Home » Behavior (Page 2)
Category Archives: Behavior
When I was living in Japan in the late 1990s and again in the early 2000s, I recall walking a lot every day. I felt healthy then not just because I thought I ate well but I had a lot of exercise, too. I consciously walked and jogged in the mornings and/or afternoons depending on the weather. And my commute included walks between my train station and the university. The following article seems to support what should be a healthy lifestyle without gym time.
Okumura, K. (November 6, 2020) “How Japanese People Stay Fit for Life, Without Ever Visiting a Gym,” Medium.com, https://kokumura.medium.com/how-the-japanese-exercise-to-stay-youthful-be2d6105e6e6.
I tried to estimate the number of steps I took on average each day. It seems I could easily make more than 10,000 steps everyday as I usually walk more than 6,000 steps for my commute and the typical walks in and around campus (including lunch time strolls with friends). My morning and afternoon walks can match this 6,000 steps. These can even be more during weekends when I’m out in the city or in Tokyo to be with friends. These steps seem nothing then and I loved to walk around partly to keep my sanity while studying there.
When I was visiting researcher later at another university, my step count was about the same if not higher. The only difference perhaps between Yokohama and Saitama was that I had a bicycle when I was in Saitama. The bicycle increased my range and I took the bicycle lent to me by friends to dome groceries or explore the nearby wards. Those were the days, I guess, that I wished I still have now in terms of more active transportation.
This seems like a non-transport post but it is, actually. Since the start of the pandemic, one of the biggest concerns have been the so-called super-spreaders. These are people who are usually asymptomatic of the COVID-19 virus and as such have been going around seemingly oblivious to their impacts on other people who may not be as resistant (somehow) as they are. These people might not be aware of their being carriers of COVID-19 and yet exercise little or no restraint or care in their movements.
Cox, C. [November 10, 2020] “The Vulnerable Can Wait. Vaccinate the Super-Spreaders First,” Wired. https://www.wired.com/story/covid-19-vaccine-super-spreaders/?bxid=5bd6761b3f92a41245dde413&cndid=37243643&esrc=AUTO_OTHER&source=EDT_WIR_NEWSLETTER_0_DAILY_SPECIAL_EDITION_COVER_ZZ&utm_brand=wired&utm_campaign=aud-dev&utm_mailing=WIR_Daily_111020_Special_Cover&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nl&utm_term=WIR_Daily_EXCLUDE_PaywallSubs
One wonders how many super-spreaders are there among us in the Philippines considering many people have practically disregarded other people’s safety vs. COVID-19 by moving about without necessity and application of best practices like distancing and the use of masks and shields.
I read this post on social media stating:
“The work commute is statistically the longest and least frequent type of journey we make in a day. Yet it dominates transport planning.Now more than ever, cities must build cycle networks to support recurring local trips: to the corner store, café, community center, or school.”
I am not sure about the context of the word “dominate” as it is used in the statement but this originates from the Dutch so perhaps there is a difference, even slight, between their case and ours. I would like to add though that aside from “going home” trips, the most dominant in the Philippine context are “to work” and “to school”. And dominant here covers frequency and distance traveled. Consequential are travel times as these are affected by the quantity and quality of facilities and services available to commuters.
I think there should also be restructuring of how surveys are conducted to capture these more frequent trips. Typical surveys like JICA’s usually ask only about the main trips during the day so those will have responses of “to work”, “to school” or “to home”. For the metro level, maybe that’s okay but at the local levels, LGUs would have to make their own surveys in order for data to support initiatives for local transport, most especially active transport. A possible starting point would be the trip chains collected that appear to be a single trips with “original origins” and “final destinations”. These can be separated or disaggregated into individual trips made by different modes rather than be defined or associated with a single (main) mode of transport. That surely would expand the data set and redefine the mode shares usually reported.
Road safety experts and advocates have been calling for more people-friendly streets through design, policy and awareness initiatives embodied in what are usually referred to as 3 E’s – engineering, eduction and enforcement. Among the more contentious issues of road safety is jaywalking, which is defined as a pedestrian walking into or crossing a road while there are designated places or facilities for doing so. Jaywalking is a crime in most cities though enforcement can be lax in many. But while most technical and non-technical advocates of road safety agree that a more people-friendly or people-oriented environment along roads can be attained by decriminalizing jaywalking, the resistance to such a proposal mainly comes from the government and enforcement agencies. It is a bit surprising because even with studies and best practices showing better designs and policies coupled with IECs, the notion of pedestrians crossing the roads anywhere while not castigating motorists deliberately running down or swiping at the pedestrians seem unfathomable or difficult to understand for many administrators or enforcers.
Here is a nice article that argues for decriminalizing jaywalking:
Schmitt, A. and Brown, C.T. (October 16, 2020) “9 Reasons to Eliminate Jaywalking Laws Now,” Bloomberg CityLab, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-16/jaywalking-laws-don-t-make-streets-safer.
Of course, there’s another angle or perspective there in the article since it was written from the context of the current situation in the US. All the reasons, however, are valid and should be taken up seriously in a country like the Philippines where there is also a push for more people-friendly transportation that includes our roads and all its users.
The Institute for Transportation & Development Policy (ITDP) released a new tool for assessing walkability and presents good practice examples from many cities around the world. The tool can be used to assess and/or compare your city, a neighborhood or a street with others. Here is the link to the ITDP’s tool:
There is an introductory article that came out recently from Planetizen about this tool:
Litman, T. (October 16, 2020) ‘Pedestrians First’ Measures Walkability for Babies, Toddlers, Caregivers, Everyone. Planetizen. https://www.planetizen.com/node/110876?utm_source=newswire&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news-10192020&mc_cid=1736ec624f&mc_eid=9ccfe464b1
Personal mobility devices (PMD) are in the news now as the Land Transportation Office (LTO) issued a statement calling for their users to be required to get a license. Apparently, the agency is interpreting the law for people operating motor vehicles as something that extends to users of all powered vehicles. This may be an example of the law not being apt or suitable for the times and not considering the specifications or operating characteristics of these vehicles. Thus, this issue emphasizes the need to update policies and regulations and perhaps re-formulate them to be less car-oriented or biased vs. active transport as well as this emergence of PMDs as another mode choice for travelers.
I took the following photos while conversing with one of the project research staff at our center who uses an electric PMD for his commute between UP and his home in the Cubao district. He related that he alternates between this and his motorcycle. When asked if he felt safe using the PMD, he said it was the same as when he rides a motorcycle as he also wears a helmet and protective pads when using the PMD.
I’ve seen a few PMD users along my commute and for most I thought they practiced safe riding. There were some though who seem to fancy themselves as stunt riders. These are the ones who endanger not only themselves but other road users with their reckless behavior on the roads. They are not different from other so-called “kamote” drivers or riders (with all due respect to the kamote or sweet potato). Like any road user, these should also be apprehended and penalized for unsafe behavior that endangers others.
I saw this article shared by a friend on social media and share it here as an interesting piece providing ideas and the thinking or attitude required if we are to transform our streets:
Jaffe, E. (2020) “4 ways to go from “streets for traffic” to “streets for people”, Medium, https://medium.com/sidewalk-talk/4-ways-to-go-from-streets-for-traffic-to-streets-for-people-6b196db3aabe [Last accessed: 9/30/2020]
It is actually interesting to see how this plays out in Philippine cities. The ‘honeymoon’ or ‘grace’ period from the lockdown to the ‘normalization’ (read: going back to the old normal) of traffic might just have a window and this is closing for active transport. National and local officials, for example, who seemed enthusiastic and quickly put up facilities for active transport have slowed down efforts or even stopped or reneged on their supposed commitments. The next few weeks (even months) will show us where we are really headed even as there are private sector initiatives for active transport promotion and integration.
Here’s a nice link to a National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine pointing to the wealth of researches supporting improvements for active transportation:
The references listed should aid researchers, practitioners, advocates and policymakers in their work towards realizing a people-oriented vs car-centric transportation.
Here is another quick share of an article that is timely and relevant not just now but for years (maybe decades?) to come:
Grossman, D. (2020) “New Study Proposes a Mathematical Solution to Big Cities’ Inequality Problem,” Inverse, https://www.inverse.com/science/a-new-study-shows-why-building-more-equal-cities-could-save-lives?link_uid=15&utm_campaign=inverse-daily-2020-09-14&utm_medium=inverse&utm_source=newsletter [Last accessed: 9/15/2020]
I will just leave it here for future reference but to summarize, the article explains how cities should be planned or replanned based on the distribution or redistribution of certain facilities like hospitals, banks, schools, supermarkets, and parks. It argues that there is an optimum location for these in relation to where people live and work. If properly planned, travel distances and times can be significantly reduced.