POLICY REVIEW OF THE ROLE OF PHILIPPINE SECTORAL LAWS

IN DISASTER RISK GOVERNANCE

September 2015
1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Overview

Over the last two decades, the Philippines has been experiencing a massive destructive
disaster events from extreme climatic events (severe tropical cyclone, flooding and storm
surges) and earthquakes. As a consequence, it threatens the country's sustainable development
goals and also undermines the fight against poverty. It is the most marginalized or the poorest
sector of the Philippine society that disproportionately pays the heaviest price, whether in lives
lost, homes destroyed or vanished livelihoods.1 The scientific community has evidence to show
that extreme climatic events, occurring almost annually in the country, are attributed to climate
change.

Thus, in 2014, the Philippine Government, through the Office of Civil Defense (OCD) has
forged an agreement with the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) to implement a 3-
year project called “Capacity Development for Managing Disaster Risks from Natural Hazards
and Climate Change”, also known as the “DRRM/CCA Policies and Standardization Project”. This
project seeks to promote policy coherence through the comprehensive review of the provisions
of the NDRRM law (RA 10121), its Implementing Rules and Regulations and the National DRRM
Plan, and initiate reform processes to significantly improve national and sub-national
Disaster/Climate Risk Management measures. The results of this project will inform the
operationalization of the whole Disaster and Climate Risk Management continuum/framework
toward building resilience of the country and its people.

The following policy review of the role of Philippine sectoral laws in disaster risk
governance is undertaken in support of the said Project and is part of Outcome 1 that targets
the assessment of policies, plans, programs and bureaucratic systems and procedures of key
oversight agencies and other concerned national government agencies for consistency, synergy,
and harmony on strategy, priorities and opportunities for functional cooperation on
management of disaster risks from natural hazards and climate change.

As one of the project's output, the policy review of the role of Philippine sectoral laws in
disaster risk governance will attempt to look at a number of sectoral laws that play, contribute
and/or supplement the current legal framework of DRRM in the country. As defined, disaster
risk governance2 refers to the way in which the public authorities, civil servants, media, private
sector and civil society coordinate at the community, national and regional levels in order to
manage and reduce disaster and climate related risks. This requires sufficient levels of capacity
and resources are made available to prevent, prepare for, manage and recover from disasters. It

1
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), “Effective
Law and Regulation for Disaster Risk Reduction: A Multi-Country Report”, June 2014.
2
Ibid. pp.xv

1
also entails mechanisms, institutions and processes for citizens to articulate their interests,
exercise their legal rights and obligations, and mediate their differences.

1.2 Legal Bases of DRRM and CCA in the Philippines

A. Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010 (RA10121)

The main legal basis for the implementation of DRRM in the Philippines is well
expressed in Republic Act 10121, also known as the “Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and
Management Act of 2010”, promulgated into law on May 27, 2010. RA 10121 paved the way for
the need to adopt a disaster risk reduction and management approach that is holistic,
comprehensive, integrated, and proactive in lessening the socio-economic and environmental
impacts of disasters including climate change, and promote the involvement and participation of
all sectors and all stakeholders concerned, at all levels, especially the local community. The Act
and its implementing rules and regulations (IRR) provide for the development of policies and
plans and the implementation of actions and measures pertaining to all aspects of disaster risk
reduction and management, through a whole-of-society approach, that includes good
governance, risk assessment, early warning, knowledge building and awareness raising, reducing
underlying risk factors, and preparedness for effective response and early recovery all of which
are required to be gender responsive and sensitive to indigenous knowledge systems. It also
highlights the need for institutionalizing DRRM policies, structures, coordination mechanisms
and programmes with continuing budget appropriation on DRR from national down to the local
levels. Under this Act, the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (NDRRMC)
was established replacing the National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC). The NDRRMC is
headed by the Secretary of the Department of National Defense (DND) as Chairperson of the
Council, with four (4) vice chairpersons representing the four (4) thematic pillars of DRRM,
represented by the Secretary of the Department of Science and Technology (DOST) as Vice
Chairperson for Prevention and Mitigation, the Secretary of the Department of Interior and
Local Government (DILG) as Vice Chairperson for Preparedness, the Secretary of the
Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) as Vice Chairperson of Response and
the Director General of the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) as Vice
Chairperson for Rehabilitation and Recovery. The NDDRMC is composed of a total of 44
members from national government, CSOs, and the private sector. The Office of Civil Defense
(OCD) functions as the Secretariat of the NDRRMC. The NDRRMC is mandated to develop the
National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Framework (NDRRMF) and correspondingly
its national Plan (NDRRMP).

B. Philippine Climate Change Act of 2009 or RA 9729

Prior to the enactment of RA10121, a law was passed on July 27, 2009, that provides
synergy to DRRM. This law is the Climate Change Act of 2009 or RA9729, creating the Climate
Change Commission (CCC). It is an Act mainstreaming climate change into government policy

2
 formulations, and establishing the National Framework Strategy on Climate Change (NFSCC) and
National Climate Change Action Plan (NCCAP), among others. The CCC is composed of the
President of the Republic of the Philippines as Chairperson and three Commissioners, one of
whom shall serve as the Vice Chairperson of the Commission. It has an Advisory Board
composed of 24 members from national government agencies, academe, business, non-
government organization (NGO), and DRR community. RA 9729 identifies the functions of key
government agencies such as the Department of Education (DepEd), Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA), Philippine
Information Agency (PIA), DILG, and government financial institutions. In its statement of policy,
the State likewise adopts the strategic goals in order to build national and local resilience to
climate change related disasters. Further recognizing that climate change and disaster risk
reduction are closely inter-related, thus, the State shall integrate disaster risk reduction into
climate change programs and initiatives. One of the powers and functions of the Commission is
to ensure mainstreaming of climate change, in synergy with disaster risk reduction, into the
national, sectoral and local development plans and programs. In August 16,2012, another law
was passed, Republic Act 10174, which is an Act establishing the People’s Survival Fund(PSF) to
provide long-term finance streams to enable the government to effectively address the problem
of climate change, amending for the purpose Republic Act 9729 otherwise known as the Climate
Change Act of 2009. The People's Survival Fund was created as a special fund in the National
Treasury for the financing of adaptation programs and projects based on the National Strategic
Framework on Climate Change. The Fund shall be used to support adaptation activities of the
local governments and communities. The amount of One billion pesos (PhP1,000,000,000.00)
has been appropriated from the General Appropriations Act as opening balance of the PSF.

In harmony with the said provision of the Climate Change Act State policy, Section 6 (n)
of RA10121, as part of the powers and functions of NDRRMC, provides that NDRRMC, in
coordination with the Climate Change Commission, is mandated to “formulate and implement a
framework for climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction and management from
which all policies, programs, and projects shall be based”. Furthermore, both the Climate
Change Act of 2009 and the Philippine DRRM Act espouses for a rationalized policy environment
to integrate and mainstream DRR and CCA into national and local development planning and
decision making processes in the country.

2.0 NATIONAL STRATEGIC FRAMEWORKS AND ACTION PLAN ON DRRM AND CCA

2.1 National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Framework

As the immediate responsibility of NDRRMC, as stipulated in powers and functions as

provided under RA10121, the Council shall develop a National Disaster Risk Reduction and
Management Framework (NDRRMF) which shall provide for a comprehensive, all-hazards, multi-
sectoral, inter-agency and community-based approach to disaster risk reduction and
management. The Framework shall serve as the principal guide to disaster risk reduction and

3
management efforts in the country and shall be reviewed on a five(5)-year interval, or as may be
deemed necessary, in order to ensure its relevance to the times.

Through a series of consultative meetings throughout the country in partnership with

various stakeholders, the NDRRMC through OCD reviewed the existing disaster management
framework and revised it accordingly to align it with the principles and policies of the RA 10121.
In June 16, 2011, the Council, through the chairperson and the four (4) vice chairpersons,
representing each of the thematic areas, has adopted and signed the NDRRMF. The Framework
has laid the basis for a paradigm shift from just disaster preparedness and response to disaster
risk reduction and management (DRRM).

The National DRRM Framework, which envisions a country that is “safer, adaptive, and
disaster resilient Filipino communities toward sustainable development”, aims to raise
awareness and understanding among governments and people on the country's DRRM goal. It is
geared towards guiding national and local efforts in DRRM and provides common direction in
addressing underlying causes of the country's vulnerability to help reduce and manage these
risks to disasters.

The NDRRMF, the principal guide to DRRM activities in the country, provides for a
comprehensive, all hazards, multi-sectoral, inter-agency and community-based approach to
DRRM, focusing on risk factors; covering four thematic areas of disaster prevention and
mitigation, disaster preparedness, disaster response, and disaster rehabilitation and recovery;
and mainstreaming of DRR and climate change adaptation (CCA) in planning and
implementation (Figure 1).

In the past, disaster management in the Philippines was purely a disaster response
approach, focusing on the provision of assistance or intervention during or after a disaster
event. This time, the paradigm shift, from reactive approach as the common disaster
perspective, it has moved to proactive and preventive approach and from a single hazard to
multi hazard approach of assessment. Such paradigm shift also gave equal emphasis on
vulnerabilities and capacities of exposed elements apart from the hazard. Also, the framework
views disaster as a development concern and an important component to ensure the country’s
sustainable development.

The national framework is primarily based on the following principles of disaster risk
reduction and management (DRRM):

 It is about addressing the underlying causes of vulnerability;

 It is a national responsibility within a sustainable development approach;
 It stresses the need for community empowerment and shared responsibilities;
 It is about good responsive governance and mutually reinforcing partnerships;

4
  It needs strong and responsive political will, commitment and leadership; and
 It is best done through local and customized adoption (and adaptation).

FIGURE 1. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF NDRRM

The above conceptual representation emphasizes that resources invested in disaster

prevention, mitigation, preparedness and climate change adaptation will be more effective
towards attaining the goal of adaptive, disaster resilient communities and sustainable
development. The framework shows that mitigating the potential impacts of existing disaster
and climate risks, preventing hazards and small emergencies from becoming disasters, and
being prepared for disasters will substantially reduce loss of life and damage to social, economic
& development assets. The upward motion indicated by spiraling arrows represents a bottom up
participatory process, enhanced level of awareness, strengthened multi stakeholder
partnerships and pooling of resources. These changes will be realized through mainstreaming of
DRR and CCA into national and local plans which would help refocus the country’s development
goals, objectives and targets to adequately respond to as well as identify and implement
appropriate interventions to address the impacts of disaster risks.

5
 Using the previous DRM framework as starting point, the new NDRRM framework will
still have the same four quadrants: (1) Prevention and Mitigation; (2) Preparedness; (3)
Response; and (4) Rehabilitation and Recovery. The new framework gives greater emphasis on
the first quadrant which is prevention and mitigation. The color coding scheme of each quadrant
likewise has its significant meaning; i.e. green – to show care for the environment under
prevention and mitigation area; blue – to show alertness and readiness under preparedness; red
– to show emergency status and immediate response to the needs of affected population under
response; and yellow – to show hope under rehabilitation and recovery.

The National Framework has initially identified the expected outcome and several key
result areas (KRA) of each of the four (4) distinct but mutually reinforcing thematic areas. The
expected outcome in each thematic area is the desired end or final result once all the KRAs are
completed and achieved through various strategies, all leading to the achievement of a safer,
adaptive, and disaster resilient Filipino communities toward sustainable development. Table 1
shows the expected outcome and key result areas of each of the thematic areas.

Table 1. Expected Outcome and Key Result Areas of Each of the DRRM Aspects (Thematic Areas)
DRRM Aspect Expected Outcome Key Result Areas
Prevention & Mitigation Avoided hazards and mitigated 1. Mainstreamed and integrated DRR and CCA in
their potential impacts by national, sectoral, regional and local
reducing vulnerabilities and development, policies, plans and budget.
exposure and enhancing 2. DRRM/CCA sensitive environmental management.
capacities of communities. 3. Increased disaster resiliency of infrastructure
systems.
4. Community based and scientific DRR/CCA
assessment, mapping, analysis and monitoring.
5. Risk transfer mechanisms.

Preparedness Established and strengthened 1. Community awareness and understanding of the

capacities of communities to
anticipate, cope and recover
from the negative impacts of
emergency occurrences and
disasters.
risk factors.
2. Contingency planning at the local level (to include
Incident Command Systems, Early Warning
Systems, Pre-emptive evacuation, stockpiling and
equipping).
3. Local Drills and simulation exercises.
4. National disaster response planning.

Response Provided life preservation and
met basic subsistence needs of
affected population based on
acceptable standards during or
immediately after a disaster.
1. DANA as generic activity (adapted from ADPC).
2. Relief Operations.
3. Search, rescue, retrieval.
4. Dissemination/information sharing of disaster
related information.
5. WATSAN and health.
6. Development/provision of temporary shelter.
7. Psycho social support.
8. Early recovery mechanism.
9. Management of dead and missing.
10. Evacuation management.

6
 11. Social protection intervention.
12. Civil and uniformed services coordination.

Rehabilitation & Recovery Restored and improved 1. Livelihood (1st priority).

facilities, livelihood and living 2. Shelter (2nd priority).
conditions and organizational 3. Infrastructure (3rd priority).
capacities of affected
communities and reduced
disaster risks in accordance with
the “building back better”
principles.

2.2 National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan

Less than a year later, consistent with the NDRRMF, the National Disaster Risk Reduction
and Management Plan 2011 – 2028, further fulfilling the requirements of RA 10121, was
formulated. The Plan is the DRRM road map that sets down in detail the expected outcomes,
outputs, key activities, indicators, lead agencies, implementing partners and timelines under
each thematic area. The goals of each thematic area lead to the attainment of the country’s
overall DRRM vision, as graphically shown in Figure 2. The NDRRMP lists 14 objectives, 24
outcomes, 56 outputs, and 93 outputs to be achieved by 2028.

Figure 2 Philippine DRRM Vision and Goals of Each Thematic Areas.

Disaster Preparedness Disaster Response

Establish and strengthen Provide life preservation and
capacities of communities to meet the basic subsistence
anticipate, cope and recover needs of affected population
from the negative impacts of based on acceptable
emergency occurrences and standards during or
disasters immediately after a disaster

Safer, adaptive
Disaster Prevention & and disaster Disaster Rehabilitation &
Mitigation resilient Filipino Recovery
Avoid hazards and mitigate communities Restore and improve facilities,
their potential impacts by towards livelihood and living conditions
reducing vulnerabilities and and organizational capacities of
sustainable
exposure and enhancing affected communities, and
capacities of communities development reduced disaster risks in
accordance with the “building
back better” principle

7
 2.3 National Framework Strategy on Climate Change

The NFSCC (2010 -2022) is committed towards ensuring and strengthening the
adaptation of the country's natural ecosystems and human communities to climate change and
as a principle to aggressively highlight the critical aspect of adaptation meant to be translated to
all levels of governance alongside coordinating national efforts towards integrated ecosystems-
based management which shall ultimately render sectors climate resilient. The Framework
envisions a “climate risk-resilient Philippines with healthy, safe, prosperous and self-reliant
communities, and thriving and productive ecosystems”. The goal is to build the adaptive
capacity of communities and increase the resilience of natural ecosystems to climate change
and optimize mitigation opportunities towards sustainable development. It provides as basis for
the national program on climate change and based on fundamental principles of sustainable
development and treats mitigation (greenhouse gas) as a function of adaptation.

Figure 3 shows the schematic diagram of the NFSCC while Figure 4 shows the
operational diagram that illustrates a more specific aspect of the Climate Change Framework,
taking into account how climate change impacts and vulnerabilities shall be addressed by
adaptation, mitigation and cross-cutting strategies supported by the means of implementation.

Figure 3. National Framework Strategy on Climate Change

8
Figure 4. Operational Diagram of NFSCC

2.4 National Climate Change Action Plan (NCCAP)

Consistent with the NFSCC, the NCCAP outlines the specific programs and strategies for
climate change adaptation and mitigation for 2011-2028 focusing on seven strategic priorities:
(1) food security, (2) water efficiency, (3) ecosystem and environmental stability, (4) human
security, (5) climate-smart industries and services, (6) sustainable energy, and (7) knowledge
and capacity development. It is a comprehensive plan that provides key actions that (i) enhances
adaptive capacity and resilience of communities and natural ecosystems to climate change; (ii)
adopts the total economic valuation of natural resources while ensuring biodiversity
conservation; and (iii) recognizes the competitive advantage of putting value on the direct use,
indirect use, option to use and non-use of environment and natural resources, as a short to long
term sustainable development goal.

Table 2 provides the priority areas and corresponding key outcomes expected from the
NCCAP 2011 -2028.

9
Table 2. Priority Areas and Key Outcomes of the Climate Change Action Plan
PRIORITIES OUTCOMES
1. Food security The objective of the national strategic priority on food security is to ensure
availability, stability, accessibility and affordability of safe and healthy food
amidst climate change.
2. Water sufficiency In light of climate change, however, a comprehensive review and
subsequent restructuring of the entire water sector governance is required.
It is important as well to assess the resilience of major water resources and
infrastructures, manage supply and demand, manage water quality, and
promote conservation.
3. Ecological and Ecosystems resilience and environmental stability during the plan period is
Environmental stability focused on achieving one immediate outcome: the protection and
rehabilitation of critical ecosystems, and restoration of ecological services.
4. Human security The objective of human security agenda is to reduce the risks of women and
men to climate change and disasters.
5. Climate-friendly NCCAP prioritizes the creation of green industries and eco-jobs and
Industries & services sustainable consumption and production. It also focuses on the
development of sustainable cities and municipalities.
6. Sustainable energy NCCAP prioritizes the promotion and expansion of energy efficiency and
conservation; the development of sustainable and renewable energy,
environmentally sustainable transport, and climate proofing and
rehabilitation of energy systems infrastructures.
7. Knowledge and The priorities of the NCCAP on knowledge and capacity development are:
capacity development  Enhanced knowledge on the science of climate change;
 Enhanced capacity for climate change adaptation, mitigation and
disaster risk reduction at the local and community level; and
 Established gendered climate change knowledge management
accessible to all sectors at the national and local levels.

10
3.0 Review of the Philippine Sectoral Laws in Relation to DRRM

The foregoing section, providing the legal bases for DRRM and CCA initiatives in the Philippines,
both emphasized the mainstreaming and integration of DRRM and CCA into national, sectoral and local
development plans and programs, both aligned with internationally agreed frameworks and protocols
where the Philippine Government is a signatory. Likewise, a specific single entity is established
(NDRRMC for DRRM and CCC for CCA) as the national focal point for leading the whole of society
approach for DRRM and CCA and providing national leadership and policy direction. These two inter-
related legal frameworks are the critical tools on where this country's decision making and action on
DRRM and CCA would be heading. However, although both legal frameworks clearly defines the
objectives and visions it wants to achieve, there are cross-cutting areas of various laws that support
DRRM and CCA. As such, this section will attempt to review existing laws that contribute and/or
supplement the current legal framework of DRRM/CCA in the country and plays a major role in the
overall disaster risk governance. This study may not necessarily be comprehensive but will attempt to
look at several existing laws that have an impact on the reduction of the underlying risk factors to
disasters, such as laws related to the ENR (environment and natural resources), building (structure) and
planning frameworks.

3.1 ENR Sectoral Laws with DRR Concerns

As previously stated, the NDRRMF which serves as the principal guide to DRRM activities in the
country, with the whole-of-society approach, provides for a comprehensive, all hazards, multi-sectoral,
inter-agency and community-based approach to DRRM. Some actions to address or manage the risk
from natural hazards, in particular climate related hazards such as floods, tropical cyclone severe wind
and droughts, are inherently linked with the management of natural resources (forests and water) and
land management to prevent degradation that exacerbates the risk from these hazards3.

3.1.1 Evolution of Forestry Laws and Related Policies

The Philippines has a total land area of about 30 million hectares (has.), made up of
52.7% forestland and 47.3% alienable and disposable land. However, the total forest cover is
just about 6.8 million has., with 6.4 million has. in forest land and about half a million has. in
alienable and disposable land. There are 114 proclaimed watershed forest reserves in the
country in 2013 with an aggregate area of 1.3 million hectares4. Much of the country is hilly and
mountainous with more than half of the land area officially classified as “forestland” (FMB
2002). The term “forestland” refers to all property owned by the national government that is
still in the public domain. In reality, much “forestlands” do not contain forests (Pulhin et al.
2006). The country’s forestlands and resources have vital national and global significance.
Domestically, forestlands are important sources of water for irrigation, hydroelectric power,
industrial use and household use (Lasco et al. 2001). They are also home to millions of

33
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP),
“Effective Law and Regulation for Disaster Risk Reduction: A Multi-Country Report”, June 2014, Chapter 19, p.67
4
2013 Philippine Forestry Statistics, Forest Management Bureau - DENR.

11
 indigenous peoples and migrants from the lowlands.5 Forest lands are also the main watersheds
of rivers which provide water for various uses. Soil erosion and hydrological deterioration of
these watersheds caused losses in productivity and utility of infrastructures. The forestry sector
is the major centerpiece of the country’s natural resource base and ecosystems. Although the
sector’s contribution to the national economy has been declining, its continued development
and that of the environmental sector is a pre-requisite to a sustained growth in agriculture and
other industries.6

Historical accounts of forest use in the Philippines reveal how massive deforestation has
depleted the once lush tropical rainforests of the country. A century of plunder of the forest
resource can be traced to factors such as conversion of forest to agricultural land, commercial
logging and the pressures of population growth. In order to address the decline of the forest
resource, policy reform has been instituted, as has a shift in the direction of forest management,
particularly since the end of dictatorial rule under Marcos. Forest policy in the Philippines has
subsequently become known for its active pursuit of people-centered sustainable forest
development7

The forestry sector is governed by Presidential Decree (PD) 705, known as the Revised
Forestry Code of the Philippines. This PD was issued by the then President Ferdinand E. Marcos
on May 19, 1975, revising PD 389 or the Forestry Reform Code of the Philippines. It is the
principal law governing forest management in the country, containing basic forestry standards
and practices such as areas needed for forestry, multiple use, forest utilization and
management, and criminal offenses and penalties. It has been amended by PD 865, PD 1559, PD
1775, BP 83, RA 7161 and EO 277.8

To respond to the destructive outcome of the uncontrolled timber harvesting by TLA

Concessions and huge conversion of forestland to agriculture, which caused rapid deforestation,
a new approach was introduced to rehabilitate areas through reforestation. Some of the related
initiatives include the formulation of policies on Forest Ecosystem Management in 1976,
Communal Tree Farming in 1979 and the Family Approach to Reforestation in 1981. In 1982, the
Integrated Social Forestry (ISF) policy was introduced to include the upland dwellers as partners
in resource development and conservation. The emphasis was put on the issuance of secured
long-term tenure stewardship contracts for 25 years (Poffenberger and McGean 1993, Magno
2001).9

5
"Three decades of community-based forest management in the Philippines: Emerging Lessons for Sustainable and
Equitable Forest Management", by J.M. Pulhin, M. Inoue and T. Enters, International Forestry Review Vol. 9 (4),
2007.
6
"Revised Master Plan for Forestry Development", Sustainable Forest Management, Poverty Alleviation and Food
Security in Upland Community, a Project of FAO, UNDP and FMB, October 2003.
7
"Trends in Forestry Policy of the Philippines", Policy Trend Report, by Dr. Juan M. Pulhin, 2002.
8
Philippine Forest and Wildlife Law Enforcement: Situationer and Core Issues. Philippine Environmental
Governance 2 Project, USAID-DENR, March 12, 2007.
9
"Forest Governance and Institutional Structure", G.R. Dahal and D. Capistrano, International Forestry Review
Vol.8 (4), 2006.

12
 The changed political circumstances (1986) slightly helped to strengthen the devolution
process in forestry as government started to formulate new policies and guidelines. In this
endeavour, the following three main policy reforms were initiated in the Philippines. First is the
"Local Government Code (also known as Republican Act, RA 7160)", which transferred certain
roles of previously operating integrated social forestry (ISF) sites from the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) to the Local Government Units (DENR 1992).
Second, the enactment of Executive Order 263 in 1995 by the then President Fidel Ramos
declared "Community-Based Forest Management (CBFM)" as a national strategy to achieve
sustainable forest management and social justice. Under this the DENR transferred their role
and authority over forest protection to the organised local communities, under community
based forest management agreements (CBFMA) for 25 years and conditionally renewable for
another 25 years. Since then there have been more than 1500 CBFM agreements made in the
Philippines to manage 1.5 million hectares of forestland (Table 2). The third is the Indigenous
People’s Rights Act (IPRA) of 1997. This Act mandated a National Commission for Indigenous
People (NCIP) to hand over specified ancestral domain to the indigenous cultural communities
to manage, protect and use the resources in their domain forever. In theory, the preamble to all
these milestone policies stated that local institutions would be given full authority and power to
make independent decisions at the local level in terms of management of forests, the policies
would ensure that the tenure and use rights of local communities were secured. However, in
practice, a considerable literature indicates that the authority, power and resources are not
devolved, benefits to the real users of the forest have been limited.

Another important law relevant to forestry is RA 7586 or the “National Integrated

Protected Area System” (NIPAS) Act of 1992. This Act established a NIPAS which shall
encompass outstanding remarkable areas and biologically important public lands that are
habitats of rare and endangered species of plants and animals, biogeographic zones and related
ecosystems, whether terrestrial, wetland or marine, all of which are designated as "protected
areas". As defined under the Act, NIPAS is the classification and administration of all designated
protected areas to maintain essential ecological processes and life support systems, to preserve
genetic diversity, to ensure sustainable use of resources found therein, and to maintain their
natural conditions to the greatest extent possible.10 Another feature of this Act is that Organized
communities living in selected zones within or around protected areas may be given a 25-year
tenure security provided this will not pose a threat to the environmental integrity of the
protected areas. They may also be allowed to harvest non-timber forest products like rattan,
bamboo, vines, etc., in non-restricted zones of these areas11.

In July 22, 2002, the Philippine Congress enacted RA 9175, otherwise known as the
Chainsaw Act of 2002, regulating the ownership, possession, sale, importation and use of

10
National Integrated Protected Areas System, RA 7586
11
"Three decades of community-based forest management in the Philippines: Emerging Lessons for Sustainable
and Equitable Forest Management", by J.M. Pulhin, M. Inoue and T. Enters, International Forestry Review Vol. 9 (4),
2007.

13
 chainsaws, penalizing violations thereof and for other purposes, to prevent them from being
used in illegal logging or unauthorized clearing of forests.

Other relevant law includes Executive Order No. 318, Promoting Sustainable Forest
Management in the Philippines, issued by the then President Gloria M. Arroyo in 2004. This EO
prescribed for the pursuit of sustainable management of forests and forestlands in watersheds
based on six key principles including community-based forest conservation and development.
CBFM shall remain the primary strategy in all forest conservation and development and related
activities12. The EO reiterated community-based forest management as the primary strategy in
all forest conservation and development projects in the country.

The most recent policy issuance in the forestry sector is Executive Order No. 23 issued
on February 1, 2011, by President Benigno C. Aquino III, Declaring a Moratorium on the Cutting
and Harvesting of Timber in the Natural and Residual Forests and Creating the Anti-illegal
Logging Task Force. Under the Act, DENR is prohibited to issue logging contracts/agreements in
all natural or residual forests such as Integrated Forest Management Agreement (IFMA),
Socialized Integrated Forest Management Agreement (SIFMA), CBFM Agreement or other
contracts with logging components. It also required DENR through its DA-DENR- DAR
Convergence Initiative to develop a National Greening Program (NGP) in cooperation with
DepEd, CHEd, for educational drive campaign, DILG to hels establishing communal tree farms for
firewood and other purposes, DSWD to identify upland farmers and DBM to provide funds for
the production of quality seedlings for the NGP. 13

Table 3 provides the historical evolution of Community-Based Forest Management

Policies in the Philippines.

Despite the promulgation of a number of policies favoring community-based

management of the forest in the country, there are still inherent difficulties and insufficiencies
in the implementation of these policies that limits equity of forestland allocation and access of
local communities to forest resources. Policy and institutional support for CBFM was identified
as major area of concern and until now remains weak. This is mainly attributed to: 1) complex
and overly bureaucratic procedures and many restrictions imposed on local communities who
seek access to utilize forest resources; 2) the perceived institutional inefficiency to implement
CBFM especially at the field level; 3) the absence of financial mechanisms to help finance CBFM;
and 4) the policies for soliciting the participation of the LGUs, non-government organizations,
and tacitly, the people’s organizations, are insufficient. Another major issue is that access of
local communities to forest resources remains elusive and that government still has the ultimate
control and supervision over the utilization of forest resources including those being managed
by local communities. CBFM is viewed as a project and not as an approach to replace large scale
commercial forestry. Another is the unresolved issue of the log ban policy, restricting all other
members of the local community to access timber resources.

12
Ibid. p. 872
13
Executive Order No. 23, February 1, 2011, Declaring Moratorium on the Cutting and Harvesting of Timber in the
Natural and Residual Forests.

14
Table 3 Historical Overview of CBFM Policies in the Philippines14
Periods/ Key Policies
Dates
1975 Revised Forestry Code of the Philippines
(Presidential Decree No. 705).
1982 Integrated Social Forestry (ISF) Program
(Presidential Letter of Instruction No.
1260; Ministry Administrative Order No.
48, Series of 1982; Department
Administrative Order No. 97, Series of
1988).
1991 Local Government Code (Republic Act
No. 7160)
1992 National Integrated Protected Area
System (NIPAS) Act (Republic Act
No. 7586)
1995 Adoption of Community-Based Forest
Management (CBFM) as the National
Strategy for the Sustainable
Development of Forestlands (Executive
Order No. 263)
1996 Rules and Regulations for the
Implementation of Executive Order 263,
Otherwise Known as the CBFM Strategy
(DENR Administrative
Order No. 96-29)
14
"Three decades of community-based forest management in the Philippines: Emerging Lessons for Sustainable
and Equitable Forest Management", by J.M. Pulhin, M. Inoue and T. Enters, International Forestry Review Vol. 9 (4),
2007.
Features
Kaingineros, squatters and other occupants who
entered forest zones before May 1975 shall not
be prosecuted provided they do not expand their
clearings and that they undertake forest
protection activities.
Designed to maximize land productivity, enhance
ecological stability, and improve socioeconomic
conditions of forest occupants and communities.
Participants in the Program who have been
residing in forestlands on or before December 31,
1981 were granted the right to occupy and
develop their areas for a period of 25 years,
renewable for another 25 years through the
issuance of stewardship agreement.
The implementation of social forestry and
reforestation initiatives, the management of
communal forests not exceeding 5,000 ha., the
protection of small watershed areas, and the
enforcement of forest laws are devolved to local
government units.
Organized communities living in selected zones
within or around protected areas may be given a
25-year tenure security provided this will not
pose a threat to the environmental integrity of
the protected areas. They may also be allowed to
harvest non-timber forest products like rattan,
bamboo, vines, etc., in non-restricted zones of
these areas.
CBFM is the national strategy to achieve
sustainable forestry and social justice. Organized
communities may be granted access to forest
resources under long-term tenure provided they
employ environment-friendly, ecologically
sustainable, and labour-intensive harvesting
methods. CBFM integrates all people-oriented
forestry programs and projects of the
government.
Local communities shall prepare their respective
Community Resource Management Frameworks
with the assistance of DENR, local government
units, NGOs, and other government agencies. The
CBFM program shall apply to all areas classifi ed
as forestlands including allowable zones within
protected areas. It integrates all people-oriented
forestry programs of the government.
15
Periods/ Key Policies
Dates
1997 Indigenous People’s Rights Act (Republic
Act No. 8371)
2003 Strengthening and Institutionalizing the
DENR-DILG-LGU Partnership on
Devolved and other Forest
Management Functions (DENRDILG
Joint Memorandum Circular No. 2003-
01)
2004 Promoting Sustainable Forest
Management in the Philippines
(Executive Order No. 318)
2004 Revised Rules and Regulations for the
Implementation of the CBFM Strategy
(DENR Administrative Order No. 29)
2006- Formulation of 2nd Decade Strategic
2007 Action Plan
Features
Mandated the State to protect the rights of
indigenous cultural communities to their
ancestral domains to ensure their economic,
social and cultural well being. Also recognizes the
property relations in determining the ownership
and extent of ancestral domain. Indigenous
peoples whose ancestral domains have been offi
cially delineated and determined by the National
Commission on Indigenous People shall be issued
a Certifi cate of Ancestral Domain Title (CADT) in
the name of the community concerned,
containing a list of all those identifi ed in the
census.
Guidelines and instructions for DENR, DILG and
LGUs in accelerating collaboration, partnership,
coordination and institutionalization of its
working relations on forest management and
related environmental concerns.
Prescribed for the pursuit of sustainable
management of forests and forestlands in
watersheds based on six key principles including
community-based forest conservation and
development. CBFM shall remain the primary
strategy in all forest conservation and
development and related activities.
Improve on the 1996 CBFM Implementing Rules
and Regulations by allowing more fl exibility to
participating communities such as the
requirement of a Five-Year Work Plan instead of
Annual Work Plan, etc.
Puts primacy on the ownership of the different
CBFM stakeholders on the process of the
Strategic Plan formulation but also commitment
and support to its implementation.

3.1.2 Integrated Coastal Resource Management (ICRM)

The Philippines is a global center of marine diversity, an archipelago with more than
7,100 islands, and one of the longest coastlines in the world, has a total land area of 298,170
km2 and has an inland water area of 1,830 km2 and a coastline length of about 36,289 km.15. The
country is confronted with enormous challenge of finding a suitable path to food security,
sustainable livelihood, poverty alleviation and reduction of vulnerability to natural hazards,
while protecting ecological integrity and strengthening economic growth. Responding to this

15
Philippine Country Profile, Partnerships in Environmental Management for the Seas of East Asia (PEMSEA).

16
 challenge, integrated coastal management (ICM) has emerged, through practice, as a better
alternative in the governance of coastal and marine resources. In as much as the Philippines is
an ocean-dependent country, application of ICM is of vital importance to the country's long-
term social and economic development.

Coastal and marine ecosystems of the country consist of beaches, mangrove forest,
coral reefs, sea-grass beds, soft-bottom communities (including tidal flats, estuaries), and open
marine waters and small islands. Beach forests and mangrove forests have been largely cut
down to give way to human settlements and for other purposes. Reduction of mangrove areas
has further compromised their ecological support for fishery production and of serving as
habitats for both marine and terrestrial biodiversity. Sea grass beds and coral reefs have been
subjected to direct human disturbances through destructive fishing and other human activities
including chemical and organic waste pollution, sedimentation from upland due to soil erosion
from loss of forest cover, from dredging and land reclamation in coastal areas. The open coastal
waters and coral reefs have been affected by the rising sea temperatures attributed to climate
change, resulting in episodes in coral bleaching degrading the reefs, thus significantly reducing
fish harvest16.

The guiding legal framework for the current ICRMP is the the Executive Order No. 533
issued by the President. Section 3 of this EO states that a national program shall be developed
by DENR, in consultation with other government agencies concerned with coastal and marine
resources and the various stakeholders dependent upon these resources. “The National ICM
Programme shall include principles, strategies, and action plans identified after balancing
national development priorities with local concerns, define national ICM targets and develop a
national ICM coordinating mechanism.” Furthermore, the ICM processes are useful in managing
risks and in implementing Philippine laws relating to the environment including the Local
Government Code (LGC), the NIPAS Act, the Fishery Code, the Millenium Development Goals
and the program of the Climate Change Commission as well as the International Conventions
ratified by the Philippine government17.

Table 4 shows the significant events and laws in the evolution of ICM in the
Philippines18.

16
A National Integrated Coastal Resources Management and Marine Biodiversity Research Agenda for the
Philippines, prepared for DENR-PAWB, ICRM Project, Dr. A.C. Alcala, 2011, p. 1
17
Ibid. p. 6.
18
Integrated Coastal Management in the Philippines, Local Governance: Evolution and Benefits, White, et.al.,
2006, FISH Project

17
Table 4 Important Events and laws in the evolution of ICM in the Philippines
Periods/ Dates Events
1975 Revised Forestry Code of the Philippines (Presidential Decree No. 705) established
the need to protect mangrove forests.
1976 Environmental Impact System established.
1976 National Mangrove Committee established
1978 Marine Parks Task Force created to recommend sites for marine parks
1979 Coastal Zone Management Committee with 22 agencies formed
1981 Philippines become signatory to CITES (Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, international agreement to ensure
that international trade of wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival.
1986 Muro-ami and Kayakas fishing methods banned in Philippine Waters
1987 Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) moved from Ministry of Natural
Resources to Department of Agriculture
1991 Local Government Code devolves responsibilities to local governments
1992 Philippine Council for Sustainable Development created
1992 Philippines becomes a signatory to Agenda 21
1992 National Integrated Protected Area System (NIPAS) Act passed
1993 Coastal Environment Program of DENR established
1994 National Marine Policy formulated
1995 Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Management Councils authorized
1998 Fisheries Code reinforces the roles of local government in management
2002 Coastal and Marine Management Office replaces CEP at DENR
2004 Framework for Sustainable Philippine Archipelagic Development (ARCDEV)
formulated
2006 Executive Order No. 533 issued by President G.M. Arroyo adopting ICM as a
national strategy to ensure sustainable development of coastal and marine
environment and resources
2007 Coastal and Marine Management Sectoral Framework Plan (CMMSFP) developed

Even with a vast of experience of ICM in the Philippines over the last several decades,
still a number of issues that undermines the sustainability of ICM and stability of coastal and
marine ecosystems in the country. An examination of these issues shows that they are
reinforced by ineffectual coastal governance due to a number of factors such as: insufficient
understanding of the connectivity of marine biodiversity and the ecological processes that
support it; understaffed and under-funded conservation management and enforcement
regimes; limited technical capacity of national and local natural resource managers;
overlapping and conflicting policies and lack of coordination among national CRM
implementing agencies; economic incentives that favor short-term gains over long-term
sustainable use; and lack of political will to enforce laws and policies that would have
ascertained predictability and consistency in decision making19.

19
National Integrated Coastal Management Program, A Proposal in Compliance with EO 533, DENR, Integrated
Coastal Resources Management Project, September 2011.

18
3.1.3 Philippine Mining Sector Policies

3.1.4 Philippine Environmental Impact Assessment

3.1.5 Ecological Solid waste Management Act

3.1.6 Philippine Clean Water Act, Republic Act 9275

As early as 1996, monitoring of the country’s rivers showed that only 51% of
the classified rivers still met the standards for their most beneficial use. The rest
were already polluted from domestic, industrial and agricultural sources. Most
studies point to the fact that domestic wastewater is the principal cause of organic
pollution (at 48%) of our water bodies. Yet, only 3% of investments in water supply
and sanitation were going to sanitation and sewage treatment. A World Bank report
pointed out that Metro Manila was second to the lowest in sewer connections among
major cities in Asia. In addition, another report indicated that thirty-one percent
(31%) of all illnesses in the country are attributed to polluted waters. Clearly, to
ensure access to clean water for all Filipinos, it was imperative that government put
together a comprehensive strategy to protect water quality.

The Philippine Clean Water Act of 2004 was signed into law on July 28, 2003. It is an
Act providing for a comprehensive water quality management in all water bodies, that it
shall primarily apply to the abatement and control of pollution from land based sources
(industries and commercial establishments, agriculture and community/household
activities) and that the water quality standards and regulations and the civil liability and
penal provisions under this Act shall be enforced irrespective of sources of pollution.

Management of water quality will either be based on watershed, river basin or

water resources region. Water quality management areas with similar hydrological,
hydrogeological, meteorological or geographic conditions which affect the reaction
and diffusion of pollutants in water bodies are to be designated by the DENR in
coordination with the National Water Resources Board (NWRB).

Tables 5 and 6 shows the evolution of laws pertaining to water use and
management, and laws pertaining to water quality control.

19
Table 5 Laws Pertaining to Water Use and management
Laws Description
Republic Act No. 198, Authorizes the creation of local water districts to operate and administer
Creation of Provincial water supply and wastewater disposal systems in the provincial areas
Water Utilities (1973)
Presidential Decree Creation of the National Water Resource Council
No. 424 (1974)
Presidential Decree Addresses ownership, appropriation, exploitation, development,
No. 1067 (1976), conservation and protection of water resources.
Water Code of the
Philippines
Presidential Decree Mandates the conduct of environmental impact assessment studies for all
No. 1586, investments undertaken by the government and private sector to include
Environmental Impact baseline information of natural resources/ecosystems (including water).
Statement System
(1978)
Republic Act No. 7160, Devolves enforcement of laws on sanitation to LGUs and the provision of
Local Government basic services such as water supply, sanitation and flood control
Code (1991)
Republic Act No. 8041, Addresses the issues of water supply, privatization of state-run water
National Water Crisis facilities, protection and conservation of watersheds and the waste and
Act of 1995 pilferage of water

Table 6 Laws Pertaining to Water Quality Control

Related Laws/Policies Description
Commonwealth Act 383, Prohibits dumping of refuse, waste matter or other substances into
Anti-Dumping Law (1938) rivers

Republic Act 4850 (1966),
Laguna Lake Development
Authority Act, as amended
by PD 813
Republic Act 6234, Creation
of Metro Waterworks and
Sewerage System (1971)
Presidential Decree 281,
Creation of the Pasig River
Development Council
(1973)
Presidential Decree No.
856, Sanitation Code of the
Philippines (1975)
Regulates and controls the pollution of the Laguna de Bay Region,
including sewage works and industrial waste disposal systems
Constructs, operates, and maintains water systems, sewerage and
sanitation facilities in the Metro Manila area
Regulates and controls pollution of the Pasig River
Covers solid and liquid waste disposal
Prescribes standards for sewage collection and refuse and excreta
disposal
Assigns to cities and municipalities the responsibilities to provide for
efficient and proper disposal, and to handle nuisance and offensive
trades and occupations

20
Presidential Decree 984,
Pollution Control Law
(1976)
Republic Act 6969, Toxic
Substances & Hazardous &
Nuclear Wastes Control Act
(1990)
DENR Administrative Order
No. 90-34, Revised Water
Usage and Classification /
Water Quality Criteria
DENR Administrative Order
No. 90-35, Revised Effluent
Regulations of 1990
DENR Administrative Order
No. 94-26A, Philippine
National Standards for
Drinking Water (1994)
DENR Administrative Order
No. 97-39, Chemical
Control Order for Mercury
and Mercury Compounds
(1997)
DENR Administrative Order
No. 98-58, Priority
Chemical List (1998)
Republic Act No. 9003,
Ecological Solid Waste
Management Act of 2000
R.A. No. 9275, Clean Water
Act (2004)
3.2 Other Philippine Sectoral Laws Relevant to Disaster Risk Governance
Provides guidelines for the control of water pollution from industrial
sources and sets penalties for violations, also requires all polluters to
secure permits
Mandates the control and management of the import, manufacturing,
processing, distribution, use, transport, storage, treatment, and
disposal of toxic substances and hazardous and nuclear wastes
Section 68 defines classification of water bodies according to their best
usage
Section 69 identifies the different parameters and criteria for water
quality required for each type of classification
Prescribes the standards for discharge of effluents to the different
classifications of water bodies
Provides the different parameters and value for drinking water quality
Defines guidelines for assessing water quality for drinking water
Regulates the importation, manufacture, distribution and use of
mercury and mercury compounds and the storage, transport, and
disposal of their wastes
Identifies existing and new chemicals that the DENR has determined to
potentially pose unreasonable risk to public health, workplace, and the
environment.
Requires all manufacturers, distributors, users, and importers of
chemicals included in the PCL to submit bi-annual reports
Calls for the institutionalization of a national program that will manage
the transfer, transport, processing, and disposal of solid waste in the
country
Sec. 40 sets the criteria for siting landfills to ensure that their operation
do not affect aquifers, groundwater reservoirs or watersheds.
Provides for a program and regulations for the abatement and
management of water pollution from point and non-point sources
Introduces market-based instruments (MBIs) such as the wastewater
charge system that imposes fees based on the volume of effluents
discharged
Strengthens enforcement by providing stiffer penalties for violations of
standards
The permitting system has been modified to accommodate the fee
system based on amount of pollution discharged
21
 3.2.1 Development Planning Policy

3.2.2 National Building Code

4.0 ROLE OF PHILIPPINE SECTORAL LAWS IN DISASTER RISK GOVERNANCE

This report has found that there is a large body of sectoral regulation relevant to DRR in the sample
countries, albeit with gaps in some countries. There are major implementation challenges in many
lower- and middle-income countries, particularly at the local level. At present, sectoral laws on
development planning cannot fulfil their role in disaster risk governance in all but high-income countries
due to insufficient resources, capacity, and in some cases, lack of acceptance of the need for their
implementation. Yet, the vast majority of sample countries continue to make a priority of building
codes, land use planning and environmental management laws by keeping them up to date and
relevant, even where local capacity for implementation is stretched. However, while regulatory
coverage is, for the most part, comprehensive, few of these laws make specific provision for the
reduction of risk from natural hazards, including risks related to climate change. Only a minority include
specific legislative cross-references and institutional links within these sectors, and still fewer make any
such links with the DRM system.
The countries that face the challenge of large urban informal settlements employ a range of regulatory
strategies to govern these settlements and to reduce the risk levels of residents. Regularization of these
settlements is identified as one of the more effective approaches, balancing public safety concerns with
the rights of residents in order to provide a sustainable resolution. Yet, implementation of these laws
and policies in the lower- and middle-income countries is intermittent and at times contradicts the legal
safeguards provided. Given that almost all the population growth in the coming decades is predicted to
occur in urban areas, this is clearly one of the most pressing challenges for DRR facing many less
developed countries.
Many of the sectoral laws provide for community consultation and/or civil society participation in
planning processes related to development, but the potential of these provisions is rarely realized in the
lower- and middle-income countries. Since these countries also face challenges in implementation of the
laws, it seems likely that greater inclusion of communities and civil society could result in significant
improvements in disaster risk governance at the local level.
When considering the role of such sectoral laws compared with that of DRM laws, it is evident that
countries with significant disaster risk need to support both forms of regulation. While most DRM laws
focus on managing and reducing risk from the direct effects of natural hazards, disaster risk governance
through development planning laws is essential to reduce the exposure and vulnerability of the
population to hazards, and indeed to prevent the constant creation of new disaster risk through urban
development. In moving towards more comprehensive risk management, some countries that currently
have reduced capacity in sectoral regulation have taken the approach of establishing wide-ranging DRM
laws that not only give a high priority to DRR, but also support public education and provide leadership
on DRR that extends into these other sectors. This is one approach that makes it possible to close the

22
gap between the DRM system and DRR within development sectors, even if the ultimate goal is to
ensure that the DRR approach is mainstreamed into development.

An ecosystem is a community of living organisms in conjunction with the nonliving components of their
environment (things like air, water and mineral soil), interacting as a system.

The coastal areas must also be protected from sea level rise and storm surges. Communities living along
the coastline and in the uplands must be prepared to meet the challenges to their environment,
livelihood and homes.

23
REFERENCES:

“Effective Law and Regulation for Disaster Risk Reduction: A Multi-Country Report”, International
Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) and the United Nations Development
Programme (UNDP), pp.xv, June 2014. UNDP New York.

Republic Act 10121, Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010.

National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Framework (NDRRMF), NDRRMC, June 16, 2011.

National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan (NDRRMP) 2011 - 2018, NDRRMC, 2012.

Republic Act 9729, Climate Change Act of 2009, October 23, 2009.

Republic Act 10174, People's Survival Fund, Amending RA 9729, August 16, 2012.

National Framework Strategy on Climate Change, April 28, 2010.

National Climate Change Action Plan, 2011-2028.

2013 Philippine Forestry Statistics, Forest Management Bureau - DENR.

"Revised Master Plan for Forestry Development", Sustainable Forest Management, Poverty Alleviation
and Food Security in Upland Community, a Project of FAO, UNDP and FMB, October 2003.

"Trends in Forestry Policy of the Philippines", Policy Trend Report, by Dr. Juan M. Pulhin, 2002.

"Philippine Forest and Wildlife Law Enforcement: Situationer and Core Issues", prepared by
Development Alternatives, Inc., under Ecogov 2 Project, a USAID and DENR Project, March 12, 2007.

"Forest Governance and Institutional Structure", G.R. Dahal and D. Capistrano, International Forestry
Review Vol.8 (4), 2006.

"Three decades of community-based forest management in the Philippines: Emerging Lessons for
Sustainable and Equitable Forest Management", by J.M. Pulhin, M. Inoue and T. Enters, International
Forestry Review Vol. 9 (4), 2007.

National Integrated Protected Areas System, RA 7586.

Republic Act 9175, Chainsaw Act of 2002

Executive Order No. 23, Declaring Moratorium on the Cutting and Harvesting of Timber in the Natural
and Residual Forests, February 1, 2011.

24
“A National Integrated Coastal Resources Management and Marine Biodiversity Research Agenda for
the Philippines”, prepared for DENR-PAWB, ICRM Project, Dr. A.C. Alcala, 2011.

Integrated Coastal Management in the Philippines, Local Governance: Evolution and Benefits, White,
et.al., 2006, FISH Project

National Integrated Coastal Management Program, A Proposal in Compliance with EO 533, DENR,
Integrated Coastal Resources Management Project, September 2011.

25