Babe's Eye View article

Every year, traffic in Metro Manila gets worse with vehicles moving at a frustratingly slow turtle’s pace, compounded today by the sweltering 95 degree heat. Accidents happen regularly because of clogged three-lane roads accommodating vehicles crammed four-deep, with drivers trying to overtake at every opportunity.

Add to that, the pollution from unmoving vehicles spewing toxic fumes and you have a potent combination guaranteed to raise one’s blood pressure to sky-high levels. Aside from decongesting traffic, we really need to decongest the pollution from our lungs.

Traffic congestion is a problem that not only affects Metro Manila, but other big cities in the world. In New York, Mayor Michael Bloomberg has come out with an ambitious plan to decongest traffic and reduce pollution levels in America’s largest city. Called "congestion pricing," the plan would charge passenger cars $8 and trucks $21 a day for entering the busiest area in Manhattan during weekdays from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. Exempted from paying are taxis, emergency vehicles and those with handicapped plates.

Bloomberg believes congestion pricing can prevent the city from choking on its own fumes and help it cope with climate change, making New York the cleanest and greenest city by 2030. As early as 2005, a group of New York businessmen had been pushing for congestion pricing to ease the flow of traffic and speed up the crawling pace of vehicles, which would reduce the financial cost of delays and improve air quality in the city.

The idea of congestion pricing is not really new, and has been used in several cities to cut traffic in busy districts. The idea is for people to know when they should take mass transportation or reschedule trips to avoid paying higher fees for driving through busy streets during so-called peak hours.

London implemented congestion pricing in 2003 to stop the traffic gridlocks that were affecting the city’s economic competitiveness. The scheme successfully reduced congestion by 30 percent; increased the traffic speed by 37 percent; and reduced carbon dioxide emissions by 20 percent.

Actually, Singapore is acknowledged as the pioneer in congestion pricing—implementing it as far back as 1975—when it charged a flat rate of S$3 for vehicles to enter the central business district during morning rush hours. This produced quick results, cutting traffic by almost 50 percent and reducing accidents by 25 percent in the central district.

This was later modernized to allow for flexibility by charging different toll rates at different times of the day, depending on the traffic build up. Every three months, officials review toll levels to ensure the smooth flow of traffic. Of course, Singapore is a small city so, officials can easily control the flow of traffic—charging high taxes for luxury vehicles.

All of these have increased the use of public transportation by 65 percent, with traffic speeding up by as much as 21 mph. But most important of all, the reduction of vehicles on the road has improved the air quality in Singapore with the significant reduction of carbon dioxide emissions and other air pollutants.

Metro Manila can emulate the example of Singapore and other cities to drastically reduce the number of vehicles that are clogging its streets, and encourage the use of mass transport systems like the MRT and the LRT. According to the LTO, there are 5.3 million vehicles registered in the country, and more than 1.5 million of those are in the metropolis. According to the Department of Health, vehicular accidents have become the fourth leading cause of death in this country.

A study by the World Health Organization and the UN Environment Program (UNEP) cites Manila as one of the 20 cities where serious health risks are increasing due to air pollution. According to the DOH, motor vehicles, especially buses account for 80 percent of pollution in the country, with 4,000 Filipinos dying every year because of air pollution. Add to this, the $400 million lost each year because of health costs due to air pollution-related diseases.

But the economic costs could be higher if one factors in the value of wasted opportunity and productivity because of time lost in traffic, added expenses for fuel and vehicle maintenance, costs incurred due to vehicular accidents and sometimes, the brawls and fights over traffic altercations between hot-headed drivers.

After the May elections, maybe the next batch of congressmen and senators can come out with good and do-able legislation that can really solve the perpetual problem of traffic congestion in Metro Manila. Sure winner Loren Legarda was one of the authors of the Clean Air Act and is a staunch environmental advocate. She should work with MMDA chairman Bayani Fernando and the LTO to conduct studies that would determine traffic patterns and find out which areas can be decongested at particular hours and days.

The "number coding" scheme is fast becoming obsolete. There has got to be a more creative and bold program to decongest traffic and improve the quality of air in Metro Manila perhaps similar to the "congestion pricing" initiated by New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg.

No doubt, a move like this will receive resistance especially from those with shortsighted vision—not realizing that long-term effects outweigh the initial inconvenience that congestion pricing may entail.

In the long run, this could solve the problem of air pollution and bring in revenue that can be used for the construction and maintenance of better roads and highways that could finally help decongest the infernal traffic of Metro Manila—a city that will be uninhabitable if nothing is done soon about the gridlocked traffic and the worsening air pollution.