Philippines: Flood Control Project Disregards Rights
By Human Rights Watch
October 12, 2026
Pampanga Residents Face Flooding, Lack of Livelihoods at Relocation Site
(Manila) – Philippine authorities disregarded the rights of residents who were removed from a small island in Pampanga province for a flood control project and relocated to a site with chronic flooding and few livelihood opportunities, Human Rights Watch said today.
In 2022, the Macabebe, Pampanga government relocated 90 families without adequate consultation and information from Pulo Island on the Pampanga River. The relocation site, in the town of Macabebe, is a low-lying area that was formerly a fish pond that floods throughout the year, causing residents to struggle to access services and work. Although the Pulo community wanted to stay together, some family members have since left because of the effects of the flooding on their lives and livelihoods.
“Philippine authorities in Pampanga have threatened the safety and livelihoods of Pulo Island residents by relocating them to a low-lying area as part of a flawed flood control project,” said Lian Buan, Southeast Asia researcher at Human Rights Watch. “The Philippine government should consult the community to find a better solution and ensure that future relocations related to flood control projects respect affected people’s rights.”
Pampanga province in the Philippines’ northern island of Luzon experiences the country’s most severe flooding, which is exacerbated by storms, sea-level rise, and limited dam capacity, and is likely to worsen as climate change accelerates. From 2015 to 2025, floods and sea-level rise displaced 6.6 million people in the Philippines.
The Philippine government has adopted a national policy for moving entire communities, called planned relocation or resettlement. However, the authorities responsible for moving the Pulo Island community did not follow national or international standards to protect affected people’s rights. Planned relocations, according to the United Nations Guidance on Protecting People from Disasters and Environmental Change through Planned Relocation, should be a measure of last resort to protect life and health, and based on consultation with affected communities or at their request.
Human Rights Watch interviewed 35 residents of the Pulo relocation site in Pampanga’s Barangay Candelaria, Macabebe, between July and August 2026, as well as 9 authorities in Pampanga, and climate change experts. Human Rights Watch also analyzed satellite imagery of Pulo Island and the relocation site, and employed photogrammetry—using a camera to obtain precise measurements—to determine the difference in elevation between the relocation site and the dike.
Between 2020 and 2023, the Pampanga municipal government and the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) dredged Pulo Island and relocated the island’s residents. Human Rights Watch found that the relocation did not involve adequate consultation, access to information, or the selection of a suitable site. “They removed us [from Pulo Island], and they put us in a place where we feel we were thrown here like trash,” said a 48-year-old mother of two children.
Public works department engineers told Human Rights Watch that the late mayor of Macabebe, Anette Balgan, had requested the dredging—excavating sediment, soil, and other material from the bed of the Pampanga River—and to relocate the community. They said that removing the island would increase the river’s capacity and prevent flooding in the area, making the relocated residents and communities along the river safer.
Beginning in 2018, government officials held several meetings with the affected families, some in the local Kapampangan language. None of the residents interviewed by Human Rights Watch felt they were given a choice about the relocation.
Community members said they were informed about the relocation site in 2021, and expressed concerns about its suitability during meetings with authorities. The relocation site is below a dike, an elevated ridge built parallel to the river bank to prevent floodwaters reaching nearby residential areas. A road runs along the top of the dike beside the relocation site and serves as the main route to the town.
“They did not present any other solutions,” said the 48-year-old mother. “There were no options.”
Longtime residents said they felt pressured to move without understanding the reasons, or the compensation and assistance being provided.
Residents were required to demolish their own homes to receive compensation. Many feared that if they did not demolish their houses quickly enough, the funding allocated would run out, based on rumors spread in the absence of official information. Some said they felt intimidated by the authorities.
“The personnel on site were slightly harassing us too, telling us that we are obligated to leave, that we have no choice, and that they will tell on us to higher authorities,” said a 57-year-old farmer.
Many of the families are related and wanted to stay together. The UN Guidance provides that planned relocation should “maintain social cohesion and kinship ties.”
A massage therapist, 44, said an official became angry when she posed questions about the suitability of the relocation site: “The engineer pointed at me and said they studied engineering and would not risk their licenses over the project [if it weren’t suitable].”
Community members said that in response to their concerns, local authorities told them the site would be raised to the same height as the road dike to protect them from flooding. However, the embankment works never reached that elevation, and the site remains below the dike. One engineer who worked on the relocation said that the road dike design does not allow raising the site to the same level.
Human Rights Watch visited the relocation site from July 12 to 14, at the beginning of the rainy season, when at high tide the floodwater was knee- to thigh-deep. Human Rights Watch observed children wading through floodwaters, and older people who could not leave their homes while they were flooded. Residents, who described similar flooding year-round, needed to wade through flooded areas to reach the dike road.
© 2026 Human Rights Watch
