ta-8111 ph - revised road map_cleaned

FEBRUARY 2015

DRAFT UMRBPL ECOTOWN GREEN GROWTH ROAD MAP REPORT ADB TA-8111 PHI: Climate Resilience and Green Growth in the Upper Marikina River Basin Protected Landscape: Demonstrating the Eco-town Framework (46225-001) of the Climate Change Commission (CCC)

SEARCA-ERGONS i

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Baseline Information, Vulnerability Assessment and GHG Inventory ........ 2

2.1 Land Cover changes in UMRBPL (2004 and 2012) .................................... 2 2.2 Bio-physical, land use and natural resource conditions .............................. 5 2.3 Over-all household survey results ............................................................... 7 2.4 UMRBPL demographics ............................................................................. 9 2.5 Poverty ....................................................................................................... 9 2.6 Local community adaptive capacity and gender ......................................... 11 2.7 GHG Inventory ........................................................................................... 12 2.8 Natural Resource Accounting (NRA)/Economic Valuation of UMRBPL’s

Forest, Water and Agriculture Resources ................................................... 17

3.0 UMRBPL Climate change scenarios (2020-2050) and potential impacts .... 19 3.1 Climate change projections and potential impacts:

worst case future scenario .......................................................................... 19 3.2 Vulnerability Assessment in the UMRBPL .................................................. 25

4.0 UMRBPL Ecotown Strategic Green Growth Road Map ................................ 56 4.1 UMRBPL Ecotown Strategic ‘Green Growth’ Road Map Methodology ........ 56 4.2 UMRBPL’s multi-criteria variate analysis (MCVA) framework for prioritizing

climate change adaptation and mitigation measures .................................. 58 4.3 Key Implementation Issues and Challenges ............................................... 61

5.0 Proposed UMRBPL Ecotown Green Growth Strategic Road Map (Priority Mitigation and Adaptation Measures) and Proposed Local Climate Change Action Plans (LCCAP) ............................. 62 5.1 Proposed UMRBPL Ecotown Green Growth – Strategic Framework .......... 62 5.2 Vision, Mission and Goal ............................................................................ 63 5.3 Strategies For Green Growth and Climate Resilient Communities .............. 66 5.4 Proposed Green Growth Roadmap Implementation Period (10-year) ......... 74 5.5 UMRBPL Priority Mitigation and Adaptation Measures ............................... 75 5.6 Local climate change action (mitigation and adaptation) plans ................... 82 5.7 Key Implementation Arrangements ............................................................. 82

6.0 Proposed Local Plan Mainstreaming and Implementation Arrangements . 94 6.1 Integration and Mainstreaming of Priority CC Mitigation and

Adaptation Measures in Local Plans and Programs.................................... 94 6.2 Specific Recommendations and Action Points ............................................ 96

7.0 Monitoring and Evaluation ............................................................................ 99 8.0 Estimated Investment Cost/Timetable of UMRBPL Ecotown Green

Growth Road Map (Priority Mitigation and Adaptation Measures) ............. 99 8.1 Priority Adaptation and Mitigation Measures and

Estimated Period of Implementation ........................................................... 100 8.2 Estimated Investment Cost of Priority Adaptation and Mitigation Measures 102


SEARCA-ERGONS ii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Land Cover changes in UMRBPL (2002 and 2012) ........................... 4 Table 2. LGUs and barangays coverage areas inside UMRBPL ...................... 5 Table 3a. Land Use per Sub-river basin ............................................................ 6 Table 3b. Land Use by Municipality ................................................................... 6 Table 4a. Over-all Land Classification of UMRBPL ............................................ 7 Table 4b. Land Classification by LGUs inside the UMRBPL .............................. 7 Table 5. Population, population density and land area ..................................... 10 Table 6. Temperature changes under mid-range in 2050 ................................ 20 Table 7. Potential climate change-related impacts in the Municipality and Barangay level INSIDE the UMRBPL ................................................. 23 Table 8. Potential climate change-related impacts in the Municipality and Barangay level OUTSIDE the UMRBPL ............................................. 24 Table 9. Categorization of LGUs in the UMRBPL in terms of vulnerability ....... 25 Table 10. Project vulnerability types in terms of landslides/erosion and droughts, forestry sector LGUs, UMRBPL, 2030 ............................................... 26 Table 11. Estimating exposure and sensitivity to climate change ....................... 37 Table 12. Estimating vulnerability to climate change .......................................... 37 Table 13. Perceived Changes in Climate Attributes ........................................... 42 Table 14. Summary of Key Mitigation and Adaptation Measures of UMRBPL Green Growth Road Map ................................................... 77 Table 14a. UMRBPL MCA measures based on vulnerability ............................... 79 Table 14b. UMRBPL GHG measures emission reduction .................................... 81 Table 15. Key Vulnerabilities of UMRBPL LGUS in Key Sectoral Areas ............ 85 Table 16. Key Priority Measures in Proposed Local Climate Action Plan of UMRBPL LGUs .................................................................................. 86 Table 17a. Local climate change action (mitigation and adaptation) plan priority activities.......................................................................... 88 Table 17b. Proposed priority GHG emission reduction measures per LGU ......... 92 Table 18. Priority Adaptation Measures ............................................................. 100 Table 19. Priority Mitigation Measures ............................................................... 102 Table 20. Estimated cost of priority adaptation measures .................................. 103 Table 21. Cost Estimate of proposed Mitigation Measures ................................ 104

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. UMRBPL Map .................................................................................... 1 Figure 2. Ecotown Green Growth Component .................................................. 2 Figure 3. New satellite imagery ......................................................................... 2 Figure 4. Land Cover Map of UMRBPL (2002 and 2012) .................................. 3 Figure 5. Population and Density Map .............................................................. 10 Figure 6. Income levels of UMRBPL barangays ................................................ 10 Figure 7. Carbon emission due to electricity consumption in UMRBPL ............. 14 Figure 8. Carbon emission of the LUCF sector, UMRBPL ................................. 15 Figure 9. Methane emission from the agriculture sector in five municipalities ... 16 Figure 10. Estimated CO2 emission from wastes by UMRBPL LGUs ................. 17 Figure 11. Multi-hazards map ............................................................................. 22 Figure 12. Sensitivity level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts in the forestry sector .......................................................................... 27 Figure 13. Exposure level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts in the forestry sector .......................................................................... 27 Figure 14. Adaptive capacity level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts in the forestry sector .......................................................................... 28 Figure 15. Vulnerability level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts


SEARCA-ERGONS iii

in the forestry sector .......................................................................... 28 Figure 16. Adaptive capacity level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts in the agriculture sector ...................................................................... 31 Figure 17. Exposure level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts in the agriculture sector ...................................................................... 31 Figure 18. Sensitivity level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts in the agriculture sector ...................................................................... 32 Figure 19. Vulnerability level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts in the agriculture sector ...................................................................... 32 Figure 20. Exposure level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts on the water sector ............................................................................ 34 Figure 21. Sensitivity level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts on the water sector ............................................................................ 34 Figure 22. Adaptive capacity level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts on the water sector ............................................................................ 35 Figure 23. Vulnerability level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts on the water sector ............................................................................ 35 Figure 24. Vulnerability level of roads and bridges .............................................. 38 Figure 25. Extent of transport facility over land use............................................. 39 Figure 26. Extent of transport network classified according to type land use ...... 40 Figure 27. Extent of transport facilities classified according to level of vulnerability to climate change over land use ............................................................ 40 Figure 28. Satellite image of Marcos Highway segment in Cupang, Antipolo ...... 41 Figure 29. Level of sensitivity and exposure to landslide based on population to landslide .................................................................. 43 Figure 30. Level of sensitivity and exposure to landslide based on population to flooding .................................................................... 44 Figure 31. Level of sensitivity and exposure based on poverty ........................... 45 Figure 32. Female population exposure and sensitivity ....................................... 46 Figure 33. Sensitivity and exposure based on main source of income ................ 47 Figure 34. Adaptive Capacity Index based on education .................................... 48 Figure 35. Adaptive Capacity based on Participation in Community Action ......... 49 Figure 36. Adaptive Capacity Based on Knowledge and Information on Climate Change ............................................................................ 50 Figure 37. Sensitivity and Exposure Index of the Study Area .............................. 51 Figure 38. Adaptive Capacity Index of the Study Area ........................................ 52 Figure 39. Vulnerability Assessment to Climate Change ..................................... 53 Figure 40. Total Projected Population in the Study Area under Different Annual Growth Rates .......................................................... 54 Figure 41. CCC Ecotown Framework ................................................................. 56 Figure 42. Continuum of Development Responses from Development to Climate Change ............................................................................. 60 Figure 43. Strategic framework for climate resilience and green growth in UMRBPL .................................................................. 67 Figure 44. Exposure and sensitivity of female population ................................... 73 Figure 45. Entry-points in Integrating CCA and DRRM at the CLUP Process ..... 95 Figure 46. Integrating CCA/DRRM into the Comprehensive Development Planning (CDP) Process .............................................. 96

LIST OF ANNEXES Annex 1 Stakeholders’ Identified List of Possible Mitigation and Adaptation Measures Annex 2 UMRBPL MCVA 10-point evaluation criteria Annex 3 Priority Adaptation and Mitigation Measures with MCA scores Annex 4 Detailed Estimated Costs for UMRBPL Priority Mitigation and Adaptation Projects


SEARCA-ERGONS iv

LIST OF ACRONYMS ADB Asian Development Bank CC Climate Change CCC Climate Change Commission CSO Civil Society Organization DA Department of Agriculture DAR Department of Agrarian Reform DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources DILG Department of Interior and Local Government DMF Design and Monitoring Framework DOST Department of Science and Technology DRR Disaster Risk Reduction DRRM Disaster Risk Reduction and Management FGD Focus Group Discussion GHG Green House Gas GIS Geographic Information System IP Indigenous People IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change KII Key Informant Interview LDCs Least Developed Countries LGU Local Government Unit LLDA Laguna Lake Development Authority LPG Liquefied Petroleum Gas LRA Land Registration Authority LUCF Land-Use Change and Forestry MCVA Multi-Criteria Variate Analysis MGB Mines and Geosciences Bureau NAMRIA National Mapping and Resource Information Authority NCIP National Commission for Indigenous People NEDA National Economic Development Authority NGAs National Government Agencies NGO Non-Governmental Organization NRM Natural Resources Management PA Protected Area PAGASA Philippine Atmospheric Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration PAMB Protected Area Management Board PASU Protected Area Superintendent PAWCZM Protected Areas Wildlife and Coastal Zone Management PENRO Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Office PPDO Provincial Planning and Development Office PTWG Project Technical Working Group RTD Regional Technical Director SEARCA Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture TA Technical Assistance TWG Technical Working Group UMRBPL Upper Marikina River Basin Projected Landscape UPLB University of the Philippines Los Baños URS University of Rizal System VA Vulnerability Assessment


SEARCA-ERGONS 1

UMRBPL ECOTOWN GREEN GROWTH ROAD MAP

ADB TA-8111 PHI: CLIMATE RESILIENCE AND GREEN GROWTH IN THE UPPER MARIKINA RIVER BASIN PROTECTED LANDSCAPE:

DEMONSTRATING THE ECO-TOWN FRAMEWORK (46225-001)

1.0 Introduction Through Proclamation No. 296 issued by the President of the Philippines on 24 November 2011, the Upper Marikina River Basin was declared a protected area. The proclamation enabled the creation of the Protected Area Management Board (PAMB) lead by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) to administer the Upper Marikina River Basin Protected Landscape (UMRBPL). The Asian Development Bank (ADB) granted the request of the Climate Change Commission (CCC) for a Technical Assistance (TA) to demonstrate the Eco-town Framework in the UMRBPL. The project focuses on the demonstration of the Eco-town Framework and enhancing resilience and green growth in the UMRBPL. One of the main outputs of the ADB TA grant to CCC is the formulation of a strategic UMRBPL Eco-town “green growth road map” as part of the implementation of the country’s National Climate Change Action Plan (NCCAP) adopted in 2011. As espoused in the NCCAP 2011–2028, the implementation of climate change action plans at the local level will be packaged using the concept of ecologically stable and economically resilient towns or Eco-town. As defined in the NCCAP, an Eco-town is a planning unit composed of municipalities or a group of municipalities located within and in the boundaries of critical key biodiversity areas (forest, coastal/marine and fishery, or watersheds), highly vulnerable to climate change risks due to its geography, geographic location, and poverty situation. Under the CCC’s Eco-town Framework (see Figure 2), the ‘green growth’ strategic road map shall be composed of prioritized mitigation and adaptation measures which were decided upon by local stakeholders and partners based on the results and findings of science-based vulnerability assessment (VA) and greenhouse gas (GhG) emissions inventory and the use of a multi-criteria variable analysis (MCVA). The Eco-town ‘green growth’ road map shall also serve as basis for the implementation of local climate change action plans (LCCAP) that would be integrated into the local land use and development plans of the five UMRBPL local government units (LGUs) (Antipolo, Baras, San Mateo, Rodriguez and Tanay). Similarly, from these prioritized mitigation and adaptation measures, the Project shall ‘pilot’ selected green growth and resilience measures in the UMRBPL.

Figure 1. UMRBPL Map


SEARCA-ERGONS 2

Figure 2. Ecotown Green Growth Component

Source: A. Lapiz, Climate Change Commission (CCC) Ecotown Powerpoint presentation, 2012. 2.0 Baseline Information, Vulnerability Assessment and GHG Inventory

2.1 Land Cover changes in UMRBPL (2004 and 2012)

The satellite imagery (December 2012 – False Color Composite) obtained by the Project1 (see Figure 3) showed significant changes in the current land use within the UMRBPL areas. A comparative analysis of the land use/cover maps from 2004 (DENR) and 2012 (ADB-Upper Marikina) showed noticeable expansions in built-up and production (e.g. cultivated and agricultural) areas and reduction of open canopy and close canopy forest areas (see Figure 4). Table 1 shows the estimates in the land cover/use changes in the UMRBPL. It shows significant increases from double to more than seven times in the built-up areas and drastic decreases in open canopy forests from 70% - 100%. Approximately 686 hectares of built up areas were detected and confirmed through ground truthing at the Wawa sub-watershed especially in the Barangay of Pinugay and Cuyambay area. Open canopy forest in the Montalban sub-watershed were gone and converted into crop areas or grassland as a consequence of slash and burn farming and charcoal making as confirmed during the Natural Resource Survey of the area.

1 This is satellite imagery obtained by the Project through Rapid Eye.

Figure 3. New Satellite Imagery


SEARCA-ERGONS 3

The largest gains in built-up areas are in San Mateo (1,750% or 2,500 hectares), Rodriguez (1,007% or 2,805 hectares), Tanay (959% or 1,123 hectares) and Antipolo City (487% or 5,806 hectares). A total of 11,740 hectares of settlement/built-up areas were seen within the UMRBPL LGUs. Likewise, around 12,840 hectares of agricultural/cultivate land uses were converted into non-agricultural uses, presumably settlements/built-area. The largest conversion of agricultural lands to non-agriculture use was in Antipolo City (6,029 hectares), San Mateo (2,502 hectares) and Tanay (2,373 hectares). On the other hand, the widest decline in open canopy forests by land area was in Rodriguez with more than 9,000 hectares lost and Tanay with 1,390 hectares lost. Over the last 10 years, UMRBPL lost a total 12,950 hectares of open and closed canopy forests or an annual deforestation rate of 1,295 hectares which is about half the size of Marikina City. These were either converted into cultivate lands or grasslands. Among the key issues to the drastic changes in land uses/cover in UMRBPL were attributed to increased urban population, resettlement, slash and burn agriculture/kaingin, charcoal-making, and land conversion. Figure 4. Land Cover Map of UMRBPL (2002 and 2012)

Source: DENR (2004) and ADB-UMRBPL Project (2013).


SEARCA-ERGONS 4

Table 1. Land Cover changes in UMRBPL (2002 and 2012)

LGU Land Cover 2002 2012 Difference %

Antipolo City

Arable land, crops mainly cereals and sugar 3,551.90 284.72 (3,267.18) -92

Built-up areas 1,193.21 6,999.27 5,806.06 487

Coconut plantations 505.75 367.25 (138.50) -27

Cultivated area mixed with brushland/grassland 24,518.39 21,893.92 (2,624.47) -11

Grassland, grass covering >70 percent 2,972.47 4,977.45 2,004.98 67

Open canopy, mature trees covering < 50 percent 2,527.22 746.32 (1,780.9)1 -70

Baras

Arable land, crops mainly cereals and sugar 2,151.11 257.35 (1,893.7)6 -88

Built-up areas 227.78 227.78 100

Cultivated area mixed with brushland/grassland 1,999.27 1,957.45 (41.82 ) -2

Grassland, grass covering >70 percent 91.20 91.49 (0.30) 0

Rodriguez

Built-up areas 207.12 2,292.14 2,085.02 1007

Closed canopy, mature trees covering > 50 percent 3,369.40 2,616.35 (753.05) -22

Cultivated area mixed with brushland/grassland 9,988.45 19,224.79 9,236.35 92

Grassland, grass covering >70 percent 234.91 372.81 137.89 59

Open canopy, mature trees covering < 50 percent 11,255.96 2,260.77 (8,995.20) -80

San Mateo

Built-up areas 142.85 2,642.43 2,499.59 1750

Cultivated area mixed with brushland/grassland 3,198.75 2,896.89 (301.86) -9

Open canopy, mature trees covering < 50 percent 183.95 187.72 3.77 2

Arable land, crops mainly cereals and sugar 2,201.50 0.00 (2,201.50) -100

Tanay

Arable land, crops mainly cereals and sugar 1,119.27 373.82 (745.46) -67

Built-up areas 117.14 1,240.11 1,122.98 959

Coconut plantations 55.16 3.85 ( 51.31) -93

Cultivated area mixed with brushland/grassland 18,215.47 16,638.21 (1,577.26) -9

Grassland, grass covering >70 percent 4,491.87 7,131.86 2,639.99 59

Open canopy, mature trees covering < 50 percent 1,751.77 527.91 (1,223.86) -70

Closed canopy, mature trees covering > 50 percent 168.56 (168.56) -100

Total 96,212.64 96,212.64 (0.00) 0

Source: ADB-UMRBPL Ecotown Project, 2013.


SEARCA-ERGONS 5

2.2 Bio-physical, land use and natural resource conditions The main findings indicate that UMRBPL’s rugged physical features, coupled with the uncontrolled and creeping spread of human settlements, are posing constant threats to its natural resources. Physically, UMRBPL covers a total land area of 29,505.8 hectares and encompasses the political boundaries of the City of Antipolo and Municipalities of Baras, Rodriguez, San Mateo, and Tanay, all in the Province of Rizal (see Table 2). Table 2. LGUs and barangays coverage areas inside UMRBPL.

LGU Barangay UMRBPL* Total Area

(ha)** Area in UMRBPL

(%) Area (ha) %

Antipolo City

Calawis 5,426.9

28.60

5,581.12 97.00

Inarawan 13.9 959.90 <1

San Jose 2,971.1 13,787.77 22.00

San Juan 27.9 3,327.69 <1

Total 8,439.7 23,656.48 35.67

Rodriguez (Montalban)

Balite (no data)

42.77

53.88 (no data)

Mascap 410.9 7,576.41 5.42

Puray 16.1 15,437.70 <1

San Isidro 75.5 3,792.00 1.99

San Rafael 595.8 6,061.45 9.82

Total 12,620.9 32,921.44 38.34

San Mateo Pintong Bocawe 306.1 1.04 753.00 40.65

Baras Pinugay (no data) (27.59)

6,059.10 (no data)

Tanay Cuyambay (no data) 5,923.00 (no data)

Total 29,505.8 100 69,313.02 42.57 Source: Comprehensive Upper Marikina River Basin Protected Landscape Management Plan (January 2012), Volume 1 – River Basin Characterization; Volume 2 – The Plan. The Upper Marikina River Basin straddles the headwaters of four major sub-river basins: the sub-river basins of Boso-Boso, Montalban, Tayabasan all flowing westward to Wawa Sub-river Basin. In terms of land use (see Table 3a/b), UMRBPL is dominated by brush and shrub lands which constitute 33.8% (9,965.5 hectares). Protection forest covers 27.9% (8,222.5 hectares) of the area which are mostly located in Montalban Sub-river Basin (5,126.8 hectares) and Tayabasan Sub-river Basin (2,604 hectares). Around 14% (4,216.7 hectares) are devoted to agriculture located mainly in Boso-Boso Sub-river Basin (2,813.6 hectares). Production Forest covers roughly 12% (3,521.2 hectares) with Boso-Boso, Tayabasan, and Wawa Sub-river Basins having approximately 1,000 hectares each. About 12% of the area is grassland of which 1,737.4 hectares are located in Boso-Boso Sub-river Basin and another 1,036 hectares found in Tayabasan Sub-river Basin. By municipality, most of the protection forest is located in the Municipality of Montalban (7,291.8 hectares) with the remaining patches situated in Antipolo (359.1 hectares). However, there are 1,685.3 hectares of production forest in Antipolo and 757.5 hectares in Montalban. The former has 1,828.6 hectares of agricultural lands while the latter has 485.7 hectares. Grassland areas in Antipolo cover a total land area of 1,516.3 hectares while those of


SEARCA-ERGONS 6

Montalban cover 564.6 hectares land area. Only 7.6 hectares of built-up areas are located in Antipolo while 75.6 hectares are located in Montalban. Table 3a. Land Use per Sub-river basin.

Table 3b. Land Use by Municipality.

More than 90% (26,983.3 hectares) of the total land area of the Upper Marikina River Basin is declared as river basin reservation (see Table 4a/b). The alienable and disposable land (A&D) accounts for only 2.5% (746.5 hectares) of the total area while forest reserve covers 3.6% (1,061.2 hectares). About 2.4% (714.8 hectares) are unclassified public forests. Table 4a/b shows that only Boso-Boso Sub-river Basin (124.1 hectares) and Wawa-Sub-river Basin (622.3 hectares) have A&D lands located inside the forest reservation. It implies that those within the boundary of Montalban and Tayabasan Sub-river Basins are all classified as forestland. A sizable area of unclassified public forest is also found within Wawa Sub-river Basin. More than 40% (12,620.9 hectares) of the Upper Marikina River Basin is part of Montalban while 28.6% (8,439.7 hectares) belongs to Antipolo. About 25% (7,259.9 hectares) of the area is subject to conflicting claims between adjacent municipalities. About 4% (1,185.2 hectares) of the area needs to be validated on the ground. Slash and burn farming system (kaingin) is the most prevalent agricultural practice in the UMRBPL. The annual crops raised in the kaingin include corn, rice, vegetables and root crops. Small-scale fruit production of mango (Mangifera indica) and cashew (Anacardium occidentale) is practiced in some areas of UMRBPL. There are also small woodlots of exotic fast growing species such as ipil-ipil (Leucaena leucocephala), mahogany (Swietenia spp.), mangium (Acacia mangium), and yemane (Gmelina arborea). A large expanse of UMRBPL,


SEARCA-ERGONS 7

from the western portion of the Montalban Sub-river Basin down to a greater extent in Antipolo, including some sites at the slopes of the high and low plateau region of Boso-Boso Sub-river Basin are blanketed with Imperata (cogon). Grass fires usually occur in summer months that affect the grassland ecosystems. Dense stands of an endemic, erect bamboo Schizostachyum lumampao locally known as buho occur in pockets in UMRBPL. There are patches of young secondary forests in areas that had been cleared by slash and burn but had been left as fallow and allowed to regenerate. Secondary forest also arises after abandonment of plantations such as yemane (Gmelina arborea). A considerable part of the northeast portion of the UMRBPL, particularly in Brgy. Puray, Rodriguez, still harbors residual stands of lowland forests. In Antipolo City, the last remaining fragments of residual forests are in Libis (496 masl) at the middle slopes of Mt. Amaya and Tayabasan (479 masl) in Mt. Masola. Table 4a. Over-all Land Classification of UMRBPL.

Land Classification Sub-River Basin (ha) Total Percent Boso-Boso Montalban Tayabasan Wawa Alienable/Disposable 124.1 377.5 680.8 1,061.2 2.5 Forest Reserve 2.9 6,782.9 7,361.7 2,886.9 26,983.3 3.6 Unclassified Public Forest 714.8 714.8 2.4 River Basin Reservation 9,951.8 6,782.9 7,361.7 2,886.9 26,983.3 91.5 Total 10,078.8 7,160.4 7,361.7 4,904.9 29,505.8 Percentage 34.2 24.3 24.9 16.6 100.0

Table 4b. Land Classification by LGUs inside the UMRBPL

Land Classification Municipality Total Percent Antipolo Montalban Conflict No Data Alienable/Disposable 114.1 590.3 42.1 746.5 2.5 Forest Reserve 2.9 606.2 452.1 1,061.2 3.6 Unclassified Public Forest 689.0 25.8 714.8 2.4 River Basin Reservation 8,322.8 10,735.4 6,739.9 1,185.2 26,983.3 91.5 Total 8,439.7 12,620.9 7,259.9 1,185.2 29,505.8 100.0 Percentage 28.6 42.8 24.6 4.0 100.0

2.3 Over-all household survey results The major findings in the household survey are in the context of UMRBPL’s agricultural, forestry and water resources concerns as well as on the perceptions of the respondents on the significance of the UMRBPL as an ecosystem. Among the key household survey results are:

x Around 80% (173 respondents) relied on rain (rainfed) as a source of irrigation water while 19% (40 respondents) mentioned that they irrigated their crops. Among the major crops planted that rely on rainwater are root crops (20%), cassava (16%), fruit trees (17.5%), and corn (8%) with rice (57.5%) as the most irrigated crop.

x Crop plots are prepared mainly by manual means (96%) and only 2% did land preparation mechanically and 2% used the combination of manual and mechanical techniques.

x Majority of the 71 respondents (76%) applied inorganic fertilizers to their crops such as rice, corn and vegetables compared to around 14% that used organic fertilizer mainly for ginger, cassava, sweet potato and bitter gourd. Almost the same percentage use pesticide (75%) for pest protection.

x Almost all of respondents (98%) surveyed manually use soil and water conservation techniques for their crops.


SEARCA-ERGONS 8

x Around 179 respondents disposed their farm wastes by composting (38%), burning (23%) and burying (39%).

x In terms of the forest services that the UMRBPL forests provide to their communities, the majority of the respondents mentioned water (73%), fresh air (64%), wood (55%) and fuel wood (53%). The other forest services were income (35%), protection of soils and slopes (28%), and habitats for wildlife (22%).

x On the other hand, of the 71 respondents who identified where they source or buy their forest products, 83% said they get the products direct from the forests, 8% bought from the market, 7% from the vendors and 2% from the farm. Most of the products are bamboo (buho), fern fruits and orchids.

x In terms of resource management, reforestation is the most activity that the respondents mentioned (44%) in support to the protection of the UMRBPL followed by forest protection (7%) and information campaigns (7%). The other forms of support are solid waste management (6%), trainings (6%), Bantay Gubat (6%), farm-to-market roads (4%), and slope stabilization (2%).

x Respondents who are willing to pay to protect UMRBPL per year gave an average value of PhP243/year/respondent and the mode is PhP60/year/respondent. The highest amount is PhP2,400/year and the lowest is PhP60/year.

Generally, due to its rugged terrain, UMRBPL has limited areas that are suitable for large scale grain production. Thus, it is a deficit area in terms of production of basic agricultural products such as rice, corn and vegetables. Due to its burgeoning population, the UMRBPL’s demand for food far exceeds its production capacity and, as such, the area is dependent on food supplies from other provinces. The remaining forest resources are being exploited to meet the needs of the increasing demands of the populace. For example, firewood extraction and charcoal-making are prevalent in the rural barangays of UMRBPL. Though mining operations of non-metallic minerals are in areas outside the UMRBPL, the offsite impacts of quarrying are evident in downstream portions of UMRBPL. UMRBPL’s river system is still providing the water source for the Marikina River, thus, maintaining its significant role of regulating the water supply that eventually impacts the downstream areas of Laguna de Bay and Metro Manila. General trends on utilization and supply of natural resources have been established from the updated CLUPs, comprehensive development plans and Eco profiles of Antipolo City and the Municipalities of Rodriguez, Tanay, San Mateo and Baras. For example, Antipolo City is a deficit area in terms of agricultural commodities (rice and vegetables) because it is mainly a settlement place for Metro Manila workers. Rodriguez and Tanay have vast areas of forestlands that are declared as protection zones All in all, the natural resources management (NRM) baseline information points to the increasing overexploitation of the UMRBPL’s natural resources and this must be addressed in line with Eco-town’s tenets. Measures must be planned and implemented to arrest this trend.


SEARCA-ERGONS 9

2.4 UMRBPL demographics The 2010 estimated total population of the 16 UMRBPL barangays is 345,236 with Brgy. Cupang and San Jose in Antipolo City as the most populated while Brgy. San Andres having the least number of residents (See Table 5). However, in terms of population density, the barangays within and in the buffer area of the UMRBPL are distinct. Population density in the 16 UMRBPL barangays ranges from a low 0.47 to a high of 34.85. The barangays with low population density (less than 1) are from Tanay (2 barangays), Rodriguez (Mascap) and Antipolo (0.27). These barangays are located in the mountainous and upland areas of the protected area. The high population density areas are found in Antipolo City (Brgy. Bagong Nayon - 29.88, Cupang - 17.47, San Jose - 23.75). This is expected since Antipolo City is already considered a highly urbanizing city and the most urbanized city in the whole province of Rizal. By 2030, the estimated population in the UMRBPL barangays will triple in size to 1.09 million based on the average growth rate of 3.4% for Rizal province over the last 10 years. By 2050, the UMRBPL barangay population will explode to 2.33 million people. The annual growth rate (2000-2010) of Rizal province is nearly twice the national average of 1.98% and the highest for the CALABARZON region. Together with Laguna province, Rizal has the highest rate of population increase due to natural growth and in-migration. This is largely attributed to the continuous economic growth of the two provinces over the last two decades due to industrial and settlement expansion. 2.5 Poverty

Majority of the barangays reported to earn between PhP1,000 and PhP5,000 monthly income (Income Class 4), way below the poverty threshold (set at PhP250/day - rural barangays) which is followed by income class earning from PhP5,001 to PhP10,000 (Income Class 3), a better figure compared with the former. Survey results also recorded households earning a better figure than the previous income classes (PhP10,001-PhP15,000). (Figure 6) The extreme level of income earning (less than PhP1,000) is recorded to many barangays, ranging from 5% to 57% of sample population. San Andres in the Municipality of Tanay recorded the highest occurrence of earnings in this income class (57% of sample population). Income above PhP15,000 was only recorded in Brgy. Calawis of Antipolo City (4%).

Figure 5. Population and Density Map


SEARCA-ERGONS 10

Based on the household income profile from survey results, the poverty level may be determined by looking at the percentage of household within income classes 3, 4 and 5. Households in income classes 2 and 1 are those that can be considered above the poverty threshold in the country. Table 5. Population, population density and land area

No. LGU Barangay Population NSO (2010)

Total Land Area (ha)

Population Density

1 Antipolo City Bagong Nayon 45,152 1,510.89 29.88 2 Antipolo City Calawis 4,252 15,793.38 0.27 3 Antipolo City Cupang 84,187 4,818.99 17.47 4 Antipolo City Inarawan 18,026 3,357.80 5.37 5 Antipolo City San Jose 88,222 3,714.33 23.75 6 Antipolo City San Juan 8,488 3,032.84 2.80 7 Baras Pinugay 7,396 421.47 17.55 8 Rodriguez Burgos 38,554 1,106.38 34.85 9 Rodriguez Geronimo 5,417 1,992.75 2.72

10 Rodriguez Mascap 4,425 7,085.22 0.62 11 Rodriguez Puray 2,941 1,961.30 1.50 12 Rodriguez Rosario 5,881 2,717.16 2.16 13 Rodriguez San Rafael 24,710 6,759.85 3.66 14 San Mateo Pintong Bocawe 4,080 2,202.44 1.85 15 Tanay Cuyambay 2,442 5,300.33 0.46 16 Tanay San Andres 1,063 2,242.76 0.47

Total 345,236 64,017.89 5.39 Source: NSO 2010 and ADB-Ecotown Project, 2013. Figure 6. Income levels of UMRBPL barangays.

Source: ADB-Ecotown Project, 2013.


SEARCA-ERGONS 11

2.6 Local community adaptive capacity and gender The baseline structured survey on the adaptive capacity2 of households done by the Project involving 300 respondents/residents as sampling population from the 16 UMRBPL-covered barangays to serve as basis for vulnerability and capacity building assessment showed that people living inside the protected area were predominantly poor to medium income group, with majority having completed elementary education. Small percentage of the sample population has reached college. In terms of gender issue, majority of the respondents are female, although more females have had more years in school. Among the key findings in this area are:

x The mean age of the total respondents is about 43 years, with more female respondents (60.3%) than males (39.7%). Most of the respondents are married (74%), while only a few (10.3%) are living as common law husband/wife. Some are solo parent (1.7%); widowed (5.7%) and separated (2%).

x Literacy is relatively high with almost all of the respondents have spent some years in school. High percentage have reached high school (20.3%) and graduated (21%) while some have finished college (8.3%)

x Majority of the respondents have also been in the area for many years, with mean value of 25 years, even if originally they are from other places. Significant numbers are originally from Rizal Province. Others are from Albay, Aklan, NCR, Quezon, Samar, and Leyte. Due to family (33.7%) and work (39.0%) are the most common reasons for migration in the area.

x Sources of income for males and females differ slightly. Survey showed that more males are in crops and livestock production while more females are drawn to labor and in putting up sari-sari store. Merchandising, OFW remittance and market vending is dominated by males, including practice of profession and government service.

Physical and financial capitals are those that pertain to infrastructures and services available as well as financial services as major indicators. Some of the barangays at the buffer zones have better access to roads, health and medical facilities. On the other hand, those who are remote tend to be adversely affected. Though the interests are very high, credit sources are always wanting and informal lending facilities are getting more popular. Social capital is high in all of the covered areas based on their level of participation in community actions ranging from cleaning canals, relief and rehabilitation and in many training activities. This is a resource that the local leadership can tap to mainstream climate change adaptation (CCA) and disaster risk reduction (DRR) in community development activities. Among the key related survey results are:

x Almost all of the respondents shared the view that the climate has changed over the past 10 years compared with conditions 10 years ago. The most observed changes are in terms of rainfall (57.7%) and temperature (19%).

2 Human capital such as education, gender, income and health were used as indicators for differential susceptibility


SEARCA-ERGONS 12

x Typhoons are still the most observed weather-related event and heavy rains are now considered climate hazards and have only been observed in 2009 and 2011. In fact, the respondents said that the duration of frightening heavy rains they have experienced lasted for 4 days non-stop while 60 days for flooding. The sample population for the survey has never experienced drought.

x Damages to dwellings are the most apparent impacts (15.6%) especially in the upland barangays where houses are made of light materials. Livelihood and work is also disrupted, especially when the roads connecting the barangays to their work stations are damaged.

x Some noted occurrence of diseases as one impact that needs to be addressed, particularly dengue, malaria and leptospirosis, and diarrhea.

x In terms of duration to bounce back to a better state or state before the extreme events, majority mentioned that it could take them 840 days or almost 3 years to recover especially from destructive typhoons. In terms of flooding, it can take them 240 days or up to a year to recover.

x Local government at the barangay level serves as a primary support service to communities in cases of extreme events like typhoons and flooding followed by municipal offices, albeit still insufficient.

There is a prevalence of poor knowledge on climate change impacts and threats, climate change adaptation options and skills needed to promote and integrate these practices in daily lives despite increased national level communication programmes. Knowledge on programs and policies of the LGU on CCA is not also well known among the sample population, including budget allocation. This may be attributed to the fact that there are really no legal provisions that mandate the LGU to integrate budget for CCA, when compared with DRR. In all areas under study, while there is expressed willingness to adopt new approach or technologies in order to enhance adaptation, there is an apparent low level of access to new information that emanates or can emanate from the research stations. Although the local governments have shown serious actions to mainstream disaster prepared and risk reduction programs, it appears there is some promise in improving the mechanisms for information dissemination and community engagement. Any capacity and knowledge building programmes in the areas should focus on climate change science simplified; climate change impacts and threats; climate change adaptation options and skills; forest management and climate change adaptation, disaster risk reduction, leadership training and value formation for CCA/DRR and health and sanitation including prevention, early detection and emergency responses in cases of climate sensitive diseases. 2.7 GHG inventory

Of the six sectors assessed, waste is found to be the biggest source of emission in UMRBPL. Total emission of the waste sector is 6.52 Mt which represents 81% of the total emissions in the UMRBPL. Following the waste, is the energy sector which has a total CO2 emission of 1.15 Mt. This comprises 14% of the total emissions at UMRBPL. The remaining sectors have very little share on the total CO2 emissions in the UMRBPL. For instance, emission from the agriculture sector represents 1.97% only while that from transportation is a mere 1.16%. The Land-Use Change and Forestry (LUCF) sector has total emission of about 0.13 Mt which comprises 1.58% of the total emissions while the industry


SEARCA-ERGONS 13

sector is negligible as emission is estimated to be 1.5 tons only. This likely emission trend is due to the following factors: (1) dense population of the five municipalities included in UMRBPL; (2) proximity to Metro Manila; (3) presence of many manufacturers and establishments; and (4) massive land conversion into settlement. Results of the inventory in UMRBPL show different trend compared with the results of the national GHG inventory. Based on the 2000 national GHG inventory, energy shares more than half of the total Philippine emission while inventory in UMRBPL reveals that it is the waste sector that gets the largest share in the total emission of the basin. At the national level, emissions of the sectors have the following trend: energy > agriculture > waste > industry. At UMRBPL, the emission trend observed is as follows: waste > energy > agriculture > LUCF > transportation > industry. At the national level, LUCF sector is a huge sink of carbon sequestering a total of 105.11 Mt while in UMRBPL, LUCF sector is a source of carbon emitting about 0.13 Mt. The basic reason for this is the land use changes that occurred in the basin during the last 10 years. Both inventories are however in agreement in terms of the share of the industrial sector. At the national and basin levels the industry has the smallest emission. In terms of percent share of the different municipalities in the total carbon emission of UMRBPL, results show that Antipolo City’s emissions comprise more than 50% of the total emissions of the basin. The remaining 48% of the total emissions of UMRBPL is shared by the remaining four municipalities: San Mateo (24%); Rodriguez (12%); Tanay (8%); and Baras (4%). Results of the GHG inventory indicate that of the five municipalities, Antipolo City is the most urbanized and has the largest population hence has the largest emission. Rural towns such as Tanay and Baras that host less number of people have less carbon emissions.

Energy

One of the sources of carbon emissions from the energy sector is the use of electricity by the following: residential, commercial, industrial and streetlight. Results show that a total of 1.15 Mt CO2 were emitted in 2012 in UMRBPL due to use of electricity. Almost half of this total CO2 emission was contributed by the residential sector. Around 321,110.4 tons of CO2 or 28% of the total was due to electricity consumption of the commercial sector while 278,453.5 tons or 24% was attributed to consumption by the industrial sector. A mere 9058.4 tons of CO2 or 0.78% of the total emissions was contributed by the streetlights. Figure 7 shows the carbon emissions from electricity consumption in 2012 at the municipalities covered by UMRBPL by source. Comparing the five municipalities, results show that Antipolo City exhibits the highest amount of carbon emission (808,987 tons) while Baras has the least (15,745 tons). This is understandable as Antipolo City is the most urbanized and highly populated municipality while Baras is the least populated and a rural municipality of the province. Following Antipolo City in terms of amount of carbon emission due to electricity consumption is Rodriguez which has a total emission of 143,438.1 tons of CO2. San Mateo, on the other hand, ranks 3rd in terms of carbon emission as it has emitted a total of 132,977 tons. Tanay occupies the 4th place with an emission of 53,272.7 tons.


SEARCA-ERGONS 14

Figure 7. Carbon emission due to electricity consumption in UMRBPL.

LUCF

In the LUCF sector, results show that the UMRBPL is a net source of carbon. As mentioned earlier, total carbon emitted by the sector amounts to 127,000 tons of CO2 (Figure 8). This is largely contributed by the massive conversion of forested forestlands into other land uses that contain low or no carbon. Based on the results of the land cover change analysis for 2004-2012, significant decline (70% - 100%) on the area covered by the open canopy forest occurred during the said period to favor the increase in the built-up areas by as much as seven times and the grassland area as a result of slash and burn activities and charcoal making. At the municipal level, results show that the LUCF sectors of Antipolo City and Tanay are net sinks of carbon. Total CO2 sequestered by this sector of Antipolo City and Tanay amount to 39,000 tons and 52,000 tons, respectively. This is mainly due to the presence of brush and open canopy forests in the area. Carbon sequestered by the LUCF sector due to change in forest/woody biomass in Antipolo City is about 193,000 tons of CO2 while in Tanay said activity resulted to sequestration of 133,000 tons. Carbon emission due to forest/land use change in Antipolo City and Tanay amount to 154,000 tons and 81,000 tons, respectively. Thus, despite the changes in land uses occurring in these two municipalities, emissions of the LUCF sector are offset by the regrowth of trees in the brush and open canopy forests of the areas.

On the other hand, LUCF sectors of Baras, Rodriguez and San Mateo are all net sources of carbon arising from land use conversion of open canopy forests and grass/shrub lands into agriculture or cultivated lands and settlements/built-up areas. These land use conversions are clearly shown in the 2004-2012 land use/cover change analysis UMRBPL. Largest net carbon emission of the sector is observed in Rodriguez with a value of 203,000 tons. LUCF sectors of San Mateo and Baras have net emissions of 11,000 tons and 2,000 tons, respectively.

0100000200000300000400000500000600000700000800000900000

Antipolo Baras Tanay Rodriguez San Mateo

Carbon emissions in tons

Municipality


SEARCA-ERGONS 15

Figure 8. Carbon emission of the LUCF sector, UMRBPL.

Transportation

In the transportation sector, total CO2 emissions in the UMRBPL amounts to 93,770 tons. Bulk of this total emission is contributed by Antipolo City. This is understandable because Antipolo City is highly urbanized and hosts large number of public utility vehicles that consume huge quantities of fuel. Its proximity to Metro Manila allows locals who work and attend schools in Metro Manila to commute from Antipolo City to their respective offices and schools everyday resulting to large demand for public utility vehicles in the area. Also, a large number of the town’s population belongs to middle and high income families who can afford to buy private cars. CO2 emissions due to fuel consumption in Antipolo City amount to 57,480 tons. The town of Rodriguez comes in second in terms of contribution to the total emission of the transportation sector. Rodriguez has become the refuge for informal settlers in Metro Manila. Large part of the town that was formerly devoted to agricultural production is currently used as a resettlement/residential area. Commuters from Rodriguez create a big demand for jeepneys and FX since the town is just 20 minutes away from Quezon City. Consequently, such big demand for public utility vehicles results to huge consumption of fuel. Around 15,000 tons of CO2 is emitted by the transportation sector of Rodriguez. San Mateo, the adjacent town of Rodriguez ranks third in terms of total CO2 emissions from the transportation sector in the UMRBPL. A total of 13,820 tons of CO2 is estimated to be emitted due to fuel use in San Mateo. Similar to Rodriguez, San Mateo’s proximity to Metro Manila makes commuting daily of the residents of the municipality from the town to the metropolis when going to offices and schools highly feasible. This has resulted to large demand for public transportation and fuel. The transportation sector of Tanay emits 6,670 tons of CO2 making it to rank 4th among the municipalities inside UMRBPL. Baras, on the other hand, ranks 5th in terms of total emission of the transportation sector in the UMRBPL. Calculation of the total CO2 emission due to fuel use of vehicles in Baras reveals that emissions from this sector amounts to 320 tons only. These results are understandable because Tanay and Baras are not urbanized and host relatively small population hence fuel consumption due to vehicle use of the two municipalities are relatively low.

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

800

Change inForest/Woody

Biomass

Forest/Land UseChange

TOTAL

Carb

on e

miss

ion

in 0

00t

Component


SEARCA-ERGONS 16

Agriculture

Total methane emissions from the agriculture sector in UMRBPL amounts to 57560 tons. Large percentage of this is contributed by livestock while a mere 7% is due to emission from rice production. At the municipal level, Rodriguez contributes the largest share in terms of the total emissions of the agriculture sector in UMRBPL (Figure 9). Livestock and rice production in Rodriguez emit a total of 30620 tons of methane or 53% of the total methane emission in the UMRBPL. Around 99.58% of the methane emission in Rodriguez is due to livestock production while 0.42% is attributed to paddy fields. The fairly small percentage contribution of rice production is due to the small area devoted to growing rice in the area. Tanay ranks 2nd in terms of total methane emission in the agriculture sector with 12780 tons emission. This represents 22% of the total methane emission of the agriculture sector in UMRBPL. About 11Gg or 91% of the total emission is due to livestock production while 1.14 Gg or 9% is contributed by rice production. Baras is next with an estimated total emission of 8.67 Gg representing 15% of the total emission. Around 7.42 Gg (85.66%) of methane was produced by the livestock industry while 1.24 Gg (14.24%) was due to rice production. Antipolo City ranks 4th as its methane emission of 4 Gg contributes only about 7% of the total methane emissions in UMRBPL. Around 59% of Antipolo’s methane emission came from the livestock industry while 41% is due to rice production in the area. San Mateo has the least level of methane produced by its agriculture sector. Its total methane emission is merely 3%. A total of 1.73 Gg of methane is produced by the agriculture sector of San Mateo, most (around 87%) of which comes from livestock while around 13% or 0.22 Gg is due to rice production. Figure 9. Methane emission from the agriculture sector in five municipalities

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

Antipolo Baras Rodriguez San Mateo Tanay

Methane em

ission in tons

Municipality


SEARCA-ERGONS 17

Waste

Results show that, of the five municipalities, Antipolo City exhibits the highest emissions followed by San Mateo. Tanay ranks 3rd while Rodriguez occupies the 4th place. Baras, being the smallest town in terms of population, has the least amount of methane emission from the waste sector. This trend is understandable as among the municipalities, Antipolo City is the most urbanized while Baras is the most rural. Total methane emission from waste in UMRBPL is 2.37 Mt. Of these total methane emission, 51% is from waste of Antipolo City while around 27% comes from San Mateo. Wastes from Tanay contribute about 9% of the total emissions while the waste sectors from Rodriguez and Baras comprise 7.85% and 5%, respectively of the total. Equivalent CO2 emissions from waste in the UMRBPL amount to 6.52 Mt. Antipolo City’s wastes emit 3.33 Mt CO2 while that of Baras give off 0.33 Mt CO2 only. Waste sector of San Mateo has emitted a total of 1.75 Mt CO2 while the same sector of Tanay and Rodriguez discharge 0.60 Mt and 0.51 Mt, respectively (Figure 10). Figure 10. Estimated CO2 emission from wastes by UMRBPL LGUs

Most of the wastes generated in UMRBPL are domestic waste coming from residential/settlement areas and agricultural waste products (from livestock and crops/vegetables). Most of these are largely biodegradable waste. Antipolo and San Mateo generate most of the residual wastes, largely from packaging materials and commercial/industrial wastes. 2.8 Natural Resource Accounting (NRA)/Economic Valuation of UMRBPL’s Forest, Water and Agriculture Resources UMRBPL provides important environmental and socioeconomic services to the population of the five on-site LGUs and to off-site areas that include Metro-Manila. The landscape provides livelihood sources to its inhabitants. It is a source of freshwater for various domestic, agricultural, commercial and industrial uses. It provides various environmental functions such as carbon sequestration, soil conservation, flood control, biodiversity, aesthetics and recreation. However, these environmental goods and services do not have prices or their prices are so low such that their real values are not reflected. The absence of price for these resource functions lead to further exploitation. Along this line, the natural resource

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

Antipolo City

Baras

Rodriguez

San Mateo

Tanay

Carbon emission in M

tMunicipality


SEARCA-ERGONS 18

accounting/economic valuation of UMRBPL’s water, forest and agriculture resources was undertaken as component of the ecotown principle. The estimation was done by using the total economic value (TEV) framework that determined their use values and non-use values. The accounting/valuation work was anchored on the general trends on utilization and supply of forest, water and agriculture resources in UMRBPL. The current conditions of these resources served as the physical accounts. The figures were based on secondary data (CLUPs, comprehensive development plans and ecoprofiles of the five LGUs) and primary data from the household surveys and GIS figures. On the other hand, the economic accounts (economic values) are mainly based on benefits-transfer, that is, results of similar studies were used. The household survey conducted in June 2013 validated the secondary data that were used in the estimation. In terms of the sectoral accounts, the forests in UMRBPL are classified into closed canopy, mature trees covering >50 percent and open canopy, mature trees covering <50 percent. The direct-use value, expressed in timber accounts (at current prices), of the closed canopy forests is P463 million and P132 million for the open canopy forests. The indirect-use values of the carbon stock are P803 million for the closed canopy forests and P604 million for the open canopy forests. The soil conservation value of the entire watershed is P303 million; biodiversity value is P288 million; flood control is P1 billion; and aesthetics and recreational value at P200 million. Summing all the figures, the total value of UMRBPL’s forests is P3.97 billion (at current prices). UMRBPL’s water resources contribute significantly to the socioeconomic development of its inhabitants as well as to those living in the off-site communities, particularly those in Metro Manila, where domestic water supply and demand are a big issue. The water context is further refocused when the impacts of climate change on UMRBPL’s hydrologic cycle is put into the overall equation. Such impacts would be the changes in water quantity (high during the wet season and low in summer months), water quality effects due to an intensification of rainfalls (accelerating soil erosion and rapid infiltration towards groundwater), and shift of the main recharge period of groundwater. The household survey in June 2013 indicated that the domestic water needs include drinking water, water for hygiene/sanitation, food preparation, and washing clothes. The value of raw water from UMRBPL was estimated based on the resource charge formula from the National Strategy and Action Plan for the Water Supply and Sanitation Sector (NEDA 2000). For the entire UMRBPL river systems, the total surface water yield is 22.239 m3/s/km2 and a resource charge of P25/m3, the total value of water is about P18 billion/year. The agricultural resource accounting focused on two basic groups of questions:

(1) How are production activities in UMRBPL supporting local consumption? Is the agricultural resource base able to sustain these consumption needs?

(2) Are the agricultural resource bases appreciating or depreciating, and how fast are they depreciating as consumption increases?

Generally, due to its rugged terrain, UMRBPL has limited areas that are suitable for large scale agricultural production. Thus, it is a deficit area in terms of production of basic agricultural products such as rice, corn and vegetables. Due to its burgeoning population, the UMRBPL’s demand for food far exceeds its production capacity and, as such, the area is dependent on food supplies from other provinces.


SEARCA-ERGONS 19

Agriculture is not a major industry in UMRBPL (and in Rizal Province, in general). In terms of income, the sector is lumped with forestry contributing only 6.2 percent of the provincial income. Agriculture trails the area’s major sectors of manufacturing, transport, wholesale and retail, construction and public administration. Agriculture has the lowest share of total (family) income by major industry classification despite Rizal Province being categorized as an agricultural province. Over the years, the area’s agricultural economy apparently slowed down because the labor force is being absorbed by other sectors. This trend can be accounted for by the increasing urbanization and industrialization. Being proximate to Metro Manila, Rizal Province (including UMRBPL’s LGUs) has become a favorite choice as a residential area. Due to its rugged topography, slash-and-burn farming system (kaingin), is the most common agricultural practice in the UMRBPL. The annual crops grown include corn, upland rice, vegetables and root crops. Fruit production (mango, banana, avocado) is practiced in some areas. Backyard agricultural productions (home gardens) are also practiced by households in most rural barangays. The values of the agricultural net benefits of farm households inside UMRBPL are based on their net incomes from their crop and livestock farms. Net incomes range from P10,000 to P20,000/ha/year for crop farms and for poultry and livestock farming, a much higher income/unit can be realized due to the high demand of these commodities, with primary markets in nearby Metro Manila. All in all, the estimated values of forest, water and agriculture resources of UMRBPL point to substantial monetary values of the direct and indirect attributes in both on-site and off-site influence areas. However, with the current trends of resource utilization, the values of the resources are depreciating at an increasing rate due to the inevitable population increases, unplanned land use conversions and development activities. As a recommendation based on the economic analysis (natural resource accounting and valuation), the rate of deforestation should be arrested; water resource management should be enhanced; and the dwindling agricultural resource base should be protected, in the face of climate change challenges. All these measures are embodied in the UMRBPL’s management plans but a cohesive implementation scheme is needed that is backed by sufficient financial support and strong political will. 3.0 UMRBPL Climate change scenarios (2020-2050) and potential impacts

3.1 Climate change projections and potential impacts: worst case future scenario

The Project adopted the three climate scenarios developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its Special Report on Emission Scenarios (IPCC SRES) namely, A2 (high-range), A1B (mid-range), and B2 (low-range). The A2 scenario is at the so-called higher end of the emission scenarios (although not the highest), and is preferred by most countries because, from an impacts and adaptation point of view, if man can adapt to a larger climate change, then the smaller climate changes of the lower end scenarios can also be adapted. The B2 scenario representing the low-range emissions is, therefore, the most unlikely, even if it represents the low end. It also used the Philippine Atmospheric Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA) future climate change projections for 2020 and 2050.3

3 This model was developed by the UK Met Hadley Centre (in the United Kingdom) using the PRECIS (Providing Regional Climates for Impact Studies) model in two time frames; 2020 and 2050.


SEARCA-ERGONS 20

Based on these climate projections and scenarios, the Project used the A1B (mid-range) scenario because the future climates in the next 30-40 years will be greatly influenced by past emissions, principally due to the long lifetimes of carbon dioxide (CO2). The project only focused on the 2050 (2036-2065) impacts since the country should prepare for the worst case scenario and planning for CCA and DRR strategies on a long term basis.

x All areas of the UMRBPL will get warmer, more so in the relatively warmer summer months (Table 6);

x Annual mean temperatures (average of maximum and minimum temperatures) in all areas in the UMRBPL are expected to rise by 1.9 °C in 2050.

x Likewise, all seasonal mean temperatures will also increase and these increases during the four seasons (e.g., DJF, MAM, JJA and SON) are quite consistent.

x In terms of seasonal rainfall change, generally, there is a substantial spatial difference in the projected changes in rainfall in 2050 in the UMRBPL, with reduction in rainfall during the summer season (MAM) making the usually dry season drier, while rainfall increases are likely in during the southwest monsoon (JJA) and the SON seasons, making these seasons still wetter, and thus with likelihood of both droughts and floods in areas where these are projected;

x The northeast monsoon (DJF) season rainfall is projected to increase;

x During the southwest monsoon season (JJA), a larger increase in rainfall is expected, thus the repeat of Typhoon Ondoy in the future is a reality.

What the projections clearly indicate are the likely increase in the performance of the southwest and the northeast monsoons in the UMRBPL exposed to these climate controls when they prevail over the area. Moreover, the usually wet seasons become wetter with the usually dry seasons becoming also drier. These could lead to more occurrences of floods and dry spells/droughts, respectively. Table 6. Temperature changes under mid-range in 2050.

TEMPERATURE 2020 2050

DJF MAM JJA SON DJF MAM JJA SON

Baseline 21.1 22.9 23.5 22.9 21.1 22.9 23.5 22.9

Minimum 0.9 1.1 1.1 1 1.9 2.1 2.1 1.9

Maximum 1.1 1.3 0.8 1.1 2.1 2.4 1.6 2.1

Average 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.3 2.0 2.3 1.9 2.0

Biophysical Impacts The biophysical impacts of climate change was calculated by integrating other thematic maps in the map overlay in a Geographic Information System (GIS) environment such as the projected impacts of climate change by taking the 2050 scenario. The rainfall accumulated during typhoon Ondoy (1,000 mm) in 2009 which devastated Marikina City and affected almost 90% of Metro Manila was used for the extreme events on rainfall.


SEARCA-ERGONS 21

Inside UMRBPL Results of the integrated geospatial analysis showed that the greatest climate-induced threat to UMRBPL area would come from landslides. Approximately 73% (19,088.03 ha) of the UMRBPL is susceptible to landslide (see Figure 11). Of the four sub-watersheds comprising the UMRBPL, the sub watershed of Tayabasan has the largest landslide threat area of 7,295.83 hectares, followed by Boso-Boso with 5,404 hectares. The second largest climate-induced threat in UMRBPL is erosion and drought. A total of 5,050 hectares or 19.33% are threatened. Almost three-fourths (3/4) of these are seen in the Montalban covering 3,728 hectares. Only 1.92% of the total area is susceptible to flooding mainly in the areas of the Boso-Boso sub-watershed. At the municipality and barangay levels, the greatest threat to landslides among the UMRBPL communities is in Brgy. Calawis in Antipolo City with 5,768.74 hectares or 30% of the total 19,000 hectares of threatened areas in the whole UMRBPL (see Table 7). In the case of erosion and drought, Barangays Rodriquez – Mascap (1,716) and San Rafael (1, 470) has more than 60% of all threatened areas in UMRBPL.

Outside UMRBPL Similarly, landslides largely threaten the outlying areas of the UMRBPL. Of the more than 39,000 hectares outside the UMRBPL area, around 56% or 22,355 hectares are susceptible to landslide (See Table 8). The six barangays of Antipolo City has the largest percentage among UMRBPL LGUs with more than 13,000 hectares with Brgys. Calawis (4,894 hectares.), Cupang (3,195 hectares) and San Jose (2,234 hectares) as the most heavily threatened. In the case of erosion and drought, some 7,216 hectares are threatened with the largest located in Brgy. Mascap, Rodriguez with a total of 2,415 hectares under threat. Landslides and drought, on the other hand, affects some 6,691 hectares of outlying areas of the UMRBPL. Both Brgy. Calawis in Antipolo City and Brgy. Mascap in Rodriguez are the most susceptible to these combined threats with more 5,700 hectares directly threatened.

Elmer Mercado

Elmer Mercado

Elmer Mercado

Elmer Mercado

Elmer Mercado

Elmer Mercado

Elmer Mercado

Elmer Mercado


SEARCA-ERGONS 22

Figure 11. Multi-hazards map

Source: ADB-Ecotown Project, 2013.


SEARCA-ERGONS 23

Table 7. Potential climate change-related impacts in the Municipality and Barangay level INSIDE the UMRBPL.

No Sub Watershed City/Municipality Barangay Landslide Landslide

+ Flooding Erosion Erosion + Drought

Erosion + Flooding + Drought

Flooding Total

1 Boso-Boso Antipolo City Bagong Nayon 73.11 73.11 2 Boso-Boso Antipolo City Calawis 1,833.09 426.53 120.59 856.48 133.27 3,369.97 3 Boso-Boso Antipolo City Cupang 102.47 102.47 4 Boso-Boso Antipolo City Inarawan 1,946.41 36.83 1,983.24 5 Boso-Boso Antipolo City San Jose 102.34 35.42 2.71 5.86 146.32 6 Boso-Boso Tanay Cuyambay 1,119.36 236.30 206.62 282.32 54.04 361.74 2,260.37 7 Boso-Boso Tanay San Isidro 227.95 14.69 242.64 Sub Total Boso-Boso 5,404.73 698.24 327.21 1,193.03 54.04 500.87 8,178.12 8 Montalban Antipolo City San Juan 604.06 604.06 9 Montalban Rodriguez Burgos 518.91 518.91

10 Montalban Rodriguez Mascap 119.87 116.39 1,716.68 198.25 2,151.20 11 Montalban Rodriguez Puray 355.20 541.32 896.52 12 Montalban Rodriguez San Rafael 1,277.00 62.86 1,470.05 9.36 2,819.27

Sub Total Montalban 2,875.04 179.25 - 3,728.05 207.61 - 6,989.96 13 Tayabasan Antipolo City Calawis 3,811.32 1.65 3,812.98 14 Tayabasan Antipolo City Inarawan 553.41 553.41 15 Tayabasan Antipolo City San Juan 2,094.94 2,094.94 16 Tayabasan Rodriguez San Rafael 836.16 127.61 963.77

Sub Total Tayabasan 7,295.83 - - 129.27 - - 7,425.09 17 Wawa Antipolo City Bagong Nayon 1,372.41 5.32 1,377.73 18 Wawa Antipolo City Inarawan 376.36 376.36 19 Wawa Antipolo City San Juan 333.43 333.43 20 Wawa Rodriguez Geronimo 237.10 237.10 21 Wawa Rodriguez Burgos 586.84 586.84 22 Wawa Rodriguez Puray 8.98 8.98 23 Wawa Rodriguez Rosario 164.77 164.77 24 Wawa San Mateo Pintong Bocawe 432.54 13.59 446.14

Sub Total Wawa 3,512.42 18.91 - - - - 3,531.33 Grand Total UMRBPL 19,088.02 896.40 327.21 5,050.34 261.65 500.87 26,124.50

Source: ADB-Ecotown Project, 2013


SEARCA-ERGONS 24

Table 8. Potential climate change-related impacts in the Municipality and Barangay level OUTSIDE the UMRBPL.

No City/ Municipality Barangay Landslide Landslide +

Drought Landslide +

Flooding Erosion Erosion + Flooding

Erosion + Drought

Erosion + Flooding +

Drought Flooding Total

1 Antipolo City Bagong Nayon 60.04 60.04

2 Antipolo City Calawis 4,894.90 3,197.27 72.84 337.04 108.43 8,610.48

3 Antipolo City Cupang 3,195.20 720.81 722.32 78.20 4,716.53

4 Antipolo City Inarawan 234.05 54.11 38.31 118.32 444.79

5 Antipolo City San Jose 2,234.98 159.30 757.79 415.94 3,568.00

6 Antipolo City San Juan 0.44 0.44

7 Baras Pinugay 58.76 268.98 56.43 37.29 421.46

8 Rodriguez Burgos 0.64 0.64

9 Rodriguez Geronimo 1,674.36 81.29 1,755.65

10 Rodriguez Mascap 2,518.04 2,415.78 4,933.81

11 Rodriguez Puray 608.17 20.59 427.05 1,055.80

12 Rodriguez Rosario 1,025.94 30.39 193.52 21.93 963.30 317.23 2,552.30

13 Rodriguez San Isidro 1,323.81 407.12 11.46 25.29 6.35 1,774.02

14 Rodriguez San Rafael 1,710.49 976.44 18.33 265.46 6.12 2,976.83

15 San Mateo Pintong Bocawe 1,460.62 10.61 285.07 1,756.30

16 Tanay Cuyambay 1,933.54 241.36 709.77 154.91 0.41 3,039.98

17 Tanay San Isidro 1,998.79 1,998.79

Total 22,355.97 6,691.74 1,366.49 702.51 33.39 7,216.15 541.04 758.58 39,665.87

Source: ADB-Ecotown Project, 2013


SEARCA-ERGONS 25

3.2 Vulnerability Assessment in the UMRBPL In identifying climate change vulnerability we adapted the concept contained in the third IPCC Assessment Report where vulnerability is defined as: “the degree to which a system is susceptible to, or unable to cope with the adverse effects of climate change, including climate variability and extremes. Vulnerability can thus be defined as a function of exposure (E), sensitivity (S), and adaptive capacity (AC), express in the equation below:

V = ∑ (E+S +AC) Typically, attempts are made to quantify each of these components, usually by identifying appropriate indicators for each, and then combining them into indices, and subsequently combining the components into an integrated index of vulnerability. Some of the indicators (primarily of exposure and sensitivity) are from the biophysical realm; others (mainly describing adaptive capacity) are drawn from socio-economic statistical sources The vulnerability profile of the LGUs in UMRBPL is defined using a number of selected indicators to represent the levels of exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity. These indicators have been selected based on the availability of data and the analyst’s knowledge and understanding on the connection between the data and level of exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity and their connection with climate variability and climate change. The vulnerability profile of the LGUs in the UMRBPL can be grouped into five types as shown in Table 9. The two extreme types are the ones have low adaptive capacity and high sensitivity and exposure level will be the most vulnerable (Type 5), while the ones with high capacity index with low sensitivity and exposure index will be least vulnerable (Type 1). Another approach for defining the vulnerability profile of villages is by applying cluster analysis to the indicators and indices used for defining level of exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity (e.g. Lüdeke, et al. 2007;; O’brienet al. 2004). Table 9. Categorization of LGUs in the UMRBPL in terms of vulnerability.

LGU Type Vulnerability Level

Sensitivity Index

Exposure Index

Adaptive Capacity Index (ACI)

Type 5 Very vulnerable High High Low Type 4 Vulnerable Low Low Low Type 3 Medium Medium Medium Medium Type 2 Quite Vulnerable High High High Type 1 Less or not Vulnerable Low Low High

Source: Vulnerability and Climate Risk Assessment of Villages at the Citarum River Basin, Integrated Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Strategy for the Citarum River Basin (Package E) by R.Boer, A.Rakhman, and J. Pulhin (2013).


SEARCA-ERGONS 26

Projected VA results of CC impacts on UMRBPL’s forestry sector One of the effects of climate change is the worsening heat stress or drought, which is defined as a period of dry weather that can be extensive in time and injurious to plants. A measure of drought and its various effects to the water sector is through its sensitivity/exposure and adaptive capacity. Drought: The sensitivity/exposure (SE) analysis indicates that two LGUs (Antipolo City and Tanay) are categorized under Low SE while Baras, San Mateo and Rodriguez are under Medium SE. Only Antipolo City has a high adaptive capacity and the rest are under medium category. Rain-induced landslides/erosion: The sensitivity/exposure (SE) analysis indicates that two LGUs (Antipolo City and San Mateo) are categorized under Low SE while Baras and Rodriguez are under Medium SE. The adaptive capacity of Antipolo City and Tanay are high while Baras, San Mateo and Rodriguez are of medium category. The projected 2030 VA indicates that Antipolo City and San Mateo showed a consistent Type 1 category (Less or Not Vulnerable). Tanay is a Type 2 LGU (Quite Vulnerable) while Baras and Rodriguez are under Type 3 (Medium Vulnerable) (Table 10). Illustrated in Figures 12, 13, 14, and 15 are maps of vulnerability assessment in the forestry sectors. Table 10. Projected vulnerability types in terms of landslides/erosion and droughts, forestry sector LGUs, UMRBPL, 2030.

CC Impact (Water Sector)

Indicators/LGU Type Local Government Unit (LGU)

Antipolo Baras Rodriguez San Mateo Tanay

Landslide erosion

Sensitivity/ Exposure Low Medium Medium Low Low

Adaptive Capacity High Medium Medium Medium High

LGU Type* Type 1 Type 3 Type 3 Type 2 Type 1

Droughts

Sensitivity/ Exposure Low Medium Medium Medium Low

Adaptive Capacity High Medium Medium Medium Medium

LGU Type* Type 1 Type 3 Type 3 Type 1 Type 2 * Type 3 Medium Vulnerable, Type 2 Quite Vulnerable Type 1 Less or not Vulnerable


SEARCA-ERGONS 27

Figure 12. Sensitivity level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts in the forestry sector, UMRBPL, 2014

Figure 13. Exposure level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts in the forestry sector, UMRBPL, 2014.


SEARCA-ERGONS 28

Figure 14. Adaptive capacity level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts in the forestry sector, UMRBPL, 2014.

Figure 15. Vulnerability level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts in the forestry sector, UMRBPL, 2014.


SEARCA-ERGONS 29

Projected VA of UMRBPL’s forestry sector, 2030

Maintaining a healthy and stable forest ecosystem is a necessity in the face of changing climates. Forest ecosystems provide essential services for communities: food and water; regulating functions on climate, floods and diseases; cultural and recreational benefits; support functions such as nutrient cycling, water cycling, soil formation and retention, and others. Climate change, coupled with destructive human activities, exerts tremendous pressure on forest ecosystems’ resiliency to capacity to resist and adapt. UMRBPL’s objective on the forestry sector is to enhance its resilience and stability by including the communities that depend on the forestry sector. The focus would be on forest ecosystem protection and rehabilitation of ecological services with the assumptions that the following activities are done:

x CC mitigation and adaptation strategies developed and implemented; x Management and conservation of UMRBPL improved; x Environmental laws strictly implemented; x Capacity for integrated ecosystem-based management approach enhanced; x Natural resource accounting institutionalized; x Relevant environmental laws and regulations strictly implemented; x Support system established (financing, training and capacity building; and legal &

institutional concerns), and x Mapping is done for hazard, risk and vulnerability.

Several activities would lead to the attainment of this long-term outcome, including the following:

x Gendered ecosystem vulnerability and risk assessment conducted x Mitigation and adaptation strategies planned and implemented x The National REDD Plus Strategy (NRPS) implemented x Gender-fair innovative financing mechanisms and a bundle of CCA assistance

designed x Moratorium on pollutive and extractive industries in UMRBPL implemented x Increase knowledge and capacity for integrated ecosystem-based management

at the community levels x Training programs on wealth accounting or ENRA for key government agencies

implemented Projected VA results of CC impacts on UMRBPL’s Agriculture Sector UMRBPL’s agricultural sector vulnerability assessment identifies the most vulnerable agricultural areas, how these areas are affected, the determination of adaptation strategies and interventions that enhance their resilience. The effects of climate change on the agricultural sector are the occurrence of floods due to intense rainfall, droughts (due to worsening heat stress), and rain-induced landslides. Floods directly affect crops and livestock production by physically submerging or uprooting the crops and for livestock, destroying the facilities and causing diseases. Indirectly, floods would exacerbate the incidence of plants and livestock pests and diseases that decrease productivity. Droughts are periods of prolonged dry weather that adversely affect the water supply that can be detrimental to crops and livestock production. Droughts cause reduced soil moisture that may lead to wilting of crops, thus, decreasing productivity. Rain-induced landslides clog the waterways, cause damages to infrastructure and facilities that affect the production and marketing of agricultural products.


SEARCA-ERGONS 30

URMBPL’s agriculture sector, as shown by the vulnerability assessment, reacts differently to droughts, floods and rain-induced landslides. Based on the analysis at the municipal (LGU) level, the agricultural sector of some LGUs are more resilient than those of the others. For example, Antipolo City’s agricultural sector, despite its diminished role in the City’s economy, can withstand droughts, floods and rain-induced landslides. This is a result of the many interacting factors, both biophysical and socioeconomic support systems. Generally, agriculture plays a minor role in the overall economy of UMRBPL. The sector lags far behind the other sectors (commercial, service, transport, tourism) in terms of economic contribution such as income and employment. Although all agricultural areas are considered at low risk to flood hazards, droughts, and rain-induced landslides, preventive measures should be undertaken to minimize the adverse effects of these climate-change related occurrences to agricultural production and marketing. The usual measures such as slope stabilization, provision of early warning device, reforestation, putting up of demarcation lines/buffer zones, and information dissemination campaign, should be strengthened in the protected landscape. Specifically, San Mateo will be severely affected in a rare event of flooding and needs immediate prioritization in terms of relevant and effective mitigation such as flood control structures and drainage control, declogging of rivers and creeks, and the provision of relocation sites of informal settlers that built their houses in riverbanks and flood-prone areas. All municipalities will also be affected by rain induced landslide in all level of susceptibility. Interventions should be slope stabilization, reforestation, and relocation of residents along the hazard prone area, provision of housing facilities and strict implementation of the zoning ordinance. Climate change will likely affect food security in terms of water resource allocation, particularly that of irrigation which can be regarded as an adaptation measure for prolonged droughts. Over the years, the National Irrigation Administration (NIA) is mandated to address the irrigation needs of the country and in so doing, NIA has been contributing unconsciously to alleviating the adverse climate change impacts by storing and distributing water for irrigation. Also, the LGUs with the UMRBPL have small scale irrigation programs to help the farmers address insufficient water supply during periods of droughts. Working with the stakeholders, the LGU and NIA can alleviate the impacts of the lack of water for agricultural production but also contributing to food security’s intermediate outcome of ensured food availability, stability, access, and safety amidst increasing climate change and disaster risks. Illustrated in Figures 16, 17, 18, and 19 are the output map of the VA assessment for agriculture.


SEARCA-ERGONS 31

Figure 16. Adaptive capacity level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts in the agriculture sector, UMRBPL, 2014.

Figure 17. Exposure level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts in the agriculture sector, UMRBPL, 2014.


SEARCA-ERGONS 32

Figure 18. Sensitivity level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts in the agriculture sector, UMRBPL, 2014.

Figure 19. Vulnerability level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts in the agriculture sector, UMRBPL, 2014.


SEARCA-ERGONS 33

Projected VA of the agriculture sector by 2030 As a highly vulnerable area to climate change risks and natural hazards, UMRBPL’s LGUs must address climate change risks to agriculture for long-term benefits of their stakeholders. Actions towards building a food secure community amidst climate change must address poverty and sustainable livelihood, human and institutional capacities, and advancement in scientific knowledge on climate change risks and adaptation technologies in the food production and distribution sector. The agricultural sector in UMRBPL shall focus on two outcomes: enhanced resilience of agriculture production and distribution systems and enhanced resilience of agricultural communities in the midst of climate change. The scenario in 2030 assumes that having gone into the different stages of transformation of communities, LGUs have finally acquired knowledge and capacity for self-protection against climate change and have created political will for adopting climate-sensitive policy, plans and programs to suit changing climate and environment. To achieve these planned outcomes by 2030, the LGUs of UMRBPL are further assumed to have done the following interventions:

x Enhancement of site-specific knowledge on the vulnerability of agriculture; x Establishment of gender-responsive, climate-smart policies, plans and budgets; x Building of adaptive capacity of farming communities taking into account the

differentiated impacts of climate change on women and men; and x Strengthening the resilience of men and women in agricultural communities

through the development of appropriate climate risk transfer and social protection mechanisms.

It is further assumed that future activities shall be focused on updating scientific information and database, reviewing the sector plans, scaling up the implementation of adaptation measures and technologies, and evaluating progress towards resilience to climate change.

Recently, the country’s super- typhoons are increasing and have shown some properties such as excessive wind speeds, expanding coverage and prolonged rainfall events. The climate related events affecting local food security efforts are related to climate change permutation where “there is too little water or there is too much water” and that while there are “losers” in each extreme climate events, there are likewise “gainers.” Projected VA results of CC impacts on UMRBPL’s Water Sector The vulnerability of UMRBPL’s water sector, in connection with climate change, has been assessed in terms of two indicators, namely, rain-induced erosion/landslides and droughts. Rain-induced soil erosion/landslides occur in several areas of UMRBPL that can be attributed to its rugged, mountainous terrain coupled with human activities that alter the ecosystems. The impacts of rain-induced soil erosion/landslides affect the biophysical regime of the water bodies of UMRBPL as well the socioeconomic conditions of both on-site and off-site communities. The sensitivity analysis indicates that two LGUs (Baras and San Mateo) are categorized under Low Sensitivity while Antipolo City, Rodriguez and Tanay are under Medium Sensitivity. In terms of exposure, Antipolo city, Rodriguez and Tanay are classified under the Medium category while Baras and San Mateo are under Low category. The adaptive capacity of Antipolo City and San Mateo are high while Baras, Rodriguez and Tanay are of medium category. Illustrated in Figures 20, 21, 22, and 23 are the results of the VA analysis.


SEARCA-ERGONS 34

Figure 20. Exposure level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts on the water sector, UMRBPL, 2014.

Figure 21. Sensitivity level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts on the water sector, UMRBPL, 2014.


SEARCA-ERGONS 35

Figure 22. Adaptive capacity level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts on the water sector, UMRBPL, 2014.

Figure 23. Vulnerability level of LGUs in connection with CC impacts on the water sector, UMRBPL, 2014.


SEARCA-ERGONS 36

Projected vulnerability assessment of the water sector by 2030 UMRBPL’s priority on the water sector is to ensure that water resources be sustainably managed and equitably accessed. In light of climate change, a comprehensive review and subsequent restructuring of the entire water sector governance is required. It is also important to assess the resilience of the area’s major water resources and infrastructure, to manage supply and demand, to manage water quality, and to promote conservation. For the 2030 projections, the following interventions are assumed to have been done by the LGUs of UMRBPL:

x Restructuring water governance to be better responsive to climate change, such as , review of the Water Code and other water resources laws and regulations, streamlining and structuring government institutions responsible for water and building the capacity of relevant agencies;

x Conducted vulnerability and risk assessment of water resources, infrastructure and communities, including analysis of the differences in vulnerabilities of men and women to the impacts of climate change;

x Formulation of a roadmap for climate-proofing critical water infrastructure based on the results of the vulnerability and risk assessments;

x Rehabilitation of water distribution systems;

x Completion of the characterization of the UMRBPL subwatersheds;

x Conducted water supply and demand analysis under various hydrologic conditions and scenarios;

x Reviewed and modified the processes and supply/demand management of existing and new water supply systems;

x Establishment of flood plain zones and development of flood plain management and hazard reduction operating plans as a modular or incremental adaptation measure (through the coordinative efforts of DENR, DA, DOE and DPWH);

x Updated water resources database and monitoring systems; and

x Developed gendered knowledge products and materials and disseminate using media, outreach and other means to target stakeholders.

The actions for achieving this long-term objective should focus on harmonization of policies, programs and implementation plans along and consistent with the convergence creation for the awareness, knowledge, and capacity building and governance of water-related institutions and other stakeholders. Since water resources are not adequately documented and locally quantified and that water has multiple roles to economic and social development, well-focused and targeted research-based and action agenda for policy and programs are important elements for sustainability and access to safe and sufficient water supply.


SEARCA-ERGONS 37

Projected VA results of CC impacts on UMRBPL’s Transport Sector The level of exposure and sensitivity was determined by assigning weights to each impacts and hazards as shown in Table 11. Exposure and sensitivity were treated as one given that higher exposure usually means higher sensitivity. Table 11. Estimating exposure and sensitivity to climate change.

Impacts and Hazards Exposure and Sensitivity Level

Rating Description (Reclass) 1. Landslide + Flooding, or 0.40 Very High High

Landslide + Drought 2. Landslide 0.30 High High 3. Flooding 0.15 Moderately High Medium 4. Erosion + Drought 0.07 Moderate Medium 5. Erosion 0.05 Low Low 6. Drought 0.03 Very Low Low

Total 1.00 ‘Landslide + Flooding’ means the areas exposed can experience either landslide or flooding or both. Landslide and flooding may occur simultaneously, at the same time and space. ‘Landslide + Drought’ means the areas exposed can experience either landslide or drought. However, landslide and drought cannot occur at the same time and space. For instance, landslide can be expected to occur during erosive rainfall events or typhoons, while droughts can occur during El Nino or dry season. ‘Erosion + Drought’ means the areas exposed can experience either erosion or drought. However, severe erosion and drought cannot occur at the same time and space.

Areas exposed to more than one hazards were given higher exposure and sensitivity rating. For example, Landslide+ Flooding and Landslide + Drought were assigned the highest exposure and sensitivity rating, followed by landslide, flooding and so on. To simplify, the levels of severity were reclassified from five levels to three levels (high, medium and low) as shown in table above.

Estimation of Level of Vulnerability Given SE and AC information, the level of vulnerability was generated. Following Boer et al (2013), exposure and sensitivity as well as adaptive capacity levels were used as bases for determining the level of vulnerabilities as shown in Table 12. Table 12. Estimating vulnerability to climate change.

Exposure and Sensitivity

Adaptive Capacity

Level of Vulnerability

Rank of Vulnerability

High Low Very High Vulnerability 5 Low Low Vulnerable 4

Medium Medium Medium 3 High High Quite Vulnerable 2 Low High Less or Not Vulnerable 1

The results of vulnerability level estimation showed that 1.3-kilometer secondary roads in Bagong Nayon, 7.1-kilometer trails in Geronimo; and the 3.1-kilometer secondary roads and 6.3-kilometer trail in Pintong Bocawe were found to have very high level of vulnerability to climate-change-induced landslide. That is a total of 17.8out of 686.7 kilometers (2.6%) of road network within 16 barangays: 4.4 kilometers of secondary roads (0.6%) and 13.4 kilometers of trails (2%). The most notable roads with vulnerability score of 4 include the following: 41.8-kilometer secondary roads in Calawis (landslide), 100.9-kilometer secondary roads in Cupang (landslide), 1.8-kilometer main road in Pinugay (erosion and drought), 7.8-kilometer trails in


SEARCA-ERGONS 38

Geronimo (landslide), and 5.8-kilometer secondary road in Rosario (landslide). The vulnerable roads total to 186.9 kilometers or 27.2% of 686.7-kilometer road network within the study site. There are some portions of the road network identified under less or not vulnerable. These are: the 0.5-kilometer trails in Puray and the 6.2-kilometer secondary roads in Cuyambay. When combined, these roads and trails represent only 1% of 686.7-kilometer road network. The same procedure used in estimating the vulnerability level of road network was applied to bridges. Fifty nine (59) out of 139 bridges (42.4%) were found vulnerable to climate change impacts and hazards. Almost all of these bridges (58 out of 59 or 98.3%) are located in Antipolo City. Illustrated in Figure 24 shows the extent and distribution of roads and bridges and respective vulnerability level over the 16 barangays. The roads and trails with very high vulnerability levels are marked (yellow circle) for emphasis. These highly vulnerable segments of the road network (vulnerability score of 5) are located in Geronimo, Pintong Bocawe and Bagong Nayon. The map also shows the extent and distribution of vulnerable roads (vulnerability score of 4), which are concentrated inside the UMRBPL. These vulnerable roads are specifically located in Boso-boso and Tayabasan sub-watersheds. Figure 24. Vulnerability level of roads and bridges


SEARCA-ERGONS 39

Transport Vulnerability and Land Use Information on extent, distribution and climate change vulnerability levels of roads and bridges is vital for resources management and land use planning in any local government unit. Cities and municipalities are now required to ‘climate-proof’ their areas of responsibility to protect their people and resources from potential natural disasters. A graphic overplot of roads and bridges over land use map in shown in Figure 25. It shows the concentration of land transport network over land use. The highest density of roads and bridges can be found on the built-up areas of Barangays Cupang and San Jose. Those areas, although not part of UMRBPL, are worthy of attention because of their close proximity to the protected landscape and hence a possible source of encroachment into UMRBPL. The map also shows a high concentration of roads on Cuyambay/Pinugay built-up and cropland areas. These areas are within the Boso-boso Sub-watershed, containing one of the most critical headwaters in upper Marikina watershed. Figure 25. Extent of transport facility over land use.

Another way of visualizing the transport facilities in the UMRBPL (Figure 25). It shows the extent and distribution of ‘land use-based coded’ roads and bridges. In this map, it is clearer to see the high density of transport features in the built-up areas of Cupang-San Jose and Cuyambay-Pinugay. Notice also the high concentration of roads and bridges over built up areas of Rosario. A far second densest, in terms of roads over land use, would be the trails and secondary roads on grasslands of Calawis. The map illustrated in Figure 26 provides better specifications as to where to find the most vulnerable transport facility on land use class. The composite map reveals a lot of features and their interaction in space. The transport facility vulnerability is a result of numerous topological and spatial overlays, while the land use map is the product of processing remotely-sensed data.


SEARCA-ERGONS 40

Figure 26. Extent of transport network classified according to type land use Figure 27. Extent of transport facilities classified according to level of vulnerability to climate change over land use


SEARCA-ERGONS 41

Majority and the densest of roads and bridges with vulnerable level (vulnerability rank of 4) are found in the built-up areas of Cupang – mostly secondary roads exposed to landslides. These areas are adjacent to the transport facilities with medium vulnerability (vulnerability rank of 3), and are also located in Cupang or in the South-westernmost part of the study area. Such area covers a part of Marikina-Infanta highway as illustrated previously in Figure 28.

Figure 28. Satellite image of Marcos Highway segment in Cupang, Antipolo (Image Source: Google Maps 2010)

Projected VA results of CC impacts on UMRBPL’s Health and Gender Sector In assessing local adaptive capacity, Sustainable Livelihood framework as forwarded by many scholars, was considered to be appropriate. This framework focuses on what the system has that enables it to adapt to various stimuli. These are the tangible assets—natural, physical and financial capital or assets; and intangible such as human and social capital. This project looked at both the adaptive capacity of households, communities and local governments, because capacities at various scales can provide better insights into both constraints and opportunities (Adger et al, 2007). Level of Exposure and Sensitivity

Results of the survey showed that almost all of the respondents shared the view that the climate has changed over the past 10 years. Compared with conditions 10 years ago, the most observed changes are in terms of rainfall (57.7%) and temperature (19%) (Table 13). It is commonly observed that there is more volume of rainfall in an event compared with the past. About 18% perceived that short duration of heavy rains are observed now than before. Although some respondents perceived that there are also prolonged heavy rains (23%) that caused flooding of major roads and consequently disruptions and destruction of crops and other livelihoods. There is also an observed uneven distribution of rainfall especially during the rainy season (11.3%); increase in annual typhoon frequency (8.3%); decrease in rainfall during the dry season (19%); less volume of monthly rainfall during the dry season and of short duration (19%); and longer dry months are observed (25%).


SEARCA-ERGONS 42

Table 13. Perceived Changes in Climate Attributes. Perceived Changes in Climate Attributes Frequency Percent

Valid

Temperature 57 19.0 Rainfall 173 57.7 Relative Humidity 25 8.3

Total 255 85.0

Missing System 45 15.0 Total 300 100.0

Level of exposure and sensitivity Population. Percent estimation of sensitivity and exposure of land area exposed to landslides and the population or settlement of these barangays. In the case of Antipolo City, all of the barangays being studied are located in landslide prone areas. For instance, the whole barangays of Bagong Nayon and San Juan are located in identified landslide prone areas, which effectively exposed the total population of the two barangays to landslides. Brgy. Bagong Nayon has a very large population of 45,152 and San Juan with 8,488 who are currently at risk from damages to life, limbs, livelihood and property due to landslides, which gives us a total of 53,640. Two barangays of Rodriguez, namely Burgos and Geronimo have high exposure to landslides—100% and 95% respectively. Burgos is the highest populated barangay within Municipality of Rodriguez (38,554), and all of the barangays are at risk to landslides. Exposure to landslide of Brgy. Pintong Bokawe, the only barangay covered in the Municipality of San Mateo, is about 87% with a population of 4,080. Exposure to landslide risks of the two barangays of Tanay namely San Andres and Cuyambay is estimated to be a high value of 99% and 61%, respectively. Brgy. Mascap of Rodriguez has a low exposure (3%) while Pinugay of Baras is not exposed to risks from landslides.

In terms of flooding, four barangays of Antipolo City are prone to flooding. These barangays are Calawis, Cupang, Inarawan and San Jose. These barangays are also prone to landslides which exposed the communities in both hazards, hence more sensitive to the risks from climate changes. Brgy. Pinugay in the Municipality of Baras is not exposed to landslides but to flooding, and according to key informants, some areas are prone to prolonged flooding. Brgy. Cuyambay in Tanay is also exposed to flooding. Map showing level of sensitivity and exposure to landslide is illustrated in Figure 29.


SEARCA-ERGONS 43

Figure 29. Level of sensitivity and exposure to landslide based on population to landslide, 1-lowest, 5 highest

Population density. The barangays within and in the buffer area of the UMRBPL are distinct in terms of population density. It ranges from a low 0.47 to a high of 34.85. The barangays with low population density (less than 1) are from Tanay (2 barangays), Rodriguez (Mascap) and Antipolo (0.27). These barangays are located in the mountainous and upland areas of the protected area. The high population density are found in Antipolo City (Brgy. Bagong Nayon - 29.88, Cupang - 17.47, San Jose - 23.75), being a major city and in proximity to Metro Manila. Estimated total population exposed to landslides is about 260,580. Shown in Figure 30 is the level of sensitivity and exposure to landslide based on population to flooding.


SEARCA-ERGONS 44

Figure 30. Level of sensitivity and exposure to landslide based on population to flooding, 1-lowest, 5 highest

Poverty level and household income. Majority of the barangays reported to earn between PhP1,000 and PhP5,000 monthly income (Income class 4), way below the poverty threshold (set at 250/day - rural barangays) which is followed by income class earning from PhP5.001 to PhP10,000 (income class 3), a better figure compared with the former. Survey results also recorded households earning a better figure than the previous income classes (PhP10,001-PhP15,000). The extreme level of income earning (less than PhP1,000) is recorded to many barangays, ranging from 5% to 57% of sample population. San Andres in the Municipality of Tanay recorded the highest occurrence of earnings in this income class (57% of sample population). Income above PhP15,000 was only recorded in Brgy. Calawis of Antipolo City (4%). Based on the household income profile from survey results, poverty level may be determined by looking at the percentage of household within income classes 3, 4 and 5. Households in income classes 2 and 1 are those that can be considered above the poverty threshold in the country. These data will be taken as the indicator value for Poverty as a measure of sensitivity. To arrive at a ranking (1-5, with Rank 5 as the most sensitive to climate impacts) which can be used as the indicator value for Poverty as an indicator, the percent poor are grouped into 5 classes as indicated in Table 10a, and this is the basis for ranking sensitivity of each barangays. Figure 31 shows the areas with differential levels of sensitivity and exposure based on poverty as an indicator.


SEARCA-ERGONS 45

Figure 31. Level of sensitivity and exposure based on poverty, 1-lowest, 5 most sensitive

Gender Profile As mentioned earlier, there may be differential exposure and sensitivity for the male and female population. For example, females are more sensitive and exposed to risks associated with evacuation issues in cases of floods and landslides, like physical aspect of moving away from climate hazards. The women are also exposed to perennial risks associated with living in evacuation centers, such as reproductive health and exposures to communicable diseases inherent in crowded and unsanitary living spaces. On the other hand, the menfolk is normally exposed to hazards of the elements, being expected to provide assistance in cases of emergency and in looking for temporary livelihood or continuing efforts to safeguard their properties—e.g. homes and livestock. Hence, in the case of the barangays under study, it is most likely that the level of exposure and sensitivity are directly related to the population and population density. For instance, the more female and male population being exposed to the climate hazards, the higher the sensitivity and exposure, albeit to different risks, even health risks. An estimate of exposure of female population to landslides and consequently to the attendant risks associated with it such as death, injury, loss of livelihood and health hazards after surviving landslides. Using the same method in estimating level of exposure, this study clustered the barangays into five (with 1 as the least sensitive and 5 with the highest sensitivity). Brgys. Bagong Nayon, Cupang and San Jose, all of Antipolo City, are considered the barangays with highest exposure to landslide. For flooding, two barangays Brgys. Cupang and San Jose are also the most exposed to flooding, which make these two barangays with the highest exposure to climate risks (Figure 32).


SEARCA-ERGONS 46

Figure 32. Female population exposure and sensitivity, 1-least sensitive, 5 most sensitive

Main sources of income. The main sources of income are categorized into four types as and are assigned indicator value score based on the assumptions that those whose income are primarily based on agriculture are more exposed and sensitive to climatic changes, hence was assigned a value of 1, which is followed by labor, employment and services and business, trading and communication in descending order based on sensitivity to climate events (Figure 33). These scores are then used to come up with an aggregate indicator values for each of the 16 barangays and these values are used to rank. The bigger the values are, the higher is the sensitivity and exposure is to climate risks, including health risks.


SEARCA-ERGONS 47

Figure 33. Sensitivity and exposure based on main source of income (1- least sensitive, 5 most sensitive)

Adaptive Capacity Education. Most of the respondents have elementary (38%) and high school (41.3%) education, while a small percentage of the sample population has reached college (19%). Majority of the respondents are females (60%) with more years in school compared with their counterpart. This set of data may indicate that their vulnerability to climate stresses (e.g. too much rainfall and extreme events) is relatively higher compared with communities where majority of the population is educated and income sources are stable. Using the indicator value for education, shows that Brgy. Puray, Rodriguez and San Andres, Tanay are the least adaptive to climate change impacts (5). This is followed by San Jose, Antipolo and Cuyambay, Tanay (4). On the other hand, barangays San Juan, Cupang, Bagong Nayon (of Antipolo) and Burgos (of Rodriguez) are expected to be highly adaptable based on this particular index (Figure 34).


SEARCA-ERGONS 48

Figure 34. Adaptive Capacity Index based on education

Previous studies have shown that income and education are highly correlated with capacity to access, analyze and apply new knowledge and information and even adopt new technologies. Income level is also considered already in the estimation of exposure and sensitivity; hence, income was not included in the calculation of adaptive capacity. However, one of the opportunities that can contribute to a better adaptive capacity is multiple job opportunities offered by urban areas. This has also been included in the calculation of exposure and sensitivity because it is an assumption that if the livelihood is solely based on one category, their sensitivity to stress is higher than if the households have varied sources of income. In particular, barangays that are largely agricultural are therefore more vulnerable to stresses like typhoons and heavy rains such as Calawis and San Jose of Antipolo City; Mascap, Puray and Geronimo of Rodriguez; Pintong Bokawe of San Mateo; Cuyambay and San Andres of Tanay; and Pinugay of Baras, while barangays in urban areas and in lower elevation are vulnerable to flooding. Therefore, capacity to adapt to new climate hazards are likely to be low to moderate given the socio demographic profile of the local communities as a whole. In this study, physical capital pertains to infrastructures and social and community services that are available in the study areas while credit services is used as a major indicator of financial capital. Majority (80%) of the covered barangays are with satisfactory access to roads, health and medical facilities at all times, except in remote barangay of Puray and Geronimo in Rodriguez. Credit sources are always wanting. Though the interests are very high, informal lending facilities are getting more popular. The survey also showed that most respondents view that the police and fire departments provide “unsatisfactory to satisfactory only to a limited scale” in terms of services. This offers opportunity for improvement to enhance communities’ ability to respond to climate threats. This is because the police and fire departments are support facilities that can assist communities to respond to extreme events and emergencies related to climate - induced disasters.


SEARCA-ERGONS 49

Participation in community action This is an indicator of social capital. It is also hypothesized that when community members are active in many community-based actions designed to address the potential risks, these communities have higher adaptive capacity than with those who have less. One of the measures of this is their active participation in community actions ranging from cleaning canals, relief and rehabilitation as well as in many training activities. This is a resource that the local leadership can tap to mainstream climate change adaptation (CCA) and disaster risk reduction (DRR) in community development activities. Based on the analysis of data from the survey conducted, it is indicated that the highly adaptive community is Cupang, Antipolo and closely followed by Mascap, Rodriguez. The least adaptive are the barangays of Geronimo, Rodriguez and San Juan, Antipolo (Figure 35). Figure 35. Adaptive Capacity based on Participation in Community Action

Knowledge and information is a major concern because the results showed that even with the information, education and communication (IEC) campaign at the national level, there is prevalence of poor knowledge on climate change impacts and threats, climate change adaptation options and skills needed to promote and integrate these practices in daily lives. With excellent knowledge on climate change as a parameter, it is considered that Inarawan, Antipolo City is the most adaptive community, and theoretically can help in reducing the sensitivity and exposures of the population to climate change risks including health risks (Figure 36).


SEARCA-ERGONS 50

Figure 36. Adaptive Capacity Based on Knowledge and Information on Climate Change

While there is expressed willingness in all areas under study to adopt new approach or technologies in order to enhance adaptation, there is an apparent low level of access to new information that emanates or can emanate from the research stations. This provides an opportunity for the research and development institutions to mainstream new findings and recommendations.

One of the most significant determinants in order to improve the adaptive capacity of communities is the presence of responsive institutions and governance related to addressing climate hazards and consequent threats to human communities. This study used programs and policies on CCA and corresponding budget allocations as indicators of good governance for CCA and DRR. The survey revealed that knowledge on programs and policies of the local government unit (LGU) on CCA is not very well known by the sample population, including budget allocation. This may be attributed to the fact that there are really no legal provisions that mandate the LGU to integrate budget for CCA, when compared with DRR. While the LGUs have shown serious programs to mainstream disaster preparedness and risk reduction, it appears that there are still some room for improvements in terms of the mechanisms for information dissemination and community engagement.


SEARCA-ERGONS 51

Results and Discussion Based on the generated indicator value, we then calculate the Sensitivity and Exposure Index (SEI) of the barangays within the study area. Illustrated in Figure 37 shows the combined SEI based on the different SEI indices.

Figure 37. Sensitivity and Exposure Index of the Study Area

For adaptive capacity estimation, it shows that San Jose of Antipolo City has high adaptive capacity given that its population has high education index compared with others. Knowledge and information index seems to be also high. Other barangays with estimated high adaptive capacity have the same pattern as San Jose (Figure 38).


SEARCA-ERGONS 52

Figure 38. Adaptive Capacity Index of the Study Area

From these two summary tables, a vulnerability profile can be generated. Following Boer et al (2013), the SEI and the ACI are used as bases for categorizing the communities into Type1-5 (Figure 39). Figure 39. Vulnerability Assessment to Climate Change


SEARCA-ERGONS 53

While these are just estimations and are based on relative values (ranking), the study shows that San Jose of Antipolo City, San Rafael of Rodriguez and Cuyambay of Tanay have the highest level of exposure and sensitivity to impacts of climate change. It is more likely due to the fact that Brgy. Cuyambay, including Brgy San Jose and San Rafael primarily depends on agriculture and hence is more exposed to climate risks compared with barangays that have many opportunities to earn livelihood. This threatened livelihood may have indirect repercussion in the way they will manage health risks. These exposures may translate to differential ability to manage the health risks that climatic variability may generate.

When SEI and ACI are considered, the two barangays Cuyambay and San Jose show the highest level of vulnerability compared with others. On the other hand, Bagong Nayon remains to be the community with lowest level of vulnerability. It is the barangay with better employment opportunities and with access to education and health care service. Further to this analysis, when the other results of the sample survey are considered, the study shows that the health threats caused by perceived climate change impacts are real and seem to be consistent with literature on climate change and human health, both global and local. Occurrences of climate sensitive diseases like dengue; and climate related illnesses like diarrhea and leptospirosis are recorded by sample survey. It is worthy to note that, in most areas, except in remote barangays, health clinics and facilities are perceived to be adequate to respond to health problems. Yet what is troublesome in this case is the low level of knowledge of the communities on climate change impacts and threats, options and skills needed to adapt, specifically on management of CSDs like cholera, diarrhea, encephalitis and leptospirosis. Dengue is now well known and parents are alerted on the health management needed, Information on other CSDs, especially leptospirosis are not yet well disseminated. While it is commonly known that the younger population are more susceptible to dengue, the most commonly afflicted with leptospirosis are men, 20-65 years old, who are tasked to clean their homes after the flood or exposed to flood waters as in the case of Olongapo City on September 2013. Hence, men of households in flood prone barangays of Calawis, Cupang, Inarawan, San Jose, Pinugay and Cuyambay maybe at risk to exposure to leptospirosis, a deadly bacterial infection if not treated on time. The existence of government institutions and programs designed to reduce threats and risks due to climate change and natural disasters like typhoons and flooding—is considered strength of the current efforts towards climate resilient communities. However, there is still a need to reach the majority of the households in the study area—to make known these programs and what can be done. Estimating Future Vulnerabilities and Recommendations The Annual Growth Rate (AGR) in the study area is relatively higher than the national average of 2.5%. This very high annual growth rates can be attributed to very high in-migration rate, since these areas are very close to the Metro Manila and some areas are identified as resettlement areas from spill over population. Using a medium and low AGR together with that obtained for the municipalities, three scenarios can be projected to show the trend in population increase for the coming years. The overall population growth expected under different population growth rates is shown in Figure 40.


SEARCA-ERGONS 54

Figure 40. Total Projected Population in the Study Area under Different Annual Growth Rates

The Business as Usual scenario used the AGR for the study sites to project the population of the barangays up to 2050. The population exposed to landslides under the current high population growth rates is five times higher compared with exposed population at low AGR at year 2050. Similar trends are observed showing the projected populations that are exposed to flooding. The needs are less under the low annual growth rates scenario and may need to be seriously considered by policy makers.

Basis for calculations for health and education needs are based on pupil to teacher ratio of 36:1 for primary and 38:1 for secondary (DepEd, 2009-2010); and Physician to Population Ratio – 1.9:1000; nurse to population ratio-4.6:1000; hospital bed to population ratio-1:1,000 and physician to hospital bed- 6:1 (DOH-BHFS, 2009). Given the historical records of dengue cases in the National Capital Region (NCR) Philippines from the WHO study in 2005, the increase in temperature between 0.7q to 0.8qC translates into an increase of about 10 times the number of cases, with 1992 as baseline year. The good news is, as the health care system and the public become more aware of the perils of dengue, the cases are not increasing as expected. In fact, based on the same study, the occurrence of dengue has been reduced from 1992 to 2005, in spite of the increasing rainfall (WHO 2005). This may indicate that our public health system through various means is learning to manage and control the spread of infection.

Projections of future exposure and sensitivity to health risks due to changing climate attributes like rainfall, humidity and temperature may then be estimated based on the rate of population increase (as the exposure and sensitivity indicator) and potential risks based on the historical data for the NCR (WHO 2005).

In the study area, cases of dengue and other CSDs recorded in barangay and municipal clinics are not yet available as of the conduct of the study. However, the project survey showed that in the sample population, only about 4.6% reported cases of dengue, and most of the diseases attributed to climate attributes are colds, flu and flu-like symptoms, while there is one report of leptospirosis, a disease caused by water borne pathogen from urine of rats that is


SEARCA-ERGONS 55

contaminating floodwaters. This is now a major problem in urban areas that are being exposed to flooding and prolonged flooding caused by heavy monsoon rains and typhoons, denuded watersheds and clogged canals and natural waterways. While there seems to be low perception of the occurrence of these climate sensitive diseases (CSDs) among the sample respondents, the Rizal Provincial Disaster Risk and Management Council reported 34 cases of leptospirosis in 2009, and 4 in 2013. The risk may not be felt yet by members of the communities, nevertheless, the survey also showed that communities understood the need for sanitation and environmental clean-up as a way of controlling the occurrence of mosquitoes - borne diseases like dengue, and malaria.

The estimation of future vulnerability in this paper is driven by the projection of population and if adaptive capacity attributes are held constant, then future vulnerability will be higher as more population will be exposed to risks related to climate changes. Under current population growth rates alone, the increase of SEI is very significant and needs to be addressed. Under current pop growth rates with optimistic outlook for poverty alleviation, projected vulnerability may not be as high, but is nevertheless significant.


SEARCA-ERGONS 56

4.0 Proposed UMRBPL Ecotown Strategic Green Growth Road Map

4.1 UMRBPL Ecotown Strategic ‘Green Growth’ Road Map Methodology The identification of the proposed ‘green growth’ road map strategy for UMRBPL was based on the CCC’s application of the ‘ecotown framework’ as show in in Figure 2. It involved the conduct of baseline natural resource assessment and resource accounting, primary baseline and community socio-economic and GHG inventory, GIS-based project risk mapping and conduct of vulnerability assessment (i.e. exposure x sensitivity x adaptive capacity) from the projected key climate related risks (i.e. rain-induced flooding, landslides and drought) of the UMRBPL. The Project team used the findings of these assessment results in the identification of a long-list of priority adaptation measures for each vulnerable area and sector and presented, validated and prioritised by the key local and community stakeholders from the different LGUs, including key provincial, national, development partners and other sectoral groups, using a multi-criteria variate analysis in the selection and prioritization of proposed adaptation measures. Figure 41. CCC Ecotown Framework

The UMRBPL Eco-town Road Map process underwent a four-step identification, review, validation, prioritization, and confirmation process. This process is an adaptation and consolidation of generally accepted prioritization and mapping process of mitigation and adaptation measures recommended under the UNFCC’s National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPA) guidelines.4 The NAPA guidelines aim to facilitate the least developed countries (LDCs) in identifying their urgent priorities, to be met by the selected adaptation options. The priority adaptation options are those whose further delay may lead to increased costs and vulnerability. By means of NAPA guidelines, LDCs are expected to address their

4 Source: UNFCCC (2002), “Annotated guidelines for the preparation of National Adaptation Programmes of Action”, available at http://unfccc.int/files/cooperation_and_support/ldc/application/pdf/annguide.pdf, page 1.


SEARCA-ERGONS 57

immediate needs first in order to be able to adapt to climate change. NAPA addresses the low adaptive capacity of LDCs and provides a process of developing plans of actions for climate.5

Step 1: Identification of list of potential mitigation and adaptation measures. The first stage involved technical identification and evaluation of the possible mitigation and adaptation measures to address the key vulnerabilities affecting the UMRBPL area, namely: rain-induced landslides, flooding and drought and its projected impact (including local adaptive capacity) in five key sectors – agriculture, water, forestry, health, transportation/infrastructure. Based on the results of the vulnerability assessment, a long list of potential mitigation and adaptation measures were identified to address the key vulnerabilities identified in the UMRBPL’s VA.

Step 2: Individual LGUs, national and local stakeholder (including PAMB) review,

validation identification and enhancement of list of potential mitigation and adaptation measures. The second-stage of the identification process involved the detailed presentation of the UMRBPL vulnerability assessment results to LGU officials and local stakeholders in each of the five UMRBPL LGUs. During these presentations, the list of identified mitigation and adaptation measures were presented, reviewed, validated and confirmed in terms of its appropriateness and responsiveness to the identified vulnerability assessment results.

After these local stakeholders and partners consultations, the emerging list of possible mitigation and adaptation measures was further presented in a broad UMRBPL Watershed Summit for local stakeholders, national and local government, private sector, business, academe, civilian and military law enforcement groups, barangays/community/IP groups, and development partners, where additional mitigation and adaptation measures were further integrated into the possible UMRBPL mitigation and adaptation measures. The resulting list of mitigation and adaptation measures (see Annex 1) served as one of the key inputs during the UMRBPL Green Growth Road Map workshop.

Step 3. Prioritization of mitigation and adaptation measures based on MCVA evaluation criteria. The list of mitigation and adaptation measures generated from this two-stage process was then subjected to a multi-criteria variate evaluation analysis (MCVA) by different representatives and local stakeholders of the five UMRBP LGUs, including the Province and key national government agencies, private sector, academe, community stakeholders, where a 10-point criteria (see details below) with identified weights and scoring system was applied. Based on the weighted summation formula (combining criteria weights and scores for different adaptation measures)6 from each LGU and stakeholder groups, a top 3 list based on the final ranking for different measures for each sector was obtained. The results were in the UMRBPL-wide climate change ‘green growth’ strategic road map of prioritized mitigation and adaptation measures (Table 10) and individual LGU local climate change prioritized mitigation and adaptation measures/plan (Table 11). Each resulting priority (both UMRBPL and individual LGUs) was revalidated and reconfirmed with the local stakeholders/LGUs concerned during the process.

5 Anika Nasra Haque, Stelios Grafakos and Marijk Huijsman (2012). “Participatory integrated assessment of flood protection measures for climate adaptation in Dhaka”, 2012 24: 197 Environment and Urbanization 2012 24 (1), International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED)/Sage Publications, p.200. http://eau.sagepub.com/content/24/1/197 (Accessed 17 July 2014). 6 The formula of the weighted summation is FSj=ΣWSij, where FSj indicates the final score of option j, which equals the summation of weighted scores of option j ΣWSij against the evaluation criteria.

http://eau.sagepub.com/content/24/1/197


SEARCA-ERGONS 58

Step 4. Integration and adoption into Protected Area (PA) and local land use and development plans. The final stage would be the implementation priority and timetable and UMRBPL PA and local plan integration of the climate change ‘green growth’ strategic mitigation and adaptation road map. This is a continuing process that would also include possible refinements in the approved UMRBPL protected area management plan (PAMP), local land use and development plans and annual investment plans of UMRBPL LGUs, including the Provincial LGU. These shall all be part of the local integration of climate change mitigation and adaptation measures into the different plans of partner institutions (i.e. PAMB) and LGUs inside the UMRBPL.

4.2 UMRBPL’s multi-criteria variate analysis (MCVA) framework for prioritizing climate change adaptation and mitigation measures Climate change adaptation measure is defined in this UMRBPL study as any action or activity undertaken to “reduce vulnerability of a system, population, or enterprise to adverse effects of climate change” (Haque et al 2012). On the other hand, climate change mitigation measure is any action or activity that reduces greenhouse gas emission (GHG) to the atmosphere. The determination of the priority mitigation and adaptation measures adopted in the UMRBPL Eco-town Green Growth Road Map followed a downscaled application (i.e. local-city/municipal levels) of the UNFCC suggested method of participatory and stakeholder involved in prioritization of adaptation measures under the National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPA). Adaptation assessment conducted here was based on vulnerability assessment, which identified the hazards, exposures and adaptive capacity of the UMBRPL. Based on the various vulnerabilities identified in the study region such as landslides, erosion, flooding and droughts, several adaptation measures were identified by the community and relevant sectors. To be systematic, adaptation assessment followed the process similar to UNFCC protocol, as described below:

1. Conduct of integrated vulnerability assessment; 2. Identification of specific vulnerabilities by specific geographic area; 3. Identification of key climate change adaptation measures based on experts

opinion, local government officials and key community leaders; 4. Identification and prioritization of key criteria for selection of priority measures; 5. Ranking of priority activities by local experts, key informants and members of

local communities using multiple criteria; and 6. Development of project profiles and Cost Benefit Analysis.

Multi-criteria variate analysis (MCVA) takes into account simultaneously the multiple evaluation criteria arising from the multi-faceted impacts of climate change in the UMRBPL. The evaluation framework for UMRBPL MCVA was based on the “continuum of adaptation response from development to climate change” developed by McKay (Figure 42) configured mitigation and adaptation measures that are vulnerability and impact-focused and subsequently adapted in the Eco-town Green Growth Road Map for Siargao Island (LasMarias, N., 2012). In this context, the UMRBPL Green Growth Road Map is both vulnerability-focused and impact-focused.


SEARCA-ERGONS 59

The UMRBPL MCVA applied 10-point evaluation criteria (see Annex 2) for the proposed mitigation and adaptation measures were based on the following parameters and key focused questions on:

1. Urgency and Approach - This refers to whether the project in focus will address a severe climate change impact and whether the intervention will reduce its effects significantly. Questions such as “What is the cost of inaction?” are asked to estimate the nature of the climate change adaptation impacts.

2. No regrets option – This refers to whether the following questions can be addressed: “Can the project reduce climate change impacts? Can the project reduce exposure? Will the project benefits the community even without climate change?”

3. Efficiency - This criterion is often used not only in climate change adaptation but also in many other decision making processes for public health, infrastructure, development and investments. This refers to whether the benefits that can be derived from the investment are high relative to the cost of the project. In many occasions, this is the main single criterion that is used in many decision-making processes. It can also look at alternative measure that is less costly with equivalent benefits that can be derived from the project.

4. Equity and cultural acceptability - This criterion is normally being left out in the process of decision making because of difficult parameters by which it can be measured. Whilst it is difficult to set measureable parameters, this can be addressed qualitatively. This criterion hopes to bring forth the need to answer the following questions: Are both women and men provided equal access to benefits of the CC measure? Is there attention given to vulnerable groups like the Indigenous People or IPs? Would the project alleviate or reduce poverty in the community? Will this measure be consistent with cultural practices?

5. Sustainability - This is a criterion which refers to whether this climate change adaptation project can be sustained by the local government unit or by the community after external support has been terminated. It also looks at whether the positive effects can be maintained past the intervention period and whether there are willing stakeholders to ensure the sustained operation of the project.

6. Replicability and Scalability—This refers to whether the project can be replicated in many households and departments within the local government units (replicability) and to other local government units nearby; and whether it can be adopted at the provincial level or national level (scalability—bigger scale).

7. Environmental impacts—This is a criterion that addresses the questions like: Does this project have adverse impacts to other ecosystems or other sectors? Would the project provide indirect impacts to other communities and ecosystems?

8. Timing—This is a criterion that aims to ensure that timeliness of the project. The basic question is whether this project can alleviate the adverse effects immediately.

9. Level of implementation—This criterion is significant for donor agencies who may want to prioritize projects with a more general rather than very specific approach. The general approach can be tested and has a potential for a wider applicability to various locations.

10. Bottom up vs top down— Many development scholars and workers have already came up with a consensus that embarking on community development work is more sustainable if done using the bottom up or participatory and consultative process.


SEARCA-ERGONS 60

Figure 42. Continuum of Development Responses from Development to Climate Change (McKay, 2007)

Source: LasMarias, N.(2012). “Documentation of Good Practices on Climate Change Adaptation and Biodiversity: Setting the Criteria for Good Adaptation Practice”, GIZ-DENR, Quezon City. With the 10-point criteria for prioritization and the long list of adaptation measures vis-á-vis vulnerabilities, the assessment was conducted via a two-staged approach. The first stage involved the identification of key vulnerability and priority CCA and mitigation measures. This prioritization was done through a workshop environment where local government officers, local line agencies of DENR and the Department of Agriculture (DA), local academic institution, and local community representatives gathered and composed various workshop groups. This stage consisted of the following steps and assessment was based on 1-4 ranking, with 1 as the least important or least likely and 4 as the highest importance, effects or impacts. At the end of this activity, the vulnerabilities (and its CCA measures) with the highest scores were subjected to MCA.

1. Identify local development goal and objectives in the next 10 years – based on CLUP/CDP objectives

2. Identify which of the key CC vulnerabilities based on VA results such as landslides, drought, flooding, which are expected to have the biggest effect and impacts on this objective

3. Identify proposed mitigation and adaptation measures per CC vulnerability vs local development goal with most effect to mitigate and reduce impacts of CC vulnerability

4. Select the Top 3 which will be subjected to MCA Analysis 5. Proceed to Stage 2.


SEARCA-ERGONS 61

The stage 2 of the adaptation and mitigation assessment used the 10-point criteria listed above. The first 3 adaptations and mitigation measures with highest score will be considered the top priority CC measures and will consequently undergo cost and benefit analysis (CBA). The process is indicated below:

1. Rank identified mitigation and adaptation measures (using 1-4 scale, 1-lowest, 4-highest) for each MCA criteria;

2. After completing ranking of each mitigation and adaptation measure per MCA criteria; compute the total points for each proposed mitigation/adaptation

3. Select the top 3 adaptation activities based on the highest total scores garnered. A 1-4 (lowest-to-highest) scalar score system was used as ranking to reflect stakeholders preferences in each question being raised in the different criteria for each proposed measure for each sector. The total score reached (or summation of scores) by each measure from all respondents is averaged to come up with average summed total score for each criterion. The measure with the highest average summed total score is ranked accordingly. Based on these results, the prioritized mitigation and adaptation measures per identified vulnerability are reached (Table 10) for UMRBPL and LGUs (Table 11).

4.3 Key Implementation Issues and Challenges Aside from the identified CC vulnerabilities, UMRBPL LGUs and local communities also faces several key institutional and implementation issues and challenges:

a. Limited technical and competent staff – Outside of Antipolo City and San Mateo, the rest of the other UMRBPL LGUs – Rodriquez, Baras and Tanay, are very small municipalities that have very limited regular LGU personnel that could perform CCA/DRR tasks and responsibilities. This is coupled by the limited technical skills and capabilities of existing LGU staff to perform and implement CCA/DRR related programmes and activities.

b. Limited LGU resources to support and implement CCA/DRR activities and programmes - Similarly, resources to support and implement CCA/DRR are insufficient (in the case of Antipolo and San Mateo) and limited (for Rodriguez, Tanay and Baras). In the case of Antipolo and San Mateo, the concentration of exposed population in vulnerable areas (such as flooding and landslides) requires allocation of large resources over time in order to respond and protect vulnerable communities from CC impacts. Resettlement programmes for highly-at-risk communities have been identified by both LGUs but difficulty in finding safe sites and cost of developing resettlement communities makes it difficult for these LGUs to effectively implement these programmes. In the case, Rodriguez, Tanay and Baras, they are largely dependent on their internal revenue allotment (IRA) and could only tap their disaster fund (e.g. 10% of EDF) to support CCA/DRR measures.

c. Continuous influx of informal settlers and land conversion inside the protected area - This issue has been identified as one of the most critical concern of the UMRBPL PAMB and Provincial LGU. The continuous influx of informal settlers, either through government resettlement programmes and in-migration, have made it difficult to control the continuous depletion of existing forest areas in the PA (specially for agriculture and charcoal-making) and land conversion (i.e. real estate land speculation). Satellite images analysis of the UMRBPL’s land use/vegetative cover changes from 2002-2012 showed that almost 12,000 hectares or an average of 1,200 hectares of forestlands were converted into other uses (mostly agriculture and settlements) inside the UMRBPL.


SEARCA-ERGONS 62

Recent moves to legislate the release of existing forest lands into alienable and disposable lands (for land titling) will only exacerbate the CC vulnerabilities and impact in the UMRBPL and its local communities.

d. Unclear land tenure issues and arrangements - Despite being a protected area, lands inside the PA, which are all classified forestlands and public lands, are being occupied and claimed by both informal communities and land speculators. This has led to an informal land market inside the UMRBPL that threatens the integrity of any resource management rehabilitation and recovery scheme in the area.

5.0 Proposed UMRBPL Ecotown Green Growth Strategic Road Map (Priority Mitigation and Adaptation Measures) and Proposed Local Climate Change Action Plans (LCCAP)

5.1 Proposed UMRBPL Ecotown Green Growth – Strategic Framework The formulation of the Road Map is guided by the principles embodied in the Comprehensive Management Plan of the UMRBPL (CMP-UMRBPL) adopted by the PAMB, as well as the Ecotown Framework set forth by the Climate Change Commission, to wit:

a. Holistic, Integrated and Multiple Use Management and Development ((CMP-UMRBPL) 2012)

River basin is considered a highly complex natural system. Its main importance rests on its ability to provide various ecosystem services for human well being such as provisioning, regulating, cultural and supporting services. Examples of provisioning services that a river basin can provide include food, fiber, fuel and water. Regulating services, on the other hand, refers to the regulating functions of a river basin given that it is primarily a hydrologic system. Its main regulating function is the control and regulation of the release and the flow of the water from the grounds and mountaintop through the creeks and rivers, and finally to the coastal and seas. With climate change, the function of the river basin as a watershed that regulates the release and flow of water becomes highly significant. The ability of the watershed to release and regulate water flow becomes a major consideration of its major function is regulating the flow of water. Other regulating services include climate and diseases, both humans and pests regulating functions. River basin also provides cultural services such as recreational and ecotourism; and providing humans with cultural identity, burial grounds and places of worship. The last and not so evident service is the so called supporting services which include primary or photosynthetic productivity which can potentially translate into secondary productivity (or yield/harvest) and soil formation.

b. Multi-sectoral and inter-disciplinary planning (CMP-UMRBPL 2012)

Due to the multidimensional nature of a river basin, planning needs consider the different uses and users. The development of the road map for the Ecotown and Green Growth of UMRBPL conforms with the PAMB planning process in recognizing the need to engage different stakeholders of the UMRBPL resources, as well as the use of different disciplines to ensure that the biophysical, socioeconomic, and political dimensions of the management and use are examined as basis for formulation of the plan.

c. Sustainable management and development (CMP-UMRBPL 2012)

The Road Map must adhere to the principles of sustainable development. This means that the Road Map must explicitly address the ecological, socioeconomic, cultural and political aspects of the management and use of the resource to ensure sustainability. This is consistent with the call for sustainability as a primary characteristic of any development undertaking.


SEARCA-ERGONS 63

d. Participatory and equitable River Basin management and development (CMP-UMRBPL 2012)

The main concern of the Road Map for Ecotown and Green Growth is basically to ensure the integrity of the UMRBPL resources because the well being of the communities within and outside the watershed depends on it. In this respect, the participation of the stakeholders and members of the communities is imperative to ensure that the benefits derived from the wise management of the resources can be equitably shared by the communities. It also entails that the immediate communities and those that are benefitting from the resource also share the responsibilities of protecting and conserving the limited resources. Off site beneficiaries of ecosystem services include communities located in the downstream who are protected from ecological hazards (rainfall induced flooding and landslides) with the eventual rehabilitation of the river basin. This entails participation and sharing the burden or cost of management and conservation of upland resources.

e. Efficiency in resource utilization (CMP-UMRBPL 2012)

In order to ensure rational use of the resource, it is imperative to have a concrete information on its current condition. This may entail using different methodologies in resource inventory and assessment.

f. Vulnerability and climate risk assessment-based planning (CCC 2012)

Ecotown and green growth planning must take into account not only the current condition of natural as well as the social assets but also the specific vulnerabilities of the resources and its people to climate changes. Hence, a robust assessment process must be conducted. Vulnerability assessment involves determining the biophysical conditions of the river basin, examining the climate-related hazards, estimating the exposures to climate risks and determining the adaptive capacity. The adaptive capacity of the system can influence the extent to which the system may have been affected.

g. Gender sensitive and capacity building-centered process (CCC 2012) Gender mainstreaming is one of the main facets of most development endeavors. In recent years, gender sensitivity has taken serious attention as advocates contend that benefits of development work has been short of meeting sustainability because advances have left out the marginalized sector of the human society—which include women, children, the older population and the indigenous people. To fill in this developmental gap, there is an explicit concern to include gender in any development work, including Ecotown and green growth development. Capacity building is also central to Ecotown Road Map, as sustainability of the resources depends on the ability of the relevant stakeholders to carry on the program activities and make these programs realize the goals. For instance, it is critical that the stakeholders, not only understand the intricacies of living in a complex natural system like the UMRBPL, but also the skills necessary to meet the target goals and objectives. After all, they are the ones who will benefit with the impacts of a better-managed resources, or suffer the consequences.


SEARCA-ERGONS 64

5.2 Vision, Mission and Goal

This Road Map reiterates the Vision, Mission and Goals (VMG) contained in the CMP for UMRBPL which was also adopted by PAMB. The VMG is stated below.

a. Vision

A progressive Upper Marikina River Basin Protected Landscape where communities live in harmony with the natural environment, where people practice sustainable management and use of the resources, where communities within and around the protected landscape are safe and free from harm caused by climate induced risks like flooding and landslides, where communities value ecological services of the UMRBPL, where members of the community are free from poverty and active partners in the conservation and management of the natural resources.

b. Mission

It is the mission of the Ecotown and Green Growth Program to reduce the degradation of the remaining forest cover of the protected area, restore and rehabilitate the integrity of degraded areas, protect wellbeing of the human population, especially the vulnerable populations, from climate-induced hazards like landslides and flooding, promote equity and gender mainstreaming of development programs.

c. Goals

Goal 1: Improve UMRBPL as a Multiple Use Resource. Under this goal, specific objectives include:

x To protect the remaining forest cover within the basin through strict implementation of the laws and regulations by DENR and its deputized entities;

x To rehabilitate the degraded forested areas via sustainable forest management which can take different modes—community based reforestation and public-private partnership similar to ABS CBN Lamesa Forest Park Development and adopt a forest park by Rotary Club, Lions’ Club and other civic organizations and schools;;

x To promote agroforestry as a sustainable livelihood option for communities within and in the vicinity of the protected landscape; and

x To protect the sources of water from pollution both domestic and agro-industrial enterprises via education and information campaigns, establishment of incentive system for households and communities who volunteer to partner in this activity program.

Goal 2 - Enhanced Program on Disaster Prevention and Mitigation. Under this goal, specific objectives include:

x To improve information and education program on CCA and DRRM to reduce exposure of communities to risks such as flooding, landslides and drought.

x To use science and technology innovations to improve disaster preparedness of members of communities;

x To enable the local government unit optimize the use of early warning systems and protocol in the event of disasters such as multihazards maps, forecasting system, and advisories.


SEARCA-ERGONS 65

Goal 3- Improve Public Participation. Under this goal, specific objectives include:

x To engage the communities, NGOs, and private sector in the management of the resources, including resources allocation and the establishment of Upper Marikina River Basin specific plans and projects

x To engage participatory process identifying protocol and measures to monitor and evaluate the progress of the plan (AECOM, 2012).

Goal 4: Integrate Management Programs. Under this goal, specific objectives include:

x To provide a common set of management priorities across national, provincial, municipal and local/barangay levels of government

x To mainstream climate change adaptation and mitigation into the management initiatives by the concerned stakeholders.

Goal 5 -Be Proactive Rather Than Reactive for Disaster Abatement and Risks. Under this goal, specific objectives include:

x To ensure that disaster abatement and risk reduction is allocated local resources. x To continue to evaluate more prudent, innovative and cost-effective solutions,

including formation of partnerships and resource sharing. x To help direct high and low-impact development to appropriate sites within the Upper

Marikina River Basin. x To provide a mechanism for municipalities to plan for long-term growth in line with

mutually agreed-upon environmental objectives for the river basin.

Goal 6: Improve Working Relationships at All levels of Government. Under this goal, specific objectives include:

x To promote coordination of management programs and activities around a geographic focus.

x To facilitate cooperation through a planned outreach and stakeholders’ participation in River Basin management strategy development and implementation.

x To foster an open line of communication for improved working relationships at all levels of government.

Goal 7: Improve Program Efficiency. Under this goal, specific objectives include:

x To clarify and coordinate activities within and across programs and agencies in order to reduce sources of redundancy in program activities

x To streamline operation with agency resources for River Basin or sub- management areas

Goal 8: Increase Program Effectiveness and Climate Change Proofing. Under this goal, specific objectives include:

x To enhance public and private sector’s resources allocation to address the highest priority concerns within specific geographic areas.

x To improve management system to address adverse effects of climate change such as soil erosion and fertility depletion.

x To promote a management system to improve permanent forest and land cover of the UMRBPL and help minimize risks of erosion and landslide and sustain livelihood activities of farmers and other concerned stakeholders.


SEARCA-ERGONS 66

Goal 9: Support Gender Mainstreaming in the UMRBPL Programs. Under this goal, specific objectives include:

x To enhance the role of men, women and children, elderly and indigenous people in the development processes via regular provision of information, participation in public consultations and meetings, program planning, implementation and monitoring and evaluation.

x To support the programs for the different sector/s via explicit allocation of resources from LGUs and other sources.

x To support monitoring and evaluation of various programs and projects to determine progress of the well being of the sectors.

Goal 10: Improved Data Management. Under this goal, specific objectives include:

x To set up an improved system of data storage and retrieval for the UMRBPL at PAMB, LGUs and relevant universities and colleges

x To promote coordination of data collection activities on a River Basin basis x To improve data management capabilities, including the collection, storage,

integration, analysis, and assessment of data to support River Basin management planning and decision-making activities. 5.3 Strategies For Green Growth and Climate Resilient Communities

To achieve the vision, mission and goals for the UMRBPL, this Technical Assistance identified 10 strategies. The list is a product of a process that has been described in the Methodology section of this Road Map. The strategies include rehabilitation of the environment and natural resources, infrastructure/engineering development for climate change adaptation (CCA), climate change mitigation (CCM) and disaster risk reduction (DRR) and improving social and human capital to enhance the adaptive capacity of communities and LGUs. Social capital refers to the social fabric, including the rules and regulation, culture or “way of life” or “system of doing things” (e.g. laws and regulation, information system network, early warning), while human capital refers to improving the quality of population or settlements, including capacity building for various groups and sectors of the communities, improvement of health conditions of the people, education). These strategies are within the continuum of development responses (Mackay, 2007 as cited by Lasmarias et al 2012) that includes addressing the drivers of vulnerability, building response capacity, managing risks and confronting climate change. Figure 43 presents the proposed strategic framework for climate resilience and green growth in UMRBPL.


SEARCA-ERGONS 67

Figure 43. Strategic framework for climate resilience and green growth in UMRBPL


SEARCA-ERGONS 68

a. Reforestation and rehabilitation of the watershed, growing of suitable species for agroforestry, cultivation of plant varieties, and forest protection

Maintaining a healthy and stable forest ecosystem is a necessity in the face of changing climates. Forest resources provide essential services for communities: food and water; regulating functions on climate; cultural and recreational benefits; support functions such as nutrient cycling, water cycling, soil formation and retention, and others. Climate change, coupled with destructive human activities, exerts tremendous pressure on forest ecosystems’ resiliency and capacity to adapt. Without stable and resilient forest ecosystems, the impacts of climate change on communities and the forest itself would be more severe. The status of UMRBPL resources, particularly its land cover is dismal. Of the total area of 23,289.80 ha, 91% of the area is covered with cultivated area mixed with brushlands and grasslands, 1% is open canopy, with mature trees covering <50 percent slope, >1% closed canopy with mature trees covering >50 percent slope and the remaining 8% is with grassland, grass covering > 70 percent slope. For the land use, its subriver basins are dominated by brush and shrublands which constitute 33.8% (9,965.5 ha). Protection forest covers 27.9% (8,222.5 ha) of the area which are mostly located in Montalban Sub-river Basin (5,126.8 ha) and Tayabasan Sub-river Basin (2,604 ha). Around 14% (4,216.7 ha) are devoted to agriculture located mainly in Bosoboso Sub-river Basin (2,813.6 ha). Production Forest covers roughly 12% (3,521.2 ha) with Boso-boso, Tayabasan, and Wawa Sub-river Basins having approximately 1,000 ha each. About 12% of the area is grassland of which 1,737.4 ha is located in Boso-boso Sub-river Basin and another 1,036 ha found in Tayabasan Sub-river Basin. Grassland is the vegetation community that grows in site clearings that had been repeatedly subjected to slash and burn farming practices. Typically, grasses are the initial species to establish on abandoned farms and open areas, which are usually characterized by an adverse growing environment (e.g. depleted soil nutrients, low organic matter and phosphorus, moisture, intense sun exposure). A large expanse of UMRBPL, from the western portion of the Montalban Sub-river Basin down to a greater extent in Antipolo, including some sites at the slopes of the high and low plateau region of Boso-boso Sub-river Basin are blanketed with Imperata (cogon). Grass fires usually occur in summer months that affect the grassland ecosystems. The presence of various endemic forest species in the basin however is an opportunity that can be optimized. For example, dense stands of an endemic, erect bamboo Schizostachyum lumampao locally known as buho occur in pockets in UMRBPL. These bamboo thickets, when fully developed, form an almost uniform canopy at 10-11 m with a thick litter layer of dried bamboo leaves at the forest floor. Patches of young secondary forests are also found in areas that had been cleared by slash and burn but had been left as fallow and allowed to regenerate. Abandoned yemane plantations are also observed and could be areas for initiating rehabilitation. A considerable part of the northeast portion of the UMRBPL, particularly in Brgy.Puray, Rodriguez Municipality, still harbors residual stands of lowland forests which can be classified as lowland evergreen forest. In Antipolo City, the last remaining fragments of residual forests are in Libis (496 masl) at the middle slopes of Mt. Amaya and Tayabasan (479 masl) in Mt. Masola. These forests are mostly confined in the middle and upper slopes, reduced


SEARCA-ERGONS 69

considerably in terms of land area and are very susceptible to clearing and deforestation due to the close proximity of these areas to the road network. Limestone areas are also found in some parts of Rodriguez and Antipolo, and bearing karst topography in places such as Mt. Hapunang Banoy, Mt. Pamitinan, and Mt. Binicayan in Rodriguez. In Antipolo, small pockets of limestone outcrops are occasionally visible along the highway but with mostly degraded vegetation. A residual forest over craggy limestone was sampled in Mt. Domire in Brgy. San Isidro in Antipolo at 632 masl. No dipterocarps were encountered within the surveyed plot. Typical tree species in the area include Alectryonglaber, Aleuritesmoluccana, Celtis philippinensis, Diplodiscus paniculatus, Gloeocarpus patentivalvis, Heritiera sylvatica, Neoscortechinia philippinensis, and Pterospermum diversifolium. Acer laurinum, a deciduous tree common in forests at higher elevations has likewise been recorded but only as a single individual. The understory is represented by Antirheabenguetensis, Psychotrialuzoniensis, and Severiniadisticha. The high elevations of Mt. Irid (1,469 masl), Mt. Palagyo (1,251), and an unnamed peak at 1,405 masl in the northeast portion of the UMRBPL in Rodriguez fall within the elevation confines of two montane formations (i.e., Lower and Upper Montane forests). The lower montane forests can be distinguished from the lowland evergreen forests by a canopy that is much lower (15-33 m as against 25-45 m), with fewer emergent trees, less tree buttressing, and the increased abundance of ferns, bryophytes and orchids (Whitmore, 1984). Given the status of the forest resources and the watershed as a whole of the UMRBPL, the various stakeholders of the UMRBPL agreed that it is of utmost priority to rehabilitate the watershed through reforestation. The reforestation program should include the use of species endemic to the area, such as buho that has shown also to have high economic value. Nursery establishment is also prioritized.

b. Enforcement of environmental laws and regulations, covering forest protection, land use conversion, clean air, clean water and ecological solid waste management

The current status of UMRBPL (GIS Ecotown Report, 2012) is evident of the breakdown of the forest protection law. The protection forest zone (PTFZ) includes the whole Marikina Watershed in Brgys. Calawis, San Juan and San Jose which by law (PD 705) should be automatically declared a protection forest zone because of its ecologically fragile character. Also included in this zone are the small patches of land with slopes above 50 percent in the urban zone. This zone should be left alone for such non-intrusive uses as wildlife sanctuary, water flow storage and regulation, climate moderation, soil erosion prevention and biotic gene pool repository. For Antipolo City alone, this zone occupies approximately 19,011 hectares based on the actual use as reflected on the zoning map of the City.

Protection areas comprise both natural and man-made resources that serve as the life support system of the urban areas surrounding the river basin. These are vital areas that are deliberately kept open to maintain the amenity value of the City’s environment. These open spaces provide the needed buffers such as easements along river banks, lakeshores, creeks and around escarpments. Protection areas include the forestlands, prime forestry lands, water bodies like rivers and waterfalls, historic and cultural/tourism sites that are both nationally and locally significant such as the Antipolo Cathedral. The environmentally- sensitive or hazardous areas, by their very nature, need to be protected to avoid further environmental degradation resulting from encroachment. Land use conversion of watershed areas into other uses is already a perceived threat to the integrity of the resources of the UMRBPL which exposes urban settlements and cities (including outside the 5 covered municipalities and city) to severe prolonged flooding as in the


SEARCA-ERGONS 70

case of Ondoy of 2009, and flashfloods. It is observed for example that there is a significant increase in agro-industrial use in consideration of Pinugay of Antipolo City, as the agro-industrial center for the City. In the proposed land use plan, the agro industrial areas increased from 0.44% to 5.24%, from a mere 169.56 hectares in the past decade to 2,017.93 hectares in 2010. Based on the MARILAQUE/RIZLAQUE Development Framework Plan and the CALABARZON Master Plan, Antipolo City has been identified as an industrial center for Rizal due to the availability of large tracts of lands. This could be a major driver of further changes in the land cover of the watershed. Hence, it is paramount that forest protection laws, specifically the NIPAS Law, becomes a major priority to conserve the remaining forest cover. In the meantime, open areas within the UMRBPL must be rehabilitated through appropriate land use approaches. Stricter enforcement of forest protection and stronger forest fire protection and prevention program is needed. In addition, improved monitoring of forest and fireline break and break construction along sensitive areas must be seriously taken into consideration. At best, resources must be allocated just for this purpose. This road map also reiterates the importance of development of zoning for different land uses, supported by appropriate legal instruments at the local and provincial levels; and allocated sufficient budget to be implemented and realized. Other environmental laws such as RA 9003 or Ecological Solid Wastes Management, Clean Air Act, water code, and similar laws must be enforced at various levels--from households, schools and communities and the whole river basin. Resources must be explicitly allocated to enforcement of these laws. Deputization of the enforcement of some laws to the local barangays, as appropriate, is one of the best practices that some LGUs adopted and can be promoted basin wide.

c. Build capacity of LGUs and communities

An empowered community willing to be partner in the Ecotown Road Map implementation is an important requisite. A continuing education program on climate change, climate change adaptation, climate change mitigation, disaster risk reduction, ecological solid waste management, forest and environment protection and conservation, sustainable agriculture, health and sanitation, among the many, should be planned and implemented and progress must be monitored and evaluated periodically. Training programs can target various audiences to include men, women, children, and indigenous people. In disaster risk reduction and management (DRRM), the barangays and the LGUs must be in the frontline and, therefore, should be fully informed. This will ensure the aggressive implementation of the DRRM program. It ensures that the local government will be aggressive in placing health and education facilities, and other relevant public services major priority.

d. Strengthen information and knowledge management system

Knowledge and information is a major concern because the results of this study showed that even with the information, education and communication (IEC) campaign at the national level, there is prevalence of poor knowledge on climate change impacts and threats, climate change adaptation options and skills needed to promote and integrate these practices in daily lives. Among the study areas, Barangay Inarawan, Antipolo City is knowledgeable in terms of these concepts and theoretically can help in reducing the sensitivity and exposures of the population to climate change risks including health risks. In tandem with the capacity building program is the development of a system of information and knowledge management system. This enables the storage or collection of related information on the UMRBPL, which provides a support to information dissemination and


SEARCA-ERGONS 71

capacity building activities. This involves a decent filing system or library system (hard copies repository), computerized data base system (more powerful and larger storage capacity computer with back ups in mini hard drives). This information and management system is advisable to have mirror image in the local university for safe keeping and continued growth of data and information collection. A regular education and information program can be formulated based on what various audiences need. For example, for government workers, the formal seminars and training activities may be appropriate. However, informal groups like women, children, elderly and indigenous people may need different designs for information dissemination as well as capacity building. It would be more efficient to take advantage of localized system of knowledge and information dissemination than to use the more formal ones. “Kapihan sa Baryo”, “kwentong barbero” or information exchange in the barber shops, and even public film showing at the barangay halls, are some of the more common information dissemination platforms.

e. Climate proofing of physical infrastructure

Improvement of existing infrastructures and construction of new ones are deemed imperative to reduce the damage to life and property due to climate extremes such as floods and landslides, and even drought. Construction of water impounding structures like ponds can also be an option, to ensure the availability of water for agriculture during the dry season or prolonged drought. For example, recycling or re-using water in agriculture is a measure that optimizes available water. Another measure that has been identified in relation to protection from landslides and floods is the slope stabilization of rivers and creeks which can either be a combination of hard and biological engineering. In some areas in the basin, river slope stabilization can be done using indigenous plant species like bamboos. In some narrower creeks, concreting of the riverbanks can be an option in combination with some plants that can contribute to stability and enhance the aesthetics of the area. For construction or repairs of new bridges, it is recommended that the design consider the new “climate normal patterns”. For example, under climate change scenario, it can be expected that more rainfall can happening a longer period of time, which can cause flooding, erosion of bases of roads and bridges, and eventually mass wasting or landslide, even without a typhoon occurring, hence, stabilization of approaches of bridges and canals be considered. Provision of easement for natural waterways, constructed roads and bridges is an additional consideration for development and construction of new physical infrastructures.

f. Strengthen disaster preparedness of LGUs and communities

UMRBPL’s rugged physical features make it sensitive to climate change impacts. Most of the remaining forests are located in areas with slopes that are greater 18 percent. Watersheds with good vegetative cover act as regulators of water release in times of droughts and during heavy rains. At the moment, the land cover of the UMRBPL is dominantly grasslands and cultivated areas and it is expected that its hydrologic function is impaired and could not hold as much water as it was before, at least prior to 2004. In addition, for the steeper and longer slopes, there is higher the risk for erosion. This means a declining soil fertility and quality, detrimental to agricultural production. While the watershed area is decreasing and agricultural viability is threatened due to soil erosion, the population of the basin is increasing at a rapid rate. This translates into increasing population who are exposed to climate risks including floods, flashfloods, landslides, droughts, low agricultural productivity and in the longer term, poverty and high morbidity and mortality.


SEARCA-ERGONS 72

Vulnerability assessment shows that of the UMRBPL total population of 345,236, 63% is exposed to landslides. In fact, some of the barangays of Antipolo City, Rodriguez, Tanay and San Mateo have more than 80% of their population exposed to landslide risks. The project survey showed that residents of the area observed heavier rains, flash floods, flooding, and even landslides of some areas. Map analysis showed that all the barangays of Antipolo City are at risk from landslides, specifically Brgys. Bagong Nayon and San Juan (from Annex 3, Main Report by Godilano and dl Cruz, 2013). For instance, the whole barangays of Bagong Nayon and San Juan are located in identified landslide prone areas, which effectively exposed the total population of the 2 barangays to landslides. Brgy. Bagong Nayon has a very large population of 45,152 and San Juan with 8,488 who are currently at risk from damages to life, limbs, livelihood and property due to landslides. Two barangays of Rodriguez, namely Burgos and Geronimo have high exposure to landslides—100% and 95%, respectively. Burgos is the highest populated barangay within Municipality of Rodriguez (38,554), and all of the barangays are at risk to landslides. Exposure to landslide of Brgy. Pintong Bokawe, the only barangay covered in the Municipality of San Mateo, is about 87% of its population exposed to landslide risks. Exposure to landslide risks of the two barangays of Tanay namely San Andres and Cuyambay is estimated to be a high value of 99% and 61% respectively, while barangays in urban areas and in lower elevation are vulnerable to flooding. Therefore, capacity to adapt to new climate hazards are likely to be low to moderate given the socio demographic profile of the local communities as a whole. Given all these, all LGUs need to prepare its citizens for any disaster that may come about—landslides, floods, flashfloods, drought and soil erosion. Some measures can significantly enhance the communities’ preparedness. These include the use of the results of the Vulnerability Assessment to update the Comprehensive Land Use Plan or CLUP to integrate climate change (CC) and disaster risk reduction (DRR). The CLUP is a strategic instrument for mainstreaming CCA and DRR in the investment plans of LGUs. A serious investment is encouraged among LGUs to improve its forecasting and early warning system for typhoons, monsoon rains, floods and landslides. Other measures include periodic cleaning and improvement of impaired waterways and structures in flood prone areas. During events of heavy rainfall and evacuation of residents, a systematic procedure for distribution of information, relief and other services must be in place. Capacity building and information dissemination are components of an effective and efficient disaster risk reduction and management.

g. Mainstreaming gender concerns and establish additional health facilities

Results of the vulnerability assessment showed differential vulnerabilities of women based on location. VA estimated exposure of female population to landslides and consequently to the attendant risks associated with it such as death, injury, loss of livelihood and health hazards after surviving landslides. Using the same method in estimating level of exposure, this study clustered the barangays into 5 (with 1 as the least sensitive and 5 with the highest sensitivity). Based on this, Brgys. Bagong Nayon, Cupang and San Jose, all of Antipolo City, are considered the barangays with highest exposure to landslide. For flooding, two barangays Brgys. Cupang and San Jose are also the most exposed to flooding, which make these two barangays with the highest exposure to climate risks. In general, about 47% of total population are exposed to various risks, mainly landslides.


SEARCA-ERGONS 73

Figure 44. Exposure and sensitivity of female population

The study reiterated the significance of explicitly including gender concerns in any development initiatives, especially in designing projects, capacity building activities and information dissemination. Gender roles in both urban and rural/upland communities may have distinctive features, but the basic roles are similar. Largely, women, especially in the uplands, are in charge in decision making related to education of the children as well as health and nutrition concerns of the family. Health and sanitation, particularly having access to safe water, is one of the major pre-occupation. With climate change, it will be no surprise if this becomes an additional burden to the sector of women. During the interviews conducted, the need for regular water quality testing of their water sources was discussed, especially during flooding seasons. The VA also informed the stakeholders of the need to increase the number of health and education facilities to cope with the growing population of both urban and rural and upland barangays.

h. Rationalize human settlements management The increasing population within and at the periphery of the UMRBPL undeniably puts pressure on the declining quality of this multiple resource. The DENR PAMB has already conducted survey of the residents within the protected area as one step to contain the increasing human settlements inside the protected landscape. While there are legal instruments that allow for the relocation of the informal settlers within the protected areas to other less critical areas, the National Housing Authority or NHA/DSWD implements program that relocated informal settlers of Metro Manila located in hazardous areas such as riverbanks to some barangays in these municipalities, adding pressure to the limited resources of the LGUs. This program that runs in conflict with some legal instruments need to be discussed and clarified with concerns agencies. It is in this context that harmonization of local, provincial and national plans are imperative if we are to tread the path towards green growth and climate resilience communities.


SEARCA-ERGONS 74

i. Ensure energy sufficiency and efficiency to lessen GHG emission In the study conducted under this TA, levels of greenhouse gas emissions of six (6) sectors were assessed. These include the: (1) Agriculture; (2) Land Use Change and Forestry; (3) Waste; (4) Energy; (5) Transportation and (6) Industry. This was done to identify and assess GHG mitigation priorities, and identify key policies and measures for implementation in the Upper Marikina River Basin Protected Landscape.

Of the six sectors assessed, waste is found to be the biggest emitter. Total emission of the waste sector is 6521.06 Gg which represents 82% of the total emissions in the UMRBPL. Following the waste, is the energy sector which has a total CO2 emission of 1154 Gg. This comprises 14% of the total emissions at UMRBPL. The remaining sectors have very little share on the total CO2 emissions in the UMRBPL. For instance, emission from the agriculture sector represents 1.98% only while that from transportation is a mere 1.17%. The LUCF sector has total emission of about 73 Gg which comprise 0.91% of the total emissions while the industry sector is negligible as emission is estimated to be 0.0015 Gg only. This likely emission trend is due to the following factors: (1) dense population of the five municipalities included in UMRBPL; (2) proximity to Metro Manila; (3) presence of many manufacturers and establishments; and (4) massive land conversion into settlement. Emissions from energy, industries and waste are likely comparable with the national estimates but emission from LUCF is likely higher as at the national level due to the land use changes that had occurred in the last 10 years. LUCF sector at the national level is a huge sink of carbon. Given these conditions, it is imperative that the following measures are prioritized in the Ecotown and Green Growth Road Map: 1) Transmission loss reduction; 2) promote the widespread use of renewables, maximize energy efficient opportunities and promotion of climate friendly technologies and practices; 3) promotion of energy efficient designs for new buildings; 4) promotion of the use of bicycles and walking as a healthy lifestyle, and if possible, designation of bicycle and pedestrian lanes; and lastly, 5) conduct energy efficiency information campaign.

j. Implement an Integrated waste management

As was noted in the earlier section, wastes are top source of GHG emission in the study area. A landmark legislation provides for the establishment of an ecological waste management system at the LGU level or also known as the RA 9003. However, the compliance at the national and local levels is not at par, if we are to achieve green growth and climate resiliency. Stakeholders of this assessment recognized as a priority the construction of sanitary landfill. Other strategies identified to put in place an efficient and effective integrated waste management include the following: 1) efficient use of materials in households, offices, communities (REDUCE wastes); 2) waste water treatments and recycling; and 3) production of bio charcoal from wastes.

5.4 Proposed Green Growth Roadmap Implementation Period (10-year) The UMRBPL Eco-town ‘Green-growth’ Strategic Road Map is proposed to be implemented for a 10-year period to coincide with the local land use plan period in order to fully integrate the ‘green growth’ strategy local development plan. The UMRBPL Eco-town Green-growth strategy is divided into 3 time periods:

x Immediate/short-term (1-3 years) – These are priority measures that are to be implemented soonest because of its urgency and direct impact in reducing the identified CC vulnerabilities in the area. This time period shall also coincide with the existing administrative terms of offices of UMRBPL implementing LGUs and facilitate


SEARCA-ERGONS 75

the integration of the ‘green growth’ strategy’s priority measures into the local development plan and budgeting processes of UMRBPL LGUs. Measures identified under this period are short-gestation and quick impact projects. They may also include measures that are long-term in nature, in terms of expected results, i.e. reforestation and drainage systems, but will have to be done at the earliest time in order to achieve its long-term results.

x Medium-term (3-5 yrs) – These are priority measures that are to be implemented

between 3-5 years because of the necessary technical/feasibility preparation and implementation period needed in order to see the expected results of these measures. They are also measures that go beyond the terms of office of UMRBPL LGUs and officials and would have to be implemented at multi-year levels and would require funding support beyond the LGU budget cycle and may need national government appropriations and multi-lateral/bilateral donors support.

x Long-term (5-10 yrs) – Measures in this time period are strategic and programmatic

measures are expected to directly contribute to long-term reduction of the CC-vulnerabilities of UMRBPL on rain-induced landslides, flooding and drought. These are measures that would be implemented continuously or results would only be achieved after several years (i.e. 5yrs++) and which would require not only sustained local policy and institutional commitment but also national and multi-lateral/bilateral assistance. These measures are be capital-intensive (i.e. vital infrastructures – storm water and drainage systems, alternative/renewable energy sources) and have to be implemented over larger physical areas (i.e. reforestation, slope and soil stabilisation, IEC and social mobilization) to achieve desired results.

5.5 UMRBPL Priority Mitigation and Adaptation Measures (See Table 14)

A total of 23 priority adaptation directly addressing UMRBPL’s three CC vulnerabilities (i.e. rain induced landslides, flooding and drought) and three mitigation (GhG emission reduction) measures were proposed to be part of the UMRBPL Green Growth Road Map. These prioritized measures are a combination of hard (physical infrastructure and public works) and soft (social, institutional, policy, capacity building, economic programmes) measures. Several of the priority adaptation and mitigation measures were seen to address all vulnerabilities (i.e. rain-induced landslides, flooding and drought) because of its effect on the key sectors of water, forestry and agriculture sector, infrastructure and transport, and health (Table 14). Of all the priority measures identified, the integrated programme for reforestation of denuded areas inside UMRBPL and improved slope stabilization/protection, soil and water conservation measures were considered the highest priority identified by all stakeholders. These measures were considered critical to address all three major CC-vulnerabilities that are expected to be encountered by all LGUs. (See Table 10a). Similarly, slope stabilization and protection measures (using bioengineering and hard engineering/structural solutions) are also priorities to address the CC-vulnerability and impact of landslides and flooding to roads and bridges in the infrastructure/transport sector. All these measures need to be implemented immediately albeit the expected results are long-term because their full impact will only be seen over several years continuous and sustained implementation.


SEARCA-ERGONS 76

The next highest priority was the construction/provision of small water impounding facilities or check dams to address issue of flooding and drought along with the strict enforcement of environmental, forestry, building and zoning regulations. These measures are considered immediate and medium-term measures as they can be accomplished within 1-5 years if not earlier. For CC mitigation (GhG emission reduction) measures, whilst only three direct GhG emission reduction measures were identified to address the three highest GhG emission causes in UMRBPL (i.e. solid waste, energy and transportation), other CCA measures, particularly reforestation, slope stabilization and protection, soil and water conservation and enforcement of environmental and zoning regulations are complementary actions that would significantly lead to reducing GhG emissions and strengthen sustainable landscapes in UMRBPL. All of the GhG emission reduction measures are considered long-term measures as these are systemic and programmatic measures that will require sustained and prolonged implementation and monitoring.


SEARCA-ERGONS 77

Table 14. Summary of Key Mitigation and Adaptation Measures of UMRBPL Green Growth Road Map

Sector Common priority mitigation and adaptation measures

Key CC vulnerability being addressed

Proposed Implementation Period

Key Implementing Agencies and Partners

Agriculture, forestry and water

x Reforestation of sloping areas for soil stabilization and critically denuded areas of watershed;

x Strict implementation of forest laws and regulations, including the NIPAS Act and the Water Code

x Construction of water impounding structures

x ALL (rain-induced landslides, flooding and drought)

x ALL

x Flooding/drought

x Immediate-Medium (1-5 years)

x Immediate (1-3 years)

x Immediate-Medium (1-5 years)

x PAMB, LGUs and local barangays

x DENR, DPWH, PNP/Phil Army and Provincial Gov’t

x Private Sector (i.e. PDRF, PBSP, etc.)

Infrastructure and transport

x Provision of easements/drainage (roads)

x Slope stabilisation (i.e. bioengineering and structural), approach strengthening and protection (roads/bridges)

x Improved local storm water and drainage systems (roads/bridges)

x Rain-induced landslides/flooding

x Rain-induced landslides/flooding

x ALL

x Immediate (1-3 years)

x Immediate-Medium-term (1-5 years)

x Medium-Long-term (3-5 years++),

x LGU Engineering/General Services Office and local barangays

x DPWH, Provincial Engineering Office, Phil Army Engineering Battalion

x Private Sector –Maynilad, Manila Water, MWSS

Health x Regular water quality testing x IEC and capacity building on DRR/CC

impacts on health and diseases, poverty, livelihoods

x Strict enforcement of environmental management laws and zoning regulations

x Flooding/drought x ALL

x Flooding

x Immediate (1-3 years) x Immediate (1-3 years),

continuing

x Immediate (1-3 years), continuing

x LGU Health Offices, local BHWs/barangays and ENROs, Agri, SWMB Offices and C/MDPCs

x DENR, DOH, DPWH, Province Health/Envi Office/PPDO, DepEd

x Local private sector and NGOs/CSOs, schools

GhG emission reduction

x Improving integrated solid waste management program; establishment of sanitary land fill; production of bio-charcoal from solid waste (waste)

x ALL x Immediate-Medium-term (1-5 years);

x Local ENRO/SWM, Engineering and General Services, Public Safety/Traffic


SEARCA-ERGONS 78

Sector Common priority mitigation and adaptation measures

Key CC vulnerability being addressed

Proposed Implementation Period

Key Implementing Agencies and Partners

x Policies to promote widespread use of renewables, maximization of energy efficient opportunities and promotion of climate friendly technologies and practices (energy);

x Improved urban traffic and road management (transportation); promotion of e-trikes

x Medium-Long-term (3-5 years++)

x Medium-Long-term (3-

5years++)

Units, local police and barangays

x DENR, DOST, DA, DepED, Province ENRO/Agri/Engineering

x Local transport groups and private sector (i.e. livestock and poultry)


SEARCA-ERGONS 79

Table 14a. UMRBPL MCA measures based on vulnerability

No. Adaptation Measure

Sector/MCA Score Vulnerability

Agriculture Water Forestry Roads and Infrastructure Health Total

Rain Induced

Landslide

Rain Induced Flooding

Drought

1 Reforestation of sloping areas for soil stabilization and critically denuded areas of watershed

3334 2404 5404 0 0 11142 9 9

2 Strict implementation of forest laws and regulations, including the NIPAS Act and the water code

760 4073 2334 0 0 7167 9 9 9

3 Recycling or reuse of water (water conservation) in agricultural communities

858 858 858 0 0 2574 9

4 Slope Stabilization (Both Biological & Engineering) 2432 0 0 0 0 2432 9 9

5 Relocation of residents 2290 0 0 0 0 2290 9 9

6 Construction of water impounding structures 0 1776 0 0 0 1776 9

7 Growing of suitable agroforestry species as well as appropriate land cultivation practices

0 836 836 0 0 1672 9

8

Stricter enforcement of forest protection and stronger forest fire protection and prevention programmes; improved monitoring of forest and fireline/break construction along sensitive area

0 836 836 0 0 1672 9

9

Strict implementation of zoning ordinance (CLUP) such as clear ground-level demarcation lines/buffer zones (between critical agricultural areas and other land uses)

1199 418 0 0 0 1617 9 9

10 Implement the provision in the clean water, air and solid waste management act

0 0 0 0 1126 1126 9 9 9


SEARCA-ERGONS 80

No. Adaptation Measure

Sector/MCA Score Vulnerability

Agriculture Water Forestry Roads and Infrastructure Health Total

Rain Induced

Landslide

Rain Induced Flooding

Drought

11 Regular education and information dissemination about the future threats of climate change including health and diseases, adaptation and mitigation practices

0 0 0 0 1045 1045 9 9 9

12 Strengthening the agricultural supply chain system for proper distribution system during intense floods 836 0 0 0 0 836 9

13 Provision of the government's improved forecasting system (landslides, typhoons, floods) 0 760 0 0 0 760 9

14 Strengthening Land use conversion of prime agricultural lands must be minimized to the minimize flood exposure of the communities

760 0 0 0 0 760 9

15 Regular Water Quality Testing 0 0 0 0 727 727 9 9 9

16 Cleaning out water sources and structures in flood prone areas 0 0 0 432 0 432 9 9

17 Updating CLUP integrating CC & DRR and vulnerabilities 128 128 128 0 0 384 9

18 DRRM Capacity of Barangays and DILG LGU must be in frontline and must be fully developed. 0 0 0 0 336 336 9 9 9

19 Stabilization of approaches 0 0 0 332 0 332 9 9

20

DILG and LGUs must be in the frontline in DRR and CCA and therefore must be fully informed so that they can become more aggressive in ensuring that health and education facilities of the growing population are met

0 0 0 0 312 312 9 9 9

21 Provision of Easement 0 0 0 305 0 305 9 9

22 Conduct of training on the basic of climate change, impacts and threats, climate change adaptation approaches specifically in agriculture sector

0 0 0 0 218 218 9 9 9

23 Cultivation of plant varieties with insect repellent properties like Citronella and Ageratum 0 0 0 0 146 146 9 9 9


SEARCA-ERGONS 81

Table 14b. UMRBPL GHG measures emission reduction

No. GHG Emission Reduction Measure Waste Energy LUCF TRANSPORTATION MCA Score

1 Sanitary Landfill 9 876 2 National Greening Program 9 555 3 Waste recycling 9 497 4 Transmission loss reduction 9 468 5 Integrated waste management 9 350 6 Efficient use of materials 9 320 7 Waste water Management 9 320 8 Forest Protection 9 320 9 Policies to promote widespread use of renewables, maximization of

energy efficient opportunities and promotion of climate friendly technologies and practices

9 318

10 Production of bio charcoal from waste 9 311 11 Energy efficient designs for new building/houses 9 298 12 New and renewable energy (e.g. municipal wastes, wood/wood wastes,

coconut residues, animal wastes and rice residues, mini hydro) 9 296

13 Policy to promote use of bicycles/walk in short distance travels 9 235 14 Solid and watershed conservation 9 232 15 Policies to promote protection/enhancement of the country's forest

resources 9 231

16 Energy Efficiency Information Campaign 9 146


SEARCA-ERGONS 82

5.6 Local climate change action (mitigation and adaptation) plans The local priority mitigation and adaptation measures for each of the UMRBPL LGUs are presented in Table 16. These measures are based on the degree of CC vulnerabilities and GHG emissions of each LGU in each sectoral area. In terms of CC vulnerability, Antipolo City and San Mateo are seen to be the less vulnerable over-all from rain-induced landslides, flooding and drought because of their higher adaptive capacity compared to Rodriquez, Baras and Tanay which are considered moderately vulnerable, specially to rain-induced landslides and flooding. In terms of key vulnerable sector areas (See Table 15), the water sector presents significant vulnerability to all LGUs. Next would be agriculture and forestry were all LGUs exhibited medium vulnerabilities to the three key CC impacts. Health, on the other hand, has high vulnerability in certain areas/parts of Antipolo (i.e. Bagong Nayon), Baras (i.e Pinugay) and Rodriguez (i.e. Geronimo), other LGUs exhibited were medium to quite vulnerable. Antipolo City, on the other hand, along with San Mateo, showed the highest vulnerability for rain-induced landslide/erosion and drought in the infrastructure/transport sector, particularly on roads because of the highly dense population and urbanizing areas of the two LGUs. Antipolo’s bridges also showed high vulnerabilities to landslide/erosion and drought. For the rest of the UMRBPL LGUs, portions of local roads/trails showed vulnerability to landslides/erosion and drought. As regards GHG emissions, all the municipalities covered by UMRBPL have largest emissions from the waste sector. For Antipolo City and San Mateo, energy and transportation rank 2nd and 3rd, respectively in terms of contribution to total emission. This trend is observed because of the relatively high population in the municipalities and their proximity to Metro Manila that makes possible for the residents to commute daily when attending school and report for work. Baras, being an agricultural municipality has the agriculture sector as the second major emitter while energy ranks 3rd. In Rodriguez, the LUCF sector and the energy sector ranks 2nd and 3rd, respectively while in Tanay, energy sector ranks 2nd and the agriculture sector ranks 3rd. While emission from waste constitute the highest amount of total emissions across all municipalities, mitigation strategy with the highest priority given by LGUs does not concern waste. The main reason for this is that the LGUs are already undertaking programs that address waste in compliance to the implementation of Republic Act (R.A.) 9003 or the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000. Table 17a and 17b shows the prioritized local climate change action plan activities and proposed GHG emission reduction strategies based on the results of the MCVA.

5.7 Key Implementation Arrangements a. Lead Implementing Agency - The lead implementing agency for the UMRBPL

Ecotown Green Growth Road Map would be the UMRBPL PAMB and UMRBPL LGUs.

UMRBPL PAMB - The UMRBPL PAMB shall provide the over-all implementation guidance of the identified key mitigation and adaptation measures in the UMRBPL, particularly those involving broad areas and sectors covering several LGUs and communities. As the mandated administrative and management authority inside the protected area, the PAMB as chaired by the DENR and with members from the LGUs within the UMRBPL, is the appropriate and legal institution that should provide over-all leadership in the implementation of CC mitigation and adaptation measures in the UMRBPL Ecotown Green Growth Road Map, particularly as it is integrated and enhanced into the approved PA management plan.


SEARCA-ERGONS 83

UMRBPL LGUs – The LGUs of Antipolo, San Mateo, Rodriguez, Baras and Tanay serve as the lead local implementing agency of the UMRBPL Green Growth Road Map through the integration of key and appropriate mitigation and adaptation measures into their local climate change action/DRRM plan. The UMRBPL LGUs all are the legally mandated local implementing bodies for CCA/DRR mitigation and adaptation plans as provided for under CCA and DRRM Act. At the local levels, local communities, NGOs/CSOs and barangays within UMRBPL serves as the key field implementation units of the LGUs in the operationalization of their local CCA/DRRM plans.

b. Key national/local implementation and technical support agencies - Among the key national/local implementation and technical support agencies in the implementation of the UMRBPL Ecotown Green Growth Road Map are the DENR, DPWH, DA and Rizal Province.

DENR – serves a critical lead implementation and technical support in the implementation of the UMRBPL Ecotown Green Growth Road Map. The DENR is the mandated chairman of the UMRBPL PAMB and exercised management authority/jurisdiction over the whole area being a protected area and public land/forestlands. The DENR is also implementing a PA-wide reforestation and rehabilitation programme as well as is responsible for the land management and tenurial arrangements inside the PA. It also has the technical skills and capability to support the key local and community stakeholders in the implementation, operationalization and enforcement of key environmental and natural resource management policies that are critical to the success of the UMRBPL Ecotown Green Growth Road Map. Its role is also critical in the provision of technical assistance to LGUs in the GhG emission reduction programmes particularly on solid waste management, mobile pollution, and waste water pollution and quality monitoring. DPWH – serves as lead technical infrastructure support to the UMRBPL to facilitate and implement the ‘hard-and soft’ adaptation measures identified in the UMRBPL Road Map. These include road/bridge strengthening, slope stabilization and erosion control, drainage and storm-water management, construction and establishment of small water impounding systems, and refurbishing of critical public infrastructure and facilities such as schools, health centers and other government buildings. DPWH also serve as technical resource in the monitoring and enforcement of compliance to local building and infrastructure standards and codes. DA – serve as lead technical support to the implementation of UMRBPL’s agriculture sector related mitigation and adaptation measures, which is one of the most vulnerable sectors in the UMRBPL along with water. New and appropriate technologies, production process, farm inputs and implements, and better livestock/plant varieties, among others would be important support that could be provided by DA to increase resilience and sustain incomes of a large number of UMRBPL local communities and economic sector. Rizal Province - The LGU Province have been very supportive, if not, have led the province along with LGUs in the UMRBPL in ensuring the province is prepared and ready to address critical CCA/DRR vulnerabilities and impacts in the area. The Province has maintained and continued to provide necessary technical, human, financial and other resources to UMRBPL LGUs in implementing CC/DRR mitigation and adaptation measures. The Provincial governor has clearly identified local resiliency and environmental protection as key pillars in the service delivery programmes of the province to its local constituencies. This remains to be the expected role of the Province in the implementation of the UMRBPL Ecotown Green Growth Road Map but more importantly, the Province could provide the necessarily political leadership and strengthen to follow-through the implementation of the priority programmes identified in the UMRBPL Road Map.


SEARCA-ERGONS 84

c. Strategic guidance and assistance The Climate Change Commission (CCC), through its Climate Change Office, would continue to provide strategic guidance, coordination and assistance in the implementation of the UMRBPL Ecotown Green Growth Road Map. Such coordination and assistance could involve mobilizing other national government agencies to provide further assistance and support to UMRBPL LGUs and local implementors. Likewise, the CCC maintains strategic guidance in overseeing the UMRBPL Road Map and identifying key lessons learned and best practices to enable further replication and roll-out of the Ecotown framework in other areas.


SEARCA-ERGONS 85

Table 15. Key Vulnerabilities of UMRBPL LGUS in Key Sectoral Areas7

CC Vulnerability Areas

Rain-induced landslides/erosion Flooding Drought Over-all

Rodriguez Agriculture – Medium Water - Medium Forestry – Medium Infrastructure/Transport – Very High (Trails)

Agriculture- Medium Water - Medium

Agriculture-Medium Water - Medium Forestry – Medium Infrastructure/Transport – Vulnerable (Roads/Trails)

Agriculture- Medium Water – Medium Forestry - Medium

Baras Agriculture- Medium Water - Quite Forestry – Medium Infrastructure/Transport – Vulnerable (Roads)

Agriculture-Medium Water – Medium Infrastructure/Transport – Vulnerable (Roads)

Agriculture-Medium Water - High Forestry – Medium Infrastructure/Transport – Vulnerable (Roads)

Agriculture – Medium Water – Medium Forestry - Medium

Tanay Agriculture – Medium Water – Medium Forestry – Medium Infrastructure/Transport – Quite (Bridges/Roads)

Agriculture –Medium Water – Medium Infrastructure/Transport – Quite (Bridges/Roads)

Agriculture-Medium Water - Medium Forestry – Medium Infrastructure/Transport – Quite (Bridges/Roads)

Agriculture – Medium Water – Medium Forestry - Medium

San Mateo Agriculture – Medium Water – Quite Forestry - Medium Infrastructure/Road – Very High (Roads/Trails)

Agriculture – Quite Water – Quite Infrastructure/Transport – Medium (Roads/Trails)

Agriculture – Quite Water – High Forestry - Medium

Agriculture – Quite Water – Medium Forestry - Medium

Antipolo City Agriculture – Quite Water - Medium Forestry – Medium Infrastructure/Transport– High (Roads); Vulnerable (Bridges/Roads)

Agriculture – Less or Not Water – Quite Infrastructure/Transport – Medium (Roads)

Agriculture- Less or Not Water - Medium Forestry – Medium Infrastructure/Transport – Vulnerable (Bridges/Roads)

Agriculture – Less or Not Water – Medium Forestry - Medium

Vulnerability Index: Very High/High – 5; Vulnerable – 4; Medium Vulnerable – 3; Quite Vulnerable – 2; Less or Not Vulnerable - 1

7 Based on consolidated Project TA vulnerability assessment results.


SEARCA-ERGONS 86

Table 16. Key Priority Measures in Proposed Local Climate Action Plan of UMRBPL LGUs

LGU Priority Measures/Sector Projected Implementation Period Key Implementing Agencies/Partners Antipolo City x Implement the provision in the clean

water, air and solid waste management act (Health)

x Provision of easement/drainage for roads/bridges (Infrastructure/Transport)

x Regular education and information dissemination about the future threats of climate change including health and diseases, adaptation and mitigation practices (Health)

x Immediate (1-3yrs)

x Immediate-Medium-term (1-5yrs)

x Immediate (1-3 yrs), continuing

x LGU/SWM and City EnRO, City Health and Local barangays

x DENR, District Engineer, DepED, City Schools

San Mateo x Slope stabilization (both biological & engineering) and complemented by reforestation programme (Agriculture);

x Strict implementation of zoning ordinance (CLUP) such as clear ground-level demarcation lines/buffer zones (between critical agricultural areas and other land uses) (Agriculture and Water)

x Relocation of residents along the hazards (Agriculture)



x Medium-long-term (3-5 yrs++

x Municipal Engineer, General Services, Agri Office and ENRO and local barangays, MPDC and zoning administrator, shelter and housing.

x DENR, DPWH, Province Agri Office, NHA

Rodriguez x Stabilization of (roads/bridges) approaches and supports (Infrastructure/Transport);

x Reforestation of critically denuded areas of watershed and slope and soil stabilization (Agriculture, Water and Forestry)

x Cleaning out watercourses and structures in flood prone areas (Infrastructure/Transport)

x Medium-long-term (3-5 yrs++)

x Long-term (5yrs++)


x LGU ENRO, Engineering/General Services Office and local barangays, public safety office

x DENR, DPWH, Provincial Engineer/Agri Office

Baras x Reforestation of critically denuded areas of watershed and slope and soil


x LGU ENRO, General Services, Agriculture, MPDC and local barangays


SEARCA-ERGONS 87

LGU Priority Measures/Sector Projected Implementation Period Key Implementing Agencies/Partners stabilization (Agriculture, Water and Forestry)

x Construction of water impounding structures (Water)

x Updating of CLUP integrating CC & DRR and vulnerabilities (Agriculture, Water and Forestry)



x DENR, DPWH and Province Agric/Engineering Office

Tanay x Strict implementation of forest laws and regulations, including the NIPAS Act, Forestry laws and the Water Code (Water and Forestry);

x Construction of water impounding structures (Water)

x Reforestation of sloping areas for soil stabilization and critically denuded areas of watershed (Agriculture, Water and Forestry)

x Provision of the government’s improved forecasting system (landslides, typhoons, floods) (Water)





x LGU ENRO, General Services, Agri, DRRMO, and local barangays

x DENR, DPWH, Province Agriculture/Engineering Office/DRRMO


SEARCA-ERGONS 88

Table 17a. Local climate change action (mitigation and adaptation) plan priority activities (based on MCVA results) Sector Legend: A-Agriculture, F-Forest, W-Water, TF - Transportation and Facility, H - Health

ADAPTATION MEASURES

LGU / MCA SCORE

SECTOR

VULNERABILITY

ANTIPOLO BARAS RODRIGUEZ SAN MATEO TANAY

PROVINCIAL AND

NATIONAL AGENCIES

TOTAL RAIN

INDUCED LANDSLIDE

RAIN INDUCED

FLOODING DROUGHT

1 Reforestation of sloping areas for soil stabilization and critically denuded areas of watershed

303 121 450 407 722 858 2861 AFW 9 9

2 Strict implementation of forest laws and regulations, including the NIPAS Act and the water code

0 122 0 407 760 814 2103 AFW 9 9 9

3 Slope Stabilization ( Both Biological & Engineering) 0 0 0 429 760 858 2047 A 9

4 Construction of water impounding structures 0 136 0 0 760 880 1776 W 9

5 Strict implementation of zoning ordinance (CLUP) such as clear ground-level demarcation lines/buffer zones (between critical agricultural areas and other land uses)

0 0 0 418 0 792 1210 A 9 9

6 Relocation of residents 0 0 0 407 760 0 1167 ALL 9 9 7 Implement the provision

in the clean water, air and solid waste management act

305 145 362 0 314 0 1126 H 9 9 9


SEARCA-ERGONS 89

Sector Legend: A-Agriculture, F-Forest, W-Water, TF - Transportation and Facility, H - Health

ADAPTATION MEASURES

LGU / MCA SCORE

SECTOR

VULNERABILITY


PROVINCIAL AND

NATIONAL AGENCIES

TOTAL RAIN

INDUCED LANDSLIDE

RAIN INDUCED

FLOODING DROUGHT

8 Stricter enforcement of forest protection and stronger forest fire protection and prevention programmes; improved monitoring of forest and fireline/break construction along sensitive area

0 0 0 231 0 836 1067 FW 9 9

9 Regular education and information dissemination about the future threats of climate change including health and diseases, adaptation and mitigation practices

304 147 368 226 0 0 1045 H 9 9 9

10 Recycling or reuse of water (water conservation) in agricultural communities

0 0 0 0 0 858 858 AFW 9

11 Growing of suitable agroforestry species as well as appropriate land cultivation practices

0 0 0 0 0 836 836 FW 9


SEARCA-ERGONS 90


ADAPTATION MEASURES

LGU / MCA SCORE

SECTOR

VULNERABILITY


PROVINCIAL AND

NATIONAL AGENCIES

TOTAL RAIN

INDUCED LANDSLIDE

RAIN INDUCED

FLOODING DROUGHT

12 Strengthening the agricultural supply chain system for proper distribution system during intense floods

0 0 0 0 0 836 836 A

9

13 Provision of the government's improved forecasting system (landslides, typhoons, floods)

0 0 0 0 760 0 760 W 9

14 Strengthening Land use conversion of prime agricultural lands must be minimized to the minimize flood exposure of the communities

0 0 0 0 760 0 760 A

9

15 Regular water quality testing 303 0 0 218 0 206 727 H 9 9 9

16 Conduct of training on the basic of climate change, impacts and threats, climate change adaptation approaches specifically in agriculture sector

0 0 0 218 313 0 531 H

17 Cleaning out watercourses and structures in flood prone areas

0 0 432 0 0 432 TF 9 9

18 DRRM Capacity of Barangays and DILG LGU must be in frontline and must be fully developed

0 0 336 0 0 0 336 H 9 9

9

19 Stabilization of approaches 0 0 332 0 0 0 332 TF 9 9


SEARCA-ERGONS 91


ADAPTATION MEASURES

LGU / MCA SCORE

Sector

VULNERABILITY


PROVINCIAL AND

NATIONAL AGENCIES

TOTAL RAIN

INDUCED LANDSLIDE

RAIN INDUCED

FLOODING DROUGHT

20

DILG and LGUs must be in the frontline in DRR and CCA and therefore must be fully informed so that they can become more aggressive in ensuring that health and education facilities of the growing population are met

0 0 0 0 312 0 312 H 9 9 9

21 Provision of Easement 305 0 0 0 0 0 305 H 9 9 22 Cultivation of plant varieties

with insect repellent properties like Citronella and Ageratum

0 146 0 0 0 0 146 H 9 9 9

23 Updating of CLUP integrating CC & DRR and vulnerabilities 0 128 0 0 0 0 128 AFW 9


SEARCA-ERGONS 92

Table 17b. Proposed priority GHG emission reduction measures per LGU (based on MCVA results)

No. GHG MITIGATION MEASURES

LGU/MCA Scores SECTOR


PROVINCIAL AND

NATIONAL AGENCIES

TOTAL ENERGY WASTE LUCF TRANSPORTATION

1 Sanitary landfill 295 0 350 0 0 231 876 9

2 National Greening Program 0 0 0 235 320 0 555 9

3 Waste recycling 0 147 350 0 0 0 497 9

4 Transmission loss reduction 0 148 0 0 320 0 468 9

5 Integrated waste management 0 0 350 0 0 0 350 9 9

6 Efficient use of materials 0 0 0 0 320 0 320 9 9

7 Wastewater Management 0 0 0 0 320 0 320 9

8 Forest Protection 0 0 0 0 320 0 320 9

9

Policies to promote widespread use of renewables, maximization of energy efficient opportunities, and promotion of climate friendly technologies and practices

0 0 318 0 0 0 318 9

10 Production of bio charcoal from waste 0 0 311 0 0 0 311 9

11 Energy efficient designs for new building/houses

298 0 0 0 0 0 298 9

12 New and renewable energy (e.g. municipal wastes, wood/wood

296 0 0 0 0 0 296 9


SEARCA-ERGONS 93

No. GHG MITIGATION MEASURES

LGU/MCA Scores SECTOR


PROVINCIAL AND

NATIONAL AGENCIES

TOTAL ENERGY WASTE LUCF TRANSPORTATION

wastes, coconut residues, animal wastes and rice residues, mini hydro)

13 Policy to promote use of bicycles/walk in short distance travels

0 0 0 235 0 0 235 9

14 Soil and watershed conservation 0 0 0 232 0 0 232 9

15

Policies to promote protection/enhancement of the country's forest resources

0 0 0 231 0 0 231 9

16 Energy Efficiency Information Campaign 0 146 0 0 0 0 146 9


SEARCA-ERGONS 94

6.0 Proposed Local Plan Mainstreaming and Implementation Arrangements

6.1 Integration and Mainstreaming of Priority CC Mitigation and Adaptation Measures in Local Plans and Programs a. CLUP and CDP/LDP Entry points

The mainstreaming of CC/DRR into local plans and programs could be institutionalized and appropriately integrated in two key LGU planning process and documents – local comprehensive land use plan (CLUP) and local development plan (LDP). The CLUP is the strategic physical planning framework that lays down the long-term development objectives and agenda of the LGU in the next 10 years. It is a mandated document that serves as the primary basis of all local development and implementation plans as well as the allocation of local resources/budgets. A local zoning ordinance that lays down the physical development guidelines and controls, including designation of priority and critical development, protection, production, settlement and institutional areas inside the LGU accompanies the approved CLUP. The CLUP/ZO is approved by the local Council and is normally prepared by a multi-sectoral working group composed of leading community, barangay, sectoral, private sector and other stakeholders in the community. Several entry points for CC/DRR mainstreaming can be found in the 12-point formulation of an LGU’s CLUP (Figure 45). Integration of CC/DRR concerns in local land uses is one of the key approaches to mainstreaming CC/DRR at the local levels. It should be noted that in the ‘new’ Guidelines on the Formulation of CLUP approved last February 2014 by the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB), CCA/DRR concerns and information (i.e. risk and vulnerability assessments) are mandated sections in the preparation of CLUP in the next cycle of revisions/updating of CLUPs by LGUs. On the other hand, the local development plan or comprehensive development plan (CDP/LDP) is the LGU’s medium-term development plan (covering 3-years) which contains its priority programs, projects and activities that are intended to implement the strategic development vision and objectives in the CLUP. The CDP/LDP is the basis for the preparation of annual investments program/plan that would be budgeted for implementation by the LGU. Figure 46 identifies several entry points in the integration of CC/DRR into the CDP/LDP process. The CDP/LDP is the main document that would ensure the implementation of CC/DRR measures because of its direct link to an LGU’s annual work and budgeting process.

b. Integration and updating of UMRBPL Protected Area Management Plan (PAMP)

One of the key approaches of this Project was to ensure that the outputs and results of the Project are clearly linked and integrated into the plans and programmes of the UMRBPL PA Management Plan. This effort was done at the outset of the Project TA with a PAMB presentation of the objectives and programme of activities and obtaining the PAMB endorsement of the Project’s activities. In the course, of the Project TA, key briefings and presentation were done with the members of the PAMB, chaired by the DENR Regional Director, for updates on project activities, participation in project training activities and results presentation. Part of the commitment of the PAMB and Project TA was the opportunity to update the UMRBPL PAMP and its plans with the results of the Project study. The PAMB has formally expressed interest in conducting a review and updating of its PAMP based on the key results and potential impact of the Project study results into the approved UMRBPL’s PAMP.


SEARCA-ERGONS 95

c. Integration and Updating of the Provincial Physical Development and Framework Plan (PPDFP)

Another major entry point in the mainstreaming of the Project study results and findings is in the updating of the Rizal Province’s PPDFP. This has been identified at the outset by both the Project TA and Rizal Province as an expected output/assistance by the TA to the Province. The Provincial Government of Rizal has been a very active partner in the whole process of the Project study with the activity participation of its key LGU units particularly, Provincial Planning and Development Office, Environment and Natural Resources Office, Engineering Office and DRRMO. Officials and staff of the LGU Province were active participants in many of the trainings and workshops conducted by the Project TA and are well apprised of the process, methodology and outputs/results of the Project TA. Part of the key requests and opportunity of the Project is the updating of the Province’s PPDFP to improve and update its CCA/DRR section. Figure 45. Entry-points in Integrating CCA and DRRM at the CLUP Process


SEARCA-ERGONS 96

Figure 46. Integrating CCA/DRRM into the Comprehensive Development Planning (CDP) Process

6.2 Specific Recommendations and Action Points

The specific guidance for mainstreaming CC mitigation and adaptation measures and concerns at the local levels in the UMRBPL area are the following:

a. Integration of CC vulnerability assessment results/findings in UMRBPL LGUs’ local land use plans and development plans

The integration of the CC vulnerability results/findings into the local land use plans of UMRBPL LGUs is one of the critical actions for mainstreaming CC/DRR in UMRBPL LGUs. As early as the start of the project, the UMRBPL LGUs have already expressed willingness to “climate-proof” their CLUPs since most of them (Antipolo, Tanay, and Rodriquez) are at the final stages of the approval of their updated CLUPs whilst Baras is updating its current CLUP. This means the CCA/DRR findings and recommendations from the Project can still be included and integrated into their CLUPs.

In the case of San Mateo, its Mayor has already expressed during the LGU results presentation and validation of the VA findings and results their willingness to accommodate all the recommendations from the Project. This activity may require a more detailed technical


SEARCA-ERGONS 97

assistance and support to partner LGUs in guiding them in the possible refines/enhancements in their local land use and zoning plans.

Subsequent to the integration of CC/DRR findings and recommendations in the UMRBPL LGUs’ land use plans is ensuring that the CC/DRR findings and recommendations are mainstreamed into the local development plans (LDPs) of the UMRBPL LGUs. At the moment, the LDP/CDPs of UMRBPL LGUs have already been approved. However, this can still be updated based on the CC/DRR results and findings. Such process will have to be done through the Local Development Council (LDC), which is the lead local body that prepares and approves the local development plans. This activity may require convening of the LDC and a detailed presentation and discussions on the CC/DRR findings and recommendations and its impact/effect to the approved LDP/CDP of each LGU. The convening of LDC normally called for by the local mayor, who acts as chair of the LDCs.

b. Enhancement of approved UMRBPL PA Management Plan and Provincial Development Plan

Another entry point for mainstreaming of UMRBPL CCA/DRR results/findings and recommendations (i.e. Green Growth Road Map) is through the enhancement of the approved UMRBPL protected area management plan (PAMP) and the provincial physical framework development plan (PPFDP) of Rizal. In the case of the UMRBPL PAMP, the UMRBPL PAMB has passed a resolution accepting and endorsing the results of the Project findings and recommendations and have formal approved a resolution requesting ADB-Eco-town Project to assist the PAMB in the review and integration of the CC/DRR findings into the UMRBPL PAMP. The review of the UMRBPL PA management plan may result to refinement if not revision into the existing zoning arrangements inside the PA. Likewise, the Provincial Government of Rizal has also public expressed willingness to enhance their recently completed provincial physical development framework plan (PPDFP) with UMRBPL CC vulnerability results/findings. The Rizal PPDFP has already included initial CC/DRR concerns and information during the formulation of its PPDFP as part of the pilot LGUs using the NEDA guidelines for integrating CC/DRR into provincial plans. This activity may entail a more detailed presentation and discussion of the CC/DRR results to the Provincial governor and Provincial Board.

c. Formal adoption (passage of Sanggunian resolutions) of UMRBPL CC/DRR findings and recommendations (i.e. Green Growth Road Map) by individual LGUs.

A key element in the mainstreaming of CC/DRR at the local levels would be the formal adoption of the CC/DRR findings and recommendations by the respective local councils of each UMRBPL LGUs. During the LGU presentation and validation of the CC/DRR results, several UMRBPL LGUs (i.e. San Mateo, Baras, Tanay and Antipolo) have already expressed their willingness to pass a local resolution adopting the CC/DRR findings and recommendations. Such formal adoption of the UMRBPL CC/DRR findings and recommendations would provide the local enabling environment for further integration and mainstreaming of the Project’s CC/DRR recommendations into the LGU’s plans and programmes, including the LGU budget, adoption of programmes by LGU agencies, passage/revision of possible local ordinances and policies, revision of permitting and fees system, amendments/incentives in local revenue codes, among others. This process may entail detailed presentation of the CC/DRR findings


SEARCA-ERGONS 98

and recommended measures in the Ecotown Green Growth Road Map to each of the UMRBPL LGU councils.

d. Conduct of technical briefing and consultation with LDRRMC and LDRRMO

One of the key local government offices that could facilitate the integration and mainstreaming of CC/DRR concerns and issues in the LGU would be through the Local Disaster Risk Reduction Management Council (LDRRMC), the multi-sectoral body mandated under the DRRM Act to oversee the preparation of LDRRMP in the LGUs, and the Local Disaster Risk Reduction Management Office (LDRRMO), the local government office mandated to oversee the day-to-day implementation and coordination of all DRR programmes and activities in the LGU, including capacity building of local communities and volunteers. These two local bodies would be the most directly accountable group in the LGU that has specific interest and concern on CC/DRR and therefore would be mandated to pursue and support programmes and initiatives to improve the LGU’s CC/DRR resilience. It is proposed that these two DRR bodies should be engaged in the detailed discussion and mainstreaming of CC/DRR findings and recommendations of the Project. This activity may involve, not only detailed discussion, but also specific technical assistance in the review and refinement of the LGU’s existing DRR plans and programs, including possible training and capacity building activities.

e. Other follow-through activities on mainstreaming CC/DRR findings and results/recommendations at the local levels

Supportive and complementary activities intended to broaden the awareness and understanding of local stakeholders and communities in UMRBPL LGUs on the specific CC issues, impacts, vulnerabilities and options in their area would greatly enhance and strengthen the commitment and motivation of UMRBPL LGUs and officials to ensure that CC/DRR concerns are mainstreamed in their local plans and programmes. These activities are largely focused on heightened awareness, education and understanding as well as practical knowledge of CC threats, issues, challenges and options. These activities could be in the form of the following:

x General communication and education campaigns on basic CC issues, concerns and conditions; possible mitigation and adaptation measures; and, role and contribution that local people could do;

x Integration of CC information and programmes in local school discussion, fora, convocations, assemblies;

x Conduct of special CC/DRR-related or CC/DRR mitigation and adaptation measures (i.e. soil stabilization, reforestation, cleaning of drainages and waterways) campaigns, social and community mobilizations, special events, concerts, contests, sports and cultural festivals with CC-DRR themes and objectives;

x Engaging private sector/schools/NGOs/CSOs and sector groups in discussion and fora on possible application and adoption of specific CC/DRR mitigation and adaptation measures;

x Review of existing local ordinances and regulations to improve incentives towards local adoption, application and installation of CC/DRR-friendly, complementary programmes and facilities, etc.

x Conduct of further local studies and researches on specific CC/DRR-related issues affecting particularly LGUs, i.e. charcoal production, quarrying operations, land use


SEARCA-ERGONS 99

conversion, that could contribute improve understanding if not possible recommendations/options to reduce identified CC/DRR-related threats and risks.

x LGU-wide training and capacity building on CC/DRR specific skills and programmes, i.e. emergency response, building/structural inventory and assessment, local community demarcation and delineation of CC/DRR high risk areas; identification of potential community-local forest restoration and soil and water conservation sites/areas, etc.

7.0 Monitoring and Evaluation

a. PAMB-level monitoring and evaluation The monitoring of the results and outputs of the UMRBPL Ecotown Green Growth Road Map is proposed to be integrated into the existing monitoring and reporting of the UMRBPL PA Management Plan outputs and results. The integration of the UMRBPL mitigation and adaptation measures as part of the enhancement of its PA management plan would provide a seamless transition of the UMRBPL Green Growth Road Map into the PA management plan implementation. As such, the mitigation and adaptation measures are expected to mitigate, if not, enhance the planned project, programs and activities of the PA. Results of local adaptation and mitigation plans are inputted into the monitoring system of the PAMB as part of the local report submission of UMRBPL LGU members. These local results are based on the integration of local CCA/DRRM plans into the local development plans and implemented by UMRBPL LGUs. Regular progress reporting and updating of UMRBPL Ecotown Green Growth targets as part of the PAMB Plan implementation activities should form part of the regular annual, semi-annual and quarterly monitoring and reporting by both PAMB national agencies representatives and LGUs members in its regular PAMB meetings. The annual review and accomplishments of the shall form part and parcel of the agenda of the PAMB.

b. CCC-PAMB joint monitoring and coordination agreement

It is proposed that a joint CCC-PAMB monitoring and coordination agreement be established in the implementation of the UMRBPL enhanced ecotown green growth PA management plan. The monitoring and coordination agreement shall ensure that monitoring and accomplishments by concerned national agencies and LGUs in the course of the implementation of the UMRBPL Ecotown Green Growth Road Map are submitted and reviewed. CCC shall facilitate coordination and inter-actions with key national agencies and LGUs, in consultation with PAMB regarding progress of the implementation of the UMRBP Ecotown Green Growth Road Map and that such progress are duly reported and documented in the agency and LGU reports to the PAMB and CCC. CCC may use the level of accomplishment and compliance of key UMRBPL implementing agencies and LGUs in the allocation of resources for CCA/DRR mitigation and adaptation measures under the People’s Survival Fund, General Appropriations Act (GAA) and other CCA/DRR related fund sourcing that maybe facilitated by the CCC.


SEARCA-ERGONS 100

8.0 Estimated Investment Cost/Timetable of UMRBPL Ecotown Green Growth Road Map (Priority Mitigation and Adaptation Measures)

8.1 Priority Adaptation and Mitigation Measures and Estimated Period of Implementation

The three priority adaptation and three priority mitigation measures included in this estimated investment cost were outputs of consultations and workshops with various stakeholders particularly the local government units and PAMB (multi-sectoral membership). The proposed adaptation and mitigation measures is planned to be implemented in 10 years period. Table 18 shows the distribution of adaptation measures while Table 19 shows the mitigation measures per LGU. Both tables also indicated the number of estimated units/area and period of implementation. Table 18. UMRBPL Priority Adaptation Measures: Reforestation and slope stabilization

LGU Adaptation Measure Area

Coverage (ha)

Period of Implementation

1. Reforestation and slope stabilization

Antipolo Reforestation of sloping areas for soil stabilization and critically denuded areas of watershed

7324.99 8 years

Baras Reforestation of sloping areas for soil stabilization and critically denuded areas of watershed (to address rain-induced landslides)

58.756 6 years

San Mateo Slope stabilization (both biological & engineering) complemented by reforestation program

298.66 6 years

Tanay Reforestation of sloping areas for soil stabilization and critically denuded areas of watersheds

5279.64 6 years

Rodriguez Reforestation of sloping areas for soil stabilization and critically denuded areas of watersheds

10474.52 9 years

Total 23,436.57 2. Small water impounding systems and soil/erosion prevention and water conservation measures a. Check Dams Units Period of

Implementation Antipolo city Check Dams 20 5 years Baras Check Dams 10 5 years San Mateo Check Dams 12 5 years Tanay Check Dams 25 5 years Rodriguez Check Dams 40 5 years Total Check Dam 107 b. Gabions Antipolo city Gabions 30 5 years Baras Gabions 15 5 years San Mateo Gabions 20 5 years Tanay Gabions 40 5 years Rodriguez Gabions 50 5 years Total Check Dam 155


SEARCA-ERGONS 101

c. Bench Terraces

kilometer Period of Implementation

Antipolo city Bench Terraces 30 5 years Baras Bench Terraces 15 5 years San Mateo Bench Terraces 20 5 years Tanay Bench Terraces 40 5 years Rodriguez Bench Terraces 50 5 years Total Bench Terraces 155

d. Hedgerow Planting kilometer Period of Implementation

Antipolo city Hedgerow Planting 150 5 years Baras Hedgerow Planting 50 5 years San Mateo Hedgerow Planting 75 5 years Tanay Hedgerow Planting 100 5 years Rodriguez Hedgerow Planting 200 5 years Total Check Dam 155 e. Bamboo Plantation kilometer Antipolo city Bamboo plantation 100 5 years Baras Bamboo plantation 100 5 years San Mateo Bamboo plantation 80 5 years Tanay Bamboo plantation 100 5 years Rodriguez Bamboo plantation 150 5 years Total Bamboo Plantation

530

3. Transportation and Infrastructure a. Transport + Infrastructure (Roads) Area Period of

Implementation

UMRBPL Use larger drainage structures

Total Length: 5.00km Target Area: 7,500 sqm

Immediate 1-3 years

Antipolo Provision of easement Total length:11.10km Target Area: 66,000 sqm

Medium 3-5 years

Rodriguez

Supporting slope with retaining walls


Long term 5-10 years

Cleaning out watercourses and structures in flood prone areas


Immediate 1-3 years

UMRBPL Use larger drainage structures


Immediate 1-3 years

Antipolo Provision of easement Total length:11.10km Target Area: 66,000 sqm

Medium 3-5 years

Rodriguez Supporting slope with retaining walls


Long term 5-10 years

b. Transport + Infrastructure (Bridges) bridges

Rodriguez

Construction of proper drainage 8190 sqm/unit (39) Immediate

1-3 years Slope stabilization upstream 23,400 sqm/unit (39) Medium

3-5 years Stabilization of approaches 31,200 sqm/unit (39) Long term

5-10 years


SEARCA-ERGONS 102

Table 19. Priority Mitigation Measures (GhG emission reduction)

LGU Sectors with Identified Issues

Total GhG emission (CO2) volume reduce

Period of Implementation

Rodriguez, San Mateo

Energy Hydro power project (10 MW)

409.97 million tons/year Long term 5-10 years

Antipolo City, Baras,

San Mateo, Rodriguez

Waste Bio-Charcoal Briquetting 5.15 tons/year Immediate

1-3 years

UMRBPL

Waste/Energy 10-Megawatt Waste to Energy project

427,314 ton/10yrs Medium 3-5 years

Waste Materials Recovery Facility

2 tons per day/MRF Immediate 1-3 years

8.2 Estimated Investment Cost of Priority Adaptation and Mitigation Measures

The unit cost used in this estimates were derived from the average costs being used by various organizations/ agencies in estimating similar projects. However, the estimated cost shall further undergo feasibility study. Table 20 summarizes the estimated investment cost for priority adaptation measures while Table 21 indicates the estimated investment cost for priority mitigation measures. The detailed estimate of project cost is presented in Annex 4.


SEARCA-ERGONS 103

Table 20. Estimated cost of priority adaptation measures

Adaptation Measures Unit Cost Qty Unit TOTAL A Reforestation and slope

stabilization 43,145 23,437 hectares 1,011,170,813

B Small water impounding systems and soil/erosion prevention and water conservation measures

1 Check Dams 750,000 107 lots 80,250,000 2 Gabions 40,000 155 pcs 6,200,000 3 Bench Terraces 50,000 460 hectares 23,000,000 4 Hedgerow planting 30,000 575 km 17,250,000 5 Bamboo Plantation 25,000 530 has 13,250,000 C Transport and Infrastructure

Sector Measures 897,514,000

1 Roads UMRVPL Use larger drainage

structures 5,600,000 5 km 28,000,000 Antipolo Provision of easement 27,016.75 11.1 Km 299,886 Rodriguez Supporting slope

with retaining walls 11,000,000 3 Km 33,000,000 Rodriguez Cleaning out

watercourses and structures in flood prone areas 5,759,047 93.18 Km 536,627,999

2 Bridges

Construction of proper drainage 735,000

(8,190 sqm) 39 units 28,665,000

Slope stabilization upstream 10,000,000

(23,400 sqm) 39 units 390,000,000

Stabilization of approaches 1,600,000

(31,200 sqm) 39 units 62,400,000 TOTAL, PhP PhP 2,230,113,698 TOTAL, USD (USD=PhP45) USD 49,558,082

Table 21. Cost Estimate of proposed Mitigation Measures

Adaptation Measures Unit Cost Qty Unit TOTAL Hydro Power Project 90,000,000 10 MW 900,000,000 Waste to Energy Project 12,375,000 10 MW 123,750,000 Bio-Charcoal Briquetting 300,000 16 barangays 4,800,000 Materials Recovery Facility 50,850,000 5 LGU 254,250,000 TOTAL (PhP) PhP 1,282,800,000 TOTAL (USD) USD = PhP45 USD 28,506,667

ta-8111 ph - revised road map_cleaned

Documents