Esplanade Project: Tourism vs environment

Esplanade Project: Tourism vs environment | Daily Tribune

Let me play devil’s advocate for this new pet project of Marcos Jr., the Pasig River Esplanade Project behind the old Post Office building that was burned down. Let’s look at the big picture first.

There are two opposing powerful movements in this project: an unstoppable force, the dream of a tourism hub at the very heart of the city that would bring in a windfall — in direct collision with an immovable object, the unfinished cleanup of the Pasig River that President Ramos started under the Pasig River Rehabilitation Program in 1993. It is a Tourism versus Environment issue.

The PRRP did a good job, but it was not enough for a river dying from cumulative pollution for decades. The massive dredging operations got rid of thousands of cubic meters of silt. In the end, when funds ran out and the project period lapsed, and Ramos retired, the cleanup was left hanging.

A followup study in 1997 by the River Rehabilitation Secretariat reported that the pollution in the Pasig River had been reduced by 97 tons per day from 327 to 230 starting in 1995. A total of 116,676 cubic meters of garbage was hauled from the river and its tributaries since 1994. In 1997, 1,711 cubic meters of garbage was collected by the MMDA and its partners in inaccessible barangays. A total of 101,236 cubic meters of silt, 25 of 27 sunken derelicts, and 26 of 30 abandoned barges were likewise removed. All these massive successes were not enough. Even if this is a bit overstated, it was still a good job. (Source — Philstar, 23 February 2003).

Proponents of the Esplanade Project argue that both tourism development and river cleanup can be done at the same time. This is true if they do not run into conflict. The essence of river rehabilitation involves a canal on both sides running through the entire length of Metro Manila to catch all the dirty water and bring it to a catchment and treatment station downstream. If tourism development will not hamper this, then tourism and cleanup can co-exist. The first question is: Does the Esplanade Project have an Environmental Impact Assessment, a requirement of law?

We cannot answer the question on the co-existence of Tourism and Environment until we get the technical details of the Esplanade Project, which hopefully exists. This is the tip of the iceberg. Tourism development and growth will be unstoppable once the Esplanade project is a “success” and income starts pouring in. There are plans to expand the Esplanade initiative into a 25-kilometer river tourism dream. Technical details of this dream are non-existent yet. They have to do a massive Environmental Impact Assessment as required by law.

Environment advocates are scared of the Esplanade Project because it is the tip of the windfall tourism iceberg. The entire issue of total river rehabilitation for Metro Manila must be addressed and studied further first.

Tony Claparols, president of the Ecological Society of the Philippines, which is a member of the International Union for Conservation of Nature, a “world conservation union,” has a short and simple statement, “Clean the Pasig and clean the minds of people, then we are good.” Tony was an adviser to the late Gina Lopez on the environment.

It is suggested that Marcos Jr. calm the tourism frenzy until the river rehabilitation issue is fully studied. We need to stop drooling over the expected windfall. A temporary freeze will not hurt. A multi-agency Pasig River Task Force involving DENR, DoTr and DoT, with ESP, IUCN and other stakeholders as observers, may prevent future conflicts and expensive legal tussles.

In the spirit of transparency, it is suggested that the task force should be covered live by media and be open to the public.