The
Philippines is ranked as the third disastrous country in the world. And yet it lags
in terms of structural countermeasures after years of experiences due to
inadequacy in planning and design. Attributed to low exposure in flood control,
most local engineers were engaged in highways, buildings, bridges and other
infrastructures while the major flood
control works were entrusted to foreign consultants. The current thrust of the
government infused more infrastructures but master plans and feasibility
studies to be the blue print for flood control are inadequate to have effective
river structures. At the rate the studies are prepared, the 120 prioritized
river basins nationwide may not be achieved until 2035. To help facilitate the
preparation, training young engineers in flood control planning in the central
office and developing expertise nationwide in the long term are recommended and
from the plans the structural measures are implemented accordingly. Alongside
with hardware, non-structural measures are prioritized to prepare the people at
risk and decrease the vulnerability.
Key words: Prioritize,
infrastructures, disaster, expertise, river basins
GENERAL BACKGROUND
According to the United Nations Report, the Philippines ranks third on the list of nations prone to disasters. Floods, and other water induced disaster are very common. The environment is a big factor. The Philippines consists of 7,100 islands with a total land area of approximately 300,000 km2. The climate of the country is influenced by the numerous mountains, valleys, and the surrounding seas. Bounded by the West Philippine Sea and the Pacific Ocean, it is visited by an average of 20 typhoons annually with mean precipitation of approximately of 2,100 mm intensified by the southwest and northeast monsoons. The terrains are mostly mountains with narrow to extensive coastal lowlands stretching to 34,600 km. Spread over the archipelago, there are 421 principal rivers with catchment area of at least 40 km2. Out of the 200 volcanoes along the volcanic belt, 22 are considered active.
Water Induced Disasters from 2000 to Present
Historically, the Philippines has experienced perennial disasters. For almost last two decades since 2000 onwards, there are significant water induced disasters which claimed lives and lost to properties.
Year
|
Fatalities
|
Missing
|
Damage US$ M
|
|
Typhoon Winnie
|
Nov-04
|
842
|
751
|
15.8
|
Cyclone Durian
|
Nov-06
|
1399
|
100
|
130
|
Typhoon Fengshen "Frank"
|
Jun-08
|
557
|
76.4
|
|
Typhoon Ketsana "Ondoy"
|
Sep-09
|
240
|
||
Typhoon Barma "Pepeng"
|
Oct-09
|
465
|
47
|
608
|
Tropical Storm Washi "Sendong"
|
Dec-11
|
1080
|
||
Typhoon Bopha "Pablo"
|
Dec-12
|
1900
|
1040
|
|
Typhoon Haiyan "Yolanda"
|
Nov-13
|
6300
|
809
|
Structural
Approach to Disaster Mitigation
Different
agencies contribute to disaster management according to mandate through structural
and non-structural programs
As the engineering
arm of the government, the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH)
construct roads, buildings, and flood control projects. DPWH Projects were
allotted on the average 48% to road, 11 % to flood control and the rest to
other infrastructures. Prior to 2000, majority of the major flood control funds
are foreign assisted, while the local funds meagerly finance piece-meal
projects of different districts of the country.
Locally funded
projects usually operated more often without the benefit of feasible plans.
Projects were replicated from stereotype plans and designs or sets of technical
drawing. However, the functionality and sustainability of the projects are not
guaranteed once they are constructed.
Some offices have
plans but majority of the offices within the country are reactive to flood
disasters. Piecemeal projects are constructed without consideration of the
basin wide impact.
Recent natural
disasters of more frequent and of extreme conditions have led to the
integration and harmonization of non-structural and structural countermeasure
programs among various government agencies. Attempt to have basis for the
prioritization of river basins, the Flood Vulnerability Index was initiated by
Japanese Consultants. However, there was unclear flood risk management in the
country. until 2008.
Nationwide Flood Risk Assessment Framework
Completed in 2008 through
JICA grant aid, the DPWH embarked on the study on Nationwide Flood Risk
Assessment (NAFRA), which would serve as a road map in prioritizing river
basins from 2010 to 2035. The study prioritized river basins according to the risk,
social and economic impact and recommended
preparation of master plans and feasibility studies and project implementations
to cope with water related disasters in
the Philippines.
To date, the master
plans and feasibility studies completed are approximately 31 river basins out
of the 120 river basins identified and prioritized in the study and 6 river
basins and urban drainage which are not included in the 120.The low turnout can
be attributed to inadequate number of local consultants in the field of flood
control.
OBSTACLES IN IMPLEMENTING RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE NATIONWIDE FLOOD
RISK ASSESSMENT
Expertise Requirement
From 1980s to early
2000s, the Japanese and other foreign consultants ventured with the local
consultants in some foreign assisted projects, which somehow exposed the locals
to new technology. However, apart from partnership with the foreign
consultants, the local engineers may have difficulty in updating their skills.
Those who were around in the 1970s and 1980s and still employed were not able
to keep abreast with the trend in technology. Some find they are too old and
ready to retired or about to retire.
Aside from the fact
that most flood control projects were conceptualized, planned and designed by
foreign consultants, most of the infrastructures were invested on roads and bridges
and approximately less than 14% for flood control as of 2003, hence, the
expertise for flood control was developed inadequately.
Also,
engineering curricula in undergraduate level are insufficient to get acquainted
or have little relevance to flood control and much less to sabo technology. And
there are few schools offering related courses. Thus, few engineers develop
expertise in these fields.
Initiatives
to Enhance the Capability of Engineers
One of the moves
to enhance the flood control management was a technical cooperation project
funded by JICA from 2000 to 2010 with the aim of enhancing the capability of
local engineers in the field of flood control and sabo engineering. The project
produced technical standards, manuals and guidelines (mostly adopted from
Japan), then disseminated through publications and series of trainings
nationwide. Although this can be considered a good head start, specialization
of engineers in the field of flood control is difficult to achieve due to the
multi-tasking of the trained engineers in the regional and district engineering
offices. Although all trained staff have not
acquired specialized skills on the nationwide scale, the staff of Flood Control
and Sabo Engineering Center have gained sufficient skills, being the proponent
of the Technical Cooperation. At present, FCSEC is engaged in training local
engineers nationwide but still series of trainings may still be needed.
Repercussion
of Minimal Exposure of Local Engineers in Flood Control
The lack of
local expertise redounds to lag in the completed master plans and feasibility
studies which eventually affect the implementation of projects.
Within a span of
six years from the time the NAFRA study
was completed, there has been negligible increase in the number of consultants
and engineers focusing on this field.
At present,
there are four to five local consulting firms bidding for flood control projects.
In spite of being few, there are some stumbling blocks in the form of policies which
discourage participation of interested consultants. These are”
1. A consulting firm once awarded a project is
not allowed to compete with another project of same nature unless the firm has
completed the project.
2. Another
setback is the policy of the Bid and Awards Committee on the prohibition of
corporate consultants to engage in the study of river basins financed through
local funds. The rationale is to encourage small firms to flourish in consultancy
services but in the end it limits the number of firms to get involved.
Available
Funds But With Inadequate Plans
From 2010 to
2015, there were significantly calamities which caused damages and countless
loss of lives due to strong typhoons and monsoon rainfall. The government
stepped up to fortify the high risk areas with structural means. For CY 2016,
budget allotment reached P55 Billion. (approximately US$1.17) for flood control
projects nationwide, thus far the highest.
There is an increasing trend in the budget allocation as shown in the
projected budget in Figure 1. Given this scenario, disbursing the budget to the
projects nationwide is a big dilemma due to the reasons earlier mentioned.
Figure 1, Funds Allotted to DPWH
Source: DPWH website
Palliative
Response
While the
completed Master Plans and Feasibility Studies cover spatial deficiency in
relation to NAFRA target , constructing flood control structures without viable
plans would be a waste of investment. To remedy the predicament, the DPWH has devised project impact analysis
guidelines for flood control structures as requirement for funding the project.
The regional and district engineering offices are required to supply information,
such as: the reduced damages, inundated area, economic benefits and
environmental impacts.
The guidelines
are reinforced through Department Order 23, series of 2015, which state the following:
1.
For every flood control and drainage
project envisioned for capital funding under the DPWH Infrastructure Program,
the Regional Office/District Engineering Office (DEO) or Flood Control
Management Cluster of the Unified Project Management Office (FCMC UPMO) shall
submit a project request with basic
technical and economic. data that must include, among others, the Project
Impact Analysis (PIA).
2.
The project must fall within Flood
control and river control works in major or principal river basins/systems as
defined by the National Water Resources Board.
3.
The project must be part of an overall flood control master plan/
feasibility study for the river basin or urban area in which the same is
located.
However,
difficulty is encountered as most of the engineers are inept to derive the requirement
with limited skills in hydrology and hydraulics, GIS technology and other tools.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Proposed
Urgent Measures
To hasten the
preparation of the Maser Plans and Feasibility Studies, pursuable measures can
be done. These include the following:
1. On-the-job
training of engineers to do the master plans and feasibility studies using
Lidar and modeling software to augment the accomplished river basins.
Newly recruits of Flood Control Management Office
are trained to accomplish simple master plan with the aid of modeling software
and available Digital Elevation Model. The participants are required till the
end of this year to complete the studies assigned to them.
2. Simplify Master Plan and feasibility studies
containing the essentials for planning: technical feasibility, economic
feasibility, and environmental impact analysis.
The master plan can be simplified by doing away with
too many non-essential contents. Presentation may include maps showing the
extent inundation area with and without the project and the alternative
countermeasures in a river system to give a visual understanding of the
scenarios. Based on the map overlays, sections on socio-economic feasibility
and impact on environment due to project alternatives can be derived, which may
be considered in the basic contents.
3. Revise
the Project Impact Analysis (PIA) for Projects without Master Plan and
Feasibility Study.
As mentioned earlier, the engineers from the
Regional and District Engineering Offices find it difficult to fill up the
forms for the PIA of their proposed project. Aside from the need to train them,
the form for the PIA of flood control projects needs to be revised
understandable to the user. Likewise, accompanying guidelines and manuals
should be produced and disseminated to all Regional and District Engineering
Offices of the DPWH.
4. Program
the proposed project upon completion of the Master Plan and Feasibility Studies
and detailed engineering.
Through the ten year Technical Cooperation Project
funded by JICA, there were Manuals, Guidelines, Technical Standards for Flood
Control and Sabo Engineering developed and distributed to different DPWH
offices. Technical typical drawings of flood control structures were also
produced. These materials are sufficient references to come up with the design.
5. Implement
the project based on the recommendations in the studies.
Structural measures are commonly expensive and have
limited spatial coverage in relation to NAFRA targets. Hence, projects are
divided into phases to complete on multi-year program.
In the Master Plan, Project implementation plan is discussed
where the Regional Offices and District Offices can follow on their programing.
Non-structural measures should be prioritized such as early warning system, hazard
mapping, relocation, etc.
6. Implement
Technical Cooperation Project for the Enhancement of Engineers Nationwide
This year a technical cooperation project with JICA
is on the board. It deals with the enhancement of Engineers in the field of
flood control, sabo and coastal engineering. Most likely the project will kick
off in CY 2017. Some features include training, revision and updating of flood
control and sabo and formulation of coastal engineering manuals and technical
standards Coastal engineering will be
introduced this coming year.
Proposed
long Term Measures
1. Establish
specialization in the field of flood control and sabo engineering not only in
the central office but also in the Regional
and the District Engineering
Offices
Materials
Engineers, Project Inspectors, and Project Engineers are accredited in the DPWH
based on training, examination, and the magnitude of projects handled. In
similar manner, accreditation and specialization of Flood Control Engineers is encouraged.
2. Update
and revise the Flood Risk Assessment Studies to include other rivers.
Some areas not listed in the priority listing of the
NAFRA Study experienced flood disasters such as Palawan Island. For the past
years, typhoons and tropical depressions breed in the West Philippines Seas
whereas more often it is in the Pacific Ocean. Also there are areas which have
not experienced flood disasters but have been visited by heavy rainfalls and
strong windstorms nowadays, especially the Mindanao area These may be attributed to climate change.
3. Update
old Master Plans and Feasibility Studies.
Master Plans of Major River Basins were commonly
prepared by the foreign consultants. These are basins with catchment areas more
than 1,400 km2. Due to complexity and magnitude, there are no local
consultants engaged in major flood control studies, except those awarded to foreign
consultants on joint venture.
The River Basin Control Office of the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) prepared master plans for the Integrated
River Basin Management (IRBM) of 18 major river basins completed in 2014,
mostly done by local consultants. Since
IRBM consists of many aspects such as social, economic, water use, environment,
flood control, and other aspects, the nature of study does not give more in
depth information on flood risk management.
Some changes in the environmental condition,
rainfall pattern, socio-economic importance brought about by urbanization are
grounds to revise the old master plans. A joint venture between foreign
consultants and local consultants is preferred for enhancement of local engineers and for quality of work..
4. Policy
amendment and formulation pertaining to flood control, sabo and coastal
engineering.
To widen participation of consultants, limitations
on the qualifications should be revised which would allow corporate entities.
Likewise, there are conflicting mandate between the
Local Government Codes and the Water Code regarding the land use and building
permit which allows the Local Government Units to issue permits in flood plain
areas. On the other hand, there is no declaration on defining river area, flood
plain area, its management jurisdiction. Due to LGUs permitting land use, they
sometimes issue permits even in river areas,
5. Strengthening
the conviction to comply and observe the
policy
There are many laws and policies but many times
there are big gaps in implementation, such as river easement, informal settlers
relocation, etc. More often it takes common sense to do things right.
Experience, education at home, school and media are effective in shaping
attitude and values. As a starting point, strict implementation of the policy
may be necessary to imbue discipline and values to the people.
CONCLUSION
Implementation
of Flood Control Projects encounters difficulties stemming from the lack of
appropriate plans and inadequacy of engineers to formulate plans amidst the
disasters experienced in the Philippines. In response to the increasing budgets
intended for flood mitigation, enhancement of technical capabilities of engineers
from the core office down to the regional and district offices nationwide is
urgent to come up with viable flood control plans and infrastructures.
REFERENCES
References from reports:
Overview
of Natural Disasters and their Impacts in Asia and the Pacific, 1970-2014, 2015, page 23, Disaster Risk Reduction Section
ICT and Disaster Risk Reduction Division ESCAP
Study on
Nationwide Flood Risk Assessment, 2008, JICA, CTII, Manila, Philippines
Department Order
140 series of 2014, DPWH, Manila
Department Order
23 series of 2015, DPWH, Manila
Water Code of the Philippines,
1979, National Water Resources Council , Manila
Reference from the website
Master Plan on
Flood Risk Management in Metro Manila and Surrounding Areas., 2015, http://www.gov.ph/downloads/2015/07jul/20150715-MASTER-PLAN-PROJECT-BRIEFER.pdf
