Sim ilar to 2015, the approved 2016 clim ate budget has been largely focused (89%) on adaptation response. The majority of the adaptation responses are for service delivery and hard infrastructure, including DPWH’s flood mitigation structures and upgrading of infrastructure design standards to incorporate climate risks. In addition, adaptation PAPs are focused on resiliency building through enhancing capacity of both social and ecological system, policy and governance, and research and development. Meanwhile, the approved 2016 mitigation expenditures (11%) decreased by 2% from 2015, which can be attributed to the dropping of DOE’s Energy Efficient Electric Vehicles Project. Large mitigation PAPs include the administration’s forest rehabilitation program (NGP), promotion of mass transportation (LRT2), and building of sanitary landfills. Figure 3: Distribution of CC Expenditure by Objective, 2016 As in 2015, the 2016 approved clim ate budget is also concentrated in very few NGAs. With an increase of 34% from 2015, DPWH accounted for 74% (or PHP 130 billion) of the approved climate budget in 2016. Meanwhile, 23% of the total approved climate budget is from five NGAs: DA, DENR, DOTC, DOST, and DOE. Among the five NGAs, only DOST and DOE showed substantive declines (46% and -95%, respectively) in their climate budgets. The remaining 3% (PHP 5.1 billion) was distributed among the other 23 NGAs. Figure 4: Clim ate Appropriations by Agency, 2016   9