METRO MANILA:
A Case Study in Metropolitan
Planning and Governance
NATHANIEL VON EINSIEDEL
(Former Commissioner for Planning of
The Metro Manila Commission)
February 2009
INTRODUCTION
Location of Metro Manila
INTRODUCTION
The Metro Manila Area
Component Local Governments
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
Manila
Quezon
Caloocan
Pasay
Makati
Paranaque
Las Pinas
Muntinlupa
Taguig
Pateros
Pasig
Marikina
Mandaluyong
San Juan
Navotas
Malabon
Valenzuela
INTRODUCTION
Basic Information
„ Premier urban
„
„
„
„
„
„
„
center
Center of
government,
trade, commerce,
finance,
education, and
culture
Total Land Area:
636 sq. km.
Total Population:
11,553,427
Population
Density: 18,650
Annual Population
Growth Rate:
2.11%
Per Capita
Income: P67,290
Contribution to
GNP: 32%
INTRODUCTION
Origins of Metro Governance
„ Urban problems such as poverty, inadequate housing, proliferation
of slum areas, water shortage, flooding, traffic congestion,
uncollected garbage, and increasing crime were perceived to have
reached critical levels in mid-1960s.
„ By late-1960s, there were many proposals from various sectors
suggesting the establishment of a metropolitan governance and
planning system.
„ In 1968, the Metro Manila Mayors Coordinating Council was
organized as a voluntary organization of the 17 cities and towns
comprising what was then called the ‘Greater Manila Area’. It
existed for six years, accomplishing nothing.
„ In 1972, then President Ferdinand Marcos declared Martial Law,
and in 1975 created the Metro Manila Commission (MMC).
RATIONALE FOR CREATING THE MMC
(1975)
„ Problems in Metro Manila had reached critical levels,
and attempts by the individual towns and cities to solve
these have been failures.
„ These problems are too large, complex and widespread
for individual towns and cities to solve. They don’t have
the necessary financial resources, manpower and
equipment.
„ National government has the whole country to take care
of, especially regions which are much poorer than Metro
Manila.
„ Most of the problems faced by Metro Manila’s towns and
cities went beyond their traditional jurisdictional
boundaries.
FUNCTIONS OF THE MMC
1. To act as a central government to establish,
administer and provide services common to the Metro
Manila Area;
2. To perform general administration, executive and
policy-making functions;
3. To establish a garbage disposal operations center
which shall direct garbage collection and disposal in
the metro area;
4. To establish and operate a transport and traffic center
which shall direct traffic management activities;
FUNCTIONS OF THE MMC (con’t.)
5. To coordinate and monitor governmental and
private activities pertaining to essential services such
as transport, flood control and drainage, water supply
and sewerage, housing, health and environmental
services, park development, and others;
6. To ensure and monitor the undertaking of a
comprehensive social, economic and physical
planning and development of the metro area; and
7. To study the feasibility of increasing barangay
participation in their respective local governments.
MMC’s ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
OPERATING UNITS:
COMMISSION OFFICERS
„ Governor / Chairman
„ Vice Governor
„ Commissioner for Planning
„ Commissioner for Finance
„ Environmental Sanitation
„
„
„
„ Commissioner for
Operations
„
„
„
„
Center
Traffic Operations Center
Barangay Operations Center
Engineering Operations
Center
Action Center for
Infrastructure Development
Health Operations Center
Cultural Affairs Office
Others (Action Officers, each
one corresponding to a
“basic need”)
ISSUES AGAINST THE MMC
(1982)
„ That MMC never accomplished its mandated tasks
„ That MMC had not solved the problems for which it was
created to solve
„ That it had usurped the powers and functions of the local
government units comprising the Metro Manila Area
„ That it was overstaffed with political appointees
„ That it continued to maintain offices which were created for
special time-bound projects that had already been completed
„ That what it claims as its accomplishments (e.g., housing,
flood control, etc) were actually implemented by national
government agencies
ATTEMPTS TO REFORM THE MMC
(1983-85)
„ Internal recommendations from the Office of the
Commissioner for Planning (1983-84) recommending,
inter alia, the repeal of PD which gave Mrs. Marcos sole
authority to act on behalf of the MMC; activate the MMC
as a true Commission; and redefine its roles, powers,
functions, and relationships with other government
units.
„ Recommendations of the University of the Philippines
Law Center (1985), basically the same as above.
„ All these recommendations were not implemented as
the People Power Revolution of 1986 overthrew the
Marcos administration and installed Mrs. Corazon
Aquino as President.
REFORMS UNDER THE AQUINO
ADMINISTRATION (1986-1992)
„ Adoption of a new Constitution in 1987 with a specific provision on
the creation by Congress of metropolitan political subdivisions
whose jurisdiction “shall be limited to basic services requiring
coordination.”
„ The same provision also states that “The component cities and
municipalities shall retain their basic autonomy and shall be entitled
to their own local executives and legislative assemblies.”
„ Repeal of the law creating the MMC and transforming it into the
Metro Manila Authority (MMA) with the Mayors’ Council as the
decision-making body but chaired by a Chairman appointed by the
President.
„ But the MMA retained all the offices that existed under the MMC, as
almost all the politicians were busy preparing for elections. It was
business as usual.
REFORMS UNDER THE RAMOS
ADMINISTRATION (1992-1998)
„ Passage of the 1991 Local Government Code, giving
local authorities more powers, wider authority, and
additional sources of revenues.
„ This further weakened the MMA and sparked the filing
of several bills in Congress to abolish the MMA and
replace it with something more relevant.
„ In 1995, RA 7924 was passed abolishing the MMA and
replacing it with the Metro Manila Development
Authority (MMDA), with a Chairman (with the rank of a
Cabinet member) who is appointed by the President
serving as CEO, and the Metro Manila Mayors’ Council
as the governing and policy-making body.
REPUBLIC ACT 7924
„ Continued to recognize the special and unique situation
and circumstances of the Metro Manila area.
„ Treats the metropolis as a special development and
administrative region, but without prejudice to the
autonomy of the affected local authorities.
„ Provides MMDA with the responsibility for planning,
monitoring and coordination, and exercise of regulatory
and supervising authority over the delivery of
metropolitan-wide services within the metropolis.
„ Makes a distinction that purely local matters are the
concern of the local authorities and therefore are
outside the MMDA’s scope of authority
REPUBLIC ACT 7924
„ Defines metropolitan-wide services to be those which have
metropolitan-wide impact and transcend local political boundaries, or
entail huge expenditures such that it would not be viable for these
services to be provided by the individual local authorities.
„ These services are:
1. Development planning for the metropolitan area
2. Transport and traffic management
3. Solid waste disposal and management
4. Flood control and sewerage
5. Urban renewal, zoning and land use planning, and
shelter services
6. Health and sanitation, urban protection and pollution
control
7. Public safety, including disaster preparedness, prevention,
rescue operations, and rehabilitation
IN REALITY . . .
„ The MMDA Chairman has difficulties convening a
quorum for the meetings of the Mayors’ Council.
„ The MMDA has become ineffective in development
planning of the metropolitan area.
„ Among its several mandated functions, it is mainly
focused on 1) transport and traffic management; 2)
solid waste disposal; and 3) flood control.
„ Some local authorities in the metropolis do not
implement or enforce the policies of the MMDA.
CONCLUSIONS
„ In the context of the Philippine political and public
management system, there is an inherent conflict
between metropolitan governance and local government
autonomy.
„ To the Mayors of local authorities comprising the Metro
Manila area, their primary and full-time concern is their
constituency. Their participation in the affairs of the Metro
Manila Mayors’ Council is secondary and part-time.
„ The differentiation between “metropolitan-wide services”
and “purely local matters” is contentious since
metropolitan-wide services invariably have local
components.
„ A metropolitan governance system needs to be reviewed
regularly (say, every 5 years), and reformed accordingly.
Thank you
for your attention.