The Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction Management Act of 2010 (Republic Act 10121) is an act strengthening the Philippine disaster risk reduction and management system, providing for the national disaster risk reduction and management framework and institutionalizing the national disaster risk reduction and management plan. Republic Act 10121 was signed by former president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo on the 27th of May, last year after the country was hard hit by typhoon Ondoy and Pepeng leaving the country with high death toll and millions of property losses.
According to the law, Republic Act 10121 will 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, including good governance, risk assessment and early warning, knowledge building and awareness raising, reducing underlying risk factors, and preparedness for effective response and early recovery.
After the 8.9 magnitude earthquake and tsunami that struck Japan, Senator Juan Miguel Zubiri filed Resolution No.426 asking the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and the Committee on Climate Change to determine the implementation of the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction Management Act of 2010 , which calls for the development of a “comprehensive” program to mitigate the effects of natural calamities.

Get Help With Your Essay
If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!
Essay Writing Service

In an interview with Senator Juan Miguel Zubiri, he said, “Almost a year after the enactment of Republic Act No.10121 and with the recent natural calamities happening in the Asian region and nearby countries, it is timely for Congress and our people to be informed of the status and implementation of the country’s National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan”. He further said that “the Japan earthquake was preceded by a destructive 6.3 magnitude earthquake in Christ-church, New Zealand, thus, there are some who raised the possibility that a powerful earthquake happening in the Philippines could not be far behind”.
Senator Edgardo Angara also expressed his concern over the country’s ability to address a strong earthquake and tsunami at the same time. He also said that, “We are fortunate to have not been severely affected by this catastrophe which has crippled Japan, despite all their measures to safeguard the people and the infrastructure. But what if we are not so lucky next time? The Philippines is not nearly as prepared”.
In view of challenges and risks that disasters pose in our society, a broader and more comprehensive response to changes prevailing in the country today can be achieved through the integration of the CNE (cultural-natural-economic) Model for sustainable development. The CNE model is a single integral unity of understanding not only of economics but also of its interface with ecology and sociology.
Gonzales (2005) mentioned, in his in-depth study of the CNE model, that a balance between culture and nature is life giving and life nourishing. The economic system is primarily subsistence with no monetary type of transaction of persons and communities. There is a free flow of free goods from nature than economic goods from the marker system. This phenomenon is the dependency to Common Property Resource by communities. On the other, the non dependency to Common Property Resource by communities phenomenon showed rather different approach. The life giving forces of culture and nature have been threatened by imbalances in the system of society, ecology, and economy. There is perceived contradiction between traditions, industrial interest and survival. Economic system on the other end integrates a perceived conflict between subsistence and commercial activities.
Statement of the Problem
Past and current studies present a narrow perspective on the relationship of National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management (DRMM) policies to culture, nature, and to the nation’s economy. In the Philippine setting, few studies were directed towards such studies.
The inadequacy of existing literature in the Philippines directs us to assessing the degree of integration of the CNE Model in DRMM policies.
Objectives of the Study
General Objective:
The study aims to assess the degree of integration of the CNE Model in the DRMM policies
Specific Objectives:
To determine if in the current DRRM policies, mechanism are in place to protect the cultural integrity of vulnerable population groups in the event of a disaster.
To determine to what extent do programs on pre-disaster preparedness, response and post-disaster recovery work under the framework of environmental sustainability?
To investigate if mechanism are in place to address economic recovery during post-disaster phase.
Are there policies that make local economies resilient to the effects of disaster?
To what extent are these policies implemented?
Has there been an assessment of economic resiliency development in response to disaster?
Review of Related Literature
Disasters cause great damage by disrupting the functioning of a society thus rendering the country incapable of coping through using its own resources as there is a need for outsider assistance in order to effectively preserve lives and the environment. Conversely, Natural hazards are natural phenomena that are potential threats to people within a society, structures or economic assets and may cause disaster. Natural disasters are inevitable and ubiquitous worldwide, they are chiefly present in the forms of hurricanes, earthquakes, floods, droughts, and volcanoes. The great damages caused by natural disasters may be divided into three categories: social, economic and environmental.
To name a few impacts of disaster are as follows: loss of lives and homelessness, disruption of communities, employment (social impact) process of money being diverted into relief activities and reconstruction, Gross Domestic Product (economic impacts), food shortage and the contamination of water, loss of homes (social impacts) and the overall impact on the economy as well as assistance received from outsiders (economic impacts).
Impacts of Disaster on Culture/Society
The social consequences of natural disasters can be far larger than the immediate physical effects of the disaster. Primary damage is the destruction of buildings and roads, and it is the most obvious form of consequence from natural disasters. Secondary, or social, consequences stem from the primary. The impact of natural disasters is strongly linked with social factors; for example, 90 percent of deaths from natural disasters occur in the developing world. The most obvious devastating effect of leaving people homeless, destruction of housing can have other major long-term impacts on a society. Health issues have short- and long-term consequences. In most countries of the developing world, the health care infrastructures are already poor, so they simply cannot cope with the strain on resources that natural disasters create. Education is one of the biggest losers in a natural disaster. Lack of access to education cannot be underestimated, as it prevents children from receiving adequate training. Political instability can last for years after a natural disaster. In the developing world, where responses to natural disasters are limited by poor infrastructure, governments are often blamed for slow action. Political instability can lead to the breakdown of law, which again severely inhibits the recovery of the local economy, in terms of domestic trade and external investment.
Impacts of Disaster on Nature/Environment
The impacts of disasters, whether natural or man-made, not only have societal dimensions, but environmental ones as well. Environmental conditions may exacerbate the impact of a disaster, and vice versa, disasters have an impact on the environment. Deforestation, forest management practices, agriculture systems etc. can exacerbate the negative environmental impacts of a storm or typhoon, leading to landslides, flooding, silting and ground/surface water contamination. The majority of risks and vulnerabilities that humans are facing have environmental precedence, whether natural or built environments. Human production and consumption patterns lead to environmental degradation, which results in exacerbation of natural risks and hazards.
Impacts of Disaster on Economy
The impacts of natural disasters have historically been devastating on economies that do not move to offset these effects. The economy of the U.S. and Japan are unique in that disaster recovery plans are set up to help offset such economic impacts. Furthermore, both economies are resilient to such shocks given the expectations of such shocks to take place. Developing countries often do not share the same luxury and cannot avoid the long term economic impacts. The impacts in question are specifically reductions in aggregate supply and demand, with lower levels of output (income), causing price deflations and higher levels of unemployment.
Furthermore, the Japanese government on Wednesday estimated the direct damage from a deadly earthquake and tsunami that struck the country’s northeast this month at as much as $310 billion, making it the world’s costliest natural disaster.
Tokyo said the estimate covered damage to roads, homes, factories and other infrastructure, and eclipses the losses incurred by other natural disasters such as the 1995 Kobe quake and Hurricane Katrina in 2005.
Loayza et al (2011) research paper studies several such disasters in both developed and developing countries over the period 1961-2005 to determine their impact on growth. Their focus is on the impact of growth in the medium term, over five years. The researchers study four different types of natural disasters-droughts, floods, earthquakes and storms-and find that they affect economies differently. Droughts, for instance, have a negative impact on growth because they lower agricultural production, hamper the provision of raw materials for industry, and also affect electricity generation. Floods, if they do not last too long and are localized, can, however, have a positive effect on growth if they lead to higher agricultural production and greater electricity generation. But here’s what the paper has to say about the effect of earthquakes: “Earthquakes may have a positive impact on industrial growth. Although they severely affect both workers and capital, earthquakes particularly destroy buildings, infrastructure, and factories. The capital-worker ratio is then sharply diminished, the average (and marginal) product of capital increases, and output grows as the economy enters a cycle of reconstruction. Moreover, if destroyed capital is replaced by a vintage of better quality, factor productivity increases, leading to a further push to higher growth.”That’s why most analysts (and there is no shortage of armchair analysts on natural disasters these days, they have mushroomed like radiation after a nuclear disaster) have said that while there will be a short-term negative impact on the Japanese economy, longer-term growth will be positive as reconstruction starts. Storms, on the other hand, have negative effects on agricultural growth, as crops are destroyed, but their impact on industrial growth is positive, again because of the destruction of capital, which has to be rebuilt later. The authors say that while droughts affect the greatest number of people, earthquakes cause the most destruction. The results also depend on the severity of the natural disaster. The authors point out that “while moderate earthquakes and storms can have a beneficial ‘reconstruction’ effect on industrial growth, severe events are so devastating that the loss of capital cannot be compensated by increasing capacity, thus dissipating the potential gains. Overall, any potential positive effects on growth from natural disasters appear to disappear when natural disasters are extreme”. And finally, the economies of developing countries are more affected by natural disasters than those of developed countries and the poor are affected the most. The study more or less confirms what is suggested by common sense. But perhaps the most worrying effect of the disaster in Japan has been the danger of radioactive leakage from nuclear plants. If this leads to a shift away from nuclear energy to oil, that could well have much more far-reaching impact, not only on the Japanese economy, but globally as well.
Disaster Risk Reduction and Management on a Wider Perspective
The International Strategy for Disaster Reduction System
The International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR) is a system of partnerships. These partnerships are composed of a broad range of actors, all of which have essential roles to play in supporting nations and communities to reduce disaster risk. Partners include Governments, inter-governmental and nongovernmental organizations, international financial institutions, scientific and technical bodies and specialized networks as well as civil society and the private sector. The Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction is the main forum for continued and concerted emphasis on disaster reduction, providing strategic guidance and coherence for implementing the Hyogo Framework, and for sharing experiences and expertise among all its stakeholders. A secretariat – the UNISDR secretariat – supports and assists the ISDR System in implementing the Hyogo Framework for Action.
Purpose of the ISDR system
The overall objective of the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR) system is to generate and support a global disaster risk reduction movement to reduce risk to disasters and to build “a culture of prevention” in society as part of sustainable development. In pursuit of this objective, the ISDR system supports nations and communities to implement the Hyogo Framework for Action through widened participation of Governments and organizations in the ISDR; raising the profile of disaster reduction in the priorities and programmes of organizations; and building a stronger, more systematic and coherent international effort to support national disaster reduction efforts.
United Nations Development Programme (Disaster Reduction Unit)
According to UNDP reducing the impact of natural disasters requires a comprehensive approach that accounts for the causes of a society’s vulnerability to disasters. Not only must a comprehensive strategy be articulated, but the political will must be established to sustain new policies. The key elements of a comprehensive approach to disaster risk reduction consist of:
Political will and governance aspects (policies, legal frameworks, resources and organizational structures)
Risk identification (risk and impact assessment, early warning)
Knowledge management (information management, communication, education &training, public awareness, research)
Risk management applications (environmental and natural resource management, social and economic development practices, physical and technical measures)
Preparedness and emergency management
Disaster Risk Reduction and Management in the Philippine Context
Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) is a systematic approach to identifying, assessing and reducing the risks of disaster. It aims to reduce socio-economic vulnerabilities to disaster as well as dealing with the environmental and other hazards that trigger them.
United Nation agencies such as UNISDR and UNDP define it as “The conceptual framework of elements considered with the possibilities to minimize vulnerabilities and disaster risks throughout a society, to avoid (prevention) or to limit (mitigation and preparedness) the adverse impacts of hazards, within the broad context of sustainable development.”
DRR is such an all-embracing concept that it has proved difficult to define or explain in detail, although the broad idea is clear enough. Inevitably, there are different definitions of the term in the technical literature but it is generally understood to mean the broad development and application of policies, strategies and practices to minimise vulnerabilities and disaster risks throughout society The term ‘disaster risk management’ (DRM) is often used in the same context and to mean much the same thing: a systematic approach to identifying, assessing and reducing risks of all kinds associated with hazards and human activities. It is more properly applied to the operational aspects of DRR: the practical implementation of DRR initiatives.
Republic Act No.10121 defines DRR as the concept and practice of reducing disaster risks through systematic efforts to analyze and manage the causal factors of disasters, including through reduced exposures to hazards, lessened vulnerability of people and property, wise management of land and the environment, and improved preparedness for adverse events.
Disaster Risk Reduction and Management (DRRM) on the other hand is the systematic process of using administrative directives, organizations, and operational skills and capacities to implement strategies, policies and improved coping capacities in order to lessen the adverse impacts of hazards and the possibility of disaster. Prospective disaster risk reduction and management refers to risk reduction and management activities that address and seek to avoid the development of new or increased disaster risks, especially if risk reduction policies are not put in place.
Furthermore, the law provides for comprehensive, all hazards, multi-sectoral, inter-agency and community-based approach to disaster risk reduction and management through the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Framework (NDRRMF). The National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan (NDRRMP) on the other hand shall provide for the identification of hazards, vulnerabilities and risks to ‘be managed at the national level; disaster risk reduction and management approaches and strategies to be applied m managing said hazards and risks; agency roles, responsibilities and lines of authority at all government levels; and vertical and horizontal coordination of disaster risk reduction and management in the pre-disaster and post-disaster phases. It shall be in conformity with the NDRRMF.
Among the policies of Republic Act No.10121 are as follows:
(a) Uphold the people’s constitutional rights to life and property by addressing the root causes of vulnerabilities to disasters, strengthening the country’s institutional capacity for disaster risk reduction and management and building the resilience of local communities to disasters including climate change impacts;
(b) Adhere to and adopt the universal norms, principles and standards of humanitarian assistance and the global effort on risk reduction as concrete expression of the country’s commitment to overcome human sufferings due to recurring disasters;
(c) Incorporate internationally accepted principles of disaster risk management in the creation and implementation of national, regional and local sustainable development and poverty reduction strategies, policies, plans and budgets;
(d) Adopt a disaster risk reduction and management approach that is holistic, comprehensive, integrated, and proactive in lessening the socioeconomic 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;
(e) Develop, promote, and implement a comprehensive National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan (NDRRMP) that aims to strengthen the capacity of the national government and the local government units (LGUs), together with partner stakeholders, to build the disaster resilience of communities, and’ to institutionalize arrangements and measures for reducing disaster risks, including projected climate risks, and enhancing disaster preparedness and response capabilities at all levels;
(f) Adopt and implement a coherent, comprehensive, integrated, efficient and responsive disaster risk reduction program incorporated in the development plan at various levels of government adhering to the principles of good governance such as transparency and accountability within the context of poverty alleviation and environmental protection;
(g) Mainstream disaster risk reduction and climate change in development processes such as policy formulation, socioeconomic development planning, budgeting, and governance, particularly in the areas of environment, agriculture, water, energy, health, education, poverty reduction, land-use and urban planning, and public infrastructure and housing, among others;
(h) Institutionalize the policies, structures, coordination mechanisms and programs with continuing budget appropriation on disaster risk reduction from national down to local levels towards building a disaster-resilient nation and communities;
(i) Mainstream disaster risk reduction into the peace process and conflict resolution approaches in order to minimize loss of lives and damage to property, and ensure that communities in conflict zones can immediately go back to their normal lives during periods of intermittent conflicts;
(j) Ensure that disaster risk reduction and climate change measures are gender responsive, sensitive to indigenous knowledge systems, and respectful of human rights;
(k) Recognize the local risk patterns across the country and strengthen the capacity of LGUs for disaster risk reduction and management through decentralized powers, responsibilities, and resources at the regional and local levels;
(l) Recognize and strengthen the capacities of LGUs and communities in mitigating and preparing for, responding to, and recovering from the impact of disasters;
(m) Engage the participation of civil society organizations (CSOs), the private sector and volunteers in the government’s disaster risk reduction programs towards complementation of resources and effective delivery of services to the Citizenry;
(n) Develop and strengthen the capacities of vulnerable and marginalized groups to mitigate, prepare for, respond to, and recover from the effects of disasters;
(o) Enhance and implement a program where humanitarian aid workers, communities, health professionals, government aid agencies, donors, and the media are educated and trained on how they can actively support breastfeeding before and during a disaster and/or an emergency; and
(p) Provide maximum care, assistance and services to individuals and families affected by disaster, implement emergency rehabilitation projects to lessen the impact of disaster, and facilitate resumption of normal social and economic activities.
The CNE Model
The CNE Model is the integration of the CNE (cultural-natural-economic) factors to sustainable development. The CNE model is a single integral unity of understanding not only of economics but also of its interface with ecology and sociology.
Gonzales (2005) mentioned, in his in-depth study of the CNE model, that a balance between culture and nature is life giving and life nourishing. The economic system is primarily subsistence with no monetary type of transaction of persons and communities. There is a free flow of free goods from nature than economic goods from the marker system. This phenomenon is the dependency to Common Property Resource by communities. On the other, the non dependency to Common Property Resource by communities phenomenon showed rather different approach. The life giving forces of culture and nature have been threatened by imbalances in the system of society, ecology, and economy. There is perceived contradiction between traditions, industrial interest and survival. Economic system on the other end integrates a perceived conflict between subsistence and commercial activities.
The integration of the CNE model to sustainable development can lead to an eagles view to the prevailing changes in the country today. It does not only focus on one aspect of the problem but sees the problem in a wider perspective. It also considers factors like culture, nature, and economy in order to create a more comprehensive approach to a country’s development and sustainability.
There had been a lot of literature published with regards to DRRM but does not provide links with assessing the integration of the CNE Model to DRRM. There are studies assessing the integration of the environment to DRRM, as well as assessing the integration of the economy to DRRM, but does not encompass all the CNE factors.
Theoretical and Conceptual Framework
The Hyogo Framework for Action
The Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters was adopted at the World Conference on Disaster Reduction, held in Kobe, Hyogo, Japan, 18-22 January 2005. It provides a strategic and comprehensive global approach to reducing vulnerabilities to natural hazards, and represents a significant reorientation of attention toward the root causes of disaster risks, as an essential part of sustainable development, rather than on disaster response alone. It stresses the need for greater political commitment and public awareness, and defines an expected outcome, three strategic goals and five priority areas of action. The Framework’s implementation is identified as primarily the responsibility of States, but with the active participation of others such as local authorities, nongovernmental organizations, the scientific community and the private sector. Regional and international communities, including the international financial institutions, the UN system and the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR), are called on to provide an enabling environment and to support capacity development. The ISDR system undertakes international efforts to reduce disaster risk and includes Governments, intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations, international financial institutions, scientific and technical bodies, as well as civil society.
The Hyogo Framework calls for the following priority actions:
Ensure that disaster risk reduction is a national and a local priority with a strong institutional basis for implementation. (Planning, budgeting and implementing risk reduction policies to avoid settlement in hazardous areas and to ensure that hospitals and schools are hazard resistant, for example)
Identify, assess and monitor disaster risks and enhance early warning. (Knowing the risks and taking action involves identifying, assessing and monitoring disaster risk and enhancing early warning)
Use knowledge, innovation and education to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels. (Raising awareness and educating all, through school curricula and sectoral training for instance, to reduce vulnerability)
Reduce the underlying risk factors. (Reducing communities’ vulnerability and risk in sectors through land-use zoning and building codes, by protecting ecosystems and natural defences, and developing insurance and microfinance initiatives)
Strengthen disaster preparedness for effective response at all levels. (Being prepared and ready to act including by developing and testing contingency plans, establishing emergency funds and coordination systems)
Results and Discussions
Culture, nature, and economy factors of the CNE Model were considered in the formulation of the DRRM policies of the country. One of the policies explicitly state that the country will adopt a disaster risk reduction and management approach that is holistic, comprehensive, integrated, and proactive in lessening the socioeconomic 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.
In relation to the culture/social, the law integrated this factor by upholding the people’s constitutional rights to life and property by addressing the root causes of vulnerabilities to disasters, and by adhering to and adopting the universal norms, principles and standards of humanitarian assistance and the global effort on risk reduction as concrete expression of the country’s commitment to overcome human sufferings due to recurring disasters.
Furthermore, the law integrated the culture factor to the DRRM policies by mainstream disaster risk reduction into the peace process and conflict resolution approaches in order to minimize loss of lives and damage to property, and ensure that communities in conflict zones can immediately go back to their normal lives during periods of intermittent conflicts, ensuring that disaster risk reduction and climate change measures are gender responsive, sensitive to indigenous knowledge systems, and respectful of human rights, by developing and strengthening the capacities of vulnerable and marginalized groups to mitigate, prepare for, respond to, and recover from the effects of disasters, by providing maximum care, assistance and services to individuals and families affected by disaster, implement emergency rehabilitation projects to lessen the impact of disaster, and facilitate resumption of normal social and economic activities.
The nature/environment factor on the other hand was the least integrated and considered in the DRRM policies. The only policy integrated this factor was mainstream disaster risk reduction and climate change in development processes such as policy formulation, socioeconomic development planning, budgeting, and governance, particularly in the areas of environment, agriculture, water, energy, health, education, poverty reduction, land-use and urban planning, and public infrastructure and housing, among others.
In the ISDR, the nature/environment factor was highly integrated and considered to DRRM policy making. ISDR stated that nature degradation plays a big role to natural disaster occurrences and natural disasters have great impact to environment.
Lastly, the economic factor was also integrated in the DRRM policies by incorporating internationally accepted principles of disaster risk management in the creation and implementation of national, regional and local sustainable development and poverty reduction strategies, policies, plans and budgets.
Integrating economic factor to DRRM policies though in the country was not that highly considered. Unlike for developed countries were economy was highly considered. There had been no policies making the local economies resilient the effects of disasters.
Conclusions and Recommendations
In can be concluded from the study that the CNE factors of the CNE Model to sustainability were integrated in the DRRM policies in the country, however the country put little emphasis on the integration of the nature/environment and economy factors.
The CNE Model to sustainability suggests that all the three factors should be considered in DRRM policy making in order to encompass all the aspects needed. Specifically, the nature/environment and economic considerations should be integrated and emphasized in DRRM policies.
For instance, DRRM policies should set forth mechanisms that promote and enhance the resiliency of nature/environment and local economies to disasters.
Invest in natural resource management, infrastructure development, livelihood generation and social protection to reduce vulnerability and strengthen the resilience of rural livelihoods.
Protect and enhance ecosystem services through mechanisms such as protected area