Just recently, the Alliance Development Works, United Nations University and The Nature Conservancy released the 2012 World Risk Report, which ranked the all countries according to their vulnerability to risk. In this report, the Philippines was identified as the third highest disaster risk hotspot in the world, the result of combining a high exposure to natural hazards and climate change with a very vulnerable society.  The Philippines comes after Vanuatu and Tonga, which were ranked first and second, respectively.

That the Philippines is ranked so high in the World Risk Index may actually seem both fitting and ironic. It is fitting because given the country’s high exposure to the risks brought about by climate change, the government responded quickly by putting in place policies aimed at addressing these risks.  The Philippines is one of the first few countries that came out with definite climate change policies, and actually enacted laws on climate change.  At the same time however, it may seem ironic because despite such an acknowledgement of these risks, there still seems to be a rather raw understanding of climate change in general, and what is needed to address it.

The Climate Change Act established the Climate Change Commission in 2009, and gave it the task of coordinating climate change-related actions and policies.  As part of its mandate, the CCC produced the National Framework Strategy on Climate Change, and the National Climate Change Action Plan.  The even more recent establishment of the People’s Survival Fund, meanwhile, provides an avenue for the management of climate financing at the national level.

On July 25, 2013, the Climate Change Commission, Department of Budget and Management and the World Bank launched a Climate Public Expenditure and Institutional Review, which “identified process reforms that could deliver desired climate results more effectively and enhance the quality of the decision-making process.”

According to the report, “[t]o assess gaps and accelerate implementation of the climate agenda, the Department of Budget and Management and the CCC sought advisory services from the World Bank to carry out a Climate Public Expenditure and Institutional Review (CPEIR). The review, carried out between February 2012 and March 2013, sought to identify innovations in policy, institutions, and financing of climate action, along with achievements, limitations, and disconnects in the current approaches to addressing climate issues and policy. …The analysis, based on the rich set of data gathered by the team, provides a valuable basis for the Philippines to develop a baseline for financing climate change.

“The recommendations and action plan in this report complement and reinforce the multi-faceted public finance reform agenda that the Government is currently implementing (e.g., by increasing transparency and accountability in public climate financing, operationalizing the program approach, and bottom-up budgeting). The operationalization of the People’s Survival Fund can also be a catalyst—not only for putting in place systems for local climate financing, but also as a stepping stone to manage climate financing at the national level.”

The CPEIR suggests a number of comprehensive recommendations aimed at addressing what have been identified as institutional gaps and barriers.  These recommendations were centered on three main pillars, namely (1) strengthening the planning, execution and financing for climate change, (2) enhancing leadership and accountability through monitoring, evaluation and review of climate change policies and activities, and (3) building capacity and managing change.

These three pillars were then further expressed into eight primary objectives, which include (a) strengthening the budget planning and execution framework for managing climate programs, activities and projects, (b) aligning plans and strengthening implementation to achieve climate change goals, (c) rationalizing and harmonizing climate financing instruments, (d) enhancing the CCC’s leadership role in reviewing and communicating climate change performance, (e) strengthening coordination between the CCC and oversight agencies and departments, (f) strengthening monitoring in the departments and LGUs, (g) building skills and a knowledge-base on climate change, and (h) raising public awareness of climate change.

In a recent survey conducted by the Social Weather Station, 85 percent (or 8 out of 10) Filipinos are said to have personally felt the effects of climate change in the past three years.  However, about 37 percent of survey respondents admitted to understanding only a little with regard to climate change and its impacts, with 35 percent having “partial but sufficient” understanding, 14 percent having “almost no understanding,” and 12 percent having “extensive” knowledge or understanding.

Climate change seems to still be primarily associated with disaster, which in our country is characterized by more intense tropical cyclones and drastic changes in rainfall patterns.  Resulting floods and the damage they cause are still at the forefront of everyone’s minds when the subject of climate change arises, and with good reason.  However, it is time to broaden the understanding of Filipinos in order for us to be able to adapt to the changes that have already begun to occur.  Part of this is understanding more our current climate policies and what we can do to strengthen implementation.  In my next few columns, I will be going into more detail on the CPEIR, and the suggested actions or activities to further advance planning and implementation.

EAGLE EYES is Dean Tony La Viña's column in Manila Standard Today. Follow him on Facebook: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. and Twitter: @tonylavs.