9.

8
VOLUME

Strengthening

Local Disaster

Management

OCCASIONAL

PAPER

AUGUST 2016

OCCASIONAL PAPER AUGUST 2016

02

Strengthening

Local Disaster
Management

NATURAL DISASTERS
In the Philippines, more than half of the total land area is exposed
to multiple hazards and two-thirds of the population are vulnerable to natural disasters.
Hazards lead to disasters. In the context of rapid urbanization, exposure to
hazards intensifies and weakens the vulnerability of poor people.

The Philippines consist of 7,107 islands. It has

the fifth longest coastline in the world with a span
of 36,289 kilometers. Having 6o percent of its
population residing in 832 coastal municipalities
makes the archipelagic nation extremely vulnerable
to climate change and natural disasters.
In the 2015 World Risk Index, the Philippines
placed third in disaster vulnerability, next only to
Vanuatu and Tonga, among 171 countries. The
country actually improved from its second place
ranking in the previous year due to measures to
improve adaptive capacities and susceptibility.1

Disasters impair development. The annual

cost of natural disasters from 1990 to 2008 is
approximately 0.7 to 1.0 percent of gross
domestic product (GDP). This makes it one of
the most hazard-prone countries internationally.2
The huge burden that disasters place on the
economy is evident from the worst disasters to visit
the Philippines in recent years. As Table 1 indicates,
the economic cost incurred due to Typhoon
Yolanda climbed up to more than USD 2 billion
while the damage brought about by Typhoon
Pablo reached up to USD 1.69 billion.3

C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

Image Credit: cnn.com

* The views and opinions expressed in this Paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Institute.

OCCASIONAL PAPER AUGUST 2016

03

Table 1: Economic Cost of Recent Disasters in the Philippines

In the Philippines, more than half of the total land area is

exposed to multiple hazards and two-thirds of the population
are vulnerable to natural disasters. Hazards lead to disasters
when people and communities are caught in a web of
vulnerability, where they are constrained from building
resiliency and mobilizing resources to cope with the adverse
consequences. Poverty enhances vulnerability to disasters.4
In the context of rapid urbanization, exposure to hazards
intensifies and weakens the vulnerability of poor people.5
The scope and impact of strong typhoons and heavy
flooding has affected wide segments of the population in
recent years. As shown in Table 2, around 16 percent of the
population was affected by Typhoon Yolanda in 2013.
The number of affected people due to Typhoon Pablo,
Typhoon Ondoy, and the 2012 Habagat comprised 4-6
percent of the population. On the other hand, the
death toll from disasters has escalated with the advent
of super typhoons like Yolanda combined with weak
institutional capacities for governing disaster risks.

Source: EM-DAT. The International Disaster Database, 2014

Table 2: Number of Affected People in Recent Disasters in the Philippines

Source: EM-DAT. The International Disaster Database, 2014

C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

www.stratbase.com.ph

OCCASIONAL PAPER AUGUST 2016

04

The Policy Landscape

The policy landscape for managing disasters was
previously shaped through the establishment of
Disaster Coordinating Councils from the national to
the local levels of government. Presidential Decree
No. 1566 (PD 1566) was issued by President
Ferdinand Marcos in 1978 creating the National
Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC) which
consisted of representatives from 18 separate
national agencies. The NDCC rules on key policy
issues but delegates disaster management
operations to the Office of Civil Defense. The
country had Regional Disaster Coordinating
Councils in the 17 geographic administrative
regions. Each local government unit (LGU) at
the provincial, city, municipality, and barangay
levels had a disaster coordinating council.6
A National Calamity Fund was set up to support
disaster-related activities. The NDCC recommends
and the President approves funding for the programs
of national agencies and LGUs who are required to
allocate 5 percent of their estimated revenues to a
Local Calamity Fund (LCF). The traditional practice
was to allocate calamity funds for response and
relief operations. In the past, LCFs can only be
used when a state of calamity is declared by
the local legislative council. However, a joint
memorandum circular from the Department
of Budget and Management (DBM) and the
Department of the Interior and Local Government
(DILG) was made in 2003 that allowed LGUs to use
their LCFs for disaster preparedness activities.
C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

Table 3: Number of Casualties in Recent Disasters in the Philippines

Source: EM-DAT. The International Disaster Database, 2014

In 2010, a policy breakthrough happened when Republic Act 10121

or the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act
was signed into law by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.
Legislative efforts to replace PD 1566 started way back in 1997.
The traditional approach to disasters in the Philippines,
anchored on the armed forces, focused on emergency response,
rescue and relief operations. Disaster rehabilitation, mitigation,
or planning and preparation activities had been
neglected until the passage of the law.
A reform advocacy for a more integrated approach to disaster
management was pursued by the Disaster Risk Reduction Network
of the Philippines (DRRNet), which is a broad coalition of civil
society, local government, and academic institutions that pushed
for community-based approaches to disaster risk reduction. The
DRRNet eventually adopted an alternative paradigm which embraced
the principles and strategies from the Hyogo Framework of Action
(HFA) that focused on integrating disaster risk considerations into

sustainable development policies, planning, and programming

at all levels.7 The law reflects some of the important language
and substance that the DRRNet had sought. A broad and incisive
understanding of community-based disaster risk management
was given legitimacy in the reform measure. It also established
the building of community resiliency as a strategic goal.
The deep sources of disaster vulnerabilities, including
poverty, land use policies, and good governance
principles, are integrated in the new law.8

Local Governments in Disaster Risk

Reduction and Management
There has been growing international consensus that local
governments and communities should have an active role in disaster
risk reduction. The paradigm shift is that disaster management is
an integral development approach that communities and localities
www.stratbase.com.ph

OCCASIONAL PAPER AUGUST 2016

05

should own. Sub-state agents given their scope and optimal

reach can strategically address risks and vulnerabilities.
With a mixed inter-governmental approach with national government
agencies and a bottom-up approach, local governments can be the
responsive agents in the reduction of risks. Local governments provide
a facilitative link between national government (policy suppliers) and
the citizens affected by climate change and disaster risks (demanders).
LGUs are considered in the frontlines of preparedness and response
hence DRRM investments on human resources and capacity building
should be at the behest of local governments. Resiliency is seen
as a function of local capacity to reduce risks and vulnerabilities.
According to the Hyogo Framework for Action, the following are the
important functions of local governments in DRRM: a) establishment of
organization and coordination systems for disaster preparedness and
quick response; b) assignment of resources for DRRM; c) preparation
of risk assessments; d) investment in critical infrastructure that reduces
risks; e) application of risk-compliant land use planning principles; f)
conduct of safety assessment of all infrastructures such as schools
and hospitals; g) implementation of education and training programs
in schools; h) protection of ecosystems and natural buffers to mitigate
risks; i) install early warning systems and emergency management
systems including quick response; and j) prioritize the needs
of the affected population especially the vulnerable sector.10

Local Governments in the Philippine DRRM Act

To respond to its commitment to the United Nations through the Hyogo
Framework for Action, the Philippines passed Republic Act 10121 or
the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010.
One of the critical salient features of the law that distinguishes it from
the old disaster management paradigm is the enhanced role of local
governments in all levels of disaster risk reduction and management.

C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Office

With the passage of the Philippine DRRM law, all local governments
are tasked to form, institutionalize, staff, and budget local DRRM
offices (LDRRMOs) in every province (PDRRMO), city (CDRRMO), and
municipality (MDRRMO). LDRRMOs are tasked to manage, implement,
and coordinate disaster risk reduction activities such as the facilitation
of risk assessments and contingency planning; consolidation of local
disaster risk information; implementation of training and local DRRM
capacity building activities; operation and establishment of a multihazard warning systems; implementation of disaster preparedness
activities; and formulation and implementation of Local Disaster Risk
Reduction and Management Plans (LDRRMPs). The law also requires
that the LDRRMOs shall have at least three (3) staff members
who shall be assigned for: administration and training;
research and planning; and operations and warning.
In the performance of administrative and training functions, LDRRMOs
are expected to lead in the implementation of preparedness programs,
dissemination of information about local risks and hazards, and
conduct of learning activities on disaster preparedness training
and response to LDRRMO staff and the community.
With regard to research and planning, LDRRMOs are mandated to
develop DRRM plans, conduct risk assessments including vulnerability
studies and hazard maps in the community, consolidate risk
information, and advise the local DRRM council on the possible
local policy actions that need to be taken to address risks.
On operations and warning, LDRRMOs are responsible for installing
early warning systems in communities, conducting continuous
disaster monitoring, establishing local emergency response
center, and establishing of operations centers.

www.stratbase.com.ph

OCCASIONAL PAPER AUGUST 2016

06

Figure 1 : JMC 2014-1 Prescribed LDRRMO Structure11

With regard to salary and remuneration, JMC-1 2014 prescribes the following salary grade for LDRRMO for each classification of LGUs.

Prescribed salary grade for Local DRRM Officers12

C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

www.stratbase.com.ph

OCCASIONAL PAPER AUGUST 2016

07

Prescribed qualifications for Local DRRM Officers and staff13

Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Councils

At the decision-making level, the law mandates the formation of
Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Councils (LDRRMC)
for each province, city, municipality, and barangay. The LDRRMCs
should be composed of key local government officials, representatives
from local police, representatives of the military assigned in the
local area, civil society organizations, and private organizations. The
LDRRMC are tasked to make decisions on how LDRRMF should be
utilized, appointment of personnel in LDRRMOs, implementation of
contingency plans and quick emergency response activities,
and declaration of state of calamity. LDRRMCs are also
mandated to monitor the performance of LDRRMOs
and the implementation of LDRRMPs.

C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

The local chief executive heads the LDRRMC (Mayor, Governor). It

is responsible in taking the lead in preparing for responding to and
recovering from the effect of any disaster based on the following
criteria: a) The City/Municipal DRRMC if two or more barangays
are affected; b) The Provincial DRRMC if two or more; cities/
municipalities are affected; and c) The RDRRMC if
two or more provinces are affected.14
The law also requires the formation of Barangay Disaster Risk
Reduction and Management Councils (BDRRMCs). The BDRRMCs
serve as decision-makers and implementers of community
DRRM activities. BDRRMCs are also expected to craft
and implement Barangay DRRM plans (BDRRMPs),

www.stratbase.com.ph

OCCASIONAL PAPER AUGUST 2016

08

Local Disaster Risk Reduction and

Management Fund
Local government units are required to set aside at
least five percent (5%) of their total budget as the
Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management
Fund (LDRRMF) to support activities, projects, and
programs of the Local DRRMO. The appropriation
for the LDRRMF shall be included in the Annual
Budget of the LGU. The programs, projects, and
activities that shall be charged to the LDRRMF
shall be articulated in the Local DRRM Plan and the
Annual Investment Plan of the LGU.
Seventy percent (70%) of the total LDRRMF shall
be used for disaster preparedness activities such
as trainings, capacity development, education,
advocacy programs, and purchase of equipment
and supplies. Thirty percent (30%) of the LDRRMF
budget shall be utilized as a Quick Response Fund
(QRF) or stand-by fund for relief and recovery
programs in order to address In disasters,
calamities, or emergencies. The QRF can only be
utilized by the LGU if there is only a declaration
of a Local State of Calamity by the Local
DRRMC and Local Sanggunian. The QRF
can also be accessed if there is a Presidential
declaration of a State of Calamity.

LDRRM Projects and Programs

Local governments under the DRRM Act of 2010
can fund and implement the following project and
activities on Disaster Prevention and Mitigation:

C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

risk assessment, vulnerability analysis, ecological

profiling, streamlining of Comprehensive Land
Use Planning with DRRM and Climate Change
Adaptation Planning, development of tools
on risk assessment, and construction
of facilities and infrastructure that will
mitigate floods and other hazards.15
The projects that can be supported under Disaster
Preparedness relate to the conduct of training
on disaster preparedness and response, search,
rescue and retrieval operations. It also includes the
conduct of simulation exercises at various levels to
test plans and skills; development of information,
education and communication (IEC) campaign and
information sharing between LGUs/communities and
the national government; development of standard
operations manual for Disaster Operation Centers;
and development and implementation of standard
operating procedures for deployment, evacuation
and coordination with rapid assessment teams.
Disaster preparedness may also involve
conduct of multi-stakeholder consultations,
conduct of participatory contingency planning,
and establishment of volunteer management.16
Disaster Response projects include the provision of
alternative livelihood, relief or assistance to victims
of disasters; provision of tents and other temporary
shelter facilities; provision of food subsistence
or relief goods to disaster victims, and
other programs of similar nature.
Investments in Disaster Rehabilitation and
Recovery include the formulation of designs for the

reconstruction of houses and making them disasterresilient; construction/rehabilitation of damaged

infrastructure facilities and evacuation centers;
conduct of trainings for social preparation of host
communities and those that will be relocated;
implementation of building code and promotion
of green technology; conduct of post conflict
analyses; and other similar undertakings.

Capacity Gaps
LGUs encounter difficulties in implementing the DRR
law because of the lack of implementation advice
and knowledge particularly on provisions related
to use of funds, staffing, and institutionalization.17
There is also need to invest in capacity development
including identification of key competencies. Before
the release of guidelines on creating LDRRMO and
assigning permanent local DRRM officers, LGUs
were at a loss on how to create the personnel
position and allocate budget for the office.

Absence of functioning Local DRRM Councils

The work of the LDRRMC is to ensure that
structures, processes, personnel, and outputs
concerning local disaster risk reduction and
management are institutionalized. A functioning
council provides space for decision making on
local DRRM. Decision-making involves decisions
on funding of local DRR objectives and plans.
More than 50% of LGUs in the country do not
have a functioning LDRRMC.18 Another implication

www.stratbase.com.ph

OCCASIONAL PAPER AUGUST 2016

09

of non-functioning LDRRMC is on the integrity of

how LDRRMF is allocated and spent. A functioning
LDRRMC can support the planning, budget,
and expenditure process of the LDRRMO
by providing a venue for key stakeholders
to demand their DRR needs.19

Political accommodation, appointments,

and rivalries
Appointment of local DRRM officers based on
political discretion is not a new issue (or non-issue)
in local governments. There is an absence of the
use of criteria or a merit-based system, resulting in
the appointment of co-terminous officials that do
not have the knowledge and skills to handle the
DRR office. It also jeopardizes the sustainability
of local DRR efforts given the limited tenure of the
LDRRMOs political principals. This can also be a
function of the absence of functioning LDRRMC
which can collectively decide on merits and criteria
for LDRRMO appointments. This delays the
process of designating of full-time personnel who
should handle local DRR responsibilities.

C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

Staff tenure and retention

LGUs resort to employing casual personnel.
Part-time employees and job-order personnel are
tapped by the LGU to comply with the personnel
requirements of the DRR law. While tapping part
time employees allows for the entry of new ideas,
there is also a risk of facing sustainability issues and
losing institutional memory to manage medium-term
and long-term local DRRM programs.
Another practice is the appointment of present LGU
officials concurrently as the LDRRMO. This practice
burdens officials, as they have to fulfill multiple roles
in the LGU in an ad-hoc fashion. This may result
in decrease in the quality of performance of the
department given the employee demotivation
and exhaustion. Full-time personnel are
needed to manage the LDRRMO.
To illustrate the pattern of difficulty in providing full
time staff, the DILG reports that only two-thirds or
67% of all local governments in the country
have complete staff in-charge of DRRM Act
prescribed positions of the LDRRMO.20

Lack of integration of Performance Systems

and HR in Local DRRM
Since most of the appointed LDRRMOs are casual,
part-time, adjunct, and based on the discretion of
the LCEs, the appointments are not covered by any
HR standards or performance criteria. Albeit the
release of the JMC 1-2014, LGUs have expressed
their difficulty in complying with the law because of
the lack of budget to open full time positions and the
high standards qualification set by the JMC. LGUs
need to invest in training for their part-time LDRRMO
to fulfill the training hours requirement
set by the DBM and CSC. Completing the
training hours requirement will allow the
LCEs to upgrade the appointment of LDRRM
officials from part-time to full-time.22

Need for capacity development in data

collection, knowledge management, and
planning tools
Most LGUs submit their DRRM plans for compliance
purposes rather than treating the DRR plan as a
substantive development plan that can guide local

www.stratbase.com.ph

OCCASIONAL PAPER AUGUST 2016

10

resilience and development. The practice of copying and fillingout pro-forma plans defeats the purpose of understanding local
risks and developing programs to address local risks. LDRRMOs
demand to have knowledge and skills in data collection, analysis,
and reporting. Data gathering is critical in planning tools such as
hazard mapping, risk assessment, assets audit, and vulnerability
mapping and assessment. Knowledge and skills in using
planning tools that focuses on how to collect and use
data can help DRRMOs develop LDRRMP and LCCAP
that are relevant to the local communitys goals.23

Weak partnership with local CSOs and academe

It is observed that there is weak LDRRMO partnership with local
CSOs and the academic institutions. While foreign international
NGO, (INGOs) were present in various local DRR activities after the
major disasters, the presence of CSOs and universities can support
activities to address the resources gaps and training needs of local
DRRMOs. INGOs presence is on an interim basis. Local CSOs
and higher education institutions can be institutional partners and
resources that LGUs can tap. The weak participation of local
CSOs can be attributed to the non-functionality of LDRRMCs.24

C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

Institutional incentives
In the administration of Benigno Aquino III, the DILG implemented
the Seal of Good Local Governance. The SGLG was a
performance-based grant that allows compliant LGUs to access
performance grants to fund development projects. One of the
criteria to obtain the SGLG is to show that the SGLG has invested
in capacity and organizational development on local DRR. However,
the DILG (2014) reports than less than half of the local governments
in the country have passed the SGLG. Another incentive
mechanism is the Bottom-up Budgeting (BuB) where LGUs can
propose capacity-building projects related to DRR . Other LGUs are
motivated by international and local recognition. DRR in Bulacan
and Albay are regarded by the Office of Civil Defense (OCD)
(Gawad Kalasag Awards) and the International Strategy for Disaster
Risk Reduction by the United Nations as best practices in the
Philippines and in the developing economies.

www.stratbase.com.ph

OCCASIONAL PAPER AUGUST 2016

11

endnotes
1
See http://www.uni-stuttgart.de/ireus/Internationales/WorldRiskIndex. The
World Risk Index was developed by Jrn Birkmann and Torsten Welle of the Institute
of Spatial and Regional Planning, University of Stuttgart. The index measures exposure
to natural hazards and their impact on 171 countries. The results are disseminated in
the World Risk Report published annually by the United Nations University and Alliance
Development Works.

11
Joint Memorandum Circular 2014 -1. NDRRMC, DILG, DBM, and CSC.
April 4, 2014

23
Magno, F. (2013). Local Government Cooperation and Capacity in DRRM
and CCA. Commission on Higher Education Philippine Higher Education Network
(CHED-PHERNet). Unpublished work.

12
Joint Memorandum Circular 2014 -1. NDRRMC, DILG, DBM, and CSC.
April 4, 2014

24
Department of the Interior and Local Government (2014). Results of the
Seal of Good Local Governance Round One. Unpublished report.

2
Government of the Philippines, ADB, UN. 2008. National Assessment on
the State of Disaster Risk Management in the Philippines. Final Report. October. Manila.

13
Joint Memorandum Circular 2014 -1. NDRRMC, DILG, DBM, and CSC.
April 4, 2014

The EM-DAT, The International Disaster Database is managed by the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters, School of Public Health, Universit
Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
3

2028.

National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan (NDRRMP) 2011-

5
UNESCAP, UNISDR. 2012. Reducing Vulnerability and Exposure to Disasters: The Asia-Pacific Disaster Report 2012, Bangkok.

6
Eunice Agsaoay-Sao. 2010. Advocacy and Support Work for the Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Law in the Philippines. in Lenore Polotandela Cruz, Elmer M. Ferrer, and Maureen C. Pagaduan, eds. Building Disaster Resilient
Communities: Stories and Lessons from the Philippines. Quezon City: CSWCD-University of the Philippines.

International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. 2005. Hyogo Framework for

Action 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters;
https: www.unisdr.org/wcdr
7

8
Ralph S. Brower and Francisco A. Magno. 2011. A Third Way in the Philippines: Voluntary Organizing for a New Disaster Management Paradigm, International
Review of Public Administration, vol. 16, 1: 31-50.

9
United Nations ISDR (2010). Local Governments and Disaster Risk Reduction: Good Practices and Lessons Learned. United Nations: Geneva

10
Global Facility for Disaster Risk Reduction (2012). Making Cities Resilient.
United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. United Nations: Geneva

14
Commission on Audit (2014). Assessment of Disaster Risk Reduction and
Management at the Local Level. Commission on Audit: Quezon City

15

Joint Memorandum Circular 2013-1. NDRRMC, DILG, DBM

16
Magno, F. (2013). Local Government Cooperation and Capacity in DRRM
and CCA. Commission on Higher Education Philippine Higher Education Network
(CHED-PHERNet). Unpublished work.
17
Commission on Audit (2014). Assessment of Disaster Risk Reduction and
Management at the Local Level. Commission on Audit: Quezon City

18
Francisco A. Magno and Ian Jayson Hecita. 2015. Local Governance Capacity Development for Disaster Reduction, Report for the Philippines-Australia Human
Resources and Organizational Development Facility.

19
Department of the Interior and Local Government (2014). Results of the
Seal of Good Local Governance Round One. Unpublished report.

20
Francisco A. Magno and Ian Jayson Hecita. 2015. Local Governance Capacity Development for Disaster Reduction, Report for the Philippines-Australia Human
Resources and Organizational Development Facility.

21
Magno, F. (2013). Local Government Cooperation and Capacity in DRRM
and CCA. Commission on Higher Education Philippine Higher Education Network
(CHED-PHERNet). Unpublished work.

22
Francisco A. Magno and Ian Jayson Hecita. 2015. Local Governance Capacity Development for Disaster Reduction, Report for the Philippines-Australia Human
Resources and Organizational Development Facility.

Image Credit:ffmagazine.com

C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

www.stratbase.com.ph

9.8
VOLUME

ABOUT
Dr. Francisco A. Magno and Ian Jayson Hecita
Dr. Kiko Magno is a Trustee of the ADR Institute. He is likewise the
President of the Philippine Political Science Association. Concurrently, he is
the Director of De La Salle University Robredo Institute of Governance and
an Associate Professor of Political Science in De La Salle University. His
expertise includes Political Science, Development Studies and Comparative
Politics. Most of his papers include research on policy analysis, local
government, local development and environmental studies.
Ian Jayson Hecita is currently Program Manager at the Jesse M. Robredo
Institute of Governance of De La Salle University. In 2010, Mr. Hecita was
Visiting Research Scholar at the Institute for Energy Systems, Economics,
and Sustainability at Florida State University. His research interests include
collective action theory and practice, collaborative local governance,
and disaster risk reduction and management.

Stratbases Albert Del Rosario Institute

is an independent international and strategic research
organization with the principal goal of addressing the
issues affecting the Philippines and East Asia
9F 6780 Ayala Avenue, Makati City
Philippines 1200
V 8921751
F 8921754
www.stratbase.com.ph
C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

Image Credit:rappler.com