Environmental Challenges in the Philippines

Abstract

The Republic of the Philippines is one of most exposed countries in the world to many “natural” hazards: earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tsunami, lahar flows, typhoons, flooding, landslides, and sea level rise. Earthquake risks make Metro Manila especially vulnerable, due to the high population density and the poor quality of buildings, partly linked to corruption. This chapter examines the current policies to reduce risk in the metropolis and the scales of vulnerability, both at the national, regional, community and individual levels, focusing on the resilience of people and society when confronted with danger. Their vulnerability is heightened with several forms of environmental degradation, such as deforestation, soil impoverishments, mining impacts, all favoring landslides and floods, as well as the loss in biodiversity, both in maritime and land areas. Despite the establishment of protected areas and natural parks, adaptation to climate change and mitigation of damage remains difficult and requires building up a better institutional resilience.

The Philippines is often described as a melting pot of natural disasters. The archipelago’s exposure to disasters is to a significant extent due to the country’s geographical and geological characteristics. As part of the Pacific ring of fire, it is widely considered as one of the most exposed countries in the world to “natural” hazards (Vergano 2013). Extreme events hitting the country may be climatic in origin (typhoons, floods, droughts, sea-level rise), telluric (earthquakes, tsunami), volcanic (explosive eruptions) or a combination (landslides, lahar). In this regard, the Philippines resemble its archipelagic neighbors Japan and Indonesia , widely exposed to the same calamities, except for typhoons almost non-existent in Indonesia. Different institutions have ranked countries and cities worldwide in terms of risk, vulnerability and resilience. Most of these studies show that the Philippines fare poorly and that Manila is among the world’s least resilient cities (Diola 2014a, b) due to its poor environmental and social adaptive capacity and high vulnerability (combination of high hazards susceptibility, high population density, and insufficient levels of preparedness).

“Natural” hazards leading to disasters occur so frequently in the Philippines that this constant threat is integrated into the daily political, economic and social life of Filipinos to form what can be called a “culture of disaster”: the possibility of death during extreme geophysical events has been normalized as an integral part of the Philippine culture (Bankoff 2003).

Filipinos are used to disasters, but 2013 brought such severe ones that the country was brought to its knees. First came heavy monsoon rains in August, associated with Tropical Storm Trami and Typhoon Utor. Then a Bohol -centered earthquake hit the Visayas in October. Next came Typhoon Haiyan in November—the most powerful typhoon ever to make landfall—striking the final and heaviest blow and affecting ten million people. Its combined winds, rains and tsunami-like waves devastated huge swathes of the country. Communities, already struggling from disasters earlier in the year, were overwhelmed. Five million survivors were left in immediate need of shelter when one million homes were damaged or destroyed as Typhoon Haiyan struck the central Philippines in November 2013, exacerbating a pre-existing housing crisis. The state of the built environment, particularly poor construction and inadequate maintenance in hazardous locations, is a major contributing factor in determining community risk and is often largely responsible for what makes people vulnerable in many disasters. In the current disaster management schemes, the poor are likely to be put last. Conventional risk reduction mitigation methods (land use control, building codes implementation) are failing. A paradigm shift is needed—one that enables poor communities to maximize their limited resources and contribute to risk reduction.

The Philippines is also experiencing much environmental degradation—mainly in the form of deforestation, soil erosion, disruption of hydrological systems, over-exploitation of fisheries, destruction of coral reefs, and extinction of species. These problems are accentuated by the pressures of a large, fast-growing and impoverished population; and they may be more aggravated by climatic change in the wake of the global ‘greenhouse effect’. Moreover, the environmental degradation leads to adverse economic consequences (Myers 1988a, b) that are pervasive and profound—as may be expected in a country where several salient sectors of development are dependent upon the natural-resource base. In the long run, indeed, environmental degradation could well preclude the Philippines’ prospects for sustainable development.

1 A Most Exposed and Vulnerable Country

The Philippines are among the countries most affected by disasters identified with natural phenomena. According to the EM-DAT database (The International Emergency Disasters Database) of the Center for Research on Epidemiology of Disasters, the country was hit by 355 disasters¹ between 1900 and 2002, of which 340 occurred between 1950 and 2002 following an exponential trend. Available data on the total number of casualties (deaths and affected people) and economic developments reveal damage similarly on the rise. The list of events is probably incomplete, since in the first reference years the recording disasters system was far from adequate. However, it raises questions about the causes of such an increase of catastrophic events.

1.1 World Rankings of Risk and Vulnerability

The World Risk Report (Mucke et al. 2014) prepared since 2005 by Alliance Development Works/Bündnis Enwicklung Hilft (BEH) for the United Nations University’s Institute for Environment and Human Security (EHS) places the Philippines as the second most at risk country in the world after Vanuatu (Fig. 22.1). The index based on the consideration of several factors leading to has developed a World Risk Index, which ranks global disaster hot spots. The World Risk Index is calculated by combining four elements: exposure, susceptibility, and lack of coping capacities and lack of adaptive capacities. Combining these four yields the so-called vulnerability index, which is the possibility of a disaster happening due to an extreme natural event.

Fig. 22.1

World Risk Report 2014, selected countries. http://www.worldriskreport.org/fileadmin/PDF/2014/WorldRiskReport_2014_online.pdf; NB-Taiwan data are not available

The Philippines is the third most exposed country. Among the 25 countries with the highest risk worldwide, 12 are tropical (or semi-tropical in the case of Japan ) archipelagic or island states: Vanuatu (No. 1), the Philippines (No. 2), Tonga (No. 3), the Solomon islands (No. 6), Papua New Guinea (No. 10), Timor Leste (No. 11), Mauritius (No. 14), Fiji (No. 16), Japan (No. 17), Jamaica (No. 20), Haiti (No. 21), the Dominican Republic (No. 23). Owing to their proximity to the sea, island states are particularly exposed to the natural hazards of cyclones, flooding, and sea level rise. African countries and countries at war, as expected, fare the worst in the vulnerability categories, including the lack of coping capacities and adaptive capacities (Afghanistan, Central African Republic, Chad, Eritrea, Mali, Mozambique , Sierra Leone, Sudan, Tanzania, Yemen…). Haiti joins them in these bottom rankings. The Philippines fare better than those, but much more poorly than similarly exposed Japan (Tables 22.1 and 22.2).

Table 22.1 Components of risk: exposition and vulnerability

Table 22.2 Components of risk: susceptibility, lack of coping capacities, lack of adaptive capacities

Weather-related disasters are by far the most frequent in the Philippines, hit by typhoons twice as much as Japan . Out of 363 disaster events between 1980 and 2010, 197 have been tropical storms and 94 major floods (Tables 22.3 and 22.4)².

Table 22.3 Number of disasters with loss of human life, 1980–2010, in selected Asian countries

Table 22.4 Major natural disasters in the Philippines

1.2 “Natural” Disasters

Located slightly north of the Equator, the Philippines islands face the western Pacific without much else in the way to take the force of storms before they make landfall. Warm, equatorial waters power storms, 20–25 typhoons a year in this Western Pacific Belt, the most active tropical cyclone generator area in the world. It has the warmest ocean temperatures in the world, consistently above 28 °C, the needed temperature for tropical depressions to develop into typhoons and super-typhoons such as Yolanda/Haiyan (November 2013). Coastal and extended swamp areas are prone to floods and storm surges during typhoons. Their effect is enhanced by the concentration of the population in coastal areas and the configuration of the coastline, due to the many capes, bays, peninsulas and islands may locally increase the effects of a storm-related rise in oceanic waters.

The country is part of the Circum-Pacific seismic belt and lies in a complex pattern of tectonic plates, whose movements have created the islands and mountain ranges. The 21 active volcanoes of the country are a permanent danger, even more after the powerful explosion of Mt Pinatubo in 1991. Earthquakes are felt quite regularly and the Indonesian and Japanese tsunamis of 2005 and 2011 are a reminder to Filipinos living on the coastlines that the sea can be a source of death.

El Niño/La Niña (ENSO) cycles across the entire Pacific induce episodes of drought or heavy rains in many parts of the Philippines, regularly posing serious problems in agricultural production and drinkable water supply. On a longer time frame, climate change, including global warming, may threaten the Philippines with more powerful storms and a rise on sea level, which will impact many parts of the archipelago.

In past typhoons, mudslides have killed many storm survivors in the Philippines, due to excessive deforestation which has denuded hillsides from tree roots able to hold together waterlogged slopes, which can lead to mudslides when they are hit by sudden huge outbursts of rain, as also happened in Haiti . The Philippines being largely mountainous, devastating landslides can happen all over the archipelago. Topsoil clogged waterways with stagnant water are linked to malaria and dengue outbreaks as well as episodes of intestinal disease epidemics. Uncontrolled mangrove removal weakens the natural defense of coastal areas to sea-borne disasters.

1.3 Disasters and Society

Disasters, however, do not occur only as a result of natural events like earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and typhoons. For geographers, disasters are defined as spatial and temporal conjunction between the occurrence of a potentially damaging natural phenomenon (a hazard) and a vulnerable society.

Disasters are the product of the social, economic and political environment, an environment where people live in adverse socio-economic situations that lead them to inhabit high-risk areas and engage in unsustainable and dangerous livelihoods. The young and poor population of the Philippines has increasingly shifted to coastal regions, where it lives in rapidly constructed houses, easily damaged by high winds. Uncontrolled urbanization is a factor in flooding, particularly in Manila. Risk can then be considered as a social construction.

Meanwhile, disaster preparedness is low in the Philippines, as it is in most of South and Southeast Asia (Ambanta 2013), leaving the economies in the region vulnerable to destructive typhoons. Effective management of disaster, preparedness coupled with mitigation should be given due attention for a more proactive rather than reactive response. Despite crippling floods in Bangkok , Jakarta and Manila in recent years, disaster preparedness in most of Asia’s developing countries remains disturbingly low, with many of the poor living in unplanned, low-lying areas in cities at highest risk. Systematic disaster risk reduction measures still do not feature sufficiently in national development plans.

Vulnerability has been described as the interface between exposure to the physical threats to human well-being and the capacity of people and communities to cope with those threats. These threats may arise from a combination of social and physical processes. Vulnerability is “the state of susceptibility to be harmed from exposure to stresses associated with environmental and social change and from the absence of capacity to adapt” (Adger 2006) . In other words, these are the conditions for a society that cause the occurrence of a potentially damaging natural phenomenon to turn into a disaster (Gaillard et al. 2008). Hazards become disasters when they affect vulnerable people who cannot cope with the physical, economic and social impact.

How vulnerable is the Philippine archipelago, and most importantly its population? The combination of geography and poverty leaves Filipinos at almost unequaled risk of calamity, a vulnerability that ranks among this nation’s most pressing and confounding challenges.

How do the country and the Filipinos cope with recurring disasters? Filipinos use self-help strategies starting from the family members to the community leaders to bring back normalcy in their living arrangements and in their farm activities in the aftermath of disaster, while government and non-government organizations focus mainly on the rehabilitation aspect through provisions of relief goods and resettlement areas (Luz Nelson and Abrigo 2008). Resilience is a commonly used concept to describe, with some admiration, Filipinos’ attitude to hazards. More critical minds point out a lack of prevention by authorities and the pervasive burden of corruption that increases danger for people, since necessary measures are often taken without much concern for quality of the protection work.

Can the recurring catastrophes hitting the Philippines be a catalyst for a stronger action to mitigate the effects of global climate change? (Birkmann et al. 2008). The worldwide coverage of super-typhoon Haiyan in 2013 has shown the weaknesses of the country and highlighted the need for action. The joint February 2015 Manila declaration for action on climate change during the state visit of French president François Hollande may be an important step in that direction.

These concepts of vulnerability and resilience of communities, along with adaptation and mitigation³ (Janssen et al. 2006; Smit and Wandel 2006), require a complex social, political, and ecological analysis in the context of global climate change (Adger and Brooks 2003; Gaillard 2010) in a developing country made up of mountains and water bodies under tropical weather conditions.

2 Earthquake and Tsunami Risks: Towards Mitigation Policies?

2.1 Are Filipinos Prepared for the “Big One”?

Experts have warned repeatedly that Metro Manila, the country’s capital, which historically has suffered many damaging tremors⁴ (De La Cruz 2014a, b) could be hit at any time by a magnitude 7.2 (or more) earthquake from the West Valley Fault which runs from Sierra Madre to Tagaytay City under the Manila metropolitan area or a 7.9 (or more) seismic tremor triggered by the offshore Manila trench, with the added threat of a tsunami. The West Valley fault has moved four times in the past 1400 years, with an average interval of 400–600 years. The last earthquake that can be related to this happened in 1658. Another quake is therefore expected soon. This feared earthquake, referred to as the “Big One” (Romero 2014; Talavera 2015; Torrevillas 2015) as it is also in California for the Los Angeles and San Francisco regions, is expected to kill about 35,000 people and destroy about 40% of the structures, according to the 2010 report “Metro Manila Earthquake Vulnerability Assessment,” prepared by Pacific Strategies and Assessments (PSA), a multinational firm doing intelligence work for clients on business and security in the Philippines, using data from the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) and the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) (Bergonia 2011). High technology assessment of the building environment and the ground conditions, using GIS and satellite imagery, have been done with help, among authors, of Japanese earthquake scientists and engineers (Miura and Midorikawa 2006).

The apocalyptic scenario (Yap 2012) calls for many compounding problems. 35,000 people would die instantly, many others would slowly agonize in the rubble; more than 100,000 would be injured severely and need rapid treatment. Most casualties would likely be caused by building collapse (Miura et al. 2008) and spreading fires (Geronimo 2011). At least 117,000 homes would either collapse or suffer heavy damage, rendering 1.2 million people homeless. A fourth of public facilities—hospitals, schools, fire houses and police stations—would suffer damage. Damage to water reservoirs and purification plants would immediately cut 4000 water supply points, leading to inadequate capabilities to combat shanty town fires. Many electric and telecommunication cables would be cut, hundreds of antennas would be downed, instantly removing the supply of power across the metropolis and suspending telecom services at a most crucial moment, a situation that could last for several weeks. The airport would be closed, damage to major ports and cargo handling infrastructure would make bringing in relief supplies difficult. Metro Manila could be split into at least four regions (Diola 2014a, b) due to the collapse of buildings, destruction of elevated highways and bridges, impassable roads and fire. The Pasig River exacerbates the potential of separation in the event of an earthquake. If the Guadalupe Bridge, that carries EDSA and the MRT 3 rail line across the Pasig River, collapsed or suffered significant structural damage, the Ortigas Center area would be shut off from Makati City. Operations to evacuate thousands would be hampered by the sheer lack of open spaces in the metropolis, since open spaces like parks, schools, sports arenas and burial grounds now comprise less than 1% of total land areas of cities in Metro Manila. The lack of hospitals, fire trucks and ambulances, as well as the logistical difficulties would seriously hinder rescue and relief operations and the medical treatment of thousands of earthquake victims.

The report stresses that the effects of a 7.2-magnitude tremor are likely to be made more terrifying by a lack of preparedness and failure to enforce zoning laws and building standards. “While earthquakes are a global and natural phenomena that can hit any city without warning, there are both openly declared and unspoken reasons why Metro Manila is particularly vulnerable,”, among them poor building standards, weak enforcement and lack of opens spaces.

“Despite international assistance programs that have gained considerable momentum over the course of the last several years, unreliable infrastructure system, poor building standards due to corruption in the construction and inspection process, informal settlements … in hazardous areas and a lack of government resources and coordination … are just some of the factors that plague the country’s disaster preparedness,” the PSA report said. Making sure that buildings and houses are safe is critical to reducing potential casualties if a major earthquake hits the city. But the report doubted whether builders had taken into consideration that Metro Manila’s soil was mostly made of quaternary alluvium [alluvial deposits of sand, gravel, silt and clay], which is generally not suitable for construction of big infrastructure and buildings, due to the heavy risk of liquefaction (Flores 2011). The risk is particularly worrisome in the coastal barangays of Marikina , Pasig , Taguig , Caloocan , Malabon , Navotas , Marikina, Muntinlupa , Pasay , Las Piñas and Pateros , alongside Manila Bay and Laguna de Bay , as well as several areas in the provinces of Pampanga and Nueva Ecija . It includes reclaimed lands such as portions of Roxas Boulevard and the Mall of Asia area. Despite rapid urbanization and the decay that it brings, “the national government has failed to adopt a comprehensive land use plan for Metro Manila,” the report said.

The 1968 Casiguran earthquake (De La Cruz 2014a, b) pushed the Marcos government in 1972 to enact a law that provides guidelines and minimum standards for the construction of buildings (Republic Act 6541, “An Act to Ordain and Institute a National Building Code of the Philippines”), revised in 1977 to implement a National Building Code of the Philippines (Presidential Decree 1096).⁵ Based on the new building code, an edifice should be able to withstand an 8–8.9-magnitude earthquake. However, there is still a weak enforcement of the safety regulations. If the high rise buildings—because they can afford to engage top-notch structure engineers, civil engineers—appear to be well constructed, the bigger problem, according to a Congressional hearing (Rosales 2011), is that of low cost/low rise buildings now proliferating in Metro Manila. They are under the biggest threat because construction firms or developers of low-cost and low-rise buildings (2–5 stories) have a tendency to do shortcuts and do not strictly follow the letter of the Building Code, breaching the safety regulations and proper footing foundation. People most at risk in earthquakes are those located on the middle floors of multistory buildings constructed of concrete or mixed materials (Roces et al. 1992). At fault are a widespread corruption in the building industry (building permits delivery, bribes to inspectors) (Palafox 2016) and the lack of coordination between local and national agencies has weakened the enforcement of building standards, so that many residential and commercial buildings are still being built on hazard-prone areas, using substandard construction materials.

There is a common understanding that more must be done to increase the country’s resilience and mitigate earthquake impacts (Iuchi and Esnard 2008), since the occurrence of a powerful seismic tremor in the nations’ capital is not a case of ‘If’, but ‘When’. Several organizations and agencies, including the MMDA, PhiVolcs (the Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology) the National Disaster Risk Reduction & Management Council (NDRRMC) and the Philippines Disaster Resilience Foundation (PDRF) regularly engage both the public and private sectors in increasing resilience and undertaking preparedness activities. Computer scenarios (Parsons 2016) based on the 2004 MMEIRS (“Metropolitan Manila Earthquake Impact Reduction Study”) and subsequent studies have been drawn. Several-size earthquake drill exercises have been staged at the municipal level first, and more recently at the metro-wide scale (Francesco 2015a, b; Lozada 2015). These drills are critical to test not only the response capacity and the readiness of the residents but also existing communication lines between different government units and other groups that need to respond. Not everyone, however, has taken earthquake drills seriously, since many participants were reported to take selfies during the drill, instead of listening to the local authorities (De La Cruz 2014a, b). For preparedness, the importance of having an evacuation plan, and actually knowing where evacuation centers are located.

In case a powerful earthquake hits the National Capital Region, the government will use at least four golf courses (Santos 2011; Zurbano 2015a, b) as evacuation centers in the National Capital Region. The Villamor Golf Club in Villamor Air Base in Pasay City (South), Intramuros Golf Club in Manila (West), Wack-Wack Golf Club in Mandaluyong (East) and the Veterans Memorial Medical Center Golf Club in Quezon City (North) were identified by the MMDA as evacuation centers in preparation for the “big one.” Golf clubs will also be used as relief distribution hubs, trauma centers, mobile hospitals, training and command posts based on the agreement made by the agency and the management of the golf courses. The MMDA also designated other private establishments and public institutions as operation centers to assist affected residents. These are University of the Philippines Campus in Diliman, Quezon City; Light Rail Transit depot in Santolan, Pasig City; Marikina Boys Town, Marikina Red Cross and the University of Life Arena, also in Pasig City. The Pasig River would also serve as an alternate route for rescue and relief personnel in case bridges are destroyed.

People should know what to do before, during and after the earthquake. In 2014, Phivolcs and JICA have distributed a 12-point questionnaire⁶ (“How Safe is My House? Self-check for Earthquake Safety”) so that homeowners can use it to assess the earthquake readiness of their houses (Ranada 2014a, b, c, d, e, f). The national agency Phivolcs has issued a list of recommendations to residents and businesses and a pocket-sized Earthquake Preparedness Guide. It has also prepared the Valley Fault System Atlas (Ranada 2015), a handbook of large scale maps (scale of 1/5000 for paper maps) that detail the 57 subdivisions and villages traversed by the Valley Fault System, which was distributed to local government units (Mangosing 2015) and put online,⁷ while the University of the Philippines National Institute of Geological Sciences (UP-NIGS) published an updated Google map based on Phivolcs’ VFS Atlas data.⁸ A team of Filipino web developers have created Project Tremors, a website⁹ calculating how far a place is from the West Valley Fault (Diola 2015; Panela 2015).

The MMDA started in 2015 to mark structures and areas where the West Valley Fault passes as part of its preparedness plan in the event a powerful earthquake hits Metro Manila. The effort, dubbed as “Walk the Fault” (Zurbano 2015a, b), started in the villages of Pinagsama, North Signal, Central Signal and Maharlika in Taguig . It is not intended to cause unnecessary alarm, but to make the public more conscious and start preparations from within the homes and neighborhoods.

The Metro Manila Disaster Risk Reduction Council, under the MMDA, has conducted in 2014 an “earthquake census” to inform residents of some urban villages that their homes are near active faults. This census, however, was weakened by a lack of manpower. Test barangays, at least one per constituent city of Metro Manila, were thoroughly examined, with the hope that other barangay would follow.

The Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010 was passed with its lofty objectives, transforming the former National Disaster Coordinating Council into the National Disaster Risk Reduction Council. However, this agency, the Department of Interior and Local Government, MMDA and other closely concerned government agencies have still done too little to prevent a major catastrophe. The disaster preparedness and risk reduction program has been limited to the installation of early warning systems, purchase of lifeboats by local government units and a stricter implementation of evacuation orders. Despite many warnings by scientists and media about the readiness, or lack of readiness, in Metro Manila and other places (Romero 2014), no serious mitigation and adaptation measures have been implemented nationwide. Only small-scale successes—such as St Bernard in Southern Leyte (Quismondo 2012)—due mostly to the initiatives of enlightened leaders and/or support from foreign actors¹⁰ can be reported. Despite the identification of the most vulnerable areas in Metro Manila cities and municipalities, the government continues to permit construction of high-rise buildings. Building and construction regulations are still negated by corruption while budget cuts have slowed down the conduct of disaster preparedness trainings and the formulation of plans (Oliveros 2015). Timid efforts at coordination between local government units have not yet been successful (Francesco 2015a, b).

2.2 Tsunami and Earthquake Preparedness

Besides the threat of an earthquake, Metro Manila is also vulnerable to tsunamis based on historical records showing waves entering from the port of Manila. Unlike typhoon-related hazards, tsunamis from major earthquakes occur infrequently. It is this infrequency that contributes to people becoming complacent, causing them to forget about sustaining preparedness measures (Martinez-Villegas 2011). How to prepare for earthquakes and subsequent tsunamis? The best way is to learn from past disasters, in the Philippines, such as the 1976 Moro Gulf event and the 1990 Luzon earthquake, or abroad (Turkey , Chile , Japan , Haiti , Nepal ) and plan according to the possible impact.

Phivolcs and the Department of Science and Technology (DOST) have developed strategies and programs on strengthening monitoring and hazard mapping, increasing public awareness and establishing community-based early warning systems for tsunami.

After the northern Luzon earthquake of July 16, 1990, Phivolcs-DOST greatly improved its earthquake-monitoring system. From 12 stations in 1984, they now operate 66 seismic stations nationwide. Data are received in real time through satellite communications, which allows to release bulletins in less than 10 min. Phivolcs-DOST monitors earthquakes not only nationwide but also globally. To keep watch of tsunami-generating earthquakes that might occur outside the country but could hit the coastal areas, they have acquired and installed global earthquake-monitoring tools in 2010, to receive seismic data from other world seismic networks. An alarm is automatically set off whenever a significant earthquake is detected outside the Philippines as it happens.

In 2005–2007, Phivolcs launched a project called Tsunami Risk Mitigation. Tsunami-hazard maps for the 43 coastal provinces of the Philippines were generated based on modeling of tsunami heights and arrival times. These maps were distributed to provincial offices so that local government units would have information to use as basis for land-use and development planning, and earthquake- and tsunami-disaster preparedness. The devastating tsunamis of 2010 (Chile ) and 2011 (Fukushima in Japan ) were opportunities for the Philippines to test the monitoring system. They showed that the country still needs to establish of a solid, smooth and reliable communication system, from the national, regional, provincial, city and municipal levels down to barangays, and to develop information and education campaigns about earthquake and tsunami preparedness.

Another tool that became handy during the monitoring of the 2010 Chile tsunami and the 2011 Fukushima tsunami was a software known as Tidetool from the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. It enables Phivolcs/DOST to monitor if tsunami waves had already hit certain tide gauges installed all around the Pacific Ocean at an estimated height.

However, advanced technologies, which are very useful to monitor tsunami waves generated by a distant earthquake, for which there is enough time to monitor and issue appropriate warnings, are not sufficient for a locally generated tsunami, where the needed alert time may be less than 5 min, as shown by the 1976 Moro Gulf and 1994 Mindoro tsunamis. In such a situation, residents of coastal communities must be aware of three natural signs: strong earthquake, sudden and unusual retreat of the sea, rumbling sound of the approaching waves.

If it is a locally generated tsunami, how fast can barangay leaders react to warn residents? The level of preparedness of communities is extremely varied from one community to the next and is most often dependent on leadership and resources. Under the new disaster-risk management law (Republic Act No. 10121 of May 2010), the local government has the responsibility to establish 24/7 operations of their disaster-risk reduction and management councils.

Under the Ready Project funded by AusAID through the United Nations Development Program, a community-based early warning system for tsunami was introduced in 2006 to 20 pilot barangays in 9 provinces. Communities are taught how to organize an early warning system for the barangay. Barangay-wide earthquake and tsunami drills test how fast communities can mobilize people to move to higher ground during a tsunami threat. Earthquake drills in schools started in 2005, in collaboration with the Office of Civil Defense and the Department of Education. What is important is to teach schoolchildren what to do and how to protect themselves in case of a strong earthquake and tsunami, and to educate the parents through the children. RA 10121, enacted in May 2010, provides for the integration of disaster-risk reduction in the basic school curriculum: the education sector will play a major role in shaping and changing the mindset from a reactive to a more proactive and self-reliant community when it comes to disaster preparedness.

2.3 Coastal Hazards and Climate Change

Climate change, involving both natural climate variability and anthropogenic global warming, has been a major worldwide concern, particularly with the publication of the Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and the set-up of international conferences culminating in the agreement reached in Paris during the December 2015 COP21 conference.

The importance of climate change-related adaptation¹¹ measures was highlighted in the tropical archipelagic Philippines, albeit a relatively minor emitter of greenhouse gases, by repeated geo-meteorological related disasters such as Supertyphoon “Yolanda” (Haiyan) in November 2013. They have given the Philippines an good understanding of the acute impacts of climate change. Officials have warned Filipinos to brace against the “inconvenient truth” of devastating storms, flooding and drought unless policies and projects are put in place to mitigate climate change. In the next 20–50 years, the Philippines is predicted to experience drier and hotter dry seasons leading to worries about water resources (Jose and Cruz 1999) and wetter wet seasons with stronger typhoons, superstorms becoming the norm rather than the exception (Yamsuan and Alave 2011).

With one of the longest coastlines in the world, the Philippine archipelago cannot escape the adverse impacts of sea-level rise and extreme climate events that are expected to happen in a warming world. The country is constantly exposed to the wrath of the sea, most of its towns and cities lie on the coast and are confronted with the perils of rising sea levels. Changes in the climate system have already affected various coastal ecosystem and communities (Capili et al. 2005): coral bleaching, changes in productivity and plankton dynamics, alterations in seagrass and sea weed reproduction patterns, shoreline erosion and retreat due to sea level rise, aggravation of marine diseases, reduced fishery yields. Human activities and modifications of the environment have a role in the worsening of climate-related hazards in the Philippines. Settlements in coastal lowlands are especially vulnerable to risks resulting from climate change, yet these lowlands are the most densely settled and growing rapidly (McGranahan et al. 2007). The proliferation of fishponds and aquaculture projects in the major waterways and in the coasts has slowed down the flow of water from the typhoons and the dams, resulting in prolonged flooding in residential and rural areas such as the plains of Pampanga and Bulacan, which were already flood-prone. When the water is released from the dams to avoid overflowing, the natural drainage cannot handle it anymore due to fishponds and the garbage, as we have seen for Manila, while deforestation had caused flooding in areas that did not experience it in the past. Illegal logging, slash-and-burn farming and quarrying in mountain areas lead to increased soil erosion and flooding. Electric generation through coal-burning plants is adding to the greenhouse gases that are deemed responsible for global warming.

Outside of the Metro Manila area, ports, roads, and drainage systems in Tacloban , Naga , Batangas , and Angeles cities have been pointed out as most vulnerable to future typhoons (Ranada 2014a, b, c, d, e, f). There are many reasons why Tacloban was among the cities worst hit by Super Typhoon Yolanda (Haiyan) (Ranada 2013). Bound on the east and south by water leading to Leyte Gulf and the Pacific Ocean , the city is surrounded by mountains on its north and west sides. Taclobanons were not able to escape the 15-foot high storm surge that submerged the city, and landslides damaged the slopes of the mountains with the high winds and heavy rains of the furious storm. They could not evacuate further than the mountains. Land subsidence and rising sea levels have already made the town susceptible of extreme flooding.

The country is now one of the world’s strongest voices in the global movement to fight the problem and adapting to climate change (Berlin 2016; Mayuga 2016a, b, c). In 2015–2016, at the time of the preparation of the Paris COP21 conference climate conference, the Republic of the Philippines was presiding the V20 Climate Vulnerable Forum,¹² which is a venue for countries most vulnerable to the effects of climate change. The February 2015 visit of French president François Hollande in Guian , Samar , the first place hit by the supertyphoon in 2013 (Gabieta 2015), was a signal that France , as the host of the United Nations COP21 conference, was looking at the Philippines to lead and encourage other vulnerable countries, especially in Southeast Asia and the Western Pacific, to actively participate in negotiations for a legally-binding agreement on climate change (La Viña and Romero 2015; Sabillo 2015).¹³ It was the rationale for the launch of the February 2015 “Manila Call to Action on Climate Change”, which aims to engage the global community to efficiently and equitably address climate change.

The United Nations Organization has praised the Philippines several times (Lim Ubac 2012; Alegado 2015) for taking the lead in the global campaign to mitigate disaster risks brought about by global warming, by the organization of international workshops on this topic,¹⁴ by inviting former US vice-president Albert Gore , a Nobel peace laureate and global climate activist, to give visibility to the topic and the country within this topic (Quismondo 2015; Lim Ubac 2016), and by the work of Senator Loren Legarda (Carrion 2010), chair of the Philippine Senate climate change committee, who had authored the Climate Change Act of 2009 (Republic Act No. 9729) creating the Climate Change Commission and cosponsored the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010 (RA 10121).¹⁵ Both laws highlight a policy shift from a reactionary to a proactive stance in climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction. The 2010 law mandates all local government units (LGUs) in the country to allocate at least 5% of their yearly budgets for disaster risk reduction and management (Allen 2006; De La Cruz 2015a, b, c). Thirty percent of the sum should be used for quick response (reactivity) and 70% for equipment and disaster prevention, preparedness, response, rehabilitation and recovery measures (mostly proactivity). Funds are supposed to address not only the short-term needs and problems, but also the long-term ones. In Bulacan province, for example, the disaster management office has purchased hazard information handbooks for elementary school children, written in tagalog with “things to do” practical advice that can be used by the whole family. Pampanga province has trained barangay officials on risk management and the use of funds to mitigate risk. The Aquino government has also pushed for climate change resiliency policies, focusing on carbon sequestration through forests and energy policies (energy efficiency and conservation and greater reliance on renewable and cleaner energy sources such as natural gas and geothermal energy) (Lozada 2014). According to Senator Legarda, the Philippine archipelago has 246,000 megawatts of untapped solar, wave, steam, geothermal, biomass, and hydro resources. This quantum of indigenous renewable energy potential is 13 times more than the currently installed capacity, more than enough to make the Philippines fully energy self-sufficient (Legarda 2016).

The challenge is now to translate the country’s governance mechanism on climate change into local community action to save lives, and reduce disaster risks and economic losses. In August 2012, the Philippine Congress passed a law (Republic Act No. 10174) establishing the People’s Survival Fund (PSF), a national climate fund meant to financially support climate adaptation initiatives (Dalabajan and Caspe 2015), but information about the availability of funding through this channel was not well transmitted to many LGU executives (Rey 2015).

Scientists and political leaders have a good grasp of the issues, but what is critical to saving lives in extreme weather events is the availability of evacuation plans, early-warning systems, and shelters. Earthquakes and tsunamis happen suddenly, but typhoons can be tracked for days before they reach land, and an elaborate three-tier warning system is now well in place. TV news broadcasts, newspapers, online social networks, and specialized websites¹⁶ allow most Filipinos to be well aware of impending storms. But the task of relocating thousands or millions of citizens when a storm is approaching, a massive hurdle for any country, is a huge endeavor in a developing nation like the Philippines with 100 million citizens spread out across thousands of islands. Education and information of coastal residents, at the barangay and the household level (Combest-Friedman et al. 2012) are deemed as fundamental for the success of national policies prepared on the advice of scientists.

The 2010 law on disaster risk reduction and management mandated the creation of a local disaster risk reduction and management office (DRRMO) in every local government (Tupaz 2013a, b). For coastal villages, climate change has several facets, which are obvious to their residents: the exposure to stronger typhoons, the degradation of coastal resources (coral reefs, sea grass beds, fisheries) and the slow receding coastline under the influence of sea-level rise. This makes the idea of climate change quite understandable at the local level. To make climate change adaptation and resilience more than empty formulas, what appears to be needed is the training of all barangay officials, and the implementation of mitigations plans down to the barangay level. In Iloilo , for example, the ReBUILD project¹⁷ includes the following plans: early warning systems in communities, operational contingency plans, re-engineered infrastructure, zoning regulations based on risks. Increased budgets allow simple measures like the purchase of hand-held radios for barangay captains to be able to be faster in warning people to evacuate when there are threats of flooding. The government-sponsored NOAH project (Nationwide Operational Assessment of Hazards) created in 2012 by the Department of Science and Technology (DOST) is supposed to give citizens a 6-h lead time to evacuate and take measures to prevent loss of lives and damage to property. The Project Team is composed of academics, researchers, planners, government and private agencies, as well as non-government organizations. It is based at the Institute for Geological Sciences of the University of the Philippines in Diliman, Quezon City .

Under Project NOAH, the Disaster Risk and Exposure Assessment for Mitigation (DREAM) surveyed the country’s 18 major river systems and used that data to create flood hazard maps for up to 18,000 villages and barangays. These maps are meant to help local leaders to identify safe zones and danger zones and achieve a goal of zero casualty during disasters. The state weather bureau PAGASA is now using in daily weather forecasts new data generated by Weather Information-Integration for Systems Enhancement (WISE), with previsions up to 7 days in advance.

Other NOAH disaster preparedness initiatives include the distribution of Hydro-meteorological Devices in hard-hit areas in the Philippines (“Hydromet”), the Local Development of Doppler Radar Systems (LaDDers), the Landslide Sensors Development Project and the development of an advanced storm surge warning system that provides a high-resolution simulation of how a storm surge will affect localities (CHASSAM project, “Coastal Hazards and Storm Surge Assessment and Mitigation”) (Ranada 2014a, b, c, d, e, f).

The magnitude of devastation caused by Haiyan has pushed scientists and the Philippine government to intensify research on the vulnerability of the country, with a high focus on Leyte Island (Fernandez 2013) and Bicol (Button et al. 2013). Storm surges, a big part of the damage in Tacloban (Lagmay et al. 2013a, b), appear as one of the topics of renewed interest, with a thorough mapping of the most exposed areas (Lapidez et al. 2014). GIS simulations (Cuadra et al. 2014), satellite imagery (Perante 2016), cross-analysis of physical dangers and at-risk populations, especially informal settlers (Lagmay et al. 2013a, b), have been made public through the Project NOAH website,¹⁸ and solutions proposed, such as the development of early warning systems (Tablazon et al. 2014), stressing the importance of hazards maps (Lagmay 2016), the rehabilitation of mangrove environments, which are known to be an effective barrier to the inland intrusion of the sea, or the implementation of stricter regulations concerning land use in the coastal areas (setback policies, construction regulations, stronger seawalls in high-danger zones) most likely to be hit by typhoons and storm surges (Perez et al. 1999). Reducing vulnerability could be done by building typhoon-resistant homes and reducing social and economic vulnerabilities. Increasing coping capacity could be done through relocation plans at the provincial, municipal and barangay levels.

Areas away from the coastlines are also hit by climate change related geohazards, in the form of landslides triggered by heavy rains in deforested regions offering steep slopes (Faustino-Eslava et al. 2013).

Much less spectacular than terrifying Yolanda-type storms, the episodes of increased drought predicted in climate change scenarios also call for specific adaptation measures (Jose and Cruz 1999), such as comprehensive watershed management (see the regional plans efforts, Chap. 17), a review of water allocations between cities and farm areas, more efficient irrigation, the introduction of low water use crops and efficient farming practices, more recycling/reuse of water, an improvement of the monitoring and forecasting systems for floods as well as droughts, and a possibly unpopular review of water pricing policies.

The rise in sea levels, three to five times faster on the Philippine coastlines (up to 1 cm/year) than the global average (Flores and Romero 2016; Rietbroek et al. 2016; Saxena 2016) is another type of climate change threat that requires adaptation measures (more than mitigation) throughout the archipelago, including the semi-enclosed Manila Bay (Perez et al. 1996; Sales 2009) bounded by the provinces of Bataan to the west, Pampanga , Bulacan, NCR and Cavite to the east (Perez et al. 1996; Sales 2009). The bay area, subject to floods and storm surges during tropical cyclones and at risk of tsunami, has seen its shoreline change greatly due to reclamation for housing, ports, coastal roads, buildings, and other urbanized waterfront developments (Palafox 2014), adding to the threat of inundation.

3 Environmental Degradation

The Philippines archipelago not only is prone to major disasters, it also suffers severe human-caused environmental degradation aggravated by a high annual population growth rate. The country has to confront several major environmental issues (Broad et al. 1993), which are sometimes related to each other. We already examined in Chap. 11 some of the environmental damages in the marine realm, in particular with overfishing, corals and mangroves, to which we can add the growing problem of floating plastics, ingested by marine animals (Abreo 2016). Issues of concern also abound on land, including uncontrolled deforestation; soil erosion; loss of agricultural lands through urbanization; environmental damage associated with mining operations; improper disposal of solid and toxic wastes in rivers and sea waters; air and water pollution, mismanagement and abuse of resources (Porter and Ganapin 1988; La Viña 2014).

These issues converge with geophysical hazards (earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, lahar, tsunami), climatic events (monsoon rains, typhoons, storm surges, but also droughts) and global climate change, with the associated sea-level rise, to put the environmental issues as central in the life of Filipinos today and tomorrow. Governmental choices have their share of responsibility, since the export oriented development strategy advances the exploitation of natural resources. The Philippine government has facilitated the rapid depletion of the forests by allocating concessions on the basis of political influence, while the political elites receive a share of logging profits. In the past, it also awarded concessions to giant copper mining companies, which dumped toxic mine tailings into waterways thereby threatening marine life. We will address in this section four contemporary issues: deforestation, soil degradation, the negative impacts of mining, and the loss of biodiversity, which are all related.

3.1 The Sad State of Philippine Forests

Deforestation has been rapid and widespread in the Philippines, now one of the most severely deforested tropical countries, ranking fourth in the world’s top ten most threatened forest hotspots (Pamintuan 2011). If the current deforestation rate (twice the land area of Metro Manila every year) continues, the country’s remaining forest cover could be wiped out in less than 40 years. In recent years, deforestation has been increasingly blamed for soil erosion (Schmitt Olabisi 2012), river siltation, flooding, and drought; environmental awareness is now rising in the country.

The primary forests of the Philippines are now a relic of a bygone era, as in Cebu (Kummer et al. 1994, 2003), where further environmental degradation appears to have stopped. The only remaining primary forests are found in the Pantaron mountain range of Davao del Norte, Mindanao (Dulce 2014; Ragragio 2014), home of the Pantaron Manobo tribe, and on Palawan Island, which harbors the last few Palawan eagles. But this Palawan forest is currently threatened by agricultural colonization (Eder 1990; Eder and Fernandez 1997; Shively and Martinez 2001), as migrants from throughout the Philippines settle annually in the island’s forested uplands, which are now heavily logged since other wood resources have dwindled considerably. The same story that happened in Mindanao in the 1950s is happening (Coxhead et al. 2001). Palawan still has the largest forest reserve of the whole country, but its forest cover is not the densest anymore (Eigenheer 1995). Most forests in the Philippines are now secondary forests (Lasco et al. 2001). Despite the high rates of deforestation in the twentieth century, it seems that already during the Spanish period there was some clearing of the forest, as Spanish forestry engineers considered the tree (dense tropical forest) as the “enemy of man” (Bankoff 2004a, b).

To assess the rate of deforestation, researchers (Kummer 1991; Liu et al. 1993) have been able to use official data at the provincial level and have also used information from remote sensing data. However, the Spanish and American periods records of forestry are incomplete, missing or destroyed, and the calculation of deforestation rates at the national scale need to take into consideration, as it is in Brazil (Peres and Schneider 2012), the government-sponsored frontier resettlement in Mindanao (see Chap. 19) (Bankoff 2007a, b, c).

According to the national Forest Management Bureau, forest cover in the Philippines has declined from 21 million ha, or 70% of the its land area, in 1900 to 17 million in 1934, 10 million in 1970 (Bautista 1990) and about 6.5 million ha by 2007, with a peak of about 55,000 ha/year in the 1980s and 1990s. Between 1990 and 2005 the Philippines still lost a third of its forest cover, according to FAO estimates, but the country’s deforestation is down since its peak in the 1980s and 1990s.

Estimates of current forest cover in the Philippines depend on the sources and the definition of what constitutes forest cover (up to 59%—9.3 million ha—of the country’s official forest lands are not forested at present and are either grass or shrub land, or under cultivation) (Le et al. 2014), but all authors are converging to agree on the dramatic reduction of the Philippine forests, which has hit the whole country, and is currently most intense in the MIMAROPA area (the island provinces of Mindoro , Marinduque , Romblon and Palawan ), where more than 40% of the total forest loss of the country occurred between 2000 and 2012. Between 1990 and 2000, the Philippines lost more than 800,000 ha of forests.

Widespread logging was responsible for much of the historical forest loss in the Philippines. Despite government bans on timber harvesting (Guiang 2001) following severe flooding in the late 1980s and early 1990s, illegal logging continues today (Van Der Ploeg et al. 2011a, b; Wallace 2011). The cycle of tropical deforestation (Ancog et al. 2016) typically begins with excessive logging. Logged-over forestlands are then converted for agricultural uses. Unproductive farmlands are later abandoned after being subjected to intensive anthropogenic activities, soil degradation and recurring fires, and isolation from intact forests. The direct drivers of forest loss are many: forest products extraction (logging/timber poaching, charcoal production, fuel wood gathering), agricultural expansion (kaingin practices, forest conversion to settlements, plantations, vegetable gardens, grazing) and infrastructure expansion (mining, road construction, hydropower dam and tourism facilities construction). Analysts (Bernad 1957; Kummer and Turner 1994; Pulhin et al. 1998; Carandang et al. 2012) also recognize underlying causes for deforestation and forest degradation: weak policies and governance (conflicting forest policies and mandates; flaunted logging bans; open access forestlands due to lack of clear tenure on forestlands; lack of political will; poor monitoring and law enforcement; corruption and intimidation) (Cagalanan 2015; See 2014); poverty and population pressure (landlessness, expansion of farms and settlements); market demand and economic development (high demand for forest products; improved market access through road construction); and technological and biophysical factors (inappropriate land uses; low farm productivity; over-extraction and unsustainable harvesting; proliferation of chainsaws; fire, floods, landslides, calamities).

GIS analysis has shown that between 1934 and 1988, the highest rates of deforestation were in the vicinity of roads. Nearly 78% of the 2.1 million ha of forests within 1.5 km of roads in 1934 was removed by 1988 (Liu et al. 1993).

After temporarily lifting the log export ban in the late 1990s, the government has increasingly tried to crack down on timber smuggling and forest degradation (Tumaneng-Diete et al. 2005). Additional threats to Philippine forests come from legal and illegal mining operations—which also cause pollution and have been linked to violent conflict—agricultural fires, collection of fuel wood, and rural population expansion.

The ages-old debate on the role of swidden agriculture (kaingin) in deforestation (Suarez and Sajise 2010) has continued in the Philippines, especially on the island of Mindoro , which has high degrees of forest depletion (−61% in Oriental Mindoro and −54% in Occidental Mindoro for the 2003–2010 period, highest rates of the whole country), despite the fact that there is not much logging activity (Rodriguez 2015a, b, c). Are the Mangyan kaingineros to blame, or lowlanders encroaching on their tribal lands? Representatives from the Hanunuo Mangyan communities insist it is not in their culture to sell timber, and that the main reason for the forest cuts is lowland charcoal making. However, kaingin practices do indeed lead to the production of charcoal and if not managed properly may lead to forest fires much wider than anticipated.

The demographic growth of the Philippines has led to intensified hillside farming (Hayami et al. 1976; Kummer 1992; Cruz et al. 1998) and severe impacts on land use patterns, vegetation cover, soil nutrient status, and erosion. Previously forested spaces are increasingly used to provide subsistence food and income to landless lowlanders, primarily through forest product collecting and food and cash-crop cultivation. Much of the farming is done on slopes of a 45-degree incline or greater. As trees are felled to create clearings for farming, the whole hydrological system is affected. Without trees to soak up the rains, water instead runs down the steep slopes into the valleys, causing severe slope erosion, flooding and sedimentation of rivers. In Leyte , unregulated forest product collecting and shortened swidden fallow cycles have depleted mature, commercially harvestable rattan and hardwood species and led to a impoverished xerophytic flora dominated by cogon grass (Imperata cylindrica) (Siebert 1987). The intensified cultivation of corn and sweet potato has gradually damaged the soils (lower calcium, magnesium, phosphorus and organic matter levels, and increased soil acidity). Environmentalists in the Philippines now fear that plantation agriculture, especially for palm oil, an emerging activity that would replicate the booming growth seen in neighboring Indonesia and Malaysia , could become the newest threat to remaining forests, even if government officials have proposed to use denuded, idle, unproductive lands for this potential exporting activity (Lagsa 2014; Larsen et al. 2014).

In 1990 the Island of Palawan was declared a “Man and Biosphere Reserve” by UNESCO. It is the Philippines ‘last ecological frontier’, with the largest contiguous forest block in the country. However, in recent years mining projects and oil palm plantations in southern Palawan are posing a threat on environment and local communities, leading to increased activism against the government supported “development” projects. Activist groups and indigenous peoples networks have used online information websites and petitions to call the attention on the dual problems of deforestation and mining, especially in Palawan and Mindanao, where most of the big-scale plantations are still developing. “Rainforest Rescue, for example, was able to gather 94,000 signatures against the expansion of oil palm plantations in Palawan. Alongside other organizations, they have denounced the Aquino government claims that the establishment of oil palm plantations would be part of reforestation efforts and good for the environment. In fact, these vast plantations destroy the soils’ ecology and facilitate the proliferation of pests, hence the “need” to use pesticides, herbicides and other agro-chemicals and the negative results of loss of biodiversity, damage to groundwater and marine life, soil erosion and pollution of rivers and streams. In addition, the removal of indigenous tribes continues with the establishment of new plantations in Mindanao (Villanueva 2011; Mandawa 2013; Wee 2013). Hundreds of Higaonon families have already been evicted from their farms and homes since the oil palm plantation A. Brown Company, Inc. (ABCI) penetrated Misamis Oriental (Natividad 2012).

The continuing disappearance of Philippine forested lands is of great concern, since forests play a critical role in controlling global warming and climate change (Sheeran 2006; Lasco et al. 2008). The negative effects of deforestation can be observed at various scales of space and time. If forests sequester carbon emissions from the atmosphere and store the carbon long term in vegetation and soils, their destruction has the opposite effect. At the macro/global level, tropical deforestation reduces biodiversity and has an effect on global climate, since the carbon stored in tropical vegetation is released as CO₂ in the atmosphere by combustion, and contributes to global warming (Lasco 1998, 2008; Lasco and Pulhin 2003, 2009). In the year 2000, the Philippines was one of the top ten deforestation countries contributing to global greenhouse gas emissions from global forest loss (Carandang et al. 2012). At a meso/regional scale, weather patterns are affected (less evapotranspiration, increased risk of droughts), and slope erosion is greatly enhanced by the loss of soil protection (Cruz et al. 1988; David 1988) and the subsequent stronger runoff, with downstream flooding and excessive silting. Sedimentation is affecting not only Laguna lake, as seen in Chap. 17, but also non-metropolitan areas, rich in tourism and fishing potential, such as the coral reef areas surrounding Palawan (Hodgson and Dixon 1988). Illegal logging has been pointed out repeatedly as a culprit after flash floods in many parts of the Philippines. The removal of forest cover also decreases stream flows in the dry season (Boehnert 2011). Irrigation is therefore at risk (Urich 2000). At a micro/local scale there are effects on the ground temperature, possibly raising the risk of locally violent thunderstorms, while many plants and animals are losing their ecological niches, through sheer destruction of their environment or its increasing fragmentation (Lacuarta 1997; Pereira et al. 2006; Bagarinao 2010), sometimes also due to geophysical crises such as the eruption of Mt Pinatubo destroying tiny ecological niches (Madulid 1992).

The fact that only about 5% of the Philippines land area is under some form of protection, these are indeed issues of concern for environmentalists, but also for the local populations who may be deprived of many minor forest products, such as fuel wood, resins, gums, mushrooms…. In the Philippines, this affects especially the tribal populations of the highlands in the Cordillera despite the Ifugao muyong practices (Serrano and Cadaweng 2005; Camacho et al. 2012), the Aeta and Agta of central Luzon (Headland 1988), the Ivatan of Batanes (Rede-Blolong and Olofson 1997), the Mangyan of Mindoro or the Lumad of Mindanao (Neyra-Cabatac et al. 2012). Population pressures increases tensions between the mountain communities and the lowlanders as the forest resources are diminishing and competition for their use becomes more intense, with the risk of ethnic strife or deculturation of the tribes (Doedens et al. 1995).

Efforts are now underway to protect and re-forest the Philippine mountains. 135 forest reserves, most of them organized around watersheds to protect water resources, have been established across the country, some of them quite large (180,640 ha for the Lake Lanao Watershed Reservation in the ARMM, 116,452 ha for the Kabulnan River Watershed Forest Reserve in Cotabato , 92,450 ha for the Allah River Watershed Forest Reserve in South Cotabato, 85,219 ha for the Casecnan River Watershed in Nueva Vizcaya , 84,500 ha for the Pantabangan-Carranglan Watershed Reserve Pilot Area in Nueva Ecija ), but some of them cover less than 50 ha (6 ha only for the Lucnab Watershed Forest Reserve in Baguio City).

However, even the protected areas are still threatened by illegal woodcutting and tree felling. Clandestine logging camps, log ponds and illegally cut logs are fought against by the Anti-Illegal Logging Task Force in places such as the Agusan-Surigao “timber corridor” of Mindanao (Solmerin 2012).

Small-scale re-planting activity has been implemented in several parts of the country, through a National Greening Program (NGP), supported by large Philippine corporations, such as the SM and BDO (Banco de Oro) foundations in partnership with the Sitio San Ysiro Upland and Lowland Farmers Association, just outside of Metro Manila, on the slopes of the Sierra Madre above Antipolo (De La Cruz 2015a, b, c), and the rate of deforestation has slowed down in recent years. Cebu , long described as an uplands ecological disaster, has seen a gain in forested areas (Bensel 2008). But the management of floods requires a vigorous and continued effort, well beyond what has been done recently. Multiple small reforestation projects are taking place in the country (43 in Leyte alone).

Farm forestry may, however, be a smarter use of the hillsides and mountains than mono-species replanting or plantation of exogenous trees (mahogany, gmelina, and rubber), which can grow fast but are less adaptive to the Philippine environment (resistance to pests and typhoons, weaker use by indigenous bird species, lower commercial prices than local tree species) (Ranada 2014a, b, c, d, e, f). The Department of Environment and Natural Resources, when it launched the NGP in 2011, ordered a total of 25 million seedlings of exotic trees, versus only five million for native or indigenous species. Mixed species plantations that have a significant effect of reducing reported soil erosion and landslide frequency, can produce more litter and have higher canopy cover than monocultures (Le et al. 2014). Sustainable forestry may also include the establishment of recreational zones within protected forests (Catibog-Sinha 2011): using different native fruit-bearing trees in reforestation would attract a diverse wildlife while enhancing the tourism and conservation values of botanic gardens within forest reserves, as shown by the butterfly sanctuaries in Bohol .

Forest management can become a vehicle of self-determination for ethnic minorities, since it can be highly participatory and empowering, especially when the forest management practices embrace the traditional systems that distinct ethnic cultures have developed over centuries. For example, in the Kalahan Forest Reserve (Pangasinan Province), the Ikalahan indigenous ethnic group is using forestry practices to help maintain cultural identity and reduce threats to ancestral lands (Dolom and Serrano 2005). Reforestation also sustains jobs, as shown for example in the Mt Malindang range natural park of Misamis occidental, Mindanao (Bracamonte et al. 2010).

The action of NGOs and environmental activists (Teehankee 1993), who can now benefit from powerful high-tech tools such as satellite mapping, GIS, and deforestation information websites (www.globalforestwatch.org) showing tree loss around the world in high resolution and with frequent updates, may push the Philippine government towards more efforts in reversing deforestation.

3.2 Soil Degradation

Four key issues challenge rural development in the Philippines: low growth of the rural economy; high levels of rural poverty; land ownership; and degradation of natural resources.

Soil degradation can happen suddenly and dramatically in the case of massive landslides but is usually a long-term process of decline in soil productivity and its environment-moderating capacity. Soil degradation also includes processes such as loss of nutrients and organic matter (Asio et al. 1998). In the “Green Revolution” effort to increase food production beginning in the 1960s, the Philippines’ government supported high yielding varieties of rice along with their concomitant need for increased fertilizers and pesticides, which further depleted the soil of its nutrients as well as polluted the soil and waterways. After conversion from forest to agricultural land use (Asio et al. 1999), other negative effects such as salinization, acidification (Jahn and Asio 1998), pollution, compaction, and subsidence have also contributed to an overall degradation of soils throughout the Philippines, in lowland as well as upland areas. Studies have shown that the widely degraded upland soils (Asio 1997) suffer from acidic or calcareous pH, low organic matter and nutrient contents, presence of toxic substances and compaction, all characters that are serious impediments to crop growth.

Soil erosion due to deforestation and smallholder agriculture in upland areas of the Philippines is widely regarded as one of the country’s most serious environmental problems (Cramb 1998). Soil degradation represents a major threat to food security in the country (Dregne 1992; Pimentel 2006; Asio et al. 2009). More than 5 million ha are seriously degraded, resulting in a 30–50% reduction in soil productivity.

Many rural people live in upland areas, largely dependent on low-input shifting agriculture, with a high incidence of severely degraded areas and the highest poverty incidence in the country. The pressure of population, among other factors, has led to increased cultivation of steeplands. Severe erosion commonly results when steeplands are converted to intensive arable use, especially in a country like the Philippines that combines a 59% prevalence of slopes 18% and steeper (Presbitero et al. 2005) and intense precipitations during the monsoon months and on the frequent occurrence of typhoons.

A number of upland development projects involving the promotion of soil conservation and agroforestry measures have been formulated and launched by government, non-government organizations and other concerned for more than three decades (Pasicolan et al. 1997). All have/had significant components to promote farming technologies that minimize the occurrence of soil erosion on sloping land (Presbitero et al. 1995), such as the widely promoted Sloping Agricultural Land Technology (SALT), based on contour hedgerows of leguminous shrubs (Paningbatan et al. 1995) or a mix of asparagus, pineapple, mung beans, corn, tomato, lemongrass and others (Poudel et al. 1999, 2000). Natural vegetative strips following contour lines also provide a simple solution, in which indigenous vegetation is allowed to re-grow into a thick, protective cover. The strips may be the start of more complex agroforestry systems including fodder, fruit, and timber trees (Mercado et al. 2001).

Yet the diffusion of erosion control measures on the farm level has been limited in most upland development projects and the adoption of such practices has been minimal (Cramb et al. 1999, 2000), with farmers interest usually peaking at the start of the during project implementation but rapidly declining thereafter, possibly due to the lack of appropriation of “imported’ techniques by small farm holders. Successful and sustained adoption of erosion control technologies occurred only where farmers were certain of the short-term economic returns compensating their extra labor and loss of production areas (Nelson et al. 1996), and where farmers clearly understood the basic concepts and purposes of the technologies promoted.

“Landcare” approaches emerged in the late-1990s in the Philippines, particularly in Mindanao and the Visayas, as an important strategy for developing collective action at the local level to deal with problems of agricultural land degradation. They are based on the development of community landcare groups, supported through partnerships with government and non-government agencies. These farmer-led organizations “concerned about land degradation problems are interested in working together to do something positive for the long-term health of the land” (Campbell and Siepen 1994) share knowledge about sustainable and profitable agriculture on the sloping lands while conserving the natural resources. They try to identify problems at the local level and mobilize information, community efforts and financing in order to improve the management of their natural resources (soil, water, vegetation). It may be a more efficient way to achieve sustainable farming practices than implementing top-down strategies such as heavy government regulation or transfer of technology.

The current trend towards the transformation of unproductive degraded lands as sites for intensive and long-term biodiesel production requires appropriate soil management strategies to avoid further soil deterioration and aggravation of the already existing ecological problems.

3.3 Mining Impacts

Many studies have shown how mining operations have negatively affected environmental quality in the Philippines (Holden and Jacobson 2012) and led to loss of livelihood, for example in Rapu-Rapu (Albay ) (Lusterio-Rico 2013) or Honda Bay (Palawan ) (Williams et al. 1999). As for coal burning (in electric power plants and small-scale charcoal use for cooking), it is known to have very detrimental effects on air quality (excessive amount of particulate matters) and for being a major contributor to global warming (increase on atmospheric CO₂). Coal electric production and non-ferrous mining have been for decades two elements of the industrial system of the Philippines.

However, the incoming administration of Rodrigo Duterte has hinted it would bring radical changes in the energy and mining policies of the Philippines. The new secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Mrs. Gina Lopez , has ordered a moratorium on the approval of new mining projects and indicated that there would be a comprehensive review of the mining claims of concessions given (Mayuga 2016a, b, c), with a more thorough environmental assessment than before (Bravante and Holden 2009). An audit of all operating mines will determine the adequacy of and efficiency of the environmental-protection measures of each mining firm, identify gaps in environmental-protection measures and determine appropriate penalty/ies in case of violations of mining and environmental laws. Open pit mining—the method most widely used to produce nickel ore—may be banned because it is not environmentally friendly. The audits will also ensure that the concerns of the helpless and the impoverished are addressed, especially in case of conflict between indigenous people and mining firms.

The concerns of the Lumad and others are related to issues of dispossession of ancestral lands (Holden et al. 2011; Minter et al. 2012), despite the protective laws already on the books, but which are still ignored, also to issues of land degradation and toxic pollution (especially from mercury in the case of gold mines) (Appleton et al. 1999, 2006; Israel and Asirot 2000; Drash et al. 2001), and finally of mining-enhanced disasters, when typhoon’s rains and winds bring waves of mud, water and logs descending from the denuded mountains into lowlands, as shown in Mindanao’s Compostela Valley with typhoons Sendong (December 2011) and Pablo (December 2012) devastating Iligan and Cagayan de Oro City, as computer models have indicated it could happen (Alave 2011). Large-scale mining accelerated the deforestation in the Mt. Kitanglad and Mt. Kalatungan watershed areas in Mindanao, and was considered as a major factor in the breach of a gold mine tailing dam in Benguet the same year (Salamat 2012a, b). Mining disasters themselves are accelerated and amplified by natural hazards in the Philippines such as typhoons, earthquakes and volcanic eruptions. Earthquakes can destabilize tailings storage facilities, typhoons can flood tailings ponds, and mine-pit dewatering can enhance the competition for groundwater resources during droughts.

Environmental and social considerations, which constitute two of the well-known “three pillars” of sustainable development, appear to gain an increased importance, to be balanced with the economic pillar, in terms of energy production and metal export resources, as well as jobs. The case of nickel, where the Philippines is now the leading world producer, is quite emblematic.

There is also a fourth dimension, more political, which is the role of large foreign corporations, involved in deforestation for plantations, and in large mining operations, versus the small-scale producers. Mining has caused tension among the people, dividing them into “pro-mining” (or people passively accepting the negative impacts for the sake of employment) and “anti-mining” camps, prone to organize protests in Manila as well as locally. Activist groups and indigenous peoples networks have used online information websites and petitions to call the attention on the dual problems of deforestation and mining, especially in Palawan and Mindanao, where most of the big-scale plantations are still developing. “Rainforest Rescue”, for example, was able to gather 94,000 signatures against the expansion of oil palm plantations in Palawan. Alongside other organizations, they have denounced the Aquino government claims that the establishment of oil palm plantations would be part of reforestation efforts and good for the environment. In fact, these vast plantations destroy the soils’ ecology and facilitate the proliferation of pests, hence the “need” to use pesticides, herbicides and other agro-chemicals and the negative results of loss of biodiversity, damage to groundwater and marine life, soil erosion and pollution of rivers and streams.

Public opinion, the Catholic Church (Holden and Jacobson 2007) and NGOs are widely opposed to the control of national resources by foreign entities and corporations, even as the Ramos, Arroyo and Aquino administrations have welcomed foreign investment and pushed investor-friendly policies in this sector (Holden 2005; O’Callaghan 2009). The new administration’s environmental announcements on mines have already impacted the world nickel price, with a sudden rise in prices in an already tense market (De La Paz 2016; Hume 2016).

3.4 Loss of Biodiversity and Protected Areas

Owing to its richly varied geographic features and favorable location in the tropics, the Philippines is one of 18 mega-biodiverse countries of the world (Myers 1988a, b; Mittelmeier et al. 1998; Myers et al. 2000), in an area of overlap between the distinct faunas of the Pacific and Indian Oceans (Gaither and Rocha 2013). The archipelago ranks fifth in the world for the number of plant species and maintains 5% of the world’s flora. An estimated number of over 38,000 vertebrate and invertebrate animal species have been described within Philippine territory (Catibog-Sinha and Heaney 2006). Species endemism—or the prevalence of particular species exclusively within the country’s geographic boundaries, even within a single island—is exceptionally high, covering about half of terrestrial wildlife, while the country ranks fourth in bird endemism. Nearly half of its approximately 1100 terrestrial vertebrates are unique to the islands, and estimates of endemism for vascular plants range from 45 to 60% (Posa et al. 2008). Endemicity rates reach 84% in the case of geckos (Siler et al. 2014). No less than 352 species of butterflies are endemic to the Philippines (Mohagan et al. 2011). The country’s archipelagic composition (Brown et al. 2013) and intrinsically small landmass contribute to a high density of species per unit area. The Mount Makiling forest reserve (Lusterio 1996; Pulhin and Tapia 2005; Combalicer et al. 2011) in Los Baños , Laguna , is particularly important as an educational and research resource. It also has enormous biological diversity (Luna et al. 1999) and genetic resources, since botanical references to Mt. Makiling describe an exceptional diversity of woody plant species, totaling more than the entire number of woody species found in the United States ! The level of endemicity in the Philippines is high, but fragile due to the country fragmentation in many small islands: Bohol ’s tarsier, flying foxes of Subic Bay (Mildenstein et al. 2005), Mindoro ’s tamaraw, carnivorous pitcher plants of Dinagat island (Mayuga 2016a, b, c).

The country’s agricultural ecosystem is also noteworthy. The Philippines is part of the center of diversity of rice, coconut, mung bean, taro and yam, as well as the center of origin and diversity of bananas in Southeast Asia.

This unique biodiversity is supported by a large variety of ecosystems, landscapes and habitats, most of which are also greatly threatened by human activities. Agricultural biodiversity is experiencing general decline, due to the use of a limited number of cultivars for commercial purposes, the use of pesticides that poison many animals, big or small, and the shrinking land area devoted to farm production with urbanization.

The country is now one of the world’s “biodiversity hotspots” (Myers 1988a, b; Brooks et al. 2002) with at least 700 threatened species, thus making it one of the top global conservation areas. An International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN)’s 2004 assessment lists down alarming numbers of highly threatened species among those known or described in the country: 52% for vertebrates, 68% for invertebrates, and 84% for plants. A national list of threatened faunal species was first established in 2004 and includes today 43 species of land mammals, 126 species of birds, 29 species of reptiles and 14 species of amphibians. In terms of fishes, the Philippines counts at least 3214 species, of which about 121 are endemic and 76 threatened. In 2007, an administrative order issued by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources established a national list of threatened plant species, indicating that 99 species were critically endangered, 187 endangered and 176 vulnerable. In 2014, the numbers added up to 526 plant species threatened.

The list of critically endangered animals includes, among others, the monkey-eating Philippine eagle (Pithecophaga jerreryi) (Rabor 1971; Bueser et al. 2003; Salvador and Ibañez 2006), whose tagalog name “haribon” has been adopted by one of the major conservancy groups in the Philippines. Several other birds are also in critical situation: the red-vented Philippine cockatoo (Cacatua haematuropygia, “katala” or “kalangay”, now under breeding conservation efforts in Palawan ) (Boussekey 2000) and the Palawan hornbill (Anthraceros marchei, or “talusi”, a large forest-dwelling bird) (Gonzalez 2011), as well as large mammals and reptiles: the “tamaraw” small buffalo (Bubalus mindorensis, endemic to Mindoro , now under a breeding program to boost its population which is lower than 300) (Ishihara 2015), the “pawikan” (Eretmochelys imbricata, a sea turtle threatened by poaching and clandestine trade to China ), the Philippine freshwater crocodile (Crocodylus mindorensis, less than 100 individuals) (Van Weerd 2010; Manalo and Alcala 2015), the dugong (Dugong dugon, Aragones 1994; Aragones et al. 2010) and the Visayan warty pig (Sus cebifrons, with a few specimens left in Panay and Negros , the Cebu subspecies being now extinct, and breeding programs in the Netherlands and California ) (Oliver 1995; Nuijten 2016). If the situation is left unaddressed, the country is at risk of losing both its distinctive reputation as a world-class haven of biodiversity, but also its own homegrown natural heritage.

Several strategies have been promoted by scientists to protect this biodiversity in the Philippine archipelago (Hauge et al. 1987): (1) the establishment of protected areas and the preservation of existing forests; (2) the prevention of alien species introduction; (3) no introduction to new habitats; (4) the re-introduction of lost species within strict guidelines after captive breeding. Ecotourism can be a positive factor by bringing both revenues to finance the protection efforts and by raising the public’s awareness of the biodiversity value. Bohol has been a prime example of the efforts to develop such tourism around the emblematic tarsier and whale watching off Pamilican Island.

After the 1986 overthrow of Ferdinand Marcos , the Philippine government adopted fundamental reforms and became more open to nongovernmental organizations NGOs and people’s organizations concerned with environmental management and sustainable development. At least on paper, considerable progress in environmental protection legislation has been made, under pressure from organizations and with the input of environmental scientists. Heavy fines have been imposed on poachers and illegal traders of threatened species. For example, killing a Philippine crocodile carries a minimum penalty of 6 years imprisonment and/or a fine of 100,000 Pesos (approx. 2000 euros).

The National Integrated Protected Areas System Act of 1992 (Republic Act No. 7586), commonly known as the NIPAS Act, provides the legal and developmental framework for the establishment and management of protected areas (PAs) in the Philippines (Custodio and Molinyawe 2001). It was enacted primarily for biodiversity conservation and has a vital role in implementing one of the top ten major approaches of the Philippine Strategies for Sustainable Development, which aims to achieve economic growth without depleting the stock on natural resources and degrading the environment. NIPAS Act clearly states its goals: “to maintain essential ecological processes and life-support systems to preserve genetic diversity, to ensure sustainable use of resources therein, and to maintain their natural conditions to the greater extent possible, to secure for the Filipino people of present and future generations the perpetual existence of all native plants and animals through the establishment of a comprehensive system of integrated protected areas within the classification of national park as provided for in the Constitution”.

There are currently 35 National Parks in the Philippines, the oldest being Mt Arayat in Pampanga , established in 1933. They range in size from Mt Iglit-Baco National Park in Mindoro Occidental (75,455 ha) to the McArthur Landing Memorial National Park in Polo , Leyte (7 ha only). These national parks are “places of natural or historical value designated for protection and sustainable utilization”. Some of them are explicitly qualified as “protected landscapes and seascapes” (Batanes ).

Marine protected areas (MPAS) (White et al. 2010; Horigue et al. 2012) were established in the Philippines as early as 1974 (see Chap. 11). These early models on Sumilon and Apo Islands established a framework for coral reef management aiming both to protect and maintain nearshore coral reef habitats for biodiversity and enhance fish yields to traditional fishers. Devolution of authority for management of natural resources to local governments (municipalities and cities) in 1991 was a major national policy shift that has supported more localized management efforts.

Many of the designated protected areas are the ancestral domains of numerous indigenous cultural communities (ICCs) (Cairns 1997). Their right to the sustainable use and management of their ancestral domains are provided for in the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1992. But the effective control of native populations on the management of the parks and reserves is an object of debate (Bryant 2000; Minter et al. 2014). The Local Government Code of 1991 (RA 7160) gave the local governments greater authority in the management of protected areas through their representation in the Protected Area Management Board (PAMB).

The Law defines protected areas as the identified portions of land and/or water set aside by reason of their unique physical and biological significance, managed to enhance biological diversity and protected against destructive human exploration. The NIPAS Act identified 202 initial components comprising of proclaimed national parks, game refuge and wildlife sanctuaries, nature reserves, wilderness areas, mangrove reserves, watershed reservations, fish sanctuaries, protected landscapes and seascapes, among others prior to the implementation of the NIPAS Act, covering an approximate total area of 2.57 million ha. As of 2012, their number was increased to 240, covering 3.57 million ha, 11.9% of the total land area of the country.

The establishment and management of these protected areas, originally inspired by American examples (Bankoff 2009) are part of the international commitments signed by the Philippine Government such Convention on Biological Diversity, Ramsar Convention, World Heritage Convention, Convention on Migratory Species, and the ASEAN Agreement on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources. 228 Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) have been identified throughout the archipelago (Ambal et al. 2012), representing the known habitat of 855 species of plants, corals, mollusks, fishes, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals in the country. Efforts for their inclusion within in the country’s protected area system would help ensure the conservation of the whole natural heritage of the country. 45 of the 128 land-based KBAs now benefit from official protection status, including 5 or the 10 AZE (Alliance for Zero Extinction) sites identified as absolute priorities: they are Siburan Rain Forest (Occidental Mindoro ), the 2086 m Mt Mantalingajan (southern Palawan ), South and North Gigante Islands off the eastern coast of Panay , Mt Kambinlio and Mt Redondo (Dinagat Island province), and Tawi-Tawi Island.

However, assessments of the existing protected areas in the Philippines seem to indicate that, as in many other sectors of the country, quality governance and funding are insufficient to reach the stated goals (Ranada 2014a, b, c, d, e, f; Mallari et al. 2016). Mountain parks and coral reefs are threatened by lack of funding, lack of trained personnel, lack of population involvement, overuse by trekkers or divers—should the number of visitors be limited in the most popular areas such as Apo Reef or Mt Pulag ?—, lack of expertise in park management and conflicting policies: guidelines from the DENR and policies covering ancestral domain overlap when part of a protected area is also part of an ancestral domain; local government units with jurisdiction over the protected areas also have policies of their own; zoning laws, boundary conflicts, and clashing land and resource uses add to the confusion. Land use change models have been developed by scientists (Verburg et al. 2006) but some areas of threatened biodiversity are sites of jungle warfare by the Moro groups or the NPA, and it becomes impossible to insure their protection, since guards park rangers and guards risk being attacked by dissident groups. The protection itself of some areas, as in the Bohol karst, may be source of conflict by depriving local farmers of the use of land they considered as useful (Urich et al. 2001). The protection of species deemed dangerous by the population (crocodiles) is problematic (Van Der Ploeg et al. 2011a, b). Some LGUs do not include the protected area in their community’s Comprehensive Land Use Plans, considering they are the responsibility of the central government. This leads to intense debates, as in other parts of the world, about the optimal degree of centralization/decentralization needed for park management (Dressler et al. 2006).

4 From Vulnerability to Resilience

Resilience¹⁹ (Klein et al. 2003) is derived from the Latin word “resilia” (to jump back). Originally the term was used in physics to characterize the energy absorbed by a body during deformation (“Charpy Test”). The first publications in the field of psychology date back to World War II, first in studies about school children in Hawaii , then about the survival of death camps survivors in Europe (Cyrulnik 1999). Resilience has been defined by psychologists as the ability of individuals to properly adapt to stress and adversity and to bounce back from a traumatic situation, such as an accident, the death of a loved one, a divorce, the loss of a job, or a prolonged period of deprivation (famine, imprisonment). A person considered resilient is flexible, adaptable, enduring, and optimistic. He or she bounces back from adversity (Vickers and Kouzmin 2001). The concept gained acceptance in other scientific fields such as ecology or sociology. Ecological resilience is a characteristic of ecosystems to maintain themselves in the face of disturbance. Social resilience refers to the ability of groups or communities to cope with external stresses and disturbances as a result of social, political and environmental change, and to maintain order and functioning capacities (Adger 2000; Manyena 2006).

4.1 Filipinos at Risk

As defined by Neil Adger , “Vulnerability is the state of susceptibility to harm from exposure to stresses associated with environmental and social change and from the absence of capacity to adapt” (Adger 2006). Studies of vulnerability in the Philippines (Porio 2011; Usamah et al. 2014) have indeed shown repeatedly that the environmental-ecological vulnerability interacts strongly with the social vulnerability, highlighting the effects of climate related changes on the poor and marginal, who possess little in the way of resources, except an ability to organize and a practice of mutual reliance.

Events like super-typhoons Ondoy in 2009 (Manila), Sendong in 2011 (Mindanao) and Yolanda in 2013 (Visayas) have shown how climatic events can aggravate bad conditions that compromised the stability of complex societies (De Castro 2011). Tropical storms, even if they are individual phenomena with a given name, cannot be seen as isolated events, while societal collapse is also rarely a one-time event. Many small failures of different origins reasons across various time periods usually precede a massive societal collapse (Diamond 2011; Lim Ubac 2014). Yolanda’s catastrophe in Tacloban and other areas of the Visayas combined several elements: an unusually strong storm brewing in the context of global warming, a storm surge enhanced by the local configuration of the coastline, severe environmental damage (mangrove depletion alongside the coastline and deforestation in the mountains above the city), and the government lack of responsiveness in the following days, a point that led to heavy criticism of the Aquino administration, accused of being much too slow to react adequately, especially in the case of a Tacloban city run by members of the Marcos family. Damage was heavy because it hit a crowded city where many people lived in shanty houses not protected from the fury of the sea in an area known to be a frequent target of Pacific storms.

Small islands, with limited space to find shelter away from the sea, and more difficult to reach due to their islandness, are often poorer and even more vulnerable than areas in larger islands (Mondragon 2015). Their small size, hence their small population, frequently isolates them not only physically, but also politically, economically and culturally. They are not priority areas for relief, adaptation or mitigation policies (De La Cruz 2015a, b, c).

Many Filipinos do not have stable livelihoods due to irregular and variable incomes, whether they live in the countryside (fickle agricultural production), the coastal areas (fisheries difficulties) or in cities (informal settlers without salaried jobs). Therefore, they live on a day-to-day basis, often in permanent debt, and cannot accumulate the significant savings to build better homes or even recover adequately after disasters. Repairs are done when there is a little money available after the basic needs (food) are met. They are entirely dependent on government aid, which may be siphoned off by corruption (Paterno 2014), charities or foreign aid to receive medical care, food and clothing donations first, then to cope with their house losses, fishpen losses, fishing boat losses, after a storm devastates their lives once again. When they rebuild, there is a return to the same kind of home, location and activity. Tenure vulnerability is an added risk factor for poor households, who constantly live in the fear of being expelled from the place they call home, which leads them to look at places perceived as less prone to expulsions but often more prone to flooding.

In the Philippines, the cost of disasters falls disproportionately on those least able to bear them, but these marginalized people are able to respond and show resilience through social mechanisms that help them in disaster resilience (Gaillard 2015).

4.2 Filipinos in Risk

The repeated occurrence of floods and typhoons has led Filipinos to develop a common culture of coping with disasters because risk is a permanent element of their lives (Bankoff 2002, 2003, 2007a, b, c). Filipinos of all ethnic origins have developed cultural coping practices to come to terms with living under the constancy of threat and that are shared by peoples of all ethnic origins in the archipelago (Landa Jocano 1969; Pe-Pua and Protacio-Marcelino 2000). Among them the concept of “bahala na” (leave it to God, what will be will be) (Lagmay 1993; Gripaldo 2005).²⁰ It is usually, if somewhat erroneously, translated as fatalism (Bostrom 1968), since it implies a loss of control of the situation, and prayers may be the only way to survive. In Western eyes, this may be interpreted as passive Filipinos leaving everything to chance or fate, putting their trust in God only. For some Filipinos, God is punishing people for their sins by unleashing natural forces, and resisting is useless (Bankoff 2004a, b). Bahala-na response is evoked in cases of uncertainty about the outcome of a dangerous situation, when the person feels unable to control it for lack of means, knowledge, ability, time, help or support. But it can also be seen as a demonstration of determination and willingness to take risks, a way to embolden oneself, almost like “I’m going to do what I can”. Courage, hope, optimism, self-efficacy and faith together (Menguito and Teng-Calleja 2010) would be the strengths to defend lives againts the elements. The concept of “bahala na” also helps people to accept tragedy, because disaster can occur despite their best efforts of human and divine intervention.

“Bayanihan” (Barrameda and Barrameda 2011), a feeling of shared community, is a core Filipino value, which complements “pakikisama” (getting along well with people) (Nery 1979; Leoncini 2005), “damayan” (compassion) and “pakikipagkapwa”²¹ (reliance on others) (Enriquez 1986; Arellano-Carandang and Nisperos 1996; Guevara 2005) to help people cope collectively with disaster. People armed with this strength will not give up, but rebuild with whatever resources they may have, in the spirit of “pagpupunyagi” (perseverance and resourcefulness) (Tuason 2010). All these social psychology traits are essential in the immediate coping with disaster (Adviento and De Guzman 2010; Carandang 1996; Espina and Teng-Calleja 2015) as the individual or the family can count on the assistance of their friends and neighbors in a time of hardship impacting everyone in a similar way. After a storm, people in the neighborhood will help each other to rebuild as fast as possible, with chainsaws to clear up fallen trees, roofing materials already available prior to the storm (people are prepared !) and mutual comforting with food, coffee and special attention given to young children. Reliance on the neighbors and relatives rather than the government is a part of this social resilience (Victoria 2003; Maguire and Hagan 2007). This social cohesion is made of mutual trust, solidarity, common values, neighborhood identity, community involvement at the barangay or purok level, and place attachment. This social capital in poor communities may be what allows the people to be resilient in times of environmental disaster (Bankoff 2007a, b, c; Luna 2012).

An analysis of the attitudes of residents in a Marikina barangay during and after Ondoy (Adviento and De Guzman 2010) identified ten positive characteristics as both resources and outcomes in the disaster experience. They were: (1) pakikibagay sa kalikasan (adaptation to nature); (2) malasakit (empathy, care and concern for the other); (3) bayanihan (collective responsibility for each other, see above); (4) tiwala (trust); (5) pagtitiis (endurance, ability to bear suffering or pain in the face of adversity); (6) pagkamasayahin at palabiro, (cheerfulness and sense of humor, see below); (7) lakas ng loob at tapang sa gitna ng takot (courage and bravery in the midst of fear); (8) pogkamapamaraan (resourcefulness); (9) pasasalamat (gratitude, counting one’s blessings); (10) pananalig sa Diyos (faith in God).

Many outside observers have noted that even through the most devastating events, the Filipino people will always smile. The sense of humor of Filipinos (Andres 2002) and their ability to laugh even in disaster is another coping practice. It may be explained as a means of sharing pain or embarrassment in society, “so much so that when people laugh at a person who slips and falls, the victim usually laughs too” (Landa Jocano 1969). Exchanging jokes with friends and neighbors, as well as posting humorous pictures on Facebook during a flood (Serrano 2015), is seen as an efficient way to deal with stress. In August 2012, when severe flooding hit Manila at the time of the London Olympics, the “indomitable Filipino spirit” (Del Rosario 2013) was expressed when young men played basketball in waist-deep flood waters and with Facebook pictures of people standing on chairs in the middle of an inundated room as if in starting position for an Olympic swimming race.

People tend to rush past discomfort and onto acceptance as quickly as possible. They want to turn the negative into a positive all at once. This may be seen as admirable, a show of inner strength (“lakas na loob”), to be culturally independent and self-reliant, to focus on positive, productive actions.

Psychologists have shown that resiliency can be nurtured by helping survivors to: (1) make connections; (2) reframe the crisis as a solvable problem; (3) accept inevitable changes; (4) move towards goals; (5) take decisive action; (6) seek opportunities of self-discovery; (7) nurture a positive view of self; (8) keep things in perspective; (9) maintain a hopeful outlook; and (10) take care of one’s self. Psychologists at Ateneo de Manila have come up with the 6-modules “Katatagan program”²² designed to hone coping skills of Filipino disaster survivors, which was tested in Tacloban , Samar and Zamboanga (Hechanova 2014; Hechanova et al. 2015).

4.3 Adaptation and Mitigation

Resilience is more than standing strong amid challenges and live with danger (adaptation). It also entails taking action to minimize, if not eliminate, vulnerability to adversity (mitigation).

Since hazards have been normalized as an integral part of culture, specific coping mechanisms and behaviors have evolved in the Philippines to deal with the immediate impact of storms, landslides or earthquakes, but also to adapt and avoid some of the dangers. As we have seen in Chap. 14, traditional houses (nipa palm and bamboo huts/bahay kubo and colonial homes/bahay na bato) contain elements of adaptation to the major hazards, as do the low-lying stone houses of the Batanes archipelago. Local agricultural systems also show some adaptations to limit the risk of complete crop losses, through crop diversification and the planting of root crops (yam, taro, onions, garlic, ginger) less likely to be destroyed by high winds than rice, corn, banana trees or coconut trees. In Batanes, the extreme fragmentation of farm plots to minimize the likelihood that an entire harvest may be lost is an important mechanism for ensuring food security (Bankoff 2007a, b, c).

One problem often identified in Philippine disasters is the reluctance of people to abandon their properties and livelihoods, which hinders their evacuation from threatened areas (Asuero et al. 2012). It is indeed harder for them to evacuate when the community depends on natural resources for livelihood like those in the fishing community. It is also the expression of a strong sense of place (in its three dimensions of place dependence, place identity and place attachment) (Anacio et al. 2016) and community, which goes against the government policies of mandatory evacuation (short-term), relocation (middle-term) or resettlement (long-term).

Risk reduction requires understanding the causes of vulnerability of the population. It cannot be done without the participation of communities at risk. Proactive risk management emphasizes the reduction of vulnerability and increasing local capacity to overcome hazards. It is contrary to the long-dominant reactive risk management approach, with focuses more on reducing the hazard than the vulnerability and somehow neglects the economic, political, social and cultural constraints facing threatened populations. Risk management and disaster policies conducted in the Philippines illustrate this dichotomy between an official reactive approach that focuses on the management of crises related to extreme and rare natural phenomena, and the difficulty of taking into account the daily dimension of vulnerability (Delfin and Gaillard 2008).

NGOs and associations have for a long time been particularly active in the Philippines to assist populations at risk (Heijmans and Victoria 2001; Luna 2001), through the development of participatory projects within a wider logic of sustainable development with a special focus on the access to resources. Involving the populations in the process is essential to insure efficient protection. People are community-resilient and able to overcome the havoc of disasters if recovery policies consider their real needs and acknowledge their contributions (Gaillard 2015). Experiments of community empowerment in disaster preparedness have been undertaken, such as participatory mapping by a French-Filipino group of geographers in Divinubo Island, Samar (Maceda et al. 2009). The dual purpose of this project was (1) to involve local populations in the assessment of their own abilities and vulnerabilities to natural hazards and (2) to identify economically, socially, culturally and politically acceptable measures to reduce vulnerability and increase capabilities. It showed that community was least prepared to tsunami risk and that the most important resources to protect, according to the people, were fishing boats, coconuts and…karaoke players! Local populations, included the youth (through the local Youth Council down to the barangay level) (Fernandez and Shaw 2013) need to be consulted more on the options for relocation after a disaster, which had not been the case in other tragedies such as the Patayas landfill slide in Quezon City (Gaillard and Cadag 2009).

The participatory approach is in line with the goals of the 2005 United Nations’ Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA), which focuses on local knowledge and the role of communities (Delica-Willison and Willison 2004) threatened in the management of risks and disasters. The HFA, which ran from 2005 to 2015, set five specific priorities for action: (1) Making disaster risk reduction a priority; (2) Improving risk information and early warning; (3) Building a culture of safety and resilience; (4) Reducing the risks in key sectors; (5) Strengthening preparedness for response. The Hyogo framework marked a shift away from the dominant paradigm of command-and-control and top-down frameworks, emphasizing better dialogue between scientific knowledge and decision-makers in government (Innocenti and Albrito 2011), and a better accounting of bottom-up actions and populations empowerment (Matsuoka and Shaw 2011, 2012; Izumi and Shaw 2012; Matsuoka et al. 2013).

4.4 Building Institutional Resilience

The Filipino spirit is “waterproof” due to geographical necessity and government failure. If people are resilient, it is because very often they have only resilience to bank on (Sison 2014). Filipinos help themselves because they know nobody is coming to help them, due to the inefficiency of government at all levels, from the president to the governors or even the barangay captains, who are also victims of the elements.

A lack of solid waste management, long-term deforestation, and massive land conversion multiply the effects of natural disaster in the Philippines. The lack of ready infrastructure to mitigate the impact of expected storms subjects the poorest people to the worst of its geography and the worst of its government’s irresponsibility.

What is sorely needed to fight floods is to install water-pumping stations, dredge the garbage-filled rivers that unnecessarily exacerbate the effects of flooding, especially in the slum areas; establish a full, national chain of permanent, bunker-style, fortified, fully-provisioned evacuation centers; reinforce the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council; strengthen local disaster management institutions (Bawagan et al. 2015) and fund the design of low-cost housing built to withstand the effects of storms and earthquakes.

Disaster risk reduction (DRR) policies and strategies are well established within the international development community, being utilized at the grassroots level to address all forms of hazards. Modern societies have the ability and technology to control environmental stresses. But the people’s inability to learn from their mistakes, and apply the lessons of past societal collapses, hinder progress in the management of risk. According to the United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR), disaster risk reduction can be achieved through “systematic efforts to analyze and manage the causal effects of disasters, including through hazards, lessened vulnerability of people and property, wise management of land and the environment, and improved preparedness for adverse effects.” Best practices and experiences from other disasters in different settings may also be useful to share (Pelling 2007).

In the Philippines, the passing of the Climate Change Law in 2009 and the Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Law in 2010 reflect significant advancements towards a risk reduction and resilience approach. However, despite the mapping of hazardous areas and the laws and regulations, local communities in the Philippines still continue living in hazardous areas, due to weak law enforcement. Effective disaster risk reduction remains a challenge at the local scale (Esplanada 2015). A 2016 report from the Climate Change Commission indicates that only 160 out of 17,000 local government units, less than 1%, have existing action plans to deal with disasters (Sy Egco 2016) and too few LGUs are requesting the multi-hazards maps prepared for distribution (Ranada 2014a, b, c, d, e, f). The maps are ready and available, they have been requested by several national agencies (Department of Social Welfare and Development, Department of the Interior and Local Government, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources, National Housing Authority), research institutions, the United Nations, but at the local levels, city and barangay, the apparent lack of interest is worrisome and may call for stronger emphasis and training of the elected officials throughout the Philippines (Panti 2014). A possible way to better involve local officials and populations in this risk mapping would be to further encourage participatory mapping (Cadag and Gaillard 2012), which would facilitate the understanding of geo-referenced data by the population.

Adaptation is not merely coping with catastrophic consequences of climatic or telluric events; it is a question of anticipation and mitigation. If an earthquake, a volcanic eruption, a tsunami or a typhoon cannot be avoided, the prevention of disaster involves risk reduction programs, which may in the long term be more cost-efficient than rebuilding after each event. There will be less to rehabilitate and recover if effective disaster prevention and risk reduction programs are put in place. This is quite evident in the case of housing.

Precarious habitat is a major factor of vulnerability for the population in the Philippines. Poor quality of housing cannot resist the strong winds and torrential rain associated with typhoons. Very often there is also no real water drainage system and the means of communication in risk areas are also very weak, so that people are often not aware of impending danger. In contrast, Japan is one of the best-prepared countries for such events, with good quality buildings and warning systems working perfectly.

To remediate these deficiencies, it is difficult in the short term to change the quality of millions of dwellings across the Philippines. However, it is important that people know where there is a strong enough building in their neighborhood to take refuge in. This must go hand in hand with an efficient alert system involving volunteer teams traveling to every household in the community, which is needed for two reasons: face-to-face contact is more effective, and many poor people do not have computers or information devices at hand. This is a low-cost solution that can save many lives. Indigenous ways to communicate can be used, as shown by the Dagupan City Flood Warning System, which has revived the use of the kanungkong, a bamboo instrument which was traditionally used to call community members to assemble at the village hall for meetings, along with staff gauges as flood markers in strategic locations in the villages of the city (Victoria 2008).

On the longer term, improving the quality of habitat is essential, with better-built houses (stronger materials) and proper location, which involves the development and strict implementation of land use plans and construction standards. The real difficulty, however, is to enforce the rules laid down (Gavieta and Onate 1997). It is difficult to accomplish in poor countries with rapid urban growth like the Philippines. The large number of people and their migration patterns have led to crowded cities, waste and housing problems, pollution, and encroachment of upland forests and watersheds leading to denudation and, consequently, significant reduction of carbon sinks. Many self-made homes are not legally built and do not follow any safety standard. Nevertheless, it is possible to start programs within communities to help people access a more robust habitat, through the dissemination of good practices regarding the construction techniques and materials used. The population must be trained to a better perception of risks related to natural disasters, especially when many informal settlers live in risk zones such as flood-prone riverbeds. In the countryside and in the mountains, better landcare (Villanueva 2006) in the form of reforestation and intercropping will both reduce the risk of landslides and downstream flooding, and improve the income of rural communities.

The most at-risk areas should be reserved for public parks, shops, offices, which are easier to evacuate. Housing should be banned from these areas. The real key is transportation, to steer urbanization towards safer areas, while thinking of transport and communication infrastructure to bring people closer to employment places.