The small island of San Francisco, Cebu in the Philippines has gained global recognition for its community-based disaster management program. By institutionalizing the purok system—a sub-village level of organization—citizens are empowered to plan and implement disaster preparedness programs that fit their specific needs and geographical context.
We interrogate the logics that underpin this prize-winning governance innovation. We find that San Francisco—the island where all survive even after the most devastating of disasters—functions through the modality of participation as knowledge transfer. It is underpinned the ethos of solidarity over conflict and takes place in a predetermined rather than citizen-driven space for participatory politics. We situate our arguments in the recent literature on public participation to understand the precise character of participatory politics in the field of disaster response.
AldrichDMeyerM (2015) Social capital and community resilience. American Behavioral Scientist59(2): 254–269.
2.
AllenK (2006) Community-based disaster preparedness and climate adaptation: Local capacity-building in the Philippines. Disasters30(1): 81–101.
3.
AlyH (2016) The World Humanitarian Summit: Winners and losers. Integrated Regional Information Networks (IRIN), 26May 2016.
4.
AndersonB (1988) Cacique democracy in the Philippines: Origins and dreams. New Left ReviewI:169.
5.
AnejaU (2006) Bold reform or rhetoric? A critique of the world humanitarian summit. Special Report for the Observer Research Foundation, India, May.
6.
AppaduraiA (2015) Success and failure in the deliberative economy. In: HellerPRaoV (eds) Deliberation and Development: Rethinking the Role of Voice and Collective Action in Unequal Societies. Washington, DC: World Bank Group, 67–84.
7.
ArnsteinS (1969) A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of American Institute of Planners35: 216–224.
BankoffG (2007) Dangers to going it alone: Social capital and the origins of community resilience in the Philippines. Continuity and Change22(2): 327–355.
10.
BrowerRSMagnoFADillingJ (2014) Evolving and implementing a new disaster management paradigm: The case of the Philippines. In: KapuchuNLiouKT (eds) Disaster and Development, Environmental Hazards. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing Switzerland, 289–313.
11.
Buchanan-SmithM (2003) How the Sphere Project Came into Being: A Case Study of Policy-Making in the Humanitarian Aid Sector and the Relative Influence of Research. London: Overseas Development Institute.
12.
CalainP (2012) In search of the new informal legitimacy of Medecins Sans Frontieres. Public Health Ethics5(1): 56–66.
13.
CannonTMüller-MahnD (2010) Vulnerability, resilience and development discourses in context of climate change. Natural Hazards55(3): 621–635.
14.
CollingwoodVLogisterL (2005) State of the art: Addressing the INGO “legitimacy deficit”. Political Studies Review3(2): 175–192.
15.
CollinsKIsonR (2009) Jumping off Arnstein’s ladder: Social learning as a new policy paradigm for climate change adaptation. Environmental Policy and Governance19(6): 358–373.
16.
CookeBKothariU (2001) Participation: The New Tyranny?London: Zed Books.
17.
CretneyRBondS (2014) “Bouncing back” to capitalism? Grassroots autonomous activism in shaping discourses of resilience and transformation following disaster. Resilience2(1): 18–31.
18.
DalisaySN (2008) Survival strategies to overcome in aagosto and nordeste in two coastal communities in Batangas and Mindoro, the Philippines. Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal17(3): 373–382.
19.
DalisaySNDe GuzmanMT (2016) Risk and culture: The case of typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines. Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal25(5): 701–714.
20.
DeanRJ (2017) Beyond radicalism and resignation: The competing logics for public participation in policy decisions. Policy and Politics45(2): 213–230.
FungA (2006) Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public Administration Review66(s1): 66–75.
23.
KothariU (2001) “Power, Knowledge and Social Control in Participatory Development” Pp. 139–152 in Participation: The New Tyranny? Edited by CookeBillKothariUma. London: Zed Books.
24.
KrauseM (2014) The Good Project: Humanitarian Relief NGOs and the Fragmentation of Reason. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
25.
LedermanJ (forthcoming) The people’s plan? Participation and post-politics in Flint’s master planning process. Critical Sociology.
26.
McCannEWardK (2013) A multi-disciplinary approach to policy transfer research: Geographies, assemblages, mobilities, and mutilations. Policy Studies34(1): 2–18.
MendozaRUBejaELVenidaVS, et al. (2016) Political dynasties and poverty: Measurement and evidence of linkages in the Philippines. Oxford Development Studies44(2): 189–201.
PodolnyJLynnF (2010) Status. In: HedstromPBearmanP (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Analytical Sociology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 544–565.
34.
PoterieATBaudoinM (2015) From Yokohama to Sendai: Approaches to participation in international disaster risk reduction frameworks. Journal of Disaster Risk Science6(2): 128–139.
35.
RafaelVL (1988) Contracting Colonialism: Translation and Christian Conversion in Tagalog Society Under Early Spanish Rule. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
RobardsKJGillespieDFMurtySA (2000) Clarifying coordination for disaster planning. In: ZakourMJ (ed.) Disaster and Traumatic Stress Research and Intervention. New Orleans, LA: Tulane University Press, 41–60.
38.
ShawR (2012) Overview of community-based disaster risk reduction. In: ShawR (ed.) Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing, 3–17.
39.
SidelJ (1999) Capital, Coercion, and Crime: Bossism in the Philippines. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
40.
Sphere Project (2004) The Sphere Handbook: Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian Response. Available (accessed 12 September 2018) at: http://www.ifrc.org/docs/idrl/I1027EN.pdf
41.
StoneD (2012) Transfer and translation of policy. Policy Studies33(6): 483–499.
42.
StoutJ (2010) Blessed Are the Organized: Grassroots Democracy in America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
43.
TaylorM (2007) Community participation in the real world: Opportunities and pitfalls in new governance spaces. Urban Studies44(2): 297–317.
TroyDACarsonAVanderbeekJ, et al. (2007) Enhancing Community-based Disaster Preparedness with Information Technology. Oxford: Blackwell, 149–165.
46.
The Sphere Project (2011) Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian Response. Bourton on Dunsmore: Practical Action Publishing.
47.
United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (2005) Hyogo Framework for Action 2005–2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters. Geneva: UNISDR.
48.
United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (2015) Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. Geneva: UNISDR.
49.
WhiteSC (1996) Depoliticising development: The uses and abuses of participation. Development in Practice6(1): 6–15.
