ANALYSIS OF THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF
MASS TRANSIT SYSTEM: INSIGHTS FROM LRT LINE TWO STUDENT
COMMUTERS OF MENDIOLA CONSORTIUM
An Undergraduate’s XXXXXXX Presented to the
Faculty of the Department of Economics – College of Arts and Sciences
San Beda College
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Bachelor of Science in Economics and Public Policy
By
XXXXXXXXX
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER I
Introduction
3
Statement of the Problem
8
Statement of Assumptions and Hypotheses
10
Significance of the Study
10
Scope and Limitations
11
Definition of Terms
11
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES
12
Conceptual Framework
16
Research Paradigm
17
CHAPTER III
Research Methodology
18
CHAPTER I
OVERVIEW OF THE RESEARCH PROBLEM
Introduction
The Light Rail Transit Authority is known as the premier railway in the nation providing
efficient, well founded and nature loving mass rail services to all citizens of Metro Manila.
LRTA is an entirely owned corporation of the administration established on July 12, 1980 under
Executive Order (EO) No. 603, as revised by EO No. 830 dated September 1982, and EO No.
210 dated 7th of July 1987. The LRTA is solely liable for the operation, maintenance,
construction of light rail transits in the country.
Since 1984, LRTA is a pioneer of the industry, it has become the nation’s prime mover in the
railway transport sector providing the needs of millions of citizens where the LRT system could
constantly issue a systematic transport services and encouraging economic and orderly
operations.
In the year 1976-1977, a research worth of 14 months conducted by Freeman Fox and
Associations was funded by the World Bank and the proposal was a street-level light railway.
The then newly created agency, Ministry of Transportation and Communications (MOTC)
evaluated and reexamined the recommendations, introducing an elevated type because of the
many intersections. This increased the expenses from P1.5 billion to P2 billion. Another study
authorized by MOTC, a foreign firm which was finished within three months.
The Light Rail Transit Authority (LRTA) as a government agency was formed by President
Ferdinand E. Marcos, the former president of the Philippines, on July 12, 1980. Imelda
Romualdez Marcos, the former First Lady and Governor of Manila was the Chairman. This
LRTA enclosed its projects to determining rules, to the management and fixing of fare rates, and
to the preparation of extensions to the system. The plan was named Metrorail and was managed
by a sister firm of the former tramway corporation Meralco, called Metro, Inc.
The Belgian government assisted in building the LRT plan which granted a P300 million free of
interest loan with a 30-year repayment time. The plan was anticipated to reimburse for itself with
a 20-year period of revenue alone. The consortium of Belgium composing of ACEC (Ateliers de
Constructions Electriques de Charleroi, BN), (Constructions Ferroviaires et Metalliques,
formerly Brugeoise et Nivelles), TEI (Tractionnel Engineering International) and TC (Transurb
Consult) supplied a P700 million additional loan. The association supplied the railroad cars,
signalling, power control, technical assistance, training of employees and telecommunications.
The whole structure was anticipated to be economically well into 1993. Government deficits
were thought likely to attain P216 million, against an anticipated gross revenue of P365 million
for the first functioning twelve-month period. The network was schemed as a public utility rather
than as a benefit center.
Creation of the rail way began in October 1981, and was the task of CDCP (Construction
and Development Corporation of the Philippines), with aid from the Swiss corporation of
Losinger and the American company Dravo, the latter, through its Philippine branch. The
administration nominated Electrowatt Engineering Services of Zurich (Switzerland) to handle
and organize the project. Electrowatt build branches in Manila and became liable for expansion
researches of the structure which eventually encompass 150 km of routes along all major roads
in the span of 20 years.
The LRT2 construction plan began in March 1996 but the project stalled because the Philippine
Government investigated the alleged irregularities with the project’s contract. The plan restarted
in 2000, managed by the Asia-Europe MRT Consortium (AEMC). The former President Gloria
Macapagal Arroyo inaugurated the Santolan to Araneta Center-Cubao stations on April 5, 2003
while the remaining stations opened on April 5, 2004 except for Recto station that opened on
October 29, 2004.
The LRTA can only operate using Line 1 System (Green) from Roosevelt, Balintawak,
Monumento, 5th Ave, General Ricardo Papa Sr., Abad Santos, Blumentritt, Tayuman, Bambang,
Doroteo Jose, Carriedo, Central Terminal, United Nations Avenue, Pedro Gil, Quirino, Vito
Cruz, Gil Puyat, Libertad, EDSA, Baclaran. The operational stations in Line 2 System (Blue) are
Claro Mayo Recto, Legarda, Pureza, Victorino Mapa, Juan Ruiz, Gilmore, Betty Go-Belmonte,
Araneta Center-Cubao, Anonas, Katipunan, Santolan.
The major issue of the transportation sector is the worsening traffic every year. It is rampant in
many parts in the country and it is wasting our resources and time.
Since there is traffic in developed areas in this nation and we have the LRTA, it is an efficient
mode of transportation in addressing the traffic and as an alternative to accommodate the
growing population of our country.
The ongoing projects of LRTA are the following:
1. Locally Funded Projects
1.1 LRT Rehabilitation Projects
The source of the fund is the national government. The project cost is P7.078 Billion. From 2011
to 2020, the rehabilitation project involves the major repairs and maintenance of rolling stocks,
facilities and tracks.
1.2 LRT Line 2 West Extension Projects
The project was approved by NEDA and the cost is P10, 118.46M. The source of the fund came
from the national government. The total length of the line extension is 3.02kms from Recto
station to Pier 4. They are building the Tutuban, Divisoria and Pier 4 stations and included in the
project is 5 new 4-car rolling stocks. The extension project is starting this year 2017 up to 2021.
1.3 Transport Interchange Project – Cubao Interchange
They are building an elevated passenger walkway connecting LRT Line 2 Araneta Center –
Cubao Station and MRT3 Cubao. The project cost is P450M funded by the national government
and the duration is this year 2017 to 2018.
2. Foreign-Assisted Projects
2.1 Line 1 South Extension Project
The aim of the project is to extend the existing 20.7kms by an additional 11.7kms of which
approximately 10.5km is raised from the ground and 1.2km will be at-grade. From Baclaran
Station, it will reach Paranaque, Las Pinas and Bacoor City. The total cost is P64.915B funded
by Official Development Assistance (OCA) from Japanese International Cooperation Agency
(JICA), national government and the private sector. The duration of the project is 4th Qtr. of 2017
to 3rd Qtr. of 2021.
2.2 Line 2 East Extension Project
The aim of the project is to extend the existing LRT Line 2 by 3.793km east from the Santolan
Station to Emerald and Masinag Terminal. The cost of the project is P9.511B funded by
government of the Philippines and JICA-ODA. The duration of the project is 2014 to 2017.
The Future project of LRTA is the NAIA Rail Link Project. It will be a 6.2km line from Baclaran
Terminal Station to Terminal 3 of Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) with an additional
4 stations. The project can be implemented through Public-Private Partnership (PPP) or ODA but
it is still in the pre-feasibility study stage. They have a forecasted capacity of 2,800 passengers
per hour per direction or 40,000 passengers per day.
The advantages of LRTA are the following:
1. The passenger will not experience traffic since the trains will only stop at every station.
2. Air pollution will be lessened because the passengers are inside the rolling stocks.
3. Passengers will have a peace of mind that they will reach their destinations ahead of time.
The disadvantages of LRTA are the following:
1. Sometimes, there will be stations that are unusable for certain reasons and the passenger will
be forced to ride other modes of transportation.
2. Sometimes, the air-conditioning units are not functioning and there are leaks on the ceiling.
3. Sometimes, passengers are late at work or school because of the delayed services of LRTA.
4. Due to rush hours, the train is crowded and it will lead to pick pocketers to attack unconscious
victims.
5. Malfunction of some trains
6. The personnel, especially the security guards should be vigilant when accidents happen.
Statement of the Problem
Specific Problem:
1. What are the characteristics of the respondents in terms of:
1.1 Demographic Profile
1.2 Improvement in the socio and economic conditions of the household in terms of:
1.2.1
Income and expenditures
Current Life Status
Perceived Income Level
Spending priorities
1.2.2
Household related living conditions
1.2.3
Good Health of the family and Ability to Pay for Medical Expenses
1.2.4
Wellness at work of parents in the family
1.2.5
Wellness at school of children in the family
1.3 Travel related attributes
1.4 Perception on impact, advantages and disadvantages of LRT2 riding experience
2. What is the general observation of the respondents on the catchment areas covered by the
LRT in terms of the following:
2.1 Business and commercial development
2.2 Social condition
2.3 Environmental condition
3. What is the general status of the Public mass transit –LRT2 in the last five years as
observed and experienced by the respondents on the following dimensions:
3.1 Safety
3.2 Transport System Maintenance
3.3 Environmental Quality
3.4 Reliability
4. How significant is the impact of the LRT2 to the following?
4.1
4.2 Economic
4.3 Environment
4.4 Social
5. What are the policy implications of the study to the future goals of the respondents to
enhance their socio-economic and the living conditions of Mendiola college students?
Statement of assumptions and hypotheses
Ho:The economic, environment, and social impact of the LRT2 does not have a significant effect
on the life of the students.
Ha: The economic, environment, and social impact of the LRT2 does have a significant effect on
the life of the students.
Ho: The economic, environment, and social impact of the LRT2 does not have a significant
effect on the general living conditions of the respondent’s area of residence.
Ha: The economic, environment, and social impact of the LRT2 does have a significant effect on
the general living conditions of the respondent’s area of residence.
Significance of the Study
This paper hopes to shed light to issues that surround the system of the LRTA which attribute to
its contributions to the economy and welfare of the citizens availing public transport. This paper
will be relevant to the public, most especially to those who avail the LRTA services, future
researchers, the government, and the management of LRTA who are in charge of crafting
policies for better public provision.
•
Light Rail Transit Authority
They are responsible in providing better services and managing our railway system.
•
Government
The government is the one creating laws and implementing such. It provides budgets specifically
to our transportation system. The strength of the LRTA system will rely on its laws and policies
that will redound to the benefit of the government in terms of revenue generation and job
creation due to ease of access the LRTA may provide.
•
Citizens
This will be relevant to the people who utilize the services of LRTA every day and to provide
them the information they want to know.
•
Future Researchers
This study will be relevant to students and other researchers who would like to conduct a study
here and abroad. This paper will give them ideas on what are the other problems of our trains.
Scope and Limitations
This paper will inform the people of the current situation of LRTA, the laws and programs that
the government has implemented and currently implementing, assessment of the LRTA
economically.
The researcher will focus on the college students of Mendiola who regularly rides the LRT2.
Definition of Terms
Demographic profile –It is abackground data that talks about the characteristics of the
population, such as age, gender, income of the persons within the population.
Respondents – people who will answer the survey questionnaires.
Socio-economic status – it talks about the income, expenses of an individual, current life status,
spending priorities of the respondents.
Wellness – it means the kind of life the respondents have.
Business and commercial development– the businesses near the stations of LRT2.
Social condition – it refers to living conditions of the respondents like educational attainment,
type of residence.
Environmental condition – the state of pollution in the environment the respondents live in.
Public mass transit – any mode of transportation that can accommodate a large number of
passengers.
Transport System Maintenance – the regular inspection of the infrastructure of LRTA.
LRTA – Light Rail Transit Authority
Infrastructure –the physical structure and facilities needed so that the society will function.
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES
Evans and Stecker (2007) examined numerous studies on the impact of environmental stress.
They concluded that exposure to stressors such as traffic congestion can have serious
implications, such as causing motivational deficiency. The negative effects of an environmental
stressor are more pronounced when there is no control or perceived control over the situation, as
is the case with traffic congestion. Stress induced by traffic congestion has also been linked to
increased absenteeism (Bhat and Sardesai 2006). Unreliability and delays on commuter trains in
London have been associated with low productivity and low efficiency in tired workers. This
loss in productivity has been estimated to cost London city at least £230 million per annum (Cox
et al. 2006). The public transport system in Dublin comprises an extensive bus network, twolight
rail lines, and one heavy rail line. The main bus operator, Dublin Bus, managesa fleet of 1,200
buses, operating on 193 routes (Dublin Bus 2007). In 2007, the DublinBus fleet travelled over 63
million kilometers, providing 148 million passengerjourneys. The bus system consists of 12
Quality Bus Corridors (QBCs), providingpassengers with a high quality of service and
comparable transit time with that ofa private car (Caulfield and O’Mahony 2004). Dublin Bus
operates a number of differentvehicles in its fleet; typically, 77 percent of the onboard capacity is
seated.(Cantwell, Caulfield, O’Mahony 2009)
Rintoul (1995) presented a four-step method for quantifying the socio-economic impacts of
motor vehicle traffic on pedestrians and cyclists. The method addresses both the transverse effect
(the impact on pedestrians and cyclists attempting to cross a roadway) and the longitudinal effect
(the impact on cyclists as they travel in the traffic flow). This research contains the assumption
that the barrier in question is passable, and therefore may not be applicable to high-speed
highways, where safe crossings are more likely to be tunnels or overpasses. While the author
points out that further research is needed, the methodology is useful in quantifying the effects on
pedestrian and bicycle travel of changes in low- to medium-volume streets within an urban
setting. Changes in transportation systems may affect the safety of persons as they go about their
dailylives in their neighborhoods or places of work. Increased traffic or changes in traffic
patterns
may transform a pedestrian-friendly environment into one in which residents are at greater risk
of injury. It also may make it more difficult and unsafe to walk or travel by bicycle. Such
changes necessitate a consideration of pedestrian and bicycle traveling patterns and of possible
alternative routes for pedestrians and cyclists. (Forkenbrock, Benshoff, Weisbrod 2001)
Even before the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail line (HBLR) began operation in 2000, a debate was
underway in the US that weighed in on the advantages and disadvantages of investment in light
rail systems. Listed advantages were reduced pollution, congestion, and energy consumption
levels along with more compact economic development. The prime disadvantage was the size of
annual government subsidies required to underwrite such projects that appeared to benefit a
relative few. Nevertheless, rising environmental awareness, sky-rocketing real prices of petrol
and diesel fuel, local bonds, and federal and state transportation capital funding enabled several
new light rail transits (LRT) in the US. Admittedly, enhancing economic development around
light rail stations were another substantial bullet point to booster LRT (Garrett 2004). METRO
Rail in Houston, Hiawatha light rail in Minneapolis, Lynx in Charlotte, the River Line along the
Delaware River in southern New Jersey, and the HBLR, for example, were planned and opened
during an LRT revival. The municipalities served via HBLR have rather diverse local
characteristics. Distinctsocio-economic and socio-demographic characteristics and dissimilar
existing accessibility withpublic transportation may influence a HBLR ridership propensity;
thereby, produce different accessibility gains capitalized in property values. To better recognize
these local circumstances, three political and demographic groups can roughly be categorized:
Jersey City/Hoboken, Bayonne, and the cluster of northern municipalities. Like other Rustbelt
cities, Jersey City experienced decline during the early 1960s. Since the 1990s, new
commercial/office and luxury residential developments in the JCCBD waterfront (near PATH
stations; Pavonia-Newportand Exchange Place) have occurred; there, residential property prices
have been buoyed by their accessibility to Manhattan. Areas beyond walking-distance to PATH
stations have yet to partake in this revival, however. Investment in the HBLR was intended to
stimulate the local economy by enhancing accessibility to the JCCBD waterfront – particularly
areas, the county’ slow-income neighborhoods in inner Hudson County, which retain high shares
of minoritypopulations. (Kim, Lahr 2014)
BRTS can be regarded as a step towards a sustainable transport system in terms of cost-effective
mass transit solutions with less environmental impact. The BRT system that is proposed in
Ahmedabad city is expected to improve the quality of the urban transport system improving the
urban mobility and the quality of environment with less fuel consumption and emissions.Buses
generally take less roadspace, helping to reduce congestion and with its high occupancy, it has
far lower footprint perpassenger kilometer as compared to othermodes. With its good service in
terms of timely service, reasonable fare and good comfortlevel, as comparedto the existing bus
service, more people areexpected to use the newly proposed system, once theservice is in
operation. Although, from themodal shift analysis towards the BRTS, the estimated footprint
reduction is seen only as a marginal figure, nevertheless, the BRTS shows a promising public
transport option for cities looking to reduce their transport-related GHG emissions.
An
implementation of BRTS should be encouraged in other cities as well, which will have
significant contribution to the overall reduction of the GHG emissionsfrom the urban transport
sector.(Bajracharya 2008)
Conceptual Framework
Environment

Safety

TransportSyste
Social
m Maintenance

Environmental
Quality

Reliability
Economic
Student’s Life
Input
Demographic
Profile
Research Paradigm
Process
Output
OutcomeImpact
Random Sampling
Survey
Improved
This paper will
Questionnaire
Questionnaire
statusesbe
ofused
the as a
Interview
Primary Data
LRT2 Legarda
means to study
Socio-economic
conditions
ANOVA
Station other
on the ff:
Travel related
Regression Analysis
Business
and
underdeveloped
attributes
and Hypothesis
commercial
areas that can be
Perception on
Testing
development
reached by LRT2
impact,
stations.
Social condition
advantages and
Environmental
disadvantages of
condition
LRT2 riding
experience
Living conditions
of the respondents
General status of
LRT2
CHAPTER III
Research Methodology
This chapter shows the methods on how the researcher will conduct the paper. It presents the
data requirements and sources, methods of research, sampling technique, sample questionnaire,
respondent’s profile.
Data Requirements and Sources
This study aims to analyze the socio-economic and environmental impact of using the LRT2 to
college students in Mendiola.
First of all, the researcher will present the demographic profile of the college students. This
comprises the age, gender, employment, education and other socio-economic conditions like
Income and expenditures, Current Life Status, Perceived Income Level, Spending priorities.
Second, the researcher would like to consider also the travel related attributes like the distance of
their residence to the LRT station, travel time before, during and after rush hour, waiting time for
the train to arrive.
Third, the researcher will identify the Business and commercial development, Social condition,
Environmental condition and living condition in the area of residence of the college students.
Fourth, the researcher would like to know the awareness and experiences of the college students
using the LRT 2 in terms of: Safety, Transport System Maintenance, Environmental, Quality,
Reliability.
Fifth, the research will present the significance of LRT2 to the socio-economic impact,
environmental impact and student’s life to the society.
Lastly, the researcher will inform the readers of the policy implications of the study to the future
goals of the respondents to enhance their socio-economic and the living conditions of Mendiola
college students.
The researcher will use cross-sectional data to find the relationship between the independent and
dependent variables. The study will discuss about the experience, awareness of college students
with regard to the current situation of LRT2. There will be interviews with the respondents that
will be conducted. To give answers to the research problems, analysis of the dependent and
independent variables, and the results of the tests and interpretation.
Methods of Research
Researcher Design.
This paper will use the quantitative analysis to present how significant is the impact of
the interviewee’s travel related attributes, current status of LRT2 and the living conditions of the
college students.
Descriptive Research.
As stated above, the method of research that will be used in this paper is
descriptive.Studies that are descriptive present a brief synopsis of huge datasets of quantitative or
qualitative information obtained.
The researcher will utilize data sets like mean, median, mode which is the measures of
central tendency, correlation between variables, percentage and variation. Research that gathers
data using surveys usually covers these types of measurement, but frequently surpasses boundary
the descriptive statistics so that to draw inferences.
Correlation Analysis.
This type of analysis is utilized when someone is regarded to know the relationship
between two or more matched variables. This is where the fascination is concentrated basically
on the task of getting which variables are associated to a specific variable. The researcher is
fascinated in measures of degree of relationship like correlation coefficients. These correlation
coefficients will not sum up the firmness of relation between a match of variables, but it also
gives a method for contrasting the firmness of relatedness between one match of variables and a
different pair.
Subject and Study Site.
The target interviewees of the survey will be the college students in Mendiola, they will
be randomly selected and in consideration to their willingness to participate to the given
questionnaires.
Data Collection through Questionnaire.
The survey questionnaire is a research tool that comprises of questions that will require
answers from respondents. It suggests a form comprises of a set of multiple choices or scaling
questions, to be answered by the respondents. It is equal of the interview in written form. It is
objective and will need close-ended question so that it will result to factual and fixed answers.
Data Collection through Face to face Interview.
Interview is a formal talk between the interviewer and interviewee wherein the two
engages in the question answer session. Its subjective nature will make room for open-ended
questions and give the interviewer systematic information that is related to his/her research.
The
researcher
will
conduct
interviews
with
consent
and
arrangement
to
(random/selected) college students in application to the research.
Sampling Technique
Sample Questionnaire
Respondent’s Profile
Bibliography
http://www.lrta.gov.ph/
https://history-ph.blogspot.com/2017/04/lrt-2-names.html
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/news/ulatfilipino/520418/sino-nga-ba-si-r-papa-sa-lrtstation-sa-maynila/story/
http://www.lrta.gov.ph/images/upload/project-status-as-of-september-30-2017.pdf
http://www.yourdictionary.com/demographics
Haseeb Jamal. May 15, 2017. Mass Transit System - Impacts, Advantages &
Disadvantages. Traffic engineering. Mass transit. Transportation engineering.
https://www.aboutcivil.org/mass-transit-system-definition-impact.html
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080907120006AAXoUtZ
Dictionary
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manila_Light_Rail_Transit_System_Line_2
Examining the Factors that Impact Public Transport Commuting Satisfaction. Mairead Cantwell,
Brian Caulfield, Margaret O’Mahony
Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland. Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2009.
http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1180&context=jpt
David J. Forkenbrock, Shauna Benshoff, Glen E. Weisbrod. Assessing the Social and
Economic Effects ofTransportation Projects. NCHRP Web Document 31 (Project B25-19):
Contractor’s Final Report. February 2001.
http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_w31.pdf
Kyeongsu Kim, Michael L. Lahr. The impact of Hudson-Bergen Light Rail on residential
property appreciation. Papers in Regional Science, Volume 93 Supplement 1 November 2014.
© 2013 The Author(s). Papers in Regional Science © 2013 RSAI
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/pirs.12038/pdf
Ashim Ratna Bajracharya. March, 2008. The impact of modal shift on the transport ecological
footprint, A case study of the proposed Bus Rapid Transit System in Ahmedabad, India
https://www.itc.nl/library/papers_2008/msc/upm/bajracharya.pdf