Home » Governance (Page 15)
Category Archives: Governance
On “universal basic mobility”
You’ve probably heard or read about the concept of “universal basic income.” The concept has been discussed and implemented or attempted in some countries including those that have successfully tinkered with their social welfare systems. Here is an article that presents and discusses the idea of universal basic mobility:
Descant, S. (December 22, 2021) “‘Universal Basic Mobility’ Speaks to a City’s Values,” Government Technology, https://www.govtech.com/fs/universal-basic-mobility-speaks-to-a-citys-values [Last accessed: 12/24/2021]
It was in graduate school back in the 1990s when I first encountered the concept of the ‘transportation poor’ and ‘transport poverty’. While the term suggests people who are generally in the low income classes, the actual definition of transport poverty is more complicated and comprehensive than that. While sustainable transport and its current versions have always discussed the more fad issues on public transport, low carbon transport, active transport, etc., specific engagements on the more rad topic of equity in transportation have not been as common. Perhaps this current issue and discussions on the government’s “no vaccination, no ride” policy will open doors for equity to be out in the open?
–
Placeholders and inheritors
[Notice to the reader: This post is not directly about transport or traffic.]
I like one post circulating in social media that is attributed to former Sen. Ramon Magsaysay, Jr. about the Vice President. I particularly like this part: “Did NOT choose to be a placeholder when her husband finished his term as Mayor in Naga.” If you do a scan of elected officials around the country, you can probably see how many if not most are held by political families. Even Marvel Comics recognizes this when they featured Filipino superheroes in an Iron Man series where the original team perished and was replaced by their children!
Placeholders are usually wives of politicians who have reached the maximum of their term limits. A mayor, for example, can only run for reelection twice for a total of 9 years continuously in power. After the nine years, he/she must step down to give way to a new mayor. Instead of honing someone competent from the other leaders in the local government (e.g., the vice mayor, a councilor, etc.). As they say, elective posts in the Philippines are family business and are often passed on to the next generation of what are termed as dynasties.
My most recent encounter with a “placeholder” was with the then Mayor of Tacloban City, Cristina Gonzales-Romualdez. She was on the second year of her term after she took over from her husband who was mayor for 3 terms (9 years). I must say that she had very competent staff and we thought they did their jobs well and for the benefit of many in Tacloban. And this was during the years immediately after the tragedy brought by Typhoon Yolanda (Ketsana).
Previous to that, we’ve also encountered or engaged with other local government units dominated by certain families. One town in Cebu even had the matriarch as mayor, the son as vice mayor and the uncles as councilors! The municipal hall had a portrait of the patriarch as a multiple term mayor in the recent past. You wonder if there were no other competent people in such towns and cities.
The next presidential elections will feature the son of a former dictator with the daughter of a current president as running mate. They are supported by other dynasties such those of two previous presidents including one who was been convicted of plunder but pardoned by his successor. He was allowed to run for president again despite the conviction as the Comelec failed to make a firm interpretation and stand vs. it. Now comes someone who believes he is entitled to the presidency despite also being convicted of tax evasion. While arguably a lighter crime, it is still a conviction and should mean he cannot run for the highest position in government. He’s also a fraud because he claims to have completed his education at a well known UK school when in truth he failed there. Would you trust a tax evader, fraud and one who does not admit guilt nor expresses regret or remorse for his family’s crimes with the presidency of the country? I certainly won’t and don’t!
–
What they are not saying about UTSMMA and Metro Manila’s first subway line
My social media feed is suddenly filled with shares of articles (the same PR text apparently) from the Department of Transportation, its Secretary and his fans and local rail aficionados about the progress of the Metro Manila Subway Project, which is dubbed as Metro Manila’s first subway line. While these posts start and appear as factual narratives, they are silent about certain facts that the writers conveniently did not include as part of their narrative. Perhaps it is because they are currently allied with the son of the dictator who decided vs. building what could have been the country’s first subway line and a game-changer for commuting in the metropolis.
UTSMMA or the Urban Transport Study in Manila Metropolitan Area was completed in 1973 and was immediately followed by a Feasibility Study on the Manila Rapid Transit Rail Line No. 1 that was completed in 1976. Here’s a nice render of a subway station platform from that FS:

Two things that need to be said:
- Marcos decided against the subway line in favor of LRT Line 1 after being heavily influenced by a World Bank report and the succeeding MMETROPLAN (funded by the WB). It is also said that he wanted to have the bragging rights to the first mass transit line in Southeast Asia but Singapore’s first MRT line would finish ahead of Metro Manila’s if the Philippines pursued the subway. The latter was a late and fateful decision because commitment to the RTR Line 1 could have been made earlier and construction could have started ahead of Singapore’s (and likely finished ahead if there were no major delays).
- The corruption during the Marcos dictatorship led to succeeding administrations including the current being saddled by debt and unable to put up major transportation infrastructure such as a subway line for decades (this is already well documented so denial or refusal to understand is the burden of the denier – no logic or fact can can probably change such people’s views or beliefs) without piling up more debt.
That said, I would caution vs. delaying the subway project any further. It is already almost 40 years since a subway was due and though the alignment is totally different from what was planned in the 1970s, there’s potential here to revolutionize how people will commute in Metro Manila. It will only become more expensive to build in the future.
–
Article on people-oriented traffic management
Here’s a quick share on a topic that is also very relevant especially for local government units – traffic management. To quote from the article:
“Today, when the mobility of Filipinos is severely constrained by limited public transport capacity, …and when there is heightened pressure for private vehicle use, there is no better time to re-orient traffic management in the Philippines in order to prioritize inclusive, efficient and environmentally sustainable travel modes. The crucial ingredient is not infrastructure but political will.”
Siy, R.Y. (January 8, 2022) “People oriented traffic management,” Mobility Matters, The Manila Times, https://www.manilatimes.net/2022/01/08/business/top-business/people-oriented-traffic-management/1828593 [Last accessed: 1/8/2022]
The article makes perfect sense as traffic management in the country has always been car-oriented including the strategies, policies, schemes, measures and others that have focused on facilitating private car travel over active and public transport modes. The challenge here is how to bring this up front and an election issue at both national and local levels.
–
On transport equity
To start the year 2022, I’m sharing another article by Todd Litman. I thought this was a timely one as this is basically about transport equity and the results despite competent planners and perhaps good intentions.
Litman, T. (December 21, 2022) “Good Planners: Bad Outcomes. How Structural Biases Can Lead to Unfair and Inefficient Results,” Planetizen, https://www.planetizen.com/blogs/115621-good-planners-bad-outcomes-how-structural-biases-can-lead-unfair-and-inefficient?utm_source=newswire&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news-12232021&mc_cid=35d4ce69aa&mc_eid=9ccfe464b1 [Last accessed: 12/27/2021]
There should be similar studies for the Philippine case. We need to understand and correct bad practices including those related to an over-reliance to what is referred to as “old school” practices (i.e., “nakasanayan na”, “ginagawa na noon pa”, and so on), which is what young engineers and planners are taught by the “old boys” in certain agencies as an initiation of sorts if not part of their ‘continuous orientation’ at these offices.
–
Back to the old normal?
As traffic continues to worsen after, The MMDA has reinstated the number coding scheme albeit from 5:00 to 8:00 PM on weekdays for now. This is in recognition of the worsening traffic congestion brought about by people returning to their workplaces and the easing of travel restrictions across the entire population. People are now moving about as can be seen in transport terminals and commercial areas (e.g., shopping malls, markets, etc.). With the return of severe traffic congestion, it begs the question whether we are back to the ‘old normal’.
I thought the photo above pretty much describes how it was before Covid-19. The problem is that this photo was taken earlier today and we are still technically in a pandemic. Does the photo show the people’s renewed confidence in using public transportation? Or is it a matter of necessity (i.e., commuters having no choice but to risk it in order to get to their workplaces or home)? If they had motorcycles, these people would likely use them instead of taking the jeepney. I will also dare ask why don’t they bike instead? They seem able bodied enough to try cycling instead. Is it because their commuting distances are long? Or are there other reasons that evade us? If these are the same reasons and Covid-19 is not a major factor for their choice, then perhaps we are back to the ‘old normal’ and have not progressed significantly despite claims by various groups that we are experiencing a paradigm shift in favor of active transport. All the more that we need to urgently revisit and reassess how transport should be in order for us to transition to a more sustainable future.
–
Vaccines for road safety
If there is the current vaccination drive vs. Covid-19, there is also something like this for road safety. The International Road Assessment Program (iRAP) developed many tools and resources to address road safety issues. I am sharing the link to the Vaccines for Roads site of iRAP here:
Because Every Life Counts
It is always good to know about these resources whether you are a practitioner, a researcher. a teacher or perhaps an advocate of road safety. There are many examples here of interventions for various scenarios or conditions that will hopefully lead to safer roads for all.
–
On the key transformations needed to achieve sustainable, low carbon transport
Also related to COP26, I am sharing material from the Sustainable Low Carbon Transport (SLOCAT) partnership, of which our center is part of. SLOCAT recently released the 11 key transformations for sustainable low carbon land transport urgently needed to meet the climate targets. Here’s a link to their site:
SLOCAT also has the following Wheel of Transport and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s) on the same site. The Wheel illustrates the four cross-cutting themes: equitable, healthy, resilient and green.

In the SLOCAT site, they list the following to support the transformations:
Overarching approaches to apply across transport modes and sub-sectors overtime
- Put people first, not vehicles and technology
- Co-create and communicate a compelling vision and targets
- Guide short- and medium-term action with clear, coherent political messages
- Combine push and pull measures: Regulate and incentivise
- Link policies within and beyond transport for synergies
- Prioritise resources by social and sustainable value for money
- Engage, empower and coordinate stakeholders across government levels and sectors
- Build capacity and improve data
- Implement pilots to learn and share, then roll out at scale
–
On housing and transportation
I’ve written about how we should not be trying to isolate transportation as if it is singly at fault for the transport and traffic mess many of us are in at present. There are many factors affecting travel behavior including mode choice. Travel distances, travel times and mode choices are not a consequence of transportation system (including infrastructure) alone. Land development and pricing especially those pertaining to housing are critical in how people decide where to live. These are intertwined with transportation and can be quite complex without the proper data or information to help us understand the relationship. That understanding, we are to assume, should lead us to the formulation of policies intended to correct unwanted trends and perhaps encourage more compact developments that are closer to desirable concepts such as the 15-minute city.
Here is an interesting article to enrich the discussion on this topic:
Dion, R. (October 28, 2021) “Coupling Housing and Mobility: A Radical Rethink for Freeways,” Planetizen.com, https://www.planetizen.com/features/115126-coupling-housing-and-mobility-radical-rethink-freeways?utm_source=newswire&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news-11012021&mc_cid=85ec2b565f&mc_eid=9ccfe464b1%5BLast accessed: 11/3/2021]
The first thing that came to my mind are residents of northern and southern Metro Manila and the surrounding provinces. Many chose to buy houses there and beyond (i.e., Bulacan, Laguna and Cavite) and yet work or study in Metro Manila CBDs like Makati, Ortigas and BGC. And they do use the tollways (e.g., NLEX, SLEX, CaviTEX, Skyway) to get to their workplaces and schools.
This is also a relevant and timely topic in the Philippines as many cities are already headed for sprawls that will inevitably put more pressure on transportation infrastructure development that usually leans towards car-oriented projects (e.g., road widening, new roads, flyovers, etc.) rather than people-oriented ones (e.g., modern public transportation systems, bikeways, pedestrian infrastructure). Note that only Tokyo has developed an extensive enough railway system to cover the sprawl that is the Tokyo Metropolitan Area, which if interpreted loosely also includes Yokohama, Kawasaki and Chiba in the sprawl. No, we cannot build as fast to have as dense a railway network as Tokyo’s or other cities with similar rail systems. And so we have to figure out another way to address this problem.
–
Parking: minimum or maximum
The National Building Code (NBC) of the Philippines stipulates the minimum number of parking spaces or slots per type of establishment and intensity of development (i.e., according to area or other parameters). These established provisions are generally called parking minimums. The NBC’s provisions are already archaic by current standards and need to be revised but not in the way it was apparently developed. The NBC needs supporting evidence from studies (are there any dependable ones around?) on parking requirements including those for bicycles and motorcycles. These should clearly not include or impede the requirements of pedestrians. And local government units must be required to enforce these NBC provisions.
Here is an article that discusses the proposal for new limits on parking, particularly in large developments in Boston, Ma. in the US:
The article points to this one:
City of Boston (September 20, 2021) Maximum Parking Ratios, https://www.boston.gov/departments/transportation/maximum-parking-ratios [Last accessed: 10/19/2021]
I must admit that I still have to do a lot of reading on this. There are some who are calling for the abolition of parking minimums but you just can’t do this so abruptly without understanding the context and current set-up. We are not Boston or San Francisco or Hong Kong or Singapore in terms of the transport infrastructure and services and the progressiveness of policies including those governing or covering housing and other factors that come into play with transportation. Sprawl and the resulting pressures (requirements for efficient travel) on the transportation system is not transport’s fault or responsibility alone like what some articles or infographics make it appear to be. It is very much about land use and land development, and the policies and the political economy behind these developments.
–
