Monday, July 07, 2008 CDO is not among Top 10 livable cities By Froilan Gallardo
CAGAYAN de Oro managed poorly in competitiveness, placing only 11th among mid-size Philippine cities, according to the 2007 assessment of the Asian Institute of Management (AIM) policy center.
Dr. Federico Macaranas, AIM executive director, made the announcement at the Manila Intercontinental Hotel last July 4. He said 90 Philippine cities were covered by the survey.
The cities were divided according to the size of their population. Cagayan de Oro, with a current population of 461,877 persons, was classified as a mid-sized city. The cities were divided to 20 metro, 25 mid-size and 45 small size cities.
The cities were scored based on six "drivers of competitiveness" -- cost of doing business, dynamism of the local economy, human resources and training,
infrastructure, responsiveness of local government unit (LGU), and quality of life.
Macaranas said that mid-size competitive cities, based on weighted scores, are Olongapo (7.05), followed by General Santos (6.94), Tarlac (6.8), San Pablo (6.75), Cabanatuan (6.74), Tagum (6.66) and Lucena (6.64).
Though they didn't win any award, Butuan tied for the 9th place with Iloilo (6.58); Cagayan de Oro tied for the 11th place with Tacloban (6.49); Iligan ranked 13th (6.42); and Zamboanga 17th (6.19).
For Cagayan de Oro, it was two notches higher to the assessment of MoneySense, a business magazine, which ranked CDO as 13th in the top 20 list of "best places to live" in the country early this year.
The AIM survey is a very important and objective benchmark indicator of the strengths and weaknesses of each city. It provides business investors and government officials a framework to improve business and human environment. It also measures the level of competitiveness in relation with other cities.
How Cagayan de Oro fared?
The survey used a ten-point scale with 8-10 as top marks indicating high competitiveness; 6-7, above average competitiveness; 5, average; 3-4, below average competitiveness; and 1-2, very low competitiveness.
Cagayan de Oro only scored high, 8.64, in the Cost of Doing Business, placing second to General Santos City, which scored 8.68.
Macaranas defined Cost of Doing Business as direct cost of doing business such as land, labor, rent, telecommunications and power.
But Cagayan de Oro fared poorly in the Dynamism of Local Economy with 4.60. It means the local economy is not vibrant enough to attract inward investment and generate income.
Cagayan de Oro got above-average scores, 7.08, in road infrastructure, transport, information and communication technology.
Responsiveness of the Cagayan de Oro local government to the business sector was above average. Cagayan de Oro elected officials scored 6.24 in this category but much lower to how local government officials respond in Iligan City, which scored 6.27, and General Santos City, 6.99.
In the Quality of Life category, the survey gave Cagayan de Oro an above-average score of 6.88.
The survey used the yardstick of how local officials take care of the social welfare of the people, the environment, peace and order.
Lastly, Cagayan de Oro scored above-average grades, 6.73, in Human Resource Training category. It look at how competent is the local manpower and the availability of training programs for skills development of the city.
But Cagayan de Oro paled in comparison with Iligan City, 8.11; General Santos City, 8.26; and Butuan City, 7.23 in this category.
Number One City
Davao City remains the number one most competitive city among 20 metro cities in the Philippines.
Macaranas said Davao City ranked 1st in Cost of Doing Business and Infrastructure, 3rd in the Responsiveness of the Local Government to Business needs, 4th in Dynamism of the Local Economy, and 7th in Human Resource and Training and Quality of Life.
Based on weighted scores, Davao City scored 7.06 points to make it to number one, followed by Quezon City (6.61), Makati (6.58), Manila (6.43), Marikina
(6.37) and Lapu-lapu (6.301).
Though they didn't win any award, two more metro Visayas cities -- Cebu City (6.27) ranked 9th and Mandaue City (6.22) ranked 11th.
For small cities, Macaranas announced the top 12 based on alphabetical order as Bayawan, Calapan, Calbayog, Dagupan, Dipolog, Laoag, Malaybalay, Naga,
San Fernando (La Union), Surigao, Tagbilaran and Tuguegarao.
Based on weighted scores, however, San Fernando topped with 7.55, followed by Malaybalay (7.11), Surigao (7.08), Tagbilaran (7.01), Laoag (7.0),
Bayawan (6.78), Dipolog (6.75), Calbayog (6.73), Dagupan (6.72), Calapan (6.69), Tuguegarao (6.68) and Naga (6.65)
Survey
The Philippine Cities Competitiveness Ranking Project (PCCRP), Macaranas said, is the flagship project of the City Competitiveness Program of AIM Policy Center. It assesses the capability of cities to provide an environment that nurtures dynamism of its local enterprises and prosperity of its residents. The study seeks to identify the best cities in the Philippines in where to live, work and operate a business.
Macaranas explained that PCCRP results have, over the years, served as benchmarks for local chief executives, city planners, and economic and development managers in improving their development strides in their cities.
He explained that this year's round of city competitiveness program has taken a big leap with the strategic integration of the PCCRP and International Finance Corporation's (IFC) Doing Business Sub-national Report (DBSR). This sub-national application of IFC's Doing Business Report is seen to be a substantial complement to the PCCRP.
The PCCRP, on one hand, provides the businessmen's point of view on city's competitiveness in general and the cost of doing business and responsiveness of LGUs to business needs in particular.
Macaranas said the results of the study would be disseminated through its academic partners. In Cagayan de Oro City, the Xavier University has provided institutional support to AIM in the last three rounds of assessment.
The results can also be browsed at AIM's website: http://www.policy.aim.edu.ph/event4.htm
This latest survey was launched and completed in collaboration with the German Technical Cooperation (GTZ), the International Finance Corporation (IFC), the International Labour Organization (ILO), SM Investments Inc., and the Petron Corporation. (With Sunnex)
