Experts push evidence-based reforms to curb flood project corruption

By Joseph Bernard A. Marzan

MANILA — Experts affiliated with Harvard University and the University of the Philippines have urged Philippine policymakers to adopt science-based reforms and independent oversight to reduce corruption and enhance the effectiveness of flood control projects nationwide.

In a policy recommendation paper released on Oct. 15, 2025, Dr. Vincenzo Bollettino, director of the Program on Resilient Communities at the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative, and Dr. Pamela Gloria Cajilig, a professorial lecturer at the UP College of Architecture and an Atlantic Fellow for Health Equity, warned that corruption in flood control programs continues to erode public trust and heighten communities’ vulnerability to climate-related disasters.

“As the Philippines continues to top the World Risk Index, we respectfully urge Congress to take specific, evidence-based steps to restore integrity to flood risk management,” the researchers said.

The paper, titled Policy Recommendations for Strengthening Public Trust and Integrity in Philippine Flood Control Through Scientific Evidence, outlined three key reforms.

These include mandating independent and transparent evaluation and oversight for all major flood control and disaster resilience projects; requiring integrated flood risk management that combines engineering with land use planning, nature-based solutions, and community engagement; and institutionalizing evidence-based and open science to ensure that interventions are tailored to local conditions and data is accessible to the public.

Bollettino and Cajilig proposed the formation of multi-sector oversight commissions composed of community representatives, civil society, academics, scientists, and engineers to monitor flood control projects from planning to post-construction maintenance.

They also called for legal protections and capacity-building for civil society monitors to ensure their continued participation and access to infrastructure oversight.

The authors cited World Bank and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) protocols that require third-party monitoring and evaluation throughout an infrastructure project’s life cycle.

They also highlighted international models from Japan, France, and the Netherlands where river basin committees composed of diverse stakeholders manage flood control projects, reducing technical errors and preventing corruption.

In addition, they emphasized the value of nature-based solutions such as watershed restoration, rainwater harvesting, and wetland rehabilitation.

They cited a France-based study assessing 83 nature-based solutions in the Alps, which found a 280 percent return on investment—or at least EUR 2.80 for every EUR 1 invested.

Local initiatives like Manila Water’s “i-Float” project in Marikina City, which used participatory research to reduce flooding and waste blockages, were also recognized as effective models of science-driven community engagement.

The authors stressed the importance of developing “a culture of scientific integrity” in disaster risk management and investing in capacity-building for independent evaluation and citizen science.

“[I]ndependent, science-based oversight and public participation lead to better-quality, corruption-resistant infrastructure that saves lives and resources,” the paper stated.

“Filipino researchers, who have long been on the frontlines of disaster risk reduction, must be included in all major disaster infrastructure projects,” they added.

The policy recommendation comes amid growing public scrutiny over multi-billion-peso flood control projects in the Philippines that have faced criticism for inefficiency, cost overruns, and alleged irregularities.