Green Convergence (GC) held its 428th Kamayan Para sa Kalikasan forum, themed “New Manila International Airport in Bulacan: Is it Necessary?,” on February 20, via Zoom and Facebook livestream, tackling the impacts of the construction of the New Manila International Airport (NMIA) in Bulakan, Bulacan, and the processes taken to reach its approval.
Opening the forum, GC Public Relations Officer David D’Angelo emphasized the need for the continuous conversation despite questions on whether the public’s opinions matter, given that the construction of the NMIA is around 90% complete.
He added that there still is a necessity in further broadening the understanding of both sides of the coin—the pros and the cons—and to figure out how people can altogether ‘make things better for ecological sustainability.’
Atty. Julius Victor Degala, Department Head of the Bulacan Environment and Natural Resources Office, presented the provincial government’s position, explaining that the NMIA is intended to address increasing air traffic demand and complement the Ninoy Aquino International Airport.
He noted that, while some traffic may be diverted to Clark International Airport, its distance of about 90 km from Metro Manila limits its capacity to fully decongest the metro, making Bulacan a strategically viable “Gateway to the North.”
Atty. Degala clarified that the 2,565-hectare project, located in Barangays Taliptip and Bambang in Bulakan, is privately implemented by San Miguel Aerocity Inc. under a 50-year Build-Operate-Transfer concession agreement with the national government through the Department of Transportation.
He added that phase one, which is targeted for completion in 2026, includes two runways and a modern terminal designed to accommodate 35 million passengers annually, with long-term plans to expand to four runways and a capacity of up to 100 million passengers per year.
In line with Republic Act No. 11506 and other environmental and aviation regulations, Atty. Degala said that the project is nationally regulated and must comply with the Philippine Environmental Impact Statement system, civil aviation rules, land acquisition laws, and public participation requirements.
He said the Provincial Development and Physical Framework Plan (PDPFP) views the airport not merely as a transport facility but as growth-inducing infrastructure expected to expand trade and logistics, attract investors, generate employment, and help tourism while integrating disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation measures.
On the other hand, Architect and Environmental Planner Dr. Nathaniel “Dinky” von Einsiedel questioned the viability of the current site, stressing that the issue is not the need for a new airport but its location within a flood-prone environment at the confluence of major river systems draining into Manila Bay.
He shared hydrological data indicating that the 2,500-hectare reclamation area sits on what he described as the “hydraulic heart of Central Bulacan,” where floodwaters from the Pampanga River basin naturally discharge.
Linked with this hydrologic concern, he warned that burying river mouths and natural flow channels could worsen floods in surrounding municipalities, which currently is already experienced by the residents of Bulacan.
Dr. Von Einsiedel also raised geohazard concerns, referencing warnings about potential strong ground shaking and liquefaction linked to the West Valley Fault System, as well as findings that sea level rise in Manila Bay has exceeded global averages due to subsidence and other factors.
Furthermore, he discussed biodiversity losses, noting that mangrove forests, which were designated as protected zones, have reportedly been cleared, affecting habitats of migratory birds and nursery grounds for fish.
Dr. Von Einsiedel added that around 3,000 residents were reportedly displaced, with allegations from affected families and civil society groups of coercive consultations and insufficient compensation, involving even military personnel in the acts of coercion.
From a geologist’s perspective, Mines and Geosciences Bureau Region 3 Director Noel Lacadin described the site as part of a soft, deltaic location influenced by river runoff from Northern Luzon and compounded by siltation from the 1990 earthquake and the 1991 Mount Pinatubo eruption, requiring extensive engineering and stabilization.
Moreover, Environmental Management Bureau Region 3 Chief Raldy Pagador explained that the project went through the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process under a Category B Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
The project was issued an Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) in 2021 after review and online public hearings conducted during the pandemic, noting also that the EIA study is accessible through the regional office’s website.
In the open forum, participants questioned the effectiveness and transparency of the EIA system, raising concerns that the NMIA’s proponents primarily identify and mitigate their own project risks and that impacts of multiple reclamation projects in Manila Bay were not fully considered.
Residents of Bulacan and civil society representatives also expressed that they are facing worsening floods, declining fisheries income, and gaps in local government review, while government officials responded that hydrologic studies and quarterly monitoring are in place and that the compliance with ECC conditions is being tracked.
Participants also called for genuine public access to EIA documents in respect to their freedom of information and greater accountability in light of alleged violations, while raising questions about alternative airport proposals, such as the then-studied Sangley Point.
The open forum concluded with recommendations: Review and possibly update the EIA and ECC system; require pre-feasibility studies to really determine whether a large-scale project should even proceed to a feasibility study or not; ground decisions on science and ensure development goes with nature, not against nature; guarantee transparent and fair compensation for affected communities; consider simultaneous dredging of all rivers to manage flood pathways; involve multisectoral groups in monitoring; and revisit policies on conversion of alienable and disposable lands in environmentally sensitive areas.
Tying up the discussions, GC President Victoria Segovia delivered her closing remarks, stating that the issue of the NMIA project has more questions and issues than solutions and that it represents a major test of balancing development with environmental protection in the country.
“The real issue now is not just about building the airport—people say that it is also a necessity for national development. What we should do now is to pay attention to ensure that the mitigation measures are in place so that the project is climate resilient, environmentally sustainable, protective of communities, and carefully managed in the long term,” Segovia said, emphasizing that collaboration is crucial.
The next Kamayan forum will be on March 20, 2026.
Kamayan Para Sa Kalikasan is a monthly initiative organized by Green Convergence that enables non-government organizations, government representatives, the media, students, teachers, church groups, and concerned citizens to discuss, analyze, and create solutions to pressing environmental issues in the country.
For those interested to be a member of Green Convergence, visit this link to register: bit.ly/GCMembershipRegForm.
#GreenConvergence #KamayanParaSaKalikasan #NewManilaInternationalAirport