Development Choices: Sustainable Development Trajectories for Rapidly Growing Cities

 Rapidly growing cities and towns are faced with a range of developmental choices that will shape their growth and long-term economic, social and environmental sustainability. Many of these are complex choices with differing short-term versus long-term cost and benefits. These choices are seldom determined by individual actors or agencies, but emerge out of the complex interplay of decisions made by a range of actors across national and local governments, investors and entrepreneurs in the private sector, and a range of local community and civil society voices. The outcome of one set of choices often influences outcomes in other dimensions also, further increasing the complexity of the decision processes and overall development pathways for cities. Some of the choices are briefly described below, categorized under UNDP’s sustainable urbanization approach –

Sustainability, Inclusiveness and Resilience.31

 

SUSTAINABILITY

Transportation and mobility systems Traffic is one of the major development problems of any major city of the developing world and a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. The development options to ease traffic include mass transit public transport, increased car-centric road transportation or shared economy solutions. Mass transit public transport has higher up-front costs in terms of initial infrastructure investments and service integration. with existing transport options, although these costs can be mitigated through innovative approaches such as bus rapid transit. Car-centric road transportation, on the other hand, has lower up-front costs, as roads can be constructed and improved incrementally, as exemplified by Dakar’s approach, which uses paving stones and small scale contractors for road construction. Finally, there is a growing recognition of the potential benefits of shared economy solutions such as carpooling and bike schemes in Amsterdam and Copenhagen, in helping cities save costs and protect the environment.

 

In many cities of the developing world, the default choice has been expansion of the road network for cars. However, in the longer term, investments in road building to reduce congestion induces more cars onto the road and creates a cycle of car dependency that spurs urban sprawl. The lack of an integrated and efficient public transport system, meanwhile, severely hampers mobility and accessibility to social and economic activities

(particularly for those unable to afford private cars), while also increasing pollution, traffic

hazards and costs to deliver public services. The lower short-term costs of focusing on car-centric road transportation rather than mass transit results in higher long-term. costs in gridlock, fossil fuel dependence and pollution with its increased costs related to health care, and consequently a decrease in productivity. The challenge for cities is to overcome the short-term infrastructure investment costs of efficient mass transit systems, which requires political will, effective planning and implementation and access to suitable financing.

 

Energy systems

Cities face a trade-off in energy generation systems between options that have lower up-front costs but are often polluting and inefficient (e.g., diesel generators and coalfired plants) and investments in renewable sources (solar, wind or hydro) that may have higher capital costs but are less polluting, produce fewer GHG emissions and often have lower life-cycle costs. Energy efficiency measures in buildings, businesses and industries can provide additional benefits including cost-savings and increased income. Sustainable energy solutions can also contribute to other urban issues such as air quality, waste management, more efficient transport, better health and safety. Developing cities also face the choice to draw their energy production from a single energy source or to develop more diversified energy systems, making them more resilient to shocks such as natural disasters or sudden fuel price hikes.

 

These choices raise the question not just about the financial calculus of these investments in sustainable and resilient energy systems, but also about the added policy and technical complexity of planning for and instituting municipal codes for energy efficiency and incentive mechanisms or policies for renewable energy investments such as feed-in-tariffs. These complexities often lead capacity-constrained developing countries to opt for well-tested solutions such as grid systems and coal or diesel power plants, even when these have much higher total long-term costs. Yet, cities play a major role in transforming the current energy systems towards a more sustainable energy future, providing urban populations with access to affordable, reliable, zero-carbon and climate resilient energy solutions.

 

Environmental protection

and waste management

Many developing countries cite the need to modernize at the cost of environmental degradation. Pollution and water contamination and depletion may be seen as necessary

side effects to rapid modernization, with the assumption that, once cities become more developed, the rate of pollution and environmental destruction will decrease and eventually recede. Public officials may be tempted to allow pollution for immediate economic growth. However, this incurs long-term costs for clean-up and remediation, as many developing countries are now facing. Yet, cities also present unique opportunities for developing innovative waste management such as waste-to-energy technologies (e.g., methane from landfills), reusing and recycling as an economic opportunity and ecosystem-based sewage treatment. Solid waste management measures including composting and generating energy from methane combustion can also help reduce methane emissions in landfills, increase forest carbon sequestration and contribute to overall reduction of greenhouse gases.

 

INCLUSIVENESS

The geography of urbanization:

compact cities vs. sprawl

The spatial growth of cities can vary, depending on the policy choices made by decision makers as well as variables such as the availability of cheap land in surrounding areas. Older cities that developed before the advent of car transportation tend to have more compact city centres. However, as cities have grown over the last century, car ownership and the availability of cheap land encouraged the development of cardependent suburbs.

In the short term, such urban sprawl was an attractive option for municipal authorities due to the low costs of converting surrounding agricultural land; the availability of more affordable housing; affordability of automobile transportation due to low fuel costs; and the dispersion of concentrated poverty, crime and associated social problems. In many instances, however, these benefits mainly accrued to those who lived in those suburban communities, leading to crime and poverty being concentrated in core urban areas. Yet, relocation of low income groups away from inner city slums to the outskirts of the city can reduce their access to employment and livelihoods opportunities in the city centre, as has

occurred in Mumbai. In other cases, poverty ridden and sometime ghettoized suburbs  tend to be hubs of social problems.

 

In other cities, the choice to invest in public transport rather than car-centric road networks encouraged the development of more compact cities, particularly when surrounding land was scarce. These compact cities are more energy-efficient (due to lower per capita transportation costs and to lower heating or cooling costs), encourage greater upward mobility as people from different economic strata mingle and associate, and provide greater access to social services and employment. Compact urban development also provides greater scope to maintain key ecosystem services in surrounding hinterlands, such as watersheds for water supply and agricultural land for food to be grown for these cities.

 

Spatial equality and social equality

Cities are confronted with increased spatial inequalities within cities and between cities. With rapidly growing populations and limited land, the spatial planning choices cities make

can risk creating ‘ghettos’ of concentrated poverty, crime, unemployment and limited basic services. Consequently, developing well-off neighbourhoods can create gated communities that privatize the space they occupy and exacerbate the socio-economic gaps between communities and disparities in access to education, health and employment opportunities. Even where physically gated communities are not in use, more

subtle forms of exclusion and inequality are evident. A recent analysis demonstrated how poorer districts in Cairo receive proportionately lower per capita local development budgets, despite demonstrating greater need for service provision. In many developing countries, the links between periurban and urban areas are important, where local landholders participate in subsistence activities but try to utilize proximity to markets and services. These peri-urban areas are often excluded from landuse planning and governance systems and present significant challenges for poverty reduction and contribute to inequality.

 

Public space and land development

Countries urbanize to accommodate a growing population by building sewage conduits, water pipes, optic fiber and electricity lines; increasing security and fire fighters; and building and staffing local clinics and primary schools. All of this is done in a much more extensive territory with a proportionally much smaller fiscal base. Public space therefore remains an important urban development choice in which officials must confront short-term gains in economic growth from land development with long-term losses in social inclusion of urban populations. Cities can be made more inclusive by choosing to provide greater access to public spaces that offer opportunities for interaction and would enhance the social and cultural development and integration for families of various cultures and diverse backgrounds. These long-term social development concerns are viewed with less importance when land is initially developed to house much needed residential, commercial or industrial properties.

 

Governance systems:

openness and participation

Developing effective, accountable and transparent institutions has become a key target under SDG Goal 16, signalling the significance of a functioning public service. The urban governance approach focuses not only on the spatial boundaries (‘where’ governance systems are applied), but also on ‘how’ and ‘by whom’ governance and local development processes are promoted, such as supporting the role of elected mayors. Such an approach would need to be holistic and strongly risk-informed. It also needs to consider the long-term climate change and disaster risks that cities are likely to be exposed to and to envision a role for municipal authorities and mayors as champions and facilitators of action rather than as reactive administrators of change. Many forward-thinking city leaders around the world are already shifting to such forms of governance, as has been seen in cities as diverse as Medellin in Colombia,40 Makassar in Indonesia41 and Seoul in South Korea.

 

The influence of economic actors such as outside investors and local economic elites is often disproportionately high in developing cities, where mechanisms for the countervailing voice of local communities and neighbourhoods are underdeveloped. Participatory governance systems are good for long-term social cohesion and effective public service systems and challenge the capture, collusion and influence of the political system by elites. The compact size of cities makes the creation of mechanisms to promote collective action and to institutionalize negotiations between disparate societal interests easier than is possible at the national level. Cities offer the greatest potential for the development of inclusive institutions for managing political conflict rather than suppressing it. They are critical spaces for institutionalized forms of political debate and participation.

 

Effective urban governance requires better integration across the different levels of government policymaking processes. Greater decentralization and devolution of power using multilevel governance approaches also increase responsiveness and efficiency. Government agencies, in particular line ministries, and other national actors, public and private, are implementing their strategies and plans at local level, where policies meet people. Hence, government’s choice of policies, programmes and plans should be based on people’s demand and coordinated across the different levels of governance. It is also important to foster cooperation amongst actors that operate at the local level, based on local demand. This helps to prevent the risk of fragmentation and overlap of actions and

to build complementarities among actors and coherence between local processes and national strategies.

 

Migration

Many developing cities continue to grapple with burgeoning migrant populations from rural areas and foreign countries who move to cities in the hope of finding greater opportunity and peaceful societies. Cities can integrate these migrants and other minority

communities into the social fabric of a city or isolate them in camps, temporary settlements or other transient arrangements. Urban migrants can contribute greatly to the economic growth, cultural diversity, entrepreneurial culture and economic dynamism of a city, providing long-term benefits that will often outweigh the short-term costs of inclusion. Many major cities worldwide have benefited from waves of migration, including global capitals such as New York, Hong Kong, Berlin and Sydney.

 

Integration can pose huge challenges and opportunities. Inclusiveness is particularly difficult in the contexts of crises and sudden massive displacements, as seen with the Syrian crisis. Even where integration is attempted, cities need to consider the obstacles that migrants face in finding employment, learning the culture and language of their host country and navigating public service systems. Any interventions to address these obstacles need to be balanced by the sentiments of host communities, as they may feel threatened by increased competition for social services and economic opportunity and might view migrants as draining social

service programmes.

 

Job creation, informality

and entrepreneurship

Cities actively promote local economic development by creating employment opportunities that build on the comparative advantages and unique qualities of their localities. Some cities are hubs of innovation and entrepreneurship, such as Bengalore, while others are centers of manufacturing, such as Dhaka. In all instances, the choices cities make to create an enabling environment for development and growth should depend on dialogue and partnership among local-level stakeholders (e.g., employers, workers’ organizations, entrepreneur organization and informal workers), based on an understanding of business opportunities and the labour environment to target skills training, support local enterprises to thrive, and extend social security coverage to informal workers.

 

In many places, the informal economy provides financial services and social safety nets, for instance through moneylending, mutual savings groups and informal and indigenous health care. Yet, some cities perceive informal businesses such as street vendors, hawkers and streetside food stalls as nuisances that disrupt orderly environments needed to encourage tourists and businesses to invest. Others choose to recognize informal businesses as essential drivers of growth and providers of goods and services, particularly for poor and working-class residents. They also see these informal businesses as critical entry-points for the poor, migrants and other marginalized groups to earn livelihoods and assimilate into cities. The degree to which cities allow space for and encourage informality is important to consider when fostering a climate of entrepreneurship. Allowing space for informality encourages a business climate that drives job creation and innovation. Balancing the vibrancy and diversity of informal businesses against the need for structure and efficiency is a delicate choice that many growing cities grapple with.

 

RESILIENCE

Managing risk and

investing in resilience

Rapid growth often results in development on hazard-prone sites (coastlines, river beds, hill-slopes), which increases exposure and vulnerability to climate and disaster risk. Vulnerability to climate and disaster risks in urban areas is also shaped by socioeconomic

variables like poverty, security of tenure, access to social safety nets, livelihoods and ecosystem services, and other inequities. Decisions to integrate measures such as disaster risk management and climate change adaptation into national development planning are critical for cities to build sustainability and resilience against future climate and disaster risks.

 

Cities must institute effective planning and administrative systems to avoid continued development on these vulnerable and disaster-prone areas and the pressure for land for growing populations. Informal settlers often settle on these locations, causing other policy challenges related to relocation, compensation and the use of these informal settlements as political bargaining chips. Cities must also contend with the short-term vs. the longer-term disaster risk management strategies. The short-term responses such as better building codes and emergency action plans are most often not well integrated into long-term disaster risk strategies. Many local governments in developing cities are limited by financial or technical know-how in administering effective building codes and zoning regulations.

 

Urban conflict, violence and crime

Political violence and civil wars increasingly ignite in cities, as they are the locus of political

and economic power and social tensions and inequalities. Refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) are increasingly drawn to cities and towns, where they seek better access to basic services and livelihood opportunities.

 

In a context where national structures and authorities cease to operate or become too fragile and weak, local-level structures and municipal administrative systems can be the only means to reach out to local communities. In Bogota and Medellin, urban violence has been reduced due to better urban governance policy choices, in particular through their ability to establish inclusive coalitions between elites and popular groupings. The choice to engage at this level, though, needs to be done in a risk-informed and conflict-sensitive manner so as to avoid doing harm to local communities.

 

CONCLUSION

The choices and dimensions above are complex in and of themselves. Adding to the complexity is the fact that these choices or development pathways are interconnected in multiple ways. For example, whether cities develop in smart, compact ways or through suburban sprawl depends in part on the availability of efficient public transport infrastructure (which encourages compact development around public transportation hubs) or on whether transportation is car-dependent, which allows for and encourages sprawl. This also links to the issue of spatial inequality, livability and hence potential to attract entrepreneurs and inbound investment. Hence, decisions around infrastructure drive the degree to which inequality and pockets of poverty may arise, affecting in turn outcomes in economic development, social cohesion, conflict and crime.

 

Source: Development Choices: Sustainable Development Trajectories for Rapidly Growing Cities. SUSTAINABLE URBANIZATION STRATEGY: UNDP’s Support to Sustainable, Inclusive and Resilient Cities in the Developing World. United Nations Development Programme 2016

 

 

URBANIZATION TRENDS

For the first time in history, more than half the world’s people are urban. Between now and 2030, the world’s rural population is expected to remain largely static, while the urban population is projected to grow by 1.5 billion people.

By 2030, 60 percent of the global population will live in cities. Over 90 percent of that urban growth will occur in cities and towns of the developing world, mostly in Africa and Asia.

The urbanization of the global population has fundamental ramifications for the economy, society and the environment. Urban centres currently cover only a small part of the world’s land surface - 0.51 percent of the total land area. However, urban areas will expand significantly during the next two to three decades.

Based on current trends, urban land cover will increase by 1.2 million km2 by 2030, nearly tripling global urban land area between 2000 and 2030. Cities cover a small part of the world, but their physical and ecological footprints are much larger. Cities accounted for 82 percent of global GDP in 20143 and by 2025 this will rise to an estimated 88 percent. There will be 230 new cities by then, all in middle-income countries. One hundred cities in China alone may account for 30 percent of global GDP at that time.

Cities produce more than 70 percent of the world’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions4 and use 80 percent of the world’s energy.5 The International Energy Agency projects that

urban energy-related GHG emissions will rise from around 67 percent today to 74 percent

by 2030.6 Cities also host most of the world’s critical infrastructure, key development assets, political institutions and major socioeconomic activities. Global analyses of climate change and disaster impacts show that a high proportion of the people and economic activity affected by extreme weather events is concentrated in urban centres.

Cities’ vulnerability goes beyond exposure to climate change impacts and extreme events. Violence and crime are pressing issues in many urban areas. The urbanization process in developing countries is often poorly managed, resulting in inequitable, exclusionary and fragmented cities and increased risk of violence, especially among disenfranchised sections of the urban population that cannot access the formal political system, including refugees and Internally Displaced People (IDPs).

While there are challenges to be addressed, there are also critical opportunities to be seized in making growth more sustainable, inclusive and equitable, cities more resilient and their inhabitants less vulnerable. Urban residents in well-planned cities enjoy better

access to employment opportunities, health care, education and public services compared to their rural counterparts. Well-managed urban areas have lower per capita energy, climate and ecosystem footprints and lower costs per person for infrastructure and basic services. And the concentration of resources, ideas and energy in urban areas is fertile ground for the creativity and technological innovation needed to solve the many developmental challenges the world faces today.

Millenials in their 20s and 30s are moving into cities at an astounding rate, attracted by the concentration and density of people that they can connect with. At the same time, companies, including startups companies, are increasing moving into dense, dynamic and energetic urban centers where talent entrepreneurs, infrastructure, knowledge and capital are clustered. These two mutually reinforcing dynamics are shifting and shaping the way cities are developed, spurring innovation and revitalization, creating new relationships between local residents, companies and local governments, as well as exposing underlying challenges in cities.

Cities are also home to significant concentrations of the poor and marginalized. Urban poverty is growing12 and the World Bank estimates that, by 2035, most of the world’s extreme poor will be found in urban areas.

Urbanization has significant impacts on the environment and the well-being of urban dwellers. Cities are key contributors to many environmental problems, such as air and water pollution. Pervasive levels of air pollution has been seen recently in China, India and Mexico City. For many cities, municipal waste is a significant problem. Globally, 3 billion urban residents generate 1.2 kg of waste a day - 1.3 billion tonnes per year.14 This generates challenges such as GHG from transporting waste, marine pollution (including plastics) from coast cities, shortage of land for landfill sites and health hazards such as cholera outbreaks, from informal dumps and untreated waste.

Cities are highly vulnerable to climate change impacts. This is due to the fact that many cities are located in highly exposed coastal areas and riverbanks, which are prone to sea level rise, typhoons, storms, flash floods and landslides. Urbanization also displaces open space such as farmland, wetlands, parks and forests and reduces water supply as excessive ground water usage depletes water tables. These degradations significantly reduce the ability of natural ecosystems to filter air and water and provide other ecosystem services.

 

The impacts of climate change and disasters in cities disproportionately affect the poor, who normally settle in compact settlements and slums, on riverbanks and steep slope areas where land is more affordable or settled illegally. These areas are often prone to floods, storms and landslides. In addition, people living in these areas tend to hold informal settlement status and thus receive inadequate or no basic infrastructure and social services support. About one in seven people in the world lives in deteriorated and overcrowded spaces in urban areas.

By 2040, the world’s energy systems will need to serve 9 billion people, with two thirds of them in urban areas. The urban poor in many developing countries who typically have access to some electricity face a number of challenges. They experience irregular supply, frequent blackouts and quality problems associated with the grid electricity such as low or fluctuating voltage.16 Affordability is another barrier, due to high connection fees and tariffs. This can lead to continued use of unsustainable energy sources such as kerosene for lighting or solid fuels for cooking and heating, which cause indoor pollution and increased health and safety risks. Informal or illegal connections are also a common practice in many urban centres. As economies develop, energy demand also increases significantly for uses such as refrigeration, heating and cooling. In Mumbai, India, for example, 40 percent of total electricity consumption is for air-conditioning.

Many cities remain strongly divided and segregated spatially and socially. High and extreme inequality in cities is a driver of violence and unrest. In Latin America, UNDP’s analysis points to a correlation between urbanization and rising crime where institutional capacities to include marginalized groups are inadequate. Conflict-affected countries such as Sudan, Somalia, Yemen, Lebanon and Iraq have cities characterized by an abundance of slums, comprising 50 percent to 90 percent of total urbanization.

Vulnerable groups such as youths, migrants and IDPs often experience marginalization and stigmatization. Amidst waves of conflict- and disaster-driven migration, the displaced are increasingly seeking refuge in urban areas, with over half of the world’s 38 million ID Ps and 13 million refugees living in towns and cities. Beyond displacement, economic migration continues to be a major factor in the growth of cities. In many global

cities such as Sydney, London and New York, migrants make up more than one third of the population. In Asia and Africa, fast-growing secondary and tertiary cities are expected to absorb much of the future population growth through migration, with many migrants moving to, from and amongst rural and urban areas in seasonal and circular flows.

Inequality between cities is also growing. The increasing concentration of wealth in a few attractive cities is driving up the cost of living, forcing lower-paid residents to migrate to distant suburbs or relocate entirely.

In many developing countries, urban unemployment and underemployment are now a rising concern, particularly for youth, women and marginalized groups. One major element of city economies that still generates less attention is the informal economy, yet it accounts for 50 percent to 80 percent of a city’s GDP and provides livelihoods for the majority of poor and excluded groups in many developing countries.

Limited public space for city residents to access and limited opportunities for the public to influence decision-making regarding public space or land use22 expose cities to the risk of future internal conflict (gang violence, riots, civil unrest) and social exclusion based on a population’s immigration or socio-economic status. It also leads to a range of other issues such as reduced physical and mental health and reduced adaptive capacity to cope with heat island effects and flooding.

In order to meet the SDGs by 2030, around 40 percent of the world’s population will need proper housing and access to basic infrastructure and services such as water and sanitation systems. This creates significant pressure on land and housing, particularly in urban areas where supply is limited and policy and regulatory frameworks to manage demand are poorly developed. The urban poor and other vulnerable groups (migrants, IDPs, female-headed households) fare worst, as they lack access to housing, tenure security and land ownership. In many developing countries, this often leads to the emergence of slum settlements. Municipal administrations play a major role in ensuring proper urban planning, service delivery and creation of economic opportunities (e.g., the 14 million jobs that need to be created each year for young people).

However, urbanization is peaking where the capacity to govern is in short supply. Rapidly growing cities in developing countries are struggling to provide the infrastructure, services and governance systems needed by their increasing populations as they deal with competing priorities and demands.

The decentralization reforms that have occurred in many countries, such as in Latin America, have given local governments and local communities increased influence on policies in urban areas. Yet, fiscal decentralization lags behind. City leaders repeatedly point to the lack of urban financing as one of the primary barriers to long-term development. In many instances, the lack of financing options also drives cities towards unsustainable short-term solutions, for instance by selling land for commercial development as a means of financing municipal infrastructure, as has been common in many parts of China. Many municipal authorities, particularly in developing countries, continue to lack access to revenue and the autonomy to generate revenue. Access to affordable finance and enhanced administrative capacities is still needed at all subnational tiers of government – municipal, metropolitan and regional.

Public authorities face increasing difficulty in maintaining effective governance in large cities, due to corruption, the erosion of governance and institutional capabilities in the justice system, law enforcement and security institutions, and poorly managed public space. The degree of social integration and cohesion in a community also affects the rates of crime, violence and peaceful coexistence. Without strong participatory governance systems, the needs of the poor and marginalized, particularly of migrants, IDPs, women and minority groups, are often neglected. Developing countries will need efficient, multi-tiered policy and institutional mechanisms to address the complex and interconnected consequences of urbanization across all tiers of government and with non-state actors. Urbanization is not a challenge exclusively for cities. The shift of populations to urban areas also has economic, social and governance consequences for peri-urban and rural areas that need to be addressed. These surrounding territories provide vital goods and services to cities such as labour and natural resources. In many developing countries, working-age rural dwellers migrate to cities in search of economic opportunities, leaving the very young and the aged behind in rural communities.

Rural-urban migration can also be highly gendered. In many regions, it is mainly the men who leave in search of work, leaving women to work the fields and manage the burden of care.26 In other countries, women go to cities for employment in households, factories or service industries, which provide them with better incomes and greater economic and social empowerment, but also exposes migrant women to the risk of exploitation.27 Declining populations in rural areas also pose challenges for agriculture and for continuing to maintain social service provision for smaller, scattered, aging populations. These challenges are already evident in Europe28 and Japan,29 presaging challenges that developing countries will face in years to come.

The rise of the middle class is becoming more apparent in many regions. In 2009, 1.8 billion people were considered to be middle class, with Europe (664 million), Asia (525 million) and North America (338 million) accounting for the highest number of people in this group. It is estimated that, by 2030, the middle class will account for nearly 5 billion out of the world’s 8 billion people, with most of them living in urban areas. This will continue to drive up global demand for food, water, transport, energy and housing and contribute to GHG emissions, particularly in developing countries where most of this urban growth occurs.30 All 10 of the fastest-growing cities in the world at present are found in developing countries in Asia and Africa. The process of urbanization and the types of cities that emerge in the developing world will deeply affect outcomes of many development challenges in the post-2015 era. The infrastructural and economic characteristics of these growing cities will help determine humanity’s ecological and climate footprints and the degree to which societies are resilient to future climate, social and economic shocks. Success in poverty reduction will be influenced by the degree to which urban poverty is understood, identified and overcome in this urbanization process. Ensuring that these cities develop on sustainable development trajectories is therefore one of the biggest challenges and opportunities on the development landscape.

 

Source: Urbanization Trends. SUSTAINABLE URBANIZATION STRATEGY: UNDP’s Support to Sustainable, Inclusive and Resilient Cities in the Developing World. United Nations Development Programme 2016

 

Green, Green, Green Program: Key to Making Cities Liveable

 Exposure to natural environments significantly reduces stress levels. Living in spaces surrounded by nature—whether the majestic mountains, the tranquil sea, or lush gardens and forests—is a powerful antidote to stress. (https://business.inquirer.net/468670/the-healing-power-of-greenery#ixzz8gIYcdBTm)

Studies have shown that exposure to natural environments significantly reduces stress levels and profoundly impacts our mental well-being. For instance, people living near green spaces report lower stress levels and decreased cortisol, the stress hormone, which can lead to improved overall health and a more robust immune system. The natural scenery fosters calm and tranquility, a crucial element often missing in urban environments. (https://business.inquirer.net/468670/the-healing-power-of-greenery#ixzz8gIYcdBTm)

Recognizing the important role of the green spaces in creating liveable and sustainable urban centers, the national government has provided an allocation for the “development or enhancement of public open space by creating esplanades, parks, arboretum, or botanical gardens, and building bike lanes, walkways, and green infrastructure (DBM).” Therefore, people in the cities which accounts to “over 50 million Filipinos can look forward to a healthier, more pleasant, and more relaxing life (DBM).”

The program is dubbed as the “Green, Green, Green which is now in full swing and funded under the Local Government Support Fund - Assistance to Cities (LGSF-AC) (DBM).” It assists the Philippines’ 145 cities and their local government units (LGUs) in making their communities more livable, sustainable, and well-connected through the development or enhancement of public open space by creating esplanades, parks, arboretum, or botanical gardens, and building bike lanes, walkways, and green infrastructure(DBM).

The program is a parallel endeavor to the massive national infrastructure development program Build, Build, Build (DBM).

Currently, 100 cities are now processing their project proposals out of the 143 that submitted their expression of interest to avail of the funding (DBM).

Cities are investing in a variety of public open spaces which they have identified as important civic spaces for their citizens. These include: institutional open spaces such as new government centers (10); public squares and plazas (20); mangroves (2); parks (54); waterfronts (25); streets (13). Another 19 cities are still finalizing their proposed site (DBM).

The following are some urban development programs in various cities in the Philippines cited by the DBM in its website:

 ·       Plaza Rehabilitation in San Juan City

·                 ·       Park Redevelopment in Marikina City

·       Park, Plaza, and Port in Dagupan City

·                 ·      Valenzuela City’s Polo Park

·       River esplanades in five cities

·       Wet Park in Iligan City

·       Mangrove Parks in the cities of Mandaue and Masbate

·                 ·    Quezon City’s streetscape project “Gora Lane”

·       Historic Downtown Redevelopment in Antipolo City

·       Redevelopment of waterfront boulevard in Zamboanga City

·       Caloocan City’s nature park

References

Green, Green, Green pushes city governments to build better open spaces. Department of Budget and Management accessed at https://www.dbm.gov.ph/index.php/management-2/758-green-green-green-pushes-city-governments-to-build-better-open-spaces

The healing power of greenery by Ar. John Ian Lee Fulgar. Philippine Daily Inquirer  accessed at (https://business.inquirer.net/468670/the-healing-power-of-greenery#ixzz8gIYcdBTm  / 10:55 AM July 13, 2024

 

 

 

A Productive and Inspiring Week at the Intensive Course in Environmental Planning (ICEP)

 I attended the Intensive Course in Environmental Planning (ICEP) last February 12-16, 2024 conducted by the Planning and Research Foundation, Inc. (PLANADES) in cooperation with the UP-School of Urban and Regional Planning (UP-SURP). The seminar was held at the New SURP Building at UP Diliman.

As a lifelong learner in the environmental planning profession, I consider ICEP as a great learning opportunity with the professors’ par excellence in the country. For me, it was both a refresher and a sort of updating sessions after having been away from my formal classes in Diploma in Land Use Planning (DLUP) which I started in 2017 and finished in 2019.

The five-day course has all the topics that an environmental planner must study to be effective in the profession. It started with the discussion of EnP. Ronnie H. Encarnacion on the history and evolution of planning running thru various epochs and development stages that shaped the emergence of various planning theories and principles. This was followed by the lecture of EnP. Krishna V. Buenaventura on City Growth and Planning Theories which has focused on urbanization principles, theories and trends.  

The ethical standards for environmental planners were succinctly discussed by Dr. Corazon B. Cruz. I was reminded of my responsibilities as a planner and to be proud of being one. I am so delighted to meet her and had a photo with her. I told her that she was our guest of honor during our oath-taking ceremony for new environmental planners in Tagbiliran, Bohol in 2017.

I was again amazed and inspired while listening intently to Professor Ernesto Serote whom we regard as the father of local development planning in the country. His topic was Rationalized Planning System (RPS) which he developed and authored. RPS is considered as the bible of local development planning. The RPS was later on adopted by the DILG as its important material in local development planning. I even bought Prof. Serote’s book Property, Patrimony, and Territory and had him personally autographed and posed a picture with him. The first time I had the chance to listen to Prof. Serote’s lecture on RPS was in 2015 in Tacloban City when I attended the seminar for aspiring environmental planners conducted by Philworld Gateway managed by Enp Nick Tabungar.

A lecture on population and demography came next by Prof. Carmeli Marie Chaves and such topic is crucial in planning as the present number of people and its projected increase in a community are prime consideration in addressing current and future needs.

The succeeding lectures have focused on various development sectors and subsectors. These included Social Development Sector Planning by EnP Maria Veronica Arreza-Arcilla; Economic Development Sector Planning by Dean Dina C. Magnaye; Institutional Development Sector Planning by Atty. Mark Anthony M. Gamboa; Infrastructure and Utilities Development Sector Planning by EnP Ma. Sheila G. Napalang, and; Environment and Natural Resources Development Sector Planning by For. Jose M. Ragunay. Transportation Planning was discussed by Dr. Jun T. Castro; Risk Sensitive Comprehensive Land Use and Development Planning by Dr. Engr. Tabassam Rasa; Area Development Planning by Enp Nick Espina, Jr. and; Project Planning by Prof. Crispin E.D. Diaz.

During the weeklong course, I was so glad to have met and saw in person some of my former professors in UPOU, specifically, Dean Dina Magnaye and Prof. Jonathan John Maldupana whom I had the opportunity to have a picture with. One of the lecturers Prof. Nick Espina was also my former professor.

For those who aspire to join the world of environmental planning and be the best in this field, I advise you to attend the future ICEP.

Local Government and Decentralization

 

Governance is about how local government bodies ensure that they are doing the right things, in the right way, for the right people, in a timely, open, inclusive, honest and accountable manner (p.2). It comprises the systems, processes, and cultures and values by which local government bodies are directed and controlled, and through which they account to, engage with and, where appropriate lead their communities (pp.2-3).

At the heart of local governance is decentralization and local autonomy which is mandated by the 1987 Philippine Constitution specifically under section 3 whereby the Congress is mandated “to enact a local government code that will institutionalize decentralization.” Hence, came the Local Government Code of 1991 which basically provides under sec 2 Book I that LGUs “shall genuine and meaningful autonomy to enable them to attain their fullest development as self-reliant communities…”

Salient Features of Decentralization

Decentralization refers to the transfer of powers and functions from a higher or central level of authority to a lower level government or field offices of central units. There are basically two modes by which decentralization can be effected. These are through devolution and deconcentration (Cabo:128). 

Deconcentration decentralizes functions from central government agencies to its field units. The transfer of functions takes place within the same administrative machinery of government, from the central office to its field units or offices. Deconcentration is administrative in nature, hence, it is also called administrative deconcentration (p.128).

Devolution is political in character for it transfers powers and functions from the national government to local government. In effect, devolution empowers local governments by giving it wider scope of discretion and decisionmaking powers. The passage of the 1991 Local Government Code is an act of devolution (Cabo, p129). The Local Government Code devolved powers and functions including the delivery of basic services: responsibility to enforce regulatory powers; powers to increase financial resources by broadening their taxing powers, shares from internal revenues, and the exploitation of national wealth; legitimization of participation for civil society in local governance; and authority to engage in entrepreneurial and development activities (Reyes: 359).

Privatization involves the assumption by a business corporate of a service or function performed by government (Cabo:129).

Relevance to the Country

          Decentralization has been adopted to improve the delivery of public services, and the management of public affairs among newly-independent nations (Reyes:167). Brillantes, Jr. asserts that governments have adopted to decentralization because of the merits of facilitating speedy “decisionmaking processes by decongesting central government and reducing red tape” while at the same time increasing citizens’ participation and empowerment to engender a “more open and democratic government” (Brillantes, 2003:324) (Reyes:167). Decentralization brought much optimism to liberate local political units from extreme reliance and dependency on the national government. It “strengthens and empowers the LGUs to be at the helm of forging their futures, especially in the aspects of fighting poverty, engendering development, self-reliance, consolidating good governance practices and reinvigorating democracy (Reyes:176).”

How Decentralization was Implemented

          Decentralization was implemented with the passage of the Local Government Code of 1991. As it is, the LGC covers a vast and bulky enumeration of policies and mandate provided in four books divided into 536 sections to transform local government units into self-reliant communities. It is this a complex codified body of legislation that captures the many facets and aspects of local governance that had been neglected if not conveniently ignored through many attempts because of vested interests in the legislature and in the national government, which has been disinclined to share power and authority (Reyes: 172.)

According to Reyes (2016), based on a rough and preliminary assessment, the following could be identified as some of the recognized salutary gains of the LGC during the last 25 years (Reyes:173-176):

1.     - Grassroots empowerment and greater citizens’ participation in the communities.

2.    - Greater involvement of civil society and people’s organizations and the private sector in policy-making and in the management of public affairs.

3.    - The rise and strengthening of inter-local cooperation thru the establishment of Leagues of Local Government Units and Elective Officials

4.    - Consciousness on the rights of Local Government Units and greater transparency

5.    - Recognition of Best Practices under the Galing Pook Awards (Excellent or Best Localities) Program

6.     - Anti-poverty and development initiatives at the local levels

7.     - Participation in local elections by the citizenry remained strong, if not strengthened

8.     - Women leaders are on the rise

Reyes (2016) further said the LGC should not be regarded as a nostrum or a cure-all, one-size-formula that will correct the many multifarious problems that beset communities. In fact, he listed down the following dysfunctions (Reyes:176-179):

1.     The problematic of the absorptive capacities of LGUs has not matched the demands of responsibilities entrusted by the Code.

2.     The financial capacities of LGUs leave much to be desired

3.     - Many local governments continue to be dependent on their shares of the Internal Revenue Allotment

4.     - The national government continues to hold and control the bulk of productive sources of revenue even in the Post-Code Period (Llanto, 2013)

5.     - There is a wide disparity in the distribution of government personnel between the national government and the LGUs.

6.     - The poverty incidence has not been contained.

7.     - Political dynasties remain well-entrenched in the various provinces, cities and towns of the country.

Brillantes, Llanto, Alm, and Sosmena (forthcoming 2009) conducted many consultations in major regions of the country and have identified the following the key issues and challenges pertaining to the implementation of the LGC drawn from the study (Reyes:371-373).

1.       Local Personnel Administration/Human Resource Development, Organization, and Staffing

The professionalization of the local bureaucracy has been considered as one important issue. More specifically, the study highlights the following issues that emerged: 1.) low compensation of local officials, 2.) low compensation/pay of barangay officials and staff, 3.) certain sector are not given priority at the local level, 4.) need to clarify specific positions at the local level, and 5.) unclear career path of local appointive officials.

2.       National-Local Relations

These are related to 1.) lack of synchronization/harmony between national and local government development planning and action, 2.) NGAs generally bypass local development plan formulated by LGUs; and 3.) unclear conditions concerning the creation and conversion of LGUs.

3.       Local Government Performance Measurement

The study found that there continues to be: 1.) a lack of a well-crafted and functional performance measurement system of LGUs, and 2.) the proliferation of performance indicators and lack of awareness of such indicators by LGUs.

4.       Capacity Building

The main issues here are: 1.) lack of awareness and appreciation of a comprehensive capacity building program for local governments, and 3.) election of local officials who are not ready or prepared to assume the position due to lack of technical skills.

5.       People Participation

Inasmuch as the LGC has created an enabling framework for genuine people participation in local governance, key issues remains including: 1.) unclear relations between non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to operationalize their participation, 2.) inability of many LGUs to fill-up the 25% NGOs mandatory representation requirement, and 3.) LCEs do not convene the local development council.

6.       Political Concern

The study validated that: 1.) the current 3-year term of local officials does not allow authentic development work, 2.) Sangguniang Kabataan seems to be highly politicized, and 3.) unclear rules and procedures of Congress in the conduct of referendum.

7.       Federalism

Finally, the study echoed the high hopes and opportunities that federalism may bring as a possible politico-administrative set-up to push decentralization in the Philippines (Brillantes, Llanto, Alm, and Sosmena 2009:52-59).

Reflection

          As for me, the struggle on giving flesh and blood to good local governance thru decentralization is a long marathon. All those issues mentioned above should be addressed to achieve the goals of decentralization. Doing so requires the active participation and engagement of the government, the private sector and the civil society. With federalism being considered by the current leadership to empower local government units, I agree with PA scholars that it should spin-off from the gains and shortcomings of our experiences with the present mode of decentralization as contemplated by the LGC.

In the area of politics, it is very important to develop an educated and responsible citizenry that will elect good leaders that will form a well-performing and responsive bureaucracy. It is equally important for the society to develop values and norms that complements with the demands for high level of ethical standards in public service. Though the Wilsonian doctrine of “administration-politics dichotomy” is the most ideal condition, there remains the fact that the quality of bureaucracy we have depends on our political choices basically on how we elect our leaders and how we participate in policy deliberations.

Effective decentralization means effective and efficient management of the bureaucracy. Professionalization of government positions in the local level must give way to the patronage and spoils tradition. The use of modern technology and communications technology should be fully harnessed to keep up with the demands of the Fourth Industrial Revolution to speed up service delivery and to improve transparency, accountability and participation. Sustainability and continuity of good programs of previous administrations and the private sector should be ensured by the present administrators to keep development track on the right direction.

References:

Cabo, Wilhelmina L., P201 Theories and Practice of Public Administration, University of the Philippine Open University, 1997.

Delivering Good Governance and in Local Government Framework edited by Sarah Lloyd. CIPFA The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy, 2007, UK accessed at httpsdemocracy.york.gov.ukdocumentss82198CIPFADeliveringGoodGovernanceinLocalGovernmentFramework1.pdf.pdf

Reyes, Danilo dela Rosa. Issues and Problems in Decentralization and Local Autonomy in the Philippines: A Preliminary Assessment of Impact and Challenges. Journal of Politics and Governance, Vol. 6, Special Issue, September – December, 2016 accessed thru httpcopag.msu.ac.thjournalfilesjournal6-Special%20Issue130120175022212.Danilo%20de%20la%20Rosa%20Reyes.pdf accessed on 03-10-2020.

 

Reyes, Danilo, R. History and Context of the Development of Public Administration in the Philippines, Public Administration in Southeast Asia (Thailand, Philippines, Malaysia, Hongkong, and Macao) edited by Evan MM. Berman (CRC Press 2011) pp. 333-352 accessed at http://blancopeck.net/Public-Administration-in-Southeast-Asia.pdf on 02-07-2020

 

The Local Government Code of 1991

The 1987 Philippine Constitution