Sustainable communities(Part 2)

NO HOLDS BARRED
Ike Señeres

With all the basic needs clearly identified and incorporated into the UNIDA framework, we now have a roadmap for integrated national development. This is now the basis for integrating all the basic needs into one master plan.

The dimension of public safety is actually encompassing, because its benefits could extend towards the other three dimensions. For instance, environmental safety is really part of public safety, and this would include the other environmental concerns such as climate change and global warming. Environmental safety also affects the sustainability of shelter and livelihood projects.

As required by the laws, all municipalities (my preferred collective term for both cities and towns) are supposed to prepare their own Municipal Development Plan (MDP), in cooperation with their own Municipal Development Council (MDC). In theory, the MDP is supposed to incorporate the inputs of the barangay units, but apparently this does not happen.

Due to the lack of material and technical resources at the municipal level, it would be best to mobilize the more active participation of the private sector in the MDC, in the spirit of public and private partnership (PPP), an approach that is supported by many international development organizations.

In the past, there were already many efforts exerted by the private sector in support of the MDC, but the results have not been encouraging, due perhaps to the lack of cohesion among the participants to agree on a common framework for integrated development. This is the vacuum that could be filled by the HDI method.

Despite the large number of municipalities all over the country, it would be still be realistic as common objective to identify at least one non-government organization (NGO) that will be assigned to assist each and every municipality, at the same time promote the adoption of the UNIDA framework. In this context, civic organizations could be considered as NGOs.
On the practical side, it would be best for these local NGOs to form four technical working groups (TWGs) from among their members. Given this approach, one TWG will be able to focus on the four priority dimensions, namely health, education, livelihood and peace and order.

It is not clear which national government agency is on top of livelihood at the local level. The most suitable agency for this I think is the Department of Finance, mainly through the Cooperative Development Authority (CDA). It is clear that Department of Local Interior and Government (DILG) is on top of public safety, though the Philippine National Police (PNP).

I understand that livelihood is not generally seen as an employment issue, given the fact that livelihood generally falls under the category of entrepreneurship or small business. Looking at it another way however, livelihood could be seen as a form of self-employment. From the perspective of data management, it should really be the DOF that should know how many people in a locality would need financing for self-employment.

I also understand that public safety is more than just police work. As a matter of fact, the Bureau of Fire Protection (BFP) and the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP) are also considered as public safety agencies under the DILG. From the perspective of data management however, there is a need to review the role of the PNP in reporting the criminality rate, because of perceived conflicts of interest.

In so many ways, public safety as a basic need is very closely associated to the delivery of justice, yet another human need. As a matter of fact, the DILG is directly involved in two of the five pillars of justice, namely arrest (accusation) and penology (transformation). The other pillars of justice are prosecution, judgment (promulgation) and parole (reintegration).

The delivery of basic services is generally affected always by the lack of human resources, and the inability to clearly identify the focal points of the delivery process. It is clear that doctors should be the core of the human resources needed for health delivery, in a similar manner that teachers should be the core of the human resources needed for education delivery. It is also clear that hospitals should be the focal points for health delivery, in the same manner that schools should be the focal points for education delivery.

In the case of livelihood however, it is not clear who should be at the core of the human resources, and it is not clear either where the focal point of livelihood delivery should be. This is also the case of public safety, wherein it is not clear who should be at the core of the human resources, and where the focal point of the delivery should be.