Policy Brief

Policy paths for addressing coastal erosion in the Philippines Immediate actions needed to curb human activities leading to coastal land loss

Coastal erosion as a national issue Coastal erosion is prevalent in the Philippines (e.g., Fig. 1). As an archipelagic landmass, the loss of coastal lands poses a serious threat to about 60% of the population occupying coastal regions. Typically, long shorelines with narrow coastal plains border the Philippines from large open oceans that are exposed to typhoons. Rapid sea-level rise (higher than the global average) and intensifying storms due to climate change exacerbate the susceptibility of Philippine coasts to erosion. Eroding coasts translate to loss of land that will displace coastal communities and damage industries, ultimately affecting the fragile national economy. Beaches in important tourist sites such as Boracay and Bantayan Island are eroding and, if unmanaged, will continue to do so, eventually impacting revenue in the area.

Call to action. Coastal erosion must be recognized as a national issue. Urgent action from the national government is needed to mitigate man-made causes, and to manage and prepare for the exacerbating effects of climate change. Explicit policies to address this national problem should be put in place.

Human activities exacerbate coastal erosion Human activities speed up the rates of erosion

beyond natural limits. These include unregulated

foreshore development, extraction of beach

materials, abuse of natural habitats, and even the

maladaptive use of hard structures to manage

coastal erosion.

What should be done about it?

• Improve the current easement guideline

• Refine the delineation of seaward limit

• Incorporate easement law into

foreshore development and fisheries

operation

• Enforce easement limit (PD 1067)

• Adopt technical guidelines for the design and

placement of coastal structures (i.e. piers,

seawalls, groins, etc.)

Figure 1. Coastal erosion in Zambales. At the southern flank of Bucao River, as much as 40 m of shoreline eroded after a storm event in 2006.

SAGIP BAYBAY PH

What is the common response to

coastal erosion in the Philippines?

Oftentimes, the default response to

erosional events especially after a typhoon

is the placement of seawalls. However,

seawalls speed up erosion. Over time, the

beach fronting the seawall narrows and

eventually vanishes. Similarly, building of

groins that trap sediments to widen the

beach leads to an undesired consequence

elsewhere: by effectively trapping

sediments on its updrift side, less

sediments can pass through causing

erosion downdrift (Fig. 3a). Solid-based

piers also act like groins (Fig.3b).

Hard structures on the foreshore can

further hasten, rather than arrest, coastal

erosion. What makes things worse is that

these structures are built piecemeal, often

without considering its impacts on adjacent

coastlines.

Figure 2. Caba, La Union after the passage of Typhoon Feria in 2001. Several houses were destroyed by large waves during the onslaught of Typhoon Feria. Erosion persisted even after this typhoon. Stronger typhoons are expected with warming climates.

Unregulated foreshore development, extraction of beach materials, abuse of natural habitats, and even the management of coastal erosion using hard structures (seawalls, groins, solid-based piers and ports) may exacerbate coastal erosion.

Fig. 3a. A groin field along the coast from Agoo to Sto. Tomas in La Union. Rubble groins (top) were constructed in the mid-1980s to arrest erosion resulting in a highly irregular shoreline (right).

Fig. 3b. A solid-based pier in Sta. Fe, Bantayan Island in Cebu acts like a groin. It hinders the transport of sediments leading to accretion updrift and erosion downdrift of the pier.

1. Improve the design and placement of coastal

structures.

Use of solid-based piers and seawalls must

be minimized for coasts to be more resilient.

However, when resorting to such hard

structures, consider the connectivity of

coastal processes, which may extend beyond

municipal or political boundaries.

Evaluate through Environmental Impact

Assessment (EIA) whether the foreshore

structures cause and/ or worsen erosion.

Use geomorphological boundaries such as

continuous coastline or embayment (instead

of political boundaries) when conducting

assessments and/ or planning for coastal

protection.

Figure 4. A geomorphological boundary can be a littoral cell that may consist of an embayment, or a linear beach bounded by rivers or cliffs. Within a littoral cell, the transport of sediments, through the longshore currents, runs uninterrupted. Erosion may occur if, for example, a solid-based pier is built in Municipality C that will hinder riverine materials from reaching the coast of Municipality D since both municipalities are within the same Cell 3. Due to the connectivity of processes within a littoral cell, there should be close coordination in the management of these contiguous coasts.

Figure 5. Pier

built on stilts.

This type of pier

allows sediment

to pass through,

preserving a

continuous

shoreline.

Figure 6. Seawall in Baler, Aurora. This seawall is no match to the strong waves. Its repair and maintenance will be costly.

Apply technical guidelines in designing and

placing foreshore structures, including the

following

o Build ports and piers on coastal segments

where there will be minimal disruption on

longshore drift.

o Build ports and piers on stilts to allow

sediments to pass and reach other coastal

segments.

o Avoid building ports and piers on coral reefs

to minimize harm to the coastal ecosystem.

The loss of coral reefs can affect fisheries as

well as beach stability.

o If seawalls are necessary, consider that

erosion tends to worsen at their front and

along adjacent coasts. Seawalls can also

change the substrate and associated

habitats. Further, they require high initial and

maintenance costs.

What should be done about coastal

erosion?

Addressing coastal erosion calls for minimizing

human activities that speed up beach loss.

Below are some of the actions that can be

considered.

2. Improve the current easement guideline.

o If hard structures are necessary,

combine them with soft measures

such as protection of natural barriers

like coral reef and mangrove.

o If groins are necessary, determine the

net longshore drift because erosion

worsens on the downdrift area.

• Clarify where the seaward limit of the

easement should be reckoned.

The current guideline prescribes simply

“the high-tide line,” but this is variable

with the moon phase. Consider instead a

more fixed alternative such as the

average king tide, which would also

accommodate potential sea-level rise.

• Clarify the definition of the easement or “no-

build zone” in fishery and foreshore lease

agreements.

If invoking accepted terminology, the

“foreshore” is the part of the shore

alternately covered and uncovered by the

ebb and flow of tides and “easement” is

the “no-build zone” landward of the high-

tide line.

PD 1067 (Water Code)

RA 8550 (Fisheries

Code of the Philippines)

? Foreshore lease contract (FLC) / Fishery Lease Agreement (FLA)

Easement

EASEMENT AS DEFINED IN THE WATER CODE OF

THE PHILIPPINES (PD 1067)

“Structures of any kind cannot be built on the banks of rivers and streams and the shores of the seas and lakes throughout their entire length within a zone of three (3) meters in urban areas, twenty (20) meters in agricultural areas and forty (40) meters in forest areas. These zones are subject to the easement of public use only for recreation, navigation, floatation, fishing and salvage.” (PD 1067 (Water Code), Art. 51)

Figure 7. Ambiguity on how the

easement is considered in the

Foreshore Lease Contract (FLC) and

Foreshore Lease Agreement (FLA).

The easement guideline is unclear and not enforced.

Easement is essentially a “no-build zone”. This

guideline addresses the problem of “building too

close to the waterline”, and can provide buffer

against the effects of sea-level rise and storm

waves. In many places, the easement is not

implemented as development is undertaken too

close to the waterline. The poor implementation

of the easement may partly be blamed on vague

definitions of the current guideline. This may be

addressed by the following:

Works Cited: 1. Nicholls, R.J., P.P. Wong, V.R. Burkett, J.O. Codignotto, J.E. Hay, R.F. McLean, S. Ragoonaden and C.D. Woodroffe, 2007: Coastal systems and low-lying areas. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson, Eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 315-356. 2. PNAR. 2013. Coastal Erosion in the Philippines: A National Assessment Report. Submitted to the COBSEA YEOSU Project: Addressing the Challenge of Sea-Level Rise and Coastal Erosion in the East Asian Seas – Initial Implementation of the COBSEA Regional Programme on Coastal Erosion. 3. Siringan, F.P., Sta. Maria, M.Y.Y., and Pang-ot, G. 2006. Coastal erosion in Northern La Union: Trends and possible mitigating measures (unpublished). A terminal report submitted to the Provincial Government of La Union, 102 p National policies and programs Presidential Decree No. 1067 (31 December 1976): The Water Code of the Philippines

Lead Author: Short Bio Dr. Fernando Siringan is a coastal and marine geologist. He has been involved in a wide array of research projects including harmful algal blooms, paleo-climate reconstructions, coastal erosion, submarine groundwater discharge and geophysical mapping of mesophotic corals. For more than two decades, he has spearheaded research on coastal erosion. Dr. Siringan is the current Director of the Marine Science Institute of the University of the Philippines-Diliman.

Co-Authors:

Caroline Marie B. Jaraula. Ph.D. Ma. Yvainne Sta. Maria

Contact details: cepa.msi@gmail.com

Fernando P. Siringan, Ph.D. Project Leader DOST-PCAARRD poject, “CEPA and policy review towards improving coastal erosion management in the Philippines”