COMMENT Traffic woes are a perennial problem in Malaysia - in common with many other countries in the region and beyond. This is compounded by the fact that private ridership continues to cumulatively increase. It has to be, therefore, emphasised time and again that resolving traffic issues is not only for the short- and medium-term but also for the long haul.

This means that myopic solutions that only offer temporary relief in the form of ‘patch-ups’ such as for example, widening trunk roads can only lead to persistent problems recurring and accumulating over time.

Thus, as a matter of policy principle, measures such as road widening, flyovers, the construction of new bitumen/ asphalt roads or even of elevated highways and mass rapid transit (MRT) system etc. should be ‘conceptualised’ only as ‘stop-gap’ measures - which provide time and the breathing space for the authorities to implement more sustainable and comprehensive solutions.

The urgency is all the more critical since traffic congestion does not just add to the inconvenience of the road user. But as we all know, there is the impact on health, environment, and even economic loss. Then, too, economic loss is either in the form of monetary (‘measurable’) or non-monetary (“immeasurable) costs and thus making it to be multi-dimensional.

Monetary costs would include productivity leakages, business and opportunity costs (i.e. benefits and costs accruing from the choosing one alternative over the other), fuel wastages, etc.; and the non-monetary form would cover aspects such as transactional and social costs, e.g. psychological and physical well-being as well as inter-personal relationships (whether occupational/professional or otherwise).

In terms of health, traffic congestion can cause stress and in turn leads to high blood pressure which can be a silent killer as it is linked to heart disease or problems.

This is why despite extensive road improvement works and opening of new highways, the World Bank’s 2015 Malaysia’s Economic Monitor report ( The Star , July 12, 2015) that jams in the Klang Valley shows no sign of abating. The report calculated that commuters wasted between 270 and 500 million man-hours in 2014 with the concomitant wastage of 1.2 billion litres of petrol that together represent a per capita loss of RM3100.00.

All in all, the aggregate cost was estimated to be a staggering 1.1 percent to 2.2 percent of GDP for a country the economic and geographical size of Malaysia. (This is only approximately another 1.1 percent to 2.2 percent less than the government’s fiscal target!)

Haphazard implementation

Critically the traffic challenges in Malaysia are symptomatic of the haphazard implementation of planning guidelines or urban master plan, or even a lack of strategic and comprehensive planning per se - where traffic management is relegated to the ‘periphery’ compared to the core elements of provision of infrastructure and facilities.

The same World Bank report confirms that there is no overall coherent approach with different government agencies adopting conflicting attitude. And then there is the broader policy contradiction, as for example, between the National Automotive Policy (NAP) and the National Public Land Transportation Master Plan. It seems that the government of the day wants to have its cake and eat it, too.

The aspiration and paving the way for Malaysia’s transition to become a low-carbon economy cannot be left to the blind and indeterminate or random (stochastic) forces of free market - so that if increasing demand for energy efficient vehicles will somehow automatically contribute to reduction of carbon emissions.

But the government is not playing a pro-active role enough in coming up with long-run viable and feasible solutions that at the same time ensure the various policies are integrated with each other so as to fit a wider comprehensive framework design to promote both the economic as well as social well-being of the nation.

The Cities Innovation System (CIS) can help fill in the policy gap - as long as there is the political will in place. CIS as a relatively (new and) ‘stand-alone’ concept simultaneously allows for the integration of the various aspects and layers of specific/ specified policy measures to be subsumed under a holistic and broader framework to promote a sustainable outcome for the longer term.

In other words, CIS promotes consistency and coherence of urban transportation policies - so that one specific/ specified policy target is not pitted against the other or not implemented at the expense of the other.

For example, the introduction of mass rapid transit (MRT) as a major component of the urban transportation system is not implemented in a way that simply diverts or off-loads the flow of traffic from the critical mass of one area to another and at

the expense of the quality of life in the surrounding areas. In adopting CIS, traffic management policy must give sufficient attention to need to not only disperse and dilute traffic flow but also, e.g., shorten travelling distances for private riders as well as considering the social and environmental impact on the local community.

This entails and requires that urban planning as a whole be sensitive to growth of private ridership and long-term demands of traffic capacity. Construction of MRT lines, therefore, should not cut across major urban centres as such but sited around (as in ring-fencing”) the areas of critical mass.

Other policy proposals in line with CIS include the use of e.g. an electronic road pricing (ERP) system (as in Singapore) and global positioning satellite (GPS) system to monitor the movement of vehicles (as already exists in certain parts of Malaysia) not as ends in themselves but to serve a wider integrated or unified purpose, namely to complement and supplement the public transportation system conceived as a whole.

Trickle-up effects

In short, the aim of these singular or separate ‘parts’ is to jointly-produce several trickle-up effects that will serve the ultimate purpose of delivering the best public transportation system possible and thus alleviate traffic congestion.

It must also be emphasised that CIS encourages the employment and mobilisation of all possible means across the whole spectrum of resources (human, natural and capital) ranging from technology to legal measures conditioned and characterised by public-private-voluntary partnerships to tackle public transportation problems considered as a specific problem.

Thus, CIS is prone to adopt a multi-pronged approach towards realising the ambition of reducing private vehicle ridership, and by extension, traffic congestion.

At the same time, CIS can also encourage (and provides the policy incentives for the) active participation by the other stakeholders, namely the commuters of public transportation in providing real-time and on the go feedback and information to the service providers via digital communications and information technology (something that Singapore is implementing through its Smart Nation Vision).

This helps not only to ensure pre-emptive actions and quicker response time for remedial redress but also promote the on-going shaping of the provision of public transportation services for continuous improvement.

In conclusion, traffic congestion is not an insurmountable problem. Instead of congestion-free traffic as the ‘exception to the general rule’, is time that we aspire and work towards making it as the norm. It can be done where there is the political will and strategic vision. Malaysia Boleh!

JARON KENG is secretary of the Green and Blue Environmental Protection Society of Malaysia.