Resource  Management  and  Ancestral  Domains:  
The  Case  of  the  Ligawasan  Marsh  
 
 
 
BERMUDEZ,  Ma.  Reinna  Salcedo  
MA  EDP-­‐SFS  
DED  6007  –  Environment,  Conflicts,  and  Sustainability  
Final  Assignment  
 
 
I.  Introduction  
 
The   island   of   Mindanao,   in   Southern   Philippines,   has   been   identified   as   the   primary   food   basket  
region  in  the  country,  particularly  in  agriculture,  as  38%  of  the  Philippines’  farmlands  and  60%  of  
the  country’s  agricultural  exports  all  hail  from  the  region  (World  Bank,  2010:  p.1).  However,  even  
given  this  agricultural  productivity  level  that  Mindanao  contributes  to  the  Philippine  economy,  the  
region   remains   to   be   in   a   constant   economic   volatility,   due   to   the   armed   conflict   that   unfolded   in  
various   areas   of   the   island   particularly   in   Muslim   Mindanao   (Bangsamoro)   with   the   Moro  
secessionist  movements  and  in  the  hinterlands  of  the  region  with  the  communist  insurgents,  while  
episodes   of   banditry   and   clan   feuding   (rido)   are   also   rampant   (World   Bank,   2010).   Figure   below  
shows   the   geographic   representation   of   the   Mindanao   conflict,   as   published   by   the   World   Bank  
(2010;  p.12).  
 

 
The  decades-­‐old  armed  conflicts  in  Mindanao  have  caused  massive  destruction  in  life,  property,  and  
livelihood  of  the  region’s  inhabitants.  In  the  Bangsamoro  alone,  more  than  120,000  lives  were  taken  
in   the   past   fifty   years   of   the   Moro   insurgency   movements,   with   millions   of   civilians   –   Moros,  
indigenous   peoples,   and   settlers   –   recurrently   displaced   over   time   (Abunda,   2015).   Structural  
concerns,   particularly   economic   disparity,   were   identified   as   primary   causes   of   conflict   in  

  1  
Mindanao,   with   the   World   Bank   (2010)   recognizing   that   “inferior   socioeconomic   status   of  
indigenous  people  and  Moros  and  in  longstanding  clan  feuds,  has  long  posed  an  obstacle  to  growth”  
(p.9).    
 
The   natural   resources   in   the   area,   for   its   part,   became   collaterals   in   this   game   of   violence   and  
control.   Though   there   are   studies,   such   as   Savchuk’s   (2011)   field   paper   as   published   on   Johns  
Hopkins  University  SAIS  Mindanao  Field  Trip  Report,  that  label  the  historical  roots  of  the  Mindanao  
conflict   on   the   issues   involving   control   and   management   of   land   and   natural   resources   (i.e.   oil,  
timber,   and   minerals),   other   studies   found   that   socio-­‐economic   factors   such   as   resentment   of  
Muslim   population   towards   Christian   settlers,   not   to   mention   political   elitism   and   corruption,  
among  others,  contribute  to  the  further  escalation  of  conflict  in  the  region  (Judd  &  Schiavo-­‐Campo,  
2005).  
 
Identity   assertion   and   land   issues,   as   well   as   resource   control,   are   primary   grievance   points   that  
were  championed  by  the  Moro  Islamic  Liberation  Front  (MILF),  a  Moro  secessionist  group,  in  its  bid  
for   meaningful   autonomy   for   the   Moros   in   Mindanao.   Negotiations   with   the   Government   of   the  
Philippines  have  been  fruitful  in  coming  up  with  resource  management  clauses  in  the  Bangsamoro  
Basic  Law  (BBL),  which  would  give  the  Moros  the  capacity  to  control  the  area’s  wealth  generation  
activities  and  turn  them  into  economic  growth  for  the  region  (HB  4994;  2014).  For  the  case  of  the  
Province   of   Maguindanao,   where   the   native   people   called   Maguindanaons   have   rooted   their  
existence   to   their   traditions   and   lands,   autonomy   is   nothing   short   of   having   the   capacity   to   manage  
their  own  resources,  as  these  are  part  of  their  ancestral  lands  (Gatmaytan,  2015).  
 
Maguindanao   lies   at   the   heart   of   this   conflict.   Bestowed   with   extensive   forests,   rivers,   and  
marshlands,  the  people  of  Maguindanao  have  relied  on  the  area’s  environmental  gifts  for  their  daily  
lives,   particularly   for   agriculture.   The   conflicts,   particularly   the   Moro   insurgency   and   rido,   have  
made   life   particularly   harsh   for   Maguindanaons,   especially   for   the   poor   farmers   and   fisherfolk   who  
have  to  flee  armed  encounters  and  find  their  livelihoods  gone  upon  return,  as  denoted  in  the  story  
of   Sumilalau   as   narrated   by   UN   OCHA   (2015).   It   is   easy   to   assume   that   the   natural   Maguindanao  
environment   could   have   played   a   role   in   the   conflicts   through   competition   for   the   control   of  
resources,  especially  with  stories  of  political  bigwigs  forcibly  taking  lands  from  farmers  (Alconaba,  
2013),  but  in  reality,  such  assumptions  do  not  hold  as  much  ground  as  they  pose  to  have;  there  is  
more   to   resource   control   that   has   to   be   understood   to   establish   the   link   between   resources   and  
conflict.   These   contested   lands   are   not   simple   beholders   of   natural   wealth;   these   are   ancestral  
domains  that  carry  centuries  of  culture  and  traditions.  In  the  case  of  the  Ligawasan  Marsh,  known  
as   the   Maguindanao   wetlands,   realities   are   not   as   simple   as   what   has   been   painted   regarding   the  
resource-­‐conflict  nexus,  and  its  complexity  is  rooted  to  it  being  an  ancestral  land.  
 
 
II.  The  Ligawasan  Marsh:  Of  indigeneity,  resources  and  biodiversity  
 
Sinolinding  (2015)  identified  the  Ligawasan  Marsh  as  the  “largest  of  freshwater  area  (288,000  has.)  
of    floodplains  in  the  Philippines”  (p.1),  with  primary  livelihood  focused  on  farming  of  dry  and  wet  
rice  and  fishing  of  freshwater  fish  and  seafood  and  aquatic  plants.  Most  of  the  residents  (63%)  of  
the   marshlands   are   of   Maguindanao   descent,   with   the   rest   coming   from   at   least   six   other  
ethnolinguistic   groups   (MinDA,   2007).   Of   Sinolinding’s   (2015)   surveyed   respondents,   42%   of   the  
fisher/farmer  folk  respondents  did  not  enter  any  formal  schooling,  with  their  families  averaging  the  
size  of  7.2  members.  Al  Qalam  Institute  (2014)  stated  that  more  than  a  million  residents  live  in  the  
area   and   its   periphery,   traversing   the   provinces   of   Maguindanao,   Sultan   Kudarat,   and   North  
Cotabato.   The   Maguindanaon   residents   of   the   marshlands   have   regarded   the   area   as   part   of   their  

  2  
ancestral   territory   as   Maguindanaon   people,   which   reflects   the   people’s   views   that   only   those   from  
within  the  area  can  access  the  resources  of  the  marsh;  non-­‐Maguindanaons  and  outsiders  are  not  
entitled   to   the   area   (Gatmaytan,   2015).   The   wetlands   are   part   and   parcel   of   its   inhabitants’   lives,   as  
it  is  considered  a  gift  of  God,  holding  the  marshlands  to  be  sacred  and  protected  by  spirits  or   pagali  
(Sinolinding,   2015).   This   attachment   to   the   marsh   signifies   why   the   Maguindanaon   people   are  
called  the  “people  of  the  floodplains”  (Roces,  2015).  
 

The  marshlands,  as  seen  from  Paglat,  Maguindanao  

 
 
The  economic,  traditional  and  cultural  attachments  of  the  Maguindanaon  Moros  to  the  marshlands  
have   brought   the   Government-­‐Moro   conflict   to   the   floodplains,   as   government   forces   have   attacked  
the   marshlands   in   response   to   the   Moro   insurgency,   such   as   the   attack   on   the   Buliok   Complex,  
where   the   MILF   chairman,   the   late   mujaheed   Salamat   Hashim,   was   residing   in   2003,   which   brought  
down   the   peace   process   between   the   government   and   the   MILF   (Alim,   2008;   Savchuk,   2011)  
(Alconaba  (2013)  noted  that  the  Ligawasan  Marsh  is  a  known  lair  of  the  Moro  insurgents).  Rebels  
and  criminals  with  a  good  grasp  of  the  wetlands  have  also  used  the  forested  environment  as  their  
protection  during  attacks  by  government  forces  (Sunstar,  2006).  
 
A  further  look  into  the  Ligawasan  Marsh  will  show  that  the  area  is  also  a  haven  of  natural  oil  and  
gas   deposits,   which   have   become   a   lovely   sight   in   the   eyes   of   non-­‐Maguindanaons   and   private  
interests.  According  to  Savchuk  (2011),  the  Philippine  government  has  conducted  explorations  on  
the   alleged   gas   reserves,   which   was   “estimated   to   be   over   1.7   trillion   cubic   feet”   (p.115).   These  
possible  gas  deposits  in  the  wetlands  were  allegedly  another  reason  behind  the  attack  on  the  Buliok  
Complex  so  that  the  government  forces  can  enter  the  marshlands,  control  the  area,  and  implement  
oil  agreements  between  the  Philippine  government  and  the  Petronas  group  of  Malaysia  (Savchuk,  
2011).   Oil   palm   plantations   also   begin   to   sprout   in   the   area,   with   the   plantations   expanding   at  
142%  between  2008  and  2012  (Gatmaytan,  2015),  posing  concerns  on  the  exploitation  of  the  rich  
agro-­‐forests   in   the   marshlands.   These   information,   whether   verified   or   not,   would   only   push   the  
people  of  the  floodplains  into  further  crisis.  
 
Aside  from  being  a  lair  of  natural  gas  and  agro-­‐forests,  the  Ligawasan  Marsh  has  also  been  known  
for  its  extensive  biodiversity,  particularly  for  its  endemic  bird  population.  The  Foundation  for  the  
Philippine  Environment  (FPE)  (2014)  has  identified  the  marshlands  as  “home  to  many  water-­‐bird  

  3  
species,   including   herons,   egrets,   rails,   and   shorebird   sand   ducks,   and   is   the   only   place   in   the  
country   where   the   comb-­‐crested   jacana   can   be   found”   (par.3).     The   Philippine   eagle   and   the  
Philippine  duck  are  also  among  the  endemic  birds  supported  by  the  marshlands  (Sarmiento,  2012).  
According  to  researchers  from  Al  Qalam  Institute  (2014),  the  marshlands  was  “declared  as  a  game  
reserve   and   bird   sanctuary   and   is   included   in   the   list   of   protected   areas   under   the   1992   National  
Integration   Protected   Area   System   (NIPAS)   Act”   (par.3).   However,   due   to   issues   surrounding  
environmental   degradation   especially   of   nearby   deforested   and   mining-­‐exploited   mountains   and  
presence  of  rivers  which  drain  to  the  marshlands,  the  Ligawasan  Marsh  has  become  an  Extremely  
High   Critical   (EHC)   conservation   area   under   the   Philippine   Biodiversity   Conservation   Priority-­‐
setting   Program   (PBCPP)   (Al   Qalam   Institute,   2014).   This   calls   for   a   much   thorough   conservation  
scheme  that  will  protect  the  rich  biodiversity  of  the  area.  The  problem  however  is  how  to  balance  
this  need  to  conserve  the  Ligawasan  with  the  centuries-­‐old  indigenous  practices  that  have  been  in  
place  in  the  lives  of  Maguindanaons.  
 
Given  the  present  information  and  situation  posited  above,  there  are  two  vital  issues  that  should  be  
discussed  about  the  realities  on  the  ground  as  presented  in  the  Ligawasan  Marsh:  1)  the  threat  of  
resource  exploitation  by  outside  interests,  leading  to  escalated  violence;  and  2)  the  possible  conflict  
between  environmental  preservation  and  indigenous  agricultural  practices.  
 
 
III.  The  scramble  for  resources:  the  honeypot  hypothesis  and  the  gifts  of  the  marshlands  
 
In   Kahl’s   (2006)   paper   on   the   relation   of   resource   scarcity   (and   abundance)   to   occurrence   of  
conflict,   the   author   provided   a   critique   to   the   very   popular   theoretical   viewpoint   of   Neo-­‐
Malthusians   that   population   growth   causes   environmental   degradation   (“the   demographic   and  
environmental   pressures”   (p.8)),   thus   leading   to   scarcity   of   resources   of   which   humans   have   to  
contend  over  especially  in  cases  when  states  fail  to  exert  authority   over  the  scramble  for  resources.  
One  of  the  neoclassical  arguments  against  the  Neo-­‐Malthusians  posits  that  abundance  of  resources  
is   most   likely   to   cause   conflict   than   scarcity,   as   resources   pose   as   honeypots   that   groups   would  
compete   for   (Kahl,   2006;   Lujala   &   Rustad,   2012).   This   honeypot   hypothesis,   as   discussed   by   Kahl  
(2006),   holds   that   “abundant   supplies   of   valuable   natural   resources   create   incentives   for   conflict  
groups   to   form   and   fight   to   capture   them”   (p.15),   the   control   of   which   would   eventually   lead   to  
escalation  of  conflict.  Kopinski,  Polus  &  Taylor  (2014),  provided  a  more  in  depth  discussion  of  the  
‘honeypot’   idea,   citing   researchers   Paul   Collier   and   Anke   Hoeffler   as   the   primary   movers   of   the  
hypothesis   with   their   ‘greed   or   grievance’   model   of   analysis   (Collier   &   Hoeffler,   2004).   The  
honeypot   hypothesis   looks   at   the   resource-­‐conflict   nexus   in   two   ways:   first,   the   resources   sustain   a  
conflict   which   could   have   started   with   political,   social,   or   economic   grievances;   and   second,   the  
resources  are  the  reason  for  the  occurrence  of  conflict  (Kopinski,  Polus,  &  Taylor,  2014).  Kopinski,  
Polus,   &   Taylor   (2014)   provided   an   extensive   critique   to   the   hypothesis,   citing   that   the   devaluation  
of  principle-­‐driven  grievance-­‐based  conflicts  to  being  mere  greed-­‐based  activities  has  led  studies  to  
look  at  rebellions  as  criminalities,  and  they  pointed  out  that  resources’  impact  on  conflict  depends  
on   geography,   policies,   and   the   nature   of   the   resources   themselves,   not   simply   on   the   value   of  
resources.  
 
Given   such   understanding   of   conflicts,   the   case   of   the   Ligawasan   Marsh   could   be   seen   as   somewhat  
a   related   issue   to   the   honeypot   debate,   except   that   only   one   party   in   the   story   looks   at   the  
marshlands   as   a   honeypot.   It   has   been   noted   early   on   in   this   paper   that   the   Moro   secessionist  
conflict   is   not   only   driven   by   the   need   for   control   of   resources,   but   also   by   the   quest   for   freedom   to  
self-­‐determination  and  assertion  of  identity.  The  issue  on  the  interests  of  the  ‘outsiders’  to  mine  the  
abundant  oil  and  natural  gas  hidden  in  the  marshlands  could  lead  us  to  believe  that  the  control  over  

  4  
the  resources  of  the  Ligawasan  Marsh  would  escalate  the  already-­‐present  conflict,  considering  that  
the   Maguindanaons   would   not   give   up   the   jurisdiction   over   the   wetlands   and   greedy   groups   will  
find  ways  to  encroach  the  land.  
 
The  obstinacy  of  the  Maguindanaons  over  the  marshlands  is  not  born  out  of  greed,  thus  the  reason  
why  only  the  ‘outsiders’  are  the  ones  looking  at  the  Ligawasan  Marsh  as  the  honeypot.  As  pointed  
out   by   Sinolinding   (2015),   Maguindanaons   believe   that   the   Ligawasan   Marsh   is   a   gift   from   their  
Creator,   and   is   deemed   sacred   by   the   tribe.   Given   such   belief,   the   identity   of   the   people   of   the  
floodplains  is  intertwined  with  their  freedom  and  right  to  live  in  the  marshlands,  to  secure  access  
and   control   the   resources   of   the   area,   and   to   practice   the   customs   and   traditions   that   they   have  
been   observing   long   before   interested   parties   discovered   that   natural   gas   reserves   exist   in   the  
territory.  These  marshlands,  for  them,  are  not  a  simple  honeypot  that  should  be  seized,  controlled,  
and   exploited   in   the   name   of   self-­‐interest;   for   the   Maguindanaons,   the   Ligawasan   Marsh   is   the  
totality  of  their  lives,  which  they  must  protect  even  with  the  spilling  of  blood.  
 
This  is  what  the  BBL  should  be  able  to  address,  given  its  capacity  to   lay  down  the  legal  and  political  
framework   where   the   Bangsamoro   should   be   established.   The   respect   to   ancestral   domains   is   a  
very  important  issue  to  inculcate  not  only  to  the  Moros,  but  more  especially  to  non-­‐Moros  who  do  
not   understand   the   traditional,   spiritual,   and   historical   value   of   sacred   lands   such   as   the   Ligawasan  
Marsh   to   the   lives   of   their   inhabitants.   Such   is   why   political   measures   like   policy   and   advocacy  
building   should   take   into   consideration   the   Maguindanaons’   right   to   the   ancestral   lands,   and  
provide   the   mechanisms   for   the   people   to   be   able   to   exercise   their   autonomy   in   the   most  
meaningful  manner.    
 
The  problem,  however,  is  that  the  entity  that  should  ensure  protection  for  the  Maguindanaons  –  the  
state  –  is  the  very  thing  that  denies  the  fulfillment  of  their  rights.  Civil  society  support  is  needed  to  
ensure  that  interests  will  not  encroach  upon  the  marshlands  of  Ligawasan,  and  to  help  preserve  the  
sacredness  and  natural  beauty  of  the  land.  
 
 
IV.  Conservation,  the  Maguindanaon  way  
 
Given  the  important  role  of  the  Ligawasan  Marsh  in  the  lives  of  Maguindanaons  vis-­‐à-­‐vis  the  crucial  
status   of   the   wetlands   as   an   extremely   critical   conservation   area,   another   possible   phase   of   conflict  
might  unfold:  the  conservationists  against  the  indigenous  inhabitants.  
 
Redpath  et  al  (2013)  noted  that  “across  the  globe,  conservation  is  increasingly  in  conflict  with  other  
human   activities”   (p.100),   as   the   protection   of   biodiversity   and   wildlife   could   go   against   social,  
economic,   cultural,   and   traditional   activities   of   people   who   live   within   the   endangered   area.   The  
authors  go  on  to  define  conservation  conflicts  as  “situations  that  occur  when  two  or  more  parties  
with  strongly  held  opinions  clash  over  conservation  objectives  and  when  one  party  is  perceived  to  
assert  its  interests  at  the  expense  of  another”  (Redpath  et  al,  2013;  p.100).  Conservation  conflicts  
happen  when  conservationists,  or  proponents  of  environmental  protection,  are  opposed  by  people  
who  benefit  from  the  endangered  area,  particularly  those  who  rely  on  the  agricultural  and  forestry  
support   of   the   questioned   territory,   or   by   inhabitants   who   will   be   displaced   in   the   event   of   a  
massive  environmental  conservation  of  the  area  (Redpath  et  al,  2013).  The  authors  have  provided  
different  aspects  to  look  into  regarding  the  conservation-­‐vs-­‐human  activity  debate,  particularly  on  
the  common  misbelief  that  humans  and  wildlife  cannot  live  together,  which  provides  solutions  for  
possible  conflicts  (Redpath  et  al,  2013).  
 

  5  
In   the   case   of   the   Ligawasan   Marsh,   Sinolinding   (2015)   admitted   that   the   indigenous   practices   of  
the   Maguindanaons   with   regard   to   the   agricultural   utilization   of   the   marshlands   “in   one   way   or  
another,   are   contradictory   to   the   desire   of   conservation   and   protection   of   Ligawasan   Marshland”  
(p.2),   as   the   marsh   inhabitants   primarily   rely   on   the   environment   for   their   food   and   livelihood.  
However,   the   impact   of   these   activities   should   be   reviewed   first   before   coming   up   with   the  
judgment  that  they  go  against  present  conservation  initiatives.  A  question  should  also  be  asked  on  
what   kind   of   conservation   is   needed   in   the   area,   and   conservation   by   whose   definition.  
Implementing   mainstream   conservation   techniques,   such   as   exclusion   of   human   activity   from   the  
protected   area,   would   mean   cutting   the   indigenous   people’s   access   to   the   lands   that   they   have  
deemed  to  be  their  ancestral  home.  And  just  like  the  problem  with  the  oil  exploiters  coming  into  the  
marsh,  imposing  conservation  methods  that  the  Maguindanaons  are  not  familiar  of,  not  comfortable  
with,   or   at   the   worst   excludes   them   from   their   identity   as   marshpeople,   would   only   breed  
resentment  that  can  turn  into  conflict.  
 
For  example,  in  the  rapid  site  assessment  of  the  marsh  undertaken  by  the  Mindanao  Development  
Authority   (MinDA)   (2007),   it   was   found   out   that   the   farmers   and   fisherfolk   of   the   Ligawasan   Marsh  
undertake   farming   and   fishing   activities   using   indigenous   practices   of   barehand   fish   catching  
(kapanikep),  bolo/spear  gun  fish  catching  (kapametik),  use  of  traps  (balia,  sukob)  and  fishing  rods  
(kapamingwit),   and   rice   planting   (kabpelubang).   Slash-­‐and-­‐burn   (kaingin)  practices,   however,   are  
also  undertaken  to  clear  forests  in  the  uplands  (MinDa,  2007).  Indigenous  beliefs,  for  their  part,  also  
play   a   role   in   making   Maguindanaons   wary   of   their   surroundings.   Hunting   of   certain   animals   are  
prohibited   due   to   fear   of   the   lash   of   the   spirits;   reptiles   are   considered   as   friends   as   they   are  
believed  to  be  their  dead  relatives  (pagali);  and  trees  should  not  be  cut  down  as  spirits  live  on  them  
(MinDA,   2007).   The   Maguindanaons   also   treat   the   marshlands   as   a   sacred   place   where   they  
worship   their   ancestors   (kapanundyong)   (MinDA,   2007).   Sinolinding   (2015)   also   noted   that  
fisherfolks  and  farmers  also  follow  local  government’s  ban  on  electrofishing  and  chemical  poisoning  
and  the  ban  on  use  of  prohibited  farming  chemicals.  Most  of  the  farming  techniques  are  still  manual  
and   traditional   (Sinolinding,   2015).   The   author   also   noted   that   fishermen   and   farmers   show  
consciousness   and   awareness   on   conserving   the   environment   using   their   indigenous   knowledge  
system  (Sinolinding,  2015).  Given  all  these  information,  it  should  be  asked  if  the  total  impact  of  all  
these   activities   could   cause   serious   and   significant   damage   to   the   Ligawasan   Marsh,   and   how   can  
the   practices   of   the   communities   be   reformed   to   ensure   sustainability   of   the   area.   Forcing   the  
Maguindanaons  out  of  the  marsh  is  definitely  a  war  in  the  making.  
 
The  Ligawasan  Marsh  is  classified  as  a  protected  area  by  the  NIPAS  Act,  but  its  protection  should  
not   be   imposed   and   implemented   by   the   people   who   do   not   have   the   affinity   to   the   area   at   the  
expense  of  those  whose  lives  have  been  synonymous  to  the  life  of  the  marshland.  Conservationist  
efforts   are   welcome,   but   it   should   be   understood   that   the   people   of   the   floodplains   have   already  
been  practicing  their  own  form  of  conservation  even  before  these  outsiders  have  stepped  into  the  
Maguindanaon   soils.   Imposing   mainstream   conservation   methods   to   the   Maguindanaons   would  
only   make   things   more   conflictive;   cooperation   and   local   community   development   are   better  
options  to  enhance  existing  environmental  protection  initiatives.  
 

  6  
V.  The  way  forward  for  the  ‘people  of  the  floodplains’?  

A  boy  from  the  marshlands.  Mamasapano,  Maguindanao  

 
 
The   academic   reading   of   the   case   of   the   Ligawasan   Marsh   would   see   the   area   as   a   potential  
enhancer   of   an   already   existing   conflict,   given   the   Maguindanaons’   strong   attachment   to   the   area;   a  
practical  understanding  of  the  reality  would  give  opportunities  to  mitigate  the  chances  of  escalating  
the  conflict.  The  marshlands  are  a  part  of  who  the  Maguindanaons  are  as  a  people,  and  also  a  part  of  
their  destiny  as  a  nation.  This  is  a  value  strongly  held  and  advocated  by  the  BBL  in  giving  the  Moros  
the  right  to  determine  their  own  lives  and  remain  in  affinity  with  their  environment.  Imposition  of  
non-­‐indigenous   concepts   such   as   resource   exploitation   and   mainstream   exclusive   conservation  
methods   could   be   harmful   in   the   growth   of   the   consciousness   of   the   Maguindanaons   as   a   tribe,   and  
of   the   Moros   in   general.   To   assert   one’s   identity   should   not   be   seen   as   criminal,   nor   should   be   used  
to  dominate  over  others.  If  only  the  Ligawasan  Marsh  would  be  seen  by  outsiders  as  a  natural  haven  
that   cradles   the   culture   and   identity   of   an   autonomous   people,   conflicts   would   not   ensue.   The  
bigger   Mindanao   problem   of   conflict   remains   to   be   unsolved,   and   it   gets   more   complicated   as   years  
pass   by,   but   steps   are   being   taken   to   correct   historical   injustices   through   the   BBL.  Structural   issues  
such   as   economic   greed,   social   superiority,   and   political   elitism   are   the   real   culprits   in   these  
conflicts,  and  the  best  way  we  can  go  about  these  issues  is  to  respect  other  people  as  humans  and  
not  as  objects  of  exploitation.  That,  however,  is  not  something  that  could  be  legislated  or  ordered,  
as  it  involves  values  and  understanding.  But  there  are  things  that  could  still  be  done  to  change  the  
wicked   structure.   Educating   people   of   these   differences   should   be   advocated,   emphasizing   that  
people  might  come  from  different  places  and  with  different  practices,  but  these  differences  should  
be   celebrated   instead   of   feared.   Understanding   of   local   contexts   and   cultures   should   also   be  
observed,  so  that  people  can  proactively  work  together  in  enhancing  local  mechanisms  instead  of  
imposing  foreign  ideas  to  already  established  and  working  systems.  Indigenous  communities  might  
not   be   living   their   lives   the   way   the   mainstream   societies   do,   but   that   doesn’t   mean   they   cannot  
manage  their  lives  as  efficiently  as  other  ‘more  technologically  advanced’  societies.  
 
The  people  of  the  floodplains,  the  Maguindanaons,  might  be  experiencing  these  economic  and  
political  hardships  that  they  did  not  enlist  for  themselves,  but  in  shaa  Allah  soon  enough  they  will  
find  peace  and  live  in  peace  with  their  ancestral  lands  in  the  Ligawasan  Marsh.  One  could  only  hope  
for  now  that  the  BBL  will  find  its  dawn  for  the  people  of  the  Bangsamoro.    

  7  
 REFERENCES  
 
 
Abunda,  I.  (2015,  03  February).  ‘Imperfect  Bangsamoro  basic  law  still  our  best  option  for  peace’.  
Rappler.  URL  =  http://www.rappler.com/move-­‐ph/ispeak/82775-­‐bangsamoro-­‐basic-­‐law-­‐
mindanao-­‐problem  
 
Alconaba,  N.  (2013,  23  November).  Atrocities  etched  in  Ampatuan  turf.  The  Philippine  Daily  
Inquirer.  URL  =  http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/533465/atrocities-­‐etched-­‐in-­‐ampatuan-­‐turf    
 
Al  Qalam  Institute.  (2014).  Ligawasan  Marsh  Protected  Area  Plan.  URL  =  
http://alqalam.addu.edu.ph/programs/environment/lmpa/    
 
Alim,  G.  (2008).  Community  development  and  human  security:  addressing  the  gaps.  “Peaceful  
experiences  and  knowledge  from  Asia  to  the  world”.  Paper  presented  at  the  Tokyo  
Peacebuilders  Symposium,  UN  House,  Tokyo,  Japan.  24-­‐25  March  2008.  URL  =  
http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/un/pko/symposium0803/guiamel-­‐alim-­‐text.pdf    
 
Collier,  P.  &  Hoeffler,  A.  (2004).  Greed  and  grievance  in  civil  war.  Oxford  Economic  Papers  56.  
pp.563-­‐595.  URL  =  
http://www.econ.nyu.edu/user/debraj/Courses/Readings/CollierHoeffler.pdf.  DOI  =  
10.1093/oep/gpf064.  
 
Foundation  for  the  Philippine  Environment.  (2014).  Marshals  of  the  marsh.  URL  =  
http://fpe.ph/impact_story/marshals-­‐of-­‐the-­‐marsh/12  
 
Gatmaytan,  A.  (2015).  Class  tensions  and  the  MILF  in  a  post-­‐conflict  Maguindanao.  Paper  presented  
at  the  Contested  access  to  land  in  the  Philippines  and  Indonesia  International  Conference,  
University  of  the  Philippines,  Diliman,  Quezon  City,  Philippines,  16-­‐17  February  2015.  URL  =  
http://calpi.up.edu.ph/wp-­‐content/uploads/2015/02/1B-­‐Gatmaytan.pdf    
 
Judd,  M.  &  Schiavo-­‐Campo,  S.  (2005).  The  Mindanao  conflict  in  the  Philippines:  Roots,  costs,  and  
potential  peace  dividend.  Social  development  papers:  Conflict  prevention  and  reconstruction.  
Paper  No.  24.  New  York:  The  World  Bank.  URL  =  

  8  
 http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTCPR/214578-­‐
1111996036679/20482477/WP24_Web.pdf.    
 
House  Bill  4994.  An  Act  providing  for  the  Basic  Law  for  the  Bangsamoro  and  abolishing  the  
Autonomous  Region  in  Muslim  Mindanao.  Philippine  House  of  Representatives.  URL  =  
http://www.opapp.gov.ph/sites/default/files/House%20Bill%20No.%204994.pdf    
 
Kahl,  C.  (2006).  States,  scarcity,  and  civil  strife  in  the  developing  world.  Princeton  University  Press:  
Princeton.  pp.  1-­‐27.  URL:  http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s8208.pdf    
 
Kopinski,  D.,  Polus,  A.,  &  Taylor,  I.  (2014)  China’s  rise  in  Africa:  Perspectives  on  a  developing  
connection.  Routledge:  London.  URL  =  
https://books.google.co.cr/books?id=IcroBAAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#
v=onepage&q&f=false  
 
Lujala,  P.  &  Rustad,  S.  (2012).  High-­‐value  natural  resources  and  post-­‐conflict  peacebuilding.  
Routledge:  London.  URL  =  https://books.google.co.cr/books?id=X-­‐
jFBQAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q&f=false  
 
Mindanao  Development  Authority.  (2007).  Rapid  site  assessment  of  2007  in  Ligawasan  
Marsh.    Mindanao  Knowledge,  Research  and  Policy  Center.  URL  =  
http://mkrpc.minda.gov.ph:32706/River%20Basin%20Master%20Plans%20and%20Relate
d%20Studies/Forms/AllItems.aspx?RootFolder=%2FRiver%20Basin%20Master%20Plans%
20and%20Related%20Studies%2FMaster%20Plan&View=%7BBE2A235C-­‐793F-­‐4D62-­‐
A89D-­‐F38677E5A8B6%7D  
 
National  Statistics  Office.  (2013).  Maguindanao  Quickstat.  Philippines:  NSO.    
 
Redpath,  S.  M.,  Young,  J.,  Evely,  A.,  Adams,  W.  M.,  Sutherland,  W.  J.,  Whitehouse,  A.,  Gutiérrez,  R.  J.  
(2013).  Understanding  and  managing  conservation  conflicts.  Trends  in  ecology  &  
evolution,  28(2),  100-­‐109.  
 

  9  
Roces,  M.  (2015,  06  February).  Essay:  Ligawasan  Marsh.  Mindanews.  URL  =  
http://www.mindanews.com/mindaviews/2015/02/06/essay-­‐ligawasan-­‐marsh/  
 
Sarmiento,  B.  (2012,  12  December).  Center  for  Ligawasan  Marsh  conservation  rises  in  North  
Cotabato.  Mindanews.  URL  =  http://www.mindanews.com/top-­‐stories/2012/12/12/center-­‐
for-­‐ligawasan-­‐marsh-­‐conservation-­‐rises-­‐in-­‐north-­‐cotabato/  
 
Savchuk,  M.  (2011).  Natural  resources  of  Mindanao:  Fuelling  the  conflict?  Mindanao:  Understanding  
conflict  2011.  Washington  DC:  Johns  Hopkins  University  School  for  Advanced  International  
Studies.  URL  =  https://www.sais-­‐jhu.edu/sites/default/files/Mindanao-­‐
Report_Complete_Report%20April%205_0.pdf.  
 
Sinolinding,  H.  (2015).  Indigenous  resource  management  system  towards  conservation  of  Ligawasan  
Marsh.  Cotabato  Foundation  College  of  Science  and  Technology:  Arakan,  Cotabato.  pp.1-­‐12.  
URL  =  http://researchjournal.cfcst.net/wp-­‐content/uploads/2015/01/Indigenous-­‐Resource-­‐
Management-­‐SYSTEM-­‐toWARDS-­‐ConservATION-­‐OF-­‐Ligawasan-­‐Marsh.pdf  
 
Sunstar.  (2006,  01  May).  Rehab  drive  for  Ligawasan  Marsh  spins  off.  River  Basin  Initiative.  URL  =  
http://www.riverbasin.org/newsmaster.cfm?&menuid=45&action=view&retrieveid=244  
 
United  Nations  Officer  for  Coordination  of  Humanitarian  Affairs.  (2015).  Philippines:  Floods  and  
conflict:  A  farmer’s  story  from  Sultan  sa  Barongis,  Maguindanao.  Infographic.  URL  =  
http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/phl-­‐ocha-­‐mindanao-­‐
floods_and_conflict-­‐a_farmers_story_ssb_2015.pdf  
 
The  World  Bank.  (2010).  Behind  the  veil  of  conflict:  Moving  toward  economic  integration  for  
sustained  development  and  peace  in  Mindanao.  New  York:  IRDB/The  World  Bank.  
 

 
 

  10