I HAVE built many databases for the government either as a manager or director. Sad to say, most of these databases have not been sustained for one reason or another. More often than not, the main reason for the inability to sustain government databases is the lack of budgets and manpower.
This was true during the days when databases were still very expensive to maintain, and only highly skilled technical workers could operate them. Gone are those days however, because nowadays, databases no longer cost a lot to maintain, and even ordinary users could operate these systems.
In this column, I will talk about building databases for development in general and not for government in particular. This perspective comes from the thinking that governance actually involves not only the government, but also the private sector. In this context, the databases could be owned and operated either by the government sector or by the private sector, depending on which sector would be in the best position to sustain the projects.
The government is not lacking in the legal basis to own and operate databases. As a matter of fact, the government agencies have the legal basis to do so, as shown in their mandates and charters. For the most part, it could be said that most government agencies would have data assets collected in the form of paper files or computer files, except that these are not encoded into operable and functional databases. The challenge therefore is to build automated databases that could integrate all of these scattered databases.
While most of us are already familiar with internet websites and mobile apps, many of us forget the fact that these websites and apps are actually depending on the databases at the backend in order to be able to serve information. As it is technically defined, information is processed data, meaning to say that it is the finished product that is derived from the raw data at the backend. That is how important databases are, even if websites and apps are the ones that are getting our attention, being in the forefront.
Under the Local Government Code (LGC), Local Development Councils (LDCs) are supposed to be convened at all levels of local governance, from the barangay level all the way up to the regional level.
At the barangay level, the Barangay Development Councils (BDCs) are supposed to report directly to the Barangay Assemblies, being the highest authorities in the barangays that are in effect the equivalent of the Stockholder’s Meetings in the private corporations. As stated in the law, seats are supposed to be reserved for private sector representatives to sit in the BDCs.
Also under that same law, the Barangay Councils are supposed to produce their own Comprehensive Land Use Plans (CLUPs) for submission to the municipal Mayors and the Municipal Development Councils (MDCs). As I understand it, the municipal Mayors are supposed to integrate the barangay CLUPs into the municipal CLUP, with the participation and support of the MDCs.
This process goes up the ladder, because in turn, the municipal CLUPs are supposed to be submitted to the provincial Governors and the Provincial Development Councils (PDCs) and further up the ladder, provincial CLUPs are also supposed to be produced for submission to the Regional Development Councils (RDCs).
I would imagine that in each step of the ladder, copies of the CLUPs should also be submitted to the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG), being the lead agency in the implementation of the LGC. For all intents and purposes, the DILG should own and operate the databases containing the CLUPs from all levels. On the demand side however, I would also imagine that the contents of these databases would also be needed by other government agencies such as the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) and the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB).
On the technical side, the CLUP databases could be built using Geographic Information Systems (GIS), Global Positioning Systems (GPS), images, videos and animations, in effect giving these the necessary multimedia features. Since these technologies are already widely available, all that is needed now is the political will to do it, meaning to say that the BDCs, MDCs, PDCs and RDCs have to put their hearts and minds into it, led by their government sector and private sector members.
Nowadays, internet sites such as Google already have the online services that these councils could use, such as Google Maps and Google Street View. The national government led by the National Mapping and Resource Information Authority (NAMRIA) has also put up an online geographic portal that these councils could use. Storage space is also not a problem nowadays, since cloud computing is already available, along with data centers that could be cheaply rented.
Even without computers, these councils could actually make three dimensional topographic maps and scale models using only scrap paper and ordinary paste. All told, there is no more excuse not to produce the CLUPs. As provided for in the law, local residents could actually sue their local officials in the Office of the Ombudsman for their failure to produce the CLUPs or for their failure to convene the Barangay Assemblies or the LGCs. Rather than do that however, they should just join hands with their local officials in order to produce the CLUPs.
Other than the DENR and the HLURB, the information contained in the CLUP databases could also be used by the local offices of the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (NDRRMC) and the Climate Change Commission (CCC). It could actually be argued that not unless the Environmental Clearance Certificates (ECCs) that are issued by the DENR are based on the CLUPs, these would have no basis, and could be prone to corruption. Same is true in the case of the building permits that are issued by the LGUs. These should be based on CLUPs./PN
