The EDSA Rehab Postponement: Prudent Pause or Political Panic?

By Louis ‘Barok‘ C Biraogo — June 3, 2025

FOR jeepney driver Mang Pipoy, the daily grind along Metro Manila’s Epifanio de los Santos Avenue (EDSA) is a four-hour battle through choking traffic, where every kilometer feels like a test of endurance. His story is one of millions, as EDSA—Metro Manila’s 23.8-kilometer lifeline—carries over 421,000 vehicles daily, a number that underscores its role as the region’s economic artery. When President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. announced the postponement of the P8.7-billion EDSA rehabilitation project on June 1, 2025, citing a need to explore “new technologies” and reassess the cost-benefit analysis, Mang Pipoy and countless others exhaled with relief but also skepticism. Would this delay bring real solutions, or is it another chapter in the Philippines’ long history of infrastructure inertia? The decision, while framed as commuter-friendly, exposes deeper flaws in governance and planning, demanding a rigorous examination of its justifications, alternatives, and broader implications.

Deconstructing Marcos’ Cost-Benefit Claims

Marcos’ rationale for halting the EDSA rehabilitation, originally slated for June 13, 2025, hinges on a cost-benefit analysis that weighs a two-year construction period against its potential to exacerbate Metro Manila’s already dire congestion. He argued that the “huge sacrifice” of prolonged traffic disruptions—potentially adding one to two hours to commutes—outweighs the benefits of a modernized, flood-free highway. This perspective aligns with the Japan International Cooperation Agency’s (JICA) estimate that Metro Manila’s traffic costs the economy P3.5 billion daily, a figure projected to balloon to P5.4 billion by 2035 if unaddressed. Yet, the administration’s sudden pivot to “new technologies” raises red flags. Why were these innovations—rapid-setting concrete, prefabricated segments, or 24/7 modular phasing—not integrated into the Department of Public Works and Highways’ (DPWH) initial blueprint? As infrastructure expert Nigel Paul Villarete pointedly noted, “It’s not as if the existing technologies are difficult to find, assess, and choose.” The absence of such foresight suggests a planning process that is either myopic or overly reactive to public outcry post-midterm elections.

Stakeholders offer mixed reactions. Commuters like Mang Pipoy fear “carmageddon,” a term echoed in media reports warning of catastrophic traffic if construction proceeds without robust mitigation. Businesses along EDSA, anticipating a 15-20% drop in foot traffic, welcomed the pause but remain wary of prolonged uncertainty. Senator Grace Poe cautioned that a rushed rollout without preparation risks “mayhem,” a fear compounded by past disruptions like the Guadalupe Bridge closure, which paralyzed nearby routes for weeks. Conversely, critics argue that delaying repairs only perpetuates EDSA’s deterioration—its pavement, nearly 50 years old, is nearing “exponential” failure, per DPWH Secretary Manuel Bonoan. The administration’s one-month review period to explore faster methods feels ambitious, if not unrealistic, given the complexity of retrofitting a highway with intricate underground utilities under constant traffic load.

Contrasting Implementation Approaches

The DPWH’s original plan—a lane-by-lane, two-year rebuild involving concrete reblocking, asphalt overlays, and drainage upgrades—prioritized thoroughness but underestimated commuter pain. Marcos’ call for a six-month timeline, while bold, invites scrutiny of alternative methods. Japanese grinding and overlay techniques, which mill damaged pavement and apply rapid-setting concrete, have proven effective in Tokyo’s Metropolitan Expressway projects, reducing timelines by up to 40%. Prefabricated road segments, assembled off-site and installed in short overnight windows, could further compress schedules, as seen in Singapore’s urban road upgrades. A 24/7 modular phasing approach, dividing EDSA into micro-zones (as short as 50 meters), would limit active work areas to under 5% of the highway at any time, maintaining 60-70% traffic capacity. However, engineers privately question whether these methods can scale to EDSA’s 200 lane-kilometers without compromising structural integrity or safety, especially given the road’s complex utility network.

Tokyo’s parallelized contractor model offers a compelling benchmark. By deploying specialized teams—one for substructure, another for surfacing—with strict zone handoffs, Japan cut urban highway rehab times significantly. The Philippines could adopt this, assigning multiple contractors to work concurrently on prioritized segments, like the Pasay-Guadalupe stretch critical for the 2026 ASEAN Summit. Yet, this demands meticulous coordination, a historical weak point for Philippine infrastructure projects. The 2019 SEA Games’ chaotic venue preparations serve as a cautionary tale of what happens when ambition outpaces execution.

Reimagining Traffic Management

The scrapped odd-even scheme, intended to restrict vehicle access based on license plate numbers, was criticized as overly blunt, likely pushing congestion onto already strained side roads. The Metropolitan Manila Development Authority’s (MMDA) fallback—maintaining the number coding scheme—feels like a half-measure, doing little to address the 421,000 vehicles clogging EDSA daily. Innovative alternatives exist. Dynamic AI-driven rerouting, as used in Singapore, could optimize alternate routes like C5 or Mabuhay Lanes, adjusting signals in real-time to boost capacity by 15-20%. Staggered mobility windows—prioritizing freight at night, buses during peaks, and private cars midday—could maintain critical flow while work progresses. Pop-up bus lanes on parallel routes, coupled with expanded MRT-3 trains and EDSA Busway units, could absorb displaced commuters, though the latter risks overcrowding without additional capacity, as Senator JV Ejercito warned.

Senator Ejercito’s proposal to defer rehabilitation until the North-South Commuter Line (NSCR) and Metro Manila Subway are operational by 2027 is pragmatic but risks kicking the can down the road. The NSCR, a 147-kilometer railway, could divert significant vehicle traffic, but its partial operation is years away, and full completion may take until 2031. Waiting for these systems assumes flawless execution—an optimistic bet given past delays. A hybrid approach, starting preparatory works (e.g., drainage upgrades) now while fast-tracking transit augmentation, would better balance urgency and practicality.

Economic, Political, and Urban Planning Implications

The economic stakes are staggering. JICA’s P3.5 billion daily congestion cost underscores EDSA’s role as Metro Manila’s economic spine, supporting 37% of the Philippines’ GDP. Prolonged construction could deter consumer spending, with malls along EDSA bracing for significant revenue drops. Yet, delaying repairs risks further pavement failure, increasing vehicle operating costs and accident risks. John Paolo Rivera, a senior research fellow, notes that a rehabilitated EDSA could enhance productivity and property values, but only if disruptions are minimized. The one-month review must quantify these trade-offs transparently, detailing how accelerated methods could save billions in avoided congestion costs.

Politically, the postponement reeks of election-year caution. Coming weeks after the 2025 midterms, Marcos’ decision aligns with public sentiment, as commuters voiced fears of unlivable commutes. While Senator Poe praised the move as “heeding reason,” the timing suggests sensitivity to voter backlash rather than strategic vision. The administration’s narrative of “finding a better way” must deliver concrete results to avoid accusations of pandering.

From an urban planning perspective, synchronizing with the NSCR and subway is logical but not without flaws. These projects promise to reduce EDSA’s vehicle load, yet their timelines are uncertain, and over-reliance on them risks neglecting immediate needs. EDSA’s rehabilitation could instead serve as a catalyst for a broader mobility ecosystem, integrating bike lanes, pedestrian paths, and smart traffic systems. The EDSA Busway, a pandemic-era success, proves that bold reforms can work when stakeholders align. A similar mindset—treating EDSA as a living urban system, not just a road—could transform this project into a model of sustainable infrastructure.

A Path Forward: Recommendations

The one-month review period must be more than a pause; it must spark a revolution in infrastructure governance.

First, adopt a hybrid implementation plan:

Leverage Japanese techniques: Use grinding and overlay methods for high-damage sections, paired with prefabricated segments for rapid installation.
Parallelize contractors: Deploy specialized teams across micro-zones, ensuring no more than 5% of EDSA is under construction at once.
Pre-integrate utilities: Adopt Singapore’s unified trench system to future-proof the highway.

Second, overhaul traffic management:

Implement AI rerouting: Deploy dynamic signal systems and pop-up bus lanes on alternate routes.
Stagger access: Prioritize buses and freight in dedicated windows, supported by 100 additional Busway units and MRT trains.
Incentivize WFH: Offer tax breaks to businesses maintaining 30% remote work, easing peak-hour demand.

Third, ensure transparency and accountability:

Launch a digital twin system: Embed sensors to monitor pavement wear and traffic flow, feeding a public dashboard tracking lane-hour productivity and congestion metrics.
Tie contractor payments to dual metrics: Reward timeliness and minimal traffic disruption, as Japan does.
Engage stakeholders: Form an EDSA Rehab Task Force with commuters, businesses, and local governments to co-design mitigation measures.

Finally, start preparatory works now—drainage upgrades, utility relocations—to shave months off the main construction phase. This hybrid plan could achieve 80% of the project’s goals in 8-10 months, limiting capacity loss to 35% at peak times, a vast improvement over the original two-year, 50-60% disruption forecast.

Conclusion: Beyond Promises to Action

Mang Pipoy’s four-hour commute is a daily reminder of EDSA’s decay, but also of the human toll of policy missteps. Marcos’ postponement is a chance to rethink not just a road, but how a nation builds for its people. The one-month review must deliver a plan that marries cutting-edge technology with empathetic governance, ensuring EDSA’s rebirth doesn’t come at the cost of Metro Manila’s soul. This delay must be more than a political salve—it demands a revolution in infrastructure accountability, where every lane-kilometer paved is a step toward a city that moves, not just survives.