The temporary closure of the main runway of the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (Naia) due to emergency pavement repairs on Monday underscores the urgent need for the country to have a new international airport.
The Naia’s age and years of sloppy maintenance have made traveling in and out of the facility a virtual nightmare for local and foreign travelers. In that singular incident alone, some 10 international and domestic flights had to be diverted to the Clark International Airport in Pampanga, resulting in delayed or canceled flights all over the country. To say that such inconvenience is causing irreparable damage to the country’s image in the international community is an understatement. The Duterte administration has to act fast to put an end to the hardship air travelers have had to endure inside the dilapidated structure.
In our last column, we detailed the proposal of Dennis Wright, president of Peregrine Development International, to build a new world-class airport in Clark Freeport, explaining that it is currently the only location that can immediately host a new airport.
In a nutshell, Wright is saying that his proposal doesn’t mean the government should focus on the Clark Freeport alone, clarifying that the country still needs the Naia and another airport. In this respect, I believe that the proposal of San Miguel Corp. to construct an airport on the reclaimed area on Roxas Boulevard is still viable, going by Wright’s belief that the Philippines needs at least three major airports servicing its people and visitors.
The main beef of those against having the Clark Freeport as a host to the new airport is its distance from Metro Manila, which is admittedly a myopic view, considering that not all air travelers reside in the metropolis. They are saying that a high-speed railway to connect Clark to metro center is not only expensive, but problematic, as well, since right-of-way issues are bound to hound its construction.
There is a lot of misconception related to the benefits of high-speed rail transport. Wright says no one should be advocating for the Naia’s closure. He explains that countries need more than one major airport. In effect, anyone living in Makati and nearby areas could still use the Naia, in much the same way that a resident in Washington, D.C., can use National, Dulles or Baltimore Washington International Airport, or an individual living in New York could use the John F. Kennedy International Airport, La Guardia or Newark Airport.
Furthermore, rail transportation is not necessary between the two airports, because airlines generally do not link routes between sister airports in the same city. For example, no one flies into Narita and connects out of Haneda, or flies into O’Hare and out of Midway. So passengers rarely need or would use a rail connection between the airports.
While there are some benefits to building high-speed rail, it is not a prerequisite. One should look into what the high-speed rail is supposed to do. Some say that it will connect the Naia and Clark with stops in Bonifacio Global City and/or Makati and, perhaps, North Edsa. But this benefits only a few, and does not address the needs of millions living outside the metropolis.
Clark catchment basin
Here is Wright’s point of view: “There are over 23 million people living in the Clark catchment basin. This catchment basin is easy to understand. Do you live, timewise, closer to Clark or the Naia? The catchment is comprised of those who live in Regions 1, 2, and 3, Cordillera Administrative Region, and the northern environs of Caloocan, Malabon, Navotas and Valenzuela (Camanava). Now, consider how each of these 23-plus million residents will be forced to travel on Edsa to get to the Naia, when they could more easily fly in and out of Clark? Similarly, the $6 billion in exports from Clark, not to mention other shipments going to or from the catchment basin, by and large, go in and out of the Port of Manila because of insufficient use of the Port of Subic (where similar situations can be found in the Port of Batangas and Southern Luzon).
“For every passenger and truck in the catchment basin, diverting to Clark or Subic would be one less on the already overcrowded Metro Manila infrastructure. And the cost to the government is nothing more than political will—just promote the airport at Clark (and the ports of Subic and Batangas, as well). There is no downside to the expansion of the Clark airport (or either port). Quite the contrary, its growth would provide a variety of benefits, including a second major international gateway in Luzon as an alternative to the Naia [which would serve as] a major metropolitan center to help alleviate Metro Manila congestion and an economic stimulus to the national economy. It would be a huge economic multiplier.”
Economic impact
Airports are a great economic stimulant. We’ve seen how they arouse and drive economic development worldwide. Dr. John Kasarda and Greg Lindsay, who collaborated in their recent book Aerotropolis—The Way We Live Next are two of the most preeminent scholars, authors and experts on airports, urbanization and the economic impact of airports.
Wright says Kasarda and Lindsay have documented that Class A office space in and around new airports often exceeds that of comparable space in the metropolitan cities they support, and that retail-shopping space returns revenues per square meter of floor space up to six times that of comparable malls in the nearby cities.
He concludes: “Airports generate jobs, expand the tax base and stimulate the economy. Times have changed; the economy has changed. If [the country’s leaders] could understand the demographics and effects of urbanization, they would quickly realize that Clark needs to be more aggressively marketed and developed—now!”
For comments and suggestions, e-mail me at mvala.v@gmail.com