The enactment of an RH law will frontally address problems spawned by calamities and ecological despoliation.
An inordinately huge population growth rate makes difficult and expensive risk management during calamities, contributes to the destruction of the environment, creates an imbalance in the ecosystems, and hinders the efficacy of climate change mitigation and adaptation.
The current flooding of Metro Manila and many provinces shows the hardship and expense of rescue and relief operations because of the multitude affected by the calamity.
We must learn from the tragedies brought about by catastrophes like Ondoy and Sendong and accept the fact that there is a direct link between a high population growth rate and climate change.
As population expands, people reside precariously along riverbanks, invade forestlands for habitation and cut trees for livelihood, and clog waterways with their garbage, which all compound the calamity and deter efficient risk management.
The problem of solid waste management is aggravated in populous areas as shown when Manila Bay recently inundated tons of solid wastes along Roxas Boulevard.
The negative impact of an uncontrolled huge population growth rate on the environment will continually make risk management nightmarish and perpetuate similar tragedies to happen.
The DENR-commissioned study on “Mapping Population-Biodiversity Connections in the Philippines (MPBCP)” recognizes that uncontrolled population growth greatly strains our finite resources and fragile ecosystems and emphasizes that “policies and interventions that focus on biodiversity conservation alone are insufficient in abating biodiversity losses and destruction of forest resources unless population and development concerns are adequately addressed.”
A report published by the London School of Economics entitled, Fewer Emitters, Lower Emissions, Less Cost, found that family planning is five times cheaper than conventional green technologies to combat climate change.
The report projected the benefits of bridging the global unmet need for family planning and found that “every £4 spent on family planning over the next four decades would reduce global CO2 emissions by more than a ton, whereas a minimum of £19 would have to be spent on low-carbon technologies to achieve the same result”.
The report concluded that if “basic family planning needs were met, 34 gigatons (billion tonnes) of CO2 would be saved – equivalent to nearly 6 times the annual emissions of the US and almost 60 times the UK’s annual total.”
Mr. Roger Martin, chairman of the Optimum Population Trust at the London School of Economics said: “It’s always been obvious that total emissions depend on the number of emitters as well as their individual emissions – the carbon tonnage can’t shoot down as we want, while the population keeps shooting up.”