rodela, 2019); climate change adaptation (Ensor & Harvey, 2015; Cundill & Harvey, 2019) and water governance (Johannessen et al., 2019). Noticeably though, social learning in the context of participatory irrigation management is still largely unexplored with only one existing case (see Sinclair et al., 2013).

Rodela (2011) has identified three distinct ways that social learning has been operationalized in the literature. First is the individual-centric group where social learning is described as an internal-reflective process of change; second is the network-centric group where changes in practices/way things are done are manifested and third group is the systems-centric perspective of social learning. In one of her subsequequent work (Wals & Rodela, 2014) called for further testing on the assumptions of the individual-centric group particularly on the operational measures of social learning suggested by Webler and colleagues. Webler et al. (1995) were among the first to operationalize the concept of social learning through an empirical study of solid waste management with the assumption that social learning is manifested in two dimensions; cognitive enhancement and moral development. These two measures were later on expanded to include trust and relational dimension (Wals & Rodela, 2014).

In addition to Wals and Rodela (2014) call for more empirical testing of the existing operational measures of social learning. Lumosi et al. (2019) also highlights the need to examine long-term emergent social learning processes. Emergent is hereby defined as learning processes that are self-organized or occur naturally (Cundill & Rodela, 2012; Cundill & Harvey, 2019). While it is imperative to identify the features that could hinder or stimulate learning in purposely designed social learning activities, it is equally important to recognize that social learning could also occur in self-organizing processes through long-term human-environment interaction (Olsson et al., 2004; Folke et al., 2005).

Drawing from a case study of a participatory irrigation project in Northern Philippines, this paper examines whether and how participatory processes contribute to social learning outcomes. The learning outcome is evaluated through a change in understanding both at the individual and collective levels resulting in the development of shared meanings and values thereby promoting concerted action. This study investigates user attitude through interviews and personal observation to establish a link between public participation, social learning and collective action.

The case study presented here seeks to answer two interrelated questions: what feature of the participatory irrigation management approach implemented in the Philippines facilitated social learning, and what were the limiting factors for its long-term success? By utilizing the theoretical notions of social learning as an analytical framework, the present study aims to identify ways participatory processes can be better designed to facilitate learning for sustainability.

2. Conceptual framework

Social learning is increasingly cited as a normative goal in sustainable resource management. Long before the advent of the sustainable development agenda, the notion of social learning as a means to induce social change was already quite widespread (Muro & Jeffrey, 2008). However, vague notions of learning have been perpetuated because of the lack of careful examination on the specific goals of the learning process. Also, the plethora of learning theories coming from different fields of study (e.g. international development, organizational learning, and environmental policy) makes it challenging to define social learning. Gerlak et al., (2017) review of learning and environmental policy literature revealed that although the field has considerably grown, it is still faced with many challenges with respect to conceptualizing learning, as well as theorizing and measuring learning processes and outcomes.

Cundill and Rodela (2012) framed social learning as an interactive approach to problem solving and collective decision-making. Elsewhere, it is referred to as an environmental management approach directed towards improving human and environmental interrelations through collective action and reflection (Keen et al., 2012). (Röling, 2002) highlighted the primary role of communication and relationships in facilitating desirable social change and also argued that a sustainable society can only emerge through learning and interaction. But what sets social learning truly apart from other perspectives, is the belief that people play an active role in creating the very environment that affects their behaviour (Maarleveld & Dabgbégnon, 1999), an important concept in examining sustainable behaviour. It is believed that social learning supports the necessary system transformation needed for sustainable development (Folke et al., 2005; Pahl-Wostl et al., 2008). Noguera-Mendez et al. (2016) elaborated on the role of social learning in fostering pro-environmental values. Social learning was found to be instrumental in the improvement of forest governance around the world (Egunyu et al., 2016; Hegde et al., 2017). Social learning is also said to be key in building the resilience of social-ecological systems (De Kraker, 2017). Recently, social learning has been gaining more prominence as an intervention strategy for changing behaviours and actions to combat the growing threat of climate change and disaster risks (see Murti et al., 2020; Cundill & Harvey, 2019; Van Epp & Garside, 2019).

One important assumption of social learning is, not only will it result to individual behaviour change but also lead to joint practices and collective action (Pahl-Wostl, 2006). Social learning in a participatory setting improves the ability of a group to set aside their private interests in pursuit of a common purpose oriented towards a shared interest (Webler et al., 1995). Social learning plays an important role in promoting collective action within a network (Maurel et al., 2007). It facilitates a shared understanding of an issue thereby improving collective action (Lebel et al., 2010). A case study of an extension project supporting communal forest management in the Bolivian amazon found that social learning outcomes such as knowledge acquisition and increased trust among the participants enhances collective action (Biedenweg and Monroe, 2013).

The expectation that participatory processes will result to a collective action has been featured in the collaborative and adapative management literature since the 1990s when management success was evaluated based on the coming together of multi-stakeholders, reaching an agreement and taking action (Keen et al., 2006). Inherent to the participatory approach is the deliberative process of sustained interaction between individuals and sharing of knowledge and perspectives in a trusting environment which enables social learning to take place. However, the extent to which collective action is an expected outcome of social learning should be subjected to further empirical scrutiny (Cundill & Rodela, 2012).

The literature on collective action in irrigation management has long been established.The characteristics of the resource, characteristics of the users and the institutional context were identified to be the main influencing factors in the cooperative action of farmer-irrigators (Wade, 1988; Tang, 1992, Lam, 1998; Ostrom, 1990, 2009; Totin et al., 2014). Although much have been learned about these factors in the context of the Philippines (Ostrom, 1990, Fujiie et al., 2005; Araral, 2005) understanding the social learning impact of participatory projects on the collective action capacity of local irrigation institutions is an area that is yet to be explored. This presents a promising field of study considering that participatory irrigation is an important component of irrigation reform worldwide (Araral, 2005).

This study adapts Pahl-wostl et al. (2007) conceptual framework for social learning to elucidate the essential processes of learning in participatory irrigation. This framework was originally developed to account for social learning in water resources management based on a large-scale collaborative river management project in the European Union (Bouwen & Taillieau, 2004, Craps & Maurel, 2003; Pahl-wostl, 2002, 2006). One underlying assumptions of the framework is, social learning occurs in a cyclical and iterative manner, which can offer useful insights on emergent properties of long-term social learning processes that is the main interest of the paper.

In deliberately designed social learning processes the design features largely determine the outcome of the learning process (Muro & Jeffrey, 2012). Such design features served specific purposes and usually requires external facilitation and intervention. The identification of these design features that could stimulate or hinder the social learning process is crucial for improving future designs. At the same time, further examination on how learning processes occur beyond deliberately designed activities is equally important in understanding how social learning is produced and reproduced over time. The concept of long-term emergent social learning argues that social learning is a continuous, interactive and dynamic process that can arise and decline at different phases as actors interact, deliberate and reframe problems and solutions (Lumosi et al., 2019).

The framework assumes the presence of a feedback loop between the context, process and outcome which results to an iterative social learning process (Figure 1). Existing literature suggests that the process of social learning embedded in a particular social and governance context can lead to improved technical capabilities and development of shared meanings through relational and cognitive changes (Schusler et al., 2003; Mostert et al., 2007). However, a cyclical relationship between active stakeholder engagement and outcome suggests that participatory processes do not always result to social learning. A feedback loop connects the outcomes and context to take into consideration the changing dynamics of learning in an iterative manner. These changing dynamics are largely influenced by learning spaces which includes physical platform, structural setting, or self-organized processes that are embedded in a cultural, institutional and historical context (Lumosi et al., 2019).

Figure 1. Conceptual framework for social learning in resources management. Modified from Pahl-Wostl et. al. (2007).

In this study, social learning is seen as an exploratory process where stakeholders generate and disseminate knowledge in the wider social units to overcome constraints in their irrigation-related activities through deliberation and reframing. Deliberation occurs through debates where actors question and redefine their assumptions by revealing the differences in their viewpoints and interests (Kowarsch et al., 2016, Newig et al., 2010). Reframing happens when communication and negotiation between actors lead to integration (Aarts & Van Woerkum, 2002). Reframing is important for resolving conflicts but it can only take place in the presence of deliberation spaces.

Social learning is manifested through improved technical capabilities and development of shared meanings which serve as the basis for collective action. The assertion that social learning takes place through a deliberative process where stakeholders interact and share different knowledge and perspectives has been thoroughly corroborated by the collaborative management literature (Cundill & Rodela, 2012; Sinclair et al., 2011). However, this study also recognizes that social learning processes can be hindered by the challenges of integrating multiple sources of knowledge (Rist et al., 2006; Schusler et al., 2003), as well as limited resources and time (e.g. and rigid hierarchal and bureaucratic structures (see Webler et al., 1995). Also despite increasing recognition on the value of participatory processes, actual stakeholder involvement in design is rare and often not very successful when applied (Muro & Jeffrey, 2012).

Social learning processes are highly dependent on contextual circumstances and are highly influenced by the location as well as the cultural and historical context (Ison et al., 2007; Keen & Mahanty, 2006). Hence, participatory strategies should not only facilitate stakeholder interaction but also appreciate local culture (Brown et al., 2008). Culture is defined here as the values shared by communities (Ostrom, 2005) which encompasses norms, traditions, language, belief system and religion. History refers to political and non-political settings of actors (Lumosi et al., 2019). Furthermore, recognizing the importance of steering mechanisms such as leadership and/or facilitation in bringing about social learning, Mostert suggests that participatory strategies must be structured in a manner that can guide and support the interaction of interdependent actors (Mostert et al., 2007).

3. Case study and research methods

To better understand the phenomena under investigation, a qualitative case study approach (Yin, 2014) was selected for this study, combined with an interpretive research approach ( Schwartz-Shea & Yanow, 2006) to make sense of the meanings that actors construct based on the social, historical and cultural context in which they are embedded. The case selected is a participatory irrigation project in an upland rice farming community in Sagada, Philippines comprising of four villages, or barangays as they are locally called, which include Aguid, Banga-an, Pide, and Fidelisan (see Figure 2).

Figure 2. Location of four communities selected for the study.

The study area is inhabited by an indigenous group of people who continue to adhere to customary laws and tradition. Although such small indigenous communities are increasingly being influenced by the mainstream Philippine society on how they manage their resources, irrigation management in this part of the country remains traditional.

The case study approach is deemed suitable for investigating how social learning processes are reflected in the everyday experiences of farmers, since it allows the in-depth and multi-faceted explorations of complex issues in their real-life settings. This approach aims to capture the social reality through fieldwork in a natural setting (Yin, 2009). As a methodological choice, it provides the researcher a context-dependent experience by enabling the study of an object or a phenomenon at close range (Flyvberg, 2011). The data presented for analysis is based on fieldwork from 2014-2016 including document review, interviews and surveys, interacting with stakeholders, taking field notes, and observing the interaction between the informants during community meetings.

Guided by the exploratory approach, initial data collection began with in-depth interviews of the four barangay leaders and one municipal representative. During the second visit, nineteen key informants were recruited through purposive snowball sampling. The respondents were identified on the basis of their historical knowledge and long-term involvement in the management of the irrigation system. Building on the information generated from key respondents, eighty-two semi-structured interviews were later conducted through a combination of purposive and snowball sampling (Liamputtong, 2013) to validate the key findings and increase sample representation.The details of the interviewees are described in Table 1.

Table 1. List of key informants.

No	Name	Role/s	Barangay
1	Farmer A	Elder	Fidelisan
2	Farmer B	Elder, former barangay chairman	Fidelisan
3	Farmer C	Elder	Pide
4	Farmer D	Elder	Pide
5	Farmer E	Elder, former lampisa, former barangay official	Pide
6	Farmer F	Elder	Pide
7	Farmer G	Former barangay chairman, former lampisa	Pide
8	Farmer H	Elder	Pide
9	Farmer I	Former barangay official	Pide
10	Farmer J	Former barangay chairman	Pide
11	Farmer K	Former barangay chairman	Aguid
12	Farmer L	Elder	Banga-an
13	Farmer M	Current barangay official, former lampisa	Banga-an
14	Farmer N	Current barangay chairman	Aguid
15	Farmer O	Former barangay official	Fidelisan
16	Farmer P	Former lampisa	Fidelisan
17	Farmer Q	Former barangay chairman, former lampisa	Fidelisan
18	Farmer R	Elder	Fidelisan
19	Municipal official	Head of Planning and Development Division

The informants were asked to describe key events in the construction and operation of the irrigation system before, after and during the implementation of the participatory project as a basis for retrospective analysis of social learning processes. Many of the farmer informants were also dap-ay elders who were later elected as barangay officials as customary in the community. Some of the farmers also served as local water distributors also known as lampisa.

The timeline of the irrigation development that was used for the recall were as follows: (a) original construction of gravity-flow irrigation system through dap-ay (informal IA) initiative in 1952; (b) operation and maintenance through lampisa system by dap-ay from 1952 to 1990s; (c) Formalization of IA for implementation of rehabilitation project by World Bank from 1990s to 2000; (d) operation and maintenance by the newly organized IA between 2000 and 2012; (e) rehabilitation project in 2012.

In between the data collection process, several stages of ‘making sense’ of the empirical material took place. Throughout the data analysis a hermeneutic and interpretative stance was assumed. The first stage is the transcription of the data. After reading the transcribed data to get an overall view, it is organized into key themes, categories and patterns. The citations were also clustered together to further identify recurrent themes. These themes are then compared and contrasted to identify the relationships between themes, as well as their linkages and contradictions. The process of moving back and forth between data and interpretation in order to achieve a more authentic picture of reality that matches the analytic frames of the study is referred to as analytic induction (Ragin & Amoroso, 2011).

This method ex-post analysis allows the researcher to conduct a reflexive inquiry to re(describe) and re(interpret) data, concepts and ideas. The aim is to bring together past experiences in order to highlight those aspects that are seen as key elements for social learning (Rodela et al. 2012). As indicators of social learning, farmer participation to the collective maintenance and conflict resolution under the dap-ay system and the formalized IAs were compared and analyzed based on the influence of the socio-cultural, economic and historical setting in the specified timeline earlier. The analytical focus was on cognitive changes (improved technical capabilities), normative changes (cultural norms, beliefs and practices) and relational changes between local actors as they interact, deliberate and re-frame problems and solutions for managing their communal irrigation system.

4. Major findings

The aim of the participatory process was to involve all the relevant stakeholders in planning and project design. A participatory approach was undertaken by the government to cultivate a strong sense of project ownership and responsibility. With the assumption that farmer beneficiaries with higher sense of project ownership would be more willing to invest in the project maintenance, it was expected that such an approach would lead to better project sustainability.

To facilitate the process, water users were organized into a formal participatory institution called the Irrigators Association (IA) during the implementation of the first rehabilitation project in the 1990s. The establishment of IAs was a national strategy devised by the NIA to devolve the management of irrigation systems as a cost-cutting measure. The IA was designed to take over the operation and maintenance of the newly rehabilitated irrigation system after project completion. It was expected to be the main channel of communication between the government and the local community.

The organization of IA was made easier by the existence of the ad hoc irrigators group under the dap-ay system. They only had to elect their officers and establish the constitution and by-laws of the organization. The dap-ay is an informal institution that had been managing the Mabileng-Oliwek since its original construction in 1952.The dap-ay is the traditional form of governance in Sagada and is led by elders who are the recognized traditional leaders in the community. The modern form of local governance is known as barangay which refers to the smallest socio-political unit in the Philippines.

4.1. Changing context of governance, socio-cultural and economic setting

The municipality of Sagada was established in 1965 which required the creation of barangays as units of governance. Historically, Sagada was comprised of nine indigenous territories also called ili belonging to different tribal groups. Our study area was originally governed by the applai tribe through the dap-ay system before it was sub-divided into four barangays. Prior to the establishment of the formal barangay system, dap-ay elders formed informal ad hoc groups for decision-making in the community which included rulemaking for irrigation management since agriculture is the main source of livelihood. Each dap-ay group is typically composed of around 5-10 farmer households, represented by the male head. Members are obligated to participate in collective farming activities, primarily in the annual canal cleaning before the start of the planting season as well as occasional repair and maintenance activities to ensure stable water supply throughout the season. Farmers who fail to participate in these collective activities are subjected to penalties and fines imposed by the dap-ay.

Traditional rituals and ceremonies are sanctioned by the dap-ay and their execution must be led by the dap-ay elders. Because of the high regard for their moral authority, the dap-ay elders are well-respected in the community establishing their powerful position. People seek their judgement to resolve disputes and for them to impose fines and penalties on violators of irrigation rules.

However, economic changes such as the introduction of cash economy has had significant impacts to the imposition of fines and penalties. As mentioned above, one of the main reasons for incurring fines is the failure to participate in collective activities such as the annual clearing of the canals prior to the start of the planting season. According to interviews, it was very rare for a farmer to not participate in this activity because it is seen as a social norm that one must ascribe to as part of the community. Hence, if the father as head of the household cannot attend, he will exert all effort to send a representative who can either be the wife or one of the children. Nowadays however, the monetization of fines and penalties has made it more convenient for households to shirk responsibility by simply paying for their absence with cash which has now become the norm. Moreover, since the dap-ay system is inextricably linked to the socio-cultural beliefs and practices of the community, changes in social and cultural norms has unavoidably also caused changes in the dap-ay system.

The formalization of dap-ay into IA as a requirement for project implementation occurred when the community is undergoing rapid changes in its social and cultural values. It was also a time when democratic voting process of electing barangay officials was introduced in contrast to the dap-ay system where traditional elder leaders are unilaterally chosen by the ad hoc dap-ay elders based on their reputation and good standing in the community. Good reputation is earned by practicing customary rituals and traditions as well as ability to resolve conflicts. The authority of the dap-ay elders hence rests on the continued adherence of the locals to customary traditions. Nowadays, the existence of these traditions is threatened by the changing context of the community brought about by modernization, economic development, and the increased influence of Christian religious sects.

Interviews suggested that the moral authority of the dap-ay elders has declined over the years which have affected their ability to enforce irrigation rules. Also, the total number of recognized elders in the community had been decreasing without any replacement. The decline in the enforcement capacity of the dap-ay led to a decrease in the number of participating farmers in the routine maintenance work for the irrigation canals and contribute for the compensation of the traditional water distributors. ‘From 1952 to 1970s, the annual cleaning and maintenance of the irrigation canals have decreased’, (Farmer A). Local farmers claimed that because of the diminished presence and authority of the elders, it has become harder to mobilize local farmers.

‘It is very different nowadays because the old men are not present to lead the work. The irrigation system is no longer well-maintained’ (Farmer A). Another respondent expressed similar concern noting that

we do not have written by laws; it is all verbal because we have very strong trust with each other. During this time, however, I can observe that community cooperation is becoming weak since there are no more old men who were the very persistent ones in advising their children to participate. (Farmer H)

Notably, there was no lampisa since 2017 despite the willingness of some farmers to serve. The dap-ay elders claimed that it is the responsibility of the barangay officials to appoint the lampisa while the barangay expects that dap-ays to be responsible.

The changing social and economic values of the community have weakened the authority of the dap-ay elders which subsequently lessened their power to impose the rules and regulations for the operation and maintenance of the irrigation system. Various religious sects that denounces dap-ay practices has penetrated the community. The practice of cultural ceremonies and rituals has become less due to the high cost of animal sacrifice. A growing number of the highly educated population has started to distance themselves from many of the traditional beliefs and practices, branding them as outdated and no longer relevant to the modern times.

4.2. Irrigation management of CIS under the informal dap-ay system – 1952 to 1990s

4.2.1. Collective action

To cope with the perennial shortage of water during summer season, Mabileng-Oliwek CIS was collectively built by the community after the end of the Second World War. Due to the distance of the water source and the mountainous topography of the area, the cost of building irrigation canals is too high to bear for individual farmers. Collective efforts must be expended to distribute the burden of cost. Under the leadership of the dap-ay the construction work was completed in 1952, nine years after it was started since local farmers could only work intermittently in-between the planting seasons. Every man and woman of the community contributed free labour. While the men did the hard labour of digging the canal the women took turns in cooking food for the workers and hauling of construction materials.

As soon as the canal became operational, management rules were established by the dap-ay to ensure the collective maintenance of the system. Apart from monitoring participation and implementing sanction for the annual cleaning and maintenance of the irrigation system, the dap-ay elders are also responsible for ensuring that water is properly appropriated amongst the farmers. Ideally, each paddy field is allocated with two hours’ worth of water. Farmers caught stealing other farmers share are subjected to a fine decided by the dap-ay elders.

Non-participation to the annual maintenance of the irrigation system is subject to penalty in the form of either cash or equivalent amount in food for others who participate. Reportedly, the amount varies for each area, but it is usually between fifty to one hundred pesos. After the annual cleaning, assigned members of the dap-ay go around the community to collect penalty from households without any representative. According to the informants, however, even if a non-participating farmer can pay the penalty, the damage to his reputation of being branded as non-cooperative is a heavier price to pay, especially if he does it repeatedly.

The dap-ay is the center of community life. Thus, if you always violate rules of the dap-ay you will get bad reputation in the community. This situation is difficult if you need help then people may be hesitant to give it. (Farmer I)

Since collective management of the irrigation system rests heavily on the dap-ay system which is the centre of the socio-cultural life of the community, non-compliance is equivalent to a violation of the cultural norms of the community. The cost of which is too high to bear for members which ensured high community participation.

4.2.2. Conflict resolution

Historically, the irrigation rules were established by the dap-ay because of conflicts between farmers after the establishment of the irrigation system.

After the completion of the irrigation system in 1952, fights especially among the women were very common because they are usually in-charge of irrigating their paddy fields while the husband works off-farm after the planting season. Many farmers also spent sleepless nights to safeguard their turn for the irrigation water. (Farmer E)

Through the initiative of the dap-ay elders, a water management system called lampisa became a central part of managing irrigation. In the lampisa system, the elders appoint several farmers to work as water-distributors during the dry season to ensure that, despite limited supply, everyone can get a fair share of water. The water distributors are compensated with a five percent share from each farmer’s total harvest.

Conflicts between the lampisa and farmer, or between farmers themselves due to stealing of water supply are not uncommon especially during dry season when water demand is very high. First time violators are given warning but repeat offenders are subjected to a counselling session by dap-ay elders. At the same time, the offender is usually asked to pay fine in the form of food for the elders who takes part in the counselling. If water stealing results to altercation with another farmer, the offending farmer may be asked to compensate the aggrieved party by providing food, usually butchering a pig, for the whole community. According to key informants, the main objective of conflict resolution is to restore good relationship between farmers and fines are usually in the form of animal sacrifice for ritual of restoring order in the community. Afterwards, all those involved in resolving the conflict share the meal provided from the ritual.

4.3. Irrigation management under formal IA (1990s – present)

In the 1990s Mabileng-Oliwek was chosen as a pilot site for the implementation of a participatory irrigation project funded by World Bank. Prior to the implementation of the project, there were documented reports that the management of the irrigation system was starting to be problematic due to difficulty in mobilizing farmers for repair and maintenance activities.

The participatory irrigation project was aimed at providing financial support for the physical rehabilitation of community-based irrigation systems including technical training for its operation and maintenance. Despite several delays in the implementation the project was completed and formally turned-over to the newly established Mabileng-Oliwek IA in early 2000. A portion of the irrigation system was again rehabilitated in 2012 through a joint funding by the Department of Agriculture and the municipal government of Sagada. Through the years small financial grants were allocated by the local government for the repair of certain canal portions damaged by typhoons, most recently in 2014.

Through the formal organization of water users into IA, local farmers gained access to skills trainings and seminars on how to better design their irrigation system and learned new O & M practices to better manage their newly rehabilitated irrigation system. Through the IA, the government provided local farmers with trainings and seminars to enhance their capabilities to manage and operate the newly rehabilitated irrigation system. However, interviews suggested that the formal user’s association played very little role in the actual day to day operation and maintenance of the irrigation system after the turn-over. ‘The establishment of IA was one of the main requirements to access government funding so we had to comply’, (Farmer B). However, the de facto management of the irrigation system remained highly reliant on the authority of the dap-ay system. Respondents claimed that they continued to refer to the dap-ay elders about daily operational issues such as water stealing or complaints about water distribution of the lampisa. On the other hand, it was widely acknowledged during the interviews that having a formally registered IA was useful in accessing government funds for occasional repairs such as those damaged by seasonal typhoons. To date the Mabileng-Oliwek IA remains to be the official irrigation association representing farmers in the study area.

Interviews suggested that the design stage of the project was characterized by conflicts between farmer representatives and project engineers. To resolve this issue, IA initiated a series of barangay meetings which eventually led to the creation of a technical working group composed of engineers and dap-ay elders who represented the interest of the local farmers. This technical working group was tasked to lead the planning and design of the rehabilitation work.

Farmers interviewed revealed that they were initially skeptical of the ability of the engineers to make a good design because of the assumption that their main priority was to complete the project as fast as they could to save on labour cost. Through the working group, the engineers and the dap-ay elders conducted joint inspection of the project site building rapport in the process. The opportunity for the engineers to see the actual site and learn more about the history of the irrigation system from the elders enabled both parties to engage in better discussion and create a shared vision.

The municipal engineers interviewed acknowledged that the technical inputs from the locals who are more familiar with the area’s history and topography helped them design the system so that it was appropriate for local conditions.

A group of farmers who regularly go to the mountains to gather a type of mountain tea have also taken up the habit of checking on the state of the irrigation canals. The intimate knowledge of these farmers on the workings of the irrigation system was particularly helpful in designing the rehabilitation work. (Farmer N)

Like most of the farmers interviewed he expressed appreciation for the willingness of the engineers to listen to the inputs and suggestions of the locals, adding that the project engineers adjusted some of the original project design including the path of the canal to avoid areas that are prone to landslide based on local recommendations This resulted to a better design that met the needs of the local people and also satisfied the technical requirements from the funding agency.

Most people interviewed claimed that the technical information shared by the project engineers helped expand their knowledge about their irrigation system, e.g. the difference in the volume of water between the rainy season and the dry season or the location of the tertiary canals. In establishing the IA, the actual number of water users was determined, including the size and number of paddy fields of each member. The interviews suggested that acquisition of this factual information resulted in improved water sharing and determination of appropriate payment for the lampisa.

In the past, paddy fields are traditionally passed down to the youngest child. More recently however, this practice has been changing with more parents equally sub-dividing their plots for each of their children. It doesn’t help that the passing down of inheritance are not always officially documented and simply done verbally which causes a lot of confusion about water-sharing. (Farmer G).

Since quite a number of farmers who sold their paddy fields also left to live somewhere else, this created confusion about the amount to be paid to the lampisa in cases where the previous owner did not inform the new owners. (Farmer E)

In addition to the creation of a technical working team, one strategy employed by the project is to employ the locals as project staff to facilitate community cooperation and a way to empower the local community. A review of project documentation revealed that during implementation the project was temporarily halted because of a misunderstanding of the counterpart scheme. As part of the participatory approach, the funding agency requires the beneficiary community to provide thirty percent of the total project cost either in cash or in kind to increase their sense of ownership. During this stage, community organizers were hired by the government to facilitate communication between local stakeholders and technical experts representing the government.

Some locals claimed that the counterpart scheme was unfair for the community because they had to provide for the counterpart twice. Despite the efforts of the community organizer to clarify the misconception, it took a while to settle the issue resulting to delay in implementation. Interviews suggested that it was difficult for the locals to trust the community organizer because she was considered an outsider, thus it was assumed that she didn`t represent the best interest of the community. To help resolve the problem, another community organizer who grew up in the locality was brought in from another assignment which led to improved relation between the project and the community.

Because the locals knew the community organizer personally, they were more responsive and open with her. It was also helpful that they were aware of her experience working on a similar project in the neighboring municipality which was implemented quite successfully. (Municipal official)

Another pertinent feature of the formal IA establishment is the election of dap-ay elders as officials of the organization and the adoption of traditional irrigation practices as part of the formalized constitution and by-laws. This provided an opportunity for the project to legitimize IA and for the dap-ay to re-establish its authority through formal means.

5. Social learning spaces and opportunities for learning

This section elucidates how the integration of the formal IA and informal dap-ay system in the participatory process created ideal learning spaces that were highly conducive for social learning. The learning spaces that emerged from the participatory process and the resultant social learning that ensued are elaborated below. These learning spaces provided an avenue for deliberation and framing of issues pertinent to social learning. Nevertheless, there are limitations to social learning processes especially in the context of a project-based approach which are discussed in the succeeding section. The analytical focus was on cognitive changes (improved technical capabilities), normative changes (cultural norms, beliefs, and practices) and relational changes between local actors as they interact, deliberate and re-frame problems and solutions for managing their communal irrigation.

In this study, social learning is seen as an exploratory process where stakeholders generate and disseminate knowledge in the wider social units to overcome constraints in their irrigation-related activities through deliberation and reframing. Because of the differences in viewpoints and interests of stakeholders a platform for deliberation and negotiation is necessary. Deliberation happens when actors question and redefine their assumptions through debates with other actors. Equally important to deliberation is reframing where the different viewpoints of actors are negotiated and integrated. Through deliberation and reframing, local actors were able to resolve conflicts that was necessary for their continued cooperation in the collective maintenance of the irrigation system.

5.1. Integration of IA and dap-ay worldview

The creation of the technical working group in the beginning of the project comprising of project representatives was particularly important because it was instrumental in allowing different stakeholders, in this case the project engineers and the dap-ay representatives, to be aware of each other's different goals and objectives. Pahl-Wost and Hare (2004) noted that sharing and learning can only start to happen when the differences in actors’ perspectives are brought out in the open. Mutual learning occurs when participants agree that individually they do not have all the answers themselves which is key to successful collaborative initiatives (Wondolleck & Yaffee, 2000).

The opportunity that was afforded for the dap-ay representatives to have their opinion and ideas be heard by the technical team encouraged them to also be receptive to the project staff and engineers which allowed for a collaborative environment to be created. This finding reinforces the idea that learning can occur when people willingly engage with one another through open communication, constructive conflict, and sharing of experiences which leads to the development of shared understanding as a basis of joint action (Schusler et al., 2003).

5.2. Incorporation of traditional authority into formal IA system

Interviews suggested that the intervention of dap-ay elders was largely instrumental in influencing the conduct of local farmers which highlights the important role of leadership in shaping social behaviour (Yukl, 1998). The integration of the dap-ay into the formal IA system and hiring of local staff from the area proved to be an important opportunity to localize power which created a more conducive environment for collaboration. By empowering the locals, they became more able and willing to engage in a communicative interaction. Damtew et al. (2020) posits that social learning is a communicative process that aligns improved technical knowledge and social relations into collective action agreements.

Since the dap-ay elders are trusted in the community they are known to facilitate positive interaction between actors. ‘Our salary as lampisa is not really much compared to the work that we do but being selected by the dap-ay means I am considered trustworthy in the community, so I try to do a good job’. This illustrates the extent of influence and power that the dap-ay held over the community. By recognizing the power of local institutions, the project was able to harness their legitimacy and utilized it for facilitating joint responsibility in resolving issues during the implementation of the project.

The informal authority of the dap-ay elders was complemented by the formal administrative powers of the barangay officials. To avoid conflict between the different forms of authority, IA officials are selected from dap-ay elders and barangay officials. The facilitation of social learning in farming groups have been documented to perform better when it is done by multiple stakeholders (Hermans et al., 2015; Ingram, 2010; Moschitz et al., 2015)

5.3. Strengthened group membership from IA and dap-ay integration

Muro and Jeffrey (2008) claimed that group membership is important in social learning as it helps create a common understanding among its members. Behind this claim is the assumption that through participatory processes group participants would be able to overcome differences and agree on future actions. But what would compel individuals to change their views and abandon their private interests in favour of the group? According to research on group processes, the existence of a pressure on individuals to hold accurate views of their abilities and surrounding compels them to turn to others for validation thereby creating a social reality (Baron & Kerr, 2003).

Formal membership in the IA provided an opportunity for the locals to re-establish the social network of irrigators thereby renewing communication channels and strengthening group commitment. Since the traditional dap-ay network was largely intertwined with cultural norms and traditions, those who stopped subscribing to such practices were inadvertently marginalized from the group.

Some farmers who joined religious sects that do not allow the observance of cultural rituals stopped attending dap-ay events. Since informal discussions and information sharing usually happen during these events, these farmers lose access to such, simply by not attending. (Farmer P)

Through the establishment of the IA constitution and by-laws, the group members were able to redefine their identity and responsibilities as part of the group. The process of organizing the IA also provided the members an opportunity to set new procedures and set a collaborative agenda. Later on the network and knowledge acquired during IA establishment enabled local farmers to acquire government funding for the repair of the irrigation system for damages caused by later typhoons.

5.4. Expansion of platform for dialogue and interaction

The presence of external facilitators challenged the existing status quo by creating a platform where everyone can freely express their feelings and opinions. According to interviews and IA meeting minutes, the interaction between participants during the organizing process of the IA did not only help the actors gain an improved understanding of the situation but also increased their confidence in their own knowledge and capabilities. Interviews suggested that local farmers were more willing to express their feelings and opinions when discussion was facilitated by third-party actors such as municipal representatives and community organizers because they did not fear any repercussions from their neighbours.

This is a very close-knit community and since the opinions of the elders are held in high regard, the younger ones are often hesitant to voice their opinion, perhaps due to fear of appearing disrespectful to the elders. Growing up here myself, I am highly aware of this situation that’s why we try to provide equal opportunities for everyone to contribute or simply express their personal opinions during meetings. (Municipal official)

I remember attending several workshops where we had to make small groups, come up with ideas and present it as a group with the help of project staff. I like smaller groups because we can discuss a lot and because it’s a group output it becomes easier to deal with criticism from others. (Farmer Q)

Building on the established relationship that they had in the dap-ay system and the presence of a trusted facilitator, they were able to discuss complex and challenging issues with a high degree of sensitivity. The community organizer was particularly effective in her role as facilitator because she had both the trust of her co-workers in the project and the local people based on her pre-existing relationship with them having grown up in the locality. This process did not only provide a platform for the local farmers to reveal their own framing of the issues but also for the project staff to give their expert opinion resulting in a process of inclusive deliberation. In the work of Daniels and Walker (1996) they suggested that inclusive deliberation is an important component of social learning since it enables the participants to reflect on their own as well as other’s values, orientations, and priorities.

Interviews suggested that there was a general perception among the local farmers that by increasing their awareness of the subjective preferences and feelings of others they were able to contribute better to the common good of the community.

When I was a barangay chairman, the communication between elders and us officials was very important because we can remind each other of our responsibilities. Although we have our own roles and sometimes, different goals, the most important is that we work for the benefit of the community as a whole. (Farmer J)

This finding supports another body of work which defines social learning as the process by which changes in popular awareness and changes in how individuals see their private interests linked with the shared interests of their fellow citizens (Webler et al., 1995).

6. Limitations and challenges of facilitating social learning

The findings of this study enhanced our understanding of the potentials of participatory processes to facilitate social learning in a community with strong traditional institutions. At the same time, it also helped shed light on its limitations. Based on the insights gained from the case study, three main challenges were found to have had the most impact on the social learning outcomes of the participatory process: the lack of a shared learning agenda, the institutional approach and the time limitation of deliberate learning processes.

6.1. Lack of a shared learning agenda

The majority of farmer respondents acknowledged that being able to participate in the planning and delivery of the project was an important design aspect of the participatory process from which they were able to learn. Interviews with municipal project representatives, however, suggest that the resulting learning experiences were not purposely coordinated, and social learning was in fact not included in the list of the projects’ objectives. This finding is not surprising considering that the dichotomy in the relationship between participatory process and social learning is well-documented in the literature. On one hand, participatory processes are seen as important devices to foster social learning while on the other hand, social learning theories are thought to inform the design of the participatory process. Although the results confirm that participatory processes helped facilitate social learning, there was no indication that the design of the process itself was influenced by any of the existing theories on social learning. Muro and Jeffrey (2008) earlier investigation similarly found that only a few examples of participatory processes that were specifically based on social learning theories exist in practice.

The absence of a clear learning agenda creates additional challenges to achieving an operational environment that stimulates and values learning. Specification of learning goals can help clarify the expectations of participants by linking the learning processes to the learning outcomes. In addition, having a shared learning agenda that goes beyond ensuring efficiency of project implementation can be more empowering for the participants in the long run. The design of the IA should be further improved to promote not only widespread learning but also, most importantly, guided learning. It is important to do this in the beginning of the participatory process when the broad values and assumptions that underpin the project are set by the key participating stakeholders. A shared learning agenda can serve to provide more meaning to the projects’ effort to empower the participants thus making it more effective in the long term.

6.2. Institutionalism

The implementation of the participatory approach in the Philippines was mainly based on an institutional model of participation. The institutional approach that is prevalent in participatory projects perpetuates the myth that local communities are capable of anything as long as they are sufficiently mobilized in the interest of advancing development. During the course of implementation the government utilized the influence of informal leaders who have well-established authority in the community in order to gain the cooperation of local community. This approach is often linked to the immanent legitimacy of traditional institutions and the subsequent assumption that they can best manage local resources because of their long-term existence in the community. Traditional institutions are highly regarded in the literature for their role in local management of natural resources. Many of these institutions were documented to be sustainable for a long period of time (Ostrom, 2005; Pretty, 1995).

Recognizing informal institutions proved to be beneficial in this case, especially in establishing the legitimacy and credence of IA as a participatory platform. However, the findings of the case also exemplified the tendency of participatory projects to narrowly define institutions based on their project functions. The results which suggest that IA was merely seen by local farmers as a means to gain access to funding rather than as an effective agency for learning strongly supports this argument.

Building institutions is highly favoured in development projects because they provide a visible unit of collectivity. Arguably, institutions are easier to analyse and more amenable to intervention and influence (North, 1990). However, as social learning processes are highly dependent on contextual circumstances, institutional forms of participation can sometimes hinder innovative learning. As shown in the case study, establishing the IA institution was a central part of the participatory process; however, IA membership alone does not guarantee learning. Instead, too much focus on institutionalization can sometimes result in very rigid structures that limit opportunities for learning. Future participatory approaches should be designed so that institutions are more fluid and responsive to the interplay of different components of the project to create better learning situations.

6.3. Dynamic timeframes of project-based social learning initiatives

Developing a shared understanding takes time thus extended timeframes are critical for achieving social learning (Measham, 2013; Pahl-wostl et al., 2007). The results of our study highlight the dynamic timeframes of participatory projects mainly usually caused by scheduling and budgetary constraints which poses a challenge for social learning intentions. The construction work on Mabileng-Oliwek communal irrigation system was stopped several times because of disagreements between the local farmers and the project staff. One example of such, is a misunderstanding about the counterpart scheme which led to considerable delay in implementation.

In our analysis, it started as a communication problem that escalated into a full-blown conflict partly due to the local's distrust of the community organizer assigned in the project area which is also reflective of the general lack of rapport amongst the different stakeholders. The conflict was eventually resolved when the project brought in an additional community organizer who had prior established relations with the locals having been born and raised in the area. This scenario underscores the importance of building rapport and good relationship with local communities, which unfortunately entails time and resources that participatory projects may not always afford. Our findings are slike Rist et al. (2007) and Mostert et al. (2007) who find that social learning through participatory platforms can be time-consuming and costly.

On a practical level, the chances of developing good relations between project staff and the local community is highly reliant on the frequency of their interactions. Repeated contact is believed to reduce conflict because it provides more time to understand the perspective of others (Webler et al., 1995). However, since the project is bound to a specific implementation timeline and funding mechanism, the number of IA meetings were limited by the project schedule and budget. Less number of interactions provided less opportunity for the project staff and local stakeholders to interact and build rapport. Ironically this resulted to additional transactional costs for conflict resolution.

The findings of our study support that social learning outcomes cannot be achieved simply by mutual awareness of the problem, instead sufficient time is needed to achieve a shared understanding to be able to develop solutions. It follows Reed et al. (2010) and Measham (2013) argument that social learning does not only entail a change in understanding but most importantly this change should enable participants to better deal with the problems they encounter. This raises a practical challenge of reconciling social learning timeframes with the realities of project-based learning approach.

7. Implications to social learning for sustainability

In much of the existing literature in resource management, social learning is framed as a normative goal of what should be achieved in participatory approaches (Romina, 2014). As a result, there has been a tendency to conflate social learning outcomes with participatory processes (Muro & Jeffrey, 2008). Our methodological choice of ex-post evaluation enabled us to analyze learning outcomes outside of participatory settings. Our findings offer useful conceptual insights about the emergent nature of social learning, in other words, learning that happens outside of deliberative processes. This is in line with the idea that social learning is an outcome of self-organized processes occurring in the long-term through human-interaction with the environment (Olsson et al., 2005; Folke et al., 2005).

Three elements of learning spaces were established to be necessary for emergent social learning outcomes; physical spaces, structural settings and self-organized processes (Lumosi et al., 2019). Our case study demonstrates that even without external facilitation through participatory processes, social learning can still be triggered internally. The results of our study show that social learning processes in our area of study were initially triggered by the need to address a common issue, that is, how to ensure equitable distribution and access to irrigation water for everyone long before the implementation of the participatory irrigation project. Collective learning outcomes resulted to the establishment of self-organized institutions and creation of physical and structural learning spaces for local actors to communicate, address conflicts and reframe water management practices. Our findings show that over time the local farmers were able to overcome constraints in their irrigation-related activities through deliberation and reframing of issues made possible through the facilitation of traditional community leaders.

However, our case also revealed that learning spaces peaks and declines over time in relation to changes in the cultural identities and institutional realities of those involved in the management and operation of the irrigation system. Our results support Lumosi et al. (2019) findings that learning spaces are embedded in the cultural, historical and institutional context of the locality. Traditional authority was shown in our case study to be intimately bound to the history and cultural values of the community. The legitimacy of traditional leaders is founded on the belief that they are guardians of the land, resources and its people and whose main responsibility is to preserve the welfare of the community.

Our findings, however, show that there is a wide perception that traditional authority is declining because of the changes in the socio-economic and cultural aspirations of the community. Local people are becoming less reliant on traditional authority resulting to the loss of legitimacy and breakdown of community leadership. During the implementation of the participatory project, the government was able to strategically utilize traditional authority to gain legitimacy and ensure local participation within its limited timeframe. While it benefitted the project in the short term, it did not have a long-term positive impact in the management of the irrigation system.

Traditional authority is an important resource that can be tapped to enhance local solidarity and cooperation in the implementation of development projects (Cleaver, 1999). Local attitudes, knowledge and practices especially that of the poor have moral value such that the task of development interventions should be to release such potential (Chambers, 1997). Because of this foundational belief on the positive values of culture and community, development projects are often wary of criticizing local practices. This is especially true in participatory projects which espouses stakeholder representation hence are often heavily reliant on local institutions.

Our case study presents a cautionary tale that simply formalizing traditional institutions without addressing their weaknesses is not sustainable in the long-term. The implementation of the participatory project should have represented another peak in the learning process for the opportunity it provided to strengthen and reframe the learning spaces in the community. Instead, both the community leaders and the project implementers were complicit in leveraging traditional authority for efficiency and cost-cutting reasons thereby failing to craft more appropriate institutions that can correspond to the changing socio-cultural and economic realities of the community.

8. Conclusion

It is worth noting that the findings of this study is exploratory since it is limited to a single-case study. Further empirical research which operationalizes social learning in the context of participatory processes in resource management is necessary to identify the conceptual and practical weaknesses of the concept of social learning.

Social learning is increasingly identified as a valuable tool in the pursuit of sustainable development agenda in the same manner that participatory processes are seen as important avenues for creating social learning situations. Hence, to explore the scope and limitations of participatory approach in community-based resource management, the present study utilized the concept of social learning.

Through an empirical case study of participatory processes undertaken to rehabilitate a community-based irrigation system in the Philippines, the case provided a good illustration on how learning can be facilitated among the participants of a project. However, the case also showed that long-term social learning outcomes were not realized because of three main reasons namely; the lack of shared learning agenda, institutional model of participation and the time constraints in implementing project based-social learning initiatives.

The findings of the study explicate the need for carefully designed participatory processes that are specifically aimed at creating long term learning outcomes. Participation alone will not lead to learning without robust facilitation. Institutional platforms that can support, coordinate, and purposefully generate learning situations are necessary. However, to create better learning outcomes, it is also important to distribute facilitation roles and responsibilities among a variety of actors and not to solely rely on an institutional approach to participation.

The formalization of traditional institutions to modern forms is perhaps one of the most prominent feature of participatory approaches. While this approach enhances local cooperation and solidarity by legitimizing intervention thus providing short-term benefits for the project, our findings underscores the need to enhance the process of integrating formal and informal institutions for better learning outcomes. To ensure a more long-term positive impact, necessary institutional change must be undertaken for emergent social learning to continue beyond the intervention phase even in the absence of external facilitation.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Doreen Ingosan Allasiw

Doreen Ingosan Allasiw is a faculty member of the Department of Development Communication, Benguet State University and an affiliate faculty of the College of Business Administration, University of the Cordilleras. She earned her masters and PhD in Sustainability Science from the University of Tokyo.

Toshinori Tanaka

Toshinori Tanaka is an Associate Professor at the Department of Research and Promotion, Institute for Asian and Oceanian Studies, Kyushu University. He received his Bachelor Degree in history (2006) from Osaka University, and his Master (2008) and PhD in environmental policy (2011) from Kyoto University.

Shogo Kudo

Shogo Kudo is a faculty member of the International Liberal Arts, Akita International University (Japan) and research fellow in the Department of Geography, University of the Free State (South Africa). He earned his masters and PhD in Sustainability Science from the University of Tokyo.

Takashi Mino

Takashi Mino is Project Professor at Tokyo College, the University of Tokyo. He received his Bachelor's, Master's and PhD Degrees in Engineering from The University of Tokyo in 1978, 1980 and 1983, respectively.