Removing EDSA bike lanes is the wrong thing to do

I

T is a fantasy for the MMDA to claim that removing the bike lanes on EDSA will improve traffic. From decades of experience, we know that removing the bike lanes do very little as more road space for motor vehicles leads to greater motor vehicle use due to the phenomenon of induced demand. “Adding highway lanes to deal with traffic congestion is like loosening your belt to cure obesity,” as Lewis Mumford put it in 1955.

With EDSA constantly choked with traffic, it makes total sense to create alternative channels to move people safely and efficiently using sustainable travel modes. This is the concept behind the EDSA Carousel. If buses on EDSA can move fast and carry many times more people on a dedicated lane than a roadway for cars, it makes sense to transform a mixed traffic lane into one for buses. At times the EDSA Busway may appear empty, but it is only because the buses have already gone ahead of everyone stuck in traffic.

Similarly, the EDSA bike lane offers a safe and efficient corridor for those on bicycles or light mobility devices (electric kick scooters, e-bikes and e-trikes). The EDSA bike lane may also often seem empty but it is only because cyclists have also already gone ahead and left you behind in traffic. Have you checked how many cyclists use the EDSA bike lane at sunrise when the weather is still cool?

If you think that there are very few cyclists using the EDSA bike lanes, keep in mind that very large numbers of blue-collar workers (construction workers, security guards, factory workers, etc.) use bicycles to get around. Bike racks at factories, office buildings, malls and commercial establishments are filled to the brim.

Offering buses and bicycles as attractive travel options on EDSA are the right strategy for our metropolis. It motivates a desirable shift from using a private motor vehicle to taking a bus or a bicycle. We need car-using Filipinos stuck in EDSA traffic to think: “If I were on that bus or on a bicycle, I could be home 30 minutes sooner.” This is the type of travel environment that ultimately alleviates traffic by creating a virtuous cycle away from the use of private motor vehicles.

Is society better off with bike lanes and more cyclists on EDSA? Absolutely. Cyclists travel without generating pollution, carbon, heat or noise. More bicycles make roads safer; they hardly cause any road injuries or deaths. A person on a bicycle is also a very efficient user of road space. Cycling also delivers considerable health benefits — if more Filipinos are healthier, society will save on health care costs.

Moreover, if a public transport user switches to using a bicycle, it frees up a seat on limited public transport. If a car user switches to using a bicycle, it means less congestion and pollution. When more people use bicycles to move around, everybody gains.

The potential benefits from more people on bicycles are huge. In 2021, the policy advocacy organization AltMobility PH released a report (Bikenomics: Assessing the Value of Cycling in the Philippines) quantifying the social and economic benefits. Using a bicycle instead of a car can save a household about P281,462 per year (this leaves a family with larger savings or more money for food/health care). If only 5 percent of trips within Metro Manila are made on bicycles, society gains P738 billion in health cost savings annually.

When it comes to fighting climate change, bicycles are one of the best weapons available. In terms of reducing carbon in our atmosphere, attracting more people to cycle instead of using a motor vehicle is like planting trees. Converting 5 percent of car trips in Metro Manila into bicycle trips can save 57,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions annually, equivalent to planting 2.31 million trees.

The good news is that there are, today, many more Filipinos using bicycles. Only 6 percent of Filipino households own cars. Meanwhile, households with bicycles outnumber households with cars — 4:1. Between May 2020 and March 2023, the growth in bicycle ownership and use was carefully documented by Social Weather Stations. The percentage of cycling households (those with at least one member who cycles regularly) increased from 11 percent in 2020 to 29 percent in 2022 and to 36 percent as of March 2023. This means that about 10 million Filipino households use bicycles today, many as a means to fight inflation and save money.

Those who argue that EDSA should be reserved for cars and that cyclists should take secondary routes need to recognize that secondary routes mean much

longer and more strenuous travel. Cyclists, propelled by their own energy and without any negative environmental impact, deserve to use the most direct route and EDSA is the most direct route.

Those using fossil fuel cars that generate pollution, carbon, noise and heat are already privileged to travel with convenience — they should be the ones to shift to longer, secondary routes. This approach will also be in line with the strategy of promoting greater bicycle use while discouraging private motor vehicle use.

Because more space for cars induces more automobile use, the logical consequence of removing the EDSA bike lanes is more vehicles, more traffic, more pollution, more noise and more heat at a time when we are already at a breaking point. The MMDA’s failed approaches have made Metro Manila the titleholder for the world’s worst traffic. Unfortunately, it looks like the agency is hell-bent on keeping its title at all costs.

Robert Y. Siy is a development economist, city and regional planner, and public transport advocate. He is a co-convenor of the Move As One Coalition. He can be reached at mobilitymatters.ph@yahoo.com or followed on Twitter at @RobertRsiy.