Curing Metro Manilas Cancer of Traffic

Traffic congestion has long been known to be one of the leading problems faced
by Filipinos within the metro. Almost every day, commuters would have their fair share
of traffic blockage by which to some extent seems endless. For some people if not all I
might add, time is actually valued and it is something not exactly worth wasting on
traffic jams. So, would we allow ourselves to be toyed around by traffic clogging for
eternity? I therefore propose that the government should enforce a law regarding the
road pricing on a certain type of vehicle: the private ones, seeing that they along with
their users encompass majority of the culprits behind Metro Manilas traffic congestion.
According to Eliasson and Lundberg (2002) road pricing is actually normally used for
systems with the main objective to reduce traffic congestion by allocating the traffic to
other less congested alternative routes and hours (p. 6) and I for one deem that it will
somehow draw an end to Metro Manilas problem of traffic obstruction.
According to several authors, the implementation of present alleviations dont
actually mitigate but instead invite further congestion thus suggesting the failure of the
governments means to address the problem of traffic congestion. This also suggests the
need to implement effective new laws. For instance, an article stressed that there are
only 2 alternatives in solving the problem of traffic congestion: spend billions on
increasing road capacity but with only a short term effect, or start enforcing laws that
are supposed to be enforced at present (Traffic Solutions, 2012). Sure enough we would
want the most convenient and efficient choice, enforcing new laws. Meanwhile another
article mentioned We can all but take stock of the sad futility in the governments lousy
efforts to solve Metro Manilas traffic mess. U-turn slots, counter flow systems, more

roads, more flyovers, truck bans, truck lanes, and odd-even schemes; all of these quaint
measures to solve traffic are examples of Filipinos small-minded approach to solving
its problems (Why Metro Manilas, 2014). In addition, another article introduced the
phenomenon of triple convergence which suggests that expanding the available
capacity for vehicles to occupy in the roads wont exactly solve traffic jams for the
volume of traffic would always expand in the long run to maximize the available capacity
(Traffic Solutions, 2012). Yes, the construction of more roads, flyovers and such do
decongest traffic but only for a short while; sooner or later the roads would be clogged
up once more thus making it a total waste of money, energy, and of course resources.
Another article then mentioned it is a fact that freeways provide some short term
relief, but within a short time, the extra road capacity generates more traffic than there
was before. In the long run, freeways just allow congestion to grow further: they dont
reduce it (Myth: Freeways Relieve). And finally, Santiago mentioned that the number
or color coding scheme implemented by the government only pushed households to buy
an extra car to use alternately thus defeating the purpose of reducing traffic congestion.
Before the government plans to start wasting resources they should probably think
twice; their present mitigations are not the answers.
Although some mitigations help worsen the problem of traffic congestion, some
probably have contributed to the decongestion of Metro Manilas traffic but
unfortunately werent sufficient enough to let traffic flow smoothly; two of which would
be the very famous Light Rail Transits (LRTs) and Metro Rail Transits (MRTs). As a
commuter myself, I have observed that the LRTs and MRTs are also often very
congested thus entailing that a lot commute via the LRTs and MRTs however at the

same time traffic is still also very congested. These were enforced but as per observation,
the level of traffic obstruction is still pretty high thus implying that these solutions are
not yet enough to suffice solving one of Metro Manilas huge problems of traffic
blockage.
Several authors support the idea of road pricing and even suggest that it is the
most effective way to solve traffic congestion. For instance, Santiago coined pricing to be
the forgotten lever and mentioned that it would be the most effective and efficient way
to solve the problem of traffic congestion. Meanwhile Beatrice Schell, the director of
T&E, quoted that road pricing has long been promoted and suggested by transport
economists to solve traffic congestion in big cities. In another perspective, a study noted
that the potential for road pricing in solving the problems of congestion in the streets of
Metro Manila is very promising (Galiza and Sigua, 1999, p. 36) and thus if
implemented correctly would surely decongest Metro Manilas traffic. And finally, a
study conducted by Schneider and Weimann stressed that road pricing aims to reduce
time loss resulting from road congestion and promises a reduction of traffic congestion
when implemented (p. 134). Furthermore, road pricing should be implemented for it
proves to be effective in solving the problem of traffic congestion.
In addition to improving the condition of traffic congestion, road pricing also
provides positive effects to the society in many other aspects. This suggests that aside
from being the upmost effective way to solve Metro Manilas traffic problem, road
pricing may also deem worthy to be called an efficient practice. According to Eliasson
and Lundberg (2002) road pricing has 2 main purposes namely traffic management and
financing, and the latter further branches out to other positive outcomes (p. 8). The

revenue from road pricing can be used to fund projects such as the improvement of
public infrastructures, scholarship programs, and the like. For instance, a study stressed
that the overall economic effect of road pricing is likely to be positive as long as the tax
revenues are recycled into the economy (Lijesen, Hoen, and Verhoef, p. 16).
Meanwhile, Galiza and Sigua (1999) stressed that road pricing exhibits potential in the
generation of funds for other infrastructure projects (p.36). In addition, road pricing
may also offer positive effects to the environment for it reduces disturbances such as
emissions and noise brought about by traffic. Road pricing discourages the use of
private cars (Galiza and Sigua (1999), p. 36) thus implying lesser vehicles on the roads
upon its implementation. Lesser vehicles result to a cleaner environment and the
promotion of walking and biking to reach a certain destination thus the promotion of a
healthy lifestyle among Filipinos. With these at hand road pricing should be
implemented in Metro Manila for it not only effectively addresses the problem of traffic
congestion but also efficiently provides other advantages to the society.
Traffic congestion has definitely taken its place in the daily lives of people and I
doubt that it would remove itself without the proper mitigations. We should start
thinking efficiently and true enough with everything discussed, imposing road pricing
on private vehicles is the most effective and efficient way to address the problem. The
government should open their eyes and must enforce road pricing for the betterment of
Metro Manila.