by Alex Roldan
Poverty remains a serious problem in the Philippines, which is the only populous country in East Asia in which the absolute number of people living on less than $1 a day remained constant over 2 decades, according the figures compiled by Dr. Cielito Habito, former NEDA Chief and professor of Ateneo de Manila. In his recent presentation on “Why Poverty Persists in the Philippines” at a forum sponsored by Peace and Equity Foundation, Dr. Habito estimates that even if the Philippine economy posts a positive growth for the next decade, it will still not be possible to bring the poverty to a level compared to our neighboring countries. Many economists agree that it may take some 2 decades more of continuous economic reform before the country can match the single-digit poverty figures of our more wealthy neighbors.
In general, widespread poverty in the country is a direct result of inappropriate and unresponsive economic policies, mismanagement of resources, corruption, and failure of government to implement anti-poverty programs. We all knew that economic policies from the 1960” to the 1980s focused on capital-intensive, import-substituting strategy which bred inefficient industries and contributed to the neglect of the agricultural sector. Policies promoting industrialization favored the development of urban areas to the detriment of rural areas, which remained underdeveloped. At the outset, urban areas, especially Metro Manila, cornered major infrastructure and social projects, attracted most of the investments and jobs in the manufacturing and industrial sector. In contrast, living standards in the rural areas continued to decline, leaving most of the peasant communities to subsistence living.
Starting the mid 1980s, policies adopted by the government moved toward a more open, market-friendly economy. However, as government continued to pursue industrialization, the country’s foreign debt ballooned and most of the government’s ability to finance infrastructure and social programs for the neglected sectors of the population.
Though it may be true that the country’s GDP growth remained positive despite global financial crisis, the data of Dr. Habito corroborated the long contention that this is mainly driven by government spending. The data from Ateneo Center for Economic Research showed the in the 2nd quarter of this year total personal consumption of the private sector increased by 2.2% which is down by almost 50% compared to the same quarter last year, while government consumption increased by 100 percent or 9.1%. The biggest leap is in the construction sector wherein the government’s expenditure reached 29.9% while the public’s share shrunk to 6.5%. The bad thing is that our exports posted negative growth (-16%) despite reduced expenditures for imports.
But where did we fail? A glaring example made by the Dr. Habito which I can personally attest is the failure of our local and national leaders to “listen” to the poor” – what is best for them, their culture, and present environment and support to their productive activities, how can this be solved.
An example is his personal discussion with a farmer leader in a remote area in Davao del Sur. When asked about what is needed by the farmers to improve their income, the response is unexpected – “a couple of horses” to help carry their produce to the nearest market. The solution may sound absurd to many since modern transportation can easily reach the remote areas by constructing a farm to market road. But why horses instead of a road which is more useful?
The farmer is just being practical to their situation. They knew that a farm to market road is a distant dream for them at the moment. Nobody among the politicians would waste their precious pork barrels to construct roads to connect communities with very few convertible votes! Their number simply cannot justify a multi-million project. In the business parlance, it is simply not feasible or profitable! The farmers’ only hope is horses, and of course, it is already a common knowledge that our dear leaders do not have a heart to buy horses or carabaos to be distributed to farmers. The earnings to the benefactor is almost nil, unlike large and expensive construction projects.
This is the reason why we see poor communities who need horses but were given expensive covered basketball courts, farmers needing carabaos so that they can till their lands, but were given fertilizers. It is simply stupid!
In my 15 years stint with a development organization saw all these so-called “pro-poor projects” by politicians being implemented again and again in many communities. Our calls to our politicians that if they wanted to help alleviate the poverty conditions, is to listen to what the poor would say to their situation and how could they be helped, sadly fell on deaf ears.
With the recent disasters that hit the country, our dear leaders are again thinking of grandiose ways to help the poor and the affected, of course at staggering cost! I suggest, please listen to the poor, you will be amazed how simple, practical and how little they need. Just listen to them. Will ya!
For comments, mail to: roldanalex@yahoo.com
