[New Rx] PhilHealth, telcos, and the business of surviving Super El Niño

At the GSMA Digital Nation conference in Manila on November 4, two discussions caught my attention. The first, featuring representatives from Globe Telecom, ACEN, and Ericsson, explored infrastructure resilience against natural disasters. The second examined how 5G, including private networks, could accelerate innovation across industries such as healthcare. Both demonstrated how businesses invest in technology and operational continuity. But they raised a broader question: If our infrastructure is becoming more resilient, why do Filipinos continue to suffer preventable illnesses, healthcare disruptions, and deaths during disasters? A telecommunications tower may survive a typhoon while residents struggle to obtain medical assistance. A power plant may remain operational while a rural health unit loses electricity. Major hospitals may explore private 5G while remote healthcare facilities struggle with basic connectivity. Infrastructure resilience does not automatically translate into community health resilience. When resilience makes commercial sense Companies such as Globe and ACEN have strong incentives to protect infrastructure, sometimes beyond minimum regulatory requirements. Damaged assets mean lost revenue, expensive repairs, and interrupted operations. Prevention makes commercial sense. But who finances backup electricity for an underfunded rural health unit? Who invests in potable water systems in isolated barangays? Who maintains healthcare connectivity where customer demand cannot justify infrastructure costs? These investments can prevent illness and hospitalizations, but their benefits extend beyond individual companies. In geographically isolated and disadvantaged areas (GIDAs), commercial incentives may be insufficient. We cannot expect private companies to finance these services indefinitely through corporate social responsibility. Government needs mechanisms that make community resilience economically sustainable. Super El Niño: An immediate test PAGASA warned in October that the ongoing strong to very strong El Niño could peak before the end of 2026, with effects potentially continuing into 2027. Heightened drought risks threaten water security, agriculture, and public health. When water supplies diminish, households may turn to untreated wells or unsafe alternatives, increasing risks of diarrheal diseases, dehydration, and other adverse health outcomes. During extreme heat, residents are advised to drink more water. But what if safe drinking water is precisely what they cannot obtain? Public health advisories cannot substitute for potable water. Government should prepare community purification facilities, appropriate filtration systems, safe storage, and emergency distribution before shortages become health emergencies. How can we prevent a water crisis we cannot see? Another weakness is fragmented municipal-level water information. PAGASA forecasts drought. Utilities monitor their systems. Local governments oversee drinking-water surveillance. But does the Department of Health (DOH) have a regularly updated picture showing which municipalities face potable-water shortages, how many households are affected, and where health risks are emerging? An October 2026 OECD report identified gaps in Philippine water-information systems, including incomplete coverage and fragmented reporting. DOH should coordinate a municipal-level water-security and health-risk dashboard integrating data from utilities, local government units, PAGASA, and healthcare providers. It could track interruptions, water quality, affected households, and emerging illness. We cannot prevent health emergencies effectively if we discover water shortages only after residents become sick. Can telecommunications help? Imagine residents accessing water interruption notices, potable-water distribution locations, heat advisories, and essential healthcare services without consuming mobile data. Telcos could provide free access to designated public-health platforms during drought emergencies. Connected monitoring systems could help utilities report shortages while rural health units report emerging health problems. Connectivity is particularly important in GIDAs, where some facilities rely on satellite alternatives such as Starlink. Not every rural health unit needs 5G. But every rural health unit needs reliable connectivity. Telcos already provide temporary emergency connectivity, including portable towers. Yet El Niño can affect communities for months, requiring longer-term arrangements. The Philippines also has multisector disaster-management structures and private-sector resilience initiatives. The challenge is making these services sustainable where commercial incentives remain weak. Can PhilHealth make prevention pay? PhilHealth could play a more innovative role. Its YAKAP primary-care expansion creates opportunities for earlier intervention and prevention. And a reminder to PhilHealth: preventing disease is often cheaper than treating its complications. In October, PhilHealth chief Beverly Ho disclosed that approximately 25% of benefit payouts went to dialysis. This illustrates the substantial financial burden of advanced disease and the importance of earlier intervention. (READ: [OPINION] Philippines’ peculiar health policy: Waiting until kidneys fail) The same logic should guide climate-health resilience. Potable water can prevent waterborne illness. Backup electricity can maintain treatment. Emergency connectivity can support timely referrals. But how can companies be encouraged to provide these services beyond their commercial obligations? One possibility is a PhilHealth Climate-Health Resilience Credit Scheme. Companies providing independently verified community-health resilience services could earn credits against part of their PhilHealth employer contributions. A telecommunications company offering free emergency connectivity, water-monitoring services, or dedicated rural healthcare communications could earn credits linked to verified service delivery. Energy developers providing backup power to healthcare facilities, or water-treatment operators maintaining potable-water systems, could participate similarly. Instead of requiring companies to make additional charitable contributions, government could allow verified community-health investments to offset part of their existing PhilHealth employer obligations, while fully compensating the insurance fund. Such a scheme would require legislation, transparent verification, appropriate limits, and government funding to replace foregone contributions. Employees’ healthcare entitlements and PhilHealth’s financial sustainability must remain protected. DOH could certify eligible services, while PhilHealth evaluates healthcare benefits and administers authorized credits. Beyond business continuity The telecommunications and energy sectors have demonstrated that resilience can be engineered, financed, and incorporated into long-term business planning. The next challenge is extending those capabilities beyond commercially attractive customers. With the right financing mechanisms, healthcare connectivity, municipal water monitoring, and resilient community infrastructure could become commercially sustainable services rather than occasional corporate donations. Success should be measured through fewer preventable illnesses, uninterrupted healthcare, and improved community health — not simply infrastructure restored. The Philippines has the technology and private-sector expertise. What it needs is a business model that directs those capabilities toward underserved communities. The next frontier of climate resilience is not simply protecting the infrastructure that generates revenue. It is finding a way to generate revenue from protecting the communities that depend on it. – Rappler.com Dr. Jaemin Park is a physician, healthcare investor, and adjunct professor at the University of the Philippines Manila. He writes about healthcare economics, investment, and public policy in the Philippines and across Asia.