Biodiversity and Genetic Resources in the Philippines: a State of the Art Report

Edwino S. Fernando, William Sm. Gruezo, Nathaniel C. Bantayan, Margaret M. Calderon, & Josefina T. Dizon

HIGHLIGHTS

Introduction 1. In this report only the and terrestrial ecosystems, and the economic and socio- cultural factors affecting them, are treated in detail. 2. The Philippines is one of the world’s 25 megadiversity countries with impressive record of species diversity and endemism (Mittermeier et al. 1999). However, it is also considered a biodiversity “hotspot” (Myers et al. 2000) because its species and ecosystems are threatened. 3. Biodiversity refers to the variety and variability among living organisms, or simply the total variability of life on Earth. The term biodiversity is often referred to at three different levels, viz. genes, species, and ecosystems. It also covers the complex sets of structural and functional relationships within and between these different levels, including human action, and their origins and evolution in space and time.

Biogeography and Climate 4. Recent palaeogeographic (Roeder 1977; McCabe et al. 1982; Geary et al. 1988) and plate tectonic models (Hall 1998) indicate complex geological origins for the Philippine archipelago. The archipelago comprises more than 7,000 islands of varying sizes and distance apart and with a generally mountainous topography. The archipelago is today linked by island arcs to neighboring islands to its north and south. These island arcs have been postulated as migration routes for flowering plants in both directions. 5. The Philippine Islands lie slightly above the equator on the western edge of the Pacific Ocean. They are spread in a north-south orientation between 210 and 50 N latitude and between 1160 and 1260 E longitude, stretching some 1839 km between Taiwan to its north, and Borneo and Sulawesi to its south. The islands form part of a distinct plant geographical region in Southeast. Asia known as ‘Malesia’ (Figure 1) that also includes Malay Peninsula and the islands of Borneo, Sulawesi, Moluccas, Java, the Lesser Sunda, and New Guinea (Steenis 1950; Johns 1995a). FERNANDO, et al. (2001) Biodiversity and Plant Genetic Resources of the Philippines: Highlights 2

Figure 1. Map of the plant geographical region of Malesia that includes the Philippines (after Johns 1995a).

6. The tropical climate of the Philippines is largely governed by the southwest and northeast monsoons with two main seasons: the wet (typhoon) season from June to October and the dry season from November to May. The mean annual rainfall varies considerably in different parts of the archipelago ranging from 900 mm to 4500 mm. The western parts of the archipelago, which are in the lee of many mountain ranges, are generally drier and seasonal in character. The eastern parts receive much of the rainfall and are perhumid. Greatest precipitation occurs when tropical storms (typhoons) cross the archipelago from the Pacific. 7. There are six distinct faunistic and seven floristic regions within the archipelago. The Department of Environment and Natural Resources of the Philippines (DENR- UNEP 1997) recognizes 15 biogeographic zones based on floristic, faunistic, and geological composition of the geographic areas.

Forest Formations 8. The natural vegetation of the Philippine Islands is generally a mosaic of different kinds of forests (often called “formations”, Whitmore 1984) which differ from each other in structure, physiognomy, and floristic composition. The primary vegetation (both dryland and wetland) may be divided into 13 types following the scheme and nomenclature used by Whitmore (1984). The 13 types of primary vegetation or forest formations are: (1) tropical lowland evergreen rain forest (Figure 2), FERNANDO, et al. (2001) Biodiversity and Plant Genetic Resources of the Philippines: Highlights 3

Figure 2. Shorea palosapis (Blanco) Merr., a Figure 3. Forest over limestone on Palawan species of the family Dipterocarpaceae, is Island. This formation is generally open with endemic to the Philippines. This species and few scattered large trees. © Photo by E.S. others in the family are major components of Fernando the tropical lowland evergreen rain forest and its emergents. © Photo by M.L. Castillo

(2) tropical semi-evergreen rain forest, (3) forest over limestone (Figure 3), (4) forest over ultramafic rocks, (5) beach forest, (6) mangrove forest, (7) brackish-water forest, (8) peat swamp forest, (9) fresh-water swamp forest, (10) tropical moist deciduous forest, (11) tropical lower montane rain forest, (12) tropical upper montane rain forest, and (13) subalpine rain forest.

Biodiversity of the Philippines 9. There are in the Philippines about 54,000 species of various kinds of organisms that have been described to date, representing about 3.8% of the conservative estimated total for the world (Villareal and Fernando 2000; see Table 1). Many hundreds of species remain unknown to science. More than 40% of the known Philippine species are endemic to the archipelago. Of the Philippine organisms, those traditionally regarded as ‘plants’ comprise only 32% (total 16,865/6,335 endemic).

FERNANDO, et al. (2001) Biodiversity and Plant Genetic Resources of the Philippines: Highlights 4

Table 1. Estimated number of living species of all kinds of organisms currently known in the Philippines (after Villareal and Fernando 2000).

Taxonomic group Estimated No. of Species Endemic Species Angiosperms 8,120 c. 5,800 Gymnosperms 33 6 Ferns & Fern Allies 1,031 334 Bryophytes 1,271 195 Algae 1,355 ? Fungi, Slime molds, water molds 3,555 ? Lichens 789 ? Cyanobacteria & Protozoans 711 ? Sub-total 16,865 c.6,335 Mammals 179 110 Birds 559 171 Reptiles 257 158 Amphibians 95 51 Fishes 2,175 ? Molluscs and Squids 8,000+ / Echinoderms 641 ? Insects 20,131 c. 13,898 Spiders 400 ? Mites and Ticks 1,001 c.486 Other Arthropods 2,298 ? Annelids 700 ? Poriferans/Sponges 200+ Cnidarians 500+ ? Sub-total 37,136 c. 14,874 TOTAL 54,001+

Protected Areas 10. The Philippines has one of the oldest national park systems in Southeast Asia established in the early 1900s. The 4, 244 ha Mt Makiling Forest Reserve on Luzon Island (see Figure 4) is one of the earliest having been established in 1910. This and other national parks established before 1992 became the initial components of the National Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS). Currently, there are 294 of these in the NIPAS with a total area of more than 4 million ha, including some marine parks and reserves and mangrove swamps (see Table 2; Figure 5). Majority, are however, terrestrial ecosystems representing different types of forest formations ranging from a small 1-ha forest park to the large 247,861-ha national park.

Table 2. Categories of protected areas in the Philippines (after DENR-UNEP 1997).

Category Number Area (in hectares) National parks, national marine parks and reserves 67 455,314 Game refuges and bird sanctuaries 8 924,150 Wilderness areas 16 3,297 Watershed forest reserves 85 1,200,129 Mangrove swamp forest reserves 27 undetermined Tourist zones and marine reserves 56 undetermined Protected areas declared through administrative and 14 127,749 memorandum orders Newly proclaimed protected areas under NIPAS category 21 1,410,261 TOTAL 294 4,120,900 FERNANDO, et al. (2001) Biodiversity and Plant Genetic Resources of the Philippines: Highlights 5

Figure 4. Mt Makiling on Luzon Island rises to 1100 m above sea level. It is the oldest established national park and one of the 18 centers of plant diversity in the Philippines. © Photo courtesy of MCME.

Figure 5. The Batanes Protected Landscapes and Seascapes is in the northernmost island province of Batanes, and is one of the 294 protected areas in the Philippines. This protected area is an important flyway for migratory birds. © Photo by E.S. Fernando

FERNANDO, et al. (2001) Biodiversity and Plant Genetic Resources of the Philippines: Highlights 6

Centers of Plant Diversity 10. About 18 areas in the Philippines, mostly mountains, have been identified as centers of plant diversity (see Table 3). These areas are considered to harbor the greatest diversity of plants anywhere in the archipelago. One of these is Mt Makiling (see Figure 4), generally regarded as the best-known biological area in the Philippines owing much to its scientific history (Pancho 1973). It is often cited in having more species of woody plants than the entire United States of America (Dasmann et al. 1973; Earthlife 1986). Table 3. Centers of plant diversity in the Philippines (after DENR-UNEP 1997).

Name of mountain or area Location 1 Mt Iraya Batan Island 2 Sierra Madre Mountains Isabela Province, Luzon 3 Mt Pulag Cordillera Mountains, Luzon 4 Mt Arayat Pampanga Province, Luzon 5 Mt Makiling Laguna and Batangas Provinces, Luzon 6 Lobo Batangas Province, Luzon 7 Mt Isarog Camarines Sur Province, Luzon 8 Mt Halcon Mindoro Island 9 Coron Island Coron Island 10 Palawan Island Palawan Island 11 Southern Samar Samar Island 12 Sibuyan Island Sibuyan Island. 13 Mt Kanlaon Negros Island 14 Mt Talinis + Lake Balinsayao Negros Island 15 Mt Baloy Panay Island 16 Mt Kitanglad Mindanao 17 Agusan Marsh Mindanao 18 Mt Apo Mindanao

11. As a center of plant biodiversity and shown by the major work of Pancho (1983) dealing with the vascular flora of Mt Makiling and vicinity, this legendary and biologically important mountain (Figure 4) harbors some 949 genera, 2038 species, 19 subspecies, 167 varieties, and several forms and cultivars of flowering plants and ferns in 225 families. Tan (1982) listed 211 species of mosses belonging to 97 genera and representing nearly a one-third of the Philippines’ moss flora.

Flora and Endemism 12. The indigenous flowering plants are estimated at about 8000 species belonging to nearly 1500 genera and 200 families. These estimates are based from Merrill (1926). The number of species is roughly 26%-32% of the 25,000-30,000 (Jacobs 1974) estimated for the entire Malesian region, while the number of genera represent more than 60% of the total 2382 (Steenis 1987) for the region. About 37% of the FERNANDO, et al. (2001) Biodiversity and Plant Genetic Resources of the Philippines: Highlights 7

estimated number of species are trees with a stem diameter of 3 cm or more (Salvosa 1963). 13. There 25 endemic genera of flowering plants representating 12 families (see Table 4). There are four in Rubiaceae; three each in Asclepiadaceae and Orchidaceae; two each in Melastomataceae, Sapindaceae, Zingiberaceae, and Loranthaceae; and one each in Palmae, Urticaceae, Leguminosae, Euphorbiaceae, Rutaceae, and Compositae. Two genera of ferns, viz., Psomiocarpa (Tectaria Group) and Nannothelypteris (Thelypteridaceae) are also endemic to the Philippines.

Table 4. Genera of flowering plants and ferns endemic to the Philippine Islands; figures in parentheses denote the number of species in the genus (modified after Steenis 1987; Johns 1995b).

Adonidia (Palmae) (1) Gloeocarpus (Sapindaceae) (1) Sulitia (Rubiaceae) (1) Amesiella (Orchidaceae) (1) Gongrospermum (Sapindaceae) (1) Swinglea (Rutaceae) (1) Antherostele (Rubiaceae) (4) Greeniopsis (Rubiaceae) (6) Thaumasianthes (Loranthaceae) (2) Astrocalyx (Melastomataceae) (2) Leptosolena (Zingiberaceae) (1) Vanoverberghia (Zingiberaceae) (1) Astrothalamus (Urticaceae) (1) Luzonia (Leguminosae) (1) Villaria (Rubiaceae) (5) Catrionia (Melastomataceae) (1) Macropodanthus (Orchidaceae) (1) Nannothelypteris (Thelypteridaceae) (5) Clemensiella (Asclepiadaceae) (1) Merrittia (Compositae) (1) Psomiocarpa (Tectaria Group) (1) Cyne (Loranthaceae) (4) Phragmorchis (Orchidaceae) (1) Dolichostegia (Asclepiadaceae) (1) Quisumbingia (Asclepiadaceae) (1) Fenixia (Compositae) (1) Reutealis (Euphorbiaceae) (1)

15. Endemism at the species level is relatively high, reaching 70% to 80% in certain families, especially those inhabiting primary forests (Merrill 1926; Dickerson 1928). These include, among others, the following, each with no less than 15 genera: Orchidaceae, Rubiaceae, Euphorbiaceae, Sapindaceae, Asclepiadaceae, Palmae, Annonaceae, Meliaceae, Zingiberaceae, Sterculiaceae, Melastomataceae, and (Mitra 1973). The Orchidaceae, with nearly 900 species and 77 genera, is the largest family of flowering plants in the Philippines. In the Palmae with 139 species and 20 genera, species endemism reaches just over 70% (Fernando 2001). In Symplocos (Symplocaceae) endemism is 77% (Nooteboom 1977), while in Rhododendron (Ericaceae) it is 72% (Sleumer 1966). In other families of mostly woody large trees, endemism is slightly lower, e.g. Dipterocarpaceae, 47% (Ashton 1982), Fagaceae, 31% (Soepadmo 1976), Burseraceae, 33% (Leenhouts 1956), and Anacardiaceae, 44% (Ding Hou 1978). However, on the whole, species endemism is estimated at about 75% (Merrill 1926; Dickerson 1928; Mitra 1973). The more recent Flora Malesiana FERNANDO, et al. (2001) Biodiversity and Plant Genetic Resources of the Philippines: Highlights 8

revisions for other families indicate a decreasing endemism. However, many more new species are also being added to the Philippine endemic plants list.

Endangered Plants 16. IUCN (2000) includes 249 species of terrestrial flowering plants, four species of conifers, and two species of bryophytes from the Philippines in its Red List of Threatened Species. Forty-four (44) of these species were categorized as ‘critically endangered’, i.e. species ‘facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild in the immediate future’. Of these critically endangered species, 37 are commercial timber trees of the family Dipterocarpaceae (see Figure 1) typical of the lowland evergreen rain forests. 17. There are a number of species that have been identified as critically endangered. Three of these are Rafflesia manillana (Rafflesiaceae) (Figure 6), philippinensis () (Figure 7) (Tan et al. 1986), and Pinanga bicolana (Palmae) (Fernando and Cereno 2000); all are endemic to the Philippines. Rafflesia manillana, although known from three islands including Luzon, has never been recollected. This species is surprisingly excluded from the recent list of IUCN (2000). The small population on Mt Makiling (one of only two sites on Luzon) is probably nearly extinct, and was last seen in 1982 just before the site was bulldozed for geothermal exploration. Pinanga bicolana is known only from the Bicol National Park on Luzon Island. It has been severely threatened by reduction of its natural habitat to a mere 10% of its original size, with the remaining population consisting of not more than 100 mature individuals (Fernando and Cereno 2000). Tectona philippinensis occurs only in a small coastal area near Lobo in Batangas Province in southern Luzon and on Ilin Island off southern Mindoro. The small area on Luzon where this tree grows has been converted into an exotic fruit tree plantation and the remaining individual trees are felled for charcoal production.

Timber Trees 18. There are an estimated 3500 species of trees indigenous to the Philippines (Salvosa 1963); about 10% of these have economic importance as timber source (Meniado et al. 1974; see Figure 8). The bulk of the commercial timber extracted from Philippine forests, however, belongs to species of Dipterocarpaceae (see Figure 1). FERNANDO, et al. (2001) Biodiversity and Plant Genetic Resources of the Philippines: Highlights 9

Figure 6. Rafflesia manillana Teschem. on Mt Makiling, Luzon Island. This endemic species is strictly parasitic on stems of Tetrastigma spp. (Vitaceae) and is very rare and critically endangered. © Photo by E.S. Fernando

Figure 7. Tectona philippinensis Benth.& Hook. f. in forest near Lobo, Batangas Province on Luzon Island. This tree species is endemic to the Philippines and also critically endangered due to timber poaching and reduction in the size of its natural habitat. © Photo by E.S. Fernando FERNANDO, et al. (2001) Biodiversity and Plant Genetic Resources of the Philippines: Highlights 10

Figure 8. Afzelia rhomboidea (Blanco) Vidal in tropical semi-evergreen rain forest in the Subic Bay Forest Reserve on Luzon Island. This species is one of the economically important timber tree species in the Philippines. © Photo by E.S. Fernando

Plant Genetic Resources 19. The National Plant Genetic Resources Laboratory (NPGRL) at Institute of Plant Breeding, The University of the Philippines – Los Baños, holds a collection of 396 species of various plants that include cereals, fibers, forage and pasture crops, fruit trees (Figure 9), legumes, nut trees, oil crops, plantation crops, root crops, small fruits and vegetables (Villareal and Fernando 2000, Table 5). A large proportion (about 75%) of this collection is of local origin. Table 5. Germplasm holdings of the National Plant Genetic Resources Laboratory, Institute of Plant Breeding, The University of the Philippines – Los Baños, as of October 1998 (after Villareal and Fernando 2000).

Crop Group Species Accessions Cereals 2 3,099 Fiber Crops 7 350 Food Legumes 29 15,899 Forage/pasture 38 246 Fruit Trees 126 743 Nut Trees 13 221 Oil Crops 12 376 Ornamentals 28 229 Plantation Crops 100 245 Root Crops 8 910 Small Fruits 12 362 Vegetables 120 11,191 Recent Introductions Unclassified 8,636 Total 495 42,507 FERNANDO, et al. (2001) Biodiversity and Plant Genetic Resources of the Philippines: Highlights 11

Figure 9. Edible fruits of Nephelium ramboutan-ake (Labill.) Leenh. collected from lowland evergreen rain forest in Surigao del Sur Province on Mindanao Island. This species is one of many economically useful wild fruit trees in the Philippines. © Photo by E.S. Fernando

20. Coronel (1983) noted more than 200 species and varieties of potentially useful fruit trees in the Philippines (Figure 9) with only 40-50 species grown for their edible fruits. Five of these are considered major fruits, contributing substantially to the country’s domestic and export markets. 21. Many of the benefits of plant genetic resources derived from the forests originate from sources other than wood – the so-called non-wood forest products. These include food plants (wild fruits, palm hearts and other edible young plant shoots), medicinal and aromatic plants, fiber plants (for making ropes, baskets, mats, and other domestic products), and rattans (Figure 10) and bamboos (for construction, furniture, basketry). These plants and their products are extracted from the forests to supplement food, income, farm inputs, fodder, as well as, to meet social, cultural, and religious functions. The economic returns of many of these species (e.g. rattans) may even exceed the value of timber in certain localities.

FERNANDO, et al. (2001) Biodiversity and Plant Genetic Resources of the Philippines: Highlights 12

Figure 10. Collecting rattans by a member of the indigenous Manobo tribe from the forests on the eastern slopes of the Diwata Mountains on Mindanao Island. Rattans are an important source of livelihood for many indigenous peoples in the Philippines. © Photo by E.S. Fernando

Land Use and Forest Types 22. Of the remaining 5.4 million ha forest cover, 66% are lowland dipterocarp forests with about 805,000 ha classified as old-growth forests and 2.7 million ha as residual forests. The remaining forest types are categorized by the Forest Management Bureau (1998) as follows: pine forest, 227,900 ha; sub-marginal forest (includes the limestone and ultramafic forests), 475,100 ha; mossy forests (includes the upper montane and subalpine rain forests), 1.04 million ha; and mangrove forest, 112, 400 ha (see Table 6). Table 6. Land -use and area of forest types in the Philippines (after DENR-UNEP 1997).

Land use / Forest type Area (in hectares) Percentage of total area Forest 5,391,717 17.9 Dipterocarp forest 3,536,017 11.7 Old-growth 804,000 2.6 Residual 2,731,117 9.1 Pine forest 227,900 0.7 Submarginal forest 475,100 1.5 (includes the limestone and ultramafic forests) Mossy forest 1,040,300 3.4 Mangrove forest 112,400 0.3 Brushland 2,232,300 7.4 Other land use 22,375,983 74.5 Total 30,000,000 100.0

FERNANDO, et al. (2001) Biodiversity and Plant Genetic Resources of the Philippines: Highlights 13

Conservation Values of Mountain Protected Areas and Wetlands 22. Many Philippine ecosystems, especially mountain protected areas are provide conservation values as (a) watersheds, providing the greater part of riverflows downstream and constantly recharging groundwater aquifers, (b) as important habitats for many endemic plants and wildlife, and as flyways for migratory birds, (c) as ecotourism sites. 23. The wetland areas of the Philippines comprise 421 major rivers, 78 lakes, four major swamps or marshes, and many water reservoirs, estuaries, mudflats, bays and islands (DENR-UNEP 1997). Thus far, about 1, 616 species of plants and 3,675 species of animals have been recorded from the wetlands. This inventory covers microalgae and aquatic macrophytes for plants, and aquatic invertebrates (including aquatic insects), waterfowl, and fish for animals (DENR-UNEP 1997). However, the DENR-UNEP (1997) biodiversity assessment did not include the inventory and assessment of the numerous streams, fishponds, and flooded cultivated fields while the extant mangrove swamps are included under marine habitats. 24. Wetlands provide many conservation values, viz. (a) as habitat of resident and migratory birds; (b) as means for navigation and communication, (c) as fisheries areas, (d) as source of food and medicinal plants, (e) as agricultural crop production areas, (f) as source of biomass and raw material for the cottage industry, and (g) as human settlements.

The Philippines as a Biodiversity Hotspot 25. As a biodiversity “hotspot” (Myers et al. 2000) the Philippines is characterized by an exceptional concentration of endemic species of plants (70-80%) and experiencing exceptional loss of habitat. The basic analysis developed by Myers et al. (2000) is driven by two criteria: species endemism and degree of threat. The expanded criteria also require that a hotspot (a) contains endemic plant species comprising at least 0.5% of all plant species world-wide (300,000); and (b) should have lost 70% or more of its primary vegetation. This is easily met as the Philippines contributes 1.9% to the global total, and has already lost more than 95% of its original primary vegetation. Because of its relatively small area the Philippines as a biodiversity hotspot is also significant. Its species/area ratio per 100 km2 for endemic plants is 64.7, the second highest in the world (after the Eastern Arc and Coastal forest of Tanzania and Kenya FERNANDO, et al. (2001) Biodiversity and Plant Genetic Resources of the Philippines: Highlights 14

with species area of 75). And because the Philippines comes out five times in the top ten listings of five key factors considered (numbers of endemic plants and vertebrates, species/area ratios for both plants and vertebrates and habitat loss), it ranks second (after Madagascar) in the list of the eight ‘hottest hotspots’ in the world.

Problems and Threats to Biodiversity 25. The problems and threats to biodiversity may be divided into two general categories: human population threats and land use threats. With increasing population, intensification of production is in order. In instances where production of renewable resources have exceeded rates of renewal, stress on such resources follow. The pressures of human need and their rising expectations for fuel, food, housing, industrial products and leisure conspire in disrupting the ecosystems and reducing wild populations of animals and plants on an unprecendented scale. Poverty and the inequitable distribution of wealth exacerbate the impacts of human populations on living resources and biodiversity. This condition has a built-in tendency for more intensive extractive activities. All these conditions present opportunities for biological and environmental degradation. Land uses that pose threats to biodiversity include infrastructure development, road networks, irrigation, water resources, power and energy projects, ports and harbors. Their operations and possible expansion may disturb, pollute or encroach upon biodiversity-rich 26. Other equally serious threats to indigenous plant biodiversity include the introduction of exotic species as ornamentals, food crops, or as reforestation species. These species can sometimes become invasive weeds and can displace native species in their habitats. Habitat degradation, such as slash-and-burn agriculture (kaingin) (Figure 11), timber poaching and illegal logging, overexploitation, can also cause the decline of biodiversity.

The Importance of the Watershed Approach 27. The watershed approach is defined as the application of watershed management principles in the planning and development of a particular terrestrial ecosystem and all the resources found therein (Cruz 1997). This approach is important for the following reasons: (a) limited land resources with increasing population; (b) 70-90% (21 Million – 27 Million ha) of the Philippines are considered watersheds; (c)

FERNANDO, et al. (2001) Biodiversity and Plant Genetic Resources of the Philippines: Highlights 15

Figure 11. A patch of forest on Mindoro Island cleared for slash-and-burn agriculture (kaingin). This and other types of habitat alterations have been responsible for the reduction of forest cover in the Philippines and continues to threaten biodiversity at all levels. © Photo by E.S. Fernando

dependence of many people on watersheds for their livelihood; (d) importance of water to society; and (e) intimate relationship between the lowlands and uplands. This approach calls for a recognition of the watershed continuum that includes the uplands, the lowlands, and the coastal environment (Figure 12).

Figure 12. Cross section of a watershed continuum with 3 environments delimited: mountain environment; lowland environment; and sea environment. FERNANDO, et al. (2001) Biodiversity and Plant Genetic Resources of the Philippines: Highlights 16

Social and Cultural, Factors Affecting Biodiversity 28. The social factors that negatively affect biodiversity conservation are poverty, insecure tenure, and activities like kaingin making, logging (legal and illegal), and the gathering of non-timber forest products. While it is not possible to totally prevent communities from making use of biodiversity resources (in fact, resources are meant to be used), government should implement economic and policy measures that will regulate the use of these resources. 29. Indigenous knowledge of biodiversity is based on the people’s perceptions of their environment acquired through the cultural rule-of-thumb (Xu and Ruscoe 1993). These form the basis of local decisions pertaining to agriculture, aquaculture, health care, and natural resources management, among others. An ever-increasing population accompanied by abject poverty puts even greater stress on existing natural resources, which in turn affects, the biodiversity level of the ecosystem. Many studies have been conducted on the relationship between biodiversity and human activities. Various indigenous knowledge and practices (IKPs) are well documented, but some of them are in danger of being lost due to acculturation. There is a need to encourage indigenous peoples/indigenous cultural communities to continue those practices that favor biodiversity conservation. Even non-indigenous people communities can be motivated to adopt these IKPs where social and biophysical conditions allow.

Economics of Biodiversity conservation 30. The economic importance of biodiversity relates to its direct and indirect effect on human well-being or welfare. Valuation of biodiversity is typically through established markets, but conventional markets are not always necessary to determine economic value. The fact that many biodiversity resources are unpriced has forced environmental and resource economics to refine innovative methods to investigate individual preferences for states of the environment and biodiversity (Pearce and Moran 2000). The unpriced nature of goods and services from biodiversity resources has resulted in over- or unwise exploitation.

National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan for the Philippines 31. The present conservation efforts on biodiversity can be traced back in 1989 when the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) formulated the FERNANDO, et al. (2001) Biodiversity and Plant Genetic Resources of the Philippines: Highlights 17

Philippine Strategy for Sustainable Development (PSSD). Biodiversity conservation is one of the 10 major strategies of the PSSD. In 1992, the Philippine Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD), with a Sub-Committee on Biodiversity was created. This committee formulated the Philippine Strategy for Biological Diversity Conservation (PSBDC) which was later refined into a National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan for the Philippines (NBSAP) (DENR UNEP 1997). Completed in 1996 and approved in 1997, NBSAP has the following goals: (1) conservation of biodiversity through improved knowledge and management systems; (2) research and development; (3) information; and institutional support; (4) sustainable use of biodiversity; and (5) equitable sharing of benefits of biodiversity. 32. To achieve its goals and objectives, NBSAP has outlined the following strategies and actions: (1) expanding and improving knowledge on the extent, characteristics, uses and value of biodiversity; (2) enhancing existing and planned biodiversity conservation efforts and identifying potential ones, consolidating research and development and setting up networks of conservation centers; (3) formulating policies and laws on biodiversity conservation emphasizing sustainable use and equitable sharing of benefits; (4) integrating biodiversity conservation in all levels of government and non-government planning as well as strengthening of human resources capability for biodiversity conservation; (5) mobilizing an integrated Information, Education and Communications system; and (6) advocating stronger international cooperation on biodiversity conservation.

Policies and Laws on Biodiversity Conservation 33. As a signatory to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, the Philippine government has promulgated a number of policies and legislations to address the issue of biodiversity conservation. Foremost of these is Republic Act 7586 known as the National Integrated Protected Areas (NIPAS) Act of 1992, which provided for the establishment of a comprehensive system covering biologically important public lands that are habitat of various species. One other national law that supports biodiversity conservation is Executive Order (E.O.) No. 247 issued in 1995 which regulates the prospecting of biological and genetic resources. EO 247 provided a framework for regulating prospecting activities by requiring prior informed consent from the government, Protected Area Management Boards, local and indigenous communities, and private landowners. An earlier FERNANDO, et al. (2001) Biodiversity and Plant Genetic Resources of the Philippines: Highlights 18

legislation intended to curb activities adverse to biodiversity conservation is the Philippine Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) System institutionalized in 1978 through Presidential Decree No. 1151 also known as The Philippine Environment Policy of 1978. This policy mandated the conduct of EIA for all projects affecting the quality of the environment.

Organizations Involved in Biodiversity Conservation

34. Government, academic and other research institutions, and non-government organizations play active roles in biodiversity conservation. DENR is the government agency mandated to manage the country’s natural resources. Three bureaus under the DENR are directly concerned with biodiversity research. These are the Protected Areas and Wildlife Bureau (PAWB), Forest Management Bureau (FMB), and the Ecosystems Research and Development Bureau. PAWB is mandated to implement the NIPAS Act in the country, while ERDB is the primary agency tasked to undertake biodiversity research.

35. The Philippine Council for Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources Research and Development (PCARRD), under the Department of Science and Technology, is in charge of monitoring and evaluation of researches on agriculture, forestry and natural resources. The Philippine National Museum (PNM) is another key player on biodiversity research. It is tasked with the collection of Philippine national heritage covering all aspects of biodiversity. The University of the Philippines System, with its hundreds of academic departments and research centers and institutes in various campuses in the country is the largest institution in the Philippines involved in various aspects of biodiversity conservation at all levels, from genes to ecosystems.

CONCLUSIONS 36. The biodiversity and plant genetic resources of the Philippines are one of the richest in the world. There are many unique ecosystems and thousands of species are endemic to the archipelago and are not found anywhere else in the world, and thus are globally significant. The Philippines contributes 1.9% to the world total number species of vascular plants, but has already lost more than 95% of its original primary vegetation. As such it is also considered a biodiversity “hotspot”. FERNANDO, et al. (2001) Biodiversity and Plant Genetic Resources of the Philippines: Highlights 19

LITERATURE C ITED Ashton, P.S. 1982. Dipterocarpaceae. Flora Malesiana Ser. I, 9: 237-552. Coronel, R.E. 1983. Promising Fruits of the Philippines. 508 p. The University of the Philippines - Los Baños. Dasmann, R.F., J.P. Milton, and P.H. Freeman. 1973. Ecological Principles of Economic Development. John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. London. DENR-UNEP. 1997. Philippine Biodiversity: An Assessment and Action Plan. 298 p. Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the United Nations Environment Programme. Bookmark, Inc., Makati, Philippines. Dickerson, R.E. 1928. Distribution of Life in the Philipppines. Bureau of Printing: Manila. 322p. Ding Hou. 1978. Anacardiaceae. Flora of Malesiana Ser. 1, 8(3): 395-548. Earthlife Foundation. 1986. Paradise Lost? 45 p. Earthlife Foundation, London. Fernando, E.S. 2001. Diversity, endemism, and rarity in the palm flora of the Philippines. In Biodiversity – Status, Conservation and Restoration: Proceedings of the 19th International Symposium on Plant Biology, (D.S. Cho, ed.), pp. 182-195. The Botanical Society of Korea, The Botanical Society of Japan, and The Catholic University of Korea, Puchon, Seoul, Korea. Fernando, E.S. and R.P. Cereno. 2000. Pinanga bicolana: a critically endangered palm species from the Philippines. Species 33: 62. Geary, E.E., Harrison, T.M. and M. Heizier. 1988. Diverse ages and origins of basement complexes, Luzon, Philippines. Geology 16: 341-344. Hall, R. 1998. The plate tectonics of SE Asia and the distribution of land and sea. pp. 99-131. In R. Hall and J.D. Holloway (eds.), Biogeography and Geological Evolution of SE Asia. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden. IUCN. 2000. The 2000 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. IUCN/SSC, Cambridge, U.K. Jacobs, M. 1974. Botanical panorama of the Malesian archipelago (vascular plants). pp. 263-294. In: UNESCO (ed.), Natural Resources of Humid Tropical Asia. Natural Resources Research, XII. Johns, R.J. 1995a. Malesia – an introduction. Curtis’s Botanical Magazine 12(2): 52-62. Johns, R.J. 1995b. Endemism in the Malesian flora. Curtis’s Botanical Magazine 12(2): 95-110. Leenhouts, P.W. 1956. Burseraceae. Flora Malesiana Ser. 1, 5(2): 209-296. McCabe, R., Almasco, J. & W. Dieger. 1982. Geologic and paleomagnetic evidence for a possible Miocene collision in western Panay, central Philippines. Geology 10: 325-329. Merrill, E.D. 1923-1926. An Enumeration of Philippine Flowering Plants. 4 vols. Bureau of Printing, Manila. Mitra, M. 1973. The Philippines in a botanist’s eye. Bulletin of the Botanical Society of Bengal 27: 67-70. Mittermeier, R.A., N. Myers, P.R. Gil, and C.G. Mittermeier. 1999. Hotspots: Earth’s Biologically Richest and Most Endangered Terrestrial Ecoregions. Cemex, Conservation International, and Agrupacion Sierra Madre, Monterey, Mexico. Myers, N., R.A. Mittermeier, C.G. Mittermeier, G.A.B. de Fonseca, and J. Kent. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403: 853-858. Nooteboom, H.P. 1977. Symplocaceae. Flora Malesiana Ser. I, 8(2): 205-274. Pancho, J.V. 1973. Mt. Makiling as a station for biological research. Philippine Agriculturist 57: 21- 33. Pancho, J.V. 1983. Vascular Flora of Mount Makiling and Vicinity (Luzon: Philippines) Part 1. Kalikasan, The Philippine Journal of Biology, Supplement Number 1, Kalikasan Press, 476 p. Roeder, D. 1977. Philippine arc system – collision or flipped subduction zones? Geology 5:203-206. Salvosa, F.M. 1963. Lexicon of Philippine Trees. FPRI Bull. No. 1, College, Laguna. 136 p. Sleumer, H. 1966. Ericaceae. Flora Malesiana Ser. I, 6(4): 469-668. Soepadmo, E. 1976. Fagaceae. Flora Malesiana Ser. 1,7:265-403 Steenis, C.G.G.J. van. 1950. The delimitation of Malaysia and its main plant geographical divisions. Flora Malesiana Ser. I, 1: lxx- lxxv. Steenis, C.G.G.J. van. 1987. Checklist of Generic Names in Malesian Botany. Flora Malesiana Foundation: Leiden. 162 p. Tan, B.C. 1982. Checklist of mosses of Mt Makiling (Luzon Island, Philippines). Quarterly Journal of the Taiwan Museum 35 (3-4): 135-148. FERNANDO, et al. (2001) Biodiversity and Plant Genetic Resources of the Philippines: Highlights 20

Tan, B.C., E.S. Fernando, and J.P. Rojo. 1986. An updated list of endangered Philippine plants. Yushania (Taiwan) 3(2): 1-5. [Reprinted in PESAM Bulletin (Philippines) 7(1): 8-9, 12 (1987)]. Villareal, R.L. 1985. Utilization of the genus Lycopersicum germplasm in plant breeding. In K.L. Mehra and S. Sastrapraja, eds. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Southeast Asian Plant Genetic Resources: Lambaga Biologi Nasional-LIPI, Bogor. Whitmore, T.C. 1984. Tropical Rain Forests of the Far East. 2nd ed. Clarendon Press: Oxford. 352 p. Xu J. and M.T. Ruscoe. 1993. The Use of Indigenous Knowledge in Agroecosystem Management for Biodiversity Conservation: A Case Study in barnagay Haliap, Kiangan, Ifugao, Centeral Cordillera, Philippiines, pp. 9-14. Institute of Environmental Science and Management, University of the Philippines – Los Banos.