False Equivalencies, False Hopes

Iloilo City Mayor Jerry Treñas raised very valid concerns regarding the water distribution services in the city, an attitude expected of leaders worth their salt.

His firm stance on improving public services, including utilities, deserves recognition. Indeed, the city grapples with a serious water distribution problem, one that has been deeply entrenched for decades, buried beneath rapid urbanization and outdated infrastructure.

But to compare two entities with separate and different operations and regulatory environments is misleading and potentially counterproductive. Such comparisons often overlook crucial contextual factors that shape how each organization functions, the constraints they operate under, and the unique challenges they face.

Comparing different entities operating under distinct regulatory environments does not necessarily lead to effective solutions.

The mayor recently drew a parallel between Metro Pacific Iloilo Water (MPIW), the city’s water provider, and MORE Power, the electricity distributor.

While his frustration over MPIW’s slow improvements is understandable, the comparison is not only misleading but also potentially counterproductive. Different industries function under separate operational constraints, distinct regulatory frameworks, and unique developmental challenges.

These false equivalencies can lead to inappropriate expectations, flawed policy recommendations, and missed opportunities for meaningful improvements tailored to each entity’s specific circumstances.

A more productive approach would be to evaluate each organization within its own operational context, acknowledging both the universal principles that should apply across sectors and the legitimate differences that necessitate distinct approaches.

Comparing MPIW to MORE Power overlooks fundamental differences between the two utilities:

1. Infrastructure differences: Water systems require extensive physical infrastructure (treatment plants, underground pipe networks) that face different geographic and environmental challenges than electrical distribution.
2. Resource availability: Water utilities depend on natural resource availability (rivers, groundwater) that electricity distributors don’t face in the same way.
3. Regulatory frameworks: Water and electricity sectors likely operate under different regulatory structures with distinct permitting processes, as evidenced by MPIW waiting for DPWH, DENR, and other permits.
4. Development timelines: Large-scale water infrastructure projects like desalination plants and dams typically require longer implementation periods than electrical system upgrades.
5. Underground vs. surface operations: This distinction is particularly significant. MPIW must manage an extensive underground pipeline network, which presents unique challenges:

– Leak detection and maintenance require specialized equipment and techniques

– Pipeline repairs involve disruptive excavation work in urban areas

– Underground infrastructure assessment is inherently more difficult and time-consuming

– Environmental factors like soil conditions and groundwater affect underground systems

– Construction and expansion projects require more extensive permitting and coordination with other underground utilities

In contrast, MORE Power’s primarily above-ground infrastructure allows for more visible monitoring, easier access for repairs, and typically faster implementation of expansions or upgrades.

Expecting MPIW to match MORE Power’s rate of progress disregards these operational differences. While both utilities are essential, their challenges and solutions are not interchangeable. Rather than forcing a comparison, a more productive approach would be to evaluate MPIW’s performance based on realistic water sector benchmarks.

This, of course, does not absolve MPIW of accountability. The company must accelerate improvements, enhance transparency, and find innovative ways to overcome regulatory and logistical roadblocks. However, the discussion should focus on practical solutions tailored to the water industry’s specific constraints rather than misleading comparisons that create false hopes among Ilonggos.

Mayor Treñas’ leadership is crucial in ensuring MPIW is held to account, but it should be done with a framework that acknowledges the complexities of the water sector. Iloilo City needs realistic, sector-specific strategies to resolve its water crisis, not misplaced analogies that risk derailing meaningful progress.