Government programs are hobbled by financial constraints. Funding support for watershed management has been insufficient to cover all important watersheds. It will take 280 years to reforest given the average budget allocation of about PhP300 million for reforestation in the past 10 years.30 Thus, more funds should be allocated, to prioritize watersheds that support irrigated lands. The implementation of National Sewerage and Septage Management Program by the DPWH has also been slow due to lack of funds to meet the large investment needed for infrastructure development.
As for CCA, putting in place adaptation measures also requires financial resources. The Philippines continues to uphold the UNFCCC principle of common and differentiated responsibilities to hold on to the agreement that Annex I countries will extend financial assistance over and above the level of development assistance. Developed countries are required under the Convention to provide new and additional resources, either through bilateral, multilateral or regional funding mechanisms, to meet the agreed costs of developing countries in complying with their obligations as well. The country, however, cannot be dependent on these funds.
The National Environmental Economic and Development Study (NEEDS) 2010 on the inventory of financial flows showed that grants to the environment, agriculture, biodiversity, energy, CCA, health, and water supply and sanitation address only a given problem or requirement, like solid waste management, resource conservation, production constraints, biodiversity loss, Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions, institutional capacity, outbreak of infectious diseases, and water shortages. The grants received have moreover been limited in scope and geographic coverage. The restricted project scale, for instance, could be seen in an integrated area project covering at most only one or few cities or municipalities, a watershed or ecosystem, or of a nationwide scale but focused only on a few provinces or interregional areas. Limited geographical coverage result in project benefits being confined to particular area niches, a project piloting mode of introducing change, an inability to scale up, and turfing among country donors and multilateral agencies (EMB-DENR, 2010).
The NEEDS study concluded the budgetary resources set aside by the Philippine Government for CCA have been inadequate. The larger budgetary share of disaster management from 2003 to 2008 did not represent proactive efforts to mitigate the expected damages and risks from natural disasters but merely reflected the postdisaster relief and rehabilitation expenditures.
The budget for DRR, particularly those appropriated as Calamity Fund in the GAA, still reflects the response-oriented perspective of traditional disaster management. The DRRM Act (RA 10121) already explicitly provides for the change in the nature of the calamity fund making it more appropriate for DRR use as the NDRRMF. Government budget allocations for DRR should be clearly delineated so that aid from international financial institutions can be directed to where it is really needed. It is also critical to determine the extent and manner of obtaining funding from other stakeholders and partners in order to finance DRR activities, especially costly structural measures.
While good results from DRR projects and activities have provided opportunities for sound practices to take root, existing organizational and societal structures do not necessarily allow positive values to thrive. Sustaining mechanisms such as making DRR a regular budget item, strengthening PPP, creating incentives for disaster risk-reducing behaviour, recognizing and replicating best practice, instilling risk awareness at all levels of government, in households, firms and workplaces should be part of a general strategic plan.
The inadequacy of financing for the enforcement of laws and policies is an important continuing concern. Several studies and initiatives have been undertaken to measure the costs of user's activities on natural resources, assessing the feasibility of generating funds for their management. ENR agencies however continue to rely largely on administrative services for regulation rather than on market-based instruments.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________