Sparing Over Volcano Evacuees

The ongoing conflict between the Office of Civil Defense (OCD) and local government units (LGUs) in Negros Occidental over the handling of Kanlaon Volcano evacuees puts to fore a glaring systemic flaw: the lack of sustainable local funding for disaster response.

The standoff highlights not only the challenges of balancing safety and practicality but also the dependence of LGUs on national support during crises.

The OCD has been firm in urging mayors of Bago City and La Castellana to retain evacuees in shelters, citing heightened volcanic activity and the risk of pyroclastic density currents (PDCs).

However, the mayors argue that residents outside the six-kilometer danger zone should return home to ease the financial and logistical strain on local resources. The disagreement exposes a broader issue: LGUs are often left to bear the brunt of disaster response with inadequate resources, while national agencies struggle to align local actions with overarching safety protocols.

At the heart of the problem is the financial burden. Maintaining evacuation centers, providing food and water, and addressing the health and psychological needs of evacuees require substantial funding. Local officials have voiced frustration over the lack of clear and immediate financial support from the national government. Negros Occidental Governor Eugenio Jose Lacson pointed out the staggering PHP 15-billion monthly cost of maintaining “Tent Cities,” a figure that far exceeds provincial and municipal budgets.

While the lack of funds is a pressing issue, questions also loom over how LGUs manage the distribution of aid to evacuees. Reports of uneven or delayed aid distribution raise concerns about potential misuse of funds or corruption. Oversight mechanisms must be in place to ensure that every peso allocated to disaster response is spent efficiently and transparently. Regular audits and community involvement in monitoring aid distribution can help prevent irregularities and build trust between local officials and the affected population.

This dependence on national funds for disaster response highlights the need for a more sustainable framework. Current practices rely heavily on top-down decision-making, often sidelining the practical realities faced by LGUs. For instance, while the OCD insists on extended evacuations, local officials must contend with limited budgets, mounting frustrations among evacuees, and the risk of eroding public trust.

Breaking this impasse requires structural reforms that prioritize collaboration, financial sustainability, and accountability. Here are some actionable recommendations:

1. Increase Local Disaster Funds: Congress should mandate a significant increase in the local disaster risk reduction and management fund (LDRRMF). Allocations should be proportional to the vulnerability and population of an area, enabling LGUs to independently sustain evacuees for extended periods.
2. Expedite National Fund Releases: National agencies must streamline processes for releasing financial assistance to disaster-hit areas. Bureaucratic delays exacerbate local frustrations and hinder timely action. A preemptive fund transfer mechanism could ensure that LGUs have immediate access to necessary resources.
3. Strengthen Local-National Coordination: Establishing clear, evidence-based evacuation protocols is critical. These protocols should involve input from both local officials and national agencies like PHIVOLCS and the OCD. Joint planning can address scientific concerns while considering the practical challenges on the ground.
4. Promote Pre-Disaster Resilience Programs: Investing in long-term solutions, such as pre-identified relocation sites and durable shelters, can reduce the need for prolonged evacuations. In areas like La Castellana, where relocation sites are already identified, the national government should expedite funding and logistical support.
5. Ensure Aid Transparency: LGUs must adopt clear and transparent processes for aid distribution. Public disclosure of fund allocations and expenditures, supported by third-party audits, can prevent corruption and ensure equitable distribution of resources.
6. Foster Community Participation: Evacuation decisions and aid distribution should be transparent and involve community leaders. Empowering residents with clear information about risks and the reasoning behind evacuation measures can improve compliance and reduce dissent.

This situation also underscores a critical reminder for policymakers: disaster management is not just about immediate responses but also about building systems that empower LGUs to act decisively and ethically. Without financial autonomy, clear protocols, and oversight mechanisms, local governments are left in an untenable position, forced to navigate a delicate balance between safety and sustainability.

Ultimately, the safety of evacuees must remain the priority. Both the OCD and LGUs should approach this crisis as a collaborative effort rather than a jurisdictional battle. The stakes are too high for disunity. Lives hang in the balance, and only a unified, well-funded, and transparent response can mitigate the worst outcomes of Kanlaon Volcano’s unrest.