ESTABLISHMENT OF PHILIPPINE FLOOD RISK INDEX BY PROVINCE BASED ON NATURAL AND SOCIAL FACTORS Jerry Austria FANO Supervisor: Prof. Kuniyoshi TAKEUCHI MEE 09206 ABSTRACT This thesis offers a measure to formulate a Philippine Flood Risk Index (P-FRIc) by province in coverage, on the basis of Pressure and Release (PAR) Model which consists of five (5) key Indexes: Hazard (H), Exposure (E), Vulnerability (V), Coping Capacity using Soft countermeasures (C S ) and Hard countermeasures (C H ). The basic equation "Risk = Hazard × Vulnerability" (Wisner, B. et. al., 2004) is modified (Kannami, Arai et. al, Master Thesis, 2004) to calculate the P-FRIc, expressed as: This study identified and analyzed the indicators based on natural and social conditions that compose each index of P-FRIc. It quantified the indexes that include hazards (e.g., proneness to typhoons, topography), exposure (e.g., lowland population density, population growth per province) and progression of vulnerability (e.g., peoples’ socio- economic conditions) and coping capacity (e.g., hard and soft measures). It also analyzed the distribution of indexes for different provinces comparatively to draw the usable policies to be considered in future flood mitigation administration. Each index is composed of three (3) kinds of datasets which are called Indicators. P-FRIc is then used to assess the current potential risk to floods for the 82 provinces. The results of analysis indicated high flood-risk for provinces such as Metro Manila, Albay, Pampanga, Zambales, Negros Occidental, Cavite, etc. The assessment of Metro Manila as high flood risk area was confirmed on September 2009 when 80% of the capital was submerged by flashflood caused by Typhoon Ketsana that killed more than 300 people (Nilo & Espinueva, 2009). This implies the effectiveness of flood risk index. Key words: Philippine Flood Risk Index, Hazard, Exposure, Vulnerability, Coping Capacity, PAR model INTRODUCTION The Hyogo Framework for Action in the World Conference on Disaster Reduction (WCDR) held in Kobe, Japan, on January 2005 stated that “the development of indicator systems for disaster risk and vulnerability is one of the key activities enabling decision makers to assess the possible impacts of disasters”. Therefore to be able to apply to this study – the assessment of the flood risk in a flood prone area is the first step in motivating the government and the people to enhance their capabilities in flood risk management. The government of the Philippines can hardly allocate ample resources (money, manpower, machinery, etc.) for the appropriate implementation of flood disaster mitigation measures due to its limited information of areas perennially affected by floods, numerous organizational structures, differing laws as well as budgetary constraints. These reasons make the flood management system in the Philippines too complicated to put into simple terms both comparatively and quantitatively. Inasmuch that most flood disaster preparedness such as construction of critical infrastructures like national roads and bridges, dikes, sabo dams, pumping stations, diversion channels, etc., are undertaken in the national level, flooding occurs at the local level. More so, there is difficulty in knowing the level of flood risk by the regional, province or even barangay level which is not usually expressed explicitly. Most related studies in the past deal mostly by river basin. Assistant Section Chief (Engineer III), Flood Control and Sabo Engineering Center, Department of Public Works and Highways (FCSEC-DPWH), Philippines ** Director, International Centre for Water Hazard and Risk Management (ICHARM), Japan ( ) c S H Hazard Exposure Vulnerability H E V P FRI Capacity Soft Measures Hard Measure C C
Transcript
ESTABLISHMENT OF PHILIPPINE FLOOD RISK INDEX BY PROVINCE BASED ON NATURAL AND SOCIAL FACTORS
Jerry Austria FANO Supervisor: Prof. Kuniyoshi TAKEUCHI
MEE 09206
ABSTRACT
This thesis offers a measure to formulate a Philippine Flood Risk Index (P-FRIc) by province in coverage, on the basis of Pressure and Release (PAR) Model which consists of five (5) key Indexes: Hazard (H), Exposure (E), Vulnerability (V), Coping Capacity using Soft countermeasures (CS) and Hard countermeasures (CH). The basic equation "Risk = Hazard × Vulnerability" (Wisner, B. et. al., 2004) is modified (Kannami, Arai et. al, Master Thesis, 2004) to calculate the P-FRIc, expressed as: This study identified and analyzed the indicators based on natural and social conditions that compose each index of P-FRIc. It quantified the indexes that include hazards (e.g., proneness to typhoons, topography), exposure (e.g., lowland population density, population growth per province) and progression of vulnerability (e.g., peoples’ socio-economic conditions) and coping capacity (e.g., hard and soft measures). It also analyzed the distribution of indexes for different provinces comparatively to draw the usable policies to be considered in future flood mitigation administration. Each index is composed of three (3) kinds of datasets which are called Indicators. P-FRIc is then used to assess the current potential risk to floods for the 82 provinces. The results of analysis indicated high flood-risk for provinces such as Metro Manila, Albay, Pampanga, Zambales, Negros Occidental, Cavite, etc. The assessment of Metro Manila as high flood risk area was confirmed on September 2009 when 80% of the capital was submerged by flashflood caused by Typhoon Ketsana that killed more than 300 people (Nilo & Espinueva, 2009). This implies the effectiveness of flood risk index.
Key words: Philippine Flood Risk Index, Hazard, Exposure, Vulnerability, Coping Capacity, PAR model
INTRODUCTION
The Hyogo Framework for Action in the World Conference on Disaster Reduction (WCDR) held in Kobe, Japan, on January 2005 stated that “the development of indicator systems for disaster risk and vulnerability is one of the key activities enabling decision makers to assess the possible impacts of disasters”. Therefore to be able to apply to this study – the assessment of the flood risk in a flood prone area is the first step in motivating the government and the people to enhance their capabilities in flood risk management. The government of the Philippines can hardly allocate ample resources (money, manpower, machinery, etc.) for the appropriate implementation of flood disaster mitigation measures due to its limited information of areas perennially affected by floods, numerous organizational structures, differing laws as well as budgetary constraints. These reasons make the flood management system in the Philippines too complicated to put into simple terms both comparatively and quantitatively. Inasmuch that most flood disaster preparedness such as construction of critical infrastructures like national roads and bridges, dikes, sabo dams, pumping stations, diversion channels, etc., are undertaken in the national level, flooding occurs at the local level. More so, there is difficulty in knowing the level of flood risk by the regional, province or even barangay level which is not usually expressed explicitly. Most related studies in the past deal mostly by river basin.
Assistant Section Chief (Engineer III), Flood Control and Sabo Engineering Center, Department of Public Works and
Highways (FCSEC-DPWH), Philippines ** Director, International Centre for Water Hazard and Risk Management (ICHARM), Japan
( )c
S H
Hazard Exposure Vulnerability H E VP FRI
Capacity Soft Measures Hard Measure C C
ANALYSIS OF THE PAST FLOOD DAMAGE
As result of the comparative analysis of three kinds of water related disaster databases related to Philippines: the Philippines Annual Flood Disaster Damage database as compiled by its National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC) and the Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA) is accepted for data analysis as compared to two global disaster database which are the Dartmouth Flood Observatory and the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disaster (CRED) through its Emergency Events Database (EM-DAT). The Philippines Annual Flood Disaster Damage is a comprehensive database that lists a 40-year flood record (1970~present) that includes the typhoon name, the affected regions and provinces, inclusive dates and the number of casualties – death tolls, missing and those injured. Also included are the amount, in PhP Peso the damage to properties, infrastructures and agriculture.
Three kinds of data were used for the measurement; number of events, killed people, and average killed people per event. All events with one killed people or over were classified into three classes by the size of death toll. To make the provinces comparable, the variables were converted to indicators, namely Flood Damage Indicator (FDIa), using the following formula:
x : variables (number of events (noted by N), number of killed people (noted by K), and killed people per event (noted by KperN))
Max(x): actual maximum value Min(x) : actual minimum value
Figure 1 Annual Flood Casualties Caused by Water Related Disasters
ESTABLISHMENT OF PHILIPPINE FLOOD RISK INDEX (P-FRIc)
There are a lot of conceptual frameworks, which help us to assess the complicated structure of flood risk. One of the most common and simple conceptual framework is the Pressure and Release Model (PAR Model), which is based on the equation ‘Risk = Hazard x Vulnerability’. Basically this concept defines “disaster as the intersection of two opposing forces which are hazard and vulnerability” (Wisner, B. et al, 2004). This concept is used in this thesis to calculate the Philippine Flood Risk Index (P-FRIc).
P-FRIc considers the five aspect indexes: Hazard, Exposure, Basic Vulnerability, Capacity Soft countermeasures and Capacity Hard countermeasures. Each index is then composed of three kinds of datasets which are the most representative indicators (see Fig. 2).
To calculate for P-FRIc the following datasets for indicators and indices are expressed as follows:
Eq. (2) Where:
H : Hazard Index E : Exposure Index V : Basic Vulnerability Index
INDICATORS: Indicators are selected by quantitative method: discussion with ICHARM experts, consideration of availability of natural and social statistical data and review of past related studies. Selected indicators and datasets are shown in Table 1. Data are collected from various kinds of sources such as the National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC), National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB) and Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN).
Fig. 2 Structure of Philippine Flood Risk Index
cS H
H E VP FRI
C C
Table 1 Datasets for Indicators
INDEXES 1. Hazard Index If a province is frequently affected by typhoons, then the more it will be hazardous and flood prone. Albay is assessed as the most hazardous province in the Philippines. While typhoon prone provinces like Benguet, Pampanga, Zambales, Negros Occidental, Bataan and Iloilo are also ranked hazardous because of these provinces have high annual average monthly rainfall values. Fig. 3 shows the distribution map of the Hazard Index of provinces which are colored in red. 2. Exposure Index Exposure plays a very important role in risk evaluation. If large floods take place in a highly populated area of lowland areas, there would be large number of victims. That is why the population density in low elevation coastal zones (LECZ, below 10m elevation) is used as for this thesis. Cavite, is calculated as high exposure province in the Philippines. Metro Manila, Bulacan, Rizal and Mindoro Oriental also ranked at high position because of these provinces have rapid population growth rate. Fig. 4 shows the distribution map of the Exposure Index. The areas in red indicate high value areas while those areas in green indicate low value of Exposure Index. 3. Basic Vulnerability Index Basic Vulnerability is defined as the basic condition of each province. Batanes, Benguet, Laguna, Rizal and Cavite rank high in the list because of good governance indicator and high human development index.
Fig. 5 shows the distribution map of the Vulnerability index. Dark green areas indicate high vulnerable areas.
LEYTE
BUKIDNON
BOHOL
ISABELA
PALAWAN
CAGAYAN
QUEZON
CEBU
ABRA
ILOILO
APAYAO
AGUSAN DEL SUR
CAPIZ
NUEVA ECIJATARLAC
PANGASINAN
DAVAO DEL SUR
AURORA
QUIRINO
ALBAY
ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR
NEGROS OCCIDENTAL
KALINGA
MASBATE
ZAMBALES
IFUGAO
CAMARINES SUR
MAGUINDANAO
BATANGAS
DAVAO ORIENTAL
ANTIQUE
BENGUET
BULACAN
ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE
NUEVA VIZCAYA
AKLAN
SULTAN KUDARAT
OCCIDENTAL MINDORO
EASTERN SAMAR
LANAO DEL SUR
NEGROS ORIENTAL
SOUTH COTABATO
ILOCOS NORTE
SURIGAO DEL SUR
LAGUNA
RIZAL
ORIENTAL MINDORO
PAMPANGA
ILOCOS SUR
COTABATO (NORTH COTABATO)
SAMAR (WESTERN SAMAR)
COMPOSTELA VALLEY
SARANGANI
CAVITE
BATAAN
MISAMIS ORIENTAL
SORSOGON
NORTHERN SAMAR
LA UNION
LANAO DEL NORTE
SULU
BASILAN
AGUSAN DEL NORTE
DAVAO (DAVAO DEL NORTE)
CAMARINES NORTE
MOUNTAIN PROVINCE
PALAWAN
CATANDUANES
SARANGANI
MISAMIS OCCIDENTAL
SOUTHERN LEYTE
QUEZON
MARINDUQUE
ROMBLON
BILIRAN
TAWI-TAWI
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
GUIMARAS
ROMBLON
MASBATE
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
MASBATE
SIQUIJOR CAMIGUIN
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
SULU
SULU
SOUTHERN LEYTE
TAWI-TAWI
BATANES
DAVAO (DAVAO DEL NORTE)
BATANES
SULU
ROMBLON
SULU
TAWI-TAWI
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
COTABATO CITY
TAWI-TAWI
BILIRAN
BATANES
TAWI-TAWI
TAWI-TAWI
ISABELA CITY
NCR - MANILA, FIRST DISTRICT
BATANES
Distribution Map of Vulneratbility Index
All_Provinces
Vulnerabil as Percent of Total
0.54 - 0.79
0.79 - 0.98
0.98 - 1.13
1.13 - 1.22
1.22 - 1.32
1.32 - 1.45
1.45 - 1.62
1.62 - 2.01
±
Vulnerability Index
ISABELA
PALAWAN
CAGAYAN
LEYTE
QUEZON
BUKIDNON
CEBU
ABRA
ILOILO
BOHOL
APAYAO
AGUSAN DEL SUR
CAPIZ
NUEVA ECIJATARLAC
PANGASINAN
DAVAO DEL SUR
AURORA
QUIRINO
ALBAY
ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR
NEGROS OCCIDENTAL
KALINGA
MASBATE
ZAMBALES
IFUGAO
CAMARINES SUR
MAGUINDANAO
BATANGAS
DAVAO ORIENTAL
ANTIQUE
BENGUET
BULACAN
ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE
NUEVA VIZCAYA
AKLAN
SULTAN KUDARAT
OCCIDENTAL MINDORO
EASTERN SAMAR
LANAO DEL SUR
NEGROS ORIENTAL
SOUTH COTABATO
ILOCOS NORTE
SURIGAO DEL SUR
LAGUNA
RIZAL
ORIENTAL MINDORO
PAMPANGA
ILOCOS SUR
COTABATO (NORTH COTABATO)
SAMAR (WESTERN SAMAR)
COMPOSTELA VALLEY
SARANGANI
CAVITE
BATAAN
MISAMIS ORIENTAL
SORSOGON
NORTHERN SAMAR
LA UNION
LANAO DEL NORTE
SULU
BASILAN
AGUSAN DEL NORTE
DAVAO (DAVAO DEL NORTE)
CAMARINES NORTE
MOUNTAIN PROVINCE
PALAWAN
CATANDUANES
SARANGANI
MISAMIS OCCIDENTAL
SOUTHERN LEYTE
QUEZON
MARINDUQUE
ROMBLON
BILIRAN
TAWI-TAWI
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
GUIMARAS
ROMBLON
MASBATE
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
MASBATE
SIQUIJOR CAMIGUIN
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
SULU
SULU
SOUTHERN LEYTE
TAWI-TAWI
BATANES
DAVAO (DAVAO DEL NORTE)
BATANES
SULU
ROMBLON
SULU
TAWI-TAWI
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
COTABATO CITY
TAWI-TAWI
BILIRAN
BATANES
TAWI-TAWI
TAWI-TAWI
ISABELA CITY
NCR - MANILA, FIRST DISTRICT
BATANES
Distribution Map of Hazard Index
All_Provinces
Hazard as Percent of Total
0.000
0.00 - 0.75
0.75 - 1.00
1.00 - 1.23
1.23 - 1.45
1.45 - 1.63
1.63 - 1.91
1.91 - 2.38
±
Hazard Index
Fig. 3 Hazard Index
ISA
BE
LA
CAGAYAN
LEY
TEB
UK
IDN
ON
CE
BU
AB
RA
ILOILO
BOHOL
AP
AY
AO
CAPIZ
IFUGAO
PALAWAN
QUEZON
AGUSAN DEL SUR
NUEVA ECIJATARLAC
PANGASINAN
DAVAO DEL SUR
AURORA
QUIRINO
ALBAY
ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR
NEGROS OCCIDENTAL
KALINGA
MASBATE
ZAMBALES
CAMARINES SUR
MAGUINDANAO
BATANGAS
DAVAO ORIENTAL
ANTIQUE
BENGUET
BULACAN
ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE
NUEVA VIZCAYA
AKLAN
SULTAN KUDARAT
OCCIDENTAL MINDORO
EASTERN SAMAR
LANAO DEL SUR
NEGROS ORIENTAL
SOUTH COTABATO
ILOCOS NORTE
SURIGAO DEL SUR
LAGUNA
RIZAL
ORIENTAL MINDORO
PAMPANGA
ILOCOS SUR
COTABATO (NORTH COTABATO)
SAMAR (WESTERN SAMAR)
COMPOSTELA VALLEY
SARANGANI
CAVITE
BATAAN
MISAMIS ORIENTAL
SORSOGON
NORTHERN SAMAR
LA UNION
LANAO DEL NORTE
SULU
BASILAN
AGUSAN DEL NORTE
DAVAO (DAVAO DEL NORTE)
CAMARINES NORTE
MOUNTAIN PROVINCE
PALAWAN
CATANDUANES
SARANGANI
MISAMIS OCCIDENTAL
SOUTHERN LEYTE
QUEZON
MARINDUQUE
ROMBLON
BILIRAN
TAWI-TAWI
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
GUIMARAS
ROMBLON
MASBATE
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
MASBATE
SIQUIJOR CAMIGUIN
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
SULU
SULU
SOUTHERN LEYTE
TAWI-TAWI
BATANES
DAVAO (DAVAO DEL NORTE)
BATANES
SULU
ROMBLON
SULU
TAWI-TAWI
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
COTABATO CITY
TAWI-TAWI
BILIRAN
BATANES
TAWI-TAWI
TAWI-TAWI
ISABELA CITY
NCR - MANILA, FIRST DISTRICT
BATANES
Distribution Map of Exposure Index
All_Provinces
Exposure as Percent of Total
0.00 - 0.20
0.20 - 0.73
0.73 - 1.01
1.01 - 1.21
1.21 - 1.34
1.34 - 1.51
1.51 - 1.81
1.81 - 2.31
±
Exposure Index
Fig. 4 Exposure Index
ISABELA
CAGAYAN
BUKIDNON
ABRA
BOHOL
PALAWAN
LEYTE
QUEZON
CEBU
ILOILO
APAYAO
AGUSAN DEL SUR
CAPIZ
NUEVA ECIJATARLAC
PANGASINAN
DAVAO DEL SUR
AURORA
QUIRINO
ALBAY
ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR
NEGROS OCCIDENTAL
KALINGA
MASBATE
ZAMBALES
IFUGAO
CAMARINES SUR
MAGUINDANAO
BATANGAS
DAVAO ORIENTAL
ANTIQUE
BENGUET
BULACAN
ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE
NUEVA VIZCAYA
AKLAN
SULTAN KUDARAT
OCCIDENTAL MINDORO
EASTERN SAMAR
LANAO DEL SUR
NEGROS ORIENTAL
SOUTH COTABATO
ILOCOS NORTE
SURIGAO DEL SUR
LAGUNA
RIZAL
ORIENTAL MINDORO
PAMPANGA
ILOCOS SUR
COTABATO (NORTH COTABATO)
SAMAR (WESTERN SAMAR)
COMPOSTELA VALLEY
SARANGANI
CAVITE
BATAAN
MISAMIS ORIENTAL
SORSOGON
NORTHERN SAMAR
LA UNION
LANAO DEL NORTE
SULU
BASILAN
AGUSAN DEL NORTE
DAVAO (DAVAO DEL NORTE)
CAMARINES NORTE
MOUNTAIN PROVINCE
PALAWAN
CATANDUANES
SARANGANI
MISAMIS OCCIDENTAL
SOUTHERN LEYTE
QUEZON
MARINDUQUE
ROMBLON
BILIRAN
TAWI-TAWI
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
GUIMARAS
ROMBLON
MASBATE
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
MASBATE
SIQUIJOR CAMIGUIN
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
SULU
SULU
SOUTHERN LEYTE
TAWI-TAWI
DAVAO (DAVAO DEL NORTE)
SULU
ROMBLON
SULU
TAWI-TAWI
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
COTABATO CITY
TAWI-TAWI
BILIRAN
TAWI-TAWI
TAWI-TAWI
ISABELA CITY
BATANES
NCR - MANILA, FIRST DISTRICT
BATANES
Distribution Map of Capacity H Index
All_Provinces
CapacityH as Percent of Total
0.000
0.00 - 0.83
0.83 - 1.03
1.03 - 1.19
1.192 - 1.35
1.35 - 1.50
1.50 - 1.66
1.66 - 1.93
±
Capacity H Index
Fig. 6 Capacity S IndexFig. 5 Vulnerability Index
4. Capacity Hard Countermeasure Index Provinces like Pangasinan, Pampanga, Tarlac and Rizal rank high in the Capacity H Index because of the provinces’ good investment for flood mitigation projects as outlined in the Medium Term Philippine Development Plan (2005-2010). Isabela topped the ranking considering that it has good sizeable forest cover area. Forest cover is a good indicator for hard countermeasures against floods. Devastated forests cause rapid rainfall runoff, which is contributory to floods. Ifugao, Ilocos Norte, Apayao and Quirino on the other hand complete the ranking (Fig. 6) because of its good basic delivery of services through implementation of basic infrastructures. 5. Capacity Soft Countermeasure Index Education of the people in itself is enabling capacity and power that will pump prime the community into action for preparedness against disaster. If the people are not well educated - access to information will amount to nothing - the people cannot interpret and will not know what action to do with it. Provinces like Camarines Sur, Batangas, Laguna, Leyte and Ilocos Norte topped the ranking because of its high literacy and access to information indicators.
The above results are deemed acceptable, convincing and agreeable with the result of similar past studies. Philippine Flood Risk Index (P-FRIc) Fig. 8 shows the distribution map of P-FRIc. Provinces in dark brown indicate high flood risk while in that in yellow show low flood risk. Metro Manila is assessed as the most flood risk province in the country having high vulnerability and exposure. This was confirmed on September 2009 when 80% of the capital was submerged by flashflood caused by Typhoon Ketsana that killed more than 300 people.
Albay province comes in the 2nd place mainly due to its high Hazard and Exposure. Albay has been hit with destructive debris flow in November 2006 when Typhoon Durian caused widespread debris flow over Mt. Mayon that killed 1,150 people and buried infrastructures and houses.
Several provinces occupying the top 10 are: Zambales at 3rd, Pampanga at 4th , Bulacan at 7th and Bataan at 10th. These provinces are high risk due to high Vulnerability and low Coping Capacity soft measures. Pangasinan although has high Hazard and Vulnerability, comes in at 15th place only because of high Coping Capacity hard measures. The completion of the Agno Flood Control Project has addressed the perennial flooding in the province of Pangasinan.
Fig. 9 Radar Chart Showing Structure of P-FRIc
ISABELA
PALAWAN
CAGAYAN
LEYTE
QUEZON
BUKIDNON
CEBU
ABRA
ILOILO
BOHOL
APAYAO
AGUSAN DEL SUR
CAPIZ
NUEVA ECIJATARLAC
PANGASINAN
DAVAO DEL SUR
AURORA
QUIRINO
ALBAY
ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR
NEGROS OCCIDENTAL
KALINGA
MASBATE
ZAMBALES
IFUGAO
CAMARINES SUR
MAGUINDANAO
BATANGAS
DAVAO ORIENTAL
ANTIQUE
BENGUET
BULACAN
ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE
NUEVA VIZCAYA
AKLAN
SULTAN KUDARAT
OCCIDENTAL MINDORO
EASTERN SAMAR
LANAO DEL SUR
NEGROS ORIENTAL
SOUTH COTABATO
ILOCOS NORTE
SURIGAO DEL SUR
LAGUNA
RIZAL
ORIENTAL MINDORO
PAMPANGA
ILOCOS SUR
COTABATO (NORTH COTABATO)
SAMAR (WESTERN SAMAR)
COMPOSTELA VALLEY
SARANGANI
CAVITE
BATAAN
MISAMIS ORIENTAL
SORSOGON
NORTHERN SAMAR
LA UNION
LANAO DEL NORTE
SULU
BASILAN
AGUSAN DEL NORTE
DAVAO (DAVAO DEL NORTE)
CAMARINES NORTE
MOUNTAIN PROVINCE
PALAWAN
CATANDUANES
SARANGANI
MISAMIS OCCIDENTAL
SOUTHERN LEYTE
QUEZON
MARINDUQUE
ROMBLON
BILIRAN
TAWI-TAWI
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
GUIMARAS
ROMBLON
MASBATE
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
MASBATE
SIQUIJOR CAMIGUIN
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
SULU
SULU
SOUTHERN LEYTE
TAWI-TAWI
DAVAO (DAVAO DEL NORTE)
BATANES
SULU
ROMBLON
SULU
TAWI-TAWI
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
COTABATO CITY
TAWI-TAWI
BILIRAN
BATANES
TAWI-TAWI
TAWI-TAWI
ISABELA CITY
BATANES
NCR - MANILA, FIRST DISTRICT
BATANES
Distribution Map of Capacity S Index
All_Provinces
CapacityH as Percent of Total
0.00
0.00 - 0.83
0.83 - 1.03
1.03 - 1.19
1.192 - 1.35
1.35 - 1.50
1.50 - 1.66
1.66 - 1.93
±
Capacity S Index
Fig. 7 Capacity H Index
Fig. 8 Philippine Flood Risk Index
ISABELA
CAGAYAN
BUKIDNON
ABRA
PALAWAN
LEYTE
QUEZON
CEBU
ILOILO
BOHOL
APAYAO
AGUSAN DEL SUR
CAPIZ
NUEVA ECIJATARLAC
PANGASINAN
DAVAO DEL SUR
AURORA
QUIRINO
ALBAY
ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR
NEGROS OCCIDENTAL
KALINGA
MASBATE
ZAMBALES
IFUGAO
CAMARINES SUR
MAGUINDANAO
BATANGAS
DAVAO ORIENTAL
ANTIQUE
BENGUET
BULACAN
ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE
NUEVA VIZCAYA
AKLAN
SULTAN KUDARAT
OCCIDENTAL MINDORO
EASTERN SAMAR
LANAO DEL SUR
NEGROS ORIENTAL
SOUTH COTABATO
ILOCOS NORTE
SURIGAO DEL SUR
LAGUNA
RIZAL
ORIENTAL MINDORO
PAMPANGA
ILOCOS SUR
COTABATO (NORTH COTABATO)
SAMAR (WESTERN SAMAR)
COMPOSTELA VALLEY
SARANGANI
CAVITE
BATAAN
MISAMIS ORIENTAL
SORSOGON
NORTHERN SAMAR
LA UNION
LANAO DEL NORTE
SULU
BASILAN
AGUSAN DEL NORTE
DAVAO (DAVAO DEL NORTE)
CAMARINES NORTE
MOUNTAIN PROVINCE
PALAWAN
CATANDUANES
SARANGANI
MISAMIS OCCIDENTAL
SOUTHERN LEYTE
QUEZON
MARINDUQUE
ROMBLON
BILIRAN
TAWI-TAWI
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
GUIMARAS
ROMBLON
MASBATE
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
MASBATE
SIQUIJOR CAMIGUIN
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
SULU
SULU
SOUTHERN LEYTE
TAWI-TAWI
DAVAO (DAVAO DEL NORTE)
SULU
ROMBLON
SULU
TAWI-TAWI
SURIGAO DEL NORTE
COTABATO CITY
TAWI-TAWI
BILIRAN
TAWI-TAWI
TAWI-TAWI
ISABELA CITY
NCR - MANILA, FIRST DISTRICT
Distribution Map of P-FRIc
All_Provinces
PFRIc as Percent of Total
0 - 0.39
0.39 - 0.79
0.79 - 1.19
1.19 - 1.59
1.59 - 1.98
1.98 - 2.38
2.38 - 2.78
2.78 - 3.18
±
P-FRIcPhilippine Flood Risk Index
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN P-FRIc AND PAST FLOOD DAMAGE
The calculated Philippine Flood Risk Index (P-FRIc) is compared with the past actual flood damage data in order to verify agreement. Fig. 10 shows the scatter graph plotted by P-FRIc and composed actual Flood Damage Indicator of total killed people (FDIa_Com_K), which is calculated by using three classified flood damage indicators, based on levels of magnitude. The composed flood damage indicator FDIa_Com is calculated by simple addition of the three classified indicators:
FDIa_L (low) : 10 deaths and below (K < 10) FDIa_Com_K = FDIa_L + FDIa_M + FDIa_H FDIa_M (middle): more than 10 and below 100 deaths (10 < K < 100)
FDIa_H (high) : more than 100 deaths (K > 100)
P-FRIc exhibit correspondence with the past flood damages, but apparently this is not so significant (R2=0.1974). One of the reasons for this disagreement is that P-FRIc expresses the present condition of flood risk whereas FDIa_Com_K indicates the consequence of past 40 year record annual flood damage data.
Fig. 10 is the scatter graph in which all the provinces are classified into 6 groups and plotted by P-FRIc and FDIa_Com_K. The provinces in group 4 and 3 have relatively good agreement between FDIa_Com_K. While the provinces in Groups 2 and 6 have lower value P-FRIc than FDIa_Com_K. It means that there is possibility that the values of FRIc were underestimated in this aspect. The provinces in Groups 1 and 5 have large values of P-FRIc and FDIa_Com_K. It means P-FRIc may have overestimated the flood risk. This means that these provinces have the high possibility to experience from high casualty flood events in the future.
CONCLUSION This master thesis established the Flood Risk Index for 82 provinces in Philippines, by considering the following: Fifteen (15) indicators considering natural and social conditions of the Philippines were identified as
components of Flood Risk Index. These datasets were selected based on availability and quality (length of record) of data and their relevance to characterize and represent hazard, vulnerability, exposure and coping capacity factors.
The nationwide Philippine Flood Risk Index (P-FRIc) was assessed quantitatively based on the conceptual framework of Pressure and Release (PAR) Model using five indexes. P-FRIc assessed flood risk at present time even without utilizing past flood damage data. It presented the structure of flood risk in comparative and quantitative approaches.
P-FRIc assessed flood risk at present time even without utilizing past flood damage data. It is observed that the comparison of radar charts indicates the different composition of strengths and weaknesses in risk components by province.
The methodology to assess the flood risk is a new attempt and is very informative for disaster managers. It is hoped that the outcomes of this thesis will advance the knowledge of disaster managers and planners in the Philippines in flood risk assessment and motivate the people, who are at risk to the negative impact of floods to enhance their flood risk administration.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my Advisor, Prof. Kuniyoshi Takeuchi, for his scholarly advice, guidance and encouragement and the staff of ICHARM led by Chief Researcher Mr. Katsuhito Miyake, Dr. Tadashi Nakasu and Dr. Ali Chavosian for their sincere cooperation and valuable review of this thesis.
REFERENCES Ben Wisner,et.al. At Risk; 2nd Edition, Natural Hazards, People's Vulnerability and Disasters. Routledge, 2004. National Statistical Coordination Board http://www.nscb.gov.ph/ Yasuo Kannami, Master Thesis for GRIPPS / ICHARM . Establishment of Country Based Flood Risk Index: ICHARM, 2008. Yuko Arai, Master Thesis for University of Tokyo . Establishment of a Global Flood Risk Index: University Of Tokyo, 2008.
Fig. 10 Scatter Graph of the Provinces Plotted by P-FRIc vs FDI_Com_K
