Natural Disaster Research Report of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 45 ; February, 2011

Representations over a Tropical Storm Disaster andthe Restoration of Everyday Lives for Urban Poor Victims in the Philippines− The Case of Typhoon Ondoy −Akiko WATANABE*, Tadashi NAKASU**, and Takashi INOKUCHI****Toyo University, Japanakiko_w toyo.jp**
International Centre for Water Hazard and Risk Management under the auspices of the UNESCO,
Public Works Research Institute, Japant-naka55 pwri.go.jp***
Disaster Information Laboratory,
National Research Institute for Earth Science ant Disaster Prevention, Japan
inokuchi bosai.go.jp

Abstract
In this paper, the urban poor victims of a natural disaster caused in the Philippines by Typhoon Ondoy in September of2009 are examined. Focus is put on the steps taken before the disaster and restoration period of the marginalized peopleof Metro Manila as well as the way these people conduct their everyday lives. Whenever a natural disaster occurs in
the Philippines, there is the belief that natural disasters are the act of God and that both the rich and poor suffer damage
equally. However, this conceals the awkward truth of the social structure in the country; the poor are more vulnerable, lessprivileged, and have little access to resources, as proven by the Ondoy disaster. In this paper, the author describes how
these marginalized people dealt with the typhoon and what practices were seen during the restoration phase.
Key words : Philippines, Ondoy, Urban poor, Everyday lives, Community, Resettlement

1. Introduction
Two tropical storms, named “Ondoy” (also known as“Ketsana”) and “Pepeng” (Parma), hit urbanized areas ofManila and Baguio over a short period of time in September
and October of 2009. The calamities caused by Ondoy alone
totaled nearly 300 lives and affected 3.1 million people
within Metro Manila and its suburbs, resulting in the biggest
devastation of the past forty years (850 lives were claimed
and 7 million homes were flooded in Luzon). The urban poor,
who constitute half the population of Metro Manila, were thevictims most affected. Yet, what seemed peculiar with Ondoy
was that the rich and middle class also suffered. What was
the real situation, how did the media report this and createddisaster conception, and above all how did the poor respondto this?
In this report, the author focuses on the process and content
of the media coverage together with the steps taken before thedisaster and the restoration period of the marginalized urban
people, and the way these people conduct their everyday
lives. The author analyzes newspaper articles and other news
sources to illustrate the discourse used by the media, looking
into two months worth of articles from the Philippine Daily
Inquirer (PDI) after the disaster from these consecutive
tropical storms. The author chose the PDI as it is the mostinfluential and most read English newspaper in the country
amongst all social classes*1). The paper is also connected to
one of the two biggest broadcasting networks and thus shares
the same news sources and tone of argument. On top of these*1) A survey conducted by Synovate, the market research arm ofAegis Group Plc., in July of 2007 found that among more than
1.34 million Filipinos who read English newspapers and belong to
the ABCD classes in Greater Manila, 46% read the PDI, 44% the
Manila Bulletin, and 36% the Philippine Star. Yet it is hard to saythat the PDI is an indicator of public opinion since not all the classes
can read English and afford buying copies everyday.

*

Hakusan 5-28-20, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 112-8606, Japan
Minamihara 1-6, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 305-8516, Japan***
Tennodai 3-1, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 305-0006, Japan**− 81 −

Natural Disaster Research Report of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 45 ; February, 2011

materials, the author’s experiences in fieldwork from 1996 up
to 2010 are referred to here.
2. Ondoy: a Great Equalizer?
In the early stages of the disaster, the PDI called Ondoy
a “great equalizer.” With the headline “No rich, no poor for
Ondoy’s onslaught,” a writer tells the story of a middle-classresident who was surprised to see that the water was near
the second floor since “this is a middle-class subdivision”(Lopez, 2009), indicating the expectation that upper-classsubdivisions should not be affected by such natural hazards.
In another article, it was stated that the “flooding madeno distinction between the rich and the poor.” It included
the story of a woman, working in the Supreme Court, whoshowed anger for not being saved by rescue choppers. One
survivor said that it reminded her of the biblical story about
the Great Flood and Noah’s Ark” (Andrate et al., 2009).
An article published a week after the disaster contained aheadline declaring that “Ondoy” was a great equalizer. In it,
the writer stated, “the rich in their gated communities sufferedjust as much as the squatters in their shanties” (Cruz, 2009).
Seeing the tone of the arguments put out by the PDI, awriter for Bulatlat, a pro-human rights internet newspaper
based in Metro Manila, claimed that the blame should be putupon the system, not the weather:
The newspaper was attempting to bolster the view that theFilipino class system had nothing to do with the disasters,
and that the lives of all Filipinos are shaped by the sameforces of nature, even by fate or by God (Boehringer,2009).
Admittedly, nearly one-third of Metro Manila was coveredby the flood, including Magallanes Village (a high-end
residential district). The flood caused Provident Village,
a middle-class subdivision located in the interior of theinverted S-curve of the Pasig River, to suffer more than 50
fatalities (Yap et al., 2009)*2). However, the great majorityof the victims were the marginalized people living in urban
shanties built along canals, riverbanks, and lakeshores. The
onslaught of the flood, caused by nearly a month’s worth ofrain falling within six hours, swept away what little materials
they possessed and, above all, confined or washed away theirfamilies as well (Yap, 2009).
The amount of suffering cannot be equal between the rich,or rather, the middle-class and the poor. The material loss was
not the same in that the higher class could recover their losses*2) The blame for the disaster in Provident Village fell on the developerof the subdivision which neglected the geographical risk of flooding
as well as the authority that gave permission in order to enact a highresidential land tax instead of the low tax placed on idle land. See
Marcy Racelis, “‘Ondoy’s message,” PDI, Oct. 20, 2009.

through insurance coverage. For the poor, the loss of work
tools was a debt on their shoulders that they had to pay back.
In a Bulatlat article by Ellao, a man had to pay his company
for damaged work tools worth 100,000 pesos, while he wasearning only 7,000 pesos a month (Ellao, 2009a).
The difference between the two was that the poor weremore vulnerable, less privileged, and had little access toresources. During evacuation, many did not leave their houses
in fear of losing their properties from looters, or because
they thought that leaving the house meant dispossessing
it since they were squaring off with the authorities over
the occupation of land (Yap, 2009). They did not hearprecautionary safety information such as when or where to go,
especially the newcomers (Salamat, 2009). These newcomers
did not comprehend most, if any, of the information, as
some of them, new migrants, could not understand Tagalog
but instead spoke a different mother tongue*3). The poor did
not have stable houses able to withstand being submerged.
They did not have ways to call for help such as by telephoneor internet, nor did they have a big network of family andfriends. They were not influential enough to receive help from
authorities like the police and military (Presse, 2009)*4).
Instead, what the poor had were “informal arrangements”(as opposed to “formal arrangements” by the government
and from international support), which the Ondoy victims
sought help from (Jimenez-David, 2009a). Support extended
from family, friends, and social networks is vital for people intheir everyday lives, not to mention during hard times. Thisstrong social network, however, is generally not seen in othersocial strata. During this disaster, however, a quite a numberof the middle class people offered to help, such as by giving
materials and opening their residences as temporary shelters(Andrate et al., 2009, Cabal et al., 2009, Kwok, 2009). The
media commended this action and spirit of volunteerism, andone reporter commented that “The capacity of the Filipino torise above himself, to think of others before self, in times ofdisasters has been noted again and again, and for good reason,
which is that the Filipino does it again and again” (Quiros,2009).
Greg Bankoff, the author of “Cultures of Disaster” (2003),
writes that the exposure to centuries of repeated disasters
had affected the behavioral patterns of the Filipinos, and*3) For example, not all migrants such as Muslims from the southern
Philippines could speak Tagalog, as armed conflict in their homeland
had prevented them from schooling. Some came to Manila in order
to work abroad for their means of survival. On of the problems
affecting Muslims are that they might have difficulties in evacuation
center due to food restrictions from their faith.
*4) Military speedboats came to rescue the residents of Magallanes
Village as early as the day the flood hit Manila, whereas slow
governmental action was taken in other areas. See, Alison Lopez,“No rich, no poor for Ondoy’s onslaught,” PDI, Sep. 27, 2009.

− 82 −

Representations over a Tropical Storm Disaster and the Restoration of Everyday Lives for Urban Poor Victims in the Philippines − A. WATANABE et al.

that this has cultivated the Filipinos’ sense of bayanihan*5)(spirit of cooperation and volunteerism). Bankoff also noted
in a forum held at a university in Baguio in July of 2009 that“bayanihan would be important in understanding how thePhilippines could become the model for the world’s disasterrisk management” (Cabreza, 2009).
A week after the disaster, according to the geologist’s
findings, the blame was put upon these informal settlers,
nevertheless much of the victims were the urban poor
(Tandoc, 2009) *6). Owing to this, those 107,139 families
living in the danger zone would be relocated to the placeoutside of the capital region (Burgonio et al., 2009). The
marginalized living along waterways are not to be allowed
to return and will instead be relocated. They are considered
as inutile existence nevertheless of their functional role in a“highly unequal society” of the metropolis (David, 2009). A
prominent sociologist Randy David quotes:
These communities are an abundant source of inexpensive
house help, drivers, gardeners, handymen and private
security personnel. Politicians tolerate and coddle thembecause of the votes they represent. They themselves do
not see the danger to which they are exposed, or, if they do,they tend to minimize these while highlighting the benefits
they derive from living under such circumstances. Everysociety thus settles down to a way of life, where danger
is normalized and risk becomes more or less calculable(David, 2009).
Thus, living near their sources of income but in thedanger areas is a survival strategy for these societal “others.”
Needless to say, they would not voluntarily live in a place
like the danger zone, which is the only place where people intheir position can survive, as there are no other places to livein the city that they can afford.
3. Resettlement and Restoration
With the help of local governments, the administration is
instituting a program for returning to one’s residence called
Balik-Bahay, a program for returning to one’s province
called Balik-Probinsiya, and a program for relocating
informal settlers to relocation sites in Laguna Province, Rizal
Province, and those in other nearby provinces (Labro, 2009,
Ellao, 2009b, Cinco, 2009). In the Balik-Bahay project, afamily will be given 1,000 to 2,000 pesos, and in the BalikProbinsiya program, travel fare will be granted to those who*5) Bayani means hero. In the Philippines, Jose Rizal, a martyr for
the independent revolution, is regarded as a national hero. Today,
overseas workers are called “bagong bayani” in recognition of theirsacrifice for their family.
*6) Although both squatters and subdivisions bore the brunt of thefinger-pointing, only the squatters have become the target of
relocation.

enroll in the program (Ellao, 2009b).
These measures are not new to the government. Together
with postwar reconstruction, Manila faced rapid urbanization
caused by an excessive population influx as early as the
1950s. In response to the overpopulation in the growing slumareas, the government attempted to push migrants back totheir provinces by implementing a Balik-Probinsiya programwith little effect since the migrants later moved back to thecity. From the 1960s to the late 70s, these informal settlers
were relocated to danger zones such as riverbanks andgarbage dumps and to vacant public and private land. The
government put up four relocation sites outside of Manila andtransferred these slum residents. However, as Starke pointed
out, before long nearly one-third had moved back to theirprevious dwelling sites, again making a living in a dangerous
place (Starke, 1996).
There are other troubles as well. Based on the author’s
short-term observations from 1996 to 1998 in the Sapang
Palay relocation site in San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan
Province, the breakup of families and bigamous marriages
were among the serious problems faced by the residents
since the fathers lived alone in the city apart from the family
for work. On top of these difficulties and abandonments,
the administration showed a lack of consideration to therelocatees by relocating them to places lacking social andmaterial infrastructures such as food, water, health services,
schools, sanitation, street lights, cheap transportation, andjob opportunities. They were relocated at random without
any consideration to the relationships from their previous
residences. From these lessons, the trend for dealing withslum dwellers no-wadays shifted to non-transferring solutions
such as on-site upgrading and community mortgage programs
coordinated by NGOs.
Even though resettlement was inevitable, merely 300
families were relocated among the 500,000 on the list asof mid-October 2009. Women are expected to play a morecrucial role in rebuilding efforts (Bordadora and Papa,
2009). Jimenez-David writes that women organize theirneighborhoods and communities for the long haul ahead:
Men soon have to return to the urgent task of survival;
women keep an eye on the future, aware that their efforts
today will affect their children and grandchildren (JinemezDavid 2009b).
In relocation-site societies especially, since men are likely
to move back to the cities in order to make money, thepresence of women will increase.
When conducted fieldworks in the aforementioned site in1997 to 1999, the author noticed that a majority of barangay(barangay means village; the smallest administrative unit
in the Philippines) counselors, auditors, treasurers, health− 83 −

Natural Disaster Research Report of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 45 ; February, 2011

workers, and leaders of sitio (sitio means “neighborhood
community”) were consisted of women 30 to 70 years ofage. These women mentioned that their spouses were either
deceased or working in Manila but returning only on theweekends. Indeed, Metro Manila was a two-and-a-half hourbus trip from their residences. These women were mobilizingneighborhoods to implement support projects, organize
Christmas and sports festivities, and hold religious activities,
thus involving children and youth to participate in community
strengthening. Gaillard, who studied volcano victims in thePhilippines, also supports my findings. In his paper, Gaillard
states that even if people are relocated, they choose to go
back to their place of origin if their social lives do not bringa sense of attachment to the land prior to economic security
at the relocation site (Gaillard, 2008). A women’s role, thus,
becomes more vital in reinforcing a sense of community.
4. Conclusion
In this report, the author tried to look into the disaster andhow people perceived it by analyzing periodic articles from anewspaper and a journal. In the early period of the onslaughtof the tropical storm Ondoy, the media was claiming thatboth the rich and poor experienced the same suffering, thus
bringing mythical conception of the disaster. Eventually,
it became clear that the conditions between the two weredifferent; the poor suffered more due to material damage anda lack of information resources, among others. Moreover,the poor, who reside and work out of the danger zone, wereblamed for exacerbating the disaster, while the rich, including
the policy makers, have a need for their manpower. Lateron, the articles gradually shifted on the relocation of theurban poor from the danger zone. Yet, anxiety toward theinequalities and instabilities of the socio-economic situation
still remain even if the poor are to be moved to the outskirtsof the metropolis.
The measures and policies of resettlement have becomea mainstream issue in dealing with slums and squatters,
and they have yielded results to certain extent. Still, forthe families, it is much more favorable to live in a slum.
One factor why relocation will take time is that a qualified
relocation site needs to be constructed (Dizon, 2009), andanother is hesitation from those living where relocationsites are based who fear raising crime rates in these areas(Cinco, 2009). In the meantime, the society will likely find,as has been the legacy of the Philippine government, thatthese resettlement programs will be overshadowed by otheremergent and more prioritized issues and thus postponed as
future projects.
Yet, assuming that the social welfare of these people would
be enhanced, it would be desirable to bring up the voicesof the masses to foster sustainable development. Now thatnearly half of the population of Metro Manila is living under

the poverty line, we have to know what sort of life, society,and relationship these marginalized people are attempting toreconstruct.
References
1) Andrade, Jeannette et al. (2009) : Survivors seethes withanger. Philippine Daily Inquirer, Sep. 28.
2) Bankoff, Greg. (2003) : Cultures of Disaster: Society
and natural hazard in the Philippines. Routledge Curzon,
Taylor & Francis Group: London and New York.
3) Boehringer, Gill H. (2009) : Class and Ondoy: The
Philippine Daily Inquirer’s ideological distortions.
Bulatlat, Oct. 23.
4) Bordadora, Norman and Alcuin Papa. (2009) : Metrosquatter relocation to cost P32B. Philippine Daily
Inquirer, Oct. 19.
5) Burgonio et al. (2009) : Arroyo: 3 to-do things now:
Gargbage, etc.. Philippine Daily Inquirer, Oct. 9.
6) Cabal, Stef et al. (2009) : What is your ‘Ondoy’ story?.
Philippine Daily Inquirer, Oct. 3.
7) Cabreza, Vincent. (2009) : Calamities shape ‘bayanihan’culture. Philippine Daily Inquirer, Oct. 6.
8) Cinco, Maricar. (2009) : Marikina flood victims moved
to Laguna. Philippine Daily Inquirer, Oct. 12.
9) Cruz, Neal. (2009) : ’Ondoy’ was great equalizer.
Philippine Daily Inquirer, Sep. 30.
10) David, Randy. (2009) : Blind-sided by disasters.
Philippine Daily Inquirer, Oct. 10.
11) Dizon, Nikko. (2009) : ‘Ondoy’ victims’ relocation totake a year-DSWD chief. Philippine Daily Inquirer, Oct.
10.
12) Ellao, Janess Ann J. (2009a) : Tales of woe from those
who had it worse. Bulatlat, Oct. 2.
13) Ellao, Janess Ann J. (2009b) : Ondoy survivors at ultra
victimized twice over. Bulatlat, Nov. 1.
14) Gaillard, Jean-Christophe. (2008) : Alternative paradigmsof volcanic risk perception: The case of Mt. Pinatubo in
the Philippines. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal
Research, 172 (3-4) : 315-328.
15) Jimenez-David, Rina. (2009a) : ‘Ondoy’: Counting costs
and blessings. Philippine Daily Inquirer, Oct. 9.
16) Jimenez-David, Rina. (2009b) : Listen to the voices ofwomen. Philippine Daily Inquirer, Oct. 10.
17) Kwok, Abigail (2009) : 5 years for Marikina village torecover. Philippine Daily Inquirer, Sep. 30.
18) Labro, Vicente. (2009) : Eastern Samar to launch backto-province program. Philippine Daily Inquirer, Oct. 12.
19) Lopez, Allison. (2009) : No rich, no poor for Ondoy’s
onslaught. Philippine Daily Inquirer, Sep. 27.
20) Presse, Agence France. (2009) : Woman finds mom 3days after flood. Philippine Daily Inquirer, Oct. 5.
21) Racelis, Mary. (2009) : ’Ondoy’s’ message. Philippine− 84 −

Representations over a Tropical Storm Disaster and the Restoration of Everyday Lives for Urban Poor Victims in the Philippines − A. WATANABE et al.

Daily Inquirer, Oct. 10.
22) Quiros, Conrado de. (2009) : Astonishing. Philippine
Daily Inquirer, Oct. 6.
23) Salamat, Marya. (2009) : In Marikina, Ondoy Shatters aMyth. Bulatlat, Oct. 2.
24) Starke, Kevin. (1996) : Leaving the Slums: The
Challenge of Relocating the Urban Poor. Pulso
Monograph No. 16. Institute on Church and Social

Issues. Manila: Philippines.
25) Tandoc, Edson C. Jr., (2009) : Geologist blames floods onsquatters, subdivisions. Philippine Daily Inquirer, Oct. 3.
26) Yap, DJ (2009) : Dad’s lament: ‘I wish I had died withthem’. Philippine Daily Inquirer, Oct. 1.
27) Yap, et al. (2009) : ‘Why didn’t she listen?’ Death tollhits 246. Philippine Daily Inquirer, Sep. 30.
(Accepted : November 25, 2010)

Map：Locations of Disaster-affected Areas Sited in Articles.

Note: Red pins indicate the urban poor areas, blue pins indicate the upper and middle class villages andsubdivisions, and the yellow pins indicate indistinct places.
Source : Pins placed by the author with courtesy of Google Maps.

− 85 −