The Undebated Side Of PUVMP That Must Be Debated On
By: C-Help Team
Do you know that the controversial Public Utility Vehicle Modernization Program (PUVMP) is a nationally determined contribution (NDC) of the Philippines to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)? It is that side of PUVMP which is not much publicly debated on but, as will be discussed here, it’s an important reason why PUVMP must be paused and revised.
The Philippines submitted to the UNFCCC its first NDC in April, 2021, committing to a projected greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction and avoidance of 75%, of which 2.71% is unconditional, for the period 2020 to 2030 for the sectors of agriculture, wastes, industry, transport, and energy. This commitment is referenced against a projected business-as-usual cumulative economy-wide emission of 3,340.3 MtCO2e for the same period. In order to meet these targets, the Philippines rolled out some projects and pursued mitigation actions.
One of these NDC projects is the PUVMP of the Department of Transportation through which the country expects to decarbonize the public transport; specifically, reduce GHGs at 2.91% by 2030[1] and 2.75% by 2040[2].
According to the United Nations Development Programme, climate action “means stepped-up efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-induced impacts, including: climate-related hazards in all countries; integrating climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning; and improving education, awareness-raising and human and institutional capacity with respect to climate change mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction and early warning.”
The most common GHG in the context of climate action is carbon dioxide, but others include methane, water vapor, nitrous oxide, and ozone. The rapid rise in GHG concentrations is primarily due to the combustion of hydrocarbon-containing fossil fuels and other carbon-containing compounds for the production of energy, whether it be from a vehicle, airplane, power plant, factory, or cooking fire. These emissions increase what is called the “greenhouse effect” wherein the GHGs effectively trap heat close to the surface of the earth by absorbing and emitting solar radiation that is reflected back from earth's surface as infrared radiation, leading to rapid changes in climate and disturbances to historic weather patterns that can result in more frequent and severe storms, heat waves, and droughts for example. Normally, the greenhouse effect is what keeps our planet warm enough for life. Today, however, too much GHG is warming the planet faster than life's ability to cope with the rapid climatic changes.[3]
Based on the foregoing definition, as a climate action, PUVMP is noble and necessary. But, is it?
Central to climate action is the Paris Agreement. The Paris Agreement builds off of the UNFCCC and, brings all nations together into a common cause to undertake ambitious efforts to combat climate change and adapt to its effects. NDCs are in the core of this Agreement and the achievement of its long-term goals. NDCs embody efforts by each country to reduce national emissions and adapt to the impacts of climate change. The Paris Agreement (Article 4, paragraph 2) requires each Party to prepare, communicate and maintain successive NDCs that it intends to achieve. Parties shall pursue domestic mitigation measures, with the aim of achieving the objectives of such contributions.
However, in the pursuit of such mitigation measures, the preamble of the Paris Agreement underscores the close links between climate action, sustainable development, and a just transition of the workforce, with decent work and quality jobs for all[4]. “Justice requires that climate action is consistent with existing human rights agreements, obligations, standards and principles. Those who have contributed the least to climate change unjustly and disproportionately suffer its harms. They must be meaningful participants in and primary beneficiaries of climate action, and they must have access to effective remedies”[5].
Based on the above, is there just transition in PUVMP? Is it consistent with human rights obligations?
Transport groups DLHB Transport Service Corp. (DLHB), Team UV Express Transport Service Coop. (Team UV), AMCL UV Express Federation (AMCL), and Freeport Area of Bataan Jeepney Operators and Drivers’ Association (Fabjoda), and student passengers Jonna Joyce N. Panti, Lei Andrew A. Relojas, and Alwyn Ryan Gaviola Mijos answered the above questions in the negative.
In July, 2023, they filed a petition at the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of some sections and guidelines of franchising regulations that operationalizes the PUVMP. Last week, they filed a reiterative motion for a restraining order against the consolidation (more popularly known as jeepney phase out) deadline on Dec. 31, 2023.
According to DLHB et al., some provisions of the PUVMP circulars violate the Constitution, Section 1, Art. III on due process, among others. This is because, if PUV operators and drivers fail to consolidate into a cooperative or association with15 or more modern PUVs, with terminals, garage and bank account by Dec. 31, 2023, they will automatically lose their franchise to ply their old routes—the scenario that became more popularly known as the traditional jeepney phaseout deadline as most jeepney operators and drivers would not be able to afford the modern jeepney that’s costing more than P2 million these days. Likewise, the DOTr issuances are inconsistent with the just transition requirement of R.A. No. 11697 or the Act Providing for the Development of the Electric Vehicle Industry (E-Vehicle Law), and as previously said, the just transition framework of the UNFCCC.
Aside from that, DLHB et al. say that PUVMP merely calls for engine model shift, but the old and new engines are still fossil fuel based which not only counters or defeats the GHG emissions reduction goals of PUVMP but also limits public transport.
Transport must not be by public or private motor vehicle only. It must include transport or mobility by walking, cycling, using electric vehicles, etc. which must be supported by the Department of Transportation and government by providing safe, convenient paths for them, and other infrastructures. These modes of transport do not require fossil fuel use, and would not emit GHGs.
Without just transition and low carbon mobility, the PUVMP is setting up the Filipinos—and the country’s climate action—to fail. Therefore, by Dec. 31, 2023, the PUVMP must be paused and revised.
[1] Financing low-carbon transport transition in the Philippines: Mapping financing sources, gaps and directionality of innovation. Science Direct. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590198222000525
[2] Ibid.
[3]Sustainable Development Goals Helpdesk. Retrieved from https://sdghelpdesk.unescap.org/knowledge-hub/thematic-area/climate-action-0
[4] Just Transition. UNDP Climate Promise. Retrieved from https://climatepromise.undp.org/what-we-do/areas-of-work/just-transition
[5] Understanding Human Rights and Climate Change. United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commission. Retrieved from https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/ClimateChange/COP21.pdf