King of the Road: The Argument Against the Mandatory Implementation of

Modern Jeepneys

Back in 2017, the Duterte administration launched the Public Utility Motor Vehicle
Modernization Program (PUMVP). Its main goal is to restructure the entire land
transport system of the Philippines into a more modernized, systematic, and
environmentally sustainable system. While these are notable and praiseworthy
ambitions, one of its core implementations is the mandatory replacement of old
jeepneys at, mostly, the driver’s/owner’s expense.
Ever since its broadcast on national media, the PUMV program sparked multiple
debates—particularly, regarding the mandatory replacement of what has historically
been known as the “King of the Road” in the Philippines (Gatarin, 2023). Albeit a case
can be made for both sides, examining the economic nuances that could affect both
jeepney drivers and common passengers, as well as the cultural impact of this
implementation suggests that this program needs a humanitarian-centered reform or be
scrapped entirely. Not only will it be a financial burden to both jeepney drivers and
consumers, but it will also push a part of Filipino culture toward obscurity.
Economic Challenges for Jeepney Drivers
One of the main arguments against the mandatory implementation of modern
jeepneys is the financial burden that the jeepney drivers would need to endure.
According to the LTFRB, a modern jeepney costs anywhere around 1.4 million to 3
million pesos. As reported by Dantes (2023) of Manila Standard, due to recent fuel
hikes, an average jeepney driver can earn 300 to 400 pesos a day which translates to
93,900 to 125,000 pesos annually if they work 6 days a week. This is a far cry from the
expected annual expense should older jeepneys were to phase out and drivers are
forced to buy newer models.
Even if we consider the subsidy given by the government to public transport
workers that will be affected, the 260,000 pesos grant barely makes a dent in the cost of
the units barring maintenance and overhead costs. While some may argue that the
PUMVP’s industry consolidation provision that will require jeepney operators to join or
form cooperatives to ease the financial burden is somewhat helpful, it makes no
difference since the models bought under cooperatives will only mean that operators
cannot, legally and contractually, fully own their units.
Additionally, other expenses might’ve been overlooked during the rapid
implementation of the program. The total subsidy needed to replace every jeepney in
the country will cost taxpayers a whopping 64.2 billion pesos barring other
infrastructures necessary for its operation such as charging stations (Punongbayan,
2023). More importantly, the maintenance cost of such modern jeepneys will also affect
operators and owners since spare parts and consumables would most likely need to
come from other countries.
The Fare Dilemma
The financial burden of the PUMVP implementation regarding the replacement of
old jeepneys extends beyond the operators’/owners’ expense. In his recent piece, Lalu
(2024) of the Inquirer claimed that a lawmaker suggested that drivers would need to
earn around 6,000 to 7,000 pesos per day to afford to transition to a modern jeepney.
Moreover, Rider Party-List Representative, Bonifacio Bosita, further suggested
that for the transition to be financially feasible, the base fare would need to increase to
around 30 to 40 pesos—even with the government subsidy considered. Comparing
these numbers to the current base fare for jeepneys in Manila at around 13 to 15 pesos,
it is needless to say that consumers will feel this dramatic increase in fare prices.
Although the LTFRB assured passengers that a five-fold increase in base fare is
“statistically impossible” many other organizations, such as the IBON Foundation,
believe the opposite considering that only above half of jeepneys and UVs are
consolidated nationwide thus far (Romero & Villamente, 2024). Regardless, it is not a
ridiculous idea that the financial burden of jeepney modernization will be shared with
common consumers.
Preserving Cultural Identity
Regardless of what angle you look at the PUMVP’s Old Jeepney Phase-Out
implementation, it seems like its financial feasibility is questionable at best. However,
the jeepney modernization program is not solely a land transport reform and economic
issue; it also endangers a part of our cultural identity.
While most Filipinos see jeepneys as a mode of transport that is uniquely nested
in our country and, thus, part of our “culture,” it is way more than that. Jeepney is the
only mode of transport that works on an “honor system.” As Dychangco (2023) of The
Rappler put it, “There are no turnstiles to ensure payment before boarding nor are there
conductors to collect fares.” Regardless, you trust the jeepney driver to take you where
you want to go, and the driver trusts you to hand over your fare to the one next to you
until it reaches him.
Dychangco further suggested that despite not being PWD-friendly, jeepneys
accommodate passengers with disability through the genuine concern of passengers
alone. Almost every Filipino experienced helping PWDs, senior citizens, and expecting
mothers with or without heavy loads to board in and out of jeepneys.
All of these small elements make jeepneys a central feature of our cultural
identity. It allows us to show the world that we are trustworthy and helpful people. We
are welcoming, regardless of if you are with a disability, old, young, or pregnant. We
 lend a hand when we can, and we have genuine trust and concern for each individual—
be it a stranger or familiar.
That said, it is not as easy to simply send these machines to obsolescence, given
that they have been part of our lives and have helped us mold and practice our core
values.

Conclusion

While the call for modernization of jeepneys is rooted in good intentions, it is

crucial to consider the adverse effects on the economic well-being of jeepney drivers
and consumers, as well as the loss of cultural identity associated with the traditional
jeepneys. The government needs to reassess its approach and address the economic
challenges faced by drivers by providing more substantial subsidies and rigorous
regulations to make sure that the financial burden is fairly shared with passengers.
Additionally, a more gradual transition that preserves the iconic design and feel of
traditional jeepneys could be explored, striking a balance between modernization and
the preservation of cultural heritage. Ultimately, the focus should be on finding
sustainable solutions that benefit both the environment and the people.

References:
Dantes, C. (2023). Jeepney drivers’ daily takehome income drops to P300. Manila Standard.
https://manilastandard.net/?p=314300436
Dychangco, B. (2023). [OPINION] The jeepney phaseout as a cultural issue. RAPPLER.
https://www.rappler.com/voices/thought-leaders/opinion-jeepney-phaseout-cultural-issue/
Gatarin, G. R. (2023). Modernising the “king of the road”: Pathways for just transitions for the Filipino
jeepney. Urban Governance. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ugj.2023.11.002
Lalu, G. P. (2024). Modern jeepneys’ cost may push drivers to earn P6K daily – solon. INQUIRER.net.
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1887140/modern-jeepneys-high-cost-may-press-drivers-to-earn-
p6k-a-day-lawmaker
Punongbayan, J. (2023). [ANALYSIS] The economics of jeepney modernization. RAPPLER.
https://www.rappler.com/voices/thought-leaders/analysis-economics-jeepney-modernization-
program/
Romero , M., & Villamente, J. (2024). LTFRB: P50 minimum PUV fare impossible. Daily Tribune.
https://tribune.net.ph/2024/01/04/ltfrb-p50-minimum-puv-fare-impossible