Most developed nations in the world are highly urbanized. Their people live mostly in cities. It is in their cities that their economic activities are concentrated. Many of their people are rich. In a developing country like the Philippines, many people also live in cities and there hangs a tale. Unlike in the developed countries, most of the people that live in developing country cities are poor.
I mentioned last Wednesday that our cities have no development strategies. That was not entirely correct. With the assistance and guidance of the Washington D.C.-based Cities Alliance, several Philippines cities were able to formulate their City Development Strategies. The Cities Alliance is a global partnership for urban poverty reduction and the promotion of the role of cities in sustainable development. I saw in its website the City Development Strategies of Tagaytay, Sorsogon, San Jose, Roxas, Masbate, Marikina, Kabangkalan, Iloilo, Dapitan, Bayawan, Zamboanga, Tanjay, Tangub, Tanauan, Puerto Princesa, Paranaque, Pagadian, Makati, Laoag, Iriga, Cavite, Canlaon, Baguio and Bago. None from Cebu was listed.
In some way, though, I think I am still correct in the sense that many of these development strategies are probably not implemented or not working at all when implemented because they were not responsive to the real needs of cities in order for them to play their rightful role. Otherwise, why do we still see slums, squalors, poor infrastructure and inadequate delivery of social services in many of our cities?
What at is the role of cities?
Before answering, I would venture to say that prior to the passing of the Local Government Code of 1991, some municipalities became cities mainly because of the strong effort or influence of their local officials to turn their place into a chartered city even if they only had a small population and local revenue. In the 1991 Code, provisions were made how a municipality can become a city. Having met the requirements and after going through the process in Congress, a town is then declared a city. Whether that place really plays the role of a city is another story. Many just want to avail of the bigger internal revenue allotment given to cities.
The world, according to the 2011 UN-HABITAT report on the economic role of cities, has reached a turning point in 2008 for the first time in history when more than half its human population, 3.3 billion people, live in urban areas. It says that the world’s urban population grew from 220 million to 2.8 billion in the 20th century and that the next few decades will see an unprecedented scale of urban growth such that by 2030, this is expected to expand to about 5 billion.
The report says that cities play an important role in economic development by achieving economies of scale, agglomeration, and localization and providing efficient infrastructure and services through density and concentration in transportation, communications, power, human interactions, water and sanitation services. Given what they offer in terms of good jobs and other opportunities, cities also attract talents and skilled labor that allow further specialization in knowledge, skills, and management capabilities possible.
Properly guided, economic growth in cities naturally comes with urbanization. As such, cities become the driving force for national economic development. Economic growth also stimulates further urbanization but the report warned that urbanization can also occur in the absence of economic growth such as what is happening in some Sub-Saharan African countries.
In formulating their strategies, the cities were guided by the Cities Alliance into following five themes. These are (1) Livelihood, such as job creation, business development, and sources of household income; (2) Environmental sustainability and energy efficiency of the city and the quality of its service delivery; (3) Spatial form and its infrastructure; (4) Financial resources; and, (5) Governance.
I have nothing against these themes except that when followed to the hilt, the City Development Strategy when formulated may lack one key ingredient – its development focus.
In formulating the development strategy, city planners must also looked beyond its boundary to see what is going on outside and how the city fits in the overall scheme of development that is happening or not happening around it. What is the connection between the city and its surrounding areas? Is the city linked with the rest of the country and the world? In what way? What is the city’s competitive advantage in relation to its neighbors and the rest of the nation and world? How can it use this advantage to promote its own development and welfare of its people?
Is the city just a center of government where the national government agencies based their operation to carry out the programs of the national government? Is it a transshipment point of goods coming from the surrounding areas destined for other parts of the country or abroad? Is it a production based or distributing center of national or multi-national corporations that market their products globally? Or is it just a place where poor people in the rural areas congregate because they have nowhere else to go in order to eke a living no matter how limited?
Without knowing its rightful place and role, there is nowhere the city could go but just perpetuate its underachievement with an increasing number of people that it could not properly provide with good jobs, housing and other basic services.