Tradition, Values, and Religion in a Center-periphery Explanation of Disaster Governance

This study finds that flood governance in Metro Manila is most equitable and resilient when community knowledge, cultural and religious traditions, and civil society leadership are meaningfully integrated into decision-making, rather than relying solely on technocratic, state-centered relocation models.

This study examines three flood governance models in Metro Manila: a government-centered relocation model, a collaborative model, and a civil society initiative model. Drawing on center-periphery theory, it analyzes how power asymmetries and cultural values shape disaster governance and recovery outcomes. The study uses qualitative data collected between 2009 and 2024, including semi-structured interviews, archival documents, and field observations. Findings show that state-driven relocation policies often marginalize vulnerable populations by prioritizing technocratic efficiency over social equity and community participation. In contrast, grassroots initiatives and civil society-led responses leverage local knowledge, community networks, and cultural and religious traditions to foster resilience and collective action. Collaborative approaches occupy an intermediate position, partially mitigating exclusion while retaining centralized authority. The study highlights the importance of integrating local knowledge and participatory governance into disaster management frameworks to enhance social equity and sustainability.

1. How can a center-periphery framework explain different models of flood disaster governance in Metro Manila?

2. In what ways do tradition, cultural values, and religion shape governance practices and community responses to relocation and disaster risk?

3. How do government-centered, collaborative, and civil society-led approaches differ in terms of social equity, participation, and the inclusion of peripheral voices?

4. What are the implications of these governance models for understanding power asymmetries and community resilience in disaster management?

Existing studies in disaster governance and climate adaptation have shown that technocratic, state-led approaches often prioritize efficiency and physical risk reduction while overlooking social equity, local knowledge, and community participation. Collaborative governance scholarship has highlighted the potential for cross-sector partnerships to improve inclusiveness, but it has also noted that such arrangements frequently remain embedded in hierarchical and centralized systems.

At the same time, research on social capital, culture, and religion has demonstrated that local networks and shared belief systems can play important roles in collective action and recovery. However, these cultural and value-based dimensions have rarely been integrated into structural explanations of disaster governance. Center-periphery theory has been widely used to explain spatial and political inequalities in development and public administration, yet it has seldom been applied to the analysis of disaster relocation and community-level governance dynamics.

This study brings center-periphery theory into disaster governance to show how power, resources, and decision-making authority shape different relocation and risk-reduction models. By doing so, it moves beyond institutional and network-focused explanations and provides a structural account of why some approaches systematically marginalize peripheral communities.

The article also introduces tradition, values, and religion as key analytical factors rather than background context. It demonstrates how these elements function as governance resources that sustain civil society-led initiatives, strengthen collective action, and enable more socially embedded and equitable forms of resilience. Empirically, the study offers a long-term qualitative analysis of multiple relocation experiences in Metro Manila, allowing for a comparative understanding of government-centered, collaborative, and grassroots models. This comparison shows that collaborative arrangements only partially reduce exclusion, while civil society-driven approaches more fundamentally shift the center-periphery relationship by amplifying community voice.

This study employs a comparative qualitative case study of flood governance and relocation in Metro Manila over a long temporal span (2009-2024), combining interview data, field-based observations, and document analysis. Rather than examining a single governance arrangement, it systematically compares three distinct models (i.e., government-centered, collaborative, and civil society-led) through a center-periphery analytical framework.

The methodological contribution lies in integrating structural analysis with cultural and relational dimensions. Center-periphery theory is used not only to map institutional power asymmetries but also to explain how tradition, shared values, and religion operate as governance resources that enable collective action in peripheral communities. This allows the study to capture forms of agency and resilience that are often overlooked in technocratic and network-based analyses.

The findings show that government-centered approaches tend to reproduce spatial and social exclusion, collaborative arrangements partially mitigate these inequalities but remain constrained by centralized systems, and civil society-led initiatives create more socially embedded and participatory forms of disaster governance. The study concludes that culturally grounded community networks are not merely adaptive responses but structurally significant actors that can reshape center-periphery relations.

The research demonstrates that disaster risk reduction is not only a technical issue but also a matter of social equity and community voice. Recognizing local culture and grassroots networks can lead to more inclusive, sustainable, and trusted climate adaptation and urban development outcomes.

This study extends center-periphery theory to disaster governance and highlights the need to integrate cultural and value-based factors into collaborative governance research. It encourages comparative and cross-national studies on how peripheral actors exercise agency within centralized systems.

The findings suggest that relocation and disaster policies should move beyond top-down approaches and instead support community-driven, participatory governance. Empowering civil society and incorporating local knowledge can produce more equitable and durable policy outcomes.

Yang, J., Brower, R. S., & Berlan, D. (2026). Tradition, values, and religion in a center-periphery explanation of disaster governance. Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration, 1-24.