PERCEPTIONS OF VENDORS ON THE CARBON PUBLIC MARKET

MODERNIZATION PROJECT

An Undergraduate thesis

Presented to the Faculty of the

Department of Anthropology, Sociology, and History

School of Arts and Sciences

University of San Carlos

In partial fulfillment of the requirements

Of the Degree

Bachelor of Arts in Anthropology

By

MARI ELISE GWYNETH R. LIM

May 2022
 Table of Contents

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION

Rationale………………………………………………………………………………………….1

Review of Related Literature……….……….……….……….……….……….……….……….2

Statement of the Problem……….……….……….……….……….……….……….…………...6

Conceptual and Theoretical Framework……….……….……….……….……….……………6

Significance of the Study……….……….……….……….……….……….……….…………...11

Research Design…….……….……….……….……….……….……….………………………12

Research Methodology……….……….……….……….……….……….……………...12

Research Environment……….……….……….……….……….……….……….…….13

Data Gathering Methods……….……….……….……….……….……….…………...16

Research Participants……….……….……….……….……….……….………………19

Research Instruments……….……….……….……….……….……….….…….…..…20

Data Analysis……….……….……….……….……….……….……….……….………21

Chapter 2: PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS

Perceived Effects of the Modernization Project on the Vendors’ Livelihoods………………23

The Carbon Public Market as a Lifeline………………………………………………24

The COVID-19 Pandemic and the Deceit that Followed……………………………..25

Dobermans and Dog Cages, A Market for the Rich…………………………………………..26

Shift Changes and Increase of Fees, Unwelcome Market Changes………………………….28

The Vendors’ Original Market Processes……….……….……….……….…………..29

Vendors’ Alternative Development……….……….……….……….……….……….………..30

Discussion……….……….……….……….……….……….……….……….……….…………32
Chapter 3: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary……….……….……….……….……….……….……….……….……….……….….35

Conclusion……….……….……….……….……….……….……….……….……….………...35

Recommendations……….……….……….……….……….……….……….……….…………37

References……….……….……….……….……….……….……….……….……….…………38

Annexes……….……….……….……….……….……….……….……….……….……….…...41

Annex A – Research Instruments……….……….……….……….……….……….….41

Annex B – Courtesy Letters……….……….……….……….……….……….………..44

Curriculum Vitae……….……….……….……….……….……….……….……….……….…45
 Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

Rationale

“Whose right, what right, and to what city?” Marcuse (2009, p. 185) presents these

questions in the debates surrounding the Right to the City. Specifically, the right of those who are

deprived of the services, the material, and the space in the urban city and thus, have the right to

demand for what has been deprived of them and create a city from which the oppressed, alienable,

and insecure benefit from. The Carbon Public Market serves to be a public space that becomes a

focal point of the community members. Farmers drop off and sell their produce before day breaks

as these are procured by the vendors whose stalls and even families have long been members of

the community of the public market. After the vendors procure the goods, these are displayed and

sold to ordinary consumers who buy goods for their families’ consumption or to businesses and

restaurants who come to purchase in Carbon for the price and the quality of the goods. And this

cycle goes on and on day as the days go by in the public market. However, these things are expected

and are bound to change as a project aimed for the modernization of the public market has begun.

This project is a product of the joint venture agreement of the Cebu City Local Government Unit

and the Megawide Construction Corporation, arguably, a partnership between a public and a

private entity towards the goal of modernization. But these efforts have been met with staunch

criticism and accusations of causing a destruction of the identity and the existence of the Carbon

public market from community members notably the vendors resulting in mass protests and legal

actions to halt the modernization. It is then imperative to investigate why a structural and as the

JVA actors would argue, economic and cultural development, would receive such opposition from

the community members themselves.

1
Review of Related Literature

Neoliberalism is viewed as a product of the political economic conditions after the Second

World War, borne out of the desperation to cope with the crises of capitalism, and as others would

argue, “a financially centred effort to to dispossess the Global South” (Herrera, 2006, p.1). It has

been argued in various studies (Miraftab, 2004; Shatkin, 2007; Monzon, 2014), how neoliberalism,

in this case through privatization, has encroached more onto the public urban space. Moreover, it

is exactly this encroachment that leads into the displacement, destruction, and ultimately,

dispossession of communities in these spaces. The themes that will appear in this review will

focus on two major themes: Neoliberalism, specifically neoliberalization through privatization and

Harvey’s Accumulation by Dispossession focused primarily on studies on public spaces in the

urban.

David Harvey (2005, p.2) defines neoliberalism as “a theory of political economic practices

that proposes human wellbeing can be best advanced by liberating individual entrepreneurial

freedoms and skills in an institutional framework characterized by strong property rights, free

markets, and free trade.” Moreover, becoming one of a hegemonic mode of discourse, Harvey also

posits how deregulation, privatization, state withdrawal from areas of social provision or

liberalization are all too common occurrences brought about by neoliberalism. As is the reality of

which where the role of the state is minimized and the markets are granted the maximal role in the

organization of economic life (MacEwan, 2005, as cited in Ginsburg, 2012). It is through such

theory of political economic practices that countries’ economies, especially those of the Global

South’s, have been thoroughly reconfigured (Ortega, 2016), often no longer serving the economic

interests of the greater majority but that of a very few or as the author would term, the elite.

2
 One of the many policy expressions of neoliberalization is privatization. It is defined as a

transfer of publicly-owned businesses, industries, or services to private ownership (The Editors of

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2010). Privatization in urban development is often defined as

mismarketed partnerships under the guise of shared power by the people, the state, and the private

sector. But more often than not, what occurs is a deception of the said partnerships and the

advancement of the private sector’s interests (Miraftab, 2004). Such partnerships also grant the

liberalization and the inaction of state actors initially involved in these partnerships. One popular

form of these partnerships are PPPs or Public Private Partnerships is making the provision of a

service a responsibility of not just one actor, but of a culminated effort of many (Inocencio, 2003).

In their beginnings, these partnerships or PPPs or Public Private Partnerships were used by both

the Thatcher and the Reagan administrations as a main strategy in their projects for urban

development (Mitchell-Weaver and Manning 1991; Beauregard 1998 as cited in Miraftab, 2004).

However, despite such ideals for these partnerships, as Miraftab (2004) presents in her article,

many of PPPs end up to be Trojan horses in neoliberal development. She argues how these

partnerships, despite being promoted by the state, are in fact dominated by the interests of the

private sector and as stated earlier, end up as a form of privatization. What proves to be most

harmful about these PPPs are that more often than not, the affected communities are often

discarded or if not, not granted the chance to exert their interests in these PPPs (Miraftab, 2004).

In the case of the Philippines, in his research on urban megaprojects in Southeast Asia,

specifically, Metro Manila, Shatkin (2007) argues for a defining characteristic of urban

development, which he states as the “unprecedented privatization” of planning. Moreover, he

argues that the city’s development was shaped intensely by both the fiscal and external pressures

on the government in conceding to private actors. As for the stakeholders, the author also presents

3
the potential of conflict between the affected and the private sector actors in the implications of

the development projects. In these said development projects, land acquisition becomes a norm.

Jou et al (2012), states that this land acquisition is done through land grabbing and eventually

leading to the privatization of the land. The authors further argue that most of the land grabbed in

their study of the megaprojects in Taipei are part of a neoliberal transformation of the city, paving

a way for private capital.

The perception of the communities affected by these PPPs are also an element that must be

considered greatly especially in the evaluation of the success and the efficacy of the projects.

Monzon (2014) in her research among the Laguna Lake Fisherfolk who are the affected community

of a proposed PPP in the area, found that all the respondents had experienced a change in the fish

production, resulting in the lack thereof due to the project. The respondents of the research had

expressed their concerns, especially those of the project hindering their maximal use of the lake,

leading to issues of hunger and poverty. This effect on the community solidifies Miraftab’s (2004)

recommendation that the social, economic, cultural and political environment of a program,

especially that of a PPP must be given particular attention. Moreover, Miraftab (2004) stresses the

importance of the role of the state and the policy environment of these partnerships. The lack

thereof of policies supporting the redistributive interventions of the state, are a cause of concern

especially in the state’s supposed mediation of these projects.

With the growing capitalist crisis and the exponentially widening gap between the rich and

the poor, the capitalist accumulation of capital becomes more blatant than ever. Harvey (2003)

argues how Marx’s description of primitive accumulation in fact reveals a wider range of processes

and how all of these features continue to pervade today’s world. Land is still continually

4
commodified and privatized, peasants are still forcibly ejected from their lands, and common

property rights are converted into exclusive private property rights among others.

In the urban scene, populations are subject to a kind of displacement (Wilhelm-Solomon,

2021) that Harvey would argue as, an accumulation by dispossession due to the commodification

and privatization of property rights in the spaces where most of the alienable reside. And the

continual displacement of these populations leads to the absorption of surplus capital and

ultimately, capital accumulation (Wilhelm-Solomon, 2021). Ortega (2016) presents this analysis

as well stating that development programs supported by the state prove to be effective modes of

accumulation of capital. Where does this then put the alienable urban populations? What can be

done in asserting their right to the spaces in the urban?

Henri Lefebvre defines the Right to the City as “a cry and a demand,” (Lefebvre, 1967 as

cited in Marcuse, 2009) that also meanders through who has the rights to information, to the usage

of multiple services, to making known their ideas and the space and time of activities in the urban

areas. Marcuse (2009, p. 189) emphasized this by reiterating the point: “whose right, what right,

and to what city?” Ultimately, Marcuse (2009) argues that the goal of this movement is certainly

not one after profit, but one for a living environment that proves to be decent and supportive of the

alienated and the deprived whose common enemy is none other than capitalism —though it goes

by many names. This then solidifies the conflict that exists among the actors and communities in

these projects for “development”. The question continues to re-echo itself, “Development for

Who?”

Many theories have been presented to explain the effects of neoliberalism especially in the

urban spaces. Specifically, the discussion flows from how neoliberalism, through privatization,

and more concretely through the various public and private partnerships, endanger the urban

5
population’s – especially those of the directly affected community’s – right to the spaces. How to

approach such a dilemma, especially in a public space such as the Carbon Public Market where

various communities such the urban poor in the residential, the public market, and even the

suppliers and consumers are to be affected when a privatization is forced upon them. When the

question of development then arises for the case of Carbon, what must deeply be investigated upon

is who benefits the most out of the development project. More specifically, whether the

modernization project leads to a genuine development or just another means to further accumulate

capital at the expense of the dispossession and the displacement of the alienable.

Statement of the Problem

This study seeks to determine the perceptions of vendors on the modernization project for

the Carbon Public Market. Specifically, this study first focuses on the perceptions of the vendors

on the modernization’s effect on their livelihood as market vendors. Second, it focuses on how the

vendors would perceive the relocation of stalls into the new Carbon market following the

modernization. Third, this study focuses as well on the vendors’ perceived changes in the market

process within the Carbon Public Market. Lastly, the study is concerned in shedding light on the

alternatives of the affected community in contrast to the modernization project.

Conceptual and Theoretical Framework

Edelmann and Haugerud (2005) define development as an unstable term. Though

conventionally connoting to improvements in an individual or community’s overall quality of life

and opportunities, it may also refer to, “the historical processes of commodification,

industrialization, modernization, or globalization” (p. 1).The definition of development as

6
connoting to the improvements in an individual’s quality of life is supported by Sen (1999),

defining it as a process of the expansion of the freedoms that people enjoy and is dependent on

determinants such as social, political, cultural, and economic arrangements and as such, requires

the removal of various unfreedoms such as systematic social deprivation and tyranny among

others. In the same work, he criticizes the narrow view of development, one often shared by

economists in viewing it as the mere growth of gross national product, increase in personal

incomes, or social modernization. Sen (1999) argues rather that such developments are only part

and parcel of the necessary arrangements to assure development or the elevation of the quality of

human life.

Arturo Escobar (1995) takes this discourse further by presenting the question of whether

development is an imagined future that we strive towards or a mere destructive myth concocted in

the history of Western modernity. As he argues in his work (Encountering Development)

development has been used by institutions in the West to problematize poverty and take on the

mission of granting development as a form of “salvation” for the third world.

This development debate stems greatly from the postwar approach towards development

that took a position toward extensive state intervention in the economy of a nation and the goal of

the reduction of world poverty after the Bretton Woods Conference, the same body that established

the international financial institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank

– institutions aimed at limiting capital movements and the institutionalization of national economic

planning (Edelman and Haugerud, 2005). As the state interventionist approach eventually broke

down, new policy changes known as economic neoliberalism, better known as simply

neoliberalism to third world countries, came into fruition.

7
 Edelman and Haugerud (2005, p. 7) refer to neoliberalism as the “doctrines or policies that

accord the market rather than the state the main role” in the resolution of problems such as

economic problems. In the case of the United States, Edelman and Haugerud (2005, p. 7) regarded

it as “a blend of neoclassical economics and political conservatism”. David Harvey (2005)

supports this definition by providing the perspective of neoliberalism as a theory whose

proposition is that wellbeing of an individual can be best advanced by the liberation of

entrepreneurial freedoms that is characterized by “strong property rights, free markets, and free

trade” (p. 2, 2005). A case in point towards such aims for the elevation of the quality of human life

through neoliberalism, was the World Bank’s focus on economic growth by addressing poverty

and equity issues. More concretely, this focus was expressed through structural adjustments by the

World Bank and the International Monetary Fund in the 1980s and the 1990s. These structural

adjustments had as its goal, the reduction of the role of the states in their nation’s economies as

well as calling for the diminution in state expenditures for basic social services and a focus towards

trade-liberalization, sale of state-owned enterprises, and deregulation in the financial and labor

market (Edelman and Haugerud, 2005).

Eventually, the fractures of the neoliberal approach were revealed during the 1980s debt

crisis with the World Bank modifying the said structural adjustments. These modifications were

prompted by the increase of debt problems pushing the Bank to develop social investment and debt

relief programs for nations affected by these adjustment policies. Bello (2002, 2004) would even

go as far as stating that these structural adjustments had only institutionalized stagnation in Third

World countries, calling it “a blight on the Third World” (p. 68). Criticisms on the adjustment

policies’ impacts (Stiglitz 2002; Sachs 1999; Soros 2002) reveal how the neoliberal approach is in

contrast to the aim of addressing efforts toward world development and instead, sacrificed these

8
ideals in the goal of prioritizing capital and the market (Edelman and Haugerud, 2005). Edelmann

and Haugerud also cite Chang and Grabel’s work (2004) criticizing the faults in the neoliberal

approach and debunking the myth that neoliberalism promoted developments such as economic

growth and historical success in wealthy nations. Such a criticism made it clear how the neoliberal

approach to development is an expression of how it desperately tries to protect the further

accumulation of the “free market”.

Bello (2009) illustrates the effort of making the Philippines a newly industrializing country

as the face of neoliberal development. This took place especially during the administration of

President Fidel Ramos when neoliberalism, as Bello (2009) would argue, was at its most influential

point. This said effort saw the Philippines’ accelerated integration into the global market through

trade and investment liberalization. In his earlier work, Bello (2002, 2004) mentions

neoliberalism’s focus on the liberation of the market through “accelerated privatization,

deregulation and trade liberalization.” Here, market forces were unleashed and the barriers set by

“labour, the state, and society” were removed (p. xiii). What this “liberation of the market” meant

for Third World countries becomes evident in the vast effects of neoliberalism in the Philippines

through the deregulation of policies and the privatization of public utilities and sale of state-owned

enterprises and properties (Angeles, 1992; Ortega, 2016).

The reconfiguration of markets and the insistence of a one-sided and extremely limiting

narrow view of development that benefits only the very few through the mass accumulation of

wealth is considerably a hallmark of neoliberal development. Building on this premise, David

Harvey’s theory of accumulation by dispossession proves to be important to this study. The theory

draws primarily from Karl Marx’s description of primitive accumulation, which Harvey (2003)

defines as a wide range of processes being

9
 the commodification and privatization of land and the forceful expulsion of peasant populations; the
conversion of various forms of property rights (common, collective, state, etc.) into exclusive private
property rights; the suppression of rights to the commons; the commodification of labour power and the
suppression of alternative (indigenous) forms of production and consumption; colonial, neo-colonial,
and imperial processes of appropriation of assets (including natural resources); the monetization of
exchange and taxation, particularly of land; the slave trajdefand [sic] usury, the national debt, and
ultimately the credit system as radical means of primitive accumulation. (p. 145)

Harvey (2003) argues that the conditions of accumulation today have progressed from what was

once considered ‘primitive’ or ‘original’ as newer mechanisms for accumulation have arisen while

some have been tweaked in order to play a stronger role in the process today. Accumulation by

dispossession reevaluates and fills the lacunae of Marx’s primitive accumulation in its explanation

of the overaccumulation of capital, through the dispossession of assets such as land or raw

materials. In this “organic relation between expanded reproduction on the one hand and the violent

processes of dispossession on the other,” (2003, pp. 141-142) Harvey posits that capitalism, in

order to escape its crisis of overaccumulation, actively manufactures an ‘other’ to where it

reinvests in order to generate more profit. Accumulation by dispossession then helps solve this

problem of overaccumulation by releasing assets at low or even at zero costs in order to create an

outlet for the capital surplus turning these assets into profitable use for capitalism.

Harvey (2003) provides the collapse of the Soviet Union and the opening up of China as

an illustration of how overaccumulated capital is no longer held idle once it seizes hold of assets

and makes them profitable. One way to do so, other than the releasing of cheap raw materials into

the system, is through the neoliberal project of privatization, as any territory or social formation

that is brought forth to the “logic of capitalist development must undergo wide-ranging structural,

institutional, and legal changes,” (Harvey 2003, p. 153) the kind that Marx would describe under

primitive accumulation.

With its “monopoly of violence and definitions of legality” (2003, p.145), Harvey also

highlights how the state plays its crucial role in the backing and the promotion of the processes of

10
primitive accumulation as the transition towards capitalist development continues to be dependent

on the role of the state. Even in the past, the state’s power was often used to force the

corporatization and privatization of public assets turning them into profitable use for capitalism.

In the case of China (Harvey, 2003) accumulation by dispossession was “the necessary cost of

making a successful breakthrough into capitalist development” (p.154).

Harvey describes privatization as the “cutting edge of accumulation by dispossession”

(p.157), and rightly so as through the said neoliberal project, formerly state-held assets are released

into the market where overaccumulated capital invests, upgrades, and speculates in such creating

a new terrain for profitable activity. And in the expansion of capital, as in the case of land as assets

being liberated from state control and commodified, populations are expelled and displaced.

Ultimately, privatization as the cutting edge of accumulation by dispossession creates

neoliberalized spaces that “facilitate global flows of economic integration and exchange values”

(Ortega, 2016) in order to continue capitalism’s cycle of overaccumulation.

Significance of the Study

The findings of this study will aim to contribute to the ongoing debates on the

neoliberalizing of spaces, specifically the conversion of public spaces through the privatization

of state-owned properties. As well as contribute to the discourse that has arisen in the

modernization project for the Carbon Public Market, on whether such a project would contribute

to the growth and positive development or gradually dwindle the public identity of the Carbon

market. The findings of this study will give a deeper perspective into the understanding of one of

the most affected sectors of the modernization project, the vendors.

11
Research Design

Research Methodology

In this research, a qualitative methodological approach serves to be the suitable approach

that sheds more light on the non-quantifiable data that can be gathered in research in inquiring in

social phenomena (Teherani et. al, 2015) such as the modernization project of the Cebu Carbon

Public Market. A qualitative methodological approach is utilized to investigate social phenomena

holistically without it being limited to sets of variables or causal relationships that are only parts

of a bigger whole explanation of the phenomena (Jennings, 2005). .

In this regard, a qualitative approach would grant a holistic investigation into the

perceptions of vendors on the Carbon Public Market Modernization Project. The approach is

expected to provide the study a focus to obtain a detailed description, first, on the vendors’

perceptions of the effects of the project on their livelihood. On whether the project’s effects would

fare well for their livelihood in the long run such as providing an increase in profit or whether the

project would produce adverse effects on their livelihood producing a decrease in profits. Second,

to arrive at a detailed description of the vendors' perceptions on the possible effects of the project

on their stall locations with their subsequent relocation once the project commences. Whether the

relocation would retain the same environment and conditions for their stalls or otherwise. Lastly,

a qualitative approach would provide the study a focus towards obtaining a detailed description of

the vendors’ perception of changes to the market process due to the modernization project.

Whether the modernization would remove the regular and maintained procure, buy, and sell

process of the vendors towards their consumers and producers, or would the modernization instead

hasten or efficiently improve the process?

12
 Research Environment

The Carbon Public Market is located in the downtown area of the city proper, specifically

on MC Briones Street, Barangay Ermita, Cebu City. The area is measured to be at 2.9 hectares or

29,197 square meters. The market serves home to an estimated 15,000 vendors of varying

classifications such as loose vendors, ambulant vendors, and stall-owning vendors.

Carbon serves as the main source of cheap goods that are most often bought in bulk by

consumers with some stalls run by decades-long traditions from families. Prior to the pandemic,

the public market was regarded to be functioning throughout the day with most consumers flocking

to the market from dawn to early morning as the freshest produce and fish arrives at this time. But

their numbers have dwindled since the pandemic hit (Obejas, 2021).

The public market serves as a merging place, the avenue for the event between vendors,

producers, and consumers alike. Making it the suitable environment to conduct the research on the

perceptions of the vendors of the modernization that may affect the current status and structure of

Carbon and their respective livelihoods.

In the joint venture agreement between Megawide and the city LGU, Carbon's Freedom

Park at 9, 804 sq. m. and Warwick Barracks at 5,056 sq.m. are grouped as a Parcel 1 deliverable

totaling about 14,860 sq.m.. While units 1 (4,869 sq.m.), 2 (5,922 sq.m.), and 3 (3,546 sq.m.)

totaling to 14,337 sq.m. is considered as the Parcel 2 deliverable. While Sitio Bato is the Parcel 3

deliverable (see fig. 1). The Warwick Barracks area together with the Freedom Park is considered

as a proposed area for the reconstructed Carbon Public Market now excluding units 1-3 based on

the Megawide Construction Corporation proposal.

13
Figure 1. Map of the Carbon Market (Villamor-Ilano, 2021)

For this research, due to the spatial, physical and economic limitations by the researcher,

the study will be conducted in the span of ten (10) weeks in the Warwick Barracks section of the

Carbon Public Market. The focused area will be on vendors in Parcel 1: the Warwick Barracks and

Freedom Park area. This section of the public market is 14,860 square meters and is one of the

first sections of the public market that was initially scheduled to be demolished to make way for

the modernization project and is home to both ambulant and stall-owning vendors alike.

14
Figure 2. Aerial view of the Freedom Park and Warwicks Barracks of Carbon Public Market

15
 Data Gathering Methods

In the research to be conducted, select qualitative research methods will be employed.

Namely, Field Observation, specifically participant observation. Focus Group Discussions or

FGDs with the vendors and as well as key informant interviews to gather the necessary textual

data in the qualitative research to be conducted.

In the SAGE Encyclopedia of Educational Research, Measurement, and Evaluation (2018)

Participant Observation is regarded as one of the data collection methods in qualitative research.

Through it, the researcher is able to provide a rich description of a particular context by being the

research instrument themselves and engaging the target social group and observing them in the

research environment. Doing so provides the researcher a holistic understanding of the particular

context that they are researching. With this method, a wider understanding of the surrounding

context of the perceptions of the vendors toward the modernization project would be achieved.

The Focus Group Discussion or FGD is a data gathering method for qualitative research

that is used to obtain or gather an in-depth understanding of the issue or topic being researched or

studied. This is often done with individuals or participants that have been specifically selected

based on a certain criteria, thereby representing a certain sample (Nyumba et al., 2018).

FGDs have been perceived as “cost-effective” and a “promising alternative” to

participatory research (Morgan, 1996), making it easy for adjustments in the limitations of the

study without sacrificing the richness of in-depth data that is characteristic of qualitative research.

Two (2) structured focus group discussions will be employed so as to provide an allowance for

discussions and emerging themes without the FGD being limited by variables as it would in

quantitative research. The focus group discussions will then stand complementary to key

informant interviews with the textual data from the narratives obtained from the FGDs. When

16
efficiently planned and designed, “helps to collect the appropriate and elaborated data related to

the intended topic,” (p.301) As the conduct of FGDs are designed to produce in-depth information

from a group in a relatively shorter time compared to informant interviews (Gundumogola, 2020).

Focus group discussions would prove to be effective in bringing out arising general themes and

issues from the discussion among the participants. This would elicit a more in-depth discussion

and a general but descriptive overview of perceptions of on the upcoming modernization project

such as a rich data in the perceptions of the vendors of the modernization’s effect on their

livelihood. Whether the said change would induce prosperity or the total opposite. The method of

focus group discussions will also help identify what are the most commonly arising themes in the

perceptions of the vendors towards the subsequent relocation brought about by the construction of

structures by Megawide. The discussions will shed light on whether the vendors perceive this to

be beneficial to their stalls with a new environment or this would affect their relation to consumers

and possible other vendors upon their relocation. The use of FGDs will also effectively provide

data on the perception of vendors on the possible changes in the market process between producers,

vendors and consumers in the public market.

Other than focus group discussions that will generally be conducted in groups or batches,

a key informant method of interview will also be used in the study. The KII is a more in-depth and

loosely structured qualitative research method that is conducted with “individuals selected for their

particular knowledge about a topic of interest,” (SAGE MethodsMap). This method particularly is

in the aim of procuring more in-depth narratives to explain or gather the perspectives of the

informant on the social phenomena or issue. Most of these interviews are done through telephone

interviews or calls or through face to face interviews which are more time intensive as is required

17
on the ground planning as well as the great probability of getting more in-depth detailed responses

from the informant. (UCLA Center for Health Policy Research).

As with focus groups discussions, an informant guide is necessary in order to guide the

flow of the discussion but most often, key informant interviews offer more freedom in its conduct

as the interview leans towards the more conversational methods of interviewing requiring a level

of trust and credibility with the interviewer. The key informant interview provides a more robust

narrative of the perceptions of the vendors in relation to the modernization of the Carbon Public

Market. It allows detailed data to be gathered in the form that also encourages an expounding of

narratives from the interviewees while at the same time, building rapport between the interviewer

and the interviewee. With this established relation, clarification on the narratives can be done

during the interview, creating a more comprehensive response to questions by the interviewer

(UCLA Center for Health Policy Research).

The use of KIIs in this study would complement the general narrative obtained during the

conduct of FGDs, giving a deeper discussion from the would be existing general narrative of the

perceptions of a vendor towards their livelihood in relation to the modernization project. The

interviews would also complement the FGDs discussions on the vendors’ perceptions of the

subsequent relocations. Such as how the new locations would differ and how they would affect

their stall’s prosperity. The key informant interviews would also grant a detailed account of a

vendor’s perception of how the market process would be affected by the modernization project.

18
 Research Participants

The goal of a focus group discussion as an extended way of interviewing, is to grasp an in

depth discussion on a specific topic (Gundumogula, 2020) with specifically selected individuals

that meet a certain set criteria.

A criteria that will be employed in the selection of research participants for the two (2)

focus group discussions. The target number for research participants would be at 6-8 vendors per

FGD. For the first group, each participant must be a bonafide Carbon Public Market stall-owning

vendor for not less than 3 years. They must also be vendors that own stalls in the Parcel 1 area,

namely the Freedom Park and Warwick barracks of the Carbon Public Market. They must also be

stall-owning vendors that are part or are registered members of organizations inside the Carbon

Public Market. For the second group, each participant must be a Carbon Public Market ambulant

vendor for not less than 3 years. They must also be ambulant vendors that are part or are registered

members of vendors’ organizations inside the Carbon Public Market. These characteristics for

research participants in the conduct of the focus group discussions will ensure firstly, the

credibility of the accounts or narratives that each participant will be presenting in the discussion,

as well as give an oversight of what possible perceptions or issues the participant may highlight in

the focus group discussion.

Research participants for the key informant interview that will be conducted “must have

firsthand knowledge” (p.3, UCLA Center for Health Policy Research) on the community being

researched, the community members, and the issues surrounding the community (UCLA Center

for Health Policy Research). This is to ensure that the “proxy for his or her associates'' (Lavrakas,

2008) is well-versed and knowledgeable about the topic and subtopics being researched.

19
 A criteria for participants in the six (6) key informant interviews will be utilized in order

to ensure that the said research participants are knowledgeable enough to grant a more in-depth

discussion of the research that would stand complementary to the data gathered from the focus

group discussions. The vendors considered as key informants must also stall-owning vendors or

ambulant vendors at the Parcel 1 area, which is the Freedom Park and Warwick barracks area of

the Carbon Public Market. Informants must also be vendors who have been selling at the Carbon

Public Market for no less than 10 years as the vendors’ experience within these years would add

to the value of the credibility of the information or textual data that will be gathered both from the

group discussions and the informant interviews themselves.

Research Instruments

The quality of gathered data rests on factors such as the credibility of participants, the

choice of relevant questions that will be asked in the focus group discussion, as well as an effective

moderator with an effective analysis strategy (Krueger, 1993; Morgan. 1995; Morgan, 1996 from

Gundumogula, 2020).

A discussion guide, unlike that of a questionnaire used in surveys for quantitative research,

is utilized only to facilitate or literally guide the discussion of the focus group. It is used so as to

facilitate the flow of the discussion so as to highlight or bring out the discussions that are necessary

to be covered in the discussion of the group. In contrast to questionnaires, a guide must not be used

rigidly as it should instead encourage a more comprehensive discussion with descriptions and

details not taken into account in quantitative methods.

In conducting key informant interviews, a discussion guide is as necessary for focus group

discussions. It provides an outline or a framework for the desired flow of the interview with the

20
key informant (UCLA Center for Health Policy Research). Though informant interviews must be

conversational and the environment must translate to an openness for discussions, the researcher

must gain control of the flow of the discussion to avoid straying from the goal of the research or

the interview and gather only the related data for the research. With the use of a key informant

guide, the researcher can be assured of unrestricted flow of ideas and important discussions with

the participant. As well as expect new themes or issues that will be brought into light by the in-

depth discussions with key informants that will substantially contribute to the necessary qualitative

data gathered for the research.

Data Analysis

Sally Thorne (2000) describes data analysis being “the most complex and mysterious of all

the phases of a qualitative project, and the one that receives the least thoughtful discussion in the

literature.” Thematic analysis is defined as a qualitative method used to analyze qualitative data

that “entails searching across a data set to identify, analyze, and report repeated patterns,” (Kiger

and Varpio, 2020). The thematic analysis of qualitative data is widely used, though as Kiger and

Varpio (2020) would argue, often misunderstood. The said analysis is still seen as an effective tool

for researchers conducting studies in the qualitative methodological approach as the process

involves interpreting and constructing themes that arise in textual data gathered from discussions

and interviews.

In order to provide the most comprehensive interpretation of the data, a thematic data

analysis will be utilized in the study to analyze the textual data gathered through focus group

discussions and key informant interviews and identify the emerging themes that arise in these data

gathering methods. The researcher will identify themes drawn from the textual data that relate to

21
the perceptions of the participants towards the modernization project. The themes will be coded

according to the subtopics of the research. Such as whether they perceive the modernization having

a positive contribution towards the improvement of their stalls in the new Carbon Public Market

or would they perceive the modernization as a hindrance of their livelihood?

The researcher will also code the identified themes in the textual data that would relate to

the vendors perceptions towards their space. Such as the location of their stalls and the following

relocation to a new public market, an event that is triggered by the modernization project on the

public market. As well as perceptions of the vendors towards the market process when the

modernization project commences. Such as how the research participants would perceive the

changes in the market process once the modernization project on the public market commences.

22
 Chapter 2

PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS

In this study, the findings were centered on the three major themes. The first being the

vendors’ perception on the effects of the modernization project on their existing livelihoods with

emerging sub-themes of the perceived importance of the public market and its benefits, and their

pandemic experience that contributed to their need to guard their livelihood. The second theme

was their perceptions on the proposed relocation of vendors. And the third being their perceived

market changes with an emerging sub-theme of the vendors’ description of the original market

process prior to the entry of the modernization project. Worth noting is a fourth and arising theme

upon analyzing the data gathered, which is the vendors’ alternatives to the modernization project.

The analysis was drawn from the data gathered from three key informant interviews

conducted on vendors’ organization leaders to draw a deeper discussion on the study and two focus

group discussions conducted with both ambulant and stall-owning vendors from the Freedom Park

and Calderon Barracks of the Carbon Public Market. The aforementioned were also supplemented

by data gathered by the researcher during the conduct of participant observation.

Perceived Effects of the Modernization Project on the Vendors’ Livelihoods

The study sought out to find the vendors’ perceived effects of the Megawide and Cebu City

Local Government Unit’s Carbon Market Modernization Project on their livelihood. Based on the

data gathered, the vendors generally had a general sense of distrust and antagonism towards the

modernization project as from the start, there had been important processes such as a public hearing

targeted as a consultation of the affected community that had been by-passed. The affected

community substantiated this by stating that officials tasked with reviewing and approving the

23
bidding process expedited it without reading the whole proposal. And because of these maneuvers

the vendors’ projected a vast loss of an ingrained culture unique to the Carbon Market. For all

vendors’ organizations leaders, the turning over of the development and future management of the

public market to a private entity would entail the loss of the public identity and public ownership

of the market.

Another perceived effect of the fast-tracking of the modernization project is a mass exodus

of vendors from the market which would then lead to a plethora of problems such as the loss of

certain sections of goods sold in the public market as well as the bustling in of the displaced

vendors’ in the other existing markets in the province. This would lead to the disappearance of the

Carbon Public Market, as the vendors projected.

Moreover, if the vendors would not be able to transfer to other public markets or other

markets in the province, the loss of the Carbon Public Market would also mean mass losses of

livelihood for the majority of the vendors and more families falling below the poverty line. The

vendors stressed that Carbon also stood as a second chance for Persons Deprived of Liberty or

PDLs as many of the vendors and residents from the sitios in Carbon have PDLs who have found

work in the market.

For others, when faced with the loss of their livelihood due to the modernization project,

they would opt to entrust their fates to the powers that be claiming hopelessness at their future.

Which is why they remained stubborn against the newly implemented regulations such as

relocation of vendors to the interim market.

The Carbon Public Market as a Lifeline.“The Carbon Market is not just a simple public

market,” one respondent puts it. Vendors and their families alike depend on the fruits of their labor

24
from their livelihood in the market. And in the many years that it has persisted, the public market

has produced graduates and professionals from it. To the vendors, the Carbon Public Market was

always associated with affordability and variety of goods, a prime example being the hangyo

culture where a customer is able to ask a favor to lower the price from the seller. A culture absent

from bigger businesses such as malls and supermarkets.

As for the ambulant vendors, losing the public market would be equal to losing everything

and losing life itself, often comparing the perceived experience to being a painful thorn thrust into

the body or a bodily impairment. If others leave it to fate, the group of stall-owning vendors find

strength in the sentiment that it should have been some divine intervention that their removal kept

being delayed or postponed.

Moreover, a point that was raised by all the vendors interviewed were their strong ties to

the market, bound together by their years of experience in the market, some even noting that their

hair has grayed in the Carbon Public Market.

The COVID-19 Pandemic and the Deceit that Followed. Many vendors lamented the

push to continue the modernization of the Carbon Public Market despite the undesirable effects of

the pandemic to their businesses with all of them stating that things in Carbon, such as the influx

of customers from inside and outside Cebu City have never been the same since. It seemed as

though the abrupt halt of sales at the public market and the barring of entries of vendors and

customers alike during lockdown was a taste of how it would be once the modernization project

took full swing. According to the vendors, the Megawide Construction Corporation and the City

LGU, the JVA actors, took advantage of this vulnerability and allegedly deceived the vendors into

signing away their stalls to expedite the modernization process. This was said to be done cunningly

25
by having the vendors sign forms that stipulated they would be given financial and material aid

during the COVID-19 pandemic and after the onslaught of Bagyong Odette. During the claiming

of aid however, to the anger and utter shock of the vendors it was revealed that they would be

receiving no aid and instead signed away their consent to the modernization project. Such levels

of deceit hit the vendors hard and the feelings of distrust and even disgust grew among the vendors

toward the JVA actors and the public market authority.

Dobermans and Dog Cages, A Market for the Rich

“Praning ning gobyernoha,” (this government is crazy) one respondent said in anger when

asked about the proposed relocation of vendors. This sentiment, though not verbatimly stated, was

common among the responses. The vendors showed and iterated a shared anger over the move to

relocate them and their stalls to a different location that they assessed as not conducive nor suited

for their businesses’ needs.

Initially, the modernization project was slated as an improvement of the market, marketing

high-tech additions such as e-currency that would transform the public market. When they asked

for a copy of the JVA proposal however, they were turned away and told that these public

documents were in fact confidential and not for public-viewing. Eventually, they were able to

obtain a copy of the proposal and were shocked to realize that the whole Carbon Public Market

was planned to be cramped inside an interim market while construction was underway and would

eventually be transferred to the new public market limited to the area of the Freedom Park and the

Calderon Barracks.

The general sentiment shared by all respondents was that of betrayal from the LGU

specifically and in turn, disdain for Megawide. Many have clarified that contrary to popular belief

26
that the vendors were merely stubborn and resistant to the idea of development, they did support

the move to develop Carbon, evidenced by their initial curiosity of the modernization project

proposal. They clarified their stance that they were in fact pro-development, as long as it was the

kind that was people-oriented and no one would be discriminated against and left behind.

One leader emphasized the point that the entry of a private entity who had no knowledge

or integration with Carbon would not understand the culture and the intricate social relations and

arrangements within the public market. If the “pangdato” or for the rich modernization was to

push through and the vendors were displaced, they state that all their years of hard work and

bending over backwards to make ends meet would be all for nothing.

Specifically, the vendors gravely detested the lack of planning for their placements in the

interim market that showed the lack of understanding of Carbon. They complained of the small

space that would not accommodate all of the vendors, let alone one stall from Freedom Park.

Another leader even compared the interim market’s structure to that of a dog cage and them being

Dobermans cramped into the cages. They also cite of instances where vendors who transferred to

the interim market, transferred back to their old stalls in Freedom Park because sales were

extremely low and the conditions such as lack of electricity and running water in the interim market

were not feasible.

The vendors’ however did state that they weren’t entirely stubborn about the idea of being

relocated and would even voluntarily relocate to their temporary and eventually newer stalls if the

spaces were conducive for their businesses and they were allowed to produce and stay there, as

well as for the ambulant vendors to also have their own space in the interim and the new public

market.

27
Shift Changes and Increase of Fees, Unwelcome Market Changes

The recurring discussion with the respondents on the perceived market changes revolved

mostly on their concern of whether the new public market would be conducive for their businesses

and sales. According to the vendors, the prices for rent were slated to increase each year in the new

public market. From the current Php 8.50 per sq.m. it would be raised to Php 16.00, Php 20.00 on

the next, and Php 28.00 the year after. And in the next 50 years or so, the public market would be

under the management, including the profit, of Megawide.

Other fees such as entrance fees, maintenance, and parking fees were expected to spike

following the new market regulations crafted by Megawide and approved by the City Government.

The usual entrance fees of banyeras or big basins of wet goods such as fish, poultry, or even

vegetables would rise from the current Php 80.00 to a projected Php 240.00- Php 280.00 per

banyera. A change they view, that would either cause the vast losses of businesses within Carbon

or forcing the vendors to rack up the prices of their products due to the projected increases. While

at the same time, displacing many informally employed individuals who were residents from

nearby sitios who clean and collect garbage in the public market to survive.

The vendors especially grew concerned if they would be able to step into the new public

market, lest they not survive the interim market and its consequent conditions. For flower vendors

like most ambulant vendors in Freedom Park, the area of the interim market would cause their

flowers to die. Their products, they said, would not survive the salty sea breeze, salty water, heat,

and smoke at the interim market. Even the delivery process, accessibility of customers, especially

the loyal customers, and the back and forth of transferring finished products would cause grave

problems for the vendors. According to the respondents, the worst part about the new market would

be the shift changes, especially for the ambulant vendors who would be forced to break the twenty-

28
four hours of a day into three separate eight-hour shifts, making the vendors compete with each

other instead. Another vendor expressed their disapproval of the fact that they would no longer be

able to craft their products in the interim nor the new market, causing a big blow to their businesses.

If the modernization project were to move full swing and the market changes be

implemented, the vendors would see their businesses slowly dying out and their customers,

especially their suki or loyal customers would no longer come to Carbon and purchase from them.

The Vendors’ Original Market Processes. In order to draw a comprehensive picture of

the perceived market changes come the entry of the modernization project, the vendors were asked

about the original market processes that took place for their businesses. The discussion always

circled back to the public market being known for being a bagsakan or where producers such as

farmers, fisherfolk, and artisans drop off their products or directly sell them at a specific time of

day. As per one leader, once the day time shops closed, the ambulant vendors who sell at the

bagsakan (also a drop-off point in the public market) start to come in. Some drop off their products

to vendors who have prior arrangements with them while others, such as farmers from the southern

parts of Cebu set up shop temporarily and directly sell there. This is why, according to the

respondent and corroborated by the other vendors, consumers and suki flock to Carbon either deep

in the night or in the early morning.

For the vendors whose shops were eateries or karenderias, they usually employ a “rolling”

process. One leader whose shop is such states that this is how she acquired her goods as her

earnings would not let her buy meat or vegetables in bulk. She stated that the variety of the food

she displayed was dependent on how much she earned either the day before or in the early morning.

29
As for where she procures the ingredients, she claimed that the public market already provided her

with everything she needed, supplying her with even the freshest of ingredients.

The respondents also belied the accusations of the public market being dirty. Stall-owning

and ambulant vendors alike apparently contribute to make sure the market is kept clean by paying

fees to the duly tasked janitors or paying off locals from the area to clean and gather trash

independent from the routine garbage collection. This is supported and maintained by the various

vendors’ organizations especially in the Freedom Park. Even the ambulant vendors who are not

usually counted as official vendors of the public market corroborate the claims of the stall-owning

vendors’ claims of their independent efforts through proper representation in their organizations.

Such as having a separate representative from each shop section in the public market.

Another area of discussion worth mentioning was the willingness of the ambulant vendors

to pay for the janitorial services and the City LGU tickets for their entry in Freedom Park

specifically. Though not counted in the official rosters of vendors in Freedom Park or Calderon

Barracks results showed that there is a sense of community between stall-owning and ambulant

vendors especially during times of crisis such as sudden displacements of the ambulant vendors

during “clean-ups” by the market authority or during the current modernization project. Certainly

despite having these differences, the vendors altogether share the fear of their usual market

practices and processes being overhauled and interrupted by the modernization project.

Vendors’ Alternative Development

In order to contest claims that the vendors’ opposed development altogether, the leaders

raised an alternative development plan during the discussions. The first respondent and the second

respondent presented an alternative plan that according to them cost billions of pesos less than the

30
current modernization project between Megawide and the City Government. They recalled that the

current budget for the modernization project of the city now stood at a whooping Php 8 billion, as

another Php 2.5 billion was added to the existing Php 5.5 billion due to the delays in construction.

Their alternative plan was at a mere Php 750 million. A plan that would only be made possible

with the combined efforts of the city government and the vendors’ cooperatives inside the public

market.

The leaders stated that they consulted with an architect and together with the leaders of

their cooperatives, designed a sustainable design for the public market that would take into account

the language, customs, and arrangements within the intricacies of the culture of the public market

as well accommodate all the communities in Carbon. They even presented a fail-safe in case the

public market is plunged into financial problems, planning to consult financial experts to create a

mechanism to address deficits while at the same time, audit and assess each year to make sure that

as much do consumers and vendors do benefit from Carbon, so does the city government profit

from the project. This is what they said sets it apart from the public-private partnership whose

main goal is to generate more profit. As their alternative plan is a kind of development that is

geared towards the genuine improvement of the public market as well as betterment of the lives of

the Carbonhanons.

The vendors share this preference of a modernization project that is led by them and the

city government. One even stated that it did not matter if it took long to make into a reality as long

as it was a development led by them and the city government. And as for the ambulant vendors,

recognition and formal assimilation into the public market is what they desired other than the

proposed development alternative, as they viewed that it was their exclusion that left them ignorant

of Megawide modernization project’s effect on their livelihoods.

31
Discussion

Development can connote improvements to an individual’s overall quality of life and the

expansion of the people’s freedoms and removal of unfreedoms (Sen, 1999). But it can also refer

to a destructive myth or historical processes of commodification or modernization among others

(Edelman and Haugerud, 2005). Nevertheless, once faced with efforts toward development and in

this case, modernization projects, one must always ask the question, “development for whom?”

In the case of the Carbon Public Market, this study has found that the development of the

area through a modernization project was not perceived as a development for the market

community but rather a development that was geared towards profit and the destruction of lives

and opportunities left in its way. Vendors initially had a sense of awe at the idea of a development

of their beloved public market only to come to the realization later on, that it was one that did not

include let alone consider them in its plans. This is where the general feeling of distrust and

antagonism had stemmed firstly for the affected community.

The said perceptions of the modernization project had stemmed from various areas. First,

the modernization project did trample upon the existing culture and livelihood of the community.

With many choosing to refuse to leave their spaces despite threats of violent dispersals by the local

government unit. Second, the social ties and bonds that were created in these spaces were one of

the major factors that contributed to the vendors’ perception of the projected relocation. To be

cramped into the tiny spaces far away from the familiar and comfortable spaces in Freedom Park

and Calderon Barracks, drew distress and a sense of being unheard and misunderstood from the

vendors.

Third, their perception of the modernization was doubled-down by the perceived market

changes that would gravely change the way they work and live as the interim market despite being

32
sold off as a better area to set up shop, had proven to be an unconducive environment and possibly

disastrous to their businesses.

Ultimately, the data has shown that the vendors are not anti-development and resistant to

positive changes in their livelihood and the bigger Carbon Public Market community. Rather, their

preference is that of a development that proves to be beneficial for all of the vendors, residents,

kurmateros, consumers and even the city government alike. This is evidenced in their push for a

people-oriented and sustainable alternative approach toward the modernization of the public

market.

This is what Marcuse (2009) argued as the deprivation of the alienable, especially to their

right to spaces that they are able to benefit from. And certainly a mismarketed partnership under

the mask of shared power by the people, state, and private entities such as Megawide would not

be something that the vendors would benefit from. The vendors were right to describe the whole

process as deceitful, as this is the character of privatization in urban development (Miraftab, 2004).

David Harvey (2003) has even referred to privatization as the “cutting edge of accumulation by

dispossession” (p. 157) when formerly state-owned assets, in this case, the Carbon Public Market,

are released into the market to create a profitable new terrain where the overaccumulated capital

is invested.

Harvey (2003) especially highlighted the crucial role of the state as an actor in the

railroading of the processes of primitive accumulation, evidenced in its role in the corporatization

and most importantly, the privatization of public assets transforming them to profitable outlets for

capital. Hence, in the case of the Carbon Public Market modernization project, the Cebu City LGU

has used its “monopoly of violence and definitions of legality” (Harvey, 2003, p. 145) to further

alienate and ultimately, remove the whole affected community to facilitate the creation of a

33
neoliberalized space for the private sector by dispossessing the vendors from their livelihood,

displacing them from their spaces, and destroying the public identity of the community’s space for

capital.

34
 Chapter 3

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary

The study sought to determine the perceptions of vendors of the modernization project of

the Carbon Public Market. Specifically, the vendors’ perceived effects of the modernization on

their livelihood, the relocation of their stalls, and their perceived changes in the market process. In

order to gather the necessary information, the study utilized a qualitative research method, through

participant observation, key informant interviews, and focus group discussions. The data gathered

was analyzed using a thematic analysis drawn from the transcriptions of recorded interviews and

discussions from the public market vendors.

The findings of the study revealed that the affected community collectively perceived the

modernization project to be an encroachment of their space and would lead to the disappearance

of their livelihood, the ingrained culture of their community, as well as prospects for a future. The

vendors’ opposition to the proposed project unmasks the modernization as a development for a

select few and not a development for the community at large. To counter their dispossession and

displacement, the vendors put forth an alternative plan for development that would rightly address

the aim to develop the public market while also sustainably accommodating the whole affected

community.

Conclusion

Development continues to be a contested term, especially when we start to look at it from

the standpoint of for whom its desired effects would be. The study sought to investigate why a

structural, economic, and “cultural” development of a public space would receive much opposition

35
from its own community. From the perception of the vendors, one of the major sectors of the

affected community, the encroachment of a private entity on a public space endangered their

livelihood, culture, and future. The modernization project by Megawide Construction Corporation

and the Cebu City Government was initially marketed as a development project that would

alleviate the social and economic conditions of the public market and in turn, the city. However,

what it turned it out to be was an example of one of the policy expressions of neoliberalism,

namely, privatization. What was at first projected as a shared partnership for the betterment of the

community and the attaining of a higher quality of life unveils itself as a Trojan Horse of deception

and an advancement of the private and the not the public sector’s interests.

In order to create an “other” to satiate the need for capital to reinvest itself and escape the

crisis of overaccumulation, public spaces are sold off by the state and transformed into

neoliberalized spaces to accommodate this. The resulting effect of such, is the displacement of the

alienable, oppressed, and insecure. David Harvey’s theory of Accumulation by Dispossession best

illustrates this phenomenon as the dispossession of the vendors’ futures, displacement of their

shared spaces, and destruction of their livelihood validates the thesis that the conditions of

accumulation today have since progressed to create an outlet for the surplus of capital in order to

successfully breakthrough to capitalist development at the expense of the community.

Understanding the plight of the modernization of the Carbon Public Market through this

perspective is then an imperative in order to protect the rights of the alienable to their spaces. The

vendors have every right to demand what is being deprived of them and preserve or create a space

that the entire affected community can benefit from. And the only way to do so, is to preserve not

only the public identity of the Carbon Market but also the intricate social relations and culture of

36
the public space. Only then does development become a development that is genuinely working

toward the attainment of a better quality of life.

Recommendations

The study sought to investigate the perceptions of the major sector in the Carbon Public

Market community. In order to create a more comprehensive understanding of the effects of the

modernization project on the public market further studies must be conducted on how uniquely the

project would affect the various stakeholders within. The study was limited in the research

environment of the Freedom Park and the Calderon Barracks where the new Carbon Market is

expected to rise. It is recommended that the same studies be conducted in the other areas that

encompass the whole public market, as well as a comprehensive risk assessment to provide

quantifiable data of the effects of the modernization project not only on the surrounding

community but also the city’s economic development.

37
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Angeles, L. (1995). Why the philippines did not become a newly-industrializing country.
Kasarinlan.7 (2,3).

Bello, W. (2004). Deglobalization: Ideas for a New World Economy. London: Zed Books

Bello, W. (2009). Neoliberalism as hegemonic ideology in the philippines: rise, apogee, and
crisis. Philippine Sociological Review 57 (1-4): 9-19.

Chang, H. and Grabel, I. (2004). Reclaiming Development: An Alternative Policy Manual.

London: Zed Books.

Edelman, M. and Haugerud, A. (2005). Introduction: the anthropology of development and

globalization. In The Anthropology of Development and Globalization: From
Classical Political Economy to Contemporary Neoliberalism, Eds. Edelman, M. and
Haugerud, A. USA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Escobar, A. (1995). Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World.
Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Ginsburg, M. (2012). Chapter 4: Public Private Partnerships, Neoliberal Globalization and

Democratization. In Robertson, S., Mundy, S., Verger, A., Menashy, F. (Eds). Public
Private Partnerships in Education: New Actors and Modes of Governance in a
Globalizing World. (pp. 63-80) Massachussetts: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Gundumogula, (2020). Importance of Focus Groups in Qualitative Research. International

Journal of Humanities and Social Science (IJHSS), Center for Promoting Ideas (CPI),
USA, 2020, 8 (11), pp.299-302. Retrieved from
https://hal.univ-lorraine.fr/hal-03126126/document

Herrera, R. (2006). The neoliberal rebirth of development economics.Monthly Review, 58(1),

1-1

Harvey, D. (2003). The New Imperialism. New York: Oxford University Press.

Harvey, D. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. New York: Oxford University Press.

Inocencio, A. (2003). Public-private partnerships in Metro Manila, Philippines. Waterlines. DOI:

10.3362/0262-8104.2003.004

Jennings, G.R. (2005) Business research, theoretical paradigms that inform. Encyclopedia of
Social Measurement. Retrieved from
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B0123693985003662

38
Jou, S.C., Hansen, A.L., and Wu, H.L. (2012). Accumulation by Dispossession and Neoliberal
Urban Planning: ‘Landing’ the Mega-Projects in Taipei. In T. Ta¸san-Kok,
G.Baeten(Eds.), Contradictions of Neoliberal Planning, The GeoJournal Library 102.
151-171.DOI 10.1007/978-90-481-8924-3_9,

Kiger, M.E. & Varpio, L. (2020): Thematic analysis of qualitative data: AMEE Guide No. 131,
Medical Teacher, DOI: 10.1080/0142159X.2020.1755030

Lavrakas, P. (2008). Encyclopedia of Survey Research Methods.

http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412963947.n260

Marcuse, P. (2009). From critical urban theory to the right to the city. City, 13 (2-3), 185-197.
DOI: 10.1080/13604810902982177

Miraftab, F. (2004). Public-Private Partnerships: The Trojan Horse of Neoliberal Development?

Journal of Planning Education and Research, 24, 89-101. DOI:
10.1177/0739456X04267173

Morgan, D. L. (1996). Focus Groups. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 129-152.

Nyumba, T., Wilson, K., Derrick, C.J., and Mukherjee, N. (2018). The use of focus group
discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of application in conservation.
Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 9 (1) pp 20-32.
https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/2041-210X.12860

Obejas, C. (2021) At Cebu’s historic market, vendors face displacement, slashed incomes.
Rappler. Retrieved from https://www.rappler.com/nation/cebu-carbon-market-vendors-
face-displacement-slashed-incomes on 9 November 2021.

Ortega, A. (2016). Neoliberalizing spaces in the Philippines : suburbanization, transnational

migration, and dispossession. Maryland: Lexington Books.

Sachs, W. (1992). Introduction. In The Development Dictionary: A Guide to Knowledge as

Power, Wolfgang Sachs (Ed.). London: Zed Books.

SAGE Research Methods. Methodsmap. Retrieved from https://methods.sagepub.com/methods-

map/keyinformant-interviews on 9 November 2021.

SAGE Research Methods (2018). Participant Observation. In Frey, B. B. (Ed.) The SAGE
Encyclopedia of Educational Research, Measurement, and Evaluation.
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781506326139.n505
Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.

Shatkin, G. (2007). The city and the bottom line: urban megaprojects and the privatization of
planning in Southeast Asia. Environment and Planning A, 40, 383-401. DOI:10.1068
/a38439

39
Soros, George (2002). On Globalization. New York: Public Affairs-Perseus.

Stiglitz, J. E. (2002). Globalization and its Discontents. New York: W.W. Norton.

Teherani, A. et al. (2015). Choosing a qualitative research approach. Journal of Graduate

Medical Education. Retrieved from
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4675428/ on 9 November 2021

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica (2010). Privatization. Britannica.com. Britannica.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/privatization

Thorne S. 2000. Data analysis in qualitative research. Evid-Based Nurs. 3(3):68–70.

UCLA Center for Health Policy Research (No Year). Section 4: Key Informant Interviews.
Health Data Program.
https://healthpolicy.ucla.edu/programs/health-data/trainings/Documents/tw_cba23.pdf

Villamor-Ilano, Marites (2020). Going to Carbon will be more than just going to the market.
Sunstar. Retrieved from
https://www.sunstar.com.ph/article/1885950/Cebu/Feature/Going-to-Carbon-will-be
-more-than-just-going-to-the-market on 9 November 2021

Wilhelm-Solomon, M. (2021). Disposession as depotentiation. EPD: Society and Space, 0(0),

1-18. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/02637758211036467

40
 ANNEXES

Annex A - Research Instruments

Key Informant Interview Guide

A. Perceptions on the modernization project’s effect on the livelihood of the vendors

a. What does your livelihood mean to you? How would you feel if something were

to happen to your livelihood?

b. What significance does the Carbon Public Market hold to you and to your

livelihood?

c. There is an ongoing joint venture between the city LGU and the Megawide

Corporation for the modernization of the Carbon Public Market, how do you feel

about this modernization project?

d. What do you think of the idea of having the public market modernized?

e. How do you see this modernization affecting your livelihood? What do you think

about this effect?

f. What are your thoughts about having the public market modernized?

B. Perceptions on the project’s effect on the location of their stalls

a. The modernization project entails the need to remove you from your original

stalls and into a new location for the building process to commence. What can

you say about this move?

b. According to Megawide, the private corporation in charge of the modernization

partnered with the LGU, vendors will be given an allocated location for the public

market while the other areas will be used for other purposes. How will this new

41
 location differ from your previous location? What can you say about the new

location of the Carbon Public Market?

c. How do you think this move would affect your livelihood? Why do you think it

would have this effect?

C. Perceptions of the project’s effect on the market process

a. Before the modernization project, how does the market process in the public

market work? What sets it apart from the other public markets in the city?

b. How do you think the modernization project would affect the market process such

as the procurement of goods such as in the bagsakan?

c. What do you think would be the difference in the consumption/buying of goods

by the consumers once the modernization project is finished?

d. How do you see this modernization project in the future of the market? How

about in the market process?

Focus Group Discussion Guide:

A. Perceptions on the modernization project’s effect on the livelihood of the vendors

a. What does your livelihood mean to you? How would you feel if something were

to happen to your livelihood?

b. What significance does the Carbon Public Market hold to you and to your

livelihood?

c. There is an ongoing joint venture between the city LGU and the Megawide

Corporation for the modernization of the Carbon Public Market, what do you

think about this project?

42
 d. How do you see this modernization affecting your livelihood?

B. Perception on the project’s effect on their stalls’ locations

a. The modernization project entails the need to remove you from your original

stalls and into a new location for the building process to commence. What do you

think about this move?

b. According to Megawide, the private corporation in charge of the modernization

partnered with the LGU, vendors will be given an allocated location for the public

market while the other areas will be used for other purposes. How will this new

location differ from your previous location? What can you say about the new

location of the Carbon Public Market?

c. How do you think this move would affect your livelihood? Why do you think it

would have this effect?

C. Perceptions on the project’s effect on the market process

a. How do you think the modernization project would affect the market process such

as the procurement of goods such as in the bagsakan?

b. What do you think would be the difference in the consumption/buying of goods

by the consumers once the modernization project is finished?

c. How do you see this modernization project in the future of the market? How

about in the market process?

43
Annex B - Courtesy Letters

44
Curriculum Vitae of the Researcher

Mari Elise Gwyneth Lim

[email protected] / [email protected]
Dama de Noche, P. Rodriguez St., Looc, Lapu-Lapu City,
Cebu, Philippines, 6015
09999702097

EDUCATION:
- Bachelor of Arts in Anthropology
University of San Carlos, Cebu City
Expected Graduation: 2022
THESIS: The Market of Modernization: Perceptions of market vendors on the Carbon
Public Market Modernization Project
Adviser: Prof. Zona Hildegarde S. Amper, PhD
Relevant Coursework: Community Development, Economic Anthropology, Social
Change and Development, Applied Anthropology/Sociology

- Secondary Education
University of San Carlos – Basic Education Department – South Campus
2011 – 2015

- Elementary Education
University of San Carlos – Basic Education Department – South Campus
2011

CONFERENCE PRESENTATIONS:
- “The Lumad’s Struggle for Food, Land, and Peace,” UGAT 41st National Conference,
November 7-9, 2019, Baybay, Leyte.

VOLUNTEER WORK:
- Spokesperson, Save Our Schools Network Cebu (2021-)
- Volunteer, Save Our Schools Network. (2018-2019)

AFFILIATION:
- Member, UGAT (2019-2020)

SKILLS:
- Language: Fluent in Cebuano, Tagalog, and English
- Graphic Design: Intermediate skills in crafting of various publication materials
- Public Speaking: Gives out educational discussions in volunteer work and coherently and
concisely explains concepts in presentations and interviews.

REFERENCES:

45
Prof. Marjury E. Dino
University of San Carlos
Deparment of Anthropology Sociology and History
Faculty

Patrick Gerard F. Torres

Central Visayas Farmers’ Development Center
Former Executive Director

46