Critique of the Five-Year Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan (2018-2022)

of the City Government of Naga

The five-year Comprehensive Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan (DRRMP) of Naga
City presents the local risk reduction, preparedness and mitigation, and resiliency plan of the City
Government of Naga. This plan is the compendium of different undertakings taken upon by the city
government to highlight its response to disaster mitigation, preparedness and resiliency. It consists of five
chapters, namely, Introduction, Gaps, Six-Year Financial Projection of Plan, Three-Year DRRM Matrix
Plan, and Implementation Arrangements.

The DRRMP was published on November 2017 by the City Disaster Risk Reduction and
Management Office (CDRRMO) with the theme “safer, adaptive and disaster resilient Nagueño
communities toward sustainable development”. The plan consists of 56 pages of detailed responses to
various crisis situations.

Basically, the DRRMP has four major components – the Local Climate Change Adaptation
Program (LCCAP), the Disaster Preparedness and Response Program, the Disaster Prevention and
Mitigation Program, and the Rehabilitation and Recovery Program. The LCCAP covers various projects
pertaining to ecosystem and infrastructure. The Disaster Preparedness and Response Program aims to
systematize preparedness during disaster emergency situations to avoid loss of life and damage of
property, agriculture infrastructure, and other lifeline support system. The Disaster Prevention and
Mitigation Program touches the physical component of disaster risk reduction. Lastly, the Rehabilitation
and Recovery Program aims to make all key infrastructures immediately function and participate in the
recovery program of the community after a disaster.

This paper aims to critique the Naga City DRRMP using the eight principles of emergency
management, to wit: comprehensive, progressive, risk-driven, integrated, collaborative, coordinated,
flexible, and professional.

Comprehensive

This emergency management principle is fourfold, that is, emergency managers should consider
and take into account all hazards, all phases, all impacts, and all stakeholders relevant to disasters.

All hazards. The five-year DRRMP talked about all the hazards which the City of Naga is
vulnerable to, namely, flooding, typhoons, fire hazards, temperature rise, landslide, land erosion, seismic
hazards, drought, and dengue outbreak. These hazards however are not prioritized on the basis of impact
and likelihood of occurrence. In fact, the DRRMP does not discuss the impact and likelihood of
occurrence of all of the hazards enumerated. It presents the impact of only three hazards, namely,
flooding, landslide, and seismic hazards, and the likelihood of occurrence of only four hazards, namely,
flooding, temperature rise, landslide, and land erosion.

The plan should also discuss the impact and likelihood of occurrence of the other types of hazards
and should not only mention the past occurrences of such hazards so that the limited resources of the city
will be properly allocated.

All phases. According to the DRRMP, it addresses three phases of disaster – pre-disaster, during
and after disasters, and the post-disaster stage. It incorporates a Disaster Preparedness and Response
Program, a Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Program, and a Rehabilitation and Recovery Program.
 All impacts. The DRRMP did not discuss all the possible impacts of all the hazards enumerated
when it should.

All stakeholders. The DRRMP mentioned all the offices, agencies, and groups that can be easily
tapped in responding to various emergencies. These are the Naga City Disaster Risk Reduction and
Management Office (NCDRRMO), Public Safety Office (PSO), Naga City Police Office, Bureau of Fire
Protection (BFP), Chin Po Tong Volunteer Fire Brigade, Naga White Volunteer, Emergency Rescue Naga
(ERN), Naga City Hospital (NCH), Our Lady of Lourdes Infirmary (OLLI), City Health Office (CHO),
Philippine Red Cross, and various volunteer groups. Close working relationships among these groups is
essential to an effective emergency management.

Progressive

This principle underscores that emergency managers must become more progressive and strategic
in their thinking given the escalating risks facing communities.

The DRRMP is progressive in a way because it recognizes the importance of incorporating

gender perspective into disaster prevention, mitigation, and recovery strategies. However, the plan did not
state how this will be specifically done in the city level.

Risk-Driven

This principle communicates that emergency managers should use sound risk management
principles in assigning priorities and resources.

The DRRMP is risk-driven because in the course of developing the LCCAP, the adaptation
capability of the city was assessed. The perceived vulnerable areas and people in the local government
unit (LGU), the adaptive capacity of urban systems, and the potential partnership and resiliency options
were identified. A climate resilience strategy which responds to projected climate risks as they affect
critical urban systems was also developed according to the DRRMP.

Integrated

Unity of effort among all levels of government and all elements of a community should be
ensured by emergency managers according to this principle.

The DRRMP ensures unity of effort between the barangay level and the overall operations plan of
the city. One of the activities enumerated in the plan is the conduct of a seminar/workshop/training in the
barangay level to achieve improved coping capacities to lessen the adverse impacts of hazards and the
probability of disaster.

Collaborative

This emergency management principle highlights the importance of creating and sustaining broad
and sincere relationships among individuals and organizations to improve the performance of the
community in responding to emergency and disaster situations.

The DRRMP aims to build strong linkages and optimize collaboration among organizations and
stakeholders. The DRRMP fostered an open and cooperative relationship among individuals and agencies
involved because a citywide workshop was conducted to come up with local disaster risk reduction,
preparedness and mitigation, and resiliency plans. The collaboration proved fruitful because during the
said workshop, gaps with regard to program implementation that should be addressed were identified.

Coordinated

According to this principle, emergency managers should synchronize the activities of all relevant
stakeholders to achieve a common purpose.

The DRRMP has a section on Coordinating Mechanism which lists 22 agencies. Section 5.2 lists
the functions of the agencies and city departments that are responsible during disaster and disease
outbreak. However, the listed functions are broad and no details were given. Such details are important to
guide these agencies and departments as well as the general public.

Flexible

This principle focuses on the need to use creative and innovative approaches and to provide
alternative solutions in solving disaster challenges.

The DRRMP lists various program/project/ activity for each phase of disaster. An innovative
approach that was mentioned in the plan is the GIS Enabled Mapping Project which was designed to
continue the effort in the production of GIS enable map that will provide visual information to the general
public on the hazards that exist.

Professional

Lastly, this principle stresses that emergency managers must value a science and knowledge-
based approach in emergency management.

The CDRRMO adopted two planning frameworks in the preparation of the LCCAP. These
frameworks are the Eco-town Framework and the Urban Climate Planning Resilience Framework.

As stated in the DRRMP,

Naga City underwent the ICLEI – Asian Cities Climate Change Resilience Network (ACCCRN)
process in the course of developing the LCCAP. The Eco-town framework and other technical
support from the Climate Resilience and Green Growth in Critical Watersheds-CCC-SEARCA
2014-2016 provided scientific based and empirical evidence in the LCCAP planning. The later
shaped the eco-system approach that deepened the vulnerability assessment of the LCCAP team –
the multi-impact of intervention based on the vulnerability of critical watershed. The
Strengthening Management System in MINP-GIZ 2014-2016 provided input on the current status
of Mt. Isarog as a protected area”.

These show that the CDRRMO valued a science and knowledge-based approach in developing its
adaptation program.

Conclusion

While the DRRMP incorporates the emergency management principles, there is still room for
improvement based on the aforementioned discussion. The above observations must be addressed to
effectively reduce the vulnerability of the city to hazards and help its residents cope with disasters.