Concrete won’t save us from the floods
EVERY rainy season, familiar images return: cars submerged on city streets, families wading through chest-deep waters and local officials scrambling to deploy rescue boats. The instinctive government response is also predictable: build more flood control infrastructures. From multibillion-peso dikes, drainage systems and pumping stations to grand proposals of mega dams, flood control projects have become the default policy prescription. While these structures are undoubtedly necessary, the hard truth is that they are not enough. Worse, systemic corruption undermines even their intended purpose. Unless we recognize that floods are a symptom of multiple, interrelated problems, and not merely an engineering puzzle, we will continue to throw money into projects that fail to deliver real protection.
The Philippines has long suffered from a “build and forget” culture in public works. Flood control projects often become cash cows for politicians and contractors, riddled with overpricing, ghost projects and substandard implementation. Recent revelations about anomalous allocations in flood control projects only confirm what many Filipinos already suspect: corruption erodes both the quality and quantity of infrastructure. Dikes collapse after just a few years, drainage canals clog even before they are turned over and pumping stations mysteriously break down during the heaviest downpours. The tragedy is that every peso stolen from flood control budgets translates to more communities left vulnerable. Yet even if corruption were magically eliminated tomorrow, the fundamental flaw would remain. Infrastructures alone cannot solve flooding.
Floods are not merely the overflow of water that needs to be controlled by concrete barriers. They are the outcome of multiple forces: natural, social and political. Climate change has altered rainfall patterns, making storms more intense and unpredictable. No infrastructure designed in the past two decades can fully account for the sheer volume of rain now being dumped in just a few hours. Land use change magnifies flood risks. Rapid urbanization has replaced forests, wetlands and agricultural lands with impermeable concrete. The loss of these natural sponges means rainwater has nowhere to go but into clogged streets and swollen rivers. Quarrying, mining and deforestation in upland areas loosen soil, sending sediments downstream to fill up rivers and reduce their carrying capacity. Unregulated settlement in low-lying and riverine areas puts thousands directly in harm’s way, as even the best-engineered flood structures cannot protect households built on natural floodplains or riverbanks that are meant to overflow. Institutional fragmentation makes matters worse. Flood management responsibilities are spread across multiple agencies without effective coordination. The result is a patchwork of projects that fail to integrate watershed management, land use planning and community preparedness.
In almost every flood disaster, images of plastic waste and garbage-clogged esteros become the visual shorthand for blame. Indeed, improper solid waste disposal exacerbates flooding by choking drainage systems. But while addressing garbage is necessary, it is also not sufficient. A drainage canal kept free of trash will still overflow if the river it empties into is silted, if upstream forests are denuded, or if rainfall intensity overwhelms its design. Focusing solely on garbage is like treating a fever without curing the infection.
Infrastructure and garbage disposal are not enough. The answer lies in moving from a purely engineering-centric view of flood control to an integrated risk management approach. Floods do not begin in cities; they begin in degraded uplands. Restoring forests, wetlands and mangroves is one of the most cost-effective flood mitigation strategies. These ecosystems slow down rainfall runoff, absorb excess water and reduce sedimentation in rivers. Policies must therefore prioritize watershed management, not just riverbank dikes. At the same time, the National Land Use Act, languishing in Congress for decades, must finally be passed. Local governments must strictly enforce zoning laws to prevent settlement in flood-prone areas. Urban development should integrate permeable surfaces, green infrastructure and retention basins that mimic natural hydrology. Floods also do not respect municipal or provincial boundaries, which is why the River Basin Control Office must be empowered to coordinate across jurisdictions and agencies. Planning should cover the entire basin, from ridge to reef, rather than piecemeal projects serving political districts.
Preparedness is just as important as prevention. No infrastructure can completely eliminate flooding, which means communities must be empowered with real-time flood forecasts, evacuation drills and locally managed emergency response systems. Investments in social capital are as vital as investments in concrete. Corruption must be addressed through stronger audit mechanisms, transparent procurement and citizen monitoring of projects. Without trust in government spending, even well-designed projects will be dismissed as political pork.
Building more flood control infrastructure is therefore the wrong path to take. The right way to reduce flood risks should be holistic, equitable and sustainable. Infrastructure is only one part of the answer, and it is the most expensive one. Unless accompanied by ecological restoration, land use reform and governance overhaul, it will never be sufficient. The Philippine public has been conditioned to equate progress with visible concrete. But true resilience lies in what is not immediately visible: restored watersheds, functioning institutions, empowered communities. This requires a cultural shift in governance and citizenship. We must stop demanding ribbon-cutting ceremonies for every project and start asking whether policies are reducing risks in the long term.
Floods will always be part of our geography. We live in an archipelago battered by typhoons and carved by rivers. The challenge is not to wage war against water with walls, but to learn to live with it wisely. That means making room for rivers to breathe, for communities to adapt and for ecosystems to perform their natural functions. Flood control infrastructures will always be important, but they are neither silver bullets nor shields. Corruption corrodes their effectiveness, and even if perfectly built, they can never address the full complexity of flooding. Garbage disposal, too, is necessary but insufficient. What the Philippines needs is a paradigm shift: from building monuments of concrete to cultivating an integrated response system. Until we confront the root causes, ecological degradation, chaotic land use, poor governance and weak institutions, our streets will continue to drown, and with them, our dreams of a safer future.
Disclosure: I am a professor at the University of the Philippines Los Baños and vice chairman of the board of state-run PTV Network Inc.
@highlight
No comments:
Post a Comment