Financing a Blue-Green Future: People

Bicol has become the country’s test case for climate resilience. Year after year, it absorbs some of the Philippines’ strongest typhoons, floods, and coastal erosion—plus a big share of corruption scandals—revealing both the strength of its communities and the fragility of traditional governance. If the region is to transition to a truly blue-green future, climate governance and anti-corruption reforms must move in lockstep. Accountability is not an option; it is the foundation of resilient, equitable development.

Real transformation—especially in climate-vulnerable coastal regions—requires collaboration at a scale the country has not yet attempted. This is where the emerging Bio-Circular Blue-Green Economy (BGE) Strategy becomes a timely national opportunity. It should be seen not merely as an environmental agenda but as a viable climate-action and economic-development framework. The Philippines is a marine biodiversity superpower with a young workforce, strong civil-society networks, and LGUs that confront climate risks daily. But the success of any BGE pilot hinges on aligning institutions that historically work in silos and redirecting their strengths toward shared, measurable outcomes.

This was the central message behind my presentation of a winning paper at Ocean Centres Philippines last November 14. Advancing the BGE agenda means integrating climate action, economic inclusion, and people-centered development into one coherent approach. Consider maritime skills training: TESDA-aligned courses such as Naval Architecture, Marine Engineering, and maritime safety can be reimagined not only to serve traditional employment pipelines but to support boat building, vessel repair, community-based shipyards, and climate-smart navigation. These are not niche technical fields; they are essential components of coastal resilience, food security, and livelihood generation.

First, national agencies and LGUs must co-design—not just coordinate—solutions. Current governance still relies on top-down directives and fragmented project cycles. A co-design approach ensures LGUs shape climate programs based on localized hazard profiles, while national agencies provide regulation, financing, and cross-regional oversight. Policies supporting mangrove rehabilitation, nature-based coastal defenses, blue-green port upgrades, circular aquaculture, and waste-to-value systems deliver faster, more transparent results when built from the ground up. Co-design reduces resource leakage, avoids misallocations, and ensures climate finance flows to communities with the highest exposure.

Second, the academe, civil society, and the private sector must be elevated as co-architects of implementation. Higher education institutions anchor research and workforce development; CSOs strengthen community ownership and safeguards; businesses bring technology, capital, and market pathways. When these sectors collaborate simultaneously—not sequentially—the country can rapidly build a shared blue-green curriculum, stackable micro-credentials, regional research hubs, climate data platforms, and community-based monitoring systems. These are essential enablers for scaling BGE beyond isolated pilot sites.

Third, international development partners should act as strategic catalysts. They can help strengthen transparency safeguards, align technology transfer with LGU needs, expand access to climate finance, and support multi-site BGE pilots. The Philippines’ long experience in humanitarian coordination shows that when global and local actors work within a unified framework, outcomes can reshape entire systems—not just deliver short-term projects.

Yet one persistent gap remains: financing the people who power climate action. The transition to a blue-green economy will fail without sustained investment in human capital—especially youth in coastal and rural communities. Today, climate finance overwhelmingly flows to infrastructure, while the technical expertise needed to operate, maintain, and innovate within those systems remains chronically underfunded.

If we are serious about inclusive climate resilience, blue-green education and workforce development must become core pillars of climate-finance policy. Mariners Polytechnic Colleges Foundation (MPCF)—long engaged in maritime training, fisherfolk development, logistics, social entrepreneurship, and disaster leadership—demonstrates how education can anchor local resilience ecosystems. With the right support, maritime schools and maritime-aligned Senior High Schools can evolve into TESDA-aligned Blue-Green Workforce Hubs specializing in renewable-energy maritime operations, climate-smart navigation, coastal engineering, rescue-livelihood boat building, circular aquaculture enterprises, and clean-port management.

But no school can scale this alone. It requires scholarships, upgraded laboratories, faculty development, industry partnerships, and modern facilities—from welding shops and boat-making workshops to simulation labs and composite-fabrication areas. The policy implication is clear: if government and development partners want the BGE strategy to succeed, they must fund not only the hardware of climate resilience but the people who will build, manage, and sustain it.

Bicol—and the Philippines—now stand at a crossroads. We can continue piecemeal efforts, or we can pursue a national Blue-Green Economy strategy that mobilizes our greatest strengths: our people, our seas, and our bayanihan spirit. Let us choose not only to fund projects, but to empower the workforce that will shape our blue-green future.