By Prime Sarmiento
MANILA, Oct 4 2009 (IPS)

Typhoon Ketsana, which swept into the Philippines and left hundreds of people dead and massive devastation in its wake, should serve as a wake-up call to the government.

The tropical storm that battered the South-east Asian country on Sep. 26 underscored the country’s vulnerability to strong cyclones and must spur the government to launch a comprehensive disaster preparedness plan, according to Charlotte L. Sterret, global adviser for climate change adaptation to Oxfam, a Britain-based development, advocacy and relief agency.

“Cyclones won’t go away, and activities such as cyclone shelters, community preparedness plans, and simple building techniques can help vulnerable people cope with cyclones,” Sterret said in an interview with IPS.

Sterret, who was in Manila recently to participate in Oxfam-led dialogues with local communities, said that it is the poor who are most vulnerable to natural disasters like typhoon Ketsana.

“Poverty drives more people to live in areas that are exposed to cyclone impacts such as steep hillsides. Poverty also denies them the safe shelter and other infrastructure and services that would reduce the risk they face,” she said.

Ketsana devastated the country’s capital as well as surrounding areas in Luzon, northern Philippines, killed some 240 people and forced at least 145,000 others to flee their homes. Experts said that the typhoon, which brought the heaviest rains in the country for the last 40 years, was an indication that the Philippines was already reeling from climate change.

Oxfam, which has been on the forefront of the climate change debate, cannot say if Ketsana is a direct impact of climate change. “The science around global warming and how it interacts with other human systems is extremely complex. So while we can say with almost 100 percent certainty that climate change is happening, its impacts are less certain. More research is still needed, ” Sterret said.

She said, however, that the need for a “no regrets” adaptation – the importance of preparing for any natural calamity, which may or may not be attributable to climate change, cannot be emphasised enough.

She explained why developing countries like the Philippines are more vulnerable to climate change compared to others, and what needs to be done about it.

IPS: Ketsana is said to be one of the worst typhoons to hit the Philippines. Is it fair to say that this is due to climate change?

CHARLOTTE L. STERRET: Based on what we know to date, it is very difficult to attribute any particular tropical cyclone to climate change. The impact of climate change on tropical cyclones is one of the most controversial areas in climate science. There are several reasons for this.

Tropical cyclones are both comparatively rare events and vary hugely from year to year.

The historical record of cyclone observations is poor. In the past, tropical cyclones were only recorded if they made landfall or if they crossed a shipping channel. In the last few decades they have been detected by satellite, but comparing these two sets of information is fraught with difficulty, and so trends over time are difficult to assess.

Global climate models work at too big a scale to ‘generate’ tropical cyclones — so how climate change affects them is difficult to determine. Several things also need to be in place for a tropical cyclone to form, including warm sea surface temperatures, little change in the wind with height, and a large- scale vortex in the lower atmosphere. Each of these is likely to be affected differently by climate change.

IPS: Do you expect another ‘Ketsana’ to hit the Philippines because of global warming?

CLS: The scientific debate is not whether global warming can cause a trend in tropical cyclone intensities. The question is how large a change (it can cause): a relatively small one several decades into the future or large changes occurring today? Published analyses of the observational record support either conclusion, while theory and numerical modeling results suggest the former.

There is no evidence that the annual numbers of tropical cyclones has changed at all in recent decades. But observations suggest that tropical cyclones may have become more intense. This (data) is mainly from the North Atlantic (generated in the) 1970s, and although there is similar evidence from other regions, the quality of data is poorer. However, this suggested increase in cyclone intensity is still being debated, and even if it is true, it is not clear that it has been caused by climate change.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said there’s a 66 percent chance that tropical cyclones will become more intense, with higher wind speeds and heavier rainfall. Any increase in wind intensity is likely to be modest. The possible increase in rainfall associated with tropical cyclones is likely to be higher.

IPS: Is the Philippines vulnerable to climate change?

CLS: Vulnerability is dictated by a number of factors, including access to resources. The Philippines is vulnerable because of its high level of poverty incidence and the inequality between urban and rural populations.

It’s also vulnerable because of its physical characteristics. It’s in the typhoon belt. It’s an island nation, with many communities in the coastal areas. Any rise in sea level will affect the communities. It can lead to saltwater inundation of agricultural lands and pollute water sources.

A small increase in sea level also increases the incidence of high tides, typhoon, cyclones. You get a lot more water coming in. It comes on land, destroy homes. This will become worse under climate change.

IPS: What are the worrisome signs that the Philippines is now experiencing climate change?

CLS: The communities that Oxfam are working in are saying that they’re now experiencing changes in temperature. There’s a delay on the onset of rainy seasons, and that it is hard to tell the difference in seasons now.

IPS: What are the crucial points that the Philippine delegation should put forward in the 15th Conference of Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) that will be held in Copenhagen this December?

CLS: We like to see developing countries like the Philippines to have a strong position on mitigation and adaptation. It’s crucial to negotiate on making sure that countries should cut emissions. The reason for that is that there’s a limit to adaptation.

Industrialised countries must also help developing nations in adaptation — not just on financing, but also in providing technical support.

There should be equity within the global deal. Developing countries can continue to develop in a responsible way. In order to do that, they need both technical and financial assistance.

IPS: Apart from preparing for the negotiations in Copenhagen, what can the Philippine government do now to lessen the impact of climate change?

CLS: The government needs to develop a comprehensive and inclusive adaptation plan. (It) should consult several stakeholders — not just experts and scientists … they also need to involve affected communities. Oxfam would like to see more involvement from marginalised groups, including children, women and indigenous people. It’s important for this adaptation plan to be as inclusive as possible.

Oxfam is also calling for the passage of the Disaster Risk Management bill, which remains pending in Congress. This proposed law seeks to change the policy framework of disaster response in the country from emergency relief to risk reduction.

Excerpt:

By Prime Sarmiento
MANILA, Sep 7 2009 (IPS)

The Chinese government needs to engage local communities in harnessing its vast water and hydropower resources and pursuing sustainable development, says environmental advocate Yu Xiaogang, recipient of the 2009 Ramon Magsaysay Award for Participatory Social Impact Assessment for Watershed Management.

“China’s GDP (3.86 trillion U.S. dollars) is now the third largest in the world. But China is also one of the world’s most polluted countries. Now is the time for Chinese government to consider what’s the next step” it needs to take to pursue sustainable development, Yu said in a forum at the University of the Philippines.

The 57-year-old Yu, known for his work with dam-affected communities in China and in pushing public discussion of social issues around dam projects, was in Manila recently to accept the Ramon Magsaysay Award, considered the Asian equivalent of the Nobel Prize. He heads a non-government organisation called Green Watershed, which set up an integrated watershed management program in his area.

China is home to 85,000 dams or nearly half of the world’s such structures, notes the Manila-based foundation’s citation for Yu. China’s central government is keen to build more to meet the needs of a growing economy, but this has also damaged the natural environment and displaced millions of Chinese.

Yu, who hails from the south-western province of Yunnan that has some of China’s richest hydropower resources, has studied the social impact of the Manwan hydroelectric project in the Lancang, or the upper reaches of the Mekong River. His research into the negative impacts of the dam led then Premier Zhu Rongyi to conduct an investigation, and the Yunnan government to take steps to ease the villagers’ plight.

IPS spoke to Yu about China’s challenges in balancing energy needs with environment and empowering locals to get involved in dam and other projects that affect them.

IPS: Are you against the building of dams?

YU XIAOGANG: Dam building is like any technology. You can’t simply say you’re against it. Dams have many benefits. They irrigate farmlands and generate electricity. But several dams that were built in China are — socially and environmentally — not acceptable. People get monetary compensation (from companies which build the dams) and relocate. But when they give up their land (to the companies), they don’t only lose their land. They also lose their traditions, natural resources, their culture, their social capital.

The monetary compensation (is not enough). You will use all that money. After you spend it out, you don’t have any resources any more to support your life.

IPS: What is the central government doing to address problems like these?

YX: The central government provides social security. If you lose your livelihood (because a dam was constructed in your community), the government will provide some subsidy, like giving you 50 U.S. dollars a month.

But people need to be productive. They can’t depend on social security. People must create something, do business, have their own jobs. They can’t be too dependent because (if they do), they become sad about themselves. Many people suffer from psychological problems.

IPS: So what is the alternative? Is there such a thing as a good dam?

YX: People should participate, they should know from the very beginning how the dam will affect their community. The dam can also generate more benefits. . . . For example, the dam-affected people can be shareholders in the dam company. A good dam, then, must contribute to local development and have less social impact.

IPS: How were you able to persuade the people that they need to protect their communities from the harmful impact of dams?

YX: Most people who contact us (Green Watershed) live in communities where a dam has already been built. The dam has very big social impact on them. They lose their land, their houses and their livelihoods. We also invite researchers and the media, and the people talk about their problems with them.

When we go to these communities, we find that people are very active in participating in this discussion (on social impact assessment). We hold group meetings and workshops where they learn to do their own analysis of (how the dam will affect them). We invite local officials to come, and then villagers can present their social impact report. We also bring people to other communities where the dam was already built, so they can learn what can happen to them if a dam is built in their village.

IPS: What is the central government’s view on social impact assessment?

YX: They think it’s not necessary, that it’s a western concept. They think that ‘my party is the communist party, the people’s party’, ‘my government is the people’s government’, ‘my court is called the people’s court’.

Everything is about the people, so why do this (social impact assessment)? The central government follows the traditional philosophy on leadership — that as a leader you should take care of the people, but the people shouldn’t tell you how to do it. If people tell you how to do a better job, then you’re not a good leader.

Excerpt:

By Prime Sarmiento
MANILA, Aug 4 2009 (IPS)

Developing economies are vulnerable to climate change and need funds to implement much needed adaptation and mitigation measures. This is one of the key points that needs to be addressed during the next round of U.N.-led negotiations on climate change in Copenhagen, according to Mohamed Aslam, Maldives Minister of Housing, Transport and Environment.

Government negotiators – meeting in Copenhagen Dec. 7-18 – are expected to argue over emissions targets. Industrialised countries like the U.S. are insisting that the fast rising Chinese and Indian economies should also commit to cap their emissions, while the latter argue that developed economies are the culprits behind global warming.

Mohamed was in Manila recently to attend a regional forum on climate change. In an interview with IPS, Mohamed expressed his frustration over the ‘who-did-what’ bickering over climate change.

“Whoever did it, it doesn’t matter,” Mohamed told IPS, adding that what is crucial now is that “whoever has the funds must make them available for the ones who need it.”

The tiny and picturesque Indian Ocean nation of the Maldives is one of the most vulnerable countries to climate change as its 1,190 individual islands are only 1-2 metres above sea level. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has repeatedly warned that sea level rise caused by global warming is very likely to exacerbate storm surges and coastal erosion of small islands.

Mohamed said that the Maldives government is doing what it can, but with modest resources, it is impossible for them to implement costly adaptation and mitigation measures.

IPS: What are the main issues that the Maldives panel will raise during the Copenhagen dialogue? Mohamed Aslam: We do not want to see the blame game. Whoever did it, it doesn’t mater. But what matters is that whoever has the funds must make them available for the ones who need it. We need technology. We do not need handouts, we need partners to come out and help us.

We do not want any more studies and action plans. There has been enough of that. It is about time we have clear vision of what to do now.

We do not want to talk about cutting down on greenhouse gases. We want the world to invest in green technologies. We will continue to use the fans and the air conditioning, and we are not going to stop doing that. So we must develop an alternative way of producing power.

IPS: Are you experiencing the effects of climate change right now? MA: What was predicted as effects of climate change – like erosion, flooding and swirls, droughts, changes in rainfall patterns – we are seeing all that now in Maldives. Many coastlines are eroding as well. This is not something we saw when we were children.

As for drought, for the past few years, we [the Maldives government] has had to supply fresh drinking water to many of our islands. We are also seeing lots of floods. In 2005, there was a major flood and it was not caused by a storm close to us, but by storms far off shore – Maldives is in a storm-free region. Because Maldives’ islands are low-lying, any swirls which are above normal will cause flooding.

IPS: How is the Maldives government preparing for climate change? MA: The government is advocating. That’s the best that we can do. We want to change the habits of the people. The long-term solution to this problem is for everyone to get involved. Everyone has to realise that they have some level of contribution to mend this.

We have money allocated for coastal protection as well as to address the shortage of fresh water. We cannot deal with the major issues by ourselves. We simply do not have the funds.

Adaptation is not cheap. We need almost 40 million dollars just to protect the coastline of one island.

IPS: Do you get any financial assistance from multilateral agencies? MA: Nothing significant. There is a lot of talk of available financing but I do not know how many countries have received them. We have not. Maybe we do not know how to get it. Maybe somebody needs to tell us how to do it.

IPS: How is the tourism sector – your country’s biggest industry – helping the government in coping with climate change? MA: We are trying to bring tour operators and resort owners into the country’s development programme. We encourage them to help us provide basic services and infrastructure to the people.

IPS: What is the most urgent project that you need to do now to cushion the Maldives from the impacts of climate change? MA: We need to implement projects on physical adaptation. We need to prevent coastal erosion and to manage our waste.

IPS: How bad is your waste problem? MA: Over the past few decades we have seen a lot of economic growth. Habits have not changed. We also at times chose the path of non-sustainable development. When people started consuming new items, the Maldivian government did not show them methods of disposal. People who used to throw away the fish bones into the sea, will also now throw baby diapers into the sea.

Thirty years ago, we didn’t have toilets in our houses. Most people just went to the bush, so we had no problem of sewage treatment or garbage disposal. But now everyone has toilets in their houses and the government has not laid down the network to get rid of that waste.

IPS: The Maldives government recently announced that it plans to become the first carbon-neutral country in line with the global campaign against climate change. Please expound on this new project. MA: We know that us going carbon neutral will not change the global climate. We do not emit that much carbon. But we want people in the Maldives to start living a lifestyle which is environmentally friendly. We want to set an example for our people and the outside the world. If we sink – and God forbid we sink – we will sink knowing that we did the right thing.

Excerpt:

By Prime Sarmiento and Anna Martelino
MANILA, Aug 1 2009 (IPS)

An icon of democracy whose unexpected rise to power in 1986 gave birth to the term “people power” in the world’s political lexicon. A reluctant president and survivor of six coup attempts. A moral force known for her stubbornness even if told she was wrong.

These are some of the ways that Filipinos are remembering former Philippine President Corazon Aquino, who died before dawn Saturday after a battle with colon cancer. She was 76.

But for many in this South-east Asian country of more than 90 million people, Aquino – a widow who led a popular movement against the dictator Ferdinand Marcos and was later catapulted to power in a bloodless revolt – was simply ‘Tita Cory’ (Auntie Cory).

“She was the only President we called ‘auntie’ because she was the only one really close to our hearts”, mused one woman who had come to the memorial park where Aquino’s body was first brought Saturday.

Later on, amid a shower of yellow confetti, the former President’s body was brought to La Salle high school gymnasium for the public wake before the private burial on Wednesday. Thousands, many in yellow – the pro-Cory Aquino colour — had gathered outside the gymnasium Saturday afternoon.

On Saturday, flags flew at half-mast across the country. Masses were said in churches in this mainly Catholic nation. Volleys of fire in 30-minute intervals, traditionally given when former presidents pass away, took place in military camps in the country.

President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo declared a 10-day period of national mourning and said the country had “lost a national treasure”. The Aquino family however has chosen not to have a state funeral usually given to former presidents.

While the death did not come as a surprise since Aquino had taken a turn for the worse in recent weeks and she had been a private citizen since stepping down from the presidency in 1992, her death made many Filipinos reflect on the state of democracy and political affairs in their country.

Aquino’s transition from being a partner to her husband Benigno, who had been Marcos’ nemesis, to president began in 1983.

Against the backdrop of a country reeling from difficult economic ties and a growing communist rebellion, Filipinos’ anger deepened after Corazon’s husband was assassinated upon his arrival at the Manila airport on Aug. 21, 1983. Opposition grew over the next years, until Marcos called a snap election on his rule in February 1986.

Massive cheating occurred and Filipinos found in Corazon Aquino the symbol of the end to Marcos’ 20-year dictatorship they wanted.

Within four days in February 1986 – the ‘People Power’ revolt — top military leaders withdrew their support from Marcos. Millions flooded into the city’s streets, demanding that he step down from power and on Feb. 25, with the nudging of the U.S. government, Marcos flew into exile in Hawaii.

Aquino was president for six years, during which she oversaw the drafting of a new Constitution, restored democratic institutions and reopened Congress that Marcos shut down during martial rule, began the unfinished process of recovering billions in dollars in Marcos’ ill-gotten wealth, and restored press freedom.

She had her critics, from those who said she did not introduce radical enough reforms to others who said she was not presidential material.

But in retrospect, Aquino’s legacy goes beyond those, some say, to her brand of integrity.

“Aquino will always symbolise the pure, understated power of just causes and how the justness and sheer righteousness of a cause can make plain housewives triumph over powerful tyrants,” Teodoro Casino, party-list representative in the lower house of Congress, said in an interview.

Casino recalls that as a student activist, he was disappointed by Aquino’s failure to institute social and economic reforms. But “her failures, which left me frustrated and disillusioned, will always pale in comparison to that singular triumph of People Power,” he said.

Like Casino, University of the Philippines professor and former anti-Marcos activist Pamela Fernandez is critical of aspects of Aquino’s presidency – including the failure to pass a genuine land reform programme. But “she’s part of the actualisation of the destiny of our nation, ” Fernandez said, because of her part in restoring democratic institutions in the country.

“It was her moral ascendancy, impeccable integrity and sincere love for country,” Gwen Garcia, governor of the central province of Cebu, said of her legacy. “Whether we agreed with what she was doing or not, we knew that she loved the Philippines and she truly believed that it was the right thing to do.”

In her retirement, Aquino set up a foundation that sought to help people with microfinance and empowerment. She had also taken up painting.

Aquino mostly stayed out of politics. But in December 2008, she caused a furore when she apologised to former President Joseph Estrada for supporting a popular movement in 2001 to oust him from office on accusations of corruption. “We all make mistakes, so please forgive me,” she said to Estrada. Supporters later said her remarks had been misinterpreted.

She had also been critical of incumbent President Arroyo, whose resignation she sought in 2005 after allegations of electoral fraud.

As heavy rains poured over the Philippine capital, hours after Aquino’s son Benigno, a senator named after his assassinated father, announced her death, 40-something year-old domestic worker Norma Nicol cried. “It’s raining. Everyone’s weeping because Cory died.”

Excerpt: