Project 10. Safer Cities Initiative

Intended Outcomes

Outcome No. 1: Efficient and Effective Urban Development Management Outcome No. 2: Strengthened and Institutionalized Participation

Key Result Areas

KRA NO. 3: Capacity Building

Rationale

• Costs of crime
• Responses to Urban Crime
• Urban Safety Concerns in the Philippines
• Crime in the Philippines
• Most Prevalent Crimes in the Philippines
• Police statistics 2000
• Consequences of Urban Insecurity
• The Need for Urban Partnerships for Crime Prevention
• The Safer Cities Programme of UN-HABITAT

Observers generally agree on a number of trends affecting cities worldwide: there is a continued growth in urbanization and a widening gap between rich and poor. In addition, both in the North and in the South, countries have experienced a several-fold increase in crime over the last thirty years. Crime has become a serious problem in cities all over the world. Crime adds to the deleterious effects of exclusion and contributes to a low level of quality of life, deterioration of neighborhoods and public spaces, the building of architecture of fear, which are all serious threats to the stability and the social climate of cities, to sustainable and economic development, the quality of life and human rights. Urban crime and violence do not happen spontaneously. They grow out of an unequal and exclusive society, as well as out of a lack of institutional and social control.

Responses to Urban Crime

Despite these challenges and difficulties, cities have proved to be more flexible than national governments in adapting to changing situations. In the crime and criminal justice area the role of cities in responding to crime and insecurity has been emphasized over the last two decades.

Since the mid- and late 1980's, numerous conferences of national and local elected officials, experts and researchers, criminal justice practitioners and non-governmental organizations¹ have paved the road to new crime prevention policies at the city level. Their conclusions and recommendations have led to the gradual development of alternatives to the traditional criminal justice responses, notably the inclusion of strong and effective prevention policies and strategies. Prevention is not designed to replace the crime control apparatus. It focuses on causes of crime and therefore at uprooting the factors which bring about deviant behaviors. ↑

Urban Safety Concerns in the Philippines

The Philippines has one of the highest population growth rates in the world at an average of 2.36% per year observed in the last eight years. Of the total population of 76 million, 40 million live in urban areas (52%)^{2, 3}. By 2010, the urban population is projected to increase to 56 million (60%). The urban poverty rate in the Philippines fell from 24.0% to 17.9% between 1994 and 1997, then, rose again slightly to 20.4% in 2000.⁴ Poverty reduction has stagnated since.

The urbanization process is accompanied by deteriorating environmental conditions, unbalanced and ill-planned urban growth, incidences of corruption and fraud, increasing urban poverty, and worsening economic inequity. The unabated growth in urban population is exerting environmental, economic, and social pressures on urban systems and the institutions that are responsible for them. Social services and air and water quality in most urban areas are already below the desired levels. In the Philippine urban areas the increasing exclusion of entire communities from equal access to social and economic services is evolving into a problem as the unabated growth in population and the influx of rural dwellers to urban areas put pressure on the ability of cities to accommodate their social and economic needs.

The increasing social and economic inequities, combined with increasing corruption and fraud within public bodies, inefficiencies and in transparencies in the criminal justice system, particularly in dealing with these cases of corruption, the heightened threat of terrorist attacks and overall increases in urban crime and violence (see box on the next page) have contributed to increased fear of crime and feelings of insecurity as well as to a loss of public confidence in government, the police and the justice system. Insecurities, as well as feelings of insecurity and fear have adverse effects on the urban economy and society. They reduce investment, tourism and restrict movements of urban residents thereby threatening democratic foundations, such as civic engagement and people's power. ↑

Research done by Transparency International showed that the Perceived Corruption Index for the Philippines is 3 on a scale of 0 to 10 (0 = total corruption and 10 = no corruption).

Consequences of Urban Insecurity

Increasing levels of crime, violence and the fear of crime scare away private investments and tourists and therefore hamper economic development. Furthermore, it contributes to a sense of lawlessness, the breakdown of communities and the dilapidation of neighbourhoods. City victimization surveys have indicated that people living in marginalised neighbourhoods, who are excluded from access to urban services, such as education, adequate housing and the job market, are mostly affected by crime and insecurity. Property and income losses as a result of crime and violence can maintain their cycle of poverty as they can not afford insurance nor private security.

Furthermore, their living status and environment make them more vulnerable and exposed to insecurities as informal settlements are often characterized by higher levels of crime and violence, limited police surveillance and assistance, lack of street lighting, etc. Urban insecurity threatens the democratic foundations of a society as people take justice into their own hands and people’s confidence in public authorities diminishes. Improved safety and reduced levels of crime and violence ensure that cities can function as engines of social and economic growth and as centres for democratic principles. Improved safety invites national and international investment, promotes tourism and supports good governance. ↑

The Need for Urban Partnerships for Crime Prevention

The response of many cities to increasing levels of crime and violence has been to invest in more police officers, improved technologies for policing and in harsher penalties.

Unfortunately, these measures have proven to be unsuccessful in curbing the trend of urban crime growth. Therefore, many cities have embarked on a new approach that involves a variety of urban partners in designing and implementing crime prevention activities that seek to address the causes of crime, to complement the traditional approach of the criminal justice system. These activities have resulted in significant decreases in levels of crime and violence.

The new approach builds on the notion that safety is everybody's responsibility. The police and the criminal justice system only come in once the crime has already taken place. Police are not responsible for urban design, social service delivery, access to housing and land, education and health care, or economic development. Yet these factors contribute to crime and violence. Therefore urban partnerships for crime prevention should involve local authorities, as the coordinating actor, the police and justice system, national government, the private sector, the media, civil society and communities. ↑

The Safer Cities Programme of UN-HABITAT

The Safer Cities Programme, together with its international partners, has been spearheading this crime prevention approach in cities around the world. As more and more governments realize that the traditional law enforcement approach is not sufficient to tackle the increasing levels and changed characteristics of urban insecurity, crime and violence, the demand for innovative approaches increases.

The Safer Cities Programme has been set up to respond to this demand. It provides technical assistance to cities and city authorities to build their capacity to address causes of crime and insecurity. The capacity building efforts also include key partners such as NGO's, the private sector, police, justice, and the media. Through this assistance cities should become able to assess the extent and causes of crime and to address these in a sustainable manner through social crime prevention (addressing groups at risk such as youth and women), institutional reform, alternative forms of justice and policing, good urban governance, as well as urban design and planning.

The Safer Cities Programme is part of UN-HABITAT's Good Urban Governance Campaign. Security is one of the norms of good urban governance. Good governance and safety are mutually reinforcing. Improved safety fosters increased civic engagement and improves solidarity and citizenship. Furthermore, the development of successful crime prevention strategies requires participative, inclusive and efficient decision making, planning, and implementation. Finally, improved efficiency and effectiveness in governance, as well as reduced corruption within public institutions improve public confidence in government and police and thus improve feelings of security and enable good governance. Additionally, the Safer Cities Programme has strong links with the Secure Tenure Campaign, for instance where land disputes and forced evictions lead to crime, violence and feelings of insecurity. Therefore, the Safer Cities Initiative will also contribute to the development of concrete linkages and modes of collaboration between the two campaigns and their respective partners. ↑

Objectives

1. To improve the capacity of LGUs (Local Government Units), including the Barangays, to address the causes of crime through partnerships with the police, the justice system, civil society (communities, people’s organizations, non-governmental organizations), the private sector, the media, etc.
2. To operationalize the link between security and good governance by building capacities at the city level to address the various causes of urban crime and thereby improving feelings of safety and reducing levels of crime and violence.

Project Components/Scope of Work

1. Safer Cities Pilot Projects
2. Mainstreaming Urban Safety

A. Safer Cities Pilot Projects

The Safer Cities Project will be piloted in at least three cities in the Philippines and will as such be a demonstration of how to translate a norm of the Good Urban Governance Campaign into concrete local operations and activities. The three pilots will define urban safety and security in the Philippine context, develop good practices for crime prevention, and as such contribute to country wide replication and the development of city as well as national crime prevention strategies.

The project will target the following stakeholders in each city:

1. Local Government Units (LGU’s) and their officers, as the main beneficiaries
2. Barangay’s and their officers, also as main beneficiaries
3. Barangay level institutions, such as the Local Development Councils, Peace & Order Councils, the Tanods, the People's Law Enforcement Boards, etc.
4. Civil society, non governmental organizations, people’s organizations and community groups, as well as groups at risk, such as youth in conflict with the law, marginalized families and communities, victims of violence, etc. as direct beneficiaries
5. Police officers and justice officials, including the Department of Justice (DOJ)
6. National governments and their officials, mainly the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) and the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD)
7. Representatives from the media as well as the private sector.

The project will seek to build partnerships in each city between these stakeholders, coordinated by LGU’s, that will develop, implement and test strategies and practices for crime prevention.

Training and capacity building will be an important element of the Pilot Projects and will build on local traditions and cultures so as to recognise, strengthen and develop localized approaches to safety that link with Filipino cultures and traditions. Furthermore, the pilot cities, through the Safer Cities network, will benefit from international good practices that will be adapted to the Filipino context.

In each city, a rigorous process including

1. Partnership building
2. Diagnosis of local insecurity
3. Strategy development and action planning
4. Strategy implementation
5. Institutionalization will be conducted.

To ensure sustainability of the Safer Cities initiatives at city level, it is imperative that LGUs contribute to the financing of the pilot project for instance through the provision of office space, office equipment, and human resource capacity. ↑

B. Mainstreaming Urban Safety

The Safer Cities Initiative will also seek to mainstream urban safety concerns as a cross cutting issue into all campaign activities, Bahanggunihanan components and activities, as well as policies and approaches of the various stakeholders.

Through the mainstreaming of urban safety, this project component seeks to adapt institutional structures, work methods, approaches and policies so that safety is integrated as a cross cutting, multi-dimensional and multi-sectoral issue in all policies, programmes, and activities that affect urban development, planning, and management.

Furthermore, project component 2 should aim to promote and facilitate the decentralization of responsibility, alongside financial and human resources, to LGUs, supported by the necessary training and capacity building. It should also involve awareness raising and the forging of partnerships at the national level to facilitate and coordinate integrated urban policies, and realize the necessary legal, institutional and policy reform for the empowerment of LGU’s and the integration of safety concerns as a cross cutting issue.

Finally, the mainstreaming aims to support the development of a National Strategy for Urban Safety that will seek to build capacities of LGU’s, facilitate, and replicate the development of successful crime prevention practices, innovate police and justice systems, support urban safety through legal, institutional, and policy reform and strengthen partnerships for crime prevention at the neighborhood, city, as well as national level. ↑

The campaigns, as well as the implementation of the Bahanggunihanan take place at a national level. Therefore, this project component mainly targets actors at the national level:

1. The Departments of Interior and Local Government (DILG), Justice (DOJ), Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), Planning, etc.
2. The National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM) and the Philippine National Police (PNP).
3. Public training institutes such as the Local Government Academy (LGA).
4. National bodies and commissions, such as the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB), the National Anti Poverty Commission
(NAPC), the National Youth Commission (NYC), the Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Committee (HUDCC), the National Commission on the Rights of Filipino Women (NCRFW), the League of Cities (LCP), the League of Barangay, etc.
5. National level representatives of civil society, private sector, media networks, etc. ↑



Back to Top ↑

---

Expected Outputs

1. Diagnostic report of each pilot city to complement police statistics
2. Design of safer city strategies and practices and implementation plan
3. Sensitisation and awareness building campaigns
4. Training and capacity building in pilot cities including tool kits
5. Survey and documentation of crime prevention best practices
6. Legal and Policy reform recommendations
7. Institutional reform recommendations (national and local levels)
8. Established pool of professionals on urban safety and crime prevention in pilot LGUs
9. National Crime Prevention Strategy
Back to Top ↑

---

Project Management Arrangements

The DILG will be the executing agency for the project. It will be supported by the Local Development Academy, the National Police Commission, the League of Cities and the PUF. Technical support teams will be established to manage individual or groups of project components. At the pilot LGU level steering committees will be organized by the Coalition of Stakeholders.

UN-HABITAT’s Safer Cities Programme, Regional Office for Asia and Pacific and UNDP. SC will be responsible for the technical backstopping and capacity building. ROAP will ensure coordination with human settlement national issues and partners, and mainstreaming of the approach in all other UN-HABITAT initiatives in the country. These tasks should evolve to the Department of Interior and Local Government or the new Department of Housing and urbanization after the end of the project period.

Back to Top ↑

---

Project Duration

Three years

Back to Top ↑

---

Estimated Cost

US$ 1,800,000

Back to Top ↑

---

Endnotes

1. International Conferences of Mayors in Barcelona (1987), Montreal (1989), Paris (1991), and Johannesburg (1998).
2. Source: ADB (April 1999), p. 1; and The World Bank, Urban Sector Country Assistance Strategy (CAS), Manila: World Bank, 2001a (Final Draft), p.1
3. Overseas Philippines workers, numbering at least 3 million are dominantly urban in origin and current place of work, indicating an even higher real rate of urbanization in Philippines society. Most overseas workers are from the Manila EUR (the NCR plus Regions III and IV), contributing 4.925 billion US dollars to the economy, mainly to the Manila EUR, in 1998. Data on size of overseas population from: Mallari, R., "What a Performance," Asian Business, August 2001, p.50.
4. Based on Philippine official data, as cited in NSCB’s Philippine Poverty Statistics, 2000a, p.2; and in World Bank’s Urban Sector CAS, 2001, p.2. According to the World Bank’s Philippines Poverty Assessment, which uses a lower poverty line, the 1997 urban poverty incidence was only 11.9%. See: The World Bank, Philippines Poverty Assessment, Vol. I: Main Report, The World Bank, 2001b, p. 2.

Back to Top ↑