Upload
cheyene-violanta
View
132
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
5
5
International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters
March 2006, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 5-43
Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards:
The 1991 Mt. Pinatubo Eruption and
the Aetas of the Philippines
Jean-Christophe Gaillard
Laboratoire Territoires, UMR PACTE 5194 CNRS
Institut de Géographie Alpine
14 bis, avenue Marie Reynoard
38100 Grenoble
France
This article explores the response of traditional societies
in the face of natural hazards through the lens of the concept
of resilience. Resilient societies are those able to overcome
the damages brought by the occurrence of natural hazards,
either through maintaining their pre-disaster social fabric,
or through accepting marginal or larger change in order to
survive. Citing the case of the 1991 Mt. Pinatubo eruption in
the Philippines and its impact on the Aeta communities who
have been living on the slopes of the volcano for centuries, it
suggests that the capacity of resilience of traditional societies
and the concurrent degree of cultural change rely on four
factors, namely: the nature of the hazard, the pre-disaster socio-
cultural context and capacity of resilience of the community,
the geographical setting, and the rehabilitation policy set up
by the authorities. These factors significantly vary in time and
space, from one disaster to another. It is important to perceive
their local variations to better anticipate the capability of
traditional societies to overcome the damage brought by the
occurrence of natural hazards and therefore predict eventual
cultural change.
6 International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters
Introduction
Natural hazards are those natural phenomena that pose a threat
to people, structures and economic assets. Natural hazards include
earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, landslides, tsunamis, storms and
cyclones, droughts, floods and storm surges among others. The
response capacity of people in the face of natural hazards is defined
by the concepts of vulnerability and resilience.
Early definitions of vulnerability mostly referred to the quantitative
degree of potential loss in the event of the occurrence of a natural hazard
(e.g., United Nations Department of Humanitarian Affairs 1992). The
concept eventually evolved to encompass the wider social context in
what is commonly called ‘social vulnerability’. Social vulnerability
may be defined as the propensity of a society to suffer from damage
in the event of the occurrence of a given hazard (D’Ercole 1994:
87-88). Vulnerability thus stresses the condition of a society which
makes it possible for a hazard to become a disaster (Cannon 1994:
13). It basically depends on a large array of factors which interact
in systemic (D’Ercole 1994) and causal directions (Watts and Bohle
1993; Wisner et al. 2004). These factors are demographic, social,
cultural, economic and political in nature. It is further important to
recognize that vulnerability reflects the daily conditions of society
(Maskrey 1989; Wisner 1993). Disasters are therefore viewed as the
extension of everyday hardships wherein the victims are marginalized
in three ways: geographically because they live in marginal hazard-
prone areas, socially because they are poor, and politically because
their voice is disregarded (Wisner et al. 2004). Vulnerability further
varies according to the nature of the hazard (Wisner 2004).
People’s capability of response in the face of natural hazards also
relies on their capacity of resilience. This concept spread widely in the
disaster literature in the 1990s and is still the object of a conceptual
debate around its sense and application among social scientists (e.g.,
Klein et al. 2003). Pelling (2003: 48) views resilience as a component
of vulnerability or the ability of an actor to cope with or adapt to hazard
stress. In this regard, it basically includes the planned preparation and
the spontaneous or premeditated adjustments undertaken in the face of
natural hazards. Other scholars (Folke et al. 2002: 13) define resilience
7Gaillard: Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards
as the “flip” (positive) side of vulnerability or the capacity to resist from
damage and change in the event of the occurrence of a natural hazard. A
third approach breaks away from the previous two to define resilience
as the capacity of a system to absorb and recover from the occurrence
of a hazardous event (Timmermann 1981: 21). Dovers and Handmer
(1992: 270) further distinguish three levels of societal resilience and
differentiate 1/ resilience through resistance to change; 2/ resilience
through incremental change at the margins and 3/ resilience through
openness and adaptability. The United Nations International Strategy
for Disaster Reduction (United Nations Inter-Agency Secretariat of
the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction 2004) recently took
over this differentiation in its definition of resilience as “the capacity of
a system, community or society to resist or change in order that it may
obtain an acceptable level of functioning and structure”. Following
the same approach, Walker et al. (2004) differentiate four crucial
aspects of resilience. The first aspect is the latitude or the maximum
amount by which a system can be changed before losing its ability to
recover. The next dimension is the resistance or the ease or difficulty
of changing the system. The precariousness or how close the current
state of the system is to a limit or “threshold” is also of importance.
The final aspect is the panarchy or the cross-scale interactions and
influences from states and dynamics at scales above and below.
Resilience differs from vulnerability by addressing the capability
and the ways people deal with crises and disaster. On the other hand,
vulnerability only encompasses the susceptibility of individuals to
suffer from damage and thus to transform the occurrence of a natural
hazard into a disaster. Both concepts may rely on the same factors
(demographic, social, cultural, political, etc.) which may however
vary on different scales. Resilient societies are able to overcome the
damages brought by the occurrence of natural hazards, either through
maintaining their pre-disaster social fabric, or through accepting
marginal or larger change in order to survive. The concept of resilience
is thus intimately linked to the concept of change. Post-disaster
changes within the impacted society may be technological, economic,
behavioral, social or cultural in nature. The latitude and resistance to
change greatly depend on the type of society affected by the disaster.
The following paragraphs explore the case of traditional societies.
8 International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters
Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards
Traditional societies, sometimes called folk, tribal, or primitive
societies, are those groups characterized by their pre-industrial self-
sufficient ways of either hunting / gathering or extensive agriculture
type. These societies are further identified by the intimate relationship
they nurture with their immediate natural environment and the slow
level of cultural change they usually experience (Kottak 2003).
Many researchers have addressed the capacity of industrial
societies to overcome the havoc wrought by the occurrence of
natural hazards with more or less change in the social fabric (see
Drabek 1986; Bates and Peacock 1986; Nigg and Tierney 1993
and Passerini 2000 for syntheses). Fewer scholars discussed the
capability of traditional societies to cope with natural hazards. A
review of the scarce literature further denotes a lack of consensus
among social scientists. Three different theoretical frameworks may
be distinguished from the available corpus of research materials.
The first and dominant framework regards traditional
environment-dependent societies as fragile and unable to cope on
their own with large-scale fast-onset natural hazards. Destruction of
the environment due to extreme natural phenomena deprives these
societies of their main resources and pushes them to rely on external
resources in order to recover. Natural hazards are therefore viewed
as a powerful vector of socio-cultural change (Burton 1972; Burton,
Kates, and White 1993; Dynes 1976; Kates 1971; Kates et al. 1973;
Mileti, Drabek, and Haas 1975). Such an argument largely emanates
from the “top-down” technocratic and western logic characterizing
the dominant paradigm in the hazard and disaster literature. The
proponents of this approach find justification for promoting a transfer
of experience, knowledge and technology from industrialized
countries to developing nations in the poor capacity of traditional
societies to respond to natural hazards. This view takes advantage of
the results of several studies conducted following the 1943 to 1952
eruption of Paricutín volcano in Mexico (Nolan 1979; Nolan and
Nolan 1993), the 1951 eruption of Mt. Lamington in Papua New
Guinea (Belshaw 1951; Keesing 1952; Ingleby 1966; Schwimmer
1977), the 1961-1962 eruption of the volcano of Tristan de Cunha,
9
in the South Atlantic (Blair 1964; Munch 1964, 1970; Lewis,
Roberts, and Edwards 1972), the 1968 eruption of the volcano of
Nila in Maluku (Pannell 1999) and the 1994 eruption of Mt. Rabaul
in Papua New Guinea (To Waninara 2000).
On the other hand, the second theoretical framework sees
traditional societies as capable of recovering on their own from the
impact of natural phenomena. The environmental modifications
resulting from the occurrence of natural hazards forced these societies
to make slight adjustments without modifying the fundamentals of
their social organization (Sjoberg 1962; Torry 1978a, 1979). This
framework emerged from the growing anthropological literature
on hazards and disasters during the 1960s and 1970s (see Torry
1979 and Oliver-Smith 1996 for syntheses). The arguments of this
approach have greatly contributed to challenging the aforementioned
dominant and technocratic paradigm on disaster management by
pointing out the perverse effects of emergency measures and other
technological adjustments set up by western governments. For the
proponents of this approach, if there is temporarily an incapacity of
traditional societies to overcome the consequences of natural hazards
occurrence, it is due to the foreign relief aid that disrupts indigenous
resilience systems rather than to the intrinsic incapability of affected
societies (Waddell 1975, 1983; Torry 1978b, Cijffers 1987, Ali
1992). The radical approach is fed by the work of Spillius (1957),
eventually revisited by Torry (1978a) and Boehm (1996), on the
small island of Tikopia (Solomon islands), which was devastated by
two typhoons and a subsequent famine between 1952 and 1953; the
documentation of Schneider (1957) on the island of Yap regularly
swept by tropical storms; the monumental study of Oliver-Smith
(1977, 1979a, b, c, 1992) about the Quechua Indians of Yungay
following the total destruction of their town by a debris avalanche
triggered by the 1970 Peruvian earthquake; the researches of Lewis
(1981, 1999), Hurell (1984) and Rogers (1981) among the people
of Tonga in the face of typhoons and following the restless activity
of Niuafo’ou volcano in 1946; the comparative study of Holland
and VanArsdale (1986) in Indonesia and Peru among communities
affected by flash floods; and the investigation of Zaman (e.g.
1989, 1994, 1999; Haque and Zaman, 1994) among Bangladeshi
Gaillard: Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards
10 International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters
communities recurrently affected by floods, and Cijffers (1987) in
the Cook Islands regularly struck by hurricanes.
Finally, the third approach regarding the responses of traditional
societies in the face of natural hazards defends an intermediate
viewpoint. It argues that the occurrence of natural hazards rather
acts as a catalyst for ongoing cultural changes among traditional
societies increasingly pressured by the industrial world (Blong 1984;
Bates and Peacock, 1986; Oliver-Smith 1996). This phenomenon
has been observed among several Tarascan Indian communities
following the eruption of Paricutín volcano in Mexico between 1943
and 1952 (Rees 1970; Nolan 1979; Nolan and Nolan 1993), among
Guatemalan Mayas after the 1976 earthquake (Bates 1982; Cuny
1983; Hoover and Bates 1985), and among Yemeni highlanders
following the 1982 earthquake (Leslie 1987).
The foregoing frameworks are all driven primarily by the concept of
vulnerability or the susceptibility of traditional societies to experience
disaster following the occurrence of natural hazards. They do not
address cultural change as a way of coping with the havoc wrought
by the disaster. In this paper, we aim to tackle the capacity of response
of traditional societies in the face of natural hazard through the lens of
the concept of resilience. Our discussion will be based on the case of
the 1991 eruption of Mt. Pinatubo volcano in the Philippines and its
impact on the Aeta communities. To assess the Aetas’ resilience will
first require evaluating if the eruption brought about some changes in
the folk culture. A critical review of the factors that affected resilience
in the Mt. Pinatubo case will eventually lead to the advancing of an
alternative approach to the response of traditional societies in the face
of the occurrence of natural hazards.
The 1991 Mt. Pinatubo Eruption and the Aetas
The Aetas are one of the many ethnic minorities occupying
the mountains of the Philippine islands. They are found on the
flanks of Mt. Pinatubo which towers at the apex of the provinces
of Pampanga, Tarlac and Zambales on the main island of Luzon
(Figure 1). Considered by some as the direct descendants of the
populations that first inhabited the archipelago during the Pleistocene
11
Period (Headland and Reid 1989), the Aetas’ small height, very
dark complexion, and curly hair easily distinguish them from the
majority of Filipinos who are taller and are characterized by brown
skin and straight hair. The approximately 50,000 Aetas counted on
the slopes of Mt. Pinatubo in 1999 depend for their livelihood on
cultivating root crops and other vegetables, hunting and fishing,
and also on gathering plants and wild fruits that abound in their
surroundings (Barrato and Benaning 1978; Garvan 1964; Reed
1904; Shimizu 1989). The following paragraphs particularly focus
on the communities located within the 200km2-Pasig and Sacobia
River Basins on the eastern flank of Mt. Pinatubo, in the immediate
vicinity of the former Clark American facilities (Clark Air Base
– CAB) (Figure 2).
Figure 1: Areas Affected by the 1991 Eruption of Mt Pinatubo
and Location of the Study Area (After Data from PHIVOLCS
and Mount Pinatubo Commission).
1
25
30
40
10
5
MANILA BAY
SOUTH
CHINA
SEA
BATAAN
BULACAN
PAMPANGA
NUEVA
ECIJA
TARLACZAMBALES
Botolan
Cabangan
San
Narciso
San
Marcelino
Olongapo CityDinalupihan
Guagua
San Fernando
Angeles
City
ConceptionCapas
Tarlac
50
20
15
Mt Pinatubo
SUBIC
BAY
Clark
Air Base
Gumain River
Sacobia / Bamban River
O'Donnel R
iver
Bucao River
Sto Tomas
Abacan River
Pasig Potrero RiverPorac
River
Bamban
5
Dueg
Palayan City
Kalangitan
Maynang
LubaoSubic
Poonbato
Villar
Subic
Naval
Base
Sapang
Bato
Dau
Magalang
Mt Arayat
20°N
15°N
10°N
5°N
120°E 125°E
CELEBES SEA
SULU SEA
PH
ILIPPIN
E S
EA
Studyarea
Manila
200 km
SOUTHCHINASEA
0 20km
June 1991pyroclastic deposits
Lahar deposits
Isopachs (in cm)of airfall deposits
Active lahar channels
Provincial limits
Towns
Doña Josefa
PInaltakan
MabalacatMadapdap
Villa
Maria
Aeta resettlement sites
Gaillard: Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards
12 International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters
Figure 2: Spatial Redistribution of the Aeta Villages in the
Pasig and Sacobia River Basins Subsequent to the
Eruption of Mt Pinatubo in 1991.
Mabubuteun
Pamatayan
Calang
Kaging
Mataba
StaInesSta Rosa
Burug
San Martin
Sacobia
Haduan
Target
Sitio Babo
InararoCamatsilis
Sapang Uwak
Sapang Uwak
Sacob
ia Rive
r
Abacan River
Sapang Cauayan
Marimla River
Mabulilat Angeles City
Mabalacat
Bamban
Sacobia Rive
r
Bamban River
Calumpang
MarcosVillage
Pulang Lupa
Clark Air Base Area
PoracDiaz
Calapi
Porac River
Calapi
Inararo
TimboBingaBanabaPanabunganMt
Mc Donald
Mt Dorst
To Planas
To MadapdapResettlement
Site
Burakin
To Palayan City
Bliss
Gate 14
Baguingan
Burug
San Martin
Pasig River
To Dueg Resettlement SiteTo Kalangitan Resettlement Site
To Maynang Resettlement Site
Abandoned settlements
Old settlementsstill occupied in 2001
New settlements
Main towns
Main movementsof population
Kapampanganlowland territory
50cm ash
20cm ash
fall deposits
deposits
fall
Villa Maria ResettlemetSite0 2km
Isopach of ashfall deposits
Pyroclastic flow deposits
Present upper limitof Aeta settlements
The Aetas were the first to feel the precursory signs of the volcano’s
restlessness during the first days of April 1991; they responded by
immediately warning the Philippine Institute of Volcanology and
Seismology (PHIVOLCS) (Lubos na Alyansa ng mga Katutubong
Ayta ng Sambales 1991; Tayag et al. 1996). This abnormal volcanic
activity intensified until June 1991. The eruptive paroxysm
materialized on June 12 and June 15. On these particular dates, the
volcano spewed some 5 to 7 km3 of pyroclastic materials that buried
many Aeta villages located on the slopes of Mt. Pinatubo. Since
15 June 1991, destructive lahars (volcanic debris flows), triggered
by typhoon-associated downpours, tropical monsoon rains and lake
break outs, have flowed down the flanks and foothills of the volcano
affecting anew a large number of these Aeta settlements (Pinatubo
Volcano Observatory 1991; Umbal 1997; Wolfe 1992).
13
In April 1991, with the initial signs of restlessness by the volcano,
almost all of the Aeta communities were already evacuated (Banzon-
Bautista and Tadem 1993). However, an unknown number of Aetas
who refused to leave their homes perished during the eruption.
According to oral accounts, a score of Aetas found shelter in caves that
had eventually been buried by pyroclastic flows (Shimizu 2001). At
first, the Aetas who chose to evacuate were relocated in some major
surrounding towns (Tarlac City, Capas, Bamban, Mabalacat, Angeles
City, Porac, etc.). Eventually, with the paroxysm of the eruption
on June 15 that affected even the town inhabitants, the authorities
had to once again transfer many Aeta families toward evacuation
centers that were much farther (e.g., provinces of Bulacan, Nueva
Ecija and Manila) from their villages. Inside overcrowded school
buildings, gymnasiums, churches or tent camps, nutrition problems
and diseases (pneumonia, measles…) quickly spread and left a
heavy death toll among Aeta children (Lapitan 1992; Magpantay
1992; Magpantay et al. 1992; Sawada 1992).
Faced with the impossibility of sending the Aetas back to their
former villages which had already been buried under meters of
volcanic deposits, the Philippine government had to plan a permanent
resettlement program. By June 1991, the authorities created the
Task Force Mt. Pinatubo, which was replaced in 1992 by the Mount
Pinatubo Commission (MPC), an intergovernmental structure under
the authority of the President of the Philippines. The task force then
had created eleven upland resettlement centers intended primarily
for the Aetas (Task Force Mount Pinatubo 1991). The Aetas from
the Pasig and Sacobia river basins were mainly distributed on four
sites (Villa Maria, Kalangitan, Dueg, and Maynang). Dueg, the most
remote, is about 100km away from the native villages. In each of
the centers, a lot measuring 150m² together with traditional housing
materials (bamboo, palm leaves…) was allocated for each family.
In 1995, more solid building materials (‘GI sheets’, lumber…) were
provided (Tariman 1999). Some Aetas of the Clark Air Base vicinity
were resettled in a lowland relocation site, Madapdap (municipality
of Mabalacat), with 7,000 lowland families from the neighboring
‘Kapampangan’ ethno-linguistic group who were affected by the
lahars from the Pasig-Potrero and Sacobia Rivers. Each family was
Gaillard: Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards
14 International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters
awarded a 94m² lot with a concrete house equipped with sanitary
installations (Tariman 1999). There were also two resettlement
centers (Doña Josefa and Pinaltakan) implemented by NGOs
at Palayan City (province of Nueva Ecija) where the Pinatubo
Aetas rubbed shoulders with other upland ethno-linguistic groups
(Dumagats and Bagos) from the Sierra Madre mountain range.
Other resettlement attempts in more remote places such as the island
of Palawan failed because of unsuitable conditions that pushed the
Aetas back to Central Luzon (Gaillard and Leone 2000).
Methodology
The following discussion relies on extensive field work conducted
in the basin of the Pasig and Sacobia rivers between July 1999 and
June 2000 and completed by additional field explorations between
June and September 2001. The lack of reliable census data for the
study area compelled the researcher to abandon the sampling survey
and instead opt for open interviews with selected key informants.
Sixteen villages were visited. Only three occupied settlements were
avoided: one because of security concerns and the two others because
of their inaccessibility. The four neighboring resettlement sites (Villa
Maria, Kalangitan, Maynang and Madapdap) were also part of the
study. Key informants were not limited to community leaders and
included other members (both men and women) of the communities
visited. Interviews were conducted in the Kapampangan language
spoken by almost all the Aetas. Local guides sometimes served as
interpreters in the local Aeta Mag-Aantsi dialect. Questions sought
to assess the pre-eruption lifestyle, the response of the victims to
the disaster, notably their journey up to their present settlement,
and the present way of life. Community leaders further provided
approximate population figures for their village. All the respondents
were cooperative and were willing to share their experience.
In addition to the survey among the Aeta settlements, interviews
were conducted with stakeholders of the Mt. Pinatubo disaster
management. Those include the Mt. Pinatubo Commission (MPC),
other government agencies (National Commission for Indigenous
People, Department of Social Welfare and Development, Department
15
of Environment and Natural Resources, Department of Public Works
and Highways, Department of Health, Department of Agriculture,
Department of Education), local government units (LGUs) and non-
government organizations (NGOs). These interviews were aimed at
assessing the role of the authorities in the shaping of the observations
made on the field. A large amount of useful primary written documents
was also collected from these visits to institutions.
Field work was completed by the collection of secondary written
documents such as journal publications, conference proceedings,
and relevant press clippings from regional and national newspapers.
Both primary and secondary written materials provided information
mostly on the disaster management policy. Very few sources
discussed the response of the populations.
From Uplands to Foothills: The Inevitable
Redistribution of the Population
In 1990, about 1,200 to 1,300 Aeta families (approximately 7,000
individuals) were occupying the Pasig and Sacobia basins on both
the upper slopes and the lower foothills of Mt. Pinatubo (National
Statistics Office 1990; Tadem 1993). After the awakening of the
volcano in 1991, both the unsuitability of the upper flanks of the
mountain and the resettlement policy implemented by the Philippine
government led to a general redistribution of the Aeta population of
the Pasig and Sacobia river basins. Figure 2 shows that the present
upper limit of Aeta settlements matches the lower limit of the 1991
pyroclastic deposits and the 20cm-isopach of ash fall. All the Aeta
communities located on the upper flanks of Mt. Pinatubo prior to the
eruption had to abandon their small villages which had been buried
under these thick and hot pyroclastic and ashfall deposits preventing
the immediate reoccupation of the settlements. Most of these Aetas
have been relocated in the government resettlement sites, either on the
lower slopes of the volcano or on the foothills (Figures 1 and 2). Today,
these resettlement sites are the biggest Aeta settlements. Kalangitan,
the biggest relocation center is inhabited by 385 families. These
resettlement sites host Aeta communities from both the upper and
lower flanks of Mt. Pinatubo. The lack of land suitable for cultivation
Gaillard: Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards
16 International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters
and the inadequate housing in resettlement sites has however led many
Aeta families native to the lower slopes of Mt. Pinatubo to return to
their old villages and till their abandoned fields (Gaillard and Leone
2000; Macatol 1998, 2000; Macatol and Reser 1999-2000; Seitz
1998, 2000; Shimizu 1992). With the exception of Villa Maria, the
population of other resettlement centers, like Maynang and Palayan
City, has greatly decreased during the last few years. Other Aetas
native to the upper slopes of Mt. Pinatubo and who chose to leave the
resettlement sites have tried to rebuild their villages on more suitable
sites (e.g., Calapi, San Martin, Burug) or near the relocation centers
(e.g., Inararo). Worth noting is that other Aetas maintain residences
in resettlement sites and at the same time tend their fields near their
former villages. This practice is very prevalent in Villa Maria. It is
now also being practiced in Maynang, prompting the service of daily
or weekly shuttles to and from their original villages. Finally, ten years
after the eruption, several families still live in evacuation centers that
were intended for temporary purposes. At Planas, for example, tents
have been replaced by bamboo huts and other sturdier structures.
All the Aeta settlements are nowadays concentrated on the lower
flanks of Mt. Pinatubo in the immediate proximity of lowland
villages and towns occupied by Kapampangan people, the dominant
ethnic group of the southwestern part of the Central Plain of Luzon
(Figure 2). Henceforth, there are no more Aeta communities left
isolated on the upper flanks of Mt. Pinatubo. All have established
regular contacts with lowlanders.
Increasing Interactions with Lowlanders
The closer geographic proximity between Aeta people and their
lowland neighbors, induced by the downhill redistribution of the
population following the 1991 Mt. Pinatubo eruption, has increased
the interactions between the two communities. These interactions
are economic and social, as well as political.
Until Mt. Pinatubo erupted in 1991, regular economic interactions
between Aetas and lowlanders were limited to the communities located
on the lower slopes of the volcano. Many Aetas of the villages situated
near the former Clark Air Base were both agriculturists and employed
17
by the US Air Force as watchmen, jungle survival instructors, and
janitors while others earned their living by scavenging the garbage of
the US servicemen in the area or by gathering scrap materials left by the
Americans during their training (Cunanan 1982-83; Gaabucayan 1978;
Simbulan 1983). The Aetas living in villages farther away from Clark
Air Base used to sell or swap their products for rice, coffee, or sugar in
the public markets of the surrounding towns at least once a week. Aeta
communities living on the highest slopes of Mt. Pinatubo lived almost
exclusively on tilling different rootcrops, hunting, fishing and gathering
tropical fruits without regular contact with lowlanders and other
ethno-linguistic groups. Noteworthy is that despite these significant
differences in their way of life, upland and lowland communities can
still be regarded as a single ethnic group on the basis of their common
physical features, language, traditional beliefs and inter-individual
relationship based on a great sense of ‘communalness’ (Barrato and
Benaning 1978; Brosius 1983; Fox 1952; Shimizu 1989). The downhill
redistribution of the population following the 1991 eruption has deeply
modified the economic landscape by making all the Aetas dependent
on the lowland market to earn their living. Interviews conducted in the
Pasig and Sacobia river basins in 1999 and 2000 show that, at present,
there are no more isolated communities and all the Aetas have thus
learnt to sell their produce directly in the public markets of surrounding
towns without being deceived by Kapampangans who used to act as
middlemen. Besides the traditional public markets, the former Clark Air
Base converted into a vast industrial, tourist and commercial complex,
Clark Special Economic Zone (CSEZ), has become another fruitful
commercial outlet for the Aetas. The Aetas are now all selling fruits
(bananas, papayas…), vegetables (banana tree hearts…), rootcrops
(taro, cassava…) and souvenir items (flutes, bows, blowpipes…) to
local and foreign tourists visiting the Duty-Free shops of Clark Special
Economic Zone. These economic interactions between Aetas and their
surrounding communities, especially with Kapampangans, now take
place on an almost daily basis and hence concern all the Aeta people.
Social interactions between Aetas and their lowland neighbors
began as soon as they rubbed shoulders together inside the overcrowded
evacuation centers that hosted the victims of the eruption of Mt.
Pinatubo in June 1991. Most of the Aetas interviewed who never
Gaillard: Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards
18 International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters
previously lived beyond the domains of their respective communities
on the upper flanks of the volcano discovered for the first time the
socio-cultural way of life of the lowlands. Aetas also admitted that
they experienced cohabitation difficulties and discrimination from
non-Aetas who had to scamper for the much needed attention of the
authorities. This situation inside the evacuation centers lasted only
for a few months. Nonetheless social contacts between Aetas and
lowland neighbors continued. The redistribution of the population
downhill and the subsequent closer geographic proximity have
resulted in permanent social interactions. For example, the closer
distance to school facilities and the support of government and non-
government organizations have led many young Aetas to now share
school benches with lowland children. Moreover, these interactions
are daily and long-lasting, and concern the young generation that is
supposed to be the most permeable to cultural change. Data from
the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) show
that the literacy rate among the Aeta people has thus risen from 4
per cent of the population in 1990 to 30 per cent in 2000. Presently,
most of the youth study until they reach the age of 12 (elementary
school). Moreover, literacy programs for adults are being provided
by the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples and other NGOs,
especially within the resettlement centers.
Finally, there are increasing political interactions between Aetas
and surrounding lowland communities. Most of these contacts
have been conveyed by the increasing density of population on the
lower slopes of the volcano as a result of the coming-in of former
uphill communities. The competition for land has become intense,
involving long-time downhill Aeta communities, former uphill
Aetas, lowland Kapampangans whose high population growth
rate pushes them toward the lower slopes of the mountain, and the
developers of Clark Special Economic Zone who try to expand the
area intended for economic development. The numerous territorial
conflicts which have emerged following the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo
are symptomatic of the increasing pressure put on the land (Gaillard
2002). These conflicts have pressed the Aetas to engage in delicate
political negotiations with their lowland neighbors as well as with
government administrations. The Aetas coming from the upper slopes
19
of the volcano who were interviewed as part of this study admitted
that they were unused to such transactions. They further claimed
that numerous Kapampangans took advantage of the ignorance of
some Aetas on the real land-valuations, managing to buy lands from
the latter at very low prices and use unjust leases.
Non-Aeta Socio-Cultural Inputs in the Aeta Culture (see Table 1)
The redistribution of the population on the lower slopes of the
mountain and the following increasing economical, social and political
interactions between Aetas and non-Aetas had some socio-cultural
implications. These interactions progressively compelled the Aetas to
adopt cultural elements from their lowland neighbors. Differentiation
has yet to be made between the communities coming from the upper
flanks of the volcano and those which have been on the foothills of the
mountain for a long time. Among the latter, acculturation was already
ongoing long before the eruption. The communities which were
located around the former Clark Air Base, in Angeles or Mabalacat,
have been deeply influenced by their daily contacts with the Americans
(Dale 1985). Those located farther away from the base, in Porac or
Bamban, were less acculturated though not spared by their weekly
contact with their lowland neighbors (Mendoza 1982). Therefore, the
input of non-Aeta cultural elements due indirectly to the 1991 Mt.
Pinatubo eruption is more apparent among the communities formerly
settled on the upper slopes of the volcano.
The first cultural change concerns the settlement pattern. Before the
eruption, Rice (1973: 256) and Brosius (1983: 134) described clusters
of two-three to five-fifteen houses as typical settlements of the upper
flanks of Mt. Pinatubo. On the lower slopes, settlements were larger,
especially for the villages in the vicinity of Clark Air Base (Sapang
Bato, Marcos Village). The redistribution of the population downhill
subsequent to the eruption and the concurrent increasing density of
population have led to a generalization of large settlements. This is
evident in the resettlement sites but also in most of the villages located
in the basins of the Pasig and Sacobia rivers visited during field work
conducted as part of this study. Today, most of the Aetas coming from
uphill live in settlements which number several tens of houses.
Gaillard: Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards
20
Inte
rnational Journ
al of M
ass E
merg
encie
s a
nd D
isaste
rs
1990 2000
Uphill communities Foothill communities Both former communities
Settlement pattern Small cluster Varied Larger cluster
Religious belief Apo Namalyari / Anitos Both animist and Christian Jesus Christ / Holy Spirits
Medicine Plants / Manganito Plants / Manganito /
Chemical drugs
Chemical drugs
Social leadership Apo Apo Barangay captain / Tribal leader
Territory demarcation No discrete boundaries No discrete boundaries
/ Western concept of
ownership
Administrative boundaries (barangays,
ancestral domains) and western concept
of ownership
Language / dialect Mag-Aantsi Mag-Aantsi / Kapampangan Mag-Aantsi / Kapampangan
Housing material Indigenous Indigenous Foreign
Diet
Tubers / Fruits
Tubers / Fruits / Canned
and fast foods
Canned and fast foods
Clothing Lubay / Indigenous dresses Indigenous dresses /
Western labels
Western labels
Christmas habits None None Quest for Aguinaldo
Table 1. Main Non-Aeta Cultural Inputs in the Aeta’s Culture Following the 1991 Eruption of
Mt. Pinatubo and the Subsequent Redistribution of the Population.
21
The second element of cultural change is the religious beliefs of
the Aetas. Before the 1991 eruption of Mt. Pinatubo, Aetas, especially
those who used to live uphill, traditionally believed in a number of
supernatural beings called ‘Anito’ (good spirit) or ‘Kamana’ (malicious
spirit). The universal creator, or ‘Apo Namalyari’, was supposed to
live at the heart of Mt. Pinatubo (Fox 1952; Lubos na Alyansa ng mga
Katutubong Ayta ng Sambales 1991; Shimizu 1989). On the lower
slopes of the mountain, the number of Aetas getting Christianized by
Catholic or Protestant missions was increasing long before the eruption
but most of them still kept Apo Namalyari and the Anitos at the core of
their beliefs. Due to their redeployment on easily accessible foothills
following the eruption, all the Aetas eventually became easy prey to a
number of religious organizations and sects that mushroomed in their
present villages and used disaster relief as a facade for evangelization.
The ‘kindness’ of the missionaries served as a powerful argument to
lead a large number of Aetas from the Pasig and Sacobia river basins
to become active members of mainstream religions. At present, key
informants acknowledge that Apo Namalyari is assimilated to Jesus
Christ or the representative of God on earth. In the same way, the
Anitos are compared to the Holy Spirit.
Since 1991, there have been modifications in their traditional
medicine as well. These have been brought about both by the
redistribution of the population as well as the extinction of many
plant species following the eruption (Madulid 1992). Indeed, Aetas
were recognized for their expertise in the chemical properties of
plants (Fox 1952). They were also known for their traditional way
of curing sicknesses through ‘manganito’ séances where they used
to seek assistance from the spirits (Shimizu 1983, 1989). Only in the
vicinity of Clark Air Base did the Aetas benefit from free health care
offered by the US Air Force in exchange for the former’s services in
improving their GI’s jungle survival skills. New religious beliefs and
the depletion of many natural drugs pushed the Aetas to adopt modern
medical treatments provided by the government and other civic-
oriented groups (Ignacio and Perlas 1994; Alvarez-Castillo 1997)
which benefit from the easier access to the Aeta settlements. Moreover,
there are now only a few Aetas who still practice manganitos séances
which were once intended to cure the most serious sicknesses.
Gaillard: Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards
22 International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters
This integration of the two (animist and non-Aeta or lowland)
cultures is also very much visible in the novel social references
of the Aetas. The village chieftain of the Aetas at present is much
different from those of the communities before the eruption, who
then had the appellate ‘Apo’ because of his seniority (Jocano 1998).
The researcher’s interviews indicate that for a chieftain of the clan
to be able to retain a moral influence on the community (especially
at Porac), the ‘captain’ or ‘tribal chieftain’, is usually chosen on the
strength of his political influence exogenously, rather than because
of his age. This exerts a new administrative role. It is indeed viewed
as the representative of the State within the village and, thus, is
in contact with the different local authorities (mayor, governor,
congressman/woman…) and the main institutions. The provincial
government of Tarlac has even established a parallel consultative
political system for the Aetas. This includes a ‘Tribal Chieftain’ at
the level of the village, a ‘Tribal Mayor’ at the municipal level, and a
‘Tribal Governor’ at the provincial level. This hierarchy was largely
shaped by concerns about dealing with political matters. Before
the eruption, Brosius (1983: 136) furthermore asserted that uphill
Aeta communities did not claim discrete and bounded territories.
Only near Clark Air Base and the Sacobia river basin, where former
First Lady Imelda Marcos implemented an integrated development
project, were Aetas used to western land ownership rights (Sacobia
Development Authority 1985; Tadem 1993). The demographic
pressure induced by the redistribution of the population and the
continual encroachment of non-Aetas on their lands pushed all the
Aetas to noticeably modify their relation to their territory and to now
claim their own territorial units (‘barangays’—the smallest Philippine
administrative unit—or ‘ancestral domains’—established as part
of the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997), to be administered
exclusively by and for themselves (Gaillard 2002).
The next non-Aeta cultural input in the Aeta culture is the language
of the lowlanders. Before 1991, the Aetas of the upper flanks of Mt.
Pinatubo interviewed for this study used to communicate exclusively
using their native tongue Aeta Mag-Aantsi, an Aeta dialect close to
the Sambal language. Usage of the Kapampangan lowland language
was limited to the lower slopes of Mt. Pinatubo where regular contacts
23
occurred between Aetas and Kapampangans. Today it is widespread
among all the Aetas of the Pasig and Sacobia river basins. Following
their relocation downhill and their subsequent schooling, the young
Aetas had to speak the language of the lowlanders to communicate
with their classmates. It is thus common nowadays to hear Aeta
Mag-Aantsi children speaking Kapampangan when playing in their
backyards. The Kapampangan language also spread among the
adults. Those interviewed admitted that they use the Kapampangan
language due to the increasing political and economic interactions
with Kapampangan people who do not speak Aeta Mag-Aantsi.
Observations during field work and interviews with key informants
show that the western material culture has now also penetrated
communities that would have been most unlikely prior to 1991, owing
to their remoteness from the lowland populations. Lowland house
materials are now rapidly spreading among the Aeta settlements. The
ready-to-use diagonal-oriented ‘sawaling (light wall material made of
waived bamboo) Tagalog’ (from the dominant ethno-linguistic group
of the Philippines) and other modern construction materials (cement,
‘GI-sheet’…) are gaining ground on the traditional and robust square-
oriented ‘sawaling Aeta’. Canned and ‘fast foods’, which former
uphill villagers discovered for the first time in the evacuation centers
in 1991, are also quickly becoming the favorite delicacies of most
of the Aetas in lieu of tubers and fruits. The traditional ‘lubay’ (G-
strings) and other native dresses, which uphill Aetas were regularly
wearing before 1991, are progressively being replaced by pants with
international labels. Drinking (notably gin) has now also become
prevalent among all Aetas. Influenced by the new commercial
markets, traditional craftworks and utensils (bows and arrows,
blowguns, flutes, baskets…) are now being transformed into folkloric
items for sale to tourists visiting Clark Special Economic Zone. For
the Aetas from the vicinity of the former American military facilities
who were used to western clothing and food regularly distributed
by the servicemen, changes were much less radical and limited to a
larger proportion of western housing material.
Another consequence of the increasing social contacts with
lowland neighbors is the Aeta children’s quest for little Christmas
cash gifts (Aguinaldo) during the month of December, a widespread
Gaillard: Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards
24 International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters
custom among non-Aeta children in the Philippines. For that reason,
Aeta children now roam the streets of Porac, Angeles City and San
Fernando in the hopes of receiving a small Christmas donation from
lowlanders (Sicat 2001).
Other fundamentals of the Aeta social organization have however
undergone less change. The most important is the ‘communalness’ of
the Aetas recognized long before 1991 and considered as the center
of the social and economic life (Barrato and Benaning 1978; Brosius
1983; Fox 1952; Shimizu 1989). Indeed, the Aetas are, among all the
other Negritos of the Philippines, the only group to focus towards
a core which is the grouping of two to five families. In this regard,
it is particularly important to note that this peculiarity has survived
the eruption. Interviews with key informants indeed indicate that
groups of two to three Aeta households still co-exploit swiddens,
share food and journey together to the public markets for economic
transactions. Similarly, Aeta families are still nucleated around a
husband, his wife and their children as they were before the eruption
of Mt. Pinatubo (Brosius 1983; Shimizu 1989). Furthermore, the
survey conducted in the Pasig and Sacobia river basins indicate that
the Aetas have retained the strong identity attachment to their village
mentioned by Shimizu (1989). It is very evident in the gathering of
families from the same villages inside the resettlement sites. These
clusters are always named in respect to the community of origin.
The 1991 Mt. Pinatubo eruption brought undeniable but
differentiated changes in the Aeta society. On the other hand,
there are some fundamentals of the Aeta social system which have
survived the consequences of the disasters. Is it sufficient to assert
that the Aetas have been resilient in the face of the occurrence of a
powerful natural hazard?
Aeta Resilience in the Face of the Mt. Pinatubo Eruption
Changes in the Aeta society following the 1991 eruption of Mt.
Pinatubo have been brought by the increasing interactions with lowland
neighbors brought by the spatial redistribution of the population on
the foothills of the volcano. Changes have therefore concerned the
components of the Aeta social fabric exposed to these interactions. On
25
the other hand, some of the fundamentals pertaining to relationships
within the society, notably the sense of ‘communalness’, have been
less affected and have survived the eruption and its consequences.
Henceforth, the Aeta social system has not disappeared following the
disaster. It has rather adapted to new environmental, social, economic
and political environments while maintaining a stable core. This
viewpoint is further reinforced by the perseverance of the Aetas to
claim their own ethnic identity, as manifested by their massive abandon
of the resettlement centers. Thus, if resilient societies are those that are
able to overcome the damages brought by the occurrence of natural
hazards, either through maintaining their pre-disaster social fabric, or
through accepting marginal or larger change in order to survive, then
the Mt. Pinabuto Aetas of the Pasig and Sacobia river basins have been
resilient. However, a distinction has to be made between pre-1991
uphill and downhill communities. It is quite evident that the eruption
of Mt. Pinatubo and the subsequent redistribution of the population
brought major and abrupt changes in the way of life of former uphill
Aeta communities. Increased interactions with Kapampangan people
progressively led these communities to adopt lowland cultural
references. They also reoriented their economic activities toward the
market demand in the lowlands and no longer rely exclusively on
environmental resources (Table 1). Aetas from the upper flanks of Mt.
Pinatubo thus became resilient through openness and adaptability. The
latitude of the social fabric was wide and permeable enough to easily
accept large changes but did not allow the loss of some fundamentals
of the Aeta society such as the sense of ‘communalness’. Indeed, the
system was already in a state of precariousness induced by increasing
pressure from lowland groups.
On the other hand, the communities formerly situated at the
foothills of the mountain and near the old Clark Air Base underwent
fewer changes. Among these communities, acculturation was
already ongoing before the eruption, which acted as an accelerator
of the trend through further cultural adjustments and diversification
of economic activities (Table 1). Therefore, Aeta communities
from the lower slopes of Mt. Pinatubo have been resilient through
incremental and marginal change due to a narrower gap or latitude
between lowland and upland cultures.
Gaillard: Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards
26 International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters
The differential capacity of responses of the Aeta communities
and the amplitude of the cultural change did not lie exclusively in
the pre-disaster social fabric. It has been influenced by the context
of the disaster. For the past two decades, considerable attention has
been given to this question in the hazard and disaster literature (e.g.,
Wisner et al. 2004; Cannon 1994; Hewitt 1983, 1997; Lavell 1997;
Maskrey 1993; Susman, O’Keefe, and Wisner 1983). Natural hazards
such as volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, landslides, typhoons or
floods have different inherent characteristics such as diverse speed
of onset, temporal spacing and magnitude. Moreover, they occur in
very different geographical, social, political and cultural contexts
that contribute to shape the responses and adjustments of the victims.
It is therefore important to break away from universal patterns of
response to natural hazards as those mentioned in the first section of
this paper. It rather seems that the capacity of resilience of traditional
societies in the face of natural hazards and related cultural changes
are commanded by an intricate interrelation of several factors that
vary in time and space, from one event to another. These factors are
physical, socio-cultural, geographical and political in nature. The
following section illustrates each of them as a new approach to the
capability of traditional societies to overcome the damage brought
by the occurrence of natural hazards. Worth mentioning is that this
framework only applies to fast-onset and contemporary events like
the 1991 Mt. Pinatubo eruption and thus excludes prehistoric and
slow-onset hazards phenomena like droughts and climatic changes.
Factors of Resilience of Traditional Societies in Facing the
Occurrence of Natural Hazards
Based on the Aetas’ experience following the 1991 Mt. Pinatubo
eruption, it is possible to identify several interdependent factors that
affect the capacity of resilience of traditional societies in the face of
the occurrence of natural hazards. These factors may be gathered
into four groups (Figure 3).
First is the nature of the hazard. The magnitude and the temporal
spacing of the event played a great role in shaping the long-term
consequences of the Mt. Pinatubo eruption on the Aeta communities.
27
In the Philippines, several authors have demonstrated the ability of
environment-dependent ethnic groups to cope with natural hazards
in a quite efficient way (Blolong 1996; Heijmans 2001; Insauriga
1999; Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology et al.
1998). However, most of the indigenous adaptations are in dealing
with recurrent, usually seasonal, events like typhoons and floods. The
magnitude of the Mt. Pinatubo eruption was far greater. Moreover,
despite the vague existence of an oral memory of a previous eruption
(Gaillard et al. 2005), the Aetas had to deal with a phenomenon they
did not know.
Figure 3: Factors of Resilience among Traditional Societies in
Facing the Occurrence of Natural Hazards.
The extent of damage also played a crucial role in the acculturation
of uphill Aeta communities following the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo.
Most of the Aeta villages were buried under several meters of
hot pyroclastic and ash fall deposits preventing the immediate
reoccupation of the upper slopes of the volcano. This is another
major difference from phenomena like typhoons or floods that allow
post-disaster reoccupation of the stricken area. Relocation downhill
following the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo was a must and no other
alternatives were left for the Aetas.
Gaillard: Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards
28 International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters
The second factor affecting the capacity of resilience of traditional
societies is the intrinsic social condition of the particular group
exposed to a given hazard. It seems that the capability of traditional
societies to overcome disasters particularly depends on the pre-
disaster level of acculturation, the relationships between the affected
group and its neighbors, the diversity of pre-disaster livelihood, the
cultural attachment to the devastated site, the size of the community
affected and the age and the conservatism of the traditional leaders.
It is obvious that the deepest socio-cultural changes occurred
among those communities which were the least acculturated before
the eruption, whereas the most acculturated communities in 1990
only made small adjustments to the new environmental and socio-
economic contexts. The capacity of resilience therefore seems to be
directly linked to the pre-disaster level of acculturation. The more
traditional the community before the occurrence of the hazard, the
more prone it is to cultural change.
Closely related is the amplitude of pre-disaster socio-cultural
differences between the affected ethnic group and its neighbors, as
well as the intensity of inter-group interactions. It seems that the
larger the gap and the slighter the interactions, the more permeable
is the community and the deeper the cultural changes. Aetas from
the upper slopes of the volcano, who discovered the way of life
of the lowlanders during their stay in the evacuation centers, were
the most prone to cultural change. Conversely, changes were much
slighter among the communities from the foothills of the mountain
which had long been interacting with neighboring groups.
This study also confirmed that the communities which were
most prone to cultural changes were those with no diversification
of livelihoods. Uphill communities exclusively dependent on
agriculture for their living were rendered helpless by the destruction
of their fields by volumes of pyroclastic deposits. On the other hand,
the communities situated near the former Clark Air Base which used
to rely on several sources of livelihood turned out to be more capable
of further diversifying their activities after the disaster.
The extent to which a community is affected seems to have a
direct link with the capacity of resilience and post-disaster cultural
change as well. If the whole community is hit by a natural hazard,
29
resistance to cultural changes seems unlikely. The Mt. Pinatubo
eruption spared no Aeta community. All were affected and all the
Aetas experienced life in the evacuation and resettlement centers,
where contacts with the lowlanders first took place for those from
the uphill communities. The absence of intact villages, which would
have taken care of the Aeta traditions, did not allow a retreat to a
preserved socio-cultural environment.
In the Mt. Pinatubo case, preservation of socio-cultural references
was also hindered by the critical shift in leadership that followed
the eruption. The “Apo” or old wise man lost his prerogatives in
preserving and transmitting the indigenous traditions because of his
incapacity to deal with the new issues the Aetas had to cope with after
their relocation downhill. Younger leaders are now emerging from
among the different communities due to their ability to communicate
with lowlanders. This phenomenon has been reinforced by the
greater access of the youth to the educational system. This process
is viewed as a needed evolution in the Aeta society. Nowadays, this
has even compelled some communities to adopt young educated
women as their leaders. The age and conservatism of the traditional
leader before the disaster has thus shown to be a significant element
affecting the capacity of resilience of traditional societies in the face
of the occurrence of natural hazards.
The third factor is the geographic setting which is directly linked
to the two previous points. The lack of space in a homeland-like
environment for relocation without encroachment on other ethnic
groups and cultures is of critical importance. The existence of
available space is directly connected to the magnitude of the event
and the extent of damage brought among the affected communities.
In the case of the 1991 Mt. Pinatubo eruption, there was certainly
no space available in a homeland-like environment for spontaneous
relocation. The resettlement sites selected by the government
encroached on lowlander territories and favored contacts between
Aetas and their neighbors. Foothill sites where other Aeta
communities spontaneously resettled also trespass on lowlanders’
lands. Moreover, attempts of the authorities to resettle Aetas in
similar but not identical physical milieu (Palawan and the Sierra
Madre of Luzon) have failed (Gaillard and Leone 2000).
Gaillard: Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards
30 International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters
The fourth and last factor affecting the capacity of resilience and
cultural change among the Aeta communities is the post-disaster
rehabilitation policy set up by the authorities. Some authors
mentioned the insensitivity of disaster managers and their lack of
cultural knowledge about the Aetas (Güss and Pangan 2004: 46).
Others (e.g., Bennagen 1996: 60 and also Shimizu 1992: 2) have
reported that some government officials were boasting of trying
to ‘civilize’ the Aeta through the rehabilitation programs initiated
in response to the disaster, especially through the resettlement
policy and social programs (education, health…). This may be
challenged. Major cultural changes among the Aeta communities
did not occur by direct inputs of the government but rather as a
progressive process due to geographic proximity which led to
increasing interactions with external lowland culture. However, it
is true that education within the resettlement centers contributed to
enlarge the cultural references of the youth. The fact that many Aeta
families are going back to the mountain further questions the role
of the government in the acculturation process that has occurred
among former uphill communities. It clearly demonstrates that the
Aetas tend to meet their own needs without any assistance from
the government or other NGOs (Bennagen 1996; Estacio Jr. 1996;
Seitz 1998). Yet, if the authorities did not directly input lowland
cultural references, they greatly participated in the relocation of
the victims downhill and conditioned the redistribution of the
population that occurred after the eruption. The close proximity
at present between Aeta communities and their lowland neighbors
greatly favor contacts of all sorts.
Furthermore, the fate of the Aeta communities cannot be detached
from the national government policy toward ethnic and cultural
minorities. At the time of the eruption, there were no specific
governmental guidelines to protect and defend ethnic minority rights
in the Philippines. It was only in 1997 that the Indigenous Peoples
Rights Act (RA 8371) was legislated (Department of Environment
and Natural Resources 1997). Therefore, it was most unlikely
that the Philippine government took appropriate measures for the
preservation of the Aeta culture in 1991.
31
Conclusions
The 1991 eruption of Mt. Pinatubo has implied a massive
redeployment of the Aeta communities of the Pasig and Sacobia
river basins toward the foothills of the volcano. This demographic
redistribution has increased the geographic proximity between
Aeta communities and their lowland neighbors and concurrently
heightened the political and socio-economical relationships between
Aetas and non-Aetas. More than ten years after the eruption, the level
of cultural change induced by these increasing interactions has not
been uniform. The less acculturated communities before the event are
those who have undergone the highest level of cultural transformation.
On the other hand, the eruption only acted as an accelerator of an
on-going trend among the most acculturated communities before
the eruption. Both uphill and foothill communities have however
retained some fundamentals of the Aeta society, notably their sense
of ‘communalness’. An increasing number of families further try to
recover their pre-eruption way of life by leaving the resettlement
centers or by going back to the upper slopes of the volcano when
possible. Hence, Aeta communities have turned out to be resilient in
the face of the Mt. Pinatubo eruption. Resiliency required a certain
level of cultural change and adaptation to the new environmental,
social, economic and political context. Former uphill Aetas resorted
to larger changes in their social system than their counterparts long
living on the lower slopes of the volcano who recovered through
marginal changes.
This flexibility of the Aeta society in the face of changing contexts
had already been noticed before the 1991 eruption of Mt. Pinatubo
(e.g., Brosius 1983; Shimizu 1989). For instance, Shimizu (1989: 78)
asserted that “the dynamism of Aeta social life hinges on the flexibility
and durability of the Aeta social system”. Indeed, during their long
history which may date back to the Pleistocene period, the Aetas
have had to cope with major environmental and cultural disturbances,
including several powerful eruptions of Mt. Pinatubo and earthquakes,
climate changes, the arrival of the ‘Austronesian’ agriculturists, the
coming of the Spaniards, and finally the establishment of American
military bases on their territory. Yet, they have managed to retain
Gaillard: Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards
32 International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters
specific cultural traits that still distinguish them from the majority of
the Philippine ethno-linguistic groups today.
The capacity of resilience of the Aetas and the level of culture
change that their society has undergone following the 1991
eruption of Mt. Pinatubo have been commanded by a complex
set of interacting factors. These factors include the nature and
magnitude of the hazard, the pre-disaster socio-cultural context,
the geographical context and the rehabilitation policy set up by
the authorities. It is evident that these factors vary somewhat in
time and space, from one disaster to another. Even at the scale of
the Mt. Pinatubo eruption and the Aeta people, conclusions drawn
from the case study of the Pasig and Sacobia river basins can barely
be generalized and extended to other flanks of the volcano (e.g.,
Seitz 2004). Given the great diversity of natural hazards and the
multiplicity of their local geographical context of occurrence, the
quest for a unique and universal theoretical framework assessing
the capacity of resilience of traditional societies in facing the
occurrence of natural hazards becomes secondary. More important
is to perceive the local variations of the factors detailed in this
paper to better anticipate the capability of traditional societies
to overcome the damage brought by the occurrence of natural
hazards and therefore predict eventual cultural change. This
framework is in line with the new approach of hazards and disaster
management programs which enhances a local consideration of
the problems rather than being limited to a transfer of technology
from industrialized to developing countries.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Greg Bankoff, Norma Bulaclac,
Jessie Candules, Nestor Castro, Lino Dizon, Rene Estremera,
Cyrene Gaillard, Guy Hilbero, Frédéric Leone, Catherine Liamzon,
Emmanuel Maceda, Joel Mallari, Michael Pangilinan, Wesley
Platon, Lanie Quemada-Dioniso, Tony Sibal and William Tolentino
for their contribution.
33
References
Ali, L. 1992. “Symbolic Planning and Disaster Preparedness in
Developing Countries: The Presbyterian Church in Vanuatu.”
International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters 10
(2): 293-314.
Alvarez-Castillo, F. 1997. “Cultural Conflict in the Context of
Undemocratic Social Change: The Encounter of Modern Health
Care and the Aetas.” Pp. 235-240 in Papers and Proceedings of
the International Symposium on Disaster and Health. Manila:
University of the Philippines.
Banzon-Bautista, M.C.R. and E.C. Tadem. 1993. “Brimstone and Ash:
The 1991 Mt. Pinatubo Eruption.” Pp. 3-15 in In the Shadow of the
Lingering Mt. Pinatubo Disaster, edited by M.C.R. Banzon-Bautista.
Quezon City and Amsterdam: University of the Philippines-CSSP
and University of Amsterdam-Center for Asian Studies.
Barrato Jr., C.L. and M.N. Benaning. 1978. Pinatubo Negritos
(Revisited). Field Report Series No 5. Quezon City: Philippine
Center for Advanced Studies Museum.
Bates, F.L. 1982. Recovery, Change and Development: A Longitudinal
Study of the 1976 Guatemalan Earthquake. Athens: University
of Georgia.
Bates, F.L. and W.G. Peacock. 1986. “Disaster and Social Change.”
Pp. 291-330 in Sociology of Disasters: Contribution of Sociology
to Disaster Research, edited by R.R. Dynes, B. de Marchi and C.
Pelanda. Milan: F. Angeli.
Belshaw, C. 1951 “Social Consequences of the Mount Lamington
Eruption.” Oceania 21: 241-253.
Bennagen, P.L. 1996. “Amin Ito: Who Controls Disaster
Management.” Aghamtao: Journal of the Anthropological
Association of the Philippines 8: 56-64.
Blair, J.P. 1964. “Home to Tristan de Cunha.” National Geographic
125: 60-81.
Blolong, R.R. 1996. “The Ivatan Cultural Adaptation to Typhoons:
A Portrait of a Self-Reliant Community from the Indigenous
Development Perspective.” Aghamtao: Journal of the
Anthropological Association of the Philippines 8: 13-24.
Gaillard: Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards
34 International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters
Blong, R.J. 1984. Volcanic Hazards: A Sourcebook on the Effects of
Eruptions. Sydney: Academic Press.
Boehm, C. 1996. “Emergency Decisions, Cultural-Selection Mechanics,
and Group Selection.” Current Anthropology 37 (5): 763-793.
Brosius, J.P. 1983. “The Zambales Negritos: Swidden Agriculture
and Environmental Change”. Philippine Quarterly of Culture
and Society 11: 123-148.
Burton, I. 1972. “Culture and Personality Variables in the Perception
of Natural Hazards.” Pp. 184-195 in Environment and the
Social Sciences: Perspectives and Applications, edited by J.F.
Wohlwill and D.H. Carson. Washington: American Psychological
Association Inc.
Burton, I, R.W. Kates, and G.F. White. 1993. The Environment as
Hazard. 2nd ed. New York: The Guilford Press.
Cannon, T. 1994. “Vulnerability Analysis and the Explanation of ‘Natural’
Disasters.” Pp. 13-30 in Disasters, Development and Environment,
edited by Ann Varley. Chichester: J. Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Cijffers, K.M. 1987. “Disaster Relief: Doing Things Badly.” Pacific
Viewpoint 28 (2): 95-117.
Cunanan, J. 1982-83. “The Impact of the United States Military Bases
on the Aetas (Negritos): Victims or Beneficiarie?” Aghamtao:
Journal of the Anthropological Association of the Philippines
5-6: 63-79.
Cuny, F.C. 1983. Disasters and Development. New York: Oxfam /
Oxford University Press.
Dale, C.D. 1985. “An Analysis of Variables Contributing to
Successful Employment of Negrito Males in Clark Air Base
Environ: Their Implications to Cross-Cultural Education.” Ph.D.
Dissertation, Angeles University Foundation, Angeles City.
Department of Environment and Natural Resources. 1997.
Indigenous People Republic Act of 1997: RA No 8371. Quezon
City: Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
D’Ercole, R. 1994. “Les Vulnérabilités des Sociétés et des Espaces
Urbanisés: Concepts, Typologies, Mode d’Analyse.” Revue de
Géographie Alpine 32 (4): 87-96.
Dovers, S.R., and J.W. Handmer. 1992. “Uncertainty, Sustainability
and Change.” Global Environmental Change 2 (4): 262-276.
35
Drabek, T.E. 1986. Human System Responses to Disaster: An Inventory
of Sociological Findings. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Dynes, R.R. 1976 “The Comparative Study of Disaster: A Social
Organizational Approach.” Mass Emergencies 1 (1): 21-32.
Estacio Jr., L.R. 1996. “Ang Antropolohiya ng Disaster sa Punto de
Bista ng mga Ayta: Ang mga Ayta ng Banawen, Maloma, San
Felipe, Zambales.” Aghamtao: Journal of the Anthropological
Association of the Philippines 8: 65-75.
Folke, C., S. Carpenter, T. Elmqvist, L. Gunderson, CS. Holling,
B. Walker, J. Bengtsson, F. Berkes, J. Colding, K. Danell, M.
Falkenmark, L. Gordon, R. Kasperson, N. Kautsky, A. Kinzig,
S. Levin, K.-G. Mäler, F. Moberg, L. Ohlsson, P. Olsson, E.
Ostrom, W. Reid, J. Rockström, H. Savenije, and U. Svedin. 2002.
Resilience and Sustainable Development: Building Adaptive
Capacity in a World of Transformations. Scientific Background
Paper on Resilience for the process of The World Summit on
Sustainable Development. Stockholm: The Environmental
Advisory Council to the Swedish Government.
Fox, R.B. 1952. “The Pinatubo Negritos: Their Useful Plants and
Material Culture.” The Philippine Journal of Science 81 (3-4):
173-414.
Gaabucayan, S.P. 1978. “A Socio-Economic Study of the Pinatubo
Negritos of the Pampanga—Tarlac Area.” Ph.D. Dissertation,
University of the Philippines Diliman, Quezon City.
Gaillard, J.-C. 2002. “Territorial Conflicts Following Volcanic
Disasters: The 1991 Mt. Pinatubo Eruption (Philippines) and the
Aetas.” Philippine Geographical Journal 46 (1-4): 3-17.
Gaillard, J.-C. and F. Leone. 2000. “Implications Territoriales de
l’Eruption du Mont Pinatubo pour la Minorité Ethnique Aeta: Cas
des Bassins Versants des Rivières Pasig et Sacobia (Provinces
de Pampanga et Tarlac, Philippines).” Cahiers Savoisiens de
Géographie 1-2000: 53-68.
Gaillard, J.-C., F.G. Delfin Jr., E.Z. Dizon, J.A. Larkin, V.J. Paz,
E.G. Ramos, C.T. Remotigue, K.S. Rodolfo, F.P. Siringan, F.,
J.L.S. Soria, and J.V. Umbal. 2005. “Dimension Anthropique de
l’Eruption du Mont Pinatubo, Philippines, entre 800 et 500 Ans
BP.” L’anthropologie 109: 249-266.
Gaillard: Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards
36 International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters
Garvan, J.M. 1964. The Negritos of the Philippines. Horn: Verlag.
Güss, C.D. and O.I. Pangan. 2004. “Cultural Influences on Disaster
Management: A Case Study of the Mt. Pinatubo Eruption.”
International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters 22
(2): 31-58.
Haque, C.E. and M.Q. Zaman. 1994. “Vulnerability and Responses
to Riverine Hazards in Bangladesh: A Critique of Flood
Control and Mitigation Approaches.” Pp. 65-79 in Disasters,
Development and Environment, edited by A. Varley. Chichester:
J. Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Headland, T.N. and L.A. Reid. 1989. “Hunter-Gatherers and their
Neighbors from Prehistory to the Present.” Current Anthropology
30 (1): 43-66.
Heijmans, A. 2001. Vulnerability: A Matter of Perception. Disaster
Management Working Paper 4/2001. Benfield Greig Hazard
Research Centre. London: University College of London.
Hewitt, K. 1983. “The Idea of Calamity in a Technocratic Age.” Pp.
3-32 in Interpretations of Calamity, edited by K. Hewitt. The
Risks and Hazards Series #1. Boston: Allen & Unwin Inc.
———. 1997. Regions of Risk: A Geographical Introduction to
Disasters. Harlow: Longman.
Holland, C.J. and P.W. VanArsdale. 1986. “Responses to Disasters:
A Comparative Study of Indigenous Coping Mechanisms in Two
Marginal Third World Communities.” International Journal of
Mass Emergencies and Disasters 4 (3): 51-70.
Hoover, G.A. and F.L. Bates. 1985. “The Impact of a Natural
Disaster on the Division of Labor in Twelve Guatemalan
Communities: A Study of Social Change in a Developing
Country.” International Journal of Mass Emergencies and
Disasters 3 (3): 7-26.
Hurell, J. 1984. “Mitigation through Rehabilitation: Tonga’s
Cyclone Isaac.” Pp. 198-211 in Proceedings of the International
Conference on Disaster Mitigation Program Implementation
(Vol. 2). Ocho Rios, Jamaica, 12-16 November 1984.
Ignacio, L.L. and A.P. Perlas. 1994. From Victims to Survivors:
Psychological Intervention in Disasters Management. Quezon
City: University of the Philippines-IPPAO.
37
Ingleby, I. 1966 “Mt. Lamington Fifteen Years after.” Australian
Territories 6: 28-34.
Insauriga, S.I. 1999. “Natural Hazard Awareness and Disaster
Preparedness among the Bagobos of Mindanao.” Master’s thesis,
University of Santo Tomas, Manila.
Jocano, F.L. 1998. Filipino Indigenous Ethnic Communities:
Patterns, Variations, and Typologies. Quezon City: Punlad.
Kates, R.W. 1971. “Natural Hazard in Human Ecological Perspective:
Hypotheses and Models.” Economic Geography 47(3): 438-
451.
Kates, R.W., J.E. Haas, D.J. Amaral, R.A. Olson, R. Ramos, and
R. Olson. 1973. “Human Impact of the Managua Earthquake.”
Science 182 (4116): 981-990.
Keesing, F.M. 1952. “The Papuan Orokaiva vs. Mt. Lamington: Cultural
Shock and its Aftermath.” Human Organization 11: 26-22.
Klein, R.J.T., R.J. Nicholls, and F. Thomalla. 2003. “Resilience to
Natural Hazards: How Useful is this Concept?” Environmental
Hazards 5: 35-45.
Kottak, C.P. 2003. Anthropology: The Exploration of Human
Diversity. 10th ed., McGraw-Hill, Guilford.
Lapitan, J.M. 1992. “On Dealing with Mt. Pinatubo Disaster Victims
at the Palauig Evacuation Center in Zambales, Philippines: A
Cry of Woe, A Cry of Victory.” Pp. 63-73 in After the Eruption:
Pinatubo Aetas at the Crisis of their Survival, edited by H.
Shimizu. Tokyo: Foundation for Human Rights in Asia.
Lavell, A. (ed.). 1997. Viviendo en Riesgo: Comunidades Vulnerables
y Prevencion de Desastres en America Latina. Lima: La Red.
Leslie, J. 1987. “Think before you build, experiences after the Yemen
Earthquake.” Open House International 12 (3): 43-49.
Lewis, J. 1981. “Some Perspectives on Natural Disaster Vulnerability
in Tonga.” Pacific Viewpoint 22 (2): 145-162.
———. 1999. Development in Disaster-Prone Places: Studies of
Vulnerability. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.
Lewis, H.E., D.F. Roberts, and A.W.F. Edwards. 1972. “Biological
Problems, and Opportunities, of Isolation among the Islanders of
Tristan da Cunha.” Pp. 383-417 in Population and Social Change,
edited by D.V. Glass and R. Revelle. London: E. Arnold.
Gaillard: Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards
38 International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters
Lubos na Alyansa ng mga Katutubong Ayta ng Sambales. 1991.
Eruption and Exodus: Mt Pinatubo and the Aytas of Zambales.
Botolan: Lubos na Alyansa ng mga Katutubong Ayta ng Sambales.
Macatol, I.C. 1998. “Grass Huts or Concrete Blocks? Culturally
Appropriate Post-Disaster Housing for Indigenous Communities
in Mount Pinatubo, Philippines.” Pp. 260-270 in Proceedings
of Disaster Management: Crisis and Opportunity – Hazard
Management and Disaster Preparedness in Autralasia and the
Pacific Region, James Cook University (Australia), Nov. 1998.
———. 2000. The Role of Housing in Disaster Recovery of
Indigenous Groups: A Case Study of Post-Disaster Resettlement
of Mount Pinatubo Aetas. Ph.D. Dissertation, James Cook
University, Townsville.
Macatol, I.C. And J. Reser. 1999-2000. “A Reconsideration of the
Nature and Role of Resettlement Housing and Housing Materials
in Natural Disaster Recovery in Indigenous Communities.”
Australian Journal of Emergency Management: 33-41.
Madulid, D.A. 1992. “Mt Pinatubo: A Case of Mass Extinction of Plants
Species in the Philippines.” Silliman Journal 36 (1): 113-121.
Magpantay, R.L. 1992. Health Status of Aeta Children in Relocation
Camps: An Evaluation of the Aeta Emergency Targetted
Assistance Project. Department of Health, Manila.
Magpantay, R.L., I.P. Abellanossa, M.E. White, and M.M. Dayrit.
1992. “Measles among Aetas in Evacuation Centers after a
Volcanic Eruption.” P. 171 in Proceedings of the International
Scientific Conf. on Mt Pinatubo, Department of Foreign Affairs,
Pasay (Philippines), 27-30 May 1992.
Maskrey, A. 1989. Disaster Mitigation: A community Based
Approach. Development Guidelines No. 3. Oxford: Oxfam.
———. 1993. Los Desastres no son Naturales. Lima: La Red.
Mendoza, A.M. 1982. Community Organization and Development
Among the Negritos in Pampanga Using a Down-To-Earth
Experiential Pedagogy (DEES). Ph.D. Dissertation, Angeles
University Foundation, Angeles City.
Mileti, D.S., T.E. Drabek, and J.E. Haas. 1975. Human Systems in
Extreme Environments: A Sociological Perspective. Boulder:
Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado.
39
Munch, P.A. 1964. “Culture and Superculture in a Displaced
Community: Tristan da Cunha.” Ethnology 3 (4): 369-376.
———. 1970. “Economic Development and Conflicting Values: A
Social Experiment in Tristan da Cunha.” American Anthropologist
72 (6): 1300-1318.
National Statistic Office. 1990. 1990 Census of Population and
Housing: Report No 2-74C – Pampanga. Manila: National
Statistic Office.
Nigg, J.M. and K.J. Tierney. 1993. “Disaster and Social Change:
Consequences for Community Construct and Affect.”
Presentation during the Annual Meeting of the American
Sociological Association, Miami, 13-17 August 1993.
Nolan, M.L. 1979 “Impact of Parícutin on Five Communities.” Pp.
293-335 in Volcanic activity and Human Ecology, edited by P.D.
Sheets and D.K. Grayson. New York: Academic Press.
Nolan, M.L. and S. Nolan. 1993. “Human Communities and their
Responses.” Pp. 189-214 in Parícutin: The Volcano Born in a
Mexican Cornfield, edited by J.F. Luhr and T. Simkin. Phoenix:
Geoscience Press Inc.
Oliver-Smith, A. 1977. “Traditional Agriculture, Central Places, and
Post-Disaster Urban Relocation in Peru.” American Ethnologist
4: 102-116.
———. 1979a. “Post Disaster Consensus and Conflict in a
Traditional Society: The 1970 Avalanche of Yungay, Peru.”
Mass Emergencies 4: 43-45.
———. 1979b. “Disaster Rehabilitation and Social Change in
Yungay, Peru.” Human Organization 36 (1): 5-13.
———. 1979c. “The Yungay Avalanche of 1970: Anthropological
Perspective on Disaster and Social Change.” Disasters 3 (1):
95-101.
———. 1992. The Martyred City: Death and Rebirth in the Andes.
2nd ed. Prospect Park: Waveland Press.
———. 1996. “Anthropological Research on Hazards and Disasters.”
Annual Review of Anthropology 25: 303-328.
Panell, S. 1999. “Did the Earth Move for you? The Social Seismology
of a Natural Disaster in Maluku, Eastern Indonesia.” The
Australian Journal of Anthropology 10 (2): 129-143.
Gaillard: Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards
40 International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters
Passerini, E. 2000. “Disasters as Agents of Social Change in Recovery
and Reconstruction.” Natural Hazards Review 1 (2): 67-72.
Pelling, M. 2003. The Vulnerabilities of Cities: Natural Disasters
and Social Resilience. London: Earthscan.
Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology, Philippine
Atmospheric Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration
and Ugnayang Pang-Aghamtao Foundation Inc. 1998. Natural
Disaster Management among Filipino Cultural Communities.
Quezon City: Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology,
Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services
Administration, Ugnayang Pang-Aghamtao Foundation, Inc.
Pinatubo Volcano Observatory Team. 1991. “Lessons from a Major
Eruption: Mt Pinatubo – Philippines.” EOS, Transactions,
American Geophysical Union 72 (49): 545, 552-553, 555.
Reed, W.A. 1904 Negritos of Zambales. Ethnological Survey Pub.
Manila: Department of Interior.
Rees, J.D. 1970. “Paricutin Revisited: A Review of Man’s Attempts
to Adapt to Ecological Changes Resulting from Volcanic
Catastrophe.” Geoforum 4-1970: 7-25.
Rice, D. 1973. “Pattern for Development.” Philippine Sociological
Review 21: 255-260.
Rogers, G. 1981. “The Evacuation of Niuafo’ou, an Outlier in the
Kingdom of Tonga.” The Journal of Pacific History 16 (3): 149-
163.
Sacobia Development Authority. 1985. Sacobia: The Making of a Rural
Community. Clark Air Base: Sacobia Development Authority.
Sawada, T. 1992. “A Report from Tent City – Experience in Medical
Relief.” Pp. 63-73 in After the Eruption: Pinatubo Aetas at the
Crisis of their Survival, edited by H. Shimizu. Tokyo: Foundation
for Human Rights in Asia.
Schneider, D.M. 1957. “Typhoons on Yap.” Human Organization
16 (2): 10-15.
Schwimmer, E.G. 1977. “What Did the Eruption Mean?” Pp. 296-
341 in Exiles and Migrants in Oceania, edited by M.D. Leimer.
Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Seitz, S. 1998. “Coping Strategies in an Ethnic Minority Group: The
Aetas of Mt Pinatubo.” Disasters 22 (1): 76-90.
41
———. 2000. “Bewältigung einer Naturalkatastrophe: Die Aeta am
Mt. Pinatubo (Philippinen).” Geographische Rundschau 52 (4):
49-55.
———. 2004. The Aeta at the Mt. Pinatubo, Philippines: A Minority
Group Coping with Disaster. Quezon City: New Day Publishers.
Shimizu, H. 1983. “Communicating with Spirits: A Study of
Manganito Seance among the Southwestern Pinatubo Negritos.”
East Asian Cultural Studies 22 (1-4): 129-167.
———. 1989. Pinatubo Aytas: Continuity and Changes. Ateneo de
Manila University Press: Quezon City.
———. 1992. Past, Present and Future of the Pinatubo Aetas: At the
Crossroads of Socio-Cultural Disintegration. Pp. 1-49 in After the
Eruption: Pinatubo Aetas at the Crisis of their Survival, edited by
H. Shimizu. Tokyo: Foundation for Human Rights in Asia.
———. 2001. The Orphans of Pinatubo: The Ayta Struggle for
Existence. Manila: Solidaridad Publishing House.
Sicat, R.M. 2001. “Urban Migration of Aetas: A Retrospect on the
Socio-Cultural Identity of the Indigenous People of Tarlac.”
Tarlac State University Graduate Journal 19: 36-55.
Simbulan, R.G. 1983. The Bases of our Insecurity: A Study of
the US military Bases in the Philippines. Quezon City: Balay
Fellowship.
Sjoberg, G. 1962. “Disasters and Social Change.” Pp. 356-384 in
Man and Society in Disaster, edited by G.W. Baker and D.W.
Chapman. New York: Basic Books.
Spillius, J. 1957. “Natural Disaster and Political Crisis in a
Polynesian Society: An Exploration of Operational Research.”
Human Relations 10 (1): 3-27.
Susman, P., P. O’Keefe, and B. Wisner. 1983. “Global Disasters,
a Radical Interpretation.” Pp. 263-283 in Interpretations of
Calamity, edited by K. Hewitt. The Risks and Hazards Series
#1. Boston: Allen & Unwin Inc.
Tadem, E.C. 1993. Integrated Rural Development and US Baselands:
The Sacobia Project. Quezon City: University of the Philippines
Press.
Tariman, M.L.L. 1999. The Pinatubo Resettlement Strategy. Clark
Field: Mount Pinatubo Commission.
Gaillard: Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards
42 International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters
Task Force Mount Pinatubo. 1991. Rehabilitation and Reconstruction
Program for Mt Pinatubo Affected Areas. Manila: Task Force
Mt Pinatubo.
Tayag, J.C., S. Insauriga, A. Ringor, and M. Belo. 1996. “People’s
Response to Eruption Warning: The Pinatubo Experience, 1991-
1992.” Pp. 87-106 in Fire and Mud: Eruption and Lahars of
Mt Pinatubo, Philippines, edited by C.G. Newhall and R.S.
Punongbayan. Seattle / Quezon City: University of Washington
Press / Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology.
Timmerman, P. 1981. Vulnerability, Resilience and the Collapse of
Society: A Review of Models and Possible Climatic Applications.
Environmental Monograph No.1. Institute for Environmental
Studies, University of Toronto, Toronto.
Torry, W.I. 1978a. “Natural Disasters, Social Structure and Change
in Traditional Societies.” Journal of Asian and African Studies
13 (3-4): 167-183.
———. 1978b. “Bureaucracy, Community, and Natural Disasters.”
Human Organization 37(3): 302-308.
———. 1979. “Anthropological Studies in Hazardous Environments:
Past Trends and New Horizons.” Current Anthropology 20 (3):
517-540.
To Waninara, C.G. 2000. The 1994 Rabaul Volcanic Eruption:
Human Sector Impacts on the Tolai Displaced Communities.
Goroka: Melanesian Research Institute.
Umbal, J.V. 1997. “Five Years of Lahars at Pinatubo Volcano:
Declining but Still Potentially Lethal hazards.” Journal of the
Geological Society of the Philippines 52 (1): 1-19.
United Nations Department of Humanitarian Affairs. 1992. Glossaire
International Multilingue Agréé de Termes Relatifs à la Gestion
des Catastrophes. Geneva: United Nations Department of
Humanitarian Affairs.
United Nations Inter-Agency Secretariat of the International Strategy
for Disaster Reduction. 2004. Living with Risk: A Global Review
of Disaster Reduction Initiatives. Geneva: United Nations.
Waddell, E. 1975. “How the Enga Cope with Frost: Responses to
Climatic Perturbations in the Central Highlands of New Guinea.”
Human Ecology 3: 249-273.
43
———. 1983. “Coping with Frosts, Governments and Disaster
Experts: Some Reflections Based on a New Guinean Experience
and a Perusal of the Relevant Literature.” Pp. 33-43 in
Interpretation of Calamities, edited by K. Hewitt. The Risks and
Hazards Series #1. Boston: Allen & Unwin Inc.
Walker, B., C.S. Holling, S.R. Carpenter, and A. Kinzig. 2004.
“Resilience, Adaptability and Transformability in Social–
Ecological Systems.” Ecology and Society 9 (2): 5. http://www.
ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss2/art5 Accessed 26 October 2005.
Watts, M.J., and H.G. Bolhe. 1993. “The Space of Vulnerability: The
Causal Structure of Hunger and Famine.” Progress in Human
Geography 17(1): 43-67.
Wisner, B. 1993. “Disaster Vulnerability: Scale, Power, and Daily
Life.” GeoJournal 30(2): 127-140.
———. 2004. “Assessment of Capability and Vulnerability.” Pp.
183-193 in Mapping Vulnerability: Disasters, Development and
People, edited by G. Bankoff, G. Frerks and T. Hilhorst. London:
Earthscan.
Wisner, B., P. Blaikie, T. Cannon, and I. Davis. 2004. At Risk:
Natural Hazards, People’s Vulnerability, and Disasters. 2nd. Ed.
London: Routledge.
Wolfe, E.W. 1992. “The 1991 Eruption of Mt Pinatubo, Philippines.”
Earthquakes and Volcanoes 23 (1): 5-37.
Zaman, M.Q. 1989. “The Social and Political Context of Adjustment
to Riverbank Erosion Hazard and Population Resettlement in
Bangladesh.” Human Organization 48 (3): 196-205.
———. 1994. “Ethnography of Disasters: Making Sense of Flood
and Erosion in Bangladesh.” The Eastern Anthropologist 47 (2):
129-155.
———. 1999. “Vulnerability, Disaster, and Survival in Bangladesh:
Three Case Studies.” Pp. 192-212 in The Angry Earth: Disaster
in Anthropological Perspective, edited by A. Oliver-Smith and
S.M. Hoffman. London: Routledge.
Gaillard: Traditional Societies in the Face of Natural Hazards