On November 17, 2025, the National Innovation Council formally approved a ₱6,793,000 grant to Naga City for an ambitious project titled: “AI-Empowered People-Centric Sustainable Transport and Land Use Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation System.” The initiative, spearheaded under Mayor Maria Leonor G. Robredo and endorsed by Project Development Officer Trish-Marie O. Albeus, positions Naga as the first local government unit in the Philippines to pilot AI-driven urban planning under the Department of Economy, Planning, and Development (DEPDev) grant and framework.

The project—identified by proposal code 2025-00184-00442—is still undergoing negotiation for final terms. But even at this early stage, it signals a shift: from reactive planning toward predictive, data-informed governance.

Urban mobility and spatial planning remain persistent governance bottlenecks across Philippine cities. Metro Manila alone reportedly loses ₱3.5 billion daily to traffic congestion, based on longstanding JICA estimates. Left unchecked, those losses are projected to climb past ₱5 billion per day by 2035. Meanwhile, smaller urban centers like Naga grapple with limited transport planning tools and aging infrastructure, even as they face mounting climate and hazard risks.

Inefficiencies also show up in less visible ways: poorly coordinated land use, overlapping permits, vulnerable development sites, and minimal public feedback in planning cycles. A system that uses AI to integrate traffic flows, hazard maps, and project timelines into a unified platform could radically improve how decisions are made—and monitored—at the local level.

What We Know About the System So Far

According to initial public descriptions, the proposed AI system will combine three main capabilities: traffic flow analysis, hazard-risk screening for proposed development sites, and project implementation tracking to flag potential delays. While the full technical specifications and terms of reference are still pending release, this integrated approach reflects trends already in motion across other public agencies, such as adaptive traffic signaling systems in Metro Manila and risk-informed platforms like HazardHunterPH.

The project is aligned with broader policy goals under the Philippine Innovation Act and the National Innovation Agenda & Strategy Document (NIASD) 2023–2032, which both emphasize digital transformation, resilience, and people-centered design in governance.

The Larger Context: A System that Cities Need

Across the country, urban design has historically prioritized vehicles over people. Walkability studies show that only about a third of destinations in major cities fall within a comfortable 15-minute range for pedestrians. Sidewalks are often narrow or obstructed, bike lanes fragmented, and transport planning reactive rather than anticipatory.

The result? Cities that are hard to navigate, expensive to manage, and frequently hazardous during extreme weather events.

Integrating datasets from agencies like PHIVOLCS, MGB, DPWH, and NAMRIA into local decision-support systems could prevent poor land-use choices and reduce risk exposure. That, in turn, could free up public funds for better infrastructure, faster response, and more inclusive development, especially for low-income and hazard-prone communities.

What Makes the Naga Model Noteworthy

Rather than relying solely on static planning documents or third-party consultants, the proposed system aims to embed a digital feedback loop into everyday governance. By fusing real-time traffic data with spatial and environmental risk assessments, the city could evolve toward adaptive governance, where plans are continuously updated based on live data, and residents can be kept in the loop through more accessible public information portals.

Because the initiative is funded through the National Innovation Fund, it’s also expected to undergo public reporting, including procurement and performance milestones. That makes it a valuable test case not just for AI in governance, but for transparency and accountability in innovation spending.

For the public to assess the true value and viability of the project, several key documents have yet to be disclosed: the full proposal form, technical annex, system architecture, data inventories, privacy impact assessments, KPIs, and monitoring and evaluation plans.

In many cases, such details only become available at the terms of reference or procurement stage via PhilGEPS or local bidding sites. Still, early publication of these materials could help build public trust and foster collaboration with civic tech, academic, or planning organizations that could enrich the project’s development.

The Naga City AI City Planner may only be one project among many in the national innovation pipeline, but its stakes are high. If successful, it could provide a replicable model for other local governments, especially mid-sized cities balancing urban growth, mobility, and climate risk.

But innovation doesn’t end at software delivery. It must include inclusive design, ethical data use, and public transparency. If these pillars hold, Naga won’t just be testing a tool; t’ll be testing a system of governance built for the public, powered by data, and shaped by civic intent.

‍