END OF COURSE PROJECT Murallos 1) Background Information The Republic of the Philippines is an archipelago consisting of some 7,100 islands and islets lying about 500 miles off the coast. It has a total land area of 300,000 square kilometers. It is bounded by the Philippine Sea in the east, Celebes Sea in the south and South China Sea in the west and north. The Philippine population, as of last census (2000) stands at 76, 499,000 with an annual growth rate of 2.36. The climate of the Philippines is tropical and is strongly affected by monsoon winds, which blow from the southwest approximately from May to October and from the northeast from November to February. The temperatures remain relatively constant from north to south throughout the year and seasons consist of period of wet and dry. The amount of precipitation varies throughout the country.(source:britanica Online) The Philippines is a developing economy in Southeast Asia. In 2004, it was ranked 24 th largest economy by the World Bank according to purchasing power parity. The important sectors of Philippine economy are agriculture and industry, particularly food processing, textiles and garments and electronics and automotive parts. At 2004 estimates, the GDP purchasing power parity stands at $430.6 billion and the GDP real growth rate is at 6.1%. The GDP per capita (2005 est.) is at $ 5,100.00. The 2003 estimates show that the source of national income is distributed as follows, agriculture 14.5%, industry 32.3% and services 53.2% The major import partners of the Philippines are Japan,, U.S.A., Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, China and Hongkong, while the major export partners are U.S.A., Japan, Hongkong, Netherlands, Taiwan, Malaysia, Singapore and China. The country is a reciepient of economic aid ODA commitments which stands at $ 1.2 billion (2002). (source: wikpedia.org). There is a transition of population distribution from rural to urban which signifies a change in the human habitat with respect to several physical, demographic and economic characteristic of the barangays. Results of the latest Census 2000 placed the total population of the Philippines as of May 1, 2000 at 76.5 million persons, of which, 36.7 million persons or 48.0 percent were in 9,950 urban barangays. (source: NSO) The Philippines is experiencing continuously various natural disasters, and like any other developing country, its environment and economy are highly vulnerable to the impact of these natural disasters.
The country has its share of geologic and hydro-meteorological hazards, such as earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, landslides, floods, typhoons, storm surge and droughts. There are other weather systems affecting the Philippines like tropical cyclones, seasonal monsoons, cold front, inter-tropical convergence zone, easterly trade and thunderstorms. The intensity 8 earthquake which happened last July 16, 1990 left the country with 1666 persons dead, 3,500 persons injured, P11 billion cost of damage property and P 1.2 billion cost of damage in agriculture. The Mount Pinatubo eruption in 1991was the biggest volcanic eruption of the century. It caused the death of 800 persons and P10.6 billion damages to property.(source: The Philippine Risk Profile and Disaster Management Trends) The Philippines experiences an average 20 tropical cyclones per year. Five of these cyclones can be very destructive. It is estimated that damages to property is about P10 million to P 500 million for every typhoon that hits the country. On the other hand, flooding causes damage to property between P2 million to P 100 million. (source: Punongbayan, R., Philippine Disaster Preparedness System for Natural Hazards: An Assessment) 2) Brief Description of the Selected Disaster Event The most tragic natural disaster that happened in the Philippines is the Guinsaugon Landslide in St. Bernard, Southern Leyte. This massive landslide occurred in Barangay Guinsaugon, St. Bernard, Leyte, Philippines at around 11:00 a.m. on 17 February 2006. The landslide occurred along the steep fault scarp of the Philippine Fault Zone, a large and active tectonic structure that traverses the entire length of the Philippines. Barangay Guinsaugon is located at the foot of the scarp, directly along the path of the downward moving mass of earth. The landslide has a planform area of approximately 3,000,000 m and a distance of 4.0 km from the crown to toe. It has a thickness of 6 to 7 m at the toe and 30 m at the base of the fault scar. The volume of the deposit is in the order of 10 to 20 million m 3 Heavy rainfall was the dominant factor that triggered the Guinsaugon rockslide-debris avalanche. The PAGASA rainfall station at Otikon, which is located 7 km southwest of Guinsaugon, recorded an accumulated rainfall of 674 mm from 8 to17 February 2006. The highest amount of daily rainfall recorded (171 mm) over this duration occurred on 12 February 2006 while the average rainfall recorded on 17 February 2006 was only 2.6 mm. A 2.6 magnitude earthquake was reported by PHIVOLCS to have occurred at a location 25 km west of the landslide area at 10:36 a.m., 17 February 2006. The magnitude of this earthquake was too weak and distant to have caused the landslide.(source:preliminary Geological Report on the Southern Leyte Landslide conducted by National Institute of Geological Sciences, University of the Philippines and Manila Observatory, Ateneo de Manila University) The Mortality Report submitted by Department of Health (DOH) Regional Office 8 shows that there were 139 retrieved dead bodies, 56 of which were identified and 83 unidentified. There were also 15 body parts recovered.
The latest report of PDCC-Southern Leyte showed that 972 (inclusive of residents and non-residents) were buried alive by the mudslide debris and are presumed dead. There were 411 survivors and these include the 22 who were rescued by the different emergency response teams. A Rapid Assessment conducted by Mines and Geosciences Bureau after the Guinsaugon landslides found out that out of the 500 barangays, 104 are highly susceptible to landslides, 136 moderately susceptible, 168 are least susceptible, while the rest do not have any threat of having a landslide. In view of this reports, 35, 931 persons, 12,494 families and 19,259 hectares of land are affected by the threats of landslide in eight (8) municipalities and one (1) city in Southern Leyte.(PDCC-Southern Leyte). The disaster directly affected Barangay Guinsaugon with 281 houses and elementary school buildings buried. The Philippine authorities estimate Php 92.2 million (US $1.78 million) in infrastructure damage and Php 22.6 million (US $436,000.00) in agricultural damage in the area.(source: February 24, UN-OCHA) The barangays adjacent to Guinsaugon can also be considered directly affected because they were also evacuated due to further threats of landslides in the area. While their rice lands were not covered by mudslides, the local government has prohibited them from going back to ensure their safety. The provincial government of Southern Leyte and the Municipality of St. Bernard relied heavily from the national government and foreign donors due to the gargantuan task of relocating and rehabilitating more than 1500 families to safer residential sites. 3) National Disaster Management System As a response to the damages brought about by World War II, the Philippine government established the National Civil Defence Administration (NCDA) in 1954 to render basic services such as rescue, evacuation and emergency welfare in times of war. In 1967, the NCDA created the Committee on Warning System (COWS) to provide warning of an impending disaster. By 1968, all government agencies were required to organize their respective disaster control groups. A Committee on Disaster Operations designed to coordinate activities of various government agencies involved in disasters was also informed. The disaster-related functions of these government bodies were contained in a set of Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) issued in the same year. To integrate these disparate efforts, the Office of the President, in 1970, created an inter-departmental planning group tasked mainly to prepare the Natural Disasters and Calamities Plan of 30 March 1970. This plan has since been amended and was issued in 1998 as the Calamities and Disaster Preparedness Plan (CDPP). (source: The PDMS: Institutional and Organizational Structure) The National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC) is the national government agency responsible in planning, implementing, and allocating resources for disaster management. NDCC is in charge of mitigating the impact of natural disasters. The Council was established in 1978 by Presidential Decree No. 1566 to strengthen the Philippine disaster control capability and to establish the national
program on community disaster preparedness. The head of the Council is the Secretary of National Defence, together with the heads of 18 departments/agencies as members. It includes the Chief of Staff of the AFP, Secretary General of the PNRC and PIA. The Administrator of the Office of the Civil Defence (OCD) acts as the Executive Secretary of the Council. The Council does not have a regular budget. It operates through the memberagencies and its local networks. The most prominent national agencies during disasters are the PAGASA, PHIVOLCS and DSWD. The Philippine Atmospheric, Geo-Physical and Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA) was established in 1972 through Presidential Decree 78. It is responsible for providing information on the weather and detection, monitoring, forecasting and warning of cyclones and floods. The geostationary meteorological satellite (GMS) receiver system to a GMS SVISSR system gives PAGASA the capability to receive meteorological satellite data in digital for useful early detection, monitoring and timely issuance of typhoon warnings. The forerunner of the Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology was the Commission on Volcanology which was created in 1952. This was re-structured and renamed PHIVOLCS in 1982. PHIVOLCS operates the seismological and volcanological networks of the country. The DSWD is specifically given the task of extending emergency and relief assistance and social services to victims to help them cope with the crisis, meet their immediate basic needs and eventually lead to their rehabilitation and normal life. The 17 Regional Disaster Coordinating Councils coordinate the activities of all national government agencies assigned in a particular region. The PNP Regional Directors are designated as RDCC Chairmen, while the OCD Regional Directors act as Executive Officers. The Local Disaster Coordinating Councils in the country include 79 Provincial DCCs, 113 City DCCs, 1,496 Municipal DCCs and 41,956 Barangay DCCs. (source: The PDMS: Institutional and Organizational Structure) Hereunder is the organizational structure of a barangays disaster coordinating council which is replica of the provincial, city and municipal organizational structure. There might be some deviations but these are minimal. Chairman Barangay Captain Vice Chairman Staff Teams DOC Security Supply Transportation Communication Operating Teams Warning Rescue Evacuation Relief Medical Fire Brigade Damage Control
(source:cbdrm: The Philippine Experience) The Philippine Disaster Management System assumes the following policies as can be gleaned from PD 1566: A. Self-reliance shall be developed by promoting and encouraging the spirit of self-help and mutual assistance among the local officials and their constituents. B. Each political and administrative subdivision of the country shall utilize all available resources in the area before asking assistance from neighboring entities or higher authority. C. The primary responsibility rests on the government agencies in the affected areas in coordination with the people themselves. E. Planning and operation shall also be done on the Barangay level in an inter-agency, multi-sectoral basis to optimize the utilization of resources. G. Responsibility for leadership rests on the Provincial Governor, City Mayors, and Municipal Mayors, (and Barangay Chairman), each according to his area of responsibility. (source: The PDMS: Institutional and Organizational Structure) It is interesting to note that policies were already pointing towards localizing disaster response despite the fact that PD 1566 was issued in 1978, 13 years before the effectivity of Local Government Code. RA 7160 otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991 strengthens the mandate of local officials as provided by the following sections in the said code: Section 16, 17, 389, 391, 324d All LGUs shall ensure public safety and protect the general welfare of its constituents and provide the basic social services that they need Sections 24, 35, 36 LGUs shall recognize and promote the participation of local actors in the delivery of basic services Section Sec. 324 (d) as amended by RA 8185, s, 1997 Funding of DRM activities Five percent (5%) of the estimated revenue from regular sources shall be set aside. (source: CBDRM: The Philippine Experience) The PDMS evolved from simply responding to disasters before the 70s to disaster preparedness and response in the 80s then to disaster preparedness and response and natural disaster reduction from 1990-2000 up to the present which include disaster preparedness and response, disasters and development and natural disaster risk reduction. (source: The Philippine Risk Profile and Disaster Management Trends) The Philippine Disaster Management System has a broad scope covering preparedness, mitigation, response and rehabilitation.
The measures that are being pursued in terms of mitigation include, risk transfer which involve fire and earthquake insurance, implementing safety regulations such as the building and fire code, zoning and land use. Under preparedness, initiatives are being done in community organizing, training, planning equipping, hazard mapping, equipping, stockpiling and public information and education. Response is another scope of the PDMS which provides emergency assistance or relief to persons who are victims of disasters and in the restoration of essential public activities and facilities. While on rehabilitation, the PDMS provides emergency funding assistance to the locality hit by disasters in order to restore damaged public infrastructure to their actual condition prior to the disaster. This funds usually come from the national government and from donations given by private persons, corporations or non government organizations. The national government, who accepts the disaster management responsibility which can be gleaned from different legislations and policies, usually provides technical and financial assistance while the local government units implement the program of activities of preparation, mitigation, response and rehabilitation. However, there are some local government units which are prone to disasters have started to equip themselves and are on their way to become less and less dependent to central government.. (source: ndcc.gov.ph) The private sector such as the non government organizations, religious group and the foundations of different corporations continue to be more involved not only in the response but also in the preparedness, mitigation and rehabilitation phases of disaster management. (source: ndcc.gov.ph) 3) Strengths and Weaknesses of the National Disaster Management System The Philippine Disaster Management System, like any other system has its own strengths and weaknesses. Foremost among its strength is the established disaster coordinating councils at the different levels from the national, regional, provincial, city/municipal and barangays. The roles and functions of each council are defined clearly. The offices which are members of these councils also have their respective duties and responsibilities. The organizational strength of the disaster coordinating councils at all levels was showcased during the Guinsaugon Landslide Tragedy from search and rescue, evacuation and relief operations to rehabilitation and reconstruction phases of the disaster. The PDCC headed by the governor took charged during the search and rescue and the parallel relief and evacuation operations, while the MDCC ably supported them while waiting for the assistance of the national government and non government organizations, corporations and the religious sector. Since there is an established roles and function for each stakeholder, misunderstanding, and other challenges were fixed, everything were running smoothly after two or three days of
chaotic operation. The roles of the national, local governments and non government organizations have become very clear especially in the rehabilitation and reconstruction phase. The municipal government acquired the lot of the relocation sites, the provincial government undertook the development of the relocation sites, the national government provided financial assistance from the donations it received locally and from international donor countries and organizations, private corporations donated houses, non government organizations constructed the houses with the volunteers, conducted psycho-social and capacity building activities and provided livelihood projects. One weakness that I have to emphasize is the lack of fund to finance various disaster preparedness, mitigation, response and rehabilitation activities. The province with 15 million calamity fund for the current year will not be able to undertake all rehabilitation activities without the help that it received from generous donors. What if another landslide of the same magnitude happens? Will the donors still extend their help? Filipinos are not fond of insuring their life and property. I believe that most if not all of the residential houses, commercial buildings, rice mills and rice lands were not insured since insurance is not required. Another weakness that PDMS has is that it does not have a list of certified rescuers or volunteers. During the Guinsaugon Landslide search and rescue operations, there were more than 2,000 rescuers at ground zero. We only have the names of the group in our list but we really did not know the competencies of these rescuers and volunteers. We are thankful because there were a lot of non government organizations who helped, however, some of these NGOs did not coordinate their activities with the local government (PDCC/MDCC). They insist to work independently guided by their own policies. Some members of the local disaster coordinating councils did not know their roles and functions. The first two or three days of search, rescue, evacuation and relief operations were chaotic because of them. 4) Recommendations for Improvement Basing on the prevailing weaknesses of the Philippine Disaster Management System, my first recommendation would be for the establishment of a Calamity Trust Fund at the National Level. It should be an amount commensurate to the average cost that the national government is spending to respond to natural and man-made disasters. In order to be able to respond to victims with lesser cost, the national government should be able to come up with a mandatory insurance for all calamities. Insurance companies should be required to come up with such products in order to lessen the impact of the disaster economically. At the local government level, the 5% calamity fund should be increased to 10%
of the total local government budget. The fund should not be reverted to general fund when not utilized, instead, it should be treated as a continuing appropriation. Five to seven percent should be utilized for pre disaster activities and the remaining 3% will be for relief operation. The funds will not always be adequate when disasters strike but at least with the available funds, risk and impact on the economy will be reduced. Another recommendation that I would like to be implemented is the certification of all volunteers and the eventual accreditation of the groups where they belong. Volunteers have different competencies. Every volunteer should be certified according to the competencies that he/she has. The TESDA which is the only government agency mandated to certify acquired skills by individuals should work with appropriate organizations in order to come up with basic standards for every disaster management related skill. For example, there should be a standard list of competencies for an individual to be certified as evacuation center manager or a debriefer. A list of volunteers and their corresponding skills can be very useful when asking for help. We will be assured also that people who are working during disaster response are certified and have the necessary skills. Another recommendation which I think we need to implement is to make some policies of non government organizations uniform where it can be done. As experienced, there are NGOs which would like to have all their donated houses completed before they allow the beneficiaries to occupy these houses through a raffle. While other NGOs set a standard sweat equity (number of hours) with the beneficiaries, say 400 hours. Once they complete it, they are being allowed to occupy the completed houses. The second policy is better since it encourages volunteerism and it clears the evacuation centers earlier. Another recommendation for improvement is the continuing training and retraining of Local DCCs. The DILG should strictly enforce this policy and should go beyond merely asking local government units to submit documents showing the organizational chart of local DCCs. They should inspect and require DCCs to conduct drills on disasters prevailing in the area like evacuation of the community when there is a flood. Local Chief Executives with non functional DCCs should be warned and penalized. Considering all recommendations of the participants including the few recommendations stated above will help the PDMS improve the quality of its services and allow our country and people to become a disaster resilient.