The Law Has Changed — Our Planning Must Change With It
Urban planning is not just about drawing maps or assigning colors to land. It is about shaping how people live, how cities grow, and how communities stay safe. In a time when flooding has reached catastrophic levels in Cebu, we can no longer pretend that our current land-use system is enough.
The truth is simple: Cebu City’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) is outdated. It no longer reflects the new legal, scientific, and ecological standards that planners are now required to follow. And unless the CLUP is reviewed and corrected, the city will continue to make decisions that worsen flooding, landslides, and environmental collapse.
1. PENCAS Changed the Entire Landscape of Land-Use Planning
The Philippine Ecosystem and Natural Capital Accounting System (PENCAS) Act introduced a revolutionary requirement:
Government must account for the value of ecosystems, watershed functions, water recharge, soil stability, and the economic value of nature itself.
PENCAS was signed into law on May 22, 2024 as Republic Act 11995. Meanwhile, the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance on June 30,2025.
Before PENCAS, CLUPs mainly focused on land use—where houses, commercial buildings, roads, or industries should go. After PENCAS, that is no longer enough.
A compliant CLUP must now quantify:
- How much forest, river, or watershed capacity is being lost
- How upland developments reduce water absorption
- How much “natural capital” is being depleted when slopes are cut
- How these losses translate into economic damage (flooding, disasters, carbon loss, siltation)
Cebu’s current CLUP does not do this. It is operating on an old framework while the law has moved forward.
2. ECCs for Upland Developments Also Fall Short
Environmental Compliance Certificates (ECCs) for subdivisions, commercial estates, and roads in the uplands were issued using pre-PENCAS standards.
Most Environmental Impact Statements focused on:
- earthworks
- drainage structures
- erosion controls
But almost none assessed watershed function, downstream flood risk, cumulative basin impact, or natural capital loss—which PENCAS now requires.
This is why upland developments continue to be approved even if they sit on steep slopes, natural drainage paths, and fragile geological formations.
3. This Is Not Optional Knowledge — Planners Must Know This by Heart
Environmental planners, geologists, engineers, and city officials are now expected to integrate natural capital accounting into every zoning decision. That includes:
- development suitability analysis
- watershed carrying capacity
- runoff modeling
- ridge-to-reef planning
- accounting for carbon sinks and biodiversity
If planners continue operating with outdated tools, they are making decisions that violate the very law they swore to uphold.
4. A Non-Compliant CLUP Is a Legal Liability
A CLUP that does not integrate PENCAS can be questioned for:
- grave abuse of discretion
- failure to perform ministerial duties under the Local Government Code and PENCAS
- violating the constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology
Cebu City cannot afford to implement a plan that is legally vulnerable and scientifically obsolete—especially when thousands of lives and billions in property are at stake.
5. The Consequences Are Measurable: More Flooding, More Damage
Flooding in Cebu is not simply caused by rain.
It is the product of upland disruption:
- excessive cut-and-fill
- blocked natural waterways
- subdivisions and roads acting as mini-dams
- forest cover loss
- soil compaction
- reduced infiltration
When a CLUP does not account for these, the result is predictable: water that should have been absorbed in the uplands rushes violently into lowland communities.
The disaster we saw during Typhoon Tino is not an accident.
It is the output of planning failures.
6. Reviewing the CLUP Is Not Political — It Is a Legal, Scientific, and Moral Responsibility
A CLUP cannot remain static in a time of climate crisis. It must evolve with:
- new hazard data
- new scientific findings
- new national laws
- new development pressures
- new experiences of disaster
If the city refuses to review its CLUP now, it is refusing to learn, refusing to adapt, and refusing to protect its people.
Final Word: Cebu Deserves a CLUP That Protects, Not Endangers
Cebu does not lack intelligence, science, or expertise. It lacks alignment.
The CLUP must be updated.
ECC processes must be reformed.
Planners must operate using modern standards.
And citizens must demand a planning system that finally honors the value of our uplands, our watersheds, and our right to safety.
A CLUP review is not just a technical exercise.
It is a step toward a safer Cebu, a smarter Cebu, and a Cebu that finally plans with the future—not the past—in mind.
Real LexEcon 