pm, poverty alleviation

8/7/2019 PM, poverty alleviation

1/123

Arturo G. Corpuz

Poverty Alleviation and

Economic Growth


2/123

OBJECTIVES

To enhance knowledge: concepts of growth, poverty, growthstrategies and poverty alleviation strategies

To enhance skills in analyzing provinces potential for andconstraints to growth and poverty alleviation

To enhance skills leading to the design of development programs

for their province

Source: Based on Edillon, 2003


3/123

Growth = increase in size

Economic growth refers to a sustained increase inproduction, usually measured in terms of per capita GrossDomestic Product (GDP).

Economic Growth and PovertyEconomic Growth and Poverty

Factors traditionally expected to lead to economic growth inthe Philippines

-- Large population-- Strategic location

-- Long coastline-- High literacy rate

Source: Edillon, 2003


4/123

2004 Phil pop (est) = 84 M Luzon 56%

Visayas 20%Mindanao 24%

52:48 urban : rural

65:35 projected in 2030

About 43 M urban pop

1995-2000 AGR = 2.36% Pop doubles in 29 years

1960-1995 Urban AGR = 4.2%



5/123

Largest metro areas (> 1 M Pop):

-- Metro Cebu = 1.7M-- Dasmarinas-Bacoor = 1.5-- Malolos-Meycauayan = 1.4-- Metro Antipolo = 1.3-- Metro Davao = 1.2-- Metro Angeles = 1.2-- Calamba-San Pedro = 1.1



6/123


7/123

Male Female

Philippines (Yr 1960)

MaleFemale

h il n (Yr 1960)

Popul tion Pyr mi , 1960

Economic Growth n PovertyEconomic Growth n Poverty



8/123

FemaleMale

Philippines (Yr2000)

Male Female

h il n (Yr2000)

Popul tion Pyr mi , 2000

Economic Growth n PovertyEconomic Growth n Poverty



9/123

Factors traditionally expected to lead to economicgrowth in the Philippines

-- Large population: BUT WIT IG DEPE DE CY RATIO

-- Strategic location

-- Long coastline

-- igh literacy rate



10/123

The Philippine Bulletin,

New York, August 1913

The Philippines as a trade center of the Far East


The best harbor . . . no equal as a coalingstation or naval and military base. . . . Theentrances are narrow, the shores bold, thewater deep, the bay landlocked, easilydefended from attack by sea or land, and thefresh water supply ample. As it is just off thetrade route between Manila, China, andJapan, it strategically commands Manila. Itis there that the Spanish government hadplanned to place its principal naval arsenal inthe east. Already a great deal of money hasbeen expended, many buildings erected,and much work done. A contract has beenmade with an English company to constructa floating drydock of 12,000 ton capacity;some of the material has been delivered andpayments made. (U.S. Congress, 1899)


11/123

The Brussels-based InternationalCommittee of the Red Cross and RedCrescent described the Philippines as theThe Most Disaster-Prone Country in theWorld based on statistics on the number ofvictims in typhoons, earthquakes, volcanic

eruptions, floods, garbage landslide andmilitary action . . . (August 2002)



12/123


-- Large population: BUT WIT IG DEPE DE CY RATIO

-- Strategic location: BUT DISASTER-PRONE; LOCATIONIS NOT EVERYT ING

-- Long coastline-- igh literacy rate



13/123

Coastline Trade Growth

Trade: historically limited;

did not encourage porturban developmentoutside Manila

Shipping industry did notmodernize

Coastline advantageeroded by technology

Many small islands;limited contiguous area;integration obstacle



14/123


-- Large population: BUT WIT IG DEPENDENCY RATIO

-- Strategic location: BUT DISASTER-PRONE; LOCATIONIS NOT EVERYT ING

-- Long coastline: DID NOT LEAD TO TRADE GROWT ;MANY SMALL ISLANDS; LIMITEDCONTIGUOUS AREA

-- igh literacy rate



15/123

1993 Primary School

Country Completion

Rate (%)Philippines 70

Indonesia 77

Malaysia 96

Singapore 100

Thailand 87China 85Source: ADB, HDR, in Monsod, 1999



16/123

100

6

Children startingschool age (1997)

Finishintermediatelevel

1

16

No school

Drop out

60 EnterHS

7

Do not enterHS

45

Finish HS

15

Drop out(usually after1st year)

Source: Based on Monsod and Monsod, 1999

55% of those enteringlabor force will have atmost up to 1st yeareducation



17/123


18/123

GDP per capita, selected countries, 1980-2000 (1980=100)

1980 1981 1982 198

198 198 198

198 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 199

199 199 199

199 1998 1999 2000

ina

Korea, ep

P i l ipp ines

ailand

P IL

T AI

SKOREA

C IN

A



The Philippines has not experienced significant economicgrowth in recent decades (flat growth 1980-2000).


19/123

Trend in per capita GDP, Philippines vs. Thailand, 1960-2000

19 6

1969 19

19

9 19

19

9 199

1999

Phi l ippines

Thailand


Before 1980, average Filipino was richer than average Thai;reversed since 1980.


T AI

P IL


20/123

Lack of economic growth

-- Little improvement in quality of life-- Poverty reduction is slow or does not take place

Substantial sustained economic growth leads to substantialpoverty reduction

-- For each 1% increase in average per capita income,poverty rate declines by 2%(elasticity of poverty to income = 2)



21/123


Annual per Cap Poverty %Eco growth (%) Pt Reduction

E Asia Pacific 6.4 14.9S Asia 3.3 8.4Lat America Carribean 1.6 - 0.1Mid East N Africa 1.0 - 0.1Sub-Sahara Africa - 0.4 - 1.6

Central East Europe - 1.9 -13.5Source: HDR, 2003

Economic Growth and Poverty Reduction (1990s)


22/123

T r e n d o f p e r c a p i t a G D P a n d p o v e r t y i n c i d e nc e

0.85

0.9

0.95

1

1.05

1.1

1.15

1.2

1.25

1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002

Per capita

DP

Pover ty Incidence

P o v e r t y In c i d e n c e

P e r Ca p i ta G D P

Ec o n o mi c G r o wth a n d P o v e r t yEc o n o mi c G r o wth a n d P o v e r t y

1 9 8 7 2 0 0 1

T r e n d o f P e r Ca p i t a G D P a n d P o v e r tyIn c i d e n c e , P hi li p p i n e s,(ba se y e a r = 1 9 8 7)

So ur c e :Ed i llo n , 2 0 0 3


23/123

The major causes of poverty in the Philippines:


Poverty reduction re uires growth


> Inability to benefit from growth

> Lackluster economicperformance of the country

> Vulnerability to shocks; thevulnerable become poor

(1997-2000: Asian financialcrisis + El Nino = add 3 million

poor)

Economic growth

Distribution

Social protection/disaster mitigation


24/123

Classical (Adam Smith et al.)

Wealth can grow only in so far as division of labor allows.

-- Specialization--

Trade-- Comparative advantage

Schools of Thought on Economic GrowthSchools of Thought on Economic Growth



25/123


Self sufficient


26/123

=+ +?



27/123

=+ +?


=Specialization


28/123


Trade

What to trade? What to produce? ComparativeAdvantage


29/123



-- Specialization--




Comparativerelative to another producer/trader(competitor)

General principle: produce commodity that is more

efficiently produced Comparative advantage > absolute advantage

> least disadvantage


30/123



-- Specialization--



Source: Based on Edillon, 2003; G. Tecson 2001; E. Tan ,2001)

Philippines losing comparative advantage in simplelabor-intensive production (China, Vietnam, SriLanka, Bangladesh, India, Indonesia)

True comparative advantage: relatively abundanttechnical labor and mid-level management

Need to focus on education/training, science, math,english (college enrollment: sciences = 0.9%;math/computer = 6.9%; business = 34.9%)


31/123


32/123



-- Specialization

-- Trade-- Comparative advantage



Philippine economic experience: non-growth due to the following:

-- Market constraints (lack of info/access)-- Limited division of labor-- Inefficient production processes-- Trading constraints


33/123

Neo-Classical ( arrod-Domar)

Economic growth is directly proportional to savings rate andproductivity of capital (efficiency)


-- low saving rate-- low productivity of capital




34/123

Tre nd in Saving and Per Capita GDP

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

PCGDP ( $ 100), Phi l ippines

PCGDP ( $ 100), Thai land

GDS (%), Phi l ippines

GDS (%), Thailand

SchoolsofThought on Economic GrowthSchoolsofThought on Economic Growth

PCGDP Phil

GDS Thai

PCGDP Thai

GDS Phil

Trend in Saving (GDS) and Per Capita GDP(PCGDP),1960-2000

1960 2000Source:Edillon, 2003


35/123

Solow-Swan Capital is subject to diminishing marginal returns; less

developed countries will catch up with capital-rich developedcountries



-- Profit rates tend to be higher in LDCs because of cheaper inputcosts (labor and raw materials)

-- Capital flows (investments) from DCs to LDCs, with technologytransfers

-- LDCs catch up and become NICs: costs rise (wage and input

cost increases) and profit rates decline

-- Capital from DCs and NICs flows to otherLDCs


36/123

Solow-Swan

Capital is subject to diminishing marginal returns; lessdeveloped countries will catch up with capital-rich developedcountries


-- Low savings

-- Low investment rates

-- Minimal benefit from technological advances of richer countries



-- Population problem:-- Low savings and high population growth rate mean capital per

worker diminishing

-- 1985-2000, poverty incidence declined from 40.9% to 27.5% butabsolute number of the poor increased by almost 1.4 million

-- Very high dependency ratio


37/123


38/123

Endogenous Growth

Returns to capital need not diminish as capital stock increases;emphasis on uality not uantity of investments


Source: Based on Edillon, 2003, M.J. Abrenica, 2001; E. Tan, 2001)

Philippine economic experience: non-growth due to the following:-- Lack of R & D

UNESCO science manpower critical mass = 380/one millionpopulation

Philippines = 60/one million population

Philippines has largest tertiary education system in East Asiaoutside Japan but has lowest scientist publications (ISI Journals,1994-95)

DOST budget = 3.2% national budget (18% goes to R&D)


39/123

R&D l t, R&D it r DPCountr i nti t R&D

Engineer Expenditures

per illionpop per DP ( )

Philippines 60 0.1

ingapore 2,512 1.1

Korea 2,636 2.8

Tai an 1,669 1.7

Malaysia 87 0.4

Thailand 173 0.2

China 1,993 0.6

Indonesia 181 0.2

Sour : SCO i . , 2001)

SchoolsofThought onEconomic rowthSchoolsofThought onEconomic rowth


40/123

Endogenous Growth

Returns to capital need not diminish as capital stock increases;emphasis on uality not uantity of investments


Source: Based on Edillon, 2003)

Philippine economic experience: non-growth due to the following:-- Lack of R & D

-- Insecure property rights

-- Weak institutions

-- Failure (of government) to encourage innovation


41/123

Growth, Development, Welfare

Development: advance expand to a more complex orcomplete form; improve> E.g. hunting/gathering > agriculture > industry > services> Higher level of satisfaction for society

Growth = increase in size> Economic growth refers to a sustained increase in production,

usually measured in terms of per capita GDP.

Welfare: state or condition of doing or being well (Oxford)> Theory of utility, i.e. condition or level of satisfaction

(per capita income is not everything).

Measures and Factors of PovertyMeasures and Factors of Poverty


42/123

Social welfare in development context

> Welfare of society is brought to higher level> E.g. Lifting members of society from poverty

Social welfare function> Description of a desired type of welfare in a society;

benchmark for evaluating welfare impacts (e.g. povertyalleviation projects)



43/123

Average welfare level The greater good for the greater

number (democratic principle)

Forms of Social Welfare Function

Prioritarianism: higher weight towelfare of the disadvantaged

Ignores distribution; notconcerned whose welfare isimproved (whether rich or poor)

Current concept of poverty andits measures (e.g. foodconsumption, RDA)

HDI concept (life expectancy,knowledge, income)



Sufficientarianism: welfare of everyindividual is at least e ual to some

minimum

E uality in capabilities: eachindividual is endowed with samecapabilities to do be what he wishes


44/123

Lack of income (means) necessary to consume a basic bundleof goods and services; or

Definition of Poverty: A State ofBeing

Measures of Poverty

Means-based

Outcome-based

Perception-based


Shortfall in consumption of a basic bundle of goods and

services necessary to do basic functions (outcomes);

Subjective valuation (perceptions)


45/123

Means-based Outcome-based

Human Development Index

Human Poverty Index

Capability Poverty Measure

Gender-

relatedD

evelopmentIndex

Gender Empowerment

Measure

Incidence

Gap (Depth)

Severity

Poverty Threshold Food Threshold

Gini Ratio

$1/day Poverty Line

-- Poverty

-- Subsistence

-- Poverty

-- Income



46/123

Means-based

Source: NSCB

Families (or population) with per capita incomeless than the per capita poverty threshold

---------------------------------------------------------------

Total number of families (population)

Cost of basic food &non-food reqmts =P11,605/year per capP4,835/month per fam

Poverty Incidence (%):E.g. Philippines = 28.4%

> Percent of families (or individuals) whose incomes fallbelow the Poverty Threshold as defined by NEDA and/orcannot afford in a sustained manner to provide their basic needsof food, health, education, housing and other amenities of life

Poverty:Inability to acquire basic needs for decent quality of life



47/123

Povert I i ence, ffici l ti tesCountr P er Povert

Capita Inci ence

( $) ( pprox %)

Philippines 950 40 1994Indonesia 880 15 1990

Sri anka 640 27 earl 1990

China 530 15 1990-1994

Paskistan 430 25 earl 1990

India 320 34 earl 1990

Bangladesh 220 40 earl 1990

Viet am 200 20 1993

Source: Monsodand Monsod, 1999

Measuresand FactorsofPovertMeasuresand FactorsofPovert


48/123

Means-based

Source: NSCB

Subsistence Incidence (%):E.g. Philippines = 13.1%

> Percent of families (individuals) whose incomesfall below the Food Threshold

Cost of foodrequired to satisfy

nutritional reqmts= P7,829(Philippines 2000)

Families (or population) with per capita incomeless than the per capita Food Threshold

---------------------------------------------------------------

Total number of families (population)



49/123

Means-based

Income Gap (%):E.g. Mt Province = 38.0%

> Measure of amount needed by poor families toeradicate poverty

Source: NSCB

Measuresof depthof poverty

Poverty Gap (%): E.g. Romblon = 18.5%

> Measure of amount needed to eradicate poverty

Avg income shortfall offamilies is 18.5%

Total income shortfall of families below poverty

threshold (expressed in proportion to the poverty line)------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total number of families

Avg income shortfall ofpoor families is 38.0%

Total income shortfall of families below povertythreshold (expressed in proportion to the poverty line)-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Total number of poor families



50/123

Means-based

Severity of Poverty (%):E.g. Masbate = 10.1%Saranggani = 9.7%

> Measure of ine uality among the poor

Source: NSCB

Poverty more severe in

Masbate

Total of squared income shortfall of families below povertythreshold (expressed in proportion to the poverty line)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total number of families

Gini Ratio:

> Measure of ine uality in income distribution(all families individuals)

1=perfectequal

0=perfectunequal



51/123

Means-based

Source: NSCB

Poverty Incidence Subsistence Incidence Poverty Gap Income Gap Severity of Poverty Gini Ratio Poverty Threshold Food Threshold

1 day Poverty Line (WB): amount in pesos needed tobuy a basket of goods and services that $1 would buy inthe US

Annual

Every three years(FIES)

Official poverty statisticsPre-2003: national

regionalSince 2003: plus

provincial



52/123

Outcome-based

uman Development Index ( DI)

Composite of development outcomes:-- ealth:life expectancy

-- Knowledge:functional literacy-- Standard of living:per capita income

Human Poverty Index (HPI)

Composite of poverty outcomes:

-- Short life:% of people expected to die before 40-- Lack of education:% of adults illiterate-- Lack of access to resources:% of people w/o

access to health services & safe water, and & %of underweight children under 5

Source: Monsod and Monsod, 1999



53/123

Outcome-based

Source: Monsod and Monsod, 1999

Capability Poverty Measure (CPM)

-- Early version ofHPI

Gender-related Development Index (GDI)

-- HDI adjusted for gender inequality

Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM)

-- Measures gender inequality in key areas of economic andpolitical participation



54/123

Means-based

Poverty Incidence

Subsistence Incidence

Income Gap

Poverty Gap

Severity of Poverty

Outcome-based

Human Development Index

Human Poverty Index

Capability PovertyM

easure Gender-related Development

Index

Gender Empowerment

Measure

Poverty Threshold

Food Threshold

Gini Ratio

$1/day Poverty Line



55/123

Poverty incidence: gives the proportion of the poor-- simple but assumes uniform distribution of poor-- does not account for improvement within poor

Poverty gap: average income shortfall-- shortfall = 0 if non-poor-- total amount to eradicate poverty-- easy to understand but also does not account for distribution

Severity of poverty: average of the squared income gap of thepoor-- assigns higher weights to the poorer among the poor-- not easy to estimate or understand

Means-based




56/123

Regional

Poverty Statistics, 2000Region

(%) Rank (%) Rank (%) Rank

NCR 5.5 1 0.9 1 0.2 1

Region 1 20.3 5 4.2 4 1.3 4

Region 2 29.9 9 6.8 8 2.3 7,8

Region 3 16.1 2 3.1 2 0.9 2

Region 4 19.5 3 4.8 5 1.7 5Region 5 53.3 15 15.8 15 6.3 15

Region 6 28.1 8 6.4 7 2.1 6

Region 7 39.4 12 11.8 12 4.8 12

Region 8 46.8 13 14.2 13 5.8 13

Region 9 47.0 14 14.3 14 6.0 14

Region 10 27.3 7 7.1 9 2.6 9

Region 11 25.4 6 6.3 6 2.3 7,8

Region 12 38.0 11 9.5 11 3.4 11

CAR 19.8 4 4.1 3 1.2 3

ARMM 60.7 16 19.3 16 8.0 16

Caraga 33.8 10 8.2 10 3.0 10

Incidence Gap (Depth) Severity


57/123

010

20

30

40

50

60

70

NCR

Region 1

Region 2

Region 3

Region 4

Region 5

Region 6

Region 7

Region 8

Region 9

Region 10

Region 11

Region 12

CAR

ARMM

Caraga

Percent (Year2000)


58/123

Poverty

Inc idence ( )

Phili i 28 .4

NCR 5.7

Region II I 17 .0

Region I 20 .8

Region II 24 .8

Region I 29 .6

CAR 31.1

Region XI 31 .5

Region II 32 .3

Region X 32 .9

Region I 37 .8

Region II I 37 .8

Region IX 38 .3

Caraga 42.9

Region XII 48 .4

Region 49 .0

ARMM 57.0

Po vertyT hreshold

(Pesos)

Phili ines 11,60 5

NCR 15 ,67 8

Re gion II I 13 ,84 3

Re gion I 13 ,41 4

CAR 13,17 6

Re gion I 12 ,76 6

ARMM 12,75 3

Re gion I 11 ,55 3

Re gion 11 ,52 4

Re gion II 11 ,07 7

Re gion XII 11 ,01 9

Caraga 10,60 5

Re gion XI 10 ,56 8

Re gion X 9,88 1

Re gion II 9,79 1

Re gion II I 9,62 3

Re gion IX 9,29 8

Regional Poverty Statistics

Source: NSCB


59/123

Poverty

Inc idence ( )

Phili ines 28.4

NCR 5.7

Region II I 17 .0

Region I 20 .8

Region II 24 .8

Region I 29 .6

CAR 31.1

Region XI 31 .5

Region II 32 .3

Region X 32 .9

Region I 37 .8

Region II I 37 .8

Region IX 38 .3

Caraga 42.9

Region XII 48 .4

Region 49 .0

ARMM 57.0

Po vertyT hreshold

(Pesos)

Phili ines 11,60 5

NCR 15 ,67 8

Re gion II I 13 ,84 3

Re gion I 13 ,41 4

CAR 13,17 6

Re gion I 12 ,76 6

ARMM 12,75 3

Re gion I 11 ,55 3

Re gion 11 ,52 4

Re gion II 11 ,07 7

Re gion XII 11 ,01 9

Caraga 10,60 5

Re gion XI 10 ,56 8

Re gion X 9,88 1

Re gion II 9,79 1

Re gion II I 9,62 3

Re gion IX 9,29 8

Subsistence

Inc idence ( )

Phili ines 13.1

NCR 0.7

Region II I 4.0

Region I 8.1

Region II 9.3

Region I 11 .5

CAR 14.2

Region XI 14 .6

Region X 15 .0

Region II 17 .0

Region I 18 .4

Region II I 19 .8

Region IX 20 .4

Caraga 23.4

Region XII 25 .5

ARMM 27.2

Region 27 .8

oo dT hreshold

(Pesos)

Phili ines 7,82 9

NCR 9,56 1

CAR 8,87 3

Re gion II I 8,79 7

Re gion I 8,68 2

ARMM 8,61 1

Re gion I 8,60 9

Re gion 8,27 6

Re gion I 8,10 9

Re gion XII 7,71 4

Re gion II 7,52 6

Caraga 7,49 2

Re gion XI 7,16 4

Re gion II I 7,16 2

Re gion X 6,89 7

Re gion II 6,76 0

Re gion IX 6,58 6

Regional PovertyStatistics

Source: NSCB


60/123

Povert

Incidence (%)

TenPoorest

Sulu 63.2

Mas ate 62.8

Tawi-tawi 56.5

Ifugao 55.6

Romblon 55.2

Maguindanao 55.1

Lanaodel Sur 55.0

Sultan Kudarat 54.3

Camiguin 53.1Camarines orte 52.7

Ten east Poor

2ndDistrict CR 4.1

4t District CR 4.9Bulacan 5.4

1st District CR 5.8

Batanes 7.5

Rizal 8.0Laguna 8.6

3rdDistrict CR 9.0

Bataan 9.9Cavite 10.2

Povert Thresholds

(Pesos)

Ten ighest

NCR 15,678

Batangas 15,305

Mt. Province 15,285

Cavite 14,965

Rizal 14,787

Nueva ci a 14,755

Pampanga 14,713

Oriental Mindoro 14,531

Benguet 14,185Lanaodel Sur 13,986

Bulacan 13,881

Ten owest

WesternSamar 9,574

EasternSamar 9,516ZambSur 9,404

Basilan 9,271

Nort ernSamar 9,166

Bohol 9,125ZambNorte 9,090

Bukidnon 8,982

Si ui or 8,966Negros Oriental 8,940

Subsistence

Incidence (%)

TenPoorest

Masbate 42.6

Sulu 34.2

Romblon 33.7

Ifugao 32.7

Maguindanao 31.2

Saranggani 30.9

Lanaodel Norte 30.5

ZambNorte 30.4

Agusandel Sur 29.7Camarines Norte 28.7

Ten east Poor

Batanes 4.1

2ndDistrict NCR 4.94thDistrict NCR 5.4

1st District NCR 5.8

Bulacan 7.5

Bataan 8.0Rizal 8.6

Cavite 9.0

Laguna 9.93rdDistrict NCR 10.2

oodThreshold

(Pesos)

Ten ighest

Mt. Province 10,112

NCR 9,561

Rizal 9,487

Batangas 9,484

Cavite 9,457

NuevaEci a 9,392

Pampanga 9,336

Batanes 9,073

Sulu 9,062Oriental Mindoro 9,022

Ten owest

Bohol 6,329

ZambSur 6,501Si ui or 6,519

Bukidnon 6,561

Negros Oriental 6,602

ZambNorte 6,678Davaodel Sur 6,846

NorthernSamar 6,863

Basilan 6,919Occidental 6,991

Provincial Povert Statistics


61/123

Povert

Incidence (%)

TenPoorest

Sulu 63.2

Masbate 62.8

Tawi-tawi 56.5

Ifugao 55.6

Romblon 55.2

Maguindanao 55.1

Lanaodel Sur 55.0

Sultan Kudarat 54.3

Camiguin 53.1Camarines Norte 52.7

Ten east Poor

2ndDistrict NCR 4.1

4thDistrict NCR 4.9Bulacan 5.4


Batanes 7.5

Rizal 8.0Laguna 8.6

3rdDistrict NCR 9.0

Bataan 9.9Cavite 10.2

Povert

ap (%)

TenBiggest

Masbate 22.6

Saranggani 19.4

Maguindanao 19.1

Lanaodel Norte 18.8

Mt. Province 18.6

Romblon 18.5

Ifugao 18.2

Abra 17.5

Camarines Norte 17.4ZambNorte 17.2

TenSmallest

Batanes 0.6


Bulacan 1.1


Rizal 1.5Bataan 1.5

Laguna 1.7

3rdDistrict NCR 2.1Cavite 2.2

Severit of

Povert (%)

Ten ighest

Masbate 10.1

Saranggani 9.7

Mt. Province 9.3

Lanaodel Norte 9.0

Maguindanao 8.7

ZambNorte 8.7

Romblon 8.2

Abra 8.2

Ifugao 7.9Oriental Mindoro 7.7

Ten owest

Batanes 0.1


Bulacan 0.3

Bataan 0.4

1st District NCR 0.4Rizal 0.5

Laguna 0.5

Cavite 0.73rdDistrict NCR 0.7

Provincial Povert Statistics


62/123

Location and Time Dimensions

Absolute vs. Relative Poverty-- In measuring absolute poverty the benchmark does not

change regardless of the locality, except with respect to

prices. In measuring relative poverty, meanwhile, thebenchmark varies according to the locality.-- Reducing incidence of absolute poverty is more relevant



63/123

010

20

30

40

50

60

70

NCR

Region 1

Region 2

Region 3

Region 4

Region 5

Region 6

Region 7

Region 8

Region 9

Region 10

Region 11

Region 12

CAR

ARMM

Caraga

Percent

Measure

sandFactorso

fPoverty

Measure

sandFactorso

fPoverty


64/123

Location and Time Dimensions

Absolute vs. Relative Poverty-- In measuring absolute poverty the benchmark does not

change regardless of the locality, except with respect toprices. In measuring relative poverty, meanwhile, the

benchmark varies according to the locality.-- Reducing incidence of absolute poverty is more relevant

Chronic vs. Transient Poverty-- Chronic poverty is when the state of poverty has prevailed for

a very long time. Transient poverty is when the state ofpoverty is only temporary.



65/123

Causes of Poverty in the Philippines

Unsustained economic growth (or lack of economic growth)

Inability to benefit from economic growth

Vulnerability to shocks



66/123

Rural sector accounts for of poverty-- Agri sector is biggest contributor (about 80%) to poverty

Poverty alleviation needs understanding of rural sector includingresponses of rural areas to growth stimuli

-- How important are rural conditions to poverty?

ignificance of Poverty aria lesplanatory

aria le ncidence ap epth everity

unctional literacy

and ine uality

arm si e

enancy

gri terms of trade

rrigation

Road wealth

lectricity

acro eco pol

ource

ased on

alisacan

! " " "

easures and actors of Povertyeasures and actors of Poverty


67/123

Factors affecting Poverty:

GROWTH

Education (complemented by infrastructure)

Policy environment (e.g. agriculture terms of trade) Investment in land uality productivity (e.g. irrigation)

Agrarian reform

Governance (political dynasties hurt the poor)

Transportation (high transport costs are poverty traps)

Source of growth

Source: R. Edillion, Framework on Growth and Development, Asia-Pacific Policy Center, Training Manual.



68/123

Cycle of Poverty Determinants

Employment

Income

Education

Health

Nutrition

Quality of labor, land, capital

Access togoods services

Poverty: Inability to ac uire the basic needs for a decent uality of life

Economic Growth

Approaches and Policy Responses to PovertyApproaches and Policy Responses to Poverty

A h d P li R PA h d P li R P


69/123

Economic Growth


Classical approach:

Increase specialization Increase trade

Neoclassical approach:

Increase savings Increase investments (on productive activities)

Endogenous growth approach:

Increase knowledge Increase innovation


A h d P li R t P tA h d P li R t P t


70/123

Cycle of Poverty Determinants

Deliverymechanism &

public spending

Employment

Income

Access to private

goods services

Education

Health

Nutrition


Access to publicgoods services

Public transfer& subsidy

Population

Source: DILG, NEDA, NAPC, UNDP, Guidebook on Local Poverty Diagnosis and Planning, 2002

Politicalparticipation

Peace andorder




71/123

International Institution Responses


1970: UN War on Poverty

1974: WB Redistribution with Growth

1980s: ILO World Employment Program

1990: WB World Development Report focus on povertythrough three fronts:-- labor intensive economic growth

-- development of human resources (education, health,nutrition) of poor

-- social safety nets

1999: ADB3 pillars strategy



72/123

ADB: Three Pillars


Pro-poor economic growth

Social development

Good governance



73/123

1 Pro-Poor Economic Growth


Economic growth

> Generates employment and income; necessary foreliminating or reducing poverty

Pro-poor Growth Index

S Korea = 1.14 (1994-95)Laos = 0.21 (1992-98)Philippines = 0.67 (1994-97)Thailand = 0.64 (1994-96)Vietnam = 0.87 (1992-98)

Source: E. Pernia, ADB, ERD Policy Brief, 2003

> But may be biased against poor

> Pro-poor growth; priority to:

-- Labor intensive activities-- Employment creation-- Increased labor mobility-- Enhanced credit access for

SMEs-- Other measures that remove

anti-poor biases



74/123

2 Social Development


Strategies that target basic social services for the poor

-- Human capital development (e.g. education, training)-- Social protection (e.g. insurance, peace and order)-- Population program

3 Good Governance

Necessary to carry out pro-poor growth social development activities

-- Reduced corruption-- Greater accountability-- Increased participation-- Sound macroeconomic management



75/123

Overall Approach


Broad-based labor-intensive and inclusive growth

Good governance and accountability

Human and social development

Social protection

Special poverty alleviation policies or direct anti-poverty

interventions such as land reform, micro credit, publicemployment schemes

Source: A. Deolalikar et al., Poverty Reduction and the role of institutions in developing Asia, ADB, May 2002.



76/123

Social Reform and Poverty Reduction Act (RA 8425)

(KALAHI: Policy framework to address poverty in the Philippines)


Deliverymechanism &

public spending

Employment

Income

Access to privategoods/services

Education

Health

Nutrition


Access to publicgoods/services

Public transfer& subsidy

PopulationPolitical

participtn

Peace &order

Asset Reform Increased Employment &Livelihood Opportunities

Improved Access to HumanDevelopment Services

Increased Social Protectionand Security from Violence

Enhanced Participation inGovernance and InstitutionBuilding



77/123

Local Government Role in Poverty Reduction


Local Government Code of 1991

DILG Memorandum CircularNo. 2001-109 (August 21, 2001):

Enjoined all LCEs to undertake local poverty reductionprograms and to formulate LPRAA (Local Poverty ReductionAction Agenda)

DILG Memorandum CircularNo. 2001-105 (August 31, 2001):Called for identification of LPRAO (Local Poverty ReductionOfficers) in all municipalities, cities, and provinces



78/123

What is role of provincial LGUs in the goal of promoting growthand reducing poverty?

Provide link between national government and municipal and(component) city LGUs

Bring together merits of the top-down and bottom-up approachesto governance

Ensure that municipal/city development plans form coherentstrategy towards goal of provincial development; at the sametime, consistent with national goals





79/123

Local PlanningContext

Economic DevAnalysis Plan

Anti-povertyinstruments

Organization &Implementation

Poverty ProfileAnalysis

VisionObjectives

SituationerPlanning analysisStrategies

Projectsprograms

Planimplementation


Integrating Poverty Reduction in Provincial Development Planning

Planning Process



80/123

Economic Growth


Increase specialization and trade Increase savings and investments (on productive activities) Increase knowledge and innovation

Source: R. Edillion, Framework on Growth and Development, Asia-Pacific Policy Center, Training Manual.; R. Neri, 2004

Income and employment creation-- Increase productivity-- Reduce cost-- Increase growth potential-- Reduce risk

Population Activity (Industries) Location (Economic

areas)


81/123

Basic Approach

Population-Activity-Location-- Population distribution-- Production: major income/value-generating, employment

activities-- Consumption: market centers, expenditure items, access to services-- Location/spatial distribution as an inherent factor

Analysis-- Existing levels-- Trends-- Comparative benchmarks

-- Significance: strategic importance


82/123

Strategic Questions

Are current conditions/trends acceptable? (Access to jobs, markets, services)What are the gaps? What will happen if they continue?

What are the development drivers (supply/demand)? How do they affectcurrent conditions/trends? External? Internal?

What industries/sectors are doing well? Promising? Not doing well?

Given trends and drivers, what are likely scenarios for these industries? Whatindustries/sectors should be encouraged? Discouraged? Competition?

What should be done to promote these industries/sectors? What arethe obstacles? What are the tradeoffs?

What industries/sectors?-- Consistent with the regions competitive advantages-- Already established but not as competitive as in the past but still

generate substantial employment/income benefits to region-- Support the first two types (e.g. transport, telecom, housing)



83/123

Understand the Economy Economic sectors/activities

-- Production, employment,other economic data(compare w/ other provinces/rest of country) ETC/S

Potentials, comparativeadvantages

Obstacles to growth

Understand the Poor Poverty Profile

-- Official poverty stats(compare w/ other provinces/rest of country)

-- Other poverty indicators (13),LPRAPs, local profiles

Obstacles to increased income/access to goods & services

Economic DevAnalysis Plan Poverty ProfileAnalysis

Economic activities of the poor

Involvement of poor in economy



84/123

Population, Population Growth Rate, Population Density,CAR, by province, 1990-2000

Area1990 Pop 2000 Pop 2000

Pop%1990-2000

APGR

LandArea

(s km)

LandArea%

2000PopDen

CAR 1,142,814 1,365,220 100% 1.79 18,294.2 100.00% 75

Abra 184,743 209,491 15% 1.27 3,975.6 21.73% 53

Apayao 74,607 97,129 7% 2.67 3,927.9 21.47% 25

Benguet 485,857 582,515 43% 1.83 2,655.4 14.51% 219

alinga 133,791 174,023 13% 2.66 2,517.8 13.76% 69

Ifugao 147,281 161,623 12% 0.93 3,119.7 17.05% 52

Mt. Prov 116,535 140,439 10% 1.88 2,097.3 11.46% 67

Source: NSO


85/123

1970 1980 1990 2000

Population Density


86/123

1970-1980 1980-1990 1990-2000

Annual Population Growth Rate


87/123


88/123


89/123


90/123

1980

1990 2000

Population Density


91/123

1980-1990 1990-2000

Annual Population Growth Rate


92/123

1980, 1990, 2000 Standard Distances


93/123

Figure 13. GDP Regional Shares 2000

35.7%

2.3%3.1%

2.1%

7.4%

13.9%

2.7%

6.5% 6.8%

2.5% 2.5%3.5%

5.9%

2.6% 1.0% 1.5%0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

NCR

CAR

Ilocos

CagValley

CLuzon

SLuzon

Bicol

WVis

CVis

EVis

W

#in

N

#in

S

#in

C

#in

ARMM

Caraga


94/123

Figure . VA: Services 2000

45 .0%

1.3% 2.9% 1.6%

6.8%11 .1%

2.8%6.2% 7.6%

1.9% 1.9% 2.9%4.7%

1.6% 0.7% 1.0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

NCR

CAR

Ilocos

Cag

$ alley

CLuzon

%L

uzon

&icol

' $is

C

$is( $is

WMin

NMin

% Min

CMin

ARMM

Caraga

Figure 15. GVA: Agri Fish Forestry 2000

0.0%2.0%

6.5% 6.2%8.8%

19.2%

4.6%

10.2%

4.6% 3.9%

6.5%4.6%

11.8%

4.9%3.1% 3.1%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

NCR

CAR

Ilocos

CagValley

CLuzon

SLuzon

Bicol

WVis

CVis

EVis

WMin

NMin

SMin

CMin

ARMM

Caraga


95/123

Figure 32. Livestock Inventory (Number ofHead), by Type

and Region, 1998

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

CAR

Ilocos

Cagayan

C

Luzon

STag

Bicol

WVis

CVis

EVis

WMind

NMind

SMind

CMind

Caraga

ARMM

Swine

Goat

Cattle

Carabao

Figure 33 Poultr In entor (NumberofHead)by Typeand

Region,1998

02,000,0004,000,0006,000,0008,000,000

10,000,000

12,000,00014,000,00016,000,000

CAR

Il)

0

)

1

C2

3

2

4

2

5

C

6

7z)

5

8

9

2

3

@

A

0

)l

WVis

CVis

EVis

WMind

NMind

SMind

CMind

C2

r2

3

2

ARMM

Chicken

Duck


96/123

Figure GVA: Mining/Quarr 2000

0.0B

25.4B

2.2B 1.2 B 1.1 B

10.3B 9.2

B

13.5B

6.2B

1.5B

2.8B

2.8B

17.3B

0.2B 0.0

B

6.3B

0

10

20

30

NCR

CAR

IloCoD

CE

F Vall

Gy

C

H

I

Po

Q

S

H

I

Po

Q

Bi

Col

R Vi

D

CVi

D

EVi

D

R Mi

Q

NMi

Q

SMi

Q

CMi

Q

ARMM

Caraga

Figure GVA: Manu ac uring2000

43.1S

3.3S

0.7S

0.3S

7.9S

16.1S

0.2S

5.3S 6.3

S

2.4S

1.1S

4.5S

4.4S

3.4S

0.2S

0.9S

0

10

20

30

40

50

NCR

CAR

IloToU

CagVall

Vy

C

W

X

Yo

`

S

W

X

Yo

`

Bi

Tol

a Vi

U

CVi

U

EVi

U

a Mi

`

NMi

`

SMi

`

CMi

`

ARMM

Caraga


97/123

Figure . DPSectoral Shares

16%

1%

23%

5%

3%

53%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Ag/ ish/ or

Mining

Mfg

Constn

Elec/Gas/ at

Ser ice

Figure A CAR RDPSectoral Shares

14%

%

32%

12%

6%

30%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Ag/ ish/ or

Mining

Mfg

Constn

E/G/

Ser ice


98/123

Figure 21. C Luzon GRDP Sectoral Shares 2000

19%

0%

24%

4%

4%

48%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Ag/Fish/For

Mining

Mfg

Constn

E/G/W

Service

Figure 21A CAR GRDP Sectoral Shares 2000

14%

7%

32%

12%

6%

30%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Ag/Fish/For

Mining

Mfg

Constn

E/G/W

Service


99/123

1995 1996 1997 1998

Total BEPZ Exports 588 731 508 0

INDUSTRY SECTOR

Fashion Acc/Leather 1.2 1.4 2.5 1.1

Houseware 0.02 0 0.04 0.04

Garments/Textile 2.5 3.5 4.7 0.8

Other ConsumerMfrs 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.2

Industrial Mfrs 359 573 712 497

Resource-based 0.05 0.14 0.06 0.1

Value of Exports Monitored, by Industry Sector, BEP ,FOB Million US , 1995-1998.

Source: BETP/DTI


100/123

Fi ur . i i or rri l , p of i i or nd ion, n

S p

14.4%

b

.c

%

4.d %

10.b

%

e

.f

%

15.0%

f

.e

%

4.g%

d .e

%f

.g%

e

.5%h

.4%

4.5% 4.0%

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

900,000

CAR

Il

i

p

i

q

Cag

ayan

CL

uzin

r

Tagal

i g

Bi

p

il

s t

i

qayas

C

t

is

ayas

E

t

is

ayas

W

uind

anao

N

uind

anao

S

uind

anao

C

uind

anao

Ca

raga

Domesti

verseas

Forei


101/123

Strengths-- Established tourism destination; tourism potential expansion-- Unique physical characteristics/scenic beauty-- Mining tradition and potential-- Manufacturing/BEPZ?-- SMEs-- Agriculture? Fruits and vegetables? Cash crops?

-- Labor productivity?

Weaknesses-- Limited external and internal linkages (road, air); still dependent on

Metro Manila link/market-- Relatively difficult access to services

-- Dependence on external provinces for exports (port and airport)-- Physical environmental threat to tourism, and of tourism (also of mining)-- Basic service gaps (water, power, education, health)?-- Declining agriculture? Threat to tourism?-- Poor land use management-- Physical constraints on horizontal development


102/123

Strategies

Improve access/linkages:

With Regions 1 and 2 (ports, airports, domestic/foreign markets) With NCR domestic/foreign market (NLE extension to Tarlac/Rosario) Lateral/internal (strategic e.g. Banaue-Bontoc)

Protect and expand tourism market (e.g. environmental integrity of traditionaldestinations, New Baguio?)

Hi-tech, environment-friendly mining?

Industrial development: increase/improve services to BEPZ(retention/expansion strategy); cluster development; niche industries? IT?

Education center (including tourism, upland agriculture research, IT-based?)

Process streamlining/remove transaction obstacles

Enhance/ensure security (image?)



103/123

Understand the Economy Economic sectors/activities

-- Production, employment,other economic data(compare w/ other provinces/rest of country) ETC/S

Potentials, comparativeadvantages

Obstacles to growth

Understand the Poor Poverty Profile

-- Official poverty stats(compare w/ other provinces/rest of country)

-- Other poverty indicators (13),LPRAPs, local profiles

Obstacles to increased income/

access to goods & services



Economic activities of the poor

Involvement of poor in economy



104/123

Poverty Profile: Province

NSO data can be used as a basis for the poverty profile. Thesesurveys contain information that can proxy for quality of life.

> FIES (Family Income and Expenditure Survey)

> APIS (Annual Poverty Indicator Survey)> LFS (Labor Force Survey)

Some provinces conduct their own data collection. These aremostly information on the Minimum Basic Needs (MBN).

In general the available information about poverty at the sub-provincial level is minimal.




105/123

Local Poverty Profile: MunicipalityBarangay

Area Dimension Indicator of Poverty

SURVIVAL Health 1 Ratio of children 0-5 yrs who died to sumof children aged 0-5 yrs

Nutrition 2 Ratio of children aged 0-5 yrs mal-

nourished to total children 0-5 yrsAccess basic amenities 3 Ratio ofHH w/o access safe water

4 Ratio ofHH w/o access sanitary toiletSECURITY Shelter 5 Ratio of HH squatting

6 Ratio ofHH living in makeshift housingPeace and order 7 Ratio of HH w/ members crime victims

ENABLING Income 8 Ratio of HH income < poverty threshold9 Ratio ofHH income < food threshold

10 Ratio ofHH eat < 3 meals/dayEmployment 11 Unemployment rateEducation 12 Elementary participation rate

13 Secondary participation rate

Source: Guidebook, 2002


106/123

Figure . DPSectoral Shares

16%

1%

23%

5%

3%

53%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Ag/Fish/For

Mining

Mfg

Constn

Elec/Gas/ at

Ser ice

Figure A CAR RDPSectoral Shares

14%

7%

32%

12%

6%

30%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Ag/Fish/For

Mining

Mfg

Constn

E/G/

Ser ice


107/123

Figure 24. National Employment Shares by

Industry Group, 2000

Agri/Fisv

/Forestry

37.5%

Wholesale/Retail

16.5%

Transpt/Stor/Com

7.3%

Fin/Ins/RE/Bus

2.4%

Com/Soc/Pers

20.3%

Manufacturing

10.1%

Mining/Quarrying

0.4%

Elect/Gas/Water

0.4%

Construction

5.2%

Figure 25A. Employment Shares by Industry

Group, AR, 2000

Agri/Fish/Forestry

56%

Transpt/Stor/Com

5%

Fin/Ins/RE/Bus

1%

Com/Soc/Pers

1w%

Wholesale/Retail

8%

Manufacturing

4%Mining/Quarrying

3%

Elect/Gas/Water

0%

Construction

5%

Figure 2 mpl yment f anufacturing Firms 0+ rkers


108/123

Figure 2 . mpl yment f anufacturingFirms, 0+ rkers,

y Regi n,

0.4%1.1%0.8%3.1%2.

x

%0.8%0.y

%

8.7%

2.

%0.6%

21.1%

7.0%

0.3%0.8%0.y

%

49.3%

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

450,000

500,000

NCR

CAR

Ilocos

C

g

yan

CLuzon

T

g

log

Bicol

WVisayas

CVisayas

EVisayas

WMind

NMind

M

ind

CMind

C

rag

ARMM

Figure 2 . Value fOutput P illi n) f anufacturingFirms,

0+ rkers, y Regi n,

0.1%0.8%2.

%2.8%2.6%0.6%

3.0%4.

%2.

%0.

%

26.

%

9.7%

0.

%0.

%2.1%

40.

%

0

50

100

150

200250

300

350

400

450

NCR

CAR

Ilocos

C

g

yan

CLuzon

T

g

log

Bicol

WVisayas

CVisayas

EVisayas

WMind

NMind

M

ind

CMind

C

rag

ARMM


109/123

Employment Status (X1000),Selected Regions, 2002

StatusMetroManila

CAR Reg 3 Reg 4(2003)

Reg 7

HH Pop 15+ 7,241 912 5,144 6,240 3,651Labor ForceParticipation Rate

68.1% 70.2% 64.8% 64.8% 69.0%

UnemploymentRate

20.3% 10.5% 15.0% 13.7% 15.4%

UnderemploymentRate (% of Employed)

12.0% 17.1% 12.7% 11.3% 15.4%

Source: 2003 NSCB


110/123

1997 2000Inc/Dec

%

1997 2000Inc/Dec

%

1997 2000Inc/Dec

%

Philippines 9,843 11,60 17.9 28.1 28.4 0.3 33.0 34.0 1.0

CR 13,201 15,678 18.8 4.8 5.7 0.9 6.5 7.6 1.2

Ilocos Norte 10,172 13,096 28.7 19.3 18.2 -1.1 25.1 22.8 -2.3

Ilocos Sur 11,046 13,455 21.8 28.7 30.6 1.9 35.2 35.4 0.2

La Union 11,002 13,121 19.3 37.5 33.7 -3.8 43.5 39.0 -4.5

Pangasinan 10,584 12,471 17.8 33.5 30.9 -2.5 39.5 37.2 -2.3

Batanes 11,841 12,976 9.6 8.7 7.5 -1.2 14.6 13.9 -0.7

Cagayan 8,690 10,119 16.4 25.3 20.3 -5.1 30.8 25.4 -5.5Isabela 9,235 11,626 25.9 31.8 30.2 -1.6 37.2 34.6 -2.6

N Vi caya 8,837 11,271 27.5 13.7 15.9 2.2 18.8 21.6 2.8

Quirino 9,233 10,665 15.5 33.8 31.4 -2.4 40.5 38.2 (2.3

Bataan 10,605 12,433 17.2 7.7 9.9 2.3 10.2 12.1 1.8

Bulacan 11,777 13,881 17.9 8.3 5.4 -2.9 10.7 7.5 -3.2

N Eci a 11,381 14,755 29.6 23.7 27.3 3.6 27.1 32.0 4.8

Pa panga 11,421 14,713 28.8 7.4 14.4 7.0 9.7 18.2 8.5

Tarlac 10,106 12,575 24.4 21.5 27.6 6.1 25.6 33.6 8.0

Za bales 10,266 12,716 23.9 16.6 23.5 6.9 22.3 28.0 5.7 Aurora 10,539 11,407 8.2 28.4 26.6 -1.9 34.4 33.2 -1.2

Abra 10,280 13,693 33.2 55.7 48.8 -6.9 58.9 58.6 -0.4

Benguet 11,788 14,185 20.3 18.9 14.1 -4.8 26.2 19.2 -7.0

Ifugao 11,225 11,852 5.6 57.7 55.6 -2.1 66.0 64.0 -2.1

Kalinga 10,307 11,439 11.0 38.7 38.8 0.1 44.3 45.1 0.7

Mt. Province 13,048 15,285 17.1 56.6 49.0 -7.6 64.7 57.6 -7.1

Apayao 9,563 11,278 17.9 27.5 26.1 -1.4 34.1 33.8 -0.4

Incidenceo Popula ion

(Percen

AnnualPerCapita

Po ertyThreshold

Incidenceo Fa ilies

(Percent)Pro ince


111/123


112/123

Strategies

Improve access/linkages: With Regions 1 and 2 (ports,

airports, domestic/foreign markets) With NCR domestic/foreign market

(NLE extension to Tarlac/Rosario) Lateral/internal (strategic)

Protect and expand tourism market (e.g.

environmental integrity, New Baguio?)

Hi-tech, environment-friendly mining?

Industry development BEPZ retention/expansion: cluster

development; IT? niche industries?

Education center (including tourism,upland agriculture research, IT-based?)

Process streamlining/removetransaction obstacles (e.g. land titling)

Enhance/ensure security (image?)

Pro-Poor Strategies

Improve access/linkages: constructionand operations employment; relocationfrom disaster prone areas/disastermitigation

Local employment: service industry,

environment management; construction

Local employment

Skills training; microlending/credit toSMEs (e.g. tourism-oriented; specialtycrafts, cash crops/agri- and foodprocessing)

Rural school dev with road/accessimprovement; clustering? Scholarships

Land/property reform/IP rights?


113/123



114/123

Choice of Anti-poverty instruments

Delineation of responsibilities between municipal andprovincial LGUs seemingly governed by two parameters:

> Coverage of impact: province = cross-municipalE.g. inter-municipal irrigation


> Point of influence: province = upstream (municipal = downstream)E.g. Animal breeding station (vs Livestock dispersal)

Tourism promotion (vs Regulation of tourism facilities)Techl assistance to coops (vs Organization of coops)R & D on plant diseases (vs Quality control of crops)

Economies of scale: health services



115/123



ASSET REFORM Urban housing and land distribution Capital and infrastructure provision Agrarian reform and land distribution Priority access of small fisherfolk (to 15 km zone)

Grant of ancestral domain titles to IPs

IMPROVED ACCESS TOHUMAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Basic education, Health, Shelter Potable water

Sanitation facilities Electrification

ENHANCED PARTICIPATION IN GOVERNANCE & INSTITUTIONBUILDING Participation of civil society and basic sectors in policy-making at national and

local levels



116/123

INCREASED SOCIAL PROTECTIONAND SECURITY FROM VIOLENCE Provision of social welfare and assistance: maintain minimum living standard,

reduce risk from violence, illness, disability, old age, unemployment,

resettlement, harvest failure Safety nets or mechanisms that mitigate adverse impacts of economic

dislocation, disasters and calamities, structural adjustments Social security that mitigates risk from retirement, unemployment, illness, and

disability

INCREASED EMPLOYMENT AND LIVELIHOOD OPPORTUNITIES Creation of rural jobs (agriculture and fishery) Improved access to credit facilities, microfinance services Entrepreneurial training





117/123

Factors affecting Poverty: GROWTH

Education (complemented by infrastructure)

Policy environment (e.g. agriculture terms of trade)

Investment in land uality productivity (e.g. irrigation)

Agrarian reform

Governance (political dynasties hurt the poor)

Transportation (high transport costs are poverty traps) Source of growth




118/123

1. Poverty reduction: an inherent bias ofLDPs

2. LPRAP: need-based and resource-based

3. Planning process: involve focused-targeting in terms of geographic

areas and basic sectors.4. LPRAP: cover a strategic and program mix of direct services,

institution building, advocacy and networking.

5. Planning process: municipal-led but barangay-based

6. Interventions: involve convergence or resource sharing

7. Planning process: involve a multi-sectoral focal team.

8. LPRAP: blueprint for action, advocacy, social marketing

Guiding Principles: Local Poverty Reduction Plan

(LPRAP)

Source: Guidebook, 2002



119/123

1. Causes of poverty in the Philippines

> Lack of economic growth> Inability to benefit from growth> Vulnerability to shocks

Summary:

2. Overall approach

> Broad-based labor-intensive and inclusive growth> Good governance and accountability> Human and social development> Social protection> Special poverty reduction policies or direct anti-poverty

interventions such as land reform, micro credit, public employmentschemes



120/123

1. Causes of poverty in the Philippines

> Lack of economic growth> Inability to benefit from growth> Vulnerability to shocks

Summary:

2. Overall approach

> Broad-based labor-intensive and inclusive growth> Good governance and accountability> Human and social development> Social protection> Special poverty reduction policies or direct anti-poverty

interventions such as land reform, micro credit, public employmentschemes



121/123

Local PlanningContext


Anti-povertyinstruments

Organization &Implementation


VisionObjectives

SituationerPlanning analysisStrategies

Projectsprograms

Planimplementation

Summary:

3. Basic objective: pro-poor economic growth

> Fundamental to social development and development planning> Should not be confined to a single plan (e.g. LPRAP)> Will be subject to various levels of influence (e.g. global, national, local)

4. Integrate with provincial development planning



122/123

Summary:

5. Need to link with city, municipality, barangay

> Because poverty reduction is best addressed and evaluated at thefamily/individual level

> Thru LPRAPs, specific programs/projects, etc

6. Selection and implementation of anti-poverty instrument(project program) is key

> Poverty reduction plan is not the end product

> Various approaches based on studies/experience are available to guideselection


123/123

E N D

pm, poverty alleviation

Documents