Cut the cycle

Anthony Jay Ambait

We often hear that the environment should not be traded for development. Yet across the Philippines, green spaces are rapidly transforming into gray concrete jungles. Manila’s Quirino Avenue is a prime example of this troubling shift.

The Southern Access Link Expressway (SALEx) is a massive P152.39-billion elevated tollway project in Metro Manila spearheaded by San Miguel Corporation (SMC). Alongside its construction comes the cutting of 617 mature trees along Quirino Avenue to make way for the development.

Nevertheless, the project was permitted by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), raising questions about how environmental protection is being balanced with infrastructure development. 

Although the DENR points to safeguard measures such as the 1:100 sapling replacement for every tree cut established under DENR Memorandum Order No. 2012-02 and techniques like earthballing, the real question is not whether these policies exist, but whether they are truly effective on the ground. If they are properly implemented, consistently monitored, and capable of ensuring long-term survival rather than just satisfying requirements on paper. Even so, this approval is framed as part of the government’s effort to ease Manila’s worsening traffic congestion, yet the deeper issue remains unresolved.

We are not solving gridlock. We are only repeating the same cycle of building more roads while quietly destroying the very green spaces that sustain us.

To put it plainly, infrastructure projects such as SALEx can contribute to economic growth. By bypassing congested city roads, travel time for supply chains and the delivery of goods can be significantly reduced, helping create a more efficient flow of commerce in Manila. However, this convenience comes at a cost. The removal of hundreds of trees also means the loss of shade for pedestrians, potentially increasing cases of heat-related illnesses, especially during the hottest months of the year.

Living in a tropical country, Filipinos regularly experience high heat indices. Especially during the hot and dry season, the heat index in Metro Manila typically ranges from 38°C to 44° C. How will regular commuters bear the heat if those who shield them from it are cut down?

As someone who regularly walks out of school for lunch, I know how much of a difference a line of trees can make. A shaded sidewalk can turn an exhausting walk into a bearable one. Without those trees, commuters are left exposed to unforgiving heat.

Trees lining sidewalks provide much-needed shelter for walkers and commuters. Beyond that, they serve a greater purpose by producing oxygen and absorbing carbon dioxide and other pollutants. In an avenue filled with vehicles releasing exhaust fumes daily, these trees act as natural air filters that help improve environmental quality.

I may not live in Manila, but the issue feels familiar. In many communities across the country, trees are often among the first casualties of development projects. Take the Dupax Mining operations in Nueva Vizcaya as an example, where forested land has been cleared and ecosystems disrupted in the name of development. We celebrate new roads and buildings yet rarely stop to ask what is being lost in the process. By the time the shade disappears and temperatures rise, the damage has already been done.

We cannot deny the DENR’s decision to permit the project, as traffic congestion remains a serious problem in the Philippines, with Metro Manila even ranking among the most congested cities in the world according to the 2023 TomTom Traffic Index. However, even with measures like earthballing being considered, the damage has already been done. The moment more than 200 mature trees were cut, including some trees that were over 50 years old, no mitigation effort can fully replace what was permanently lost. Safeguards that come after such large-scale removal feel less like prevention and more like damage control, raising serious doubts about how environmental protection is actually being enforced alongside development.

This issue is not limited to Metro Manila. Even here in our own city, traffic seems to worsen every year. Going to school every day, traffic has been my greatest enemy in reaching the gate and not being late. While Manila experiences congestion on a much larger scale, the frustration is familiar: more vehicles, longer travel times, and roads that never seem wide enough.

However, perhaps the real issue is not about the lack of roads. In recent years, purchasing private vehicles has become increasingly accessible due to aggressive promotional offers such as zero down payment or P1,000 “all-in” down payment. As a result, an average of 3.6 million cars pass by Manila roads each day according to the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) which significantly exceeds the region’s intended road capacity. And as more people are encouraged to buy cars, the number of vehicles on the road continues to rise.

This raises an important question: are we truly solving the problem, or merely making room for it? If the number of private vehicles continues to grow, constructing additional roads may only provide temporary relief before congestion inevitably returns. Instead of sacrificing hundreds of trees to accommodate more automobiles, perhaps the focus should shift toward improving public transportation and reducing dependence on private vehicles. After all, traffic is not simply a road problem, it is also a car problem. The DENR can mitigate the environmental cost of projects like SALEx, but it cannot solve traffic alone.

We will remain trapped in a cycle of building more roads, sacrificing more green spaces, and searching for the next solution to the same problem.

If we genuinely care about the future, environmental protection cannot be treated as an afterthought. While the DENR’s approval of tree-cutting permits may come with safeguards such as the 1:100 sapling replacement policy and techniques like earthballing, these measures only matter if they are strictly monitored, properly implemented, and sustained over time. Approving development projects should go hand in hand with transparent oversight, meaningful reforestation efforts that actually survive, and long-term accountability that ensures trees are not just replaced in numbers but restored in reality. Without this, policies risk becoming symbolic gestures while Manila’s rapidly shrinking green spaces continue to disappear.

Also, the Department of Transportation (DOTr) must ensure that the country’s transportation system becomes more efficient, accessible, and commuter friendly. As a Filipino who has experienced the country’s public transportation system firsthand, I know that traffic is only part of the problem. The real challenge lies in a system that often forces commuters to endure long waits, overcrowded vehicles, and exhausting daily journeys. A reliable transit system would encourage more people to leave their cars at home, easing pressure on already congested roads.

Employment opportunities, particularly in suburban and rural communities, must also be taken into consideration. Many students today dream of finding work in major cities because opportunities are concentrated there. According to PSA data, more than half of the country’s population lives in urban areas, where a large share of formal and wage-based employment is located. This means that approximately 26 to 30 million of Filipinos depend on jobs concentrated in urban centers. 

As a result, many workers are forced to travel long distances every day just to earn enough to support themselves and their families. This situation often pushes people to rely on private vehicles to cope with traffic congestion and unreliable public transportation, adding pressure to already crowded roads. As more people commute into cities, demand for road space increases, prompting calls for even more infrastructure projects. Unless economic opportunities are expanded beyond major urban areas, we risk continuing the same cycle of congestion and road expansion.

By expanding economic opportunities outside major cities, the government can reduce the need for daily migration into urban areas, ease transportation pressures, and lessen the demand for infrastructure projects that come at the expense of green spaces.

If we wait any longer, we risk losing both the environment we depend on and the opportunity to solve the problem at its root. We must not wait until we find ourselves stuck in an endless cycle of problems and temporary solutions while sacrificing the very environment that sustains us. Development and environmental protection do not have to exist on opposite sides. With proper planning and collective action, both can progress together.

The solution is not to cut down more trees; it is to cut the cycle.