See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/287817230

Disaster Risk Profile and Disaster Risk Management Framework of the

Philippines: Natural Disasters

Conference Paper · December 2015

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.4656.3922

CITATIONS READS

0 15,791

1 author:

Harold James Emmanuel Doroteo

International Care Ministries, Inc
7 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Disaster Risk Profile - PHILIPPINES View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Harold James Emmanuel Doroteo on 22 December 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Informe Monográfico
Monographic Report

PHILIPPINES: DISASTER RISK PROFILE

AND DISASTER RISK REDUCTION (DRR)
FRAMEWORK: NATURAL CALAMITIES

Author:
HAROLD JAMES E. DOROTEO
December 2015

University of Oviedo - Department of Medicine

Unit for Research and Emergency and Disaster
 ANNOTATED OUTLINE
Title Page …………………………………………………………………………………………1
Annotated Outline ………………………………………………………………………………...2
List of Abbreviations ………………………………………………………………………………..3
List of Tables ………………………………………………………………………………………..5
List of Figures ……………………………………………………………………………………….5

The Global Riskscape 6

Section I. Overview_______________________________________________________7
Looking back…

Section II. The Philippine’s RISKSCAPE______________________________________9

Earthquakes
Volcanic Eruptions
Landslides
Floods
Typhoons

Section III. Disaster Impact Assessment_____________________________________19

Impact on Public Health
Impact on the Environment
Impact on the Economy
Impact on Development

Section IV. Structure and Characteristics of the NDRRM System________________ 25

Legal Authority
Disaster prevention and response strategies
Best Practices in the Philippines

Section V. Lessons Learned_______________________________________________35

Case Study: Typhoon Haiyan (Yolanda), November 2013
Progress on the Implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action

Section VI. Towards Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030____39
Section VII. Discussion: W-A-Y Forward_____________________________________39
Section VIII. Conclusion__________________________________________________ 42
Section IX. References___________________________________________________45

2
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ARMM Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao

AFP Armed Forces of the Philippines
CAR Cordillera Administrative Region
CBOs Community Based Organizations
CCO Central Census Office
CCOCCC Climate Change Office of the Climate Change Commission
CHED Commission on Higher Education
CRED Center for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters
CSO Civil Society Organization
DA Department of Agriculture
DBM Department of Budget and Management
DFA Department of Foreign Affairs
DOF Department of Finance
DOJ Department of Justice
DOLE Department of Labor and Employment
DOST Department of Science and Technology
DOT Department of Tourism
DOTC Department of Transportation and Communication
DPWH Department of Public Works and Highways
DRRM Disaster Risk Reduction and Management
DRRMO Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Office
DSWD Department of Social Welfare and Development
DTI Department of Trade and Industry
EOC Emergency Operation Center
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GFDRR Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery
GSIS Government Service Insurance System
HFA Hyogo Framework for Action
HR Human Resource
HUDCC Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council (HUDCC
IASC Inter-Agency Standing Committee
IFRC International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
IMF International Monetary Fund
IOM International Organization of Migration
IOs International Organizations
Kph kilometers per hour
LDRRMF Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund
LGU Local Government Unit
LIDAR Light Detection and Ranging
MDGs Millenium Development Goals
NAPC-VDC National Anti-Poverty Commission-Victims of Disasters & Calamities
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

3
NCR National Capital Region
NCRFW National Commission on the Role of Filipino Women
NDRP National Disaster Response Plan
NDRRM National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management
NDRRMC National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council
NDRRMC National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council
NDRRMP National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan
NEDA National Economic and Development Authority
NFI Nonfood Item
NGOs Non-government Organizations
OCD Office of the Civil Defence
OFDA Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID)
OPAPP Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process
Philippine Atmospheric Geophysical and Astronomical Services
PAGASA Administration
PAR Philippine Area of Responsibility
PDNA Post Disaster Needs Assessment
PHIC Philippine Health Insurance Corporation
PHIVOLCS Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology
PNP Philippine National Police
PNRC Philippine National Red Cross
PO President's Office
QRF Quick Response Fund
RDANA Rapid Disaster Needs Assessment
RDT Rapid Deployment Team/s
SNAP Strategic National Action Plan
SSS Social Security System
TARA Technical Assistance and Resource Augmentation
ULAP Union of Local Authorities of the Philippines
UN United Nations
UNDP United Nation Development Program
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNISDR United Nations Officer for Disaster Risk Reduction
UNISDR United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction
UNOCHA United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
United Nations University and the Institute of Environment and Human
UNU-EHS Security
USAID United States Agency for International Development
USD United States of America Dollar
WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene
WB World Bank
WFP World Food Programme
WHO World Health Organization

4
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Total number of people reported and killed and affected by disasters in the
Philippines

Table 2: The impact of different disaster types in the Philippines from 1900 to 2014
Table 3: Cluster Approach Assignments

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Frequency of Natural Disasters Occurrence from year 1990-2014

Figure 2: Active Faults and Trenches
Figure 3: Earthquake-triggered Landslide Susceptibility Map
Figure 4: Liquefecation Susceptibility Map
Figure 5: Volcano distribution in the Philippines
Figure 6: Annual Extreme Rainfall
Figure 7: Thunderstorm Frequency in the Philippine Archipelago
Figure 8: Tsunami Prone Areas in the Philippines
Figure 9: Risk Dimension and Components
Figure 10: Geographic distribution of high impact disasters from 1900-2014
Figure 11: Pie chart of the main island distribution of high impact disasters (1900-2014)
Figure 12: Mortality Rate of Natural Disasters Occurrence from year 1990-2014
Figure 13: Global multi-hazard average annual loss (AAL)

5
 The Global Riskscape

“ Different hazards can be seen to represent different risk layers and

are therefore associated with various levels of frequency and impact.
It is important to understand the implications of these different hazards and the
way that they interrelate with drivers of vulnerability and exposure to create
specific patterns of risk.
”
- Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2015

6
Disaster Risk Profile and Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) Framework
of the Philippines: Natural Calamities | by Harold James E. Doroteo

I. Overview
Disasters have been interpreted as threatening development from the outside. As a result,
disaster risk generation within development has not been addressed effectively.
Understanding the costs and benefits of managing disasters will become a key tool for future
success. This means understanding and measuring the trade-offs implicit in decisions; their
benefits in terms of reduced poverty and inequality, environmental sustainability, economic
development and social progress; and who retains the risks, who bears the costs and who
reaps the benefits.1

Managing risk, rather than managing disasters as indicators of unmanaged risk, now has to
become inherent to the art of development; not an add-on to development, but a set of
practices embedded in its very DNA. This paper seeks to eat the meat and spit out the bones
for the ‘disaster universe’ of the country, Philippines.

The Philippines (Filipinas/Pilipinas),

officially known as the Republic of the
Philippines is a sovereign archipelagic
nation located in Southeastern Asia
situated in the western Pacific ocean. It
constitutes 7,107 islands and has a total
land area of approximately 299,764 square
kilometers. It spans 1,850 kilometers from
the northern part near Taiwan down to the
most islands near Borneo. Three huge
bodies of water surround the archipelago:
the Philippine Sea and Pacific Ocean on the east, the South China Sea (West Philippine Sea)
on the north and west, and the coastal waters of Borneo on the south. The country is divided
into three major island groups. Luzon is the largest (located at the north), followed by
Mindanao (south), and Visayas (middle-part). These are divided into 18 regions, 81
provinces, 144 cities, 1,490 municipalities, and 42,029 barangays. The rest are small islets
that emerge and disappear with ebbing and rising of tides.

Due to its geographical location, the Philippines is exposed to high incidents of hazards such
as tropical storms, tsunamis, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, landslides and droughts.
Tropical storms or typhoons accompanied by heavy rain and/or strong winds result in floods
and storm surges. The country is also situated along a highly seismic area lying along the
Pacific Ring of Fire where two major tectonic plates (Philippine Sea and Eurasian) meet and
is highly prone to earthquakes and volcanic eruptions. This explains the existence of more or
less 300 volcanoes of which 22 are classified is active, and the several occurrence of
earthquakes and tsunamis all year round. While being prone to hazards, its geographical
location also endows it with abundant natural resources and some of the world’s greatest
biodiversity.

The country has an as estimated population of 101 million people (seventh-most populated
in Asia and the 12th most in the world) with 44% are living in the urban areas while 55%

7
resides in the rural places. The form of government is a unitary presidential constitutional
republic. Philippines has a Gross Domestic Product of (GDP-PPP) of 7,41202 million US
dollars per capita.2

A number of ethnic groups and cultures are found throughout the islands. The major source
of livelihood includes agriculture-related farming, mining, forestry, and fishing. At present, it
is considered as a lower middle-income country.

It has a tropical maritime climate that is usually hot and humid. There are three seasons: tag
-init or tag-araw, the hot dry season or summer from March to May; tag-ulan, the rainy season
from June to November; and tag-lamig, the cool dry season from December to February. The
southwest monsoon (from May to October) is known as the Habagat, and the dry winds of
the northeast monsoon (from November to April), the Amihan. Temperatures usually range
from 21 °C (70 °F) to 32 °C (90 °F) although it can get cooler or hotter depending on the
season. The coolest month is January; the warmest is May.

Looking back…
For the past decades, data attest proof of “heavy burden” on Asia as it suffers the load of the
world’s disasters. Asia and the Pacific is subject to all major types of natural hazards and
dominates disaster impact categories across all regions of the world. Between 1970 and
2012, 1.8 million natural hazard-related deaths were recorded in the region, 51% of the global
total. Reported direct physical losses totaled almost $1.5 trillion (in real 2012 terms) over the
same period, equivalent to an average $95 million loss per day.7 Physical losses accounted
for 43% of the total global losses, far higher than the region’s share in global gross domestic
product.

According to EM-DAT, the region accounted for half of the estimated economic cost of
disasters in the world over the past 20 years, or $927 billion in Asia (more than $40 billion
annually on average) and $956 billion outside of Asia.4

Table 1 shows the total number of reported deaths and people affected for the past two
decades of all sorts of disasters. Figures shows that there is a marginal increase of deaths
and people affected which almost doubled. This can be explained by the doubling frequency
of disaster occurrence, population growth, and increasing risk factors.

Table 1. Total number of people reported and killed and affected by disasters in the Philippines
1994-2004 2004-2014 2014-2015
Total number of 8,520 19,793 332
reported deaths
Total number of 32,883,519 103,332,628 13,233,096
people
reported affected
* Source: World Disasters Report 2015

Throughout recorded history, the Philippines is considered as one of most disaster-prone

countries in the world. This, combined with high poverty, leaves various communities
throughout the Philippines in highly vulnerable situations.

8
II. The Philippines RISKSCAPE

Philippines is basically exposed to various natural hazards (lowest-highest exposure) of

earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, landslides, floods, and typhoons. An average of 20
earthquakes per day (most are too weak to be felt) is observed. Also, being located along the
typhoon belt/superhighway in the Pacific makes it vulnerable to extreme weather events. An
average of 20 typhoons visits the country every year. The wide coastlines are also vulnerable
to tsunamis, making the country susceptible to sea-level rise and storm surges. This, in turn,
results to secondary phenomena of flooding, landslides, heavy monsoon (torrential) rains,
and drought.

4.1 1.7
4.6

Figure 1. Frequency of Natural Disasters Occurrence from year 1990-2014 (CRED EM-DAT [Feb. 2015])

Figure 1 shows that for the last 15 years (1990-2014). 314 (51.3%) of all recorded disasters
are due to tropical storms/typhoons. This is followed by 136 counts of flooding (31.9%), 34
landslides (6.4%), 25 volcanic eruptions (4.6%), and 20 earthquakes with 4.1 percent.

Natural disasters are now 4 times more likely to affect people in Asia and the Pacific than
those in Africa, and 25 times more likely than those in Europe or North America. Hotspots in
Asia include Bangladesh, the Philippines, and Vietnam. Per historical assessment, they
possessed the highest risk of human losses and economic damages.1

Earthquakes
Since it lies along the Pacific Ring of Fire, the country have frequent seismic and volcanic
activities. Very big statistic of earthquakes of smaller magnitude occur very regularly due to
the meeting of major tectonic plates in the region.
Within the past two decades (1990-2010), five destructive earthquakes were recorded and
human casualty included 15 deaths and 119 persons injured. Damage to the economy was
estimated to reach PhP 207 million. The 1990 Luzon earthquake, the Moro Gulf Tsunami,
and the collapse of the Ruby Tower were the most devastating ever recorded. 4

9
Figure 2 below shows the distribution of active faults and trenches in the Philippines.

Figure 2. Active Faults and Trenches

(Source: PAGASA Website, http://pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

The latest major earthquake happened in Bohol and Cebu with a 7.2 magnitude last October
15, 2013. The national disaster council’s data reported 222 fatalities and 796 injured people.
Ten of thousands of structures were damaged including historical churches in the provinces.

10
 Figure 3. Earthquake-triggered Landslide Susceptibility Map
(Source: PAGASA Website, http://pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale (MMI), figure 3 shows the susceptibility of certain areas to
landslides once an earthquake occurs. Most susceptible regions happens to be those
located in the mountain range of Luzon and Mindanao.

11
 Figure 4. Liquefecation Susceptibility Map
(Source: PAGASA Website, http://pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

Liquefaction is a phenomenon where saturated sand and silt take on the characteristics of a
liquid during the intense shaking of an earthquake. Figure 1 shows the liquefecation
susceptibility map of the Philippines.5

12
Volcanic Eruptions
There are 53 active volcanoes (out of the 300+ total) in the archipelago. Philippine plate
and several smaller micro-plates are sub ducting along the Philippine trench to the east,
and the Luzon, Sulu, and several other small trenches to the west.
The currently active volcanoes are found in the several corresponding volcanic arcs, which
can be simplified into two major north-south trending arcs: the Luzon and Mindanao
volcanic arcs. The volcanoes are produced at the junction of the Philippines tectonic plate
and the Eurasian plate. Figure __ shows the location of the active volcanoes.6

Green - dormant
Orange - minor activity has been observed
Yellow – state of restlessness

Figure 5. Volcano distribution in the Philippines

The volcanoes of the Philippines rank as the most deadly and costly in the world.
Approximately 13% of its historic eruptions have caused fatalities, most notably at Taal and
Mayon volcanoes. Also, 22% of its eruptions caused significant damage.

Lahars (mud flows) are very common in the country due to heavy rains. Tsunamis accompany
eruptions more often than in any other volcanic region.6

13
Flooding

A review of the high impact tropical cyclones in the Philippines indicate that majority of the
victims were affected by inland flooding and landslides. The torrential rain can result in
flooding in overflowing rivers, saturated soil, low-lying areas and poor drainage. The most
number of deaths and economic losses come from this type of hazard. 31

Environmental concerns such as deforestation are worsening the risk of floods and
landslides. The uncontrolled urban growth, poor land use, the decrease in the number of
protected forests and riverbanks, poor waste disposal and housing have clogged waterways
and increased the risk of floods. 29

Figure 6. Annual Extreme Rainfall

(Source: PAGASA Website, http://pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

14
Typhoons / Tropical Cyclones
The climate of the Philippines is tropical and is strongly affected by monsoon (rain-bearing)
winds, which blow from the southwest from approximately May to October and from the
northeast from November to February, although there is considerable variations in the
frequency and amount of precipitation across the archipelago. From June to December
typhoons often strike the archipelago. Most of these storms come from the southeast, with
their frequency generally increasing from south to north. On average, about 20 typhoons
occur annually, with the months of June to November averaging approximately 3 typhoon
strikes per month. Luzon is significantly more at risk than more southern areas.
Typhoons are heaviest in Samar, Leyte, eastern Quezon province, and the Batan Islands,
and when accompanied by floods or high winds they may cause great loss of life and
property. Mindanao is generally free from typhoons. Figure 1 attached shows area prone to
thunderstorms; thus, storm surges based on the historical record.

Figure 7. Thunderstorm Frequency in the Philippine Archipelago

(Source: PAGASA Website, http://pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

An interesting phenomenon of Fujiwhara effect was observed with three typhoons proximal
to each other within the Philippine area of responsibility occurred together. This was the effect
of Ketsana, Pepeng and Mujigae on each other’s track which caused more damage.

15
Figure 8. Tsunami Prone Areas in the Philippines
(Source: PAGASA Website, http://pagasa.dost.gov.ph)

16
Top 10 Naturals Disasters (100 years back)
1. Typhoon Haiyan (Yolanda)
devastated the Eastern
Visayas region and the city of
Tacloban in November 2013.
Leaving the country with 7,986
deaths and 16.11 million
affected people, it is
considered as the strongest
typhoon which made landfall
ever recorded.
2. A tsunami triggered by a
magnitude 7.9 earthquake
devastates the Moro Gulf on
the southern island of
Mindanao on August 16, 1976,
killing between 5,000 and
8,000 people.
3. Tropical Storm Thelma
unleashes flash floods on the
central city of Ormoc on Leyte
island on November 15, 1991,
killing more than 5,100.
4. Typhoon Bopha smashes into
the main southern island of
Mindanao on December 3,
2012. Rarely hit by cyclones,
the region suffers about 1,900
people dead or missing.
5. A 7.8 magnitude earthquake
strikes the mountain resort of
Baguio city and other areas of
the northern Philippines on
July 16, 1990, killing 1,621
people.
6. Typhoon Ike hits the central islands on August 31, 1984, killing 1,363 people.
7. Taal volcano, about 60 kilometres (30 miles) from NCR, erupts on January 30, 1911,
killing about 1,300 people living in nearby villages.
8. An entire mountainside collapses on the village of Guinsaugon on the central island of
Leyte on February 17, 2006, killing 1,126.
9. Typhoon Washi hits the northern part of Mindanao island on December 16, 2011, killing
at least 1,080 people.
10. Floods and landslides unleashed by Typhoon Trix kill 995 people in the Bicol region of
the main island of Luzon on October 16, 1952.
(No. 7 in the image: Mayon Volcano eruption (1814) was omitted, while Typhoon Haiyan (2013) was added)
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/524569/10-deadliest-natural-disasters-in-the-philippines#ixzz3tvsChVg7

17
Using Index for Risk Management (INFORM), the first global, objective and transparent tool
for understanding the risk of humanitarian crises, the Philippines profile has a value of 5.1
(high), ranking 31st of all the 191 countries assessed.

(Source: http://www.inform-index.org/Results/Country-profiles?iso3=PHL)

Figure 9. Risk Dimension and Components

18
INFORM scores the risk dimension
components using a Likert scale with
0 as the lowest and 10 as the
highest). Apparently, the high
exposure to the natural hazards is
can be slightly altered; however, the
vulnerability and coping capacity can
be improved a lot. Apparently, for the
record since big natural calamities
hit the country two years back, there
has been a dramatic improvement in
terms of the capacities and reduction
of vulnerabilities. The highest risk
indicator for the Philippines is the
physical exposure to earthquake
and typhoons vis-à-vis storm surge.

III. Disaster Impact Assessment

From the EMDAT database, a total of 565 natural disasters were reported in the Philippines
from 1900 to 2014. Its impact included 69,777 deaths, and 187 million total people affected.
The estimated economic damage is 23 billion US dollars.

Table 2: The impact of different disaster types in the Philippines from 1900 to 2014
Type of Disaster Number Number Total Damage
of Events of Deaths Affected (000 USD)
Drought 8 8 6553207 64453
Earthquake 27 9924 5798678 583178
(seismic activity)
Flood 136 3532 28548497 3793743
Mass movement dry 3 361 -- --
Mass movement wet 30 2441 317546 0
Storm 316 49230 143843387 18276583
Volcano 25 2996 1734907 231961
Wildfire 1 2 300 0
Epidemic 18 1283 149422 0
Insect Infestation 2 0 200 925
Total 565 69,777 186,946,144 22,950,843
Data Source: "EM-DAT: The OFDA/CRED International Disaster Database, Universite catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Bel."
Data version: v12.7, Retrieved on 20-Nov-2014

19
In more than 100 years, majority of the events affected NCR, CAR and Region I-VII. These
regions are found in the main islands of Luzon and Visayas with a mode of 60 occurrences
per region.

Conspicuously, Region III has practically twice the frequency of 105 events as compared to
its neighbouring regions. The Southern Philippines, include the main island group of
Mindanao, is less affected with disasters. Only 10-30 disasters occurred per region in
Mindanao. Region XI has the least number with only 11 meteorological disasters in one
century. (See Figure 8)

Number of Deaths Economic Damage

Data Source: "EM-DAT: The OFDA/CRED International Disaster

Database, Universite catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Bel."Data version 12.7

Figure 10: Geographic distribution of high impact disasters from 1900-2014

The plotted locations of disasters with high number of deaths are concentrated in regions not
frequently affected by the tropical cyclones. Most disasters occur in Region III or the main
island group of Luzon, the deadly tropical cyclones happened in the regions of Visayas (29%)
and Mindanao (45%). In contrast, the costliest disasters when plotted are concentrated in the
Luzon (64%) and Visayas (26%) areas. Although some are found in Mindanao (10%), these
are in the major urban cities of Davao, General Santos, Cagayan de Oro and Zamboanga.
20
The costly disasters are less frequent in the Visayas compared to Luzon but larger plotted
dots in the Visayas indicate a higher economic loss per event (See Figure 9 and 10).

Number of Deaths Total People Affected Economic Damage

26%
11% 10%
45% 26%
30%
59%
64%
29%

Legend: Luzon Visayas Mindanao

Data Source: "EM-DAT: The OFDA/CRED International Disaster Database, Universite catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Bel."Data version 12.7

Figure 11: Pie chart of the main island distribution of high impact disasters (1900-2014)

The distribution of the total people affected and estimated economic damages are similar.
Majority of them occurred in Luzon and Visayas. (See Figure 11)

Impact on Public Health

Natural disasters and related emergencies often result in significant impacts on people’s
health, including the loss of many lives. Every new threat reveals the challenges for managing
its health risks and effects.

Crises due to disasters cause ill-health directly or through the disruption of health systems,
facilities, and services. This, leaves several people especially disadvantaged populations
without access to health care in times of emergency. Also, basic infrastructures such as water
supplies and safe shelter which are essential for health is affected. 23

Figure 12. Mortality Rate of Natural Disasters Occurrence from year 1990-2014 (CRED EM-DAT [Feb. 2015])

21
Based on the disasters, leading causes of casualties are from typhoons. Figure 12 shows
the proportion for each disaster type that occurred in the country.
Between 1980 and 2012, 42 million life years were lost in internationally reported disasters
each year. (The concept of “human life years” provides a better representation of disaster
impact, as it provides a metric describing the time required to produce economic development
and social progress.) Over 80 per cent of the total life years lost in disasters are spread across
low and middle-income countries, representing a serious setback to social and economic
development comparable to infectious diseases such as tuberculosis.1

Aside from deaths, other health impacts include displacement of populations where health
status are compromised and health needs are not fully provided. Add to this are the
psychological stress which increases number of cases of psychosocial behavioral disorders.
Lastly, there is a tremendous risk of infection and contamination for response and relief
personnel. In a study conducted by the DOH assessing the baseline health status and health
needs of natural disaster-stricken populations, a high incidence and prevalence of
communicable diseases (i.e. URTI, cholera, etc) were observed.

Impact on the Environment

Environmental pollution is a major impact of natural disasters in the Philippines. Increasing
incidence plays a significant role in the degradation of the environment. Adding up to the
catastrophes brought about by disasters are the demographic growth and poor land-use
planning. This led to massive depletion of natural resources of the country.
Declining forest cover, in particular is contributing to increased run-off, resulting in more
frequent flash flooding, landslides and droughts. Upland communities in Panay, for instance
have started to experience periods of drought since the 1980s, becoming more frequent in
the 1990s, as a direct consequence of deforestation. Reduced forest cover has also left the
area also increasingly exposed to typhoons, which in the past had little impact. Urban flooding
is also on the increase. Bagiuo City, for instance, has begun to experience problems of
flooding in recent years, again due to deforestation.

Also, each hazard affects people, agriculture, the built environment and transport (e.g.
aviation) in very different ways. For example, people living close to a volcano may be at direct
risk from pyroclastic flows, avalanches or lahars. At the other extreme, volcanic ash clouds
in the atmosphere and ash fall on the ground can have impacts hundreds to thousands of
kilometres from their source. Damage and loss of facilities/infrastructures. Breakdown and/or
altered communication networks and information flows are some of the environmental
impacts.

Moreover, current trends such as urbanization, environmental degradation, and climate

change will bring even more severe impacts.

Impact on Development
Poverty and vulnerability to natural hazards are closely linked and mutually reinforcing. Poor
and socially disadvantaged groups are usually the most vulnerable to hazards, reflecting their
social, cultural, economic and political environment. Disasters, in turn, are a source of
transient hardship and distress and a factor contributing to persistent poverty. Indeed, at the
household level, poverty is the single most important factor determining vulnerability, in part

22
reflecting location of housing (e.g., on floodplains, riverbanks, steep slopes or contaminated
land previously occupied by industrial facilities); level of access to basic services (e.g., refuse
collection) particularly for illegal squatters; sources of livelihood; and level of access to
financial and other assets and resources, leaving limited recourse to inter-temporal
consumption smoothing. The covariate nature of natural hazards also implies that there is
limited scope for community level support systems. The poverty-exacerbating nature of
vulnerability can be further reinforced by deliberate risk averting livelihood choices that poorer
households may make. For example, poorer households may choose to forego the potential
benefits of higher yielding crops in favor of more hazard-tolerant ones, implying more stable
and secure but, in most years, lower earnings.7
Disasters can also contribute to longer-term states of poverty by delaying development of
poorer areas. The cost of disasters has severe consequences for the country's economic
development. The direct costs resulting from natural disasters lower annual gross domestic
product by 0.8 percent. In addition, indirect and secondary effects that further raise the costs
including major social and environment-related costs.7

The Philippines has consistently experienced financing gaps owing to disasters since 2000.
The country's 2013 national disaster budget, amounting to about 128 million euros ($171
million), was used up even before super typhoon Haiyan hit. 8

Urbanization is creating large concentrations of people and physical capital that are
potentially exposed to natural hazards. For instance, rapid urbanization, low levels of income
and lack of areas allocated for affordable residential developments have led to the
proliferation of unplanned, informal and overcrowded settlements, often in more hazard-
prone areas as illustrated in the case of Navotas, and this trend is set to continue. The rapid
growth of Metro Manila, in particular, is placing increasing numbers of people and physical
assets at direct risk from potential seismic events. The National Capital Region already
accounted for 30.8% of national GDP in 2001 and this figure seems set to rise. A major
earthquake in Metro Manila would thus have substantial short and longer-term economic
ramifications, far beyond those experienced as a consequence of the 1990 Baguio
earthquake. Demographic growth and urbanization is also placing considerable pressure on
the provision of basic services. Resulting shortfalls in provision – for example, deteriorating
solid waste management and related siltation of rivers and drainage channels – could have
direct implications for the future incidence and severity of flooding.27 Informal settlers are no
longer welcomed in some cities and municipalities, as seen in the cases of Marikina and
Navotas. However, others continue to allow them in, in some cases as a deliberate political,
vote-raising strategy.

Given that spending on social protection, public health and public education investment is
critical to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), this again highlights that those
objectives cannot be achieved unless disaster risk is addressed.

Impact on the Economy

Disaster risk is not evenly distributed around the earth, but reflects the social construction of
hazard, exposure and vulnerability in different countries in the context of different risk drivers
(UNISDR, 2009a). Globally, the distribution of AAL reflects the value and vulnerability of the

23
capital stock concentrated on cyclone or tsunami-prone coastlines, along seismic fault lines
or in flood prone river basins.

In absolute terms, global AAL is concentrated in large, higher-income, hazard-exposed

economies, such as Japan and the United States of America (Figure 3.4). However, the
disproportionately high risk of lower-income countries relative to the size of their economies
or the value of their capital stock has been repeatedly recognized. 1,8

In relation to annual capital investment, for example, many low and middle-income countries,
and in particular small island developing states (SIDS), have the highest concentrations of
risk.1

Figure 13: Global multi-hazard average annual loss (AAL)

Global average annual loss (AAL) in the built environment associated with tropical cyclones (wind
and storm surge), earthquakes, tsunamis and floods is now estimated at almost US$314 billion. This
is the amount of money that should be set aside each year worldwide to cover the future disaster
losses associated with these hazards. (GAR 2015)

In absolute terms, global AAL is concentrated in large, higher-income, hazard-exposed economies.

However, in relation to annual capital investment or social expenditure, many low and middle-
income countries (Philippines), and in particular small island developing states (SIDS), have the
highest concentrations of risk.

Disaster risk is not evenly distributed around the earth, but reflects the social construction of hazard,
exposure and vulnerability in different countries in the context of different risk drivers (UNISDR,
2009a).

Globally, the distribution of AAL reflects the value and vulnerability of the capital stock concentrated
on cyclone or tsunami-prone coastlines, along seismic fault lines or in flood-prone river basins. 1

Apart from SIDS, a number of larger countries like Myanmar, Madagascar, Philippines and
Honduras face particularly difficult challenges in this regard, as the AAL represents nearly
69 per cent in the Philippines.1

In countries with a high ratio of average annual loss to their capital stock and savings,
disasters can lead to severe economic disruptions. In those with a high ratio of risk to capital
investment, future economic growth can be compromised. And in those with a high ratio of
risk to social expenditure, social development may be challenged. 1

24
The Filipino population and economy are growing rapidly, especially in urban centers, where
over 65 percent of the country lives, 45 percent of it in poverty. While the urbanization policy
has been good for economic growth, it has also increased the vulnerability of its 25 largest
cities, most of them on riverbanks and coastlines. Urban vulnerability is made worse by poor
housing conditions, and the low adaptive capability of the urban poor.

IV. Structure and Characteristics of the NDRRM System

Legal Authority: Republic Act 10121

The Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act

Republic Act (RA) 10121 which was passed last May 2010 is the foremost guiding policy and
backbone of the present National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management (NDRRM)
system in the country.
Among other things, it recognizes the need to adopt a disaster risk reduction and
management approach that is holistic, comprehensive, integrated, and proactive in lessening
the socio-economic and environmental impacts of disasters including climate change. It also
seeks to promote the participation and involvement or all sectors and stakeholders at all
levels, especially in the local level, which is the community. The law replaced its predecessor,

25
Presidential Decree No.1566 of 1978, (Strengthening the Philippine Disaster Control,
Capability and Establishing the National Program of Community Disaster Prevention), which
no longer reflect the social realities of time and defaults on the development context of
disasters and climate change.
RA 10121 provides strong legal and institutional basis for DRRM in the country and gives a
boost to the development of policies and plans, implementation of actions and measures
pertaining to all aspects of disaster risk reduction and management. This includes good
governance, risk assessment and early warning, knowledge building and awareness raising,
reducing underlying factors, and preparedness for effective response and early recovery. 4

National Disaster Risk and Reduction Management and Council

Per RA 10121, a framework and national body responsible for the mandate was created, the
National Disaster Risk and Reduction Management and Council (NDRRMC). It serves as the
Chief of Staff’s (in this case, the President of the Republic of the Philippines) adviser on
disaster preparedness programs, disaster operations and rehabilitation efforts undertaken by
the government and the private sector. It acts as the top coordinator of all disaster
management and the highest allocator of resources in the Philippines.9
The NDRRMC was formerly known as the National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC).
The primary goal is disaster reduction by ensuring effective and efficient implementation of
civil protection programs through an integrated, multi-sectoral and community based
approach and strategies for the protection and preservation of life, poverty and environment.
The NDRRMC is chaired by the Secretary of the Office of Civil Defense. It has 4 Vice
chairpersons. The vice-chairpersons come from the Secretary of the lead agencies
corresponding to the four priority areas of the NDRRMP, namely: (1) disaster prevention
and mitigation – Department of Science and Technology; (2) disaster preparedness –
Department of Interior and Local Government; (3) disaster response – Department of
Social Welfare and Development; and (4) rehabilitation and recovery-National Economic
and Development Authority.10

26
 Source: Philippine NDRRMC, 2011
Figure 11: The institutional mechanism of the NDRRM Framework

The council has 39 members including representatives of four CSOs and one from the private
sector. Aside from the chairperson and vice-chairperson, the members include the following:
1. Secretary of the Department of Health (DOH)
2. Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR);
3. Secretary of the Department of Agriculture (DA)
4. Secretary of the Department of Education (DepEd)
5. Secretary of the Department of Energy (DOE)
6. Secretary of the Department of Finance (DOF)
7. Secretary of the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI)
8. Secretary of the Department of Transportation and Communication (DOTC)
9. Secretary of the Department of Budget and Management (DBM)
10. Secretary of the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH)
11. Secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA)
12. Secretary of the Department of Justice (DOJ)
13. Secretary of the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE)
14. Secretary of the Department of Tourism (DOT)
15. The Executive Secretary
16. Secretary of the Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process (OPAPP)
17. Chairman, Commission on Higher Education (CHED)
18. Chief of Staff, Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP)
19. Chief, Philippine National Police (PNP)
20. The Press Secretary

27
 21. Secretary-General of the Philippine National Red Cross (PNRC)
22. Commissioner of the National Anti-Poverty Commission-Victims of Disasters
and Calamities Sector (NAPC-VDC)
23. Chairperson, National Commission on the Role of Filipino Women
24. Chairman, Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council (HUDCC)
25. Executive-Director of the Climate Change Office of the Climate Change
Commission;
26. President, Government Service Insurance System
27. President, Social Security System
28. President, Philippine Health Insurance Corporation
29. President of the Union of Local Authorities of the Philippines (ULAP)
30. President of the League of Provinces in the Philippines (LPP)
31. President of the League of Cities in the Philippines (LCP)
32. President of the League of Municipalities in the Philippines (LMP)
33. President of the Liga ng Mga Barangay (LMB)
34. Four (4) representatives from the CSOs
35. One (1) representative from the Private Sector
36. Administrator of the OCD

The act includes the establishment of a permanent Local DRRM Offices in every province,
city, and municipality. These offices shall set the direction, development, implementation, and
coordination of DRRM programs within their area of responsibility.
Together with the technical management group, the OCD conducts a regular monitoring
with a standard evaluation template of the program ensuring that it is on time. The
systematic monitoring and evaluation includes the LGU, regional and national levels which
are based from the HFA priorities. A report is submitted annually to the office of the
President, Senate and House of Representatives. 14
RA 10121 acknowledges the need for developing a National Disaster Reduction and
Management Framework (NDRRMF) that shall provide a comprehensive, multi-hazard, multi-
sectoral, inter-agency and community-based approach to DRRM. The NDRRFM will be the
principal guide to DRRM efforts of the country and should undergo project implementation
review every five years, or as may be deemed necessary, in order to ensure relevance. 4

Comprehensive NDRRM Framework

From NDCC to NDRMMC, there has been a dramatic paradigm shift in the guidance of the
disaster management programs, projects and strategies implementation in the country. It has
been observed and noted from past experiences, combined with lessons learned and gaps
examination, that the previous law that creates the Council is more leaning and gives more
emphasis on response action, thus, making the implementers reactive to possible disasters
rather than taking a proactive stance in disaster risk management.
We have been made aware that the existing framework for disaster management in the
Philippines has been the traditional, reactive or dominant approach, which focuses more on
relief and emergency response. Since NDRRMC took charge a few years back and initiated

28
the paradigm shift on disaster management approaches and strategies from reactive to
proactive (from disaster response and preparedness to disaster risk reduction/management
(DRRM).
“The paradigm of Philippines’ disaster risk management framework shifted from
reactive to proactive mode.”
Since then, various stakeholders have started adopting to it and are now taking the lead in
developing best practices for the current advocacy initiatives. Included here is the “Inter-
agency/multi-sectoral, multi-stakeholder approach” which stresses that action and
cooperation is needed especially for major disaster events; “community-based approach”
where the national government strongly pushes that the community is the first line of
defense in any emergency situation.

Budget Allocation. The total Philippine budget for 2015 is PHP 2.606 T. PHP 14 B of this
is for the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund (NDRRMF). PHP 6.7 B
is for Quick Response Funds (QRF) (source: General Appropriations Act (GAA) 2015).

On local allocation, Section 21 of RA 10121 provides that the Local Disaster Risk Reduction
and Management Fund (LDRRMF) amounting to not less than five percent (5%) of the
estimated revenue from regular sources shall be set aside to support disaster risk
management activities…” This shall “cover the thirty percent (30%) lumpsum allocation for
Quick Response Fund (QRF) and the seventy percent (70%) allocation for disaster
prevention and mitigation, preparedness, response, rehabilitation and recovery.” There are
other budget allocations undertaken by respective agencies (some of them may not be
explicitly labelled as “for DRRM” but in fact perform this function).

The National Disaster Risk Reduction Management Plan (NDRRMP)

The Philippines’ National Disaster Risk Reduction Management Plan (NDRRMP) was
formulated to serve as a roadmap on how DRRM shall contribute to sustainable development.
It promotes inclusive growth, build adaptive capacities of communities, increase the resilience
of vulnerable sectors, and optimize disaster mitigation opportunities with the end in view of
promoting people’s welfare and security.
Guided by good governance principles within the context of poverty alleviation and
environmental protection, the plan is about partnerships for effective delivery of services to
the people up to the grass-root level. Thus, a vital component of the plan is the engagement
of civil society organizations (CSOs) and private sector in the government’s programs.
Ii also highlights the significance of mainstreaming and harmonizing DRRM and Climate
Change Action (CCA) in the development processes such as policy formulation, socio-
economic development planning, budgeting, and governance, specifically in the sectors of
agriculture, energy, health, and education.

29
Disaster Prevention and Response Strategies
Cluster Approach
The Cluster Approach operates at two levels. At the global level, which aims to strengthen
system-wide preparedness and technical capacity to respond to humanitarian emergencies
by designating global Cluster Leads. At the country level, the aim is to ensure a more
coherent and effective response by mobilizing groups of agencies, organizations, and NGOs
to respond in a strategic manner across all key sectors or areas of activity, each sector having
a clearly designated lead, as agreed by the UN Humanitarian Coordinator and the Country
Team, with specific Terms of Reference (ToR), and in support of existing government
coordination structure and emergency response mechanisms. This will ensure operational
synergy and optimization of deliverable benefits to the affected areas.

In the advent that the coping capacity of the country does not suffice to meet the needs
caused by the disaster, a cluster approach is implemented as well to international
humanitarian organizations. Each cluster corresponds to a lead government agency which
the international counterpart is paired and coordinated. 16

Table 3: Cluster Approach Assignments

Cluster Cluster Lead IASC Counterpart
Nutrition Department of Health United Nations Children’s Fund
(DOH) (UNICEF)
Water, Sanitation and World Health Organization (WHO)
Hygiene (WASH)
Emergency Shelter Department of Social International Federation of Red
Welfare and Development Cross and Red Crescent Societies
(DSWD) (IFRC); UN Habitat
Protection UNICEF
Food World Food Programme (WFP)
Livelihood International Labour Organisation
(ILO)
Camp Coordination and Office of Civil Defense – International Organization of
Management Provincial Disaster Migration (IOM)
Coordinating Council
(OCD-PDCC)
Agriculture Department of Agriculture Food and Agriculture Organization
(DA) (FAO)
Early Recovery Office of Civil Defense United Nations Development
(OCD) Programme (UNDP)
Logistics WFP
Emergency UN Office for the Coordination of
Telecommunications Humanitarian Assistance (UN-
OCHA); WFP; UNICEF
Education Department of Education UNICEF
(DepEd)
Source: NDCC Memorandum No. 04, s. 2008, 07 March 2008 – Addendum to NDCC Memorandum No 05, S-2007

30
The Cluster Approach clearly defines leadership roles among government cluster leads that
are expected to craft cluster operational strategies covering phases before, during, and after
disasters, which will provide a clear direction for cluster partners and other stakeholders on
how, what, when, and where to contribute; facilitate a process aimed at ensuring well-
coordinated and effective humanitarian responses in the sector or area of activity concerned;
and, ensure continuous improvement in the implementation of the Cluster Approach in the
country by identifying best practices and carrying out lessons learned and activities either
individually or in collaboration with other clusters. These arrangements will all redound to
more benefits that are timely delivered and wider areas covered. 11

Public information and Mainstreaming

An extensive campaign is conducted to increase the public awareness of disaster risk
reduction. It is done before, during and after disaster through trainings, campaigns, manuals,
bulletins and media. The civic consciousness is enhanced through special events like fire
prevention month and the disaster consciousness week. Watershed management projects
with reforestation efforts have been employed. 17, 18
Contingency plans have been developed based on hazards and risk mapping for flood,
communities and lifelines at risk, capacity and vulnerability assessment, strategic
interventions. The pilot local government unit is Hinulaton, a low-income class municipality in
the province of Surigao del Sur. Inspite of the limited resources, the community developed
local hazard and risk maps. Through involvement of the all sectors and all stakeholders’
respective roles and responsibilities were determined to increase the resilience of the
population. 18

Infrastructure and Socioeconomic Assistance

The Philippines has also allocated resources for infrastructure and facilities to mitigate
flooding such as the construction of river dikes and sea walls. Multi-sectoral initiatives have
been done to declog critical sewage, drainage system and water tributaries. These projects
have been launched in major cities of Metro Manila, Davao City and Cebu City to be sustained
by the locality. 17,18
The government launched multi-sectoral rehabilitation program in the areas of Southern and
Central Mindanao which have been severely affected by climate change. Its strategies
include the creation of livelihood and household income, improving the health and nutrition
services, protecting and supporting the vulnerable communities, agricultural development
and modernization. 19, 21

Community Based Capacities

The participation of civil society organization is important in effective disaster risk reduction
and management. The DRRM Framework emphasizes the principle of multi-sectoral
accountability since disasters have a cross-cutting effect. Disasters affect all sectors of the
society and have a major impact to the most vulnerable groups particularly the poor, women,
children, elderly and the differently-abled.

31
The CSOs help in breaking the barriers of social exclusion, marginalization and economic
inequity. They provide a venue for the vulnerable groups to express the conditions and needs
of the grassroots communities. In addition, the CSOs have huge experience and knowledge
on risk assessment and risk reduction approaches in the locality. 15 They have filled gaps in
the government response and complement the capacities of the government. These have
ranged from medical care, housing to search and rescue. The church, schools and media
have become strategic avenues for disaster management and information dissemination. 22
Listed in Appendix 2 (Table 9) are the civil society organizations in the different regions and
provinces of the Philippines which have implemented community based risk reduction and
management program.22 Some organizations were established through local initiatives while
some under the assistance of international nongovernment organizations.

National Disaster Response Plan

The NDRP was developed by the Office of Civil Defence with the recommendations from the
NDRRMC member agencies. It provides guidance on the processes and mechanisms in a
coordinated response by the national or/and local offices.
The NDRP is categorized into parts which refer to the type of the disaster. The activities are
based on the cluster approach targeted to specific emergency and disaster needs.
Exemplified in table 6 is the response for hydrometeorological disasters which covers tropical
cyclones. The details of the procedures are discussed further in the operations protocol.
The role of the OCD is to coordinate and mobilize resources for response and information
management. The role of the DSWD, head of the Response Cluster of the NDRRMC, is to
provide Technical Assistance and Resource Augmentation (TARA) together with Camp
Coordination and Management. It also provides food and non-food Items to the affected
families. 23

Best Practices in the Philippines

Early Warning system
The development and implementation of early warning systems has been repeatedly cited
as one of the areas where the most progress has been made within the HFA (WMO, 2011,
2014a; UNISDR, 2013b, 2011b). Success stories from Bangladesh, Chile, India, the
Philippines and other countries show that timely and effective warning and communication
coupled with risk information and a prepared population significantly reduces mortality.

The knowledge on disaster management in the country remains inadequate. Hence, research and
development in disaster reduction techniques have been developed and integrated into the national
disaster management program. The priorities in this strategy include the development of the Philippine
weather bureau known as the PAGASA. This encompasses the researches on tropical cyclones, track
prediction, typhoon formations, typhoon intensification research, and meteorological and hydrological
hazards assessment. The Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (PHIVOLCS) is also part
of the development where seismic activities of in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao are monitored and

32
hazards are studied as well. 15,16 Warning systems for typhoons, tsunamis, flood, volcanic eruption and
lahar flows have been set up in strategic places in the Philippines. 21
The (PHIVOLCS) Strategic Plan 2012-2016 also includes the “Volcano, Earthquake, and
Tsunami Disaster Risk Reduction Program,” which includes seminars, workshops, trainings,
lectures and drills for various stakeholders.

The Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration

(PAGASA), meanwhile, reports the following:
1. Flood/Flashflood Hazards Mapping (10K) and Storm Surge Hazard Mapping (10K) of
17 provinces in the Eastern Seaboard.
2. Multi-hazard maps (Flood/flashflood and Storm Surge) developed for the Greater
Metro Manila Area (GMMA READY Project), including Storm Surge Hazard maps for
the municipalities along the Manila Bay Area (1:50K).
3. Tropical Cyclone Severe Wind Hazard Mapping and Risk Assessment for the
4. Greater Metro Manila Area under the AusAID Project to serve as basis for future
tropical cyclone emergency planning and to mitigate the risks from severe winds in
Greater Metro Manila Area.
5. Flood Risk assessment along Marikina-Pasig River Basin.

Mobile applications
Project NOAH’s (Nationwide Operational Assessment of Hazards) is an information and
map hazards platform through multiple media. The USD48 million project was launched in
July 2012. It incorporated automated rain gauges in river basis around the country, allowing
on time tracking of rainfall and river water levels. It also enhanced visualization through the
LIDAR technology which allows high-resolution 3D mapping of the country’s topography.

33
Its mission is to undertake disaster science research and development, advance the use of
cutting edge technologies and recommend innovative information services in government's
disaster prevention and mitigation efforts. Though the use of science and technology and in
partnership with the academe and other stakeholders, the DOST through Program NOAH is
taking a multi-disciplinary approach in developing systems, tools, and other technologies that
could be operationalized by government to help prevent and mitigate disasters.

FEATURES:

1. Map View
 PAR (Philippine Area of Responsibility)
 Overview (MTSAT, Rainfall Contours, Chance of
Rain, etc)
 Doppler (Subic, Tagaytay, Cebu, Hinatuan,
Tampakan)
 Sensors (Weather Stations, Stream Gauges, Rain
Gauges, Tide Levels)
 Weather Outlook (Probablity of Rain, PAGASA
Typhoon Forecast)
2. List View
 Almost the same with Map View but presented as
list for ease of use.
3. News
 DOST-PAGASA
 ClimateX
 PAGASA-FFWS
(Flood Forecasting and Warning Section)
4. Help
 Help articles and guidelines
5. Info
 Information Dashboard
 Useful links and contents

Another breakthrough mobile application is the fruit of Project NOAH which is Project ARKO.

34
The Philippines is hit by an average of twenty typhoons a year. Most of the time, these cause
major flooding that can be a danger to one’s life and livelihood. Lives have been lost due to
storm flooding because people didn’t know what path to take to safety or even if their area
would be hit by a flood-causing downpour.

ARKO hopes to address the need of every Filipino to more information during times of
major rains and flooding. By accessing the extensive databases of Project NOAH and
DOST, Arko can give the user up-to-the-minute updates on rainfall and other weather
conditions near you or wherever you choose.

Features
 Flood Mapping: Using data from previous floods (like Ondoy), Arko will show you
which areas are prone to flooding so you can avoid them, or designate a safe zone
where evacuees can go to during floods.
 Remote Monitoring: Arko can allow you to check on how flooding and/or rainfall is in
other areas. Perfect for those who worry if a family member, loved one or friend is
doing fine despite the weather.

Weather Advisory: By connecting with Project NOAH, PAGASA and DOST's various
weather monitoring facilities, Arko can give you updates on the weather. It can even
give you a good estimate on whether it will rain or not, based on the data it gets.

The important component of the system is the social media capability. This allows the civilian
to have regular updates on calamity stricken areas while allowing them to post an update.
The Philippines has an overall internet penetration rate of about 33% of its 100 million people.
Through social media networking, information is shared faster together with the broadcasting
networks.20

V. Lessons Learned

A lot of attention and leverage has been given to DRRM in the country for the past several
years. Several programs and projects have been undertaken by numerous organizations and
stakeholders. A concerted effort to address the face of reality of disasters has shown key
results. However, there were still some backlogs and bottlenecks where lessons can be
learned. The follow through that is needed so that the gains are sustained or scaled up
remains to be the challenge. Threats remain to haunt the government and other stakeholders
in adopting good and best practices contextually. Vulnerability and people’s risk was
lessened significantly but are still on the rise.

Complementing DRRM components. The disaster preparedness, response, prevention,

mitigation, rehabilitation, and recovery are not mutually exclusive. However, operational and
institutional setups deal with actual operations and planning as separate structures with
respective personnel and stakeholders. There is a need to strengthen partnerships and
improve relationships among these key players and stakeholders. To build resilience,
disaster relief and rehabilitation requires sensitivity to the development processes so that
dependence is will be prevented and sustainability is assured.

Let us take a look on the case study of Typhoon Haiyan (Yolanda) published by the World
Disaster Report (2015), and learn from the issues and gaps experienced.

35
Case Study: Typhoon Haiyan (Yolanda), November 2013
Typhoon Yolanda (internationally known as Typhoon Haiyan), a Category 5 typhoon, made
landfall in Eastern Visayas, Philippines on 8 November 2013 and affected more than 16
million people, with almost 8,000 deaths and 4.1 million people displaced.

Total economic losses have been estimated at US$10 billion, over ten times the losses
associated with Typhoon Bopha of 2012, known locally in the Philippines as Typhoon Pablo.13

Working with Local Actors. (World Disaster Report 2015, Chapter 1: Box1.5)
On 8 November 2013, Typhoon Haiyan (known locally as Yolanda) devastated the Visayas region of the
Philippines. More than 6,000 deaths were recorded while in excess of 14 million people were affected and
approximately 4 million people were displaced. Approximately 5 per cent of the total damage to housing and
settlements occurred in Tacloban City – where more than 23,000 houses were partially damaged and
approximately 30,000 destroyed. All seven hospitals and 17 public health facilities sustained major damage, as
did 90 per cent of all educational facilities, 36 public buildings and the city’s electricity, water and
communications networks

Prior to the typhoon, Tacloban City was the fifth fastest-growing city in the country. It was the social, economic,
transportation and administrative hub of the Eastern Visayas region and had been granted highly urbanized’
status in 2008 – giving it autonomy from the provincial government of Leyte. However, the city still had a housing
shortage of almost 18,000 dwellings and its location and topography make it vulnerable to typhoons, landslides,
storm surges, earthquakes and tsunami. Tacloban was “reduced to ruins” by a typhoon and storm surge in 1897
and “practically destroyed” by a similar disaster in 1912 (Luces, 2013). One year after Typhoon Haiyan, a series
of interviews were conducted with humanitarian practitioners regarding their experiences of the challenges and
opportunities of humanitarian response in Tacloban.

A common finding from this research was the number and diversity of stakeholders in urban areas – ranging
from community-based organizations and cooperatives, landlords and banks, to universities, utility companies
and the various levels and departments of local and national government. This meant that humanitarian
agencies needed both the local knowledge and the time to understand and consult a large number of
stakeholders in order to design and implement programmes. On the other hand, there were many more potential
partners, which made it possible to provide a broader range of support.

A specific challenge of working in Tacloban (which was easy to get to and received significant media attention)
was the number of actors providing humanitarian assistance outside the humanitarian system. These ranged
from interventions by individuals and extended families to larger programmes of assistance from religious
groups and the private sector. Actors such as these were less likely to register their activities with either the
local government or humanitarian coordination systems – making it difficult to coordinate activities and levels of
assistance.

Several interviewees commented on the higher levels of staff, skills and expertise within Tacloban City’s
government in comparison to local governments in rural areas. They found the city government an accessible
and capable partner in terms of integrated recovery planning and programme design, with partnerships with
local institutions to access specialist expertise. However, they also noted that:
 the city government was overwhelmed with requests and demands from national government,
humanitarian agencies and communities, which limited their ability to provide services and work in
partnership
 staff lacked key technical skills and experience in areas such as urban planning, livelihoods and shelter,
and specifically in the application of these skill-sets in a post-disaster context
 the lack of surge capacity in key national government departments meant that staff who were affected
by the disaster were expected to return to work, which caused harm to some of them.

Despite high levels of capacity, the city government was deprived of almost all of its income from local taxes
and permits (50 per cent of its total income) after the typhoon. This left the city lacking the resources to
implement activities identified in its Recovery and Rehabilitation Plan and dependent on assistance from
national government and humanitarian agencies. National government delayed approval of the city’s plan,

36
claiming that it was too costly in comparison to other, predominantly rural, municipalities. Despite the plan’s
focus on infrastructure-led (“service-orientated”) resettlement, both humanitarian organizations and national
government were also unable or unwilling to invest in the infrastructure required for the holistic development of
the proposed resettlement sites. National government argued that post-disaster funding should be allocated to
repair and rehabilitation rather than new infrastructure, while the humanitarian agencies’ funds were tied to
assistance in specific sectors.

Politics were felt to play a much greater role in decision-making in Tacloban than in rural areas, with political
allegiances subject to change much more frequently. One interviewee described how this can be a positive
thing – for example, if shared objectives can be identified then government officials can be helpful in moving
things forward. On the other hand, politics can bias decision-making or the implementation of projects and
programmes can be obstructed. Another respondent highlighted the fact that Tacloban City government made
(and sometimes implemented) decisions very quickly, for example, concerning relocating people to
bunkhouses. The number and rapidity of decisions being taken about many different groups of people made it
difficult both to keep up and to influence the decision-making process.

To maximize the opportunity of working with local actors in future humanitarian responses in urban
areas, interviewees recommended that humanitarian agencies:
 establish close working relationships with city, regional and national governments
 undertake an immediate assessment of the pre-existing social and political structure of the city
 assess what programmes are already being undertaken by government, what the gaps are and what
are the roles and responsibilities of the different agencies involved
 provide service-delivery, administrative and technical support to city governments to help them meet
the increased demand for services, coordination, regulation and decision-making
 work with the government to deliver programmes by enhancing or adapting existing services and
systems in order to strengthen the relationship between communities and government and build long-
term capacity in the system
 are aware that cities may attract a large number of non-traditional humanitarian actors and establish
mechanisms to coordinate activities with them
 work with the city government to establish a recovery and reconstruction platform involving all
stakeholders including civil society and the private sector
 support the city government to develop an immediate action plan and a recovery and rehabilitation
plan and update its long-term development plans and building codes.

Pre - Typhoon
The main issue of the pre-typhoon Haiyan not considering the R=HxV, is the serious
misunderstanding of the term “storm surge”. Citizens continuously heard reports from mass
media that there will be a storm surge coming in the next days brought about by the typhoon
itself. However, they did not realize that storm surges could be somehow like a “tsunami” as
they are familiar, with more than 10 meter height of sea waves.

Post - Typhoon Haiyan

The post-Yolanda emergency response phase has since gradually transitioned to early
recovery and further to long-term reconstruction. Recognizing that the full recovery and
reconstruction from a disaster of this scale takes years and requires a long-term commitment,
the Government of the Philippines led a series of strategic actions starting from the
assessment of damage and losses to inform the planning and budgeting of the recovery plan
to the implementation and monitoring of the plan to set the stage for a long-term successful
recovery. These actions aimed at seizing the opportunity provided by the recovery process
to address the underlying factors of vulnerability, strengthen resilience, and achieve higher
development outcomes for the affected areas of Visayas, which even before the typhoon,
was facing critical development challenges.

37
 Full recovery and reconstruction from a disaster such as Typhoon Yolanda takes
years and long-term commitment. This summarizes lessons learned in formulating
and carrying out the recovery as well as efforts to link recovery to development.

One main concern is the coordination between the government and international actors
especially during times of disaster. The deluge of external assistance, if not managed well,
has the potential to compound the already chaotic situation especially in the areas directly
affected. This was apparent in the country’s recent disasters, most notably during Yolanda,
when the local government and communities were overwhelmed not only by the calamity
itself but also by the initially chaotic state of humanitarian responders.

Another main concern is how the country, and the rest of the ASEAN Member States, can
optimize the existence of the AHA Centre, especially its systems and protocols that can
facilitate not only data exchanges among each other but actual, immediate support during
times of emergency. The AHA Centre has already developed a system of cross-country
reporting and exchange as well as a manual of procedures and SOPs of cooperation during
actual disasters – which are codified in the Standard Operating Procedure for Regional
Standby Arrangements and Coordination of Joint Disaster Relief and Emergency Response
Operations (SASOP).

The challenge is in making use of this regional mechanism, as well as in harmonizing it with
the rest of the international humanitarian architecture, including the systems developed by
the UN.

Progress on the Implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action

In a summary of progress report developed by UNISDR, the Philippines is one of the 12
countries who show substantial achievement attained but with recognized limitation in
capacities and resources for priority 1 which is to ensure that disaster risk reduction becomes
a national and local priority with a strong institutional basis for implementation. The country
made significant strides with the NDRRM Act of 2010. This allowed US 111 million to be
allocated to the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund.
The same level was achieved for priority action 2 and 5. Priority 2 is to identify, assess and
monitor disaster risk and enhance early warning. Priority 5 is to strengthen disaster
preparedness for effective response at all levels, The Department of Education Culture and
Sports together with the Department of Health pledged to develop 100,000 education and
health facilities that are safe from disasters in support of the “One Million Safe Schools and
Hospital Programme”. 15
For priority action 3 and 4, the country only achieved institutional commitment attained, but
achievements are neither comprehensive nor substantial. Priority 3 is to use knowledge,
innovation and education to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels. Priority 4 is
to reduce the underlying risk factors.22 The reduction of risk factors in the country includes
the discussed hazards, vulnerabilities and gaps in the coping capacities. This will require a
mutisector cooperation from the government down to the grassroots level. Innovations have
from the indigenous knowledge on resilience and coping capacity have to be harnessed to
achieve a sustainable form of DRRM and community development.

38
VI. Towards Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) 2015-2030
The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 was adopted at the Third
UN World Conference in Sendai, Japan, on March 18, 2015. It is the outcome of
stakeholder consultations initiated in March 2012 and inter-governmental negotiations from
July 2014 to March 2015, supported by the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk
Reduction at the request of the UN General Assembly.

The Sendai Framework is the successor instrument to the Hyogo Framework for Action
(HFA) 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters. The
Sendai Framework is built on elements which ensure continuity with the work done by
States and other stakeholders under the HFA and introduces a number of innovations as
called for during the consultations and negotiations. (Sendai Framework)

Convergence and Mainstreaming of DRR and CCA in development plans

Gaps and inconsistencies due to misunderstanding of development implications existed
among disaster management people. At present, links between disaster risk reduction and
climate change adaptation are now more and more appreciated by concerned groups. The
convergence will soon be articulated in more concrete terms. This will give way to capacity
building; thus, adapt to changes and climate-related hazards to reduce vulnerability.
In terms of mainstreaming, development of programs have been reactive (done
simultaneously/quick response to a disaster) in the past. Yet, recent initiatives became more
proactive per sustainable development view in the Sendai. This mainstreaming into
development plans (national and local) will facilitate sustenance of political support and
funding.

Building Back Better (BBB)

In the context of recovery and rehabilitation, the “building back better”principle is being
promoted. Even current practices have not ensured that safer structures are built on strategic
locations during rehabilitation phase and engineering and land use practices are not that
much risk sensitive in addressing mitigation and prevention measures, BBB can be be
achieved if such measures will be done: a) increasing knowledge and capacities, b) DRR
mainstreaming into development plans, and c) building institutional mechanisms through
monitoring and evaluations.4
Also, recently, the Philippines’ IASC has launched the “Last Facility Standing” program
geared towards resilient hospitals and schools.

VII. Discussion
Legal Aspects. There are some questions on whether the RA 10121, as well as its
implementation plan, is in complete harmony with the Philippines’ Local Government Code.
There needs to be a study to see any possible conflicts and to address these through
subsequent policy drafting or even legislation.

39
Another challenge is that the integration of DRR and CCA in programs and initiatives has yet
to be fully realized. It is strongly recommended that DRR and CCA are fully mainstreamed in
all CLUPs.

In the earlier years of this coverage period, bulk of the budget has been allocated more for
response. For example, in 2013 out of the PHP 3.7 B DRRM fund released, P3.69 Billion
have been for the Quick Response Fund (QRF).
There is also some difficulty in tracking the resources that fall under different names or
categories but can actually be considered “for disaster risk reduction and management
(DRRM).” A way to address this is shown in the initiative of the Climate Change Commission
(CCC) and the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) on “Tagging/Tracking
Government Expenditures for Climate Change in the Budget Process,” where government
offices are asked to identify and tag in their Online Submission of Budget Proposal (OSBP),
the climate change-related expenditures shown in the Climate Change Typologies.

It may be useful to follow such “tagging” practice for expenditures related to DRRM.

Poverty. A disaster in the Philippines is aggravated by the state of poverty. The country has
a GDP of USD 454 billion. Its population is 105 million as of 2013. IMF categorized the
Philippines as a developing economy. The Under 5 mortality rate is 32/1000 live births. The
life expectancy at birth is 71 years. In every 100,000 live births, 99 women die from pregnancy
related causes.30 Malaria is endemic in some parts of the country. Seventy four percent of
the population is vulnerable to hazards with the poor being the most vulnerable to damage
caused by natural disasters. 20
The Human Development Index of the Philippines for 2013 is 0.660. This is above the
average of 0.614 for countries in the medium human development category. The position of
the country is at 117 out of 187 countries and territories. The average annual increase is
0.46%. Approximately 65.9% of adult women have reached at least a secondary education
compared to 63.8% among men. About 26.9% of parliamentary seats are held by women. 32

Poor infrastructure and weak governance have affected the immediate disaster response in
the Philippines. Only 22% of the nation's roads are paved. The humanitarian relief workers
often struggle with accessing affected areas. The use of light or weak construction materials
has also added to the damaging and lethal effects of storms. Most homes are made of
wooden frames and exteriors. Some have dried grass or coconut leaves as roofs. The
exploitation of natural resources to alleviate poverty such as deforestation of the mangroves
has led to the destruction of the natural barriers against storms. 29, 36, 43
Almost one-third of the country’s employment is based on agriculture. Disasters have
contributed to the increasing incidence of poverty. The disaster consequently hinders their
opportunity of closing the poverty gap. The Philippine Development Plan of 2011- 2016 stated
that 16 out of the 32 provinces with poverty rates of at least 40%, are hit by typhoons at least
once a year. 30

40
W-A-Y Forward

W- Weave disaster risk considerations into sustainable development policies,

planning and programming at all levels.

The integration of DRR-CCA was at first done only with external assistance, and only for
piloting. The country was only compelled to continue it in order to sustain the programs; hence
the integration will die. There are plans in place but implementation remains a challenge.

RA 10121 is still not completely localized, and there is also not complete clarity on questions
of LGU monitoring and supervision. DRRM and CCA have been integrated in the various
plans including the comprehensive land use and physical framework plans and the local
DRRM Plan, but with so many plans being required from LGUs they may be overwhelmed.
There is a need to come up with a more harmonized and at the same time comprehensive
planning process with clear demonstration of linkages. Furthermore, there is some difficulty
in understanding the plans and their link to sustainable development. Some LGUs submit
only for compliance purposes. Inter-LGU collaboration/cooperation in planning and
ecosystem based approach also remains a challenge.19
 Review RA 10121 (Sunset Review of the law and its implementation plan).
 Harmonize the whole planning process.
 Mainstream all established guidelines (DRR-CCA Policy Integration and
 Harmonization).
 Fully integrate DRR-CCA functions.
 Enhance DRRM appreciation and understanding for local governments as well as
communities through more vigorous IEC.

A– Anchor mechanisms and capacities in developing and strengthening

institutions in particular at the community level that can systematically
contribute to building resilience to hazards.

The integration of DRRM into the educational system needs to be more purposive and
comprehensive. It should be recognized as a distinct discipline and that should be accorded
a higher level of priority.

Priority should also be given to the full institutionalization of DRR offices, as prescribed under
RA 10121, especially at the local level. The establishment of fully functioning and fully
represented local DRRMCs should be the first order of the day. Stakeholder involvement
should be upgraded. The willingness to help and direct involvement of civil society, the private
sector, and other stakeholders are already there, it is now a question of putting order and
system in this so that actors can interact and cooperate with each other with synergy and
greater harmony and mutuality.

The problem of resources should be addressed in the following manner: accurately identifying
exactly where the needs are; finding the possible sources; and systematizing how these are
utilized. The latter involves proper channeling, allocation, and prioritization – which are all
functions of management, organization, leadership, and vision. What goes where, and when,
and towards what? These are matters that need to be fully addressed if the country wants to
be one step ahead of disasters.

41
Finally, there is the matter of culture. Filipinos definitely have coping capacities – hardy
people built for survival. But the times call for the need to go beyond coping and making do.
A culture of transcending needs to be adopted; a disposition that dictates controlling the
givens instead of being controlled by what comes. Hence, governance reform should be
integral to DRRM.

Y– Yield into systematic incorporation of risk reduction approaches into the

design and implementation of emergency preparedness, response and
recovery programmes in the reconstruction of affected communities.

There are a number of positive ways forward in the area of response and recovery. Foremost
of this is the development of a national recovery framework, with the notio of “building back
better” or “bouncing forward” as a core guiding principle.

The laws and policies also need to be harmonized in order to ensure a clearer, more effective
response system. These include the RA 10121 and the Local Government Code primarily,as
well as the Climate Change Act of 2009 (RA 9729), the NDRRM Plan, the National Climate
Change Action Plan (NCCAP), National Disaster Response Plan, National Disaster
Preparedness Plan and other related policies and guidelines. The integration of DRR and
CCA should be fully operationalized.

Community-Based DRRM should also be strengthened and institutionalized, through

the national agencies’ support to LGUs as well as that of civil society. There should also be
constant post-incident evaluation. On the whole the monitoring and evaluation framework and
mechanisms should be institutionalized.

Lastly, the welfare and safety of DRRM workers, especially the disaster responders, should
be ensured. One possible way is the creation of a Magna Carta for DRRM Workers.19

VIII. Conclusion
Accumulated disaster risk now directly challenges the capacity of many countries to make
the capital investments and social expenditure required to achieve sustainable development.
Apart from overconsumption and inequality, the current development paradigm also
generates and accumulates disaster risk, which has impact in a lot of dimensions.

RP’s DRR on Sustainable Development

If this risk were shared equally amongst the world’s population, it would be an existential risk
for people living below the poverty line already struggling for survival on a daily basis. It also
represents a significant opportunity cost for development, as these resources could be used
to make investments in infrastructure, social protection, public health and public education.

Expressed as a proportion of social expenditure, expected annual losses in low-income

countries are five times higher than in high-income countries. The countries with the greatest
need to invest in social development are those most challenged by disaster risk. This is a
problem not only for low-income countries, but for middle-income countries like the
Philippines. Although countries like Jamaica (low-income) have far lower relative risk

42
compared to the Philippines, the overall impact on future development will be very similar.
While economic growth will be mainly undermined in higher income countries, the challenge
facing the Philippines is one of social development.1

“SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT CANNOT BE ACHIEVED UNLESS DISASTER RISK IS REDUCED.”

Leadership and Governance

2 Kings 2:19-22 in the Bible says, “The land is well-situated, but the water is bad so the land
becomes unproductive”. This can be contextualized in the present dilemmas of the country.
Abundant resources are existing; however, these are not utilized properly because of the
corruption of current leaders (water). If we go forward on this scripture, the prophet Elisha
went to the source (spring) and put a bowl of salt in it. Up to this day, the water remains pure
and became productive. Thus, we need to go to the source which is the future leaders of the
country and impose “change management”. This may sound aphoristic but nation
transformation will be the x-factor. There is an extreme need ng political will in developing the
DRR system, and lessening abuse of opportunities for personal gains. RP needs to move
forward from such stronghold and follow the footsteps of Japan as a model. Such innovation
need strong advocacies for leadership and governance.
Disasters such as Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines in 2013 are blowing away the veils of
hyper-reality to show that even countries with apparently mature and comprehensive disaster
risk governance arrangements in place are challenged by continued risk accumulation. The
governance approach based on the disaster management cycle and represented by a
specialized disaster risk management sector may have reached its limit, while at the same
time a new governance paradigm has yet to emerge.1

Private sector engagement in integrated disaster risk management will be a change

agent. Promoting greater private sector engagement in innovative DRRM solutions and
encourage and support will strengthen disaster resilience of the all sectors. Greater private
sector engagement in DRRM is essential to help meet the funding gap for DRM, to share and
spread post-disaster relief, recovery, and reconstruction costs, and to ensure that all
infrastructure constructed by the private sector is disaster resilient. The private sector will
play a significant role in meeting the region’s huge and increasing infrastructure investment
and financial institution needs over the next few decades and a vision of disaster resilience
is unrealistic without private sector engagement.

As the Philippines moves towards establishing objectives and targets under the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs), which for the first time will be framed for universal application,
there is an urgent need to reinterpret disaster risk reduction so that it weaves and flows
through development as a set of mutually supportive approaches and practices. Without
effective disaster risk management, sustainable development will not be sustainable and the
SDGs will not be achieved.1

43
In general, the Republic of the Philippines has shown significant strides in attaining disaster
risk reduction as a national and local priority with the enactment of its DRRM legal framework.
It also improved in developing early warning systems and preparedness through new
technologies and multimedia networking. However, significant efforts must be done on the
area of reducing underlying risk factors such vulnerabilities relating to poverty, conflict, high
population density and hazards associated with meteorological disasters. The priorities must
be based on context, risk and capacity on regional or local level.

44
VIII. References
1) UNISDR (2015). Making Development Sustainable: The Future of Disaster Risk
Management. Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. Geneva,
Switzerland: United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR).
2) “Philippines in Figures 2014" (PDF). National Statistics Office. Retrieved November
16, 2014
3) Asian Development Bank. Operational plan for integrated disaster risk management
2014–2020. Operational plan for integrated disaster risk management 2014–2020:
Asian Development Bank: 2014.
4) National Disaster Risk Reduction Management Council. National Disaster Risk
Reduction and Management Plan 2011-2028. Manila: Philippines: NDRRMC,
Department of Science and Technology; 2014.
5) Liquefecation Susceptibility. (Available at http://earthquake.usgs.gov/
regional/nca/bayarea/liquefaction.php) (accessed 10 December 2015).
6) Volcano Discovery. Volcanoes of the Philippines. (http://www.volcano
discovery.com/philippines.html) (accessed 10 December 2015).
7) The World Bank East Asia and Pacific Region. Natural Disaster Risk Management In
The Philippines: Enhancing Poverty Alleviation Through Disaster Reduction. Available
at http://www.droughtmanagement.info/
literature/WB_disaster_risk_management_philippines_2005.pdf (accessed 10
December 2015)
8) UNISDR (2013). Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. Geneva,
Switzerland: United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR).
9) Republic of the Philippines, Fourteenth Congress. Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction
Management Act of 2010. http://www.ndcc.gov.ph/ (accessed 10 December 2015).
10) National Disaster Risk Reduction Management Council. National Disaster Risk
Reduction and Management Framework. NDRRMC. Manila. 2011. Available from:
http://www.ndrrmc.gov.ph/attachments/article/227/NDRRMFramework.pdf)
11) The Official Government Portal of the Republic of the Philippines. Philippine Country
Profile. http://www.gov.ph (accessed 10 December 2015).
12) National Disaster Risk Reduction Management Council. Implementing Rules and
Regulations of Republic Act 10121. NDRRMC. Manila. 2011. Available at:
http://www.ndrrmc.gov.ph/attachments/095_IRR.pdf
13) Metro Manila Development Authority. Flood Reduction Measures in Metro Manila.
Manila. Gov Ph Official Gazette. 2010. [Cited 2010 Sept 27] Available from:
http://www.gov.ph/2010/09/27/mmda-flood-reduction-measures-in-metro-manila/
14) Department of Interior and Local Government. The National Disaster Risk Reduction
and Management Plan (NDRRMP) 2011-2028. DILG. Republic of the Philippines.
2011. Available from: http://www.dilg.gov.ph.Philippines.2011 or
http://www.dilg.gov.ph/PDF_File/reports_resources/DILG-Resources-2012116-
ab6ce90b0d.pdf)
15) United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. HFA Progress in Asia-Pacific :
Regional Synthesis Report 2009 to 2011. Geneva. UNISDR. 2011. Available from:
http://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/21158

45
 16) National Disaster Coordinating Council. NDCC Memorandum No. 04, s. 2008, 07
March 2008 – Addendum to NDCC Memorandum No 05, S-2007. Manila. 2008.
17) Metro Manila Development Authority. Flood Reduction Measures in Metro Manila.
Manila. Gov Ph Official Gazette. 2010. [Cited 2010 Sept 27] Available from:
http://www.gov.ph/2010/09/27/mmda-flood-reduction-measures-in-metro-manila/
18) Oxfam. Integrating Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation in the
Philippines. "A Sharing of Theory and Practice on DRR-CCA Work". Philippines.
Oxfam. Philippines. 2011. Available from: http://www.oxfamblogs.org/philippines/wp-
content/uploads/2013/10/pdf-disaster-risk-reduction.pdf
19) National Disaster Risk Reduction & Management Council.National progress report on
the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action (2013-2015). Manila:
Philippines: NDRRMC, Department of Science and Technology; 2015.
20) Philippine Statistics Authority. 2010 Census of Population and Housing [Internet].
Manila. National Statistics Office. 2010. [Cited 2011 Jan 24] Available from:
http://web0.psa.gov.ph/
21) Federation of the Red Cross and Crescent Societies. Fourteenth Congress of the
Republic of the Philippines. Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Bill.
International Federation of the Red Cross and Crescent Societies. Geneva. 2010.
Available from: http://www.ifrc.org/docs/idrl/878EN.pdf
22) United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. HFA Progress in Asia-Pacific :
Regional Synthesis Report 2009 to 2011. Geneva. UNISDR. 2011. Available from:
http://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/21158
23) United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. Disaster Risk
Management for Health. Disaster Risk Management for Health Fact Sheets 2011; (): .
(accessed 10 December 2015)

46

View publication stats