1 | P a g e

CHAPTER 1

Introduction When United Nations General Secretary Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction (GAR/DRR) (UNISDR, 2009) particularly emphasizes the challenge of reducing the impact of disasters on the poor and the less priviledged, numerous references are made to the extreme vulnerabilities of the poor and their disaproportionate suffering from disaster occurences. Yet, the vulnerability of the urban poor is escalating due to pressure from urbanization, the competition for scarce resources to ensure basic livelihood and services, and weaknesses in governance structures. Like in so many other urban cities, many neighborhoods in Metro Manila are integral to the life and culture of a city. They supply manpower and undertake the tasks that make the lives of city dwellers comfortable. Yet their situation is unstable, and their lives and financial means are susceptible by hazards both natural and man-made. Structures for both living and making a living are poor and unstable, streets are narrow; access is difficult, space is scarce, and service are minimal. These conditions make any attempt at developing such neighborhood a difficult process. More so, people and families living under these condition have developed their own culture, norms and beliefs. They felt neglected for so long that any attempt to help them would mean the opposite. So how do we help these people? These communities? This study would answer by making them resilient and lessen their vulnerability. The Problem and Its Background Communities faces the risk of being struck by a disaster of one type or another, including natural disasters such as floods, earthquakes, volcanic erruptions, tsunamis or technological disasters such as a chemical/oil spill or explosion. When disaster strikes, it can destroy not just the physical structure but also the lives of people of these communities -- leaving people and families homeless and out of work. All over the country, property damage from disasters has been increasing steadily, in part because of larger disaster events, but also because more and more people are living in hazard-prone areas. A vulnerability assessment can serve as the basis for developing strategies for reducing the risks from disasters. The assessment helps a community to:

- Estimate the number of people at risk, including people with special needs, - Identify the number and location of buildings at risk, including critical facilities such as

hospitals and schools, and

2 | P a g e

- Examine the communication links and networks that are vulnerable to disruption during and after a disaster, including informal networks of communication such as church groups.

Disaster Vulnerability in the Global Setting In 2004 UNDP, released an assessment report on disaster-related mortality risks associated with cyclones, floods and earthquakes. Countries are the unit of analysis. The report identifies the relative contributions of hazard exposure and vulnerability factors to mortality risk and analyzes how these can be reduced or intensify through the development process. The analysis is based on a Disaster Risk Index, developed by the United Nations Environment Programme, that measures relative vulnerability to the above hazards. Relative vulnerability is measured as the number of people killed in a country due to a particular natural hazard compared to the number of people exposed. Countries that suffer a higher loss of life than others who are equally exposed have a higher relative vulnerability to the hazard in question. Countries with relatively high vulnerability to earthquakes, for example, include the Islamic Republic of Iran, Turkey, India, Italy, Algeria, and Mexico while countries with relatively low vulnerability include Japan, Costa Rica and the United States of America. Countries with relatively high vulnerability to cyclones include Honduras, Nicaragua and Bangladesh while the low-vulnerability countries include Australia, Japan and Cuba. On the other hand, countries with relatively high vulnerability to flooding include Venezuela, Morocco, Somalia and Botswana while Argentina and Germany on the other hand have historically experienced relatively low mortality during flood events. The UNDP report was an alarming sight. What is more alarming is that we began to feel the vulnerability all around us. Let us take for example United States of America which is in the relatively low vulnerability to earthquakes and Japan which is both in the relatively low vulnerability to earthquakes and relatively low vulnerability to cyclones. These countries are considerered super power, they hold the world economy, have the best equipment and trainings on disaster mitigation and preparedness but still when they were striked by disaster they were left powerless. During the Hurricane Katrina (August 2005) in the USA wherein the damages was estimated by the Department of Homeland Security to topped $110 billion and the March 11, 2011 earthquake and tsunami that occurred in Japan followed by a nuclear crisis and shortage of electricity is having a large negative economic impact on the country but a lesser effect on world markets. Japan has lost considerable physical and human capital. Physical damage has been estimated to from $250 billion to as much as $309 billion, the latter figure being nearly

3 | P a g e

four times as much as Hurricane Katrina and roughly equivalent to the GDP of Greece and twice that of New Zealand. In excess of 27,000 persons in Japan are killed or missing, and more than 146,000 homes and other buildings have been totally or partially damaged. Both countries suffered not just its structures, but most especially they sufferred through the lost of their citizens, their people, the families that build these communities.

Disaster Vulnerability in the Philippine Setting Being one of the most disaster-prone countries in the world, the Philippines have a long experience in dealing with, responding to and managing disaster. Being an archepelago, the Philippines is constanly being visited by typhoons and tropical cyclone as well as being prone to tsunamis and other natural calamities and since we are also located along the Pacific Ring of Fire the most active part of the earth that is characterized by an ocean-encircling belt of active volcanoes and earthquake generators we also also prone to earthquake and volcanic activities resulting to lost of millions of lives and properties. Per record from the center for Research and Epidemiology of Disasters, the Philippines tops the list as the worlds most disaster prone country from 1900-1991, with a total of 70 incidents or almost 8 disasters a year. One good example was the Tropical Storm Ondoy (international name Ketsana) which hit the Philippines on September 26, 2009, causing widespead flooding. Ondoy brought an unusually high volume of rain which inundated the Central Luzon including Metro Manila. During the 12 hour period the rainfall was recorded as approximately 450 mm at the Manila Observatory, an extremely rare occurrence. In turn, these intense rains generated high flooding in Metro Manila and the neighboring province such as Rizal. Ondoy caused substantial damages and losses, the storms hit regions of the country, the adverse impacts on the productive sectors were largely due to damaged or lost inventories, raw materials and crops. In addition, business operations were interrupted by power and water shortages, damaged machinery, and absent employees whoch contributed to an overall reduction in production capacity. Another recent example of an natural calamity turned disaster happened last December 15 - 18, 2011 where Tropical Storm Sendong (international name Washi) entered East of Mindanao. According to PAGASA, Sendong dumped a total of 142 mm amount of rainfall in 12 hours, which is classified as super heavy rainfall. NDRRMC said that Sendong affected 338,415 individuals or 63,079 families. The fatalities have exceeded the combined number of deaths brought by Ondoy and Pepeng. The death toll has reached 957 while there are still 49 missing persons. The amount of damage to agriculture is pegged at an estimated P1.94M in the regions of CARAGA and Bicol.

4 | P a g e

Being a regular route of powerful storms/cyclones as well as other calamities, various contingency plans were made in order for the country to lessen the countrys vulnerability to these calamities. In 1970s the country has shifted its approach from disaster preparedness and response to disaster management in 1980s to the disaster risk management in the 1990s and the disaster risk reduction in the years 2005 and beyon. This evolution paved the way to the paradigm shift in the way people, communities and governments think, act and respond to the current and emerging risks that continually face them. In 1973, the National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC) was established through Presidential Degree (PD) 1566. This law also provided for the establishment of regional, provincial, city, municipal ad barangay Disaster Coordinating Councils. The DCCs are formed to advice the President and recommend the declaration of state of calamity and the release of calamity funds for relief and rescue operations, among others. In 2005, the President approved the implementation of the NDCC Four Point Plan of Action for Preparedness (4PPAP) which aims to increase public awareness and involvement in measures put in place by the government to minimize the impact of disasters in the future. In following years, various discussions with different stakeholders in disaster risk reduction and diaster risk management happened which produced key policy documents. One was the Preliminary Assessment on the State of Disaster Risk Management in the Philippines completed in 2008 which formulated a Disaster Risk Management (DRM) framework to assess the situation in the country and recommend an agenda for action that would strategically address the constraints and limitations in the current efforts in reducing disaster risk. Based on the consolidated ratings, the overall state of DRM in the country is 2.27 which is classified as low to very low in the ladder of accomlishments and progress in implementing DRM. In 2010, the Executive Order Number 888 was signed by the President adopting the landmark plan on DRR of the country titled Strengthening Disaster Risk Reduction in the Philippines: Strategic National Action Plan (SNAP) 2009 - 2019. SNAP is the countrys road map for disaster risk reduction, indicating the vision and strategic objectives and capacity, gap analysis that identified and mapped out significant ongoing initiatives; and DRR activities based on the Hyoho Framework for Action (HFA)1 that were considered by stakeholders as achievable prioritues for the country, with adequate relevant resources, and capacity for implementation over the nest three to ten years. SNAP aims to build the resilience of communities to disasters

1 The Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) is a 10-year plan to make the world safer from natural hazards. It was

adopted by 168 Member States of the United Nations in 2005 at the World Disaster Reduction Conference, which took place just a few weeks after the Indian Ocean Tsunami

5 | P a g e

and reduce disaster losses in lives and in the social, economic and environmental assets of communities and countries. On May 27, 2010, Republic Act 10121 or the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction Management Act was passed into law and paved the way for the need to adopt a disaster risk reduction and management approach that is holistic, comprehensive, integrated, and proactive in lessening the socio-economic and environmental impacts of disasters including climate change, and promote the involvement and participation of all sectors and all stakeholders concerned, at all levels, especially the local community. Disaster Preparedness in Quezon City Quezon City (QC) is the largest city of Metropolitan Manila (see Annex A: Quezon City Map), which is an urban agglomeration of 16 cities and 1 one municipality. With a land area of 161.126 sq. km. or 16,112.8 hectares). Quezon City is more than four times the size of Manila, nearly six times the expanse of Makati, and more than 14 times bigger than Mandaluyong. It is almost one-fourth the expanse of Metro Manila. It is located near the center of Metro Manila, towards its northeastern portion. It is bordered by Manila to the southwest, by Caloocan City and Valenzuela City to the west and northwest. Towards the south, lies San Juan and Mandaluyong City, while Marikina City and Pasig City borders Quezon City to the southeast. Towards the north, across Marilao River, lies San Jose del Monte City in the province of Bulacan, and towards the east, lies Rodriguez and San Mateo, both in the province of Rizal. Of the Metro Manila local governments, Quezon City has the biggest population, constituting 24% of the regional population. With a population of nearly three million, Quezon City is one of the largest sources of manpower in the Philippines, with its employable human resource assets of 1.672 million. 2010 estimate is 2,960,627 people, with a 2.92% annual growth rate. It is the most populated city of the Philippines. According the the study conducted last 2009 by Kyoto University in partnership with METROPLANADO (Metro Manila Planning and Development OfficersAssociation Inc.) overall, Quezon City has high physical resilience; moderate social, economic and institutional resilience; and a low natural resilience. To explain further below is the table of resieliency of the QC in tems of physical, social, economic, institutional and natural:

6 | P a g e

Table 1: Analysis of Quezon City Resilience, 2009

Physical Among the cities in Metro Manila, QC has the forth highest physical resilience. It has a high score in Accessibility of roads but low score in Sanitation and Solice waste disposal. The percentage of solid waste recycled (botyh formal and informal: city socild waste management and the waste recycling actvities of scavengers and the waste pickers) is less than 50%. It has low capacity for alternative emergency electric supply to keep emergency services functioning.

Social The city has a high score in Education and awareness in Social capital. However, its score in Population is low. The citys annual population growth of 2.92 is very high, second in metro Manila after Taguig. A large percentage of the citys population live in slum area/urban informal settlement/urban poor areas. The Commonwealth area has one of the largest barangays in the Philippines, the area aso play host to one of the largest squatters communities in the country. The population of the area is so big it is equivalent to a single highly-urbanized city.

Economic Among the cities in Metro Manila, QC has the fifitg highest economic resilience. The city has a low score in Finance and savings. The percentage of youth unemployed in the formal sector is high. The percentage of the citys household properties that are under any sort of insurance scheme is below 20%. The housing shortage is becoming more and more pronounce as the population increases. It is estimated that 40% of the population are in need of shelter, most of whom are urban poor. Informal settlers occupy not only vast tracts of public and private lands but also riverbanks and creeksides.

Institutional QC has a low score in Effectiveness of citys institutions to respond to a disaster. The availability and efficiency of trained emergency workers during and after a disaster is limited and not sufficient to serve the citys 142 barangays. The integration and implementation of disaster risk management plans/policies is also limited and must be improved.

Natural Numerous rivers and creeks crisscross QC. Flash floods occur in several places particularly during heavy downpour caused by clooged drainage inlets and pipes. Some of the roads and streets were flooded due to crrek overflow and clogged drainage inlets and canal caused by the indiscriminate practice of residents and business establishments of dumping their garbage in Metro Manilas creeks, rivers and canals. The tree branches and leaves which littered the roads contributed also to the clogging of the canals. There is a high frequency of floods and typhoons. The urban air quality is poor as well as the urban water quality in bodies of water.

Source: Metro Manila Profile, CDRI

7 | P a g e

Disaster Vulnerability in Block 465 GK-STC Community, Sto. Domingo, Quezon City Block 465 GK-STC Community is an area located in Barangay Sto. Domingo. It is one of the 142 barangays in District I Quezon City. Geographically, the area is bounded by Maria Clara St. in the East, Don Jose St. in the North, Tirad Pass in the West and Santo Domingo St. in the South along the periphery of the four angles of the block. In Blk. 465 houses are mostly made from concretes and only few are made up of light materials. These can be an indicator that the people are somewhat aware that their area is susceptible to hazards. The damages and losses brought about by the 2004 fire and the 2009 Ondoy flooding made the researchers aware of the need to further investigate and assess the vulnerability factors of Blk. 465 GK-STC. Thus, enabling the community to be more prepared for hazard and disaster occurrence. Statement of the Problem

This study seeks to assess the disaster vulnerability of Blk 465 GK STC Community. Particularly, this study will answer the following questions:

1. What is the demographic profile of the respondents based on the position in the family, gender, age, length of stay in the area, and type of ownership of residences of the respondents?

2. What is the disaster vulnerability of the residents of Blk. 465 Groups 1, 2 and 3 in terms of:

a. Social factors including the number of family members per household, number of families living under one house, age and number of women and men, children and elderly per household, presence of people with disability (PWD) and other health related problem of the household; educational attainment of the household members,

b. Economic factors including the number of working/income generating household member/s, average household monthly income and other sources of income; and

c. Physical factors including the location of houses, type of materials used in the structures, typical number of floors of structures

3. What are the disaster experiences in Blk. 465 Groups 1, 2 and 3: GK-STC Village?

8 | P a g e

Significance of the Study This study is beneficial to the following groups of individuals: Residents of Blk. 465, Sto. Domingo, Quezon City. They will benefit from this study by learning the vulnerability of their community. Their common knowledge, tools and practices before, during and after a disaster as well as having a disaster evacuation plan. Barangay Sto. Domingo Administrators. They will benefit from this study by knowing the most vulnerable families and areas in Blk. 465, Grp. 1,2 & 3: GK-STC of Brgy. Sto. Domingo. Likewise, the study could ensure timely, appropriate and effective delivery of relief and assistance following a disaster. More so, this study would be beneficial to the Local officials by learning the social vulnerability in their area which they can use as basis in formulating programs and projects in the future. Local Government of Quezon City. As stated in its vision Quezon City envisions itself to be a model of effective governance and responsible leadership, working in partnership with the citizenry in building a Quality Community. To attain such vision the disaster preparedness of the 142 barangays is a vital element. In building a quality community one must have a passionate, knowledgeable, trained and organized force that would minimize the adverse effects of hazard, through effective readiness measures to expedite emergency actions, rehabilitation and recovery. Community stakeholders and Society-at-large. The study might instill awareness in the importance of a disaster preparedness. The map would be beneficial specially to Gawad Kalinga (GK) and St. Therese College (STC) which are the major partner of the community in its development. Future Researchers. The result of the study could serve as a baseline data for subsequent similar research which will explore the variables included in the study.

9 | P a g e

Scope and Limitation The locus of the research is in GK-STC village Block 465, Ma. Clara, Barangay Sto. Domingo, Quezon City. The area is divided into nine blocks however, due to time constraint, the study just limit to Groups 1, 2 and 3, an area which was gravely affected by fire and flood. The study focuses on the personal disaster experiences, the vulnerability factors which are social, economic and physical as well as gathering the respondents demographic profile. Its data was gathered through home visits and interviews. There could be other concerns related to this particular group but the researchers opted to focus on its vulnerability to hazards such as flood and fire due to its frequent occurrence. Operational Definition of Terms

Community - In this study it is defined as a group of people in living in Blk 465., GK-STC, Sto Domingo Quezon City who shares common values and goals

Disaster - In this study we will use the definition of disaster based on RA 10121 which states, a serious disruption of the functioning of a community or a society involving widespread human material, economic or environmental losses and impacts which, exceeds the ability of the affected community or society to cope using its own resources.

Disaster Experiences

- It refers to the experiences, pratices, thoughts, learnings as well as the actions taken to prevent and/or reduce the vulnerability to hazard of the household.

Hazard - In this study we will defined it as a dangerous phenomenon, substance, human activity or condition that may cause loss of life, injury or other health impacts, property damage, loss of livelihood and services, social and economic disruption, or environmental damage.

Household - Use to refer to the unit of close relatives or unrelated individuals living in one house, share common toilet and kitchen, and share in electricity and water bills and usually living in one compound.

Economic Vulnerability

- In this study we will define it as the economic condition that influences or shapes peoples susceptibility to harm, injury or loss during disasters such as the number of working/income generating household member/s, average household monthly income and other sources of income.

10 | P a g e

Physical Vulnerability

- In this study we will define it as the physical condition that influences or shapes peoples susceptibility to harm, injury or loss during disasters such as the location of houses, type of materials used in the structures, typical number of floors of structures.

Social Vulnerability - In this study we will define it as the social condition that influences or shapes peoples susceptibility to harm, injury or loss during disasters such as the number of family members per household, number of families living under one house, age and number of women and men, children and elderly per household, presence of people with disability (PWD) and other health related problem of the household; and educational attainment of the household members.

Vulnerability - In this study we will use the definition of disaster based on RA 10121 wherein it was defined as the characteristics and circumstances of a community, system or asset that make it susceptible to the damaging effects of a hazard.

Furthermore, Global Crisis Solutions Understanding Vulnerability Ensuring Appropriate and Effective Responses defined vulnerabilioty as a set of prevailing or consequential conditions, which adversely affect the community's ability to prevent, mitigate, prepare for or respond to hazard events.

11 | P a g e

CHAPTER 2

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK In this study several theories and principles was used as its framework such as the Community-Based Disaster Management Approach; the Baranganic Approach; Locality Development Theory and partial Community Based Participatory Research (CBPR). The Researchers felt that these theories and principles are essential in showing the relationship between vulnerability factors of a community and the importance of community participation in conducting such vulnerability assessment. In the CommunityBased Disaster Management (CBDM) Approach the community is involved in the whole process, their felt and real needs, as well as inherent resources are considered and aimed to reduce vulnerabilities and strengthen peoples capacity to cope with hazards through assessment of a communitys exposure to hazards and an analysis of their specific vulnerabilities and capacities in reducing disaster risks. Peoples participation concerns both process and content. The community should be contributing to the progress of their community and they are the primary actor in the development process. A typical vulnerability assessments are carried out by professionals in state or local emergency management offices, often with little or no input from local stakeholders. As a result, the assessments often fail to incorporate the experiential knowledge of people who have lived through disasters and who understand how such disasters make them vulnerable. Involving the community in the preparation of the vulnerability assessment can improve its effectiveness and ensure that the assessment is relevant to those who are the most at risk. Also, meaningful community involvement helps improve awareness about the risks posed by certain hazards and motivate community members and organizations to take steps to become more prepared. The underlying principles of CBDM is also true in the Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) which is a collaborative approach to research that equitably involves community members, organization representatives and researchers. Given the CBPR eight principles: (1) research must be locally relevant; (2) development, implementation, evaluation plans must benefit the community; (3) it must enhance community capacity; (4) all partners are involved in the (some) research process; (5) project is conducted via open communication; (6) research is produced, interpreted and disseminated to community members in clear useful respectful language; (7) there is a joint agreement on the access and location of data; (8) research adheres to human participants review process. (Chavez & All, 2004)

12 | P a g e

CBPR was used in community development for drafting a community profile (Ledwith, 2005). Using this type of research and producing a profile will represent not only a description by an outside observer, but a storyline that is representative of the views of community members. Also, because this type of community profile would be a process of discovery and self-analysis for community members as well as the researchers involved it would contribute to defining a community identity that all members believe in. The community profile obtained, or a demographic and economic profile of a given locality, is something that planners in Blk. 465 will include in every planning effort as the basis for their subsequent proposals. A community profile that is done based on the principles of CBPR can greatly improve the analysis and proposals of planners. This would result in more customized proposals, and plans that reflect the views of people who are supposed to at least support the implementation of plans. More so, the primary strategy of vulnerability reduction is to increase a communitys capacities, resources and coping strategies. In increasing the capacities, resources and coping of the community it is the goal of the Baranganic Approach2 because it seeks to develop the peoples capacity in the community for planning, planning and decision-making especially in times of disaster. The objectives of the Baranganic Approach in times of disaster is that it could help the community in getting the baseline data and preparing a community profile through survey and research work because in implementing CBDM and CBPR it is important to know who in the community should be involved. The most vulnerable are the primary actors in a community. The focus should be at the household level. As all individuals, houses, organizations and services stand a chance of being affected, they should be involved. According to Zastrow (2010) the model of Locality Development (Theory) asserts that community change can best be brought about through broad participation of a wide spectrum of people at the local community level. This theory emphasizes that change efforts on the community level are the most achievable with the cooperation of the local citizens, as they should be involved in the problem-solving process. In line with this theory, one of the workers roles is to be a catalyst within the change effort due to the fact that the residents of Blk. 465 are responsible and knowledgeable for the various ideas in the problem-solving process. The challenge for the organizer is in allowing the community members to complete the objectives as they could be readily accomplished by the organizer.

2 Baranganic Approach is an active participation and the involvement of the people themselves in any

development process and treat the promotion of social welfare is not the sole responsibility and concern of the government alone, but is shared with all sectors in the community-public, private and religious.

13 | P a g e

There is a need for the organizer to encourage community participation, because residents should be responsible for obtaining, maintaining, or securing their own interest rather than the organizer. In doing so, the outcome is greater cohesiveness, pride, empowerment, confidence, and problem-solving capabilities within the community. The goal for this theory is that residents of Blk. 465 are stronger together than they are separately, and therefore collectively they may be able to resolve issues and challenges. However, the use of these theories in this study is partial or limited such as in CBDM and CBRP whereby the residents of Blk. 465 are not involved in all the process of the research, not formally that is. Like in the formulation of the research problem, and interview questionnaire. This is due to the lack of availability of time in the part of the community leaders. Although theyve suggested the need for disaster awareness/preventive activities for their community, they were not present when the researchers formulated the research problem which is to assess their vulnerability. In addition they were also not involved in the formulation of the interview schedule questionnaire although they were consulted regarding the information they would like to know and be included in the said questionnaire. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK We based our Conceptual Framework on the study conducted by Mr. Reyne June Bawisan last January 2010 entitled An Earthquake Risk Assessment of the 33 Barangays of Makati City., wherein the types of hazards that Blk. 465 is susceptible was shown as well as the three (3) factors that contribute to the vulnerability of its residents. Figure 1: Conceptual Framework

14 | P a g e

The conceptual framework shows the types of major hazards Blk. 465 is susceptible to such as typhoon/storm, flood and fire. It also showed the relation of these major hazards to vulnerability factors: (1) social which includes the number of family members per household, number of families living under one house, age and number of women and men, children and elderly per household, presence of people with disability (PWD) and other health related problem of the household; and educational attainment of the household members; (2) economic which includes the number of working/income generating household member/s, average household monthly income and other sources of income; and (3) physical which includes the number of structures, the location of houses, type of materials used in the structures, typical number of floors of structures. The framework also shows how these vulnerability factors directly affect Blk. 465. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE Vulnerability to Hazards According to John Twigg3 (2004), the phrase natural disaster, which is widely used by specialists and generalists alike, often causes confusion and has been the subject of debate. Strictly speaking, there is no such thing as a natural disaster: there are only natural hazards. The difference between a hazard and a disaster is an important one. A disaster takes place when a society or community is affected by a hazard (it is usually defined as an event that overwhelms a societys capacity to cope). As classified by UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, there are three types of hazard: natural, technological and environmental. Earthquakes, landslide, floods, tropical cyclones, drought or outbreak of epidemic disease are natural hazards; fires, spills, industrial pollution, toxic waste are technological hazards; air pollution, climate change, sea level rise, deforestation are environmental degradation. In other words, the impact of the disaster is heavily influenced by the degree of the communitys vulnerability to the hazard. This vulnerability is not natural. It is the human dimension of disasters, the result of the whole range of economic, social, cultural, institutional, political and even psychological factors that shape peoples lives, and create the environment that they live in. Similarly a study entitled Global Crisis Solutions Understanding Vulnerability Ensuring Appropriate and Effective Response emphasized the long-term factors, weaknesses or constraints that affect a

3 John Twigg is an Honorary Research Fellow at the Benefield Hazard Research Centre, University of London

researching and writing on social and institutional aspects of risk reduction

15 | P a g e

household's, community's or societys ability (or inability) to absorb losses after disasters and to recover from the damage. It has two interacting forces: the external force, which is exposure to shock, stress and risk; and internal force, which is defenselessness, in other words a lack of means to cope. Categories of Vulnerability Maskrey (1998) categorizes vulnerability and these are physical, technical, economic, environmental, social, political, cultural, educational and institutional vulnerabilities. Communities in hazard prone locations arephysical vulnerability while structures and infrastructures (houses, roads, bridges, irrigation channels, etc.) that are unable to withstand and resist hazard events are technical vulnerability. The insufficient assets and reserves to withstand loss and lack of diversification is an economic vulnerability and the lack of biodiversity and the incapacity of the ecosystem to resist and recover is an environmental vulnerability. Social vulnerability refers to the family size, existence of community organizations, and social support mechanisms, age structure of community, gender differences, racial, ethnic, religious discrimination, etc. while political vulnerability is the level of participation in decision-making, the existence of authoritarianism and corruption, political violence and conflict resolution mechanisms. Cultural vulnerability however, is the system of beliefs regarding hazards, vulnerabilities and disasters. Similarly, educational vulnerability is the lack of information or misinformation regarding risk scenarios and institutional vulnerability is the lack of public services, planning, emergency preparedness and response, etc. Social Vulnerability Social vulnerability explicitly focuses on those demographic and socioeconomic factors that increase or attenuate the impacts of hazard events on local populations (Tierney, et al., 2011 Heinz Center 2002) in other words who is at risk and the degree to which they can be harmed. Many researchers have proclaimed the significance of social vulnerability as a critical component of disaster risk management. Social vulnerability cannot be expressed in absolute values or losses. To quantify social vulnerability and to make it comparable between regions, indices containing different variables have been developed, which are in most cases derived from data collected during community-based approaches or from census data.

16 | P a g e

Dow (1992) cited that the distinct feature of social vulnerability theory is its description of the possible threats to human-environment system, and threats to sustainability. It emphasizes the human response, coping capacity and resilience to absorb perturbation and changes from its environment. It characterizes vulnerability as the state of individuals, groups or communities in terms of their ability to cope with and adapt to any external stress on their livelihoods and well-being. Adger and Kelly (1999), provides the theoretical perspective on social vulnerability that human capacity to withstand a variety of stressors. It was conceived that humans are directly or indirectly dependent on natural resources of ecosystems to meet their needs for survival, thus, influencing the state and condition of nature, which is similarly stressed by the ecosystems-based model. Economic activities aimed to fulfill human needs exceeded the ecological threshold in many ecosystems, particularly the watershed ecosystem. From the point of view of Brooks (2003), social vulnerability theory can be referred to as people-based explanatory model of socio-economic vulnerability to a range of stressors and consequences. It applies to vulnerable situations and classification schemes of vulnerability factors characterized as internal social vulnerability or cross-scale social vulnerability. He described social vulnerability as factors that determine the outcome of hazardous events of a given natural severity, which encompasses elements of the physical environment like topography, and biophysical changes, among others. Poverty In Anthropological Essays, Lewis (1970) reiterates the culture of poverty theory, which at its most basic level is an adaptation to economic circumstances: The culture of poverty isa reaction of the poor to their marginal position is a class stratified highly individuated, capitalistic society. Indeed it is easier to blame the poor for their poverty than be open to understand the historical, political, social, cultural and economic factors that have generated poverty. Furthermore, Gaillard et al. (2007) argue that the impact of the 2004 tropical depressions and typhoons on the Philippines eastern coast was so devastating not due to the actual hazards, but rather was rooted in the underlying social, political, and economic conditions that further contributed to peoples vulnerability. The recent landslide in Cagayan that swept many lives has also been controversial that the political, social, economic factors are detrimental to it. Hence, there are various factors to be considered in understanding social vulnerability not only looking on the physical structure.

17 | P a g e

Poverty is an indicator of lack of access to resources and income opportunities which is only one of the several dimensions of vulnerability. People living in poverty are more vulnerable than the wealthy to hazard impacts. Poor people have less money to spend on preventative measures, emergency supplies, and recovery efforts. The monetary value of the economic and material losses of the wealthy may be greater; the losses sustained by the poor are far more devastating in relative terms because they are more likely to live in substandard housing, which can be a major disadvantage when disaster occur (Long 2007), and during disasters, are less likely to have access to critical resource and lifelines, such as communications and transportation. The vulnerability of the poor people is analyzed in a dynamic process of people and organization to assess the hazards and risk they face and determining what they wish to do about them. Vulnerability assessment also includes a means of structured data collection geared towards understanding the levels of potential threats, needs and immediately available resources. Assessment includes two general categories of information. The first is relatively static infrastructure information that provides bases for determining the extent of development, types of physical advantages and disadvantages faced by communities residing in an area, and a map of available structures that might be useful in times of emergencies. Who Are the Most Vulnerable? Barusch, Amanda S. (2011), in her editorial on Disaster Vulnerability, and Older Adults: Toward a Social Work Response, discussed the factors that contribute to the vulnerability of older adults in times of disaster. The fact that older adults move more slowly puts them at greater risk of injury and death when disasters hit. Barusch stated that older adults, particularly those with poor health or low socioeconomic status, are more vulnerable to the physical effects of disasters, particularly rapid onset disasters, like tornadoes and earthquakes (NGO, 2011). In a study of mortality patterns revealed during Hurricane Andrew that hit southern Florida, older adults were at disproportionate risk from dying from mechanical asphyxia in their homes and from falls. It was also found that older adults are more likely than younger people to die from cardiovascular causes (Lew & Wetli, 1996). This pattern of higher mortality among the elderly has been observed across a range of disasters (CDC-ARC, 1997). The deaths of older adults can be attributed to the following:

Negligence of professionals charged with their care

Professionals deciding to ease the pain of those elderly facing appalling conditions during disaster. Thus, ending their life.

18 | P a g e

According to S. Yodmani (2001), poverty, as an indicator of lack of access to resources and income opportunities is one of the several dimensions of vulnerability. He stated that in addition to the economic dimension, there are also other aspects of social positioning such as geographical location, age, gender, class, ethnicity, community structure, community decision making processes, and political issues that determine poor peoples vulnerability. Risk reduction strategies for the poor should work toward reducing economic vulnerability and the same time capitalize on the inherent social and cultural capacities of the poor communities. Some of the strategies discussed were the following:

Risk reduction needs to be consciously integrated into the planning and implementation of development.

Recognition of the proneness to natural hazards of each geographical location and the use of available hazard maps to assess risks needs to become an integral part of each project appraisal by development agencies.

Require a multi-dimensional approaches and innovative institutional arrangements to achieve the goal of risk reduction for the poor.

REVIEW OF RELATED STUDIES

According to the Philippine Statistics 1980-2010, the Philippines is a disaster prone country where every year, almost an average of 363 events of various types disasters occurs. Leaving many families vulnerable since no one is spared of its effect. Every year, an average of 3,748, 788 people is affected damaging the houses and source of work of families, and community infrastructure and facilities; hence, result to economic losses, damage in the social environment and extensive disruption on the activities of people. Hazards are occurrences which are unavoidable. However, its consequences and/or effects can be prevented. Enabling affected families to respond to its aftermath can thus protect and save lives. The poor are often those most affected by a disaster, one can identify a particular geographical areas or communities that are predictably under threat from a hazard; these may include traditionally drought-prone areas or flood prone areas. They could be squatter settlement in which housing structures are known to be prone to flood and fire. In a study conducted by the City Government of Makati (CGM), Earthquake and Megacities Initiatives (EMI), German Federal Foreign Affairs Office (DKKV) entitled The Risk Sensitive Urban Redevelopment Plan of Barangay Rizal it was found out that there is a way in reducing the vulnerability of highly vulnerable poor communities. In this case study, Fouad Bendimerad & Nathanial von Einsiedel (2010), used the Risk-Sensitive Urban Redevelopment Approach. This approach combines in a single solution the reduction of risk and the improvements of

19 | P a g e

emergency management capacity with the improvement of the socio-economic and the living conditions of the residents. This approach was little known and largely untested elsewhere by planners. The Risk Sensitive Urban Redevelopment Plan of Barangay Rizal demonstrates how a long-term plan can be developed to guide future development within the ultimate goal of reducing exposure to hazards. The plan was developed using a participatory approach by an integrated team consisting of technical experts, barangay leaders, and representatives of the community and Makati city officials. In this study, Barangay Rizal in Makati City was described as at risk since it sits on the fault, which makes it highly vulnerable to earthquake hazards such as surface rupture, ground shaking, land subsidence, liquefaction and fire following earthquake. According to the Metro Manila Earthquake Impact Reduction Study (MMEIRS 2004), rupture of the fault can cause a magnitude 7.2 earthquake, which has the potential to cause severe damage to approximately 40 % of the total number of residential buildings within Metro Manila, with an estimated 34,000 deaths and 114,000 injuries. Certain portions of the barangay are expected to suffer serious damage due to ground rupture. A rapid visual screening of buildings for seismic vulnerability revealed that at least 1 out of every 3 of the inspected structures may not withstand a seismic event of magnitude 7.2 or higher. (Fernando Germar, Tabassam Raza, and Fouad Bendimerad, Report on Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings for Seismic Vulnerability, Working Paper, Makati Risk-Sensitive Redevelopment Planning Project, Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative, Philippines, June 3, 2009.) Using the participatory approach various stakeholders were involved in all stages of the planning process. A series of planning workshops was undertaken to engage the representatives of the community in the redevelopment process. First, they were oriented on the hazards and their vulnerabilities. Then they were asked to formulate their vision for the community, identify the major problems, and suggest solutions. Then, they participated in the identification of programs, projects and activities, and the validation and acceptance of findings and proposed redevelopment plan. This helped ensure that the plan reflected all stakeholders interests, needs and aspirations. All findings and outputs from the projects were shared and validated with the community representatives. The physical vulnerability of individual structures was done through a Rapid Visual Screening for Seismic Vulnerability of Buildings. This was carried out by means of a sidewalk survey where trained engineers from Makati City filled up a data collection form for each structure based on visual observation supplemented by data obtained from the Citys engineering office. Special attention was also paid to evaluate liquefaction potential.5 A total of 1,150 structures covering 44 blocks in Zones 7, 8, 9, and 10 were surveyed. This constitutes around 94% of the total number of structures (1,229) in the planning area.

20 | P a g e

Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis (VCA) was undertaken to determine the existing conditions that predispose the community to potential socio-economic losses and damages in the event of a disaster. The VCA assessment specifically seeks to identify individuals and households who will be adversely affected by a disaster event, and also identify and assess the capacity of households and the community to respond and recover from a disaster event. The results of the surveys were shared with the community to raise awareness and for educating the community in risk-sensitive re-development. In another study conducted at Barangay Manguin, Dagupan City they studied the Communitys preparedness against perennial flooding. It was demonstrated how the barangay remains the most effective and accessible strategy for disaster risk management. The community are involved starting from the assessment of its vulnerability to the development of a detailed response plan. The said case study was in collaboration with Dagupan Local Government, Center for Preparedness (CDP), the Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC) and USAID. It was led by Mayfourth Luneta (Senior Program Officer and CBDRM Trainer) and Jesusa Grace Molina (Center Coordinator of CDP) in Dagupan. Straddling the seacoast and the eastern margin of the Agno River Delta, Dagupan is the catchment basin of all waters and is also the exit point of all waters to the Lingayen Gulf. The degradation of its ecosystem which makes the river to have a high sediment load; the heavy rainfall leading to the release of water from two major dams (Binga & San Roque) and worse during high tide affects the low-lying delta communities to experience recurrent floods. The city government turned then to its eight high-risk barangays as the mechanism for disaster risk mitigation under and initiative called Program for Hydro-Meteorological Disaster Risk Mitigation in Secondary Cities of South and Southeast Asia (PROMISE). The strategies created were formation of the technical working group of the LGU, capacity building, completion of the disaster risk management plan, reactivation of the barangay disaster coordinating council, formulation of the early warning system and evacuation plan, citywide and community flood response simulation and small-scale mitigation program. Barangay Manguin devised a flood marking system which guides the people on the level of flood alertness by classifying it into colors, white for normal, yellow for alert level, orange for preparatory phase, red for evacuation phase and green for forced evacuation. From this, the people would know the degrees of water depth, then a warning signal are used such as church bells or bamboo sounds. As the water level increases so are the strikes and intervals of the bell sounds. The people would be prepared on what actions to be taken such as monitoring the news, elevating their belongings at home, preparing for candles, batteries, flashlight and medicines, transferring the animals and vehicles to a safer place, prioritizing the children,

21 | P a g e

women and elderlies, waiting for the signal of the barangay disaster council for evacuation and registering their names at the barangay. On the other hand, the barangay disaster council would also keep the LGU alert through updating their reports and activating the transport, evacuation and rescue teams. In the study it was found out that coordination and partnership with the local government as well as building of networks composed of different stakeholders from various sectors is fundamental for material, human and social resource mobilization. In addition, the participation of the most vulnerable sectors or group such as women and children - from risk assessment and planning to implementation - has yielded more risk- reduction measures in response to the felt needs of the community. Lastly, building on indigenous knowledge, skills, tools and strategies toward CBDRM is crucial not only for the success of any undertaking but also to help the people develop self-reliance and a sense of ownership. JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY The UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction emphasizes that the impact of the disaster is heavily influenced by the degree of the communitys vulnerability to hazards. This study analyzes the vulnerability factors of the household residing at Block 465, Groups 1, 2, and 3 to hazards particularly flood and fire. It takes into consideration the social, economic and physical factors --- an important determinant of the communitys vulnerability. This study affirms the community efforts done in Barangay Rizal, Makati for the earthquake preparedness and in Barangay Manguin, Dagupan City for their flood early warning system. The participatory approach that is applied wherein the people get involved the process. It goes to the grassroots level of community organization accentuating the indigenous knowledge and capacities of the people. Such approach is initiated in this research to a certain extent through knowing the peoples common needs and concerns and having their assistance in data gathering and analysis and interpretation of the data. On the other hand, the uniqueness of this study is in the use of focus group discussion (FGD) method wherein we had a deeper understanding of the personal experiences of the respondents. During the said FGD the resiliency of the participants in times of disasters were narrated. Each experience is unique and they were able to highlight its different angles. Furthermore, the bayanihan spirit and their faith enabled them to surpass the challenges that are beyond their capacity.

22 | P a g e

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The Research Methods Used The research method used is Descriptive research which the purpose is to describe and provide us with higher level of knowledge; situated in the middle of the research continuum and survey because in gathering data it helps to uncover data which already exist (the Research in Social Work, p 205- Grinnell, Williams); Descriptive research goes beyond mere gathering and tabulation of data. It also involves the elements or interpretation of the meaning or significance of what is described. Thus description is often combined with comparison and contrast involving measurements, classifications, interpretation and evaluation. (Cited by Sanchez, p. 83 - Calderon) Descriptive Research was utilized to describe the characteristics of socio-demographic and socio-economic profile of the respondents and their community. It is a purposive process of gathering, analyzing, classifying, and tabulating data about prevailing conditions, practices, beliefs, trends, processes and cause and effect relationships and then making adequate and accurate interpretation about such data with or without the aid of statistical methods. Research Locale

This study was conducted at the Block 465, Brgy. Sto. Domingo, Quezon City also known as GK-STC Village (Figure 2: Community Map) which is situated along Maria Clara and Don Pepe Streets. The Block was divided into nine (9) groups based on their location. It was observed that in the community the houses are connected with their walls separating them thus it is a fire hazard. The path walks are too narrow hence has poor accessibility for entry of persons and furniture or big materials. The houses are mostly built 2-3 storeys and highly elevated as it is frequented by floods even just with ordinary rainfall. Residents seem well adjusted to it, does not seem bothered by the situation.

23 | P a g e

Figure 2: Community Map

Source: PRA Report On Social Mapping, Block 465, Maria Clara, Gk-Stc, Bgy. Sto. Domingo, Quezon City, December 27, 2010

Respondents and Sampling Techniques In this study the respondents were limited to the residents of Groups 1, 2 and 3 selected among the 9 groups in Blk. 465 with only 41 households. Due to limited time in conducting the study the researchers opted to focus on 3 groups only. Furthermore, the researchers chose Groups 1, 2 and 3 based on their observation that these groups are the most vulnerable to flood and fire. These groups are the researchers key informants in the survey. He/she may be the spouse who was available at the time of the interview or in their absence, any adult member of the family, their sons/daughter or immediate relatives capable of answering the interview schedule. Likewise, due to time constraints we used purposive sampling technique during the FGD wherein 15 residents were identified and selected with the following criteria: worst disaster experiences; representation of various sectors such as elderly, women, youth and men. Third, most of them are from the groups 1, 2 and 3 and only few are also from other groups in the block.

24 | P a g e

Figure 3: Sketch Map of the Area Surveyed

Source: Drawn by one of the leader in Group 2 (Aling Sion)

Instruments Used for Data Gathering

In measuring the effectiveness and clarity of the items or questions of the instrument a Pre-testing of the interview schedule was conducted. The pre-test was conducted last February 18, 2012 to 10 respondents living (Group 4) in Sto. Domingo area but were not part of our study and those who have the same characteristics of our study.

In this study, the researchers strictly observed that the instrument used in the study is reliable and valid. Items were properly worded to cover the required aspects to be included in order to measure what is to be measured. The instrument (Interview Schedule) was subjected for critiquing by ASI professors. This process was done to ensure that the instrument has content validity.

GROUP 1 (12 respondents)

GROUP 2 (15 respondents)

GROUP 3 (14 respondents)

GROUP 4 (pre-test area)

25 | P a g e

1. An Interview Schedule was formulated for data collection translated in Filipino following

a structured type of interview questions. (See Appendix A: Interview Schedule)

According to author Jose Calderon an interview schedule is the same as a questionnaire. But the difference between an interview schedule and questionnaire is that in the former, the question is read to the respondent for him to answer and his reply is written by the interviewer. In the latter, the respondent himself reads and fills out the questionnaire alone without the aid of the researcher. The interview schedule is used when the researcher or is knowledgeable on all the items to be included in the interview.

The interview schedule used in this study divided into four (4) parts: The Social Situation; Economic Situation; Physical Information; and Disaster Experiences. The interview schedule from Groups 1, 2 and 3 were conducted from February 19 to 22, 2012. (See Appendix B: Tabulated Data)

Community Survey February 19 to 22, 2012

2. A Focused Group Discussion (FGD) was also conducted last March 1, 2012 to gather

qualitative data about the respondents experiences of hazard occurrence. Different sectors of the community were represented during the said FGD held at the residence of one of the Community Leaders. (See Appendix C: Attendees of the FGD) The FGD was held last March 1, 2012 around 8:00 in the evening at Philippine Benevolent Missionaries Association Maria Clara Sub-Chapter Office (3/F of Nanay Sylvias house). There are 15 residents who came to the FGD. We asked them these questions:

(1) What are your experiences when there are hazardous/disastrous events? (2) What have you done to recover from those experiences? (3) What were you thinking and/feeling during those times? (4) How do you prepare for another such event?

26 | P a g e

Data Analysis and Statistics Used

Data Analysis refers to the process of organizing data into logical, sequential, and meaningful categories and classifications to make them amenable to study and interpretation. There are three ways of presenting data: textual, tabular, and graphical. In analyzing and interpreting data, collected information was classified in the light of objectives set forth for the study. The classified data was coded, tabulated and percent calculated for the same. The mean or average was also utilized. The results were presented and discussed along with tables and graphs in numbers and percentages.

27 | P a g e

CHAPTER 4

ANALYSIS, PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

Part 1: Demographic Profile of the Respondents A. Position in the Family

On the data Position in the Family of the Respondents it can relatively be observed that 61% of the respondents were mothers while 19.51% were fathers and 14.6% were either their sons or daughters and the remaining 4.8% were others. Table 2: Position in the Family of the Respondents

Group No. Mother Father Son/Daughter Others Total

1 6 5 1 0 12

2 8 1 5 1 15

3 11 2 0 1 14

Total 25 8 6 2 41

Percentage 61% 19.5% 14.6% 4.8% 100%

B. Gender of the Respondents

Table 3: Gender of the Respondents

Group No. Babae Lalaki Total

1 7 5 12

2 12 3 15

3 12 2 14

Total 31 10 41

Percentage 75.61% 24.39% 100%

The table shows that there are more female than male respondents. The researchers concluded that most of the male residents are at work during the interview.

28 | P a g e

C. Age Bracket of the Respondents

Moreover, the researchers found out that 39% of the respondents fall under the age range of 51 years old and above. 24.39% are 41 to 50 years old. 21.95% are 31 to 40 years old. 9.75% are 21 to 30 years old and 4.87% are 20 years old below. Figure 4: Age Bracket of the Respondents

This means that most of the respondents are elderly who have been in the area for a long time and gave us accounts of their personal experiences in the area such as disaster experiences in Blk. 465.

D. Length of Stay in the Area

Table 4: Length of Stay in Blk. 465, Groups 1, 2 & 3

Group No. 5 years below

6-10 years

11-20 years

21-30 years

31 year & above

Total

1 0 3 0 3 6 12

2 0 2 3 2 8 15

3 1 2 2 2 7 14

Total 1 7 5 7 21 41

Percentage 2.43% 17.07% 12.19% 17.07% 51.21% 100%

29 | P a g e

Based on the collected data most of the respondents are longtime residents. In Group 1, 2 and 3 it is worth noting that 51% have lived in the area almost all their life (31 years and above) while those whove been in the area for 21-30 years and 6-10 years both have 17%. Meanwhile only 2% of the respondents from Group 1, 2 and 3 have lived in area for less than 5 years.

E. Type of Ownership of Residences of the Respondents Table 5: Type of Ownership of Residences of the Respondents

Group No Owner GK

Beneficiary Sharer/

Ext. Family Caretaker

GK Renter

Renter/ Boarder

Total

1 7 0 0 0 0 5 12

2 6 5 1 2 1 0 15

3 4 5 2 0 1 2 14

Total 17 10 3 2 2 7 41

Percentage 41.5% 24.4% 7.3% 4.9% 4.9% 17% 100%

As shown in the table, out of 41 respondents, 20 are homeowners and extended families which mean that around 53% of the residents of Blk. 465 are eligible to become a GK Beneficiary. Another significant figure is the GK Beneficiaries which is 10 families or 28%. It can be concluded that out of 41 respondents around 81% or 30 respondents are homeowners. On the other hand, there are only 2.5% of families with a status of GK Renters while the remaining 16% are either borders or caretakers. It is important to know the type of residence of each family in the assessment of the community vulnerability of Blk. 465. The type of residences will give us some information on the willingness of the residents to undergo community vulnerability risk reduction activities. Part 2: Disaster Vulnerability of the Residents of Blk. 465, Groups 1,2 and 3 A. Social Factors

A.1. Number of Family Members per Household

The data shows that 39% of the total households have at least 1 to 5 family members living in their house while 36.6% have at least 6 to 10 family members and 12% have 21 members and above. On the other hand, only 2.43% have 16 to 20 family members and 9.75% have 11 to 15 family members. The researchers observed that the sizes of their houses are too small to accommodate 21 persons. This could be a problem when conducting disaster rescue in the area.

30 | P a g e

Figure 5: Number of Family Members per Household According to Tierney of Heinz Center (Tierney, et al., 2011 Heinz Center 2002) social vulnerability explicitly focuses on demographic and socio-economic factors that increase or attenuate the impacts of hazard events on local populations. In the study, it was focused on the household size, age, gender, educational attainment, economic means of the respondents as well as the physical features of their houses. The researchers are working into the premise that the composition of the household as well as the greater the number the household size greatly affect its vulnerability.

A.2. Number of Families Living Under One House Figure 6: Number of Families Living Under One House

0

10

20

30

4039

36.6

9.75

2.43

12.19

1-5 6-10 11-15 16 - 20 21 Up

4.87

9.75

19.51

65.85

0 50 100

I family

2-3 families

4-6 families

7 familiesand up

31 | P a g e

With regards to the Number of Families Living under One House it can be observed that most of the households have only 1 family. This is equivalent to 65.85%, while 19.51% have 2 to 3 families, 9.75% have 4 to 6 families and only 4.87% have 7 and above families respectively. The number of families inside a house and the number of family members in a household is a vital indicator on how vulnerable a household during disaster. A.3. Age, Gender and the Number of Men and Women, Children and Elderly Members of the

Household

Table 6: Age and Gender of the Household Members

Group No.

Women Men

Total 0-10 y/o

11 - 17 y/o

18-30 y/o

31-59 y/o

60 Up y/o

Sub-total

0-10 y/o

11 - 17 y/o

18-30 y/o

31-59 y/o

60 Up y/o

Sub-total

1 15 14 27 24 5 85 21 14 14 26 2 77 162

2 15 9 10 18 4 56 15 13 9 11 1 49 105

3 12 13 7 16 4 52 11 10 13 17 5 56 108

Total 42 36 44 58 13 193 47 37 36 54 8 182 375

% 11.2 9.6 11.7 15.5 3.5 12.5 9.9 9.6 14.4 2.1

100

In Table 6, it is evident that there are more females who are 18 to 60 years old than males. On the other hand, there are more males who are 0 to 17 years old. Looking at the total picture, we can see that there are only 21 residents comprising the age bracket of 60 and up years old, which means that out of 375 residents only 5.65% are old people. However, around 30% of the residents are from the age bracket of 31 59 years old, this is also the highest in terms of age bracket, meaning that the communitys age trend is aging4. Moreover, Group 1 has the most number of older people both men and women which means that they are the most vulnerable group when it comes to age consideration of social vulnerability.

There are also more women than men in the community in almost all age brackets except for 11-17 years old. For some residents, this is a problem especially during disaster because women are considered physically weaker than males. Further, they mention that this can be a hindrance in conducting rescue operations. Maskrey (1998) said that for Social Vulnerability, family size, age structure of community, and gender differences should be considered. These considerations were affirmed in the editorial of Amanda Barusch (Pgs.347-350; 2001) wherein she mentioned that older adults move more

4 There are more old people than young people

32 | P a g e

slowly puts them at greater risk of injury and death when disasters hit. Thus, we can therefore say that the greater the number of children, women and elderly the higher is the vulnerability of the community during disasters. A.4. Presence of People with Disability (PWD) and Other Health Related Problem of the

Household

Table 7: Number of People with Disability and with Other Health Related Problem of the Household

Group No. Disabilities Illness

With Disabilities

Without Disabilities

Total With Illness

Without Illness

Total

1 4 8 12 4 8 12

2 3 12 15 5 10 15

3 0 14 14 5 9 14

Total 7 34 41 14 27 41 Percentage 17.07 82.93 100 34.15 65.85 100

The table shows that around 65.85% of their household members are in good health while 34.15% have illnesses. Hypertension, tuberculosis, diabetes and cancer are the common illnesses experienced by the household members. On the other hand the data also shows that 82.93% have no disability while 17.07% have. Disabilities that were observed pertain to sensory disabilities. It was also noted that due to the lack of sufficient finances, most of the household members who suffer from an illness or impairment do not seek medical services. A.5. Educational Attainment of the Household Members Table 8: Highest Educational Attainment of the Household Members

Group No. Elem. HS College Vocational No answer Total

1 4 10 5 0 0 19

2 5 7 4 0 4 20

3 2 5 3 0 6 16

Total 11 22 12 0 10 55

Percentage 20 40 21.81 0 18.18 100

Based on the table, we can see that most household members reached at least reached High School level which is 40% before they stopped their educational pursuit. Next to it is the 22% who answered that they at least entered the college level. This is relatively low if we validate it

33 | P a g e

to the possible number of adult ages 18 - 60 up years old who has a total of 203 (see table 6). Moreover, this also implies that at least 62% of the household members can be trained on disaster preparedness and this can reduce their vulnerability. Table 9: Number of Household Members Currently Studying

Group No. Elem. HS College Vocational No Answer Total

1 6 7 0 1 3 17

2 7 2 1 1 8 19

3 9 9 4 0 6 28

Total 22 18 5 2 17 64

Percentage 34.37 28.12 7.81 3.12 26.56 100

In addition, 62% of the household members in Groups 1, 2 and 3 are currently studying in elementary and high school while only around 11% are in college and or taking up vocational courses. This is relatively low compared to the number of 80 male and females under the age bracket of 18 to 30 years old in Table 6. There are only 8.75% of household members under the age bracket of 18 to 30 years old are studying. Like the previous data, this is relatively low if we validate it to the possible number of adult ages 0 - 17 years old which has a total of 162 (see table 6). B. Economic Factors

B.1. Number of Working/Income Generating Household Member/s Figure 7: Number of Family Income Earners Based on Position in the Family

* Some HH have multiple wage earners

0

10

20

3012

24

12

2

Mother Father Daughter/Son Others

34 | P a g e

The data validates that majority of fathers, are the ones earning to sustain the needs of their families. Some of the mothers and their adult children also have jobs. Most of the household members are self-employed (drivers-tricycles, taxi, store owners), others have blue collar jobs such as in construction, fast foods, and factories. These jobs do not have permanent status and are mostly contractual based. B.2. Average Household Monthly Income and Other Sources of Income Figure 8: Average Household Monthly Income

* Some HH have multiple wage earners

The data shows that most of the families in Group 1, 2 and 3 have 5,000 and below income which is 59.09% this shows that most of the households are earning below the minimum wage. Only 3 out of 44 stated that they are earning 11,000 and up and they are mostly those with spouses working abroad. When asked if they have other sources of income, respondents in Group 2 mostly stated that earn extra doing pangangalakal. The group also encountered a family which resorted into panlilimos just to get by. Whats alarming here is that the parents let their 3 blind children do the panlilimos so they can have some money for the family. In Group 1, which is in-front of the road, most of the houses where converted into commercial spaces (bakery, karinderia, junk shop, and sari-sari stores). They are mostly earning an additional of 500 daily and this is a big difference between group 1 and group 2 & 3 wherein most residents are just earning below the minimum wage

0

20

40

60

59.09

25

9.09 6.8

5000 below 5001-8999 9000-10999 11000 up

35 | P a g e

In-front of the

Road, 26.82%

Inside an

Alley, 73%

If we will relate the data gathered in Figure 9 into Longs study (2007) which states that, people living in poverty are more vulnerable than the wealthy to hazard impacts. Poor people have less money to spend on preventative measures, emergency supplies, and recovery efforts. The monetary value of the economic and material losses of the wealthy may be greater; the losses sustained by the poor are far more devastating in relative terms because they are more likely to live in substandard housing, which can be a major disadvantage when disaster occur, and during disasters, are less likely to have access to critical resource and lifelines, such as communications and transportation. Since majority (59%) of the household in the study said that they are earning below the minimum wage we can say that they are highly vulnerable in this aspect. C. Physical Factors C.1. The Location of Houses The household who participated in this study are either in-front of a road or inside the alleys. However, there is a difference of 46% between those living in-front of a road and those inside the alleys, in favor of the later.

Household living in alleys are more vulnerable than those living in-front of a road since living in-front of a road makes it easier for rescuers to rescue you in times of disasters such as flood, earthquake, as well as during fire. Residents living in-front of a road can escape fire easily while those living in alleys might get trapped or be a victim of a stampede. It is alarming that 73% of these families are living in alleys which make them vulnerable during disasters.

Figure 9: Location of Houses

In addition, Blk. 465 is one big canal underneath it. All the alleys are covered drainage system which is frequently being clogged with garbage and dirt. This makes the whole block vulnerable during flooding.

36 | P a g e

C.2. Type of Materials Used in the Structures Figure 10: Type of Materials Used in the Structures Since most of the residents of Blk. 465 are homeowners and GK Beneficiaries, most of them also have houses made of concrete and wood which is 51.21% however, there are still 29.26% of residents with houses made of wood only. Out of the 12 respondents with houses made of wood, 5 are renters/boarders that are 41.66%. The data implies that most of the houses which is made of wood only is occupied by renters/boarders and not homeowners. In addition, these 5 renters have stayed in the Blk. from 4 to 8 years except for 2 which have been in the area for 16 and 25 years. Most of the houses in Blk. 465 are 2 Storey which is 73.17% this is due to their experience of frequent flood. Next to it are houses with 3 Storey which is 7.3% while 2.4% are still bungalow types (1 Storey) and 4.9% are either 4 Storey or in-stills. C.3. Common Number of Floors of Structures Table 10: Number of Floors of Structures

Group No. 1 Storey 2 Storey 3 Storey Others Total

1 0 9 3 0 12

2 1 10 2 2 15

3 0 11 3 0 14

Total 1 30 8 2 41

Percentage 2.43% 73.17% 19.51% 4.9% 100%

Concrete 19.51%

Wood 29.26%

Combination

51.21%

Conrete Wood Combination

37 | P a g e

Although, most of the houses are already 2 Storey they said that their houses were all submerged into flood water during Ondoy. Most of the residents stayed in their roof or the roof of their neighbors while some were in their 3rd or 4th floors. Some houses in Group 2 were in stills, there were at least 3 houses wherein their first floor is just vacant space, when I asked why they said that it was ruined during Ondoy and they did not repair it anymore. This findings in Table 10 reaffirmed the findings in the study Global Crisis Solutions Understanding Vulnerability Ensuring Appropriate and Effective Response which emphasized that disaster is heavily influenced by the degree of the communitys vulnerability to the hazard wherein the long-term factors, weaknesses or constraints that affect a household's, community's or societys ability (or inability) to absorb losses after disasters and to recover from the damage. It has two interacting forces: the external force, which is exposure to shock, stress and risk; and internal force, which is defenselessness, in other words a lack of means to cope. Residents who are not doing well economically, suffered both the external and internal forces. Part 3: Disaster Experiences of the Residents of Blk. 465, Groups 1, 2 and 3 A. Type of Hazard Commonly Experienced by the Residents All forty one respondents related that flooding is the most common hazard occurrence in the area. For the past five years, theyve related their experience during Ondoy which submerged the whole Blk. 465 in flood. They also experienced fire which is one of the reasons why Gawad Kalinga (GK) entered in their community. This happened last 2004. The respondents seldom experience earthquake in the area. In relation to the definition of Maskrey (1998), communities can be considered hazard prone locations when they are located in flood plain or a coastal location exposed to cyclones. In the situation of Blk. 465 the community is the catch basin of waters coming from Talayan Creek along Araneta Avenue making them vulnerable to flood. Table 11: Type of Hazard Experienced by the Residents and the Year It Occurred

Year Occurred earthquake Flood Fire Total

1 5 Years 0 41 6 47

6 10 Years 3 17 15 35

11 Years Up 3 16 0 19

Total 6 74 21 101

Percentage 46.53 34.65 18.81 100 * Some respondents have multiple disaster experiences

38 | P a g e

Figure 11: Severity of the Hazardous Experiences

51% of the residents said that they experienced disasters with very severe wherein they need to evacuate. However, the same respondents also answered that they experienced flooding every time there is a one hour non-stop rain. So, they are not particularly alarmed. They have acquired a particular routine or practice during flooding which is to go up to their roof and wait for the water to subside. Some expressed that they enjoyed the flood experience because the bayanihan spirit is evident. B. Findings of the Focus Group Discussion B.1.Common Hazard Occurrences and Experiences Experiencing flood is such as regular occurrence that the residents became fairly resistant on the matters of flooding. The regular experience on flooding is the reason why the residents of Blk. 465 are not afraid of flood nor they felt vulnerable because of it. Aside from flood, fire is one of the most common hazard occurrences in the block. The FGD attendees said that they can remember two big fires incidence which happened in 1976 and 2004. Although, the participants of FGD said that their area is not really prone to fire because if there is fire the residents always helped each other to stop it before it gets big. However, the 2004 fire which happened during daytime was a different story; nobody noticed it right away because the house where the fire started did not call for help.

39 | P a g e

During the FGD last March 1, 2012, the 15 residents who came were able to relieve their experiences during disaster. Most of them said that the Flood they experienced during Ondoy was the worst because it caught them off-guard. They did not expect that their houses will be submerged into water. Likewise, most of them said that they were able to get by with a little help from their neighbors. A few of them mentioned that during the times of tragedy/calamity like the fire in 2004 and the flood in 2009 those neighbors who they never thought cared about them were the ones who actually provided them with shelter, clothes, food, water and other basic supplies. In the words of Ms. Nita Quintos lumalabas ang Bayanihan Spirit sa lugar namin pag oras ng kagipitan. B.2. Practices During Hazardous Events Most of the participants of the FGD narrated that during flood they first, secure their material possessions by transferring them to the upper floors of their houses. Then, they wait inside their houses and if the flood water would not subside, then, they stay in the upper floors of their houses or their neighbors. If the water continues to rise, they would eventually transfer to the roof where they will eventually be rescued. For fire, they mentioned that they are not worried, since they try to put it off before it gets big enough for them to stop it. Moreover, the typical reaction of the FGD participants during fire is that they try to save as many material possessions as they can and if they cant, they just make sure that their loved ones are safe. B.3. Thoughts and Feelings During Hazardous Events The state of mind of the FGD participants during the 2009 flood were mixed, although most of them were in a panic state there were also some who stayed rational and calm. They were the ones who helped and rescued others. While during the fire in 2004, it was mentioned by one of the FGD participants that most of the fire victims were angry. The center of their anger is towards the family wherein the fire started. B.4. Mitigation Practices In the span of the FGD, the participants did not identify any measures done to reduce their vulnerability in times of flood and fire. Their only precautionary measure is to lift all their things up to the second or third floors of their houses when it is raining.

40 | P a g e

To further understand the feelings and experiences of the attendees of the FGD when they are relating their experiences during various hazards, here are some of their personal experiences: C. The Flood Experience Boyet Papa said that was the worst flood he ever experienced in their area. He said that he rescued his family first and then helped his neighbors. They lost all their belonging and yet he was thankful to have his family alive and well. The loss of economic means was also experienced by Primo Licaunan which narrated how he was not thinking straight because of the flood and rescued the cigarettes instead of other more important merchandise in their store. He also said that his panic did not helped at all, when he saw that his appliances are floating, he was in awe and just stared since he knows that he cannot do anything anymore. Gina Austria also mentioned that flood affected their food business since most of their pots were gone. She mentioned that even though their house had a third floor it was too late to save all their belongings. According to Lourdes, she cannot forget the major disaster experiences she have in the area, which happened almost every ten (10) years. She narrated: nagsimula nung 1976, mga August yon, kabuwanan ko nun eh, nagkaroon ng baha hanggang baywang, ung kapatid kong lalaki hila-hila ako hanggang makarating sa Sto. Domingo Church, dun kasi ung evacuation area namin, naalala ko kasi ung anak ko nagkaroon ng pneumonia dahil magdamag nababad sa tubig. Tapos nun, mga bago mag-1986, binaha ulit kami. Naalala ko marami kaming alagang baboy, kaya ung Tatay ko gumawa ng bangka para mailagay ung mga baboy, pero din man kasya lahat ng baboy kaya marami rin ang nawala, mabababa pa ang mga bahay nun kasi dati bawal ang mataas na bahay dito, kapag nakikitang merong nagtatayo ng bahay dito pinagigiba ng Tuazon-Araneta, sila kasi ang may-ari nitong lupa dati. Di pa na-award to nung mga panahon na yon sa amin. Tapos, nung 1996 naman tuwing nagkakaroon ng baha merong amphibian truck na ginagamit para ma-rescue kami, ngayon wala na yon eh, sa krame yata kasi yon, hinihiram lang. 2009, nitong Ondoy, pakiramdam ko end of the world na, kasi nasa bubong kami kasi inabot na ng tubig ang second floor ng bahay namin, tumingin ka sa paligid mo sa ibaba makikita mo baha, tumingin ka sa bandang simbahan makikita mo nagliliyab na apoy, kasi nasusunog ang Brgy. Tatalon. Wala na ko nagawa nun kundi manalangin, kasama ng mga apo ko. Makikita mo mga tao talaga nagsisigawan na, kasi walang naming nagre-rescue. All in all during the Ondoy, there was one casualty, a young man died due to drowning. As learning to this experience, Primo Licaunan said that ngayon tuwing makikita ko na madilim ang langit, tapos nagsisimula ng umulan, inililipat na namin ang mga gamit naming sa taas ng bahay.

41 | P a g e

D. The Fire Experience Nanay Lourdes remembered that during the 2004 fire incidence her mother was already paralyzed and she cannot do anything seeing that the fire is already in their house, she just put her mother in a wheel chair and get out of the house there is no material property she rescued but at least they are all alive. On the other hand, Ate Belen shared that although she was not at home during the 2004 fire, still, she cannot forget that tragedy. She was devastated to go home and found only the remnants of their house. She narrated further that the source of the fire was the vacant lot beside them, until now that lot was vacant because the previous owner cannot come in Blk. 465 without being physically assaulted by the residents. They all have a feeling that the fire wouldnt be that big if they did immediately asked for help, what happen is that they did not asked for help and only when the fire was big enough did that nobody can stop it did they left their house and run. Nanay Sion narrated a little funny story that during the 2004 fire when her daughter called saying, Nanay, Nanay umuwi ka na at andito na sa atin ang sunog umuusok na ang bahay sa takot ko tinakbo ko pabalik ang Sto. Domingo, tapos ng malapit na ko may nakasalubong akong kapitbahay tinanong kung san ba ang bahay ko sabi ko sa likod nina Primo, tapos sabi nya ahhh, malayo naman di kayo abot. Sabi ko hay salamat sa Diyos di nya ako pinabayaan alam nya wala akong pangpagawa ng bahay..Pagdating ko buo pa ang bahay ko, tapos naalis pa ang hika ko sa pagtakbo kong yon. After the 2004 fire, the non-government organization (NGO) Gawad-Kalinga (GK) came to the community and helped the residents reconstruct not just the houses but the community itself. With the help of another partner, the St. Therese College (STC) the area known as Block 465 was transformed to STC-GK Village. Now, there are 43 families which is GK beneficiary in the area. They are planning to build more 3-storey building this coming summer along the Group 1 area (front) of the block. E. Bayanihan Spirit During Disaster E.1. Bayanihan Spirit During Flood During Ondoy, the Bayanihan Spirit became apparent. Boyet Papa mentioned that after making sure that his family is safe he started going around their community to help other families. Boyet is a reserve army member and have some technical know-how on do disaster rescue. Boyet narrated an unforgettable experience which is when he was able to rescue a newborn baby. Nilagay ko silang mag-ina sa palanggana tapos inalalayan ko ung palang