________________________________________________________Attaining the MDGs and Sustainable Growth with Equity
patterns of production and consumption resulting from the frenzied drive to achieve economic growth by governments. In spite of the rapid growth however, regional review of the MDGs reveals that poverty and hunger are far from being eliminated. The Philippines is facing three broad environmental challenges: [1] urban air and water pollution; [2] natural resource degradation; and [3] declining quality of coastal and marine resources. These are otherwise known as brown, green, and blue agendas. The first set of challenges, or brown agenda, refers to pollution caused by industrial, urban, transport and energy sources and the measures to address them. Air quality has been declining in Metro Manila and key urban centers. Water quality in rivers and coastal waters has been in parallel decline due largely to increasing solid and hazardous waste generation and improper management. The second, or green agenda, includes environmental impacts caused by agriculture, deforestation, land conversion and destruction of protected species and the conservation measures intended to address them. A sound land use plan could help arrest the decline of forest cover, loss of critical habitats and biodiversity, and land degradation. The third, the blue agenda, refers to all forms of water resources management. Water supply and demand is increasingly unable to meet the needs of a growing population, especially in urban areas. Watersheds, which are being degraded faster than they could be regenerated, badly need policy and management measures. Coastal and marine resources continue to decline despite, or because of the poor implementation of, the fisheries code. There is no shortage of policy and legislation on sustainable development in the Philippines. The principles of sustainable development have been laid down in the Philippine Strategy for Sustainable Development (PSSD) of 1990 and the Philippine Agenda 21 (PA21) of 1996. The inconsistencies between these landmark documents and development plans at all levels remain a major concern. Medium-term development plans (MTPDP) and local development plans are basically plans for growing the economy, not sustainability plans that will deliver social and environmental justice. The policy-action gap has been widening. While laws addressing urgent environmental issues such as those on clean air, water, ecological solid waste management, GMO and biosafety, etc. are already in place, the implementation have been snagged in implementation bottlenecks, financing foremost among them. Environment indeed ranks low in government priority. The budget of Department of Environment and Natural Resources has not even figured as government’s Top 10 agencies -- a sad indication of lack of appreciation to the environmental crisis and its implication to sustainability. To add insult to injury, its limited budget has often been used to support unsustainable human activities. In the face of these pressing concerns about the country’s environmental sustainability the Alternative Budget Initiative is forwarding a proposal that will pursue the IMPERATIVES OF (ecological footprint). Where a country’s footprint exceeds its own biocapacity, it is said to be running at an “ecological deficit.” The ecological footprint methodology is a conservative estimate of environmental pressures - human activities such as extraction of non-renewable resources, toxic pollution and species extinction are not incorporated in the model
2008 Alternative Budget Initiative
25