REAP Conference Proceedings

1

FRONT COVER - See separate file

5th Annual REAP Conference

Proceedings of the

Traders Hotel, Pasay CityMarch 31-April 1, 2011

Integrating Climate Change Adaptation, Disaster Risk Management and Watershed Management in Local Land Use and Development Planning: Practitioners and Technical Experts’ Discussion

Proceedings of the

Traders Hotel, Pasay CityMarch 31-April 1, 2011

Conference Theme:

Integrating Climate Change Adaptation, Disaster Risk Management and Watershed Management in Local Land Use and Development Planning: Practitioners and Technical Experts’ Discussion

5th AnnualREAP Conference

AcknowledgmentsThe Resource and Environmental Economics Foundation of the Philippines, Inc. (REAP) would like to thank the following for making this publication possible:

speakers and documenters during the conference;

WWF-Philippines through grant support from the the Coca-Cola Foundation for funding the participation of local government participants and the documetation and publication of this report;

Environment and Economy Program for South East Asia (EEPSEA) for their technical and financial support during the conference;

Landbank of the Philippines for their financial support;

Resources, Environment and Economics Center for Studies, Inc. (REECS) for hosting the foundation in their office and for logistical support; and

Special thanks to the REAP board members, to Ms. Dieldre Harder for documenting the proceedings, and to Ms. Rina Bernabe De Alban for the editing and lay out of this report.

Photos courtesy of WWF-Philippines unless otherwise indicated. Cover photos (clockwise from left: WWF-Philippines, Laguna Water Corporation, WWF/Lory Tan, WWW/Lory Tan).

The views and recommendations appearing in this conference proceedings are those of the organizers and do not necessarily reflect those of the Board of Directors of WWF-Philippines, Coca-Cola Foundation and Landbank of the Philippines.

Contents

Acknowledgments 4

List of Abbreviations 7

Conference Rationale 9

Conference Objectives 9

Conference Structure and Composition 10

Conference Program 11

Welcome Address 13

Keynote Speech 14

Advancing the Primacy of Public Interest: Integrating CCA, DRR and Watershed Management in Local Land Use and Development Planning 14Rolando Acosta, Asst. Secretary for Administration, Department of the Interior and Local Government

Plenary Presentations 15

Plenary Presentation 1Watershed Management and Urban Planning–Steps Toward Integrating CCA and DRR Concerns 15Prof. Jose Gomez, UP School of Urban and Regional Planning

Plenary presentation 2Climate Change and Adaptation to Extreme Climate Events 16Dr. Herminia A. Francisco, Director, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia

Plenary presentation 3Securing the Future: LGU Initiatives and Directions in Environmental Protection and Disaster Risk Management 17Hon. Rene Gaudiel, Mayor of Bayawan City, Negros Oriental

Plenary presentation 4Earthquake and Tsunami Preparedness and Risk Reduction 18Dr. Renato U. Solidum Jr., Director, Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (PHIVOLCS)

Plenary presentation 5Capacity Needs for Integrating CCA, DRR, and Watershed Approach in Local Planning: the CALABARZON Experience 19Mr. Donald James Gawe, NEDA Region 4

Plenary presentation 6Presentation of Survey Results on LGU Capacity Needs for CCA, DRR and Watershed Management 20Dr. Zenaida Sumalde, REAP/UP Los Baños-College of Economics and Management;

Open Forum Highlights: Plenary Presentations 24

Session A: Upland/Agricultural Landscape 26

A Reference Guide for Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency (RIDF) Tables and Curves for the Laguna Lake Basin 26Mr. Edgardo Tongson, Director, WWF PhilippinesAnalysis of Flooding and Rainfall Events in Laguna de Bay Basin through Hydrologic Monitoring and Modeling 27Mr. Emiterio Hernandez. Laguna Lake Development Authority

Open Forum Highlights: Upland/Agricultural Landscape 28

Session B: Coastal Landscape 28

Challenges, Opportunities and Issues in Integrating CCA and DDR in the Coastal Landscape 28Mr. Ronnel Lim, Mayor of Gubat, SorsogonBuilding Resilient Seas to Meet the Climate Change Imperatives 29Dr. Porfirio Aliño, Professor, University of the Philippines-Marine Science Institute

Open Forum Highlights: Coastal Landscape 30

Session C: Urban Landscape 31

Urban Floods, Health, Water, Infrastructure and Epidemics Assessment and Measures 31Arch. Felino Palafox Jr., Managing Director/Principal Architect, Palafox AssociatesChallenges, Opportunities and Issues in Integrating CCA and DDR in the Urban Landscape 32Engr. Honore Jordan, UN Habitat, Sorsogon City

Open Forum Highlights: Urban Landscape

Output of Group Workshops 33

Open Forum Highlights: Workshop Presentations 41

List of Participants 42

About REAP 51

BFAR Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources

CCA climate change adaptation

CENRO Community/City Environment and Natural Resources Office

CLUP Comprehensive Land Use Plan

CPDO City Planning and Development Office

CSO civil society organization

DA Department of Agriculture

DAR Department of Agrarian Reform

DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources

DepEd Department of Education

DILG Department of the Interior and Local Government

DPWH Department of Public Works and Highways

DRR disaster risk reduction

DRRM disaster risk reduction and management

EEPSEA Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia

EO executive order

FLUP Forest Land Use Plan

GIS geographic information system

HLURB Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board

HUDCC Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council

ICE CREAM Integrated Coastal Enhancement: Coastal Research Evaluation and Adaptive Management Project

IEC information, education, communication

LGU local government unit

LLDA Laguna Lake Development Authority

MGB Mines and Geosciences Bureau

NAMRIA National Mapping and Resource Information Authority

NEDA National Economic and Development Authority

NGA national government agency

NGO nongovernment organization

NWRB National Water Resources Board

PAGASA Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration

PCUP Presidential Commission for the Urban Poor

PD presidential decree

PENRO Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Office

List of Abbreviations

PES payments for ecosystem services

PHIVOLCS Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology

PO people’s organization

RA republic act

REAP Resource and Environmental Economics Foundation of the Philippines, Inc.

REDAS Rapid Earthquake Damage Assessment System

REECS Resources, Environment and Economics Center for Studies, Inc.

RIDF rainfall intensity-duration-frequency

UP NCTS University of the Philippines National Center for Transportation Studies

UP SURP University of the Philippines School of Urban and Regional Planning

UPLB University of the Philippines Los Baños

UP-NCPAG University of the Philippines-National College of Public Administration and Governance

UPV University of the Philippines Visayas

USAID United States Agency for International Development

9

Climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction are inherently local undertakings that require significant levels of investment of resources.

The cost of not taking immediate and calculated action is very high and persistent. In light of these, the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) and the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) are presently preparing a manual and have issued directives to local government units to update their Comprehensive Land Use Plans (CLUP) and other local framework plans in order to integrate climate change adaptation (CCA) and disaster risk reduction (DRR) measures to such plans. These undertakings require both coordinated long-term planning and immediate stopgap measures.

The Resource and Environmental Economics Foundation of the Philippines (REAP) agrees with national entities that such local undertakings will need technical support in defining appropriate long term and immediate measures as well as in conducting assessments. These needs guided the theme of REAP’s fifth annual conference held from March 31 to April 1, 2011 at Traders Hotel, Pasay City. The conference aimed to acquaint local planners as well as technical and academic individuals on current development, challenges, opportunities and knowledge on CCA and DRR integration in local planning, using the watershed as the planning unit, so that efforts of both groups are focused and matched.

Conference Rationale

Conference Objectives

1. To bring local government managers and planners together to interact with technical and academic groups to discuss challenges, opportunities and gaps in integrating CCA, DRR and watershed management into local development planning.

2. To identify local planning needs and research and development gaps in CCA, DRR and watershed management in program implementation at the local level.

3. To apprise association members of recent development in the implementation of CCA and DRR measures at the local level.

©WWF-Philippines

10

Table 1. Conference ParticipantsLuzon Visayas Mindanao Total

ParticipantsAcademe 17 1 - 18National government agencies 41 1 3 45Local government units 26 1 2 29Private groups/organizations 7 - - 7

Sub-total 99Speakers and sponsors 17 1 - 20*REAP Board Members 19 1 - 20Secretariat and REECS Staff 9 - - 9

Total 136 5 5 148

*Includes 2 resource persons from EEPSEA-IDRC

Conference Structure and Composition

Plenary Discussions Breakout Sessions

• Governance mechanisms and the mandate for CCA/DRR

• Experiences and technical insights in integrating CCA and DRR in local planning/initiatives

• Research results on current adaptation practices

Upland/Agricultural Landscape

Coastal Landscape

Urban Landscape

Plenary presentation of workshop results

The two-day conference included plenary discussions and three simultaneous breakout group sessions on the first day followed by group

workshops on the second day. In particular, the simultaneous sessions were divided into three: upland/agricultural landscape, coastal landscape and urban landscape. Each group included two paper presenters, a moderator and documenter.

Overall, there were 148 conference attendees composed of participants from different sectors (99), speakers and sponsors (20), REAP Board and members (20) and staff (9) from Resources, Environment and Economics Center for Studies, Inc. (REECS) who served as the conference secretariat (Table 1).

In terms of geographical distribution, of the 148 participants, the majority were from Luzon (136 or 91.9%), while 10 came from the Visayas and Mindanao (3.4% or 5 participants each), and 2 participants or 1.4% came from Singapore.

11

Conference Program

Time Topic/Activity PresenterDay 1, April 1, 2011

Moderator: Dr. Corazon Rapera7:00 a.m. Registration REAP Secretariat9:00 a.m. Opening Program Dr. Corazon Rapera

REAP/University of the Philippines Los Baños (UPLB)

Prayer Dr. Germelino BautistaResources, Environment, and Economics Center for Studies

National AnthemWelcome RemarksIntroduction of Participants and Acknowledgment of Sponsors

Dr. Gem B. Castillo Acting President and Chair of the Organizing Committee

Messages: WWF and EEPSEA9:15 a.m. Keynote Address

Advancing the Primacy of Public Interest: Integrating Climate Change Adaptation, Disaster Risk Reduction and Watershed Management in Local Land Use and Development Planning

Assistant Secretary Rolando AcostaDepartment of the Interior and Local Government

9:45 a.m. Presentation 1: Watershed Management and Urban Planning–Steps Toward Integrating CCA & DRR Concerns

Prof. Jose GomezUP School of Urban and Regional Planning

10:30 a.m. Presentation 2: Climate Change and Adaptation to Extreme Climate Events

Dr. Herminia A. FranciscoDirector, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia

11:00 a.m. Presentation 3: Securing the Future: LGU Initiatives and Directions in Environmental Protection and Disaster Risk Management

Hon. Rene Gaudiel Mayor of Bayawan City, Negros Oriental

12:00 noon Lunch1:00 p.m. Presentation 4: Earthquake and

Tsunami Preparedness and Risk Reduction

Dr. Renato SolidumDirector, Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology

1:30-3:30 p.m. Simultaneous Sessions Upland/Agricultural Landscape Moderator: Dr. Zenaida Sumalde, REAP/UPLBDocumenter: Ms. Lilia Raflores, REAP/Department of Environment and Natural Resources

12

Time Topic/Activity PresenterSimultaneous Sessions Urban Landscape

Moderator: Dr. Corinthia Naz, REAP/UP-NCPAGDocumenter: Ms. Anabeth San Gregorio, REAP

Coastal LandscapeModerator: Dr. Rodel Subade, REAP/UP VisayasDocumenter: Ms. Imee Bellen, WWF

3:30 p.m. Survey of LGUs: Gaps in CCA, DRR and Watershed Approaches (by session)

Dr. Zenaida SumaldeREAP/UPLB

4:00 p.m. REAP Assembly/Meeting REAP BoardDay 2, April 2, 2011

Moderators: Ms. Ester Batangan/Mr. Edgardo Tongson8:15 a.m. Assembly and Opening of Sessions Ms. Ester Batangan, REAP8:30 a.m. Recapitulation of Day 1 Ms. Dieldre Harder, REAP8:45 a.m. Presentation 5: Capacity Needs for

Integrating CCA, DRR, and Watershed Approach in Local Planning: The CALABARZON Experience

Mr. Donald James GaweNational Economic and Development Authority-Region 4

9:30 a.m. Presentation 6: Presentation of Survey Results of the LGU Capacity Needs for CCA, DRR and Watershed Management

Dr. Zenaida Sumalde, REAP/UPLB

10:00 a.m. Simultaneous Workshops (Upland, Urban and Coastal)

Upland/Agricultural LandscapeModerator: Dr. Zenaida SumaldeDocumenter: Ms. Lilia Raflores

Urban Landscape Moderator: Dr. Corinthia NazDocumenter: Ms. Anabeth San Gregorio

Coastal LandscapeModerator: Dr. Rodel SubadeDocumenter: Ms. Imee Bellen

12:00 noon Lunch1:00 p.m. Plenary Session: Presentation of

Outputs: Integrating Climate Change Adaptation and Disaster Risk Reduction in Comprehensive Land Use Planning

Mr. Edgardo E. TongsonREAP Facilitator

3:00 p.m. Closing Program Ms. Ester BatanganREAP Facilitator

Closing Remarks Dr. Gem B. Castillo Acting President and Chair of the Organizing Committee

13

Highlights of Plenary Sessions

Dr. Gem Castillo, Acting President, REAP

Dr. Castillo acknowledged the attendance of a mixed group of participants from the academe, local governments, and the private sector:

• Conference sponsors such as WWF-Philippines, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), the LandBank of the Philippines and the Resources, Environment and Economics Center for Studies (REECS)

• Mayors: Hon. Ronnel Lim of Gubat, Sorsogon; Hon. Wilma Gattud of Tuba, Benguet; Hon. Anthony Wooden of Tadian, Mountain Province; and Hon. Rene Gaudiel of Bayawan City, Negros Oriental

• Officers from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Department of Agriculture (DA), and Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR)

• Local government representatives from CALABARZON, Abra, Visayas and Mindanao

• Representatives from the academe (state colleges and universities, private universities)

• Representatives from research institutions

• Private consulting groups

• Members of REAP

Looking forward to a fruitful discussion, he expressed hope that the conference would serve as a venue to enlighten participants in developing their plans and establishing their adaptation measures in light of prevailing climate change.

Welcome Address

©REAP

14

Keynote SpeechAdvancing the Primacy of Public Interest: Integrating CCA, DRR and Watershed Management in Local Land Use and Development PlanningRolando Acosta, Asst. Secretary for Administration, Department of the Interior and Local Government

Discussions on local governance and planning should always be guided by the principle of public interest. This is related to the legal mandate of the

DILG to exercise meaningful and robust supervision of the local government units (LGUs). The mandate is easily understood through its twin dimensions: 1) to empower and capacitate LGUs and 2) to perform oversight by exacting accountability, performance and transparency. It is the department’s firm belief that building a foundation of empowerment and valuing of public accountability translates into responsible government, which is in turn is a key to integrating CCA, DRR and watershed management in the land use plans.

While empowerment requires supporting the capacity development of the LGUs (on matters like CCA, DRR, Millennium Development Goals and local economic transformation), what is more essential in the end is the principle of accountability or the conscious recognition and enforcement of the law and public service delivery standards. This is how supervision is being operationalized today. Capacity oversight on the other hand, is being done through initiatives such as the Local Government Performance Management System, Seal of Good Housekeeping, Millennium Development Goals Scorecard, Policy Audit and Full Disclosure, and Incentives and Awards.

Through a memorandum order, the President directed the DILG to assess the level of disaster management preparedness of the LGUs and to inspect the condition and soundness of their infrastructure projects and public buildings. However, the department does not have the capacity to come up with a disaster preparedness index, as well as the capability to define the condition and soundness of infrastructure in the engineering sense. Instead, efforts were focused on the audit, which includes leadership structure and guide to action (contingency plan), trained personnel, equipment and evacuation centers. Nevertheless, instead of the typical action of auditing information and telling LGUs what to do, what is needed is a reverse strategy of engagement. This would require LGUs to assess their expertise, build multiple scenarios based on hazards and match it with the level of capability, and then scale up their capability in keeping with multiple scenarios developed by experts. A complete anatomy of disaster preparedness should not only focus on institutions but also on the service delivery capability of the LGUs and community preparedness.

What is also important is the formulation of an integrated land use plan at the provincial level for all cities and municipalities. CCA, DRR and watershed management need to be consistent with the framework for governance. In integrating these concepts into the CLUP, interaction with other dimensions or pillars of governance must be noted because these also impact upon the actions or inactions of government. In the end, what constitutes a conceptual and operational test of a responsible government is an LGU that has an outcome-oriented development, invests in the quality of human capital, promotes a favorable investment climate, and protects the integrity of the environment.

15

Plenary Presentations

Plenary Presentation 1

Watershed Management and Urban Planning–Steps Toward Integrating CCA and DRR ConcernsProf. Jose Gomez, UP School of Urban and Regional Planning

Prof. Gomez discussed watershed management and urban planning as applied to the development of a knowledge

product commissioned by WWF for Sta. Rosa, Laguna. Elements that went into the writing of the manual or knowledge product were enumerated. The project compiled various sets of technical information and made them more accessible and digestible to policymakers, planners, local chief executives and concerned laypersons.

Specifically, the elements that went into the knowledge product are:

• socioeconomic background or profile of Sta. Rosa, including relevant development issues and concerns;

• science of watershed planning, including five factors affecting hydrological balance (amount of rainfall, how much of it evaporates, how much runs over to the surface, how much is the groundwater recharge, and storage capacity of the soil);

• climate change impacts on the water cycle and the water characteristics of the site; and

• exacerbating factors such as massive groundwater depletion that leads to subsidence and polluted water infiltration, multiple and uncontrolled water pollution sources, and unregulated competition for water resources.

By looking at the flood susceptibility map of Sta. Rosa and the flooding event patterns, planners will be guided on the type of flood that they need to prepare for (e.g., the ones that come less frequently are more intense and more destructive). It would also help them build the right type of infrastructure and manage emergencies in case of delays or a lag time between the event and peak discharge of flood. To address flooding concerns, planners can consider some general approaches in building infrastructure (e.g., low-impact and “green” building approaches, refitting or replacing infrastructure for more intense climate events). These approaches are designed to restore and retain hydrologic characteristics as closely as possible to their natural patterns prior to “development” and to foresee the environments’ capacity to sustainably meet the growing needs of humans and other living organisms.

©W

WF/

Gre

gg Y

an

16

Land use plans and watershed management strategies need to be climate change and DRR-responsive, and integration1 is needed. This means avoiding or removing built-up development from hazardous areas, removing elements at risk (people and property) and reducing vulnerability. While it is possible to implement CCA and DRR without focusing too intensely on the watershed, a good knowledge of site hydrology and biology can translate to significant cost reductions.

In conclusion, he asserted the need for studies to have a sound basis, for a mental ability to see things at various perspectives or lenses, and for behavioral change to take place on and off the job. A holistic integration should also adopt unusual perspectives such as looking at development beyond the foreseeable lifetime of the decision maker and planner, taking into account other living organisms in the watershed, and projecting worst case scenarios given current consumption trends and ideas of the “good life.”

Plenary presentation 2

Climate Change and Adaptation to Extreme Climate EventsDr. Herminia A. Francisco, Director, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia

Dr. Francisco shared two EEPSEA research initiatives on climate change: 1) a climate change vulnerability mapping; and 2) an adaptation study done in

five Southeast Asia countries.

The first study generated a vulnerability map Southeast Asia which included 590 provincial or sub-national units. Three dimensions of vulnerability were used

to come up with a composite index for vulnerability: climate hazards (typhoon, flood, drought, landslide and sea level rise), sensitivity (population density and ecological vulnerability) and adaptive capacity (socioeconomic, technology and infrastructure). The model, however, excludes institutions due to unavailable data.

Knowing which of these elements contribute to vulnerability in general or to sensitivity in particular informs the LGUs on the type of interventions needed so that limited resources can be put into best use. For instance, if climate hazards dominate vulnerability, then LGUs can invest in protection or relocation. However, one of the major limitations of

the study is that it considered only past events (20-25 years of climatic patterns) and did not include future scenarios. Thus, the analysis will be extended in the next phase to incorporate the probability of different futures2 and develop the Climate Change Risk Vulnerability Map.

1 This could occur at three levels: inter-agency perspectives (cross-cutting plans and a coordinated bureaucracy), physical integration with infrastructure, and time horizon (reconciliation of short-term and long-term initiatives).

2 What are the different outcomes and under what conditions will it happen? Are we prepared for that? The cost of intervention could be determined by: Probability of outcome x expected value of damages x expected loss/damages from uncertain incomes. This would answer the question, “if we do these interventions, how by much will it reduce the risk or how much of the damage is reduced?”

©W

WF/

Mav

ic M

atill

ano

17

The second study dealt with Southeast Asian households’ adaptive capacity to reduce disaster vulnerability. It answered basic questions such as how people cope with extreme climate events and what factors determine the adaptation choices of households. To respond to these, the study identified four general household adaptation measures: soft structural (e.g., tying their pole into a tree), behavioral (e.g., storing food at the roof), technological (e.g., early warning systems), and financial (e.g., buying crop insurance). These adaptation choices were classified as either reactive or pro-active.

Results showed that households that adopt reactive measures are generally poor, less educated, and have low access to information channels, among other characteristics. On the other hand, pro-active adopters are those who experienced more climate change events in the past, have permanent house structures, have more access to information channels, and have higher social capital. Analysis further showed that households who did pro-active measures were able to avert damages significantly more than those who only did reactive measures. Nonetheless, knowing how households behave does not provide much information of what has to be done next. The subsequent stage of the study would be to analyze the behavior of people or the basis of their decision-making. Towards this end, researchers are encouraged to work directly with the LGUs for policymaking.3


Securing the Future: LGU Initiatives and Directions in Environmental Protection and Disaster Risk Management Hon. Rene Gaudiel, Mayor of Bayawan City, Negros Oriental

In the past, the hinterlands and urban areas of Bayawan City were plagued

with environmental and natural resource problems such as deforestation, soil erosion, flooding, improper waste disposal/open dumping, poor sanitation, and lack of clean water. Realizing the need to do something to address these issues, the city began laying the groundwork for change.

Their first initiative was the development of their Forest Land Use Plan (FLUP) which started in 2003 under the EcoGov project of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and DENR. The FLUP project was composed of four main components: the Bayawan Riverbank Rehabilitation and Management Program, issuance of individual property rights through a formalized co-management agreement with DENR in 2004, development of

3 The goal is to involve LGUs in identifying future scenarios and for research findings to serve as an input in improving their decision-making, including that of natural resource managers.

Pho

to: L

GU

Bay

awan

City

18

water production areas to arrest grassland fires, and the rehabilitation of denuded critical watersheds such as the Danapa watershed.4

To achieve environmental protection and food security, Bayawan City invested on long-term projects such as communal irrigation systems and water supply improvements. The city also promoted organic agriculture, strategic agroindustrialization, and homegrown ventures such as biodiesel processing. On the other hand, addressing its solid waste management concerns required additional investments including the 27-hectare waste management and ecological center, sanitary landfill facility, materials recovery facility, composting facility, and a conventional septage treatment facility (lagoon type).

The city’s sanitation battle plan further includes having decentralized wastewater treatment systems through constructed wetlands in the peri-urban areas. It pioneered the LGU-managed project on wastewater treatment in a Gawad Kalinga Village that benefited 676 households. It also adopted the ecosan strategy of on-site treatment using Urine Diversion Dehydration toilets in the hinterlands.

Besides addressing food, water and sanitation concerns, the city government created the City Public Safety Office, which also serves as its Disaster Operations Center. Its activities cover all aspects of disasters from preparedness, mitigation, response and rehabilitation to prevent or at least minimize the impact of disasters to the community. This is complemented by infrastructure support (e.g., protective seawalls, heightened spillways, drainage and flood control) and rebuilding of communities hit by the flood.

These local development initiatives have won the city several prominent awards, one of which is the Hall of Fame Award for Best Component City (2008-2010) given by the National Disaster Coordinating Council.


Earthquake and Tsunami Preparedness and Risk Reduction Dr. Renato U. Solidum Jr., Director, Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (PHIVOLCS)

The world has experienced many devastating earthquakes such as the 1990 Luzon earthquake and 2011 earthquakes in Japan and Myanmar.

Several hazards associated with these quakes include ground rupture, ground shaking, liquefaction, landslide, fire, and tsunami.

Lessons learned from these global disaster events are the need for:

• appropriate disaster preparedness and development planning under appropriate scenarios

• appropriate land use and development plans that need to be applied not only because of rapid growth but also because of unplanned development

4 Besides being a potential source of water supply, the watershed is also being developed for eco-tourism and aquaculture inland hatchery.

©W

WF/

Lory

Tan

19

• safer construction for critical facilities (e.g., houses, schools, hospitals, public buildings)

• earthquake-resistant critical facilities (including those needed for governance such as Malacañan Palace, Senate and Congress)

• increased awareness and preparedness for infrequent but devastating events

• training on response (e.g., search and rescue, medical response) • preparedness at the national and local levels• public-private sector collaboration to prepare for and reduce risks from

earthquakes and tsunamis

It was noted that Filipinos typically prepare for typhoons because these happen frequently but do not prepare for earthquakes and tsunamis. Yet, the country has existing trenches where strong earthquakes can occur5 and there have also been past tsunami incidences. Given this, it is important to note the three elements of risk reduction: hazards, exposure and vulnerability. While there is nothing that can be done about hazards, efforts can be made to reduce exposure and vulnerability. To prepare for earthquakes and reduce risk, the first level of action is self-help or individual/family preparedness, such as building safer houses. The second is mutual help, which refers to community/organizational preparedness, evacuation, emergency response plan and drill, information management, etc. The third level is governance. This includes legislation, building regulations and land use planning, construction and retrofitting of public buildings and infrastructure, building of emergency shelters and having a disaster information system. Ordinary citizens are part of governance and are therefore also part of the blame when disasters happen.

For the part of PHIVOLCS, it offers four general services: warning and advisory on volcanic and earthquake hazards, hazard and risk mapping, research and development, and disaster preparedness and risk mitigation. PHIVOLCS has the capacity to detect earthquake and tsunamis (like the one that occurred in Japan)as well as anticipate the magnitude of the tsunami’s impact to be able to issue alert levels to affected communities.

In DRR, it should always be kept in mind that hazards cannot be prevented but the impacts can be minimized. Everyone has a capability to do something and choose his/her own level of participation.


Capacity Needs for Integrating CCA, DRR, and Watershed Approach in Local Planning: the CALABARZON ExperienceMr. Donald James Gawe, NEDA Region 4

National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) Administrative Order 1, Series of 2012 directs local governments, “particularly the provinces, to

adopt and use the DRR Guidelines to enhance natural disaster risk reduction efforts in the local development planning process.” These guidelines specifically

5 Dr. Solidum noted that while the Philippines has not yet experienced a really strong earthquake, the faults are already storing up energy and movements can unleash such energy in a big manner such as 7.2 magnitude earthquake.

20

refer to the Guidelines on Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction in Subnational Development and Land Use/Physical Planning developed by NEDA. Since the guidelines provide the framework for DRR, all national government agencies (NGAs) providing technical assistance are encouraged to base their actions on these guidelines for coherence. However, there is still a need to integrate the guidelines on provincial/local planning expenditure (which came first) with the DRR guidelines in the next planning cycle.

In the mainstreaming process, the drivers of development (e.g., population, economic activity, and physical resources/transport) are identified as well as their observed impacts on services and land use changes. Based on the situational analysis, development objectives/targets/strategies and PPAs6 are determined. These are considered in the investment planning process where PPAs are prioritized given available budget. However, there is a disparity between the LGU plans and investment programs, which hopefully the memorandum circular would be able to address.

There is a need to incorporate the DRR perspective (which looks at processes such as hazard characterization, consequence analysis, risk estimation and risk evaluation) not only in the situational analysis but also in criteria-setting to ensure that this is embedded in LGU plans, programs and activities. For instance, having DRR-enhanced settlements land use planning could help in summarizing development issues. Since disasters do not choose political boundaries, analysis must also include inter-local cooperation.

Identified issues in integrating DRR and CCA in local planning include: awareness building (particularly for the civil society), data,7 skills, institutional mechanism,8 and logistics/funds. To address these, the intended actions are plan preparation (with civil society groups and experts in the planning committee), continuous awareness building, clearly defined roles, reorientation of Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council members, visioning, investment programming9 and monitoring and evaluation. However, there is a lack of initiative in integrating watershed approach to local planning. But if there will be one, the approach also has to be inter-local and holistic.

Plenary presentation 6Presentation of Survey Results on LGU Capacity Needs for CCA, DRR and Watershed ManagementDr. Zenaida Sumalde, REAP/UP Los Baños-College of Economics and Management

Fifteen (15) LGU representatives participated in the survey done to assess LGUs’ capacity needs for CCA, DRR and watershed management. Results

showed that most of the LGUs surveyed are vulnerable to disasters such as

6 Programs, Projects and Activities (PPAs) are tentative lists of interventions that address problems and enhance the potential of the LGU. It considers resources needed to implement these interventions.

7 He emphasized the lack of data in the LGUs and the need for information sharing as well as enhancing knowledge on mapping tools and statistical software to aid in data analysis and management.

8 Based on a report from the Office of Civil Defense, 73% of Calabarzon cities and municipalities have completed their advocacy activities, 43% on organizing DRRM and 15% in creating DRRM offices. The challenge is the setting up of a mechanism to achieve a synchronized operation.

9 Investment programming requires having the skills to generate more income such as joint ventures and other financing mechanism, instead of depending on government subsidy or IRA.

21

Table 2. Disasters Experienced (n=15)Disaster Number % Year Estimate of Damage

Typhoons 13 (87) 2004-2010 Yes = 5Flooding 13 (87) 2004-2009 Yes = 4Earthquake 10 (67) 1990/2010/2011 No estimateLandslides 11 (73) 2004-2009 Yes = 4Flashfloods 11 (73) 2008-2010 Yes = 4Drought 5 (33) Not stated NoTornado 2 (13) 2008-2010 YesTsunami 1 (7) 2011 No estimateWildfires 2 (7) 2004-2009 No

Table 3. Biological Hazards Experienced (n=15)Biological Hazard Number % Year Estimate of DamageDengue 10 (67) 2007-2009 NoneMalaria 6 (40) 2007-2009 (frequent) NoneTyphoid fever 3 (20) 2006 (frequent) NoneCholera 3 (20) 1995 NoneRed Tide 1 (7) Not specified NoneMeasles 1 (7) 2010 None

Disasters experienced by most LGUs:

• Strong/damaging typhoons (87%)

• Flooding (87%)

Biological Hazards:

• Dengue (67%)

• Malaria (40)

Most LGUs do not have the estimate of damage

Summary

Results of Capacity Needs Survey of LGUs

strong/damaging typhoons and flooding. In terms of biological hazards, cases for dengue (67%) and malaria (40%) top the list. Despite the prevalence of these hazards, majority of the LGUs do not have estimates of the damages.

To aid in disaster preparedness, most maps available to the LGUs are political boundary maps (87%), land use maps (80%) and zoning maps (73%). These are usually included in the Comprehensive Land Use Plans (CLUPs) of cities and municipalities. On the other hand, the least available maps include rainfall maps, hydrology maps, tenure maps, elevation and land cover maps.

All LGUs collect vital socio-economic information on local infrastructure and population. However, more than half of the respondents did not have data on migration and industries. They also face constraints with their local plans and programs such as climate change adaptation, plans related to Clean Water Act, forest land use plan and watershed management plan. In general, local plans and programs suffer from inadequate manpower and training as well as lack of multi-stakeholder mechanisms.

22

Table 4. Types of Maps Available at LGU Map Number % Remarks

Political Boundary Map (barangay level)

13 (87) 1991, 2000 (Included in CLUP and updating in progress), 2008, 2010

Land Use Map 12 (80) 1987, 1998, (on-going revision) 2000, 2001, 2005

Zoning Map 11 (73) 1988 (on-going revisions) 2001, 2004, 2010, 2005 (resubmitted to SP)

Topographic Map 10 (67) 2000, 2001, 2003, 2010 (NAMRIA)Slope Map 8 (53) 1998, 2003.Settlement map 8 (53) (one with spot map only) 1995, 2000,

2003, 2008, CBMS, 2010Soil Map 5 (33) 1998, 2000, 2001Geologic Hazard Map 4 (27) From MGB, REDAS, 2008, 2010Infrastructure Map 4 (27) 2000, 2010Flood Map 4 (27) 2002, 2009, on-going draftingElevation Map 3 (20) 2001, 2003Land cover/Vegetation Map 3 (20)Tenure Map 2 (13) 2008Hydrology Map 1 (7)Rainfall Map - -

Most commonly available maps:

• Political Boundary (87%)

• Land Use Map (80%)

• Zoning Map (73%)

Least available maps:

• Rainfall Map (0)

• Hydrology Map (7%)

• Tenure Map (13%)

• Elevation and Land Cover Maps (20%)

Summary

Table 5. Socioeconomic InformationMap Number %

Local Infrastructure 15 (100)Population 15 (100)Settlement 11 (73)Employment 9 (60)Migration 7 (47)Industries 7 (47)Health, Education, services 1 (7)Others (27)

Most commonly socioeconomic information:

• Local Infrastructure (100%)

• Population (100%)

Least available maps:

• Migration (47%)

• Industries (47%)

Summary

23

Table 6. For each of the following program/plans does the LGU have (n = 15) (% with Yes response)Plans and Programs

An Office in charge

Adequate manpower

Skills LGU budget

Equipment Ordinances/Resolution

Multi-Stakeholder mechanisms

Risk Assessment

47 27 47 60 47 47 30

Solid Waste Management Plan

93 53 47 80 60 93 53

Food Security Progrm

47 40 40 47 40 47 40

Updated CLUP 67 33 53 60 33 67 40Early Warning and Emergency Alert System

53 27 40 47 47 53 20

DRRM 67 40 60 87 67 53 53Clean Water Act-related

33 13 13 33 27 7 27

Climate change adaptaion

20 7 7 27 7 0 20

Watershed Management Plan

60 27 40 40 27 40 27

Forest Land Use Plan

33 20 20 20 20 20 20

Disaster Rehabilitation Plan

47 33 40 47 33 27 33

Others Banning the use of plastic for one LGU

Plans and Programs with most constraints:

• Climate change adaptation

• Plans related to Clean Water Act

• Forest Land Use Plan

• Watershed Management Plan

Most cited constraint for all plans and programs:

• Adequate manpower

• Multi-stakeholder mechanism

• Skills training

Summary

24

Open Forum Highlights: Plenary Presentations

Funding local initiatives. Based on previous experiences of local governments as well as some suggestions from conference participants, there are various ways by which local governments can source and maximize funds for their CCA and DRR-related initiatives. These include seeking project funding from international or local donors as well as funding through the local budget (as much as 70% of LGU calamity funds may be used for preparedness activities). Projects may be implemented by phase to spread out the need for huge outlays and implemented directly by the LGU instead of contracting them out. Projects may also be designed to have livelihood or economic benefits, and beneficiaries may co-finance through amortization arrangements.

Generating or accessing information. Participants, especially the LGU representatives, expressed interest in ways to access and use technical information such as hazard maps. PHIVOLCS, which offers hazard and risk mapping services, provides training for local governments on the use of REDAS, or the Rapid Earthquake Damage Assessment System, a noncommercial, GIS-based software for computing hazards and preparing scenarios. Local governments may use this software to build a database of their critical and at-risk facilities and draw up impact scenarios based on known or expected hazards in their area. For geo-hazard maps, which may be needed for evaluating infrastructure projects, LGUs may request copies from the DENR’s Mines and Geosciences Bureau.

In order to generate other technical information that are needed in developing CLUPs, LGUs belonging to the same watershed may consider working together and pooling their resources so they can afford to tap the needed technical expertise to do the study for them.

Information dissemination. It is important to spread technical information as well as experiences and lessons learned on CCA and DRR, especially to local governments. It was suggested to hold similar conferences at the regional level, where local governments can more easily participate and share in the costs. This will also ensure that the conference design is suited to address local needs.

The importance of considering indigenous knowledge, systems and practices in CCA and DRR was also raised and acknowledged. Participants also suggested the use of standard communication materials, which may be developed at the national level and disseminated to local governments.

Knowledge products from past projects or local initiatives may be compiled and disseminated (examples given are the climate change school modules

©R

EA

P

25

developed by the University of the Philipines-Los Baños with Albay province and materials on coping mechanisms in DRR developed by a Food and Agriculture Organization-funded project implemented by the Department of Agriculture in Bicol).

NEDA planning manual. NEDA is working with HLURB in developing new guidelines for updating of CLUPs. LGUs that have completed or almost completed their CLUPs or other local plans (Provincial Development and Physical Framework Plan) may have to integrate some supplements if their planning documents have elements that are different from those provided by the new guidelines.

©W

WF/

Gre

gg Y

an

26

Highlights of Breakout Sessions

Session A: Upland/Agricultural LandscapeModerator: Dr. Zenaida Sumalde, REAP/UPLBDocumenter: Ms. Lilia Raflores, REAP/DENR

A Reference Guide for Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency (RIDF) Tables and Curves for the Laguna Lake BasinMr. Edgardo Tongson, Director, WWF Philippines

Daily rainfall data from manual sources (rain gauges) and telemetries observed at rainfall stations within the Laguna Lake sub-region were combined and

harmonized to obtain information that planners and decision makers can use. Rainfall intensity for 2, 5, 10, 20, 25, 50 and 100-year return periods were calculated to generate iso-plubial maps. LGUs within the basin can use these maps in the design and analysis of major flood control works (diversion channel and retention/detention ponds), drainage system components (canals, pipe and box culverts, etc), bridges and other river crossings.

The study showed that the new rainfall intensity-duration-frequency (RIDF) tables would provide better estimation of peak discharges. This provides relevant input to flood control management, planning and design of hydraulic structures as well as to flood risk and damage analysis. In general, the study recommended that: 1) RIDF tables and curves of the synoptic stations within and around the Laguna Lake Basin should be updated by the Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA) using the latest year (at least 2009) to account for higher rainfall intensity, 2) a program to upgrade the EFCOS telemetry system (Effective Flood Control Operation System) and to install new stations within the basin for the next five years should be formulated and implemented, and 3) daily rainfall data of other stations must be updated to the same year and RIDF estimates should be re-computed to minimize bias. Updating the RIDF tables on all stations should also lead to the updating of isoplubial maps.

©REAP

27

Analysis of Flooding and Rainfall Events in Laguna de Bay Basin through Hydrologic Monitoring and ModelingMr. Emiterio Hernandez. Laguna Lake Development Authority

To determine the effectiveness of possible flood control structures in properly managing the flow and height of water in the Laguna Lake basin area, the

study assessed the impacts of infrastructure development on the lake’s hydraulic regime. The construction of the Parañaque Spillway is one of the simulation scenarios considered. Result shows that given the assumed dimensions of the spillway, piling up of water during storm events cannot be prevented. However, it can control water build up before the typhoon, leading to less extreme water levels after the typhoon. It can also effectively reduce water during flood recession. Nonetheless, the feasibility of this option needs careful study. It must also fit with the overall master plan and should use existing knowledge on water system functioning. The spillway has to be combined with other measures such as improved catchment management, creation of floodplain storage in the Marikina catchment and dredging of Pasig, Napindan and small tributaries.

The effect of northern lakeshore dike on water level and circulation was also evaluated, including the predicted velocity changes of shoreland reclamation. Another scenario considered was a five-meter sea level rise in Manila Bay, which is projected to increase water level in the lake by two to three meters as well as increase salinity intrusion. This also leads to the need to revisit existing hydrologic design parameters and standards to consider changing climatic conditions. Also, steps need to be taken to address uncontrolled development along floodplains such as Metro Manila, since it reduces

the flood carrying capacity of waterways and increases flood heights and flood hazards in areas beyond encroachment.

In general, to avert floods, water must be given space through retention basins and floodplain protection, deepening of the Napindan Channel, and other alternative options such as dredging of river mouths, creation of other storage areas and optimization of flood control structures and reservoirs.

Pho

to: L

LDA

28

Open Forum Highlights: Upland/Agricultural Landscape

Watershed protection. Participants expressed interest in the watershed protection and management aspect of Laguna Lake, as well as other important watersheds that provide water to low-lying areas. For LLDA, they work with local governments and civil society organizations in implementing re-greening programs. Setting up payments for ecosystem services (PES) arrangements, where water users in the lowlands pay for protecting the watershed in the uplands, is one possible way of addressing watershed protection needs. However, institutional mechanisms for payments for environmental services are not yet in place.

Planning and prioritization. The master plan for Laguna Lake is being developed by LLDA with UP Planades. The master plan will define the priority programs and projects for the basin. It was also pointed out that it is necessary to integrate the public- and private-initiated projects. The usual practice in the Philippines is for government to plan for the public space while the private sector plans for the private space. However, problems do not recognize boundaries. In other countries, government prepares the development plan for the area and the plans of the private sector for their properties follow the government’s requirements. The private sector must also internalize the cost of its contribution to flooding (flood neutral concept).

Session B: Coastal LandscapeModerator: Dr. Rodel Subade, REAP/UP VisayasDocumenter: Ms. Irene Belen, WWF

Challenges, Opportunities and Issues in Integrating CCA and DDR in the Coastal LandscapeMr. Ronnel Lim, Mayor of Gubat, Sorsogon

The municipality of Gubat in Sorsogon province is endowed with beautiful beaches fronting the Pacific Ocean. However, its location, exacerbated by

highly dense population within its flood prone zone, renders it highly vulnerable to climate change hazards. Some of its villages are being confronted with problems on coastal erosion and defective infrastructure such as damaged seawalls and septic tanks.

©R

EA

P

29

To meet the challenge of sea level rise, the most common solution of the LGU is to build seawalls. Besides being an expensive undertaking (PhP39M in 1995 prices), seawalls provide a false sense of protection. A World Bank study conducted in the municipality recommended that hard infrastructure is not enough even if the LGU can afford it. It has to be complemented with soft infrastructure such as enhanced natural protection systems through seagrass restoration or coral reef protection. Towards this end, the municipality is working to establish marine protected areas to protect its natural protection systems, especially in the high-risk zones.

Another challenge faced by the municipality is the dearth of relocation sites. The land it acquired in 2008 for future relocation site of informal settlers was declared by the DENR-MGB an unfit for settlement after a geo-hazard mapping was done in the area in 2009.

They are also trying to follow the mandate under the DRRM law for every LGU to have a Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Office. But given personal service limitations, the municipality cannot hire additional employees (they already reached the 45% PF limit set by DILG). The next available option is to tap an existing staff of the planning office. However, since this is an extra work that holds a huge responsibility, it is debatable whether this is a good solution.

Building Resilient Seas to Meet the Climate Change ImperativesDr. Porfirio Aliño, Professor, University of the Philippines-Marine Science Institute

Since the 1950s, the Philippines’ coastal fishery resources have experienced rapid decline due to overfishing.

Despite various initiatives undertaken in the past to integrate coastal resource management in national development goals (Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan, Coral Triangle Initiative, etc.), the problem persists and is further exacerbated by the effects of climate change and other oscillations (e.g., El Niño phenomenon).

The Integrated Coastal Enhancement: Coastal Research Evaluation and Adaptive Management (ICE CREAM) Project was established to help build resilient seas. This initiative is implemented in partnership with local governments and is composed of eight projects from six institutions in Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. Overall, the program has three focus themes: coastal integrity, biodiversity and fisheries. It looks at indicators and types of climate change-related exposure and adaptation measures. It also works on building monitoring systems and knowledge-based communities by establishing

©W

WF/

Gre

gg Y

an

30

LGUs and community networks through stewardship arrangements and community participation.

It also uses interrelated modeling/simulation scenarios to look at aspects such as location regimes, wave surges, and movement of fishes from different areas as they adjust to changing monsoon conditions. Analyses done include backtracking of climate conditions (10,000 years past), coming up with area projections, and incorporating LGU performance as one of the incentives to encourage participation. Available decision support tools complement the analysis, including vulnerability assessment and adaptation through GIS overlays and simulation scenarios and adaptive responses at appropriate scales.

Results of these analyses feed into recommendations for adaptive management measures such as coastal zoning guidelines, marine protected area networks, and fisheries management. Dr. Aliño emphasized the need to look at ecosystems as sentinels or “canaries” and learn from the findings of the project so that actions will be done with more discretion, hopefully leading to resilient seas.

Open Forum Highlights: Coastal Landscape

Scenario building and adaptation response. Modeling/simulation of impacts of various conditions (e.g., intensity of storms) given an area’s ecological attributes and management interventions will guide the development of adaptation measures appropriate to the area concerned. Based on these inputs, decisions can be made on soft engineering responses like protecting natural buffers instead of building seawalls.

Packaging technical information. Participants acknowledged the challenge of translating technical information into forms that can easily be understood not only by decision makers but also by local stakeholders such as fishers and residents. The academe is trying to answer this challenge by linking their efforts with NGOs, NGAs and POs that already have the needed communication skills. Suggested communication tools/strategies include using game-like computer simulations, integrating information into school curricula, and establishing community theater groups. It is also important to discuss climate change in terms of how it will directly affect the community and its immediate surroundings.

Possible funding mechanisms. Local governments can raise funds for CCA/DRR by exploring mechanisms like payments for ecosystems services, issuing non-compliance certificates to settlers of hazard-prone areas and imposing fines those that refuse to move out after a given period, employing operations funds for running businesses, and developing tourism areas. Climate change adaptation

©R

EA

P

31

has also been discussed as a component of the government’s conditional cash transfer program, although there is still no clear mechanism in place. LGUs, with assistance from other sectors and partners, can explore other innovative financing approaches which may be used to supplement the LGU calamity and development funds. The new law on disaster risk management (RA 10121) also allows local governments to access up to 70% of its calamity funds to be used for disaster preparedness. Prior to the enactment of this law, the local governments’ 5% calamity fund can only be appropriated after an area is declared under a state of calamity.

Session C: Urban LandscapeModerator: Ms. Corinthia Naz, REAP/UP-NCPAGDocumenters: Ms. Bates San Gregorio, REAP/Ms. Ma. Teresa Agarrado, REECS

Urban Floods, Health, Water, Infrastructure and Epidemics Assessment and MeasuresArch. Felino Palafox Jr., Managing Director/Principal Architect, Palafox Associates

Based on lessons that can be gleaned from past global disasters, disaster preparedness response in construction and management should consider

the worst case scenario. However, the country is ill equipped in responding to natural disasters. From the grim findings of the Metro Manila Earthquake Impact Reduction Study, there is a need to have enough evacuation centers that comply with international standards such as having 1 square meter evacuation area/person or at least 10 hectares. However, we don’t have enough open spaces as well as emergency facilities such as clinic, food and water stations, helicopter pads and temporary shelter for casualties. Poor urban planning in the metropolis (poor oversight of building permits, presence of growing number of illegal settlers along major waterways) is bound to have dire consequences.

As early as 1976-1977, a flood map for Metro Manila was drawn identifying disaster prone areas as well as obsolete drainage and flood control systems. A warning was issued that if development is allowed to take place, appropriate infrastructure has to be built first in these areas. However, the government did not take this warning seriously. While the Manggahan Floodway was constructed, its parallel outfall (Parañaque Spillway) was never built. The spillway was supposed to flush out excess water to Pasig River to avert flooding in Metro Manila and surrounding municipalities of Laguna Lake.

After the 2009 flooding disaster, the Palafox team came up with ideas on adoptive architecture (e.g., float your house) if relocation is not possible. This includes building cities on stilts, particularly those located along floodplains, so

©W

WF/

Lory

Tan

32

that the floodwater could flow underneath. They also proposed some disaster action plans such as securing open spaces, creating disaster proof building zones, implementing land use preparedness for disaster prevention, setting up systems for fighting disasters, preparing disaster policy measures, and promoting comprehensive flood control measures. In terms of current efforts, PHILVOCS is doing hazard mapping, structural audit of public building and bridges, learning best practices from other countries, and other initiatives.

Palafox advocates for green architecture (sky gardens), green energy (sloping ceiling and maximize natural light and ventilation), green technology, and green sustainable development. The vision is building safer towns and communities that are better connected, more accessible, likeable, walkable, convenient, cleaner, compact and meets the cross-dimensional needs of development.

Challenges, Opportunities and Issues in Integrating CCA and DDR in the Urban LandscapeEngr. Honore Jordan, UN Habitat, Sorsogon City

Sorsogon City’s geographical location exposes it to climate hazards such as tropical cyclones, storm surges, increased precipitation, increased

temperature, extreme rainfall/flooding and sea level rise. Recognizing their limited knowledge on climate change as well as limited support for capacity enhancement, the city welcomed partnerships with UN Habitat Philippines through its Cities and Climate Change Initiatives and with UN-GoP Joint Program on Climate Change (MDGF 1656) spearheaded by NEDA. They also looked within localized climate change issues by assessing current and future vulnerabilities to project climate change impacts. The city’s topographic map aided in the simulation exercises of different scenarios for sea level rise (0.5 m, 1 m, 2 m) as well as for the projected level of inundation at urban coastal areas.

The city also undertook greenhouse gas emission profiling, which showed that residential and commercial energy consumers as well as the transport sector are the highest greenhouse gas emitters.

From stakeholder consultations and supplementary research, priority actions per focus area were identified using capacity-based approach in development planning. These include housing and basic services, livelihood and economic development, environmental management and climate/disaster risk reduction. These are considered as “quick wins,” or initiatives/actions that can be done in a short-term with highest impact towards climate change resilience and responsiveness while ensuring sustainable urbanization.

They also embarked on climate change adaptation strategies such as establishing automatic weather stations and using Miracool (heat-shielding) paint on the roofs of elementary school buildings. These measures are supported by local ordinances that integrate climate change in schools and institutionalize mitigation and adaptation in the governance and processes in the city. Climate change issues are also being communicated in different fora and media channels.

Another relevant initiative of the LGU is the updating of their CLUP based on climate change data. The revised CLUP integrates regulations on climate

33

change and disaster resiliency with allowable land use. The policy zone now takes into account three factors: level of risk, topography and use. Coastal/built up areas are considered as hazard prone, inland/agriculture as low risk, upland/agri-forest as medium risk and upland/protected forest as high risk.

Open Forum Highlights: Urban Landscape

Data sources for risk assessments. Sorsogon City used local data from PAGASA in developing their climate change vulnerability studies. Since the city is the demo project of UN Habitat, they have an arrangement with PAGASA for specific technical research in their area to come up with projections and historical records. However, for sea level rise, the only available observation is for Legazpi City and what they have are mostly accounts validated from the community.

Zoning and policies. Policies that are being developed in Sorsogon City take into account the city’s new zoning recommendations. As an example, the city is considering passing a local ordinance that would complement the socialized housing requirements (e.g., houses built in high-risk urban coastal areas must have elevated flooring).

Output of Group WorkshopsThe succeeding tables outline the workshop outputs of the three groups on upland/agricultural, coastal and urban landscapes. These results cover issues, needs/gaps for integration, institutions to guide and provide assistance, applied research and training needs.

©R

EA

P

34

Workshop Results: Upland/Agricultural LandscapeClimate Change

Action PlanDisaster Risk

ReductionWatershed Management

Issues Communication/Information• LGUs not properly

informed on use of calamity fund

• Not all LGUs understand what climate change is

• Low level of awareness at the grassroots level

• Lack of advocacy activities

• Data are not organized to address climate change

Policy/Governance/Planning• No specific/permanent

office and personnel in charge

• No action plan• Climate change not

priority program of LGU• LGU/NGA/NGO

initiatives are sectoral; not complementary or integrated

Funding• Lack of/limited funds to

come up with the plan• No funding for creation of

specific/permanent office

Others• Planting calendar no

longer applicable vis-à-vis traditional practices

• Land tenurial conflict• Site-specific agriculture

related climate responsive interventions, e.g., drought and flood resistant varieties

Communication/InformationCCA and DRR presentations are not laymanized

Policy/Governance/Planning• Not all watersheds have

management plans due to limited budget

• Non-integration of watershed plans

• Watershed management plans covers more than one political unit while CLUP is based on political unit

Needs Communication/Information• Data• Training or technical

assistance• IEC • Institutional mechanism

at LGU level, which allows LGUs to access data from NGAs, other sources

• Guidelines on how to do integration

Policy and FundingOperationalization of the PES

35

Workshop Results: Upland/Agricultural Landscape (continued)Climate Change



Data • Data on vulnerable areas, physical resources

• Inventory of available Appropriate climate change adaptation technologies

• Need for multi-stakeholder mechanism

• Awareness building for barangay leaders on climate change

• LGUs need to be proactive

• Need for integration • Consider watershed

characteristics• Valuation of water

resources

Institutions Providing Assistance

• Foundation for the Philippine Environment gives support to NGOs/POs/IPs on CCA DRR/watershed management as long as they are in line with the foundation’s thrust of biodiversity conservation; can support training needs of LGUs through NGOs

• National Climate Change Commission

• PHIVOLCS• PAGASA• NAMRIA• MGB

Applied Research Needs

Adaptation technologies (simple techniques like rain gauges, etc.)

• Hydrological studies• Siltation studies

Training Needs • GIS applications/mapping• Preparation of hazard

and other related maps• On-the-job training/

technical assistance• Tools on simulations

leading to good land use allocation decisions

• Monitoring and evaluation

36

Workshop Results: Coastal LandscapeClimate Change



What we have • Enabling legal framework and policy environment (RA 9729 or Climate Change Act of 2009)

• National Strategic Framework on CCA

• Initiatives in the development of national plan on CCA

• Various CCA capacity building initiatives

• Enabling legal framework and policy environment (RA10121 or Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010)

• Various DRRM capacity building programs from NGAs, CSOs

• Opportunities to partner with various sectors

• With supporting law such as PD 705, Forestry Code; EO 533 adopting Integrated Coastal Management (ICM) strategy and policy environment

(Note: no law; need to identify who is accountable to the forest/watershed management plan; no agency to take accountability; no institutional framework; except when proclaimed as protected area under the NIPAS Act)• Various initiatives and

programs, instruments on watershed management and ICM

Issues • Inadequate information and knowledge

• Too focused on top-down approach

• Localization• Too many overlapping

environmental laws• Eroding coastlines• Illegal fishing• Flashfloods• Depletion of coastal

resources


• Too many overlapping environmental laws

• Unable to identify hazardous areas

• Identify status of preparedness

• Identify devastation in locality

• Clear planning guidelines

• Proliferation of formal and informal settlers

• Political planning approach on watershed management


• Too many overlapping environmental laws

• Conversion mangroves into fishponds

• Diminishing mangrove areas

Needs/Gaps Communication/Information• IEC• Need for awareness

among indigenous peoples

• Strengthening of information sharing among the various stakeholders/sectors

• Database and information accessibility

• Integration in school curriculum

• Continuous mainstreaming especially in far flung areas

• Climate information dataFunding• Incentive programs• Proper allocation of

funds/legal appropriation• Valuation of damages• Partnerships with various

sectors

Communication/Information• IEC• Strengthening of

information sharing among the various stakeholders/sectors

• Integration in school curriculum

• Continuous mainstreaming especially in far flung areas

• Strengthening grassroots participation in planning processes

• Database and information accessibility

FundingIncentive programsProper allocation of funds/legal appropriation

Communication/Information• IEC• Integration in the

curriculum• Continuous

mainstreaming• Strengthening grassroots

participation database and information accessibility

• Strengthening of information sharing among the various stakeholders/sectors

Funding• Incentive programs• Proper allocation of

funds/legal appropriation• Valuation of damages

37

Workshop Results: Coastal Landscape (continued)Climate Change



Needs/Gaps Policy/Governance/Planning• Strengthening grassroots

participation in planning processes

• Identification and prioritization by LGUs of their CCAs strategies

• Harmonization of existing policies and initiatives

• Revisit the National Building Code

• Opportunity for mixed-use coastal communities –advocate compact development; avoid sprawl

OthersValuation of damagesHarmonization of existing policies and initiativesLocalization

Policy/Governance/Planning• Inter-LGU approach• Establishment of more

protected areas• Harmonization of existing

policies• More deputized

environment officers to ensure nurturing mangroves, etc.

• Application of ecological succession in watershed rehabilitation

• Law to support watershed management beyond PD 705

Institutions Providing Assistance

• PAGASA• DENR• DA• Philippine Ports Authority• BFAR• Donor (Local/

International) Agencies• Academe• Media• Other research

institutions• Climate Change Network• CSOs• CCC

• DENR-MGB• PHIVOLCS• DPWH• Academe• Media• Other research

institutions• CSOs• DRRNetPhils

• DENR• BFAR• LGUs• Private and civic

institutions• Academe• Media• Other research

institutions• CSOs• Private sector

partnerships

Applied Research Needs

• Adaptation measures and mechanisms

• Documentation of traditional knowledge

• Should be tailored fit for the situation in the community

• Water quality assessment of physical, chemical & biological aspects

• Assessment of component/existing local capacity

• Adaptation behavior assessment of household and local communities in the coastal areas


• Should be tailored fit for the situation in the community

• Water quality assessment of physic chemical & biological aspects

• Local capacity to DRRM• Integrate all initiatives

on DRRM from various sectors

• Coastal disaster risk pitching and financing

• Conduct watershed characterization

• Conduct coastal resource assessment


• Pilot implementation of ecological succession on watershed rehabilitation

• Should be tailored fit to the situation in the community

• Water quality assessment of physic chemical & biological aspects

• Financing of gap analysis

38

Workshop Results: Coastal Landscape (continued)Climate Change



Training Needs• Use of climate change

indicators• All stakeholders/sectors,

not only LGUs should undertake training –understanding and skills

• Vulnerability and adaptation assessment

• Risk assessment• Monitoring and evaluation• Planning

• Assessment and mapping (GIS Application)

• All stakeholders/ sectors, not only LGUs should undertake training

• Integrated DRR Assessment & Management

• Vulnerability and adaptation assessment

• Risk assessment

• All stakeholders/ sectors, not only LGUs should undertake training

• Conduct integrated watershed planning approach training

Workshop Results: Urban LandscapeIssues Neds Gaps Applied

Research Needs

Training Needs

Institutions

Priorities of national government do not match priorities of local govt. (e.g., unregulated land use vis-à-vis traffic congestion/intense land use vs. protection of natural resources)

Environmental impact assessment

Integrated land use and transport plan

Traffic impact assessment)

• Training of officials on CCA and vulnerability and adaptation assessment

• Training on REDAS

• Government (DENR, DILG, NEDA, PCUP, HUDCC, HLURB, DAR, NIA, NAMRIA, DepEd)

• Academe (UPD-NCTS -College of Engineering, SURP)

• Research institutions

• NGOs (NGOs (Oxfam, Coastal Care)

• Funding agencies/donors

• Lack of skills for DRRM

• Absence of DRRM Plan

• Different understanding of CCA and vulnerability and adaptation assessment by different sectors

Vulnerability adaptation and assessment tools for different sectors/sub sectors

• Training on CCA and vulnerability and adaptation assessment

• Training on REDAS

39

Workshop Results: Urban Landscape (continued)Issues Neds Gaps Applied

Research Needs

Training Needs

Institutions

• Lack of data and maps or access to these

• Outdated land use maps

Accurate and updated maps/data

• GIS knowledge

• Data (primary and secondary data on municipality and barangay levels

• Difference in figures between NSO and CBMS data

Capacity building (CCA)

Geo-hazard mapping

GIS

Localization of CC issues/laws to suit local scenario

Updated HLURB guidelines for CCA /DRR compliance

Research on updating HLURB guidelines for CCA /DRR compliance

Low awareness of CC issues

IEC at all levels and sectors

Training and seminars on CC at all levels and sectors

Lack of participatory consultations among stakeholders

Multi-stakeholder consultation for esp. for NGA projects

Sanctions for illegal land use conversion

Additional regulations for reclassification and conversion of agricultural lands

Study on economic valuation of lands

Lack of implementation of the plans

Funding for projects

Implementing mechanism to spearhead the crafting of comprehensive area development plan integrating CCA/DRR indicators

Additional manpower (especially CPDO)

40

Workshop Results: Urban Landscape (continued)Issues Neds Gaps Applied

Research Needs

Training Needs

Institutions

• Lack of urban design

• Absence of integrated land use and transport plan

• Lack of plans on worst case scenario per type of hazard

EIA and Integrated Transport Plan

Study of appropriate land use, and urban design and transport plan

Training on sectoral planning, contingency planning

Influx of illegal migrants/ settlers

Need for resettlement areas for rapidly growing urban areas

Reclassification/ rampant conversion of agricultural lands, especially in prime agricultural lands and sloping areas

Use of idle lands through MOA between owners and LGU

Additional regulations for reclassification and conversion of agricultural lands

41

Open Forum Highlights: Workshop PresentationsLack of legal framework for watershed management. There is no strong legal framework for watershed management. While policies such as the NIPAS Act, EO 533, and PD 705 cover watersheds to a certain extent, there is still no entity or governing body which has the mandate or accountability to plan for watershed management. This is an important policy gap, especially for watersheds that cover several provinces or municipalities. For watersheds that are not proclaimed as protected areas, there is no mandate for local governments to develop a watershed plan. The Clean Water Act may be the closest policy that may be used to mandate for watershed management.

Role of government in planning for private lands. Local governments can influence the way that private lands are used for DRR, CCA, and watershed management through the process of developing the CLUP, which include public consultations. Landowners can give their consent for the use of their lands or enter into agreements with local government to facilitate certain land uses.

Managing water resources. While LGUs can pass ordinances regulating the use of their freshwater resources to avoid groundwater depletion, it should be kept in mind that under the Philippine Water Code, this function is under the mandate of the National Water Resources Board (NWRB). LGUs seeking to monitor or regulate their ground water resources should coordinate with the NWRB.

River management. Management plans on riverbank occupation and riverbank enhancement are needed, especially in highly populated urban areas where many people live along riverbanks. Under the law, river easement should be three meters for urban areas and 20 meters for rural areas, although implementation of these requirements is sorely lacking.

Informal settlers. Participants discussed ways to address the problem of illegal settlers encroaching on watershed areas or public/private lands. LGUs are mandated to provide socialized housing to informal settlers and some are able to implement good shelter plans for establishing housing projects. Private landowners can also explore a win-win solution where the landowners would benefit from the overall development of their property on one hand; while on the other hand, informal settlers can own a piece of land with decent housing and access to amenities. LGUs, with the help of private sector, can also exercise control to prevent the growth of informal settlements within their jurisdiction.

©W

WF/

Gre

gg Y

an

Lis

t o

f P

art

icip

an

ts

No.

Nam

ePo

sitio

nO

ffice

Age

ncy

Mai

ling

Add

ress

Con

tact

Nos

.Fa

x

AC

AD

EME

1B

ala,

Jan

ette

P.

Aca

dem

ic F

acul

tyD

e La

Sal

le U

nive

rsity

- D

asm

ariñ

asD

e La

Sal

le U

nive

rsity

, D

asm

arin

as 4

115

046-

416

4531

2B

ande

laria

, Cho

na T

. A

cade

mic

Fac

ulty

De

La S

alle

Uni

vers

ity-

Das

mar

iñas

De

La S

alle

Uni

vers

ity,

Das

mar

inas

411

504

6-41

6 45

31

3B

rione

s, R

omel

U.

Hea

dA

gric

ultu

re a

nd

Agr

ibus

ines

s R

esea

rch

Bat

anga

s S

tate

Uni

vers

ityc/

o B

SU

, Ala

ngila

n C

ampu

s A

lang

ilan,

Bat

anga

s C

ity,

Bat

anga

s 42

00

043-

300

2202

lo

c 10

8

4C

aban

ag, F

raul

ein

MS

Neg

ros

Orie

ntal

Sta

te

Uni

vers

ityD

umag

uete

City

, Neg

ros

Orie

ntal

5C

uare

sma,

Joc

elyn

A

ssis

tant

P

rofe

ssor

Nat

iona

l Col

lege

of

Pub

lic A

dmin

istra

tion

and

Gov

erna

nce

UP

D92

7-90

85

6C

ueva

s, C

herr

y Z.

A

cade

mic

Fac

ulty

De

La S

alle

Uni

vers

ity-

Das

mar

iñas

De

La S

alle

Uni

vers

ity,

Das

mar

inas

411

504

6-41

6 45

31

7Fl

oran

o, E

bine

zer R

. A

ssis

tant

P

rofe

ssor

Nat

iona

l Col

lege

of

Pub

lic A

dmin

istra

tion

and

Gov

erna

nce

UP

DR

m 2

03-M

NC

PAG

Bld

g.,

Uni

vers

ity o

f the

Phi

lippi

nes

Dili

man

110

1 Q

uezo

n C

ity

981-

8500

loca

l 41

7592

6 14

32

8G

uyam

in, M

icha

el

Aca

dem

ic

Teac

hing

Fac

ulty

De

La S

alle

Uni

vers

ity-

Das

mar

iñas

De

La S

alle

Uni

vers

ity,

Das

mar

inas

411

504

6-41

6 45

31

loc

3093

9Jo

vella

no, J

ulie

ta A

. R

esea

rch

Ass

ista

ntA

tene

o S

ocia

l S

cien

ce R

esea

rch

Cen

ter

Ate

neo

de N

aga

Uni

vers

ity05

4-47

2 31

78

10K

arim

, Jun

aid

Ibne

M

. B

udge

t and

M

anag

emen

t S

peci

alis

t

PU

P / D

epar

tmen

t of B

udge

t an

d M

anag

emen

t4F

BM

B-E

Driv

e B

ldg.

, II

Gen

. Sol

ano

St.,

San

M

igue

l Man

ila

490-

100

loc

2626

/234

049

0-10

00

loc

2625

11M

acah

ia, A

lma

H.

Ass

ocia

te

Pro

fess

orB

iolo

gica

l Sci

ence

s D

epar

tmen

t C

olle

ge o

f Sci

ence

D

ela

Sal

le U

nive

rsity

- D

asm

ariñ

as

De

La S

alle

Uni

vers

ity,

Das

mar

iñas

411

504

6-41

6 45

31

loc

3093

12M

ercu

rio, A

irill

L.

Aca

dem

ic F

acul

tyD

e La

Sal

le U

nive

rsity

- D

asm

ariñ

asD

e La

Sal

le U

nive

rsity

, D

asm

arin

as 4

115

046-

416

4531

13P

ecas

o, E

ngr.

Jeric

k P.

Fa

culty

CE

/EN

SE

Dep

artm

ent

Bat

anga

s S

tate

Uni

vers

ityc/

o C

E /

EN

SE

Dep

t.,

BS

U, A

lang

ilan

Cam

pus

Ala

ngila

n, B

atan

gas

City

14Te

jada

, Mar

lyn

L.

Res

earc

h A

ssoc

iate

Ate

neo

Soc

ial

Sci

ence

Res

earc

h C

ente

r

Ate

neo

de N

aga

Uni

vers

ityA

SS

RC

, GF

Dol

an B

ldg.

, A

tene

o de

Nag

a U

nive

rsity

054-

472

3178

No.

Nam

ePo

sitio

nO

ffice

Age

ncy

Mai

ling

Add

ress

Con

tact

Nos

.Fa

x

15Ti

csay

, Mar

iliza

V.

Hea

dK

now

ledg

e R

esou

rces

Uni

tS

EA

RC

AU

PLB

Cam

pus,

Col

lege

, La

guna

049-

536

3459

lo

c 16

104

9-53

6 22

8316

Vela

rio, N

oem

i A.

Facu

ltyC

olle

ge o

f Vet

erin

ary

Med

icin

e an

d A

gric

ultu

ral S

cien

ce

De

La S

alle

Ara

neta

U

nive

rsity

Vict

onet

a Av

e., M

alab

on

City

02-3

30 9

128

loc

123

02-3

30

9203

17Vi

llare

al, F

ranc

is F

. P

rogr

am H

ead

Civ

il an

d S

anita

ry

Eng

inee

ring

Pro

gram

De

La S

alle

Uni

vers

ity

-Das

mar

iñas

De

La S

alle

Uni

vers

ity,

Das

mar

inas

411

502

-710

472

2

18Vi

sta,

Arv

in

Ass

ista

nt

Pro

fess

orD

epar

tmen

t of

Agr

icul

tura

l E

cono

mic

s

UP

LBU

PLB

Rm

. 8, A

g E

con

Bld

g., C

EM

, UP

LB C

olle

ge

Lagu

na 4

031

049-

536

3292

049-

536

3292

LOC

AL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

UN

ITS

Nor

then

Luz

on1

Aga

ge, J

erry

S.

EM

S II

LGU

Tad

ian,

Mt.

Pro

vinc

eTa

dian

, Mt.

Pro

vinc

e2

Gat

tud,

Wilm

a

May

orLG

U T

ubo,

Abr

aTu

bo, A

bra

3W

oode

n, A

ntho

ny D

. M

ayor

LGU

Tad

ian,

Mt.

Pro

vinc

eTa

dian

, Mt.

Pro

vinc

eC

avite

4C

abre

ra, M

erlin

a B

. M

EN

RO

LGU

Sila

ng, C

avite

LGU

Sila

ng, C

avite

LGU

Sila

ng, C

avite

046-

4143

146

5D

el M

undo

, Cor

azon

Z.

D

epar

tmen

t Hea

dM

EN

RO

Mun

icip

ality

of

Imus

ME

NR

O -

Mun

icip

ality

of

Imus

046-

472

3033

046-

471

6612

6G

onza

les,

Man

uel

ME

NR

OLG

U-A

lfons

o, C

avite

LGU

Alfo

nso,

Cav

iteLG

U A

lfons

o, C

avite

046-

863

0000

7

Med

ina,

Erw

in D

. A

dmin

istra

tive

Aid

e II

MP

DC

O-L

GU

C

arm

ona,

Cav

iteM

PD

CO

-LG

U C

arm

ona,

C

avite

MP

DC

Offi

ce M

unic

ipal

ity o

f C

arm

ona,

Cav

ite04

6-43

0 30

0504

6-43

0 30

018

Pur

ifica

cion

, Mild

red

MP

DC

LGU

Car

mon

a, C

avite

LGU

Car

mon

a C

avite

MP

DC

Offi

ce M

unic

ipal

ity o

f C

arm

ona,

Cav

ite04

6-43

0300

504

6-43

0 30

019

Vida

llon,

Virg

ilio

H.

MP

DC

Lagu

na

10A

lmei

da, A

nton

io B

. M

EN

RO

LGU

San

Ped

ro, L

agun

aM

EN

RO

- LG

U -

San

Ped

ro,

Lagu

na86

8-74

01

11G

utie

rrez

, Ros

aly

M.

MP

DC

Mun

icip

al

Gov

ernm

ent o

f Sta

. C

ruz,

Lag

una

Mun

icip

al G

over

nmen

t of

Sta

. Cru

z, L

agun

a J.

P. R

izal

St.,

Esc

olap

ia

Bld

g., P

obla

cion

III S

ta.

Cru

z, L

agun

a

049-

501

3572

049-

501

3572

12M

acab

uhay

, Wal

ter

Cou

ncilo

r/C

hair,

Com

mitt

ee

on E

nviro

nmen

t an

d H

ealth

San

ggun

iang

Bay

anLG

U V

icto

ria, L

agun

a 04

9-55

9 04

33

No.

Nam

ePo

sitio

nO

ffice

Age

ncy

Mai

ling

Add

ress

Con

tact

Nos

.Fa

x

13M

onta

les,

Mon

ita

MP

DC

MP

DO

LGU

Sta

. Mar

ia, L

agun

a04

9-51

1611

14P

ablo

, Dan

ilo

MP

DC

MP

DO

LGU

Sta

. Ros

a, L

agun

a15

San

tos,

Mar

ia P

az G

. M

PD

CLG

U P

angi

lLG

U P

angi

lM

unic

ipal

Gov

ernm

ent o

f P

angi

l, 2/

F M

unic

ipal

Bld

g.,

Bar

anga

y S

an J

ose

Pan

gil,

Lagu

na

049-

5570

252

049-

557

0977

16To

rres

, Tw

ila T

. M

PD

CM

PD

OLG

U L

os B

años

, Lag

una

Offi

ce o

f the

Mun

icip

al

Pla

nnin

g an

d D

evel

opm

ent

Coo

rdin

ator

, Mun

icip

ality

of

Los

Bañ

os, L

agun

a

049-

536

1385

Riz

al17

Bril

lo, S

hery

l C.

Info

rmat

ion

Tech

nolo

gy O

ffice

r I

MIS

City

Gov

ernm

ent o

f Ant

ipol

oM

IS, 2

/F C

ity H

all B

ldg.

, M

.L. Q

uezo

n co

r. C

arig

ma

st.,

Bgy

. San

Roq

ue,

Ant

ipol

o C

ity

695-

1999

695-

1979

18D

elor

itos,

Mar

ia R

uth

M.

Pla

nnin

g O

ffice

r II

MP

DC

- LG

U A

ngon

oM

L. Q

uezo

n Av

e., B

gy.S

an

Isid

ro A

ngon

o R

izal

02-4

51 1

983

02-4

51

1983

19G

abrie

l, K

arla

Mar

ie

V.

IT O

ffice

rLG

U M

untin

lupa

20In

ofre

, Jr.,

Car

los

E.

Exe

cutiv

e A

ssis

tant

II

ME

NR

O-L

GU

Tan

ay,

Riz

alM

.H. d

el P

ilar S

t., T

anay

R

izal

654

1002

654-

1002

21M

endo

za, R

amon

cito

Y.

M

PD

CM

PD

OLG

U S

an M

ateo

, Riz

alG

en. L

una

St.,

Brg

y.

Gui

tong

Bay

an I,

San

M

ateo

, Riz

al c

/o M

PD

C

Offi

ce 2

/F, M

unic

ipal

Hal

l of

San

Mat

eo, R

izal

941

1904

941-

1904

22M

enes

es, C

ynth

ia T

. P

lann

ing

Offi

cer

IVM

PD

OLG

U M

untin

lupa

862

4684

23Vi

llam

or, V

eron

ica

G.

Sup

ervi

sing

A

dmin

istra

tive

Offi

cer

CP

DO

City

Gov

ernm

ent o

f Ant

ipol

o 3

/F, C

ity H

all,

Ant

ipol

o C

ity69

7-03

9469

7-03

94

Que

zon

24Ve

lasc

o, J

r., D

iosc

oro

MD

RR

MO

Offi

ce o

f the

May

orLG

U N

akar

, Que

zon

Sor

sogo

n25

Del

a C

ruz,

Gla

iza

F.

Spo

kesp

erso

nC

limat

e C

hang

e O

ffice

UN

-Hab

itat,

Sor

sogo

n C

ity

No.

Nam

ePo

sitio

nO

ffice

Age

ncy

Mai

ling

Add

ress

Con

tact

Nos

.Fa

x

26H

uend

a, O

rland

o F.

C

PD

OC

ity P

lann

ing

and

Dev

elop

men

t Offi

ceLG

U S

orso

gon

City

Visa

yas

27A

loja

do, A

lain

S.

Exe

c. A

sst.

IIILG

U B

ayaw

an C

ity, N

egro

s O

rient

alM

inda

nao

28D

asila

o, M

arie

tta

EM

S I

LGU

Kor

onad

al C

ity29

lano

s, II

I, N

onito

A. L

Boa

rd M

embe

rS

angg

unia

ng

Pan

lala

wig

anP

rovi

nce

of D

avao

Del

Sur

55

3-41

95

NAT

ION

AL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

AG

ENC

IES

1A

brer

a, M

a. V

icto

ria

V.

Chi

efE

nviro

nmen

tal

Pla

nnin

g an

d P

olic

yE

nviro

nmen

tal M

anag

emen

t B

urea

u, D

EN

RE

MB

Bld

g., D

EN

R C

mpd

. Vi

saya

s Av

e., Q

uezo

n C

ity92

8 88

9392

0 22

43

2A

cay,

Del

fin R

. Fo

rest

M

anag

emen

t B

urea

u - D

ILG

Infre

s P

roje

ct O

ffice

DA

2/F

Jafe

r Bld

g., 1

18 W

est

Ave.

, QC

928-

7605

& 1

5 lo

cal 1

0892

8-76

05

& 1

5

3A

darm

e, V

isita

cion

D.

Sta

ffN

ED

A - R

egio

n 2

4A

lan,

Elv

ira L

. S

taff

NE

DA

- Reg

ion

2Tu

gueg

arao

City

078-

304

1243

5A

lcar

ia, J

osel

ito

Fran

cis

Sr.

Sci

ence

R

esea

rch

Spe

cial

ist

DE

NR

- R

egio

n 7

DE

NR

6B

aldo

sa J

r., C

orne

lio

B.

Adm

in O

ffice

r VD

A - S

peci

al P

roje

cts

DA

- Reg

iona

l Fie

ld O

ffice

2O

/Sec

, Elli

ptic

al R

oad,

D

ilim

an, Q

uezo

n C

ity92

0-17

6792

0-17

67

7B

asal

i, Fr

anci

s G

. C

hief

Pla

nnin

g an

d M

anag

emen

t Div

isio

nD

EN

R -

CA

R80

Die

go S

ilang

St.,

Bag

uio

City

074-

443

9406

074-

443

9406

8C

aisi

p, J

ohn

Wag

uel

B.

P

rote

cted

Are

as

and

Wild

life

Bur

eau,

D

EN

R

Pro

tect

ed A

reas

and

Wild

life

Bur

eau,

DE

NR

9C

onst

anci

o G

. Ala

ma

Reg

iona

l Te

chni

cal D

irect

orD

A - R

egio

n 9

DA

- Reg

ion

9R

FU 9

- Le

nien

za,

Pag

adia

n C

ity06

2-99

1 35

7606

2-99

1 25

3610

Cor

sino

, Elis

eo B

. S

taff

NE

DA

- Reg

ion

211

Cru

z, D

enni

s Jo

seph

A

. S

uper

visi

ng

Agr

aria

n R

efor

m

Pro

gram

Offi

cer

DA

RD

AR

58 D

on B

asili

o, B

autis

ta

Mal

abon

City

482

1395

454

2027

12C

usto

dio,

Car

lo C

. C

MM

OP

rote

cted

Are

as

and

Wild

life

Bur

eau,

D

EN

R

Pro

tect

ed A

reas

and

Wild

life

Bur

eau,

DE

NR

925-

8948

No.

Nam

ePo

sitio

nO

ffice

Age

ncy

Mai

ling

Add

ress

Con

tact

Nos

.Fa

x

13E

nriq

uez,

Kris

zia

Lorr

ain

Sr.

Pro

gram

me

Ass

ista

ntM

DG

F 16

56 P

MU

, A

gric

ultu

re S

taff

NE

DA

- Cen

tral O

ffice

NE

DA

sa P

asig

, 12

Jose

M

aria

Esc

ueva

Driv

e,

Orti

gas

Cen

ter P

asig

City

16

05

631-

2187

477-

3932

14G

apuz

, Edn

a S

PO

Dev

elop

men

t A

cade

my

of th

e P

hilip

pine

s

DA

P, S

an M

igue

l Ave

nue,

P

asig

City

631-

2131

/69

15H

ubill

a, S

hand

y M

. A

gric

ultu

ral

Pro

duct

ivity

S

peci

alis

t

Infre

s P

roje

ct O

ffice

DA

2/F

Jafe

r Bld

g., 1

18 W

est

Ave.

, QC

928-

7605

& 1

5 lo

cal 1

0892

8-76

05

& 1

5

16M

agla

ya, M

ildre

d B

. S

taff

NE

DA

- Reg

ion

217

Mal

ano,

Mel

ody

Ann

E

cosy

stem

M

anag

emen

t S

peci

alis

t II

Pro

tect

ed A

reas

an

d W

ildlif

e B

urea

u,

DE

NR

Pro

tect

ed A

reas

and

Wild

life

Bur

eau,

DE

NR

Que

zon

Ave.

, Dili

man

, Q

uezo

n C

ity92

5 89

4792

5-89

47

18M

alla

re, J

aim

e P.

In

form

atio

n Te

chno

logy

Offi

cer

NA

MR

IALa

wto

n Av

e., F

ort A

. B

onifa

cio,

Tag

uig

City

810-

5460

810-

5460

19M

asal

aysa

y, L

ina

M.

Fore

st M

anag

emen

t B

urea

u-D

EN

R20

Men

doza

, Cec

ilia

PO

DE

NR

DE

NR

21M

endo

za, M

arly

nn M

. C

hief

PA

CA

DP

rote

cted

Are

as

and

Wild

life

Bur

eau,

D

EN

R

Pro

tect

ed A

reas

and

Wild

life

Bur

eau,

DE

NR

925

8950

925-

8950

/ 92

4-60

31

loc

226

22M

esin

a Jr

., Vi

ctor

iano

A

. E

ngin

eer I

II28

4 47

9428

6 61

19

23M

ijare

s, J

oybe

rt F.

M

ines

and

Geo

scie

nces

B

urea

u, D

EN

R24

Muñ

oz, Z

enai

da B

. C

hief

Res

earc

h an

d S

tatis

tics

Div

isio

nD

EN

RVi

saya

s Av

e.

02-9

25 8

278

02-9

25

8278

25O

livas

, Kay

S.

PO

III/C

hief

Pla

nnin

g , M

&E

Pro

j. D

ev’t

Offi

ceD

A - R

egio

nal F

ield

Offi

ce 2

Nur

sery

Cm

pd.,

San

Gab

riel

Tugu

egar

ao C

ity 3

500

Cag

ayan

078-

8443

006

078-

8443

006

26P

ablo

, Ral

ph C

. A

sst.

Dire

ctor

Land

Man

agem

ent

Bur

eau,

DE

NR

Land

Man

agem

ent B

urea

u,

DE

NR

Pla

za C

erva

ntes

, Bin

ondo

, M

anila

243

6651

27P

aral

uman

, Lar

ry

DA

- Reg

iona

l Fie

ld O

ffice

10

Ant

onio

Lun

a st

., C

agay

an

de O

ro C

ity

No.

Nam

ePo

sitio

nO

ffice

Age

ncy

Mai

ling

Add

ress

Con

tact

Nos

.Fa

x

28P

oser

io, L

eono

r A.

Dev

’t M

anag

emen

t O

ffice

r III

Lagu

na L

ake

Dev

elop

men

t A

utho

rity

Km

24

Man

ila E

ast R

oad,

Ta

ytay

Riz

al28

6 61

17

29P

rinci

pe, A

lvin

S

PO

Dev

elop

men

t A

cade

my

of th

e P

hilip

pine

s

DA

P, S

an M

igue

l Ave

nue,

P

asig

City

631-

2135

30P

rinci

pe, E

duar

do

Dire

ctor

III

DE

NR

- N

FOD

EN

R31

Qui

lloy,

Ilde

fons

o 32

Reg

alad

o, R

osar

io

PD

O II

IP

DM

SD

AR

Cen

tral O

ffice

426

7021

33R

otol

, Lum

inad

a C

. E

cono

mic

s D

ivis

ion

Fore

st M

anag

emen

t B

urea

u-D

EN

R34

Rud

inas

, Lou

rdes

O

IC -

Chi

efP

lann

ing

Div

isio

nD

A - R

egio

nal F

ield

Offi

ce

1008

8-22

7 27

403

088-

227

2656

435

Saw

ey, M

artin

a S

UA

RP

OD

AR

- C

AR

Dep

artm

ent o

f Agr

aria

n R

efor

m, C

AR

(DA

R-C

AR

)30

9-26

53

36S

urra

tos,

Tris

tan

SP

OD

evel

opm

ent

Aca

dem

y of

the

Phi

lippi

nes

DA

P, S

an M

igue

l Ave

nue,

P

asig

City

631-

2131

37Ta

may

o, N

onito

M.

Offi

cer i

n C

harg

eO

ffice

of t

he A

ssis

tant

D

irect

orFo

rest

Man

agem

ent

Bur

eau-

DE

NR

Visa

yas

Ave.

Dili

man

.Q.C

928-

9313

/927

-47

8892

8 93

13

38Te

nefra

ncia

, Ma.

B

uena

Vic

toria

T.

Exe

cutiv

e A

ssis

tant

of t

he

Reg

iona

l Dire

ctor

DA

R -

CA

RD

epar

tmen

t of A

grar

ian

Ref

orm

, CA

R (D

AR

-CA

R)

51 N

agui

lian

Roa

d, P

laza

N

atal

ia B

ldg.

, Bag

uio

City

, 26

00

074-

445

4497

074-

300

3821

39Tr

ia, J

uliu

s B

. A

IP T

echn

ical

S

uppo

rtIn

fres

Pro

ject

Offi

ceD

A 2/

F Ja

fer B

ldg.

, 118

Wes

t Av

e., Q

C92

8-76

05 &

15

loca

l 108

928-

7605

&

15

40Vi

lla-V

enan

cio,

Fr

aulie

n S

r. A

grar

ian

Ref

orm

Pro

gram

O

ffice

r (S

AR

PO

)

DA

RD

AR

, Elli

ptic

al R

oad,

D

ilim

an Q

uezo

n C

ity92

8 64

29

41Vi

llega

s, J

an Ir

ish

P.

AIP

Tec

hnic

al

Sup

port

Infre

s P

roje

ct O

ffice

DA

2/F

Jafe

r Bld

g., 1

18 W

est

Ave.

, QC

928-

7605

& 1

5 lo

cal 1

0892

8-76

05

& 1

542

Virtu

cio,

Leo

pold

o S

r. S

cien

ce

Res

earc

h S

peci

alis

t

Min

es a

nd

Geo

scie

nces

Bur

eau,

D

EN

R

Min

es a

nd G

eosc

ienc

es

Bur

eau,

DE

NR

MG

B C

mpd

.,Nor

th A

venu

e,

Dili

man

, Que

zon

City

02-9

26 0

936

02-9

26

0936

43Za

bala

, Nen

ita

Eco

nom

ist I

IP

lann

ing

and

Man

agem

ent D

ivis

ion

DE

NR

Dili

man

. Que

zon

City

925-

1183

No.

Nam

ePo

sitio

nO

ffice

Age

ncy

Mai

ling

Add

ress

Con

tact

Nos

.Fa

x

PRIV

ATE

INST

ITU

TIO

NS

1A

gonc

illo,

Oliv

er

Ene

rgy

&

Env

ironm

ent

US

AID

552-

9828

552-

9997

2C

ruci

o, E

mm

anue

l P.

Env

ironm

enta

l A

dvis

er/

Con

sulta

nt

E.P

Cru

cio

Env

ironm

enta

l P

lann

ers

1210

Bah

ia S

t., P

acifi

c H

eigh

ts/V

ista

Gra

nde,

C

andu

law

an T

alis

ay C

ity,

Ceb

u 60

45

6332

-516

240

7

3G

omez

, Yol

anda

P

rogr

amm

e C

oord

inat

orS

TRE

AM

S o

f Kno

wle

dge

554

27/7

1

4H

inlo

, Ma.

Rhe

yda

P.

Pro

ject

Offi

cer

Foun

datio

n fo

r the

Phi

l. E

nviro

nmen

t77

Mat

ahim

ik S

t., T

each

er's

Vi

llage

, Q.C

.02

-927

9403

02-

9223

022

5Lo

jo, M

s. N

ina

Pre

side

ntA

sian

Cen

ter f

or

Con

tinui

ng E

duca

tion

and

Soc

ial S

olid

arity

Imus

, Cav

ite

6To

gono

n, L

ara

Dire

ctor

Phi

lippi

ne In

stitu

te o

f E

nviro

nmen

tal P

lann

ers

7Tu

mon

ong,

Mal

yn

Sen

ior A

dvis

orE

NR

D P

rogr

amG

IZ2/

F P

DC

P B

ank

Cen

ter,

Levi

ste

cor R

ufino

st.,

S

alce

do V

illag

e, M

akat

i City

892-

9051

to 5

389

2-33

74

SPEA

KER

S/SP

ON

SOR

S1

Aliñ

o, P

orfir

io M

. P

rofe

ssor

UP

Mar

ine

Sci

ence

Inst

itute

2A

ntep

uerto

, Ana

liza

B.

PD

OLa

ndba

nk o

f the

Phi

lippi

nes

3B

elle

n, Im

ee

Pro

ject

C

oord

inat

orW

WF

- Phi

lippi

nes

Que

zon

City

426-

3927

4C

ruz,

Mel

inda

P

DO

Land

bank

of t

he P

hilip

pine

s5

Dap

roza

, Mar

iano

G

IS S

peci

alis

tW

WF

- Phi

lippi

nes

6E

ncar

naci

on,

Ron

nie

PD

OLa

ndba

nk o

f the

Phi

lippi

nes

Land

bank

Pla

za, M

H d

el

Pila

r, M

alat

e, M

anila

528

8541

7Fr

anci

sco,

Her

min

ia

A.

Dire

ctor

EE

PS

EA

8G

audi

el, R

ene

G.

May

orLG

U -

Bay

awan

City

, N

egro

s O

r.03

5-53

1065

0

9G

awe,

Don

ald

Jam

es

NE

DA

- IVA

NE

DA

IV R

egio

nal O

ffice

, R

eal,

Cal

amba

, Lag

una

10G

omez

, Jr,

Jose

E

dgar

do

Urb

an P

lann

erU

P-S

UR

P

No.

Nam

ePo

sitio

nO

ffice

Age

ncy

Mai

ling

Add

ress

Con

tact

Nos

.Fa

x

11G

uab

III, A

lfred

o G

IS S

peci

alis

tW

WF

- Phi

lippi

nes

920

7923

12H

erna

ndez

, Em

iterio

C

. E

ngin

eer I

VLa

guna

Lak

e D

evel

opm

ent

Aut

horit

y13

Jord

an, H

onor

e P

roje

ct

Coo

rdin

ator

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

Pro

ject

-UN

Hab

itat,

Sor

sogo

n C

ity

UN

30

5 40

96

14Li

m, R

onne

l U.

May

orM

unic

ipal

ity o

f G

ubat

,Sor

sogo

n15

Pal

afox

, Jr.,

Fel

ino

Pre

side

ntP

alaf

ox A

ssoc

iate

s16

Pal

afox

, Kar

ima

Pat

ricia

P

artn

er U

rban

P

lann

erP

alaf

ox A

ssoc

iate

s

812

1254

17P

ine,

Rue

l P.

D.

WW

F - P

hilip

pine

s18

Pre

do, C

anes

io

EE

PS

EA

19R

evel

o, J

uliu

s P

roje

ct

Coo

rdin

ator

Pal

afox

Ass

ocia

tes

20S

olid

um, J

r., R

enat

o D

irect

orP

HIV

OLC

SQ

uezo

n C

ityR

EAP

MEM

BER

S1

Aco

sta,

Rom

eo

AD

B/D

EN

R2

Bal

angu

e, T

onie

P

resi

dent

R

EE

CS

3B

autis

ta, G

erm

elin

o R

EA

P/R

EE

CS

4C

astil

lo, G

em

Pre

side

nt

RE

AP

/RE

EC

S5

Dim

agui

ba, J

ustin

R

ache

lle P

. st

uden

tS

t. Lo

uis

Uni

vers

ity,

Bag

uio

City

6E

scov

er, E

mm

a Tr

easu

rer

RE

AP

7H

arde

r, D

ield

re

Con

sulta

ntR

EE

CS

8La

smar

ias,

Noe

la

RE

AP

/RE

EC

S9

Lum

bao,

Lis

a C

hief

of P

arty

US

AID

Phi

ls.

San

itatio

n A

llian

ce,

AE

CO

M

168

Sal

cedo

St.,

Mak

ati C

ity81

9 06

8781

9 06

87

10N

az, C

orin

thia

N

CPA

GU

P D

ilim

an11

Par

aiso

, Dr.

Mel

ly

Cha

irM

aste

r of A

rts in

E

cono

mic

sP

UP

Lots

11&

13, B

lock

4 P

hase

1

Sta

Bar

bara

Vill

as 2

B

aran

gay

Sila

ngan

, San

M

ateo

Riz

al

716

7832

to 4

5 lo

c 35

171

3 70

70

REE

CS

STA

FF/S

ECR

ETA

RIA

T1

Jon

Jose

ph G

. Man

luna

s2

Girl

ie R

uta

3C

athe

rine

Bol

ante

4G

erry

Bal

dago

5B

erni

e B

atay

ola

6Te

resa

Aga

rrad

o7

Ther

esa

Lore

nzo

8M

iche

lle P

alay

payo

n9

Kar

en M

ae M

agtib

ay10

Ele

na M

arie

Ens

eñad

o

No.

Nam

ePo

sitio

nO

ffice

Age

ncy

Mai

ling

Add

ress

Con

tact

Nos

.Fa

x

12P

eñal

ba, L

inda

IA

RD

S, C

PAF,

UP

LBU

P Lo

s B

años

04

9-53

6 32

8413

Rafl

ores

, Lili

a S

ecre

tary

DE

NR

/RE

AP

928

7327

14R

amire

z, M

ark

Ant

hony

P

rogr

am O

ffice

rE

mba

ssy

of J

apan

15R

aper

a, C

oraz

on

Facu

ltyC

EM

UP

Los

Bañ

os16

San

Gre

gorio

, A

nabe

th I.

17

San

chez

, Flo

r M

SIA

RD

S, C

PAF,

UP

LBU

P Lo

s B

años

04

9-53

6 32

8418

Sub

ade,

Rod

elio

P

rofe

ssor

and

In

stitu

te D

irect

orD

ivis

ion

of S

ocia

l S

cien

ces

Uni

vers

ity o

f the

Phi

lippi

nes

Visa

yas

Inst

itute

of F

ishe

ries

Pol

icy

and

Dev

elop

men

t Stu

dies

, B

ayba

y, L

eyte

033-

315

9030

/033

-315

90

33

033-

513

7012

19S

umal

de, Z

enai

da

UP

LB/R

EA

P20

Tong

son,

Edg

ardo

R

EA

P/W

WF

About REAPResource and Environmental Economics Foundation of the Philippines, Incorporated is a non-stock, non-profit association of professionals who are keen to actively participate in and contribute to the formation of sound and appropriate programs, strategies and policies involving natural resource and environmental economics and management concerns.

It is committed to harmonizing economic development, equity, environmental protection and resource sustainability. This requires working closely and interactively with government agencies, NGOs, civil society, industry and other members of the civil society.

We aim to promote critical involvement in discussions concerning the sustainability of environment and natural resources.

Our objectives are as follows:

• to conduct research, training, conferences, and meetings that will support legislators and government chief executives in formulating and implementing sound and appropriate programs, strategies, and policies involving natural resources and environmental management concerns;

• to promote development and institutionalization of environmental economics in tertiary education; and

• to strengthen networking and partnership among and between government agencies, academic, and research institutions, NGOs, business specialists, donor agencies, and international organizations and associations.

Membership to REAP is open to economists and other professionals who are committed to the protection of natural resources and the environment.

For inquiries, please contact [email protected] or:

Resource and Environmental Economics Foundation of the Philippinesc/o REECS, Suite 405, The Tower at Emerald SquareJ.P. Rizal cor. P. Tuazon Sts, Project 4, Quezon City, 1109 PhilippinesTelephone: +632 438-8858Fax: +632 995-0556Website: http://resenviecon.org/

REECS

The 5th Annual REAP Conference was organized by the Resource and Environmental Economics Foundation of the Philippines, WWF-Philippines, and the Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia through the support of Resources, Environment, and Economics Center for Studies, Landbank of the Philippines and the Coca-Cola Foundation.

REAP Conference Proceedings

Documents

Transcript of REAP Conference Proceedings