FLOOD DISASTER RISK REDUCTION AND RISK MANAGEMENT OF PASIG CITY

Robert John O. Robas

Introduction
The World Risk Report 2011 assessed the vulnerability of 173 countries to natural
hazards and their ability to handle the aftermath of natural disasters based on
exposure, susceptibility of the population, coping capacity and adaptation strategy.
This report from the United Nations University Institute for Environment and Human
Safety (UNU-EHS) revealed that the Philippines was the third most vulnerable
worldwide because of the frequency of calamities, such as typhoons, floods,
landslides andearthquake, combined with the countrys ineffectual disaster
preparedness programs (Mucke, 2011).
Being one of the most disaster-prone countries in the world, the Philippines had long
experiences in dealing with, responding to and managing disasters. Since the
1970s, the country has shifted its approach from disaster preparedness and
response to disaster management in the 1980s to disaster risk management in the
1990s and disaster risk reduction in the years 2005 and beyond. This evolution
paved the way to the paradigm shift in the way people, communities and
government think, act and respond to the current and emerging risks that
continually face them. In 1978, the National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC)
was established through Presidential Decree (PD) 1566 as

the highest policy making body and the focal organization for disaster management
in the country. This law also provided for the establishment of regional, provincial,
city, municipal and barangay disaster coordinating councils. These DCCs were
formed primarily to advice the President and/or the local chief executive on all
natural disaster preparedness and management plans; recommend the declaration
of state calamity and the release of calamity funds for relief and rescue operations,
among others. (PD. 1566; NDRRMF, 2011) In 2005, President Gloria Macapagal
Arroyo approved the implementation of the National Disaster Coordinating Council
(NDCC) Four Point Plan of Action for Preparedness (4PPAP)

which aimed to increase public awareness and involvement in measures put in

place by the government to minimize the impact of disasters in the future. (NDRRM,
2011) Republic Act No. 10121 was also legislated as continuous policy prior to SNAP
program. However, despite such progress, problems were still seen during Bagyong
Ondoy in September 2009 where Philippines was badly hit and many of the cities
and provinces like Pasig City flood was as high as eight meters or eight hundred

centimeters approximately. During Typhoon Ondoy, the Pasig City government

incurred huge damages in infrastructures: buildings (P11,800,000,000-US$3B);
Roads/drainages(P1,500,000,000-US $36B); Government buildings schools, health
centers, playgrounds (P800,000,000 or US$20 B); Government vehicles, equipment
and facilities (P14, 609, 791or US$3.5M); not included were the many innocent
people who died during the catastrophe (Porio, 2011). The adverse disaster
happened again last August 2012 when deadly floods brought by southwest
monsoon (Habagat) have swamped Metro Manila and other provinces. The amount
of rainfall brought by southwest monsoon surpasses typhoon Ondoy that prompted
some local government to declare state of calamity. From the records of NDRRMC, a
total of forty nine (49) cities/municipalities in Region I,III, IV-A, IV-B, XII and NCR was
declared under State of Calamity wherein the Pasig City were included. The total
cost of damages of southwest monsoon for infrastructure is Php 639,128, 230.00
and for agriculture is Php1,624,410,815.14 or combined damages for infrastructure
and agriculture amounting of Php. 2,263,539, 045.14 (NDRRMC, 2012). In the Local
Government of Pasig the affected places of southwest monsoon are twenty four
barangays (24), seven thousand one hundred fifty (7,150) families or thirty three
thousand two hundred eighty (33,280) persons (NDRRMC, 2012).
Data do not include those unreported statistics of affected families recorded from
each barangay of Pasig. People who live in poverty and adverse socio-economic
conditions are highly vulnerable to disasters. The most vulnerable sectors include
the poor, the sick, people with disabilities, older persons, women and children.
Although many people may be affected, these sectors will have the least capacity to
recover from the impact of disasters. This situation is exacerbated by rapid
urbanization, environmental degradation and the increasing risk of environmental
disasters, whether as a result of direct human impact and or from climate change.
The risks induced by these hazards
have big effects on the countrys economic
development targets and programming as well as in the overall welfare of the
people and their properties, especially on the poor and most vulnerable groups. The
milestone towards disaster risk reduction- disaster risk management preparedness
is prevention rather than recovery. The protection and security of houses,
properties, and the life of every human individual, during a disaster, must be given
utmost attention by the government. The researcher is very much interested to
know the flood disaster risk management-disaster risk reduction of the city
government of Pasig, This study will serve as a wake-up call to the community and
officials to formulate or improved necessary disaster management measures to
reduce the vulnerability in risk reduction, risk recovery, relief and rehabilitation plan
and the like. In addition, the vigilance of the public regarding disaster management
preparedness and other related measures to protect their rights are the main
concerns of the researcher because this will warrant saving and protecting life,
property and conserving properly the natural environments.

Flood Abstract & Situation in Pasig City

Pasig City is one of the highly developed cities in the Metropolitan Manila area due
to rapid development and its accessible location is suited for doing business like the
Ortigas area. The growth and political stability of city encourage many people to
migrate within the city to find opportunities. As a result, city became highly
industrialize and polluted by permanent structure such as buildings and houses to
accommodate the needs of the city for progress. In the Metro Manila structure,
Pasig is located at the eastern boundary of Metro-Manila and within the
intermediate core, together with Muntinlupa, Valenzuela, Las Pias, Paranaque,
Marikina, Taguig, Pateros. In the national structure, it lies within the Laguna de Bay
basin and between two coastal growth centers of Metro Manila and MARILAQUE. It
lies approximately on the southern end of Pasig River and is bounded by Quezon
City and Marikina City on the North; the City of Mandaluyong on the West; Pateros,
Tagig and Makati City on the South; and Rizal towns of Cainta and Taytay on the
East. The city is the catch basin of all excess water from Marikina river, Pasig river,
Napindan Channel, human made Manggahan floodway. The Manggahan floodway is
created by the national government to catch water from the mountain due to
diminished forests in Antipolo and Rizal province. Cited to PAGASA (2012), the
capacity of river and the flow rate during Ondoy the Marikina river has a current
capacity of 2,900m/second, Pasig river with 500m/second, Napindan Channel with
35m/second, and Manggahan Floodway with 2,400m/second. The risk is further
exacerbated by inappropriate human practices contributing to still higher levels of
natural hazards, such as deforestation, lack of drainage systems, and concrete and
asphalt paving, all of which lessen the absorption capacity of the plant layer. For
these reasons, disaster risk management means not only intervention in and control
of natural phenomena, but also (and especially) modification of existing land use
practices, occupation practices, and economic activities that generate hazards and
vulnerabilities; it also means strengthening the application of risk reduction criteria
in development planning. Expert such as Palafox Associates and Dr. Britton,
suggested that Ondoy and Habagat floodings is as a result of poor urban planning
coupled with poor environmental management. People built houses along the
riverbanks most especially in floodway that block the water flowing to the Laguna
De Bay. Poor solid waste management is also factor despite the mandate of R.A.
9003 (Solid Waste Management Act) the garbages clogged the water ways and
causes flood. The man made Manggahan Floodway built in1980s cuts across the
city, from the Marikina riverbend in Brgy. Rosario down to Laguna Bay. About 3 km.
of Manggahan floodway traverse the city, in particular barangay Rosario, and
Maybunga. The Manggahan floodway is part of Metro Manila flood control program
that prevents flooding in Manila and its vicinity through diversion of about 70% of
the water coming from Marikina River to flow towards the Laguna de Bay and only
30% to flow to the Pasig River. (Pasig City Profile,2010) Figure 4 the map shows that
the city is highly susceptible to flood based on Mines and Geo Science Bureau (PIA,
2012) Aside from two natural bodies influencing flood in the city (Marikina River

and Pasig River), the drainage lines within the City of Pasig have a total aggregate
length of 104 kilometers consisting of open canal, covered canal and underground
reinforced pipes. This represents the drainage facilities installed in private
subdivision which are mostly underground reinforced concrete pipes. Almost all
thoroughfares and residential areas have underground drainage facilities, while
most high density residential areas are provided with open or closed canal to
relieved the city of storm flooding. In
total, sixteen (17) other creeks serve as the citys
drainage outfall. A total of 26 km. of creeks runs through the territory and periphery
of Pasig. At present, Pasig has three (3) pumping stations located on both ends of
the Parian Creek in Ilugin, Pinagbuhatan and Kapasigan and at San Agustin creek,
Barangay Pinagbuhatan with combined pumping capacity of 10 gallons/minute
(Pasig City Profile, 2010). The City of Pasig created a Comprehensive Land Use Plan
that identified the existing flood situation and listed the current status of creeks
within the city which Table 3 shows. The status of seventeen creeks reveals one
reason for the flood on the last typhoon Ondoy of September 2009 and Habagat of
August 2012. Most of the creeks were dried-up, silted or totally lost due to
infrastructures built within, such as houses by squatters or illegal settlers,
commercial establishments etc. the development of the city paved way to look for
vacant place that shall be utilized for industrial, business or houses occupation.
Hence, since the city is highly urbanized vacant area for commercial consumptions
are very limited. As result, water ways was converted and sacrifice. For instance,
the Parian creek (Bitukang Manok) that serves as outlet of water within the city to
Marikina river which was culvert and filled, from Plaza Bonifacio to Marikina River,
400 meters and occupied by structures of Rio de Pasig Linear Park, Brgy Out-post,
Brgy Multipurpose Hall, San Jose Barangay Hall, commercial establishments, and
houses which eventually in absence of water ways resulted to flooding in Sto.
Tomas, Sta Cruz, and City hall and other parts of the city. Bautista et al. (2011)
summarized Dr.
Lagmays presentation entitled
Flood Risk
Mitigation: Learning from Ondoy
presented during the NDRRM planning workshop conducted by OCD that there is a
consensus that the intensity and volume of Ondoy was unusually high; it was
beyond the capacity of existing drainage systems, natural or man-made, in Metro
Manila. However, events of greater magnitude may have happened in the past.
According to Taiwanese experts, typhoon Morakot brought three times as much rain
as Ondoy delivered. There are also human activities contributory to the mishap. One
is groundwater subsidence. There are areas in Valenzuela, Rosario, Las Pias, and
Dasmarias showing land subsidence which are believed to have been caused by

excessive extraction of groundwater. The areas are subsiding at 5cm/year (Bautista

et al, 2011).
Statement of the Problem
It is the purpose of this study to evaluate the flood disaster management program
of Pasig City, a local government unit in the National Capital Region, during calendar
year 2012. Specifically, the study sought answers to the following sub problems: 1.
What is the demographic profile of the Pasig City local government officials who
respond to disasters in terms of: 1.1. age, 1.2. gender, 1.3. government affiliation,
1.4. position held, and 1.5. length of service 2. What is the evaluation of Flood
Disaster Risk Management- Disaster Risk Reduction (DRM-DRR) programs of the
Pasig City? 3. Is there any significant relationship between socio demographic
profiles and evaluation on the flood Disaster Risk Management- Disaster Risk
Reduction (DRM-DRR) programs in terms of; 3.1. government affiliation, 3.2.
position held, and 3.3. length of service
4. What are the problems encountered in the implementation of Flood Disaster Risk
Management-Disaster Risk Reduction program in the City of Pasig? 5. What are the
Flood Disaster Risk Management- Disaster Risk Reduction (DRM-DRR) program
needs in terms of: 5.1. Program objectives, 5.2. Program resources, 5.2.1. staff,
5.2.2. physical resources, and 5.2.3. budgetary allocation 5.3. Program activities,
5.3.1.prevention and mitigation, 5.3.2. emergency preparedness and risk reduction,
5.3.3. emergency response, and 5.3.4. rehabilitation and recovery 6. Is there any
significant difference between the responses of barangays to the implementation of
DRR-DRM program in their respective area?
Hypotheses
1. There is no significant relationship between the socio-demographic profiles of
respondent and the disaster risk management-risk reduction DRR-DRM program of
Pasig City for flood. 2. There is no significant difference between the responses of
barangays to the implementation of disaster risk reduction- risk management
program in their respective area.
Methodology
The study was conducted to assess and evaluate the flood disaster risk reduction
and management program of Pasig City, a local government unit in the National
Capital Region using the fundamentals of program/project/activities (P/P/A) designed
and implementation, taking into consideration the input-process-output linkages in
the series of activities. The study focused on the nineteen (19) barangays severely
affected by the Typhoon Ondoy of September 2009 and South West Monsoon
(Habagat) of August 2012. These are the Barangay Chairmen, Councilors, and the
Head of the Barangay Disaster Coordinating Councils of Barangay Manggahan,
Maybunga, Pinagbuhatan, Rosario, San Miguel, Santolan, Sta. Lucia, Bagong Ilog,

Bambang, Caniogan, Kalawaan, Malinao, Palatiw, Pineda, Sagad, San Joaquin, Sto.
Tomas, Santa Cruz, and Ugong. Also the key personnel of the planning division,
Committee in Disaster Management and Department of Engineering of LGU-Pasig
City Hall that are directly in task in disaster management implementation shall also
be included as participants of the study. These respondents sought to answer the
questions and framework of PDRRMF on national policy for disaster management
pursuant to
Republic Act No 10121 also known as
Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of
2010
and to other mainstream policy context for disaster management program
specifically the Philippine Development Plan, Millennium Development Goals (MDG),
Hyogo Framework for Actions (HFA), Asean Agreement on Disaster management
and Emergency Response (AADMER), International Disaster Response Law (IDRL),
Kyoto Protocol, and United Nations (UN). All policy context and DRRMF focuses in
disaster risk management on (1.) prevention and mitigation, (2.) emergency
preparedness and risk reduction, (3.) emergency response, and (4.) rehabilitation
and recovery. These four areas will be the key assessment areas of the study for
disaster management preparedness of Pasig City. The study utilized the descriptive
method of research employing quantitative and qualitative approach. Hence, a
researcher made questionnaire is used employing purposive sampling to gather
data from respondents and interview schedule was employed to collect data from
groups of respondents. Likert scale was utilized to interpret the data and
Percentage, Weighted Mean, Chi Square, and F test was employed to treat the data
gathered. Henceforth, the study is collaborated by the literatures, records, and data
examined by the researcher and the observation conducted to the places affected
by the floods. Out of the 180 survey questionnaires, only 151 were retrieved,
considered and used in the study. The study is collaborated by the literatures,
records, and data examined by the researcher and the observation conducted to the
places affected by the floods.

Summary of Findings
1. The respondents are predominately males mostly affiliated with the barangay
with the position of barangay councilors and had been serving as officials for
4 to 7 years. More than 1/3 of the respondents have ages 46 years old and
above while only 6% have ages as young as 18 to 25 years old. 2. On the
overall the respondents assessed the Flood Disaster Risk ManagementDisaster Risk Reduction (DRM-DRR) programs of the Pasig City as effective. 3.
There is no significant relationship between the variables government

affiliation, position, and length of service and the respondents on the overall
assessment of the flood DRR-DRM. 4. The respondents disagree that they
encounter problems in lack of disaster management plan, lack of coordination
between LGU, NGO,NG & other agency, and delayed implementation of
project. However, the respondents moderately agree that they encounter
problems in budget, Awareness thru education & information, Community
participation, Political will (Leadership of Officials), Community resistance,
manpower, poor implementation of law, and insufficient assistance from
National Government. 5. Flood Disaster Risk Management- Disaster Risk
Reduction (DRM-DRR) program. 5.1. In terms of program objectives, the
respondents assessed the flood DRR- DRM program to be effective. 5.2. Flood
DRR-DRM Program Resources 5.2.1. In terms of program resources, the
respondents assessed that the city has a sufficient physical resources in the
life savings jacket, life saving buoys, rescue boat, search light, water proof
battery, generators, diving suit, ambulance, vehicles (transportation), early,
warning device, portable toilets, evacuation area, fire alarm system,
telephone services, and health facilities. 5.2.2. The respondents assessed
that the city has a sufficient funding in prevention and mitigation, emergency
preparedness and risk reduction, emergency response, rehabilitation and
recovery. 5.3. Flood DRR-DRM Program Activities 5.3.1. In terms of program
activities in prevention and mitigation, the respondents agree that the
needed plans are hazard mapping and urban planning, education and
awareness, sufficient shelter food & cloths, antibiotics and medical kits,
transportation to help the effected people, community involvement and
participation, infrastructure, de-clogging of water ways and canals, dredging
of rivers, and early warning mechanism. 5.3.2. In terms of program activities
in emergency preparedness and risk reduction, the respondents assessed
that the community level are responsive and aware of the disaster risk
factors. First, the communities organize themselves to monitor potential
disaster. Second, there are warning systems in place to the community level.
Third, communities are ready and understand official warning and react.
Fourth, community vulnerable has evacuation plans/maps. Fifth, there are
training, simulation exercise, or local drills conducted, at the community
level. Sixth, the training conducted at the community level is relevant. Lastly,
there is disaster awareness and public information projects or programmes
being undertaken to the community 5.3.3. In terms of program activities in
emergency response, the respondents assess that the plan for life
preservation and supply of the basic needs of affected population during the
actual and immediate after the disaster are responsive and effective. The
program for relief operation, search and rescue, dissemination/information
sharing of disaster related information, development/provision of temporary
shelter, health service, psycho social support, early recovery mechanism,
management of dead and missing, evacuation management, social protection
intervention, and civil & uniformed services coordination are responsive.

5.3.4. In terms of program for rehabilitation and recovery, the respondent

assess that the government action taken to restore and improved the living
conditions of the affected residents are efficient. The program for livelihood
for affected victims, search and retrieval, shelter/relocation for affected
victims, psycho social counseling, infrastructure and relocation plan, post
disaster need assessment, and environmental protection are efficient.

6
6. Significant Difference between the Responses Per Barangay and DRR-DRM
Program. 6.1. There distinction on responses per barangay and the objectives of
flood disaster risk reduction-risk management program. Hence, the null hypothesis
regarding the assessment by the officials of different barangay in terms of program
objectives is rejected. 6.2. There is disparity on the assessment of flood DRM-DRR
programs in terms of program resources for staff, physical resources, and budgetary
allocation and the officials of different barangay of Pasig City. Therefore, the null
hypothesis regarding the assessment by the officials of different barangay in terms
of program resources is rejected. 6.3. There is divergence on the assessment of
Flood DRM-DRR programs in terms of program activities and the officials of different
barangay of Pasig City. A
ll computed Fs for
prevention and mitigation, emergency preparedness and risk reduction, emergency
response, and rehabilitation and recovery are exceeding the critical value thus the
null hypothesis is rejected.
Conclusions
Based on the above findings, the following conclusions are stated:

1. The respondents are predominately males mostly affiliated with the barangay
with the position of barangay councilors and had been serving as officials for 4 to 7
years. More than 1/3 of the respondents have ages 46 years old and above and 6%
have ages as young as 18 to 25 years old. 2. The Flood Disaster Risk ManagementDisaster Risk Reduction (DRM-DRR) programs of the Pasig City for prevention and
mitigation, disaster preparedness and risk reduction, emergency response, and
rehabilitation and recovery are effective. 3. It found out that there is no significant
relationship between the variables of government affiliation, position, and length of
service, and the responses of barangay officials on the overall assessment of the
flood DRM-DRR. 4. It resulted that respondents moderately agree that they
encounter problems in budget, awareness thru education & information, community
participation, political will (Leadership of Officials), community resistance,

manpower, poor implementation of law, and insufficient assistance from National

Government. On the other hand, the respondents disagree that they encounter
problems in lack of disaster management plan, lack of coordination between LGU,
NGO,NG & other agency, and delayed implementation of project. 5. It attested that
the program objectives of flood Disaster Risk Management- Disaster Risk Reduction
(DRM-DRR) program are effective. Further, program resources for physical needs
and funding for DRR-DRM are sufficient. 6. It shows that the DRR-DRM program
activities in prevention and mitigation needed the plan for: First, hazard mapping
and urban planning. Second, education and awareness. Third, sufficient shelter food
& cloths. Fourth, antibiotics and medical kits. Fifth, transportation to help the
effected people. Fifth, community involvement and participation. Sixth,
infrastructure. Seventh, de-clogging of water ways and canals. Eighth, dredging of
rivers. Lastly, early warning mechanism. Moreover, the program activities in
emergency preparedness and risk reduction resulted to be responsive. Likewise, the
program activities in emergency response emphasized to be effective and
responsive. Similarly, in terms of program for rehabilitation and recovery confirmed
to be efficient. 7. It shows on F computation that there is distinction on responses
per barangay and DRR-DRM program for objectives, program resources, and
program activities in prevention and mitigation, disaster preparedness and risk
reduction, emergency response, and rehabilitation and recovery.
Recommendations
Based on the findings and conclusions, the following recommendations are made to
improved the current flood DRR-DRM program and for future research.
Prevention and Mitigation
1. Carry out more comprehensive vulnerability assessments to identify the risk and
7
hazard. Mapping is very effective as mitigation measures. Assessment of all physical
infrastructures, number & classification of people at risk, and hazard areas is very
significant to reduce risk 2. Incorporate the study of Disaster Risk Reduction in
formal school as part of the curriculum, so that at a young age students will be
educated on environmental awareness and its harmful effect. 3. Encourage multisectoral participation in DRR-DRM program and activities. Ex. School to conduct
socio-civil activities about flood disaster. Companies to participate in tree planting
or environmental activities. 4. Educate the barangay officials and volunteers about
the DRR and their role in the community. Further, encourage them to participate in
the training about DRR. Training must be periodic and barangay must have an
evaluation, assessment and inventory of human physical resources. 5. Aside from
the CCTV installed in the community the LGU and barangay is also encouraged to
put up a visible public address system (i.e. megaphone) that will serve as early
warning device at the community level. 6. Installations of flood control system in

strategic areas are encouraged. Most especially on those low lying barangays near
the main water ways. 7. The purchased and installations of disaster management
medical kits and box to barangays are suggested. 8. The continuous programs of
the city in reclogging of canals, drainage and sewerage systems should be
encouraged. 9. The rehabilitation and reclamation of Bitukang Manok River are
strongly suggested or the creation of new water ways connected to Marikina river
are suggested to reduce the impact of floods within the city. 10. Activation,
formation and empowerment of BDRRCC, BDRRCO, and volunteers are strongly
suggested to each barangay.
Emergency Preparedness and Risk Reduction
11. Encourage the community to build their own capacity by establishment
community disaster group link to barangay and LGU that will monitor disaster in
their area. 12. Conduct more trainings, seminars, and drills to the community base
about the disaster risk reduction. Information dissemination of leaflets, journal,
caricature, and cartoonist is significant. 13. Encourage the community to participate
in the activities and training conducted in the community level. Most likely required
member (at least one per family) to undergo training on first aid and basic life
support. 14. Encourage the people to volunteer in disaster risk reduction and
disaster risk management. 15. Develop a policy of coordination among departments
and agency involved in LDRRMC. Emphasize a bottom up decentralized approach
about DRM-DRR program. 16. Build a coordination capacity from the Pasig City local
government to other neighboring cities, communities and national government. We
remember that Local government code give local autonomy to each LGU, these
hampered the coordination due to different policies and strategies imposed in each
city. However, links between the cities is very important in order to notify each other
of the
plan about DRR. No one can stand on their own disaster needs a multi sectoral
and
partnership approach in order to lessen the vulnerability. 17. The flood management
plan must specifically identify the source of fund and the process how it should be
tap.
Emergency Response
18. Secure of master list of areas families and individuals that are in high risk or
prone to disaster. 19. It is suggested to have an annual inventory of physical
resources and capacity of all barangay to determine their needs in disaster
response and preparedness.

10
NDRM, (2000)
Natural Disast
er Risk Management in the Philippines: Enhancing Poverty Alleviation
through Disaster Reduction
33822 Vol. 1, The World Bank East Asia and pacific Region Rural Development,
National Disaster Coordination Council, republic of the Philippines NDRRMP (2011)
National Disaster Risk Reduction
and Management Plan 20112028
DILG-Resources-2012116-420ac59e31.pdf (PDF Downloadable @ DILG Website)
Romero, Alexis (2012)
Monsoon death toll hits 65

The Philippine Star, Vol XXVII No. 15, August 11, 2012. Rabonza Glenn J (2009)
NDCC UPDATE FINAL Report
on Tropical Storm Ondoyand
Typhoon
Pepeng, Glide No. TC
-2009-000205-PHL and Glide No. TC2009-000214-PHL,(September 24-27 and
September 30-October 10, 2009) National Disaster Coordinating Council. National
Disaster management Center, Camp Gen. Emilio Aguinaldo, Quezon City
Philippines. Pasig City Profile (2010) Pasig City Hall.
C. Online Database/Internet Website
Abat, Crispina B. (2006) Asian Conference on Disaster Reduction 2006, Manual
[Online] Available PPT, March 15 to 17, 2006. (Date Retrieved November 2012)
http://www.adrc.asia
/acdr/2006seoul/documents/006bcountry_presen/Philippines.pdf Ceph.org (2012)
Outcome Assessment for School
and Program Effectiveness: Linking Planning and

Evaluation to Mission, Goals and objectives

(Date Retrieved December 2012) http://www.ceph.org
/pdf/LinkingProgramEvaluationtoMission.pdf Duque, Atty. Priscilla P. (2005).

Disaster management and critical issues on disaster Risk reduction in the

Philippines
paper presented at
International Workshop on Emergency Response and Rescue
,
October 31 ~ November 1, 2005.
http://ncdr.nat.gov.tw/iwerr/doc/pdf/S10%20PDF/s10-4%20ATTY..pdf Disaster Risk
Profile (2012) Philippines GFDRR (Available Online PDF File)
http://gfdrr.org/ctrydrmnotes/Philippines.pdf Dimaandal, Marianito (2010) Executive
Order No. 888, Office of the President [Official Gazette Online] Available PPP
http://www.ndrrmc.gov.ph/ attachments/048EO%20888% 20SNAP.pdf FEMA (2013)
Ready Campaign (Date Retrieved: January 2013) http://www.ready.gov/floods Forces
of Nature TQ 2000: Flooding.
http://library.thinkquest.org/C003603/english/flooding /index.shtml (Date Retrieved:
November 2012) Geronimo Gian C. (2012),
P5 billion for immediate
flood-control projects approved by
NEDA
GMA News (September 5, 2012) http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story /272718/
news/nation/p5-billion-for-immediate-flood-control-projects-approved-by-neda
Guidelines on Mainstreaming DRR in Subnational Development Land Use Planning.
(Available Online, Date Retrieved November 2012)
http://www.neda.gov.ph/references/Guidelines/DRR/Guidelines%20on
%20Mainstreaming%20DRR%20in%20Subnational%20Development%20Land
%20Use%20Planning.pdf Hyogo Framework for Actions: Philippines,(2008) An HFA
Monitor update published by Prevention
Webhttp://www.preventionweb.net/files/7495_Philippines.pdf HFA, (2005) Hyogo
Framework for Actions 2005-2015
World Conference on Disaster Reduction,
January 18-22 2005, Kobe, Hyogo, Japan [Online] Available PFP
www.unisdr.orgDirectory: ISDRhttp://www.adaptationlearning.net/sites/default/

files/Hyogo-framework-for-action-english.pdf Local Government Code (1991)

http://ppp.gov.ph/wpcontent/uploads/2010/11/The-Local-Government-of-thePhilippines.pdf
NDCC (2007) History of Disaster Management in the Philippines (Date Retrieved
October 2012)http://www.ndcc.gov.ph/ndcc/index.php?module=pagemaster&
PAGE_user_op=view_print... National Geographic Website (2012). News Letter on
Floods, (Date Retrieved: December
2012)http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/ environment/naturaldisasters/floods-profile/
Nacmara, Cartel (2002) Basic Guide for Program Evaluation
Austenticity Consulting, LLC. (Date Retrieved October 2012)

11
http://www.tgci.com/magazine /A%20Basic% 20Guide%20to%20Program
%20Evaluation.pdf NDRRMC Website (2012) National Disaster Risk Reduction and
Management Council Portal Update, http://www.ndrrmc.gov.ph/ NCBI Resources
(2012)
Monitoring Unit
-Based Innovations: A Process Evaluation
Approach
(Date retrieved October 2012) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov /pubmed/8345878
Macaraig, Mynardo (2012)

Philippine floods a man-made disaster

experts,
Philippine Daily Inquirer, August 9th, 2012.
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/246867/philippine-floods-a-man-made-disaster-experts
MDG (2012)
Millennium Development Goals:
Philippines

(Date Retrieved November

2012)http://www.indexmundi.com/philippines/millennium-development-goals.html
Official Gazette (2012)

NEDA Board approves 11 projects for flood control, bridges, transportation, &
energy

Office of the President, MalacanangPalace

,
http://www.gov.ph/2012/09/04/neda-board-approves-11-projects-for-flood-controlbridges-transportation-energy/ PAGASA DOST Website (
2012)
Definition And
Nature Of Flood
http://kidlat.pagasa.dost.gov.ph/ genmet/floods/def_nature.html RA No. 10121
(2010)
Philippine Disaster Risk Management Act of 2010,
http://download-88flood.www.gov.tw/otherReC/file/045_RA%2010121.pdf
PIA (2012)
Flood Hazard Map Of Pasig City Quadrangle

Philip pine Information Agency, Media Center Building, Visayas Ave, Diliman, Quezon
City, Philippine http://www.pia.gov.ph/news/ hazzard. php?
geomap=pasig&regmap=NC Philippine Development Plan (2011) 2011-2016.
(Online) Available at Adobe Reader http://www.neda.gov.ph/PDP/rm/pdprm20112016.pdf
Public Affair Branch (2012) Program evaluation
Methods: Measurements and Attribution of Program Results. Third Edition, Review
Practice and Studies Government Review and Quality Branch Treasury Board of
Canada, Secretariat, Minister of Government Service http://www.tbssct.gc.ca/cee/pubs/meth/pem-mep-eng.pdf REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9729 (2009)

"Climate Change Act of 2009". http://www.chanrobles.com

/republicacts/republicactno9729.php
Santos, Kara (2013)
Philippines Floods Prompt
Climate Action, January 11, 2013,

Inter Press Service(Online)http://www.ipsnews.net/2012/08/philippines-floodsprompt-climateaction/

Salazar, Tessa R. (2012) Bad
habits, overdevelopment caused Metro floods, say
analysts.
August 18, 2012, Philippine Daily Inquirer
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/246867/philippine-floods-a-man-made-disaster-experts
Sardar Sarovar Narvada Nigam Limited (2012)
Disast
er Management Plan-2012, Flood Memorandum2012
, Sardar Sarovar Narvada Nigam Limited. Gandhinagar 382010 Block No. 12, ground
Floor, Sardar Bhavan, Gandhinaar, Government of Gurat, Indonesia PA 21 (2008)
The Philippine Agenda 21, www.emb.gov.ph
UNISDR (2009).
2009 UNISDR Terminology on Disaster
Ge
neva: UNISDR. (United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction
http://unisdr.org/files/7817_UNISDRTerminologyEnglish.pdf . United Nations Office for
Disaster Risk Reduction
(UNISDR)(2009).
New Legislation in the Philippines places Disaster Risk Reduction as the first line of
defense against climate change
risks

http://www.unisdr.org/archive/11516 VUSS, (2012)

Introduction to Disaster Management
(Date Retrieved November 2012) Virtual University for Small States of
Commonwealth Version 1.0, 1055
http://www.col.org/SiteCollectionDocuments/Disaster_Management_version_1.0.pdf
Webster Online Dictionary (2013) Urban Planning
(Date Retrieved, February 2013) http://www.websterdictionary.org/definition/urban
%20planning World Population Prospects: The 2007 Revision (database). Population
Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations
Secretariat. http://esa.un.org/unup

12
World Health Organization. (2013)
Flooding and
communicable diseases fact sheet Risk assessment and p
reventive measures

(Date Retrieved February 23, 2013)

http://www.who.int /hac/techguidance/ems/flood_cds/en/

D. Related Studies (Published/Unpublished)

Anderson, Mary B. (1993). Lessons learned in Rehabilitation of population Displaced
by Disaster and policy Implications of these Lessons for programs to Assist the Mt.
Pinatubo Victims, Mt. Pinatubo Rehabilitation options and Alternatives Research
Study Project, No. 492-0432, Philippine Business for Social Science
(Published;AvailableOnline)http://www.bahaistudies.net/asma/in_search_of_alternati
ves.pdf
Chhetri, Dr. Meen B. Poudyal, (2008) Disaster Management In Nepal: A Review (a

country paper presented). Ministry of Home Affairs, Disaster Relief Section,

SinghaDurbar, Kathmandu, Nepal. (International Research Published) Co, Jason
Christopher Ramos (2010) Community-Driven Disaster Intervention (Human
Settlements Working paper Series: Climate Change and Cities25) September, 2010
(PublishedOnline)
http://www.sdinet.org/media/upload/documents/HSWP2010Rayos.pdf De Leon, Juan
Carlos Villagran, Et Al. (2006)
Eval
uation of the capacity Building Programme for Natural Disaster Reduction (CBNDR)
in Central America and the Caribbean (Available Online) Internal Oversight Service
Evaluation Section. IOS/EVS/PI68
Gil, Sharon (2010) Making Social Networks, Work
Post-Ondoy Flood Management In Metro Manila, Philippines. Asian Development
Bank (Master Thesis, Unpublished Report)
Noson, Linda (2012) Hazard Mapping and Risk
Assessme
nt. Igional Workshop on
Best Practices in Disaster Mitigation [(Published Online) Date Retrieved
February2013] Linda Noson Associates,http://www.adpc.net/audmp/rllw
/PDF/hazard%20mapping.pdf
E. List of Interviewees Dr. Neil Britton
ADBs Principal Disaster Risk Manage
ment Specialist, Regional and Sustainable Development Department (RSDD), Asian
Development Bank (ADB), Philippines
Mr. Von Ong
Head, PRC- Pasig/Pateros Branch Philippine Red Cross-Rizal Chapter
Mr. Richie Van Angeles
Head, Local Disaster Risk Reduction Management Office and Member, LDRRMC,
Pasig City Hall
City Hall Employees
Department of Engineering Department of Planning Local Government of Pasig

Barangay Captains, Councillors, BDRRC, and Volunteers,

Barangay Officials 2012 Local Government of Pasig