ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY CONCERNS IN THE PHILIPPINES TODAY

[A Suggested Framework]
Ben S. Malayang III

Current Context
Clear public demand for development Clear public concerns with environment Highly sectoralized development and environmental policies Unclear policy prescriptions on linking population, environment, and development Unclear policy on prioritizing national interests on environment and development

CURRENT ISSUES

Public Demand for Development

Mainly economic in content: to satisfy present material needs, address pervasive poverty, acquire higher incomes, achieve economic prosperity Unclear interest on sustainable development: to achieve economic growth and prosperity, while also achieving improved environment & social and cultural security (the two being necessary preconditions to continuing economic growth)

Public Concerns with Environment

Focused on sectoral concerns: mainly forests, fisheries, minerals, biodiversity, SW, & air & water quality, and their value and effects on people esp. the marginal & marginalized (e.g., indigenous peoples, farmers, fishers, women, youth, urban poor); often adversarial with the better off (industries, investors, & govt) Pervasive but in pockets; so, while considerable, really lacks political potency (or the power to make the political leadership tremble in fear)

High Sectoralization of Policies

Sectoralized Legislation: on forests [PD705], fisheries [RA8550], minerals [RA7942; PD1899; RA7976], biodiversity [RA7586, RA9147 (wildlife), RA9072 (caves)]; solid wastes [RA9003], & air & water qlty [RA8749 & RA9275, respectively]; EIA [PD1586] Highly differentiated social policies on people and environment (e.g., IPRA [RA8371]; kaingineros [PD705]; fisherfolk [RA8550]; farmers [RA8435]; small miners [RA7076])

 Dearth & unclear policy instrumentation on cross-cutting implementation of sectoral polices: Across environment and other sectors (e.g., mining & energy versus biodiversity or AFMA; forestry versus fisheries in foreshores) Across social concerns (e.g., indigenous peoples versus poor upland farmers or small miners; commercial versus municipal and artisinal fishers)

 No legislated operational guidelines on facing impending and preparing for emerging and threatening environmental events: Climate Change (increasing severity and frequency of severe climatic events) Land Degradation and Desertification Biodiversity Loss

Linking Popn, Envt & Devt

One indubitable thing about population: it represents certainty of consumption, but only a probability of production; it becomes a problem when (as is usually the case, when rising fast) it has a higher proportion of net consumers than net producers Envt is capital for devt; devt is the means for satisfying needs; higher popn means higher needs; how might they be linked as policy?

Prioritizing National Interests on Environment & Development

Food Security: At what cost to the envt (which determines the long-term sustainability of Philippine agricl); how much of each: GMOs & biotechnology or biosafety; short-term productivity, or long-term sustainability; present or long-term competitiveness? Fiscal & Economic Stability: quick infusion of investments, or long-term stability of domestic productivity?

A Hard Choice on Food Security

Long-term Sustainability of Primary Production Short-term Maximization of Primary Production Time

Level

A Hard Choice on Mining and Biodiversity

Mining: Offers immediate DFIs (US$3.2B investments & US$1.2B in exports in 5 yrs [Star f. DTI, 23Nov04]) Biodiversity: (Also has value: bequest, heritage, cultural, economic, financial)

 Philippine Biodiversity (From Tabaranza 2004)

462 recorded spp of corals (maybe 30 more); highest in world; higher than Great Barrier Reef; 12 spp endemic in Phil 2,177 fish spp out of 4,000 in Indo-Pacific; 22,000 spp of mollusc; 9 spp of giant clams in world, 7 in Phil; Around 20,940 spp of insects; 68.8% endemic Est. 15,000 spp of plants; 50% endemic; 193 threatened Of 105 spp of amphibians worldwide, 82 found only in Phil 254 spp of reptiles; 208 found only in Phil 576 spp of birds; 195 only in the Phil Of 179 spp of land mammals, 111 found only in the Phil Many used by Filipinos for food, agril, culture, fuels

Value of Biodiversity (from AAAS 2004)

Source of food & fuel; billions still depend on bush food; 16% of global protein needs met by fisheries from the wild; 20-25% of worlds poor depend on gathered food & fuels Source of medicines; 60% of worlds pop,n depend on traditional plant medicines for day to day primary health care; at least 118 out of top 150 prescription drugs in US are lab versions of extracts from organisms found in the wilds Critical to agriculture; most crops rely on continuous infusion of genes from the wild in order to maintain genetic rigor to survive from ever evolving pests; this dependence on natures genetic library allows for at least 1% annual increase in crop productivity worth at least US$1B Wilds contribute 4.5% of GDP in US

Comparing Philippine Biodiversity

COUNTRY Total species counted Endemic Species % Endemic Land Area (km2)

Philippines

1139

558

50%

300,780

Spain Brazil

435 3131

25 788

6% 25%

451,171 8,511,965

Source: Tabaranza 2004 c.f. Heaney, 2002

Mining and Alternative Land Uses

Metal Prices When Investments Become Viable Level Level of Investments* Prices of Metal Time *Carries high (exclusionary) costs to alternative resource uses

SUGGESTED POLICY DEVELOPMENT TRACKS

A. Fill Gaps in Existing Sectoral Policies

1. FORESTRY: Production, Protection, or Mix of
Production & Protection; by how much; where?

Forestry Resource Development: For What? For

Timber, Biodiversity, Energy, Food, Fiber, or for Shelters of Indigenous Philippine Culture?

Major Concerns on Philippine Forests

Total Cover is Declining: from around 72% of Total Land Area in 1900 (21.6Mha), to now 21.6% (7.2Mha) Imports are Increasing: currently, 60% of Phil wood & pulp requirements are satisfied from imports; in 50s-70s, forestry products were 2 of the Phils top 10 exports

 Energy Implications: wood fuel is still poor peoples energy source Biodiversity Implications: forests are habitats of most terrestrial biodiversity in the Phil, and regulators of water flow & quality in downstream & coastal habitats Cultural Implications: forests are final frontiers for many of our indigenous cultures

2. FISHERIES: Unresolved policy issues on the

delineation of municipal fishing areas

3. EIA: Unresolved policy issues of social acceptability and on balancing rigor and dispatch; also on whether or not national interests are limited to only environmental impacts of development projects, or on the extent that projects contribute to, or lessen, the prospects for sustainable development in the country

4. BIOSAFETY: New concern due to wider application of a new science (genetic engineering) in agriculture & other areas; yet, the Phil has no statute-specified guidelines on biotech or on use of GMOs in free envt (we have yet to ratify the Cartagena Protocol of the UNCBD); presently left entirely to the Executive Branch. 5. BIOPROSPECTING: Assaying of organic tissues & extracts for possible comml & indl uses (e.g., for medicines); now spread in many laws (NIPAS, IPRA, Wildlife); needs consolidation & ensuring nat,l interests.

Track A Strategic Legislative Initiatives*

New Forestry Law (PD705 is outdated; does not contain new methods and approaches like CBFM, biodiversity protection, protection of indigenous cultures; set basis for FLUPs) A Law on Delineating Fishing Boundaries (either explicit or setting the statutroy basis)
*Option is to leave the same to the Executive

 A Law on Impact Assessments (EIA or SDIA); incorporate principles in practice like participation of communities & LGUs) A Law on Biotechnology (its Uses & Products, their Applications in the Philippines); A Law on Biosafety (provide statutory prescriptions for ensuring the integrity & competitiveness of Phil biodiversity in Age of Biotechnology A Law on Bioprospecting (to consolidate existing statutory pronouncements on it; and to ensure advantages to Filipinos)

B. Fill Gaps in Cross-Sectoral Policies & Instruments for Cross-Sector Policy Implementation
1. Universal Accountability: (e.g., of Multisector Bodies, investors, & government) 2. Rationalization of Mixed Resource Uses: (e.g., determination of Best Resource Uses in areas of multiple and exclusionary land uses; need for comparative valuation system)

3. Equity: (i.e., among stakeholders of different and mutually exclusionary resource uses; e.g., crosssubsidies among competing resource users?) 4. Rationalization of Conflict Resoultion: (e.g., among competing & mutually exclusionary resource users; esp. in complex resource regimes like uplands, foreshores, coastal waters, watersheds, lakes) 5. Standardization (of good envl governance by NGAs, LGUs, regulated industries, SMEs)

Track B Strategic Legislative Initiatives*

New Environment Code** (to set principles and guidelines for implementing sectoral laws together, & for rationally & consistently deter-mining how laws might be jointly applied; e.g., Principles of comparative valuation of alternative resource & land uses;
*Option is to leave the same to the Executive **Or Comprehensive Environment Policy

 Principles of universal responsibility & accountability over key environmental assets of the nation, by different sectors Principles of equity & competitiveness when harmonizing the application of different laws Principles of conflict resolution over complex resource regimes Principles of good conduct & governance of the environment, by government agencies, bodies & instrumentalities, LGUs, & the private sector

C. Refocusing Policy Implementation from Sectors to Ecosystem Services

1. Provisioning Services: (i.e., production of useful goods: food, fiber, fuel, water, clean air, minerals, genetic products of potentially high agricultural, commercial or industrial values) 2. Regulating Services: (i.e., capacities to provide order in nature: biogeochemical cycles, climate patterns, flooding-drought episodes, pest outbreaks, population-ecosystem balances)

3. Cultural Services: (i.e., production of needed amenities: for recreation, aesthetics, abodes for spiritual experiences, tourism, wilderness 4. Supporting Services: (i.e., capacities to sustain natural processes: soil formation, water production, ecological balance, decomposition, evolution, extinction) Mainly about how to implement existing environmental laws to bring about developmental services; a principally executive tack.

Track C Strategic Legislative Initiatives*

Encourage the Executive (particularly DENR & DA) to manage environmental assets toward meeting specified national interests & development objectives DENR has actually begun refocusing its planning framework toward meeting the 10-Pt Agenda of the President & the MTPDP targets

DENR POLICY & PLANNING FRAMEWORK

(Proposed and Being Reviewed)

Sectoral Sources & Producers of Services Forestry Biodiversity Mines & Geoscis Environmental Mgt Land Mgt Ecosystem R&D Archipelagic Areas

Ecosystem Services to be Enhanced Provisioning

Food Fuel Fiber Water Const. Mtrls Minerals Clean Air Genetic Info

Regulating
Water cycle Nutrient cycle Carbon cycle N cycles Erosion Pests Flooding Drought

Cultural
Tourism Recreation Sacred Plcs Histl Plcs Cultl Plcs Landmrks

Supporting
Soil Frmtn Water Prdn Ecol Blnce Decay Evolutn Extnctn

Can be targetted to specifically support & sustain natl devt agenda: e.g., to create jobs, provide infra for linking islands, expand agroindustries, food, water, health, school bldg, others in 10-Pt agenda of President & MTPDP