MOTORISTS, transport workers and commuters are in a panic once more as fuel prices increase due to the conflict in the Middle East. And as we enter the “ber” months, we can only expect traffic congestion to worsen.
There are many ways we can address our transport crisis, but based on my experience, the best solutions tend to be the simplest ones. Active mobility is low-hanging fruit because it is the most direct and cost-efficient means of reducing congestion and pollution in our cities.
What is active transportation?
Active transportation is a collective term for all forms of human-powered mobility. This usually refers to walking and cycling, but it also includes public transportation to a certain extent. After all, commuters must walk or cycle to access transit stations.
Everyone uses active transportation, even those with private vehicles. That is because walking is the most basic form of mobility; we are all pedestrians first and foremost, which is why we cannot afford to neglect it in the planning and development of cities.
The right tool for the right job
When planning our transportation system, we must employ the right tool for the right job. This is especially true for cities where space is limited, and people are plentiful.
Walking is ideal for short distances, such as moving within central business districts or residential areas, or going to transit hubs. Meanwhile, cycling is suitable for much longer distances, depending on the terrain, weather, and other factors.
Active transportation is already ideal for many basic trips that we make in our daily lives, such as going to the convenience store, grocery, bank, restaurant, café and other errands within the neighborhood.
If you could walk or ride a bicycle for any of these trips, instead of driving, then you would not have to worry about traffic congestion, parking and fuel expenses. Why make life harder when there are more efficient alternatives?
Car-centricism vs transport equity
The problem with Metro Manila and many other cities is that our infrastructure and policies are “car-centric,” instinctively prioritizing the movement and convenience of motor vehicles.
The consequence of increased automobile usage is that even the most basic of trips become excruciatingly unbearable. What could have been a five-minute drive to the mall could easily end up taking half an hour or longer — and that doesn’t even include finding parking.
That is why we must exhaust all modes of transportation, starting with what is most efficient and equitable.
Policy as the backbone of infrastructure
Design dictates behavior, and so do infrastructure and policy. Despite the cross-cutting benefits of active mobility, such as reduced travel time and transportation expenses, improved health and wellness, and cleaner air, people will not actively choose it over private motoring unless certain conditions are met.
The Netherlands-based CROW Design Manual for Bicycle Traffic outlines five core principles for urban design: cohesion, directness, safety, comfort and attractiveness. Moving people is different from transporting cargo because we must prioritize the health, wellness and safety of living beings as they travel around their city.
If the global best practices are already known, why don’t more cities adopt them? That is where policy comes into play. Policy is crucial because it serves as the legal mandate and framework for the national and local governments. Without it, there would be no obligation for public officials to promote active transportation.
When I was consulted for the Philippine Development Plan 2023-2028, I made sure this was explicitly stated: “Pedestrians and cyclists will be accorded highest priority in the hierarchy of road users.” In other words, those with less in wheels must have more in roads.
Low-hanging fruit
Active transportation is low-hanging fruit because of its affordability and plentiful benefits. Compared to building a new rail line or a new expressway, improving sidewalks and bike lanes costs only a fraction in terms of time and money.
Local governments can also use tactical urbanism to experiment with different setups before committing to a long-term investment. Maintenance is much cheaper because pedestrians and cyclists inflict little to no wear and tear, compared to motor vehicles.
Active transportation also reduces healthcare expenses because regular exercise prevents chronic diseases. In fact, studies show that people who reside in walkable and bikeable neighborhoods live longer than those who live in car-dependent suburban areas.
‘Move people, not just cars’
During a workshop organized by political science students from Paris, I, along with other stakeholders, discussed the policy and infrastructure of cycling in Metro Manila. The findings of that event were that, although we have good policies on paper, they are not apparent in the on-the-ground reality.
That is because we have a flawed definition of mobility. The root problem is that we still equate mobility with vehicular traffic, and measure our infrastructure based on the volume and speed of cars. And this is reflected in the priorities and projects of national agencies and transport departments of local government units.
We need a paradigm shift, one where we measure mobility, not by vehicular traffic, but by people throughput. Until there is dignity in mobility, “move people, not just cars” remains the battle cry of urbanists, mobility advocates and frustrated commuters alike.
Civic participation and government accountability
Ultimately, the issue of mobility and transportation boils down to governance and civic participation.
The Netherlands is a prime example with the Stop de Kindermoord movement. Long before Amsterdam and other Dutch cities became the cycling paradise they are known for today, they were no different from Metro Manila, with congested and chaotic streets filled with automobiles.
However, they realized the deeper cost: If they continued building more roads for more cars, more children would get killed in vehicular collisions. As a result of the protests, the government seriously invested in active transportation to make walking and cycling safe and convenient. The Dutch are among the happiest people in the world because they do not waste their time in traffic jams.
In our country, active transportation alone will not eradicate traffic congestion. But it will alleviate the problem by reducing the number of vehicles on the road and by empowering people with an additional means of mobility.
Just as Rome wasn’t built overnight, we can’t expect Metro Manila to instantly transform. However, that should not deter us from striving for a better and more livable city. The question is not whether we are trying to fix things, but whether we are willing to adopt proven global practices and fight for it. That is why we need visionary leadership, good governance and strong political will.
