This site uses cookies for learning about our traffic, we store no personal details. ACCEPT COOKIES DECLINE COOKIES What are cookies?
univerge site banner
Original Article | Open Access | Br. J. Arts Humanit., 2023 5(2), 90-98 | doi: 10.34104/bjah.023090098

Yolanda Permanent Housing Projects Turnover Engagements towards Safe and Sustainable Shelter Foresight

Marites S. Pimentel* Mail Img

Abstract

Housing ensures that everyone in society has a place to live. This study explored the engagement of the Local Government Units (LGUs) in Capiz in the turnover of Yolanda Permanent Housing Projects (YPHP) toward safe and resilient shelter under the Participatory and Capacity Development framework. A descriptive-qualitative approach leaning on intrinsic case study design was utilized. Data collection was through Key Informant Interviews, Focus Group Discussions, and observations. The participants were three (3) Municipal Mayors, one (1) NHA Region VI Resettlement and Development Officer, and seven (7) Heads of Offices and Housing Coordinators of LGUs in Capiz. The LGUs readiness and acceptance of YPHP were linked to participation, capacitation, and engagement. LGUs participation was in the form of attendance at meetings, consultations, and dialogues. Turnover experiences were in planning, implementation, the administrative capacity of NHA, and stakeholders representation and participation. LGUs capacitation and engagement were drawn from the establishment and operationalization of the Local Housing Office and Local Inter-Agency Committee. The findings revealed that LGUs participated minimally, were non-agreeable to housing design, not consulted about the project, “Risgos” or risk-takers occupied the units, beneficiaries selling their units, project transition from the past administration, disagreements on beneficiaries listings, and limited NHA manpower. There were social and economic service provisions for beneficiaries like access to food, health, transport, fire, police services, and livelihood projects but no sustainability in economic services. A safe and sustainable shelter foresight framework, which the researcher developed, is recommended for further participation, capacitation, and engagement of the stakeholders in the housing projects. 

INTRODUCTION

Housing, whether it is a house or another type of acco-mmodation or shelter, ensures that all members of society have a place to live. The authority for housing, often known as a housing department, is a government agency for shelter production. The combined factors of population growth and urban migration as well as a rapid rise in housing needs brought by housing displacement due to natural calamities have increased the challenges that confront the Local Government Units (LGUs) in implementing programs for provi-sions of adequate shelters in their respective localities. The passing of the Local Government Code or Repub-lic Act 7160 in 1991 devolved the responsibility for the provision of basic services and facilities from the national government to the local government. Devo-lution is the act by which the national government transfers authority and control to local governments for the performance of activities and responsibilities previously done by the national government in the delivery of services and facilities. These provisions in the Code strengthened the mandate of LGUs to provide for the housing needs of the poor and vulner-able sectors of their communities; however, in many localities, the problem continues to persist (Sayos et al., 1998; Rasheduzzaman et al., 2020). 

On November 8, 2013, Typhoon Yolanda, internat-ionally known as Haiyan, brought destruction, thous-ands of deaths and unprecedented damages to six (6) regions, fourteen (14) provinces, and one hundred seventy-one (171) towns were severely affected and approximately 550,000 houses damaged and 580,000 units destroyed (Shelter Cluster Philippines, 2014). According to President Rodrigo R. Dutertes autho-rized Comprehensive Rehabilitation and Recovery Plan (CRRP), the National Housing Authority (NHA) has to construct 205,128 stable housing units to accommodate these Yolanda-affected families (Cailao, 2015). According to the NHA report, a total of 11,588 Yolanda Permanent Housing Projects (YPHPs) were built in Capiz as of May 30, 2022, out of a total target of 12,561. As the YPHP nears completion, President Duterte directed the NHA to fully hand over these housing units to the LGUs. As mandated in the Local Government Code or RA 7160, Chapter 2, Section 17 (a), this devolved function clearly defines the LGUs obligation to accept the management and administra-tion of the housing projects from the national gover-nment. A Deed of Donation and Acceptance (DODA) between NHA and LGU, which both parties sign during the turnover activities stipulates the local gov-ernments function to wit (NHA Template of DODA):

“There is a necessity to transfer the completed project to the “LGU/DONEE” including the award, transfer/allocation, and cause the occu-pancy of the units to the beneficiaries to enable said government unit to administer, operate, main-tain the completed components and utilize, main-tain and/or improve the same by its role and duties about such facilities”. 

With the above provisions of a Deed of Donation and Acceptance (DODA), the Local Government Unit (LGU) is compelled to accept the turnover of man-agement and administration of said housing project whether they are ready to accept it or not. This study generally explored the engagement of the LGUs in the province of Capiz in the turnover of Yolanda Per-manent Housing Projects (YPHP) towards safe and resilient shelter under the framework of the Partici-patory and Capacity Development Approaches. This study also utilized foresight as a major tool in tackling sustainable development in preparation for sustainable strategies and policies in housing. According to Stof-faes, (2010) in this changing world, the aim of fore-sight is sustainable development. Sustainability is therefore the end goal of strategic planning.

METHODOLOGY

This study utilized the descriptive-qualitative research leaning on intrinsic case study design, which the exp-eriences of the individuals or group of individuals were comprehensively gathered, summarized, and analyzed. According to Sandelowski, (2000) descript-tive-qualitative research seeks to address the following questions in the study: what, who, where, when, and how, but not why. Conferring to Kothari, (2004) quali-tative research will be effective in examining and comprehending a central phenomenon. It will also let the investigator to ask broad and general questions of the participants, collect thorough responses, and ana-lyze the information provided. The case study method also served as an inquiry method for this research. For Stake, (1995) this is a study of inquiry, in which the investigator scrutinizes the in-depth program, event, action, or process of individual/s. Sometimes, a case is chosen to learn about the precise case. There is some-thing unique about the case that makes it worthwhile to investigate. Such circumstances are known as intrinsic cases. According to (Taber, 2014) a case may be intrinsically intriguing since it is unique and diffe-rent from others - and hence we want to explore it because of its uniqueness. The study was conducted in Capiz, comprising its 1st and 2nd districts with Yolanda Permanent Housing Projects (YPHPs). The studys subjects were the municipalities in the 1st and 2nd districts of Capiz, specifically Roxas City, Panay, Pon-tevedra, Panitan, President Roxas, Pilar, Ivisan, and Sapian. The informants were the discussants/ inter-viewees during the Focus Group Discussion (FGD) and Key Informant Interviews: the three (3) Municipal Mayors, one (1) National Housing Authority (NHA) Region VI Resettlement and Development Officer, and seven (7) Heads of Offices and Housing Coordi-nators of the LGUs of said municipalities. The parti-cipants were chosen since they were involved or had actual and hands-on experience on the implemen-tation and turnover of YPHPs in their respective municipalities. The data generation focused on dis-covering the engagement of LGUs in the turnover of YPHPs by NHA. The data collection utilized a broad to general, structured, open-ended questions, Key Informant Interviews, FGD, and observations. Name codes were generated, particularly during the data collection from the participants and the answers of the coded participants were analyzed to generate practi-cally implemented recommendations. A deliberate sampling, also known as the purposive or non-proba-bility process, was utilized. The purposive or deli-berate objects were chosen that would represent the participants with actual and hands-on experience in the carrying out and turnover of YPHPs. For Kothari (2004), sampling method involves the purposive or deliberate selection of specific units of the universe that constitutes a sample that represents the universe. During the course of the research, the researcher kept ethical considerations in mind at all times. The parti-cipants were told about the studys objective and bene-fits, as well as the time and methods for keeping their data confidential. The researcher also requested formal authorization from the subjects to participate. Their anonymity was respected by withholding their identity and keeping their rights to privacy.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

During the FGD and interviews, most of the parti-cipants shared that there were active participation and attendance of LGUs in the YPHP activities. The result showed that most of the participants claimed that their LGUs conducted, participated, and attended in the carrying out and turnover activities of YPHPs. Six (6) of the participants affirmed that they had attended meetings, consultations, and dialogues before and after the implementation and turnover of the project. Two (2) of the participants affirmed that they participated only in the turnover activities; three (3) of them asserted as involved in pre-planning or initial activities and participated in beneficiary selection and verifica-tion, validation/revalidation, raffle, and transfer of beneficiaries onsite; one (1) said that the involvement was in list of beneficiaries submissions, planning, site identification, coordination with lot owners, bidding process and reclassification of property, and pro-cessing of licenses, while the other one (1) got invol-ved in carrying out the project and listing of bene-ficiaries. According to the Comprehensive Rehabilita-tion and Recovery Program (CRRP), as of 2014, only 64 LGUs in the Yolanda-affected corridors were in the process of formulating their Comprehensive Land Use Plans (CLUPs), while 49 LGUs were in the process of having their CLUPs approved (CRRP, 2014). This absence of approved CLUP prevented the swift identi-fication of areas suitable for resettlement. Suitable areas require being located in safe zones and away from shores and fault lines. This absence of CLUP contributed to the delay in the implementation of the Yolanda Housing Projects (Cuaresma, 2016).  Most of the participants affirmed that there was an operational Local Housing Office (LHO) in the municipality and a functional Local Inter-Agency Committee (LIAC) was created in-charge of beneficiary selection, awards, and arbitration. However, two (2) of the participants con-firmed that Local Inter-Agency Committee (LIAC) was not created but there was an involvement of Provincial Administrator and the Municipal Social Welfare and Development Officer and Staff in disse-minating information to different barangays. There were also convergences, which the stakeholders atten-ded to ensure their involvement and engagement in the program. There were meetings with the National Hou-sing Authority (NHA), coordination with service pro-viders like Capiz Electric Cooperative (CAPELCO) and Metro Roxas Water District (MRWD), coordi-nation with the Presidential Commission for Urban Poor (PCUP) for homeowners organization and possible provision of livelihood programs, active in the verification of beneficiaries before the turnover, Gawad Kalinga for the job, a community with the worker, and PAG-IBIG to fund, participation and contribution to the conduct of training, and beneficiary transfer to the housing units. Majority of the partici-pants claimed that the LGUs encountered different challenges during the implementation and turnover of YPHPs. One of them was the project transition from past administration, which includes political acco-mmodations of beneficiaries. Some beneficiaries were difficult to reach out, specifically those without add-resses and contact numbers. The “Risgos” or risk-takers occupied the units without legal documents. The originally awarded beneficiaries are selling their units. There were lapses on the contractor for the damaged housing units before the turnover as sub-standard materials were used. The contractor also made changes on the plans without conforming to the original submissions during applications for permits and clearances, which are still for resolution with the Municipal Planning Office of the LGU. There were also disagreements encountered with the Barangay Officials regarding the listings of the beneficiaries with several revisions until the lists were perfected. NHA manpower was limited. One personnel handled 15 projects, which limits the full capacitation of the various stakeholders. The findings corroborate Cuare-smas, (2016) findings that the technical capacity of the national agencies regional offices was found limited. The hiring of sub-contractors as well as the paucity of close monitoring during construction be-cause of limited number of technical staff available contributed to substandard units and non-conformity to the set standard of construction by the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH). Provision for food and health services was present in all project sites. There were provisions for transport, fire, and police services in most of the project sites; however, in the case of Ivisan, the Local Government Unit (LGU) plans to put up an Administration Office on the project site, outpost and Bureau of Fire sub-station, and intends to fence the area for security reasons. As to economic services, there were limited livelihood pro-jects but there were agencies like that of the Depart-ment of Labor and Employment (DOLE), Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), Technical Edu-cation Skills Development (TESDA), Municipal Social Welfare and Development Office (MSWDO), and other private organizations providing livelihood assistance grant and offering livelihood training in partnership with the LGU. Active participation and attendance of the stakeholders in social preparation activities, capacity development, and engagement may be given heed to have a safe and sustainable shelter. The National Housing Authority (NHA) and the LGUs may look into a resilient natural disasters shelter, considering sustainable land relocation and housing structure standards. Inclusive settlement social and economic services may also be considered through the creation and innovation of business markets. The find-ings adhere to the National Housing Authority (NHA) Memorandum Circular (MC) No. 2016 - 088, which directs the abidance of the organization to the com-munity empowerment program in housing develop-ment. This adherence to the community empowerment program emanated due to customers demand for participation in critical decision-making on housing matters that would affect them. Also spelled out in RA 7279, or the Urban Development Housing Act (UD-HA), the LGU as the main implementing entity calls for effective peoples participation.  This resulted in engaging the stakeholders to partner with the change agents - the NHA. This development became the pillar for promoting increased partnership with LGU and beneficiaries, contributing to their enjoyment of the housing benefits. The NHA affirmed its adherence to the Participatory Approach since its creation 47 years ago and continues its commitment to the promotion of the peoples planning process. This Memorandum Circular identifies the opportunities in achieving the ultimate goal of building lives in new communities, which would involve engagement with the stake-holders like the LGU, contractors, and beneficiaries in all phases of housing development to attain maximum contribution as partners. The responsibilities of these stakeholders must be determined and considered as the bases of partnership. Even the structure, and imple-mentation processes must be created and formed and the capacities of these partners must be developed for productive collaboration. Conferring to NHA Com-munity Empowerment Manual (2015), the adherence to the participatory approach has proven the value of engaging the LGUs to promote involvement in the planning phase. The Republic Act 7279, or the Urban Development Housing Act of 1992, Section 3, stipu-lates and defines the process of consultation as the “constitutionally mandated process, whereby the LGU or the public on their own or through peoples organi-zation may have a chance to be heard on issues con-cerning the protection and promotion of their col-lective interests. This should be constant through the planning principle of inclusive and Participatory Ap-proach to settlement development and the LGU, as one of the stakeholders, should have active partici-pation and engagement in all phases of housing deve-lopment to elicit maximum inputs. The NHA adhering to its quality policy of Building Adequate, Livable, Affordable, and Inclusive (BALAI) Filipino com-munities has the mandate to provide basic services (water and electricity), community facilities (parks and playgrounds, road networks, covered courts). There was neither provision nor access to societal and financial opportunities to the beneficiaries to have viable improvement. As to the findings of this study, NHA only provided the basic facilities on the YPHP. According to NHA, their mandate is to only provide for the basic facilities as mentioned above. Despite the NHAs aims and objectives towards the provision of quality housing, the project implementation is a long, tedious process that requires a big budget, strong drive, organized and systematic coordination, and commitment to have a well-organized and effective public service delivery despite the limited budget.  

Safe and Sustainable Shelter Foresights that Can be Drawn from the Results

Results, transcriptions of interviews, and field obser-vations presented facts, drawing the readiness and acceptance of the LGUs in Capiz for the turnover of the YPHP through active participation and attendance in social preparation activities, capacity development and engagement, for a safe and sustainable shelter. The NHA and LGUs may look into a resilient disaster and natural calamities shelter, considering sustainable land relocation and housing structure standards.  In-clusive settlement social and economic services may be considered through the creation and innovation of business markets. The Philippines is a country ex-posed to natural disasters like storms, floods, earth-quakes, droughts, and sea level rise. Located along the typhoon belt, it is battered by typhoons, floods, and cyclones annually, and being situated along the Ring of Fire, it is prone to earthquakes. These challenges of nature add to the extent of housing needs and recur-ring housing back-logs of the country. This study encourages the government to quickly adapt and sys-tematically addresses the challenges of the natural environment and climate change.  Housing in the Philippines has been seriously hampered by inade-quate financial, technical, and managerial capacities, specifically at the local level. Typhoon Yolandas de-vastation degree challenged the capacity of NHA as implementing agency to swiftly accomplish the task of providing houses to families affected by the said typ-hoon. Regional Offices of NHA lack technical people to closely monitor and oversee the project imple-mentation. On the other hand, the LGU lacks technical capacity in large-scale Yolanda rehabilitation program implementation, specifically in infrastructure and pro-jects on resettlement. Aside from these reasons, hous-ing development is a long-term process and the local executives tenure is only three years. Housing deve-lopment ceases to become a priority of the local gove-rnment aside from the inadequate budgetary require-ment to develop a resettlement project. Since the Philippines is a disaster-prone nation and climate change needs to be addressed quickly, the government must take action to create a department dedicated to disaster risk reduction management. Most housing interventions are reactive instead of preventive so the government must be more preventive than curative in dealing with environmental and climate change issues. Other housing production constraints include the limited land access due to unbalanced land markets resulting to poorly locate housing areas that are too far from opportunities on occupation and income, which discouraged the beneficiaries to occupy their units and instead returned back to their original houses un-mindful that these are in the danger zones or unsafe places. The administration must work on addressing these land fair problems by reviewing the Commission on Audits (COAs) guidelines on the pricing of land for government acquisition so it will be competitive with private developers or it would soon run out of land for resettlement projects. It should also properly manage land acquisition that is nearer to work and means of living, access to schools, hospital, and trans-port services. Peoples participation should involve all stakeholders in the housing development processes, especially in the first phase of development that involved social preparation as previously discussed, they should understand the processes and their roles in the project improvement, the ways to safeguard gover-nment resources, the probable conflicts and challenges to be encountered and how these stakeholders (LGUs, Barangay Officials, intended beneficiaries, and others) organized to confront the challenges with strong inter-action and collaboration among these diverse stake-holders, whose interests are to be afforded equal cha-nce for significant and effective participation. This collaborative planning can be time consuming, messy, contentious process because each participant will support their own interest and preserve their own values, including imbalance of knowledge, under-standing, personal experiences, and power. Even after the consensus and the adoption of a community-based plan through a collaborative process are done, the power struggle still continues as shown by Barangay Officials and citizens insistence to the availment of the housing units even if all units were awarded and majority were already occupied. The LGU can make a general pronouncement or conduct a convergence of Barangay Officials declaring that the housing units were already fully-awarded and all units are no longer available. The Beneficiary Selection Awards and Ar-bitration Committee (BSAAC) should enforce clear and predetermined rules to prevent any disputes over requests for unit awards and claims of awards.

The contractors continue to submit requests to LGUs for plan amendments and project approval subsequent to community plan adoption. It is another persons responsibility to continue participating in and keeping an eye out for any plan revisions that might have an impact on them as stakeholders. This collaborative, comprehensive community-based planning process aims to raise stakeholders awareness of their deci-sion-making power and the bearings of their invol-vement in planning that will help them learn of other sustainable development options available for the communities and engage them more fully with their LGU, both in community planning and in project development decisions that will directly affect them as project beneficiaries. Peoples participation can make better government and yield more legitimate, appli-cable, and practical policy that would benefit the public and the housing beneficiaries, in particular. People inclusion in comprehensive planning through Participatory Approach, involving gathering and ana-lyzing the data, which public policy decisions are made for future growth and development will surely impact the communities, so the local government should look to people for input and always afford them opportunities in planning and policy-making pro-cesses. They should not have to compete with other stakeholders who appear powerful because they have strong authority to participate in decision-making and their choices are taken into account, nor should they struggle to get their voices heard. One difficult process that NHA encountered and led to the slower pace of long-lasting housing implementation was the finding of safe resettlement lands. The land that will be used for relocation should have a title and be approved for residential use, safe from flooding, landslides, storm surge, and tsunami, and not on an earthquake fault line. These obligatory rules highlighted that lands owned by local governments in the affected areas were not titled, and almost all of the island communities and coastal areas are unsafe and prone to geo-hazards. Building resilient disaster and natural calamities hous-ing constructed on approved safe housing structure standards like a Low Rise Building (LRB) near the city could be considered by housing agencies as an option for mass or emergency housing due to scarcity and high cost of land areas available for acquisition. The housing/resettlement projects implementation is administratively subjected to mandatory adherence to bidding and procurement processes and the eventual securing of licenses and permits from various govern-ment agencies. For example, land conversion permit from Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) must be secured first if the land classification is agricultural land. There should be a clearance from the National Irrigation Authority if it is an agricultural land; envi-ronmental Clearance Certificate from Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), exemp-tion on tax from the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR); and Development Permit from LGU. Based on this experience, government itself should facilitate and hasten the grant of such permits, clearances, and licenses. These permitting processes, which the hous-ing can start, may last a very long time and take almost two to four years for any housing projects to take off on the ground. This long, tedious, expensive process even gets interrupted by elections and other reasons. This study unveiled that the social services sector had been excluded from preparedness and emergency management efforts until recognized recently. The dreadful effects of Typhoon Yolanda to the vulnerable population demonstrated the signifi-cance of integrating social services as chunk of human recovery activities by the livelihood development and housing sectors. The Low Rise Building (LRB) as mentioned above could be located near the city to address the concern of accessibility to employment opportunities and other basic facilities like schools, hospitals, and other commercial establishments. This vertical integration involves cross-sector coordination, collaboration, and communication through the inter-agency committees or Local Inter-Agency Committee (LIAC). Disasters often resulted to increased demand of social services since the degree of impact to vulnerable populations due to displacement and inter-rupted service delivery and loss of livelihood and income, social services must be made an integral part of the community-based plan. When the schools and Day Care Centers are closed, the children are left with no safe space to play. They are also exposed to high risk of injury. In the governments provision of housing, this basic service must be accessible to all. United Nations University (UNU) World Risk Report (2012) informs countries worldwide that “Natural hazards turning into disasters depend on the intensity of an event and crucially determined by a societys level of development”. The national and local govern-ments ability in coping with disasters and mitigate their adverse effects in housing rehabilitation and con-struction showed to be low and slow. The countrys state of preparedness is highly vulnerable to disaster so it should prepare and effectively mitigate by build-ing resilient homes away from danger zones. In relo-cation sites construction, it must strictly follow those standards established by the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) to lessen the impacts of these natural disasters. The LGU has yet to work on mainstreaming the Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR), and the Climate Change Adaptation (CCA) measures into LGUs plans, Comprehensive Land Use Plans (CLUPs), Zoning Ordinances and budget are still to be done. Practically, the LGUs need to be assisted in strengthening their disaster preparedness and miti-gation capabilities. The people in the community must be engaged and get involved in the preparation of the comprehensive rehabilitation plan to generate a com-munity-based plan, which could become formal public policy (Cuaresma, 2016). Fig. 1 shows the framework of engagements in the turnover of YPHP, while Fig. 2 illustrates a safe and sustainable shelter foresight framework the researcher framed (Nur et al., 2021).

Fig. 1: Framework of engagements in the turnover of Yolanda Permanent Housing Project (YPHP).

Fig. 2: Safe and Sustainable shelter foresight frame-work.

The focus of sustainable shelter foresight in develop-ment is housing with integration of social (provision of basic facilities and utilities) and economic provi-sions through job creation, livelihood provision and poverty elimination. The parents in turn get stressed about where to leave their children safely so that they could return to work and begin restoring normalcy in their lives.  Social services providers are called upon to alleviate the human impacts of disaster and fill the gaps in resources and capabilities to include reestabli-shing access to food, shelter, and clothing provisions.

CONCLUSION

The Local Government Units (LGUs) readiness and acceptability of the turned over Yolanda Permanent Housing Project (YPHP) were linked to the partici-pation, capacitation, and engagement of the LGU from the start of the implementation of the project up to its accomplishment. Participation was through the atten-dance at meetings, consultations, and dialogues parti-cipated by the LGUs with the National Housing Authority (NHA), contractor, beneficiaries, Barangay Officials, Municipal Social and Welfare Development, and Municipal Engineer. The participation was in the selection and verification, validation, raffle, and onsite beneficiary transfer, listing and submission of bene-ficiaries, planning, site identification, coordination with lot owners, bidding process and reclassification of property, and licenses processing. There was a creation and establishment of Local Housing Office and Local Inter-Agency Committee, which was in-charge of beneficiary selection, awards, and arbitra-tion. There were also convergences attended by the stakeholders to ensure their involvement and engage-ment in the program. As to challenges, there were lapses on the contractor for the damaged housing units because of the usage of sub-standard materials and modifications to the plans, “risgos” or risk-takers occupying the units, the originally awarded beneficia-ries selling their units, project transition from past administration, which include political accommoda-tions of beneficiaries and difficulties in reaching out to the awarded beneficiaries not occupying their units without any addresses and contact numbers. There were disagreements encountered with the Barangay Officials regarding the beneficiaries list. There was limited NHA manpower. Societal and profitable services were provided to the beneficiaries. However, these economic services provided were not sustain-able. Other beneficiaries still reside in their original houses due to close proximity to the source of income. The NHA and LGUs in Capiz may look into a resilient disaster and natural calamities shelter, considering sustainable land relocation and housing structure standards by considering the construction of low rise building. 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Appreciation is given to those who shared valuable support to the researcher for this endevour, specifi-cally to the informants/participants, College of Man-agement of Capiz State University-Main Campus, Roxas City, Capiz, and National Housing Authority Region VI, Iloilo City, Philippines.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

The author declares no conflicts of interest.

Article References:

  1. Cailao, R.P. (2015). Feature: Yolanda Perma-nent Housing Underway despite Challenges News and Press Release.
  2. Cuaresma, J.C. (2016). Assessment of the Imp-lementation of the Typhoon Yolanda Rehabili-tation Program. J. of Politics and Governance. 6, p.134-138. http://copag.msu.ac.th/journal/filesjournal/6Special%20Issue/130120175012410.Jocelyn%20C.%20Cuaresma.pdf     
  3. Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques. Second revised edi-tion. New Age International (P) Limited, Pub-lishers, New Delhi.
  4. National Housing Authority, (2015). Typhoon Yolanda Permanent Housing Program. https://mirror.officialgazette.gov.ph/2015/03/17/p8-b-housing  
  5. National Housing Authority, (2015). Commu-nity Empowerment Manual. 
  6. National Housing Authority, (2015). Major Milestones and Challenges/issues in the Imple-mentation of the Social Service Cluster (SSC) Programs Under the Comprehensive Rehabilita-tion and Recovery Plan (CRRP) for the Typh-oon “Yolanda” affected Areas. Livelihood Clus-ter Accomplishments and On-going Activities.
  7. Nur MNB, Rahim MA, and Rasheduzzaman M. (2021). Identifying cyclone shelter facilities and limitations for enhancing community resiliency in coastal areas of Bangladesh, Asian J. Soc. Sci. Leg. Stud., 3(4), 107-118. https://doi.org/10.34104/ajssls.021.01070118   
  8. Rasheduzzaman M, Uddin A, Shamsuzzoha M., and Rahman MA. (2020). Analysis of cyclone shelter patterns to build a better shelter mana-gement: a case study of Bangladesh southern region, Asian J. Soc. Sci. Leg. Stud., 2(3), 47-55. https://doi.org/10.34104/ajssls.020.047055   
  9. Shelter Cluster Philippines, (2014). https://sheltercluster.org/geographic-region/-philippines  
  10. Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Res-earch. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
  11. Taber, K. S. (2014). Methodological issues in science education research: a perspective from the philosophy of science. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching, Dor-drecht: Springer Netherlands, 3, pp. 1839-1893. 
  12. United Nations Development Programme (UN-DP), (2019). A House for Every Filipino: A Pipe Dream in the Land of Promises? http://www.ombudsman.gov.ph/UNDP4/wp-%-20content/uploads/%E2%80%A6/Chap  
  13. United Nations University, (2012). G.R. No. 209287. Decision on the unconstitutionality of the Disbursement Acceleration Program.

Article Info:

Academic Editor

Dr. Sonjoy Bishwas, Executive, Universe Publishing Group (UniversePG), California, USA.

Received

February 12, 2023

Accepted

March 20, 2023

Published

April 2, 2023

Article DOI: 10.34104/bjah.023090098

Corresponding author

Marites S. Pimentel*

Acting Resettlement and Development Chief, National Housing Authority Region VI, Iloilo City, Philippines

Cite this article

Pimentel MS. (2023). Yolanda permanent housing projects turnover engagements towards safe and sustainable shelter foresight, Br. J. Arts Humanit., 5(2), 90-98. https://doi.org/10.34104/bjah.023090098 
Views
238
Download
226
Citations
Badge Img
Share