Environmental Destruction, Effects of Climate Change to Worsen in Philippines

By ANNE MARXZE D. UMIL
Cross-posted from  Bulatlat.com [1]

MANILA – The year 2010 should have been an opportunity for the new administration to implement fundamental reforms to protect the environment and national patrimony, especially since during the former administration of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, the state of the environment of the country has gone from bad to worse.

Environmental groups called on President Benigno S. Aquino III to repeal all the environmentally destructive laws, policies, and acts that were passed and implemented during the Arroyo administration such as the Mining Act of 1995, and the approved contracts and environment compliance certificate (ECC) of controversial projects such as the Rapu-rapu polymetallic mining project. It also urged the new administration to investigate and prosecute the environmental crimes [2] committed by the previous administration.

But none of the said challenges were taken into consideration by the current administration. The Aquino government is even enticing foreign investors [3] to build more coal-fired power plants in the country. Coal is identified as the single major source of carbon emission and air pollution in the world. Its effects would greatly affect the health of people living within the perimeter of the coal-fired power plant.

The policy of the Aquino government on mining remains the same, according to Kalikasan People’s Network for the Environment (Kalikasan-PNE). The group criticized Aquino for appointing Ramon Paje, who they branded a mining bureaucrat, as secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). Paje is a former executive director of the Mining Development Council (MDC) and presidential adviser on mining. These positions made him one of the top architects of the liberalization of the mining industry under the previous Arroyo administration.

The mining liberalization continues to worsen the landlessness of poor and indigenous peoples in the country. Data from Kalikasan-PNE show that in the first half of 2010, the total area covered by mining concession is more than a million hectares, covering three percent of the total land area of the country. Kalikasan-PNE finds it alarming that there are thousands of mining applications that are being processed by the government, with 2,827 applications as of the third quarter of 2010 [4].

Climate Change

While the Aquino administration seems determined to pursue the policy of attracting more foreign investments in extractive industries such as mining, it pays lip service to mitigating the effects of climate change.

The effects of climate change manifest not only in the environment’s degradation. Global warming also affects energy, agriculture, health, water and marine resources, said Dr. Teresita R. Perez, director of the Ateneo De Manila University’s Department of Environmental Sciences.

Perez said, in a conference on climate change, the downstream effects of climate change would make an already bad situation worse. Extreme changes in the weather and the rise of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would reduce the harvests of farmers, cause habitat degradation and species loss, epidemics and diseases, kill corals, and disrupt carbonate chemistry making shell and bone formation difficult.

These effects are aggravated by the environmental crisis brought about by large scale plunder of the environment. In an interview with bulatlat.com, Dr. Giovanni Tapang, chairman of Agham (Science and Technology for the People, not the party list group) said the large scale plunder of the environment benefits only a small segment of society while generating large scale effects on society. “The rapid destruction of the environment is a direct result of the rapid, unchecked appropriation of the world’s resources for the benefit of a few.”

Tapang added that climate change also aggravates environmental hazards. “In the Philippines, disasters, whether climate-induced or not, add up to the already impoverished situation of the majority of Filipino families who are living below the poverty line. The harmful effects of climate change and the disasters it induces bear heavily on the most vulnerable or marginalized segments of the Philippine population, especially the poor peasants.”

Rosario Bella Guzman, executive editor of Ibon Foundation blamed the anarchic system of production –meaning production planning not based on people’s needs –and unsustainable balance of consumption as mainly responsible for global warming.

Industrial countries like the United States are the world’s biggest greenhouse gas emitters. The current greenhouse gas or carbon dioxide emission in the atmosphere is 388.59 parts per million (ppm) according to the CO2Now.org (http://co2now.org/). This should be reduced to 350 ppm [5], the safe limit for carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to prevent global warming.

Twisted Policies

The law that was passed supposedly to protect the country from the effects climate change, the Climate Change Act of 2009 (CCA), has gaps and limitations and is based on a “flawed context and framework,” said Finesa Cosico, an agriculturist and member of Agham.

The CCA mirrors the over-all twisted policy direction of the government, falling short of essential elements in adaptation and mitigation strategies, and ineffective in building a climate resilient nation, Center for Environmental Concerns (CEC) said.

While the CCA aims to address the vulnerability of poor communities to climate change, it, however contradicts the government’s existing laws, policies, and development projects. “It has been totally unacceptable and even unimaginable how the government intends to put a stop to deforestation and the destruction of ecosystems on one side, and then promote large-scale mining on the other,” said Cheamson Boongaling of CEC citing RA 7942 or the Philippine Mining Act of 1995.

Former senator and environmentalist Ana Maria Consuelo “Jamby” Madrigal said,“You cannot talk about addressing climate change and, at the same time, push for policies such as the Japan- Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement (JPEPA).You cannot talk about mitigating the impact of climate change while upholding 100 percent foreign ownership of our mines and natural resources. You cannot talk about climate change, if our environment is being destroyed and our riches are not benefitting the people because of mining. Our minerals are being shipped in airplanes, without monitoring, to countries such as Japan and we would buy back the processed goods.”

Tapang said in confronting the climate crisis, the government has to first satisfy basic human needs, economic and social development, adequate energy and infrastructure.

“Government policies such as the Electric Power Industry Reform Act, Biofuels Act, oil deregulation law, Mining Act of 1995, Forestry Code, neo-liberal globalization, corruption, bureaucrat capitalism aggravate our climate vulnerability despite the signing of the CCA,” said Tapang.

He cited factors that adversely affect the ability of the community to respond, to cope with or recover easily from disaster events results to vulnerability. “These are high poverty incidence, high inflation rates, low wages despite the increasing daily cost of living, high unemployment and underemployment rate, landlessness/inequitable distribution of country’s resources,” Tapang said.

While the CCA’s National Framework and Strategy acknowledges the decline in agriculture and food security, the law does not mention land reform as a crucial adaptation measure to climate change. According to Cosico, farmers have traditional knowledge on what crops to plant that can adapt to climate change. They also have farming practices that could adapt to the effects of climate change such as a crop diversification system and seasonal climate forecast.

“Unfortunately, a large part of agricultural land are privately owned and used for commercial or industrial farming or corporate agriculture. The agriculture industry as well as the people’s food security, are vulnerable to the effects of global warming,” she said.

Boongaling also said that studies have shown that if the ownership and control of farmers over their land are stable, it allows them to be more flexible in the face of a rapidly changing climate. They could decide what plants to cultivate in what season and what technology to use that will give them the maximum yield with the least impact on the environment.

Market-based Solutions

Ironically, International Financing Institutions (IFIs) have made a business out of the issue of climate change.

Boongaling cited provisions in the CCA that give the authority to the Climate Change Commission to recommend “key development investments” in climate sensitive areas. Its National Framework Strategy also identifies the development of a “competitive energy investment climate” as part of its mitigation strategy.

Because the government relies on IFIs to finance climate change mitigation programs of the government, the latter uses this as leverage to push for policies that would enable multinational corporations to earn more profits. The World Bank, for example, has its Climate Investment Funds. “The problem with these sources of funding is the existence of conditionalities,” Boongaling said. Hence, the state of the country’s economy would also be vulnerable to the increasing debt-burden, privatization of key industries and social sectors, speculation and financial instability, corruption, to name a few.

Even the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) uses the market-based approach in identifying responses to climate change. The Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+) mechanism is a mitigation option, a kind of international payment for ecosystem services. Through this mechanism, developed countries could pay developing countries like the Philippines for conserving its forests so that the world would turn a blind eye to the environmentally-destructive practices of the former. The REDD+ was passed in the Conference of the Parties (Cop) 15 negotiations in December 2009. The passage of REDD+ came about when the Cop failed to arrive at a binding agreement for countries under the United Nations. Cop is the governing body of the UNFCCC.

There are already existing REDD+ projects in the country and one is in Mindoro according to Boongaling. Issues like land grabbing also arise in the implementation of REDD+. Many indigenous peoples who live in the forest are prone to displacement because REDD+ project areas are restricted. The definition of forests under REDD+ is flawed. A plantation is considered as a forest. Landlords who own plantations, therefore, would have an opportunity to ask for funds to further monopolize the land.

“Governments from around the globe have repeatedly failed to come up with a lasting remedy and a truly pro-people response to the reality of climate change,” said the Philippine Watch Alliance, an alliance compromised of representatives of grassroots organizations, non-government organizations, community organizations, the scientific community and environmental groups that seeks to address and discuss the issue of climate change in the Philippines.

According to environmental groups, for as long as solutions to climate change are dictated by developing countries –the major culprits of climate change –these would surely fail. Take for example the Kyoto Protocol of 1998, a landmark international agreement that was signed by different countries to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to the impact of climate change. It miserably failed not only because it was not able to force developed countries to abide by the treaty, but it has also adapted market-based mechanisms to combat climate change.

The PCWA noted, “The Kyoto Protocol failed to achieve its mandate due to low targets, flawed mechanisms, lack of political will by nations – particularly the United States, which did not ratify the Kyoto Protocol – to cut down emissions, and the accommodation of market-based mechanisms which maintained the unsustainable global order of overproduction by developed countries and transnational corporations.”

As for the Philippines, the issue of climate change is an issue closely linked to social justice and national development. The country needs to come up with a solution based on the people’s welfare and interests. Boongaling said that to effectively confront climate change, the Philippine government needs to “initiate a radical shift in its overall framework to one that has a basic appreciation of the root of the current crisis, that would identify who are responsible and thus must be held accountable and that deals with climate change not simply as an environmental crisis.”? (http://bulatlat.com) [6]


Article printed from Bulatlat: http://bulatlat.com/main

URL to article: http://bulatlat.com/main/2011/01/06/environmental-destruction-effects-of-climate-change-to-worsen-further/

URLs in this post:

[1] Bulatlat.com: http://www.bulatlat.com/

[2] environmental crimes: http://bulatlat.com/main/2010/04/20/environmental-groups-list-arroyo%E2%80%99s-crimes-against-the-environment-and-the-people/

[3] enticing foreign investors: http://bulatlat.com/main/2010/11/27/environmental-groups-intensify-opposition-to-planned-expansion-of-coal-fired-power-plants/

[4] with 2,827 applications as of the third quarter of 2010: http://www.mgb.gov.ph/pgs.aspx?pgsid=9

[5] 350 ppm: http://www.350.org/en/understanding-350

[6] Image: http://bulatlat.com

Leave a Comment

Filed under Climate Change

0 Responses to Environmental Destruction, Effects of Climate Change to Worsen in Philippines

  1. al rey l. estillore

    i am the MENRO of dumingag, province of zamboanga del sur.
    your article has satisfied my soul.
    please send me more articles, commentaries and the like on the government’s action on prevailing environmental activities.
    while we are making hot pursuits on this part of the country, some people are yet to be educated.
    more power!
    al rey

  2. al rey l. estillore

    kindly give me more through my e.mail

  3. Mun A. Atencio

    Your article is full of facts and it touches the leadership’s lack of full grasp appreciation of the damaging effects of climate change. however I want to also your recommendation on how to mitigate and adapt to global warming. How about touching the improved built environment as a measure?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>