LessonsLearntTyphoons Philippines GroupeURD
LessonsLearntTyphoons Philippines GroupeURD
CHAPTER 1
A number of key lessons emerged from the Real-time Evaluation of the response to the
disasters that affected Northern Mindanao in 2011. Further lessons were drawn from a review
of the impact of the floods that hit Manila in 2009 and the aid mobilization that followed. This
made it possible to combine two levels of analysis, covering the following situations which
could potentially affect the Filipino Archipelago:
- Floods in very large cities, particularly long-lasting floods which affect urban planning
and the emergency response capacity;
- Floods in smaller urban contexts, where small- to medium-scale funding is required,
but where speed is important.
Signal #1
winds of 30–60 km/h (20-35 mph) are expected to occur within 36 hours
Signal #2
winds of 60–100 km/h (40-65 mph) are expected to occur within 24 hours
Signal #3
winds of 100–185 km/h, (65-115 mph) are expected to occur within 18 hours.
Signal #4
winds of at least 185 km/h, (115 mph) are expected to occur within 12 hours.
The critical role of the municipal authority should be underlined. Though Iligan’s disaster
management team was mobilized at the alert stage even before the Washi/ Sendong typhoon
made its landfall, this was not at all the case in the Center for Disaster Preparedness (CDP),
leading to delays and inconsistency in the response. Each city or municipal entity is made up
of several “barangays”, the lowest level of political organization in the Philippines, which are
primarily responsible for addressing management concerns within their geographical
jurisdiction as stipulated in the national strategy.
In cases where the scale of a disaster is too big for community resources to cope, the LGU
takes over or provides the necessary support. Politics is never very far in the Philippines.
Being with the right party makes all the difference in terms of resource allocation and political
support. It can also affect aid distribution at the sub-area level. There is still need for training
of Mayors and municipal councils on humanitarian principles. When a disaster triggered by
an extreme natural event, or even a relatively less extreme event, takes place in an area where
conflict is either just below the surface or veritably happening in nearby areas, care needs to
be taken to make sure humanitarian aid does not fuel the conflict, but rather contributes to
alleviating it.
Civil society groups such as the Citizen Disaster Response Centre (CDRC) and many national
or local NGOs are also very involved in disaster prevention (for instance through the “stop
illegal logging” campaign) and in disaster response through very dynamic networks of
volunteers.
The Philippine Red Cross is also a key actor both because of its strong decentralized capacity
but also thanks to the international support it can receive rapidly from the International Red
Cross and Red Crescent Movement.
Improved coordination
Two institutions play a vital role in coordinating the response.
DSWD-DROMIC
The DSWD’s Disaster Response Operations Monitoring and Information Center
(DROMIC) monitors the affected areas, populations and displacement in flood-
affected municipalities.
NDRRMC
The National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (NDRRMC)
monitors the impact of flooding as a result of the heavy rains brought about by
climatic events (see: www.ndcc.gov.ph).
There has been considerable progress in the way the international and Filipino systems
collaborate to respond to the frequent disasters in the Philippines. From the relatively chaotic
Ondoi response to the more orderly Sendong one, some key features have emerged. In most
parts of Metro Manila, there are now alert systems, which have 3 phases (alert, early warning
and evacuation warning). Part of the coastal area is becoming more protected. There is a clear
understanding at the highest level of the authorities that an insufficiently efficient and badly
coordinated response is always paid for on the political front. There are still opportunities to
improve it during the early days of the operations, when the request from the government for
international help is still being prepared. In 2012, several inefficient mechanisms were still in
place, such as the food and livelihoods clusters, which had not yet been merged.
Civil society support for national and local disaster management institutions is essential and
regularly proves absolutely critical during the first month.
6
Key recommendations
At the international level:
Pre disaster warning is essential. In Metro Manila, the residents were caught unaware by
Typhoon Ondoi. The alert system did not function much for Sendong, even though rescue
teams were in position by late afternoon in Iligan.
Early warning and Alert systems should be in place and evacuation exercises
should be practiced regularly
Evacuees in evacuation centres are not IDPs. They are often living a few hundred meters from
their former houses and all their networks are still there. Their urban culture makes them
specific. Treating them and calling them IDPs triggers an “assistance reflex” which can be
quite detrimental to their own resilience and capacities.
Managing evacuation centres in urban settings is not the same as managing camps. The whole
Camp Coordination and Camp Management system, including the Displaced Tracking
Matrice (DTM) is largely irrelevant due to the fluidity of situations, people’s mobility and the
temporary nature of these evacuation centres.
The use of the classical IDP category in urban settings produces inaccurate
situation analysis and inappropriate response mechanisms. Evacuees should be
treated as urban residents who have temporarily sought a safe haven.
The ECHO supported REACH-ACTED study underlined the potential of reconstruction and
rehabilitation. This should be given priority rather than concentrating energy and resources on
relocation with temporary sites and transitional shelters.
Legal issues linked to forensic medicine and the management of dead bodies, but also
people’s registration and reproduction of identity papers and land, property and housing
documents are crucial issues to manage properly. The initiative of the Protection cluster to
field a person to look into this issue should be commended.
Relocation of affected people outside of their areas of origin should be the last option, when
all the others have been explored. When it is deemed necessary, enough space inside and
outside the houses should be ensured. Specific attention should be given to livelihood
opportunities. Otherwise, as proved in many other contexts and as is already taking place in
post Ondoi relocation sites in Laguna and Antipolo areas, the relocation process will not be
sustainable and people will move back to the city system.
All the measures that could limit the need to relocate people far from their homes
and their livelihoods should be given top priority.
DRR measures are necessary, as long as proper risk analysis is carried out. In Cagayan de Oro
and Iligan, it was not the typhoon, nor the rain which killed most people; it was the high speed
wave of water carrying heavy logs. It was more a man-made rather than a natural disaster and
the root causes should be treated by DRR measures, not only the symptoms.
A no-build zone (NBZ) should only be imposed if it does not complicate the situation further.
In fact, in both Cagayan de Oro and Iligan, the size of the NBZ could have been reduced to a
minimum if proper river course management and embankment protection work was done.
This would be much more efficient and socially accepted than a full size no build zone which
is not likely to function well, but rather will create many social and livelihood problems.
7
Proper DRR measures are always the result of in-depth situation and risk
analysis. These analyses should be given enough weight in the decision-making
process.
The future
In order to be look ahead to future disaster management in the Philippines, the “worst case
scenario” was discussed in Manila with the head of the Office of Civil Defense (OCD): a
large-scale earthquake hits Metro Manila, inducing a tsunami in the middle of the Typhoon
season. It was clear in the discussions that this scenario had been discussed at length within
the relevant circles among Filipino stakeholders. However, neither the Command Center of
the OCD, nor even the offices or houses where OCD staff work and live are able to withstand
a magnitude 7 earthquake. The only structure which has been built to do so is the Military
Headquarters Operations Centre. This should be a source of concern.
In many areas, the initial response (search and rescue, distribution of basic survival goods for
the first few days) seems to have improved with the development of preparedness and alert
systems. However this is dependent on clear involvement by national and local institutions.
When this is missing, as seen in Cagayan de Oro after Sendong, the situation remains chaotic
for a longer period as problems tend to become bigger and more complex in urban contexts.
8
The Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB) is in charge of mapping risk. It has produced a
map locating the flood prone areas in Metro Manila (see map below). Areas shaded in blue
are affected by a 50-100 year flood cycle while
those in yellow are affected by a 2-5 year flood
cycle.
When the
dams broke, the water was transformed into a high
kinetic wave full of heavy logs which were
transported at high speed downstream. When crossing
inhabited areas, this phenomenon had an effect
similar to that of a tsunami.
The Geoscience division of the Mine and Geology Bureau had a map of the areas at risk of
flooding in the Cagayan de Oro area and the whole Misamis Oriental region. Areas at risk
were clearly delineated on this map.
12
CHAPTER 2
1. Response to Ketsana/Ondoi
1.1. Immediate response
a) Local population and National Authorities
The fact that typhoon Ketsana/Ondoi impacted Metro Manila meant that the highest level of
the State and the National system were both respondents and victims. Government agencies
responded swiftly to the storm, launching extensive search and rescue operations and
releasing emergency relief stocks. However, the extensive damage caused by the floods meant
that the capacities of many local and national agencies were exhausted. Rapidly, solidarity
between neighbours became a lifeline. Rescuers came with boats and ropes to evacuate people
stranded on roofs to take them to evacuation centres (schools, gymnasiums, covered public
and private squares). Nearly 700.000 people were sheltered in 726 evacuation centres, with
another 350,000 people receiving Government assistance outside them. The strong
involvement of volunteers of all kinds (the Philippine Red Cross and civil society networks)
and of the private sector resulted in the mobilization and distribution of essential relief goods:
bottled water, food and blankets. Relief operations were slowed down by the size of the area
and the logistical difficulties involved in getting goods to many areas which remained under
water for a number of weeks. Assessment of the damage and needs was made difficult due to
the destruction of the archives of many local institutions whose offices were under water.
b) United Nations system
Immediately after the request for international aid from the National Authorities was received
by the UN Resident Coordinator, a UNDAC team was deployed to assist with the first phase
of the assessments (Primary Scenario Definition), support the launch of the flash appeal
(which was quite well funded) and support the initial coordination. At the time of the event,
there was no OCHA office in country and the operations were initially managed by the
regional office for Asia and the Pacific in Bangkok. Although funding was received promptly,
OCHA was only able to establish an office two and a half months after the disaster. It was
understaffed and therefore not very effective in managing the cluster system and the
development of the revised flash appeal (far less supported).
c) NGOs
A lot of development NGOs were present in the Philippines, working in agricultural projects
in the provinces or on child issues, especially in Manila. The few humanitarian agencies that
were present were involved in dealing with the consequences of the armed conflict in
Mindanao, but this had become increasingly difficult. The humanitarian agencies who
deployed teams after the disaster functioned in a largely disconnected way from the local
authorities.
13
1.3. Coordination
In Manila, as frequently observed in capital cities, pre-disaster anticipation of response
coordination between international organizations was virtually non-existent. Before the
disaster, the main urban issue at stake was urban development and humanitarian coordination
was largely devoted to the Mindanao situation. There was no OCHA office in country and the
UN country team was reluctant to set one up, preferring instead to leave humanitarian
coordination in a remote regional OCHA office. The cluster system was not rolled out. It took
some time to get the OCHA office fully operational. In the relocation sites, negotiation, if not
coordination, with the Local Government Units (LGU) is a prerequisite.
15
2. Response to Washi/Sendong
2.1. The stakeholders in the response
The post-disaster situation in Cagayan De Oro and Iligan cities was such that immediate and
targeted humanitarian assistance was necessary to respond to the needs of the 471,000 people
affected by the typhoon.
National and local Authorities
The first response was the alert and prepositioning of teams. It worked relatively well in
Iligan, where rescue teams were positioned in different parts of the cities early in the evening
as a response to the typhoon alert from PAGASA. It worked far less effectively in Cagayan de
Oro where the alerts and warnings from PAGASA were not followed by effective actions.
During the night and in the early hours of Sunday,
people were rescued and sent to evacuation centres,
mainly schools, colleges and covered gymnasiums,
where people could be registered and catered for. As
of 18 December, 37 evacuation centres were
established, housing 44,311 individuals most of
whom had completely lost their houses from the
massive flooding. Displaced families remained in
these congested evacuation centres for up to 6 weeks.
The central Civil Defense force immediately sent
very strong teams (including several UNDAC-trained high-ranking staff) to support local
Civil Defense teams and the DSWSD, the national and local institution in charge of the
delivery of relief and the coordination of humanitarian assistance. DSWD kept receiving and
dispatching relief goods to the Evacuation Centres and had an office in all of them.
An update from the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (NDRRMC)
dated 19/12/2011 states that the Defence Secretary/Chairman of the NDRRMC has “accepted
the offer of assistance from the international humanitarian community thru the United Nations
Resident Coordinator and Humanitarian Coordination in the Philippines to the Philippine
government for the victims of Tropical Storm
Sendong.”
The President of the Philippines rapidly visited
the affected area to display national solidarity
with the victims. It is important to remember that
politics is never far from the surface in the
Philippines. Northern Mindanao is particularly
sensitive due to its proximity to the area affected
by the separatist /Muslim insurgency.
16
NGOs
The presence of International NGOs in the
response was much less visible a circus than in
other disasters. Local NGOs were extremely
active and present in the field. There was
significant mobilization of Filipino NGOs and
civil society networks. For instance, the
Community Response and Development Centre,
together with its local partners and networks of
Volunteers from other parts of Mindanao, was
very active in ensuring distribution of Non Food
Items in many parts of the affected areas in both
Cagayan de Oro and Iligan.
17
A consortium bringing together Accion Contra El Hambre, Spain (Lead), Save the Children
(SC), Plan International (PLAN) and CARE Netherlands received a large grant from DG
ECHO as well as contributions from donors such as Spanish Cooperation. OXFAM was part
of the HRC Consortium with a handful of local NGOs. Representatives of the Caritas family,
in particular CRS and other faith-based organizations (ADRA, World Vision) were also
present
The Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement
The operations centre of the Philippines Red Cross (PRC) society had been monitoring the
situation since Typhoon Washi/Sendong entered the Philippine territory, and issued advisories
and regular updates to its chapters in the projected
typhoon path. At the onset of the disaster, PRC swiftly
deployed emergency response units and Red Cross
143 volunteers in Cagayan de Oro and nearby
chapters. At the time, there were more than 600 Red
Cross staff and volunteers on the ground assessing the
situation and providing relief assistance.
Alongside rescue operations, the Cagayan de Oro,
Dumaguete and Iligan chapters provided hot meals to
2,333 persons and food items to 828 persons. PRC
also set up first aid and welfare desks at the evacuation
centres to provide necessary services to those affected.
IFRC initially dispatched 2,000 pre-positioned stocks
of non-food items from Manila. More items were to be dispatched for distribution in the
following days.
In addition, ICRC dispatched 3,000 hygiene kits, food items and non-food items from its
warehouse in Davao. There were plans to distribute food packages and relief supplies such as
blankets and sleeping mats. The national headquarters was coordinating response efforts
while continuing to monitor the situation.
The mobilization of Open Street Map producers
Immediately after the 17
December, several mapping
portals based on crowd-sourcing
were immediately initiated on
various fronts by a government
agency, academic institutions
and local bloggers in Iligan city.
In the first few days after the
disaster, the demand for updated
OSM data and maps was
somewhat limited because the
primary focus was on relief and
donations (and rightly so).
However, rapidly, it became
indispensable for both
coordination and urban
planning.
18
Data sets and maps which were already comprehensive prior to the disaster were shared with
several humanitarian groups involved in the disaster areas. The UN-OCHA Philippine
division responded and took interest in using Open Street Map data in their situational maps.
It became an indispensable tool for road data and a good resource for geo-referencing the
location of evacuation centres as provided by responders on the ground.
More and more humanitarian groups (MapAction, UN OCHA, International Organization for
Migration) were using the data created both by OSM and by satellite imagery as well as all
the basic geographic data provided by local networks of mappers, bloggers and other
specialized individuals who want to help organizations involved in the response on the
ground.
Worth noting is the very promising work done by the REACH project in identifying and
mapping all the destroyed houses for the Shelter Cluster. Deployed rapidly after the disaster,
REACH managed to provide data and maps on destructions in a very effective way in less
than a month.
2.4. Shelter
In Cagayan de Oro, most of the houses
and community facilities along the
riverbank were destroyed or damaged. In
Iligan, displaced families had set up
temporary roadside shelters. With almost
30,000 houses damaged or destroyed,
housing repair and reconstruction was a
priority, both to allow affected families to
rebuild their lives but also to relieve
overcrowding at the evacuation centres.
Not all affected individuals had sought
shelter in the evacuation centres. Other
families had started to return to their
homes. Many reported that their homes
had been washed away or were so damaged that they had been rendered uninhabitable.
Similarly, school structures had also been damaged and flooded and equipment, furniture and
books had been washed away.
20
In most instances, the affected population did not have the tools or materials to clean up or
repair their homes.
In these areas, there was an urgent need to provide IDPs with materials to repair their
damaged homes and promote safe and voluntary return to their places of origin or movement
to alternative transitional sites.
The provision of emergency shelter materials had already started to allow affected people to:
- either build temporary shelters on specific
sites in the city (like the ones in the photo
opposite which were built out of bamboo
near the San Xavier University)
2.5. Health
Floods damaged health facilities in riverside areas. The large reference hospitals in both
Gagayan de Oro and Iligan had not been affected by the floods and had been able to care for
the wounded people brought by either family members or Red Cross ambulances. Local
authorities, International agencies (especially MSF) and Civil Society Organisations in most
of the evacuation centres provided health services. A number of evacuation centres had no
dedicated health facilities. Initial reports indicated that the primary health concerns were
diarrheal and respiratory diseases, with the potential for outbreaks. These health issues were
all typical of temporary displacement in congested conditions in ill-equipped centres.
However, the culture of hygiene and cleanliness of the Philippines was strong enough to keep
a relatively high level of hygiene in the centres
A Leptospirosis epidemic, a potientially lethal disease, caused most concern. Displaced
populations were also in need of psychosocial support because of the massive destruction and
unexpected number of lives lost. Adults who had lost children, in particular, needed to be
under surveillance.
21
2.7.1. The post emergency phase: difficulties linked to relocation and no build zones
The real difficulties came with the post-emergency phase: What could be done for people who
had lost everything? Where should rebuilding take place? How big should the No Build Zone
be? How could complex land law and utilization-rights systems be approached to allow access
to an acceptable shelter solution for everyone?
A fully-fledged Post-Disaster Needs Assessment (PDNA) and a Damage And Loss
Assessment (DALA) were expected to be carried out at the time of the mission. The three
possible options were:
Returning to areas of origin (if these are not in the No Build Zone).
The work done by REACH made it possible to
identify people’s construction and rehabilitation
needs. This represented more than 40 % of the
population from the affected areas. Many people
were already moving back, as these were areas
where they were able to generate income, and
where they invested in land and property (some
had either land and houses, or houses built on
rented land). Returning to the area of origin was
often seen as a better option than being relocated to
faraway places.
23
Finding a place with relatives or renting or buying flats or houses in other areas of the
cities.
This was only possible for the richer segments of the affected population, especially the ones
who had connections with the very large overseas Filipino community which supported their
relatives with remittances.
Relocation to new sites: As areas close to rivers
remained exposed to future flash floods, No Build
Zones had been announced during the President’s
visit to the area on January 25th. Therefore,
permanent relocation of the families from the
“NBZ” areas was necessary. The feasibility of this
process raised some issues: The sites identified in
Cagayan de Oro - Lumbia and Cahanan - were far
from ideal. They were a long way from work places
and schools and would therefore impose high daily
transport costs. In addition, the permanent sites
were far from being ready. This potentially meant that the concerned population would have
to stay for an extended period of time in temporary or transitional shelters. The process of
establishing the permanent sites would probably be lengthy (despite promises) and agencies
had been asked to establish temporary sites with Transitional shelters. The sites visited in
CDO underlined some difficulties to be expected (compared with similar situations after
Hurricane Mitch in Central America and the earthquake of January 12, 2010 in Haiti).
Conflict prevention
The tensions of the conflict in Mindanao South are not far away, and in areas like Iligan,
especially in the remote rural areas affected by the typhoon, this factor of risk had to be taken
seriously into account.
The post-typhoon helicopter-borne relief operation carried out by UNHCR with the
Philippines’ Armed Forces was an interesting attempt to demonstrate that even in a situation
where there is a lot of tension, the principle of impartiality can still be applied, even though
military choppers had to be used.
24
2.8. Coordination
2.8.1. Strengths and weaknesses of the national and local coordination systems
In the Philippines, decentralization has been pushed so far that coordination necessarily passes
through the different levels of the administrative pyramid:
- National;
- Provincial
- Municipal or city (these are different types of status)
- Barangay
The staff sent by the central OCD level to support local institutions proved a very important
factor to improve coordination and LGU levels. These highly trained staff (often UNDAC
trainees) were able to set up operation centres rapidly and impose coordination on LGUs who
were sometimes not “up to the job”.
At all levels, the government institutionalized its own internal “cluster system”. This National
system brings all the line departments under the authority of the Mayor, who is assisted by the
DSWD and the local head of Civil Defense.
To improve the coordination of relief goods, the DWSD established a system called the “One
stop shop’ (OSS) (see below) which was to receive and re-dispatch relief goods to agencies.
National, local and international NGOs did not seem to use this system optimally, though it
would have been very useful to avoid problems with Customs and Importation procedures.
This appears to have been because of “confidence issues” on the part of Filipino civil society
and “visibility issues” on the part of the donor community who were afraid to see their
bilateral donations disappearing into the warehouses of the DWSD.
The internal top-down system from the OCD onwards is supposed to be complemented by a
bottom-up system for fund requests to support preparedness and response based on the
responsibility of the mayors and regional governors. The politicization of the Filipino system
is a serious hindrance for the proper functioning of the system. Lines of allegiance, party links
and other political issues have a significant influence on resource allocation for risk
management and therefore the credibility of the chain of command, control and coordination.
Coordination in the Philippines has improved significantly since Typhoon Ondoi struck in
Manila in 2009. The UN cluster system, with national and local institutions in charge, and
cluster lead agencies in a support position, is now rapidly rolled out when there is an
emergency. The mission noticed that many actors, including those from the UN system, were
not really clear about the dual nature of the system and whether the government and the
International coordination systems were still disconnected. Some interviewees did not even
know that an internal cluster system existed within the government. It was interesting, for
instance to see that project proposals by some aid actors using the DG ECHO Single Form
only mentioned the local authorities in terms of information sharing.
The OCHA set up was strong in Cagayan de Oro, with dedicated staff and good interpersonal
dynamics. The cluster system functioned relatively well, with some clusters better managed or
more relevant than others.
25
Communication
ANNEX N 1. Bibliography
ACF, Philippines Bulletin, ACF-Philippines, Vol. 2, Issue 1, January-March 2012, 8 P.
Citizens’ Disaster Response Center, Community-based Damage and Rights Accounting and Monitoring: Taking
Roots again: A Vulnerability Reduction Program for the Internally Displaced People of Mindanao, CDRC,
2007, 49 P.
Citizens’ Disaster Response Center, Disasters: The Philippine Experience, CDRC, 1992, 127 P.
Citizens’ Disaster Response Center, Wellspring of Hope: Emerging Good Practice on Disaster Preparedness
and Mitigation in Typhoon-Prone Philippine Region, CDRC, 2010, 26 P.
College of Social Work and Community Development, Building Disaster-Resilient Communities: Stories and
lessons from the Philippines, University of the Philippines, 2010, 245 P.
Congress of the Philippines, An act strenghthening the Philippine disaster risk reduction and management
system, Republic of the Philippines, July 2009, 27 P.
DOH, Key Health Messages for Emergencies: Philippines, UNFPA, WHO, République des Philippines,
Coopération Espagnole, 2007, 101 P.
Heijmans, A., Victoria, L.P., Citizenry-based and Development-Oriented Disaster Response: Experiences and
Practices in Disaster Management of the Citizens’ Disaster Response Network in the Philippines, Center for
Disaster Preparedness, 2001, 118 P.
Microdis, Integrated health, social and economic impacts of extreme events: evidence, methods and tools,
Microdis, 2011, 128 P.
National Economic and Development Authority, National Commission on the Role of Filipino Women, Official
Development Assistance Gender and Development Network, Harmonized Gender and Development Guidelines
for Project Development, Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation, NEDA, NCRFW, June 2009, 40 P.
Nepal Risk Reduction Consortium (The), Disaster Risk Reduction in Nepal: Flagship Programmes, April 2011,
62 P.
OCHA, Philippines (Mindanao): Humanitarian Action Plan 2012, UN, November 2011, 120 P.
Oxfam, Climate Change Adaptation in Practice: Yuha Tu Banwa: A women-led community food and health
bank, Oxfam, 4 P.
Oxfam, Integrating Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation in the Philippines, Oxfam, 2010.
Oxfam, Rising to the Call: Good Practices in Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation in the
Philippines, Oxfam, 2011, 147 P.
Oxfam GB, Building Resilient Communities: Good Practices in Disaster Risk Management in the Philippines,
Oxfam Great Britain Philippines Programme, 2008, 91 P.
Periurban Vegetable Project, Philippine Allotment Garden Manual with an introduction to Ecological
Sanitation, Xavier University Research and Social Outreach: Philippines, 2008, 103 P.
Poisson, Gregoire, 2011, Cash transfer programmes in Emergencies: Cash transfer mechanisms and disaster
preparedness in the Philippines, CaLP, OXFAM House, , Oxford, 92 p.
Polastro, R., Roa, B., Steen, N., Inter-Agency Real Time Evaluation (IA-RTE) of the Humanitarian Response to
Typhoons Ketsana and Parma in the Philippines, DARA, April 2010, 83 P.
Save The Children Sweden, Annual Report 2010: Southeast Asia and the Pacific, STC, 2011, 23 P.
Shelter Cluster, Terms of reference: Temporary Shelter and Material Supplies Technical Working Group,
January 2012, 15 P.
United Nations, Emergency Revision: Philippines (Mindanao), Response to Tropical Storm Washi, 2012
Humanitarian Action Plan, UN, 2011, 36 P.
United Nations, 2011 Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction: Revealing Risk, Redefining
Development, UN, 2011, 178 P.
United Nations, Philippines: Midterm Progress Report on the Millennium Development Goals, République des
Philippines, UN, 2007, 96 P.
United Nations, Supporting inclusive, sustainable and resilient development: The United Nations Development
Assistance Framework for the Philippines 2012-2018, UN, 2011, 83 P.
UNDAC, End of Mission Report, Philippines: Tropical Storm Ketsana and Typhoon Parma, October 2009, UN,
4 P.
UNDAC, Typhoon Ramil (Lupit), Philippines: Mission Report 21-27 October 2009, UN, 2009, 9 P.
UN-Habitat, Climate Change Assessment for Sorsogon, Philippines : A Summary, UN, 2008, 28 P.
UN-Habitat, Global Report on Human Settlements 2011, Cities and Climate Change : Policy Directions, UN,
2011, 51 P.
UN-Habitat Philippines, Mainstreaming climate change mitigation and adaptation in development and land use
plans, UN, 4 P.
UN-Habitat Philippines, Making houses resilient to climate change, UN, 4 P.
29
UN-Habitat Philippines, Strategizing towards sustainable settlements through local shelter planning, UN, 4 P.
UN-Habitat Philippines, Strengthening livelihoods and income-generating capacities for climate change
adaptation, UN, 4 P.
UN-Habitat Philippines, Climate change and local shelter planning national workshop caps 2010 activities,
Urban Phillipines: Monthly electronic bulletin, UN, January 2011, 4 P.
UN-Habitat Philippines, Philippine urban consortium initiates the Philippine urban observatory, Urban
Phillipines: Monthly electronic bulletin, UN, March 2011, 4 P.
UN-Habitat Philippines, Stakeholders map out urban agenda for climate change, Urban Phillipines: Monthly
electronic bulletin, UN, October 2011, 4 P.
UNHCR, Emergency operations: Supporting internally displaced persons (IDPs) affected by Tropical Storm
Washi, UNHCR Mindanao: Philippines, January 2012, 11 P.
UNHCR, National Disaster Coordinating Council, Contingency Planning for Emergencies: a manual for local
governments units, UNHCR, NDCC, October 2007, 106 P.
United Tourist Promotions, Philippines Travel Atlas 3rd edition, 2009, 356 P.
Disaster Management in Metropolitan Mania, Philippines: A Summary of the Presentation Paper for the First
Shanghai, Manila and Kobe Tri-Cities Meeting on Disaster Prevention, 26-27 January 2000, Kobe, Japan
Webliography:
This webliography consists of articles, researches, web pages, and web resources on disaster management in the
Philippines. Disaster management is the the "actions taken by an organization in response to unexpected events
that are adversely affecting people or resources and threatening the continued operation of the organization".
Disaster management "includes the development of disaster recovery plans, for minimizing the risk of disasters
and for handling them when they do occur, and the implementation of such plans. Disaster management usually
refers to the management of natural catastrophes such as fire, flooding, or earthquakes".
[Quoted from: http://dictionary.bnet.com/definition/disaster+management.html]
Activities of Volunteers in Disaster management in the Philippines and their problems
[Retrieved October 23, 2009]
"Here are presented the varied activities and problems of volunteers in the various phases of disaster
management in the Philippines".
Groupe URD
La Fontaine des Marins
26 170 Plaisians
www.urd.org
+ 33 (0)4.75.28.29.35