Traffic has always been a huge problem in the country. Several urban planners recently stressed that the government must focus on modernizing the transport system particularly in Metro Manila “because there is no solution to the traffic.” Public transportation, particularly jeepney, modernization has been a touted solution with pros and cons being heavily discussed by various stakeholders.
As a response, the Traffic Crisis Act, or House Bill (HB) 4334, and the Department of Transportation’s (DOTr) transport modernization program was proposed in congress and government institutions. The program includes jeepney modernization as one of its main parts. Unfortunately, this initiative towards transportation modernization has been met with criticism of being anti-poor.
There will always be pros and cons to any issue. The government’s transport-modernization program, aimed mainly at jeepneys, buses, school buses and others, is no exception. In this article, we discuss the pros and cons of jeepney phase out.
Defining “Modernization”
The government is right to modernize the jeepneys. If it follows its own definition that a modern transport is “roadworthy, safe, reliable” and, above all, “prevents pollution” or has “emissions within acceptable standards.” If that is the case, then transportation modernization is certainly a necessity.
The definition of modernization is extended by Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) Resolution 2013, dated January 11, 2013, to mean a “strict 15-year age limit on public-utility vehicles, from the date of manufacture of the vehicle instead of the date of initial registration with the Land Transportation Office [LTO].”
Transportation modernization certainly has its pros. Vehicle dealers, manufacturers, and financiers will rejoice at this new replacement market as it translates to massive spurts in business. The jeepney phase out, however, has both pros and cons–especially when we talk about one of the main stakeholders: the drivers.
Several jeepney groups oppose the phase out, including the newly formed National Jeepney Federation for Environmental Sustainable Transport (NJFEST). Headed by Ronald Baroidan, the NJFEST disagrees with the looming transportation modernization program, but seriously wants to comply with the Clean Air Act (CAA). While each sector adds onto the debate of jeepney phase out pros and cons, NJFEST grabs this chance as its “defining moment” to address why the government’s definition of modernization is partly wrong.
Exploring the Jeepney Phaseout’s Pros and Cons
With traffic ever-increasing and carbon emissions rising, it seems that modernizing mass transport is a step in the right direction. However, drivers and operators are unsatisfied with its current parameters. This issue remains and the transportation sector in elections is a common topic.
In this part, we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of jeepney modernization:
The Pros of Transport Modernization: Justifying the Phaseout
Here are some of the benefits of the jeepney phase out:
Higher Job Demand for the Transport Sector
One of the biggest pros of jeepney modernization is that it can provide the country with more jobs. The jeepney modernization potentially raises the need for skilled drivers and operators. With newer models needed, there is also a higher demand for workers and laborers in vehicle manufacturing.
Lessened Carbon Emissions
Older jeepney models emit a lot of carbon and have often been cited as violators of the Clean Air Act. As the country leans towards a greener standpoint, modernizing jeepneys is one of the steps that the government sees fit. With newer units, a significant decrease in carbon emissions is expected.
The Cons of Transport Modernization: Arguing for the People Phaseout
On the other hand, here are the disadvantages of the transport modernization:
High Cost
Modern jeepneys are expensive. A modern jeepney costs about 600,000-700,000 PHP, while the government’s preferred units cost around 1.6-1.8 million PHP. The average jeepney driver earns around 500-600 PHP a day–but with rising costs of gasoline and other factors, it is safe to assume that they earn less.
Drivers and transport laborers point out how out of budget these units are, even with government assistance. Many drivers express that they have no objections to PUV modernizations, especially with all its pros. However, cost is a big con that they cannot overlook.
Possible Lack of Jeepneys
When we talk about the jeepney phase out’s pros and cons, we also need to consider the possible impacts. One of the biggest impacts that the jeepney phaseout can have is the severe lack of jeepneys in the country. As less and less jeepneys ride, commuters may find it difficult to catch a ride.
The government should have an option that provides a more affordable way for drivers to acquire one of the vehicles. Otherwise, it is not an exaggeration to say that many drivers will have issues getting one. This will inevitably lead to a severe lack of PUVs and can even lead to bigger difficulties in traffic.
Minimal Environmental Impact
A study done by the VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland shows almost a direct correlation of the effects of PAHs or LCOs on emissions. By reducing PAH content in diesel by 80 percent from 5-percent weight content to only 1 percent, PAH-related emissions also dropped massively by a range to as much as 80 percent. Sweden A-1 diesel is now down to a PAH-content of 0.02 percent with Finland at 0.2 percent owing to a tax incentive to refiners, but average PAH content in diesel in Europe is still about 4.5 percent, with a few still high at 10 percent. Bringing it down to 6 percent costs the industry in Europe about €312 million, and will increase costs for every drop in PAH content to as high as €2.249 billion at 1-percent content.
In short, what we do not see is how diesel is produced behind the scenes, somehow coming out now from behind from the tailpipe emissions. But science now tells us that when a vehicle farts from behind, these can still be measured, even if many toxic fumes, like carbon monoxide, are odorless and invisible.
Minimal Traffic Congestion Difference
Jeepneys have always been looked at as a violator of the Clean Air Act and a cause of congestion in roads. Unfortunately, what many fail to realize is that the number of private cars also contribute to air pollution and traffic congestion. Simply proposing transport modernization is not a complete solution.
Ishmael Ace Sevilla, chairman of the NCR Toda Coalition of 17 Metro Manila Toda federations, claims he could not also understand why franchises of tricycles and pedicabs will be revoked within six months upon publication of HB 4334 once enacted into law (Section 15), when the traffic is on major roads like Edsa, where tricycles are banned anyway. Tricycles only service the secondary and tertiary roads.
The bill is aimed to ease traffic as a small treat, perhaps, to commuters and motorists complaining about traffic, but it appears it’s more a threat to small guys, who only earn a few hundred pesos a day.
Weighing the Jeepney Modernization’s Pros and Cons: Finding the Balance
The jeepney phaseout is a longstanding issue that affects many sectors in the country. From commuters to jeepney drivers, stakeholders have spoken about their perceived pros and cons on the issue. While the government has put this on hold, many experts and citizens continue to weigh in on how transport modernization can be done more efficiently.
Image credits: Dreamstime.com