Grassroots strategy - Part 2

What happened to the emerging grassroots-based movement in Cebu City in the 1990s?

In April 2000, a study authored by UP Cebu professor Felisa U. Etemadi entitled “Civil Society Participation in City Governance in Cebu City” was published in the peer-reviewed journal Environment & Urbanization. The study described how in the 1990s a coalition of NGOs and people’s organizations sought to ensure election of mayors with pro-poor policies and to ensure these policies were implemented.

Etemadi’s study also discussed the then successes, which mainly involved improved service provision, as well as the limitations and difficulties, that such grassroots-based organizations faced as regards articulating their interests and influencing the policies of the city government.

Slowly emerging then was a grassroots-based movement that sought to be part of formal decision-making process and to participate in the delivery of social services in Cebu City. This led to the conclusion that indeed at that time “Cebu City showcases a strong and viable state-civil society partnership in poverty alleviation programs.”

Fast-forward to two decades later, and no grassroots-based organizations stand out now as much as the independent people’s organizations and NGOs which became partners in governance of the city government from the late 1980s to the 2000s.

We seemed to have fully reverted to the default paternalistic and patronage-based system of governance. Paternalistic governance sees the voting public as subordinates who are subject to the control and manipulation of the political elite competing for control of government machinery and resources. Patronage-based governance, likewise, treats the poor and marginalized citizens as mere passive beneficiaries of such bureaucrat-capitalist transactions.

Whatever happened to that apparent yet emerging grassroots-based movement in Cebu City in the past is an article for another day. The reason I brought up the lack of grassroots-based movements in our country is to try to explain through the lens of people’s empowerment and disempowerment our palpable difficulty in curbing the spread of COVID-19.

While most developing countries used various communication channels to make their people aware of the dangers of the virus and on how to prevent its spread, the situation on the ground spelled the difference between success in one country and failure in another.

In Vietnam, which like the Philippines is a middle-income country with limited financial resources, grassroots strategy played a key role in the pandemic response. Vietnam’s grassroots health system is composed of 707 district health centers and 10,614 commune health stations that include networks of health collaborators, according to Dr. Hoang Van Minh of the Hanoi University of Public Health.

Because its grassroots health system was already in place, the country didn’t have to resort to militaristic solutions to “discipline” its people into following instructions from authorities. Prior to the pandemic, already set up was an organization of community stakeholders, including health workers, policemen, soldiers, teachers, representatives of community organizations, and community people, whom local authorities can simply tap on to coordinate with them.

That way, it was easier to mobilize government resources such as basic food supplies, personal protective equipment, medicines, and medical supplies for prevention and control of the epidemic. As a result, not a single person was heard complaining that some groups were prioritized over the others by local partisans. My Cebuano friends who are living in Vietnam have confirmed to me what international observers have written about that country’s response to the pandemic.

The Vietnamese government has supported over the years the strengthening of grassroots communities. This grassroots strategy is now helping Vietnam’s comprehensive health education campaigns to raise community knowledge and awareness about COVID-19. On the ground, it is the community members themselves who advise their relatives and neighbors about hygienic practices such as physical distancing, wearing a face mask, and washing hands with soap.

There are none of those spit-firing public officials with bloated egos appearing on television and social media, warning “hard-headed” people that should they fail to cooperate, more military and police assets will be sent to impose discipline.

Policemen, of course, were still seen barricading the streets of Hanoi and setting up stations around infected neighborhoods. But according to international watchers, the police were likewise mobilized to check daily on the well-being of locals in quarantined communities, and provide disinfectants and free food to them.

As we seek to curb COVID-19 in our communities, may we learn from Vietnam’s example in nurturing its grassroots-based system to enhance bureaucratic capacity. And here in Cebu, may we continue what we had started in the 1990s.