Friday, October 8, 2010
TV ratings
I do not mind if my favorite station's rating is lagging. Its rating simply implies that its shows are designed not for Class D and E but for the group enjoying superior intellectual or social or economic status. GMA station, which enjoys the top spot in terms of TV ratings, is followed by the majority of the respondents= poor households. This is just a simple case of market stratification. Gee.
The Rise of Middle Classes
Personally, I don't mind having a steady rise in the population so long as the growth is attributed to the middle class. Left without a choice, it is the middle class/the petty bourgeoisie or the professionals that carry the fiscal responsibility of the state through their consistent and correct payment of tax duties. At the same time, the middle class, more often than not, opt for private services and even for higher-than-market rate services rather than availing government provided and subsidized services. Class D and E, the poor segment of the population, does not have avenue to pay taxes to the government as most find themselves in underground market or in casual employment. Yet, bulk of the expenditure for social services are directed towards the poor sector. This sector is the cause exponential population growth. On the other end of the spectrum, the elites exhibits the free-rider syndrome we expect only from the poor. Elites are notorious tax evaders. Their maneuvers (including under the table transactions, grease money, and other illegal activities) have contributed significantly to fiscal instability of the country.
All the same, the population growth owing to middle class is far from reality. Firstly, we are talking about professionals who prefer smaller families. Even at individual levels, economic development may entail inverse relations with the number of family members (either by preference or by lack of opportunity as the household head/s are tied to regular employment). They are also relatively aware and educated on the concepts of family planning. In the same manner, the poor sector will always be the reason for steady population growth due to economic, social and cultural reasons.
So the question is how to incentivise the middle class to multiply and disincentivise poor families for them to consider family planning.
Unite middle class!
All the same, the population growth owing to middle class is far from reality. Firstly, we are talking about professionals who prefer smaller families. Even at individual levels, economic development may entail inverse relations with the number of family members (either by preference or by lack of opportunity as the household head/s are tied to regular employment). They are also relatively aware and educated on the concepts of family planning. In the same manner, the poor sector will always be the reason for steady population growth due to economic, social and cultural reasons.
So the question is how to incentivise the middle class to multiply and disincentivise poor families for them to consider family planning.
Unite middle class!
Monday, June 15, 2009
On National Land Use Policy: Salient Features of HB 3637
The bill provides for the establishment of crucial priorities for land use, especially to areas to be protected for ecological integrity and protected from industrial conversion to ensure food security. This provision is stated in Article 2, Section 10 of the bill. The bill also provides for the conduct of National Base Mapping and Geohazard Mapping Programs to provide relevant and timely data for land use planning. These mapping programs can fill up data gaps that hinder the effective land utilization and allocation. In terms of organization, the bill proposes for the creation of Land Use Policy Council that will be the highest policy making body on land use and final arbitrator on land use conflicts between or among agencies of the government.
Merits:
The conduct of mapping programs implies institutionalization of mapping programs in land use planning process. This provides identification and demarcation of areas that must be allocated accordingly. Aside from laying out parameters for identifying land that should be devoted to particular land use, it provide opportunity for specifying where or how much of these lands should be used accordingly. This is the current limitation of the National Physical Planning Framework. Specifically, it will lead to complete identification of protected areas such as the Network of Protected Areas for Agro-Industrial Development (NPAAAD), Strategic Agricultural and Fisheries Development Zones, forestlands and critical watershed areas. By establishment of crucial priorities for land use, it sets specific areas to address future land demand or land requirement.
Knowing that AKBAYAN party list advocates for agrarian reform program and its extension, their bill on land use act also reflects this advocacy. As stated in Section 29 of the bill, the priority areas for agricultural development are the CARP and CARPable areas. To ensure that these lands will be for agriculture use, prime agricultural areas (land suitability) and lands subject to CARP (principle of social justice and equity), must be protected from land use conversion. The bill links land use planning to land acquisition and distribution (LAD) and land rights to farmers. The bill implies that the security of land rights has to be guaranteed. The bill views that effective land utilization and allocation for development must also be in line with the principles of food sufficiency, improved productivity and social justice.
The bill reinforce local autonomy because LGUs have power to adopt and approve land use plans. Nevertheless, check and balance is ensured because the land use plans for implementation are still subject for review by the Land Use Policy Committee. This is explicitly stated in Article 5, Sections 23 and 24 of the bill.
Demerits:
On Public Participation:
While the bill stresses out the institutionalization of people’s participation in defining the framework and guiding the principles of land allocation by providing for the mandatory participation of stakeholders in key decision-making bodies on land use policy, there is no provision for the specific steps in public participation and consultation in land use plan formulation. There are no specific provisions on nature of hearing or qualification of persons or representative who can attend the meeting. The bill provides for the mandatory conduct of public hearing by the local development councils in preparation of land use plans at all level, as stated in Section 7 to Section 9 of the bill, but there are no specific provisions on how the mandatory public hearing will be carried through and how the public will be represented.
On Sanctions and Penalties:
Referring to Article 17 of the bill, the system of fines and sanctions for LGUs who have not completed and implemented the CLUP will hurt poor LGUs. Furthermore, the dynamics within local government is so complex that punishing public official or employee will not guarantee that after the sanction period, CLUPs will be completed and successfully implemented. Although the bearers of public offices have responsibility to the locality, punishing these persons doesn’t bring one to the real root of non-completion and non-implementation of CLUPs. This might be applicable for poor LGUs, LGUs getting most of its budget from Internal Revenue Allotment; they have weak access to financial resources that they cannot generate their own funds. Notwithstanding that there are considerable issues in the design of the IRA that spun-off vertical inequalities within lgus and horizontal imbalance across levels of LGUs.
Also, the bill doesn’t have provisions on how the LUPC will set parameters for investigation and how will they qualify non-implementation of CLUP; what are the parameters that will say that the CLUP has not been implemented. With the provisions not spelled out well, it gives the Executive Director (of LUPC) flexibility to maneuver or at least react to problems which will arise.
The Article 16 of the bill spells out the system of incentive and awards to LGUs that regularly update their CLUPs and ZO within prescribed period and the priority in giving technical assistance to LGUs. This provision creates bias against LGUs who are just starting in institutionalization of land use planning. This will widen the gap between the LGUs that started their CLUPs years ago and LGUs that are just beginning to formulate CLUP. The latter will always lag once compared with the former, leveraging on its primitive accumulation, with this system of incentives and awards. It is also equitable that they give equal technical assistance to LGUs which don’t have approved CLUP yet because the lack of technical assistance may be the reason why their CLUPs were not approved.
On the Planning Organization:
As stated in Section 19, the Executive Director of the Land Use Policy Council will be appointed by the President of the Philippines. Being the executive head of the LUPC and thus responsible for the implementation of policies adopted by the LUPC Board, the Executive Director bears important function in land utilization and allocation with LUPC being the highest policy making body on land use and final arbitrator on land use conflicts. The bill doesn’t provide for the process of selection or nomination of the Executive Director. Moreover, there is a question of independence because the Executive Director will be appointed by the President.
Merits:
The conduct of mapping programs implies institutionalization of mapping programs in land use planning process. This provides identification and demarcation of areas that must be allocated accordingly. Aside from laying out parameters for identifying land that should be devoted to particular land use, it provide opportunity for specifying where or how much of these lands should be used accordingly. This is the current limitation of the National Physical Planning Framework. Specifically, it will lead to complete identification of protected areas such as the Network of Protected Areas for Agro-Industrial Development (NPAAAD), Strategic Agricultural and Fisheries Development Zones, forestlands and critical watershed areas. By establishment of crucial priorities for land use, it sets specific areas to address future land demand or land requirement.
Knowing that AKBAYAN party list advocates for agrarian reform program and its extension, their bill on land use act also reflects this advocacy. As stated in Section 29 of the bill, the priority areas for agricultural development are the CARP and CARPable areas. To ensure that these lands will be for agriculture use, prime agricultural areas (land suitability) and lands subject to CARP (principle of social justice and equity), must be protected from land use conversion. The bill links land use planning to land acquisition and distribution (LAD) and land rights to farmers. The bill implies that the security of land rights has to be guaranteed. The bill views that effective land utilization and allocation for development must also be in line with the principles of food sufficiency, improved productivity and social justice.
The bill reinforce local autonomy because LGUs have power to adopt and approve land use plans. Nevertheless, check and balance is ensured because the land use plans for implementation are still subject for review by the Land Use Policy Committee. This is explicitly stated in Article 5, Sections 23 and 24 of the bill.
Demerits:
On Public Participation:
While the bill stresses out the institutionalization of people’s participation in defining the framework and guiding the principles of land allocation by providing for the mandatory participation of stakeholders in key decision-making bodies on land use policy, there is no provision for the specific steps in public participation and consultation in land use plan formulation. There are no specific provisions on nature of hearing or qualification of persons or representative who can attend the meeting. The bill provides for the mandatory conduct of public hearing by the local development councils in preparation of land use plans at all level, as stated in Section 7 to Section 9 of the bill, but there are no specific provisions on how the mandatory public hearing will be carried through and how the public will be represented.
On Sanctions and Penalties:
Referring to Article 17 of the bill, the system of fines and sanctions for LGUs who have not completed and implemented the CLUP will hurt poor LGUs. Furthermore, the dynamics within local government is so complex that punishing public official or employee will not guarantee that after the sanction period, CLUPs will be completed and successfully implemented. Although the bearers of public offices have responsibility to the locality, punishing these persons doesn’t bring one to the real root of non-completion and non-implementation of CLUPs. This might be applicable for poor LGUs, LGUs getting most of its budget from Internal Revenue Allotment; they have weak access to financial resources that they cannot generate their own funds. Notwithstanding that there are considerable issues in the design of the IRA that spun-off vertical inequalities within lgus and horizontal imbalance across levels of LGUs.
Also, the bill doesn’t have provisions on how the LUPC will set parameters for investigation and how will they qualify non-implementation of CLUP; what are the parameters that will say that the CLUP has not been implemented. With the provisions not spelled out well, it gives the Executive Director (of LUPC) flexibility to maneuver or at least react to problems which will arise.
The Article 16 of the bill spells out the system of incentive and awards to LGUs that regularly update their CLUPs and ZO within prescribed period and the priority in giving technical assistance to LGUs. This provision creates bias against LGUs who are just starting in institutionalization of land use planning. This will widen the gap between the LGUs that started their CLUPs years ago and LGUs that are just beginning to formulate CLUP. The latter will always lag once compared with the former, leveraging on its primitive accumulation, with this system of incentives and awards. It is also equitable that they give equal technical assistance to LGUs which don’t have approved CLUP yet because the lack of technical assistance may be the reason why their CLUPs were not approved.
On the Planning Organization:
As stated in Section 19, the Executive Director of the Land Use Policy Council will be appointed by the President of the Philippines. Being the executive head of the LUPC and thus responsible for the implementation of policies adopted by the LUPC Board, the Executive Director bears important function in land utilization and allocation with LUPC being the highest policy making body on land use and final arbitrator on land use conflicts. The bill doesn’t provide for the process of selection or nomination of the Executive Director. Moreover, there is a question of independence because the Executive Director will be appointed by the President.
Impact of Practicum to Development Studies Students and its Significance to DS
As students of Development Studies, most of us aim to be development practitioners. The practicum program has become a good training ground and capacity-building undertaking for future development practitioners. Development should not be value-free; policies must be rather addressed to specific sectors - to the marginalized sectors. The practicum program specifically brought us to the rural communities wherein we were exposed to myriad of issues that led the farmers to vicious cycle of poverty – the inequitable allocation of land resources and unfair agricultural trade was not compensated with an efficient local service delivery, making rural poverty worse than urban poverty. The integration with the masses, more than being humbling, was an empowering experience. We have equipped ourselves with grassroots level of understanding to macroeconomic issues. I have realized that the key to an in-depth analysis of macro-level issues is micro-studies of local communities; practicum brought us to communities where we did case studies and small research. In our case, the underdevelopment of agriculture sector in District III of Cavite was investigated and the locals, with their vernacular language, discussed how speculative investment, land grabbing, unfair trade and lack of support service create disincentive in farming. This can partly explain why we have country-level low agricultural productivity as revealed by various empirical evidences.
Practicum has been significant to me because it led me closer to social realities – the reality of poverty and inequality. These realities were enough to realize that there really is a need for agents of change and development. The case studies produced in community immersion can be extended into more substantive research work or even an advocacy. My exposure to issues in rural communities remains an inspiration to future research work. The practicum program filled in the shortcoming of the theories. The academe and textbooks cannot solely arm the students with development strategies and solutions; otherwise this development remains academic and moot. Development of practical and actual significance emanates from examination of each community because every community has its peculiarities. This examination is fulfilled by community immersion in practicum program.
Practicum has been significant to me because it led me closer to social realities – the reality of poverty and inequality. These realities were enough to realize that there really is a need for agents of change and development. The case studies produced in community immersion can be extended into more substantive research work or even an advocacy. My exposure to issues in rural communities remains an inspiration to future research work. The practicum program filled in the shortcoming of the theories. The academe and textbooks cannot solely arm the students with development strategies and solutions; otherwise this development remains academic and moot. Development of practical and actual significance emanates from examination of each community because every community has its peculiarities. This examination is fulfilled by community immersion in practicum program.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Monday, March 16, 2009
Location of Sanitary Landfill
The aggravating problem of waste disposal in Metro Manila has been widely discussed. Who could not be moved by the statistics that reflects the rate at which we are generating our waste? As reported by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Study, Metro Manila alone could generate an estimated amount of 6, 700 tons of garbage per day (14). This means roughly 207, 700 tons of garbage per month and consequently almost 2.5 million tons a year. If the above cited figures appear squiggly to you then let me cite the tragedy on Payatas dump site in Quezon City. The tragedy that has buried many lives with an avalanche of garbage is a sufficient benchmark of the intensity of the Metro Manila waste crisis. The Payatas dump site (and the other dumpsites) is a clear manifestation of how part of the 6, 700 tons of garbage is being disposed. Around 720 tons of the 6,700 tons of garbage is recycled or composted, leaving us with the balance of almost 6, 000 tons. Thus, bulk of our daily generated garbage is being dumped legally or illegally. Of the 6, 000 tons, some 1, 500 tons daily is dumped illegally on private land, in rivers, creeks, Manila Bay or openly burned (Asian Development Bank 11).
The waste crisis of Metro Manila is among the negative externalities of urbanization, which is loosely equated with economic growth. It is but normal to regard Metro Manila as the country’s premier metropolis because of fast paced urbanization. As early as the 1970s, the region’s level of urbanization was at 100% (Ballesteros 4). Urbanization is a process in which the area is acquiring the character of cities. Industrial and commercial activities progress alongside this process. Thence, the values of capitalism are inculcated along the way; primary of which is consumerism. The value of consumerism in Metro Manila has intensified our daily waste generation deed. Congestion is also a consequence of urbanization; the population density of Metro Manila, which is at 15,617 persons per square kilometre, was highest among the regions, based on the 2000 Census. The congestion of metropolis multiplies the amount of waste being disposed (note: disposing not at their own backyard). We have a need for recipient of the urban waste because of the fact that Metro Manila has less than 2 year disposal capacity (at the time of the ADB Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Study). Notwithstanding these facts, Metro Manila wastes are serviced by dumpsites with inadequately engineered protection systems. On top of that, sanitary landfills are poorly developed in the region. The list of sanitary landfill sites from the National Solid Waste Management Commission reflects there is a single sanitary landfill site that exists i.e., the Brgy. Tanza Sanitary Landfill in Navotas City. While the region is running out of disposal capacity, mandated sanitary landfills are not being developed.
Efforts to accord waste management, with the principle of sustainability of land resources via ecological integrity, were made apparent in Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 or Republic Act No 9003. RA 9003 sets sensible guidelines that translate into effective waste management. Because dump sites pose environment, health and other social risks, RA 9003 lays action plans to avert dump site deficiencies and environmental risks by providing for closure of open dumpsites, operation of controlled dumpsites until to 2006 only and establishment of fully operational sanitary landfills by 2006. The closure of open dump sites and eventually the controlled dump sites signifies the end of our reliance to short-term yet dangerous approach to waste disposal. The movement to a rational system of engineered sanitary landfills indicates its commitment to long-term and environmentally sound actions for waste disposal. The sanitary landfills are equipped with technology that allows it to stay clear from the hazards of dump sites such as leachate and landfill gas (by treatment system) and these landfills can be closed and converted to other uses. Also, it delegates the primary responsibility for solid waste management to local government. RA 9003 mandates the local government to prepare a 10-year solid waste management plan. This approach creates a link between waste management and development plan, which is also prepared by the local government, allowing waste management to be anchored on the community’s development plan. While RA 9033 may give us spark of hope in our battle with garbage crisis, it still allows us for dependence over landfills. This dependence creates another conflict, i.e., where should the landfill be located.
Siting of Disposal Facility and Land Use Planning
With the people’s mentality limited to waste collection (thinking that household’s waste problem can be shortly resolved by garbage collection) and attitude confined to not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY), the disposal phase of waste management carries most of the waste crisis. The bulk of garbage issue is now more concentrated on the disposal and the location, identification or siting of the waste disposal facility. This brings to mind that waste management is actually a function of land use planning. Because land is a scarce resource, competing and conflicting land use is inevitable. Hence, the allocation, use and management of country’s land and land resources should be carefully planned to attain the common good, general welfare. In as much as the highest and best use of land area is a relative concept since it considers the relative demand for that certain use, highest and best land use is ultimately determined by the general welfare or what land-use will bring most benefit to all with due regard to the concept of sustainability. Waste disposal facility utilizes a land resource. One striking concern is that Metro Manila is running out of disposal capacity, and furthered by the fact that there are waste disposal facilities that have closed because of the immense public opposition it has received.
Hence the issue on the identification and availability of sites for the final waste disposal in Metro Manila is truly a land-use issue. It was discussed that facilities such as sanitary landfill or dump site should be carefully located because of their potential to pollute the environment and risk the life and limb of affected residents. Thus, the final waste disposal site for Metro Manila must be carefully located. However, the difficulty in locating a prospective disposal facility arises from perspectives of two major stakeholders: First, from the public point of view wherein they simply object to any site suggested because all of them simply don’t want it in their own backyard. Then, from the disposal agencies wherein they complain that either the site is too small or too distant.
Landfilling is perhaps the oldest method of waste disposal. But this has been modified in the last 30 to 40 years to minimize environmental hazards. Sanitary landfill requires large area and suitable location. Setting this up involves three phases, which are construction, operation and post-closure. The preparation of landfill site involves detailed analysis of biotic factors in the site such as water and air quality. The environmental impact assessment for a sanitary landfill involves protection of the healthy and safety of the public in the immediate impact area of the proposed site; prevention of on-site pollution and off-site environmental damage; and economics of operation. The assessment of environmental impacts of sanitary landfills is necessary to avert the usual danger we associate with it; some of which are the dangers of leachate contamination, landfill gas migration that can ignite landfill fires, human contact to exposed waste because of inadequate covers of dumpsites. There must be a real environmental impacts assessment because the RA 9003 directs our move towards sanitary landfill and away from dumpsites which are dangerous, high environmental, public health and social risks. In a sanitary landfill, wastes would be planced in sanitary landfill cells equipped with engineered environmental protection systems, including landfill lining systems, to act as barrier between the original ground and the waste itself. Typically, it also has a leachate and landfill gas collection and treatment systems, groundwater monitoring wells and landfill cover systems. These specifications must be ensured so as to avoid the abovementioned risks that a landfill can bring to environment and community. In terms of operation of sanitary landfill, there are also technical specifications involving the entry and exit of garbage trucks; compacting and unloading garbage; spraying with insecticides; spreading and levelling by bulldozers; and periodic soil covering, among others. These specifications imply proper maintenance of the landfill site so as not to endanger groundwater, public health and the environment. Similar to land-use planning which takes into account not only the biological and natural framework but more importantly the institutional/sociocultural factors affecting land use, sanitary landfill site planning involves assessment of the socio-cultural and economic impacts of such land use. These will include the possible displacement and resettlement of the affected communities; the potential effects on crop yields, fish catch, water availability i.e., the effect of the site on the natural resources that they utilize economically; public health problems; problems arising from inadequate housing and sanitation facilities of the laborers; safety and peace and order among workers and community.
Likewise, RA 9003 specified the criteria for siting a sanitary landfill. First, the site selected must be consistent with the overall land use plan of the LGU; the site must be accessible from major roadways or thoroughfares; the site should have an adequate quantity of earth cover material that is easily handled and compacted; site must be chosen with regard for the sensitivities of the community residents; the site must be located in an area where the landfill's operation will not detrimentally affect environmentally sensitive resources such as aquifer, groundwater reservoir or watershed area.
Questions of Suitability and Public Acceptability
It is necessary that every sanitary landfill project must comply with the technical criteria set upon so as to avoid environment and community dangers that will outweigh the prospective benefits that can be given by landfill projects. We have cited some technical criteria that can guide planners on site location of sanitary landfills. I will not cite the geological, chemical specifications on siting landfills. Various literature points that and ideal sanitary landfill must meet local zoning and land use criteria. It must also control landfill gas and safely protects surface and groundwater quality, thus the operation will not affect external environmentally sensitive areas. It must also be accessible by solid waste vehicles in all weather conditions, pointing out the distance factor in siting of landfill i.e., the distance from the source of waste to the disposal facility. Alongside the technical suitability, we also have to deal with public acceptability in evaluating a sanitary landfill because there are communities that will affected in landfill operations. While land use planning is a technical exercise, it must also be anchored on the social and economic goals of the area. It should be therefore, if not outright congruous, responsive with the socio-economic goals and values of the community affected by land use planning. Likewise, the use of land resources is not confined only with the analysis of its biological and natural factors. It must also be delved with the institutional framework, taking into account the man’s cultural environment. At the height of the operation of the earlier San Mateo landfill (the one which opened in 1991), residents lobbied for the total closure of the landfill. Their reasons usually varied from economic underdevelopment to environmental hazard brought by the landfill but the pervasive argument is that they do not want the waste of Metro Manila be disposed in their place. To put it simply, they didn’t want to bear the cost of Manila’s wastes. The NIMBY mentality was also prevalent among these protesters. The very same mentality held by the residents of Metro Manila that created our need for disposal sites (sites which should be outside the backyard of Manila). Obviously, no locality has been willing to take Metro Manila’s garbage even Metro Manila (because of the NIMBY mentality). A survey found that while 67% of residents believed that Metro Manila has a serious garbage problem, 73% did not want to see a sanitary landfill in their community, 78% of surveyed household had no idea where their collected garbage was taken for final disposal (Asian Development Bank 19). There is generally low public acceptability for such disposal facility, especially because of the improper location of sanitary landfills.
Case Study: Suitability and Acceptability of San Mateo Landfill Facility in Brgy. Pintong Bukawe, San Mateo, Rizal
The paper was limited to archival research; there were no site visit and community interviews because of time and budget constraint. San Mateo, Rizal is a first class urban municipality of Rizal Province. San Mateo is one of the largest municipalities in Rizal Province in terms of land area, at approximately 65 square kilometres. San Mateo lies in the Marikina Valley. The valley extends south towards Marikina City, Pasig City and Cainta, Rizal. The Marikina River runs through the western portion of the municipality and the Nangka River runs through the southern portion. The dynamic Sierra Madre Mountains, the longest mountain range in the Philippines, are located at the mid-eastern portion, while the Quezon City hills are located to the west. The municipality features many spacious parks, tree-lined streets and roads, and industrial zones. Most of the municipality is composed of residential areas and the other side is composed of tons of trees, high plateaus and mountains. San Mateo is a lush valley bounded by mountain ranges and sliced by a river. Aside from hosting light to medium industrial establishments and bustling commercial and trade centers, the municipality has recently welcomed the construction of sanitary landfill, which was proposed and developed by San Mateo Sanitary Landfill and Development Corp. (SMSLDC). The initial 19-hectare landfill facility in would service its host town and neighboring cities and municipalities, including Metro Manila. The arrangement is the municipality would pay no fees to bring in its garbage in the said facility. As for Metro Manila, Metro Manila Development Authority Chairman Bayani Fernando had yet to hammer out an agreement on terms and conditions particularly on charges for Metro Manila wastes. SMSLDC was able to secure an ECC from the Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) which is under the DENR on November 24, 2008 by apparently presenting documents signifying their intent to construct a dump in Sitio Mabilog na Bato, Barangay Pintong Bukawe in Rizal. The new landfill in Barangay Pintong Bukawe is outside from the protected zone, it is actually located seven kilometres from the Marikina watershed. The 5-hectare crater of the sanitary landfill facility is lined up with layers of high density polyethelene membrane that is certified impermeable; this ensures the safety of the San Mateo residents against secretions from the solid wastes that may endanger their health. The construction of such facility will not just reduce waste crisis in Metro Manila and San Mateo but will also bring about new jobs. It is estimated that about 2,000 of the town’s population will be given jobs as recyclers, who will earn at least P300 daily. The local government is affirmative of the facility because of the economic gains that it can bring to the town. (Standard Today February 3, 2009 San Mateo dump gets the green light)
This seemingly good news amidst the perennial garbage disposal problem of San Mateo and Metro Manila has been the subject of opposition of San Mateo residents and environmental advocates. The sanitary landfill, which started its construction in 2008 was met with resistance by several environmental groups. The proposed landfill was said to be constructed on ground area within a protected forest. As argued by opposition, Barangay Pintong Bukawe is an environmentally-critical area because it was declared part of the Marikina Watershed. This was in the light of Supreme Court decision on December 13, 2005 that ordered the closure of the first San Mateo sanitary landfill, which is also located in Brgy. Pintong Bukawe and was developed by Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) in 1985. The said decision nullified Proclamation 635 issued by former President Fidel Ramos, which allowed the use of a portion of the Marikina watershed reservation area as a sanitary landfill. The first San Mateo landfill is within the watershed area. The decision was congruous to the RA 9003 that ordered closure of sanitary landfills located within an aquifer or groundwater reservoir or watershed area; landfill must be located in an area where the landfills operation will not detrimentally affect environmentally such sensitive resources. Furthermore, the ruling of Supreme Court was backed by studies conducted by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) that showed the first San Mateo landfill was an environmental and health hazard.
What is more striking was the report that the 19-hectares initial phase of the project was actually built on a private property in Brgy. Guinayang. This was confirmed by the advocacy group Kalikasan People’s Network for the Environment (Kalikasan-PNE). They cited that the landfill is to be constructed not in the permitted site in Sitio Mabilog na Bato, Barangay Pintong Bukawe, but is actually planned to be expanded up to 200-hectares in Barangays Maly and Guinayang, which are actually protected forest area. Barangays Maly and Guinayang are two of five areas in San Mateo that were declared as watershed areas by virtue of Presidential Proclamation No. 1636, proclaiming 4.775 square kilometers of San Mateo Rizal as a Protected Forest Area under the National Integrated Protection Areas System (NIPAS) on April 1977.
As a response to the opposition to the sanitary landfill and accusation against SLMDC, environmental groups have launched statements of criticism and petition calling for immediate stop of sanitary landfill. Even the Department of Environment and Natural Resources has ordered an investigation on this landfill. While the Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) is issued by Environmental Management Bureau, which is under DENR, Secretary Jose Atienza noted that EMB has issued an ECC to the said project in another area different from the area of complaint. Hence the landfill construction in Brgy Maly and Guinayang prompted the agency to investigate because they granted permit in Brgy Pintong Bukawe. Furthermore, the Senate Committee on Environment and Natural Resources has urged the Upper House to conduct an inquiry on the landfill amidst reports that is being constructed on protected forest watershed area. The investigations conducted by the executive and legislative arm of government were instigated by the seemingly anomalous and incongruous plan of the developer. In the event that there is really an irregularity between the approved site of development and actual site of construction, this may reflect how political and economic power can bypass environment standards that sets the technical suitability.
As long as we do not change our individual ways on how we dispose our wastes, demand for landfill will mount and mount. With engineered and technologically equipped landfill, the issue is not the environmental risk of the landfill per se but rather the land allocation and utilization. No one would want a landfill within their community. Even if this point was missed by the law, RA 9003 is good start to effectively manage waste crisis. It must be properly and strictly implemented to realize its goals. Recycling and composting is one of the means to divert our ways from waste disposal and these methods must be really institutionalized at barangay levels to increase awareness among individual household. This, even in small way, is a big aversion to the mounting waste crisis of Metro Manila. This can minimize demand for landfills and thence reduce conflicts over the location and operation of the landfills. But in the case of the new San Mateo landfill, the point of their opposition is the construction of the landfill in environmentally protected areas. National land use issues such as rapid urbanization and population growth must be taken into account. This is just one of the manifestations that the process of uncontrolled urbanization takes place at the expense of the natural environment. The increase in urbanization entails increase in urban land use and encroachment of unbuilt environment or green areas. In same way, increase in urbanization means increase in urban activity and increase of waste generation. The increase of urban activity and land area may imply search for new areas where the urban activity and its derivatives can take place. Since growth in waste generation accompanies growth in urban activity, disposal facility or sanitary landfill must be recognized as an acceptable urban land use. With that recognition, proper planning of site location and the operation as well (by way of proper engineering) must follow to avoid conflict between urban activity and unbuilt or protected environment. With political power and irregularities aside, I deem that public opposition (opposition emanating from NIMBY attitude) can be averted if the public and major stakeholders have participated in choosing the site search process for sanitary landfills. Public opposition could lead to wasted investment or investment not optimized partly because it can be closed immediately due to public pressure as what happened in the earlier San Mateo landfill or if it is not bound for closure, it can create costly delays in operations. However, in the case of present San Mateo landfill, the opposition does not simply come from NIMBY attitude but from their knowledge on the irregularity in the construction of sanitary landfill because it was allegedly constructed on environmentally critical areas.
References
Asian Development Bank. The Garbage Book. Metro Manila: Asian Development Bank, 2004.
Ballesteros, Marife. “Land Use Planning in Metro Manila and the Urban Fringe”.
Discussion Paper Series No. 2000-20 (2000)
Clark, Michael, Denis Smith. and Andrew Blowers. Waste Location: Spatial Aspects of Waste Management, Hazards and Disposal. New York: Routledge. 1992.
Desiderio, Louella. “Atienza orders probe on new San Mateo landfill”.
Business World. 22 January 2009.
National Framework for Physical Planning from NEDA website
Natividad, Beverly. “San Mateo residents protest new landfill”
Philippine Daily Inquirer. 17 January 2009.
Quina, Francis Paolo, “Wasting Away: The Challenges of Solid Waste Management in the Philippines.” University of the Philippines Forum. July 2008.
University of the Philippines. 22 December 2008
.
Severino, Howie. “Basura: Saw it Coming.” GMA. CD-ROM. 1999.
Villar, Manny. “P.S. Res. No. 884.” Senate of the Philippines.
The waste crisis of Metro Manila is among the negative externalities of urbanization, which is loosely equated with economic growth. It is but normal to regard Metro Manila as the country’s premier metropolis because of fast paced urbanization. As early as the 1970s, the region’s level of urbanization was at 100% (Ballesteros 4). Urbanization is a process in which the area is acquiring the character of cities. Industrial and commercial activities progress alongside this process. Thence, the values of capitalism are inculcated along the way; primary of which is consumerism. The value of consumerism in Metro Manila has intensified our daily waste generation deed. Congestion is also a consequence of urbanization; the population density of Metro Manila, which is at 15,617 persons per square kilometre, was highest among the regions, based on the 2000 Census. The congestion of metropolis multiplies the amount of waste being disposed (note: disposing not at their own backyard). We have a need for recipient of the urban waste because of the fact that Metro Manila has less than 2 year disposal capacity (at the time of the ADB Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Study). Notwithstanding these facts, Metro Manila wastes are serviced by dumpsites with inadequately engineered protection systems. On top of that, sanitary landfills are poorly developed in the region. The list of sanitary landfill sites from the National Solid Waste Management Commission reflects there is a single sanitary landfill site that exists i.e., the Brgy. Tanza Sanitary Landfill in Navotas City. While the region is running out of disposal capacity, mandated sanitary landfills are not being developed.
Efforts to accord waste management, with the principle of sustainability of land resources via ecological integrity, were made apparent in Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 or Republic Act No 9003. RA 9003 sets sensible guidelines that translate into effective waste management. Because dump sites pose environment, health and other social risks, RA 9003 lays action plans to avert dump site deficiencies and environmental risks by providing for closure of open dumpsites, operation of controlled dumpsites until to 2006 only and establishment of fully operational sanitary landfills by 2006. The closure of open dump sites and eventually the controlled dump sites signifies the end of our reliance to short-term yet dangerous approach to waste disposal. The movement to a rational system of engineered sanitary landfills indicates its commitment to long-term and environmentally sound actions for waste disposal. The sanitary landfills are equipped with technology that allows it to stay clear from the hazards of dump sites such as leachate and landfill gas (by treatment system) and these landfills can be closed and converted to other uses. Also, it delegates the primary responsibility for solid waste management to local government. RA 9003 mandates the local government to prepare a 10-year solid waste management plan. This approach creates a link between waste management and development plan, which is also prepared by the local government, allowing waste management to be anchored on the community’s development plan. While RA 9033 may give us spark of hope in our battle with garbage crisis, it still allows us for dependence over landfills. This dependence creates another conflict, i.e., where should the landfill be located.
Siting of Disposal Facility and Land Use Planning
With the people’s mentality limited to waste collection (thinking that household’s waste problem can be shortly resolved by garbage collection) and attitude confined to not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY), the disposal phase of waste management carries most of the waste crisis. The bulk of garbage issue is now more concentrated on the disposal and the location, identification or siting of the waste disposal facility. This brings to mind that waste management is actually a function of land use planning. Because land is a scarce resource, competing and conflicting land use is inevitable. Hence, the allocation, use and management of country’s land and land resources should be carefully planned to attain the common good, general welfare. In as much as the highest and best use of land area is a relative concept since it considers the relative demand for that certain use, highest and best land use is ultimately determined by the general welfare or what land-use will bring most benefit to all with due regard to the concept of sustainability. Waste disposal facility utilizes a land resource. One striking concern is that Metro Manila is running out of disposal capacity, and furthered by the fact that there are waste disposal facilities that have closed because of the immense public opposition it has received.
Hence the issue on the identification and availability of sites for the final waste disposal in Metro Manila is truly a land-use issue. It was discussed that facilities such as sanitary landfill or dump site should be carefully located because of their potential to pollute the environment and risk the life and limb of affected residents. Thus, the final waste disposal site for Metro Manila must be carefully located. However, the difficulty in locating a prospective disposal facility arises from perspectives of two major stakeholders: First, from the public point of view wherein they simply object to any site suggested because all of them simply don’t want it in their own backyard. Then, from the disposal agencies wherein they complain that either the site is too small or too distant.
Landfilling is perhaps the oldest method of waste disposal. But this has been modified in the last 30 to 40 years to minimize environmental hazards. Sanitary landfill requires large area and suitable location. Setting this up involves three phases, which are construction, operation and post-closure. The preparation of landfill site involves detailed analysis of biotic factors in the site such as water and air quality. The environmental impact assessment for a sanitary landfill involves protection of the healthy and safety of the public in the immediate impact area of the proposed site; prevention of on-site pollution and off-site environmental damage; and economics of operation. The assessment of environmental impacts of sanitary landfills is necessary to avert the usual danger we associate with it; some of which are the dangers of leachate contamination, landfill gas migration that can ignite landfill fires, human contact to exposed waste because of inadequate covers of dumpsites. There must be a real environmental impacts assessment because the RA 9003 directs our move towards sanitary landfill and away from dumpsites which are dangerous, high environmental, public health and social risks. In a sanitary landfill, wastes would be planced in sanitary landfill cells equipped with engineered environmental protection systems, including landfill lining systems, to act as barrier between the original ground and the waste itself. Typically, it also has a leachate and landfill gas collection and treatment systems, groundwater monitoring wells and landfill cover systems. These specifications must be ensured so as to avoid the abovementioned risks that a landfill can bring to environment and community. In terms of operation of sanitary landfill, there are also technical specifications involving the entry and exit of garbage trucks; compacting and unloading garbage; spraying with insecticides; spreading and levelling by bulldozers; and periodic soil covering, among others. These specifications imply proper maintenance of the landfill site so as not to endanger groundwater, public health and the environment. Similar to land-use planning which takes into account not only the biological and natural framework but more importantly the institutional/sociocultural factors affecting land use, sanitary landfill site planning involves assessment of the socio-cultural and economic impacts of such land use. These will include the possible displacement and resettlement of the affected communities; the potential effects on crop yields, fish catch, water availability i.e., the effect of the site on the natural resources that they utilize economically; public health problems; problems arising from inadequate housing and sanitation facilities of the laborers; safety and peace and order among workers and community.
Likewise, RA 9003 specified the criteria for siting a sanitary landfill. First, the site selected must be consistent with the overall land use plan of the LGU; the site must be accessible from major roadways or thoroughfares; the site should have an adequate quantity of earth cover material that is easily handled and compacted; site must be chosen with regard for the sensitivities of the community residents; the site must be located in an area where the landfill's operation will not detrimentally affect environmentally sensitive resources such as aquifer, groundwater reservoir or watershed area.
Questions of Suitability and Public Acceptability
It is necessary that every sanitary landfill project must comply with the technical criteria set upon so as to avoid environment and community dangers that will outweigh the prospective benefits that can be given by landfill projects. We have cited some technical criteria that can guide planners on site location of sanitary landfills. I will not cite the geological, chemical specifications on siting landfills. Various literature points that and ideal sanitary landfill must meet local zoning and land use criteria. It must also control landfill gas and safely protects surface and groundwater quality, thus the operation will not affect external environmentally sensitive areas. It must also be accessible by solid waste vehicles in all weather conditions, pointing out the distance factor in siting of landfill i.e., the distance from the source of waste to the disposal facility. Alongside the technical suitability, we also have to deal with public acceptability in evaluating a sanitary landfill because there are communities that will affected in landfill operations. While land use planning is a technical exercise, it must also be anchored on the social and economic goals of the area. It should be therefore, if not outright congruous, responsive with the socio-economic goals and values of the community affected by land use planning. Likewise, the use of land resources is not confined only with the analysis of its biological and natural factors. It must also be delved with the institutional framework, taking into account the man’s cultural environment. At the height of the operation of the earlier San Mateo landfill (the one which opened in 1991), residents lobbied for the total closure of the landfill. Their reasons usually varied from economic underdevelopment to environmental hazard brought by the landfill but the pervasive argument is that they do not want the waste of Metro Manila be disposed in their place. To put it simply, they didn’t want to bear the cost of Manila’s wastes. The NIMBY mentality was also prevalent among these protesters. The very same mentality held by the residents of Metro Manila that created our need for disposal sites (sites which should be outside the backyard of Manila). Obviously, no locality has been willing to take Metro Manila’s garbage even Metro Manila (because of the NIMBY mentality). A survey found that while 67% of residents believed that Metro Manila has a serious garbage problem, 73% did not want to see a sanitary landfill in their community, 78% of surveyed household had no idea where their collected garbage was taken for final disposal (Asian Development Bank 19). There is generally low public acceptability for such disposal facility, especially because of the improper location of sanitary landfills.
Case Study: Suitability and Acceptability of San Mateo Landfill Facility in Brgy. Pintong Bukawe, San Mateo, Rizal
The paper was limited to archival research; there were no site visit and community interviews because of time and budget constraint. San Mateo, Rizal is a first class urban municipality of Rizal Province. San Mateo is one of the largest municipalities in Rizal Province in terms of land area, at approximately 65 square kilometres. San Mateo lies in the Marikina Valley. The valley extends south towards Marikina City, Pasig City and Cainta, Rizal. The Marikina River runs through the western portion of the municipality and the Nangka River runs through the southern portion. The dynamic Sierra Madre Mountains, the longest mountain range in the Philippines, are located at the mid-eastern portion, while the Quezon City hills are located to the west. The municipality features many spacious parks, tree-lined streets and roads, and industrial zones. Most of the municipality is composed of residential areas and the other side is composed of tons of trees, high plateaus and mountains. San Mateo is a lush valley bounded by mountain ranges and sliced by a river. Aside from hosting light to medium industrial establishments and bustling commercial and trade centers, the municipality has recently welcomed the construction of sanitary landfill, which was proposed and developed by San Mateo Sanitary Landfill and Development Corp. (SMSLDC). The initial 19-hectare landfill facility in would service its host town and neighboring cities and municipalities, including Metro Manila. The arrangement is the municipality would pay no fees to bring in its garbage in the said facility. As for Metro Manila, Metro Manila Development Authority Chairman Bayani Fernando had yet to hammer out an agreement on terms and conditions particularly on charges for Metro Manila wastes. SMSLDC was able to secure an ECC from the Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) which is under the DENR on November 24, 2008 by apparently presenting documents signifying their intent to construct a dump in Sitio Mabilog na Bato, Barangay Pintong Bukawe in Rizal. The new landfill in Barangay Pintong Bukawe is outside from the protected zone, it is actually located seven kilometres from the Marikina watershed. The 5-hectare crater of the sanitary landfill facility is lined up with layers of high density polyethelene membrane that is certified impermeable; this ensures the safety of the San Mateo residents against secretions from the solid wastes that may endanger their health. The construction of such facility will not just reduce waste crisis in Metro Manila and San Mateo but will also bring about new jobs. It is estimated that about 2,000 of the town’s population will be given jobs as recyclers, who will earn at least P300 daily. The local government is affirmative of the facility because of the economic gains that it can bring to the town. (Standard Today February 3, 2009 San Mateo dump gets the green light)
This seemingly good news amidst the perennial garbage disposal problem of San Mateo and Metro Manila has been the subject of opposition of San Mateo residents and environmental advocates. The sanitary landfill, which started its construction in 2008 was met with resistance by several environmental groups. The proposed landfill was said to be constructed on ground area within a protected forest. As argued by opposition, Barangay Pintong Bukawe is an environmentally-critical area because it was declared part of the Marikina Watershed. This was in the light of Supreme Court decision on December 13, 2005 that ordered the closure of the first San Mateo sanitary landfill, which is also located in Brgy. Pintong Bukawe and was developed by Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) in 1985. The said decision nullified Proclamation 635 issued by former President Fidel Ramos, which allowed the use of a portion of the Marikina watershed reservation area as a sanitary landfill. The first San Mateo landfill is within the watershed area. The decision was congruous to the RA 9003 that ordered closure of sanitary landfills located within an aquifer or groundwater reservoir or watershed area; landfill must be located in an area where the landfills operation will not detrimentally affect environmentally such sensitive resources. Furthermore, the ruling of Supreme Court was backed by studies conducted by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) that showed the first San Mateo landfill was an environmental and health hazard.
What is more striking was the report that the 19-hectares initial phase of the project was actually built on a private property in Brgy. Guinayang. This was confirmed by the advocacy group Kalikasan People’s Network for the Environment (Kalikasan-PNE). They cited that the landfill is to be constructed not in the permitted site in Sitio Mabilog na Bato, Barangay Pintong Bukawe, but is actually planned to be expanded up to 200-hectares in Barangays Maly and Guinayang, which are actually protected forest area. Barangays Maly and Guinayang are two of five areas in San Mateo that were declared as watershed areas by virtue of Presidential Proclamation No. 1636, proclaiming 4.775 square kilometers of San Mateo Rizal as a Protected Forest Area under the National Integrated Protection Areas System (NIPAS) on April 1977.
As a response to the opposition to the sanitary landfill and accusation against SLMDC, environmental groups have launched statements of criticism and petition calling for immediate stop of sanitary landfill. Even the Department of Environment and Natural Resources has ordered an investigation on this landfill. While the Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) is issued by Environmental Management Bureau, which is under DENR, Secretary Jose Atienza noted that EMB has issued an ECC to the said project in another area different from the area of complaint. Hence the landfill construction in Brgy Maly and Guinayang prompted the agency to investigate because they granted permit in Brgy Pintong Bukawe. Furthermore, the Senate Committee on Environment and Natural Resources has urged the Upper House to conduct an inquiry on the landfill amidst reports that is being constructed on protected forest watershed area. The investigations conducted by the executive and legislative arm of government were instigated by the seemingly anomalous and incongruous plan of the developer. In the event that there is really an irregularity between the approved site of development and actual site of construction, this may reflect how political and economic power can bypass environment standards that sets the technical suitability.
As long as we do not change our individual ways on how we dispose our wastes, demand for landfill will mount and mount. With engineered and technologically equipped landfill, the issue is not the environmental risk of the landfill per se but rather the land allocation and utilization. No one would want a landfill within their community. Even if this point was missed by the law, RA 9003 is good start to effectively manage waste crisis. It must be properly and strictly implemented to realize its goals. Recycling and composting is one of the means to divert our ways from waste disposal and these methods must be really institutionalized at barangay levels to increase awareness among individual household. This, even in small way, is a big aversion to the mounting waste crisis of Metro Manila. This can minimize demand for landfills and thence reduce conflicts over the location and operation of the landfills. But in the case of the new San Mateo landfill, the point of their opposition is the construction of the landfill in environmentally protected areas. National land use issues such as rapid urbanization and population growth must be taken into account. This is just one of the manifestations that the process of uncontrolled urbanization takes place at the expense of the natural environment. The increase in urbanization entails increase in urban land use and encroachment of unbuilt environment or green areas. In same way, increase in urbanization means increase in urban activity and increase of waste generation. The increase of urban activity and land area may imply search for new areas where the urban activity and its derivatives can take place. Since growth in waste generation accompanies growth in urban activity, disposal facility or sanitary landfill must be recognized as an acceptable urban land use. With that recognition, proper planning of site location and the operation as well (by way of proper engineering) must follow to avoid conflict between urban activity and unbuilt or protected environment. With political power and irregularities aside, I deem that public opposition (opposition emanating from NIMBY attitude) can be averted if the public and major stakeholders have participated in choosing the site search process for sanitary landfills. Public opposition could lead to wasted investment or investment not optimized partly because it can be closed immediately due to public pressure as what happened in the earlier San Mateo landfill or if it is not bound for closure, it can create costly delays in operations. However, in the case of present San Mateo landfill, the opposition does not simply come from NIMBY attitude but from their knowledge on the irregularity in the construction of sanitary landfill because it was allegedly constructed on environmentally critical areas.
References
Asian Development Bank. The Garbage Book. Metro Manila: Asian Development Bank, 2004.
Ballesteros, Marife. “Land Use Planning in Metro Manila and the Urban Fringe”.
Discussion Paper Series No. 2000-20 (2000)
Clark, Michael, Denis Smith. and Andrew Blowers. Waste Location: Spatial Aspects of Waste Management, Hazards and Disposal. New York: Routledge. 1992.
Desiderio, Louella. “Atienza orders probe on new San Mateo landfill”.
Business World. 22 January 2009.
National Framework for Physical Planning from NEDA website
Natividad, Beverly. “San Mateo residents protest new landfill”
Philippine Daily Inquirer. 17 January 2009.
Quina, Francis Paolo, “Wasting Away: The Challenges of Solid Waste Management in the Philippines.” University of the Philippines Forum. July 2008.
University of the Philippines. 22 December 2008
Severino, Howie. “Basura: Saw it Coming.” GMA. CD-ROM. 1999.
Villar, Manny. “P.S. Res. No. 884.” Senate of the Philippines.
Urban Dilemmas
The term urban pertains to the structures and ways of life of cities. Most of us think that anything urban offers special attraction. In same fashion, we see urbanism, or the ways of life associated with living in cities, in positive light. This is often because an urban place offers more diverse and dynamic activities than in a rural area; it has dazzling malls, high-rise buildings, automobiles, stadiums and other impressive features. More importantly, many are attracted to urban areas because it serves as manufacturing and commercial centers and thus provides jobs to the population. The employment opportunities that urban areas offer remain the primary reason why the population flock into the urban areas. Since the structures for the delivery of basic services such as water, power and communication are well integrated in management of urban areas, people choose to live here also because of the accessibility of such basic services making life more convenient (relative to rural areas). In the Philippines, the term urban brings to mind Metro Manila. As early as 1970s, Metro Manila’s level of urbanization was already at 100% (Ballesteros 2000). In global statistics, it ranked 18th among the largest urban agglomeration in the world in 1990; it is expected to rank 20th of the 28 identified megacities in the world (Mercado 1998). Despite many attractions of an urban area, it also faces tremendous problems. Alongside urbanization are urban dilemmas and challenges that pose serious threat to the development goals of that urban settlement. These urban problems have been well studied and documented elsewhere. Finding solutions to urban ills arising from the industrial revolution, such as pollution and overcrowding, led to Ebenezer Howard’s concept of garden cities. Sharing with Ebenezer in drawing inspiration from the English industrial laboratory was Freidrich Engels who documented the ills of industrial urbanism with a socialist lens, arguing that the inhumane condition of physical infrastructures and hypocritical city design is just a reflection of the exploitative economic relation between the capitalists and the working class.
Metro Manila experience is a glaring evidence of the negative consequences of urbanization. Urban planners in this region delve on issues of urban poverty, in-migration, traffic congestion and urban blight. Below are some of the remarkable urban dilemmas in the Philippines.
Congestion in urban areas
The urbanization process of Metro Manila was accelerated by rural migration to Manila. Rural migration is still rampant these days, rural folks may be lured by the opportunities and brightness of the city; it has malls, restaurants, glamour, fashion and answered dreams. However, it also has crimes, pollution, traffic, and expensive living; these are the things that rural folks do not take into account when they decide to migrate since their perception of the positive things in the city almost always outweighs the urban ills and so, there is the perennial problem of rural folks migrating to the cities in search for improved life (PIDS 2000). These rural migrants are now partly the cause and at the same time victims of urban dilemma in Metro Manila. This migration has caused the congestion of region with an average density of 15,617 persons per square kilometre. The congestion in turn created urban dilemmas, water pollution, slums, traffic jams. As victims, these migrants are usually the poor seeking opportunities in Metro Manila but urban problems, say as water pollution, directly hurt them. Whereas the rich can afford to buy distilled water, the poor can ill afford to pay the costs incurred by water pollution. The cityward migration is a result of concentration of economic activities in the urban center results to regional imbalance.
Transportation failures
Deterioration of the traffic condition has always afflicted Metro Manila since the 1950s. Traffic woes stem primarily from insufficient road system, rapid increase in car ownership, lack of quality public transportation services, defective administration of traffic regulations as well as undisciplined motorists and pedestrians (Mercado 1998). Traffic congestion that we are currently experiencing is caused by the presence of vehicles with low acceleration performance due to aging engines, furthered by the long on-street dwelling time of buses and jeepneys so as to wait for passengers and the frequency of lane changing due to driver behaviour in Metro Manila (Vergel and Rai 2002). These phenomena are tolerated not only by the current transportation but also by the existing road infrastructure.
Alteration of urban landscape
The rampant cityward migration caused indiscriminate land-use mix in Metro Manila and this is partly because of the weak efforts to rationalize relationship among various land use plan (Mercado 1998). Urban deterioration is another facet of the land-use problem in Metro Manila with its dilapidated buildings, timeworn and environmentally deteriorated areas. On top of that is the increased number of squatter households. Embryonic settlements (more euphemistic term to squatter) remain to be a pervasive problem in the third world.
Urban Heat
There are studies confirming that Metro Manila is getting hotter. One of which is the study conducted at at the Institute of Environmental Science and Meteorology, College of Science, University of the Philippines, scientists from UP have found that temperature in the region increased compared with its adjacent rural areas (Lagmay 2007). Urban Heat Island, as its name suggests, is an urban phenomenon caused by the dominance of asphalt, concrete, bricks and stones in lieu of vegetation and natural land.
These urban problems probably arise from the lack of planning. With the absence of planning, described as art and science of ordering use of land so as to secure maximum practicable degree of economy, convenience and beauty, the process of urbanization follows it natural way of just occurring inevitably and carries with it the determined urban problems. In such way, industries, houses, markets in a city may just be constructed independently without regard to its relationship with one another; it is far from harnessing the maximum net economic and social gain (that can be attained if buildings and routes are ordered according to development goals, assuming that the goal includes maximum economic and social gain. If urban planning is present, urban problems persist because of the wrong emphasis of the planners. The community deviates from the goal embodied in the plan because planners care more about beautifying communities and helping individual businesses than addressing social urban problems. The Metro Manila also suffered from this dilemma. The Philippine’s premiere metropolis developed far from the grandiose plan originally envisioned by the colonial government because planned development was seldom implemented and town planning was valued mainly for aesthetic reasons rather than for the management of land and urban growth (Ballesteros 2000). But if equipped with a vision for general welfare, city planning, through spatial principles, can sensibly solve urban dilemmas. This was proved by the enduring concept of Sir Ebenezer Howard in his Garden City movement.
The glaring urban blight and urban dilemma led to construction of ideal settlements. Alongside the social, economic and political framework, most of the conceived ideal urban settlements include substantial discussion of the physical layout of the proposed settlement. The physical layout of their proposed ideal settlement provides concreteness to their ideas, giving the proposal high chance of being realized into actual settlement. Many have framed their social ideals within spatial layout principles including Ebenezer Howard with his Garden Cities. Since congestion is perceived to be the primary problem in urban area, decongestion is necessary. Congestion is inevitable because the city forms are economically biased to centers. Taking off from growth pole theory minus its spread effect, majority is likely to move towards the center (in this case, Metro Manila) because economic activities are concentrated here. In my proposed utopian framework, decongestion measures will include development of secondary growth pole in rural area adjacent to Metro Manila, creation of new road system with rail transit as major mode of transportation, balancing mixed use area inside in major blocks, designing inner roads that will make the major blocks walkable, creation of urban green spaces, and establishing the industrial sector at the edge of the city. Below are the details of the proposal.
Development of secondary growth pole
Rural migration is caused by poverty and lack of opportunity in rural areas. Hence there is a need to locate some industries in these areas to create opportunity for the rural folks. It is a measure to prevent further in-migration and displacing urban settlers to rural area, making the measure both preventive and positive check to congestion and regional disparity. To realize the proposal, infrastructure connecting the urban and rural area is necessary. Rail system will be the mode of transportation. In case natural features such as mountain will make the construction of rail system impossible, underground rail system will be built. The vision here is to make over the relationship between an urban and a rural area. With urban greenery integrated in the city and some industrial facilities situated in the rural area, arguments on rural versus urban development will end and balanced growth will be ensured.
Building of public transit system within the city
As an effort to mitigate traffic jams and more importantly air pollution, the new road system is designed so that the people will not rely on private and public automobiles. Major roads in Metro Manila are no longer sufficient to accommodate the rising traffic volume due to dominance public buses and jeepneys along major routes and increase in private car ownership. There is a need to design a road system that will lessen our dependence on automobiles because there is a faster way to get to other part of the city and in the internal section of the city, there is no need for vehicles in minor roads since it is walkable. There has been an increase in the demand for quality public transportation system that delivers quality service in terms of travel speed, riding comfort and in-vehicle air-quality. Urban rail transport is still limited as to date. As such, the city will require a construction of extensive light rail system. Rail transit will be the major mode of transportation and will be a key feature of the city. The rail transit will divide the city into major blocks; these major sections will be comprised of settlement, commercial and special use areas. For instance, block A will be composed of residential units, some shopping stores and restaurants while block B will be composed of residential units, schools and convenient stores. All the blocks will be mixed used area and there will be careful planning on the combination of areas established in a section. Industrial area is not included in these blocks. The selection of the transit station/terminals will be based on the location of the commercial and important special use areas (i.e., schools and hospitals). Thus each transit station will be associated with a certain commercial area, school or hospital.
Urban renewal and careful land-use mix
Since we will make way for urban green spaces, we have to carefully plan the composition of the major blocks. Number and size of commercial areas in each block were considered. The nature of commercial activity, major shopping and luxury goods, convenience goods that will be mixed with the residential units were considered. The type and grade of residential areas and the appropriate location of areas servicing the residents such as education and worship facilities were considered. The location and combination was planned with due consideration to provision of open green space for each block. For each block (minus the street), 60% of the land use will be devoted to the mixed use and 40% will be provided for open green space. Industrial areas will be located at the edge of the city. Industrial firms will remain at the edge because of the industrial risks that it can afflict to residents of the city. This design reflects the cease of subservience of the population to the machineries of capitalism. The industrial firms will defray the transportation of the industrial workers by way of provision of shuttle services. Wide roads leading to industrial site will be built to ensure ease of access. The design is biased on striving towards a humane city and not on driving economic investments. Underlying assumption is there is already a stable economic activity in the city. The goal now is to create a city where its residents will enjoy the basic amenities of decent urban living. Employment security will not be a problem because of the economic stability.
A cooler city
It was found out by the similar UP study touching on Urban Heat Island that the hottest place in Metro Manila is the Central Business Districts. Likewise, Ortigas commercial area, Port area and NAIA are hot places. While Wack Wack golf course, Camp Aguinaldo, Manila Seedling Bank and UP campus are relatively cool. Thus the nodes of the urban area are the hotter places while areas characterized by wide open spaces and vegetation are the cooler places. The process of urbanization has deprived Metro Manila of green space and bare land. The combined percentage of green space and bare land in Metro Manila is less than 10 percent (Hoyano, Yoon and Iino 2002).
Another key feature of the proposed design is its spaciousness that is, creation of open space with vegetation. This is to acknowledge the role of urban green space in contributing to ecological integrity of urban systems and the psychological and social effects of spacious green space to those living in areas. Outdoor shadings will be created including shading spaces from trees with large crown and from the design of buildings. Like Howard’s Garden Cities, every housing unit will have its own backyard. Major buildings like government halls, shopping centers or schools will have a veranda to use it as an outdoor living space and a rooftop where planting will be carried out to prevent solar radiation.
The conceptualization of alternative urban forms seems to be an effective measure to address urban dilemmas. With the futility of policy alternatives, creation of new urban forms directs people to live in accordance to the built paths and structures aimed towards maximizing economic and social gains. Urban dilemmas are deeply rooted on economic problems that is, the unequal access over the scarce resources of those who have less buying power or the poor. The provision of physical infrastructures and organization of urban space and forms facilitates the localization and accessibility of these resources and complements the shortcomings of aspatial economic models in resource allocation. However, alternative urban forms should be anchored on understanding of poverty, offshoot of which is urban dilemmas. In general, conceptualizing alternative urban forms must be directed toward creating a community that will foster holistic development and will advance the common good.
References:
Ballesteros, Marife (2000). Land Use Planning in Metro Manila and the Urban Fringe: Implication on the Land and Real Estate Market. Discussion Paper Series, 20, 1-4.
Hoyano, A., Yoon, S., & Iino, A. (2002). Southeast Asian High-Density Habitation and the Formation of a Comfortable Outdoor Thermal Environment. In T. Ohmachi & E. Roman (Eds.), Metro Manila: In Search of a Sustainable Future (135-147). University of the Philippines Press.
Lagmay, A.M.F., (2007). UP study confirms Metro Manila getting hotter. Philippine Daily Inquirer.
Mercado, Ruben (1998). Megalopolitan Manila: Striving Towards a Humane and World Class City. Discussion Paper Series, 30, 1-10.
Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS) (2000). Urbanization in a Decentralized Framework: The Lure of the City. Development Research News, 18 (2), 9-11.
Yai, T., & Vergel, K. (2002). Outline of Microscopic Road Traffic Simulation. In T. Ohmachi & E. Roman (Eds.), Metro Manila: In Search of a Sustainable Future (135-147). University of the Philippines Press.
Metro Manila experience is a glaring evidence of the negative consequences of urbanization. Urban planners in this region delve on issues of urban poverty, in-migration, traffic congestion and urban blight. Below are some of the remarkable urban dilemmas in the Philippines.
Congestion in urban areas
The urbanization process of Metro Manila was accelerated by rural migration to Manila. Rural migration is still rampant these days, rural folks may be lured by the opportunities and brightness of the city; it has malls, restaurants, glamour, fashion and answered dreams. However, it also has crimes, pollution, traffic, and expensive living; these are the things that rural folks do not take into account when they decide to migrate since their perception of the positive things in the city almost always outweighs the urban ills and so, there is the perennial problem of rural folks migrating to the cities in search for improved life (PIDS 2000). These rural migrants are now partly the cause and at the same time victims of urban dilemma in Metro Manila. This migration has caused the congestion of region with an average density of 15,617 persons per square kilometre. The congestion in turn created urban dilemmas, water pollution, slums, traffic jams. As victims, these migrants are usually the poor seeking opportunities in Metro Manila but urban problems, say as water pollution, directly hurt them. Whereas the rich can afford to buy distilled water, the poor can ill afford to pay the costs incurred by water pollution. The cityward migration is a result of concentration of economic activities in the urban center results to regional imbalance.
Transportation failures
Deterioration of the traffic condition has always afflicted Metro Manila since the 1950s. Traffic woes stem primarily from insufficient road system, rapid increase in car ownership, lack of quality public transportation services, defective administration of traffic regulations as well as undisciplined motorists and pedestrians (Mercado 1998). Traffic congestion that we are currently experiencing is caused by the presence of vehicles with low acceleration performance due to aging engines, furthered by the long on-street dwelling time of buses and jeepneys so as to wait for passengers and the frequency of lane changing due to driver behaviour in Metro Manila (Vergel and Rai 2002). These phenomena are tolerated not only by the current transportation but also by the existing road infrastructure.
Alteration of urban landscape
The rampant cityward migration caused indiscriminate land-use mix in Metro Manila and this is partly because of the weak efforts to rationalize relationship among various land use plan (Mercado 1998). Urban deterioration is another facet of the land-use problem in Metro Manila with its dilapidated buildings, timeworn and environmentally deteriorated areas. On top of that is the increased number of squatter households. Embryonic settlements (more euphemistic term to squatter) remain to be a pervasive problem in the third world.
Urban Heat
There are studies confirming that Metro Manila is getting hotter. One of which is the study conducted at at the Institute of Environmental Science and Meteorology, College of Science, University of the Philippines, scientists from UP have found that temperature in the region increased compared with its adjacent rural areas (Lagmay 2007). Urban Heat Island, as its name suggests, is an urban phenomenon caused by the dominance of asphalt, concrete, bricks and stones in lieu of vegetation and natural land.
These urban problems probably arise from the lack of planning. With the absence of planning, described as art and science of ordering use of land so as to secure maximum practicable degree of economy, convenience and beauty, the process of urbanization follows it natural way of just occurring inevitably and carries with it the determined urban problems. In such way, industries, houses, markets in a city may just be constructed independently without regard to its relationship with one another; it is far from harnessing the maximum net economic and social gain (that can be attained if buildings and routes are ordered according to development goals, assuming that the goal includes maximum economic and social gain. If urban planning is present, urban problems persist because of the wrong emphasis of the planners. The community deviates from the goal embodied in the plan because planners care more about beautifying communities and helping individual businesses than addressing social urban problems. The Metro Manila also suffered from this dilemma. The Philippine’s premiere metropolis developed far from the grandiose plan originally envisioned by the colonial government because planned development was seldom implemented and town planning was valued mainly for aesthetic reasons rather than for the management of land and urban growth (Ballesteros 2000). But if equipped with a vision for general welfare, city planning, through spatial principles, can sensibly solve urban dilemmas. This was proved by the enduring concept of Sir Ebenezer Howard in his Garden City movement.
The glaring urban blight and urban dilemma led to construction of ideal settlements. Alongside the social, economic and political framework, most of the conceived ideal urban settlements include substantial discussion of the physical layout of the proposed settlement. The physical layout of their proposed ideal settlement provides concreteness to their ideas, giving the proposal high chance of being realized into actual settlement. Many have framed their social ideals within spatial layout principles including Ebenezer Howard with his Garden Cities. Since congestion is perceived to be the primary problem in urban area, decongestion is necessary. Congestion is inevitable because the city forms are economically biased to centers. Taking off from growth pole theory minus its spread effect, majority is likely to move towards the center (in this case, Metro Manila) because economic activities are concentrated here. In my proposed utopian framework, decongestion measures will include development of secondary growth pole in rural area adjacent to Metro Manila, creation of new road system with rail transit as major mode of transportation, balancing mixed use area inside in major blocks, designing inner roads that will make the major blocks walkable, creation of urban green spaces, and establishing the industrial sector at the edge of the city. Below are the details of the proposal.
Development of secondary growth pole
Rural migration is caused by poverty and lack of opportunity in rural areas. Hence there is a need to locate some industries in these areas to create opportunity for the rural folks. It is a measure to prevent further in-migration and displacing urban settlers to rural area, making the measure both preventive and positive check to congestion and regional disparity. To realize the proposal, infrastructure connecting the urban and rural area is necessary. Rail system will be the mode of transportation. In case natural features such as mountain will make the construction of rail system impossible, underground rail system will be built. The vision here is to make over the relationship between an urban and a rural area. With urban greenery integrated in the city and some industrial facilities situated in the rural area, arguments on rural versus urban development will end and balanced growth will be ensured.
Building of public transit system within the city
As an effort to mitigate traffic jams and more importantly air pollution, the new road system is designed so that the people will not rely on private and public automobiles. Major roads in Metro Manila are no longer sufficient to accommodate the rising traffic volume due to dominance public buses and jeepneys along major routes and increase in private car ownership. There is a need to design a road system that will lessen our dependence on automobiles because there is a faster way to get to other part of the city and in the internal section of the city, there is no need for vehicles in minor roads since it is walkable. There has been an increase in the demand for quality public transportation system that delivers quality service in terms of travel speed, riding comfort and in-vehicle air-quality. Urban rail transport is still limited as to date. As such, the city will require a construction of extensive light rail system. Rail transit will be the major mode of transportation and will be a key feature of the city. The rail transit will divide the city into major blocks; these major sections will be comprised of settlement, commercial and special use areas. For instance, block A will be composed of residential units, some shopping stores and restaurants while block B will be composed of residential units, schools and convenient stores. All the blocks will be mixed used area and there will be careful planning on the combination of areas established in a section. Industrial area is not included in these blocks. The selection of the transit station/terminals will be based on the location of the commercial and important special use areas (i.e., schools and hospitals). Thus each transit station will be associated with a certain commercial area, school or hospital.
Urban renewal and careful land-use mix
Since we will make way for urban green spaces, we have to carefully plan the composition of the major blocks. Number and size of commercial areas in each block were considered. The nature of commercial activity, major shopping and luxury goods, convenience goods that will be mixed with the residential units were considered. The type and grade of residential areas and the appropriate location of areas servicing the residents such as education and worship facilities were considered. The location and combination was planned with due consideration to provision of open green space for each block. For each block (minus the street), 60% of the land use will be devoted to the mixed use and 40% will be provided for open green space. Industrial areas will be located at the edge of the city. Industrial firms will remain at the edge because of the industrial risks that it can afflict to residents of the city. This design reflects the cease of subservience of the population to the machineries of capitalism. The industrial firms will defray the transportation of the industrial workers by way of provision of shuttle services. Wide roads leading to industrial site will be built to ensure ease of access. The design is biased on striving towards a humane city and not on driving economic investments. Underlying assumption is there is already a stable economic activity in the city. The goal now is to create a city where its residents will enjoy the basic amenities of decent urban living. Employment security will not be a problem because of the economic stability.
A cooler city
It was found out by the similar UP study touching on Urban Heat Island that the hottest place in Metro Manila is the Central Business Districts. Likewise, Ortigas commercial area, Port area and NAIA are hot places. While Wack Wack golf course, Camp Aguinaldo, Manila Seedling Bank and UP campus are relatively cool. Thus the nodes of the urban area are the hotter places while areas characterized by wide open spaces and vegetation are the cooler places. The process of urbanization has deprived Metro Manila of green space and bare land. The combined percentage of green space and bare land in Metro Manila is less than 10 percent (Hoyano, Yoon and Iino 2002).
Another key feature of the proposed design is its spaciousness that is, creation of open space with vegetation. This is to acknowledge the role of urban green space in contributing to ecological integrity of urban systems and the psychological and social effects of spacious green space to those living in areas. Outdoor shadings will be created including shading spaces from trees with large crown and from the design of buildings. Like Howard’s Garden Cities, every housing unit will have its own backyard. Major buildings like government halls, shopping centers or schools will have a veranda to use it as an outdoor living space and a rooftop where planting will be carried out to prevent solar radiation.
The conceptualization of alternative urban forms seems to be an effective measure to address urban dilemmas. With the futility of policy alternatives, creation of new urban forms directs people to live in accordance to the built paths and structures aimed towards maximizing economic and social gains. Urban dilemmas are deeply rooted on economic problems that is, the unequal access over the scarce resources of those who have less buying power or the poor. The provision of physical infrastructures and organization of urban space and forms facilitates the localization and accessibility of these resources and complements the shortcomings of aspatial economic models in resource allocation. However, alternative urban forms should be anchored on understanding of poverty, offshoot of which is urban dilemmas. In general, conceptualizing alternative urban forms must be directed toward creating a community that will foster holistic development and will advance the common good.
References:
Ballesteros, Marife (2000). Land Use Planning in Metro Manila and the Urban Fringe: Implication on the Land and Real Estate Market. Discussion Paper Series, 20, 1-4.
Hoyano, A., Yoon, S., & Iino, A. (2002). Southeast Asian High-Density Habitation and the Formation of a Comfortable Outdoor Thermal Environment. In T. Ohmachi & E. Roman (Eds.), Metro Manila: In Search of a Sustainable Future (135-147). University of the Philippines Press.
Lagmay, A.M.F., (2007). UP study confirms Metro Manila getting hotter. Philippine Daily Inquirer.
Mercado, Ruben (1998). Megalopolitan Manila: Striving Towards a Humane and World Class City. Discussion Paper Series, 30, 1-10.
Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS) (2000). Urbanization in a Decentralized Framework: The Lure of the City. Development Research News, 18 (2), 9-11.
Yai, T., & Vergel, K. (2002). Outline of Microscopic Road Traffic Simulation. In T. Ohmachi & E. Roman (Eds.), Metro Manila: In Search of a Sustainable Future (135-147). University of the Philippines Press.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
