SUTI Report - Metro Manila

Disclaimer
The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the
United Nations Economic and Social Commission of Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP). The designation employed and
the presentation of the material in the report do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the
Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city, or area or of its authorities,
or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The views expressed, analysis, conclusions and
recommendations are those of the authors, and should not necessarily be considered as reflecting the views or
carrying the endorsement of the United Nations. Mention of firm names and commercial products does not imply the
endorsement of the United Nations ESCAP.
This report has been issued without formal editing.
ii
Table of Contents
ACRONYMS ......................................................................................................................................................................... IV
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................................................ VII
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................................................. VIII
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................................................... 1
1 METRO MANILA PROFILE .............................................................................................................................................. 6
1.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................................. 7
1.2 METRO MANILA’S TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM.......................................................................................................................... 9
1.2.1 Metro Manila’s Road Network ................................................................................................................................ 9
1.2.2 Airport .................................................................................................................................................................... 10
1.2.3 Ports........................................................................................................................................................................ 10
1.2.4 Motor vehicle trends and congestion .................................................................................................................... 11
1.2.5 Public Transportation Policies and Infrastructure................................................................................................. 12
1.2.6 Institutional Arrangement ..................................................................................................................................... 16
1.2.7 Future Plans and Projects ...................................................................................................................................... 18
1.2.8 Relevance of the SUTI analysis ................................................................................................................................... 20
2 CURRENT STATE OF URBAN TRANSPORT IN METRO MANILA: COVID-19 IMPACTS .................................... 21
2.1 EMERGENCE OF COVID-19 IN THE PHILIPPINES ....................................................................................................................... 22
2.2 INTER-AGENCY TASK FORCE FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF EMERGING INFECTIOUS DISEASES ............................................................. 22
2.3 COMMUNITY QUARANTINE CLASSIFICATIONS ......................................................................................................................... 22
2.4 TRANSPORTATION GUIDELINES FOR VARIOUS QUARANTINE LEVELS .............................................................................................. 27
2.5 PUBLIC TRANSPORT UNDER GENERAL COMMUNITY QUARANTINE ............................................................................................. 29
2.5.1 Rationalized Bus Routes in Metro Manila ............................................................................................................. 30
2.5.2 Service Contracting Program ................................................................................................................................. 32
2.5.3 Free Rides: Expansion of the Service Contracting Program .................................................................................. 34
2.6 RETURN TO ECQ AND REVISED TRANSPORT GUIDELINES .......................................................................................................... 35
2.7 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION .................................................................................................................................................. 37
2.8 IMPACTS TO CITIZENS’ MOBILITY ......................................................................................................................................... 39
2.9 IMPACTS TO THE TRANSPORT AND TOURISM INDUSTRIES.......................................................................................................... 42
2.10 MOVING FORWARD: PLANS OF THE PHILIPPINE GOVERNMENT .................................................................................................. 42
3 SUTI DATA COLLECTION/ COMPILATION APPROACH .......................................................................................... 44
4 DATA AND ANALYSIS FOR SUTI ................................................................................................................................. 49
4.1 INDICATOR 1:EXTENT TO WHICH TRANSPORT PLANS COVER PUBLIC TRANSPORT, INTERMODAL FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE FOR ACTIVE
MODES ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 50
4.2 INDICATOR 2: MODAL SHARE OF ACTIVE AND PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN COMMUTING............................................................................ 52
4.3 INDICATOR 3: CONVENIENT ACCESS TO PUBLIC TRANSPORT SERVICE ................................................................................. 54
4.4 INDICATOR 4: PUBLIC TRANSPORT QUALITY AND RELIABILITY ............................................................................................. 56
4.5 INDICATOR 5: TRAFFIC FATALITIES PER 100,000 INHABITANTS....................................................................................................... 57
4.6 INDICATOR 6: AFFORDABILITY – TRAVEL COSTS AS PART OF INCOME ................................................................................. 60
4.7 INDICATOR 7: OPERATIONAL COSTS OF THE PUBLIC TRANSPORT SYSTEM .......................................................................... 61
4.8 INDICATOR 8: INVESTMENT IN PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS ................................................................................... 62
4.9 INDICATOR 9: AIR QUALITY (PM10) ....................................................................................................................................... 63
4.10 INDICATOR 10: GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM TRANSPORT ................................................................................... 64
4.11 ADDITIONAL DATA .................................................................................................................................................................. 65
4.11.1 Energy ........................................................................................................................................................................ 65
4.11.2 Gender and Inclusive Policies .................................................................................................................................... 66
5 SUMMARY, REFLECTIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................ 72
REFERENCES: ................................................................................................................................................................... 78
iii
ACRONYMS
AFCS Automated Fare Collection System

APORs Authorized Persons Outside Residence
BAU Business-As-Usual
BGC Bonifacio Global City
BLRC Bulacan, Rizal, Laguna, and Cavite
BRT Bus Rapid Transit
CBD Central Business District
CIA Clark International Airport
CDP Comprehensive Development Plans
CLUP Comprehensive Land Use Plans
CNG Compressed Natural Gas
CPC Certificate of Public Convenience
DBP Development Bank of the Philippines
DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources
DILG Department of the Interior and Local Government
DHSUD Department of Human Settlements and Urban
DOH Department of Health
DOLE Department of Labor and Employment
DOTr Department of Transportation
DPWH Department of Public Works and Highways
DTI Department of Trade and Industry
ECQ Enhanced Community Quarantine
EDSA Epifanio Delos Santos Avenue
GAA General Appropriations Act
GAD Gender and Development
GCQ General Community Quarantine
GCR Greater Capital Region
GFPS Gender and Development Focal Point System
GHG Green House Gas
GTFS General Transit Feed Specification
HIS Household Interview Survey
HLURB Housing & Land Use Regulatory Board
i-ACT Inter-Agency Council for Traffic
IATF-EID Inter-Agency Task Force for the Management of Emerging Infectious Diseases
JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency
LBP Land Bank of the Philippines
LDIP Local Development Investment Program
LGU Local Government Unit
LPTRP Local Public Transport Route Plan
LPG Liquefied Petroleum Gas
LTFRB Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board
LTO Land Transportation Office
MC Memorandum Circular
MECQ Modified Enhanced Community Quarantine
MGCQ Modified General Community Quarantine
MMARAS Metro Manila Accident Recording and Analysis System
MMC Metro Manila Council
MMDA Metro Manila Development Authority
MMUTIS Metro Manila Urban Transportation Integration
MRT-3 Metro Rail Transit Line 3
NAIA Ninoy Aquino International Airport
nCOV novel Corona Virus
NCDA National Council for Disability Affairs
NCR National Capital Region
NCR-RDP National Capital Region - Regional Development Plan
NEDA National Economic and Development Authority
NLET North Luzon Express Terminal
ODA Official Development Assistance
OFG Omnibus Franchising Guidelines
iv
SUTI Sustainable Urban Transport Index
SRIT Santa Rosa Integrated Terminal
PAPs Priority Programs and Projects
PDP Philippine Development Plan
PITX Paranaque Integrated Terminal Exchange
PIP Public Investment Program
PIU Program Implementing Unit
PM10 Particulate Matter 10
PNP Philippine National Police
PNP-HPG Philippine National Police-Highway Patrol Group
PPPC Public-Private Partnership Center
PUB Public Utility Bus
PUJ Public Utility Jeepneys
PUV Public Utility Vehicle
PUVMP PUV Modernization Program
PWDs Persons With Disabilities
TNVS Transportation Network Vehicle Service
UNDP United Nations Development Program
USD United States Dollar
VGC Valenzuela Gateway Complex
v
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. National Capital Region Population and Population Density. ........................................................................... 8

Table 2. Length of Road Network in Metro Manila ......................................................................................................... 9
Table 3. Annual Passengers in NAIA Terminals .......................................................................................................... 10
Table 4. Integrated Terminals in Metro Manila catering to provincial buses ................................................................ 15
Table 5. Railway lines operating in Metro Manila ......................................................................................................... 15
Table 6. Institutions with mandates relevant to urban mobility ..................................................................................... 17
Table 7. Infrastructure Flagship Projects Significant to Metro Manila Transport .......................................................... 19
Table 8. Community Quarantine Classifications in Metro Manila ................................................................................. 23
Table 9. Comparison of restrictions for various Community Quarantine classifications effective June 2021 .............. 24
Table 10. Industries allowed/ not allowed to operate under various Community Quarantine classifications effective
June 2021 ............................................................................................................................................................ 25
Table 11. IATF/DOTr Public Transport Protocols for Areas Under GCQ. .................................................................... 28
Table 12. Comparison of number of PUVs before and during the pandemic ............................................................... 32
Table 13. Payouts Under the Service Contracting Program ........................................................................................ 33
Table 14. Payouts and Incentives Under the Expanded Service Contracting Program ............................................... 34
Table 15. Status of Service Contracting Participants in Metro Manila ......................................................................... 34
Table 16. Revised Omnibus Guidelines on Public Transportation in the Enforcement of ECQ ................................... 35
Table 17. Change in mobility for various destinations during different community quarantine classifications in Metro
Manila from Google mobility report ...................................................................................................................... 40
Table 18. Indicator 1 Score Card .................................................................................................................................. 50
Table 19. SUTI Table for Indicator 1............................................................................................................................. 51
Table 20. Modal share data from the JICA study (2015) .............................................................................................. 52
Table 21. Estimation of bicycle trips percentage from HIS data ................................................................................... 52
Table 24. Tabulation of survey response (Pre-pandemic)............................................................................................ 56
Table 26. Number of Persons Involved in Fatal and Non-Fatal Accidents ................................................................... 59
Table 27. Persons Involved in Fatal Accidents ............................................................................................................. 59
Table 29. Determination of Single Ticket Price ............................................................................................................ 60
Table 32. Breakdown of Investment in Public Transport Systems ............................................................................... 63
Table 35. SUTI Table for Indicator 10........................................................................................................................... 64
Table 36. Number of Electric PUVs in Metro Manila .................................................................................................... 65
Table 37. Accessibility policies ..................................................................................................................................... 67
Table 38. Gender and Development Policies ............................................................................................................... 70
Table 39. Summary of scores for all SUTI indicators ................................................................................................... 73
Table 40. Comparison of SUTI scores for various cities .............................................................................................. 76
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Map of Metro Manila ........................................................................................................................................................... 7
Figure 2. Urban and peri-urban centers in Metro Manila ................................................................................................................... 8
Figure 3. Metro Manila Road Network............................................................................................................................................... 9
Figure 4. Trend in registered vehicles in Metro Manila ................................................................................................................... 11
Figure 5. Tricycle ............................................................................................................................................................................ 12
Figure 6. UV Express ...................................................................................................................................................................... 12
Figure 7. Traditional Public Utility Jeepneys (PUJ) ......................................................................................................................... 12
Figure 8. Components of the PUV Modernization Program ............................................................................................................ 14
Figure 9. Various scenes from the Paranaque Integrated Terminal Exchanged (PITX) .................................................................. 15
Figure 10. Historical Ridership of railways serving Metro Manila .................................................................................................... 16
Figure 11. Pasig River Ferry Service .............................................................................................................................................. 16
Figure 12. Mall tenants of the first-ever mall to be given the Safety Seal pose in a ceremonial event. ........................................... 23
Figure 13. Community Quarantine Classifications and Covid-19 Cases ......................................................................................... 24
Figure 14. Movement Restrictions Under the Alert Level System ................................................................................................... 26
Figure 15. March 16, first day of community quarantine: Competition for public transportation due to the capacity restrictions were
seen with passengers wanting to enter Metro Manila. ........................................................................................................... 27
Figure 16. 16 March 2020, first day of community quarantine: Passengers of MRT-3 queueing and not following social distancing
protocols. ............................................................................................................................................................................... 27
Figure 17. Mobile palengkes (markets) such as this in Pasig City became a trend so people need not travel far to buy food........ 28
Figure 18. Omnibus Guidelines on Public Transport as of May 2020. ............................................................................................ 29
Figure 19. Drivers of a traditional PUJ demonstrate a pulley system for collecting fares, in order to reduce physical contact
between passengers. Before the pandemic, passengers would pass along money to pay the driver at the front. ................ 30
Figure 20. Acrylic barriers and electric fans separate the driver from passengers in a Grab car. ................................................... 30
Figure 21 Rationalized bus routes in Metro Manila per LTFRB MC No. 2020-019 to be effective when the community quarantine
status is downgraded to GCQ ............................................................................................................................................... 31
Figure 22. Sample output of the Bus and Jeepney Live Location Tracker which now allows passengers to track the location of the
PUVs they want to ride. The tracker can be accessed via https://tracker.sakay.ph ............................................................... 32
Figure 23. The process for Service Contracting was presented by the LTFRB Chairman in a Congressional hearing held via Zoom
last 21 June 2021. ................................................................................................................................................................. 33
Figure 24. A volunteer from Bikers United Manila stood on the streets of Commonwealth Avenue in Quezon City to guide cyclists,
using makeshift dividers made of water bottles. .................................................................................................................... 37
Figure 25. 313 kilometers of Bicycle Lanes in Metro Manila as of July 2021 .................................................................................. 37
Figure 26. Classes of Bicycle Lanes ............................................................................................................................................... 38
Figure 27. Sample page from the Bike Manual, showing safety guidelines for cyclists and road users. This can also be
downloaded from: https://www.smsupermalls.com/smcares/advocacies/bike-friendly-sm/ ................................................... 39
Figure 28 Apple Mobility Trends report for Metro Manila as of 7 October 2021 show the level of reduction in mobility based on
Apple Map requests............................................................................................................................................................... 39
Figure 29 Google mobility report for Metro Manila show the trends in movement towards various trip attractors/ generators........ 40
Figure 30. Rail ridership before and during the community quarantine ........................................................................................... 41
Figure 32. Passenger queue at the Roosevelt Station of the EDSA Carousel bus line in Quezon City on June 8, 2021 ................ 41
Figure 31. Average Annual Daily Traffic in major thoroughfares ..................................................................................................... 42
Figure 33. Active Transportation Policies. ....................................................................................................................................... 43
Figure 34. Workflow Diagram to Develop the MUCEP HIS Master File .......................................................................................... 46
Figure 35. Rail, Bus, and Jeepney routes in Metro Manila .............................................................................................................. 54
Figure 36. Metro Manila population within 500-meters from public transport stops ........................................................................ 54
Figure 37. Comparison on public transport frequency usage before and during pandemic ............................................................ 57
Figure 38.Number of Accident Cases in Metro Manila (2016-2020) ............................................................................................... 58
Figure 39. Vehicles Involved (Fatal and non-fatal) 2019 ................................................................................................................. 58
Figure 40. Vehicles Involved (Fatal only) 2019 ............................................................................................................................... 58
Figure 41. Trend in Number of Vehicles Involved in FATAL Accidents ........................................................................................... 58
Figure 42. Historical PM10 concentrations in Metro Manila ............................................................................................................ 64
Figure 43. Modelling framework used in Bottom-up approach to GHG emission estimation .......................................................... 64
Figure 44. Percentage Distribution of Population Age 15 and Older by Disability Level and Sex, 2016 ......................................... 66
Figure 45. Modern Jeepney prototype with provision for passengers with wheelchairs .................................................................. 67
Figure 46. SUTI Diagram for Metro Manila ..................................................................................................................................... 74
Figure 47.SUTI diagram comparison with other cities ..................................................................................................................... 76
vii
Executive Summary
The National Capital Region (NCR) or Metro Manila is the Philippines’ economic, political, and educational
center. With a population of 13,484,462, it is the second most populated region in the country and the
densest. Its economic importance also makes it the hub for international and domestic transport. The
country’s main gateway, the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) is located in Metro Manila. The port
of Manila also serves as the principal gateway seaport of the Philippines. It is made up of three major
facilities: Manila North Harbor, Manila South Harbor, and the Manila International Container Terminal.
The number of motor vehicles registered in Metro Manila increased by 38% from 2014 until pre-pandemic
year of 2019. Improvements in the economy and rise in population along with the slow pace of infrastructure
development has resulted to severe traffic congestion, heavy air and water pollution, lack of affordable
housing, and swatch of blighted zones (JICA, 2019). JICA estimated the transport cost to be Php 3.5 Billion
(USD 69.1 Million) per day in Metro Manila, with the observation that nearly all roads have reached
saturation point.
Public transportation in Metro Manila is largely operated by the private sector. Although rail lines exist, there
are only three (3) urban and one (1) sub-urban line operating. The most dominant mode of road-based
transport is the Public Utility Jeepney along with buses, and UV express which are predominantly operated
by many small to medium-scale business owners. Coupled with a lack operational standardization and strict
enforcement of policies, service quality has be quite poor.
The Philippine government has recently embarked on various reforms aimed at improving the state of public
transportation nationwide, one of which is its Build, Build, Build infrastructure program which is proclaimed
to usher in the “Golden Age of Infrastructure”. This ambitious program is composed of many projects, at the
forefront of which are 104 Infrastructure Flagship Projects costing around Php 4.13 Trillion (USD 81.7
Billion) which are accorded with high priority. Moreover, the Public Utility Vehicle Modernization Program
has also been established which aims to institute comprehensive reforms in the PUV industry starting from
regulatory improvements, to local government involvement in route planning, and vehicle modernization
and financing, to name a few.
Metro Manila has been the focus of several master-planning efforts, studies, and projects due to its
economic importance as the country’s capital. This is a good start for SUTI evaluation in the Philippines.
Covid-19 Impacts to Transport in Metro Manila

On January 5, 2020, following reports of the Coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan City, China, the Philippines’
Department of Health (DOH) ordered tighter checks on all travelers entering the Philippines. This was
followed by a series of flight restrictions for countries with Covid-19 outbreaks. It was only in March of 2020,
after the first case of local community transmission was detected, when stricter quarantine measures were
implemented.
Four (4) community quarantine classifications were designated by the Inter-agency Task Force on Emerging
Infectious Diseases. The classification assigned to each region is based on healthcare utilization rate
(available hospital beds), risk classification, number of cases, and other socio-economic factors. The figure
on the next page illustrates the various quarantine levels assigned to Metro Manila vis-à-vis the Covid-19
cases. The period of March 16 – May 30, 2020 was the toughest for transportation workers as public
transportation services were not allowed except for minimal services that catered to healthcare workers.
Starting September 16, 2021, a new system for classifying the quarantine status was released which was
based on a numbered alert-level system.
*Community quarantine restrictions vs. Covid-19 cases. Ranges marked with “S” are periods wherein public transport was suspended
Public transportation was eventually reinstated even under the strictest community quarantine classification,
subject to the following strict health protocols:
• Wearing of face masks and face shields are required
• Physical distancing inside vehicles in required. Maximum capacity shall therefore be kept at 50%
and gradually increased.
• Conduct of frequent disinfection.
Covid-19 Impacts to Citizens’ Mobility

The community quarantine drastically impacted the mobility patterns of Metro Manila residents. Apple’s
mobility recorded significant decreases in walking, driving, and transit use to date. Google also noted a
significant increase in movements from/to residential areas but not to/from parks, workplaces, retail and
recreation.
The mobility restrictions gave rise to the “new normal” in the form of online classes, increases in work-from-
home set-up, and further increase in online shopping and deliveries. For instance, during the periods of
extended lockdown, around 4,000 drivers from the Grab ride-hailing firm transitioned to become delivery
drivers while businesses also signed up. UNICEF and other organizations, in a Covid19 impact study in
Metro Manila noted that urban poor households, especially those with children, are more vulnerable to the
pandemic’s effects as they have less space for social distancing, are more reliant on public transportation
services, hold jobs in which working from home is not an option.
Significant Transport Programs and Initiatives

Recognizing mobility problems experienced by passengers as well as the need for industry support due to
the capacity restrictions, various transport programs and projects were implemented as follows:
a. Rationalized bus routes. Bus routes in Metro Manila were organized into rationalized routes which
operated in high-volume corridors. An exclusive bus lane was also established along EDSA which
is Metro Manila’s busiest thoroughfare.
b. Service contracting program. To augment losses of the transport sector and improve public
transport reliability during the pandemic, the service contracting program initially provided partial
subsidies to public transport operators and drivers. This was eventually expanded to fully cover
operational costs and offer free rides to passengers.
c. Active Transportation. The Metro Manila bicycle network was established which covered a total of
313 kilometers of bicycle lanes.
Sustainable Urban Transport Index Analysis

Overall, Metro Manila’s total SUTI score is relatively high compared to other Asian cities. The public
transport system of the Philippines is relatively unique in the sense that majority of its public transport
systems are run as small to medium-scale operators (such as bus, jeepney) which have fixed routes and
2
well-defined fare structure. Their inclusion may be one of the reason for the Philippines’ high SUTI score as
these have contributed to high ratings in modal share (Indicator 2), convenient access (Indicator 3), and
operational costs (Indicator 7). On the other hand, exclusion of the buses and jeepneys will lead to an
unrealistically low SUTI score. Hence, direct comparison of scores with other cities may not be
straightforward and require consideration of the specific countries’ context. It is important to note that the
most significant SUTI comparison will be by the country with its past/future self, as a means of monitoring
the progress of its initiatives.
The summary of SUTI scores per indicator is illustrated below:
. xtent to which transport

plans cover public transport,
intermodal facilities and
infrastructure for active
2. Modal share of active and
0. Greenhouse gas
public transport in
emissions from transport
commuting
. Convenient access to
. Air uality pm 0
public transport service
. Investment in public . Public transport uality

transportation systems and reliability
. Operational costs of the 5. Traffic fatalities per

public transport system 00.000 inhabitants
. Affordability travel costs

as part of income
Indicator 1: Extent to which transport plans cover public transport, intermodal facilities and
infrastructure for active modes. Metro Manila has been the focus of several master planning efforts and
a significant portion of government resources have been poured into it given its role as the economic capital
of the Philippines, especially in “hard infrastructure” such as intermodal transfer facilities and public
transportation. From the review of more than 20 national, regional, and local plans, public transport and
intermodal facilities have been prioritized and funded mostly by the national government, with large
investments on railways and integrated terminals. Plans for walking and cycling infrastructure before the
pandemic have been limited to specific corridors only, with only some cities allocating significant funds to
active transport initiatives. However, more expansive active transport networks have been introduced as a
consequence of the pandemic. A more comprehensive plan that will integrate multiple modes and improve
connectivity to achieve seamless transfers between higher capacity modes and feeder lines is yet to be
seen.
Indicator 2: Modal share of active and public transport in commuting. Metro Manila’s public transport
modal share is on the high side compared to other Asian cities. The 63.7% market share was determined
using the definition under the SUTI guidelines’ wherein paratransit modes are not considered as public
transport. Despite this, a large percentage of citizens are still not using private vehicles, indicating a high
potential for public transport. However, the rise in motorcycle use may be a cause for caution as these may
eventually reach high enough levels and threaten public transport share.
Indicator 3: Convenient access to public transport service. Majority of Metro Manila residents are within
500 meters from a rail, bus, or jeepney stop (77.71%). However, this does not necessarily translate to a
convenient trip since trip-chaining and transferring behavior were not accounted for in the analysis.
Indicator 4: Public transport quality and reliability. There was an overall low satisfaction for various
aspects of public transportation, especially for level of service criteria such as Punctuality, Comfort and
Cleanliness, Safety, and Availability of Information. Higher satisfaction ratings were observed for Personnel
Courtesy and Fare.
3
Indicator 5: Traffic fatalities per 100.000 inhabitants. Metro Manila’s fatalities per 00,000 inhabitants
are on the low side (2.9%). However, this is not close to the goal of achieving zero road traffic deaths by
year 2022 as stated in the Philippine Road Safety Action Plan. No significant signs of decrease were also
observed during the pandemic wherein there were severe mobility restrictions.
Indicator 6: Affordability – travel costs as part of income. Monthly public transport fares do not appear
to be too costly from the perspective of household incomes. However, the passenger survey in Indicator 4
indicated dissatisfaction for Punctuality which, when taken as a whole, may result to higher economic costs
for users.
Indicator 7: Operational costs of the public transport system. Overall, majority of private sector-
operated PUVs such as bus and jeepney are generally profitable whereas the railway lines indicate low
farebox ratios which are supported by the fact that they are heavily subsidized by the government. The non-
rail transport are generally profitable for various reasons. For one, they operate relatively small fleets and
hence require smaller capital costs. Second, weak inspection and maintenance regulations result to low-
cost maintenance practices which lead to safety issues. These issues are being addressed by the PUV
Modernization program. However, results may take time to reflect on the ground.
Indicator 8: Investment in public transportation systems. There is significant funding allocated for public
transport systems, majority of which is on hard infrastructure such as railways and intermodal terminals.
Indicator 9: Air quality (PM10). The weighted PM10 concentration in Metro Manila was seen to have
significantly declined from its 2012 levels. However, its current concentration is still above the WHO’s target
reduction rate to achieve its target reduction rate in air pollution-related deaths.
Indicator 10: Greenhouse gas emissions from transport. The estimated GHG emission levels are on
the high side (54.93% normalized value). Majority of vehicles are still using petrol and diesel, with cleaner
fuels and associated vehicles not yet gaining critical mass.
Many essential factors to achieving improved urban mobility are in place: high public transport modal share,
sizeable investments in public transportation systems, widespread reach of routes/convenient access.
However, these still have not translated to desirable outcomes as there is low satisfaction of quality and
reliability, poor air quality, accidents do not appear to be decreasing, and emission levels are still not low
enough. In addition, the promotion of cleaner vehicles both from the supply and demand side is yet to be
mainstreamed.
The pandemic has caused significant impacts to transport. The latest population census in 2020 noted a
decrease in population due to internal migrations from Metro Manila to provinces. The strict community
quarantines also led to livelihood losses which prompted other residents to seek better opportunities
elsewhere. Efforts to improve public transport are underway, but progress is affected by capacity restrictions
due to social distancing measures. On the upside, the quarantine has opened several opportunities to
improve urban mobility such as the heightened focus on active transport, the commencement of service
contracting for PUVs, as well as the provision of priority lanes for buses. The concept of “sharing the road”
and veering away from car-centric thinking is also gaining more interest from civil society organizations, the
academe, and government, among others. Moving forward, travel demands have slightly decreased due to
the pandemic and further adoption of telecommuting and hybrid work arrangements may also reduce
demand. Still, there is a need to further improve public transport quality in view of increasing shifts to ride-
hailing and motorcycles.
The Philippine government has recently embarked on several initiatives which will significantly improve
urban mobility. The effects of such initiatives will be more apparent in the medium to long term and may not
have been felt on the ground during this SUTI evaluation. The following are seen as significant actions that
will lead to sustainable urban mobility outcomes:
4
• Sustained support for walking and cycling infrastructure that focuses on connectivity and integration
with public transport;
• Successful implementation of the PUV modernization program especially route rationalization, keeping
in mind the economic costs to public transport users;
• A more transparent and institutionalized feedback mechanism for determining service quality and
satisfaction levels should be considered to measure if the intended transport experience is felt by users;
• Increased support for low carbon technologies and transport modes.
Relative to other cities, Metro Manila rated highly in terms of Investments in public transport, operational
costs, and affordability. It however fared poorly in terms of public transport quality and reliability, road traffic
fatalities, and GHG emissions.
5
1 Metro Manila Profile
6
1.1 Introduction
The National Capital Region (NCR), also known as Metropolitan Manila or “Metro Manila” is located in the
middle of the Luzon island of the Philippines, on the eastern coast of Manila Bay, and at the mouth of Pasig
River. It is surrounded by Marikina Valley and the Sierra Madre mountains in the east, bounded by the
Manila Bay in the west, Central Luzon in the north, and Laguna de Bay in the south.
Figure 1 Map of Metro Manila

Source: NCR RDP 2017-2022 [73]
Metro Manila is the Philippines’ economic, political, and educational center. It is the smallest in land area
among the seventeen (17) regions in the country but has the second highest population and the largest
population density. It is home to 13,484,462 residents which is 2. % of the country’s population.
Administratively, it is subdivided into 4 districts which is composed of 17 Local Government Units (LGUs):
16 cities and 1 municipality, which are made up of a total of 1,705 barangays.
7
Table 1. National Capital Region Population and Population Density.
Population Density
Population (2020 Land Area
Status (persons per square
Census) (sq. km)
kilometer)
NCR, 1st District
(Capital District, Manila) 1,846,513 38.55 47,899
City of Manila City 1,846,513 38.55 76,225
NCR, 2nd District
(Eastern Manila District) 4,771,371 234.15 20,377
City of Mandaluyong City 425,758 11.25 49,057
City of Marikina City 456,059 21.52 22,309
City of Pasig City 803,159 34.32 17,585
Quezon City City 2,960,048 161.12 18,068
City of San Juan City 126,347 5.94 20,677
NCR, 3rd District
(CAMANAVA District) 3,004,627 124.32 24,168
Caloocan City City 1,661,584 53.33 29,933
City of Malabon City 380,522 15.71 23,884
City of Navotas City 247,543 10.69 27,946
City of4th
NCR, District
Valenzuela City 714,978 44.59 14,109
(Southern Manila District) 3,861,951 225.94 17,093
City of Muntinlupa City 543,445 43.84 13,905
City of Paraña que City 689,992 45.13 16,222
Pasay City City 440,656 18.64 31,205
Pateros Municipality 65,227 10.4 6,292
Taguig City City 886,722 47.88 22,280
Total 13,484,462 623 21,646
Source: Philippine Statistical Authority, LGU websites
Metro Manila holds majority of economic activities in the country

and it has the largest contribution to the country’s GDP at 2. %
as of 2020. Its Gross Regional Domestic Production mainly
comes from the services sector wherein the top 3 producers are
01. Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor vehicles and
motorcycles (22.48%), Financial and insurance activities
(19.09%), and professional and business services (12.87%).
There are a number of urban and peri-urban centers in Metro

Manila as indicated by nodes in Figure 2 which are centers of
economic, cultural, educational and leisure activities. Four (4)
major rail lines connect some of them.
The Makati Central Business District (CBD) is one of the top

financial districts where the top construction firms, stock
brokerages, banks, and other companies are headquartered.
The Bonifacio Global City (BGC) in Fort Bonifacio is a relatively
younger CBD that has recently been establishing itself as a
financial and lifestyle hub.
Urbanization in Metro Manila has grown uncontrollably through

the years and in effect, the growth has spilled over to the Figure 2. Urban and peri-urban centers in Metro
Manila
neighboring provinces of Bulacan, Rizal, Laguna, and Cavite
(BLRC). Hence, the term Greater Capital Region (GCR) or Source: Metro Manila Green Print 2030
[74]
NCR plus includes Metro Manila and the BLRC area.
8
1.2 Metro Manila’s Transportation System
1.2.1 Metro Manila’s Road Network
Metro Manila’s Road Network is comprised of 1,166.23 kilometers of paved roads whose length comprises
around 4% of the National Road System’s. Its backbone is comprised of a combination of ten (10) radial
and six (6) circumferential roads. The road network is formally classified as follows:
a. Primary Roads - A contiguous length of significant road sections extending linearly without any
breaks or forks that connect major cities (At least around 100,000 population) comprising the main
trunk line or the backbone of the National Road System.
b. Secondary Roads - Directly connect cities to national primary roads (except in metropolitan areas)
or those not included in the category of major cities. Likewise, said roads directly connect major
ports, major ferry terminals, major airports, tourist service centers, major government infrastructure
to national primary roads. They also directly connect provincial capitals within the same region.
c. Tertiary Roads - Other existing roads under DPWH which perform a local function.
Table 2. Length of Road Network in Metro Manila

Classification Length (km)
Primary 169.68
Secondary 395.67
Tertiary 600.88
Total 1166.23
Figure 3. Metro Manila Road Network

Source: DPWH
9
Metro Manila has the highest road density amongst all other regions in the country, having 188.24
kilometers of road per 100 km2 of land area which is 17 times that of the national average of 10.65. Its
road density is close in value to that of Hong Kong (200 km per 100 km2) but just around 40% of
Singapore’s which is similar in land area.
1.2.2 Airport
The country’s main gateway, the Ninoy A uino International Airport NAIA is located in Metro Manila. In
2019, it accommodated a total of 47.9 Million domestic and international passengers across its four (4)
terminals as shown in the table below. The airport has already reached its peak capacity, prompting the
opening of the larger New Manila International Airport which is currently under construction. The nearby
Clark International Airport (CIA) which is around 100 kilometers north of Metro Manila is also providing
domestic and international flights.
Table 3. Annual Passengers in NAIA Terminals

Source: DOTr
Terminal Passengers (2019)
1 8,252,257
2 10,738,220
3 23,170,943
4 5,736,626
Total 47,898,046
Public transport access to the airport is currently limited to Point-to-point (P2P) buses serve limited
destinations. Choices for arriving passengers are: regular taxis, yellow metered airport taxis which have
higher cost than regular taxis, coupon taxis, car rentals, and ride-hailing services. P2P buses transferring
passengers to the CIA are also available.
1.2.3 Ports
The port of Manila also serves as the principal gateway seaport of the Philippines. It is made up of three
major facilities: Manila North Harbor, Manila South Harbor, and the Manila International Container Terminal.
In 2019, the port handled around 4.8 million T Us, making it among the world’s top 0 international
container ports [58]. Despite the existence of nearby port of Batangas and Subic, the port of Manila still
remains the port of choice for many businesses due to inadequacy of ancillary services, such as proximity
to consolidators; warehouses and availability of carriers, service providers, forwarders and shipping
companies; reliability of the shipping schedules; efficient cargo acceptance and release; and affordable
rates [59]. Inefficiencies in port operations also resulted in congested access roads, affecting traffic in
surrounding areas.
10
1.2.4 Motor vehicle trends and congestion
Figure 4. Trend in registered vehicles in Metro Manila

Source: LTO
The number of motor vehicles registered in Metro Manila increased by 38% from 2014 until pre-pandemic
year of 2019. Improvements in the economy and rise in population along with the slow pace of
infrastructure development has resulted to severe traffic congestion, heavy air and water pollution, lack of
affordable housing, and swatch of blighted zones (JICA, 2019). JICA estimated the transport cost to be
Php 3.5 Billion (USD 69.1 Million) per day in Metro Manila, with the observation that nearly all roads have
reached saturation point.
Number Coding Scheme. To help curb congestion, the MMDA implemented the Unified Vehicular
Volume Reduction Program Regulating the Operation of Certain Motor Vehicles on Roads in Metropolitan
Manila (UVVRP) or “Number Coding Scheme”. Under this scheme, motor vehicles are prohibited from
operating in Metro Manila roads from 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM depending on the last digit of their respective
vehicle plate numbers. Although this policy led to a reduction in vehicles, congestion is still a significant
problem especially during hours when the UVVRP is not in effect. Moreover, many citizens have resorted
to buying additional cars. Nevertheless, studies such as that of Regidor [78] conclude that the UVVRP
may be retained as a short-term solution but ultimately, improvements to public transport infrastructure
are to be prioritized to encourage modal shift from private cars.
Truck Ban Ordinance. The Truck Ban Ordinance is also being implemented wherein cargo trucks are
prohibited from passing through selected major thoroughfares from 6:00 -10:00 AM and from 5:00- 10:00
PM everyday except Sundays and holidays [57].
i-ACT. Recognizing the need for enhanced coordination in traffic enforcement between agencies and
LGUs with varying authorities, the Inter-Agency Council for Traffic (i-ACT) was re-launched in September
2017 to further improve solutions to traffic situations in the Philippines with the following key member
institutions: the Department of Transportation (DOTr), Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA), Land
Transportation Office (LTO), Land Transportation and Franchising Regulatory Board (LTFRB), the
Philippine National Police Highway Patrol Group (PNP- HPG) with its new members, the Armed Forces of
the Philippines (AFP), Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), Metro Manila Council (MMC)
Local Government Units and the Liga ng mga Barangay ng Pilipinas. According to its mandate, the Council
assumes its role in synchronizing efforts of the aforementioned government agencies in addressing the
perennial traffic situation of our country, more particularly in Metro Manila and the adjoining provinces of
Bulacan, Laguna, Cavite, and Rizal, by unifying all the traffic management operations including manpower,
resources, equipment and infrastructures under a unified chain of command [60].
11
Despite the various efforts and policies, traffic congestion is still very prevalent. In 2019, the TomTom
traffic index ranked Metro Manila as second most congested worldwide, with a recorded congestion level
of 71% wherein for 30 minute trip, 29-38 minutes extra time was spent driving [56]. Even with the pandemic
where mobility restrictions have been implemented, the congestion level only dropped to 53% with Metro
Manila still ranking 4th worldwide in congestion.
For air pollution, the DENR as of its 2018 emissions inventory reported that majority of air pollutants came
from mobile sources or vehicles for pollutant categories such as Carbon Monoxide (98.41%), Nitrogen
Oxide (83.09%), and Volatile Organic Compounds (99.32%).
1.2.5 Public Transportation Policies and Infrastructure
The public transport system in Metro Manila is mostly road-based. Rail lines are relatively scarce with
three (3) metro lines and one (1) sub-urban line currently operating. Last mile connectivity is served by
tricycles (Figure 5) which are managed by LGUs. The most dominant type of Public Utility Vehicle (PUV)
is the Public Utility Jeepney (PUJ, Figure 7) with more than 42,043 units followed by UV Express1 (Figure
6) at 10,956 and city bus at 4,803 units as of February 2020. These PUV routes have long relied on private
sector initiative in serving transport demand which resulted to several overlapping routes and unhealthy
competition among PUV operators. PUV franchises used to be issued upon presentation of proof of
demand for the desired corridor being applied for without regard for the number of existing franchises
already issued. In 2003, a moratorium on franchise issuance was imposed, which resulted to the
proliferation of illegal PUV operators.
Figure 5. Tricycle
Source: TopGear [75]
Figure 7. Traditional Public Utility Jeepneys (PUJ) Figure 6. UV Express

Source: economist.com [63] Source: Spot.ph [64]
1
DOTr D.O. 2017-011 definition: UV Express Service is a form of paratransit system which uses airconditioned utility
vehicles or vans that ferry passengers directly from an authorized origin and destination. They may load/unload
passengers within a 2 kilometer radius from their end points specified in their franchise or within the territorial bounds
of the commercial/business district specified therein.
12
The PUJ sector has long been highly fragmented, it being composed of a large number of small scale
operators with an average operator-to-vehicle ratio of just 1.3 for its more than 24,000 operators [52]. Its
business model is largely profit-driven, with the franchise holder usually renting out the vehicle on a daily
basis to the driver who gets to keep what was left from the day’s rent and operating expenses. This practice
has led to poor service quality and low motivation for upgrading and maintenance. According to the DOTr
in 2017, 90% of PUJ fleet nationwide were older than 15 years.
Due to the public transport’s low capacity and level of service, the proliferation of Transport Network
Vehicle Service (TNVS) such as Grab Car and motorcycle-based ride-hailing platforms have gained
popularity over the years.
Public Utility Vehicle Modernization Program. In 2017, the DOTr embarked on the PUV Modernization
Program (PUVMP) that aims to formally lift the moratorium on franchise issuance. The basic guidelines
for the program are set out in DOTr Department Order 2017-0 entitled “Omnibus Guidelines on the
Planning and Identification of Public Road Transportation Services and Franchise Issuance“ . Although
the policy includes all modes, the program largely targets PUJs given their volume. Salient points of the
program are as follows:
a. Reforms in the franchise issuance process. Franchise issuance is now contingent on the submission
of the Local Public Transport Route Plan (LPTRP) which contains the map of rationalized routes, a
hierarchy of modes based on demand, and the number of vehicles to operate in each route. This
plan shall be used by the LTFRB as basis for issuing franchises in a region. For Metro Manila, DOTr
has engaged consultancy services for the conduct of the Route Rationalization Study which is yet
to be completed.
b. Vehicle modernization and financing support. Standards were issued for PUVs which standardized
vehicle dimensions, keeping in mind safety concerns. The design features that improved safety
included moving the doors of the jeepney from the backside to the right side, imposition of ceiling
height minimums for standing passengers, and reducing the height of the entrance step for easier
entrance. Accessories such as GPS receivers, WiFi, CCTVs, and speed limiters are also included
as new requirements. The DOTr in partnership with two government financial institutions - the Land
Bank of the Philippines (LBP) and the Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP) set up a loan
facility to offer concessional loans to jeepney operators.
c. Environmental impact. New PUVs shall now have engines compliant with EURO IV standards or
better, in accordance with emission standards issued by the Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (DENR) as mandated by the Clean Air Act.
d. Reforms in the PUV business model. Several policies were issued by the LTFRB requiring industry
consolidation and formation of formalized entities that are more capable of fleet management.
Consolidated groups shall be prioritized in the issuance of updated franchises and access to loans.
13
Figure 8. Components of the PUV Modernization Program
Compliance to the PUVMP has been relatively slow, especially with the onset of the pandemic. Moreover,
the program has been met with opposition from the transport sector, some politicians, and other
stakeholders. One of the biggest issues is related to the economic displacement of the drivers and
operators who have long relied on their jeepneys for their livelihood. According to the DOTr’s latest data,
there are only around 793 units in Metro Manila that are compliant with the new guidelines. Despite the
challenges, the program is ongoing along with efforts at legislation.
Plans for offering higher capacity bus services are in the government’s pipeline. The Metro Manila Bus
Rapid Transit Line 1 or Quezon Avenue BRT, a 12.3 kilometer BRT line funded with assistance from the
World Bank, is targeted to be operational by 2023. In addition, a bus service with a dedicated lane along
Epifanio Delos Santos Avenue (EDSA) has been operational since July 2021 but lacks traditional BRT
infrastructure components.
Integrated Terminals. Executive Order No. 67, series of 2012 by the President of the Philippines [53],
provided for the establishment of the Integrated Transport System in pursuance of the policy of prioritizing
the creation of an integrated and multimodal transport and logistics system, there is a pressing need to
interconnect mass transportation systems, such as buses and railways, to feed into each other and afford
an efficient, reliable, seamless and integrated network/system. These terminals also serve as termini for
provincial bus routes entering Metro Manila, in order to further decongest urban roads.
Several bus terminals catering to provincial routes used to be located along EDSA (or Circumferential
Road # which have long contributed to congestion in Metro Manila’s busiest thoroughfare. In 2019, the
Metro Manila Council (MMC) issued MMDA Regulation No. 19-002 prohibiting or revoking the issuance of
business permits to all public utility bus terminals and operators and other public utility vehicles along
EDSA.
The Parañaque Integrated Terminal Exchange is the first integrated and multi-modal terminal in southwest
Metro Manila which was developed as a PPP project by DOTr and MWM Terminals. Called the Philippines’
first “landport”, the PITX has a maximum daily capacity of 100,000 passengers and has departure and
arrival bays for buses, jeepneys and taxis. It also implements a bus reservation and online booking system
and provides passengers with multiple modes of transport in one easy-to-navigate facility. Moreover, it
also offers a wide array of amenities, such as comfortable waiting areas, drinking water stations, free Wi-
Fi access, workstation areas, charging stations, locker facilities, telephone booths, centralized shopping
center, baby care rooms, breastfeeding stations, clinic, prayer room, pay-in lounge, and clean restrooms.
Trolleys and wheelchairs are also available for senior citizens and persons with disabilities (PWDs).
Source: [54].
14
Figure 9. Various scenes from the Paranaque Integrated Terminal Exchanged (PITX)
Source: Rappler [65]
LTFRB issued MC 2020-051 wherein the following terminals catering to provincial buses have been
assigned for use of various routes:
Table 4. Integrated Terminals in Metro Manila catering to provincial buses

Terminal Covered provincial bus routes
Araneta Bus Port To and from Region 3
Paranaque Integrated Terminal Exchange
(PITX) To and from Region 4A
From Region 3 to NCR and vice versa, other
Valenzuela Gateway Complex (VGC) routes identified by LTFRB
From Regions 1,2, and CAR to NCR and vice
North Luzon Express Terminal (NLET) versa
Santa Rosa Integrated Terminal (SRIT) From Visayas and Mindanao and vice versa
Railway operations. Railway lines in the Philippines are relatively scarce. There are currently three (3)
railway lines servicing Metro Manila and one (1) sub-urban line, the basic details of which are as follows:
Table 5. Railway lines operating in Metro Manila

Annual
Length
Railway Line Stations Ridership
(Km)
Operator (2019), Million
LRT-1 (Roosevelt-
18.1 20
Baclaran) DOTr-LRMC (Private) 161.35
Light Rail Transit Authority
LRT-2 (Recto-Antipolo) 16.5 13 (Government Owned and
Controlled Corporation) 57.54
DOTr-Metro Rail Transit
MRT-3 (North Avenue-
16.9 13 Corporation (Public-Private
Taft)
Partnership) 97.56
PNR Metro Commuter Philippine National Railways
(Gov-Pascual-Tutuban- 75.7 40 (Government Owned and
IRRI) *sub-urban line Controlled Corporation) 11.23
15
Figure 10. Historical Ridership of railways serving Metro Manila
Source: DOTr
Throughout the years, the existing railway systems have suffered from poor asset preservation/
maintenance, congestion, and inter-operability issues due to different gauge and signaling systems [59].
As a result, ridership throughout the years has also decreased while repairs are being done. The
Pasig River Ferry Service. The PRFS is currently being operated by the MMDA and is the only water-
based urban transport mode in Metro Manila. It runs at 26.36 kilometers along the Pasig River from
Pinagbuhatan in Pasig to Escolta in Manila with a total of 12 stations. This ferry service however hasn’t
lived up to its full potential, having carried only around 436,931 passengers from April 2014 to October
2019 due to the recurrent problem on water hyacinths that oftentimes resulted to cancelled or limited trips
[55].
Figure 11. Pasig River Ferry Service

Source: PNA [66]
1.2.6 Institutional Arrangement
Several institutions at the national and local levels are involved in the planning and implementation of
initiatives related to transportation and urban mobility in Metro Manila, making coordination vital in
achieving significant milestones in urban mobility.
The Department of Transportation (DOTr) is the primary policy, planning, programming, coordinating,
implementing and administrative entity of the executive branch of the government on the promotion,
development and regulation of a dependable and coordinated network of transportation and
communications systems, as well as in the fast, safe, efficient and reliable transportation. It initiates and
implements mass transit systems that cross administrative boundaries and oversees the LTFRB which
16
grants franchises to Public Utility Vehicle operators. Although the DOTr is national in scope, it has various
projects focusing on Metro Manila due to its economic importance.
The Department of Public Works and Highways is mandated to undertake (a) the planning of infrastructure,
such as national roads and bridges, flood control, water resources projects and other public works, and
(b) the design, construction, and maintenance of national roads and bridges, and major flood control
systems.
The Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) performs planning, monitoring and coordination
functions, and also exercises regulatory and supervisory authority over the delivery of metro-wide services
within Metro Manila, complementing local government units who deal with purely local matters. Its scope
includes metro-wide services that transcend legal political boundaries or entail huge expenditures such
that it would not be viable for said services to be provided by the individual local government units
comprising Metropolitan Manila. These include development planning, transport and traffic management,
solid waste disposal, flood control and sewerage, urban renewal, zoning and land use planning, and
shelter services. The MMDA chairs the Metro Manila Council which is composed of the heads of the Metro
Manila’s LGUs, the president of the Metro Manila Vice Mayors League and the president of the Metro
Manila Councilors League.
The Local Government Units are granted autonomy by virtue of the Local Government Code (Republic
Act No. 7160) to develop their own plans and prepare their respective Comprehensive Land Use Plans
(CLUP) and Comprehensive Development Plans (CDP) that cover five development sectors: social,
economic, environmental, infrastructure, and institutional sectors. The formulation of the CLUP, CDP and
zoning ordinances are based on the guidelines provided by the then Housing & Land Use Regulatory
Board (HLURB) whose functions have recently been incorporated into the newly-created Department of
Human Settlements and Urban Development (DHSUD). Therefore, the DHSUD also plays a key role in
strengthening the synergy between land use and transport in order to achieve more efficient movement of
people and goods on a local scale.
A summary of institutions with functions that are relevant to urban mobility are as follows:
Table 6. Institutions with mandates relevant to urban mobility

Regional
Local
/ Metro Strategic Areas of
Responsible Agency National (City
Manila- Urban Mobility
level)
wide
Transport policy, regulation and
Department of Transportation
✓ implementation
Land Transportation Franchising Regulation of public land transport
and Regulatory Board ✓ ✓ operators (excluding rail)
Motor vehicle registration, inspection
Land Transportation Office
✓ ✓ and regulation
Regulation of toll road facilties and
Toll Regulatory Board
✓ operators
Light Rail Transit Authority
Philippine National Railways ✓ Rail mass transit systems
Department of Public Works and
Highways ✓ ✓ Road Infrastructure
Department of the Interior and Local
Government ✓ ✓ Oversight of local government units
National Economic Development
Authority ✓ Economic planning and policy
Department of Environment and
Natural Resources ✓ Emission standards setting
17
Climate change mainstreaming in
Climate Change Commission ✓ national and local programs
Department of Human Settlements Housing, human settlement and
and Urban Development ✓ ✓ urban development
Transport and traffic management,
Metro Manila Development Authority urban renewal, zoning, and land use
✓ planning for Metro Manila
Philippine National Police ✓ ✓ Traffic Management
Department of Budget and
Management ✓ Budget
Department of Science and Transport Technologies and Industry
Technology ✓ Development
Transport Technologies and Industry
Department of Trade and Industry
✓ Development
Data Consolidation, Monitoring, and
Philippine Statistics Authority
✓ ✓ Evaluation
Department of Energy ✓ Energy
Land use planning and regulation,
Local Government Units local public transport regulation,
✓ traffic management
*In some agencies, a regional office usually exists and caters to region-specific concerns. Meanwhile, its national or central office
deals with concerns that cover multiple regions or enacts general policies.
Source: Philippine Urban Mobility Programme [ ] with author’s inputs
Socio-economic planning at the regional level (Metro Manila level) is coordinated by the MMDA. It
consolidates and reconciles plans of various agencies and local governments for Metro Manila for various
sectors. With respect to transportation infrastructure and route planning that transcends political
boundaries in Metro Manila, plans are carried out by the Department of Transportation.
While the distribution of responsibilities ensures sharing of resources, manpower and overall efforts,
issues related to coordination have also been encountered wherein varying interests and priorities have
caused conflicts, resulting to delays in keeping with project timelines.
1.2.7 Future Plans and Projects
In order to address the long standing problems brought about by poorly developed infrastructure wherein
the backlog has reached more than three decades, the administration of President Duterte in 2016
launched the “Build, Build, Build” program which is proclaimed to usher in the “Golden Age of
Infrastructure”. This ambitious program is composed of many projects, at the forefront of which are 0
Infrastructure Flagship Projects costing around Php 4.13 Trillion (USD 81.7 Billion) which are accorded
with high priority. The author has identified thirty (30) projects in Metro Manila that are related to
transportation and urban mobility whose aggregated project cost comprise 48% (USD 39.7 Billion) of the
cost of all flagship projects (Table 7).
Most notable are the DOTr’s various rail projects including the Philippine’s very first subway. The flagship
projects are under various stages of implementation, with some that are still at the project feasibility phase.
Despite the Covid-19 pandemic and its economic impacts, the Philippine government still aims to continue
its infrastructure push and relies on it to further stimulate the economy towards recovery.
18
Table 7. Infrastructure Flagship Projects Significant to Metro Manila Transport
Implementing
No. Name of Project Location Cost (in USD Million) Funding Source Type
Agency
Expressway, Bridge, Road projects 2,696.02
Expressway, Bridge, Road
1 Southeast Metro Manila Expressway Project DPWH NCR 905.8 PPP
projects
PPP Expressway, Bridge, Road
2 NLEX-SLEX Connector Road DPWH NCR 466.04
(Unsolicited) projects
Metro Manila Logistics Network: Pasig River
and Manggahan Floodway Bridges
Construction Project Expressway, Bridge, Road
3 DPWH NCR 256.02 ODA
a) North and South Harbor Bridge projects
b) Palanca-Villegas Bridge
c) East-West Bank Bridge 2
Public-Private
4 C5 Southlink Expressway Project DPWH NCR 252.9 Partnership
projects
(PPP)
PPP Expressway, Bridge, Road
5 NLEX Harbor Link Extension to Anda Circle DPWH NCR 240
(Unsolicited) projects
Metro Manila Logistics Network: Pasig River

and Manggahan Floodway Bridges
Construction Project
6 a) J.P. Rizal-Lopez Jaena Bridge (Marikina DPWH NCR 183.26 ODA
projects
River)
b) J.P. Rizal-St. Mary Bridge (Marikina River)
c) Marikina-Vista Real Bridge (Marikina River)
Metro Manila Priority Bridges for Seismic Expressway, Bridge, Road

Improvement Project projects
Metro Manila Logistics Network: China Grant Official

Bridges Development Expressway, Bridge, Road
8 DPWH NCR 118.94
a) Binondo-Intramuros Bridge Assistance projects
b) Estrella-Pantaleon Bridge (ODA)
Government
Metro Manila Logistics Network: Bonifacio Expressway, Bridge, and
9 DPWH NCR 114.4 Appropriations
Global City-Ortigas Center Link Road Project Road projects
Act (GAA)
Water transport/ Urban Development 661.94
Pasig-Marikina River Channel Improvement Water transport/ Urban

Phase IV Development
Railway 35,911.33
11 Unified Grand Central Station DOTr NCR 55.66 GAA Railway
North South Commuter Railway Extension

12 DOTr Luzon 12568.4 ODA Railway
(PNR North 2, PNR South Commuter)
13 Metro Manila Subway Project Phase 1 DOTr NCR 7139.48 ODA Railway
14 PNR South Long Haul DOTr Luzon 3506.36 ODA Railway
15 North South Commuter Railway (PNR North 1) DOTr Luzon 2982.6 ODA Railway
PPP
16 C5 MRT 10 Project DOTr NCR 1629.4 Railway
(Unsolicited)
PPP
17 MRT 7 DOTr NCR 1500 Railway
(Unsolicited)
PPP
18 MRT 11 DOTr NCR 1422.2 Railway
(Unsolicited)
Manila Metro Line 1 Cavite Extension
19 (Baclaran - Niog, Bacoor) DOTr Luzon 1298.3 ODA/PPP Railway
(a.k.a LRT 1 Cavite Extension Project)
LRT 6 Cavite Line A/ Modified LRT 6 Project
PPP
20 Phases 1 (Niog-Dasma City) and 2 (Dasma DOTr Luzon 1007.6 Railway
(Unsolicited)
City- Tagaytay)
21 MRT 4 DOTr NCR 996.82 ODA Railway
22 Metro Manila Skyway Stage 3 DPWH NCR 897.2 PPP Railway
23 MRT 3 Rehabilitation Project DOTr NCR 439.32 ODA Railway
24 LRT 2 West Extension DOTr NCR 202.4 GAA Railway
25 LRT 2 East Extension DOTr NCR 195.1862 ODA Railway
PPP
26 Fort Bonifacio-Makati Sky Train DOTr NCR 70.4 Railway
(Unsolicited)
Road-based transport and others 453.96
27 EDSA Greenways DOTr NCR 170.24 ODA Road-based transport
28 Metro Manila BRT Line 1 (Quezon Ave) DOTr NCR 109.26 ODA Road-based transport
29 Taguig Integrated Terminal Exchange DOTr NCR 80 PPP Road-based transport
National Interoperable Automatic Fare

30 Collection System Project (formerly Automated DOTr Nationwide 94.46 ODA Road/Rail transport
Fare Collection Clearing House)
19
1.2.8 Relevance of the SUTI analysis
Compared to most Asian cities for which the SUTI analysis was also conducted, the case of Metro Manila
has been a challenging one to conduct due to the volume of sources and institutions involved given its
strategic importance to the Philippine economy. There are a total of seventeen (17) local governments
involved along with several agencies whose mandates touch on various aspects of transport and urban
mobility.
The SUTI analysis brings to light certain well-known realities, one of which is how fragmented transport
plans and institutions in the Philippines can be. Although systems are already in place to monitor transport-
related indicators and how they contribute to the nation’s overall goals, the focus tends to be on conventional
metrics such as infrastructure spending or number of projects completed. Other aspects affecting urban
mobility are not measured such as an evaluation of existing plans and measurement of modal share.
SUTI allows for institutional self-evaluation that considers the perspectives of various stakeholders:
government, private investors, and most importantly, the transport users. It provides a good framework for
measuring the progress towards creating and achieving urban mobility goals.
20
2 Current State of Urban
Transport in Metro Manila:
Covid-19 impacts
21
2.1 Emergence of Covid-19 in the Philippines
On January 5, 2020, following reports of the Coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan City, China, the Philippines’
Department of Health (DOH) ordered tighter checks on all travelers entering the Philippines. With the
ongoing increase of cases and outbreaks in other countries, flights from Wuhan were banned on January
23, 2020. With this, 500 Chinese tourists who arrived in Kalibo, a popular tourist destination, were sent back
[1]. Several suspected cases around the Philippines were being investigated and on January 30, 2020, the
DOH confirmed the existence of the first case of the novel coronavirus (nCOV) in the Philippines, a Chinese
national who travelled to the Philippines from Wuhan via Hong Kong [2].
With this, the Office of the President imposed a travel ban on Chinese nationals coming from the Hubei
province as well as other parts of China where the nCOV has been confirmed by the Chinese government
to have spread [3]. Additional travel restrictions involving travelers from other countries followed: China,
Macau, Hongkong (January 31), Taiwan (February 11), North Gyeongsang Province of South Korea
(February 26).
Finally, on 7 March 2020, the first case of community transmission was confirmed. With the total number of
confirmed cases reaching 49 individuals, the Inter-Agency Task Force for the Management of Emerging
Infectious Diseases in the Philippines (IATF-EID) recommended the imposition of Stringent Social
Distancing Measures in the National Capital Region for thirty (30) days, suspending classes in all levels in
Metro Manila, prohibiting mass gatherings, work suspension in government offices, imposing social
distancing in public transport, and suspension of land, domestic air, and domestic sea travel to Metro Manila.
2.2 Inter-Agency Task Force for the Management of Emerging Infectious Diseases
By virtue of Executive Order 168 series of 2014, the Inter-Agency Task Force for the Management of
Emerging Infectious Diseases in the Philippines (IATF-EID) or more popularly known as IATF was created
in response to the emergence of various public health emergencies of international reach such as the
Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, Avian Influenza, Ebola, and the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome
Coronavirus as well as the threat of other recurring diseases.
Headed by the DOH, the IATF-EID shall mainly conduct activities on the identification and screening of
infected individuals, prevention and minimization of the local spread of emerging infectious diseases as well
as mortality, and educate the public, among others.
On March 18, 2020, the Office of the Executive Secretary issued a memorandum directing all heads of
departments, agencies, and instrumentalities of government including the police and armed forces,
government-owned and controlled corporations, government financial institutions, state universities and
colleges, and local government units to adopt, coordinate, and implement guidelines issued by the IATF,
consistent with their respective mandates. It is the IATF that prescribes the high-level quarantine guidelines
via the “Omnibus Guidelines on the Implementation of Community Quarantine in the Philippines” to be
applied to all areas subjected to community quarantine.
2.3 Community Quarantine Classifications
There essentially four (4) levels of community quarantine as follows with their corresponding definitions per
the IATF-EID:
a. Enhanced Community Quarantine - refers to the implementation of temporary measures imposing

stringent limitations on movement and transportation of people, strict regulation of operating
industries, provision of food and essential services, and heightened presence of uniformed personnel
to enforce community quarantine protocols.
b. Modified Enhanced Community Quarantine - refers to the transition phase between ECQ and GCQ,
when the following temporary measures are relaxed and become less necessary: stringent limits on
22
movement and transportation of people, strict regulation of operating industries, provision of food and
essential services, and heightened presence of uniformed personnel to enforce community quarantine
protocols.
c. General Community Quarantine - refers to the implementation of temporary measures limiting

movement and transportation, regulation of operating industries, and presence of uniformed
personnel to enforce community quarantine protocols.
d. Modified General Community Quarantine - refers to the transition phase between GCQ and the New
Normal, when the following temporary measures are relaxed and become less necessary: limiting
movement and transportation, the regulation of operating industries, and the presence of uniformed
personnel to enforce community quarantine protocols.
The IATF-EID determines the community uarantine classification based on its analysis of each area’s
healthcare utilization rate (available hospital beds), risk classification, number of cases and other socio-
economic factors [4]. The classification levels are announced either by the President or the Presidential
spokesperson via public address. The frequency of announcements vary, usually every 2 weeks or every
monthly, as the need arises. Table 8 shows the various community quarantine classifications imposed on
Metro Manila. A graph of the community quarantine classifications vis-à-vis the Covid-19 cases in Metro
Manila is illustrated in Figure 13.
On 13 May 2021, the President approved the

IATF- ID’s recommendation to place Metro
Manila under “GCQ with heightened
restrictions”. This classification also applied to
the neighboring areas of Bulacan, Cavite,
Laguna and Rizal, collectively known as the
“NCR plus”. This gave rise to the Safety Seal
Certification Program that aims to increase
compliance of public and private
establishments to the government’s minimum
public health standards and to encourage Figure 12. Mall tenants of the first-ever mall to be given the Safety Seal pose in a
ceremonial event.
adoption and use of the Staysafe.ph digital
Source: [5]
contact tracing application.
Table 8. Community Quarantine Classifications in Metro Manila

Date Community Quarantine Status
March 16, 2020 - May 15, 2020 ECQ
May 16, 2020 - May 30, 2020 MECQ
June 1, 2020 - August 3, 2020 GCQ
August 4, 2020 -August 18, 2020 MECQ
August 19, 2020 – August 31, 2020 MGCQ
September 1, 2020 - March 28, 2021 GCQ
March 29, 2021 - April 11, 2021 ECQ
April 12, 2021 - May 14, 2021 MECQ
May 15, 2021 - June 15, 2021 GCQ with heightened restrictions
June 16, 2021 - July 15, 2021 GCQ (with some restrictions)
July 16, 2021 - July 22, 2021 GCQ
July 23, 2021 - August 5, 2021 GCQ with heightened restrictions
August 6, 2021 - August 20, 2021 ECQ
August 21, 2021 - September 15, 2021 MECQ
Sept. 16, 2021 - October 15, 2021 GCQ (Alert Level 4)
On 14 June 2021, the Presidential Spokesperson announced that the community quarantine status of Metro
Manila was classified as GCQ “with some restrictions”. ssentially, this new variant of GCQ provides allow
some industries such as gyms, fitness centers, meeting venues, personal care services, etc. to open but at
very low levels and subject to inspections.
23
omm nity arantine e els in Metro Manila
ases
N m er o
CQ M CQ GCQ MGCQ ate
Figure 13. Community Quarantine Classifications and Covid-19 Cases
Table 9 shows a comparison of latest restrictions for each community quarantine classification and
permitted industries for various quarantine classifications. The list of permitted industries are shown in
Table 10.
Table 9. Comparison of restrictions for various Community Quarantine classifications effective June 2021
Source: [6]
24
Table 10. Industries allowed/ not allowed to operate under various Community Quarantine classifications effective June 2021
Sources: [7,8]
Shift to Alert Level System
On September 2021, a new system for assigning community quarantine classifications was proposed by
the IATF for pilot implementation in Metro Manila starting September 16, 2021. The new system focuses
on granular or smaller-scale lockdown measures to be decided by the respective local government units.
25
Community quarantine classes have 5 levels and are classified as either ECQ (Level 5) or GCQ (Levels
1-4) with varying levels. The levels are:
• Alert Level 1 - refers to areas wherein case transmission is low and decreasing, total bed utilization
rate, and intensive care unit utilization rate is low.
• Alert Level 2 - refers to areas wherein case transmission is low and decreasing, healthcare
utilization is low, or case counts are low but increasing, or case counts are low and decreasing but
total bed utilization rate and intensive care unit utilization rate is increasing.
• Alert Level 3 - refers to areas wherein case counts are high and/or increasing, with total bed
utilization rate and intensive care unit utilization rate at increasing utilization.
• Alert Level 4 - refers to areas wherein case counts are high and/or increasing, with total bed
utilization rate and intensive care unit utilization rate at high utilization.
• Alert Level 5 - refers to areas wherein case counts are alarming, with total bed utilization rate and
intensive care unit utilization rate at critical utilization.
A summary of the movement restrictions are given in the figure below:
Figure 14. Movement Restrictions Under the Alert Level System

Source: Bureau of Communications Services
26
2.4 Transportation guidelines for various quarantine levels
When the President declared that a thirty day community quarantine in Metro Manila will be imposed starting
15 March 2020, Department of Transportation (DOTr) released guidelines [9] for various public
transportation modes that provided details on the allowable capacities of public transportation vehicles in
order to enforce social distancing. On 16 March 2020, the first Monday after the effectivity of the community
quarantine, severe congestion was experienced due to several checkpoints and lower public transport
supply. Moreover, the reduction in public transportation capacity resulted to long queues, crowding, and
disregard for social distancing.
Figure 16. 16 March 2020, first day of community quarantine: Passengers Figure 15. March 16, first day of community quarantine: Competition for
of MRT-3 queueing and not following social distancing protocols. public transportation due to the capacity restrictions were seen with
passengers wanting to enter Metro Manila.
Source: [10] Source: [11]
On the evening of 16 March 2020, in an effort to curb further spread of the virus and encourage people to
stay home, the President placed the entire region of Luzon, which includes Metro Manila, under ECQ. All
mass transport systems were suspended in areas under ECQ. On the same day, the DOTr released
guidelines allowing the use of motorcycles for personal use but prohibiting back rides [12].
The abrupt halt in transportation services caused various mobility problems for essential health workers as
well as difficulties in reaching essential services. Only private vehicles with one passenger were allowed
provided that they will only go out to buy essential items. Government offices and local government units
provided free rides but these were still not enough. One issue ensued when the Pasig City Mayor temporarily
allowed tricycles to travel within the city in order to cater to essential workers who could no longer be
accommodated by the city’s free rides. This sparked issues with the national government for non-
compliance with national directives and the doubts on the overall safety of tricycles [13].
Moreover, the closure of most businesses left many citizens jobless and reliant on government assistance
in the form of either cash or food packs. According a World Bank study, unemployment tripled to 17.5% in
April 2020, with the poorest households experiencing lack of income. Around 40% of households were
unable to buy essential food products due to lack of money and mobility restrictions [14].
Driven by the heightened difficulties of citizens and aware of the dangers of easing mobility restrictions,
both the public and private sectors implemented initiatives to help reduce the need to travel such as the
“Mobile Palengke” mobile market which are roving stores that bring the markets closer to the people and
Life Cycles PH’s bicycle donation drives for essential workers.
27
Figure 17. Mobile palengkes (markets) such as this in Pasig City became a trend so people need not travel far to buy food.
Source: [15]
The ECQ was finally lifted on 1 June 2020 and Metro Manila’s community uarantine status was
downgraded to GCQ. The relevant guidelines for areas under GCQ were released by the DOTr. On August
2020, the DOTr mandated a “No Face Shield, No Ride” policy for all public transport modes, in addition to
the mandatory wearing of face masks.
The road-based guidelines shown in Table 11 which mostly focuses on capacity restrictions. Moreover, the
guidelines stated that higher capacity modes shall be prioritized, meaning not all public transport modes
can operate.
Table 11. IATF/DOTr Public Transport Protocols for Areas Under GCQ.
ROAD SECTOR
General guidelines
1. All permitted PUVs, transport terminals and operators must follow three essential components dictated in the
protocol/guidelines - SAFETY, CAPACITY and COVERAGE/SCOPE.
2. SAFETY refers to guidelines that REDUCE contact, transmission, and spread of the virus through the
MANDATORY USE of face masks and gloves for drivers. Thorough DISINFECTING practices of vehicles,
terminals, and even among passengers are also required.
3. CAPACITY and passenger load factors will be required for each mode of transportation to ensure that physical
distancing is followed.
Capacity restrictions
4. Passenger load for public utility buses (PUBs) and public utility jeepneys (PUJs) SHOULD NOT EXCEED 50
percent or half of the vehicle’s capacity, excluding driver and conductor.
5. For UV Express and taxis, passenger load SHOULD NOT EXCEED TWO PASSENGERS PER ROW, except
for the driver’s row where only one passenger is allowed.
6. Tricycles must NOT EXCEED ONE PASSENGER in the side-car, while backriding is not be allowed.
7. Private cars and motorcycles will be allowed to operate for the purpose of essential travels as defined by the
Inter-Agency Task Force (IATF).
8. Private cars will only be allowed ONE PASSENGER to occupy the front passenger seat, while FRONT-
FACING seats shall not exceed TWO PASSENGERS per row.
9. Motorcycles are PROHIBITED from having BACKRIDE passengers. Meanwhile, the use of BICYCLES and
similar devices are also highly encouraged, and LGUs are also encouraged to identify bike-lanes, or bike-only
roads.
10. The mode of PUV that will operate in each route in the GCQ areas will be guided by the number of
passengers that will be transported.
Additional remarks
11. PUVs with higher passenger capacity such as buses will be prioritized consistent with the Department Order
No. 2017-011. In areas where buses are not enough to serve the actual passenger demand, or the road
characteristics will not permit their operations, PUVMP compliant PUVs are the next priority. In areas with
unavailable buses and modern PUVs, PUJ’s and UV xpress may operate. In areas were no other mode of
public transportation is available, tricycles may be permitted to operate as determined by the LTFRB in
coordination with the corresponding LGU.
28
12. The LTFRB has already finalized the mechanism for issuing of special permits to allow PUVs to operate.
Drivers and operators may apply for the permit, free of charge, through LTFRB offices or by email through
LTFRB's online channels.
RAIL
Capacity restrictions
1. Operations of LRT-1, LRT-2, MRT-3 and PNR will resume with LIMITED CAPACITY after the lifting of the
Enhanced Community Quarantine (ECQ) imposed in Metro Manila, or on May 16, 2020.
Safety protocols
2. Upon the resumption of operations, all rail lines will observe the March 14, 2020 DOTr Guidelines on
Community Quarantine, as well as additional health and safety measures pursuant to IATF and DOH
Guidelines.
3. 1-meter SOCIAL DISTANCING should be strictly observed inside the trains and stations. Presence of
markings, signages, tarpaulins and other logistics will be utilized to ensure its firm implementation.
4. Pursuant to DOH Guidelines, the following passengers will not be allowed to enter the station: 1) Passengers
who are not wearing proper face mask; 2) Passengers showing COVID-19 symptoms or with a registered
body temperature of 37.8°C or higher; and 3) Senior citizens, passengers aged 0-20, and pregnant women
due to their susceptibility to COVID-19.
5. Regular disinfection and sanitation of train interiors, station premises and facilities will be conducted. In
addition, handwashing or disinfectant stations will be installed to adhere to sanitary measures set by DOH.
Source: DOTr [16]
Figure 18. Omnibus Guidelines on Public Transport as of May 2020.

Source: DOTr [17]
2.5 Public Transport Under General Community Quarantine
In time for the shift to GCQ in other regions as well as the impending resumption of public transport services
in Metro Manila, LTFRB issued public transportation guidelines for areas under GCQ via LTFRB
Memorandum Circular No. 2020-017. It stated that only identified and approved routes shall be allowed to
operate. Moreover, it enforced a “hierarchy of modes” wherein Public Utility Buses PUBs shall be
prioritized as the preferred units and should those be unavailable and/or inadequate, the succeeding
preferred modes shall be used. The hierarchy of modes is given as follows:
Hierarchy of modes:
i. Public Utility Bus
ii. Tourist bus
iii. Public Utility Jeepneys compliant with the Omnibus Franchising Guidelines
iv. UV Express service
v. Traditional PUJs, which have already consolidated as cooperatives or are fleet-managed
vi. Tourist vans
29
Operators are required to secure a special permit and were made to follow sanitation protocols such as
wearing of mask and gloves, use of Automated Fare Collection System or collection of fares before
boarding, frequent disinfection, use of non-permeable material, contact tracing at their own cost. LTFRB
MC No. 2020-018 was subsequently issued providing guidelines for Transportation Network Vehicle Service
(TNVS) such as Grab, providing similar protocols on disinfection, use of non-permeable transparent material
for safety, and restricting payments to cashless or online ones.
Figure 20. Acrylic barriers and electric fans Figure 19. Drivers of a traditional PUJ demonstrate a pulley system for collecting fares, in order to
separate the driver from passengers in a Grab reduce physical contact between passengers. Before the pandemic, passengers would pass along money
car. to pay the driver at the front.
Source: [18] Source: [19]
The DOTr on 29 May 2020 informed the public that the operation of public transport during the GCQ will be
done in two phases. Phase 1 (June 1 -21, 2020) shall involve trains, buses, taxis, TNVS, shuttle services,
Point-to-point buses under limited capacities as well as bicycles. Meanwhile, Modern PUJs and UV Express
routes shall be opened for Phase 2 (June 22-30, 2020) [20].
According to a survey of the Social Weather Station (SWS), there has been a high level of compliance to
mask rules among their Metro Manila respondents. As of their September 2020 survey, the number of
face mask users have increased by 4 points. Metro Manila residents were also found to have a high level
of compliance with regards to the wearing of face shields, frequent hand washing, and keeping physical
distance [79].
2.5.1 Rationalized Bus Routes in Metro Manila
For Metro Manila, in anticipation of the shift from ECG to GCQ as well as the capacity reduction of the
railways, LTFRB MC 2020-019 was issued on 14 May 2020, providing the guidelines for the operation of
thirty-one (31) bus routes that will operate in Metro Manila with a total of 4,600 authorized bus units. One
of the main routes was the EDSA Loop Service which will serve the Epifanio Delos Santos Avenue, Metro
Manila’s busiest thoroughfare. The DSA Loop Service occupied the median lanes below the MRT-3 line
and were separated by concrete barriers.
30
Figure 8. EDSA before Covid-19 and the establishment of dedicated lanes Figure 9. EDSA buses with dedicated lanes.
had no dedicated bus stops and loaded/unloaded passengers at the kerbside.
Source: [22]
Source: [21]
Figure 21 Rationalized bus routes in Metro Manila per LTFRB MC No. 2020-019 to be effective when the community quarantine status is downgraded to GCQ
Guidelines for the operation of other PUV modes such as OFG-compliant PUJs (LTFRB MC 2020-023),
UV Express (LTFRB MC 2020-025), Traditional PUJs (LTFRB MC 2020-026), Tourist transport services
(LTFRB MC 2021-013) were subsequently issued. However, these initial issuances were also for selected
routes only.
31
The reduced operations and lower priority accorded to traditional PUJs caused many complaints from the
operators and drivers of PUJs which have been considered an “informal” transport mode and have been
the target of the government’s PUV Modernization Program that also sought to impose stricter regulations
on their operations through the imposition of more stringent vehicle standards and requirements leading
to industry formalization via consolidation of individual operators into corporations or cooperatives, among
others. The opening of the jeepney routes was rather gradual which involved the issuance of around 35
separate Memorandum Circulars from the LTFRB.
Table 12 shows a comparison of the number of operational PUVs before the community quarantine and
as of today. It can be observed that the number of authorized units have generally decreased except for
the TNVS which has more than doubled.
Table 12. Comparison of number of PUVs before and during the pandemic
Franchised units Authorized units
as of 02.2020 as of 06.2021 %
Mode (Pre-quarantine) (Present) Difference
City Bus 4,803 4,550 -5%
Public Utility Jeepney 42,043 41,175 -2%
Modern PUJ 970
Traditional PUJ 40,205
Taxi 29,968 * 21,663 -28%
UV Express 10,956 * 9,091 -17%
TNVS (Grab, etc.) 12,323 25,495 +107%
*Includes franchises registered in both the LTFRB Central Office and the LTFRB-NCR offices. May include units that go outside of NCR.
Sources: DOTr, LTFRB
2.5.2 Service Contracting Program
Although transport operations have already resumed, the transport sector have been identified as among
the most vulnerable and suffering from reduced revenues due to capacity restrictions and additional costs
due to sanitation protocols. This resulted into lower availability of PUVs as due to the low financial viability
of operations. On September 2020, the President signed into law Republic Act No. or “Bayanihan
to Recover as One Act” which provides a comprehensive program to lead the country towards recovery
from the Covid-19 pandemic. Under the Response and Recovery Interventions in the law, the DOTr was
tasked to facilitate partial subsidized service contracting of public utility vehicles (PUVs) as a form of
temporary relief for adversely affected workers in the public transport sector, and at the same time
improving the level of service of public transport. A total of Php 5.58 Billion (USD 144.9 Million) was
provided for the purpose of giving temporary livelihood to displaced workers in the industry through service
contracting.
With this, the DOTr issued Department Order No.

2020-017 allowing all PUVs with valid franchises to
participate in the program and assigning the LTFRB
to be the lead implementing agency. On 08 October
2020, the LTFRB issued MC No. 2020-059 providing
for the creation of a Program Implementing Unit (PIU)
which shall implement and monitor the program. This
issuance also introduced a Systems Manager that
shall track the performance/ accomplishments of the
program participants based on identified Key
Figure 22. Sample output of the Bus and Jeepney Live Location Tracker
Performance Indicators. which now allows passengers to track the location of the PUVs they
want to ride. The tracker can be accessed via https://tracker.sakay.ph
32
The initial version of the program followed a net-cost contracting scheme wherein the government’s
payments were given in addition to the fares being collected by the participating transport service
providers. The payouts effectively served to make up for losses made by PUVs due to the capacity
restrictions and additional expenses.
The program is not just seen as merely a form of financial support but is also targeted to improve the
quality of public transportation through proper monitoring and incentivizes better service levels via a
system of merits and demerits. This has long been a challenge for the DOTr and LTFRB as the PUV
Modernization Program has been battling the decades-old system wherein drivers are paid on a
commission-basis and routes were not well-planned which led to inefficient and unhealthy and unsafe
competition on the road. The GPS locations of PUVs are tracked and viewable online via the System
Manager’s platform. Moreover, commuters can also rate and send feedback to drivers.
Figure 23. The process for Service Contracting was presented by the LTFRB
Chairman in a Congressional hearing held via Zoom last 21 June 2021.
Table 13 shows the payouts to be given to participating operators (on top of the farebox collection) under
the Service Contracting Program.
Table 13. Payouts Under the Service Contracting Program

Initial
Mode Subsidy Weekly Payout Monthly payout
a. If km threshold attained: USD 24.72/ driver/day
OR USD 0.94/km in excess of
If km threshold not attained: USD 0.94/km the km threshold.
PUB b. Merit incurred: upto 10% of net weekly
payment 40% paid to drivers, 60%
c. Demerit incurred: upto 10% gross daily paid to operator.
payment
a. If km threshold attained: USD 16.48/driver/day
USD USD 0.56/km in excess of
If km threshold not attained: USD 0.56/km
82.40 per the km threshold.
b. Merit incurred: upto 10% of net weekly
Modern PUJ driver payment
40% paid to drivers, 60%
c. Demerit incurred: upto 10% gross daily
paid to operator.
payment
Traditional a. USD 0.56/ km, paid to the driver

b.Merit incurred: upto 10% of net weekly payout None
PUJ
c. Demerit incurred: upto 10% of gorss daily
payout
33
PUBs a. USD 0.96/km run. 30% paid to driver, 70% paid
providing free to operator. None
rides to health b.Merit incurred: upto 10% of net weekly payout
care workers c. Demerit incurred: upto 10% of gorss daily
payout
Conversion rate: 1 USD = 48.55 Php
Sources: LTFRB MC 2020-079, LTFRB MC 2021-028 LTFRB MC 2021-008
2.5.3 Free Rides: Expansion of the Service Contracting Program
On 11 April 2021, recognizing the need of the sector and the commuters for continued financial support
and assistance from the government, the DOTr ordered the LTFRB to expand the free-ride program for
Authorized Persons Outside Residence and medical front liners and integrate it to the Service Contracting
Program. This was to be applicable to all areas regardless of community quarantine classification. The
participants of this expanded program would be giving free rides to its patrons. The payouts and incentives
are provided in Table 14.
Table 14. Payouts and Incentives Under the Expanded Service Contracting Program
Initial
Mode Weekly Pay-out Incentives
Subsidy
a. USD 1.70/ km run
b. Merit incurred: upto 10% of net
PUB weekly payment
c. Demerit incurred: upto 10% On-boarding incentive:
gross daily payment USD 514.98 (on-boarded as of
April 30, 2021)
a. USD 1.08/km run
USD 411.99 (May 1-June 15)
USD 82.40 b. Merit incurred: upto 10% of net
Modern
per driver weekly payment
PUJ Merit pay-out:
c. Demerit incurred: upto 10%
USD 144.20 /week/driver if
gross daily payment
logged onto the Systems app
a. USD 1.70/ km run
for at least 5 days in a week
b. Merit incurred: upto 10% of net
Traditional
weekly payment
PUJ
c. Demerit incurred: upto 10%
gross daily payment
Source: LTFRB MC 2021-030
In a report to the House of Representatives’ Committee on Transportation last 2 June 202 , the LTFRB
Chairman reported that only close to 20% of the allocated budget has been spent with the expiration of
the funds set by the end of June 2021. Interviews of public transport operators attribute the low
participation rate to the difficult application process and delayed payouts from the LTFRB which led to loss
of working capital [24]. The latest participation status is shown in Table 15.
Table 15. Status of Service Contracting Participants in Metro Manila

Orientation Contracts Monitoring
Drivers w/ Drivers w/
Registered Uploaded Activated
Oriented Drivers Submitted Executed
Drivers Drivers Drivers
Contracts Contracts
25,838 14,680 8,245 5,731 8,255 2,653

Source: LTFRB Congress Hearing Presentation (June 21, 2021)
34
2.6 Return to ECQ and Revised Transport Guidelines
By the end of March 2021, the emergence of new Covid-19 variants led to an upsurge in cases. The number
of cases reached close to 10,000 in a single day and the total number of active cases have reached more
than a hundred thousand. Once again, Metro Manila was scheduled to be placed under ECQ effective on
29 March 2021. On 28 March 2021, the DOTr released a revised version of the Omnibus Guidelines on
Public Transportation in the Enforcement of ECQ in its Facebook page [25].
A summary of guidelines and restrictions for road-based transport is presented in Table 16. This time, mass
public transportation was already allowed under limited capacities. A momentary suspension of railway
operations was announced for the Holy Week holiday due to maintenance works.
Table 16. Revised Omnibus Guidelines on Public Transportation in the Enforcement of ECQ
ROAD TRANSPORT
Public Transportation shall be allowed in areas under ECQ at reduced capacity in accordance with
the guidelines of the IATF-MEID. All other modes of transportation - privately-owned, with special
permit, and/or dedicated service under government initiative, among others, shall strictly observe the
prescribed physical distancing and sanitary measures at all times.
1. For public utility buses (PUBs) and public utility jeepneys (PUJs), 50% of the vehicle’s capacity
will be allowed, excluding the driver and the conductor. Passengers will observe the one seat
apart rule, and no standing passengers will be allowed.
2. Entry of provincial buses with only APOR as passengers shall be allowed provided rhat these
are point-to-point trips.
3. For UV Express, only a maximum of 2 passengers per row will be allowed and the vehicle should
not exceed 50% of its capacity. Only passenger will likewise be allowed on the driver’s row.
4. Taxis and TNVS are also required to only allow two (2) passengers per row and 1 passenger on
the driver’s row.
5. Shuttle service vehicles shall be allowed to operate, subject to strict physical distancing (one-
seat apart) and sanitary practices in accordance with the guidelines of Department of Trade and
Industry (DTI)-Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) JMC 2020-04-A.
6. For tricycles, only 1 passenger will be allowed to ride in the side-car and no passenger shall be
seated right beside/behind the driver. Further, the operations of tricycles shall be approved by
the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) and respective LGUs, in compliance
with the existing policies on its operational limitations.
7. The operation of motorcycle taxis shall be allowed for those considered as APOR. Moreover,
enforcement agencies shall continue to apprehend informal and illegal MC Taxi services or the
“habal-habal.”
8. The operations of free transport services for medical frontliners will be sustained during the
enforcement of ECQ. This is in consideration of the decrease in the capacity of PUVs due to
physical distancing measures.
9. Non-Motorized Transport and Personal Mobility Device are encouraged, such as bicycles,
provided that the rider will strictly abide by the physical distancing measures imposed by the
Department of Health (DOH).
35
RAILWAYS
In the country’s rail lines, the DOTr Railway sector shall implement the following:
1. Passenger capacity for all rail lines will be retained to 20-30%.
2. With 20-30% capacity, rail lines can accommodate the following number of passengers per train
set: 370 for LRT-1, 274 for LRT-2, 372 for MRT-3, and 310 for PNR.
3. In observance of the Lenten Season and to give way for the annual maintenance and
rehabilitation of the country’s rail lines,’ the following schedule will be observed from 30 March to
04 April 2021:
• MRT-3: NO OPERATIONS from 30 March 2021 (Holy Tuesday) up to 04 April 2021 (Easter
Sunday)
• LRT-1: NO OPERATIONS from 31 March to 04 April 2021 (Easter Sunday)
• LRT-2: NO OPERATIONS from 31 March to 04 April 2021 (Easter Sunday)
• PNR: NO OPERATIONS on 01 April 2021, except for the Calamba-Tutuban trip; NO
OPERATIONS as well on 02-03 April 2021
*On 04 April 2021 (Easter Sunday), the PNR will immediately resume operations on the following
routes: Tutuban-Alabang and vice versa, Tutuban-Calamba and vice versa, Tutuban-Gov. Pascual
and vice versa, Gov. Pascual-Bicutan and vice versa, and Naga-Sipocot and vice versa.
*Regular operations for all rail lines will resume on Monday, 05 April 2021.
Source: DOTr [25]
36
2.7 Active Transportation
The adoption of active transportation has been slowly gaining popularity among citizens even before the
pandemic. However, the numbers have not risen enough to cause significant modal shift to cycling due poor
or lack of infrastructure, among others. In a survey conducted by the Institute for Climate and Sustainable
Cities, MNL Moves, and University of Twente of 407 people in Metro Manila on November-December 2019
(before the pandemic), 93% agreed that there should be more bicycle lanes in their cities for health and
time-savings. However, deterrents to cycling were poor cycling facilities, perceived unsafe conditions, and
inadequate facilities for changing in schools and workplaces. Similar reasons were also given for walking
[26].
Since the onset of the community

quarantines, more and more citizens have
been using bicycles despite the lack of
safety measures. In June 2020, an private
group called Bikers United Marshalls
volunteered to assist bikers by giving away
reflectorized vests, deploying volunteer
marshals who carried safety signs and with
the use of makeshift barriers made from
recycled water bottles. At first, the gesture
was opposed by the MMDA who did not
agree with their lack of coordination and Figure 24. A volunteer from Bikers United Manila stood on the streets of
accused the group of barricading the road Commonwealth Avenue in Quezon City to guide cyclists, using makeshift dividers
[27]. made of water bottles.
Source: [28]
Data from the Bureau of Customs show that bicycle imports increased from 1 million to 2.1 million units or
by 112% from 2019 to 2020 [29]. In August 2020, the DOH, DOTr, DILG, and DPWH released a Joint
Administrative Order directing all National Government Agencies and Local Government Units to promote
the use of active transport such during and after the pandemic and promote a community-wide network of
safe paths for active transport. As of December 2021, the DILG reported that among the 900 transportation
plans submitted to them, 173 or 19% of local governments have identified bicycle lanes and walking paths
in their areas [30].
Figure 25. 313 kilometers of Bicycle Lanes in Metro Manila as of July 2021
Source: DOTr [32]
Under Republic Act. No. 11494 or the Bayanihan to Recover as One Act, PhP 1.1 billion (USD 22.7 Million)
funding was provided to support the establishment of bike lane networks in metropolitan areas while another
Php 200 million (USD 4.1 million) was allocated for bike sharing. Together with the DPWH, the DOTr
37
solicited inputs from civil society organizations in the development of design guidelines for bicycle lanes.
Php 800 million (USD 16.5 Million) will be used for the construction of bicycle lanes in Metro Manila [31]. In
late July 2021, DOTr announced the opening of 313 kilometers of bicycle lanes in Metro Manila [32].
Three classes of bicycle lane configurations were constructed based on motor vehicle volumes and
operating speeds as specified in the Guidelines on the Design of Bicycle Facilities Along National Roads
which formulated by the DPWH in cooperation with DOTr. These are shown in the figure below:
Figure 26. Classes of Bicycle Lanes
38
The local governments of Metro Manila such as Pasig City, San Juan City, Marikina City, and Quezon City
have also been active in the establishment of bicycle lanes in their respective areas. DOTr, MMDA, and
DPWH also established bicycle lanes connecting major roads, residential areas, and high-volume commuter
areas to major medical facilities to Manila City and Quezon City. Bike racks were also installed in various
railways stations.
Along with the increase in bicycle riders came an increase in bicycle-related accidents. As of 2020, the
MMDA recorded a 48% increase in accidents from the 2019 total accident figure of 1,759 [33]. Unprotected
bicycle lanes are still overrun by motorists to this day which signifies a need for intensified safety education
for all road users. One step towards this direction happened on 21 April 2021, when the DOTr in partnership
with SM Supermalls and other stakeholders released a Bike Manual aimed to educate cyclists, pedestrians,
and other motorists on safety, courtesy, and etiquette while on the road. The passport-sized manual will be
given for free in SM malls during its pilot run [34]. Similarly, the DOH together with civil society groups also
issued a Health Promotion Playbook on Active Transport.
Figure 27. Sample page from the Bike Manual, showing safety guidelines for cyclists and road users. This can also be downloaded from:
https://www.smsupermalls.com/smcares/advocacies/bike-friendly-sm/
2.8 Impacts to Citizens’ Mobility
The community quarantine drastically impacted the

mobility patterns of Metro Manila residents.
Compared with other cities, Metro Manila mobility
still haven’t returned to pre-pandemic levels.
Apple’s Mobility Trends report [35] which is derived

from Apple Map requests showed a drastic
decrease in walking (-42%), driving (-44%), and
transit (-56%) movements compared to pre-
pandemic levels, with the lowest levels (around 80%
decrease) observed during the March-April 2020
period when the toughest mobility restrictions (ECQ)
were imposed.
Figure 28 Apple Mobility Trends report for Metro Manila as of 7
October 2021 show the level of reduction in mobility based on
Apple Map requests.
Source: [35]
39
Similarly, Google’s mobility report [36] which is
based on Google map interactions noted that
movements in residential areas have increased
compared to the baseline (pre-pandemic levels)
while it decreased for the other activity areas
considered such as retail and recreation,
groceries, parks, transit stations, and even
workplaces.
A summary of the values from the report is

provided in Table 17.
Figure 29 Google mobility report for Metro Manila show the trends in movement
towards various trip attractors/ generators.
Source: [36]
Table 17. Change in mobility for various destinations during different community quarantine classifications in Metro Manila from Google mobility report
%Change from baseline
Date Community Quarantine Status Retail and Grocery and Transit
Parks *** Workplaces Residential
recreation* pharmacy** Stations ****
March 16, 2020 - May 15, 2020 ECQ -84 -57 -82 -89 -76 37
May 16, 2020 - May 30, 2020 MECQ -79 -37 -88 -83 -63 32
June 1, 2020 - August 3, 2020 GCQ -59 -23 -61 -69 -50 26
August 4, 2020 -August 18, 2020 MECQ -66 -34 -61 -81 -55 30
August 19, 2020 August 31, 2020 MGCQ -56 -25 -54 -71 -51 25
September 1, 2020 - March 28, 2021 GCQ -47 -13 -44 -64 -40 21
March 29, 2021 - April 11, 2021 ECQ -69 -27 -64 -80 -56 31
April 12, 2021 - May 14, 2021 MECQ -51 -7 -49 -67 -42 25
May 15, 2021 - June 15, 2021 GCQ with heightened restrictions -40 5 -39 -60 -33 21
June 16, 2021 - July 15, 2021 GCQ (with some restrictions) -36 10 -34 -58 -32 19
July 16, 2021 - July 22, 2021 GCQ -38 6 -40 -58 -35 21
July 23, 2021 - August 5, 2021 GCQ with heightened restrictions -39 2 -49 -64 -37 24
August 6, 2021 - August 20, 2021 ECQ -59 -9 -55 -73 -45 29
August 21, 2021 - September 15, 2021 MECQ -48 2 -47 -65 -39 25
Sept. 16, 2021 - October 3, 2021 GCQ (Alert Level 4) -40 10 -39 -61 -35 23
Average -54 -13 -54 -69 -46 26
*restaurants, cafes, shopping centers, theme parks, museums, libraries, and movie theaters
**grocery markets, food warehouses, farmers markets, specialty food shops, drug stores, and pharmacies
***national parks, public beaches, marinas, dog parks, plazas, and public gardens
****public transport hubs such as subway, bus, and train stations
The numbers show that in general, more people are starting to travel again although still not as much as
they used to. Movements have increased around residential areas only (short-trips) as well as to groceries
and pharmacies, which underscore the need for accessible sources of essential goods.
Moreover, it is important to note that movements to and from transit stations have significantly decreased.
Reduction in rail capacity has led to a more than 70% reduction in passengers (see Figure 30), shifting
passengers to buses and jeepneys and causing very long passenger queues (see Figure 31).
40
Figure 30. Rail ridership before and during the community quarantine
Source: DOTr website
In a nationwide survey of 1500 individuals by the Social Weather Stations last November 2020, 67% of
Metro Manila respondents answered that going to work was harder than before the pandemic [37]. Long
passenger queues at the EDSA Carousel bus line have been reported in the news. The MMDA is also
anticipating that car levels along DSA, Metro Manila’s busiest thoroughfare will soon reach congested
levels [48].
Figure 31. Passenger queue at the Roosevelt Station of the EDSA Carousel bus line in Quezon City on June 8, 2021
extends up to the footbridge.
Source: [47]
The mobility restrictions gave rise to the “new normal” in the form of online classes, increases in work-from-
home set-up, and further increase in online shopping and deliveries. For instance, during the periods of
extended lockdown, around 4,000 drivers from the Grab ride-hailing firm transitioned to become delivery
drivers while businesses also signed up. By the third quarter of 2020, Grab added over 78,000 merchant-
partners in the Philippines and across Southeast Asia [38]. Annual Average Daily Traffic data in major
thoroughfares show a general decrease in traffic volume for almost all modes in 2020, except for
motorcycles which have increased despite the pandemic (see .
41
Figure 32. Average Annual Daily Traffic in major thoroughfares
Source: MMDA website (covers C1-C5, R1-R10, Marcos Highway, McArthur Highway)
Although these data are somewhat indicative of mobility levels, it should be noted that these are only limited
to Apple and Android users who have used the map application. UNICEF and other organizations, in a
Covid19 impact study in Metro Manila noted that urban poor households, especially those with children, are
more vulnerable to the pandemic’s effects as they have less space for social distancing, are more reliant
on public transportation services, hold jobs in which working from home is not an option [39]. In the same
study, measures for adopting to the new normal exacerbated their financial constraints. For example,
concerns on the adoption of remote learning included problems with money for phone load, lack of gadget,
and bad internet, among others. Financial coping mechanisms such as cutting on non-essential items,
reducing food intake or resorting to cheaper food were also noted.
2.9 Impacts to the Transport and Tourism Industries
In a nationwide survey conducted by the World Bank and other partner agencies in July 2020 of more than
74,000 firms, 40% reported to have temporarily closed while 15% have closed permanently during the
pandemic [40]. Two of the most affected industries with the highest number of closures belonged to the
transportation and tourism sectors which are obviously highly dependent on person and goods movement.
Following global trends, two-thirds of the firms were reported to have turned to digital solutions for sales,
marketing, and payment methods as a way of adapting to the new normal. In terms of demand, temporary
closures of firms in the tourism and accommodation sector were higher than average.
Similarly, the International Labour Organization in its 2020 labor report also identified workers in the
transport and tourism industries as facing high risk of job disruption due to the Covid-19 crisis [41]. It
reported a 27% decrease in employment for the period of April 2019-2020 for the transportation and storage
sector. For example, Okada Manila, a five-star hotel and casino, reportedly laid off 1,000 employees in May
2020. Moreover, it remarked that the impacts to the sector are likely caused by individuals and households
saving their cash which eventually leads to reduced demand for leisure activities and hence, reduced
income for workers in these industries.
2.10 Moving Forward: Plans of the Philippine Government
The Philippine government adopted a 4-pillar socio-economic strategy against Covid-19 composed of the
following:
Pillar 1: Emergency support for vulnerable groups
Pillar 2: Marshaling resources to fight Covid-19
Pillar 3: Monetary actions and other financing support
Pillar 4: An economic recovery program to create jobs and sustain growth
42
The DOF estimate activities in all pillars to cost Php 2.6 trillion (USD 51.3 Billion). Pillar 1 involves the
provision of emergency subsidies for low-income families which also involved workers in the transport
sector. It also included the provision of loans for small businesses. Measures to strengthen the health sector
through health insurances, additional payment for health workers, and procurement of protective equipment
comprise Pillar 2. Pillar 3 involves liquidity infusion into the economy and financing support from various
local and foreign sources. Pillar 4 supports the ongoing and proposed economic recovery measures such
as those outline in the Bayanihan to Recover as One Act.
As for the transport industry, the crisis served as a catalyst for the hastened implementation of various
reforms in the sector which have previously started but have suffered from slow adoption. For instance, the
use of technology and digital innovation as measures to deal with the mobility restrictions are welcome
improvements that are seen to stay beyond the pandemic [42].
Examples of these measures are:

• Land Transportation Management System for online application for drivers’ license, motor vehicle
registration, certifications, and revision of records;
• LTFRB Public Transport Online Processing System for online franchise-related transactions;
• Cashless transactions at tollways;
• Cashless transactions in Public Utility Vehicles;
• Higher utilization of Automated Fare Collection system in Railways;
Active Transportation efforts are planned not just during the pandemic but also for the long term with more
and more policies being issued in support of it
(Figure 33). Private groups have also been
lobbying for the inclusion of bicycle counts in the
MMDA’s annual traffic counts for planning
purposes [43]. On the other hand, a bill seeking to
institutionalize Service Contracting has been filed
in Congress [44].
Meanwhile, the government’s infrastructure

projects under its massive “Build, Build. Build”
program are being continued despite the
pandemic and are foreseen to speed up economic
recovery. Several big-ticket transport projects in
Metro Manila and its adjacent regions compose a
new international airport, more than 10 new
railways lines including the first-ever subway in the
country, a Bus Rapid Transit line, and the Source: DOTr
continuation of the development of integrated
terminals. Figure 33. Active Transportation Policies.
The Philippine General Election is also set to be held on May 2022, marking the end of the term of President
Rodrigo Duterte. The elections will result to a change in leadership from the presidential down to the city
and municipal levels. Historically, modifications or changes in priorities may be expected.
As of June 28, 2021, Metro Manila has had a total of 525,716 Covid-19 cases with 7,470 active cases and
already 7,942 deaths [45]. However, only . % of the country’s population have received their first vaccine
dose while 2.32% have received both doses as of July 27 [46]. Should the low vaccination rate persist, the
Philippine government’s target of achieving herd immunity by the end of the year may not be achieved and
mobility restrictions may continue to persist. This indicates that mobility trends observed so far may continue
to grow at a very slow rate. While improvements in public transportation and active transport infrastructure
are ongoing, quantification of their positive effects on the overall commuting experience should be subjected
to further study.
43
3 SUTI Data Collection/
Compilation Approach
44
Indicator 1: Extent to which transport plans cover public transport, intermodal facilities and
infrastructure for active modes.
Metro Manila has been the focus of many master planning efforts. Given its status as the capital and
economic center of the Philippines as well as the fact that it is composed of 17 Local Government Units, it
is covered by plans at the national, regional, and local levels.
Evaluation shall be conducted based on a review of various long term and medium-term plans of the national
government. The evaluation shall focus on pre-pandemic plans to be consistent with the evaluation of other
indicators.
a. Overall government plans. This includes a review of various plans as follows:

i. Philippine Development Plan 2017-2022 which is anchored on the government’s zero to ten-
point socioeconomic agenda and geared towards the achievement of its long-term vision: Isang
matatag, maginhawa, at panatag na buhay para sa lahat.
ii. Public Investment Program contains the priority programs and projects (PAPs) of various
agencies. This accompanies the PDP and contains proposed and ongoing priority PAPs that are
responsive to the desired outcomes and results matrix of the PDP.
iii. Regional Development Plan for the National Capital Region (NCR-RDP). This follows the
development agenda of the PDP 2017-2022 which highlights the role of regions in achieving
national development goals. and objectives. This also adopts the long-term development vision
stated in the Metro Manila Greenprint 2030. This shall be the main document to be used in the
evaluation.
b. Local government plans. The evaluation shall also be accompanied by a review of publicly-available
plans for each Local Government Unit in NCR which includes the Comprehensive Land Use Plan,
Comprehensive Development Plan, and other publicly-announced plan/agenda of local executives as
can be found in their websites or social media pages.
c. Sector-specific plans and roadmaps. This includes various roadmaps and plans that are sector-specific
such as the infrastructure roadmap being used by DOTr (Roadmap for Transport Infrastructure
Development for Metro Manila and its Surrounding Areas (Region III and Region IV-A)), the strategic
vision for Metro Manila led by the MMDA (Metro Manila Green Print 2030), and sector plan of the
Department of Human Settlements and Urban Development.
The evaluators of this indicator are the following:

Dr. Sandy Mae A. Gaspay (report author), Transportation Consultant
Dr. Marie Danielle V. Guillen, Professorial Lecturer 2/Lecturer, University of the Philippines/ Ateneo de
Manila University
Dr. Ma. Sheilah G. Napalang, Assistant Secretary, Department of Transportation
Indicator 2: Modal share of active and public transport in commuting

Modal share data being used by the Department of Transportation is based on the findings of the report
entitled “The Project for Capacity Development on Transportation Planning and Database Management in
the Republic of the Philippines” prepared in cooperation with JICA [51]. The data was derived from various
sources such as Household Interview Surveys (HIS) conducted in 2012 and 2014, census data, and traffic
surveys.
The workflow diagram used in the collection of data is presented in Figure 34.
45
Figure 34. Workflow Diagram to Develop the MUCEP HIS Master File
Given the number of processes undergone to develop the Origin-Destination Matrix for which the mode
share data is based, it is challenging to conduct own manipulations and conduct validation in order to update
the data. Therefore, the final modal share data presented in the JICA report dated 2015 [51] was used for
SUTI’s Indicator 2.
In the JICA 2015 report, bicycle trips are not explicitly counted and are classified under private mode.
Therefore, bicycle trips will be estimated based on the study of Fillone, et. al. [49] which contains a detailed
breakdown of trips per mode based on the Household Information Survey data of the JICA 2015 study.
Given that the data is relatively old, comparison was done using data from the Follow-up Survey on
Roadmap for Transport Infrastructure Development for Greater Capital Region (2019) by JICA [50] which
conducted an update of the 2014 database via additional traffic surveys. Unfortunately, data from this report
was only divided into public and private transport trips so this could not be used for the SUTI evaluation.
Indicator 3: Convenient access to public transport service

Estimation shall be done using GIS software wherein the rail, bus, and jeepney routes shall be overlayed
onto the geographic map containing population density data. A 500-meter buffer zone shall be used to
estimate the land area with corresponding density that is covered by the buffer zone.
2020 census data at the barangay level was obtained from the Philippine Statistical Authority. Public
transportation route information was requested from the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory
Board LTFRB but could not be obtained in time for this study’s completion. Therefore, this data was
obtained from Sakay.ph, a private company that provides transit directions to commuters.
Indicator 4: Public transport quality and reliability

The latest comprehensive perception survey on public transportation was conducted in 2014. Hence, it may
no longer be representative of current public transport conditions, especially in light of various reforms
implemented.
In consideration of health risks posed by the Covid-19 pandemic, an online survey was conducted which
was disseminated in various social media pages with high membership of Metro Manila residents.
46
Indicator 5: Traffic fatalities per 100,000 inhabitants
This data was derived from the Metro Manila Accident Recording and Analysis System (MMARAS)
database of the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority.
Indicator 6: Affordability – travel costs as part of income

Assessment of this indicator involved estimation of the average monthly fare paid per mode. Given that the
fare structure in Metro Manila is based on distance travelled, the average fare per day was computed based
on average trip distance. The monthly cost was computed as Average daily fare x 60 per the SUTI
guidelines. Market shares were based on mode share data used in Indicator 2.
Consistent with the SUTI guideline, the third decile of the mean household monthly income was obtained
from the 2018 Family Income and Expenditure Survey of the Philippine Statistics Authority.
Indicator 7: Operational costs of the public transport system

For this indicator, only operating costs were included. Capital expenditures were not factored in. The
following data sources and strategies were used:
a. Railway operational costs were obtained from the latest pre-pandemic reports (2019) of the three
railway operating institutions in Metro Manila: LRTA, MRT, and PNR.
b. Bus and Jeepney operational costs. Given the large number of bus and jeepney operators and that
many jeepney operators do not operate as corporate entities, average operational costs were
computed using various studies as references.
Indicator 8: Investment in public transportation systems

Data for this indicator were derived from various sources as follows:
i. Five-year budget of the following national government agencies:

a. Department of Transportation: the primary policy, planning, programming, coordinating,
implementing and administrative entity of the executive branch of the government on the
promotion, development and regulation of a dependable and coordinated network of
transportation systems, as well as in the fast, safe, efficient and reliable transportation
services.
b. Department of Public Works and Highways: mandated to undertake (a) the planning of
infrastructure, such as national roads and bridges, flood control, water resources projects
and other public works, and (b) the design, construction, and maintenance of national roads
and bridges, and major flood control systems.
c. Metro Manila Development Authority: performs services which have metro-wide impact and
transcend legal political boundaries or entail huge expenditures which would not be viable
for individual Local Government Units to provide. These services include transport and traffic
management, solid waste disposal and management, flood control and sewerage
management, and urban renewal, zoning, land use planning, and shelter services.
ii. Local government infrastructure program. Due to limitations encountered in obtaining the
detailed infrastructure budget of each LGU, information was sourced from the NCR-
Rehabilitation and Recovery Plan (NCR-RRP) which included projects and programs for
submitted by LGUs over a three-year period (2020-2022). Hence, only the budget for 2020 and
2021 were reported. From the NCR-RRP, it was observed that most road projects in LGUs are
funded by the national budget via the DPWH. Majority of the LGUs’ infrastructure projects are
for social infrastructure such as multi-purpose buildings, health centers, and the like. Therefore,
majority of expenditure on transport are believed to have been covered by the analysis.
iii. Private sector investments. Data was obtained from the Public-Private Partnership Center’s
PPPC’s database of PPP projects covering the period 20 -2021. LTFRB-NCR’s data on the
number of modernized PUJs and UV Express ever since the implementation of the PUV
Modernization Program in 2017 was obtained to estimate private sector expense on public
transport fleet. Only PUVs operating within Metro Manila were included. Bus franchises are
processed by the LTFRB Central Office instead of the NCR Regional office and the data obtained
47
only showed consolidated bus units nationwide. Therefore, the number of buses in NCR were
estimated based NCR’s proportion of franchised units.
Indicator 9: Air quality (PM10)

Data was obtained from the website of the Department of the Environment and Natural Resources- Air
Quality Management Section. 2019 data consisting of six (6) stations was used in the analysis since this
reflected conditions before the pandemic.
Indicator 10: GHG emissions from transport

The data for this indicator shall be derived from the study entitled “Energy demand, emissions forecasts and
mitigation strategies modeled over a medium-range horizon: The case of the land transportation sector in
Metro Manila” by Ahancian and Biona 20 .
Additional data 1: Energy/Renewable Energy Use by Public Transport

The LTFRB does not categorize public transport data based on fuel type. However, data on PUVs that have
complied with the Public Utility Vehicle Modernization Program (PUVMP) is available. Under this program,
PUVs must either comply with “ uro standards or better”.
The latest vehicle registration data obtained that is segregated by fuel type contains the following categories:
Gasoline, Diesel, Compressed Natural Gas (CNG), Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG), Electric, Others. As of
the latest data obtained (2018), CNG and LPG vehicles comprised less than 1% of the registered vehicles
in Metro Manila. Therefore, only data on Electric vehicles from DOTr will be presented.
Additional data 2: Inclusiveness: Addressing the needs of gender equality and consideration for
differently-abled and aging society.
Data on gender and inclusivity policies were obtained from the websites of the DOTr, MMDA, National
Council for Disability Affairs (NCDA), and various news reports.
48
4 Data and Analysis for SUTI
49
4.1 INDICATOR 1:Extent to which transport plans cover public transport, intermodal
facilities and infrastructure for active modes
According to the SUTI guideline, this indicator directly refers to SDG target .2 “By 20 0, provide access
to safe, affordable, accessible and sustainable transport systems for all”. It is also relevant for SDG target
. “Develop uality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure”. The provision of alternatives to
motorized individual transport such as walking, cycling, public transport facilities are essential to promoting
urban sustainable transport. Hence, this indicator involved the evaluation of plans to provide such. The
following score card provided in the SUTI guidelines were used:
Table 18. Indicator 1 Score Card
It is important to note that the plans reviewed for this indicator were formulated before the pandemic. Overall,
national plans contained little to no concrete plans and targets for walking and cycling networks although
the principles of walkability, transit-oriented development, and movement of people were acknowledged as
important. At the city level, however, only a few cities had concrete and dedicated plans for walking and
cycling in their Comprehensive Land Use Plans and Comprehensive Development Plans.
Integrated transfer facilities are part of the national plan and budget but the projects are only concentrated
in selected areas. Although the concepts of seamlessness and smooth transfers are mentioned in the plans,
a detailed roadmap involving the entirety of Metro Manila was not present. There is heavy focus on public
transportation infrastructure such as railways given the government’s major priority of catching up on its
thirty-year infrastructure backlog. As for other road-based systems such as buses and jeepneys, only one
BRT corridor has been identified. As for buses, jeepneys and other Public Utility Vehicles, the
implementation of a route rationalization plan is yet to materialize.
50
The SUTI ratings are provided in the following table.
Table 19. SUTI Table for Indicator 1

Aspects Explanation Score
• The Philippine Development Plan (PDP) espouses the implementation of
strategic infrastructure, among which is the improvement and expansion
of non-motorized transport such as bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure.
Moreover, the Metro Manila Green Print and DHSUD sectoral plans
acknowledge the importance of Transit-Oriented Development and the
importance of close access to public transportation facilities (via walking).
• One of the key strategies in the NCR-Regional Development Plan (RDP)
I) walking networks is the upgrading and rehabilitation of alternative modes of transport. 2
• The Public Investment Program includes the EDSA Greenways Project,
which is the closest to an extensive active transport network. However,
this project only covers the environs of four (4) railway stations.
• Some city plans include visions for improving pedestrian
infrastructure/walkability. However, only a few cities such as Pasig,
Mandaluyong, Caloocan, among others, have identified areas/corridors
for improvement.
• The PDP espouses the implementation of strategic infrastructure, among
which is the improvement and expansion of non-motorized transport such
as bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure.
• One of the key strategies in the NCR-RDP is the upgrading and
II) cycling networks 2
rehabilitation of alternative modes of transport.
• Majority of city plans have discussed the importance of cycling. However,
only a few cities such as Pasig, Mandaluyong, and Makati have explicitly
designated areas/corridors for cycling.
• The PDP and NCR-RDP emphasize improved connectivity and
enhanced mobility, particularly the establishment of multi-modal transport
terminals for better accessibility and integration.
• The Public Investment Program (PIP) and transport roadmap include
integrated terminal projects such as the Paranaque and Taguig Integrated
III) intermodal
Terminal Exchange that shall cater to provincial buses from outside Metro 2.33
transfer facilities
Manila and decongest urban roads. These projects are currently under
implementation and have secured funding. In addition, a Unified Grand
Central Station or Common station project that integrated various railway
lines is also being implemented.
• The thrusts of the NCR-RDP emphasize prioritization of mass transport

system projects in order to encourage modal shift to public transport.
• Majority of transport projects under the Department of Transportation as
reflected in the PIP and outlined in the transport roadmap are focused on
the development of public transportation infrastructure such as railways
and BRTs. The railway projects under the roadmap include extensions of
the existing rail lines, sub-urban line, and new lines that include Metro
Manila's first subway. These projects are already committed. Some BRT
projects are also committed.
• With regards to Public Utility Vehicles (PUVs) such as buses and
IV) public transport 3
jeepneys, the DOTr has embarked on a Public Utility Vehicle
Modernization Program that aims to rationalize PUV routes and modernize
existing fleet into safer and more energy-efficient ones. The program is
not capital-intensive and is mostly comprised of regulations that aim to
formalize the public transport sector.
• Contents of city plans mostly provide for support infrastructure for mass
transit such as waiting sheds and connections to stations.
• In the transport roadmap, it is estimated that implementation of various
projects identified will result to a 41.5% decrease in transport cost, 16.7%
decrease in GHG emissions, and 64.3% reduction in PM by year 2030.
Total (sum) 9.33
51
Active transport projects such as a Metro Manila-wide bicycle lane have gained prominence as a
consequence of the Covid-19 pandemic, wherein most of the budget was provided via the laws that provided
pandemic support. In the recently released NCR Rehabilitation and Recovery Plan, projects on walking and
cycling have been added in some cities. The sustainability of active transport infrastructure and continued
growth is something worth observing in the coming years.
4.2 INDICATOR 2: Modal Share of Active and Public Transport In Commuting
As mentioned in the previous section, the following data obtained from the JICA study [51] was used. This
data includes all trip types and is not limited to commuting trips.
Table 20. Modal share data from the JICA study (2015)
The above table does not explicitly indicate bicycle trips and lumped them along with other private modes.
Therefore, the percentage of bicycle trips from the category “Other: private mode” was estimated based on
the Household Interview Survey (HIS) data. Fillone, et. al. [41] conducted an analysis of the HIS data of the
JICA study. This data provided a detailed breakdown of all modes included in the HIS. The private modes
that were not explicitly named in Table 20 are assumed to compose “Other: private mode”. Based on the
HIS data, 80.7% of other private trips were bicycle trips. Therefore, this was used to estimate the number
of bicycle trips, yielding 666,582 bicycle trips.
Table 21. Estimation of bicycle trips percentage from HIS data

Others-private mode #Trips %
Bicycle 6,386 80.7%
Pick-up / Delivery Van 590 7.5%
Others 937 11.8%
The results for Indicator 2 are presented in the table below, showing that the modal share for active and
public transport is at 63.65%. This result is close in value to data from the more updated Follow-up Survey
On Roadmap for Transport Infrastructure Development for Greater Capital Region (2019) by JICA [50]
which conducted an update of the 2014 data by using socio-economic growth rates and traffic survey data
in selected locations. Based on the update report, the share of public transport trips were at 70.1%. Given
that demand forecasting involves a series of complex steps that involve a transport modelling software that
are not accessible to the author, attempts to conduct a simplified forecast in order to update the 2014 data
was not done.
52
Average number of trips per person by main mode of transport

PURPOSE ALL TRIP TYPES
MODE # of trips (000) subtotals
a. Bus 2352
b. Train 1485
c. Jeepney 6763
d. UV/ HOV 261
e. Others 156
f. Public transport (a+b+c+d+e) 11017
g. Walking 10913
h. Bicycle 667
i. Active transport (g+h) 11579
j. Passenger car 2894
k. Motorcycle 2948
l. Taxi 315
m. Truck 270
n. Paratransit (tricycle and pedicab) 6318

o. Others 159
p. Individual motorized (j+k+l+m+n+o) 12904
q. Total (f+i+p) 35501
r. Public and active (f+i) 22596
s. Modal share of active and public transport 63.65
The public transport share in Metro Manila is relatively high compared to many ASEAN cities. Given the
recent reforms in transportation routes, the emergence of ride-hailing applications, as well as the recent
widespread adoption and support for walking and cycling, an updated inventory or estimation of modal share
in Metro Manila is in order.
53
4.3 INDICATOR 3: CONVENIENT ACCESS TO PUBLIC TRANSPORT SERVICE
The approach used for this indicator

involved the overlaying of the PUV routes
and stops information onto the geographic
map of Metro Manila. Population data for
each barangay from the latest PSA census
(year 2020) was used.
The route information was supplied in

General Transit Feed Specification (GTFS)
format by Sakay Mobility Philippines Corp.
which owns and operates Sakay.ph, an
online platform that provides commuting
directions to Metro Manila citizens. The
routes analyzed included the following
modes: Rail, Bus, and Public Utility
Jeepney.
Following the SUTI guidelines, 500-meter

buffer zones were drawn around the transit
stops and the overlap of these zones with
the population density was computed. It is Figure 35. Rail, Bus, and Jeepney routes in Metro Manila
assumed that the population density per barangay are equally distributed within the barangay’s land area.
The aggregate map of the buffer zones for the routes are presented in the figure below and tabulated in
Table 23.
Figure 36. Metro Manila population within 500-meters from public transport stops
54
Number of bus/ Coverage area within a Pop. Density Inhabitants #
jeepney/ rail stops radius of 500m km2 (inhabitants/km2)
5,246 398.7 26,277.59

10,478,109
Total Population
13,484,462
% within 500m buffers (Year 2020) 77.71
The results show that majority of the population have easy access to a public transport stop. However, the
indicator does not capture whether the nearest public transport stop is one that the user prefers for reasons
such as it minimizes transfers or overall travel cost. Moreover, a high score in this indicator may also be a
sign of oversupply or inefficient route allocation. In Metro Manila, the DOTr has already noted the presence
of too much competition and overlapping routes which necessitated a route rationalization effort as part of
the PUV modernization program.
This result can also be improved if data on UV Express will be included. Moreover, the presence of tricycles
and other paratransit services as an additional option for last mile trips will also contribute to improved
access.
55
4.4 INDICATOR 4: PUBLIC TRANSPORT QUALITY AND RELIABILITY
An online survey both in English and Filipino was conducted for this indicator. Since the survey was
conducted during the pandemic period, the respondents were first requested to rate the public transport
dimensions before and during the pandemic. There were a total of 463 respondents but only 390
respondents took public transportation and were able to provide ratings. 70% of the respondents were
female. The breakdown of results is as follows:
Table 24. Tabulation of survey response (Pre-pandemic)

Neither
satisfied
Very Partly nor Partly
dissatisfied dissatisfied dissatisfied Satisfied Satisfied Average
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Score
Frequency of Service 19 65 109 142 55 3.38
Punctuality 36 66 119 124 45 3.19
Comfort and cleanliness of
vehicles 30 84 124 112 40 3.12
Safety of vehicles 21 67 108 144 50 3.35
Convenient location of
stops/stations 19 39 100 153 79 3.60
Availability of information 24 57 130 123 56 3.33
Personnel courtesy 6 39 108 173 64 3.64
Fare 9 48 98 162 73 3.62
Overall 164 465 896 1133 462 3.41
The percentage of respondents that gave satisfied ratings are presented in Table 25.

Dissatisfied Satisfied
Dimension Responses % SATISFIED
Frequency of the service 84 197 390 50.51

Punctuality (delay) 102 169 390 43.33
Comfort and cleanliness of vehicles 114 152 390 38.97
Safety of vehicles 88 194 390 49.74
Convenience of stops/stations 58 232 390 59.49
Availability of information 81 179 390 45.90
Personnel courtesy 45 237 390 60.77
Fare level 57 235 390 60.26
Responses 629 1595 3120 51.12
Overall, a relatively high satisfaction rating was obtained on Personnel courtesy, Fare Level and
Convenience of stops/stations. The result appears reasonable as public transport in the Philippines is
relatively cheap, with the railways heavily subsidized and PUV fares heaving regulated by the government.
As mentioned in Indicator 3, the routes and stops are widely available.
However, respondents provided low satisfaction ratings on level of service criteria such as Punctuality,
Comfort and Cleanliness, Safety, and Availability of Information. These low scores merely validate the goals
of the PUV modernization program and the Service Contracting Program which aim for reforms in the PUV
operators’ business model in order to provide better uality of service.
During this exercise, only the LRTA and PNR were found to have conducted customer satisfaction surveys.
However, a detailed breakdown of the questions and criteria were not obtained. For the case of buses,
56
jeepneys, and UV express, the high number of operators make it difficult to obtain a representative sample.
The conduct of a regular customer satisfaction survey by agencies such as the DOTr and/or LTFRB can be
done to influence policies.
The survey of public transportation use during the pandemic showed significant differences in travel
frequencies via public transport (see Figure 37). Commuters that used public transport five days or more in
a week were reduced by 60%.
Consequently, 34.9% (136 respondents) indicated that they no longer used public transport during the
pandemic. Among those that continued to use public transportation during the pandemic, 30% changed
the modes that they used. The top reasons given for avoiding public transport were:
• Fear of contracting Covid-19 (86%, 177 respondents)
• Stops/stations were too far (15%, 21 respondents)
• No need to travel due to change in work, school arrangements (7%, 10 respondents)
Figure 37. Comparison on public transport frequency usage before and during pandemic
4.5 INDICATOR 5: Traffic Fatalities per 100,000 Inhabitants
The data was derived from the Metro Manila Accident Recording and Analysis System (MMARAS)
database of the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority. The MMARAS database is obtained from two
(2) major sources:
1. Philippine National Police (PNP) Traffic Precinct Blotter Book wherein road crash reports are
copied and transferred to the TEC-RSU Road Crash Form categorized into (Fatal, Non-Fatal and
Damage to Property)
2. MMDA Command Center (Metrobase). This includes crash records of the MMDA Metrobase that
were reported thru radio, calls from concerned citizens, and captured by CCTV’s.
The data covers the following modes: bike/e-bike/pedicab, motorcycles, tricycles, car, jeepney, taxi, bus,
van, truck, train. According to the SUTI Guidelines, the World Health Organization defines death counts as
related to a traffic accident if it occurs within 30 days after the accident. Per phone interview with the MMDA’s
Road Safety Unit, the fatality data recorded are obtained directly from police blotters and are limited to on-
site fatalities.
The trend in total accident cases was observed to be slowly increasing through the years (see Figure 38),
with the exception of year 2020 wherein mobility restrictions due to Covid-19 were in place. A breakdown
of the number of vehicles involved in accidents by mode for year 2019 (Figure 39) regardless of severity
shows that cars are the most frequently involved in accidents. However, the most number of vehicles
involved in fatal accidents are motorcycles followed by trucks and cars (Figure 40). Motorcycle-related
fatalities have consistently been the highest over the last five years (Figure 41).
57
250,000 2 5, ,500,000
225,
2 0,5 2 2 0,0
,000,000
,0 ,0
N m er o re istered e i les
200,000 2, 2 ,
2, 2,
ases
2, ,5 2,500,000
2, 05, 22
50,000
2,000,000
ras
25,0 0
N m er o
,500,000
00,000
,000,000
50,000
500,000
20 20 20 20 2020
ear
Figure 38.Number of Accident Cases in Metro Manila (2016-2020)
Figure 39. Vehicles Involved (Fatal and non-fatal) 2019 Figure 40. Vehicles Involved (Fatal only) 2019
Figure 41. Trend in Number of Vehicles Involved in FATAL Accidents
The number of persons involved in accidents for the year 2016-2020 is shown in Table 26 wherein an
average of 545 persons per day are involved in accidents with fatality rate at 1.9%. The breakdown of
fatalities in Table 27 show the unfortunate fact that fatalities didn’t just involve drivers and passengers but
involved an average of 34% of pedestrians.
58
Table 26. Number of Persons Involved in Fatal and Non-Fatal Accidents
Persons involved in accidents

Type/ Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Fatal 446 434 394 394 345
Non-fatal 20,876 19,374 21,893 25,229 16,870
Total persons 21,322 19,808 22,287 25,623 17,215
Table 27. Persons Involved in Fatal Accidents

Number of Persons Involved 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Average %
Driver Killed 194 217 198 214 243 213.2 53%
Passenger Killed 57 55 54 62 27 51 13%
Pedestrian Killed 195 162 142 118 75 138.4 34%
Total Persons Killed 446 434 394 394 345 402.6 100%
For this analysis, pre-pandemic data (year 2019) was used. The result for this indicator is presented in the
table below.
Total Fatalities 394
Inhabitants 13,633,497
Fatalities/100,000 inhabitants (Year 2019) 2.9
The data shows that Metro Manila’s accident and fatality rates are still not close to achieving the zero road
traffic death target by 2022 which was set out in the Philippine Road Safety Action Plan. Despite the mobility
restrictions during the pandemic, the number of accident cases especially for motorcycles have not
significantly decreased.
59
4.6 INDICATOR 6: AFFORDABILITY – TRAVEL COSTS AS PART OF INCOME
The average trip distances were derived from the following studies that have conducted extensive surveys
of public transport operations in Metro Manila:
• Rail, UV: The Project for Capacity Development on Transportation Planning and Database
Management in the Republic of the Philippines, JICA (2014)
• Jeepney: Alternative Technologies for the Philippine Utility Jeepney, Blacksmith Institute and Clean
Air Asia (2017)
• Bus: GIZ, “National Urban Mobility Program, DSA-Bus Case Study: Operations and Business
Model.” 20
Given that changes in public transportation routes have yet to be implemented, it is assumed that the travel
distance data from the above studies have not significantly changed.
The average trip distances were then used to compute the average ticket prices by using the fare structure
applicable in year 2018. The market shares were estimated based on the number of trips by mode in
Indicator 2. The table below illustrates how the estimated single ticket price was determined.
Table 29. Determination of Single Ticket Price

Average
No. of Trips Estimated Travel Estimated Single
Mode Fare Structure, Php
(000) Market share Distance ticket price
(km)
Train 1,485 13.7% 15.47 11 + 1/km 26
11 (first 5 km) +
Bus (ordinary)
1.85/km 21
2,352 10.46
Bus (aircon) 13 (first 5 km) +
21.7% 2.2/km 25
11 (first 4 km) +
Jeepney 6,763
62.3% 5.27 1.5/km 13
UV/HOV 261 2.4% 14.82 2/km 30
The result of the SUTI analysis is shown in the table below:

Market Single ticket Single ticket Monthly cost Weighted
shares price (in Php) price (60 tickets) monthly cost
Services ( in US $) ( in US $) ( in US $)
Train 13.7% 26.5 0.5 32 4.3430
Bus 21.7% 23.1 0.5 28 5.9902
Jeepney 62.3% 12.9 0.3 15 9.6391
UV/ HOV 2.4% 29.6 0.6 36 0.8547
A: Weighted Average of Monthly Ticket Cost in USD 20.8271
B: Mean monthly household income (Third Decile) in USD, 2018 169
B/A (%) 12.3
Based on the result, monthly public transport fares do not appear to be too costly from the perspective of
household incomes. This may be attributed to the large subsidies of the government in rail transport as well
as the highly regulated fares. However, this result only accounts for direct trips (i.e. no transfers) since
information on the average number of transfers is not available.
Moreover, it is also important to look at service quality and reliability which is being evaluated in Indicator
4. Recently, some alternative modes of transportation have been emerging in the Philippines such as
motorcycle back-riding and ride-hailing which are becoming more preferrable for their improved speed or
60
comfort. These may also be studied in the future when more data is available to determine additional costs
of transport.
4.7 INDICATOR 7: OPERATIONAL COSTS OF THE PUBLIC TRANSPORT SYSTEM
The data for this indicator was derived using a mix of financial data and author’s estimates. Railways
operations data was derived from the latest pre-pandemic annual reports of the DOTr-MRT3, PNR, and
LRTA.
On the other hand, there is a lack of publicly-available data on the earnings of Bus and Jeepney operators.
Given that the fare structure is distance-based, an estimate of operational costs and earnings depend on
the length of the route and its average patronage. Due to limitations in available studies, only City Bus and
Jeepney which are the most common public transport modes were included in the analysis of non-rail
transport.
The detailed analysis table is provided in the calculation sheet for Indicator 7 and omitted here for brevity.
The following estimation procedure was adopted:

• Market shares are estimated from mode share data used in Indicator 2.
• Jeepney operational cost components included fuel consumption, tire cost, lubricant, maintenance
cost, rental fee and other expenses. Given that the PUV modernization program and the requirement
for consolidation has not yet reached critical mass as of year 2019, the prevalent rental-based
business model was used. Under this model, drivers do not receive a daily salary and just pay a
rental fee to the franchise owner/operator. The amount remaining from the farebox revenues after
the rental and other operating expenses have been deducted are taken home by the drivers. In this
case, rental fee is considered as an expense. Data sources are as follows:
o Jeepney net operating income and daily cost structure: Mettke, Christian, Danielle Guillen,
and Cristina Villaraza. "Transforming public transport in the Philippines: The jeepney+
NAMA of the Philippine government." (2016).
o xpenses for traditional and modern jeepneys: GIZ, “Reforming the semi-)informal minibus
system in the Philippines .The ‘Public Utility Vehicle Modernization Program’ arly Route
valuation.” 20
o Jeepney route information: Alternative Technologies for the Philippine Utility Jeepney,
Blacksmith Institute and Clean Air Asia (2017)
o Estimation of other vehicle operating cost items: The Project for Capacity Development on
Transportation Planning and Database Management in the Republic of the Philippines
(MMUTIS Update and Enhancement Project), 2015
o PONTAWE, Joemier, and Ma Sheilah NAPALANG. "Examining the Potential Significance
of Industry Consolidation and Fleet Management in Implementing the DOTr’s PUV
Modernization Program: A Case Study of 1TEAM." (2018).
• Bus operational cost components were based on data obtained for city bus routes that pass through
EDSA (total of 44 bus routes). Given that EDSA is the busiest thoroughfare holding majority of bus
routes, this data is assumed to be representative of typical bus operations in Metro Manila. The cost
components include fuel consumption, lubricants, tires, repair and staff cost. Data sources are as
follows:
o Bus costs, trip lengths, passenger demand: GIZ, “National Urban Mobility Program, DSA-
Bus Case Study: Operations and Business Model.” 20
o Estimation of other vehicle operating cost items: “The Project for Capacity Development on
Transportation Planning and Database Management in the Republic of the Philippines
MMUTIS Update and Enhancement Project” 2015)
61
Services Market shares Fare Revenues Transport Operating Farebox ratio
(estimated) (USD) Expenses
(USD)
Railway:
MRT 3 8.2% 38,213,637 79,083,053 48%
LRT 2 4.7% 21,372,600 29,277,534 73%
PNR 1.0% 4,571,031 7,551,765 61%
City Bus 22.2% 161,777,656 107,869,814 150%
Jeepney 63.8% 666,578,541 502,344,603 133%
Total Weighted 126.0%
The result for indicator 7 shows the weighted average farebox ratio at 126%. This result is heavily influenced
by city bus and jeepney value which have higher market shares. Many bus and jeepney operations are
highly profitable as they can operate even with small fleets, therefore with minimal capital costs. Moreover,
many buses and jeepneys were purchased from the second-hand market and not undergoing strict
maintenance practices. This is currently being addressed through the PUV modernization program which is
progressing at a slow pace.
On the other hand, railways are operated in a centralized manner which entail larger capital and operational
costs. In the light of ongoing efforts to modernize and consolidate PUV operations by instituting reforms via
the PUV modernization program (see Section 1.2.5), it would be interesting to update the status of this
indicator when the reforms have penetrated the majority of the PUV industry.
4.8 INDICATOR 8: INVESTMENT IN PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS
The breakdown of transport investments from various sources described in Section 3 is provided in the
following table. The budget data of various agencies were checked and only budget for capital expenditures
were considered. For example, government subsidies on railway operations were not included.
Actual expenditure data is ideal to be used in this analysis. However, data of most agencies (except DOTr)
were not broken down to the project level so the budget data was instead used. For DOTr, the data on
committed funds or obligated funds were used.
LGU expenditures were only derived from the NCR-RRP as well as the Quezon City website. All in all, only
data from six (6) LGUs that submitted to the NCR-RRP was obtained: Mandaluyong, Makati, Las Pinas,
Caloocan, Quezon City, and Navotas. An attempt to request the Local Development Investment Program
(LDIP) of the LGUs from the DILG was done but the data could not be obtained in time for this report.
Therefore, this analysis can be further improved with additional data.
The types of projects included in the analysis are based on the SUTI guidelines:
a. Public transport facilities- Bus and minibus services, BRT, train, fleet acquisition and public transport
infrastructure, pedestrian and NMT infrastructure.
b. Non-public transport facilities- Roads, bridges, flyovers and such other infrastructure serving mixed
traffic.
Majority of public transport investments are made by the DOTr and composed of investments in Rail
infrastructure, especially with the upcoming Metro Manila Subway project. DPWH’s budget is mainly for
road and bridge construction, with just around 4% dedicated to pedestrians. According to the DPWH,
Department Order no. 88, series of 2020 was issued which states that new national road and bridge
construction or future expansion of projects shall incorporate a bicycle facility contingent on the prevailing
62
road and traffic conditions, but will have no less than 2.44 meters of bicycle path width. Therefore, further
costs for bicycle lanes can be further added to this analysis if the corresponding cost proportion can be segregated.
Table 32. Breakdown of Investment in Public Transport Systems

Transport Investments in Million USD
Source
Entity 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Within 2017-2021
PT Facilities 1.99 11.88 7.94 11.92 21.69
DPWH General Appropriations Act 2017-2021
Total 202.63 391.19 116.54 286.19 364.57
PT Facilities 145.21 250.61 834.14 1,080.14 432.51 DOTr Statement of Appropriations, Allotments,
DOTr Obligations, Disbursements and Balances (2017-
Total 145.21 257.02 834.14 1,126.60 432.51 2021)
PT Facilities 3.16 2.07 1.84 1.20 1.50
MMDA General Appropriations Act 2017-2021
Total 3.50 12.12 7.47 1.36 7.50
NCR- Rehabilitation and Recovery Plan:
PT Facilities 0.81 13.26 0.94
LGUS https://mmda.gov.ph/images/Home/Development-
Total 7.70 17.40 0.94 Planning/RRP-NCR/RRP-
PT Facilities 1,304.00 PPP Center Projects Database:
PPP Projects https://ppp.gov.ph/project-database/
Total 3,526.40
Estimated based on LTFRB's Database of Land
Private-fleet PUJs and UV Express
Transport Services (DLTS) data from DOTr
investments Bus website
The final breakdown of transport expenditure are as follows:

Within 2017-
INVESTMENTS 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Average
2021
Public Transport
150.37 264.56 843.92 1,094.07 468.95 1,469.55 858.28
Facilities
Total Transport 351.35 660.33 958.15 1,421.86 821.98 3,527.34 1,548.20
SHARE 43% 40% 88% 77% 57% 42% 55
The data shows significant investments in public transport infrastructure, especially with the current
administration’s heightened focus on railway infrastructure spending. Although the amounts invested are
important to measure, they may also be misleading since different types of projects have varying
complications and costs. For example, railway costs on a per kilometer basis are significantly higher than
the cost of a BRT or pavement improvement. It may be useful to include an estimate of the number of
beneficiaries to this indicator.
4.9 INDICATOR 9: AIR QUALITY (PM10)
Data for a total of six (6) stations were reported by the DENR and shown in the table below:

PM10 Population Population
Station Location
yearly mean in area percentage
1 Pateros 61 63,840 1.01%
2 Manila City 57 1,780,148 28.18%
3 Marikina City 51 450,741 7.13%
4 Quezon City 44 2,936,116 46.47%
5 Makati City 36 582,602 9.22%
6 Muntinlupa City 23 504,509 7.99%
Total 6,317,956 100%

Population weighted concentration (Year 2019)
45.92*
*WHO target: 20 μg/m3 to cut air pollution-related deaths by 15%
63
The weighted PM10 concentration in Metro Manila has significantly declined (35%) from its 2012 values
(see Figure 42). Despite this, its current level is still above the WHO’s target reduction to 20 μg/m3 in order
to cut air pollution-related deaths by 15%.
Figure 42. Historical PM10 concentrations in Metro Manila
4.10 INDICATOR 10: GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM TRANSPORT
The estimated GHG emission used in this indicator is based on the study of Ahancian and Biona (2014).
This study used a bottom-up approach to forecast future emissions using the Low Emissions Analysis
Platform of the Stockholm Environment Institute. The framework of the estimation model is shown in Figure
43. The results of this study were utilized because of the range of data sources used as well as the conduct
of demand and resource analysis at each stage of the vehicle’s life cycle from primary energy level to end-
use. The results of the study were found to approximate to within 0.7% the actual energy consumption data
reported by the Department of Energy.
The study also looked at scenarios wherein clean fuels were used. Given that the share of non-petrol and
diesel fuels are below 5% according the 2018 Philippine Energy Plan of the Department of Energy, the
Business-As-Usual (BAU) scenario wherein the petrol and diesel are the dominant fuel sources was
assumed to hold. Unfortunately, the forecasts were conducted in five (5) year increments so the closest
data to present, that for year 2020 was used. Therefore, the value used for this indicator does not consider
pandemic effects.
Figure 43. Modelling framework used in Bottom-up approach to GHG emission estimation
The SUTI table is show below:

Bottom-up Emissions (tons of Population Emission/capita
approach CO2 equivalent)
TOTAL 16,675,000 13,453,701.00 1.24
YEAR THAT THE INDICATOR CONCERNS 2020
64
4.11 Additional Data
4.11.1 Energy
The principles of environmental sustainability and clean technology are integrated in the Department’s
Omnibus Franchising Guidelines (DOTr DO 2017-011), which is the key document that underpins its PUV
Modernization Program. However, the current policy does specifically dictate a particular fuel source but
only requires PUVs to have vehicles with engines that follow “ URO IV standards or better”. At the moment,
there is no existing roadmap that charts the path away from the use of petroleum and diesel. Focus on
establishing an improved Motor Vehicle Inspection Program is also underway to ensure that registered
vehicles are road-worthy as the prevailing system was mostly reliant on visual inspections and smoke
emission tests.
Past efforts to utilize cleaner fuels have been undertaken such as the pilot implementation of buses using
Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) in 2004 as well as the promotion of Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) taxis
in 2006. However, various issues on either supply or demand have hampered their continued
implementation.
The following table shows the number of jeepney/mini-bus operators that are currently using pure electric
vehicles from DOTr’s data. There are a total of electric vehicles in Metro Manila from the nationwide total
of 389.
Table 36. Number of Electric PUVs in Metro Manila
Pure Electric Vehicle (Jeepney/Mini-bus)
Route
Name of Transport Number
Region Route Name Length
Operator of Units
(km)
Baclaran-Nichols
Baclaran - Nichols via Menzi Park
NCR Transport Service 3.9 3
Terminal CAA
Cooperative
NCR South Metro TSCI Alabang - Zapote 11.3 15
EDSA/Buendia via Jupiter - Mandaluyong
NCR ESakay Inc. 5 15
City Hall ia Rockwell
Great Power Movers
NCR PITX - Sucat via Sucat Avenue 10.5 33
Transport Corporation
Electric Vehicle
NCR Expansion Enterprises, Filinvest Loop 5.2 10
Inc. (EVEEI)
Alabang Town Center (ATC) - Ayala
NCR Eco-PUV Transport Inc. 11.4 5
Alabang Village
Total 81
Source: DOTr/ UNDP LCUTS Project
Presently, there are several bills filed at the House of Representatives supporting vehicle electrification.
Most notable is the Electric Vehicles and Charging Stations Act which aims to provide a national energy
policy and regulatory framework for the use of electric vehicles as well as the establishment of electric
charging stations. The bill also seeks to address the challenges in the development of the electric vehicle
industry by mandating the creation of a comprehensive roadmap for Electric Vehicles (both for public and
private use). Moreover, it also provides for fiscal and non-fiscal incentives for the importation, utilization,
and manufacture of EVs.
65
The DOTr has also secured grant funding from the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) for a
project entitled “The Promotion of Low Carbon Urban Transport System in the Philippines”. The project aims
to create an enabling environment for the commercialization of low carbon urban transport systems in the
Philippines through 1) effective enforcement of policies and support provided for the promotion of low carbon
modes of transport; 2) adopting and implementing low carbon transport plans and/or programs in major
cities; 3) increasing private sector participation in the widespread deployment and commercialization of low
carbon transport systems; and 4) increasing private sector investment in low carbon transport systems. The
project is currently ongoing.
Moreover, further efforts to decarbonize transport by promoting active transport have also gained traction
especially in light of the Covid-19 pandemic. The relevant policies and initiatives were discussed in Chapter
2.7.
4.11.2 Gender and Inclusive Policies
Inclusive and people-oriented mobility among the principles enshrined in the National Transport Policy
which was issued by the NEDA Board in 2017, which states that people-mobility should be prioritized over
vehicle-mobility.
Accessibility
Gender-related and inclusive policies issued are presented in this section. It is important to note that policies
aiming to mainstream these concerns into the regular processes and procedures of various government
agencies (not just transportation) as well as the provision of funds for their implementation have been
accomplished. For example, the Accessibility Law requires institutions to abide by specific design guidelines
to ensure that facilities are accessible to Persons with Disabilities.
The National Disability Prevalence Survey, a nationwide survey that covered 11,000 households which was
conducted in 2016 and surveyed individuals 15 years and older showed that 81% of individuals surveyed
experienced mild to severe disability [67]. Although not all forms of disabilities impair peoples’ ability to
move, there is still much to learn and be done to understand the varying needs of people experiencing
different types of disabilities.
Figure 44. Percentage Distribution of Population Age 15 and Older by Disability Level and Sex, 2016
Loss of vision is a major impediment to using public transportation. Among the persons with sever disability,
57% reported suffering from loss of vision. The following are some key statistics on persons in the severe
disability group which have impacts on their mobility needs:
a. Sight
• 57% reported suffering from loss of vision
• 23% reported problems with seeing at a distance
66
• % reported problems in seeing at an arm’s length
b. Most affected daily life areas

• Walking a kilometer (41%)
• Engaging in vigorous activities ( 39%)
• Getting to desired destination (30%)
c. Problematic areas:
• Using transportation and walking 100 meters (24%)
• Standing for long periods and standing from sitting down (15%)
According to the 20 5 Census conducted by the PSA, .5% of the country’s population then was composed
of senior citizens (persons aged 60 and above), with Metro Manila having 851,000 (or 11.5%) senior citizens
[68].
In a recent new article last December 3, 2020, the Executive Director of the National Council for Disability
Affairs (NCDA) said that basic requirements of ramps, non-skid flooring, signages, toilet and washrooms,
and parking slots are still lacking in many buildings and establishments despite the enactment of laws
mandating accessible buildings for PWDs [69].
Figure 45. Modern Jeepney prototype with provision for passengers with wheelchairs
Source: [70]
The DOTr has institutionalized its Task Force on Accessibility that conducts audits of transport infrastructure
per sector and checks for its compliance with Accessibility guidelines. Moreover, provisions for ramps and
wheelchairs are embedded in the design requirements for city buses and mini-buses as part of its PUV
Modernization Program.
Various policies related to accessibility are provided below:
Table 37. Accessibility policies

Policy Description
Batas Pambansa 344: An Act • Requires building and facility owners to provide facilities that
to Enhance the Mobility of shall enhance the mobility of disabled persons.
Disabled Persons by • Regards discrimination against disabled persons in
Requiring Certain Buildings, transportation as unlawful.
Institutions, Establishments • Its Implementing Rules and Regulations provides requirements
and Public Utilities to install and specifications on building and walkway design, designation
Facilities and Other Devices of seats in public transport vehicles and installation of signages
(Accessibility Law) (1982) to maximize awareness.
LTFRB MC 2009-010 • 20% discount for Senior Citizens and providing penalties for
non-compliance
67
RA 9994: Expanded Senior • Requires that senior citizens are given assistance to fully gain
Citizens Act (2010) access to public transport facilities.
DOTr DO 2014-013 • Provides minimum requirements and standards to make public
transportation facilities and utilities accessible to PWDs.
• The first row of each bus is designated for PWDs.
• The first coach/car of passenger trains shall be designated for
PWDs, pregnant women and children.
LTFRB MC No. 2011-004 • Titled: 2011 Revised Terms And Conditions of CPC and
Providing Penalties for Violations Thereof
• Required PUV operators to grant fare discounts as prescribed

by law, policies, rules and regulations to Senior Citizens and
Persons with disability.
• Children less than 1 meter in height shall be transported free of
charge and those from 1 to 1.30 meters in height shall pay half
fare. PUV operators shall provide in an adequate place in their
motor vehicles the necessary markings for verifying the heights
of the children passengers who are entitled to free or half fare.
• The PUV operator shall display the International Symbol of
Accessibility in their units and shall designate seats in all their
units specifically for the use of Persons with Disabilities as
follows:
For PUBs
▪ Regular buses shall have at least five (5) designated
seats for PWDs near entrance doors
▪ Air-conditioned buses shall have at least four (4)
designated seats for PWDs near entrance doors.
▪ Owners or operators of PUBs operating in highly
urbanized cities shall install in their units audio-visual
aids such as buzzers, bells flashing lights to inform
the driver of any alighting passenger.
For PUJ’s
▪ Owners of PUJ’s shall provide at least two 2 seats,
at the convenience of the PWD, for the use of PWDs
in their units.
For Bus Terminals and Stations
▪ Widen doors/access to comfort rooms to be able to
allow the entry of wheelchairs
▪ Provide ramps for easy access by wheel chair to the
waiting lounges; and
▪ Mark a bench or space for the use of PWDs in
waiting lounges. This may be used by others if there
are no PWDs using it.
It shall be considered discriminating for PUV operators and
their drivers/personnel to charge higher fare or to refuse to
convey a PWD, his orthopaedic devices, personal effects and
merchandise by reason of his disability.
DOTr D.O. 2017-011 • ntitled: “Omnibus Guidelines on the Planning and Identification
of Public Road Transportation Services and Franchise
Issuance”
• Accessibility is a core principle espoused by this policy which
states that public transport must be available in every
68
community, with accessibility for all segments of society,
including senior citizens and persons with disabilities.
• Requires city buses and mini-buses to have low entry for quick
boarding and alighting with space for at least one wheelchair
and foldable/retractable wheelchair ramp at the curbside door
DOTr D.O. 2017-018 • Mandating all Airport Authorities to facilitate compliance with the
above regulations by requiring aircraft operators to use PWD
and Senior Citizen accessible passenger boarding ramps and
designating such authorities to monitor compliance.
Joint Memorandum Circular • Joint MC by the DOTr and other air sector authorities such as
No. 2018-001 on Installation CAAP, CAB, MIAA, CIAC, and MCIA enjoining all airline
of Accessible Passenger operators to install and use PWD and Senior Citizen-accessible
Boarding Ramps/Aircraft passenger boarding ramps for all their aircrafts
Stairs for PWDs and Senior
Citizens
LTFRB MC No. 2018-004 • 20% discount for PWDs pursuant to RA 10754 and providing
penalties for non-compliance
Formal policy not found • Exemption of PWDs and Senior Citizens from the UVVRP or
Number Coding scheme, upon successful registration (NCDA,
2010: [62]).
Gender
Gender differences in travel patterns have been well documented by various literature. In a recent study
comparing travel characteristics of men and women in 8 cities around the world [71], statistically significant
differences were found with respect to gender, age, and income. When asked for their mode preferences
in taking a motor cycle versus alternative modes, women in Metro Manila were found to be 3.9 times more
likely than men to prefer a bus, 3.8 times more likely to prefer a taxi or train, 3.4 times more likely to prefer
walking or cycling, and twice more likely to prefer driving a car.
The study also noted that although more women tend to use public transport services than men, public
transport was still largely perceived as unsafe. It discussed that in cities such as Jakarta and Manila, sexual
harassment cases were often linked to conditions of over-crowding and measures to address harassment
remain categorized as responses related to passenger volume. It also noted findings on the lack of
awareness of the social and gender implications for transport policies by transport professionals.
In a 2020 publication [72] that surveyed university students in Metro Manila, 137 out of 316 (or 43.4%) of
the respondents reported having been a victim of sexual assault or harassment crime while on the bus,
train, bus stop or station platform, or on their way to/from the transit stop. Bus and train riders reported non-
verbal acts such as “unwanted sexual looks or gestures” - and physical - “groping, touching inappropriately”
as the most common types of harassment experienced. The survey also revealed that 85% of the victimized
students did not report or make a formal complaint.
One significant policy is the Safe Spaces Act of 2019 that defines and provides penalties for acts of sexual
harassment in streets, public spaces, among others.
In the case of transportation, a Gender and Development Focal Point System (GFPS) has been
institutionalized within the DOTr. Organized since 2012 and recently reconstituted in 2020, the GFPS is a
group of people from the road, rail, maritime and aviation sectors of the DOTr and its attached agencies
that work together to catalyze and accelerate gender mainstreaming. Moreover, the DOTr has also
established an Inclusive Transport Unit which is responsible for taking necessary actions to address
inclusivity concerns such as Gender and Accessibility. Apart from incorporation of design interventions in
infrastructure projects, activities have also focused on education and awareness. Measures that target the
69
organizations and its policy makers are identified along with measures that address the concerns of
transport stakeholders/clients.
The strengthening of policies and institutional capacity on gender concerns is a positive step towards the
right direction and shall require cooperation from various policy-making levels and stakeholders in order to
see significant improvements.
Table 38. Gender and Development Policies

Republic Act No. 7192 (1992) • Women in Development and Nation Building Act
• In support of the full benefits of gender-responsive planning,
external and domestic resources shall be increasingly mobilized
for utilization by national and local government agencies to
support programs and projects for women.
Executive Order No. 273 • ntitled “Approving and adopting the Philippine Plan for Gender-
(1995) Responsive Development, 1995-2025”
• This order directs all government agencies, departments,
bureaus, offices, and instrumentalities at the national, sub-
national and local levels to institutionalize Gender and
Development (GAD) efforts by incorporating GAD concerns in
their planning, programming and budgeting processes.
NEDA/DBM/ NCRFW Joint • Tasked agencies to formulate a Gender and Development Plan
Circular No. 2004-1 and to implement the same by utilizing at least five percent (5%)
of their total budget appropriations, pursuant to the Annual
General Appropriations Act (GAA)
DPWH D.O. No. 48, series of • Entitled, “Guidelines for Mainstreaming Gender uality Actions
2011 in Road Infrastructure Projects”
• Prescribes that gender equality actions are to be executed at
the planning, design, pre-construction, construction, and
maintenance stage.
• Provided a toolkit that contains checklists and methodologies for
mainstreaming gender considerations in road infrastructure
projects
DOTr DO 2012-05 • Mainstreaming Gender and Development (GAD) in the
Transportation Sector (Policies, Plans,
Programs/Activities/Projects) and Strengthening the GAD focal
points in the DOTC-Central Office, its Project Offices, Regional
and Sectoral Offices and Attached Agencies and Corporations
• This DO mandated the integration of GAD in all transportation
policies, plans, programs, activities and projects of the
Department and ordered al transport infrastructure projects to
conform to the requirements of the Harmonized Gender and
Development Guidelines for Project Development,
Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation.
• Created a GAD National Task Force and Technical Working
Group that shall conduct information dissemination, trainings,
develop sex-disaggregated database, prepare the annual GAD
plans and budget, and conduct monitoring activities/ audits as
well as consultations of stakeholders.
Investment Coordination • Is a checklist of various GAD elements and their presence in the
Committee ICC’s Project design and project documents submitted by agencies for
Evaluation Form on Gender approval of the ICC. The checklist ensures that a gender
Responsiveness analysis has been conducted for each project and that gender
issues have been considered and addressed.
70
Official policy not found • Designation of special coaches for women, children, elderly,
(2006) and disabled in Railways.
Republic Act 11313 or Safe • An Act Defining Gender-Based Sexual Harassment in Streets,
Spaces Act (2019) Public Spaces, Online, Workplaces, and Educational or Training
Institutions, Providing Protective Measures and Prescribing
Penalties Therefor.
• In the case of gender-based sexual harassment in Public Utility
Vehicles, the LTO may cancel the license of guilty perpetrators
and the LTFRB may suspend or revoke the franchises of
operators who commit gender-based streets and public spaces
sexual harassment acts. These consequences shall be in
addition to the penalties specified in the law.
DOTr D.O. 2020-010 • ntitled, “Guidelines for the Strengthening and
Institutionalization of the Department of Transportation- Gender
and Development Focal Point System (DOTr-GFPS), its
composition, functions, roles and responsibilities.
71
5 Summary, Reflections, and
Recommendations
72
5.1 Summary of SUTI Scores and Reflections
The summary of scores for all SUTI indicators for Metro Manila are presented in Table 39.
Table 39. Summary of scores for all SUTI indicators

Natural Range
# Indicators Weights VALUE YEAR Normalized
units MIN MAX
Extent to which transport plans
cover public transport, 0 - 16
1 intermodal facilities and scale
0.1 0 16 9.33 2019
infrastructure for active modes 58.33
Modal share of active and public
2 transport in commuting
% of trips 0.1 10 90 63.7 2014 67.06
Convenient access to public % of
3 transport service population
0.1 20 100 77.71 2020 72.13
Public transport quality and %
4 reliability satisfied
0.1 30 95 51.12 2019 32.50
Traffic fatalities per 100.000
5 inhabitants
# fatalities 0.1 10 0 2.89 2019 71.10
Affordability – travel costs as % of
6 share of income income
0.1 35 3.5 12.35 2018 71.91
Cost
Operational costs of the public
7 transport system
recovery 0.1 22 100 100.00 2019
ratio 100.00
% of total
Investment in public 2017-
8 transportation systems
invest- 0.1 0 50 50.00
ment 2021 100.00
9 Air quality (pm10) μg/m 0.1 150 10 45.92 2019 74.34
Greenhouse gas emissions from
10 transport
Tons/cap 0.1 2.75 0 1.24 2020 54.93
Geometric Mean 67.33
• Indicator 1: Metro Manila has been the focus of several master planning efforts and a significant
portion of government resources have been poured into it given its role as the economic capital of
the Philippines, especially in “hard infrastructure” such as intermodal transfer facilities and public
transportation. From the review of more than 20 national, regional, and local plans, public transport
and intermodal facilities have been prioritized and funded mostly by the national government, with
large investments on railways and integrated terminals. Plans for walking and cycling infrastructure
before the pandemic have been limited to specific corridors only, with only some cities allocating
significant funds to active transport initiatives. However, more expansive active transport networks
have been introduced as a consequence of the pandemic. A more comprehensive plan that will
integrate multiple modes and improve connectivity to achieve seamless transfers between higher
capacity modes and feeder lines is yet to be seen.
• Indicator 2: Metro Manila’s public transport modal share is on the high side compared to other Asian
cities. The 63.7% market share was determined using the definition under the SUTI guidelines’
wherein paratransit modes are not considered as public transport. Despite this, a large percentage
of citizens are still not using private vehicles, indicating a high potential for public transport. However,
the rise in motorcycle use may be a cause for caution as these may eventually reach high enough
levels and threaten public transport share.
• Indicator 3: Majority of Metro Manila residents are within 500 meters from a rail, bus, or jeepney stop
(77.71%). However, this does not necessarily translate to a convenient trip since trip-chaining and
transferring behavior were not accounted for in the analysis.
• Indicator 4: There was an overall low satisfaction for various aspects of public transportation,
especially for level of service criteria such as Punctuality, Comfort and Cleanliness, Safety, and
Availability of Information. Higher satisfaction ratings were observed for Personnel Courtesy and
Fare.
73
• Indicator 5: Metro Manila’s fatalities per 00,000 inhabitants are on the low side 2. % . However,
this is not close to the goal of achieving zero road traffic deaths by year 2022 as stated in the
Philippine Road Safety Action Plan. No significant signs of decrease were also observed during the
pandemic wherein there were severe mobility restrictions.
• Indicator 6: Monthly public transport fares do not appear to be too costly from the perspective of
household incomes. However, the passenger survey in Indicator 4 indicated dissatisfaction for
Punctuality which, when taken as a whole, may result to higher economic costs for users.
• Indicator 7: Overall, majority of private sector-operated PUVs such as bus and jeepney are generally
profitable whereas the railway lines indicate low farebox ratios which are supported by the fact that
they are heavily subsidized by the government. The non-rail transport are generally profitable for
various reasons. For one, they operate relatively small fleets and hence require smaller capital costs.
Second, weak inspection and maintenance regulations result to low-cost maintenance practices
which lead to safety issues. These issues are being addressed by the PUV Modernization program.
However, results may take time to reflect on the ground.
• Indicator 8: There is significant funding allocated for public transport systems, majority of which is
on hard infrastructure such as railways and intermodal terminals.
• Indicator 9: The weighted PM10 concentration in Metro Manila was seen to have significantly declined
from its 20 2 levels. However, its current concentration is still above the WHO’s target reduction
rate to achieve its target reduction rate in air pollution-related deaths.
• Indicator 10: The estimated GHG emission levels are on the high side (54.93% normalized value).
Majority of vehicles are still using petrol and diesel, with cleaner fuels and associated vehicles not
yet gaining critical mass.
The SUTI diagram is shown below:
. xtent to which transport

infrastructure for active
0. Greenhouse gas
public transport in
emissions from transport
commuting
. Convenient access to
. Air uality pm 0
. Investment in public . Public transport uality

transportation systems and reliability
. Operational costs of the 5. Traffic fatalities per

public transport system 00.000 inhabitants
. Affordability travel costs

as part of income
Figure 46. SUTI Diagram for Metro Manila
Overall, Metro Manila’s total SUTI score is relatively high compared to other Asian cities as can be shown
in Table 40. The public transport system of the Philippines is relatively unique in the sense that majority of
74
its public transport systems are run as small to medium-scale operators (such as bus, jeepney) which have
fixed routes and well-defined fare structure. Their inclusion may be one of the reason for the Philippines’
high SUTI score as these have contributed to high ratings in modal share (Indicator 2), convenient access
(Indicator 3), and operational costs (Indicator 7). On the other hand, exclusion of the buses and jeepneys
will lead to an unrealistically low SUTI score. Hence, direct comparison of scores with other cities may not
be straightforward and require consideration of the specific countries’ context. It is important to note that the
most significant SUTI comparison will be by the country with its past/future self, as a means of monitoring
the progress of its initiatives.
Many essential factors to achieving improved urban mobility are in place: high public transport modal share,
sizeable investments in public transportation systems, widespread reach of routes/convenient access.
However, these still have not translated to desirable outcomes as there is low satisfaction of quality and
reliability, poor air quality, accidents do not appear to be decreasing, and emission levels are still not low
enough. In addition, the promotion of cleaner vehicles both from the supply and demand side is yet to be
mainstreamed.
The pandemic has caused significant impacts to transport. The latest population census in 2020 noted a
decrease in population due to internal migrations from Metro Manila to provinces. The strict community
quarantines also led to livelihood losses which prompted other residents to seek better opportunities
elsewhere. Efforts to improve public transport are underway, but progress is affected by capacity restrictions
due to social distancing measures. On the upside, the quarantine has opened several opportunities to
improve urban mobility such as the heightened focus on active transport, the commencement of service
contracting for PUVs, as well as the provision of priority lanes for buses. The concept of “sharing the road”
and veering away from car-centric thinking is also gaining more interest from civil society organizations, the
academe, and government, among others. Moving forward, travel demands have slightly decreased due to
the pandemic and further adoption of telecommuting and hybrid work arrangements may also reduce
demand. Still, there is a need to further improve public transport quality in view of increasing shifts to ride-
hailing and motorcycles.
The Philippine government has recently embarked on several initiatives which will significantly improve
urban mobility. The effects of such initiatives will be more apparent in the medium to long term and may not
have been felt on the ground during this SUTI evaluation. The following are seen as significant actions that
will lead to sustainable urban mobility outcomes:
• Sustained support for walking and cycling infrastructure that focuses on connectivity and
integration with public transport;
• Continued implementation of the PUV modernization program especially route
rationalization, keeping in mind the economic costs to public transport users;
• A more transparent and institutionalized feedback mechanism for determining service
quality and satisfaction levels should be considered to measure if the intended transport
experience is felt by users;
• Increased support for low carbon technologies and transport modes.
Relative to other cities, Metro Manila rated highly in terms of Investments in public transport, operational
costs, and affordability. It however fared poorly in terms of public transport quality and reliability, road traffic
fatalities, and GHG emissions.
75
Figure 47.SUTI diagram comparison with other cities
Table 40. Comparison of SUTI scores for various cities

Metro Ho Chi
Manila, Bangkok, Minh, Dhaka, Ulaanbaatar Jakarta, Thimphu, Kathmandu
Philippines Thailand Vietnam Bangladesh , Mongolia Indonesia Bhutan , Nepal
1. Extent to which transport
infrastructure for active modes 58.33 62.5 43.75 50 50 75 68.75 43.75
public transport in commuting 67.06 34.49 23.15 96.39 57.16 35.11 33.5 74.41
3. Convenient access to
72.13 69.58 69.71 45.63 81.42 46.88 40.96 81.25
4. Public transport quality and
reliability 32.50 58.26 18.11 12.15 39.46 49.25 51.57 5.12
5. Traffic fatalities per
100.000 inhabitants 71.10 1 76.21 95.31 72.31 94.43 38.89 81.91
6. Affordability – travel costs
as part of income 71.91 99.93 92.98 60.7 44.25 67.9 73.02 75.87
7. Operational costs of the
public transport system 100.00 100 15.89 34.14 74.85 28.35 44.09 52.55
8. Investment in public
transportation systems 100.00 100 27 100 1.76 100 60.26 35.68
9. Air quality (PM10) 74.34 77.93 32.44 9.04 37.29 53.57 78.36 44.29
10. Greenhouse gas
emissions from transport 54.93 26.42 86.28 94.18 57.6 71.27 79.8 88.73
Overall SUTI score 67.33 42.22 40.15 46.27 39.08 57.88 54.46 47.78
5.2 Feedback on the SUTI exercise
Overall, the SUTI exercise showed a concrete multi-perspective approach in assessing the state of urban
mobility in cities which is a useful guide in ensuring that plans, policies, and projects translate to desired
sustainability outcomes. The following are comments and suggestions on the SUTI exercise:
a. The maximum value of modal share appears too high at 95% considering that there will still be a
need for private car use.
b. It may be worth considering measuring the trip cost in terms of a generalized cost function or
economic cost. While financial cost of a trip seems simple enough, measuring time delay due to
inefficient transfers or poor service fre uency provides a better indication of urban mobility’s
efficiency;
76
c. It is suggested that there also be an indicator on the satisfaction of walking and cycling infrastructure
in order to create a complete picture of users’ end-to-end journey.
d. The measure of uality and reliability from the users’ perspective Indicator is linked to all other
indicators as it serves as the “check” of the effectiveness of other indicators. For example, the cost
recovery ratio may be high which will result to a larger SUTI score but this may be attributable to
cheap maintenance practices and therefore low user satisfaction. In the case of convenient access,
it may be high but if the network is inefficiently designed, users may have higher travel times and
transfer costs. Therefore, it is suggested that increasing the weight of Indicator 4 be considered
because if the other indicators are high, it should translate to satisfied users. It is however
acknowledged that Indicator 4 is highly subjective. Perhaps a more objective metric can also be
considered or its weight will still be higher than other indicators but not significantly high.
e. Indicator 8 may be improved by taking the ratio of investment to people served in order to measure
investment efficiency. This will give more weight to initiatives that are low cost but have high impacts.
f. Indicators 9 and 10 are related. High GHG emissions translate to poor air quality. Therefore, it may
be useful to combine the two or just select one.
g. It is suggested that the additional data on energy use, gender and accessibility be included as
indicators.
77
REFERENCES:
[1] Nearly 500 Chinese tourists in PH to be flown back to Wuhan. (2020, January 24). CNN.
https://cnnphilippines.com/news/2020/1/24/wuhan-tourists-repatriation.html
[2] Gregorio, X. (2020, January 30). Philippines confirms first case of novel coronavirus. CNN.
https://cnnphilippines.com/news/2020/1/30/Philippines-coronavirus-case.html
[3] IATF-EID. (2020, January). IATF Resolution No. 2 (S. 2020). https://iatf.doh.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/IATF-
Resolution-No.-2.pdf
[4] Ranada, P. (2020, November 20). EXPLAINER: How gov’t decides your area’s quarantine classifications. Rappler.
https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/explainers/explainer-how-philippine-government-decides-area-covid-19-quarantine-
classifications
[5] [Robinsons Malls are awarded with ‘Safety Seal’]. 2021, June 2). Https://Business.Inquirer.Net/324006/Robinsons-Malls-Are-
Awarded-with-Safety-Seal
[6] COMPARATIVE MATRIX FOR QUARANTINE CLASSIFICATIONS. (2021). IATF-EID. https://iatf.doh.gov.ph/wp-
content/uploads/2021/06/UPDATED-COMPARATIVE-TABLE-OF-QUARANTINE-CLASSIFICATIONS-As-of-June-2021-
A.docx.pdf
A.docx.pdf
A.docx.pdf
[9] DOTr. (2020, March). Department of Transportation Task Group Guidelines for the Management of Emerging Infectious
Disease. https://covid19.gov.ph/information/issuances/5f0434cb3f220f1accf3f8fc
[10] Langit, D. (2020, March 16). TOO CLOSE FOR COMFORT. [Photograph]. LOOK: Traffic, No Social Distancing on 1st
Monday Rush under Metro Manila Lockdown. https://www.rappler.com/nation/photos-metro-manila-lockdown-traffic-
social-distancing-march-16-2020
[11]Diosina, D. J. (2020, March 16). STRUGGLING COMMUTERS. [Photograph]. LOOK: Traffic, No Social Distancing on 1st
Monday Rush under Metro Manila Lockdown. https://www.rappler.com/nation/photos-metro-manila-lockdown-traffic-
social-distancing-march-16-2020
[12] DOTr. (2020b, March 16). DOTr Guidelines on Social Distancing and Community Quarantine [Announcement]. Facebook.
https://www.facebook.com/DOTrPH/posts/1642842255854904
[ ] Aguilar, K. 2020, March . Pasig Mayor Vico Sotto: Why not tricycles as emergency, health workers’
transpo? INQUIRER.Net. https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1244862/vico-sotto-on-allowing-tricycles-operate
[14] World Bank. (2021). Impacts of COVID-19 on Households in the Philippines- Results from the Philippines COVID-19
Households Survey. https://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/109011605520157559/Results-from-the-Philippines-COVID-19-
Households-Survey-conducted-in-August-2020-Presentation.pdf
[15] Pasig’s mobile palengke. (2020, March 26). [Photograph]. Https://News.Abs-
Cbn.Com/News/Multimedia/Photo/03/26/20/Pasigs-Mobile-Palengke. https://news.abs-
cbn.com/news/multimedia/photo/03/26/20/pasigs-mobile-palengke
[16] IATF/DOTr OMNIBUS PUBLIC TRANSPORT PROTOCOLS/GUIDELINES. (2020, May 3). [Announcement]. Facebook.
[17] DOTr Media Comms. (2020, May 21). DOTr - LOOK: OMNIBUS PUBLIC and PRIVATE TRANSPORT PROTOCOLS
DURING ECQ, MECQ, and GCQ set by the Inter-Agency Task Force for the Management of Emerging Infectious
Diseases (IATF-EID) and the Department of Transportation (DOTr). DOTr Official Website. https://dotr.gov.ph/1495-look-
omnibus-public-and-private-%20transport-protocols-during-ecq-mecq-and-gcq-set-by-the-inter-agency-task-force-for-
the-management-of-emerging-infectious-diseases-iatf-eid-and-the-department-of-transportation-dotr.html
[18] R.B. (2020, July 20). Grab Protects [Photograph]. https://wanderingbakya.com/grab-protects/
[19] Gumban, E. (2020, June 30). UV Express back; traditional jeepney routes out this week [Photograph].
https://www.pressreader.com/philippines/the-philippine-star/20200630/281509343458530
[20] DOTr Media Comms. (2020b, May 29). DOTr - READ: As various areas in the country prepares to shift from Modified
Enhanced Community Quarantine (MECQ) to General Community Quarantine (GCQ), the “NEW NORMAL.”DOTr
Official Website. https://dotr.gov.ph/55-dotrnews/1558-read-as-various-areas-in-the-country-prepares-to-shift-from-
modified-enhanced-community-quarantine-mecq-to-general-community-quarantine-gcq-the-new-normal.html
[21] MMDA expects to complete 14 new bus stops along EDSA, says new system will be “efficient.” (2020, June 29).
[Photograph]. CNN Philippines. https://www.cnn.ph/news/2020/6/29/MMDA-14-new-bus-stops-along-EDSA.html
[22] EDSA Busway to go cashless to prevent coronavirus spread. (2020, September 29). [Photograph]. ABS-CBN News.
https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/09/29/20/edsa-busway-to-go-cashless-to-prevent-coronavirus-spread
[23] Punay, E. (2021, June 2). Bayanihan 2 extended till end of year. Philstar.Com.
https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2021/06/03/2102729/bayanihan-2-extended-till-end-year
[24] Delays in service contracting program hinder dignified commute and livelihood: transport workers. (2021, May 6). Vera Files.
https://verafiles.org/articles/delays-service-contracting-program-hinder-dignified-commute
[25] DOTr ANNOUNCES OMNIBUS GUIDELINES ON PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF ENHANCED
COMMUNITY QUARANTINE. (2021, March 28). [Announcement]. Facebook.
[26] ICSC, MNL Moves, University of Twente. (2020). #PHmobility: Active Mobility Survey in Metro Manila. https://icsc.ngo/wp-
content/uploads/2020/06/ActiveMobilityBriefer_09June2020_A4_WEB.pdf
78
[27] ABS-CBN News. (2020, June 2). ‘Doing nothing is more fatal’: Group defends improvised bike lanes on Commonwealth
Ave. https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/06/02/20/doing-nothing-is-more-fatal-group-defends-improvised-bike-lanes-on-
commonwealth-ave
[28] Demayo, M. (2020, June 2). Members of various cycling groups guide cyclists traversing Commonwealth Avenue in Quezon
City at peak hours on Tuesday. [Photograph]. https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/06/02/20/doing-nothing-is-more-fatal-
group-defends-improvised-bike-lanes-on-commonwealth-ave
[29] CYCLING, PROTECTED BIKE LANES CAN AUGMENT PUBLIC TRANSPORT SHORTAGE DURING PANDEMIC – NEDA.
(2021, March 8). NEDA Official Website. https://www.neda.gov.ph/cycling-protected-bike-lanes-can-augment-public-
transport-shortage-during-pandemic-neda/
[30] Servallos, N. J. (2020, December 2). DILG: 173 LGUs identify bike lanes, walking paths. Philstar.Com.
https://www.philstar.com/nation/2020/12/03/2061050/dilg-173-lgus-identify-bike-lanes-walking-paths
[31] DOTr aims to nearly double bike lanes nationwide by year-end. (2021, April). Cnn. https://www.cnn.ph/news/2021/4/22/DOTr-
double-bike-lanes-nationwide-by-year-end.html
[32] DOTr (2021, July). DOTr completes 497 kms of bike lane markings, signages in NCR, Metro Cebu, and Metro Davao. DOTr.
https://dotr.gov.ph/55-dotrnews/3695-dotr-completes-497-kms-of-bike-lane-markings-signages-in-ncr-metro-cebu-and-
metro-davao.html
[33] Santos, B. (2021, February 18). Bicycle accidents hit record high in 2020 as number of cyclists grow amid subpar
infrastructure. L!Fe The Philippine Star. https://philstarlife.com/news-and-views/499928-bicycle-accidents-2020?page=5
[34] DOTr Media Comms. (2021). DOTr - DOTr, SM LAUNCH BIKE MANUAL TO BE DISTRIBUTED NATIONWIDE AS BIKE
LANES, FACILITIES CONTINUE EXPANSION. DOTr Official Website. https://dotr.gov.ph/55-dotrnews/3395-dotr-sm-
launch-bike-manual-to-be-distributed-nationwide-as-bike-lanes-facilities-continue-expansion.html
[35] COVID-19 - Mobility Trends Reports. Apple. Retrieved June 28, 2021, from https://covid19.apple.com/mobility
[36] Google LLC "Google COVID-19 Community Mobility Reports".
https://www.google.com/covid19/mobility/ Accessed: <24 June 2021>.
[37] Stations, S. W. (2021, May 7). Social Weather Stations | Fourth Quarter 2020 Social Weather Survey: 42% of non-home-
based working Filipinos say going to work is very much harder; 44% of them walk to work. Social Weather Station.
http://www.sws.org.ph/swsmain/artcldisppage/?artcsyscode=ART-20210507063140
[38] Delivery firms big winners in quarantine. (2020, August 2). Manila Bulletin. https://mb.com.ph/2020/08/02/delivery-firms-big-
winners-in-quarantine/
[39] UNICEF, UNDP, Economic Policy Research Institute. (2020, December). The Impact of the Covid-19 Crisis on Households in
the National Capital Region of the Philippines.
https://www.unicef.org/philippines/media/2061/file/Final%20report:%20The%20Impact%20of%20the%20COVID-
19%20Crisis%20on%20Households%20in%20the%20National%20Capital%20Region%20of%20the%20Philippines.pdf
[40] World Bank, DOF, NEDA, Australian Aid. (2020). mpacts of COVID-19 on firms in the Philippines Results from the
Philippines COVID-19 Firm Survey conducted in July 2020.
https://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/201241601955900723/Results-from-the-Philippines-COVID-19-Firm-Survey-
conducted-in-July-2020.pdf
[41] International Labor Organization. (2020). COVID-19 labour market impact in the Philippines Assessment and national policy
responses. https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---asia/---ro-bangkok/---ilo-
manila/documents/publication/wcms_762209.pdf
[42] DOTr. (2020a). Revolutionizing Transportation Amid the Pandemic. 2020 Annual Report. Arthur P. Tugade.
[43] Bike commuters along EDSA reach some 100,000 in June, 77,000 in July. (2020, September 7). Manila Bulletin.
https://mb.com.ph/2020/09/07/bike-commuters-along-edsa-reach-some-100000-in-june-77000-in-july/
[44] Salo, R. (2020). House Bill 7270: An Act Institutionalizing Transportation Service Contracting and For Other Purposes. House
of Representatives. https://www.congress.gov.ph/legisdocs/basic_18/HB07270.pdf
[45] DOH Covid-19 Tracker. (2021). Department of Health. https://doh.gov.ph/covid19tracker
[46] Rappler.com. (2021, June 28). TRACKER: The Philippines’ COVID-19 vaccine distribution. Rappler.
https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/data-documents/tracker-covid-19-vaccines-distribution-philippines
[47] Razon, J. (2021). Rush hour [Photograph]. https://www.pna.gov.ph/photos/48974
[48] Villanueva, R. E. (2021, June 19). MMDA expects the worst in EDSA traffic. Philstar.Com.
https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2021/06/19/2106550/mmda-expects-worst-edsa-traffic
[49] Fillone, et. al. (February 2020) Metro Manila Transportation Network: Big Data Analytics and Applications
[50] JICA (2019). Follow-Up Survey on Roadmap for Transport Infrastructure Development for Greater Capital Region (GCR).
https://openjicareport.jica.go.jp/pdf/1000041638_03.pdf
[51] JICA (Dec 2015) The Project for Capacity Development on Transportation Planning and Database Management in the
Republic of the Philippines . https://openjicareport.jica.go.jp/pdf/12247623.pdf
[52] Kaenzig, R, Mettke, C., Mariano, P. (2019). Reforming the (semi-)informal minibus system in the Philippines The ‘Public
Utility Vehicle Modernization Program’ Early Route Evaluation. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale
Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH. https://www.changing-transport.org/wp-content/uploads/2019-11_GIZ_Jeepney-
Modernisation_Early-Evaluation_final.pdf
[53] Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines. (2012). https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/2012/02/21/executive-order-no-67-s-
2012/?TSPD_101_R0=3aff0fd04a15e66cedb7654951c67802lmu0000000000000000232b9131ffff0000000000000000000000000000611
4980600a34cb3d00853bbb257ab20009119d9d4e82c71b91a6477ff45a9a60d1e3dc8d4a6cfed9bcd3132d2bd00fd840824ae9ca50a28000
1f5ca9941cf0c9cbdf6c7b5adf09e8d9c366d019f3c524d356087be9974541598e3990f40892b93
[54] PITX, country’s first “landport”, set to open on November 5. (2018, November 6). DOTr Website. https://dotr.gov.ph/55-
dotrnews/652-pitx-phl-s-first-landport-now-open-to-the-public.html
79
[55] MMDA. (2021, March 4). Pasig River Ferry Service Gets One More 50-Seater Boat for its Fleet. MMDA Website.
https://mmda.gov.ph/77-news/news-2021/4526-march-4-2021-pasig-river-ferry-service-gets-one-more-50-seater-boat-
for-its-fleet.html
[56] Tomtom. (n.d.). Manila traffic report. TomTom Traffic Index. Retrieved July 24, 2021, from
https://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/traffic-index/manila-traffic/
[57] MMDA. (2019, April 11). Truck Ban Ordinance (Updated as of April 11, 2019). MMDA Website. https://mmda.gov.ph/20-
faq/299-truck-ban-ordinance.html
[58] Wallis, K. (2019, January 25). Congestion clogs port of Manila. Journal of Commerce Online. https://www.joc.com/port-
news/international-ports/volume-holidays-delay-cargo-manila_20190125.html
[59] NEDA. (2017). Philippine Development Plan 2017–2022: Chapter 19. https://pdp.neda.gov.ph/wp-
content/uploads/2017/01/19-04-07-2017.pdf
[60] IACT PH. (2021, August 1). Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/IACTPH/
[61] Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH. (2018). An Inventory and Assessment of National
Urban Mobility in the Philippines. https://www.changing-transport.org/wp-content/uploads/E_K_NUMP-Inventory-and-
Assessment_Philippines_2018_EN.pdf
[62] NCDA. (2010, September 6). MMDA Retains Exemption of PWDs from Vehicular Coding.
https://www.ncda.gov.ph/2010/09/mmda-retains-exemption-of-pwds-from-vehicular-coding/
[63] The Philippine government declares war on a beloved vehicle. (2017, December 7). [Photograph]. Economist.
https://www.economist.com/asia/2017/12/07/the-philippine-government-declares-war-on-a-beloved-vehicle
[64] UV Express Services are no longer allowed on EDSA. (2016, August 1). [Photograph]. https://www.spot.ph/newsfeatures/the-
latest-news-features/67263/ltfrb-bans-uv-express-along-edsa-a00169-20160801
[65] Nabong, B. (2018, November 5). Here’s your Parañaque Integrated Terminal Exchange guide [Photograph].
https://www.rappler.com/nation/paranaque-integrated-terminal-exchange-guide
[66] Dela Cruz, R. (2020, January 10). NEW BOAT FOR PASIG RIVER FERRY [Photograph].
https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1090596
[67] PSA. (2019, May). Disability Spares No One: A New Perspective (No. 2019–062). https://psa.gov.ph/ndps/disability-survey-
id/138567
[68] PSA. (2015). Facts on Senior Citizens.
https://psa.gov.ph/system/files/2015%20Fact%20Sheets%20on%20Senior%20Citizen_pop.pdf?width=950&height=700&iframe=tr
ue
[69] Luna, F. (2021, February 8). CHR lauds bills seeking accessibility and mobility for PWDs. Philippine Star.
https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2021/02/08/2076233/chr-lauds-bills-seeking-accessibility-and-mobility-pwds
[70] DOTr. (2017, October). LOOK: New jeepneys under PUV modernization program [Photograph]. INCLUSIVE.
https://www.rappler.com/moveph/new-jeepney-puv-modernization-program-pictures
[71] Ng, Wei-Shiuen, and Ashley Acker. "Understanding urban travel behaviour by gender for efficient and equitable transport
policies." International Transport Forum Discussion Paper, 2018.
[72] Mateo-Babiano, Iderlina B., Ma Sheilah Gaabucayan-Napalang, and Anabel Abuzo. "Manila, Philippines." Transit Crime and
Sexual Violence in Cities. Routledge, 2020. 63-71.
[73] MMDA. (2018). NCR Regional Development Plan 2017–2022. https://mmda.gov.ph/images/Home/Development-
Planning/Plan-Formulation/NCR-RDP-2017-2022/Full-Version/NCR-Regional-Development-Plan-2017-2022-resize.pdf
[74] AusAID, The Cities Alliance, MMDA. (2012). The Metro Manila Greenprint 2030: Building a Vision.
https://mmda.gov.ph/images/Home/Metro-Green-print/Greenprint-2030-Building-a-Vision.pdf
[75] D., Laurel. (2018). A memorandum of agreement might allow tricycles on national roads [Photograph].
https://www.topgear.com.ph/news/motoring-news/memorandum-of-agreement-tricycles-national-roads-a00013-20180717
[76] Mettke, Christian, Danielle Guillen, and Cristina Villaraza. "Transforming public transport in the Philippines: The jeepney+
NAMA of the Philippine government." (2016).
[77] Romero, J. "Alternative Technologies for the Philippine Utility Jeepney: A Cost-Benefit Study." Blacksmith Institute and Clean
Air Asia: Pasig City, Philippines (2017).
[78] Regidor, Jose Regin F. "Traffic congestion in Metro Manila: Is the UVVRP still effective?." Philippine Engineering Journal34.1
(2013).
[79] https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1444595/sws-compliance-with-covid-19-protocols-declines-in-visayas-mindanao
[80] https://www.rappler.com/nation/guide-covid-19-localized-granular-lockdown-alert-level-system-metro-manila
[81] PONTAWE, Joemier, and Ma Sheilah NAPALANG. "Examining the Potential Significance of Industry Consolidation and Fleet
Management in Implementing the DOTr’s PUV Modernization Program: A Case Study of T AM." 20 .
80

SUTI Report - Metro Manila

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SUTI Report - Metro Manila

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Disclaimer

This report has been issued without formal editing.

AFCS Automated Fare Collection System

Table 1. National Capital Region Population and Population Density. ........................................................................... 8

Covid-19 Impacts to Transport in Metro Manila

Covid-19 Impacts to Citizens’ Mobility

Significant Transport Programs and Initiatives

Sustainable Urban Transport Index Analysis

The summary of SUTI scores per indicator is illustrated below:

. xtent to which transport

. Investment in public . Public transport uality

. Operational costs of the 5. Traffic fatalities per

. Affordability travel costs

Figure 1 Map of Metro Manila

Metro Manila holds majority of economic activities in the country

There are a number of urban and peri-urban centers in Metro

The Makati Central Business District (CBD) is one of the top

Urbanization in Metro Manila has grown uncontrollably through

1.2.1 Metro Manila’s Road Network

Table 2. Length of Road Network in Metro Manila

Figure 3. Metro Manila Road Network

Table 3. Annual Passengers in NAIA Terminals

Figure 4. Trend in registered vehicles in Metro Manila

1.2.5 Public Transportation Policies and Infrastructure

Figure 7. Traditional Public Utility Jeepneys (PUJ) Figure 6. UV Express

Table 4. Integrated Terminals in Metro Manila catering to provincial buses

Table 5. Railway lines operating in Metro Manila

Figure 11. Pasig River Ferry Service

1.2.6 Institutional Arrangement

Table 6. Institutions with mandates relevant to urban mobility

Source: Philippine Urban Mobility Programme [ ] with author’s inputs

1.2.7 Future Plans and Projects

Metro Manila Logistics Network: Pasig River

Metro Manila Priority Bridges for Seismic Expressway, Bridge, Road

Metro Manila Logistics Network: China Grant Official

Pasig-Marikina River Channel Improvement Water transport/ Urban

11 Unified Grand Central Station DOTr NCR 55.66 GAA Railway

North South Commuter Railway Extension

14 PNR South Long Haul DOTr Luzon 3506.36 ODA Railway

21 MRT 4 DOTr NCR 996.82 ODA Railway

22 Metro Manila Skyway Stage 3 DPWH NCR 897.2 PPP Railway

23 MRT 3 Rehabilitation Project DOTr NCR 439.32 ODA Railway

24 LRT 2 West Extension DOTr NCR 202.4 GAA Railway

25 LRT 2 East Extension DOTr NCR 195.1862 ODA Railway

27 EDSA Greenways DOTr NCR 170.24 ODA Road-based transport

29 Taguig Integrated Terminal Exchange DOTr NCR 80 PPP Road-based transport

National Interoperable Automatic Fare

2.3 Community Quarantine Classifications

a. Enhanced Community Quarantine - refers to the implementation of temporary measures imposing

c. General Community Quarantine - refers to the implementation of temporary measures limiting

On 13 May 2021, the President approved the

Table 8. Community Quarantine Classifications in Metro Manila

CQ M CQ GCQ MGCQ ate

Figure 13. Community Quarantine Classifications and Covid-19 Cases

Shift to Alert Level System

A summary of the movement restrictions are given in the figure below:

Figure 14. Movement Restrictions Under the Alert Level System

Source: DOTr [16]

Figure 18. Omnibus Guidelines on Public Transport as of May 2020.

2.5 Public Transport Under General Community Quarantine

2.5.1 Rationalized Bus Routes in Metro Manila

2.5.2 Service Contracting Program

With this, the DOTr issued Department Order No.

Table 13. Payouts Under the Service Contracting Program