Poverty in the Philippines

This article needs more links to other articles to help integrate it into the encyclopedia. Please help
improve this article by adding links that are relevant to the context within the existing text. (April 2013)

This article's factual accuracy may be compromised due to out-of-date information. Please update this
article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (August 2012)

The estimates of poverty incidence in the Philippines per province as of 2012. The national average is
22.3%, virtually unchanged from 2006's 23.4%. Poverty remains a critical social problem that needs
to be addressed. Philippines' poverty line marks a per capita income of 16,841 pesos a year.[1]
According to the data from the National Statistical Coordination Board, more than one-quarter
(27.9%) of the population fell below the poverty line the first semester of 2012, an approximate 1 per
cent increase since 2009.[2] This figure is a much lower figure as compared to the 33.1% in 1991.[3]
The decline in poverty has been slow and uneven, much slower than neighboring countries who
experienced broadly similar numbers in the 1980s,[4] such as People's Republic of China (PRC),
Thailand, Indonesia (where the poverty level lies at 8.5%) or Vietnam (13.5%).

This shows that the incidence of poverty has remained significantly high as compared to other
countries for almost a decade. The unevenness of the decline has been attributed to a large range of
income brackets across regions and sectors, and unmanaged population growth. The Philippines
poverty rate is roughly the same level as Haiti.[4] The government planned to eradicate poverty as
stated in the Philippines Development Plan 2011-2016 (PDP). The PDP for those six years are an
annual economic growth of 7-8% and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals
(MDGs). Under the MDGs, Philippines committed itself to having extreme poverty from a 33.1% in
1991 to 16.6% by 2015.

This article's factual accuracy may be compromised due to out-of-date information. Please update this
article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (August 2012) Rapid population
growth[edit]

Poverty is a state or condition in which a person or community lacks the financial resources and
essentials to enjoy a minimum standard of life and
well-being that's considered acceptable in society. –Investopedia. (2014). “Terms beginning with P”
p.4

Poverty is one of the major problems in the Philippines which should be solved. Because of poverty,
people suffer from hunger and people live on the streets.

“There is Bec, a 56-year-old visually impaired worker at the Department of Education central office,
who was tutored at a young age by SPED-trained teachers Gerardo Consolacion and Ricardo
Monegro.

The focused mentoring helped her cultivate a love for learning as she eventually earned her Bachelor
of Arts degree from the Central Philippine University in Iloilo City. For over 30 years now, she has
devoted her life preparing Braille materials for visually-impaired students in public schools.

There is also 54-year-old farmer Bert of Sierra Bullones, Bohol whose lack of education was no
hindrance to his dream of a better life for his family. His desire to familiarize himself with various
farming techniques led him to participate in the training programs provided by the Department of
Agrarian Reform (DAR) and other agencies.

Given that the population of the Philippines is increasing at a rapid rate of 2.36% per year, this can be
translated as an increase of more than 5,000 people daily in a country that already has an increase of
more than four million poor people since 1985.[5] In 1985, the absolute number of people living in
poverty was 26.5 million. This increased to 30.4 million in 2000 and from 2006 to 2009, increased by
almost 970,000 Filipinos from 22.2 million to 23.1 million.[4] As the Philippines has financially limited
resources and a high poverty rate, the rapid increase in population has become a problem because
there is insufficient resources to support the population, which leaves much fewer resources to
improve the economy. From 2003 to 2006, even though the Philippines experienced above-average
economic growth, the poverty incidence increased as a result of its population growth rate.[6]

Poverty reduction has not kept up with GDP growth rates, largely due to the high unemployment rate,
high inflation rate and wide income inequality. The official rate of unemployment for 2012 in the
Philippines was 6.8 per cent.[7] This was an increase of joblessness even though in 2012, the GDP
grew at 6.6 percent. From 2000 to 2009, the economy of Philippines grew by 3.2% on average
annually, which was on par with the economic performance of its neighbors.[8] However, this recent
growth did not translate into more jobs. Unemployment in the Philippines has been high in
comparison to its neighbors, at around 7.5% to 8.0% since 2006.[9]

The Philippines has faced difficulty in job creation due to its inability to attract more foreign, direct
investments. Diwa Guinigundo, who is the Central Bank Deputy Governor, mentioned that while
capital flows are turning to the emerging markets,[10] foreign, direct investments to the Philippines
remain relatively low due to the weak investment climate. The Philippines has hefty business
procedures, poor tax and customs administration, weak protection against expropriation and high-
energy cost. Therefore, the poverty rate remains constant over the years.

The various training Bert attended cultivated his preference for fertilizer from animal manure over the
costlier chemical-based alternatives. He has, since then, used and advocated for organic farming in
Bohol. These are people who, despite the hardship brought by destitution and disability, refused to
use illegal means to survive and instead made themselves available for service to the country in their
own little way. They are people who played by the government’s rules – the rule of law – and
benefited in return.

There is a term for it, and it is called "trust." It is the acknowledgment that social mobility is possible
through the coordinated efforts of government and civil society. The book, by virtue of inherent
limitations in form and volume, fails to document the thousand other Filipinos fighting their way
through bureaucratic hurdles and “falling through the cracks.” Then again, that is not what the book is
for.
It makes no mention, for instance, of those on the opposite side of the spectrum: people who have
abandoned all hope. This is precisely because the stories featured are meant to build trust and a
resolve to overcome poverty.” –Bernal. B. (2013). 18 stories of Filipinos overcoming poverty.

This is a story about Filipino citizens who are trying to overcome poverty through their hardships.
Most Filipinos are trying to find a way out of poverty. Filipinos are known as hard workers and
dedicated citizens. But it is not enough. The government should also help to overcome poverty in the
country. The government should be a model to its people. But it is not happening. The government is
one of the reasons why there is poverty in the Philippines.

Corruption is a cause of poverty in the Philippines. The government raises the tax and all the other
expenses of the people but do not use the money for the benefit of the people. They use the money
for the benefit of their own. They keep it for themselves and tell the people that they worked for the
money they have. Corruption leads to poverty in a way that the people’s money is being kept and
used by the people who are just using their position in the government to be rich. All they care about
is their selves. They do not care about the people suffering because of what they are doing.

“Former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo of the Philippines was arrested Thursday afternoon on
corruption charges related to allegations of misuse of $8.8 million in state lottery funds during her
administration.” –Floyd W. (2012). Philippines Ex-President Is Arrested in Hospital on New Charges.

Another cause of poverty in the Philippines is overpopulation. People do not plan on what they want
to do with their future families. They do not plan on how many kids the want to have and can support
all through their lives. What happens is they make babies, more babies, and then afterwards they
won’t have any money left to buy food for their family. So every member of the family suffers.

“Most developing nations have large number of people who are illiterate, live below the poverty line
and have little or no knowledge about family planning. Getting their children married at an early age
increase the chances of producing more kids. Those people are unable to understand the harmful
effects of overpopulation and lack of ignorance prompts them to avoid family planning measures”
–Overpopulation. (2014).

Nowadays, many teenagers are getting pregnant. Teenagers are getting curious about having sex at
an early age that can cause overpopulation. Without planning on what their lives would be and how it
will affect the community.

“There are a lot of reasons as to why the Philippines is overpopulated. One reason, or I was able to
think of, is Pre-Marital Sex. We learn from the Bible that sex before marriage is a sin and yet a lot of
people do it. Some happens accidentally but some do it on purpose. Another cause of overpopulation
is unprotected sex. Maybe one of the reasons as to why people do it is mainly just because of
pleasure. Come to think of it, I ask myself 'why do they do it when they know that it could actually lead
to something bad?'

This is a cause of overpopulation because the child born was just mainly an accident. These couples
did not want to have a child in the first place and that one child is a big contribution to the country's
population. Another main cause that hit me the most is those families on the poverty level still
manage to get a child when they already have fiver or even more to take care of. They keep on
making children when they know themselves that they are only limited to a number.” – Whang. C.
(2012). Overpopulation in the Philippines.

Pre-Marital Sex is caused by lack of education when it comes to sexual education. Lack of education
is another cause of poverty. Most children have no opportunity to study. They can’t go to school
because they have no money and no one is helping them, especially the government. If they do not
study, they won’t be able to get a job in the future. And then they will suffer again from the same
problem, poverty. If the children will not learn anything especially the lessons about pre-marital sex,
there is a big chance that they will try it at an early age out of curiosity.

The Philippines has achieved only modest reductions in poverty at a national level since the
economic and political collapse of the mid-1980s. In addition, severe regional disparities remain. The
proportion of households living below the official poverty line has declined slowly and unevenly from
59 percent in 1961 to below 39 percent in 1991 and around 36 percent in 1994. Urban poverty stood
at around 23 percent in 1991 and rural poverty at 53 percent (by World Bank staff calculations).

Food poverty (or those living below subsistence) was around 20 percent of households in 1991, but
32 percent of rural households while only 12 percent of urban households. Two-thirds of the poor are
engaged in the agriculture, fishery, and forestry sectors and have an elementary school education or
less. However, the depth of poverty is relatively small (with the poverty gap index only 17 percent in
1991, having fallen by 40 percent since 1961), and income disparities among the poor have declined
noticeably.

Since 1971, the urban poor have become a rising share of the total poor population, but still two-thirds
of the poor live in rural areas. The depth of poverty is nearly 2 1/2 times larger in rural areas than in
urban areas. The urban poor are concentrated in Luzon, while the rural poor live predominantly in
Mindanao and the Visayas. Poor households in the Philippines tend to combine into extended families
to conserve household assets. Thus, larger households are observed as having greater poverty than
smaller households: households of 8 or more members represent nearly a third of all the poor.

The incidence and severity of poverty is significantly lower among elderly and female headed
households in the Philippines, in striking contrast to the evidence from other developing countries,
again because these households tend to be absorbed into others. It also reflects women's strong
position in the labor market in terms of relative pay and attachment compared with many other Asian
countries and even relative to many OECD countries.

Philippine performance on poverty reduction has been disappointing compared with the rest of East
Asia, but the Philippines has not been able to sustain growth long enough to reduce its incidence of
poverty to the levels attained by its neighbors. GDP growth averaged only 1.1 percent per annum in
the 1980s. Further, the pattern of growth in the past tended to accentuate rather than reduce income
disparities. Slow growth of higher productivity sectors resulted in absorption of labor in low
productivity employment in the 1970s and 1980s. The industrial sector shrank over this period, and
agricultural growth slowed dramatically. More importantly, poverty declines were modest even when
the economy was growing rapidly in the 1960s and 1970s because of the distorted structure of the
economy. Policies discriminated against labor, subsidized capital-intensive methods of production,
and gave low priority to agriculture and exports.

This resulted in growth that was narrowly based and inequitable, trapping many people in marginal,
low paying occupations such as upland agriculture, rural wage labor, and informal employment in
cities. Infrastructure was highly concentrated in Metro Manila. Government interventions, especially in
the 1970s and early 1980s, tended to diminish the role of market mechanisms in favor of regulation
by parastatals and promoted oligopolisitic control in important sectors of the economy. This inward-
looking strategy was inherently unstable, and so the economy lurched from balance of payments
crisis to crisis.

“The biggest cause of overpopulation in the Philippines is the lack of education. People there don't
have the knowledge on how to use contraceptives. The big and powerful Roman Catholic Church
(which basically controls the country) disapproves of any form of sexual education and birth
contraceptives. This explains the lack of sexual education and the government constant refusal to
provide free birth control for its citizens.” –Anonymous. (N.D)

The church disapproves to sexual education which is why the children have a lack of knowledge
when it comes to sexual intercourse. Sex education somehow must be taught to children when they
are already at the right age for them to know the effects of pre-marital sex.

“Unemployment creates a lack of financial stability, leading to a downwards spiral in social mobility
and eventually poverty. The unemployed will have a lower standard of living than most employed
people. Lack of a regular income leads to the inability to be able to maintain the basic needs,
including fundamental provisions such as eating healthy foods, buying into health care and providing
adequate heating for the home. While there are many types of poverty, the reasons behind poverty
are always a lack of money. It is possible to live in poverty even with employment. A low paid worker
may suffer much the same hardships.” –Anonymous. (N.D)

When a person is unemployed, he will have no income to earn for himself. Being employed is a very
important way to prevent poverty. When you are employed, you are going to earn money. You will be
able to supply all your needs in everyday life. Unlike the unemployed persons, they cannot supply
themselves with all their needs. Unemployment leads to poverty because when a person has no job,
he will have no money to buy food and no shelter to live in, he will have to depend on the help coming
from other people.

In the wake of across-the board structural reforms of the financial sector, agricultural pricing and
marketing, the tax system, the foreign trade and investment regimes, and government corporations,
the experience of the Philippines in the late 1980s showed that accelerated growth in a more
liberalized economy has a positive impact on incomes of the poor and that poverty declines during
periods of rapid growth. Between 1985 and 1988, when GDP growth averaged 4.8 percent, the
poverty headcount fell by 1.3 percentage points each year, an achievement equivalent to Thailand's
long-term rate of poverty reduction. Analysis of the economic growth of 1985 to 1988 concludes that
deregulation in agriculture and greater control over inflation were likely the key factors that improved
the lot of the poor. Labor market performance has also shown signs of improvement.

Public expenditures on education in 1994 were less than 3 percent of GDP compared with 4 percent
in Indonesia or 7 percent in Malaysia, despite inching upwards since the late 1980s, after over almost
two decades of limited investment through the 1970s and early 1980s. Public primary education
remains relatively under-financed, and funding is based on pupil headcount without any
compensatory mechanisms to assist the most "at-risk" areas, schools, or ethnic groups. Thus, in the
Philippines, poor youth are much more likely to drop out of school or get a poor quality education. The
Philippines spends comparatively less of its resources on health than several other East Asian
nations, both publicly and privately (spending 0.6 percent on GDP on health publicly and 2.4 percent
of GDP on health overall).

In addition, public health gains are not as great as they should be because of the poor distribution of
health facilities and personnel over the country. The poor would benefit from more emphasis on
primary care and the reduction of environmental risk factors (which induce disease disproportionately
among the poor). In many cases, the improvement of other infrastructure such as rural roads will
allow existing health facilities to be used more intensively. As a result of the fiscal decentralization
enacted in 1991, most traditional poverty alleviation programs except education have become the
responsibility of local governments, limiting the ability of the central authorities to implement programs
of national priority.

At the same time, the current revenue sharing arrangements with local governments (set by a legal
formula) do not redistribute resources towards poorer provinces. Also, by devolving functions and
whole institutions to local government, expertise and efficiency in many areas has been (at least
temporarily) lost and likely is weakest in poorer provinces. The variation in capacity and resources
calls for continued attention by central authorities--for technical assistance, capacity building, and
incentives to raise revenues locally.

The Philippine Government has implemented a number of safety net programs, ranging from cash
and in-kind income transfers (such as food subsidies and nutrition interventions) to wage employment
programs and livelihood creation programs. In response to natural disasters, the National Food
Authority distributes assistance to affected areas in the form of subsidized rice. In addition, the private
sector, NGOs, and foreign donors have been actively assisting in the planning, financing and
execution of many of these programs. However, the government's set of programs do not constitute
an efficient and equitable social safety net: (i) they are fragmented and not a consistent or adequate
response to the problem; (ii) they have generally failed to mobilize communities to help themselves;
and (iii) recent changes of institutions and strategies are creating problems of transition that tend to
obscure priorities in the government's delivery of social services or make additional demands on an ill-
equipped bureaucracy and cadre of field workers.

Policymakers must not waver in keeping the economy outward-oriented and geared towards
competition, because an East Asian-style economy is far more likely to be able to sustain the rapid
and smooth rate of growth that is fundamental to improving the welfare of the poor. To reach the
government's target of reducing the number of families living below the poverty line from 39 percent in
1991 (by official measures) to 30 percent by 1998, it is estimated that GNP will need to grow by about
6.5 percent annually for 1996 to 1998. Many of the urban poor will be helped directly by growth, as
employment opportunities respond to increased demand. Even a good number of the rural poor will
find their incomes rising, as demand for agriculture-based products, especially exports, expands.
However, significant reduction of rural poverty will require improvements in health and education and
infrastructure (especially roads, markets, and agricultural extension).

Access to the means of production by the rural poor is crucial. It is time to revisit how to accomplish
the goals of rural land reform so that the intended beneficiaries--the poorest of farmers and landless
agricultural workers--can benefit. The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program, which has
accomplished a number of its original goals, is getting too expensive and complicated. Tenancy
should be allowed once again, as a useful interim state between landless labor and owner-cultivator
status. A market-assisted land reform program should be studied to explore options for reducing
costs. Investments with the greatest impact on the poor, e.g., rural infrastructure, should be a priority
for use of scarce public funds In urban areas, the scarcity of affordable housing (a problem
aggravated by skyrocketing land prices) and threats to environmental health must be addressed.

It is now urban, rather than rural, land reform that should be a priority for government action. Tax and
regulations on land ownership and development need to be revised. A commission should consider
options to balance the rights of dwellers in irregular settlements with the legal owners of urban
properties. Water and sanitation services must be extended to poor urban areas. The government
should hesitate to spend more money on housing since little of it helps the truly poor. Investment in
human capital must be increased by improving the quantity and the quality of primary education and
access to primary education in rural areas.

Primary health services must be strengthened, especially immunization and prevention of water-
borne and respiratory diseases. The social safety net must be consolidated and targeted. General
food price subsidies should be stopped, in favor of targeted income subsidies or food stamps and
supplementary feeding programs. The National Government should redirect resources formerly used
for government livelihood programs towards creating an enabling environment for private institutions
to provide credit to the poor successfully. To foster the growth of a healthy microfinance sector,
government financial institutions should focus on wholesale lending, ensuring adequate capital is
available to reach the poor.

The key survey for poverty data in the Philippines is the Family Income and Expenditure Survey,
conducted every three years. The survey questionnaire is of standard form, more or less comparable
to an LSMS format. An important limitation on the relevance of these data for policy purposes has
been the long delays for processing, e.g., the 1991 results became available only in early 1995. Also,
the household survey sample is not large enough to allow provincial indicators to be calculated for the
smaller provinces. This basic dataset is not integrated with the social sector and other data (surveys
on health, demographics., labor force and occasional censuses of population and housing) or with
government expenditure information. Monitoring of poverty and the relative performance of the
provinces and cities is an important continuing role for the National Government, even after fiscal
decentralization.

The report recommends that the government expand the household survey and integrate and
improve existing statistics and program information so as to provide crucial assistance to the
provinces in setting priorities and in raising awareness down to the community level of how well the
government is meeting the minimum basic needs of the people. The World Bank has provided
technical assistance and grant funding for training and equipment for the government agencies
involved (as well as generating interest by other donors) and will continue to do so.

Poverty and inequality in the Philippines remains a challenge. In the past four decades, the proportion
of households living below the official poverty line has declined slowly and unevenly and poverty
reduction has been much slower than in neighboring countries such as the People's Republic of
China, Indonesia, Thailand, and Viet Nam. Economic growth has gone through boom and bust cycles,
and recent episodes of moderate economic expansion have had limited impact on the poor. Great
inequality across income brackets, regions, and sectors, as well as unmanaged population growth,
are considered some of the key factors constraining poverty reduction efforts.

You might be surprised to find that the United States isn’t the richest country in the world. Actually,
that crown goes to Qatar who has recently jumped ranks to take first place. But what about the other
side of the spectrum, the parts of the world struggling with devastating poverty? Well, on that end the
Democratic Republic of Congo comes in first – or last, to be more accurate – with the lowest GDP per
capita than any other country. Determining a country’s rank in wealth isn’t the easiest of tasks when
you sit down and think about the data and economics involved. However, a good indicator of a
nation’s standard of living is the assessment of its GDP (gross domestic product) per capita, which is
defined as the total value of all domestic goods and services that country produces annually, times its
PPP or purchasing power parity. GDP per capita (PPP) isn’t a perfect shot because its purpose isn’t
to calculate that kind of economic rank but it’s measured frequently, widely and consistently, allowing
trends to become visible.

In 2010, GNI (gross national income) per capita replaced GDP in the calculation, but the list is the
same between the two. Qatar was still first with about $100,000 GDP per capita (PPP) in 2012 just as
it was on the GNI list and the Democratic Republic of Congo came in last at around $370 GDP per
capita (PPP). The gap is massive. Of the 40 poorest countries in the world, a solid 33 are in Sub-
Saharan Africa. They include Zimbabwe, Burundi, Liberia, and Niger. Other parts of the world
notoriously infamous for high poverty rates include Afghanistan, Haiti, and Nepal. But none of these
places takes it quite as harshly as the Democratic Republic of Congo (not to be confused with the
Republic of Congo) whose turbulent past and bloody wars have eclipsed the nation’s potential to
thrive. Since its independence in 1960 and once the most industrialized country in Africa, Congo has
bled onto the ground because of its lack of infrastructure and the brutal impact of civil war.

Disputes between Congo’s prominent rival groups, the Hutu and Tutsi, erupted after the Rwandan
Genocide in which 500,000 people, mostly Tutsi, were victims of mass slaughter by the Hulus in the
East African state of Rwanda. The result was an exodus of over 2 million Rwandans fleeing to
neighboring countries like the Democratic Republic of Congo, known in that time as Zaire. Most of the
refugees were Hulus attempting to escape the Tutsi who had climbed to dominance at the end of the
genocide. The Hulu refugee camps in Zaire, however, became politicized and militarized and when
Tutsi rebels invaded Zaire to repatriate the refugees, the conflict escalated into the First Congo War in
1996. The situation only grew worse and by 1998, the Second Congo War, which was sometimes
called the “African world war” because it involved a total of nine African countries and twenty armed
groups, devastated Zaire and laid waste to her population and economy.

The political turmoil continues today despite intervention and peace attempts and is one of the world’s
deadliest conflicts with a death toll of 5.4 million people. More than almost 90 percent of the conflict’s
victims, however, died due a lack of access to shelter, water, food and medicine – all severely
aggravated by displaced and overcrowded populations living in unsanitary conditions. Not to mention,
47 percent of deaths were children under 5 and some 45,000 children continue to die each month.
The nation also faces the problem of human rights and the countless crimes against humanity
because while many have returned home, an estimated 1.5 million are still displaced. DR Congo is
also infamous and heavily criticized for its treatment of women.

The east of the country has been described as the “rape capital of the world” and rates of sexual
violence has been described as the worst in the world. It doesn’t help that DR Congo is consistently
poisoned by corruption and greed. While mining growth has somewhat boosted the country’s
economy, the elite are said to syphon off revenue for their own personal gain due to the nation’s lack
of strong central government. Conflicts over basic resources, access and control over rich minerals
and oil, and political agendas are some of the many complex causes behind the Democratic Republic
of Congo’s inability to rise among the ranks and take the title of the poorest country in the world.
Don't know where to start with your assignment?
HIRE VERIFIED EXPERT
Let our experts help you