Why my wealthy friend won't buy a car, and what it says about Vietnam traffic problems

His reasoning? Using ride-hailing services spares him the hassle of finding parking and avoids adding to the congestion when maneuvering through Vietnam's often narrow and chaotic urban streets.

Traffic jams in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City have plagued residents for decades. Yet, the public discourse tends to focus on blaming vehicles—first motorbikes, now cars—without addressing the underlying causes. This oversimplification often leads to heated debates, even among my circle of friends.

My car-free friend argues that in densely populated cities, owning a car only exacerbates traffic problems.

"Whenever I need to go somewhere, I just ride my motorbike," he says. "On rainy days or for longer trips, I use ride-hailing services, which saves me from worrying about parking." He admits that if his hometown were far away, he might consider owning a car, but only to use it a few times a year during holidays like Tet. For him, a car would otherwise sit idle in the garage, serving little purpose.

He also pointed out how cars on narrow streets can lead to gridlock, frustrating motorbike riders who feel displaced as cars occupy their lanes. But is the root of Vietnam's traffic woes really the vehicles themselves—or does the problem stem from poor urban planning?

Cars and motorbikes are stuck in traffic in Hanoi. Photo by VnExpress

In well-designed cities worldwide, personal vehicles and public transportation coexist harmoniously, supported by efficient urban planning and traffic management systems. In contrast, Hanoi and HCMC suffer from overpopulation in their urban centers, coupled with underdeveloped transportation infrastructures that fail to accommodate the growing number of vehicles on the streets.

With overcrowded areas, narrow roads, and limited public transport options, residents have little choice but to rely on personal vehicles. Banning motorbikes, as some have suggested, would not solve the problem—it would likely worsen congestion by increasing car usage, adding larger vehicles to roads already struggling to cope.

The solution lies not in choosing between cars and motorbikes but in rethinking how our cities are planned. Hospitals, universities, factories, and high-rise apartments are concentrated in city centers, forcing people from suburban and rural areas to commute long distances daily. This constant flow of workers and students overwhelms the already strained traffic network.

Rather than debating which vehicle type causes more congestion, we should be questioning the inefficiency of current urban planning. Why not relocate universities, hospitals, and industrial zones to suburban areas? Why not impose stricter caps on population density in city centers instead of continuing to build more high-rise apartments?

Cities with balanced population distribution and accessible basic services reduce the need for extensive travel, naturally decreasing dependence on personal vehicles. Moreover, developing an efficient public transportation system would provide residents with reliable alternatives to cars and motorbikes, further easing congestion.

Ultimately, the future of urban transportation is not about banning specific vehicle types but about designing systems where all forms of transport—public and private—can function smoothly together. Addressing issues like urban planning, population density, public transport infrastructure, and enforcement of traffic laws is key to solving Vietnam's traffic jams.

Without a shift in how we tackle these fundamental issues, traffic congestion will persist, leaving us stuck in the same gridlock for decades to come. It's time to focus on the bigger picture and build cities where mobility is a seamless and efficient experience for everyone.