North Luzon Monitor

North Luzon

Remembering the Philippine Agenda 21

Valred Olsim
Latest posts by Valred Olsim (see all)

Before the celebrated 17 Sustainable Development Goals, there is the Philippine Agenda 21 (PA21). This was launched on September 26, 1996, and was written in response to the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, integrating social development into the country’s governance framework. PA21 focuses on investments in human and social capital, health, population management, and human settlements, while addressing poverty in communities across various ecosystems.The consultative process allowed the resulting agenda document to stand as a collective expression of the nation’s agenda vis-à-vis sustainable development broadly conceived to include human development. This mission for sustainable development in the Philippines is intended as a collective undertaking of all sectors of society.

The Philippine Agenda 21 lays down fifteen principles, including the primacy of developing the human potential, holistic science and appropriate technology, cultural, moral and spiritual sensitivity, self-determination, national sovereignty, gender sensitivity, peace, order, national unity, social justice, participatory democracy, institutional viability, sustainable population, ecological soundness, bio-geographical equity, community-based resource management, and global cooperation. Said principles are all centered in human-centered development which should be holistic and sustainable.

Almost three decades from its inception, the Philippine Agenda 21 has been praised as an ideal set of ideal goals in the developmental dreams of the current millennium, but also criticized as an ineffective hodgepodge of copied motherhood statements which, in reality, are easily bypassed by the priorities of traditional politicians, and counter-productive bureaucracy. Just like many countries, the Philippines, in general, did not fare well in the accomplishment of these goals. A report by the Civil Society Counterpart for Sustainable Development cited the following observations: a.) Economic, environmental, and social problems have persisted and even worsened (e.g., population growth, social disparities, pollution, deterioration of the environment, etc.)  b.) New challenges and risks have been compounding the already fragile state of the environment and the economy c.) Changes in priorities and approaches of the administrations after 1998 have relegated the importance of ‘sustainable development’ as a guiding principle.

Although much of these principles of the Philippine Agenda are integrated in National and Local development plans, critics will point out the evident current situation of our country which lacks basic social welfare programs, rapid and destructive urbanization and population growth, devastation of forests and natural resources, and even economic and environmental injustices – “res ipsa loquitor”

The report also concluded that the Philippine Agenda 21 (PA21) was full of promises and sent a powerful message, but when it came down to the country’s economic goals and governance, it “became a weak advocacy.” Said Economic goals should translate into reduced poverty incidence, however a report by the ADB states that economic growth did not translate into poverty reduction through the years. Key Findings as to the causes include; Weak government capacity or system in implementing poverty reduction programs, and that Governance and institutional constraints remain in poverty response (Asian Development Bank, 2019). With these evident scenarios, would it be fair to conclude that government itself did not put to heart the directional plans and polices that are grounded on the principles of the Philippine Agenda?

Regardless of the said criticisms, a guide map for the nation’s directions and goals is necessary and should be in place. However, if the Agenda should serve as a blueprint for the nation’s sustainability, then perhaps it should have laid out an order or prioritization of implementation; ranking the quest to ending poverty at the top and with it preserving the life and dignity of the Filipino. This is because the country cannot have sustainable communities or developed cities without looking into the quality of life of its individual members. Looking at it on a holistic sense, the Economic gains should also translate into more socio-development programs addressing poverty as this remains to be a huge gap in the last decades.

The Philippine Agenda 21and its principles introduced the heart of the said direction and developmental goals which is “Sustainable Development”. Sustainable development features holistic sustainable practices and principles that addresses not only the needs of the present, but of the future. Achieving sustainable development is a formidable task, driven by political, economic, cultural, environmental, and global forces. Regardless of any criticism on its “alleged” pretentious appearances of the Agenda, and its current failure, the country needs a roadmap to achieve its goal of Sustainable and Holistic development towards the end of the century. Hence, the country should revisit its original directions, and look inward to its core to steer it back to the soul of its Agenda in this century.

References:

Asian Development Bank. (2019). Poverty in the Philippines: Causes, Constraints and Opportunities. In Asian Development Bank. Asian Development Bank. https://www.adb.org/publications/poverty-philippines-causes-constraints-and-opportunities

Civil Society Counterpart for Sustainable Development. (2012). Draft report: Philippine Rio+20, country paper (civil society organization). Manila, Philippines: Lingkod Tao-Kalikasan. Retrieved from http://lingkodtaokalikasan.org

Rio in Retrospect: The Philippines and Global Agenda 21. (2023). Psdn.org.ph. https://www.psdn.org.ph/agenda21/rio001.html

Philippine Agenda 21: Setbacks and hopes for the future* – Anna Velas-Suarin. (n.d.). Retrieved February 12, 2024, from https://annasuarin.com/philippine-agenda-21-setbacks-and-hopes-for-the-future/

Scroll to Top