No Build Zone Policy

The damage to life and property in the Philippines caused by Typhoon Yolanda
(international code name: Haiyan) is unimaginable, amounting to billions of pesos, not
counting the incalculable trauma that befell survivors. For the fisheries sector, this has
meant the loss of fishing boats that are the foundation of livelihoods, the loss of daily
catch that feeds people, the destruction of homes that provide shelter, and the loss of
family members. After suffering the brunt of the typhoon and the storm surge, these
people are now targeted for permanent relocation. Government officials justify
relocation on the basis of physical safety. However, the emphasis on livelihoods and
tenure security in the responses to survey demonstrates that their needs and
expectations, in relation to relocation, are broader than physical safety. Local authorities
should ensure that relocation planning integrates these elements for the process to be
durable and successful.

Basic Policy and Objective

It is the policy of the state to maintain peace and order, protect life, liberty and
property, and promote the general welfare of the people as essential for the enjoyment
by all the people of the blessings of democracy 1. It is also the policy of the State to
serve, protect and promote the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in
accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature 2. It is the policy of the State to uphold the
peoples constitutional rights to life and property by addressing the root causes of
vulnerabilities to disasters, strengthening the countrys institutional capacity

The objective of the No Build Zone Policy is to regulate the activities in hazard-
prone areas, particularly those that are within the immediate vicinity of oceans, seas,
lakes, rivers and other bodies of water, and instable slopes; to provide guidelines and
mechanisms in the determination of appropriate activities and development in hazard
prone areas; and to provide guidance in the issuance of yearly warning to residents
during typhoons, flooding and landslides.3

Terminologies

1. DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources

2. DILG Department of the Interior and Local Government
3. DND Department of National Defense

1 Section 5, Article II of 1987 Philippine Constitution

2 Section 16, Ibid.

3 Section 3, Joint DENR-DILG-DND-DPWH-DOST Memo Circular No. 2014-01

 4. DPWH Department of Public Works and Highways
5. DOST Department of Science and technology
6. LGU Local Government Units
7. MGB Mines and Geosciences Bureau
8. NAMRIA National Mapping and Resource Information Authority
9. OCD Office of Civil Defense
10. Yor Indo Center Yolanda Rehabilitation Scientific Information Center
established by the DENR and DOST based at the National Engineering Center,
University of the Philippines- Diliman. It is the repository of Yolanda-related
scientific information, imageries and maps.
11. Flood rise in water level or overflow of a body of water beyond its confines
causing inundation of water onto a normally dry area.
12. Hazard zones areas identified in the hazard maps as susceptible to natural
hazards, such as flooding, rain-induced landslides and storm surges; maybe
Law, Moderate or High.
13. Hydro-meteorological hazard map process or phenomenon of atmospheric,
hydrological or oceanographic nature that may cause loss of life, injury or other
health impacts, property damage, loss of livelihood and services, social and
economic disruption or environmental damage. These include: 1) floods; 2) storm
surge and 3) rainfall-induced landslides.
14. Landslide (rain-induced) downward movement of a mass of earth, rock or
debris due to gravity and triggered by rainfall.
15. No-Build Zone the easement areas defined by the Water Code, Civil Code and
Revised Forestry Code of the Philippines excluding areas for critical government
infrastructure in support of economic development
16. No Dwelling Zone areas not recommended for human habitation.
17. Safe Zone areas identified outside hazard zones and not covered by existing
laws on human activity and use.
18. Storm surge abnormal rise of sea water over and above the astronomical tide
due to the presence of a storm. This rise in water level can cause heavy flooding
in coastal areas, particularly when extreme storm surges coincide with high tide
reaching twenty (20) feet or six (6) meters in some cases.

Legal Basis

Article 638 of Republic Act 386 known as the Civil Code of the Philippines states
that the banks of the rivers and streams, even in case they are of private ownership, are
subject throughout their entire length and within a zone of three meters along their
margins, to the easement of public use in the general interest of navigation, floatage,
fishing and salvage.

Likewise, Article 51 of Presidential Decree No. 1067 known as the Water Code of
the Philippines expounds that the banks or rivers and streams and the shores of the
seas and lakes throughout the entire length and within the a zone of the three 3 meters
in urban areas, twenty 20 meters in agricultural areas and 40 meters in forest areas,
along their margins, are subject to the easement of public use in the interest of
recreation, navigation, floatage, fishing and salvage. No person shall be allowed to stay
in this zone longer that what is necessary for recreation, navigation, floatage fishing or
salvage or to build structures of any kind.

Section 105 of Presidential Decree No. 1096, the National Building Code of the
Philippines, prescribes the site requirements, to wit; The land or site upon which will be
constructed any building or structure, or any ancillary or auxiliary facility thereto, shall be
sanitary, hygienic or safe. In the case of site or buildings intended for use as human
habitation or abode, the same shall be at a safe distance, as determined by competent
authorities, from streams or bodies of water and or sources considered to be polluted;
from a volcano or volcanic site and/ or any other building considered to be a potential
source of fire or explosion.

Moreover, Section 2 (g) of Republic Act No. 10121, the Philippine Disaster Risk
Reduction and Management Act of 2010 disclosed that the mainstream disaster risk
reduction and climate change in development processes such as policy formulation,
socio-economic development planning, budgeting and governance, particularly in the
areas of environment, agriculture, water, energy, health, education, poverty reduction,
land use and/or urban planning, and public infrastructure and housing, among others.

Priority: Housing and Economy

Typhoon Haiyan destroyed or severely damaged the livelihoods of almost 6

million people.4 Small stores were flattened, 30,000 boats were damaged or
demolished, millions of coconut trees were destroyed 5 and more than 1 million tonnes of
crops lost.6 The poorest people were disproportionately affected. With meagre income
and limited or no access to social security prior to the disaster, these groups are most
vulnerable to any disruption in employment and income flows. This holds true
particularly for women, who are overrepresented in informal work (home-based
4 According to the Early Recovery and Livelihoods cluster, 5.9 million workers (of
which 60 per cent were men and 40per cent women) lost their sources of income
and livelihood. Cluster update, April 2014.

5 See Oxfam report, Building Inclusive Coconut-Based Livelihoods: Post-Haiyan

reconstruction in the Philippines,(February 2014), http://www.oxfam.org/en/policy/building-
inclusive-coconut-based-livelihoods

6 According to OCHA,(February 2014).

livelihoods, vending of fish, vegetables and other non-food items or unpaid work in
family enterprises).

For the people surveyed, the key concern about permanent relocation is the
disruption or end to their livelihoods. Forty-nine per cent of people interviewed said that
livelihood is the most important criterion that authorities should consider when selecting
a permanent relocation site either to enable them to continue their existing livelihoods
(28 per cent), or to provide new opportunities to make a living (21 per cent). 7

Various professions rated it as their first concern: fishing industry (56 percent),
laborers (47 per cent), and petty traders (47 per cent), showing the need for a
comprehensive livelihoods strategy in permanent relocation sites. Women rated
livelihoods almost as highly as men (44 percent vs. 55 per cent). In focus-group
discussions, people emphasized the responsibility of the government to provide
economic opportunities if they are relocated.8

The farther away the permanent relocation sites are from original districts, the
more anxious people are and the more emphasis there is on the livelihood opportunities
of a relocation site. For instance, in Tacloban, where the relocation site is about 15 km
away, livelihood is the most important factor. In focus group discussions, women also
emphasized the maintenance of social relations. If relocated too far, women may be
removed from their longterm social networks or extended family. These networks often
support them with childcare enabling them to have other income-generating work.

Therefore, for relocation to be successful, the new site should provide equivalent
livelihood opportunities, including physical access to essential markets (i.e. customers,
trading opportunities and inputs), and be as close as possible to the original location of
the community.

Haiyan-affected communities have suffered a drastic reduction in basic services

and livelihoods opportunities, and the incidence of poverty in the Visayas is expected to
soar as a consequence of the typhoon. 9 There is a real risk that relocation processes,
unless improved, may add to the economic vulnerability of these communities. People
may lose their productive assets or income sources, face new financial costs (i.e.

7 http://www.recoveryplatform.org/assets/publication/Typhoon_Haiyan2013/The
%20Right%20Move-Ensuring%20durable%20relocation%20after%20typhoon
%20Haiyan.pdf

8 Ibid.

9 Governments plan Reconstruction Assistance on Yolanda, December 2013.

transport) or find themselves in environments where their productive skills may be less
applicable.

Our team is concerned that municipalities planning relocation are currently

focusing their efforts on identifying available land and housing units providers, with less
attention paid to livelihood generation. Livelihood and housing requirements should be
addressed and planned for simultaneously to safeguard against impoverishment.
Authorities should conduct socio economic studies in the early stages of planning, along
with a census survey on the demographics of displaced households including
livelihoods and skills, social needs, and vulnerable groups. They should also study
market opportunities to identify suitable opportunities, verify feasibility and demand, and
assess whether alternative or diversified livelihoods support is required. Providing
livelihoods opportunities will also strengthen resilience to disasters.

Implementation

The policy should be science-based and area-specific. Science should inform the
policy. A thorough study should be conducted to generate information such as, but not
limited to, high-risks areas vulnerable to geological hazards like tsunamis, storm surges
and sea-level rise, among others. Updated maps should be made available and put to
use in determining the safe and unsafe zone.

The adaptive capacity of the area and the community must be taken into
account. This will help lessen chances of displacement.

Local knowledge should be tapped into, particularly on changing coastlines, to

show that coastal integrity is highly vulnerable in areas with constantly changing
coastlines. Substrate type, elevation and wave breakers are factors that need to be
considered.

An ecosystem-based rehabilitation approach is required in the no-dwelling zone

policy. Policymaking should be participatory in nature. Multi-sectoral, indigenous and
community-based processes of assessments, consultations, monitoring and continued
education campaigns should be conducted, which are rights-based, needs-based and
gender-fair.

In coastal areas, Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Management Councils

(FARMCs) ought to be consulted on any proposed area utilization and/or management,
either temporary or permanent, to ensure community participation in the decision-
making process and to allow community members to identify possible impacts to the
fisheries sector and other stakeholders. In indigenous communities, free, prior and
informed consent from tribal councils/councils of elders should be secured.
 The no-dwelling zone policy should recognize and respect existing legal and
customary tenurial rights. In the implementation of the policy, property rights should be
protected. The policy should be inclusive, taking into account its impact on sectors and
stakeholders.

The policy should not be a standalone policy. Review and harmonization of the
no-dwelling zone to existing policies should be done. The policy should form part of the
comprehensive land-use plans (CLUPs).

CLUPs are consistent with the State policy on provision for a rational, holistic and
fair allocation, utilization, management and development of the countrys land resources
to ensure their optimum use, consistent with the principles of social justice and
sustainable development.

The policy should recognize the integrity of the shoreline. It is recommended that
the following shoreline management principles be taken into account:

non-disposition or alienation of shore lands and natural resources;

regulation of private lands and property located on the margins of the coast to
ensure public safety, and to protect the shoreline from the deleterious natural
processes in the coastline environment, such as, but not limited to, coastal
erosion, storm surges and sea-level rise;
equal and equitable public access to, and from, the foreshore and adjacent
beaches and shore lands;
strict observance and enforcement of legal restrictions on construction of
structures along the shore, particularly the setback requirements mandated by
law; and
undeveloped coastal frontage to be considered as highly valuable areas on
account of their aesthetic appeal, naturally protective characteristics, support for
livelihoods of coastal communities, environmental benefits, public utility and
recreational use.

Access to foreshore areas, especially for livelihood, should be secured. Access

to the foreshore areas that are traditionally used by artisanal fisherfolk as docking sites,
for fish and seaweed drying, as gleaning areas, fish-landing sites, small wet markets
and fish gear storage areas, among others, should be given priority. Preferential use of
these areas by municipal fisherfolk as guaranteed under the 1987 Philippine
Constitution and the Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998, should be recognized.

Areas bordering the no-dwelling zone should, likewise, be identified on their best
uses consistent with the law, and be ecologically viable, economically feasible, socially
acceptable, culturally appropriate and be compatible with adjacent uses. Particularly in
foreshore areas, extractive industries should not be allowed as these affect coastal
integrity.

The policy should address institutional relationships to prevent overlapping of

functions. A co-ordinated effort between the National Disaster Risk Reduction
Management Council (NDRRMC), OPARR and other relevant national government
agencies is necessary to ensure:

the conduct of comprehensive post-Yolanda assessments with the active

participation of different stakeholders, including local communities, local
governments and civil society organizations;
integration of recovery and restoration plan into the NDRRM Plan, consistent with
the NDRRM framework; and
assistance for LGUs in developing and/or reviewing their plans and frameworks,
including CLUPs, Local Climate Change Action Plan (LCCAP), Local Disaster
Risk Reduction Management Plan, Integrated Coastal Resources Management
Plan, Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development Protection Plan (ADSDPP)
among others.

The roles and responsibilities of government agencies should be clarified. DENR,

in co-ordination with relevant government agencies, shall map out the no-build zone
areas. DILG, on the other hand, shall provide support to the LGUs in the implementation
of the guidelines. The LGUs shall implement the guidelines, incorporating them into
their comprehensive land-use plans, CRM plans, DRRM Plan and LCCAP, among
others.

The following are the relevant government agencies and their functions in
relation to the no-dwelling zone policy:

DENR: generation of maps on no-dwelling zone, geo-hazards, resources

(mangroves and beach forests, coral reefs, seagrass beds), mangrove and
beach reforestation areas, and cadastral maps (alienable and disposable lands,
government lands, titled lands);
DILG: technical support for formulation of CLUPs, provision of guidelines on the
implementation of no-dwelling zone, and capacitating LGUs on matters relating
to the implementation of the guidelines;
LGUs: formulation and issuance of ordinances on no-dwelling zone, identification
of resettlement sites, implementation of the no-dwelling zone policy, DRRM Plan,
ICM Plan and CLUPs, engaging stakeholders in assessment, planning and
monitoring;
Department of Social Welfare and Development: provision of livelihood
opportunities for affected families/communities, basic social services;
 Department of Public Works and Highways: construction of road networks;
Department of Agriculture: construction of post-harvest facilities;
NDRRMC: overseeing formulation of local DRRM Plan;
Department of Science and Technology: conduct of scientific research and
generation of climate maps that are needed in planning;
OPARR: co-ordination among government agencies in relation to reconstruction
and rehabilitation; and
National Commission on Indigenous Peoples: ensuring the protection of the
rights of indigenous peoples.