Mindanao as seen from space.

Taken on December 12th:

Cagayan de Oro before the December 2011 flood.

Taken on December 19th:

Cagayan de Oro after the December 2011 flood.

Most of the land surface changes happened near the shoreline, near rivers and on populated areas (I encircled those changes). These are the same locations where most deaths and injuries were reported.

Changes occured near shorelines.

What is also very clear from the images, which others may have not seen, are the browning of the mountain slopes (not posted here). What have our Philippine officials been doing to stop the deforestation in the area? Denuded forest would always lead to killer floods. With Cagayan de Oro and Iligan cities situated on low-lying areas, without any doubt vulnerable to flooding, local officials must have known this beforehand. Or maybe not. Or maybe they do, but they just turned a blind eye on the issue. May this calamity awaken the minds of our public officials and, much more, agonize the conscience of those who are involved in illegal activities that have ravaged our forest!

We can never turn back time. We can never bring back to life the more than 1500 people (via Associated Press) who died in that horrific flash flood on December 16th. We can only hope that this will never happen again.

But now may not be the right time to blame. There are thousands of homeless survivors who need help. This is the moment that we Filipinos unite and share our love and care to those affected by the tragedy.

Have you already donated? Visit the Philippine Red Cross and share your blessings.

Note: I did not post the Iligan images here. Also, you can share this article and the link, but please ask my permission, through the comment section, if you intend to use the subset images and the map I made. Thanks.

The Philippines is ranked 18th regionally and 94th overall, down eight places since the last edition, with a weaker performance across most areas measured by the Index. Among the country’s strengths are aspects of its natural resources: it is ranked 24th for the number of World Heritage natural sites and 40th for the total known species in the country. The Philippines also benefits from excellent price competitiveness (ranked 20th), with low prices overall, particularly hotel prices, and low ticket taxes and airport charges. There are also some aspects of the policy rules and regulations regime that are conducive to the development of the sector, such as few visa requirements for foreign visitors (ranked 3rd) and bilateral Air Service Agreements that are assessed as comparatively open (29th), although other areas— such as the protection of property rights, rules related to foreign investment, and the difficulty of starting a business in the country—remain a challenge. Other matters of concern are safety and security (ranked 109th); health and hygiene levels (97th); and transport, tourism, and ICT infrastructures that require upgrading.

This is a screenshot of the table showing the Philippines’ overall ranking breakdown in each qualifying category. Which one did the country score low?

And see how the Pilipinas fares among all Asia Pacific countries.

Why are we going down the ranks? The Philippine government should really look into the business environment and improve our infrastructure. These are the areas were we scored so low.

The State of Peace Map

Here is where we stand among the bottom countries (with average scores):

125 – Honduras – 2.395
126 – Turkey – 2.420
127 – Ethiopia – 2.444
128 – India – 2.516
129 – Yemen – 2.573
130 – Philippines – 2.574
131 – Burundi – 2.577
132 – Myanmar – 2.580
133 – Sri Lanka – 2.621
134 – Lebanon – 2.639
135 – Zimbabwe – 2.678
136 – Central African Republic – 2.753
137 – Nigeria – 2.756
138 – Colombia – 2.787
139 – North Korea – 2.855
140 – Democratic Republic of the Congo – 2.925
141 – Chad – 2.964
142 – Georgia – 2.970
143 – Russia – 3.013
144 – Israel – 3.019
145 – Pakistan – 3.050
146 – Sudan – 3.125
147 – Afghanistan – 3.252
148 – Somalia – 3.390
149 – Iraq – 3.406

Here’s more. The Philippines is one of the top 5 fallers in the 2009 GPI.

1. Cyprus – Rank: 76
Change in score 2009-10: 0.276
Change in rank 2009-10: -25

2. Syria – Rank: 115
Change in score 2009-10: 0.225
Change in rank 2009-10: -18

3. Philippines – Rank: 130
Change in score 2009-10: 0.247
Change in rank 2009-10: -10

4. Georgia – Rank: 142
Change in score 2009-10: 0.234
Change in rank 2009-10: -3

5. Russia – Rank: 143
Change in score 2009-10: 0.264
Change in rank 2009-10: -2

The Philippines’ slide in the GPI rankings to 130th position echoes rises in the country’s indicators of internal conflict and crime. Several regions experienced a worsening security situation in 2009. A violent conflict between the Islamist Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG) and the government centered on Sulu, in the southwest of the Mindanao archipelago, escalated, with 163 conflict-related fatalities in 2009, compared with 82 during the previous year. The ASG continued to use kidnapping to raise its profile and hostages as bargaining tools. An ongoing contretemps between the Communist Party of the Philippines and its military wing, the New People’s Army (NPA) and the government remained violent and peace talks, initiated by Norway, were postponed.

Perceptions of criminality in Filipino society rose to a score of 4, defined as “high levels of distrust in other citizens”. Violent crime is high in many districts and armed guards are routinely deployed to defend private property. Kidnap-for-ransom is also a high risk, especially among the ethnic-Chinese community, which is perceived as wealthy and willing to pay a ransom to secure the release of an abducted relative. The homicide rate escalated, according to UNODC, and the proportion of the population in jail ratcheted up in 2009 to a score of 3 (fairly high, by regional standards).

I selected some of the peace indicators and checked how we fared (ranked 1-5: very low-very high):

Number of external and internal conflicts fought – 3/5
Conflict is defined as a contested incompatibility that concerns government and/or territory where the use of armed force between two parties, of which at least one is the government of a state, results in at least 25 battle deaths in a year. Source: Uppsala Conflict Data Program.

Relations with neighbouring countries – 2/5
Qualitative assessment of relations with neighbouring countries.

Number of deaths from organised conflict (internal) – 3/5
Number of battle deaths from internal conflict, which is defined as a contested incompatibility that concerns government and/or territory where the use of armed force between two parties, of which at least one is the government of a state, results in at least 25 battle-related deaths in a year.

Political instability – 2.75/5
Qualitative assessment of the political instability within the country. It addresses the degree to which political institutions are sufficiently stable to support the needs of its citizens, businesses and overseas investors.

Potential for terriorist acts – 4/5
Qualitative assessment of the potential for terrorist acts within a country.

Number of homicides per 100,000 people – 3/5
Intentional homicide refers to death deliberately inflicted on a person by another person, including infanticide.

Likelihood of violent demonstrations – 4/5
Qualitative assessment of the likelihood of violent demonstration within the country.

Some others indicators:

Electoral process – 8.33/10
Qualitative assessment of whether elections are competitive in that electors are free to vote and are offered a range of choices. Ranked 1- 10 (very low to very high).

Functioning of government – 5/10
Qualitative assessment of whether freely elected representatives determine government policy? Is there an effective system of checks and balances on the exercise of government authority? Ranked 1- 10 (very low to very high).

Political culture – 3.13/10
Qualitative assessment of the degree of societal consensus and cohesion to underpin a stable, functioning democracy; score the level of separation of church and state. Ranked 1- 10 (very low to very high).

Civil liberties – 9.12/10
Qualitative assessment of the prevalence of civil liberties. Is there a free electronic media? Is there a free print media? Is there freedom of expression and protest? Are citizens free to form professional organisations and trade unions? Ranked 1- 10 (very low to very high).

Corruption perceptions – 2.4/10
The Corruption Perception Index draws on multiple expert opinion surveys that poll perceptions of public sector corruption scoring countries on a scale from 0 – 10, with 0 indicating high levels of perceived corruption and 10 indicating low levels of perceived corruption.

Women in parliament – 21%
Percentage of the total number of representatives in the lower house. Figures are based on information provided by national parliaments.

Freedom of the press - 38.25/100
The index measures the state of press freedom in the world, reflecting the degree of freedom journalists and news organisations enjoy in each country, and the efforts made by the state to respect and ensure respect for this freedom.

Current education spending (% of GDP) – 2.53%
Public spending on education, total (% of GDP).

Adult literacy rate (% of pop over 15) – 93.6%
Data refers to national literacy estimates from censuses or surveys.

Willingness to fight – 3/5
Qualitative assessment of the willingness of citizens to fight in wars. Ranked 1- 5 (very low to very high) by EIU analysts.

Unemployment % – 7.5 %
ILO defines the unemployed as members of the economically active population who are without work but available for and seeking work, including people who have lost their jobs and those who have voluntary left work.

There were some points where we rated good enough, but there were more points where we rated way, way low.

And the most peaceful countries? New Zealand is ranked as the country most at peace for the second consecutive year, followed by Iceland and Japan.

Here are the top 10:

1 - New Zealand - 1.188
2 - Iceland - 1.212
3 - Japan - 1.247
4 - Austria - 1.290
5 - Norway - 1.322
6 - Ireland - 1.337
7 - Denmark - 1.341
7 - Luxembourg - 1.341
9 - Finland - 1.352
10 - Sweden – 1.354

It is also very surprising to know that the United States has been ranked 85 out of 149 countries.

So what is next for us? Only our elected officials will know. President Noynoy Aquino, please do something with this!

The email spam says:

We strongly oppose the passage of the Reproductive Health Bill (HB5043) for the following reasons:

1. AS EMPLOYERS, we do not want to be compelled to provide free reproductive health care services, supplies, devices and surgical procedures (including vasectomy and ligation) to our employees, and be subjected to both imprisonment and/or fines, for every time that we fail to comply. (Section 17 states that employers shall provide free delivery of reproductive health care services, supplies and devices to all workers more particularly women workers. – Definition of Reproductive Health and Rights Section 4, paragraph g, Section 21, Paragraph c and Section 22 on Penalties).

There is nothing wrong with this. Employers are just afraid to spend more money for their women or men workers! Reproductive health services are essential to the general health and human development of the employees. Having said that, employers must also promote the need for appropriate guidance and training, if necessary, in utilizing these services. Maybe, provide a forum for the exchange of ideas and experiences within the organization. Maybe, form a group to strengthen employees’ education on population, reproductive health and gender issues.

2. AS HEALTH CARE SERVICE PROVIDERS, we do not want to be subjected to imprisonment and/or a fine, if we fail to provide reproductive health care services such as giving information on family planning methods (outside the natural family planning methods) and providing services like ligation and vasectomy, regardless of the patient’s civil status, gender, religion or age (Section 21 on Prohibited Acts, Letter a, Paragraphs 1 to 5 and Section 22 on Penalties)

If there is a good reason not to provide services, health care providers can do that. The bill states: “Provided, That all conscientious objections of health care service providers based on religious grounds shall be respected: Provided, further, That the conscientious objector shall immediately refer the person seeking such care and services to another health care service provider within the same facility or one which is conveniently accessible: Provided, finally, That the patient is not in an emergency or serious case as defined in RA 8344 penalizing the refusal of hospitals and medical clinics to administer appropriate initial medical treatment and support in emergency and serious cases.”

3. AS SPOUSES, we do not agree that our husband or wife can undergo a ligation or vasectomy without our consent or knowledge (Section 21 on Prohibited Acts, Letter a, paragraph 2)

If two people love each other, why would a wife or husband undergo a ligation or vasectomy without the consent of the other, in the first place? I also believe reproductive health is a human right — that each one has the right to reproductive health information and services and to impartiality in reproductive decision-making and issues of sexual health.

4. AS PARENTS, we do not agree that children from age 10 to 17 should be taught their sexual rights and the means to have a satisfying and “safe” sex life as part of their school curriculum. (Section 12 on Reproductive Health Educaiton and Section 4 Definition of Family Planning and Productive Health, Paragraphs b, c and d)

Why not? Like parents, schools are the next most capable entity to teach sexual rights to kids. Article 24 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child affirms that children have the right to attain the highest standards of health and to health care, including family planning education and services… Parents and teachers must help educate the young minds before these teens discharge their rights and responsibilities of adulthood.

5. AS CITIZENS, we do not want to be subjected to imprisonment and/or pay a fine, for expressing an opinion against any provision of this law, if such expression of opinion is interpreted as constituting “malicious disinformation” (Section 21 on Prohibited Acts, Paragraph f and Section 22 on Penalties)

Is there Section 21 on Prohibited Acts, Paragraph f? Wrong citation and people are even signing up for this campaign without reading the bill! Anyway, I believe that everyone must try to understand the law — information sharing and collaboration are necessary to send the right message across. Authorities must ensure that the right approaches to reproductive health care are developed and implemented.

6. We also oppose other provisions such as losing our paternal authority over a minor/child who was raped and found pregnant (Section 21, a, no. 3)

Why need paternal authority when parents or relatives were usually the ones abusing the child? Part of the bill that was missing in this argument but very important “…abused condition is certified by the proper official or personnel of the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD)…” In 2003, the UN committee that monitors the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, affirmed: “States Parties should provide adolescents with access to sexual and reproductive information, including on family planning and contraceptives, the dangers of early pregnancy, the prevention of HIV/AIDS and prevention and treatment of STIs. States Parties should ensure access to appropriate information regardless of marital status, and prior consent from parents or guardians.”

7. We also do not agree to the provision which reclassifies contraceptives as essential medicines (Section 10) and appropriating limited government funds to reproductive services instead of basic services (Section 23)

Why disagree? Did someone ever think that maybe the meaning of ‘medicine’ is different in this bill? What other names will you suggest instead? The names or terms should never be an issue here in the first place, shouldn’t they?

Thus, we urge you to immediately stop deliberations on the bill and stop wasting taxpayers money.

Ridiculous arguments and without substance! These people should think of the increasing population in the country. This is one of the ways to curb massive population growth. Why could we not just help provide the necessary information and services to people deficient of it and help them exercise this right in the most effective manner? Why could we not just help the government in assuring the highest level of quality of health care provided?

I don’t think the Philippine Reproductive Health Bill is an evil that will tear Christians apart. We should see the full spectrum of the information and services it can offer before we cast the stone and throw the bill to the bin.

If you want to sign and join the campaign to oppose the passing of the bill, please read the full text of House Bill No. 5043 first. Maybe after that, you will understand better what you are actually signing for.

According to the research company FreshMinds, there were 23 factors used to rate each country, with more than 3,100 expatriates surveyed between February and April 2009. Each factor was weighted to arrive at a score. Scores were integrated and the final eight measures were selected. The measures were: organizing school for my children, organizing my finances, organizing my health care, finding somewhere to live, making friends, making local friends, setting up utilities, and joining local community groups. Based on these criteria, the top 10 World’s Friendliest Countries were revealed:

1. Bahrain
2. Canada
3. Australia
4. Thailand
5. Malaysia
6. South Africa
7. Hong Kong
8. Singapore
9. Spain
10. United States

If you are a traveler, your reactions to the positioning of the 10 countries would be, most likely, hinged on the experiences you had in the country. If those experiences were hostile, far to being memorable and better left forgotten, then finding that country in the top 10 is a huge surprise. But wait, your experience may just be an exception rather than the rule. The percentage of significance of what you went through may have likely to have occurred by chance and may never happen to someone else. Then your case is isolated and, thus, saying that the U.S. should not be on the list because you happened to stumble upon one rough and noisy American, for instance, is insignificant.

I could not dispute nor approve, beyond doubt, the listing of the top 10 countries, since I have not been to all of them. Out of the ten, I have only been to 5. There were good and bad side for each. As an expatriate, I would rank a couple of them lower than the other countries I used to live in that are not found on the list. I would have placed the Philippines among the top 5 ‘friendliest’, had I ranked the countries myself.

The Philippines is nowhere to be found, sadly. We, Filipinos, may argue about how hospitable we are. But call to mind that the survey wasn’t about how friendly we are in our OWN eyes. The survey was about our country’s “friendliness” in the eyes of the expats. The friendliness was not defined alone by the smiles we share to them when they walk in sleeveless and shorts on our busy sidewalks nor the cordial atmosphere we tend to present when they ask for directions — the definition deflected more towards the aspect of security of family, of health and of business.

Applause. The Philippines should be perfect 10s for ‘making friends’ and ‘making local friends’, but painfully receiving failing marks for the other measures. Six out of eight is not enough to place us on top. Others say that some countries on the list have people speaking foul languages in public places (could even be a common sight and a no-no for what is supposed to be a friendly place), nevertheless, they are efficient in the banking, postal services, transport sectors, that is why they easily stole the top places.

Bahrain may have ranked bottom low (#20) in ‘Making Local Friends’ but placed at no. 1 for both ‘Joining Community Groups’ and ‘Organizing My Health Care’ and third in ‘Organizing My Finances.’

Canada ranked 2nd. Among the 8 measures, the country is lowest in ‘Making Friends.’ However, what Canada is deficient of, it compensates itself with the rest of the factors that were related to the quality of life (note: Unfortunately, the Philippines lack most of these factors to be classified as ‘friendly’).

Look at our neighbor Thailand. In areas ‘Joining Community Groups’ and ‘Organizing My Finances’, the country that we think is most likely be at our level, ranked low. But it placed at no. 1 in ‘Making Friends’ and ‘Finding Somewhere to Live’ and no. 2 in ‘Organizing My Health Care.’ Do we think the Philippines could be better than Thailand in those parameters?

If we look at the rankings of the United States in all of the 8 measures, we see that they were not impressive at all or at a standard where we can call a ‘friendly’ country. Still the U.S. is positioned at no. 10.

Making Friends – #15
Making Local Friends – #7
Joining Community Groups – #4
Organizing School For My Children – #12
Organizing My Finances – #24
Finding Somewhere To Live – #10

So imagine where the Philippines is actually positioned. If the U.S. can score this low, then where are we on the scale? Where are the ‘friendly’ South American countries, by the way?

The survey may have lacked a valid data or the proper sample size, so we should not take the results as conclusive. Besides, we (from the 195 countries in the world) all have differing opinions that it is difficult to find a common ground to agree on, especially when it comes to ranking our individual country.

We should see this survey as a guide to improving the quality of life in our specific neighborhood. It starts from there. We look at the 8 measures — organizing school for my children, organizing my finances, organizing my health care, finding somewhere to live, making friends, making local friends, setting up utilities, and joining local community groups — and see were we can help to cultivate ‘friendliness,’ directly or indirectly. And what we cultivated should grow as a driving force — to pressure people running our public offices to make the necessary actions.

We Filipinos should not do this to impress the expats. We aim to be the world’s friendliest country because, in the end, it would still be for the best of us.

Shhh, we still have the friendliest of smiles. Let us be happy about it.