Unfortunate is the recent news on the ranking of Manila in the 2020 Global Smart City Index. Conducted yearly by the Institute for Management and Development, this year saw Manila slipping to 104 out of 110 countries worldwide and last when compared to our Asian neighbors. Though unfairly that it was Manila the city that was surveyed, it would be right to assume that this would also reflect how other Metro Manila cities would fare. I am sure this survey would cause concern for all city administrators in the metropolis, but it is not entirely their fault. Rather than acting in haste to address the need to improve their smart city conditions, it would be more prudent for all of us to take a step back and reflect on the situation.
What makes a smart city? Smart city broadly refers to how a city, utilizing modern technology and proper governance, provides better rendering of services to its citizenry. In this survey, five key areas were highlighted, namely—health and safety, mobility, activities, opportunities and governance. In addition, the cities were surveyed in light of the pandemic. With reference to Manila, road congestion was the top-of-mind concern with 54 percent, followed closely by the dispensation of services. Also highlighted were the low scores on air pollution, unemployment and health services.
Looking at the survey criteria, one can understand the reasons why Manila failed, as well as why our other cities in the metropolis would also fail. One, the indicated areas of city services such as transport and traffic management; utility management—energy, solid waste and water; health services as well as the availability of the needed technology to support such smart city applications are built in our national policy DNA and not within the control of the metro local governments. No matter how our metro cities would like to advance themselves to become “smarter,” their latitude in doing so is hampered by the national policies that govern such concerns. Just take a look at this: metro transport concerns are decided on the national level. Localities where such transport corridors will be built are not involved in the planning. Whether it be the planned subway, the extension of the airports, or even just the regular granting of jeepney franchises, there is no requirement for prior approval of any city council, or even metro-wide in the case of the MMDA. And this is not limited to transport. We can very well see this in the granting of utility franchises—water, electricity as well as telcos. True, we understand that there are major concerns that needed to be resolved nationally especially in Metro Manila, but it would be more effective if the voice of the locality that is directly affected be primarily considered.
Second, what the national government can do is to provide guidance or the “roadmap” insofar as these concerns are charted out and applied locally. Yes, we have national masterplans for the longest time but we have yet to see them being implemented cohesively through succeeding administrations. In doing so, what we achieve is a continuous hodgepodge of improvements that are not part of a big picture, made worse as they become subjected to the ever-changing political winds every time a new administration comes in. In the meantime, we have a metro authority—the MMDA that we all know we need yet until now has only been the subject of legislative discussions in making it stronger.
Smart cities are needed and are the way forward in light of an unpredictable and uncertain world. We, as a country, need to be “smart” in our national smart city policies; get our act together as they say. Without touching on the subject of federalism, we need to re-engineer our national DNA, develop a master plan, adhere to such national master plan while allowing independence of our metro cities to grow and chart their own destinies guided by national policies. We need to be “smart” nationally for smart cities to happen.
Thomas “Tim” Orbos was formerly with the DOTr and the MMDA. He has completed his graduate studies at the McCourt School of Public Policy of Georgetown University and is an alumnus of the MIT Sloan School of Management. He can be reached via e-mail at thomas_orbos@sloan.mit.edu