Professional Documents
Culture Documents
fSSN 0115-8848
ABSTRACT
Metro Manila continuously experiences traffic congestion similar to growing
cities in Asia. Traffic congestion is noted to be a manifestation of inter-related urban
problems such as the influx of migrants from the provinces and local areas, overconcentration of economic, cultural and social activities in major urban areas, rapid
development and uncontrolled urbanization of urban areas, lack of public transportation
system, increasing growth in car ownership and usage, poor traffic management and
control schemes and lack of coordination among government agencies involved in
transportation and traffic and lack of strict enforcement.
This paper presents the current transportation and traffic situation in Metro
Manila and mitigating measures or schemes that are being implemented. as well as
those proposed to alleviate the impacts of traffic congestion. Among these are the 00Fixed Project, Do-Existing Project and Do-Maximum Project which cover existing
transport network, completing expressways, skyway and LRT/MRT lines, which should
be incorporated with city plans of the LGUs.
Key words: traffic congestions. sociological and economic impacts, mitigating
measures
INTRODUCTION
Like its neighboring growing metropolis in Asia, notably in the Southeast
Asian region, Metro Manila is continuously experiencing traffic congestion and
deteriorating transportation and traffic infrastructure facilities. It has been accepted that traffic congestion and deterioration of the conditions of traffic facili37
JI
ties are directly interrelated, Albeit this observation. it could also be noted that
traffic congestion is considered more as a manifestation problem.
Traffic congestion is a manifestation of the interrelatetl urban problems.
Notable of these urban issues are the following:
o The influx of migrants from tbe provinces and local areas;
o Over-concentration of economic, commercial. cultural and social
activities in major urban areas;
The above issues are considered as among the root causes of traffic congestion in an urban area. Thus, the mitigating measures to alleviate traffic congestion
require the understanding of the root problems. Technical solutions alone may
not alleviate traffic congestion. Given this. it should be important to understand
the root problems of traffic congestion as technical and in&titutional.
The gravity of the impacts of traffic congestion on urban areas is becoming
a serious concern not only to the government but also 10 the business sector and
the people. An unpublished report stated that the annual cost attributed to IIaftic
congestion is roughly 100 Billion Pesos I . The report also stated this may still be
undervalued due to a\'ct'clging. Apan from Ihis economic impact, traffic congestion also has social and environmental impacts.
Given the above background on traffic congestion. Ihis paper will present
tbe currenl transportation and traffic situation in Metro Manila and the mitigating
measures or schemes being implemented or proposed to alleviate the impacts of
traffic congestion. The paper is organized as follows: a) brief profile of Metro
Manila and its ex.isting transportation system, b) pressing transportation and traffic
concerns, c) mitigating schemeS being implemented or proposed, and d) concluding remarks. Most of the materials used for this paper come from the Metro
Manila Uman Transportation Integration Study (MMUTlS) of DOTC and a paper
prepared on traffic for NAST.
LidizSOII
39
.a
Area
Population
('000)
Growth
1980-1995
1980
1995
2015
95/80
9,454
4,914
13 ,157
12,563
2.0
14,368
25 , 7~0
1.7
1995-2015
1.6
3.2
4.8
3.7
1.4
2.6
1.8
1.7
4.8
3.0
Population Density
(persons/hectare)
Area
Metro Manila
Adjoining Areas
TOTAL
1980
!995
2015
99
8
22
158
[5
38
220
38
68
f ~~~
8,000,000
-6 000 000
- -- -- '
'
4,000,000 1== - - 2,000,000
-- ~-- - -,
jl
10,000,000
0.
--..1980
1990
Year
Figure 1. Population Trend (1980-1995)
1995
Gruwtb
1~801995
('000)
1980
1995
1,709
1,44{)
5.,149
2,966
1,624
4,580
201$
95t80
~JYr.
1995-2015
1015195 o/01'\'r.
Employm~nl
Source:
3,815
3,()28
9,443
l.l
.n.a.
n .u~.
School Enrolment
4,J67 2.0
4,227
8,394
5,0
L6
n.a.
n.a.
2.5
1.8
1.3
4.7
3.1
4.7
i.4
liJL
n.a.
2.9
n.a.
LLa.
1.8
11
L5
MMUTtlll'a~tbook , . J998
Usln.g the database from the Metro Manila tirban Transpor:tU:ion Integration
Smdy (MMUnS) Person Trip Survey conducted in 1996 with a sample household
size .of 50,500 .and additi(IIllll 8,0()() huuschol; in the adjoining areas, some
41
Adjoining Areas
MMUTlS PT Survey
9,454
1.988
4.8
4,914
1,002
4.9
14,368
2,990
4.8
Population ('000)
No. of HHs ('000)
Ave. HH Size
I ,440
100.0%
l.l%
22.9%
76.0%
118
440
882
8.2
30.6
61.3
Primary
Secondary
Tertiary
39
851
2,818
5,146 100.0%
156
1,291
3,699
3.0
25.1
71.9
Enrolment ('000)2.966
100.0%
1,624
100.0%
4,589
100.0%
1,696
1,270
100.0%
42.8%
1,624
6l4
100.0%
39.0
4,589
1,903
100.0%
41.5%
Pupil
Student
Car Ownership
59
212
16.9
45
7l9
18.7
54
11,760
6.5
9.740
1.2.8
11,090
8.7
527
J 9.7
Household Income
Ave. (Peso/month)
% HHs below Poverty
Line
'no./000 pop'n.
Note: Employment and enrolment areal workplace and school place respectively
SQurce: MMl.TTlS l'aclbook, 1998
YEAR
Private
For Hire
TOTAL
1980
391,178
55,964
446,142
1990
1990
623,498 928,381
61,280 127,3ll
684,778 1,055,692
1995/19980
%/Yr.
2.0
2.3
2.4
4.7
5.6
5.9
LiJIISIIII
43
The structure of car ownership is given in Table S and it shows the significant
increase in car ownership in Metro Manila from 9.5% in 1980 to !9.7% in 1996.
However, there was no notable increase in the average number of cars per car
owning household and the percentage of multiple car owning households in Metro
Manila. This would imply that there was no cbange in the structure of car ownership
in Metro Manila.
Table 5. Car Ownership Structure
Metro Manila
Adjoining Areas
YEAR
1980
1996
1996
9.5
19.7
16.9
I,4
19.0
1.3
20.1
1.2
13.3
Predicting the car ownership for year 2015, it is ex peeted thai there will be a
sharp and significant increase (Table 6). This is perceived to be attributed to the
rise in income level and population. The MMUTIS Study estimated that the
number of cars in year 2015 is slightly more than 2,12 million. This is almost
tripled the current number. Lili.ewise, tbe future growth of car ownership in the
adjoining areas is significant. This is an indication of the movement of people
from the metropolis to the adjoining areas.
Table 6. Car Ownership Forecast in Metro Mllllila
Area
1996
2015
201511996
Metro Manila
Adjoining Areas
TOTAL
527
212
1,()47
1,072
2,119
2.0
5.1
2.9
Metro Manila
Adjoining Areas
TOTAL
56
43
80
51
S2
L4
2.0
1.6
No. of Vehicles
(' 000)
739
~5
4t
City
vehiclesfkm
Jakarta
Bangkok
Kuala Lum!)ur
Hong Kong
840
695
620
266
Singapor~"
214
Meuo Manila*"
352
Source:
19~5
Transportation System
The present land tronspoi'Ultion system of the metropolis is supported by
major infrllstructure systems of roads and railways. The m;Jjor roads arc charac
terized mainly as ~,;ircumferential {presently at 5) and radial (I 0). The total length
of roads is at 3,425.3 kms. Oftbese, 47% are city roads, 28% national roads, 17%
municipal roads, R% barangay roads and a very small 0. I% private roads.
The only two raJiway lines of the country are found in 1\<letro Manila: the
Philippine National Railways (PNR) und the Light Rail Transit (LRT) system.
The fom1cr consists of lines servicing not only the metmpolis but atsQ connects
the area with the adjacent province$ on the north and on the south, On th.e otlwr
hand. the LRT sys1em, with l& stations has been operating on a single corridor
since 1985. The LRT system has been si.gnilicamly contributing tO the improvement of the trnffic sitlllltion in that corr[dor and has an e$timated sbare of about
3% of total trips by public transpon.
As for the dynamic component of land transportation, the following stiltistics show the existing numbor of yebic les serving both rrivate and public transport
users. Table 8.
In 1995, registered motor vehicles reached 1.06 million. Of this total, the
share of the private vehicles is ovc.rwhelmingly at 86.14% followed f:tr behind by
vehicles for hire at 12.06%, !lnd government \'t>hiclcs nt 1.22%. To illustrate the
aggregation of private cars in the metropolis, Figure 2 shmvs the share of the
metropolis in nut.ionaltoral.
Utility vehicles arc locally referred to as "jeepneys". These are the most
popular mode of public transport Ill Metro Man i Ia as they Jre cheap in fare and
provide access Jo nny part of the metropolis. They can only seat approximately 16
Uda:sun
4S
Year
Total
Private
Govl
For Hire
Othcrs 11
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
684,778
721,776
796,719
901,312
973,550
1.055,692
596.769
620,060
694.705
772,074
833,611
909,411
19,469
16,620
15.447
17,594
15.883
12.873
61,280
16,6ZO
7,260
78,203
3,702
6,054
6,968
6,097
Sn~n:c;
~-
82.865
105,590
117,088
127,31]
-.
~~ ~R
;F~rH~e_!'h~ -
.ForHireNCR
z..m.cro , - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - -- -
.um.cro
1 .~.cro
ll
'&
ci
z um,cro
19!11
1992
19!13
1994
Bul
'I
-=---
I1214IIQI
48
others
5%
22%
school
25%
Figure 4. Trip l'urposa Composition (Excl. "to home" and wulk trips)
Table lO below shows the modal sbare by trip purpose. lt is still evident that
majority of the people arc still dependent on !he public modes of transportation.
However, ~till from the table below it is also noticeable that there is a significant
percent:\ge of business trips using priv~te modes of transportation.
Table 10 Modal Share by Trip Purpose(%)
Trip Pwposc Private
To Home
Public
Car
16
22%
To Work
20
To School
25
43%
57%
10
10
21
24
14
16
34
24
24
13
14
3
80%
46
21
2
76
42
12
13
3
72%
18
20%
Private
39
78
28%
Business
1983
1996
Car
Jecpney
Bus
Taxi
Tricycle
42.8
34.7
43.4
56.3
77.9
34.4
13.6
55.5
18.1
53.0
1~98
hours are usually dominated by to school trips (between 6 and 7 A.M. and to work
trips (between 7 and 9 A.M). (MMUTIS Factbook, 1998)
In te:nns of travel demand by type of facilities (Table 12), residential and
educational facilities have the bulk of trips gencratcd and attracted. They ill'e
followed by wholesale and office facilities.
The MMUTIS Study has shown that there hl!S lx:en an intensifit:d movement
of people when it compared tbe distribution of travel demand between 191!0 and
1996. Most notable is the incre~se in trips outwards to the south, north and east.
The Study further noted that what used to be ~uburban areas outside of EDSA (the
major circumferential road traversing Metro Manila) in 1980 are alr~dy urbanized.
This observation further validated the increase in travel distance and rruvcl time in
the metropolis.
Similarly, the commerc-ial and business centers in Metro Manila vary in
character. The cities of Manila and Makati attract traffic from all over the mettopolts.
On the other hand, the EDSA area in Quezon City atttacts mostly those residing in
the northern half of Metro Manila. These observations indicate hat analysis of
area wide traffic characteristics will yield relevant information in formuluting traffic
and urban plan of municipalities. This is one of the major recommendations of the
MMUTJS Study. By establ~hing areawrdc database on transportation and tand
use will strongly put emp~is on an integrated lrans~rtatloniond use planmng
approach in alleviating transportation and traffic problems in Metro Manila.
50
'OOOTrips
Residential
Comme[cial
Office
Factory
Educational
Recreational
Medical
Social
Wholesale
Restaurant
Others
TOTAL
Sourc~:
Attraction
Generation
14,213
651
2,289
1,239
5,612
112
320
406
2,660
527
2,453
30,491
ooo Trips
46.6
2.1
7,5
4.1
t8.4
0.4
1.1
1.3
!1.7
1.7
8.0
100.0
14,238
46.7
642
2.1
2,260
1,231
5,670
112
314
408
2,655
7.4
4.0
18.6
0.4
1.0
1.3
8.7
1.7
8.0
100.0
513
2,447
30,491
MMUTIS Factbook
Ud4Si111
51
1995
1980
99,900
1995/1980
Total
Car/ Jeepncyl
Truck Bus
172,500
154,700
113,700
111,300
2.400
1.6
53.300
102,SOO
68,400
34,100
2.0
17.800
1.7
67.800
82.300
74,100
8.200
1.2
51,500
76,100
72,900
3,400
1.5
37,300
43,500
27,800
15,700
1.2
5l
Trant, Nat.
A~"
Sci. T~h .
Philippine~ 22:
(2000)
Mode
Ave. Occupllilc)L
!996
19%fl98)
1983
JC)96
1996/1983
Bus
56.3
77.9
1.38
39.7
30.0
),26
Jccpncy
34.7
43.4
1.25
10.3
1~.0
1.46
Tricycl
13.6
IJ
2.6
2.00
34.4
18.1
55.5
1.33
Taxi
1.61
2. I
2.2
1.05
Ave. Houdy
l\'1'1:1.
Total
Dday
Inc~,ml:
Cung~~tion
(hr_)
(Pcsll)
Cost (Peso)
Number
of Trip&
TotaJ
Cost
(Peso
Gov't Officials
0.63
93.75
29.3&
3,427,860
100,693,388
?rofessionals
0.69
187.50
65
1,460,326
94,921,190
Technicians
0.73
62.50
22.&6
853,063
19,504,930
Clerical Workers
0.72
50.00
17.&8
1.134,083
20,171,734
Service Workrs
0.61
62.50
19.05
2.194,432
41 ,793,262
Sowcc Economic Jm~acl ofTraftic Canges~ion m Metro Manila, Apnl200~ (an U!lp.ubJishcd n:oportl
Lidc.sun
S.l
54
Lidawn
55
b)
c)
d)
Aside from the PNR commuter rail, the introduction of a rail-based mass
transpo.rtation system in Metro Manila commenced with the construction of lRT
Line I. Now t~e construction of a network of LRTs becomes one of the priorities
of the government due to the entry of the private sector through the bwld-operatciransfer (BOT) scheme or its variants_6
The following are some of the TOM and TSM measures that .have been
applied or suggested in Metro Manila .to help aUeviate traffic congestion. 7
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
b)
i)
j)
One-way Scheme
Carpooling /Van-pan ling
Reversible Lane
Truck Routes
Staggerro and Flexible Work Hours
Flexible Work/School Days
Fare Surcharge
Improvement to Public Transport Services
Bus Lanes
Odd-Even Scheme
51 bid.
6tbid.
7Jbid.
.56
adopted wilhoul 5tudies to support them. For th.is en4. the next &ection presents
altemalive reoommendations that could be mote appropriate
Traasportttlon Sy1tem hUegratloQ
The whIte paper memioncii in the prtvious section prov ldcd st\'eral altemalive couries of uctioi'lll In alleviating urban transportatirn1 problems in Metro Manila. These wall ~ pteliellted agam in th.is ~tion . The exi~ti:ng tramponation.
modes in ?1-f'etro-Manila lack the euential fe~ of a fully tnwgrated tmnspcr.tatlon system. Tbi~ is due mainly to the Ineffective wordin~on and projeet-ori
enled planning of various agenGies of govemment deali"g wlth diffemu., ~d in
some cas~, common s*pects- of the tr.trtspottatton system. And wtt.l1 the
government's recent effort to attract private sector investments tn infrastructure
devel"lfment, coordination of tJ:ansport de\~lopmcnt has become C\'en more dlffi
cult to manag~ ~~ Qf tile need to consider private ~tor interests, Which
sornetimes.are in conflict with public interes~
This lack of i~gtatinn results in wasted transport capacities,, poor quality of
transport services; and l~w system-wide ttaniiport productivity. Hence. II is oot
$Ufficient t() simply build new roads 1111d put up new m~ tnmsit iines without
formulating a comprel\erlsive master plan for integratiJ\g these variona road .00
rail projects. The key ewment_s of Ill integntt-ed transportation ystem should have
~ hie.rarchical road and public transport netw~tlcs, and strategically planned station
and terminal facilities. 8
modes in Motro-Manita togeihcr with their basi' ctwaclenJtics {i.e., capacity all(j
service area}.
CAl>ACITY
SERVICE AREA
un
l5fl pe~Ritntin
8~
47~seats
Jet:pncy
Tur
Tncyde
14-20 seats
4 sean
2 scars
500-(000 pci'S()RSltraln
Intra-urban
lnll'a und inter-urban
Intra and inter-urban
lmra-utban
MODE
PNR Commuter
)i)Cal
A heavy rail transit 1)11em will bc::eome the lllllin line-haul or lllillk
line $CI"Ving regional passenger and 'freight transpon demand to and
from Melro-Manila.
A light rail tramit ~yste.m wlll become lhe mam Hne-baul nctW.ork
iCJ'vtng commuter. tra1:l demand within Metro-Manila. Buses may
~e as. main lie~haul in ~in areas.
Within Metro-Manila, buses and jeepneys will serve as feeder routes
til the beavy and light rail D'ansit s~stttm. In certain are.l!S, j=vneys
may ~!10 serve as feeder rou~ to bus smnon.s and stopS,
0Ytsick! Metro-Manila, jeepneyw und pro\'inciaJ buM:S will ~e as
feederrcutos ro tbe regullll' hcaYy rail transil system.
Provincial bu~ termina~e at the heavy tall tml!if statil;llls outside of
Metro Manila. lfhl stratqy of comolkiating provincial passenger trips
outside the metropolitan !lie& would improve the turmsround time and
5I
t6Jbid.
lltbid.
12Jbid.
131bid.
4
' tbid.
Lidtullrr
59
IS Ibid.
l6tbid.
l71bid.
18tbid.
19lbill.
61
Metro Manila As such, this appr~aah needs f\Jrther studies and therefore has to be
considered rather as a Long, term mcasore. Other means such as raising lhc ree .
related to acquisition and usage of vehicles (license, price of vebicles, et9. ), impose
high parking fees, oongeation pricing Bnd toll feeft in lhc pr.esent and future
expm$ways can be applicable in Metro Manila md the C:01llltry in general.20
There are several viable ways in distouraging the demand far single
occupan~y vehtcles(estimated to ~ 50% of tbc total private users). The present
plan to constfllct several mass transit systems in Metro Manila can be useful in
this aspect, Likewise, promotlng high GCCupa.ncy vehicles s:uch as Cil.l: or vanpooling can also reduce fbe demand for single-occupancy velticles. Volume
reduction scheme (such as the odd-even scheme) Is in a way a C(lnccpt to curb
traveJ demand ood at the sam!) time a,goal to alleviate traffic cong!~Stlon. 21
Some iDM ~tctlons have .already been experimented on in Metro Manila.
.However, they have not bc~n appropriately implemented. There is a need to further
study or cvaruatCI the effeotivencss and approprialen~s or these schemes. Among
the TDM mt'l!SUICS for the dLlrrulnd-side applied are: a) Car-pooling/Van-pooling.
b) Staggering Work Houl1i and Fl~xible Work Hours, c} flexible work/school
days, and d) Odd-even scb.eme.22
Aside from the promising TOM meas11r:es mentioned above, the follawing
are hereby prapcmd: 23
a.
b.
201btd.
' 'lbd.
2llbld.
llfbad.
traflic is a function of land usc and yet th.e current zoning ordinances and building
code do not pr\lvidc enough safeguards to ensu~ that land and transportation
developments are synchronized . ~~
.........
\l'ROVI~CIAL
ROUTES
BliS
,
! ,,/
,'
_.-''
\\
--t--LRT
\
\
'
61
Presently, lanq developers do not fully shoulder the cQst of traffic congestion
they induce on the road and public transport system. A system for estimating such
cost and a mechanism charging it as part of land development cost charged to the
developcn should be implemented, A traffic impact assessment (TIA) must be a
requirement for any land developmenl As a matter of principle, land developers
must shoulder the cost of providing additional transport infrastructure necessary to
maintain the same transport level of servi~e in the areas affected by its
development 25
Traffic education is three-fold: a) educating personnel in the transport and
tnffic sectors including the traffic enforCers, b) educating the road users and the
public in general on proper values, and c) education through research.26
The number of local experts in the field oJ transportation is still very limited.
Key personnel of various government agencies related to traffic need intensive
training, both here and abroad. 27
One contributing factor in the aggravation of traffic congestion in the streets
of Metro Manila is road users' poor driving behavior o.r attitude. Educating (or reeducating} people on their respective roles in traffic can contribute in alleviating
the worsening traffic congestion. The present system of seminars for persons
seeking driver's license and violators needs improvements. It must include value
formation for both enforcers and followers. Traffic safety education must be
integrated in the curriculum of schools especially from the primary levels. This
has been foun~ to be effective in other countries.18
Finally, transportation research (both basic and applied) must be promoted.
A tletter understanding of the transportation and traffic problems in Metro Manila
is necessary In fmding appropriate solutions. One of the major factors contributing
to wrong fore.casts and modeling In the country especially in Metro Manila is the
lack of accurate data. In addition, most of the standards and modeling techniques
employed in many transport studies are patterned afier other countries' standards,
notably from the developed ones. These resulted to misspecilications of the models
thereby resulting to inaccurate and/or inappropriate recommendations. Hence, it is
essential that !he establishment of a transportation database and improvement of
data collection be promoted and encouraged. There is 11lso a need to establish
standards appropriate for Metro Manila and th.e country in general. Moreover,
transport and traffic models need to be specified and calibrated with the local
conditions. It is only through these that transportation research can be used as a
powerful tool in solving traffic problems in Metro Manila.2~
251bid.
26Jbid.
271bid.
281bid.
291bid.
/.idU.l Un
6J
The above re<:ommendations of the white paper indicated tha.t the courses of
actions in alleviating urban transportation problems should be holistic and focus
on the root causes of these problems. Not only the technical aspects should be
addressed, but also the institutional and academic or research aspects of
transponation. Furthermore, it was mentioned elsewhere in this paper that social
and cultural aspc.cts should also be included in the formulation of the measures.
These aspects are relevant in considering the human factor of the urban
transportation problems.
Finally, the social acceptance of any courses of actions bas to be considered
for these actions to be effective and viable.
As already mentioned elsewhere in this paper, the datubase of the Metro
Manila Urban Transportation Integration Study (MMUTlS) was used in the
presentation of tne current situation of Metru Manila's transportation and traffic
system. The major output of the MMUTlS study is a 1Ianspol1lltion master plan
for Metro Manila_ Highlights of the MMUTIS transportation master plan is
summarized below.
30twlia, S., MMUTIS Ma11er Plan Hiahl iaht1, 12Lh MMUTIS Scminr on Str1teslc Ma111gemcnt
of Urball TranlJ)Ortadon, Mulila. Sept 1998.
64
..,
...
,S''
}i
~:......:
"!'}
'
c \.\
\f"'
oc
...
.:I
,t
1
'
Lidilsan
Legend:
PROPOSED
LRTUNE
~
.......
6~
"
31 Lidasan, HS, Private Sector Investment in Infrastructure Planning - The Conpl ofPFI, a
Jlllle1' pn:scntcd in the SPRING WI>C'ishop, Dortmund Univenil)', NoHmher 1998.
32tbid.
33 Ibid.
/Jrhlwr
.,
Amount
(US$
Remarks
(billion~)
I.
a)
b)
c)
2.
BASIC PROGRAM
Low Cost Management
MaintcnancefRehabilimtioo
Existing Network
Improvements
ON-GOiNG
MAJOR PROJECTS 8
1.50
0.50
(0.72)
( 1.84)
3.
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Secondary Roads
Expressways
MRT/LRT Systems
3.70
1.40
0.40
3.30
3l0kms. (80%)b
265 kms. (50%)h
tOO kms. (10%)b
Busways
developments.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
This paper, culled from various studies and similar papers (of which the
author is involved) has provided an overview of the present transportation system
in Metro Manila, in particular tbc pressing concerns on its growing traflk problems,
notably congestion. lt is expected that Metro Manila will become one of the
mcgacities in this part of the world. As such, it is anticipated also that the current
68
Lidasan
69
REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Alleviating Traffic Congestion in Metro Manila, a white paper prepared for the University of
the Philippines (UP) and the National Academy of Science and Technology (NAST), 1997.
DPWH, Road Handbook in the Philippines, 1994.
Iwata, S., MMUTIS Master Plan Highlights. 12th MMUTIS Seminar on Strategic Management
of Urban Transportation, Manila, September 1998.
JlCA, Metro Manila Urban Transportation Integration Study (MMUTIS), 1998.
Lidasan, H.S., Present Urban Transport Problems and Its Countermeasures - The Case a/the
Philippines, an unpublished paper presented at the Symposium on "Growth of Mega-Cities and
Road Transport Policy in Southeast Asia", under the sponsorship of the Institute of Hgihway
Economics of Japan. Tokyo Mercantile Marine University , Tokoy, Japan, March 8 - 13, 1999.
Lidasan, H.S., Present Status and Existing Problems of Asian Logistics - The Case of the
Philippines, an unpublished paper presented in the OECD TRILOG Seminar Workshop on
Logistics, Institute of Highway Economics, Tokyo, June 1998.
Lidasan, HS, Private Sector Investment in Infrastructure Planning - The Concept of PFI, an
unpublished paper presented in the SPRING Workshop, Dortmund University, November 1998.
Lidasan, H.S. , Tamura, T. and Sison, V.L. , A Study on the Perception on Unijied Vehicular
Volume Reduction Program (UVVRP), Vol. 2, Proceedings of the pt Asia Pacific Conference
on Transportation and the Environment, Singapore, 1998.
National Statistical Coordination Board. Philippine Statistical Year, 1996.
NEDA, Philippine Transport Strategy Study (PTSS), 1996.
Nishioka, S., Opportunities and Constraints of Private Finance Initiative (PFl), a paper presented in the 12th MMUTlS Seminar on Strategic Management of Urban Transportation,
Manila, Septemlier 1998.
Trinidad-Lichauco,J .. DOTC Under-Secretary, "Public-Privace Partnership in Transportation
and Communications Development: The Legae." of the Ramos Administration ", March 16 ,
1998.