Umapad Dumpsite

Mayor Jonah Cortes and his predecessor both attempted to address the plight of informal settlers living on the Umapad Dumpsite in Mandaue. The Umapad Dumpsite sat on a 5-hectare site, and in 2009 it received an average of 195 tons of waste per day. This was the biggest dumpsite in Mandaue, and it desperately needed the attention of the city government for more than one reason. First, it was an ecological disaster. It was receiving more waste than it could handle, and officials from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources deemed the dumpsite “environmentally critical.” Part of the dumpsite was routinely overtaken by high tide, and the nearby airport complained about smoke from

the dumpsite impairing flight visibility. To comply with the Ecological Solid Waste

Management Act of 2000, the city would need to close the dumpsite. But where would the city’s waste go, and what about the scavenger families living on the dumpsite?

Scavengers lived on the dumpsite, making their livelihood by sifting through

garbage to look for anything of value. Not surprisingly, the conditions were not sanitary or safe. “Scavengers reported that they come in contact with different waste such as medical waste, fecal matter, needles, scrap metals, air particulates, and chemical fumes from burning waste.”¹⁵⁴ And yet, scavengers were making on average Php 387 per day, higher than the legal minimum daily wage of Php 327 within the province of Cebu.¹⁵⁵ Not only were they making a living, but they were inadvertently contributing to the city’s waste management through recycling, contributions that “remain[ed] unacknowledged.”¹⁵⁶

In 2009, Mayor Cortes’ public support among that group and their advocates was damaged when he closed the Umapad Dumpsite, relocating the scavenger families who lived on the dumpsite to free government housing. He thought he was addressing at least two of the three issues: the environmental concerns and the well-being of the scavenger families. In reality, the situation pitted environmental concerns against infrastructure (waste management) concerns and the interests of the individuals who made their livelihoods living on the dumpsite.

154 Jay A. Ejares, Kristina O. Paler, and Erian L. Aguilar, "Socio-Demographic Profile of Scavenging Households in Umapad Dumpsite, Mandaue City Cebu, Philippines." Journal of Sustainable Development Studies 6, no. 1 (2014): 175-192; see p. 184-185

155 Ejares et al, "Socio-Demographic Profile of Scavenging Households in Umapad Dumpsite, Mandaue City Cebu, Philippines," p. 187-188

156 Ejares et al, "Socio-Demographic Profile of Scavenging Households in Umapad Dumpsite, Mandaue City Cebu, Philippines," p. 189

Closing the dumpsite resulted in the piling up of garbage around the city, causing sanitation issues. In spite of the resulting sanitation issues in the city, one would think at least a single positive outcome would be the relocation of the scavenger families to free government housing. The scavenger families, however, were not involved in the search for a solution, and they disagreed with the city’s course of action. The scavenger families were forcibly removed from an area they considered home and their source of livelihood. The closed dumpsite was not managed properly, and so some scavenger families returned to remake their homes and resume scavenging. Stakeholders were not sufficiently accounted for, interests were not aligned, and a plan to coordinate the efforts and anticipate effects was not in place. As a result, complications surrounding the Umapad dumpsite stretched on for several more years.

This was not the first attempt to address the well-being of the scavenger families, as mentioned earlier. Previous policies enacted by Mayor Cortes’ predecessor in 2006 also made free housing available to scavenger families being relocated from the Umapad

dumpsite. But the efforts did not yield the intended outcomes: Resistance was high, further fracturing the relations with that community; and families returned to the dumpsite to rebuild their homes illegally. Reflecting on these efforts, the error was not immediately obvious: better housing was needed, and so better housing was provided at no cost to the beneficiaries. Basic unmet needs (housing) and economic interests (free housing at no cost to beneficiaries) were satisfied by the policy design and implementation. And yet none of these efforts were successful. Those being relocated were not part of the design process;

they were not persuaded to relocate, they were compelled; and they contributed nothing in

terms of design or cost sharing for their would-be new homes. As a result, opportunities to instill a sense of ownership and cultivate civic dignity were lost.

Eventually, the Umapad Dumpsite conundrum was addressed again by Mayor Cortes’ administration. The dumpsite was closed permanently and converted to a waste segregation center where the scavenger families could work legitimately. Waste

segregation projects were rolled out throughout Mandaue at the barangay level (smallest political unit in the Philippines) to address the volume of garbage produced in the city.

Between August 2012 and February 2013, 40 households were relocated from living on the dumpsite to free housing.

Was the Umapad Dumpsite scavenger resettlement successful in the end because the policy design and implementation was more dignified or because it accounted for the individuals’ livelihood (economic) interests? Supporting one explanation over the other with certainty is difficult since we cannot know what would have happened if livelihood opportunities were offered without any opportunities for the scavenger families to offer their suggestions and have their concerns addressed. Then again, that the livelihoods of the scavenger families were finally incorporated into the policy design and implementation was a result of the scavenger families having the opportunity to participate meaningfully.

They were, in this sense, given the chance to be the authors of their own stories, to have some ownership over the project and thus their lives.

More to the point, we can easily acknowledge that individuals are driven in part by economic needs. But as individuals, we are not the mere sum of our economic needs; we have other needs that we want satisfied within the political community. Civic dignity

consists of having dignity (characterized by nonhumiliation and noninfantilization)¹⁵⁷ and being dignified (characterized by having an opportunity for meaningful political

participation) in the political community.¹⁵⁸ Though we cannot know for sure, there is evidence suggesting that what ultimately mattered was not the free housing (otherwise they would have relocated permanently earlier) or the income, but it was being viewed and treated as a full and legitimate member of the political community. Viewing the scavengers as victims, charity cases, or would-be wards of government welfare is too easy, especially considering their living and working conditions—who would choose such a life? But the fact is, they chose that life—perhaps because they lacked other viable options on their own—but it was still a choice they made. And that choice ought to be respected. To do otherwise is to treat them as children, to infantilize them. Instead, the city and scavengers together were able to find a solution whereby some of the scavengers were able to work at the waste segregation center, making a living and finally being acknowledged for their contribution to the city’s commitment to recycling.