the enterprise. The management team has to find new ways of being more transparent and reporting progress to the community. · · It is important to review the social and economic benefits that are shared with the community members. Some members dared open sacred sites such as beaches to tourists which the community elders have not approved. As the local tourism industry grows, the community or some members would be pressured or tempted to open more sacred sites for tourism development. This would challenge the traditional leadership, community harmony and References: Conservation International, Haribon Foundation, Department of Environment and Natural ResourcesProtected Areas and Wildlife Bureau, Department of Agriculture-Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources. (2012). Priority Sites for Conservation in the Philippines: Marine and Terrestrial Key Biodiversity Areas. [Map]. Retrieved from http://www.conservation.org/global/ philippines/publications/Documents/Philippines_KBAs_ integrated.pdf. De Vera, D. (2007). Indigenous Peoples in the Philippines: A Country Case Study. In RNIP Regional Assembly. Hanoi, Vietnam. August 20-26, 2007. De Vera, D. and Zingapan, K. (2010). The Tagbanwa People of Northern Palawan Reclaiming their Rights over their Ancestral Lands and Waters. Philippine Association for Intercultural Development (PAFID). the traditional values of stewardship and respect over sacred sites. · The traditional values of the Tagbanua youth working for the enterprise are threatened by the exposure and subsequent succumbing to alcohol, sex and drugs that come along with the growth of the local tourism industry. How will the youth be empowered to face the temptations of this industry? How will they be trained to eventually take over the management of their ancestral domain and the protection of their natural resources in the midst of a totally opposite worldview which is creating changes within that they may not be aware of? Arizona Journal of International & Comparative Law. Vol 21(1). Pedragosa, S. (2012). An analysis of international law, national legislation, judgements, and institutions as they interrelate with territories and areas conserved by indigenous peoples and local communities. Report No. 16 The Philippines. Natural Justice in Bangalore and Kalpavriksh in Pune and Delhi. Retrieved from http://www. iccaconsortium.org/wp-content/uploads/images/stories/ Database/legalreviewspdfs/philippines_lr.pdf Presidential Decree 705. Revised Forestry Code of the Philippines. 19 May 1975. Republic Act 7227. Bases Convention Act of 1992. 13 March 1992. Republic Act 7586. National Integrated Protected Areas System Act of 1992. 29 June 1992. ILO Convention 169. Convention concerning indigenous and tribal peoples. June 27, 1989. Republic Act 7924. Philippine Mining Act of 1995. 3 March 1995. International Union of Conservation Networks (IUCN). (2011). Key biodiversity areas. Retrieved from https:// www.iucn.org/about/union/secretariat/offices/iucnmed/ iucn_med_programme/species/key_biodiversity_areas/. Republic Act 8371. Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act of 1997 (IPRA). 29 October 1997. Molintas, J. M. (2004). The Philippine indigenous peoples’ struggle for land and life: Challenging legal texts. In 110 Tacconi, L. (2012). Redefining payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics, 73(1): 29-36 UN Convention on Biological Diversity. 5 June 1992. Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC)