The Missing Link in Philippine Infrastructure: Local Governments

In the Philippines, project implementation lives and dies at the local level. National projects identified under the Philippines’ “Build Better More” initiative, such as the Central Luzon Link Expressway (CLLEX), represent more than just infrastructure. They are litmus tests for governance. Yet time and again, these projects stall not for lack of ambition, but for lack of execution capacity.

Infrastructure bottlenecks are not new. Past administrations, including Aquino III and Duterte, encountered significant delays due to land acquisition conflicts or right-of-way (ROW) delays at the local level. CLLEX Phase I, scheduled for July 2025, connects agricultural hubs to major highways. The project exemplifies the tension between national ambition and real-world results. Due to valuation disputes, delayed compensation, and title inconsistencies, the project ran into five years of delays. The Bataan-Cavite Interlink Bridge, which aims to cut travel time between Central Luzon and the Calabarzon region by several hours, has been beset by delays.

The central government has sought to tackle these problems. The 2025 Accelerated and Reformed Right-of-Way (ARROW) Act and the 2024 Real Property Valuation and Assessment Reform Act (RPVARA) reflect the government’s recognition of these policy bottlenecks. These laws introduce standardised protocols for land acquisition, mandate the creation of ROW action plans, and enforce valuation standards. But without local capacity to implement these procedures, these reforms risk stalling. Many municipalities lack trained personnel who understand updated valuation methods and other ROW issues.

This gap is not just technical, but institutional. Staff turnover, limited interagency coordination, and the absence of permanent infrastructure oversight units at the local level mean that each new project often starts from scratch. Local government units (LGUs), which include provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays (smaller units of local government), are expected to manage not only land access but also regulatory challenges in areas like digital connectivity, data governance, and cybersecurity compliance.

Not all LGUs falter. The Davao City Bulk Water Supply Project (DCBWSP), the country’s largest private bulk water facility, was delivered on schedule owing to collaboration between local agencies and private partners. Operational since December 2023, it now serves over one million residents. In Pangasinan, the provincial government partnered with San Miguel Corporation to deliver the Pangasinan Link Expressway (PLEx), a toll road running from Binalonan to Lingayen. Owing to LGU support in securing land and permits, the project was able to break ground in 2024. PLEx illustrates how empowered LGUs can help launch high-impact infrastructure in coordination with private partners through early-stage land and permit facilitation. When LGUs are resourced and aligned, they can coordinate technical execution and cross-sector collaboration.

The question is no longer whether LGUs can deliver, but how quickly they can be empowered to lead. Encouragingly, the Philippines appears to be on the right path.

While the ARROW Act and RPVARA are important legislative steps, they cannot succeed unless subnational actors are resourced to meet their obligations. Otherwise, these policies amount to little more than technocratic optimism. Empowering LGUs to deliver on infrastructure mandates requires technical assistance, long-term investment in a professionalised civil service, and better coordination between national agencies and local counterparts.

Some support mechanisms already exist. The 2017 Local Road Network Development Plan requires provinces to create integrated, data-driven road plans to qualify for the Conditional Matching Grant to Provinces (CMGP) funding. Provinces are aligning road priorities with national strategies, improving project execution and maintenance. While the programme has shown results, gaps in coordination and local capacity remain.

To improve delivery, the government could establish permanent infrastructure units within LGUs, scale up grants like CMGP, and provide targeted assistance in planning, procurement, and project management. Strengthening interagency coordination between local governments, the Department of Public Works and Highways, and utility providers can help prevent overlaps and reduce costly delays.

Political realities cannot be ignored even with reforms. President Marcos Jr.’s political capital is already under question as the 2028 presidential election nears. This pattern was observed during the Aquino-Duterte transition, when several municipalities delayed finalising PPP agreements pending clarity on new fiscal priorities. To mitigate this, Marcos must act swiftly: scale up performance-tied budget incentives, institutionalise project commitments through multi-year agreements, and formalise coordination via the League of Provinces and League of Cities. These are national associations of governors and mayors that serve as platforms for policy dialogue and intergovernmental engagement.

Despite progress, implementation remains inconsistent across provinces. Infrastructure performance depends on the effective management of land acquisition, procurement, and interagency coordination. But this gap is not solely technical; it is systemic. LGUs often lack capacity because they lack consistent funding, staffing pipelines, and long-term support — this creates a classic chicken-and-egg problem. National reforms expect local implementation, yet LGUs are rarely equipped with the tools to deliver. Even well-designed legislation risks becoming performative if it assumes institutional readiness that does not exist. For infrastructure policy to succeed, national planners must recognise that execution is reform, and not just a downstream task.

Where support systems are in place, LGUs can deliver. The focus now must shift to scaling these conditions nationally. The question is no longer whether LGUs can deliver, but how quickly they can be empowered to lead. Encouragingly, the Philippines appears to be on the right path. With continued investment, scaled technical support, and sustained political will, it has the potential to become a regional model for locally anchored infrastructure development — one where national ambition is made real by local capability.

2025/233