Comments on Urbanization Process and the Changing Agricultural Landscape Pattern in the Urban Fringe of Metro Manila, Philippines

    Urbanization is important for it is a sign of economic development. But too much of it results to ecological devastation which would eventually slow down the economy of the affected region. Agricultural lands are mostly the ones being sacrificed to accommodate the growing demand for urban spaces. It was inevitable to happen in the Metropolitan Manila and is also feared to happen in other parts of the country. Several issues are brought up in the article as the main factors for the land conversion in the urban fringe areas: change of ownership with the land, abandonment of agricultural land, political influences, and fertility of the land as well as the presence of good agricultural infrastructure in the area, which I think is not only evident in Metro Manila but also in Davao Region and other areas of the country.

    In my observation in my town in Santa Cruz, there are land owners of agricultural lands who sell their lands to commercial and real estate sectors thinking that selling their lands to these buyers would give them much profit than cultivating those lands. Other land owners intentionally stopped cultivating their lands hoping they would be converted into commercial lands and sell or lease it at a much profitable and “preferably high” price as what the co-author of this research had shared in our previous lectures in AR 60.

    Politics in local or in national sense is much more pro-commercial and pro-industrial since commercialization and industrialization give more revenues. On the other hand, even if the farmers want to continue farming their lands but inadequate agricultural infrastructures such as “insufficient irrigation for the rice crops grown there” (as mentioned in the said research) would drive them to prefer conversion of their lands.

    Land use conversion is unavoidable. But intense land conversions over agricultural lands are unhealthy in general sense and thus, have to be dealt with seriously before it will cause much devastating effects – image-wise and most importantly in ecological sense.

    We cannot prevent the local regions, especially the provinces to aspire for urbanization, but at least, local governments should strongly consider “Desakota” for their development plans in their domain so that there would be a compromise, a win-win situation for the agricultural sectors and for the business and industrial sectors as well. And for the Philippines in general, much firmer policies on better urban and regional planning for the whole country should not only be supported but should be strictly monitored and implemented. As well, which is the most important of all, continuity of these better policies is much more of value because no matter how great these programs may be, if they would not be fully applied in the end, they are still useless causing only regrets and frustration.

Originally published in the admin's old blog, "Architecture and the Architect in the Making",  (http://cathydiaz.blogspot.com/), March 16, 2008

Several Practical Approaches in Urban and Regional Planning

        There are many urban planning theories formulated. But some of them sound very impressive which are too ideal that they could not work out. But there are a few of them which I find significant and most importantly, feasible in our local setting. They are the Comprehensive Planning, New Pedestrianism, and Planned Unit Development.

             Comprehensive Planning by Patrick Geddes states that social and economic planning should be integrated in physical planning in a context of environmental concern for he believes that physical planning “could not improve urban living conditions” alone.

Michael E. Arth’s New Pedestrianism (NP) is an urban planning theory founded in 1999, which addresses to various social, health, energy, economic, aesthetic, and environmental problems. It specially focuses on reducing the role of the automobile. A Pedestrian Village is a neighborhood or new town utilizing New Pedestrianism. Pedestrian Villages can vary between from being nearly car-free to having vehicle access behind closely every house and business, keeping in mind that pedestrian lanes are always in front.

Planned Unit Development (PUD) is implied to land development or redevelopment schemes for a new or built-up project. This project requires a Comprehensive Development Master Plan (CDMP). PUD has a unitary development plan or site plan that “permits flexibility in planning or urban design, building or structure siting, complementarity of building types and land uses”, “usable open spaces for general public use services and business activities,” and the “preservation of significant natural land features if feasible.”

New Pedestrianism and Planned Unit Development are applicable in a smaller scope such as in a neighborhood level while Comprehensive Planning is pertinent in a regional scale. While comprehensive planning is the principle, NP and PUD are the application or product of comprehensive planning.

While there are many idealistic planning theories, but only a few seems to be considered as necessity in our local urban and regional planning. I find the three urban planning theories mentioned very important and practical in Davao City and Mindanao. NP should be considered especially in Davao City to address the problem of high transportation cost and to the city being pedestrian-unfriendly – which is an undebatable fact. PUDs are very ideal for business districts. Comprehensive planning should be promoted in every region especially in Mindanao so that the towns and cities to be able to achieve development without compromising the welfare, the culture, and the rich environment of the area.

My idea for an ideal urban and regional planning approach is something that combines comprehensive planning, PUD and NP - basic and practical, may not be a utopia, yet very well-siuted in the Philippines particularly in Mindanao setting.

Originally published in the admin's old blog, "Architecture and the Architect in the Making",  (http://cathydiaz.blogspot.com/), March 16, 2008

Redefining ‘Barriotic’

An old photo of the author's ancestral house surrounded with coconut trees in Coronon, Davao del Sur, Philippines. (circa unknown)

Hearing the slang term ‘barriotic’ often implies a negative meaning. When a thing or place is described as barriotic, it usually means its baduy (uncool, in poor taste, unfashionable, mismatched) like those found in the rural places. A barriotic mentality or idea is perceived as something that is backward, not progressive and not modern like the people in the countryside. Although barriotic people may simply mean as people who were born or grown up in the province like the slang ‘promdi’, the meaning is much harsher and more derogatory when used to describe people. It’s a perception of some city people about countryside people as baduy, ignorant or naive to city living and inferior to city people. There’s even one who wrote online and described disgusting people who are law-breakers and filthy as barriotic people! These negative connotations related to the barrio may not only sound discriminating to the people from the barrio but it also shows the stereotype, the generalization, the close-mindedness, and the ignorance that somehow needs to be dealt with. 

Why should we allow some city people to connote ‘barriotic’ negatively which is just an outsider’s point of view and probably have no clue about nor actual experience living in the barrio? Doesn’t it make more sense that it's the barrio people themselves who should define what barriotic is? 

The point of redefining ‘barriotic’ is not to cause hate against city people  nor to romanticize the barrio and its people. Nothing and nobody is perfect of course but shedding light or offering a more positive meaning is way better that could result in more productive and positive results in general.

As somebody who grew up in the province (and knows what barrio living is too well), here’s how I would define barriotic in several context:

1. A barriotic living is a simple, healthy, laid-back and sustainable living where people generally live in a more spacious environment close to nature and greeneries, breathe fresh air, grow or have easy access to organic food sources, less stressful and more. Barrio living typically involves having plants in and out of the house (both for food and beautification and not just one), raising pets, chicken and other animals for livelihood and food, having the time and space for coffee,  ‘tagay’ (social drinking), chika/chismis  and hangout with neighbors or family. Of course the quality and nature of living in the barrio may vary depending on one's geographic location, social conditions and other factors.

2. A barriotic mentality is having a sense of community than individuality (e.g. bayanihan, neighbors sharing foods together and looking after each other), generally respecting and protecting nature, preserving and practicing local traditions and culture. Having a barriotic mentality is compared to having a backward mentality as the barrio people are often accused to be against rural development and influx of investment. But can you blame the people from the barrio to protest these “developments” when these city people or outsiders are exploiting their natural resources and causing pollution to their once naturally peaceful and beautiful barrios? Thus, a barriotic mentality is not really an anti-development or “backward” mentality but is unknowingly in line with sustainable development.

3. A barriotic person, apart from being somebody from a barrio,  is more of an ingenious person rather than an ingenuous or naive person as what some people would characterize the people from the barrio. There are traits that are common among the people in the barrio - can’t live without plants, mostly love animals, nature-lover, tidy (neighbors would be horrified to see many dried leaves and weeds on your garden), skillful, resourceful, laid-back, friendly, ingenious (in a good way) and more. Barriotic people  know a lot of life skills, self-sustaining and resourceful. However, the trait of the barriotic people that stands out the most is their ingenuity which people can find if they would closely observe with an open mind how people live, adapt and build in the barrio.

The fascination of this ingenuity witnessed and experienced especially in the structures in the barrios is the inspiration behind this concept called Barriotecture. 

 *  *  *

Thanks for reading.

What are your thoughts about this article? Write your comments below and share this article to others.