Fizzling of ‘Ceboom’: Insights from Hutchcroft and Gera's study (Part 1)

I have promised my good friend and UP Cebu colleague, Dr. Weena Gera, that I would share a very interesting and insightful study she co-authored with Dr. Paul Hutchcroft, a professor at the Australian National University, entitled “The Fizzling of 'Ceboom': How Jurisdictional Battles and Warring Factions Undermined Cebu's Development Coalition.”

Since I have referred to Dr. Gera as a colleague, let me clarify that I am not a government employee. Dr. Gera is a state professor, whereas I only teach part-time, handling a three-unit subject on media law during the recently-concluded semester at UP. I am making this clarification because I am scheduled to travel overseas, and an immigration screener previously inquired about a travel authority required for government employees.

On December 3, 2024, the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) and the Urban Studies Program of the UP Center for Integrative and Development Studies organized a roundtable discussion on the said study by Dr. Hutchcroft and Dr. Gera at the NEDA Regional Office 7 in Sudlon, Lahug. The study was published in the Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs (2024, Vol. 43[2]). You can access a copy of it under a Creative Commons Attribution license through an online search on Google Scholar.

Let me now share with you the study’s key findings and highlights. I have often written here that Cebu has become a victim of its own past success, with its leaders in recent years falling short in addressing the challenges of a growing urban economy and society. And the upcoming 2025 elections in Cebu is crucial because it will define the future of our island for decades to come.

The Hutchcroft and Gera study notes that Cebu experienced an economic boom in the late 1980s to the 1990s, attracting local, national, and international investments. This period saw two strong and effective local government leaders, Governor Emilio “Lito” Osmeña and Mayor Tomas “Tommy” Osmeña. Large-scale infrastructure projects, such as the Cebu Transcentral Highway and the second Mandaue-Mactan Bridge, were initiated, alongside the flourishing of the Mactan Export Processing Zone. The Metro Cebu Development Project (MCDP) also played a significant role in addressing Cebu’s urban infrastructure challenges during those boom years.

However, the study stressed that Cebu’s fragmented governance, with competing jurisdictions among three highly-urbanized cities (Cebu City, Mandaue City, and Lapu-Lapu City) and 10 component LGUs, undermined coordinated, long-term development efforts. Unlike Metro Manila, which has the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA), Cebu lacks a unified metropolitan authority, resulting in poor urban planning, traffic congestion, and other inefficiencies.

Sadly, the decline of the development coalition was fueled by political infighting among key local leaders. These rivalries hampered infrastructure development and disrupted collaborative efforts for metropolitan coordination. The study highlights the collapse of intergovernmental coordination in Cebu since 2016, worsened by intensified political rivalries under the Duterte administration.

While infrastructure and economic activities have persisted, these gains have been increasingly undermined by governance gaps and competing political interests. Today, Metro Cebu faces severe urban challenges, including traffic congestion, insufficient waste management, water supply problems, flooding, and inadequate housing.

Efforts to establish a metropolitan authority have repeatedly failed due to political and jurisdictional hurdles. The lack of cohesive governance and coordination threatens Cebu’s ability to reclaim the promise of 'Ceboom' and regain its past economic momentum.

Due to limited space, I will continue in my next column with more details about the study, specifics on the challenges mentioned, as well as lessons and implications that Cebu and emerging urban centers in the Visayas and Mindanao can derive from Cebu’s experience.