TRAINING NEEDS ANALYSIS FOR INCLUSIVE MOBILITY COURSE FOR PROFESSIONALS

10 FEBRUARY 2014

ATENEO SCHOOL OF GOVERNMENT, ATENEO DE MANILA UNIVERSITY,

LOYOLA HEIGHTS, QUEZON CITY

OPENING PROGRAM

The program started with the singing of the Philippine National Anthem followed by an invocation

led by Mr. Lorenzo Cordova, Research Associate of Inclusive Mobility Project.

This meeting aims to conduct training needs analysis for the course development workshop for

professionals. The proposition on this inclusive mobility course has been presented to NCP and

Metro Planado and this meeting serves as the next step toward developing the course.

Welcome Address Dr. Segundo Romero, Director, iBoP Asia Program, Ateneo School of Government

Dr. Romero firstly observed that the meeting with Metro Planado was composed mostly of female

attendees but in this meeting, majority of the participants were male. The inclusive mobility (IM)

project team was delighted for the cooperation of the participants to help them outline an IM

course for professionals. There are and have been plenty of courses offered on urban planning and

environmental management but these courses were not designed specifically for LGUs.

One of the outputs of the IM project is to come up with an IM course intended for professionals

specifically those in planning, transport, mobility and road safety. A course that is responsive to the

needs of the LGUs. In this meeting, the project team hoped to pick the brains of the participants and

specify their needed competencies so the course will be designed according to the needs of those

working on transport and mobility. The course is intended for LGUs to respond to the needs of their

constituents.

Inclusive mobility seemed like a new concept to the participants so Dr. Romero asked them to think

of their cities in terms of formal and informal and those with capacity to buy vehicles and those who

have none to understand the idea. As an illustration, in Metro Manila some who have no capacity to

buy a vehicle use bikes to go to work from far-flung areas like San Mateo Rizal to Makati City

everyday, putting their lives at risk on roads. In other countries, biking is a primary mode of

transportation that even officials and most LGU employees use it together with walking as means to

go to work daily. A lot of countries now are using non-motorized forms of transport with the idea of

"letting the people help transform themselves" and not be too dependent on infrastructure. With

these examples, the IM concept simply speaks of congruence of people from all walks of life with all

modes of transportation. This is what the IM training is about and what the project team would like

to imbed or share with the LGUs.

Metro Manila, like Jakarta will be growing to be one of the biggest cities in the world. So the

planners in the government sectors within these cities should think of more imaginative and

innovative ways of meeting the needs of the people they serve.

Dr. Romero also shared that he came from a meeting with MMDA to find out that this year there will

be eighteen infrastructure projects (some will happen simultaneously) in line for Metro Manila. He

wondered how this would work physically and reiterated that as public servants in (local)

government, they have political capital and a big responsibility in their hands over the long term to

do their mandated work and even beyond. Sometimes it is not a matter of intention but should be

backed up with the right competency. Seeing the big picture would allow them to work on a specific

issue per location and create more impact.

This TNA meeting aims to come up with a wish list of what the local government can study and

what competencies they would need to create a more sustainable urban transport. This meeting

can help come up with a course that will be responsive to the needs of the LGUs over the long term.

The course might require getting resource persons and knowledge from abroad when needed. The

project team thinks that this course is a good opportunity for the LGUs to increase their capacity

and competency especially in the area of inclusive mobility for transport. For the participants, the

team sees the course to be applicable to their continuing professional education entitlement or be

credited in postgraduate studies, but definitely this course will add on to their competencies.

Profiling of Participants

As part of getting to know everyone on the table, the participants were given metacards and pens

and were asked to provide the following information each:

Name Position City/ Office/ Organization Traffic and transport related initiatives they are currently working on Expectation on the workshop

All in all there were seventeen participants coming from eight LGUs in Metro Manila, representing

the City Planning and Development office, Urban Development office, Engineering Department and

Disaster Risk Reduction and Management office.

NAME POSITION & CITY/

OFFICE

TRAFFIC/ TRANSPORT

RELATED INITIATIVES

EXPECTATION

Nick Llorence R.

Sangalang

Project Development

Officer, City Planning and

Development Office -

Pasay City

Hiring more traffic aide/ enforcers for more strict implementation of laws

Sidewalk clearing Anti-scavenging

To learn and

understand the

current situation of

traffic and transport

systems and to

address and solve the

NAME POSITION & CITY/

OFFICE

TRAFFIC/ TRANSPORT

RELATED INITIATIVES

EXPECTATION

problems.

Achilles L.

Robiso

Environmental

Management Chief, City

Planning and

Development Office -

Pasay City

Approval of recent CLUP Promotion of non-

motorized transport

To design a course that

suit the needs of

professionals

especially those in the

LGU or the local level.

Gregorio S.

Raposon Jr.

Project Development

Officer, City Planning and

Development Office -

Mandaluyong City

Project estimator of the Mayor (vertical and horizontal)

Zoning division: create and maintain set back of the project

Roberto J. Javier Zoning Officer II, Traffic

and Parking Management

Office - Mandaluyong City

Member of former TWG

for the uniform traffic

code of Metro Manila. No

longer meeting as a group

because of change in

administration

Outlined the traffic code of Metro Manila as member of the TWG

Goal of the TWG: set up traffic department per city in Metro Manila

TWG Outcome: Single ticketing system

Mandaluyong City is the first to include tricycle and pedicab regulation office as a division of traffic and management

Engr. Calvin A.

Carambag

Engineer, Planning Office

- Marikina City

Update CLUP and Zoning Ordinance

Bikelanes Education for pedestrians

Improve the

knowledge/

information about

transportation and

land use to enhance

LGU capacity

Jennifer Michelle

D.L. Macas

Planning Officer II, Urban

Development Department

- Makati City

Expanding pedestrian and bikeway network in the city

Promotion of the use of non-motorized vehicles

Promotion/ explanding the use of e-vehicles/ hybrid buses (BRT)

Upgrading/ enhancing infrastructures (roads, signage, etc.)

Promotion of road safety measures

Organizers can draw

out all the great ideas

from the participants

and can maintain the

active participation

among us.

NAME POSITION & CITY/

OFFICE

TRAFFIC/ TRANSPORT

RELATED INITIATIVES

EXPECTATION

Roberto Horique Section Head, Monitoring

Division Engineering

Department - Muntinlupa

City

City oversees disaster. Removal of illegal signage along the road. Trimming down trees that obstruct roads.

Beautification of national road for safety in transportation/ vehicles and pedestrian users

Member of sidewalk clearing operation by MMDA

Coordination from Traffic Management Bureau (MTMB) officer to their needs in study on traffic

To be more successful

on the study of these

training

Dionisio M.

Nicolas

Monitoring Inspector,

Engineering Department -

Muntinlupa City

Studies transport and traffic along Alabang to reduce traffic congestion

To adopt additional

knowledge on the

topic of this training.

Jerry G. Arciaga Monitoring Inspector,

Engineering Office -

Muntinlupa City

City overseer on disaster Task force illegal sidewalk

vendor

Additional Knowledge

about mobility

Alphipany G.

Roque

Operation & Warning

Technical Staff, Disaster

Risk Reduction and

Management Office -

Malabon City

Retrofitting of bridges Setting of No Parking zones Sidewalk clearing

operations for pedestrians Re-routing scheme (heavy

traffic flow) CCTV on major roads and

intersections

Additional ideas on

public safety and

traffic management

Tomas (Tomet)

Domingo

Zoning Officer, Planning

Office (Zoning division) -

Malabon City

Clearing of sidewalks No parking zones Implementation of one-way

streets

To minimize if not

eliminate traffic

Gissel B. Blanco Zoning Officer II, City

Planning and

Development Office -

Taguig City

(locational clearance and development permit)

Updating CLUP Implementation of Zoning

Ordinance

Additional knowledge

and skills

Ronnie M.

Pagkalinawan

Zoning Officer II, City

Planning and

Development Office -

Taguig City

Updating the CLUP FTI Ayala Plans for

transport modes

Additional

information/

knowledge about the

training/ seminar

NAME POSITION & CITY/

OFFICE

TRAFFIC/ TRANSPORT

RELATED INITIATIVES

EXPECTATION

Tess Quinto Chief, Research and

Statistics Division of

CPDO - Parañaque City

Daniel Jay Santos Administrative Assistant

I, Research and Statistics

Division of CPDO -

Parañaque City

To learn new things

Presentation of the Rationale of the Training Needs Analysis Mr. Lorenzo Cordova, Research Associate, IM Project

Mr. Cordova shared his excitement because of the varied representation from planning to

implementation to research in this meeting. The project team recognizes that each city has different

required expertise and hoped to widen the competencies - in terms of knowledge, skills and

orientation - of the participants at the end of this meeting.

He introduced the IM project by showing a short video. Dr. Romero heads the IM project together

with Dr. Danielle Guillen under the iBoP Asia Program of the Ateneo School of Government. The

entire program focuses on social innovations and how these innovations work for the poor and the

vulnerable. Specifically, the IM project deals with the vulnerable sector in the transport sector

composed of 80% of the total population in Metro Manila. In 2011, the IM project was funded by the

Rockefeller foundation and since then has worked with LGUs, academe and other transport

stakeholders in Metro Manila.

The development of a course on IM for professionals is one of the project components. The second

component is related to the campaign of sustainable urban transport and utilizing the IM

framework where the project team is organizing and mobilizing a multi-stakeholder IM Network.

The first organizational meeting of the Network happened last February 4, 2014 with only a few

more steps needed until the Network is completely registered formally with the Securities and

Exchange Commission. The third component consists of designing a training course for IM

professionals and give capacity building for LGUs in the field of transport and planning to address

the challenges in sustainable urban transport and IM, which is what this TNA meeting is about. The

fourth and last project component is a research on transport governance for possible indicators

veering towards the right policies for the transport system and how the national and local policies

complement each other.

This training needs analysis (TNA) meeting wishes to assess the particular competency and

development needs of the cities toward a more efficient transport system. TNA is a good

opportunity to customize the needs of the cities considering the possible dimensions on

engineering, technical, economic, social and the overall impact in the city.

The IM project team conducted few trainings on sustainable transport and climate change in which

many of the LGU offices from planning and transport offices participated. Mr. Cordova showed

another short video on the trainings that transpired. The video talked about sustainable urban

transport as being more than just infrastructure. Sustainable urban transport also includes

technology, social, economic and data that needs to be sewn together to be responsive to the

challenges of the LGUs. The project also conducted a Sustainable Urban Transport technical tour

funded by the Rockefeller foundation in Guangzhou China. Several LGU executives and technical

staff attended such as the Mayor of Muntinlupa, MMDA Chairman and Mayor of Marikina, to name a

few. All in all thirty-four participants were brought to Guangzhou to examine their transportation

system and how their Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system integrates with the walkable sidewalks,

bikeways and open spaces (i.e. public parks).

Mr. Cordova discussed the framework of inclusive mobility as composed of the following 10

principles:

1. A transport system that works for the poor and the vulnerable. Statistics say that more than

80% of the population of Metro Manila takes public transport but traffic is caused by 20% of the

population using private vehicles. In this case, transport is seen also as a social right or social

justice. A planning related question on transport is whether to focus on the 80% of the population

or the 20%? The challenge for transport planning is for it to work in both ways and not just favor a

particular sector.

2. A walkable, bikeable and accessible city. The truth is Metro Manila is not lagging behind other

cities in terms of having sustainable transport. There are some cities in developing countries that go

back to the basic ways of walking and biking just like what the city of Marikina has done with their

bikeways project. However, this type of program needs continuous housekeeping.

3. Moving people, not vehicles. If the framing of city planners is moving vehicles, it results to

traffic. The challenge related to inclusive mobility is how to move people, goods and services and

not vehicles.

4. Mobility with safety and civility. This principle is inclined toward the social side. Safety tackles

the issue on avoiding road accidents (i.e. bus accidents) that seem to be happening a lot lately.

Civility, on the other hand, is more on the moral side of the people.

5. Clean air, clean streets, clean vehicles and clean facilities. Sidewalk clearing is one initiative

that falls under this principle. Together with it is clean air by the use of e-vehicles. Technology also

has a big role in making this principle possible.

6. Planning and communicating better and travel less. This refers to careful planning of daily

routine to reduce travelling from one place to another and contribute to Metro Manila traffic.

7. Sharing information to increase connectivity and accessibility. LGUs should have readily

available data in order to help come up with informed and sound decision-making. This deals with

the most efficient way to have up to date data to be easily provided to decision makers and

researchers.

8. Making our neighborhood more accessible to the rest of the city. Transportation system is like

veins in our body that if one is clogged, the entire body will suffer. In this like, a community

stakeholder once said that opening exclusive subdivisions in Metro Manila would help decongest

traffic.

9. Changing mindsets and behaviors - authorities' as well as ours. Each one has a role but there

is a need to change one's perspective and civility.

10. Mobility of all, for all, by all. Everyone should get involved in making transportation work for

the poor and the vulnerable (i.e. pregnant, elderly and children).

In forming the IM network, the stakeholders agreed on a vision. The various stakeholders' -

composed of academe, private, NGOs, CSOs, government - vision of sustainable urban transport and

inclusive mobility for Metro Manila is:

A safe, seamless, well-connected, accessible, and user-friendly Metro Manila sustainable

urban transport system that works for all Metro Manilans, especially the poor, the

vulnerable, the disadvantaged, and the marginalized.

The LGUs respond to the challenge of sustainable transport and IM in the following manner:

1. Design and construct "complete streets" that are walking and cycling-friendly. There should be hierarchy of transport modes.

2. Create dense and inter-connected street networks that enhance accessibility 3. Ensure efficient use of right of way through traffic management and organized and paid

parking. 4. Support high quality public transport that is reliable, comfortable and frequent. 5. Maintain a compact city footprint by facilitating public transport-oriented development. If

the framing is traffic, is it leaning towards public transport or leaning towards the use of vehicles?

6. Strengthen and improve intermediate public transport for last mile connectivity.

The IM course framework should work in multiple layers with transportation as one aspect. But the

framework also looks at the overall urban development and management and sustainable

development and management. There is also a need to look at the gaps in terms of vision, policy,

implementation and evaluation. It is possible that the city has a vision but there is not enough

policy. Perhaps there are policies but not enough implementation. It is also possible that the city

implements but has no proper monitoring and evaluation mechanism in place. The overarching

component is communication and performance management. For this meeting, the project team

will look at knowledge, skills and orientation of each LGU to identify the gaps.

The core competencies of IM professionals should include:

Policies and regulations Tools and techniques Planning design Operations Management Communication

This course is intended to build the capacity of local government executives and technical staff in

the area of mobility management and sustainable transport development towards more livable

cities.

The key features of the IM course include:

5-day training course classified into introductory, intermediate and advance Should have a designed mix of disciplines that it is not solely for technical purposes Credited courses

The development of the IM course starts in this TNA meeting today by identifying challenges. The

results would be presented on March 6, 2014. Everyone will agree on the course design then the

project will develop training materials which will be validated on its applicability and helpfulness to

LGUs.

The essence of the TNA is to look at the big picture by starting with future organizational goals and

challenges. Next is to assess the required employee performance to meet the goals and challenges.

Then move on to assess required employee skills, knowledge and orientation to deliver the

performance. And lastly, identify training needs to bridge the gap (new skills, knowledge and

orientation). These are the four stages of the workshop in this TNA meeting.

Every workshop session will run for fifteen minutes with additional ten minutes allotted for open

forum. Metacards were given to the participants to write their ideas on. Each metacard should have

keywords in big bold letters to be visible by everyone in the room.

Workshop 1: Determining the Goals of the Future Performance of the Organization

The first guide question was: What key words represent your LGU's vision of sustainable

transport and IM for your city? Enumerate as many key words, 1 per metacard.

The answers were grouped as follows:

Accessible, Walkable City, To open City Alternative Route Exit System or C.A.R.E.S. Green Mobility and Smart Mobility, Environment Friendly, User-friendly, Eco-friendly,

Clean, Green, Healthy, Low carbon dioxide emission Safe, Safe and Healthy, Safe and Walkable streets Comfortable Inclusive, Balance between gender (added in plenary) Flood free Smooth flow of traffic, Flexible road Progressive city, Economical, Affordable, Profitable Sustainable, Modern Educate

The workshop result also showed that most cities see sustainable transport as a complete package,

from being environmentally sound to being citizen-friendly while some cities were specific to their

own advocacy. Answers classified per city came out as follows:

Las Piñas Accessible, Safe and Healthy, Progressive city

Pasay Accessible, Environment Friendly, Healthy, Affordable

Marikina Walkable City

Muntinlupa To open City Alternative Route Exit System or C.A.R.E.S.

Makati Green Mobility and Smart Mobility

Taguig User-friendly, Safe, Comfortable, Affordable

Parañaque Eco-friendly, Clean, Green, Low carbon dioxide emission, Economical, Profitable

Sustainable, Modern

Malabon Eco-friendly, Safe and Walkable streets, Smooth flow of traffic

Mandaluyong Safe, Flood free, Educate

Open Forum

Overall, the concept of inclusive mobility is something new to the participants. They were familiar

about the elements but they were unaccustomed to the whole IM concept.

In clarification to some of the responses, the participants expounded on some of the terms that

emerged such as Comfortable pertains to the contentment of the people in the city on their entire

well being. Progressive means rate of improvement while modern refers to development. Educate is

related to civility.

The most common answer from the participants was healthy and clean followed by

progressiveness, accessibility comes third and safety comes fourth.

Jennifer (from Makati) clarified her answer on Smart Mobility as pointing to all concerns and

aspects coming from all sectors. She perceived transport is for everyone to have access regardless

of one's economic stature.

Robert (from Mandaluyong) said that the problem is mostly on program/policy implementation. As

an example he mentioned a case during elections when the poor do things for a living that could

obstruct traffic and is highly tolerated during that period. The LGUs should be consistent with

implementation hence, political will is critical in inclusive mobility.

Workshop 2: Identification of Challenges that the LGU might face in the Future

The question for the second stage of the TNA was: What are the key challenges that our LGUs face

in the area of inclusive mobility?

The participants were asked to identify the challenges in terms of:

VISION GAPS (eg. no vision; vision not responsive to the needs of constituents; vision unrealistic, vision uninformed by local and foreign exemplars)

POLICY GAPS (eg. lack of adequate enactments and mandates) IMPLEMENTATION GAPS (eg. lack of operationalization, projectization, and actual

performance)

EVALUATION GAPS (eg. lack of measurement of actual achievements)

The answers gathered were as follows:

VISION GAPS Not on strategic point of view of leader results to non inclusion in the

Vision (Parañaque)

Lack of framework (Parañaque)

Vision is tantamount to politics

Lack of awareness

POLICY GAPS Lack of political will (Las Piñas)

No existing policy on IM (Parañaque)

Prioritization

Lack of information (Muntinlupa)

IMPLEMENTATION GAPS Information dissemination (Taguig)

Financial Constraint

Poor Implementation of Policy (Malabon)

Dialogue with stakeholders (Makati)

Not applicable/ suitable

EVALUATION GAPS List of indicators/ standards (Makati)

Sustainability

Continuity

Open Forum

Ms. Guillen gave an IM viewpoint upon noticing that the participants found the concept a bit

complex to connect with transportation challenges. She mentioned that inclusive mobility uses a

top to bottom and bottoms up approach where they work simultaneously on getting executives

(local chief executives) and top officials as well as the various stakeholders such as the

communities, NGOs, CSOs, private, government, poor and vulnerable sector to understand and fully

grasp the entire inclusive mobility idea. Inclusive mobility requires looking at the entire picture and

not just focusing on individual advocacies. The notion of inclusivity in the local government context

wants to show that each city in Metro Manila is doing something toward having sustainable urban

transport which Metro Manila as an entity need to undergo. The event where everyone gets to

share their own experience (especially those who were successful) is a useful tool for replication to

other cities or scaling up.

She also reiterated that in this training needs analysis meeting, the IM project team wants to find

out what else is missing in the realm of local government when it comes to inclusive mobility.

Contrary to what the participants think, inclusive mobility does not depend on the administration.

Inclusivity is looking at the big picture, on Metro Manila's sustainable urban transport entirety. The

push for their desire to connect all that is happening on transport and mobility and highlight the

key challenges that each LGU face with regard to promoting and fulfilling a true inclusive mobility.

Some cities might highlight pedestrianization but ultimately, the IM course should respond to the

needs of each city.

Tess (from Parañaque) gave her observation that in city planning, the planners look at roads mostly

for the benefit of private vehicles but not for pedestrians. The city plans evidently do not reflect

inclusiveness as pedestrian lanes are used for other purposes so people are forced to walk along the

road.

Workshop 3: Determining Employee Performance in order to respond to the

Challenges and Attain Goals

The guide questions for the third stage of the TNA were: How should the employees in your city

government start performing differently to help you meet the challenges and take us to the

goal of inclusive mobility? What kinds of skills are needed? Can we start with policy research?

How do we make employees more oriented to inclusive mobility?

The response of the participants were categorized in terms of knowledge, skills and orientation:

KNOWLEDGE Project programming and approval

Leveraging LGPMS

National policy/ mandated at the national level

SKILLS Policy

Awareness in project development cycle

ORIENTATION Creation of Technical Working Group (TWG)

Inclusion in plans (e.g vendors)

Challenge in current plantilla position of LGUs

Inter-LGU TWG

Open Forum

Aniel (from Parañaque) mentioned two things: 1) For the LGUs to start with awareness especially

with the key employees that are contributory to inclusive mobility. Look at the existing policies in

the cities and find out the gaps to see the things that need to be implemented by the policy makers.

It is best to start with the foundation, the subset of government employees who are aware of their

responsibility in bringing inclusive mobility to the city. 2) Get into a more holistic approach but

using a strategic point of view. To meet the challenges, there should be a holistic vision that

requires a paradigm shift by the leaders. The thinking should not be about eliminating people in the

streets instead creating harmony with the transport sector. The policies should aim for a win-win

solution.

Jennifer (from Makati) said that the IM role should not be assigned to a particular division or

department only, rather everyone in the LGU should be involved. All departments should have an

appreciation of inclusive mobility and all stakeholders should be involved to generate better ideas.

Leonida (from Las Piñas) suggested creating a technical working group on inclusive mobility.

Tess (from Parañaque) said that the presentation of Executive Legislative Agenda and the Annual

Investment Plan of LGUs could be a venue for awareness by political or legislative leaders including

department heads, council and barangay captains. It is pivotal to create awareness and advocacy

first especially at the top level.

In terms of scoring system for career, there is no point or bearing to go an extra mile for IM. What can

LGU employees do?

Achiles (from Pasay) recognized that it would be difficult to include the practice of IM in the present

duties and responsibilities of LGU employees. He proposed creating a new line item or position to

focus mainly or specifically on inclusive mobility. Some people will have to be directly involved but

people in planning must have the strength to incorporate IM in the plans. There is a knowledge

component, orientation and skills/ competency required in making this possible.

Leonida (from Las Piñas) acknowledged that as of the moment, IM is not yet embedded in LGU

policies, plans and programs, however she appreciated that fact that in the creation of an LGU's AIP,

inclusive mobility should be integrated. She proposed to organize a training workshop for

awareness purposes. It is best to start with knowledge and orientation on the IM concept then

followed by specific LGU assignments. Mainstreaming IM in LGU undertakings and business

operations is key before application. It would also help to have a specific mandate coming from the

national government because laws might already be in place in relation to inclusive mobility but

they are not explicitly identified as IM.

Roberto (from Mandaluyong) commented that there are different groups who offer courses on

sustainable urban transport already. What is IM's assurance that this training course on IM for

professionals will not be duplication?

Ms. Danielle responded by saying that this is exactly the purpose of the having a TNA meeting

today. The TNA meeting would aid in identifying the value added by the IM training course to

professionals. For one, UP-NCTS who offers a course on sustainable transport is more engineering-

oriented. They are more technical in looking at things. The project team wanted to look at the

perspective of various sectors and offers another perspective. UP-NCPAG is more inclined to

governance and politics as compared to the combination of everything, emphasizing inclusiveness,

which is what the IM training course intends to bring. Mobility for all is still non-existent in cities

and the IM project team would like to fill in the missing piece(s).

Dr. Guillen assured everyone in the table that everything gathered from the workshops and all

outputs are brought up to the respective LGU leaders, hence IM using the bottom up and top to

bottom approach. The IM project team most certainly does not want to emulate or rehash the

training done by other institutions. The team is definitely also not competing with other institutions

giving almost similar course on transport, rather, the team wants to highlight what the LGUs are

doing on sustainable transport that are related to IM. The intention of the development of a training

course is not adversarial. The main difference with others who are more technical in doing

conducting training but the IM course would enlighten decision makers how to make informed

decisions that revolves around inclusive mobility. IM is advocating and focuses on change for the

people who are most affected and not how. Some do not address this issue and there is not much on

inclusiveness. Other institutions are not political in their method but more technical while the IM

training course is in a sense political that changes the distribution of values in the society and

affects the behavior in the institutional and customer level.

Dr. Guillen was also a bit surprised that IM is not yet embedded in the LGU level. She reiterated that

the notion of inclusive mobility is not to solve traffic rather increase mobility for all. The LGUs can

be champions on IM and inspire others to change their perspective on sustainable urban transport.

Workshop 4: Identification of needed new skills, knowledge and attitude of the Employees

The guide question for this stage was: In order for employees to respond accordingly to the

challenges, what kind of new competencies do they need to have?

The responses of the participants are summarized in the table below and classified into new

knowledge, new skills and new orientation needed

NEW KNOWLEDGE Benchmark models (local and international)

Social media techniques for social audit

Setting up computer systems

NEW SKILLS Project Management

Dealing with media and politicians

Crafting and support for ordinance addressing social issues

NEW ORIENTATION Inter-department cooperation and management

Open Forum

Daniel (from Parañaque) proposed that in terms of project management, the team should consider

a more rounded policy management.

Roberto (from Mandaluyong) recommends including sanctions to those who disobey policies (eg.

structures built on sidewalks and illegal parking that obstructs traffic and mobility) Dr. Romero

said that social media could be used to get reports on these violations in a process called Social

Audit and Monitoring. But Roberto Javier raised a concern regarding violations committed by

politicians, he was curious about who gives sanctions to these officials.

Engr. Calvin (from Marikina) said that with reference to their city, city ordinances in relation to IM

are present but implementation is key. From an IM point of view, there is a need to modify

ordinances to promote accessibility. (i.e. assign or set a specific place for informal settlers to hold

their wake to avoid obstructing traffic in using roads to hold funerals)

Synthesis and Moving Forward

The project team's initial idea for the basic IM training course is to hold it in five days consisting of

three days worth of inputs and two days working on a project in the municipality that is IM

oriented. The project could either be a new project or a continuing project.

The project team posed various (existing) courses from academic institutions on the wall and the

participants were given five sticker dots to choose the top five topics that they feel were most

relevant to the IM course.

There were 28 possible key areas that could be studied or be included in the IM course. The project

team deemed it best to limit and prioritize which among the list of options are applicable for the

respective cities. The participants should consider the topics that will have huge contribution to

enhance the knowledge, skills and orientation towards promoting a sustainable transport and IM.

Jennifer (from Marikina) expressed her hopes of translating the figures as result of this exercise

outcome-based.

Dr. Romero affirmed that the perceived outcome from this exercise is for the LGUs to promote IM in

their respective cities. The input is for trainees from the LGUs to come up with a design and

implementation of IM projects. This may require a level of acceptance by the respective Mayors that

the IM training course would not only be a series of lectures but also be their advocacy. The project

team offered to talk to the LGUs' respective Human Resource department and Mayors since the

Mayor's pronouncement is needed before the training starts. Technically, the IM training course

should start with the Mayors. It is possible that not all LGUs could participate in the IM course. The

project team sees that only the cities whose local chief executives are sold to the idea would begin

with the training.

Below are the 28 topics posted on the wall with the corresponding voting tally in parenthesis.

1. Transitional to Low Carbon Transport (0) 2. Climate Finance for Low Carbon Transport (0) 3. Sustainable Mobility Events (0) 4. Housing and Mobility (0) 5. Survey Methods in Transportation (0) 6. Transportation Modeling (0) 7. Active Travel Audits (0) 8. Transport Technologies (1) 9. Transportation Economics (1) 10. Safety and Social Issues (1) 11. Tourism and Mobility (1) 12. Mobility Management and Travel Awareness (2) 13. Project Management (2) 14. Stakeholder Analysis and Involvement (2) 15. Special Problems in Transportation Planning (2) 16. City/ Municipal Mobility Management (2) 17. Public Transport Services (2)

18. Sustainable Mobility Campaigns (2) 19. Transport and Health (3) 20. Transportation Planning Analysis and Techniques (3) 21. Transportation Plan and Project Evaluation (3) 22. Public Transportation and Operations Planning (4) 23. Children and Mobility (5) 24. Theory and Practice of Transportation Planning (6) 25. Urban Growth and Strategies for Sustainable Development (8) 26. Transportation Policies and Planning Practices (10) 27. Monitoring and Evaluation of Mobility Management Activities (11) 28. Sustainable Transport and Climate Change (11)

Out of the twenty-eight choices, seven got zero scores. The top five key areas chosen by the

participants were:

1. Sustainable Transport and Climate Change (11) 2. Monitoring and Evaluation of Mobility Management Activities (11) 3. Transportation Policies and Planning Practices (10) 4. Urban Growth and Strategies for Sustainable Development (8) 5. Theory and Practice of Transportation Planning (6)

The top subjects were all leaning to the operational and social side of transportation while the

scientific and technical subjects were regarded much less applicable. The project team guaranteed

that even those without scores would be considered in course development but the top 5 would be

their key priority. They recognized that each subject is important and interrelated.

In the future, the project team plans to make the IM course more fitted to all LGUs and they also

intend to develop courses that are LGU specific.

After this TNA meeting, the team will draft a course and curriculum design, which will be presented

on March 6 to the same group present in this meeting. The same group of attendees hopes to

validate the course design.

The IM project team would serve as intermediary. There will be instances when people on the

ground will serve as resource persons and LGU representatives are the experts but there will also

be instances when the course would need expertise from abroad. It was acknowledged that there

are many international models on IM that may be successful but may not be applicable to the LGU

setting here in Metro Manila.

The project team sees this course development working in both ways. One is building the capacity

of LGUs that within itself they harness a pool of experts. This is why they encourage the

participation and cooperation of the junior and senior level to attend for continuity and capability

building.

Closing

In behalf of ASoG and the IM project team, Mr. Cordova thanked everyone for giving their time and

hoped that they the same group of participants will join them again on March 6.