Routes are built for operators.
Not for commuters.
The Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board was established in 1987 — when Metro Manila still had large undeveloped areas. Its model made sense then: operators propose routes, government approves or denies.
That logic no longer holds. Today, all 636 km² of Metro Manila is fully built-out — and actively expanding. The Manila Bay reclamation projects, the construction of the New Manila International Airport (NMIA) in Bulacan, and new expressway corridors within and adjacent to the metro will bring additional trip demand into an already saturated road network. MBT does not compete with these investments. It complements them — providing the internal distribution network that makes large-scale infrastructure useful to the daily commuter.
Yet the LTFRB framework hasn't changed. Routes still exist because an operator found them profitable — not because a planner found them necessary.
There is no network map. No unified card. No single authority accountable for the whole.
| # | Regions | Population |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | National Capital Region | 14,001,751 |
| 2 | Cordillera Administrative Region | 1,808,985 |
| 3 | Region 1 | 5,342,453 |
| 4 | Region 2 | 3,777,608 |
| 5 | Region 3 | 12,989,074 |
| 6 | Region 4-A | 16,933,234 |
| 7 | MIMAROPA | 3,245,446 |
| 8 | Region 5 | 6,064,426 |
| 9 | Region 6 | 4,861,911 |
| 10 | Region 7 | 6,640,875 |
| 11 | Region 8 | 4,625,929 |
| 12 | Negros Island Region | 4,904,944 |
| 13 | Region 9 | 3,943,837 |
| 14 | Region 10 | 5,178,326 |
| 15 | Region 11 | 5,389,422 |
| 16 | Region 12 | 4,462,776 |
| 17 | Region 13 | 2,865,196 |
| 18 | BARMM | 5,691,583 |
| Philippine Statistics Authority, 2024 Census of Population[3] | ||
In reading the Bible, the first book to cover is Genesis. In today's time & date, the word genesis has been used to connote the “origin”, “first”, and the “beginning” of something. If we were to discuss the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board, it is necessary for us to understand how it really started. Of course, it may be irrelevant in today's discussion if we cited the transportation system up to the creation of the First Philippine Republic. So, let's settle with the most “original” reason to where we are now in terms of transportation — “Post-Martial Law Era”.
Executive Order No. 202, June 19, 1987.[1] This has been the bread and butter of this organization. Following are the most crucial parts of this regulatory board:
Sec. 5 (a). The board was created to prescribe and regulate routes of service, economically viable capacities and zones or areas of operation of public land transportation services…[1]
As you may observe, the exact wording of EO No. 202 contains the words, “economically viable”. Now, let those words sink in first before we continue.
Given that the mandated role of the board encircles around a route being “economically viable” — this alone is the problem per se. Why? When we talk about the economic viability of a route, it pertains to the demand and supply of that proposed route, which sounds fair — right? But the problem for Metro Manila is that we are talking about moving 14 million passengers in this region alone.[3]
Such words like a route being “economically viable” is definitely an understatement. It's like asking for a pepperoni pizza while being inside a Pancit Malabon House — completely doesn't make any sense, right? Same with the LTFRB. If we are still under the discretion of looking whether a route is economically viable in a region with 14 million population, then we must be the problem. Nothing will go right under those circumstances.
Okay, now let's stop throwing hate at least to the LTFRB. Let's try to point out what are the key points that the board was able to do excellently. If we were to discuss the purpose of identifying routes being “economically viable” or not, especially outside Metro Manila, or especially outside a 14 million region, then the conversation will be different.
Imagine, in certain regions in the country where population is still not a big matter, the discussions of supply & demand might take precedence. It might even be the most reasonable option available, right? Because indeed, this may be the same argument that the first writers of this executive order had in mind.
“Let's create a board where it judges if a proposed route is indeed economically viable or not — because data shows that that Metro Manila's population at that time was around 5.9 to 7.9 million, which is relatively lower compared to what we have right now.”[3]
Now, should we scrap the LTFRB — no. Exactly no reason for that. Should we update them — yes. To end this conversation about the LTFRB, let me cite the findings of Engr. Villarete of The Cebu BRT Experience, a presentation pertaining to Cebu BRT. In one of the observations & recommendations he had, is to:
“Institutionalize the Framework for Service Contracting. The government should come up with a Service Contracting Regime which is clear and well defined and properly communicated to all actors.”[2]
This was brought to the table as some of the issues with Cebu BRT concerned the handling of the actual system — is it the LGU or the National Government (DOTr) duty? This resonates with the whole conversation about whether or not the LTFRB is still relevant to much greater populated regions like Metro Manila, and even Metro Cebu.
As much as we want to move forward with our mass road public transportation — buses, jeepneys, and even UV Express — all these transportation modalities are under the LTFRB, thus returning to the same bread and butter of the board to only judge within the “economic viability” of a route.
Major cities outside Metro Manila like SG, Hong Kong, and even Tokyo has there public transportation systems planned properly. Regardless if it's by means of macro or micro planning, it should always be planned. The question now for Metro Manila: who plans who? Who plans Metro Manila's traffic? Who plans Metro Manila's public transportation? Because if none, then indeed — my good friend Benjamin Franklin[4] might be right again — “if we fail to plan, then we are planning to fail.”
An alternate solution for the board is to waive the duty of economically viable routes in regions with an overwhelming number of population. Respectively, the table above shows the recent total population of the country per region. As you can see, the regions with almost 10 million and above are: Region 3 (Central Luzon), Region 4-A (CALABARZON), and the National Capital Region (NCR).
Instead, these regions should focus on both planning the micro and macro level of the movement of people. Indeed, almost 14 million is the population of the National Capital Region at nighttime — and might even be greater during daytime, as most of the people that work within the NCR also reside in neighboring regions, which is presented also in the table above.
Now, for those regions that fall between more than 5 million and less than 10 million — where the population is comparable to other regions in the world with the “best public transportation” — it might also be crucial to study and further improve their transportation systems, since questions of economic viability are also deemed unreliable. These regions include Cebu, Davao, and many other growing regions.
With those regions that are less than 5 million in population, indeed the question of routes being “economically viable” might still play a crucial role, as these said regions are yet to have enough population for sustaining the real economics of transportation.
Revelation has been the final book of the New Testament.[5]This book primarily discusses the return of Jesus Christ and even the creation of a new Heaven & Earth. Not to sound very religious, but I think it is now time for us to start writing our book of Revelation in terms of public transportation — not because the book of Genesis is outdated, but certain things and necessary writings must be done to stay true to the real purpose of this message.
May the country be blessed with a prophet like John in writing the rightful book of Revelation in our country's public transportation.
References
[1] Executive Order No. 202, June 19, 1987 — The Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) was created under Executive Order No. 202, signed by President Corazon C. Aquino on June 19, 1987. Section 5(a) mandates the Board “to prescribe and regulate routes of service, economically viable capacities and zones or areas of operation of public land transportation services.” Primary source — Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines: officialgazette.gov.ph · Secondary source — Supreme Court E-Library: elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph
[2] Engr. Nigel Paul Villarete — The Cebu BRT Experience. Presented at the 27th Annual Conference of the Transportation Science Society of the Philippines (TSSP), November 19, 2021. Theme: “Public Transport Reforms in Transition: Policy Lessons and Prospects on Competition, Consolidation and Contracting for the Philippine Road-based Public Transport Sector.” Primary source — National Center for Transportation Studies (NCTS), University of the Philippines Diliman: ncts.upd.edu.ph
[3] Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) — 2024 Census of Population (POPCEN). Total Philippine population as of July 1, 2024: 112,729,484, declared official by President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. through Proclamation No. 973 dated July 11, 2025. Region IV-A (CALABARZON) recorded the largest population at 16.93 million, followed by NCR at 14.00 million, and Region III (Central Luzon) at 12.99 million. Primary source: psa.gov.ph · NCR-specific data: psa.gov.ph (NCR)
[4] Benjamin Franklin Attribution Note — The saying “If we fail to plan, then we are planning to fail” is widely attributed to Benjamin Franklin in popular usage. However, historical research by Quote Investigator traces the earliest known instance to Reverend H.K. Williams in 1919. The ascription to Franklin, who died in 1790, is not supported by documented historical sources. Source — Quote Investigator: quoteinvestigator.com
[5] Book of Revelation — The final book of the New Testament of the Christian Bible, traditionally attributed to John of Patmos. Covers themes including the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, the Final Judgment, and the creation of a new Heaven and new Earth (Revelation 21). Theologically understood as the fulfillment and completion of what began in Genesis — the restoration of creation to its original intended purpose. Reference — Bible Gateway (New International Version): biblegateway.com