Participative Governance on Urban Development in Naga City, Philippines

“He is the same as me, yet I am not him. Only if you understand it in this way will you merge with the way things are.” – Tung-Shan (807-869)

            One of the key ingredients of development is participation of the peoples. Naga City in the Philippines has institutionalized this through the Naga City People's Council (NCPC).

Paving the Road of Dialogue

            The NCPC, being the nucleus of representation of various sectors in the city, has called on the concerned sectors namely; the business, urban poor, city government, and NGOs to discuss the current issues besetting the city such as land conversion, expropriation, resettlement sites, and among others relative to urban poor concerns, business interest, and the city’s policies on urban development. It was quite clear to all sectors present that the dialogue will not result to a draft of policy direction of the city in view of the issues raised. Rather, it would open more rooms for discussion, brainstorming, and convergence of the different points of view.

Three Lanes of the Road

            City Government. The programs and policies in urban development of the city are premised on its pursuit of the common good for all sectors. Every sector is a vital part and parcel of its vision for development, thus the NCPC was formed. In an event that one sector feels marginalized in favor of other sectors, it should not be construed that the former is less important than the latter in terms of resources from the government. The city assures all sectors that there would be given their due.

            For example, the Naga City government has no choice but to expropriate the land should there be an impending demolition order in the given urban poor settlement. The city government’s act of expropriation should not be interpreted as a case of favoring the urban poor over the landowner. In a given circumstance like this, the city government’s best decision is to deliver justice to the majority who need the land more than the landowner. As Magsaysay aptly explained, “Those who have less in life should have more in law.”

            For example, in one meeting, the Urban Poor Affairs Office (UPAO) presented 4 options for the city to act upon with regard to the issues affecting the urban poor. These options are the negotiated purchase, the land swapping scheme, the land sharing scheme, and the expropriation of properties. The last option is the last recourse. The city therefore does not automatically expropriate a land without exhausting first the 3 options. Anyhow, there are cases that should be treated as an exemption than a rule so must not be defined as a precedent to any case.

            Engagingly, a member of the Naga City Urban Development Housing Board (NCUDHB) asserted that before the city endorsed an expropriation proceeding, it should consider first the affordability of the land by the occupants. He cited a case where the land in question is a high-priced property which could cost from P300,000 to P400,000 for each occupant-family. The assertion was well taken by the city official present.

            Business Sector. The apprehension was unanimously shared by the business people that in such case – expropriation would become the policy direction of the city and a precedent to settle land issues. Their reason was primarily anchored on the city’s declaration of a specified area as part of growth corridor. The city, according to them, contradicted itself when it decided to expropriate the land for the urban poor when it had identified the area, sitting along the national road, as potential investment site. They feared that the city’s decision could send a wrong signal for prospective business investors. They also noted that politicians already aiming for public office since election will be held in 9 months time could use cases like this for propaganda.

            Urban Poor Sector. As the informal sector of society, they want to live decently as part of the growing society. Topping all concerns, they reiterated their need to have a shelter of their own that is livable, accessible by transportation, has means to earn a livelihood, to do their share in the development of the community. They asked to be regarded as partners in development and not impediment of the same.

            It is widely accepted now that economic capital alone does not bring about development. Social investments through housing, health, education, are essential in developmental goals.

Hope at the End of the Road

            Recognizing the diverse interests of the sectors present in the dialogue, it was difficult to come up with one statement of principle relative to these issues. The differences in the concept of development appended the indifference among each sector’s interest. But then if there was one thing that the dialogue had gained, it was the motion to willingly look into the areas where each sector could compliment each other’s interest. The fact that this kind of dialogue had happened, it was not too much to hope for a point of concurrence among sectors of society to make Naga indeed a “Maogmang Lugar.” That,  I think, will supersede conflicting interests among/between sectors of society particularly Naga City, Philippines.