Living with water, governing with foresight
Each year in the Philippines, the cool months give us a brief illusion of calm. Skies clear, rivers recede, and disaster headlines fade. But we know what is coming. On average, around 20 tropical cyclones enter the Philippine area of responsibility every year. Many make landfall. And when the rains intensify, they no longer produce “ordinary floods.” They trigger compound and cascading disasters.
Yet this is not only a Philippine story. Across the Asia-Pacific—from the Mekong Delta in Vietnam to the Chao Phraya River in Thailand, from eastern India to the great river systems of southern China—hydrometeorological hazards are becoming more complex. Rainfall interacts with rapid urbanization, land subsidence, sediment mismanagement, and coastal processes. Floods are no longer singular events. They are system failures.
If we want to understand where we are headed, the Mt. Pinatubo-Pampanga river basin offers a sobering but instructive case. When Mt. Pinatubo erupted in 1991, it expelled between 5 and 10 cubic kilometers of volcanic material—one of the largest eruptions of the 20th century. But the eruption did not end in 1991. Vast volumes of volcanic debris remain on the slopes. For decades, intense rainfall has remobilized these deposits into lahars—dense, destructive mudflows that travel downstream.
The result is not just flooding. It is a compounded risk. Rainfall does not flow through stable river channels. It interacts with elevated riverbeds clogged by sediment. Retention basins lose capacity. Dikes overtop more easily. In the Pampanga delta, back-flooding occurs when rivers cannot discharge efficiently into Manila Bay. Land subsidence—driven partly by groundwater extraction—lowers the ground even as sea levels rise. Fishpond dikes, built to support livelihoods, impede drainage, and prolong inundation. A single typhoon can now trigger a ridge-to-reef chain reaction: upland erosion, midstream infrastructure stress, downstream stagnation, and coastal backflow lasting weeks.
This pattern is not unique to Pinatubo. It mirrors what we see elsewhere in the Asia-Pacific. The Mekong Delta struggles with sediment starvation and subsidence. Bangkok faces land sinking combined with tidal surges. Eastern India contends with embanked rivers that trap floodwaters behind poorly maintained levees. Southern China sees urban sprawl expanding into floodplains faster than drainage systems can adapt.
What are we learning? First, flood risk is no longer primarily meteorological. It is geomorphological and political. The rainfall may be natural. But the damage is shaped by land-use decisions, infrastructure design, watershed management, and governance fragmentation.
Second, hazard maps alone are insufficient. Many countries in the region now possess increasingly sophisticated forecasting systems. The Philippines, for example, has institutions such as Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical, and Astronomical Services Administration, Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology, and the University of the Philippines Resilience Institute, which produce detailed hazard analytics. But despite improved forecasts, losses remain high.
The gap lies between forecasting and decision-making. Local governments often lack technical capacity, sustained funding for monitoring equipment, or pre-agreed action protocols tied to forecast thresholds. Recovery dominates planning cycles. We have invested heavily in prediction—less so in institutional transformation.
So how do we begin to change structure and transformability? The Mt. Pinatubo region suggests three starting points. The first is ridge-to-reef integration. Flood governance must treat upland slopes, midstream rivers, delta settlements, and coastal waters as one hydro-social system. Fragmented jurisdictional approaches fail in compound hazard environments. Basin-wide coordination mechanisms—supported by shared data platforms—are essential.
The second is impact-based, anticipatory governance. Digital innovation should not merely refine rainfall forecasts. It should translate thresholds into automatic triggers: pre-budgeted emergency funds, equipment mobilization, targeted agricultural advisories, and evacuation matrices. When rainfall exceeds a certain level upstream, barangays downstream should know how to act within hours. This reduces discretion under pressure and closes the forecast–decision gap.
The third is the structural adaptation of settlement form. In parts of Pampanga, communities have begun elevating homes and adjusting agricultural calendars based on flood depth and duration modeling. More profound changes may be required—cluster-based housing on higher ground, rethinking fishpond configurations to restore drainage, and integrating subsidence management into planning. Flood risk is shaped by where and how we build. Transformability means redesigning exposure, not merely coping with it.
Across the Asia-Pacific, the lesson is clear. We cannot treat floods as external shocks to otherwise stable systems. In many river basins and deltas, instability is now the baseline. The coming typhoon season will test our preparedness again. But the deeper question is whether we are willing to move from reactive relief to anticipatory restructuring—from hazard response to system redesign.
—————-
doyromero@gmail.com
