On how we design public projects
The worsening traffic in Metro Cebu has people like me wishing for a big wave of infrastructure projects to come crashing in -regardless of the immediate consequences. Our island may boast of a consistently growing economy, but that is not seen in the quantity and quality of public infrastructure and stakeholders that we have.
From a distance, we can see tall buildings sprouting all over the metro, an obvious sign of development. But on the ground, we commute on scarred, jam-packed roads, struggling not to lose our temper at ignorant drivers who do not know what a box junction is for. (It is designed to prevent congestion and gridlock at junctions.)
Our roads have become a pathetic scene of toxic, slow-moving streams of private cars and public transportation -the "haves" and the "have-nots"- competing for that limited stretch of space in the absence of a decent mass transport system. And the biggest surprise is that no one yet has been bold enough to seriously suggest limiting the number of private vehicles that can enter certain major roads during peak hours.
There are large-ticket projects that are trickling in. The second terminal of the Mactan-Cebu International Airport is scheduled to open in July. Construction of the Cebu-Cordova Link Expressway, also known as the Cebu-Cordova Bridge, will start this year. And the Naga-Cebu-Danao Expressway project is also expected to start this year.
Then there is the 800-meter road depression project in UN Avenue, Mandaue City. For valid reasons, Regional Development Council chairman Kenneth Cobonpue is asking the Department of Public Works and Highways to put the project on hold. Cobonpue said the project lacks public consultation. There is also no plan for alternative roads when construction of the project begins.
Had we planned and implemented these projects 10 years ago, we would not have been anxiously playing catch up now. But that has been the way here in our country (which we should refuse to accept). Either by benign neglect or lack of foresight, not to mention the incessant political bickering, we always get stuck in the process or just manage to play catch up.
Cobonpue's timely admonition to the DPWH, though, also deserves some further thoughts on how we integrate public preferences into the design of large infrastructure projects. This one goes beyond how project construction affects traffic and strikes at the core of the project itself.
As with many design processes, the first step in planning a project is to understand the requirements of its users. This can be done through public hearings, survey questionnaires, interviews, and focus group discussions.
Though it may take some time and resources, large infrastructure projects whose designs incorporate the views of several stakeholders including the general public will have more success in terms of social acceptability and sustainability. Research has also shown that public engagement in project design and implementation could save the time and costs that could be incurred by opposition to the project.
While we cannot satisfy different public and stakeholders' preferences, a feasible design can still come out in the process that can satisfy as many needs as possible. The design experts and engineers would gain important information from the public while the public would learn to appreciate the project. In academe or NGO lingo, this process is called the "participatory design framework."
One major project in Cebu has gone through more or less a similar process -the Bus Rapid Transit project, Cebu's own version of a mass transport system. Unfortunately, some new kids on the political block are bent on blocking it, citing their own set of Johnny-come-lately experts and stakeholders.
- Latest
