A recent taxi ride in Cebu, marked by an old cab, worn seats, and an unpleasant odor, became a personal catalyst for understanding the appeal of electric vehicles (EVs). For many commuters, the promise of cleaner, quieter, and newer transport offers a clear upgrade from such uncomfortable experiences. This shift in perspective is particularly relevant as Cebu prepares to host an ASEAN gathering next year, aiming to boost its profile in sustainable development.
The Core of the Controversy: Provisional Authority for 600 EVs
However, the path to this greener future is facing a critical test. The current proposal to allow electric vehicle taxis to operate under a provisional authority has ignited a significant debate. The central issue is not the environmental benefits of EVs or the need for better service quality, both of which are widely acknowledged. The deeper question is whether the transition is being managed in a fair, orderly, and trustworthy manner, consistent with Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) principles.
At the heart of this debate is Cebu Governor Pamela Baricuatro's firm opposition to a plan to grant taxi franchises for 600 electric vehicles. She argues that issuing licenses under provisional authority risks unfairly displacing current taxi operators who have complied with all existing rules, paid their dues, and invested in the system with the expectation of stability. For numerous families, a taxi franchise is a vital economic lifeline.
Beyond Technology: The Risks of Erosion and Instability
While Governor Baricuatro did not detail all the specific risks, the concerns are clear: potential economic displacement, erosion of institutional trust, regulatory inconsistency, and overall system instability. The move to welcome new players solely because they use electric technology, while bypassing the standard franchise process, sends a conflicting message. It prioritizes environmental progress and comfort but potentially at the expense of social equity and the integrity of long-established rules.
This situation underscores that poor service—dirty, smelly, and poorly maintained cabs—is primarily a failure of governance and enforcement, not just a lack of technology. The solution should involve stronger regulation for all operators, not selective shortcuts for a new segment. True governance should operate on a level playing field, where no sector is favored simply for its novelty or branding.
The Three Pillars of a Just Transition
Sustainable development rests on three interconnected pillars: protecting the environment, ensuring secure livelihoods, and maintaining trustworthy institutions. A green transition that sidelines workers who followed the rules is not inclusive. A regulatory process that creates exceptions instead of clear, fair pathways is not strong. When people lose faith that compliance protects them, the system's legitimacy weakens, making long-term cooperation for sustainability much harder.
This analysis is not an argument against electric vehicles. On the contrary, it is a case for managing the transition correctly. A fair approach would support existing operators in converting their fleets, accessing financing, and meeting higher environmental and service standards over time. It would reward improvement and compliance rather than bypassing them.
We often frame sustainability as a duty to future generations. That is true. But we also owe fairness and dignity to today's commuters seeking a decent ride and to the workers who placed their trust in the system. A green future built on fairness, clean service, and strong institutions may not be the fastest route, but it is undoubtedly the stronger and more enduring one for Cebu and the Philippines.
