International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 52 (2021) 101939

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ijdrr

Impact of the 2013 super typhoon haiyan on the livelihood of small-scale

coconut farmers in Leyte island, Philippines
Moises Neil V. Seriño a, b, *, Jedan A. Cavero b, Jacob Cuizon b, Therese C. Ratilla c,
Brenda M. Ramoneda b, Maria Hazel I. Bellezas b, Maria Juliet C. Ceniza d
a
Extension Office, OVPRE, Visayas State University, Visca, Baybay City, Leyte, Philippines
b
Department of Economics, Visayas State University, Visca, Baybay City, Leyte, Philippines
c
Visayas Socio-Economic Research and Data Analytics Center, Visayas State University, Visca, Baybay City, Leyte, Philippines
d
National Coconut Research Center, Visayas State University, Visca, Baybay City, Leyte, Philippines

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

JEL classification: The Philippine coconut industry is characterized by a high incidence of poverty among small-scale coconut
Q12 farmers. We investigate how severely the farmers were impacted when the super typhoon hit central Philippines
Q54 in 2013, causing massive damages to the coconut industry. We used a cross-sectional data set collected through
C21
face-to-face surveys to quantify the adverse effect of the super typhoon on the livelihood of coconut dependent
C59
farmers in Leyte island. The estimation was done through an empirical investigation that tackles the method­
Keywords:
ological issue in assessing the effect of extreme weather event shock on the socio-economic status of farmers. As
Impact analysis
Coconut farming
households were not randomly assigned to the typhoon-affected group, the propensity score matching method
Extreme weather event was used in comparing the changes in livelihood between severely affected farmers and relatively less affected
Coping mechanism farmers. Results show that the onslaught of the super typhoon has significantly reduced the income of coconut
farmers. The estimated reduction in income is at least 20,649.89 Philippine pesos (405 USD) per hectare
annually. Replanting coconut will take around 7–9 years before it can return to full production capacity. With the
drastic decrease in farm income due to the super typhoon, farmers coped by exploring other sources of income,
such as by raising livestock, growing other crops, and intercropping coconut farms with coffee or cacao and
working off-farm. None of the coconut farmers availed of crop insurance. Results suggest that there is a need to
enhance the role of climate-resilient agricultural practices for farmers to cope with extreme weather events.

1. Introduction in agriculture, infrastructure, and private property damage. Central

The super typhoon Haiyan (locally known as Yolanda) devastated
the central Philippines on November 8, 2013. With wind speeds sus­
tained close to 200 mph, it is considered one of the strongest typhoons to
ever hit the Philippines [1]. There were massive devastations of lives,
livelihoods and properties in the typhoon-affected areas. The National
Disaster Risk Reduction Management Council [2] reported that a total of
3,424,593 families or 16,078,181 persons were affected in 12,139 bar­
angays in 44 provinces, 591 municipalities and 57 cities of Regions IV-A,
IV-B, V, VI, VII, VIII, X, XI, and CARAGA. A total of 4.1 million people
were displaced and an estimate of 6293 casualties was recorded with 28,
689 injured and 1061 missing as of April 3, 2014 [2]. According to the
National Economic Development Authority [3]; the cost of damage is
estimated to reach 40 billion Philippine pesos (PHP) (USD 784 million)
Philippines, particularly Leyte island in Region VIII, experienced severe
devastation due to strong winds and storm surges brought by the super
typhoon [1,4]. The geographic location of Leyte island is also a major
factor because it lies near the Pacific ocean.
The coconut sector is the second most important agricultural sector
in the Philippines in terms of planted area, number of dependents, and
share of agricultural exports according to the Philippine Coconut Au­
thority (PCA) [5]. The coconuts used to be the most extensively culti­
vated crop in Region VIII or Eastern Visayas, producing an estimated 1.7
billion nuts per year. In the Eastern Visayas, where Leyte island is
located, typhoon Haiyan caused the most devastation with an estimated
33 million coconut trees have been damaged out of 46 million coconut
trees, across 295,191 ha of land, putting at risk the livelihoods of more
than one million farming households [6]. The estimated damage of the

* Corresponding author. Extension Office, OVPRE, Visayas State University, Visca, Baybay City, Leyte, Philippines.
E-mail address: moisesneil.serino@vsu.edu.ph (M.N.V. Seriño).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101939
Received 2 June 2020; Received in revised form 31 October 2020; Accepted 1 November 2020
Available online 5 November 2020
2212-4209/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M.N.V. Seriño et al.
super typhoon to coconut trees in the Eastern Visayas is around 72%
(United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
[OCHA] [7]. According to the Philippine Statistics Authority [8]; prior
to super typhoon Haiyan, coconut production in Leyte reached 526,559
metric tons per year, covering a total farm area of 167,974 ha. In the
following year, production fell by more than 50% to 194,050 metric tons
covering a total farm area of just 94,744 ha [8].
In 2016, about 11.06 million Filipinos were employed in the agri­
culture sector and this comprised 27% of the national employment [9].
All over the Philippines, there are around 3.4 million coconut farmers
and about 25 million Filipinos are directly on indirectly dependent on
the coconut industry [10]. The super typhoon Haiyan flattened millions
of coconut trees, adversely affecting more than a million coconut
farmers in Eastern Visayas [11]. Fig. 1 shows the extent of coconut
damages in one of the heavily affected areas in the northern part of Leyte
island. The picture depicts how heavily devastated the small-scale co­
conut farmers will be struggling to find alternative sources of livelihood.
Small-scale farmers who rely on coconut farming as main source of
livelihood are heavily affected because they are considered among the
poorest of poor in the agricultural communities [12–14]. In addition,
OCHA [15] echoed that small-scale coconut farmers are among the
poorest rural people in the Philippines and data shows that 6 out of 10
coconut farmers are living in poverty. Disrupting their main source of
income can have dire consequences.
The estimated area planted with coconut in the Philippines is about
3.565 million hectares and there are approximately 3.4 million coconut
farmers. This suggests that on average the estimate farm size of coconut
farmers is around 1.05 ha [16]. In addition, FAO [11] reported that in
the Philippines around 71% of the coconut farms have 5 ha and below
and only about 3% of the coconut farms have more than 50 ha land area.
This further shows that coconut farmers in the Philippines are mostly
small-scale, making them more vulnerable to extreme weather events
and adverse climate change impacts. The main product of farmers from
coconut production is copra. The average annual copra yield of a farmer
is at least 2000 kilos per hectare, with a price of PHP 35–38 (USD
0.7–0.75) per kilo of copra. This production is valued on average around
PHP 73,000 (USD 1431) total annual gross income per hectare. Total
income less than the production cost of PHP 15,000 (USD 294) per
hectare provides a small farmer with PHP 58,000 (USD 1137) per
hectare [17]. Unfortunately, this income would not be possible consid­
ering the massive devastation caused by the super typhoon. It will take
at least 7–9 years before coconuts return to full production and
currently, farmers will be facing serious food security problems unless
alternative livelihood solutions are available. Though PCA is facilitating
Fig. 1. Heavy damages on coconut trees in the north part of Leyte island (photo by the authors).
2
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 52 (2021) 101939
the massive replanting of coconut trees to replace the damaged trees,
farmers have to endure before they can start to harvest.
This study will focus on investigating the adverse impact of the super
typhoon on the livelihood of coconut dependent farmers in Leyte island,
Eastern Visayas, Philippines. We are using Leyte island’s case because
Leyte is one of those islands severely hit by the super typhoon Haiyan.
The coconut farmers were reported to be the worst-hit livelihood sector
because of the massive uprooting or breaking of coconut trees, sending
the coconut farming back to year zero [18]. The challenge will be on
how coconut farmers can cope with the devastating effect of typhoon
Haiyan. With the frequency and severity of typhoons in Eastern Visayas
expected to increase, this poses a serious risk to coconut production,
threatening livelihoods and food security [19–21]. Estimating the
impact on how the typhoon altered the livelihood of coconut dependent
farmers is important to help them rebuild and become more resilient to
extreme weather events. The destruction brought by the super typhoon
wiped out the main livelihood of millions of coconut farmers. The results
of the study offer opportunity to quantify the amount of income lost
attributed to the super typhoon. This information is valuable to poli­
cymakers, organizations and advocacy groups to make evidence-based
recommendations and actions to provide alternative livelihood and
draft concrete recovery plans for the coconut farmers.
This study used a quasi-experimental method in assessing the impact
of extreme weather events such as super typhoon on the livelihood of
coconut farmers. The super typhoon’s impact is defined as the difference
in livelihood outcome between those who were badly affected or hit and
the outcome that have been obtained if those coconut farmers were not
hit by the super typhoon [22,23]. The World Bank Group introduced
various methodologies in evaluating impacts [24]. These methods
include randomized assignment, instrumental variables, regression
discontinuity design, difference-in-difference method and propensity
score matching. For this study, we are exploring the methods of pro­
pensity score matching (PSM) in quantifying the impact of the super
typhoon on the livelihood of coconut dependent farmers. Propensity
score matching (PSM) is a useful technique to reduce selection bias by
matching similar households from the treatment and control groups
using the so-called propensity score [24,25]. For this study, the treated
group refers to those farmers who were severely hit or affected by the
super typhoon. In contrast, the control group comprises farmers who
were not affected or relatively less affected by the super typhoon (or
those farmers located far from the typhoon path). By comparing how the
outcomes differ between those affected farmers relative to those less
affected farmers with similar observable pre-typhoon characteristics, it
is feasible to quantify the impact of the super typhoon [26].
M.N.V. Seriño et al.
Several studies have used propensity score matching in estimating
the impacts of development projects [25,27,28]. Take for example,
Mendola [27] used propensity score matching in analyzing the impact of
adopting high yield varieties of rice on poverty reduction in rural
Bangladesh. In another study, Rodriguez et al. [28] used panel data and
propensity score matching techniques to estimate the impacts of agri­
cultural development programs designed for poverty alleviation among
coconut producers in the Philippines. Klasen et al. [25] employed
several statistical methods including propensity score matching in
investigating the impacts of upgrading water supply on sanitation and
improving livelihoods in Yemen. While most empirical studies using
PSM is applied in evaluating development projects and interventions
among communities, several applications also use PSM at the household
level (see for example, Liu et al., [29]; Shehu & Sidique, [30]; Ali et al.,
[31]; Taganas, [32]; Shi et al., [33]. However, very few papers applied
the methods of propensity score matching in disaster-related impact
evaluation. Most impact evaluations related to disaster or disaster risk
reduction programs are correlational or descriptive in nature [34].
For this paper, we use the methods of propensity score matching
(PSM) in analyzing the impacts of an extreme weather event like the
super typhoon Haiyan on the livelihood of coconut dependent farmers in
Leyte island, Philippines. It can contribute to the literature in two major
aspects. First, by exploring the applicability of counterfactual analysis
using PSM in providing a quantitative estimate of the adverse impact of
disasters like super typhoons on the livelihood of coconut dependent
small-scale farmers from one of the islands in the Philippines. Second,
studies on assessing the impact of super typhoons at the farmer level can
be a crucial input in devising actions, recovery plans, and policies
aiming to reduce risk, losses and damages in the event of similar di­
sasters in the future.
2. Methodology
In assessing the impact of the super typhoon Haiyan, randomly
selected households in two areas in Leyte island were interviewed face to
face in 2017 using a semi-structured questionnaire. The questionnaire
was divided into six major sections. Section 1 of the questionnaire
focused on the household’s socio-demographic characteristics, Section 2
on household expenses, and Section 3 looks at the employment and in­
come profile of the household. Section 4 focuses on the general char­
acteristics of the coconut farm including production, practices and
damages related to the super typhoon. Section 5 asks about the coping
mechanisms of farmers and Section 6 on information related to credit,
sources of information, and related capacity building activities. The
questionnaire was pre-tested and prior consent was asked to the par­
ticipants if they were willing to participate.
Leyte island’s northern and southern part has been hit by the super
typhoon differently [2,35]. Leyte’s northern part lies within the eye of
the super typhoon, while the southern part of Leyte island is relatively
far from the super typhoon path. Consequently, northern Leyte experi­
enced heavy damages in coconut production, while southern Leyte
experienced minimal damages in coconut production. The super
typhoon still hit southern Leyte but the coconut trees were not uprooted.
Southern Leyte continued its coconut production after the onslaught of
the super typhoon. However, the northern part of Leyte faced a much
bigger problem because most of the coconut trees were uprooted or
damaged. The super typhoon occurred in late 2013 and our survey was
conducted in 2017, four years after the super typhoon hit. We did this so
that we can measure the productivity of the remaining coconuts in the
affected areas. This was confirmed during the focus group discussion
conducted in 2018 that it was only after two years since the super
typhoon hit that farmers started harvesting coconuts from those
remaining coconut trees. Also, during the first two years after the super
typhoon hit the area, the farmers could not focus more on coconut
farming because of the several donations and interventions coming from
various donors [36].
3
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 52 (2021) 101939
We are using the incident of super typhoon Haiyan as a natural
experiment where we compare two coconut farming areas within the
same island. The coconut farmers from the southern part of Leyte will
serve as the comparison group considering minimal damages in coconut
production compared to Leyte’s northern part. By having two groups
from the same island, we can assume that the production, management,
market access and cultural practices of these farmers are relatively ho­
mogenous. Before the super typhoon, it can be assumed that there is no
relative difference in coconut production between the northern and
southern parts of Leyte island. While this may be a strong assumption
considering inherent difference among farmers, but access to market can
be assumed to be relatively similar. Coconut farmers from the southern
part of Leyte can sell their produce in the markets of Sogod or Maasin
City, while coconut farmers from the northern part can sell their produce
in Tacloban City or Ormoc City. These primary markets in Leyte island
are connected by paved roads that can be accessed by public or private
transportation. In addition, the city of Baybay located in the central
western part of Leyte island can also be accessed by farmers from the
north or south. There are several ports in the north and south part of
Leyte island where the farmers can access if they decide to sell their
products outside Leyte island. Also, we consulted experts from the
Philippine Coconut Authority for areas that can be considered relatively
similar in terms of farming and production characteristics.
Fig. 2 shows the location of surveyed coconut farmers. The island of
Leyte is divided into two major administrative provinces. The north part
of Leyte island belongs to the Province of Leyte and the south part of the
Leyte island belongs to the Province of Southern Leyte. A governor
governs each province. The province of Leyte is composed of 40 mu­
nicipalities and three cities while the province of Southern Leyte is
composed of 18 municipalities and 1 city [37]. The respondents from
northern Leyte comprise the municipalities of Kananga, Dulag, Pal­
ompon and Mayorga. This is represented by four yellow circles (Fig. 3).
The less affected farmers are from the southern part of Leyte island
comprising the municipalities of Sogod, Silago and Hindang. The less
affected group is represented by three green triangles reflecting three
less affected municipalities (Fig. 2). Although Hindang is part of the
province of Leyte but it is located down south and far from the typhoon
path, hence it was part of the less affected group. The total number of
respondents surveyed is 402 coconut farmers. There are 240 coconut
farmers representing the heavily affected (northern Leyte) and 162 co­
conut farmers representing the less affected (Southern Leyte). Fig. 2
shows the path of the super typhoon traversing through the island of
Leyte and the location of the respondents of the study.
2.1. Impact estimation using propensity score matching
Fig. 3 shows the hypothesized impact of the super typhoon on the
income of coconut farmers. After the super typhoon, we assumed that
northern Leyte’s coconut production would decline because of the
devastation brought by the super typhoon while coconut production
form the southern part of Leyte will not be adversely affected. To
quantify the impact on income, the method of propensity score matching
was used. We compare the outcome between the affected areas (north­
ern Leyte) and less affected (southern Leyte) areas.
The empirical analysis was conducted by using propensity score
matching (PSM) to correct for potential sample selection bias that might
arise from systematic differences between the affected group of farmers
and the less affected group. The propensity score matching approach is
widely used in the impact assessment of development projects but
relatively few applied PSM on disaster-related studies [34]. If baseline
data is available, then the method of difference in difference approach is
preferred. However, we are constrained for not having a panel data set,
hence in this study, the impact of super typhoon on the livelihood of
coconut farmers were estimated using propensity score matching. PSM
is an empirical technique that tackles the methodological issue in
comparing the changes in livelihood between severely affected farmers
M.N.V. Seriño et al.
Fig. 2. Location of respondents on the island of Leyte and the path of the super typhoon Haiyan on November 8, 2013.
Fig. 3. Assumed differences in income from coconut farming between northern
and southern Leyte after the super typhoon hit Leyte island.
and relatively less affected farmers when randomization is not possible
and experimental approach is not possible like the occurrence of super
typhoons or disasters.
In the case of experimental approach, the impact of the events,
policies, shocks, programs or interventions on particular outcome of
interest can be directly computed as the difference in outcome variables
between the treated group and the control group as follows:
∂ = Y1 i − Y0 i
where ∂ is the average treatment effect and Y1i is the outcome of the
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 52 (2021) 101939
treated group and Y0i is the outcome of the control group. The impact is
obtained by averaging the effect across all the individuals in the popu­
lation [23]. This is known as the average treatment effect or ATE.
( )
ATE = E(∂) = E Y1 i − Y0 i (2)
A fundamental problem in estimating the causal effect is that Y1i or
0
Y i can only be observed once and not both. It is impossible to find a
group that belongs to both the treated and control.
The other parameter of interest is the average treatment effect of the
treated or ATT which measures the impact of programs or interventions
on those entities who participated and not for all the population.
Formally, the ATT can be written as follows:
( ) ( ⃒ )
ATT = E Y1 i |T = 1 − E Y0 i ⃒T = 1 (3)
The second term in Equation (3) is not observed. The term E(Y0i |T =
1) represents the average outcome of treated individuals in the absence
of treatment or in our case, it represents the coconut farmers in the
affected areas in the absence of the typhoon. But then again, the coun­
terfactual is not observed. The problem can be solved through different
estimation techniques. Assuming that being affected by the typhoon is a
function of a wide range of observable characteristics, then it is possible
to estimate the counterfactual by balancing the distributions of observed
covariates between the typhoon affected coconut farmers in northern
Leyte and the control group or the less affected coconut farmers in
southern Leyte. The balancing can be estimated using the similarities of
predicted probabilities between the two groups (affected farmers and
(1) the less affected coconut farmers) [25,27,28].
In the absence of experimental data, the method of propensity score
matching is employed to account for selection bias for observational
studies [38]. The matching methods are designed to ensure that impact
4
M.N.V. Seriño et al.
estimates are based on the differences in outcomes between comparable
groups [26]. The basic idea of matching is to find for each household in
the affected group a household from the less affected group which re­
sembles the affected households as closely as possible with regard to a
chosen set of important socio-economic indicators such as education,
household size, gender, marital status farm size, land ownership and
nonfarm sources of income. An obvious problem here is the curse of
dimensionality of the matching problem as the set of indicators grows
large. A solution to this problem of multidimensionality is the use of
propensity score, which reduces the problem to one dimension, namely
the so-called propensity score [23]. The propensity score (PSi) can be
interpreted as the conditional probability that a coconut farmer will be
severely affected by the typhoon, given pre-typhoon characteristics. The
propensity score is an estimate of individual i’s probability of being in
the affected group. It can be estimated using a limited dependent model
such as logit or probit model. For this evaluation, the probit model of the
following form was used:
Pi = E(Ti = 1|X) = β0 + β1 educhhi + β2 farmsizei + β3 hhsizei + β4 fowni + β5 nfincomei
β6 malei + β7 marriedi + ui
where:
Pi = probability of a household being part of the affected group
E = the expected value of being part of the affected group given the
covariates
T = 1 if a household is heavily affected and 0 for less affected by the
super typhoon
X = is set of explanatory variables
β0 = is the intercept
ßi = the regression coefficients
The explanatory variables include the following:
educhh = years of education for the household head
farmsize = farm area measured in hectares
hhsize = household size
fown = dummy variable for farm ownership (1 if the farm is owned
and 0 otherwise)
nfincome = log of household nonfarm income
male = male respondent (1 for male and 0 otherwise)
married = marital status of respondent (1 for married and
0 otherwise)
ui = remaining error term
and i refers to the individual coconut farmer
The choice of the explanatory variables is based on the premise that
the selected covariates should satisfy two vital conditions. First, these
matching variables should influence both the probability of being
selected to be part of the affected group as well as the impact of the
typhoon. As discussed by Heinrich et al. [26]; after controlling for ob­
servables, the assignment whether the farmers belong to the affected or
less affected group is as good as random. This condition is known as
unconfoundedness or selection on observables [26]. This allows for the
less affected group of farmers in southern Leyte to be used to construct
the counterfactual. Second, these variables should not be changed by the
affected group itself. In line with these requirements, the propensity
score is estimated based on related household and farm characteristics.
Sufficient overlap of densities between the affected and less affected
coconut farmers is vital for the successful matching of households using
the estimated propensity score. The model used was based on the kernel
5
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 52 (2021) 101939
density estimate of the propensity score distribution between the
affected and less affected groups.
However, a noticeable drawback of the propensity score matching is
the reliance on the so-called assumption of unconfoundedness. This
means that it is assumed that all relevant differences between affected
and non-affected coconut farmers are captured by the covariates X, and
therefore assignment to treated group or in this case affected group is
not influenced by further unaccounted covariates [25]. This is a limi­
tation of the PSM.
2.2. Matching methods and average treatment effect of the treated (ATT)
After estimating the propensity score, the second step is to match
farmers in the affected group to the less affected group. There are
various and well-established algorithms available in the literature for
matching two groups. For this study, three common matching tech­
niques were employed, namely nearest neighbor matching, radius
(4)
matching and kernel matching. When using nearest neighbor matching,
the propensity score of the less affected farmer will be matched with the
closest score of the affected farmer. When applying kernel matching,
each affected farmer is matched with an artificial control, which is
constructed from the less affected group, receiving different weights,
depending on the distance of their propensity score from the score of the
affected household [25]. Radius matching can be seen as a method lying
somewhere in between kernel and nearest neighbor matching. For
radius matching, the non-weighted mean of all less affected households
within a defined distance (caliper) from the propensity score of the
affected households are used.
After estimating the propensity score, imposing the common support
region and ensuring that the balancing property is satisfied, the adverse
impact of super typhoon Haiyan can be estimated using the average
treatment effect of the treated. The average treatment effect of the
treated (ATT) is calculated as the difference of means between the two
groups (affected and less affected) after matching. The average differ­
ence in outcomes between the affected group and their matched com­
parison captures the estimated impact. In summary, the impact is
derived by comparing the average outcomes (farm income) among the
statistically matched subgroup of households using observable charac­
teristics. The propensity score matching estimator for ATT is the mean
difference in outcomes between the affected and less affected group with
common support imposed, appropriately weighted by the propensity
score distribution of the treated group. The estimated impact using ATT
is expressed using the following form:
ATT = E[Yli − Y0i |Ti = 1]
ATT = E[E{Yli − Y0i |Ti = 1, P(Xi )}] (5)
ATT = E[{E[Yli |Ti = 1, P(Xi )] − E[Y0i |Ti = 0, P(Xi )]}|Ti = 1]
where P(Xi) = Pr(T = 1 | Xi) = E[Ti | Xi] = conditional probability or
propensity score, T = binary variable 1 for the affected group and 0 for
the less affected group, Y1 and Y0 are the values of the outcome variable
(farm income) for the affected group and for the less affected group and
i = refers to the individual coconut farmer. The differences in the out­
comes of the affected and less affected group can be attributed to the
super typhoon [39].
Propensity score matching (PSM) is a technique that attempts to
estimate the effect of a treatment, policy, development projects, other
interventions, economic or in our case extreme weather shock by ac­
counting for the observable covariates that predict receiving the
M.N.V. Seriño et al. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 52 (2021) 101939

treatment. With PSM, this determines the change in outcome after the Table 2
intervention among the treated and control group that have relatively Comparison of groups on observable household characteristics after matching.
the same characteristics. This cancels out the bias when comparing two Variable Affected (n = Less Affected (n = t- P>|t|
groups. 229) 159) value
To substantiate the empirical results, a focus group discussion was Household size 4.71 4.68 0.12 0.901
conducted among coconut farmers in one of the heavily affected coconut Farm area 1.79 1.81 − 0.10 0.918
production areas. (hectares)
Education (years) 8.12 8.08 0.11 0.910
Land ownership 0.57 0.52 1.03 0.303
3. Results and discussion Log nonfarm 11.38 11.39 − 0.19 0.852
income
3.1. Descriptive statistics of the matching variables Male 0.50 0.53 − 0.84 0.401
Married 0.75 0.73 0.43 0.670

The data used in the analysis were derived from cross-sectional

surveys conducted face-to-face among coconut farmers in 2017. The
household survey was carried out by trained enumerators. From the list
of coconut farmers, random samples were drawn from both affected and
less affected areas. The selected observable farming characteristics used
in matching are listed in Table 1. The empirical analysis was aided with
the use of Stata software version 14.
A crucial point in any impact assessment is coping with selection
bias. This happens when there are systematic differences between the
comparison groups. For this study, the groups compared are the
typhoon-affected group of coconut farmers from the northern part of
Leyte and the less affected group from southern Leyte. The selection of
the comparison was based on suggestions from key informants and local
officials. We consulted field technicians and experts from the Philippine
Coconut Authority Region 8. We ask them which area in the northern
and southern part of Leyte have comparable situations in terms of
farming characteristics in coconut production in 2013 or just before the
typhoon hit.
Table 1 shows that there are systematic differences in the observed
characteristics between the affected and l less affected group. Results
show that the respondents statistically differ in household size, farm
area, education and land ownership. To reduce the differences in
observable characteristics, the propensity score matching technique was
used to match households with similar observable characteristics.
Table 2 shows that the observable characteristics between the
affected and less affected group have been balanced after matching.
There is no evident statistical difference in the chosen set of covariates.
However, this balancing method is at the expense of reducing the sample
size. After matching, the affected group is now composed of 229 re­
spondents, while the less affected group has a total of 159 respondents.
In addition, Fig. 4 shows the changes in the distribution of propensity
scores before and after matching. After matching, there are considerable
changes in the distribution and it appears that the two groups (less
affected and affected) have a more or less similar shape in terms of the
propensity score.
3.2. Reduction in coconut farm income
After matching the two groups, the quantitative impact of the super
Table 1
Comparison of groups on observable household characteristics before matching.
Variable Affected (n = Less Affected (n = t- P>|t|
240) 162) value
typhoon on the farm income of coconut dependent farmers can now be
estimated. To capture income from coconut production, gross margin
was used. The gross margin is equal to the total revenue minus the total
variable cost. Total revenue is obtained from the cash income and non-
cash income in coconut production. Cash income simply refers to the
cash obtained from the coconut harvests, while non-cash income refers
to home consumption, given away products, and others. Total variable
cost refers to material inputs and labor inputs, whether it is a hired
worker or a family worker.
Table 3 shows the results of impact estimation using nearest
neighbor, radius and kernel matching. The outcome variable is coconut
income measured per hectare derived from two to three harvesting cy­
cles per year. The parameter of interest is the average treatment effect of
the treated (ATT). ATT measures the impact of the super typhoons for
those farmers affected by the super typhoon and not for the entire
population of coconut farmer. A negative ATT value can be interpreted
as a negative impact brought about by the super typhoon Haiyan on the
livelihood of coconut dependent farmers. Results show that the coconut
income of the less affected group is consistently and relatively higher
than the affected group. The ATT result is robust across several matching
techniques implying a significant adverse impact on coconut income.
For the nearest neighbor matching, the estimated negative impact of
super typhoon is around PHP 21,400 (USD 420) per year. For the radius
matching, the reduction in coconut income is around PHP 20,750 (USD
407) per year. And for kernel matching, the estimated negative impact of
super typhoon Yolanda on coconut income is around PHP 20,650 per
year (USD 405).
For robustness checks, we explored another algorithm in using pro­
pensity score matching available in Stata 14 software. The nearest
neighbor matching technique is used to match affected and less affected
group observations with relatively the same characteristics to determine
the average treatment effect of the treated (ATT). Using the nearest
neighbor matching technique, 99 observations from the less affected
group are matched to the 238 respondents who belong to the heavily
affected group (Table 4). Results show that the super typhoon Haiyan
has significantly reduced the income of coconut farmers by PHP -22,200
(USD 435) per hectare per year. According to the National Economic
Development Authority (NEDA) Region 8, where Leyte island is located,
the average annual income of coconut farmers per hectare is around PHP
35,358 (USD 693) [40]. Our results show that around 65% of coconut
farming income was lost due to the super typhoon. This is a significant
loss to the coconut farmers, considering that there is a high incidence of
poverty among coconut farmers in rural areas [12–14].

Household size 4.70 4.14 2.64 0.009***

Farm area 1.89 1.33 3.21 0.001*** 3.3. Coping strategies of the farmers
(hectares)
Education (years) 8.11 8.88 − 2.06 0.040**
Land ownership 0.55 0.75 − 4.14 0.000***
The main challenge of the affected farmers is how to generate income
Log nonfarm 11.39 11.34 0.43 0.667 and sustain their daily needs when coconut production is down. This is a
income test of resiliency for the farmers. Table 5 shows the summary of the
Male 0.51 0.52 − 0.20 0.842 different coping strategies employed by coconut farmers after super
Married 0.75 0.73 0.39 0.697
typhoon Haiyan devastated their farms. The majority of the respondents
Note: ***p < 0.01, **p < 0.05, *p < 0.1. (65%) replanted or replaced the coconut trees uprooted or damaged by

6
M.N.V. Seriño et al. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 52 (2021) 101939

Fig. 4. Comparison of propensity score before and after matching.

Table 3 Table 5
Impact estimate using the average treatment effect of the treated (ATT) of three Coping strategies of coconut farmers after the super typhoon Haiyan damaged
matching algorithms. their farms.
Farm income Nearest Radius Kernel Strategiesa Count Percentage
Neighbor Matching Matching
Replanting 262 65.2%
Affected Group (PhP) 10,092.00 10,092.00 10,092.00 Praying 177 44.0%
Less Affected Group 31,498.83 30,847.03 30,741.89 Intercropping 101 25.1%
(PhP) Multiple cropping 64 15.9%
ATT (PhP income/ − 21,406.83*** − 20,755.03*** − 20,649.89*** Switching to livelihood such as livestock 45 11.2%
hectare) Pursued other means to generate additional income 37 9.2%
Bootstrapped SE§ 7711.453 3553.43 5312.34 Non-farm work 32 8.0%
Z − 2.78 − 5.84 − 3.89 Adapting new farming practices 25 6.2%
P > |z| 0.006 0.000 0.000 Joined cooperatives 21 5.2%
Affected sample size 229 Access to credit 20 5.0%
Less affected sample 159 Participate in community activities/projects 17 4.2%
size Establishment of coconut farmers organization 17 4.2%
Set up personal savings, join savings group 11 2.7%
Note: 1 USD is equivalent to 51 Philippine pesos (PHP). Innovation of farming system 10 2.5%
§
Standard error was bootstrapped and replicated 50 times. Practice group farming 10 2.5%
***p < 0.01, **p < 0.05, *p < 0.1. Farmed to other places 6 1.5%
Balancing property satisfied and common support imposed. Off-farm work 5 1.2%
a
Multiple responses.

Table 4
The average treatment effect of the treated using the nearest neighbor matching intercropping. This is in line with the Philippine Coconut Authority’s
technique. program of promoting intercropping coconut trees with coffee, cacao
Northern Leyte (n) Southern Leyte (n) ATT (PHP) Std. Err. t
and other high value crops. Other farmers resorted to raising livestock
(11.2%). This coping strategy was also highlighted by Rodriguez et al.
238 99 − 22,200 4441.136 − 4.992
[28] that promotion of intercropping and livestock integration, coupled
Note: the numbers of treated (heavily affected) and controls (less affected) refer with improved access to credit and technical assistance contributed to
to actual nearest neighbor matches. better outcomes in coconut farming. In addition, McDougall et al. [41]
reported that coconut growing areas in Eastern Leyte devastated by the
the strong winds. This is made possible since the government and some super typhoon resorted to vegetable production providing early returns
farmer associations have supported them by providing coconut seed­ and food supplies while the damaged coconut areas were replanted.
lings for replanting. However, according to the coconut farmers, the Some of the farmers (9.2%) pursued other means to generate addi­
seedlings given to them were not enough to cover the damaged trees, so tional income, such as selling rice-based goodies or locally known as
they resorted to using their own seedlings for replanting. Other farmers kakanin, selling banana products to augment and sustain their daily
also mentioned that they did not receive any coconut seedlings or any needs. The other coping strategies mentioned by some farmers include
form of assistance from PCA. adapting new farming practice, joined cooperative, access credit,
A quarter of the respondents (25.1%) reported that they adopted participate in community activities/projects and joined coconut

7
M.N.V. Seriño et al.
farmers’ organization. There few farmers who mentioned the following
coping strategies: set up personal savings, joined savings group, opted to
innovate farming system, practice group farming, farmed to other places
and off-farm work (Table 5).
It is worth mentioning that the second largest coping mechanism
mentioned by coconut farmers is praying. Around 44% of the re­
spondents mentioned that one of their main adaptation strategies is to
pray and hope that everything will turn out fine. This is a manifestation
of the Philippines’ religious culture to resort to praying during difficult
times, disasters, and calamities. By praying, it sets them in a positive
perspective and move forward with optimism. This is also an indication
of small-scale coconut farmers’ strength and resiliency that despite the
odds, they continue surviving.
To strengthen the coping strategies of small scale farmers, the local
government unit or non-government organizations may consider
establishing a farmer field school that focuses on the climate resiliency
of farmers. It is expected that more frequent, stronger and damaging
typhoons will hit these agricultural villages in the Philippines, consid­
ering the issue of climate change. Chandra et al. [42] argued that there
some visible benefits of farmer field school highlighting climate resil­
iency. In addition to livelihood outcomes, small-scale farmers can
strengthen coping mechanisms, adaptation, mitigation, and food pro­
duction from the interventions learned from farmer field schools [42].
Rodriguez et al. [28] emphasized that technical assistance and training
associated with coconut production with marketing components were
found to have a positive impact on the income of farmers.
For the Philippines, it is not uncommon that coconut farmers do not
access crop insurance. Crop insurance is more common among rice
farmers. Table 5 did not even reflect that coconut farmer availed crop
insurance. While the advantages of crop insurance are widely under­
stood, very few farmers avail of it. No one in our interviewed re­
spondents bought crop insurance. For small-scale farmers, crop
insurance is an added cost and is not a priority because they do not have
enough income to sustain their basic needs for food, clothing, shelter
and education. Although the Philippine Crop Insurance Corporation
(PCIC) [43] plans to expand crop insurance coverage after the super
typhoon incident in 2013 to include coconut farmers, more has to be
done on this issue to boost the resilience of coconut farmers. Coconut is
one of the crops that has been listed in PCIC’s high value crops covered
for crop insurance [44]. Better protection for small-scale coconut
farmers is vital to help them become more resilient in times of
calamities.
3.4. Focus groups discussion with coconut farmers
To validate the results of the household survey, we conducted focus
group discussions (FGD) among 15 coconut farmers in May 2018 at
Barangay Santiago, Palompon, Leyte together with local village officials.
Palompon was identified as one of the municipalities in Leyte that was
heavily devastated by the super typhoon in terms of coconut production.
During the FGD, the farmers narrated how they survived the onslaught
of the super typhoon. The strength of the super typhoon was beyond
their expectation. They said they grew up in this locality and were used
to typhoons, but the super typhoon in Haiyan changed everything.
The super typhoon Haiyan that hit the Philippines in 2013 heavily
devastated their coconut production. Almost all of their coconut trees
were uprooted. The super typhoon had negatively affected their liveli­
hood and they were at a loss on how to respond because their livelihood
is mainly dependent on coconut production. However, they mentioned
that there was help coming in from various organizations and could do
cash for work activities in their municipalities. They restarted replanting
the damaged coconut trees from the seedlings provided by PCA. For
some who did not receive any seedlings from PCA, they replanted using
their own seedlings. Some respondents reported that their replanted
coconuts had been damaged by farm animals like carabaos and goats. As
to their coconut production, it took them around two years after the
8
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 52 (2021) 101939
super typhoon to restart harvesting from the remaining coconuts.
Ruales et al. [45] highlighted that coconut small-scale coconut
farmers are facing unprecedented challenges increasing productivity
because of the occurrence of extreme weather events, particularly in
Leyte island. Coconut farmers are expected to face constant income
shocks from frequent and stronger typhoons threatening production and
livelihood. To cope with the loss in income, coconut farmers in the short
run shifted to alternative livelihoods such as planting other crops like
vegetables, root crops and bananas. Other farmers were able to pursue
backyard piggery production. Other farmers mentioned that some
farmers migrated to other places to look for other sources of income. The
long run term adaptation option is to develop resilient and tolerant
coconut varieties with high survivability in the occurrence of strong
typhoons [45].
Coconut farmers perceived that weather these days are unpredict­
able compared before. And because of the changing weather patterns,
they perceived that their coconut harvests were declining through time.
The same perception was also highlighted by Timbal & Seriño [46] that
local farmers observed abnormal changes in the weather patterns. The
farmers also identified that they have lesser working hours on the field
due to extreme heat condition, which result for them to be less pro­
ductive on coconut production.
4. Conclusions
Small-scale coconut farmers are facing unprecedented challenges
associated with the seemingly frequent occurrence of extreme weather
events. The damaging effects of the super typhoon is putting at huge risk
the main livelihood of millions of Filipinos dependent on coconut
farming. This situation is further aggravated, considering that the
Philippines is one of the countries classified as highly vulnerable to the
adverse effects of climate change [47]. Hence, studies on impact
assessment related to disasters like super typhoons are becoming more
relevant to enable policymakers, organizations, and managers to make
necessary recommendations to create responsive programs to farmers
need and contribute to a speedy recovery. It will also help devise pro­
grams or policies that aim to reduce losses in the event similar shocks
happen in the future.
The literature is abundant with reports related to super typhoon
Haiyan but it is mostly concentrated on human loss and infrastructure
damages. Very few studies accounted for the socio-economic impacts of
the super typhoon on the livelihood of coconut farmers (Monteclaro
et al., 2018). This study tries to fill that gap by estimating what was lost
to farmers attributed to the super typhoon by applying appropriate
estimation techniques. While it is convenient for policy makers and
private sectors to just come up with a quick estimate of lost income, it
could be biased. Our analysis shows that using propensity score
matching the onslaught of the super typhoon has significantly reduced
the income of coconut farmers ranging from PHP 20,649.89 (USD 405)
up to PHP 21,406.83 (USD 420) per hectare annually. With the drastic
decrease in income, farmers coped by raising livestock, growing other
crops, and intercropping coconuts with coffee or cacao and working off-
farm. Results suggest that there is a large scope for government and non-
government organizations in enhancing the role of climate-resilient
agricultural practices in coconut farming.
While the coconut is one of the most important crop of the
Philippines and the country is the second largest producer accounting
for around 27% of the global production [11], information on farmers’
level is very critical to develop a concrete recovery plan. Understanding
and adequately estimating what was lost can help efficiently allocate
scarce government resources to the affected farmers. More than the
immediate response provided by the government and international or­
ganizations after the typhoon, the Philippine Coconut Authority and all
other cooperating agencies had provided coconut seedlings for
replanting and initiated cash-for-work for coconut farmers. However,
based on the discussion with farmers, it shows that the coconut seedlings
M.N.V. Seriño et al.
provided by the government were not enough to cover their areas and
not all coconut farmers received assistance from the Philippine Coconut
Authority (PCA). However, the government may focus not only on the
provision of coconut seedlings but also on other farming and
non-farming practices that would generate alternative income for the
coconut farmers. Although the government already promoted inter­
cropping and provided various capacity building activities to help the
farmers diversify their income sources, other areas not yet covered with
this technology should be included.
The government and non-government organizations should contin­
uously rebuild the livelihood coconut farmers by providing them the
necessary inputs, livelihood assistance, relevant training for entrepre­
neurship, and skills training for coconut production. The Philippine
government provided compensation for households whose houses were
totally or partially damaged by the super typhoons. For totally damaged
houses, each household received a compensation of around PHP 30,000
(USD 588) while partially damaged houses were given compensation at
PHP 10,000 (USD 196) [35]. The same compensation can also be
extended to small-scale coconut farmers who were farther pushed down
below poverty because of the super typhoon. Our estimated value on lost
income attributed to the super typhoon Haiyan can serve as a bench­
mark in devising policies to provide assistance. However, more than the
compensation for physical damages, there is a need to strengthen pro­
grams that will help and support coconut farmers become climate
resilient since the country expects more frequent and stronger typhoons
because of climate change. Considering that the Philippines is located in
a region where typhoons are regular and super typhoons are expected to
be more frequent, then climate-resilient agricultural practices should be
advocated so that the farmers can be responsive to the changing climate
and can bounce back better from any climate shock on their production.
In addition, strengthening the crop insurance system for coconut pro­
duction should be further enhanced to boost small scale farmers’ resil­
ience in disaster-prone areas.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgement
This research was financially supported by the Office of the Vice
President for Research and Extension, Visayas State University, Visca,
Baybay City, Leyte, Philippines.
References
[1] N. Mori, M. Kato, S. Kim, H. Mase, Y. Shibutani, T. Takemi, K. Tsuboki, T. Yasuda,
Local amplification of storm surge by super typhoon haiyan in Leyte gulf, Geophys.
Res. Lett. 41 (14) (2014) 5106–5113, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL060689.
[2] National Disaster Risk Reduction Management Council (NDRRMC), Final Report Re
Effects of Typhoon “Yolanda” (Haiyan), 2015. http://ndrrmc.gov.ph/attach
ments/article/1329/FINAL_REPORT_re_Effects_of_Typhoon_YOLANDA_(HAIYAN)
_06-09NOV2013.pdf.
[3] National Economic Development Authority (NEDA), The Philippines: Fifth Progress
Report− Millennium Development Goals Executive Summary, 2014. http://www.
neda.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/MDG-Progress-Report-5-Final.pdf.
[4] C. Yi, A. Suppasri, S. Kure, J.D. Bricker, E. Mas, M. Quimpo, M. Yasuda, Storm
surge mapping of typhoon haiyan and its impact in tanauan, Leyte, Philippines,
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 13 (2015) 207–214, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2015.05.007.
[5] Philippine Coconut Authority, Annual Accomplishment Report of the Philippine
Coconut Authority CY 2010 (PCA), 2011, http://pca.gov.ph/pdf/accomp/arcy201
0text.pdf.
[6] J. Rodriguez, Rebuilding Better for Coconut Farmers, Post-Haiyan Reconstruction
in the Philippines, 2014, February 12. https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.
org/files/bn-coconut-livelihoods-philippines-recovery-120214-en.pdf.
[7] Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Coconut Losses Super
Typhoon Yolanda: Damages in Eastern Visayas (OCHA), 2014, https://reliefweb.
9
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 52 (2021) 101939
int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/OCHA_Coconut%20damages_11032014_1.
pdf.
[8] Philippine Statistics Authority, Philippine Statistical Yearbook, 2016 (PSA), 2016,
https://psa.gov.ph/content/2016-philippine-statistical-yearbook.
[9] Philippines Statistics Authority, Selected Statistics on Agriculture 2017 (PSA),
2017, https://psa.gov.ph/sites/default/files/SSA2017%20%281%29.pdf.
[10] Philippine Coconut Authority, Coconut: Major Export Crop of Filipino Farmers
(PCA), 2019, https://pca.gov.ph/index.php/10-news/234-coconut-major-export-
crop-of-filipino-farmers.
[11] Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Philippine Coconut
Farmers Struggling to Recover from Typhoon (FAO), 2014, January 27, http
://www.fao.org/asiapacific/%20news/detail-events/en/c/213022/.
[12] A.M. Balisacan, Rural poverty in the Philippines: incidence, determinants and
policies, Asian Dev. Rev. Stud. Asian Pac. Econ. Issues: Studies of Asian and Pacific
Economic Issues 10 (1) (1992).
[13] I.M. Pabuayon, R.D. Cabahug, S.V.A. Castillo, M.D. Mendoza, Key actors, prices
and value shares in the philippine coconut market chains: implications for poverty
reduction, Journal of International Society for Southeast Asian Agricultural
Sciences 15 (1) (2009) 52–62.
[14] I.B. Gurbuz, M. Manaros, Impact of Coconut Production on the Environment and
the Problems faced by Coconut Producers in Lanao del Norte Province, Philippines,
Scientific Paper Series Management, Economic Engineering in Agriculture and
Rural Development 19 (3) (2019) 247–258.
[15] Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Rebuilding Coconut
Production after Typhoon Yolanda (OCHA), 2014, https://reliefweb.int/sites/reli
efweb.int/files/resources/PHL_Rebuilding_Coconut_Production_After_Typhoon_Yol
anda_04122013_0.pdf.
[16] Philippine Coconut Authority, Philippine Coconut Industry: a Sleeping Giant
(PCA), 2019, https://pca.gov.ph/index.php/about-us/10-news/237-ph-coconut
-industry-a-sleeping-giant.
[17] S. Magat, Understanding Right, the Productivity (Yield) of Coconut from the
Philippines’ Research and Field Experience: A Knowledge Tool for Industry
Development and Management (A Research Note), 2014. http://www.pca.da.gov.
ph/coconutrde/images/yield.pdf.
[18] The Guardians, Typhoon Haiyan Sends Coconut Farming Back to “Year Zero”,
2014, February 6. https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/201
4/feb/06/typhoon-haiyan-coconut-farming-year-zero.
[19] R.G. De Guzman, F. Hilario, D. Ortega, P. Hayman, B. Alexander, El nino southern
oscillation in the Philippines: impacts, forecasts, and risk management, Philippine
Journal of Development XXXVI (1) (2010). https://ideas.repec.org/p/phd/pjdevt/
pjd_2009_vol__xxxvi_no__1-b.html.
[20] M.N.V. Seriño, Decomposition analysis of income inequality in eastern Visayas,
Philippines, DLSU Business & Economics Review 24 (1) (2014) 126–139. http://ej
ournals.ph/form/cite.php?id=6499.
[21] J. Giles, P.B. Macandog, C. Sova, M.N.V. Seriño, J.H. Ruales, W.C. Enerlan, L.
K. Palao, J.G. Balanza, J. Hildebrand, G. Grosjean, Climate-Resilient Agriculture in
the Philippines: Climate Risk Profile, Visayas, 2019, June. https://ciatph.github.
io/#/crads/crp.
[22] J. Heckman, H. Ichimura, J. Smith, P. Todd, Characterizing Selection Bias Using
Experimental Data, 1998, August. NBER Working Paper No. 6699, https://www.nb
er.org/papers/w6699.
[23] P. Rosenbaum, D. Rubin, The central role of the propensity score in observational
studies for causal effects, Biometrika 70 (1) (1983) 41–55, https://doi.org/
10.1093/biomet/70.1.41.
[24] P.J. Gertler, S. Martinez, P. Premand, L.B. Rawlings, C.M. Vermeersch, Impact
Evaluation in Practice, second ed., The World Bank and Inter-American
Development Bank, Washington, DC, 2016. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/25030.
[25] S. Klasen, T. Lechtenfeld, K. Meier, J. Rieckmann, Impact Evaluation Report: Water
Supply and Sanitation in Provincial Towns in Yemen (Courant Research Centre
Discussion Papers No. 102, 2011, November. https://ideas.repec.org/p/got/gotc
rc/102.html.
[26] C. Heinrich, A. Maffioli, G. Vázquez, A Primer for Applying Propensity-Score
Matching A Primer for Applying Propensity- Score Matching Impact-Evaluation
Guidelines, Inter-American Development Bank, 2010. https://publications.iadb.or
g/en/primer-applying-propensity-score-matching.
[27] M. Mendola, Agricultural technology adoption and poverty reduction: a
propensity-score matching analysis for rural Bangladesh, Food Pol. 32 (2007)
372–393, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2006.07.003.
[28] D.G.P. Rodriguez, R.M. Rejesus, C.T. Aragon, Impacts of an agricultural
development program for poor coconut producers in the Philippines: an approach
using panel data and propensity score matching techniques, J. Agric. Resour. Econ.
32 (3) (2007) 534–557, https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.7081.
[29] W. Liu, J. Li, J. Xu, Impact of the ecological resettlement program in southern
Shaanxi Province, China on households’ livelihood strategies, For. Pol. Econ. 120
(2020) 102310, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102310.
[30] A. Shehu, S.F. Sidique, A propensity score matching analysis of the impact of
participation in non-farm enterprise activities on household wellbeing in rural
Nigeria, UMK Procedia 1 (2014) 26–32, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
umkpro.2014.07.004.
[31] A. Ali, D. Bahadur Rahut, B. Behera, Factors influencing farmers’ adoption of
energy-based water pumps and impacts on crop productivity and household
income in Pakistan, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 54 (2016) 48–57, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.09.073.
[32] A.H. Taganas, Assessing the impact of super typhoon Yolanda (haiyan) on the
livelihood of coconut dependent farmers in Kananga, Leyte and Sogod, southern
M.N.V. Seriño et al.
Leyte, Philippines, Review of Socio-Economic Research and Development Studies 3
(1) (2019) 58–77. http://www.reserds.com/vol-3-paper-4/.
[33] L. Shi, G. Li, J. Hao, W. Wang, W. Chen, S. Liu, Z. Yu, Y. Shi, Y. Ma, L. Fan,
L. Zhang, X. Han, Psychological depletion in physicians and nurses exposed to
workplace violence: a cross-sectional study using propensity score analysis, Int. J.
Nurs. Stud. 103 (2020) 103493, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.103493.
[34] M.M. Sarabia, A. Kägi, A.C. Davison, N. Banwell, C. Montes, C. Aebischer,
S. Hostettler, The challenges of impact evaluation: attempting to measure the
effectiveness of community-based disaster risk management, International Journal
of Disaster Risk Reduction 49 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijdrr.2020.101732.
[35] M.N.V. Seriño, J.C. Ureta, J. Baldesco, K.J. Galvez, C. Predo, E.K.L. Seriño, Valuing
The Protection Service provided by Mangroves in Typhoon-Hit Areas in the Philippines.
(Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA) Research Report
No. 2017-RR19), 2017. http://www.eepseapartners.org/wp-content/uploads
/publication/2017-RR19Serino_web.pdf.
[36] Philippine News, International Aid for Typhoon Yolanda Victims (List of Donations
by Country and Organization), 2013, November 13. https://philnews.ph/2013/11
/13/international-aid-yolanda-haiyan-victims-list-donations-country-organizatio
n/.
[37] Philippines Statistics Authority, Region VII Eastern Visayas (PSA-EV), Province of
Leyte, 2019. http://rsso08.psa.gov.ph/leyte?page=5#sthash.sM6YTzbk.dpbs.
[38] R.H. Dehejia, S. Wahba, Propensity score-matching methods for nonexperimental
causal studies, Rev. Econ. Stat. 84 (1) (2006) 151–161, https://doi.org/10.1162/
003465302317331982.
[39] M. Caliendo, S. Kopeinig, Some practical guidance for the implementation of
propensity score matching, J. Econ. Surv. 22 (1) (2008) 31–72, https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1467-6419.2007.00527.x.
[40] S. Meniano, Copra Price Drop Hurst Region 8 Coco-dependent Families, 2019,
March 1. https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1063339.
10
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 52 (2021) 101939
[41] S. McDougall, Z. Gonzaga, G. Rodgers, G. Adam, L. Borines, R. Gerona, M.N.
V. Seriño, M. Labonite, N. Gonzaga, V. Justo, E. Carusos, E. Lonzaga, R. Acosta,
L. Tesoriero, S.P. Singh, I. Kernot, Integrated Crop Management (ICM) to Enhance
Vegetable Profitability and Food Security in the Southern Philippines and
Australia, 2019, June. https://aciar.gov.au/publication/technical-publications/i
ntegrated-crop-management-icm-enhance-vegetable-profitability-and-food-securit
y.
[42] A. Chandra, P. Dargusch, K.E. McNamara, A.M. Caspe, D. Dalabajan, A study of
climate-smart farming practices and climate-resiliency field schools in mindanao,
the Philippines, World Dev. 98 (2017) 214–230, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
worlddev.2017.04.028.
[43] Philippine Crop Insurance Corporation (PCIC), After Haiyan (Yolanda), Philippines
Expands Crop Insurance, 2019. https://pcic.gov.ph/after-haiyan-yolanda-philippi
nes-expands-crop-insurance/.
[44] Philippine Crop Insurance Corporation (PCIC), General Information on the High
Value Crop Insurance Program, 2018. https://pcic.gov.ph/wp-content/up
loads/2019/01/HVCC-Final.pdf.
[45] J.H. Ruales, M.N.V. Seriño, T.C. Ratilla, J.G. Cuizon, W.C. Enerlan, Investment
appraisal of selected climate smart agricultural (CSA) practices among small scale
coconut farmers in Leyte, Philippines, Scientific Papers Series Management,
Economic Engineering in Agriculture and Rural Development 20 (3) (2020)
499–506.
[46] D.P. Timbal, E.K. Seriño, Farmers’ perception on the impacts of climate change in
malinao dam community, pilar, bohol, Review of Socio-Economic Research and
Development Studies 3 (1) (2019) 78–95. http://www.reserds.com/vol-3
-paper-5/.
[47] S. Kreft, D. Eckstein, L. Junghans, C. Kerestan, U. Hagen, Global Climate Risk Index
2015: Who Suffers Most from Extreme Weather Events? Weather-Related Loss
Events in 2013 and 1994 to 2013, 2014. https://germanwatch.org/en/9470.