1. Catalyzing New Mobility in Cities:
The Case of Metro Manila
Catalyzing New Mobility in Cities:
Inception Meeting Documentation Report
The Case of Metro Manila
NOVEMBER 2011
The Report was prepared by the Ateneo School of Government for the
Rockefeller Foundation
2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Ateneo School of Government’s iBoP Asia (Innovation for Inclusive Development) Program with support
from Rockefeller Foundation is implementing a project entitled “Catalyzing New Mobility in Cities: The Case of
Metro Manila”. This project aims to use New Mobility as a lens in search of more sustainable and innovative
solutions in the transport sector, especially in Metro Manila, that address problems of the poor and the
vulnerable.
The Inception Meeting was held last October 27, 2011 in Gateway Suites, Cubao, Quezon City and was
attended by total of 44 participants from various Local Government Units of the Cities of Quezon, Makati,
Marikina, and Mandaluyong; National Government Agencies (Department of Transportation, Metro Manila
Development Authority); Non-government Organizations and corporate foundation (Manila Observatory,
CAI-Asia, Gawad Kalinga, PLDT-Smart Foundation); the private sector (Ayala land, Inc., Ortigas Center
Association Inc.); development organization (The Rockefeller Foundation); and research and academic
institutions (Ateneo De Manila University, UP NCTS, University of Michigan).
Mr. Benjamin de la Peña (Associate Director for Urban Development of Rockefeller Foundation) highlighted
that the more the city is urbanized, the higher the economic growth. However, he emphasized that in order
to make a sustainable and liveable city, there is a need to make the pedestrians a priority. Ms. Susan Zielinski
(Managing Director, SMART-University of Michigan.) supported this idea and further elaborated that it is
within the cities where most opportunities can be sought. The challenge however in moving forward with
New Mobility is to connect the dots. But there are reasons to be hopeful for Metro Manila with the
participants’ involvement on this. Atty. Yves Gonzales of MMDA presented about the current transport and
mobility situation in Metro Manila. He reiterated that the metro comprises 1/8 of the country’s population
contributing to a lot of transport-related issues and challenges. The MMDA, however, envisions a world-class,
vibrant, safe and healthy metropolis – which can be achieved by implementing effective programs.
The project background was presented by Dr. Segundo Romero (iBoP Asia Program Director) followed by
the presentation of the Project Team of the research plans for the following: (1) mapping of public transports
in the metro; (2) the impact and cost of public transport on the poor and the vulnerable; and (3) the
entrepreneurial and livelihood opportunities in the transport sector. Having this multi-sectoral
representation of the inception meeting has been instrumental in surfacing of inputs and suggestions to the
research plans of the Project. The remarks gathered contributed to determining the focus of the researches,
identification of study area(s), key persons and organizations, improving the research methods, defining the
variables of the researches, and possible collaborations with LGUs and national government agencies.
Moreover, the interaction of participants helped determine the interrelationship and integration of the three
researches to better present the baseline of the transport system in Metro Manila, and also the promise of
engagements and collaboration with the stakeholders present in the meeting. Dr. Danielle Guillen also
presented the Project Activities in the next 12 months and is hopeful to continuously get the support of the
stakeholders.
Dr. Antonio La Viña gave the closing remarks and emphasized that the issues are solvable and requires a
vision even though it may take time and focus. He also expressed enthusiasm to engage with all stakeholders
in doing changes in areas possible then connect the dots.
Atty. Alu Dorotan read the message from Chairman Francis Tolentino of MMDA. He congratulated the
organizers –the Ateneo School of Government and commended the Rockefeller Foundation for supporting
new learning and delivering services for the Filipino and conveys his appreciation for making Metro Manila the
subject of study and for giving MMDA the chance to participate in this worthwhile undertaking. Chairman
Tolentino is optimistic that this study will provide new lessons in looking at transportation beyond
infrastructure with the inclusion of the poor and the vulnerable. That it will provide a human face, which is a
very important factor in transport management.
3. CATALYZING NEW MOBILITY IN CITIES: THE CASE OF METRO MANILA
INCEPTION MEETING
Topaz Room 2, Gateway Suites, Araneta Center, Cubao, Quezon City
27 October 2011
9:00 am to 3:00 pm
HIGHLIGHTS
1. The Ateneo School of Government under its iBoP Asia (Innovation for Inclusive Development)
Program with support from Rockefeller Foundation hosted the Inception Meeting held last October
27, 2011 in Gateway Suites, Cubao, Quezon City for the project entitled ―Catalyzing New Mobility
in Cities: The Case of Metro Manila‖. It was attended by 44 participants from from various Local
Government Units of the Cities of Quezon, Makati, Marikina, and Mandaluyong; National
Government Agencies (Department of Transportation and Communication, Metro Manila
Development Authority); Non-government Organizations and corporate foundation (Manila
Observatory, CAI-Asia, Gawad Kalinga, PLDT-SMART Foundation); the private sector (Ayala Land
Inc., Inc., Ortigas Center Association, Inc. ); development organization (The Rockefeller
Foundation); and research and academic institutions (Ateneo de Manila University, UP NCTS,
University of Michigan). The list of attendees can be found in Annex 1.
2. The event started with invocation, national anthem, and the welcome remarks given by Prof. Mary
Jean Caleda, the Assistant Dean of Ateneo School of Government.
3. Mr. Benjamin de la Peña, the Associate Director for Urban Development of Rockefeller Foundation,
gave a presentation about the Foundation, some facts about Metro Manila, and the need for
understanding Manila’s urban development. His presentation is attached as Annex 2.
The following are some key points of his presentation:
Metro Manila grew in the last 50 years by 1440 ha/year with an average of 180,000 people/year.
This is about half the size of Makati in land area each year. There is no agency in the world that
could have cope with this kind of growth. This led to problems like informal settlements, slums,
and traffic. To cope up with this kind of growth, there is a need to build 100 houses per day –at
a no vacations, no weekends and no holidays assumption.
The situation in Metro Manila (e.g. slums, traffic congestion) is not unique to the country and
can be found in other major cities/ metropolitan in the world.
The more the city is urbanized, the higher the economic growth. The US is about 80%
urbanized, Korea is 92%, and Japan is even more so. The only place in the world that does not
have horizontal slums is China because it is intentionally urbanized. These countries see the
connection between urbanization and growth. Here in Metro Manila, it is not realized.
Cities share 70% of the global economy and are considered the economic engines of the world.
It has a huge share for a very miniscule size of the world’s land area.
Mr. dela Peña shared his favorite quote from Triumph of the City by Ed Glaeser:
4. “Cities don’t make people poor. Cities attract poor people. They attract poor people because they deliver
things that people need most of all — economic opportunity.”
There is a demographic shift
happening. The World Bank
thought that in order to solve
world poverty, people don’t have
to go into cities. They come to
realize over the last five years
that it cannot happen—that
people come to cities because of
opportunities.
Metro Manila is only 2.1% of the
total land area of the country,
but it produces 1/3 of the
national economy. Every square
kilometer in Metro Manila
produces more than $ 3 billion
dollars per year. Mr. de la Peña presenting the facts about the contribution of cities in
Comparatively, Metro Manila national economy
produces about $158,000 per sq.
km. per year versus $1,720 for every square kilometer per year in the rural areas.
Poverty incidence of families of NCR (4.8%) is lower than in whole of the country (24.4%).
Lower poverty incidence is due to economic opportunities. Starting a business in the city or
finding a job is nine times higher than being in the rural areas.
The myths of decongesting Metro Manila and traffic are as follows:
Moving people out of the City (mainly the poor). An example is Balik Probinsya Program
in the 1950s.
Create alternative growth centers to relieve pressure.
Need more mass transit to relieve the traffic congestion
There are two ways of solving congestion: (1) traffic congestion pricing and (2) high gas cost
One way to decongest the city is to kill its economy.
The more roads you build, the more people drive.
Mr. de la Peña emphasized that if we want a sustainable and a livable city, it is the pedestrian that
needs to be king. All that happens in cities depend on people. The way to make a sustainable and
livable city is to make the pedestrians a priority. That’s the indicator species, not the person in
the car.
4. Ms. Susan Zielinski, the Managing Director of Sustainable, Mobility and Accessibility Research and
Transformation (SMART) Center at the University of Michigan, gave a presentation on the
international perspectives on New Mobility.
Before Ms. Zielinski started her presentation, she asked everyone to introduce themselves, their
affiliation, and tell a positive word that represents ―transportation.‖ Some of the participants’
responses included the following: speed, legroom, potent, space, convenience, movement, choice,
service, door-to-door, connectivity, safe, seamless, enforcement, clean air, engineering, people,
democratic, integrated, and sustainable.
5. She gave a presentation with the theme ―connecting the dots.‖ Her presentation can be found in
Annex 3. The highlights of her presentation are as follows:
Urbanizing world is an opportunity to think differently about solutions. We have to think
creatively, not only focusing on what’s wrong or what the problems are, but looking at
innovations all around the world.
There are new ways of providing services including fractional use (e.g. zipcar), new technologies
(iphone applications telling us when trains are coming, integrated fare payment), new kinds of
design and infrastructure (bike parking, urban design—transportation as a framework for city
building), new modes of transportation (foldable bikes, new types of buses) and cultural shifts.
We should consider not just people’s movements but also goods movements, and the lesson to
be learned from the latter. Transportation is not just going from A to B, it is also about making
trips shorter or eliminating it (e.g. building a corner store in a neighborhood eliminates longer
trips). Transportation is a means not an end. Good movement should be multilevel, door-to-
door, IT-enhanced and seamless.
A three-minute video presentation (created by Veolia) was shown to give the participants ideas
on new mobility.
Ms. Zielinski emphasized that it is important to identify transportation grid that already exist in
the city then look at how it increases connectivity. Connectivity infrastructure rather than roads
as infrastructure.
She also discussed the Four-step Approach – convening, mapping, piloting and roll out, and
moving minds.
According to Ms. Zielinski, convening identifies great things, so as to bring them together and
make them better. It’s beyond usual suspects. It’s not just the city planners and engineers but
also the entrepreneurs (e.g. doing iphone apps, people at Cisco doing neat IT, NGOs), and
sometimes labor.
Mapping and piloting on the other hand should be able to identify things that make sense and
should generate interest, more demands, and public participation of the city’s transportation.
There are many industries involved in the traditional transportation industry as follows: real
estate, tourism, logistics, IT and GIS. With New mobility, it further contributes to economic
benefits. It saves money, creates jobs, boosts businesses, and revitalizes local economies.
Ms. Zielinski asked the participants to think of a thing in Metro Manila that they are most
excited, proud and hopeful for the future. Furthermore, give at least whom they would like to
bring to participate in the table.
The participants said they are proud of the following:
Train system (MRT) – it may be insufficient but at least Metro Manila already has it.
Transportation rich; excited about transportation issues and possible solutions.
Connections have greatly improved
Alternate routes
Rationalizing public transit
Retaining public transit share
Cooperation among stakeholders
Covered walks and the efforts of various groups to improve it
Current initiative in Commonwealth Avenue for motorcycle lane
People Power
Growing awareness of importance of health
6. Hoping for a
subway in Metro
Manila
Partnerships with
NGOs
Existing
improvements
People welcome
positive changes
People here in the
room who came
with an open mind
and willing to Right photo: Ms. Zielinski listens to the participants while giving their insights on what
collaborate with they are excited, proud of and hopeful in the future of transportation in Metro Manila.
everyone
Enthusiasm and Left photo: Local Government representatives from City of Marikina and CAI-Asia sharing
interest of their thoughts
different sectors of
the community
Renewed zeal/ desire of young people to be part of city and nation building
Numerous options to live in the places where you work
Organizations promoting paradigm shift from infrastructure building to shifts in mass
transit; excited by projects of line 7 and line 9
Streets are already marked
Potential as center for innovation
Capacity to talk about traffic rather than coup d’etats and crime
Talking about mobility and not just transportation/ traffic
People have open minds, not looking at Manila as a dead end
Groups and/ or individuals identified by the participants are as follows:
Bus operators (80% of traffic caused by buses, lack of discipline thereof)
Councilors of the different LGUs especially Chairpersons of the Committee on
Transportation
People working on urban air quality
Students and those studying more efficient transport systems
Representatives of car users
Mayors of Pasig, Mandaluyong and Quezon City (for the Ortigas Business District)
National government agencies
Motorcycle users
President
Urban planners
Public transport operators
Commuters
Social entrepreneurs
Youth groups
Township developers
Church
People working in transport services sector to better understand the economic situation
Core users, especially those in lower-income tax brackets
Drivers
7. Ateneo community (future leaders, entrepreneurs)
Future problem solvers, including young children
Bloggers/media
Young planners hungry for development
Artists who could help visualize what the real identity of Metro Manila should be
5. The following are the highlights of the discussion:
Mr. Danilo Ocampo asked if there is a room for discussions and planning on some manageable
innovations and mobility system at the local level.
Mr. de la Peña responded that what happens and what we can do in this table should not be
defined by the funders or the proponents. It should be defined by the participants. And in order
to effect change, it is important to change minds. With this, what we can do is to shift the
framing of the problem. He cited US as an example, that, it is a mistake to count cars instead of
people. He emphasized that if we count people and consider it to be at the core, which we
forget, we will be thinking about how many people can be moved as fast as possible.
6. Atty. Yves Gonzales, Director of the Traffic Discipline Office of the MMDA, presented about the
Metropolitan Manila Transport and Traffic Development and Management Program (Annex 4).
The highlights of his presentation are as follows:
The Philippines is about 88 million in population, Metro Manila comprised its 11 million. The
classification of the roads is about 44% concrete and about 56% of the national road is in asphalt.
The road network composes of five circumferential roads (C-roads) and 10 radial roads.
The vehicle registration in 2010 totaled to 6.6 million. There is an increase in vehicle registration
from 2008 and 2010.
As the country progresses,
more and more people buy cars
and traffic congestion gets
worse.
For buses that passes thru
EDSA, there a total of 3,700
city buses and 3,088 provincial
buses. For non-EDSA there are
total of 1,589 city buses and
4,280 provincial buses. These
accounted to a total of 5,321
for EDSA and 7,368 for non-
EDSA buses.
Based on a study, the actual
limit of buses is just about
1,600. There is oversupply of Atty. Yves Gonzales presenting the initiatives of MMDA
city buses. In addition, provincial
buses also contribute to traffic and congestion.
There are 85 bus stations clustered in the areas of Sampaloc-Manila (29), EDSA-Cubao (26),
EDSA-Pasay (19), Buendia-Pasay (7) and Monumento (4). Currently, there are 1,719 franchise
holders for a total of 48,514 units.
We also have the rail system, MRT, LRT 1 and 2, and PNR. The expansions MRT 7, MRT 4 are
also part of the expansion plans. The LRT 1 has 111 trains, the LRT 2 has 13 train sets, and MRT
3, the most popular has 73, and the Philippine National Railways has 18 trains.
8. There is also the Pasig River Ferry System. However, its operation is currently suspended. The
DOTC has plans to bring it back and strengthen because it is one of the alternative means to get
around Metro Manila.
There are a total of 76,938 of traffic-related accidents from January to December 2010 in Metro
Manila. 380 are fatal accidents, 14,853 non-fatal accidents, and 61,705 damage to property.
While from January to May 2011, we have 168 fatal accidents, 6,321 non-fatal injuries, 22,962
damaged properties, and a total of 29,446 accidents.
The number of accidents along Commonwealth Avenue has been reduced by 23% as compared
to 2010.
The Issues and Challenges are:
Obstructions and illegal structures along the carriageways
Outmoded traffic signal system
Poor road condition
Inadequate public transport
Vehicular and pedestrian accidents
Low or weak enforcement of transport and traffic related-laws/regulations; and
Lack of discipline and poor road behavior
Metro Manila’s vision is to be a world-class, vibrant, safe and healthy metropolis. We are not yet
there but we are getting there.
The MMDA has proposed/implemented the following flagship programs:
The establishment of the Mega Manila North and South Provincial Bus Axis System or
PIBAS. The goal: to decongest EDSA from buses.
The development of the Airport Tram System aims to inter-connect all the three (3)
international airport terminals.
The installation of an Intelligent Transport System. It consists of two parts: (1) to
improve Metro Manila’s traffic signaling system—improving traffic lights, changing LEDs
and installing counters which shows the number of seconds for the red time, yellow
time and green time, (2) to increase monitoring and surveillance abilities by installing of
additional cameras; the more parts of the road that we can monitor, the better services
we can provide for the people.
Installation of road signs and markings following international standards.
Construction of rotondas to improve the traffic flow.
Landscaping and beautification of the road.
Installation of strategic traffic safety and traffic flow enhancement facilities.
Improving illumination of roads.
Transport and traffic entry summit and stakeholder’s consultation meeting.
Construction of pedestrian footbridges. Currently there are 66 footbridges serving a
total of 2.3 million pedestrians a day. It is equivalent to 2.3 million pedestrians that are
not on the road.
Deployment of lady traffic enforcers to areas with severe traffic problems. Motorists
tend to be more compliant and try to obey traffic laws when lady traffic enforcer is
around.
Expansion of Unified Vehicular Volume Reduction Program (UVVRP). Number coding
system.
Introduction of Christmas lanes, also known as Mabuhay Lanes. These are alternate
routes that the motorists can traverse, instead of the major roads. The MMDA deploy
enforcers to ensure that these routes remain free flowing.
Employment of female bus drivers. MMDA believed that female bus drivers are more
caring and less aggressive in driving PUVs.
9. Setting speed limit of 60 kph and introduction of motorcycle lanes along
Commonwealth and Macapagal Avenues.
Vehicle tagging scheme that aims to tag all vehicles to allow identification of vehicles (e.g.
during accidents, etc.) via CCTV. It is also important for the identification of vehicles
and out-in-line vehicles. There is no cost to government because the vehicles are tag
voluntarily by operators.
Establishment of MMDA twitter account that replaced MMDA radio/TV operations. It is
much cheaper and currently has 144,000 followers. It is simple, it is cheap and efficient.
Metro Manila Traffic Navigator aims to provide traffic information in line with major
thoroughfares—EDSA, C-5, SLEX, NLEX, Roxas Boulevard, Quezon Avenue, España,
Commonwealth, Ortigas, and Marcos Highway.
Creation of MMDA iOS mobile application.
7. The highlights of comments, questions, and recommendations for the presentation given by Atty.
Gonzales are as follows:
Mr. Ocampo asked if the MMDA thought about replicating the MRT system to a situation of
buses and jeepneys.
Atty. Gonzales responded that
improving public transportation is
one of the solutions to solve traffic
problems. Establishing Bus Rapid
Transit may take time because of
political challenges. It is also cheaper
but will require new capital for buses.
The improvement of public
transportation is not exactly a
mandate of MMDA but of DOTC.
The MMDA is working with DOTC,
LTO, and LTFRB to come up with
solutions to improve our level of
transportation. BRT system is one of Mr. Danny Ocampo asking Atty. Gonzales, if MMDA has thought about
them. Next year, Chairman Tolentino replicating MRT system to bus and jeepneys.
is planning to introduce a project
regarding the loading and unloading. Again, this is one of the problems in traffic situation
because people just load and unload everywhere.
Ms. Jessica Bercilla cited that wherever there is increase in mobility, there are new social hubs
that evolve. Where there are new evolving social hubs, the more vulnerable sectors and the
urban poor sectors, are very quick at finding opportunities. In relation to this, she asked if
MMDA, in all the innovations implemented, has thought about addressing the issues of the urban
poor who use and benefit in the evolving mobility that we have in Metro Manila.
Atty. Gonzales said that MMDA is concentrating on it mandates to provide better
transportation management services in Metro Manila. The result of will be reaching down to
the poor and the vulnerable. However, MMDA don’t have that project right now that is why we
are talking with the ASoG to have an initial meeting on how these people - the poor and the
vulnerable - will benefit from agencies transportation project especially in Metro Manila.
Mr. de la Peña, asked the participants to name one city in the world, a vibrant city that has no
traffic. He cited that even Singapore has traffic. The goal of traffic-less city is probably
impossible. He also gave New York, Tokyo and Hong Kong as examples of cities that have the
best transport systems in the world. Even these cities have traffic. He congratulate MMDA with
10. its initiatives and with the Traffic Navigator, it shows how we can achieve our objectives in the
future.
On the Traffic Navigator, Atty. Gonzales said that their vision is to cover everywhere. It is built
in a modular way so that more roads can be added fairly.
Mayor Herbert Bautista on the other
hand asked the group on what is the
basis of planning, is it transportation
or land use? Moreover, what are the
regulations regarding the use of ten-
year old cars?
Dr. Antonio La Viña emphasized that
the whole point of the Search is to try
to answer the questions that the
stakeholders have. He is also
optimistic that the group can do a lot
of things on transportation that is
good for the environment, for
progress, for development, and for
energy. Dr. La Viña also emphasized
one of the reasons we invited the local
government officials (e.g. Quezon
City) is for the team to move forward
on this initiative and be able to
locating these issues in specific places.
Mr. de la Peña responded to the query
raised by Mayor Baustista. He said that
transportations are city shapers. In
understanding levels of development
(e.g. in Quezon City), it is important
to consider the following questions:
How many cars will have to pass Above photo: Ms. Jessica Bercilla asking Atty. Angeles if MMDA (given
before thinking about expanding the their innovations) thought of addressing the issue of urban poor who use
road? But what if, we count people and benefit in the evolving mobility that we have in Metro Manila.
instead of cars? Then how many people
will be coming through here then how Below photo: Dr. La Viña explaining the objective of the Search.
do we carry that people? Is the most
efficient, cars? Is the plan based on transportation or land use, would you be doing plan based on
people? Where will people go? How will they move? How many of them can we move? Where
do we get down and get off? How do we make it more convenient for them?
On the query of Mayor Bautista about the regulation on cars, Ms. Corazon Japson (Supervising
Transportation Development Officer, DOTC) mentioned that there is a DOTC regulation that
limits the age of public utility vehicles to 10 years. The agency will not give franchise if they
exceed to 10 years. It is not that strict for private cars, so long as the vehicle passes the
requirements for motor-vehicles registration and NBI safety road forms.
8. The morning session ended with a photo shoot of all the meeting participants. The presentation
about the project and its research components were moved in the afternoon.
11. The participants of the Inception Meeting from LGUs, national government agencies, private sector, academe, non-government
organizations and development partners.
9. In the afternoon session, Dr. Segundo Romero (iBoP Asia Program Director), gave a presentation
entitled, ―Background and Overview of the Project on Catalyzing New Mobility in Cities: the Case
of Metro Manila.‖ The presentation is attached as Annex 5.
The highlights of his presentation are as follows:
Government agencies are repositories of a lot of information that are not shared.
The Metro Manila Action Plan should be able to contain provisions on safety, mobility,
productivity, and civility. For inclusiveness, it is to design the public transport system for the
pedestrians, the bicyclists, the
commuters, the long trippers.
Design safety for the pedestrians.
For mobility, we should also look how
it affects the productivity for the rich
and poor.
Dr. Romero raised the following
questions that the project wanted to
answer for this Search:
Is it possible to design civility
into interactions on the road?
If the streets show the attitude
and our citizenship, how do we
focus on cooperative and
interactions? Dr. Romero presenting the background and overview of the project
Where are the informal transport
hubs? What are their attributes?
Where are the formal transport networks?
How to combine different modes of travel?
How Metro Manila combine these services, etc?
12. What basically designs to ride a jeep rather than a bus?
Economics and mobility.
Social enterprise opportunities
Focus on governance not government
Connect ―islands‖ of transportation systems. The SMART primer highlights transportation as a
system of systems, connecting nodes, services, etc. Thus the concept of transportation also
includes behavioral mobility changes and innovations from various stakeholders.
In the end, we want to increase the accessibility in Metro Manila. The output that we are
promising is a sustained multi-stakeholder discourse on new mobility—a series of discourses on
mobility beyond the project line. We are going to feed it with workshops and fora, research,
communication and information activities that enriches knowledge sharing.
In the next 12 months, the project will do the following:
Stakeholder workshops
Mapping and research - both visible and invisible public transport system. The team
wanted to map behavioral patterns and understand the impacts/ costs of public
transportation, particularly on the poor and vulnerable, and identify existing and emerging
entrepreneurial activities in the transport sector.
Profile raising activities
10. Mr. Lorenzo Cordova, Jr., Research Associate of iBoP Asia Program, presented the Mapping of
Public Transport Networks in Metro Manila (Annex 6) in behalf of Dr. Jun Castro.
The highlights of his presentation are as follows:
Database is very effective in planning if it is reliable and updated. If it is updated, it should be
relevant as well.
In building database, it is important to answer the following:
What is the purpose of the data?
Who needs the data?
Should it be able to be implemented on various platforms?
What are the platforms available for the users?
GIS-based maps and database can be overlaid with several layers to come up with guidance in an
effective decision making. Results and analyses will be useful in policy making, management, guide
in planning your system, traffic information in your GIS.
The study will select four to fiv areas in EDSA (e.g. from MRT stations), and will cover the 500
meter radius from the area identified.
The One-year time frame limits the study.
For the road network and capacities, we have MMDA and DPWH as sources of data—vehicle
types and volumes, public transport services, pedestrian improvements, and traffic management.
He emphasized that LGU have critical roles as well.
Mr. Cordova raised some questions to the participants to sought guidance from the participants
to improve the study. These are:
What is the purpose of mapping?
What are we trying to connect for this invention? What are we trying to achieve? What
are we looking at?
Who are the people who will use this data or these GIS maps?
What needs to be added given the existing information that we have?
How do GIS maps help define or determine the socio-economic and new mobility
programs to be implemented by the LGUs, as well as the policies?
13. 11. The summary of key questions, comments, and recommendations for the mapping component of
the Search are as follows:
Dr. Regidor gave recommendations
to ask the following considering the
perspectives of using maps as
follows: 1) What were the
objectives of the maps based on the
maps presented by the MMDA? 2)
Depending on the objectives, we
have to define what level of detail
we want in these maps; 3) What
type of information exactly do we
want to put in these maps? Then we
can define what type of data we will
be putting in the layers of the maps
(e.g. travel speed, volume). 4) Do
we need to determine densities, Dr. Regidor of UP NCTS sharing his insights for the mapping
vehicle mixes? component of the Search
For the informal hubs, the
connectivity will be identified. It’s one of the basic objectives--to see how the urban poor
commute.
If the study will only look at three MRT stations along EDSA and we want to focus on inclusion,
why not map an urban poor community and find out how they are traveling and to where?
These stations are just exchange points.
Importance of language and legibility in creating maps
―New mobility map‖
Understand connection points
Maps should give opportunity for both users and for the entrepreneurs who want to fill up the
system and identify gaps
Define the purpose of the map and the mapping exercise.
If maps should promote dialogue, then what kind of design will support conversations?
12. Mr. Randolph Carreon, Transportation Economist, presented Impact and Cost of Public Transport
on the Poor and Vulnerable (Annex 7).
The highlights of his presentation are as follows:
The poor comprised considerable part of the population of the Metro Manila. The cost of
transportation, especially public transport, has been increasing over the past years. The
increasing costs are felt especially from those belonging in the low-income bracket.
The vulnerable groups include persons with disability, senior citizens, women and children.
These sectors have specific transport needs however received less attention in the previous
years and studies. Public transport is a vital part of the transportation system in Metro Manila.
The objective is to understand the nature of the transportation needs, accessibility, mobility, and
cost of the poor and the vulnerable groups.
14. The study aims to establish the travel demand of the
poor and the vulnerable groups. Specifically, how these
people move from their house, from their work,
school. Moreover, to look qualitatively at the efficiency
of the transport system compared to the needs of the
poor and the vulnerable groups.
The study will also estimate the cost of transportation
of the poor, estimate the actual and the desired cost of
transport of those within the vulnerable groups and
examine other quantifiable cost incurred by these
groups.
The ―poor‖ will be defined as those living within the
colonies of the informal settlers. Typically we define
poor in terms of income, relatively those in the
poverty line but for the purpose of this study, we
would assume that once you live in the colony of
informal settler, you could be considered poor.
The ―vulnerable groups‖ will include PWDs, senior
citizens, and women and children. Additional category
consists of those working in BPOs will be covered
because this is a new and emerging industry. Mr. Randolph Carreon presenting the study on
The study will use primary and secondary data covering Impact and Cost of Public Transport on the Poor
all the LGUs in Metro Manila. The primary data will be and Vulnerable
gathered from selected areas, while secondary data will be gathered, hopefully, from all the
LGUs in Metro Manila. Then, we can expand the primary data gathering.
We plan to conduct household interview surveys to determine travel demand patterns and
transport cost. Currently we are considering the colonies of Bgy. Old Balara, Agham Road, and
along EDSA extension. We are hoping to have a sampling rate of approximately 2.5% per area.
The study will conduct individual interviews among PWDs, senior citizens, women and children,
and BPO workers. The interviews will be conducted in public places such as terminals at mall
stations, in short, where we can find them, we will interview them.
The target number of samples is 2,000 respondents from all the vulnerable groups.
The study will utilize other methods:
Key-informant interviews
Focus group discussions
Since we have selected study areas, we will try to get some specific case studies, for example, a
typical family within the informal settler colony. We will try to document how they move out to
go to school, how they get their income, and what are the costs. For each of the vulnerable
group, we will get one specific case study.
By end of January, we will have the initial findings after we do the initial running of the results.
And on March, we will be able to finalize the report.
13. The summary of key questions, comments, and recommendations for the Impact and Cost of Public
Transport on the Poor and Vulnerable component of the Search are as follows:
Stratify the approach. Are we talking only of informal settlers with no land title or no tenure and
some informal settlers with tenure already, whether those are awarded lots? The areas chosen
are mixed since the focus is along EDSA.
15. Areas far from EDSA are still under consideration to get the feeder of the movement (e.g.
people in EDSA that are walking towards to and from the MRT; the tricycle and pedicab
movements are not recorded).
Consider including the community that was relocated to see what is the impact on their
transportation.
Mayor Bautista cited the example of the QC government’s idea of donating about five jeepneys
(creating transport cooperative) so the people can build and eventually own. The Matandang
Balara is okay for the study, it is far from EDSA, however, most of them are dense and many of
the residents are working outside Quezon City. He also expressed to support the project and
will be very much willing to volunteer Quezon City as one of the study areas.
If the research looks at the cost of
public transit and how it causes
traffic, there is a tendency to deal
with it instead of the cars
Is there a ―language‖ that can say
something on public transit
opportunities, and impacts of
motorized transportation on the
poor/vulnerable? It might be a
semantic thing but at first glance, it
may look like that transit is seen
as bad.
Up to what degree of specificity
and usefulness you can devise the
study such that the information Mayor Herbert Bautista of Quezon City shares his insights and expressing
would be useful to prospective his support to the project.
social entrepreneurs who can
devise very specific focus in transport systems that will make sense to those poor and
vulnerable sectors? (e.g. people with disabilities, one way of looking at it is, what is the actual
mode of transport they are using now?)
Need focus on specific communities and see how dynamically they do their transport
We are trying to look at transport data and impact. We are also looking at socio-
entrepreneurship data. If we have to do them in the same communities and in same locations,
there is no way we will be able to inter-relate that data and integrate theoretical ferment that
might be useful to our people. Is it possible to look at specific communities where we can do all
these studies but in an integrated manner?
Ideographic case studies are good.
Why don’t we try to locate the senior citizens, the PWDs, and the others from this community?
You may not have all of them but when you look at them together from Metro Manila, you will
have enough conclusions.
14. Ms. Tieza Santos, Associate Director of Ateneo Center for Social Entrepreneurship, presented
Entrepreneurial and Livelihood Opportunities in the Transport Sector (Annex 8).
The highlights of her presentation are as follows:
Social entrepreneurship – innovative way of doing things in order to provide a pervasive social
solution.
16. For this component of the project, we would
like to look at the enterprise landscape and
potentials of the transport and new mobility
sector.
Research Overview (preliminary ideas):
Goals and Objectives:
Identify existing transportation related
social enterprises or mobility
innovations in the Philippines and
including other countries.
Generate ideas and business models on
new mobility and transport-related
social enterprises with high potential to
benefit particularly the poor and the
vulnerable.
Identify market barriers and aiders for
the development of mobility
innovations.
- We look at the economics, the Ms. Tieza Santos presenting the proposed study in
consumers, and the market. We enterprise landscape and potentials in the transport sector
consider the social aspect and
elements governing these
dynamics. And finally the cultural
patterns and behaviors.
Scope and Limitation:
Focus on commercial enterprise component of the transport and new mobility sector.
- We consider the things that are more efficient that provide less cost, safe,
convenient, poor and vulnerable-friendly transport systems.
The research activities will involve the following:
- Interviews with proponents, managers, customers of existing mobility enterprises
and projects
- Focused group discussions and/or crowd sourcing
Geographic coverage on Metro Manila
Preliminary Research Directions:
The social and economic dimension of the transport sector
- To look at the social context and cultural mobility in Metro Manila
- To survey the development and evolution of the transport and mobility in Metro
Manila
- To look at historical changes, economic drivers in national
- To look at the sociological perspective and behavior patterns of transports and new
mobility market
Main Goal:
To understand the minds of the people and how goods and services are delivered.
Moreover, try to answer the following: How policy makers and government officials
envision the way the city was built, the way they develop our transport system; how
commercial areas sprung in transport hubs?; How they think and re-think the way they
17. construct Metro Manila and our cities?; What do we make out of our cities?; and why has
Metro Manila evolved into what it is today?
Using the new mobility paradigm, we have two considerations:
- What were the elements that influence the way you projected and built our city?
- As Metro Manila reaches a point in terms of population and increasing demands for
goods and services, did we consider the idea of how the city is built that is central
to human progress?
Going back to the roots: the transport sector as an enterprise
For politicians and planners, we look at transportation as service provider but for
operators, drivers, it is not just service but an enterprise—it is a livelihood for them
The content of Search will also include the following:
Historical overview of the urban transport development in Metro Manila and
how it emerged.
- How these transport shaped our city today?
Market overview –the supply and demand analysis, the barriers and enablers
that resulted to privatizations, colorums, TODA.
The development and emergence of transport enterprise in Metro Manila
- What are the factors that drove the formal and informal enterprise
surrounding the major transportation hubs in the country?
- How we would be able to provide new mobility and come up with
alternative enterprises for the formal and informal sectors that would be
able to increase/address the challenge of new mobility?
Survey emerging enterprise and innovations in the new mobility paradigm.
- Look at people and services
- What are the new models that cater to people mobility, the transfer of
services, the barriers and enablers, the systems and structural developments
that are currently emerging?
The future direction
- The projections of sustainable business models for new mobility and social
enterprises in the Philippines.
- What can be replicable locally?
- What would be the role of social enterprises or social entrepreneurs in
addressing the new mobility challenges with particular consideration for the
poor and the vulnerable and other dimensions such as safety, convenience,
health, efficiency, environment, and the cost? How will the challenges shape
the mobility of the people, goods and services in Metro Manila
Some examples in the transport and mobility sector:
- Mobius motors in Africa – low cost and high quality motors
- Bikeshare
- Suica pasmo in Japan
What if we do something like that in Metro Manila instead of carrying three pass
cards?
- Philippines: RoRo, Bayad Center
Key considerations:
Efficiency cost, environment, convenience, safety
What are the enterprises, commercial/social and even public, that can be introduced and
implemented to address these concerns?
18. What are the proximate demands and supply for new mobility mechanism, specifically,
the characteristics of the demand segment or the consumer profile in terms of
segmentation that make up for the demand of new transport enterprises and new
mobility mechanisms, infrastructures and systems that support the various needs of
mobility consumers?
What could be the features of new mobility system that would be convenient and
helpful to consumers?
What would be the incentives and principles that will govern or encourage the
emergence of new models to facilitate new mobility of goods, people and services?
We will be doing research designs and content, finalize survey questionnaires, dry run of the
survey, preliminary market study and analysis, key sectoral/institutional representatives, FGDs,
research data processing.
15. The summary of key questions, comments, and recommendations for are as follows:
Possible to include research on regulatory aspect of public transport?
Interested also in jeepney model, and have discussion with DOT officials.
When people have just little money, renting a jeepney becomes an attractive investment.
16. Dr. Danielle Guillen presented the proposed activities of the Search (Annex 9). The highlights of her
presentation are as follows:
Launch/mapping in January 2012
Launching in partnership with
MMDA
Mapping exercise – connecting
the dots. Will involve MMDA
and 17 LGUs and public sectors
(e.g. Department of
Transportation), media (e.g.
print, radio, TV), and private
sectors (e.g. shopping malls,
private developers, IT and
telecom), NGOs, academe,
planners and other groups,
International Organizations
Dr. Danielle Guillen presenting the proposed activities of the New
Launching of Crowd Sourcing Activity Mobility in Cities Project
Crowd sourcing - like an
innovation award for best
practice. It is a distributed problem solving and production model. It is a participatory
process. It will be in a partnership with the academe, or some NGO groups going to these
communities for them to think of a social enterprise.
Social enterprises are businesses in the market to fulfill social aims, bringing together
people and communities together for economic development and social gain.
We want to create an innovation award in best practice and/or idea for social enterprise
in the transport sector.
- Planning : November-December 2011
19. - Launching : January 2012
- Call for Nominations : February – March 2012
- Presentation at Rio Summit: May 2012
Characteristics:
- Enterprise-oriented involvement
- Explicit social aims (e.g. job creation, training, provision of local services)
- Social ownership (autonomous organizations with governance and ownership based on
participation by stakeholder groups or trustees)
The project team will create a website to encourage interaction among stakeholders and as a
resource facility to allow people to get what they need.
Highlighted that the project is owned by all the stakeholders, not just by ASoG-iBoP Asia or
Rockefeller Foundation.
17. Dr. La Viña gave the synthesis and ways forward.
He emphasized that these issues are solvable and
requires a vision even though it may take time and
focus. That this is not only the project of ASoG.
The team wanted to engage with all stakeholders as
we move along. There are interesting initiatives
going on in the public and private sector.
Moreover, the levels of interest to solve the issues
we are dealing with in terms of transportation are
very high. We want to keep moving this forward
and faster. Dr. La Viña emphasized that in a city like
Metro Manila, he believes in ―mosaic‖ version of
change, do changes where possible then connect
the dots. This project is only a starting point of
work that has to be done. Dr. La Viña thanked
everyone for coming.
18. For the Closing Remarks, Atty. Alu Dorotan read
the message from Chairman Francis Tolentino of
MMDA. He congratulated the organizers –the
Ateneo School of Government. He also
commended the Rockefeller Foundation for
supporting new learning and delivering services for
the Filipino and conveys his appreciation for making
Metro Manila the subject of study and for giving
MMDA the chance to participate in this worthwhile
undertaking. Above photo: Dr. La Viña giving synthesis and ways forward
Chairman Tolentino expressed that this is very Below photo: Atty. Dorotan of MMDA reading the message
important project especially for MMDA since Metro from Chairman Francis Tolentino
Manila is facing lots of challenges. With the
increasing rate of urban development, many factors
affect the delivery of services particularly in the area of transport. This study will provide new
lessons in looking at transportation beyond infrastructure with the inclusion of the poor and the
vulnerable. It will provide a human face, which is a very important factor in transport management.
19. The Inception Meeting ended at around 3:00 in the afternoon.
21. CATALYZING NEW MOBILITY IN CITIES: The Case of Metro Manila
Inception Meeting
27 October 2011 | Topaz 2 Gateway Suites, 4th Floor Gateway Mall, Araneta Center, Cubao, Quezon City
Email Address/
Name Designation Organization
Contact Information
Asinas, Rodney PDO Makati City Hall rdneyasns@gmail.com
Bathan-Baterina, Glynda Tpolicy & Partnership Manager CAI-Asia Glynda.bathan@cai-asia.org
Bautista, Herbert Mayor Quezon City mhmbqc@yahoo.com
Bercilla, Jessica Consultant Ateneo School of Government jbercilla@gmail.com
Buencamino, Victor Gen. Manager Ortigas Center Association +63 2 631 7212
Caleda, Mary Jean Assistant Dean Ateneo School of Government mj.caleda@gmail.com
Camarillo, Ernesto Transport Consultant Makati LGU ernlcam@yahoo.com
Carreon, Randolph Transportation Economist randolphcarreon@gmail.com
Comandao, Armando, City Planning and Development Mandaluyong LGU
armandocomandao@yahoo.com
Officer
Cordova, Lorenzo Jr. Ateneo School of Government lorenzojr.cordova@gmail.com
de la Peña, Benjamin Associate Director Urban Development, The
randolphcarreon@gmail.com
Rockefeller Foundation
Diaz, Jennifer Chief, Engineering TOD Quezon City Government BdelaPena@rockfound.org
Duran, Anna Field Coordinator OCM Office of the City Mayor
Faulan, Ma. Josefina Director MMDA-OAGMP mdps_mmda@yahoo.com
Gison, Michael PO V MMDA +63 2 882-4151 to 77 loc. 280
22. Gonzalez, Yves Director III & OIC TDO MMDA zz@mmda.gov.ph
Gotangco, Kendra Program Manager, Klima Climate Manila Observatory
manila@observatory.ph
Center
Guillaume, Marion Intern iBoP Asia, ASoG Marion.guillaume@gmail.com
Guillen, Marie Danielle Program Manager iBoP Asia-New Mobility Project danielle.guillen@gmail.com>
Ibrahim, Amira Associate The Rockefeller Foundation AIbrahim@rockfound.org
Japson, Ma. Corazon Supervising Transportation DOTC
corajap@yahoo.com
Development Officer
La Viña, Antonio Dean Ateneo School of Government tonylavs@gmail.com
Laluna, Christian Ateneo School of Government allycrislna@yahoo.com
Lopez, Eriq Chief Staff Quezon City Government
Marcaida, Jaime City Transport & Development Marikina
Office
Marin, Michael City Transport & Development Marikina
Michael_om020380@yahoo.com
Office
Martinez, Al Ateneo School of Government
Medalla, Aly Councilor Quezon City alymedalla@yahoo.com
Nilo-Fulo, Marien Project Officer Ateneo School of Government Marien_nilo@yahoo.com
Ocampo, Danny Director Ateneo Center for Social
Ocampo_d@yahoo.com
Entrepreneurship
Palarca, Coryell Legislative Staff Quezon City Council Coryell_palarca@yahoo.com
Quesada, Noi Director GK Ateneo noiquesada@yahoo.com
Rabe, Corazon Office Assistant ASoG csrabe@ateneo.edu
Regidor, Jose Regin Director UP NCTS Up.ncts@gmail.com
Romero, Segundo Program Director iBoP Asia Program doyromero@yahoo.com
23. Sanchez, Mario Asst. Head Quezon City Government
Santos, Esther President PLDT-Smart santosesther@gmail.com
Santos, Mary Grace Program Manager iBoP Asia-UNIID Project mgpalaciosantos@yahoo.com
Santos, Tieza Asst. Director Ateneo Center for Social
tiezasantos@yahoo.com
Entrepreneurship
Tan, Salvador Sr. Div. Mgr. Ayala Land, Inc. tan.buddy@ayalaland.com.ph
Ubaldo, Virgilio TFB Quezon City Hall virgilioubaldo@rocketmail.com
Victorino, Punie OCM Quezon City
Zielinski, Susan Managing Director SMART Centre, University of
susanz@umich.edu
Michigan
Aliliran, Karen Documenter Ateneo School of Government
24. ANNEX 2
The Rockefeller Foundation and
the Catalyzing New Mobility in Cities Search
30. 11/29/2011
The World’s Megacities
1. Tokyo-Yokohama, Japan - 33,200,000 1. Tokyo, Japan - 34,100,000
2. New York, United States - 17,800,000 2. Mexico City, Mexico - 22,650,000
3. Sao Paulo, Brazil - 17,700,000 3. Seoul, South Korea - 22,250,000
4. Seoul-Incheon, South Korea - 17,500,000 4. New York, United States - 21,850,000
5. Mexico City, Mexico - 17,400,000 5. Sao Paulo, Brazil - 20,200,000
6. Osaka-Kobe-Kyoto, Japan - 16,425,000 6. Mumbai, India - 19,700,000
7. Manila, Philippines - 14,750,000 7. Delhi, India - 19,500,000
8. Mumbai, India (formerly Bombay) - 14,350,000 8. Los Angeles, United States - 17,950,000
9. Jakarta, Indonesia - 14,250,000 9. Shanghai, China - 17,900,000
10. Lagos, Nigeria - 13,400,000 10. Jakarta, Indonesia - 17,150,000
11. Kolkata, India (formerly Calcutta) - 12,700,000 11. Osaka, Japan - 16,800,000
12. Delhi, India - 12,300,000 12. Kolkata, India - 15,550,000
13. Cairo, Egypt - 12,200,000 13. Cairo, Egypt - 15,450,000
14. Los Angeles, United States - 11,789,000 14. Manila, Philippines - 14,850,000
15. Buenos Aires, Argentina - 11,200,000 15. Karachi, Pakistan - 14,100,000
16. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil - 10,800,000 16. Moscow, Russia - 13,750,000
17. Moscow, Russia - 10,500,000 17. Buenos Aires, Argentina - 13,400,000
18. Shanghai, China - 10,000,000 18. Dhaka, Bangladesh - 13,100,000
19. Karachi, Pakistan - 9,800,000 19. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil - 12,100,000
20. Paris, France – 9,645,000 20. Beijing, China - 11,950,000
Source: Demographia. Source: Th. Brinkhoff: The Principal Agglomerations of the World
6
35. 11/29/2011
Bogota
This is a good thing
Urbanization and growth go together: no country
has ever reached middle income status without
a significant population shift into cities.
Urbanization is necessary to sustain
(though not necessarily drive) growth in developing
countries, and it yields other benefits as well.
But it is not painless or always welcomed by
policymakers or the general public.
Urbanization and Growth
World Bank Growth Commission 2009
11
36. 11/29/2011
70%
Cities’ share of the global economy
12
37. 11/29/2011
“Cities don’t make people poor.
Cities attract poor people.
They attract poor people
because they deliver things
that people need most of all
— economic opportunity.”
Triumph of the City, Ed Glaeser
London mid 1800s
13
40. 11/29/2011
Meanwhile back in our Mega City…
2.1% of total land area of the country
30% of the national economy
PhP1,933.04 billion GRDP (2005)
Every square kilometer in Metro Manila
produced more than $3B/year in 2005
16
42. 11/29/2011
If Metro Manila is the engine
of economic opportunity…
Insanity is doing
the same thing
over and over again
and expecting
different results.
Albert Einstein
18
43. 11/29/2011
Myths of decongestion
“Let’s move people out of the city.”
(mainly the poor)
What does a “decongesting”
city look like?
19
45. 11/29/2011
Myths of decongestion
“Let’s create alternative growth
centers to relieve the pressure on
Metro Manila.”
-ß
R=αS
The problem of Zipf’s Law
Rank-Size Distribution for Cities
21
46. 11/29/2011
Myths of decongestion
“We need more roads to
to relieve traffic congestion.”
22
47. 11/29/2011
Myths of decongestion
“We need more mass transit
to relieve traffic congestion.”
Source: colorfulrag
23
48. 11/29/2011
For every complex problem,
there is a solution that
is clear, simple, and wrong.
H.L. Mencken
67,000 jeepneys
10,754 buses
61,173 tricycles
1.47 million private vehicles
24
49. 11/29/2011
If gas was severely restricted to
5% of the existing supply
would you allocate it to
public or private transport?
25
50. 11/29/2011
Metro Manila Land Use distribution
44.83% residential
12.22% commercial
7.62% industrial
6.90% institutional
28.43% open spaces, parks and roads
Reasons to be optimistic
26
51. 11/29/2011
Cities are 100 year projects
100 years – Burnham’s plan for Chicago
50 years to clean up the Thames
30 years to make Copenhagen the
biking capital of the world
The pedestrian is the indicator
species for livable and
sustainable communities.
Harriet Tregoning
Chief Planner, Washington D.C.
27
53. ANNEX 3
Connecting the Dots and
International Perspectives in New Mobility
54. 11/29/2011
CONNECTING
THE
DOTS
(getting underway:
revealing the New Mobility Grid
and spurring innovation,
economic vitality, and
livability for Metro Manila)
Susan Zielinski, SMART, University of Michigan.
October 27, 2011, Manila Philippines
DRIVERS
1
55. 11/29/2011
ZIPCAR: Wheels When You
Need Them
services
FRACTIONAL USE: AUTO RICKSHAWS, TAXIS & COMMUNAL
CABS, INTERMEDIATE VEHICLES, CARSHARE, BIKE
SHARE, SOCIAL NETWORKING, SLUGGING
2
56. 11/29/2011
new technology
wayfinding; shared
use; fare payment;
traffic management;
security etc.
Design & new
infrastructure
3
59. 11/29/2011
VEOLIA Video
CONNECTIVITY/OPTIMIZATIO
CONNECTIVITY / OPTIMIZATION
N
(both energy & time)
• spatial *
• spatial / physical
• service (use vs. own)
• technological (wayfind; fare pay; traffic manage; security)
• economic (revitalize; save $; create jobs; boost business)
• institutional & policy
(public private innovation)
• cultural / psychological (moving minds)
6
60. 11/29/2011
LIVING LABS:
Bangalore
Cape Town
Chennai
Cochin
Detroit Region
Los Angeles
Manila
Mexico City
Mystic
Pasadena
Portland
Seattle
Shanghai
Washington DC
Lisbon / Coimbra / Porto
Etc…
Connecting the Dots; Moving Money; Moving Minds
RESEARCH, EDUCATION, TECH TRANSFER: ACCELERATE IMPLEMENTATION
LIVING LABS:
Bangalore
Cape Town
Chennai
Cochin
Detroit Region
Los Angeles
Manila
Mexico City
Mystic
Pasadena
Portland
Seattle
Shanghai
Washington DC
Lisbon / Coimbra / Porto
Etc…
Connecting the Dots; Moving Money; Moving Minds
RESEARCH, EDUCATION, TECH TRANSFER: ACCELERATE IMPLEMENTATION
7
61. 11/29/2011
PARTNERS & SPONSORS:
National Science Foundation
Center for South Asian Studies
Transportation Research Board
Rockefeller Foundation
Mott Foundation
FIA Foundation
Alcoa Foundation
Ford Motor (redefining)
US Environmental Protection Agency
Cisco Systems
IBM
Federal Highway Administration
U.S. Department of Education
CEO’s for Cities
City Connect Chennai
Confederation of Indian Industry
etc…
GAME CHANGE 4.0: SEAMLESSLY CONNECTED OPTIONS
LEAPFROG: Straight to Next Generation Whole Systems Design & Build
- spatial connectivity supported by New Technologies and PPI
NEW MOBILITY GRID: More Choices, More Connected
The Next Infrastructure; The Next Industry Cluster
8
62. 11/29/2011
Transportation Meetings
0:00 1:40 1:50 2:00
Agenda: WHAT IS NOT WORKING
Solutions Laundry List
Quick attempts at prioritization
Adjourn
Attendees: Usual Suspects
A heart? A lung? Pituitary gland? Your choice
What is better? What is the silver bullet?
I only use my heart I’m too rich and powerful to use my capillaries
9
63. 11/29/2011
ROLLING OUT THE GRID: 4 STEPS
1. CONVENING – The Crucial & Often Under-Rated First Step
(not just the usual suspects – public private innovation
2. MAPPING – An Engaging and Tangible Catalyst for Action
3. PILOTING & ROLL-OUT – Start with Hologram for Wider Spread
Roll-Out
4. MOVING MINDS – Speak a new language (Rumi, Philip K. Dick)
5. NETWORK (SMART network – “twinning” for shared genius)
CONVENING
10
64. 11/29/2011
MAPPING
and
PILOTING
Washington, DC
Ann Arbor, Michigan
CHENNAI:
Linking design, value
capture, cycles, auto
rickshaws, pedestrians,
local business & new
technologies (e.g.
Mapunity, Cisco, Ashok,
thru CII)
11
65. 11/29/2011
COCHIN (quiet leapfrog)
Links train, metro, bus, ferry, auto, taxi, parking, 2 wheelers & cycles
Linked to commercial, entertainment, tourism, lifestyle
70% of people need not enter city (larger hubs gateways to grid of smaller hubs)
Transform economy & lifestyle
Sustainable – supported by real estate elements
Mexico City
12
66. 11/29/2011
CAPE TOWN – entrepreneurial ventures, way-finding,
workplaces, public-private innovation, moving minds
Moving
Minds
Did Philip K. Dick predict or shape the future?
13
67. 11/29/2011
SYSTEM OF SYSTEMS: CHANGES THE GAME
Connects Mode Service Product Technology Design
Door to Door (feeds trunk, focused on user)
Scalable / incremental / ALL YESES / induces demand
For all shapes & sizes of communities & regions
Short term / long term (not land use / policy dependent)
Appealing (design, cool status) & Safe & Equitable
Resilient & Robust (to climate / geopolitical challenges)
Business, Innovation, Job Opportunities
(New Mobility Industry Cluster Multi-Billion $)
NEW MOBILITY ECONOMIC BENEFITS
Saves Money
Creates Jobs
Boosts Business
Revitalizes Local Economy
14
68. 11/29/2011
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
& WIRELESS
CLEAN ENERGY E- BUSINESS
& NEW MEDIA
TRANSPORTATION INFORMATION
EQUIPMENT TECHNOLOGY
FINANCIAL SERVICES,
TOURISM
BAN KING &
INVESTMENT
NEW MOBILITY & RETAIL
INDUSTRY
TRANSPORTATION
GEOMATICS OPERATIONS
& SERVICES
REAL ESTATE
CONSTRUCTION, GOODS MOVEMENT
PLANNING & & SUPPLY CHAIN
INTELLIGENT MANAGEMENT
OPERATIONS
TRANSPORTATION
SYSTEMS
15
69. 11/29/2011
NEW ROLES (AND OPPORTUNTIES)
PUBLIC SECTOR – incentives to connectivity / systems
convening beyond the usual players / implementing,
integrative frameworks / platforms to boost innovation &
implementation. MOBILIZATION
PRIVATE SECTOR – public-private innovation (action
affects policy), new products, marketing New Mobility
culture PUBLIC PRIVATE INNOVATION
ACADEME – new models / tech transfer based on real
world contexts, understanding & advancing solutions (not
just problems). ACCELERATING IMPLEMENTATION
NGO’s – informing / new approaches, partnering,
engaging constituencies / implementing
METRO MANILA
What Dots Are Already Connected?
What dots can be easily connected?
What needs to be added
(locally and system wide)?
What benefits can be reaped? Social, ecological economic?
Who else should be at the table?
What policies, business models, marketing approaches can help
address the challenges?
When does the fun start?
16
70. 11/29/2011
THE TRANSFORMATION BEGINS:
STEP 1: NAME THE DOTS. ACCENTUATE THE POSITIVE
1 minute each
• Your Name
• Your effort / group
• The thing you’re most proud, happy, excited, hopeful about
• One other person / group you’d bring to the table
SMART CONNECTIONS:
• http://um-smart.org/blog or email me susanz@umich.edu
• Living Labs (in pilot communities & regions) & NETWORK
• Primer (Connecting & Transforming)
• Global Learning Community (education & capacity building)
• SMART Exchange collaborative tool -- smartumich.ning.com
• Business network
• Research collaborative
• Regular gatherings / summits of the “systems” network
17
71. ANNEX 4
Metropolitan Manila Transport and
Traffic Development and Management Program
75. No. of 85
terminals
in Metro
Manila
Terminals Sampaloc =29
clusters EDSA – Cubao = 26
EDSA – Pasay = 19
Buendia – Pasay=7
Monumento =4
No. of 60
provincial
bus
companies
No. of PUB 7,368
units
FRANCHISE UNIT
METRO MANILA CITY BUS 92 5,083
METRO MANILA PROVINCIAL BUS 653 6,999
SHUTTLE SERVICE 151 1,227
TAXI 236 14,038
TOURIST BUS 32 876
TOURIST CAR 20 1,575
TRUCK FOR HIRE 410 15,902
UTILITY VEHICLE 125 2,814
TOTAL 1,719 48,514
SOURCE: Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) Data Base
4
76. Northrail
MRT7
LRT 1 NORTH EXT (Closing the Loop).
MRT4 LRT2
MRT8
MRT3
LRT1
PROPOSED
EXISTING
h
PNR Northrail-Southrail Linkage Phase 1
nsio Sout
LRT Line 2 (Caloocan-Alabang, 34 km)
Exte Line I
PNR Line
n
LRT Line 1
PNR Northrail-Southrail Linkage Phase 2
LRT
Metro Star (Alabang-Calamba, 27 km)
PARTICULAR LRT 1 LRT 2 MRT 3 PNR
(including the (Mega Tren) (Metro Star)
line 1/MRT 3
Loop)
No. of Light Rail 111 LRVs 13 train sets 73 LRVs 18 LRV
Vehicles (LRV)
(operational cars,
coaches or train sets)
Capacity per LRV, Car or 81 seated/293 232 seated/ 80 seated/ 194 seated/
Coach (passengers) standees 349 standees 314 standees 360 standees
Annual Ridership 155.91 Million 63.36 Million 153 Million 9.138 Million
(2010) (2010) (2010) (2009)
Daily Average Ridership 427,151 172,850 420,482 397,989
(2010) (2010) (2010) (2009)
SOURCE: Department of Transportation and Communication
5
77. SOURCE: Department of Transportation and Communication
Non Fatal Damage to Grand
Month Fatal
Injury Property Total
January 33 1,266 4,780 6,079
February 24 1,309 4,830 6,163
March 32 1,296 5,156 6,484
April 31 1,185 4,821 6,037
May 30 1,164 5,037 6,231
June 34 1,120 4,960 6,114
July 42 1,298 5,642 6,982
August 37 1,355 5,405 6,797
September 34 1,244 5,294 6,572
October 25 1,170 5,265 6,460
November 27 1,269 4,799 6,095
December 31 1,143 5,465 6,639
Grand Total 380 14,853 61,705 76,938
SOURCE: Metro Manila Accident Reporting and Analysis System (MMARAS)
6
78. Non Fatal Damage to Grand
Month Fatal
Injury Property Total
January 34 1,397 4,717 6,148
February 35 1,218 4,508 5,561
March 34 1,385 5,134 6,553
April 30 1,230 4,329 5,589
May 30 1,091 4,274 5,395
Grand Total 168 6,321 22,962 29,446
SOURCE: Metro Manila Accident Reporting and Analysis System (MMARAS)
Non Fatal Damage to
Fatal Grand Total
Month Injury Property
2010 2011 2010 2011 2010 2011 2010 2011
January 0 0 8 2 28 11 36 13
February 1 0 35 24 106 60 142 84
March 2 2 26 27 111 74 139 103
April 0 0 24 32 93 80 117 112
May 1 1 18 19 42 49 61 69
Grand
4 3 118 104 380 274 495 381
Total
SOURCE: Metro Manila Accident Reporting and Analysis System (MMARAS)
7
79. 2010 2011
TYPE OF
PERSON
INVOLVED KILLED INJURED TOTAL KILLED INJURED TOTAL
DRIVER 0 66 66 0 62 62
PASSENGER 1 41 42 1 81 82
PEDESTRIAN 3 21 24 2 20 22
TOTAL 4 128 132 3 163 166
SOURCE: Metro Manila Accident Reporting and Analysis System (MMARAS)
NO PHYSICAL CONTACT APPREHENSION ALONG COMMONWEALTH AVENUE
period coverage (January 26 to April 10, 2011)
VIOLATION BUS PRIVATE PUJ TAXI TOTAL
1 PUV LANE ORDINANCE 11,636 0 29 1 11,666
2 LOADING/UNLOADING IN 991 0 1 5 997
PROHIBITED ZONE
3 RECKLESS DRIVING 16 0 0 0 16
4 ILLEGAL PARKING 0 1 0 1 2
(NOT TOWED)
5 OPEN DOOR POLICY 130 0 0 0 130
6 OVERSPEEDING 452 648 9 235 1,344
7 OBSTRUCTION 3 0 0 0 3
TOTAL 13,228 649 39 242 14,158
No. of Summon/Citation mailed = 10,422
8
80. COLORUM
MONTH PERCENT INCREASE /
2010 2011
DECREASE
JANUARY 55 188 242%
FEBRUARY 78 88 13%
MARCH 89 172 93%
APRIL 56 84 50%
MAY 65 --- ---
JUNE 53 --- ---
JULY 132 --- ---
AUGUST 248 --- ---
SEPTEMBER 209 --- ---
OCTOBER 129 --- ---
NOVEMBER 168 --- ---
DECEMBER 141 --- ---
TOTAL 1,423 532
1. Obstructions and illegal structures along the
carriageways
2. Outmoded traffic signal system
3. Poor road condition
4. Inadequate public transport
5. Vehicular and pedestrian accidents
6. Low or weak enforcement of transport and
traffic related-laws/regulations, and
7. Lack of discipline and poor road behavior
9
82. ● Establishment of the Mega Manila Provincial Integrated Bus
Axis System (MM-PIBAS)
● Development of Airport Tram System
● Installation of Intelligent Transport System
● Development of alternative modes of transport
• Installation of road signs and markings following
international standards
• Construction of rotundas
• Landscaping and beautification
11
83. ● Construction of short span left-turn fly-over
Possible Sites:
1.MIA Road –
Domestic Road
2.Roxas Boulevard
– MIA Road
3. North Avenue –
Mindanao Avenue
● Replacement of high-pressure sodium streetlights to
energy - efficient LED lights
12
