Ira Beau L. Baconguis recalls her mother asking her sisters when she planned to find a “real” job upon realizing that her daughter planned to stay working for a non-government organization (NGO) environmental group. “(It was) in 1995, and my family was not very sure that this was a good decision. It seemed I worked long hours and the pay was not (very) competitive. I remember my mom asking my sisters if I had no plans of finding a ‘real’ job. They (used to) ask me frequently if I had money, even if money was never an issue with me (since ) I figured that as long as I spend less than what I earn, I'll get by and I'll still even have some savings,” she says.

And so it was that Baconguis got involved with the promotion of environmental protection, an offshoot, perhaps, of her “becoming aware of the different issues as a college student at the Ateneo de Davao University, (where) my favorite subject was ecology and physiology, both subjects looking at the interconnectedness of different units within a system” – akin to human acts and the environment, always intertwined.
Interestingly, Baconguis couldn’t recall any “particular trigger for going into environmental work. It seemed like it was a natural course for me to take, although there were some ‘diversions’ along the way.” Among others, she worked as a science researcher for Tanggol Kalikasan (1995 to1998), advocacy officer for the Hari-bon Foundation for the Conservation of Natural Resources (1999 to 2000), and researcher for the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives.

As early as 1997, however, Baconguis was already doing research work for Greenpeace International – the group she chose to stay with, and which promoted her as toxics campaigner for Southeast Asia in June 2005.

“The good thing about working in an environmental organization is that most, if not all, of your colleagues share your vision of a green planet. So most are willing to take longer strides to make environmental initiatives work,” Baconguis says. “Of course, everyone will not always be on the same page. But as long as there is openness, then the task ahead will not be so difficult.”

Not that the job is not challenging, Baconguis admits. “Sometimes people are unwilling to try new things or new ways of doing things. It takes time for people to adjust. However, (even if they are willing to change their old ways, some) people want immediate results, and when they don't get it, they revert to old habits. Going green tests your patience and your dedication to the cause,” she says, adding that, of course, people tend to look negatively at greening because of initial costs. “For many Filipinos, some of the greener options are a little more expensive. Organic food, for one, is certainly more expensive. The challenge is on how to demonstrate health and environmental costs (in pesos and centavos), and how these all add up in the final balance sheet.”

Baconguis adds: “There are certainly lots of challenges, but it takes lots of patience and persistence to get there. I recognize that change does not happen overnight.” Baconguis is most proud of helping in the passage of the Clean Air Act and the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act into law. “These are landmark Philippine environmental legislation, instituting a ban on incineration (through a provision in the Clean Air Act), further strengthened in the Solid Waste Management Act, also globally lauded,” Baconguis says. “We have some very good environmental laws that if consistently and strictly enforced will spell a huge difference in improving current environmental conditions. An SWS survey commissioned by the Greenpeace shows that only 8% of those surveyed believe that these laws are often enforced. Consistent and strict enforcement educates the public about these laws and also gives a signal that government is serious in doing its job.” Baconguis gets disappointed that at times, “there is so much greenwashing under the guise of corporate social responsibility (CSR) – I call it greenwash when the initiatives have nothing to do with their actual business, or the scale of the initiative is too small compared to what is destroyed by their operations,” she says. “More importantly, it should mean consuming less, consuming only what is needed.” Already, there is a “huge body of scientific evidence that confirms how certain acts affect the environment. Our reckless acts have brought the planet to a precarious state, and human survival now is under threat. Going green is a response to these realities, and that there is no other way to go but to be green if we want to survive.”