[OPINION] Next decade of Philippine climate action set in new but incomplete NDC

It is true that we need to secure finance, technologies, and means for capacity-building from developed countries. Yet the impacts of the climate crisis would not stop affecting our economy and society if we just wait for developed countries to fulfill their obligations.

AT A GLANCE

• The Philippines has updated its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) to reduce climate pollution by 75% from 2025 to 2035, with 7% being unconditional.
• Despite the need for international support, the country must prioritize national sustainable development and increase funding for nature-based solutions, which are currently underfunded compared to infrastructure projects.
• The government has been slow to transition away from fossil fuels and lacks transparency on the implementation of previous climate pledges, highlighting the urgency for effective climate action and a commitment to a low-emissions future.

This is AI-generated. Read the article for full context. Report any errors.

If our nation got P1,000 every time someone in government mentioned that the Philippines is one of the most climate-vulnerable countries, maybe this country would not be in so much debt.

But the risk we face due to the climate crisis is real and of serious concern. If the past few weeks of flooding or extreme heat — depending on where you live — have not made that apparent, then look at what has happened to our country in the past year or two alone. Or look at Nepal or Indonesia or Antarctica — or almost anywhere else in this world.

This should make us wonder: what is the vision for our response to the climate crisis, especially as we also continue to pursue sustainable development?

On September 8, we got our answer to that question with the publication of the Philippines’ updated Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), our pledge for climate action as part of the Paris Agreement.

The positives

Compared to a “business-as-usual” scenario, the new NDC sets our target for reducing climate pollution by 75% between 2025 and 2035. Of this figure, 7% is unconditional — meaning no foreign assistance is needed to implement climate solutions — from energy efficiency and conservation and some nature-based solutions (NbS) like reforestation.

It is true that we need to secure finance, technologies, and means for capacity-building from developed countries. This is not just because we do need these resources, given the enormity of the problem; it is because those countries are the ones who polluted the world the most on their way to achieving high-income economy status, causing the climate crisis. Polluters must pay.

Yet the impacts of the climate crisis would not stop affecting our economy and society if we just wait for developed countries to fulfill their obligations. We still need to pursue national sustainable development — which necessitates a higher unconditional target. 

Is the proposed 2027 national budget actually prioritizing these unconditional climate solutions? If the Marcos Jr. administration truly prioritizes the climate agenda — which the President claimed at the start of his term — then this must be reflected in every national budget until 2035.

Look at our NbS, for example. Using all government-led actions under the third thematic area of our National Climate Change Action Plan as the basis for the scale of its funding, the 2026 funding for NbS is 28 times lower than for climate-tagged new roads, bridges, and other gray infrastructure. It is also five times lower than the ASEAN benchmark for the NbS-to-public expenditures ratio.

A big part of the higher target is due to the full integration of the forestry and other land use sector in the updated NDC, unlike the first version. How much more signs does the government need to invest public funds in ecosystem protection, conservation, and restoration?

The negatives

You might ask yourself — why does the Philippines need to decrease its climate pollution? 

Yes, we do not emit as much pollution as the rich countries. But to paraphrase what a lawmaker said once, the cost of inaction is greater than the cost of action now. 

The Philippines has been playing catch-up to the rest of its ASEAN neighbors and the rest of the world on many aspects of development — from public transport to renewable energy. Every climate extreme that hits our country — and there is still a Super El Niño headed our way — forces us to spend more on response and rehabilitation instead of investing in these areas that lead to climate-resilient development that also creates green jobs and ensures food, water, energy, and human security.

This is why implementing the NDC matters. This is why we need to decarbonize as a country.

Yet there are many challenges to which the government has not properly responded, despite calls from civil society groups in recent years.

Among these is the lack of a strong commitment to transitioning away from fossil fuels (TAFF). The national government has refused to join a global coalition of the willing to initiate an approach that everyone will have to do anyway. It has even eased restrictions on the coal moratorium under the guise of advancing projects it considers nationally significant.

The impacts of the war in the Middle East — higher oil prices, inflation in other goods and services, disruptions in work and schooling, among others — should have already taught us the lesson of making the TAFF choice. Instead, the country remains on the path to an energy sector dominated by fossil fuels — which has given us high electricity bills and alerts of different colors on our energy supply.

Sooner or later, the Philippine government will make the TAFF choice. It should have been sooner.

The benchmark

There are still many questions left unanswered in this process of updating our climate pledge. How much of the first NDC submitted in 2021 has been fully implemented? How much would it cost to implement it?

Failing to provide these critical pieces of information is, at the minimum, arguably considered neglect of the national government’s responsibilities in addressing the climate crisis. This is established under the 2025 International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion on climate change, which is politically reaffirmed through a United Nations General Assembly resolution passed this year — one that the Philippines itself voted for.

These global decisions reinforce the 1.5°C warming limit as the benchmark with which we assess whether our government is doing enough to address the climate crisis. Yes, that threshold will be exceeded in at least the next few years, largely because developed countries failed to do what is right.

Yet this should make our country more determined to enact a just transition toward a low-emissions, climate-resilient nation, where no one is left behind. That can start with properly implementing our NDC.

After all, no matter how ambitious a promise is, climate action speaks louder than words. – Rappler.com

John Leo Algo is the national coordinator of Aksyon Klima Pilipinas.