The document discusses tracking national progress on climate change adaptation in the Philippines. It provides an overview of key climate policies and adaptation initiatives in the country. It notes that most adaptation efforts have focused on planning rather than implementation. It also identifies challenges in monitoring and coordination between agencies. Effective monitoring is seen as important for prioritizing adaptation investments and tracking progress over time. Coordination across government levels is needed to support a whole-of-society approach to adaptation.

1. Tracking National Progress in Adaptation:
The Case of the Philippines
ASSISTANT SECRETARY MERCEDITA A. SOMBILLA
National Economic and Development Authority
Republic of the Philippines
Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change
14-15 March 2017 | Paris, France
https://www.giz.dehttps://ccafs.cgiar.org https://www.wexas.com

2. I. CC Policy Timeline
II. Adaptation Initiatives
III. Lessons learned and Gaps/ Challenges in the Implementation
of Adaptation Initiatives
IV. Lessons learned and Gaps/ Challenges in Existing
Monitoring/Tracking System
V. Benefits/Advantages of Tracking Adaptation Progress
Presentation Outline

3. I. Climate Change Policy Timeline
Inter-Agency
Committee on
Climate Change
(AO 220)
Presidential
Task Force on
Climate Change
(AO 171)
Climate Change
Act and
creation of the
Climate Change
Commission
(RA 9729)
National
Framework
Strategy on
Climate Change
2010-2022
Philippine Development
Plan 2011-2016 and
Results Matrix
National Climate Change
Action Plan 2011-2028
and Results Based
Monitoring and
Evaluation System
Cabinet Cluster on
Climate Change
Adaptation and
Mitigation (EO 43)
People’s
Survival Fund
Act (RA 10174)
JMC on
National and
Local Climate
Budgeting
(JMC 2013-01,
2014-01, 2015-
01)
Philippine
Development Plan
2017-2022 and
Results Matrix
Updating of the
National Climate
Change Action
Plan following the
NAP Process
1991 2007 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013-2015 2017

4. • Strengthening Implementation of Adaptation and
Mitigation Initiative in Agriculture (AMIA Project)
• Philippine Climate Change Adaptation Project (PhilCCAP)
• Strengthening the Philippines’ Institutional Capacity to
Adapt to Climate Change (MDGF 1656 Joint Programme)
• Climate and Disaster Risk Assessment Training (CDRA)
• Addressing the Impacts of Climate Change in the
Philippine Agriculture Sector
II. Adaptation Initiatives
• Nationwide Operational Assessment of Hazards (Project
NOAH)
• Downscaling of global and regional climate models
(PAGASA)
• DRR and CCA-enhanced frameworks and
guidelines:
o National Framework on Climate Change and Health
Adaptation (DOH Circular No. 2010-0187)
o Guidelines in mainstreaming DRR and CCA in
subnational landuse and physical planning (NEDA)
o CLUP Guidebook: Supplemental Guidelines on
Mainstreaming CC and DR in the CLUP (HLURB)
o Technical Guidelines Incorporating DRR and CCA
Concerns under the Philippine EIS System (DENR-
EMB)
o User’s Handbook-Designing Resilient Structures (DILG)
Use of science-based tools and techniques
Knowledge management and capacity-building
Mainstreaming in the development planning
process
Finance and Risk Financing Mechanism
• People’s Survival Fund
• Weather Index-based Insurance

5. Climate Budgeting (Climate Change Expenditure Tagging)
DBM-CCC Joint Memorandum Circular
(JMC) 2013-01
• Mandates national government
agencies to track CC adaptation and
mitigation expenditures in their
respective budget submissions.
Local Budget Memorandum 70 s.
2015, JMC 2014-01 & JMC 2015-01
• Requires LGUs to identify, tag, and
prioritize their respective climate
change PAPs in their annual
investment program.
• 45 agencies tagged CC expenditure amounting to PHP 176
billion across 233 programs, activities, and projects
(PAPs), representing an increase of 25% from PHP140
million in 2015
• This corresponds to about 6% of the total National
Government Budget, or 30% of the allocations to NGAs
• 89% of the approved climate budget is primarily designed
to support adaptation (compared with 87% in 2015)
• 130 LGUs tagged CC expenditure amounting to PHP92
billion or about 29% of the local government budget
• 98% of the approved climate budget is primarily designed
to support adaptation activities
Local Government
National Government

6. • Resilience index
• National, local, and sectoral plans that mainstreamed CC and
DRR considerations
• Infrastructure facilities that mainstreamed CCA and DRR
considerations (e.g., length of roads and number of disaster-
resilient infrastructure – school building, hospitals)
• Early warning facilities installed in communities nationwide
• Availability of multi-hazard and risks/vulnerability maps
nationwide
Philippine Development Plan
The 2017-2022 laid out CC and DRR strategies. The
fulfillment of these strategies will be measured through the
Results Matrix that contains outcome and output indicators:
Annually, responsible agencies report to NEDA the accomplishments
with respect to the strategies and targets identified in the PDP and its
RM

7. III. Lessons learned and Gaps/Challenges in the implementation of
Adaptation Initiatives vis-à-vis building adaptive capacity and resilience
• Most of the adaptation initiatives in the past are at the policy and planning levels (i.e.,
mainstreaming guidelines and hazard maps), and impacts of concrete adaptation
actions (i.e., resilient infrastructure facilities) have yet to be realized
• Weak alignment of climate change interventions with targeted strategies in the PDP and
NCCAP
• Poor coordination among government agencies in implementing CC adaptation projects
• Need for stronger climate change-related R&D
• Need for a more strategic climate financing scheme
• Need to continuously provide capacity building given the transition in government
offices (particularly at the local level)

8. IV. Lessons learned and Gaps/Challenges in Existing Monitoring/Tracking
System
• Need to fully operationalize the Results-based Monitoring and Evaluation System (RBMES) with emphasis
on the need to identify indicators that measure effectiveness of adaptation measures/actions
M&E System
• Lack of baseline information to better assess progress in the implementation of adaptation action (e.g.,
exposure data, sectoral risk and vulnerability assessments)
• Lack of standard methodology for data collection and reporting (e.g., timing of data collection and
difference in form/metric/scale used in data presentation)
Data and Information

9. V. Benefits/Advantages of Tracking Adaptation Progress
• Identification of appropriate indicators keep track of the progress made in the implementation
of adaptation measures vis-à-vis increasing adaptive capacity and resilience
• Tracking climate budget guides prioritization of climate adaptation investments by providing
information on whether the government budget is:
- spent to priority adaptation actions in the sector; and
- sufficient to support the country’s adaptation needs
• An effective M&E system identifies the responsible agency to implement the adaptation action
and allows effective coordination of efforts on the ground
The use of M&E to track progress in adaptation cannot be overemphasized. A good
adaptation M&E is one that arises from a whole-of-society approach and is supported at
all levels of the government.

10. THANK YOU VERY MUCH!
ASSISTANT SECRETARY MERCEDITA A. SOMBILLA
National Economic and Development Authority
Republic of the Philippines
Global Forum on the Environment and Climate Change
14-15 March 2017 | Paris, France

11. References:
CCC. n.d. Climate Change Expenditure Tagging for Local Government
Source: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B35ePJ5EjR1GblIwSm5fS0NidlU/view
DBM. 2016. Budget operations manual for local government units
Source: http://www.dbm.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/Issuances/2016/Local%20Budget%20Circular/LBC-112-BOM-inside%20pages-correct%20paging-FINAL.pdf
DBM. 2013. National Budget Memorandum No. 2013-119. Budget Priorities Framework
Source: http://www.dbm.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/Issuances/2013/National%20Budget%20Memorandum/NBM119/NBM119.pdf
DBM and CCC. 2013. JCM No. 2013-01. Guidelines in Tagging/Tracking Government Expenditures for Climate Change in the Budget Process
Source: http://www.dbm.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/Issuances/2013/Joint%20Memorandum%20Circular/JMC2013-01_DBM-CCCdec27.pdf
DBM and CCC. 2015. JCM No. 2015-01. Revised Guidelines for Climate Change Expenditure Tagging (CC ET) amending JMC No. 2013-01
Source: http://www.dbm.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/Issuances/2015/Joint%20Memorandum%20Circular/JMC2015-
1_MARCH242015_REVISEDGUIDELINESFORCLIMATECHANGEEXPENDITURETAGGING(CCET)AMENDINGJMC%20NO.%202013-01_all.pdf
DBM and CCC. 2016. People’s Climate Budget 2016
Source: http://climate.gov.ph/images/CCET/FY-16-PCBD.pdf
DBM, CCC and DILG. 2014. JCM No. 2014-01. Tagging/Tracking Climate Change Expenditures in the Local Budget
Source: http://www.dbm.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/Issuances/2014/Joint%20Memorandum%20Circular%20/JMC2014-01_CC-DILG.pdf
DBM, NEDA, DILG, and DOF. 2007. JCM No. 2007-01. Guidelines on the Harmonization of Local Planning, Investment Programming, Revenue Administration, Budgeting and Expenditure
Management
Source: http://www.pdf.ph/downloads/decentralization/jmc%20final%20signed%20with%20date.pdf
Republic Act No. 10174
Source: http://www.gov.ph/2012/08/16/republic-act-no-10174/