Man-Made Policies, Made-to-Drown Realities

Extreme weather may be natural, but the disaster it costs is an act of human decision.

The Philippines receives a mean annual rainfall ranging from 965 to 4,064 millimeters, according to PAGASA—making downpours highly predictable and assessable. This means the state possesses actionable solutions to keep communities above water. Yet when those same communities repeatedly drown under foreseen skies, it unmasks not a natural tragedy but a prolonged failure of policy and governance long disguised as the countrymen’s resiliency.

To define resilience is to recognize that it is often built from broken homes, washed belongings, and the repetitive cycle of starting each day simply to survive after impairment. This exposure escalates into catastrophe not only because of natural hazards but also because of human-made conditions that deepen vulnerability. Climate change can bring heavy rains, but state negligence can determine how far the flood reaches. And flooding is not merely a drainage failure; it is an intersectional crisis shaped by land management, climate change, livelihoods, and political action—or inaction over the years.

These vulnerabilities of Philippine communities do not appear out of nowhere; rather, they stem from institutional failures deeply rooted not only in poor flood control outcomes, but also in flawed administrative processes and the underutilization of allocated post-disaster relief funds. The crisis in Philippine disaster management lies not in a shortage of funds but in a systemic disconnection between the money allocated and the actual compliance carried out on the ground.

On a national level, a deep sense of neglect is palpable. The Commission on Audit (COA) noted in a 2023 report on the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) that 22 out of 58 flood-control projects, valued at ₱510.58 million, failed to finish on schedule, with delays ranging from one to 310 days. Furthermore, 29 projects worth ₱371.03 million were completely shelved due to procurement issues and cancellations.

And by 2024, COA’s annual report exposed an even bigger disaster: the government lost a staggering ₱6.4 billion to structurally defective, idle, or unusable DPWH projects—all because authorities failed to monitor basic contractor compliance.

However, the problem does not stop at the national level; it extends down to local governance. The Commission on Audit (COA) flagged 70 local government units in 2024 for underutilizing disaster funds. Despite having billions available, these LGUs failed to optimize their allocations, with some utilization rates dropping as low as 1.41%. COA emphasized that hoarding these funds directly defeats the purpose of Republic Act 10121 (Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010), which mandates building disaster-resilient communities before calamities strike.

Among the cities enumerated, Taguig recorded the lowest utilization rate at just ₱238.01 million out of its ₱2.36 billion fund. Manila spent ₱400.05 million of its ₱2.06 billion, while Makati utilized 52% of ₱996.47 million of its ₱2.19 billion budget.

These data show that the decision-making does not end at the top levels of leadership. Local officials, contractors, and project monitors make deliberate choices every single time they delay critical infrastructure or sit on unused disaster funds. Accountability is not confined to the national level, as local government entities are equally accountable in the implementation and oversight of measures aimed at safeguarding the citizens.

Even so, while domestic execution remains broken, the government continues to preach climate defense on the global stage. With the Philippines assuming the ASEAN chair this year, the nation holds a crucial opportunity to integrate climate resilience into the national security agenda. Environment Secretary Juan Miguel Cuna said at the Stratbase Institute conference held in Makati, Towards a Peaceful and Sustainable Future: Addressing the Climate-Conflict Nexus in ASEAN, that climate change must be treated as a direct national security concern. He further emphasized that its cascading impacts on food, water, livelihoods, public health, and human migration actively deepen the country's existing vulnerabilities.

This regional and international commitment stands in dichotomy to the realities on the domestic ground. Framing disaster prevention as a national security concern means nothing when our flood defenses are left to rot in practice. The allocation of the budget remains an indictment in itself. The core issue is not the absence of funds but an institutionalized habit of squandering billions on temporary and unfinished fixes while citizens bear the burden of every flood alone.

This gap between rhetoric and reality is a direct slap in the face to communities hit by the recent flooding across Central Luzon, Davao, and Metro Manila. Decades of unregulated groundwater extraction are causing the ground across Central Luzon and Metro Manila to physically sink. According to official data tracking up to 2022 by the National Mapping and Resource Information Authority (NAMRIA), relative sea levels in Manila Bay are rising at roughly 13.2 to 14.4 millimeters per year—nearly four times the global average of 3.4 millimeters. Compounding this crisis, the foundational research from coastal geologists Dr. Fernando P. Siringan and Dr. Kelvin S. Rodolfo shows that parts of Central Luzon are sinking over eight times faster, with land subsidence rates exceeding 100 millimeters annually.

This means that parts of our land are sinking more than 30 times faster than the global sea-level average and nearly eight times faster than Manila Bay is rising. No amount of reactive flood controls can save us when the very foundation of our coastal regions is giving way. Until our leaders treat unregulated groundwater extraction as the structural emergency it is, resilience remains a convenient excuse for government inaction while millions of Filipinos are left stranded on land that is caving beneath their feet.

Ironically, the legal framework for defense has existed for over a decade. RA 10121 was enacted precisely to shift our national posture from reactive emergency relief to proactive, structural prevention. Yet, it remains largely trapped on signed paper while citizens tread water on the ground.

No matter how many laws are signed or publicized, if administrations fail to execute them, the state will keep hiding behind the glorified resilience of its people. These disasters are not merely environmental crises; they are a direct result of institutional failures.

When rising tides wash over coastlines without sea walls, when heavy downpours hit cities sitting in their own runoff like a plugged sink, and when farmlands turn into an open lake that drowns an entire harvest, the rain stops being merely an act of nature. Its consequences become the product of human decisions that leave communities to bear what could have been prevented or reduced.

We can only withstand these man-made realities when we stop treating our resilience as a duty, look beyond passive accountability, and demand outright justice from a system that repeatedly fails to protect us.

Article: Claire Galao

Graphics: Keren Hope De Leon