Environmental Risk and Adaptation inTwo Coastal Communities in the - - PDF document

Environmental Risk and Adaptation inTwo Coastal Communities in the Philippines

Lindy Williams, Department of Development Sociology Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853 lbw2@cornell.edu Joy Arguillas, Department of Sociology The University of the Philippines Florio Arguillas CISER Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853 Acknowledgements: We are grateful to Cornell University’s Atkinson Center for a Sustainable Future, the Mario Einaudi Center for International Studies, and the Polson Institute for Global Development, all of which provided funding for this research. We are additionally grateful to Sneha Kumar for traveling to Capetown to present this paper on our behalf.

1

Introduction The American Association for the Advancement of Science (2014:1) has argued that the “overwhelming evidence of human-caused climate change documents both current impacts with significant costs and extraordinary future risks to society and natural systems…” In addition, “many people do not yet understand that there is a small, but real chance of abrupt, unpredictable and potentially irreversible changes with highly damaging impacts… around the world.” Our research identifies perceptions and experiences of environmental risks and responses in two coastal communities in the Philippines. The Philippines has a long history of environmental degradation and has experienced recent catastrophic weather-related events, including super-typhoon Haiyan (known locally as Typhoon Yolanda),1 which claimed over 6000 lives and destroyed much of Tacloban, the capital city of the province of Leyte, in 2013. Other typhoons that are less well known to those living outside of Southeast Asia have also caused significant damage to coastal and near-coastal areas in recent years, where approximately 60 percent of the population resides (Bohra-Mishra et al., 2017). Longer-term consequences of climate change are beginning to be identified, and are expected to become increasingly visible in the Philippines, as well as in countries throughout the Asia-Pacific region, much of which is very densely populated and settled in low-lying coastal zones. The potential for widespread human displacement is thus very real and is garnering attention in policy circles. We attempt to understand the ways in which those living in two communities on the island of Luzon in the Philippines have been experiencing flooding over the last few years, and how they are envisioning their future options. Although extensive displacement from flooding

1 To date, Yolanda is the largest typhoon ever to make landfall.

2

events is considered likely by numerous climate scholars, others “reject the deterministic view that directly links climate change to mass migration. Instead, they recognize that the linkages are complex and operate through social, political, economic, and demographic drivers, with migration being just one of many possible adaptations to environmental change” (Fussell, Hunter, and Gray, 2014: 182; McLeman and Hunter, 2010). We take the warnings surrounding the potential for significant future displacement, along with the cautionary just noted, as the starting point for our research. We draw on the literature on climate change related risk assessment and adaptation, and on field observations, focus group interviews and key informant interviews to address the following questions: (1) how are people who live in flood- prone communities experiencing gradual change on a regular basis and dramatic events on an

• ccasional basis? (2) What changes, if any, are they making to prepare for ongoing or

worsening conditions? Is out-migration one of the changes they currently envision making? (3) What steps are being taken at the local level to reduce risk for community members, and what do local officials report as their accomplishments and challenges when it comes to gradual environmental change, as well as to more abrupt events? Background Flood risk, mitigation, and adaptation Globally, those living in low-lying areas are expected to confront substantial flooding- related challenges in the years ahead, while those living in coastal towns and cities are likely to face unique sets of challenges. The World Bank (2012) has predicted, for example, that a number of mega-cities in Asia will face greatly expanded geographical exposure to flooding and

3

large increases in the numbers of people who will experience flooding incidents, along with considerable damage to buildings and infrastructure and high financial costs associated with such events. Urban development in coastal areas can aggravate flooding risk due to reliance

• n inadequate drainage systems, the reduction or removal of wetland buffers against tidal

floods to make room for expanded construction, and the subsidence that results from groundwater extraction (McGranahan, Balk, and Anderson, 2007). While the poor are likely to be most vulnerable to flooding episodes, those with more resources will also be affected (World Bank, 2012). McGranahan, Balk, and Anderson (2007: 17) have argued that it is important to mitigate climate related risk in coastal regions, but “it is too late to rely solely on mitigation.” Migration away from high-risk areas will no doubt be one of several important methods of adaptation,2 although other adjustments to coastal development and coastal life will be necessary. Prescriptions to increase community resilience include taking adaptive measures in both agriculture and infrastructure. Agricultural adaptions might include bolstering irrigation systems, reevaluating which crops are grown where, and how fertilizers and pesticides are applied, while modifications in infrastructure include projects aimed at reducing risk to storm surge and flooding more generally (World Bank, 2013). In The Philippines, a combination of environmental, geographical, and social factors exposes the population to an especially elevated risk of future flooding. Recent research indicates that the Philippines “ranks third among the world’s countries most vulnerable to weather-related risk” (World Bank, 2013: xxiv).

2 Bohra-Mishra et al. (2017) have found, for example, that rising temperatures and typhoon activity in the

Philippines have recently spurred inter-provincial migration (mostly of younger, male, more educated subgroups).

4

The archipelago experiences five typhoons, on average, each year (Bohra-Mishra et al., 2017), and coastal communities are expected to be increasingly impacted by stronger typhoons, worsening storm surges, and sea level rise. In addition, climate change is likely to affect both farming and fishing in the Philippines, lowering the productivity of both (World Bank, 2013). Conceptualizing risk and adaptation In order to devise effective strategies to mitigate some level of risk and to adapt to risk that remains it is important to understand both the risk itself, about which much is already known in the Philippines, and local perceptions about risk, about which less is currently

• understood. For decades, researchers have been studying risk perception, devising strategies

to disentangle the often-complex assessments of what is, in fact, risky and at what level of

• concern. Policy makers involved in health and safety promotion, for example, have sought this

information in order to ascertain how people recognize and react to hazards in the hopes of improving education and communication strategies for risk management (Slovic, 1987). Because “individuals do not always share the same perception about the meaning and the underlying causes of different risks… understanding how the risk perception affects risk-coping and adaptation strategies is [becoming] increasingly important” (Iwama et al., 2016: 94-95). Researchers often categorize risk perception on more than one dimension. For example, the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR, 2009) classified risk as: (1) the likelihood of an outcome, and (2) the potential consequences or losses that accrue following an

• event. In a meta-analysis of risk perception and behavior, Brewer and colleagues (2007)

examined the relationship between belief about disease risk and its relationship to vaccination,

5

along two dimensions that were very comparable to the UNISDR’s (1) likelihood of being harmed and (2) severity of the apparent threat. They included a third dimension (3) apparent susceptibility to harm, and found all three dimensions to be important predictors of behavior. In inquiries pertaining specifically to climate change-related risk, one line of research has assessed the ways in which people feel psychologically distant (geographically, socially, and temporally) from or proximate to climate risk (Spence, Poortinga, and Pidgeon, 2012). Similarly, Iwama et al. (2016) have examined place-specific contextual information, along with social, psychological, cultural factors, and the availability and sources of information concerning

• risk. All of these factors are thought to be potentially important in determining the likelihood

that members of the public will engage in more sustainable future-oriented behavior (Spence, Poortinga, and Pidgeon, 2012); although they are also likely to be critical in the development of effective adaptive responses to potential threats. Like risk perception, adaptive responses to climate-related risks are often classified in the literature on multiple, often overlapping dimensions. For instance, such responses may be classified as (1) reactive or anticipatory; (2) technological, behavioral, managerial, or policy- implementing; (3) characterized by protection, retreat, or accommodation; (4) focused in the public or private sector; (5) focused on human or natural systems, and (6) autonomous or planned (Francisco, 2008; IPCC, 2001; Klein, 2002; UNFCCC, 2006). Examples of adaptive responses that are anticipatory, that work on human systems, and operate through the public sector could include developing early warning systems, building dykes, and devising new building codes. Examples of technological adaptations can include those that protect (dykes,

6

seawalls), retreat (setback zones, relocation), and accommodate (early warning systems, hazard insurance, upgraded drainage systems, desalination projects) (UNFCC, 2006). According to Leiserowitz (2006), theorists generally believe that individual decisions about climate-related risk and response are made cognitively and are less influenced by emotion or affect. He argues, however, that fundamental “values and worldviews” very much affect both the ways in which risk is understood by the (American) public, and the ways in which public policy solutions to climate change are prioritized. In addition, perception of risk and preferences about policy solutions “go well beyond issues of scientific literacy, analytical reasoning and technical knowledge” and are actually heavily influenced by social and political concerns (Leiserowitz, 2006: 63-64). Finally, an individual’s adaptive response to a perceived threat is likely to be influenced by whether or not available solutions are thought likely to be effective (and likely to produce greater benefits than costs, as in an evacuation, for example). Responses may also depend on whether or not certain options are open to individuals or groups, or are seen as within that their capacity to act (Eiser et al., 2012). Data and Methods Drawing on the above literature on risk and adaptation and on results from two phases

• f fieldwork, we analyze local perceptions surrounding flooding risk, and the adaptive

responses that are underway or under consideration in two coastal communities in the

• Philippines. Phase I of data collection took place between April and June of 2016 and is the

focus of this research. Phase II occurred in December of 2016 and January of 2017. Data analysis is ongoing, and we discuss some preliminary results from that phase briefly in our

7

• conclusions. In Phase I, we purposively selected field sites in several neighborhoods, or

barangays, in two coastal municipalities in neighboring provinces in the Philippines, Hagonoy, Bulacan and Malabon, Metro Manila. We identified the barangays for this study with the assistance of local leaders who were knowledgeable about the extent of flooding in the region. Because we were hoping to understand risk perception and adaptation in vulnerable communities, the municipalities selected for this study have both experienced significant flooding in recent years. Hagonoy is a coastal town that is flood-prone as a result of heavy typhoon and monsoon rains, as well as high tides from Manila Bay. It also experiences back-flooding from the neighboring provinces of Pampanga and Nueva Ecija through the Pampanga River System, as flood waters flush through Manila Bay (Bulacan Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan, date). The barangay that serves as our research site in Hagonoy lies along the Hagonoy River.3 Malabon is a coastal city that is also apt to flood, primarily as a result of high tides and heavy

• rains. Three river systems (Navotas, Tullahan and Malabon) link the Malabon River to Manila
• Bay. The field sites for this municipality are bounded by riverbeds that also make them highly

susceptible to flooding. During the first phase of our research, we conducted eight focus group discussions (FGDs), two with men and two with women in each municipality. See Table 1. All participants were married and were between the ages of 21 and 50 years of age. Group participants were also selected according to their socioeconomic status (SES), since those with fewer economic

3 We do not report the names of the barangays selected as our field sites because these are small geographic units

and revealing their locations might jeopardize the confidentiality of our research participants.

8

resources are generally assumed to be at greater risk of environmental hazards. Thus, all those chosen for Phase I of our research were either low SES, or lower-middle SES. Group size ranged from 8 to 11 participants. The focus group discussions lasted, on average, about 1.5 hours. Table 1 – Focus Group Location and Composition Hagonoy – Phase I Women Men

Lower SES N=8 Lower-Middle SES N=11 Lower SES N=9 Lower-Middle SES N=11

Malabon – Phase I Women Men

Lower SES N=9 Lower-Middle SES N=8 Lower SES N=9 Lower-Middle SES N= 8

Malabon – Phase II Women Men

Lower SES N=5 Lower SES N=6

Rodriguez – Phase II Women Men

Lower SES N=12 Lower SES N= 8

In addition to FGDs conducted with community residents, we interviewed key informants, including local leaders in the barangay and city/municipality officials, in order to

• btain information on the social and environmental conditions of the area and to learn about

9

local government initiatives to mitigate risk and vulnerabilities. During those interviews, several key informants in Malabon discussed the recent government relocation of dozens of families who had been living along the Tullahan River, noting that while a number of families had remained in relocation sites, many others had returned to their pre-relocation community. As a result, in December of 2016, we initiated Phase II of our research, conducting additional focus group interviews with families who had been relocated, but who had returned to the site from which they had been moved. All respondents in this set of interviews had been relocated to affordable government housing projects in Bulacan, but had opted not to remain

• there. Participants in this phase of the research were married and older, on average, than

those interviewed in Phase 1. Phase II respondents were between 40 and 70 years of age. Again, focus group interviews were done separately for women and men. Those we interviewed represented approximately half (9 out of 20) of the families who had been relocated from Malabon to the resettlement areas. We had also planned to interview families who had remained in the relocation sites, but we received conflicting reports regarding their whereabouts and our efforts to find them failed. As a consequence, we identified a second relocation site (in Rodrigues, Rizal) and, in January of 2017, we held additional FGDs with men and women who had been moved to that site. Most

• f those interviewed there had lost their homes when Tropical Storm Ondoy (international

name, Ketsana) submerged Metro Manila and several other provinces at record-breaking levels.4 The average age of participants in this set of interviews was approximately 40 years. The FGDs conducted in Phase II of our research ran from one hour to one hour and 45 minutes.

4 During Ondoy there was an eight-day period of heavy southwest monsoonal rains and thunderstorms.

10

Results: Community Context and Disaster Risk Management Planning Both communities have endured substantial flooding in recent years. The field site barangays in Hagonoy, Bulacan continue to experience tidal incursion and local flooding on a regular basis, in addition to more severe flood risk during major storm events. In the field site barangays in Malabon, infrastructure projects appear to be reducing more regular flooding for many in the community, but occasional severe flooding during typhoons remains a real threat. Specific local government infrastructure initiatives in Malabon include improved drainage systems, river dredging, and the construction of a seawall and a pumping station. In the field sites in Bulacan, the local government has effected some adaptive infrastructure improvements, including elevating main roads so that vehicles can operate during heavy rains. Although many of the main arteries are now passable during routine flooding events, most of the surrounding alleyways that lead to residents’ homes remain lower lying, and during higher tides, those alleyways are flooded on a regular basis. In both communities, there is widespread recognition of the importance of trash removal for a host of health reasons, to limit contamination of local waterways, and to reduce flood risk from clogged drainage systems. As a result, there is now regular garbage collection in the field site barangays, and laws now prohibit the dumping of trash into local rivers and coastal waters. The separation of biodegradable and recyclable refuse from other trash is also mandated, but for each mandate, compliance is limited and enforcement is inadequate. That neighboring barangays have not all enacted similar mandates further aggravates the situation. In the Bulacan field site, garbage belonging to the next barangay is routinely piled high on the

11

bridge at the border of the community. The local officials we interviewed reported that inadequate waste management remains a significant contributor to the flooding events they

• face. However, in one of the barangays in Malabon, efforts to improve enforcement are

underway and fines are being imposed on those who violate local ordinances. Each community is required to establish a Barangay Disaster Committee to implement the country’s disaster risk and management programs and to have communication systems to warn people of impending disasters. The local government officials we interviewed claimed to have identified all of the vulnerable individuals in their communities, including elderly and disabled individuals, who might need assistance during a disaster. Community leaders are responsible for communicating flood forecasts to sitio (subdivision of a barangay) leaders, who then relay those warnings to local residents through text messaging and going door-to-door. Most FGD respondents confirmed that flood warnings are issued promptly and on a regular basis: “Even before the water starts rising, advice is given to the people. A patrol circles around to announce this.” “As soon as the barangay announces, ‘Kindly raise your belongings - the water is coming,’ we immediately follow.” Many residents averred that these advance warnings have allowed families to minimize risks to their safety and the damage that might otherwise have occurred to their property. “We were able to prepare everything because our barangay announced it in a timely manner. Even before the waters rise everything is already in place.” Below, we discuss the specific steps families follow when a major flood warning is issued.

12

Community Context - Flood-Related Problems identified by Community Members In this section of the paper, we describe the results of our focus group interviews with respondents from both communities in which environmental problems and governmental and individual responses were discussed. We begin by providing FGD quotes that identify the flood- related problems that respondents in each community considered most serious. Many of the accounts provided by community leaders were echoed during interviews with local residents. While residents of Hagonoy showed us homes, alleys, and basketball courts that continue to flood regularly, many of those in Malabon reported a reduction in routine flooding events, claiming that this has been brought about by improvements in infrastructure. At the same time, however, Malabon residents reported that severe flooding can occur during major storms and that “When it floods here, O God; it’s even higher than a man.” A number of themes emerged as important to the two communities. They include issues of (1) regular salt water incursion and loss of agricultural land and local trees, mainly reported in Bulacan, (2) some of the health effects resulting from flooding, mainly reported in Malabon, (3) garbage in waterways that contaminates water, clogs drainage systems, exacerbates flooding, and often enters homes, reported in all focus groups, (4) effects on local livelihoods, and (5) the disruption and safety concerns arising during larger flooding events that require evacuation. Salt water incursion was widely reported by respondents in Bulacan as a reason for the disappearance of agriculture and the loss of trees.

• Before there were a lot of farms, but today none exist...
• Today almost all backyards have no trees. They have died because of the inflow of

salt water.

13

• ALL: *overlapping comments explaining death of trees* They all sip salt water… and

they die. In addition, however, the loss of trees was seen as a reason for additional flooding.

• There are no more trees that sip water; that’s why it floods.

Adverse health effects from flooding were more commonly reported in Malabon, despite the fact the routine flooding events were less frequent there.

• If you have an open wound it is important not to get it wet in the flood. You don’t

know what is in the water…

• … once it floods the water stagnates and mosquitos will multiply. That guy there is

called, “Boy Dengue”.

• … the common diseases when there’s flood are leptospirosis, athlete’s [foot], and

dengue… and also maybe minor is LBM, diarrhea because of the contaminated

• water. Because not all the water pipes are good. Sometimes there is contaminated

water intrusion in the pipes. Garbage and contaminated water were considered major problems in all focus groups interviews in both communities. For example, in Bulacan respondents noted:

• There is litter everywhere [in the river] and a lot of people just keep throwing

garbage in… Fish try to avoid it as a habitat….

• Whenever you see that the actual garbage you threw comes back at you [with the

tide], you tend to get annoyed enough to make it as a motivation to do something, but sooner or later you tend to forget it.

• We have to clean our houses everyday. Everyday there is a flood because of high
• tide. You have to clean it because it leaves behind mud and debris.
• The contaminated water just goes back and forth. They release the water down the

river, but the high tide will push it back up. Then the floods become worse. It’s just a

14

• cycle. Now, if you look at the water, it is already red. Back in the day, the water

there was clean. We would even catch tiny seahorses. Similarly, in Malabon, respondents indicated that during flooding events:

• The water gets too big too quickly … A little bit of rain and it’s already flooding. You

have to close your door so the trash won’t come in. The garbage comes all the way from other places. Many of the houses in one of our field sites in Malabon are on stilts over water. The following exchange illustrates the condition of the neighborhood as people continue to dump their trash into that water.

• There are people who throw garbage and they do not mind their neighbors. Just like

the one there over the fence.

• I clean what’s underneath my house and I pay someone to clean and get rid of the
• garbage. Now people are putting nets around their house … when you tell others not

to throw garbage they get angry... When the garbage overflows, the nets also give way (to the weight/volume of the garbage).

• Interviewer: Houses there have nets?
• Yes there are. So that the garbage will not get trapped under the houses.

Efforts to clean up communities and waterways are gaining strength in some communities, however, where those caught littering face fines and other penalties:

• Because they don’t respect it here [laws about proper disposal of garbage and

recyclables]. That’s why they delegated more watchers. So that offenders can be given appropriate action. That’s why people learn not to litter because there will be a punishment.

• Now, even if you just throw away cigarette butts, candy wrappers. There are a lot of

enforcers here… I myself pay their fine; it’s a good 500 pesos and that’s a huge thing.

15

*overlapping remarks* If you don’t pay then you have to render community service at the city hall. Threats to livelihood/local economy were also reported in both communities. Respondents in Bulacan reported a decline in fish harvest because of contaminants in rivers and coastal waters, including those from commercial fish food used in local aquaculture. Those who fish for a living now have to go farther out to sea to fish and they cannot go at all during

• storms. The variety of fish they are able to catch has declined over the years.
• …for a long time fishing was my livelihood. Before, it is easy to catch fish because

there are no problems in the ocean. But, ever since commercial feeds became commonplace the ocean became polluted. When you fish, almost all that you can catch are plastic and trash.

• Cages are actually a source of water pollution. Owners release the contaminated

water from the cage, which will later on flow to the river and reach the ocean. Among those who drive tricycles (local mode of transportation) for a living report that although most streets have been elevated, most drivers cannot ply the streets during floods for fear that they will be washed away. Evacuation disruption and safety concerns were also reported in both communities. For example, in Bulacan:

• During Ondoy we could not operate our business in the local wet market because

there was no delivery of fresh supplies… We spent two weeks in the evacuation center.

• If ever you choose to evacuate entirely there is the fact that you are left exposed...

At least if you can stay inside your own house, you might as well guard it.

16

Similarly, in Malabon, residents worry about the safety of their belongings during evacuation.

• Because usually in that situation, what is common is looting. Because they expect

there will be no people there. Breaking and entry… They don’t want to leave their house because they don’t want anything to happen to their house. They really don’t. And we do not have enough manpower to guard all the houses. In the following exchange, respondents discussed the issue and reported that it is typical for someone to remain with their homes, even during large flood events. P: The men are usually left behind. I: When you evacuate, not everybody leaves? Why did they choose to stay at home? P: They did not want to leave our belongings. (Note: Most respondents express agreement). I: Ahhh. P: Because the things left at home may be stolen. I: Who else among you evacuated? Your whole family evacuated? P: Yes, my husband was the only one left at home. I: Why? P: Because we were concerned that burglars would enter our house. He just put up a hammock there. I: On the roof? P: Yes. Adaptation of Individuals In addition to identifying the above-outlined problems, respondents also discussed the ways in which they cope with common and less common flooding occurrences. As we have

17

demonstrated, some deal primarily with regular tidal incursion, which is reasonably predictable, and most have experienced less frequent, but more extreme events, such as storms Ondoy (2009) and Habagat (2012) that have caused significant flooding. Those storms are generally considered more dangerous for people and property, although regular flooding in Hagonoy has caused some people to abandon their (ruined) homes. In any case, most participants reported being increasingly prepared for both types of flooding events. NGOs have been training residents to prepare for disasters, including when and how to evacuate. Most of those we interviewed have survival bags consisting of water, flashlights, medicine, and food for several

• days. Their experience with storm-related disasters has made many of them more responsive

to calls for early evacuation. In the past, people often resisted evacuating until the water was waist-deep (some say neck-deep), and as we have shown, many would not leave at all over fears that their homes would be looted. Our research suggests that many more actually do evacuate now before major flooding events begin, although that is by no means universal. Among those who face tidal incursions on a regular basis, those who have few resources report preparing for recurring high tides by storing their personal belongings on a high shelf or

• n stacked objects such as empty soda cases. Those with more financial resources have

typically raised the lower levels of their homes by adding layers to their floors, or they have added second stories to their houses, a strategy commonly recommended by barangay

• leadership. During heavy rains or typhoons, residents with second floors typically move their

appliances and personal belongings upstairs or at times even to the roof. Many reported buying portable electronic appliances and portable gas stoves precisely so that they can move them upstairs when a major tidal event occurs. Those who keep pets move them to the second

18

floor as well, although some reported closing their doors and allowing pets to “float” until a flood subsides. Many with second stories let bulky wooden furniture, such as cabinets and dressers, go underwater because of limited space upstairs, and because they dry/recover easily. Those who do not have a second floor leash their appliances or their furniture to posts

• r something secure and put their personal belongings in plastic bags. Appliances that are

submerged in water are left to dry for days before they are used again. Once these preparations are made, residents (with or without a second story) who choose to evacuate close their doors and windows and hope that their belongings will not be washed away.

• In case of imminent tyhoon or flooding and if they have money, they store food,

medicine, drinking water, flash lights, batteries, and they charge their mobile phones. Important documents such as birth certificates or marriage contracts are kept in plastic

• rganizers so that they are handy in case evacuation is needed.
• Fishponds get wrecked [during typhoons]. But fishermen are smarter these days. If

they know that [there’s going to be a typhoon]…they already anticipate ... they harvest the fish before others come ahead …. In 2011 with typhoon Pedring hit, our streets were flooded with shrimps, crabs, and milkfish.

• At the level of the barangays, regular disaster preparedness drills, including flood and

earthquake drills, are conducted. Residents are taught what warning signs mean and what to expect, how to evacuate, where to evacuate and what to bring in case of evacuation.

• We prepare food, flashlights, water, stuff like that… We also prepare ropes in case the

water gets really big. We tie down the roof when the wind gets strong and use ropes to help us into the alley when the water reaches up to our necks.

• If the person has money then he will raise his house up. If you don’t have the money

then you have to suck it up and deal with what you have.

• [In 2012] all of the people who lived in our area evacuated [to a warehouse with a

second floor]. We crammed ourselves in there. All of us.

19

Although long-term displacement/migration out of flood-prone coastal zones is widely anticipated by climate change researchers, few respondents in our FGDs reported expecting to move away specifically because of local flooding. Most wanted to stay in their communities, despite the problems. Among those who planned to migrate away, economic issues were sometimes cited, with flooding as a contributing factor. One man reported being very tired of having “wet feet”. It was not unusual to hear of others who had left the neighborhood because

• f flooding, however:
• I: She has already transferred to Sta. Rosa? Why did she leave?
• She would commute to work and not be able to return because it always floods

here.

• It has always flooded here so what she did was to stay-in for her work. Nowadays, it

does not flood much but she has not returned. She doesn’t live here anymore. At times out-migration occurs when homes are no longer habitable:

• My child’s godmother moved because of the flooding. The house they were

building…, it’s all in ruins now. Conclusions Our results are drawn from focus group data, observation data, and interviews with local government leaders of flood-prone coastal communities in the Philippines. Both the leaders and the residents described their experiences with local flooding for this research. Flood events are seen as posing a potential threat to individual and community health (e.g., due

20

to skin diseases or mosquito-borne illnesses), and as a threat to local livelihoods (including but not limited to work in agricultural, fishing, and transportation). Severe storms create the potential for loss of life and catastrophic destruction of property (e.g., housing ruined/swept away, fish ponds collapsed), as well as for less severe property damage (e.g., housing filled with mud and garbage). Salt water incursion has contaminated agricultural land and killed trees in the field site in Bulacan. Garbage has clogged drains and contributed to minor and major flooding in both communities. Our narratives reflect this. Nonetheless, most respondents are adapting in place and few plan to migrate at this point because of local flooding. With few exceptions, most who are considering out-migration do not report doing so specifically because

• f ongoing flooding events. Consistent with Fussell, Hunter, and Gray (2014), out-migration

decisions that are partially motivated by environmental factors also appear to have other, largely economic, drivers. At the same time, most know people who had left the community primarily because of flooding. These were often better-off community members who could afford to move. There were also reports from leadership and community members of those who were less voluntarily relocated. In the next phase of our research, we will present data from our interviews with (1) those who remain (at least for now) in destination communities, and (2) those who were relocated during the same campaign but who have returned. Preliminary results from transcripts of the latter interviews indicate that most people who returned to the neighborhoods from which they were moved did so because of security concerns in the relocation sites (including high rates of violent crime), and inadequate housing, infrastructure, employment, and sense of community.

21

The World Bank (2012) recommends that Asian megacities, including Manila, consider the likely specific risks they will each face from climate change, and take immediate steps to address the threats most salient to them. Based on that understanding, each should make efforts to build appropriate infrastructure to reduce flood threat, reduce subsidence, and to make these correctives while considering appropriate ecological remedies / restoration. The community leaders we interviewed appear to be aware of these issues and to be taking steps to protect against major and minor floods, to the extent possible. Of the adaptive responses mentioned earlier (reactive/anticipatory; technological, behavior, managerial, managerial, or policy-implementing; etc.), many are underway. Both communities have early warning systems, new dykes, and are encouraging new forms of building to protect residents from

• floods. Unfortunately, resources are limited and housing and other adaptations are often

highly unlikely to survive a major storm event. Eiser et al. (2012: 13) argue that: A pervasive misconception is that ordinary citizens typically fail to protect themselves from hazards because they are ignorant of ‘the facts’, irrational in how they interpret information, or both. Citizens may not always respond (as authorities hope) to risk warnings, not because they are ‘irrational’, but because they feel severely constrained in terms of the options open to them (as when evacuation in the face of a less-than-certain hazard will result in a loss of livelihood and means of supporting one’s family). These constraints must be understood and anticipated in any plans for disaster prevention and risk mitigation. We concur. Most of the respondents in our focus groups believe climate change is real and

• ccurring locally now, and they connect it directly with flooding and severe weather events.

22

Many are aware of the connections between salt water incursion and loss of agricultural land, deforestation and other environmental problems occurring elsewhere in the Philippines, and so are not ‘ignorant’ of many of the problems looming at the local and national level. They are abundantly aware of flood risk and do what they can to ensure the safety of their homes and families in severe events. That they do not always follow protocols in an evacuation appears, in many cases, also to be the result of a reasoned response to the circumstances they face. Respondents in our study are not psychologically or otherwise distant from climate risk. Nonetheless, they are not all engaging in future-oriented sustainable behavior (Spence, Poortinga, and Pidgeon, 2012); many, for example, are failing to adhere to mandates on proper garbage disposal despite being aware of those mandates and the problems caused by

• noncompliance. Despite local attention to climate change risk, substantial work remains to be

done in both communities if their futures are to be secure from ongoing ‘routine’ flooding and more rare but more catastrophic events.

23

References American Association for the Advancement of Science (2014). What We Know: The Reality, Risks, and Response to Climate Change. Black R, Arnell N, Dercon S, (2011), editors. Migration and Global Environmental Change – Review of Drivers of Migration, 21(Supplement 1):S1–S130. Brody, S. D.; Zahran, S.; Vedlitz, A.; Grover, H. (2008). Examining the relationship between physical vulnerability and public perceptions of global climate change in the United

• States. Environmental and Behavior. 40 (1), 72-95.

Brower, R. S., Magno, F. A., & Dilling, J. (2014). Evolving and Implementing a New Disaster Management Paradigm: The Case of the Philippines. In Disaster and Development (pp. 289- 313). Springer International Publishing. Eiser, J. R., Bostrom, A., Burton, I., Johnston, D. M., McClure, J., Paton, D., van der Pligt, J. & White, M. P. (2012). Risk interpretation and action: A conceptual framework for responses to natural hazards. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 1, 5-16. Francisco, H. (2008). Adaptation to Climate Change: Needs and Opportunities in Southeast Asia. ASEAN Economic Bulletin, 25(1), 7-19. Fussell, E., Hunter, L. M., & Gray, C. L. (2014). Measuring the Environmental Dimensions of Human Migration: The Demographer’s Toolkit. Global Environmental Change : Human and Policy Dimensions, 28, 182–191.

24

Hunter, L. M., Luna, J. K., & Norton, R. M. (2015). "Environmental Dimensions of Migration." Annual Review of Sociology. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change). (2001). "Climate Change: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability". Contributions of Working Group II to the 3rd Assessment Report

• f the IPCC.

IPCC (2014): Summary for policymakers. In: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and

• Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth

Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Iwama, Allan Yu, Batistella, Mateus, Ferreira, Lúcia da Costa, Alves, Diogenes Salas, & Ferreira, Leila da Costa. (2016). Risk, Vulnerability, and Adaptation to Climate Change: An Interdisciplinary Approach. Ambiente & Sociedade, 19(2), 93-116. https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1809-4422ASOC137409V1922016 Jäger J, Frühmann J, Grünberger S, Vag A. (2009). Environmental Change and Forced Migration Scenarios: Synthesis Report. Klein, R.J.T., R. J Nicholls, S. Ragoonaden, M. Capobianco, J. Aston, and E.N. Buckley. (2001). Technological Options for Adaptation to Climate Change in Coastal Zones. Journal of Coastal Research 17 (3), 531.

25

McGranahan, G., Balk, D., & Anderson, B. (2007). The rising tide: assessing the risks of climate change and human settlements in low elevation coastal zones. Environment and urbanization, 19(1), 17-37. McLeman R. (2014). Climate and Human Migration: Past Experiences, Future Challenges. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2014. McLeman, R. A. and Hunter, L. M. (2010), Migration in the context of vulnerability and adaptation to climate change: insights from analogues. WIREs Clim Change, 1: 450–461. McLeman R, Smit B. (2006). Migration as an adaptation to climate change. Climatic Change. 76:31–53. Spence, A., Poortinga, W. and Pidgeon, N. (2012), The Psychological Distance of Climate

• Change. Risk Analysis, 32: 957–972.

The World Bank. (2013). “Getting a Grip… on Climate Change in the Philippines,” The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/THE WORLD BANK 1818 H Street, NW Washington, DC 20433, U.S.A. The World Bank on Climate Risks and Adaptation in Asian Coastal Megacities. (2012). Population and Development Review, 38(4), 751-755. UNFCCC (United Nations Framework for Climate Change Convention). (2005). "Climate Change in Small Island Developing States". Climate Change Secretariat, Bonn, Germany.

26

UNFCCC, (United Nations Framework for Climate Change Convention). (2006). Technologies for Adaptation to Climate Change. Adaptation, Technology and Science Programme of the UNFCC Secretariat. UNISDR – UNITED NATIONS OFFICE FOR DISASTER RISK REDUCTION. (2009). Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction: Risk and poverty in a changing climate. Geneva, Switzerland: UNISDR.