How Metropolitan area of Monterrey ranks in the latest mobility ranking?

The metropolitan area of Monterrey is located at number 10 of the urban mobility ranking, released by the Mexican Institute of Competitiveness (IMCO).

IMCO analyzes and compares urban conditions necessary to achieve competitive mobility
IMCO analyzes and compares urban conditions necessary to achieve competitive mobility

The Urban Mobility Index (IMU), which evaluates 20 cities, which are composed of 203 municipalities that account for 43% of the national population and 68% of urban economic activity, reported that in the ranking of the overall results , Monterrey has a level of low average competitiveness.

First qualified as the Valley of Mexico, number two was Saltillo, followed by Guadalajara, Leon and Toluca and Monterrey was placed in the tenth place.

IMCO analyzes and compares urban conditions necessary to achieve competitive mobility and the IMU measures the degree of competitiveness in mobility that cities have by offering various transport options, which must be attractive, desirable and achievable for its inhabitants .

"The mobility of a city is competitive if it reduces the person-hours that are lost during transfers, as well as the impacts it has on health and the environment", details the report made up of 100 indicators, 95 of them divided into seven subscripts and five that are used as reference variables in the themes of mobility in ways and sustainable accessibility.

In the category or sub-index of "Safe transportation", Monterrey was in the 16th place, while the best city was Mérida.

Saltillo ranks second, with an adequate level of competitiveness; Aguascalientes the third, followed by Veracruz and Chihuahua; Monterrey has a low average level of competitiveness, before the Valley of Mexico, Toluca, Cuernavaca and Villahermosa, both with a low rating.

The information describes that Merida was the city with the lowest perception of insecurity in the street, automobile and public transport, as well as with the lowest proportion of respondents who declared having stopped using public transport (6%) or using taxis ( 16%) due to insecurity.

Safe transport is closely linked to the quality of life of citizens, as well as the decisions they take to move, says the communication, so it is important to take into account that the percentage of the population that uses private cars to travel is going from a minimum of 11% in Acapulco to a maximum of 51% in the city of Chihuahua.

"By far, the most efficient transport in terms of space and emissions is public transport. However, in Mexico and other parts of the world, this means of transport is linked to the perception of inefficiency, discomfort and insecurity.

"This, compared to a means of transport such as the private car that is more comfortable and more flexible, and that has also historically been the subject of public policies that promote and encourage its use, causes the population with sufficient means to acquire a car. always prefer it over public transport. "

An average of 38 percent of the population of the cities studied, use public transport.

The people who stopped using public transport due to insecurity in the 20 cities studied, represented on average 17.58% of the population, the report details, reaching its maximum in the city of Toluca where 31% of the population stopped use public transport due to insecurity.

The sub-index "Accessibility and operation of urban infrastructure" describes that Monterrey is in fourth place, after León, Chihuahua and Guadalajara. Last are Cuernavaca and Querétaro.

The sub-index called "Urban Context" measures the growth and density of the urban sprawl, the modal distribution and some consequences of these configurations, such as the cost of a user to reach his destination.

In the ranking of said sub-index, Monterrey was placed in the 19th place, only above Chihuahua. In the first place was Villahermosa, followed by Morelia and Puebla-Tlaxcala.

IMCO reveals that between 2010 and 2015, the urban area of the 20 cities evaluated grew by 0.5% annually while its population increased by 1.7%.

"There is no clear relationship between the growth of the urban sprawl and the population registered for each city. This can be a reflection of dispersed urban policies, where local governments manage urban growth without having a coordinated strategy focused on the containment of urban sprawl. "

In the "Clean Air" category, which measures compliance with air quality standards, the emission of pollutants from mobile sources and some of their effects on health. The indicators are limited to seven pollutants, the metropolitan area of Monterrey was placed in fifth place, with high average quality.

Monterrey stood out in ozone concentration levels, according to NOM-020-SSA1-2014 in 2015.

The highest concentration was in the city of León with 0.18, in second place the Valley of Mexico with 0.18 points, and in third place, Monterrey, with 0.16.

The report states that the concentration refers to the average of one hour, whose limit marked in NOM-020-SSA1-2014 is 0.095 particles per million (ppm).

In the measurement of "Government Efficiency and Transparency", which measures the performance of local governments, as well as the management of public resources allocated to transportation and infrastructure, Monterrey repeats a low rating, placing it at number 18.

This sub-index contains information on the configuration of the mobility budget, budget transparency, perception of corruption, air quality management and anti-alcohol operations.

Valle de México obtained the highest rating, while in second place was Morelia. The last places are occupied by Monterrey, San Luis Potosí and Acapulco.

In "Regulation and public policies in favor of mobility", Monterrey has the sixth position, below the Valley of Mexico, Toluca, Saltillo, Guadalajara and León.

In this area we sought to measure the inclusion of necessary parameters in the current regulations that encourage the efficient mobility of the inhabitants within the urban area and includes composite variables that qualify the current regulations with respect to best practices.

The IMU highlights the case of Uber, clarifying that it has been a good service option for citizens and a qualified competition as disloyal by traditional taxi drivers, so that beyond the advantages or disadvantages, the existing legal uncertainty is worrisome around him five years after Uber operated for the first time in Mexico City.

"The 20 cities evaluated in this Index of Urban Mobility are composed of municipalities present in 22 states, of which only seven explicitly consider in their transport or mobility laws the system operated through mobile applications and only three list of limiting the requirements for these platforms to work and register with the state government. "

The Institute emphasizes that the local Congresses are failing in their obligation to generate a normative framework that specifies the rights and obligations of the platforms and in making explicit the conditions that must be fulfilled as individuals by the members of the platform.

Finally, in the topic of "Dynamic and competitive economy", with indicators that describe the situation of the employed population, the dynamism of the economy and the formality of the same, Monterrey was placed fifth in the list.

Between 1990 and 2017, vehicles in circulation grew at an average annual rate of 5.3% while the population did so at a rate of 1.5%, notes the IMCO report, "as a result, cities have grown horizontally, detonating isolated and segregated neighborhoods ".

The above has also caused the population to live in remote areas, which increases their spending on transportation, which is equivalent to an average of 1,815 pesos per month, the highest percentage among the G20 countries.

Among the actions necessary to increase the degree of competitiveness in mobility that IMCO recommends based on the IMU, are reducing uncontrolled expansion and ordering the growth of cities, reward municipalities that invest more in public transport networks, take into account account the economies of agglomeration in the construction of infrastructure.

Other suggestions include increasing funding mechanisms for infrastructure projects from the state, as well as the provision of public transportation in the municipalities