ASSESSMENT OF TRANSPORT NETWORK VEHICLE
SERVICES BASED ON SOCIAL ASPECTS OF SUSTAINABLE
TRANSPORT IN METRO MANILA
Mathew A. Naral
Christian F. Villarin
Submitted to the
Institute of Civil Engineering
College of Engineering
University of the Philippines
Diliman, Quezon City
Undergraduate Research Program in Civil Engineering
In partial fulfilment of the requirements
for the degree of
Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering
June 2018
i
APPROVAL SHEET
This report, entitled “ASSESSMENT OF TRANSPORT NETWORK VEHICLE
SERVICES BASED ON SOCIAL ASPECTS OF SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT
IN METRO MANILA”, prepared and submitted by MATHEW A. NARAL and
CHRISTIAN F. VILLARIN, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
Undergraduate Research Project Course of the Undergraduate Research Program in
Civil Engineering is hereby accepted.
DR. JOSE REGIN F. REGIDOR
Faculty Adviser
Accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Undergraduate Research
Project Course of the Undergraduate Research Program in Civil Engineering.
DR. MARIA ANTONIA N. TANCHULING
Director
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to thank everyone who helped us in completing this research especially
the respondents who participated in our survey.
We are very grateful to our adviser, Dr. Jose Regin F. Regidor, for guiding us all
throughout the research period.
To our families and friends who supported us during the completion of this study,
thank you.
Finally, gratitudes to the Institute of Civil Engineering for the opportunity given to us
for conducting this research.
iii
ASSESSMENT OF TRANSPORT NETWORK VEHICLE SERVICES BASED
ON SOCIAL ASPECTS OF SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT IN METRO
MANILA
Mathew A. Naral
Christian F. Villarin
ABSTRACT
Transport Network Vehicle Services (TNVS) such as Uber and Grab have risen to popularity recently
in Southeast Asia especially in the Philippines. Adoption and implementation of these services impose
problems for transportation engineers and urban planners. This paper aimed to assess the services in the
context of social aspects of sustainable transport as defined in this research. Criteria such as equity,
security and safety were set by the researchers for the analysis of the results from the survey
instruments. The scope of the study is only within Metro Manila and is limited to Uber/Grab passenger.
Survey forms were disseminated online through social media for better reach. Questionnaires gathered
the demographics of respondents, travel practices, driver and vehicle evaluation, and the overall
assessment quality of these services. Correlation between certain parameters includes monthly income,
travel cost and time. Findings show that accessibility was the major reason of people shifting to
Uber/Grab. This study determined if the emergence of TNVS has brought improvement in terms of
social aspects of sustainable transport.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..................................................................................... iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................... v
LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................vii
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................... viii
1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Background and Significance of Study............................................................ 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem ................................................................................. 2
1.3 Objectives ........................................................................................................ 2
1.4 Scope and Limitation ....................................................................................... 2
1.5 Conceptual Framework .................................................................................... 3
1.6 Study Flow ....................................................................................................... 4
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................... 5
2.1 TNVS in the Philippines .................................................................................. 5
2.2 Uber and Grab .................................................................................................. 5
2.3 Sustainable Transportation............................................................................... 6
2.4 TNCs and Public Transportation ..................................................................... 6
2.5 Regulation and Policies for Ridesharing Services ........................................... 7
2.6 Memorandum Circulars for Transportation Network Companies (TNC) ....... 7
2.7 Summary .......................................................................................................... 8
3. METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................. 9
3.1 Research Design............................................................................................... 9
3.2 Population and Sampling Procedure ................................................................ 9
3.3 Survey Instrument ............................................................................................ 9
3.4 Tools of Analysis ........................................................................................... 11
v
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS ...................................................................... 12
4.1. Survey Demographics ................................................................................... 12
4.2 Respondents Travel Routine .......................................................................... 15
4.3 Vehicle and Driver Evaluation....................................................................... 21
4.4 Overall Quality Assessment of the Service ................................................... 23
4.5 Evaluation of Social Aspects of Sustainable Transport ................................. 25
5. CONCLUSION .................................................................................................. 30
5.1 Summary of Findings ..................................................................................... 30
5.2 Conclusions .................................................................................................... 30
6. RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................... 32
6.1 Policy and Service Improvement ................................................................... 32
6.2 Further Research ............................................................................................ 33
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Clusters of Questions ------------------------------------------------------ 10
Table 2. Social Aspects of Sustainable Transport Criteria ---------------------- 11
Table 3. Demographics of Respondents ------------------------------------------- 12
Table 4. Status of Rider Respondents ---------------------------------------------- 13
Table 5. Sampling per Geographic Location -------------------------------------- 15
Table 6. Previously Used Modes of Transport ------------------------------------ 20
Table 7. Mean Evaluation Rating of Likert Criteria ------------------------------ 22
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework ------------------------------------------------------- 3
Figure 2. Study Flow --------------------------------------------------------------------- 4
Figure 3. Demographics of Uber users in USA -------------------------------------- 14
Figure 4. More Frequently Used Ride Hailing App --------------------------------- 15
Figure 5. TNVS Use on Different Days of the Week ------------------------------- 16
Figure 6. TNVS Use on Different Periods of the Day ------------------------------ 17
Figure 7. Frequency of TNVS Use ---------------------------------------------------- 18
Figure 8. Frequency of TNVS Use (UC Davis) ------------------------------------- 18
Figure 9. Average Travel Time -------------------------------------------------------- 18
Figure 10. Average Travel Cost ------------------------------------------------------- 18
Figure 11. Trip Purpose of TNVS Rides --------------------------------------------- 19
Figure 12. Uber/Grab Replaced Modes ---------------------------------------------- 20
Figure 13. Factors Influencing Modal Shift to TNVS ------------------------------ 21
Figure 14. Vehicle and Driver Evaluation ------------------------------------------- 22
Figure 15. Reliability Rating ---------------------------------------------------------- 23
Figure 16. Comfortability Rating ----------------------------------------------------- 24
Figure 17. Affordability Rating ------------------------------------------------------- 24
Figure 18. Safety Rating --------------------------------------------------------------- 25
Figure 19. Security Rating ------------------------------------------------------------- 25
Figure 20. Non-earning vs. Earning in terms Frequency of Use ----------------- 26
Figure 21. Income vs. Travel Cost --------------------------------------------------- 26
Figure 22. Travel Time vs. Travel Cost --------------------------------------------- 27
Appendix 1. Introduction -------------------------------------------------------------- x
Appendix 2. Personal Information --------------------------------------------------- xi
Appendix 3 Queries regarding the TNVS ------------------------------------------ xiii
Appendix 4. Vehicle and Driver Evaluation --------------------------------------- xviii
Appendix 5. Overall quality assessment -------------------------------------------- xix
viii
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background and Significance of Study
The Philippine population is at 100.98 million according to the 2015 Census by
Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA). According to a United Nations study on
urbanization, 46.9 percent of people live in urban areas. They also reported the
population to be at 106.5 million as of 2018. The National Capital Region holds 13.5
million people and has a population density of 20,785 persons per square kilometer.
Manila City is one of the most overcrowded cities in the world with having twice the
population density of NCR.
Urbanization has advantages for the country and the people living in cities. These may
be economic development, accessibility to social services like education and health
services, job opportunities, technological advancements, and many others. However,
along with a rapidly increasing population density, certain challenges arise including
environmental concerns, disaster management, and mass transportation.
The study conducted by NEDA and JICA states that Philippines was projected to a
loss of ₱3.5 billion daily due to traffic congestion. Overcrowded roads are a common
sight in Metro Manila since the daily traffic demand is 12.8 million trips. Along with
the trend of increasing car trips and declining of public transport trips, car ownership
grows and public vehicle occupancy decreases. Traffic jams discourage commuters to
take public modes of transportation and resort to private vehicles, which further
worsens the condition of our roads.
Ride-hailing services have risen in popularity United States and in turn, the rest of the
world followed including the Philippines. Grab started to offer its services in the
country in 2013, followed by Uber in 2014. Ever since, they have been considered as
a better transportation alternative than taxis in many aspects such as vehicle
conditions, app-based booking system, and predetermined pricing.
These companies were given spotlight after being issued suspensions by the Land
Transportation and Franchising Regulatory Board (LTFRB). It divided people into
1
Uber/Grab antagonists and defenders. The question of whether the emergence of these
companies brought improvement in terms of transportation sustainability arises. The
assessment of this young modes of transportation will give input on whether the
government should support its development or not. Findings may also influence or be
used as basis in writing of policies that concern TNVS such as, but not limited to, area
of coverage, number of service providers, pricing, and scheduled availability/coding.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
The study aimed to answer these research questions:
● What significant modal shift and other transport behavior changes transpired
with the emergence of TNVS?
● What factors influence commuters to shift to TNVS from their previous mode
of transport?
● What are the commuters’ perception on the service of Uber/Grab in terms of
Reliability, Comfort, Affordability, Safety, and Security?
● What can be done to improve the sustainability of transportation in Metro
Manila with the coexistence of Uber/Grab and other modes of transport?
1.3 Objectives
The study aimed to assess the ride hailing services prior to modal shift and
congestion. More specifically, it aims to:
1. To define the criteria for the social aspects of sustainable transport.
2. To conduct sample surveying to obtain passenger travel practices, perception,
and assessment.
3. To analyze the data obtained to determine whether TNVS is a sustainable
mode of transportation.
4. To recommend policies and strategies towards promoting sustainability.
1.4 Scope and Limitation
This study was conducted mainly to assess the emergence of ride-hailing services
based on its effect on the roads in terms of congestion and vehicle occupancy. Data
was obtained through an online survey containing questions about traffic routines and
individual assessments. The survey was open for respondents from March 2018 until
2
May 2018 which is coincided with the time Grab purchased Uber in the Philippines. It
was given only to people who use Uber or Grab in Metro Manila.
1.5 Conceptual Framework
Concepts needed in understanding and accomplishing this research is demonstrated in
Figure 1. It also shows the needed output after the analysis of the conducted survey.
Passengers shift from one mode of transportation to another depending on several
factors, as presented on the upper part of the figure. The research focused on the
modal shifts that occurred with the emergence of TNVS, hence the separation from
the other modes. The lower part of the diagram represents sustainability of
transportation which is divided into three main parts: Economic, Environmental, and
Social. It is in the form of a Venn diagram since some of the aspects fall under the
intersection multiple categories. The modal shifts that occurred with the emergence of
TNVS affect the sustainability of transportation. All significant changes must be
evaluated in order to determine the recommended actions for the overall improvement
of transportation. This research concerns only the social aspects.
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework
3
1.6 Study Flow
The study flow is illustrated in Figure 2. The researchers followed a straightforward
research flow. From a selected research question, enough information is obtained
from related studies. A thesis proposal is presented containing the research design.
Once the proposal is accepted, the researchers commenced to the rest of the process.
In the case of this research, survey methodology was the implemented mode of data
gathering. Analysis was then performed on the data gathered based on defined
criteria. All parts of the research were documented on the manuscript.
Figure 2. Study Flow
4
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 TNVS in the Philippines
Mobility demand in Philippine cities and municipalities have increased through the
years. This results for mobility problems to arise and it is evident especially in Metro
Manila as it undergoes urbanization and growth. The Department of Transportation
and Communications (now DOTr) released department order with improving the
sustainability of public transport services as one of its objectives. This amendment
which encourages innovation, recognized and set standards for new forms of transport
services that are gaining popularity including the Transportation Network Vehicle
Service (TNVS).
Vehicle types of TNVS are not different with privately owned cars while it also
functions similar to taxis. Its edge is the technological innovation of using smartphone
applications provided by Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) to ‘book’ or
request for a ride. The driver will then pick-up the passenger from a predetermined
origin and bring them to an also predetermined destination. The mode of payment is
also pre-arranged. (DOTC, 2015)
2.2 Uber and Grab
This advancement has brought huge convenience to its users that it became part of
their daily lives up to a point where the term “Uberification” was coined, coming
from the TNC named Uber. This word basically means that the process of booking
and utilizing a service has been simplified, often to a few buttons presses on a
smartphone. Uber, which is based on San Francisco, operates on 633 cities
worldwide, and is one of the dominant TNCs in the Philippines. The other one is
Grab, based on Singapore, which is available in 154 cities across Southeast Asia.
Paronda et al. (2016) assessed TNCs performance by comparing it to conventional
taxi services. Conclusions to this study tell Uber and Grab are cheaper than taxis
while providing a better quality of service. Comparative studies to other mode of
transportation may give information about the reasons for modal shift to TNCs.
Modal shift of passengers can be an indicator if an emerging mode of transport
contributes to sustainable transportation
5
2.3 Sustainable Transportation
It has been argued that Sustainable Transportation is not definable, and the concept is
meaningless. It cannot have a single definition since it can be defined in many ways
since transportation encompasses many aspects of the society. However, there is a
way to select a definition that conforms to the principles that guides the vision of your
institution (Cormier & Gilbert, 2005).
Another study divided transportation sustainability into economic, social, and
environmental. All three are integrated into good governance and planning.
Assessment of sustainable transportation may be based on a specific list of
performance indicators (Litman, 2016).
2.4 TNCs and Public Transportation
Rise of ride sharing apps influenced the usage of other modes of transportation.
According to the study done on major cities in the United States, ride-hailing attracts
Americans away from bus services (a 6% reduction) and light rail services (a 3%
reduction). Ride-hailing serves as a complementary mode for commuter rail services
(a 3% net increase in use). (Clewlow & Mishra, 2017)
Rise of Uber and Grab is also said to be complementing public transport adoption.
Since rideshare can support public transport usage by serving as a first/last mile
feeder system. This study on impacts of ride sharing in Southeast Asia was
commissioned by Uber. It mostly talked about the role of ride sharing on developing
cities in different countries (Chin et al., 2017).
Ride sourcing services are most frequently used for social trips between 10pm and
4am, times when public transit runs infrequently or is unavailable. Shared modes
substitute more for automobile trips than public transit trips. This implies that shared
modes
complement
public
transit,
enhancing
mobility
(Grisby,
2016).
6
2.5 Regulation and Policies for Ridesharing Services
The ridesharing services Uber and Grab exists in various parts of the world and each
country has their own governing body. In the Philippines, the Department of
Transportation (DOTr) governs the transportation systems present in the country;
under which is the sectoral office, Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory
Board (LTFRB) that is involved in implementing and regulating public utility modes
of transport. Regulation of public transportation has been present during the early
1900 until LTFRB was established on June 19, 1987.
2.6 Memorandum Circulars for Transportation Network Companies (TNC)
In line with promoting mobility, DOTr released the Department Order No. 2015-11
introducing new forms of transport services which aims to address the increasing
demand for transport services in an efficient way. It was stated here that
Transportation Network Company (TNC) shall be defined as an “organization
whether a corporation, partnership, or sole proprietor, that provides pre-arranged
transportation services for compensation using an internet-based technology
application or digital platform technology to connect passengers with drivers using
their personal vehicles”, thus being considered as a transport provider.
In accordance with the provisions of the Department Order, LTFRB issued
Memorandum Circulars which set guidelines pertinent to Transport Network Vehicle
Service (TNVS). The Memorandum Circulars pertaining to TNVS were taken into
effect on October 23, 2017 after deliberating with the parties involved in the services.
Memorandum Circular 2015-015-A: Rules And Regulations To Govern The
Accreditation Of Transportation Network Companies, covers the required document
needed for the accreditation of TNCs along with the amount to be paid before filing
for the certificate of accreditation.
Memorandum Circular 2015-016-A: Terms And Conditions Of A Certificate Of
Transportation Network Company Accreditation, defines the responsibility of TNC
for guidance of all holders of certificate of TNC accreditation.
7
Memorandum Circular 2015-017-A: Implementing Guidelines On The Acceptance Of
Application For A Certificate Of Public Convenience To Operate Transport Network
Vehicle Service, contains the requirement of the TNC, their driver and their vehicles
to be employed in the services.
Memorandum Circular 2015-018-A: Terms And Conditions Of A Certificate Of
Public Convenience To Operate A Transportation Network Vehicle Service, serves as
a guide for Certificate Of Public Convenience (CPC) holders to operate TNVS.
2.7 Summary
Memorandums were used to give context about the Philippine transportation with the
government looking for alternatives to solve mobility problems. Uber and Grab made
their service available in Metro Manila and adjacent cities. Becoming an integral part
of urban transportation, it caused commuters to shift from previously used modes.
With the emergence of TNVS, it alters the society and affects the sustainability of
transportation. Sustainability can be interpreted in different ways, definition depends
on the context of each research. In this research, social aspects of sustainability were
brought to focus. Studies on TNVS have been conducted in other countries, providing
reference for comparison for this research. Given the recent issues concerning TNCs,
the transportation regulating body in the Philippines (LTFRB) implemented
guidelines for accreditation. Results from this research may give inputs for
amendments on these guidelines.
8
3. METHODOLOGY
3.1 Research Design
The study employs a cross-sectional research design that is mainly about the
perception on TNVS and the changes in commuters. It was done through survey
methodology.
3.2 Population and Sampling Procedure
The sample is composed only of Uber and Grab users in Metro Manila. There is no
available data about the demographics of TNVS user population in the Philippines. It
was decided to gather a minimum of 500 respondents employing convenience
sampling. This means that the survey respondents were selected for being the most
accessible to the researchers.
Online forms were distributed to personal contacts through Facebook before being
posted various pages and groups which serves as a good platform to reach the number
of sample needed for the analysis.
3.3 Survey Instrument
An introductory message was prepared for the respondents to read before they
proceed to the survey questions. The proponents were introduced here, and it gave the
respondents an idea on what the research is about. The respondents were asked to
answer the questions truthfully and they were also given assurance of confidentiality
on their answers.
The data gathered from the survey were analyzed using descriptive statistics, which
was done with the aid of Google Docs add-on. The add-on provides summary of the
answers through charts and it can create a separate summary for a sample using filters
based on similar answers to selected questions.
Table 1 shows the items included in the questionnaire. The questions were grouped
into four clusters: Personal Information, Initial Queries, Evaluation of Vehicle and
Driver, and Overall Quality Assessment. Screenshots of the actual questionnaire are
attached in the appendices
9
Table 1. Clusters of Questions
Dimension
Personal
Information
Initial
Queries
Evaluation of
Vehicle and
Driver
Dimension
Overall
Quality
Assessment
Content of Question items
Item
Content
1
Name
2
Contact information
3
Sex
4
Age
5
Present city
6
Employment status
7
Occupation
8
Monthly income
9
More often used service (Uber or Grab)
10
Frequency of use
11
Days of use
12
Time ranges of use
13
Usual origin
14
Usual destination
15
Average travel time
16
Average cost
17
Previous mode of transport used
18
Mode of transport replaced (3 max.)
19
Reasons for shifting
20
Usual rating given (for Uber only)
21
Exterior of vehicle is clean and up to date
22
Plate number is clearly visible
23
Car features are functioning
24
Price is shown after the end of trip
25
Driver complies with traffic rules
26
Driver uses traffic navigation apps (Google Maps, Waze, etc.)
27
Driver takes you to your destination without unnecessary stopovers
28
Driver does not text, smoke, or eat while driving
Content of Question items
Item
Content
29
Reliability
30
Comfort
31
Affordability
32
Safety
33
Security
10
3.4 Tools of Analysis
Descriptive statistics was implemented in the analysis of data gathered from the
survey. Data obtained were interpreted and presented in significant ways to come up
with assessments on certain social aspects of sustainable transport.
In order to have an assessment for TNVS, the criteria must be defined. Studies
enumerating criteria for evaluating sustainable transport were conducted by an
independent research organization Victoria Transport Policy Institution in 2016 and a
government department Transport Canada in 2005. From the lists of criteria, they
provided, a few were selected based on falling under of social aspects and obtainable
within the scope of our research design. Some are presented in Table 2.
Table 2. Social Aspects of Sustainable Transport Criteria
Aspect
Definition
Stakeholders
Cost
Price and value of money
Passenger
Equity
Safety
Salary
Security
Accessibility to general public
Society
and inclusion
Protection from accidents and
Passenger, Driver
other risks
Amount and modes of salary
Driver
Protection from crime or any
Passenger, Driver
illegal activities
Traffic
Congestion
Traffic condition and vehicle Passenger, Driver,
volume on roads
Society
Travel Time
Working
Condition
Time to reach destination
Passenger, Driver
Duration of shifts, insurance,
Driver
and others
Performance Indicator
Affordability Assessment
and Comments
Income vs. Frequency of
Use
Safety Assessment and
Comments
Related Literature
Security Assessment and
Comments
Modal Shift data and
Details about PCU and
vehicle occupancy
Driver Assessment
Related Literature
11
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
4.1. Survey Demographics
Table 3 shows some of the basic characteristics of the respondents. The total of 634 is
composed of 265 (41.8%) male respondents and 369 (58.2%) female respondents.
Majority of the respondents or a total of 567 (89.43%) come from the youngest age
bracket of 15-24 years, followed by 25-34-year bracket (4.89%), 35-44-year bracket
(2.05%), and only 3 respondents (0.47%) belong to the 45+ bracket.
Consistent with the age distribution, most of the respondents (75.1%) were students.
The rest of the sample were from the private sector (15.5%) and public sector (4.9%),
15 (2.4%) were self-employed, and 14 (2.2%) were unemployed. Distribution of the
respondents based on their monthly income can also be found in the table.
Table 3. Demographics of Respondents
Frequency Distribution of Personal Characteristics of the Respondents
Personal Characteristic
(N=634)
Percent
Male
369
41.80
Female
265
58.20
15-24
567
89.4
25-34
51
4.9
35-44
11
2.0
45+
3
0.5
Student
476
75.1
Private
98
15.5
Public
31
4.9
Self-employed
15
2.4
Unemployed
14
2.2
470
74.1
Sex
Age (years)
Employment Status
Monthly Income (Php)
Student/Unemployed
Frequency Distribution of Personal Characteristics of the Respondents
Personal Characteristic
(N=634)
Percent
12
Below 10 000
18
2.8
10,000 - 20,000
45
7.1
20,000 - 30,000
55
8.7
30,000 - 40,000
24
3.8
40,000 - 50,000
7
1.1
Above 50,000
15
2.4
Table 4 shows the sample demographics from Paronda’s research. It also consisted of
a survey and in contrast, the sample was composed of 119 respondents, (76%) were
employed, (3%) were students, and (20%) belonged to the unemployed or selfemployed. Results were expected to be distinct from ours since bulk of his
respondents belonged to the working force. This consequently lead to difference in
age groups as observed; our study having 21.50 years old as the mean age while
Paronda’s has a mean age of 31.48 years old. This was taken into account; thus a
separate analysis was done for students apart from the employed and unemployed
respondents when compared to his study.
Table 4. Status of Rider Respondents (Paronda, 2017)
Category
No.
%
Employed
91
76
Student
4
3
Unemployed
24
20
Grand Total
119
100
Both surveys had a majority of female users, 57% of his respondents were women as
compared to our survey yielding 58%. Paronda stated that safety is one of the main
reasons why female users choose ridesharing services, due to the inadequate public
transport system. In support of this, out of the 161 respondents that answered Safety
as their reason for shifting to Uber/Grab, 65% (104) were women.
Figure 3 illustrates basic demographics of Uber users in the United States. It shows
that most users fall on the age group of 16-24 years old, it has more resemblance to
our sample rather than Paronda’s. Disregarding the students and the unemployed,
13
respondents earning Php 20,000 to Php 40,000 a month, or what is considered the
middle-class, comprise most of the users which is relatively similar to the data by
GlobalWebIndex.
Figure 3. Demographics of Uber users in USA
The respondents’ profiles in the Uber and regular taxi comparative study by Nistal
(2016) also belong to the middle-income class. Most of our respondents, if not
students, were young urban professionals, majority of which are working in the
private sector as teachers, engineers, and researchers.
Respondents were also classified by their location in wherein they are able to utilize
TNVS. Through convenience sampling, subjects were selected based on their
proximity to the researchers. Despite this, our survey was able to reach all the cities in
Metro Manila except for Navotas City, Muntinlupa City, and Pateros City. Table 5
shows the sampling per geographic location of TNVS users.
14
Table 5. Sampling per Geographic Location
Present City of the Respondent
City
(N=634)
City
(N=634)
Quezon City
390
Caloocan (North)
13
Outside Metro Manila
40
Mandaluyong
12
Manila
37
Caloocan (South)
8
Marikina
28
Las Piñas
8
Makati
26
Valenzuela
8
Pasig
15
Pasay
7
Taguig
15
San Juan
5
Parañaque
14
As shown on Table 5, preponderance of respondents came from Quezon City having
390 ride sharing users with a percentage of 61.5%. Forty (40) responses outside Metro
Manila were from users residing in zones near borders of Metro Manila with access to
the ridesharing services. A relatively high number were from Manila with 37 (5.8%),
Marikina having 28 (4.4%), and Makati with 26 (4.1%).
4.2 Respondents Travel Routine
As presented in Figure 4, by a large margin, respondents use Uber (76.8%) more
frequently than Grab (23.2%). In the Overall Quality Assessment part of the survey,
Uber received higher ratings than Grab in all categories by an average margin of 0.27
from a 1-10 rating scale. The respondents perceive Uber as superior in providing
service, therefore it is expected that more of them favor its use over Grab.
Figure 4. More Frequently Used Ride Hailing App
15
Increased use of ridesharing services was found towards the end of the week and on
weekends. This indicates that users stick to conventional transport modes on their way
to work or school, while they avail TNVS during weekends to travel to infrequent
destinations. Graphic representation is shown as Figure 5.
Figure 5. TNVS Use on Different Days of the Week
Figure 6 shows that the peak usage of ride hailing apps are on evenings (6PM-10PM).
It is during this time when a great deal of people is on their way home. A factor that
can be attributed to this trend include people wanting to feel comfortable after a day
of work or school. A lot of people also utilize TNVS during midnight (11PM-1AM),
the reason for this could include higher crime frequency and unavailability of other
modes of transportation during this time.
16
Figure 6. TNVS Use on Different Periods of the Day
Our survey shows that 34.9% of the respondents use the services once a month or
less. More than a quarter (28.3%) of the sample are utilizing the services 2 to 3 times
a week. Followed by less frequent users, using the service only once a week (22.6%).
The respondents that use ridesharing on a daily basis were the least in number
garnering only 4.7%. These values are presented in Figure 7.
A similar survey was also conducted by UC Davis in determining the frequency of
use of ridesharing services in metropolitan areas in the United States. Comparing the
frequency of ridesharing use with UC Davis’ study, relatively similar results were
generated. Bulk of their respondents are the ones that only use the services
occasionally and least often. The drop in percentage is clear as it move as the
frequency of use increases. The UC Davis study produced Figure 8 which was placed
adjacent to Figure 7 for comparison.
17
Figure 7.
Frequency of TNVS Use
Figure 8.
Frequency of TNVS Use (UC Davis)
Figures 9 and 10 illustrate the average time users travel using the ride hailing services
as well as the average amount a rider usually pays for the trip. Majority of passengers
have ride for less than an hour, mostly within the 30-45-minute range. A great number
of passengers also pay less than 300 pesos for a trip, mostly within the 100-200-peso
range.
Figure 9.
Average Travel Time
Figure 10.
Average Travel Cost
18
The outcome of the survey shows that bulk of the respondents use TNVS for
commuting to school/work (57%), 43% of which are commuting to school while the
other 14% are for work, followed by shopping (29%), transfer trips to bus terminals
and airports (10%), and others which include going to churches, hospitals, or
restaurants (4%). Consistent with the 2016 Uber Manila Survey, 67% or majority of
the people’s trip purpose is for commuting. Results from the study made by Nistal and
Regidor (2016) on TNVS also verifies that most riders utilize the services for
commute having 46% of the user's response. Distribution is presented on Figure 11.
Figure 11. Trip Purpose of TNVS Rides
From the eight (8) choices of prevalent modes of transport in the Philippines
including the Jeepneys, Tricycles, Buses, Rail Transits (e.g. MRT/LRT), Regular
Taxis, UV Express, Motorcycles (including Habal-habal and Angkas), and Owned
vehicles, frequency of usage is rated on a scale of one (1) being the most frequent to
eight (8) being the least frequent.
Table 6 arranged based on their average ranking, the different modes of transportation
previously used by the respondents. Jeepneys were clearly the most used having a
1.56 difference between the second ranked Tricycle. Followed by Bus, Train, Taxi,
UV Express, and Private Vehicles with almost even rankings. Motorcycles were the
least used, having an average rank of 6.64.
19
Table 6. Previously Used Modes of Transport
Mode
Overall Rank
Average Rank
Rank SD
Jeepney
1
2.40
2.15
Tricycle
2
3.96
2.12
Bus
3
4.29
2.33
Rail
4
4.40
2.21
Taxi
5
4.67
2.10
UV Express
6
4.79
2.41
Owned Car
7
4.94
2.77
Motorcycle
8
6.64
2.25
Jeepneys are considered to be the staple of transportation in travelling. While
commuters use tricycle to go to specific locations that are not accessible to jeepneys.
Buses are similar to jeepneys, but they cover more distance and only travel on the
major roads.
The researchers also asked each user the three (3) modes of transport Uber/Grab
served as a replacement for or an alternative to and the results are presented below in
Figure 12. Results show that most of the respondents chose regular taxi (397) as an
alternative to TNVS followed by jeepneys (373).
Figure 12. Uber/Grab Replaced Modes
20
Relating the two parameters, it can be drawn that TNVS serves as a substitute to
conventional taxis but not to jeepneys. Jeepneys offers a higher passenger occupancy
and affordable price as compared to the TNVS and regular taxis. Due to the
similarities in features of taxis and TNVS as both were ride hailing services and
convey passengers to locations of their choice, comparisons as to whether TNVS are
better than regular taxis are still disputable. Previous studies have been leaning to
promote TNVS as a better option to regular taxis for the reason of convenience,
reliability, and safety (Dela Peña and Dizon, 2016).
As seen in Figure 13, accessibility is the main reason why people shifted from their
previous mode of transport to Uber/Grab. It is its distinction from the other modes of
transportation. Most of the modes transportation existing follow a strict route and may
only pick up and drop off passengers at designated stops. The advantage of ridehailing using smartphone applications is that the only requirement is an internet
connection, the passenger can be picked up at any location within the coverage area.
Figure 13. Factors Influencing Modal Shift to TNVS
4.3 Vehicle and Driver Evaluation
Passengers generally agree that Uber and Grab vehicles are in good condition while
the drivers practice good etiquette and provide quality service. The chart in Figure 14
shows that passengers have a good perception on TNVS.
21
Figure 14. Vehicle and Driver Evaluation
The Likert scale in the survey form gives insight about the evaluation of the
respondents regarding the quality of service offered to them. The respondents were
asked to rate each set of parameters according to its degree of correspondence from
'strongly disagree' to 'strongly agree'. Using the Likert criteria, the respondents were
asked to evaluate their usual experience with the driver and the condition of the
vehicle based on their perception. Values are presented in Table 7.
Table 7. Mean Evaluation Rating of Likert Criteria
LIKERT CRITERIA
Exterior of vehicle is clean and up to date
Plate number is clearly visible
Car features are functioning
Price is shown after the end of trip
Driver complies with traffic rules
Driver uses traffic navigation apps (Google
Maps, Waze, etc.)
Driver takes you to your destination without
unnecessary stopovers
Driver does not text, smoke, or eat while driving
MEAN
4.5300
4.4811
4.5899
4.4464
4.2145
4.6104
4.5726
4.3170
22
The criteria ‘Driver uses traffic navigation apps’ gained the highest mean out of all
the benchmark with 4.6104 which is expected as most drivers integrate the use of
navigation apps along with the ridesharing apps for drivers. On certain instances
wherein, drivers are more knowledgeable of the faster route compared to that
provided by the navigation app are reasonable. ‘Driver complies with traffic rules’
gained the least mean having 4.2145 possibly due to some of drivers lacking
discipline and knowledge of traffic rules as experienced by the passengers.
4.4 Overall Quality Assessment of the Service
Users were asked to rate their overall assessment regarding their preferred ride hailing
apps. 1-10 rating scale was used in assessing the overall quality, one (1) being the
lowest rating and ten (10) as the highest.
Reliability of the TNVS factors in the arrival of the vehicle as notified. Distribution
presented on Figure 15, it received an average rating of 7.71 out of 10. Most of the
comments given by the respondents was about the service being late relative to the
calculated ETA. Reasons for late arrival includes traffic congestion, inaccurate
location services, and driver unfamiliarity to the area/route.
Figure 15. Reliability Rating
Comfortability or the overall ergonomic quality experienced by the rider on the ride.
It received an average rating of 7.89. Responses were mostly consisted of comments
about the car seats and air conditioning. Aside from vehicle related inputs, driver
behavior was also a factor for some of the respondents. Distribution of rating is
presented below on Figure 16.
23
Figure 16. Comfortability Rating
Affordability was also considered if users were able to get the value for money they
pay for the ride. It was rated the lowest compared to other criteria, having a mean of
6.37. Users that spend less than 100 pesos gave a 7.31 rating, while those who spend
400 or more gave a 5.13 rating. The low rating was associated with the price as
compared to public modes of transport and the surge pricing. Figure 17 gives the
distribution of ratings given by the respondents.
Figure 17. Affordability Rating
Safety refers to the service’s unlikelihood to cause accidents. It was rated the highest
among all categories having an average of 8.44. TNVS was perceived to be safer
relative to other modes of transport. Since the vehicles are in good condition, trip
safety depends on the drivers. Drivers generally follow traffic rules since they can
easily be reported through the apps. Figure 18 illustrates the distribution of ratings.
24
Figure 18. Safety Rating
Security considers if the service is unencumbered from crime or being subjected to
illegal acts. It was rated high with an average of 8.41. Similar to Safety, respondents
view Security in TNVS to be better compared to other modes of transport. Despite
reports of harassment, passengers felt more secure since the drivers are profiled.
Similar to the previous figures, Figure 19 below also resembles a normal distribution.
Figure 19. Security Rating
4.5 Evaluation of Social Aspects of Sustainable Transport
4.5.1 Equity and Cost
Equity in transportation refers to being accommodating to all users regardless of
constraints such as disabilities and income. In this section, the focus would be on the
socioeconomic constraint. Cost was not only associated with the actual price of fares,
but also with the value of money and fair pricing.
25
Figure 20 below plots the frequency of TNVS use while separating those earning and
non-earning respondents. The chart supports the notion that financial constraints
affect the frequency of use of passengers. It can be observed that those who have
financial capabilities use TNVS more often.
Figure 20. Non-earning vs. Earning in terms Frequency of Use
Shown on Figure 21 is the average costs of trips taken by passengers grouped
according to their income ranges. Some of the income ranges consists of only a few
respondents, namely below 10K, 40K-50K, and above 50K. However, the general
trend is still evident. The passengers with higher income participated on higher
costing trips, while those with less income partake in cheaper trips.
Figure 21. Income vs. Travel Cost
26
According to their websites, Uber upfront fare calculation is based on a base rate,
estimation of time and distance, and current demand in the area. Meanwhile, Grab
fares are fixed regardless of route and trip duration, but Rush Hour Rates may be up
to 1.5 or twice the standard rate.
From the Overall Quality Assessment, it has been established that TNVS is perceived
to be more expensive than public transportation modes. Despite that, its emergence is
still undebatable. Being compared the most to Taxis, its edge is the precalculated fare
prior to the trip.
Figure 22 correlates the Travel Time and Cost of TNVS trips. Longer trips in terms of
duration correspond to higher costs. This graph serves as a validation for the fare
calculation of ride hailing apps.
Figure 22. Travel Time vs. Travel Cost
This section evaluates the TNVS pricing system as generally fair in terms of
consistency in calculation. However, it is also evaluated as non-equitable since it
favors those in higher socioeconomic levels.
27
4.5.2 Traffic Congestion
Table 8 tabulates different vehicle types with factors affecting traffic condition. The
Average Occupancy data was obtained from the study conducted by NEDA and JICA
in 2015. Buses transport the most people per vehicle with an average of 35.3
passengers, while Cars have an average occupancy of 1.7 passengers.
PCU determines the impact of a type of vehicle on traffic variables with the Car as
reference, thus the 1.0 value. Despite having two times the value of PCU, Buses
accommodate 20 times the number of passengers Cars do. Having a high occupancy
while maintaining a low PCU means that more people are transported with the least
amount of traffic congestion. The last column gives an idea on what types of vehicle
are most advantageous in the urban setting. The Car category, which includes TNVS,
has the highest value of 0.59. They are the least preferred types of vehicle in the
context of traffic congestion.
Table 8. Philippine Data on Occupancy and PCU
Vehicle Type
Ave. Occupancy
PCU
PCU per passenger
Car
1.7
1.0
0.59
Jeep
10.0
1.5
0.15
Bus
35.3
2.0
0.06
Relating these values to the modal shift as shown in Figure 12. Taxis and Owned Cars
fall under the same vehicle type with TNVS. Passengers shifting from either of these
modes experience better commuting conditions without adding to road congestion.
However, those shifting from other modes increase the number of vehicles on the
road, which is unideal. From this information, TNVS can be evaluated to be
detrimental to sustainable transport in the context of traffic congestion.
28
4.5.3 Safety and Security
Crucial factors in considering sustainable transport are the safety and security of the
riders. Safety is defined as the improbability of accident causation whereas security is
contingent on involvement in criminal acts. Evaluation of these criteria is solely based
on riders’ perception along with the comments relating to safety and security.
Most users asserted that TNVS are much safer than taxis and jeepneys for it provide
details of the vehicle and the driver. Despite having high ratings for safety and
security as shown in Figures 18 and 19, reports regarding some malicious and rude
drivers operating the services were claimed by minority of respondents causing them
to be hesitant of the ride.
29
5. CONCLUSION
5.1 Summary of Findings
From a sample of 634 respondents, most were students, thus limiting the relevance of
findings due to skewed demographics if treated as representative of whole. This was
taken into account, and the resolution was independent analyses on sample set for
students and non-students.
Results on the survey indicate that TNVS served as a substitute to conventional taxis
and jeepneys mostly, Uber being the more popular TNC than Grab. People shifted
from their previous mode of transport to Uber/Grab for the main reason of its
Accessibility.
Users rode the service with the purpose of daily commuting on Weekdays, but a
higher demand on Weekends prevail. Most rides took place on Evenings and during
Midnight, taking advantage of the most well received advantage of Safety and
Security. Majority of the passenger engage in trips lasting for less than an hour and
trips costing less than two-hundred (200) pesos.
5.2 Conclusions
The researchers were able to accomplish the objectives of the study. First, criteria for
sustainable transport were defined to be the social parameters that were obtainable
through our methodology. Then, data about passenger travel practices, perception, and
assessment were successfully gathered through sample surveying. Next, the
researchers compared these data with similar studies and performed analysis to
determine whether TNVS is a sustainable mode of transportation based on the defined
criteria. Lastly, recommendations on policies and strategies to promote sustainable
transportation were given, it can be found on the next section.
Obstacles in conducting this research were present including time and financial
constraints, but the most notable was the difficulty in gathering respondents. The
methodology also limited the analysis of social aspects of sustainable transport to
selected criteria. Despite these, the following conclusions were found:
30
TNVS offers high quality of service, however it comes with a high price for those
coming from lower socioeconomic levels.
The transport system improvements brought with its emergence are focused on the
individual level. It became the alternative for taxi since it functions the same purpose
while being better in all multiple aspects such as: Comfort, Safety, Security, Travel
Time, and Pre-Arranged Pricing.
Its negative effects on our transport system influences a larger portion of our society.
Drawing away people from using public transportation while increasing the number
of vehicles on the road leads to more congested roads that costs the country millions
every day. Given the results and analysis done, the researchers can conclude that
TNVS does not promote sustainable transport.
31
6. RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 Policy and Service Improvement
On the survey form, respondents were permitted to give general comments regarding
the services they use. From these, along with the findings, the researchers were able to
infer recommendations for improvements:
1. Maximize vehicle occupancy through ridesharing. Since TNVS are already
established modes of transportation, they are here to stay, along with increased
number of vehicles in Metro Manila. In order to minimize their effects on traffic
congestion, maximization of available seats would be a contribution. Ridesharing
must be made more appealing to users over riding solo. This may be done by
decreasing the price and improving the algorithm in selecting ridesharers.
2. More efficient navigation. Despite having the access to navigation apps such as
Waze and Google Maps, drivers still tend to get lost. TNVS should equip their
applications with better navigation systems giving alternative routes with less traffic.
Real-time updating of optimal routes should be made available to account for unusual
incidents like road constructions, events, and accidents.
3. More accurate ETA. Inconsistency of the ETA or the estimated time of arrival
being shown on the app is one of the concerns of the users. Better algorithm should be
embedded on the app to display more accurate ETA. This should consider several
overlooked parameters in the computation, this includes traffic conditions, traffic
lights, and weather.
4. Lesser surge price rate. Surge prices serve as a compensation for a high demand
for ride hailing service. Responses from users suggest lowering the surge price rate
significantly.
5. Safety measures. Installation of CCTV cameras or dashboard cameras and other
safety features to ensure better security should be imposed. Partnership with the
government authorities would be advantageous for faster response in cases of
accidents or crime.
32
6. Greater service coverage. TNVS coverage is limited only within Cebu, Metro
Manila and its neighboring areas. Greater coverage of TNVS allow users to travel
farther destinations. Studies should be conducted to determine if offering the service
on additional areas would be proven to be beneficial.
6.2 Further Research
Further and more in-depth research could be done regarding this topic for a more
accurate assessment of TNVS. Printed survey forms could be distributed on target
areas for a better reach. Implementing additional methodologies would be beneficial
in order to collect data that are unobtainable from a survey.
Broadening the scope of our study, extending the study area to Cebu City and
increasing the target number of respondents would account for better statistics.
Allowing drivers to participate on the survey would give another perspective on the
study.
Due to a discord in study time frame, ride hailing apps emerged subsequent to the
acquisition of Uber that includes Hype, hirna, Owto, GoLag, micab, and uHop. These
new services should also be considered on succeeding researches.
For a complete assessment of TNVS based on sustainable transportation, aside from
its social aspect, environmental and economic aspects must also be evaluated
extensively.
Incorporate findings with urban development plans and policy writing in order to
promote sustainable transport.
33
REFERENCES
1.
Chin V. et al., 2017. Unlocking Cities: The impact of ridesharing in Southeast
Asia and beyond, Boston Consulting Group
2.
Clewlow R. and Mishra G., 2017. Disruptive Transportation: The Adoption,
Utilization, and Impacts of Ride-Hailing in the United States, UC Davis Institute of
Transportation Studies
3.
Cormier A. and Gilbert R., 2005. Defining Sustainable Transportation, The
Centre for Sustainable Transportation
4.
Dela Peña and Dizon, 2016. Comparative Study of GrabTaxi and Regular Taxi
Services in Metro Manila, Undergraduate Research Report, NCTS
5.
Department of Transportation and Communications, 2015. DO No. 2015-011
“Further Amending Department Order No. 97-1097 to Promote Mobility”
6.
Grisby D., 2016. Shared Mobility and the Transformation of Public
Transit, Shared-Use Mobility Center (SUMC)
7. Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) and National Economic And
Development Authority (NEDA), 2014). Roadmap for Transport Infrastructure
Development for Metro Manila and Its Surrounding Areas.
8. Littman T., 2016. Well Measured: Developing Indicators for Sustainable and
Livable Transport Planning, Victoria Transport Policy Institution
9.
LTFRB, 2015. Memorandum Circulars. Retrieved from:
<ltfrb.gov.ph/index.php/issuances/memorandum-circulars/>.
10. Paronda, Regidor and Napalang, 2016. Comparative Analysis of Transportation
Network Companies (TNCs) and Conventional Taxi Services in Metro Manila,
Presented at 23rd Annual Conference of Transportation Science Society of the
Philippines, NCTS
11. Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), 2016. Philippine Population Density
(Based on the 2015 Census of Population).
12. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2018), Population
Division, 2018. World Urbanization Prospects: The 2018 Revision, Online Edition
ix
APPENDIX
Online Survey Form
Appendix consists of complete survey form made using Google Forms
captured with screenshots of the questionnaire as viewed on the Web. Pages are
subdivided to certain parts: Introduction, Personal Information, Queries regarding the
TNVS, Vehicle and driver evaluation, and Overall quality assessment.
Appendix 1. Introduction
x
Appendix 2. Personal Information (1/2)
xi
Appendix 2. Personal Information (2/2)
xii
Appendix 3. Queries regarding the TNVS (1/5)
xiii
Appendix 3. Queries regarding the TNVS (2/5)
xiv
Appendix 3. Queries regarding the TNVS (3/5)
xv
Appendix 3. Queries regarding the TNVS (4/5)
xvi
Appendix 3. Queries regarding the TNVS (5/5)
xvii
Appendix 4. Vehicle and Driver Evaluation
xviii
Appendix 5. Overall quality assessment (1/2)
xix
Appendix 5. Overall quality assessment (2/2)
xx