CESFA Volume 1

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 25

PHILIPPINES

COUNTRY ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL


FRAMEWORK ASSESSMENT
PHASE 1 - STOCKTAKING

VOLUME 1 - FINAL SUMMARY REPORT

MARCH 2022
THE PHILIPPINES
© 2022 Interna�onal Bank for Reconstruc�on and Development / The World Bank
1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433
Telephone: 202-473-1000; internet: www.worldbank.org
Some rights reserved
1 2 3 4 23 22 21 20
This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contribu�ons. The findings, interpreta�ons, and conclusions
expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Execu�ve Directors, or the
governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The
boundaries, colors, denomina�ons, and other informa�on shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the
part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries.
Nothing herein shall cons�tute or be considered to be a limita�on upon or waiver of the privileges and immuni�es of The World
Bank, all of which are specifically reserved.
Rights and Permissions

This work is available under the Crea�ve Commons A�ribu�on 3.0 IGO license (CC BY 3.0 IGO)
h�p://crea�vecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo. Under the Crea�ve Commons A�ribu�on license, you are free to copy,
distribute, transmit, and adapt this work, including for commercial purposes, under the following condi�ons:
A�ribu�on—Please cite the work as follows: [[Produc�on editor: Insert the complete, correct cita�on here followed by the DOI.
The following is an example: Galvanovska, Natalija, Michel Rogy, and Carlo Maria Rosso�o. 2020. Broadband Networks in the
Middle East and North Africa: Accelerating High-Speed Internet Access. <Add series name if the book is in a series>.
Washington, DC: World Bank. doi:10.1596/978-1-4648-1112-9.]] License: Crea�ve Commons A�ribu�on CC BY 3.0 IGO
Transla�ons—If you create a transla�on of this work, please add the following disclaimer along with the a�ribu�on: This
translation was not created by The World Bank and should not be considered an official World Bank translation. The World Bank
shall not be liable for any content or error in this translation.
Adapta�ons—If you create an adapta�on of this work, please add the following disclaimer along with the a�ribu�on: This is an
adaptation of an original work by The World Bank. Views and opinions expressed in the adaptation are the sole responsibility of
the author or authors of the adaptation and are not endorsed by The World Bank.
Third-party content—The World Bank does not necessarily own each component of the content contained within the work. The
World Bank therefore does not warrant that the use of any third-party-owned individual component or part contained in the
work will not infringe on the rights of those third par�es. The risk of claims resul�ng from such infringement rests solely with
you. If you wish to reuse a component of the work, it is your responsibility to determine whether permission is needed for that
reuse and to obtain permission from the copyright owner. Examples of components can include, but are not limited to, tables,
figures, or images.
All queries on rights and licenses should be addressed to World Bank Publica�ons, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW,
Washington, DC 20433, USA; email: pubrights@worldbank.org.
ISBN (paper):
ISBN (electronic):
DOI:
Cover photo: [[image credit, if applicable]]
Sample credit for a non-WB image: c Ami Vitale / Panos Pictures. Used with the permission of Ami Vitale / Panos Pictures.
Further permission required for reuse.
Sample credit for a WB image: c Curt Carnemark / World Bank. Further permission required for reuse.
Cover design: [[Designer credit, if applicable]]
Library of Congress Control Number: XXXXXXXXXX

1
Acknowledgment

The Country Environmental and Social Framework Assessment (CESFA) was undertaken by the World Bank
Philippines in close partnership with the Government of the Republic of the Philippines. The World Bank
would like to extend its deep appreciation to all the government representatives who participated in
various consultations and interviews for the CESFA. Special acknowledgment is extended to the following
agencies for their substantial technical inputs and guidance in finalizing the report: the National Economic
and Development Authority (NEDA) led by Undersecretary Mercedita A. Sombilla, Undersecretary
Rosemarie G. Edillon, and Director Nieva T. Natural; the Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (DENR) led by Undersecretary Jonas R. Leones; the Department of Labor and Employment
(DOLE) led by Assistant Secretary Ma. Teresita S. Cucueco; and the National Commission on Indigenous
Peoples (NCIP) led by Chairperson Allen A. Capuyan.

The CESFA report was prepared by the Environment, Natural Resources and Blue Economy (ENB) Practice
Group and the Social Sustainability and Inclusion (SSI) Practice Group. Gerardo Parco, Martin Fodor,
Addepalli Sitarama Krishna, and Ma. Loreto N. Padua jointly led the CESFA with technical inputs from the
following consultants: Cherry Rivera, Paz J. Benavidez II, and Mary Ann Botengan. The CESFA team drew
substantial inputs from Josefo Tuyor and Svend E. Jensby as peer reviewers as well as from Agnes Balota,
Carlos Tomas Perez Brito, Marivi Ladia, and Maya Gabriela Villaluz. Policy and strategic guidance were
provided by Achim Fock (Portfolio Manager), Madhu Raghunath (Practice Leader for Sustainable
Development Network), Mona Sur (ENB Practice Manager), and Janmejay Singh (SSI Practice Manager).
Overall management guidance was provided by the Country Directors Mara Warwick (2019) and Ndiame
Diop (2020 to present).

2
Table of Contents
I. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 6
A. RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE CESFA........................................................................................ 6
B. METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................................................. 7
II. STOCKTAKING OF THE PHILIPPINE ES COUNTRY POLICY FRAMEWORK ......................................... 7
ESS1 - ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL RISKS AND IMPACTS ........................... 8
ESS2 - LABOR AND WORKING CONDITIONS ................................................................................................. 10
ESS3 - RESOURCE EFFICIENCY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION AND MANAGEMENT ............................................. 11
ESS4 - COMMUNITY HEALTH AND SAFETY ................................................................................................... 13
ESS5 - LAND ACQUISITION, RESTRICTIONS ON LAND USE AND INVOLUNTARY RESETTLEMENT .............................. 13
ESS6 - BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF LIVING NATURAL RESOURCES ............ 15
ESS7 - INDIGENOUS PEOPLES/SUB-SAHARAN AFRICAN HISTORICALLY UNDERSERVED TRADITIONAL LOCAL
COMMUNITIES.............................................................................................................................. 15
ESS8 - CULTURAL HERITAGE ..................................................................................................................... 17
ESS9 - FINANCIAL INTERMEDIARIES ............................................................................................................ 18
ESS10 - STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT AND INFORMATION DISCLOSURE ........................................................... 19
III. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................. 19
ANNEX A1: LIST OF PERSONS/AGENCIES MET/INTERVIEWED ............................................................ 22
ANNEX A2: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS VALIDATION WORKSHOP, JANUARY 15, 2020 ............................... 24

3
Acronyms

AD - Ancestral Domain
AL - Ancestral Land
BAP - Bankers Association of the Philippines
BARMM - Bangsamoro Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao
BFAR - Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources
BFP - Bureau of Fire Protection
CCC - Climate Change Commission
CDMP - Comprehensive Development and Management Plan
CESFA - Country Environmental and Social Framework Assessment
CL - Customary Law
CNC - Certificate of Non-Coverage
CSC - Civil Service Commission
CTB - Chamber of Thrift Banks
CWC - Council for the Welfare of Children
DA - Department of Agriculture
DAO - Department Administrative Order
DBP - Development Bank of the Philippines
DENR - Department of Environment and Natural Resources
DHSUD - Department of Human Settlements and Urban Development
DILG - Department of Interior and Local Government
DOH - Department of Health
DOLE - Department of Labor and Employment
DOST - Department of Science and Technology
DOTr - Department of Transportation
DPWH - Department of Public Works and Highways
DRAM - Department of Public Works and Highways Right-of-Way Acquisition Manual
DSWD - Department of Social Welfare and Development
e-NIPAS - Expanded National Integrated Protected Areas System
ECA - Environmentally Critical Area
ECC - Environmental Compliance Certificate
ECP - Environmentally Critical Project
EHSG - Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines
EIA - Environmental Impact Assessment
EIS - Environmental Impact Statement
EMB - Environmental Management Bureau
ES - Environmental and Social
ESF - Environment and Social Framework
ESMP - Environmental and Social Management Plan
ESMS - Environmental and Social Management System
ESSESMP - Environment and Social Standards
FBI - Field-Based Investigation
FI - Financial Intermediary

4
FPIC - Free and Prior Informed Consent
GHG - Greenhouse Gas
GPH - Government of the Philippines
ICC - Indigenous Cultural Community
IEE - Initial Environmental Examination
IKSPs - Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices
ILO - International Labour Organization
IP - Indigenous People
IPAP - Indigenous People’s Action Plan
IPF - Investment Project Financing
IPOPHL - Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines
IPRA - Indigenous Peoples Rights Act
IRRs - Implementing Rules and Regulations
IVM - Integrated Vector Management
LBP - Land Bank of the Philippines
LGU - Local Government Unit
MC - Memorandum Circular
MENRE - Ministry of Environment, Natural Resources and Energy
MOA - Memorandum of Agreement
NCCA - National Commission on Culture and the Arts
NCDA - National Council on Disability Affairs
NCIP - National Commission on Indigenous People
NEDA - National Economic and Development Authority
NEHAP - National Environmental Health Action Plans
NM - National Museum
OHS - Occupational Health and Safety
PAMB - Protected Area Management Board
PAMP - Protected Area Management Plan
PCSD - Palawan Council for Sustainable Development
PD - Presidential Decree
PEISS - Philippine Environmental Impact Statement System
PPPPAs - Policies/Programs/Projects/Plans/Activities
RA - Republic Act
RBAP - Rural Bankers Association of the Philippines
ROW - Right-of-Way
SAPA - Special Use in Protected Area
SBMA - Subic Bay Metropolitan Administration
-
-
-

5
I. INTRODUCTION
1. The World Bank Group, as a global partnership among 189 member countries including the
Philippines, is committed to sustainable development through its twin goals of ending extreme poverty
and promoting shared prosperity. In pursuit of these goals, the World Bank adopted the Environmental
and Social Framework (ESF) in 2018, replacing the old Operational Policy and Bank Procedures on
environmental and social safeguards to a set of 10 new standards.

2. The ESF sets out the following Environmental and Social Standards (ESS) for preparing,
managing/implementing, and evaluating an investment project for World Bank support:

• ESS1: Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts
• ESS2: Labor and Working Conditions
• ESS3: Resource Efficiency and Pollution Prevention and Management
• ESS4: Community Health and Safety
• ESS5: Land Acquisition, Restrictions on Land Use and Involuntary Resettlement
• ESS6: Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resources
• ESS7: Indigenous Peoples/Sub-Saharan African Historically Underserved Traditional Local
Communities
• ESS 8: Cultural Heritage
• ESS9: Financial Intermediaries
• ESS10: Stakeholder Engagement and Information Disclosure.

3. The ESF provides the Borrower or recipient of the World Bank financing with practical steps and
tools to develop and implement environmentally and socially sustainable projects. The ESS intend for
projects to not only avoid/mitigate harm but also optimize the potential benefits of development. The ESF
implementation requires a strong partnership between the Borrower and the World Bank as well as with
other development partners. The application of the ESF varies based on the project’s objective, scope,
location, and activities.

4. The World Bank is committed to support the use and development/enhancement of the
Borrower’s environmental and social (ES) framework to achieve concerted outcomes rather than
duplication of development efforts. The use of the Philippines’ policy framework on environmental and
social development for World Bank-supported projects would be based on an assessment of the country’s
ES framework and determination of its material consistency with the objectives of the ESF. Such an
exercise entails mapping of country’s laws/legislations with ESS and assessment of their implementing
rules and regulations (IRRs), executive orders, and institutional arrangements for implementation. In this
context, to build the increasing use of the Philippine ES framework, the World Bank initiated the Country
Environmental and Social Framework Assessment (CESFA).

A. Rationale and Objectives of the CESFA

5. The CESFA has two phases: Phase 1 focuses on a stocktaking of relevant Philippine laws, policies,
and regulations that correspond to the key provisions/requirements of each of the 10 ESS and the major

6
agencies that are responsible for overseeing the implementation of the Philippine ES system. The results
of the stocktaking have by and large indicated the ESS for which there are materially consistent Philippine
laws/policies. Specific objectives of Phase 1 are as follows:

• Undertake an inventory of laws, policies, and corresponding IRRs, and identify mandated
agencies and relevant stakeholders.
• Assess the congruence1 of the Philippine framework with ESS.
• Prepare a road map for establishing partnerships with relevant Philippine government
agencies on ESF application, including a proposed capacity-building agenda to be
undertaken as part of the Phase 2 assessment.

6. Aside from policy congruence, the use of the country ES system also requires that the operational
system for implementing and monitoring compliance to the policies is in place. Thus, Phase 2 would
involve an analysis of the institutional capacity of select departments and agencies to implement and
monitor the Philippine ES laws. Phase 2 would also seek to identify capacity-building needs to fully
harmonize the national ES framework and the ESF or aspects of the ESF.

7. This report summarizes the results of Phase 1 which is the stocktaking of existing Philippine laws,
policies, and regulations as well as the comparative assessment in relation to each of the 10 ESS under
the ESF.

B. Methodology

8. The Phase 1 CESFA assessment involved the following methodology:

• Desk review of laws and their respective IRRs which were issued as department orders,
memorandum circulars (MCs), and other guidance documents (for example, procedural
manuals, technical notes, and handbooks)
• Interview with environmental and social development experts and focused group
discussions with representatives from key agencies, the list of which is in Annex A1
• Validation workshop with multi-stakeholders on January 15, 2020—Annex A2 presents the
list of the participants.

II. STOCKTAKING OF THE PHILIPPINE ES COUNTRY POLICY FRAMEWORK


9. This section presents the highlights of the stocktaking of the Philippine laws, policies, and
regulations in relation to the key requirements of ESS1 to ESS10. The details of the stocktaking are
presented for each of the ESS in Annex B. The assessment matrix captures the following key elements:

(a) Summary of findings is listed along with the identification and mapping of the institutional
stakeholders responsible for overseeing the implementation of the Philippine policy
framework of the pertinent ESS.

1Congruence refers to the general equivalence or similarities of the country’s environmental and social safeguards system with
the World Bank ESS based on policies, principles, objectives, and operational requirements.

7
(b) Key requirements for each ESS are presented in the first column to fully understand each
standard.
(c) Philippine laws and policies. Column 2 provides a summary of the corresponding Philippines
laws/policies for each ESF requirement. Since national laws are issued for the development
agenda that are broader than the project design, the stocktaking also looked into the IRRs
which were issued in varying executive issuances (for example, department order, MC, and
technical guidelines) that are intended to translate the law into operational details duly
provided by the law itself and/or by the duly mandated agency.
(d) Variance. The third column describes the differences between the Philippine laws/policies
and the ESF requirements to determine material consistency as well as potential areas for
strengthening/enhancements that can be further assessed under Phase 2 CESFA.

ESS1 - Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts

10. ESS1 sets out the Borrower’s responsibilities for assessing, managing, and monitoring ES risks
and impacts associated with each stage of a project supported by the World Bank through Investment
Project Financing (IPF), to achieve ES outcomes consistent with the ESS. ESS1 seeks to manage the risks
and impacts of a project thereby improving environmental and social performance, through a risk- and
outcome-based approach. Project-desired outcomes are achieved through means that are appropriate to
the nature and scale of the project and proportionate to the level of ES risks and impacts.

11. Congruence. The Philippines has a sufficient policy framework, especially Presidential Decree (PD)
1586 otherwise known as the Philippine Environmental Impact Statement System (PEISS) and its IRRs,
including administrative orders (principally Department Administrative Order [DAO] 2003-30) and MCs
which were issued by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). PD 1586
institutionalized a system intended to reconcile the requirements of environmental management with
exigencies of socioeconomic undertakings under the principle of sustainable development. The PEISS is
fundamentally consistent with the core principles of ESS1, particularly in terms of the requirement for
screening, scoping, and assessment of the direct and indirect ES risks/impacts throughout the
development process; health impact assessment; independent review; and mitigation of adverse impacts.
DAO 2003-302 also recognizes in the assessment and review process the relevant ESS under the mandate
of other laws such as those pertaining to protected areas and ecosystem services, water resources,
indigenous peoples (IPs), resettlement, grievance mechanisms, labor, climate change, and sociocultural
heritage, among others.3 The release of the Environmental Clearance Certificate (ECC) leads to the next
stage of the project planning and the acquisition of approvals from other government agencies and the
local government units (LGUs), and the ECC and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) report serve as
guidance documents to other agencies and LGUs in their decision-making.4

12. Both the Philippines policy framework and ESS1 provide guidelines for the classification of
projects based on the results of the assessment. However, the Philippines categorizes projects into the
following: (a) Category A or Environmentally Critical Projects (ECPs), requiring an EIS or a full
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report; (b) Category B or non-ECP located in an Environmentally
Critical Area (ECA), requiring either an Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) checklist or an EIS
depending on the thresholds for Category B; (c) Category C or environmental enhancement project

2 IRRs of PD No. 1586, Establishing the PEISS.


3 The other laws are presented in detail in relation to the other ESS to which each of them are specifically relevant.
4 DENR MC 2007-008.

8
requiring a project description report; and (d) Category D or projects not covered by the PEISS. A project
category and the corresponding EIA requirement are determined using quantitative thresholds such as
production capacity, length in case of linear projects, megawatts in case of power projects, area for
structures, and so on. according to MC 2014-005 while the ESS1 classification is based on the level of risks
(High, Substantial, Moderate, and Low) that are proportionate to the nature of the projects.

13. The PEISS contains elements of social assessment that include the identification of impacts to
project-affected communities, vulnerable people, and groups and other socioeconomic impacts. It also
requires stakeholder consultations and public participation in determining the social risks and impacts of
a development effort as provided for in DAO 2017-15. Aside from the PEISS and its IRRs, there are also
other laws such as the Magna Carta of Women (RA 9710), Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA) (RA 8371),
Expanded Senior Citizens Act of 2010 (RA 9994), and Magna Carta for the Disabled Persons (RA 7277) that
require, albeit implicit, an assessment of the social risk/impact of the development initiatives.

14. There are also policy provisions that invoke the requirements of ESS1 on project disclosure,
consultations with affected persons and different stakeholders, and public hearings, with a focus on
projects that are categorized as ECPs and those under Category B that require an EIS. Regardless of the
category, the DAO 2003-30 requires the presentation of social acceptability through local government
resolutions and clearances. Moreover, an approved ECC has a project assessment planning tool to assist
the project proponent, LGUs, and other concerned agencies on the management of the project and for
better coordination in the mitigation of the project impacts, in particular social issues and regulatory
conditions which are prescribed by other laws.

15. The PEISS/DAO 2003-30 requires the identification of a wide range of measures to avoid,
minimize, mitigate, and compensate adverse impacts caused by a project. DAO 2003-30 requires that the
impact assessment considers alternatives to project location, technology, and resources and that these
are considered in developing the environmental protection and enhancement measures. The template of
the impacts management plan in DAO 2003-30 is similar to the Environmental and Social Management
Plan (ESMP) requirements in terms of outlining the options for prevention or mitigation.

16. Variance. While there are sufficient Philippine policy mandates for ES assessment based on the
PEISS and DAO 2003-30, some ESF requirements, while not negated by any law, could be made explicit to
broaden the ES assessment. Some of these include

(a) Assessment of project risks which could determine the proportionality in designing the
management responses;
(b) Consistency of IEE checklists for projects in ECAs to accurately identify ES impacts and
address risks/hazards, including climate change impacts and risks;
(c) Gap or challenges in assessing social project risks/impact particularly with reference to
vulnerable people and/or disadvantaged groups;
(d) Assessment of risks/impacts of associated facilities and activities;
(e) Assessment of project-level impacts on climate change and the impacts of climate change
on the selection, site, planning, design, and implementation and, where applicable,
decommissioning of projects; and
(f) Assessment of cumulative impacts and monitoring of projects and integration of ECC
conditions in tender documents and contract conditions of contractors. The programmatic

9
EIA approach as part of the PEISS requirement addresses some aspects of the cumulative
impact assessment concept of the ESF. Such approaches can be harmonized with ESF
requirements.

17. Institutional stakeholders. The PEISS is implemented primarily by the DENR through the
Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) and its 16 regional offices and by the Ministry of Environment,
Natural Resources and Energy (MENRE) in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao
(BARMM). There are other agencies such as the Ecology Center of the Subic Bay Metropolitan
Administration (SBMA) and the Palawan Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD) that review
mitigation plans of projects in their areas of jurisdiction. Other concerned agencies are responsible for
addressing social issues, such as the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) for IP concerns;
LGUs and the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) for community issues and land
uses/zoning; the Department of Human Settlements and Urban Development (DHSUD) for housing,
human settlements, and urban development, including land use and zoning issues; the Department of
Labor and Employment (DOLE) for worker’s rights; the Department of Social Welfare and Development
(DSWD) for the promotion of social protection in general; the National Council on Disability Affairs (NCDA)
for the promotion of welfare of persons with disability; the Council for the Welfare of Children (CWC) for
the protection of children; and the Department of Health (DOH) for the promotion of community health
and sanitation. There are also other government agencies with focus on specific population groups such
as the National Commission on Senior Citizens and the Philippine Commission on Women. The analysis of
the institutional capacity to implement and monitor the Philippine ES laws under Phase 2 could determine
the viability of designating a lead agency to ensure a comprehensive assessment of the social impact of
projects, considering all the various relevant laws. It is equally important to improve interagency
coordination to deliver ES results effectively for development projects. This could be achieved by involving
National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) which is an apex agency for development
planning.

ESS2 - Labor and Working Conditions

18. ESS2 introduces labor management procedures and emphasizes non-discrimination, equal
opportunity, protecting the vulnerable workers and preventing child labor or any form of forced labor,
and providing mechanisms for association as well as grievance redress. It provides specific requirements
on occupational health and safety (OHS), expanding upon the World Bank Group’s Environmental, Health
and Safety Guidelines (EHSG). ESS2 includes provisions on the treatment of direct, contracted,
community, and primary supply workers and government civil servants. In most part, ESS2 invokes that
compliance to ESS2 standards and requirements shall be subject to the applicable provisions of relevant
national laws.

19. Congruence. The Philippines has a Labor Code since 1974, a comprehensive legislation that
regulates employment relationships providing details on labor and working conditions for the private
sector. Updates have been made through several subsequent amendatory laws, including Republic Act
(RA) 11058 (2017);5 Anti-Age Discrimination in Employment Act (2016); RA 10771 (2016);6 RA 9481

5 An Act Strengthening Compliance with Occupational, Safety and Health Standards and Providing Penalties for Violations
Thereof.
6 Act Promoting the Creation of Green Jobs, Granting Incentives, and Appropriating Funds Therefor.

10
(2007);7 Special Protection of Children Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act (2003);
and Wage Rationalization Act (1988).

20. For the public sector, Executive Order 292, s. 1987 or the Administrative Code of 1987 and civil
service rules and regulations are applicable. Other laws enacted that relate to labor and working
conditions are Safe Spaces Act, Expanded Maternity Leave Law, Social Security Act of 2018, Expanded
Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2012, Magna Carta of Women, Magna Carta for Disabled Persons, as
amended, Wage Rationalization Act (2000), and the IPRA of 1997. These laws, together with their rules
and regulations, prescribe the applicability of labor laws, labor management procedures, terms and
conditions of employment, rights of workers, OHS, non-discrimination and equal opportunity, forced
labor, workers’ organizations, grievance mechanism, and provisions for vulnerable workers, including
child worker, in all labor management or employee-employer arrangements. Compliance with these legal
requirements and standards is enforced by the concerned government agencies as prescribed by
applicable laws.

21. As stated in ESS1, the PEISS process includes manpower requirements and OHS risks and
mitigation measures in the assessment of project impacts and risks that may occur during the different
phases of project implementation as well as identifying the responsible entities and resources needed to
ensure workers’ safety. The PEISS recognizes that OHS standards are observed by all organizations,
projects, sites, or any workplace in both the private and public sectors as prescribed under RA 11058 and
Civil Service Commission (CSC)-DOH-DOLE Joint MC No. 1, s. 2020.

22. Variance. The Philippines policy framework on labor, however, could be more explicit in terms of
measures to prevent harassment8 apart from sexual and gender-based exploitation in the IRRs. The
provisions could also be enhanced with regard to monitoring of compliance of contractors with labor
welfare and protection and the applicability of a grievance mechanism to contracted employees in the
public sector. There are also no standards under Philippine laws governing community workers as defined
in ESS2. It is also observed that the applicability of ESS2 requirements in terms of working conditions,
terms and conditions of employment, labor management procedures, non-discrimination and equal
opportunity, forced labor, workers’ organizations, grievance mechanism, and rights of workers, including
the vulnerable sector, except with respect to manpower requirements and OHS, is not established during
the ES assessment described in ESS1.

23. Institutional stakeholders. The lead agency that implements labor laws for the private sector is
the DOLE, while rules and regulations on public sector employment are implemented primarily by the CSC.

ESS3 - Resource Efficiency and Pollution Prevention and Management

24. ESS3 promotes the sustainable use of resources as well as avoidance/minimizing of pollutants,
generation of hazardous and non-hazardous waste, and use or negative impact of pesticides. ESS3
supports the implementation of technically and financially feasible measures to improve efficient
consumption of energy. It includes a requirement on the management of wastes and chemical and

7 An Act Strengthening the Workers’ Constitutional Right to Self-Organization, Amending for the Purpose PD No. 442, as
Amended, Otherwise Known as the Labor Code of the Philippines.
8 Under International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention C190, ‘violence and harassment in the world of work’ refers to ‘a

range of unacceptable behaviors and practices, or threats thereof, whether a single occurrence or repeated, that aim at, result
in, or are likely to result in physical, psychological, sexual, or economic harm and includes gender-based violence and
harassment’.

11
hazardous materials. It requires the Borrower to estimate gross greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, where
technically and financially feasible. Where the project involves historical pollution, the Borrower must
establish a process to identify the responsible party. ESS3 lists specific requirements where a project is a
potentially significant user of water or would have potentially significant impacts on water quality. It puts
an emphasis on the World Bank Group’s EHSG and on other good international industry practices.

25. Congruence. Although there is no single law covering all the aspects of ESS3, the Philippine
legislative framework on resource efficiency and pollution prevention and management is comprehensive
and covers several regulations on the conservation and protection of natural resources such as water
resources, fisheries, mineral resources, and forests. These laws are anchored on the basic framework on
environment based on the 1987 Philippine Constitution which manifested in Section 16, Article II that
“The State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord
with the rhythm and harmony of nature.” Furthermore, Section 15, of the same article mandates the state
“to protect and promote the people’s right to health.” Overarching laws to address the conflicting
demands of population growth, urbanization, industrial expansion, rapid natural resources utilization, and
increasing technological advances are provided in PD No. 1151 (Philippine Environmental Policy) and PD
1152 (Philippine Environment Code), which were promulgated in 1977. The succeeding laws on air, water,
waste, minerals, and forestry, among others, are anchored on these two PDs. These laws and IRRs
prescribe the rational appropriation, utilization, exploitation, development, conservation, and protection
of resources, including provisions to safeguard the environment and rights of affected communities. The
legislative framework covering pollution prevention is likewise comprehensive with laws, regulations, and
standards on managing solid waste,9 air pollution,10 land-based water pollution,11 marine pollution,12
sanitation,13 hazardous wastes and chemicals,14 fertilizer and pesticide,15 and climate change.16

26. The impacts of projects to the environment and communities due to the use of resources and the
generation of pollution are assessed through the PEISS. For instance, the PEISS requires the assessment
of water demand, sources, and water quantity (water balance) and quality impacts, including issues on
resource competition. The provision of pollution control systems and other mitigation measures that
comply to standards (that is, air quality and emission standards of the Clean Air Act; water quality and
effluent standards of the Clean Water Act; Ecological Solid Waste Management Act; and the Toxic,
Hazardous and Nuclear Control Act) are cross-referenced in the PEISS. The foregoing policies and
regulations link to the country’s aim of achieving sustainable production and consumption which will
directly address the concept of circular economy.

27. Variance. Consistency of the Philippine regulations with ESS3 including capacities of agencies to
implement the laws could be further assessed, particularly on GHG accounting by Executive Order 174,
series of 2014 (Institutionalizing the Philippine Greenhouse Gas Inventory Management and Reporting
System), standards for sulfur in fuel, noise standards, establishing a responsible party who would
undertake the remediation of contaminated sites, Integrated Vector Management (IVM), and adoption of
some of the relevant good international industry practices including the World Bank EHSG.

9 Ecological Solid Waste Management Act (RA 9003).


10 Philippine Clean Air Act (RA 8749).
11 Philippine Clean Water Act (RA 9275).
12 Marine Pollution Decree (PD 979).
13 Sanitation Code of the Philippines (PD 856).
14 Toxic, Hazardous and Nuclear Waste Control Act (RA 6969).
15 Fertilizer and Pesticide Act (PD 1144).
16 Climate Change Act (RA 9729).

12
28. Institutional stakeholders. The DENR, the National Water Resources Board, the Department of
Energy, Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System, the Local Water Utilities Administration, the
National Solid Waste Management Commission, the Climate Change Commission (CCC), Laguna Lake
Development Authority, the DOH, the Philippine Coast Guard, Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority, the
Philippine Nuclear Research Institute, and LGUs are responsible for implementing and monitoring the
relevant laws on resource efficiency as well as pollution prevention and management.

ESS4 - Community Health and Safety

29. ESS4 recognizes that project activities, equipment, and infrastructure can increase community
exposure to risks and impacts. In addition, communities that are already subjected to impacts from
climate change may also experience an acceleration or intensification of impacts due to project activities.
ESS4 addresses the health, safety, and security risks and impacts on project-affected communities and the
corresponding responsibility of the Borrower to avoid or minimize such risks and impacts, with particular
attention to people who, because of their circumstances, may be vulnerable.

30. Congruence. The Philippine regulations contain elements that address health, safety, and security
risks and impacts on project-affected communities. Project implementers are required to conduct risk
hazard assessment particularly for facilities and installations that utilize chemicals and hazardous
materials. The Philippines has a framework to address climate change, natural hazards, and disasters.
Also, the National Environmental Health Action Plans (NEHAP) provide a good framework for addressing
community health and safety aspects.

31. Variance. The country system however could provide explicit guidelines for anticipating and
avoiding the transmission of sexually transmitted communicable diseases due to the influx of temporary
or permanent workers as an enhancement to the IRRs. Further, review and assessment of consistency in
the implementation and capacities of concerned agencies would facilitate the identification of relevant
provisions of the Philippine laws to harmonize with ESS4.

32. Institutional stakeholders. The lead agencies for implementing community health and safety laws
and regulations are the DENR, DOH, DOLE, Department of Science and Technology (DOST), Department
of Agriculture (DA), DILG, Department of Transportation (DOTr), Department of Public Works and
Highways (DPWH), Bureau of Fire Protection (BFP), and the CCC as well as the LGUs under whose
jurisdiction the project is located.

ESS5 - Land Acquisition, Restrictions on Land Use and Involuntary Resettlement

33. ESS5. Although major development projects could have far-reaching or broad-based benefits,
they could also entail acquisition of land that causes loss of productive assets and/or involuntarily relocate
project-affected persons. ESS5 seeks to avoid involuntary resettlement, forced eviction, or economic
losses due to land acquisition as a first recourse. If resettlement and/or economic losses due to land
acquisition are unavoidable, the affected persons should be duly compensated, or their losses should be
replaced in a manner that would restore or even improve the quality of their lives. Special attention should
be given to vulnerable groups such that they directly benefit from the project and attain a better quality
of life. The affected persons should be duly consulted throughout the process.

34. Congruence. The Philippines’ policy framework on land acquisition, restrictions on land use, and
involuntary resettlement comprises several laws and their corresponding rules and regulations, the most

13
relevant of which are RA 10752 (2016),17 RA 7279 (1992),18 RA 8371 (1997),19 RA 7160 (1991),20 RA
11038,21 as amended, RA 9147 (2001),22 PD 1586,23 and PD 70524 and their IRRs and procedural manuals.
These laws and their respective IRRs prescribe rules on the permissible modes of real property and Right-
of-Way (ROW) acquisition; alternatives to reduce impacts of land acquisition; statutory compensation and
other entitlements, including livelihoods and transition support, to owners of lands and/or improvements;
rights of informal and customary settlers, including their security of tenure; protection of vulnerable
groups; restrictions of access to natural resources; and appropriate resettlement and eviction guidelines
in connection with all national government projects. Also, negotiation is the primary mode utilized to start
the process of land acquisition, and expropriation is done as a last resort. It is noted, likewise, that all
implementing agencies are mandated to develop their own ROW Manual of Procedures in accordance
with the outline in RA 10752.

35. Variance. The stocktaking exercise reflects several aspects of the Philippines policy framework on
land acquisition and involuntary resettlement that could be made more effective through enabling
guidelines. A detailed analysis of policy and regulatory provisions would be desirable to ascertain the
addressal of the key concerns listed below. Such an analysis would provide insights for
enhancing/updating the relevant IRRs and/or the need for interventions to pass new laws:

(a) Criteria for determining eligibility of informal settlers


(b) Time of entry and use of acquired land by the project before full compensation is made
(c) Just compensation for expropriated land and/or improvements
(d) Adequacy of transition support, alternative income-earning opportunities, and livelihoods
restoration, particularly for vulnerable people
(e) Restrictions of access to natural resources in declared critical habitats
(f) Standards/protocols (in terms of content and process) for the development of an ROW
Manual by different implementing agencies as required under RA 10572
(g) Considerations when a proposed project would potentially affect the customs and
livelihoods of the IPs in ancestral domains (ADs) which are community property that cannot
be sold, disposed, or destroyed.

36. Institutional stakeholders. Laws and regulations on land acquisition, restrictions on land use, and
involuntary resettlement are implemented by several government agencies, such as the DENR, DHSUD,
LGUs, and the implementing agency of a project that requires land acquisition and resettlement. For AD,
the NCIP is responsible for access to land by virtue of the IPRA.

17 The Right-of-Way Act.


18 Urban Development and Housing Act of 1992.
19 IPRA of 1997.
20 The Local Government Code of 1991.
21 The Expanded National Integrated Protected Areas System (e-NIPAS) Act of 2018.
22 Wildlife Resources Conservation and Protection Act.
23 Establishing an EIS system including other environmental management-related measures and for other purposes.
24 Revised Forestry Code of the Philippines.

14
ESS6 - Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resources

37. ESS6 recognizes that protecting and conserving biodiversity and sustainably managing living
natural resources are fundamental to sustainable development, and it recognizes the importance of
maintaining core ecological functions of habitats, including forests, and the biodiversity they support.
ESS6 also addresses sustainable management of primary production and harvesting of living natural
resources and recognizes the need to consider the livelihood of project-affected parties, including IPs,
whose access to, or use of, biodiversity or living natural resources may be affected by a project.

38. Congruence. The Philippine Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (2016) is the country’s road map
to conserve its biodiversity and achieve its vision by 2028. The PEISS, e-NIPAS Act, Fisheries Code, Wildlife
Conservation and Protection Act, and the Revised Forestry Code are among the laws that regulate
activities in protected areas and forests. The PEISS screens and identifies biodiversity impacts and requires
the development of mitigation measures to adverse impacts. Both the PEISS and the e-NIPAS Act and its
IRRs restrict development in strict (core) protection zones and nature reserves while allowing settlements,
agriculture, and other activities only in buffer zones and/or multiple-use zones that are managed as part
of the protected area resource management plans for protecting the strictly protected zones from
encroachments. Activities in multiple-use and buffer zones should be aligned with the Protected Area
Management Plan (PAMP) of each protected area. There are also requirements for a Comprehensive
Development and Management Plan (CDMP), Rehabilitation Plan, and annual operations planning and
provision of budget to protect and conserve biodiversity and mitigate impacts, including implementation
of biodiversity offsets as part of ecosystem rehabilitation based on the e-NIPAS Act, Forestry Code, and
the PEISS. Project interventions in protected areas are required to secure the Special Use in Protected
Area (SAPA) and to pay an annual development fee as premium to the protected area for ecosystem
services through the Integrated Protected Area Fund according to the e-NIPAS Act.

39. Variance. While there is similarity of the Philippine regulations with ESS6 in terms of the
assessment of impacts on and conservation of habitats and biodiversity, there are variances in terms of
the cumulative impact assessment on habitats and biodiversity, implementation of mitigation hierarchy,
and independent forest certification system and in ensuring the overall sustainability of primary
production activities such as forest harvesting. While the e-NIPAS Act introduces the concept of ecosystem
services through the payment of annual development fees, these are computed based on zonal values of
land of the nearest barangay or municipality where the project is located and not on the adverse impacts
caused by the development of a project in the protected area. The concept of No Net Loss, Net Gain is not
applied in the existing policy and regulatory framework.

40. Institutional stakeholders. The implementation of these laws is within the mandate of the DENR
and its line bureaus, DA and its bureaus, Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR), and the
Protected Area Management Board (PAMB). The PAMB structure is composed of the DENR, other
government agencies, concerned LGUs, NCIP, IP representatives, and civil society organizations and
interest groups.

ESS7 - Indigenous Peoples/Sub-Saharan African Historically Underserved Traditional Local Communities

41. ESS7 seeks to enhance development benefits to, and avoid adverse impacts of development
projects on, IPs. Moreover, ESS7 upholds respect for the culture of IPs that would potentially be affected
by a project; promotes optimum benefits for IPs by ensuring that project designs are appropriate,
culturally sensitive, and inclusive; requires meaningful consultation throughout the project life, and

15
obtaining free and prior informed consent (FPIC) whenever the project has been assessed to have adverse
impacts on land and natural resources could cause relocation or have significant impact on the cultural
heritage of IPs.

42. Congruence. The Philippines’ IPRA of 1997 and other IPRA-related policies like NCIP AO No. 1-
2012, NCIP AO No. 3-1012,26 and NCIP AO No. 2-201827 are deemed comprehensive and consistent with
25

the requirements of ESS7 that advocates essential elements of fostering full respect for the rights, dignity,
aspirations, identity, culture, and natural resource-based livelihoods of IP. Enabling mechanisms are in
place for development initiatives to avoid the adverse impacts of projects on IPs, or when avoidance is
not possible, to minimize, mitigate, and/or compensate for such impacts. Meaningful consultations, FPIC,
and mechanisms for grievance redress are observed across the development stages. While the IPRA is the
umbrella policy, there are other laws that support some provisions of the IPRA. The PEISS requires an EIS
for ECPs and projects within ECAs with IP areas considered as ECAs. Hence, assessment of the direct and
indirect impacts of projects on the biophysical and human environment are conducted resulting in the
crafting of appropriate mitigating and/or enhancement measures. Other laws are RA 10752,28 RA 7942,29
RA 10121,30 RA 11054,31 RA 7942, and RA 7586 (as expanded in 2018),32 among others.

43. Variance. The only variance between the IPRA and ESS7 is that under the IPRA, all proposed
policies/programs/projects/plans/activities (PPPPAs) within ADs/ancestral lands (ALs) are subject to FPIC
as validated by the NCIP through field-based investigations (FBIs) that involve potentially affected
IP/indigenous cultural communities (ICCs).33 A whole range of PPPPAs are subject to FPIC with varying
degrees of processing requirements. All projects that undergo FPIC would require written resolutions from
the affected ICCs/IPs, expressing their acceptance of a project, and processed through a series of
community consultative assemblies leading to consensus building among the IPs. The resolution is
formalized through a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA).

44. ESS7, on the other hand, requires FPIC only if a project is assessed to potentially result in (a)
adverse impacts on land and natural resources with traditional ownership; (b) relocation from such land
or natural resources; or (c) significant impact on cultural heritage including commercial use of land, natural
resources, or cultural heritage. However, ESS7 also requires the preparation of an IP Framework or Plan
to ensure that the impacts of the project are periodically assessed throughout the project

25 The Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices (IKSPs) and Customary Laws (CLs) Research and Documentation Guidelines
of 2012: https://ncip.gov.ph/wp- content/uploads/2020/09/ncip-ao-no-1-s-2012-iksp.pdf.
26 The Revised Guidelines on Free and Informed Consent and Related Processes.
27 The Revised Guidelines on the Formulation of the Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development and Protection Plan:

https://ncip.gov.ph/wp- content/uploads/2020/09/ncip-ao-no-1-s-2004-adsdpp-guidelines.pdf.
28 The implementing agency prepares the Preliminary Land Acquisition Plan and Resettlement Action Plan or Indigenous

People’s Action Plan (IPAP) as applicable as part of the EIA.


29 The Mining Act requires the social development and management programs of proponents to ensure sustained economic

and social benefits to the host communities, such as IP communities.


30 Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010 ensures gender-responsive disaster risk reduction and

climate change measures, sensitive to indigenous knowledge systems and practices and respectful of human rights.
31 The Organic Act of Muslim Mindanao provides the basic structure for IPs within BARMM to secure their identity and

posterity, allowing for meaningful self-governance within the framework of the Constitution and the national sovereignty as
well as territorial integrity of the Republic of the Philippines and promote and support traditional or tribal justice systems of IPs.
32 Philippine Mining Act of 1995 and RA No. 7586 (National Integrated Protected Areas System) as expanded by RA 11038 (e-

NIPAS Act of 2018) uphold the use of heritage and genetic resources within ADs to serve as the basis for cultural integrity.
33 NCIP has an exhaustive list of recognized IP communities. However, there are recognized IP groups who do not consider

themselves as IPs but more of ethnic groups, and confirmation for inclusion to the FPIC is determined through the FBI.

16
implementation, any adverse impact would be avoided or mitigated so that the affected IPs would benefit
in an optimum manner, and their welfare and culture are duly protected/promoted.

45. Meaningful consultations are provided for IPs outside ADs/ALs under the IPRA and other
Philippine laws (see ESS10) though procedures are less rigid compared to IPs within ADs/ALs. At a later
stage, further review of the consistency of Philippine laws pertinent to ESS7 during project
implementation as well as concerns on institutional capacities will be conducted with NCIP and pertinent
agencies.

46. Institutional stakeholder. The NCIP is the primary government agency responsible for the
formulation and implementation of policies, plans, and programs to recognize, protect, and promote the
rights of IPs/ICCs.

ESS8 - Cultural Heritage

47. Cultural heritage, in tangible and intangible forms, not only are manifestations of traditional
beliefs and values but also, more importantly, could serve as a significant source of knowledge. ESS8
protects cultural heritage from the adverse impact of projects as well as promotes equitable sharing of
benefits that accrue through the use of cultural heritage.

48. Congruence. RA 10066, otherwise known as the National Cultural Heritage Act of 2009 serves as
the omnibus legal framework that governs the regulation of activities concerning cultural heritage with
the main objectives of protecting, preserving, conserving, and promoting the nation’s cultural heritage
covering both the tangible and intangible,34 its property and histories, and ethnicity of local communities.
Other Philippine laws have been crafted in support of the spirit of RA 10066 and ESS8. Other laws such as
the PEISS and IPRA are in support of RA 10066. Under the PEISS, declared heritage zones are deemed
culturally sensitive areas and therefore covered under the PEISS. Project impacts on cultural heritage must
be determined specifically as direct, indirect, and cumulative project-specific risks and impacts. Through
the EIA, an Archeological Impact Assessment is required in declared heritage zones and archeological sites.
Upon discovery of archeological sites, earth-moving activities cease and the site is subject to assessment
by the National Museum (NM). The IRRs of RA 10066 mandate the National Commission on Culture and
the Arts (NCCA) to come up with Conservation Management Plans for World Heritage Sites, and this is
delegated to LGUs along with the conservation and development of historic centers and heritage zones,
including cultural properties located within such areas. The general policy is to integrate heritage concerns
(for example, historic centers and heritage zones) in the comprehensive land use plans or master
development plans of a particular town or city. Concerns under the IPRA are direct through consultations
under the FPIC process. More specific is the Joint Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL)-
NCIP AO No. 01, s. 2016,35 which states whether ICCs should be recognized to have created and owned
artistic or literary work or invention. ICCs are entitled to collective management of intellectual property
rights over these works. Artistic and literary works and inventions of IPs refer to tangible and intangible
forms in which IKSPs are expressed, communicated, or manifested and include traditional music,
performances, narratives, names and symbols, designs, and technological innovations.

34 The Philippine Intangible Cultural Heritage Committee leads implementation of UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of
the Intangible Cultural Heritage.
35 Rules and Regulations on Intellectual Property Rights Application and Registration Protecting the Indigenous Knowledge

Systems and Practices of the Indigenous Peoples and Indigenous Cultural Communities.

17
49. Variance. The country system, as mapped with ESS8 provisions, reflects the variance in the
following areas: (a) preparation of a Conservation Management Plan for cultural heritage not only for
world heritage sites; (b) inclusion of contractors in the observance of globally recognized practices; (c)
under chance finds, consideration of an advance survey and monitoring of ground-disturbing activities,
especially in locations with a high likelihood of cultural heritage, contractor procurement and guidance in
the form of a contractor code of conduct and training of contracted workers; and a monitoring system for
the implementation of the chance finds procedure; and (d) a move toward accreditation of experts.
Further review of consistency of implementation and capacities of the environmental agencies and other
pertinent agencies will be conducted at a later stage on relevant provisions of the Philippine laws
pertinent to ESS8.

50. Institutional stakeholder. The NCCA is the policy-making body and coordinating agency for the
preservation, development, and promotion of the Philippine arts and culture. It serves as the conduit in
linking local governments and institutions with their pool of experts and trainers. The NCIP is responsible
for the implementation of the IPRA provision on cultural integrity.

ESS9 - Financial Intermediaries

51. ESS9 ensures that environmental and social risks/impact assessment are done for projects that
are supporting or supported by financial intermediaries (FIs). It also promotes the establishment of an
environmental and social management system (ESMS), including relevant human resources requirements
within these FIs.

52. Congruence. The Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) and the Development Bank of the Philippines
(DBP) are lead FIs in the country. As required by foreign-funded projects, an ES management procedure
is prepared by these FIs. The procedure outlines the requirements for the screening of subprojects based
on the PEISS categorization, approval based on the submission of the EIA/IEE or ECC/Certificate of Non-
Coverage (CNC), and the monitoring and reporting requirements for subprojects. Both FIs have
institutionalized an ES monitoring unit/department to ensure the implementation of ESMSs of foreign-
funded projects. The Bankers Association of the Philippines (BAP), Chamber of Thrift Banks (CTB), and
Rural Bankers Association of the Philippines (RBAP) jointly signed in 2001 the ‘Statement on
Environmental and Sustainable Development’ to promote the integration of environmental concerns in
the operations of financial institutions in the overall lending and investment strategy. However, the
development and implementation of the ESMS by banks are generally driven by requirements of
international lenders such as the World Bank. In such case, FIs can implement the ESMS in the screening
and review of loan documents, require borrowers to comply with PEISS and other national environmental
laws through the submission of copies of the EIS/ECC and permits, and assess and monitor ES risks
throughout the subproject lifecycle.

53. Variance. There is no regulation in the Philippines that requires FIs to implement an ESMS.
Although the bank associations have signed the statement on sustainable development, there is no
consistent application of the ES management procedure to their entire portfolio. There is also no
requirement to conduct stakeholder engagement as well as disclosure of documents by sub-borrowers,
except for those with funds coming from international lenders.

54. Institutional stakeholders. Aside from LBP and DBP, the Small Business Guarantee and Finance
Corporation and People’s Credit and Finance Corporation also provide credit delivery for Barangay
microenterprises registered under the Barangay Microenterprises Law (RA 9178).

18
ESS10 - Stakeholder Engagement and Information Disclosure

55. ESS10 recognizes the importance of open and transparent engagement between the Borrower
and project stakeholders as an essential element of good international practice. Effective stakeholder
engagement can improve the ES sustainability of projects, enhance project acceptance, and make a
significant contribution to successful project design and implementation. ESS10 requires the engagement
of various project stakeholders in an appropriate and timely manner throughout the project life.

56. Consistency of country system. Requirements for stakeholder engagement under the Philippine
regulations (principally the PEISS) are comprehensive and consistent with the requirements of ESS10 that
advocate essential elements of disclosure of information for ECPs (Category A) and those located in ECAs
which fall within the threshold of EIS under Category B: stakeholder identification, engagement, public
scoping, public hearing, meaningful consultations, grievance redress, and documentation. Category B
projects which require IEE under Category B are required to present proofs of social acceptability.

57. Stakeholder consultations are undertaken throughout the stage of project development and
management stages. Enabling mechanisms are in place through the PEISS, IPRA, ROW Act, DPWH Right-
of-Way and Acquisition Manual (DRAM), and DOTr Right-of-Way and Site Acquisition Manual for
development activities to consult stakeholders throughout the project life cycle. Meaningful consultations
and grievance redress are also observed across development stages. Institutionally, the organizational
capacity, roles and responsibilities, and authorities are clearly identified due to the mandates of agencies
and organizations as specified in the different laws and regulations.

58. Variance. Further review of the quality of the consultations particularly in terms of inclusion of
marginalized groups and/or broad-based representation need to be conducted to ascertain compliance
to relevant provisions of the Philippine laws as well as material consistency with the requirements of
ESS10.

59. Institutional stakeholders. Stakeholder engagement is the responsibility of all project


proponents. As a requirement under the PEISS, stakeholder engagement is the responsibility of the DENR,
project implementing agencies, LGUs, NCIP, and project proponents.

III. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS


60. The stocktaking confirms that the Philippines has a comprehensive ES policy framework that
corresponds to the core principles of the 10 ESS. While the requirements of ES assessment and
consultations are well defined in the PEISS, there are other laws and regulations that supplement and
complement conformance to the ESS. The PEISS, in itself, serves both as the planning and regulatory tool
to enable projects to identify and mitigate impacts and risks while also recognizing the significant issues
which fall entirely within the mandates of other laws or agencies which have jurisdiction and authority
over a particular issue. The congruence of the Philippine policy framework to the ESF provides a strong
legal platform for the application of the ESF standards. There are, however, variances between the
Philippine policy framework and some requirements of the ESF in terms of the operational/enabling
policies, for example

(a) Specificity of the guidelines as well as the definition of the scope/coverage of application of
standards—a major example is the guidelines on the ES assessment as well as the criteria
for the classification/categorization of projects;

19
(b) Coherence of procedural guidelines that might affect the results or application of the
policy—for instance, the ESF has specific guidelines on stakeholder engagement, but it is
more generalized in the Philippine policies; and
(c) Clarity on policies and links of different institutional or organizational responsibilities—this
is particularly noted for ESS3 and ESS6 which focus on resource efficiency and biodiversity
broadly whereas the Philippine policies are by specific type of resources and,
correspondingly, mandated by different regulatory bodies.

61. To a large extent, the variance in operational/enabling guidelines is attributed to the fact that
national laws have broader purpose and application that are beyond project development, which is the
primary focus of the ESF. Most of the variances do not necessarily present a major constraint for World
Bank-supported projects to fulfill the requirements of the ESF but would be a matter of adopting more
explicit guidelines for application in project development. Based on the results of the stocktaking, the
following major recommendations are put forward:

Harmonization of Operational/Enabling Guidelines

62. As previously mentioned, even while there is significant consistency between the Philippine
framework and the ESF at the level of policy declaration, there are some variations in operational
guidelines that could create substantial differences in application. If a program is funded by various
sources such that the Philippine policy framework is applied in one phase and standards of other
development partners are applied in another phase, this could affect the overall sectoral performance
and sustainability. Thus, based on in-depth analysis, the Government of Philippines could consider a road
map to strengthen its regulations, with a view to harmonization with some of the internationally accepted
practices, particularly with regard to the following: (a) scope of risk assessment (ESS1); (b) competency
requirements for effective GHG accounting; (ESS3) (c) compensation package for involuntary
resettlement, including the eligibility of informal settlers (ESS5); (d) the protocol and mechanism for
obtaining FPIC (ESS7); (e) biodiversity management (ESS6); and (f) integration of ES risk management as
an integral part of credit risk management - FIs (ESS9).

63. NEDA, being the apex agency responsible for policy, economic development, and planning, could
play a major role in harmonizing and strengthening the policy framework by providing sound policy
recommendations to the Office of the President, Congress, and other government agencies through the
interagency technical working group of core agencies such as DOLE, DENR, DSWD, DHSUD, and NCIP.

Updating/Enhancement of Enabling Guidelines

64. Since many of the Philippine laws were issued several years back, some aspects of the IRRs and
other enabling guidelines could benefit from simple updating or be made more explicit in terms of
application to project development. While further in-depth analysis is envisaged during Phase 2 including
the assessment of implementation mechanisms and institutional capacities, the stocktaking exercise in
the interim has highlighted the need for updating the following guidelines and procedures:

• Guidelines on the promotion and protection of community health and safety particularly in
relation to prevention of sexually transmitted diseases associated with labor influx
• Protocol or guidelines for the inclusion of key labor welfare standards in agreement with
contractors

20
• Expounding on stakeholder consultation protocols to cover the whole project cycle
• Issuance of guideline/protocols on cultural heritage
• Guidelines on the application of ECC conditions through actionable instruments such as a
construction contract, post-implementation monitoring and evaluation protocols, and so on.

Enhancing Mechanism for Monitoring Compliance to ES Policy Framework

65. Following the stocktaking of the policy framework, it is likewise important to look at the
mechanism for monitoring compliance to the Philippine policy framework by the different major
regulatory agencies to get a full picture of the operational status. It is recommended to undertake a rapid
assessment of the regulation of critical aspects of the Philippine policy framework to determine the actual
status of compliance and determine the operational challenges in applying the standards as well as
corresponding capacity-building measures to address them. Since most of the ESS and/or Philippine
policies are monitored by several agencies, it is recommended that Phase 2, involving an analysis of
institutional capacity to implement and monitor the laws, focus on specific policies that could be selected
on the basis of (a) relative importance in applying other related standards/policies, (b) policies/standards
that serve as a significant determinant of the level of risk/impact, and (c) broad application across different
categories/types of projects. The World Bank will be carrying out such an analysis under Phase 2 of CESFA.

66. Phase 2 will be initiated based on the outcomes of the proposed stakeholder consultation to share
the results of Phase 1. Phase -2 will be carried out in close collaboration with NEDA and other relevant
departments resulting in the preparation of a road map for establishing partnerships with the relevant
Philippine government agencies on ESF application, including a proposed capacity-building agenda.

21
ANNEX A1: List of Persons/Agencies Met/Interviewed

Date/Time
Meeting
2019
July 24 (Wednesday)
9:00 AM Philippine Commission on Women
1145 J.P. Laurel St., San Miguel, Manila
c/o Ms. Kristine Balmes
1:30 PM Environmental Quality Division - Environmental Management Bureau
c/o Renato Cruz, Geri Sañez, and Edwin Navaluna - Environmental Quality Division
3:00 PM Environmental Impact Assessment Division - Environmental Management Bureau
c/o Esperanza Sajul and Marivic Yao
July 25 (Thursday)
10:00 AM Philippine Rural Development Project - Department of Agriculture
Elliptical Road, Quezon City
c/o USEC Ariel Cayanan - Executive Director
Engr. Cirilo Namon - Deputy Executive Director
July 26 (Friday)
9:00 AM Bureau of Plant Industry - Plant Product Safety Services Division
692 San Andres St., Malate, Manila
c/o Mr. George Culaste - Director
5:00 PM Land Bank of the Philippines
Department of Energy, Taguig City
c/o Prudencio Calado - pcalado3@gmail.com
Henry Samaniego - EJSAMANIEGO@mail.landbank.com
+63917-813-6462
July 29 (Monday)
9:00 AM Laguna Lake Development Authority
Ecology Center, East Avenue, Quezon City
10:00 AM Metro Manila Development Authority - Metro Manila Flood Management Project
Planning Office
c/o Mico Gison - Director, Physical Planning and Special Development Office
Karren Aguas
2:00 PM Meeting with Gerry and Malu
World Bank
July 30 (Tuesday)
8:30 AM Maynilad Water Services, Inc. - Metro Manila Wastewater Management Project
QESH Conference Room, Ground Floor, Maynilad Head Office
c/o Mr. Emmanuel Martinez
11:00 AM Department of Transportation - Cebu Bus Rapid Transit Project
Room 8284 Columbia Tower, Ortigas Avenue, Pasig City
c/o Mr. Siegfred Landoy - Officer in Charge
3:00 PM Department of Labor and Employment - Bureau of Working Conditions
3rd Floor, DOLE Building, Muralla corner Gen. Luna Sts, Intramuros, Manila
c/o Dr. Ma. Teresita S. Cocueco - Director
tel.: 527-3000 local 306/307
bwcsecretary@gmail.com

22
Date/Time
Meeting
2019
July 31 (Wednesday)
10:00 AM National Water Resources Board
NIA Building, EDSA, Quezon City
c/o Vilma Vergara / Susan Abaño
Tel: 928-2365
10:00 AM National Commission on Indigenous Peoples
West Avenue, Quezon City
2:00 PM Biodiversity Management Bureau
August 1 (Thursday)
1:00 PM National Council on Disability Affairs
Don Antonio Heights, Quezon City
c/o Mr. Cris Perez
August 19 (Monday)
2:00 PM Socialized Housing Finance Corporation
BDO Tower, Makati Avenue, Makati City
c/o Mr. Jojo Carandang
August 20 (Tuesday)
9:00 AM Department of Health
San Lazaro Compound, Rizal Avenue, Manila
August 22 (Thursday)
9:30 AM National Economic and Development Authority
Office of Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environment
Pasig City
c/o Ms. Bobot Corpuz
1:00 PM Tanggol Kalikasan (NGO)
Unit 1213 Corporate 145 Bldg., Mother Ignacia St.
Barangay South Triangle, Quezon City
c/o Atty. Asis Perez, Atty. Ronely Sheen
August 27 (Tuesday)
10:00 AM Quezon City (Local Government Unit)
Office of City Administrator, 4th Floor Quezon City Hall

23
ANNEX A2: List of Participants
Validation Workshop, January 15, 2020

S. No. Name Department


1 Division Chief Nic Bon Bureau of Working Conditions
2 Undersecretary de Leon Cebu Bus Rapid Transit Project - DOTr
3 Project Manager Johan Martinez
4 Undersecretary Juaneza Cebu Bus Rapid Transit Project - DOTr
5 Ria Reyes Cebu Bus Rapid Transit Project - DOTr
6 Mr. Wilfredo Roldan DA FPA Building, Bureau of Animal Industry Compound
7 Assistant Shanel
8 Director Jose Reynaldo Lunas Metro Manila Development Authority
9 Mr. Joaquin Antonio Santos Metro Manila Development Authority
10 Ms. Junilou Monjardin Metro Manila Development Authority
11 Ms. Patricia Albis Metro Manila Development Authority
12 Director Janet Armas DSWD
13 Ma. Consuelo Acosta DSWD
14 Rannon Padrinao DSWD
15 Mr. Erwin R. Yumping Department of Education
16 Director Rommel S. Herrera Department of Finance
17 Mr. Rommel A. Rivero Department of Finance
18 Ms. Ross Glyne S. Aquino. Department of Finance
19 Director Yolly Department of Budget and Management
20 Director Joy Department of Budget and Management
21 Mr. Jason Department of Budget and Management
22 Mr. Ted lorezo Office of Civil Defense
23 Ronne L. Batrilan Office of Civil Defense
24 Myrne Magditang
25 Undersecretary Emmanuel Juaneza Department of Energy
26 Ms. Ria Reyes Department of Energy
27 Ms. Mary Angelie Sto Domingo CCC
28 Mr. Jonas Brian Almendrala CCC
29 Mr. Tom Hawate NEDA
30 Director Darauay NEDA
31 Mr. Ervannie Jay Belarmino DA
32 Ms. Elaine Borejon (PRDD) DA (PRDP)

24

You might also like