See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/260427235

Planning Resilient City in Cebu: Lessons Learned and Practical Application

Conference Paper · January 2014

CITATION READS

1 6,639

3 authors, including:

Fritz Akhmad Nuzir Bart Julien Dewancker

Universitas Bandar Lampung Kitakyushu University
28 PUBLICATIONS   78 CITATIONS    87 PUBLICATIONS   426 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Evaluation of Pedestrian's Profile, Activity, and Environment in the City of Bandar Lampung, Indonesia View project

Vernacular Architecture in Rural, Touristic and Rapidly Developing Indonesia - Case of Labuan Bajo View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Fritz Akhmad Nuzir on 03 March 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Planning Resilient City in Cebu: Lessons Learned and Practical Application

Fritz Akhmad Nuzir1, Dickella Gamaralalage Jagath Premakumara2, Bart Julien Dewancker3

1
Doctoral student, Department of Architecture, the University of Kitakyushu, Japan and Lecturer, Bandar Lampung University
2
Senior Policy Researcher, Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) Kitakyushu Urban Center, Japan
3
Professor, Department of Architecture, the University of Kitakyushu, Japan

Abstract
Nowadays, climate change and natural disasters bring inevitable impacts on urban systems, especially in
Asia where cities are growing rapidly despite having high proportion of urban poor. Recent catastrophic
events in the Philippines have urged its government to take climate and disasters risks management as a
priority in their urban development agendas. Thus the government has enacted national laws such as the
Philippine Climate Change Act 2009 and the Disaster Risk Reduction Management Act 2010.
Based on those laws, Cebu city, a fast growing metropolitan in the coastal area of the Philippines, has been
involved in planning resilience city. Because of its physical characteristic the city continuously faces disaster
risk-related issues risking its enormous urban developments.
This paper therefore aims to review the vulnerability of the city and discuss initiatives and actions for
building resilient city in Cebu. The paper further discovers the key driving forces, enabling factors, and
challenges in planning and implementing the disaster risk reduction management. The study adopted both
primary and secondary data collection methods. The paper concludes that planning resilient cities can be
achieved through building capacities of social agents, straightening urban infrastructure and ecosystem and
also reinforcing institutions that link agents and urban systems.

Keywords: resilient; city; Cebu; the Philippines; disaster

1. Introductions The Philippines is considered as one of the most

Despite the popular use of the term: “Climate disaster prone countries in the world due to its hazard
Change”, the climate actually does not change. We, prone location, physical characteristics and vulnerable
human, are the one who changed and are changing. population. The World Index 2012 published by the
The climate just reflects our actions in regard to the United Nations University Institute for Environment
exploitation of the nature. Nowadays there are more and Human Security (UN-EHS), ranks the Philippines
than seven billion people in the world and all is as the third most vulnerable countries to disaster risks
contributing to these changes. More than half of the and natural hazards.
above number is living in Asia (Worldometers, 2013).
Global emissions of carbon dioxide from fossil fuel
combustion and cement production rose from 22.6
billion tons in 1990 to approximately 31 billion tons in
2007. Tropical deforestation adds 6.5 billion tons of
carbon dioxide to the atmosphere a year (Worldwatch,
2009). Countries from Asia also significantly
contributed to that. Therefore it is inevitable that the
change on nature simultaneously triggered the event of
natural disasters in many Asian countries. During this
decade, Asian cities already suffered from many
catastrophic and disastrous events (Mapreport, 2013).

Contact Author: Fritz Akhmad Nuzir, Doctoral Student, the

University of Kitakyushu, Hibikino 1-1, Wakamatsu,
Kitakyushu, 808-0135, Japan.
Tel: +81-80-9140-9050 Fax: +81-93-695-3345
e-mail: u3dbb003@eng.kitakyu-u.ac.jp Fig.1. Natural disaster events in the Philippines
(Source: National Geographic, 2013)
 The National Laws specifically addressing climate
change such as the Philippine Climate Change Act
2009 which aims to mainstream climate change into
government policies, and the Disaster Risk Reduction
Management Act 2010 which aims to strengthen the
disaster risk reduction and management system,
provisions for development of the national disaster risk
reduction and management framework, and
institutionalization of the disaster risk reduction and
management plan, were enacted. Yet it seems that the
enforcement of these laws, at the local government
units (LGUs), has not been successful.
November 8th, 2013, a super typhoon Haiyan landed
in the Philippines, swept out several cities, and caused
enormous fatalities. More than 5,600 were killed,
26,200 injured, and over 1,700 people still remain
missing. Over four million people still displaced from
their homes and 1.2 million homes damaged or
destroyed. Haiyan was the strongest typhoon to make
landfall ever recorded, with wind speeds of 315 kph
(Chughtai, 2013). The number of death tolls is almost
200% increase when compared to the situation in 2012
which had about 2,360 people killed by natural
disasters (CDRC, 2012).

1.1. Backgrounds
In this background, Cebu City, one of the fast
growing metropolitan cities in the Philippines, has
been involved in implementing the national mandate.
Cebu is located on the central eastern part of Cebu
Province, an island at the center of the Visayas in
Southern Philippines which often gets typhoons. With
its rapid development, the city continuously faces
disaster risk-related problems. As per 2010, total
population is 866,171 inhabitants (Cebu City, 2013).

Fig.3. Land use plan of Cebu City

Fig.2. Geographical location of Cebu City (Source: Cebu City Profile, 2008)
(Source: Cebu Watch, 2013)
1.2. Objectives
This paper therefore aims to review the risks and
Cebu City is the second biggest growth center in the
vulnerabilities of the city and discuss recent initiatives
country next to Metro Manila. The city is dependent
and actions introduced by the local government for
on its trade and service activities that accounts for
building resilient city in Cebu. The paper further
almost three fourths of its employment. Direct foreign
discovers the key driving forces, enabling factors, and
trade of Cebu City is equivalent to 52% of the entire
challenges in planning and implementing the disaster
foreign trade of Mindanao. Allied with the trading and
risk reduction management (DRRM).
financial services in the city is the growing tourism
industry. The city density is 7,753 persons per square
1.3. Previous studies
kilometer in its urban area (Cebu City Profile, 2008).
1.3.1. What is resilient city?
Simeon Romarate, Administrative Officer of Cebu
According the World Bank, a resilient city is one
City Disaster Risk Reduction Management Council
that is prepared for existing and future impacts,
(CCDRRMC) and also the Head of Cebu City Disaster
thereby limiting their magnitude and severity. Resilient
Risk Reduction and Management Office (CCDRRMO),
cities reduce vulnerability to extreme events and
stated that excessive land use, high migration rate,
respond creatively to economic, social and
traffic congestion, presence of squatters and illegal
environmental changes in order to increase their
structures along areas vulnerable to floods, landslides
long-term sustainability (Premakumara, 2014). A
and fire intensify the disaster-related issues.
resilient city is therefore defined by the overall
Further, Cebu city hit by an earthquake with a
abilities of its governance, physical, economic and
magnitude of 7, 2 which is probably the biggest in 23
social systems and entities exposed to hazards to learn,
years (BBC, 2013). And following this, on the
be ready in advance, plan for uncertainties, resist,
absorb, accommodate to and recover from the effects
of a hazard in a timely and efficient manner, including
through the preservation and restoration of its essential
basic structures and functions (Jabareen, 2013).
1.3.2. Framework for planning resilient cities
Y. Jabareen (2013) has developed the Resilient City
Planning Framework (RCPF) which is defined as a
network, or a theoretical plane of interlinked concepts,
that provides a comprehensive understanding of city
resilience. It is composed of four concepts, which are
vulnerability matrix analysis, urban governance,
prevention, and uncertainty oriented planning.
1.3.3. Key-factors in planning resilient cities
It has been acknowledged that several factors will
enable cities to become more resilient and motivate
them on planning resilient cities. These include strong
political leadership and will, development of dedicated
institutional setup, sustainability of institutional
capacities and resources at local level, building
multi-stakeholder partnership, ensure community
participation, constructing or enhancing hazard
mitigating infrastructure suit to local context, and
establishment of education and awareness programs.
Furthermore, it was also identified the importance of
strong supportive policies and sufficient financial
commitments from the national governments.
International agencies can also play a supportive role
in building partnerships and enhancing momentum for
disaster risk reduction activities and sharing ideas on
best practices (Premakumara, 2014).
2. Methods
2.1. Data Collection
The study adopted both primary and secondary data
collection methods. The desk and web search are
carried out to gather the secondary information, and a
consultation workshops was planned and established
for gathering primary information.
Institute for Global Environmental Strategies
(IGES) Japan has selected Cebu City with other three
Asian cities (Nonthaburi, Ho Chi Minh, Shanghai) as a
Resilient City Policy Model under the Resilient Cities
Policy Model Initiative which aims to identify existing
gaps and proposing policy recommendations with
respect to climate change responses, energy and
disaster risk management (see the web page of IGES
for more information about Resilient City Policies:
http://www.iges.or.jp/en/sustainable-city/outline.htm).
IGES in partnership with A2D Project-Research
Group for Alternatives to Development Inc., with
support from the Ministry of Environment, Japan
(MOEJ) and offices of Cebu City Councilor Hon. Ma.
Nida Cabrera and Atty. Jose Daluz III, planned two
separate workshops, which were consultation
workshop and planning workshop to facilitate and
assist the city in identifying vulnerability situation in
the city, planning and designing strategic actions for
achieving a resilient city in Cebu. The first workshop
collected stock of the existing disaster risk reduction
programs at the barangay level. Barangay is the
smallest governmental division in the Philippines.
There are 80 barangays in Cebu City (Cebu City
Profile, 2008).
2.2. Consultation Workshop
On September 5th, 2013, the Consultation
Workshop took place at Sinulog Hall, Rizal Public
Library at Cebu city, Philippines. It was attended by
more than fifty key participants that included barangay
local leaders, representatives from non-government
organizations, government agencies, the private sector
and academe, department heads and members of the
CCDRRMC and the CCDRRMO. It was also attended
by Cebu City government officials headed by Hon.
Mayor Michael L. Rama.
Specifically, the workshop aimed to conduct
consultation among barangay stakeholders to identify
their exposure to risks and vulnerabilities, priority
areas to be intervened, and existing DRRM programs
and activities; and also to assess entry points and
recommendations for strengthening community-based
DRRM policies and programs in Cebu City.
3. Results
After studying previous and recent projects in regard
to disaster risk reduction management in Cebu City,
three key factors were underlined which are
institutional set-up, capacity building of agents, and
physical improvement.
3.1. Institutional set-up
The workshop participants identified the importance
of setting up supportive institutional regulations and
organizations for successful planning and
implementation of resilient city. During the group
discussions, it was identified that the following
national and local legal frameworks on DRRM of
Cebu City have already available; however, the level
of enforcement and the knowledge of citizen is weak.
 Presidential Decree No. 1566 of 1978,
strengthening Philippine disaster control,
capability and establishing program on
community disaster preparedness thru creation
of National Disaster Coordinating Council;
 Cebu City Resolution No. 06-3381 of 2006,
approving Cebu City Ordinance No. 2077;
 Cebu City Ordinance No. 2077, creating the
Cebu City Disaster Coordinating Council;
 Republic Act No. 10121, also known as
“Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction
Management Act of 2010”, strengthening the
Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and
Management system;
 Cebu City Executive Order No. 12-6,
adopting the provision of R.A. 10121 to create
the CCDRRMC and establish CCDRRMO.
 CCDRRMC has set up laws and regulations,
organizations and the formulation of the Cebu City
Disaster Management Plan of which provides the
scheme for the city’s organizational structure and
major lines of authorities during emergency periods. It
also has standard operating procedures, guidelines,
responsibilities and assignments to local governments
for establishing well-coordinated response during
disasters. However, it does not lay down the concrete
plans and next actions in making the city resilient.
3.2. Capacity building of agents
On the other hand, when it comes to an event of
disaster, people will not be able to depend entirely
either on the organizations nor the regulations. Instead
they have to depend on their neighbors, friends,
families, and mostly, themselves. Thus workshop
participants identified the importance to ensure that
individuals know what to do in an emergency and what
measures they can individually and collectively take in
advance to reduce the risks.
As an example, in September 2008, a partnership
between the barangay and the Fellowship for
Organizing Endeavors Incorporation (FORGE Inc.)
was crafted to develop the Medium Term Barangay
Development Plan incorporating disaster risk reduction
strategies. In November 2008, barangay officials,
members of people’s organizations and other key
informants conducted a Participatory Capacity and
Vulnerability Assessment (PCVA) to assess and record
community experiences and issues related to hazards
and disasters and its risks in three barangays which are
Apas, Kalunasan, and Bulacao (Balang Jr., 2009).
In 2009, The Alliance of Barangay Apas
Community Association, Inc. (ABACA) which is a
federation of nine community organizations in Apas,
Cebu City, was in the process of building the
capability of its members. They had institutionalized
seminars such as community organizing, resource
mobilization, simple book keeping, vermi composting,
establishment of eco-waste centers and urban container
gardening (Balang Jr., 2009).
3.3. Physical improvement
Another important key factor that workshop
participants identified during their discussion for
creating resiliency is the physical improvement. In an
urban area, it is mainly in a form of improving city
infrastructures. In year 2009 in Cebu City, the ABACA
officers actively initiated the delivery of basic social
services needed by community such as road concreting
and construction of drainage systems. Meanwhile
FORGE also has implemented several physical
projects such as Riverbank Stabilization in Barangay
Kalunasan, Tree Planting Activities in Barangay
Bulacao, and Household based Solid Waste
Management in Barangay Apas (Balang Jr., 2009).
Recently after the recent earthquake, process of
retrofitting is prepared especially for old buildings in
Cebu city. Also from the private sectors, Mudajaya
Group of Malaysia has signed agreement for integrated
renewable energy project that will put up wind mills
within Cebu City (Philstar, 2013).
4. Discussions
After identifying the key factors that required for
establishing a resilient city in Cebu, workshop
participants identified their prevention, preparation,
response, and recovery initiatives within previous and
future DRRM actions which are inter-related and
inter-connected, categorized as in the following table.
Table 1. Activities in relation to key factors
Resilience Activities
elements
Institutional Establishment of early warning systems and
set-up establishment of command centers.
Capacity Conducting seminars and information drives,
building of conducting DRRM trainings and emergency
agents drills, activating disaster volunteers, relocation
assistance, conducting damage and need
assessments, and crisis counseling.
Physical Relocation of informal settlers living along rivers,
improvement procurement of emergency equipment, providing
tents and relief goods, housing materials, and
financial aid.
Source: Authors
The setting up of institutional has taken place in
Cebu City. Yet the benefit is still lacking due to the
lack of concrete plans, initiatives, and actions within
comprehensive coordination. It is likely depending on
“top-down” approach by the governments which
means that the actual conditions of the citizens are
often overlooked. This is even exacerbated by the
corruption problem and lack of political will, which
lead to substandard projects for infrastructures. Thus,
the citizens feel that the governments are not fully
accountable in implementing regulations related to
disasters, and unwillingly participate in DRRM actions
from the government as it was stated on the workshop.
Also in most cases, the capacity building of agents
become meaningless because of the absence of
managing forces, integrated long-term planning, and
scenarios for un-predicted events. These were assumed
to occur because of the capacity building actions were
mostly done by non-governmental organizations which
often had limitations due to budget and bureaucracy.
On the consultation workshop it was explained that
CCDRRMO has done activities which focused more in
building infrastructures rather than setting up trainings.
This resulted unbalance capacity between the
government and the citizens. Therefore during the
event of disaster, the citizens are incapable to execute
DRRM actions or even to make use all the institutional
means and physical infrastructures.
And without reliable management and incapable
individuals, physical improvements are hardly to
happen if not become useless and then neglected. As
mentioned previously, development of physical
infrastructures is often not optimum due to corruption. In regard to capacity building, the agents should
Even if it has been improved, mostly the citizens give clear information of their actions to other
would not be able to access and use it properly, “non-agent” citizen as a part of informal direct
moreover to manage and maintain it for a long-term education and reflect democracy in their actions. So
use. This then only becomes burden to the government the capacity building is considered successful if it can
in term of maintenance and operation. change the agent’s behavior, and then influence others.
The agents should also be prepared for step-by-step
Table 2. The uncompleted key factors process rather than an instant solution and ready for
Elements Issues Missing links the unpredicted situations.
Institutional - “Top-down” approaches Community At last regarding the physical infrastructure
set-up - Corruptions lead to participation or improvements, resilient governance indicators could
substandard “bottom-up
infrastructures approaches be seen if the infrastructures are equipped with
- Uncooperative citizens transparent information about the planning, the
Capacity - Disarray, overlapping, Actual capacity construction, the standard operation, and the
building of repeated, ineffective, building of the
agents and inefficient actions citizens within
maintenance. The infrastructures should also be a
- Mostly done by NGOs integrated plan and result of bottom-up initiatives from the community and
which have limitations implementation by based on agreement of stakeholders.
- The government has the government
capacity but not the collaborated with
citizens. the NGOs 5. Conclusions
This paper reviewed the vulnerability of the
Physical - Non optimum Citizens as initiator, Philippines especially the city of Cebu to natural
improvement construction of physical planner, and
infrastructures executor, and
disasters in relation to the phenomenon of climate
- Un-necessary physical government as change and provided examples of recent catastrophic
improvements facilitator, educator, events. This study referred to the definition of resilient
- Non optimum use of and manager. city as one that is prepared for existing and future
physical infrastructures
impacts, thereby limiting their magnitude and severity.
Source: Authors
Then the paper discussed recent initiatives and
actions introduced by the government for building
Therefore generally in order to make the key factors
resiliency in Cebu city. By collecting information
work in balance and sustainable, a good form of
about previous and current activities mainly from the
governance is vital for establishing a resiliency. Thus,
consultation workshop, some enabling factors and
workshop participants identified the missing links
challenges in planning and implementing the disaster
related to key factors (see Table 2). This shows that
risk reduction management were learnt and analyzed.
there is fundamental change is required within the city
Afterward the paper concluded that building
to move from govern to governance.
resilient cities can be looked at from three key factors
capacity such as capacity building of the agents, improving
physical physical infrastructure, and also reinforcing
build. of
improv. institutional means. Current practices have shown that
agents
there are unbalance proportion in the implementation
of the key factors that resulting inefficiency,
ineffectiveness, and even setbacks. Unfortunately,
institutional these issues have been causing non optimum DRRM
set-up actions in the recent disasters occurred in Cebu.
RESILIENT Therefore in order to improve the DRRM
RESILIENT GOVERNANCE? implementations in the city of Cebu, the key factors
Fig.5. Key factors of resilient city (source: Authors) require interactions within proposed resilient
governance framework that contributes to the holistic
A normative framework (Cadman, 2011), as shown management of urban resilience. The framework
in Table 3, shows how this translation can be happened introduces principles such as meaningful participation
in the cities. Principles such as “meaningful and productive deliberation then produce integrative
participation” and “productive deliberation” are governance approach, deliberative and communicative
introduced and interpreted into indicators for decision making in creating resilient city. In the end,
assessment. For example, in regard to institutional this paper also proposed indicators to assure that such
set-up, any organizations or regulations should be governance framework would work and improve the
equally represented by the citizens and applicable at state of the key factors in building resilient city.
any condition. It should also have accountable Further, the study again reminds us the importance of
management and is possible to be accessed by applying participatory research methods such as
everyone within full disclosure and without any consultative workshop for data collection in the area of
conflict of interest. disaster planning and management.
 Table 3. Normative framework of governance quality (Cadman, 2011). Modified by authors.

Principle Criterion Indicator Reflected on Resilient Key Factors

Institutional Set-up Capacity Building Physical
of Agents Improvement
“Meaningful Interest Inclusiveness Be represented by any Be represented by any Be benefit and useful
participation” representation citizen and at any citizen and project all to all citizens.
condition. citizens to participate.
Equality Treat and reflect to Be for all citizens Be distributed to all
everyone equally. without any exception. areas contextually.
Resources Dedicate its resources Have the possibility to Be compatible with
for public needs. use and access available resources.
required resources.
Organizational Accountability Have accountable Be conducted within Be operated and
responsibility management and accountable planning maintained in
enforcement. and implementation. accountable manner.
Transparency Be accessible by Give clear information Be equipped with
everyone within full of their actions to transparent information
disclosure and without other “non-agent” as a about the planning, the
any conflict of interest. part of informal direct construction, the SOP,
education. and the maintenance.
“Productive Decision Democracy Be established within Reflect democracy in Be a result of
deliberation” making democracy, all voices all of their actions. bottom-up planning
is counted. from the community.
Agreement Provide agreement on Always strive upon Be based on agreement
every action efficiently agreement by thinking of stakeholders.
and effectively. over wider objectives.
Dispute Be capable to conduct Avoid dispute as much Not be the cause of any
settlement dispute settlement. as possible in order not dispute due to its
to stall the actions. development.
Implementation Behavior Be devoted to change At first changes their Trigger behavior
change people’s behavior. own behavior, and change of its users.
then influences others.
Problem Be able to provide and Be helpful and put up Solve existing
solving to assist to get best extra effort to find problems and foresee
solutions. appropriate solutions. possible problems in
the future.
Durability Be projected within Be prepared for Be built and
long-term step-by-step process maintained with high
development. rather than an instant. durability.

6. Acknowledgements
This study was supported by University of Kitakyushu,
Directorate General Higher Education of Indonesia,
Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, and
Bandar Lampung University.
7. References
1) Balang Jr., A.D. (2009) Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction in
Barangays Apas, Bulacao and Kalunasan in Cebu City. FORGE
Inc. The Eldis Communities.
2) Cadman, T. (2013) Climate change and global policy regimes.
Towards institutional legitimacy. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
International Political Economy Series.
3) Cebu City Population Pattern 1995-2010 for researcher (2013) City
Planning and Development Office. Cebu City.
4) Cebu City Profile (2008) City Planning and Development Office.
Cebu City.
5) Chughtai, S. (2013) Typhoon Haiyan - The response so far and
vital lessons for the Philippines recovery. Oxfam. U.K.
6) Premakumara, D.G.J., Canete, A.M.L. (2014) Planning Resilient
Cities: Lessons from the Philippines. Proceeding of the 9th
International Symposium on City Planning and Environmental
Management in Asian Countries.
7) Starke, Linda. Eds. (2010) State of the World 2009. Into a
Warming World. A Worldwatch Institute Report on Progress
Toward a Sustainable Society. The Worldwatch Institute.
8) Jabareen, Y. (2013) Planning the resilient city: concepts and
strategies for coping with climate change and environmental risk.
CITIES 31-pp.220-229.
9) Report on the Consultation Workshop on DRRM in Cebu City
(2013) IGES in partnership with A2D Project. Cebu City.
10) Ramos, G.E. (2012) Country Report: Philippines. Climate Change,
Sustainability and Resilience. IUCN Academy of Environmental
Law. E-Journal Issue 2012 (1).
11) Von Einsiedel, N., Bendimerad, F., Rodil, A.S., and Deocariza, M.
(2010) The Challenge of Urban Redevelopment in
Disaster-Affected Communities. Environment and Urbanization
Journal 1 (1), pp. 27-44.
12) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-24530042
13) http://www.cebucity.gov.ph/about-cebu-city?start=1
14) http://www.iges.or.jp/en/sustainable-city/outline.html
15) http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/11/131111-philippi
nes-dangers-haiyan-yolanda-death-toll-rises/
16) http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2013/10/19/1246856/sinkhole-ji
tters-hit-bohol-cebu
17) http://www.philstar.com/business/2013/10/28/1250135/malaysian-
group-inks-deal-160-m-re-project-cebu

View publication stats