Bikeshare is coming to Metro Manila
Part 2: Millions of residents are in desperate need of affordable, accessible, and immediate mobility. The Philippine government’s bikeshare pilot could provide a solution. What will ensure its success?
Julia Nebrija spoke with Dana Yanocha, Principal Author of ITDP’s Bikeshare Planning Guide 2018 Edition, to better understand what helps a bikeshare system become an inclusive public transport option.
Watch the full interview here.
This interview has been edited for clarity.
Julia Nebrija: The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) updated the Bikeshare Planning Guide in 2018. What led ITDP to develop the guide and what are some of the updates in the latest version?
Dana Yanocha: ITDP is a global organization made up of regional offices around the world where local staff provides technical assistance to cities. Having the bikeshare planning guide as a resource allowed our local offices to push for better designed and better implemented bikeshare systems at a time when bike share was just coming onto the scene. Since the original guide launched in 2014, it has been used by cities around the world to plan and implement their systems.
Aside from providing design and planning guidance, a major motivation for creating the guide was to develop standardized metrics that enable cities to evaluate their bikeshare systems. Those didn’t really exist before the original guide. Without those metrics it was really difficult to measure whether systems were improving over time or to decide if systems were meeting the needs that were initially identified. Having those metrics helped to create a race to the top at a time when bikeshare was just starting to emerge as a key amenity. Cities were just starting to realize bikeshare provided a lot of benefits aside from just functioning as a tourist or recreation benefit.
Aside from providing design and planning guidance, a major motivation for creating the guide was to develop standardized metrics that enable cities to evaluate their bikeshare systems.
We updated the guide in 2017 at another key moment, which is when dockless bikeshare started coming onto the scene, as well as other changes like pedal assist electric bikes. Pricing models were also changing at that time, shifting from longer term annual and monthly memberships towards per-trip pricing, which made bikeshare a lot more accessible.
Ultimately the guide aims to help cities think about how bikeshare can help them meet broader transportation goals and design systems to meet those outcomes.
Ultimately the guide aims to help cities think about how bikeshare can help them meet broader transportation goals and design systems to meet those outcomes.
JN: A guide is meant to help decision makers as they develop bikeshare systems, but of course it’s not a one-size-fits-all; the recommendations still need to be tailored to the local context. Are there some principles though that ensure a successful system regardless of the context?
DY: The idea of tailoring to local contexts is crucial when thinking about bikeshare. It’s important to make sure that politicians or other decision-makers buy into the idea that bike share is really public transportation and that a well designed bikeshare system provides a lot of benefits to the city. Having this understanding in place can help justify investments in bikeshare whether that’s financial or in terms of staff time from the city.
It’s important to make sure that politicians or other decision-makers buy into the idea that bikeshare is really public transportation and that a well-designed bikeshare system provides a lot of benefits to the city. Having this understanding in place can help justify investments in bikeshare whether that’s financial or in terms of staff time from the city.
You asked about a couple things that could push a system to be successful regardless of context. From our work, we’ve seen there are three key metrics to ensure success.
The first is station density. We recommend 10–16 stations per square kilometer, about a station every 300 meters or so. This helps ensure there’s a station within a convenient walking distance from where population centers are.
The next metric is bike density or bikes per resident. We recommend 10–30 bikes per 1,000 residents in the service area, so you not only want to have stations that are accessible but you want to have enough bikes at those stations that people can reasonably assume there will be a bike at the station when they need it.
And the last one is the coverage area. That helps ensure there are enough origins and destinations within the coverage area to ensure that system use will be relatively high. So with this metric it’s not just about the destinations but also the origins and how convenient it is for people to get to those stations to start their trip.
All three of these metrics together help to create a foundation of reliability. Even if you don’t know exact station locations, you can be reasonably confident that there will be a station close to you at both your origin and your destination.
All three of these metrics together help to create a foundation of reliability. Even if you don’t know exact station locations, you can be reasonably confident that there will be a station close to you at both your origin and your destination.
JN: In the Philippines, there’s a modest budget for a bikeshare program as part of the COVID-19 emergency response fund. This is great because the government is recognizing the importance of active mobility, especially during the pandemic. However, the limited budget will only cover a pilot phase, which might not be enough to reach the recommended coverage area you just mentioned. What would you want to see from the inaugural phase of a bikeshare system?
DY: It is great to see that cities are taking advantage of the interest in active mobility and are thinking of investing in bikeshare as a result. Even if you are not going to establish the full coverage area as part of a pilot or inaugural phase of the system, you still want to think about the same ideas, like what modes are people taking and what type of trip do you want them to take using bikeshare?
You also want to think about the role and opportunity of bikeshare to replace existing trips or create new trips. Are you encouraging people to access public transit like a BRT or a metro where bikeshare serves as a feeder? Or are you encouraging more people to cycle in which case you want to place stations near existing cycle lanes and perhaps more recreational places like waterfronts or open streets or other active mobility initiatives that are part of the COVID-19 response, like temporary cycle lanes.
In an inaugural phase, if you aren’t able to establish the full coverage area, it’s important to think of what types of trips you are trying to generate and placing stations in a way that enables you to do that.
In an inaugural phase, if you aren’t able to establish the full coverage area, it’s important to think of what types of trips you are trying to generate and placing stations in a way that enables you to do that.
JN: In some of these scenarios we might not have baseline data for the origin destination, either because it didn’t exist before, we never had it, or because the types of trips may be changing especially during the pandemic where we see more social mobility rather than the residential to downtown commute. Destinations may also be different during the pandemic with more trips to hospitals or grocery stores for instance. How do we plan in real-time for where stations should be located if we don’t have that information readily available?
DY: It could be challenging to think about that especially with a station-based system which inherently feels inflexible. Once you place those stations, depending on the model, they can be movable, but that can create additional logistical needs. So I think this is a unique opportunity to implement a bikeshare system given some of these shifts in travel patterns. I think the inaugural phase will inevitably test the viability of those locations, which you can use as your baseline to understand what those trips are looking like, which stations are seeing a lot of use and which aren’t, and having the flexibility to relocate those lower use stations as part of subsequent phases.
There’s also an opportunity to think about the type of bike being used. I’m thinking primarily about station-based systems in the United States and Europe that are starting to use a dockless hybrid so bikes can be left at the station or they can be locked outside of the station to a sign post or other street furniture. The hybrid gives the best of both worlds- the reliability of the station and picking up a bike outside the stations.
JN: What are the common misconceptions or myths you often hear about bikeshare? Even though we’ve seen so many good examples and successful models all over the world, I’m sure there are still some misconceptions about bikeshare.
DY: I think a big one is that bikeshare is only for young, wealthy men. And while bikeshare ridership in some countries can reflect that demographic, what this really points to is an access issue. You may not see people who look like you riding bikeshare because it’s harder for other demographics to access bikeshare, whether that’s not feeling physically fit enough to ride a bike in general or being able to afford a bike share membership. There are ways to address access issues whether it’s integrating e-bikes so a wider variety of ages and abilities can access bikeshare or reducing membership fees for lower-income individuals. Addressing and ensuring there’s a wide variety of bikeshare users helps combat that misconception.
There are ways to address access issues whether it’s integrating e-bikes so a wider variety of ages and abilities can access bikeshare or reducing membership fees for lower-income individuals.
Another interesting misconception is that only people who don’t own a bike will use bike share or that if you already own a bike, you don’t need bike share. We’ve seen across a lot of bikeshare systems that have been operating for a number of years that bike owners use bikeshare because it’s flexible for one way trips or because they use it to connect to a bus and they don’t want to have to bring it on the bus. There are a lot of trip types and use cases that benefit personal bike users.
There are a lot of trip types and use cases that benefit personal bike users.
JN: Cities in Metro Manila tend to be very large and very dense. Planning systems can be slow and we have trouble getting caught up with transportation planning in particular. What specific challenges do you see for designing, implementing, and managing bikeshare systems in megacities of the Global South?
DY: It’s interesting to think about megacities specifically. We’ve seen bikeshare work in megacities, for instance in Mexico City and in Rio de Janeiro which has recently improved their bikeshare system and seen increased ridership. Buenos Aires has seen bikeshare take off in the last couple years. It can be done.
You are right that there are some specific challenges to megacities. The sheer size tends to be an issue especially for station-based systems. Service areas tend to be in higher income or tourist focused locations mainly because of the financial model. There’s a need to get return on investment for the initial stations and have the financial ability to expand to outer neighborhoods from there. Given the size of megacities it can be challenging to site stations in outer neighborhoods because the financial investment is harder to make it work.
This is where the city needs to ask- what do they want bikeshare to be and who do they want it to serve? Just because that model has been used in the past doesn’t mean it’s the only way to do it.
Something to consider about megacities specifically is that people may be taking longer trips because destinations are further from each other, so thinking about really investing in and designing a bikeshare system around integration with public transit could be a good opportunity.
Something to consider about megacities specifically is that people may be taking longer trips because destinations are further from each other, so thinking about really investing in and designing a bikeshare system around integration with public transit could be a good opportunity.
There are some cities that have thought about bikeshare differently in this context, implementing models like in Fortaleza, Brazil which uses an overnight model. At bus stations there’s bikeshare there for the last mile trip and you can keep it overnight and ride it back to the stations in the morning. That approach emphasizes the reliability piece and connection to transit. So there could be innovative models around integration that could work really well in megacities that might be different from the role bikeshare has played in smaller cities.
JN: The opportunity for megacities and bikeshare is huge because it is more difficult to roll out mass transport projects that can cover every area, especially as areas pop-up up and grow faster than we can plan for them. That’s why I think bikeshare could be really important for cities like Metro Manila because you can roll out mobility options to a large population with lower investment in a way that meets demand where it is, on the ground, in real-time. We are hoping this first phase will prove that concept and show the potential of it for these types of cities specifically.
Lastly, COVID-19 is top of mind. How are you seeing bikeshare systems adapt to the pandemic?
DY: There’s been a lot of variability in terms of adapting and responding to COVID-19 for bikeshare. City-owned bikeshare has fared a lot better compared to newer, private, dockless offerings. City-owned systems are working closely with their operators who are clued into what a city’s responses are like and whether they need to shut down or can continue operating.
In the face of really low transit ridership, bikeshare has seen expanded ridership across the board. Even looking at similar months this year compared to last year, we are seeing an uptick in ridership because people feel more comfortable using a personal mode where they can safely maintain distance from others.
In the face of really low transit ridership, bikeshare has seen expanded ridership across the board. Even looking at similar months this year compared to last year, we are seeing an uptick in ridership because people feel more comfortable using a personal mode where they can safely maintain distance from others.
At first there was a lot of focus with bikeshare operators on sanitation and making sure bikes were being wiped down. Those are still in effect, but as our understanding of the virus has improved and there’s less fear around contracting the virus from surfaces, there’s been a renewed demand for bikeshare.
I think the opportunity now is around the broader coalition of people who value active mobility, whether that’s bikeshare or walking or whether that’s encouraged people to buy their own bike. There’s this larger coalition calling for better bike infrastructure, slower streets, and other efforts that will be really important for making sure that bikeshare and cycling are safe and reliable for everyone going forward. There’s a lot of opportunity to broaden that coalition.
There’s this larger coalition calling for better bike infrastructure, slower streets, and other efforts that will be really important for making sure that bikeshare and cycling are safe and reliable for everyone going forward.
Bikeshare will hopefully be able to capitalize on and utilize this momentum to expand systems and expand access and generally shift toward active mobility and inter-mobility more broadly.
Dana Yanocha is a research manager at the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP). Dana’s (she/her/hers pronouns) work at ITDP includes research and analysis of trends in sustainable transportation focused primarily on cycling, bikeshare, and other forms of shared mobility. She has led the development of key ITDP publications including the 2018 Bikeshare Planning Guide, and several policy briefs including Optimizing Dockless Bikeshare for Cities and Ride Fair: A Policy Framework for Managing Transportation Network Companies. Dana is passionate about identifying connections between the social, economic, and environmental spheres of sustainable development, with a particular interest in providing guidance to cities to strengthen transportation networks, leverage emerging technology and innovations, and improve overall accessibility. Prior to joining ITDP in 2017, Dana worked for the Chaddick Institute for Metropolitan Development in Chicago, and for Resources for the Future, an environmental economics think tank in Washington, DC. She holds an MA in Sustainable Urban Development from DePaul University.
Julia Nebrija is a Co-Founder of Agile City Partners. She has over a decade of leadership experience advancing urban development agendas in the Philippines across grass roots, government, and international organizations. She worked as an urban specialist with the World Bank before serving as the Assistant General Manager of Operations for the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority, Program Manager in the Office of the Secretary for the Philippines Department of Budget and Management, and most recently, as Chief Operating Officer of the Philippine Japan Initiative for Clark. She specializes in conceptualizing transformative initiatives through participatory methods and executing with results by building public-private partnerships. She speaks regularly as a resource person on placemaking and inclusive mobility. Her articles have been featured in Design Anthology, CNN Style, Domus, Esquire, and BluPrint.
