A Future for Jeepneys (What do you think?)

[architect]

*jpdm,

Do you have a soft copy of the paper? If so, is it possible to email it to me?

Thanks.

[jpdm]

Sige, i will look for it again. Very interesting. Feeling ko pinagawa ng japanese auto interest yun para makita nila kung paano ma-break ang market ng locally-made PUJ.

[dprox]

Sige, i will look for it again. Very interesting. Feeling ko pinagawa ng japanese auto interest yun para makita nila kung paano ma-break ang market ng locally-made PUJ.

Please send it to me, too. Thanks, jpdm.

[architect]

Sige, i will look for it again. Very interesting. Feeling ko pinagawa ng japanese auto interest yun para makita nila kung paano ma-break ang market ng locally-made PUJ.

Ugh! If this is true, we need to do our best to pre-empt them, though admittedly it would feel like going against a big tsunami.

[architect]

[SIZE=4]PUJ versus AUV[/SIZE]

[SIZE=4]Rivalry of Development and Survival In and Out of the Road[/SIZE]

[SIZE=4]The Case of Transport Industry in Metro Manila Philippines[/SIZE]

[SIZE=4]Candy Lim Chiu, MBA, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan[/SIZE]

[SIZE=4]Hiromi Shioji, D. Econ, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan[/SIZE]

[SIZE=4]ABSTRACT[/SIZE]

[SIZE=4]The Public Utility Jeepney (PUJ) industry’s days are numbered despite the fact that it is an epitome of Philippine ingenuity on hybrid vehicle, cheap transportation, means of livelihood and employment generator that spans more than 50 years as the King of the Road. Its detour in the Philippine economy continue to be challenge by factors such as indirect government support, environmental issues, social demands, economic crisis, transport competition and entrance of substitution of Asian Utility Vehicle (AUV) that collide from all direction living the industry in jeopardy. [/SIZE] [SIZE=4]This paper examines the similarities, differences and trends of transport business and industry in the Philippines concentrating to two major rival mode namely PUJ and AUV where it present diverse lessons to be shared for future studies of transportation business and industry around the globe. Ultimately, it aims to make recommendation on measures of ensuring a level of playing field between the players with the existence of substantial economic potential, industry improvement and concrete policy instrument.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=4]INTRODUCTION[/SIZE]

[SIZE=4] From downtown city of Metro Manila famously overcrowded public utility vehicles (PUV) headed by the legendary Public Utility Jeepneys (PUJ) and the contemporary Asian Utility Vehicles (AUV) riding the waves of the city commuter and connecting businesses as it may sees as strong at it seems. The transport industry is in era of great change. It is probably the best transport systems that were created to cater the Filipino way of living but it beset by challenges and problems that threaten to cause collision of both sectors. [/SIZE] [SIZE=4] The rise of traditional Public Utility Jeepney (Casuga, 1974; Grava, 1972; Kurokawa et. al., 1984; Mercado, 1994, Torres, 1979) and the entrance of contemporary Asian Utility Vehicle (Diaz and Cal, 2005; Doroy, 2005) has given a lot of varying side, the acknowledge importance and the target of scrutiny. However, behind its popularity in the Philippines and some part of the world, there is dearth of critical literature on the challenges and potentials as the industry reached a defining moment in its road map.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]The success story is not all smooth cruising but there are also some bumpy rides and collision that need to be cushion so this study aims to examine the situations and trends of development, rivalry and survival of Public Utility Jeepney (PUJ) and Asian Utility Vehicle (AUV) in Metro Manila, Philippines. Thus, in lieu with the major objective, the study aims:[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]§[/SIZE][SIZE=4]To characterize the emergence of PUJ and AUV as public utility vehicles in Metro Manila.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]§[/SIZE][SIZE=4]To determine the product and service structures of PUJ and AUV.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]§[/SIZE][SIZE=4]To identify their role as a paratransit in Metro Manila.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]§[/SIZE][SIZE=4]To assess the nature of competition between PUJ and AUV, and their implication in the economy.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]§[/SIZE][SIZE=4]To make recommendation on measures of ensuring a level of playing field between the players with the existence of substantial economic potential, industry improvement and concrete policy instrument.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4] This study cross-examine the two major transport industry in the Philippines by focusing on the development and rivalry of PUJ and AUV in Metro Manila, which are known as the controversial transport business and are considered as instruments in providing to the alleged improvement and development of the Philippines. [/SIZE] [SIZE=4]Descriptive method of research has been adopted in the study. This was employed to provide a comprehensive update on the Public Utility Jeepney and Asian Utility Vehicle in the Philippines, examining the trials and opportunities, and the future of the industry. This study will provide important contribution to remedy the need for more current information on this topic.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]Because of the limited literature on the topic to be analyzed, heavy reliance had to be placed on direct interviews with and information provided by makers, government agencies, operators and users. Analysis of periodicals, statistical data, journals and a book review were also conducted to support factual information of the study. The author’s findings and recommendation are based on fieldwork in the Philippines supplemented by interviews to provide the validity of the analysis and the accuracy of the factual information.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]This study is divided into different sections. In addition to this introductory part, the study intent to provide the emergence of both transport sectors by reviewing the basic nature and contribution to the economy. Given the broad extent of the PUJ and AUV in the Philippines, it is necessary to separate the presentation of the investigation to provide clarity to the readers. This is logically done by starting literature review on a brief background of the transport metropolies, ridership of PUV in Metro Manila, rise of informal sectors, influences in society, contribution, rivalry, problems and potentials. The succeeding sections will discuss the concluding remarks and the future recommendation.[/SIZE]

[architect]

[SIZE=4]LITERATURE REVIEW[/SIZE]

[SIZE=4]
Metro Manila – Transport Metropolies

[/SIZE] [SIZE=4] Metro Manila or known as National Capital Region (NCR) is the capital of the Philippines and among the twenty largest metropolitan areas. It is located on the southwestern coast of the island of Luzon around the mouth of Pasig River, which drains into the Manila bay. The metropolis is composed of 12 cities and 5 municipalities with a total population of 9,932,560 consisting almost 12 percent of the entire national population of 85.3million within its land area of 636 square kilometer large (NSO, 2006). [/SIZE] [SIZE=4] Metro Manila is the capital center of industry, commerce, economy, education, administration, and politics in the Philippines, it produces almost one-third of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of 5,418,839 as of 2005 are indicative of economic activity and therefore associated with the production or trips of both passengers and commodities . Higher GNP and GDP usually translate into higher volumes of traffic as people and goods flow from one place to another (UPNCTSFI, 2004). [/SIZE] [SIZE=4]As one of the modern metropolies in Southeast Asia, Metro Manila transport industry plays a major role in connecting people, goods and businesses in the country. One of the largest islands of the Philippines, Luzon account for one-thirds of the area and 13 percent of the total population. The transport, as well as the economic, system is focused on and dominated by Metro Manila, the capital city. All the basic modal systems in Luzon have radiating linkages, which use Metro Manila as their hub (Leinbach and Chia, 1989).[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]Metro Manila is dominated by road transport mainly of buses and jeepneys. As the flow of passengers and commodities, there has been more than a four fold increase in the number of road vehicles in the past two decades in the Philippines, from less than a million in the late 1980’s to almost 4.2 million in 2003 (LTO, 2005). [/SIZE] [SIZE=4] In Metro Manila alone, the number of vehicles increased from about 600,000 in the early 1990’s to approximately 1.5 million in 2003. This is about 33% of the total for the whole country. The increase is more pronounced among the diesel fuelled vehicles, which is more in-demand for public utility vehicles. The number of diesel fuelled vehicles in the whole country increased from about 331,000 in 1987 to 1 million in 2005, a more than three fold increase. Meanwhile, the number of gas fuelled vehicles increased from 594,559 to 631,530 in the same time period, a little more gradual flow (DOTC, 2006). [/SIZE] [SIZE=4]The importance of transport industry as catalyst to socio-economic development is given major priority by developed and developing countries like the Philippines. The Metro Manila as the public transport hub extends to its neighboring environment where short distance provincial operations form an important part of the urban public transport system. [/SIZE][SIZE=4]

Public Utility Vehicle - Ridership Growth in Metro Manila

[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]“A safe, modern, efficient and environmentally sustainable transportation is every Filipino’s dream. Whether it is for leisure or business, reaching one’s destination at the shortest possible time with relative comfort is the basic transport need of our people.” (Ildefonso T. Patdu, Jr. – Department of Transportation and Communication, 2005)[/SIZE] [SIZE=4] The transport industry in Metro Manila is a mixture of diverse modes of transport and most of them are considered ride-sharing transport from non-motorized to motorized conveyances available for hire to public. In the context of Metro Manila, alternative public transportation modes that are available for individual or household used. All of these public transportation services do not provide fixed time schedule, self-schedule are being practiced based on full-occupancy of passengers, driver’s decision and the flow of movement.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4] Total trips during the year 1980 are classified into those using public transport modes (bus, jeepney, tricycle) and those by private modes (car, van, truck, taxi). The former have a share of 74.4% or 7.9 million trips, while the latter, 25.6% or 2.7 million trips (JUMSUT I).[/SIZE] [SIZE=4] The traffic in Metro Manila by the year 2000 has been heavily dependent on public vehicle modes, the total of 17.8 million person-trips occurs daily about 70% is met by public transport modes, 9% by semi-public transport modes (which is defined to include taxi, AUV, private buses) and 21% by private modes (Roth 2000). [/SIZE] [SIZE=4] Motorcycle and Tricycle is the highest motor vehicle registered with 42.56% is due to low fuel consumption and the continuous rise of fuel prices followed by Utility Vehicles with 32.29% as the major vehicle use for transport system. However, as of 2005 a decrease in new utility vehicle registration from 129,983 units to 93,959 units are experienced due to number of factors such as economic crisis, political instability and rise of fuel prices.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4] For public transport modes, jeepney have a significant share of total demand. This mode comprises 51% of the total demand or 77% of public transport demand alone. However, a distinct 40% of “business” trips are notably made by cars (JUMSUT I).[/SIZE] [SIZE=4] As of 2006, Road based mode dominate the transport industry. The Public Utility Jeepney (PUJ) is still the dominant mode in Metro Manila transport system accounting for 39%of the trips, however, from 1985 to 2006 the market share decrease to 12%, followed by buses 24%, taxi and tricycles 6%. . Light Rail Transit (LRT) system and Metro Rail Transit (MRT) system year accounted 2% (LTO, 2006). Therefore, most of the people depend on public transport that has relatively providing relatively good services. While the service level has been quickly decreasing as congestion worsened and comfort reduced, new types of services such as Asian Utility Vehicles (AUV), a shared air-conditioned taxi with about 10 seating capacity providing point to point service. [/SIZE] [SIZE=4]Public Utility Jeepneys (PUJs) are the most popular mode while Asian Utility Vehicles (AUVs) are gaining its attractiveness. However, the PUJ patronage is declining, partly from the rise of much more convenient transport alternative and as a consequence of severe traffic congestion. Due to inadequacy of formal transport service such as Light Rail Transit (LRT) and Metro Rail Transit (MRT) and the logical reason that Philippines is a developing country are the main factors to bring the popularity of paratransit in Metro Manila. The major modes of paratransit in Metro Manila include buses, taxis, tricycles, pedicabs, Calesa, the indispensable PUJ and AUV known as FX. [/SIZE] [SIZE=4] One of the reasons for the relatively high share of public transport in Metro Manila is attributed to the lack of enforcement measures against different kinds of illegal vehicles and operations, which have encouraged jeepneys to penetrate places where demand-supply gaps exist. Many jeepney and FX drivers operate without a license or known as colorum. Without these illegal vehicles and operations, the current service level of public transport can hardly be maintained. However, the urban traffic situation, to which the ever-increasing jeepney also contributes, is becoming worse (Metro Manila Planning Transportation Study, 1983). [/SIZE] [SIZE=4]The establishment of PUJ and AUV is based on the demand-side and supply-side factors. Demand-side factors are the increasing population and the inadequacy of transport development, whereas supply-side factors are the inefficiency of public transportation service and the efficiency of service of PUJ and AUV. [/SIZE] [SIZE=4]Dieleman et. al. (2002) reported that defining the relationships between land use composition and the mode of travel are influenced by sets of factors come into play: [/SIZE] [SIZE=4]§[/SIZE][SIZE=4]Commuter’s hold different personal and household attributes, income, household composition, and participation in the workforce, which have strong impacts on mobility and modes employed. [/SIZE] [SIZE=4]§[/SIZE][SIZE=4]Residential environment and the transportation services the residential location is endowed with affect travel behavior, and [/SIZE] [SIZE=4]§[/SIZE][SIZE=4]Trip purpose, space-time constraints and land use affect the chaining of trips, which strongly affects modes utilized.[/SIZE]

[architect]

[SIZE=4]Paratransit – An Informal Industry

[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]One type of public transportation choice that is particularly well suited to spread-out metropolitan areas is paratransit. Paratransit was originally adopted in Western context by the United States Department of Transportation to denote “a group of mainly urban services somewhere between private passenger transport and conventional public transport in terms of cost and quality service” (Rimmer, 1980:937). [/SIZE] [SIZE=4]In the developing world, this category embraces a range of vehicles with flexible pick-up and delivery stops from cycle rickshaws and pedicabs to jitneys, taxis and buses (Leinbach and Sien, 1989). These services employ people who need jobs and fill need not met by regular transit routes, especially who live in slums (Sheehan, 2002).[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]Demand for paratransit services continues to grow at unexpected rates, thus leaving transit operators straining to maintain sufficient capacity to accommodate this demand and to control costs and anecdotal reports from local press suggest that there is considerable concern about the reliability and responsiveness of these paratransit operations (Stump, 2000).[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]In developing countries, paratransit provide the travel work-horse and play a major role in meeting the travel needs of the poor (Allport, 2000). Alterrnative or informal public transport modes are common in the Philippines both in the countryside and in the urban areas. Often the vehicle used as paratransits are originally designed as a private vehicle and not as public transportation. Hence, these modes are usually outside of government public transport regulations and do not belong to any of the existing standard classification of public conveyances (Doroy, 2005). This concern stems from the situation in the Philippines where paratransit as one of the informal sector roughly contribute a share in the 44% of GDP of the Philippines (Domingo, 2004). [/SIZE] [SIZE=4]Based on the study of Allport (2000), “The owners of paratransit are some individuals, those from low income families who have worked overseas and invest to provide some security for their family, or people who invest windfalls or pensions, and often the military, senior government officials and middle-ranking civil servants. The drivers are sometimes the owners, but often other family members, or others who pay fixed ‘boundary fee’ to the owner each day. Despite the important niche paratransit fills by meeting the needs of the public, governments often try to restrict it to make room for growing car fleets catering to the privileged, which is seen to be outside their system of control. But, mostly because of their ownership and partly because they are so popular with the riding public, such control fail. It thus seems that paratransit often has a ‘ratchet effect’: it appears when there is a supply interruption, established itself, expands and expands again, fuelled by expanding in most developing countries.” [/SIZE] [SIZE=4]Based on DOTC (2006), paratransit competes very effectively with other form of transport. Cost per passenger-km, and hence fares in a competitive market, are no higher, and it is preferred by passengers, being easier to access (stopping anywhere), more frequent, easier to get on and off, usually providing a guaranteed seat once on and being faster (it weaves through the traffic better than buses). Not surprisingly paratransit progressively takes over from bus services, and in many cities this has happened and paratransit is the main workhorse.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]Road-based public transport appears, in practice, to be susceptible to the formation of cartels and monopolies, particularly where paratransit remains, in formal terms, illegal – and outside the rule of law. There are no notable scale of economies in the provision, indeed, the threshold of entering the market is law, particularly for paratransit. Links to illegal organizations, and coercion of travelers, is not in common. Market access maybe controlled by force-with would be competitors simply run off the road. [/SIZE] [SIZE=4]Paratransit vehicles, in particular, often use dated technology or second-hand, and may contribute significantly towards air pollution. They may not be the only offenders, but their numbers combined with their polluting characteristics, often make them a target for action to improve air quality (Allport, 2000). [/SIZE] [SIZE=4]In Metro Manila, the staff costs would appear to be particularly low, whilst fuel costs are a major cost component. Since 2004, the price of oil has increased six-fold and it has a dramatic effect on developing countries. Followed by depreciation, interest, taxes and licenses cost, this costs are correspondingly high. In addition public transport operators in the Philippines are not subsidized as is the case of other countries such as Europe and United States where continue operations loans have to be acquired either from state government (Jacobs et.al, 1986).[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]Philippine government have advocated assisting the informal sector where it occurs, not only to provide jobs and raise incomes for the poor but also to avoid the shortage of the capital which large-scale enterprises would need. In many cases, they encouraged the formation of the paratransit and promoted schemes to encourage people from all walks of life to enter the business.[/SIZE]

[architect]

[SIZE=4]Evolution of Public Utility Jeepney Industry (PUJ) in the Philippines

[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]As Torres (1979) wrote “The Jeepney is a mobile assemblage of signs, symbols, decorative motifs and fetishes, rattling along the streets of Metro Manila and other towns throughout the archipelago with a ‘Whoopee’ that would astonish the designers of the Original Willy’s Jeep.” Anywhere in the island of Philippines, you can find a jeepney and it will take you where you need to go. They will stop anywhere for you as long as you are within sight.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4] As the late Frank Lynch says, “Yesterday’s visitor is today’s native (Torres, 1979).” In the past, Filipino started with an ox/horse cart or drawn calesa as a means of transportation, it served as people carrier, baggage loader, business mover and tourister. When the rise of population and the demand for fast transport arise, the drivers and makers had to create a substitute to satisfy the demand of the public. This is where the jeepney industry begins. [/SIZE] [SIZE=4]After the Second World War, the US Army left in the Philippines the seed for another model which is the jeep. [/SIZE][SIZE=4]After destruction it has created, leveled the Philippines capital city of Manila and choked the roads with debris making them almost impossible to travel on or through. With the ability of the Willy’s jeep to navigate, due to its off-road capabilities, to go up mountains, cross deserts and bodies of water, impervious weather, and able to transport soldiers, goods and weapons, this sturdy vehicle was to become the father of all jeepneys (Mercado, 1994).[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]The jeep, a versatile and simple means of transportation, was adopted by the Filipinos as a piece of appropriate technology. This model set the standard for the development of indigenous industry which produces a wide variety of vehicles, now called jeepneys for private and public use. The front design of most jeepneys still resembles that of the original jeep model, even though they may be extended to function as either buses or trucks.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]The forerunner of the Jeepney at first as a military vehicles was the U.S. Army General Purpose or the American G..I., an army jeep were converted into a public utility vehicle or owner-type jeep to meet the needs for more commuter transport in the Philippines. It resembles a US Army M38. The evolution of the Jeep to Jeepney, made American soldier astonished what the Filipino had done to the Original. [/SIZE] [SIZE=4]As the American servicemen left the island, the war surplus vehicles, some were sold and most were remained in depots waiting to be disposed after war damage claims. As Torres (1979:14) stated, “A small motorized vehicle called jeep. It had an 80-inch wheel base, 1/4 – ton capacity, four-wheel drive. General George C. Marshall called it ‘America’s greatest contribution to modern warfare.” Designed for rugged duty on and off the road, it could plow through monsoon rains and tropic heat, and grunt through deep ruts, potholes, plains of mud and hard bumps.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]As Reynaldo Francisco of Francisco Motor Corporation (2005) said “the jeep made a strong impression on the entrepreneurial Filipinos who had just been through acute war shortages and had developed a keen appreciation for anything built to go a long way. That it was. Its sturdy design promised virtual indestructibility on rugged roads. Its economic virtues (accessible spare parts, easy maintenance) made it an ideal workhorse in an underdeveloped country. Its small size was exactly right for the five-foot-or-so Pinoy.”[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]When the surplus units were lined up for disposal, Filipino being resourceful with limited financial resources by nature overhauled and transformed these into some Pop Baroque machine on wheels, complete with colorful paintings, banners and blinding lights. It was molded after the kalesa or Visayan tartanilla where the entrance is at the rear and the passengers sit facing each other (Mercado, 1994).[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]According to Jeepney Makers in the Philippines (2006), jeepney production is decentralized – there are dozens of shops along the roads where jeepneys are assembled by the unit or by the dozen. It is a fascinating example of an artisan appropriation and popularization of the factory assembly line. Each jeepney is assembled from parts originating from multiple sources and, as a result, each jeepney is unique. The engines are recycled from Japan but most of other components are made in the Philippines by specialized suppliers.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]The total number of franchise and units of PUJ in the Philippines with three different services offered for passengers namely: air-con service with 1,352 units under 1,232 franchise owners followed by dual service with 29,958 units under 27,513 franchise owners and the most in-demand service is regular service with 194,636 units under 175,735 franchise owners. The total jeepney is 225,946 units under 204,480 franchise (LTFRB, 2006). However, according to Nida Quibic of LTFRB (2006), colorum jeepney operation are more than the total units officially recorded. In short, the basic assumption of jeepney in the whole Philippines will reach 500,000 units or more.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]The Philippine jeepney industry was thus born, and later on, it spread to the different provinces from Metropolitan Manila where it all started, making the jeepney the most ever present vehicle indeed in the Philippines. The jeepney have been around for ages, they have not only endured but have also prevailed to be the one and only “King of the Road”.[/SIZE]

[architect]

[SIZE=4]Public Utility Jeepney (PUJ) as a Public Utility Vehicle

[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]The road in the Philippines is not only a means of communication and transportation but it is an important focus of economic and social life, particularly for the poor. The mode of transportation shapes the city and the demands of the city also shapes the transportation particularly public utility vehicle. [/SIZE] [SIZE=4]The attributes of transportation that are of interest to Filipino passengers are the cost of transportation, the time in transit, the reliability of the vehicle in meeting schedules, frequency of service, comfort and safety, vehicle sizes, loading and unloading facilities (Dieleman and Burghouwt, 2002)[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]Jeepney is dominating the trips in Metro Manila accounting for 39% of the whole transport industry (LTO, 2005). The work-trip commuting demand was significant enough to encourage jeepney services to serve the affluent commuter moving from the suburb to the urban or vice versa. Jeepney is used not only by the very poor but by middle and upper income groups.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]Since 1950, there has been a significant trend toward the manufacture and assembly of jeepney in the Philippines to satisfy their own need, largely because of a desire to have a means of transport (Jeepney Makers of the Philippines 2006). The demand for jeepney in the Philippines has been increasing of the growth of population and income. [/SIZE] [SIZE=4]According to NSO 2003, Filipino families spent more on transportation and communication as their expenditure were monitored to move up from 6.8 percent in 2000 to 7.4 percent in 2003. From the viewpoint of the Filipino, there is a great advantage in making a vehicle that are mostly adapted to local market demands and operational environment (Jeepney Makers of the Philippines, 2006). [/SIZE] [SIZE=4]Jeepneys are privately owned and operated, with the fleet mostly owned by individual operators who lease them to drivers. In addition, the vehicles assembled locally by a thriving industry. The dominance of jeepneys have resulted from generally dispersed travel demand pattern in Metro Manila. Other factors leading to dominance of jeepneys include (JICA):[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]§[/SIZE][SIZE=4]Abundant low-cost labor that contributes to low operating costs.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]§[/SIZE][SIZE=4]The self-management system of the industry including the support of jeepney association.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]§[/SIZE][SIZE=4]The availability of local technology for vehicle supply.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]§[/SIZE][SIZE=4]Fare levels about equal to those for buses whose service level is generally lower than that provided by jeepney.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]Jeepney, a practical means of mobility and accessibility, this vehicle was appropriately done for the Philippines, with its tropical climate – ventilation was not a problem, rough roads/ eroding potholes/bottomless mudholes of urban and rural areas– driving was not a problem, typhoons days or monsoon season- ability to cope with the flooded streets from as little as one foot to as high as a meter - was not a problem. Filipino need just to relax because the public utility jeepney is on its way to save the day.[/SIZE] [SIZE=4]Based on the study of JUMSUT, the estimated growth rates from 1997 to 2016 for PUJ, the number of trips is 2.11 with 2.37 vehicle – kilometer.[/SIZE]

[architect]

The paper then goes on to discuss the evolution of the AUV. It then provides a comparison of the two and finally gives a conclusion. For those who want a soft copy of the complete paper, just pm me.

*dprox, jpdm - I already emailed you.