Element and isotope composition of selected volcanics from the Bicol arc, Philippines

Pliocene to recent volcanic rocks from the Bulusan volcanic complex in the southern part of the Bicol arc (Philippines) exhibit a wide compositional range (medium- to high-K basaltic-andesites, andesites and a dacite/rhyolite suite), but are characterised by large ion lithophile element enrichments and HFS element depletions typical of subduction-related rocks. Field, petrographic and geochemical data indicate that the more silicic syn- and post-caldera magmas have been influenced by intracrustal processes such as magma mixing and fractional crystallisation. However, the available data indicate that the Bicol rocks as a group exhibit relatively lower and less variable 87Sr/86Sr ratios (0.7036-0.7039) compared with many of the other subduction-related volcanics from the Philippine archipelago. The Pb isotope ratios of the Bicol volcanics appear to be unlike those of other Philippine arc segments. They typically plot within and below the data field for the Philippine Sea Basin on 207Pb/204Pb versus 206Pb/204Pb and 208Pb/204Pb versus 206Pb/204Pb diagrams, implying a pre-subduction mantle wedge similar to that sampled by the Palau Kyushu Ridge, east of the Philippine Trench. 143Nd/144Nd ratios are moderately variable (0.51285-0.51300). Low silica (<55 wt%) samples that have lower 143Nd/144Nd tend to have high Th/Nd, high Th/Nb, and moderately low Ce/Ce* ratios. Unlike some other arc segments in the Philippines (e.g. the Babuyan-Taiwan segment), there is little evidence for the involvement of subducted terrigenous sediment. Instead, the moderately low 143Nd/144Nd ratios in some of the Bicol volcanics may result from subduction of pelagic sediment (low Ce/Ce*, high Th/Nd, and high Th/Nb) and its incorporation into the mantle wedge via a slabderived partial melt.

Organizational Capability of Local Societies in Rural Development: A Comparative Study of Microfinance Organizations in Thailand and the Philippines

The importance of organizing local people for development work is widely recognized. Both governmental and non-governmental agencies have implemented various projects that have needed and encouraged collective action by people. Often, however, such projects malfunction after the outside agencies retreat from the project site, suggesting that making organizations is not the same as making a system of making organizations. The latter is essential to make rural organizations self-reliant and sustainable. This paper assumes that such a system exists in local societies and focuses on the capacity of local societies for creating and managing organizations for development. It reveals that (1) such capability differs according to the locality, (2) the difference depends on the structure of the organizations that coordinate people's social relations, and (3) the local administrative bodies define, at least partly, the organizational capability of local societies. We compare two rural societies, one in Thailand and the other in the Philippines, which show clear contrasts in both the form of microfinance organizations and the way of making these organizations.

Case Study of Applied LIP Approach/Activities in the Philippines The Training Services Enhancement Project for Rural Life Improvement (TSEP-RLI) Experience

TSEP-RLI was a technical cooperation project jointly conducted by GOP thru DA-Agricultural Training Institute (ATI) and GOJ thru JICA aimed at institutionalizing the training program for Rural Life Improvement (RLI) at the (ATI). As expected, farmers, fisherfolk, women, youth and extension agents were provided with efficient and effective training services from ATI leading to the improvement of quality of life in the rural areas through efforts of human resource development. The ATI- Bohol was chosen as the model center where participatory trials and various activities of the project were undertaken for five years. These activities were participatory surveys and data collection of on-farm and off-farm productive activities; planning workshop for RLI; feedbacking of survey results and action plans to the community and the Local Government Units (LGUs), and signing of Memorandum of Agreement between the Project and participating LGUs. The above activities were done to facilitate the planning and development of most effective and necessary rural life improvement activities, to confirm the willingness of the people to support and participate and to formalize the partnership between the Project and the LGUs. Since the concept of rural life covers a vast range of activities, a consensus had been reached that the total aspects of rural life be grasped in three spheres, namely, Production & Livelihood (P/L), Rural Living Condition (RLC) and Community Environment (C/E). The RLI for Ubi (Yam) Growers was one of the pilot activities undertaken in two pilot barangays and the target beneficiaries were members of the Rural Improvement Club (RIC- a group of organized women) with the LGU of the Municipality of Corella as the implementing partner. During the planning workshop, the barangay residents articulated their desire to promote production and processing of ubi (sphere on P/L - as the entry point), lack of nutritious food was one of the identified problem (sphere on RLC- expansion point) and environmental degradation such as deforestation, and soil erosion was another problem articulated by the community people (sphere on C/E- expansion point). Major activities that were undertaken namely, Ubi cooking contest, cooking/processing seminar, training courses on entrepreneurial development, ubi production and storage technology, packaging and product design, human resource development and simplified bookkeeping motivated the beneficiaries as well as developed and enhanced their skills & capabilities while strengthening their associations. Their participation to the 5 ubi festivals and other related activities had brought some impacts on their economic and rural life improvement activities. The seven principles of TSEP-RLI include the participatory process, holistic approach, dialogical approach, bottom -up training needs assessment, demand-driven approach, cost sharing approach and collaborative implementation with other agencies including LGUs and the community.