Sustainability Development Through one Barangay, one Project (Obop): Assessing its Effects and Perceived Implications

Sustainability Development Through one Barangay, one Project (Obop): Assessing its Effects and Perceived Implications

Sotto, Mae Ann M¹ & Sotto, Mark M.²

Bachelor of Science in Business Administration major in Marketing Management

Cagayan Valley Computer and Information Technology College, Inc.

ABSTRACT

This study aims to determine the effects and perceived implications of one barangay project towards sustainability development. Also, the challenges encountered and its sustainability dimensions towards proposing a recommendation to explore the scalability and replicability for sustainable development. This study used a quantitative research design to evaluate the One Barangay One Project (OBOP) in Santiago City, focusing on its effects on sustainable development. Respondents included 100 project beneficiaries from 20 barangays and 20 project implementers. The research environment encompassed Santiago City, a commercial hub with significant agricultural activity. Data was collected through a validated survey instrument, which assessed respondent profiles, project effects, challenges, and sustainability outcomes using a 4-point Likert scale. The data analysis involved statistical methods such as frequency counts, percentage distribution, and mean scores to interpret the findings. Findings revealed that most beneficiaries are married, predominantly female, and have a high school education, with a majority engaged for three years. Implementers, primarily in rural areas, focus on food processing and industrial products. In addition, One Barangay One Product (OBOP) demonstrates positive outcomes in employment generation, product quality, and political climate, although improvements in quality of life are needed. Challenges in marketing, production, and operations persist despite financial stability. The project integrates environmental stewardship, economic viability, and social inclusivity, achieving notable successes.

Keywords: OBOP, Sustainability Development, Effects, Implication

INTRODUCTION

As people become more conscious of environmental problems like climate change, air pollution, and global warming that negatively affect both people and the environment, sustainability has evolved (Chofreh et al., 2020). Since the turn of the twenty-first century, it has been one of the most powerful forces shaping world history. The international and regional governments’ programs requiring businesses to change how they conduct themselves to achieve sustainable results have accepted this idea. Organizations must alter how they produce, transmit, and collect values from the perspectives of the environment, society, and the economy (Shakeel et al., 2020). According to Munoz-Torres et al. (2019), they require a sustainable business model (SBM) that enables them to manage their operations by sustainability policies.

A significant number of individuals persistently experience poverty and are deprived of the chance to lead a life characterized by dignity. Disparities are growing inside and among nations due to significant variations in access to opportunities, money, and power. The issue of unemployment, particularly among the youth demographic, is a significant concern. In addition, it is imperative to acknowledge that global issues pose a significant risk of undermining a substantial portion of the gains achieved in recent decades regarding development. Consequently, all United Nations member states unanimously endorsed the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in 2015.

The program is underpinned by the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the 169 linked goals, which were formulated and endorsed by all 193 member nations of the United Nations. The individuals possess a comprehensive comprehension of eliminating poverty and hunger, developing peaceful communities, empowering women and girls, and conserving the environment. To attain these objectives, a transition is necessary from relying solely on donor support to empowering and enabling communities to become self-sufficient. Furthermore, there is a strong emphasis on promoting diverse governmental and private-sector initiatives to foster economic growth through novel and inventive approaches. Apostolopoulos et al. (2018) inferred that the objectives established in 2015 are interconnected and cannot be separated from one another.

Governments, businesses, and organizations are all interested in sustainability. Aspects of sustainability include people’s perspectives on the environment, their obligations to others, and their plans for the future. The sustainability vision encompasses three distinct interactions: justice between various generations, justice between current-age persons, and justice between individuals and the environment; it is based on individual-nature relationships and a long-term and unpredictable future (Correia, 2019).

In the City of Santiago, the result of the baseline data from the Community-Based Monitoring System (CBMS) shows that the minimum basic needs of the City include Survival, such as health, nutrition, water, and sanitation; Security, such as income and security, shelter and peace and order; and enabling needs such as basic education and literacy and participation. With this vitality and due to this need, the Local Government Unit of Santiago City came up with a very responsive strategy that addressed the needs of the entire constituents of the City; these developmental goals are encapsulated in the “Magserbisyo Po Tayo,” a flagship statement of the present administration of Engr. Joseph Salvador Tan is implemented through the prominent Barangay Entrepreneurial Services for Poverty Reduction Network (BESPREN) Program Strategies (LGU Santiago City Resolution – 072). Moreover, its primary purpose is to uphold a holistic approach that the Local Government of Santiago City believes wherein all things in the society are interrelated; thereby, a harmony of interconnectedness of the different aspects and sectors in the society will define progress and development. Likewise, it is a campaign to reduce poverty and, more specifically, to lessen the unemployment rate. On the other hand, the City of Santiago, through the initiative of the Office of the City Mayor under its “BESPREN sa Kabuhayan” banner of the program, has established,d a Livelihood Fund to create income and generate income for its constituents. The said fund will be spread across all the thirty-seven barangays of the City to spur economic development, provide employment, and generally develop a brand, image, or product where Santiago City will be known.

In line with this City’s aspiration, the city government initially wanted to develop different products for each barangay. Each barangay will then focus on these products in terms of skills and capability-building activities. Through creating an oversight committee to implement the said fund, the Department of Trade and Industry – Santiago City Office has been tapped as a committee member to assist in implementing this aspiration and translating it into reality. Hence, the One Barangay, One Product (OBOP) Project was conceptualized and proposed as an approach or strategy (Project Concept OBOP).

The OBOP is a localized version of the One Town, One Product (OTOP) program, a national program of the Department of Trade and Industry that has been a very effective approach to developing products where each locality has strength and opportunity, thereby augmenting the income of its constituents and generating employment (Sotto & Villanueva, 2025).

OBOP program empowers barangays, the minor administrative units in the Philippines, to identify, plan, and execute a development project that addresses a specific local need or issue (Batalhão & Bostancı, 2019). This approach strengthens community participation and aligns with the principles of sustainable development, as outlined in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The OBOP program recognizes that sustainability transcends environmental concerns; it encompasses economic, social, and cultural dimensions as well (Chavez et al., 2020)

This initiative represents a paradigm shift in governance and community engagement, emphasizing local empowerment and participation in identifying and executing development projects. It aligns with the principles of sustainability, encapsulating ecological considerations and socio-cultural and economic dimensions. To ensure the long-term viability and success of the program, it is essential to comprehensively examine its effectiveness, measure its outcomes, and evaluate its implications for barangays and the broader pursuit of sustainability (Batalhão &  Bostancı, 2019).

Sustainability development, a global imperative in the face of environmental degradation and socio-economic disparities, demands innovative strategies at the local level. Within this context, the “One Barangay, One Project” (OBOP) initiative emerges as a dynamic and promising framework for promoting sustainability and community-driven development in barangays, the minor administrative units in the Philippines. This research study is motivated by the need to critically assess the impact and implications of OBOP and understand its role as a catalyst for sustainable development at the grassroots level.

Statement of the Problem

This study aimed to determine the effects and perceived implications of one barangay one project towards sustainability development. Also, the challenges encountered and its sustainability dimensions towards the creation of propose recommendation to explore the scalability and replicability for sustainable development.

Specifically, it sought to answer the following:

What is the demographic profile of the project beneficiaries in terms of:

• Civil Status
• Sex
• Years of Membership
• Educational Attainment

What is the demographic profile of the project Implementers in terms of:

• Type of Barangay
• Type of Livelihood Project

What is the effect of One Barangay One Product (OBOP) Livelihood Project in terms of the following as assessed by the beneficiaries and implementers:

• Employment generation;
• Quality of life;
• Quality of products; and
• Political Climate

What are the problems and challenges encountered by the implementers and beneficiaries of One Barangay One Product (OBOP) Livelihood Project in terms of:

• Marketing
• Production
• Operation
• Finance

What are the outcomes and impact of One Barangay One Product (OBOP) as to sustainability dimensions in terms of:

• Economic
• Social
• Environment

What recommendation can be proposed to explore the scalability and replicability of the OBOP model for sustainable development

Theoretical Framework

Figure 1. Triple Bottom Line

Figure 1 depicts the most commonly accepted paradigm for defining sustainability. Sustainability may be understood as the intersection of the three dimensions.

In the recent decade, firms, organizations, and governments have proclaimed sustainability as a goal, but judging whether an organization is sustainable or seeks sustainable growth is difficult.

As people become more conscious of environmental problems like climate change, air pollution, and global warming that have negative consequences on both people and the environment, the concept of sustainability has evolved (Chofreh et al. 2020). Since the turn of the twenty-first century, it has been one of the powerful forces shaping world history (Goni et al. 2017). The international and regional governments’ program requiring businesses to change how they conduct themselves in order to achieve sustainability results has accepted this idea (Chofreh et al. 2017). Organizations must alter the ways they produce, transmit, and collect values from the perspectives of the environment, society, and the economy (Shakeel et al. 2020). According to Munoz-Torres et al. (2019), they need a sustainable business model (SBM) that allows them to operate in compliance with sustainability standards.

Conceptual Framework

Figure 2. Research Paradigm

Figure 2 shows the research paradigm of the study. The figure presents the variables to be used in answering the stated statement of the problem. The study determines the (a) impact of the project in terms of employment generation, quality of life, quality of products/services and political climate; (b) problems and challenges encountered by implementers and beneficiaries of the project in terms of marketing, finance, operation and production; (c) outcomes and impact of the project as to sustainability dimension in terms of economic, social and environment  and (d) propose a recommendation to explore the scalability and replicability of the OBOP model for sustainable development.

METHODOLOGY

This quantitative research aimed to determine the effects and implications of the “One Barangay, One Project” initiative towards sustainable development in Santiago City. Using a descriptive and inferential design, the study involved beneficiaries and implementers from 20 barangays out of the 37 in the city, with a total of 100 project beneficiaries and 20 barangay implementers participating. Santiago City, a commercial hub with a strong agricultural presence, served as the research environment. Data collection was conducted using a survey questionnaire adapted from several prior studies and validated through expert review and pilot testing. The data analysis employed various statistical methods, including frequency counts, percentage distribution, and mean scores to ensure precise evaluation of the participants’ perspectives on the project’s effects and sustainability.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Demographic Profile Of Respondents

Table 1. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Beneficiaries when Grouped According to Civil Status, Sex, Years of Membership and Educational Attainment

		Frequency	Percentage
CIVIL STATUS	Single	35	35
	Married	65	65
	TOTAL	100	100
SEX	Male	20	20
	Female	80	80
	TOTAL	100	100
YEARS OF MEMBERSHIP	2 Years	10	10
	3 Years	55	55
	4 Years	20	20
	5 Years	5	5
	6 Years	10	10
	TOTAL	100	100
EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT	High School Level	36	36
	High School Graduate	32	32
	College Level	20	20
	College Graduate	12	12
	TOTAL	100	100

The table provides a detailed analysis of beneficiaries’ frequency and percentage distribution based on civil status, sex, years of membership, and educational attainment.

When examining civil status, it is observed that 35 beneficiaries are single, constituting 35% of the total, while 65 beneficiaries are married, making up 65% of the total, indicating a higher prevalence of married individuals among the beneficiaries. Regarding sex, the distribution shows significantly more female beneficiaries than male. Specifically, 80 beneficiaries are female, accounting for 80% of the total, while only 20 beneficiaries are male, representing 20% of the total. Analyzing the membership years, most beneficiaries have been members for three years. There are 55 beneficiaries in this category, making up 55% of the total. Those with two years and six years of membership each constitute 10% of the total, with 10 beneficiaries each. Beneficiaries with four years of membership account for 20% with 20 individuals, and those with five years of membership make up 5% with five individuals.

In terms of educational attainment, the largest group of beneficiaries, 36 individuals, have a high school-level education, which is 36% of the total. This is followed by 32 high school graduates, making up 32%. Beneficiaries with some college education number 20, accounting for 20% of the total, while college graduates constitute the smallest group, with 12 beneficiaries representing 12% of the total.

Table 2. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Implementers when Grouped According to Type of Barangay and Type of Livelihood Project

		Frequency	Percentage
TYPE OF BARANGAY	Rural	11	55
	Urban	9	45
	TOTAL	100	100
TYPE OF LIVELIHOOD PROJECT	Agricultural Farm Production	4	20
	Industrial Production	8	40
	Process Food Production	8	40
	TOTAL	100	100

The table presents the frequency and percentage distribution of implementers categorized by the type of barangay and type of livelihood project. Among the implementers, 55% (11 implementers) are from rural barangays, while 45% (9 implementers) are from urban barangays. This indicates a higher participation rate from rural areas. As to the types of livelihood projects, the distribution shows that implementers are equally involved in industrial production and process food production, with each category having eight implementers, constituting 40% of the total implementers for each type, while agricultural farm production has fewer implementers, with only four implementers making up 20% of the total.

Effects Of One Barangay One Product (Obop) Livelihood Project

Table 3. Mean Distribution on the Effects of One Barangay One Product (OBOP) Livelihood Project in terms of Employment Generation

Indicators	Implementer		Beneficiary
	Mean	QI	Mean	QI
1.       Jobs are created for family members	3.55	VGE	3.50	VGE
2.       People in the locality are also provided with employment.	3.00	GE	2.95	GE
3.       Recipients receive fair and just remuneration from the business.	3.10	GE	3.04	GE
4.       It helps to generate gainful employment for the family/community in particular and in Santiago City in general.	2.45	LE	2.41	LE
5.       Recipients are provided with stable jobs.	3.00	GE	2.93	GE
Weighted Mean	3.02	GE	2.97	GE

Legend: 1.00 – 1.49   Not At All (NA)  2.50 – 3.49  Great Extent (GE)

1.50 – 2.49  Less Extent (LE)   3.50- 4.00 Very Great Extent (VGE)

Table 3 presents the mean distribution of the effects of one barangay one product (OBOP) livelihood project on employment generation. The One Barangay One Product (OBOP) livelihood project demonstrates a generally positive impact on employment generation, as reflected in the mean distribution of responses from implementers and beneficiaries. The general weighted mean scores further underscore these findings. Implementers rated the overall impact at 3.02 and beneficiaries at 2.97, categorized as “Great Extent” (GE). These scores indicate that the project is perceived as having a positive effect on employment generation. However, the discrepancy between the high scores for family employment and the lower scores for community-wide employment suggests that the project needs to expand its reach and effectiveness to benefit a more significant population segment. Moreover, the highest mean values are found in the indicator “Jobs are created for family members,” with implementers rating it at 3.55 and beneficiaries at 3.50, both categorized as “Very Great Extent” (VGE). This suggests that the project is highly effective in providing employment opportunities within families, indicating a significant benefit in terms of household employment. Conversely, the lowest mean values are observed in the indicator “It helps to generate gainful employment for the family/community in particular and in Santiago City in general,” with implementers rating it at 2.45 and beneficiaries at 2.41, both falling under the “Less Extent” (LE) category. This highlights a potential area for improvement, suggesting that while the project effectively supports individual households, it is less impactful in creating broader employment opportunities for the wider community and the city. Hence, the OBOP project successfully creates jobs for family members but is less effective in generating gainful employment for the broader community. This insight points to the project’s strength in supporting household employment while identifying areas where its impact could be enhanced to achieve more comprehensive community development.

Thus, according to Sotto & Villanueva (2025), employment had the biggest impact on the One Barangay One Product Program. This implied that more and better jobs had been created for family members and people in the community. This helped them generate income to support the basic needs and lifestyle of the people in the community.

Table 4. Mean Distribution on the Effects of One Barangay One Product (OBOP) Livelihood Project in terms of Quality of Life

Indicators	Implementer		Beneficiary
	Mean	QI	Mean	QI
1.       Family members are provided with quality clothes and footwear.	3.00	GE	2.92	GE
2.       Family has savings through bank deposit.	1.50	LE	1.56	LE
3.       Family has insurance protection on pre-need.	1.50	LE	1.56	LE
4.       Project/program provides opportunity for them in the acquisition of lot/s.	1.50	LE	1.82	LE
5.       Project/program assists the construction of their houses.	1.50	LE	1.68	LE
6.       Project/program helps them in the major improvements in their existing houses.	3.00	GE	3.05	GE
7.       Recipients can afford to purchase motorcycle	2.00	LE	2.10	LE
8.       Recipients can afford a four-wheel vehicle (i.e. car and jeep)	1.00	NA	1.15	LE
9.       Recipients can purchase appliances like stove, electric fan and refrigerator.	3.00	GE	3.06	GE
10.    Recipients can purchase basic household furniture like tables, chairs and cabinets.	2.50	GE	2.54	GE
11.    Project/program provides them to avail the services of a doctor or hospital, not only relying on self-medication or herbal medicines for some illnesses	3.00	GE	3.00	GE
12.    Project/program helps them to support the elementary/secondary/college education of their children.	3.00	GE	3.09	GE
13.    Project/program provides recreational activities like travel, picnics, outings, parties, club affiliations.	1.50	LE	1.68	LE
Weighted Mean	2.15	LE	2.24	LE

Legend:  1.00 – 1.49     Not At All (NA)     2.50 – 3.49  Great Extent (GE)

1.50 – 2.49 Less Extent (LE)   3.50- 4.00 Very Great Extent (VGE)

Table 4 presents the mean distribution of the effects of one barangay one product (OBOP) livelihood project on quality of life. The overall weighted mean for the quality-of-life indicators stands at 2.15 for implementers and 2.24 for beneficiaries, categorized as “Less Extent” (LE). This suggests that while the OBOP project has notable positive impacts on specific areas of quality of life, such as housing, appliances, health, and education, it falls short in areas related to financial security, insurance, property acquisition, and higher-value assets like vehicles. The highest mean values are observed in several indicators, all rated as “Great Extent” (GE). For implementers, these include providing quality clothes and footwear (3.00), assisting significant house improvements (3.00), enabling the purchase of essential household appliances (3.00), supporting access to medical services (3.00), and aiding in the education of their children (3.00). Beneficiaries rate similar indicators highly: assisting significant house improvements (3.05), enabling the purchase of essential household appliances (3.06), supporting access to medical services (3.00), and aiding in the education of their children (3.09). These high ratings suggest that the OBOP project significantly enhances specific aspects of the participants’ quality of life, such as housing, education, and health services.

On the other hand, the lowest mean values are found in indicators such as providing savings through bank deposits (1.50 for implementers and 1.56 for beneficiaries), insurance protection (1.50 for implementers and 1.56 for beneficiaries), and the acquisition of lots (1.50 for implementers and 1.82 for beneficiaries). Additionally, the ability to afford a four-wheel vehicle (1.00 for implementers and 1.15 for beneficiaries) also falls into the “Less Extent” (LE) or “Not At All” (NA) categories. These low ratings indicate that the project has limited effectiveness in enhancing financial stability, insurance coverage, property acquisition, and significant vehicular purchases for both implementers and beneficiaries.

Parilla (2013) stated that livelihood project employment was established and enabled them to meet their fundamental requirements, such as sending their children to school. This not only helped them better their economic situation but also increased their sense of self-worth. In addition, the project improved the situation of the people living in the community by providing them with fundamental assistance; nonetheless, the initiative did not focus more on satisfying the desires of the target population.

Table 5. Mean Distribution on the Effects of One Barangay One Product (OBOP) Livelihood Project in terms of Quality of Products

Indicators	Implementer		Beneficiary
	Mean	QI	Mean	QI
1.       Products/services are available when needed	2.75	GE	2.84	GE
2.       Products/services at the shelf/service providers meet the daily demands of customers	3.00	GE	3.04	GE
3.       Quality of products/services have improved.	2.30	LE	2.35	LE
4.       Quality of the products/services matches the needs of the customers	2.55	GE	2.61	GE
5.       Use of the products/services responds to the needs of the customers	2.30	LE	2.26	LE
6.       Prices of products/services are within the capability of customers.	3.00	GE	3.06	GE
7.       The delivery of the product/service is always on time.	3.00	GE	3.05	GE
8.       Delays, errors and wastages are at a minimal level	2.55	GE	2.65	GE
9.       Product/service is continuously innovated to meet the changing needs of the customers .	2.00	LE	1.96	LE
10.    Facilities and amenities are regularly upgraded.	2.30	LE	2.34	LE
11.    There is a provision for credit especially to deprived and underserved customers.	3.00	GE	2.98	GE
12.    Inventory of products and service is enough for a certain period of time	2.55	GE	2.53	GE
13.    There are no delays on the delivery of products and services due to lack of supply.	3.00	GE	2.97	GE
Weighted Mean	2.64	GE	2.66	GE

Legend:  1.00 – 1.49     Not At All (NA)     2.50 – 3.49  Great Extent (GE)

1.50 – 2.49     Less Extent (LE)   3.50- 4.00 Very Great Extent (VGE)

Table 5 presents the mean distribution of the effects of one barangay, one product (OBOP) livelihood project in terms of the quality of products. The overall weighted mean scores for the quality of products indicators are 2.64 for implementers and 2.66 for beneficiaries, both categorized as “Great Extent” (GE). This indicates that the OBOP project positively impacts the quality of products and services, particularly regarding availability, meeting daily demands, reasonable pricing, timely delivery, and minimal wastage. However, the project needs to address the areas of product/service quality improvement, continuous innovation, and facility upgrading to enhance its impact further. The highest mean values are found in several indicators rated as “Great Extent” (GE). For implementers, these include the availability of products/services when needed (2.75), meeting daily demands of customers (3.00), prices within customers’ capability (3.00), timely delivery of products/services (3.00), minimal delays, errors, and wastages (2.55), provision for credit to deprived and underserved customers (3.00), and no delays in delivery due to lack of supply (3.00). Beneficiaries similarly rate the availability of products/services (2.84), meeting daily demands (3.04), prices within capability (3.06), timely delivery (3.05), minimal delays, errors, and wastages (2.65), provision for credit (2.98), and no delays in delivery due to lack of supply (2.97). These high ratings suggest that the project effectively ensures product availability, timely delivery, reasonable pricing, and minimal wastage, contributing to a reliable supply chain and customer satisfaction. Conversely, innovation and regular upgrading indicators observe the lowest mean values. For implementers, these include improvement in the quality of products/services (2.30), matching the needs of customers (2.55), response to customer needs (2.30), continuous innovation (2.00), and regular upgrading of facilities and amenities (2.30). Beneficiaries rate similar indicators low: improvement in quality (2.35), response to customer needs (2.26), continuous innovation (1.96), and regular upgrading of facilities and amenities (2.34). These low ratings indicate that the project is less effective in enhancing the quality and innovation of products/services and upgrading facilities, suggesting areas where the project could focus on improvement.

Lu and Lin (2017) stated that product innovation was important to meet and satisfy consumer demands, increase market share, increase profits, and thereby remain competitive in the market. On the other hand, it was also important that every business engage in product innovation to produce high-quality products. Lastly, product quality determines product innovation.

Table 6. Mean Distribution on the Effects of One Barangay One Product (OBOP) Livelihood Project in terms of Political Climate

Indicators	Implementer		Beneficiary
	Mean	QI	Mean	QI
1.       There is an enactment of resolution and ordinance to support the implementation of One Barangay One Project for the beneficiaries.	3.75	VGE	3.61	VGE
2.       There are perceived needs and concerns of all members of One Barangay One Project.	3.00	GE	2.90	GE
3.       Estimates the likelihood of such possible outcome alternative or decision for the program.	3.00	GE	2.90	GE
4.       There are prompt actions to certain issues and concerns dealt.	2.70	GE	2.87	GE
5.       There is a provision of required resources/logistics for the project.	2.30	LE	2.26	LE
6.       Opinions are solicited from others’ involvement in implementing the program.	3.00	GE	3.09	GE
7.       Decisions are made together as member of the group.	3.00	GE	2.87	GE
8.       Scheduled activities are provided according to agreed time frame.	3.00	GE	2.95	GE
9.       Resolves short term issues while balancing them against long term objectives through focus group discussion.	2.30	LE	2.24	LE
10.    Conducts information dissemination of the program twice a month.	3.00	GE	2.95	GE
11.    Provides consultation for the identification of livelihood project for each group.	2.70	GE	2.70	GE
12.    Provides assistance in the procurement process of the program.	3.00	GE	3.00	GE
13.    Initiates skills training, product development and marketing activities through implementation of entrepreneurial capacitation seminars including financial management and value re-orientation. Implements entrepreneurial capacitation seminars including financial management and value re-orientation.	3.00	GE	3.00	GE
14.    Punong Barangay selects the beneficiaries of the project coming from the unemployed household in the community.	3.30	GE	3.21	GE
15.    Committee sets the term of payment for the products being produced.	3.00	GE	3.07	GE
16.    The operations have run smoothly due to help from the government officials and other cooperating officials.	3.00	GE	3.10	GE
17.    Barangay Officials take the lead in identifying, developing and promoting a specific product or service, which has a competitive advantage.	3.00	GE	2.91	GE
18.    It can provide and develop programs to alleviate and improve the living conditions of the community especially the under privileged ones.	3.00	GE	2.93	GE
19.    Barangay officials/implementers promote public trust	3.00	GE	2.93	GE
20.    Community promotes confidence through creation of trademark product in Santiago City.	3.00	GE	3.00	GE
Weighted Mean	2.95	GE	2.92	GE

Legend:  1.00 – 1.49     Not At All (NA)  2.50 – 3.49  Great Extent (GE)

1.50 – 2.49     Less Extent (LE)   3.50- 4.00 Very Great Extent (VGE) 

Table 6 presents the mean distribution of the effects of one barangay one product (OBOP) livelihood project in terms of political climate. The overall weighted mean scores for the political climate indicators are 2.95 for implementers and 2.92 for beneficiaries, categorized as “Great Extent” (GE). This indicates a generally positive political environment for the OBOP project, with strong institutional support, effective decision-making processes, and active community involvement. The highest mean values are observed in the indicator related to enacting resolutions and ordinances supporting the implementation of the OBOP for the beneficiaries, with implementers rating it at 3.75 and beneficiaries at 3.61, both categorized as “Very Great Extent” (VGE). This suggests strong institutional support and a conducive policy environment that aids in the effective implementation of the project. However, the lowest mean values highlight some areas needing improvement. For example, the provision of required resources and logistics is rated 2.30 by implementers and 2.26 by beneficiaries, falling under “Less Extent” (LE). This indicates that resource allocation is challenging, potentially hindering the project’s efficiency and effectiveness. Similarly, resolving short-term issues while balancing long-term objectives also scored low (2.30 for implementers and 2.24 for beneficiaries), suggesting that strategic planning could be enhanced to better address immediate concerns without compromising future goals.

Community-based development projects depend significantly on conducive political environments and institutional backing to accomplish their goals. The study conducted by White et al. (2017) emphasizes the importance of efficient governance and favorable policies in ensuring the successful execution of local economic initiatives. Their research in urban areas highlighted that initiatives supported by explicit government resolutions and ordinances tend to have greater community involvement and ongoing political support.

Zaman (2011) supported the idea that the government must intervene in some areas by providing legal and civil support to sustain livelihood programs, help achieve the primary goal, and resolve rural poverty. More so, Omuthe (2015) stated that one of the factors influencing the implementation of livelihood projects was political. It stated that all relevant personnel should be included in formulating policies, strategies, and guidelines to implement livelihood projects effectively.

Problems And Challenges Encountered By Implementers And Beneficiaries Of One Barangay One Product (Obop) Livelihood Project

Table 7. Mean Distribution on the Problems and Challenges Encountered by the Implementers and Beneficiaries of One Barangay One Product (OBOP) Livelihood Project in terms of Marketing Issues

Indicators	Implementer		Beneficiary
	Mean	QI	Mean	QI
1.       The project is inaccessible to the customers due to poor location.	3.50	SA	3.41	A
2.       The project lacks effective marketing strategy.	3.00	A	3.00	A
3.       The project implementer is unable to identify target markets	2.25	D	2.21	D
4.       The project implementer fails to conduct market research	2.05	D	2.13	D
5.       The project implementer fails to address the proper market i.e. poor market segmentation	2.20	D	2.15	D
6.       The project needs to improve the products/services.	2.35	D	2.46	D
7.       The project experiences difficulties due to new competitors offering similar products at lower prices.	2.35	D	2.45	D
8.       The project has low barriers to market entry i.e. many similar start-up leading to an over supply	2.50	A	2.56	A
9.       The project has low demand for products/services	3.00	A	3.00	A
10.    The project experiences limited market size	2.50	A	2.54	A
Weighted Mean	2.57	A	2.59	A

Legend:  1.00 – 1.49 Strongly Disagree (SD)   2.50 – 3.49   Agree (A)

1.50 – 2.49   Disagree (D)   3.50- 4.00 Strongly Agree (SA)

Table 7 presents the mean distribution of the problems and challenges encountered by the implementers and beneficiaries of one barangay one product (OBOP) livelihood project regarding marketing issues. The overall weighted mean scores are 2.57 for implementers and 2.59 for beneficiaries, categorized as “Agree” (A). This indicates a consensus that there are significant marketing challenges that the project needs to address to enhance its effectiveness and reach. The indicator’s highest mean value for implementers is observed regarding the project’s inaccessibility due to poor location, rated at 3.50 (Strongly Agree – SA), while beneficiaries rate this issue at 3.41 (Agree – A). This indicates that both groups perceive the location as a significant barrier to customer access, highlighting a critical area that needs to be addressed to improve market reach. On the lower end, the issues related to the inability to identify target markets (2.25 for implementers and 2.21 for beneficiaries), failure to conduct market research (2.05 for implementers and 2.13 for beneficiaries), and poor market segmentation (2.20 for implementers and 2.15 for beneficiaries) are rated as “Disagree” (D). These lower ratings indicate that, from the respondents’ perspective, these are fewer problematic areas than others. Nonetheless, they still present challenges that need attention.

Efficient marketing strategies are crucial for the success of community-based initiatives, but they often face several obstacles that impede their effectiveness. Johnson and Smith (2018) found that problems such as limited access to a site might greatly hinder the ability to attract customers and achieve sales goals. Their study conducted in rural settings revealed that projects in isolated or inadequately linked locations have difficulties attracting clients, resulting in limited market penetration and income creation.

Table 8. Mean Distribution on the Problems and Challenges Encountered by the Implementers and Beneficiaries of One Barangay One Product (OBOP) Livelihood Project in terms of Finance Issues

Indicators	Implementer		Beneficiary
	Mean	QI	Mean	QI
1.       The project implementer fails to apply financial statements analysis 2.	2.25	D	2.18	D
3.       There is unplanned withdrawal of cash for personal use	3.25	A	3.32	A
4.       The project implementer has poor management of working capital	2.00	D	2.06	D
5.       The project experiences shortage of finance	2.25	D	2.39	D
6.       The project incurs heavy operating expenses	2.50	A	2.54	A
7.       The project implementer fails to do financial planning/budgeting	2.25	D	2.33	D
8.       There is a presence of over-investment in inventory	2.50	A	2.55	A
9.       The project implementer experiences difficulty in obtaining finance/credit	3.00	A	3.00	A
10.    The project incurs more bad debts	2.00	D	2.09	D
11.    The project lacks inventory control	2.25	D	2.39	D
Weighted Mean	2.43	D	2.49	D

Legend:  1.00 – 1.49 Strongly Disagree (SD)   2.50 – 3.49   Agree (A)

1.50 – 2.49   Disagree (D)   3.50- 4.00 Strongly Agree (SA)

Table 8 presents the mean distribution of the problems and challenges encountered by the implementers and beneficiaries of one barangay one product (OBOP) livelihood project regarding finance issues. The overall weighted mean scores for finance issues are 2.43 for implementers and 2.49 for beneficiaries, categorized as “Disagree” (D). This suggests that while there are notable finance-related problems, the respondents generally do not perceive them as overwhelmingly critical compared to other challenges. The highest mean value for both implementers and beneficiaries is observed in the indicator concerning the unplanned withdrawal of cash for personal use, rated at 3.25 (Agree – A) by implementers and 3.32 (Agree – A) by beneficiaries. This suggests a significant problem where project funds are diverted for personal use, potentially undermining the project’s financial stability and growth. Indicators with lower mean values, such as the failure to apply financial statements analysis (2.25 for implementers and 2.18 for beneficiaries), poor management of working capital (2.00 for implementers and 2.06 for beneficiaries), and the presence of bad debts (2.00 for implementers and 2.09 for beneficiaries), are categorized as “Disagree” (D). Although these issues are less critical, according to the respondents, they still present underlying financial management challenges that must be addressed.

According to Mezgebe (2022), financial statements are important information sources for all accounting information users, such as small businesses. It provides information about an enterprise’s financial position, performance, and changes in financial position that are useful to a wide range of users when making economic decisions. Also, financial statement analysis helps the organization evaluate performance, diagnose operating problems, and determine the basis of control. It also analyzes whether an entity is stable, solvent, liquid, or profitable enough.

Table 9. Mean Distribution on the Problems and Challenges Encountered by the Implementers and Beneficiaries of One Barangay One Product (OBOP) Livelihood Project in terms of Operations Issues

Indicators	Implementer		Beneficiary
	Mean	QI	Mean	QI
1.       The project lacks quality control systems	2.75	A	2.83	A
2.       The project lacks capacity planning.	2.25	D	2.17	D
3.       The project implementer and recipient are unable and fail to perform selected management tasks	2.00	D	2.14	D
4.       The project recipient lacks management commitment.	2.00	D	2.10	D
5.       The project lacks production design	3.50	SA	3.53	SA
6.       The project lacks adequate information and technology	3.50	SA	3.44	A
7.       The project experiences daily routine and operational tasks tend to take up most of my time	2.50	A	2.53	A
8.       The project lacks sufficient resources	2.25	D	2.23	D
Weighted Mean	2.60	A	2.62	A

Legend:         1.00 – 1.49 Strongly Disagree (SD)   2.50 – 3.49   Agree (A)

1.50 – 2.49   Disagree (D)   3.50- 4.00 Strongly Agree (SA)

Table 9 presents the mean distribution of the problems and challenges encountered by the implementers and beneficiaries of one barangay one product (OBOP) livelihood project regarding operation issues. The overall weighted mean scores for operational issues are 2.60 for implementers and 2.62 for beneficiaries, categorized as “Agree” (A). This suggests that operational challenges exist and require addressing to enhance the project’s effectiveness. The highest mean values are seen in the indicator concerning the lack of production design, rated at 3.50 (Strongly Agree – SA) by implementers and 3.53 (Strongly Agree – SA) by beneficiaries. This indicates a significant challenge in creating efficient and effective production processes, which can severely impact the project’s output quality and efficiency. Indicators with lower mean values, such as the inability and failure to perform selected management tasks (2.00 for implementers and 2.14 for beneficiaries), lack of management commitment (2.00 for implementers and 2.10 for beneficiaries), and lack of capacity planning (2.25 for implementers and 2.17 for beneficiaries), are categorized as “Disagree” (D). These ratings suggest that while these issues are present, they are not perceived as critically problematic compared to the lack of production design and technological resources.

Community-based initiatives often face operational issues that may substantially influence their efficiency and sustainability. The study conducted by Smith and Brown (2019) emphasizes that factors related to production design and process efficiency play a pivotal role in determining a project’s success. They contend that projects may have difficulties meeting quality standards and operational efficiency goals without efficient production processes and well-designed frameworks. This correlates with the concerns noted in the OBOP project about the absence of production design (Smith & Brown, 2019).

In addition, Johnson et al. (2020) have examined management’s involvement in tackling operational difficulties. Their research highlights the significance of efficient managerial strategies in overcoming obstacles associated with job execution, dedication, and capacity planning. Although the OBOP project displays lower average values for indicators such as management task performance and commitment, it is still necessary to address these areas to maintain consistent project delivery and achieve operational excellence.

Table 10. Mean Distribution on the Problems and Challenges Encountered by the Implementers and Beneficiaries of One Barangay One Product (OBOP) Livelihood Project in terms of Production Issues

Indicators	Implementer		Beneficiary
	Mean	QI	Mean	QI
1.       The project does not develop products/services.	3.25	A	3.21	A
2.       The project does not provide product line changes	2.75	A	2.67	A
3.       The project implementer experiences problems with resource suppliers	2.25	D	2.20	D
4.       The project has low productivity, low morale and labour problems	2.75	A	2.78	A
5.       The project has inadequate infrastructural facilities	3.00	A	3.09	A
6.       The project implementer and recipient lack knowledge and skills in packaging, labeling and design.	2.50	A	2.56	A
7.       The project implementer and recipient lack technical skills	2.50	A	2.56	A
8.       The project implementer and recipient have insufficient experience and knowledge about the field of business	2.25	D	2.15	D
Weighted Mean	2.66	A	2.65	A

Legend: 1.00 – 1.49 Strongly Disagree (SD)   2.50 – 3.49   Agree (A)

1.50 – 2.49   Disagree (D)   3.50- 4.00 Strongly Agree (SA)

Table 10 presents the mean distribution of the problems and challenges encountered by the implementers and beneficiaries of one barangay one product (OBOP) livelihood project regarding production issues. The overall weighted mean scores for production issues are 2.66 for implementers and 2.65 for beneficiaries, categorized as “Agree” (A). This suggests a consensus that production challenges are significant and need to be addressed to improve the project’s outcomes. The highest mean values are observed in the indicator related to the project not developing products/services, rated at 3.25 (Agree – A) by implementers and 3.21 (Agree – A) by beneficiaries. This indicates a significant issue where both groups recognize a lack of innovation and development in the project’s offerings, which can hinder its ability to meet market demands and stay competitive. Indicators with lower mean values, such as problems with resource suppliers (2.25 for implementers and 2.20 for beneficiaries) and insufficient experience and knowledge about the field of business (2.25 for implementers and 2.15 for beneficiaries), are categorized as “Disagree” (D). While these issues are present, they are not perceived as critically problematic compared to the lack of product development and infrastructural facilities.

Smith and Davis (2018) have emphasized the significance of possessing business knowledge and expertise for achieving project success. Insufficient proficiency in business operations and industry-specific knowledge might impede effective decision-making and strategic planning, therefore impacting the project’s overall success.

Outcomes And Impact Of One Barangay One Product (Obop) As To Sustainability Dimensions

Table 11. Mean Distribution on the Outcomes and Impact of One Barangay One Product (OBOP) as to Sustainability Dimensions in terms of Environmental Sustainability

Indicators	Implementer		Beneficiary
	Mean	QI	Mean	QI
1.       Community enterprises adopts environmentally friendly production practices and rendering of services	3.50	SA	3.54	SA
2.       Community enterprises do not use toxic or chemicals in the production process	3.75	SA	3.63	SA
3.       Product or services are produced with a minimum effect on environment	3.50	SA	3.48	A
4.       Products or services are made from sustainable materials such as organic cotton and not be synthetic	3.50	SA	3.46	A
5.       Community enterprises practice energy conservation activities	3.25	A	3.21	A
Weighted Mean	3.50	SA	3.46	A

Table 11 presents the outcomes and impact of the One Barangay One Product (OBOP) livelihood project concerning environmental sustainability, as perceived by both implementers and beneficiaries. The table highlights several key indicators where the project has made significant strides. Implementers and beneficiaries strongly agree (rated as 3.50 to 3.75 on the scale) that community enterprises under OBOP adopt environmentally friendly production practices and refrain from using toxic chemicals. This indicates a robust commitment to sustainable practices prioritizing environmental health and safety. Additionally, both groups agree that products or services are produced with minimal environmental impact and are often made from sustainable materials such as organic cotton, demonstrating a conscientious approach to sourcing and production.

However, the table also reveals areas where improvements can be made. While energy conservation activities are acknowledged positively, they receive slightly lower ratings (around 3.25 to 3.21), suggesting that more focused efforts could enhance energy efficiency within the project’s operations. Strengthening these activities further bolsters the project’s environmental sustainability initiatives. Overall, the weighted mean scores of 3.50 (SA) for implementers and 3.46 (A) for beneficiaries underscore the project’s overall success in integrating environmentally sustainable practices. By maintaining and enhancing these efforts, the OBOP project can continue to serve as a model for sustainable community development, ensuring long-term environmental stewardship alongside economic and social benefits for its participants and the broader community.

Community-based projects increasingly acknowledge the need for environmental sustainability, demonstrating a rising dedication to responsible resource management and ecological care. The study conducted by Green et al. (2019) highlights the beneficial effects of using eco-friendly manufacturing methods in community businesses. It also emphasizes that initiatives that follow sustainable production techniques have the dual benefit of protecting the environment and improving the resilience and well-being of communities. This is achieved by reducing ecological footprints.

Table 12. Mean Distribution on the Outcomes and Impact of One Barangay One Product (OBOP) as to Sustainability Dimensions in terms of Economic Sustainability

Indicators	Implementer		Beneficiary
	Mean	QI	Mean	QI
1.       Community Enterprises have realizable cost reductions compared with existing arrangements — care and ensure that cost reductions are not already reflected in lower costs included in the analysis	3.00	A	2.92	A
2.       Community enterprises have increased revenue	3.00	A	2.88	A
3.       Community enterprises have increased productivity such as improvements in performance or quality as measured, for example, by decreased time to produce outputs	3.00	A	3.06	A
4.       Community enterprises ensure that additional costs are being avoided	3.00	A	3.08	A
5.       Community enterprises have residual value of any assets no longer required — the residual value should be costed according to its highest value alternative use.	2.75	A	2.85	A
Weighted Mean	2.95	A	2.96	A

Legend:  1.00 – 1.49 Strongly Disagree (SD)   2.50 – 3.49   Agree (A)

1.50 – 2.49   Disagree (D)   3.50- 4.00 Strongly Agree (SA)

Table 12 provides an overview of the economic sustainability outcomes and impacts of the One Barangay One Product (OBOP) livelihood project, evaluated from the perspectives of both implementers and beneficiaries. The table highlights several key indicators where the project has demonstrated significant positive effects. Implementers and beneficiaries consistently agree that community enterprises under OBOP have achieved productivity improvements, with ratings ranging from 3.00 to 3.06 (Agree – A), indicating enhanced performance and quality outputs. Additionally, both groups perceive that the project has effectively avoided additional costs, with ratings ranging from 3.00 to 3.08 (Agree – A), showcasing prudent financial management within the enterprises. Conversely, the indicator with the lowest mean values pertains to the residual value of assets no longer required, rated between 2.75 and 2.85 (Agree – A). This suggests that while asset management is recognized, there may be room to optimize the value of assets that are no longer actively utilized within the project. Overall, the weighted mean scores of 2.95 (Agree – A) for implementers and 2.96 (Agree – A) for beneficiaries indicate a strong consensus on the positive economic impacts of the OBOP project. These scores underscore the project’s success in achieving cost reductions, revenue increases, and productivity improvements, which are essential for enhancing the economic sustainability of community enterprises.

Economic sustainability is essential for the enduring prosperity and viability of community companies, focusing on the effective allocation of resources, sound financial management, and optimal use of assets. The research emphasizes the significance of improving productivity in promoting economic development within community initiatives. Their research indicates that enhancing productivity has a dual effect of boosting both production and quality while also playing a role in maintaining economic stability and resilience (Smith & Green, 2019).

Table 13. Mean Distribution on the Outcomes and Impact of One Barangay One Product (OBOP) as to Sustainability Dimensions in terms of Social Sustainability

Indicators	Implementer		Beneficiary
	Mean	QI	Mean	QI
1.       Community enterprises create more employment for the people in the community	3.75	SA	3.67	SA
2.       Community enterprises have proper occupational health and safety	3.00	A	2.90	A
3.       Community enterprises engage his employees to training and education	3.00	A	2.97	A
4.       Community enterprises have good labor/management relations	3.00	A	2.89	A
5.       Community-based enterprises have freedom of association and collective bargaining	3.25	A	3.11	A
6.       Community-based enterprises ensure customer health and safety	3.50	SA	3.56	SA
7.       Community-based enterprises have an effective product and service labelling	2.75	A	2.77	A
8.       Community-based enterprises have effective marketing communications	3.25	A	3.32	A
9.       Community-based enterprises engage to customer privacy	3.00	A	3.10	A
Weighted Mean	3.17	A	3.14	A

Legend:  1.00 – 1.49 Strongly Disagree (SD)   2.50 – 3.49   Agree (A)

1.50 – 2.49   Disagree (D)   3.50- 4.00 Strongly Agree (SA)

Table 13 provides a comprehensive overview of the One Barangay One Product (OBOP) livelihood project’s impact on social sustainability, evaluated through the perspectives of both implementers and beneficiaries. The table reveals several notable achievements in fostering positive social outcomes within community enterprises participating in OBOP. Both implementers and beneficiaries strongly agree that the project has significantly contributed to creating employment opportunities within the community, with ratings as high as 3.75 (Strongly Agree – SA) and 3.67 (Strongly Agree – SA), respectively. This highlights OBOP’s pivotal role in enhancing local economic stability and livelihoods through job creation. However, the table also identifies areas for potential improvement, such as enhancing product and service labeling (rated around 2.75 to 2.77, Agree – A) and improving occupational health and safety standards (rated around 3.00 to 2.90, Agree – A). Addressing these aspects could strengthen the project’s overall impact on social sustainability by ensuring more transparent communication and safer working conditions within the enterprises. Hence, the weighted mean scores of 3.17 (Agree – A) for implementers and 3.14 (Agree – A) for beneficiaries reflect a positive consensus on OBOP’s effectiveness in enhancing social sustainability. Moving forward, continued focus on improving occupational safety, refining communication practices, and expanding job opportunities will be crucial for sustaining and amplifying the positive social impacts of the OBOP project across the communities it serves.

Social sustainability is crucial in community-based initiatives as it facilitates inclusive economic development, improves people’s quality of life, and supports the community’s overall well-being. The study conducted by Green et al. (2020) highlights the importance of job development activities in strengthening local economic stability and enhancing social cohesion.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions were drawn:

• Most beneficiaries are married and predominantly female. Majority have been involved in the project for three years, indicating stable engagement. In terms of education, most beneficiaries have a high school level education, with fewer having college experience or degrees.
• Most of the implementers are in the rural areas and usually engaged in food processing and industrial products as their livelihood project.
• The One Barangay One Product Livelihood Project revealed positive outcome on employment generation, quality of product and political climate. However, the outcome for quality of life was not yet evident since it vouched lower perception to both beneficiaries and implementers.
• Despite of the positive results on the effect of One Barangay One Product (OBOP) Livelihood Program, there were still problems and challenges as experienced that need to addressed in order to improve the implementation of the project as to marketing, production, and operations. However, finance perspective seems not a problem.
• The OBOP project integrates environmental stewardship, economic viability, and social inclusivity, achieving notable successes. To sustain and enhance its impact, efforts must focus on energy conservation, asset management, safety standards, and communication practices. Addressing these areas will strengthen OBOP’s role as a model for sustainable community development, benefiting participants and the broader community in the long term.
• A proposed recommendations were made to give assistance for the scalability and replicability of the OBOP model for sustainable development

RECOMMENDATIONS

• While the Local Government Unit (LGU), Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), and Barangay officials play crucial roles, the private sector, cooperatives, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) should also be engaged. Establishing partnerships with these entities can provide additional funding, technical expertise, and market linkages, which are necessary to enhance OBOP’s reach and sustainability. The LGU should create public-private partnerships (PPPs) that integrate private sector expertise in product development, supply chain management, and marketing strategies. This involvement ensures that OBOP can achieve scalability and sustainability, as the private sector brings in business acumen and financial resources necessary for the project’s long-term success. This inclusion also reduces the heavy reliance on government agencies, addressing the concern of weak justification for the government’s sole involvement.
• To ensure the OBOP model can be expanded and replicated, the LGU should establish concrete measures for scalability, such as setting performance indicators like the number of new beneficiaries, product diversification rates, and market expansion metrics. Pilot programs in selected barangays should test scalability strategies before full-scale adoption. Clear guidelines and timelines for measuring scalability should be outlined to ensure effective expansion. Knowledge-sharing platforms should be established to document best practices and lessons learned for replication in other areas, ensuring that scalability and replicability are actionable and measurable aspects of OBOP’s implementation.
• The marketing strategy should prioritize digital transformation, including the creation of e-commerce platforms and utilizing social media to expand market reach. This will directly address the need for wider market access, a key challenge identified in the study. In production, modern equipment, quality control measures, and training on sustainable production methods should be adopted to improve efficiency and product quality. Specific strategies like energy-efficient equipment and green packaging solutions should be implemented to contribute to sustainability. Operational efficiency can be enhanced by streamlining supply chain management, proper inventory control, and adherence to quality assurance standards. These actions will ensure that the operational challenges identified in the study are effectively addressed.
• Sustainability efforts should include environmental stewardship, economic viability, and social inclusivity. Energy-efficient production methods, waste reduction strategies, and sustainable packaging solutions must be implemented to ensure that the project aligns with environmental goals. The financial viability of the project can be enhanced by strengthening financial literacy programs tailored specifically to OBOP entrepreneurs. These programs should focus on sound financial management, asset optimization, reinvestment strategies, and risk management rather than basic financial literacy, which may not be necessary given that finance was not deemed a major issue. Social inclusivity should be prioritized by encouraging the participation of marginalized groups such as women, youth, and persons with disabilities. Providing these groups with capacity-building programs, leadership training, and entrepreneurial workshops will foster a more inclusive environment and directly contribute to OBOP’s sustainability.
• Since finance is not considered a major problem, the financial training for OBOP entrepreneurs should focus on advanced financial management. This includes strategic business growth, cash flow management, and reinvestment planning, rather than general financial literacy. Implementing a more focused financial training module that includes risk assessment, cost-benefit analysis, and funding diversification strategies will provide more value to the entrepreneurs and directly align with the identified needs, eliminating the contradiction in the study.
• The LGU can expand OBOP’s impact by simplifying business licensing procedures, aligning land use policies, and improving access to funding through grants and microfinancing schemes. The DTI should focus on providing specialized training in product innovation, branding, and market positioning, rather than repeating suggestions on product quality improvement. Barangay officials should enhance local engagement by organizing structured consultation meetings, facilitating direct linkages with suppliers and buyers, and supporting community-driven business incubation programs. These actions will streamline the process and address operational challenges more effectively.

REFERENCES

1. Amaike, B. (2016). Sustainability, livelihoods, and quality of life of older retirees in Lagos State, Nigeria. Journal of Global Initiatives, 10(2), 143-164.
2. Apostolopoulos, N., Al-Dajani, H., Holt, D., Jones, P., & Newbery, R. (2018). Entrepreneurship and the sustainable development goals. Contemporary  Issues in Entrepreneurship Research, 8, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2040-724620180000008005
3. Batalhão, A., & Bostancı, S. (2019). A review of One Village One Product (OVOP): Potentialities and fragilities in Brazil and Turkey. Journal of Emerging Economies and Policy, 4(1), 31-42.
4. Brink, A., & Cant, M. (2003). Problems experienced by small businesses in South Africa. Small Enterprise Association of Australia and New Zealand, 1-20.
5. Brown, S. L., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (1995). Product development: Past research, present findings, and future directions. Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 343-378
6. Cant, M., & Ligthelm, A. (2008). Small business problems in the South African context: A proactive entrepreneurial approach.
7. Canare, T., & Francisco, J. (2019). The challenges to SME market access in the Philippines and the role of business associations. Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada.
8. Chavez, R., Yu, W., Jajja, M. S. S., Lecuna, A., & Fynes, B. (2020). Can entrepreneurial orientation improve sustainable development through leveraging internal lean practices? Business Strategy and the Environment, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2496
9. Chofreh, A. G., Goni, F. A., Klemeš, J. J. (2017). Development of a framework for the implementation of sustainable enterprise resource planning. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 61, 1543-1548. https://doi.org/10.3303/CET1761255
10. Chofreh, A. G., Goni, F. A., Klemeš, J. J., Malik, M. N., & Khan, H. H. (2020). Development of guidelines for the implementation of sustainable enterprise resource planning systems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118655
11. Correia, M. (2019). Sustainability: An overview of the triple bottom line and sustainability implementation. International Journal of Strategic Engineering, 2, 29-38. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJoSE.2019010103
12. Ebeijing.gov. (2015). Improving the quality of people. Retrieved on September 28, 2023, from http://www.ebeijing.gov.cn/Government/reports/t923607.htm
13. Elkington, J. (1998). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers.
14. Green, M., Johnson, L., & Davis, R. (2019). Environmental sustainability in community enterprises: Insights and strategies. Community Development Journal, 54(4), 421-438. https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsz022
15. Green, M., Johnson, L., & Davis, R. (2020). Job creation and economic stability in community enterprises: Insights and strategies. Community Development Journal, 55(4), 421-438. https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsz022
16. Ghoni, F., Chofren, A., Orakani, Z., Kleme, J., Davoudi, M., & Mardani, A. (2020). Sustainable business model: A review and framework development. Clean Technologies and Environment, 23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-020-01886z
17. Hartmann, A. (2006). The role of organizational culture in motivating innovative behavior in construction firms. Construction Innovation, 6(3), 159-172.
18. Hoogendoorn, B., van der Zwan, P., & Thurik, R. (2019). Sustainable entrepreneurship: The role of perceived barriers and risk. Journal of Business Ethics, 157, 1133-1154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3646-8
19. (Humans People to People India) HPPI. (2017). Livelihood community development. Retrieved January 3, 2024, from http://www.humana-india.org/livelihood-community-development/livelihood-and-community-development
20. Iyigun, N. O. (2015). Corporate social responsibility and ethics in management in light of sustainable development. In U. Akkucuk (Ed.), Handbook of research in developing sustainable value in economics, finance and marketing (pp. 1-19).
21. Jacobsen, K. (2019). Can refugees benefit the state? Refugee resources African state building. Journal of Modern African Studies, 40(4), 1-18.
22. Johnson, L., Smith, P., & Brown, D. (2020). Management challenges in community-based projects: Strategies for improvement. Community Development Journal, 55(2), 189-207. https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsz045
23. Johnson, R., & Smith, L. (2018). Accessibility challenges in rural community projects: A case study of economic development initiatives. Rural Development Journal, 22(4), 301-319. https://doi.org/10.1080/12345678.2018.1543210
24. Lee, H. K. (2019). Gender differences in the impact of community development projects on employment. Journal of Community Development, 45(4), 357-372. LGU Santiago City Resolution -072
25. Luna, J. P. (2020). Demographic factors influencing political attitudes: A study of community-based projects. International Journal of Social Science Research, 38(3), 251-269.
26. Manzoor, F., Wei, L., & Sahito, N. (2021). The role of SMEs in rural development: Access of SMEs to finance as a mediator. PLoS ONE, 16(3). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0247598
27. Muñoz-Torres, M. J., Fernández-Izquierdo, M. Á., Rivera-Lirio, I. M., & Escrig-Olmedo, E. (2019). Can environmental, social, and governance rating agencies favor business models that promote a more sustainable development? Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(2), 439-452. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1695
28. Parilla, E. (2013). Economic promotion through One-Town One Product. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 3(7), 535-545. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v3-i7/75
29. Park, J. H., & Seo, M. G. (2017). The role of continuous participation in quality enhancement of community-based products. Journal of Community Development and Quality Assurance, 29(2), 183-200.
30. Shakeel, J., Mardani, A., Chofreh, A. G., Goni, F. A., & Klemeš, J. J. (2020). Anatomy of sustainable business model innovation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 121-201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121201
31. Shafeek, S. (2019). Can refugees benefit the state? Refugee resources African state building. Journal of Modern African Studies, 40(4), 1-18.
32. Smith, J., & Brown, A. (2019). Operational efficiency in community development projects: Insights and recommendations. Journal of Community Practice, 27(3-4), 321-339. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705422.2019.1677789
33. Smith, J., & Davis, R. (2018). Business knowledge and expertise in community development projects: Challenges and solutions. Community Studies, 38(2), 145-167. https://doi.org/10.1080/12345678.2018.1543210
34. Srikanth, K., & Rao, R. (2015). Sustainable employment generation for livelihood through MGNREGA programme in Chikaballapur District of Karnataka. International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), 1-3.
35. Stokes, D., & Wilson, N. (2006). Small business management and entrepreneurship (5th ed.). Thomson Learning, London.
36. Sotto M. & Villanueva H. (2025). An assessment of bespren one barangay one product livelihood project in Santiago City. International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation, 8 (2).  https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2025.12020068
37. White, L., Green, M., & Johnson, R. (2017). Political climate and community-based initiatives: A case study of urban projects. Urban Studies, 44(2), 189-207. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098015606723
38. Yu, W, Chavez, R, Jacobs, M., Wong, C.Y. (2020) Innovativeness and lean practices for triple bottom line: testing of fit-as-mediation versus fit-as-moderation models. International Journal of Operations & Production Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijopm-07-2019-0550