A former government official recently raised an interesting concern: After serving four years as Chief of Infrastructure at NEDA and six years as City Planning and Development Coordinator, how could someone with such extensive experience no longer qualify as an Environmental Planner?
The concern deserves clarification.
Republic Act No. 10587, or the Environmental Planning Act of 2013, did not simply disregard the experience of practitioners who were already engaged in planning before the law was implemented.
In fact, the law provided a transitional period to accommodate qualified graduates of non-planning degree programs and experienced practitioners who met the prescribed requirements.
Under Section 18(b)(4), (5), and (6) of RA 10587, certain categories of applicants from related academic disciplines and government planning positions were allowed to take the Environmental Planning Licensure Examination during a five-year transitional period.
The Professional Regulatory Board of Environmental Planning clarified through Resolution No. 01, Series of 2019, that this five-year period commenced on October 1, 2014, when the Implementing Rules and Regulations took effect, and ended on October 2, 2019.
Thus, there was a five-year opportunity for qualified practitioners to obtain professional registration through the licensure examination.
This distinction is important.
Experience is not the same as professional registration. Political appointment is not the same as professional qualification. And holding a government planning position does not automatically confer a license to practice environmental planning.
We must recognize the institutional knowledge and contributions of experienced government planners. Their work in infrastructure planning, development coordination, and public administration deserves respect.
However, the purpose of professional regulation is to establish minimum qualifications, accountability, and standards for those undertaking the regulated practice of environmental planning.
This is not unique to environmental planning. Engineering, architecture, real estate appraisal, and other regulated professions similarly distinguish practical experience from legal authority to practice.
The transition period under RA 10587 was an acknowledgment of the contributions of existing practitioners while establishing a more formal professional licensing framework.We should also distinguish the role of an elected official from that of a licensed Environmental Planner.
It was not an indefinite exemption from professional qualification requirements. In other words, the law recognized experienced practitioners and provided them an opportunity to obtain professional registration through the licensure examination. It did not simply disregard their previous qualifications or government service. The five-year transition period was intended to help achieve that balance.
We should also distinguish the role of an elected official from that of a licensed Environmental Planner.
Elected officials have the legal authority to formulate policies, deliberate on development priorities, and exercise their statutory powers over plans and ordinances. But political authority does not automatically confer professional competence or registration as an EnP.
Conversely, an Environmental Planner’s professional license does not confer the legislative or executive powers of elected officials.
Both have important roles, but their functions are different.
The larger issue is therefore not whether experienced government officials have contributed to planning. Many certainly have.
The issue is whether professional planning services are undertaken in accordance with the qualifications and standards prescribed by law.
Environmental planning is not merely about preparing maps or identifying where development should occur. It involves decisions affecting land, infrastructure, economic opportunities, ecological systems, and the welfare of present and future generations.
That is precisely why professional standards matter.
Respect experience. Recognize expertise. But uphold the law governing professional practice.
Legal references: RA 10587, particularly Section 18(b)(4)–(6); Professional Regulatory Board of Environmental Planning Resolution No. 01, Series of 2019.
Primary reference: PRC Board Resolution No. 01, Series of 2019 (official PDF)
