TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Trading mobility to cut pollution: Is it urgent now?
JP/Donny FernandoJakarta Governor Anies Baswedan has signed an extension of the odd-even license plate policy, which took effect on Sept
Change Size
JP/Donny Fernando
Jakarta Governor Anies Baswedan has signed an extension of the odd-even license plate policy, which took effect on Sept. 9, as part of attempts to reduce air pollution plaguing the capital city on a daily basis. The worsening pollution has taken a new twist, especially after a group of individuals sued the Jakarta and central governments for allegedly leaving the problem unaddressed.
Indeed, the pollution in Jakarta, a megacity of more than 10 million inhabitants, reached an unhealthy air quality index (AQI) level of 159 as of the end of July. According to many, the main culprit is private vehicles.
Research on transportation shows that the sector contributes around 20 to 30 percent to the pollution in a country. The researchers have agreed that in order to reduce pollution, policy measures must be exercised to limit the number of private vehicles.
To this end, they have identified and proposed two types of policy: hard and soft measures. Hard measures are typically implemented by directly restricting or penalizing the use of private vehicles.
The odd-even number plate policy now in effect in some parts of Jakarta is a prime example of hard measures.
Jakarta’s commuters have also heard of other hard measures, such as the electronic road pricing and car restrictions based on year of production.
Less familiar nonrestrictive policies encourage shifting to alternative transportation modes. Such soft measures range from subsidizing public transportation to providing travel information to commuters.
Unfortunately, hard measures are unpopular among car drivers, as they limit mobility. The contribution of the measures to pollution reduction is also debated. For instance, the odd-even policy does not effectively cut emissions as car owners can find alternative routes or just wait until the restriction hours end.
Research, such as in Beijing and Mexico City, has shown that these measures are also ineffective in reducing pollution. Thus we may need to rethink our approach to restricting private vehicles, to ensure that a policy really contributes to pollution reduction.
What about a harder policy then? Many have proposed that through a stricter odd-even plate number policy, which was implemented during the Asian Games last year, we could reduce pollution.
As we urgently need to tackle the unhealthy pollution levels in Jakarta, small improvements will still be important. The restriction policy before and during the Asian Games last year would suggest there is much truth to that idea. But, it is also obvious that people’s mobility in Jakarta was impacted.
Whether it is wise to offer a tradeoff between restricting mobility and reducing pollution will remain a huge question. For if mobility restrictions impinge on economic and social activities, the negative externalities of having such restrictions may be greater than the positive externalities of reducing pollution.
To further complicate matters, in our research we have found that policy change, such as lifting or imposing tougher restrictions on private vehicle use may put additional pressure on public transportation services providers.
Our study on the lifting of the three-in-one policy in 2016 indicated that the policy change increased the number of Transjakarta passengers in a skewed manner; the substantial increase was observed mainly during peak hours.
Therefore, it is necessary to ensure that public transportation services are ready to absorb this additional pressure. Or else, we might lay too heavy pressure on the public transportation system, leading to an increase in unwanted delays and instances of overcrowding.
It is not all bleak though. Perhaps combined hard and soft policy measures may work wonders in this situation. The solution of coupling the stricter road restrictions and the use of free special-route bus services (that solely focus on commuter transportation to and from Jakarta’s Sudirman and Kuningan central business district areas) seem to be the most plausible in the short run.
As research has indicated, the need to make transfers reduces commuters’ willingness to use public transportation services. Having special routes that directly bring commuters from bus terminals and large shopping centers in suburbs close to their homes to office buildings may be effective in persuading — at least in theory — private vehicle owners to use this type of service.
In the end, while efforts have been made, and options will continue to be considered in order to manage Jakarta’s pollution in the short run, it remains necessary to constantly question and discuss the state of urban mobility in Jakarta.
Sustainable urban mobility in Jakarta is only attainable in the long run; and for that to happen, we must not be easily satisfied with the short-term solutions to Jakarta’s transportation problems.
_______________________
Doctoral candidate at Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam with a dissertation topic related to transportation policy, sharing economy and information management. The views expressed are his own.
