By Beatriz Marie D. Cruz, Senior Reporter
MANILA dropped seven spots in the 2026 Smart City Index by Switzerland-based Institute for Management Development World Competitiveness Center (WCC), as residents continued to fret about corruption and traffic congestion.
The Philippine capital ranked 132nd out of 148 countries, down seven spots from the 125th spot a year prior.
The study evaluates cities based on how they use technology and infrastructure to improve the lives of its residents.
Manila also ranked last among major Southeast Asian cities Singapore (9th); Kuala Lumpur (65th); Bangkok (90th); Hanoi (97th); Ho Chi Minh City (105th); and Jakarta (106th).
According to the WCC, a smart city “strikes a good balance between its economic prowess (e.g., jobs and business activity), applied technology, environmental concerns, and inclusiveness to facilitate a high quality of life for its citizens.”
It surveyed 120 residents per city based on key indicators like health and safety, mobility, activities, opportunities, and governance.
According to the survey results, 71% of Manila residents perceived corruption/transparency as the most urgent concern in the city; followed by health services (51.6%); road congestion (49.2%); security (44.4%); and unemployment (41.1%).
In a briefing late Monday, WCC Director Arturo Bris said Manila’s low ranking is tied to residents’ concerns on corruption.
“Corruption hinders any other potential improvement of the city. In the Manila survey, we see that people are not willing to provide data to authorities,” he said.
Mr. Bris said that corruption is more of a country-level problem than a city-level issue.
“As long as the country resolves those corruption and government problems, then cities will do exactly the same,” he said.
Manila’s residents also raised concerns over air pollution (39.5%): affordable housing (37.9%); basic amenities like water and waste (37.1%); public transport (36.3%) and fulfilling employment (29%).
Other issues revolved around school education (19.4%); green spaces (15.3%); recycling (13.7%); citizen engagement (3.2%); and social mobility/inclusiveness (3.2%).
On the city’s availability of technologies for health and safety, Manila scored the highest (67 out of 100) on arranging medical appointments online, and on the availability of CCTV cameras (65.8). It scored the lowest on the presence of a website or application to monitor air pollution (42.5).
In terms of mobility, Manila received a score of 61.9 for online scheduling and ticket sales for public transport, and scored 46.3 on the availability of apps that can direct residents to available parking space.
On the availability of structures for mobility, Manila received its lowest score of 11.7 on traffic congestion. It also scored low on corruption of city officials (14.9) and air pollution (15.3).
Manila received a score of 78.9 on the activities indicator, particularly on the availability of online platforms to easily buy tickets for shows and museums.
Under opportunities for work and school, Manila received the highest score (76.6) on the availability of job listings online; but scored the lowest (55.8) on internet speed and reliability.
On governance, Manila received a score of 68.5 on the online processing of identification documents, which residents said has helped reduce waiting times. The city also had low scores on online voting (53.6), and the provision of an online platform (50.8) where they can propose ideas to improve city life.
Manila scored 40.5 on online public access to city finances, which respondents thought should reduce corruption.
However, the city scored the highest for job generation by businesses (69.2) and the availability of cultural activities (66.9).
According to the survey, 78.2% are comfortable with using face recognition technologies to lower crime; and 71% are willing to provide personal data to improve traffic.
“The most advanced urban centers, where citizens feel happiest, are not necessarily those distinguished by their utopian skylines, visible sensor networks, or pure technological sophistication,” Mr. Bris said.
“Instead, they stand out for how effectively they align governance structures, sustainability priorities, public investment decisions, and perhaps most importantly, the cultivation of citizen trust.”
