Home » Transportation
Category Archives: Transportation
With the Tokyo Olympics recently concluded and me supposed to be in Hiroshima now and participating in an international conference, I am somewhat nostalgic about Japan. Having lived there for a few years while studying, and then staying again for a few months twice later (2001 and 2008) as a visiting researcher, I miss many of my haunts.
Another discovery one time I was searching for an item in my office drawers is a stash of cards from the various times I was staying in Japan. You can purchase these at the station, convenience stores or from the bus driver.
The bus cards already have discounts incorporated. The pink 1,100 bus card costs 1,000 yen so you get an extra 100 yen value. It’s +360 for the blue and +850 for the yellow. Since I was a regular commuter before, I usually got the yellow card. I’m not sure these cards are still there given the advances in technology and innovations over the past decade but it is likely that these were upgraded and are other options to more high tech ones using, for example, smartphones. Mobility as a service (MaaS) is now being promoted in Japan and as I have registered for my conference in Hiroshima, I have a three day transport pass included in my registration. This can be accessed through my phone and could have made a convenient companion going around the city.
A few years ago, Uber was the darling of transportation. It and others like it were considered disruptors. They were but then eventually unraveled as their business model and practices were challenged and exposed. Here’s an article that does not mince words in describing what and how Uber is:
Doctorow, C. (August 11, 2021) “End of the line for Uber,” Medium, https://marker.medium.com/end-of-the-line-for-uber-901e3077bbbc [Last accessed: 8/21/2021]
There’s a wealth of references (links provided) in the article provided to support the arguments of the author. It is not anecdotal but an accumulation of facts from various experiences as well as a documentation of the company’s efforts to hide its flaws.
I co-authored several papers analyzing what was seen as a phenomenon. It was clear that people preferred Uber or Grab over regular taxis because of the higher quality of service they got. Similar results were obtained elsewhere and spelled the doom of many taxi drivers. Those that survived were the better serving ones like taxis in Japan and Singapore. However, the more recent of those papers have shown that what are called TNVS or transport network vehicle service have basically been deceiving and took advantage of their drivers (whom they do not want to refer to as employees). Did they help reduce congestion? They did not, and even added more cars to traffic.
Here’s another share of an article I recently read about what is referred to as “invisible exercise”. This might just be semantics to some people as we often just refer to this as “chores”. Yes, you can do a lot of exercise by being active around your home. Handwashing clothes and dishes, doing gardening, cleaning the house, walking the dog(s), etc. all burn calories. I recall having a workout at our old house in Iloilo where we have wood floors. It’s no joke polishing the floors using a coconut husk (bunot). Just imagine you’re doing/dancing the twist. 🙂
Putka, S. (August 9, 2021) “The invisible exercise that might count more than your workout,” Inverse, https://www.inverse.com/mind-body/hidden-exercise-better-health [Last accessed: 8/19/2021]
To quote from the article:
“More physical activity is almost always for the better when it comes to living a long, healthy life. But only some of us have access to the time, equipment, and resources it takes to engage in what we typically think of as “exercise.”
The spaces we occupy, or our “built environment,” can also erode or enhance chances of staying “fit” over time. In many cases, the necessities of daily life mean many people will get their exercises from daily activities — especially if they live in low-income countries.”
There’s another article I recently read about how regular exercise helps one become resistant to Covid-19. There’s also another that states regular exercise or being active may contribute to those who have Covid-19 to have milder cases (of course this is combined to already having been vaccinated). The key here is being active!
Here are some good reads for those who are following the discussions and arguments pertaining to active transport:
The statements by Engr. Rene Santiago in the article ticked off some people who suddenly were attacking him instead of addressing his arguments. Unfortunately, Santiago is not on any of the social media platforms like Facebook or Twitter so he could not explain his points further. It would have been interesting to read that exchange between him and all comers. Actually, he doesn’t need to be in socmed, and has nothing to prove to those reduced to saying the guy needs to be involved in relevant projects than giving what detractors thought were flawed opinions. Santiago was and still is involved in many projects that are relevant impactful. The body of work speaks for itself unless you aren’t or choose not to be aware of his accomplishments. Perhaps his faults, if you can consider these as faults, are that he is very direct and speaks his mind? But aren’t being direct and speaking your mind supposedly among the attractions of whom old-timers (boomers?) might refer to as upstarts?
Here are a couple of articles from another experienced professional relating about personal experience and expounding on the ideas from Santiago’s interview:
Villarete, N.P. (May 25, 2021) “Walking and biking,” The Freeman, https://www.philstar.com/the-freeman/opinion/2021/05/25/2100630/walking-and-biking [Last accessed: 6/1/2021]
Villarete, N.P. (June 1, 2021) “The concept of quiet streets,” The Freeman, https://www.philstar.com/the-freeman/opinion/2021/06/01/2102287/concept-quiet-streets-streetlife [Last accessed: 6/1/2021]
These opinions are important in the discourse on active transport that we are currently engaged in. No one has a monopoly on ideas and perhaps we need differing opinions to enrich the discussion. What are your thoughts on walking and cycling? Shouldn’t we also give walking equal if not greater priority in terms of policies and infrastructure even as we push for more bike lanes and other cycling-related facilities?
I am an avid reader of history and have been involved in some history projects myself, particularly those concerning transportation. Recently, a former staff of mine who now works in the archives section of the university library discovered a treasure trove of magazines with articles about road safety written back in the 1950s. Then as now, road safety has been an issue and concern for society.
Here is a good read about “jaywalking”, which basically refers to the illegal crossing of streets by pedestrians:
Stromberg, J. (November 4, 2015) The forgotten history of how automakers invented the crime of “jaywalking”, Vox, https://www.vox.com/2015/1/15/7551873/jaywalking-history [Last accessed: 5/27/2021]
The article is very relevant today as we grapple with the specter of road crashes and its outcomes including fatalities and injuries that have long term effects on those involved and affected. We generally regard those crossing anywhere along the streets as jaywalkers; even branding them as “pasaway” (naughty or pesky) as what we learn early on is that there are designated places to cross streets (e.g., crosswalk, pedestrian overpasses and underpasses). And we see all those signs vs. jaywalking including the “Bawal ang tumawid dito” signs by local government units. Were these appropriate in the first place and are we prioritizing vehicles over pedestrians in most cases where “jaywalking” is considered illegal?
While this article maybe factual in as far as history is concerned, we still need to contextualize jaywalking in the current world. There still should be rules albeit these need to be revised, too. Along what roads can we have pedestrians first and cars last? What re-designs do we need to do to make roads safe? While I’m sure engineers and planners are prepared to design and implement these, the buck stops with the decision-makers, who are often politicians with their own agendas. How do we convince them and other authorities about making “jaywalking” legal?
I’ve seen posts where people have offered data on bicycle counts based on short period measurements (e.g., 5 to 15 minutes). They are quick to expand the counts to hourly values. So counting 10 bikes in 5 minutes (10 bicycles/5-minutes) is reported as 120 bikes/hour. I have seen some posts even stating that this was evidence of just how many people choose cycling for their commutes. While there is a significant increase in cycling volumes since last year (probably mainly due to the lack of public transport during this pandemic), their numbers still are quite low compared to both public and private transport users. It would be nice to know just how many people are cycling compared to pre-Covid levels. Here are some data I posted 5 years ago about traffic along the Iloilo Diversion Road where they have a wide bike lane along the northbound side of the highway. One wonders about the current numbers.
Figure 1. AM Peak hour traffic along the Iloilo City Diversion Road (ca. 2016)
Figure 2. PM Peak hour traffic along Iloilo City Diversion Road (ca. 2016)
It’s one thing to report and another to use the expanded value for modeling or analytical work. One basic reason why traffic scientists and engineers use the expanded value is because traffic volume is generally expressed in “vehicles/hour” as a standard unit. For certain purposes, this unit is converted to “pcu/hour” or “passenger car units per hour”. Flow rates may vary and are useful to describe the flow at specific times but the variation of flow is actually more important as this describes the behavior of traffic. I know, it reads or sounds like a car-centric unit of measurement, and it is. But that same comment can be made about currency and how the US dollar is being used rather than the Euro, the Yen, or the Yuan/Renminbi…if you get my point.
Perhaps a better argument is to use persons/hour/direction as the unit of measure if people cannot agree about using a specific vehicle type? That should be more acceptable to most people. But you need to have information about vehicle occupancies. Past studies in Metro Manila have established, for example, that on average the private vehicle occupancy is between 1.2 to 1.6 persons per car. This and other vehicle occupancies are multiplied to the various vehicle to estimate the number of persons in persons/hour/direction traveling along roads. This can be for the entire day or for peak periods. Note though that occupancy values will also vary according to time of day. The same calculations can be applied to rail and other modes as well.
The classic and popular graphic comparing the road space occupied by cars vs. spaces occupied by buses, motorbikes or bicycles, respectively is also inaccurate as these show capacity or the potential high value if certain modes are used. There will never be a 100% single mode choice especially for major roads like say the urban street network. Most people will choose their mode of transportation based on many factors including travel distance, time and cost. Those are the measurable factors. Others like comfort and convenience are also important and perhaps may have other factors substituting for them.
While I support cycling and the provision of bike lanes, there should always be a fair treatment of how data or information are gathered and presented. Otherwise, we are just misinforming people and generating hostility where cooperation or collaboration should be pursued instead. More work or effort towards convincing the general public and especially decision makers and movers in government and the private sector to effect changes in policies and infrastructure requires being collaborative rather than combative. That includes formulating ang communicating solutions rather than playing a blame game.
I was reading about articles and posts in social media about the ’15-minute’ city. The concept basically states that your home should be within 15 minutes of necessary destinations such as the market, the grocery store, the drug store, hospital, police station, and maybe perhaps the government office.
“The core principles behind the 15-minute city aren’t new to urban planning. They derive from an old history of designing cities around people rather than cars, and many European cities that were planned before the invention of the automobile are better suited to this notion. But the idea that has been popularized during the pandemic is that all cities — including European ones — must center future planning on the goal of ensuring car-free access to basic necessities, such as health care, schools, employment and food. It’s a lofty goal, but one that is unlikely to reach all neighborhoods in many cities without drastic interventions and investments. Pitter warns that simply injecting design changes such as bike lanes and parklets into a neighborhood will not reverse segregation that has been embedded into city planning.” O’Sullivan in “Where the ’15-Minute City’ Falls Short”
Many of our cities and municipalities date to the Spanish times or older (e.g., Manila, Cebu). Those that developed during the Spanish period were planned according to European cities. You know, with the church, government (i.e., municipal hall), market and school located at the center. Residential and commercial establishments surround the center, which often had a plaza. And, as the saying goes, the further you were from the center (i.e., the fainter the sound of the church bells), the lesser you are as far as society goes. This set-up still applies now and arguably sari-sari stores, which were the convenience stores of old, are now being replaced by convenience store chains like 7/11 and Family Mart. Commerce-wise, it helps that big companies like SM, Robinsons and Puregold have smaller stores spread around. And hospitals like Medical City have smaller clinics and laboratories. Wet markets? Surely there are talipapas if you just check around you.
Even now, if you look around closely, the only likely exceptions to the 15-minute city concept would be concerning the workplaces and schools. Many people live more than 15 minutes from their workplaces, enduring ‘painful’ or ‘wasteful’ commutes on a daily basis. The same goes with students who are enrolled in their or their parents’ preferred schools. Note that the public school system in the Philippines, despite its being maligned, has pre-school, elementary and high school campuses or buildings located strategically in each barangay. That would mean short commutes for students enrolled in these schools which prioritize residents of the barangays. However, many prefer private schools (e.g., Ateneo, LaSalle, St. Scholastica, St. Paul, Assumption, etc.) or elite public schools (i.e., science high schools) and so even children have to endure long commutes.
So do you still think we don’t have 15-minute cities in the Philippines?
Since the Philippine government is engaged in its Build, Build, Build infrastructure development program, and agencies like the DPWH and DOTr often or regularly refer to what’s happening in the US in terms of projects, guidelines and standards, I am sharing the following article on the principle
Marshall, A. (March 18, 2021)“What Are the Five Principles of Good Infrastructure?” Governing.com, https://www.governing.com/community/Five-Principles-Good-Infrastructure.html [Last accessed: 4/5/2021]
Despite obviously being an article about US infrastructure in the context of the new administration there, there are just too many takeaways or relevant information here that applies to us and how we are developing and maintaining our infrastructure. To quote:
“First of all, cost matters. The evidence is pretty clear now that we pay several times more than other advanced nations to build transit infrastructure, particularly tunnels, and possibly highways as well. It appears we pay too much to build public parks.
Second, time matters. We still get estimates for infrastructure projects whose construction stretches into decades, when it should be a few years. Time relates to cost. Adding time makes projects more expensive.
Third, connections matter. Whether it’s a light-rail line joining up to a bus line, or an interstate exit linking to a town, the connections between infrastructure systems are important. High-speed rail lines need to intersect seamlessly with the cities they serve. Infrastructure can’t be designed in a vacuum. Urban planners and designers should be at the top of the infrastructure food chain, so that transportation and other departments work for comprehensive visions.
Fourth, design matters. Western Europe has been erecting light, airy bridges for decades, while we have continued to build heavy concrete slabs. This is changing, but we lag behind other countries in the design quality of everything from bridges to subways.
Finally, ownership matters. Even the best-designed and swiftly built infrastructure will turn bad if we give one or two private companies total control over them. As we use private companies for broadband, cable, telephones, data management and the power that runs our homes, we need to remember this. When we can’t (or won’t) have public systems, then the private ones need to be carefully managed.”
To what extent do you think these principles apply to our case?
I saw this article posted on Planetizen about what the new US DOT Secretary would be and should be doing upon his appointment:
Fischer, R. (February 8, 2021) “You’re in Charge of the US DOT; Where Do You Start?” Planetizen, https://www.planetizen.com/node/112170?utm_source=newswire&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news-02152021&mc_cid=f4502363c4&mc_eid=9ccfe464b1
While, the US needs to implement a lot of projects for their needs and perhaps some catching-up here and there across the country, the term “catching-up” cannot really describe the backlog of programs and projects we need to implement in the Philippines. And so I posted the same article on social media to solicit some reactions. There were some good responses but many I though were on the cliche side. Some even posted about personalities in various transport agencies rather than the reforms needed or the infrastructure required to address transport problems.
How about you? If you were appointed Secretary of the Department of Transportation; where do you start?
I write this as a super typhoon is bearing down on us this 1st of November. I found this map on the internet without attribution to the original source. It shows a still-born Metro Manila with only four local government units: Manila, Quezon City, Pasay City and San Juan.
What if instead of the Metro Manila we have now, Rizal retained the towns (that eventually became cities) that were transferred to what became the National Capital Region (NCR)? These are Navotas, Malabon, Caloocan, Marikina, Pasig, Pateros, Mandaluyong, Makati, Taguig, Paranaque, Las Pinas and Muntinlupa. Valenzuela was taken from Bulacan Province. Pasig was the capital of the province (Yes, that’s why there is Capitolyo and the Rizal Provincial Capitol used to be in Pasig where you now have Capitol Commons. Surely, the political landscape could have been different though one could argue that certain families would have still held sway in cities/towns where they have their routes. Imagine, the governorship of the province would have been a coveted post but not by the the current holders but likely by personalities from the more progressive and densely populated cities. Governance would have been different, too, as Rizal would have both highly urbanized and rural areas. Perhaps certain undesirable politicians could not have emerged due to the dynamics of a province with highly urbanized cities? What’s your take on this “what if”?