Pre Colonial Philippines

This paper contains scientific and anecdotal evidence, and expert and grassroots recommendations brought about by the questions: What are we doing about Slow Onset Impacts (SOI) or the long-term effects of climate change? Why should we do more? And what steps should be taken
to meet this challenge?
There are two kinds of climate change events: “rapid onset” (extreme episodic disasters) and “slow onset” (chronic hazards) events. The former are what we are more familiar with, what with the massive devastation left behind by typhoons such as Ondoy, Pablo, and Yolanda. The latter (prolonged
drought, increasing precipitation, sea level rise, and changes in ocean temperature, among others) are not so evident. They can, however, be just as deadly. Often more so.
Unfortunately for the Philippines and in most countries, a fixation on the short-term climatic impacts has been observed throughout the development of climate change initiatives.
According to Alexander Müller, FAO Assistant Director General for Natural Resources, "Currently the world is focused on dealing with shorter-term climate impacts caused mainly by extreme weather events."
This fixation is understandable—after all, it is human nature to focus on the immediate, which is seemingly more urgent. It is easier and much more expected to respond to something seen and which inspires more emotion, than to work on something which takes years to take effect.
However, as this paper will show, a failure to understand the urgency of Slow Onset Impacts will severely affect the country’s food security, biodiversity,
ecosystems, and culture (due to cultural loss and migration), posing potentially irreparable loss and damage to infrastructure, human lives (due
to decrease of personal security and health), and the economy.
Recent scientific reports say that: “Continued emission of greenhouse gases will cause further warming and long-lasting changes in all components
of the climate system, increasing the likelihood of severe, pervasive, and irreversible impacts for people and ecosystems."
The 2012/2013 Human Development Report by the Philippine Human Development Network tells us, “To some degree, communities may be comforted by the knowledge that because episodic events … are ‘familiar’ to the external sector (national and international agencies), well-oiled disaster
response mechanisms (e.g., resource mobilization) are likely to come to their aid. The same cannot be said for responses to... [s]low-onset changes
in average annual precipitation—more rainfall here, less there—[that] will affect ecosystems and agricultural productivity in the long term, in profound ways. Because such impacts will not necessarily be accompanied by or reach the scale of severe flooding or catastrophic events, funding for response measures or anticipatory adaptive programs may not necessarily be readily available, if at all. Sea level rise will likewise impact coastal communities
profoundly; water resources will be affected by salinity, land areas by increased susceptibility to erosion and storm surges. The change in the ocean
chemistry will impact food chains. In the overall, risks in food and water security will be amplified.” Scientific reports project a 1.5- to 4-degree Celsius increase in global mean temperature from now till 2100. This could go up to a catastrophic six degrees if global emissions are not curbed, and data from the Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical, and Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA) show that this will create an increase in weather–related disasters and a change in precipitation patterns that will translate to shifts in the location, frequency, severity, and duration of dry and wet
seasons in the Philippines.
This paper intends to shed light on the country's response, or lack of it, to Slow Onset Impacts.
It should propel concerted action among policy makers, through budget interventions and structural changes that can make development more durable.
Key areas for focus:
• Monitoring stations. Most of the knowledge we have on local climate change impacts are interpretations of local communities, which vary. Expert climatologists insist the first requirement of research is an adequate network of weather monitoring stations manned by qualified technicians
that record and synthesize detailed observations of changes in rainfall, temperature, and other similar natural phenomena.
• Data. We lack not only the proper kind of data; we also lack the amount to unequivocally quantify and predict impacts of climate change—and to formulate comprehensive mitigation and integrated adaptation measures through proper scientific modeling, not just generally accepted knowledge.
• Infrastructure that works and lasts. We need research to create more locally specific, sustainable designs to protect communities against impacts of climatic events, that can then take into consideration parameters like velocity of water flow—or other hazards, like flooding—alongside the specific strength of the materials with which they build roads in certain areas.
• Food security. An evaluation of the adaptability of our crops in relation to increases in temperature, rainfall, and rainfall patterns in specific locales will
help us know what kind of crops will thrive, what kind should be replaced, and what help we need from modern technology.
• Preservation of community, culture, and ecosystems. It is time to properly profile areas and find sustainable solutions that help sustain communities and preserve our culture.
• Expense. Better infrastructure planning can save the government hundreds of millions of pesos almost every year from having to replace damaged roads, and climate-resilient irrigation systems.
If there is one insight that this paper wishes to elevate, it is the urgent need to support more research.
Experts acknowledge that the current state of climate change research is seriously inadequate.
Studies on the causes of climate change should be supported and in terms of better observational equipment and sustained improvements in technical
capacity across the archipelago.
This paper takes voices from the scientific community, academe, non-government organizations, and local governments. It attempts to humanize scientific and technical jargon encountered in research, and includes a section for self-check—a novel and perhaps risky decision for a paper seeking policy change.
By promoting the importance of a common language, values, and posing recommendations anchored on practicality and doability, the paper hopes that it will reach beyond its intended initial readership, to be appreciated by those who will benefit most from new policies, research, and initiatives that might arise from this endeavor: communities on the frontlines of the climate crisis.