Building Resilience of Philippine Communities to Climate ...

Building Resilience of Philippine Communities to Climate

Change

Philippines | Land Bank of the Philippines (Landbank)

11 August 2016

Project/Programme Title: Building Resilience of Philippine Communities to Climate Change

Country/Region: Philippines/ Asia Pacific

Accredited Entity: Land Bank of the Philippines

National Designated Authority: Climate Change Commission

PROJECT / PROGRAMME CONCEPT NOTE GREEN CLIMATE FUND | PAGE 1 OF 5

Please submit the completed form to [email protected]

A. Project / Programme Information

A.1. Project / programme title Building Resilience of Philippine Communities to Climate Change

A.2. Project or programme Programme

A.3. Country (ies) / region Philippines/Asia Pacific

A.4. National designated authority(ies)

Philippines’ Climate Change Commission

A.5. Accredited entity Land Bank of the Philippines

A.6. Executing entity / beneficiary

Executing Entity: Department of Environment & Natural Resources, Department of Agriculture, Office of National Defence

Beneficiary: Concerned LGUs/ Barangay Councils, NGOs/CBOs

A.7. Access modality Direct International ☐

A.8. Project size category (total investment, million USD)

Micro (≤10) ☐ Small (10<x≤50) Medium (50<x≤250) ☐ Large (>250) ☐

A.9. Mitigation / adaptation focus

Mitigation ☐ Adaptation Cross-cutting ☐

A.10. Public or private Public

A.11. Results areas

(mark all that apply)

Which of the following targeted results areas does the proposed project/programme address?

Reduced emissions from:

☐ Energy access and power generation

(E.g. on-grid, micro-grid or off-grid solar, wind, geothermal, etc.)

☐ Low emission transport

(E.g. high-speed rail, rapid bus system, etc.)

☐ Buildings, cities, industries and appliances

(E.g. new and retrofitted energy-efficient buildings, energy-efficient equipment for companies and supply chain management, etc.)

☐ Forestry and land use

(E.g. forest conservation and management, agroforestry, agricultural irrigation, water treatment and management, etc.)

Increased resilience of:

Most vulnerable people and communities

(E.g. mitigation of operational risk associated with climate change – diversification of supply sources and supply chain management, relocation of manufacturing facilities and warehouses, etc.)

Health and well-being, and food and water security

(E.g. climate-resilient crops, efficient irrigation systems, etc.)

☐ Infrastructure and built environment

(E.g. sea walls, resilient road networks, etc.)

Ecosystems and ecosystem services

(E.g. ecosystem conservation and management, ecotourism, etc.)

A.12. Project / programme life span

4 years

A.13. Estimated implementation start and end date

Start: 2017

End: 2020

1 Please use the following naming convention for the file name: “[CN]-[Agency short name]-[Date]-[Serial number]” (e.g. CN-ABC-20150101-1).

PROJECT / PROGRAMME CONCEPT NOTE GREEN CLIMATE FUND | PAGE 2 OF 5

B. Project/Programme Details

The Fund requires the following preliminary information in order to promptly assess the eligibility of project/programme investment. These requirements may vary depending on the nature of the project/programme.

B.1. Project / programme description (including objectives)

As a country situated in the “Pacific ring of fire” and directly in the typhoon path, the Philippines is no stranger to natural hazards and their impacts. Over time, the country’s adaptive capacity to these hazards has grown but with the advent of climate change, this coping capacity has been rapidly eroded. The net effect is a setback of the country’s development gains, costing it an average of 0.5% of GDP almost every year, especially for the past 5 years. On top of this is the growing number of casualties because the country’s burgeoning population has rapidly occupied dangerous areas like coastlines, waterways and landslide prone locations. Climate change impacts are also becoming very prominent in such sectors as food, water, ecosystems and health. Food insecurity and water insufficiency are becoming major problems every time a climate disaster occurs.2 These two problems are already chronic, being directly tagged as outcomes of the country’s chronic poverty of 26%. With each natural disaster, they have become serious concerns. The country’s ecosystems, especially its forests, have not been spared. In addition to the human induced degradation, natural hazards, especially climate influenced ones, are further degrading the Philippines’ natural resource base and compromising ecosystems services. It is of particular concern to the continued thriving of biodiversity resources in both land and water ecosystems, noting that the country’s biogenetic pool does not only offer potential for wealth creation, but holds the key to the very survival of the most vulnerable in terms of health. A national adaptation and resilience development programme that would address immediate and long term needs of the most vulnerable among the Philippine population, building on the country’s experiences and exploring opportunities for further innovation that would not only address climate induced problems but optimize opportunities for sustainable development is direly needed. This programme is anchored on the principle that adaptation should not only catalyse resilience building but lead to the attainment of the higher goal of human well being.

This Proposal aims to achieve this goal by developing the capacities of the Philippines’ most vulnerable population to adapt and build resilience to the impacts of climate change and sustainably developing in the process. In view of the variety, complexity, comprehensiveness and inter-relatedness of the issues to be addressed, a programmatic approach weaving seamlessly and sustainably the proposed interventions to address the climate change induced problems in critically affected sectors like food, water, ecosystems, and health and safety, needs to be taken in formulating the solutions. This would ensure that not only short to medium term impacts of climate change are addressed nor the issues treated disparately, missing cost effective and efficient solutions, but also that the whole nation, especially the communities, are able to deal with future climate change challenges, turning adverse situations into opportunities for resilience building and sustainable development. A national climate change adaptation & resilience building programme, “Building Resilience of Philippine Communities to Climate Change “ is, therefore, being proposed here, with the following goal, objectives, components, outcomes, outputs and activities:

Programme Goal: A resilient Filipino people supported by a healthy and resilient economy & ecosystems

Objectives:

1.) to avert food insecurity brought on by climate change impacts on the poorest and the most vulnerable population through “no regrets” and innovative food production measures like community gardens;

2.) to ensure the continuous availability of adequate water supply of appropriate quality that

2 The latest El Nino event resulted in a number of deaths in Kidapawan, North Cotabato in Mindanao(farmers)because of a violent confrontation between the farmers demanding support from the government, and government forces.

PROJECT / PROGRAMME CONCEPT NOTE GREEN CLIMATE FUND | PAGE 3 OF 5

would meet the domestic and other socioeconomic needs of all Filipinos, especially the poorest and most vulnerable;

3.) to safeguard the stock and quality of the country’s natural resources from the adverse impacts of climate change, ensuring sustainability and integrity of ecosystems services and livelihood of poor, resource dependent and climate vulnerable communities; and

4.) to enable the most vulnerable communities to manage the disaster risks of climate change and avoid its disastrous impacts.

The Programme will comprise the following components, with the concomitant outcomes, specific objectives, outputs and major activities:

Component 1: Fostering Food Security through Community Food Gardens and Enterprises

The component objective is to develop a sustainable source of nutritious food using a simple implementation modality (food gardens)that can also generate income for communities and households.

Outcome 1: Thriving Community Gardens at the barangay (village) and household levels

producing vegetables, fruits and high value crops, also utilizable for micro and small and medium enterprises.

Outputs

Community gardens at village and household levels established

Common village level enterprises established

National roll out plan formulated and implemented

Major Activities:

Vulnerability/needs assessment

Design & piloting of gardens & enterprises

Evaluation of pilots, adjustment of models & formulation of national roll out plan

Implementation of Roll out Plan nationwide

Component 2: Ensuring Adequate & Sustainable Water Supply for Households and Communities through Innovative Approaches and Technologies

The component objective is to ensure that households and community level endeavors using water such as enterprises, have adequate supply of water of appropriate quality, especially during extreme climate events like droughts.

Outcome2 : Households and Community Enterprises in target areas have access to adequate

water at all times at reasonable cost.

Outputs:

Quantity and quality of Freshwater (surface and ground) resources assessed,

Household/Community level water harvesting and management technologies and approaches culled, assessed and selected models piloted.

Selected/tested technologies and approaches disseminated and rolled out nationwide.

Major Activities:

Vulnerability/needs assessment

Design and piloting of water harvesting/management interventions

PROJECT / PROGRAMME CONCEPT NOTE GREEN CLIMATE FUND | PAGE 4 OF 5

Evaluation of pilots, model adjustments and national roll out plan formulation

Implementation of national roll out plan.

Component 3: Ecosystems Management and Enhancement

The component’s objective is to conserve and enhance the stock and quality of the remaining natural resource base of the country in the terrestrial and aquatic target areas, optimizing their wealth creation potential, to contribute to alleviation of poverty and resilience building of the poorest and most vulnerable, especially the indigenous peoples.

Outcome 3: Improved quality and areal coverage of natural resources conservation areas supporting vibrant and sustainable community livelihoods and enterprises in key biodiversity areas.

Outputs:

Terrestrial and aquatic natural resources in target areas assessed

Ecosystems management models, including innovative strategies such as enterprise development, compiled, assessed and promising cost effective ones tested;

Roll out plan implementation, deploying chosen cost effective models formulated and implemented.

Major Activities

Conduct of resource (including vulnerability) assessment to determine quantity, quality and vulnerability of resource base to climate risks;

Compilation & assessment of resource management/ climate change adaptation strategies, including enterprise development;

Testing of new management /adaptation strategies; strengthening of conventional ones; and

Roll out plan implementation of chosen management approaches/adaptation strategies,

Component 4: Managing Disaster Risks of Climate Change

The component’s objective is to develop the disaster risk management capability of the most vulnerable communities in the target areas, including the establishment/strengthening of institutional systems and mechanisms for implementation of DRM interventions.

Outcome 4: Most vulnerable communities in the target areas are able to manage the disaster risks

of climate influenced natural hazards, from avoidance to mitigation to addressing residual risks.

Outputs:

Disaster risks of climate influenced natural hazards assessed.

Disaster risk mitigation framework and implementation plan for target areas formulated and tested.

Disaster risk management competencies of target population improved.

Strategies/approaches to address residual disaster risks (e.g. WIBI) designed, tested and rolled out.

The Program will address the climate change related needs of approximately 15.7million people (7,644,400 males; 7,395,600 females) in a maximum of 388 municipalities/cities within 19 of 28

most climate vulnerable provinces in the Philippines’ eastern seaboard. These areas also contain the critically remaining natural resources ( terrestrial and aquatic) base of the country which fuel its agriculture and green industries but are climate vulnerable. 9,024,000 farmers and fisher folks are dependent on these resources for subsistence and livelihood.

PROJECT / PROGRAMME CONCEPT NOTE GREEN CLIMATE FUND | PAGE 5 OF 5

The Program will also facilitate the take up of renewable energy in the target areas, estimated to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions.This will be in the context of providing energy sources for the enterprises to be supported by this Programme.

B.2. Background information on project/programme sponsor

Describe project/programme sponsor’s operating experience in the host country or other developing countries.

The Land Bank of the Philippines (LANDBANK) is a government financial institution (GFI) established on August 8, 1963, by virtue of Republic Act (RA) 3844 (Agricultural Land Reform Code) with an initial authorized capitalization of 1.5 Billion PhP. It was primarily created to finance the acquisition and distribution of agricultural estates for division and resale to small landholders, as well as, the purchase of the landholding by the agricultural lessee. Since then, its service scope has expanded by virtue of Presidential Decree No. 251, when LANDBANK was granted universal or expanded commercial banking powers and was transformed into a universal bank with a social mission of spurring countryside development in 1973. LANDBANK’s authorized capitalization was subsequently increased to 3 Billion PhP. Consistent with its expanded mandate as a development financial institution, LANDBANK has taken the lead in extending timely financial and development support to small farmers and fisherfolks, micro and small and medium enterprises, agri-infrastructure, agri-businesses, and agri-related and environmental projects which it considers its priority sectors. At present, LANDBANK is the official depository bank of the Republic of the Philippines. Recently, LANDBANK was awarded as the Philippines’ Bank of the Year for 2014 by The Banker based in London. LANDBANK has a relatively broad experience working with national government agencies, local government units (LGUs), and the private sector, including implementing the following initiatives:

• Support for Strategic Local Development and Investment Project (S2LDIP) – A US$100 Million equivalent loan from the World Bank aimed at improving local public service provision and management through facilitation of Local Government Units’ access to viable financing to implement strategic infrastructure investments. Duration of project is 2007 to 2016.

• Metro Manila Wastewater Management Project (MWMP) – A US$414.1 Million project with a

World Bank financing of US$275 Million and US$139.1 Million in equity provided by two (2) MetroManila water concessionaires (MWCI & MWSI) in Metro Manila. Project duration is 2012 to 2017.

• Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS) Phase-out Project – A US$30 Million grant from the

Multilateral Fund of the Montreal Protocol, through the World Bank to the Philippine Government/DENR for the phase-out of ODS. The project was successfully implemented from 1995 to 2011.

• Yolanda Reconstruction Program (YRP) – EUR 13 Million grant from KfW to finance, in a

timely and a sustainable manner, social,economic and infrastructure projects of LGUs that were completely or partially damaged by Typhoon Yolanda (Haiyan). The overall goal is to contribute through improved LGU services and economic infrastructure to the socio-economic reconstruction of the affected areas and the living conditions of the local population. Duration of the project is from 2010 to 2018.

• Community Based Forest and Mangrove Management Project (CBFMMP) – EUR 7 Million

from KfW to manage the forests and mangroves under co-management agreements, community-based forest management agreements and other community-based tenurial instruments sustainably and to alleviate poverty through improvement of infrastructure and/or

PROJECT / PROGRAMME CONCEPT NOTE GREEN CLIMATE FUND | PAGE 6 OF 5

additional livelihood opportunities in Panay and Negros provinces. Duration of the project is from 2014 to 2017. The project is implemented in partnership with the DENR.

• Third Rural Finance Project/ Countryside Loan Fund – US$150 Million equivalent loan amount

with the World Bank for the purpose of providing financial support to the rural economy for overcoming both the regional financial and currency crisis in 1998.

Describe financial status and how the project/programme sponsor will support the

project/programme in terms of equity, management, operations, production and marketing.

The Programme is being proposed against a backdrop of dispersed, independent initiatives with their own budgets. The Philippine Government itself has incorporated in the current budget, funding for related, complementary aspects of the proposal (20 B PhP or 435 M USD) for Sustainable Livelihoods; 60.7 billion PhP (1.3B USD) for risk resilience; and 15 B PhP (326M USD) for climate related interventions in agriculture. It is worth noting, however, that capacity development for the intermediaries and the direct beneficiaries, which is the main strategy for this proposed Programme, is not a prominent cost item of these government budgets. The Philippine Government, through the prospective executing entities under this Programme, also work with Development Partners on undertakings, the results of which either form important take off points for or will complement some of the major tasks and deliverables under this proposed Programme. The LANDBANK itself, as the Sponsor, has a little over USD 500 million which can complement the proposed Programme in terms of funding activities like enterprise development, among others. Its 14 lending programs 3will be able to provide significant cash counterpart. not only be able to provide cash and in kind counterpart, but also oversight management, operations support , and linkages with the relevant domestic and international entities and channels to facilitate access to markets, especially for the products to be produced by the community enterprises under this initiative.

B.3. Market overview

Describe the market for the product(s) or services including the historical data and forecasts.

The expected markets for the commodities ( e.g. coffee, cacao, abaca, non-timber forest products) to be produced by the forest and other ecosystems communities under this Programme, are initially intended for the domestic market, to ensure domestic self sufficiency in these commodities. They are, however, also targeted for the export market, which promises significant potential income for the community level producers. Markets include European countries, the United States of America, Japan, etc..The detailed historical data and market forecasts will be provided in the detailed proposal.

Provide the key competitors with market shares and customer base (if applicable).

Competitors are established medium and big businesses (domestic and foreign- ASEAN countries like Thailand, Vietnam and other East Asian countries such as China).

Provide pricing structures, price controls, subsidies available and government involvement (if any).

Pricing structures and other related information being required here will be given in the Proposal

3Credit Assistance for Cacao Agri-Business and Other Organizations (CACAO 100) Program; Integrated Support for the Development of Aquaculture (ISDA) Program; Kalikasang Kabuhayan para sa WAstong PamaYanan (KAWAYAN) Program; Masustansyang Inumin para sa Likas na Kalusugan (MILK) Program;H2OPE (Water Program for Everyone)/Water District Loan Program; H2OPE (Water Program for Everyone)/Water District Loan Program;LBP CaReS (Calamity Rehabilitation Support Program);Calamity Rehabilitation Support (CARES) Program;Department of Agriculture (DA) SIKAT SAKA PROGRAM;AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SUPPORT PROJECT; AGRICULTURAL AND FISHERS FINANCING PROGRAM; Agrarian Production Credit Program (APCP);Agricultural and Fisheries (AFFP) Financing Program; Countryside Financial Institutions - Calamity Assistance Program (CFI-CAP); Microfinance Program for Microfinance Institution-Retailers; Support for Strategic Local Development Investment Project (S2LDIP).

PROJECT / PROGRAMME CONCEPT NOTE GREEN CLIMATE FUND | PAGE 7 OF 5

proper. The Government does not normally provide nor encourage subsidies but it has a number of technical assistance mechanisms which can be accessed by new or growing enterprises. A number of loan portfolios are also available in the government financing institutions and private banks which can be accessed by prospective entrepreneurs. In this context, the lending portfolio of the Sponsor will be very important (enumerated under footnote 3). Additional details will be provided in the Proposal proper. It must also be noted that the Philippines has a vibrant microfinance regime which supports the financing needs of micro and small enterprises.

B.4. Regulation, taxation and insurance

Provide details of government licenses, or permits required for implementing and operating the project/programme, the issuing authority, and the date of issue or expected date of issue.

Normally, Government requires development permits, where relevant (e.g. Prior Informed Consent from the National Commission of the Indigenous Peoples; Environmental Compliance Certificate from the Environmental Management Bureau, Locational Clearance, etc..) However, ex ante agreements between the Sponsor and the concerned regulatory agencies will be drawn up to either relax and facilitate issuance of the required permits or exempt the concerned entities (e.g. enterprises) all together, noting that the Government has a stake in the outcome of the programme.

Expected date(s) of issue of the required permits if they cannot be dispensed with, will be prior to the actual activities, e.g. construction; operation, needing them.

Describe applicable taxes and foreign exchange regulations.

The Sponsor is covered by the country’s taxation and other relevant laws which extend to its contractors. Consultants and project/programme personnel are levied the required taxes which are withheld and remitted to the Philippines’ Bureau of Internal Revenue.

Provide details on insurance policies related to project/programme.

The Sponsor also requires insurance for goods procured under the Project/ Programme which the Executing Entity and contractors are expected to comply with.

B.5. Implementation arrangements

Describe construction and supervision methodology with key contractual agreements.

The Sponsor will provide oversight to the Executing Entities which will have direct supervision over the contractors. The EE is expected to apply at all times, the standards required by the Sponsor, which, in turn, should be strictly adhered to by the contractors. The Sponsor will ensure that construction tasks are performed by contractors according to international standards.

Describe operational arrangements with key contractual agreements following the completion of construction.

As part of its fiduciary responsibility, the Sponsor ensures that “after sales” service or guarantees are made part of the contracts of the Executing Entity and contractors.

Provide a timetable showing major scheduled achievements and completion for each of the major components of the project/programme.

TIMETABLE OF PROGRAMME

Component

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Community Gardens

Outcome1

Output 1.1

PROJECT / PROGRAMME CONCEPT NOTE GREEN CLIMATE FUND | PAGE 8 OF 5

Output 1.2

Output 1.3

Water Self Sufficiency

Outcome 2

Output 2.1

Output 2.2

Output 2.3

Ecosystems Management

Outcome 3

Output 3.1

Output 3.2

Output 3.3

Disaster/Climate Risk Management

Outcome 4

Output 4.1

Output 4.2

Output 4.3

Output 4.4

PROJECT / PROGRAMME CONCEPT NOTE GREEN CLIMATE FUND | PAGE 9 OF 5

C. Financing / Cost Information

C.1. Description of financial elements of the project / programme

Breakdown of Cost Estimates Analysed According to Major Cost Categories4

(Million USD)

Item Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4

Comp. 1 Community Gardens

0.9344256 0.9344256 0.9344256 0.3114752

Comp.2 Water Sufficiency

0.9344256 0.9344256 0.9344256 0.3114752

Comp.3 Ecosystems adaptation

0.74754048 1.2131072 1.2131072 0.74754048

Comp. 4 Disaster risk reduction

1.68196608 1.68196608 1.68196608 0.56065536

Programme Management (5%)

0.2116 0.2116 0.2116 0.2116

Contingency (3%)

0.12696 0.12696 0.12696 0.12696

Total Direct Costs

4.63691776 5.10248448 5.10248448 2.26970624

Indirect Cost (8%)

0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4

Grand Total (18.7138528 Million USD)

5.0391776 5.50248448 5.50248448 2.66970624

a financial model that includes projection covering the period from financial closing through final maturity of the proposed GCF financing with detailed assumptions and rationale; This will be provided during the preparation of the Proposal Proper.

a description of how the choice of financial instrument(s) will overcome barriers and achieve project objectives, and leverage public and/or private finance.

At this time, the grant being applied for would go to capacity building of target direct beneficiaries (Local Government Units, Community Leaders, Community based Organizations, Nascent Entrepreneurs, Disaster Managers, Small Farmers & Fisherfolk Organizations) and small grants that would catalyse establishment/ strengthening of micro and small enterprises that would enhance the resilience of the country and its people to climate change. These are normally the cost items that the Government cannot defray but can counterpart in term of the needed

4 Only breaks down the cost items of the proposed support requested from GCF. The total cost expected, however, is 46.77 M USD which includes other cost items which the Government and other prospective partners, will be providing to the Programme.

PROJECT / PROGRAMME CONCEPT NOTE GREEN CLIMATE FUND | PAGE 10 OF 5

infrastructure, equipment and technical assistance. It would also support the piloting of technologies which Government or other partners do not directly support at this time, such as the very promising reinjection technology for ground aquifers.

The grant will also be used to test integrated approaches and demonstrate economies of scale from non-conventional, natural resource based and climate friendly enterprises, to provide the national government the solid basis for more comprehensive programs that address climate change impacts on the various sectors in an integrated manner.

As in previous experiences, providing opportunity for the conventionally non-bankable potential borrowers from the ranks of the poorest of the poor to showcase their capacity to run small businesses but unable to meet the usual requirements from financial institutions such as collateral assets, will go a long way in directly improving the socioeconomic status and eventually, resilience of poor, vulnerable communities. The Small Grants program of the Government and other multilateral/bilateral partners are replete with experiences of grantees going on to successful business endeavors, even export businesses.

C.2. Project financing information

Financial Instrument

Amount Currency Tenor Pricing

Total project financing

(a) = (b) + (c)

46.77 M USD

(b) Requested GCF amount

(i) Senior Loans

(ii) Subordinated Loans

(iii) Equity

(iv) Guarantees

(v) Reimbursable grants *

(vi) Grants *

…………………

…………………

28.07 M

…………………

…………………

18.7 Million

Options

Options

USD

Options

Options

USD

( ) years

( ) years

( ) %

( ) %

( ) % IRR

Justification for Grant Request

Please provide detailed economic and financial justification in the case of grants.

The Programme, while expected to generate cash flow and income stream from the enterprises, is not primarily a revenue/ generating endeavour. The major expense of the Programme will be capacity/competency development of the direct beneficiaries and will, therefore, not be directly income generating and would need to be subsidized. It cannot be reimbursable grant either because the beneficiaries cannot front load nor advance expenses.

Total Requested (i+ii+iii+iv+v+vi)

18.7 Million USD

PROJECT / PROGRAMME CONCEPT NOTE GREEN CLIMATE FUND | PAGE 11 OF 5

(c) Co-financing

Financial Instrument

Amount Currency Name of

Institution Seniority

Grant

Options

Options

Options

2.49 B USD

…………………

…………………

…………………

Options

Options

Options

Options

Philippine Government5

…………………

…………………

…………………

Options

Options

Options

Options

Lead financing institution: LANDBANK

(d) Covenants

(e) Conditions precedent to disbursement

D. Expected Performance against Investment Criteria

Please explain the potential of the Project/Programme to achieve the Fund’s six investment criteria as listed below.

D.1. Climate impact potential [Potential to achieve the GCF's objectives and results]

Specify the climate mitigation and/or adaptation impact. Provide specific values for the below indicators and any other relevant indicators and values, including those from the Fund’s Performance Measurement Frameworks.

Total tonnes of CO2 eq to be avoided or reduced per annum

(Will be provided during the Proposal preparation proper once the mitigation aspects of the Programme are identified, e.g. use of renewable energy for commodity production; operations, etc..)

Expected total number of direct and indirect beneficiaries and number of beneficiaries relative to total population (e.g. total lives to be saved from disruption due to climate-

related disasters

The expected direct and indirect beneficiaries are the following : 388 Local government units (LGUs) in 19 provinces; 9,024,000 farmers and fisher folks. The ultimate beneficiaries are the 15.7million people (7,644,400 males; 7,395,600 females) in the target municipalities/cities . Total lives to be safeguarded in this area are those of the 15.7million people because of the DRR-CCA component.

D.2. Paradigm shift potential [Potential to catalyze impact beyond a one-off project or programme investment]

Provide the estimates and details of the below and specify other relevant factors.

Potential for scaling-up and replication (e.g. multiples of initial impact size) The potential for scaling up and replication extends theoretically to the whole 100 million Filipinos distributed widely throughout the Philippines.

Potential for knowledge and learning : Triple (3x) the programme beneficiary size and the whole 100million population.

Contribution to the creation of an enabling environment

5 Will include the relevant lending portfolios of the Sponsor, and related budget of the Executing Entities. A number of related/ complementary bilateral projects are also being designed at this stage which can provide co-financing but will be finalized during the detailed proposal preparation stage.

PROJECT / PROGRAMME CONCEPT NOTE GREEN CLIMATE FUND | PAGE 12 OF 5

Significant since the Programme is designed to also produce policies that would roll out the appropriate enabling environment for the rest of the concerned population/sectors of the Philippines.

Contribution to the regulatory framework and policies-

The Programme results’ contribution to the existing related regulatory frameworks and policies are expected to be significant as there are, as yet, no national learnings on how integrated adaptation approaches drawing from conventional responses, mixed with new, innovative approaches could actually be operationally applied in terms of codified protocols, systems and procedures and tools that would form part and parcel of the country’s relevant regulatory regimes dealing with the incremental challenges of climate change. A major example of this is the creation of a more realistic regulatory regime for MSMES, especially those dealing with commodity production from the country’s natural resource base, to maximize their contribution to national resilience building. Another is how to influence standards for land use and urban planning that formally incorporates risk management, as well as, “low hanging fruit”/ no regrets options of food and water considerations to enable highly vulnerable metropolis like MetroManila to be food and water sufficient even in times of natural disasters.

D.3. Sustainable development potential

[Potential to provide wider development co-benefits]

Provide the estimates of economic, social and environmental co-benefits. Examples include the following:

Economic co-benefits 6

- Total number of jobs created : 10,000 - Amount of foreign currency savings : 18.7 M USD - Amount of government’s budget deficits reduced

Social co-benefits

- Improved access to education - Improved regulation or cultural preservation

- Improved health and safety: 15.7 million people

Environmental co-benefits

- Improved air quality High - Improved soil quality High - Improved biodiversity High

Gender-sensitive development impact

- Proportion of men and women in jobs created 50:50

D.4. Needs of recipient [Vulnerability to climate change and financing needs of the recipients]

Describe the scale and intensity of vulnerability of the country and beneficiary groups and elaborate how the project/programme addresses the issues. Examples of the issues include the following:

Level of exposure to climate risks for beneficiary country and groups

The Philippines is considered to be in the topmost global quartile in terms of vulnerability to climate change, sustaining an average of 0.5% of GDP losses from climate related hazard events/disasters every year. Typhoon Haiyan caused losses in the order of 3-4% of GDP. The provinces in the country’s eastern seaboard, numbering 28, are considered to be the most vulnerable to climate change, being in the typhoon path, although uncertainty in the direction of these hazards has increased in recent years, rendering the entire country and its people almost equally vulnerable. The population in the country’s 1,700 cities and municipalities, almost 80% of which are located in coastal areas, are rapidly becoming extremely vulnerable to the acute (disaster) risks but also to the chronic risks like sea level rise.

Does the country have a fiscal or balance of payment gap that prevents from addressing the needs?

The 2016 national budget of the Philippines is 1.6 trillion PhP. The Philippines is spending almost 50% of its national budget to pay off debts incurred during the martial law years without

6 To be confirmed in the detailed Proposal preparation,

PROJECT / PROGRAMME CONCEPT NOTE GREEN CLIMATE FUND | PAGE 13 OF 5

fail as it also has an automatic debt repayment law which constrains the Philippine bureaucracy from programming available national budget (realistically the remaining 50%) to all the country’s basic development needs. The GoP officially set the fiscal deficit for 2016 at 2% of GDP. Outstanding debt in 2016 was estimated at 6.4 trillion pesos. In the recent study undertaken by the Philippine Government with the World Bank, the estimated adaptation cost of the country has been initially estimated at between 2-3% of the national budget. The budget deficit, however, is considered to be still manageable in the sense that the economy is growing faster than the deficit. The balance of payments on the trade side is not particularly worrying because the Philippines’ oil import bill is not that large. However, it could benefit from a decreased import of commodities/products that the country can easily produce like vegetables and carbohydrate substitutes to staples like rice which the country currently imports.

Does the local capital market lack depth or history?

Some experts say that the local capital market lacks depth in the sense that the trading volumes and number and types of traded securities are low relative to the size of the economy. It does not lack for history but is still not mature enough relative to its years. It is changing but not fast enough where it is a major contributor to economic development. It is still too much in thrall to big corporate interests and very vulnerable to abusive speculators.

Needs for strengthening institutions and implementation capacity

To implement this proposed pilot Programme, capacity development has to happen at various levels involving a variety of sectors and key institutions towards development of competencies which are considered gaps. A collective national capacity needs to be built to enable the country to address the climate change problem, especially its impacts. This national capacity building process has started at the national government level, with improvements in technical competencies, changes in regulatory regime (e.g. risk based planning required) and extended to the sub-national (regional/provincial). However, those at the frontlines (LGUs, community leaders, Community based organizations) have barely been capacitated. Their technical capacity and know-how have to be immediately put at par with the national actors. Their natural partners too like local academic institutions have to have increased competencies on climate change to be able to effectively support players at the local level.

D.5. Country ownership [Beneficiary country ownership of project or programme and capacity to implement the proposed activities]

Provide details of the below and specify other relevant factors.

Coherence and alignment with the country’s national climate strategy and priorities in mitigation or adaptation

The proposed intervention is fully aligned with the Philippines’ National Climate Change Strategy and National Climate Change Action Plan (NCCAP) , as well as, the Philippine Development Plan and the Government’s Sectoral Plans. In fact, the components of the proposed Programme were actually proposed to be “Anchor Programs” addressing climate change in the priority sectors, both for adaptation and mitigation. The difference now is that this will pilot the simultaneous addressing of sectoral impacts and explore opportunities of weaving mitigation seamlessly into the formulation and implementation of adaptation measures such that they will all add up to an operational Sustainable Development Strategy for the Philippines.

Brief description of executing entities (e.g. local developers, partners and service providers) along with the roles they will play

There is a wide variety of potential executing agencies which can optimally support implementation. The Sponsor has been using this multi-execution modality and has worked/ is working with Government agencies, local government units and the private sector to implement a wide variety of projects much like this programme. There is a further potential working arrangement to channel resources to the community beneficiaries through the Microfinance Institutions (MFIs), especially for enterprise development. An Executing Entity which can be any of the above, is directly responsible for day to day operations. In turn, the EE(s)can contract private contractor(s) to discharge tasks for them. The Sponsor, being a government entity, is subject to the national audit requirement, which extends to all its partners and contractors.

Stakeholder engagement process and feedback received from civil society organizations and other relevant stakeholders

Content and design of each component have been vetted separately among multi-stakeholders. Their inclusion in this integrated proposal is a result of multi-stakeholder feedback and recommendations drawn from limited piloting of the concepts. Extensive consultations will again be conducted when formal detailed Proposal preparation begins. It

PROJECT / PROGRAMME CONCEPT NOTE GREEN CLIMATE FUND | PAGE 14 OF 5

must be emphasized that country ownership is a major principle that the Philippine Government espouses and practices and extends to this Programme.

D.6. Effectiveness and efficiency [Economic and financial soundness and effectiveness of the proposed activities]

Provide details of the below and specify other relevant factors (i.e. debt service coverage ratio), if available.

Estimated cost per t CO2 eq (total investment cost/expected lifetime emission reductions)

Not directly applicable but can be calculated and incorporated during the Proposal preparation stage, once use of renewable energy becomes part of the formal design of the Program.

Co-financing ratio (total amount of the Fund’s investment as percentage of project) In relation to a rough estimate of

The total cost of the project as proposed for GCF funding is 18.7 M USD, of the conservative 46.77 M USD needed to put together an integrated pilot Programme involving a minimum 19 municipalities (estimated from the attached pre-feasibility documents for undertakings which are currently separately in progress, in a limited sense, in the Philippines. The estimated GCF project cost of 18.7 M USD is roughly 40% of the required full proposal cost ( estimated at 46.77M USD based on pre-feasibility data and emerging results of projects which were used as basis for this proposal. Not all aspects, however, e.g. infrastructure such as model evacuation centers are incorporated. The remaining 60% of project cost will be the “minimum” co-financing of the sponsor and the Executing Entities.

Economic and financial rate of return ( This will be provided in the Proposal proper). - With the Fund’s support

- Without the Fund’s support

E. Brief Rationale for GCF Involvement and Exit Strategy

Please specify why the GCF contribution is critical for the project/programme.

As stressed above, the GCF grant is critical for the Programme because it will address a critical funding gap for the capacity development process, a major strategy of the Programme and other “non-bankable” interventions like revolving funds for ecosystems communities as a sustainable feature of enterprises to be set up or strengthened in the target areas.

Please explain how the project/programme sustainability will be ensured in the long run, after the project/programme is implemented with support from the GCF and other sources.

Mainstreaming of results into the planning, programming and regulatory processes of the Philippines in a “roll out” process and/ or “incorporation as the projects go” which the national government is already practicing in joint endeavors with the Sponsor and other partners. Knowledge management will be with existing knowledge management/knowledge generating sectors & entities like the academe for continuing competency development of the actors. New approaches, products which need to be taken up by the private sector would be developed in conjunction with them , as well as, government sectoral agencies in an integrated fashion, to immediately link community producers and entrepreneurs to markets. Other requirements like continuing financing will be ensured by involving the network of participating financial institutions directly, in addition to the Sponsor, to influence lending and lending requirements in a way that they become responsive to prospective clients.

F. Risk Analysis

Please describe the financial and operational risks and discuss mitigating measures.

RISK MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK

PROJECT / PROGRAMME CONCEPT NOTE GREEN CLIMATE FUND | PAGE 15 OF 5

Risk Rating Mitigating measures

Change in political leadership may pose delays in implementation

Medium Constant consultations and advocacy to secure buy in will be endeavored at the highest political leadership, as well as, the lowest stakeholder levels.

Failure in technology & know how which form part of the basis and assumptions of the successful implementation of the programme.

Medium Strategic partnerships with the local academe and centers of excellence will be established to provide continuous technical support on all aspects of the initiative- from the risk/ vulnerability assessments to operationalization and evaluations. External technical support will also be brought in by the Sponsor when needed.

Regulatory constraints on local communities to undertake programme activities, e.g. the upland dwellers to harvest, transport, market and sell their products; entrepreneurs, etc can demotivate direct beneficiaries and make them opt out of the Programme.

Medium The project will support/catalyze review of regulatory frameworks at national and local levels, and initiate policy dialogues and consultations with stakeholders and facilitate social auditing to promote appropriate development, interpretation and application of regulations by authorities. Ex ante agreements between the Sponsor and the concerned regulatory entities/bodies will be secured to facilitate issuance of the necessary permits or exempt contractors all together, where they can be provided.

Lack of clear land and resource tenure, overlapping jurisdictions and conflicting land claims.

Medium The programme will support the review of tenure models of relevance to programme objectives and based on field experiences; support dialogue and conflict resolution mechanisms. Select actual sites without these issues, where possible.

Unpredictability in climate & environmental conditions may affect the level of success of field level activities.

Medium Close monitoring of weather updates will be done to ensure that the field activities will be timed under the most suitable weather conditions. Similarly, the project will consider technologies that are adjudged to be most climate adaptable and resilient.

Significant currency loss/exchange rate differential

Medium Peg implementation to original currency and budget utilized for planning; Resort to use of contingency resources & measures in a timely manner; explore augmentation of operational expenses by co-financing of partners.

G. Multi-Stakeholder Engagement

Please specify the plan for multi-stakeholder engagement, and what has been done so far in this regard.

Individual stakeholders have been consulted and some have put in proposals; the proposal has, therefore, been extensively vetted on a per component basis. The Proposal preparation proper will again afford the opportunity to conduct more detailed consultation on the integrated proposal submitted to the GCF.

H. Status of Project/Programme

1) A pre-feasibility study is expected to be completed at this stage. Please provide the report in section J.

Separate concept notes which have been prepared based on actual pilots and which reflect the feasibility of the

PROJECT / PROGRAMME CONCEPT NOTE GREEN CLIMATE FUND | PAGE 16 OF 5

component proposals, are attached.

2) Please indicate whether a feasibility study and/or environmental and social impact assessment has been

conducted for the proposed project/programme: Yes No ☐ (If ‘Yes’, please provide them in section J.)

3) Will the proposed project/programme be developed as an extension of a previous project (e.g. subsequent phase),

or based on a previous project/programme (e.g. scale up or replication)? Yes No ☐

(If yes, please provide an evaluation report of the previous project in section J, if available.)

Yes but in a different mode- as an integrated intervention (programme), expected to have different, more optimized results.

I. Remarks

J. Supporting Documents for Concept Note

Map indicating the location of the project/programme

☐ Financial Model

Pre-feasibility Study

☐ Feasibility Study (if applicable)

Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (if applicable)

Evaluation Report (if applicable)

Page 1 of 3

CONCEPT NOTE

WATER HARVESTING FOR EVERY BARANGAY: A CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION STRATEGY FOR WATER SELF SUFFICIENCY

OF PHILIPPINE COMMUNITIES 1. RATIONALE

Climate change is expected to affect some sectors more than the rest such as the water sector.1 The latest Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)2 states that “Freshwater availability in Central, South, East and South-East Asia, particularly in large river basins, is projected to decrease due to climate change which, along with population growth and increasing demand arising from higher standards of living, could adversely affect more than a billion people by the 2050s.” The Philippines is no exception, with impacts already being felt during the dry months in both rural and urban areas. The impact is more acutely felt by the country’s poor population who already do not have access or have only limited access to water for domestic purposes. Water rationing among sectors is a regular course of action by the national government during the dry season to avert serious water shortages that can trigger social upheavals, economic damage and water related health problems, among others.

The National Climate Change Action Plan (NCCAP) has clearly identified and earmarked the water sector as a major impact area of climate change in the Philippines for which anticipatory adaptation actions must be started now. Among the proposed measures is water conservation, including such specific actions as water harvesting. Water harvesting by households is envisioned not only to ease the periodic water scarcity experienced by the average Filipino families, especially the poor, but will also lower their water costs and promote conservation values towards sustainability and resilience for the country. It can also foster “water independence” for Philippine households generating direct benefits in terms of monetary savings. Water harvesting is a low cost, “no regrets” climate change adaptation option which can facilitate technology innovations and spur new enterprises contributing to poverty alleviation. If every barangay ensures that its constituents have the capacity to gather and store water for their domestic and other related needs, water demand from other sectors can be addressed from current and planned supply, averting crisis and promoting optimization of water use.

2. GOAL AND OBJECTIVES Goal: This project aims to catalyze water independence for the average Filipino household, especially the poor, who are expected to be adversely affected by the growing impacts of climate change on water availability and provide the community with other water alternatives that can support common community endeavors like community gardens.

Specific Objectives:

To harness the potential of barangays, especially the households, to contribute to the country’s sustainability in the area of water through cost effective, no regrets options like water harvesting;

To raise the awareness and develop the competencies of the various sectors in systematically conserving water as a major strategy for climate change adaptation;

To facilitate development of water harvesting technologies and related enterprises to contribute to poverty alleviation; and

1 The others being food, health, coastal and marine, forests, etc. 2 Issued in 2007; Fifth Assessment Report currently in progress and expected to be released in 2014.

Page 2 of 3

To increase the synergy with and potential of related community adaptation endeavors towards national resilience to climate change.

3. COMPONENTS The programme will have four (4) components, as follows: 3.1 Component 1: Water Harvesting Systems Design and Implementation This component will concentrate on developing appropriate design(s), piloting and rolling out a water harvesting scheme for barangays, primarily at the household level. It will catalyze formulation and issuance of the appropriate policy and development of system(s) to ensure that all households, especially the poorest, are supported to optimize use of available water, especially rain water, through water conservation techniques as rainwater harvesting. This component will also work with the “Community Gardens” Programme3 to ensure that the former is also supported by this endeavor. Activities

Development of water harvesting system designs at household and community level4

Piloting and roll out of programme; and

Policy development to institutionalize water harvesting as a critical element of water management for climate change adaptation.

3.2 Component 2: Social Marketing and Competency Development Component This component will ensure buy in and voluntary take up of water conservation approaches such as rainwater harvesting by households and communities as a long term adaptation strategy to climate change impacts. A systematic information, education and communications (IEC) campaign will be undertaken comprising activities such as orientation seminars, dissemination of multi-media IEC materials, etc.. The programme will also endeavor to incorporate the relevant concepts in the formal school system and develop competencies and skills through relevant training and tertiary level curricula. Activities

Development of water conservation Communications Plan and compilation of water conservation multi-media IEC materials;

Piloting and implementation of ComPlan and dissemination of corollary IEC materials; and

Development, piloting and roll out of national training programme(s) on water conservation/water harvesting5.

3.3 Component 3: Water Harvesting Technology and Enterprise Development Water harvesting involves use of technologies which evolve over time and new knowledge which become available. A programme which is national in scope and involves a variety of users and uses will require support in terms of technology development which can spawn a whole new industry by itself. This component will assess and facilitate take up of existing technologies and/or development of new ones which the country can roll out for use of

3 Also proposed to be an “anchor” programme under the auspices of the NCCAP 4 Expected to support the community gardens which are to be established under the Community Gardens Programme, another catalytic initiative under the Food Security component of the (NCCAP). 5 Will include existing programmes by relevant service providers like the academe.

Page 3 of 3

communities. It will also link up with sectors that can support further technology development and deployment, e.g. academe and the private sector. Activities:

Assessment of current and emerging technology needs of communities for water harvesting/water conservation;

Dissemination of technology needs assessment results to relevant sectors, especially the academe and the private sector;

Linking concerned actors like the academe, private and civil society organizations and government to develop unavailable but needed technologies; and

Linking technology developers to funding mechanisms. 3.4 Component 4: Knowledge Management This component will systematically compile and codify knowledge generated under this programme to be fed back for use in the three other components of the programme. A Community of Practice (CoP) can be facilitated also under this component to underpin a vibrant and dynamic knowledge generation initiative which should support and enhance the implementation of this and other related programmes. Activities:

Assessment of existing knowledge generators and identification of potential contributors;

Design, piloting and roll out of an integrated KM system; and

Establishment of a Community of Practice on water conservation/water harvesting. 4. BUDGET AND TIMETABLE 5. IMPLEMENTATION/MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS

Page 1 of 5

CONCEPT NOTE

ARTIFICIAL GROUNDWATER RECHARGE AS A MEANS TO MINIMIZE FLOODING AND INCREASE WATER SUPPLY FOR THE IRRIGATION OF RICE LANDS

RATIONALE Many low-lying agricultural lands suffer from disastrous floods during the rainy season and endure lack of water for irrigation during periods of drought. In both cases, such conditions result in loss of livelihood and increasing poverty in the rural areas. If the uncertainty about the availability of water can be minimized or removed, these conditions may be somewhat alleviated. PROJECT DESCRIPTION In response to the adverse effects of climate change the Philippine Groundwater Society (PGS) proposes the utilization of water from creeks for the artificial recharge of the shallow aquifers. In so doing, the flow of water in the creeks will be reduced and flooding of the lower areas would be minimized. Overland flow will also be captured and diverted to the subsurface to recharge the shallow aquifers which can then supply water for irrigation during the dry months. From the results of the study, PGS hopes to develop appropriate strategies that would address the lack of irrigation water during the dry months and excessive water during heavy rainfall events. PROJECT OBJECTIVES 1. To determine appropriate methods of water development and utilization that would

address the effects of climate change on water resources; 2. To reduce flood levels by diverting some of the flood waters to artificial recharge

facilities; 3. To find ways to increase the stream base flow by improving the soil condition along the

river banks; 4. To define the characteristics of the shallow aquifers that could be the main source of

irrigation water for the rice lands; 5. To prepare the most suitable design of the shallow tube wells; 6. To determine the relationship between the rainfall and groundwater level in a specific

area; 7. To evaluate various methods of intercepting the stream flow and the artificial recharge

facilities in terms of the cost, and the ease of construction and maintenance.

PROPOSED STUDY AREA As a pilot project, the Philippine Groundwater Society proposes to undertake the above studies in Minalabac, Camarines Sur. The specific area covers the land between Bicol River and two of its numerous tributaries. These two creeks are the Baras Creek and the Manapao Creek. The land has a gentle topography which rises gradually towards Tariric at an elevation of more than 25 meters above mean sea level (masl). The banks of Bicol River stand at an elevation of about 10 masl. Rice is often grown in the nearly flat lands but coconut trees occupy the upper slopes. The lower areas particularly along Bicol River become flooded during the rainy season. The depressions dry up later but farmers find it difficult to obtain water from the ground for irrigation during the dry season. The water from the creeks becomes barely adequate for the parched rice lands within the proposed study area.

Page 2 of 5

SCOPE OF WORK 1. Present the project to the municipal and barangay councils to secure their cooperation

and assistance in its implementation. 2. Site inspection to identify the locations of the interceptor and recharge facilities. 3. Perform aquifer characterization by geo-resistivity survey and test boring. This activity

seeks to define the nature and depth of the water-bearing formations in the study area. 4. Define the characteristics of the Baras and Manapao Creeks. Aside from the flow

characteristics, the condition of the streambed and the banks shall be examined. Prepare the design of weirs or other facilities that will access the water from the creek and divert them to the artificial recharge basins.

5. Construction of the interceptor facilities. 6. Construction and testing of the recharge wells to determine how much water the aquifer

can absorb. It will be the basis of the number of recharge wells that would be required for each recharge basin.

7. Establish baseline data on water levels in the study area from monitoring wells that will be distributed evenly around the study area.

8. Establish stream gauging stations using a Parshall flume across each creek and a rain gauge station at the approximate center of the project area; and the training of field aides on the manner of obtaining data from these gauging stations.

9. Prepare the schedule for the measurement of water levels in the recharge and monitoring wells. Stream flow measurements shall be performed daily at the same time of day. In case of floods, the flood peak levels should be noted.

10. Analysis of the water level measurements to determine how fast the aquifers respond to the rainfall and the artificial recharge process. There will be a continuing monthly evaluation particularly from the start to the end of the rainy season.

11. Evaluation of the effectiveness of the water collection strategy in terms of simplicity, cost and ease of maintenance of the recharge facilities.

12. Evaluation of the effect of the groundwater recharge on the reduction of flooding and the increase of available water for irrigation.

13. Selection of the most appropriate design/configuration of the conveyance systems and artificial recharge facilities for rural areas, particularly in rice lands that are subject to flooding during heavy rainfall events.

14. Strip planting with vetiver grass along the banks of the creek at a location above the stream gauging stations. Analyze the effect of the bank rehabilitation on the stream flow.

AQUIFER CHARACTERIZATION OF A RIVER BASIN Despite the heavy dependence on ground water in the country, no systematic studies have been made to determine how much ground water is available for various uses. The earliest regional hydrogeologic map was prepared by the Bureau of Mines in 1970. It has not been updated even if newer and more extensive information can be obtained from water districts. In 1997, the Philippine Task Force on Water Resources Development and Management produced a Ground Water Availability Map on a scale of 1:2,500,000. The map is too small to provide the details that will help water users or developers in locating favorable well sites or in assessing the availability of ground water. Many local studies have been undertaken in the exploration for ground water. The results of these studies reside in the water districts, the NWRB, LWUA, NIA and other government agencies. However, no comprehensive compilation has been attempted that would synthesize the available information in a format that can be easily understood and be publicly available to people wishing to manage and regulate the exploitation of groundwater resources.

Page 3 of 5

This deficiency impacts most on the agricultural sector which needs substantially more water for irrigation than for municipal or public water supply. Aquifer characterization of agricultural lands within large river basins can provide guides on how to address the lack of water during extended periods of drought. Water resources management would then be based more solid and scientific information rather than on arbitrary figures derived from assumed hydrogeologic conditions. The characterization of the shallow aquifers in river basins involves the definition of the geological framework of the basin and a knowledge or understanding of the subsurface conditions. From this knowledge, the nature, extent, depth, thickness and hydraulic properties of the shallow aquifers will be determined. The selection of the suitable design of the irrigation wells can be based on the understanding of the hydrogeologic conditions of the basin. Appropriate groundwater development plans can then be devised to address the impact of climate change on water resources and thereby minimize agricultural losses. WHY THE PHILIPPINE GROUNDWATER SOCIETY Aside from water well drilling contractors, the Philippine Groundwater Society (PGS) is composed of professional hydrogeologists and consulting firms that are engaged in the exploration for, development and management of water resources. The member-drillers have over the years accumulated a wealth of data and information about the ground water resources in the country. Some of these valuable information are not recorded in the files of government agencies and information can be made available to the working team of hydrogeologists that belong to the PGS. The groundwater professionals in the PGS have more than 200 years of experience in groundwater studies and management, more than the experience in most government agencies. The combined experience of PGS experts provides them the compelling reason to undertake the preparation of aquifer characterization of shallow aquifers in major river basins. That study would be a valuable tool for the planning of groundwater resources development for agricultural and even domestic uses. SCOPE OF WORK 1. Preparation of working base maps, using digitized topographic maps from the

NAMRIA. 2. Compilation and review of available geological and hydrogeological literature and

maps of the river basin. 3. Conversion of geologic maps on a scale of 1:50,000 to a regional geologic map on to

the digitized map on a scale of 1:250,000. 4. Field investigation and verification of the geologic features and structures obtained

from the Mines and Geosciences Bureau, the Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology, other government agencies and private companies.

5. Because agricultural lands often occupy flat alluvial basins, subsurface information is also inadequate for aquifer characterization. In this case, geo-resistivity surveys should be conducted to obtain a clearer picture of the subsurface formations. Several test wells shall also be constructed to obtain realistic information about the shallow aquifers.

6. The results of the test borings will provide the nature and composition of the water-bearing formations. The analysis of pumping test results will show the capacity of the aquifers to store and transmit water.

7. Field aides shall measure the water levels so that the hydrogeologists can create water table maps that will show the depth of water and also the direction of flow of the ground water.

8. A composite hydrogeological map shall be prepared on a scale of 1:100,000. It will show the extent and depth of the shallow aquifers, and the elevation of water table. A

Page 4 of 5

separate map shall be prepared to indicate the capacity of the aquifers to yield water to wells.

The methodology and the results of the aquifer characterization shall be summarized in a final report that will accompany the maps and diagrams.

COST DETAILS

ITEM Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 TOTAL

I. PERSONNEL SERVICES (PS)

A. Direct Cost

1 Team Leader @ P100,000/mox18 mos

1,800,000.00

1 Senior Hydrogeologist @ P45,000/mo x 12mos.

540,000.00

3 Hydrogeologists @ P30,000/mo x 12 mos

1,080,000.00

2 Research Assistants @P25,000/mo x 12 mos

600,000.00

1 Agriculturist @P30,000/mo x 12 mos

360,000.00

1 GIS/CAD Specialist @P30,000/mox12 mos

360,000.00

2 Community relations officers @ 30,000/mox12 mos

720,000.00

1 Draftsman @ P20,000/mox12mos

240,000.00

1 Administrative Officer @ P30,000/mox12mos.

360,000.00

1 Clerk/Typist @ P18,000/mox12mos

216,000.00

1 Utility Man @ P15,000/mo x 12 mos

180,000.00

2 Drivers @P18,000/mox12mos 432,000.00

Insurance and Benefits 1,033,200.00

ITEM Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 TOTAL

MAINTENANCE AND OTHER OPERATING EXPENSES

A. Direct Cost

Office Rental 1,440,000.00

Office Renovation 400,000.00

Office Furniture 200,000.00

Travel Expenses 240,000.00

Supplies and materials 100,000.00

Communication expenses 160,000.00

Printing and binding expenses 135,000.00

Representation Expenses 200,000.00

Laboratory analyses 130,000.00

Software and licenses 2,000,000.00

Personnel Insurance 120,000.00

Fuel and lubrication 360,000.00

Repair and maintenance 120,000.00

Electric and water utilities 300,000.00

Topographic and hydrographic survey

150,000.00

Acquisition of digital maps 50,000.00

TOTAL FOR MOOE 6,085,000.00

Page 5 of 5

ITEM Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 TOTAL

Equipment Outlay

Laptop (3 units) 150,000.00 150,000.00

Air conditioner (4 units) 200,000.00 200,000.00

Desktop computer (2 units) 150,000.00 150,000.00

Work stations (3units) 50,000.00 50,000.00

Resistivity instrument (2 units) 1,400,000.00 1,400,000.00

Conductivity-TDS-pH meter 30,000.00 30,000.00

Water level sounders (3 units) 120,000.00 120,000.00

Global positioning systems (3 units) 90,000.00 90,000.00

Diver (3) with complete accessories 100,000.00 100,000.00

Chemical Field kits 80,000.00 80,000.00

Vehicles (2 units) 2,400,000.00 2,400,000.00

Wide format printer 300,000.00 300,000.00

A3 laser jet printer 50,000.00 50,000.00

Photocopier 60,000.00 60,000.00

A3 inkjet printer 20,000.00 20,000.00

Total 5,200,000.00

ITEM Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 TOTAL

Field Expenses

Monitoring wells (8) @150,000.00 1,200,000.00

Recharge wells (4) @ 1,500,000 6,000,000.00

Production well (8) @ 1,500,000 12,000,000.00

Solar power source and controls (8 units)

16,000,000.00

Data acquisition and tele-metering system

2,500,000.00

Pump, motor and controls/fittings 4,000,000.00

Civil works for AR trench (2 km) 2,000,000.00

Labor expenses for resistivity survey (5) @500/day

200,000.00

Labor expenses for field monitoring @10,000/

120,000.00

Total for Field Expenses 44,020,000.00

EXPENSES, TOTAL PHP 63,226,200.00

Contingency Expense (15%) 9,483,930.00

GRAND TOTAL 72,710,130.00

Page 1 of 6

CONCEPT NOTE

COMMUNITY FOOD GARDENS FOR EVERY BARANGAY: A FOOD SECURITY ADAPTATION STRATEGY FOR THE PHILIPPINES1

I. INTRODUCTION Climate change is expected and anticipated to affect significantly the capacities of affected countries, especially developing ones, to adapt to its impacts. One of the most pronounced effects is on food security which is already a challenging issue for the Philippines under normal circumstances. Relevant UN agencies like the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO) characterize food security as having three- four facets: “food availability, food access, food use and the stability of the first three dimensions over time”. Climate change will create new food insecurities in coming months, years and decades. Projected low-income countries like the Philippines with limited adaptive capacities to climate variability and change are confronted with significant threats of food insecurity. The Philippines is among the countries most affected by climate change, as manifested in the increasing magnitude of extreme weather events traversing the country. This trend is expected to further exacerbate the increasing food insecurity situation due to population increase and external factors like trade. At the heart of the food security situation is its implication for households. Increasing food production and national food availability figures that do not translate to food on the table of households are meaningless and fosters the chronic perception of food insecurity. A household is considered generally food secure when its members do not live in hunger or fear of starvation. As a middle income country, the Philippines posted remarkable economic growth over recent years but is still plagued by pockets of poverty. This poverty situation goes hand in hand with the hunger situation, perceived or otherwise, which is validated by periodic surveys. The Social Weather Station (SWS) survey in the 4th quarter of 2015 still showed that the average hunger rate, while going down, is still 13.4%, 2.2 % of which experienced severe hunger and the rest (11.2%), moderate hunger. This relatively chronic hunger situation is expected to continue until the country’s pockets of poverty are totally eradicated. In fact, it is expected to aggravate with the onset of climate change. Food prices are rising and are becoming increasingly linked with energy prices. Why are food prices rising? What are the implications for food production, markets and consumption? What are the consequences for the livelihoods of the poor consumers and communities that are food insecure? What options do policy makers have in the short and long run? How can the Philippines survive without resulting to a costly rice importation? What are the options and sacrifices that the country has to make? Food shortage will even be worst than terrorism? Majority of the vulnerable poor people are not farmers so things become more complicated? The Philippines is not an exception, in the Metro Manila alone the current population is approximately 12.4 million and would require about 1.5 million metric tons of rice. The

1 Prepared by: LCCAD Executive Director Nong C. Rangasa, Federalismo Alyansa ng Bicol (FA) Regional Convenor Dante Jimenez, and DA Asec Bong Año

Page 2 of 6

consequence of letting 3 million people get hungry and out in the streets of Metro Manila will mean chaos and may even result to rebellion. Expect the unexpected phenomenon? The general anticipatory adaptation strategy to cope with the increasing adverse impacts of climate change is to increase over-all resilience of affected populations. Among the resilience development actions are cost effective “no regrets” options requiring minimal inputs but with significantly bigger benefits, inclusive, empowering and with other development co-benefits that catalyze over-all well-being of the target population, especially the poorest and most vulnerable. A major intervention of this type is a “food self-sufficiency” endeavor such as community food gardens which could provide chemical-free, clean, nutritious, organic food, healthy, sustainable environment and could generate material for food-based enterprises that could be sources of livelihood and income for communities and multiple stakeholders. To accurately sustain the organic food garden and harness the potential of barangays, especially the households, and contribute to the country’s sustainability in the area of water, cost effective “no regrets” option like water harvesting /water conservation can be integrated. While the bigger, more normative interventions led by the sectoral government agencies like the Department of Agriculture (DA) are in progress pursuant to such plans as the Philippine Development Plan (PDP), the National Climate Change Action Plan (NCCAP), and the Local Climate Change Action Plan (LCCAP), catalytic projects like Community Food Gardens for every Barangay for Climate Change Adaptation can inspire, motivate, empower and provide immediate direct results and impacts that are confidence building, community resiliency laying the ground for sustainability and ultimately eradicate hunger and poverty. II. OVER-ALL GOAL AND OBJECTIVES Goal: The project’s over-all goal is to develop the adaptation capacities of Philippine communities to climate change in the area of food security towards resilience and well-being of the poorest and most vulnerable. Objectives: 1. To enable the poorest and most vulnerable of the Philippine population to adapt to the

impacts of climate change in the area of food security by enabling them to grow their own food (primarily vegetables and fruits) through community food gardens using organic fertilizers;

2. To contribute to the alleviation of poverty & hunger by developing food-based enterprises

through innovative technologies and know-how anchored on the community food gardens made possible by having at least one high school and one college graduate in every family;

3. To raise awareness on the impacts of and develop competencies on food security adaptation measures to climate change, including the health, organic food and nutritional importance of commodities from these community food gardens; and

4. To contribute to the development of social cohesion through community volunteerism and provision of venue for community “green like activities”.

Page 3 of 6

5. To encourage K to 12 senior high students to specialize in agri-business or agri-preneur and food technology.

III. PROJECT COMPONENTS

Establishment and Management of Community Food Gardens This component will design, pilot and roll out the establishment of community food gardens in every barangay of the Philippines and other areas to be designated/ made available by the Government of the Philippines and its development partners. It will also define the protocols and ground rules in the development, management and benefit sharing from this endeavor. This component will also delineate, through forum and consultations with the concerned parties, the indicative crops, fruit trees and other plants to be planted in these gardens, in line with the contemplated enterprises to be developed and established under Component 2. The national government will provide the enabling environment by issuing the appropriate policies; providing experts, know-how and critical development, management and benefit sharing from this endeavor and critical inputs like seeds and basic equipment; and, designating or facilitating designation of food garden sites. It will also oversee and monitor implementation at the municipal, city, provincial, regional and national levels. To the extent possible, this component will promote the use of indigenous species and, therefore, contribute to the conservation and protection of endangered plant and tree species that are in danger of extinction. Activities: 1. Site(s) identification and assessment per barangay; 2. Design and piloting of community adaptation/food gardens, including roll out; and 3. Development of guidelines/protocols governing implementation, including access and

benefit sharing. Community Food Gardens Based Enterprise Development

This component will focus on developing food and other related enterprises that can be supported from the produce in the community food gardens established in Component 1. The poorest and the most vulnerable in the community (barangay) are envisioned to be actively involved in the management and operation of these enterprises, the latter to be designed primarily not as “one off” or stand- alone green initiatives but as a more cohesive conglomerate generating economies of scale that can address the country’s remaining pockets of poverty. This component will also link up with related national endeavors of the national government, to situate, contextualize and harmonize the marketable products and contribution of these community food gardens with the economic output(s) targeted in the national and local plans and programs while addressing the needs and preferences of the local communities. Activities: 1. Scoping/assessment of existing and planned food-based enterprises at national, regional

and local levels; 2. Design, piloting, roll out of recommended enterprises; and 3. Evaluation and institutionalization through integration into regular national and local plans,

programs and activities with continuing financial and technical support.

Page 4 of 6

Awareness Raising/ Advocacy, Competency Development and Social Mobilization

This component will catalyze the national advocacy on the significance, role and contribution(s) of these community food gardens not only as source of food production and income generators through the enterprises they can create, but as a social cohesion and showcase of local empowerment and actual collaboration between the national government and the local constituents. It can also be areas for educating the youth on the value of manual labor and collective, cooperative ventures. In short, these community food gardens can be an opportunity for societal renewal and introspection on the value of self-reliance, sustainability, hard work and environmental caring for the most marginalized and vulnerable in Philippine society. As this is primarily a climate change adaptation endeavor, the importance of systematic and collective preparation for a significant impact area of climate change should be a major message that must be disseminated by the advocacy facilitated by this component. By facilitating inter-LGU competitions the standards can be set and progressively improved over time, encouraging quality improvement & enhancement and the spirit of healthy competition/critical collaboration, among others. This component will also communally, systematically develop and codify the competencies needed for implementing and sustaining a national endeavor which is envisioned to be an anchor for national adaptation in the area of food security. The learning by doing and practical learning experience approach will be the main competency development strategy, with subsequent documentation and competency development programmes developed and established formally mainstreamed, integrated and calibrated into the local competency development programs, plans, activities and implementation. This component will also secure, facilitate the social mobilization and preparation of constituents for the systematic anticipatory adaptation approach and strategy to climate change. Activities: 1. Design of the Information, Education and Communications (IEC) plan, especially the

advocacy/social marketing to be undertaken in relation to the importance and role of community gardens in an anticipatory adaptation national system to climate change;

2. Execution of the IEC/social marketing as part of the Local Climate Change Action Plan (LCCAP) of the provinces, cities and municipalities and Barangay Contingency and Recovery Plan (BCRP) at the Barangay level;

3. Development of competency programs from actual experiences of communities, multiple-stakeholders and institutionalization in the programs of existing service providers like the academe, private sectors, NGOs and multiple stakeholders; and

4. Piloting and formal roll out of the competency development program. IV. BUDGET AND TIMETABLE (to be supplied)

V. IMPLEMENTATION/MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS

As oversight agency for climate change matters, including the implementation of the National Climate Change Action Plan (NCCAP) and the Local Climate Change Action Plan (LCCAP), the Climate Change Commission (CCC) shall facilitate initiation of this Community Food Gardens for every Barangay Program and monitor implementation. A lead national agency (e.g. Department of Agriculture) will oversee administration while other related agencies, research institutions and other functionalities of the government may be called upon to support specific

Page 5 of 6

aspects of the implementation. Civil society organizations, the private sectors, service provider and development partners will be involved and invited to contribute and participate in the actual implementation and will be represented in the National Steering Committee to guide Community Food Gardens for every Barangay Program implementation. The local government units will lead actual implementation at the city/municipality and barangay chairpersons will be directly in charge, responsible and accountable at the barangay level. Constituents will be organized in manageable groups for the proper implementation and actual work to secure the workability, applicability and replicability to other communities in the country. VI. EXPECTED OUTPUTS

Community free hunger, alleviation and reduction of poverty

Harmonizes all greening effort of the community with nutrition organic food for the table (Pagkain sa bawat Mesa, Laban sa Kahirapan)

Community free from malnutrition, healthy and productive people

Water sufficiency through water conservation and harvesting

Solid waste to zero waste management

At least one high school and one college graduate in every family

At least one agri-preneur and food-based enterprise in every family

Community resiliency to impacts of climate change and disasters

Community Biodiversity conservation

Mainstreamed climate change adaptation and mitigation VII. FOOD GARDENS RESULTS

Human Security

Increased community and household incomes through organic food-based enterprise or agri-preneur

Improved general well-being of communities

Enhanced environmental and cultural stewardship

Ecological Security

Enhanced organic food gardens

Enhanced agroforestry plantations

Enhanced environmental and cultural stability

Improved sustainable ecosystem goods and services

Economic Security

Increased crops production, food and forest-based enterprise and materials

Increased business development and technology transfer

Increased economic activity and development

Page 6 of 6

VIII. POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS:

CCC, DA, DILG, DOST, DOH, DSWD, NAPC, NDRRMC, DENR, DPWH, TESDA, DepEd, CHED, DTI, PIA, NIA, PNP, NPTE, UNDP, LCCAD and Project NOA

Leagues of Provinces, Cities, Municipalities and Barangays of the Philippines

Private sectors, NGOs, religious sectors, academic institutions, scientific community, media practitioners and multiple stakeholders

PREPARED BY: The Climate Change Commission (CCC), Department of Agriculture (DA), Local Climate Change Adaptation for Development (LCCAD), Federalismo Alyansa ng Bikol (FAB), the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), and Philippine Chamber of Commerce & Industry (PCCI)

Page 1 of 7

CONCEPT NOTE

SUSTAINABLE USE AND MANAGEMENT OF BIODIVERSITY RESOURCES FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Proponent: DENR in partnership with DOST, DTI, DA and its relevant Bureaus, DoT, Landbank of the Philippines, DBP I. SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS The Philippines has high biodiversity, being among the mega-diverse countries of the world. It has prolific and highly diverse marine and coastal resources which makes it the third highest in marine biodiversity in the world. For example, it hosts a total of 464 reef-building coral species or nearly half of all known coral species. The country also has 1700 reef species and 9% of the total known global coral reef area at 25,060 sq. km. The Philippines is home to an estimated 53,500+ species of plants and animals. Recent reviews have recognized 105 species of amphibians (79% endemic) and 264 reptiles (68% endemic), while recent summaries of birds have recognized 593 species (32% endemic). Mammal diversity is currently estimated at 175 native terrestrial mammals (65% endemic). Total country estimates include as many as 15,000+ plants (and their relatives) and 38,000+ animals (vertebrates and invertebrates). These numbers are considered conservative considering that recent studies have shown that terrestrial biodiversity of the Philippines is substantially under estimated. The Philippines has among the highest rates of species discovery in the world (sixteen new species of mammals have been discovered in the last ten years alone). New species are being discovered at a remarkable rate and this pattern shows no sign of slowing. Current taxonomic estimates show that the Philippines has the highest level of endemism in the Indo-Malayan Realm on a per unit-area basis and the highest concentration of biodiversity on earth. This rich variety of genes, species, biological communities and life-sustaining biological and chemical processes have been the source of food, wood, fibers, energy, raw materials, industrial chemicals and medicines which pour hundreds of billions of dollars into the world economy each year. In fact, the Philippine marine fisheries produced a total fisheries volume of 5 million metric tons in 2009 valued at PhP 215.58 billion. The Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) estimates the fishing industry’s contribution to the country’s GDP at 2.2% (PhP 170.3 billion) and 4.4% (PhP63.2 billion) at current and constant prices, respectively. It must be noted that marine organisms are the source of 60% of new anti-cancer agents currently on trial. Aside from this, they also hold potential for possible central nervous system, anti-microbial drugs and enzymes for cellulosic biofuels production. Philippine waters are estimated to harbor an estimated 10,000 species or approximately one fifth of all known species. The country’s marine waters are also widely regarded by marine biologists as the epicenter of marine biodiversity. These marine resources host a wealth of potential pharmaceutical benefits which can be economically valuable to the country. Data shows that global sales of pharmaceuticals are estimated to be US$300 billion annually, of which the component derived from genetic resources accounts for between US$75billion and US$150billion1. In the US alone in the 1980s, it was estimated that the pharmaceutical opportunity loss from every plant species lost is around US$6 billion annually2. Pharmaceutical companies are highly dependent on biodiversity particularly on plant species to ensure sustainable growth of their businesses. For instance, Unilever is amongst the

1The Economist, 1998, Chapter 3 as cited in Kate et al, 1999, The Commercial Use of Biodiversity: Access to Genetic Resources and Benefit Sharing 2 Pearce D., et al, The Economic Value of Biodiversity, 1994, Earthscan Publications Limited

Page 2 of 7

world’s largest users of agricultural raw materials such as tea, vegetables and vegetable oils3. Unfortunately, the Philippines, despite its rich biodiversity, remains a striving economy in the region. Poverty incidence among Filipinos was recorded at 27.9% in 2012.Based on the 2009 official poverty statistics for the basic sectors, fishermen posted the highest poverty incidence for nine basic sectors in the Philippines at 41.4%, the same level in 2006, followed by farmers and children at poverty incidences of 36.7% from 37.2% in 2006 and 35.1% from 32.7% in 2006, respectively4. Worse, the country is also experiencing continuous biodiversity loss due to a number of reasons. In fact, the Philippines is also known to be a biodiversity hotspot, where there is increasing degradation of habitats and forest land conversion in unprecedented manner. Between 1990 and 2010, Philippines lost an average of 547.5 sq. km or 0.83 percent per year of forest area5. The most common approach in addressing biodiversity loss is establishing protected areas with different degree of restrictiveness on the access and use of resources. These restrictions often raise the fundamental issue of protecting the biodiversity, that the human use for livelihood are sometimes not compatible to biodiversity protection. And this is where the nexus of biodiversity and poverty come in. The poor, who largely depend on biodiversity for their subsistence needs, suffer first and most severely from biodiversity degradation as well as in strictly protecting it. Through the years, it has been learned that biodiversity conservation will only be successful if the people depending on it also benefit to sustain a living. There have been many attempts in the past to diversify sources of livelihoods to the point of diverting them from their main sources of income. However, experience will also show that these alternative livelihoods have not been sustainable for the reason that capacities and skills were not inherently present. Community members tend to return to their main sources of income where they have gained capacities and specialization over the long years. Similarly, the lack of access to financing and market-linkage have made these initiatives unsustainable and unviable as businesses. Hence, this proposal aims to demonstrate that ENR-based livelihoods can be sustained and that biodiversity resources can offer greater incentives to those communities dependent on it by sustainably utilizing the resources through enterprise development. UNDP has tried modeling a biodiversity-friendly enterprise/business in a protected area through the UNDP-GEF supported project, the Biodiversity Partnerships Project, however, the potentials of biodiversity in other ecosystems are yet to be explored and/or scaled-up. Likewise, convergence and institutionalization of support to BD-friendly MSMEs by relevant government institutions from product identification, development, promotions and marketing have yet to be showcased. II. PROPOSED SOLUTION The Philippines is one such haven of very important resources for economic purposes. Being one of the 17 mega diversity countries identified by the World Conservation Monitoring, in 1998, as accounting for more than two-thirds of the biological wealth in the planet6 , the Philippines possess so much wealth that can potentially address its own needs

3http://www.unilever.com/sustainable-living-2014/reducing-environmental-impact/sustainable-sourcing/protecting-biodiversity/ 4 Philippine Statistics Authority 5 3rd NBSAP 2014 6http://www.conservation.org/documentaries/Pages/megadiversity.aspx

Page 3 of 7

for development. The greater the extent of variety among ecosystems, habitats and species, the more varied and distinctive are the opportunities it present which can be managed sustainably and tapped for economic development. Over-all objective: To address and reduce the threat to degradation of biodiversity and the environment, in a manner, whereby poverty of the people is correspondingly reduced or alleviated.

A. COMPONENTS: Component 1: Policy Development to support investments and increase financing support to biodiversity-friendly enterprises Given the significance of biodiversity not only to the environment but also to the economy, it is important to increase investments aimed at enhancing its economic value and benefits while at the same time managing it in a sustainable manner. Hence, policy supporting the establishment of biodiversity-friendly enterprises will prove the point that protecting or managing biodiversity resources can contribute in creating wealth for poverty reduction and trade-offs can be minimized if not eliminated. This proposal will support in initiating or scaling-up community-based and biodiversity-friendly micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs). However, just like any regular MSMEs, the success of community-based and BD-friendly enterprises must be given sufficient support in terms of development, promotion and marketing. Since 1990’s, the Philippine Government has intensified its support to MSMEs due to its recognition of its productive characteristics in significantly contributing to the country’s economic growth. Several policies have been passed to address the challenges and difficulties facing MSMEs such as Magna Carta for Micro and Small Enterprises (RA9501) which consolidated all government programs for the promotion and development of SMEs into a unified institutional framework. It paved the way for the creation of Small and Medium Enterprise Development Council and the Small Business Corporation. Both mechanisms look into providing incentives and financing for SMEs. The SBC is considered as the National Government’s largest provider of SME financing. With a comprehensive policy framework in place to provide financing to MSMEs, still MSMEs are faced with the problem of access to financing. Although the Magna Carta for Micro and Small Enterprises (RA 9501) has required lending institutions to set aside at least 8% of their total loan portfolios to micro and small enterprises, accessing it has been a challenge. Assessments and studies for MSMEs have showed that despite the availability of funds for lending, MSMEs still unable to access these. Banks are still wary of SME lending because of the lack of credit information that would establish the credit worthiness of the borrower firm. Likewise, too many small loans would entail high operational costs for the banks. They are also concerned about the bankability of MSMEs and the high risks involved in MSME lending given that many MSMEs have limited management and financial capability.7MSMEs are also constrained by the fact that most of these lending facilities require collateral that they have difficulty complying with. Likewise, there are no incentives given to SMEs that use raw materials that can encourage biodiversity conservation and/or environmental sustainability. Currently, the UNDP-GEF BPP Project has been working with the DTI Bureau of Investment to include BD-friendly enterprises in the Investment Priority Plan. SMEs in the IPP will be accorded with several tax incentives. However, most of the SMEs in the IPP are those involved in manufacturing,

7Aldaba, R. SME’s Access to Finance: Philippines, PIDS Discussion Paper Series No. 2012-05

Page 4 of 7

services, agribusiness, and infrastructure8 with export potential. There are no current incentives accorded to starting entrepreneurs especially those community-based enterprises with minimal capital. Under this component, the project will explore to simplify lending requirements and processes which can cater to small and community-based and biodiversity-friendly enterprises. MSMEs that promote/ contribute/ complement/ enhance biodiversity conservation or environmental sustainability will be a condition to access financing. A credit registry or credit information database can be established to provide information on the creditworthiness of a certain MSMEs. A guarantee system by LGUs can be explored to replace the collateral system. Component 2: Biodiversity Friendly Enterprise Development and Promotion (this is systematizing the steps in developing business with raw materials from biodiversity)

a. Value Chain Analysis Venturing in an enterprise entails analysis of the value chain. This is to determine where in the value chain can the community or PO benefit from. Value chain analysis often starts with linear mapping of activities from the initial inputs of suppliers at the very beginning of the production process to the final consumption of products and services taking into account the key players in each activity of the chain. In the context of biodiversity-friendly enterprise development and systematizing the management of a biodiversity-friendly businesses, it is important to consider the important elements of shared economic, social and environmental values that will impact on the evolution of the value chain. This proposal aims to connect the BD-friendly enterprises and businesses and local or urban markets in a mutually beneficial way and creates the foundation for sustainable livelihoods/business for all key players in the chain. It is also hoped that activities in the chain that negatively and positively affecting biodiversity will be identified so that corresponding actions are taken to ensure the sustainable use of biodiversity resources. b. Product development/transformation

Community-based enterprises in different ecosystem types will be developed and pilot-tested. In each ecosystem, there are potential livelihood initiatives that when scaled up can be promising enterprises for the communities. Below are the few examples which can be scaled-up and supported as a community-based enterprises:

1. Agro-biodiversity

Coffee and Cacao Production

In 1800’s, the Philippines is one of the top exporters of coffee in the world. However, due to coffee rust and infestation, coffee production waned drastically and was not able to recover. Today, the Philippines produces 30,000 metric tons of coffee a year or 30 million kilos of coffee and ranks 110th in the world in terms of output, but it consume almost 100,000 metric tons a year. It is estimated that around 300,000 Filipinos depend on the coffee industry. The national average yield is 400 kg/ha, a very low production compared to leading coffee producing countries such as Brazil where production is at 2,000 kg/ha. Average coffee production is at 485 kg/ha of green beans. This, according to experts, is much lower than the

8http://news.pia.gov.ph/index.php?article=2131391354235#sthash.gEeYonyI.dpuf

Page 5 of 7

ideal production of 1,500 kg/ha. While most of the coffee farms are situated in Mindanao, the most productive area is in Cavite, in terms of volume and quality, averaging 840 kg/ha, according to statistics from Nestle Philippines. However, from 1987 to 1996, the total hectare planted to coffee decreased, from 149,657 hectares to 138,830 or an average of 1% reduction per year9.

Similarly, cacao production in the country is not enough. According to statistics, the country's supply reached a deficit of 44,349 metric tons a year (2005) against local consumption. Production was then nearly 5000 metric tons in 2005. Local consumption then reached nearly 50,000 metric tons10. There is indeed a large demand for local production of cocoa beans. The demand for cacao and coffee is huge that this can be an opportunity to develop these as enterprises. The National Greening Program of DENR has coffee and cacao have been named as reforestation species by the DENR and encouraged to be intercropped to indigenous and native species in forest areas. Community-based coffee and cacao enterprises will be encouraged to give more income to coffee and cacao farmers. This is by providing them the technology to add value to coffee and cacao beans such as roasting and processing machines and equipment.

2. Natural and Organic Agriculture

According to a study conducted by the scientists from University of Oxford, organic farms support, on the average, 34% more plant, insect and animal species than conventional farms.11 The project will support development of farms and the necessary applicable technologies which can be replicated. The project will also work on the certification of these farms.

3. Non-timber Forest Products

Non-timber forest products have long been an important component in the livelihood strategies of forest-dwelling people. They include fruits and nuts, vegetables, fish and game, medicinal plants, resins, essences and a range of barks and fibres such as bamboo, rattans, and a host of other palms and grasses. In the Philippines, NTFP such as abaca, ticog, buri, pandan, rattan are still those that can be explored and enhanced through product development. The potential of these NTFPs as raw materials for enterprises are high. In fact, Abaca or Manila Hemp supplies about 85.0 percent of the total world abaca requirement. Other handicraft materials which have market potential are tikog, bamboo, pandan, rattan, etc.

4. Fisheries and Marine-based Products Currently, there are enterprises with raw materials coming from marine resources. Enterprises that can be pursued under this sector are: fish processing, fish drying, fish canning, seaweed farming, etc. These enterprises should be within the over-all ICM framework and plan to ensure sustainable harvesting of fish and other marine resources.

9http://www.bar.gov.ph 10http://www.bar.gov.ph 11http://www.ox.ac.uk/media/news_stories/2014/140204.html

Page 6 of 7

5. Mangrove-based products

Mangroves are normally converted into fishponds or cut for charcoal making. However, mangrove plantation/rehabilitation can be encouraged if access and harvesting will be allowed and regulated. The barks, leaf shoots and roots of the mangrove trees supply tannin used for dyes, leather preservatives and furniture stains. Leaves are used for livestock food, as "green manure" in fishponds, and as tea and tobacco while the fruits are said to be edible and flowers are a source of honey and fish poison.

c. Technology Transfer and Marketing Crucial to any enterprises to prosper is the linkage to sustainable and viable market. Livelihood attempts in the past were assessed to be very limited to developing products with no assurance of feasible market, hence became unsustainable. Hence, this proposal will assist in the development and application of technologies to enhance and add value to the products. The project will closely coordinate with relevant government agencies such as the Department of Science and Technology, Department of Agriculture, DTI, etc. for the technology and product development as well as support in the marketing and promotions. The distribution and marketing of the products can be done through a consolidator for enterprises in the rural areas with small production capacity, or directly to the targeted buyer/s either as a supplier of semi-processed products or a subcontractor for finished products. Other potential buyers are the exporters, cooperatives, department stores, supermarkets and food retail outlets, souvenir shops, and local and foreign buyers of green and certified products (with eco-labels). To expand its market linkages, enterprises can also join local, provincial, regional and national, and international trade fairs through the support of the LGUs and the DTI. In the context of biodiversity conservation and the sustainability of the enterprise, branding a product and highlighting its unique selling proposition as “biodiversity-friendly” adds premium value and supports the global trend on “green” products. Component 3: Capacity Building for BD-friendly MSMEs Just like any MSMEs, BD-friendly entrepreneurs must be capacitated in terms of enhancing or diversifying their products, running the business and managing finances. In many initiatives in the past, sustaining a livelihood or a business by a PO has always been a challenge. This is because running a business is not an inherent skill to the organization and to its leaders. Guidance from business experts should be a continuing initiative until the PO has imbedded in their day to day operation the business mind set. Continuing capacity building will be pursued under this component. It is a process of strengthening the skills and abilities of organizations, groups or institutions to perform their core functions in a sustainable manner over a period of time. It may also require developing or improving conditions that will allow the enterprise to build on its existing knowledge and skills and be empowered to engage in the continuous process of learning and adapting to the necessary changes to build their capacities. Capacity building encompasses both organizational and functional levels of an enterprise. It will look into the ability and skills of the key leaders to plan, manage, organize, budget, monitor and evaluate the business. It will focus on the process of running a business and how to improve and make it sustainable over a period of time.

Page 7 of 7

For those enterprises needing technical assistance to improve or enhance their production capacity, product collections , and expand market access for their products, the capacity building interventions may include Skills Training (e.g., basket weaving, carving, food processing, furniture-making, handicrafts-making), Product Development and transformation (e.g., agro-biodiversity, non-timber forest products, fisheries and marine-based products, mangrove-based products, and other raw materials for pharmaceuticals, personal care products and essences), Technology-transfer training (e.g., raw materials treatment, processing and manipulation, finishing techniques, food packaging, design and fabrication of simple and low-cost tools and equipments), and Training on sustainable production of Organic Food and Natural products leading to organic certification. There are several government agencies that provides capacity building trainings and tools and equipment to enhance the production capacity and productivity of micro, small and medium enterprises. These are the DA, DOST, DOLE, DTI-Design Center of the Philippines, DTI – Cottage Industry Technology Center (CITC), TESDA, among others. Under this component, capacity building in setting-up a livelihood/production fund will be explored. This fund can be used by the organization in rehabilitating/restoring/planting production materials (eg. abaca, reforestation with intercropping of cacao and coffee, mangrove management, etc.). A system of fund generation, access, usage and monitoring will be developed. This is to ensure that fund will revolve sustainably to support the continuous business operation of their organization. B. POTENTIAL SITES

Key Biodiversity Areas in the following areas:

Central Panay Mountains

Northern Luzon

Leyte and Samar

Bangsamoro Areas

Others III. PROPOSED BUDGET

Project Components Proposed Budget (in USD)

Component 1 1,500,000.00

Component 2 3,500,000.00

Component 3 2,000,000.00

Project Management 350,000.00

Total 7,350,000.00

Social and Environmental Screening Template The completed template, which constitutes the Social and Environmental Screening Report, must be included as an annex to the Project Document. Please refer to the Social and Environmental Screening Procedure for guidance on how to answer the 6 questions.]

Project Information

Project Information

1. Project Title Building Resilience of Philippine Communities to Climate Change

2. Project Number

3. Location (Global/Region/Country) Asia-Pacific / Southeast Asia / Philippines

Part A. Integrating Overarching Principles to Strengthen Social and Environmental Sustainability

QUESTION 1: How Does the Project Integrate the Overarching Principles in order to Strengthen Social and Environmental Sustainability?

Briefly describe in the space below how the Project mainstreams the human-rights based approach

The project will endeavor to improve the well-being of the poor and most vulnerable communities in the areas most vulnerable to climate change impacts. The project will be ensuring availability of basic needs especially food and water to these communities. It will reintroduce and intensify community gardening to augment food security efforts in low-income communities.

Briefly describe in the space below how the Project is likely to improve gender equality and women’s empowerment

Gender-sensitivity and gender-responsiveness shall be among the indicators for activity design, staff and Consultant selection, and Project monitoring. Gender disaggregation of data shall be pursued in data gathering and Project reporting. Gender lens shall be applied to analysis of data and outputs. These are is particularly tricky to undertake

Briefly describe in the space below how the Project mainstreams environmental sustainability

The Project will aim to enhance the ecological integrity and resilience of the environment as the resource-based of these communities. This will be done through sustainable management and conservation models and showcase the potential of generating revenues and income from its sustainable management.

Part B. Identifying and Managing Social and Environmental Risks

QUESTION 2: What are the Potential Social and Environmental Risks? Note: Describe briefly potential social and environmental risks identified in Attachment 1 – Risk Screening Checklist (based on any “Yes” responses).

QUESTION 3: What is the level of significance of the potential social and environmental risks? Note: Respond to Questions 4 and 5 below before proceeding to Question 6

QUESTION 6: What social and environmental assessment and management measures have been conducted and/or are required to address potential risks (for Risks with Moderate and High Significance)?

Risk Description Impact and Probability (1-5)

Significance (Low, Moderate, High)

Comments Description of assessment and management measures as reflected in the Project design. If ESIA or SESA is required note that the assessment should consider all potential impacts and risks.

There are still unorganized farmers and fisherfolks and/or the capacities of the local communities are low which can affect the assertion of their rights.

2 Low This can be addressed through IEC and making sure that the most vulnerable sectors are reached and given information about the project and the importance of their participation

Almost all forest lands and even protected areas in the country are inhabited by local people. Hence, implementation of the project might be done in areas that are declared as critical habitats or protected areas. Similarly, the use of chemical-based fertilizer can also impact in these areas

3 Moderate The Project will adopt the framework on biodiversity-friendly enterprises and agricultural practices. This framework has been developed, tested and demonstrated in previous UNDP projects and the government has adopted such framework. Organic farming will be encouraged. The DA has already established standards on biodiversity-friendly agricultural practices and these will be followed.

The project may explore development of enterprises that are resource-based, hence, may entail extraction, harvesting and utilization of natural resources.

2 Low The Project will ensure sustainable harvesting and utilization of natural resources as raw materials. A policy issuance will be pursued supported by information provided by science such as carrying capacity. This will be part of the vulnerability assessment.

Community gardens and NR-based enterprises are most often very sensitive to effects of climate change since its base and raw materials are from the natural environment.

3 Moderate Seed banking will be part of the initiative to ensure sustainable supply of seeds for replanting purposes. Similarly, the Project will also endeavor to work with relevant institutions in designing/developing a financing facility for micro-enterprises especially those in the initiation stage.

QUESTION 4: What is the overall Project risk categorization?

Select one (see SESP for guidance) Comments

Low Risk ☐X The project will have low adverse social and environmental impacts since the Project aims to increase the capacity of the most vulnerable groups to adapt and build resilience to

the impacts of climate change.

Moderate Risk ☐

High Risk ☐

QUESTION 5: Based on the identified risks and risk categorization, what requirements of the SES are relevant?

Check all that apply Comments

Principle 1: Human Rights ☐

Principle 2: Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment

☐

1. Biodiversity Conservation and Natural Resource Management

X

2. Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation X

3. Community Health, Safety and Working Conditions

☐

4. Cultural Heritage ☐

5. Displacement and Resettlement ☐

6. Indigenous Peoples ☐

7. Pollution Prevention and Resource Efficiency ☐

Final Sign Off

Signature Date Description

QA Assessor 30 July 2016 UNDP staff member responsible for the Project, typically a UNDP Programme Officer. Final signature

confirms they have “checked” to ensure that the SESP is adequately conducted.

QA Approver UNDP senior manager, typically the UNDP Deputy Country Director (DCD), Country Director (CD), Deputy Resident Representative (DRR), or Resident Representative (RR). The QA Approver cannot also be the QA Assessor. Final signature confirms they have “cleared” the SESP prior to submittal to the PAC.

PAC Chair UNDP chair of the PAC. In some cases PAC Chair may also be the QA Approver. Final signature confirms that the SESP was considered as part of the project appraisal and considered in recommendations of the PAC.

SESP Attachment 1. Social and Environmental Risk Screening Checklist

Checklist Potential Social and Environmental Risks

Principles 1: Human Rights Answer

(Yes/No)

1. Could the Project lead to adverse impacts on enjoyment of the human rights (civil, political, economic, social or cultural) of the affected population and particularly of marginalized groups?

No

2. Is there a likelihood that the Project would have inequitable or discriminatory adverse impacts on affected populations, particularly people living in poverty or marginalized or excluded individuals or groups? 1

No

3. Could the Project potentially restrict availability, quality of and access to resources or basic services, in particular to marginalized individuals or groups?

No

4. Is there a likelihood that the Project would exclude any potentially affected stakeholders, in particular marginalized groups, from fully participating in decisions that may affect them?

No

5. Are there measures or mechanisms in place to respond to local community grievances? Yes

6. Is there a risk that duty-bearers do not have the capacity to meet their obligations in the Project? No

7. Is there a risk that rights-holders do not have the capacity to claim their rights? Yes

8. Have local communities or individuals, given the opportunity, raised human rights concerns regarding the Project during the stakeholder engagement process?

No

9. Is there a risk that the Project would exacerbate conflicts among and/or the risk of violence to project-affected communities and individuals?

No

Principle 2: Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment

1. Is there a likelihood that the proposed Project would have adverse impacts on gender equality and/or the situation of women and girls?

No

2. Would the Project potentially reproduce discriminations against women based on gender, especially regarding participation in design and implementation or access to opportunities and benefits?

No

3. Have women’s groups/leaders raised gender equality concerns regarding the Project during the stakeholder engagement process and has this been included in the overall Project proposal and in the risk assessment?

No

4. Would the Project potentially limit women’s ability to use, develop and protect natural resources, taking into account different roles and positions of women and men in accessing environmental goods and services?

For example, activities that could lead to natural resources degradation or depletion in communities who depend on these resources for their livelihoods and well being

No

Principle 3: Environmental Sustainability: Screening questions regarding environmental risks are encompassed by the specific Standard-related questions below

Standard 1: Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Natural Resource Management

1.1 Would the Project potentially cause adverse impacts to habitats (e.g. modified, natural, and critical No

1 Prohibited grounds of discrimination include race, ethnicity, gender, age, language, disability, sexual orientation, religion, political or other opinion, national or social or geographical origin, property, birth or other status including as an indigenous person or as a member of a minority. References to “women and men” or similar is understood to include women and men, boys and girls, and other groups discriminated against based on their gender identities, such as transgender people and transsexuals.

5

habitats) and/or ecosystems and ecosystem services? For example, through habitat loss, conversion or degradation, fragmentation, hydrological changes

1.2 Are any Project activities proposed within or adjacent to critical habitats and/or environmentally sensitive areas, including legally protected areas (e.g. nature reserve, national park), areas proposed for protection, or recognized as such by authoritative sources and/or indigenous peoples or local communities?

Yes

1.3 Does the Project involve changes to the use of lands and resources that may have adverse impacts on habitats, ecosystems, and/or livelihoods? (Note: if restrictions and/or limitations of access to lands would apply, refer to Standard 5)

No

1.4 Would Project activities pose risks to endangered species? No

1.5 Would the Project pose a risk of introducing invasive alien species? No

1.6 Does the Project involve harvesting of natural forests, plantation development, or reforestation? No

1.7 Does the Project involve the production and/or harvesting of fish populations or other aquatic species? Yes

1.8 Does the Project involve significant extraction, diversion or containment of surface or ground water?

For example, construction of dams, reservoirs, river basin developments, groundwater extraction

No

1.9 Does the Project involve utilization of genetic resources? (e.g. collection and/or harvesting, commercial development)

No

1.10 Would the Project generate potential adverse transboundary or global environmental concerns? No

1.11 Would the Project result in secondary or consequential development activities which could lead to adverse social and environmental effects, or would it generate cumulative impacts with other known existing or planned activities in the area?

For example, a new road through forested lands will generate direct environmental and social impacts (e.g. felling of trees, earthworks, potential relocation of inhabitants). The new road may also facilitate encroachment on lands by illegal settlers or generate unplanned commercial development along the route, potentially in sensitive areas. These are indirect, secondary, or induced impacts that need to be considered. Also, if similar developments in the same forested area are planned, then cumulative impacts of multiple activities (even if not part of the same Project) need to be considered.

No

Standard 2: Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation

2.1 Will the proposed Project result in significant2 greenhouse gas emissions or may exacerbate climate change?

No

2.2 Would the potential outcomes of the Project be sensitive or vulnerable to potential impacts of climate change?

Yes

2.3 Is the proposed Project likely to directly or indirectly increase social and environmental vulnerability to climate change now or in the future (also known as maladaptive practices)?

For example, changes to land use planning may encourage further development of floodplains, potentially increasing the population’s vulnerability to climate change, specifically flooding

No

Standard 3: Community Health, Safety and Working Conditions

3.1 Would elements of Project construction, operation, or decommissioning pose potential safety risks to local communities?

No

3.2 Would the Project pose potential risks to community health and safety due to the transport, storage, and use and/or disposal of hazardous or dangerous materials (e.g. explosives, fuel and other chemicals during

No

2 In regards to CO2, ‘significant emissions’ corresponds generally to more than 25,000 tons per year (from both direct and indirect sources). [The Guidance Note on Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation provides additional information on GHG emissions.]

6

construction and operation)?

3.3 Does the Project involve large-scale infrastructure development (e.g. dams, roads, buildings)? No

3.4 Would failure of structural elements of the Project pose risks to communities? (e.g. collapse of buildings or infrastructure)

No

3.5 Would the proposed Project be susceptible to or lead to increased vulnerability to earthquakes, subsidence, landslides, erosion, flooding or extreme climatic conditions?

No

3.6 Would the Project result in potential increased health risks (e.g. from water-borne or other vector-borne diseases or communicable infections such as HIV/AIDS)?

No

3.7 Does the Project pose potential risks and vulnerabilities related to occupational health and safety due to physical, chemical, biological, and radiological hazards during Project construction, operation, or decommissioning?

No

3.8 Does the Project involve support for employment or livelihoods that may fail to comply with national and international labor standards (i.e. principles and standards of ILO fundamental conventions)?

No

3.9 Does the Project engage security personnel that may pose a potential risk to health and safety of communities and/or individuals (e.g. due to a lack of adequate training or accountability)?

No

Standard 4: Cultural Heritage

4.1 Will the proposed Project result in interventions that would potentially adversely impact sites, structures, or objects with historical, cultural, artistic, traditional or religious values or intangible forms of culture (e.g. knowledge, innovations, practices)? (Note: Projects intended to protect and conserve Cultural Heritage may also have inadvertent adverse impacts)

No

4.2 Does the Project propose utilizing tangible and/or intangible forms of cultural heritage for commercial or other purposes?

No

Standard 5: Displacement and Resettlement

5.1 Would the Project potentially involve temporary or permanent and full or partial physical displacement? No

5.2 Would the Project possibly result in economic displacement (e.g. loss of assets or access to resources due to land acquisition or access restrictions – even in the absence of physical relocation)?

No

5.3 Is there a risk that the Project would lead to forced evictions?3 No

5.4 Would the proposed Project possibly affect land tenure arrangements and/or community based property rights/customary rights to land, territories and/or resources?

No

Standard 6: Indigenous Peoples

6.1 Are indigenous peoples present in the Project area (including Project area of influence)? Yes

6.2 Is it likely that the Project or portions of the Project will be located on lands and territories claimed by indigenous peoples?

Yes

6.3 Would the proposed Project potentially affect the rights, lands and territories of indigenous peoples (regardless of whether Indigenous Peoples possess the legal titles to such areas)?

No

6.4 Has there been an absence of culturally appropriate consultations carried out with the objective of achieving FPIC on matters that may affect the rights and interests, lands, resources, territories and traditional livelihoods of the indigenous peoples concerned?

Yes

3 Forced evictions include acts and/or omissions involving the coerced or involuntary displacement of individuals, groups, or communities from homes and/or lands and common property resources that were occupied or depended upon, thus eliminating the ability of an individual, group, or community to reside or work in a particular dwelling, residence, or location without the provision of, and access to, appropriate forms of legal or other protections.

7

6.4 Does the proposed Project involve the utilization and/or commercial development of natural resources on lands and territories claimed by indigenous peoples?

No

6.5 Is there a potential for forced eviction or the whole or partial physical or economic displacement of indigenous peoples, including through access restrictions to lands, territories, and resources?

No

6.6 Would the Project adversely affect the development priorities of indigenous peoples as defined by them? No

6.7 Would the Project potentially affect the traditional livelihoods, physical and cultural survival of indigenous peoples?

No

6.8 Would the Project potentially affect the Cultural Heritage of indigenous peoples, including through the commercialization or use of their traditional knowledge and practices?

No

Standard 7: Pollution Prevention and Resource Efficiency

7.1 Would the Project potentially result in the release of pollutants to the environment due to routine or non-routine circumstances with the potential for adverse local, regional, and/or transboundary impacts?

No

7.2 Would the proposed Project potentially result in the generation of waste (both hazardous and non-hazardous)?

No

7.3 Will the proposed Project potentially involve the manufacture, trade, release, and/or use of hazardous chemicals and/or materials? Does the Project propose use of chemicals or materials subject to international bans or phase-outs?

For example, DDT, PCBs and other chemicals listed in international conventions such as the Stockholm Conventions on Persistent Organic Pollutants or the Montreal Protocol

No

7.4 Will the proposed Project involve the application of pesticides that may have a negative effect on the environment or human health?

No

7.5 Does the Project include activities that require significant consumption of raw materials, energy, and/or water?

No

Page 1 of 12

CONCEPT NOTE

NATIONAL CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT FOR MAINSTREAMING DISASTER RISK REDUCTION AND CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION INTO PLANNING AND

IMPLEMENTATION PROCESSES AT THE LOCAL LEVEL1

1. BACKGROUND

As a country situated in the “Pacific ring of fire” and directly in the typhoon path, the Philippines is no stranger to natural hazards and their impacts. Over time, the country’s adaptive capacity to these hazards has grown but with the advent of climate change, this coping capacity has been rapidly eroded. The net effect is a setback of the country’s development gains, costing it an average of 5% of GDP almost every year, especially for the past 5 years. On top of this is the growing number of casualties because the country’s burgeoning population has rapidly occupied dangerous areas like coastlines, waterways and landslide prone locations. The recent spate of yearly natural disasters affecting the Philippines has underscored the urgency of developing the capacities of the Filipino people, especially the most vulnerable, to deal with the potential impacts of natural hazards, especially those influenced by climate change. Capacity gaps span the breadth of national to local stakeholders and across a range of sectors and intervention areas. They can also be characterized as gaps at the institutional, as well as, individual levels. Institutional gaps involve policy, mechanisms, tools, systems and procedures and individual capacity gaps include lack of awareness and competencies. Specifically, the absence of consolidated hazard information, such as multi-hazard maps and exposure data that would enable the country to understand, prepare for and mitigate the impacts of natural hazards, especially those aggravated by climate change, is at the top of the list. Other problems involve the lack of competencies among planners and implementors to use these information in a standard, reproducible risk analysis, the results of which need to be fed into a systematic risk management system, comprising: a.) risk avoidance e.g. relocation, proper land use zoning; b.) mitigation through early warning, contingency planning, re-engineering; c.) addressing residual risks e.g. risk sharing/risk transfer mechanisms. As a natural disaster prone country, the Philippines has increasingly undertaken a lot of bold initiatives to address the above capacity gaps which have worked.2 However, these actions are obviously not enough to address the intensifying impacts of climate change. What is needed is a comprehensive, rapid and almost simultaneous capacity development of stakeholders, from national to sub-national and local levels. The assumption, which is borne out by experience, is that the systematic infusion of capacity development interventions, especially on raising awareness, knowledge and competencies to deal with natural hazards and climate change impacts through long term (e.g. risk based planning) and short to medium term mitigation actions (early warning, contingency planning, re-engineering, insurance schemes) will go a long way in averting significant losses in terms of economic losses and mortalities. All these have to come together in a coherent, integrated framework which ensures adequate and optimum disaster risk management. This framework must

1 A national programme that would “roll out” tested components of the DRR-CCA mainstreaming process being used in various projects currently being implemented by the national government through the Climate Change Commission, OCD on behalf of NDRRMC and the UNDP with some bilateral partners, e.g. Governments of Australia, New Zealand. 2 Examples of these are initiatives like the Climate Twin Phoenix project which have produced innovations in the risk assessment process among which is Climex d.b. a real time database of people and support systems critical for planning, early warning and evacuation actions.

Page 2 of 12

comprise standardized, reproducible steps starting with risk analysis3 and risk evaluation, the results of which should feed to risk management. Elements of this framework are in various stages of implementation. For risk analysis, characterization of the multi-hazards faced by the Philippines is on-going, translating to multi-hazard maps of 1:50,000 and 1:10,000 scales, respectively. Seventy four (74) of the 81 provinces have multi-hazard maps and profiles and the remaining 7 without these maps are: Davao del Sur, Sulu, Tawi Tawi, Basilan, Lanao del Norte, Maguindanao and Zamboanga Sibuguey. Of the 1,634 cities and municipalities4, 45 cities and municipalities spread across Regions 2, 6, 8, 10, 11, 13 and NCR are in various stages of being mapped. The 74 provinces also have risk based Provincial Development Physical Framework Plans (PDPFPs). Early warning systems, both automated and manual have been set up across the country and now total no. They range from simple rain gauges to automatic weather stations. These systems are not composed of equipment alone but an organization of people who can relay critical information about the progression of the hazard. On contingency planning, the new approach which was tested in Metro Manila is integrated planning- organizing cities and municipalities sharing the same risk source (e.g. fault systems, riverine systems, bays) to respond in an integrated manner in case of an emergency or disaster. National roll out of capacity development on DRR –CCA mainstreaming, in the context of the above framework should already ensue, to address the urgent need of preparing Filipinos to avoid disasters from natural hazards and climate change. The LGUs, as the front-liners for actions to avert or mitigate the impact of disasters, together with other local stakeholders, should be the focus of this national capacity development. Relevant executive issuances have been issued to this effect which provide the policy environment to make this happen. These are: 1.) Presidential Administrative Order No.1 Series of 2010, “Directing LGUs, Particularly Provinces to Adopt and Use in their Planning Activities the Guidelines on Mainstreaming DRR in Sub-National Development and Land Use Planning/Physical Planning”; and 2.) HLURB Board Resolution No.915 issued on Feb.24, 2014 or “Supplemental Guidelines on Mainstreaming DRR-CCA in Comprehensive Land Use Plans (CLUPs)”. The 74 PDPFPs cited above were produced by the concerned provinces using the Guidelines prescribed under AO 1, Series of 2010. At least six (6) cities and 22 municipalities produced risk based CLUPs pursuant to the HLURB Supplemental Guidelines. The mainstreaming task is, therefore, still huge noting that the cities involved represent only 4% of the country’s 144 cities and the municipalities concerned comprise only 1.5% of the total. This proposal, therefore, details this national rollout process, even as developmental work on this framework is still in progress and some aspects of it, like impact modelling under the risk analysis process, are still being developed and tested. However, what should really be rolled out are low hanging fruits such as hazard and exposure data compilation, generating a common understanding and the required competencies to enable standardized analysis and management responses of the disaster risks from natural hazards and climate change. Within the latter (management processes) tested methods such as risk-based planning and programming; mitigation actions like early warning and contingency planning, can already be replicated with confidence all over the country.

3 Being tested is the probabilistic approach which takes into consideration future climate information in scenario building . 4 Source: National Coordinating Statistical Board (NCSB) December, 2013.

Page 3 of 12

2. GOAL

This national programme aims to contribute to the national goal of resilience building by significantly reducing mortalities and economic losses from natural hazards and climate risks through disaster avoidance and mitigation. 2.1 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES:

2.1.1 To increase the capacities of local government units to lead local stakeholders in

averting losses from natural hazards and climate change through an appropriate enabling environment;

2.1.2 To increase the capacities of critical local partners such as local academic institutions and civil society organizations to consistently support local risk management actions; and

2.1.3 To increase the capacities of communities to avoid or mitigate the impact of natural hazards and climate change.

3. OUTCOME

This national programme aims to achieve the outcome, “Increased capacities of LGUs and other local stakeholders on DRR-CCA mainstreaming in planning, programming, regulatory and other implementation processes for avoided/reduced losses from natural hazards and climate change impacts.”

4. COMPONENTS, OUTPUTS, ACTIVITIES

Component A: RISK ANALYSIS OF ALL CITIES AND MUNICIPALITIES5 OF THE PHILIPPINES A quantifiable, objective risk assessment that characterizes the hazards and exposed elements and brings them together in impact scenarios, can be the only logical basis of rational, systematic, consistent and reproducible risk management actions. Noting the increased uncertainty as to which locality will be affected, given the experiences of places like Davao Oriental and other places recently hit by typhoons, adjudged to be not or less vulnerable compared to those located in the Eastern Seaboard, all cities and municipalities need to be all equally prepared for the disaster impacts of natural hazards and climate change. This component will, therefore, already roll out this risk assessment process as the first step (hazard characterization & vulnerability analysis). For example, the delineation of the possible physical extent of multi-hazards, as does the construction of the exposure data base such as Climex d.b.6, take time but needs to be done anyway. The mapping approach of the Government is well set and can be applied broadly. Capacities of anchor academic institutions7 need to be developed at the same time as or even ahead of the first batch of the LGU trainees in this roll out process. This is part of the sustainability strategy which would

5 Will exclude those already subjected to this process under projects implemented by the CCC or complying with the Supplemental Guidelines on DRR-CCA issued by the HLURB. 6 The Climate Exposure or Climex database is a population cum support systems database, taking off from the Government’s Community Based Monitoring System (CBMS) but disaggregated in a manner that would enable targeting of the most vulnerable (children, pregnant women, elderly) in disaster situations for more effective evacuation. 7 Academic institutions which can provide technical support to LGUs on a continuing basis in the form of technical advisory, training & other competency development work, and, research & development services, among others.

Page 4 of 12

ensure that future human resources and research needs of LGUs pertaining to coping/adaptation strategies and resilience building to natural hazards and climate change impacts are met and addressed in a predictable manner. Output 1. Climate/disaster risk and vulnerability assessment(s) produced as a basis for “climate/disaster proofing” future development, urgent mitigation actions & addressing residual risks in the target areas. This output will produce risk and vulnerability profiles of all cities and municipalities of the country. The probabilistic risk assessment approach which allows incorporation of future climate scenarios and use of dynamic impact models will be applied.8 This output will specifically produce 1:10,000 scale climate adjusted multi-hazard maps for use by the LGUs in their risk based Comprehensive Land Use Plans (CLUPs), Comprehensive Development Plans (CDPs) and other local plan(s) (e.g. contingency & investment plans) preparation. The climate adjusted multi-hazard maps are expected to be refined and upgraded to risk maps as the tools like impact models are refined9. Available climate change/ natural hazard impact models10, e.g. flood, storm surge, etc. will be used in the risk assessment process but will have to be adjusted individually for each risk source in the target areas. This output will also produce an exposure database11 for each LGU, which can be used for the risk (vulnerability) analysis and mitigation and plan enhancement purposes. This undertaking will specifically assist ALL target LGUs in characterizing and mapping their inherent hazards, with the support of risk management agencies and ‘ANCHOR’ academic institutions.12 The climate exposure database tool, ClimEx.db, which was developed under Project Climate Twin Phoenix13 will help define the vulnerability of the exposed population, structures and economic activities in the areas most likely to be affected by the hazards, and the extent of risks in terms of damage and losses should hazard events happen in the future. The ClimEx.db is seen as complementing the ecological profiles produced by LGUs for use in their comprehensive land use planning. ClimEx.db may be upgraded, to build into the system the administrative maps of the LGUs, thus, allowing for faster processing of data. Component B: MITIGATION Output 2. Priority disaster mitigating measures such as community-based and managed early warning systems (CBMEWS), integrated contingency plans, re-engineering of vulnerable infrastructure and other resilience building interventions14 developed and implemented. This output will focus on developing systems and protocols for early warning, development & operationalization of the integrated contingency plan(s)15 and application of re-engineering standards, especially for critical public infrastructure (e.g. evacuation centers) which may

8 Sectoral impact models are currently in various stages (final, under development, under refinement). 9 The probabilistic approach will be used, incorporating or factoring the downscaled climate scenarios produced by the Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical & Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA) of the Department of Science & Technology. 10 Produced by DOST with academic institutions like the University of the Philippines 11 Climex db 12 Local academic institutions which will support the target LGUs in capacity development and research needs on DRR-CCA; normally centers of excellence on issue(s) being addressed. 13 This is a risk management project implemented in Typhoons Sendong, Pablo and Haiyan affected areas in the course of their recovery and re-development, implemented by the Climate Change Commission with other risk management agencies, under the guidance of UNDP and with financial support from the Australian Government. 14 e.g. Ecosystems enhancement/rehabilitation such as mangroves re-planting. 15 Enabling the LGUs around a common risk source, e.g. riverine flooding, coastal storm surge, to plan in an integrated fashion.

Page 5 of 12

now be the norm for vulnerable countries like the Philippines. This output will also facilitate the take up of risk reducing/mitigating interventions like ecosystems enhancement through practices like mangrove re-planting, upland reforestation, etc.. Using the hazard maps and the exposure data gathered under Output 1, this output will support LGUs to produce LGU-specific and inter-LGU integrated contingency plans, community/barangay-based and managed early warning systems (CBMEWS) for critical hazards with improved local weather and hazard advisories, coupled with functional coordination mechanisms for disaster preparedness and response. Integrated CBMEWS for cities and municipalities with common risk source(s) will be developed and operationalized. The early warning system(s) to be chosen will be least cost and simple, not requiring sophisticated, costly instrumentation, but duly tested and proven to function effectively. The LGU(s) will have overall accountability for the CBMEWS while operation and maintenance will be the responsibility of the host community/barangay. The maintenance plans for the CBMEWS will be drawn up by LGUs with technical assistance from the relevant risk management agencies (e.g. PAGASA, PHIVOLCS, MGB). The CBMEWS will be established and tested in strategic areas around the risk source. Intensive Information, Education and Communications (IEC) campaigns, including drills and rapid assessments of the integrity/adaptive capacity of structures to the hazards of concern will also be undertaken under this output. Likewise, partnerships with Civil Society Organizations, such as the DRRNET Philippines, shall be facilitated, to enable preparation and participation of communities to progress faster. Using the results of the climate/disaster risk and vulnerability assessment, mitigation measures will be identified to manage inherent risks from natural hazards. In particular, new engineering standards16 formulated based on the country’s experiences from recent disaster situations like Typhoon Haiyan, will be communicated and applied. A menu of re-engineering options for LGUs will be developed and offered as basis for an anticipatory strategy to address the vulnerability of local infrastructure. Re-engineering standards for critical facilities will be applied immediately such as in the construction of, at least, 1 inter-LGU evacuation center. Component C: COMPETENCY DEVELOPMENT Output 3: Competencies of local governments and critical partners17 improved to deal with the disaster risks of multi-hazards, including those from climate change and general level of awareness and competencies of vulnerable communities and other local stakeholders increased to deal with disaster and climate change risks. This output will focus on developing the competencies of LGU planners and other concerned stakeholders like the academe, civil society organizations and the business sector, among others, on mainstreaming disaster risk reduction/climate change adaptation in all relevant planning, programming, regulatory and implementation spheres and processes at the local level in a “learning by doing approach.” The major indicator(s) for Output 3 will be compliance with competency standards to be set by the national government18 and the risk based CLUPs and CDPs to be produced by all target LGUs, as well as, contingency plans that work and regulatory processes that are able to impose risk based regulations such as zoning ordinances. Among the knowledge and skills that will be developed are: (a) basic knowledge on linkages of climate, disasters and development, disaster risk and climate change vulnerability assessment; b.) skills on geo-referenced ecological and risk profiling of the municipalities; (c) skills on the preparation or updating of climate adjusted multi-hazard maps; (d) skills to undertake climate and disaster risk assessments; (e) climate and disaster risk-sensitive land use and sectoral development planning; (f) skills on developing &

16 Being developed in risk management projects like Climate Twin Phoenix-RAPID 17 Local academic institutions which can also act as “anchor” or centers of excellence on DRR-CCA related researches and capacity development. 18 Competency standards that will be set by the concerned oversight agencies/mechanisms such as the Office of Civil Defence on behalf of the NDRRMC and the Climate Change Commission.

Page 6 of 12

implementing priority mitigation measures such as integrated contingency planning, community based and managed early warning system(s), re-engineering of infrastructure and settlements19 for sustainability, and (g) knowledge management. This output will not only raise the general level of awareness of the affected communities/barangays but will also endeavor to develop their skills to use the empirical information produced in Output 1, such that they become active and competent participants in the over-all disaster risk management of their localities. In the process, civil society partners and community leaders and vulnerable sectors, particularly women and youth groups, will be trained to participate at the planning and execution levels of DRRM and CCA plans, programmes and projects. Community level monitoring of local environmental indicators will be developed on which these groups will be trained. Component D: DRR and CCA MAINSTREAMING IN PLANNING, PROGRAMMING, REGULATORY AND IMPLEMENTATION PROCESSES Output 4. DRR/CCA mainstreamed into land use, development plans and investment programs at the national and local level. Under this output, all target LGUs will be provided technical assistance in formulating/updating their respective plans (CLUPs, CDPs, LDIPs, AIPs) utilizing the methodology prescribed in HLURB’s Supplemental Guidelines on Mainstreaming Climate and Disaster Risks in the CLUPs, which was produced under Project Climate Twin Phoenix. The provinces’ DRR/CCA-Enhanced Provincial Development and Physical Framework Plans (PDPFP) 20will provide the broader perspective for the climate and disaster risk-sensitive CLUPs of the LGUs. Relevant consultative mechanisms and approving bodies such as the Sangguniang Bayan, Regional and Provincial Development Councils will be duly capacitated and their protocols updated. Component E: ADDRESSING RESIDUAL RISKS Output 5: Risk sharing/transfer mechanisms applied. Recognizing that there is no such thing as “zero risk” especially in such a vulnerable country as the Philippines and that no amount of disaster risk reduction/ climate change adaptation will eliminate the possibility of disasters, Output 5 will enable and facilitate the take up of risk sharing/transfer mechanisms (e.g. weather based/multi-peril insurance) for the poorest and most vulnerable, especially those who are dependent on natural resources in the study area such as the fisher-folk and small farmers. Component F: KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT Output 6: Knowledge management on disaster risk reduction and management and climate change adaptation developed and implemented. At the heart of a vibrant and sustainable initiative on whatever concern is a continuing information and knowledge exchange among stakeholders and their access to evolving information and knowledge. It is important to have a system of managing relevant information and knowledge on DRR CCA which are pre-existing, generated during and continue to be generated after the roll out endeavor. The LGUs and other local actors must have access to a mechanism which will enable them to access and share critical information

19 Will focus on setting applicable standards. 20 Produced for 74 provinces under the NEDA implemented, UNDP managed Integrating DRRCCA Project with financial support from the Governments of Australia and New Zealand and the UN MDGF DRR-CCA project funded by Spain

Page 7 of 12

and knowledge. DRR-CCA management is an evolving concern, hence “operational” knowledge is still scanty. However, knowledge can accumulate very fast and for optimum utility, must be disseminated or accessed in a timely manner. A knowledge management system which can serve this roll out process, as well as, continue to assist DRR-CCA stakeholders in a continuous manner over the long term, must be set up. A KM system will be designed and established for this purpose. A national focal institution will be chosen for the lead coordination role, as well as, KM entities, which, all together, will make up the “core” of a national KM network. These KM entities will “anchor” the KM hub per region, which in, turn, will comprise KM related institutions. This system will have the capability of eliciting DRR-CCA information and knowledge bottom up from the communities and the capacity to channel information and knowledge from the international to local levels. 5. IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS AND TIMETABLE Implementation of this national programme will take off from on-going and past initiatives on DRR-CCA implemented by the Climate Change Commission21, the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (NDRRMC) through the Office of Civil Defense22, and, the National Economic & Development Authority23. First phase of the rollout will be implemented over a period of 3 years, commencing in 2016 to 2018. This initial phase will prioritize Climate/Disaster Risk Assessment and Exposure Database establishment toward completion of DRRCCA-enhanced CLUPs and CDPs; setting up of vital DRRCCA measures - CBMEWS, ICP and Coordination Mechanisms; and C/DRM Competency Development of Critical Partners (e.g. anchor academic institutions) who will train LGUs and other key stakeholders in target areas. The selection of target LGUs at city/municipality level should consider contiguous areas sharing the same risk sources within a river basin or coastal area. The indicative schedule is provided in Annex A. The implementation of this national programme will be led and overseen by the Climate Change Commission, in close coordination with key oversight agencies of NDRRMC and NEDA, with the production of outputs to be undertaken/led by the relevant agencies, e.g DOST for CBMEWS for flood(s), storm surge, etc.; contingency planning by OCD; HLURB for CLUPs. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) will support this national roll out, managing the technical and financial inputs of development partners and the GoP for cost-effective, coherent and harmonized results. 6. BUDGET The estimated budget needed for the initial phase of the national roll out programme for the first 300 LGUs (city/municipality level), covering Components A-D is PhP 9.411 Billion or USD 200.24 Million. The breakdown is provided in Annex A. The estimate is based on the per unit cost of expenditure items, per experience of GoP implemented projects such as the Twin Phoenix and ReBUILD which used the methodologies and framework proposed in this undertaking. Funding for this initial phase of the national roll- out will be sourced from the national budget, as well as, contributions by interested bilateral and multilateral partners. For Component E, the application of risk transfer/ sharing mechanisms through the provision of non-life micro-insurance products for the low-income sector on a national scale, at least PhP 103.9 Billion or 2.36 Billion USD, equivalent to 1 year worth of premiums will be required initially (Annex B). This will require work on a national policy and institutional

21 Twin Phoenix/ReBUILD 22 “DRR/ CCA Standardization Project”; GMMA READY 23 “Integrating DRR-CCA in Local Development Planning”

Page 8 of 12

arrangements to enable coverage of the most vulnerable population on a sustainable basis. 24 For Component F, the establishment of a KM system and network comprising a central station, 17 regional hubs and 81 local KM centers (for each province) is estimated to entail PhP 1.18 Billion or USD 24.8 Million at the outset, with an expected annual operational cost of PhP 651 Million or USD 14.8 Million (Annex B).

24 Economic upliftment is projected to be an important strategy for vulnerability reduction and developing resilience, enabling vulnerable communities to be socioeconomically independent, able to afford risk management measures like insurance.

Page 9 of 12

Annex A

# Rollout Components Amount (PhP 47: USD1)

PhP USD Remarks

A. Risk Analysis of Cities and Municipalities

1 C/DR Assessment and Exposure Database Establishment

Y1 2016 Y3 2017 Y4 2018

1.1

Climate/Disaster Exposure Database established

2,550,000.00 54,255.32 per LGU

1.2

Climate-adjusted hazard maps produced25 (assumption: spatial scope of 5 contiguous LGUs in 1 province sharing a common risk source/(sub) riverbasin or coastal/baywide approach; Flood, SS, SW and RIL hazards; downscaled CC projections; GIS specialist)

40,050,000.00 852,127.66 Lump sum cost per 5 LGUs in 1 province

1.3

Climate/Disaster Risk and Vulnerability Assessment & Sectoral VA Assessments completed (assumption: no development of new tools/methodology – PCTP/ReBUILD models/outputs utilized)

3,800,000.00 80,851.06 per LGU

Sub-Total 1a - per LGU 6,350,000.00 135,106.38

Sub-Total 1b - multihazard mapping per 5 LGUs in 1 province

40,050,000.00 852,127.66

B. Mitigation

2 Priority DRRCCA measures - CBMEWS, ICP and Coordination Mechanisms Establishment

2.1

Community based and managed early warning systems (low-cost)26

740,000.00 15,744.68

per LGU

2.2

Inter-agency/Multi-sectoral coordination mechanisms for disaster preparedness and response designed

1,000,000.00 21,276.60 per LGU

2.3

Integrated Contingency Plan(s) developed and tested; plans for ICP updating instituted

1,000,000.00 21,276.60 per LGU

2.4

Protocols for drills updated and conduct of drills undertaken

860,000.00 18,297.87 per LGU

2.5

1 model inter-LGU multipurpose evacuation center constructed (assumption: to serve 5 contiguous LGUs in 1 province, land acquisition c/o Government)

30,000,000.00 638,297.87 1 center

Sub-Total 2a - per LGU 3,600,000.00 76,595.74

Sub-Total 2b – 1 model inter-LGU multipurpose evacuation center27

30,000,000.00 638,297.87

25 Second level iteration with the climate change projections incorporated into the risk analysis 26 If more advanced or state of the art technology such as an automated flood forecasting and early warning system is preferred, a full telemetered network to support existing government hydromet stations is estimated at 270,000 USD. 27 To be excluded from the total estimate of the initial phase

Page 10 of 12

# Rollout Components Amount (PhP 47: USD1)

PhP USD Remarks

C. Competency Development of LGUs and critical partners

3 C/DRM Competency Development

3.1

Capacity assessment of LGUs and critical partners

100,000.00 2,127.66 per LGU

3.2

C/DRM competency development programme formulated and Trainings of Trainers conducted for lead academic partners (assumption: 1 lead academic institution to be selected per 5 contiguous LGUs in 1 province)

1,250,000.00 26,595.74 Lump sum cost for 1 academe serving 5 LGUs in 1 province

3.3

C/DRM competency development programme implemented for LGUs and critical partners

1,500,000.00 31,914.89 per LGU

3.4

Awareness of general population of selected stakeholders within and surrounding the selected river basins raised

1,500,000.00 31,914.89 per LGU

Sub-Total 3a - per LGU 3,100,000.00 65,957.45

Sub-Total 3b – C/DRM CD programme formulation and ToT for 1 academic institution covering 5 contiguous LGUs/province

1,500,000.00 31,914.89

D. DRRCCA Mainstreaming in Planning , Programming, Regulatory and Implementation Processes

4. DRRCCA mainstreamed in CLUPs and CDPs

4.1

DRR/CCA-enhanced CLUPs produced (assumption: estimated cost of Land Use Specialist shared by 5 contiguous LGUs)

2,310,000.00 49,148.94 per LGU

4.2

DRR/CCA-enhanced CDPs produced (assumption: estimated cost of Land Use Specialist shared by 5 contiguous LGUs)

2,310,000.00 49,148.94 per LGU

Sub-Total 4 – per LGU 4,620,000.00 98,297.87

Sub-Total of Outputs 1a, 2a, 3a and 4 per LGU 17,670,000.00 375,957.45

Sub-Total of Outputs 1a, 2a, 3a and 4 for 5 contiguous LGUs/ province

88,350,000.00 1,879,787.23

Sub-Total 1b and 3b - multihazard mapping per province 41,550,000.00 884,042.55

Project Management (regional level) at 15% 19,485,000.00 414,574.47

TOTAL per province, covering 5 LGUs with PM Cost 149,385,000.00 3,178,404.26

UNDP GMS Cost at 5% 7,469,250.00 158,920.21

TOTAL 156,854,250.00 3,337,324.47

Estimated average cost per LGU 31,370,850.00 635,680.85

Page 11 of 12

# Rollout Components Amount (PhP 47: USD1)

PhP USD Remarks

Estimated TOTAL for 300 LGUs 9,411,255,000.00

200,239,468

Annex B For the Risk Sharing/Risk Transfer Mechanisms: Poverty incidence among Filipinos in the first semester of 2014 was estimated at 25.8 percent28 (or about 25.8 Million Filipinos29), according to the latest release of the National Statistical Coordination Board. This sizable segment of the population is most vulnerable to unforeseen and unfortunate events such as death, illness, injury, and loss of property, situations that are further aggravated by disaster risks from natural hazards. Risk protection is thus a recognized need especially for the low-income and informal sectors. According to the Insurance Commission, about 25 million people are now covered by life insurance30. The penetration rate of life insurance marked sustained increase for the past five years as shown below. This was attributed to the increase in total premium income generated by the insurance industry, with higher sales of variable life products. However, at 1.89%, this is still low compared to the regional average penetration rate of 4.2% among ASEAN countries31. The average amount of insurance spent by each person in the Philippines is estimated at PhP 1,592 (36 USD) in 2012. Of this amount, about 82% was spent on life insurance and only about 18% for nonlife insurance. The total amount spent on insurance was only 1.2% of per capita income32. While total sum insured for life is about 35% of GDP, only 24.43% of the population is covered with life insurance33. Together with the information that the increase in premium income during the year came mostly from variable insurance premiums, this seemingly indicates that those who are insured have relatively large amount of insurance cover and that they mostly must have come from the higher-income sector.34 Following the definition of microinsurance as an insurance activity for the low-income sector, the Insurance Commission issued the Regulation for the Provision of Microinsurance Products and Services through Memorandum Circular 01-2010, which sets the limit of premium cost of microinsurance products (should not exceed 5% of current daily minimum

28http://www.nscb.gov.ph/pressreleases/2015/PSA-20150306-SS2-01_poverty.asp#sthash.CWZGCTGI.dpuf 29 http://www.rappler.com/nation/64465-100-millionth-filipino-born 30 http://www.asiainsurancereview.com/Magazine/ReadMagazineArticle?aid=35421 31 http://www.manilatimes.net/insurers-face-largely-untapped-integrated-asean-market/98327/ dated May 21, 2014. 32 http://www.insurance.gov.ph/_@dmin/upload/reports/AR2012.pdf 33 http://www.insurance.gov.ph/_@dmin/upload/reports/AR2012.pdf 34 http://adb.org/sites/default/files/pub/2013/assessment-microinsurance-service-for-poor.pdf

Page 12 of 12

wage for nonagricultural workers in Metro Manila) and the maximum amount of benefits (not more than 500 times of said daily minimum wage).35 This translates to: a. Maximum cost of premium on a daily basis:

PhP 481.0036 x 0.05 = PhP 24.05 / day or approximately a monthly rate of PhP 481 (11

USD) at 20 days/month for each insured person

b. Maximum amount of benefits: PhP 481.00 x 500 = PhP 240,500 (5,466 USD) for each insured person, assumed coverage of 500 days or 16.5 months

As of July 2012, about 7.8 million have been reportedly insured, including dependents, under various microinsurance products, which include (i) life insurance such as term life and voluntary group life insurance; and (ii) nonlife insurance that adopts the nonlife prototype policy contract, which is a first-loss insurance (financial assistance) covering any of such identified perils as fire, flood, typhoon, accidental death, lightning, etc. Nonlife product is also referred as bahay, buhay, kabuhayan product37. With these information, and assuming that 7.8 million of the 25.8 million38 poor Filipinos are insured, the remaining 18 million poor Filipinos need to be targeted. Roughly, this will require at least PhP 103.9 Billion or 2.36 Billion USD, equivalent to 1 year worth of premiums to cover 18 million of the poorest and most vulnerable. Detailed studies on the risk transfer/sharing mechanisms for the benefit of the underserved sector will need to be undertaken to ensure their access to and genuine coverage from a varied array of needs-based microinsurance products over the long term. For the DRRCCA KM System Establishment: Initial Infrastructure & KM tools Annual Operation & Maintenance

National KM Center (1) 30,000,000 12,000,000

Regional KM Hubs for 17 Regions 340,000,000 153,000,000

Local KM Centers (81 provinces) 810,000,000 486,000,000

Total (PhP) 1,180,000,000 651,000,000

Total (USD)

26,818,182

14,795,455

35https://a2ii.org/fileadmin/data_storage/documents/internal_documents/Case_Study_Philippines_on_Microinsurance_market_development_FINAL.pdf, Page 7 36 http://www.nwpc.dole.gov.ph/pages/statistics/latest_wo.html Summary of Latest Wage Orders and Implementing Rules Issued by The Regional Boards (As of 20 March 2015) 37 http://adb.org/sites/default/files/pub/2013/assessment-microinsurance-service-for-poor.pdf 38http://www.nscb.gov.ph/pressreleases/2015/PSA-20150306-SS2-01_poverty.asp#sthash.CWZGCTGI.dpuf