Excerpt

Okay, this is an excerpt of one project proposal that i wrote for the office. I am sharing this as a prelude to a future blog with the title, “In defense of technical writing”, or something like that. Anyway, here it is…

DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT

The global trend points to the concentration of people in cities, a phenomenon otherwise known as urbanization. Projections have it that by 2030, 61% of the world’s population (around 5 billion people) will be living in urban areas. This figure indicates a giant leap from 2003’s 48% or roughly, 3 billion urban dwellers.[1]

The even darker side of this trend is the increasing number of urban poor/slum dwellers worldwide. In 2000, the world’s urban poor population was estimated at 924 million. It is expected that by 2020, 500 million more will be added, thereby reaching a total of 1.425 billion.[2]

The Philippines is not exempted from this global trend. In fact, it has been identified as one of the world’s fastest urbanizing countries, going at an average rate of 5% annually between 1980 and 1990. Should this urbanization rate continue, an estimated 65% of the total population will be living in urban areas by the year 2020.[3]

The National Anti-Poverty Commission (NAPC) identifies rural poverty as the root cause of rural-to-urban migration. Sadly, the cities do not necessarily offer economic opportunities to those migrants lacking in skills and educational background. Many of them are then forced to settle at the fringes, where they suffer from congestion, and the lack of basic social services, including decent shelter.

The Medium Term Philippine Development Plan for Shelter has estimated the country’s housing need at 3.3 million units for 1999 to 2004, and 3.75 million units for 2005 to 2010.

Through continued lobbying and advocacy by various civil society groups, the Philippine Government was able to craft programs, policies, and legislations towards addressing the country’s ever-growing housing need. One landmark piece of legislation is Republic Act 7279, otherwise known as the “Urban Development and Housing Act (UDHA) of 1992”.

UDHA outlines a three-point agenda: 1) fostering people’s participation in the urban development process, 2) empowerment of local government units (LGUs) to address urban development issues particularly homelessness; and 3) private sector participation in the national shelter program (i.e., UDHA requires developers to set aside 20% of all proposed subdivision areas for socialized housing).[4]

In response to this law, the Cebu City Government, has, among other things, convened the Local Housing Board; formed an office for urban poor affairs known as the Division for the Welfare of the Urban Poor (DWUP), as well as passed resolutions and ordinances to localize the provisions of UDHA.

Also, the City has purchased lands intended for relocation. To date, Cebu City has a total of 43 relocation sites, one of which is fully developed[5], 35 are partially developed[6], and seven remain undeveloped[7].

On the other hand, non-government organizations have incessantly lobbied for the implementation of UDHA and other related legislations. FORGE has actively participated in the Local Housing Board as the NGO Sector representative for the past five years or so. It has pushed for such pro-poor policies as the Beneficiary Selection Guidelines, which have helped ensure that parcels of lot are awarded to bonafide socialized housing beneficiaries. It has likewise provided consultancy service to DWUP towards the installation of the office’s systems and procedures, which in turn, are expected to improve its service delivery.

Aside from its engagement with government, FORGE has also been active on the ground. For 19 years, it has been organizing urban poor communities for collective action towards the resolution of issues like demolition/eviction threats and limited access to basic social services.

In the last three years alone, FORGE has assisted around 1,000 urban families to acquire relocation sites. However, experiences of partner-communities brought out the insight that the struggle for decent living does not end in the acquisition of a relocation site. As the urban poor embark on a new chapter in their lives, they find themselves confronted with a new set of challenges ranging from the absence of basic social services, to the absence or limited livelihood opportunities, to the relocation site’s considerable distance from the city, not to mention its steep terrain and vulnerability to disasters like landslides and flood.

Compounding the aforementioned challenges is the City Government’s limited financial and human resources to carry out site development in all the relocation areas. For these reasons, the Local Housing Board found it a necessity to farm out the work to the private sector, specifically, non-government organizations.

---

[1] Department of Economic and Social Affairs Population Division. (2004). World Urbanization Prospects: The 2003 Revision. New York: United Nations.

[2] Bazoglo, Nfese. (2005). The Need for a More Ambitious Target. Habitat Debate, .Vol.11 No.3, p. 8.

[3] Commission on Population. (2002). Philippines Country Report to the Fifth Asian and Pacific Population Conference. Manila, Philippines: POPCOM.

[4] Philippine Urban Forum. (2003). Reforms Initiated Towards Sustainable Urbanization. Retrieved July 30, 2007 from http://home.earthlink.net/~lordprozen/PUF/bahang/reforms.html

[5] Fully developed means that the relocation site is complete with the basic social services.

[6] Partially developed means that initial bulldozing activities have been done, but still, the area lacks basic social services such as water, road, drainage, etc.

[7] Undeveloped means there is neither site development nor basic social services, whatsoever.