Keywords

8.1 Introduction

Adaptation has gained significant attention in recent years with the varying impacts of changing climate, including variability and extreme weather events, which were experienced in different parts of the world. The demands for adaptation have become immensely apparent, especially with the current and predicted environmental risks. Utter disregard to the expected system transformation required for handling the impacts from environmental risks may render some areas and economic activities unviable (Nelson et al. 2007). Further, climate change is a multiplier of existing disadvantages; hence doing nothing would also lead to unprecedented losses much greater than the costs of adaptation, as emphasized by the Stern Report (2007).

The Philippines, being a developing country and an archipelagic nation that sits adjacent to the Pacific Ocean, is highly exposed and sensitive to various climatic threats, which are expected to increase in intensity and frequency with the changing climate. These threats include more intense tropical cyclones, drastic changes in rainfall patterns, sea-level rise, and increasing temperatures. The Global Climate Risk Index 2015 ranked the Philippines as number one in the list of the countries most affected by the impacts of weather-related loss events (storms, floods, heat waves, etc.) in 2013. This is also the same year when Typhoon Haiyan hit the country, the strongest tropical cyclone on record to hit land, which caused over USD 13 billion in economic losses and 6,000 deaths. In the period 1994–2013, the Philippines ranked fifth among the most affected by climate disasters, with Honduras, Myanmar, Haiti, and Nicaragua topping the list. The rankings underscored that less-developed countries are more vulnerable to climatic risks compared to industrialized countries (Kreft et al. 2014).

Managing climate risks requires adaptation. Adaptation is defined as “the process of adjustment to actual or expected climate and its effects. In human systems, adaptation  seeks to moderate or avoid harm or exploit beneficial opportunities. In some natural systems, human intervention may facilitate adjustment to expected climate and its effects” (IPCC 2014). Meanwhile, the legal documents in the Philippines (such as Climate Change Act or Republic Act (RA) 9729 and the National Framework Strategy on Climate Change or NFSCC) define adaptation as “the adjustment in natural or human systems in response to actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects, which moderates harm or exploits beneficial opportunities”. The latter was based on the IPCC Third (TAR) and Fourth (4AR) Assessment Reports, which were available when the Climate Change Act was passed in 2009 and the NFSCC was formulated in 2010 (IPCC 2001, 2007a, b).

Adaptation experience across the globe has grown and it is increasingly being embedded in planning processes (IPCC 2014). Adaptation is executed at various scales and levels, and its implementation differs depending on the context, such as resources, values, and needs. Current approaches to climate change adaptation (CCA), however, focus predominantly on sectoral and technological approaches. Apart from this, there is little discussion in the literature on how adaptation is realized in practice as well as the effects of adaptation strategies implemented (O’Brien and Hochachka 2010; IPCC 2014).

This chapter reviews the national documents on adaptation in the Philippines, including the local situation and priorities. It presents a historical background of the country’s adaptive responses to climate change in terms of policies, programs and projects, and other strategies. It also highlights the framework for adaptation employed in planning and implementing strategies, as well as the stakeholders involved. Gaps and priorities in adaptation are presented based on existing literature.

8.2 National Perspective

8.2.1 National Arrangements and Institutions

While CCA appears to just receive significant attention only recently, the Philippines already has a long history of adapting to climate variability and extremes, being highly exposed to these hazards (World Bank 2010; Lasco et al. 2008a). For instance, farmers have long been planting drought- and pest-resistant crop varieties, and have been practicing crop rotation to manage soil fertility and pest infestation (World Bank 2010). The indigenous knowledge and practices of some Filipino communities have also helped them maintain a sustainable relationship with the natural environment, which is the source of their livelihood (Sandoval and Baas 2013). More recently, the concept and feasibility of managed retreat as an adaptation measure is also being explored (Doberstein et al. 2020).

Early strategies on climate change at the national level, however, were focused on disaster response. In 1978, the then President Ferdinand Marcos passed the Presidential Decree No. 1566, which strengthens the Philippine disaster control capability and establishes the national program on community disaster preparedness. Under this law, the National Disaster Coordinating Council was created under the Office of Civil Defense, which coordinates the activities and functions on disaster management, among others (http://www.gov.ph/1978/06/11/presidential-decree-no-1566-s-1978/).

The 1987 Constitution declared it the policy of the state to “protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature” (Article II, Sect. 16). Consistent with this state policy, the Philippines, in 1989, took on sustainable development as a guiding principle in its development efforts through the approval and adoption of the framework of the Philippine Strategy for Sustainable Development (PSSD). The country’s participation in the Rio Summit further developed these initiatives, which led to the establishment of the Philippine Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD) in 1992 and the formulation of the Philippine Agenda (PA) 21 in 1996 (Republic of the Philippines 2014; World Bank 2010).

The Philippines has been noted to possess “one of the most responsive institutional and legislative mechanisms for environmental management in Southeast Asia” (Tan 2013). It is therefore not surprising that even prior to its signing of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at the Rio Summit in 1992, the Philippines already took the step to respond to the impending problem of climate change. In 1991, the then President Corazon Aquino signed Administrative Order (AO) No. 220, creating the Inter-Agency Committee on Climate Change (IACCC). The IACCC was composed of various government agencies and an umbrella non-government organization, with the primary function of formulating policies and response strategies related to climate change which also shape the country’s position in international negotiations (http://www.gov.ph/1991/05/08/).

The Philippines ratified the UNFCCC on August 2, 1994, and entered it into force on October 31, 1994. Under the Convention, countries agree to protect the climate system by stabilizing the greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations in the atmosphere, on the basis of equity and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. It is also a platform where governments share and gather information on GHG emissions and cooperate with regards to adaptation efforts (Republic of the Philippines 2014; World Bank 2010).

The Philippines signed the Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCCC in 1998 and ratified it in 2003. The Protocol is an international treaty that committed developed countries to emission reduction targets. The ratification of the Kyoto Protocol enabled it to participate in the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), which is an international offset program where developing countries can reach sustainable development goals and increase investment flows through emission reduction credits that can be traded with industrialized countries (Republic of the Philippines 2014; World Bank 2010).

The CDM and other flexible mechanisms to meet the emission targets of industrialized countries gave rise to the carbon market. This development has pushed to the fore climate change mitigation as an identified priority in the Medium-Term Development Plan of the Philippines for 2004–2010 (World Bank 2010). Lasco et al. (2008b) also observed that climate change was only mentioned once in this document, and this was in the context of CDM under energy independence. Climate change adaptation was taken in the context of disaster risk reduction, which reflected the then prevailing approach. Sectoral plans that aimed to address climate change, such as the Philippine Energy Plan 2004–2013 of the Department of Energy (DOE), also focused on mitigation, which emphasized improving energy efficiency and promoting renewable energy sources (World Bank 2010). Aside from the above strategies, the following laws also consider climate change issues (World Bank 2010):

  • Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act of 1997 (RA 8435), which directs the Department of Agriculture (DA), in coordination with the Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Service Administration (PAGASA) and other appropriate agencies, to devise a method for regularly monitoring and considering the effect of global climate changes, weather distribution, and annual productivity cycles for the purpose of forecasting and formulating agriculture and fisheries production programs.

  • Philippine Clean Air Act of 1999 (RA 8749), which orders the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) to promote environmentally sound technologies for the handling of wastes with due concern on the effects of climate change and to prepare a national plan on the reduction of GHGs in the country consistent with the UNFCCC.

  • Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 (RA 9003), which instructs the DENR, concerned agencies, and local government units (LGUs) to prepare and implement solid waste management plans.

  • Philippine Clean Water Act of 2004 (RA 9275), which aims to reduce water pollution through better management of sewerage and sanitation, industrial effluents, and agricultural, industrial, and residential wastes.

  • Biofuels Act of 2006 (RA 9367), which aims to reduce dependency on imported fuels and seeks to achieve energy self-sufficiency, while at the same time mitigating toxic and GHG emissions.

  • Renewable Energy Act of 2008 (RA 9513), which promotes the development and utilization of renewable energy resources in the context of energy security and climate change imperatives.

The undisputed evidence of science that “the warming of the climate system is unequivocal”, has brought a wave of urgency to respond to climate change (IPCC 2007a). In February 2007, the Presidential Task Force on Climate Change (PTFCC) was created with the issuance of AO No. 171. The DENR served as the chair of the task force, and its functions included conducting a rapid assessment on the impacts of climate change in the Philippines, ensuring strict compliance with air emission standards, and combating deforestation and environmental degradation. The IACCC, which was formed in 1991, acted as the technical arm of the PTFCC. Later in the same year, AO No. 171-A was passed transferring the chairmanship of the task force to DOE (Republic of the Philippines 2014). The Advisory Council on Climate Change Mitigation, Adaptation, and Communication was also created through DENR Special Order No. 2007-653, replacing the IACCC as the technical arm of the PTFCC (Finkel and Duhaylungsod 2010).

The PTFCC was reorganized in December 2008 through Executive Order (EO) No. 774, making the President of the Philippines as its chair and the Cabinet members as the members. Sixteen task groups were also formed, which included solid waste management, watershed protection, rainwater conservation, and fossil fuels, among others (http://www.gov.ph/2008/12/26/executive-order-no-774-s-2008/). Meanwhile, EO 785 issued in February 2009 mandated the PTFCC to develop a National Climate Change Framework that will consolidate and institutionalize government initiatives to achieve synergy in the implementation of climate change programs and projects. Concurrent with these initiatives, several bills on climate change were passed at the lower and upper chambers of the Congress, which would bring changes to the then existing task force and national strategies on climate change (World Bank 2010).

The aftermath of Typhoons Milenyo (Xangsane) and Reming (Durian) that hit the Philippines in 2006 has sparked a heightened level of consciousness on the necessity of CCA, especially at the local level. Being at the receiving end of frequent and severe climate hazards due to its geographical location, the Provincial Government of Albay took a proactive role in addressing disaster and climate risks and proclaimed CCA as its governing policy (PGA and CIRCA 2010; Uy et al. 2011). The Albay Province has initiated innovative approaches toward disaster risk reduction and CCA. Consistent with PD 1566, Albay is the first and only province in the Bicol region to establish the Provincial Disaster Management Office (PDMO). This office coordinates with various stakeholders to promote efficient intervention on disaster preparedness, emergency response, and recovery. PDMO was later institutionalized to the Albay Public Safety and Emergency Management Office (APSEMO) in 1994, an independent department that serves as the technical secretariat and administrative arm to support the Provincial Disaster Coordinating Council of Albay. This move has strengthened the disaster management capability of the province and ensured continuity of related programs (PGA and CIRCA 2010; Lasco et al. 2008b; Republic of the Philippines 2014).

In 2007, under the helm of the then newly elected governor, Jose Maria Clemente Salceda, the provincial government of Albay launched the Albay in Action on Climate Change (A2C2), a pioneering program for local climate change adaptation. It aims to embed disaster risk reduction to enforce climate-proofing and disaster-proofing of development. A2C2 spearheaded programs, such as a 90-hectare mangrove plantation project in Manito, Albay, and other land use and land use change and forestry (LULUCF) activities. It also led to the integration of the CCA program in the curricula of all schools, colleges, and universities in Albay (PGA and CIRCA 2010; Lasco et al. 2008b).

Aside from local actions, the province also brought the discourse on CCA to the national level by convening two National Conferences on Climate Change Adaptation (NCCCA). The first NCCCA held in Albay in October 2007 produced the Albay Declaration on Climate Change, which called for the passage of a policy prioritizing CCA in the national and local agenda. The Declaration has served as a model framework for integrating climate change concerns into national and local planning, leading to climate change adaptation. It was also instrumental in the passage of the Climate Change Act after two years. The second NCCCA held in October 2009 adopted the Manila Declaration, which made an appeal to the President of the Philippines for urgent action on the then pending bill on disaster reduction management (PGA and CIRCA 2010; Uy et al. 2011; Republic of the Philippines 2014).

The Province of Albay exemplifies the “living with risks” concept and proved that geography and environmental phenomena are not obstacles in the pursuit of development. With political will, forged partnerships, and legislative enactments, it has succeeded in rising above disasters and achieving a stronger economy (Espinas 2012). The good practices that it has pioneered has made the province a prototype for local CCA not only in the Philippines but also across the globe, with the United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR) and the World Bank declaring Albay as a “Global Local Government Unit Model for Climate Change Adaptation” in 2008 (PCA and CIRCA 2010).

8.2.2 Climate Change Adaptation at the National Level

The Philippines made another landmark legislation with the passage of the Climate Change Act (RA 9729) in 2009. In a nutshell, RA 9729 created an enabling environment to bolster climate change governance in the country in compliance with international frameworks (such as the UNFCCC) and in line with national and local development initiatives (Adaptation Knowledge Platform 2012). It established the Climate Change Commission (CCC) as the sole policy-making body mandated to coordinate, monitor, and evaluate the programs and action plans related to climate change. CCC is housed under the Office of the President and is being chaired by the President. Three Commissioners, one of whom serves as the Vice-Chairperson, also sit on CCC, and it has an advisory board composed of different government agencies and sectoral representatives (Republic of the Philippines 2014).

RA 9729 highlights the need for appropriate adaptation in recognition of the country’s vulnerability to climate change. The following adaptation-related concepts, actions, and interventions were stated in the Act, “adaptation planning; support for research and development programs; dissemination of information on CCA; enhancement of adaptive capacities of vulnerable human settlements; identification of options and prioritization of adaptation measures; and integration of climate change mitigation and adaptation framework” (Adaptation Knowledge Platform 2012).

In 2010, the National Framework Strategy on Climate Change (NFSCC) 2010–2022 was formulated, following the provision of the Climate Change Act. The Framework serves as the basis for climate change planning, research and development, and other related actions. It was also developed based on the needs of the country, particularly in relation to identified vulnerabilities, adaptation and mitigation potential (Climate Change Commission 2010).

NFSCC envisions a “climate risk-resilient Philippines with healthy, safe, prosperous and self-reliant communities, and thriving and productive ecosystems”. Its goal is “to build the adaptive capacity of communities and increase the resilience of natural ecosystems to climate change, and optimize mitigation opportunities towards sustainable development”. As illustrated in Fig. 8.1, increasing temperatures, changing rainfall patterns, sea-level rise, and extreme weather events are the climate change hazards that the country specifically contends with, which impede the achievement of sustainable development. The path toward sustainable development, therefore, requires tackling the impacts to and vulnerabilities of different sectors from the above hazards. At the same time, sustainable development affects the capacity to adapt to the impacts and address the vulnerabilities to climate change (Climate Change Commission 2010).

Fig. 8.1
figure 1

National framework strategy on climate change

Full size image

Adaptation, mitigation, and cross-cutting strategies (such as capacity development, knowledge management, etc.) would be the means for addressing climate change impacts and vulnerabilities. These shall be implemented through multi-stakeholder partnerships, financing, valuation, and policy, planning, and mainstreaming. Adaptation, however, is given high priority due to the Philippines’ geophysical and socioeconomic characteristics. The Framework’s adaptation thrusts include enhanced vulnerability and adaptation assessment, integrated ecosystem-based management, water governance and management, climate-responsive agriculture, climate-responsive health sector, climate proofing of infrastructures, and disaster risk reduction. It requires that the critical aspect of adaptation be implemented at all levels of governance. Mitigation strategies should also be implemented in the context of adaptation (Climate Change Commission 2010; Adaptation Knowledge Platform 2012).

To realistically achieve the country-driven programs on adaptation (including mitigation), the NFSCC was translated into the National Climate Change Action Plan (NCCAP) 2011–2028. Consistent with the NFSCC, the NCCAP aims “to build the adaptive capacities of women and men in their communities, increase the resilience of vulnerable sectors and natural ecosystems to climate change, and optimize mitigation opportunities towards gender-responsive and rights-based sustainable development” (Climate Change Commission 2011).

The NCCAP identified seven strategic priorities: food security, water sufficiency, environmental and ecological stability, human security, climate-friendly industries and services, sustainable energy, and knowledge and capacity development (Fig. 8.2). The achievement of these seven intermediate objectives would lead to enhanced adaptive capacity of communities, resilience of natural ecosystems, and sustainability of built environment to climate change. This desired result, together with the direct contribution from climate-smart industries and services, sustainable energy, and knowledge and capacity development, is seen as instrumental for achieving the ultimate outcome of a successful transition toward climate-smart development (Climate Change Commission 2011).

Fig. 8.2
figure 2

Source Sanchez (2015)

Overview of the national climate change action plan.

Full size image

Each of the seven strategic priorities is expressed as an objective, with specified immediate outcomes (Table 8.1) and accompanying outputs and activities. It can be observed, however, that only five of the priority areas are directly contributing to the goal of CCA. These are food security, water efficiency, environmental and ecological stability, human security, and knowledge and capacity development. The other two are geared toward mitigation.

Table 8.1 Objectives and immediate outcomes of the seven NCCAP priority areas
Full size table

While the Climate Change Act also addresses disaster risks, it was found wanting in disaster risk reduction and management (DRRM). Hence, less than a year after the passage of the above law, and heeding the call made by various experts and stakeholders after the second NCCCA, the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act (RA 10121) was legislated.

The Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010 defines DRRM as “the systematic process of using administrative directives, organizations, and operational skills and capacities to implement strategies, policies and improved coping capacities in order to lessen the adverse impacts of hazards and the possibility of disaster (Guingona and Bizaon 2009). Prospective disaster risk reduction and management refers to risk reduction and management activities that address and seek to avoid the development of new or increased disaster risks, especially if risk reduction policies are not put in place”. Disaster risk reduction (DRR), on the other hand, is referred to in the same law as “the concept and practice of reducing disaster risks through systematic efforts to analyze and manage the causal factors of disasters, including through reduced exposure to hazards, lessened vulnerability of people and property, wise management of land and the environment, and improved preparedness for adverse events”.

One of the welcome provisions of the new law is the availability of 70% of the Local and National Disaster Risk Reduction Management Fund (LDRRMF and NDRRMF, previously called calamity fund) for disaster mitigation and preparedness, while 30% will be allocated for quick response activities. This was a decisive shift from the earlier practice of disbursing the calamity fund only after the occurrence of a disaster, which provides little or no financial resources for pre-emptive response (Republic of the Philippines 2014).

Mitigation, as a strategy in DRRM, is defined in RA 10121 as “structural and non-structural measures undertaken to limit the adverse impact of natural hazards, environmental degradation, and technological hazards and to ensure the ability of the at-risk communities to address vulnerabilities aimed at minimizing the impact of disasters. Such measures include, but are not limited to, hazard-resistant construction and engineering works, the formulation and implementation of plans, programs, projects and activities, awareness raising, knowledge management, policies on land-use and resource management, as well as the enforcement of comprehensive land-use planning, building and safety standards, and legislation”.

The above disaster response overlaps with CCA, particularly in the area of climate-proofing development initiatives. DRRM and CCA address different but related problems, with the former focused on an ongoing problem (disasters) and the latter concerned with an emerging issue (climate change). Their convergence lies in the common factor of weather and climate, and the similar tools to monitor, analyze, and address the impacts (UNISDR 2009). As illustrated in Fig. 8.3, the climate- and weather-related hazards that usually cause disasters are also the same extreme weather events that are predicted to be more frequent and intense with the changing climate. The gradual increase in climatic parameters, such as sea-level rise, rising sea temperature, and changes in precipitation patterns, may also affect the occurrence of meteorological hazards. With this, it is therefore logical and beneficial to have synergistic measures for CCA and DRRM.

Fig. 8.3
figure 3

Source Climate Change Commission (2011)

Conceptual linkages of climate change adaptation and disaster risk management.

Full size image

Disaster risk reduction (DRR) is emphasized in the NCCAP through the priority areas on human security and knowledge and capacity development. Under these intermediate outcomes, enhanced knowledge on CCA and DRRM and their integration in local plans are among the expected outputs (Climate Change Commission 2011). RA 10121, on the other hand, further strengthened CCA, particularly in view of the DRRM-CCA linkage (Adaptation Knowledge Platform 2012). The palpable linkages between CCA and DRR have created a legislative impetus toward their integration. Various challenges, however, hinder the full realization of this initiative. These include mismatches in scale, norms, and knowledge (De Leon and Pittock 2016). Scale mismatches could involve institutional, temporal, vertical (level), and horizontal (sectoral) disparities. For instance, CCA deals with incremental long-term changes at the global scale while DRR on instantaneous events embodied by disasters. Thus, dominant actions focused on the latter rather than the sources of vulnerability. Current norms on responding to climate-related disasters also rely on formal approaches, involving the development of strategic frameworks and national and local plans. Such responses may be problematic for climate change as the latter involves a higher level of uncertainty. Knowledge mismatch is seen in the highly technical and largely upper scale (global, regional, and national) generation of climate change assessments, which somehow restricts its usage by disaster practitioners and related stakeholders.

Meanwhile, the Climate Change Act was amended in 2012 through the People’s Survival Fund Act (RA 10174). It included the Department of Budget and Management (DBM), the Department of Finance (DOF), and the National Youth Commission in the composition of its Advisory Council. More importantly, it introduced the People’s Survival Fund, a budget appropriation amounting to PhP 1 billion annually from the General Appropriations Act, as a special fund for financing adaptation programs and projects based on the NFSCC. The fund may be increased as the need arises, and may also be augmented by donations, endowments, grants, and contributions. These amendments further reinforce the CCA initiatives in the country, particularly at the local level.

With three specific laws that directly address CCA, the Philippines has a sufficient policy framework to facilitate efforts along this line. The effective implementation of these laws, particularly how these are transformed into actions at the local level to achieve the vision of a climate-risk resilient Philippines, is what remains to be seen. Due attention should be given not only to the specific actions that constitute the adaptation response but also to the process by which these are realized (IPCC 2014).

8.2.3 Climate Change Adaptation at the Local Level

The implementation of NCCAP at the local level is demonstrated following the concept of ecologically stable and economically resilient town or eco-town. An eco-town is a planning unit composed of municipalities or a group of municipalities located within and around boundaries of critical key biodiversity areas, which are at high risk to climate change. It will be built around protected areas and key biodiversity areas, using ecosystem management-based approach to enable communities to become ecologically and economically stable (CCC and GGGI 2014).

While the concept of eco-town is not unique to the Philippines, the country’s application of this framework focuses on adaptation. It presents an innovative approach to integrate and mainstream CCA and DRR in local development plans, programs, and activities to promote green growth. Through this, the eco-town project also highlights the role of the local government units (LGUs) as frontliners in responding to the risks of climate change. The eco-town demonstration sites include San Vicente, Palawan; Siargao Island, Siargao; Eastern Samar; Batanes; and Upper Marikina River Basin and Upper Landscape (CCC and GGGI 2014).

The Philippines’ eco-town framework adopts the ecosystem-based approach (EBA) in implementing adaptation. EBA, as defined by the Convention on Biological Diversity, is “a strategy for the integrated management of land, water and living resources that promotes conservation and sustainable use in an equitable way”. It follows a ridge to reef approach in maintaining the natural structure and functions of ecosystems (CCC and GGGI 2014). The process of implementing the eco-town framework requires the use of different assessment tools to come up with comprehensive adaptation measures (Fig. 8.4). The framework also consists of seven components (Climate Change Commission 2010): (i) Natural resource assessment; (ii) Vulnerability assessment; (iii) Environment and natural resources accounting; (iv) Initiation of adaptation and mitigation measures; (v) Application of climate adaptation support service; (vi) Design and implementation of financing scheme(s); and (vii) Integration of climate change into local plans.

Fig. 8.4
figure 4

Source CCC and GGGI (2014)

The Eco-town framework for implementation of the NCCAP at the local level.

Full size image

One of the successfully completed eco-town projects was the case of San Vicente, Palawan. Following the above process, a menu of adaptation measures was developed for different sectors. For instance, modernization of farming practices and the introduction of technology to increase productivity characterized the preferred adaptation strategies for agriculture. Prioritized measures for the coastal and marine sector focused on protecting the coral reefs, sustainable utilization of marine resources, and disaster preparedness. Those identified for the health sector include provision of clean and adequate water supply system. It is yet to be seen if San Vicente, Palawan will live up to the label of an eco-town through the successful implementation of the above CCA (CCC and GGGI 2014).

Aside from the eco-town project, the following are past and ongoing programs and projects on CCA in the Philippines (Adaptation Knowledge Platform 2012):

  • Project Climate Twin Phoenix—implemented by the CCC, and with technical assistance from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID). This project is envisioned to be the first stage of a more comprehensive and long-term capacity development program for cities and municipalities to manage risks from climate change and climate-related natural hazards. The project covers areas in Mindanao that were hardest hit by Typhoons Sendong (Washi) in 2011 and Pablo (Bopha) in 2012. Project activities include creation of flood hazard maps and preparation of Flood Contingency Plans.

  • Supporting the CCC in the Implementation of the NCCAP—the German Agency for International Cooperation (GIZ) supported CCC and DOE to improve adaptation capacity and enhance mitigation. It sought to increase local level capacities for the development and implementation of climate strategies and action plans.

  • “Resilience Capacity Building for Cities and Municipalities to Reduce Disaster Risks from Climate Change and Natural Hazards, Phase 1” or Project ReBUILD—implemented by CCC, in partnership with UNDP and with funding from the Government of New Zealand/New Zealand Aid Programme. This project aims to enhance the capacities of key local actors in selected cities and municipalities in Regions 2 and 6 to manage disaster risks from and adapt to the overall impacts of climate change toward resilient and sustainable development.

  • Philippine Climate Change Adaptation Project (PhilCCAP)—jointly supported by the Global Environment Facility, Special Climate Change Fund, and World Bank, the project would develop and demonstrate approaches that would enable targeted communities to adapt to the potential impacts of climate change. It has four components: (i) integration of CCA into the agriculture and natural resources sectors, and strengthening the capabilities of relevant government agencies; (ii) assistance to poor rural communities to adapt to the effects of climate change; (iii) improvement of access of end-users, especially in the agriculture and natural resources sectors, to more reliable scientific information for climate risk management; and (iv) support for project coordination functions through DENR’s Foreign Assisted Projects Office.

  • Climate Resilience and Green Growth in Critical Watersheds—this Asian Development Bank (ADB) technical assistance project funded by the Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction aims to assist CCC in demonstrating green growth and climate resilience alternatives in LGUs with critical watersheds. It covers nine municipalities in three watersheds: Lower Marikina, Camarines Sur, and Davao Oriental. It is expected to improve the ability of LGUs and other stakeholders to mainstream climate resilient and green growth options into development plans, programs, and policies.

  • Millennium Development Goals—Achievement Fund (MDG-F) 1656: Joint Programme on Strengthening the Philippines’ Institutional Capacity to Adapt to Climate Change—supported by the Government of Spain and UNDP. The Joint Programme is targeted to enhance capacities for CCA, mainstreaming climate risk reduction in developing plans and processes, and improving coping mechanisms. The program is also in support of the achievement of the MDGs.

While the above does not provide a comprehensive list of the adaptation programs and projects, it can be noticed that most projects are focused on building the adaptive capacity to perform CCA and DRR, particularly in mainstreaming and integrating these in development plans.

8.2.4 Local Climate Change Action Plan and Other Initiatives

Section 14 of the Climate Change Act stipulates the involvement of the local government units (LGUs) as the frontline agencies in the formulation, planning, and implementation of climate change action plans in their respective areas, consistent with the provisions of the Local Government Code, NFSCC, and the NCCAP. It fosters an inter-LGU collaboration, where barangays prioritize climate change issues and identify and implement best practices, with direct involvement of municipal and city governments. Municipal and city governments shall consider climate change adaptation as one of their regular functions, while provincial governments shall provide technical assistance, enforcement, and information management in support of municipal and city climate change action plans. LGUs are also directed to regularly update their respective action plans to reflect changing social, economic, and environmental issues. In the course of these actions, the national government shall provide technical and financial assistance to LGUs for the accomplishment of their Local Climate Change Action Plan (LCCAP).

In October 2014, the Department of Interior and Local Government issued Memorandum Circular 2014–135 outlining the guidelines on the formulation of the LCCAP. It also aims to inform the process of mainstreaming climate change adaptation, including disaster risk reduction, in local mandated plans. The suggested process for the formulation of the LCCAP follows four stages: (i) preparatory stage (which includes organizing an LCCAP Core Team; (ii) data gathering, vulnerability assessment, risk analysis, and validation; (iii) planning, prioritization, and budgeting; and (iv) monitoring and evaluation.

In support of the above, numerous trainings were held to build the capacity of the LGUs in developing their own LCCAPS (http://calabarzon.dilg.gov.ph/index.php/news/279-lccap; http://region2.dilg.gov.ph/index.php/homepage/31-capdev-on-the-lccap-formulation-for-17-lgus-of-the-province-of-cagayan). At the time of writing, only the City of Iloilo has an available LCCAP online, which was completed in April 2014 and has a 14-year planning horizon (2014–2028). The plan follows a hazards-based approach (temperature increase, flooding, sea-level rise, typhoons, drought, and storm surge) in identifying adaptation and mitigation activities to climate change. Among the strategies identified were the development of green urban centers, infrastructures, structures, and open spaces; improving city flood management; mangrove reforestation; relocation of households in danger areas to safer resettlement sites; adjustment of the cropping calendar; and rainwater harvesting project; among others.

In line with the mandate set by RA 9729 to mainstream climate change in policy formulation, the Philippine departments have embarked on various initiatives to make their plans and programs climate change compliant and climate-proofed. For instance, Development Authority (DA) set up four strategic objectives that included the development of climate-smart agriculture and fisheries, and redefining of the Strategic Agriculture and Fisheries Development Zones (SAFDZ) considering climate change vulnerabilities (DA Memorandum S-01-13-0268). DOH has produced the Policy Handbook on Climate Change and Health that compiled policies on climate change and health to guide practitioners and other stakeholders in providing appropriate health services and infrastructures. The Department has also come up with the Philippines strategy on CCA for the health sector, which outlined actions related to governance, regulation, service delivery, and financing (DOH and WHO 2012).

DENR has implemented various programs on climate change, such as geohazard mapping, the National Greening Program, and adaptation to climate change in coastal areas. They have also incorporated CCA and DRR in the Philippines Environmental Impact System, through the issuance of Memorandum Circular 2011–005. In terms of technological and management service response, the Department of Science and Technology (DOST) has launched Project NOAH (Nationwide Operational Assessment of Hazards), heeding the call of Pres. Benigno Simeon Aquino III for a more accurate, integrated, and responsive disaster prevention. Part of the components of the project is setting up of monitoring stations and early warning systems across the country for disaster preparedness (http://www.gov.ph/programs/about-project-noah/).

The National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) mainstreamed CCA-DRR in the Philippine Development Plan 2011–2016 (Chap. 10: Conservation, Protection and Rehabilitation of the Environment and Natural Resources). Furthermore, the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) developed Supplemental Guidelines on Mainstreaming Climate and Disaster Risks in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The guidelines have been used in the Project Climate Twin Phoenix.

Meanwhile, the MDG-F project has compiled best adaptation practices on climate change from 100 governments, business groups, and civil society groups (DENR 2012). While some of the adaptation strategies implemented are based on the CCA policy of the contributor, others were in the context of achieving their sustainable development goals. For instance, the business communities related how production or operation efficiency is improved and the contribution of their corporate social responsibility (CSR) projects not only in improving the livelihood of the communities but also in conserving the environment. Initiatives from the LGUs include the establishment of recycling facilities, banning the use of plastics and Styrofoam, and the creation of DRRM committees. Community-based actions, such as in disaster or emergency response, livelihood enterprises, rehabilitation, or protection efforts, are also among the common adaptation practices.

At the grassroots level, studies on assessing the adaptation of farming communities to climate change, particularly to extreme weather events and climate variability, revealed that the common adaptation strategies were diversification of livelihood (e.g., off-farm labor) and crops (e.g., drought-resistant crops) (Tapia et al. 2014; Lasco et al. 2010). In Pantabangan-Carranglan Watershed, other adaptation strategies recorded were reduced consumption, availing of loans, storing firewood, and food and asset disposal, among others (Lasco et al. 2010). Adaptation responses were observed to be mostly spontaneous and reactive in nature. They also merely address the immediate effects of a hazard and are largely characterized by bearing the losses from the impacts (Tapia et al. 2014). What is clear, however, is that the farming communities employ not just one but a bundle of adaptation strategies.

8.2.5 Research and Implementation Gaps

The Adaptation Knowledge Platform (2012) reviewed the provisions of the Climate Change Act vis-à-vis the Nairobi Work Programme (NWP), a mechanism under the UNFCCC to facilitate and catalyze the development and dissemination of information and knowledge that would inform and support adaptation policies and practices (https://www3.unfccc.int/). NWP defined nine work areas that would lead to the pathway of adaptation: (i) methods and tools; (ii) data and observation; (iii) climate modeling, scenarios, and downscaling; (iv) climate-related risks and extreme events; (v) socioeconomic information; (vi) adaptation planning and practices; (vii) research; (viii) technologies for adaptation; and (ix) economic diversification. The law was found wanting with regards to the role of climate science, climate scenarios, models, and economic diversification for adaptation as well as several aspects related to the socioeconomic dimensions of the Philippine society (Adaptation Knowledge Platform 2012).

The CCC, together with relevant stakeholders, also conducted a gap analysis of researches on climate change in the country to guide the development of a Research and Development Agenda on Climate Change (Climate Change Commission 2013). Following the NCCAP strategic priorities, water sufficiency and climate-smart industries lagged behind in research in terms of numbers. Most researches were focused on food security and ecological and environmental stability. Table 8.2 lists the identified gaps for the five NCCAP areas that specifically address CCA. Along with this, priority needs were also enumerated, which included enhanced capacity to establish and maintain observation facilities, zoning of settlement areas, identification of indicator species for health of habitat, and translation and popularization of research outputs.

Table 8.2 Research gaps in the context of NCCAP strategies focusing on CCA
Full size table

The CCC has taken significant steps to close the identified gaps, particularly in building the capacities of the LGUs. In 2013, the Commission, with support from German Corporation for International Cooperation GmbH (GIZ), published the Compendium of Climate Change Vulnerability and Impact Assessment Tools to assist LGUs in integrating CCA and DRR in their local plans, particularly on how to conduct VAs (Balangue 2013). This is a product of the project “Supporting the CCC in the Implementation of the NCCAP” described previously. The implementation of eco-town also demonstrated how the local government could carry out the above process, with specific examples and outputs especially for the case of San Vicente, Palawan (CCC and GGGI 2014). DILG, in its MC 2014-135, has reinforced the process of mainstreaming CCA and DRR in development plans.

Of late, LGUs are working toward satisfying the requirement of completing their LCCAPs. The adaptation planning process involved in accomplishing this has already been laid down. How the adaptation strategies that were identified and prioritized would be implemented presents another story, as this is the area where the Philippines is usually constrained at different levels of governance. Therefore, there is a need to look into the actual practice of adaptation (Adaptation Knowledge Framework 2012).

The implementation of adaptation should also be true to its guiding principle of equity. Adaptation governance has to consider issues of equity in both the process and the outcome (Nelson et al. 2007). The former refers to “the fairness of the institutions, their representatives, and how they incorporate the diverse values and views of the community and the collective as well as the individual good”, while the latter concerns with “the distribution of vulnerabilities across stakeholders within a population”. In addition, aspects of ensuring successful stakeholder engagement that transforms practices at multiple levels are also critical for implementing CCA (Barletti et al. 2020). This will ensure that no one is left behind toward the vision of climate-risk resilient Philippines.

8.2.6 Vulnerable Sectors and Regions

Key Concepts: Consistent with the IPCC Third and Fourth Assessment Reports, the Philippine Climate Change Act defines vulnerability as follows: “The degree to which a system is susceptible to, or unable to cope with, adverse effects of climate change, including climate variability and extremes. Vulnerability is a function of the character, magnitude, and rate of climate change and variation to which a system is exposed, its sensitivity, and its adaptive capacity”. Vulnerability is therefore most often conceptualized as a function of exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity (McCarthy et al. 2001). Exposure is the degree, duration, and extent to which the system is in contact with, or subject to, the perturbation (Gallopin 2006). Sensitivity is the degree to which a system is affected, either adversely or beneficially, by climate variability, climate change, or extreme events (IPCC 2007b). The effects may also be direct or indirect. Smit and Wandel (2006) distinguished exposure and sensitivity as almost inseparable properties of a system and are dependent on the interaction between the characteristics of the system and on the attribute of the climate stimulus. Meanwhile, adaptive capacity is the ability of a system to adjust to climate change (including climate variability and extremes) to moderate potential damages, to take advantage of opportunities, or to cope with the consequences (IPCC 2007b). The forces that influence the ability of the system to adapt, such as economic wealth, technology and infrastructure, information, knowledge and skills, equity, among others, determine its adaptive capacity (Smit and Wandel 2006; Ionescu et al. 2009). Exposure and sensitivity would result in potential impacts, and the impacts and adaptive capacity would determine the vulnerability (Fig. 8.5).

Fig. 8.5
figure 5

Schematic presentation of vulnerability based on the IPCC’s Third Assessment Report (TAR) and 4AR

Full size image

However, the emphasis changed with the release of the IPCC report in recent times (i.e., the AR5). The focus on vulnerability has shifted to climate risks, as the latter supports decision-making in the context of climate change and complements other elements (IPCC 2014). The change is also reflected in the new definition of vulnerability by IPCC AR5: the propensity or predisposition to be adversely affected (IPCC 2012). Vulnerability encompasses a variety of concepts and elements including sensitivity or susceptibility to harm and lack of capacity to cope and adapt. This new approach marries climate change adaptation and disaster risk management. With this new approach, vulnerability became a component of risk (from the disaster risk and management tradition), and it is the most palpable manifestation of the social construction of risk. Risk is interpreted using the below equation, as well as vulnerability (Mendoza 2014):

$$ \begin{aligned} & {\mathbf{R = Hazard + Exposure + Vulnerability,}} \\ {\mathbf{where, }} & {\mathbf{Vulnerability = f (sensitivity + adaptive\, capacity)}} \\ \end{aligned}$$

Figure 8.6 presents the illustration of the core concepts of SREX and AR5 reports. It evaluates the influence of natural climate variability and anthropogenic climate change on hazards that can contribute to risk. It also considers the role of the socioeconomic process in trends in exposure and vulnerability and its implications to risks (IPCC 2012). Thus, risk of climate-related impacts results from the interaction of climate-related hazards (including hazardous events and trends) with the vulnerability and exposure of human and natural systems. Changes in the climate system (left) and socioeconomic processes including adaptation and mitigation (right) are drivers of hazards, exposure, and vulnerability (IPCC 2014).

Fig. 8.6
figure 6

Source IPCC (2014)

Framework for the assessment of climate change impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability.

Full size image

Aside from vulnerability (already defined above), the other important concepts that need to be elaborated are hazard, exposure, risk, and impacts. Their definitions are presented below (IPCC 2014):

  • Hazard—the potential of a natural or human-induced physical event or trend or physical impact that may cause loss of life, injury, or other health impacts, as well as damage and loss to property, infrastructure, livelihoods, service provision, ecosystems, and environmental resources.

  • Exposure—the presence of people, livelihoods, species or ecosystems, environmental functions, services, and resources, infrastructure, or economic, social, or cultural assets in places and settings that could be adversely affected.

  • Impacts—effects on natural and human systems. In the IPCC AR5, the term impacts is used primarily to refer to the effects on natural and human systems of extreme weather and climate events and of climate change. Impacts generally refer to effects on lives, livelihoods, health, ecosystems, economies, societies, cultures, services, and infrastructure due to the interaction of climate changes or hazardous climate events occurring within a specific time and the vulnerability of an exposed society or system. Impacts are also referred to as consequences and outcomes. The impacts of climate on geophysical systems, including floods, droughts, and sea-level rise, are a subset of impacts called physical impacts.

  • Risk—the potential for consequences where something of value is at stake and where the outcome is uncertain, recognizing the diversity of values. Risk is often represented as the probability of occurrence of hazardous events or trends multiplied by the impacts if these events or trends occur. Risk results from the interaction of vulnerability, exposure, and hazard.

  • Adaptation—the process of adjustment to actual or expected climate and its effects. In human systems, adaptation seeks to moderate or avoid harm or exploit beneficial opportunities. In some natural systems, human intervention may facilitate adjustment to the expected climate and its effects.

It should be noted that since that shift in the focus of climate science from vulnerability to risk is just recent, most of the vulnerability assessment studies performed in the Philippines followed the old conceptualization of vulnerability being a function of exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity, as somehow captured in the below section.

Vulnerable Sectors: While there have been quite a number of vulnerability assessments performed in the Philippines, the program called “Adaptation to Climate Change and Conservation of the Biodiversity in the Philippines” (ACCBio) has already come up with an assessment of the vulnerability of different sectors in the Philippines, which also formed the basis for adaptation actions in the country, as well as the identification of gaps and needs for this scoping study. Much of the assessment highlighted the potential impacts of future climate on different sectors in the Philippines (Table 8.3). The gaps and issues as well as required actions were also highlighted.

Table 8.3 Vulnerability to climate change of different sectors in the Philippines.
Full size table

While the reports of the ACCBio and even the priorities of the NCCAP have focused on sectoral vulnerabilities, it should be noted that all the above sectors are interconnected and should be dealt with holistically, to achieve the NFSCC vision of a climate risk-resilient Philippines. Recent national projects in the country, such as Monitoring and Detection of Ecosystems Changes for Enhancing Resilience and Adaptation in the Philippines (MODECERA), are making a serious attempt to adopt the landscape approach. This approach lends a framework for applying systems thinking in addressing problems related to climate change. It highlights the biophysical, social, economic, institutional, and political components of the system. Central to addressing the vulnerability of each sector is enhancing the adaptive capacity of communities, institutions, and other stakeholders. Local studies have highlighted high dependence on primary industries (agriculture, fishery, and forestry), inadequate access to basic services (e.g., education, health, and finance mechanisms), and low level of information and awareness as sources of vulnerabilities (Tapia et al. 2014; Toda et al. 2015). This necessitates enhancing education and building the capacity of the stakeholders, specifically addressing the different social weaknesses for each sector as indicated in Table 8.3.

Vulnerable Regions: The different risk factors in terms of climate hazards in the Philippines are presented in Fig. 8.7 based on (DENR 2012). It can be noted from the below map that there are five major climate-related hazards that the Philippines is at risk to sea-level rise, extreme rainfall events, increased heating events, increased ocean temperatures, and a disturbed water budget. It can also be deduced from Fig. 8.7 the different system components or services that would be affected by such hazards, with the highly populated and economic centers, Metro Manila and Region IV, exposed to Cluster III hazards (i.e., extreme heating events, disturbed water budget, and sea-level rise); the agricultural area in Region III exposed to Cluster IX hazards (i.e., extreme heating events, extreme rainfall events, disturbed water budget, and sea-level rise); and the island provinces in Southern Luzon and Visaya exposed to Cluster XI hazard (i.e., sea-level rise).

Fig. 8.7
figure 7

Source DENR (2012)

The philippines exposure map on climate change.

Full size image

8.3 Adaptation Priorities

8.3.1 Approach

The Climate Change Commission (2013) has conducted a series of consultations on developing a research and development agenda for climate change in the Philippines, and this has resulted in the publication of the “Philippine Research and Development Agenda in Support of the National Climate Change Action Plan Strategies Priorities”. This report, consistent with the identified priorities in the National Climate Change Action Plan (NCCAP), included a gap analysis following an inventory of climate change research that has already been done in the country, areas that need further studies, as well as new and emerging issues. This Research and Development Agenda is also intended as the guiding document for the country’s research, especially for the science and academic institutions assisting the public, private, and non-government sectors in the quest for formulating solutions to issues and concerns brought about by climate change.

Figure 8.8 presents one of the outputs of the climate change research inventory, indicating that among the seven thematic priorities identified in the NCCAP, environmental sustainability and food security were the areas with the most number of research conducted. Other priorities such as water sufficiency, human security, sustainable energy, and climate-smart industries and services need to catch up. Nevertheless, it is not only the number that matters but also the specific gaps and priority needs that need to be addressed under each thematic area. Table 8.4 lists the gaps and priority needs identified in the Research and Development Agenda for climate change, under the five NCCAP priorities that specifically tackle climate change adaptation.

Fig. 8.8
figure 8

Source CCC (2013)

Number of research conducted in the country under the strategic priorities of the NCCAP.

Full size image
Table 8.4 Research gaps and priority needs in the context of the NCCAP
Full size table

The gaps and priorities for climate change research and development as well as the vulnerabilities of each sector and the number of current research already conducted for the different thematic areas served as the basis for the identification of several thematic areas for local action-oriented pilots (Table 8.5). The findings were then shared with stakeholders to identify potential pilots.

Table 8.5 Proposed areas for action-oriented pilots
Full size table

A local action pilot project was not proposed for the theme under food security because there are already ongoing projects that address this (such as the Smarter Approaches to Reinvigorate Agriculture as industry in the Philippines or SARAI Project). This is to avoid duplication of efforts and to redirect resources to other areas with critical needs. In its place, a cross-cutting theme on governance was identified as another priority, especially in support of the current initiative in the country for the local government units (LGUs) to formulate their Local Climate Change Action Plan (LCCAP).

While the participants in the consultation-workshop agreed that the proposed local action-oriented research pilots were needed to address current needs in the country, it was, however, observed that the priority areas are linked together, and realizing the objective of one area would mean addressing the pressing concerns of another. Hence, it was decided to select three areas representing the islands of Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao, where the project would be implemented. It was also highlighted to select an area where adaptation in an island ecosystem, which is the case for many LGUs in the Philippines, would be demonstrated. Each of the local-oriented adaptation projects would have different components to holistically address the needs or vulnerabilities in the chosen site. It was also thought useful that some sites already have a Local Climate Change Action Plan to demonstrate its implementation. Based on the above conclusion, the following potential projects were identified in order of priority.

  • Enhancing community resilience in San Vicente, Palawan through effective implementation of LCCAP with a focus on human security and capacity development. This involves strengthening the capacity of the LGU to implement LCCAP, improving human security through the development of appropriate livelihoods and environmental programs, and developing capacity and ensuring sustainability through the establishment of community-based monitoring system.

  • Reducing Vulnerability to Climate Change toward Resilient Ecosystems and Communities in the Upper East Coast Watershed of Davao Oriental (Baganga, Boston and Cateel). This involves addressing water security through effective watershed management, management of production and protected forests through community forestry, taking advantage of mechanisms such as REDD+, and protection of coastal and marine resources.

  • Enhancing Climate Change Adaptation in a Watershed Within an Island Ecosystem: The Case of Catubig Watershed. This involves improvement of water security through enhanced water governance, building the capacity of the communities through improved livelihood strategies and environmental management, and the establishment of an innovative climate-smart community and information center.

The proposed pilot projects support national priorities and build on existing initiatives toward CCA in the country, particularly that of the formulation of the LCCAP by the LGUs and the Eco-town Project of the CCC which aims to integrate and mainstream CCA and disaster risk reduction (DRR) in local development plans, programs, and activities to promote green growth. Furthermore, a landscape approach will be followed in designing holistic adaptation responses that focus not only on the strategies but also on the process to address the needs and priorities in the proposed study site. Landscape approach is generally described as “addressing social-ecological systems at the landscape scale; related to resource management and/or environmental goals; and framed around the concept of multifunctionality, with the aim of achieving multiple objectives through the approach” (Freeman et al. 2015). This approach is also characterized by the concepts of multifunctionality, transdisciplinarity, participation, complexity, and sustainability.

In designing adaptation strategies to build resilience, the Climate Resilience Framework (CRF) would be applied which focused on building the adaptive capacity of the sub-components of the system, namely the agents, institutions, and systems (infrastructure and ecosystems). Agent refers to people and their organizations, whether as individuals, households, communities, public and private sector organizations, or companies. Characteristics that need to be enhanced for the agents are responsiveness, resourcefulness, and capacity to learn. Institution refers to the rules, norms, beliefs, or conventions that shape or guide human relations and interactions, access to and control over resources, goods or services, assets, information, and influence. Capacities to be developed in an institution are access rights and entitlements, decision-making processes, information flows, and applications of new knowledge. Lastly, systems are considered as the combination of ecosystems and infrastructures. Characteristics of ecosystems and infrastructure systems that contribute to resilience include flexibility and diversity, redundancy and modularity, and safe failure (ISET 2013).

8.3.2 Proposed Local Level Pilot

The municipality of San Vicente, Palawan is a first-class municipality located on the northwestern side of the province and 186 km from Puerto Princesa City (Fig. 8.9). It occupies a total land area of 165,797 ha and has jurisdiction over 10 barangays, namely Alimanguan, Binga, Caruray, Kemdent, New Agutaya, New Canipo, Poblacion, Port Barton, San Isidro, and Sto. Niño. It has a total population of 30,565 based on the 2010 Census, with a growth rate of 6%. Based on the Community-Based Monitoring System (CBMS) survey, the municipality’s population increased by 3,500 from 27,065 in 2008. The total number of households is 6,460 with an average size of five members. San Vicente has 22 islands and islets within its municipal boundaries serving as tourist attractions. Its largely untapped beaches, coral reefs, waterfalls, forest cover, and mangrove areas are home to 23 of the 25 wildlife species found in Palawan. It has a forest area of 83,080 ha. San Vicente also hosts 24 ethno-linguistic resident groups, each with their own distinct dialects and cultural heritage. The main livelihoods in San Vicente are fishing (46.98%) and farming (37.43%). Rice and coconut are the major agricultural crops. As a first-class municipality, San Vicente aspires to tap the potential tourism, particularly the 14-km long beach from Poblacion to Alimanguan, waterfalls, dense forest cover, and rich fishing ground to generate more income and attract investments. Given its rich natural resource endowments, the municipality aspires to be a top tourist destination that strikes the balance between economic growth and environmental sustainability.

Fig. 8.9
figure 9

Location map of San Vicente, Palawan

Full size image

Since the landscape approach would be followed in enhancing the climate risk resilience of the municipality, this proposed project shall consider not only the administrative boundary of San Vicente but also its ecosystem boundary. This means that systems that influence and are influenced by the municipality would be included in the assessment. The municipality was among the prioritized sites (i) as, being a coastal community, it is perceived to be highly vulnerable to sea-level rise and coastal flooding; and (ii) people’s livelihood (farming, fishing, and tourism) is highly dependent on natural resources, which are already being adversely affected by climate change, thereby exacerbating the poverty situation in the area. San Vicente, Palawan is one of the Philippine project sites for the demonstration of the CCC’s Eco-town framework.

Based on a comprehensive analysis of San Vicente’s development priorities, natural resources, hazards and risks, and climatic vulnerability, a menu of adaptation measures was put forward through the consultation between the local stakeholders and the local and foreign experts. The task of prioritizing adaptation measures is critical to planning due to limitations in resources to finance all identified options. Through multi-criteria analysis, several options were prioritized based on effectiveness, cost, technical feasibility, social and cultural acceptability, required time, and sustainability and overall impact. It is also worth noting in the course of prioritization that the current adaptive capacity of the municipality was also taken into consideration.

Agriculture: Some of the prioritized options for agriculture are grounded on the modernization of farming practices and technology to increase productivity. These include the construction of additional automatic weather stations and small-scale irrigation facilities; training on alternative livelihood (non-timber forest product); establishment of farmers’ field schools and programs; introduction of new climate-resilient crop varieties, including hybrids; and alteration of cropping calendar and practices to adjust to changing climate patterns.

Coastal and Marine: Top measures for the coastal and marine sector are targeted to save the depleting coral reefs, promote sustainable utilization of marine resources, and prepare natural catastrophes in the coastal areas. Specifically, the proposal highlights the establishment of sea walls and dikes in Port Barton; setting up of early warning system; mangrove reforestation; monitoring of fish catch, also illegal fish catch practices; organizing and strengthening fisherfolk bodies; undertaking herbivore seeding and creating the necessary mix of marine habitat types to enhance coral resiliency; alternative livelihood training; drawing in private sector in coastal planning and management; conducting training and orientation programs on disaster risk reduction and management, and the like.

Health: The adaptation measure for health seeks to address the primary vulnerabilities specifically the climate-induced diseases and hazards. The prioritized options: the provision of clean and adequate water supply system, the use of insecticide on bed nets, and rapid treatment strips for malaria and water tablets. As preventive measures: promote and monitor regular health checks; provide training on early detection/treatment of infectious, water/vector-borne diseases; public health and hygiene training for the youth; and increased enrolment in health financing facility (PhilHealth) are paramount.

Based on the vulnerability and adaptation assessment performed through the Eco-town Demonstration Project, farming and fishing were the major livelihood sources and also formed part of the municipality’s vulnerabilities. Nevertheless, San Vicente also has a high potential for community-based ecotourism, of which the forestry and marine sectors are the natural assets. This is also hoped to safeguard the forestry and marine sectors from threats of degradation. However, it can also be noticed that the vulnerability and adaptation assessment performed is lacking on the social component, particularly that of stakeholder analysis, institutional analysis, organizational capacity analysis, and the like. Results from such endeavors would be particularly useful in the facilitation of adaptation strategies.

Taking the municipality of San Vicente as one socioecological system, this proposed project adopts a holistic approach at adaptation toward building resilience to climate change, keeping in mind the concepts of multifunctionality, transdisciplinarity, participation, complexity, and sustainability and specifically targeting the sub-components of resilience. The project could be implemented by the University of the Philippines Los Baños (UPLB) and the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), with partnership from the Municipal Government of San Vicente, Palawan. Since San Vicente was a recipient of the Demonstration of the Eco-town Framework by the Climate Change Commission, collaboration from the latter would be sought to build on their previous and current initiatives. Relevant government agencies and other institutions (such as SEARCA, ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity, etc.) would also be tapped in fleshing the details of the project activities and their implementation. Additional funding could also be requested from the Philippine Council for Agriculture, Aquatic and Natural Resources Research Development (PCAARRD). The proposed project is expected not only to contribute towards improving the resilience of San Vicente, Palawan, but also in potentially developing a framework in building resilience and sharing best practices that would also benefit the rest of the Philippines and the ASEAN region.

8.4 Concluding Remarks

The Philippines has come a long way in climate change adaptation coming from a disaster-oriented and highly reactive approach to hazards that later shifted to predominantly mitigation responses. Initial strategies on climate change adaptation (CCA) can be considered as “no regret” solutions, or those actions that are beneficial even without climate change. Since then targeted responses are being taken to address the impacts of climate change, particularly in relation to extreme weather events and climate variability. This started the serious mainstreaming of CCA into policies and development plans, which specifically address the country’s and the local governments’ vulnerabilities. At the moment, much of the accomplishments of the Philippines in CCA relate to adaptation planning. It is yet to be seen how the adaptation strategies that would be drawn by each local government unit (LGU) would contribute to the ultimate outcome of climate-smart development at different levels of governance in the country. It is therefore hoped that the Climate Change Act would not suffer the same fate of other environmental laws with wanting results.

Caution should be applied in identifying and implementing CCA and the measures implemented do not always lead to resilience. Trade-offs among adaptation strategies should be considered, and should not render any system (or any LGU in particular) more vulnerable. Similar to development initiatives, fragmentation is a major challenge. Hence, not only an action-oriented approach to adaptation is demanded, but also a systems-oriented one to ensure that nothing is left out. This likewise entails the cooperation of different stakeholders in a local government, inter-LGU collaboration (particularly those located in a single watershed), and consistency in governance across scales in working toward achieving a climate-risk resilient Philippines. The proposed local level pilot is the municipality of San Vicente, Palawan located on the northwestern side of the Palawan Province. San Vicente is a demonstration site for CCC’s Eco-town framework. The proposed pilot will apply the concepts of multifunctionality, transdisciplinarity, participation, complexity, and sustainability for enhancing climate resilience, and go beyond the administrative border to take into account its ecosystems boundary, to capture systems that influence, and are influenced by the municipality.