Steer clear of bad Aquino policies, environment groups urge Duterte

By Karol Ilagan

Conference

UNITED FOR THE ENVIRONMENT. Students and environmental activists held placards with calls for change in environment policies addressed to President Rodrigo R. Duterte. Photo by Karol Ilagan/PCIJ

FRANCES Quimpo’s recollection of the country’s worst tragedies under a parade of Philippine presidents past reveals a singular pattern — death, devastation, and a dearth of lessons learned.

More than 200 people died when mounds of garbage at the Payatas dumpsite in Quezon City collapsed. Triggered by a typhoon, the landslide took place six months before Joseph Estrada’s ouster from Malacañang in January 2001.

During Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s nine-year presidency, a string of typhoons — Frank, Ondoy, and Pepeng, to name a few — flooded many parts of the country, taking hundreds of lives and damaging billions worth of properties. It was also under Arroyo when the government’s flagship mining project in Rapu-Rapu, Albay spewed out cyanide into the sea, causing massive fish kills.

Quimpo, executive director of the Center for Environmental Concerns-Philippines (CEC), said these disasters should have served Arroyo’s successor, Benigno S. Aquino III, important lessons. The political and economic policies that previous governments had pushed, she said, had put the environment at risk, and aggravated the impact of natural hazards in what was by then the climate-vulnerable state of the Philippines.

But in the next six years as president, Aquino saw the issuance of executive orders, which according to environmental advocates, did little to address the problems they were meant to solve. On top of these new policies are old laws that are either problematic to begin with or not enforced properly.

Frances Quimpo

A TRAIL OF DISASTERS. CEC Executive Director Frances Quimpo gives a rundown of calamities that had visited the nation since former President Joseph Estrada’s term.Photo by Karol Ilagan/PCIJ

Gathered at a forum Monday afternoon, environmental groups thus urged President Rodrigo R. Duterte to steer clear of the programs and policies of his predecessors that run counter to the protection of communities and natural resources.

Presenting CEC’s annual “State of the Philippine Environment” report, Owen Migraso, CEC coordinator for the Eastern Visayas Yolanda Recovery Program, said the Aquino government issued Industrial Forest Management Agreements in Northern Mindanao, Davao Region, and CARAGA, which were all recently hit by disasters. Multiple mining tenements have also been located on Luzon island, which hosts the greatest concentration of unique mammals.

Migraso cited Aquino’s Executive Order No. 23 on logging, Executive Order No. 26 or the National Greening Program, and Executive Order No. 79 on mining as problematic. These orders, he said, have turned forests and other resources into commodities at the expense of the lives and livelihood of poor and vulnerable communities.

The forum, co-organized by the CEC, Kalikasan People’s Network for the Environment (Kalikasan PNE), and Eco-Challenge for Change coalition, also served as a venue to discuss the environmental challenges that the groups want Duterte to address.

Secretary Gina Lopez of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) was invited to speak at the forum but she failed to show up.

Clemente Bautista, Kalikasan PNE’s national coordinator, said that so far, their groups have not seen any actions from Duterte that would run against their environmental agenda; they have not also heard, however, of any pronouncements or seen any significant moves that would signal changes in the Aquino administration’s policies.
Clemente Bautista

IS CHANGE COMING? Kalikasan PNE National Coordinator Clemente Bautista posed this question to forum attendees on July 18. Photo by Karol Ilagan/PCIJ

A week before Duterte took his oath of office last June 30, the “Eco-Challenge for Change”, a coalition of environmental groups, including CEC and Kalikasan PNE, presented its 14-point agenda for the president to act on.

Signed by 41 groups, the coalition’s list of demands includes stopping illegal large-scale mining in environmentally critical areas and imposing a moratorium on the new construction and expansion of coal-fired power plants.

“Ang nakikita namin ngayon ay ang mahigpit na implementation ng mga environmental guidelines, pag-pepenalize ng mga violating private entities, at mga pangako na magkakaroon ng mabuting komunikasyon sa pagitan ng mga komunidad at mga organizations na tulad namin,” Bautista said. (What we are seeing now is strict implementation of environmental guidelines, penalizing of violating private entities, and promises that there will be good communication systems between communities and organizations like ours).

Since Lopez assumed leadership of DENR, work in at least four mining operations has been suspended. The department has likewise conducted an audit of mining activities.

Bautista said the coalition should be able to give a more thorough assessment of the Duterte administration after 100 days. “Sa ngayon, binibigyan namin sila ng puwang para patunayan ang kanilang tindig para sa kalikasan,” he said. (For now, we are giving them the chance to prove their stand for the environment)

While Duterte has shown a track record favoring environmental protection, the groups are also well aware of the former mayor’s support for the construction of a coal power plant and the establishment of palm oil plantations in Davao City.

On Monday, Duterte said he would not honor the Paris climate agreement, laying blame on developed countries for their bigger role in climate change. Signed by 178 countries, the historic deal is an effort to keep global warming below 2 degrees Celsius by reducing carbon emissions.

Bautista said Duterte was right to demand greater responsibility from developed countries but that they hope, too, that the president would not support the expansion of coal-fired power plants as this would be counter-productive.

“Our renewable and indigenous energy resources such as hydro, geothermal, solar, and natural gas are more than enough to provide our energy needs now and in the future,” he said in a statement.

Environmental sociologist Patria Gwen M.L. Borcena, meanwhile, said DENR needs a “reform team” composed of members from civil society and the academe who will occupy key positions and help Secretary Lopez.

This, Borcena said, is another lesson that should be learned from the previous administration. To be fair, she said an environment agenda was included in Aquino’s “A Social Contract with the Filipino People” and later as one chapter in the 2011-2016 Philippine Development Plan. This, she said, was the first time for the country’s development plan to have an entire chapter devoted to environment and natural resources.

Borcena said the execution of these plans did not run well in large measure because DENR did not have a reform team. Former DENR Secretary Ramon Paje and his leadership team, she said, came from the bureaucracy.

Prior to his appointment in 2010, Paje was DENR undersecretary for field operations and executive director of the Minerals Development Council under the Office of the President.

Moreover, Borcena said DENR would benefit from promoting “participatory environmental governance at all levels,” which was absent during Paje’s term. This setup could help ensure a partnership between civil society organizations and DENR.

“It shouldn’t just be token partnership. It should be institutionalized,” she said.

Borcena is a co-convenor of the Citizens’ Environment Network. She was also involved in Aquino’s presidential campaign and later joined the Inter-Agency Technical Working Group that crafted the environment chapter in the Philippine Development Plan.

At the forum’s close, CEC’s Quimpo noted that environmental issues could not be separated from political and economic policies. Efforts such as tree-planting and coastal cleanups should go hand in hand with fixing problems at the policy level, she added.

Quimpo said the president has so far made pro-people policy pronouncements but the challenge is delivering results. “Let us use these to ensure that change will come by pressing the Duterte government to walk the talk.” < strong>– PCIJ, July 2016

Paris and its climate legacy for future generations

By Titon Mitra*

AS WORLD LEADERS converge on Paris from 30 November to 11 December, the importance of arriving at an ambitious yet implementable agreement on climate change action has been graphically underlined by the fact that, based on UK Met Office data for 2015, for the first time, global mean temperature at the Earth’s surface will have reached 1°C above pre-industrial levels (data from January to September shows 2015 global mean temperature at 1.02 °C [±0.11°C] above pre-industrial levels).

We are already experiencing the adverse impacts of a warming climate: 14 of the hottest summers since 2000; rising sea levels; changing rainfall patterns; increased droughts; and more erratic and destructive storms. Only those who choose to willfully ignore the ample scientific evidence available – and the disturbing news coverage we see regularly – can deny that climate change induced by human actions is happening and its consequences are indeed very dangerous.

The Paris agreement will require compromise and importantly a recognition that the burden to take action will fall disproportionately between the developed and developing world. The key principle that has to be adopted with genuine commitment is that of “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities”. This means that each and every one of the 200 or so countries that will be present will have to commit to take actions, the scope and scale of which will differ according to their technical and financial capacities. The richer countries will need to take on a greater share of that burden and support the lesser developed.

Over 150 countries have submitted their Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) – the actions they will take to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to adapt to the impacts of climate change. The Philippines has committed to reduce carbon emissions by 70 percent from 2020 to 2030 but conditional on financial aid and associated technical support being provided by developed countries.

Based on today’s level of public and private investment and the stated climate mitigation actions, developing countries will need to bridge an annual funding shortfall of as much as $2.5 trillion from 2015-2030. Even if these funds were secured, the reality is that the current combined mitigation actions will account for only 86 percent of green house gas emissions and still result in a temperature rise of 2.7°C. A below 2°C target – the minimum we should be striving for – will require considerably more in terms of funding and commitment.

Climate change action indeed should not and need not be seen as a sunk cost but rather as an investment in the future and a catalyst for a new era of innovation. Current technologies available to us will not be sufficient. Governments will need to create the incentive structures through carbon pricing and greater subsidies to accelerate innovation and to create the break-through technologies. The private sector needs to see that these technologies will significantly add to their bottom line.

Everyone will also need to commit to low carbon lifestyles to set the market demand. This will require both a collective international and national vision of a below 2°C trajectory and a low carbon economy beneficial to people and the planet.

It should be understood that keeping global temperature rise to below 2°C of the average pre-industrial level may not be enough to avert dangerous consequences. But the 2°C gives us a target to focus upon, a rallying point to catalyse collective action. While we should continue to be hopeful for Paris, we should also prepare for the fact that we may not be able to move too far from the 86 percent of greenhouse gas emissions covered by the current INDCs.

If that is all we achieve, it is nevertheless a good first step. It is a foundation that can be built upon by putting in place transparent and robust mechanisms for measuring, monitoring and reporting progress. We should reconvene every 5 years and adjust INDCs. The consequences of continuing increases in temperature hopefully will create the realization among leaders and their political constituencies to take much more ambitious action.

UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) has done what we can for now to accompany countries on the road to Paris. From formulating INDCs, Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions, National Adaptation Plans, climate finance readiness, policies and legislation for low carbon futures and other programmes, UNDP has helped over 130 developing countries access and deliver over $2.3 billion in mitigation and adaptation initiatives. UNDP has worked with vulnerable populations within countries, including women, girls, youth, indigenous people and remote communities to adapt and build their resilience to the inevitable consequences of climate change. Whatever the final outcomes of Paris, UNDP will continue to accompany countries as they work on their climate actions.

Secretary General Ban Ki Moon delivered a very clear message recently. He said: “Success in Paris depends on you. Now is the time for common sense, compromise and consensus. It is time to look beyond national horizons and to put the common interest first. The people of the world – and generations to come – count on you to have the vision and courage to seize this historic moment.”

For the sake of the world we will bequeath to our children, one hopes that Paris is listening.

* Titon Mitra is the Country Director of the United Nations Development Programme in the Philippines.

_______________________________________________________________

About UNDP
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) partners with people at all levels of society to help build nations that can withstand crisis, and drive and sustain the kind of growth that improves quality of life for everyone. On the ground in more than 170 countries and territories, we offer global perspective and local insight to help empower lives and build resilient nations. www.undp.org

UNDP-PH Country Director: Where are we on the Yolanda recovery?

By Titon Mitra
Country Director in the Philippines
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)

THERE IS AN ENDURING ADAGE that “the whole is only the sum of its parts”. Recent Press and commentary on the statement of Professor (Chaloka) Beyani, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Internally Displaced Persons, underlines the problems with highlighting certain issues in the absence of the whole. Beyani was complimentary about the Yolanda recovery and rehabilitation efforts. He commended the institutional and policy structures and frameworks that have been put in place, noting that the Philippines has much valuable experience that should be shared internationally. This is a view UNDP shares. Our then Senior Recovery Coordinator said that from his experience in many different disasters, he had never seen a recovery happen so quickly and so effectively.

But there is no question that significant challenges remain to be resolved in areas affected by Yolanda. This is neither surprising nor unusual. Remember that two years following Hurricane Katrina, New Orleans was in far worse shape. Following the Great East Japan Earthquake, 230,000 people today are still in temporary shelters. Clearly the baseline in the Visayas (and for that matter nationally) relating to economic development, infrastructure, local capacity, financial resources, systems and processes for emergency and recovery management, were far below that of New Orleans and Japan. Benchmarking progress is important in managing expectations. The multilateral community had anticipated that reconstruction in Yolanda-affected areas would take at least 4-5 years. The usual period of time it takes for areas in similar circumstances to recover.

The issues highlighted in recent press coverage reflect a number of structural challenges that need to be addressed to expedite recovery from future disasters. Addressing these challenges requires the collaborative effort of the Legislature and the Executive and of national and local governments. It is far too convenient to point the finger in one direction, when collective responsibility and action is required. Let me comment on a few of these structural challenges.

DBM (Department of Budget and Management) has already released P88.96 billion for Yolanda operations. The total amount covers the releases from the end of 2013 to the first semester of 2015. For the second half of 2015, DBM plans to release P14.05 billion more. The transparency and accountability provisions within the law in part dictate the pace of release. Money from the center does need to move quickly. But as UNDP’s key mantra is good governance, we certainly will not be urging haste at the expense of appropriate financial controls. The structural challenge then is whether the public financial management system is ‘fit for purpose’. Stringent procurement processes prescribed under RA 9184, the Government’s Procurement Law are well intentioned, meant to ensure transparency and quality assurance. But it should be reviewed and amended, to include provisions on fast-track processes that will allow quicker recovery and rehabilitation following disasters. This requires legislative action.

Releases also have to be calibrated to the capacity of local governments and national agencies to effectively disperse allocations. Technical capacity to effectively plan, program and deliver is limited – if it weren’t, UNDP with our national and international partners, would not be working in the Philippines with programs focused on building that capacity.

Families still have to be relocated from bunkhouses. At least 2,000 families remain in temporary shelters. Government aims to move 70 percent of the 2,000 families into permanent concrete homes by year-end. But relocation is contingent on availability of land that is not vulnerable to future disasters. This requires effective use of hazard and vulnerability data and land zoning. Where appropriate land is identified, it needs to be purchased (at a fair price) or allocated and the land prepared by putting in place basic infrastructure including, roads, electricity and water. Housing and infrastructure has to be built back better. That is, re-engineered to withstand stronger hazard events than the last one experienced. This all inevitably takes time.

While families are in temporary accommodation, appropriate protection measures need to be in place. Protection is a basic right, but the draft bill on protecting the rights of displaced has languished in the Senate. Its’ appropriate formulation and passage would provide a clear framework and accountable measure for support to the displaced. Importantly, it will ensure that the UN Guiding Principles on displaced, which are based on key instruments of international human rights law, are enshrined in the national legal framework.

There is still much to do not only for those affected by Yolanda but also to prepare the systems and processes for any future event. The recovery process must continue apace. Now is also the time to examine closely what worked and did less so and make the structural fixes required to further enhance capacity to respond and recover in the future. This is a time for shared responsibility in building resilience to the new normal of a world affected by rapid climate change.


* Titon Mitra is the Country Director of the United Nations Development Programme in the Philippines. (titon.mitra@undp.org)

PH paradox: Undernourished children, overnourished adults

UNDERNOURISHED children, overnourished adults — that is “the double burden of malnutrition” that afflicts the Philippines.

A paradox, indeed, in a highly agricultural economy, which should be producing food in abundance. To this day, however, many Filipinos do not have access to proper nutrition and adequate food supply, government data show.

In fact, according to Dr. Cecilia S.Acuin of the Food and Nutrition Research Institute (FNRI), the Philippines confronts a “double burden of malnutrition” – under-nutrition among children and overnutrition among adults.

She cited sad figures.

* Among Filipinos aged 0 to 5, one of every five (20 percent) is underweight; one of every three (30 percent) is under-height or does not meet the ideal height for their age; and 8 percent are “wasted” or underweight for their height.

* Among Filipinos aged 20 and above, one of every three (31 PERCENT) is overweight or obese; one of every five (22 percent) “have high waist circumference”; and three of every five (62 percent) have high waist-hip ratio.

The over-nutrition of Filipino adults, she said, has resulted from a bad combination of “increasing physical inactivity” and “poor diet” — the low intake of fruits and vegetables and the increasing intake of “energy-dense food.”

Acuin, at a forum organized last week by Greenpeace-Southeast Asia on the theme “Is there is a Food Emergency in the Philippines?” said that this double burden of malnutrition has led to micronutrient deficiencies.

These include anemia, which remains “a problem in vulnerable population groups” like children and pregnant and lactating women, as well as iodine-deficiency disorders, which are “a problem in pockets of the country.” Across the nation though, anemia and iodine deficiency incidence is declining, she said.

According to Acuin, household food intake patterns in the country have started to change for the worse.

While the typical Filipino meal is still rice, fish, and vegetables, the FNRI’s surveys have shown “an increasing trend for meat and poultry” but also “a declining trend for fruits and vegetables.” Filipinos, she said, are eating less and less fruits and vegetables on account of price, supply, and availability concerns.

Filipinos are eating “more energy-dense food”, Acuin added, but still the consumption of recommended energy is low for 30 percent of households, and even among the wealthy who can afford energy-dense food, “only 40 percent are meeting energy requirements.”

So is there a food emergency situation in the country? Acuin’s summary observations are gloomy. She said: “Food intakes, in general, are inadequate” and an “inequitable distribution of food resources” persists.

“Ang mga kundisyon na ito ay hindi bago, matagal na ito… Kung pagbabasehan yung Millennium Development Goals, wala pagbabago mula noong mga year 2000 ang underweight prevalence natin in children. Samantala, yung overweight at obesity sa adults ay tumataas,” Acuin said. [These conditions are not new. If we base it on the Millennium Development Goals, underweight prevalence among children has been steady since 2000. Meanwhile, overweight and obesity in adults are on the rise.]

Bernadette Balamban, Poverty and Human Development Statistics chief of the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) offered insights on how malnutrition takes root and derives from poverty.

As of the first half of 2014, PSA showed that a family of five needed at least P6,125 a month on average to meet basic food needs, and at least P8,778 a month on average to meet both basic food and non-food needs. However, still eight of every 100 families earn less than the minimum income to afford even basic food needs.

Meanwhile, Neden Amiel Sarne, Agricultural Commodities Division chief of the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), said achieving food security “requires investments in strategic programs and policies and putting in place appropriate policies.”

The Philippines’ food policy, he said, “should aim to achieve inclusive access to food while generating long-term sources of productivity and income growth.”

According to Sarne, access and price are the strategic issues. “What matters more to food security is access to food at the household level and at reasonably competitive process.”

Sarne listed “suggested strategies beyond 2016″ to address food security and malnutrition concerns, including:

* “Investments in agriculture and fisheries programs that promote area-based development (in contrast to commodity-based development);

* “Prioritize investments that can increase and sustain productivity;

* “Investments in well-functioning irrigation systems and well-functioning Infrastructure;

* “Investments to increase resilience to climate-risk disasters, as well as to pests and diseases;

* “Promote further productivity enhancement along the entire supply chain, from production to marketing; and

* “Promote greater private sector investments support for agriculture through agri-business schemes such as contract-growing, joint-venture agreements, etc.”

About 150 students, civil society organization leaders, and government representatives attended the forum organized by Greenpeace-Southeast Asia at the UP Bahay ng Alumni in Diliman last week. PCIJ Executive Director Malou Mangahas served as moderator. – With reporting by Vino Lucero, PCIJ, August 2015

PH paradox: Undernourished children, overnourished adults

UNDERNOURISHED children, overnourished adults — that is “the double burden of malnutrition” that afflicts the Philippines.

A paradox, indeed, in a highly agricultural economy, which should be producing food in abundance. To this day, however, many Filipinos do not have access to proper nutrition and adequate food supply, government data show.

In fact, according to Dr. Cecilia S.Acuin of the Food and Nutrition Research Institute (FNRI), the Philippines confronts a “double burden of malnutrition” – under-nutrition among children and overnutrition among adults.

She cited sad figures.

* Among Filipinos aged 0 to 5, one of every five (20 percent) is underweight; one of every three (30 percent) is under-height or does not meet the ideal height for their age; and 8 percent are “wasted” or underweight for their height.

* Among Filipinos aged 20 and above, one of every three (31 PERCENT) is overweight or obese; one of every five (22 percent) “have high waist circumference”; and three of every five (62 percent) have high waist-hip ratio.

The over-nutrition of Filipino adults, she said, has resulted from a bad combination of “increasing physical inactivity” and “poor diet” — the low intake of fruits and vegetables and the increasing intake of “energy-dense food.”

Acuin, at a forum organized last week by Greenpeace-Southeast Asia on the theme “Is there is a Food Emergency in the Philippines?” said that this double burden of malnutrition has led to micronutrient deficiencies.

These include anemia, which remains “a problem in vulnerable population groups” like children and pregnant and lactating women, as well as iodine-deficiency disorders, which are “a problem in pockets of the country.” Across the nation though, anemia and iodine deficiency incidence is declining, she said.

According to Acuin, household food intake patterns in the country have started to change for the worse.

While the typical Filipino meal is still rice, fish, and vegetables, the FNRI’s surveys have shown “an increasing trend for meat and poultry” but also “a declining trend for fruits and vegetables.” Filipinos, she said, are eating less and less fruits and vegetables on account of price, supply, and availability concerns.

Filipinos are eating “more energy-dense food”, Acuin added, but still the consumption of recommended energy is low for 30 percent of households, and even among the wealthy who can afford energy-dense food, “only 40 percent are meeting energy requirements.”

So is there a food emergency situation in the country? Acuin’s summary observations are gloomy. She said: “Food intakes, in general, are inadequate” and an “inequitable distribution of food resources” persists.

“Ang mga kundisyon na ito ay hindi bago, matagal na ito… Kung pagbabasehan yung Millennium Development Goals, wala pagbabago mula noong mga year 2000 ang underweight prevalence natin in children. Samantala, yung overweight at obesity sa adults ay tumataas,” Acuin said. [These conditions are not new. If we base it on the Millennium Development Goals, underweight prevalence among children has been steady since 2000. Meanwhile, overweight and obesity in adults are on the rise.]

Bernadette Balamban, Poverty and Human Development Statistics chief of the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) offered insights on how malnutrition takes root and derives from poverty.

As of the first half of 2014, PSA showed that a family of five needed at least P6,125 a month on average to meet basic food needs, and at least P8,778 a month on average to meet both basic food and non-food needs. However, still eight of every 100 families earn less than the minimum income to afford even basic food needs.

Meanwhile, Neden Amiel Sarne, Agricultural Commodities Division chief of the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), said achieving food security “requires investments in strategic programs and policies and putting in place appropriate policies.”

The Philippines’ food policy, he said, “should aim to achieve inclusive access to food while generating long-term sources of productivity and income growth.”

According to Sarne, access and price are the strategic issues. “What matters more to food security is access to food at the household level and at reasonably competitive process.”

Sarne listed “suggested strategies beyond 2016″ to address food security and malnutrition concerns, including:

* “Investments in agriculture and fisheries programs that promote area-based development (in contrast to commodity-based development);

* “Prioritize investments that can increase and sustain productivity;

* “Investments in well-functioning irrigation systems and well-functioning Infrastructure;

* “Investments to increase resilience to climate-risk disasters, as well as to pests and diseases;

* “Promote further productivity enhancement along the entire supply chain, from production to marketing; and

* “Promote greater private sector investments support for agriculture through agri-business schemes such as contract-growing, joint-venture agreements, etc.”

About 150 students, civil society organization leaders, and government representatives attended the forum organized by Greenpeace-Southeast Asia at the UP Bahay ng Alumni in Diliman last week. PCIJ Executive Director Malou Mangahas served as moderator. – With reporting by Vino Lucero, PCIJ, August 2015