NEDA FINAL INTEGRATING DRR IN DEVELOPMENT PLANNING · CALAMITY FUND APPROPRIATIONS VS. COST OF DAMAGE ... Development Planning Process PlanningPlanning Investment Programming Investment

1

LINKING LINKING DISASTER RISK REDUCTION DISASTER RISK REDUCTION

TO DEVELOPMENT PLANNINGTO DEVELOPMENT PLANNING

SUSAN RACHEL G. JOSEDirector III and Officer-in-Charge

Regional Development Coordination StaffNational Economic and Development Authority

2

OutlineOutline• The Case for DRR-Development

Planning Linkage• Development Planning System of the

Philippines • Current Practices • Perspectives for Strengthening DRR-

Development Planning Links: The NEDA-UNDP-EC Mainstreaming Technical Assistance

3

The case for DRR The case for DRR and and DevPlanningDevPlanning LinkageLinkage

4

Disaster losses among Disaster losses among developing countriesdeveloping countries

Source: Munich ReSource: Munich ReWBWB

5

Estimated Damage of Disasters Estimated Damage of Disasters (In M P @ 2000 Prices)(In M P @ 2000 Prices)

010,00020,00030,00040,00050,00060,00070,00080,000

19 70 19 71 19 72 19 73 19 74 19 75 19 76 19 77 19 78 19 79 19 8 0 19 8 1 19 8 2 19 8 319 8 4 19 8 5 19 8 6 19 8 7 19 8 8 19 8 9 19 9 0 19 9 1 19 9 2 19 9 3 19 9 4 19 9 5 19 9 6 19 9 719 9 8 19 9 9 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 3 2 0 0 4 2 0 0 5 2 0 0 6

On the average, annual direct damage is P15 B

Pinatubo Eruption(1991)

15 disasters (1978)

Droughts(1984; 1987)

1.2% of GDP

0.9% of GDP

Luzon Earthquake(1990)

For typhoons, average of 0.5% of GDP every year

Source: WBSource: WB--NDCC NDCC

6

Loss of Lives from DisastersLoss of Lives from Disasters

01000200030004000500060007000

1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 19901991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20012002 2003 2004 2005 2006

7

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000

APPROPRIATIONS COST OF DAMAGE

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 20002001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

CALAMITY FUND APPROPRIATIONS VS. CALAMITY FUND APPROPRIATIONS VS. COST OF DAMAGE COST OF DAMAGE

(1991(1991--2007)*2007)*

*January to June 2007. Appropriations include 8 billion CARE fund

8

1 1 Billion PesosBillion Pesos

ClassroomsClassrooms2,5002,500 Elementary levelElementary level2,1742,174 Secondary levelSecondary level

161.29161.29 kilometers of new farmkilometers of new farm--toto--market roadsmarket roads

20,00020,000 Core Resettlement UnitsCore Resettlement Units

50,00050,000 Level III water supply projectsLevel III water supply projects

9

Development GoalsDevelopment Goals

Improving indicators of social and economic development

Short-term

Meeting the Millennium development Goals

Medium-term

Sustainable human development

Long-term

10

the pathway that we taketowards achieving

developmentdevelopment goals can lead to disastercan lead to disaster, just as disaster can interrupt disaster can interrupt the

development development process

11

disaster riskdisaster riskis a product of

inappropriate development choicesinappropriate development choices, just as much as it is a threat for

future development gainsfuture development gains

12

DisasterDisaster--Development NexusDevelopment Nexus

Building community cohesion, recognizing excluded individuals or social groups (such as women), and providing opportunities for greater involvement in decision making, enhanced educational and health capacity increases resiliency

•Access to adequate drinking water, food waste management and a secure dwelling increases people’s resiliency•Trade and technology can reduce proverty•Investing in financial mechanisms and social security can cushion against vulnerability

Development reduces disaster risk

Development paths generating cultural norms that promote social isolation or political exclusion

•Unsustainable development practices that create wealth for some at the expense of unsafe working or living conditions for others or degrade the environment

Development causes disaster risk

•Destruction of health or education infrastructure and personnel•Death, disablement or migration of key social actors leading to erosion of social capital

•Destruction of fixed assets•Loss of production capacity, market access or material inputs•Damage to transport, communications or energy infrastructure•Erosion of livelihoods, savings and physical capital

Disaster limits development

Social DevelopmentEconomic Development

Source: UNDP: Reducing Disaster Risk, A Challenge for DevelopmenSource: UNDP: Reducing Disaster Risk, A Challenge for Developmentt

13

Paradigm ShiftParadigm Shift

Disaster Response

Disaster RiskReduction

EmergencySpecialists, Hazard

Scientists

Risks Specialists, Development Planners & Economic Managers

14

Global Policy ContextHyogo Framework Action PrioritiesHyogo Framework Action Priorities

1. Ensure that disaster reduction is a national and local priority with a strong institutional basis for implementation.

2. Identify, assess and monitor disaster risks and enhance early warning

3. Use knowledge, innovation and education to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels

4.4. Reduce the underlying risk factorsReduce the underlying risk factors5. Strengthen disaster preparedness for

effective response at all levels

15

Mitigation

Rehabilitation Response

Preparedness

Continuing Implementation DRM Projects READY Project – 27 ProvGOP Multi-Hazard Mapg – 16 ProvPIP Project (DPWH & DepEd)NEDA Mainstreaming DRR in Dev’t Plans

Response Preparedness

Capacity Building

Build disaster resilient infrastructure and communities

Rebuild houses and restore damaged infrastructure

Address the immediate need for alternative livelihood

Strengthen disaster risk reduction measures

Strengthen institutional capacity

Provide for business continuity

Disaster Risk Management Focus vs. Disaster Risk Management Focus vs. Disaster ResponseDisaster Response

Pre-Event

Post-Event

Continuing Implementation of NDCC 4-pt Plan of ActionECLAC MethodologyOther NDCC Priorities

Flood Mitigation MasterplanKeeping the Phils. Bird-Flu FreeFormulation of a Comprehensive DRM Framework

Source: NDCC

16

Development Planning System Development Planning System of the Philippinesof the Philippines

17

Development Planning ProcessDevelopment Planning Process

PlanningPlanning Investment ProgrammingInvestment

ProgrammingRevenue

GenerationRevenue

Generation

Project Evaluation & Development

Project Evaluation & Development

BudgetingBudgeting

ExpenditureManagementExpenditureManagement

Programs/Projects/ Activities (PPAs)

ImplementationImplementation

Monitoring &ImplementationMonitoring &

Implementation

18

Development PlanningDevelopment PlanningProcess & OutputsProcess & Outputs

C/MDPC/MDPCLUP CLUP

NationalNationalExpenditureExpenditure

ProgramProgram

National/National/RegionalRegional

ProvincialProvincial

City/MunicipalCity/Municipal

19

Development PlansDevelopment Plans

Multisectoral plan which embodies the vision, sectoral goals, objectives, development strategies and policies within the medium-termIt contains corresponding programs, projects and activities which serve as primary inputs to investment programming

20

Physical Framework PlanPhysical Framework Plan

• 30-year land use policy agenda that synchronizes concerns for sustainable land use, economic growth and social equity

• Provides policy directions and options in the allocation and utilization land resources

• Covers proposals for settlements development, production land use, protection land use and infrastructure development

21

Investment ProgramsInvestment Programs

Investment schedule and financing plan consisting of a prioritized list of programs, projects and activities derived from the development plans and matched with financing resourcesannual component, AIP, is a major input for budgeting

22

Organizational Structure for Development Planning

NationalNational

Regional Regional

LocalLocal

NEDA BoardNEDA BoardNLUCNLUC

RDCRDCRLUCRLUC

Local Local DCsDCsPLUCsPLUCs

NEDA SecretariatNEDA Secretariat

NEDA Regional Office NEDA Regional Office (NRO)(NRO)

Provincial/City/Provincial/City/Municipal Planning & Municipal Planning & Development OfficeDevelopment Office

SanggunianSanggunian

23

GUIDELINES ON PROVINCIAL/LOCAL PLANNING EXPENDITURE MANAGEMENT

&

••••

MTPDIP

PDPFPPDIP/AIPAdditional sources ofrevenues

LDIP

RDIPRDP/RPFP

City/Municipal

DevelopmentPlan

MTPDP/NFPPMTPIP

PDPFP PDIP/AIP

City/ Municipal

DIP

RDIPRDP/RPFP

••••Annual budgetDisbursementcontrol system

Provincial Expenditure

Program

MTPDP/NFPP ••

Multi -yrexpend planAnnual budgetDisbursementcontrol system

National Expenditure

Program

••••Annual budgetDisbursementcontrol system

City/Municipal Expenditure Program

NEDANEDA DBMDBM

DILGDILG

DOFDOF

RevenueGeneration & Administration

Budgetary Issuances

PLPEMGuides

CDP Manual

City/Municipal Dev’tPlans

JMC No. 1 (s. 2007)JMC No. 1 (s. 2007)

25

Current PracticesCurrent Practices

26

DRR in the MTPDP/SERDRR in the MTPDP/SERChapter 23: Environment and Natural Resources

Thrust 5: Mitigate the occurrence of natural disasters to prevent the loss of lives and properties

• Geohazard mapping

• Gephazard assessment including Leyte, Biliran, Surigao del Sur and Surigao del Norte

• Identification of resettlement sites in Ginsaugon, Southern Leyte

• Implementation of structural measures: Mt. Pinatubo Hazard Urgent Mitigation Project

• Construction and rehabilitation of drainage facilities by DPWH and MMDA

• Flood management projects facilitated (ROW resolution, ICC processing)

27

DRR in the MTPDP/SERDRR in the MTPDP/SERChapter 12:Responding to the Basic Needs of the

Poor

Protection of the Vulnerable

• Periodic risk assessments

• Updating of land use policy based on risk assessments

• Disaster/management orientation/training for LGUs

• Institutionalization of community-based disaster risk management

• Advocacy of passage of the DRM bill, “An Act Strengthening the Philippine Disaster Risk Management Capability, Appropriating Funds Thereof and for Other Purposes

• Disaster response, relief and rehabilitation

28

DRR in the MTPDP/SERDRR in the MTPDP/SERChapter 12:Responding to the Basic Needs of the

Poor

Protection of the Vulnerable (continued…)

• Emergency loan from GSIS and loan moratorium by GSIS and SSS

• Coordinated disaster recovery plan to ensure undisrupted operations or timely opening of financial sector institutions after a catastrophic event

Development concern raised:

• need for an overall framework for disaster smanagement

• Better and functional coordination system among national and local governments, donors, private sector and communities

• Adequate and working human and institutional capacities on DRM at both national and local levels

29

DRR in the MTPDP/SERDRR in the MTPDP/SERChapter 15: Peace and Order

Organization of community-based institutions (CBIs), which include Disaster Coordinating Councils, in the LGUs which are instrumental in better maintenance of peace and order and public safety in the communities.

Chapter 18: Science and Technology

Priority areas in ICT include better delivery of critical information on disaster mitigation

30

DRR in the MTPDP/SERDRR in the MTPDP/SERChapter 23: Defense Against Threat to National

Security

Disaster Response

• Implementation of the forecasting capabilities of PAGASA and PHIVOLCS under the close supervision and coordination with DOST

• Launching of public awareness program on disaster preparrredness

• Capacity building for LGUs

• Government-Private Sector collaboration in relief and rehabilitation

• Disaster preparedness Capacities of REINA to Geologic and Meteorological Hazards

• Hazards Mapping and Assessment for Effective Community-based DRM (READY)

31

DRM Policies/Strategies in the NFPPDRM Policies/Strategies in the NFPP

• Identify and demarcate boundaries of hazard-prone areas on the ground

• In general, areas that pose extreme and frequent danger to the most number of people, whether direct or indirect, should be given priority in resolving land use conflicts

• Establish and disseminate standard parameters and databases that will aid in the identification and management of high-risk, hazard-prone areas and in the application of appropriate planning measures

• Identify and implement appropriate physical planning measures as part of comprehensive disaster mitigation plans for hazard-prone areas

32

DRM Policies/Strategies in the NFPPDRM Policies/Strategies in the NFPP

• Increase public awareness on the value of disaster preparedness

• Increase public participation in the conservation and disaster mitigation efforts within their communities

• Others

- Assess areas in terms of their vulnerability to natural hazards, determine the risks involved and make appropriate decisions on how the development of these areas should be planned and implemented

- Early warning for tsunamis

- Hazard zonation maps showing areas prone to particular hazards featuring permanent danger zones

33

NFPP Policies incorporated in RPFPs

RegionNFPP Basic Policy/Strategy

CAR, 1, 4A,4B, 5, 6, 11

Fostering public awareness on the value of disaster preparedness

All except Regs. 7, 9

Identification, implementation of planning appropriate measures as part of mitigation plans for hazard-prone areas

All, except Regs. 3, 8, 9

Identification, mapping and delineation of hazard-prone areas

34

DRR in DRR in RDPsRDPs

In general, implicit policies/strategies on DRR were indicated

DRR concerns are webbed in the environment, physical planning aspects of the RDP

DRR included as sub-section of Environmental Protection (e.g., Forest Management), Infrastructure Development (Flood control and Drainage) such as in RDPs of ARMM

In selected regions where disaster-related concerns are eminent, there are separate sections on DRR/DRM, e.g., Central Luzon, Bicol, or where DRR was treated as an issue of governance, e.g.,Davao Region, Caraga

35

Sectoral InitiativesSectoral Initiatives

• DPWH: mainstreaming DRM in their project development cycle for roads and bridges

• DepEd: design of safe schools• DOH: design of safe hospitals• MGB, PAGASA, PHIVOLCS, DA (BSWM),

NAMRIA- hazard mapping, IEC

36

PerspectivesPerspectives for Strengthening DRRfor Strengthening DRR--Development Planning Links at the Development Planning Links at the

SubnationalSubnational Level: Level: The NEDAThe NEDA--UNDPUNDP--EC Technical Assistance on EC Technical Assistance on

MainstreamingMainstreaming

37

• Make available hazard maps and other technical information

• Enhance LGU capacity to institute preventive/mitigating measures

• Prepare DRR enhanced RPFPs

NLUCNLUC’’ss DRR Action AgendaDRR Action Agenda

Strengthen disaster mitigation

38

Why special attention for integrating Why special attention for integrating DRR at the subnational levelDRR at the subnational level

• DRR is a critical part of development plans and programs at all levels of governance

• Subnational means interregional/special areas such as riverbasins and watersheds, regional and provincial/local

• Hazards are location specific• Hazards do not respect political boundaries;

thus efficient to address it at the provincial, regional and interregional levels

• More specific interventions can be designed at the subnational level

• Community participation is critical for success

39

General Framework General Framework

1. Analysis of the Planning EnvironmentExplore the role of natural hazards

and related risks in meeting developmentgoals and objectives

2. Set development objectivesDetermine whether and how to build disaster risk reduction into key

merium- and long-term objectives

3. Define, prioritize and programs interventionsConsider actions to reduce vulnerability to

Natural hazards in designing macroeconomic, structural and social policies and programmes

4. Establish M and E ProceduresInclude DRR in short- and long-term targets and inidcators as relevant , in

particular, capturing impacts of related initiatives on the poor and reduced vulnerabilities and reduced losses

5 Implementation , evaluation and feedbackAssess disaster risk reduction achievements and shortcomings, including adequacy

of initial disaster risk analysis

Significant disaster risk?Significant disaster risk?

YesYes

Adopted (with modifications) from Adopted (with modifications) from ProVentionProVention (2007)(2007)

No further needNo further needto considerto consider

Disaster riskDisaster risk

NoNo

On

goin

g co

nsu

ltat

ion

wit

h s

take

hol

der

s,

On

goin

g co

nsu

ltat

ion

wit

h s

take

hol

der

s,

Incl

udi

ng

rep

rese

nta

tive

s fr

om h

igh

ly v

uln

erab

leIn

clu

din

g re

pre

sen

tati

ves

from

hig

hly

vu

lner

able

segm

ents

of

the

com

mu

nit

yse

gmen

ts o

f th

e co

mm

un

ity

40

Risk Identification, Assessment, Quantification

Goals and Objectives of Risk Management

Evaluation and Risk Management Decisions

• Avoidance or Elimination• Reduction or Mitigation• Sharing or Transfer• Retention

ImplementationEvaluation of Risk Assessments Disaster Reduction DecisionsBest Practices

Expenditure Plan/Budget

Alternative Financing Schemes Risk Transfers (i.e., insurance)

Formulation of DRR Policies, Implementation Tools:

Settlement, Protection, Production and Transportation/

Infrastructure

Incorporate risk concerns

Sustainabledevelopment

Disaster/risk free

Jnstitutional Strengthening

Monitoring & Evaluation

Adoption

Feedback

Feedback










Infrastructure



Disaster/risk free



Adoption

Feedback

Feedback

General Concept General Concept Of DRROf DRR--Plan MainstreamingPlan Mainstreaming

41

Project BriefProject Brief

DIPECHO (Grant) – Euros 350,000/NEDA & UNDP (Counterpart)

Financing

NEDA-RDOUNDP

Implementing Agencies

• Land use planners at the sub-national level• Regional Land Use Committees• Selected Provincial Land Use Committees• ARMM-Regional Economic and

Development Planning Board

Target Beneficiaries

15 June 2007 to 14 May 2008 (11 months) Duration

Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Management in Sub-national Development and Physical Planning in the Philippines

Title

42

OutputsOutputs• Guidelines for Mainstreaming DRR in

Subnational Development and Physical Framework Planning

• Input Studies (e.g., assessing cost effectiveness of DRM measures, alternative financing schemes/risk transfer, technical and communication issues on hazard and vulnerability mapping, inputs to CDRMF)

• DRR-enhanced regional and provincial plans• Trained national, regional and local planners on DRM

Mainstreaming

43










Infrastructure



Disaster/risk free



Adoption

Feedback

Feedback










Infrastructure



Disaster/risk free



Adoption

Feedback

Feedback











Infrastructure



Disaster/risk free



Adoption

Feedback

Feedback










Infrastructure



Disaster/risk free



Adoption

Feedback

Feedback


NDCC Comprehensive Disaster Risk Management FrameworkNDCC Comprehensive Disaster Risk Management Framework

Benchmarking the planning machineryin key areas of mainstreaming:•Policy•Strategy•Geographical Planning•External Relations•Institutional Capacity

(Based on Tearfund Template)

44

Key Areas and Performance IndicatorsKey Areas and Performance Indicators

Policy on disaster risk reduction with realistic achievable goals for mainstreaming understood and accepted.

Policy addresses 3 critical issues:•Ensuring development programs are protected through DRR elements•Ensuring that DRR programs are managed in a developmental manner•Ensuring programs to not increase people’s vulnerability to disasters

Conceptual framework ofrdisaster management available which recognizes vulnerability as contributing to risk of disasters

Wide cross-section of staff engaged in consultative process to inform of policy to mainstream diasater risk

General awareness of disasters including extent of threat

Recognition of need to link development in a coordinated approach to reducing disaster risks

No or little understanding of relevance of DRR to development planning practice

Policy

Level 4Level 3Level 2Level 1Key Area

45

Risk reduction policy endorsed by senior management

Risk reduction policy is reflected in internal and external documents

Policy

Availability of a comprehensive mainstreaming strategy based on conceptual work and policy

The strategy is endorsed by senior management

The strategy is reflected in internal and external documents

A wide cross-section of staff are engaged in consultative process to:•Develop a strategy which mainstreams DRR in operations•Ensure that mainstreaming DRR is part of strategic framework

Ad hoc decision making for DRR is recognized as inadequate

There is widespread awareness of the need to develop a strategi approach to DRR in response to policy directives

DRR is done on an ad hoc basis and there is little or no recognition of the need for strategic approach to reducing risks

Strategy



46

There is ongoing analysis of the disaster environment on any given location (I.e., assessment of hazards, disaster impact, vulnerabilities and risks). This analysis involves perspectives of local communities, NGOs and other stakeholders.

Appropriate risk reduction strategies are developed on the basis of the above and integrated into new geographical plans

Inclusion of disaster risk assessment in national framework

The organization is developing a process to ensure that all planning frameworks include DRR

Widespread understanding of the disaster-risk-vulnerability relationship at relevant geographical levels

Widespread understanding of the need to apply policy commitment to RR within geograohicalplanning including financing support mechanisms

Organization is considering how existing geographical planning tools can be redesigned to take account of hazards, risks and vulnerabilities

Little or no awareness of the need to consider disaster risks within geographical planning

Geographical planning



47

Project cycles routinely incorporate DRR in planning, implementation and evaluation

Recommendations arising from M and E inform project redesign

Where explicit DRR programs are established, these are linked to organizations’humanitarian/development programs

An approach to ensure hazards, risks and vulnerabilities are addressed within project planning, implementation and evaluation according to the local context

Need for reducing disaster risks within every aspect of project cycle management recognized for dual purpose of:•Protecting projects from disaster impact•Ensuring that new projects do not increase disaster risks or enhance vulnerability

•Considering how project cycle management tools can be redesigned to take into account hazards, risks and vulnerabilities

Little or no understanding of importance of addressing hazards, risks and vulnerabilities within project cycle management

Project Cycle Management



48

Supports, enables and invests in capacity development for DRR within its implementing partners

Collaboration with other key players and relevant regional and global coordinating or networking bodies, and information expertise and resources are shared as required. Common policies and strategies may be developed.

“Public face” of the organization reflects its DRR policy and strategy

All relevant stakeholders including implementing partners and collaborating bodies are identified through stakeholders analysis

Linkages are being made with key stakeholders at local, national and international levels to raise awareness of DRR policy and strategy; to develop collaborative work; and to learn from others’ approaches/ research

Organization recognizes that it cannot act alone in the field of DRR

Works independently in DRR and has little or no awareness of the need to collaborate with others

External Relations



49

Institutional capacity is sufficient to support all processes:•Financial resources•Skills and knowledge (staff training and development, materials and appropriate technical support)•Strong commitment and ownership of risk reduction policy and strategy at all levels

•Strong links between CO-Ro staff who have access to services and exchange of information

Plans are being made to develop supportive institutional environment for mainstreaming DRR

Tools are being developed to assess the organization’s progress with mainstreaming

Recognition of the need to develop appropriate capacity including sufficient resources to support the process of mainstreaming risk reduction

Little or no capacity to mainstream DRR, and little or no recognition of the need to increase/develop its financial and human resources for this purpose

Institutional Capacity

Level 4Level 3Level 2Level 1Key AreaKey Areas and Performance IndicatorsKey Areas and Performance Indicators

50

Tools are routinely used independently and comprehensively to assess the organization’s progress with mainstreaming

Institutional Capacity


Source: Tearfund, Mainstreaming DRR: A tool for development organizations


51

Management ArrangementsManagement ArrangementsOverall supervision and policy directions

• Chair: DDG-RDO

• Members: UNDP, ECHO, DILG, OCD, MGB, PAGASA, PHIVOLCS, League of Provinces, 2 RDC Chair, 2 Governors

Project Board

Oversight, monitoring functions

• Delegated to UNDP

Project Assurance

For day-to-day operations, implementation of project activities

• NEDA-RDCS in coordination with UNDP, concerned NEDA Regional Offices and consulting team

• RLUCs/PLUCs

Project Management Team

52

Collaborative ArrangementsCollaborative Arrangements

Collaboration with mapping & risk assessment activities of the ongoing READY Project and other related government initiatives

Project will use multi-hazard maps and risk assessment data from the READY Project

UNDP to provide Rapid Earthquake Damage Assessment System (REDAS) GIS software through the READY Project

53

Potential Pilot AreasPotential Pilot Areas

BenguetBenguet

QuezonQuezonAlbayAlbay

LeyteLeyteSurigao del NorteSurigao del Norte

Surigao del SurSurigao del Sur

54

Susceptibility to Hazards:

Ground rupture, liquefaction, landslides, floods, and erosion

Capacity:

Risk identification – between Barely sufficient and Sufficient

Policies, Structures – Barely Sufficient

Commitment - between Barely sufficient and Sufficient

On going initiatives:

READY Phase 2

Land Susceptibility Mapping

Maps:

Available through PhiVolcs, MGB, BSWM

1. Benguet1. Benguet

55

2. Quezon2. QuezonSusceptibility to Hazards:

Ground rupture, Ground shaking, Liquefaction, Landslides, Volcanic Hazards, Tsunami, Floods

Capacity:Risk identification – between Barely sufficient and SufficientPolicies, Structures – Barely SufficientCommitment - Barely sufficient

Ongoing DRR Initiatives:Disaster Mitigation Measures to Minimize Damages Caused by Natural Hazards (PhiVolcs)Geohazard Mapping (MGB)Capacity Building on Geohazards and Geoharzards Mapping (MGB, UNDP)

Maps:

Available through PhiVolcs, MGB, PAGASA

56

3. Albay3. AlbaySusceptibility to Hazards:

Ground rupture, Ground shaking, Liquefaction, Landslides, Volcanic Hazards, Tsunami, Floods

Capacity:Risk identification –SufficientPolicies, Structures – Very SufficientCommitment – Between Sufficient and Very

Sufficient

Ongoing DRR Initiatives:Socio-Economic and Physical Profile System (NEDA

Region 5/RDC)Rapid Disaster Risk Assessment (Manila

Observatory in partnership with various agencies)Disaster Mitigation Through Enhanced Forecasts

Using Numerical Prediction Products and Satellite Data (PAGASA-DOST-GIA)

Institutionalization of Provincial Disaster Management Office Networking with warning agencies/stakeholders

Integration of DRR in policies/ programs of LGUs

Maps:Available through MGB, PhiVolcs, BSWM

57

4. Leyte4. Leyte Susceptibility to Hazards: Ground Rupture, Ground Shaking, Liquefaction, Earthquake-induced Landslide, Tsunami, Flash floods, Erosion, Storm Surge

Capacity:Risk identification – SufficientPolicies, Structures – SufficientCommitment - Sufficient

Ongoing DRR Initiatives:READY Phase 2MGB National Geohazards Mapping AssessmentVarious IEC Programs Multi-hazard Mapping

Maps:Available through READY, PhiVolcs, MGB, BSWM

58

5. Surigao del Norte5. Surigao del Norte Susceptibility to Hazards:

Ground Rupture, Ground Shaking, Liquefaction, Landslide, Tsunami, Volcanic Hazards, Flash floods, Storm Surge, Mass Movement/Fluvial/Earthquake-related Flooding, ErosionCapacity:

Risk identification – Nearly SufficientPolicies, Structures – Barely SufficientCommitment – Nearly SufficientOngoing DRR Initiatives:READY Phase 2MGB National Geohazards Mapping AssessmentVarious IEC Programs Multi-hazard MappingPhysical/Structural Mitigation

Maps:Available through READY, PhiVolcs, MGB, BSWM

59

6. Surigao del Sur6. Surigao del Sur Susceptibility to Hazards:

Ground Rupture, Earthquake-induced landslide, Erosion

Capacity:Risk identification – Nearly SufficientPolicies, Structures –SufficientCommitment –Sufficient

Ongoing DRR Initiatives:READY Phase 2MGB National GeohazardsMapping AssessmentMultihazard mappingVarious IEC Programs

Maps: Available through READY, PhiVolcs, BSWM

NEDA FINAL INTEGRATING DRR IN DEVELOPMENT PLANNING · CALAMITY FUND APPROPRIATIONS VS. COST OF DAMAGE ... Development Planning Process PlanningPlanning Investment Programming Investment

Documents