Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with

free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-

19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the
company's public news and information website.

Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related

research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this
research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other
publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights
for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means
with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are
granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre
remains active.
 Asian Transport Studies 9 (2023) 100101

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Asian Transport Studies

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/asian-transport-studies

Effects of Covid-19 pandemic on mode choice behavior of working Filipinos

in Metro Manila
Nell Janine S. Co, Katherine F. Dimaculangan *, Mathew Harvey T. Peralta
Institute of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, University of the Philippines Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting control measures by the government impacted the travel behavior of
Mode choice behavior Filipinos. With work trips being a major part of trips generated, this study aimed to investigate the effects of the
COVID-19 pandemic pandemic on working Filipinos’ mode choice. Data were collected from employed residents of Metro Manila
Multinomial logistic regression
using an online survey. About 48% of the respondents preferred using public transportation for work pre-
pandemic. This decreased to 22% during the transport lockdown and increased slightly to 25% after the lock­
down was lifted. Active transport share increased by 3% during the lockdown but went back down after it was
lifted. Using multinomial logistic regression, the significant factors that influence the pre-pandemic respondents’
mode choice were age, household income, travel cost, and vehicle ownership. During the lockdown, travel
distance, travel time, and sex assigned at birth became significant also. After the lockdown, the significant factors
reverted to that pre-pandemic.

1. Introduction As a result, a shortage in supply was observed, specifically in public

1.1. Background
The Coronavirus Disease 2019(COVID-19) is considered a global
pandemic mainly due to the speed and scale of the transmission of this
disease (Henri and Kluge, 2020). The Philippine government initially
responded to the threat of COVID-19 by imposing control and preventive
measures to prohibit unnecessary mobility circulation such as lock­
downs. The first-ever lockdown imposed in the country, the Enhanced
Community Quarantine (ECQ), started on March 16, 2020. This type of
quarantine is described as the implementation of temporary measures
which impose stringent limitations on the movement and transportation
of people (Inter-Agency Task Force, 2020). In this study, the period
before March 2020 was considered the period “before” transport
lockdown. The second period, labeled as “during” transport lockdown,
was from March 2020 to August 2021 since the latest ECQ implemented
at the time of writing in the chosen cities happened until August 20,
2021 (Manuel, 2021). Lastly, the third period was after August 2021 or
“after” the transport lockdown, which is the period after the latest ECQ
at the time.
These travel restrictions and guidelines implemented by the gov­
ernment caused a reduction in the service capacity of transport systems.
transportation in Metro Manila (Ramos, 2021). Despite this, people still
had to go out for different purposes, with work trips being one of the
most common (Abdullah et al., 2020). As not everyone can work from
home and/or have private vehicles, an estimated 4.98 million public
transport trips are needed daily if 50% of the pre-pandemic travel de­
mand returns (Rey, 2020). The limited transportation availability and
high passenger demand during the lockdowns caused crowding in the
streets and delays in usual work trips.
A literature review identified how the pandemic affected work trips
in different countries. In the US, work-related travel dropped from 2.2
average daily trips made pre-pandemic to 1.7 during the pandemic (Tefft
et al., 2021). In Spain, mobility to workplaces decreased to 80%
compared, with pre-pandemic trends with public transport being the
most affected mode (Awad-Nunez et al., 2021). In India, a study
revealed that about 45% reported no work-related travel, 23.6%
reduced travel, and the rest answered the same as pre-pandemic (Pawar
et al., 2021). Though there are numerous existing studies related to this
topic in other countries, the research on the effects of the COVID-19
pandemic on mode choice behavior in the Philippines is very limited.
To fill up this gap, the study focused on answering how the mode choice
behavior of employed Filipinos in the country has changed because of
the effects of the pandemic. Moreover, this can help inform policy

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: nsco@up.edu.ph (N.J.S. Co), kfdimaculangan@up.edu.ph (K.F. Dimaculangan), mtperalta2@up.edu.ph (M.H.T. Peralta).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eastsj.2023.100101
Received 31 March 2022; Received in revised form 17 December 2022; Accepted 15 February 2023
Available online 20 February 2023
2185-5560/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies. This is an open access article under the CC
BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
N.J.S. Co et al.
researchers and makers in better preparing for future crisis-related
lockdowns and planning labor-related transport policies in the country.
1.2. Objectives
The main purpose of the study was to investigate how employed
Filipinos’ mode choice behavior in Metro Manila, Philippines changed in
relation to the COVID-19 pandemic-related lockdowns. Specifically, the
study sought to
1. Determine the significant factors that affect the mode choice of
working Filipinos in Metro Manila; and
2. Identify the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic-related lockdowns on
these factors, and on their mode choice distribution.
There was a limited sampling due to the pandemic. Those who do not
have access to the internet were not able to take part in the study since
an online survey was utilized for data gathering. The survey was also
conducted during the third period (after transport lockdown) only, thus,
the respondents had to refresh their minds to answer for the first two
periods (before and during transport lockdown). In addition, the number
of participants who answered the survey was computed using the pre­
dicted working population in Metro Manila.
2. Review of related literature
2.1. Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on mode choice
Transport and work-related policies induced by the COVID-19
pandemic, coupled with the perception of people of their safety from
the COVID-19 virus, caused a shift in travel behavior (Bhaduri et al.,
2020; De Vos, 2020). One of the main effects of the pandemic-related
policies seen throughout different countries is the shift from public
transport to private modes due to the desire to reduce transmission.
During the initial month of the COVID-19 pandemic, public transport
comprised 7% of the trips in Australia, down from 15% the months
before (Beck and Hensher, 2020), while in Budapest, the modal share of
public transportation declined from 43% to 18% and private vehicle use
rose from 43% to 65% (Bucksy, 2020). There had also been an increase
in the use of active modes such as walking and cycling due to similar
reasons for avoiding closed-contact enclosed modes. Abdullah et al.
(2020) showed a shift in the travel mode of 1203 people from different
countries. From 32% before the pandemic, the modal share of the pri­
vate vehicle turned 39%, while active transport comprised 20% from the
initial 12%. Similarly, in the study by Beck and Hensher (2020), the use
of active transportation rose to 20% from 14% of the trips before the
pandemic.
At the time of writing, published research on similar effects of the
pandemic-related lockdowns in mode choice behavior in the Philippines
remained scarce. That said, there was a clearly observable shift,
Fig. 1. Trip composition by mode (left) and trip composition of public transportation (right) Source: JICA & DOTC, 2015.
2
Asian Transport Studies 9 (2023) 100101
especially in major urban areas in the country with historically high
public transport mode shares.
2.2. Pre-pandemic mode share in Metro Manila
The urban transport system in the Philippines is primarily road-
based, composed of public utility jeepneys, buses, taxis, tricycles, and
pedicabs. In Metro Manila, jeepneys and buses dominate road-based
public transport wherein buses serve 805 routes, while jeepneys travel
on 785 different routes. Taxis, tricycles, and pedicabs provide express
services, but the latter two transport modes are limited to serve in local
areas (Asian Development Bank, 2012).
Fig. 1 presents the 2014 distribution of trips by mode and the
composition of trips made by public transportation in Metro Manila.
Based on Fig. 1, most trips were generated by public transport, using
public utility jeepneys.
The percentage share of public transportation in Metro Manila is
greater than the modal share of public transportation in Jakarta, which
is 27% (Prayudyanto and Thohir, 2017), and in Kuala Lumpur, which is
20% (NKRA-UPT, as cited in Endut et al., 2015). But its trips generated
using private vehicles are lower than Jakarta, with 73% of trips made by
personal vehicles (Prayudyanto and Thohir, 2017).
2.3. Factors affecting mode choice
The mode choice behavior of people is affected by several factors.
One of these factors is sex. Studies in Malaysia (Arasan and Vedagiri,
2009) and India (Nurdden et al., 2007) found that females are less likely
to drive personal vehicles and prefer public transportation than males.
This result is comparable with the findings of Chang and Wu (2005) that
men in Taiwan prefer to drive for themselves and use personal vehicles.
Age is another mode choice influencing variable. According to Racca
and Ratledge (2003), walk trips are more common in the younger gen­
eration, while for ages 65 and above, it is more likely that people take
trips as a passenger than a driver. The study by Mayo and Taboada
(2020) on the mode choice of commuters in Metro Cebu, Philippines,
revealed that varying factors influence different age groups. People ages
36 to 44 are more concerned with cost, those ages 45 to 53 are more
concerned with comfort, while the people ages above 60 are keener on
their safety. Income is also a significant factor in mode choice as people
belonging to the lowest income group are more inclined to use public
transport (Racca and Ratledge, 2003; Bajracharya and Shrestha, 2017).
As car ownership increases, the more likely people use a car; car
owners choose private transport more than other travel modes (Abdul­
lah et al., 2020; Racca and Ratledge, 2003). Vehicle trip travel time
influenced by the travel distance also affects mode choice. In the
Philippines, De Guzman and Diaz (2005) suggested that people tend to
use private vehicles more as the total travel time increases, while Racca
and Ratledge (2003) mentioned that public transport involves shorter
travel distances than those taken by personal vehicles.
N.J.S. Co et al. Asian Transport Studies 9 (2023) 100101

The trip purpose is another mode choice influencing factor to where,

consider. For work trips, public transport and carpooling are more used,
while active transport, such as bicycling and walking, is often related to
travel to school (Racca and Ratledge, 2003).
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the travel guidelines imposed by
the government, the travel behavior of people changed. It was observed
that new mode choice influencing factors arise too. Infection-related
factors have become a high priority for people. Commuters are con­
cerned about social distance, vehicle cleanliness, and whether the other
passengers wear face masks (Abdullah et al., 2020).
The factors discussed in the previous paragraphs were the ones
investigated in this study to determine if there was a change in the mode
choice influencing factors before, during, and after the pandemic-related
lockdowns. Based on the presented literature, there is a high public
transportation use in the Philippines, but there are not many studies on
how the COVID-19-related lockdowns affected these factors, as well as
the mode choice distribution. Therefore, this study seeks to fill in this
gap and the results can be used as a basis for further research and data-
driven policy shift.
Umi: net utility function for mode m for person i,
xmi1, …, xmik: attributes of mode m for person i, and
θ1, …, θk: weights attached to each factor
Meanwhile, equation (3) presents the probability of an individual
choosing a travel mode using the multinomial logit model (Khan, 2007).
eVin
Pin = (3)
∑
N
eVim
i=1
where,
Vin: utility function of mode n for the person i,
V im: utility function of any mode m in the choice set for person i,
Pin: probability of person i selecting mode n,
N: total number of available travel modes for person i

3. Methodology Since the study included some categorical factors, such as travel
mode, sex assigned at birth, and vehicle ownership, encoding was done
An online revealed-preference survey was used for data collection to convert these categories into numerical codes for the software to
due to the limitations brought by the pandemic. The study focused on analyze (Ray, 2015). Table 1 shows the corresponding numerical codes
investigating two types of factors, namely socio-demographic factors used for the variables.
(age, sex assigned at birth, household income, household size, and The multinomial logistic model should have no multicollinearity,
vehicle ownership) and travel characteristics (travel mode, travel dis­ which means there should be no highly correlated independent variables
tance, travel time, and travel cost). Respondents were asked to consider (Shrestha, 2020; Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). In line with this, Pearson cor­
these factors for the periods before, during, and after the transport relation analyses were performed. Once the condition of no multi­
lockdown. collinearity was satisfied, the likelihood ratio test was done to show the
The study area was National Capital Region (NCR), commonly relationship between the dependent variable (mode choice) and the
known as Metro Manila. The respondents are those who resided and independent variables (International Business Machines, 2020). For
worked in this region for all three periods being studied in the study. Due each model, the p-values from the likelihood ratio test were used to
to the ongoing pandemic at the time of the study, the selected sampling determine the independent variables that significantly influence peo­
method was snowball sampling. The initial respondents, who were pri­ ple’s mode choice (e.g., variables with a p-value less than 0.05).
vate companies and barangay officials in Metro Manila, helped the re­ Meanwhile, Akaike’s Information Criteria (AIC) and Bayesian Informa­
searchers identify other potential samples. The survey was disseminated tion Criteria (BIC) values were considered in assessing each multinomial
first to them on different online platforms, and they shared it with their logistic model’s performance. The lower these values are, the better the
co-workers or employees for the next set of respondents to do the same. model fits the data (Bevans, 2020). They can be computed theoretically
Each response from the survey was checked to determine if the criteria as follows:
for the study’s respondents were all met before using it as part of the (
− 2
) (
k
)
data. After obtaining the number of valid responses, the formula pre­ AIC = ∗ LL + 2 ∗ (4)
N N
sented in equation (1), Slovin’s formula (Ellen, 2020), was used to
compute the sampling margin of error. where,
N N is the number of examples in the training dataset, LL is the log-
n= (1) likelihood of the model on the training dataset, and k is the number of
1 + Ne2
parameters in the model.
where, n is the sample size, N is the population size, and e is the margin
BIC = (− 2 ∗ LL) + [log (N) ∗ k] (5)
of error. The population size considered was the estimated working
population in Metro Manila obtained from the latest Philippine Statistics
where,
Agency data available at the time of study.
log() has the base-e called the natural logarithm, LL is the log-
Five different categories of land transportation systems were studied:
likelihood of the model, N is the number of examples in the training
public transportation (Jeepneys, trains, and buses), private vehicles
(personal cars and motorcycles), private hire (Share-a-ride, Grab, and
Taxis), active transportation (walking and bicycling), and shuttle ser­
Table 1
vices (services offered by the government, companies, and other Code for qualitative parameters.
organizations).
Parameter Category Code
For data analysis, multinomial logistic regression was used to
determine the actual effects of each parameter being studied on the Travel Mode Public Transportation 1
Private Vehicle 2
mode choice of respondents. This analysis was performed with the aid of
Private Hire 3
the statistical software SPSS. The utility of a transportation mode was Active Transportation 4
represented as a function of the attributes of the weighted coefficients Shuttle Service 5
that affect choosing that specific mode, represented mathematically by Sex Assigned at Birth Male 1
equation (2) (Khan, 2007). Female 2
Vehicle Ownership Do not own a personal vehicle 0
Umi = θ1 Xmi1 + θ2 Xmi2 + ⋯ + θk Xmik (2) Do own a personal vehicle 1

3
N.J.S. Co et al. Asian Transport Studies 9 (2023) 100101

dataset, and k is the number of parameters in the model. this to the actual age distribution in Metro Manila (PSA, 2015), they are
In addition, models were validated by comparing the predicted with similar with the highest percentage being in the prime working age
actual mode choice decisions per respondent (Ding and Zhang, 2016). group (25–54) and the lowest percentage being in the elderly age group
Lastly, the mode choice distributions in three different periods were also (65 and above). For household income, there are seven classifications
determined and compared to each other to investigate the evident based on PSA, but this study grouped them further into four only: poor to
changes that occurred using Sankey diagrams. These diagrams pre­ low income (less than ₱23,000), lower-middle to middle-middle income
sented the mode composition per period and mode choice changes be­ (₱23,000 to ₱81,999), upper-middle to upper income (₱82,000 to
tween time periods. It also represents the percentage shift per mode ₱233,999), and rich (more than ₱233,999). Most respondents belong to
between the time periods considered. the lower middle to middle-middle income households. The difference
between the survey and population percentages were about 7% only.
4. Results and discussion It can be seen in Figs. 2–4 that most of the respondents have a
household size ranging from four to six people. The actual average
4.1. Demographics household size in Metro Manila is 4.2 (PSA, 2016). There was a sizeable
decrease in household size during the COVID-19 related transport
Since the study focused on determining the changes in mode choice lockdown. The reduction in household size may be attributed to the loss
behavior by examining the distribution of mode choices in three of a family member, change of household or residency, and other similar
different periods which are before (before March 2020), during (from reasons. On the other hand, there was not much difference in the
March 2020 to August 2021), and after (after August 2021) transport household size observed between the second and third periods.
lockdown of working Filipinos in Metro Manila, the respondents who Figs. 5–7.
answered the questionnaires were only those who reside and work in As for vehicle ownership, 53.4% of the respondents owned at least
this region before the COVID-19 pandemic and until the time of the one personal vehicle before the transport lockdown. During the trans­
study. Based on the 2015 Census, Metro Manila has a population of 22 port lockdown, the percentage increased to 55.4%. People encountered
448 173 and an annual population growth rate of 1.58%. According to difficulty in commuting due to reduced public transportation capacity
PSA (2020), the region has a 60.5% labor force participation rate and/or feared contracting the virus when using other modes. After the
(LFPR). Therefore, assuming that the population growth rate and LFPR transport lockdown, the percentage remained at 55.4%.
in the region remained the same, its 2021 population was approximately As shown in Figs. 8–10, only 12.3% of the respondents worked from
13 615 897, while its 2021 labor force population would be around 8 home (WFH) before the transport lockdown. During the transport
237 618. lockdown, this increased considerably to 47.1%. This is a clear indica­
The total number of responses collected in this research was 264. But tion effect of the transport lockdowns, as well as the shift of businesses
the sample size was reduced to 204 respondents using the criteria and schools to remote work. Meanwhile, since the third period was after
mentioned earlier. Using Slovin’s formula mentioned previously, this the latest ECQ, the percentage of respondents who WFH dropped to
sample size corresponded to a 7% margin of error. According to Surresh 36.8%. That said, this percentage is still relatively high. This is the result
and Chandrashekara (2012), the acceptable range for margin of error in of the combination of some businesses allowing for a higher level of on-
survey types of studies is from 5% to 10%. Hence, the computed value site work, while some still allowing (or even requiring) WFH
was deemed acceptable. arrangements.
Table 2 shows the distribution of the respondents in terms of sex
assigned at birth, age, and household income. Majority of respondents 4.2. Trip characteristics
are female, comprising 55.4. This is similar to the population data ob­
tained from PSA (2018). In terms of age, most of the respondents come The transportation mode most available (i.e., mode people can use or
are in their 20s. This is mostly due to the data gathering being done have the access to in traveling to their workplace) before the transport
online since younger people are more active on social media. Comparing lockdown was public transportation. This transport mode was available
to 110 respondents. Urban transport in the Philippines is dominated by
Table 2 jeepneys and buses (Asian Development Bank, 2012). However, when
Profile of the survey respondents. the ECQ was imposed, there was a significant drop in public trans­
portation availability as seen in the results. The government restricted
Parameter Category Percentage of Percentage of Source for
Respondents Population Population the mobility of people, and transport facilities were not allowed to
Data operate. The availability of both private hire and active transportation
Sex assigned Female 55.4% 50.5% (PSA, 2018)
also went down during this period. Some private hire drivers chose not
at birth Male 44.6% 49.5% to operate anymore due to low profits brought upon by curfews and
Age 15–19 0.5% 17.2% 27.7% PSA (2015) lockdowns during the pandemic (Suntay, as cited in Balinbin, 2021).
20–24 16.7% Meanwhile, one possible reason behind the reduction in active trans­
25–29 30.9% 76.1% 58.2%
portation was people’s fear of being exposed to the virus. Moreover,
30–34 14.2%
35–39 10.3% during the transport lockdown, the availability of private vehicles
40–44 6.9% almost doubled. There were also more shuttle services available to the
45–49 7.4% respondents during this period compared to before the transport lock­
50–54 6.4% down. The increase in shuttle service availability may be due to the
55–59 3.4% 5.9% 8.7%
60–64 2.5%
DOLE-DTI advisory that required companies to provide shuttle services
65 and 1.0% 5.4% for their workers and the other non-government organizations that
above responded to the lack of transportation. After the transport lockdown,
Household Less than 33.3% 26.6% PSA (2018) when there was no more ECQ, the transportation modes’ availability
Income ₱23 000
slowly went back similar to before the transport lockdown situation.
₱23 000 - 44.6% 66.7% 73.4%
₱81 999 There were more public transportation, private hire, and active trans­
₱82 000 - 14.7% portation available during this time and fewer private hire and shuttle
₱233 999 services. Fig. 11.
More than 7.4% In terms of the travel distance, as shown in Figs. 12–14, most re­
₱233 999
spondents had workplaces less than 5 km (short) from their homes in all

4
N.J.S. Co et al. Asian Transport Studies 9 (2023) 100101

Fig. 2. Household size distribution in three periods.

Fig. 5. Vehicle ownership distribution in three periods.

Fig. 3. Household size distribution in three periods.

Fig. 6. Vehicle ownership distribution in three periods.

time, there was an option “work from home” to account for those who
Fig. 4. Household size distribution in three periods. WFH for a certain period and did not travel at all to work. During the
transport lockdown, 10.3% of the respondents did not work on-site at
all. After the transport lockdown, some reverted back to on-site work as
three periods. Meanwhile, the respondents with workplaces that are
suggested by the decreased number of respondents who answered “work
10–14 km (long) and 15 km and above (extra-long) from their residences
from home” during this period. Figs. 18–20.
almost had the same percentages in all three periods. The only reasons
There was not much change in the travel cost in the three periods.
for the shift in travel distance during the pandemic were the changes in
The range with the highest number of respondents in all three periods
the workplace and home addresses. Figs. 15–17.
was ₱200 to ₱799 (USD4-16), while those with the least ranged from ₱0
The distribution of the travel time was almost the same as the travel
to ₱199 (USD0-4).
distance. More than 40% of the respondents spent 30 min or less trav­
eling to work in all three periods based on the figures above. For travel

5
N.J.S. Co et al.
Fig. 7. Vehicle ownership distribution in three periods.
Fig. 8. Work arrangement of the respondents in three periods.
Fig. 9. Work arrangement of the respondents in three periods.
Fig. 10. Work arrangement of the respondents in three periods.
4.3. Mode choice influencing factors
4.3.1. Before transport lockdown
Using Pearson correlation analysis, as shown in Table 3, no pair of
independent variables have a correlation coefficient greater than 0.80.
This finding suggests that no variables are highly correlated with each
other which means that there is no multicollinearity, and all the vari­
ables may be considered in multinomial logistic regression. Table 4.
6
Asian Transport Studies 9 (2023) 100101
For this study, public transportation was used as the reference
category where the other transport modes were compared. As discussed
in the methodology, variables with a significance value less than 0.05
are considered significant in affecting the mode choice of working Fili­
pinos in Metro Manila. Hence, the significant variables before the
transport lockdown were age (XA), household income (XHI), travel
cost (XTC), and vehicle ownership (XVO). Their individual effects are
discussed in the sections that follow.
The utility function of the modes for the period before the transport
lockdown follows the format of equation (6) while the coefficients per
parameter are shown in Table 5.
U = αXA + βXHI + γXTC + δXVO + c (6)
The results suggest that the preference of people for using private
vehicles increases with age (α = 0.256). Older people have higher
chances of choosing private vehicles over public transportation. This
situation may be the case since older people have a more comfortable
travel experience when using personal vehicles; transferring from one
mode to another is not an issue. In terms of household income, the
negative coefficient (β = − 0.279) implies that people with lower total
household incomes are more likely to choose private vehicles. This is an
unexpected case and in contrast with the findings of Raca and Ratledge
(2003) and Bajracharya and Shresth (2017) who said that lower-income
people are more likely to use public transportation. The negative coef­
ficient (γ = − 0.007) for travel cost indicates that people are more in­
clined to choose public transportation when travel cost increases. People
who do not own private vehicles are also more inclined to use public
vehicles since there are no available cars for them to use.
In terms of private hire use, older people prefer traveling using this
mode to public transportation (α = 0.217). Older people may have felt
more at ease with point-to-point travel using private hire vehicles. But
compared to private vehicles, the magnitude is lesser, as suggested by
the coefficients. As household income increases, the utility of using
private hire vehicles also increases (β = 1.388). As the household income
of people increases, the utility of using private hire vehicles increases (β
= 1.388) since people belonging to higher income groups have more
capacity to pay for this mode. But when travel costs (γ = − 0.160) begin
to rise, people start to choose public transportation more. Since public
transportation is cheaper, commuters prefer this transport mode over
private hire. Travelers without personal vehicles are also more likely to
use private hire (δ = 1.142). Since these people do not have readily
available family vehicles, they are pushed to use other travel modes.
Focusing on active transportation, its utility increases as age (α =
0.388) and household income increase (β = 0.270). With increasing
travel costs, the utility of active transportation decreases. As travel cost
rises (γ = − 3.272), people tend to use public transportation. People with
no personal vehicles are also inclined to use public transportation than
active transportation.
Meanwhile, as age and travel costs rise, people are more inclined to
use shuttle services (α = 0.536 and γ = 0.221, respectively). But as
household income increases, the utility of shuttle services goes down (β
= − 1.994). Commuters with no personal vehicles are also more likely to
use shuttle services than public transportation (δ = 0.609). Table 6.
To check the accuracy of the model, the AIC and BIC parameters
were checked together with the percentage correctness of the model.
From Table 7, the model had AIC and BIC values of 412.770 and
266.093, respectively. These values were lower compared to the AIC and
BIC of models from other attempts, thus indicating that this had a better
fit than them. The resulting percentage correct of the model is 73.1%,
which is relatively high for this kind of studies. Table 8.
4.3.2. During transport lockdown
Similar to the first period, there are no pair of independent variables
with Pearson correlation coefficients higher than 0.80 during the 2nd
period, which means that the assumption for no multicollinearity in
multinomial logistic regression is checked. Table 9.
N.J.S. Co et al.
Fig. 11. Availability of transportations mode in three periods.
Fig. 12. Travel distance distribution in three periods.
Fig. 13. Travel distance distribution in three periods.
During this period, household income (XHI), travel distance (XTD),
travel time (XTT), travel cost (XTC), sex assigned at birth (XS), and
vehicle ownership (XVO) are significant in defining the mode choice of
working Filipinos in Metro Manila.
The utility function of the modes for the period during the transport
lockdown has the form shown in equation (7), while the coefficients
obtained are shown in the table that follows. Table 10
U = αXHI + βXTD + γXTT + δXTC + εXVO + ζXS + c
The influence of household income in choosing private vehicles is
unlike the first period. Respondents with higher household incomes
Asian Transport Studies 9 (2023) 100101
Fig. 14. Travel distance distribution in three periods.
Fig. 15. Travel time distribution in three periods.
prefer to use personal vehicles than public transportation (α = 0.995). As
travel distance and travel cost increase, people are more inclined to use
public transportation (β = 0.645 and δ = 0.248). But when travel time
increases, people choose private vehicles over public transportation (γ
= − 1.222). Females were found to prefer traveling using private vehi­
cles over males (ζ = − 0.325). Still, commuters with no personal vehicles
are more likely to travel via public transportation (ε = − 3.251).
For private hires, the higher the household income, the higher the
(7)
probability that a person uses this mode (α = 1.858). The utility of
private hire also increases with increasing travel distance (β = 0.457)
and travel costs (δ = 0.161) but decreases with the increase in travel
7
N.J.S. Co et al.
Fig. 16. Travel time distribution in three periods.
Fig. 17. Travel time distribution in three periods.
Fig. 18. Travel cost distribution in three periods.
Fig. 19. Travel cost distribution in three periods.
8
Asian Transport Studies 9 (2023) 100101
Fig. 20. Travel cost distribution in three periods.
time (γ = − 0.588). During the first period, this is not the case for travel
distance since people are more inclined to avoid private hires as travel
distance becomes longer. The change may be due to the COVID-19
pandemic. People choose to travel via private hire since they feel like
it is less likely that they will contact the virus while using this trans­
portation mode. Males prefer public transportation to females (ζ =
− 1.981), and it is more likely that persons with no personal vehicles
travel via private hire during this period (ε = − 0.320).
For active transportation, those part of higher-income groups prefers
this mode to public transportation (α = 1.166). But as the travel char­
acteristics, travel time, distance, and costs rise, people are more inclined
to choose public transportation over active ones. This situation may be
the case since bicycling or walking is tiring at longer times and distances.
Unlike private vehicles and private hire uses, there is a higher proba­
bility that males travel via active transportation than females (ζ =
0.788). Commuters with personal cars are less probable to resort to
bicycling or walking (ε = 0.158).
An increase in household income and travel distance results in rising
in the utility of shuttle services (α = 0.453 and β = 0.430, respectively).
The predicted influence of household income is different from the first
period. Like active transportation, it is less likely that people travel via
shuttle services as the travel characteristics (travel distance, time, and
cost) rise. Compared to females, males are more inclined to choose
public transportation than shuttle service (ζ = − 0.883). Unlike the first
period, there is a higher probability that people with no available per­
sonal vehicles choose public transportation over shuttle services (ε =
− 0.279). Table 11.
The mode choice model during the transport lockdown had an AIC
value of 459.022 and BIC value of 331.497 based on Table 12. These
values were lower compared to the obtained AIC and BIC values of
models from other trials, thus having a better fit. The percent correct of
the model during the transport lockdown shows that it is capable to
predict 68.1% of the choices of the trip makers correctlyTable 13.
4.3.3. After the transport lockdown
Just like in the previous periods, there is no multicollinearity in the
data set. Table 14.
Age (XA), household income (XHI), travel cost (XTC), and vehicle
ownership (XVO) were the independent variables that significantly
affect mode choice after the transport lockdown. The significant factors
identified for this period were similar with the period before the
transport lockdown. Based on this, the utility function of the modes after
the transport lockdown has the following form. Table 15
U = αXA + βXHI + γXTC + δXVO + c (8)
In terms of private vehicle use, age influences the utility of a mode
choice the same way as in the first period. The utility of private vehicles
goes up as age increases (α = 0.071). The effect of household income is
like the second period. As household income increases, it is more likely
N.J.S. Co et al. Asian Transport Studies 9 (2023) 100101

Table 3
Collinearity among independent variables (before transport lockdown).
Sex assigned at birth Age Household size Household income Vehicle ownership Travel distance Travel time Travel cost

Sex assigned at birth –

Age − 0.083 –
Household size − 0.034 0.058 –
Household income − 0.034 − 0.100 − 0.038 –
Vehicle ownership − 0.144 0.083 0.054 0.346 –
Travel distance 0.089 − 0.154 − 0.084 0.089 0.072 –
Travel time 0.038 − 0.131 − 0.042 0.186 − 0.036 0.646 –
Travel cost 0.030 − 0.096 0.012 0.206 0.209 0.404 0.455 –

The effect of travel cost goes back similar to the first period. With higher
Table 4
travel costs, commuters are more probable to use public transportation
Likelihood ratio tests (before transport lockdown).
than private hire (γ = − 0.116). The influence of vehicle ownership
Likelihood Ratio Tests remained to be like the second period. People with no access to personal
Effect Chi-Square df Sig vehicles choose public transportation over private hire (δ = − 0.403).
Intercept 0.000 0 Table 16.
Age 15.952 4 0.003 The influence of all the variables in the model on the utility of active
Household size 5.726 4 0.221
Household income 15.454 4 0.004
transportation is similar to their effects during the first period. As age
Travel distance 7.399 4 0.116 and household income increase, the utility of active transportation rises
Travel time 8.538 4 0.074 (α = 0.322 and β = 0.878, respectively). With increasing travel costs, it is
Travel cost 48.407 4 0.000 more likely that people will choose public transportation over active
Sex assigned at birth 5.578 4 0.233
modes (γ = − 3.264). Commuters with no personal vehicles choose to
Vehicle ownership 46.759 4 0.000
ride public transportation than resort to active transportation (δ =
− 0.940). Meanwhile, the probability of using shuttle services rise as age
also increases (α = 0.263). This behavior is also observed in the first
Table 5
period. An increase in household income causes a rise in the utility of
Coefficients and constants of the utility functions of the transportation modes
shuttle services (β = 0.444). The rise in travel costs means that people
(before transport lockdown).
are more likely to use public transportation, which is also the case
Transportation Mode α β γ δ c during the transport lockdown (γ = − 0.074). People with no personal
PV 0.256 − 0.279 − 0.007 − 3.598 0.036 vehicles remained to use public transportation over shuttle services, like
PH 0.217 1.388 − 0.160 1.142 − 6.937 in the second period (δ = − 0.063). Table 17.
AT 0.388 0.270 − 3.272 − 0.501 2.364
The mode choice model after the transport lockdown has AIC and
SS 0.536 − 1.994 0.221 0.609 − 3.399
BIC values of 466.150 and 328.624, respectively. These values are lower
when compared to the AIC and BIC value of other attempts in modeling.
that private vehicle is chosen over public transportation (β = 0.838). The model is also seen to be capable to predict 64.3% of the choices of
Travel cost has a different effect during the third period. After the the trip makers correctly.
transport lockdown, an increase in travel costs results in more public
transportation use (γ = − 0.240). Still, people with no personal vehicles
choose to travel via public transportation (δ = − 3.174). Table 7
Regarding the utility of private hire, age now has a different influ­ Model fitting information (before transport lockdown).
ence. Before the transport lockdown, as the age of people becomes Model Fitting Criteria Likelihood Ratio Tests
higher, it is more likely that they will choose private hire. After the
Model AIC BIC − 2 Log Chi- df Sig
transport lockdown, public transportation is more preferred with Likelihood Square
increasing age (α = − 0.119). Household income has the same influence Intercept 412.770 425.586 404.770
on the utility of private hire for all three periods. People with higher Only
household incomes are more inclined to ride private hire (β = 1.404). Final 266.093 330.174 226.093 178.677 16 0.000

Table 6
Percent correct (before transport lockdown).
Classification

Observed
Public transportation (e.g.,
train, jeep, bus, or van)
Private vehicle (e.g., personal
car or motorcycle)
Private hire (e.g., share-a-ride,
Grab, or taxi)
Active transportation (e.g.,
walking or cycling
Shuttle service (e.g., shuttle
services from companies,
LGUs, and other offices)
Overall Percentage
Public transportation (e. Private vehicle (e.g., Private hire (e.g., Active transportation Shuttle service (e.g., shuttle Percent
g., train, jeep, bus, or personal car or share-a-ride, (e.g., walking or services from companies, Correct
van) motorcycle) Grab, or taxi) cycling) LGUs, and other offices)
65 14 0 5 2 75.6%
6 42 0 5 0 79.2%
4 1 0 1 0 0.0%
1 2 0 25 1 86.2%
4 1 0 2 1 12.5%
44.0% 33.0% 0.0% 20.9% 2.2% 73.1%

9
N.J.S. Co et al. Asian Transport Studies 9 (2023) 100101

Table 8
Collinearity among independent variables (during transport lockdown).
Sex assigned at birth Age Household size Household income Vehicle ownership Travel distance Travel time Travel cost

Sex assigned at birth –

Age − 0.083 –
Household size − 0.096 − 0.027 –
Household income − 0.075 − 0.150 0.043 –
Vehicle ownership − 0.171 0.012 0.080 0.303 –
Travel distance 0.043 − 0.134 − 0.050 0.159 0.099 –
Travel time 0.022 − 0.051 − 0.043 0.116 0.022 0.634 –
Travel cost 0.066 − 0.070 − 0.023 0.210 0.272 0.309 0.314 –

private vehicles and shuttle services over public transportation. But in

Table 9
periods 2 and 3, the sign became positive indicating that those with
Likelihood ratio tests (during transport lockdown).
lower household incomes prefer using public transportation than these
Likelihood Ratio Tests two modes. For all the modes, the magnitude increased from period 1 to
Effect Chi-Square df Sig period 2 and decreased to period 3. These indicate that the significant
Intercept 0.000 0 factors have the greatest effect on the utility of the modes in period 2.
Age 8.556 4 0.073 For period 1, the sign of travel cost coefficient for private vehicle and
Household size 1.646 4 0.800
Household income 21.095 4 <.001
shuttle service was positive and negative for private hire and active
Travel distance 10.380 4 0.034 transportation. However, during the transport lockdown, the sign in
Travel time 18.310 4 0.001 private hire and shuttle service changed. In period 3, the effect of travel
Travel cost 67.136 4 <0.001 cost on all the modes changed to negative. This indicates that public
Sex assigned at birth 11.742 4 0.019
transportation is more preferred over all the other modes as travel cost
Vehicle ownership 50.695 4 <0.001
goes up.
The sign of vehicle ownership coefficient for private vehicle in all
The identified significant mode choice influencing factors in the three periods remained to be negative which indicates that those who
three periods are summarized in Table 18. As presented, the first and own private vehicles are more inclined to use private vehicles. Mean­
third periods had the same mode choice influencing factors. This shows while, for private hire and shuttle service, the sign was positive in period
that the mode choice behavior has relatively returned to pre-lockdown
state once the lockdowns were lifted, at least in terms of the factors
significantly affecting this mode choice. Moreover, three mode choice Table 12
influencing factors: household income, travel cost, and vehicle owner­ Model Fitting information (During the Transport Lockdown).
ship, were common during the three periods. This shows that these Model Fitting Criteria Likelihood Ratio Tests
factors are significant regardless of the state of lockdown.
Model AIC BIC − 2 Log Chi- df Sig
Table 19 summarizes the coefficients of the significant variables in Likelihood Square
all three periods. Based on this, the sign of household income changed Intercept 495.022 507.838 487.022
for private vehicle and shuttle service. In period 1, it was negative which Only
means people with lower household incomes are more likely to choose Final 331.497 421.210 275.497 211.525 24 <0.001

Table 10
Coefficients and constants of the utility functions of the transportation modes (during transport lockdown).
Transportation Mode α β γ δ ε ζ c

PV 0.995 0.645 − 1.222 0.248 − 3.251 − 0.325 0.590

PH 1.858 0.457 − 0.588 0.161 − 0.320 − 1.981 − 3.665
AT 1.166 − 0.777 − 0.901 − 3.300 0.158 0.788 4.958
SS 0.453 0.430 − 0.494 − 0.474 − 0.279 − 0.873 0.050

Table 11
Percent correct (during transport lockdown).
Classification

Observed
Public transportation (e.g.,
train, jeep, bus, or van)
Private vehicle (e.g., personal
car or motorcycle)
Private hire (e.g., share-a-ride,
Grab, or taxi)
Active transportation (e.g.,
walking or cycling
Shuttle service (e.g., shuttle
services from companies,
LGUs, and other offices)
Overall Percentage
Public transportation (e. Private vehicle (e.g., Private hire (e.g., Active transportation Shuttle service (e.g., shuttle Percent
g., train, jeep, bus, or personal car or share-a-ride, (e.g., walking or services from companies, Correct
van) motorcycle) Grab, or taxi) cycling) LGUs, and other offices)
30 7 2 5 0 68.2%
4 56 4 6 0 80.0%
3 7 7 1 0 38.9%
1 3 0 30 0 88.2%
7 3 2 3 1 6.3%
24.7% 41.8% 8.2% 24.7% 0.5% 68.1%

10
N.J.S. Co et al. Asian Transport Studies 9 (2023) 100101

Table 13
Collinearity among independent variables (after transport lockdown).
Sex assigned at birth Age Household size Household income Vehicle ownership Travel distance Travel time Travel cost

Sex assigned at birth –

Age − 0.083 –
Household size − 0.106 − 0.007 –
Household income − 0.038 − 0.146 0.005 –
Vehicle ownership − .171 0.007 0.032 0.271 –
Travel distance 0.024 − 0.151 − 0.084 0.153 0.101 –
Travel time 0.056 − 0.061 − 0.057 0.144 0.020 0.653 –
Travel cost 0.044 − .077 − 0.052 0.248 0.201 0.321 0.418 –

periods being compared. The left side shows the mode share for the
Table 14
previous period, while the values on the right side are for those in the
Likelihood ratio tests (after transport lockdown).
latter period. The thickness of the lines represents the percentage. Each
Likelihood Ratio Tests line connecting the two sides represents those that went from a mode in
Effect Chi-Square df Sig the previous period (left side) to a mode in the latter period (right side).
Intercept 0.000 0 Note that WFH was not prevalent in Metro Manila before the pandemic-
Age 10.555 4 0.032 related lockdown, hence there were no respondents from this category in
Household size 7.862 4 0.097
Household income 15.714 4 0.003
the pre-pandemic period. This was seen to be more significant during
Travel distance 6.718 4 0.152 and after lockdown periods.
Travel time 8.465 4 0.076 Before the transport lockdown, 47.5% of the respondents chose
Travel cost 57.190 4 0.000
Sex assigned at birth 3.873 4 0.423
Vehicle ownership 53.564 4 0.000 Table 17
Model fitting information (after transport lockdown).
Model Fitting Criteria Likelihood Ratio Tests
Table 15
Model AIC BIC − 2 Log Chi- df Sig
Coefficients and constants of the utility functions of the transportation modes
Likelihood Square
(after transport lockdown). Intercept 466.150 478.966 458.150
Transportation Mode α β γ δ c Only
Final 328.624 392.704 288.624 169.526 16 <0.001
PV 0.071 0.838 − 0.240 − 3.174 0.610
PH − 0.119 1.404 − 0.116 − 0.403 − 2.688
AT 0.322 0.878 − 3.264 − 0.940 2.583
SS 0.263 0.444 − 0.074 − 0.063 − 2.872 Table 18
Significant mode choice influencing factors in three periods.
Before the During the After the
1, but changed to negative in periods 2 and 3. This means that pre-
Transport Transport Transport
pandemic, those with private vehicles tend to choose public trans­ Lockdown Lockdown Lockdown
portation more than these two modes. But during the pandemic, those
Age
with private vehicles prefer public transportation less which may be due
✓ ⨯ ✓
Sex assigned at ⨯ ✓ ⨯
to people’s fear of getting exposed to different people. Moreover, the birth
magnitude was greatest in period 1 for these modes, showing that this Household ✓ ✓ ✓
parameter influenced the utility of these modes the most for this period. income
Household size ⨯ ⨯ ⨯
Vehicle ✓ ✓ ✓
ownership
4.4. Mode choice distribution Travel distance ⨯ ✓ ⨯
Travel time ⨯ ✓ ⨯
Figs. 21–23 present three different diagrams which show the changes Travel cost ✓ ✓ ✓
and shifts in the mode choice distribution of the respondents in the two

Table 16
Percent correct (after transport lockdown).
Classification

Observed
Public transportation (e.g.,
train, jeep, bus, or van)
Private vehicle (e.g., personal
car or motorcycle)
Private hire (e.g., share-a-ride,
Grab, or taxi)
Active transportation (e.g.,
walking or cycling
Shuttle service (e.g., shuttle
services from companies,
LGUs, and other offices)
Overall Percentage
Public transportation (e. Private vehicle (e.g., Private hire (e.g., Active transportation Shuttle service (e.g., shuttle Percent
g., train, jeep, bus, or personal car or share-a-ride, (e.g., walking or services from companies, Correct
van) motorcycle) Grab, or taxi) cycling) LGUs, and other offices)
32 11 2 4 0 65.3%
6 62 0 5 0 84.9%
7 6 2 1 0 12.5%
1 7 0 20 1 69.0%
8 4 0 2 1 6.7%
29.7% 49.5% 2.2% 17.6% 1.1% 64.3%

11
N.J.S. Co et al. Asian Transport Studies 9 (2023) 100101

Table 19
Coefficients of the common significant factors in three periods.
Household Income Travel Cost Vehicle Ownership

Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 1 Period 2 Period 3

Private vehicle − 0.279 0.995 0.838 0.007 0.248 − 0.240 − 3.598 − 3.251 − 3.174
Private hire 1.388 1.858 1.404 − 0.160 0.161 − 0.116 1.142 − 0.320 − 0.403
Active transportation 0.270 1.166 0.878 − 3.272 − 3.300 − 3.264 − 0.501 0.158 − 0.940
Shuttle service − 1.994 0.453 0.444 0.221 − 0.474 − 0.074 0.609 − 0.279 − 0.063

Fig. 21. Change of mode choice distribution before and during the trans­ Fig. 23. Change of mode choice distribution before and after the trans­
port lockdown. port lockdown.

transportation. There were also public transportation users who started

Fig. 22. Change of mode choice distribution during and after the trans­
port lockdown.
public transportation as their main mode of transport as they go to work,
making up the greatest percentage among the other modes of trans­
portation. People who chose private vehicles were 30.9% of the re­
spondents, 14.2% chose active transportation, 3.9% chose shuttle
services, and 3.5% chose vehicles for hire before the transport lock­
down. It can be seen that there was a decrease in the percentage of re­
spondents who used public transportation during transport lockdown.
The value dropped by more than half due to the pandemic-related
lockdowns. Public transportation users before the transport lockdown
shifted to private vehicles, private hire, shuttle services, and active
purely WFH instead. This is due to mostly three things: (1) the reduced
capacity of public modes due to social distancing requirements, (2) the
reduced demand due to WFH arrangements, and (3) the increased desire
of trip makers to reduce contact with others in enclosed spaces.
Approximately three-fourths of private vehicle users before transport
lockdown continued using the same mode during the transport lock­
down. Few vehicle for hire and active transportation users who shifted
to private vehicles during the transport lockdown. Meanwhile, all those
who use shuttle services continued using this travel mode during the
transport lockdown. The active transport mode share actually increased
by almost 3% due to lockdowns, mostly from previous public mode users
since active modes like walking and cycling can also be seen as private
mode that reduces the risk of contact with others in an enclosed space.
Generally, there was minimal modal change after the transport
lockdown. Public transportation users slightly increased from 21.6% to
25.1%. Most people who shifted to public transportation in the third
period were active transportation and vehicles for hire users during the
transport lockdown. The percentage of people who use private vehicles
continued to increase. An additional 3.5% shifted to this mode during
the third period. Most people who started to work on-site after WFH
during the transport lockdown chose to travel via private vehicles. It
should be noted that even after the time of this study, subsequent
lockdowns were imposed again due to the rise in COVID-19 cases. Hence
the comparison should be taken as a snapshot of the time considered,
instead of as a lasting condition.
The last comparison was done to check if the distribution has
returned to pre-pandemic levels after the initial lockdowns were
relaxed. As mentioned earlier, the after-lockdown period should only be
taken as a snapshot in time since subsequent lockdowns still ensued
after. As shown in Fig. 23, the mode share of each transport mode after
the transport lockdown did not yet fully return to pre-pandemic levels.
Many public transportation users before the transport lockdown were
using other modes of transport after the transport lockdown. Most of

12
N.J.S. Co et al.
which are private vehicle users now. Due to the decrease in public
transportation availability during the transport lockdown, people were
forced to use other available travel modes. From Fig. 23, the percentage
of active transportation users was equal before and after the transport
lockdown. But it is evident that the users were not entirely the same;
some shifted to active transport, while some shifted from active trans­
portation to other modes. For shuttle service and vehicle for hire, it can
be observed that the percentage of those who use these modes increased
significantly. The modal share almost doubled. Most of the additional
users of shuttle service and vehicles for hire were pre-pandemic public
transportation users.
5. Conclusions and recommendations
The main objective of this study was to determine how the COVID-19
pandemic affect the mode choice behavior of working Filipinos in Metro
Manila before (before March 2020), during (from March 2020 to August
2021), and after (after August 2021) the transport lockdown. The results
of the study revealed the distribution of the mode choice of working
Filipinos in Metro Manila and the corresponding factors that affect
people’s mode choice behaviors.
Different factors significantly affect the mode choice of people in the
three periods studied. Before the transport lockdown, age, household
income, travel cost, and vehicle ownership were significant. During the
transport lockdown, the number of significant factors increased and
turned to household income, travel distance, travel time, travel cost, sex
assigned at birth, and vehicle ownership. After the transport lockdown,
the significant factors reverted back to those before the transport lock­
down. Based on these findings, there were three parameters that were
significant in all the periods which are household income, travel cost,
and vehicle ownership; however, the magnitude and sign of the pa­
rameters changed in each period. For active transportation, the coeffi­
cient of the parameter vehicle ownership varied both in magnitude and
sign in every period. It was negative in period 1 then positive in period 2
and became negative again in period 3. The magnitude decreased from
period 1 to period 2 and increased in period 3.
Results revealed the changes and shifts in the mode choice distri­
bution of the respondents before, during, and after the transport lock­
down. Before the transport lockdown, 47.5% of the respondents chose
public transportation as their main mode of transport. But its modal
share fell to 21.6% during the transport lockdown, then rose again to
25.1% after the transport lockdown. The shift from public transportation
resulted in more people using private vehicles, private hire, active
transportation, and shuttle services. There was a continuous increase in
private vehicle use. The percentage share of private vehicles before the
transport lockdown was 30.9%. It increased to 34.3% during the
transport lockdown and continued to increase after the transport lock­
down to 37.8%. Meanwhile, active transportation users increased from
14.2% before the transport lockdown to 16.6% during the transport
lockdown, then reverted to 14.2% after the transport lockdown. Based
on the results, the mode distribution in Metro Manila has not yet fully
returned to before the transport lockdown situation.
With the gathered data, the study was able to provide additional
information regarding this topic since there were no existing studies of
this yet in Metro Manila, and transport policies made during the
pandemic still lacked basis. As discussed previously, there was a
decrease in public transportation users during the transport lockdown,
and people started using other alternatives not preferred before the
pandemic, like active transportation. This finding suggests a need to
make roads bicycle-friendly and provide more walkable space for pe­
destrians. There was also an increase in private vehicle users during this
period, indicating that planning to push people to switch to other travel
modes aside from private vehicles and prevent roads from being con­
gested is necessary. The plans may consider the variables that signifi­
cantly affect the mode choice of working Filipinos in Metro Manila after
the transport lockdown, namely age, household income, travel cost, and
13
Asian Transport Studies 9 (2023) 100101
vehicle ownership.
The main limitation of the study was the limited number of samples
because of the difficulty in obtaining responses during the pandemic.
With that, conducting a pen-and-paper survey is recommended to
encourage more participants and allow people with no internet access to
participate in the study. Future researchers may explore other correla­
tions using the existing data, such as the effects of the pandemic on
different social classes, and determine which parameters have direct
causality to the changes in mode choice. They are also encouraged to
investigate when and how the travel behavior of the working population
in Metro Manila will go back the same way as before the pandemic.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare the following financial interests/personal re­
lationships which may be considered as potential competing interests:
Katherine Dimaculangan reports financial support was provided by
WebFocus Solutions.
Acknowledgements
The researchers would like to express their sincerest gratitude and
warm appreciation to WebFocus Solutions, Inc. for the funding of the
study and to the UP ICE Transportation Engineering Group for their
guidance and assistance.
References
Abdullah, M., Dias, C., Muley, D., Shahin, M., 2020. Exploring the impacts of COVID-19
on travel behavior and mode preferences. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 8,
100255.
Arasan, V., Vedagiri, P., 2009. Modeling modal shift from personal vehicles to bus on
introduction of bus priority measure. Eastern Asia Soc. Transport. Stud. vol. 7.
Asian Development Bank, 2012. Philippines transport sector assessment, strategy, and
road map. https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/institutional-document
/33700/files/philippines-transport-assessment.pdf.
Awad-Nunez, S., Julio, R., Gomez, J., Moya-Gomez, B., Gonzalez, J., 2021. Post-COVID-
19 travel behavior patterns: impact on the willingness to pay of users of public
transport and shared mobility services in Spain. Eur. Transp, Res. Rev. 13, 20.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-021-00476-4.
Bagozzi, R., Yi, Y., 1988. On the evaluation of structural equation models. J. Acad.
Market. Sci. 16 (1), 74–94.
Bajracharya, A., Shrestha, S., 2017. Analyzing influence of socio-demographic factors on
travel behavior of employees, a case study of Kathmandu Metropolitan City, Nepal.
Int. J. Sci. Technol. Res. 6 (7), 111–119.
Balinbin, A.L., 2021. Taxis drive through ghost town of darkened bars and shops
shuttered by coronavirus pandemic. Bus. World. https://www.bworldonline.com/t
axis-drive-through-ghost-town-of-darkened-bars-and-shops-shuttered-by-coronavi
rus-pandemic/.
Beck, M.J., Hensher, D.A., 2020. Insights into the impact of COVID-19 on household
travel and activities in Australia – the early days under restrictions. Transport Pol.
96, 76–93.
Bevans, R., 2020. Akaike Information Criterion, 1, June 18.
Bhaduri, E., et al., 2020. Modelling the effects of COVID-19 on travel mode choice
behaviour in India. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 8, 1–16.
Bucsky, P., 2020. Modal share changes due to COVID-19: the case of Budapest.
Transport. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 8, 1–5.
Chang, H., Wu, S., 2005. Exploring the mode choice in daily travel behavior of the
elderly in Taiwan. Eastern Asian Soc. Transport. Stud. 6, 1818–1832.
De Guzman, M., Diaz, C.E., 2005. Analysis of mode choice behavior of students in
exclusive schools in Metro Manila: The case of Ateneo de Manila University and
Miriam College. Eastern Asia Soc. Transport. Stud. 1116–1131.
Department of Transportation and Communication & Japan International Cooperation
Agency, 2015. MMUTIS Enhancement and Update Project. https://openjicareport.
jica.go.jp/pdf/12247623.pdf.
De Vos, J., 2020. The effect of COVID-19 and subsequent social distancing on travel
behavior. Transport. Res. Interdiscip. Persp. vol. 5.
Ding, L., Zhang, N., 2016. Dynamics in mode choice decisions: a case study in Nanjing,
China. Procedia Eng. 137, 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.01.231.
Ellen, S., 2020. Slovin’s Formula Sampling Technique. Sciencing. https://sciencing.com
/slovins-formula-sampling-techniques-5475547.html.
Endut, I.R., et al., 2015. The comparison of travelers’ attitude towards public transport: a
study on the modal share in Kuala Lumpur. Appl. Mech. Mater. 773–774, 861–865.
Henri, H., Kluge, P., 2020. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak - WHO announces
COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic. WHO/Europe. March. https://www.euro.who.int/e
n/health-topics/health-emergencies/coronavirus-covid-19/news/news/2020/3/
who-announces-covid-19-outbreak-a-pandemic.
N.J.S. Co et al.
Inter-Agency Task Force, 2020. IATF Resolution No. 31. Department of Health. https
://doh.gov.ph/sites/default/files/health-update/IATF-Resolution-No.-31.pdf.
Khan, O.A., 2007. Modeling Passenger Mode Choice Behavior Using Computer Aided Stated
Preference Data. July. Queensland University of Technology. https://core.ac.uk/do
wnload/pdf/10885199.pdf.
Mayo, F., Taboada, E., 2020. Ranking factors affecting public transport mode choice of
commuters in an urban city of a developing country using analytic hierarchy process:
the case of Metro Cebu, Philippines. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 4, 100078
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2019.100078.
Manuel, P., 2021. Explainer: Metro Manila Lockdown: what You Need to Know. August
5. CNN Philippines. https://www.cnnphilippines.com/news/2021/8/5/explainer-
NCR-ECQ-in-August-2021.html.
Nurdden, A., Rahmat, R.A., Ismail, A., 2007. Effect of transportation policies on modal
shift from private car to public transport in Malaysia. J. Appl. Sci. 7, 1014–1018.
Philippine Statistics Authority. (2018). NCR gender factsheet. http://rssoncr.psa.gov.ph/
sites/default/files/2018%20gender%20factsheet_0.pdf.
Prayudyanto, M.N., Thohir, M., 2017. Sustainable Urban Transport Index (SUTI) for
Asian Cities (Indonesia).
Pawar, D., Yadav, A., Choudhary, P., Velaga, N., 2021. Modelling work- and non-work-
based trip patterns during transition to lockdown period of COVID-19 pandemic in
India. Travel Behav. Soc. 24, 46–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2021.02.002.
14
Asian Transport Studies 9 (2023) 100101
Philippines Statistics Authority, 2016. Highlights On Household Population, Number of
Households, and Average Household Size of the Philippines (2015 Census Of Population).
Philippine Statistics Authority. December 29. https://psa.gov.ph/content/highli
ghts-household-population-number-households-and-average-household-size-philippi
nes.
Philippines Statistics Authority, 2015. National Capital Region. https://www.philatlas.
com/luzon/ncr.html.
Philippines Statistics Authority, 2018. 2018 family income and expenditure survey. Natl.
Reg. Estim. 1. https://psa.gov.ph/sites/default/files/FIES%202018%20Final%20Re
port.pdf.
Racca, D., Ratledge, E., 2003. Factors that Affect And/or Can Alter Mode Choice.
Delaware Center for Transportation, Newark, Delaware.
Ramos, M., 2021. Commuter woes worsen during pandemic. May 21, Retrieved from.
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1439051/commuter-woes-worsen-during-pandemic.
Ray, S., 2015. Simple methods to deal with categorical variables in predictive modeling.
Analytics Vidhya. Retrieved from. https://www.analyticsvidhya.com/blog
/2015/11/easy-methods-deal-categorical-variables-predictive-modeling/.
Rey, A., 2020. On their own: commuters and the looming transportation crisis in Manila.
Metro Manila. https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/in-depth/262230-looming-tra
nsportation-crisis-metro-manila-part-2/.
Tefft, B., Anorve, V., Kim, W., Kelley-Baker, T., 2021. Travel in the United States before
and during the COVID-19 Pandemic. AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety.