Social and environmental impacts of road improvements in the Philippines

Abstract

Environmental and social risks are major concerns of the government to ensure the safety of the people. Integrating Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) tool in analyzing possible impacts solidifies the projected strategic plan of the management concerned. In assessing different strategies on how to aid those risks, road construction/improvement has the most numerous impacts to the society, especially on urban areas. Hence, this study aimed to assess the environmental and social impacts during and after the road improvement project in the municipality of Cainta. This study utilized descriptive research design. The gathering of data was divided into two phases: administration of survey questionnaire to the residents of Karangalan Village, Cainta and interview with the project engineer. Results show that there were lapses between the delivery and receipt of information but the project served its main purpose of resolving the flood risk of the community. Deficiency on environmental and social impact assessment (ESIA) of the project had been observed due to the absence of Environmental Management Department of the municipality. These resulted in various risks involving the road improvement project. Gender difference on the perceived environmental and social risks was also explored.

Keywords: Environmental Risks, Social Risks, Impacts, Road Improvement

INTRODUCTION

Risks can globally affect the society, environment, and economy. It magnifies every year due to the rapid growth of urbanization (Jones, Clark, & Tripidaki, 2012; Montz, 2003). Environmental risks are the actual or potential threats affecting the air, water, soil, natural habitat, and ecosystem (Rigby & Thomas, 2018). While the social risks, in the form of socioeconomic position, race, gender, social relationships, and residential and community contexts affect the livelihood, health, and safety of the people (Committee on Accounting for Socioeconomic Status in Medicare Payment Programs, 2016). According to the World Health Organization (WHO) (2018), children are more vulnerable to environmental risk and one of the reasons is that their lack or little control over their environment. Since different human actions may lead to different risks, assessments are carried out to assess the consequences of the different government or non-government company projects. In 2002, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) proposed the environmental impact assessment as “tool to identify the possible environmental, social, and economic impacts from the planning, application, and post application of the project.” Abbas (2003) specifies the importance of the economic and social development of road for the benefit of the society with the use of the Environmental Assessment Impact (EAI) as basis for making decisions pertaining to selecting the most environmentally preferable alignment.

It is essential to have the EIA in the project cycle. It comes from the early stage of preparation of project proposal to identify the unwanted effects which may occur during and after the project. During the implementation, the authorities must monitor and evaluate all the actual environmental impacts and action to the impacts. On the chance of ongoing project which does not have EIA, the authorities have task of placing EIA as soon as possible. Post-Project Analysis (PPA) is the process of evaluating the environmental effects of the project in able to learn from the experience and include all the assessment to better planning in the future (Sida, 1998).

There are different innovative strategies to resolve environmental and social risks and one of the most applicable projects in urban area is the road improvement. The primary purpose of road improvement is for promoting economic efficacy and enabling business environment which must safeguard the environment, indigenous, and vulnerable people (Gichaga, 2017). In the Philippines, the Department of Public Works and Highway (DPWH) is responsible in major infrastructure projects for national roads and bridges, and in the major flood control system. Its task is to continuously develop technology for the safety, efficacy, and quality of the planning, construction, and maintenance of the infrastructures (ADB, 2011). The Philippine Development Plan 2011–2016 envisions “safe, secure, efficient, viable, competitive, dependable, integrated, environmentally sustainable, and people-oriented Philippine transportation system” (p.4).

Based on the census conducted by the National Statistics Office (NSO) (2010), Cainta is included in the first-class municipality and the one of the most urbanized and richest towns in Rizal with a land area of 26.81 km[2] (1,019 hectares). With a population of 311,845 inhabitants, Cainta is the second most populous municipality in the Philippines, in the same census. The municipality serves as the secondary gateway to the rest of Rizal province from Metro Manila and is one of the most urbanized towns due to its proximity to Manila. The location of Cainta is ideal for investment, hence road construction and improvement are being mandated to secure the safety of the residents (Cainta, 2016).

Cainta is one of the most urbanized municipalities because it is situated near cities of National Capital Region: the northern part is bounded to Marikina City, southern part is bound to Pasig City, four (4) kilometers away from Quezon City and 19 kilometers away from Manila. According to the government website of Cainta (2016), the municipality has seven (7) Barangays and Barangay San Isidro has the largest land area with a land area of 2,158.90 hectares and is the third most populous barangay. Based on the project profile from NHA (1980), Karangalan Village is one of the oldest urbanized communities in Barangay San Isidro. Karangalan Village is a 752, 428.14 sq.m. land and was once a rice field before February 1980. Then, it was developed when the Government of the Philippines secured a loan from the International Bank for Reconstruction Development. It is one of the projects under the National Housing Authority (NHA) as directed by former President Ferdinand E. Marcos under P.D No. 757. This community is under the Third Urban Development Project (Urban III) to provide solution to the country’s problem on poverty, environment, sanitation, and shelter with an aim of “providing housing for the greatest number”.

The village is divided into two phases comprising Cainta (Phase 1) and Pasig (Phase 2). The northern part is bounded to Hakbangan Creek, eastern part is bounded to Vista Verde Subdivision, western part is bounded to Pasig Greenpark Subdivision and the southern part is bounded to Metroville Subdivision. Its land use is open for residential, commercial, institutional, and community facilities with a total lot of 6,100 sq.m. The development features have concrete roads and footpath, with drainage, water system, centralized sewage system, schools and BDCN, church site, pocket parks, electricity lines, and production centers.

Even though the location of the municipality is accessible to the most in demand cities in NCR, the city has its downsides. There was uneven level of land between the two phases due to mounding of soil project. The Phase 2 was first to be completed and was more elevated than Phase 1 due to the rush development of the project. On his interview with the ABS-CBN News in 2013, the chief of Rizal Risk Reduction and Management Council, Dong Malonzo, mentioned that flood is the most frequent hazard experienced by the municipality being the catch basin of rain from the Sierra Madre towards Marikina River. As forecasted by LiDAR Portal for Achieving and Distribution (2017) flood may occur when the rainfall intensity duration frequency is 243.10 mm. Aside from this, there was no record of road improvement from the time the village was developed.

As action, the municipality pursued the IRA Utilization FDP Form No. 7 for the First Quarter of 2017, with the program of improvement/concreting of roads and rehabilitation of drainage canal in Karangalan Village, Brgy. San Isidro, Cainta. The project started in April 2017.

Objectives of the Study

Generally, this study aimed to determine the environmental and social risks felt by the residents during and after the road improvement in Cainta, Rizal. Specifically, the study aimed to:

1. identify the socio-demographic profile of the respondents in terms of:

a. Sex
b. Age
c. Monthly Family Income;

2. identify the knowledge and satisfaction of the respondents to the road improvement project;
3. classify the environmental risks encountered by the respondents during and after the road improvement;
4. compare the male and female perceptions on different physical environmental factors during and after the road improvement project;
5. identify the most severe and least severe environmental risk encountered by the respondents;
6. assess the number and types of social risk encountered by the respondents during and after the road improvement project;
7. compare the social risk encountered in relation to sexes;
8. identify the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment of the road improvement project; and
9. assess the casualties encountered during the road improvement project and their actions to resolve the problem.

METHODOLOGY

Design of the Study

This study utilized descriptive research design establishing surveys and fact-finding enquiries (Kothari, 2004). It relies on the observation by collecting reliable data and attempts to measure situations in order to formulate better understanding to the situation (Walliman, 2011). The researchers have no control over the variables, and can only describe the state of affairs happening.

The research design is deemed appropriate to the present due to its nature, objectives, and scope. This study applied the survey research methodology, divided into two parts: A closed-ended questionnaire to the residents and a face-to-face interview to the government official concerned.

Locale of the Study

This study focused in Karangalan Village Phase 1, San Isidro, Cainta, Rizal. The researchers chose this location due to the project history of the community. The National Housing Authority (NHA) developed the Karangalan Village project; hence, researchers asked the NHA Manggahan, Pasig City Branch for the background information of this study. The researchers also asked the assistance of the Cainta Rizal Engineering department regarding the information about the road improvement project.

Population of the Study

The reliability of the findings of this study depends on the sampling technique. This study utilized the purposive sampling, under non-probability sampling in collecting the response of the participants. The researchers selected the participants according to the purpose of the study. Primarily, the residents of Karangalan Village Phase 1 and the government official assigned in the project served as the respondents. One hundred twelve (112) residents participated in the study.

Research Process and Materials

The researchers utilized the face-to-face interview and mail survey method. For the survey method, participants answered likert-scale and open- ended questionnaire.

Survey-questionnaire. In reaching all the possible respondents in the area, a google form was made reflecting the survey questionnaire. For those who do not have internet connectivity, paper survey-questionnaire was given to them.

Data Gathering and Procedures

A letter request to conduct the study was prepared and submitted to the researchers’ adviser. Upon approval, the researchers commenced with the data gathering.

In gathering the data, survey and semi-structured interview were carried out by the researchers. Residents of the Karangalan Village Phase I were asked to answer the survey questionnaire and participate in interview. The government official assigned in the project was interviewed.

The first part of the survey was on the demographic profile of the respondents such as sex, age bracket, and their monthly family income. Questions about the respondents’ knowledge on purpose and information of the road improvement project were also included.

The next part of the survey dealt with the environmental risks experienced by the respondents during and after the road improvement projects. The questions were answered in five-point Likert scale and based on the study of Trethanya and Perera (2009). Additionally, the respondents were asked about their experiences during and after the road improvement through open-ended questions. They were also asked to determine the environmental risks, which have the most and least impact to them.

Further, the respondents were asked to choose the social risk that they experienced during and after the road improvement. The last part of the survey was on the satisfaction of the respondents on the road improvement project.

A semi-structured interview to the project engineer was also conducted to obtain significant information about the road improvement in Karangalan Village, Cainta, Rizal. Respondents were also interviewed after the analysis of the surface to explore the significant results.

Ethical Considerations

In relation to the objective of the study, the researchers warrant the safety and protection of the participants and the research locale. The researchers sought the approval of the concerned government institutions (NHA and Cainta Municipality) before conducting the study to ensure that the study adhered to the ethical standards and guidelines in research of the said institution. The letter request to conduct the study and interview a government official was prepared and submitted to the Office of the Mayor of Cainta, Rizal. The researchers also made a consent letter to the respondents of the study before they answered the questionnaires. The data collected were treated with utmost anonymity and confidentiality since the researchers respect the rights of the participants for privacy and confidentiality.

In terms of providing complete information to the research participants regarding the nature of the study, the researchers included a short description of the nature and purpose of the study in the survey-questionnaire. In view of scientific honesty, the researchers made proper citations of original works that were included in this study.

Data Analysis

The study used two types of data analysis. The Qualitative Data Analysis method was used in analyzing non-numeric information responses gathered. While, statistical analysis was carried out using the Chi-square and non-parametric Z-test to evaluate the significance between the data which determines the confidence levels for each individual comparison accordingly with the means and a p-value less than 0.05 and 0.01 was accepted as significant and the confidence level for all the comparisons is 95%.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Socio-demographic Profile of the Respondents

Salkind (2010) argued that demographic profile is a necessary data to determine the characteristics of individuals of the particular study and to serve as dependent variable in this study. Also, on the study conducted by Kolhoff (1996), he implied that the integration of sexes strengthens the socio-economic factor of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Table 1 summarizes the demographic profile of the respondents. One hundred twelve (112) residents participated in the study. Thirty-nine (34.82%) are males, while 73 (65.18%) are females. In terms of age, majority (55.36%) of the respondents are in the age bracket of 21 to 30 followed by 15 to 20 with 23.21%. In terms of the monthly family income, 61 or 54.46% of the respondents reported that they have a range of PhP 10,001 – PhP 20, 000 monthly family income.

Table 1. Socio-demographic profile of the respondents

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Knowledge and Satisfaction about the Road Improvement Project

Prinsloo, van Waveren, and Chan (2017) stated that for project to be effective and successful, information dissemination about the project to the beneficiaries must be done. The purpose of the road improvement project in the Karangalan Village, Cainta, Rizal that can be found in documents and interview is for the Cainta flood control program.

Respondents’ reported knowledge as regards the road improvement project is shown in Table 2. Results showed that only 37.50% (42 of 112) of the respondents were informed about the road improvement before the project started. On the follow up interview concerning the information, five (5) out of ten (10) said that they were informed by asking the workers during the assessment period, three (3) read the information poster of the contractors and two (2) were informed by the barangay officials. Hence, more than majority of the respondents (62.50%) mentioned that they were not informed about the project. To defend their side, the engineer said that they informed the residents of Karangalan Village about the road improvement project. Also, as required, they posted project information to the area. During the interview, the engineer said:

“Yes, nagpameeting sa barangay at naglagay ng tarpaulin post. ‘Yung iba naman habang nagsusukat kami, nagtatanong na ‘yung tao kung para saan ‘yun, kaya naiinform na din sila.”

Regarding the purpose of the road improvement project, the engineer said that it aims to resolve the flood risk concern of the community. In addition, there is need for road improvement since there was no maintenance of the road constructed since 1980 when the village was developed by the NHA. According to him:

“Madalas kasi ang baha sa lugar na ‘yun, lalo na napalilibutan ng creek, noon hanggang dibdib o leeg ang baha, ngayon kung bumaha man, mababa lang kumpara sa dati, hindi talaga maiiwasan ‘yung baha pero kahit papaano naaagapan na at mula nung dinevelop ‘yung village, hindi pa nagawan ng road improvement ‘yan, ngayon lang.”

Also, the researcher asked the municipal engineer regarding the areas they prioritized the most and the least priority in Karangalan Village. He pointed out the areas near the creek were the first priority and the least priority was the main road.

“Yung areas na malapit sa creek ang priority dahil kapag umapaw ang tubig sa creek, babaha na at unang nababaha ung malapit dun, ang pinakahuli ‘yung sa main road kaya ‘yun ang huling ginawa para dumaan ‘yung tubig papalabas ng village.”

Parallel to this is the result of the response of the residents with the total count of 51.79% or 58 over 112, respondents said that they know the purpose of the project. Further, 70.54% (79 of 112) of the respondents are satisfied with the road improvement project. No significant difference was found on the answers of male and female respondents.

Table 2. Sex-disaggregated data of the respondents who answered YES on questions about the project.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Environmental risk during and after the road improvement project

In the paper of Trethanya and Perera (2009), they listed all the physical environmental problems created by road development and improvement projects. These include air dust, air pollution (smoke), noise level, vibration, surface water depletion/contamination/degradation, ground water depletion/contamination/degradation, flooding, and other wastes. The general perceptions of the respondents regarding the increase of the environmental risks that prevailed along the roads during and after the road improvement project are summarized in Table 4.

The results indicate that people perceived environmental problems during and after the road improvement projects. Also, results showed that during the road improvement, respondents felt severe impact by all the said environmental risks except flooding, in which, they were only moderately affected. After the road improvement, the respondents reported that environmental risks have still moderate impact on them. Noticeably, the response concerning flood risk had lower result compared with the other environmental risks during the project and remains the same after the project. This means that the road improvement strategy reduced the major risk encountered by the community.

Table 4. Respondents’ perception on the increase of different physical environment factors during and after the road improvement project

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Note: - Number with asterisk (*) is significantly different with the corresponding number in a row at 5% level of significance

- The description of the mean scores are: 1.00 – 1.79 = insignificant impact, 1.80 – 2.59 = less impact, 2.60 – 3.39 = moderate impact, 3.40 – 4.19 = severe impact, and 4.20 – 5.00 = most severe impact

This result is similar to the research of Pregnolato et al., (2016) where they reduced the depth of the flood water compared to the previous depth before the application of strategy. At 5% level of significance, there is a significant lowering of impact in terms of vibration during and after the road improvement. Over-all, respondents felt severely affected by all the environmental risk but this was lowered after the road improvement. Meanwhile, Table 5 shows the male respondents’ perception on the environmental risks during and after the road improvement. It is noticeable that male respondents are severely affected of all the environmental risks during the improvement. Even after the road improvement, male respondents are still severely affected at air pollution (smoke), noise level, and other forms of waste. There is significant lowering of perception at vibration and ground water contamination/degradation at 5% level of significance.

Table 6 shows that female respondents felt severe impact at three environmental risks only; air borne dust, air pollution, and noise level. All others are moderately affected. And after the road improvement, their perception of all the environmental risks lowered to all moderate impact. Significant lowering at 5% level of significance is found at air pollution and flooding.

Table 5. Male respondents’ perception on the increase of different physical environment factors during and after the road improvement project

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Note: - Number with asterisk (*) is significantly different with the corresponding number in a row at 5% level of significance

- The description of the mean scores are: 1.00 – 1.79 = insignificant impact, 1.80 – 2.59 = less impact, 2.60 – 3.39 = moderate impact, 3.40 – 4.19 = severe impact, and 4.20 – 5.00 = most severe impact

Table 6. Female respondents’ perception on the increase of different physical environment factors during and after the road improvement project

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Note: - Number with asterisk (*) is significantly different with the corresponding number in a row at 5% level of significance

- The description of the mean scores are: 1.00 – 1.79 = insignificant impact, 1.80 – 2.59 = less impact, 2.60 – 3.39 = moderate impact, 3.40 – 4.19 = severe impact, and 4.20 – 5.00 = most severe impact

In comparison with the response of male and female perceptions on the different physical environment factors during the road improvement project, Table 7 shows that all of the perceptions were severe impact for males, while in females, all are moderate impact except for the air-borne dust, air pollution, and noise level which underlies to severe impact.

Table 7. Comparison of male and female perceptions on different physical environment factors during the road improvement project

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Note: - Number with asterisk (*) is significantly different with the corresponding number in a row at 5% level of significance

- The description of the mean scores are: 1.00 – 1.79 = insignificant impact, 1.80 – 2.59 = less impact, 2.60 – 3.39 = moderate impact, 3.40 – 4.19 = severe impact, and 4.20 – 5.00 = most severe impact

During the road improvement project, males are significantly affected than females at noise level and contamination/degradation of ground water.

The comparison of male and female perceptions of the different physical environmental factors after the road improvement is shown in Table 8. Results show that all respondents were moderately affected in different physical environmental factors except for air pollution and noise level. After the road improvement, males are significantly affected than females at air pollution (smoke), noise level, and flooding. This means that males are more sensitive than females in their environment during and after the road improvement.

Table 8. Comparison of male and female perceptions on different physical environment factors after the road improvement project

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Note: - Number with asterisk (*) is significantly different with the corresponding number in a row at 5% level of significance

- The description of the mean scores are: 1.00 – 1.79 = insignificant impact, 1.80 – 2.59 = less impact, 2.60 – 3.39 = moderate impact, 3.40 – 4.19 = severe impact, and 4.20 – 5.00 = most severe impact

When asked about what environment risk encountered, the most severe impact among the respondents were primarily the flooding with the value of 47 followed by air-borne dust with the value of 33 (Figure 1). This result supports the information given by the municipality engineer assigned to be the main purpose of the project.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 1. Most Severe Impact Environmental Risk Encountered (Author’s own work)

Similarly, they were asked about the environmental risks which have the least impact and they answered contamination of ground water with the value of 49 (Figure 2).

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 2. Least Severe Environmental Risk Encountered (Author’s own work)

Social Risks

Social risks determination is equally important to environmental risk. On the study conducted by Adams and Sherar (2018), they argued that community involvement may lead to improvements in the social environment. Hence, the respondents were asked about different social risks which include livelihood, traffic, health, and road safety. Results showed that majority of the respondents were affected by these risks during road improvement (Table 9).

Table 9. Number of Respondents who answered YES when they were asked if they were affected in each social risk during and after road improvement

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Note: Number with double asterisk (**) is significantly different with the corresponding number in a row at 1% level of significance

Among all these risks, they were affected by traffic with 86.61% (97 of 112) of the respondents felt it. The least felt among these risks is in their health with 51.79% (58 of 112). However, significant decrease in number of respondents was noted after the road improvement at 1% level of significance. This is the same focus of the study by Shen and Jiang (2011) where they are concerned with the negative impacts of the construction in urban roads.

Table 10 shows the sex-disaggregated data of respondents who reported that they were affected in each social risk during the road improvement. Results showed that male and females are affected similarly by social risks except for livelihood. At 5% level of significance, females are more affected than male in terms of livelihood during the road improvement.

Table 10. Sex disaggregated data of respondents who answered YES when they were asked if they were affected in each social risk during the road improvement

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Note: Number with asterisk (*) is significantly different with the corresponding number in a row at 5% level of significance

The results changed after the road improvement (Table 11). Results showed that in terms of livelihood, males and females receive the same effect after road improvement. However, males are significantly affected than females in terms of traffic and road safety after the road improvement at 5% level of significance. At 1% level of significance, males are more affected in terms of health.

Table 11. Sex disaggregated data of respondents who answered YES when they were asked if they were affected in each social risk after road improvement

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Note: Number with asterisk (*) and with double asterisk (**) is significantly different with the corresponding number in a row at 5% and 1% level of significance, respectively.

In terms of effects during and after the road improvements on male and female respondents (Table 12), there was a significant decrease of social risk after the road improvement among male and female respondents. All are significant at 99% confidence level except for health in male which is significant only at 95% confidence level.

Table 12. Sex disaggregated data of respondents who answered YES when they were asked if they were affected in each social risk comparing during and after road improvement.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Note: Number with asterisk (*) and with double asterisk (**) is significantly different with the corresponding number in a row at 5% and 1% level of significance, respectively.

A follow up interview was done to know their specific experiences during the road improvement. Thematically, most of the responses is under the cluster of transportation, primarily they are concerned about the traffic caused by the closed road. Second is under health in which the residents experienced risk in dust and air pollution during the construction. Third was the road safety in which the respondents answered the accident-prone risk of the project due to holes or lack of reflectors of the project and the danger given by the equipment. Fourth is the noise of the construction development and fifth social risk encountered was under livelihood where some of the stores were forced to be closed due to construction. After the road improvement project, the residents were not anymore exposed to the social risk under livelihood and noise, but still experienced the social risk under the road safety due to the debris of the construction and unpolished construction and the concern with traffic is still the same due to the not concrete construction.

In seeking for the reasons why those risks were experienced by the residents, the researchers asked the engineer if they conducted the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA). Sadly, he responded that the municipal office does not have Environmental Management Department, hence, they did not include the ESIA to the planning. However, he provided a copy of site development plan of the project (Fig. 13) Quoting his response:

“Wala kasi kaming environmental management department kaya hindi na namin nagawa.”

Hence, the researchers inquired on the problems encountered during and after the road improvement since they did not conduct the ESIA. The researchers also asked them on the actions they did involving those concerns. The engineers’ response is directing to the damages of the properties of the residents, specifically with the water lines under the road and their action to this concern is to inform the contractor about the case to further investigate and finalize the solution to the problem.

“Damage with the properties of the residents. We had incident na nasira ‘yung sa linya ng tubig dahil sa construction”. The resident must inform us and we’ll make an action. Example ‘yung sa nasiraan ng linya at nagkaroon ng bill na mataas, ‘yung resident dapat magbigay ng kopya ng bill ng bago ‘yung construction na normal bill nila at nung tumaas, tapos pagbabayarin namin ‘yung contractor sa bill na ‘yun.”

As what the researchers observed on the road improvement project, the construction on different road is uneven based on height and looks. The researchers asked the engineer about it and he said that the construction is divided into two: from administrations’ man power and from the contractor.

The main road was constructed by the contractor and the street road was constructed by the administration. Follow up answer is quoted:

“Yung sa mga maliliit na street, mga tao galing administration, magkakaibang tao kaya magkakaiba ang gawa.”

DISCUSSION

1. Based on socio-demographic profile of the respondents, the total number of participants in this study was one hundred twelve (112) residents from Karangalan Village, Phase 1. Out of 112, thirty-nine (39) are males and seventy-three (73) are females. Majority (62 out of 112) were from the age of 21-30 and in terms of monthly family income, majority (61 out of 112) has a family income of PhP 10,001 to PhP 20,000.
2. On the knowledge and satisfaction about the road improvement project, only 42 out of 122 respondents were informed about the road improvement project before the project started. Meanwhile, majority of the respondents (79 out of 112) were satisfied with the road improvement project.
3. People perceived environmental risks during and after the road improvement (air-borne dust, air pollution, noise level, vibration of the ground, contamination/degradation of the surface water and ground water, depletion of surface water and ground water, flooding, and another forms of wastes). The experiences of the respondents in line with environmental risks have severe impact during and after the road improvement project except flooding which has moderate impact to the residents of Karangalan Village Phase 1.
4. In comparison with the perception of the male respondents to female, the findings showed that the males were exposed to environmental impact than females. Males had more severe environmental risk experiences during and after the road improvement project that females who had more moderate environmental risk experiences.
5. The most severe environmental risk experienced by the respondents was the flooding and the least severe was the contamination of ground water.
6. The social risks encountered by the respondents were in the cluster of livelihoods, transportation (traffic), health, and road safety. Most of the respondents were affected by the traffic during and after the road improvement project.
7. To compare the male and female experiences in social risks encountered, most of the males were affected with the transportation (traffic) social risk while most of the females were affected by the livelihood social risk.
8. The municipality did not prepare an environmental and social impact assessment before the road improvement project.
9. And the most casualties experienced was the damage with the properties of the residents and their action to the said concern is reimbursement to the damage/s.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Based on the analyses of data from the survey conducted and face-to-face interview, the researcher found out that there were lapses on the part of receiving the information of the road improvement prior to conducting the project. Hence, posting announcement and informing the residents via barangay meeting is not enough. As recommendation to this matter, the researcher would like to suggest the modern method of informing the residents in which social media could be a good source of information. Future researchers on this kind of study may use this implication for further study.

Further, the lack of Environmental and Social Impact Assessment of the municipality resulted in different environmental and social risks to the residents. The importance of the ESIA is to see beforehand the potential risk that the project may give and how to resolve the possible risks before the implementation of the project. This is in line with what Charlery, Nielsen, Meilby and Smith-Hall (2016) opined that the road improvement would never have negative environmental impacts on at least can be minimized of ESIA will be implemented.

Karangalan Village Phase 1 experienced flood risk for the past few years, given that the municipality conducted project to aid the major concern of the community, still flooding occurs at the present. Hence, the researchers would like to recommend further study in line with flood assessment risk to solve the major concern of the community.

Nonetheless, the main purpose of the road improvement which is to minimize the flood risk, was successful and majority of the residents were satisfied with the road improvement project.

Additional implication was seen is the integration of sexes to assess the environmental impact. Men and women do experience various environmental exposures at the same rate but then again, others may have different experiences conditional to their environmental exposure. The UNDP (2017) stated that women may have higher indoor exposure than men, while other exposures affect men more than woman. Hence, involving the participation of both sexes may give good quality of response and may give rise to environmental and social improvement.

References

Abbas, K. A. (2003). Environmental assessment of road alignments based on multicriteria scoping: a case study of Cairo—Ain Sukhna freeway. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 21 (4), 323–330. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154603781766194

Abdel-Raheem, M., & Ramsbottom, C. (2016). Factors Affecting Social Sustainability in Highway Projects in Missouri. Procedia Engineering, 145, 548–555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.04.043

Adams, E. J., & Sherar, L. B. (2018). Community perceptions of the implementation and impact of an intervention to improve the neighbourhood physical environment to promote walking for transport: a qualitative study. BMC Public Health, 18 (1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-5619-y

Alamgir, M., Campbell, M. J., Sloan, S., Goosem, M., Clements, G. R., Mahmoud, M. I., & Laurance, W. F. (2017). Economic, Socio-Political and Environmental Risks of Road Development in the Tropics. Current Biology, 27 (20), R1130–R1140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2017.08.067

Anciaes, P. R., Metcalfe, P. J., & Heywood, C. (2017). Social impacts of road traffic: perceptions and priorities of local residents. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 35 (2), 172–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2016.1269464

Ascensão, F., Fahrig, L., Clevenger, A. P., Corlett, R. T., Jaeger, J. A. G., Laurance, W. F., & Pereira, H. M. (2018). Environmental challenges for the Belt and Road Initiative. Nature Sustainability, 1 (5), 206–209. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0059-3

Asian Development Bank, & Department of Public Works and Highways. (2011). Report and Recommendation of the President to the Board of Directors, Project Number: 41076 - 044. Retrieved from https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/project-document/60424/41076-044-phi-rrp.pdf

Assessment Principles and Approaches: Reflections on 15 Years of Practice", Social Impact Assessment, No. 18,2 (Summer 1994), p.9- 14, New York, 1994.

Banerjee, P., & Ghose, M. K. (2016). Spatial analysis of environmental impacts of highway projects with special emphasis on mountainous area: an overview. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 34 (4), 279–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2016.1176403

Bin Zhou, & Dianmei Yao. (2011). Impact on society environment by road in operation and maintenance phase and the recovery solutions. In 2011 International Symposium on Water Resource and Environmental Protection (pp. 2531–2534). Xi’an: IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISWREP.2011.5893393

Cainta.gov.ph. (2016). One Cainta [Cainta Municipality Website]. Retrieved from http://www.cainta.gov.ph/

Caliskan, E. (2013). Environmental impacts of forest road construction on mountainous terrain. Iranian Journal of Environmental Health Science & Engineering, 10 (1), 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/1735-2746-10-23

Çelik, T., Kamali, S., & Arayici, Y. (2017). Social cost in construction projects. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 64, 77–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2017.03.001

Chang, A. P., Chou, C. C., Lin, J. D., & Hsu, C. Y. (2013). Road Construction Project Environmental Impact Assessment Scope Definition Using Project Definition Rating Index (PDRI). Advanced Materials Research, 723, 885–892. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.723.885

Charlery, L., Nielsen, M., Meilby, H., & Smith-Hall, C. (2016). Effects of New Roads on Environmental Resource Use in the Central Himalaya. Sustainability, 8 (4), 363. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8040363

Committee on Accounting for Socioeconomic Status in Medicare Payment Programs, Board on Population Health and Public Health Practice, Board on Health Care Services, Institute of Medicine, & National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2016). Accounting for Social Risk Factors in Medicare Payment: Identifying Social Risk Factors. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/21858

Condurat, M., Nicuţă, A. M., & Andrei, R. (2017). Environmental Impact of Road Transport Traffic. A Case Study for County of Iaşi Road Network. Procedia Engineering, 181, 123–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.02.379

Convention on Biological Diversity. (2018). Impact Assessment. Retrieved from https://www.cbd.int/impact/whatis.shtml

Department of Public Works and Higways. (1987). About DPWH [Public Domain]. Retrieved from http://www.dpwh.gov.ph/DPWH/content/about-dpwh

FINSTERBUSCH, K. A Methodology for Social Impact Assessment of Highway Locations, Federal Highway Administration, Maryland Department of Transportation, 1976. [2] STEVENSON, M.A. "Social Impact

Freudenburg, W. R. (1986). Social Impact Assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 12 (1), 451–478. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.12.080186.002315

Gichaga, F. J. (2017). The impact of road improvements on road safety and related characteristics. IATSS Research, 40 (2), 72–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iatssr.2016.05.002

Hosaka, A., & Mizutani, H. (2000). IMPROVEMENT OF TRAFFIC SAFETY BY ROAD-VEHICLE COOPERATIVE SMART CRUISE SYSTEMS. IATSS Research, 24 (2), 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0386-1112(14)60027-3

Jones, N., Clark, J., & Tripidaki, G. (2012). Social risk assessment and social capital: A significant parameter for the formation of climate change policies. The Social Science Journal, 49 (1), 33–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2011.06.011

Keshkamat, S. S., Tsendbazar, N.-E., Zuidgeest, M. H. P., van der Veen, A., & de Leeuw, J. (2012). The Environmental Impact of not Having Paved Roads in Arid Regions: An Example from Mongolia. AMBIO, 41 (2), 202–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-011-0155-3

Kolhoff, A. J. (1996). Integrating gender assessment study into environmental impact assessment. Project Appraisal, 11 (4), 261–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/02688867.1996.9727553

Kosamu, I. B. M. (2011). Environmental impact assessment application in infrastructural projects in Malawi. Sustainability Science, 6 (1), 51–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-010-0122-0

Kozak, M., Nijak, D., Kozak, K., Merkisz, J., & Merkisz-Guranowska, A. (2013). The analysis of the environmental impact of road traffic in a transport node on the example of the Rondo Rataje roundabout in Poznan (pp. 473–484). Presented at the URBAN TRANSPORT 2013, Kos, Greece. https://doi.org/10.2495/UT130381

Laurance, W. F., Goosem, M., & Laurance, S. G. W. (2009). Impacts of roads and linear clearings on tropical forests. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 24 (12), 659–669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2009.06.009

Marzouk, M., Abdelkader, E. M., El-zayat, M., & Aboushady, A. (2017). Assessing Environmental Impact Indicators in Road Construction Projects in Developing Countries. Sustainability, 9 (5), 843. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9050843

Masud Rana, M. (2017). Effect of Environmental Impact in Building Constructions. American Journal of Civil Engineering, 5 (6), 339. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajce.20170506.14

Mitchard, N., Frost, L. C., Harris, J., Baldrey, S., & Ko, J. (2011). Assessing the impact of road schemes on people and communities. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Engineering Sustainability, 164 (3), 185–196. https://doi.org/10.1680/ensu.1000019

Montz, B. E. (2003). Global Environmental Risk. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 93 (1), 229–231. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8306.93115

Morelli, F., Beim, M., Jerzak, L., Jones, D., & Tryjanowski, P. (2014). Can roads, railways and related structures have positive effects on birds? – A review. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 30, 21–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2014.05.006

Moretti, L., Di Mascio, P., & D’Andrea, A. (2013). Environmental Impact Assessment of Road Asphalt Pavements. Modern Applied Science, 7 (11). https://doi.org/10.5539/mas.v7n11p1

Pregnolato, M., Ford, A., Robson, C., Glenis, V., Barr, S., & Dawson, R. (2016). Assessing urban strategies for reducing the impacts of extreme weather on infrastructure networks. Royal Society Open Science, 3 (5), 160023. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.160023

Reymondin, L., Coca, A., Arango, D., Jarvis, A., Navarrete, C., Suding, P. H., & Watkins, G. G. (2014). Potential Impact of Road Projects on Habitat Loss and Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Guyana from 2012 to 2022. Inter-American Development Bank Felipe Herrera Library. Retrieved from https://publications.iadb.org/handle/11319/6369

Rigby, K., & Thomas, L. (2018). Crawford Global Technical Services. Retrieved from https://crawfordgts.com/services/environmental-risk/environmental-risk-defined.aspx

Salkind, N. J. (2010). Encyclopedia of research design. Los Angeles, [Calif.: SAGE.

Shen, H., & Jiang, H. (2011). Research on road construction’s impact upon traffic flow. In 2011 IEEE 2nd International Conference on Computing, Control and Industrial Engineering (pp. 429–432). Wuhan, China: IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/CCIENG.2011.6008156

Trethanya, S., & Ranjith Perera, L. A. S. (2008). Environmental assessment for non-prescribed infrastructure development projects: a case study in Bangkok Metropolitan. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 26 (2), 127–138. https://doi.org/10.3152/146155108X323290

UNDP (2017). Guidelines on Integratng Health and Gender into Environmental and Social Impact Assessments in Sub-Saharan Africa. Prepared for UNDP Regional Centre for Eastern and Southern Africa by the Southern African Insttute for Environmental Assessment.

Walia, K., Aggarwal, R. K., & Bhardwaj, S. K. (2017). Environment Impact Assessment of Highway Expansion – A Review. Current World Environment, 12 (3), 507–519. https://doi.org/10.12944/CWE.12.3.04

Wang, Y., Han, Q., de Vries, B., & Zuo, J. (2016). How the public reacts to social impacts in construction projects? A structural equation modeling study. International Journal of Project Management, 34 (8), 1433–1448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.07.008

Wang, Z., & Chen, L. (2016). Research on the Impact of Road Construction on Traffic Congestion. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Management Science and Management Innovation. Guilin, China: Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/msmi-16.2016.50

Xiahou, X., Tang, Y., Yuan, J., Chang, T., Liu, P., & Li, Q. (2018). Evaluating Social Performance of Construction Projects: An Empirical Study. Sustainability, 10 (7), 2329. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072329

Yrjölä, R. A., & Santaharju, J. L. M. (2015). The Impact of Road Construction on a Community of Farmland Birds. Annales Zoologici Fennici, 52 (1–2), 33–44. https://doi.org/10.5735/086.052.0203

Zheng, C., & Zhang, Q. (2009). The Assessment of the Social, Economic, and Environmental Impacts of Expressway Construction Projects Based on the DFGF Algorithm. In 2009 International Conference on Management and Service Science (pp. 1–5). Beijing, China: IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICMSS.2009.5303732

Zuo, J., Jin, X.-H., & Flynn, L. (2012). Social Sustainability in Construction – An Explorative Study. International Journal of Construction Management, 12 (2), 51–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2012.10773190