% Score % Score

0.00% 1 0.00% 4
5.00% 2 5.00% 3
10.00% 3 10.00% 2
20.00% 4 20.00% 1

H Hazard/Likelihood Score Risk = HEV, where V = S/Ac

E Exposure Score SevCon = EV
S Sensitivity Score
Ac Adaptive Capacity Score
V Vulnerability Score (Sensitivity and Adaptive Capacity)
SevCon Severity of Consequence Score (Exposure and Vulnerability)
R Risk Score

Indicative Likelihood of Occurrence Scores

Measures of
Return Period in Years Likelihood Score
Likelihood
Frequent Every 1-3 years 6
Moderate Every >3-10 years 5
Occasional Every >10-30 years 4
Improbable Every >30-100 years 3
Rare event Every >100-200 years 2
Source: Reference
Very rare event Manual on Mainstreaming Disaster
Every >200 years Risk Reduction and
1 Climate
Change Adaptation in the Comprehensive Land Use Plans Report, NEDA-HLURB-UNDP
,2012

Magnitude Score

Susceptibility Intensity Hazard Magnitude Description

Score
Highest possible
High 1.5m and above 1
intensity

Hazard has 66%

intensity
Moderate 0.5-1.5m 0.66 compared to the
highest possible
intensity

Hazard has 33%

intensity
Low 0.5m and below 0.33 compared to the
highest possible
intensity

Vulnerability Score
 Vulnerability Index Vulnerability Score Description

<=0.5 0.25 Very low

vulnerability

<=1 0.5 Low vulnerability

Moderate
<=2 0.75
vulnerability

<=4 1 High vulnerability

Risk Scores

Severity of Consequence Score (EV)

Indicative Likelihood Likelihood of
of Occurrence Occurrence Score Very High High Moderate
4 3 2
Frequent
6 24 18 12
(1-3 Years)
Moderate
5 20 15 10
(4-10 Years)
Occasional Slight
Chance 4 16 12 8
(11-30 Years)
Improbable 3 12 9 6
(31-100 Years)
Rare 2 8 6 4
(101-200 Years)
Very Rare
1 4 3 2
(>200 Years)
>12 High Risk Areas
5-12 Moderate Risk Areas
5< Low Risk Areas
 % Score
Low 4
Moderate 3
High 2
Very High 1

ere V = S/Ac
core (EV)
Low
1

1
 HAZARD

Barangay Classification Likelihood of

Flood Susceptibility
Occurrence Score

General classification or use of the

area (fisheries, agriculture, livestock, Low, Moderate, High Anecdotal Account
forest plantation, etc.)

Low 3
Fishery Moderate 4
High 5
Low 3
Agriculture Moderate 4
High 5
Marcila
Low 3
Livestock Moderate 4
High 5
Low 3
Forest plantation Moderate 4
High 5
San Nicolas
Tagumpay
Turda
 NATURAL RESOURCE-
HAZARD

Total Barangay
Flood Depth Magnitude Score Varieties produced
Area Allocation

Magnitude scores are

≤1m for moderate and relative to the Total land area per Existing crop and fish varieties
Low magnitude of the classification in a given and forest products being
≤1m for high highest level of hazard barangay produced (specify)
category (see Scoring
tab)

>1m 0.33 100 Bangus, Tilapia

>1m 0.66 100 Bangus, Tilapia
>1m 1 100 Bangus, Tilapia
>1m 0.33 200 Rice
>1m 0.66 200 Rice
>1m 1 200 Rice
>1m 0.33
>1m 0.66
>1m 1
>1m 0.33
>1m 0.66
>1m 1
High (1) - Highest possible intensity

Moderate (0.66) - Hazard has 66%

intensity compared to the highest
possible intensity

Low (0.33) - Hazard has 33% intensity

compared to the highest possible
intensity
 NATURAL RESOURCE-BASED EXPOSURE DATABASE AND RISKS BY BARANGAY AND BY TYP
EXPOSURE

Affected Value Exposure Score

Average output per Affected Area Exposure
(PHP) for Affected
hectare (PHP) (Hectares) Value Percentage

Calculated land area Exposure Score for

Annual production output per exposed to a hazard Average output/ha Affected Value Total brgy agricultural
hectare area (GIS-derived ) X affected area (optional) area ÷ affected area

200000 5 1000000 1 5.00%

200000 10 2000000 1 10.00%
200000 3 600000 1 3.00%
125000 40 5000000 1 20.00%
125000 20 2500000 1 10.00%
125000 10 1250000 1 5.00%
0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0!
Y BARANGAY AND BY TYPE OF SUSCEPTIBILITY
SENSITIVITY

Percentage of affected areas

Exposure Score
Average Exposure Total Number of without irrigation facilities (for
for Affected Dependent HHs
Area Score agricultural croplands and
or Families to ricelands)
affected areas

Exposure Score Estimated number of

proportion of HHs dependent on Percentage of affected
affected area Sum of exposure scores natural resource- areas with out Sensitivity
(<10%, 10%-20%, divided by 2 (optional) based production irrigation facilities Score
20%-40%, >40%) areas

1 1 10 n/a
2 1.5 20 n/a
1 1 6 n/a
2 1.5 20 100.00% 4
2 1.5 10 100.00% 4
1 1 5 100.00% 4
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! n/a
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! n/a
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! n/a
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! n/a
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! n/a
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! n/a
 SENSITIVITY

Percentage of affected areas

Percentage of owners/areas not Average
without water impounding (for Percentage of dependent HHs with
employing sustainable production Sensitivity
agricultural croplands and techniques Score access to alternative livelihood
ricelands)

Percentage of
Percentage of affected owners/areas not Rounded up Est. percentage of
areas with out Sensitivity employing techniques such Sensitivity average dependent HHs with
irrigation facilities Score as climate proofing, using Score sensitivity access to alternative
climate resistant crop score livelihood
varieties, etc.

n/a 50.00% 4 4 50.00%

n/a 50.00% 4 4 50.00%
n/a 50.00% 4 4 40.00%
20.00% 2 30.00% 3 3 30.00%
30.00% 3 30.00% 3 4 40.00%
50.00% 4 30.00% 3 4 40.00%
n/a 1 1
n/a 1 1
n/a 1 1
n/a 1 1
n/a 1 1
n/a 1 1
 ADAPTIVE CAPACITY

Percentage of affected areas Percentage of production areas

e of dependent HHs with
covered or protected by hazard covered by post-disaster economic
o alternative livelihood mitigation measures/structures protection

Percentage of areas
covered or protected by Percentage of areas
Adaptive hazard mitigation Adaptive covered by post-disaster Adaptive
Capactity Score measures (e.g. slope Capactity Score economic protection( (e.g. Capactity Score
protection, seawall, flood insurance. micro-finance)
control, etc.)

4 50.00% 4 30.00% 4
4 50.00% 4 40.00% 4
4 70.00% 4 50.00% 4
4 100.00% 4 30.00% 4
4 50.00% 4 20.00% 4
4 50.00% 4 10.00% 2
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
ADAPTIVE CAPACITY

Percentage of areas with access to Government Extension Programs related to Government Infrastructure Projects
information CCAM-DRR related to CCAM-DRR

Percentage of areas with Institutional, financial and technical Institutional, financial and
access to information (e.g. capacity to provide local agriculture Adaptive technical capacity to
early warning system, Adaptive and forestry-based extension Capactity implement hazard mitigation
local awareness on Capactity Score programs such as technology and Score infrastructure project (low,
climate change and knowledge transfer (low, moderate, moderate, high, very high)
natural hazards) high, very high)

80.00% 4 high 3 very high

55.00% 4 high 3 very high
45.00% 4 high 3 very high
35.00% 4 high 3 very high
25.00% 4 high 3 very high
15.00% 3 high 3 very high
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
 VULNERABILITY

Average Hazard Severity of

Risk
Infrastructure Projects Adaptive Exposure Vulnerability Vulnerability Consequence
Score
ed to CCAM-DRR Capacity Score Index Score Score
Score

Severity of
Vulenrability Scores Consequenc
Adaptive Rounded Magnitude Sensitivity Score are based on the Rounded up the e
Capactity down average Score multiply divided by Adaptive calculated product of Hazard multiply
Score adaptive to Exposure Capacity Score Vulenrability Index ExposureScore and to likelihood
capacity score Score (see Scoring tab) Vulnerability Score of
Occurrence

4 3 0.33 1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 3.00

4 3 1.32 1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 4.00
4 3 1 1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 5.00
4 3 0.66 1 0.50 1.00 3.00
4 3 1.32 1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 4.00
4 3 1 1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 5.00
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
 Risk
Category

see Scoring Tab

low
low
moderate
low
low
moderate
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
 HAZARD

Barangay Classification Landslide Likelihood of

Susceptibility Occurrence Score

General classification or use of the

area (fisheries, agriculture, livestock, Low, Moderate, High Anecdotal Account
forest plantation, etc.)

Low 3
Fishery Moderate 4
High 5
Low 3
Agriculture Moderate 4
High 5
Marcila
Low 3
Livestock Moderate 4
High 5
Low 3
Forest plantation Moderate 4
High 5
San Nicolas
Tagumpay
Turda
High (1) - Highest possible intensity

Moderate (0.66) - Hazard has 66%

intensity compared to the highest
possible intensity

Low (0.33) - Hazard has 33% intensit

compared to the highest possible
intensity
 NATURAL RESOURCE-BASED
ZARD EXPO

Total Barangay Average output per

Magnitude Score Varieties produced
Area Allocation hectare (PHP)

Magnitude scores are

relative to the Total land area per Existing crop and fish varieties
magnitude of the classification in a given and forest products being Annual production output per
highest level of hazard barangay produced (specify) hectare
category (see Scoring
tab)

0.33 100 Bangus, Tilapia 200000

0.66 100 Bangus, Tilapia 200000
1 100 Bangus, Tilapia 200000
0.33 200 Rice 125000
0.66 200 Rice 125000
1 200 Rice 125000
0.33
0.66
1
0.33
0.66
1
 - Highest possible intensity

te (0.66) - Hazard has 66%

y compared to the highest
intensity

3) - Hazard has 33% intensity

ed to the highest possible
y
NATURAL RESOURCE-BASED EXPOSURE DATABASE AND RISKS BY BARANGAY AND BY TYPE OF SUSCE
EXPOSURE

Affected Value Exposure Score Exposure Score

Affected Area Exposure
(PHP) for Affected for Affected
(Hectares) Value Percentage Area

Exposure Score
Calculated land area Exposure Score for proportion of
exposed to a hazard Average output/ha Affected Value Total brgy agricultural affected area
area (GIS-derived ) X affected area (optional) area ÷ affected area (<10%, 10%-20%,
20%-40%, >40%)

5 1000000 1 5.00% 1
10 2000000 1 10.00% 2
3 600000 1 3.00% 1
40 5000000 1 20.00% 2
20 2500000 1 10.00% 2
10 1250000 1 5.00% 1
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
ANGAY AND BY TYPE OF SUSCEPTIBILITY
SENSITIVITY

Percentage of affected areas Percentage of affected areas

Average Exposure Total Number of without irrigation facilities (for without water impounding (for
Score Dependent HHs agricultural croplands and agricultural croplands and
or Families to ricelands) ricelands)
affected areas

Estimated number of
HHs dependent on Percentage of affected Percentage of affected
Sum of exposure scores natural resource- areas with out Sensitivity areas with out Sensitivity
divided by 2 (optional) based production irrigation facilities Score irrigation facilities Score
areas

1 10 n/a n/a
1.5 20 n/a n/a
1 6 n/a n/a
1.5 20 100.00% 4 20.00% 2
1.5 10 100.00% 4 30.00% 3
1 5 100.00% 4 50.00% 4
#DIV/0! n/a n/a
#DIV/0! n/a n/a
#DIV/0! n/a n/a
#DIV/0! n/a n/a
#DIV/0! n/a n/a
#DIV/0! n/a n/a
NSITIVITY

Percentage of owners/areas not Average Percentage of affected areas

Percentage of dependent HHs with
employing sustainable production Sensitivity covered or protected by hazard
techniques Score access to alternative livelihood mitigation measures/structures

Percentage of Percentage of areas

owners/areas not Rounded up Est. percentage of covered or protected by
employing techniques such Sensitivity average dependent HHs with Adaptive hazard mitigation
as climate proofing, using Score sensitivity score access to alternative Capactity Score measures (e.g. slope
climate resistant crop livelihood protection, seawall, flood
varieties, etc. control, etc.)

50.00% 4 4 50.00% 4 50.00%

50.00% 4 4 50.00% 4 50.00%
50.00% 4 4 40.00% 4 70.00%
30.00% 3 3 30.00% 4 100.00%
30.00% 3 4 40.00% 4 50.00%
30.00% 3 4 40.00% 4 50.00%
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
 ADAPTIVE CAPACITY

tage of affected areas Percentage of production areas

Percentage of areas with access to
or protected by hazard covered by post-disaster economic
n measures/structures protection information

Percentage of areas with

Percentage of areas access to information (e.g.
Adaptive covered by post-disaster Adaptive early warning system, Adaptive
Capactity Score economic protection( (e.g. Capactity Score local awareness on Capactity Score
insurance. micro-finance) climate change and
natural hazards)

4 30.00% 4 80.00% 4
4 40.00% 4 55.00% 4
4 50.00% 4 45.00% 4
4 30.00% 4 35.00% 4
4 20.00% 4 25.00% 4
4 10.00% 2 15.00% 3
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
 Average Hazard
Government Extension Programs related to Government Infrastructure Projects Adaptive Exposure
CCAM-DRR related to CCAM-DRR Capacity Score
Score

Institutional, financial and technical Institutional, financial and

capacity to provide local agriculture Adaptive technical capacity to Adaptive Rounded Magnitude
and forestry-based extension Capactity implement hazard mitigation Capactity down average Score multiply
programs such as technology and Score infrastructure project (low, Score adaptive to Exposure
knowledge transfer (low, moderate, moderate, high, very high) capacity score Score
high, very high)

high 3 very high 4 3 0.33

high 3 very high 4 3 1.32
high 3 very high 4 3 1
high 3 very high 4 3 0.66
high 3 very high 4 3 1.32
high 3 very high 4 3 1
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
 VULNERABILITY

Severity of
Risk Risk
Vulnerability Vulnerability Consequence
Score Category
Index Score Score

Severity of
Vulenrability Scores Consequenc
Sensitivity Score are based on the Rounded up the e
divided by Adaptive calculated product of Hazard multiply see Scoring
Capacity Score Vulenrability Index ExposureScore and to likelihood Tab
(see Scoring tab) Vulnerability Score of
Occurrence

1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 3.00 low

1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 4.00 low
1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 5.00 moderate
1 0.50 1.00 3.00 low
1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 4.00 low
1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 5.00 moderate
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
 HAZARD

Barangay Classification Hazard

Likelihood of
Susceptibility/
Intensity Occurrence Score

General classification or use of the

area (fisheries, agriculture, livestock, Low, Moderate, High/ Anecdotal Account
forest plantation, etc.) Inundation Depth

Low 3
Fishery Moderate 4
High 5
Low 3
Agriculture Moderate 4
High 5
Marcila
Low 3
Livestock Moderate 4
High 5
Low 3
Forest plantation Moderate 4
High 5
San Nicolas
Tagumpay
Turda
 NATURAL RESOURCE-
HAZARD

Expected Total Barangay

Magnitude Score Varieties produced
Inundation Depth Area Allocation

Magnitude scores are

relative to the Total land area per Existing crop and fish varieties
Depth according to magnitude of the classification in a given and forest products being
hazard map highest level of hazard barangay produced (specify)
category (see Scoring
tab)

<0.5m 0.33 100 Bangus, Tilapia

0.5-1.5m 0.66 100 Bangus, Tilapia
>1.5m 1 100 Bangus, Tilapia
<0.5m 0.33 200 Rice
0.5-1.5m 0.66 200 Rice
>1.5m 1 200 Rice
<0.5m 0.33
0.5-1.5m 0.66
>1.5m 1
<0.5m 0.33
0.5-1.5m 0.66
>1.5m 1
High (1) - Highest possible intensity

Moderate (0.66) - Hazard has 66%

intensity compared to the highest
possible intensity

Low (0.33) - Hazard has 33% intensity

compared to the highest possible
intensity
 NATURAL RESOURCE-BASED EXPOSURE DATABASE AND RISKS BY BARANGAY AND BY TYP
EXPOSURE

Affected Value Exposure Score

Average output per Affected Area Exposure
(PHP) for Affected
hectare (PHP) (Hectares) Value Percentage

Calculated land area Exposure Score for

Annual production output per exposed to a hazard Average output/ha Affected Value Total brgy agricultural
hectare area (GIS-derived ) X affected area (optional) area ÷ affected area

200000 5 1000000 1 5.00%

200000 10 2000000 1 10.00%
200000 3 600000 1 3.00%
125000 40 5000000 1 20.00%
125000 20 2500000 1 10.00%
125000 10 1250000 1 5.00%
0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0!
Y BARANGAY AND BY TYPE OF SUSCEPTIBILITY
SENSITIVITY

Percentage of affected areas

Exposure Score
Average Exposure Total Number of without irrigation facilities (for
for Affected Dependent HHs
Area Score agricultural croplands and
or Families to ricelands)
affected areas

Exposure Score Estimated number of

proportion of HHs dependent on Percentage of affected
affected area Sum of exposure scores natural resource- areas with out Sensitivity
(<10%, 10%-20%, divided by 2 (optional) based production irrigation facilities Score
20%-40%, >40%) areas

1 1 10 n/a
2 1.5 20 n/a
1 1 6 n/a
2 1.5 20 100.00% 4
2 1.5 10 100.00% 4
1 1 5 100.00% 4
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! n/a
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! n/a
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! n/a
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! n/a
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! n/a
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! n/a
 SENSITIVITY

Percentage of affected areas

Percentage of owners/areas not Average
without water impounding (for Percentage of dependent HHs with
employing sustainable production Sensitivity
agricultural croplands and techniques Score access to alternative livelihood
ricelands)

Percentage of
Percentage of affected owners/areas not Rounded up Est. percentage of
areas with out Sensitivity employing techniques such Sensitivity average dependent HHs with
irrigation facilities Score as climate proofing, using Score sensitivity access to alternative
climate resistant crop score livelihood
varieties, etc.

n/a 50.00% 4 4 50.00%

n/a 50.00% 4 4 50.00%
n/a 50.00% 4 4 40.00%
20.00% 2 30.00% 3 3 30.00%
30.00% 3 30.00% 3 4 40.00%
50.00% 4 30.00% 3 4 40.00%
n/a 1 1
n/a 1 1
n/a 1 1
n/a 1 1
n/a 1 1
n/a 1 1
 ADAPTIVE CAPACITY

Percentage of affected areas Percentage of production areas

e of dependent HHs with
covered or protected by hazard covered by post-disaster economic
o alternative livelihood mitigation measures/structures protection

Percentage of areas
covered or protected by Percentage of areas
Adaptive hazard mitigation Adaptive covered by post-disaster Adaptive
Capactity Score measures (e.g. slope Capactity Score economic protection( (e.g. Capactity Score
protection, seawall, flood insurance. micro-finance)
control, etc.)

4 50.00% 4 30.00% 4
4 50.00% 4 40.00% 4
4 70.00% 4 50.00% 4
4 100.00% 4 30.00% 4
4 50.00% 4 20.00% 4
4 50.00% 4 10.00% 2
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
ADAPTIVE CAPACITY

Percentage of areas with access to Government Extension Programs related to Government Infrastructure Projects
information CCAM-DRR related to CCAM-DRR

Percentage of areas with Institutional, financial and technical Institutional, financial and
access to information (e.g. capacity to provide local agriculture Adaptive technical capacity to
early warning system, Adaptive and forestry-based extension Capactity implement hazard mitigation
local awareness on Capactity Score programs such as technology and Score infrastructure project (low,
climate change and knowledge transfer (low, moderate, moderate, high, very high)
natural hazards) high, very high)

80.00% 4 high 3 very high

55.00% 4 high 3 very high
45.00% 4 high 3 very high
35.00% 4 high 3 very high
25.00% 4 high 3 very high
15.00% 3 high 3 very high
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
 VULNERABILITY

Average Hazard Severity of

Risk
Infrastructure Projects Adaptive Exposure Vulnerability Vulnerability Consequence
Score
ed to CCAM-DRR Capacity Score Index Score Score
Score

Severity of
Vulenrability Scores Consequenc
Adaptive Rounded Magnitude Sensitivity Score are based on the Rounded up the e
Capactity down average Score multiply divided by Adaptive calculated product of Hazard multiply
Score adaptive to Exposure Capacity Score Vulenrability Index ExposureScore and to likelihood
capacity score Score (see Scoring tab) Vulnerability Score of
Occurrence

4 3 0.33 1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 3.00

4 3 1.32 1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 4.00
4 3 1 1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 5.00
4 3 0.66 1 0.50 1.00 3.00
4 3 1.32 1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 4.00
4 3 1 1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 5.00
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
 Risk
Category

see Scoring
Tab

low
low
moderate
low
low
moderate
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
 HAZARD

Barangay Classification Hazard

Likelihood of
Susceptibility/
Intensity Occurrence Score

General classification or use of the

area (fisheries, agriculture, livestock, Low, Moderate, High/ Anecdotal Account
forest plantation, etc.) Inundation Depth

Low 3
Fishery Moderate 4
High 5
Low 3
Agriculture Moderate 4
High 5
Marcila
Low 3
Livestock Moderate 4
High 5
Low 3
Forest plantation Moderate 4
High 5
San Nicolas
Tagumpay
Turda
High (1) - Highest possible intensity

Moderate (0.66) - Hazard has 66%

intensity compared to the highest
possible intensity

Low (0.33) - Hazard has 33% intensit

compared to the highest possible
intensity
 NATURAL RESOURCE-BASED E
ZARD EXPO

Total Barangay Average output per

Magnitude Score Varieties produced
Area Allocation hectare (PHP)

Magnitude scores are

relative to the Total land area per Existing crop and fish varieties
magnitude of the classification in a given and forest products being Annual production output per
highest level of hazard barangay produced (specify) hectare
category (see Scoring
tab)

0.33 100 Bangus, Tilapia 200000

0.66 100 Bangus, Tilapia 200000
1 100 Bangus, Tilapia 200000
0.33 200 Rice 125000
0.66 200 Rice 125000
1 200 Rice 125000
0.33
0.66
1
0.33
0.66
1
 - Highest possible intensity

te (0.66) - Hazard has 66%

y compared to the highest
intensity

3) - Hazard has 33% intensity

ed to the highest possible
y
NATURAL RESOURCE-BASED EXPOSURE DATABASE AND RISKS BY BARANGAY AND BY TYPE OF SUSCEP
EXPOSURE

Affected Value Exposure Score Exposure Score

Affected Area Exposure
(PHP) for Affected for Affected
(Hectares) Value Percentage Area

Exposure Score
Calculated land area Exposure Score for proportion of
exposed to a hazard Average output/ha Affected Value Total brgy agricultural affected area
area (GIS-derived ) X affected area (optional) area ÷ affected area (<10%, 10%-20%,
20%-40%, >40%)

5 1000000 1 5.00% 1
10 2000000 1 10.00% 2
3 600000 1 3.00% 1
40 5000000 1 20.00% 2
20 2500000 1 10.00% 2
10 1250000 1 5.00% 1
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
ANGAY AND BY TYPE OF SUSCEPTIBILITY
SENSITIVITY

Percentage of affected areas Percentage of affected areas

Average Exposure Total Number of without irrigation facilities (for without water impounding (for
Score Dependent HHs agricultural croplands and agricultural croplands and
or Families to ricelands) ricelands)
affected areas

Estimated number of
HHs dependent on Percentage of affected Percentage of affected
Sum of exposure scores natural resource- areas with out Sensitivity areas with out Sensitivity
divided by 2 (optional) based production irrigation facilities Score irrigation facilities Score
areas

1 10 n/a n/a
1.5 20 n/a n/a
1 6 n/a n/a
1.5 20 100.00% 4 20.00% 2
1.5 10 100.00% 4 30.00% 3
1 5 100.00% 4 50.00% 4
#DIV/0! n/a n/a
#DIV/0! n/a n/a
#DIV/0! n/a n/a
#DIV/0! n/a n/a
#DIV/0! n/a n/a
#DIV/0! n/a n/a
SITIVITY

Percentage of owners/areas not Average Percentage of affected areas

Percentage of dependent HHs with
employing sustainable production Sensitivity covered or protected by hazard
techniques Score access to alternative livelihood mitigation measures/structures

Percentage of Percentage of areas

owners/areas not Rounded up Est. percentage of covered or protected by
employing techniques such Sensitivity average dependent HHs with Adaptive hazard mitigation
as climate proofing, using Score sensitivity access to alternative Capactity Score measures (e.g. slope
climate resistant crop score livelihood protection, seawall, flood
varieties, etc. control, etc.)

50.00% 4 4 50.00% 4 50.00%

50.00% 4 4 50.00% 4 50.00%
50.00% 4 4 40.00% 4 70.00%
30.00% 3 3 30.00% 4 100.00%
30.00% 3 4 40.00% 4 50.00%
30.00% 3 4 40.00% 4 50.00%
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
 ADAPTIVE CAPACITY

tage of affected areas Percentage of production areas

Percentage of areas with access to
or protected by hazard covered by post-disaster economic
n measures/structures protection information

Percentage of areas with

Percentage of areas access to information (e.g.
Adaptive covered by post-disaster Adaptive early warning system, Adaptive
Capactity Score economic protection( (e.g. Capactity Score local awareness on Capactity Score
insurance. micro-finance) climate change and
natural hazards)

4 30.00% 4 80.00% 4
4 40.00% 4 55.00% 4
4 50.00% 4 45.00% 4
4 30.00% 4 35.00% 4
4 20.00% 4 25.00% 4
4 10.00% 2 15.00% 3
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
 Average Hazard
Government Extension Programs related to Government Infrastructure Projects Adaptive Exposure
CCAM-DRR related to CCAM-DRR Capacity Score
Score

Institutional, financial and technical Institutional, financial and

capacity to provide local agriculture Adaptive technical capacity to Adaptive Rounded Magnitude
and forestry-based extension Capactity implement hazard mitigation Capactity down average Score multiply
programs such as technology and Score infrastructure project (low, Score adaptive to Exposure
knowledge transfer (low, moderate, moderate, high, very high) capacity score Score
high, very high)

high 3 very high 4 3 0.33

high 3 very high 4 3 1.32
high 3 very high 4 3 1
high 3 very high 4 3 0.66
high 3 very high 4 3 1.32
high 3 very high 4 3 1
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
 VULNERABILITY

Severity of
Risk Risk
Vulnerability Vulnerability Consequence
Score Category
Index Score Score

Severity of
Vulenrability Scores Consequenc
Sensitivity Score are based on the Rounded up the e
divided by Adaptive calculated product of Hazard multiply see Scoring
Capacity Score Vulenrability Index ExposureScore and to likelihood Tab
(see Scoring tab) Vulnerability Score of
Occurrence

1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 3.00 low

1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 4.00 low x
1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 5.00 moderate
1 0.50 1.00 3.00 low
1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 4.00 low
1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 5.00 moderate
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
 HAZARD

Barangay Classification Hazard

Likelihood of
Susceptibility/
Intensity Occurrence Score

General classification or use of the

area (fisheries, agriculture, livestock, Low, Moderate, High/ Anecdotal Account
forest plantation, etc.) Inundation Depth

Low 3
Fishery Moderate 4
High 5
Low 3
Agriculture Moderate 4
High 5
Marcila
Low 3
Livestock Moderate 4
High 5
Low 3
Forest plantation Moderate 4
High 5
San Nicolas
Tagumpay
Turda
High (1) - Highest possible intensity

Moderate (0.66) - Hazard has 66%

intensity compared to the highest
possible intensity

Low (0.33) - Hazard has 33% intensit

compared to the highest possible
intensity
 NATURAL RESOURCE-BASED E
ZARD EXPO

Total Barangay Average output per

Magnitude Score Varieties produced
Area Allocation hectare (PHP)

Magnitude scores are

relative to the Total land area per Existing crop and fish varieties
magnitude of the classification in a given and forest products being Annual production output per
highest level of hazard barangay produced (specify) hectare
category (see Scoring
tab)

0.33 100 Bangus, Tilapia 200000

0.66 100 Bangus, Tilapia 200000
1 100 Bangus, Tilapia 200000
0.33 200 Rice 125000
0.66 200 Rice 125000
1 200 Rice 125000
0.33
0.66
1
0.33
0.66
1
 - Highest possible intensity

te (0.66) - Hazard has 66%

y compared to the highest
intensity

3) - Hazard has 33% intensity

ed to the highest possible
y
NATURAL RESOURCE-BASED EXPOSURE DATABASE AND RISKS BY BARANGAY AND BY TYPE OF SUSCEP
EXPOSURE

Affected Value Exposure Score Exposure Score

Affected Area Exposure
(PHP) for Affected for Affected
(Hectares) Value Percentage Area

Exposure Score
Calculated land area Exposure Score for proportion of
exposed to a hazard Average output/ha Affected Value Total brgy agricultural affected area
area (GIS-derived ) X affected area (optional) area ÷ affected area (<10%, 10%-20%,
20%-40%, >40%)

5 1000000 1 5.00% 1
10 2000000 1 10.00% 2
3 600000 1 3.00% 1
40 5000000 1 20.00% 2
20 2500000 1 10.00% 2
10 1250000 1 5.00% 1
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
ANGAY AND BY TYPE OF SUSCEPTIBILITY
SENSITIVITY

Percentage of affected areas Percentage of affected areas

Average Exposure Total Number of without irrigation facilities (for without water impounding (for
Score Dependent HHs agricultural croplands and agricultural croplands and
or Families to ricelands) ricelands)
affected areas

Estimated number of
HHs dependent on Percentage of affected Percentage of affected
Sum of exposure scores natural resource- areas with out Sensitivity areas with out Sensitivity
divided by 2 (optional) based production irrigation facilities Score irrigation facilities Score
areas

1 10 n/a n/a
1.5 20 n/a n/a
1 6 n/a n/a
1.5 20 100.00% 4 20.00% 2
1.5 10 100.00% 4 30.00% 3
1 5 100.00% 4 50.00% 4
#DIV/0! n/a n/a
#DIV/0! n/a n/a
#DIV/0! n/a n/a
#DIV/0! n/a n/a
#DIV/0! n/a n/a
#DIV/0! n/a n/a
SITIVITY

Percentage of owners/areas not Average Percentage of affected areas

Percentage of dependent HHs with
employing sustainable production Sensitivity covered or protected by hazard
techniques Score access to alternative livelihood mitigation measures/structures

Percentage of Percentage of areas

owners/areas not Rounded up Est. percentage of covered or protected by
employing techniques such Sensitivity average dependent HHs with Adaptive hazard mitigation
as climate proofing, using Score sensitivity access to alternative Capactity Score measures (e.g. slope
climate resistant crop score livelihood protection, seawall, flood
varieties, etc. control, etc.)

50.00% 4 4 50.00% 4 50.00%

50.00% 4 4 50.00% 4 50.00%
50.00% 4 4 40.00% 4 70.00%
30.00% 3 3 30.00% 4 100.00%
30.00% 3 4 40.00% 4 50.00%
30.00% 3 4 40.00% 4 50.00%
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
 ADAPTIVE CAPACITY

tage of affected areas Percentage of production areas

Percentage of areas with access to
or protected by hazard covered by post-disaster economic
n measures/structures protection information

Percentage of areas with

Percentage of areas access to information (e.g.
Adaptive covered by post-disaster Adaptive early warning system, Adaptive
Capactity Score economic protection( (e.g. Capactity Score local awareness on Capactity Score
insurance. micro-finance) climate change and
natural hazards)

4 30.00% 4 80.00% 4
4 40.00% 4 55.00% 4
4 50.00% 4 45.00% 4
4 30.00% 4 35.00% 4
4 20.00% 4 25.00% 4
4 10.00% 2 15.00% 3
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
 Average Hazard
Government Extension Programs related to Government Infrastructure Projects Adaptive Exposure
CCAM-DRR related to CCAM-DRR Capacity Score
Score

Institutional, financial and technical Institutional, financial and

capacity to provide local agriculture Adaptive technical capacity to Adaptive Rounded Magnitude
and forestry-based extension Capactity implement hazard mitigation Capactity down average Score multiply
programs such as technology and Score infrastructure project (low, Score adaptive to Exposure
knowledge transfer (low, moderate, moderate, high, very high) capacity score Score
high, very high)

high 3 very high 4 3 0.33

high 3 very high 4 3 1.32
high 3 very high 4 3 1
high 3 very high 4 3 0.66
high 3 very high 4 3 1.32
high 3 very high 4 3 1
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
 VULNERABILITY

Severity of
Risk Risk
Vulnerability Vulnerability Consequence
Score Category
Index Score Score

Severity of
Vulenrability Scores Consequenc
Sensitivity Score are based on the Rounded up the e
divided by Adaptive calculated product of Hazard multiply see Scoring
Capacity Score Vulenrability Index ExposureScore and to likelihood Tab
(see Scoring tab) Vulnerability Score of
Occurrence

1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 3.00 low

1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 4.00 low x
1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 5.00 moderate
1 0.50 1.00 3.00 low
1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 4.00 low
1.333333333333 0.75 1.00 5.00 moderate
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
 HAZARD

Barangay Classification Likelihood of

Magnitude Score
Occurrence Score

Magnitude scores are

General classification or use of the relative to the
area (fisheries, agriculture, livestock, Anecdotal Account magnitude of the
forest plantation, etc.) highest level of hazard
category (see Scoring
tab)

Fishery 3 1
Agriculture 3 1
Marcila
Livestock 3 1
Forest plantation 3 1
San Nicolas 1
Tagumpay 1
Turda 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

High (1) - Highest possible intensity

Moderate (0.66) - Hazard has 66%

intensity compared to the highest
possible intensity

Low (0.33) - Hazard has 33% intensity

compared to the highest possible
intensity
 NATURAL RESOURCE-BASED EXPOSU
EXPOSURE

Affected Value
Total Barangay Average output per Affected Area
Varieties produced (PHP)
Area Allocation hectare (PHP) (Hectares)

Total land area per Existing crop and fish varieties Calculated land area
classification in a given and forest products being Annual production output per exposed to a hazard Average output/ha
barangay produced (specify) hectare area (GIS-derived ) X affected area

100 Bangus, Tilapia 200000 5 1000000

200 Rice 125000 40 5000000
0
0
RCE-BASED EXPOSURE DATABASE AND RISKS BY BARANGAY AND BY TYPE OF SUSCEPTIBILITY
EXPOSURE

Exposure Score Exposure Score

Exposure Average Exposure Total Number of
for Affected for Affected Dependent HHs
Value Percentage Area Score
or Families to
affected areas

Exposure Score Estimated number of

Exposure Score for proportion of HHs dependent on
Affected Value Total brgy agricultural affected area Sum of exposure scores natural resource-
(optional) area ÷ affected area (<10%, 10%-20%, divided by 2 (optional) based production
20%-40%, >40%) areas

1 5.00% 1 1 10
1 20.00% 2 1.5 20
0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
OF SUSCEPTIBILITY
SENSITIVITY

Percentage of affected areas Percentage of affected areas

Percentage of owners/areas not
without irrigation facilities (for without water impounding (for
employing sustainable production
agricultural croplands and agricultural croplands and techniques
ricelands) ricelands)

Percentage of
Percentage of affected Percentage of affected owners/areas not
areas with out Sensitivity areas with out Sensitivity employing techniques such Sensitivity
irrigation facilities Score irrigation facilities Score as climate proofing, using Score
climate resistant crop
varieties, etc.

n/a n/a 50.00% 4

100.00% 4 20.00% 2 30.00% 3
n/a n/a 1
n/a n/a 1
 Average Percentage of affected areas Percentage of production areas
Percentage of dependent HHs with
Sensitivity covered or protected by hazard covered by post-disaster economic
Score access to alternative livelihood mitigation measures/structures protection

Percentage of areas
Rounded up Est. percentage of covered or protected by Percentage of areas
average dependent HHs with Adaptive hazard mitigation Adaptive covered by post-disaster
sensitivity access to alternative Capactity Score measures (e.g. slope Capactity Score economic protection( (e.g.
score livelihood protection, seawall, flood insurance. micro-finance)
control, etc.)

4 50.00% 4 50.00% 4 30.00%

3 30.00% 4 100.00% 4 30.00%
1 1 1
1 1 1
 ADAPTIVE CAPACITY

age of production areas

Percentage of areas with access to Government Extension Programs related to
y post-disaster economic
protection information CCAM-DRR

Percentage of areas with Institutional, financial and technical

access to information (e.g. capacity to provide local agriculture Adaptive
Adaptive early warning system, Adaptive and forestry-based extension Capactity
Capactity Score local awareness on Capactity Score programs such as technology and Score
climate change and knowledge transfer (low, moderate,
natural hazards) high, very high)

4 80.00% 4 high 3
4 35.00% 4 high 3
1 1 0
1 1 0
 VULNERABILITY

Average Hazard
Government Infrastructure Projects Adaptive Exposure Vulnerability Vulnerability
related to CCAM-DRR Capacity Score Index Score
Score

Institutional, financial and Vulenrability Scores

technical capacity to Adaptive Rounded Magnitude Sensitivity Score are based on the
implement hazard mitigation Capactity down average Score multiply divided by Adaptive calculated
infrastructure project (low, Score adaptive to Exposure Capacity Score Vulenrability Index
moderate, high, very high) capacity score Score (see Scoring tab)

very high 4 3 1 1.333333333333 0.75

very high 4 3 2 1 0.50
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
 Severity of
Risk Risk
Consequence
Score Category
Score

Severity of
Consequenc
Rounded up the e
product of Hazard multiply see Scoring
ExposureScore and to likelihood Tab
Vulnerability Score of
Occurrence

1.00 3.00 low

1.00 3.00 low
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!