We don’t want others to take advantage of Asean’s rich mineral resources: Philippine environment policymaker

Shortly after Philippine president Ferdinand Marcos, Jr formally recognised the chairship, the country signed a deal with the United States to develop a stable supply chain in critical minerals such as nickel and copper, essential raw materials for green technologies such as electric vehicles batteries and solar turbines.

The partnership, under the industry-led Critical Minerals International Alliance, aims to transition countries like the Philippines from a raw material exporter to building a domestic industry that processes its own minerals, DENR said. 

“In the same way, this is what we will be advocating at the Asean level, especially since many of our member states are minerals-rich. We don’t want other parties to be taking advantage of our rich resources in the region,” Uy told the Eco-Business Podcast.

The Philippines is the second largest producer of nickel in the world, after Indonesia. The country mainly exports its raw nickel ore.

Uy also tells the Eco-Business Podcast how the Philippines will be pushing for more adaptation infrastructure in the region, ensuring biodiversity protection from clean energy infrastructure, and supporting the blue economy by curbing marine litter. 

Noralene Uy, assistant secretary for policy, planning, international affairs and climate change of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Image: DENR

Tune in as we talk about:

• How an ethical supply chain can be set in place for the mineral-rich region
• Hopes for Asean to focus more on adaptation than mitigation
• DENR’s plans for Asean Climate Week in April 
• Supporting Singapore as Asean chair of climate change 
• The Philippines’ biggest advantage as summit chair

This podcast was edited for brevity.

The Philippines has officially taken on the role of Asean chair and is preparing to host hundreds of meetings throughout the year. What are DENR’s priorities for the year?

During this chairship year, we are framing our deliverables against the “triple planetary crisis” which includes climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution mitigation. We are also focusing on critical minerals.  

 This is a crucial year for the environment sector as we lay the foundations for the Asean Committee Vision 2045. We are trying to aim towards building a community resilient and environmentally sustainable region.

The DENR is leading the development of the Asean strategic plan on environment, a document which sets the long-term direction of regional cooperation on the environment.  

We are also tasked with the preparation of the Asean joint statement on climate change. We want the voice of Asean to be elevated to the global community. We hope to be able to come up with this joint statement just to reaffirm Asean’s commitment to climate action and the Paris Agreement. 

Because of interests from various stakeholders, we are convening an Asean Climate Week in Manila in April so that we can accommodate all the initiatives of our partners at the Asean level. 

It’ll be a week-long event, where we will announce our nationally determined contribution [to the Paris Agreement]. Apart from that, hopefully, once we’re able to complete the negotiations of the Philippines-Singapore implementation agreement [a legally binding accord that will operationalise the two countries’ cooperation on carbon markets under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement], we hope to be able to have it signed also on the first day of the event.

These are high level events followed by knowledge exchange and dialogues. 

Aside from the focus on climate change, we’re also looking at biodiversity. We’re working with Asean Center for Biodiversity on the development of the Asean joint statement on biodiversity for this year’s nature COP. 

We are also looking at updating the Asean regional action plan on marine debris, as well as putting in more work towards the implementation of the Asean Blue Economy Framework. Lastly, we aim to contribute to the Asean community pillar, where we will be coming up with an Asean Declaration on Critical Minerals.

For the Asean Power Grid, the Philippines will be tapping offshore wind, which will require a massive buildout of port facilities. We know there are a lot of nature protection laws but how can we ensure transparency that marine life will really not be harmed from new renewable energy infrastructure?

We welcome this initiative on the Asean Power Grid, and we do recognise that this is a positive step towards energy resilience. But we also recognise that it gives us an even greater responsibility on the part of the Department of Environment Natural Resources to ensure that this transition reinforces and does not compromise our natural capital. 

We have issued the Administrative Order number 2024-02, which is on the interim guidelines for offshore wind projects under the Philippine environmental impact assessment statement system. 

These guidelines adopt a precautionary and science-based approach, mandating rigorous site selection, comprehensive baseline studies, cumulative impact assessments, and robust mitigation and, monitoring measures throughout the entire project cycle from pre-development to decomissioning.

We recognise that all these developments would entail the generation of underwater noise, increase vessel traffic and also temporarily disrupt marine habitats. So the DENR requests proponents to avoid these sensitive areas or schedule activities outside critical breeding and migration periods, manage vessel movements and lighting and employ noise reduction technologies and restore affected coastal and onshore areas.

All these are provided by these guidelines and are embedded in the environmental compliance certificate framework that is monitored throughout the project life.

Environment Secretary Raphael Lotilla and United States Undersecretary of State for Economic Affairs Jacob Helberg sign the agreement on the sidelines of the 2026 Critical Minerals Ministerial in Washington on 4 February. Image: Philippine Embassy in Washington

DENR’s contribution to Asean’s green agenda includes a critical minerals roadmap. The Philippines recently signed a memorandum of understanding with the United States to boost cooperation on critical minerals, including advancing the sector away from exporting raw mineral ore toward domestic processing. How will the country leverage its chairship to drive this policy?

Within Asean we have been very active in regional discussions on responsible development of critical minerals. We signed that agreement with the US because these mineral resources are vital to clean energy technologies that must be developed transparently, sustainably and inclusively.

With our chairship, this allows us the opportunity to guide a coordinated regional approach through the development of an Asean critical minerals strategy.

That’s one of the deliverables under the economic pillar, that we are also working on through our Mines and Geosciences Bureau. This strategy will emphasise three priorities: One is on policy coherence through shared understanding of political minerals, number two is investment readiness supporting responsible and well-governed projects, and thirdly, aligning mineral development with environmental, social, and climate objectives. 

Within this framework, we are aiming to come up with common outcomes, including the original definition of critical minerals and the identification of priority minerals for regional and global value chains.

We also want shared commitments to be articulated in an Asean Leaders’ Declaration, which we hope will be announced at the Leaders’ Summit. We see the Philippines’ role as chair as a consensus-builder, strengthening regional trust and ensuring that sustainability and resilience remain central to Asean’s economic and energy features. 

How are you ensuring an ethical supply chain for critical minerals? 

The Mines and Geoscience Bureau is leading the work, but we have been engaging with various partners. That’s why we have been late in the game in joining the Critical Minerals International Alliance because we wanted to build capacity on putting in the ethical and sustainable part and the climate change objectives into the critical minerals development.

We have already initially developed some guidelines. For example, we already have some guidelines on how we can integrate climate change considerations into mining rehabilitation or restoration. We have made initial efforts to make sure that critical minerals mining is done responsibly

Can you give an example of the climate considerations you are integrating for mining restoration? 

We do recognise that many of our mining areas are located in very highly exposed locations. We need to take their risk profiles into the plans and whatever development will be in that particular location. We need to look at the socioeconomic dimension and the vulnerability of communities located in the area, ensuring that climate change does not affect them negatively. We are trying to implement this for any mining development or rehabilitation. 

The G7’s Critical Minerals Production Alliance, launched in 2025, aims to diversify supply chains for minerals like nickel away from China, which means that, they might be looking at other nickel producers and suppliers. Countries like the Philippines or Indonesia could benefit from this. Is this part of the conversation in the critical minerals roadmap?

 I am not privy to that discussion, but on the part of the Philippines, we aim to really ensure that, we do not just export our raw minerals, as we have under our US agreement. We want to make sure that some processing can be done here and some products can be developed here. In the same way, that’s what we will be advocating at the Asean level, especially since many of our member states are minerals-rich. We don’t want other parties to be taking advantage of our rich resources.

For Asean Climate Week, you mentioned that adaptation will be at the forefront. How can the Philippines leverage its chairship to drive adaptation?

 Adaptation is a priority not only for the Philippines, but the whole of Asean. The Asia Pacific is the most disaster prone area in the world so adaptation really is a priority for many of our Asean member states. 

There are a lot of activities within the Asean working group on climate change that concern adaptation. We are looking at building resilience, adaptive capacities, in our various sectors. In the same way that for the Philippines, we are trying really to localise our national adaptation plan.

That’s the only way that we see we can build adaptive capacities and also enhance resilience. It’s not really only the government that should be working, but all of the society should be contributing in this adaptation effort.

On the part of the government we are putting in all the mechanisms, infrastructure, and platforms that can somehow support adaptation work, especially at the local level, including financing. We are focusing on that because we do know that adaptation finance has a huge gap globally now. In our own way, we are trying to engage as many stakeholders as we can, from bilateral to the business sector, to contribute to adaptation action.

Are you tapping on Asean for adaptation funding?

Most of the Asean member states are doing their own submission to the Green Climate Fund and Adaptation Fund.

We have more projects as a region in mitigation technologies for methane reduction [than adaptation projects]. But on the part of disaster resilience, in terms of early warning, we do have some initiatives as a region that would advance early warning, social protection, and anticipatory action.

Why is it so hard to get financing for adaptation in the Asean region? 

This is me speaking on a personal level. Based on my experience, because many of the Asean member states are focused more on their net zero targets, that’s the goal that they have. In a way they may miss out on opportunities for adaptation. But for us, as we experience all these disasters and extreme weather events, we really need to focus and prioritise adaptation more than mitigation.

Would you hope for Asean to focus more on adaptation than mitigation?

Yes, because I think that when we work together as a region, when we have more regional projects on adaptation, we are able to achieve more in terms of adaptation.

The Philippines is one of the few Southeast Asian nations that has yet to announce its updated nationally determined contribution to the Paris Agreement. Does this delay affect the Philippines’ image as a climate leader in the region? 

The Philippines was targeting submission at COP30, but we have been very deliberate in our submission. We want a submission that would show credible policies, robust data and steadfast implementation.

We don’t want to commit to something that is not achievable come 2035. The focus is on having this NDC 3.0 as one that is actionable, investment-ready and fully aligned with our national policies and capabilities.

It was clear to us that this updated NDC must reflect what is achievable and aligned with our development direction. 

We are in the final drafting phase. It’s just the writing and the final sign-off by our principals [that are missing]. The president was expecting this in December, and before that, we tried to target COP30 in November. The last target would be released during the Asean chairship, which will be on the Asean Climate Week.

What do you think would be the biggest hurdle of the Philippines as Asean chair, in terms of climate cooperation?

Within Asean, we need to navigate diverse priorities, capacities and development pathways. We are at different stages of economic growth, decarbonisation efforts, and we have different vulnerabilities and risk profiles.

This presents a challenge to come up with a common priority. For example, the Philippines is leading the work on loss and damage, but during our consultations some of the Asean member states are not familiar yet with what loss and damage is. We are at varying degrees of understanding on some of the climate actions that are required. 

Another challenge would be, although we are chair of Asean this year, the Philippines is not chairing the Asean working group on climate change that’s leading the work. It’s Singapore who is, so we cannot really leverage on the chairship in terms of [climate change]. 

We do support all the activities of Singapore and all Asean member states. For example. we would like to carry on the proposal of Malaysia, the past chair, to have a negotiating bloc because they want to highlight a coordinated presence of Asean in the UNFCCC negotiations. 

Like them, we feel there will be a stronger voice if there’s a regional bloc. This would amplify Asean’s collective voice on many of the critical issues that we face, such as mitigation, adaptation finance, etc.

If Singapore will chair the climate change working group, does this mean that carbon credits are going to be high up in the agenda and is the Philippines going to participate in this?

We are already foreseeing that because we are about to conclude the implementation arrangement negotiation.

Although we have yet to convene with Singapore as chair in May for the asset working group on climate change meeting. Article 6 [a section in the Paris treaty which lays out the rules for countries to trade carbon credits to meet their national climate targets] is high on their priority based on some consultations that we’ve had recently.

The blue economy is also a priority for Singapore, and I believe we will see more of that in the Asean Senior Officials on Environment [the body of senior environment officials from all Asean member states that manages and coordinates regional cooperation on environmental issues] work, where blue economy is located in many of the pillars. 

Is there anything we are doing to coincide with the priority of blue economy in Singapore’s climate change working group?

Within Asean, we do already have the Asean Blue Economy Framework, but it has yet to be implemented. We did not see some efforts in past years, that’s why we’re taking this on as a deliverable.

During this chairship, because we can only do so much, we are looking at marine debris. We are updating the regional action plan on that and already starting the conversation. The Asean blue economy framework has a phased approach: the Philippines will be able to cover some aspect of the blue economy framework during its chairship, then in the next chair, Singapore, will be taking on.

Why are you focusing on marine debris in particular? 

Our priority is on the circular economy. The DENR is implementing the Extended Producer Responsibility Act [a law that requires large companies to take responsibility for the plastic packaging they introduce into the market]. We do have a national action plan on marine litter. We are also working on sustainable consumption production with Deped. We have a lot of initiatives from partners on on circular economy, like the Green Economy Program of the Philippines project that has been supported by the European Union. There are a lot of conversations to be had so that’s why we are trying to focus on that as a deliverable doing our chairship.

What are you expecting from Asean with this marine debris issue? 

There are a lot of priorities like the characterisation and investments in technologies to clean up our water systems, capacity building for behavioral change. These are some of our “asks” if we can have this done in order really to reduce the waste in our marine environment.

What do you think is the biggest advantage of the Philippines as Asean chair, in terms of climate cooperation?

We’re leading in many aspects on climate action. For example, on the loss and damage agenda, since we’re hosting the meetings of the board of the fund for responding loss and damage, we are now at the stage where we’re trying to convene stakeholders to be able to submit a proposal under the Barbados Implementation Modality phase.

We have a deadline to submit by 9 June. We hope to be able to do so to show how serious we are on advocating for loss and damage in Asean.

We have much to show in terms of leveraging on disaster risk reduction adaptation work. We have good models here in the country that can be also followed by other Asean member states. We have the systems, the governance structure and long-term programs to show for that.

Although there can be some issues sometimes, we do have these disaster risk reduction infrastructure already in place that provides us a template. If we follow it, we are sure that we will have less climate impacts.