On June 1988, the FAO Population Programme Office in Rome in coordination with the FAO Fisheries Department sent a mission to the Philippines to identify areas for possible integrated schemes taking into account population and fisheries related concerns.
The Philippine National Population Plan 1989-1993 emphasizes among other thrusts, the integration of population-related concerns into sectoral plans and programmes. This is based on two fundamental principles expressed in the social plan namely:
(a) that population-related matters must be seen by people as part of government's broader developmental concerns and are not to be pursued in isolation of other development efforts; and
(b) that strategically, such integrated approaches build a more lasting commitment on the part of people when both their economic and social development needs are addressed in a holistic manner.
In 1987, smaIl-scale fisherfolks contributed 49.4% of total fish production, and amounting to 18.5 billion pesos, to 44.4% of the total value of production. Inspite of this, small-scale fisherfolks belong to the economically and socially most depressed groups of society. Gender role analysis show, that women contribute essential functions to these basically household managed enterprises. Due to the heavy exploitation of marine fishing grounds, the fisherman's catch is progressively decreasing. The woman's small fish marketing business thus augments husband's income. But due to their low income, they are at the mercy of private moneylenders or "loansharks''.
Improving the income of these fisherfolks alone is not sufficient to raise the level of the quality of their lives. There is a need to intensify health, nutrition and family planning information and education. Equally important is the provision of basic social services. Traditionally, these communities are not reached by the services of government.
To improve their status, the Provincial Governments of Capiz and Pangasinan and- FAO formulated this project with funding from UNFPA. This was first implemented in February 1990 and was to last through December 1993, but the Project was extended for another year to allow time for sustainable impacts and for the newly-organized groups to build-up their capabilities.
The Project implementors, executing agency and funding agency assess the progress of this project through a Tripartite Review on a yearly basis. During the last quarter of 1992, the UNFPA conducted a case study of the project to examine the linkage between women's economic participation, empowerment and family planning practices. Moreover, in June 1993, "An Initial Assessment of Project Impact on Selected PHI/89/P16 Women Focusing on Specific Economic and Social Gains" was prepared by the former National Project Coordinator in response to UNFPA's request to gather more data on the results of the implementation of women's economic activities. However, impacts on fertility behavior and/or linkage to family planning practicies were not fully examined since it would require more time to get a reasonable assessment. In general, both studies found positive results in the economic and social benefits to women resulting from project assistance.
Even as UNFPA already conducted a study and the project coordinator prepared an internal preliminary asseesment, there is still a need for the third party evaluation as stated in the PRODOC. This evaluation was supposed to have taken place in December 1993, but with the one-year extension, it was deferred to this year to come up with a more reasonable and empirically objective assessment of hard statistical data.
This paper will also be used as input in the forthcoming Tripartite Evaluation Review in October 1994.
The main purposes of the evaluation as outlined in the Terms of Reference are as follows:
(a) to assess the impact of the project on the social and economic status of women participants in a statistically and empirically objective manner. Specifically, it focuses on changes in women's:
1. economic activities;
2. income for the past 4 years)
3. household expeditures;
4. credit and savings performance;
5. living conditions;
6. fertility behavior and family planning practices; and
7. perception of social gains.
(b) to assess the efficiency of project implementation and management by participating agencies,
(c) to identify and document project achievements as well as the constraints and shortcomings encountered by the project; and
(d) to assess the sustainability, replicability and durability of project achievements and activities.
A copy of the full Terms of Reference of the evaluation team is attached in Anne>: 1.
The report of the evaluation team is based on a survey and a review of documentation available at the project's National and Provincial offices and on information provided by the Project staff- and key informants which include barangay officials, midwives, school teachers and selected leaders and members of women groups.
The impact assessment was done by comparing 20% of all women who joined and remained members of the first batch of groups which were formed in Capiz and Pangasinan in the second half of 1990 (107 women participants) and with another sample consisting of 20% of the women who initially joined but then dropped out from the project (34 drop-outs). Table 1 presents the distribution of the women respondents by province and by type of women's group.
The women included in the sample were interviewed individually using a questionnaire designed by project management with slight revisions integrated by the team. The information gathered from women respondents were supplemented through interviews with women's husbands and key informants, group discussions with the officers and members of women groups and through observations.
Field survey and project evaluation were conducted from July and August 1994. The survey was administered by field workers in the provinces and validated by the evaluation team through interviews of selected respondents.
Analysis of the data was done using some statistical tools (e.g. percentages, minimum, maximum, mean and growth rates). Data were presented in a tabular forms. The periods covered in this study are from February 1990, to December 1993.
The views expressed in the report are those of the authors. The report does not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNFPA or FAO.
