Beyond hosting the Loss and Damage Fund board, can the Philippines also be more proactive in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and making polluters pay?

MANILA, Philippines – In his third State of the Nation Address, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s environmental agenda focused on adapting to the impacts of climate change and the fund to help vulnerable countries when these efforts come short.

Marcos took the opportunity to instruct Congress during the first half of his SONA to work on an enabling law “to confer the legal personality and capacity” to the Loss and Damage Fund board, which the Philippines will host. (READ: PH is host of Loss and Damage Fund board: Why does it matter?)

Marcos also reported on the state of the country’s disaster response and infrastructure: the Disaster Response Command Center, flood control projects, and “almost a hundred evacuation centers” built.

In climate parlance, these are adaptation measures supposed to help people adjust to impacts, while the loss and damage fund would address the unavoidable impacts of climate change or those that cannot be mitigated or adapted to anymore.

Not fleshed out in the President’s third SONA is how the Philippines would reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Again, in climate parlance, this is called mitigation and could include, among others, cutting back reliance on fossil fuels and addressing widespread deforestation.

He did mention mitigation one time when he was talking about hosting the fund.

“This welcome development shall complement all our climate adaptation and mitigation measures, and give us a strong voice to access the needed financial assistance for climate-related initiatives and impacts,” said Marcos on Monday, July 22.

It was not mentioned again after that, nor other concrete actions that could contribute to the country’s mitigation plans.

The Philippines has committed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 75%. A huge chunk of this target is reliant on international community’s help. Only 2.71% of this target is unconditional, prompting the Philippine government to allot its resources and efforts to reach this without aid.

What’s yet to be done

Nongovernment organization Greenpeace said that Marcos did indeed “put the Philippines in a good place” by securing a seat and the hosting duties of the Loss and Damage Fund board. However, the next step was to make fossil fuel companies responsible.

“The President should lead the call for a full, fast, fair, and funded fossil fuel phaseout, and payment for climate damages from oil and gas companies,” said Jefferson Chua, Greenpeace’s climate campaigner.

The group said Marcos could prioritize the passage of the climate accountability bill, which would hold corporations accountable for their contributions to climate change.

Greenpeace also pointed to the possibility of litigating carbon majors, making corporations pay climate damages tax, and stopping nuclear energy and fossil gas expansion.

In this regard, policy group Institute for Climate and Sustainable Cities (ICSC) doubled down on the call to decarbonize energy sources.

“While the ambition to increase renewable energy in the mix, as indicated in the Philippine Energy Plan, looks promising, the continued prevalence of fossil fuel operations can still drive up the cost of electricity and set back true progress,” said Angelo Kairos dela Cruz, executive director of ICSC.

Concerns about human rights

Another thing not mentioned during Marcos’ SONA was the plight of environmental defenders, national coalition Environmental Defenders Congress pointed out.

“Marcos Jr.’s total silence on these deadly attacks is a grave human rights violation in itself and an affront to ecological justice,” Jonila Castro, one of the environmental activists abducted in Bataan in 2023, said in a statement.

Castro joined the groups that protested along Commonwealth Avenue on Monday, holding the banner along with human rights activist Neri Colmenares, lawyer Cristina Palabay, and former Kabataan representative Sarah Elago, among others.

Meanwhile, advocacy group Legal Rights and Natural Resources Center raised their concerns about infrastructure and energy projects that could undermine indigenous peoples’ free, prior, and informed consent. (READ: Indigenous people, groups seek ‘genuine consultations’ on revision of FPIC rules)

During his SONA, Marcos boasted about the implementation of green lanes “to create an environment conducive for businesses to thrive.”

“As a result, we have ‘green-lane certified’ around a hundred projects with a total investment of about three trillion pesos across the sectors of renewable energy, digital infrastructure, food security, and manufacturing,” the President said.

For LRC, indigenous peoples are critical in climate action. Projects that encroach on territories of indigenous peoples may only “worsen land and environment conflicts.”

“The earnest rhetoric of the President to champion climate change can only be made real with his championing of indigenous peoples,” Mai Taqueban, executive director of LRC, said.

“They are, after all, responsible for protecting 75% of our remaining climate-critical forests. There can be no climate solution without indigenous recognition.” – Rappler.com