The floods are coming

The title of this column is not a prediction. It is a fact. Whether we like it or not, whatever we do now or tomorrow, the rains and the floods are coming.

Just like the idea of the Perfect Storm, the merging of two or more hurricanes into a more powerful cyclone, the Philippines is battered by a convergence of crises: periodic natural disaster made worse by climate change, poverty, and weak government institutions. As with the impact of El Niño on Mindanao this year, Typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng last year, earthquakes like that which hit Baguio in 1990, or volcanic eruptions such as in Mayon and Pinatubo, natural disasters cause widespread property damage, inflict a heavy toll on human lives, and destroy livelihoods. As I emphasize to students and audiences in dozens of lectures on climate change and disaster risk reduction I have delivered since 2006, the real disaster in the Philippines is not the natural events themselves as they can be foreseen; the disaster is in the response of the government and society.

Now that the typhoon season is upon us, are we prepared for the rains and the floods that are sure to come? Policy wise, yes. But on the ground, far from it.

Last March, in a paper co-written with Eunice Agsaoay, Johanna Jambalos and Joanne Dulce for the 2010 Academic Congress of the University of the Philippines, I identified four priorities we must have so we can respond better to disasters: (1) radically change the way we look at disasters and put into place a new framework—disaster risk reduction—that would make us more prepared; (2) ensure excellence in the way scientific institutions gather and analyze information and link them to each other to maximize synergies so that the best available information/analysis is provided to decision makers; (3) approach disaster risk reduction, preparedness, rehabilitation, and emergency response as a national project, a non-partisan undertaking that involves the government as convener and enabler but requires the collaboration of all sectors; (4) address comprehensively the root causes—economic, legal, political and cultural – for the havoc that result from disasters.

In urban areas, the following have to be addressed: improving land use planning; strict implementation of environmental rules; reversing rural-urban migration patterns; finding just solutions to human settlement challenges; and establishing effective metropolitan authorities. For rural areas, there may be a need to review the necessity of constructing and maintaining dams for irrigation and power generation purposes. Alternative sources of irrigation and power generation should be explored. Land use planning based on risk assessment is also important

One positive outcome from the Ondoy and Pepeng disasters was the cooperation they engendered from the government and the private sector. This has been institutionalized through the creation of the Philippine Disaster Recovery Foundation (PDRF) whose board is chaired by businessman Manuel V. Pangilinan. Since its creation, the PDRF has implemented reforestation, early warning, civil works, resettlement, finance and solid waste programs.

While some progress has been made, so much remains to be done. The highest priority is making sure a paradigm shift happens in the way we address disasters. Recognizing this, the 14th Congress enacted Republic Act No. 10121, the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010 (DRRM Act) which emphasize disaster risk reduction rather than disaster response as the primary strategy for dealing with natural and man-made calamities. This new law was advocated by the Disaster Risk Reduction Network (DRRNet), a coalition of citizen organizations, and enacted through the leadership of then Bukidnon Representative and now Senator Teofisto “TG” Guingona III, former Muntinlupa Representative Rufino Biazon, ex-Senator and newly-elected Congressman Rodolfo Biazon, and Senator Loren Legarda. It adopts as a policy “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, and promotes the involvement and participation of all sectors and all stakeholders concerned, at all levels, especially the local community”.

The DRRM Act also institutionalizes the primary role of local governments and communities in responding to disasters. We have seen how effective this is in the province of Albay which has adopted a “no casualty” objective under the strong leadership of Governor Joey Salceda. In addition, the law rationalizes and provides a framework for reforming the use of calamity funds at both local and national levels. Reports saying the national calamity funds for 2010 have already severely been depleted (whether they were used for the 2009 disasters, because of the last El Niño, or possibly for political reasons) illustrate the necessity of such reforms.

At the national level, the DRRM Act establishes the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (NDRRMC), replacing the National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC). The NDRRMC is an inter-agency council, and not, as many of us advocated, a separate Cabinet-level agency. An independent agency headed by a Cabinet official would have been more effective in generating resources and planning for future disasters but the Senate prevailed during the bicameral conference and a council was created (versus what would have been a national disaster authority approved by the House of Representatives). In any case, the good thing in the new law is that we now have one person clearly in charge of disaster response in the country, the Secretary of National Defense. Unlike in the past, where the NDCC was just a coordinating body, the NDRRMC has management functions and therefore is accountable when disasters strike. The Office of Civil Defense (OCD), an agency of the Defense Department, is designated as the secretariat for the council and would now have to rise up from its previously limited role. I predict that in a few years we will revisit this issue and perhaps finally create the disaster agency that the country sorely needs.

Bureaucratic politics aside and imperfect as it is, the DRRM Act is a welcome development, compared to the cycle of complacency and last-minute scrambling from the previous years. But we must remind ourselves that passing a good law is not equivalent to solving the problem. In the first place, the DRRM Act was signed only last 27 May 2010 and implementation is only beginning. We owe it to ourselves, and especially to the poor who suffer most from disasters, to accelerate this.

Ships prepare for storms by sailing to avoid the worst and sealing all hatches to prevent water from flooding in. A country is similar in most respects—it may not be able to sail away from calamity, but state and society can take concrete steps to reduce the risks and mitigate the impact of too much water, surging tides, the earth moving, or falling boulders. If we do not do this, as the floods come and mountains explode, God help us all.

E-mail: Tonylavs@gmail.com Facebook: Tonylavs@gmail.com Twitter: tonylavs