In ecology, the term ‘resilience’ is used to mean the ability of populations to rebound after a shock to the system. Some microbial ecologists (myself included) think that populations exposed to minor shocks are better equipped to handle the once-in-a-lifetime, catastrophic shocks. It’s the scientific form of the adage “What doesn’t kill you makes you better,” I suppose.
By that theory, Filipinos should be among the most resilient people in the world. We have handled minor shocks and major body blows throughout our history as a nation. We’ve had revolutions, coups, a legacy of corruption, and the curse of poverty afflicting a large segment of our population. We’ve had incompetent, self-serving, and criminal government leaders. Our people are used to being poor — to living in inhumane conditions, to not knowing where the next meal is coming from, to being lied to and used for the enrichment and self-aggrandizement of politicians. We’ve taken a continuous stream of body blows, we don’t even know what competent honest government is. Our expectations are so low, and our national moral compass so off, that most have given up. “Let’s just vote for the trapo least likely to raid the national coffers. It is what it is. There is no use to rant and rave. Nothing will change.”
But change is something we have done before, and change we must, if we are to survive through a catastrophe of another storm. Ondoy has reminded us who is boss, and it’s not the politician and not the government leader. This latest shock was bigger than any man-made institution or engineered system. The most we can do is to understand it, plan for it, and prepare for it. The most we can do, now that the waters have receded, is to adapt and change.
Understanding
We need to understand that the threat of stronger storms bringing higher precipitation will only increase in the future because of global climate change. The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has noted that Southeast Asia will experience an “increase in the frequency of intense precipitation events,” and “extreme rainfall and winds associated with tropical cyclones are likely to increase in Southeast Asia” (IPCC Assessment Report, p. 879; http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-chapter11.pdf). There are no easy fixes for global climate change. In general, lowering global climate emissions will take years to have an effect, and need the concerted efforts of the international community. This means the Philippines will just have to adapt.
One of the compounding factors is the fact that a portion of Metro Manila is already below sea level. In addition, Metro Manila is sinking. This subsidence is the result of overpumping of groundwater aquifers, which also leads to saltwater intrusion into groundwater. The increased need for freshwater, because of an increasing population, has resulted in greater risks to more people.
Planning
Given the scenarios painted above, we need to ask if Metro Manila is a sustainable city. With a population of 12 million, and given the demands on water, power, land, housing, transport systems, and other infrastructure needs — can Metro Manila remain a viable city — with adequate living conditions for everyone, with some assurance of disaster prevention and mitigation? I believe the answer is no. I think Metro Manila has to be planned with a lower population, which means that other urban centers have to be promoted. This requires increasing commercial, industrial, and government activity in areas outside of Metro Manila, to encourage people to live and work in these new urban areas.
This repopulation policy will have net positive effects. First, development can occur in a more rational way. Previously developed land that is sensitive, prone to disasters, and in general not habitable should be re-purposed to serve as parks, open areas, and buffer zones. These include land portions near waterways, flood plains, riverbanks, and other low-lying areas. How this can be achieved is a matter of government policy — something economists can think about (e.g., the government buying land, tax incentives for relocating, etc.)
Second, a lower population density means less stress on infrastructure, such as mass transport, bridges, and roads. Witness the faster traffic on EDSA during holidays, when most people are in the provinces. This will translate to an increased lifespan of infrastructure due to the greater ability to meet current and future capacity. Third, such decentralization of political, social, and economic power from Metro Manila would likely lead to higher incomes in rural areas. If there are economic and social opportunities in areas outside of Metro Manila, younger people will feel less pressure to move to “the big city,” but would feel more compelled to stay in their hometowns. The goal then is to create a positive feedback mechanism that will stabilize the growth of the big cities and spur the economic growth in the “countryside.”
Typhoon Ondoy/Ketsana created a disaster but also created a unique chance to rebuild the Philippine landscape. We now know which areas do not have a chance against super typhoons. We know that rebuilding in these areas, even with engineered safeguards against flooding, is folly. No amount of flood control will contain the increasing precipitation brought about by global climate change. Our previous one-in-a-hundred years flood/precipitation will now happen every 10 years, with the same resulting damage to commercial and private property. We have to accept this and be smarter about where to live and work. We can think of Ondoy/Ketsana as catastrophe, but we can also thank him (her?) for this unique chance to get a do-over. Let’s make a new Metro Manila, one that is adaptive to nature, but also one that gives us the best chance to promote a higher quality of life for everyone, especially the poor who always bear the brunt of these disasters. This new plan will also decentralize the economy, and decrease the gap between the rich and the poor.
The vision of a new Metropolis will pay attention to sustainable living. It will have sustainable power, drinking water, sanitation, transportation, and other infrastructure systems. It will pay attention to storm water issues, land use planning, and be judicious of when to use concrete and when to use plants, soil, trees, and forest cover. It will consider the water and nutrient cycles, and will lead to cleaner air, water, and land. Similar concepts will govern land development in the new urban centers. Instead of one big, overpopulated, and dirty Metro Manila, we will have sustainable and green metropolitan centers all over the Philippines.
Preparation
Despite these ‘utopian’ ideas, it will be inevitable that typhoons will still lead to flooding and other natural disasters. There is a need to ensure adequate emergency response everywhere in the country, but especially in high density areas like Metro Manila. A proper emergency plan would include logical evacuation plans (where will residents go? through which roads?), adequate weather monitoring (we need a Doppler now, and while we’re at it — updated satellite monitoring), an efficient public notification system, and adequate rescue material and trained personnel. We need to run “catastrophe models.” What would happen if we get a one-in-one-hundred years rainfall? One-in-two-hundred years? How should the flood control structures be operated? We need to use these model results to guide where investments should be made. These models need data, which come from having a monitoring system. I hope that a GIS/hydrology expert looks at the spatial flooding pattern over time with Ondoy — where the water rose the fastest, and where are the chokepoints for waterflow. All these require funds and manpower, but I submit that we have the brainpower to do this. I can imagine the many dissertations that can come out of our universities with these topics. I can envision Filipino scientists and engineers here and abroad collaborating to tackle these problems.
Some final thoughts
We are a resilient people. In the last two months, we have seen the Filipino Bayanihan spirit once again, as young and old volunteers staffed rescue centers, packed food, brought supplies, and helped clean the city. We can rebuild. I would just like to offer a way of looking at how and where to rebuild. We cannot rebuild to go back to what it was on Sept. 25, 2009. We have to rebuild while thinking of the future, and what’s best for the people.
* * *
Francis L. de los Reyes III is an Associate Professor of Environmental Engineering at North Carolina State University. He conducts research and teaches classes in environmental biotechnology, biological waste treatment, and molecular microbial ecology. He is on the editorial board of Water Research, was a 2008 Balik-Scientist of the DOST, and is a 2009 TED Fellow. He is a member of the Philippine-American Academy of Scientists and Engineers. Email: fldelosr@eos.ncsu.edu