Urbanization and Settlement Pattern
The National Statistics Office was
consistent in its definition of urban areas Census of
Population and Housing. As defined, urban areas consist of
the following:
-
In
their entirety, all cities and municipalities having a
population of at least 1,000 persons per square
kilometer;
-
Poblaciones or central districts of municipalities which
have a population density of at least 500 persons per
square kilometer;
-
Poblaciones or central districts (not included in 1 and
2) regardless of the population size, which have the
following:
-
Street
pattern, i.e., network of street in either parallel
or right- angle orientation;
-
At
least six establishments (commercial, manufacturing,
recreational and/or personal services); and
-
At
least three of the following:
-
a
town hall, church or chapel with religious
services at least once a month;
-
a
public plaza, park or cemetery;
-
a
market place or building where trading
activities are carried on at least once a week;
and
-
a public building like school, hospital,
puericulture and health center or library
Barangays having at least 1,000 inhabitants which meet the
conditions set forth in above, and where the operation of
the inhabitants is predominantly non-farming or fishing.
Urban areas are classified based on population density, the
presence of facilities and utilities that cater to the
socio-economic needs of the population, and on the
predominance of secondary and/or tertiary economic
activities.
Urban and Rural Distribution of Population
The distribution of municipalities in the
Bicol Region with urban agglomerations during the census
years 1970, 1980, 1990 and 2000 is presented in Table 3.44.
In 1970, only 58 out of the 114 municipalities, or barely 51
percent were with urban conglomerations. This number
increased to 111 municipalities in 1980 and remained static
until 1990, with only 4 municipalities in Camarines Sur
province having an entirely rural population (Bombon, Gainza,
Presentacion, and Sangay). In 2000, only two municipalities
in the region remained in the entirely rural category:
Jovellar in Albay and Presentation in Camarines Sur.
During the current census year, 4 cities/municipalities
qualified in the entirely urban category, namely: the cities
of Naga and Legazpi; and the municipalities of Camaligan in
Camarines Sur and Daet in Camarines Norte.
Table 3.44 Number of Municipalities with Urban
Agglomerations, by Province 1948 - 2000
|
Province |
No. of Municipalities |
1970 |
1980 |
1990 |
2000 |
|
No. |
% |
No. |
% |
No. |
% |
No. |
% |
|
Bicol Region |
115 |
58 |
51 |
111 |
96 |
111 |
96 |
113 |
98 |
|
Albay |
18 |
11 |
61 |
18 |
100 |
18 |
100 |
17 |
94 |
|
Camarines
Norte |
12 |
5 |
42 |
12 |
100 |
12 |
100 |
12 |
100 |
|
Camarines
Sur |
37 |
17 |
46 |
33 |
89 |
33 |
89 |
36 |
97 |
|
Catanduanes |
11 |
2 |
18 |
11 |
100 |
11 |
100 |
11 |
100 |
|
Masbate |
21 |
12 |
57 |
21 |
100 |
21 |
100 |
21 |
100 |
|
Sorsogon |
16 |
11 |
69 |
16 |
100 |
16 |
100 |
16 |
100 |
In terms of urban population,
only 19 percent of the region’s population in 1970 were
considered urban. This increased progressively to almost 21
percent in 1980 and to 27 percent in 1990 with average
intercensal annual growth rates of 2.70 and 3.42 percent,
respectively. (Table 3.45). Provincewise, Camarines Norte
had the highest percentage of urban population relative to
its total population (1990) at 32.59 percent, followed by
Albay with 27.72 percent and Camarines Sur, 27.50 percent.
Based on historical trend, Camarines Norte had the highest
percentage of urban population in the region in 1970 at 26
percent followed by Sorsogon and Camarines Sur at 24.57 and
21.27 percent, respectively. Albay’s urban population at
13.70 percent was the lowest among the six provinces of the
region. However, its fast rate of economic and social
growth coupled by its high tempo of urbanization enabled
Albay to emerge as the second most urbanized province in
1990. In 2000, Camarines Norte remained as the most
urbanized province with 34.97 percent of its total
population classified as urban. Albay ranked second with
31.14 percent, followed by Camarines Sur with 29.88 percent
of its total population having urban agglomeration.
Urban
Concentration of Population
The percent share of the urban population of
each of the municipalities to the total urban population of
the region was estimated and is presented in Annex 3.18.
The list of municipalities considered as areas with high
urban concentration during the twenty-year period is
likewise exhibited in Figures 3.23A - 3.23B.
Both tables and figures reveal
that some urban places decreased tremendously their share of
urban population relative to the region. Through the years,
poblaciones or central districts of advanced barangays of
rural municipalities developed to qualify to the status of
urban areas. Since 1970, numerous entirely rural areas
developed into urban agglomerations at impressive tempo and
figured prominently ten and twenty years later as they
surpassed erstwhile leading urban municipalities/areas.
Within each province, the
concentration of the urban population can easily be
detected. Logically and not surprisingly, all the cities
and/or capital towns showed the highest urban concentration
of their respective provincial population. Their prominence
can be closely associated to the functions or roles they
play vis-à-vis the other municipalities. Such centers
served as service points and seat of the provincial
government, thus, enjoying the bulk of the flow of capital
funds for developmental projects.
Evidently, only 32
municipalities had at least 1 percent share in urban
agglomeration in 1970. Throughout the 30-year census
period, only 6 municipalities/cities figured consistently at
the top among the 32 areas of concentration of urban
population. These were Naga City, Legazpi City, Daet, Iriga
City, and Tabaco. Unlike their contemporaries, however,
Legazpi City and Tabaco, both in Albay, had been increasing
their share progressively while Naga City, Daet and Iriga
City were on the reverse trend.
Together with the impressive
urban growth manifested by Legazpi City and Tabaco, Daraga
emerged to occupy the seventh spot in 1980. It retained its
rank in 1990 by increasing further its share to 2.40
percent. Significantly, this development pinpointed to the
socio-economic progress in Albay.
While most of the “old” places
decreased their urban share during the 25-year intercensal
period, five municipalities that were classified as rural in
1970 overtook 32 other municipalities in the rankings. In
contrast, five municipalities which had higher than one
percent urban share were eliminated from the list as they
failed to register a share of one percent and above during
the next two decades.
Noteworthy, four of the five
municipalities with new urban districts shared the same
qualities and resource potentials and were strategically
located. They served as service points or jumping boards
for other municipalities. These municipalities were
Mercedes and Paracale in Camarines Norte, Pasacao in
Camarines Sur and Pioduran in Albay. Except for Paracale,
all were coastal towns and fishlanding areas equipped with
good ports. Pasacao and Pioduran both face the China Sea.
Pasacao, having a national port, served as a transit point
of people from San Pascual in Burias Island, Masbate, as
well as those from the coastal barangays along Bondoc
Peninsula and from the barangays of railroad municipalities
of Camarines Sur. The port played a significant role in the
water transport system towards the National Capital Region
and other northern parts of Luzon. Pioduran, aside from
serving as a transit point of the population of Claveria,
Burias Island, is a fish and livestock landing port.
Equipped with an ice plant, the town abounds with fish
dealers who transport their goods straight to Navotas and
Manila. Likewise for Mercedes in Camarines Norte. On the
other hand, Paracale was historically a gold mining town
since pre-war years. These situations indicated clearly
that the presence of economic opportunities and
utilities/facilities in the said areas tended to attract
population and promote fast urbanization.
The phenomenon of new urban
districts seemingly occurred when prominent settlement
centers of the Spanish era and pre-war years, such as
Camalig, Guinobatan and Libon in Albay; Labo and Vinzons in
Camarines Norte; Tigaon and Nabua in Camarines Sur, failed
to expand economic activities and job opportunities for
their swelling population. People would rather be attracted
to areas with potentials for exploitation and where their
economic needs can be easily met and satisfied. Frontier
areas such as Pasacao, Pioduran and Mercedes predictably
became magnets/absorbers of the venturesome segment of the
region’s population.
FIgure 3.23A Urbanity Index CY 1990

(+) Click
to Zoom
Figure 3.23B Urbanity Index CY 2000

(+) Click
to Zoom
Census year 2000 saw the
emergence of municipalities with new urban agglomerations.
Surprisingly, those municipalities were at the bottom of the
1970-1990 urban listing but were able to gain more than one
percent urban population in 2000. One was the municipality
of Donsol, Sorsogon, which ranked 69th in 1990 but was
elevated to 12th in 2000. Its economic development was
attributed to a booming tourism industry sparked by the rare
presence of whale sharks locally known as
butanding
in Donsol Bay. Another municipality that rapidly urbanized
was San Lorenzo Ruiz in Camarines Norte. Being adjacent to
Daet, some people from the capital town chose to relocate to
San Lorenzo Ruiz for their residential area. The site also
attracted people from other neighboring municipalities and
eventually stirred up the sprouting of subdivisions and
housing projects in the area. San Lorenzo Ruiz ranked 90th
in 1990 but advanced to 15th in 2000. Three municipalities
in Camarines Sur were not in the 1990 list but were now
categorized as big shareholders in the region’s urban
population. These included Calabanga, Camaligan and Canaman.
The growth of the municipality of Calabanga from 31st in
1990 to 10th place in 2000, was attributed to the operation
of the Tamban Port and the rehabilitation/concreting of
corresponding access roads. Being very proximate to Naga
City, the municipalities of Camaligan and Canaman enjoyed
the fruits of development in the city. In fact, Camaligan is
now categorized as a 100 percent urban municipality. In the
province of Masbate, the municipality of Aroroy was
classified in the top one percent. From rank 66th in 1990,
Aroroy now ranks 19th. A mining boom in the early part of
the 90s has led to its progress.
For the past 30 years, Naga City
led the list of urbanized cities in the region but was
overtaken by Legazpi City in year 2000. The two cities have
been growing inversely. Legazpi City has increased its
share in the region’s urban population, which is now the
biggest share as per the 2000 census.
Centrality of Functions and Hierarchy of Settlements
An analysis of central places was performed by subjecting
the 114 cities / municipalities of the Bicol Region to a
manual scalogram technique of analysis (Annex 3.20)
introduced by Rondinelli and Ruddle _a / in their
book Urbanization and Rural Development.
Among the many uses of the scalogram in regional planning is
the categorization of settlements of the region into levels
of functional complexity and the determination of the types
of diversity of services and facility located in central
places at various levels of hierarchy. In so doing, it
identifies the gaps in terms of absence of the necessary
utilities in a particular but strategically significant area
which can be addressed to by the infrastructure support in
the next twenty five years.
For greater practicality and use, the scalogram in this RPFP
document included not only the common items but also the
items that were most likely not present in all
municipalities and those that has greater effect on the
people’s movement over geographical locations or space. The
RLUC-Technical Working Group identified 100 functions
(institutions and services) and each city/municipality in
the six provinces of the region were asked to identify which
among the functions are present in their respective
locality.
Limitations of this analysis, however, are many. Worth
mentioning is that the number and size of facilities and
utilities present were not given, nor the quality of the
services catered. Second, the specific settlements within
the municipality where the specific function is located are
likewise not pinpointed which may give rise to doubts on the
effectivity of the function and their potential linkages.
By scaling the resulting centrality indices, the 114 cities
/ municipalities were categorized into six levels. The first
level, with centrality indices ranging from 283.5 to 335.8
is composed of highly-urbanized areas (cities and capital
towns), namely: Sorsogon City, Legaspi City, Daet, Daraga
and Pili. These areas possessed the most number of functions
and the presence of functions that are rare in the region.
For example, in the case of Pili, the presence of an airport
and a mental hospital gave the municipality a high
centrality index. The second level, with centrality indices
ranging from 232 to 283.4 is composed of the following:
Virac, Naga City and Masbate City. In the case of Naga City,
what pulled down its centrality index was the absence of a
port and airport, two functions which, because of their
rarity usually give high weighted score. The third level,
with centrality indices ranging from 178.7 to 231, is
composed of the following: Iriga City, Tabaco City and
Camalig. Camalig, a third class municipality, was
categorized under the third level due to the presence of the
cement factory, the only cement factory in the region. The
fourth level, with centrality indices ranging from 126.3 to
178.6, is composed of Labo, Libmanan, Goa, Ligao City,
Guinobatan and Bulan. The fifth level, with centrality
indices ranging from 73.9 to 126.2, is composed of 26
municipalities (Figure 3.24)
And the last level, with centrality indices ranging from
21.4 to 73.8 is composed of 71 municipalities. These are
areas with a scarcity of facilities and utilities and highly
dependent on urbanized areas for their socio-economic needs
and services.
Figure 3.24
Centrality Index

(+) Click
to Zoom
back to top