proceedings of rtd on climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction

8/4/2019 Proceedings of RTD on Climate Change Adaptation and Disaster Risk Reduction

1/37CSO Working Group on Climate Change and Development 1 of 37

2009 Round Table Discussion on Climate Change Adaptation and

CSO Working Group on Climate Change and DevelopmentProceedings of the

ROUND TABLE DISCUSSION ON CLIMATE CHANGEADAPTATION

AND DISASTER RISK REDUCTION (DRAFT)July 20-21, 2009

Conrado Benitez Hall, PRRM Building, 56 Dr. Lazcano cornerMo.Ignacia Sts., Quezon City

Day 1 July20

I. PRELIMINARIES

Welcome and Introductions

The days activity started at precisely 1:30 in the afternoon facilitatedby Ms. Weng Bolinas, coordinator of the CSO Working Group on ClimateChange and Development. She welcomed the participants and introducedthe activity saying that this was part of a series of discussions on ClimateChange Adaptation that their coalition is conducting. She then proceeded tofacilitate the introduction of the participants, instructing them to give outtheir name, organization, and why they opted to participate in thediscussion. Below is a list of the reasons expressed by the participants forattending the one and a half day round table discussion. (Names of

participants in Annex 1: RTD and CCA Directory of Participants) (Allan Vera, Christian Aid DRR Officer) To support the CSOs in

influencing not only the Philippine position to the UNFCCC but theentire negotiations as well;

(Chito Tiongco, Panay Rural Development Center, Inc. ExecutiveDirector and Coordinator of Policy Advocacy on Climate Change)Interested to learn more on the issue of climate change adaptation;

(Ruel Velarde, Philnet RDI) One of their programs is building disasterawareness in the community and partnered with Christian Aid inimplementing DRR;

(Raymond Daen, COPE Foundation) To gain deeper understanding onclimate change adaptation;

(Sonia, Social Action) To learn more from the discussions;

(Shirley Bolanos, Coastal Core) To gain deeper understanding ofClimate Change and its effect to the community;

(Toning Balang, FORGE Cebu) To share insights on climate change aswell as learn from the sharing how we will bring the Philippine agendaon climate change to Copenhagen;


2/37

CSO Working Group on Climate Change and Development 2 of 37


(Randy Johnson, US Peace Corps volunteer in the LGU of Bolinao,Pangasinan) To learn as much as he can on how climate change isaffecting the Philippines and bring this knowledge back to Bolinao;

(Salvacion Ruiz, PARASAMAZA and Zambales FARMC) To clarify the

issue of black sand quarrying in their area and deepen understandingon climate change in order to know how to better protect the waters ofZambales;

(Al Riego, MACEC) To gain more ideas and learnings that may be usedin implementing climate change adaptation and disaster risk reductionin our area;

(Allan Reguyal, Social Action-Infanta) To participate in the discussionon DRR and CCA;

(Cesar Hawak Jr., PUMALU-MV) To participate in order to gain additionalknowledge on what needs to be done in order to prepare for the effectsof climate change to fisheries and coastal communities;

(Carmelito Tatlonghari, Chairman of SIBA, Philippine Climate WatchAlliance and AGHAM) Interested to learn more about CCA since ourfocus is on climate change and renewable energy;

(Natalie Pulvinar, AGHAM) To learn about other adaptation practicesbeing done at the community level in the areas of participants today,and gain more knowledge regarding adaptation technology inpreparation for the Bangkok Summit;

(Marie Marciano, Vice President of PNCC) To determine what ourpositions may be in the coming negotiations of the UNFCCC leading tothe summit in Copenhagen;

(Abbie Dulay, NFR Policy Research Officer) To document the entireproceedings and learn more about climate change adaptation anddisaster risk reduction;

(Jocel Pangilinan, Christian Aid) To take part in the discussions onclimate change especially regarding its effect on fisheries;

(Josefina Porcil and Lennie Alegre, Office of Civil Defense andSecretariat of the National Disaster Management Council) Was invitedby Christian Aid to take part in the discussions and very muchinterested because DRR is part of their major responsibilities. Theyexpect to learn much from the discussions and determine how theycan help in the promotion of climate change adaptation;

(Sis. Alice Original, OND Hessed Foundation) Very interested in theissue of climate change because they are implementing climatechange programs right now in South Cotabato;

(Jessica Bercilla, Christian Aid) It is their advocacy within the CSO WGon CCD to ensure that the voices of the community are heard and theirideas included in the discussions towards the UNFCCC Copenhagennegotiations, with the help of the present members of the TechnicalWorking Group.


3/37



Background on the CSO Working Group on Climate Change andDevelopmentChito Tiongco, Panay Rural Development Center Executive Director

Mr. Tiongco was provided the task of introducing the CSO WG onClimate Change and Development as well as the context leading to thisactivity. He said that one of the programs the Panay Rural DevelopmentCenter is working on is policy advocacy on climate change. A majorcomponent of this project is working with civil society organizations inengaging the Philippine government regarding its position on the climatechange negotiations. This involved the coming together of several CSOs towork out plans on engaging the Philippine negotiators, which gave rise to theCSO Working Group on Climate Change and Development. It was initially asmall number of CSOs based in Manila, but while the date of the negotiations

drew near, many more CSOs expressed their intent to join and support theadvocacy of the coalition. Right now the official members of the CSO WG onCC and Development are:

Ateneo School of Government (ASoG)

Christian Aid (CA)

Conservation International (CI)

Earth Savers Movement (ESM)

Freedom from Debt Coalition (FDC)

Greenpeace International

Haribon Foundation, Inc.

Legal Rights and Natural Resources Center (LRC-KSK) NGO Forum on the ADB

NGOs for Fisheries Reform, Inc. (NFR)

Non Timber Forest Products-Exchange Program (NTFP-EP)

ODA Watch

Oxfam

Panay Rural Development Center, Inc.

Philippine Network on Climate Change (PNCC)

PhilDHRRA

Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement (PRRM)

Third World Network (TWN) Upholding Life and Nature (ULAN)

One of the major components of the CSO Working Group activities isthe conduct of a series of round table discussions or fora on the Bali BuildingBlocks. It is expected that these RTDs would provide the venue for theformulation of a position that will be submitted to the Philippine Panel ofnegotiators. Todays RTD is the sixth of a series, where the five previously


4/37



conducted RTDs include: 1) Climate Change and Agriculture; 2) SharedVision; 3) Adaptation Financing; 4) Reducing Emissions on Deforestation andDegradation (REDD); and 5) Mining and Indigenous Peoples.

When the Philippine panel convened in April, the CSO Working Groupsubmitted an initial position on the Bali building blocks, which wasformulated in the format of the negotiating texts. The negotiating panel wasjust newly formed at the time of the submission of the CSO position. It wasused a one of the main reference document for the formulation of thePhilippine negotiating position. It was a happy note that most of theprovisions stated in the CSO position had been included in the initial draft ofthe Philippine negotiating text. As of the moment, the Philippine position isstill a work in progress and according to the negotiating panel, thenegotiating texts are still open to comments and additional provisions. Theyare even open to including provisions on REDD subject to further studies and

supporting evidence.

During the most recent RTD on Shared Vision, the CSO Working grouplobbied for more space in the crafting of the Philippine position and fromthere, the Technical Working Groups (TWGs) were formed, composed ofmembers of the official negotiating panel, concerned agencies of thegovernment and representatives of the CSOs. Four TWGs were formed,namely: 1) Mitigation; 2) Adaptation; 3) Financing and Technology Transfer;and 4) Shared Vision. Mr. Tiongco shared that the mitigation TWG had tomeet twice just to cover the entire scope of the issue. The Financing andTechnology Transfer TWG is meeting right now, while the TWG on Adaptation

will be holding its meeting the following day. The TWGs were tasked toreview the negotiating texts from the UNFCCC, containing the variouspositions of the negotiating countries, and determine which of the positionsneed to be supported, erased, added into, or whether any more provisionswould need to be put forward. Consequently, this would also help determinethe final position for the country.

The CSO Working Group is not merely confined to internationalactivities. It also wants to influence the countrys national policies such asthe Climate Change Bill, which is slated to be discussed in a BicameralConference Committee, and the formulation of a National Adaptation

Program of Action (NAPA). Though currently, the focus is on the negotiationsin preparation for Copenhagen, advocacy and influencing national policycontinues. He added that though in the end, the final decision still liesultimately with the negotiating panel it is still a great opportunity for theCSOs to be able to participate in the review of the negotiating texts and theformulation process for the Philippine negotiating position.

Presentation of the Program


5/37



Ms. Bolinas informed that the program sent earlier to the participantsby email may not necessarily be followed to the letter to make way for slightchanges brought about by developments in the discussions of the TWG. They

wanted to get the input of the participants on the negotiating texts regardingclimate adaptation in time for the TWG meeting the following day. She thenproceeded to go through the initial design of the program. (Revised RTDprogram flow in Annex 2)She stated that several government agencyrepresentatives have been invited and were expected to come tomorrow,such as National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), Departmentof Agriculture (DA) and the Inter-Agency Committee on Climate Change(IACCC).

Ms. Jessica Bercilla clarified on the need to have scientific inputs forthe discussions. One of the emphases, upon entering the negotiation process

is that, any submission the Philippines made must be evidence-based. Policyinterventions should be based on sound science. If the science is wrong, thenthe policy interventions would also be wrong and the country would beinvesting in the wrong area and well be wasting valuable resources. Sheinformed that aside from the next speaker from the Marine Science Institute,another resource person, coming from the Manila Observatory (MO), will alsobe presenting tomorrow. The MO resource person shall be presenting theirupdated list of vulnerability maps in the country. Another presenter for todaywill be coming from the Philippine Climate Adaptation Project (PhilCAP)handling agriculture.

She added that the presentations today would not focus on the basicbut more on updates on what science sees happening in our country,assuming that participants of this RTD have already been exposed to thebasics of climate change and would be in a position to relate the inputs withwhat is happening in their respective communities.

II. INPUT ON CLIMATE RELATED RISKS AND PROJECTIONS

INPUT 1: Some Possible Impacts of Climate Change to Coastal Areas(PowerPoint in Annex 3)Dr. Fernando Siringan, Marine Science Institute (MSI)

Dr. Siringan started his presentation with an overview of his

presentation, saying that he would not be able to tackle all the possiblenegative impact of climate change to coastal areas, but will be limited towhat the MSI is doing in terms of research. He said that some of theconsequences of global warming include: the warming seas, rising sea levels,changes in the frequency, strength and path of storms, changes in thepatterns of rain and amount of rainfall and coral bleaching.


6/37



He presented some data regarding the history of red tide occurrencesin Manila Bay. They conducted a study to determine the cause of the red tideoutbreak in Manila Bay in 1998, and it appeared to have been related to the

heating of the sea. He provided some graphs showing the relation ofchanges in water temperature to changes in air temperature. It showedoverall air temperature in Manila steadily rising from 1900 to 2000 by anaverage of 1.5 degrees centigrade per year, and sea surface temperature inManila Bay rising constantly from 1990 to 2000. This shows evidence thatincrease in air temperature is linked to increase in sea surface temperature.

Focusing on sea surface temperature changes, Dr. Siringan showedcombined data sets from the Comprehensive Ocean Atmosphere data setcontaining information on the sea surface temperature from 1930-1990smeasured by ships plying the waters around the Philippines. The specific

data set from Bicol shelf showed a slight increase in sea surface temperaturefrom 1930-1990. Another data set from the Integrated Global ObservingStrategy (IGOS), from 1983 to the present also shows an overall trend ofrising sea surface temperatures in the Bicol shelf. He showed several moregraphs of Surigao, Sulu Sea and South China Sea with the same increasingSST patterns. All the data presented show different slopes but all agree on aconstant rise of sea surface temperatures.

The rise in sea surface temperatures is related to the change in theamount of food production in the sea, as well as the rise in sea levels. One ofthe greatest fears in the country is that with the rise of sea levels, major

parts of the country would be inundated. Areas like Pampanga, Bulacan andpart of the CAMANAVA region would suffer from destructive floods should thesea level rise by even one meter. Aquaculture ponds in coastal plains will bemore prone to flooding. Iloilo and Naga are also flood vulnerable areas due totheir low elevation. Geographical data on possible flood vulnerable areasmay be downloadable from ASTER.

He showed another data set that shows the average of incidences ofsea level rise all over the world. And it points to a global average increase insea level. But since it is an average, it does not show the particular scenariofor each country. It may show an average global sea level increase, but there

might be countries that may actually be experiencing decrease in sea levels.In the case of the Philippines, what must be focused on would be thedifferent effects this might have to various parts of the country. There aredata that show that sea level rise in various parts of the country may reachan average of 2 cm/year.

Another consequence of sea level rise is coastal erosion. Based onstudies conducted by MSI in Palawan, several lines of coconut trees in Nara


7/37



fell due to coastal erosion, while coastal erosion were also evident in thecoral reef islands of Honda Bay. In Zambales, despite large sediment inputsfrom the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo, large shoreline segments continue toundergo erosion. There was a recorded erosion of precisely 150 meters along

the north flank of Maloma River in Zambales. Anecdotal accounts from theSouth flank of the Bucao River mouth in Botolan, Zambales declared a ten(10) and forty (40) meter erosion in just one storm event.

But sea level rise due to warming seas is not the only cause of coastalerosion. Other factors are often the more immediate cause of erosion suchas: 1) switching of river mouths; 2) subsidence due to tectonics, excessivegroundwater withdrawal, build-up over soft sediments, aquaculture; 3)engineering structures; and 4) destruction of coral reefs and mangroves thatserve as buffer against big waves. The increased extraction rate ofgroundwater resulted in enhanced ground compaction giving way to the

lowering of the ground and a 40 cm total rise in sea level. He added that thepeople have not protected the surface waters enough resulting in anincreased demand for groundwater.

Dr. Siringan provided data from their collaborative study withConservation International on the Verde Island. It shows the vulnerability ofthe Verde Passage area due to climate change. But he cautioned that, thenatural setting of the area should not be overlooked. He showed the positionof active faults along the Verde Island, according to data from the PHIVOLCS.Climate change cannot be faulted solely, the ground also changes levels.Faults are also actively causing changes in land formations.

He then moved on to show the changes in shoreline position. Based ona map using aerial photos from 1947-1953, compared with NAMRIA data forthe years 1992, 2002 and 2009, Dr. Siringan showed that there were severalchanges in the shoreline through the given years, especially along theBatangas Pier. It is expected that shoreline changes would still take place inthe coming years due to factors not actually climate change related butmanmade or induced. There are man-made constructions like dams andpiers that obstruct the flow of the seawater thereby interfering with thesediment drift and thus attributing to changes in the shoreline (coastalerosion) that may not be advantageous to communities along the coast. He

advised the participants to lobby against solid base piers in their areas andopt instead for piers on stilts or posts.

A 7.1 magnitude earthquake in Mindoro in 1994 caused a tsunami andsinking of the ground in Baco resulting in roughly a 200-meter grounderosion in the area. Due to events like these, new ground may appear but Dr.Siringan cautioned against settling there since there is a big possibility that itmight disappear again. A lot of areas in the Verde Passage experienced


8/37



widening or increase in land mass. And in determining the reason or factorsleading to this phenomenon, MSI observed the changes in precipitation orrain fall. Precipitation data from Guiuan, Samar showed an average decreasein rain fall over a period of 100 years. From 1945 to present, data collected

by the MSI on the Verde passage showed an increase in the frequency oftyphoons within and near the area. These are attributable to climate change,but more long term data is needed to be able to draw a long term trend.

With the warming of the seas, the amount of fish food in the openocean or the blue water also changes. These changes can also be observedfrom the phytoplankton assemblage. He shared the results from one of theirstudies relating to red tide or dinoflagellates, with Bolinao, Pangasinan astheir study area. Dr. Siringan noted that the overall trend is increasing overtime. The problem now is that even the toxic elements are also increasing,but they have yet to determine the cause of the increase, whether its due to

the heating of the waters or the pollution of the waters or both.

Based on the studies, it appears that toxic varieties of dinoflagellatesfavour warmer waters. This has detrimental effects to our fishers. Increasedtoxic algal blooms can severely affect the livelihood of tahong growers, itcould also cause massive fish kills due to the lack of oxygen, therebyaffecting the income of fishers. He also informed that marine scientists agreethat warming seas will decrease primary productivity, decrease in primaryproductivity will lead to the reduction of small fish that feed onphytoplankton, thereby leading also to a decrease in the bigger fish that feedon the small fish, and ultimately causing decrease or loss of income for the

small fisher folk.

Dr. Siringan concluded his presentation by saying that everyone shouldbe vigilant of the changes occurring in our country and our respectivecommunities. Approaches towards responding to the changes cannot bedone uniformly. We need more knowledge on the changes happening aroundus, and there is actually very limited data available for use. We may usepersonally generated data or data from the government. And it is ourresponsibility to know or learn how to use the available data for our purposesand to aid us in climate change adaptation.

Open Forum

The floor was opened to questions from the participants regarding Dr.Siringans presentation, below is a list of the comments raised, questionsasked and the corresponding response beneath in bullet points:

Question: Mr. Roger Concepcion said that he observed from the studiespresented that there is a need to harmonize the baselines. It seems that the


9/37



conclusions stated do not agree with each other. He added that it would bebetter if we agree on a critical period in the country and focus on it throughtime. He also asked if the speaker had ideas on the possible reasons for thesudden entry of large marine animals in Philippine waters. He asked if this

could be attributed to the animals instincts of following the food chain or ifthere were other reasons. He added that these are highly observableoccurrences that may be used as basis for anecdotal evidence.

On the first point, Dr. Siringan agreed that there is a need for a morelong term study of a set of data especially related to climate change. Ifwe are to believe the assertion of groups saying that the increase incarbon dioxide is causing global warming, this started in 1880. Allother related studies base their conclusions on data way before 1880,it has to extend far to have a frame of reference. He said that this iswhat they have been attempting in the country. This is very difficult toattempt with the existing datasets available at PAG-ASA from the

1950s, which is also incomplete. But there are still data sets that maystill be used, using records from other sources. Moreover, he arguedthat interpretation of change may not be correct if one is looking onlyat a 20-year record. There is a pacific decadal oscillation, one maysurmise that the fluctuations noted here would be the change we arelooking for but it may just be a part of the natural cycle and not reallysignificant. I would argue that people should in fact look at longerrecords as well as historical records to contextualize climate change.

Regarding the cetaceans (dolphins), Dr. Siringan agreed that therehave been many sightings of these creatures, some even noted thattuna catch in the Visayan Sea have been increasing. Though some say

this is attributable to the establishment of Marine Protected Areas(MPAs). He added that though he is not an expert on these things,personally, he surmises that these cetaceans could have been drawnto our shores because of the availability of food. But he againreminded that he is not saying this with authority, he added that moredata would be needed in order to sufficiently respond to this question.

Question: Another participant clarified if it is true that many scientistsgenerally believe that global warming would generally lead to a decrease inprimary production.

Dr. Siringan answered that based on available data primary production

is going down as sea temperature rise. But the warming of the seaitself may take root from several solar activities, but we cannot directlylink changes in primary production with changes in solar activity.

Question: The participant from Zambales asked regarding the importance ofmagnetic sand over normal sand. She said that magnetic sand is beingquarried in their area.


10/37



First and foremost, Dr. Siringan replied that any mining in the coastalarea, including mining of magnetite sand, is prohibited by law. Shouldthere be incidences of magnetite mining, it should be immediatelyreported to the authorities. He added that based on their studies in La

Union, magnetite sand mining has been a major contributor to coastalerosion, because a thick layer of magnetite sand serves as armour forthe part of the coast that is very prone to erosion.

Question: Another participant commented that there have been observablechanges in the characteristics of the fish species found in the sea waterssurrounding heat-emitting power plants. Studies say that the fish near thearea become more prolific the higher the temperature of the water. Couldthis be true?

Dr. Siringan replied that intuitively we should expect changes in thephytoplankton assemblage with a constant increase in temperature.

They have an inference that they want to investigate as part of aproject they are currently conducting, funded by the DOST, on harmfulalgal blooms. There is a power plant on the Bataan side of Manila Bay,the discharge point of which is in Limay, Bataan. It is in Limay thatalgal blooms, more often referred to as red tide, originated mostly inthe years from 1988-1998. He said that they wanted to determine ifthe presence of the power plant has any relation to the presence ofthese algal blooms. They believe that it may have an affect becausewhen the power plant started operations algal blooms appeared, anddisappeared when the plant ceased operations. Masinloc also has apower plant, and has been reporting cases of red tide occurrence

annually.

Dr. Siringan reacted to a comment from the participant that he sayshinges on the premise that global warming is due to the increase incarbon dioxide, which he personally does not believe completely as ageologist. But he said that reduction of carbon dioxide emissions,particularly vehicle emissions, would still be beneficial for the countryand that everyone should be working really hard towards this. But hestressed that he does not believe that the Philippines should go intotechnologies that are not available locally or are expensive just to shiftaway from using hydrocarbons or coal. He takes the position that

developed countries should not prevent Filipinos in engaging intechnologies that will allow us to be competitive. Technologies beingsold to us are expensive and not worth it he says.

On the issue of pollution from Asia, looking at atmospheric circulation,the reason why Canada and the US are so concerned of Asia is thataerosol transport is more direct from Asia going across the Pacific to


11/37



Canada and the US, before going back to the Philippines via oceanicflight. This way, pollution is filtered our first through the variouscountries its passed through before it reaches the country, thoughduring the winter season, there is direct input from China going to the

Philippines.

INPUT II: Philippine Climate Change Adaptation ProgramDr. Roger Concepcion, NAPC/PhilCAP

Dr. Concepcion heads the research on the Philippine ClimateAdaptation Project. He said that following various literature, it appears thattemperature plays a major role in climate change. And temperature is asingle major factor that may affect the countrys agriculture. He shared thatin their study, they took interest in two major landscapes which they deemedcritical to food security: 1) The lowland irrigated agricultural landscape,

where major investments are poured in; and 2) the highland agriculturallandscape, which he opines is most important because it is one of the mostresilient.

But the problem is that in agriculture, we are losing our best lands. Andthere seem to be no one with enough political will to stop the conversion ofagricultural lands into something else. The real issue today, is that it is in thehighlands that we find our highly valued and highly diversified crops; butwhy the highlands? Dr. Concepcion shared that if temperature climbs in thehighlands, it will be opened to a wide variety of crops. And the highland islocated along the forest lands, as well as it is where the most disadvantaged

groups are located. If the rise in temperature cannot be controlled right now,or in the next two decades, surely all forest areas will be devastated. Thehighland in this country is almost 2M hectares.

Given this, he proposed several adaptation programs as part of theirstudy. It includes an adaptation program that will improve the efficiency ofinvestments in the lowland irrigated lands and an adaptation program thatwill create proactive awareness and understanding of the importance of thehighlands to our food security.

In the lowlands, studies say that due to climate change, there will be

more typhoon occurrences. And rainfall pattern today is stronger, gusty buterosive. But he believes that this change in rainfall pattern is favouringagriculture for the moment - Rain fed agriculture contribution is increasing.But since irrigation is not properly used, and did not adjust to the rain fedrice production, nor took into consideration the shortening of the summermonths, there has been a massive rearrangement of rain fed rice productionin the past three years, in most cases, there was an advance of one month.


12/37



In agriculture, an extended rainy season is welcome, but not right nowbecause irrigation did not adjust to the changing planting calendar of therain fed that advanced by almost more than a month in many places. So theoverlap in the harvesting period of the rain fed widened. This overlap is an

impact of climate change but it did not affect productivity, in factproductivity increased. But the lack of surplus management in agricultureaffected the opportunity to increase the volume of rice without sacrificingfarm gate prices. The effect of climate change in agriculture is not inproduction but in the farm economy. The overlap in harvesting time createda one and a half month gap, affecting the rain fed areas making theminaccessible and easily affected by traders. So climate change would affectagriculture not in production but in the management of surplus. Water forirrigation should be controlled, and schedules adjusted for irrigated lands.Irrigated lands should not have seasonality. It should be used as a way tobalance the flow of agricultural products into the mainstream. We have to

manage our water resources carefully. The issue for irrigated lands ismaintaining the integrity of water but optimizing the value of water forproduction to protect farm gate prices.

As to the highlands, if this landscape is opened, the disastrous effectwould be on the biodiversity of the forest. So the adaptation program herewould be to make the Department of Agriculture (DA) work closely with theDepartment of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). These agenciesshould immediately plan proper screening of plant varieties and animalspecies that will be introduced into the highlands. The government mustdevelop a strong sense of responsibility because the highland is the last

frontier that will offer new lands for agriculture.

On the rise of pests and diseases due to climate change, Dr.Concepcion shared that they have found the rise in pest and diseasesvalidated in rice (i.e. increase in tungro and stem borers). The adaptationprogram they developed for this issue is the tapping of local knowledge anduse of biological indicators currently utilized by many farmers. Biologicalindicators could be very instructional (e.g. if you cut a bamboo and find a lotof water inside, this may be taken as a sign of pending drought). WhatPhilippine farmers need is a program that increases their cash flow, notmerely their income. We need to develop an early warning system and the

farmers biological indicators would be very helpful with this.

Clarificatory Questions:

Question: Are there available literature pertaining to these biologicalindicators?

Literature is available and the speaker promised to provide a copy ofwhat he has.


13/37



Question: What is the timeline of the indicators mentioned? Because if thiswere to be connected to the upland loss of biodiversity and to the upstream-downstream relationship, it would affect the lowland, what would be the

implications of the seemingly positive effect on the lowlands but biodiversitynegative on the highland? And how reliable are the indicators mentioned?

The speaker replied that this is where the beauty of utilizing localfarmer knowledge lies. When people from the lowland and the uplandprovide information, well be able to see the negative and positiveeffects. Farmers are geo-referenced. The problem in monitoringadvantages to the highland is that we do not know exactly what ishappening there, so our efficiency is going down. But what is funny isthat during the wet season, efficiency in the irrigated lands in thelowlands is 68%, while it is 72% during the dry season. It appearsreversed because we were not able to adapt to the surplus of water

during the wet season, but in the dry season the supply of water isefficiently rationed out. One important implication of increase intemperature would be its effect on the efficiency of the use of urea.Organic agriculture should only be promoted in an area that is rich inbiomass. One option is low carbon diet agriculture.

INPUT 3: UNFCCC and Other Climate Change Agreements

Jessica Bercilla, Christian Aid

Ms. Bercilla provided a brief overview of the United Nations FrameworkConvention on Climate Change and other related agreements as anintroduction to the succeeding workshop on climate change negotiatingtexts. She gave a cursory discussion of the resultant Kyoto Protocol and theBali Roadmap that is the bone of contention for the upcoming meeting inDecember to be held in Copenhagen. She explained that there is a need toreview the negotiating texts thus far, in order for everyone to have an idea ofthe various positions in play, as well as give opportunity for the CSO andother stakeholders to contribute in beefing up the countrys own position.

She said that addressing climate change concerns should be timebound. There are a lot of issues that are currently not being discussed in thenegotiating table such as reduction in emissions due to degradation ofcoastal and fisheries. Discussion focus mainly on upland concerns, but theeffect of the degradation of corals and other fish habitats should also bereflected in the discussions and the positions taken.


14/37



This she said would be the advantage of going through the negotiatingtexts aside from giving the participants an opportunity to give their input onthe issues being discussed and have a first hand knowledge of how thenegotiation is being done. She then proceeded to explain the mechanics of

the workshop. She explained that the focus of the first workshop is to goover the negotiating texts on climate change adaptation. The participantswere divided into three groups:

1) Framework (page 56 paragraphs 37-40);2) Multi Window (page 57 paragraph 41); and3) Means of Implementation (page 59 paragraph 42)

Each group was tasked to go through their assigned texts anddetermine what needs to be done. Then decide on whether they agree onthe points being raised taking note of national interests, solidarity andcommon but differentiated responsibilities? They have to decide if they

agree with the way the texts were phrased, and if not, to list down possiblealternatives. The groups were given an hour for the workshop and afterwardswere tasked to report their output in plenary.

III. GROUP WORKSHOP AND REPORTING

After the one hour timed limit for group discussion, the participantswere asked to report on their respective group outputs. (Workshop 1group outputs in Annex 4)Ms. Bercilla explained that though we areimplementing the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA), it is a non-binding,which is why it is important that the principle of the HFA be included in the

negotiations and in the final negotiating texts as well because then it wouldbecome binding.

IV. SYNTHESISMiguel Magalang, MACEC

Mr. Magalang shared some of the input from an Asia-Pacific Conferenceon Climate Change, sponsored by Al Gore that he recently attended. He saidthe headlines 40 years ago carried events such as the landing of the Apollo11 on the moon. And he showed several photos of the Earth from thatmission. Looking at the photos of the Earth, we are struck by the thought

that it is but a small mass in the universe, it is finite. The most beautifulphoto taken of the Earth was done accidentally by the Apollo mission whenthe sun was behind them. It became the most massively produced picture ofour planet. From that same mission in 1969, it showed how thin theatmosphere of the Earth is. This thin strip of atmosphere is what is beingthreatened and discussed and debated on right now.


15/37



Why is the warming of the Earth controlled compared to Venus which istoo hot, when it has the same atmosphere as ours? It cannot be because it iscloser to the sun because Mercury is even closer but Venus is still hotter.This is because of the absorptive capacity of the Earth the heat is absorbed

by its land and waters, unlike with Venus where the atmosphere takes it allin. Now based on studies, it is greenhouse gas emissions that are causingour planet to heat up. The challenge here is how to respond to theanthropogenic nature of climate change that has been proven by thousandsof studies.

The question now is what would we want the newspapers to carry in itsheadlines this year? What would happen if there wouldnt be any agreementafter Copenhagen? An extension of the Kyoto Protocol? It seems likelybecause as of the moment, only Norway has given its commitment at 43%reduction. And the European Union does not seem to be moving towards

making any commitment. The climate change legislations in the US havealready passed at the lower house, and though this is a big step, can they beexpected to initiate by December 2009? Or would the initiative still comefrom countries such as ours from the G77? Whats important is thateverybody is ready and equipped down to the community level to adapt tothe impact of climate change. We need to resolve how well maintain ournationalism and solidarity with other developing countries while working onthis advocacy. He ended his sharing by posing a challenge to everyone incoordinating of our adaptation mechanisms and disaster risk reductionschemes for greater effectivity.

V. CLOSING REMARKSJessica Bercilla

As a final note, Ms. Bercilla reminded that the discussion process willcontinue tomorrow, the output of which along with todays output will becarried by the members of the TWG in their respective meetings.

A participant shared that the Climate Change Commission Bill hasalready passed at both Houses of Congress and is now ready for theBicameral Conference Committee discussion. And Senator Legarda ispushing for the immediate discussion of the said bill at the Bicam. He

stressed that it is very important that everyone, especially the CSOs,participate in the discussions on this bill because it will ultimately decide onthe institutional mechanism for climate change in the country. Ms. Bercillastated that the interface of the Disaster Risk Management Bill and theClimate Change Bill, will be discussed tomorrow in order to see how we canwork together to move forward.

The days session adjourned at precisely 6:45 in the evening.


16/37




17/37



Day 2 July21

The days sessions started with an introduction given by Weng Bolinas

of the CSO TWG on Climate Change and Development, who relayed that thethird input on climate change related risks and projections will be giventoday. Before the recap of events yesterday, participants were again askedto introduce themselves. Two additional representatives from thegovernment were present BFAR and NEDA, as well as representatives froma national fisher folk federation PUMALU MV, Social Action Network, PRRMand Alyansa Tigil Mina.

I. RECAPAllan Vera, Christian Aid

Mr. Vera provided a brief but concise recapitulation of the previousdays activities, providing a map of where the discussion is progressing andpointing out what else needs to be done. He said that one of the highlightsfor the entire activity is the dialogue with scientists because it is importantfor everyone to realize there have already been studies conducted andinitiatives taken in further understanding climate change and determiningwhere we are. Review and discussions on the negotiating texts served as theparticipants contribution in the formulation and lobbying of the CSO positionto the UNFCCC negotiations in Copenhagen, which our representatives to theTWGs on climate change will be carrying along with them in their respective

meetings.

He said that later on, there will be a context sharing through theworkshops that would help in determining the situation at the local level.There shall also be a practice sharing in order for those who have hadexperience in implementing DRR to share the lessons theyve learned so farand determine how these can be related to climate change adaptation. All ofthese are designed towards improving our position as civil societyorganizations and influence the position which our Philippine delegationwould be carrying with them in the negotiations. These would also help inidentifying the unique needs of each community at the local level and the

country as a whole in terms of climate change adaptation and mitigation,such that when all negotiations in the UNFCCC have been completed andcountries have manifested their commitments, we would know what to ask ofthem in terms of support. This way, we wouldnt be tied down to just askingfor mere infrastructure support like in the past. As a final word, Mr. Verareminded everyone to highlight through the succeeding discussions, whatthe unique needs of each community are and what can be done as adequateresponse to those needs.


18/37



II. INPUT ON CLIMATE CHANGE RELATED RISKS AND PROJECTIONS

A Technical Assistance to Support Local Government Capacityto Manage Natural Disaster Risk in the CommunityDr. May Celine T.M. Vicente, Manila Observatory

Dr. Vicente clarified that her presentation would serve as a specialpreview of the study they are conducting right now, which is still in the

concluding phase, and cannot yet be released publicly. This is funded byWorld Bank-LGU Global Fund for DRR, and in partnership with the AteneoSchool of Government, International Institute for Rural Reconstruction andthe Earthquake Megacity. The Manila Observatory was tapped by Ateneo totake part in the study, based on the previous mapping study they made forDENR in 2005 that resulted in National Scale Risk Maps.

She outlined her presentation to include a preview of disaster riskrelated concepts, an orientation on the Multi-Scale Risk Mapping Frameworkthat is appropriately suited to the Hyogo Framework advocacy of Multi ScaleRisk Assessment because it responds to risk sharing and preparedness. The

highlight of her presentation would be the Risk Geographic InformationSystem (GIS) and maps. The GIS is mapping that is supported by a spatialdatabase. She would also be discussing Integrated Risk Mapping and how itcan help in mainstreaming multi-scale adaptation.

She then moved on to defining the term risk as the likelihood ofharm, loss or disaster. It is an approximation of the compounding effect ofthree things: hazard, exposure, and vulnerability, or Risk = Hazard xExposure x Vulnerability. Hazard is the physical impact of a disturbance,while Exposure shows the elements affected by the hazard. Vulnerabilityis the capacity to prepare, absorb, cope or recover from the hazard - It may

be human, socio-economic or ecological.

The Multi Scale Risk Mapping Framework being used right now wastermed multi-scale because it promotes risk sharing preparedness andadaptation. The HEV (Hazard Exposure Vulnerability) framework may beused at the national scale, in which case information from the provinces isutilized. There are hazard maps, exposure maps, and vulnerability maps thataid in determining risk.


19/37



Hazard Factors natural or anthropogenic hazards

Exposure Factors population density, settlement areas and populatedplaces, state of ecological resources etc.

Vulnerability Factors HDI (encompassing health, education and

income factors), poverty incidence, access to urban centers andtransportation facilities, state of the natural environment etc.

The Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software is used to overlayand multiply the hazard scores with the population density scores and theHuman Development Index (HDI) in order to generate a risk map. Theadvantage of this kind of work is that you can rank the provinces accordingto their level of risk. This risk mapping exercise may also be scaled down tothe municipal level as well as to the barangay level.

Dr. Vicente then breezed through a series of climate/weather related

risk GIS maps just to show what it entails. She showed national scale mapspegged to provinces showing historical and projected risks. They alsorecognized the need to peg risk to the politico-ecological context. There is aneed to analyze spatial patterns through politico-ecological context. In thenear future they want to overlay ecological units like ecosystems andwatersheds. In the future, they hope to capture risk over political boundariesbut in the context of ecosystems. The other direction also is to go local.

She breezed through maps indicating risk to typhoons, El Nio,drought, projected rainfall, temperature increase, earthquakes, tsunamis,floods and more. The beauty of the GIS is that risk maps may also be

combined and analyzed through either historical data or projected data. Shealso noted that though we are discussing the climate, we must also includegeo-physical risks of disasters in the assessment, though geophysical risk aspurely historical and cannot be projected.

Typhoons most vulnerable are the north and north eastern portionsof the country

El Nio Experienced in the years 1982-83, 1986-87, 1991- 94, and1997-98. It showed the south and south western parts of the countryas most vulnerable.

Combined Typhoons and El Nio - top vulnerable province is the Ifugaoprovince.

Total Agricultural damage due to drought, El Nio, heavy rains andtyphoons this is a historical map done for the IIRR. It showed the topthree vulnerable provinces as: Isabela, Cagayan, and Camarines Sur.

Projected Rainfall Change this is a projection map, showing the topthree vulnerable provinces as Albay, Pampanga, and Ifugao.


20/37



Combined Temperature Increase and Rainfall Projection Top threevulnerable provinces are: Basilan, Sulu, and Albay

Earthquake Induced Shallow Landslides top three vulnerableprovinces are Surigao del Sur, La Union, and Benguet

Tsunami top three vulnerable provinces are Albay, Cavite and Cebu Flood Risk Potential based on slope and elevation only. Top three

vulnerable provinces are Pangasinan, Nueva Ecija, and Pampanga.

They also monitored poverty incidence through time, and in selectingprovinces, the project counted the number of times a province was ranked inthe top 20 by hazard. And the result showed the following top 23 vulnerableprovinces due to poverty incidence:

1. Pampanga 2. Albay 3. Cagayan4. Camarines Sur 5. Maguindanao 6. Nueva Ecija

7. Pangasinan 8. Bulacan 9. Virac (?)10. Leyte 11. Negros Oriental 12. Sorsogon13. Bataan 14. Bukidnon 15. Capiz16. Davao Oriental 17. La Union 18. North Cotabato19. Tarlac 20. Zambales 21. Zamboanga del

Sur22. Quezon 23. Southern Leyte

The implication here is that this list would be the possible provincesthat will be assisted by the project, though there are still other criteria

(partnership criteria) that are being developed. Whats good about theseprovinces is that they are evenly distributed within the country. Metro Manilawas treated as a special case due to its high earthquake risk among others.A map was also generated based on frequency count indicative of disasterrisk and losses.

Dr. Vicente reiterated that the purpose of the mapping is to determinetheir priorities for adaptation especially when you relate the risk maps toexposure and vulnerability variables. Dr. Vicentes stand as a mapper is thatyou cannot fully quantify risk because it is too complex, but we can correlatespatial patterns and strategize based on this. This is what is called Integrated

Risk Mapping. It considers spatial scales, time scales and themes.

Through the spatial scales, Manila Observatory wanted to address thepolitico-ecologic context, which is the overlaying of political boundaries withecological boundaries, ecosystems and watersheds. In order to do this, theyneed to go from national to regional to provincial to municipal to barangay tocommunity and also vice-versa. This would need more evidence basedsupport, such as satellite images. In terms of time-scales, three things need


21/37



to be considered: the historical, the forecasted or seasonal, and theprojected scenarios. This needs progressive research. Finally, the complexityof themes involved also need to be taken into account, meaning althoughthe risk formula looks simple, the reality is that it is most complex. But

remote sensing or satellite image interpretation and GIS help systematizethis complexity. The key is to be able to match the various hazards,exposure and vulnerability depending on the needs of the stakeholder. Shesaid that the role of each participant now in guiding mapping is to determinewhich variable applies in their case. Risk maps must guide adaptation. It isan evidence-based decision support.

Therefore, mainstreaming with the help of integrated risk mappingmeans: awareness raising, enabling interventions, formulating policies,programming, action, planning, monitoring and evaluation, and learning andexperiencing.

Open Forum:

Question: What are the major factors that influence change in the ranking? Isit true that the methodological research processes caused the changes inthe ranking and not necessarily changes in the actual context or actualhazard?

Dr. Vicente replied that there are lots of factors. In fact all of thefactors have an influence in the ranking. As of the moment, looking atthe frequency count, each type of disaster risk has the same weight.When they conducted a peer review, they were told that it might not

necessarily be the case. Some disaster risks may have more weight insome places that in others, changes in scoring may be site-specific.

The research process, the context, the ground conditions and theformula affected the result. They apply their formula then look at whatthe map looked like and then they ask an expert if it is reflective of theground conditions. If is not, they revise the formula. This is anotherdirection that MO will be going toward. They plan to study the riskformula and the weighting.

Question: Several participants inquired on the possibility of getting a copy ofthe PowerPoint presentation, because they wanted to be able to study the

results relative to their respective areas. Ms. Bercilla explained the context of the negotiation regarding the

presentation. There are data from the study that cannot be publishedyet as of the moment. She reiterated that this presentation is only apreview of the project that is yet to be concluded, in order for everyoneto be able to give informed/educated inputs to the negotiation process.The MO agreed to share the results of the study so far, but they wouldnot be giving copies. They also have a special request. They have a


22/37



formula that they are using right now and they want to validate it, sothey did some ground proofing. They cannot base their study on dataform the national census only because it is not updated, so they had todo some ground work. They would appreciate help from the local areas

in terms of providing data that would show vulnerability that could helpvalidate or invalidate their formula. It would be easier for them to getrealistic results when data is plenty and complex. This activity is alsoserving as a validation as well. This session could help in identifyingthe vulnerability base through the inputs of the participants.

Comment: A participant from Conservation International raised three points:1. pertaining the weighting, he asked whether MO has already exploredabout historical information and probably information from the folks over acertain time period in an area, maybe the factor of frequency can beincorporated into the weighting; 2. regarding the scale, there is a need to go

to the municipality level because if its only a national map, it would be toogeneral because of the resolution, that is why there is a need to go into thevulnerability aspect to see a clearer picture of the municipality; 3. CI hasbeen trying to help out the LGUs in their respective areas in terms of themapping and its importance in terms of climate. They observed in region 2,once all the agencies came together and placed their maps on top of eachother, they found that sometimes their maps do not coincide, even theboundaries do not coincide. So sometimes the planning aspect would bejeopardized because you have different points. So what they did was toorganize the region into some form of a geographic information network. Itslike an alliance of LGUs in the region to put their maps together and do some

sharing and exchange from it. They called this the Regional GeographicInformation Network (RGIN) and is already working out in Region 2, recentlyestablished in Region 13 and following is Region 11. MO can go there andnetwork with them.

Dr. Vicente responded that besides the Philippine Climate ChangeAdaptation Program (PhilCAP), in which MO played a role in assessingcapacity for GIS, one foremost recommendation and learning in theproject is to focus on institutional partnerships. The lesson theylearned was that if this is not given priority, the institutions involvedwould not have any ownership of the formula and methodologies,which is why the recommendation was to settle first the partnership

arrangements. Another reason is to ensure that the maps coincide,because the projection would be the same and the base maps wouldbe the same.

Regarding the weighting, the process is expert driven but has to beconsultative among the partner institutions. MO has long wanted towork or collaborate with NEDA, because they believe that NEDAsregional land use mapping would be a great help, especially now MO ispromoting the Regional Risk GIS Hubs, a partnership between


23/37



government, non-government and scientific institutions at the groundlevel to optimize resources. They would welcome any support from theNEDA as a ways forward. She also noted that MO was able to useseveral maps from the Conservation International, especially the

ecological maps which have been really helpful.

Comment: The CI representative added that they have been able to come upwith an update on terrestrial priorities which the MO can also make use of.He said that they are currently moving out of the CARAGA region andsuggested that maybe MO can include this in their focus areas.

Dr. Vicente informed that ecological risk is one of the future directionsof the project study.

Question: The BFAR representative asked whether there have been anyconsultative process undergone in the drawing up of the maps, or was it just

a mere scientific process. She also wanted to know what base maps arebeing used. She suggested the use of NAMRIA maps because these are thesame per region. They just differ in boundary due to the internal revenueallotment. And last, based on the presentation, Quezon is included in the top23 vulnerable provinces due to poverty incidence, and they have beenrequesting PAG-ASA to include Quezon in their projects because the fisheriesis very vulnerable to these climatological changes. She reiterated therequest of BFAR that Quezon be included in the MO studies.

Dr. Vicente replied that they try their best to ensure that theconsultative process is followed. The learning is that they have to getthe institutions involved in the review of the risk formula and

methodology at the start. But when they attempted to partner, theyencountered turfing and if nothing happens because of this, they haveto move on to other sites. Regarding the base maps, MO has beenworking with NAMRIA and is in fact one of the common users of theirbase maps, even though sometimes their boundaries are stillconflicting, which is why it would help to peg the risk on theecosystem. In the future they plan to respond to other sites, and thismay include Quezon.

Question: The Alyansa Tigil Mina representative noted that they were gladthat mining was included as one of the hazards identified. But she wanted to

know how the mining issue was incorporated in the formula and how muchweight was given to it. And she also concurs with the need to go down to themunicipal level.

Dr. Vicente conceded that MO did not particularly focus on miningbecause it is not their area of expertise. But in the DENR atlas in theweb, they do have a mining map overlaid with protected areas. It isincluded in the framework as an ecological risk.


24/37



Ms. Bercilla gave context on the role of MO in this advocacy. Initiativesof engaging with the negotiators were started by KLIMA under the MO.Over the span of several years, the process evolved to the municipallevel. But from the start MO said that the issue of mining is really a

difficult issue to tackle because it also has to take into considerationgeographical risks. Then they also have been affected by the issue ofturfing among government agencies.

Question: A fisher folk representative shared that he was one of therepresentatives in the Bangkok Conference on Climate Change last year. Itwas stated there that the WB would be releasing funds to help countries thatare affected by climate change. Countries affected are asked to provide datato show how much they are suffering from the effects of climate change, aswell as data showing their disaster risk. The problem is that though therehave been many initiatives at the local level in terms of advocacy on the

impact of climate change, there seem to be no moving forward because thegovernment always has the excuse that there are no funds to respond to theissues being raised. Focus on climate change and DRR is almost alwaysgiven when disasters have already struck, when the calamities are alreadythere. He said that they are worried that the Philippine would not be able tocome up with the needed data on time to secure funds from these externalsources, to enable us to implement climate change adaptation and disasterrisk reduction.

The representative to the TWG on Financing and Technology Transferreplied that regarding the issue of financing related to thenegotiations, there are still no results because they are still arguing on

where to access the funds. Based on previous meetings, severaloptions and funds are actually available and proposals have beensubmitted but these would still need to be discussed further at theinternational level. But what was agreed upon was that there is noneed to wait for the negotiations at the international level in order toimplement climate adaptation and disaster risk reduction. We shouldlook first at internally generated funds just to move forward. We shouldalready lobby that these types of budget be included next yearsappropriation.

III. GROUP WORKSHOP

Ms. Bercilla was called to explain the dynamics for the next workshops.The inputs have so far laid out the scenarios happening in the countryrelating to climate change, but it falls short of what is happening in theground, at the community level. This is where the outputs for the nextworkshop would be helpful. She explained that the objective for all of thethings thats been done so far since yesterday was to contribute to the


25/37



thinking process during negotiations, lending strength to arguments with ourevidence, thus providing negotiators the means to open up more options.

Why the need to do this? This is because we are running interception

in order to block any more gains by developed countries, which have causedmost of the countries in Asia to suffer. And we hope to advocate for keyprovisions that will benefit our country as well as other who are also highlyvulnerable. So how will this be done? By presenting positions bolstered bynot only by scientific evidence of vulnerability and risk in terms of humandevelopment and capital (natural and financial) depletion/destruction, butalso on empirical data coming from everyones experience at the groundlevel.

There are specific points that are being targeted today, issues thatneed to be addressed through the succeeding workshops. She pointed out

that special care must be made in order to highlight the vulnerability ofcommunities because this is not easily made known. First in the points thatneed to be addressed in this workshop are the climate related hazards inspecific geographic contexts, in the context of each affected community in aparticular time frame. The recommendation for the time frame would tenyears. We are being asked to take note of the possible climate relatedchanges being felt in our community for the past 10 years. Next, we need toidentify the specific vulnerability in our communities. They recommend thatwe point out the specific socio-economic or gender based need within ourfield of operation or geographic context. And finally, we hope to be able tocull out at the end of the day, the specific statements of principle and our

proposed methods and mechanisms.

She then proceeded to explain the dynamics or context of thenegotiations. She explained that there are blocs or key players in thenegotiations.

G8 8 largest and richest countries in the world.

European Union and other allies with a particular advocacy - They havea wishful thinking that the G77 would break-up. Its actually G139already since several more countries have joined this bloc so it wouldbe quite difficult to hope that this would sooner break-up.

G77 plus China position poor and developing countries, including the

newly industrializing countries. China because half their population isliving below the poverty level, so their exposure is very high.

BRICS ( Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) newly formed blocthats always being targeted by the EU. They feel that these countriesshould not be included in the G77 because they are industrializing andare also major emitters.


26/37



Alliance of the 30 another alliance where the Philippines wasexcluded because we submitted a position without consulting our allycountries.

Small lsland Developing States (SIDS-AOSIS), Least Developing

Countries (LDCs), Africa US, Japan etc. the first two largest economies in the world. Japan

right now is the most difficult to negotiate with because theyll neverlet you know their position up to the last minute.

There are also certain issues within the Philippine Delegation that weneed to know about. One is that there are people within the delegationwhose main focus is more on mitigation rather than adaptation. Theunderlying reason might be because there is much more to be gained interms of financing under mitigation than there is under adaptation. In thepast, weve had very few strong advocates of adaptation within the

delegation.

Aside from that, there are also differing positions within the Philippinedelegation. There are those that do not want the country to be a member ofthe G77. We have chairmanship of two critical discussions in thenegotiations: 1) on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation(REDD); and 2) Long Term Operative Action (Shared Vision) so we need to bestrong and united in our positions or else we are in danger of being swayedto the other side, much to our detriment. Within the CSOs, initially, stronglobby came from the International NGOs. There is a need for a strongerPhilippine CSO lobby. That is why part of the goals of the CSO Working Group

is to help Philippine CSOs sharpen their analysis on climate change so thatthey will be equipped in representing the country in the negotiations.

Ms. Bercilla reminded that there are things that we need to rememberas we contribute to the Philippine submission. One, what is our point ofunity? We need to remember the plight of the most vulnerable. They arenormally found in the SIDs, LDCs and developing countries such as thePhilippines and Africa. But we are not merely talking of geographicvulnerability but the vulnerability of the people in general. Another thing weneed to remember is that countries such as China, industrializing countries,have a large population (E) who are vulnerable (V) to climate related hazards

compared to industrialized countries. We need to remember this becausethese countries are highly exposed and thus are highly vulnerable as well.

There is also the issue of historical emissions causing the currentclimate hazards versus current emissions. There are those that say Chinascurrent emissions are really high, but there are countries like Bolivia that aresaying that though industrializing countries emissions are relatively high, itis still no match to the extent of the historical emissions of the industrialized


27/37



countries, added still to their current emissions. Looking at this in thecontext of historical emissions, the climate debt of these industrializedcountries would be extensively large. And they have to pay. Still, while goingover the negotiating texts, we have to be conscious of conditionalities. But

let us bear in mind that if these countries do not pay, and they continue whattheyre doing, many vulnerable people will die.

What needs to be done at this point is for everyone to comment on thenegotiating text and give key points to guide negotiators. On the groundvulnerability, CCA adaptation needs and strategies data have to be provided.Given the comprehensive discussion above, Ms. Bercilla proceeded toexplain what is expected of everyone in the second workshop. Theparticipants were grouped based on the ecosystems they are working on.The groups were:

1. Coastal and Small Islands Group

2. Rural Upland and Lowland Group3. Urban Upland and Lowland Group

In the interests of time, workshops 2 and 3 were merged and tackled inone sitting. The guide questions for the combined workshops were as follows:

1. What are the new climate related hazards being felt in yourecosystem in the past 10 years?

2. Who are the most exposed and suffering population? Why arethey most exposed? Why are they suffering?

3. What are the effects of these hazards in terms of livelihoodsecurity, capacity for food production, food security, settlements,

DRR, etc?4. What are the current adaptation practices and strategies

employed in order to respond to the challenge of a changingclimate to the affected population? (micro, meso, macro)

5. What else needs to be responded to?6. Where available adaptation funds should be best put to use? At

what scale?

IV. PRESENTATION OF ROCKET STOVE

Prior to the presentation of the group outputs, a representative of

PRRM (Mr. Joshua Guinto) presented an invention called the rocket stove, anendogenous adaptation technology. He said that this would be highlyvaluable to communities affected by calamities, especially those living inevacuation centers. He showed a simple prototype, saying that the upsidesof the rocket stove is that it is easy to assemble, fuel efficient as it usedonly sticks and twigs, and makes use of recyclable materials. Due to itsrocket or chimney style, it is more efficient, the fire or heat is concentrated


28/37



and makes for faster cooking. (Step by step instructions on making therocket stove in Annex 9)

V. GROUP PRESENTATION (OUTPUTS FOR WORKSHOPS 2 AND 3)

After the allotted time for group discussions, a representative fromeach of the groups was tasked to report on their workshop outputs. Below isa list of the main points raised during the plenary discussion following thegroup reports. (Workshop 2 and 3 Group Outputs in Annexes 5 and 6respectively)

Urban Lowland and Upland Ecosystem Group(Unlad Kabayan, FORGE Inc., COPE, BFAR, NEDA)

A member of the group clarified that they included hazards that may atfirst glance seem not directly related to climate change such as

earthquakes, which are actually geological hazards. But if these otherhazards are placed alongside others, it becomes a multi-hazard andwould take on a climate related character.

Another comment raised from the floor is that each area or communityshould have or develop the capacity to identify which areas within theirjurisdiction are most vulnerable. Risk mapping at the communityshould be included in the things that still need to be done including thecapacity-building in terms of localized risk mapping or identification ofvulnerability.

The experiential and anecdotal data from the communities should alsobe included in the data gathering, one participant suggested.

Ms. Bercilla informed the body that during one of the nationalworkshop on the Strategic National Action Plan (SNAP), it was agreedthat if there are going to be localized climate risk mapping, thecommunity maps would be overlaid with the risk maps. This wouldsave the effort of doing another level of risk mapping at the local.Because the community maps done by the stakeholders on the groundare already reliable and would only need to be overlaid with the GISmaps being drawn by the government in order to get a clear picture ofthe vulnerabilities and risks at the local level.

One participant commented that most of the maps we have arehistorical, but we need to have more projections in order to determineclimate change vulnerability. In the interests of climate changeadaptation, it is important that we go beyond historical in doing ourvulnerability assessments. We need to predict changes brought aboutby the vulnerabilities as well. There should be projection o scenariobuilding in order for us to see the future impact of climate change.

Coastal and Small Island Ecosystems


29/37



(NFR, Coastal Core, MACEC, WVF, CI Phils., LGU Bolinao, PUMALUMV, KM-KAMMMPI)

The BFAR representative asked why the group was calling for theabolition of the LLDA. To which the group replied that LLDA have for

the longest time been ineffective in implementing its duties andresponsibilities. They have no lasting results to speak of. They havenever effectively managed and protected Laguna Lake as the lake it isbut as a watershed.

BFAR asked the group again how the existence of fish cages isattributable to climate change, and what supports theirrecommendation of reduction. To which the group replied that theincrease in sea temperature contributes to reduction of the nutrientsfor the fish and inevitably leading to massive fish kills, as wasexperienced several times in Bolinao, Pangasinan. The more fish cagesthere are, there more saturated the sea is. Moreover, the wood used in

making fish cages are left abandoned in the sea after the cage is nolonger operational and aggravates siltation and pollution of the watersespecially during typhoons and strong rains.

One recommendation from among participants is the inclusion ofinsurance for fisher folks in times of calamities brought about byclimate change as one more item that still needs to be done andshould be given budget allocation. There should be an insurancemechanism for times when fishers gears, vessels and otherparaphernalia are destroyed in times of disaster or calamities, in orderto offset their losses. So far there is no legislation yet in existence thatgives support to this. The fisher folk representatives were one in saying

that they have been advocating for this for the longest time, especiallythe insurance for the Bantay Dagat.

Another comment raised is the importance of funding risk reducingadaptation measures. There is a provision for this under thenegotiating texts. These measures allow a person to adapt to theprojected risk, and the government must be ready to provide fundingfor these measures in whatever form it takes.

One of the participants raised the issue of implementing no regretoptions. These are initiatives that should have been done even beforethe event of climate change, such as conservation etc. He remindedthat in suggesting options, we must also be aware of previous optionsor initiatives that have not been implemented as well as the reasonwhy. Would it be due to lack of funds or just plain misappropriation?

BFAR reiterated the need to establish an insurance system for fishers.They said that theyve inquired of the Philippine Crop Insurance (PCI)why fishers are not included in the insurance program. They wereinformed that it is very difficult to insure fisheries there is no assuranceof the availability or possibility of catch because the resource is mobile.


30/37



But based on recent dialogues, the PCI said that there might be apossibility of insuring culture fisheries since it is more controlled butcapture would be really difficult.

Still, one participant urged that someone should think of a way or a

scheme to make insuring capture fisheries feasible. For example, hesaid that marine sanctuaries or fish sanctuaries may be used as a sortof collateral because it is easier to monitor the resources within giventhat these are no take zones, and you can also detect the affects ofclimate change in these relatively controlled areas.

All these issues on insurance could fall under the climate risk insurancesystem that was adopted by Heherson Alvarez as one of thenegotiating position of the Philippines.

Another suggestion is to conduct a socio-economic survey for fisheriesand base the provision of insurance for capture fisheries on thefluctuation of the fishers income.

Rural Lowland and Upland Ecosystem(HESED, NQ SAC, Ipil Zambo Sibugay SAC, Philrice, NEDA, PRRM,AGHAM, ATM)

Atty. Ibay noted that many identified flooding and typhoons as newhazards. She suggested that it would be better if they would be able tospecify what is new about these hazards which have in fact been feltsince the start of time. This way, we would know how best to respondto these hazards.

The group replied that specifically, the force of tidal waves havebecome stronger (in Manila, Bicol, Mindanao and Palawan), storms andtyphoon are staying longer and becoming for frequent and bringing instronger winds and greater amounts of rainfall (South Cotabato, Cebuand Quezon), rain seasonality has changed i.e. Camarines Sur andMarinduque does not previously experience rain in the months ofFebruary, March and June, but now they do.

Atty. Ibay added that it would be best if we could detail or quantify theincrease in rainfall or the duration of rains, how long does it stay in oneplace compared to other places. It would be helpful if we could identifywhere specifically does the increase in rainfall happen.

One participant asked why despite the existence of food relief

programs, affected people still lack food during times of calamity ordisasters. He suggested that food security be included under therecommendations on investments and under the climate adaptationprogram.

VI. WORKSHOP 4 (Negotiating Text)


31/37



After the plenary for the two merged workshops, the body immediatelyproceeded to the conduct of the last workshop on the negotiating texts. Thistime, the participants were again randomly grouped into three but notaccording to ecosystem. Below are the assigned categories for each group:

Group 1: Objective, Scope and Guiding Principles (pages 20-27) Group 2: Implementation (pages 37-36)

Group 3: Means of Implementation (pages 47-55)

Ms. Bercilla explained that each group was expected to again readthrough their assigned negotiating text and do four things. First, they needto list down possible principles that they deem should be included in thedeclaration of principles such as precautionary principle, common butdifferentiated responsibilities, gender sensitivity etc. Next, they need toidentify or propose the means, mechanism, and methodology ofimplementation that they want the negotiators to bring to the discussions,

such as multi-window financing mechanisms, integration of CCA in theplanning processes, etc. The groups also need to determine guidelines forgeneral positioning on the negotiations. Finally, they need to go through theentire text if time allows in order to check on the language that would bemost acceptable to us.

VII. PLENARY REPORTING

The groups were then requested to commence their discussions andend within thirty minutes no matter what theyve accomplished. Once theywere called for plenary, each group presented their outputs for the last

workshop. Below are the issues raised during plenary. (Workshop 4 GroupOutputs in Annex 7)

Group 1: Objective, Scope and Guiding Principles (pp.20-27)66

Declaration of Principles: To integrate holistic and socially accepted in the guiding principles

Means/ Mechanism/ Methodology of Implementation: On identification or definition of vulnerable counties (e.g. low-lying

coastal, arid and semi-arid areas .) to include countries threatened

by extractive industries such as large-scale mining. Focus should be on the most vulnerable developing countries to

climate change and not just on LDCs and SIDs

Multi-stakeholders approach shall be implemented in all process ofproject development (e.g. planning, implementation, monitoring,evaluation)


32/37



Positioning:The Philippines should take the position that would bestbenefit the country and its most vulnerable sectors.

Language:

NEGOTIATING TEXT REMARKSAlternative 3 to Subparagraph 19 (a) (ii) page 27[Adaptation actions, including economicdiversification consistent with sustainabledevelopment among others especially thoseidentified in the national adaptation plans (refer todecisions 1/CP.10 and 5/CP.7);]

(ii).1 Risk reduction and management(ii).2 Implementation of urgent and immediate,

medium- and long-term adaptation actions in

all developing country Parties, particularly

LDCs and SIDS, supported by developed

country Parties

Qualify economic

diversification as consistent

with sustainable development.

Alternative 3 (d) to paragraph 19 page 28New, additional and predictable financial resourcesseparate and apart from ODA that are supported byappropriate institutional mechanisms;

Highlight the provision amongothers

Alternative 4 (i) to paragraph 19 page 29Prioritise the adaptation needs of the most vulnerablecommunities and groups, such as women, andchildren, persons with disability, elderly and peoplewith illnesses.

Include other vulnerable

sectors in the listing such as

persons with disability, elderly,

and people with illnesses.

Group 2: Implementation (pages 37-36)

Declaration of Principles: The declaration of principles should include the following:

Participatory (bottom-up

approach)

Appropriate

Socially just Scientifically sound (eco-system approach

included)Promotes common good ObjectiveCross-generational Focus on most vulnerable sectors (women,

children, IPs)Culturally-sensitive Transparency and accountabilityHumanitarian Politically correct (e.g. referring to victims of

calamity as survivors, or stakeholders)Upholds human rights

Language:

NEGOTIATING TEXT REMARKSAlternative 2 to chapeau of paragraph 24 page 41[To promote enabling activities to support adaptation

Insert marine in ecosystems

that are particularly vulnerable


33/37



action in all developing country Partiesparticularly low-lying and other small islandcountries, countries with low-lying coastal, arid andsemiaridareas or areas liable to floods, drought and

desertification, and developing countries with fragilemarine and mountainous ecosystems are particularlyvulnerable to the adverse effects of climate changemay:]

to climate change

Group 3: Means of implementation (pp.47-55)

Declaration of Principles:

The declaration of principles should include the following:Favour adaptation over mitigation Pro-Poor/ Vulnerable sectors should not be

further affected by risksEnvironmentally sound Poverty Reduction

Environmental management Sustainable developmentConsistent with nationaldevelopment goals

National development goals consistent withthe MDGs

Gender sensitive Development should be towards a lowcarbon pathway

Means/ Mechanism/ Methodology of Implementation:

Mainstreaming Climate Risk Reduction/Disaster Risk Reduction in theplanning process

Participatory - Bottom-up approach and community-managed

Transparent

Widely disseminated

Adequate funds allocation

Demystifying climate change should be able to make adaptation away of life

Corruption free

Put in place safeguards

Ensure

proceedings of rtd on climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction

Documents