Z54 Sectoral Vulnerability Assessment Tool PDF

Sectoral Vulnerability Assessment Tool
Candido A. Cabrido, Jr.

VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT: COASTAL AND MARINE HABITAT AND RESOURCES SECTOR (Cabrido,
2012)
Computing the Vulnerability Index
The Vulnerability Index (Vw) computation proceeds in three stages (Figure 2). It
starts with the calculation of Hij which is the jth climate change impact indicator
for the ith sub-index. The indicator is calculated as a weighted average of selected
sub-indicators, hijk, as follows:
n
H i j   hi j kwi j k
h
k 1
Where,
hijk= kth sub-indicator of ith vulnerability sub-index and the jth climate change
impact indicator
n
w
h
th 1
whijk=weight for the k sub-indicator and k 1
ijk
Then Ti, the ith sub-index, is calculated as a weighted average using results from
the previous stage as follows:
T i   H ij wij
H
j 1
Where,
Hij= jth climate change impact indicator of the ith vulnerability sub-index
wHij=weight for the jth climate change impact indicator of the ith vulnerability sub-
index and m
 wij  1
H
j 1
In the final stage, the Vulnerability Index, Vw, is calculated as a weighted average
of the sub-indices, Ti, as follows:
3
Vw  T i wi
T
i 1
Where,
Ti= ith vulnerability sub-index 3
w
T
i
1
wTi=weight for the ith vulnerability sub-index and i 1
Figure 1: Computation of the Vulnerability Index

Coastal and Marine Sector
Sensitivity Indicators: Coastal and Marine Sector

Indicator Scale Classification Rating
Sea level rise (Ss) Ssi = weighted (We + Cr + Mg/Pf + Sg/Wi + Fs/Df)
Coastal wetlands (We)* % of wetlands inundated

>90% of wetlands 1.0 Very high
71-90% 0.8 High
51-70% 0.6 Moderate
30-50% 0.4 Low
<30% 0.2 Very Low
Coral reefs (Cr)* % of coral reefs inundated
>50% of living cover 1.0 Very high
41-50% 0.8 High
31 - 40% 0.6 Moderate
20-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Mangroves (Mg)* Capacity to migrate landward (UPMSI, 2010)
Over 50% of fishponds and other landward developments 1.0 Very high
active and not available for landward migration
Between 20 to 50% of fishponds and other landward 0.8 High
developments idle or abandoned
Over 50% of fishponds and other landward developments 0.6 Moderate
idle or abandoned
Absence of adjacent fishponds and other developments 0.2 Very Low
landward
OR OR
Capacity to withstand Capacity to withstand prolonged flooding:
prolonged flooding (Pf) Bruguiera-Ceriops-Xylocarpus dominated forest 1.0 Very high
Avicennia-Sonneratia-Rhizophora-Aegiceras dominated forest 0.6 Moderate
Aviceniia-Sonneratia dominated forest 0.2 Very low
Seagrasses (Sg)* Capacity to adapt to sea level rise: (UPMSI, 2010)
Halophila-Halodule dominated 1.0 Very high
Thalassia-Cymodocea-Halodule dominated 0.6 Moderate
Enhalus-Thalassia dominated 0.2 Very Low
OR OR
Capacity of the meadow to Capacity of the meadow to withstand wave impacts:
withstand wave impacts (Wi) Small sized species: Halophila-Halodule meadow 1.0 Very high
Thalassia-Cymodocea-Halodule beds 0.6 Moderate
Root system extensive: Enhalusacoroides dominated 0.2 Very Low
Thalasiahemprichii dominated
Fishes (Fs) Catch of Tuna and small pelagics in 5 years:
>20% reduction in catch 1.0 Very high
16–20% 0.8 High
11–15% 0.6 Moderate
5–10% 0.4 Low
<5% reduction Very low
OR OR
Demersals and other reef Demersals and other reef food fish:
food fish (Df)* >20% reduction in catch 1.0 Very high
16-20% 0.8 High
11-15% 0.6 Moderate
5-10% 0.4 Low
<5% reduction 0.2 Very low
Flooding (Fs) Fsi =weighted (Be + Cs/Cp/Ev + Te + Al + Ws + Gw)
Beach and coastal erosion Geomorphology types: (UPMSI, 2010)

(Be)* Sandy beaches, deltas, mud/sandflat 1.0 Very high
Cobble/gravel beaches, alluvial plains 0.8 High
Low cliffs (<5m high); mangroves, coral reefs 0.6 Moderate
Cliffs < 10m high, indented coasts 0.4 Low
Rocky, cliffed coast 0.2 Very Low
Coastal settlements (Cs)* Presence of natural buffers fronting coastal settlements:
None 1.0 Very high
Mangrove or coral reef 0.8 High
Mangrove and coral reef 0.6 Moderate
OR OR Maximum width of coastal plain in meters
Maximum width of coastal <300m 1.0 Very high
plain (Cp) 301–600m 0.8 High
601–900m 0.6 Moderate
901-1,200m 0.4 Low
>1,200m 0.2 Very Low
OR OR
Elevation in meters (Ev)* Elevation in meters:
<1m 1.0 Very high
1-2m 0.8 High
3-4m 0.6 Moderate
5-6m 0.4 Low
>6m 0.2 Very Low
Agricultural lands (Al)* % of coastal agricultural lands inundated
>90% 1.0 Very high
71-90% 0.8 High
51-70% 0.6 Moderate
31-50% 0.4 Low
<30% 0.2 Very Low
Coastal wetland and water Coastal wetlands and water birds habitat affected
birds habitat (Ws)* >50% affected 1.0 Very high
41-49% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
21-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Groundwater (Gw)* Distance affected by salinity intrusion
>1 km from the high tide mark 1.0 Very high
0.6-1km 0.8 High
0.4-0.5km 0.6 Moderate
0.1-0.3km 0.4 Low
<0.1km 0.2 Very Low
Watershed runoff, nutrient Wsi = weighted (Cr/St + Sg/Fw + Mg + Fs/Df + Pb)
load and sediment load (Ws)
Coral reefs (Cr)* Grazer fish seen: (UPMSI, 2010)

Almost no large grazing fish can be seen 1.0 Very high
Small groups of grazing parrotfish, rabbitfish, and surgeon 0.6 Moderate
fish can be seen
Large groups and sizeable individuals of parrotfish, rabbitfish 0.2 Very Low
and surgeon fish can be seen
OR OR
Sediment tolerance based on Sediment tolerance based on coral growth form:
coral growth form (St)* Foliose and encrusting 1.0 Very high
Massive and branching 0.2 Very low
Seagrass meadows (Sg)* Capacity to withstand sedimentation stress higher than 10cm
per year (UPMSI, 2010):
Enhalus-Thalassia dominated 1.0 Very high
Halophila-Halodule dominated 0.2 Very Low
OR OR
Capacity to withstand Capacity to withstand increased fresh water input
increased fresh water input Multispecies seagrass bed (>6 species) 1.0 Very high
(Fw) 2-5 species seagrass beds (Thalassia-Cymodocea-Halodule 0.6 Moderate
dominated)
MonospecificEnhalus beds 0.2 Very Low
Mangroves (Mg)* Capacity to trap sediments: (UPMSI, 2010)
Area is dominated by species with prop (Rhizophora) or 1.0 Very high
buttress/plank (Xylocarpusgranatum, Heritieralittoralis) type
of root system
At least half of the mangrove area are dominated by species 0.6 Moderate
with pneumatophores (Avicennia, Sonneratia) and knee root
system (Bruguiera and Ceriopstagal)
At least half of the mangrove area are dominated by species 0.2 Very Low
with pneumatophores (Avicennia-Sonneratia dominated)
Fish (Fs) Catch of tuna and small pelagics in 5 years
16–20% 0.8 High
5-10% 0.4 Low
<5% reduction 0.2 Very Low
OR OR
Demersals and other reef Demersals and other reef food fish
16-20% 0.8 High
11-15% 0.6 Moderate
5-10% 0.4 Low
Phytoplankton bloom (Pb) Phytoplankton bloom OR Net annual primary production
-2 -1
(Phytoplankton production) in gm C m yr
>500 1.0 Very high
301-500 0.8 High
201-300 0.6 Moderate
100-200 0.4 Low
<100 0.2 Very Low
Tropical cyclones and storm Tsi = weighted (Cr/Cc + Bc + Mg/Ma + Sg/Cr + Cs/Rd/Lm/Mf)
surges (Ts)
Coral reefs (Cr)* Fringing reef length (parallel to the shore): (UPMSI, 2010)
<20% of the shore with parallel fringing reefs 1.0 Very high
21-40% of the shore with parallel fringing reefs 0.8 High
41-60% of the shore with parallel fringing reefs 0.6 Moderate
61-80% of the shore with parallel fringing reefs 0.4 Low
>80% of the shore with parallel fringing reefs – very low 0.2 Very Low
OR OR
Coral community growth Coral community growth form in the upper reef slope and
form in the upper reef slope crest:
and crest (Cc) At least half of the corals are branching and foliose 1.0 Very high
At least half of the corals are tabulate 0.6 Moderate
At least half of the corals are hemispherical/massive and 0.2 Very low
encrusting
Beaches and coastal shores Width of beaches and coastal shores without settlements:
(Bc)* <200 meters – very high 1.0 Very high
200-299m 0.8 High
300-399m 0.6 Moderate
400-500m 0.4 Low
>500 meters – very low 0.2 Very Low
Mangroves (Mg)* No mangrove forest fronting coastal settlements or presence
of mangrove cover covering:
<20% of the stretch of coastal settlements 1.0 Very high
Presence of mangrove forest fronting coastal settlements 0.8 High
covering 21-40% of the stretch of coastal settlements 0.6 Moderate
Covering 41-60% of the stretch of coastal settlements 0.4 Low
Covering 61-80% of the stretch of coastal settlements 0.2 Very Low
Covering >80% of the stretch of coastal settlements
OR OR
Mangrove area with cover Mangrove area with cover is <20%. 1.0 Very high
(Ma)* 20-30% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
41-50% 0.4 Low
>50% 0.2 Very Low
Seagrass meadows (Sg)* Areal extent relative to the reef (UPMSI, 2010)
Seagrass cover less than 1/8 of the reef flat 1.0 Very high
Seagrass cover more than 1/8 of the reef flat 0.6 Moderate
Seagrass cover more than half of the reef flat 0.2 Very low
OR OR
Capacity to recover from Capacity to recover from storm blow-outs:
storm blow-outs (Cr) Enhalus-Thalassia dominated 1.0 High
Halophila-Halodule dominated 0.2 Low
Coastal settlements (Cs)* Fringing reef width (parallel to the shore): (UPMSI, 2010)
<25m width of fringing reef 1.0 Very high
25-50m width of fringing reef 0.6 Moderate
>50m width of fringing reef 0.2 Very Low
OR
Reef depth (Rd) Reef depth:
Reef crest is >2m 1.0 Very high
1-2m 0.6 Moderate
<1m deep at lowest tide 0.2 Very low
OR
Land masses/ fringing No land masses lie between the typhoon generated waves
mangroves (Lm) and the reef and the coast 1.0 Very high
A large, distant or nearby, small land mass lies between the 0.6 Moderate
typhoon generated waves and the reef and the coast
A nearby, large land mass lies between the typhoon 0.2 Very low
generated waves and the reef and the coast
OR OR
Presence of mangrove forest Presence of fringing mangrove forest 1.0 Very high
(Mf)* Presence of riverine-fringing mangrove forest 0.6 Moderate
Presence of adjacent mangrove forests/ presence of basin- 0.2 Very low
riverine fringing mangrove forest
Sea surface temperature Ssi = weighted (Mc + Cc + Sc + Fp/Df + Pp/Np)
increase (Ss) For validation.
Mangroves (Mc)* Temperature tolerance level of mangrove species:

<1oC increase 1.0 Very high
1-1.2oC increase 0.8 High
1.3–1.5oC increase 0.6 Moderate
1.6–1.8oC increase 0.4 Low
>1.8oC increase 0.2 Very Low
Coral reef (Cc)* % of coral cover affected by coral bleaching per 100 hectares:
>20% 1.0 Very high
16-20% 0.8 High
11-15% 0.6 Moderate
5-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
Seagrass meadows (Sc)* Temperature tolerance level of seagrass species:
<1oC increase 1.0 Very high
1-1.2oC increase 0.8 High
1.3–1.5oC increase 0.6 Moderate
1.6–1.8oC increase 0.4 Low
>1.8oC increase 0.2 Very Low
Fish (Fp) Catch of Tuna and small pelagics in 5 years:
16-20% 0.8 High
5–10% 0.4 Low
Demersals and other reef OR Demersals and other reef food fish
16-20 0.8 High
11-15 0.6 Moderate
5-10 0.4 Low
Phytoplankton bloom (Pb) Phytoplankton blooms and decay affecting oxygen level and
fish catch:
>20% reduction in demersals/reef fish catch (5 year average) 1.0 Very high
16-20% 0.8 High
11-15 % 0.6 Moderate
5-10% 0.4 Low
Net annual primary OR Net annual primary production (Phytoplankton

production (Np) production) in gm C m-2 yr-1 in coastal zones:
>500 1.0 Very high
301-500 0.8 High
101-200 0.4 Low
<100 0.2 Very Low
Ocean acidification Osi = weighted (Cc + Pp/Np + Mo/Df)
For validation.
Coral reefs (Cc)* % of hard coral cover affected by ocean acidification per 100
hectares:
>20% 1.0 Very high
16-20% 0.8 High
11-15% 0.6 Moderate
5-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
Plankton production (Pp) Phytoplankton survival is reduced resulting in the reduction
of fish yield in the coastal fishing ground expressed as
reduction in fish catch:
16-20% 0.8 High
11-15% 0.6 Moderate
5-10% 0.4 Low
OR
OR Net annual primary production (Phytoplankton production) in
Net annual primary gm C m-2 yr-1 in coastal zones:
production (Np) <50 1.0 Very high
51-100 0.8 High
201-300 0.4 Low
>300 0.2 Very Low
Marine organisms/fish (Mo) Catch of Tuna and small pelagics in 5 years:
16-20% 0.8 High
11-15% 0.6 Moderate
5-10% 0.4 Low
Demersals and other reef OR Demersals and other reef food fish
16-20% 0.8 High
11-15% 0.6 Moderate
5-10% 0.4 Low
Exposure Indicators: Coastal and Marine Sector
Sea level rise/flooding (Se) Sei = weighted (We + Fs + Ne +Se + Pa/Pd + Pi + Al)
Extent of coastal wetlands >50% of coastal wetlands inundated 1.0 Very high
inundated (We)* 41-50% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
20-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of feeding sites of >50% of feeding sites inundated 1.0 Very high
water birds in beaches, sandy 41-50% 0.8 High
sands and shores, salt 31-40% 0.6 Moderate
marshes, coastal wetlands 20-30% 0.4 Low
and low lying islands (Fs) <20% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of nesting beaches of >50% of nesting beaches inundated 1.0 Very high
marine turtles affected (Ne)* 41-50% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
20-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of salinity increase in >80% of wells and wetlands affected 1.0 Very high
groundwater and wetlands 61-80% 0.8 High
(Se)* 41-60% 0.6 Moderate
20-40% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of settlements and % of barangay area <1 m elevation above MSL (UPMSI, 2010):
population affected by ≥40% 1.0 Very high
flooding (Pa)* 31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
10-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
OR OR
Population density (Pd) Population density (no. of persons/ ha)
≥300 1.0 Very high
101-300 0.8 High
51-100 0.6 Moderate
20-50 0.4 Low
<20 0.2 Very Low
Physical assets and >50% of settlements affected by floods 1.0 Very high
infrastructures including 41-50% 0.8 High
tourism facilities inundated 31-40% 0.6 Moderate
by flooding (Pi)* 20-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Agricultural lands and beach >50% of settlements affected by floods 1.0 Very high
areas affected (Al)* 41-50% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
20-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Watershed runoff (Wr) Wr = weighted (Cs + Ca)
Extent of coastal waters >50% of coastal waters affected 1.0 Very high
sedimented (Cs)* 41-50% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
20-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of coastal waters >50% of fishing grounds affected 1.0 Very high
affected by algal bloom (Ca)* 41-50% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
20-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Tropical cyclones and storm Tei = weighted (Ce + Bc + Sp + Pa + Al)
surge (Te)
Extent of shallow coral reefs >50% of shallow coral reefs inundated 1.0 Very high
inundated (Ce)* 41-50% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
20-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of beaches and coastal >50% of beaches and coastal shores affected 1.0 Very high
shores frequently 41-50% 0.8 High
affected/damaged by 31-40% 0.6 Moderate
typhoons (Bc)* 20-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of settlements and Percent of coastal/nearshore settlements and population
population affected (Sp)* affected:
>80% 1.0 Very high
61-80% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
20-40% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Physical assets and >50% of physical assets and infrastructures are damaged by 1.0 Very high
infrastructures damaged typhoons
(Pa)* 41-50% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
20-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Agricultural lands affected >50% of croplands are damaged 1.0 Very high
(Al)* 41-50% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
20-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Sea surface temperature Sei = weighted (Rf + Cs + Ss + Ms + Fn)
increase (Se) For validation
Number of reef fish species % reef fish species highly sensitive to increase in
highly sensitive to increase in temperature:
temperature (Rf)* >40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
0-10% 0.2 Very Low
Number of species of corals % coral species highly sensitive to increase in temperature:
highly sensitive to increase in >40% 1.0 Very high
temperature (Cs)* 31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
0-10% 0.2 Very Low
Number of species of % seagrass species highly sensitive to increase in
seagrass highly sensitive to temperature:
increase temperature (Ss)* >40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
0-10% 0.2 Very Low
Number of species of % mangrove species highly sensitive to increase in
mangroves highly sensitive to temperature:
increase temperature (Ms)* >40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
0-10% 0.2 Very Low
Number of families totally Dependence of population on fishing (UPMSI, 2010)
dependent on fishing as >80% of fishing families totally dependent on fishing for 1.0 Very high
source of livelihood and income
income (Fn)* 61-80% of fishing families totally dependent on fishing for 0.8 High
income
41-60% of fishing families totally dependent on fishing for 0.6 Moderate
income
20-40% of fishing families totally dependent on fishing for 0.4 Low
income
<20% of fishing families totally dependent on fishing for 0.2 Very Low
income
Ocean acidification (Oe) Oei = weighted (Cb + Ms + Fn)
For validation
Extent of coral affected (Cb)* % of coral reefs affected by acidification:
>40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
0-10% 0.2 Very Low
Number of species of marine % of marine species at risk:
organisms at risk (Ms)* >40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
0-10% 0.2 Very Low
Number of families totally Dependence of population on fishing (UPMSI, 2010):
dependent on fishing as >80% of fishing families totally dependent on fishing for 1.0 Very high
source of livelihood and income
income (Fn)* 61-80% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
20-40% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Adaptive Capacity Indicators: Coastal and Marine Sector
Sea level rise (Sa) Sai = weighted (Ch+ Sr + Wp + Ga + Cp + Cs + Bc)
Coastal habitat at risk Coastal habitats are fully surveyed, mapped and zoned 0.2 Very high
mapping and zoning (Ch)* Coastal habitats are partially surveyed, mapped and zoned 0.4 High
Coastal habitats are partially surveyed and mapped but not 0.6 Moderate
yet zoned
Coastal habitats are surveyed but not yet mapped and zoned 0.8 Low
Coastal habitats are not surveyed, mapped and zoned 1.0 Very Low
Relocation of coastal >60% of coastal settlements living in high risk areas are 0.2 Very high
settlements at high risk areas relocated
(Sr)* 41-60% 0.4 High
21-40% 0.6 Moderate
1-20% 0.8 Low
No relocation efforts 1.0 Very Low
Wetland protection program Presence of Coastal protection structures
(Wp)* Properly designed and very sturdy constructed structures 0.2 Very high
Sturdy and properly placed structures 0.4 High
Less sturdy but properly placed structures 0.6 Moderate
Ill-designed and improperly placed structures 0.8 Low
Without coastal protection structures 1.0 Very Low
Groundwater analysis and With groundwater survey and conservation program:
conservation program (Ga) With program covering more than 60% of total coastal area 0.2 Very high
With program covering 50-60% of total coastal area 0.4 High
With program covering not more than 50% of coastal area 0.6 Moderate
With program covering very small area 0.8 Low
Without any program 1.0 Very Low
Climate proofing of physical Projects to make buildings, public utilities and infrastructures 0.2 Very high
assets and infrastructures resilient to climate change and natural disasters 0.6 Moderate
(Cp)* With climate proofing policy and projects fully implemented 0.8 Low
With some investments in climate proofing projects
No climate proofing projects 1.0 Very Low
Cultivation of saline tolerant With program to plant saline tolerant cultivars 0.2 Very high
crops and trees (Cs)* With modest investment to implement planting of saline 0.6 Moderate
tolerant cultivars
No program 1.0 Very Low
Beach erosion control and Presence of Coastal protection structures:
physical protection programs Properly designed and very sturdy constructed structures 0.2 Very high
(Bc)* Sturdy and properly placed structures 0.4 High
Watershed runoff (Wa) Wai = weighted (Mr + Wr + Am)
Mapping of affected and high With survey, map and zoning of high risk areas to
risk areas (Mr)* sedimentation and nutrient pollution:
Fully implemented covering large areas 0.2 Very high
Implemented covering some areas 0.4 High
Implemented covering priority areas 0.6 Moderate
Implemented covering very few areas 0.8 Low
No survey, map and zoning 1.0 Very Low
Watershed rehabilitation Watershed rehabilitation program:
programs (Wr)* Covering >60% of problematic areas 0.2 Very high
Covering 41-60% 0.4 High
Covering 21-40% 0.6 Moderate
Covering 1-20% 0.8 Low
No watershed rehabilitation programs 1.0 Very Low
Agricultural inputs (fertilizers With program on management of agricultural inputs
and pesticides) management Covering >60% of upland farmers 0.2 Very high
programs and practices (Am)* Covering 41-60% 0.4 High
No agriculture inputs management program 1.0 Very Low
Tropical cyclones and storm Tai = weighted (Pp + Ew + Am)
surge (Ta)
Physical protection of high Presence of Coastal protection structures:
risk coastal land areas Properly designed and very sturdy constructed structures 0.2 Very high
including beaches and Sturdy and properly placed structures 0.4 High
shoreland (Pp)* Less sturdy but properly placed structures 0.6 Moderate
Early warning system and With early warning system and disaster preparedness
disaster preparedness program:
program (Ew)* Covering >60% of coastal settlements 0.2 Very high
No early warning system and disaster preparedness program 1.0 Very Low
Agro-meteorological With program on agro-meteorological monitoring and
monitoring and dissemination dissemination of cropping calendar bulletins:
of cropping calendar bulletins Covering >70% of farmers 0.2 Very high
(Am)* Covering 51-70% 0.4 High
Covering <10% or none 1.0 Very Low
Sea surface temperature Sai = weighted (Es + Ms + Fs + Mr)
increase (Sa) For validation
Establishment of more Establishment of marine sanctuaries and MPAs adequately 0.2 Very high
sanctuaries and marine funded
protected areas* MS and MPAs with some funding 0.4 High
MS and MPS modestly supported 0.6 Moderate
Very little support for MS and MPAs 0.8 Low
No support for MS and MPAs 1.0 Very Low
Mapping of sea surface With SST map in most portions of fishing grounds 0.2 Very high
temperature (Ms)* With SST map in many portions of fishing grounds 0.4 High
With SST map in some portions fishing grounds 0.6 Moderate
With SST map in very few portions fishing grounds 0.8 Low
No SST map 1.0 Very Low
Fishery stock assessment in Fishery stock assessment undertaken in all important fishing 0.2 Very high
fishing grounds and MPAs grounds and MPAs
(Fs)* In many fishing grounds and MPAs 0.4 High
In some fishing grounds and M 0.6 Moderate
In few fishing grounds and M 0.8 Low
No stock assessment 1.0 Very Low
Mangrove reforestation Mangrove reforestation in
(Mr)* >60% of denuded areas 0.2 Very high
41-60% of denuded areas 0.4 High
21-40% of denuded areas 0.6 Moderate
1-20% of denuded areas 0.8 Low
No reforestation effort 1.0 Very Low
Ocean acidification (Oa) Oai = weighted (Sm + Wp)
For validation
Establishment of more Marine sanctuaries and MPAs are adequately funded and 0.2 Very high
sanctuaries and marine implemented
protected areas (Sm)* Modest support for marine sanctuaries and MPAs 0.4 High
Limited funds to support marine sanctuaries and MPAs 0.6 Moderate
Very little funds to support program on marine sanctuaries 0.8 Low
and MPAs
No program on marine sanctuaries and MPA 1.0 Very Low
Coastal water pollution Water pollution control program is fully implemented 0.2 Very high
control programs (Wp) Water pollution control program is implemented in priority 0.4 High
sites
Water pollution control is implemented in some areas 0.6 Moderate
Water pollution monitoring and law enforcement is poorly 0.8 Low
implemented
No water pollution control program 1.0 Very Low
Notes:
Source of information: WWF-Philippines, Palawan Council for Sustainable Development and

Palawan State University. Adaptation Plan for the Eastern Taytay Using Risk Based Approach: 2012-
2020. Municipality of Taytay, Palawan. August 2011
SST incidence in Taytay

The sea surface temperature which already happened in Taytay in 2010 resulted to coral bleaching
which is the loss of pigments for photosynthesis, or loss of the algae =zooxanthellae). The
temperature rose 2-3 degrees above normal due to weak monsoon, still wave-free waters and cloud-
free days.
Coral species susceptibility

The vulnerability of the coral to bleaching varies by species. For instance, tap acropora, stylophora,
mycedlum and isoporaare the most sensitive while astreoporaand turbinariaare the least
sensitive.But the survey of Pocilloporarevealed that on average 43.1 percent of these in five transect
lines was bleached in 2011. It is estimated that if sea surface temperature rise occurs every 10 years,
the coral population will be reduced to 11 percent in 50 years. In a 5 year return time, it will be
reduced to 1 percent in 50 years.
Fish species susceptibility
Based on species, the corallivores (e.g., Chaelodontrifasciallis) are the most vulnerable followed by
the coral dwellers (e.g., Gobiodon sp. A). Theherbivores (e.g., Siganusspinus) are less vulnerable while
other species (e.g., Pomacentrussulfureus) are least affected.
Forestry Sector
Sensitivity Indicators: Forestry Sector

Indicators Scale Classification Sensitivity Rating
(points)
Erosion Esi = weighted (Rv + Vt + Sl + Lu + St)
Rainfall volume* Annual rainfall in mm
>3,000 1.0 Very high
2,499 – 3,000 0.8 High
2,001 – 2,500 0.6 Moderate
1,501 – 2,000 0.4 Low
<1,500 0.2 Very Low
OR Monthly rainfall
>500mm 1.0 Very high
251-500mm 0.8 High
101-251mm 0.6 Moderate
51-100mm 0.4 Low
<50mm 0.2 Very Low
Percent of Forest Cover * <20% forest cover 1.0 Very high
21-40% forest cover 0.8 High
41-60% forest cover 0.6 Moderate
61-80% forest cover 0.4 Low
or >80% forest cover 0.2 Very Low
Barelands 1.0 Very high
Vegetation types
Grassland 0.8 High
Plantation forest; Secondary growth, open canopy 0.6 Moderate
Old growth, open canopy; Secondary growth, closed 0.4 Low
canopy
or
Old growth, closed canopy 0.2 VeryLow
Mixed agriculture and settlements 1.0 Very high
Land use
Upland agriculture 0.8 High
Grazing land and agriculture 0.6 Moderate
Agro-forestry 0.4 Low
Protected forest 0.2 Very Low
Slope class* >50% 1.0 Very high
(DENR-LMB) 31-50% 0.8 High
19-30% 0.6 Moderate
8-18% 0.4 Low
<8% 0.2 Very Low
Soil type* Sand 1.0 Very high
Coarse sandy loam or fine sand 0.8 High
Clay or clay loam 0.6 Moderate
Silt clay or Silty clay loam 0.4 Low
Very fine sand or loamy very fine sand 0.2 Very Low
Presence of mining Presence of mining activities 1.0 Very High
activities No mining activities 0.2 Very Low
Landslides Lsi = weighted (Rv + Sc + Df + Fi + Pc + Li)
Rainfall volume* Average daily volume (mm/day) average for more
than 5 days of continuous rains
>180 1.0 Very high
131-180 0.8 High
91-130 0.6 Moderate
51-90 0.4 Low
<50 0.2 Very Low
OR Monthly rainfall
251-500mm 0.8 High
51-100mm 0.4 Low
<50mm 0.2 Very Low
Slope class* >50% 1.0 Very high
31-50% 0.8 High
19-30% 0.6 Moderate
8-18% 0.4 Low
<8% 0.2 Very Low
Distance to fault lines Distance to major fault line in kilometers
<1km 1.0 Very high
1-5km 0.8 High
6-10km 0.6 Moderate
11-15km 0.4 Low
>15km 0.2 Very Low
Est. Frequency of Return period of earthquake with intensity 6 and
occurrence of high above in the Richter scale
intensity seismic activity* <20 years 1.0 Very high
21 – 50 years 0.8 High
51 – 80 years 0.6 Moderate
81 – 100 years 0.4 Low
>100 years 0.2 Very Low
For seismic induced OR Return period of earthquake with intensity 7 and

landslide above in the Modified Mercalli scale (Mora, 1994)
<20 years 1.0 Very high
21 – 50 years 0.8 High
51 – 80 years 0.6 Moderate
81 – 100 years 0.4 Low
>100 years 0.2 Very Low
Presence of With construction/ extraction activities (mining, 1.0 Very high
construction/extraction road, building, housing, timber poaching, charcoal
activities making etc.)
Without construction/extraction activities 0.2 Very Low
Lithology* Lithology types (Mora, 1994):
-Extremely altered rocks, low shear resistant alluvial, 1.0 Very high
colluvial and residual soils and shallow water tables
-Considerably weathered, hydrothermally altered 0.8 High
rocks, strongly fractured and fissured, clay filled,
poorly compacted pyroclastic and fluvio-lacustrine
soils, shallow water tables
-Considerably weathered sedimentary, intrusive, 0.6 Moderate
metamorphic volcanic rocks, compacted sandy soils,
considering fracturing and fluctuating water tables
-Higher degree of weathering of above mentioned 0.4 Low
lithologies and of hard massive sedimentary rocks,
lower shear resistance and shearable fractures
-Permeable compact alluvium; permeable limestone, 0.2 Very Low
slightly fissured intrusions, basalt, gneus, hornfels,
low degree of weathering, low water table, clean
ruggose fractures, high shear resistance
OR (ERDB, 2011)
Recent (R); Quaternary (QAV); Plioliocene 1.0 Very high
Quaternary (QVP)
Pliocene-Pleistocene (N3+Q1); Upper Miocene- 0.8 High
Pliocene (N2)
Oligocene (SPg2); Paleocene-Eocene (SPg1) 0.6 Moderate
Undifferentiated (UV; KPg1; KPg2)
Pliocene-Quaternary (QV); Paleocene (Sedimentary 0.4 Low
& Metamorphic rocks);
Pre-Jurassic 0.2 Very Low
Flooding Fsi = weighted (Rv + Sl+ Pr + Fc + Lu)
Rainfall volume* Percent increase change from monthly average
>30% 1.0 Very high
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
OR
Average daily values (mm/day) average for 10 years
>180 1.0 Very high
131-180 0.8 High
91-130 0.6 Moderate
51-90 0.4 Low
<50 0.2 Very Low
Slope* (DENR LMB) <8% 1.0 Very high
8-18% 0.8 High
19-30% 0.6 Moderate
31-50% 0.4 Low
>50% 0.2 Very Low
Proximity to river and < 50 meters from riverbank 1.0 Very high
other water bodies* 51 – 500 meters 0.8 High
501 – 1,000 meters 0.6 Moderate
1,001 – 3,000 meters 0.4 Low
>3,000 meters 0.2 Very Low
Percent forest cover in <20% forest cover 1.0 Very high
watershed* 21-40% forest cover 0.8 High
>80% forest cover 0.2 Very Low
OR OR
Vegetation types Barelands 1.0 Very high
Grassland 0.8 High
Plantation forest 0.6 Moderate
Secondary growth, closed canopy 0.4 Low
Old growth, closed canopy 0.2 Very Low
Predominant land use in Shanties 1.0 Very high
riparian areas and flood Housing subdivision 0.8 High
plains* Mixed settlement uses 0.6 Moderate
Predominantly agriculture, grass and shrubs 0.4 Low
Predominantly Forest and trees 0.2 Very Low
Wildfires Wsi = weighted (Vt + Kp + Ft + Da)
Vegetation types* Grass and shrubs 1.0 Very high
Plantation forest 0.8 High
Agroforestry 0.6 Moderate
Secondary growth 0.4 Low
Old growth 0.2 Very Low
Extent of Kaingin Kaingin plots in 100 hectares forest area
activities* >10 hectares kaingin plot 1.0 Very high
6-10 hectares 0.8 High
3-5 hectares 0.6 Moderate
1-2 hectares 0.4 Low
<1 hectare 0.2 Very Low
Forest tourist campsites Presence of tourist campsites in 100 hectares of
forest area
>20 campsites 1.0 Very high
11-20 campsites 0.8 High
6-10 campsites 0.6 Moderate
2-5 campsites 0.4 Low
1 campsite 0.2 Very Low
Droughty areas (rainfall Monthly average rainfall (% of monthly average for 3
volume)* months in a row)
<30% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
61 – 80% 0.4 Low
>80% 0.2 Very Low
OR Or Climatic Types
Climatic types Type I 1.0 Very high
Type III 0.8 High
Type II and IV 0.6 Moderate
Drought Dsi = weighted (Fc + Lu + Ee + Rv + Rp)
Percent forest cover* <20% forest cover 1.0 Very high
21-40% forest cover 0.8 High
Land use Upland agriculture and settlements 1.0 Very high
Pasture and Grazing lands 0.8 High
Agroforestry 0.6 Moderate
Plantation forest 0.4 Low
Natural forest 0.2 Very Low
Incidence of El Nino event* Presence of El Nino event for the year 1.0 1.0 Very high
Absence of El Nino event for the year 0.2 Very low
Rainfall volume* Monthly average rainfall (% of monthly average for 3
months in a row)
<30% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
61 – 80% 0.4 Low
>80% 0.2 Very Low
Presence of river and Absence of rivers and streams 1.0 Very high
streams Presence of few intermittent rivers and streams 0.8 High
Presence of many intermittent rivers and streams 0.6 Moderate
Presence of few perennial rivers and streams 0.4 Low
Presence of many perennial rivers and streams 0.2 Very Low
Exposure Indicators: Forestry Sector
Indicator Scale Classification Exposure
Rating
(points)
Erosion Eei = weighted (Da + Uf + Ka)
Extent of denuded areas* >40% of forest area 1.0 Very high
31-40% of forest area 0.8 High
21-30% of forest area 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% of forest area 0.2 Very Low
Extent of upland farms* >50% of forest area 1.0 Very high
21-30% 0.4 Low
OR OR
Extent of cultivated areas Extent of cultivated areas
>50% of forest area 1.0 Very high
21-30% 0.4 Low
Extent of kaingin areas >30% of forest area 1.0 Very high
6-10% of forest area 0.4 Low
OR OR
Extent of cultivated areas Extent of cultivated areas
>50% of forest area 1.0 Very high
21-30% 0.4 Low
Landslides Lei = weighted (Sn + Al)
Settlements (number of Number of houses
houses and residents) >15 houses 1.0 Very high
within and below landslide 11-15 houses 0.8 High
prone areas (Settlements 6-10 houses 0.6 Moderate
under high risk)* 1-5 houses 0.4 Low
None 0.2 Very Low
Extent of cultivated >4 hectares 1.0 Very high
agricultural lands below 3-4 hectares 0.8 High
landslide prone areas* 2 hectares 0.6 Moderate
1 hectare 0.4 Low
None 0.2 Very Low
Flooding Fei = weighted (Rc + Sn + Pv + Fp)
Extent, proximity and Per 1km of river and within 50m from both river
number of riverine embankment
communities at risk* >40 houses 1.0 Very high
31-40 houses 0.8 High
21-30 houses 0.6 Moderate
11-20 houses 0.4 Low
<10 houses 0.2 Very Low
Extent and number of % of total population in floodplains:
settlements and population >20% 1.0 Very high
in floodplains at risk* 16-20% 0.8 High
11-15% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
<5% of total population 0.2 Very Low
Types and value of physical Hazardous materials facilities (oil depot, chemical 1.0 Very high
assets exposed to plants, waste treatment plants)
downstream flooding* Basic utilities (power, water, communication and 0.8 High
transportation)
Schools, hospital, houses and buildings 0.6 Moderate
Agriculture crops, livestock and poultry and 0.4 Low
aquaculture
Parks and recreation facilities 0.2 Very Low
Extent of flood prone areas % of total area lowland areas flooded:
in lowland areas* >20% 1.0 Very high
16-20% 0.8 High
11-15% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of agricultural areas % of total agricultural areas that are flood-prone:
at risk* >80% 1.0 Very high
61-80% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Wildfires/Forest fires Wei = weighted (Ge + Fa + Ce+Ft)
Extent of grasslands* Contiguous area occupied by grasslands in hectares
>50 hectares 1.0 Very high
31-50 ha 0.8 High
11-30 ha 0.6 Moderate
6-10 ha 0.4 Low
<5 ha 0.2 Very Low
Extent of coniferous forest >80% 1.0 Very high
in relation to forest areas* 61-80% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of kaingin(cultivated) >30% of forest area 1.0 Very high
areas adjacent to forest 21-30% of forest area 0.8 High
areas* 11-20% of forest area 0.6 Moderate
6-10% of forest area 0.4 Low
Number of tourist Presence of tourist campsites in 100 hectares of
campsites adjacent to forest forest area
areas >20 campsites 1.0 Very high
11-20 campsites 0.8 High
6-10 campsites 0.6 Moderate
2-5 campsites 0.4 Low
1 campsite 0.2 Very Low
Drought Dei = weighted (Uf + Cv + Ee)
Extent of upland farms* % of total area of upland farms affected
>60% 1.0 Very high
41-60% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
21-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Or OR % of estimated number of farm families

affected
Number of farm families >60% 1.0 Very high
affected* 41-60% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
21-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Value of crops lost* % of production lost per farming family
>60% of production and equivalent market value 1.0 Very high
41-60% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
21-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of areas affected by % of total area of upland farms affected
El Nino event* >60% of upland farms 1.0 Very high
41-60% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
21-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Adaptive Capacity Indicators: Forestry Sector
Indicator Scale Classification Adaptive Capacity
Rating(points)
Erosion Eai = weighted (Re + Se + Sc)
Reforestation efforts* Area coverage of reforestation program
>30% 0.2 Very high
21-30% 0.4 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
1-10% of total denuded forest area/ 0.8 Low
No reforestation program 1.0 Very Low
Soil erosion control Area coverage of soil erosion control program
measures* (vegetative and mechanical)
>30% 0.2 Very high
21-30% 0.4 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
1-10% of total denuded forest area/ 0.8 Low
No soil erosion control program 1.0 Very Low
Mine waste and >70% of mine waste dump and affected areas 0.2 Very high
bioremediation plan/ stabilized
program 51-70% 0.4 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
11-30 0.8 Low
<10% or No stabilization program 1.0 Very Low
Soil conservation/ Coverage of agroforestry program (% of upland
agroforestry* farmers)
>30% 0.2 Very high
21-30% 0.4 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
1-10% of total denuded forest area 0.8 Low
No soil conservation & agroforestry program 1.0 Very Low
OR OR
Soil and water Soil and water conservation practices:
conservation practices Regularly practicing conservation measures(>90%) 0.2 Very high
Most of the time practicing conservation (61-90%) 0.4 High
Some conservation efforts (31-60%) 0.6 Moderate
Little conservation efforts(< 30%) 0.8 Low
No conservation practices 1.0 Very Low
Landslides Lai = weighted (Lm + Ap + Re + Ss + Pa)
Maps on landslide prone 91 -100% of the barangays in a municipality or 0.2 Very high
areas(rain and municipalities in a province have available updated
earthquake induced)* maps
71-90% of the barangays in a municipality or 0.4 High
municipalities in a province have available updated
maps
51%-70% of the barangays in the municipality 0.6 Moderate
maps
<50% of the barangays in the municipality/ 0.8 Low
maps
No maps available 1.0 Very Low
Awareness of exposed >70% of population at risk are aware 0.2 Very high
population on landslide 51-70% 0.4 High
risk* 31-50% 0.6 Moderate
11-30% 0.8 Low
<10% or No awareness program 1.0 Very Low
Relocation efforts by % of population at high risk were relocated:
LGU* >70% of population at high risk were relocated 0.2 Very high
51-70% 0.4 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
11-30% 0.8 Low
<10% or No relocation efforts 1.0 Very Low
Efforts on stabilization of >70% of landslide prone slopes are stabilized by 0.2 Very high
slopes, improvement of physical/engineering and vegetative means with
drainage in landslide drainage improvement
prone areas* 51-70% 0.4 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
11-30% 0.8 Low
<10% or no stabilization efforts 1.0 Very Low
Alert and preparedness >70% of population at risk are aware of the alert 0.2 Very high
system for seismic system established and prepared for evacuation
activity 51-70% 0.4 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
11-30% 0.8 Low
<10% or no alert & preparedness system 1.0 Very Low
Alert and preparedness >70% of population at risk are aware of the alert 0.2 Very high
system for landslide system established and prepared for evacuation
activity* 51-70% 0.4 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
11-30% 0.8 Low
<10% or no alert & preparedness system 1.0 Very Low
Flooding Fai = weighted (Fm + Re + Se + Rs + Sw + Fc + Fp +
Ws + Rp)
Maps of flood prone 91 -100% of the barangays in a municipality or 0.2 Very high
areas* municipalities in a province have available updated
maps
71-90% of the barangays in a municipality or 0.4 High
maps
50%-70% of the barangays in the municipality 0.6 Moderate
maps
<50% of the barangays in the municipality/ 0.8 Low
maps
Reforestation efforts* Area coverage of reforestation program:
>30% 0.2 Very high
21-30% 0.4 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
1-10% 0.8 Low
No reforestation efforts or program 1.0 Very Low
Soil erosion control and Coverage of soil erosion control and soil
soil conservation conservation program (% of upland farmers)
practices in the >30% 0.2 Very high
watershed 21-30% 0.4 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
1-10% 0.8 Low
No erosion control and soil conservation practices 1.0 Very Low
Riverbank stabilization >70% of unstable river banks covered by the
efforts* program 0.2 Very high
51-70% 0.4 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
11-30% 0.8 Low
<10% or no stabilization efforts 1.0 Very Low
Solid waste disposal and >70% of solid wastes and collected and properly 0.2 Very high
management * disposed
51-70% 0.4 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
11-30% 0.8 Low
<10% or no collection and disposal system 1.0 Very Low
OR OR
HH implementing waste >70% Households implementing waste segregation 0.2 Very high
segregation at source at source
51-70% 0.4 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
11-30% 0.8 Low
<10% or no waste segregation at source 1.0 Very Low
Flood control and >70% capacity of facilities in place to control 0.2 Very high
drainage facilities in floodwaters
floodplain areas* 51-70% capacity 0.4 High
31-50% capacity 0.6 Moderate
11-30% capacity 0.8 Low
<10% or no flood control and drainage facilities 1.0 Very Low
Flood preparedness* >70% of population at high risk are prepared 0.2 Very high
51-70% 0.4 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
11-30% 0.8 Low
<10% or no preparedness program 1.0 Very Low
Warning system and Warning system operational and evacuation routes 0.2 Very high
evacuation routes* identified
Warning system operational and evacuation routes 0.4 High
partly identified
Warning system not fully operational 0.6 Moderate
Warning system is not operational 0.8 Low
No warning system and evacuation routes identified 1.0 Very Low
Relocation of high risk % of population at high risk were relocated:
population* >70% of population at high risk were relocated 0.2 Very high
51-70% 0.4 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
11-30% 0.8 Low
<10% or no relocation efforts 1.0 Very Low
Wildfires Wai = weighted(Fp + Fa+ Fb)
Fire prevention, >70% of upland communities at high risk are covered 0.2 Very high
preparedness and by the program
control programs* 51-70% 0.4 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
11-30% 0.8 Low
<10% or no fire prevention, preparedness and 1.0 Very Low
control programs
Fire awareness and >70% of upland communities at high risk are covered 0.2 Very high
consciousness campaign* by the program
51-70% 0.4 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
11-30% 0.8 Low
<10% or no fire awareness and consciousness 1.0 Very Low
campaign
Presence of firebreaks / Width of firebreaks (open space)
fire lines* >30m 0.2 Very high
21-30m 0.4 High
11-20m 0.6 Moderate
6-10m 0.8 Low
<5m or no firebreaks 1.0 Very Low
Drought Dai = weighted (Si + Ws)
Small scale upland >70% of upland communities are covered by the 0.2 Very high
irrigation program* program
51-70% 0.4 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
11-30% 0.8 Low
<10% or no small scale irrigation program 1.0 Very Low
Water conservation >70% of upland communities are covered by the 0.2 Very high
practices adopted* program
51-70% 0.4 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
11-30% 0.8 Low
<10% or no water conservation practices 1.0 Very Low
Agriculture Sector
1) Crop Production
Sensitivity Indicators: Crop Production

Indicators Scale Classification Sensitivity
Rating (points)
EROSION
Rainfall volume* Annual rainfall in mm
>3,000 1.0 Very high
2,501 – 3,000 0.8 High
2,001 – 2,500 0.6 Moderate
1,501 – 2,000 0.4 Low
<1,500 0.2 Very Low
OR Monthly rainfall:
251-500mm 0.8 High
51-100mm 0.4 Low
<50mm 0.2 Very Low
Slope class*(DENR-LMB) >50% 1.0 Very high
30-50% 0.8 High
18-30% 0.6 Moderate
8-18% 0.4 Low
<8% 0.2 Very Low
Soil type* Sand 1.0 Very high
Coarse sandy loam or fine sand 0.8 High
Very fine sand or loamy 0.6 Moderate
Silt clay or Silty clay loam 0.4 Low
Clay or clay loam 0.2 Very Low
Cropping system for rainfed Monoculture 1.0 Very high
and upland production areas Crop rotation 0.8 High
Alley/ row cropping/SALT 0.6Moderate
Integrated cropping 0.4 Low
Terracing 0.2 Very low
FLOODING
>30% 1.0 Very high
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
OR
>180 1.0 Very high
131-180 0.8 High
91-130 0.6 Moderate
51-90 0.4 Low
<50 0.2 Very Low
Slope*(DENR LMB) <8% 1.0 Very high
8-18% 0.8 High
18-30% 0.6 Moderate
30-50% 0.4 Low
>50% 0.2 Very Low
Proximity of farmlands to < 50 meters from riverbank 1.0 Very high
river/ stream banks* 51 – 500 meters 0.8 High
1,001 – 3,000 meters 0.4 Low
Percent forest cover in <20% forest cover 1.0 Very high
watershed* 20-40% forest cover 0.8 High
OR
Vegetation types:
Barelands 1.0 Very high
Grassland 0.8 High
Plantation forest 0.6 Moderate
Secondary growth, closed canopy 0.4 Low
Old growth, closed canopy 0.2 Very Low
Plant growth stage at the RICE/ CORN
time of flooding with muddy
flood water for an average of
4 days* Flowering stage/ Maturity stage/ Panicle initiation/ Booting 1.0 Very high
stage (Fully inundated)
(NOTE: Table of Coefficients Panicle initiation/ Booting stage (Partially inundated, i.e. 9-12 0.6 Moderate
for Crop Yield Loss, DA-BAS cm long remains above water)
2009 as cited by UPLB 2011) Minimum tillering/ Maximum tillering 0.4 Low
Ripening stage 0.2 Very Low
OR
HIGH VALUE CROPS (VEGETABLES)
Vegetative stage 1.0 Very High
Maturity stage 0.2 Very Low
OR
ROOTCROPS
Maturity stage 1.0 Very High
Vegetative stage 0.2 Very Low
River siltation/ sediment Above acceptable level set by EMB for rivers 1.0 Very High
load(TSS) Within acceptable level 0.6 Moderate
Below acceptable level 0.2 Very Low
Extent of urban land use in % of land in the upper basin used for residential, commercial
the upland areas and industrial uses:
>40% of total area of upper basin 1.0 Very High
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
≤10% 0.2 Very Low
DROUGHT/ HEAT STRESS
Incidence of El Nino* Presence of El Niño event for the year 1.0Very high
Absence of El Niño event for the year 0.2 Very low
Rainfall volume* Monthly average rainfall:
<30% of monthly average for 3 months in a row 1.0 Very high
30-40% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
61 – 80% 0.4 Low
>80% 0.2 Very Low
Presence of river and Absence of rivers and streams 1.0 Very high
streams Presence of few intermittent rivers and streams 0.8 High
Presence of many intermittent rivers and streams 0.6 Moderate
Presence of few perennial rivers and streams 0.4 Low
Presence of many perennial rivers and streams 0.2 Very Low
Plant growth stage at the Reproductive to maturity stage (Panicle to maturity/ booting 1.0 Very high
time of drought * (DA 2009 to maturity/flowering to maturity)
cited by UPLB 2011) Transplanting to maturity stage (Minimum tillering to 0.8 High
maturity)
Early vegetative stage to reproductive stage (Transplanting to 0.6 Moderate
heading/ panicle initiation)
Late reproductive to maturity stage (Milking to maturity), 0.4 Low
Maximum vegetative to reproductive stage (Maximum
tillering to heading)
Maturity stage (Soft dough to maturity; hard dough to 0.2 Very Low
maturity)
OR
Vegetative stage (from seeding to maximum tillering) 1.0 Very high
Reproductive stage (from panicle initiation stage to flowering 0.6 Moderate
stage)
Dough stage (from from soft dough to early hard dough 0.2 Low
stage)/ Ripening stage
Dependence on irrigation % of agricultural lands dependent on irrigation
>40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
o
Temperature tolerance level 0 – 0.5 C increase 1.0 Very high
o
of rice* (DA 2009 UPLB 2011) 0.6 -1 C increase 0.8 High
o
1.1 – 1.5 C increase 0.6 Moderate
o
1.6 – 1.8 C increase 0.4 Low
o
>1.8 C increase 0.2 Very Low
OR OR
Temperature tolerance of Variety not resistant 1.0 Very high
crop variety* Low resistant variety 0.6 Moderate
Highly resistant variety 0.2 Very Low
Duration of drought* >4 months 1.0 Very high
3-4 months 0.8 High
3 months 0.6 Moderate
2-3 months 0.4 Low
<2 months 0.2 Very Low
TYPHOONS/ STORMS
>30% 1.0 Very high
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
OR
>180 1.0 Very high
131-180 0.8 High
91-130 0.6 Moderate
50-90 0.4 Low
<50 0.2 Very Low
Average intensity/wind >150kph 1.0 Very high
velocity of typhoons within a 101-150 0.8 High
year* (DA 2009 cited by UPLB 70-100 0.6 Moderate
2011) <70 kph 0.4 Low
Plant growth stage during Booting or maturity stage 1.0 Very high
typhoon w/ wind velocity of Flowering stage 0.6 Moderate
150 kph at an average Vegetative stage 0.2 Very Low
exposure of 12 hours* (DA
2009, cited by UPLB 2011)
PESTS AND DISEASES
Crop variety* Level of tolerance of crop variety to common pests/ diseases:
Variety not resistant 1.0 Very high
Low resistant variety 0.6 Moderate
High resistant variety 0.2 Very low
History of outbreaks* With at least 1 pest outbreak during the past 3 years on the 1.0 Very high
same period
No outbreak but localized effects 0.6 Moderate
No outbreaks for last 3 years 0.2 Very Low
Humidity above normal value % increase in humidity above normal:
of 80%*(national average) >20% 1.0 Very high
16-20% 0.8 High
6-10% 0.4 Low
<5 % 0.2 Very Low
Temperature increase above >1.8°C 1.0 Very high
threshold or max temp of 1.6-1.8 0.8 High
36°C * (national average, 1.1-1.5 0.6 Moderate
PAGASA) 0.6-1.0 0.4 Low
<0.6 0.2 Very Low
Rainfall volume Annual rainfall:
>3,000 mm 1.0 Very high
2,501 – 3,000 0.8 High
2,001 – 2,500 0.6 Moderate
1,500 – 2,000 0.4 Low
<1,500 0.2 Very Low
OR Monthly rainfall:
251-500mm 0.8 High
50-100mm 0.4 Low
<50mm 0.2 Very Low
Production areas under crop <20% of total production area 1.0 Very high
diversification 21-40% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
61-80% 0.4 Low
81-100% of production area 0.2 Very Low
SEA LEVEL RISE
Elevation of farmlands in the % of farmlands above 4 meters from masl
coastal municipalities* <20% 1.0 Very high
20-40% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
61-80% 0.4 Low
>80% of farmlands 0.2 Very Low
Proximity of coastal <50m 1.0 Very high
farmlands to sea* 50-100m 0.8 High
(PD 1067) 101-200m 0.6 Moderate
201-300m 0.4 Low
>300m 0.2 Very Low
OR
< 50 meters from sea 1.0 Very high
51 – 500 meters 0.8 High
1,001 – 3,000 meters 0.4 Low
Salinity tolerance of Level of tolerance of crop variety to salinity:
crop/plant varieties planted Variety not tolerant 1.0 Very high
in farmlands in coastal Low tolerant variety 0.6 Moderate
municipalities* High tolerant variety 0.2 Very Low
Salinity of surface or TDS ppm or mg/L
groundwater for irrigation >2,000 1.0 Very High
(based on Class D standards 1,000-2000 0.8 High
of EMB&FAO, measured in 500-1,000 0.6 Moderate
TDS) <500 0.4 Low
Exposure Indicators: Crop Production
Indicators Scale Classification Exposure
Rating (points)
EROSION
Extent of production farm % of production areas affected :
areas exposed to different >30% 1.0 Very high
levels of erosion (in ha)* 21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
0 – 5% 0.2 Very Low
Yield losses from various % losses from total yield (average for 3 years) in (MT)
erosion level* >30% 1.0 Very high
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
0 – 5% 0.2 Very Low
Income loss from production % Decrease in total projected LGU income from agriculture:
>30% of total LGU income 1.0 Very high
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
0 – 5% 0.2 Very Low
Number of agriculture >30% families or HH 1.0 Very high
dependent families affected* 21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
0 – 5% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of irrigation canals % of irrigation canals silted (in km):
silted >30% of total length of irrigation canals 1.0 Very high
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
0 – 5% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of production areas >20% of total production area in the LGU 1.0 Very high
affected by silted irrigation 16-20 0.8 High
canals 11-15% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
≤5% 0.2 Very Low
FLOODING
Extent of flooded production % of production areas affected:
areas* >30% 1.0 Very high
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
0 – 5% 0.2 Very Low
Number of flooding every 3 ≥12 flooding incidents in the area 1.0 Very high
years* 10-12 0.8 High
7-9 0.6 Moderate
4-6 0.4 Low
≤4 0.2 Very Low
Duration (retention time) of 7 days submerged in floodwaters 1.0 Very high
flood water* (Table of 5-6 0.8 High
Coefficients for Crop Yield 3-4 0.6 Moderate
Loss by Flooding, DA 2009 1-2 0.4 Low
cited by UPLB 2011) <1 0.2 Very Low
Yield losses due to flooding in 81-100% losses from total yield(in MT) 1.0 Very high
3 years* 61-80% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
0 – 5% 0.2 Very Low
Number of agriculture- >30% families 1.0 Very high
dependent families affected* 21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
0 – 5% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of damage to houses % cost of damages to total cost of damages in the
of farmers, farm equipment, municipality/ province:
animals and physical >30% 1.0 Very high
structures * 21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
0 – 5% 0.2 Very Low
OR 0R
Estimated value of damages >Php100,000.00 1.0 Very high
from flooding (OCD MC 79- <Php 100,000.00 0.6 Moderate
2011) in past 3 consecutive
flood events
Extent of irrigated and % of irrigated and rainfed land affected:
rainfed lands silted
>30% 1.0 Very high
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
0 – 5% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of prime agricultural % of prime agricultural land or SAFDZs affected
land or SAFDZs affected >30% 1.0 Very high
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
0 – 5% 0.2 Very Low
DROUGHT/HEAT STRESS
Extent of production areas >80% 1.0 Very high
affected by the last 2 61-80% 0.8 High
occurrences of drought* 41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Yield losses (in MT) due to >70% 1.0 Very high
drought* 51-70% 0.8 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
11-30% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
0 – 5% 0.2 Very Low
Number of agriculture % of families affected:
dependent families affected* >50% 1.0 Very high
41-50% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
21-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of prime agricultural % of prime agricultural lands or SAFDZs affected :
land or SAFDZs affected >50% 1.0 Very high
41-50% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
21-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
TYPHOONS/ STORMS
Extent of production areas Area affected by typhoons (% to total agricultural land):
affected * >50% of agricultural land 1.0 Very high
41-50% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
21-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Yield losses due to typhoons Losses in % to total expected yield
at 150 kph with an average
exposure time of 12 hour 35-50% 1.0 Very high
exposure* (based on DA 25-35% 0.8 High
2009, cited by UPLB 2011) <25% 0.6 Moderate
Income loss from production % Decrease in total projected LGU income from agriculture
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
0 – 5% 0.2 Very Low
Number of agriculture HH population chiefly dependent on agriculture (in HH)
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of farm houses, farm >50% of damaged farm equipment/ infra to total cost of 1.0 Very high
equipment, and post-harvest damages in the sector (in PhP):
infrastructures damaged* 40-50% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
21-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of irrigation facilities >40%of irrigation facilities damaged by typhoons(in terms of 1.0 Very high
damaged* cost or number of facilities)
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Frequency of typhoon with at >3 times 1.0 Very high
least 120 kph hitting the area 2-3 times 0.6 Moderate
within 1 year*(DA 2009, cited Once 0.2 Very Low
by UPLB)
OR
No. of 150-kph typhoons in 5 years:
>12 1.0 Very high
10-12 0.8 High
7-9 0.6 Moderate
4-6 0.4 Low
<3 0.2 Very Low
PESTS AND DISEASES
Yield losses due to common 81-100% of total yield 1.0 Very high
pests and diseases for the 61-80% 0.8 High
past 10 years* 41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of areas affected by 81-100% of total production area 1.0 Very high
pests and diseases* 61-80% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Income losses from % Decrease in total projected LGU income from agriculture:
production >30% of total LGU income 1.0 Very high
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
0 – 5% 0.2 Very Low
Number of agriculture No. of affected families mainly dependent on agriculture
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
SEA LEVEL RISE
Yield losses in farmlands in 81-100% losses from total yield 1.0 Very high
coastal municipalities due to 61-80% 0.8 High
salinity of soil beyond 41-60% 0.6 Moderate
threshold values* (4-8 dS/m; 21-40% 0.4 Low
FAO) <20% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of farmlands at the 81-100% of farmlands 1.0 Very high
coastal municipality affected 61-80% 0.8 High
by SLR* 41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Income losses from % Decrease in total projected LGU income from agriculture
production >30% of total LGU income 1.0 Very high
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
0 – 5% 0.2 Very Low
Number of agriculture 81-100% of families 1.0 Very high
dependent families in coastal 61-80% 0.8 High
municipality affected* 41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of irrigation facilities 81-100% of irrigation facilities affected 1.0 Very high
in farmlands in coastal 61-80% 0.8 High
municipality affected* 41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Adaptive Capacity Indicators: Crop Production
Indicators Scale Classification Adaptive
Capacity Rating
(points)
EROSION
Extent of sloping farms % of total sloping farms:
covered by soil erosion 81-100% of sloping farms 0.2 Very High
control measures* 61-80% 0.4 High
(vegetative and/or 41-60% 0.6 Moderate
mechanical measures in 21-40% 0.8 Low
sloping farms) <20% 1.0 Very Low
Soil conservation practices* % of farming HHs practicing soil conservation:
81-100% of farming families
61-80% 0.2 Very High
41-60% 0.4 High
21-40% 0.6 Moderate
<20% 0.8 Low
1.0 Very Low
OR
Frequency of soil and water conservation practices:
Regularly practicing conservation measures 0.2 Very high
Most of the time 0.4 High
Sometimes 0.6 Moderate
Seldom 0.8 Low
Not at all 1.0 Very Low
Ave. expenditure for % share of total program cost to total municipal expenditure:
agricultural programs for >80% 0.2 Very High
erosion-affected areas for 61-80% 0.4 High
the past 5 years 41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Access to farm loan or crop % of farming HH or % of production areas covered by crop
insurance* insurance or loan:
81-100% of farming HH or production areas 0.2 Very High
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Livelihood diversification % of farming HH with alternative livelihood sources:
program* 81-100% of farming HH 0.2 Very High
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Enforcement of regulatory % of land of agricultural land issued conversion orders:
measures on the conversion Below 5% allowable limit 0.2 Very High
of agricultural land into non- Above the 5% allowable limit 1.0 Very Low
food production purposes
(per Sec. 9 of RA 8435 &
other DAR policies)
FLOODING
Updated Maps of flood Maps available for the whole municipality or province 0.2 Very high
prone areas Updated maps available for 80% of the barangays in a 0.4 High
municipality or municipalities in a province
Maps available for more than 50% of the barangays in the 0.6 Moderate
municipality municipalities in a province
Maps available for <50% of the barangays in the municipality 0.8 Low
municipalities in a province
Annual historical flooding Updated flood data available for the whole municipality or 0.2 Very high
data* province
Updated flood data available for 80% of the barangays in a 0.4 High
municipality or municipalities in a province
Flood data available for more than 50% of the barangays in 0.6 Moderate
the municipality municipalities in a province
Flood data available for <50% of the barangays in the 0.8 Low
municipality municipalities in a province
No flood data available 1.0 Very Low
Access to flood forecasting 81-100% of municipalities 0.2 Very High
information and early 61-80% 0.4 High
warning system, AWS and 41-60% 0.6 Moderate
AGROMET station* 21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Flood control and drainage Flood control facilities fully functional 0.2 Very high
facilities in agricultural Flood control facilities 80% functional 0.4 High
areas* Flood control facilities not fully functional (50% functional) 0.6 Moderate
Flood control facilities is not functional 0.8 Low
No flood control facilities 1.0 Very Low
Ave. expenditure for % share of total program cost to total municipal expenditure:
agricultural programs for >80% 0.2 Very High
flood-prone areas for the 61-80% 0.4 High
past 5 years 41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Access to crop insurance, % of farmland covered by crop insurance :
loans or subsidies* 81-100% 0.2 Very High
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Flood control and drainage With flood control and drainage project 0.2 Very High
project in the municipality* Without flood control and drainage project 1.0 Very Low
Access to planting calendar Updated cropping calendar available for:

bulletins and other relevant
information* The whole municipality or province 0.2 Very High
80% of the barangays in a municipality or municipalities in a 0.4 High
province
More than 50% of the barangays in the municipality 0.6 Moderate
municipalities in a province
<50% of the barangays in the municipality municipalities in a 0.8 Low
province
Cropping calendar not updated 1.0 Very Low
Enforcement of regulatory % of land of agricultural land issued conversion orders:
measures on the conversion
of agricultural land into non- Below 5% allowable limit 0.2 Very High
food production purposes Above the 5% allowable limit 1.0 Very Low
(per Sec. 9 of RA 8435 &
other DAR policies)
Introduction of flood- % of farming HH using flood tolerant varieties:
resistant crop 81-100% 0.2 Very High
varieties*(submerge 61-80% 0.4 High
varieties) 41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
DROUGHT/ HEAT WAVES
Small scale irrigation % of farmland with small irrigation :
program* 81-100% 0.2 Very High
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Water impounding or rain % of farmland with water impounding facilities:
harvesting facilities* >20% 0.2 Very High
15-20% 0.4 High
10-15% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.8 Low
<5% 1.0 Very Low
Crop diversification practices >40%of farmers practicing crop diversification 0.2 Very High
31-40% 0.4 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.8 Low
<10% 1.0 Very Low
Maps of drought prone areas Updated maps available for :
The whole municipality or province 0.2 Very high
80% of the barangays or municipalities 0.4 High
More than 50% of the barangays or municipalities 0.6 Moderate
<50% of the barangays or municipalities 0.8 Low
Access to crop insurance, % of farmland covered by crop insurance

loans, or subsidies* 81-100% 0.2 Very High
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Access to drought forecasting EWS/ AWS or AGROMET available for :
information and early The whole municipality or province 0.2 Very high
warning system, AWS or 80% of the barangays or municipalities 0.4 High
AGROMET station* More than 50% of the barangays or municipalities 0.6 Moderate
No EWS/AWS/ AGROMET available 1.0 Very Low
Cloud seeding program % of Program coverage to total area of drought-affected
farms: 0.2 Very High
>20% 0.4 High
16-20% 0.6 Moderate
11-15% 0.8 Low
6-10% 1.0 Very Low
<5%
Livelihood diversification* 81-100% of farmer with alternative livelihood sources 0.2 Very High
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Access planting calendar Updated cropping calendar available for:
bulletins and other relevant The whole municipality or province 0.2 Very High
information* 80% of the barangays or municipalities 0.4 High
Cropping calendar not updated or available 1.0 Very Low
Expenditure for agricultural % share of total program cost to total municipal expenditure:
programs for drought-prone >80% 0.2 Very High
areas 61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Use of drought resistant crop % of farmland planted or devoted to drought-resistant crop
varieties* varieties:
>20% 0.2 Very High
16-20% 0.4 High
11-15% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.8 Low
<5% 1.0 Very Low
TYPHOONS/ STORMS
Access to crop insurance, % of farmland covered by crop insurance and/or credit:
loan or subsidies* 81-100% 0.2 Very High
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Access to typhoon Warning system functional and all evacuation routes 0.2 Very high
forecasting information and identified
early warning system and Warning system functional and evacuation routes partly 0.4 High
evacuation shelters for farm- identified
based families* Warning system not fully functional 0.6 Moderate
Warning system is not functional 0.8 Low
No warning system and evacuation routes identified 1.0 Very Low
Access to planting calendar Updated cropping calendar available for:
bulletins and other relevant The whole municipality or province 0.2 Very High
information * 80% of the barangays or municipalities 0.4 High
Cropping calendar not updated or available 1.0 Very Low
Typhoon resilient irrigation Irrigation facilities climate-proofed:
facilities* 81-100% of irrigation facilities climate-proofed 0.2 Very High
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
PESTS AND DISEASES
Integrated pest management Farms at risk covered by program:
program* >40% 0.2 Very High
31-40% 0.4 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.8 Low
<10% 1.0 Very Low
OR
% of expenditure on pest management (PhP/hectare) to total
agricultural development expenditure of LGU:
>20% 0.2 Very high
15-20 0.4 High
10-15 0.6 Moderate
5-10 0.8 Low
<5% 1.0 Very Low
Pest and disease outbreak EWS services available for:
forecasting and early
warning* The whole municipality or province 0.2 Very high
80% of the barangays or municipalities 0.4 High
No EWS available 1.0 Very Low
Crop diversification Farmers practicing crop diversification:
program* 81-100% of farmers 0.2 Very High
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
OR
% of farmlands with multi-cropping system:
81-100% of farmlands 0.2 Very High
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Access to crop insurance and % of farmland covered by crop insurance & subsidies for
subsidies or loans for pest pest control:
management control* 81-100% 0.2 Very High
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Access to extension services % of farmlands covered by extension services
81-100% 0.2 Very High
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Alternative livelihood Families with alternative livelihood sources:
program* 81-100% 0.2 Very High
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Practice of organic farming % of farmer HH practicing organic farming
techniques
81-100% 0.2 Very High
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Research and development R& D covers pests/ disease occurrences in the area in the
programs past 5 years:
81-100% of occurrences 0.2 Very High
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
SEA LEVEL RISE (SLR)
Planting of saline tolerant % of crop varieties in SLR impact that are saline tolerant:
crops* >20% 0.2 Very High
16-20% 0.4 High
11-15% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.8 Low
<5% 1.0 Very Low
Access to insurance, loans Farmer families in SLR impact areas with access to insurance,
and subsidies for crop loans or subsidies for crop damages:
damages 81-100% 0.2 Very High
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Livelihood diversification Farmer families in SLR impact areas with alternative
program* livelihood sources:
81-100% 0.2 Very High
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Relocation of farm HH Farmer families in SLR impact areas relocated:
affected by SLR* 81-100% 0.2 Very High
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
2) Fisheries (Marine Fisheries/Mariculture)
Sensitivity Indicators: Marine Fisheries/ Mariculture

Sea surface temperature St = weighted (Pb + Cp + Cd + Cb)
increase (St)
Phytoplankton bloom (Pb)* Phytoplankton blooms and decay affecting oxygen level
and fish catch:
>20% reduction in fish catch (5 year average) 1.0 Very high
16-20% 0.8 High
11-15% 0.6 Moderate
5-10% 0.4 Low
OR Net annual primary production (Phytoplankton
-2 -1:
production) in gm C m yr
>500 1.0 Very high
301-500 0.8 High
100-200 0.4 Low
<100 0.2 Very Low
Catch of tuna and small pelagics Catch of tuna and small pelagics in 5 years:
in 5 years (historical pattern of >20% reduction in catch 1.0 Very high
catch) (Cp) 16-20% 0.8 High
11-15% 0.6 Moderate
5-10% 0.4 Low
Catch of reef fishes and Catch of reef fishes and demersals:
demersals in 5 years (historical >20% reduction in catch 1.0 Very high
pattern of catch) (Cd)* 16-20% 0.8 High
11-15% 0.6 Moderate
5-10% 0.4 Low
Coral bleaching (Cb)* % of hard coral cover affected by coral bleaching per
100 hectares:
>20% 1.0 Very high
16-20% 0.8 High
11-15% 0.6 Moderate
5-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
Water acidification (Wa) Wa = weighted (Pp + Sp + Tp + Cr)
Phytoplankton production (Pp)* Phytoplankton survival is reduced resulting in the
reduction of fish yield in the coastal fishing ground
expressed as reduction in fish catch:
>20% reduction in demersals/reef fish catch (5 year 1.0 Very high
average)
16-20% 0.8 High
11-15% 0.6 Moderate
5-10% 0.4 Low
OR
Net annual primary production (Phytoplankton
-2 -1
Coastal zones:
<50 1.0 Very high
51-100 0.8 High
201-300 0.4 Low
>300 0.2 Very Low
Seagrass production (Sp)* Capacity to withstand increasing levels of pH
Multispecies seagrass bed (>6 species) 1.0 Very high
2-5 species seagrass beds (Thalassia-Cymodocea- 0.6 Moderate
Halodule dominated)
MonospecificEnhalus beds 0.2 Very Low
pH level tolerance of fish Capacity to withstand increasing levels of pH
species (Tp)* <3 pH 1.0 Very high
4-6 pH 0.8 High
7-8 pH 0.6 Moderate
9-10 pH 0.4 Low
>11 pH 0.2 Very Low
Coral reefs (Cr)* % of hard coral cover affected by ocean acidification
per 100 hectares:
>20% 1.0 Very high
16-20% 0.8 High
11-15% 0.6 Moderate
5-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
Sea level rise/flooding (Sl) Sl = weighted (Mp + Mo + Ef + Sf/Cp/Ls)
Mariculture production (Mp)* Harvest of mariculture fishes in 5 years
16-20 0.8 High
11-15 0.6 Moderate
5-10 0.4 Low
Marine organism (shellfish and Catch of shellfish and crabs in mangrove areas in 5
crabs) in mangrove areas (Mo)* years
16-20 0.8 High
11-15 0.6 Moderate
5-10 0.4 Low
Estuarine fisheries production Catch of estuarine fishes in 5 years
(Ef)* >20% reduction in catch 1.0 Very high
16-20 0.8 High
11-15 0.6 Moderate
5-10 0.4 Low
Location of settlements of Presence of natural buffers fronting fishing families:
fishing families (Sf)* None 1.0 Very high
Mangrove or coral reef 0.8 High
Mangrove and coral reef 0.6 Moderate
OR OR Maximum width of coastal plain (m)

Maximum width of coastal plain <300m 1.0 Very high
(Cp) 301-600m 0.8 High
601-900m 0.6 Moderate
901-1,200m 0.4 Low
>1,200m 0.2 Very Low
OR OR Elevation in meters of the location of settlements:

Elevation of location of <1m 1.0 Very high
settlements (Ls)* 1-2m 0.8 High
3-4m 0.6 Moderate
5-6m 0.4 Low
>6m 0.2 Very Low
Tropical cyclones and storm Tc = weighted (Mp + Tv + Tf + Fr/Rd/Lm/Mf)
surges (Tc)
Location of mariculture projects % of mariculture projects inundated:
(Mp)* >90% of mariculture projects 1.0 Very high
71-90% 0.8 High
51-70% 0.6 Moderate
30-50% 0.4 Low
<30% 0.2 Very Low
Intensity of typhoons/wind Tropical Cyclone Intensity Scale Category Sustained
velocity (Tv)* Winds
≥118 km/h Typhoon 1.0 Very high
89–117 km/h Severe Tropical Storm 0.8 High
62–88 km/h Tropical Storm 0.6 Moderate
≤61 km/h Tropical Depression 0.4 Low
Frequency and duration of Based on Annual Frequency of Tropical Cyclone in PAR
typhoons hitting the area in a (1948-2004):
year (Tf)* >30 Typhoons 1.0 Very high
21-30 Typhoons 0.8 High
16-20 Typhoons 0.6 Moderate
5-15 Typhoons 0.4 Low
<5 Typhoons 0.2 Very Low
Fringing reef width (Fr)* Fringing reef width (parallel to the shore): (UPMSI,
2010)
<25m width of fringing reef 1.0 Very high
25-50m width of fringing reef 0.6 Moderate
>50m width of fringing reef 0.2 Very Low
OR OR
Reef depth (Rd) Reef depth:
Reef crest is >2m 1.0 Very high
1-2m 0.6 Moderate
<1m deep at lowest tide 0.2 Very low
OR OR
Land masses (Lm)* No land masses lie between the typhoon generated 1.0 Very high
waves and the reef and the coast
A large, distant or nearby, small land mass lies between 0.6 Moderate
the typhoon generated waves and the reef and the
coast
A nearby, large land mass lies between the typhoon 0.2 Very low
generated waves and the reef and the coast
OR OR
Fringing mangrove forest (Mf)* Presence of fringing mangrove forest:
Presence of riverine-fringing mangrove forest 1.0 Very high
Presence of adjacent mangrove forests: presence of 0.6 Moderate
basin-riverine fringing mangrove forest 0.2 Very low
Exposure indicators: Marine Fisheries/Mariculture Sub-Sector
Sea surface temperature St = weighted (Rd + Ps + Cs + Ss + Fl + Rd)
increase (St)
Number of reef fish/demersal % reef fish/demersal species highly sensitive to
species highly sensitive to increase in temperature:
increase in temperature (Rd)* >40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
0-10% 0.2 Very Low
Number of pelagic species % pelagic species highly sensitive to increase in
highly sensitive to increase in temperature:
temperature (Ps) >40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
0-10% 0.2 Very Low
Number and extent of species % coral species highly sensitive to increase in
of corals highly sensitive to temperature
increase in temperature (Cs)* >40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
0-10% 0.2 Very Low
Number and extent of species % seagrass species highly sensitive to increase in
of seagrass highly sensitive to temperature:
increase temperature (Ss) >40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
0-10% 0.2 Very Low
Number of families totally Dependence of population on fishing (UPMSI, 2010):
dependent on fishing as source >80% of fishing families totally dependent on fishing 1.0 Very high
of livelihood and income (Fl)* for income
61-80% of fishing families totally dependent on fishing 0.8 High
for income
41-60% of fishing families totally dependent on fishing 0.6 Moderate
for income
20-40% of fishing families totally dependent on fishing 0.4 Low
for income
<20% of fishing families totally dependent on fishing 0.2 Very Low
for income
% loss in income due to decline % loss of income due decline in fish catch:
in reef fish/demersal and small >40% decline in fish catch 1.0 Very high
pelagics and tuna catch (Rd) 31-40% decline in fish catch 0.8 High
21-30% decline in fish catch 0.6 Moderate
10-20% decline in fish catch 0.4 Low
<10% decline in fish catch 0.2 Very Low
Ocean acidification (Oa) Oa = weighted (Pp + Rf + Ca + Si + Fl + Fs + Fc + Mp)
Decline in phytoplankton Net annual primary production (Phytoplankton
-2 -1
production per 100 ha (Pp)* production) in gm C m yr Coastal zones:
<50 1.0 Very high
51-100 0.8 High
201-300 0.4 Low
>300 0.2 Very Low
Decline in reef fish (demersal) % decline of demersal (reef fish):
production (Rf)* >40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
0-10% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of coral affected (Ca)* % of coral reefs affected by acidification:
>40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
0-10% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of seagrass inundated % seagrass species inundated:
(Si) >40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
0-10% 0.2 Very Low
Number of families totally Dependence of population on fishing (UPMSI, 2010)
dependent on fishing as source >80% of fishing families totally dependent on fishing 1.0 Very high
of livelihood and income (Fl)* for income
61-80% of fishing families totally dependent on fishing 0.8 High
for income
41-60% of fishing families totally dependent on fishing 0.6 Moderate
for income
20-40% of fishing families totally dependent on fishing 0.4 Low
for income
<20% of fishing families totally dependent on fishing 0.2 Very Low
for income
Fish stock level (Fs) % decline in fishery stock:
>40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
10-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Decline in fish catch by Average fish catch by small fishermen:
artisanal or small fishermen <2 kg catch per boat per trip 1.0 Very high
(Fc) 3-4 kg catch per boat per trip 0.8 High
5-6 kg catch per boat per trip 0.6 Moderate
7-8 kg catch per boat per trip 0.4 Low
>8 kg catch per boat per trip 0.2 Very Low
Decline in mariculture % decline in mariculture production
production (Mp) >40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
0-10% 0.2 Very Low
Sea level rise/flooding (Sl) Sl = weighted (Mi + Mp + Sc + Ei + Cs + Pa)
Extent of mariculture projects >50% of mariculture projects inundated: 1.0 Very high
inundated (Mi)* 41-50% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
20-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Decline in mariculture % decline in mariculture production:
production (Mp)* >40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
0-10% 0.2 Very Low
Decline in mangrove % decline in shellfish and crab production in mangrove
production of shellfish and areas:
crabs (Sc)* >40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
0-10% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of estuary inundated (Ei) >50% of estuary inundated: 1.0 Very high
41-50% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
20-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of coastal settlements % of barangay area <1 m elevation above MSL (UPMSI,
and families inundated (Cs) 2010):
≥40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
10-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Cost of physical assets and Replacement value of:
infrastructures affected (Pa)* >50% of settlements and infrastructures affected by 1.0 Very high
flood
41-50% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
20-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Tropical cyclones and storm Tc = weighted (Md + Cs + Di + Pa + Mp)
surges (Tc)
Extent of mariculture projects >50% of mariculture projects damaged: 1.0 Very high
damaged (Md)* 41-50% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
20-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of coastal settlements Percent of settlements and
and population frequently populationaffected/damaged by typhoons:
affected/damaged by typhoons >80% 1.0 Very high
(Cs)* 61-80% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
20-40% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Loss in daily income due to Percentage loss of daily income due to inability to fish:
inability to fish (Di) >80% loss of income 1.0 Very high
61-80% loss of income 0.8 High
41-60% loss of income 0.6 Moderate
20-40% loss of income 0.4 Low
<20% loss of income 0.2 Very Low
Extent of physical assets and Replacement value of:
infrastructures damaged (Pa)* >50% of physical assets and infrastructures are 1.0 Very high
damaged by typhoons
41-50% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
20-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Decline in mariculture % decline in mariculture production and loss of
production and loss of income income:
from mariculture (Mp) >40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
0-10% 0.2 Very Low
Adaptive Capacity indicators: Marine Fisheries/Mariculture Sub-Sector
Sea Surface temperature St = weighted (Es + Lp + Sa + Sm + Tm)
increase (St)
Establishment of marine Adequacy of funds for the establishment of MS and
sanctuaries (MS) and marine MPAs
protected areas (MPAs) (Es)* Adequate funds needed are provided (>80%) 0.2 Very high
MS and MPAs with some funding (61-80%) 0.4 High
MS and MPAs modestly supported (41-60%) 0.6 Moderate
Little support for MS and MPAs (20-40%) 0.8 Low
Very little or no support for MS and MPAs (<20%) 1.0 Very Low
Alternative livelihood program % of fishing families with alternative livelihood
for fishing families (Lp)* program (UPMSI, 2010):
>80% of fishing families with alternative livelihood 0.2 Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
20-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Periodic stock assessment and Fishery stock assessment undertaken in all important 0.2 Very high
enforcement of fishery laws fishing grounds and enforcement of fishery laws
(Sa)* (>80% of fishing ground with stock assessment & law
enforcement)
In many fishing grounds and enforcement of fishery 0.4 High
laws (61-80%)
In some fishing grounds and enforcement of fishery 0.6 Moderate
laws (41-60%)
In few fishing grounds and enforcement of fishery 0.8 Low
laws (20-40%)
In very few or No stock assessment and enforcement 1.0 Very Low
(<20%)
Surveillance and monitoring Surveillance and Monitoring system funding:
system for coral reef and reef Adequately funded (>80% of funds needed are 0.2 Very high
fish production (Sm) provided)
With some funding (61-80%) 0.4 High
Modestly supported (41-60%) 0.6 Moderate
Little support (20-40%) 0.8 Low
Very little or no support (<20%) 1.0 Very Low
Sea surface temperature With SST map in most portions of fishing grounds 0.2 Very high
mapping (Tm)* (>80% of fishing grounds)
With SST map in many portions of fishing grounds 0.4 High
(61-80%)
With SST map in some portions fishing grounds (41- 0.6 Moderate
60%)
With SST map in very few portions fishing grounds 0.8 Low
(20-40%)
With very little SST map to No SST map (<20%) 1.0 Very Low
Ocean acidification (Oa) Oa = weighted (Em + Mp + Lp + Cs + Sa)
Establishment of more marine Establishment of MS and MPAs adequately funded 0.2 Very high
sanctuaries (MS) and marine (>80% of funds needed are provided)
protected areas (MPAs) (Em)* MS and MPAs with some funding (61-80%) 0.4 High
Proper siting of mariculture % of mariculture projects properly sited
projects (Mp)* >90% mariculture projects properly sited 0.2 Very high
71-90% 0.4 High
51-70% 0.6 Moderate
30-50% 0.8 Low
<30% 1.0 Very Low
Alternative livelihood program % fishing families with alternative livelihood program
for fishing families (Lp)* (UPMSI, 2010)
61-80% of fishing families with alternative livelihood 0.4 High
41-60% of fishing families with alternative livelihood 0.6 Moderate
20-40% of fishing families with alternative livelihood 0.8 Low
<20% of fishing families with alternative livelihood 1.0 Very Low
Surveillance and monitoring Surveillance and monitoring system funding:
system for coral reef and reef Adequately funded (>80% of funds needed are 0.2 Very high
fish production (Cs) provided)
With some funding (61-80%) 0.4 High
Modestly supported (41-60%) 0.6 Moderate
Little support (20-40%) 0.8 Low
Very little or no support (<20%) 1.0 Very Low
Periodic stock assessment and Fishery stock assessment undertaken in all important 0.2 Very high
enforcement of fishery laws fishing grounds and enforcement of fishery laws
(Sa)* (>80% of fishing ground with stock assessment & law
enforcement)
In many fishing grounds and enforcement of fishery 0.4 High
laws (61-80%)
In some fishing grounds and enforcement of fishery 0.6 Moderate
laws (41-60%)
In few fishing grounds and enforcement of fishery 0.8 Low
laws (20-40%)
In very few or No stock assessment and enforcement 1.0 Very Low
(<20%)
Sea level rise (Sl) Sl = weighted (Mp + Lp + Cs + Ps + Es + Cf)
Proper siting of mariculture % of mariculture projects properly sited
projects (Mp)* >90% mariculture projects properly sited 0.2 Very high
71-90% 0.4 High
51-70% 0.6 Moderate
30-50% 0.8 Low
<30% 1.0 Very Low
Alternative livelihood program % fishing families with alternative livelihood program
for fishing families (Lp)* (UPMSI, 2010)
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
20-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Relocation of coastal >60% of coastal settlements living in high risk areas 0.2 Very high
settlements at high risk areas are relocated:
(Cs)* 41-60% 0.4 High
21-40% 0.6 Moderate
1-20% 0.8 Low
Presence or construction of Presence or construction of physical structures:
physical structures (sea walls Properly designed and very sturdy constructed 0.2 Very high
and sea levees) (Ps)* physical structures
Sturdy and properly placed structures 0.4 High
Establishment of marine Establishment of MS and MPAs adequately funded:
sanctuaries (MS) and marine >80% of funds needed are provided) 0.2 Very high
protected areas (MPAs) (Es)* MS and MPAs with some funding (61-80%) 0.4 High
Access to calamity funds and Calamity funds/loans readily accessible 0.2 Very high
recovery loans (Cf) Modest calamity funds/loans accessible 0.4 High
Limited calamity funds/loans accessible 0.6 Moderate
Very little calamity funds/loans accessible 0.8 Low
No calamity funds/loans accessible 1.0 Very Low
Tropical cyclones and storm Tc = weighted (Tw + Cf + Lf + Cr + Ea)
surge (Tc)
Access to typhoon forecasting With access to typhoon forecasting and early warning
and early warning system (Tw)* system:
Covering >60% of coastal settlements 0.2 Very high
No early warning system and disaster preparedness 1.0 Very Low
program
Access to calamity funds and Calamity funds/loans readily accessible 0.2 Very high
loans for recovery (Cf) Modest calamity funds/loans accessible 0.4 High
Limited calamity funds/loans accessible 0.6 Moderate
Very little calamity funds/loans accessible 0.8 Low
No calamity funds/loans accessible 1.0 Very Low
Alternative livelihood for fishing % fishing families with alternative livelihood program
families (Lf)* (UPMSI, 2010):
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
20-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Relocation of coastal population >60% of coastal population relocated to suitable sites 0.2 Very high
to suitable sites (Cr) 41-60% 0.4 High
21-40% 0.6 Moderate
1-20% 0.8 Low
Access to evacuation centers Most evacuation centers readily accessible (>80%) 0.2 Very high
(Ea) Many evacuation centers accessible (61-80%) 0.4 High
Some evacuation centers accessible (41-60%) 0.6 Moderate
Few evacuation centers accessible (20-40%) 0.8 Low
Very few to No evacuation centers accessible (<20%) 1.0 Very Low
Water Supply Sector
Sensitivity Indicators: Water Supply

(points)
Drought
Rainfall volume* Monthly average rainfall:
<30% of monthly average for 3 months in a row 1.0 Very high
30-40% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
61 – 80% 0.4 Low
>80% 0.2 Very Low
Ground water potential or % to annual rainfall:
recharge capacity viz. NWRB <10% 1.0Very High
standard (10% of annual 10-15% 0.8 High
rainfall)* 16-20% 0.6Moderate
21-25% 0.4 Low
26-30% 0.2 Very Low
Surface Water sources* Share of surface water source to total water sources in
the area:
>60% 1.0 Very high
41-60% 0.8 High
21-40% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
OR
** National estimated daily Daily average loss of surface water during summer
average surface water supply months for the past 5 years:
loss due to evaporation = >10mm 1.0 Very high
5mm(UP NIGS 2010) 7-9mm 0.8 High
4-6mm 0.6 Moderate
1-3mm 0.4 Low
<1mm 0.2 Very Low
Forest cover (primary and % of Primary and secondary forests to total watershed
secondary) in critical watershed area (UP NIGS CCIM):
supporting multi-purpose dams <20% 1.0 Very High
21-25% 0.8 High
26-30% 0.6 Moderate
31-35% 0.4 Low
>35% 0.2 Very Low
Predominant land use in % of built up land to total area of watershed:
watershed >50% 1.0 Very high
(UP NIGS- CCIM program, 2010) 31-50% 0.8 High
21%-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Population serviced by level 3 % of population with level 3 supply system:
water supply service* >80% 1.0 Very high
61-80% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.4 Low
<20% of population 0.2 Very Low
Water quality for domestic use Compliance with standard for domestic uses set by
(PEM 2003) DOH/ EMB (domestic use) :
** STANDARDS: Above standard values for effluents 1.0 Very High

Below standard values 0.2 Very Low
(FOR GROUNDWATER) TDS =
500 mg/L and a “negative” for
coliform
OR
(FOR SURFACE WATER) TSS= 25

mg/L for Class AA and 50 mg/L
for Class A (EMB, 2006)
Level of water supply for Proportion of rice and crop lands dependent on
agriculture irrigation and ground water supply:
>50% 1.0 Very high
41-50% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
21-30% 0.4 Low
<20% of total agricultural land 0.2 Very Low
Water quality for agricultural Compliance with standard for domestic uses set by
use (based on Class D standards EMB for agricultural use (in TDS ppm or mg/L):
of EMB & FAO, measured in >2,000 1.0 Very High
TDS) 1,000-2000 0.8 High
500-1,000 0.6 Moderate
<500 0.4 Low
Level of water supply for Proportion of industries and commercial users
industrial and commercial uses connected to water supply service of municipality:
>40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% of total industrial and commercials users 0.2 Very Low
11-water quality for industrial Compliance with standard for industrial and
uses commercial uses set by DOH :
Above standard values for effluents 1.0 Very High
STANDARD: CLASS C surface Below standard values 0.2 Very Low
water (PEM 2003)
Typhoons/ storms and
flooding
Rainfall Volume* Average range of daily rainfall during typhoons in the
area (based on provincial rainfall data):
>20% of average range 1.0 Very High
Within average range 0.6 Moderate
<20% of average range 0.2 Very Low
Condition of water supply % of water supply facilities in need of repair/
facilities rehabilitation:
(includes major or district >50% 1.0 Very high
reservoirs, processing and 31-50% 0.8 High
distribution facilities; based on 21%-30% 0.6 Moderate
infrastructure inventory and 11-20% 0.4 Low
condition of supply <10% 0.2 Very Low
infrastructure)
Water quality (rivers and lakes) Compliance with standards for water quality for lakes
based on Class C and/or D and rivers:
standards (PEM 2003) Above standard values for effluents 1.0 Very High
Below standard values 0.2 Very Low
Storage capacity of multi- Volume of water during typhoons exceeding Normal
purpose dams (NAPOCOR/ local High Water Level (NHWL):
water districts, NIA, PAG-ASA)* Exceeding >10% of NHWL 1.0 Very High
Within NHWL 0.6 Moderate
<10% of NHWL 0.2 Very Low
Sea level rise (SLR)/flooding
Elevation of above-ground Difference between present elevation of facilities and
water distribution facilities projected SLR (in m):
(pipelines and pumping Below projected SLR 1.0 Very High
stations for water Equal to projected SLR 0.6 Moderate
distribution)* Above projected SLR 0.2 Very Low
OR
<1m msl 1.0 Very High
1-2 m 0.8 High
2-3 m 0.6 Moderate
3-4 m 0.4 Low
>4 meters masl 0.2 Very Low
Proximity of water distribution Distance of water distribution facilities viz. expected
system to SLR or flood impacts SLR or flood impact areas:
areas* 3-5 meters from SLR impact area 1.0 Very high
(Source: For SLR – Water Code 6-10 0.8 High
of the Philippines; For flooding 11-20 0.6 Moderate
– flood map of province based 20-30 m 0.4 Low
on DRA in PDPFP or MGB) >30 m 0.2 Very Low
Land subsidence due to Average depth of private deep wells in SLR impact areas
groundwater extraction* (NWRB):
>40m 1.0 Very high
31-40 0.8 High
21-30 0.6 Moderate
11-20m 0.4 Low
<10m 0.2 Very Low
OR distance between deepwells with less than 30m

depth (per PD 1067):
<200 m 1.0 Very High
201-400 m 0.8 High
501-600m 0.4 Low
>600 m 0.2 Very Low
Salt water intrusion to ground Compliance with water quality standards of EMB
water source or salinity of (source: Water Quality Monitoring Manual – EMB):
groundwater supply*
Above acceptable range for salinity 1.0 Very High
Within acceptable range 0.6 Moderate
Below acceptable range of values 0.2 Very Low
Exposure Indicators: Water Supply Sector
Indicators Scale Classification Exposure Rating
Drought
Surface water available for Supply-Demand Deficit in % (UP NIGS CCIM)
domestic, agriculture and
industry for the past 2 years* >20% deficit 1.0 Very high
11-20% 0.8 High
6-10% 0.6 Moderate
(refers to available water 1-5% 0.4 Low
supply from dams and other <1% deficit to >10% surplus 0.2 Very Low
water storage facilities vs.
demand for various uses: UP- OR
NIGS) Water supply deficit already apparent in 2010 1.0 Very high
Water supply deficit will be realized by 2020 0.8 High
Water supply is equivalent to demand 0.6 Moderate
Water supply is enough for projected demand in 0.2 Very Low
2020/2050 years
Number of years within safe # of years when Supply or Groundwater Potential is
yield (UP-NIGS 2011)* equal to Usage (Year GWP=Usage) – Year Current):
<1 year 1.0 Very high
1-2 0.8 High
3-4 0.6 Moderate
5-6 0.4 Low
>6 0.2 Very Low
Quantity of water available for Per capita/day water allocation (HLURB 2009, UP NIGS
poor population* 2010, ADB 2009: Water for All) in liters per capita per
day:
<100 lcpd 1.0 Very high
100-119 lpcd 0.8 High
120-150 lpcd 0.6 Moderate
151-180 lcpd 0.4 Low
>180 lcpd 0.2 Very Low
OR Poor population with access to potable water:

<20% of population 1.0 Very high
21-40% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
61-80% 0.4 Low
>80% 0.2 Very Low
Estimated income loss % reduction in industry employment from reduction of
capital costs of industries during drought season
(when power generation is reduced):
>40% of total employment in industry sector 1.0 Very high

31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Change in water demand Share of urban areas to total barangays or
municipalities in the province:
>40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
OR Share of income of municipality to province
>40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
OR
Ave. annual population growth rate of province
>4% 1.0 Very high
3.1-4.0% 0.8 High
2.1-3.0% 0.6 Moderate
1.0-2.0% 0.4 Low
>1% 0.2 Very Low
% of water supply % of water supply sources below EMB/ DOH
contaminated with pollutants standards:
>40% of total water sources 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Duration of water supply* Daily Water supply (in hours/ day)
<10hrs 1.0 Very High
(UP NIGS 2010) 10-15hrs 0.8 High
16-20 hours 0.6 Moderate
21-24 hours 0.4 Low
>24 hours 0.2 Very Low
Decrease in electricity Power interruption during summer (hours/ day):
generation during the summer >6 hours 1.0 Very high
4-6 hours 0.2 High
2- 4 hours 0.4 Moderate
1-2 hours 0.6 Low
<1 hour 0.2 Very Low
Illegal groundwater extraction Deepwells without permit (vs. total no. of deepwells in
the area):
>50% 1.0 Very High
41-50% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
21-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Typhoons/storms and flooding
% of total HH without access to >50% 1.0 Very high
clean/ potable water 41-50% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
21-30% 0.4 Low
<20% of HH population 0.2 Very Low
Extent of damaged water >40% 1.0 Very high
infrastructure facilities 21-40% 0.8 High
(includes storage, processing 11-20% 0.6 Moderate
and distribution facilities; 6-10% 0.4 Low
based on infrastructure <5% 0.2 Very Low
inventory)*
Alternative water sources Supply deficit
available* (based on capacity
of combined public water >20% deficit 1.0 Very high
impoundments minus demand 11-20% 0.8 High
during typhoon season ex. 6-10% 0.6 Moderate
impounded water sources) 1-5% 0.4 Low
<1% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of water supply sources >50% of sources 1.0 Very high
contaminated* 41-50% 0.8 High
31-40% 0.6 Moderate
21-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Cost of repairing damaged >50% of total cost 1.0 Very high
water supply facilities vs. total 41-50% 0.8 High
cost of damages 31-40% 0.6 Moderate
21-30% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Increase in operating costs of Number of hours in need of generator sets per day:
water districts due to power 20-24 hours 1.0 Very high
interruptions 16-20 0.8 High
11-15 0.6 Moderate
5-10 0.4 Low
<5 hours 0.2 Very Low
Sea level rise (SLR)
Extent of salt water intrusion Drawdown of groundwater extraction (PIDS 2001
to groundwater sources* citing JICA 1992):
41-50m 1.0 Very high
31-40 0.8 High
21-30 0.6 Moderate
11-20 0.4 Low
<10m 0.2 Very Low
Extent of water supply system % of water supply infrastructure or facilities in SLR
inundated by SLR* impact area affected by flood due to SLR:
>50% 1.0 Very high
31-50% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Cost of damage to water supply >50% 1.0 Very high
facilities due to SLR (vs. total 31-50% 0.8 High
maintenance and operations 21-30% 0.6 Moderate
cost) 11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Adaptive Capacity Indicators: Water Supply Sector
Indicators Scale Classification Adaptive Capacity
Rating
Drought
Access to water conservation % of barangays with water conservation programs or
programs or facilities* (e.g. rain facilities:
water harvesting technology, >80% 0.2 Very high
water recycling, etc.) 61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% of barangays 1.0 Very Low
Development of new water New water supply sources for:
supply sources following the >60% of drought-affected production areas 0.2 Very High
drought period* 41-60% 0.4 High
21-40 0.6 Moderate
<20% 0.8 Low
Without new water sources 1.0 Very Low
Regulation of water extraction* Illegal water extraction activities regulated:
>80% of illegal water extraction regulated 0.2 Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% of water extraction 1.0 Very Low
Improved water supply % of degraded water supply infrastructure
infrastructure* rehabilitated:
>80% of degraded water supply infrastructure 0.2 Very high
rehabilitated
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Reforestation programs* % of degraded watersheds covered by reforestation
programs:
>80% 0.2 Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Critical watershed protection >80% of critical watersheds with protection program: 0.2 Very high
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Water desalinization Industries with desalinization technology or facilities:
requirements for industries* >70% 0.2 Very high
51-70 0.4 High
31-50 0.6 Moderate
10-30 0.8 Low
<10 1.0 Very Low
Ecological waste management Decrease in waste generation in municipalities:
programs and pollution control >40% decrease to baseline 0.2 Very high
31-40% 0.4 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.8 Low
<10% 1.0 Very Low
Effective irrigation system Potential cropping OR crop production per year:
>90% of potential 0.2 Very high
81-90% 0.4 High
71-80% 0.6 Moderate
61-70% 0.8 Low
<60% 1.0 Very Low
Required water efficient % of HH with water-efficient fixture or technology:
practices in new >80% to total no. of HH: 0.2 Very high
building/subdivisions 61-80% 0.4 High
developments* 41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
OR
% of municipalities with policies on the use of water
efficient technologies for infra development:
>80% of total municipalities 0.2 Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Typhoons/ storms & flooding
Alternative water sources (e.g. % of barangays with alternative water sources:
rainwater harvesting)* >80% 0.2 Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-59% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
Retrofitting of water supply Municipalities with policies or projects to climate
systems for resiliency *(e.g. proof water supply system:
relocation of facilities from >80%of municipalities 0.2 Very high
high-risk to low risk areas, 61-80% 0.4 High
rehabilitation of supply infra, 41-60% 0.6 Moderate
development of new water 21-40% 0.8 Low
sources) <20% of municipalities 1.0 Very Low
Typhoon forecasting or rain Municipalities with typhoon forecasting system:
gauge systems >80% 0.2 Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% of municipalities 1.0 Very Low
Sea level rise (SLR)
Access to desalinization % of barangays within SLR impact areas with
technologies* desalinization technologies:
>70% 0.2 Very high
51-70 0.4 High
31-50 0.6 Moderate
10-30 0.8 Low
<10 1.0 Very Low
Rainwater harvesting system* % of barangays within SLR impact areas with rainwater
harvesting system:
>80% 0.2 Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
Health Sector
FOCUS AREA: INCREASE IN THE INCIDENCE OF VECTOR-BORNE AND

WATER BORNE DISEASES ASSOCIATED WITH CLIMATE CHANGE
Sensitivity Indicators: Health Sector

(points)
CHOLERA/ ACUTE
GASTROENTERITIS (AGE)/
TYPHOID
Rainfall* Average monthly rainfall during rainy months of the
province (e.g. June to November):
(UP NIH) >500mm 1.0 Very high
250-500mm 0.8 High
50-100mm 0.4 Low
<50mm 0.2 Very Low
Temperature from the mean Average monthly maximum temperature increase
monthly temperature (UP NIH) during summer months or the months following the
rainy season (e.g. March to May):
3.1.-4.0°C 1.0Very High

2.1-3.0 0.8 High
1.0-2.0 0.6 Moderate
<1°C 0.4 Low
Relative humidity Monthly relative humidity of the province:
>80% 1.0Very High
76-80% 0.8 High
71-75% 0.6 Moderate
66-70% 0.4 Low
<65% 0.2 Very Low
Coverage of levels 2 or 3 water HHs covered with levels 2 or 3 water supply:
supply* <20% of HH 1.0 Very high
21-40% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
61-80% 0.4 Low
>80% 0.2 Very Low
OR
Predominant water supply Water supply level:
service level in municipality Level 1 1.0Very High
(servicing over 80% of the Level 2 0.8 High
population) Level 3 0.6 Moderate
HH with Sanitation toilets* <20% of HH 1.0 Very high
21-40% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
61-80% 0.4 Low
>80% 0.2 Very Low
Waste management practices* Barangays practicing waste segregation or with MRF:
<20%of barangays 1.0 Very high
21-40% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
61-80% 0.4 Low
>80% 0.2 Very Low
OR OR
Frequency of waste collection Once a week 1.0 Very high
2x a week 0.8 High
Every other day 0.6 Moderate
Daily 0.4 Low
2x a day 0.2 Very Low
OR OR
Use of proper waste disposal Municipalities with access to sanitary landfill
facility (e.g. sanitary landfill) <20%of municipalities 1.0 Very high
21-40% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
61-80% 0.4 Low
>80% 0.2 Very Low
History of disease outbreak for With history of outbreak 1.0 Very high
the last five (5) years* Without history of outbreak but with reported cases 0.6 Moderate
Without history of outbreak 0.2 Very Low
% of food establishments in the >80% food establishments 1.0 Very high
municipality below health and 61-80% 0.8 High
sanitation standards on food 41-60% 0.6 Moderate
handling* 21-40% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
DENGUE
Rainfall* Average monthly rainfall from during rainy season in
(UP NIH) the province (e.g. April to October):
250-500mm 0.8 High
50-100mm 0.4 Low
<50mm 0.2 Very Low
Temperature increase from the Average monthly maximum temperature increase
mean monthly temperature during summer months or the months following the
(UP NIH)* rainy season of the province:
3.1.-4.0°C 1.0Very High

2.1-3.0 0.8 High
<1°C 0.4 Low
Relative humidity Monthly relative humidity of the province:
>80% 1.0Very High
76-80% 0.8 High
71-75% 0.6 Moderate
66-70% 0.4 Low
<65% 0.2 Very Low
Proximity of slow-flowing and/ Distance of dwelling units to stagnant bodies of water:
or stagnant bodies of water <10 meters 1.0 Very high
(near esteros, ponds, creeks, 11-20 0.8 High
rivers)/ potential breeding 21-30 0.6 Moderate
sites* 31-40 0.4 Low
>40 0.2 Very Low
Waste management practices Barangays practicing waste segregation or with MRF:
21-40% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
61-80% 0.4 Low
>80% 0.2 Very Low
OR
2x a week 0.8 High
Daily 0.4 Low
OR
Use of proper waste disposal Municipalities with access to sanitary landfill:
facility (sanitary landfill) <20%of municipalities 1.0 Very high
21-40% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
61-80% 0.4 Low
>80% 0.2 Very Low
Age structure (UP NIH, DOH Predominant age group (by barangay or municipality):
Dengue Surveillance 2011)* <1-14yrs old 1.0 Very high
>65 0.8 High
15-29 0.6 Moderate
30-44 0.4 Low
45-59 0.2 Very Low
Population density in mixed use Above provincial density in mixed use areas 1.0 Very High
areas* Equal to provincial density 0.6 Moderate
Below provincial density 0.2 Very Low
Flood-prone settlements* >80% HH in flood-prone areas 1.0 Very High
61-80% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Retention time of flood water >7 days 1.0 Very High
5-6 days 0.8 High
3-4 days 0.6 Moderate
1-2 days 0.4 Low
<1 day 0.2 Very Low
History of disease outbreak for Number of outbreaks in the area
the past 5 years* >5 1.0 Very High
4-5 0.8 High
3-4 0.6 Moderate
1-2 0.4 Low
0 0.2 Very Low
Access to level 3 water supply HHs covered with level 3 water supply :
>80% of HH 1.0 Very high
61-80% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
LEPTOSPIROSIS
Frequency or return period of <4 years 1.0Very High
street flooding (DRA for 4-5 0.8 High
PDPFP)* 6-7 0.6 Moderate
8-9 0.4 Low
>10 0.2 Very Low
Waste disposal practices* Barangays practicing waste segregation or with MRF:
21-40% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
61-80% 0.4 Low
>80% 0.2 Very Low
OR
2x a week 0.8 High
Daily 0.4 Low
OR
Use of proper waste disposal Municipalities with access to sanitary landfill:
facility (sanitary landfill) <20%of municipalities: 1.0 Very high
21-40% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
61-80% 0.4 Low
>80% 0.2 Very Low
Flood-prone settlements* >80% HH in flood-prone areas: 1.0 Very High
61-80% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.4 Low
<20% 0.2 Very Low
Incidence of leptospirosis* Frequency of case reporting:
Annual 1.0 Very High
Every 2-3 years 0.8 High
Every 3-4 years 0.6 Moderate
Every 4-5 years 0.4 Low
After more than 5 years 0.2 Very Low
OR
No. of cases reported annually is:
Above alert threshold 1.0 Very High
Within alert threshold 0.6 Moderate
Below alert threshold 0.2 Very Low
MALARIA
Rainfall volume* 5-year mean of monthly rainfall in the area (mm/mo)
(UP NIH 2011) for the past 5 consecutive years:
>500mm 1.0 Very High
250-500mm 0.8 High
50-100mm 0.4 Low
<50mm 0.2 Very Low
Temperature increase from the Average monthly maximum temperature in the past 5
mean monthly temperature consecutive years:
>1°C 1.0Very High
(UP NIH) =1°C 0.6 Moderate
<1°C 0.4 Low
OR Average monthly maximum temperature (used by

UP NIH) during summer months or the months
following the rainy season (e.g. March to May)
3.1.-4.0 1.0Very High
2.1-3.0 0.8 High
<1°C 0.4 Low
Endemicity of area* Incidence of malaria cases:
** endemic provinces do not Barangay or municipality is established as malaria 1.0Very High

mean the entire province is infested area
endemic but only a few Barangay or municipality is not a malaria infested area 0.8 High
barangays in certain but with reported isolated cases of malaria disease
municipalities Barangay or municipality is not a malaria infested area 0.6 Moderate
but with reported cases with history of travel
Barangay or municipality has no reported cases of 0.2 Vey Low
malaria
OR
Classification of province based on DOH Malaria

Endemic Map (UP NIH):
Category A – has the most cases with the situation 1.0Very High
worsened in the last 5 years and with no improvement
for the last 10 years
Category B – the situation has improved in the last 5 0.8 High
years or the number of cases is 100 to less than 1000
per year
Category C- provinces have significant reduction in the 0.6 Moderate
number of cases for the last 5 years
Category D – no reported
cases in the past 5 consecutive years but the vector 0.4 Low
may be present
OR
(Global Malaria Eradication Programme 2008,UP NIH

website):
Intense stable endemic 1.0 Very High
Moderate stable endemic 0.8 High
Unstable endemic 0.6 Moderate
Non-endemic 0.4 Low
Free (zero receptivity) 0.2 Very Low
Presence of slow-flowing clear Distance of dwelling units to slow-flowing clear and
and shaded bodies of water shaded bodies of water bodies of water:
(ponds, creeks and rivers and <10 meters 1.0 Very high
lakes)* 11-20 0.8 High
21-30 0.6 Moderate
31-40 0.4 Low
>40 0.2 Very Low
Exposure Indicators: Health Sector
Indicators Scale Classification Exposure Rating
(points)
CHOLERA/ ACUTE GASTRO
ENTERITIS (AGE)/ TYPHOID
Morbidity rate* (UP NIH2011) No. of suspect Cholera cases above alert threshold
(PIDSR 2007)
>1 or =1 1.0 Very High
<1 0.6 Moderate
OR
For Any Or All Diseases
Change in the no. of cases compared to the previous
year:
Increase 1.0 Very High
No change 0.6 Moderate
Decrease or No cases reported 0.2 Very Low
OR
For AGE and Typhoid
% Increase in morbidity rate per 100,000population
compared to the past 5-year mean (DOH 2010):
>70% 1.0Very High

51-70% 0.8 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
10-30% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Mortality rate * FOR CHOLERA
Case fatality rate compared to previous year’s CFR
(PIDSR 2007):
<1 0.6 Moderate
OR
For AGE and typhoid:
% Increase in mortality rate per 100,000 population
>70% 1.0 Very High
51-70% 0.8 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
10-30% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Population of informal % share of informal settlers to total population:
settlements >30% 1.0 Very High
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
Settlements close to bodies of Population within 10m radial distance from water
water * bodies:
>30% 1.0 Very High
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
Expenditure for prevention, % to total public health
cure and treatment (public expenditure of municipality vs. total LGU expenditure:
cost) of cholera/ AGE/ typhoid >5% 1.0 Very High
4-5% 0.8 High
3-4% 0.6 Moderate
2-3% 0.4 Low
<1% 0.2 Very Low
HH without access to sanitation >40% HH 1.0 Very High
toilets* (UP NIH 2011) 31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
HH without access to safe >40% HH 1.0 Very High
water* (UP NIH 2011) 31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Condition of water supply % of degraded water supply infrastructure:
infrastructure(that may >30% 1.0 Very High
increase the possibility of 21-30% 0.8 High
water contamination) 11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
HH within poverty incidence % of families living within poverty threshold:
(UP NIH 2011) >30% 1.0 Very High
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
<5%: 0.2 Very Low
DENGUE
Morbidity rate* (UP NIH 2011) % Increase in morbidity rate per 100,000 population
>70% 1.0 Very high

51-70% 0.8 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
10-30% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Mortality rate* Case fatality ratio for every share of population
between ages 1-20 years old (DOH 2010, Dengue
Disease Surveillance Report):
<1 0.6 Moderate
OR
compared to 5-year mean (DOH 2010)
>90% 1.0 Very high
71-90% 0.8 High
51-70% 0.6 Moderate
31-50% 0.4 Low
<30 0.2 Very Low
Young population* % of population aged (DOH 2010):
(DOH-NEC 2009, UP NIH 2011) <1 yr 1.0 Very High
1-10 yrs 0.8 High
11-20 yrs 0.6 Moderate
21-30 yrs 0.4 Low
>30 yrs 0.2 Very Low
OR
Proportion of pre-school (3-5 y/o) to total population
0-14 y/o:
>20% 1.0 Very High
16-20 0.8 High
11-15 0.6 Moderate
5-10 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
Elderly population* (UP NIH % share of aged 60 yrsabove to totalpopulation:
2011) >30% 1.0 Very high
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
HH without access to sanitation >40% HH 1.0 Very High
facilities (UP NIH 2011) 31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
HH without access to safe >40% HH 1.0 Very High
water (UP NIH 2011) 31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Poverty incidence (UP % of families living within poverty threshold:
NIH2011) >30% 1.0 Very high
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of stagnant bodies of Surface area of stagnant water bodies to total area of
water in the neighborhood* barangay or municipality:
>30% 1.0 Very high
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
Expenditure on prevention, % to total public healthexpenditure of municipality:
cure and treatment (public >5% 1.0 Very High
cost) of dengue 4-5% 0.8 High
3-4% 0.6 Moderate
2-3% 0.4 Low
<1% 0.2 Very Low
LEPTOSPIROSIS
Morbidity rate*(UP NIH 2011) % change in morbidity rate per 100,000 population
compared to previous year or% change in the number
of cases compared to previous year for the same time
period:
>70% 1.0 Very high
51-70% 0.8 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
10-30% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Mortality rate* No. of cases compared to outbreak level (ProMED
2009):
>12 deaths (outbreak level) 1.0 Very High
10-12 0.8 High
7-9 0.6 Moderate
4-6 0.4 Low
1-3 0.2 Very Low
OR
compared to the past 5-year mean (DOH 2010)
>70% 1.0 Very high
51-70% 0.8 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
10-30% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of settlements % of HH affected by flood to total HH in flood-prone
frequently flooded* areas:
>30% 1.0 Very High
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of area with long % share of area with high retention time (>2 days)to
duration of flooding total flood-prone area:
>30% 1.0 Very High
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of informal No. of families in informal settlements:
settlements* >30% 1.0 Very High
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
Poverty incidence (UP NIH % of families living within poverty threshold:
2011) >30% 1.0 Very High
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
MALARIA
Morbidity rate* (UP NIH 2011) No. of cases above alert threshold or number of
hyper-endemic case (PIDSR 2007):
>1 or =1 1.0 Very high
<1 0.6 Moderate
OR
% change in morbidity rate per 100,000 population
compared to previous year or % change in the number
of cases compared to previous year for the same time
period:
>70% 1.0 Very high
51-70% 0.8 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
10-30% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Mortality rate* % change in mortality rate per 100,000 compared to
previous year or % change in the number of cases
compared to previous year for the same time period:
>70% 1.0 Very high
51-70% 0.8 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
10-30% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of malaria infested % of municipalities within endemic provinces:
area* >30% 1.0 Very High
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
HH within poverty incidence % of families living within poverty threshold:
(UP NIH 2011) >30% 1.0 Very High
21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
Adaptive Capacity Indicators: Health Sector
Indicators Scale Classification Adaptive Capacity
Rating
CHOLERA/ ACUTE GASTRO
ENTERITIS/ TYPHOID
Access to quality health / >80% HH 0.2Very high
medical services and facilities, 61-80% 0.4 High
and drug stores* (UP NIH 2011) 41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
OR
Travel time to health care facility:
< 1 hr 0.2Very High
1-2 hrs 0.4 High
2-3 hrs 0.6 Moderate
3-4 hrs 0.8 Low
>4 hrs 1.0 Very Low
OR
Coverage of Botikasa Barangay program:
>80% of barangays 0.2Very High
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Drainage improvement % of degraded drainage in flood-prone areas covered
project* by drainage improvement project:
>80% 0.2Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Access to proper waste Municipalities with access to sanitary landfill:
disposal facility (sanitary >80% 0.2Very high
landfill) 61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20%of municipalities 1.0 Very Low
IEC campaigns on sanitary Barangays or municipalities covered by IEC campaigns:
practices for food preparation >80% of total brgys or municipalities
and hygiene* 61-80% 0.2Very high
41-60% 0.4 High
21-40% 0.6 Moderate
<20% 0.8 Low
1.0 Very Low
Expansion of health service No. of barangays in need of expansion in health
coverage services:
<20% 0.2Very high
21-40% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
61-80% 0.8 Low
>80% of total brgys 1.0 Very Low
With access to health Families or HH with health insurance:
insurance program >80% of HH 0.2Very high
60-80% 0.4 High
40-60% 0.6 Moderate
20-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Water and sanitation systems* HH with water and sanitation facilities:
>80% of HH 0.2Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Disease surveillance and Existing and functional system 0.2 Very high
monitoring systems* Existing but not functional 0.6 High
No system of disease monitoring 1.0 Very low
Access to maps or information Level of access of municipalities to health information:
on previous outbreaks and No cost 0.2 Very high
location of treatment facilities With some cost 0.6 High
Expensive to access information 1.0 Very low
Rehabilitation of water supply % of degraded water supply system rehabilitated:
system >80% 0.2Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
OR
% increase in Level 3 water supply connection
compared to previous year:
>30% 0.2Very high
21-30% 0.4 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.8 Low
<5% 1.0 Very Low
OR
% of Level 1 and 2 water supply system upgraded to

Level 3:
>80% 0.2Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
LGU policies supporting vector- >80% of municipalities 0.2Very high
borne disease control and 61-80% 0.4 High
management 41-60% 0.6 Moderate
20-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Presence of functional health >80% of barangays per municipality 0.2Very high
referral system 61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
20-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
DENGUE
Access to health services and >80% of HH with access to health facilities/ services 0.2Very high
facilities (diagnostic and 61-80% 0.4 High
treatment clinics, hospitals and 41-60% 0.6 Moderate
drugstores)* 21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
OR
Barangays with laboratory and diagnostic facilities:
>80% of barangays 0.2Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Water supply and sanitation HH with water and sanitation facilities:
systems* >80% of HH 0.2Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Vector control measures –(e.g. % of areas with reported breeding sites and/or
OL Trap)* outbreak provided vector control measures:
>80%ofareas 0.2Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Access to proper waste Municipalities with MRF and access to sanitary landfill:
disposal facility (sanitary >80%of municipalities 0.2Very high
landfill) 61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
IEC campaign on prevention of Barangays or municipalities covered by IEC campaigns:
dengue* >80% of total brgys or municipalities 0.2Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
monitoring system* Existing but not functional 0.6 Moderate
No disease monitoring system 1.0Very low
Cleaning and clearing of Coverage of clean-up activities:
stagnant and slow-flowing >90% of waterways 0.2 Very high
waterways* 71-90 0.4 High
51-70 0.6 Moderate
30-50 0.4 Low
<30 1.0 Very low
Alternative health care HH covered by alternative health care programs:
program (e.g. herbal gardens) >80% of HH 0.2Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Access to health insurance HH with health insurance:
>80% of HH 0.2Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Timing of implementation of Few days before the rains 0.2Very High
vector control measure after Within 7 days after the rains 0.6 Moderate
the rains (UP NIH) More than 7 days after the rains 1.0 Very Low
20-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Presence of functional health >80% of barangays per municipality: 0.2Very high
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
20-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
LEPTOSPIROSIS
IEC campaign on disease Barangays or municipalities covered by IEC campaigns:
prevention and control* >80% of total brgys or municipalities 0.2Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
monitoring system* Existing but not functional 0.6 Moderate
No system of disease monitoring 0.2 Very low
Access to health services and >80% of HH 0.2Very high
facilities (clinics, hospitals and 61-80% 0.4 High
drugstores)* 41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Flood control and maintenance Coverage of maintenance of drainage facilities and
of drainage facilities* flood control programs:
>90% coverage 0.2 Very high
71-90 coverage 0.4 High
51-70 0.6 Moderate
30-50 0.8 Low
<30 1.0 Very low
Access to proper waste Municipalities with MRF and access to sanitary landfill
disposal facility (e.g. sanitary or other disposal facilities within standards of RA
landfill) 9003:
>80%of municipalities 0.2Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Access to health insurance HH with health insurance:
>80% of HH heads 0.2Very high
61-79% 0.4 High
41-59% 0.6 Moderate
21-39% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
LGU policies supporting vector- >80% of municipalities: 0.2Very high
20-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
20-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
MALARIA
Presence of barangay-based Barangays with reported cases have laboratory and
laboratory diagnostic services diagnostic facilities:
and facilities* >80% of barangays 0.2Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Access to health service and >80% of HH 0.2Very high
facilities (clinics, hospitals and 61-80% 0.4 High
drugstores)* 41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Malaria control program – (e.g. % of areas with reported outbreak and/or breeding
fumigation, distribution of site covered by disease control program:
long-lasting insecticide treated >80% of areas 0.2Very high
nets and fish seeding of creeks 61-80% 0.4 High
and ponds)* 41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Coverage of vector control >80% of HH served by vector control program 0.2Very high
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
With access to safe water >80% of HH 0.2Very high
supply 61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
IEC campaign on prevention Barangays or municipalities covered by IEC campaigns
and control of malaria* on malaria control:
>80% of total brgys or municipalities 0.2Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
21-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
monitoring system* Existing but not functional 0.6 High
No disease monitoring system 1.0 Very low
Cleaning of waterways Coverage of clean-up activities:
>90% coverage 0.2 Very high
71-90 coverage 0.4 High
51-70 0.6 Moderate
30-50 0.8 Low
<30 1.0 Very low
Malaria eradication program* Endemic barangays covered by program:
>80% of barangays 0.2Very high
61-80% 0.4 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
20-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
20-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
20-40% 0.8 Low
<20% 1.0 Very Low
Biodiversity Sector
Sensitivity Indicators: Biodiversity Sector

Forest fires Fsi = weighted (Lu + Kp + Hs)
Land use in buffer zone Dominant land use:
Agriculture and settlements 1.0 Very high
Grazing land 0.8 High
Agroforestry and plantation forest 0.6 Moderate
Secondary growth forest 0.4 Low
Primary growth forest 0.2 Very Low
Kaingin plots inside protected Presence of kaingin plots in 100 hectares protected areas
areas* >10 hectares kaingin plot
6-10 hectares 1.0 Very high
2 hectares 0.6 Moderate
1 hectare 0.4 Low
0.2 Very Low
Human settlements inside Presence of scattered houses and farms inside Protected
protected areas beyond the Areas per 100 hectares
buffer zone* >20 families 1.0 Very high
16-20 families 0.8 High
11-15 families 0.6 Moderate
6-10 families 0.4 Low
None to <5 families 0.2 Very Low
Diseases and pests Dsi = weighted (Tm + Ai + Ea + Cc)
Temperature and moisture * Temperature increase above average normal temperature
o
>2.0 C 1.0 Very high
o
1.6-2.0 C 0.8 High
o
1.0 1.1-1.5 C 0.6 Moderate
o
0.6-1.0 C 0.4 Low
o
<0.5 C 0.2 Very Low
Presence of alien invasive Number of species found inside strict protection zone
plant species* >4 species 1.0 Very high
4 species 0.8 High
3 species 0.6 Moderate
2 species 0.4 Low
None to 1 species 0.2 Very Low
Presence of exotic wildlife Number of species and population finding residence inside
animals* protected areas
>6 species with more than 10 individuals 1.0 Very high
5-6 species with more than 10 individuals 0.8 High
4-5 species with more than 10 individuals 0.6 Moderate
2-3 species with 10 individuals 0.4 Low
None to 1 species with less than 5 individuals 0.2 Very Low
Cultivated crops inside Presence of cultivated plots in 100 hectares protected areas
protected areas* excluding buffer zone
>10 hectares planted to crops 1.0 Very high
3-5 hectares 0.6 Moderate
Heat waves/heat stress Hsi = weighted (Tt + Mc + Ce)

Temperature tolerance level Temperature tolerance level of flora species:
o
of flora species* 0 – 1.1 C increase 1.0 Very high
o
1.2 -1.3 C increase 0.8 High
o
o
o
Temperature tolerance level Temperature tolerance level of fauna species:
o
of fauna species* 0 – 1.1 C increase 1.0 Very high
o
o
o
o
Migration capacity of plant Mode of seed dispersal:
species* Wind dispersal 1.0 Very high
Wind and surface runoff 0.8 High
Wind, flood waters and insects 0.6 Moderate
Wind, flood waters, insects and animals (birds) 0.4 Low
Wind, flood waters, insects, animals (birds) and mammals 0.2 Very Low
Critically threatened and % of the total number of critically threatened and
endangered species* endangered species with narrow temperature tolerance:
>20%
16-20% 1.0 Very high
11-15% 0.8 High
6-10% 0.6 Moderate
<5% 0.4 Low
OR OR 0.2 Very Low
Extinction level in 10 years Extinction level in 10 years
>3 species 1.0 Very high
3 species 0.8 High
2 species 0.6 Moderate
1 species 0.4 Low
None 0.2 Very Low
Drought Dsi = weighted (Rv + Ga + Ei)
Rainfall volume* Monthly average rainfall (% of monthly average for 3
months in a row):
<30% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
41-60% 0.6 Moderate
61 – 80% 0.4 Low
>80% 0.2 Very Low
Grassland area* Grassland area per 100 hectare of protected area excluding
buffer zone:
>15 hectares 1.0 Very high
6 -10 hectares 0.6 Moderate
1 -5 hectares 0.4 Low
< 1 hectare 0.2 Very Low
Incidence of El Nino event* >1 event every 3 years 1.0 Very high
1 event every 3 years 0.8 High
1 event every 5 years 0.6 Moderate
2 events every 10 years 0.4 Low
0 to 1 event every 10 years 0.2 Very Low
Sea surface temperature Ssi = weighted (Cc + Pp + Fs + Sg + Mg))
increase
Coral cover* % of coral cover affected by coral bleaching per 100
hectares:
>20% 1.0 Very high
16-20% 0.8 High
11-15% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
Phytoplankton blooms – net Phytoplankton blooms and decay affecting oxygen level and
annual primary production* fish catch:
16-20% 0.8 High
6-10% 0.4 Low
OR Net annual primary production (Phytoplankton

-2 -1
Coastal zones:
>500 1.0 Very high
301-500 0.8 High
101 - 200 0.4 Low
<100 0.2 Very Low
Fish species Catch of Tuna and small pelagic in 5 years:
16-20% reduction 0.8 High
11-15% reduction 0.6 Moderate
6-10% reduction 0.4 Low
Seagrass meadows* Temperature tolerance level of seagrass species:
o
0 – 1.1 C increase 1.0 Very high
o
o
o
o
o
Temperature tolerance of 0 – 1.1 C increase 1.0 Very high
o
Mangrove species* 1.2 -1.3 C increase 0.8 High
o
o
o
o
Temperature tolerance of 0 – 1.1 C increase 1.0 Very high
o
seagrass species* 1.2 -1.3 C increase 0.8 High
o
o
o
Exposure indicators: Biodiversity Sector
Forest fires Fei = weighted (Be + Kc + Hp)
Extent of buffer zone % of total buffer zone cultivated:
cultivated >40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Presence of kaingin areas Presence of kaingin 1.0 Very high
inside strict protection No kaingin 0.2 Very Low
zone*
Number of households >4 households 1.0 Very high
living inside the strict 3-4 households 0.8 High
protection zone* 2 households 0.6 Moderate
1 household 0.4 Low
No household 0.2 Very Low
Diseases and pests Dei = weighted (Sd + Is + Es + Ac)
Areal extent of spread of % of total area of strict protection zone affected by
diseases and pests* plant disease and pests:
>8% 1.0 Very high
6-8% 0.8 High
4 - 5% 0.6 Moderate
2 - 3% 0.4 Low
0 to 1% 0.2 Very Low
Areal extent of spread of % of total area of strict protection zone occupied by
alien invasive species* alien invasive species:
>10% 1.0 Very high
8-10% 0.8 High
6-7% 0.6 Moderate
3 -5% 0.4 Low
0 to 2% 0.2 Very Low
Number of wildlife species >10 species 1.0 Very high
susceptible to or affected 8-10 species 0.8 High
by pests and diseases* 5 - 7 species 0.6 Moderate
2- 4 species 0.4 Low
None to 1 species 0.2 Very Low
OR
Presence of pests and Presence of >5 pests and diseases 1.0 Very high
diseases that could infect Presence of 4-5 pests and diseases 0.8 High
wildlife, plants and animals Presence of 2-3 pests and diseases 0.6 Moderate
in the immediate vicinity or Presence of 1 pest or disease 0.4 Low
within conservation area Absence of pest and diseases 0.2 Very Low
Extent of agricultural crop Area of crops planted that are affected by pests and
cultivated land inside strict diseases:
protection zone that are >6 hectares 1.0 Very high
affected by pests and 5-6 hectares 0.8 High
diseases* 3-4 hectares 0.6 Moderate
Heat waves/heat stress Hei = weighted (Tt + Mc + Se + Ce)
Number of flora species Number of critically-endangered flora species at risk:
with recorded low tolerance >11 species 1.0 Very high
for temperature increase* 9 -11 species 0.8 High
6 - 8 species 0.6 Moderate
3- 5 species 0.4 Low
0 - 2 species 0.2 Very Low
Number of fauna species Number of critically-endangered fauna species at risk:
with recorded low tolerance >11 species: 1.0 Very high
for temperature increase* 9 - 11 species 0.8 High
6 - 8 species 0.6 Moderate
3-5 species 0.4 Low
0 - 2 species 0.2 Very Low
Number of flora species Number of flora species with migratory adaptation
with migratory capability* capability:
<10% 1.0 Very high
11-20% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
31-40% 0.4 Low
>40% 0.2 Very Low
Number of fauna species Number of fauna species with migratory adaptation
with migratory capability* capability:
<10% 1.0 Very high
11-20% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
31-40% 0.4 Low
>40% 0.2 Very Low
Number of species >10% of plants and animals at risk of extinction 1.0 Very high
becoming extinct 8-10% 0.8 High
5-7% 0.6 Moderate
3-4% 0.4 Low
<2% 0.2 Very Low
Number of critically Number of critically-endangered flora and fauna species
endangered species at risk at risk:
>11 species 1.0 Very high
9-11 species 0.8 High
6-8 species 0.6 Moderate
3-5 species 0.4 Low
0-2 species 0.2 Very Low
Drought Dei = weighted(Pe + Pm + Ge + Eg)
Extent of strict protection % of strict protection zone affected:
zone affected by low >30% 1.0 Very high
volume rainfall* 21-30% 0.8 High
11-20% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
<5% 0.2 Very Low
Number of plant species Number of species with high moisture requirements:
with high moisture >40% 1.0 Very high
requirements* 31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of grassland area in % area occupied by grasslands:
buffer zone and inside >20% 1.0 Very high
protected areas* 16-20% 0.8 High
11-15% 0.6 Moderate
6-10% 0.4 Low
< 5% 0.2 Very Low
Extent of areas affected by Extent of areas within protected areas affected by El
El Nino event* Nino events:
>40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Sea surface temperature Sei = weighted (Fs + Cs + Ss + Ms)
increase
Number of reef fish species % reef fish species highly sensitive to increase in
highly sensitive to increase temperature:
in temperature* >40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Incidence of fish kill* >1 event in every 3 years 1.0 Very high
1 event in every 3 years 0.8 High
1 event every 5 years 0.6 Moderate
2 events every 10 years 0.4 Low
0-1 event every 10 years 0.2 Very Low
Number of species of corals % coral species highly sensitive to increase in
highly sensitive to increase temperature:
in temperature* >40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Number of species of % seagrass species highly sensitive to increase in
seagrass highly sensitive to temperature:
increase temperature* >40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Number of species of % mangrove species highly sensitive to increase in
mangroves highly sensitive temperature:
to increase temperature* >40% 1.0 Very high
31-40% 0.8 High
21-30% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.4 Low
<10% 0.2 Very Low
Adaptive Capacity Indicators: Biodiversity Sector
Forest fires Fai = weighted (Ms + Ze + Rs)
Monitoring and surveillance Frequency of monitoring and surveillance program:
program for protected
area* Systematic and regular (monthly) with adequate funds 0.2 Very high
Regular (quarterly) with modest funding support 0.4 High
Periodic (every six months) with low funding support 0.6 Moderate
Very irregular (once a year) with no funding support 0.8 Low
None 1.0 Very Low
Enforcement of laws within Level of enforcement efforts:
PA management zones* Strict monitoring and enforcement with adequate 0.2 Very high
funding and staffing
Enforcement with modest funding 0.4 High
Partially enforced with limited funding and staff support 0.6 Moderate
Absence of funding for enforcement 0.8 Low
Absence of a mechanism for enforcement 1.0 Very Low
Presence of firebreaks / fire Width of firebreaks (open space):
lines* >30m 0.2 Very high
21-30m 0.4 High
11-20m 0.6 Moderate
6-10m 0.8 Low
<5m or no firebreaks 1.0 Very Low
Relocation of informal % of informal settlers relocated outside PA:
settlers living inside PA* >70% 0.2 Very high
51-70% 0.4 High
21-50% 0.6 Moderate
11-20% 0.8 Low
<10% or No relocation program 1.0 Very Low
Diseases and pests Dai = weighted (Pc + Cr + Rd + Rc + Mp)
Prevention, control and Wide campaign for prevention, control and eradication 0.2 Very high
eradication of diseases and program for diseases and pests with sufficient funding
pests* Wide campaign for control and eradication with modest 0.4 High
funding
Wide campaign for eradication program with partial 0.6 Moderate
funding
Limited campaign for eradication program 0.8 Low
No program of action 1.0 Very Low
Control and removal of alien Program undertaken for prevention, control and removal 0.2 Very high
species* of alien invasive species
Program undertaken for control and removal 0.4 High
Program undertaken for removal 0.6 Moderate
Limited program for the removal of alien invasive species 0.8 Low
No program exists 1.0 Very Low
Research and development R&D program funded and implemented widely 0.2 Very high
of diseases cure and R&D program funded and implemented in priority sites 0.4 High
prevention* R&D program modestly funded and implemented in 0.6 Moderate
selected areas only
R&D program minimally funded and implemented in 0.8 Low
limited or few areas only
No R&D program 1.0 Very Low
Relocation of croplands % of croplands removed from the core zone and
outside strict protection relocated to the buffer zone:
zone into buffer zone* >70 % 0.2 Very high
51-70% 0.4 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
11-30% 0.8 Low
<10% or No efforts to relocate croplands outside of strict 1.0 Very Low
protection zone
Silvicultural Practices Absence of any silvicultural practice 0.2 Very High
Presence of any appropriate silvicultural practice 1.0 Very Low
Monitoring and protection Monitoring and protection of critically endangered 0.2 Very high
of critically endangered species is adequately funded and implemented widely
species In priority areas only 0.4 High
In selected areas only 0.6 Moderate
In very limited or few areas only 0.8 Low
No monitoring and protection program 1.0 Very Low
Heat waves/heat stress Hai = weighted(Sh + An + Cs + Rd+Mp)
Species and habitat Species and habitat protection program adequately 0.2 Very high
protection programs funded and implemented widely
In priority areas only 0.4 High
No protection program 1.0 Very Low
Assisted natural ANR program well-funded and widely implemented 0.2 Very high
regeneration program* In priority areas only 0.4 High
No ANR program 1.0 Very Low
Cloning and seed dispersal With cloning and seed dispersal program implemented 0.2 Very high
program widely
With cloning and seed dispersal program implemented in 0.4 High
selected priority sites only
Seed dispersal program for critically endangered plant 0.6 Moderate
species
Very limited seed dispersal program 0.8 Low
No cloning and seed dispersal program 1.0 Very Low
Research and development R&D program funded and implemented widely 0.2 Very high
of species adaptability to R&D program funded and implemented in priority sites 0.4 High
heat stress* R&D program modestly funded and implemented in
selected areas only 0.6 Moderate
R&D program minimally funded and in very limited or 0.8 Low
few areas only
No R&D program 1.0 Very Low
Monitoring and protection Program for monitoring and protection of critically 0.2 Very high
of critically endangered endangered species is adequately funded and
species implemented widely
Is adequately funded and implemented in priority areas 0.4 High
only
Is modestly funded and implemented in selected areas 0.6 Moderate
only
Is minimally funded and implemented in very limited or 0.8 Low
few areas only
No monitoring and protection program 1.0 Very Low
Drought Dai = weighted (Tp + Bm)
Transplantation program Transplantation program (in-situ and ex-situ) well-funded 0.2 Very high
(in-situ and ex-situ) for rare and widely implemented
species of plants under risk In-situ and ex-situ for top priority species only 0.4 High
of extinction* In-situ for some top priority species only 0.6 Moderate
In-situ for few priority species only 0.8 Low
No transplantation program 1.0 Very Low
Buffer zone management >70% of denuded buffer zone is managed and reforested 0.2 Very high
and reforestation* 51-70% 0.4 High
31-50% 0.6 Moderate
11-30% 0.8 Low
<10% or No buffer zone management and reforestation 1.0 Very Low
program
Sea surface temperature Sai = weighted (Es + Ms + Ad + Mr)
increase
Establishment of more Establishment of marine sanctuaries and MPAs 0.2 Very high
sanctuaries and marine adequately funded (>70% of total conservation funds)
protected areas* MS and MPAs with some funding (61-70%) 0.4 High
MS and MPS modestly supported (41-60%) 0.6 Moderate
Very little support for MS and MPAs (21-40%) 0.8 Low
No support for MS and MPAs (< 20%) 1.0 Very Low
Mapping of sea surface Wit SST map in most portions of fishing grounds (>80% of 0.2 Very high
temperature* fishing grounds)
With SST map in many portions of fishing grounds (61- 0.4 High
80%)
With SST map in some portions fishing grounds (41-60%) 0.6 Moderate
With SST map in few portions fishing grounds (21-40%) 0.8 Low
Very Few to no SST map (<20%) 1.0 Very Low
Fishery stock assessment in Fishery stock assessment undertaken in:
fishing grounds and MPAs*
Most important fishing grounds and MPAs (>80% of 0.2 Very high
fishing grounds)
Many (61-80%) fishing grounds and MPAs 0.4 High
Some (41-60%) fishing grounds and MPAs 0.6 Moderate
Few (21-40%) fishing grounds and MPAs 0.8 Low
Very few (<20%) to No stock assessment 1.0 Very Low
Mangrove reforestation* Mangrove reforestation in
>70% of denuded areas 0.2 Very high
51-70% of denuded areas 0.4 High
31-50% of denuded areas 0.6 Moderate
11-30% of denuded areas 0.8 Low
<10% or No reforestation program 1.0 Very Low

Z54 Sectoral Vulnerability Assessment Tool PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Z54 Sectoral Vulnerability Assessment Tool PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sectoral Vulnerability Assessment Tool

Candido A. Cabrido, Jr.

Computing the Vulnerability Index

Figure 1: Computation of the Vulnerability Index

Sensitivity Indicators: Coastal and Marine Sector

Coastal wetlands (We)* % of wetlands inundated

Beach and coastal erosion Geomorphology types: (UPMSI, 2010)

Coral reefs (Cr)* Grazer fish seen: (UPMSI, 2010)

Mangroves (Mc)* Temperature tolerance level of mangrove species:

Net annual primary OR Net annual primary production (Phytoplankton

Sea level rise (Sa) Sai = weighted (Ch+ Sr + Wp + Ga + Cp + Cs + Bc)

Source of information: WWF-Philippines, Palawan Council for Sustainable Development and

SST incidence in Taytay

Coral species susceptibility

Sensitivity Indicators: Forestry Sector

For seismic induced OR Return period of earthquake with intensity 7 and

Or OR % of estimated number of farm families

Sensitivity Indicators: Crop Production

Access to planting calendar Updated cropping calendar available for:

Access to crop insurance, % of farmland covered by crop insurance

Sensitivity Indicators: Marine Fisheries/ Mariculture

OR OR Maximum width of coastal plain (m)

OR OR Elevation in meters of the location of settlements:

Sensitivity Indicators: Water Supply

** STANDARDS: Above standard values for effluents 1.0 Very High

(FOR SURFACE WATER) TSS= 25

OR distance between deepwells with less than 30m

OR Poor population with access to potable water:

>40% of total employment in industry sector 1.0 Very high

FOCUS AREA: INCREASE IN THE INCIDENCE OF VECTOR-BORNE AND

Sensitivity Indicators: Health Sector

3.1.-4.0°C 1.0Very High

3.1.-4.0°C 1.0Very High

OR Average monthly maximum temperature (used by

** endemic provinces do not Barangay or municipality is established as malaria 1.0Very High

Classification of province based on DOH Malaria

(Global Malaria Eradication Programme 2008,UP NIH

>70% 1.0Very High

>70% 1.0 Very high

% of Level 1 and 2 water supply system upgraded to

Sensitivity Indicators: Biodiversity Sector

Heat waves/heat stress Hsi = weighted (Tt + Mc + Ce)

OR Net annual primary production (Phytoplankton

You might also like