THE persistent flooding in Metro Manila, exacerbated by Typhoon Carina, has brought to light a critical oversight: our flood-control strategies are simply not working. It’s time we confront this harsh reality head-on.
The urgency for long-term disaster prevention and mitigation cannot be overstated; yet it seems we’re dragging our feet. And when billions are poured into these initiatives, it begs the question: Are these funds being utilized effectively?
President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr.’s recent State of the Nation Address (Sona) boasted 5,500 flood-control projects with more underway—a staggering number that should yield results. However, as House Speaker Romualdez points out, without proper accountability for this financial outlay, how can we ensure real progress?
The calamity facing Metro Manila is not new; it’s a chronic issue that has plagued us since Typhoon Ondoy over a decade ago. Senate President Francis “Chiz” G. Escudero rightly calls for an investigation into this enduring problem.
While government efforts are visible through numerous projects and budget allocations earmarked for the 2025 national budget, what remains invisible are the tangible results on ground zero where Filipinos continue to wade through life-threatening floods year after year.
In our pursuit of resilience against climate-induced floods, we often find ourselves caught in a paradox: the very solutions we implement to protect communities can inadvertently exacerbate vulnerabilities. As highlighted by Dr. Pamela Cajilig, from the University of the Philippines’ College of Architecture, our current approach to flood control predominantly revolves around structural interventions—sea walls, dykes, and flood barriers. These measures aim to shield us from rising tides and inundation. However, they often overlook the intricate dance between nature and human settlements.
Maladaptation occurs when well-intentioned actions lead to unintended consequences. Consider the case of seawalls. While they protect coastal communities, they can inadvertently trap water and debris on their landward side, disrupting natural flow patterns. Similarly, expanding old flood barriers may inadvertently flood fields and compromise soil fertility.
Dr. Cajilig rightly points out that we are missing the bigger picture. Our focus tends to be short-term and intervention-centric. We build, construct, and move on without adequately considering long-term impacts. Communities—the very ones affected—are left out of the decision-making process. As a result, we perpetuate vulnerabilities rather than addressing them comprehensively.
To achieve climate justice, we must rethink our strategies. It’s time to shift from flood control to flood adaptation.
Meanwhile, Rep. Francisco “Kiko” Benitez, chair of the House Committee on Housing and Urban Development, has rightly emphasized the need for “biophilic urbanism” – an approach that integrates nature-based solutions into our urban fabric. But what does this mean, and how can we translate it into actionable policies?
Biophilic urbanism is more than a buzzword; it’s a paradigm shift that recognizes the intrinsic connection between humans and the natural world. It goes beyond mere green spaces and parks; it’s about weaving nature into the very fabric of our cities.
Imagine streets lined with trees, rooftop gardens, and permeable surfaces. Biophilic streets act as “green corridors,” allowing rainwater to percolate into the soil, replenishing aquifers and reducing flooding. These streets become vital components of what we call “sponge cities.”
Republic Act No. 6716, enacted in 1989, laid the groundwork for rainwater harvesting in the Philippines. It mandates the construction of water wells, rainwater collectors, and spring development in every barangay. However, implementation has been uneven. It’s time to revisit this law, ensuring that rainwater harvesting becomes a standard practice in our urban areas.
Biophilic urbanism encourages us to think beyond concrete and steel. Can we retrofit buildings with green roofs? Can we create urban wetlands that filter pollutants and provide habitat for wildlife? These solutions not only enhance resilience but also improve our well-being.
While the House has taken steps by passing bills on urban greening and climate adaptation, we must prioritize their implementation. It’s not just about aesthetics; it’s about survival. Here are some things, we can and should do:
-Enforce RA 6716: Let’s ensure that rainwater harvesting infrastructure becomes a reality in every barangay. Communities should actively participate in maintaining these facilities.
-Raise awareness about biophilic urbanism. Involve architects, urban planners, and citizens in designing resilient, nature-friendly cities.
-Offer incentives for green building practices. Tax breaks, expedited permits, and density bonuses can encourage developers to embrace biophilic design.
Biophilic urbanism isn’t a luxury; it’s a necessity. Let’s transform our cities into vibrant, resilient ecosystems where people and nature thrive together. The time to act is now – for our sake and for generations to come.
